Approval rates
This table displays the approval rate for Joanne E. Adamczyk based on the 372 decisions recorded between 2016 and 2017. These figures are compared against the range of other judges who have decided cases at this office in the most recent SSA data. This data provides a statistical view of past activity at the Flint office.
Judge Adamczyk is not in SSA's latest disposition file, so there is no 12-month figure. The most recent period with decisions on record is September 29, 2017. Those rows are left out rather than estimated.
Judge Adamczyk isn't in SSA's latest disposition file, so the judge comparison tool, which compares active judges over the same 12 months, leaves them out.
Approval rate over time
Year-over-year approval rate across Judge Adamczyk's docket. Annual rates fluctuate with the mix of cases SSA assigns; the longer-run pattern is more informative than any single year.
Decision pattern
Joanne E. Adamczyk's record includes 372 decisions issued between 2016 and 2017. The approval rate was 79% in 2016 and 83% in 2017. This data reflects the judge's activity during that specific period on the bench.
Preparing for an SSDI hearing
The guidance below applies to any SSDI hearing, not specifically to Judge Adamczyk's bench. Judge-specific preparation guidance requires a corpus of public Appeals Council decisions involving each judge, which we haven't built yet.
- Bring a clean treating-physician record. Longitudinal primary-care or specialist notes spanning the disability period, with consistent symptom documentation, are typically the strongest evidence at hearing. A single month's records usually aren't enough.
- Don't rely on consultative exams alone. If your medical evidence is built primarily around a one-time CE finding, expect detailed questioning. Supplement with treating-source statements where possible.
- Prepare for daily-activity questions. Have honest, specific answers about a typical day. Answers that conflict with the medical record (in either direction) tend to hurt credibility.
- Expect transferable-skills probing. A vocational expert will usually testify about jobs available to someone with your limitations. Your representative should be prepared to cross-examine.
About the Flint hearing office
The Flint Hearing Office serves you in Michigan and is part of the regional SSA network. There are 9 judges whose most recent office on record is this one. You can expect a standard administrative hearing process at this location.
Other judges whose most recent office on record is Flint
The Social Security Administration uses a workload-balancing algorithm to assign cases, meaning the judge you are assigned is essentially random. Among the 9 judges whose most recent office on record is Flint, 4 of them decided cases here in SSA's latest file and range from 42% to 59% on their since-2016 records.
Approval rates change with a lawyer
Source: U.S. Government Accountability Office, GAO-18-37. The 3× gap is a population-wide average across all judges; individual outcomes vary.
Frequently asked questions
Joanne E. Adamczyk has an 80% approval rate on her record through 2017. In comparison, the 4 judges who decided cases at the Flint office in the latest SSA file range from 42% to 59% on their since-2016 records. An attorney can help you understand how these differences might impact your specific case.
The approval rate for Joanne E. Adamczyk was 79% in 2016 and 83% in 2017. This reflects the data on record for those years. An attorney can help you prepare for your hearing.
No, you cannot request a specific judge for your hearing. The Social Security Administration uses an automated workload-balancing algorithm to assign cases to judges. An attorney can help you prepare for the hearing regardless of which judge is assigned to your case.
An approval rate is a statistical summary of past decisions and does not predict the outcome of your specific hearing. The strength of your medical evidence and testimony remains the most important factor in your claim. An attorney can help you prepare your case to meet the necessary legal standards.
