SSDI approval odds for congenital anomalies in North Dakota.

North Dakota’s DDS approves 45.4% of initial claims — 6.6 points abovethe national median. Here’s how congenital anomalies claims tend to move through the process here.

North Dakota initial DDS approval

45.4%

vs national median 38.8% · above by 6.6 points · -0.1 pts over 3 yrs

Congenital anomalies · historical allowance rate

44%

allowed at the initial level

~67%

ultimately allowed once appeals are counted

SSA research on 1997–2004 applications (Meseguer, Social Security Bulletin 73(2), 2013), national by primary diagnosis — not specific to North Dakota and older than the state and stage figures shown here.

National allowance rate by stage · FY2024

Initial application30.8%
Reconsideration12.1%
Hearing46.5%

If it reaches a hearing in North Dakota

1

hearing office

6363%

judge approval range

228228

days to decision

Approval rates vary widely by judge — which office (and ALJ) hears the case is one of the biggest factors in the outcome.

Why claims are denied — and how they’re allowed

National SSA final decisions for disabled workers, FY2022.

Top denial reasons

  • Can do other work36%
  • Other35%
  • Not severe enough20%
  • Can do past work8%

How allowances are made

  • Medical-vocational (grid) allowance47%
  • Meets a medical listing46%
  • Equals a listing5%
  • Other3%

What SSA requires to approve a claim

The Blue Book criteria for congenital disorders

The exact medical criteria — in plain language, with the evidence each one needs. Nearly half of allowances come from meeting a listing.

Estimate a specific case

Run the estimator for North Dakota

Pre-filled to congenital anomalies in North Dakota — add age and stage for the base rates that fit a real claim.

Source: SSA public datasets · Updated 2026-06-18. Not legal advice. State DDS rate is the latest SSA fiscal-year figure (all conditions); stage allowance rates are national and current. Per-condition rates are from SSA research on 1997–2004 claims (Meseguer, Social Security Bulletin 73(2), 2013) and are national, not state-specific. Figures are historical aggregates, not a prediction of any individual claim.