Veterans' Disability Benefits
Claims Processing Challenges and Opportunities for Improvements Gao ID: GAO-06-283T December 7, 2005The Chairman, Committee on Veterans' Affairs, U.S. House of Representatives, asked GAO to report on the claims processing challenges and opportunities facing the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) disability compensation and pension program. For years, the claims process has been the subject of concern and attention within VA and by the Congress and veterans service organizations. Their concerns include long waits for decisions, large claims backlogs, and inaccurate decisions. Our work and media reports of significant discrepancies in average disability payments from state to state have also highlighted concerns over the consistency of decision making within VA. In January 2003, we designated federal disability programs, including VA's compensation and pension programs, as a high-risk area because of continuing challenges to improving the timeliness and consistency of its disability decisions and the need to modernize programs. VA's outdated disability determination process does not reflect a current view of the relationship between impairments and work capacity. Advances in medicine and technology have allowed some individuals with disabilities to live more independently and work more effectively.
The Department of Veterans Affairs continues to experience challenges processing veterans' disability compensation and pension claims including large numbers of pending claims and lengthy processing times. While VA made progress in fiscal years 2002 and 2003 reducing the size and age of its inventory of pending claims, it has lost ground since the end of fiscal year 2003. For example, pending claims increased by over one-third from the end of fiscal year 2003 to the end of fiscal year 2005. Meanwhile, VA faces continuing questions about its ability to ensure that veterans get consistent decisions across its 57 regional offices. GAO recommended in August 2002 that VA study the consistency of decisions made by different regional offices, identify acceptable levels of decision-making variation, and reduce variations found to be unacceptable. Several factors may impede VA's ability to significantly improve its claims processing performance. These include the potential impacts of laws, court decisions, and increases in the number and complexity of claims received. Opportunities for improvement may lie in more fundamental reform in the design and operation of disability compensation and pension claims programs. This would include reexamining program design and the context in which decisions are made as well as the structure and division of labor among field offices. For example, in recent years, GAO has found that VA and other federal disability programs have not been updated to reflect the current state of science, medicine, technology, and labor market conditions. The schedule on which disability decisions are made within VA, for example, is based primarily on estimates made in 1945 about the effect service-connected impairments have on the average individual's ability to perform jobs requiring manual or physical labor. In addition, our work has shown that about one-third of newly compensated veterans could be interested in receiving a lump sum payment, potentially saving VA time and money associated with reopening cases over time. In addition, VA and other organizations have identified potential changes to field operations that could enhance productivity and accuracy in processing disability claims. While reexamining claims processing challenges in a larger context may be daunting, there are mechanisms for undertaking such an effort, including the congressionally chartered commission currently studying veterans' disability benefits.
GAO-06-283T, Veterans' Disability Benefits: Claims Processing Challenges and Opportunities for Improvements
This is the accessible text file for GAO report number GAO-06-283T
entitled 'Veterans' Disability Benefits: Claims Processing Challenges
and Opportunities for Improvements' which was released on December 7,
2005.
This text file was formatted by the U.S. Government Accountability
Office (GAO) to be accessible to users with visual impairments, as part
of a longer term project to improve GAO products' accessibility. Every
attempt has been made to maintain the structural and data integrity of
the original printed product. Accessibility features, such as text
descriptions of tables, consecutively numbered footnotes placed at the
end of the file, and the text of agency comment letters, are provided
but may not exactly duplicate the presentation or format of the printed
version. The portable document format (PDF) file is an exact electronic
replica of the printed version. We welcome your feedback. Please E-mail
your comments regarding the contents or accessibility features of this
document to Webmaster@gao.gov.
This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright
protection in the United States. It may be reproduced and distributed
in its entirety without further permission from GAO. Because this work
may contain copyrighted images or other material, permission from the
copyright holder may be necessary if you wish to reproduce this
material separately.
