SSA Administrative Law Judge

Hon. Valencia Jarvis

Last decided Ft LauderdaleJul 2026
Decisions 2,564since 2016

Hearing scheduled?

Free Benefits Review

Approval rates

Comparing approval rates requires looking at consistent timeframes. The 21% approval rate on record since 2016 provides a long-term view, while the latest-period data offers a snapshot of recent activity. When evaluating these figures, consider that the 19 judges whose most recent office on record is this one show a wide range of outcomes, from 21% to 87%. These statistics are derived from 2,564 decisions on record.

All decisions on record SSA records since 2016
Approval rate 21%
Decisions on record 2,564
Latest SSA reporting period July 31, 2026
Metric Judge Jarvis Ft Lauderdale National
Approval rate 12% 51% 58%
Fully favorable 6% — —
Denials 88% — —

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

Judge Jarvis
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

The approval rate for Valencia Jarvis has fluctuated across the 2,564 decisions on record since 2016. After reaching 38% in 2018, the annual approval rate has trended downward. The most recent reporting period shows an approval rate of 12%, which is below the long-term average. This recent data reflects a continuation of the lower approval trend observed since 2022, though each case remains unique based on the evidence you present.

Preparing for an SSDI hearing

The guidance below applies to any SSDI hearing, not specifically to Judge Jarvis'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 Ft Lauderdale hearing office

Valencia Jarvis's most recent office on record is the Ft Lauderdale hearing office, with decisions there through July 2026. This office serves claimants in Florida and operates as part of the broader SSA regional network. With 19 judges whose most recent office on record is this one, the office manages a significant volume of disability hearings. You can see the Ft Lauderdale Hearing Office page for the full ALJ roster.

Other judges whose most recent office on record is Ft Lauderdale

The Social Security Administration assigns cases using a workload-balancing algorithm, meaning the judge you are assigned is essentially random. There are 19 judges whose most recent office on record is this one. Approval rates for these judges vary significantly, ranging from 21% to 87% on their since-2016 records.

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