Congressional Hearings
A REVIEW OF VA'S VOCATIONAL REHABILITATION AND EMPLOYMENT PROGRAM
Congressional Hearings
SuDoc ClassNumber: Y 4.V 64/3
Congress: House of Representatives
CHRG-115hhrg35489
| AUTHORITYID | CHAMBER | TYPE | COMMITTEENAME |
|---|---|---|---|
| hsvr00 | H | S | Committee on Veterans' Affairs |
[House Hearing, 115 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
A REVIEW OF VA'S VOCATIONAL REHABILITATION AND EMPLOYMENT PROGRAM
=======================================================================
HEARING
BEFORE THE
SUBCOMMITTEE ON ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY
OF THE
COMMITTEE ON VETERANS' AFFAIRS
U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED FIFTEENTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
__________
THURSDAY, MAY 17, 2018
__________
Serial No. 115-61
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Veterans' Affairs
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.govinfo.gov
__________
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
35-489 WASHINGTON : 2019
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Publishing Office,
http://bookstore.gpo.gov. For more information, contact the GPO Customer Contact Center,
U.S. Government Publishing Office. Phone 202-512-1800, or 866-512-1800 (toll-free).
E-mail, po@custhelp.com.
COMMITTEE ON VETERANS' AFFAIRS
DAVID P. ROE, Tennessee, Chairman
GUS M. BILIRAKIS, Florida, Vice- TIM WALZ, Minnesota, Ranking
Chairman Member
MIKE COFFMAN, Colorado MARK TAKANO, California
BRAD R. WENSTRUP, Ohio JULIA BROWNLEY, California
AMATA COLEMAN RADEWAGEN, American ANN M. KUSTER, New Hampshire
Samoa BETO O'ROURKE, Texas
MIKE BOST, Illinois KATHLEEN RICE, New York
BRUCE POLIQUIN, Maine J. LUIS CORREA, California
NEAL DUNN, Florida CONOR LAMB, Pennsylvania
JODEY ARRINGTON, Texas ELIZABETH ESTY, Connecticut
JOHN RUTHERFORD, Florida SCOTT PETERS, California
CLAY HIGGINS, Louisiana
JACK BERGMAN, Michigan
JIM BANKS, Indiana
JENNIFFER GONZALEZ-COLON, Puerto
Rico
Jon Towers, Staff Director
Ray Kelley, Democratic Staff Director
SUBCOMMITTEE ON ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY
JODEY ARRINGTON, Texas, Chairman
GUS BILIRAKIS, Florida BETO O'ROURKE, Texas, Ranking
BRAD WENSTRUP, Ohio Member
JOHN RUTHERFORD, Florida MARK TAKANO, California
JIM BANKS, Indiana LUIS CORREA, California
KATHLEEN RICE, New York
Pursuant to clause 2(e)(4) of rule XI of the Rules of the House, public
hearing records of the Committee on Veterans' Affairs are also
published in electronic form. The printed hearing record remains the
official version. Because electronic submissions are used to prepare
both printed and electronic versions of the hearing record, the process
of converting between various electronic formats may introduce
unintentional errors or omissions. Such occurrences are inherent in the
current publication process and should diminish as the process is
further refined.
C O N T E N T S
----------
Thursday, May 17, 2018
Page
A Review Of VA's Vocational Rehabilitation And Employment Program 1
OPENING STATEMENTS
Honorable Jodey Arrington, Chairman.............................. 1
Honorable Beto O'Rourke, Ranking Member.......................... 3
WITNESSES
Mr. Jack Kammerer, Director, Vocational Rehabilitation and
Employment Service, Veterans Benefits Administration, U.S.
Department of Veterans Affairs................................. 4
Prepared Statement........................................... 33
Accompanied by:
Mr. Lloyd Thrower, Deputy Chief Information Officer, Account
Manager for Benefits, Office of Information and
Technology, U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs
Ms. Heather Ansley, Esq., MSW, Acting Associate Executive
Director of Government Relations, Paralyzed Veterans of America 6
Prepared Statement........................................... 36
Ms. Cassandra Vangellow, Esq., Legal and Policy Fellow, Student
Veterans of America............................................ 8
Prepared Statement........................................... 40
Mr. Shane L. Liermann, Assistant National Legislative Director,
Disabled American Veterans..................................... 10
Prepared Statement........................................... 60
STATEMENTS FOR THE RECORD
Veterans Of Foreign Wars Of The United States, Patrick Murray,
Associate DirectorNational Legislative Service................. 64
The American Legion.............................................. 65
A REVIEW OF VA'S VOCATIONAL REHABILITATION AND EMPLOYMENT PROGRAM
----------
Thursday, May 17, 2018
Committee on Veterans' Affairs,
U. S. House of Representatives,
Washington, D.C.
The Subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:28 p.m., in
Room 334, Cannon House Office Building, Hon. Jodey Arrington,
[Chairman of the Subcommittee] presiding.
Present: Representatives Arrington, Bilirakis, Banks,
O'Rourke, Takano, and Correa.
OPENING STATEMENT OF JODEY ARRINGTON, CHAIRMAN
Mr. Arrington. Good morning, or afternoon, whatever time--
someone wrote that on my paper, you know, I might want to check
that. But here it is, right here.
[Laughter.]
Mr. Arrington. All right, in case C-SPAN--regardless, I am
glad you are here. I want to welcome you to the Economic
Opportunity Subcommittee hearing today entitled, ``A Review of
VA's Vocational Rehabilitation and Employment Program.''
Today, the Subcommittee will conduct an oversight hearing
of the Vocational Rehabilitation and Employment Program at the
Department of Veterans Affairs, a program designed to help our
severely wounded and disabled veterans by helping them find
meaningful employment and to maximize their independent living.
Every day, VR&E master's level counselors work diligently with
veterans in the program to help them create a rehabilitation
plan and execute that plan, while also being a constant
resource and source of support for the participant as they go
through their individualized rehab program.
I agree with those who have said that the VR&E should be
the crown jewel of benefits provided to veterans through the
Veterans Benefits Administration. This program is more than
just a benefits program, it is also a vital first step for
disabled veterans to become more financially independent, which
is a win-win for the veteran and the taxpayer alike.
For several years now, we have seen the participation in
VR&E increase and the President's latest budget submission
anticipated a 12-percent increase of veterans participating in
the program in fiscal year 2019 compared to fiscal year 2017.
And as VBA continues to move through the current disability
claims backlog, it would seem logical that these participation
numbers are actually low, the 12 percent, that is, we think it
will rise even more. However, despite the increase in the
caseload numbers, it is concerning that once again the budget
has flat-lined counselors. This Subcommittee has continued to
sound the alarm on this issue and I am worried that our
concerns seem to have fallen or are falling on deaf ears.
Another topic that seems to be falling on deaf ears is
oversight of the new case management system for tracking VR&E
participants. This is the IT system for managing caseload. This
system was supposed to finally bring VR&E into the 21st century
and eliminate participants' paper-based files, believe it or
not, that can be lost, damaged, or hamper counselor efficiency.
After years of waiting, in 2015 VR&E was given the green light
to begin working with VA IT staff on a replacement for the
current case management program that has been in place since
1997. Lots of change since 1997.
After almost 3 years of work and hundreds of man hours,
$6.5 million paid to a contractor and another five and a half
million lost in VA staff time and resources, the case
management tool is not complete and it appears that the VA is
now considering scrapping the system all together. Twelve
million dollars of taxpayer money.
This Subcommittee was first alerted to this problem not in
December when the system was first flagged as challenged by
senior leaders, but only last week in anticipation of the
hearing. While we certainly appreciate being briefed on this
problem, we have since learned that the project has gone
through four project managers and it is still unclear if VA
plans to start over and use a commercial, off-the-shelf program
that is used by state Voc-Rehab offices in over 40 states or
try to salvage the existing program.
It is clear this project has gone off the rails due to a
number of issues, not the least of which is the breakdown in
communication between VR&E and their policy staff and the IT
team. It appears that the IT staff did not appropriately
explain, and we will certainly dig into this to verify, but did
not appropriately explain to VR&E staff the type of business
requirements they needed from them to appropriately build the
system, and VR&E staff didn't know when to raise their hand and
ask how and when the system should be built. So the IT
development continued to plug along, wasting millions of
dollars with little to no oversight by senior IT and VA
leaders, at least that is what it looks like from this vantage
point.
This lack of prioritization, making VR&E important and
demonstrating the importance by the senior leaders at the VA
seems to be on full display in this particular glitch, but
there are plenty of other areas I think that beg the question,
is VR&E a priority or not.
To the best of my knowledge, no one associated with these
IT failures has been held accountable. So that is another line
of questions I hope we get into today: what has been done, $12
million wasted, who is accountable? If too many people are
accountable, probably nobody is accountable, that is generally
what I hear when I ask that question. So be prepared for that.
Only in government do we continue to allow these types of
failures to occur without accountability. It seems like the
only disciplinary action I see is people being moved from one
office to the next, although we have empowered the VA with this
accountability tool and I think some of that is being used, but
I think we need to use it all the more. I can only think of all
the veterans that could have been helped if this money wasn't
wasted, where we could invest $12 million and how we could
better serve our heroes.
I look forward to hearing from Mr. Kramer and, more
importantly, Mr. Thrower, for an accounting of these failures
and the way forward on this system, and what concrete steps can
be taken to ensure these failures never happen again.
Mr. Arrington. With that, I recognize Ranking Member Mr.
O'Rourke, my friend from Texas, for his opening remarks.
OPENING STATEMENT OF BETO O'ROURKE, RANKING MEMBER
Mr. O'Rourke. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to thank you
and your staff, and the minority staff, for preparing us for
this hearing, the witnesses who are about to testify today. I
am very much looking forward to hearing from the VA and better
understanding this program and its performance. And what we can
look forward to in the months and years to come and how we
together are going to ensure that there is proper oversight
and, to use the Chairman's word, accountability for the
performance of the VA, and our ability to deliver value for the
veterans who put their lives on the line for this country.
I am very much looking forward to hearing from the Veterans
Service Organizations, their feedback, perhaps your guidance
and direction on how we can meet the task before us. But I
think, and I don't know if Mr. Takano and Mr. Bilirakis feel
the same, but I have been on this Committee now for five and a
half years and some of what I have learned that we are going to
hear in greater detail is very dispiriting and disappointing.
I think as we try to foster a culture of accountability and
excellence for the delivery of care and earned benefits to
veterans, to see this kind of money wasted, this lack of
performance, it just undermines veterans and their family
members' faith in the VA.
Mr. Chairman, I would remiss if I didn't point out that we
are without a VA Secretary, and this is a bipartisan problem
that we have seen in successive administrations, the VA not
being enough of a priority. I think this is the sixth
successive VA Secretary with whom I have worked, the interim
Secretary, in the 6 years that I have been here, from Shinseki
through Sloan Gibson, through Robert McDonald, through David
Shulkin to the interim Secretary, and we still await leadership
for the second-largest department in the Federal bureaucracy,
the one that has the most sacred and solemn mission that I can
think of.
If any of us, Republican, Democrat, President, or Member of
Congress, really care about our veterans, we are going to make
this a priority, because I don't think that--well, we will find
out, I don't know that we are going to get true accountability
in leadership and direction just from those who are testifying
today, it has got to come from the top and from all of us.
So, anyhow, I am committed, as I know you are and the other
Members of the Committee to working on this, but I have got to
say, some of this is on me, I have been here five and a half
years and that we still have these kind of failings. It is
very, very disappointing, but I want to make sure that we are
working constructively towards getting better. I am looking
forward to hearing ideas on how we can do that, but, yeah, we
have got to do better than what we are doing now.
Thanks.
Mr. Arrington. Well, I associate myself with your comments
and I am not going to--you know, we have got to let you guys
talk and we will question, have our colleagues, give them time
to ask questions, but you are right, without the continuity of
leadership at the top, it is hard to present the full story of
accountability and it is hard to expect that we are driving
that through the organization. We have governance
responsibility and oversight, but the first line of defense is
having the leadership, having those positions filled, having
the quarterback in place, our VA Secretary. And so I share your
concerns on that and I hope we can quickly fill them, so we can
provide not only the support that they need and the partnership
that we need, but the accountability that I think is just
devoid in too many places at the VA.
So with that rosy picture, I would like to thank the
panelists again for being here today. Joining us is Mr. Jack
Kammerer, not Kramer, as I had misstated earlier, the Director
of the Vocational Rehabilitation and Employment Service at the
VA, who is accompanied by Lloyd Thrower, the Deputy Chief
Information Officer and the Benefits Account Manager of the
Office of Information and Technology.
