SSA Administrative Law Judge

Hon. Mary Ann Poulose

Last decided NHC ChicagoJul 2026
Decisions 3,012since 2016

Hearing scheduled?

Free Benefits Review

Approval rates

Comparing approval rates provides context for how your judge's decisions align with broader trends. Over the 12 months to July 31, 2026, Mary Ann Poulose's 57% approval rate is measured against the NHC Chicago office rate of 54%, the state rate of 54%, and the national average of 58%. These figures are derived from hundreds of cases, providing a view of recent activity. Aggregate rates describe past decisions, not predictions for your individual hearing.

Last 12 months July 26, 2025 – July 31, 2026
Metric Judge Poulose NHC Chicago National
Approval rate 57% 54% 58%
Fully favorable 50% — —
Denials 43% — —
Decisions 347 — —
All decisions on record SSA records since 2016
Approval rate 44%
Decisions on record 3,012

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

Judge Poulose
0%20%40%60%80%100%FY16FY26
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, Mary Ann Poulose has issued 3,012 decisions on record. The yearly trend shows a period of fluctuation followed by a more recent rise in approval rates, with the 57% rate over the last 12 months reflecting this upward movement compared to the 44% average since 2016. This pattern suggests that recent outcomes have trended higher than the historical average for this judge.

Preparing for an SSDI hearing

The guidance below applies to any SSDI hearing, not specifically to Judge Poulose'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 NHC Chicago hearing office

The NHC Chicago is the most recent office on record for Mary Ann Poulose as of July 2026. This office serves you and other residents across Illinois and the surrounding region, supported by a bench of 19 judges. You can expect a formal hearing process where evidence quality is the primary factor in your decision.

Other judges whose most recent office on record is NHC Chicago

The Social Security Administration uses a workload-balancing algorithm to assign cases, meaning the judge you are assigned is essentially random. Across the NHC Chicago bench, approval rates vary significantly, with the 9 judges present in the latest file ranging from 17% to 88% over the 12-month window. There are 19 judges whose most recent office on record is this one.

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 Poulose's 57%. All five last decided cases in Illinois.

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 Poulose 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