The veteran's claim for special monthly pension by reason of being in need of aid and attendance has been granted, with a rating of 50% effective from October 22, 1997.
The deciding factor: The veteran was found to be in need of regular aid and attendance due to his medical conditions and psychiatric issues requiring frequent adjustments of prosthetic devices and assistance in daily activities.
- Claimed conditions
- psychiatric complaints, foot injury
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating
- Not verified here — check the original decision
- Decision date
- October 9, 2003
- Citation
- 0327057
This is a plain-language summary generated by AI from a public Board of Veterans’ Appeals decision. It can contain errors — always verify against the original. Search VA.gov for the original decision (opens in a new tab) using citation 0327057.
What this means for you
A grant means the Board allowed the benefit or issue identified in this decision. Review the original order: other issues in the same appeal may have a different outcome, and this decision does not predict another claim.
What you can do next
Use your own notice and decision stage. A remanded issue is not a final court-appealable denial. VA review guidance and CAVC filing instructions (U.S. federal; reviewed October 7, 2026).
Related decisions
Other Board decisions on a similar condition or argued the same way.
- Whole decision: Granted
The Veteran's left foot disability, diagnosed as a foot injury and malunion/nonunion of the tarsal/metatarsal bones, is related to an in-service injury during her period of active duty for training (ACDUTRA). The Board granted service connection for this condition.
- Whole decision: Denied
The Veteran's application for enrollment in VA healthcare system was denied due to his not meeting the eligibility requirements based on his service-connected disabilities and income level.
- Whole decision: Remanded (sent back)
The case is being remanded for further development based on the recent availability of service medical records.
- Whole decision: Denied
The Board finds that the veteran's unauthorized medical services provided at Massena Memorial Hospital in May 2004 do not meet the criteria for payment or reimbursement under applicable VA laws and regulations.
Free starter guide for your own claim
Reading this because you were denied or under-rated? Get the plain-English next steps — your appeal options, the deadline that protects you, and how appeals like yours turn out. One email, no spam.
We will only use this to send the guide. No spam, unsubscribe any time. We never sell your information.
We are not the VA. Veterans’ Rights is an independent resource built for veterans. We are not the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, not part of the government, and not endorsed by any government agency.
This is general information, not legal advice. For advice about your own situation, talk to a VA-accredited representative — many help for free.