Loading decisions…
Loading decisions…
451 vetted Board decisions in 2025 — showing the 200 most recent
The Board remanded the issue of entitlement to eligibility for PCAFC benefits because the Centralized Eligibility and Appeals Team's (CEAT) review was legally inadequate under the correct statutory criteria established in Veteran Warriors, Inc. v. Sec'y of Veterans Affairs. Upon remand, the CEAT must reevaluate whether the Veteran requires personal care services, supervision, protection, or instruction based on the statutory definition, considering evidence of his need for medication management assistance, self-preservation support, and fall risk management.
The Board denied the Veteran's claim for service connection for Parkinson's disease, finding that there was no current disability of Parkinson's disease and that the evidence did not support a diagnosis of Parkinson's disease in 1988 or thereafter.
The Veteran is granted special monthly compensation (SMC) based on the need for regular aid and attendance due to service-connected Parkinsonism, upper and lower extremity disorders associated with Parkinsonism, and PTSD with unspecified neurocognitive disorder.
The Board denied the Veteran's claims for earlier effective dates for service connection and ratings, as well as for special monthly compensation and Dependents' Educational Assistance.
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.