Purpose of IQRs

5. IQRs

Introduction

This topic contains information about IQRs, including

• purpose of IQRs
• review criteria for IQRs
• standard of review for IQRs
• recording method for IQRs
• peer reviews
• peer review disagreements
• notification to employees
• corrective action time limits for errors
• reconsideration requests in QMS
• deciding reconsideration requests
• non-IQR reconsideration decision timeliness
• mitigation of errors cited on IQRs, and
• employees performing special duties.

Change Date

August 20, 2026

6.5.a. Purpose of IQRs

A review of the individual’s work is intended as a performance measure to ascertain the quality element in that individual’s performance standard. The performance standard for each position outlines quality performance expectations for all employees.

An IQR is intended to provide an evaluation of an individual’s work product to determine if the minimal standard for correctness has been met.

On average, VSRs and RVSRs will have three (3) randomly selected transactions per month while MSCs and CAs will have five (5) randomly selected transactions. In limited circumstances, at the direction of management, a VSR or RVSR may have six (6) reviews monthly while a MSC or CA may receive ten (10) reviews under the expanded review program.

A diagram showing the full IQR process following the assignment of IQR to a QRS through the reconsideration stages can be found in the Quality Assurance section of the Compensation and Pension Knowledge Management website at this link. It is found under the folder 'Quality Assurance Guidance' and named 'IQR Flow.'

6.5.b. Review Criteria for IQRs

IQRs are randomly selected by PA&I and other computerized statistical models based on the available sample of work completed by the identified employee. Should a review be deselected, replacement reviews are provided by PA&I following the proper deselection of a previously selected review.

Manual selection of IQRs is not possible and cannot be provided upon request. An expanded selection of IQRs is only available through having the proper fields completed in WIT. See the WIT User Guide for additional instructions.

The QRS is responsible for performing IQRs as randomly assigned by QMS and ensuring that deselection of reviews is kept to a minimum. QRS are expected to follow their own performance standards to ensure timely feedback is provided to all employees.

6.5.c. Standard of Review for IQRs

The QRS will review all associated actions that were taken, or that should have been taken, associated with the transaction under review. IQRs should not be a de novo review of the entire case file, but limited to the actions and claims assigned to the individual for whom the review is being completed.

Scroll sideways to see the full table.

Important: Reviewers should evaluate the actions taken (or that should have been taken) based on the transaction date selected for review. Critical errors should not be cited for deficiencies that were found and corrected by the employee on the same day as the transaction date selected for review.

Example 1: On November 4, 2026, a VSR sends a Section 5103 notice to the Veteran and adds a tracked item with a 30 day suspense. The same day, the VSR realizes the 5103 development letter was not required and updates the tracked item disposition to "In Error." A VSRIQRPRE is generated for the November 4, 2026 transaction.

Analysis: A critical error related to sending the unnecessary Section 5103 notice should not be cited because the VSR caught and corrected the mistake on the same day as the transaction selected for the IQR.

Note: Because quality reviews are selected based on a specific date, quality reviewers should only consider actions taken, or that should have been taken, up to the date of the transaction under review. Corrections completed the same day are considered part of the transaction under review. If corrective action occurred on a later date, even by the same employee, this is a separate and distinctly different transaction that is not considered as part of the transaction selected for review.

Example 2: A VSR orders an incorrect examination on April 21, 2026. On April 22, 2026, an RVSR completes a partial rating on the claim and corrects the examination request. On May 26, 2026, the same VSR conducts follow-up development. A VSRIQRPRE is generated for the May 26, 2026, follow-up development transaction.

Analysis: The reviewer should evaluate the VSR actions that were taken or that should have been taken on May 26, 2026. A critical error should not be cited for ordering an incorrect examination on April 21, 2026, because as of May 26, 2026, the examination request was accurate and no corrective action was required.

Note: If the examination request dated April 21, 2026, was not corrected as of May 26, 2026, then it would be appropriate to cite a critical error.

