Parkinson's VA Rating

A ruling is one issue the Board decided in one decision; one decision often rules on several issues. Across 3,051 decided Board rulings on Parkinson's from 2021 to 2026, 35.8% were granted, 26.4% denied and 37.9% remanded. That grant rate is 11.1 points above the Board-wide 24.7 percent, one of the higher rates of any condition I track.

The opinion data points the same way. Parkinson's service connection claims the Board decided without weighing any medical opinion were still granted more often than not, which fits a presumption doing the work a nexus opinion would otherwise do, though it is an association, not proof. The Board section below shows how the Board ruled when it relied on a favorable opinion, an opinion against the claim, or none. The rest of this page covers how VA rates Parkinson's under DC 8004 and its residuals, why the Agent Orange presumption under 38 CFR § 3.309(e) drives so many grants, the Camp Lejeune and TBI routes, how the FY2021 NDAA added the broader parkinsonism category to 38 USC § 1116, and why VA denies Parkinson's claims.

TL;DR

• Across 3,051 decided Board rulings on Parkinson's from 2021 to 2026, 35.8% were granted, 26.4% denied and 37.9% remanded. Remand is narrowly the most common outcome, and grants far outnumber denials.
• VA rates each residual of Parkinson's (limb impairment and tremor, speech, swallowing, gait, bladder and bowel, mental effects) under its own code. If those ratings combine to 20 percent or less, VA assigns a 30 percent minimum under DC 8004 instead. The minimum is a floor, not an extra 30 percent on top.
• Agent Orange / herbicide exposure is the best-known presumptive lever, and most Parkinson's service connection rulings ran through a presumption. Parkinson's was added to the § 3.309(e) presumptive list in 2010.
• The FY2021 NDAA added "parkinsonism" (broader than Parkinson's disease itself) to the statutory herbicide list in 38 USC § 1116. The 2022 PACT Act later expanded herbicide-covered locations but did not add parkinsonism.
• Camp Lejeune service and a moderate or severe service-connected TBI are separate presumptive routes. Burn-pit exposure is not a Parkinson's disease presumption.
• Appeals over the rating itself were granted far less often than service connection appeals. Winning service connection is the easier fight; the rating takes residual-by-residual documentation.

Parkinson's at the Board: a Vietnam-era claim

Parkinson's at the BVA is largely a Vietnam-era story. The condition's primary path to service connection runs through the Agent Orange presumption, which makes it overwhelmingly a Vietnam-veteran appeal type, with a smaller Camp Lejeune cohort and other veterans pursuing direct exposure theories.

The data holds 3,051 decided rulings on Parkinson's. The outcome split is below.

• Granted: 1,091 (35.8%)
• Denied: 805 (26.4%)
• Remanded: 1,155 (37.9%)

The 35.8 percent grant rate is 11.1 points above the Board-wide grant rate of 24.7 percent. The three-way split is fairly balanced, with remands only 2.1 points ahead of grants, and denials are the least common outcome. Grants outnumber denials by a wide margin.

The presumption tilt is plain in the data: most decided service connection rulings on Parkinson's ran through a presumption. For Vietnam-era veterans that usually means the herbicide presumption, which catches most Vietnam-veteran Parkinson's claims that have documented covered service.

What makes Parkinson's structurally different from most condition cornerstones is the convergence of three things in the same condition.

• A specific neurodegenerative diagnosis with established clinical criteria (UK Parkinson's Disease Society Brain Bank criteria, MDS clinical diagnostic criteria, neurological examination findings of resting tremor, bradykinesia, rigidity, postural instability)
• A presumptive regulatory framework that doesn't require nexus opinions for qualifying veterans (§ 3.309(e) for herbicide exposure)
• A rating structure that rates each residual on its own, with a 30 percent minimum when the residuals are mild

The convergence is what produces the 35.8 percent grant rate, well above the Board-wide figure. Once the medical record supports a clean Parkinson's diagnosis, and once the service record supports covered exposure, the connection theory is structurally solid. The remaining work is the rating-level analysis of which residuals are present and how severe each one is.

