Elisabeth McGee is an SSA Administrative Law Judge at the Fort Smith hearing office. Her lifetime approval rate of 53% sits below the national average of 58%, but her decision patterns remain stable over your 10 years on the bench. With 22,113 lifetime decisions, her history provides a clear statistical baseline. Aggregate rates describe past decisions, not predictions for your individual hearing. An attorney can help you prepare for the specific requirements of this judge's bench.
This page presents publicly available SSA Office of Hearings Operations disposition data, with no editorial rating or evaluation. ALJs are independent decisionmakers; aggregate statistics describe past patterns, not predictions of how any individual case will be decided. Information here is provided for hearing preparation, not as legal advice.
Approval rates
Judge McGee maintains a lifetime approval rate of 53% based on 22,113 decisions. In the most recent reporting period, her 54% approval rate tracks 5 points below the national average of 58% and 6 points below the current Fort Smith office average of 59%. These figures provide a statistical baseline for understanding how cases have been decided in her courtroom over the last decade.
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 McGee's docket. Annual rates fluctuate with the mix of cases SSA assigns; the longer-run pattern is more informative than any single year.
Decision pattern
Over 10 years on the bench, your judge has seen approval rates shift from the mid-40s in her early years to a peak of 66% in 2024, before settling at 55% in 2025. This trajectory reflects the complex nature of disability adjudication where case mix and evidentiary standards fluctuate annually. The recent data indicates a return toward her long-term average after a period of higher approvals.
Preparing for an SSDI hearing
The guidance below applies to any SSDI hearing, not specifically to Judge McGee'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 with Judge McGee? Free, confidential — see if you qualify for SSDI.
Free Benefits ReviewAbout the Fort Smith hearing office
The Fort Smith Hearing Office serves you and other claimants across Arkansas and parts of the surrounding region. It is staffed by a team of judges who manage a high volume of disability appeals annually. The office currently maintains an approval rate of 59%, which serves as a benchmark for the local administrative environment.
Other judges at this hearing office
The Social Security Administration utilizes a workload-balancing algorithm to assign cases, meaning you cannot request a specific judge. Across the Fort Smith bench, lifetime approval rates for the six presiding judges range from 46% to 66%. This variance highlights why understanding the local judicial environment is useful, even though the core requirements for proving disability remain consistent.
Your odds change dramatically with a lawyer
SSDI hearing approval rates — represented vs. on your own
Source: U.S. Government Accountability Office, GAO-18-37. The 3× gap is a population-wide average across all judges; individual outcomes vary.
