Get The 'Vaseline" ready folks---The VDBC is gettin ready to 'screw' us!

[Gimpy]

The 'minutes' of the Veterans Disability Benefits Commision October 5, 2005 meeting just became available on-line and it looks like some of our worst fears may be coming out of this commission(s) direction.

As I've been saying all along, it looks like they are politically motivated to reduce or undermine VA benefits and the VA health care system. This is also the opinion of most of the military service organizations such as the DAV, VFW, AMVETS, Retired Military Officers Assc. etc, etc..

This is a portion of their 'charge' for the Department of Veterans Affairs as described in that October 5 meeting.

###START###

Department of Veterans Affairs in support of the Veterans? Disability Benefits Commission

DRAFT Statement of Work


A. GENERAL OBJECTIVES AND REQUIREMENTS


Title: Analysis of the Veterans? Affairs Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD) and Other Issues Identified by the Veterans? Disability Benefits Commission


Background: Public Law 108-136 of the National Defense Authorization Act of 2004 created the Veterans? Disability Benefits Commission (Commission) to carry out a study of the benefits under the laws of the United States that are provided to compensate and assist veterans and their survivors for disabilities and deaths attributable to military service. The Commission is an independent body that receives funding through the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). In carrying out its work, the Commission will consult with the Institute of Medicine (IOM) of the National Academy of Sciences with respect to the medical aspects of contemporary disability compensation policies (Sec. 1502(d)).


VA?s Office of Policy, Planning, and Preparedness (OPP&P) is appointed as the VA point of contact for the Commission. OPP&P is providing technical and analytic support to the Commission as well as contracting for analytical support. The scope, nature of research issues, findings, and conclusions of this and other studies are Commission responsibilities.


The Commission?s original schedule called for it to submit a report to the President and Congress by August of 2006; however, the Commission anticipates requesting an extension to this timeframe.


Purposes:

The first purpose of this assessment is to conduct a comprehensive review of the Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD) (used by the Department of Veterans Affairs and Department of Defense) to determine whether the schedule reflects:

(1) current medical understanding of the relationship between impairment and disability,


(2) technological and treatment mitigations of medical conditions as they relate to functioning in the workplace, (


3) whether medical or vocational impairments caused by rated disabilities can be offset by ancillary or special purpose benefits such as vocational rehabilitation or environmental adaptations, and


(4) provide sufficiently discrete rating levels to provide veterans with commensurate benefits without resorting to additional disability designations such as Individual Unemployability.

The second purpose of this assessment is to evaluate the utility of the VASRD based on comprehensiveness of listed conditions and their descriptions, ease of training new raters, and degree of correspondence with other schedules such as the American Medical Association Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment.


October 5, 2005 Page 1

Department of Veterans Affairs in support of the Veterans? Disability Benefits Commission DRAFT

A third purpose is to review and recommend any necessary changes to the criteria and methodology used to recognize ?presumptive? service-connected disability.

The Commission also would value IOM input on less complex issues such as the role of clinicians in the claims/appeal process and their training/certification needs.


Scope: The assessment will make an objective, third-party determination of the utility of the VASRD?s appropriateness, variability, and validity. Also, the assessment will look at the VASRD?s utility in rating the extent to which the service member?s service-connected disability(ies) so interferes with his/her earnings capacity and quality of life to inhibit his/her ability to make a successful transition to civilian life and to lead a fulfilling life.

It will look at the way in which the rating levels are determined and what skills, knowledge, training, and certification are required of the persons performing the examinations and assigning the ratings. In evaluating the criteria and methodology for establishing presumption of service connection for certain conditions, after reviewing the historical basis of current practice, IOM will propose improvements , possibly to include an epidemiological model, that could be used to support future decisions.



Methodology: The Commission is required to consult with IOM, a private, non-profit organization established under the Congressional charter of the National Academy of Sciences to advise the nation on issues of health and medical policy. IOM will review the medical and functional criteria used to rate impairments and related issues. The Institute of Medicine assembles recognized experts from government, industry, and academe who work independently to reach evidence-based positions and then, through consensus, deliver objective conclusions. A separate panel of experts then conducts a rigorous peer review before IOM releases its report(s).


