National Pension Rating Quality Checklist

What this means

This appendix explains how VA reviews the quality of pension rating work using the National Pension Quality Review (NPQR) checklist. Reviewers examine service, dependents, development, decisions, financial information and payment actions. The checklist's technical-accuracy score is not the same as deciding whether you qualify for a benefit. The written explanation of each question and the original sample checklist images are available in the source display.

How this may help with a claim

Use the question explanations to describe a specific concern in your records, such as omitted medical expenses, an unexplained rating decision or an incorrect award date. Identify the document and the rule involved. A quality-review category can help organize that concern; it does not replace the benefit rules or the review instructions in your decision notice.

What to review in your file

• Separate the technical-accuracy measure from the rest of the review. For this rating checklist, questions 1 through 10 must be Yes or N/A for a case to count as accurate. The stated No-answer test excludes questions 11 through 15. Reviewers still complete every question: Yes means accurate work, No means an error, and N/A applies when the question does not apply or a No was already recorded for the only issue under review. Every error or No needs a narrative with a statutory, regulatory, judicial or manual reference.

• Check service, dependents and the full set of issues. Questions 1 through 3 address service requirements, relationship and dependency, and consideration of every issue associated with the claim. The dependency explanation resolves relationship first; dependency may then be assumed or require development. A dependent's presence in the file does not by itself establish the correct payable rate.

• Questions 4 and 5 concern development and the rating decision. The explanation includes notice of missing evidence, who will provide or obtain it, adverse-action due process, and medical opinions when the evidence meets the minimum requirements. Possible opinion questions include diagnoses, causation, a relationship to service and aggravation. The rating itself must be warranted, explain each decision and have an accurate narrative and code sheet. This checklist does not supply a universal examination requirement.

• Questions 6 through 10 examine income, net worth and deductions, including unreimbursed medical, last and education expenses; burial; accrued benefits and substitution; adjustments for hospitalization, incarceration, active duty, Medicaid and elections; and the generated award's rates and dates. These are separate reviews. The cited benefit rules still control whether a particular expense, claimant, adjustment or date qualifies.

• Questions 11 through 15 still address due process, administrative decisions, notices, accurate system updates and other actions outside the end product being reviewed. The notice explanation applies to awards and disallowances and includes the claimant and representative. An error on an unrelated end product is recorded as a question 15 comment; it is not silently ignored because it falls outside the technical-accuracy score.

• Read the classification instructions cautiously. Violations of regulations or established policy can be errors, including overpayments and underpayments. The source generally treats procedural deficiencies as comments rather than BE errors, but says severe deficiencies are errors. Its sentence about a judgment or difference of opinion says it 'will not be recorded as a comment rather than an error,' an unclear formulation. Do not resolve that wording into a new scoring rule or assume every preferred practice proves an error.

Important limits

The September 23, 2025 instructions describe a staff quality review, not a complete pension eligibility test or an individual appeal deadline. The source display includes the original sample checklist images and the written fifteen-question explanation. The source's unclear opinion-versus-error sentence and its distinction between technical accuracy and questions 11 through 15 remain visible limitations. BE is left as the source's category label rather than given an unsupported definition.

Search terms when useful

Phrases that may help when searching your claim file or this library.

• Pension rating quality review checklist
• NPQR Yes No and N/A scoring
• Pension income expenses and award-date review
• Rating narrative and code sheet errors
• Quality-review comments and unrelated end products

Original VA guidance

The official VA text of this section

Official section title: National Pension Quality Review (NPQR) Checklist (Rating)

This page reproduces the VA text. Use the official VA source for any images and linked documents.

Appendix A. NPQR Checklist (Rating)

Introduction

This appendix contains information on national pension rating quality reviews, including

• NPQR Checklist (Rating), and
• instructions and guidelines for rating review.

Change Date

September 23, 2025

Appendix A.a. NPQR Checklist (Rating)

The following is a sample of the NPQR Checklist (Rating).

Checklist Name: NPQR

Checklist Questions and Errors:

Appendix A.b. Instructions and Guidelines for Pension Rating Quality Review

These instructions and guidelines have been developed to promote consistency and uniformity in the review of cases for the STAR program. Use these instructions and guidelines in conjunction with the NPQR Checklist (Rating).

For the purpose of measuring technical accuracy under the National Quality program, a case is considered either accurate or in error. A case will be considered accurate when Questions 1 through 10 of the NPQR Checklist (Rating) are either answered Yes or N/A. A case will be considered in error if the answer to any question is No, other than questions 11 through 15.

