SSA Administrative Law Judge

Hon. Eliaser Chaparro

Last decided Little RockSep 2025
Decisions 3,846since 2016

Hearing scheduled?

Free Benefits Review

Approval rates

Evaluating a judge's history requires looking at the broader context of their peers. The 47% approval rate for Eliaser Chaparro sits within the 27% to 66% range established by the 16 judges whose most recent office on record is Little Rock. This data is derived from 3,846 decisions on record since 2016, providing a view of past performance. 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 3,846

SSA has not published a latest-period approval, fully favorable or denial breakdown for Judge Chaparro. The most recent period with decisions on record is September 26, 2025. Those rows are left out rather than estimated.

Approval rate over time

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

Judge Chaparro
0%20%40%60%80%100%FY16FY25
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

The approval trend for Eliaser Chaparro has fluctuated across the 3,846 decisions on record since 2016. After reaching a high of 55% in 2016, the rate saw a period of decline before showing a recent recovery to 53% in 2024, followed by 45% in 2025. These shifts often reflect changes in the complexity of cases or the medical evidence presented. The recent data suggests a return toward the historical average after the volatility seen in 2021.

Preparing for an SSDI hearing

The guidance below applies to any SSDI hearing, not specifically to Judge Chaparro'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 Little Rock hearing office

Eliaser Chaparro's most recent office on record is the Little Rock hearing office, with decisions there through September 2025. This office serves you and other applicants across Arkansas and is part of a regional network dedicated to processing disability appeals. With 16 judges whose most recent office on record is this one, the office maintains a consistent volume of hearings.

Other judges whose most recent office on record is Little Rock

The Social Security Administration utilizes a workload-balancing algorithm to assign cases, meaning the judge you are assigned is essentially random. There are 16 judges whose most recent office on record is Little Rock. Approval rates across this bench vary significantly, ranging from 27% to 66% since 2016. For preparation purposes, the guidance is 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