SSDI Administrative Law Judge

Hon. Valorie Stefanelli

SSDI Administrative Law Judge at the Charlotte Hearing Office · 10 years on the bench · 17,680 lifetime decisions

Hearing scheduled with Judge Stefanelli?

Free Benefits Review →
Free
2 minutes
Confidential

Approval rates

When evaluating your hearing prospects, comparing a judge's lifetime performance against current office and national benchmarks provides helpful context. Judge Stefanelli has maintained a 61% lifetime approval rate over her decade-long tenure. This figure is measured against the Charlotte Hearing Office's current 72% approval rate and the national average of 58%. Aggregate rates describe past decisions, not predictions for individual hearings.

Metric Judge Stefanelli Charlotte National
Approval rate 61% 72% 58%
Fully favorable 76%
Denials 22%

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

Judge Stefanelli
0%20%40%60%80%100%FY16FY25
Source: SSA OHO disposition data. Approval rate = fully favorable + partially favorable decisions divided by total dispositions excluding dismissals.

Decision pattern

Over her 10 years on the bench, Judge Stefanelli has presided over 17,680 decisions. Her yearly approval trend shows a notable shift, moving from 52% in 2016 to a 78% approval rate in the most recent reporting period. This recent uptick indicates a more favorable environment for your claim than in previous years.

Preparing for an SSDI hearing

The guidance below applies to any SSDI hearing, not specifically to Judge Stefanelli'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 Stefanelli? See if a free benefits review fits your case.

Free Benefits Review
Free 2 minutes Confidential

About the Charlotte hearing office

The Charlotte Hearing Office serves a large population across North Carolina, managing a high volume of disability claims. With a bench of 6 judges, the office maintains an active docket and handles cases with varying levels of medical complexity. You can see the Charlotte Hearing Office page for the full ALJ roster.

Other judges at this hearing office

The Social Security Administration assigns cases to judges using a workload-balancing algorithm, meaning your assignment is essentially random. Within the Charlotte Hearing Office, lifetime approval rates among the bench vary significantly, ranging from 28% to 78%. Because you cannot choose your judge, understanding the office-wide environment is essential for your preparation.

Your odds change dramatically with a lawyer

SSDI hearing approval rates — represented vs. on your own

WITHOUT A LAWYER
baseline approval rate
Unrepresented claimants
WITH A LAWYER
~3×
higher approval rate
Represented claimants
Free Benefits Review

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