Chairman Hall, Ranking Member Lamborn, and members of the subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today to provide AMVETS’ views regarding VBA’s Systematic Technical Accuracy Review (STAR) Program.

The Systematic Technical Accuracy Review (STAR) Program is VBA’s compensation and pension accuracy measurement system. AMVETS agrees with the VA’s Office of Inspector General’s March 12, 2009 report that identified eight issues that will improve the process of reviewing claims for errors. And AMVETS is pleased to see VBA is taking action to correct these issues. AMVETS is concerned though, with what is done with the information that is gleaned from STAR.

For the STAR program to truly be effective, AMVETS believes three things must be done. First, STAR must be enhanced so trends in errors can be easily identified by the regional offices. With this information, VBA must hold ROs accountable for failures in accuracy and insist that ROs develop improvement strategies that include training for all accuracy issues. Second, VBA must change its culture of timeliness and strive for a culture of accuracy. Wither or not STAR is completely accurate in its reviews is important but not nearly as important as what is done to ensure the same mistakes are not repeated. Third, OIG must conduct periodic review of the STAR program to ensure that STAR’s accuracy ratings are within a 3% margin of error.

Even though AMVETS believes the STAR program is effective, we believe it should be expanded to ensure that specific programs, such as the Benefits Delivery at Discharge (BDD) program and specific conditions can be tracked for anomalies that occur, so improvement strategies and specific training can be implemented. When the Veterans Claims Assistance Act (VCAA) was introduced in the first quarter of FY 2002, nearly half of all errors were VCAA related. VBA had the ROs re-train their claims processors and in the last 8 months of the FY, these types of errors were reduced by one-third. This type of accountability needs to be the rule and not the exception.

As you know, the STAR program identifies errors in claims decisions each month through random sampling of each Regional Office (RO). The results of the reviews are sent to the ROs. Errors that are found are to be corrected by the RO that made the decision. The corrections are made, but all too often, the ROs don’t implement strategies to ensure that claims processors don’t continually repeat the same mistakes. AMVETS believes the reason these strategies are not developed is that the culture within the regional offices is one of timeliness and not one of accuracy. STAR has consistently found that 20 to 25% of claims are in error over the past decade, but VBA has done little to ensure that mistakes that are made in the regional offices are understood and that strategies for improvements are put in place. On the other hand, VBA does require ROs to develop corrective action plans if they do not reach strategic goals for production, inventory and timeliness. This paradigm must be flipped.

The March, 2009 OIG Report clearly defined the gaps in the STAR program that have caused the 10% disparity in compensation and pension rating accuracy. AMVETS believes VBA is taking action to close these gaps. However, AMVETS believes it is important to have this accuracy fall within a 3% margin of error. Therefore, AMVETS requests that OIG conduct a follow-up to the 2009 report to ensure VBA’s gap solutions are productive, and that OIG continue to conduct periodic reviews of STAR to ensure the program reaches and maintains a 3% margin of error.

Mr. Chairman, thank you again for providing AMVETS the opportunity to present our views on the STAR program. This concludes my testimony and I will be happy to answer any questions you may have.