Detailed Information on the
Veterans Pension Assessment

The program will collect and use data to implement three new performance measures regarding access, income and dignity.

The program will provide initial steps in linking performance to budget.

Program will use information derived from new performance measures to identify and make program improvements.

The program will continue to develop steps to address increased ambition for strategic targets.

Measure: Percent of recipients who were informed of the full range of available benefits

Explanation:

Measure: National Accuracy Rate-Authorization Work

Explanation:

Measure: Overall satisfaction rate.

Explanation:

Measure: Percent of pension recipients who believe that the processing of their claim reflects the courtesy, compassion, and respect due to a veteran

Explanation:The source for this measure is the Veterans Benefits Administration (VBA) Survey of Veterans Satisfaction With the VA Compensation and Pension Claims Process.

Measure: Rating - average days pending

Explanation:

Measure: Productivity Index

Explanation:This measure determines the output generated by VBA FTE nationally and for each Regional Office. It is calculated by using the following factors: Completed work (end products or EPs), Work Rate Standards (WRS) for end products - derived from the work measurement study completed in 2004. This work measurement study was done at 12 ROs and the Pension Maintenance Centers (PMC) by a random sample (over time) to determine how much processing time was required to complete EPs. Not all claims (EPs) require the same time to process. The weighted output is based on hours required to process a claim. Standard Work Hours - the number 1,576 is a standard used in the budget process to reflect the actual number of direct labor hours. This converts hours (SH) into FTE required to process claims. Actual FTE taken from the COIN DOOR 0091 and the PAID system.

Measure: Non-rating Actions - Average Days to Process

Explanation:

Measure: Percent of recipients who said their claim was very or somewhat fair

Explanation:

Measure: Rating - accuracy rate

Explanation:

Is the program purpose clear?

Explanation: The purpose of the VA pension program is to assure a level of income above the minimum subsistence level, allowing wartime veterans who are either permanently and totally disabled from injury or disease not related to service or who are age 65 or older and their survivors to live their lives in dignity without having to turn to welfare for assistance.

Evidence: VBA Mission Statement. PL 95-588; Evaluation of the VA Pension Program by ORC Macro Economic Systems, Inc., pgs. 7-10. The report is located at www.va.gov/opp/eval/Pension.htm.

Does the program address a specific and existing problem, interest, or need?

Explanation: The program addresses the need of low income permanently and totally disabled wartime veterans and their survivors by providing monthly payments. This need is based on income and net worth. About half of VA pensioners have assets valued at $1,000 or less. Approximately 94% of pensioners use VA pension benefits to pay for daily living expenses.

Evidence: RCS 0221; Evaluation of the VA Pension Program by ORC Macro Economic Systems, Inc., Chapter 5. Assets, Expenses and Debts. FY2004 Annual Performance and Accountability Report.

Is the program designed so that it is not redundant or duplicative of any other Federal, state, local or private effort?

Explanation: The program is similar to Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (welfare), Social Security Disability Insurance, and Social Security Income Program. It is similar to the disability type programs because of the inability to work aspect and similar to a welfare type program because the basic subsistence assistance. VA's Pension program allows the recipient to receive assistance from multiple federal and state programs for the same problem. However, it is distinguished by its service of wartime veterans and their survivors. An independent study found that while duplicative in nature it was unique in that it serves a much older population; allows for a higher net worth; and allows a more generous deduction for unreimbursed medical expenses.

Evidence: Evaluation of the VA Pension Program by ORC Macro Economic Systems, Inc., Table 4.13. Federal and State Program Comparison Table.

Is the program design free of major flaws that would limit the program's effectiveness or efficiency?

Explanation: The program was modified in the 1950s, 60s, and 70s to address the major flaws: increased compensation based on veterans condition and number of dependent, sliding scale of compensation based on income, and started an annual cost of living adjustment. However, the independent evaluation states that many pensioners' have unmet needs such as food, heat, transportation, and medical care and that the level of compensation needs to be adjusted further. A possible solution may be to implement geographic-based income and benefit levels.

Evidence: Evaluation of the VA Pension Program by ORC Macro Economic Systems, Inc.

Is the program design effectively targeted so that resources will address the program's purpose directly and will reach intended beneficiaries?

Explanation: VA's Pension program is designed to serve the financial needs of wartime veterans who are permanently and total disabled. However, war time period for the Gulf War (8/2/90) is still ongoing; therefore, any service member who serviced in the last 15 years is considered a war time veteran. Thus, the eligibility has been expanded to include some people who are not traditionally war time veterans. In addition, Congress recently expanded eligibility to any veteran over the age of 65.