Testimony Before the Committee on Veterans' Affairs, House of
Representatives:
United States Government Accountability Office:
GAO:
Not to Be Released Before 10:30 a.m. EST:
Wednesday, December 7, 2005:
Veterans' Disability Benefits:
Claims Processing Challenges and Opportunities for Improvements:
Statement for the Record by Cynthia A. Bascetta, Director, Education,
Workforce, and Income Security Issues:
GAO-06-283T:
GAO Highlights:
Highlights of GAO-06-283T, a statement for the record to the Committee
on Veterans‘ Affairs, U.S. House of Representatives:
Why GAO Did This Study:
The Chairman, Committee on Veterans‘ Affairs, U.S. House of
Representatives, asked GAO to report on the claims processing
challenges and opportunities facing the Department of Veterans Affairs
(VA) disability compensation and pension program. For years, the claims
process has been the subject of concern and attention within VA and by
the Congress and veterans service organizations. Their concerns include
long waits for decisions, large claims backlogs, and inaccurate
decisions.
Our work and media reports of significant discrepancies in average
disability payments from state to state have also highlighted concerns
over the consistency of decision making within VA. In January 2003, we
designated federal disability programs, including VA‘s compensation and
pension programs, as a high-risk area because of continuing challenges
to improving the timeliness and consistency of its disability decisions
and the need to modernize programs. VA‘s outdated disability
determination process does not reflect a current view of the
relationship between impairments and work capacity. Advances in
medicine and technology have allowed some individuals with disabilities
to live more independently and work more effectively.
What GAO Found:
The Department of Veterans Affairs continues to experience challenges
processing veterans‘ disability compensation and pension claims
including large numbers of pending claims and lengthy processing times.
While VA made progress in fiscal years 2002 and 2003 reducing the size
and age of its inventory of pending claims, it has lost ground since
the end of fiscal year 2003. For example, pending claims increased by
over one-third from the end of fiscal year 2003 to the end of fiscal
year 2005. Meanwhile, VA faces continuing questions about its ability
to ensure that veterans get consistent decisions across its 57 regional
offices. GAO recommended in August 2002 that VA study the consistency
of decisions made by different regional offices, identify acceptable
levels of decision-making variation, and reduce variations found to be
unacceptable. Several factors may impede VA‘s ability to significantly
improve its claims processing performance. These include the potential
impacts of laws, court decisions, and increases in the number and
complexity of claims received.
Rating-Related Claims Pending at End of Period, Fiscal Years 2000-2005:
[See PDF for image]
[End of figure]
Opportunities for improvement may lie in more fundamental reform in the
design and operation of disability compensation and pension claims
programs. This would include reexamining program design and the context
in which decisions are made as well as the structure and division of
labor among field offices. For example, in recent years, GAO has found
that VA and other federal disability programs have not been updated to
reflect the current state of science, medicine, technology, and labor
market conditions. The schedule on which disability decisions are made
within VA, for example, is based primarily on estimates made in 1945
about the effect service-connected impairments have on the average
individual's ability to perform jobs requiring manual or physical
labor. In addition, our work has shown that about one-third of newly
compensated veterans could be interested in receiving a lump sum
payment, potentially saving VA time and money associated with reopening
cases over time. In addition, VA and other organizations have
identified potential changes to field operations that could enhance
productivity and accuracy in processing disability claims. While
reexamining claims processing challenges in a larger context may be
daunting, there are mechanisms for undertaking such an effort,
including the congressionally chartered commission currently studying
veterans‘ disability benefits.
www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-06-283T.
To view the full product, including the scope and methodology, click on
the link above. For more information, contact Cynthia A. Bascetta at
(202) 512-7215 or bascettac@gao.gov.
[End of section]
Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee:
I am pleased to have the opportunity to comment on the claims
processing challenges and opportunities facing the Department of
Veterans Affairs' (VA) disability compensation and pension programs.
