SSA Administrative Law Judge

Hon. James E. MacDonald

Last decided EvanstonJul 2026
Decisions 4,097since 2016

Hearing scheduled?

Free Benefits Review

Approval rates

When reviewing approval rates, compare figures from the same time period. The 66% approval rate on record since 2016 sits within the 45% to 79% range observed among the bench at the Evanston hearing office. In the most recent reporting period, the 72% approval rate compares to an office rate of 61%, a state rate of 54%, and a national rate of 58%. These figures provide context for decision-making patterns, though they do not predict the outcome of your specific hearing.

All decisions on record SSA records since 2016
Approval rate 66%
Decisions on record 4,097
Latest SSA reporting period July 31, 2026
Metric Judge MacDonald Evanston National
Approval rate 72% 61% 58%
Fully favorable 63% — —
Denials 28% — —

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

Judge MacDonald
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

The approval rate for James E. MacDonald has shown a generally positive trend since 2016. After a period of stability between 2018 and 2019, the data shows a gradual increase in approvals, reaching 73% in 2024. The latest reporting period shows a 72% approval rate, which remains elevated compared to the long-term average. This recent performance reflects a continuation of the upward trend observed over the last several years.

Preparing for an SSDI hearing

The guidance below applies to any SSDI hearing, not specifically to Judge MacDonald'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

James E. MacDonald's most recent office on record is the Evanston hearing office, which serves claimants in Illinois. This office is part of a broader regional network, and its bench consists of 15 judges whose most recent records are tied to this location. The office-wide approval rate in the latest reporting period was 61%. You can expect a standard hearing process focused on medical evidence and vocational testimony.

Other judges whose most recent office on record is Evanston

The Social Security Administration uses a workload-balancing algorithm to assign cases, meaning the judge you are assigned is essentially random. There are 15 judges whose most recent office on record is the Evanston hearing office, 6 of whom decided cases in the latest SSA file. Approval rates among this group vary significantly, ranging from 45% to 79% on their records since 2016. Preparation remains the most effective way to manage your case 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