Federal Reports

The VA Office of Inspector General (OIG) sought to assess whether Veterans Benefits Administration (VBA) claims processors were appropriately overriding warnings and calculator results within the Veterans Benefits Management System for Rating (VBMS R). The review focused on overrides processed between April 1 and September 30, 2024, and evaluated compliance with applicable laws, policies, and procedures.

The OIG found that while many overrides were properly executed, an estimated 9,900 were not warranted or lacked valid justification. These unwarranted override decisions occurred (1) because VBA did not conduct regular quality reviews that would provide feedback to processors, (2) because of the absence of clear guidance on what constitutes a valid override justification, and (3) because of limited functionality in two VBMS R oversight tools. These deficiencies hindered VBA’s ability to perform efficient oversight and could lead to quality reviewers examining cases that did not actually involve an override.

Actions by VBA claims processors caused about $67,200 in improper disability benefits payments and unnecessary exam costs, with the potential to affect future disability benefits payments or result in unnecessary exam costs. The OIG briefed VBA on the review’s progress in March 2025, and VBA agreed with the sample review results. In December 2025, the OIG officially briefed VBA on the findings. Although VBA has since taken steps to enhance aspects of its override process by releasing a new reporting dashboard in February 2026, the OIG has not reviewed or tested it.

To address the issues the OIG identified and strengthen the VBMS-R override process, the OIG made five recommendations focused on improving guidance, oversight, and system functionality. VBA agreed to implement all five recommendations.

We found that controls existed to ensure Ohio did not use SNAP administrative funds for participant benefits; however, our analytics of FY 2024 participant data identified 17,000 out of 917,000 households had anomalous data, representing $13.3 million in questioned costs.