For each case reviewed, a NPQR Checklist (Rating) must be completed and all questions answered. A Yes response indicates that the activity associated with the question was completed accurately. A No response indicates that the activity associated with the question was in error. Indicate N/A if the question is not applicable to the case under review, or if a No response was previously recorded for the only issue subject to review. A narrative summary is required with statutory, regulatory, judicial, or manual references for any error or No answer recorded.

The general guideline is that an error will be recorded when an action is taken that violates current regulations or established policies. Examples of outcome-related deficiencies include, but are not limited to, errors that result in an overpayment or underpayment to a claimant.

Procedural deficiencies are not recorded as BE errors. These deficiencies are recorded as comments. However, if the procedural deficiency is severe in nature, it will be recorded as an error. A judgment or a difference of opinion reflecting a possible better practice or solution will not be recorded as a comment rather than an error. If an error is identified with an issue not related to the EP under review, that error is recorded as a comment under question 15.

The table below provides an explanation of the checklist questions.

Scroll sideways to see the full table.

Question	Explanation
1. Does the Veteran meet all service requirements?	An error would be cited under this element if the Veteran didn’t meet all service requirements.
2. Dependency Issues correct?	An error would be cited under this element if there are issues regarding dependency. Establishment of qualifying dependents can affect the benefit rate payable. Two issues must be resolved: relationship and dependency. Dependency may be assumed or may require development. Dependency is secondary to the primary resolution of relationship.
3. Addressed All Issues?	An error would be cited under this element if the reviewer failed to consider all issues associated with the claim under review.
4. Proper Development or Procedural Issues?	An error would be cited under this element if development or procedural requirements were not properly followed. 38 CFR 3.159 states that upon receipt of a substantially complete application, VA is required to notify the claimant and the claimant's representative, if any, of any information, and any medical or lay evidence, not previously provided that is necessary to substantiate the claim. As part of that notice, VA is required to indicate which portion of that information and evidence, if any, is to be provided by the claimant and which portion, if any, VA will attempt to obtain on behalf of the claimant. The basic rule concerning notice is contained in 38 CFR 3.103. Within that regulation, at 3.103(b)(2), are provisions for due process associated with adverse actions. A medical opinion may be required to reconcile diagnoses, determine the relationship between conditions, determine etiology or nexus to service-incurred disease or injury, or determine whether and to what extent service-connected disability has aggravated a nonservice-connected condition. Before requesting an opinion, review the claim and supporting evidence to ensure that minimum evidentiary requirements have been met. Procedural errors are considered errors with regard to manual direction but not specified by regulations.
5. Was the Rating Decision Correct?	An error would be cited under this element if the rating decision is not warranted or has deficiencies in the Narrative and/or code sheet section of the rating decision. The rating decision states the decisions made and provides an explanation supporting each decision.
6. Income Issues correct?	An error would be cited under this element if income, net worth and deductions (i.e., unreimbursed medical expenses, last expenses, education expenses) are incorrect or omitted.
7. Burial Issues correct?	An error would be cited under this element if there are deficiencies in following burial regulations contained in 38 CFR 3.1700 through 3.1713.
8. Accrued and Substitution Benefits Issues Correct?	An error would be cited under this element if there are deficiencies in following accrued and substitution benefit rules contained in 38 CFR 3.1000 through 3.1010.
9. Were Adjustments Correct? (Hospitalization, Incarceration, Active Duty, Medicaid, Elections)	An error would be cited under this element if there are deficiencies in following the rules contained in 38 CFR 3.551 through 3.558 for hospitalization and Medicaid adjustments, 3.665 and 3.666 for incarceration, and 3.654 for active duty.
10. Was the Award Generated and Correct? (Payment Rates and Effective Dates)	An error would be cited under this element if there are deficiencies on the generated award for failing to follow basic rules contained in 38 CFR 3.31, 3.114, 3.400 - 3.405 and 3.500 - 3.505.
11. Due Process Issues correct?	An error would be cited under this element if there are due process deficiencies as defined in 38 CFR 3.103. Additional instructions for implementation are found in M21-1, Part I, Subpart i, 1.B and M21-1, Part X, Subpart ii, 3.A - C.
12. Administrative Decisions correct?	An error would be cited under this element if there are deficiencies in the Administrative Decision.
13. Notification correct?	An error would be cited under this element if there are notification issues as defined in 38 CFR 3.103. Claimants and their representatives are entitled to timely notice of any decision made by VA. This rule applies to both awards and disallowances.
14. Were all systems accurately updated?	An error would be cited under this element if all the systems were not accurately updated.
15. Were all other actions correct? (unrelated EP or EP notification)	An error would be cited under this element if there are discrepancies that would have otherwise been considered as errors had the EP in question been under review.