The rationale’s medical-vocational discussion must contain the following findings of fact:

1. 1. 

   The individual's age. This fact is usually the alleged age, although the field office (FO) may develop proof of age. If other evidence, such as medical records, raised questions about the individual’s age, the adjudicator will address how any material discrepancy was resolved.

2. 2. 

   The individual's education. This fact is usually the individual's allegation, absent evidence to the contrary.

3. 3. 

   The physical and mental demands of the individual's past relevant work (PRW) experience.

4. 4. 

   A statement indicating the individual’s residual functional capacity (RFC) or mental residual functional capacity (MRFC) does not permit performing any PRW.

5. 5. 

   Consideration of the medical-vocational profiles discussed in DI 25010.001.

6. 6. 

   How the findings relate to an appendix 2 rule (commonly known as the “vocational rule(s),” “voc-rule(s),” or “grids”):

   • •

     That directs a conclusion of “not disabled,” or

   • •

     When used as a framework: The adjudicator will discuss the vocational implications of RFC, age, education, work experience, and the remaining occupational base. The adjudicator will provide an explanation of why these factors show the ability to engage in other substantial gainful activity (SGA).

   In addition to the findings of fact, when a finding of “not disabled” is based on:

   • •

     Transferable skills, the rationale must provide an assessment of those skills;

   • •

     Education that provides direct entry into skilled work, the adjudicator must discuss the education that provides for direct entry; and

   • •

     Ability to do unskilled work, the adjudicator must not discuss transferable skills or education that provides for direct entry into skilled work. Transferability and education that provide for entry into skilled work do not apply to unskilled work.

When a voc-rule providing for a finding of “not disabled” is met, the adjudicator must cite the specific rule in the rationale, but need not cite examples of jobs the individual can do, unless the determination is based on transferable skills or education that provides for direct entry into skilled work. For a rationale example, see DI 28090.300I.

When the voc-rules provide a “framework” to determine a finding of “not disabled,” the rationale must contain either:

• •

  Examples of jobs (usually three) the individual can do functionally and vocationally, and provide a statement of the incidence of such work in the region in which the individual resides or in several regions of the country, or

• •

  The Social Security Ruling (SSR) that supports finding a minimal or no effect on the occupational base.

For more information on using the voc-rules as a framework, see DI 25025.005C.

• •

  DI 25010.001 Medical-Vocational Profiles

• •

  DI 25015.005 Age as a Vocational Factor

• •

  DI 25015.006 Borderline Age

• •

  DI 25015.010 Education as a Vocational Factor

• •

  DI 25015.017 Transferability of Skills Assessment Policy

• •

  DI 25025.001 The Medical-Vocational Guidelines

• •

  DI 25025.035 Tables No. 1, 2, 3, and Rule 204.00