SSA Administrative Law Judge

Hon. Carla L. Waters

Last decided Phoenix DowntownJul 2026
Decisions 3,987since 2016

Hearing scheduled?

Free Benefits Review

Approval rates

Comparing approval rates requires looking at data from the same timeframes to ensure accuracy. While your judge's overall approval rate since 2016 is 45%, recent performance shows a 47% approval rate in the latest reporting period. This is compared against the broader bench at the Phoenix Downtown office, where judges range from 32% to 78% in their since-2016 records. Aggregate rates describe past decisions, not predictions for your individual hearing.

All decisions on record SSA records since 2016
Approval rate 45%
Decisions on record 3,987
Latest SSA reporting period July 31, 2026
Metric Judge Waters Phoenix Downtown National
Approval rate 47% 57% 58%
Fully favorable 20% — —
Denials 53% — —

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

Judge Waters
0%20%40%60%80%100%FY16FY26
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 Carla L. Waters has fluctuated over the 3,987 decisions on record since 2016. Yearly trends show approval rates oscillating between 38% and 49% over the last decade. The latest period approval rate of 47% remains consistent with the long-term average. This pattern suggests a steady approach to case evaluation, with recent rates reflecting minor variance from the historical mean.

Preparing for an SSDI hearing

The guidance below applies to any SSDI hearing, not specifically to Judge Waters'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 Downtown hearing office

Carla L. Waters' most recent office on record is the Phoenix Downtown hearing office, with decisions there through July 2026. This office serves claimants across Arizona and is staffed by a bench of 12 judges. The office-wide approval rate in the latest reporting period was 57%. You can expect a standard hearing process focused on medical evidence and vocational testimony.

Other judges whose most recent office on record is Phoenix Downtown

The Social Security Administration uses a workload-balancing algorithm to assign cases, meaning the specific judge you draw is essentially random. There are 12 judges whose most recent office on record is the Phoenix Downtown office. These judges demonstrate a wide range of approval rates, from 32% to 78% on their since-2016 records. Understanding the office-wide range helps you calibrate your expectations for the hearing process.

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