We also have Ms. Heather Ansley, Acting Associate Executive
Director of Government Relations for Paralyzed Veterans of
America; Ms. Cassandra Vangellow, Legal and Policy Fellow for
Student Veterans of America; and Mr. Shane Liermann, Assistant
National Legislative Director for the Disabled American
Veterans.
All of your complete written statements will be made part
of the hearing record and each of you will be recognized for 5
minutes for your oral statement.
Let's begin with you, Mr. Kammerer, you are now recognized
for 5 minutes.
STATEMENT OF JACK KAMMERER
Mr. Kammerer. Thank you, Chairman Arrington, Ranking Member
O'Rourke, and Members of the Subcommittee. It is an honor to
appear again to discuss VA's Vocational Rehabilitation and
Employment Program. I am accompanied by Mr. Lloyd Thrower from
OI&T, as you stated.
We have continued our deliberate efforts to achieve our
strategic goal of transforming VR&E. VR&E assists
servicemembers and veterans with service-connected disabilities
and barriers to employment to prepare for, find, and maintain
suitable employment. For veterans with service-connected
disabilities so severe they cannot immediately consider
employment, independent living services are offered to improve
their ability to live independently.
We employ nearly 1,000 vocational rehabilitation counselors
and deliver services in the network of nearly 350 locations.
Our service delivery model supports veterans where they are
located and currently includes operations of 56 regional
offices, 142 VR&E out-based offices, 71 military installations,
and 95 VetSuccess on-campus sites.
Our team is committed to and engaged in multiple
transformational initiatives. We remain focused on assisting
veterans with service-connected disabilities in achieving
employment and living independently, with over 132,000 veterans
participating in 2017. We have seen an overall increase in
applications, as you stated, as more adjudicate compensation
claims result in more eligible VR&E clients with service-
connected disabilities.
VR&E Chapter 31 applicants grew 33 percent from 2013 to
2017, with a corresponding increase of 17 percent in
participants. Most veterans in the program are on average in
the program for five or more years.
While our workload has grown, the counselor caseload has
slowly declined as we achieve more positive outcomes, resolve
older cases, and strive for active veteran participants.
Currently, VR&E has a rolling average of 133 veterans per
counselor, down from 140 veterans per counselor at the end of
2016. I would highlight that there are other VR&E staff members
who work directly with the counselors assisting veterans in
their goals.
VBA just executed an organizational review focused on VR&E
staffing in order to help standardize operations across all
ROs. We are actively looking at multiple methods, including
technology to enhance the time counselors are able to engage
with our veterans. We are also conducting an ongoing time study
with the ultimate goal of improving counselor processes.
At 2017, VR&E counselors achieved 15,528 positive outcomes,
up 8 percent from 2016. These included successfully
rehabilitating 12,128 veterans, with 10,461 of those veterans
achieving rehabilitation into employment, and 889 veterans with
disabilities so severe they could not pursue employment, but
achieved rehabilitation through the delivery of independent
living.
With our team of VSOC counselors, we continued to leverage
our partnership with schools across the country. In 2017, our
counselors assisted over 43,000 veteran students. VR&E has nine
newly signed VSOC Memorandums of Understanding and we are
working to expand these new cites.
VR&E also closely collaborates with DoD to provide VR&E
services to active duty, reserve and National Guard
servicemembers through the IDES system, with nearly 145
counselors now at 71 installations.
We appreciate the Committee's long-term support to our
wounded, ill, and injured servicemembers. We continue to work
on leveraging technology to increase efficiencies and service
delivery. In collaboration with the Veterans Health
Administration, we use technology to enhance services through
online medical referrals and tele-counseling.
In 2015, we began VHA tele-counseling technology with the
Pexip application, which we will begin piloting in June 2018.
Pexip is secure and mobile-friendly, and eliminates the need
for veterans to install specialized software. This updated
technology will improve VR&E's responsiveness to veterans'
needs, reduce travel costs and time for veterans and employees.
VBA continues to work with our partners in OI&T and other
partners to find a viable solution to transfer VR&E to an
electronic case management system, as you stated. VBA, OI&T and
our partners are conducting a needs assessment and exploring
alternatives to determine the most cost-effective and efficient
way to deliver a modern case management system. The goals of
the case management system remain to deliver a digital,
paperless service delivery, better support veterans on their
own terms, ensure better service delivery, and improve the
counselor experience. Methods to develop and implement this
effort will be evaluated once options are complete.
VR&E will continue to improve the delivery of vocational
and rehabilitation services to a most deserving population that
is our veterans with service-connected disabilities. Through
the development of this new case management system, program
performance measures that focus on veteran outcomes, clear
accounting of both veteran progress and employment outcomes,
and technologies as I spoke about such as tele-counseling, we
will continue to strive towards substantially improving and
materially enhancing the VR&E program.
Mr. Chairman, this concludes my statement and I would be
pleased to answer your questions, sir.
[The prepared statement of Jack Kammerer appears in the
Appendix]
Mr. Arrington. Thank you, Mr. Kammerer.
Ms. Ansley, you are now recognized for 5 minutes--is it Ms.
Ansley?
Ms. Ansley. Yes, that is correct, sir.
Mr. Arrington. Okay.
STATEMENT OF HEATHER ANSLEY
Ms. Ansley. Chairman Arrington, Ranking Member O'Rourke,
and Members of the Subcommittee, Paralyzed Veterans of America
would like to thank you for the opportunity to testify today
regarding the Department of Veterans Affairs Vocational
Rehabilitation and Employment Program, or VR&E.
Until the passage of the Americans with Disabilities Act,
or ADA, in 1990, there were no widespread protections in
Federal law prohibiting disability-based discrimination in
employment. PVA was a leader in advocating for the passage of
the ADA because of the need to ensure equality of opportunity
and access for all people with disabilities.
Despite the ADA and other civil rights laws, too many
people with disabilities, including disabled veterans, still
encounter barriers to entering in or remaining in the
workforce. The most recent Bureau of Labor Statistics survey
found that approximately 42 percent of Gulf War-era veterans
with service-connected disability ratings of 60 percent or
higher are not in the workforce.
VA's VR&E Program is critical to helping veterans with
disabilities to benefit from the opportunities fostered by the
ADA. Veterans who have acquired disabilities due to their
military service that then create barriers to employment have
earned every opportunity available to allow them to find
success in employment. A strong VR&E Program is critical to the
long-term success of our Nation's efforts to help veterans with
service-connected disabilities transition into employment
following their service.
Ensuring a proper counselor-to-veteran ratio in VR&E's
Program has been a perennial issue because of the impact
staffing deficiencies have on the successful administration of
the program and ultimately how successfully the program serves
veterans. Even experienced counselors need sufficient time to
properly evaluate veterans who have significant, yet manageable
physical and mental health disabilities for services, collect
needed information, and ultimately guide their veteran clients.
While managing a caseload, the vocational counselor also
needs to remain up-to-date on training programs and what is
happening in today's workforce. All these tasks are important
functions of the job.
In light of all these duties, it is important that a
counselor maintains a balanced caseload. Veterans come into the
vocational rehabilitation system with some or more barriers to
employment due to their one or many disabilities. If the
proportion of veteran clients who have significant barriers to
employment is too great, then it may be tough for one counselor
to properly manage the standard of 125 cases at a time.
In January of 2014, the Government Accountability Office
issued a report calling on VA's VR&E Program to implement
performance and workload management improvements. At that time,
caseloads for VR&E case managers ranged up to 1-to-139.
According to VA, the average counselor-to-veteran caseload
ratio was approximately now 1-to-133.
The independent budget, or IB, that was coauthored by the
Disabled American Veterans, PVA, and the Veterans of Foreign
Wars has continually highlighted the need for additional VR&E
personnel to improve the program's effectiveness. Our most
recent budget recommendation recommended an $18 million
increase for VR&E over the estimated then fiscal year 2018
appropriations. This funding would allow VA to hire an
additional 143 full-time employees, and we believe the vast
majority of these new employees should be VR&E counselors.
Increased VR&E staffing is needed due to the imbalance
between the increasing number of veterans participating in the
program and the number of employees available to serve them. In
the last 4 years, participation in the program has increased
approximately 16.8 percent; personnel, however, have not seen
anywhere near that same increase. With program participation
estimated to increase once again in the next fiscal year,
personnel will continue to feel constrained to provide the
services that veterans, particularly those with significant
barriers to employment, need to be successful.
Providing VR&E with additional resources to decrease the
counselor-to-veteran ratio is an important step toward ensuring
the program is meeting veterans' needs. VR&E must also reduce
bureaucratic hurdles that delay veterans in moving through
their vocational rehabilitation process. In addition, VR&E must
continue to deploy technology where appropriate to facilitate
interaction with veteran clients and reduce the administrative
burden on counselors.
VR&E's piloted effort to use technology to facilitate the
entitlement process by using tele-counseling was a step in the
right direction. Further implementation of electronic processes
to facilitate participation by veterans, particularly those
with catastrophic disabilities, and reduce administrative
burdens on VR&E personnel has the potential to boost the
program's success while allowing VA to more efficiently use the
resources it has available.
The services available to veterans with service-connected
disabilities through VA's VR&E Program are vital to their
ability to successfully return to work after acquiring what is
in some cases a catastrophic disability. Additional investment
in this program, along with a reduction of administrative
delays and increased use of technology, is key to ensuring that
counselors are able to use the tools needed to help these
veterans obtain and retain competitive employment in their
communities.
PVA thanks you for the opportunity to express our views and
we would be happy to answer any questions you may have.
[The prepared statement of Heather Ansley appears in the
Appendix]
Mr. Arrington. Thank you, Ms. Ansley.
Now we yield 5 minutes to Ms. Vangellow.
STATEMENT OF CASSANDRA VANGELLOW
Ms. Vangellow. Chairman Arrington, Ranking Member O'Rourke,
and Members of the Committee, thank you for inviting Student
Veterans of America to submit our testimony on the important
economic opportunity program, Vocational Rehabilitation and
Employment, or VR&E.
With more than 1500 chapters, representing the more than
1.1 million students in schools across the country, we are
pleased to share the perspective of those directly impacted by
this Committee's work.
In recent years, we have collected stakeholder feedback on
VR&E. Specifically, we performed a deep-dive analysis during
the past 5 months. Such analysis included obtaining feedback
from our constituents.
I want to begin by emphasizing the importance of VR&E. We
acknowledge many successful rehabilitations and the growth of
the VetSuccess on Campus Program. As you can see from our
written testimony, we want to spend our time highlighting
program issues, as well as supplying solutions both short-term
and strategic.
Three problem areas including counselor quality and number,
program training, and VR&E's organizational control structure.
First, counselor quality is a predominant issue our
students cite. Quality is suffering as counselors strain under
ever-increasing workloads. Public Law 114-223 requires a ratio
of one counselor for every 125 veterans in the program. The
average counselor ratio was 136.4 in 2017, yet VA consistently
does not request additional full-time employees to address this
ratio problem. Service is suffering and our veterans are paying
the price.
Robert A. asserts, ``Fewer veterans need to be assigned to
a specific counselor so it does not take an act of Congress to
get them to at least email you back.''
Second, program training raises many red flags. While we
acknowledge the requirements for a master's level education and
other required course work, a diploma does not equate to VR&E-
track knowledge. Counselors would benefit from track-specific
training. Receiving training about entrepreneurship and
changing academic requirements and demands-demand would
contribute to positive outcomes, both in terms of program
satisfaction and successful rehabilitation.
As Logan B. says, ``It feels like I'm fighting tooth and
nail to take the self-employment route. I wish they would be
more open to me making my own choices instead of trying to put
me on whatever track is easiest.''
Third, VR&E control and ownership impedes its success.
While VR&E is responsible for policy and procedure
implementation, the Office of Field Operations maintains
oversight responsibility and management. This division of
responsibility and authority is ineffective. All of the policy
guidance in the world does not address the root issue: VR&E
does not have control over individual counselors.
Katherine S. highlights, ``If a veteran does not follow
through with his or her responsibility, the veteran is removed
from the program. If the counselor does not follow through,
there is no action taken.''
