The Board has determined that the February 2023 decision denying PCAFC eligibility was inadequate due to insufficient reasoning and lack of consideration of the Veteran's safety concerns related to his seizure disorder. The case is being remanded for the AOJ to obtain private treatment records and provide a more detailed medical opinion regarding the Veteran's need for personal care services, supervision or protection, and regular extensive instruction or supervision.
The deciding factor: The February 2023 decision did not adequately address the Veteran's safety concerns related to his seizure disorder and memory loss, which are critical factors in determining eligibility for PCAFC.
- Claimed conditions
- Seizure disorder
- How they argued it
- Not specified
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- January 2, 2026
- Citation
- A26000065
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. Look up the original decision on VA.gov (opens in a new tab) using citation A26000065.
What this means for you
A remand is not a loss. The Board sent the case back for more development — often a new exam or missing records — before making a final decision. Many remands later end in a grant, and the decision spells out exactly what the Board wanted to see.
What you can do next
Related decisions
Other Board decisions on a similar condition or argued the same way.
- Denied
The Veteran's claim for an earlier effective date for a seizure disorder rating of 20 percent is denied as the evidence does not show that his condition increased in severity within one year after separation from service.
- Granted
The Veteran's service-connected disabilities, including PTSD, cervical spine disability, and seizure disorder, render him unable to secure and follow a substantially gainful occupation. Therefore, the Board has granted his TDIU application.
- Denied
The Veteran's seizure disorder is rated at 10 percent, and the Board finds that a higher rating is not warranted as he has not had any seizures in over two years.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the case due to a failure to obtain an adequate opinion regarding the cause of death and its relation to service, including in-service dental treatment. The Veteran died from acute renal failure, metastatic melanoma, cerebral metastasis, or seizure disorder.
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.