How to Use BVA Decision Search

BVA Decision Search lets you read and count real Board of Veterans' Appeals decisions. You can find cases on your condition, see grant and denial rates, and build simple charts. This guide walks through both views, every field, and the chart builder, in plain words. Everything here describes what the Board has already decided. It is research, not a prediction, and not legal advice.

What This Tool Does, and the Two Views

The tool searches the full text of hundreds of thousands of published Board decisions. You can use it to read example cases, to see outcome rates, or to build a chart that compares groups. It opens in the Simple view by default. A toggle at the top switches you to the Advanced view.

  • Simple: plain-language questions grouped into four collapsible sections, Secondary conditions and Aggravation, Statistics by Condition, Deeper questions, and Decision Text and specific scenarios. Open a section, pick a question, type your condition, and the tool sets up the search for you. Best if you are new or want a fast answer.
  • Advanced: the full form with every field and the chart builder. Best when you want exact control over the search.
The Simple view of BVA Decision Search. At the top, a Simple and Advanced toggle with Simple selected, and Decisions pills reading Modern Era Only (2019 to present) and All decisions (1995 - 2026). Below are four collapsible sections with gold titles, each with an Expand or Collapse label: Secondary conditions and Aggravation, Statistics by Condition, Deeper questions, and Decision Text and specific scenarios. The first section is expanded, showing a question with a condition input box and a Search button.

The Simple view. Open a section, pick a question, type your condition, and run it.

Both views search the same decisions and use the same data. Simple is a faster front door to the Advanced form. You can switch at any time. Your choice is remembered for next visit.

You need a free account to search. Board decisions are public and the search stays free. The account only stops bots from overloading the index. We never sell your data, and your searches stay private to your account.

The Three Advanced Modes

In the Advanced view, a row of buttons near the top sets what the tool shows. Pick one, then run your search.

  • BVA decisions: a list of real cases that match. Each result links to the full decision text. Use this to read how the Board handled a situation like yours.
  • Statistics: the outcome numbers for one condition. It shows the grant, denial, and remand split, plus how often things like a private nexus letter or a hearing appeared. Use this for a quick read on one condition.
  • Explore (build a chart): a chart builder. You choose what to group by and what number to measure, and the tool returns a sorted table. Use this to compare judges, years, theories, or conditions.

Statistics and Explore count decisions. BVA decisions lists them. If you want to read cases, pick BVA decisions. If you want numbers, pick Statistics or Explore.

Every Search Field, Explained

These fields appear on the Advanced form, not the Simple view. You can use one or many. The more you fill in, the narrower your results. A few fields show only in the BVA decisions mode. Statistics and Explore hide Outcome, Branch, and the whole More filters panel because they read issue-level data.

  • Search box: free text. Type a word, a phrase, or a case name. Put a phrase in quotes to match it exactly, like "effective date". This searches the full text of decisions and is the field to use for keywords and case law.
  • Condition: type a condition name like PTSD, or a diagnostic code like 9411, and pick from the list. This limits results to decisions that ruled on that condition.
  • Secondary to: the primary condition. Use this to find cases claimed as secondary to, or aggravated by, the condition you type. Example: type diabetes to find conditions claimed secondary to diabetes.
  • Outcome: grant, denial, remand, mixed, or unknown. Limits results to that result.
  • Branch: the service branch, such as Army or Navy.
  • How claimed: the legal theory, such as direct, secondary, aggravation, presumptive, increased rating, effective date, TDIU, or CUE. This is how the claim was framed.
  • Appeals system: AMA-era only (2019 and later), Legacy (before 2019), or all. The Appeals Modernization Act changed the rules in 2019, so this filter keeps the two systems apart.
  • Sort by: relevance, newest first, or oldest first. Relevance puts the best text match on top.

More filters

Open the More filters panel for extra controls, grouped into sets.

Where to find these: More filters lives in the Advanced view, in the BVA decisions mode only. Statistics and Explore hide it, and the Simple view does not have it.
  • Representative: the VSO or attorney, such as Disabled American Veterans. Reliable for decisions before 2019. AMA-era decisions do not list the rep in the published document.
  • Appeal type: the docket lane, such as Direct Review, Evidence Submission, Hearing, Higher-Level Review, or Supplemental Claim.
  • Hearing format: videoconference, virtual, Travel Board, Central Office, or DRO.
  • Claim type checkboxes: SMC, survivor or DIC, combat-related, returned from CAVC, and benefit-of-doubt invoked. For TDIU, use How claimed (above) set to TDIU, which matches what the Board actually ruled on.
  • Service event or signal: MST, TBI, POW, substituted appellant, and withdrawn or dismissed.
  • Conflict era: Vietnam, Korea, WWII, Gulf War (1991), OEF/OIF/OND, and Post-9/11.
  • Presumption or exposure: Agent Orange, herbicide, Camp Lejeune, burn pits, PACT Act, radiation, asbestos, and Gulf War illness.