6.5.d. Recording Method for IQRs

DRO, RVSR, VSR, CA, MSC, and QRS reviews must be completed in QMS.

QMS is the official system of record for quality reviews conducted by Compensation Service employees and is subject to oversight by VA's Office of the Inspector General. All entries made into QMS should be written and documented to withstand OIG review should it be necessary.

References: For more information on IQR routing rules and procedures, refer to the QMS User Guide.

6.5.e. Peer Reviews

Peer reviews are required for all errors cited on any IQR type. Peer reviewers are responsible for ensuring that

• cited errors are appropriate,
• errors are properly documented with applicable references,
• the remainder of the checklist has been properly completed to include correctly indicating the applicability of other tasks, and
• ensuring that there are no missed errors that should have been cited by the initial reviewing QRS.

Obvious errors that were not cited by the initial QRS should be cited and forwarded for correction per the appropriate instructions in the QMS User Guide.

Per Quality Assurance policy, QRS should not be assigned the 'peer' review level in QMS until after completing IQRs for a minimum of six (6) months following completion of QA sponsored QRS Challenge.

QMS will automatically route all claims that have identified errors on initial review to a QRS with authority to perform peer reviews. The results of the peer reviews will be documented in QMS.

Important: Once the initial reviewing QRS submits a checklist, that checklist cannot be changed by anyone except the peer reviewer.

Important: Coaches can not manually reassign a review that has been advanced to the peer review level for purposes of the initial reviewer to make a correction to the checklist. This results in the initial reviewer also acting as the peer reviewer for the IQR, which is not allowed. Once advanced to the peer level, any concerns regarding the initial review should be raised directly with the peer reviewer. QMS admins will not move reviews backwards through the IQR process.

References: For more information on QMS, see the QMS User Guide.

6.5.f. Peer Review Disagreements

As with overturning an error, the only basis for disagreeing with an error during the peer review is because the initial QRS's error call was incorrect, which means there was no CUE or clear violation of a directive or policy.

In the event of a disagreement on peer review, the following process must be followed.

The peer reviewer must contact the initial reviewer to discuss the review in order to reach a consensus regarding the appropriate outcome prior to selecting “Agree” or “Disagree” in QMS. This discussion should be expedited to ensure timely resolution of the pending quality review. The initial reviewer and peer reviewer should make all efforts to resolve any inconsistencies to avoid the need for a third QRS review. If the initial reviewer is unable to be reached, the peer reviewer must annotate the attempt in the comment box in QMS, to include date and time of the attempt.

All QRSs are reminded to ensure that cited errors meet the standard for a critical error as a CUE or violation of policy or directive.

The Peer, Final, and QRTIQRFinal review levels in QMS all function identically. The most important function at these review levels is to ensure that the checklist is completed consistently with the finding(s) of the review. When performing the review, the reviewer has the option to either agree or disagree. I f the checklist is acceptable and no changes are required, select “Agree,” provide a comment in the text box, and select “Submit Review.” The review will move forward to "Complete" or "Error Pending" status.

If the reviewer finds any discrepancies with the checklist present at the Peer, Final, or QRTIQRFinal review levels, to include only changing a task question response from "Yes" to "NA" or "NA" to "Yes," select “Disagree,” add a comment, and submit, which will allow edits to be made to the checklist. Once all updates to the checklist are completed, the reviewer will need to select “Review Summary” at the bottom of the checklist page to proceed to the “Review Summary Page” and verify the checklist accepted the changes. Select “Submit Review” if all checklist changes are complete. The QRTIQRRET level is designated for reviews returned to the initial reviewer. When performing the review at this level, the reviewer will perform the same process of reviewing the checklist that is present when performing the review.

Important: When a review is returned, selecting “Agree” will not allow for changes to the checklist, Agree means the displayed checklist requires no changes. If the reviewer selects “Disagree,” the checklist can be modified. This function allows the initial reviewer to work with the previous subsequent reviewer to make agreed-upon changes if further changes are necessary.