After identifying barriers to success, I want to shift the
conversation to solutions. In the short term, two immediate
recommendations relate to expectation management and
subsistence allowances. Many VR&E challenges arise based on
unclear expectations about what the program does and does not
do. Revamping how VR&E is publicized through consistent and
coherent messaging would be a major step forward. Subsistence
allowance cause stress for many program participants. Dean Z.,
a VR&E participant here in D.C., illustrates the point when he
says, ``I have had to take out loans to pay for housing,
because I could not afford to live in the local area.''
Program participants should not have to choose between
pursuing education and training and putting food on the table.
Providing parity with the post-9/11 GI Bill rates would be a
good start.
With regard to our strategic recommendations, I want to
focus on the VA Economic Opportunity Administration and
authority restructuring. This fourth administration at VA will
provide EO programs like VR&E with the champion these programs
need and deserve.
We are proud to support the Vet Opp Act of 2018 introduced
by Subcommittee Members Brad Wenstrup and Mark Takano. While
Director of Policy Lauren Augustine will testify on this
legislation next week, I want to emphasize how this change
provides for greater accountability without expanding the
government footprint. The VR&E office must be given
responsibility and authority over counselors and personnel
administering the program. Redistribution of this authority
will enable effective personnel allocation to each regional
office.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member, and Members of the
Subcommittee for making the success of transitioning
servicemembers, veterans, and their families a top priority in
this Congress. I look forward to your questions about this
critical transition and empowerment program.
[The prepared statement of Cassandra Vangellow appears in
the Appendix]
Mr. Arrington. Thank you, Ms. Vangellow.
Mr. Liermann, you are now recognized for 5 minutes.
STATEMENT OF SHANE L. LIERMANN
Mr. Liermann. Chairman Arrington, Ranking Member O'Rourke,
and Members of the Subcommittee, on behalf of DAV, we thank you
for the opportunity to present our recommendations on VA's
Vocational Rehabilitation and Employment Program.
We represent over one million veterans and survivors,
making DAV the largest Veterans Service Organization providing
claims assistance. Our mission includes the principle that this
Nation's first duty to veterans is the rehabilitation and
welfare of its wartime disabled. To fulfill our mission, DAV
directly employs a nationwide corps of more than 260 national
service officers.
Like all DAV national service officers, I myself received
services through Voc-Rehab when I started my career with DAV.
So not only am I a successful outcome of Voc-Rehab, but as a
DAV MSO and a supervisor, I have personally assisted over 15
DAV apprentices and hundreds of veterans with Voc-Rehab, to
include applications, meeting with their counselors, and
representation in their appeals at VA regional offices and the
Board of Veterans Appeals.
Voc-Rehab is a unique employment program that combines
training, education services, and specialty needs, to include
equipment and services, all customized to each veteran to
overcome their own disabilities.
The Voc-Rehab Longitudinal Study Annual Report for fiscal
year 2016 notes, ``On average, participants have a higher
service-connected disability rating than the overall veteran
population, thus indicating the program is benefitting those
with serious employment handicaps.''
The most significant finding of the study to date is
veterans who have achieved rehabilitation have substantially
better employment and standard-of-living outcomes than those
who discontinued services in the program. Those who achieved
rehabilitation had a median annual income that is $15,000 a
year higher than those who discontinued services, dramatically
demonstrating its successful outcomes for the veteran
population Voc-Rehab serves.
The study also reveals that roughly 90 percent of veterans
have a moderately to highly satisfying experience with Voc-
Rehab.
Mr. Chairman, notwithstanding the successes of veterans
participating in Voc-Rehab, in our written testimony we
provided several recommendations and now I will just highlight
a few.
First, for the past 3 years, VA has not requested new
personnel for Voc-Rehab. Based on the Administration's proposed
budget for fiscal year 2019, they indicate the current rolling
average ratio of counselor-to-client is 1 to 136. In order to
achieve the 1-to-125 counselor-to-client ratio established by
Public Law, we estimate that they will need another 143 full-
time employees for fiscal year 2019 for a total direct
workforce of 1,585.
Second, we believe that leveraging technology can improve
efficiency of counselors. For example, Voc-Rehab requires
regular face-to-face interactions with veterans to deliver
benefits and services and, unfortunately, half do not show for
these appointments.
Two pieces of technology can improve the appearance rate:
one, the use of electronic or text appointment reminder system,
and the other is a tele-counseling network. Both would allow
veterans to receive reminders of their appointments and receive
their counseling from their own homes or schools, while the
time improving the efficiency of each Voc-Rehab counselors.
In order to realize the advantage of technology, Voc-Rehab
needs an increase in their IT resources.
Third, we are encouraged by Voc-Rehab's new competency-
based training system that provides all newly employed
counselors 80 hours of training. We suggest this training
system can be used to provide uniformity and some
standardization, since inconsistency between VA regional
offices and counselors is common within Voc-Rehab. At the same
time, we urge them to use this training to ensure each
counselors understands the flexibility they have to address the
individualized needs of their veterans while remaining
consistent within the overall Voc-Rehab program.
Finally, in recent years there have been some suggestions
that Voc-Rehab should be scaled back by limiting the number of
veterans who are eligible, and we note that restricting
eligibility to Voc-Rehab could potentially decrease the
counselor-to-client ratio. However, DAV will adamantly oppose
any legislation or policies that would restrict existing
eligibility criteria. As Voc-Rehab is an employment program,
any changes to eligibility will negatively impact disability
veterans' ability to obtain and maintain substantial gainful
employment.
Mr. Chairman, we thank you for the opportunity this
afternoon, and this concludes my testimony. I am pleased to
answer any questions you or Members of the Subcommittee may
have.
[The prepared statement of Shane L.Liermann appears in the
Appendix]
Mr. Arrington. Thank you, Mr. Liermann. I again appreciate
the panelists coming. I am going to yield 5 minutes to myself
for questions and then we will move over to the Ranking Member.
So, Mr. Kammerer, tell me, there could be debate about what
the ratio is, I understand in some Appropriations bill it is
the ratio, the appropriate maximum ratio is 1-to-125, I think
somebody mentioned, but I don't know when that was set, I don't
know science was behind that. I am already suspect, because it
was set by Congress. So the proof should be in the outcome, the
proof should be in your achievement.
Tell me about the success rate and give me a trend of your
success rate over the last 3 years on employment rate, success
rate, and independent living success rate. I would like for you
to be a little clearer with me on how you define success with
respect to the independent living component of your mission.
Mr. Kammerer. Thank you for the question, Mr. Chairman. I
would say I agree with you on the caseload, the number 125-to-1
would be in Appropriations language from several years ago, but
I believe 125-to-1, to my knowledge when I took over the
program in 2013-2014, came from a study or review 10 years ago
informally of state vocational rehab programs.
Mr. Arrington. A lot of changes in technology, a lot of new
tools since then.
Mr. Kammerer. Absolutely. So--
Mr. Arrington. My point is, it may not be arbitrary, but
forget the ratio--
Mr. Kammerer. Moving forward, yes, sir.
Mr. Arrington [continued]. --just tell me what your
outcomes have been--
Mr. Kammerer. Right.
Mr. Arrington [continued]. --your success rate on
employment and on the sort of independent living side of your
mission. Over the last 3 years, are we going up in terms of
improvement on employment rate and independent living or are we
going down?
Mr. Kammerer. So I will give you the overall trend. We
started new performance measures in 2015 where we went to
positive outcomes. In 2016, for the first time, we reported to
Congress a national success rate, Mr. Chairman, that was the
number of veterans that achieved a positive outcome at their
sixth year in the program since GAO found that we were a 5 to 6
years organization. So, in 2016, we had 48 percent of the 6-
year group that were successful; at the sixth year, 48 percent
of them were--correction, 47 percent of them were successful
outcomes, and then 72 percent of them, including those
successful outcomes, were still in the program.
So we--
Mr. Arrington. Successful outcomes to move to independent
living or employment--
Mr. Kammerer. Those included the--
Mr. Arrington [continued]. --or both?
Mr. Kammerer [continued]. --employment rehabilitations, the
independent living rehabilitations.
Mr. Arrington. So can you bifurcate the two? Can you just
tell me what the outcomes were for employment first and then
independent living second?
Mr. Kammerer. Yes, I can.
Mr. Arrington. What you said right now is less than half
after 6 years were successful, is that--
Mr. Kammerer. That is correct. And then last year, Mr.
Chairman, we went to 48 percent were positive outcomes and
then--
Mr. Arrington. What was that percentage again?
Mr. Kammerer. Forty-eight percent. So the first year we
measured it, 47 percent who were in the program successfully
completed at their sixth year, and then 72 percent were
persisting or had been a positive outcome.
The following year, last year, the second year we reported
that overall number, it was 48 percent achieved a positive
outcome and then 68 percent, including those positive outcomes,
were still persisting.
So I read the numbers to you in my statement on positive
outcomes. Last year, they went up eight percent from the
previous year. Every year, I think for the--and I will get you
the detailed numbers for the record--every year for the last 3
years, sir, of the individual employment, independent living,
and maximum rehab gains.
But our program has performed, in my view as the director,
very well. Our performance continues to increase every year in
terms of the positive outcomes. So last year, as I said in my
statement, we were up eight percent.
So I believe, it would be my assessment as the director,
that we are performing at a level based on the success after
that sixth year, which again, on average, are veterans 5 to 6
years, if nearly half of them, sir, are positive outcomes at
the sixth year and nearly 70 percent are still persisting, I
feel as the director that those are positive measures, sir.
Mr. Arrington. And why do you feel that way? Do you have
something to compare it to or--
Mr. Kammerer. I think that we have the right performance
measures--
Mr. Arrington. If I got my votes right half the time, I
would be fired. I mean, my district would fire me.
Mr. Kammerer. I understand your concern. Maybe I could
explain it in a different way.
Mr. Arrington. I am out of time.
Mr. Kammerer. Yes.
Mr. Arrington. I really wanted to start with just getting
some idea of what success looks like and whether you're moving
in the right direction or not in spite of the caseload
increase.
We are probably going to have multiple rounds. As long as
my colleagues want to stay, I am going to stay and ask more
questions, but right now I am going to defer and yield 5
minutes to my Ranking Member.
Mr. O'Rourke. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
And, you know, I realize that the comments I made at the
opening of this hearing might have been out of context. I was
referring to something that I'd just learned today, which is
that the case management system for this program is managed on
paper right now and that there was an effort undertaken to move
that into a digital system, I guess developing our own
software, we have spent $12 million and I think it has been a
failure by all accounts.
And I was hoping that in your opening remarks you were
going to at least account for that or tell us where you are or
why that happened, because I think it touches on some of the
points that some of the Veterans Service Organizations have
brought up. If we have challenges with ratios, with training,
with outcomes, and we want to be able to shift resources where
they are most effective, I would think moving off of a, you
know, 19th century system to make sure that we are leveraging
technology to its fullest capacity to help us to do that is
essential.
So tell me, if you could just take a minute, because I only
have 5 minutes total, could you just tell me what happened and
what you are going to do going forward.
Mr. Kammerer. I understand your concern about the case
management system, I will pass to my colleague.
We started this journey in 2014 with the business
requirements, we evolved the system for 2 years, extended it
for a third year after the requirements were accepted. The
software that we showed to our leadership team in the field in
St. Paul last year, Ranking Member O'Rourke, looked good. And
we identified in January when the application was fielded there
are challenges with that, that we perhaps were not on course,
and I worked with my IT partner. I will let my IT partner
finish this.
Mr. O'Rourke. And, Mr. Thrower, before you begin, I just
want to make sure that I am not misleading anyone who is
watching this or my colleagues on the outcome, is it true that
this began in 2015, that to date we spent $12 million and we
still don't have an operable system?
Mr. Thrower. Yes, sir, that is true.
Mr. O'Rourke. Okay. Money down the toilet, something we can
salvage from that? What's next? Please don't take more than a
minute to answer that.
Mr. Thrower. Okay. I will say that, you know, as we have
looked at this, I think we had some failures on a couple points
in terms of use of our development methodology, we did not
appropriately use agile development methodology. We also didn't
communicate sort of the downsides of not doing that
appropriately to our customers.
We are at a point now where we have an incomplete system.
We made a lot of progress, we had six successful bill cycles up
until we discovered there was problems at the beginning of this
year. We are now looking at a series of options, one of them is
to finish the complete--we took the pause because we felt it
was prudent at that point to really understand where we were
and were we going to be able to complete this. We are now
looking at--
Mr. O'Rourke. Last question, when will this be complete and
what will the total cost be to the taxpayer?
Mr. Thrower. That we do not know.