Explore, the Chart Builder

Explore turns the corpus into a sorted table. You set a few dropdowns and the tool counts the decisions for you. Here are the controls.

The Explore chart-builder controls in the Advanced view. Dropdowns for Group by, Segment by, Measure, Min volume, Sort by, and Show top, each with a short plain-language note underneath explaining what it does.

The Explore controls. Each dropdown has a short note under it.

  • Group by: the buckets your results are split into. You get one row per bucket. Pick one of these:
    • Condition (DC code): one row per diagnostic code that was claimed.
    • Primary condition (secondary to / aggravated by): one row per primary condition that the claimed condition was tied to as a secondary or an aggravation.
    • Legal theory: one row per way the claim was framed, such as direct, secondary, aggravation, presumptive, increased rating, effective date, TDIU, or CUE.
    • Medical opinion language: one row per strength of the nexus opinion, such as supportive, at least as likely as not, speculative, or none.
    • Nexus opinion source: one row per source of the medical opinion, such as a private doctor, a VA C&P exam, both, or none.
    • Claim type: one row per type of claim, such as service connection or increased rating.
    • Missing element (denials): among denied issues only, one row per element the Board found missing, such as no current diagnosis, no in-service event, or no nexus.
    • Representation: one row per representative type, such as an attorney, a VSO like DAV or VFW, a state agency, or pro se.
    • Judge: one row per Board judge.
    • Service branch: one row per branch, such as Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps, or Coast Guard.
    • Year: one row per decision year.
    • Hearing held: two rows, cases with a Board hearing and cases without one.
  • Segment by: optional. It splits each bucket again into columns, so you can compare side by side. Leave it on none for a simple list. The choices are the same kind of dimensions as Group by, shown as columns:
    • None: no columns. You get a simple one-column list.
    • Legal theory: a column per way the claim was framed.
    • Medical opinion language: a column per strength of the nexus opinion.
    • Nexus opinion source: a column per source of the medical opinion.
    • Claim type: a column per type of claim.
    • Year: a column per decision year, good for trends over time.
    • Service branch: a column per branch of service.
    • Hearing held: two columns, with a hearing and without.
    • Condition (DC code): a column per diagnostic code.
    • Primary condition (secondary to / aggravated by): a column per primary condition the claim was tied to.
  • Measure: the number shown for each bucket. There are six. See the list below.
  • Min volume: hides buckets with fewer than this many decisions. A higher number drops thin, noisy groups. Raise it when small samples clutter the chart.
  • Sort by: the order of the rows. By grant rate puts the highest rate on top. By volume puts the biggest groups on top.
  • Show top: how many rows to show after sorting.

The six measures

  • Grant rate: the share of decided cases that were granted, out of granted plus denied.
  • Volume: a plain count of how many decisions fell in the bucket.
  • Remand rate: the share of cases that were sent back for more work.
  • Private-nexus lift: how much the grant rate changed when the file had a private medical opinion, compared to when it did not.
  • Representation lift: how much the grant rate changed when the veteran had a representative, compared to going it alone.
  • Time to decision: the median number of months from the start of the appeal to the Board's decision.
Lift means a difference, not a cause. A positive lift means cases with that feature were granted at a higher rate in the past. It does not prove the feature caused the grant. Other facts differ between those cases too.

Recipes: Combining the Controls

Here are common questions and how to set them up, step by step. Each one ends with a picture of the filled-in form so you can copy it. Set the Appeals system to AMA-era for modern results.

What gets claimed as secondary to a condition I already have?

This is the one most veterans want. Start from a condition you are already service-connected for and see what others commonly claim off it, so you can spot issues you may be able to claim too. The example below uses diabetes.

  1. Open the Advanced view, then click the Explore button.
  2. In the Secondary to box, type the primary condition, like diabetes. Leave the Condition box empty.
  3. Set Group by to Condition (DC code).
  4. Set Measure to Volume and Sort by to Volume.
  5. For modern results, set Appeals system to AMA-era only.
  6. Click Build chart.
The Explore form filled for this recipe, with the changed fields highlighted. Group by is set to Condition (DC code), Measure and Sort by are Volume, the Secondary to box reads diabetes, and Appeals system is AMA-era only. Below the form, a results table lists the conditions most often claimed secondary to diabetes, with the most common at the top.

The Explore form set up for this question, with the fields you change highlighted, and the results below.

What you get: one row for each condition claimed secondary to that primary, with the most common at the top.

What is my condition most often claimed secondary to?

The reverse view. Start from your condition and see which primary conditions it is most often linked to. The example below uses sleep apnea.

  1. Open the Advanced view, then click the Explore button.
  2. In the Condition box, type your condition, like sleep apnea.
  3. Set How claimed to Secondary to.
  4. Set Group by to Primary condition (secondary to / aggravated by).
  5. Set Measure to Volume and Sort by to Volume.
  6. For modern results, set Appeals system to AMA-era only.
  7. Click Build chart.
The Explore form filled for this recipe, with the changed fields highlighted. Group by is set to Primary condition (secondary to or aggravated by), Measure and Sort by are Volume, the Condition box reads sleep apnea, How claimed is Secondary to, and Appeals system is AMA-era only. Below the form, a results table lists the primary conditions sleep apnea is most often claimed secondary to, with the most common at the top.

