• Article - Building a Strong Future
• OAH Mission Statement
• Sources of OAH Appeals
• Laws Relating to OAH
• The Chief Administrative Law Judge
• Careers with OAH
• OAH Goals, Objectives, and Performance Measures
• The OAH 2007-13 Strategic Plan

The Office of Administrative Hearings (OAH) is an independent state agency made up of 74 administrative law judges (ALJs) who conduct impartial administrative hearings for Washington's citizens and governmental agencies. It is known as a "central-panel" ALJ agency.

In 1981, the Legislature created OAH to address two fundamental concerns in the state's administrative hearing process: 1) To improve the appearance of fairness issues caused by the adjudicator's employment by the agency responsible for the substantive decision in the dispute; and 2) To recognize the increasing complexity of agency procedural rules governing the hearing process. The result was passage of RCW Chapter 34.12, creating the Office of Administrative Hearings as an independent agency under the direction of a chief administrative law judge.

OAH has five field offices in Olympia, Seattle, Spokane, Vancouver and Yakima. The caseload is vast. Last year, OAH handled more than 56,000 cases for 26 state agencies.

The greatest volume of cases are unemployment insurance cases for the Employment Security Department and public assistance and child support cases for the Department of Social and Health Services. A large number of hearings also are held for the Superintendent of Public Instruction, the Liquor Control Board and the Department of Licensing. Under its legislative mandate, OAH provides due process to the citizens of Washington by providing a prompt and fair opportunity to be heard on disputed matters before state and local agencies. OAH strives to provide access to justice and to eliminate barriers to participation in administrative hearings.

OAH impacts the lives of thousands of residents each year who participate in administrative proceedings. For many, this is their first and only experience with the legal system. Pro se parties often mistrust or fear the hearing process. OAH provides a system through which pro se litigants can navigate easily and participate in a meaningful way. There are no filing fees or costs for a hearing. The rules of evidence are relaxed and OAH staff is readily available to respond to questions about the hearing process.

The mantra for administrative hearings is the prompt resolution of disputes. Appeals received by OAH are promptly set for hearing before an ALJ. The ALJ regulates the course of the hearing, ensuring that a full and complete record is made. This is important because of the large number of pro se parties.

During the hearing, the parties have the right to present witnesses, conduct cross-examination, offer rebuttal evidence and make closing argument. The ALJ plays an active role in the hearing, asking questions on direct and assisting in cross-examination. After the hearing record is closed, the ALJ issues a written decision containing findings of fact and conclusions of law.

On the Horizon

A new chief administrative law judge, Roosevelt Currie Jr., was appointed by Governor Gregoire in April. A former senior ALJ, Judge Currie plans to build on the agency's past successes and make OAH a model for other central panel states to emulate.

Recognizing that staff is the agency's most valuable asset and that without well-trained, professional and caring staff the agency mission could not be accomplished, Judge Currie will promote training and staff development. ALJs and staff look toward the future with eagerness and enthusiasm.

Implementation of the FIT Program: OAH is looking toward expanding the FIT (First in Touch) program in field offices. FIT began as a pilot project to handle questions about hearings in a clear, concise and accurate fashion. The pilot project was successful. While each field office currently has its own way of addressing these matters, a more uniform approach may be explored in the future.

Identifying Interpreter and Other Special Needs Cases: One goal of OAH is to identify and eliminate barriers to participation in hearings as early as possible. OAH often does not learn an interpreter is needed until after the hearing is scheduled. OAH will explore ways to identify when a language interpreter or other accommodation is needed prior to scheduling the hearing. OAH also plans to actively recruit bilingual staff in the future.

Technological Changes: OAH will improve technology to advance its system of providing access to justice. OAH will provide greater information about the hearing process and hearing preparation through a new and improved Web site.

Currently three independent database programs support the different OAH caseloads. The goal is to process the agency's work using a single database. OAH also is looking at changing the software used by the agency to be more in line with other agencies and is exploring digital recording to replace tape-recorded hearings. These technological changes will improve efficiency and productivity overall for the agency.

Performance Evaluations for ALJs: OAH has implemented performance evaluations for ALJs as a systematic and formal way of providing feedback to ALJs on their job performance. Performance evaluations also can be used as a basis for promotion, salary increases and disciplinary action. Most ALJs desire feedback on their performance and welcome the introduction of performance evaluations.

Performance Accountability: With implementation of Governor Gregoire's Government Management Accountability Performance program last year, OAH managers must account for performance and business practices in their work units. Managers will continue to explore new, innovative ways of doing business to increase efficiency and productivity.

Customer Satisfaction Surveys: OAH recently solicited input on the use of telephone hearings and received positive feedback from the public and agencies on their use and convenience. Telephone hearings have reduced travel costs, made scheduling easier and increased overall hearing efficiencies. OAH will continue to seek feedback on its performance from the public, agencies and stakeholders through annual customer satisfaction surveys.

