Federal civilian · Moraph software

Veterans Benefits Claims Automator

Bring service records and claimed conditions together, and show raters where a presumption may apply

Book a demonstrationRequest a technical briefingFactsheet

Overview

What you are buying

The Veterans Benefits Claims Automator digitizes military service records and claim evidence, and organizes them into a claim file a rater can work from. Rule logic maintained by your policy staff compares each claimed condition with the veteran's service history and flags where a presumption of service connection may apply, with the evidence behind each flag. Every proposal is decided by a person, and every step keeps its reasoning for quality review and oversight.

The problem it solves

Disability compensation claims depend on matching a veteran's claimed conditions to their service: where and when they served, what they were exposed to, and what their records show. Much of that evidence arrives as scanned paper, spread across service treatment records, personnel files and private medical records. Claims processors spend their time finding and reading pages rather than weighing evidence, presumptive provisions that change with new legislation are applied from memory and reference guides, and when a decision is questioned on appeal or in a quality review, the path from evidence to rating is hard to reconstruct.

  • Service and medical evidence arrives as large scanned files that must be read page by page
  • Presumptive provisions change with legislation and are applied inconsistently
  • Development requests for missing evidence are tracked by hand
  • The link between evidence, rule and decision is hard to show on appeal or review

Who uses it

  • Agencies and offices that adjudicate veterans' disability compensation claims
  • Veterans service representatives who develop claims and gather evidence
  • Rating specialists who decide service connection and evaluations
  • Policy and procedures staff who maintain presumptive rules as law changes
  • Quality assurance staff and oversight bodies who review decisions

Requirements it supports

Title 38, U.S. Code, Chapter 11 (Compensation for Service-Connected Disability or Death)38 CFR Part 3 (Adjudication), including presumptive service connection at 3.307 to 3.32038 CFR Part 4 (Schedule for Rating Disabilities)Sergeant First Class Heath Robinson Honoring our Promise to Address Comprehensive Toxics (PACT) Act of 2022Duty to assist (38 U.S.C. 5103A)Privacy Act of 1974 (5 U.S.C. 552a)

The product supports these requirements; meeting them remains your organization’s responsibility.

See how it works

A short walkthrough

Illustrative screens with fictional sample data. They show the workflow, not any client’s data or configuration, and the layout of the product itself differs. A live demonstration uses the product with sample data.

  1. Step 1

    The claims queue

    Staff start from a queue of claims by stage, with the number of conditions, documents and open development tasks on each.

    ClaimClaimantStageConditionsOpen developmentAge
    CL-88213Veteran 40217 (fictional)Ready for decision4038 days
    CL-88190Veteran 51934 (fictional)Development22 overdue52 days
    CL-88175Veteran 30018 (fictional)Mapping review6121 days
    CL-88162Veteran 77245 (fictional)Records check309 days
    CL-88149Veteran 62801 (fictional)Development1144 days
    Staff start from a queue of claims by stage, with the number of conditions, documents and open development tasks on each.

  2. Step 2

    The service timeline

    Service periods, locations and duties from personnel records on one view, each linked to the page it came from.

    Veteran 40217 (fictional) · Service history

    Branch
    Example branch of service
    Periods of service
    2 periods on file
    Locations
    3 recorded, 1 within a presumptive location list
    Duties
    Vehicle mechanic (sample)
    Source documents
    Separation document, personnel file

    Items to check

    • Second period dates differ between two documents
    • One location taken from a handwritten page
    • No record of deployment orders in the file
    Service periods, locations and duties from personnel records on one view, each linked to the page it came from.

  3. Step 3

    Rule results for each condition

    Each claimed condition shows whether a presumptive rule may apply, which rule, and what is still missing.

    Condition claimedDiagnosis foundRule checkedResultEvidence pages
    Condition A (sample)Yes, 2 sourcesPresumptive list, location-based (sample rule v3)Possible presumptive match14, 212
    Condition B (sample)Yes, 1 sourceChronic disease within one year of separationOnset date unclear88
    Condition C (sample)NoNot applicableNeeds developmentNone
    Condition D (sample)Yes, 1 sourceDirect service connectionNo presumption; in-service event found41, 63
    Each claimed condition shows whether a presumptive rule may apply, which rule, and what is still missing.

  4. Step 4

    Why a match was proposed

    A proposed match explains itself: the rule, its citation and effective date, and the service facts and diagnosis it relied on.