Through these programs, VA provided almost $30 billion in cash
disability benefits to more than 3.4 million veterans and their
survivors in fiscal year 2004. For years, the claims process has been
the subject of concern and attention within VA and by the Congress and
veterans service organizations. Many of their concerns have focused on
long waits for decisions, large claims backlogs, and inaccurate
decisions. Our work and media reports of significant discrepancies in
average disability payments from state to state have also highlighted
concerns about the consistency of decision making within VA. In January
2003, we designated modernizing VA and other federal disability
programs as a high-risk area, because our work over the past decade
found that these programs are based on concepts from the past and
continue to experience management problems. VA's disability programs
have not been updated to reflect the current state of science,
medicine, technology, and labor market conditions. In addition, VA
still experiences lengthy processing times and lacks a clear
understanding of the extent of possible decision inconsistencies.
You asked us to discuss the challenges and opportunities VA faces in
processing disability compensation and pension claims. My statement
draws on numerous GAO reports and testimonies on VA's compensation and
pension claims processing operations. (See Related GAO Products.) To
update our work, we reviewed recent claims processing performance data
and VA's fiscal year 2005 Performance and Accountability Report, but
did not perform independent verification of VA's data. We conducted our
work in November 2005 in accordance with generally accepted government
auditing standards.
In summary, VA continues to face challenges processing disability
claims. For example, as of the end of fiscal year 2005, rating-related
claims[Footnote 1] were pending an average of 120 days, 9 days more
than at the end of fiscal year 2003, and far from VA's strategic goal
of 78 days.[Footnote 2] During the same period, the rating-related
inventory grew by about 92,000 claims to a total of about 346,000
claims. While VA has improved the accuracy of its rating-related
compensation decisions to 84 percent in fiscal year 2005--close to its
goal of 88 percent in fiscal year 2005, it has 3 years to reach its
strategic goal of 98 percent. Further, we have identified concerns
about the consistency of decisions across VA's regional offices. VA has
begun studying one indicator of inconsistency, the wide variations in
average payments per veteran from state to state, in response to
adverse media coverage. While VA is making efforts to address these
problems, several factors may impede VA's ability to make and sustain
significant improvements in its claims processing performance. These
include the potential impacts of laws, court decisions, and continued
increases in the number and complexity of claims being filed.
Opportunities for improvement may lie in more fundamental reform of
VA's disability compensation programs. This would include reexamining
program design and the context in which decisions are made as well as
the structure and division of labor among field offices. For example,
in recent years, GAO has found that VA and other federal disability
programs have not been updated to reflect the current state of science,
medicine, technology, and labor market conditions. The schedule on
which disability decisions are made within VA, for example, is based
primarily on estimates made in 1945 about the effect service-connected
impairments have on the average individual's ability to perform jobs
requiring manual or physical labor. In addition, our work has shown
that about one-third of newly compensated veterans could be interested
in receiving a lump sum payment, which could potentially save VA time
and money associated with reopening cases over time and could be
beneficial to veterans. In addition, VA and other organizations have
identified potential changes to field operations that could enhance
productivity and accuracy in processing disability claims. While
reexamining claims processing challenges in a larger context may be
daunting, there are mechanisms for undertaking such an effort,
including the congressionally chartered commission currently studying
veterans' disability benefits.
Background:
VA's disability compensation program pays monthly benefits to veterans
with service-connected disabilities (injuries or diseases incurred or
aggravated while on active military duty) according to the severity of
the disability. Also, VA pays dependency and indemnity compensation to
some deceased veterans' spouses, children, and parents and to survivors
of service members who died on active duty. The pension program pays
monthly benefits based on financial need to wartime veterans who have
low income, served in a period of war, and are permanently and totally
disabled for reasons not service-connected (or are aged 65 or older).
VA also pays pensions to surviving spouses and unmarried children of
deceased wartime veterans.
When a veteran submits a claim to any of VA's 57 regional offices, a
veterans service representative (VSR) is responsible for obtaining the
relevant evidence to evaluate the claim. Such evidence includes
veterans' military service records, medical examinations, and treatment
records from VA medical facilities and private medical service
providers. Once a claim is developed (i.e., has all the necessary
evidence), a rating VSR, also called a rating specialist, evaluates the
claim and determines whether the claimant is eligible for benefits. If
the veteran is eligible for disability compensation, the rating
specialist assigns a percentage rating based on degree of disability.