Pro Tem Judges: OAH experiences episodic peaks in caseload. OAH has created a panel of pro tem judges to assist during peak caseload periods and is looking at expanding the list of pro tem ALJs in the future.

Alternative Dispute Resolution: OAH will explore the feasibility of offering alternative methods of dispute resolution, including the possibility of mediation and settlement conferences in certain disputed matters.

OAH is a little-known state agency that has broad impact on individuals, agencies and companies with appeals pending before the agency. OAH provides due process hearings before impartial ALJs with a high degree of sensitivity to providing access to justice for both the represented and pro se. In the coming years, OAH will continue to seek ways to improve its services to become the premier central panel agency in the nation.

The author, Stephanie Croom Williams, is a Senior Administrative Law Judge and OAH Public Information Officer.

Back to top

To hold fair and independent hearings for the public and for government agencies and to issue sound and timely decisions.

Back to top

Sources of OAH Appeals

Appeals filed against actions by the Department of Social and Health Services and the Employment Security Department account for more than 98 percent of the hearings held by OAH. Less frequent customers include:

• Department of Licensing
• Gambling Commission
• Department of Fish & Wildlife
• State Lottery
• State School for the Deaf
• State Patrol
• Department of Agriculture
• Office of the Insurance Commissioner
• State Liquor Control Board
• Executive Ethics Board
• Department of General Administration
• Department of Natural Resources
• Department of Services for the Blind
• Department of Transportation
• Energy Facility Site Evaluation Council
• Department of Veterans Affairs
• Department of Labor and Industries
• Office of the Superintendent of Public Instruction
• Health Care Authority
• Minority and Women's Business Enterprises
• State Human Rights Commission
• Department of Financial Institutions
• Pollution Liability Insurance Agency
• Local Government Whistleblower

DSHS Statistics

The Division of Child Support accounts for about 35 percent of DSHS appeals:

• FYE June '04 - 24,432 DSHS appeals; 8,392 DCS appeals
• FYE June '05 - 25391 DSHS appeals; 9,041 DCS appeals
• July 1 - Dec. 31, '05 - 12,172 DSHS appeals; 4,377 DCS appeals

Over 90 percent of the decisions are issued to meet OAH's internal goals of 16 days (public assistance) and 21 days (DCS) for timely decisions.

Employment Security Department

Over 95% of ESD appeals are filed by claimants or employers regarding eligibility for unemployment insurance benefits. Other appeals involve special benefit programs, such as extended benefits, training benefits, disaster benefits, and benefits for military personnel. Employers also seek relief of benefit charges or challenge tax rates. Some appeals involve multiple claimants in a labor dispute following a strike or lockout.

• FYE June '04 - 40,317 ESD appeals
• FYE June '05 - 30,649 ESD appeals
• July 1 - Dec. 31, '05 - 14,097 ESD appeals

OAH meets U.S. Department of Labor standards for quality (98% of cases reviewed scoring 85% or higher) and timeliness (over 75% of cases closed within 30 days of the the date the appeal was filed, and 97% of cases closed within 90 days of the date the appeal was filed).

Back to top

• RCW Ch. 34.12 - OAH Enabling Act
• WAC Ch. 10-04 - OAH Organization and Public Records Policy
• RCW Ch. 34.05 - WA Administrative Procedure Act
• WAC Ch. 10-08 - OAH Model Rules of Procedure for Hearings
• WAC Ch. 10-16 - Complaint against Administrative Law Judge

Back to top

Goals

1. Quality.  To conduct high quality hearings and issue sound decisions.
2. Timeliness.  To provide timely hearings and decisions.

Quality

1. Continue to meet or exceed quality standards for 90% of hearings and decisions based on random quarterly samples.
2. Continue to obtain 80% positive satisfaction ratings from periodic customer satisfaction surveys.
3. Continue to obtain ratings of 4 or higher in standardized Department of Personnel surveys of employee satisfaction conducted every three years.

Timeliness

1. Complete 80% of all cases within 90 days of filing the appeal.
2. Complete 60% of unemployment insurance benefit cases within 30 days of filing the appeal, pursuant to U.S. Department of Labor timeliness standards.
3. Complete 85% of unemployment insurance benefit cases within 45 days of filing the appeal, pursuant to U.S. Department of Labor timeliness standards.
4. Complete 95% of unemployment insurance benefit cases within 90 days of filing the appeal, pursuant to U.S. Department of Labor timeliness standards.

Efficiency

1. Reduce percentage of budget attributable to costs for office space.
2. Develop system to distribute caseload and resources equitably to different field offices based on consistent measurements of productivity.

Back to top

Back to top