SSA Administrative Law Judge

Hon. Alice F. Blackmore

Position Administrative Law Judge
On record SSA records since 2023
Decisions 945 lifetime

Hearing scheduled?

Free Benefits Review
Free
2 minutes
Confidential

Approval rates

Comparing Alice F. Blackmore's performance requires looking at both lifetime and latest-period data. Her lifetime approval rate of 63% sits within the broader 36% to 83% range observed across the Oak Park bench. In the most recent reporting period, she approved 75% of cases, which is 9 percentage points higher than the office-wide latest-period average. Aggregate rates describe past decisions, not predictions for your individual hearing.

Lifetime SSA records since 2023
Approval rate 63%
Decisions on record 945
Latest SSA reporting period July 31, 2026
Metric Judge Blackmore Oak Park National
Approval rate 75% 66% 58%
Fully favorable 71%
Denials 25%

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

Judge Blackmore
0%20%40%60%80%100%FY23FY26
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

Alice F. Blackmore has issued 945 decisions since her record began in 2023. Her approval rate has shown a recent trend, moving from 56% in 2023 to 75% in the most recent reporting period. This shift reflects a change in her recent decision-making pattern compared to her earlier record. The latest period represents a departure from her historical average.

Preparing for an SSDI hearing

The guidance below applies to any SSDI hearing, not specifically to Judge Blackmore'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 Oak Park hearing office

The Oak Park hearing office serves you and other claimants throughout Michigan and the surrounding region. It maintains a diverse bench of 20 judges on record, with an office-wide latest-period approval rate of 66%. You can expect a formal administrative process focused on your medical evidence and vocational testimony. You can see the Oak Park Hearing Office page for the full ALJ roster.

Other judges at this hearing office

The Social Security Administration assigns cases using a workload-balancing algorithm, meaning your assignment to a specific judge is essentially random. There are 20 judges on record at this office since 2016, 10 of whom reported in the latest period. Approval rates across this bench vary significantly, ranging from 36% to 83% lifetime. For preparation purposes, the guidance is the same regardless of which judge you are assigned.

Approval rates change with a lawyer

WITHOUT A LAWYER
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