SSA Administrative Law Judge

Hon. Gladys Whitfield

Last decided IndianapolisJul 2026
Decisions 3,667since 2016

Hearing scheduled?

Free Benefits Review

Approval rates

Comparing approval rates requires looking at consistent timeframes. While Gladys Whitfield has a 48% approval rate since 2016, her latest-period performance shows a 65% approval rate, which is 1 percentage point above the Indianapolis office average of 64%. These figures are derived from a significant volume of decisions, providing a stable view of past trends.

All decisions on record SSA records since 2016
Approval rate 48%
Decisions on record 3,667
Latest SSA reporting period July 31, 2026
Metric Judge Whitfield Indianapolis National
Approval rate 65% 64% 58%
Fully favorable 52% — —
Denials 35% — —

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

Judge Whitfield
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

Since 2016, the approval rate for Gladys Whitfield has fluctuated. With 3,667 decisions on record, the data indicates a shift in outcomes, particularly with the 65% approval rate observed in the latest reporting period. This recent activity represents a notable divergence from your long-term average. The latest period reflects a continuation of this recent pattern, which may be influenced by changes in case evidence or the specific mix of cases heard.

Preparing for an SSDI hearing

The guidance below applies to any SSDI hearing, not specifically to Judge Whitfield'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 Indianapolis hearing office

Gladys Whitfield's most recent office on record is the Indianapolis hearing office, which serves you if you are in the area. This office maintains a bench of 20 judges with varying approval patterns. You can expect a standard hearing process focused on the specific medical and vocational evidence presented in your case.

Other judges whose most recent office on record is Indianapolis

The Social Security Administration uses a workload-balancing algorithm to assign cases, meaning the judge you are assigned is essentially random. There are 20 judges whose most recent office on record is the Indianapolis hearing office. Approval rates across this bench range from 43% to 75% on their records since 2016. For your preparation, the guidance is the same regardless of which judge you are assigned.

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