SSA Administrative Law Judge

Hon. Nicole S. Forbes-Schmitt

On record 3,535 decisions since 2016

Hearing scheduled?

Free Benefits Review

Approval rates

Comparing approval rates requires looking at the same timeframes to ensure accuracy. While Nicole S. Forbes-Schmitt has a 54% lifetime approval rate, her latest-period approval rate of 57% sits 9 points above the Charleston SC office average of 48%. These figures rely on a robust docket of 3,535 lifetime decisions, providing a stable view of her decision-making history. These aggregate rates describe past decisions rather than predicting the outcome of your specific hearing.

Lifetime SSA records since 2016
Approval rate 54%
Decisions on record 3,535
Latest SSA reporting period July 31, 2026
Metric Judge Forbes-Schmitt Charleston SC National
Approval rate 57% 48% 58%
Fully favorable 47%
Denials 43%

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

Judge Forbes-Schmitt
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

The record for Nicole S. Forbes-Schmitt spans from 2016 to 2026, showing a steady pattern of approvals. Her yearly approval rates have fluctuated between 50% and 61% over the last decade, reflecting a consistent approach to case evaluation. The latest period shows a 57% approval rate, which remains in line with her long-term performance. This trend suggests a stable decision-making environment for you as you prepare for your hearing.

Preparing for an SSDI hearing

The guidance below applies to any SSDI hearing, not specifically to Judge Forbes-Schmitt'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 Charleston SC hearing office

The Charleston SC hearing office serves you and other claimants throughout the region, managing a diverse caseload of disability applications. With 15 judges on record, the office maintains an office-wide latest-period approval rate of 48%. You can expect a formal hearing process focused on your medical evidence and vocational testimony. You can see the Charleston SC 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 15 judges on record at this office since 2016, 5 of whom reported in the latest period. Approval rates across this bench vary significantly, ranging from 17% to 87% on lifetime records. You can find more information on the office's overall performance on the Charleston SC hearing office page.

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