Pension Authorization Quality Checklist

What this means

The pension authorization checklist helps VA quality reviewers check whether the decision and payment work were handled correctly. It covers the supporting development as well as income, dependents, benefit adjustments, notices and system records. The written National Pension Quality Review (NPQR) instructions explain fifteen questions, even though the technical-accuracy measure treats questions 1 through 10 separately from questions 11 through 15.

How this may help with a claim

If a pension award seems wrong, this appendix can help separate the problem: entitlement, income or deductions, a payment adjustment, the amount or date of the award, or the notice explaining it. Compare that specific part of the record with the question explanation and applicable benefit rule. A review score is not an award correction or a substitute for using the review rights in your notice.

What to review in your file

• For authorization quality scoring, all questions 1 through 10 answered Yes or N/A count as accurate; the stated No-answer test excludes questions 11 through 15. That does not waive those later questions. Each case needs a completed checklist with all answers. Yes means the activity was accurate; No records an error; N/A is for an inapplicable question or the described situation where a No already covers the only issue under review. An error or No must have a narrative and supporting authority.

• Begin with the service and dependency foundation and whether all claim issues were addressed. The checklist distinguishes a qualifying relationship from dependency, which may be assumed or need development after relationship is resolved. It also checks development notices, the division of evidence-gathering responsibilities and adverse-action procedures. A medical opinion may be needed for the listed diagnostic, service-relationship or aggravation questions, but staff first check the evidence against minimum requirements.

• Review both the decision and the money calculation. The rating narrative and code sheet must support and explain the decisions. Income, net worth and deductions must not be wrong or omitted; the examples include unreimbursed medical, last and education expenses. The generated award is separately checked for payment rates and effective dates. Correct development alone does not establish a correct award.

• Keep the benefit-specific questions separate. Burial, accrued benefits and substitution each have their own cited rules. Hospitalization, incarceration, active duty, Medicaid and elections can call for different adjustments. This list identifies subjects to review, not an instruction to reduce every payment or treat every survivor as eligible.

• The remaining questions cover due process, administrative decisions, timely notices to claimants and representatives for both awards and disallowances, accurate system updates and actions outside the end product under review. The instructions place errors on unrelated end products in question 15 comments. Those matters remain part of the review even when excluded from the stated technical-accuracy test.

• Distinguish a documented violation from an unclear classification instruction. Overpayments and underpayments are examples of outcome-related deficiencies. Procedural deficiencies generally become comments rather than BE errors, with an exception for severe deficiencies. The source's opinion sentence says a possible better practice 'will not be recorded as a comment rather than an error.' That wording is unclear and should not be silently converted into a rule that every disagreement is, or is not, an error.

Important limits

These September 23, 2025 authorization-review instructions do not independently establish benefit entitlement, a payment amount or a claimant deadline. The source display includes the original sample checklist images and the full written question explanations. The technical-score exception for questions 11 through 15 does not erase their review requirements. The opinion-classification sentence is ambiguous, and BE remains the source's unexplained category label here.

Search terms when useful

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

• Pension authorization quality review
• NPQR authorization scoring and narrative
• Review pension deductions and payment adjustments
• Authorization notices and system updates
• Unrelated end-product errors and comments

Original VA guidance

The official VA text of this section

Official section title: NPQR Checklist (Authorization)

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

Appendix B. NPQR Checklist (Authorization)

Introduction

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

• NPQR Checklist (Authorization), and
• instructions and guidelines for authorization review.

Change Date

September 23, 2025

Appendix B.a. NPQR Checklist (Authorization)

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

Checklist Name: NPQR

Checklist Questions and Errors:

Appendix B.b. Instructions and Guidelines for Pension Authorization Review

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

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 all questions 1 through 10, of the NPQR Checklist (Authorization) 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 (Authorization) 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.