SSA Administrative Law Judge

Hon. Emily Y. Howard

Last decided MaconJul 2026
Decisions 4,051since 2016

Hearing scheduled?

Free Benefits Review

Approval rates

Evaluating a judge's history requires comparing their performance against the broader bench at their office. While Emily Y. Howard has an approval rate of 31% since 2016, the 13 judges whose most recent office on record is the Macon office show a range of 31% to 72% for the same period. In the most recent reporting period, the judge's 18% approval rate is below the office average of 46%. These figures are based on thousands of decisions, providing a view of past trends.

All decisions on record SSA records since 2016
Approval rate 31%
Decisions on record 4,051
Latest SSA reporting period July 31, 2026
Metric Judge Howard Macon National
Approval rate 18% 46% 58%
Fully favorable 13% — —
Denials 82% — —

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

Judge Howard
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 2016, Emily Y. Howard has issued 4,051 decisions. The yearly trend shows variance, with approval rates reaching 46% in 2020 before trending downward. The latest reporting period shows an 18% approval rate, reflecting a continuation of the lower approval trend observed in recent years. This pattern suggests that recent decisions have been more restrictive than the historical average, though changes in case mix or evidence quality may influence these outcomes.

Preparing for an SSDI hearing

The guidance below applies to any SSDI hearing, not specifically to Judge Howard'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 Macon hearing office

The Macon hearing office serves you and other claimants in the region. This office maintains a bench of 13 judges whose most recent office on record is this location. In the latest reporting period, the office-wide approval rate was 46%. You can expect a standard hearing process focused on the medical and vocational evidence presented in your file.

Other judges whose most recent office on record is Macon

The Social Security Administration uses a workload-balancing algorithm to assign cases, meaning the judge you are assigned is essentially random. There are 13 judges whose most recent office on record is the Macon office, and 7 of them decided cases here in SSA's latest file through July 2026. Approval rates across this bench range from 31% to 72% for cases decided since 2016. For preparation purposes, the guidance is the same regardless of which judge you are assigned.

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