    Condition A (sample) · Possible presumptive match

    Rule
    Sample rule v3, location-based presumption
    Rule citation
    As recorded in the rule library
    Rule effective from
    Shown from the approved rule version
    Service fact
    Service at a listed location during the covered period
    Diagnosis
    Found in private medical record, page 212

    Rule criteria

    • Served at a listed location: met (personnel file, page 14)
    • Served during covered dates: met
    • Diagnosed condition on the rule's list: met (page 212)
    A proposed match explains itself: the rule, its citation and effective date, and the service facts and diagnosis it relied on.

  5. Step 5

    Development in progress

    Requests for missing evidence are tracked on the claim, with who sent them and what came back.

    Claim CL-88190 · Veteran 51934 (fictional)

    1. Gap found: no diagnosis for Condition C (sample)System
    2. Examination request proposedSystem
    3. Examination request reviewed and sentVeterans service representative
    4. Private records request sent to Example Health Clinic (fictional)Veterans service representative
    5. !Private records request past follow-up dateSystem
    6. Follow-up letter sentVeterans service representative
    Requests for missing evidence are tracked on the claim, with who sent them and what came back.

  6. Step 6

    Testing a rule change

    Before a new rule version is used, policy staff run it against decided claims and review what it would have changed.

    RuleVersionClaims testedSame resultDifferent resultStatus
    Location-based presumption (sample)v4 draft32030119 to reviewTesting
    Chronic disease within one year (sample)v24104100Approved
    Herbicide exposure list (sample)v3 draft1501464Awaiting approval
    Before a new rule version is used, policy staff run it against decided claims and review what it would have changed.

Workflows

The principal workflows

  1. Digitize

    Service treatment records, personnel files, private medical records and claim forms are scanned or received electronically, read with optical character recognition, and indexed by document type, date and source.

    • Documents arrive from intake, mail scanning or electronic submission
    • Pages are read and classified by document type and source
    • Dates, units, locations and diagnoses are extracted and linked to the page they came from
    • Low-confidence pages are routed to a records technician to check
    • The claim file is assembled with an index and search

  2. Map

    Each claimed condition is compared with the veteran's service history using rule logic for presumptive provisions, so the claim file shows which conditions may meet a presumption and which need further development.

    • Service periods, locations and duties are built into a service timeline
    • Claimed conditions are matched to diagnoses found in the evidence
    • Presumptive rules check service dates, locations and condition lists
    • Each condition is marked as a possible presumptive match, needing development or not matched, with the rule and pages cited
    • Missing evidence is listed for development

  3. Develop

    Where evidence is missing, the system prepares development tasks such as records requests and examination requests, and tracks them until the evidence arrives or the request is closed.

    • Development tasks proposed from the gaps the mapping found
    • Veterans service representative reviews, edits and sends each request
    • Responses and new evidence are added to the claim file
    • Mapping is re-run when new evidence arrives
    • Claim is marked ready for decision when development is complete

  4. Decide

    The rater reviews the evidence summary and the rule results, decides service connection and evaluation for each condition, and records the reasons. Quality reviewers sample decisions against the same evidence.

    • Rater opens the claim with the evidence summary and service timeline
    • Rater accepts, changes or rejects each proposed finding, with reasons
    • Decision and reasons for each condition recorded
    • Decision passes to the next step in your agency's process for authorization and notice
    • Completed claims sampled for quality review

Roles and permissions

Who does what in the product

Each role below is a starting point. During implementation we set them up to match your teams, and every action anyone takes is recorded in the audit trail.

Records technician

Claims assistant, records technician, intake processor

Makes sure the digitized claim file is complete and readable before it is relied on.

Sees

  • Documents in their queue with the classification and extracted facts for each page
  • Pages flagged for low-confidence reading
  • The claim file index

Does

  • Checks and corrects document classification
  • Corrects extracted dates, locations and diagnoses, with the change recorded
  • Merges, splits or marks duplicate documents
  • Marks the file as checked so mapping can run

Cannot

  • Accept or reject proposed findings
  • Send development requests
  • Change rules
Approvals
Their corrections are recorded and visible to later reviewers; nothing they do needs separate approval.
Notified about
New documents in their queue and pages flagged for low-confidence reading.

Veterans service representative

Veterans service representative, claims examiner, development specialist

Develops each claim so it has the evidence needed for a decision.

