This report to Congress examines the Social Security Administration's approach to assessing children's impairments through the individualized functional assessment (IFA) process mandated by the Supreme Court in Sullivan v. Zebley. Specifically, the report assesses the IFA's impact on number of Supplemental Security Income recipients, IFA's implementation, and its vulnerability to coaching. Investigators found fundamental flaws in the IFA process, and cited the subjective nature of adjudicators' assessments of children's behavior as a barrier to consistent and reasonable administration of the program, particularly for children with behavioral and learning disorders. Although rapid program growth is seen as leading to a public perception that many parents coach their children to fake mental impairments, little evidence of widespread coaching was found. It is noted, however, that substantiating and measuring allegations of coaching is "virtually impossible." It is suggested that the Congress consider taking action to improve and objectify eligibility determinations, possibly by eliminating the IFA altogether and directing that functional criteria be revised. Appendices describe the study's scope and methodology, efforts to effect implementation of the Supreme Court's decision, and studies previously done. (PB)