Is Parkinson's a presumptive condition? Agent Orange, Camp Lejeune and TBI

The Agent Orange presumption

The Agent Orange presumption under 38 CFR § 3.309(e) is the single most important regulatory framework in the Parkinson's claim picture. VA added Parkinson's disease to the § 3.309(e) list in a final rule published August 31, 2010 (75 FR 53202). Under the Nehmer court orders, codified at 38 CFR § 3.816, some veterans whose earlier claims were pending or denied can receive an earlier effective date for a newly added herbicide disease.

The data does not split Parkinson's rulings by which presumption applied, so I can't give exposure counts. What it shows is that most of the service connection caseload runs through a presumption of some kind. Burn-pit exposure, when it comes up, is an invoked exposure theory, not a disease presumption for Parkinson's.

The herbicide presumption is the best known of these. For a veteran who served on the ground in Vietnam during the Vietnam War (or in specific other covered locations during covered periods), the herbicide presumption establishes that any qualifying disease on the § 3.309(e) list, including Parkinson's, is presumed connected to that service.

What the presumption removes from the claim is the following.

• The nexus opinion requirement. The veteran doesn't have to prove the Parkinson's was caused by herbicide exposure. The link is presumed.
• The in-service event documentation requirement. The veteran doesn't have to document a specific incident or exposure event. Service in a covered location during a covered period establishes the exposure.

What the presumption still requires is the following.

• A current diagnosis of Parkinson's disease or the broader statutory parkinsonism category added in 2021
• Documentation of qualifying service in a covered location during a covered period
• The disease manifesting at any time after service (no manifestation-period limit for Parkinson's, unlike chloracne, porphyria cutanea tarda and early-onset peripheral neuropathy, which have a one-year limit under 38 CFR § 3.307(a)(6)(ii))

Camp Lejeune

Camp Lejeune claims come from veterans who served at Camp Lejeune between August 1, 1953 and December 31, 1987. Exposure to the contaminated water is presumed for at least 30 days of service there, consecutive or not, during that period; the veteran does not have to document the exposure itself. The qualifying-service rule is in 38 CFR § 3.307(a)(7), and Parkinson's disease appears on the disease list in 38 CFR § 3.309(f), providing another presumptive lane for that specific veteran population. That list names Parkinson's disease, not the broader parkinsonism category, so the diagnosis matters more for a Camp Lejeune claim than for an herbicide claim.

Parkinson's secondary to a TBI

A third route runs through a service-connected traumatic brain injury. Under 38 CFR § 3.310(d), parkinsonism, including Parkinson's disease, following a moderate or severe TBI is held to be caused by the TBI unless there is clear evidence to the contrary. After a mild TBI, or when the timing or severity rules are not met, the claim can still be proven with medical evidence under the ordinary secondary rules. See the TBI page for how VA classifies TBI severity.

Direct, presumptive and secondary Parkinson's claims

In the Board data, claims argued as direct and claims that ran through a presumption were granted at about the same rate, largely because the two groups overlap: the direct group counts every service connection ruling that was not a secondary claim, including many that also ran through a presumption. Secondary claims did much worse. The Board section below shows all three.

Beyond the overlap, I think Parkinson's is a condition where the diagnosis itself is solid and well-supported. Once Parkinson's is the established diagnosis, the connection theory matters less than it does for conditions where the diagnosis is contested. Veterans with clean Parkinson's diagnoses generally have either a presumptive lane available (herbicide, Camp Lejeune, TBI) or a direct lane available (documented in-service exposure or symptom onset). The data cannot show how a direct claim without any presumption fares on its own, so I would not assume it works as well.

What this means for veterans practically: if you have a herbicide-presumptive lane available, use it because it's structurally cleaner and removes the nexus opinion requirement. If you don't, a direct claim is still workable when the clinical picture is clear and the medical opinion is substantive, but the data cannot tell you how often a direct claim wins without a presumption behind it.

Parkinson's VA rating: DC 8004 and the 30 percent minimum

How VA rates Parkinson's residuals

The rating schedule for Parkinson's at 38 CFR § 4.124a uses Diagnostic Code 8004 (paralysis agitans), which carries a minimum rating of 30 percent. The instructions for this group of neurological codes say the diseases and their residuals may be rated from 10 to 100 percent in proportion to the impairment of motor, sensory or mental function, with special attention to psychotic manifestations, complete or partial loss of use of one or more extremities, speech disturbances, impairment of vision, disturbances of gait, tremors and visceral manifestations, each rated under the appropriate body system. Partial loss of use of an arm or leg from a neurological lesion is rated by comparison with mild, moderate, severe or complete paralysis of the peripheral nerves.

