SSA Administrative Law Judge

Hon. Tracy LaChance

Last decided ManchesterJul 2026
Decisions 3,021since 2016

Hearing scheduled?

Free Benefits Review

Approval rates

The approval rates for Tracy LaChance are evaluated against the broader bench at the Manchester hearing office to provide context for your hearing. While the judge's overall approval rate since 2016 is 63%, recent data shows a 60% approval rate in the latest reporting period. This latest-period performance is 3 percentage points higher than the office average of 57%. These figures are derived from a significant volume of decisions, providing a stable statistical baseline.

All decisions on record SSA records since 2016
Approval rate 63%
Decisions on record 3,021
Latest SSA reporting period July 31, 2026
Metric Judge LaChance Manchester National
Approval rate 60% 57% 58%
Fully favorable 49% — —
Denials 40% — —

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

Judge LaChance
0%20%40%60%80%100%FY17FY26
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, Tracy LaChance has maintained a varied approval pattern across 3,021 decisions. The annual approval rate has fluctuated, showing a high of 73% in 2017 and a low of 53% in 2019 and 2022. Recent years have seen an uptick, with 70% approval in 2025 before settling to 60% in the partial 2026 fiscal year. This latest-period rate reflects a slight moderation compared to the previous year, though it remains consistent with the judge's historical range.

Preparing for an SSDI hearing

The guidance below applies to any SSDI hearing, not specifically to Judge LaChance'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 Manchester hearing office

The Manchester hearing office serves you and other claimants throughout New Hampshire and the surrounding region. As of the most recent record in July 2026, this office maintains a bench of 11 judges who handle a diverse range of disability claims. The office-wide approval rate in the latest period was 57%, providing a benchmark for the local judicial environment.

Other judges whose most recent office on record is Manchester

The Social Security Administration utilizes a workload-balancing algorithm to assign cases, meaning your assignment to Tracy LaChance is essentially random. Within the Manchester hearing office, there are 11 judges whose most recent office on record is this location, with 6 of them having decided cases in the latest SSA file. Approval rates among this bench vary significantly, ranging from 26% to 86% 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