SSA Administrative Law Judge

Hon. Mark Baker

Last decided RichmondJul 2026
Decisions 2,787since 2016

Hearing scheduled?

Free Benefits Review

Approval rates

Comparing judicial approval rates requires looking at consistent timeframes. Mark Baker's 47% approval rate on record since 2016 provides a long-term baseline, while latest-period data offers a view of more recent activity. When evaluated against the 13 judges whose most recent office on record is the Richmond office, Mark Baker sits within a range of 18% to 59%. Aggregate rates describe past decisions, not predictions for your individual hearing.

All decisions on record SSA records since 2016
Approval rate 47%
Decisions on record 2,787
Latest SSA reporting period July 31, 2026
Metric Judge Baker Richmond National
Approval rate 56% 45% 58%
Fully favorable 49% — —
Denials 44% — —

Office- and national-level breakdowns of fully favorable vs denial rates aren't currently published by SSA in the per-office disposition data. The judge's own breakdown is the detail we have today.

Approval rate over time

Year-over-year approval rate across Judge Baker's docket. Annual rates fluctuate with the mix of cases SSA assigns; the longer-run pattern is more informative than any single year.

Judge Baker
0%20%40%60%80%100%FY16FY26
Source: SSA OHO disposition data. Approval rate (SSA's term: allowance rate) = fully favorable + partially favorable decisions divided by total decisions, which exclude dismissals.

Decision pattern

Since September 2016, Mark Baker has issued 2,787 decisions. The yearly trend shows fluctuation, with approval rates moving from 50% in 2016 to 56% in the most recent partial fiscal year. This latest-period performance of 56% is higher than the long-term average of 47%. These shifts often reflect changes in the complexity of cases or the quality of evidence presented, rather than a fixed judicial philosophy.

Preparing for an SSDI hearing

The guidance below applies to any SSDI hearing, not specifically to Judge Baker'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.

Hearing scheduled?

Free 2 minutes Confidential

About the Richmond hearing office

Mark Baker's most recent office on record is the Richmond hearing office, with decisions there through July 2026. This office serves you throughout the region, maintaining a bench of 13 judges whose most recent office on record is this location. With an office-wide latest-period approval rate of 45%, you can expect a review of your medical and vocational evidence.

Other judges whose most recent office on record is Richmond

The Social Security Administration uses a workload-balancing algorithm to assign cases, meaning the judge you are assigned is essentially random. There are 13 judges whose most recent office on record is the Richmond office, and 5 of them decided cases here in SSA's latest file through July 2026. Approval rates across this bench vary significantly, ranging from 18% to 59% on their records since 2016. Your preparation remains consistent regardless of which judge you are assigned.

Approval rates change with a lawyer

WITHOUT A LAWYER
1×
baseline approval rate
Unrepresented claimants
WITH A LAWYER
~3×
higher approval rate
Represented claimants

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