Mr. O'Rourke. Okay. Get back to us, please, when you do
know. I would argue that maybe we should stop digging until we
have an answer on this and a budget set forward or we are just
going to--yeah, you are not inspiring confidence; not you
personally, just this process so far and the explanation for
it.
To the Chairman's question, I show that, and you reiterated
this, Mr. Kammerer, that fiscal year 2016 VA reported a class
success rate of 47 percent and a class persistence rate of 72
percent. I want to follow up on the Chairman's question, what
was the goal?
Mr. Kammerer. Originally, when we baselined it, I believe
it was 60 percent and 70 as the goals, then we re-baselined--
that was the first year that you spoke of, Mr. O'Rourke, we re-
baselined a 55 percent and 70 percent success and persistence.
Mr. O'Rourke. So you were trying to get to 60 percent, you
hit 47 percent.
Mr. Kammerer. The first year.
Mr. O'Rourke. Then you dropped the goal down--
Mr. Kammerer. We dropped it to--
Mr. O'Rourke [continued]. --and it only moved up a point?
Mr. Kammerer [continued]. --55 percent. We didn't achieve
that again the second time.
Mr. O'Rourke. Okay. And so to the very good recommendations
made by members of this Veterans Service Organization, is that
attributable to counselor training and efficacy, is it
attributable to ratio? Why aren't you hitting your goal?
Mr. Kammerer. I think I perhaps didn't explain my answer
right to Chairman Arrington and I will try to give a better
explanation. One of the challenges we have in the VR&E Program
is veterans generally, and that is why I went to the cohort
measure, sir, spend 5 to 6 years in our program, but some
veterans spend longer in the program based on the extent of
their disabilities.
Mr. O'Rourke. That is the persistence rate?
Mr. Kammerer. Yes, sir. So if you stay in the program, it
is a positive thing. But as Chairman Arrington said, I am
driven to get the program outcomes, we need to get the veterans
re-employed. So the challenge we have is our education is
slightly different, it is up to 48 months, it can be extended
beyond that if you have a serious employment handicap, and then
generally 18 months, Mr. O'Rourke, for job services.
Many veterans in stay in longer, so we want to get them a
successful outcome, but we need to take care of their
disabilities.
Mr. O'Rourke. Okay. And for the record, because I am going
to turn it back over to the Chairman, I would like to know what
the goal is for both of these measures for the next fiscal
year, and I would like to know what the budget is for
transitioning from a paper-based system to a digital system for
the case management system, because I don't know what to
measure 12 million against. Was it a $12 million budget and we
spent it all, is it a $24 million budget? How much are we on
the line for?
Don't answer now, get us in writing, and that way we can
hold each other accountable.
And I yield back.
Mr. Arrington. I thank the Ranking Member. And we will get
that information for him and for the rest of the Committee, and
I appreciate his line of questions.
I will now yield Mr. Banks 5 minutes.
Mr. Banks. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Thrower, one of the options that I understand that is
now being explored by VR&E and the IT staff is to purchase a
commercial, off-the-shelf system. You have mentioned to this
Committee staff that this system was not available though when
the project was first scoped in 2015. Do you still stand by
that today?
Mr. Thrower. I would say that I actually do not know
whether or not the solution was available at that time. I
suspect there was early versions that were, I do not know
whether or not it was a maturity level that was to serve the
mission.
What I do know is that, from what I can understand, I do
not believe that the team at the time who was doing the
evaluation looked at a COTS product.
Mr. Banks. So you don't know?
Mr. Thrower. I don't know.
Mr. Banks. Yet you led the Committee staff to believe that
there was not a commercial option available?
Mr. Thrower. I don't think I--
Mr. Banks. You dispute that?
Mr. Thrower [continued]. --led them to believe that in that
way, but that could have been interpreted.
Mr. Banks. So if that is the case, if you didn't know if
there was a commercial option available, then clearly you and
your staff didn't do your due diligence in 2015, or now, as the
Committee's research indicates that the first version of this
system was created approximately 20 years and was being used in
dozens of states in 2015. So how do you explain that?
Mr. Thrower. I would agree with you that the team that did
the initial analysis did not look appropriately at COTS
products. I think that was a failing at the very beginning of
the program.
Mr. Banks. Okay. You have summed up quite well your
inability to find out whether or not there was a commercial
option that was available, and I surely hope that you wouldn't
either be misleading to us now or incapable of doing your job
well by figuring out the answer to that question as it stands
today.
So can you explain to me, since you didn't know then and
you don't know now, could you further explain about the steps
that you and your staff are taking to correct this colossal
mistake?
Mr. Thrower. So we discovered this problem--well, the first
inkling that we had a problem was in December when there was a
user acceptance test that did not pass all standards. That
looked to the team at the time as a glitch. We did not really,
actually realize that it was potentially a real problem until
mid-January when we were looking at the fact that there was
considerably more requirements than we expected at that point,
which should have been a further, a farther down path--we
should have been very close to completion. We caused a pause--
or we asked for an assessment at that point and in mid-February
we caused a pause.
Now we are looking at options of what is the best way to go
forward both from a financial perspective and from a timing
perspective to deliver the best solution for our veterans. We
are looking at a couple, several options. One is to see what it
would cost to understand how to blow out what we were--to
finish what we have started. Another option is to look in the
commercial COTS environment to see if that is a more
expeditious and cost-effective solution. The third is sort of a
hybrid on that and really kind of see if there is a managed
service solution that could be dealt with.
So we are in the midst of doing an analysis of those
options. We committed to--I think we, being the collective VBA
and OI&T team committed to bringing a recommendation to the
leadership of VBA at the beginning of June, so that VBA
leadership can make a decision during the month of June, as the
best way forward.
Mr. Banks. Well, thank you for those answers.
Mr. Chairman, I find this situation be thoroughly
disappointing and confusing nonetheless, but with that I yield
back.
Mr. Arrington. Thank you, Mr. Banks.
I now yield 5 minutes to Mr. Correa.
Mr. Correa. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I just wanted to
follow up on some of the comments from Mr. Banks, Mr. Thrower,
and it sounds like you are going to have some options for us or
the department in the next couple of weeks, 2 or 3 weeks. Any
thoughts where we would be going, any thoughts on some
commercial applications?
Or let me restate that question, do you think there is any
way to implement a system in a timely basis that has a long-
term horizon as opposed to, these are my words, putting a Band-
Aid on what is going on right now and moving forward?
Mr. Thrower. Our goal is to come up with the best solution
and it is not looking at--we are not look at--
Mr. Correa. And, you know, I am just trying to figure out
what is going on. Coming up with the best solution to do what?
Mr. Thrower. We are looking for the best solution to meet
the business requirement that has been defined by our customer,
by Mr. Kammerer, and by the VBA and the Vocational
Rehabilitation team. So whether or not at this point--I look at
it, as Mr. O'Rourke said earlier, as we have a certain amount
of costs in here, that happened, okay? I am now looking at can
I leverage that--or the team who is evaluating this is saying,
can we leverage this, does it make sense to finish this? Will
this best meet the need of our veterans or are we better
served--
Mr. Correa. At this point, are there--
Mr. Thrower [continued]. --looking at another option.
Mr. Correa [continued]. --at this point, sir, are there any
commercial vendors out there that with possibly off-the-shelf
programs that would meet the needs or is it so specific that
unlikely?
Mr. Thrower. There is a commercial vendor that we know
about, that is a potential that we are looking at as an option.
Mr. Correa. Thank you. Let me shift very quickly gears
here.
The Vocational Rehab and Employment Program, it is supposed
to our veterans up and running, integrate into our society. I
have got a constituent, Aaron Edwards, who goes to my alma
mater, Cal State, Fullerton. Single father, two kids, trying to
get himself up, but he has got to take care of his kids as
well.
A question to the group. I have introduced legislation too
called the Veteran Employment Child Care Access Act, that
essentially would cover childcare assistance to veterans who
are participating in the workforce. Any thoughts?
Mr. Kammerer. Jack Kammerer, representing VR&E. I would say
on a case-by-case basis we do have a limited ability to provide
some degree of childcare support--
Mr. Correa. At this point?
Mr. Kammerer. In our program, but it's case-by-case and it
is not, I wouldn't describe it as robust and we have some
ability.
Mr. Correa. Very quickly, I am running out of time, is it
not robust because that is providing childcare something you
don't consider important or it is just something that you don't
see as a need out there?
Mr. Kammerer. I will take it for the record, but my short
answer is I believe it is based on statutory authority we are
able to provide some limited childcare.
Mr. Correa. So you comply with statutory authority then?
Mr. Kammerer. I will take it for the record, sir, but I
believe that that would be my answer.
Mr. Correa. My third question, very quickly. On the ratio
of counselors-to-veterans, the Los Angeles regional office,
that covers my area, Orange County, the ratio right now is I
believe 225-to-1. And I guess I am going to come back and ask
the question different than our Chairman, but related. You have
got a ratio, you have got personnel, you have got folks who
have to wait, I guess my question is, what is an appropriate
ratio of counselors to veterans?
Mr. Kammerer. As I was stating to Mr. Arrington, I am
trying to move beyond the ratios as they have evolved over many
years to a more time-driven model to determine can we measure
the number of minutes that a counselor spends, is able to
counsel a veteran a week. So in rough order of magnitude now,
my math tells me it is about 12 minutes or so that a counselor
is able to spend on average with a veteran per week, we would
like to give more time back to the counselors.
Mr. Correa. So we are probably going to need to hire more
counselors to do the job?
Mr. Kammerer. There are a number of ways we can do that. We
have a time study going on right now. Some of the technology
ways that we are looking at, including tele-counseling, the
Dragon software we are getting ready to give to the counselors
to dictate their case notes. There is a range of things we can
do to give time back to the counselors. We have an Admin Hub
study going on in San Diego to see if we can get school
payments done for the counselors.
So there is a range of things, sir, that we can do.
Mr. Correa. And you are doing them right now?
Mr. Kammerer. Yes, we are. And I would highlight also, our
caseload in Los Angeles is one of our highest.
Mr. Correa. Yes, it is.
Mr. Kammerer. I have actually sent some of my team members
out to LA to help in the past year with applications. They have
had a turnover, they have had a number of things there. That
has been on my radar, sir.
Mr. Correa. Very quickly, are you implementing tele-
counseling in LA?
Mr. Kammerer. We are getting ready to, this year we will do
a national rollout of the new system.
Mr. Correa. When--
Mr. Kammerer. They can only have the old system, but we
will help Los Angeles with the new tele-counseling.
Mr. Correa. When do you think you will have that?
Mr. Kammerer. We are rolling out the initial capability in
the next 30 days, I will get it to Los Angeles by the end of
the year, sir.
Mr. Correa. Mr. Chair, I yield.
I would like to continue to talk to you on this issue.
Thank you.
Mr. Kammerer. Yes, sir.
Mr. Arrington. If you stick around, we will have another
round of questions. If you have to leave, we understand, and
whatever information you need from the panelist, I will make
sure you get it. Thank you, Mr. Correa.
Now we yield 5 minutes to Mr. Takano.
Mr. Takano. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I want to know if Mr. Kammerer would agree with this
statement: the most efficient action that VR&E can take to
bring about better outcomes is to have the flexibility to shift
cases from counselors who are overburdened to counselors who
are under-worked in more remote areas of the country, of the
things we can do right now, it is the most efficient thing we
can do. Would you agree or disagree with that?
Mr. Kammerer. I agree in principle, I am challenged in
practice with that. And to answer your question quickly, Mr.
Takano, as you know, in compensation claims we are able to
broker cases through the national work queue across the country
and work. Three reasons, we still have paper in VR&E in some
cases--
Mr. Takano. If I might cut in, but you basically agree that
that is the most efficient thing we can do and the barrier is
that the paper system, the breakdown with the electronic system
you are trying to build, is that right? I just want to put
the--I just want to put--
Mr. Kammerer. It is a very--I don't want to spend too much
time on this, but it is a very complex issue, but the short
answer is I agree with you in principle. Other than the
technology and the paper challenges, sir, employment is a lot
of times locally derived, so there are employment challenges
when you move cases around, and veterans are very adamant about
wanting to retain their counselors. So when we talk about
moving workload around the country, it is a very complicated
process.