Sees

  • Claims assigned to them or their team, with the service timeline and evidence summary
  • Rule results and the evidence gaps they identify
  • Development tasks and their status

Does

  • Reviews proposed development tasks and edits them
  • Sends records and examination requests
  • Adds incoming evidence to the claim file
  • Re-runs mapping when new evidence arrives
  • Marks the claim ready for decision

Cannot

  • Decide service connection or evaluations
  • Change rules or rule versions
  • Close development on a claim without recording why
Approvals
Their work is taken up by a rating specialist; requests follow your agency's own approval steps where these apply.
Notified about
New claims assigned to them, development tasks past their follow-up date, and new evidence received.

Rating specialist

Rating veterans service representative, rating specialist, decision review officer

Decides service connection and evaluations for each claimed condition, with reasons.

Sees

  • Claims ready for decision, with the evidence summary and service timeline
  • Proposed findings with the rule, facts and pages behind each
  • Earlier decisions on the same claimant, where their role allows
  • Rule library entries and their citations

Does

  • Accepts, changes or rejects each proposed finding, with reasons
  • Records the decision and evaluation for each condition
  • Returns a claim for further development
  • Adds notes for the next step in the process

Cannot

  • Change rules or approve rule versions
  • Edit extracted evidence without the change being recorded
  • Review their own decisions in quality review
Approvals
Decisions follow your agency's authorization steps, which can require a second signature for the cases you choose.
Notified about
Claims assigned for decision and claims returned to them after quality review.

Quality reviewer

Quality review specialist, systematic technical accuracy reviewer

Checks a sample of completed claims so the agency can show decisions are accurate and consistent.

Sees

  • Samples of completed claims drawn for review
  • The proposal, the rater's decision and reasons, and the evidence
  • Quality review results and where reviewers and raters disagree

Does

  • Draws samples by team, station, condition or rule
  • Records whether each decision was supported, with comments
  • Returns claims for correction under your procedures
  • Tracks findings until resolved

Cannot

  • Change the original decision or notes
  • Review their own work
  • Change rules
Approvals
Their findings go to the quality program lead, who decides on corrections and training.
Notified about
New review samples and corrections completed on items they returned.

Rules and policy analyst

Policy analyst, procedures analyst, legal and policy staff

Keeps the rule library aligned with law, regulation and agency guidance, with tested and approved versions.

Sees

  • The rule library, each rule's citation, effective dates and version history
  • Rule test results against decided claims
  • How often raters accept, change or reject each rule's proposals

Does

  • Drafts new rule versions when law or guidance changes
  • Runs rule tests against decided claims
  • Documents differences and recommends approval
  • Retires rules that no longer apply, with an end date

Cannot

  • Approve their own rule version; a second designated approver is required
  • Decide claims
  • See claim files beyond those used in tests unless your agency grants it
Approvals
Every rule version is approved by a designated policy approver before it is used on claims.
Notified about
Rule tests completed, approval decisions, and rules with high rates of rater changes.

Auditor or oversight reviewer (read-only)

Internal auditor, inspector general staff, oversight reviewer (under temporary access)

Reviews claims, decisions and rule history without being able to change anything.

Sees

  • Claims and decisions within the scope granted
  • Rule library history and test evidence
  • Quality review results
  • The audit trail

Does

  • Searches and reads records within their scope
  • Exports records and reports, with each export logged
  • Leaves review notes where enabled

Cannot

  • Change, decide or approve anything
  • See records outside the scope and dates granted
  • Keep access after it expires
Approvals
Their access is approved by an agency official and an administrator, with a scope and an end date.
Notified about
Nothing by default; access granted and expiring is confirmed to the person who approved it.

Administrator

Application administrator, IT systems administrator

Manages users, roles and configuration without access to the substance of claims.

Sees

  • Users, roles, teams and stations
  • Queue and assignment settings
  • The record of permission changes

Does

  • Adds and removes users, or maps them from single sign-on groups
  • Assigns roles, teams and stations
  • Maintains queues, task types and assignment rules
  • Runs access review reports

Cannot

  • Open claim files
  • Grant themselves a claims or rules role without a second approver
  • Change or approve rules
Approvals
Role changes that grant access to claim files are approved by the responsible program manager.
Notified about
Access reviews due and accounts unused for a period your policy sets.

