Outcome of National Reviews

5. Reporting the Correction of National Error Citations

Introduction

This topic describes procedures for reporting the correction of national error citations, including

• outcome of national reviews
• clearing RO vs. correcting RO
• identified responsible employee
• action to take following notification of a national error
• EP 930 establishment requirements
• corrective actions and reporting
• time limit for corrective action
• indicating when re-adjudication is not appropriate
• clearing RO’s Quality Review Team (QRT) Coach’s responsibility for corrective action
• correcting RO’s QRT Coach’s responsibility for corrective action
• responsible employee’s responsibility for corrective action
• responsible employee’s coach’s responsibility for corrective action, and
• error correction validation.

Change Date

August 17, 2026

3.5. a. Outcome of National Reviews

ROs will learn the outcome of a STAR assessment that results in an error via Quality Management System (QMS).

In QMS, the “Created Date” shown on the error correction record is the date the clearing RO was notified of the error in QMS.

3.5. b. Clearing RO vs. Correcting RO

The clearing RO is the RO that cleared the EP identified for national quality review. In QMS the clearing RO is identified as the “Selected Station.” For reporting purposes, all errors and comments will be associated with the clearing RO.

The correcting RO is the RO that QA has identified as responsible for taking the corrective action(s) documented during the course of national quality review. The correcting RO will be identified by its RO number at the beginning of each error correction narrative in QMS. The correcting RO is responsible for all corrective actions on a claim, even for those errors caused by a different RO. In all cases, only one RO will be identified to correct errors or comments cited on a review.

When determining the correcting RO, QA determines if the error occurred under the responsibility of the rating or clearing RO.

• The rating RO is responsible for all actions leading up to and including the final rating decision associated with the EP under review.
• The clearing RO, if different from the station completing the final rating, is responsible for any actions after the final rating, to include the award authorization of the EP under review.

Rating Reviews

If the error is…

then…

only a development- or rating-related BE error, OR in conjunction with any other errors (benefit entitlement, non-benefit entitlement, or error cited on other EP(s) not under STAR review),

the rating RO is responsible.

only a promulgation/authorization-related BE error, OR in conjunction with any other promulgation/authorization error(s),

the clearing RO is responsible.

only a non-benefit entitlement error(s),

the RO that committed the error, rating (to include development) or clearing RO, is responsible.

only a development or rating error(s) cited on another EP not under STAR review,

the rating RO for the EP that is under review is responsible.

only a promulgation/authorization error(s) cited on another EP not under STAR review,

the clearing RO for the EP that is under review is responsible.

Authorization Reviews

If the error is…

then…

identified on a rating decision (example EP 600s), OR in conjunction with any other error

the rating RO is responsible.

related to an RBPS-processed EP under STAR review

QA will manually distribute errors to BEST divisions.

on any non-rating activity NOT related to a rating decision or RBPS-processed EP

the clearing RO is responsible

Notes:

• If a deferred or partial rating is completed during the life of the claim, the RO that created the final rating will be identified as the rating RO when determining the correcting RO.
• If no rating was prepared, corrections will be the responsibility of the clearing RO.

Example: A payment error based on incorrect Special Monthly Compensation (SMC) payment is cited on a rating review.

• If the SMC coding was incorrect in the rating decision, then the rating RO is documented as the correcting RO.
• If the SMC coding was correct in the rating, but the corresponding SMC payment rate is incorrect on the award, the clearing RO is identified as the correcting RO.

3.5. c. Identified Responsible Employee

In most cases, QA will identify the employee responsible for the error. Rating Veterans Service Representatives (RVSRs) are held responsible for both rating deficiencies and deficiencies in rating-related development. Authorizers will be held responsible for award promulgation-related errors.

If multiple errors are cited on one case, QA will identify the RO responsible for executing all corrections in the error narrative(s). For example, if the case has both rating and non-rating related errors, the rating RO is responsible for taking all corrective actions.

If the only corrective action required is not related to the EP identified for STAR assessment, no employee will be named. Depending on the type of corrective action needed, QA will assign corrective action to either the clearing RO or rating RO that processed the EP under STAR assessment. This error will not count against the RO’s accuracy; however, this RO is responsible for executing the corrective action(s).

3.5. d. Action to Take Following Notification of a National Error

QMS will route the error correction record(s) to the clearing RO in all cases. The national error correction record(s) will populate in the clearing RO’s QMS Coach Team queue.

The clearing RO’s Quality Review Team (QRT) Coach, or other appointed designee, will review the national error cited to determine if a reconsideration request will be submitted.

Scroll sideways to see the full table.

3.5. e. EP 930 Establishment Requirements

An EP 930 must be established and cleared for any claim with a cited national error where the EP has been cleared or cancelled, even those that do not require a rating or award correction. This requirement has been put in place to ensure data integrity. Compensation Service will also monitor completion of error corrections using these EPs and QMS data.

EP 930s must use the correct National Quality Error claim label and the National Quality Review special issue indicator. Rating review corrections should use the Correction of National Quality Error – Rating claim label. Non-rating review corrections should use the Correction of National Quality Review – Non-Rating claim label.

Exception: As noted in M21-4, Chapter 3.B.c., it is not required to establish an EP 930 if the only citation is for an incorrect date of claim or EP on a closed EP.

