Claire R. Strong maintains a 78% lifetime approval rate over 22,027 decisions, higher than the 58% national average. In the most recent reporting period, your approval rate reached 90%, which is 20 points above the national average. These figures reflect past decisions rather than a prediction for your specific 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
Comparing a judge's history to broader benchmarks provides context for your upcoming hearing. Judge Strong’s lifetime approval rate of 78% is higher than the latest national average of 58% and the Montgomery office average of 69%. These figures are derived from 22,027 lifetime decisions. Aggregate rates describe past decisions, not predictions for your individual hearing.
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 Strong'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 a 10-year tenure, Judge Strong has demonstrated a consistent upward trend in approval rates. Starting at 68% in 2016, the rate has climbed to 90% in the most recent reporting period. This shift reflects a pattern of increasing allowance rates over the last decade. The recent data shows a continuation of this trend, which may be influenced by changes in case evidence or the specific types of claims presented to the court.
Preparing for an SSDI hearing
The guidance below applies to any SSDI hearing, not specifically to Judge Strong'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 Strong? Free, confidential — see if you qualify for SSDI.
Free Benefits ReviewAbout the Montgomery hearing office
The Montgomery Hearing Office serves you and other claimants across Alabama, managing a high volume of disability cases. With a bench of 6 judges, the office maintains an office-wide latest approval rate of 69%. You can expect a formal administrative process focused on your medical evidence and vocational testimony. You can view the Montgomery 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 the judge you are assigned is essentially random. Within the Montgomery office, lifetime approval rates among the bench range from 53% to 78%. Because you cannot choose your judge, understanding the office-wide environment is helpful. Your preparation remains the same regardless of which judge is assigned to your case.
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.