VA's rating manual applies that the same way it does for multiple sclerosis (M21-1 V.iii.12.C). VA rates each residual under its own code: the affected arms and legs, speech, swallowing, bladder and bowel function, and mental effects such as depression or cognitive decline under § 4.130. Those ratings are combined. If the combined residual rating is 20 percent or less, VA assigns 30 percent under DC 8004 instead. The 30 percent is a floor, not an extra 30 percent added on top of the residual ratings. Parkinsonism that is not Parkinson's disease is rated by analogy under the same code (8099-8004).

The note that follows DC 8025 in § 4.124a requires ascertainable residuals for these minimum ratings and says that when ratings above the prescribed minimum are assigned, the diagnostic codes used as the basis of evaluation must be cited. So a decision that rates Parkinson's above 30 percent should name the code for each residual it rated.

The data I have does not record the tier the Board granted, so I can't give a tier distribution. It does separate rating appeals from service connection appeals, and rating appeals were granted far less often. The Board section below breaks results down by what the appeal asked for. Getting a rating above the 30 percent minimum takes the residual-by-residual documentation described here, because each residual has to be shown on its own criteria. Combined ratings can land at any tier under VA's combined ratings table, including 50, 60, 70 or 100 percent.

For a single veteran with no dependents, at the rates effective December 1, 2025 (the 2026 rates), the dollar values matter.

• 30%: $552.47 per month, $6,630 per year
• 70%: $1,808.45 per month, $21,701 per year
• 100%: $3,938.58 per month, $47,263 per year

Separately rated residuals are what move a Parkinson's rating from the 30 percent minimum to 70 or 100 percent combined. Where the evidence shows loss of use of a hand or foot, or a need for aid and attendance, VA should also consider special monthly compensation under its own requirements.

Medical opinions and Parkinson's claims

The medical opinion breakdown for Parkinson's service connection rulings is worth reading carefully. The Board's opinion findings were read only on rulings it granted or denied, and the tiers record what the Board credited, not grades of evidence quality. When the Board relied on a favorable opinion it almost always granted, because relying on a favorable opinion is how the Board grants; that is true for every condition. When it relied on an opinion against the claim it almost never granted. The telling group for Parkinson's is the one with no medical opinion weighed at all, which was still granted more often than not. The Board section below gives each tier.

So the useful question is not how often a credited opinion wins, but what gets an opinion credited, or makes one unnecessary, in the first place. I think the answer for Parkinson's lives at the intersection of three factors.

First, the diagnosis is solid when it's made. Parkinson's disease has objective neurological examination findings (resting tremor with characteristic pill-rolling quality, bradykinesia, rigidity, postural instability), supportive response to levodopa, and well-established imaging when needed. A confirmed Parkinson's diagnosis is rarely overturned at the Board because the underlying clinical picture is hard to mistake for something else. This is the opposite of the chronic fatigue picture, where the diagnosis itself is the contested ground.

Second, the presumption is mature law. Parkinson's has been on the § 3.309(e) Agent Orange presumptive list since 2010. The presumption has been litigated, applied, and refined over 15 years. Board members are comfortable with the framework, C&P examiners are familiar with the connection theory, and the regulatory text is clean.

Third, the cases with a credited favorable opinion tend to be highly developed. Veterans whose Parkinson's claims reach that tier typically have specialist neurology evaluations, supportive private medical opinions that explicitly engage with the herbicide exposure literature, and documentation of qualifying service. The selection into that tier is heavily filtered by the level of documentation already in the file.

The rulings where the Board relied on an opinion against the claim are the inverse selection. These are cases where the medical record doesn't support a clean Parkinson's diagnosis, the connection theory is unclear, or the file is missing pieces the Board needs to decide. When the file is in that state, the case rarely grants regardless of how sympathetic the underlying situation is.

Parkinsonism vs Parkinson's disease

Parkinson's disease (idiopathic Parkinson's, the most common form) is a specific entity, distinct from the broader category of "parkinsonism," which includes a range of conditions with overlapping movement-disorder features. Parkinsonism includes these conditions.

