plans to have mailed statements automatically to more than 70 million workers. Overall public reaction to receiving an unsolicited PEBES has been consistently favorable. Moreover, SSA has not tested for reader comprehension and has not collected detailed information from its front-line workers on the public’s response to the PEBES. Commissioner’s Message Does Not Effectively Convey Purpose

In the 1996 PEBES, the message from the Commissioner of Social Security does not clearly explain why SSA is providing the statement. No Consensus on the Best Model for the Statement

Although the public and benefit experts agree that the current statement contains too much information, neither a standard benefit statement model exists in the public or private sector nor does a clear consensus on how best to present benefit information. By focusing on reduced printing costs as the main reason for redesigning the PEBES, SSA is overlooking the hidden costs of the statement’s existing weaknesses. Furthermore, if the PEBES frustrates or confuses people, it could undermine public confidence in SSA and its programs. To improve the statement, SSA can quickly make some basic changes. The changes include improving the layout and design and simplifying certain explanations. These revisions will require time to collect data and to develop and test alternatives. SSA can help ensure that the changes target the most significant weaknesses by systematically obtaining more detailed feedback from front-line workers. Your Personal Earnings and Benefit Estimate Statement

The first copy of each GAO report and testimony is free.
Why GAO Did This Study

GAO discussed the Social Security Administration's (SSA) Personal Earnings and Benefit Estimate Statement (PEBES).

What GAO Found

GAO noted that: (1) the public has reacted favorably to unsolicited PEBES, and SSA has improved the statement in response to public feedback; (2) the public generally feels that the statement is a valuable tool for retirement planning, but the statement does not clearly convey its purpose and related information on SSA programs and benefits; (3) PEBES weaknesses have resulted from its piecemeal development and the lack of testing for comprehension; (4) there is no consensus on the best model for PEBES; (5) SSA plans to redesign PEBES only if the redesign results in lower printing costs; (6) this approach fails to recognize the hidden costs arising from the need to answer public inquiries about statement information and the undermining of public confidence in SSA programs by the statement's poor design; (7) SSA needs to improve PEBES layout and design and simplify certain explanations, obtain more detailed feedback from its frontline workers, conduct comprehension tests, and consider alternative statement formats; and (8) SSA senior management attention is needed to ensure the success of the statement initiative by redesigning PEBES to present benefits information more effectively.