Never reassess the CPD RFC. The adjudicator must avoid substitution of judgement, see DI 28005.007.

If the CPD should have included an RFC assessment but does not, assign the maximum RFC consistent with an allowance.

For Title XVI recipients originally allowed as children and who attained age 18 before 08/22/96, the continuing disability review (CDR) evaluation process is applied.

Certain cases require a disability redetermination instead of a CDR. If the recipient was originally allowed as a Title XVI child and no age-18 disability redetermination was done, follow the instructions in DI 28005.003B.

Use the RFC from the CPD, whether it was recorded on a form or noted elsewhere in file. Do not substitute current judgment for that of the prior adjudicator.

If a CPD evaluated under the medical improvement review standard (MIRS) included multiple RFC assessments, use the CPD RFC that considered all impairments.

If:

• •

  The CPD used a medical/vocational basis but did not include an RFC assessment, or

• •

  The CPD is assumed to be medical vocational (see DI 28015.005B.2.), then

Assess the individual's prior RFC based on all available evidence concerning the impairment(s) and particular limitation(s) at the time of the CPD, and assign the maximum RFC consistent with the CPD evidence, per DI 28015.005.

For additional general information on RFC evaluation, see DI 24510.001, DI 24510.005, and DI 25020.005.

For additional information on how to complete an RFC assessment for a CDR, see DI 28015.300 and DI 28015.855.

If the beneficiary’s age, education, and work experience were such that an RFC consistent with light work would have resulted in an allowance but an RFC for more than light work would have resulted in a denial, assign a “prior RFC" consistent with light work.