Bill Seeks to Kill Public Access to Social Security Death Index by 1 January 2019

[opinion alert--you have been warned]

It is called a bill to "protect grieving families." That's all hype--it makes good headlines, good sound bites, and good "twitterness." The problem is, like most hype, it is just that--hype.

Sam Johnson, Republican from Texas, has introduced a bill to restrict access to the Social Security Master Death File--with all public release ending on 1 January 2019 if the bill is passed in the current form. All public access.

The bill is in response to criminal activity where social security numbers of deceased children were used to fraudulently obtain benefits using the Social Security numbers of recently deceased children. Those names and Social Security numbers were obtained from the online version of the Social Security Master Death File--common sold and marketed as the Social Security Death Index. It is worth remembering that there are millions of names in this index and the number of fraud cases resulting from use of this index are not in the millions.

Access to this information allows banks to deny fraudulent credit applications based on recently deceased individuals. It also allows other financial institutions to prevent fraud because those companies have access to names and social security numbers of deceased individuals. Banks and other financial institutions are not going to publicly say how many times they use the file to prevent fraud or a bogus application.  There are thousands of legitimate uses of the Social Security Death Master File each and every day. Thousands.

There is another way.

But what about those people who claimed deceased children on their income taxes and obtained refunds based on those children's names and numbers, numbers they obtained from the Social Security Death Index? Those criminals filed the returns before the actual parents and got money to which they were not entitled and that is a crime and that is something that should be prevented. Restricting access to the Social Security Death Master File is not going to prevent this fraud from happening.

There is a fix for the IRS problem. An easy fix and one that does not deny access to that information to other people and institutions with a legitimate interest, an honest interest. Oh, it does require the IRS to do something and probably a little computer coding as well.

When a dependent is included on a tax return, why can't the social security number of the person claiming that child as a dependent  on the current return be compared with the social security number of the parent who claimed the child in the previous year?  Of course some of these differences will be from a divorce or other legitimate situation.

Wouldn't that prevent more fraud than Johnson's bill? And wouldn't that prevent fraud from others who used other means to obtain those numbers? I'm certain fraud of this type occurs for other reasons besides the death master file? Reasons that don't make for such nearly written headlines and sound bites.

Decide for yourself--but decide. Don't let overeager politicians intent on getting their name in the headline limit access to information to the public. Why should a list of dead people be private?

Information on Johnson's bill can be seen here http://samjohnson.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=343045

Read it.

Harry Shipe in the SSDI--Four Databases--Three Results

The "Social Security Death Index" often confuses researchers.  The confusion usually centers on someone who is not in the database that "should" be.

In the case of Harry Shipe that is not the problem. He is in the database.

Brief Background

The actual file used to create the several renderings of "Social Security Death Index" is the "Death Master File" maintained by the Social Security Administration. This file contains the zip code of last residence of the deceased and the zip code where the last benefit (if any) was sent for the deceased. It includes also the date of birth and date of death. Not every dead person who had a social security number is in the file. It is only those deaths that were reported to the Social Security Administration. The details we will not go into here. Fairly simple stuff most of the time.

Except apparently for Harry Shipe.

Harry Shipe died in Illinois in December of 1979. He was a a first cousin of my Grandmother Neill. The fact that Harry is a grandson of Ira Sargent should have been a clue that there'd be something interesting in researching him. And there was. 

The dates of birth (5 May 1898) and death (December 1979) are the same for Harry in all three databases. The other information is slightly different as can be seen in the screen shots of the results.

Ancestry.com

 Ancestry.com 's results screen for Harry Shipe is shown here:

GenealogyBank

The result from Genealogybank.com  is shown here:

FamilySearch

The database result for Harry Shipe from FamilySearch is shown here:

NEHGS

Thanks to Randy Seaver!


NEHGS American Ancestors has:

HARRY SHIPE
Birth date: May 5, 1898.
Death date: Dec, 1979.
SSN: 351-32-6319.
State Issued: IL.
Residence location: Sutter, Illinois, 62373.
Residence county: Hancock.
Payment location: MENDON, Illinois, 62351.
Payment county: ADAMS

It may help to see the results in a chart:

Website	Last Residence Zip	Last Residence Location	Last Benefit Zip	Last Benefit Location
Ancestry.com	62373	Sutter, Hancock, Illinois	62351	Mendon, Adams, Illinois
GenealogyBank	62373	Sutter, Hancock, Illinois	62373	Mendon/Tioga; Adams, Illinois [sic]
FamilySearch	62373	Sutter, Hancock, Illinois	Not given	Not given
NEHGS	62373	Sutter, Illinois	62351	Mendon, Illinois

From the United States Postal Service website:

• 62351--is Mendon, Illinois and Tioga, Illinois.
• 62373--is Sutter, Illinois.