Veterans with multiple service-connected disabilities receive a single
composite rating. For veterans claiming pension eligibility, the
regional office determines if the veteran served in a period of war, is
permanently and totally disabled for reasons not service-connected (or
is aged 65 or older), and meets the income thresholds for eligibility.
A veteran who disagrees with the regional office's decision for either
program can appeal sequentially to VA's Board of Veterans' Appeals
(BVA), the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims, and the U.S.
Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.
In January 2003, we designated modernizing VA's disability programs,
along with other federal disability programs, as high-risk. We did so,
in part, because VA had long-standing problems with lengthy claims
processing times and lacked a clear understanding of the extent of
possible decision inconsistencies. Moreover, VA's disability programs
have not been updated to reflect the current state of science,
medicine, technology, and labor market conditions.
In November 2003, the Congress established the Veterans' Disability
Benefits Commission to study the appropriateness of VA disability
benefits, including disability criteria and benefit levels. The
commission held its first public hearing in May 2005.
VA Continues to Face Significant Challenges in Processing Disability
Compensation Claims:
VA continues to experience challenges processing veterans' disability
compensation and pension claims. These include large numbers of pending
claims and lengthy processing times. While VA made progress in fiscal
years 2002 and 2003 in reducing the size and age of its inventory of
pending claims, it has lost ground since the end of fiscal year 2003.
As shown in figure 1, pending claims increased by over one-third from
the end of fiscal year 2003 to the end of fiscal year 2005, from about
254,000 to about 346,000. During the same period, claims pending over 6
months increased by about 54 percent, from about 47,000 to about
72,000.
Figure 1: Rating-Related Claims Pending at End of Period, Fiscal Years
2000-2005:
[See PDF for image]
[End of figure]
Similarly, as shown in figure 2, VA reduced the average age of its
pending claims from 182 days at the end of fiscal year 2001 to 111 days
at the end of fiscal year 2003. Since then, however, average days
pending have increased to 120 days at the end of fiscal year 2005. This
is also far from VA's strategic goal of an average of 78 days pending
by the end of fiscal year 2008. Meanwhile, the time required to resolve
appeals remains too long. While the average time to resolve an appeal
dropped from 731 days in fiscal year 2002 to 622 days in fiscal year
2005, VA was still far from its fiscal year 2005 goal of 500 days.
Figure 2: Average Days Pending for VA Compensation and Pension Rating-
Related Claims, Fiscal Years 2000-2005:
[See PDF for image]
[End of figure]
In addition to problems with timeliness of decisions, VA acknowledges
that the accuracy of regional office decisions needs further
improvement. VA reports that it has improved the accuracy of decisions
on rating related compensation claims from 80 percent in fiscal year
2002 to 84 percent in fiscal year 2005, close to its 2005 goal of 88
percent.[Footnote 3]
VA also faces continuing questions about its ability to ensure that
veterans receive consistent decisions--that is, comparable decisions on
benefit entitlement and rating percentage regardless of the regional
offices making the decisions. The issue of decision-making consistency
across VA is not new. In May 2000 testimony[Footnote 4] before the
House Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations, Committee on
Veterans' Affairs, we underscored the conclusion made by the National
Academy of Public Administration in 1997[Footnote 5] that VA needed to
study the consistency of decisions made by different regional offices,
identify the degree of subjectivity expected for various medical
issues, and then set consistency standards for those issues. In August
2002, we drew attention to the fact that there are wide disparities in
state-to-state average compensation payments per disabled veteran. We
noted that such variation raises the question of whether similarly
situated veterans who submit claims to different regional offices for
similar conditions receive reasonably consistent decisions.[Footnote 6]
We concluded that VA needed to systematically assess decision-making
consistency to provide a foundation for identifying acceptable levels
of variation and to reduce variations found to be unacceptable. Again,
in November 2004, we highlighted the need for VA to develop plans for
studying consistency issues.[Footnote 7] VA concurred in principle with
our findings and recommendation in the August 2002 report, agreed that
consistency is an important goal, and acknowledged that it has work to
do to achieve it. However, VA was silent on how it would evaluate and
measure consistency. Subsequently, VA concurred with our recommendation
in the November 2004 report that it conduct systematic reviews for
possible decision inconsistencies.
