Gun Forums banner
1 - 11 of 11 Posts

· Registered
363 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 · (Edited)
Really short story...

1) I was medically discharged from the Military due to a massive shoulder injury.

2) 8 months into a 6 month total process I'm still waiting on any kind of word, info, yay/nay or a big f-you.

3) The claim is not my's the lack of keeping me up to date that is gets me. I get a one line letter once a month telling me that “We are still processing your application for Compensation.” and maybe get a notice for a doc's appointment...that I get no info at, yet have to go to - period! I wrote them this....

To Whom It May Concern:

I just wanted to enquire about the status of my Claim. I get a letter the first week of every month stating that “We are still processing your application for Compensation.”

But where in the processing is the claim? I’ve been to (2) medical exams, but don’t have any info more than that. Is my claim at the half way point for processing…maybe 75% done? I understand the work load you must have…but don’t understand why I can’t be kept “up-to-date” on the status/progress of said claim.

“We are still processing your application for Compensation.” Could be a number of things…setting on a desk somewhere, in a trash can, lost within a system…or waiting final approval?

Thank you they have 5 working days to respond to this.

I can't wait to see what they say.

Sorry this is me venting more than anything. :(

· Premium Member
4,133 Posts
FWIW the VA was at one time a large dollar value direct client of ours with us working as the prime.
Many of my advisors strongly suggested I not get in on the opportunity nor even to submit a response to their RFI and later RFQ, which they turned around and based on our own RFI response...but that's a whole other story (!).
Anyway 2.5 yrs. of pain, sweat, and much in the way of exasperation we broke ties with them and went our own separate ways.

I have been involved in the federal sector and working directly with govt. agencies for 12 yrs. now amongst a wide array of agencies.
I have to say that of them all and there are some really bad ones out there the Dept. of Veterans Affairs is by far in my mind the most fucked up and worst run agency I've ever had the displeasure to come in to contact with.
Everybody I trust and respect warned me but being as we're a small business and the opportunity was in dollar value was huge I just could not pass it up and at the time it all made sense, on paper.

I since have decided and proclaimed that we will never ever do business with that agency again, period.
They have since then come back knocking at our door twice under new leaderships and from what I understand and hear via our clients nothign has changed but the date.

Good luck in getting your shit worked out.
I personally despise those VA people.

- Janq gets hot around the collar when ever 'VA' comes up in a conversation

· Registered
363 Posts
Discussion Starter · #4 ·
What makes me mad about all this is without going into too much detail, I have to wait to do certain things in my personal and professional life till this claim is done. Some of these things are simple, like just moving to a different state.

My whole life is on hold till I get the yay or nay on this dumb medical claim.

· Registered
363 Posts
Discussion Starter · #6 · Headline homepage said:
The VA on Tuesday acknowledged problems in its award of $3.8 million in bonuses to senior officials who put health care at risk and said it would consider changes to avoid conflicts of interest and improve oversight.

Testifying before a House panel, Veterans Affairs Deputy Secretary Gordon Mansfield insisted the hefty awards were appropriate and necessary to retain hardworking VA employees. But he agreed the process might lack objectivity because members who sit on VA performance review boards -- charged with recommending bonuses for top employees -- all come from within the agency and typically get bonuses themselves.

"I understand the issue you are raising," said Mansfield, when lawmakers asked whether VA should add outsiders to its board to reduce peer pressure on VA employees to take care of their own at the expense of taxpayers. "Bringing some outside influence might make the system better."

Mansfield said VA Secretary Jim Nicholson would consider adding agency outsiders to the VA's review boards. In its last known report on the issue, the Government Accountability Office in 1980 urged departments to include outsiders to add credibility to bonus awards.

"VA remains committed to the statutory imperative of executive bonuses to both reward and to encourage continued excellence in performance. We've got some damn good people," a grim and subdued Mansfield said.

Mansfield spoke as a few members of a veterans advocacy group, Grassroots America, silently held up signs in the hearing room that read, "My 80% disabled son backlogged 1 1/2 years," and "$$ for vets not execs."

The hearing before a House Veterans Affairs subcommittee comes after The Associated Press reported last month that 21 of 32 officials who were VA performance review board members received more than half a million dollars in payments themselves.

Among them: nearly a dozen senior officials who received bonuses ranging up to $33,000. Those officials, however, were involved in crafting a budget that came up $1.3 billion short by repeatedly failing to anticipate needs of growing numbers of veterans returning from Iraq and Afghanistan.

Also rewarded was the deputy undersecretary for benefits, who manages a system with severe backlogs of veterans waiting for disability benefits. The current wait for veterans averages 177 days, nearly two months longer than the VA's strategic goal of 125 days.

"With this backlog, I find it hard to believe reasonable justification existed for awarding some of these bonuses," said Rep. Zack Space, D-Ohio, who elicited the pledge from Mansfield to consider changing the VA's review process. "That money could have been used to help our heroes, not line the pockets of bureaucrats."

Zack Space, D-Ohio, who elicited the pledge from Mansfield to consider changing the VA's review process. "That money could have been used to help our heroes, not line the pockets of bureaucrats."

Earlier in the hearing, government investigators told House members the VA needed to do a better job in linking its bonuses to the department's overall success in treating veterans.

The GAO said confusion still exists in the VA on the proper criteria, and executives based in Washington consistently outpaced their counterparts elsewhere in the size of payments -- $19,439 compared with $15,268 to officials outside Washington.

In a report to the subcommittee, the Office of Personnel Management said its review of VA practices found inconsistency in the awarding of bonuses.

"Discussions within the VA performance review boards should center on measurable results achieved and the awards scoring form ... should more clearly focus on results," said OPM director Linda Springer.

Mansfield expressed concern that the hardworking VA officials might leave for the more profitable private sector if they did not receive bonuses.

That drew fire from lawmakers from both parties, who decried the payments as evidence of improper favoritism and said it would be illegal to award bonuses on anything other than performance. All bonus recommendations must be approved by Nicholson, who declined to testify before the subcommittee.

"When the backlog of claims has been increasing for the past few years, one would not expect the senior-most officials to receive the maximum bonus," said Rep. Harry Mitchell, D-Ariz., who chairs the House subcommittee on oversight. "Indeed, it appears the bonuses in the central office were awarded primarily on the basis of seniority and proximity to the secretary."

Florida Rep. Ginny Brown-Waite, the panel's top Republican, said she wanted to make sure the bonuses were awarded based on VA officials' "actual performance, and not just performance on paper."

"The federal government should not be in the practice of awarding bonuses to people who permit failure on their watch," she said. "It should be limited only to the very best, particularly in time of war."
1 - 11 of 11 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.