B. TASKS AND ASSOCIATED DELIVERABLES


Project Management Requirements:


The contractor?s technical proposal shall contain a general work plan for accomplishment of the requirements of this task order and include the methodology and deliverables to be accomplished for each aspect of the project. The technical proposal shall also contain proposed staffing information and resumes of key IOM personnel assigned to this project. Immediately after the formation of panel(s) of experts, IOM is to provide resumes of experts contributing to the overall effort.


Period of Performance: Project is to be completed within approximately 15 months after the contract is awarded. IOM is to propose specific milestones and deliverables, including interim deliverables.



October 5, 2005 Page 2


Department of Veterans Affairs in support of the Veterans? Disability Benefits Commission DRAFT



I. Preliminary Research


Review and analyze all key documents regarding disability compensation benefit programs to include DoD?s Disability Retirement program and VA?s vocational rehabilitation and readjustment counseling services as well as published research on and socioeconomic studies of disabled persons in America.


II. Specific Tasks and Research Questions

For each task the contractor is expected to provide appropriate options and recommendations for improvement and include cost estimates (program and administrative) that would result from implementing proposed changes.

1. How well do the medical criteria in the VA Rating Schedule and VA rating regulations enable assessment and adjudication of the proper levels of disability to compensate both for the impact on quality of life and impairment in earnings capacity? (RQ 6): Provide an analysis of the descriptions associated with each condition?s rating level that considers progression of severity of condition as it relates to quality of life impairment and impairment in average earnings capacity.


2. In regards to Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), what policy changes, if any, need to be recommended? (RQ 25): Determine whether the rating criteria for PTSD accurately reflect the impairment caused by the disability. A general set of rating criteria is currently used to rate mental disorders. What are the advantages and disadvantages of rating PTSD using separate criteria that is specific to PTSD?


3. Certain criteria and/or levels of disability are required for entitlement to ancillary and special purpose benefits To what extent, if any, do the required thresholds need to change? (RQ 20): Determine from a medical perspective at what disability rating level a veteran?s medical or vocational impairment caused by disability could be offset by various special benefits [such as adapted housing, automobile grants, clothing allowance, and vocational rehabilitation]. Consideration should be given to existing and additional benefits.


4. Analyze the current application of the Individual Unemployability (IU) benefit to determine whether the VASRD descriptions need to more accurately reflect a veteran?s ability to participate in the economic marketplace . Commission-approved language: Do changes need to be recommended for the Individual Unemployability (IU) benefit? (RQ 16): For the population of disabled veterans, analyze the cohort who has been rated as being unemployable. Examine the base rating level to identify patterns. Determine if the VASRD description of the condition provides a barrier to assigning the base disability rating level commensurate with the veteran?s true vocational condition.


October 5, 2005 Page 3


Department of Veterans Affairs in support of the Veterans? Disability Benefits Commission DRAFT


5. What are the advantages and disadvantages of adopting universal medical diagnostic codes rather than using a unique system? Compare and contrast the advantages/disadvantages of VA Schedule for Rating Disabilities and the American Medical Association Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment. Commission-approved language: Should universal medical diagnostic codes be adopted by VA for disability and medical conditions rather than using a unique system? Should the VA Schedule for Rating Disabilities be replaced with the American Medical Association Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment? (RQ 11) :



6. From a medical perspective, analyze the current VA practice of assigning service connection on ?secondary? and ?aggravation? bases. In ?secondary? claims, determine what medical principles and practices should be applied in determining whether a causal relationship exist between two conditions. In ?aggravation? claims, determine what medical principles and practices should be applied in determining whether a preexisting disease was increased due to military service or was increased due to the natural process of the disease. Commission-approved language: To what extent should service connection on a ?secondary? basis be redefined? (RQ 15d) To what extent should service connection on an ?aggravation? basis be redefined? (RQ 15e)



7. Describe the current model used to recognize diseases that are subject to service connection on a presumptive basis. Propose a scientific framework that would justify recognizing or not recognizing conditions as presumptive. Commission-approved language: To what extent, if any, should VA policies relating to presumptive conditions be changed? (RQ 14).