Permissions at a glance

ActionRecords techVSRRaterQA reviewerRules analystAuditorAdmin
Correct document classification and extracted factsOwn work onlyOwn work onlyNo accessNo accessNo accessNo accessNo access
Confirm the service timelineNo accessOwn work onlyOwn work onlyNo accessNo accessNo accessNo access
Send development requestsNo accessOwn work onlyNo accessNo accessNo accessNo accessNo access
Mark a claim ready for decisionNo accessOwn work onlyNo accessNo accessNo accessNo accessNo access
Accept or reject proposed findingsNo accessNo accessOwn work onlyNo accessNo accessNo accessNo access
Record decisions and evaluationsNo accessNo accessOwn work onlyView onlyNo accessView onlyNo access
Draft and test rule versionsNo accessNo accessView onlyNo accessFullView onlyNo access
Approve a rule versionNo accessNo accessNo accessNo accessApprovesNo accessNo access
Record quality review findingsNo accessNo accessView onlyFullNo accessView onlyNo access
Export claim recordsNo accessOwn work onlyOwn work onlyOwn work onlyNo accessView onlyNo access
View audit trailNo accessNo accessNo accessView onlyView onlyView onlyView only
Manage users and rolesNo accessNo accessNo accessNo accessNo accessNo accessFull
  • Full
  • Own work only
  • Approves
  • View only
  • No access

How access is controlled

  • Rule versions pass a second person: the analyst who drafts a version cannot approve it, and approvers are designated by your agency. Quality reviewers never review their own decisions.
  • Roles can be limited by station, team or claim type, so staff see only the claims they are responsible for unless your administrator grants wider access.
  • Every change to a user's role or access is recorded in the audit trail, and access review reports list each person's roles for periodic certification.
  • Staff sign in through your agency's identity provider, and roles can follow its groups. Auditors and oversight reviewers get temporary read-only access with a defined scope and an end date.

Features

What it does

Record digitization

Scanned and electronic records are read, classified by document type and indexed, with each extracted fact linked back to its page.

Service timeline

Periods of service, units, locations and duties from personnel records shown on one timeline, with the source of each entry.

Presumptive rule library

Rules for presumptive provisions, each documented with its legal citation, effective dates, conditions and service criteria.

Explained rule results

Every possible presumptive match shows the rule applied, the service facts and diagnoses it relied on, and the pages they came from.

Rule versioning

When law or regulation changes, policy staff add a new rule version with its effective date, test it and approve it before it is used.

Evidence summary

A per-condition summary of the diagnoses, treatment and in-service events found in the file, for the rater to verify.

Development tracking

Records and examination requests proposed from evidence gaps, with status and follow-up dates tracked on the claim.

Rater decision record

The rater's decision on each condition and the reasons, recorded beside the proposal so any difference is visible.

Quality review sampling

Sample completed claims for second review, record findings, and see where reviewers and raters disagree.

Workload queues

Claims queued by stage, priority indicators your agency sets and age, with assignment rules by team or station.

Claim file search

Search the full claim file by term, date, document type or condition, with results linked to the page.

Audit trail

Every view, extraction correction, proposal, decision and export recorded with the person and time.

Integrations

How it connects to your systems

Connects toHowWhat flows
Claims and case managementClaim establishment data and status exchanged with your agency's claims processing system, mapped during implementation.In: claim, claimant and contention data. Out: development status, proposed findings and decisions for your process.
Document repositories and scanningDocuments received from your mail scanning vendor or electronic folder, by scheduled transfer or API.In: scanned images and electronic documents with their metadata.
Service personnel and treatment recordsService records available to your agency through its existing exchanges with the military services, received as documents or structured data.In: personnel and service treatment records as your agency receives them.
Examination schedulingExamination requests approved by a veterans service representative passed to your examination scheduling process.Out: approved examination requests. In: examination reports when complete.
Single sign-onStaff sign in through your agency's identity provider, including PIV-based authentication where your provider supports it.In: user identity and group membership for role assignment.
Work APIClaim, development and decision data available to your agency's data warehouse and reporting tools through the Moraph Work API.Out: claim stages, development tasks, proposals, decisions and timing.

Each integration is confirmed in discovery and specified in the design. See how an engagement progresses.

Security and privacy

How your data is protected

Records kept in the United States

Claim files and decision data are hosted in the United States region.

Cleared support lane

Support tickets from federal clients are routed only to US citizens with active security clearances.

