Kurt D. Schuman is an SSA Administrative Law Judge at the Colorado Springs hearing office. With a lifetime approval rate of 46% over 14,134 lifetime decisions, his record provides a baseline for your expectations. While his latest approval rate of 58% sits above the office average, it remains below the national median. 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
Judge Schuman maintains a lifetime approval rate of 46% based on a docket of 14,134 decisions. In the most recent reporting period, his approval rate reached 58%, which is 2 points higher than the current office average but 12 points below the national average. These figures provide a statistical baseline for understanding how cases have been decided in his courtroom over the last decade.
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 Schuman'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 his 10 years on the bench, Judge Schuman has seen his approval rates fluctuate, ranging from a low of 36% in 2021 to a high of 60% in 2023. The data indicates an upward trend in recent years, with the latest period showing a 58% approval rate. This recent pattern reflects a shift in outcomes that may be influenced by changes in case complexity or evidence presentation.
Preparing for an SSDI hearing
The guidance below applies to any SSDI hearing, not specifically to Judge Schuman'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 Schuman? Free, confidential — see if you qualify for SSDI.
Free Benefits ReviewAbout the Colorado Springs hearing office
The Colorado Springs Hearing Office serves a broad population across Colorado and the surrounding region. It is staffed by 6 judges who manage a high volume of disability claims annually. The office currently reports an average approval rate of 44%. You can visit the Colorado Springs 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 Judge Schuman is essentially random. Within the Colorado Springs Hearing Office, lifetime approval rates among the bench vary significantly, ranging from 23% to 51%. Because each judge manages their courtroom differently, understanding the office-wide environment is helpful for your preparation.
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.