8. Compare and contrast the role of medical clinicians in the claims/appeals process in VA and DoD, Social Security, and federal employee disability benefits programs. Commission-approved language: How do the operations of disability program compare [with respect to the role of medical clinicians]? (RQ 8a)



Tasks and Schedule for Deliverables: In broad strokes, the tasks are indicated below and shall be accomplished in accordance with the schedule indicated. If IOM believes that different dates should be established, these proposed dates will be indicated in the technical proposal and the detailed work plan.


Interim reports and all deliverables will be provided to the Executive Director of the Commission through the VA. VA provides contracting support for the Commission. After receipt, the Executive Director may authorize release of reports to VA and DoD for the purposes of conducting technical and legal review. VA TOPM will need to review deliverables. The VA TOPM will review and coordinate the response to IOM for all interim and final deliverables.

###END###



Looks like the proverbial 'FOX' will be watching the 'HENHOUSE", huh?

Better get ready folks..............this AIN'T gonna be pretty!

[Packo]

Jesus bro,

It is what you say and it don't look pretty. Gotta look at it again in the sober light of day....cause I ain't that now....but for Christ's sake people.....we can't let this go! HELP ME ORGANIZE NOW! All of ya'll know I'm no radical nut, but if this has me about to puke y'all better take notice. I know all of y'all want to help but I CAN'T DO THIS ALONE. I need everyones help. Help Gimpy and I. Start talking to Vets......go to your Vet Center and see if we can get people motivated. Who will go to Washington??? The time is NOW!

Pack

[Gimpy]

I Got some more 'readin material' for you (and everyone else I hope!)......This is the list of so-called 'Research Questions' these jerks have come up with. AND, it's the 'list' which all the Military Service Orgs. have been raising HELL about!


Veterans? Disability Benefits Commission
List of Research Questions


Approved on 9-16-05


1. How well do benefits provided to disabled veterans meet Congressional intent of replacing average impairment in earnings capacity?

2. How well do benefits provided to disabled veterans meet implied Congressional intent to compensate for impairment in quality of life due to service-connected disabilities?

3. How well do benefits provided to survivors meet implied Congressional intent to compensate for the loss of the veterans/service members? earning capacityand for the impairment in quality of life due to service-connected death?

4. How well do benefits provided to disabled veterans and survivors meet implied Congressional intent to provide incentive value for recruitment and retention?

5. Should the benefit package be modified?

a. Would the results be more appropriate if reduced quality of life and lost earnings were separately rated and compensated?

b. Would the results be more appropriate if the level of payment was higher before some normal ?retirement age? and lower thereafter?

c. Are there negative unintended consequences resulting from the current benefit structure? Does the receipt of certain levels of compensation provide a disincentive to work or undergo therapy?

d. To what extent should VA modify its compensation policies if data from certain categories of service-connected veterans demonstrate little or no measurable loss of earning capacity and/or quality of life?

6. How well do the medical criteria in the VA Rating Schedule and VA rating regulations enable assessment and adjudication of the proper levels of disability to compensate for both the impact on quality of life and impairment in earnings capacity?

7. How does the adequacy of disability benefits provided for members of the Armed Forces compare with disability benefits provided to employees of Federal, State, and local governments, and commercial and private-sector benefit plans?


8. How do the operations of disability benefits programs compare?

a. The role of clinicians in the claims and appeals processes, and the required number of staff for this function.

b. The role of attorneys and legal staff in the claims and appeals
processes, and the required number of staff for this function.

c. Compensation Claims Process

d. Appeals Process

e. Training and certification of staff and client representatives

f. Quality Assurance/Control Program

9. Pertinent law and regulations require that disability compensation be based on average impairment of earnings capacity, not on loss of individual earnings capacity.

a. Would the results be more appropriate if factors such as the individual?s military rank, military specialty, pre-service occupation, education, and skill level were taken into consideration in determining benefits?

b. Would the results be more appropriate if the effect of the veteran?s medical condition on his or her occupation were taken into consideration in determining benefits?