In December 2004, the media drew attention to the wide variations in
the average disability compensation payment per veteran in the 50
states and published VA's own data showing that the average payments
varied from a low of $6,710 in Ohio to a high of $10,851 in New Mexico.
Reacting to these media reports, in December 2004, the Secretary of
Veterans Affairs instructed the agency's Inspector General to determine
why average payments per veteran vary widely from state to
state.[Footnote 8] The Inspector General found that compensation
payments are affected by many factors and that some disabilities are
inherently more susceptible to variations in rating determinations. The
Inspector General made eight recommendations to improve the consistency
of rating decisions, including recommending that VBA conduct a study of
the major influences on compensation payments and use the results to
detect, correct, and prevent unacceptable payment patterns. Also, VA's
Veterans Benefits Administration began a study in March 2005 of three
disabilities believed to have potential for inconsistency: hearing
loss, post-traumatic stress disorder, and knee conditions. VA assigned
10 subject matter experts to review 1,750 regional office decisions.
After completing its analysis of study data, VA planned to develop a
schedule for future studies of specific ratable conditions and
recommend a schedule for periodic follow-up studies of previously
studied conditions.
Recent history has shown that VA's claims processing workload and
performance are being affected by several factors, including the
impacts of laws and court decisions and the filing behavior of
veterans. For example, court decisions in 1999 and 2003 related to VA's
duty to assist veterans in developing their benefit claims, as well as
legislation in response to those decisions, significantly affected VA's
ability to produce rating-related decisions. VA attributes some of the
worsening of inventory level and pending timeliness since the end of
fiscal year 2003 to a September 2003 court decision that required over
62,000 claims to be deferred, many for 90 days or longer. Also, VA
notes that legislation and VA regulations have expanded benefit
entitlement and as a result added to the volume of claims. For example,
presumptions of service-connected disabilities have been created in
recent years for many Vietnam veterans and former Prisoners of War.
Also, VA expects additional claims receipts based on the enactment of
legislation allowing certain military retirees to receive both military
retirement pay and VA disability compensation.
In addition, VA continues to receive increasing numbers of rating-
related claims, from about 586,000 in fiscal year 2000 to about 788,000
in fiscal year 2005. VA projects 3 percent increases in claims received
in fiscal years 2005 and 2006. VA notes that claims received are
increasing in part because older veterans are filing disability claims
for the first time. One reason for this increase could be that older
veterans have incentives to file disability claims because obtaining a
service-connected disability rating is a gateway to VA health care.
According to VA, the complexity of claims is also increasing because
veterans are citing more disabilities in their claims than in the past.
Because each disability needs to be evaluated, these claims can take
longer to complete. VA planned to develop baseline data on average
issues per claim by the end of calendar year 2005.
In November 2004, we reported that VA would have to rely on
productivity improvements to achieve its claims processing performance
goals in the face of increasing workloads and decreased staffing
levels.[Footnote 9] However, its fiscal year 2005 budget justification
did not provide information on claims processing productivity or how
much VA expected to improve productivity. VA's fiscal year 2006 budget
justification provides information on actual and planned productivity,
in terms of rating-related claims decided per direct full-time
equivalent (FTE) employee, and identifies a number of initiatives that
could improve claims processing performance. These initiatives include
technology initiatives, such as Virtual VA, involving the creation of
electronic claims folders; consolidation of the processing of Benefits
Delivery at Discharge (BDD) claims at two regional offices; and
collaboration with the Department of Defense (DOD) to improve VA's
ability to obtain evidence, such as evidence of in-service stressors
for veterans claiming service-connected Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder.
