Mark A. Clayton is an SSA Administrative Law Judge at the Springfield MO hearing office. With a 34% lifetime approval rate over 19,076 lifetime decisions, his record sits below the national average of 58%. Because case assignment is random, understanding these patterns is helpful for your preparation. Aggregate rates describe past decisions, not predictions for your individual hearing. An attorney can help you prepare for this judge's specific bench.
This page presents publicly available SSA Office of Hearings Operations disposition data, with no editorial rating or evaluation. ALJs are independent decisionmakers; aggregate statistics describe past patterns, not predictions of how any individual case will be decided. Information here is provided for hearing preparation, not as legal advice.
Approval rates
Evaluating a judge's history requires looking at the broader context of their tenure. While the national average for SSDI approvals currently stands at 58%, Judge Clayton's lifetime rate is 34% based on 19,076 lifetime decisions. Comparing this to the 41% approval rate seen across the Springfield MO office provides a clearer picture of the local environment. Aggregate rates describe past decisions, not predictions for individual hearings.
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 Clayton'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
Over a 10-year tenure, Judge Clayton has navigated a varying caseload. The yearly trend shows fluctuations, with approval rates moving from 29% in 2016 to a peak of 41% in 2023, before settling at 38% in 2025. These shifts often correlate with changes in the complexity of cases or the quality of evidence presented in court.
Preparing for an SSDI hearing
The guidance below applies to any SSDI hearing, not specifically to Judge Clayton'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 with Judge Clayton? A free benefit check tells you if you qualify.
Free Benefits ReviewAbout the Springfield MO hearing office
The Springfield MO Hearing Office serves a significant population across Missouri. With a bench of 6 judges, the office manages a high volume of disability claims, maintaining a recent office-wide approval rate of 41%. You can visit the Springfield MO Hearing Office page for the full ALJ roster.
Other judges at this hearing office
The Social Security Administration utilizes a workload-balancing algorithm to assign cases, meaning your assignment to a specific judge is essentially random. Within the Springfield MO office, lifetime approval rates among the bench range from 27% to 48%. Because you cannot choose your judge, focusing on the strength of your medical evidence remains the most effective strategy.
Your odds change dramatically with a lawyer
SSDI hearing approval rates — represented vs. on your own
Source: U.S. Government Accountability Office, GAO-18-37. The 3× gap is a population-wide average across all judges; individual outcomes vary.