10. Should lump sum payments be made for certain disabilities or level of severity of disabilities? Should such lump sum payments be elective or mandatory? Consider the merits under different circumstances such as wherethe impairment is to quality of life and not to earnings capacity.

11. Should universal medical diagnostic codes be adopted by VA for disability and medical conditions rather than using a unique system? Should the VA Schedule for Rating Disabilities be replaced with the American Medical Association Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment?

12. Are benefits available to service disabled veterans at an appropriate level if not indexed to cost of living and/or locality? Should the various benefits that are presently fixed be automatically adjusted for inflation?

13. Should VA?s definition for ?line of duty? change? If so, how?

14. To what extent, if any, should VA policies relating to presumptive condition be changed?


15. Should certain rating principles related to service connection be modified?

(See questions below)

a. To what extent should eligibility standards change for disabilities that occur as part of genetics?

b. To what extent, if any, should ?age? factor into determining entitlement to service connected compensation?

c. To what extent should the benefit of the doubt rule be reconsidered or redefined?

d. To what extent should service connection on a ?secondary? basis be redefined?

e. To what extent should service connection on an ?aggravation? basis be redefined?

16. Do changes need to be recommended for the Individual Unemployability (IU) benefit?

17. Because Vocational Rehabilitation and Employment (VR&E) benefits are an integral part of the compensation package for many service connected veterans, what changes, if any, are needed in this program?

18. Should there be a time limit for filing an original claim for service connection? (does not include claims for service connection on a presumptive basis)

19. Currently, a pending claim terminates at the time of the veteran?s death even when dependents remain. To what extent, if any, should this law be changed?

20. Certain criteria and/or levels of disability are required for entitlement to ancillary and special purpose benefits. To what extent, if any, do the required thresholds need to change?

21. What recommendations, if any, should the Commission make in regards to Concurrent Receipt policies?

22. Should the Commission explore and recommend changes to the ?duty to assist? law? If so, how?

23. Should the Commission explore the Character of Discharge Standard?


24. Should compensation payments be protected from apportionments and garnishments?

25. In regards to Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), what policy changes, if any, need to be recommended?

26. To what extent is the coordination between the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) and the Department of Defense (DoD) adequate to meet the needs of service members/veterans, particularly the needs of service-connected disabled veterans?

27. To what extent is the coordination for seriously injured and disabled service members/veterans adequate within VA between the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) and the Veterans Benefits Administration (VBA) and internally within each of the Administrations? What are the internal and external impediments, challenges and gaps, and how might these barriers be overcome?

28. To what extent is the coordination adequate within DoD between the Office of the Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness, Health Affairs and Force Management Policy, and the branches of Service. What are the internal and external impediments, challenges and gaps and how might these barriers be overcome?

29. To what extent do DoD and VA provide disabled members/veterans the means and the opportunity to succeed in their transition to civilian life? What are the adequacy, quality, and timeliness of the benefits provided by each agency?

30. What policy and cultural shifts must be made to produce a common, shared, bi-directional data exchange of information and access to medical and personnel records between VA and DoD and within VA between VBA and VHA?

31. To what extent are the training, education and outreach programs (of DoD, VA, and DOL) adequate to ensure that the greatest number of active duty, Guard and Reserve personnel are informed of the full range of Federal government veteran benefits and services and provided tools such as a statement of education and military occupational specialties experiences adaptable to civilian job searches?


###END###

I'm telling you folks, you better get ready for a RUDE awakening if we don't get off our 'collective' ass and do something about this shit!

[Packo]

Gimp,

Will go over this tomorow...can't even read it now but know it ain't good....just got off the phone with Frisco and too much
Washington State Wine.......get back at you soon. Started to read it and have to keep from throwin' up.

Love you my deah Southern Brother....

Pack

[catman]

Tom/Steve...not sure what is needed or what I can do, but count me in. I am stone sober and damn near puked.

Steve thanks for the updates, wish I had your gift for research.

Trav

[exlrrp]

Originally posted by catman Tom/Steve...not sure what is needed or what I can do, but count me in. I am stone sober and damn near puked.