Access by role and station

Staff see only the claims for their role, team or station; access to sensitive files can be limited further.

Encryption under controlled keys

Client data is encrypted with keys our staff cannot access without explicit, time-bound authorization.

Complete audit trail

Every view, correction, proposal, decision and export is recorded with the user and time, and cannot be edited.

Independent audits

Moraph's controls are covered by its SOC 2 Type II report and ISO/IEC 27001 certification, available through the Trust Center.

Company-wide controls, independent audits (SOC 2 Type II and ISO/IEC 27001) and data residency are described in our Trust Center, where you can request the evidence pack.

Reporting

What you can report on

10 standard reports, grouped by who uses them. Each shows who it is for, how it can be broken down, how it is delivered and what it is used for. The data behind them is also available to your own reporting tools.

Operational

Claims by stage and age

For team leads and station managers

Every open claim with its stage, age, assignee and open development, sorted so the oldest work is visible first.

Break down by
Station, Team, Stage, Age band, Claim type
Delivered as
Live dashboard; CSV export
Used for
Rebalancing workload and finding claims that are stalled.

Development tracking

For veterans service representatives and team leads

Development requests sent, outstanding and past their follow-up date, with the claim each belongs to.

Break down by
Request type, Recipient type, Representative, Follow-up status
Delivered as
Live dashboard; scheduled email
Used for
Following up on missing evidence before claims stall.

Records review queue

For records technicians and team leads

Documents and pages flagged for low-confidence reading or classification, by claim and age.

Break down by
Document type, Source, Age, Technician
Delivered as
Live dashboard
Used for
Keeping digitization checks from holding up claims.

Management

Throughput and inventory

For program managers and leadership

Claims received, completed and pending over time, and where in the process inventory is building.

Break down by
Period, Station, Claim type, Stage
Delivered as
Live dashboard; PDF; CSV export
Used for
Planning staffing and reporting on the claims program.

Proposal outcomes by rule

For program managers and rules and policy analysts

How often raters accepted, changed or rejected the findings each rule proposed, with the reasons recorded.

Break down by
Rule, Rule version, Station, Period
Delivered as
Live dashboard; CSV export
Used for
Finding rules that need review and checking consistency across stations.

Time in stage

For program managers

How long claims spend in each stage, from receipt to ready for decision to decided.

Break down by
Stage, Station, Claim type, Period
Delivered as
Live dashboard; CSV export
Used for
Showing where process changes would make the most difference.

Quality and oversight

Quality review results

For quality program lead and station managers

Sampled claims, the reviewer's finding, and where reviewers disagreed with the decision.

Break down by
Station, Rater, Condition type, Finding type, Period
Delivered as
Live dashboard; CSV export
Used for
Targeting training and evidencing decision accuracy.

Rule library change history

For policy staff, auditors and oversight reviewers

Every rule version with its citation, effective dates, test results, drafter and approver.

Break down by
Rule, Change date, Approver, Change type
Delivered as
Live view; PDF and CSV export
Used for
Showing that each rule used on claims was tested and approved.

Rule test results

For rules and policy analysts and approvers

For each rule test, the decided claims used and where the draft version's result differs from the recorded decision.

Break down by
Rule, Version, Test date, Difference type
Delivered as
Live view; PDF and CSV export
Used for
Deciding whether a rule version is ready to approve.

Audit trail extract

For auditors and oversight reviewers

Who did what, when and why for a selected claim, rule or period, including corrections, decisions and approvals.

Break down by
Record, User, Action, Date range
Delivered as
On request in the product; CSV and PDF export
Used for
Answering audit and oversight requests without assembling evidence by hand.

Exports, access and evidence

  • Any report can be exported to CSV, and summary and evidence reports to PDF; reports can be scheduled to arrive by email for the people entitled to see them.
  • Filters can be saved as personal or team views, and reports that need a different shape can be built in your own tools from the data described below.
  • Claim, development, proposal and decision data is available through the Moraph Work API for your agency's data warehouse or business-intelligence tools.
  • Reports follow each person's role and station: a representative sees their own work, a station manager sees their station, and personal details appear only to people allowed to see the claim file.
  • Oversight reports can be run as of a past date and give the same result each time, and every report run and export is recorded in the audit trail.

Deployment

Where and how it runs

Moraph cloud, United States

Hosted in the United States region, with records kept in the US.