The locations are pulled from the zip codes. The last residence is consistent. It is the last benefit that is somewhat confusing.  I am not understanding why the zip codes are different in the different databases. I understand that the database provides a last residence zipcode and a last benefit zipcode.  I am working on getting an answer to why the difference. Stay tuned--when (and if) I have an answer we'll post an update.

Oh, why didn't I mention Fold3?

Stay tuned for that as well.

The SS-5 Form

The SS-5 form is the form a person fills out to apply for a United States social security number. These forms are available for deceased individuals and can be obtained from the Social Security Administration. They can be an excellent genealogical source--depending upon the person and the family situation. The person does not have to be in the SSDI (Social Security Death Index)  in order for a researcher to obtain a copy of the SS-5 form. The person does have to be deceased to obtain a copy of the card.

Anyone who had a Social Security Number completed an SS-5 form  or had one completed for them.

It is easier (read: cheaper)  to obtain the form if you have the person's social security number. This can be obtained from the Social Security Death Index, the person's death certificate, or other sources. You can request an SS-5 form from the Social Secutiry Administration (link below) if you know the person is dead,but you don't have the social security number.

While the SS-5 form contains some of the same information as is on the death certificate, it is important to remember that most people filled out their own SS-5 form. Most people usually don't fill out their own death certificate. In some cases, the SS-5 form may contain information previously unknown.

The form on the page is for my wife's grandmother. The father's name listed on this form is different from the name of the father listed on her death certificate. In this case, it was a significant clue.

You can easily search the index via the link below-- or you can search  the Social Security Death Index at Genealogy Bank. Their version of the SSDI is the most current and is free.

Getting the SS-5 Application

SS5 form for Anna Margaret Lake

• If the person is in the Social Security Death Index, obtain their entry in the SSDI so you have complete information.
• If the person is NOT in the Social Security Death Index, visit the Social Security Administration page for more information on your options. 
• Want to order online or need more information? This SSA page has additonal information.
• Want to us the US mail to make your request? Print out an order form here. Getting the person's number from other records (if possible) is an excellent idea.

Redactions:

Thanks to Judy G. Russell for reminding me about the redactions in the SS-5 forms. The SSA is redacting names of parents unless you can show they are deceased or the applicant on the SS-5 form was born over 120 years ago. Yes--that does mean the parents are completely and totally dead. More information is here on the SSA site. 

From the SSA website:

Fees For Processing Requests For Individual’s Social Security Record
$27	Request for copy of Original Application for Social Security Card (Form SS-5), SSN Provided (Printout from microfilm)
$29	Request for copy of Original Application for Social Security Card (Form SS-5), SSN Not Provided (Printout from microfilm)
$16	Request for Computer Extract of Social Security Number Application, SSN Provided  (*Numident only requested)
$18	Request for Computer Extract of Social Security Number Application,SSN Not Provided (*Numident only requested)
$16	Search for Information about Death of an Individual, SSN Provided (SSA does not usually have place of death, burial, or cause of death)
$18	Search for Information about Death of an Individual, SSN Not Provided(SSA does not usually have place of death, burial, or cause of death)
$25	Forward a letter to inform a person about entitlement to money

[note: this image is (c) 2012 Michael John Neill--any use requires permission]

Where Does the SSDI Say Ida Neill "Last Resided?"

Under it's common name, the "Social Security Death Index" is an interesting beast. It is actually the Social Security Administration's Death Master File. It is one of the most used and frequently misunderstood databases available to genealogists. There are many reasons for the misunderstanding, including the unwillingness of some users to really even try and learn anything about that database.

However, it's not always the fault of the user. Sometimes it is the fault of the programmer.

Based upon my searches it appears that the Death Master File returns a zip code for the last residence. And therein lies the problem. 

I searched for my grandmother, Ida Neill in the Social Security Death index at Ancestry.com  FamilySearch, and Genealogybank.com  All pulled up a last residence zipcode of 62321, which is the correct zip code for Grandma's last residence. However, 62321 is not the zip code only for Carthage, Illinois. Ancestry.com and FamilySearch indicate that 62321 only connects to Carthage. However, GenealogyBank correctly indicates that 62321 also connects to several other outlying towns as well as is shown in the images below.

Ancestry.com results screen for Ida Neill who died 21 July 1994; obtained on 10 December 2012. 

