The Board has determined that the June 2023 denial of PCAFC benefits was not adequately supported by evidence and requires further review with a medical opinion.
The deciding factor: The decision is remanded due to an inadequate VA Functional Assessment Instrument which did not sufficiently address whether the Veteran required in-person personal care for a minimum of 6 continuous months based on inability to perform ADLs or need for supervision, protection, or instruction.
- Claimed conditions
- Inability to perform activities of daily living, Need for supervision or protection based on symptoms or residuals of neurological or other impairment or injury, Need for regular or extensive instruction or supervision without which the ability of the Veteran to function in daily life would be seriously impaired
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating
- Not verified here — check the original decision
- Decision date
- January 13, 2026
- Citation
- A26003073
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. Read the original VA decision (opens in a new tab) using citation A26003073.
What this means for you
A remand sends an issue back for more development, often a new examination or missing records. It does not award the benefit or decide the final outcome. The original decision explains the additional work ordered.
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: Remanded (sent back)
The Board has determined that the July 2024 decision was inadequate and remanded for further review, including consideration of new evidence and a medical opinion.
- Whole decision: Remanded (sent back)
The Veteran's eligibility for PCAFC benefits is remanded due to a duty to assist error in the May 2023 CEAT review. The Board finds that an adequate medical opinion is needed regarding whether the Veteran requires personal care services.
- Whole decision: Denied
The Board denied the veteran's claims for increased ratings for his service-connected lumbar myositis, psychoneurosis and conversion hysteria, residuals of shrapnel wounds of the left thigh and pelvis with retained foreign bodies and scars, and residuals of shell fragment wounds of the right thigh and left leg. The veteran was also denied entitlement to a total disability rating based on individual unemployability due to service-connected disabilities.
- Whole decision: Denied
The Board denied the Veteran's claim for an initial evaluation in excess of 10 percent for his service-connected coronary artery disease, finding that the evidence did not support a higher rating based on the severity of his condition.
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.