Dedicated environment

A single-tenant environment for agencies that require isolation, scoped in the proposal.

With a managed service

Optionally run alongside a Moraph managed service for administration, integration support and rule library maintenance support.

Security controls, independent audits and data residency are set out in our Trust Center. Engagement models and what drives a quotation are on Working with Moraph.

Implementation

What a rollout involves

The general phases are on Working with Moraph. For this product, they involve the following.

Discovery and process mapping

We map your claims process, stages, hand-offs and the systems that hold claim data, and agree which claim types are in scope first.

Document and data integration

Connections to your scanning, document and claims systems are built and tested. We need sample documents and a contact from each system's team.

Rule library review

Your policy staff review each presumptive rule against current law, regulation and agency guidance, and approve the versions to be used.

Testing on decided claims

Rules and extraction are run on claims your agency has already decided, and the results compared with the recorded decisions before go-live.

Workflow and roles

Queues, assignment rules, development task types, approval steps and roles are configured to match your procedures.

Training and go-live

Records technicians, representatives, raters and reviewers are trained on their own workflows, and the rollout is phased by station or claim type as you choose.

Limitations

What it does not do

Worth knowing before you evaluate it.

  • It proposes; it never decides. Service connection, evaluations and every other finding are made by your rating staff, and the system does not issue decisions or notices.
  • Presumptive rules reflect law and regulation as reviewed and approved by your policy staff. Moraph does not interpret the law for your agency, and rule changes take effect only when you approve them.
  • Extraction from scanned records can miss or misread information, especially handwriting and poor-quality scans. Low-confidence pages are flagged, and staff remain responsible for reviewing the evidence.
  • It does not assign disability percentages on its own. It can show the rating schedule criteria and evidence, but the evaluation is the rater's decision.
  • Moraph holds no FedRAMP authorization for this product. We provide control documentation to support your agency's own authorization decision.
  • It is not a replacement for your agency's system of record for claims, payments or notices; it works alongside them.
  • Appeals processing is not included beyond making the claim file and decision record available.
  • Coverage starts with the claim types and presumptive provisions agreed during implementation; others are added by agreement.

Evaluation checklist

What to test in a demonstration or pilot

Questions worth putting to us, and to any other vendor you are considering.

  1. Run a set of already-decided claims and compare the proposed findings with the recorded decisions
  2. Ask a rater to work a claim from evidence summary to decision and note what they still have to look up elsewhere
  3. Check that every proposed finding cites the rule, the service fact and the page it relied on
  4. Add a test rule version with a new effective date and review the test evidence it produces
  5. Review how low-confidence pages are flagged and corrected
  6. Confirm role separation: who can change rules, who can decide, and who can only view

Questions

Frequently asked questions

Does the system decide claims?

No. It organizes the evidence and shows where a presumptive rule may apply. A rating specialist accepts, changes or rejects each proposed finding, and your agency's process authorizes the decision and issues notice.

How are new presumptive provisions added when the law changes?

Your policy staff add a new rule version with its citation and effective date, test it against decided claims, and approve it. Moraph can help draft and test rule versions, but the decision to use one is your agency's.

Can it read handwritten and poor-quality records?

It attempts to, but accuracy is lower. Pages it reads with low confidence are flagged for a records technician, and every extracted fact links back to the page so staff can check it.

Is it FedRAMP authorized?

No. Moraph holds no FedRAMP authorization for this product. We provide control documentation to support your agency's own authorization decision.

Who owns the claim data?

Your agency does. How it is returned and deleted at the end of the agreement is set out in the contract.

How do we try it before buying?

A demonstration uses fictional claim files. For a deeper evaluation, a pilot can run on claims your agency has already decided, so your raters can compare the system's proposals with the recorded decisions.

Next steps

Evaluate Veterans Benefits Claims Automator

Book a demonstration

See the product working with sample data, focused on your workflows.

Request a demonstration

Request a technical briefing

Architecture, integrations, security and hosting, with our engineers and your technical team.

Request a briefing

Factsheet

This page on two sides, to share with colleagues or add to your evaluation file.

Open the factsheet

Buying through a formal procurement? See How to buy for purchasing routes, accessibility conformance reports and company information. Documentation: Veterans Benefits Claims Automator guides on docs.moraph.com (getting started and security guides are public; setup, administration and integration guides are for client accounts). Support: Veterans Benefits Claims Automator support guide.

Related products