Glaucoma VA Rating

Glaucoma is one of the more misunderstood eye claims at the VA, and the misunderstanding usually costs the veteran a rating. The diagnosis itself is not what carries the percentage. Glaucoma is rated under 38 CFR § 4.79 on the resulting visual impairment, the loss of visual acuity, the loss of visual field, or both. The same formula also allows a rating based on documented treatment visits for the eye condition when that is higher. You can have a serious, progressive optic-nerve disease, be on daily drops for years, and still see a low number on the decision if the only thing the examiner measured was central acuity.

That is the central trap. Glaucoma causes a progressive loss of peripheral vision and takes central vision only in late stages (PMID 29694684). A claim that only measures how well you read the eye chart understates the disability, sometimes by a lot, because the field defect is where the impairment lives. The fix is perimetry, formal visual-field testing by an instrument like the Goldmann perimeter or an automated equivalent, and a claim that only has best-corrected acuity in the file is a claim missing half its evidence.

There is also a floor most veterans do not know about. For open-angle glaucoma under DC 6013, and for angle-closure glaucoma under DC 6012, there is a minimum 10 percent evaluation whenever continuous medication is required to control the condition. That alone changes the calculus: if you are putting drops in every day to keep your eye pressure down, a zero rating is not the floor. This page walks through the rating criteria and chart, the medication minimum, the C&P perimetry mechanics that decide most of these cases, glaucoma secondary to diabetes and steroid use, and why VA denies these claims.

TL;DR

• Glaucoma is rated under 38 CFR § 4.79, under DC 6012 (angle-closure glaucoma) and DC 6013 (open-angle glaucoma). The rating comes from the resulting visual impairment, or from treatment visits for incapacitating episodes if that is higher, not from the diagnosis.
• The General Rating Formula for Diseases of the Eye rates either the visual impairment or documented incapacitating episodes requiring treatment visits in the past 12 months, whichever is higher. Visual impairment is based on visual acuity and visual field; when both are impaired, each is evaluated separately and the two are combined under § 4.25.
• Open-angle glaucoma (DC 6013) and angle-closure glaucoma (DC 6012) each carry a minimum 10 percent evaluation when continuous medication is required to control them.
• Glaucoma damages the peripheral field first. A claim that measures only central acuity, and skips perimetry, understates the disability.
• Visual field loss is measured by perimetry (Goldmann or an automated equivalent). Visual acuity is best-corrected acuity. Both feed the rating formula.
• Secondary chains under § 3.310: glaucoma secondary to diabetes, to chronic corticosteroid use for a service-connected condition (steroid-induced glaucoma), or to ocular trauma.
• Across 1,818 decided Board rulings on glaucoma from 2021 to 2026, 14.2% were granted, 30.5% denied and 55.2% remanded. A ruling is one issue the Board decided in one decision; one decision often rules on several issues. More than half went back on remand.

Glaucoma VA rating criteria (DC 6012 and DC 6013)

The single most important thing to understand about a glaucoma claim is that DC 6012 and DC 6013 are not standalone payment schedules. They are entry points into the General Rating Formula for Diseases of the Eye under 38 CFR § 4.79. The diagnostic code identifies the disease. Both codes read the same way in the current schedule.

6013 Open-angle glaucoma

Evaluate under the General Rating Formula for Diseases of the Eye. Minimum evaluation if continuous medication is required, 10%

DC 6013 covers open-angle glaucoma, the common adult form that progresses slowly over years. DC 6012 covers angle-closure glaucoma, caused by a closed or narrowed drainage angle, with the same 10 percent minimum. Where the form of glaucoma is documented, the diagnostic code should track the diagnosis. In both, the optic nerve is damaged in a way tied to the level of eye pressure, though other factors also play a role, and lowering the pressure is the only proven treatment (PMID 24825645). The rating follows the damage.

The General Rating Formula then gives two paths and takes whichever is higher: visual impairment, or documented incapacitating episodes, meaning clinic visits specifically for treatment, in the past 12 months. One or two treatment visits rate 10 percent, three or four rate 20 percent, five or six rate 40 percent, and seven or more rate 60 percent.

Visual impairment is evaluated along two axes, best-corrected central acuity (how well you see the chart with glasses or contacts) and the visual field measured by perimetry. When both are impaired, § 4.77(c) has each evaluated separately, with the field defect expressed as a level of visual acuity, and then combined under § 4.25. If your central acuity is still decent but your peripheral field has collapsed, the field-loss evaluation carries most of the rating.