FamilySearch results screen for Ida Neill who died 21 July 1994; obtained on 10 December 2012.

 Genealogybank.com results screen for Ida Neill who died 21 July 1994; obtained on 10 December 2012. 

What About That Zip Code?

The "problem" is the zipcode 62321 is associated with several villages besides the City of Carthage. Genealogybank.com (shown above) shows the same list of villages that are shown in the search results screen from the USPS website's Look Up a Zip Code:

There is a problem.

Carthage is the Hancock County, Illinois, county seat and Bentley, Denver, Fountain Green, McCall and Webster are all outlying villages (collection of a few homes in a few cases) that at one point in time had their own post office, but no longer do.

Notice that Harmony was not included in that list.

There is a Harmony, Illinois, but it is in the northeastern part of the state. Hancock County is in the western part of the state--just about as west as Illinois gets. The Google map (if you zoom out) will show the relative positions.


View Carthage, IL 62321 in a larger map

So What Is the "Deal" With Harmony?

The Harmony that is the list of 62321 "towns" probably is a reference to Harmony Township--which there is in Hancock County, and is the township in which Bentley is located. At some point in time, the "township" got dropped and all that was left was "Harmony."

The End Game?

The Social Security Administration provides the zip code of last residence for individuals who are listed in the Master Death File. That's what it provides. And, unless you have first hand knowledge of that last residence specifically, take care in just "grabbing" that town that the search results provides.

In the SSDI when I least expected it

I was just playing around today and found my great-grandma Neill in the Social Security Death Index. She died in 1965 and I never really thought to even look for her in the index. I don't need her SS5 form, it costs $27 and I have no doubts as to who her parents are and all that. However it makes the point that you never know if someone is in an index until you really look. I incorrectly assumed all my farming ancestors from her generation were not in the SSDI.

So, go ahead and look. You never know what you may find. If this had been a brick wall ancestor, getting a copy of her SS5 form from the Social Security Administration might have been helpful. And I NEVER buy the certified copies of records from the link on this site. They are entirely too expensive.

What is an SS5 form?

I have updated my page on the SS5 form from the Social Security Administration. It includes a sample image of one of these forms, but keep in mind they are NOT online and must be ordered from SSA--for deceased individuals through the FOIA.

Searching the Social Security Death Index for Middle Names

I could have sworn I was dreaming.

My grandmother died on 9 September 2008 in Bradenton, Florida. It was a few weeks later when her name appeared in the Social Security Death Index --first at Genealogy Bank. I did not print out the reference, but I really did not think I had seen her maiden name in the original entry. When I searched for her again today. The entry was there--with her maiden name as her middle name.

I went and searched at Ancestry.com to see what results I obtained on their site. I was hoping they were using an "older" version of the database.

Ancestry.com was apparently using the same version of the SSDI as GenealogyBank was--the results also had Grandma's maiden name listed on the entry (the second image in this post).

I also searched for Grandma at FamilySearch and there found her without the middle name. Unfortunately, my quick experimentation with FamilySearch's SSDI leads me to conclude that they do not return middle names or initials in the search results even if that information is in the SSDI (this is based upon my quick search of Ufkes relatives who appeared in the SSDI at Ancestry.com and GenealogyBank with middle names or initials).

I still could have sworn the entry for Grandma I located a few weeks ago did not have her maiden name included and actually included her middle initial of "A." But maybe I was dreaming.

At least I learned that the Social Security Death Index at FamilySearch does not give middle names or initials in the search results.

And of course, the SSDI at Rootsweb, hasn't been updated yet to include Grandma's entry.

Copies of SS-5 Forms

They aren't cheap, but in some cases, copies of an SS-5 form may be just what your genealogy research needs. The form shown here is for my wife's grandmother. She listed a different father on this form than her children listed on her death certificate, obituary, and other records for which one of her children was an informant.

The SSDI at Rootsweb can be searched for free. It can also be searched on our page which has more information about the SS-5 form, including how to obtain it. I usually only obtain SS-5 forms when I have a big "brick wall" or records created after the person's death are insufficient.

More SSDI at Rootsweb

I tried it again...using a wildcard in the SSN box on the SSDI at Rootsweb because it looked like wildcards could not be used there. However, the search shown to the right just now brought up 3,080 results. It appears that the wildcard on the SSN works with a certain number of digits in the SSN box and not with other number lengths.

333* did not work
3333* did not work
33334* did work--as shown
333344* did not work
3333441* did not work
and I know there is someone in the SSDI whose Social Security number begins with that string of numbers.
Ok, I have toooooo* much time on my hands...