Evidence: 38 CFR 3.12a, PL ?

Does the program have a limited number of specific long-term performance measures that focus on outcomes and meaningfully reflect the purpose of the program?

Explanation: The program has three purposes: access, income, and dignity. VA has proposed two new outcome measures for income and dignity. The income measure will measure the percent of beneficiaries receiving financial assistance for medical expenses. The dignity measure will measure recipients overall satisfaction with the program. VA already has a measure for access - percent of recipients who were informed of the full range of available benefits. A better measure may be - percent of eligible veterans who receive a VA Pension.

Evidence: 2003-2008 VA Strategic Plan; FY2006 President's Budget; FY2004 Performance and Accountability Report

Does the program have ambitious targets and timeframes for its long-term measures?

Explanation: The program needs more outcome measures. VA should begin the development of ambitious strategic targets once outcome measures are identified. The strategic target for Pension recipients who were informed of the full range of available benefits is 60 percent (2006 goal is 40). VA estimates that it will achieve this strategic target in 2008.

Evidence: The Pension Program's targets are identified in the Department of Veterans Affairs 2003-2008 Strategic Plan and in the FY2006 President's Budget.

Does the program have a limited number of specific annual performance measures that can demonstrate progress toward achieving the program's long-term goals?

Explanation: VA currently has several performance measures that reflect the Pension program's core purposes and that guide and inform budget and long-term decisions. These service delivery measures are intended to improve quality, productivity, and reduce cycle-time for the workload. The three program goals identified for the pension program are Access, Income, and Dignity. As shown below, the Pension program has four annual measures which serve to demonstrate progress towards long term goals: Access: Long term goal is percent of recipients who were informed of the full range of available benefits Access: Annual goals are 1) Non-rating average days to process 2) Rating Average days to process (this is an internal measure; not published in the budget) Income: Long term goal is percent of VA beneficiaries receiving financial assistance for medical expenses Income: Annual goal is authorization - accuracy rate Dignity: Long term goal is percent of pension recipients who believe that the processing of their claim reflects the courtesy, compassion and respect due to a veteran Dignity: Annual goal is percent of recipients who said their claim was very or somewhat fair

Evidence: FY2006 President's Budget.

Does the program have baselines and ambitious targets for its annual measures?

Explanation: The majority of the annual goals have been the same for the past few years. For example, the percent of recipients who were informed of the full range of available benefits goal for 2006 is 40 percent, the same as in 2001.

Evidence: DOOR Reports, STAR reviews, Pension Maintenance Study, and the FY 2006 President's Budget (chart on page 3A-11, Vol. 1).

Do all partners (including grantees, sub-grantees, contractors, cost-sharing partners, and other government partners) commit to and work toward the annual and/or long-term goals of the program?

Explanation: VA has agreements with six other Federal agencies and share certain information, i.e., verification of income, social security numbers, and??receipt of other Federal benefits. The matches determine continuous eligibility and confirm that the information of record is accurate, which ensures our payments are correct. VA needs to develop more outcome measures and expand collaboration with its partners.

Evidence: VA currently has Computer Matching Agreements with the Social Security Administration, Civil Service Annuity, Railroad Retirement Board, the Internal Revenue Service, Bureau of Prisons, and the Department of Defense.

Are independent evaluations of sufficient scope and quality conducted on a regular basis or as needed to support program improvements and evaluate effectiveness and relevance to the problem, interest, or need?

Explanation: An independent comprehensive evaluation of the VA Pension Program was completed in December 2004 by the Hay Group. This evaluation measured the degree to which the program satisfies statutorily required outcomes by using a multi-method approach. VA determined that the evaluation findings and recommendations are highly relevant, timely, and is developing responses to them. VA routinely, every 5-6 years, conducts a preliminary examination of major benefits programs to determine whether or not a full-fledged program evaluation is necessary. If necessary, then a full-fledged program evaluation will be conducted.

Evidence: The evaluation report is located at www.va.gov/opp/eval/Pension.htm for review. Draft VA Strategic Plan 2006-2011, VA Program Review Policy

Are Budget requests explicitly tied to accomplishment of the annual and long-term performance goals, and are the resource needs presented in a complete and transparent manner in the program's budget?

Explanation: The relationship between VA's budget requests for the Pension program and whether such requests will impact the achievement of targeted goals is not clear.

