Carol G. Moore is an SSA Administrative Law Judge at the Charlottesville Hearing Office, with a lifetime approval rate of 42% across 10,418 decisions. This sits below the national average of 58%, but reflects a stable pattern over her 10 years on the bench. Because case assignment is random, understanding these trends is vital. Aggregate rates describe past decisions, not predictions for your individual hearing. An attorney can help you prepare for this judge's specific 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
Comparing a judge's approval rate to broader benchmarks provides context for your hearing. Judge Moore's 42% lifetime rate is measured against the latest office performance of 44% and the national average of 58%. With over 10,000 decisions on the record, this data offers a stable view of her historical adjudication patterns. Aggregate rates describe past decisions, not predictions for your individual hearing.
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 Moore'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 her 10 years on the bench, Judge Moore has maintained a consistent approach to disability claims. While her approval rates have fluctuated annually—ranging from a low of 33% in 2021 to a high of 51% in 2017—the most recent data shows a rate of 48% in 2025. These trends reflect the complex nature of case evidence and the evolving standards of disability evaluation over the last decade.
Preparing for an SSDI hearing
The guidance below applies to any SSDI hearing, not specifically to Judge Moore'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 Moore? Free, confidential — see if you qualify for SSDI.
Free Benefits ReviewAbout the Charlottesville hearing office
The Charlottesville Hearing Office serves you and other claimants across Virginia and the surrounding region. It manages a significant volume of cases with a bench of 6 judges who oversee a wide variety of disability claims. The office currently reports an average approval rate of 44%, reflecting the local adjudication climate.
Other judges at this hearing office
The Social Security Administration utilizes a workload-balancing algorithm to assign cases, meaning your assignment to a specific judge is essentially random. Within the Charlottesville Hearing Office, lifetime approval rates among the 6 judges range from 39% to 82%. Because you cannot choose your judge, you should focus on the strength of your medical documentation.
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.