Mr. Takano. No, I understand that there is a need
continuity. If I were a disabled veteran, I would want to make
sure that the counselor who knew me was the one that stayed
with me and I would prefer the face-to-face interaction with a
local counselor, but as a matter of trying to untangle what we
have now, I mean, an optimal situation would be that we have a
local counselor working face-to-face with our disabled
veterans. But as for managing the caseload now and getting to
stability, it seems to me that we have to allocate the workload
remotely and what is in the way of that is this electronic, the
breakdowns with the electronic system. And I think we need to
make that clear for the folks who are watching this hearing to
understand why we are bearing down on and why there are so many
questions from my colleagues about the electronic system, is
that it is part of the solution to getting to a better work
allocation.
Mr. Kammerer. Absolutely, sir. And I will say as clearly as
I can state it, our counselors deserve and need a new case
management system, it is unacceptable that we don't have it,
and that technology will help us do what you are talking about.
Mr. Takano. And I believe my Ranking Member especially has
some background on IT and that the Chairman is familiar with
some of the business systems, and that we are going to get to
the bottom and get to the accountability necessary for that,
but I want to get to some of the other things that we can do to
improve the VR&E going forward.
I understand it is hard for VR&E to increase the overall
number of counselors because counselors all must have master's
degree and be highly qualified, is that correct?
Mr. Kammerer. A hundred percent of our assigned counselors
have master's degrees, that is correct.
Mr. Takano. Yeah, and I can imagine it is a complex job to
be a counselor and to make those judgments and to work with
this population group, with our disabled veterans. So do we
have incentive programs, do we have loan repayment? Are there
programs to be able to help us build that pipeline of people to
do these jobs? Do we have adequate--is there a need to do that?
Mr. Kammerer. As you know, Mr. Takano, I am not a counselor
myself, but I am responsible for the professionals that are.
Generally, in my experience in four and a half years, we
attract and retain counselors because counselors want to come
to the VA to serve veterans. There are things we can do to make
sure, like right now we are short at least 30 counselors.
Mr. Takano. Yes.
Mr. Kammerer. So we need to hire up to ceiling, and then we
need to look at opportunities. I told you earlier we did a
staffing review, we are looking at more standardization across
the regional offices, which the Committee and others have
brought to my attention in terms of service delivery, we might
be able to generate some more counselors as part of that effort
as well.
Mr. Takano. And I understand that you are conducting a time
study to see how much time counselors spend on individual
tasks, so you can figure out ways to make the process more
efficient. You have a goal to contract out the evaluation of
the administration duties of your counselors, so that they can
spend more time actually counseling veterans. So you are
increasing your telecommunication, your tele-counseling
functions, so you can minimize missed appointments and that
sort of thing, but it seems to me that, you know, the immediate
thing before us is to get the IT thing straightened out, so we
can at least reallocate the caseloads, but we need to hire more
counselors and we need to find ways to get them trained.
Mr. Kammerer. And I will make my response on this real
short, but as the Committee knows, we also have contract
augmentation to our counselors for assessments and other tasks,
my leadership has clearly communicated to me that we need to
use that to the best advantage. We used 78 percent of about $4
million last year to support our counselors in our national
service contracts and I will get the Committee more information
on that utilization.
Mr. Takano. All right. Well, you know, I too wish to echo
the sentiments of my Ranking Member that I hope you get this
right and this is a very, very important group of veterans that
we need to make sure we serve to the utmost. And I know that
you are aligned behind that purpose and I hope we can get to
the bottom of all this IT mess.
Mr. Kammerer. Yes, sir.
Mr. Takano. All right, thank you.
Mr. Arrington. Thank you, Mr. Takano. I yield 5 minutes to
myself.
Let me follow along the line of questioning of Mr. Takano.
What are the comps in terms of what a voc-rehab counselor is
paid in the private sector versus the salary, the average
salary you pay voc-rehab counselors at the VA?
Mr. Kammerer. That is an excellent question, Mr. Chairman,
I will have to take that for the record, I understand it. I
don't have those numbers, but I will get those numbers for you.
Mr. Arrington. There are voc-rehab counselors and this type
of service you provide does exist in the private sector or
outside the VA?
Mr. Kammerer. The service contracts I told you about, there
are contract--we don't have one for contract counselors, but we
are augmented by vocational rehab counselors. Every state and I
work with my partners, Mr. Arrington, at the Department of
Education Rehab Service Administration, they manage the state
workload through the state rehabilitation counselors. So all
the states have counselors and there are non-profit counselors
as well, and I work with the VSOs' partners as well.
Mr. Arrington. Do these counselors have a disabled
population as clients? I assume there--I am trying to get an
apples-to-apples--
Mr. Kammerer. Yes.
Mr. Arrington [continued]. --comparison, so we can get at
the question of the Ranking Member, which is what is a good
goal? I mean, I am not saying 100 percent is feasible,
realistic, or even 80 percent, but we have got to have
something to compare it to other than ourselves or your
operation over the last 2, 3 years, which seems like that is
the only data we have to work with.
So do you think that that exists in the marketplace where
we could ascertain that data, so we could have some comps to
know how far off the mark we are?
Mr. Kammerer. We have tried with limited success to get
state information in terms of how the states do it. I will try
again, because I believe that is an excellent measure to try to
gauge how the states do their business. One of the challenges,
sir, as you pointed out, is they are not all veteran clients.
So we are rather unique in terms of the fact that we serve
veterans. I do have a counterpart in VHA, the compensated work
there of people, that is a clinical program.
So we will work with you, sir, to get you more information
on that.
Mr. Arrington. Thank you. I took notes and took note of one
of the criticisms by the panelists that VR&E does not have
control over their counselors and that there is a sense of not
having accountability in terms of meeting with the clients,
following up with the clients, being timely, quality of
services. Do you get that impression? Do you have quality
controls in place? Are you managing that where you can identify
those counselors and the places where there are problems, and
then addressing them, do you have systems in place for that?
Mr. Kammerer. That is an excellent question, sir. I have
direct responsibility for quality assurance at the national
level. I have a staff of essentially ten, one leader and nine
folks in Nashville, Tennessee that do that for me, they do the
national. The local quality is done, as you stated, by the
local leaders, those are the VR&E leaders. The chain of command
goes through the Office of Field Operations, so the counselors
do not directly report to me. I manage the quality, I do some
of the internal controls, but I work very closely with the
Office of Field Operations. I spent many hours last week with
the district directors talking about VR&E-type issues.
So your point is well taken. It is a partnership right now
between me and the Office of Field Operations and the chain of
command in terms of the chain of command for the counselors.
Mr. Arrington. Who do you report to in the central office
at the VA?
Mr. Kammerer. Mr. Rob Reynolds, the Deputy Undersecretary
for Disability Compensation, is acting as the Deputy
Undersecretary for the Office of Economic Opportunity, he is my
direct report.
Mr. Arrington. How long has he been in that role?
Mr. Kammerer. I think he has been in that role at least
over, I would say at least a year.
Mr. Arrington. So he has been an acting?
Mr. Kammerer. He has been the acting since Deputy
Undersecretary Coy departed in December.
Mr. Arrington. I have got too many questions and I really
want to get to the systems breakdown and the $12 million we
have already established. And I appreciate your honesty, it was
a big waste of time and money, taxpayer money. And I don't know
how many counselors $12 million would add to the roster, but I
am certain it would be significant at getting after the
increase in caseload.
But let me ask you, Mr. Thrower, what disciplinary action
has ensued since your leadership has been made aware that we
have effectively wasted $12 million on this project.
Mr. Thrower. I cannot say that there has been any specific
disciplinary action. We are actually still trying to--we are
still diving in to understand exactly what the true situation
is of the history.
The key decisions that were made that I believe that took
this program off track happened from the very inception, just
the fact that we did not follow our normal process and then
various communications issues that happened as a result of
that.
Mr. Arrington. Who is responsible for that?
Mr. Thrower. Overall, the IT system development team is
responsible for all delivery of--
Mr. Arrington. Should we fire the whole team? I mean,
should the VA fire the whole team? I know I am not supposed to
ask that question, but I am going to go ahead and ask it. I
mean, is the team responsible, are you responsible? Is there a
CIO at the VA that is responsible?
I have gone over my time, Mr. Ranking Member, I'm sorry. I
am just--nobody is ever responsible at the VA, nobody. It is
everybody is and then nobody is, and we can't ever track it
down. And then I ask if there have been any disciplinary
actions, usually I ask who has been fired and they told me not
to ask that, but then I never get--we don't get the
information. If we do, nobody has been fired.
I don't know any place in the world, any market, any sector
of our economy, any industry, any private or public enterprise
where $12 million is wasted, somebody's job wasn't on the line.
I don't imagine anybody is going to get fired and that just
frustrates the dog out of me. I just don't know what to do
except to keep grilling you. I may stay here all day, I may
stay up here all day. I will let the Ranking Member go, but I
may just stay up here. We may do an all-nighter, so we can call
attention, so the taxpayers know how they are getting rooked
and how the veterans are being poorly served by the bureaucracy
at the VA. I think there is a tremendous breakdown on the IT
system side.
I am sorry I have gone over my time, Mr. Ranking Member. I
am going to yield to you and then I am going to keep going.
Mr. O'Rourke. Okay. Yeah, I think there does have to be
some accountability. And I think you can spend unlimited
amounts of money and unlimited amounts of time developing the
software if there isn't a defined budget and if there isn't a
defined deadline. I think that you can have the same people
committing the same mistakes if there isn't accountability.
You said that the typical or normal procedures were not
followed, somebody chose not to follow them or made a mistake
in not following them. I don't know if you know who that is or
if there is a lesson learned, or if there has been a message
sent throughout the organization that, you know, spending $12
million and not having a result at the end of the day is not
acceptable. We are not hearing it up here and I don't think
anyone watching it. And I think given the accountability issues
in the VA, that would just be something I would expect you to
be super sensitive to and you are not, for whatever reason.
I have a question for the VSOs, maybe if you could each
take a minute in answering this. First of all, your testimony
has been very helpful, from Ms. Ansley talking about, you know,
let's add more full-time employees, so that we get better
ratios. Ms. Vangellow, you were able to recount some anecdotes
about not getting an email returned or not having the freedom
to pursue, you know, a direction that was going to be most
beneficial to that veteran.
I really like, Mr. Liermann, the study you cited showing
$15,000 on average in higher income for those veterans who
completed the VR&E program. That is something measurable, I
mean, that is real value for the veteran, real value for the
taxpayer. It is allowing somebody to contribute at a higher
potential.
So I just thought I would ask each of you to take just one
minute, if you might, because I don't know when we are going to
meet again on this issue and I would love to have some guidance
at the highest level for you described the means to get better
outcomes, what should the Chairman and I and our colleagues be
measuring? Is it persistence, do we care how long somebody
stays in the program? Is it the success rate for these five
different tracks that people are on?
What do you at the level that we are at, voting on 1200
different bills in a year, only getting to have a VR&E hearing
once a year, what do you want us at the highest level to be
focusing on? Ms. Ansley, could you take a minute to just share
your guidance with me?
Ms. Ansley. Overall, I think it is important for the
Committee to be focused on accountability to ensure that we are
seeing a difference. I testified three years ago at the last
VR&E hearing and, unfortunately, we are still talking about a
lot of the same things, and that is disappointing.
So I feel like we need to really look at what changes are
we making within the program, whether it is bureaucratic
hurdles such as, you know, how people get into the program, how
they measure. PVA has a vocational rehabilitation program
called PAVE. I spoke with some of our counselors about these
very issues, because they are serving PVA members who have
catastrophic disabilities, and they talked about how they can
quickly get into a medical center and start talking to somebody
as soon as they acquire a disability, they can start talking to
them about, yes, it is possible to return to work, they can
quickly get the processes rolling. And how all of that is
ultimately helpful to make sure that particularly people with
catastrophic disabilities they are not self-selecting
themselves out of the workforce thinking that they can't work
and that they are not even pursuing opportunities like VR&E.
So we want to make sure that the message is given that work
is an opportunity for you and that Congress is going to invest
in this program to make the changes needed, so that we are
seeing not only higher success rates, but more veterans going
into the program.
Mr. O'Rourke. I like that and one of the things I take from
that is higher expectations that the veterans are meeting
because of a very successful VR&E Program, higher expectations
for the VA, higher expectations for the Committee of Oversight,
and we all got to perform to them. And I think it is just, you
know, success, will we get more success in that, but we have
got to take these steps. Thank you.
Ms. Vangellow, would you like to add a minute's worth to
the conversation?