Evidence: 2006 President's Budget

Has the program taken meaningful steps to correct its strategic planning deficiencies?

Explanation: VA conducts an annual review of its performance measures and annual and strategic targets. However, the Pension program's measures and annual targets have been stagnate with non-ambitious goals and unrealistic strategic targets for 2008. In addition, more outcome measures are needed. VA recently formed a working group that will work over the next year to address these issues.

Evidence: VA Strategic Plan; FY 2006 President's Budget; Performance and Accountability Report (PAR)

Does the agency regularly collect timely and credible performance information, including information from key program partners, and use it to manage the program and improve performance?

Explanation: VA collects monthly performance data through technical accuracy reviews of completed claims. This data is used to manage the program and improve performance. As an example, VA used performance data in determining a need to consolidate pension maintenance activities (all actions on a claim other than the initial determination of entitlement), which has resulted in increased efficiencies at decreased costs. VA also uses a performance improvement tool, bonuses for highly performing field stations, and brokers work based on performance data. Additionally, technical accuracy reviews are used to areas where specialized training is needed on either a local or national level.

Evidence: The Pension Maintenance Center Study of August 2003; the Pension Maintenance Center Weekly Reports. VA's Government Performance and Results Act Report'.

Are Federal managers and program partners (including grantees, sub-grantees, contractors, cost-sharing partners, and other government partners) held accountable for cost, schedule and performance results?

Explanation: Performance Standards for Regional Office Directors and Pension Maintenance Centers management are tied to targeted goals for quality, timeliness, and inventory. Bonuses and continued employment are based on the directors and managers meeting their goals.

Evidence: RO Directors and PMC managers' Performance Standards. Bearing Point Contract/SOW

Are funds (Federal and partners') obligated in a timely manner and spent for the intended purpose?

Explanation: Funds are obligated in a timely manner and spent for the intended purpose. New awards are obligated biweekly and monthly for recurring awards. To ensure funding is utilized for its intended purpose, the Office of Resource Management monitors obligations and expenditures on a monthly basis.

Evidence: ORM uses Form 4 (VBA Financial Report); SF 133 (Statement of Budget Execution) and a monthly status of funds report to monitor obligations and to compare monthly expenditures to agency operating plan (provided to the VA Departmental Budget Office and OMB); the FY2004 PAR. The FY2004 PAR documents a decrease in erroneous Pension payments from FY2003 to FY2004.

Does the program have procedures (e.g. competitive sourcing/cost comparisons, IT improvements, appropriate incentives) to measure and achieve efficiencies and cost effectiveness in program execution?

Explanation: The Pension program does have existing performance measures for timeliness and quality and tracks these measures monthly. The program recently created a third performance measure specifically for efficiency, the Productivity Index. It is used on a monthly basis.. This "Productivity Index" is calculated using completed work, associated work rate standards derived from a 2004 work measurement study, and the FTE committed. This will assist us in determining future areas to focus improvement operations. The program has taken the following actions to improve efficiency: consolidated pension claims processing into three centers, implemented a IT initiative to facilitate paperless claims processing and that makes beneficiary records available to multiple individuals concurrently. These actions have reduced costs and increased the speed of processing individual claims.

Evidence: February 28, 2001, business case for Consolidation of Means Tested Program Processing; STAR PMC report and the PMC Weekly Production Report. FY2006 President's Budget.

Does the program collaborate and coordinate effectively with related programs?

Explanation: VA works with other agencies to verify the beneficiaries income for this needs-based program. VA works with the Social Security Administration to verify social security rates. Over the past several years VA and Social Security worked together to replace a time-consuming process to verify social security rates. This enables VA to verify social security rates in seconds compared to 2 weeks. Routinely VA provides income information to local housing and energy assistance programs to assist beneficiaries continue to receive local benefits.

Evidence: SHARE Users Guide (http://vbaw.vba.va.gov/bl/21/systems/docs/SHARE85.pdf). Adjudication Procedures Manual, M21-1, Part III, par. 9.18. VA currently has Computer Matching Agreements with the Social Security Administration, Civil Service Annuity, Railroad Retirement Board, the Internal Revenue Service, Bureau of Prisons, and the Department of Defense.

Does the program use strong financial management practices?

Explanation: Currently, the Pension program has a material weakness reported under the Federal Managers Financial Integrity Act (FMFIA) related to internal controls that it doesn't anticipate closing until Q1 FY 2007.