Notes:

• The National Quality Review special issue indicator is a ‘Do Not Recall’ (DNR) indicator that prevents National Work Queue (NWQ) recall until the special issue is removed in conjunction with an appropriate transaction.
• If the EP associated with the claim reviewed for quality is still pending, which is likely following a local quality review, then an EP 930 is not necessary. Corrective action to include mentoring and entering a VBMS note should be conducted under the existing EP.
• An EP 930 is required for national errors identified on both STAR reviews and SFRs conducted by QA.

Requests for Reconsideration:

• EP 930 should not be established by the RO unless QA upholds or mitigates an error on reconsideration.
• EP 930 is not necessary if QA overturns an error on reconsideration.

References: For more information on the requirement to enter a VBMS note and how to enter one, please see

• M21-4, Appendix B, 2.930, and
• M21-1, Part II, Subpart ii, 2.A.1.c.

3.5. f. Corrective Actions and Reporting

The identified correcting RO must take corrective action on all national errors.

All actions to initiate the correction must be done within 30 calendar days of notification of the error. If multiple errors are cited on a case, all actions to initiate the correction of all errors must be executed.

When corrective actions are initiated, the error correction is considered “complete” for reporting purposes.

If the corrective action needed is development, rating correction, or award promulgation, once executed, the RO must check the “ Error Accepted ” and “Error Corrected” boxes in QMS and remove the National Quality Review special issue indicator. The EP will be returned to NWQ and redistributed when the EP is actionable for subsequent claim processing by any RO based on capacity.

If no further action is needed after the corrective action is taken and reviewed by a supervisor for completion, the EP 930 should be cleared.

If the only corrective action is to provide training and/or feedback to the responsible employee, once a supervisor has confirmed the training and/or feedback has occurred, a VBMS note should be entered and the EP 930 should then be cleared.

Important: Due to the complex nature of errors, some corrections may take extended periods of time to fully correct. For the purposes of error tracking in QMS, errors may be marked as complete upon initiation of corrective actions that will resolve the cited error(s). Any error(s) not immediately and fully resolved should be entered as a permanent VBMS claim note associated with either the EP included on the original review or the National Quality Error EP 930.

3.5. g. Time Limit for Corrective Action

The correcting RO is required to initiate and report the corrective action taken for each error within 30 calendar days of notification of an error.

3.5. h. Indicating When Re-Adjudication Is Not Appropriate

In cases in which re-adjudication may be inappropriate, the correcting RO must indicate why re-adjudication is not appropriate and describe other action taken, such as training or feedback provided to the identified responsible employee, when updating the error correction record in QMS. The clearing RO may also indicate that reconsideration has been requested. If the reconsideration request is denied, the corrective action must be taken and appropriately reported.

3.5. i. Cle aring RO’s QRT Coach’s Responsibility for Corrective Action

Upon review by the clearing RO’s QRT Coach, or appointed designee, it is determined that a reconsideration request is not warranted, the RO responsible for corrective actions is identified by the RO number at the beginning of each error narrative.

• When the identified correcting RO is also the clearing RO, the clearing RO will maintain ownership of the correction record(s) and must take corrective actions.
• When the identified correcting RO is an RO other than the clearing RO, the clearing RO’s QRT Coach must transfer the error correction record(s) to the correcting RO’s QMS Coach Team by selecting “Change Owner” for each error correction record that needs to be transferred. When changing the owner, the correcting station coach team may be selected by using the drop down menu to select “Queue” and then searching for the correction station by name or number.

The error will remain in “pending notification” status, and this action also confirms that the error has been reviewed and accepted by the clearing RO.

3.5. j. Correcting RO’s QRT Coach’s Responsibility for Corrective Action

The table below outlines the responsibility for corrective action of the correcting RO’s QRT Coach to include

• notification, QMS actions, and EP 930 establishment with claim attributes
• changing ownership of the national error correction record in QMS, and
• ensuring corrective actions are taken within five (5) business days.

Scroll sideways to see the full table.

3.5. k. Responsible Employee’s Responsibility for Corrective Action

The table below outlines the responsibility for corrective action of the responsible employee.

Scroll sideways to see the full table.

3.5. l. Responsible Employee’s Station Responsibility for Corrective Action

The table below outlines the responsibility for corrective action of the responsible employee’s station.

Scroll sideways to see the full table.

Recommendation: Due to the complexity of many STAR errors, it is recommended that the local Quality Review Team provide oversight on corrective actions that are taken by the responsible employee.

3.5. m. Error Correction Validation

QA validates the corrective actions taken on select errors cited as part of any national level review.

By marking an error as accepted and corrected, the RO is certifying that all needed actions have been taken and are correct. In the event that QA review shows corrections have not been completed, are insufficient, or contain additional errors, QA will reopen the error correction record and return error correction record to the correcting RO for additional action. A brief summary of QA’s reasons for returning the error correction record may be found in QMS under the ‘Review Comments’ section with an ‘EC Notified Reset’ comment type.

If the error correction record continues to be closed again without sufficient corrective action, QA will escalate its findings to OFO.

If a RO disagrees with QA’s findings that corrective action was insufficient or contained further errors, RO’s are to contact QA at VAVBAWAS/CO/QRT.