SSA Administrative Law Judge

Hon. Lana Johnson

Last decided EvanstonJul 2026
Decisions 4,103since 2016

Hearing scheduled?

Free Benefits Review

Approval rates

Comparing Lana Johnson's 52% approval rate on record since 2016 against the 45% to 79% range of the Evanston bench provides a view of how this judge aligns with local peers. In the latest reporting period, the 54% approval rate sits 7 points below the office-wide 61% rate and matches the state average of 54%. These figures are based on a volume of 4,103 decisions on record since 2016. Aggregate rates describe past decisions, not predictions for your individual hearing.

All decisions on record SSA records since 2016
Approval rate 52%
Decisions on record 4,103
Latest SSA reporting period July 31, 2026
Metric Judge Johnson Evanston National
Approval rate 54% 61% 58%
Fully favorable 40% — —
Denials 46% — —

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

Judge Johnson
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 January 2016, the approval rate for Lana Johnson has fluctuated, showing a peak of 60% in 2020 and a low of 42% in 2022. The record includes 4,103 decisions, with the most recent fiscal year showing a 54% approval rate. This latest period reflects a continuation of the pattern observed over the last decade. While yearly rates vary, the overall trend remains consistent with the long-term average on record.

Preparing for an SSDI hearing

The guidance below applies to any SSDI hearing, not specifically to Judge Johnson'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 Evanston hearing office

The Evanston hearing office serves you and other claimants across Illinois and the surrounding region. With 15 judges whose most recent office on record is this location, the office maintains an office-wide latest-period approval rate of 61%. You can expect a formal administrative process where evidence quality is the primary factor in your outcome. You can see the Evanston Hearing Office page for the full roster.

Other judges whose most recent office on record is Evanston

The Social Security Administration uses a workload-balancing algorithm to assign cases, meaning your assignment to a specific judge is essentially random. There are 15 judges whose most recent office on record is the Evanston office, with 6 of them having decided cases in the latest file through July 2026. Approval rates across this bench vary significantly, ranging from 45% to 79% since 2016. Preparation remains 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