SSA Administrative Law Judge

Hon. Stephen M. Hanekamp

Last decided St LouisSep 2025
Decisions 3,345since 2016

Hearing scheduled?

Free Benefits Review

Approval rates

Stephen M. Hanekamp has maintained a 56% approval rate across 3,345 decisions on record since 2016. This sits within the broader range of 30% to 78% observed among the 20 judges whose most recent office on record is the St Louis hearing office. These figures provide a statistical baseline for the office, though aggregate rates describe past decisions rather than predictions for your individual hearing.

All decisions on record SSA records since 2016
Approval rate 56%
Decisions on record 3,345

SSA has not published a latest-period approval, fully favorable or denial breakdown for Judge Hanekamp. 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 Hanekamp's docket. Annual rates fluctuate with the mix of cases SSA assigns; the longer-run pattern is more informative than any single year.

Judge Hanekamp
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 rate for Stephen M. Hanekamp has fluctuated across the 3,345 decisions on record since 2016. While the rate reached 63% in 2016, it has seen various shifts over the years, including a low of 48% in 2023 and 52% in 2025. This pattern shows that your judge's decision-making reflects changes in the evidence presented or the specific mix of cases assigned. Thorough preparation of your medical evidence remains the most effective way to address these variations.

Preparing for an SSDI hearing

The guidance below applies to any SSDI hearing, not specifically to Judge Hanekamp'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 St Louis hearing office

Stephen M. Hanekamp's most recent office on record is the St Louis hearing office. This office includes a bench of 20 judges whose most recent office on record is this location. You can expect a formal administrative process focused on the medical and vocational evidence of your disability. You can visit the St Louis hearing office page for the full roster of judges.

Other judges whose most recent office on record is St Louis

The Social Security Administration uses a workload-balancing algorithm to assign cases, meaning your judge is assigned randomly. There are 20 judges whose most recent office on record is the St Louis hearing office. Approval rates among this bench vary significantly, ranging from 30% to 78% on their since-2016 records. Your preparation remains consistent regardless of which judge is assigned to your case.

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