The Explore form set up for this question, with the fields you change highlighted, and the results below.

What you get: one row for each primary condition, with the most common at the top.

Does the strength of the medical opinion change the odds?

A nexus opinion is a doctor's statement linking your condition to service. This shows the grant rate for each strength of opinion. The example below uses PTSD.

  1. Open the Advanced view, then click the Explore button.
  2. In the Condition box, type your condition, like PTSD.
  3. Set Group by to Medical opinion language.
  4. Set Measure to Grant rate and Sort by to Grant rate.
  5. For modern results, set Appeals system to AMA-era only.
  6. Click Build chart.
The Explore form filled for this recipe, with the changed fields highlighted. Group by is set to Medical opinion language, Measure and Sort by are Grant rate, the Condition box reads PTSD, and Appeals system is AMA-era only. Below the form, a results table lists each kind of medical opinion with its grant rate.

The Explore form set up for this question, with the fields you change highlighted, and the results below.

What you get: one row for each kind of opinion, such as "at least as likely as not" next to "no opinion," with the grant rate beside each. Read it as a pattern in past cases, not a promise about yours.

When this condition is denied, what was missing?

Service connection needs three things: a current diagnosis, an in-service event, and a nexus that links them. This shows which one the Board most often found missing in denials. The example below uses PTSD.

  1. Open the Advanced view, then click the Explore button.
  2. In the Condition box, type your condition, like PTSD.
  3. Set Group by to Missing element (denials).
  4. Set Measure to Volume and Sort by to Volume.
  5. For modern results, set Appeals system to AMA-era only.
  6. Click Build chart.
The Explore form filled for this recipe, with the changed fields highlighted. Group by is set to Missing element (denials), Measure and Sort by are Volume, the Condition box reads PTSD, and Appeals system is AMA-era only. Below the form, a results table lists each missing element by how often it was the gap in denials.

The Explore form set up for this question, with the fields you change highlighted, and the results below.

What you get: one row for each missing element, such as no current diagnosis or no nexus, with the most common at the top.

Modern Decisions vs Older Ones

Prefer decisions from 2019 and later. VA regulations and court rulings change over time, so an old decision may rest on rules that no longer apply. The Appeals Modernization Act took effect in February 2019 and reshaped how appeals work. Newer decisions reflect today's law more closely.

  • In the Simple view: the Decisions pills at the top set this. Modern Era Only (2019 to present) is on by default; switch to All decisions (1995 - 2026) to include older ones.
  • In the Advanced view: use the Appeals system filter for AMA-era only, Legacy, or all. You can also set Year from and Year to for a tighter window.
Watch the sample size. When you limit to modern decisions, a rare condition may have only a handful of cases. A grant rate from a tiny sample is noisy. If the count is small, widen the years or read the cases instead of trusting the percentage.

Frequently Asked Questions

Do I need an account to search?
Yes, a free account. Board decisions are public and the search stays free. The account only stops bots from overloading the search index. You can sign in with Google, Apple, or an email and password. We never sell your data, and your searches stay private to your account.
What is the difference between Statistics and Explore?
Statistics gives a quick outcome summary for one condition: the grant, denial, and remand split plus a few common factors. Explore is a chart builder where you choose what to group by and what to measure, so you can compare judges, years, theories, or conditions side by side.
How do I find what my condition is often claimed secondary to?
In Simple, pick the secondary-conditions question and type your condition. In Advanced, use Explore: set your condition, set How claimed to Secondary to, and group by the primary condition. The chart lists the most common links by volume.
Why should I limit to decisions from 2019 and later?
VA rules and court rulings change. The Appeals Modernization Act reshaped appeals in February 2019. Decisions from before then may follow rules that no longer apply, so modern decisions reflect today's law more closely. Turn the Modern switch off only when you want the full history.
Does a high grant rate mean my claim will be granted?
No. The rates count past decisions for a group. They are not a forecast. Each appeal is decided on its own facts and evidence. Use the numbers for research and pattern-spotting, not as a prediction.
What does private-nexus lift mean?
It is how much the grant rate differed between cases that had a private medical opinion and cases that did not. A positive lift means the cases with a private opinion were granted at a higher rate in the past. It shows a difference, not a cause, because other facts differ between those cases too.

Related Tools and Guides

BVA Decision Search
the tool itself, search and chart real Board decisions.
Per-Judge Analytics
grant, denial, and remand rates for each Board judge.
BVA Insights
what moves a Board decision, drawn from the full corpus.

Disclaimer: BVA decisions are not binding precedent. Each appeal is decided on its own facts and evidence. Use this tool for research and pattern-spotting, not as legal advice, and not as a prediction of any individual claim. For help with your claim, find a VA-accredited representative.