GN 04440.003 Explanation of Quality Review Terms
In subsection A, we:
Changed information in parentheses to "federal disability processing branches or units".
In subsection B, we:
Changed "case" to "claim" in first sentence.
Added word "needed" prior to "field" in first sentence of second paragraph.
Added word "only" after "pertains" in second sentence of second paragraph to add emphasis.
Added "federal" prior to "quality reviewer" throughout the "NOTE".
Reworded "NOTE" for clarity.
Changed the word "subsequent" in last line of "NOTE" to "second", as that is the correct term.
In subsection C, we:
Added word "federal" prior to "quality reviewer" throughout subsection, as needed.
Used "federal quality reviewer" rather than "we" throughout subsection.
Changed the word "identify" to "classify" in third sentence.
Added "adjudicating component" after word "require" in last sentence to clearly delineate who is responsible for corrections.
Made minor editorial changes to last sentence to improve clarity.
Removed the second use of the word "when" in the second bullet in C.1., as it was unnecessary.
Made minor editorial and punctuation changes to the bullets in C.2. and C.3.
Changed the POMS reference in the last line of C.3. to reflect the recent changes to the technical corrective action (TCA) POMS.
Added the full POMS titles to the last line of C.3.
In subsection D., we:
Added quotation marks around the phrase "de novo" throughout the subsection, including in the title.
Expanded and reworded the definition of "de novo" to improve clarity.
Bolded the words "do not" in the first line of the second paragraph to add emphasis.
In subsection E., we:
Cleaned up the lead in sentence for the POMS reference at the end of the subsection.
In subsection F., we:
Revised sentence to improve flow and clarity.
In subsection G., we:
Revised second sentence of the first paragraph to improve clarity.
Removed CFR reference as it added no real value or additional clarifying information.
Reworded last sentence in subsection regarding POMS reference as it contained an unnecessary word.
In subsection H., we:
Added the phrase "length of the" prior to the word "period" in the second sentence to make verbiage more closely mirror how that phrase is generally written in POMS.
Reworded and shortened the POMS reference in the last line.
In subsection I., we:
Added the word "federal" prior to "quality reviewer" throughout the subsection.
Made the words "reviewer" and "PL" plural.
Changed the reference to "federal review physician/psychologist" to "regional office medical and/or psychological contractors" to more accurately describe the position of these personnel.
In subsection J., we:
Fixed a spacing issue in first bullet.
Changed the first letter of each bullet to a lower case letter.
In subsection K., we:
Added the word "federal" prior to "quality review" and " quality reviewer" throughout subsection, as needed.
Changed the references to "federal MCs and PCs" to "regional office medical and/or psychological contractors".
Added quotation marks around "de novo" in both places where that phrase appears in the first paragraph.
Corrected the explanation of the POMS reference in the second paragraph.
In subsection L., we:
Added the word "disability" prior to the word "determination" in the title of the subsection and throughout the subsection, as needed.
Revised entire paragraph to improve clarity.