6.5.g. Notification to Employees

Once an IQR is finalized, the employee and Coach designated in the employee's Salesforce contact record will immediately receive notice of any errors that were cited through automatic QMS email notification procedures. Emails will have subject line of “Notification of Error Correction.”

Settings in QMS have been defaulted to provide notification to employees when an IQR has been completed and no error has been cited. QRS are not to change the default setting contained in the " Send Review Summary" without explicit instructions from Compensation Service or OFO to do so. Coaches do not receive a copy of this email

If selected for a QRTIQR, notification to the employee of the completed review will not be issued until the review has been finalized by all QRT members.

Note: If an employee does not receive an email notice of a cited error, this is indicative that the RO did not submit all of the needed information when entering the employee into the Workforce and Time Reporting System (WATRS). Failure to include the employee’s WIT ID when submitting the employee for WATRS access will result in employees potentially not receiving automatic notification by QMS.

Important: All Salesforce users must also have verified email addresses to ensure the automated processes are able to run uninterrupted. Instructions on verifying a user's email address can be found through the QMS Guides and Job Aids Page.

6.5.h. Corrective Action Time Limits for Errors

Following notification of an error, the employee has five (5) business days to take corrective action or file a reconsideration request as outlined in M21-4, Chapter 6.5.i. If the employee files a reconsideration request and the error is upheld, the employee has five business (5) days from the notification of the decision to correct the error(s) or to submit a secondary reconsideration request.

The five (5) business day timeliness requirement may be extended when the employee is not in a duty status during the reconsideration period for one of the following reasons:

• employee was on leave for a full day,
• employee was off work due to a compressed work schedule or “in-lieu of” holiday due to a compressed work schedule, or
• other extenuating circumstance resulting in the employee being in a non duty status as documented by a Coach

Important: Employees needing an extension due to leave or other extenuating circumstance must coordinate with a Coach before entering the reconsideration request.

Coaches are responsible for documenting days the employee was not in a duty status for each full business day during a reconsideration period by entering a review comment in QMS. If the extenuating circumstance is leave, coaches should not document the type or reason for leave.

When calculating the number of business days in the reconsideration period, the first full business day following the date of notification of the error is day one.

Example 1: Employee is notified of an error on May 22, 2026. The employee submits a reconsideration request on June 1, 2026.

Analysis: The reconsideration request is considered to be timely. May 25, 2026, is a holiday so the employee receives an additional calendar day to ensure receipt of five (5) full business days to submit a reconsideration.

Example 2: The employee is notified of the first reconsideration decision on June 15, 2026, and is on leave from June 15 through June 18, 2026. The employee submits a secondary reconsideration request on July 2, 2026.

Analysis: The secondary reconsideration request is not timely. To be timely, the request must have been entered into QMS by the close of business on June 29, 2026. This will result in the error being upheld.

Note: If the employee does not wish to submit a reconsideration request, the employee will perform the accept and correct actions within QMS. If the error does not require corrective action, the employee only needs to accept the error in order for the record to successfully close.

6.5.i. Reconsideration Requests in QMS

The table below provides general information on the flow of IQR reconsiderations in QMS. For more specific information, refer to the QMS User Guide.

Important: Coaches are responsible for monitoring the status of error corrections through the appropriate reporting tools.

Important: QRSs are responsible for issuing all reconsideration decisions on IQRS. Management members are not authorized to decide or unduly influence the outcome of an IQR reconsideration request.

Scroll sideways to see the full table.

Important: If the first level reconsideration decision is to overturn or mitigate the error (meaning the error is changed so that it does not count as a critical error against the employee’s performance), QMS will not prevent the employee from submitting a second level reconsideration request. However, if the employee submits a second level reconsideration request and the decision is to uphold the error, then this final decision will override the prior reconsideration decision. This will mean the error will be counted against the employee’s quality performance metric. Employees are responsible for understanding the outcome of a reconsideration decision and how each decision impacts the employee's quality score.

