SSA Administrative Law Judge

Hon. Randolph E. Schum

Position Administrative Law Judge
On record SSA records since 2016
Decisions 2,796 lifetime

Hearing scheduled?

Free Benefits Review
Free
2 minutes
Confidential

Approval rates

Understanding how your judge compares to their peers provides helpful context for your upcoming hearing. At the Phoenix North office, the bench includes 12 judges on record since 2016, with lifetime approval rates spanning from 28% to 72%. These figures reflect the diversity of decision-making patterns within the same office. Aggregate rates describe past decisions, not predictions for your individual hearing.

Lifetime SSA records since 2016
Approval rate 28%
Decisions on record 2,796

SSA has not published a latest-period approval, fully favorable or denial breakdown for Judge Schum. The most recent period with decisions on record is September 26, 2025. Those rows are left out rather than estimated.

Approval rate over time

Year-over-year approval rate across Judge Schum's docket. Annual rates fluctuate with the mix of cases SSA assigns; the longer-run pattern is more informative than any single year.

Judge Schum
0%20%40%60%80%100%FY16FY25
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

Randolph E. Schum has issued 2,796 lifetime decisions since his record began in 2016. His approval rate has remained relatively steady over this period, showing minor fluctuations rather than a sharp upward or downward trend. While your yearly approval percentages have moved between 23% and 34%, the most recent data from 2025 shows a rate of 28%. This consistency suggests a stable approach to evaluating your evidence and medical documentation.

Preparing for an SSDI hearing

The guidance below applies to any SSDI hearing, not specifically to Judge Schum'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 Phoenix North hearing office

The Phoenix North hearing office serves claimants throughout the Arizona region. With 12 judges on record, the office handles a significant volume of disability appeals. You can expect a formal administrative process focused on the medical evidence supporting your claim. You can see the Phoenix North Hearing Office page for the full ALJ roster.

Other judges at this hearing office

The Social Security Administration uses a workload-balancing algorithm to assign cases, meaning your assignment to a specific judge is essentially random. There are 12 judges on record at this office since 2016, 5 of whom reported in the SSA's latest period. Because approval rates across the bench vary from 28% to 72%, it is natural to wonder how your assigned judge compares. For preparation purposes, the guidance is the same regardless of which judge you are assigned.

Approval rates change with a lawyer

WITHOUT A LAWYER
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