Richard E. Guida is an SSA ALJ at the Harrisburg Hearing Office with a lifetime approval rate of 29% across 27,311 decisions. Because case assignment is random, the judge you draw matters significantly. 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
Comparing a judge's performance to broader benchmarks provides context for your upcoming hearing. While the national average approval rate sits at 58%, Judge Guida has maintained a lifetime approval rate of 29% over 27,311 decisions. These figures are based on historical data, offering a view of past trends. Aggregate rates describe past decisions, not predictions for your individual 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 Guida'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 Guida has presided over 27,311 decisions. The yearly approval trend has fluctuated, showing periods of higher allowance rates in the late 2010s followed by more recent variations. The latest reporting period shows an approval rate of 23%, which represents a shift from the lifetime average. This pattern suggests that the judge's approach to evidence and case requirements remains consistent with their established judicial history.
Preparing for an SSDI hearing
The guidance below applies to any SSDI hearing, not specifically to Judge Guida'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 Guida? Free, confidential — see if you qualify for SSDI.
Check My BenefitsAbout the Harrisburg hearing office
The Harrisburg Hearing Office serves a broad population across Pennsylvania, managing a high volume of disability claims. With a team of 6 judges, the office handles cases with varying degrees of complexity and evidence requirements. You can expect a formal process focused on the specific medical and vocational documentation you provide. You can see the Harrisburg 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 judge is selected randomly. Within the Harrisburg Hearing Office, lifetime approval rates among the bench vary, ranging from 29% to 65%. This variance highlights why understanding the local judicial environment is a standard part of your case preparation.
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.