Despite these and other measures, we noted in May 2005 that it is still
not clear whether VA will be able to achieve its planned
improvements.[Footnote 10] In our May 2005 testimony we noted that VA's
fiscal year 2006 budget justification assumes that it will increase the
number of rating-related claims completed per FTE from 94 in fiscal
year 2004 to 109 in fiscal year 2005 and 2006, a 16 percent increase.
For fiscal year 2005, this level of desired productivity translates
into VA completing almost 826,000 rating-related decisions. In
actuality, VA completed about 763,000 decisions in fiscal year 2005.
Opportunities for Improvement May Lie in More Fundamental Reform:
While VA is taking a number of actions to address its claims processing
challenges, there are opportunities for more fundamental reform, that
could dramatically improve decision making and processing. These
include reexamining program design and the context in which decisions
are made as well as the structure and division of labor among field
offices. For example, in designating federal disability programs as
high risk in 2003, GAO noted that VA's and the Social Security
Administration's (SSA) disability programs have not been updated to
reflect the current state of science, medicine, technology, and labor
market conditions. In addition, our work has shown that about one-third
of newly compensated veterans could be interested in receiving a lump
sum payment, potentially saving VA time and money associated with
reopening cases over time. Moreover, VA and other organizations have
identified potential changes to field operations that could enhance
productivity and accuracy in processing disability claims.
After more than a decade of research, GAO has determined that federal
disability programs are in urgent need of attention and transformation
and placed modernizing federal disability programs on its high-risk
list in January 2003. Specifically, our research showed that the
disability programs administered by VA and the Social Security
Administration lagged behind the scientific advances and economic and
social changes that have redefined the relationship between impairments
and work. For example, advances in medicine and technology have reduced
the severity of some medical conditions and have allowed individuals to
live with greater independence and function in work settings. Moreover,
the nature of work has changed in recent decades as the national
economy has moved away from manufacturing-based jobs to service-and
knowledge-based employment. Yet VA's and SSA's disability programs
remain mired in concepts from the past--particularly the concept that
impairment equates to an inability to work--and as such, we found that
these programs are poorly positioned to provide meaningful and timely
support for Americans with disabilities.
In August 2002, we recommended that VA use its annual performance plan
to delineate strategies for and progress in periodically updating labor
market data used in its disability determination process. We also
recommended that VA study and report to the Congress on the effects
that a comprehensive consideration of medical treatment and assistive
technologies would have on its disability programs' eligibility
criteria and benefits package. This study would include estimates of
the effects on the size, cost, and management of VA's disability
programs and other relevant VA programs and would identify any
legislative actions needed to initiate and fund such changes.
Another area of program design that could be examined is the option of
providing a lump sum payment in lieu of monthly disability
compensation. In 1996, the Veterans' Claims Adjudication Commission
noted that most disability compensation claims are repeat claims--such
as claims for increased disability percentage--and most repeat claims
were from veterans with less severe disabilities.[Footnote 11]
According to VA, about 65 percent of veterans who began receiving
disability compensation in fiscal year 2003 had disabilities rated 30
percent or less. The commission questioned whether concentrating claims
processing resources on these claims, rather than on claims by more
severely disabled veterans, was consistent with program intent. The
commission asked Congress to consider paying less severely disabled
veterans compensation in a lump sum. According to the commission, the
lump sum option could have a number of benefits for VA as well as
veterans. Specifically, the lump sum option could reduce the number of
claims submitted and allow VA to process claims more quickly--
especially those of more seriously disabled veterans. Moreover, a lump
sum option could be more useful to some veterans as they make the
transition from military to civilian life. In December 2000, we
reported that about one-third of newly compensated veterans could be
interested in a lump sum option.
