SSA Administrative Law Judge

Hon. Elisabeth McGee

Last decided Fort SmithJul 2026
Decisions 3,998since 2016

Hearing scheduled?

Free Benefits Review

Approval rates

You can measure Elisabeth McGee's 64% approval rate over the 12 months to July 31, 2026, against the Fort Smith office average of 60%, the Arkansas state average of 47%, and the national average of 58% during that same period. These figures reflect past decisions rather than predictions for your individual hearing.

Last 12 months July 26, 2025 – July 31, 2026
Metric Judge McGee Fort Smith National
Approval rate 64% 60% 58%
Fully favorable 54% — —
Denials 36% — —
Decisions 473 — —
All decisions on record SSA records since 2016
Approval rate 54%
Decisions on record 3,998

SSA publishes no office- or national-level breakdown of fully favorable and denial rates. The 12 months are SSA's figures for this fiscal year to date plus the rest of the previous fiscal year; how we calculate them.

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.

Judge McGee
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 October 2016, Elisabeth McGee has issued 3,998 decisions on record. The yearly approval trend has fluctuated, moving from 40% in 2017 to 66% in the partial 2026 fiscal year. While the 12-month approval rate of 64% is higher than the 54% approval rate recorded over the entire period since 2016, the most recent 12 months represent a snapshot of recent activity.

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 scheduled?

Free 2 minutes Confidential

About the Fort Smith hearing office

The Fort Smith office serves you if you are in the region and is part of the broader SSA network. There are 8 judges whose most recent office on record is this one, with the office maintaining a 60% approval rate over the 12 months to July 31, 2026. You can expect a standard administrative hearing process focused on the medical and vocational evidence you present in your file.

Other judges whose most recent office on record is Fort Smith

The Social Security Administration uses a workload-balancing algorithm to assign cases, meaning the judge you are assigned is essentially random. Among the 3 judges who decided cases here in SSA's latest file, approval rates range from 54% to 64% over the 12 months to July 31, 2026. There are 8 judges whose most recent office on record is this one, 3 of whom decided cases here in SSA's latest file.

Judges with similar approval rates

These active judges' approval rates over the same 12 months (July 26, 2025 – July 31, 2026) are closest to Judge McGee's 64%. One of them last decided cases in Arkansas. With too few close matches there, the rest come from SSA's Dallas region.

Rates within 5 points of each other are hard to tell apart at a typical caseload, so treat these as judges with comparable records, not a ranking. See Judge McGee and the three closest side by side →

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