Record terms, in plain English.

These are names used on disability files. We explain the words. We do not invent findings. If you came here asking what is RFC for SSDI, start with the RFC entry below, then read how it differs from an MSS and from a plain-English file review.

Medical record review (what Security in Social sells)

A medical record review is a plain-English read of the medical file you already have.

You send dated records that belong to you (or to the person you help). The return is three things in everyday words: what the records show, what is still missing, and a clear next step. Lifetime review is $395. The yearly app is $129.99. Full dollar tracks live on pricing. Depth on what the review includes lives on what you get and the medical record review page.

We say no if the records are not enough. We never invent a diagnosis. We do not sell doctor letters on this site. A review is a read of paper and charts you supply. It is not an MSS, not an RFC form, and not a consultative exam.

Medical source statement (MSS)

A medical source statement is a written opinion from a doctor about what you can still do despite impairments.

On a disability file, you may see "MSS" as a label for that opinion. It is evidence from a medical source, not the same thing as a list of visit notes. Treating notes show what was observed and treated on dated visits. An MSS is the clinician's written view of remaining work-related limits when one exists in the file.

We explain the term. We do not sell or complete MSS letters on this site.

How it shows up on a file (no invented PHI): a signed form or letter from a treating clinician that answers limits such as sit, stand, lift, or attend, sometimes attached to treatment notes. If the file only has visit summaries and no opinion form, that is normal. Many claims never include a formal MSS.

Residual functional capacity (RFC)

Residual functional capacity is how a disability file describes the most you can still do at work despite documented limits.

If you are searching what is RFC for SSDI, that is the short answer. SSA rules describe RFC as the most you can still do despite your limitations, based on all relevant evidence in the case record. Physical RFC language often covers sitting, standing, walking, lifting, carrying, and similar exertional tasks when the records support those details. It is an administrative assessment used in the disability process. It is not a diagnosis, and it is not a product you buy from us.

SSA's SSR 96-8p explains how residual functional capacity is assessed in initial claims. The Title II regulation at 20 CFR § 404.1545 uses the same "most you can still do" framing.

We explain the term. We do not sell or complete RFC documents on this site.

How it shows up on a file: you may see RFC language in agency worksheets, medical consultant findings, or hearing decisions. You will not always see the letters "RFC" stamped on your own portal downloads. The idea still matters: work limits need support in dated medical evidence, not only in how you feel on a hard day.

Medical residual functional capacity (MRFC)

Medical residual functional capacity is a way the file describes mental work limits for a disability claim.

Think of MRFC as the mental-limits cousin of physical RFC. The focus shifts to abilities such as understanding, remembering, concentrating, interacting with others, and adapting to workplace change when mental impairments are part of the claim. The same integrity rule applies: the file has to support those limits with records, not with guesswork.

We explain the term. We do not sell or complete MRFC documents on this site.

How it shows up on a file: mental-health treatment notes, psychological testing summaries, or agency mental RFC worksheets when those exist. A diagnosis label alone is not the same as an assessed set of mental work limits.

Consultative exam

A consultative exam is an exam arranged in the disability process when the agency needs more medical information. It is separate from a private record review.

Disability Determination Services may schedule a consultative exam if treating-source records are incomplete or unclear. The exam is part of the government claim process. It is not something you purchase from Security in Social.

Security in Social does not provide consultative exams. Our product is a read of records you already have, plus an optional app for questions. It is not an exam appointment and not a substitute for one the agency may arrange.

For a short honesty door on thin files, see When we say no. Deeper sufficiency literacy belongs on file-ready pages, not in this glossary.

File gap / not enough records

A file gap is a part of the story the medical file does not yet support.

A gap list names those holes in plain words: missing providers, missing date ranges, notes that name a diagnosis but never describe function, mental-health charts that live in a separate portal, imaging that is years old with nothing newer. Gaps are file facts. They are not a judgment about whether your symptoms are real.

If the file is too thin, we say no. That is honesty, not a failed sale. We never invent a diagnosis so a review can look complete. SAMPLE language only on this public site. Do not paste live private records into a demo.

MSS vs a plain-English file review

People often mix up a medical source statement with a file review. They are different animals.

An MSS is opinion evidence from a medical source when one exists. A Security in Social review is a read of the dated records you supply. We explain MSS, RFC, and MRFC as words on a file. We do not complete those documents for sale.

Frequently Asked Questions