• Drug-induced parkinsonism (from antipsychotics, antiemetics, or other dopamine-blocking medications)
• Vascular parkinsonism (from cerebrovascular disease)
• Atypical parkinsonian syndromes (progressive supranuclear palsy, multiple system atrophy, corticobasal syndrome)
• Post-encephalitic parkinsonism
• Toxin-induced parkinsonism

These conditions share clinical features with Parkinson's disease but are distinct diagnostic entities. Some of them, particularly the atypical parkinsonian syndromes, don't respond to levodopa the way Parkinson's disease does, and the long-term progression and prognosis differ.

Before 2021, the regulatory herbicide list named "Parkinson's disease" specifically. Veterans with parkinsonism that didn't quite meet the criteria for idiopathic Parkinson's were at risk of having their claims denied on diagnostic grounds. The broader condition wasn't yet in the statute, even if it produced similar movement-disorder symptoms.

The William M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 changed this. Section 9109 added "parkinsonism," the broader category, to the statutory herbicide presumption in 38 USC § 1116, along with bladder cancer and hypothyroidism. The 2022 PACT Act added hypertension and MGUS to that disease list and expanded covered herbicide locations; it was not the law that added parkinsonism.

The sequence matters.

• In 2010, VA added Parkinson's disease to 38 CFR § 3.309(e).
• In 2021, the FY2021 NDAA added parkinsonism to 38 USC § 1116.
• In 2022, the PACT Act added MGUS and hypertension and expanded herbicide-covered locations.

For veterans whose diagnostic picture is "parkinsonism, etiology unclear" or "atypical parkinsonian syndrome," conditions that produce Parkinson's-like symptoms but don't meet strict idiopathic Parkinson's criteria, the 2021 statutory expansion opened a presumptive lane that wasn't available before then. That may include Vietnam-era veterans with vascular or drug-induced parkinsonism whose earlier Parkinson's disease claims were denied, veterans with atypical parkinsonian syndromes (PSP, MSA, CBD), and veterans whose neurological picture never settled into idiopathic Parkinson's.

Denials on diagnostic grounds that predate the 2021 expansion may warrant review under the broader statutory category, subject to the effective-date and readjudication rules that apply to the individual claim. The expansion should not be described as a 2022 PACT Act benefit.

Burn-pit exposure, when veterans raise it in Parkinson's appeals, is an exposure theory invoked in the decisions, not a parallel disease presumption. Section 1119 presumes covered toxic exposure, but Parkinson's disease and parkinsonism are not listed in 38 USC § 1120 or 38 CFR § 3.320. Covered toxic exposure can support direct development, including a medical examination and opinion under 38 USC § 1168 when its requirements are met.

The 2021 parkinsonism expansion and the PACT Act's later covered-location changes are still working through the data. My data covers decisions from 2021 to 2026, but appellate lag means the grant-rate impact will not be clear until more decisions accumulate.

Lay statements for a Parkinson's rating

Lay statements matter for Parkinson's, and the Board's credibility finding on them lines up closely with the outcome. When the Board found a veteran's lay statements credible, it nearly always granted; when it found them not credible, it almost never did. Like the medical opinion tiers, this records what the Board credited, so it partly restates the outcome rather than predicting it.

For Parkinson's specifically, the lay statements that the Board engages with tend to describe the following.

• Onset and progression of motor symptoms (when tremor started, when bradykinesia became noticeable, when balance issues began)
• Functional impact (effects on activities of daily living, employment, fine motor tasks like writing or buttoning clothes, driving)
• Treatment response and side effects (levodopa response, dyskinesias, "on-off" phenomena)
• Caregiver observations (when applicable, spouse or family statements describing the progression the veteran can't fully describe)
• Specific incidents (falls, near-misses, episodes of freezing, autonomic symptoms)

What weak lay statements look like is below.

• Generic descriptions ("my Parkinson's has been getting worse")
• Symptom-only without functional context
• Lack of specificity on timeline or progression

The lay-statement variable is particularly useful for Parkinson's because the rating-level analysis depends on documenting the severity and frequency of specific residuals (tremor, postural instability, autonomic symptoms), and the lay statement can fill descriptive gaps that clinical visits sometimes miss. A buddy statement from a spouse or caregiver is often the clearest record of what happens at home.