Note: Stations may forward disputed reconsideration decisions to Quality Assurance to determine if a national training opportunity exists. However, Quality Assurance will not provide responses or opinions on individual errors or reconsiderations. The decisions made by the QRS are considered to be final.

6.5.j. Deciding Reconsideration Requests

The only basis for overturning an error is because the QRS’s error citation was incorrect, which means there was no CUE or clear violation of VBA policies and procedures.

If the employee reviewed fails to provide appropriate references with the reconsideration request, but still provides a substantive narrative argument for their actions, the QRS must still fully consider the argument presented by the employee. Upholding an error solely on the grounds that the employee failed to provide a reference or other citation is inappropriate.

It is critical that QRS remember each reconsideration decision is to be completed independently of the error cited. The QRS is responsible for reviewing the entirety of the error and the employee's reconsideration request. The QRS is required to maintain impartial objectivity when completing a reconsideration decision at any level. Giving deference to the previously cited error merely because it was cited is improper.

When deciding if an error should be overturned, the QRS must consider if references the employee used to support the action they took are applicable to the claim and if the employee took correct action based on those references. If the employee does not cite references, it is incumbent on the QRS to review for any relevant references that would support the employee's actions. Instances where a judgement call has been made, the employee's judgement must be shown to clearly violate VA regulations or procedures in order for the error to stand.

If an error was correctly cited, but the references included with the error narrative are incorrect, then the error should not be overturned. QMS must continue to correctly record the valid error cited by the QRS. When completing the reconsideration decision, the deciding QRS should provide the correct references that support the cited error.

Errors may not be overturned due to instances of locally issued guidance, such as instructions from a coach or QRS on how to handle a particular claim.

If a Regional Office has contacted Compensation Service or another Central Office staff asking for assistance with a claim or clarification of a manual citation, that information is to be considered with the reconsideration. The employee requesting the reconsideration in QMS must reference the guidance that was received and be prepared to provide a copy of the guidance upon request. Upon assignment of the reconsideration in QMS, the QRS or the QRT Coach must contact the employee or the employee's Coach and request a copy of the correspondence with Central Office.

Upon receipt, if the employee took the appropriate actions as indicated by Compensation Service or the applicable office, those instructions are considered binding for that particular claim only. If a manual update or the guidance has not been forwarded by an appropriate Central Office staff to field offices for national application, the guidance cannot be applied to other cases.

If the employee or the employee's supervisor fail to provide a copy of the correspondence with Central Office to the QRS or RO deciding the reconsideration, the QRS will issue a decision sing currently published guidance.

Important: If the RO believes that national guidance is appropriate based on individual claim guidance, the RO may forward that information to the Quality Assurance District Facilitator for review.

References: For additional information, see M21-4, Chapter 6.4.a, and M21-4, Chapter 6.4.b.

6.5.k. Non-IQR Reconsideration Decision Timeliness

Employees have five (5) business days to submit a reconsideration on any review that is not an IQR. This would include IPR or MQR review types that are referred to stations through QMS for review. RO staff has two (2) business days following the submission of a non-IQR error reconsideration request, which includes the appropriate write-up and supporting references, to issue a formal decision as to the outcome of the reconsideration request. QMS must be updated with the final decision and any relevant reference used when considering the reconsideration request.

QRS are preferred to review reconsiderations. QRS or other employees, such as an assigned mentor, may review reconsiderations on field completed IPRs and MQRs as well.

Non-IQR reconsideration requests will route in QMS based on the reconsideration path selected by OFO or Compensation Service. If reconsiderations are kept on station of the employee reviewed, management is responsible for ensuring the assignment of the reconsideration to a QRS or other qualified individual for a decision. Decisions from the individual assigned the reconsideration should be issued within two (2) business days from the date of assignment.

The employee that initiated the reconsideration will receive an email providing notification once a reconsideration decision has been issued. Coaches are not notified when a reconsideration has been made.