Ms. Vangellow. Sure. Thank you for that question. And you
hit the nail on the head in terms of the outcomes, something
that we go into in more depth in our written testimony, how
positive outcome is defined currently is very, very broad. And
we think that, you know, ``pursued academic outcome,'' what
does that actually mean? It needs to be strictly defined. So,
in terms of going forward we can measure that and find out how
veterans are doing in this program in order to get them
employed.
And I think in order to make that successful, we really do
have to focus on accountability and making sure that VR&E does
have control over individual counselors. So, if someone is not
meeting the expectations to serve our veterans, they are no
longer in that role. And I think that does come down from, you
know, having someone who oversees economic opportunity in the
VA who from that top down can really make sure that the lines
are clear and people are held to those tough standards for our
veterans.
Mr. O'Rourke. And I know that SVA has been real consistent
on advocating for somebody who reports directly to the
Secretary on this issue and you are being consistent in that as
well. I appreciate that and you are making a good case for it,
right? That there is somebody who is accountable at the
undersecretary level to make sure that we deliver.
Mr. Liermann, would you like to add to the conversation?
Mr. Liermann. Yes, thank you. I think one of the best ways
to measure success for a disabled veteran is employment.
Whether it takes a year, 2 years, 3 years, or 5 years to get
there, the fact that they can come back, survive their
disabilities, and have the ability to not only provide for
themselves, but their families and their communities, will set
off a feeling within them and the community, that will just
elevate everything even higher.
So I think employment is probably the best outcome to look,
is we should never give up on our disabled veterans and give
them the means to find that employment, because as we indicated
earlier, 15,000 a year higher in annual program for somebody
who completes the program is amazing to me, it really is. So it
really shows the value of the program and I think substantial,
gainful employment should be what we are looking at as a
successful outcome for any disabled veteran.
Mr. O'Rourke. Well, I will close by thanking each of you,
including our representatives from the VA, for the work that
you are doing on this. It is an extraordinarily valuable
program and I just think that one of the consistent things we
are hearing, each one of you mentioned the word accountability,
is there just has to be better control for performance. We have
to make sure that we are truly delivering the highest value in
each case, setting very high expectations, achieving them, and
that is on us too. I want to make sure to the point of adding
another 143 employees that we make the appropriations request,
if we think that the ratio is determinative. To Mr. Takano's
point, having a system that can allocate resources where they
need to go that is not based on paper, and making sure that we
are accountable for delivering that system, all of that is
helpful.
So I just want to thank you and to Ms. Ansley especially
for reminding us that you testified 3 years ago. I think it is
a real challenge on this Committee is we just don't want to
continue to have the same conversation, because, it is on all
of us, and I really in the time I have remaining here want to
see if I can work with the Chairman to deliver on the guidance
that you gave us.
We have some very direct questions for the record for Mr.
Thrower and Mr. Kammerer, and we really look forward to getting
your answers, and we want to work collaboratively with you to
then build on that and make sure that next time Ms. Ansley is
here she is congratulating all of us on being able to deliver
to the higher expectations that we have set.
So, thank you all for doing this and, Mr. Chairman, thank
you for calling this hearing today.
Mr. Arrington. Thank you, Mr. Ranking Member. I know you
are trying to get me to wrap it up.
Mr. O'Rourke. I may have to go.
Mr. Arrington. No, you can leave at any time and I won't
keep you guys all night, but I do have a few more.
Look, the Ranking Member and I are on the same page, and
generally are. If it is resources you need and that is what we
believe would make the most impact to achieving the desired
outcomes in helping our wounded warriors make the most of their
lives, and have a purpose-filled life and an impact in their
communities and self-sufficiency and all those things, that is
all we want, that is all we want. But if it is defining success
better and having better performance metrics, if we are chasing
the wrong thing in that regard, if it is authority you don't
have, we have to just be clear so we can pursue that alongside
of you.
But I try to imagine what it would be like if a veteran, a
disabled veteran and potential client, if not client, were
sitting in this chair and my taxpayers from back in west Texas,
that is why, and I think they would just be beside themselves.
I think they would just be incensed with the waste and the
mismanagement.
And I hear it, I was at an oversight hearing recently on an
IT issue that had to with logistics, management system, and it
was $400 million of waste. So 12 million is just a drop in the
bucket, but the cumulative loss in not managing IT at the VA is
astronomical. And we keep giving more money and more money to
the VA, because we all want to help our veterans, but meanwhile
I think the taxpayers are being fleeced and I think the VA is
not serving the customer like they should in terms of our
veterans.
And so I am going to ask some more questions to you, Mr.
Thrower. Who do you report to at the VA?
Mr. Thrower. I report to the Principal Deputy CIO.
Mr. Arrington. And the Principal Deputy I suppose reports
to the CIO?
Mr. Thrower. Yes, sir.
Mr. Arrington. And who is the CIO?
Mr. Thrower. We have an acting CIO right now.
Mr. Arrington. So every time I have asked for the record,
asked the question who do you report to, ultimately it is
somebody that is in an acting role.
Mr. Thrower. Right.
Mr. Arrington. How long has that person been in this role
as acting CIO?
Mr. Thrower. Approximately a month.
Mr. Arrington. Okay. What happened to the last fellow?
Mr. Thrower. He resigned.
Mr. Arrington. On his own will?
Mr. Thrower. That is my sense, yes.
Mr. Arrington. Okay. So what is central VA, the acting CIO
and Deputy Principal, what are they doing about this? Are they
engaged in this in terms of what has happened, doing a post-
mortem, making sure we have lessons learned, making sure we
have appropriate accountability, making sure we have a plan on
whether to pick up what we have sunk and try to make it work or
do we take something off the shelf, are they engaged in that
process?
Mr. Thrower. Yes, sir, they are. I mean, you know, I and
the development teams have briefed them on what happened, our
assessment of how it happened. We have gone through and tried
to do--a lot of this is a lot of forensic work that I have been
doing over the last couple of months to really understand how
we got to where we are. And so our leadership is fully apprised
of that, as is leadership of the Veterans Benefits
Administration, because we have been briefing both parties, and
we are working to understand both what is the trail of
accountability and what we should do about it going forward,
both from an accountability point of view and more importantly,
and to me more importantly, of how are we going to deliver what
we want to deliver for veterans.
Mr. Arrington. Are you captain of the team for the project?
Mr. Thrower. No, sir.
Mr. Arrington. Who is?
Mr. Thrower. That would be within our development
organization.
Mr. Arrington. The IT development?
Mr. Thrower. Yes.
Mr. Arrington. And why isn't that person here at this
hearing?
Mr. Thrower. I am the--well, I have been the one who has
been providing--
Mr. Arrington. Do you report to him or is he--
Mr. Thrower. A separate chain of command.
Mr. Arrington. Okay. So if the captain of the team is in a
different chain of command, then I would go back and tell him
that is the last time you ever come to a hearing and take the
abuse that I am going to continue to dish out, when the person
that I am understanding by your comments who is accountable is
in a different part of the IT organization, is that correct?
Mr. Thrower. That is a challenge. I will say, though, that
I have, you know, in the time that I have been in the role that
I am in, I serve the role of being the liaison between the
Veterans Benefits Administration and OI&T, and the types of
conversations that I think did not happen at the beginning of
the program I am now in place to make sure they do happen.
Mr. Arrington. So conversations between whom?
Mr. Thrower. Between Mr. Kammerer, between the
undersecretary, and the developer teams on our side of the
fence, I broker that conversation.
Mr. Arrington. Is Mr. Kammerer and the VR&E, are they your
client essentially?
Mr. Thrower. Yes, sir.
Mr. Arrington. So they are your client and you have to
understand what the client's needs are.
Mr. Thrower. Yes, sir.
Mr. Arrington. Did you serve your client or did you fail
your client in this regard?
Mr. Thrower. I would say that we as an organization have
failed our client in--
Mr. Arrington. When you say as an organization, I want to
be specific, who is that? Who is the organization that failed
the client, VR&E, and therefore failed the case managers to
give them tools to be more efficient, and therefore failed the
disabled veterans who are receiving services? So, who is the
organization? Is it your team, is it the guy that is not here
who is actually responsible?
Mr. Thrower. My sense in this case--I have been in this
role, sir, the role that I am in is a relatively new role. I am
in the role because I think a lot are put in this role to put
between these organizations because of I think a lot of the
necessary communications and the ability to translate business
speak to IT speak, as it were, was missing.
Mr. Arrington. Were you in this role during this project?
Mr. Thrower. No, sir.
Mr. Arrington. So you just were placed in this role after
the fact?
Mr. Thrower. Well, at the point where we were past the
point of no return certainly.
Mr. Arrington. Okay.
Mr. Thrower. I have been in this role for officially 6
months.
Mr. Arrington. Is it true there have been four project
managers over this--
Mr. Thrower. So within the development team, yes, there
have been four project managers over the course of this
project.
Mr. Arrington. Who did those project managers report to?
Mr. Thrower. They reported to the development organization.
Mr. Arrington. And the head of development is whom?
Mr. Thrower. Right now, it is, I would say Bill James is
officially the head of the EPMO, he is actually--
Mr. Arrington. I don't know what EPO means, I don't know
what that means. Who is the head of development?
Mr. Thrower. He is the head of our development
organization.
Mr. Arrington. James?
Mr. Thrower. Bill James, yes. He is actually now detailed
to be our acting Principal Deputy.
Mr. Arrington. He got a promotion out of it. I would call
that a promotion.
Mr. Thrower. Well, sir, I would also say that he was not in
that role either when this job got moved.
Mr. Arrington. Okay. All right, let me just keep peeling
back, because we are not going to leave here until the veterans
back in my district understand what the hell is going on,
because nobody understands what is going on up here. So we are
just going to keep asking.
Now, that guy who has now been promoted to Principal Deputy
is gone--he is not gone, he--
Mr. Thrower. No, sir. You didn't understand, sir.
Mr. Arrington. Okay, please help me understand.
Mr. Thrower. Okay. Well, so he has actually only been in
that role for a little over a year himself.
Mr. Arrington. I did understand.
Mr. Thrower. Okay.
Mr. Arrington. So he has been promoted to Principal Deputy,
but he was not there when this project was breaking down.
Mr. Thrower. That is right.
Mr. Arrington. So when I asked who was responsible and you
said project development, then I said who is the project--so
who was the project development head, director, chief
executive, while this project went through four--
Mr. Thrower. When this guy started--
Mr. Arrington [continued]. --development managers and
ultimately failed--
Mr. Thrower [continued]. --and when I go back--
Mr. Arrington [continued]. --and wasted $12 million?
Mr. Thrower. When I go back, sir, to 2015 when the original
decisions were made in this, Mr. Rob Thomas was the head of the
project development organization and Ms. Nicole Mayerhauser was
the Deputy in that organization, neither of them are at VA
today.
Mr. Arrington. Why?
Mr. Thrower. One retired and one left.
Mr. Arrington. On their own accord?
Mr. Thrower. On their own accord, yes.
Mr. Arrington. Do you think they anticipated this hearing
and maybe that--
Mr. Thrower. I would not care to speculate. I do not
believe that they did but, you know, there was a lot going on.
Mr. Arrington. When did they retire and resign?
Mr. Thrower. Mr. Thomas left about a year ago and they both
left about a year ago.
Mr. Arrington. How long has this project been going on?
Mr. Thrower. Since 2015.
Mr. Arrington. So who carried it, who carried the ball for
at least half of the time?
Mr. Thrower. So it has been passed along. If I may, sir?
Mr. Arrington. You may.
Mr. Thrower. I mean, I have looked, I have been looking
really hard at this, because this bothers the heck out of me
too, sir, to understand how we ended up in this path and how we
diverged from things that we normally do. We normally follow a
development path wherein we--which we call Agile, which has a
methodology where you are actually delivering capability to
customers on a regular basis. You deliver a piece of it today
that people use and they work, and we know it works because it
is out there in the field, then we do another piece in 2 months
and another piece in 2 months after that. I have been up to
this Committee and spoken to you in the past about what we are
doing with education and with appeals. In both of those
situations, we are following the methodology very carefully.
Mr. Arrington. Whose methodology, the VA's?
Mr. Thrower. No, the Agile methodology. This idea of
delivering real things out in the field so we know that they
work and they are fully tested.
Mr. Arrington. Was the Agile methodology not followed in
this case, is that what you are telling me?
Mr. Thrower. It was not used in this case and it is my
belief that it should have been, and to me that was the
critical failure here. And instead, you know, there was a
desire that was expressed early on that we wanted to--that it
was a desire from the customer to deliver a fully developed,
not to deploy in the field until we had a complete product,
which in that has an inherent risk of if you do not--is that
because you don't have that ability to test with real users and
to have pieces of functionality delivered incrementally along
the way.
