SSA Administrative Law Judge

Hon. Shannon H. Heath

Last decided Franklin TNJul 2026
Decisions 3,456since 2016

Hearing scheduled?

Free Benefits Review

Approval rates

Comparing approval rates requires looking at data from the same timeframe. While your judge's approval rate of 29% reflects the entire period since 2016, recent performance shows a 25% approval rate in the latest reporting period. This is 30 points lower than the Franklin TN office's latest-period rate of 55%. These figures are based on a significant volume of decisions, providing a look at past trends.

All decisions on record SSA records since 2016
Approval rate 29%
Decisions on record 3,456
Latest SSA reporting period July 31, 2026
Metric Judge Heath Franklin TN National
Approval rate 25% 55% 58%
Fully favorable 18% — —
Denials 75% — —

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

Judge Heath
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

Since June 2016, the approval rate for Shannon H. Heath has fluctuated. The yearly trend indicates a shift in outcomes, with the most recent fiscal year-to-date period showing a 25% approval rate. This latest period reflects a continuation of the lower-end approval patterns observed in recent years. These variations in the data may be influenced by changes in the complexity of cases or the evidence you present during your hearing.

Preparing for an SSDI hearing

The guidance below applies to any SSDI hearing, not specifically to Judge Heath'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 Franklin TN hearing office

Shannon H. Heath's most recent office on record is the Franklin TN hearing office, with decisions there through July 2026. This office serves the region and manages a diverse caseload across the bench of 14 judges. The office-wide approval rate in the latest reporting period was 55%. You can expect a formal administrative process focused on the medical and vocational evidence presented in your case.

Other judges whose most recent office on record is Franklin TN

The Social Security Administration uses a workload-balancing algorithm to assign cases, meaning the judge you are assigned is essentially random. There are 14 judges whose most recent office on record is the Franklin TN office, and 10 of them decided cases here in SSA's latest file through July 2026. Approval rates for this bench range from 29% to 76% based on their records since 2016.

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