Glaucoma VA rating chart for visual field loss

Under § 4.77(b), VA measures how many degrees of field remain at eight principal meridians and averages them. DC 6080 then rates concentric contraction of the field as follows.

• Remaining field of 46 to 60 degrees: 10 percent for both eyes, 10 percent for one eye.
• Remaining field of 31 to 45 degrees: 30 percent for both eyes, 10 percent for one eye.
• Remaining field of 16 to 30 degrees: 50 percent for both eyes, 10 percent for one eye.
• Remaining field of 6 to 15 degrees: 70 percent for both eyes, 20 percent for one eye.
• Remaining field of 5 degrees: 100 percent for both eyes, 30 percent for one eye.

Each level also has an acuity equivalent (16 to 30 degrees counts as 20/100 in each affected eye), which is how VA combines field loss with acuity loss. On the acuity side, 20/40 in both eyes rates 0 percent and 20/100 in both eyes rates 50 percent. One eye alone cannot rate above 30 percent for visual impairment unless the eye is lost, and if only one eye is service connected, VA treats the other as 20/40.

At the 2026 rates for a single veteran with no dependents, the 10 percent minimum pays $180.42 a month, 30 percent pays $552.47, 50 percent pays $1,132.90 and 70 percent pays $1,808.45. VA pays by your combined rating, so the glaucoma rating adds money only when it changes the combined percentage.

Glaucoma eye drops and the 10 percent minimum

Here is the lever that gets left on the table most often. Under DC 6013 (and DC 6012 for angle-closure glaucoma), when continuous medication is required to control the condition, there is a minimum 10 percent evaluation.

Read that literally. If a veteran is on a daily pressure-lowering regimen, drops every morning, drops every night, whatever the ophthalmologist prescribed to keep the intraocular pressure in range, that ongoing medication requirement establishes a 10 percent floor for service-connected glaucoma. It does not matter that the visual field on the day of the exam looked preserved. The medication requirement itself is the basis.

This matters because glaucoma may cause no symptoms until a relatively late stage (PMID 24825645), and well-controlled glaucoma can produce normal or near-normal field and acuity findings. The drops are working; that is the point of the drops. An examiner who measures field and acuity, finds them within normal limits, and assigns a noncompensable rating has missed the regulation. If the glaucoma is service connected and continuous medication is required, the rating should not fall below 10 percent.

The evidence that establishes this is simple and it is the evidence veterans already have: the prescription record, the ophthalmology notes documenting that medication is required to control the pressure, the pharmacy refill history. A claim that includes the medication record gives the rater what they need to apply the floor.

The glaucoma C&P exam and visual field testing

The glaucoma C&P exam should follow the DBQ for eye conditions, and under § 4.75(b) it must be done by a licensed optometrist or ophthalmologist. That section allows field testing when there is a medical indication of a disease that may cause a field defect, and glaucoma is exactly that disease. A complete exam records these items.

• Best-corrected central visual acuity for each eye, distance and near, with the correction in place.
• Formal visual-field testing (perimetry) for each eye. Section 4.77(a) requires Goldmann kinetic perimetry or an automated perimeter (Humphrey Model 750, Octopus Model 101 or later versions) with simulated kinetic Goldmann testing, with results for at least 16 meridians in each eye.
• Intraocular pressure measurements.
• Optic-nerve assessment, including cup-to-disc ratio and any documented optic-nerve damage or thinning.
• Medication status, specifically whether continuous medication is required to control the condition, which triggers the 10 percent minimum.
• Whether the diagnosis is open-angle or angle-closure, which determines DC 6013 versus DC 6012.

A veteran can have substantial glaucomatous field loss, real, ratable, disabling loss, and still read 20/25 on the chart. If the field was never measured, the field evaluation defaults to whatever the file supports, which is often nothing, and the rating collapses onto the acuity number alone. The examiner who records "visual acuity 20/30 bilaterally, glaucoma controlled on medication" and stops there has not produced an exam adequate to rate the field-loss axis. That is a defect worth flagging. If your exam is coming up, C&P exam prep for eye and glaucoma DBQs is worth working through so you know what the examiner is supposed to test and can flag it on the spot if perimetry gets skipped.

Glaucoma secondary to diabetes and other causes

Glaucoma frequently arises as a secondary condition. Under 38 CFR § 3.310, secondary service connection can be granted for a condition caused by a service-connected disability, or aggravated by one, meaning it would be less severe but for that disability (Allen v. Brown, 7 Vet. App. 439 (1995)). The common glaucoma chains follow.

