SSA Administrative Law Judge

Hon. Steven M. Rachal

Last decided AlexandriaJul 2026
Decisions 3,409since 2017

Hearing scheduled?

Free Benefits Review

Approval rates

The approval rate for Steven M. Rachal is based on 3,409 decisions on record since 2017. When comparing this to the bench at the Alexandria hearing office, where judges range from 26% to 67% approval, it is helpful to look at both the long-term record and the most recent reporting period. In the latest period, the judge's 36% approval rate sits 19 points below the office rate of 55%.

All decisions on record SSA records since 2017
Approval rate 33%
Decisions on record 3,409
Latest SSA reporting period July 31, 2026
Metric Judge Rachal Alexandria National
Approval rate 36% 55% 58%
Fully favorable 26% — —
Denials 64% — —

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

Judge Rachal
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 Steven M. Rachal has shown variation since 2017. After an initial period of higher approvals, the rate stabilized before seeing a more recent shift in the 2024 and 2025 fiscal years. The latest reporting period shows a 36% approval rate, which reflects a continuation of the patterns observed in recent years. These fluctuations often correlate with changes in the specific mix of medical evidence presented in cases.

Preparing for an SSDI hearing

The guidance below applies to any SSDI hearing, not specifically to Judge Rachal'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 Alexandria hearing office

The Alexandria hearing office serves you across Louisiana and the surrounding region. As the most recent office on record for Steven M. Rachal as of July 2026, it maintains a bench of 10 judges with varying approval patterns. The office-wide approval rate in the latest reporting period was 55%, providing a baseline for the local hearing environment.

Other judges whose most recent office on record is Alexandria

The Social Security Administration uses a workload-balancing algorithm to assign cases, meaning the judge you are assigned is essentially random. There are 10 judges whose most recent office on record is the Alexandria hearing office, and 7 of them decided cases here in the latest file through July 2026. Approval rates across this bench vary significantly, ranging from 26% to 67% on their records since 2016.

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