Evidence: Audit of Veterans Benefits Administration's Income Verification Match Results (11/08/2000), OIG Report Number 99-00054-1; Follow-up Evaluation of the Causes of Compensation and Pension Overpayments (02/20/2002), OIG Report Number 01-00263-53; FY2004 Annual Performance and Accountability Report, pages 36-38, and page 52.

Has the program taken meaningful steps to address its management deficiencies?

Explanation: VBA has developed a number of systems for improving program management in the areas of timeliness and accuracy. These include: workload reports; timeliness and accuracy data; and an independent program evaluation. In addition, it conducts periodic site visits to ensure that action is taken on identified deficiencies. These systems identify management deficiencies, which are evaluated against VA Regional Office Director's Performance Standards, and used to develop action plans to correct deficiencies.

Evidence: VBA Site Visit Protocol. The Pension Maintenance Center Study of August 2003 provides a detailed description of specific program deficiencies and offers performance and work process proposals to improve the overall efficiency of the operations at the PMCs. This study also provides illustrative examples of the recommendations made along with corrections and improvements made by the program.

Has the program demonstrated adequate progress in achieving its long-term performance goals?

Explanation: The program has three long-term performance goals: Access, Income, and Dignity. Historically two of these performance goals were tracked on a monthly basis. Access through claim cycle time, refered to as "speed." Income is tracked through performance measure "accuracy." Dignity was previously been measured as a combined measure for all VA programs through "customer satisfaction." Now the program specifically examines responses of pension claimants and beneficiaries to the question "Overall, did the claims process reflect the courtesy, compassion, and respect due to a veteran of the United States, or their spouse or child?" This is tracked in our annual customer satisfaction survey.

Evidence: Department of Veterans Affairs 2003-2008 Strategic Plan; the FY2006 President's Budget; and Annual Customer Satisfaction Survey.

Does the program (including program partners) achieve its annual performance goals?

Explanation: The program routinely meets its annual performance measure goals; however, the goals are not ambitious. Most of the measures maintain the same goal year after year even when the goal is significantly lower than the strategic target.

Evidence: The Pension Program's targets are identified in the Department of Veterans Affairs 2003-2008 Strategic Plan and in the FY2006 President's Budget. The 2006 President's Budget contains the Pension performance measures for accuracy, timeliness, and overall satisfaction.

Does the program demonstrate improved efficiencies or cost effectiveness in achieving program goals each year?

Explanation: VA consolidated the Pension claims processing into three Pension Maintenance Centers in 2001. Since the consolidation VA has improved quality and timeliness in claims processing. For instance, since 2001, timeliness of pension entitlement decisions improved from 127 days in 98 days in 2004. Quality improved from 63% in 2001 to 87% in 2004. Additionally, VA has developed a productivity measure for cost effectiveness. This new performance measure, the "Productivity Index", is being used to track performance on a monthly basis. This will assist us in determining future areas to focus improvement operations.

Evidence: FY2006 President's Budget.

Does the performance of this program compare favorably to other programs, including government, private, etc., with similar purpose and goals?

Explanation: The independent evaluation compared VA to a set of need-based or income-tested programs, including SSA, SSDI, Medicaid, Food Stamps and State-level programs and showed that although the populations served by those programs vary greatly in age and income, the VA Pension program compares favorably. The VA pension program was compared to these identified programs because VA's program shares the following characteristics with them. Most of the programs are needs based programs.. Most of the programs require periodic revalidation, similar to VA's annual income reporting requirement. Most of the programs require application for other assistance and the counting of income received from other assistance programs for determining entitlement. In addition, the results showed the Pension program has the one of the lowest administrative costs for a cash benefit program.

Evidence: ORC Macro Economic Systems, Inc., Appendix F., Table 22.

Do independent evaluations of sufficient scope and quality indicate that the program is effective and achieving results?

Explanation: An independent comprehensive evaluation of the VA Pension Program was completed in December 2004 by the Hay Group. The evaluation found mixed performance on legislated outcomes. The program conveys a sense of dignity to spouses and veterans, provides income security while not displacing work, and is an important source of income for beneficiaries. Also, there is high beneficiary satisfaction with the program; however, the program needs to improve rates of participation and income benefit levels. VA routinely, every 5-6 years, conducts a preliminary examination of major benefits programs to determine whether or not a full-fledged program evaluation is necessary. If necessary, then a full-fledged program evaluation will be conducted.

Evidence: Evaluation of VA pension program by ORC Macro Economic Systems, Inc. Draft VA Strategic Plan 2006-2011, VA Program Review Policy