VA Claims Research & Decision-Support Platform

The only platform that connects VA claims from initial decision to final judgment — and shows what actually wins. Search 1,850,000+ BVA decisions, CAVC appeals, 38 CFR regulations, and M21-1 policy with AI-powered analysis.

Analyze Your BVA Denial

Paste any BVA decision and get a per-issue breakdown, evidence gap analysis, and a draftable argument outline — grounded in 1.85M+ real cases and government sources.

Features

Frequently Asked Questions

Where does the data come from?

All data comes directly from official government sources: BVA decisions from va.gov, CAVC docket from the Court's eFiling system, CFR from the Electronic Code of Federal Regulations, and M21 policy from the VA's KnowVA system.

Is this for veterans or for attorneys?

Both. Veterans can understand their own claims. VSOs, accredited agents, and attorneys get deeper research tools including advanced search, AI-powered case analysis, docket tracking, and alerts.

Why the VA Denies Foot & Ankle Claims: Lessons from 16 BVA Decisions on Pes Planus & Plantar Fasciitis

Analyze 16 BVA decisions on pes planus and plantar fasciitis to understand common denial reasons, winning strategies, and crucial evidence for veterans.

The Big Picture

Navigating the VA claims process for foot and ankle conditions like pes planus (flat feet) and plantar fasciitis can be challenging, as evidenced by a review of 20 recent Board of Veterans' Appeals (BVA) decisions. Our analysis, focusing on 16 relevant cases directly addressing these foot conditions, reveals a significant denial rate of approximately 62.5%. This high denial rate underscores the importance of a well-prepared claim, but it also highlights common pitfalls veterans face. The primary reason for denial often revolves around the lack of a clear link, or 'nexus,' between the foot condition and military service. Many veterans struggle to provide sufficient evidence that their pes planus or plantar fasciitis either began during service or was aggravated by it. This is particularly true for conditions that might manifest years after discharge, making it harder to connect them directly to service events without strong medical opinions. However, the data also offers pathways to success. Approximately 25% of the reviewed cases resulted in a grant of service connection, and another 12.5% were remanded back to the VA for further development, often due to new evidence. A key winning strategy observed was establishing a 'secondary' service connection, where a foot condition is linked to an already service-connected disability. For example, plantar fasciitis might be granted as secondary to service-connected pes planus. This approach can be highly effective when direct service connection is difficult to prove. Furthermore, some denials were for an 'increased rating,' meaning the veteran was already service-connected but sought a higher disability percentage. These denials indicate the challenge of demonstrating sufficient worsening of symptoms and functional limitations to meet the VA's stringent rating criteria. Veterans pursuing increased ratings must provide robust medical evidence detailing the current severity and impact of their condition. Overall, while denials are common, understanding these patterns—especially the need for a strong nexus, the potential for secondary connections, and the importance of comprehensive evidence for increased ratings—can significantly improve a veteran's chances of success. It's not just about having the condition, but about effectively proving its service connection and severity to the VA.

Denial Patterns

What Wins These Claims

Evidence Strategy

Analyze My Denial | Browse All Articles

Research Tools