All employees are responsible for entering an appropriate reconsideration rationale into QMS. When issuing a decision on the reconsideration, all rationale and supporting references must be included in QMS. It is not sufficient to state that an error was overturned through local procedures when references are appropriately cited and documented in QMS. All principles for deciding an IQR are applicable to deciding errors on other types of reviews as well.

Caution: QRT Coaches must ensure that the review type assigned out for reconsideration is not a review completed by a Quality Assurance staff member. These reviews have different reconsideration processes and require that all decision be made by QA.

6.5.l. Mitigation of Errors Cited on IQRs

In some situations, mitigation of cited errors may be appropriate. Mitigation of an error is different than overturning an error. When an error is overturned, it is a complete removal of the error because an adequate argument has been provided to show that an error was never warranted.

When an error is mitigated, in QMS the “Critical Error” box is unselected. This allows for the error to still be included in error trend analysis, but not count against an employee’s performance quality totals. However, the error itself is still valid and still requires corrective action within the five (5) business day timeliness requirement.

Acceptable reasons for mitigation of an error are

• instances that QA has instructed to be cited as a correctable comment but the QRS cited as a critical error, or
• the error was incorrectly cited as a critical error during an applicable grace period when the QRS failed to uncheck the ‘critical’ box, or
• the employee is in a training status (during which IQRS are not to be completed) but is not properly recorded in the Workforce Information Tool (WIT).

Participation in a special project is not sufficient basis for mitigation of an error. Mitigation of an error is not a tool for local management to utilize when in disagreement with the validity of an employee’s error.

If reviews were mistakenly pulled on an employee when they shouldn't have been due to participation in a special project, mitigation is not an appropriate method for management to handle any errors that may have been cited. If this occurs, Regional Office leadership should contact Quality Assurance for guidance and further assistance.

Reference: For more information on grace periods, refer to M21-4, Chapter 6.4.d.

6.5.m Employees Performing Special Duties

Certain employees are assigned auxiliary specialized duties that may not result in that individual taking all development actions necessary. Common examples include, but are not limited to, a Homeless Veterans Claims Coordinator (HVCC) checking for proper claim attributes or a Military Records Specialist (MRS) completing specialized development.

In instances where the employee is only performing specialized action but does not otherwise complete duties within the scope of their position, completion of an IQR on the specialized transaction is inappropriate. To exclude the specialized work from IQR, employees must enter a VBMS claim level note at the time the work is completed that they are only reviewing the claim in a limited capacity for specialized tasks.

If the employee enters this note at the time of the transaction and the claim is subsequently pulled for an IQR, the QRS should deselect the review in accordance with M21-4, 6.4.c with a deselection reason that will result in a replacement review.

If the employee fails to enter the note at the time of their transaction, and the claim is subsequently pulled for IQR, the review will be completed with any errors binding on the employee. While a reconsideration may be entered, the justification of performing specialized tasks will not be grounds to overturn or mitigate the error.

In instances where the employee performs their specialized duty, but also completes additional development unrelated to that duty, completion of an IQR on the specialized transaction is appropriate even if the specialized duty note is entered into VBMS. Examples of this include, but are not limited to, a MRS that also uploads VAMC treatment records or a Records Research Coordinator that acts upon newly submitted VA Forms 21-4142 and 21-4142a. Conversely, closing a tracked item that refers the claim for specialized development would be considered within the scope of specialized duties and considered to be generalized development.

For employees participating in long term, full time special projects in which IQR sampling would be inappropriate, the employee’s status should be updated in WIT to the IQR Pause special team. Common examples of this include, but are not limited to, a VSR reviewing the mail portal or a newly promoted RVSR completing development while awaiting centralized training. This will pause IQRs throughout the duration of the special project until the special team is removed from the employee’s profile. If an RO does not move an employee to this status timely, the RO should contact their District Representative to further coordinate with OFO and Quality Assurance. OFO will monitor employees that have IQRS paused for compliance.

For employees on long-term projects, no reconsideration decisions should be completed. If a reconsideration request with this rationale is received, the reconsideration should be referred to local management for action described in this block.