Other conditions decisions — 2026

The Board finds that the April 2025 denial of benefits for PCAFC is legally inadequate and remands the case to obtain a new medical determination considering all medical information of record.

The Veteran's son, G.J., was not found to be permanently incapable of self-support prior to turning 18 years old. The evidence showed he graduated high school and attended college until his 18th birthday.

The Board has determined that a remand is necessary to obtain an adequate assessment of the Veteran's need for personal care services due to her condition, as the previous opinion was based on inaccurate factual information.

The Veteran's appeal to the Board was untimely, and her December 2024 notice of disagreement is dismissed.

The Board has determined that the Veteran is not in need of personal care services for a minimum of six continuous months due to an inability to perform ADLs or a need for supervision, protection, or instruction. The evidence shows that the Veteran can complete all ADLs independently most of the time and does not require hands-on assistance each time he performs them.

The Board has decided that the Veteran is not eligible for PCAFC due to lack of personal care services needs. The case is being remanded to gather more detailed medical opinions and provide proper notice.

The appeal for a TDIU rating is remanded due to the need to obtain SSA records and determine eligibility.

The Veteran's appeal for service connection for colorectal abscesses was dismissed because the appeal was not filed within one year of the rating decision, and no good cause was provided.

The Board has decided to remand the case due to a failure to obtain a VA medical opinion regarding whether the Veteran's cause of death was related to his in-service exposure to herbicide agents, and whether it is at least as likely as not that the causes were proximately due or aggravated by service-connected conditions.

The Board has found a duty to assist error in not considering the results of a neuropsychological assessment, and thus remands for another CEAT assessment that includes these results.

The Veteran's claim for service connection for right foot hallux valgus was denied as there is no current diagnosis of the condition and the record does not contain a recent diagnosis prior to her filing of a claim.,For left hip strain, the Veteran's claims for initial compensable ratings based on limitation of flexion and extension were both denied due to lack of evidence showing that her symptoms meet or approximate the criteria for a compensable rating.

The Board has remanded the case for a medical opinion regarding whether the Veteran's MGUS is related to herbicide agent exposure, and also for a determination on an initial compensable rating for MGUS.

The Veteran's son is challenging the validity of an overpayment debt created due to his father's death. The Board has decided to remand this issue for further review.

The Veteran's appeal for service connection for lymph node pain is dismissed because the appeal was not timely filed and was instead construed as a motion for reconsideration of an earlier decision.

The Veteran's eligibility for benefits under the Program of Comprehensive Assistance for Family Caregivers (PCAFC) is remanded due to a duty to assist error and an inconsistency in the statutory criteria used.

The Board dismissed the appeal for continued enrollment in the Program of Comprehensive Assistance for Family Caregivers (PCAFC) based on a July 24, 2014, application due to extensions and reassessments that extended eligibility through September 30, 2028.

The Veteran's appeal for special monthly compensation based on the need for regular aid and attendance of another person has been dismissed due to their death.

The Board denied the claim for service connection for cause of death, finding that there is no evidence to support a link between the Veteran's multiple myeloma and toxic exposures during overseas service. The primary cause of death was respiratory failure.

The Veteran's eligibility for the Program of Comprehensive Assistance for Family Caregivers (PCAFC) is being remanded due to a need for personal care services. The VA Centralized Eligibility and Appeals Team previously denied his application, but an additional opinion is needed to determine if it is in his best interest.

The Board has decided to remand the case due to errors in verifying the Veteran's date of conviction and whether he was convicted of a felony, which are necessary for determining if his disability compensation benefits should be reduced due to his incarceration.