Glaucoma secondary to diabetes. In a meta-analysis of cohort and case-control studies, people with diabetes had a higher risk of open-angle glaucoma (PMID 25137059). That is an association, not proof for any one veteran. A veteran with service-connected diabetes who later develops glaucoma should have the secondary theory developed, with an ophthalmology opinion tying the glaucoma to the diabetic disease process. It often sits alongside diabetic retinopathy, so the two claims are often best worked together. Glaucoma claimed secondary to diabetes is one of the publishable pairs in the Board data, and the Board section below lists it with its count and grant rate. Secondary conditions to diabetes lists the other conditions claimed off diabetes.

Steroid-induced glaucoma. Prolonged corticosteroid use can raise intraocular pressure and cause steroid-induced glaucoma, and the risk depends on the drug, the route, the dose and how long it is taken (PMID 32057761). When a veteran takes long-term corticosteroids for a service-connected condition and develops glaucoma as a result, that is a textbook secondary chain. The nexus opinion has to connect the steroid regimen to the pressure rise and the optic-nerve damage.

Glaucoma secondary to ocular trauma. Blunt or penetrating eye injury can raise eye pressure and lead to traumatic glaucoma, including angle-recession glaucoma that can appear long after the injury (PMIDs 32057763 and 37763218). The longer the interval between a documented in-service injury and the glaucoma diagnosis, the more the nexus opinion has to do to explain the mechanism and the time course.

For any of these, the nexus opinion has to identify the mechanism, address the time course, and account for other causes. A bare "glaucoma is related to the diabetes" without rationale is not probative. In the Board's 2021 to 2026 service connection rulings, secondary and direct glaucoma claims were both granted rarely, so the secondary theory is not a shortcut; the Board section below shows both rates. The secondary conditions tool helps map which of your service-connected conditions could be driving an eye claim.

Why VA denies glaucoma claims

Across 1,818 decided Board rulings on glaucoma from 2021 to 2026, 14.2% were granted, 30.5% denied and 55.2% remanded. The grant rate is 10.5 points below the Board-wide 24.7%, and remand is the most common outcome by a wide margin. When the Board denied service connection, it most often found no link between the glaucoma and service, and among the medical opinions the Board relied on, opinions against the claim were more common than favorable ones. When it sent claims back, the most common reason was a VA exam or opinion that was not adequate. The Board section below shows how often each part of the claim failed, what the Board did with medical opinions, why claims were sent back and what happened after a remand. The same gaps repeat across these decisions.

No link to service. Glaucoma that first appears decades after separation, with no in-service eye findings, no documented injury and no reasoned secondary opinion, has nothing to connect it to service. This is the most common reason a glaucoma service connection claim fails.

No perimetry in the file. The C&P exam records acuity, notes the glaucoma is controlled, and never runs formal visual-field testing. The field-loss axis of the rating formula then has nothing to evaluate, and the rating defaults to acuity, which is exactly the axis glaucoma spares.

The medication minimum never gets argued. A veteran with well-controlled glaucoma on daily drops gets a noncompensable rating because the field and acuity looked normal, and nobody invoked the 10 percent floor. The prescription record was in reach the whole time; it just was not connected to the regulation.

Acuity measured without correction, or the correction not documented. The rating runs on best-corrected acuity. If the exam records uncorrected vision, or does not specify, the acuity figure can be wrong in either direction.

Secondary theory undeveloped. A diabetic veteran's glaucoma, or a veteran's steroid-induced glaucoma, gets filed as a direct claim with no service-connected onset, instead of as a secondary to the underlying service-connected disease. Without the nexus opinion tying it to the diabetes, the steroid regimen, or the old eye trauma, the service-connection question never gets reached and the visual-impairment rating is moot.

Stale field data. Glaucoma progresses. A field study from years ago does not reflect current loss. If the most recent perimetry in the file predates the current claim period, the rating may be built on outdated field measurements.

Questions veterans ask about glaucoma

What is the VA rating for glaucoma?

Glaucoma rates at least 10 percent when continuous medication is required. It rates higher on treatment visits (20, 40 or 60 percent) or on visual impairment, where field loss in both eyes can reach 100 percent, whichever is greater.

Do glaucoma eye drops qualify for a VA rating?