In addition to program design changes, external studies of VA's
disability claims process have identified the regional office structure
as disadvantageous to efficient operation. Specifically, in its January
1999 report, the Congressional Commission on Servicemembers and
Veterans Transition Assistance found that some regional offices might
be so small that their disproportionately large supervisory overhead
unnecessarily consumes personnel resources.[Footnote 12] Similarly, in
its 1997 report, the National Academy of Public Administration found
that VA could close a large number of regional offices and achieve
significant savings in administrative overhead costs.
Apart from the issue of closing regional offices, the Congressional
Commission on Servicemembers and Veterans Transition Assistance
highlighted a need to consolidate disability claims processing into
fewer locations. VA has consolidated its education assistance and
housing loan guaranty programs into fewer than 10 locations, and the
commission encouraged VA to take similar action in the disability
programs. In 1995 VA enumerated several potential benefits of such a
consolidation. These included allowing VA to assign the most
experienced and productive adjudication officers and directors to the
consolidated offices; facilitating increased specialization and as-
needed expert consultation in deciding complex cases; improving the
completeness of claims development, the accuracy and consistency of
rating decisions, and the clarity of decision explanations; improving
overall adjudication quality by increasing the pool of experience and
expertise in critical technical areas; and facilitating consistency in
decision making through fewer consolidated claims processing centers.
VA has already consolidated some of its pension workload (specifically,
income and eligibility verifications) at three regional offices. Also,
VA has consolidated at its Philadelphia regional office dependency and
indemnity compensation claims by survivors of service members who died
on active duty, including those who died during Operation Enduring
Freedom and Operation Iraqi Freedom.
VA is also is in the process of consolidating decision-making on
Benefits Delivery at Discharge claims, which are generally original
claims for disability compensation, at the Salt Lake City and Winston-
Salem regional offices. VA established this program to expedite
decisions on disability compensation claims from newly separated
service members. A service member can file a BDD claim up to 180 days
before separation; VA staff performs some development work on the claim
before separation. VBA actually decides the claim after the service
member is separated and the official discharge form (DD Form 214) is
received. Under the consolidation, regional offices and VBA's 142 BDD
sites will accept and develop claims, but will send the developed
claims to Salt Lake City or Winston-Salem for decision. VBA expects
this consolidation to help improve decision efficiency and consistency.
Consolidation began in December 2004 and is expected to be completed by
March 2006.
While reexamining claims processing challenges in a larger context may
be daunting, there are mechanisms for undertaking such an effort,
including the congressionally chartered commission currently studying
veterans' disability benefits. In November 2003, the Congress
established the Veterans' Disability Benefits Commission to study the
appropriateness of VA disability benefits, including disability
criteria and benefit levels. The commission was to examine and provide
recommendations on (1) the appropriateness of the benefits, (2) the
appropriateness of the benefit amounts, and (3) the appropriate
standard or standards for determining whether a disability or death of
a veteran should be compensated. As of October 2005, the commission had
established 31 potential research questions for study. Questions
include how well do disability benefits meet the congressional intent
of replacing average impairment in earnings capacity, should lump sum
payments be made for certain disabilities or level of severity of
disability, and how does VA's claims processing operation compare to
other disability programs, including the location and number of
processing centers. These issues and others have been raised by
previous studies of VBA's disability claims process.
Contact and Acknowledgments:
For further information, please contact Cynthia A. Bascetta at (202)
512-7215. Also contributing to this statement were Cristina Chaplain,
Irene Chu, and Martin Scire.
[End of section]
Related GAO Products:
Veterans' Disability Benefits: Improved Transparency Needed to
Facilitate Oversight of VBA's Compensation and Pension Staffing Levels.
GAO-06-225T. Washington, D.C.: November 3, 2005.
VA Benefits: Other Programs May Provide Lessons for Improving
Individual Unemployability Assessments. GAO-06-207T. Washington, D.C.:
October 27, 2005.
Veterans' Disability Benefits: Claims Processing Problems Persist and
Major Performance Improvements May Be Difficult. GAO-05-749T.
Washington, DC.: May 26, 2005.
VA Disability Benefits: Board of Veterans' Appeals Has Made
Improvements in Quality Assurance, but Challenges Remain for VA in
Assuring Consistency. GAO-05-655T. Washington, D.C.: May 5, 2005.