Steve thanks for the updates, wish I had your gift for research.

Trav

Steve, Tom
WHAT TRAV SAID! I'm stone sober also.
Don't wait for the revolution to start, I already started it
Stay good
James

[Arrow]

The goal of this "independent""commission" funded by the VA seeking to determine the "intent" of the first Congress that voted on veteran's benefits causes me great distress and little hope that the "commission" is open to listening to any recommendations made by outside consultants such as the Institute of Medicine. Although the IOM has presented a body of evidence that helps rather than hinders the cause of the veteran suffering from herbicide related disease and post traumatic stress.

Some of the questions are practical but most of them are seeking answers to questions that involve ongoing research in many different disciplines that could go on for years. As an example of this is the Ranch Hand Report. For decades the only measure of exposure to herbicide poisoning was the Air Force Ranch Hand report. The government did the research and called it good. To this day the Department of Defense is still calling it good. Thankfully we had and have outside resources conducting their own research such as the Australian research on the co-distillation of water aboard ship and it's impact on the blue water Navy personnel .

Packy was asking for some ideas and the best I have at the moment is what follows.I don't know if we have time to do a rally getting all the permits, PA system, speakers, security, sanitary facilities, first aid stations, mobilizing veterans across the country to get to D.C. probably takes more time and money thanmost of ushave. Not to mention that we know there is going to be a hard push to get the recommendations of this commission through as quickly as possible. But if you all want to do that you might talk to Rolling Thunder they certainly have the experience at organizing a rally and no doubt would be more than willing to give you direction.

Another option that may be more practical is give a call out for representation by brothers or sisters that can legally represent men such as Packy, call for a meeting with the head of the VA, confront them with solid evidence of illegal activities in the claims process, demand that they clean up their act, shut down this present commission and open up another one to investigate said illegal activities or the whole matter will be taken to every major news outlet in the country.

I want to revise my last statementafter looking at the names of the people taking partin this commission. It's been to hard of fightfor the last four decades to lose the ground we have gained by allowing a small group of veterans (minus one who is a nonveteran)to make decisions that will impact our wide and diversecommunity of veterans for decades to come.

Packy for Prez...

Arrow>>>>>

[PHO127]

From the VA that all of my disabilities are under review. Have medical appointments for The 8th (eye), 12th (Diabetes and neuropathy) at a obstetrics and family clinic), 22nd for PTSD, and 25th for hearing. AND they are paying a whopping 11 cents a mile for mileage.

[Arrow]

The Commission members are appointed by the President and leaders of Congress, and the Commission is independent of the Department of Veterans Affairs and the Department of Defense.The members of the Commission are:

Chairman: James Terry Scott, LTG, USA (Ret)

Members:
Nick D. Bacon, 1SG, USA (Ret)
Larry G. Brown, Col, USA (Ret)
Jennifer Sandra Carroll, LCDR, USN (Ret)
Donald M. Cassiday, Col, USAF (Ret)
John Holland Grady
Charles "Butch" Joeckel, USMC (Ret)
Ken Jordan, Col, USMC (Ret)
James Everett Livingston, MG, USMC (Ret)
Dennis Vincent McGinn, VADM, USN (Ret)
Rick Surratt
Joe Wynn
William M. Matz, MG USA (Ret)


Link to commission home page; you will need to download an adobe reader as most are in pdf form.

vetscomission

[Arrow]

The Commission will meet in open session approximately monthly. Listed below is the schedule of meetings and their locations. We will provide as much advance notice as possible of meetings, but please understand that occasionally events may occur that require us to change the schedule and/or locations.

The next public meeting will be November 17 and 18, 2005, from 9:00 am to 4:00 pm in the hearing room of the House Committee on Veterans' Affairs located in room 340 of the Cannon House Office Building, (one block north of the Capitol South Metro Station on the Orange and Blue Lines), in Washington, DC 20515.

November 17 and 18 will be the last public meetings conducted by the Commission in calendar year 2005. The first public meeting of the Commission for calendar year 2006 will be announced in early December 2005.