This matters more at the rating phase than at the connection phase. Once service connection is established (either by presumption or by direct nexus), the rating-level work is figuring out which residuals are present and how severe they are. The lay statement that describes the daily symptom picture in detail can support higher residual ratings above the 30 percent minimum.

Why VA denies Parkinson's claims

Parkinson's claims do well at the Board compared with most conditions. Across 3,051 decided Board rulings on Parkinson's from 2021 to 2026, 35.8% were granted, 26.4% denied and 37.9% remanded, a grant rate 11.1 points above the Board-wide 24.7 percent.

When the Board denied Parkinson's service connection, it most often found no link to service, and nearly as often found no qualifying in-service event or exposure; a disputed or missing diagnosis came up less often. The patterns behind those findings repeat.

Qualifying service not shown. The herbicide or Camp Lejeune presumption fails because the records do not place the veteran in a covered location during a covered period, or at Camp Lejeune for 30 days in the 1953 to 1987 window.

The wrong diagnosis for the presumption claimed. Drug-induced or vascular parkinsonism, or an atypical syndrome, does not fit the Camp Lejeune list, which names only Parkinson's disease. For herbicide claims the 2021 parkinsonism category helps, but the diagnosis still has to be established by a clinician.

A direct or secondary claim with no supporting opinion. Without a presumption, the claim needs a medical opinion that explains the link. A secondary claim on a mild TBI, for example, falls outside § 3.310(d) and needs that opinion.

Rating appeals without residual evidence. An appeal for more than 30 percent fails when the records describe "Parkinson's, on medication" without documenting each residual against its own criteria.

When the Board sends a Parkinson's claim back instead of deciding it, an inadequate VA exam or opinion and records VA still had to get are the two most common reasons, at about the same rate. The Board section below shows how often each denial and remand reason came up.

What I can't tell you from this data

Honest limits matter, particularly for a condition with this much regulatory complexity.

I can't tell you whether your specific neurological diagnosis will be characterized as idiopathic Parkinson's disease, parkinsonism, or an atypical parkinsonian syndrome. The diagnostic question requires neurological examination, response to dopaminergic medication, and sometimes imaging or biomarker studies. That's a clinical question for a movement-disorder specialist, not something aggregate data can resolve.

I can't tell you whether your service qualifies under the Agent Orange presumption. The covered locations and periods are specific. Boots-on-ground service in Vietnam, the Korean DMZ during certain periods, certain Royal Thai bases, and a few others. Blue Water Navy veterans gained presumptive eligibility in 2019 under the Blue Water Navy Vietnam Veterans Act. The PACT Act expanded some categories further. Whether your specific service file qualifies depends on what the VA's exposure tracking shows and what your records confirm.

I can't tell you whether your case should use the herbicide presumption, the Camp Lejeune presumption, the TBI rule, or direct connection. That depends on the specific covered service in your record. Burn-pit or other covered toxic exposure can support direct development, but it is not a Parkinson's disease presumption under § 1120 or § 3.320. Some veterans have more than one valid lane available; others have none. The presumptive and direct rates look alike for Parkinson's, partly because the groups overlap, but a valid presumption is structurally cleaner when available.

I can't tell you which of your residuals will qualify for ratings above the 30 percent minimum. Those ratings depend on the clinical documentation of each residual, the severity, and the rating-schedule criteria for that specific symptom category. A neurology specialist's evaluation that documents each residual separately is what supports the combined rating math.

I can't tell you whether the 2021 statutory parkinsonism expansion will benefit your specific case. The answer depends on the prior decision, the current diagnosis, and the applicable effective-date or readjudication rules.

What the data can tell you is the structural shape of this claim. The 35.8 percent grant rate sits well above the Board-wide 24.7 percent, and most service connection rulings run through a presumption. The Agent Orange presumption is mature and works when invoked appropriately. The DC 8004 minimum of 30 percent is the schedular baseline, with separately rated residuals producing higher combined ratings. And the 2021 statutory expansion broadened the diagnosis category in ways that haven't fully worked through the data yet.

How to file a Parkinson's claim: three things that matter

If I were filing or appealing a Parkinson's claim today, the three pieces of the file that would matter most are these.