Mr. Arrington. Is there a strong default or incentive
within the VA to do projects in-house?
Mr. Thrower. Actually, I would say that is changing and I
think that is a very move to the good for us because, you know,
there has been over time we know that we are not the department
of software development, we are the department--and
maintenance, we are the Department of Veterans Affairs.
Mr. Arrington. Yeah, because that just--exactly. I mean,
seriously, we are looking at trying to figure out, this is
basic management, best practice in operating any organization,
and that is what are your core competencies, what is your core
mission. And the VA is not qualified to be and nor should it be
involved in, to me, software development, that is not your core
job.
And I have seen it over and over, the failure when the VA
tries to develop their own software solutions instead of taking
it off the shelf. We have an off-the-shelf solution for this
that 40 other VA enterprise--or states, rather, have adopted,
40 states have adopted a solution for this and meanwhile VA is
trying to do their own technology, software development. It
doesn't make any sense at all and we have just thrown away
millions of dollars on account of trying to keep, in my
opinion, jobs at the VA for software developers. Would you
agree with that?
Mr. Thrower. I would agree with that. And I would say that
the leadership over the last 2 years within OI&T would agree
with you as well. I mean, we have shifted to a very strong
posture of buy before build. And in every project that is
coming forward now, the first thing we are really incentivized
to do is to see what products are out there in the marketplace
that could fill this gap and to only do, if there is any
development that we do in-house, it is only the pieces that are
truly unique to VA that no one else can do, and it may be some
issues around master data management or certain things that are
very narrowly scoped.
Mr. Arrington. I am going to give you the benefit of the
doubt that you have a different philosophical view of what VA's
core mission is and what they should be doing with respect to
software solutions and it is different than the old paradigm, I
am hoping and that is what I am hearing.
Mr. Thrower. It is pretty dramatically different.
Mr. Arrington. So I am going to just, you know, all I can
do is trust and then verify it through the process. Is there
any senior person in the software development side, CIO's
office, who was there through the entire project or at least
half of the project after those two gentlemen or the people
that you mentioned who retired and resigned?
Mr. Thrower. I actually don't believe that there has been
anybody. The turnover in OI&T has been very large over the last
several years and so there really has not been any one in a
senior role that has been in the same job.
Mr. Arrington. Mr. Kammerer, do you have to get permission
to go out on your own to get software? Like it must be
frustrating to you. Like could you just go out and get
software? Because you are the leader, you know that we need IT
solutions, because you are stuck in 1997 with a No. 2 pencil
and a big chief tablet for your case workers, and can you just
go out and get an IT solution yourself or do you have to go up
the IT chain of command?
Mr. Kammerer. There are legal and other challenges to just
being able to purchase software. So the short answer is, I
can't just get my own system for the counselors. It is
unacceptable, as I stated, what happened. We need the system.
We are working with our IT partners to address what you talked
about, the managed services or managed software as a service.
Mr. Arrington. But could you go out and purchase it
yourself?
Mr. Kammerer. There is some conversation within our
organization about what is feasible in terms of our legal and
appropriations ability to acquire those things. I will leave it
to the expert, sir, to my right to give you more context, but--
Mr. Arrington. Could he just go out and purchase a system
that would help manage the case work?
Mr. Thrower. So one piece of context is that, you know,
there is a separate IT appropriation within VA, and so things
that are clearly defined as IT do go through, all approvals go
through the CIO. There are good reasons for that, not the least
of which is that any solution that is purchased and/or
implemented, we want to ensure that from a data-integrity
standpoint and a data-interoperability standpoint that these
systems work together and that we can aggregate information to
have a holistic view of veterans. However, within that
environment, particularly with our philosophy as it has been
evolving to buy versus build, we encourage looking at outside
solutions and using that. As long as we can assert that and
assure that these solutions can be integrated within the
environment, that we have the right integration between, you
know, the folks on our side to make sure that it ties back in--
Mr. Arrington. So I think you probably have the right
answers to how it should be managed. My takeaway from my
oversight hearings, this one, and every hearing I have had
since the first hearing in this room as a new Member of
Congress, is that the bureaucracy at the VA is absolutely,
fundamentally broken, and nowhere is it more broken than on the
IT management side. It is decentralized, centralized when it
is--I would fire you guys as a client if I were Mr. Kammerer, I
would be disappointed, because you are going to get beat up for
not achieving your outcomes or you should be, if you are not,
and then you have got to point over to the CIO and the
ineptitude for these guys to manage a project.
Mr. Kammerer, are you disappointed in your service from the
IT side of VA where you are now still stuck in 1997? That is a
yes or no.
Mr. Kammerer. I am very disappointed we don't have a new
system, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Arrington. How do you stay in this job just knowing
that you aren't able to serve the veterans, the disabled
veteran community that is your clientele? And you just get no
help, it seems like. Do you need more resources? Yes or no.
Mr. Kammerer. Certainly in the conversation we are having
right now, Mr. Chairman, we need additional resources to
complete this case management.
Mr. Arrington. Do you need a better IT team?
Mr. Kammerer. The gentleman to my right and I have had more
time together in the last 6 months trying to solve this
challenge and he hasn't been anything other than supportive,
cooperative, and trying to get to, yes, so we can get some new
software to our counselors, sir.
Mr. Arrington. It has been a long day, we are going to
close, and then I would like to follow up with you guys
separately and I don't want to spend everybody else's time. I
appreciate the other panelists and I am sorry to inconvenience
you with the line of questions that has to do with you and your
members of your organizations, but they are certainly
discussions we could have outside of this Committee hearing.
So I ask unanimous consent that statements for the record
from The American Legion and the Veterans of Foreign Wars of
the United States be submitted into the hearing record.
Hearing no objection, so ordered.
Mr. Arrington. Finally, I ask unanimous consent that all
Members have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their
remarks, and include any extraneous material in the record of
today's hearing.
Hearing no objection, so ordered.
If there is nothing further, this hearing is adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 4:02 p.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.]
A P P E N D I X
----------
Prepared Statement of Jack Kammerer
Good Afternoon Chairman Arrington, Ranking Member O'Rourke, and
Members of the Subcommittee. Thank you for inviting me to appear before
you today to discuss the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Vocational
Rehabilitation and Employment (VR&E) program. I am accompanied by Mr.
Lloyd Thrower, Deputy Chief Information Officer, Account Manager for
Benefits, Office of Information and Technology. VA continues our
deliberate efforts to achieve our strategic goal of transforming the
VR&E program, delineated in Fiscal Year (FY) 2014, and remains focused
on understanding the needs of our current to future Veteran population
and enhancing our service delivery to these Veterans. My testimony
today will provide an overview of the VR&E program with a performance
summary and a discussion of VR&E's performance metrics, programs, and
initiatives.
VR&E Program Overview
The Veterans Benefits Administration (VBA) VR&E Service assists
Servicemembers and Veterans with service-connected disabilities and
barriers to employment to prepare for, find, and maintain suitable
employment. For Veterans with service-connected disabilities so severe
that they cannot immediately consider employment, independent living
(IL) services are offered to improve their ability to live as
independently as possible. VR&E employs nearly 1,000 professional
vocational rehabilitation counselors and delivers services through a
network of nearly 350 office locations. VR&E's service delivery model
supports Veterans where they are located, and currently includes
operations at 56 Regional Offices (ROs), the National Capital Region
Benefits Office, approximately 142 VR&E out-based offices, 71 military
installations for the Integrated Disability Evaluation System (IDES),
and 95 VetSuccess On Campus (VSOC) schools/sites.
VA's VR&E team in Washington, D.C., and staff across the country
are committed to and engaged in multiple transformational initiatives.
VA's intent remains to increase program efficiencies through improved
business processes, with continual refinement of our performance
metrics and ongoing technology enhancements, all to provide the optimal
support for over 132,000 Veterans participating in the VR&E program in
FY 2017.
VA remains focused on the goal of assisting Veterans with service-
connected disabilities in achieving employment and living
independently. VR&E has seen an overall increase in applications as
more adjudicated compensation claims result in more potentially
eligible VR&E clients with service-connected disabilities and barriers
to employment. VR&E Chapter 31 applicants grew 33 percent from FY 2013
to FY 2017, with a corresponding increase of 17 percent in Chapter 31
VR&E participants. VR&E processed 107,200 new Chapter 31 claims in FY
2017, with an average of 54 days to process entitlement determination.
While most Veterans are in the program, on average, five or more years,
in FY 2017 VR&E counselors achieved over 15,000 positive outcomes
including assisting more than 12,000 Veterans to achieve their
rehabilitation goals and a 6.5 percent increase in employment
rehabilitations from FY 2016.
While the VR&E workload has grown, the counselor caseload has
slowly declined as we achieve more positive outcomes, resolve older
cases, and strive for active Veteran participation in the program.
Currently, VR&E has a rolling average of 133 Veterans per counselor,
down from 140 Veterans per counselor at the end of FY 2016. However,
there are other VR&E staff members who work directly with the
counselors assisting Veterans in reaching their rehabilitation goals.
Recently, VBA executed an organizational review focused on VR&E's
staffing levels nationwide. One of the primary directives was to
standardize operations across all ROs in accordance with the population
they serve. As part of this review, we looked at the combination of
counselors and other staff members to ensure a balanced workload
approach.
VR&E is actively looking at multiple methods, including utilizing
technology, to enhance the time counselors are able to engage Veterans.
We are conducting an ongoing time study that consists of systematic
observation, analysis, and measurement of the separate steps in the
performance of a specific job. This is done for the purpose of
establishing a standard time for each performance, with the ultimate
goal of improving internal processes and procedures. This study will
capture the work accomplished by VR&E staff and will define what VR&E-
specific work is being completed, how much time it takes to complete
that work, and determine an average time for each job duty.
VR&E Program Data
In FY 2017, VR&E counselors achieved 15,528 positive outcomes, up 8
percent from FY 2016. These included successfully rehabilitating 12,128
Veterans with service-connected disabilities, with 10,461 achieving
rehabilitation into suitable employment, and an additional 778 Veterans
completing their rehabilitation plan and electing to pursue further
education rather than seek immediate employment. The remaining 889 were
Veterans with disabilities so severe that they could not currently
pursue employment, and achieved rehabilitation after they were able to
gain greater independence through the delivery of IL services. VR&E
counselors also achieved 3,400 Maximum Rehabilitation Gains.
With our team of 79 assigned VSOC counselors, VR&E continues to
leverage our partnership with 95 schools across the country to provide
educational and vocational counseling and other on-site services to a
current target population of approximately 78,000 Veteran students. In
FY 2017, VR&E's VSOC counselors assisted over 43,000 Veteran students
and eligible dependents, including over 14,000 new contacts. VR&E has
eight new jointly signed VSOC/school Memorandums of Understanding and
we are working to expand to these new sites within the next year.
VR&E also closely collaborates with the Department of Defense (DoD)
to provide VR&E services to Active Duty, Reserve, and National Guard
Servicemembers through IDES. VR&E has nearly 145 IDES counselors
located at 71 military installations, and provides early intervention
counseling and other available services to IDES and other wounded, ill,
and injured Servicemembers. In collaboration with the U.S. Army's
Warrior Transition Command, staff members are jointly visiting select
IDES sites to improve the referral process and services at military
installations. VA appreciates the Committee's long-term support for
wounded, ill and injured Servicemembers.
The VR&E program continues to provide educational and career
counseling under Chapter 36 to transitioning Servicemembers, Veterans,
and beneficiaries who are eligible for VA educational benefits. VR&E
continues to provide more comprehensive and updated information about
Chapter 36 counseling and services that was also incorporated into the
recent update to the Interagency-led (e.g. DoD, VA, DOL) Transition
Assistance Program curriculum.
VR&E Longitudinal Study
VR&E Service has continued tracking Veteran cohorts in the
congressionally mandated 20-year Longitudinal Study. This study of
Veterans who began their VR&E programs in FY 2010, 2012, and 2014, has
provided a wealth of information including detailed analysis of cohort
trends and Veteran satisfaction with VR&E services. From last year's
iteration of the study, VR&E found that the majority of participants
from all cohorts reported moderate-to-high program satisfaction (nearly
90 percent); women make up a larger percentage of the program
participants (17-20 percent) than in the overall Veteran population;
and on average, cohort members have a service-connected disability
rating of about 60 percent. The study at this juncture also reveals
that almost one quarter of participants in each cohort have a primary
rating of post-traumatic stress disorder; more than 80 percent of the
Veterans who achieved rehabilitation from an employment plan were
employed at the time of the survey; and more than 90 percent were
employed within the past 12 months. The study further indicates that
Veterans who successfully complete the VR&E program report more
positive economic outcomes including higher employment rates, annual
earnings, and home ownership compared to those Veterans who
discontinued their participation in the VR&E program.
