BVA decisions by condition

PTSD: BVA grant rates and what wins

From 2017 to 2026, the Board of Veterans' Appeals decided a PTSD issue in 80,784 decisions. It granted the PTSD issue in 29.5% of them, above the 19.4% grant rate for all conditions, denied it in 27.8%, and remanded it in 39.0%. Counting only decisions on the merits (granted or denied), 51.6% were granted.

Decisions

80,784

2017–2026

Granted

29.5%

All conditions: 19.4%

Granted on the merits

51.6%

Granted ÷ (granted + denied)

Remanded

39.0%

Denied: 27.8%

PTSD outcomes by year

YearIssues decidedGrantedDeniedRemandedOther
2017
5,950
16.5%28.5%35.9%19.2%
2018
10,542
23.1%26.4%42.3%8.2%
2019
11,203
24.9%27.6%43.6%3.9%
2020
9,744
27.4%28.3%40.5%3.8%
2021
8,543
30.7%27.2%37.7%4.4%
2022
8,442
30.7%23.1%41.8%4.3%
2023
9,112
31.1%24.5%40.1%4.3%
2024
8,898
35.1%27.9%33.3%3.8%
2025
8,091
34.6%33.8%28.3%3.3%
2026
2,986
42.5%29.9%24.4%3.2%

Each row counts issues (each condition the Board decided), so the shares add up to 100%. Other: dismissed, withdrawn or no clear outcome. Years with fewer than 50 issues are left out.

Evidence in granted and denied PTSD decisions

For each kind of supporting evidence: how often the Board granted the PTSD issue on the merits when the decision mentioned it, compared with decisions that did not. These are associations, not causes, and evidence is recorded per decision, not per issue.

In the recordDecisionsGranted when presentWhen absentDifference
Positive nexus opinion14,58775.8%44.1%+31.7 pts
Favorable VA exam14,33072.9%44.3%+28.6 pts
Buddy statement4,15371.2%50.4%+20.8 pts
Claimed as secondary2,60169.1%51.3%+17.9 pts
Treating physician opinion8,66265.9%49.2%+16.7 pts
Combat service14,66263.0%48.5%+14.5 pts
Private medical opinion26,96959.6%46.4%+13.2 pts
Lay statement68,94751.7%50.4%+1.3 pts
  • The Board applied the benefit-of-the-doubt rule (38 CFR 3.102) in 73.0% of the decisions that granted PTSD.
  • The Board found the veteran's statements credible in 46.3% of grants and 14.3% of denials.

Negative evidence in the record

An unfavorable exam or a negative nexus opinion often sits in the same record as favorable evidence, and the Board weighs them against each other. So these rows show how often PTSD was still granted when the record contained the negative item, not that the item helped.

In the recordDecisionsGranted when presentWhen absentDifference
Negative nexus opinion27,12347.1%53.9%−6.8 pts
Unfavorable VA exam56,79148.4%65.6%−17.2 pts

Conditions claimed secondary to PTSD

Other conditions veterans claimed as caused or aggravated by PTSD, with how often the Board granted them.

Why the Board granted or denied PTSD

Most common reasons in grants

  1. Current diagnosis established1,226
  2. Symptoms approximated 70% rating criteria356
  3. Occupational and social impairment with deficiencies in most areas337
  4. Symptoms met criteria for 70% rating218
  5. Symptoms approximated 70% criteria207
  6. Symptoms approximated criteria for 70% rating206
  7. Holistic analysis of symptoms considered200
  8. Symptoms approximated total occupational and social impairment181

Most common reasons in denials

  1. Preponderance of the evidence against the claim2,008
  2. No current diagnosis1,675
  3. Service records negative or silent605
  4. Symptoms did not meet criteria for 100% rating400
  5. VA examiner: less likely than not related to service348
  6. Current diagnosis established337
  7. Symptoms did not meet criteria for 70% rating315
  8. No gross impairment in thought processes or communication261

Numbers are decisions that gave the reason. Reasons are short phrases extracted by AI from each decision; common wordings of the same reason are grouped. Benefit of the doubt is reported above.

Recent PTSD decisions

Granted

Citation Nr. A26040453Michael Martin · 2026

Veteran's service records confirm Vietnam service and meritorious award related to hostile operations.; Veteran's reports of stressful events deemed consistent with service and credible.; RO conceded a stressor based on Vietnam service.; Private psychiatric evaluation diagnosed PTSD under DSM-5 criteria and linked it to in-service trauma.; Board resolved reasonable doubt in Veteran's favor to grant PTSD.

Citation Nr. A26040467David Gratz · 2026

Reduction improper as AOJ failed to demonstrate actual improvement in ability to function; Competent and credible evidence weighed against finding material improvement; Restoration of prior rating warranted due to VA's failure to meet burden of proof

Citation Nr. A26040477J. T. Hutcheson · 2026

AOJ favorable finding of conceded stressor; Prior PTSD diagnoses in VA treatment records; Private psychological evaluation opined nexus to military stressors; Veteran's statements corroborated combat events; Evidence in equipoise regarding onset during service; Benefit of the doubt applied

Denied

Citation Nr. 26005108William H. Donnelly · 2026

Symptoms prior to June 3, 2014, did not more closely approximate criteria for a rating higher than 50 percent.; Symptoms from June 3, 2014, to January 6, 2017, warranted a 70 percent rating, but not higher.; Symptoms from April 13, 2018, to June 30, 2022, warranted a 70 percent rating, but not higher.; Symptoms since November 14, 2022, warranted a 70 percent rating, but not higher.

Citation Nr. A26040554Delyvonne M. Whitehead · 2026

Symptoms did not meet criteria for 50% rating; Veteran generally functioned satisfactorily; Medication and therapy improved symptoms

Citation Nr. A26040588Steven D. Reiss · 2026

Symptoms more closely approximate occupational and social impairment with deficiencies in most areas.; Evidence persuasively against total occupational and social impairment.; Criteria for 100 percent rating are overwhelmingly absent.

Rules that apply to PTSD claims

Research your PTSD case

Narrow by year, judge, evidence or secondary condition, read the decisions, and export a research memo.

Open VA Law Explorer

How these numbers are calculated

  • Rates count decisions in which the Board decided a PTSD issue, by the outcome of that issue. Other issues in the same decision can have different outcomes.
  • “Granted on the merits” leaves out remands and dismissals. “All conditions” is the grant share across every condition issue in the data.
  • The data comes from CaseScribe's AI extraction of public BVA decisions (2017–2026) and can contain errors. It is updated automatically as new decisions are added.