Original research

The Theory Gap: How Grant Rates Vary by Legal Theory

The legal theory a claim is argued on, direct, secondary, presumptive, or aggravation, tracks with how often the Board of Veterans' Appeals grants it. Across 2,235,227 decided issues in the published record, secondary service connection was granted at 41.2%, above direct service connection at 36.8%.

41.2%secondary connection
36.8%direct connection
59.3%aggravation

Grant rate by way of establishing service connection

There is more than one way to link a condition to service. A claim can be direct (the condition began in service), secondary (it was caused or worsened by an already service-connected condition), presumptive (the law presumes a link from a qualifying exposure), or by aggravation (service made a pre-existing condition worse). Here is how often the Board granted each, among issues it decided on the merits:

Direct service connection36.8%
1,049,760 decided issues, granted or denied
Secondary service connection41.2%
138,211 decided issues, granted or denied
Presumptive (toxic exposure)29.7%
83,966 decided issues, granted or denied
Aggravation of a condition59.3%
7,626 decided issues, granted or denied
Reading this: secondary connection was granted about 4.4 points more often than direct in the decided record. Aggravation is the highest but the smallest by far. These describe patterns in published Board decisions; they are not a prediction about any individual claim, and the right theory for a claim depends entirely on its facts.

Conditions most often granted on a secondary theory

Among claims argued as secondary service connection, these fifteen conditions had the highest Board grant rate (of at least 500 decided issues each). Several are classic downstream conditions, sleep apnea, migraines, and depression tied to another service-connected disability:

Other claim types, for context

These are a different question, not how to connect a condition to service, but a rating increase, unemployability, an earlier effective date, or correcting a past error. They sit on their own axis and are shown here only for context:

Increased rating30.1%
711,087 decided issues
Earlier effective date34.1%
148,479 decided issues
Unemployability (TDIU)55.8%
81,474 decided issues
Clear and unmistakable error24.7%
14,624 decided issues
Unemployability (TDIU) grants at a high rate at the Board in part because these appeals reach it only after the underlying conditions are already service connected and rated. Do not read these against the service-connection theories above as if they were the same choice.

Methodology

This report aggregates published decisions of the Board of Veterans' Appeals at the issue level. Each decided issue carries the legal theory the Board addressed (direct, secondary, presumptive, aggravation, increased rating, unemployability, effective date, or clear and unmistakable error). Grant rate is granted divided by granted-plus-denied; remanded and dismissed issues are excluded from the rate. The secondary-conditions table is limited to codes with at least 500 decided secondary issues. Data as of July 2026; the underlying figures refresh weekly.

Cite this research

RateMyVSO. (July 2026). The Theory Gap: Grant Rates by Legal Theory Across 2,235,227 Board of Veterans' Appeals Issues. https://ratemyvso.net/dc/theory-report

Free to cite and link with attribution. Figures derived from published Board of Veterans' Appeals decisions.

Educational and encyclopedic only, not legal advice, and not a prediction of any individual claim. Figures describe patterns in published Board decisions. For help with a claim, find a VA-accredited representative.