Inspection of the VA Regional Office Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

In February and March 2017, we evaluated the Philadelphia, PA, VARO to determine how well VSC staff processed veterans’ disability claims, how timely and accurately they processed proposed rating reductions, how accurately they entered claims-related information, and how well they responded to special controlled correspondence. VSC staff did not consistently process some of the disability claims we reviewed. OIG reviewed 30 veterans’ TBI claims and found RVSRs accurately processed 27. This represented a significant improvement from our 2013 inspection. RVSRs did not always process entitlement to SMC and ancillary benefits consistent with VBA policy. OIG reviewed 30 claims involving entitlement to SMC and related ancillary benefits and found RVSRs incorrectly processed 13, resulting in 189 improper monthly payments to 10 veterans totaling approximately $123,000. This occurred because of an ineffective second signature review process. VSC staff generally processed proposed rating reductions accurately. OIG reviewed 30 rating reduction cases and found staff delayed or incorrectly processed 10 because management placed higher priority on other workload. OIG reviewed 30 newly established claims and found staff did not correctly input claim and claimant information into the electronic systems at the time of claims establishment in 15 because of lack of training and staff rushing to establish claims. VSC staff processed special controlled correspondence timely but needed to improve accuracy. OIG reviewed 30 special controlled correspondences and found staff incorrectly processed 13 because of lack of training and inadequate oversight by management. OIG recommended the VARO Director develop and implement a plan to assess the accuracy of secondary reviews involving higher level SMC, ensure oversight of rating reductions, monitor the effectiveness of claims establishment training, and develop a plan to monitor the effectiveness of training and reviews of special controlled correspondence. The VARO Director concurred with our recommendations; planned actions are responsive.