One: A specialist neurology evaluation that documents the diagnosis with the recognized criteria. A movement-disorder specialist, neurologist, or comprehensive neurological evaluation that addresses the UK Brain Bank or MDS diagnostic criteria for Parkinson's disease, or accurately identifies a broader parkinsonism diagnosis under 38 USC § 1116, is the foundation of the claim. A favorable opinion the Board credits, which nearly always means a grant, is reachable when the diagnostic record is clean and supports the connection theory. Generic neurological notes that say "Parkinson's, on medication" don't produce an opinion the Board will rely on. Substantive specialist evaluations that engage with the diagnostic criteria and document the clinical picture do.

Two: A presumptive framework invocation when available, with the supporting service documentation. If you performed herbicide-covered service, the herbicide presumption under 38 USC § 1116 applies to Parkinson's disease and parkinsonism; 38 CFR § 3.309(e) also expressly lists Parkinson's disease. If you served at Camp Lejeune during the qualifying period, use the service rule in § 3.307(a)(7) and the Parkinson's disease listing in § 3.309(f). If you have a service-connected moderate or severe TBI, check § 3.310(d). Covered PACT Act service does not create a burn-pit presumption for Parkinson's. The direct lane remains available if no disease presumption applies.

Three: Comprehensive documentation of each residual for the rating-level analysis. The 30 percent DC 8004 minimum is what VA assigns when the residuals are mild. The combined rating of separately rated residuals is where the higher numbers come from. Document each residual (resting tremor, rigidity, bradykinesia, postural instability with falls, speech impairment, swallowing difficulties, bladder and bowel symptoms, cognitive changes, mood disturbance) in clinical records and through lay statements with specific examples. Credible lay statements usually come from veterans whose lay evidence described the symptom picture with the specificity the rating-level analysis requires.

If your initial Parkinson's claim was denied before the 2021 statutory change because the diagnostic picture didn't quite fit idiopathic Parkinson's, the broader parkinsonism category may affect a new or reviewed claim. The governing effective-date and readjudication rules are claim-specific.

Questions veterans ask about Parkinson's

What is the VA rating for Parkinson's disease?

VA rates each residual of Parkinson's under its own code, such as the affected arms and legs, speech, swallowing and bladder function, and combines those ratings. If they combine to 20 percent or less, VA assigns a minimum of 30 percent under DC 8004 instead.

Is Parkinson's a presumptive condition for Agent Orange?

Yes. Parkinson's disease is on the herbicide list in 38 CFR § 3.309(e), and since the FY2021 NDAA the statute, 38 USC § 1116, covers the broader parkinsonism category. With qualifying herbicide service, you do not need a medical opinion linking it to service, and there is no time limit for when it appears.

Is Parkinson's presumptive for Camp Lejeune?

Yes, Parkinson's disease is on the Camp Lejeune list in 38 CFR § 3.309(f). You need at least 30 days of service at Camp Lejeune between August 1, 1953 and December 31, 1987.

Is Parkinson's covered by the PACT Act burn pit presumption?

No. Parkinson's disease and parkinsonism are not listed in 38 USC § 1120 or 38 CFR § 3.320. Burn pit exposure can still support a direct claim with a medical opinion.

Can Parkinson's be secondary to a TBI?

Yes. Under 38 CFR § 3.310(d), parkinsonism, including Parkinson's disease, that follows a moderate or severe service-connected TBI is presumed to be caused by it unless there is clear evidence otherwise. After a mild TBI, the link has to be shown with medical evidence.

Can Parkinson's qualify for special monthly compensation?

It can, when the residuals meet SMC's own requirements, such as loss of use of a hand or foot or a need for regular aid and attendance. VA's rating manual tells raters to consider SMC for Parkinson's when the evidence shows those effects.