Yes. Under DC 6012 and DC 6013, glaucoma that requires continuous medication rates at least 10 percent even when your vision and field test normal.

Can you get a VA rating for ocular hypertension?

Sometimes. Ocular hypertension, high eye pressure without optic nerve damage, has no code of its own, and in 2025 the Board rated it by analogy to open-angle glaucoma under DC 6013, granting 10 percent when continuous eye drops were required (citation A25019881) and denying a compensable rating when they were not and vision was 20/20 (citation A25018983).

Can glaucoma be secondary to diabetes?

Yes, if a medical opinion explains how your service-connected diabetes caused or worsened the glaucoma. Studies link diabetes to a higher risk of open-angle glaucoma, but the opinion still has to address your own records and other causes.

Is glaucoma a presumptive condition for veterans?

No. Glaucoma is not on the Agent Orange list in 38 CFR § 3.309(e), the Gulf War rule in § 3.317 or the burn pit (particulate matter) list in § 3.320, so you prove it directly or as secondary to a service-connected condition.

Bottom Line

Glaucoma is not rated on the diagnosis. It is rated on the visual impairment it produces, or on treatment visits if that is higher, under the General Rating Formula in 38 CFR § 4.79, through DC 6013 for open-angle and DC 6012 for angle-closure glaucoma. Because the disease takes the peripheral field first and spares central acuity until late, the field-loss measurement is usually the one that matters, and a C&P exam that skips perimetry understates the disability. For both glaucoma codes, the 10 percent medication minimum is a floor most veterans never invoke, and the only evidence it takes is the prescription record. The cases that succeed at the Board tend to have formal visual-field testing, a documented medication requirement, and, where the glaucoma flows from diabetes, steroids, or trauma, a properly developed secondary nexus. Same disease, different paper trail, different outcome.

Related Conditions

Glaucoma sits inside the larger picture of service-connected eye disease, so it commonly connects to cataracts, diabetic retinopathy, and dry eye, all of which are also rated through the eye-impairment framework in § 4.79 and § 4.77. When the glaucoma is secondary, the underlying driver is often diabetes, and the diabetic eye complications are best worked as a set. Veterans with more than one service-connected condition that could be driving an eye claim should review the secondary conditions tool before assuming a single direct claim tells the whole story.

Methodology and Limitations

• Data source: Rating criteria from 38 CFR § 4.79, DC 6012 (angle-closure glaucoma), DC 6013 (open-angle glaucoma) and DC 6080 (visual field defects), evaluated through the General Rating Formula for Diseases of the Eye, with §§ 4.75, 4.76 and 4.77 for the exam and field rules, checked against the eCFR text in October 2026. Secondary service connection from § 3.310, with aggravation under Allen v. Brown. The ocular hypertension practice comes from 2025 Board decisions A25019881 and A25018983. Medical background from PubMed abstracts (PMIDs 29694684, 24825645, 25137059, 32057761, 32057763 and 37763218).
• Sample size: Patterns in this post are drawn from Claim Raven's read of 511,036 Board decisions from 2021 to 2026, which contain 1,378,030 rulings, including 1,958 rulings on glaucoma. Across the 1,818 decided rulings, outcomes ran 14.2% granted, 30.5% denied and 55.2% remanded; another 140 dismissed or withdrawn rulings are excluded. The Board section on this page breaks these down by denial reason, remand reason, results after a remand, appeal type, medical opinion, claim theory, era and secondary pair; those figures are computed from the data, not typed here. The data does not break results down by axis (acuity versus field).
• Classification approach: Diagnostic code definitions and the visual-impairment framework drawn from the regulatory text. Secondary-chain analysis follows § 3.310 and established aggravation case law. The medication-minimum analysis follows the DC 6012 and DC 6013 regulatory language.
• Limitations:
• Glaucoma ratings turn on measured values (best-corrected acuity and perimetry results) that are specific to each case. The chart above shows the concentric-contraction levels; field defects of other shapes, such as loss of half the field or a scotoma, have their own rules in DCs 6080 and 6081.
• Compensation values reflect the 2026 rates for a single veteran with no dependents and adjust annually with COLA.
• Selection bias: BVA-level patterns reflect cases that appealed. Most glaucoma claims resolve at the RO level and are not in any BVA dataset.
• Application of the visual-field rating framework at the RO level is uneven, and missing perimetry is a recurring source of inadequate exams.
• These observations reflect patterns from the regulatory text, case law, and BVA decisions. They are not predictions of individual outcomes.