Paul W. Goodale has a lifetime approval rate of 47% over 22,003 lifetime decisions. While his recent approval rate has risen to 54%, it remains below the Providence office average. Aggregate rates describe past decisions, not predictions for your individual hearing. An attorney can help you prepare for the specific requirements of this judge's 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
Judge Goodale has maintained a consistent presence in the Providence Hearing Office over his 10-year tenure. While his lifetime approval rate stands at 47%, recent reporting shows a 54% approval rate, reflecting a shift in his decision-making patterns. This data is drawn from a substantial docket of 22,003 lifetime decisions, providing a stable look at his judicial history compared to the 58% national average. These aggregate rates describe past decisions rather than predicting the outcome of your specific hearing.
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 Goodale'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 the last decade, your judge's approval rate has shown a steady upward trajectory. Starting at 42% in 2016, the rate has gradually climbed to 56% in 2025. This trend suggests that the judge's recent approach to evidence and testimony may be evolving. While the latest period approval rate of 54% remains below the office average, the consistent growth indicates a shift in how cases are being evaluated.
Preparing for an SSDI hearing
The guidance below applies to any SSDI hearing, not specifically to Judge Goodale'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 Goodale? Free, confidential — see if you qualify for SSDI.
Free Benefits ReviewAbout the Providence hearing office
The Providence Hearing Office serves you and other claimants across Rhode Island and parts of the surrounding region. It is staffed by 6 administrative law judges who manage a high volume of disability claims. The office currently maintains an approval rate of 57%, which aligns closely with state averages.
Other judges at this hearing office
The SSA uses a workload-balancing algorithm to assign cases, meaning your assignment to a specific judge is essentially random. Within the Providence Hearing Office, lifetime approval rates among the bench range from 32% to 74%. Because of this variance, understanding the office environment is as important as knowing your specific judge.
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.