Bottom Line

Parkinson's disease is rated under 38 CFR § 4.124a, Diagnostic Code 8004. VA rates each residual (limb impairment and tremor, postural instability and gait, speech, swallowing, bladder and bowel, mood and cognitive changes) under its own code and combines them, and assigns a minimum of 30 percent under DC 8004 when those ratings combine to 20 percent or less. Across 3,051 decided Board rulings on Parkinson's from 2021 to 2026, 35.8% were granted, 26.4% denied and 37.9% remanded, a grant rate 11.1 points above the Board-wide 24.7%. Parkinson's disease is a presumptive condition for veterans with qualifying herbicide exposure under 38 CFR § 3.309(e), and the FY2021 NDAA added the broader parkinsonism category to 38 USC § 1116. Camp Lejeune provides a separate Parkinson's disease presumption under §§ 3.307(a)(7) and 3.309(f), and § 3.310(d) ties parkinsonism to a moderate or severe service-connected TBI. Parkinson's disease and parkinsonism are not burn-pit disease presumptions under § 1120 or § 3.320. Separately rated residuals are how veterans reach 70% or 100%. Lay statements that describe the daily symptom picture with specificity are the kind the Board finds credible. For all Parkinson's claimants, the specialist neurology evaluation is what supports the diagnosis and, when a direct lane is needed, the nexus.

Methodology and Limitations

• Data source: Board figures in this post come from Claim Raven's read of every Board decision from 2021 to 2026 that it holds: 511,036 decisions containing 1,378,030 rulings. Rating schedule framework is drawn from 38 CFR § 4.124a, Diagnostic Code 8004 (paralysis agitans), the instructions for rating these neurological diseases and their residuals, and the minimum-rating note that follows DC 8025, with VA's rating manual, M21-1 V.iii.12.C, for how the residuals and the minimum are applied. The herbicide presumption is from 38 USC § 1116 and 38 CFR §§ 3.307(a)(6) and 3.309(e), with the 2010 rule at 75 FR 53202 and the Nehmer effective-date rules at 38 CFR § 3.816; the broader parkinsonism category was added to the statute by the FY2021 NDAA, Pub. L. 116-283, § 9109. The Camp Lejeune framework is from 38 CFR §§ 3.307(a)(7) and 3.309(f), and the TBI rule from 38 CFR § 3.310(d). Sections 1119, 1120, 1168, and 38 CFR § 3.320 are cited only to distinguish direct toxic-exposure development from a disease presumption. VA disability compensation rates effective December 1, 2025 (the 2026 rates) referenced for context, veteran alone with no dependents (100% = $3,938.58/month; 70% = $1,808.45/month; 30% = $552.47/month).
• Sample size: Of 3,290 Board rulings on Parkinson's, 3,051 were decided (granted, denied or remanded). Across 3,051 decided Board rulings on Parkinson's from 2021 to 2026, 35.8% were granted, 26.4% denied and 37.9% remanded. Breakdowns by claim theory, appeal type, medical opinion and denial and remand reasons appear in the Board section below, computed from the same data. The data does not split rulings by exposure type or the rating tier granted.
• Classification approach: Rulings are coded as Parkinson's based on Claim Raven's extraction of the condition in each Board ruling. The data does not consistently distinguish idiopathic Parkinson's disease from other parkinsonian syndromes; some classifications may reflect the broader parkinsonism category, particularly for decisions after the 2021 statutory change. Medical opinion tiers (a favorable opinion the Board relied on, a VA opinion it set aside, an opinion against the claim, or no opinion weighed) and lay credibility record what the Board credited on each ruling it granted or denied, since they were not read on remands. They are not a grade of the opinion's quality.
• Limitations:
• These Parkinson's rulings come from appeals that reached the Board. Claims granted at the regional office without appeal aren't in this data, and the overall VA grant rate for Parkinson's is almost certainly higher than the 35.8% Board figure.
• The favorable-opinion tier is heavily selected: it records the opinion the Board relied on, and relying on a favorable opinion is how the Board grants, so it describes the shape of a win rather than predicting one.
• The 2021 statutory parkinsonism expansion took effect at the start of the data's 2021 to 2026 window. The full impact on grant rates may not be visible until more later cases accumulate.
• The distinction between idiopathic Parkinson's disease and the broader parkinsonism category is not always cleanly identified in the data. Some atypical parkinsonian syndromes (PSP, MSA, CBD) may be coded as Parkinson's in the dataset.
• The data does not record the rating tier granted, and the combined-rating math from separately rated residuals is not broken out.
• The Agent Orange presumption framework has evolved since 2010 (Blue Water Navy 2019, PACT Act 2022); some decisions in the data predate the PACT Act changes.
• These observations describe BVA patterns. They are not predictions of individual outcomes.