High-Risk Series: An Update. GAO-05-207. Washington, D.C.: January
2005.
Veterans Benefits: VA Needs Plan for Assessing Consistency of
Decisions. GAO-05-99. Washington, D.C.: November 19, 2004.
Veterans' Benefits: More Transparency Needed to Improve Oversight of
VBA's Compensation and Pension Staffing Levels. GAO-05-47. Washington,
D.C.: November 15, 2004.
Veterans' Benefits: Improvements Needed in the Reporting and Use of
Data on the Accuracy of Disability Claims Decisions. GAO-03-1045.
Washington, D.C.: September 30, 2003.
Department of Veterans Affairs: Key Management Challenges in Health and
Disability Programs. GAO-03-756T. Washington, D.C.: May 8, 2003.
Veterans Benefits Administration: Better Collection and Analysis of
Attrition Data Needed to Enhance Workforce Planning. GAO-03-491.
Washington, D.C.: April 28, 2003.
Veterans' Benefits: Claims Processing Timeliness Performance Measures
Could Be Improved. GAO-03-282. Washington, D.C.: December 19, 2002.
Veterans' Benefits: Quality Assurance for Disability Claims and Appeals
Processing Can Be Further Improved. GAO-02-806. Washington, D.C.:
August 16, 2002.
Veterans' Benefits: VBA's Efforts to Implement the Veterans Claims
Assistance Act Need Further Monitoring. GAO-02-412. Washington, D.C.:
July 1, 2002.
Veterans' Benefits: Despite Recent Improvements, Meeting Claims
Processing Goals Will Be Challenging. GAO-02-645T. Washington, D.C.:
April 26, 2002.
Veterans Benefits Administration: Problems and Challenges Facing
Disability Claims Processing. GAO/T-HEHS/AIMD-00-146. Washington, D.C.:
May 18, 2000.
FOOTNOTES
[1] Rating-related claims are primarily original claims for disability
compensation and pension benefits, and reopened claims. For example,
veterans may file reopened claims if they believe their service-
connected conditions have worsened.
[2] In its fiscal year 2005 Annual Performance and Accountability
Report, VA reports a separate strategic goal of 78 percent for rating-
related compensation claims and 65 percent for rating-related pension
claims.
[3] We are currently reviewing the reliability of VA's claims
processing accuracy data.
[4] GAO, Veterans Benefits Administration: Problems and Challenges
Facing Disability Claims Processing, GAO/T-HEHS/AIMD-00-146
(Washington, D.C.: May 18, 2000).
[5] National Academy of Public Administration, Management of
Compensation and Pension Benefits Claim Processes for Veterans
(Washington, D.C.: August 1997).
[6] GAO, Veterans' Benefits: Quality Assurance for Disability Claims
and Appeals Processing Can Be Further Improved, GAO-02-806 (Washington,
D.C.: Aug. 16, 2002).
[7] GAO, Veterans Benefits: VA Needs Plan for Assessing Consistency of
Decisions, GAO-05-99 (Washington, D.C.: Nov. 19, 2004).
[8] Department of Veterans Affairs Office of Inspector General, Review
of State Variances in VA Disability Compensation Payments, Report No.
05-00765-137 (Washington, D.C.: May 19, 2005).
[9] GAO, Veterans' Benefits: More Transparency Needed to Improve
Oversight of VBA's Compensation and Pension Staffing Levels, GAO-05-47
(Washington, D.C.: Nov. 15, 2004).
[10] GAO, Veterans' Disability Benefits: Claims Processing Problems
Persist and Major Performance Improvements May Be Difficult, GAO-05-
749T (Washington, D.C.: May 26, 2005).
[11] Veterans' Claims Adjudication Commission, Report to Congress
(Washington D.C.: December 1996).
[12] Report of the Congressional Commission on Servicemembers and
Veterans Transition Assistance (Washington, D.C.: Jan. 14, 1999).
