SSA Administrative Law Judge

Hon. Janice E. Barnes-Williams

Last decided Kansas CityJul 2026
Decisions 3,031since 2016

Hearing scheduled?

Free Benefits Review

Approval rates

Comparing approval rates requires looking at consistent timeframes. While your judge's overall approval rate since 2016 is 34%, her latest-period approval rate is 42%. This latest figure sits 14 percentage points below the Kansas City Hearing Office's latest-period rate of 56%. These statistics are derived from a docket of 3,031 decisions on record since 2016. Aggregate rates describe past decisions, not predictions for your individual hearing.

All decisions on record SSA records since 2016
Approval rate 34%
Decisions on record 3,031
Latest SSA reporting period July 31, 2026
Metric Judge Barnes-Williams Kansas City National
Approval rate 42% 56% 58%
Fully favorable 33% — —
Denials 58% — —

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 Barnes-Williams's docket. Annual rates fluctuate with the mix of cases SSA assigns; the longer-run pattern is more informative than any single year.

Judge Barnes-Williams
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 2016, the approval rate for Janice E. Barnes-Williams has shown varied movement. After reaching 44% in 2018, the rate saw a decline in subsequent years before showing more recent fluctuations. The latest-period approval rate of 42% is higher than the long-term average of 34% recorded since 2016. This recent activity reflects a shift in the pattern of decisions compared to the mid-period lows.

Preparing for an SSDI hearing

The guidance below applies to any SSDI hearing, not specifically to Judge Barnes-Williams'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 Kansas City hearing office

The Kansas City Hearing Office serves you across the region. With 17 judges whose most recent office on record is this location, the office maintains an office-wide latest-period approval rate of 56%. You can expect a standard administrative process focused on your medical and vocational evidence. You can see the Kansas City Hearing Office page for the full ALJ roster.

Other judges whose most recent office on record is Kansas City

The Social Security Administration uses a workload-balancing algorithm to assign cases, meaning your specific judge is essentially random. There are 17 judges whose most recent office on record is the Kansas City Hearing Office, 12 of whom decided cases here in the latest file through July 2026. Approval rates for this bench range from 33% to 77% based on records since 2016. Your preparation remains the same 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