Information Technology and Business Process Improvements
VR&E continues to work on leveraging technology to increase
efficiencies and enhance our service delivery model in preparation for
the development of a new VR&E Case Management System (VRE-CMS). In
collaboration with the Veterans Health Administration (VHA), VR&E uses
current technology to enhance Veteran services through an online
medical referral tracking system and online counseling technology. In
FY 2015, VR&E began employing VHA Telehealth technology that uses a
secure video teleconference to enable VR&E counselors to remotely meet
with and counsel Veterans receiving VR&E services. Initial feedback
received from Veterans described the technology as challenging because
the platform required the installation of specialized software, the use
of a username and password, and did not operate on mobile devices. VR&E
is working with VHA to use updated technology, the Pexip application,
which will be easier for Veterans to participate in Tele-counseling
appointments. VR&E will begin piloting this system in June 2018. The
Pexip application is a mobile-friendly device that eliminates the need
for Veterans to install specialized software, and provides a secure
link between the counselor and Veteran. The ease of use and increased
platform accessibility will improve VR&E's responsiveness to Veterans'
needs and reduce travel costs and time for both Veterans and employees.
VBA continues to work with the Office of Information and Technology
(OI&T) and Multi-Channel Technology (MCT) to find a viable solution to
transition VR&E to an electronic case management system. To ensure
alignment with program objectives, VBA is conducting a complete
evaluation of IT development to date. Currently VBA, OI&T, and MCT are
actively conducting a needs assessment and exploring alternatives to
determine the most effective and cost-efficient way to deliver a
modern, case management system. The intent remains to integrate VR&E
with other VA benefit information systems to enhance relationship
management and support vocational rehabilitation success. The goals of
the new VRE-CMS remain to deliver a paperless service delivery model,
better support Veterans on their own terms, ensure consistent efficient
service delivery and quality, and modernize the employee experience.
Methods to develop and implement this effort will be evaluated once
options are presented.
Competency Based Training System (CBTS) for VR&E Counselors
VR&E piloted and is now planning a national deployment of the
Competency Based Training System in FY 2019. This system will deliver
empirically researched and industry benchmarked competency assessments
to counselors online. This supports VBA's goal to improve the employee
and Veteran experience by targeting training to the individual
employee's needs and enabling employees to provide the highest level of
counseling and employment services.
Remote entitlement
In an effort to increase the use of Tele-Counseling, the VR&E
Service undertook a new pilot in April 2017 with the St. Petersburg,
Florida RO to allow the use during the initial entitlement
determination with the VR&E applicant. The initial results of the pilot
indicate a great benefit to the applicant with a time savings, on
average, of two hours because the applicant does not have to travel to
meet face-to-face with the counselor. Based on the success of this
pilot, remote entitlement was extended to an additional five ROs in
April 2018, with a national rollout expected by the end of FY 2018.
Other VR&E Initiatives using Innovative Approaches
VR&E is also continuing to leverage and expand the use of national
VR&E contract services to reduce the overall burden on the counselor
staff and enable positive outcomes. VR&E continues to seek other
technology and process innovations to improve service delivery to
Veterans. We recently provided all counselors access to the Joint
Legacy Viewer that provides bi-directional access to Veteran and DoD
medical records. In the coming weeks, VR&E will implement Dragon
software to our counselors. Dragon is a dictation software that will
help to increase the efficiency of counselors as they perform daily and
routine tasks.
In an effort to reduce the overall no-show rate for appointments,
VR&E is also leveraging technology to implement a process where
Veterans are reminded of upcoming appointments through a text message
on their mobile device. VR&E Service continues to work to transform the
Quality Assurance (QA) program. In an effort to better track trends in
performance and identify specific training needs, we revised this QA
review instrument and worked with a statistician to ensure a valid and
reliable sampling of cases are reviewed.
Concluding Remarks
The VR&E Service, our leaders, and our teammates in the field will
continue to further accelerate our VR&E Transformation. VR&E will
continue to assess and improve the delivery of vocational
rehabilitation services to a most deserving population: Veterans who
have incurred a service-connected disability. Through the development
of a new VR&E Case Management System, program performance measures that
focus on Veteran outcomes, clear accounting of both Veteran progress
and employment outcomes, and technology initiatives such as enhanced
VR&E Tele-counseling, we continue to strive towards both substantially
improving and materially enhancing the VR&E program. We also continue
to develop and field comprehensive training, conduct significant
oversight, and focus on efforts to enhance both service delivery and
the actual services we provide Veterans in the VR&E program.
Mr. Chairman, this concludes my statement. I would be pleased to
answer any questions from you or other members of the Subcommittee.
Prepared Statement of Heather Ansley, Esq., MSW
Chairman Arrington, Ranking Member O'Rourke, and members of the
Subcommittee, Paralyzed Veterans of America (PVA), thanks you for the
opportunity to testify for this oversight hearing regarding the
Department of Veterans Affairs' (VA) Vocational Rehabilitation and
Employment (VR&E) program. This program provides critical assistance to
veterans who have catastrophic disabilities due to their service to our
nation.
Until the passage of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) in
1990, there were no widespread protections in Federal law prohibiting
disability-based discrimination in employment. PVA was a leader in
advocating for the passage of this seminal civil rights law that
provides equality of opportunity and access for people with
disabilities, including veterans with disabilities. Despite increasing
numbers of people with disabilities finding and retaining employment,
however, too many have barriers to entering or remaining in the labor
market. For example, approximately 42 percent of Gulf War era veterans
with service-connected disability ratings of 60 percent or higher are
not in the workforce. \1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ News Release, U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Employment
Situation of Veterans - 2017
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
VR&E helps veterans as they work to rebuild their lives in the face
of disabilities that are a result of their military service. The
services available to veterans with catastrophic disabilities are
critical to allowing them to benefit from the opportunities fostered by
the ADA. VA's program, which is authorized by Chapter 31 of Title 38 of
the United States Code, allows VA to provide comprehensive services to
veterans with service-connected disabilities who have employment
barriers that make it difficult for them to obtain and maintain
competitive employment, while achieving maximum independence in daily
living. For those who may be unable to seek employment following a
disability or illness, VR&E is also authorized to provide independent
living services.
In fiscal year 2016, 137,097 veterans participated in VA's VR&E
program, while another 36,502 received evaluation and counseling
services. \2\ Of the veterans participating in VR&E services, 103,944,
or more than 75 percent of all participants, had a serious employment
barrier. \3\ Veterans with serious employment barriers have an
impairment that significantly impacts their ability to prepare for,
seek, and retain employment and may require additional services such as
adaptive equipment. \4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Department of Veterans Affairs, Veterans Benefits
Administration Annual Benefits Report for Fiscal Year 2016, https://
www.benefits.va.gov/REPORTS/abr/ABR-Vocational-Rehabilitation-
Employment-FY16-06092017.pdf.
\3\ Id.
\4\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Veterans who have acquired disabilities due to their military
service that then create barriers to employment have earned every
opportunity available to allow them to find success in employment. For
some veterans, this may mean building a small business, while for those
with the most significant disabilities it may mean working part-time
from home for an employer. Whatever the future holds for these
veterans, a strong VR&E program is critical to the long-term success of
our nation's efforts to help veterans with service-connected
disabilities transition into employment following their service.
Improve Access to Services Through New Resources and Program
Efficiencies
It takes time for a vocational counselor to properly evaluate
veterans who have significant yet manageable physical and mental health
disabilities for services and perform the necessary associated tasks.
Even an experienced counselor needs sufficient time to carefully
evaluate and collect information, and ultimately, guide their clients.
The counselor's job is to keep up with planning and all the necessary
behind-the-scenes paperwork, with an eye on moving the case forward.
While managing a caseload, the vocational counselor also needs to
remain up to date on training programs, and the ``world of work.'' At
the very least, the counselor has to be familiar with training
programs, universities, jobs in the community, resources, and more. All
of this is an important function of the job that takes time.
In light of all of these duties, it is important that a counselor
maintains a balanced caseload. A ratio of counselors to clients of
1:125 is recognized as a full workload in the field of vocational
rehabilitation counseling. Although an experienced counselor can handle
125 clients, the needs of those clients must be considered.
Veterans come into the vocational rehabilitation system with some
or many barriers to employment due to their one or more mental health
or physical disabilities (and often veterans have both kinds of
disabilities). They may have many health and physical limitations to
work around, and all this is important to know and consider when
developing services aimed at a suitable end goal. If the proportion of
veteran clients who have significant barriers to employment is too
great, then it may be tough for one counselor to properly manage 125
cases at a time.
Ensuring a proper counselor-to-veteran ratio in VR&E's program has
been a perennial issue because of the impact staffing deficiencies have
on the successful administration of the program, and ultimately, how
successfully the program services its veteran clients. In January 2014,
the Government Accountability Office issued a report calling on VA's
VR&E program to implement performance and workload management
improvements. At that time, caseloads for VR&E counselors ranged up to
1:139. \5\ According to VA, the average counselor-to-veteran caseload
ratio is now approximately 1:133.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ Government Accountability Office, ``VA Vocational
Rehabilitation and Employment: Future Performance and Workload
Management Improvements Are Needed,'' GAO-14-61, January 2014.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Independent Budget (IB), co-authored by the Disabled American
Veterans, PVA, and the Veterans of Foreign Wars, has highlighted on a
continuing basis the need for additional VR&E personnel to improve the
program's effectiveness. In the most recent IB budget recommendations
for Fiscal Years (FY) 2019 and 2020, the IBVSOs recommended an $18
million increase for VR&E over the estimated FY 2018 appropriations.
\6\ This appropriation would allow VA to hire an additional 143 full-
time equivalent employees. \7\ Of these employees, at least 75 percent
should be VR&E counselors as opposed to administrative or other
personnel.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ The Independent Budget, Budget Recommendations for Fiscal Years
2019 and 2020 (2018), http://www.independentbudget.org/2019/z--edits--
022218/IB--FY19-20--D9s.pdf.
\7\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The IB continues to recommend increased VR&E staffing due to the
imbalance between the increasing number of veterans in the program and
the number of employees available to serve them. In the last four
years, participation in the program has increased approximately 16.8
percent. \8\ Personnel, however, have only increased by 1.8 percent.
\9\ With program participation estimated to increase by an additional
three percent in the next fiscal year, \10\ personnel will continue to
feel constrained to provide the services veterans, particularly those
with significant barriers to employment, need to be successful.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ Id.
\9\ Id.
\10\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Providing VR&E with additional resources to decrease the counselor-
to-veteran ratio is a step in the right direction. VR&E must also,
however, reduce bureaucratic hurdles that delay veterans in moving
through the vocational rehabilitation process. For example, PVA, along
with our IB co-authors, support the commissioning of a study to assess
whether or not VR&E's eligibility process could be streamlined by
allowing access to any veteran with a service-connected disability. If
veterans encounter hurdles to participation, then they may lose hope,
interest, and ultimately, opportunities.
In addition to removing unnecessary processes, VR&E must deploy
technology, where appropriate, to facilitate interaction with veteran
clients and reduce administrative burdens on counselors. VR&E's piloted
efforts to use technology to facilitate the entitlement process by
using tele-counseling is a step in the right direction. Further
implementation of electronic processes to facilitate participation by
veterans and reduce administrative burdens on VR&E personnel have the
potential to boost the program's success, while allowing VA to more
efficiently use available resources.
The services available to veterans with service-connected
disabilities through VA's VR&E program are vital to their ability to
successfully return to work after acquiring what is in some cases a
catastrophic disability. Additional investment in this program, along
with a reduction of administrative delays is key to ensuring that
counselors are able to access the tools needed to help these veterans
obtain and retain competitive employment in their communities. PVA also
supports the creation of an administration within VA focused on
veterans' economic opportunity and transition. We believe that the
creation of this fourth administration within VA would elevate programs
like VR&E and result in increased attention from VA leaders and
stakeholders.
Continue Collaboration with Public and Private Partners
Continued resource constraints within the VR&E program complicate
the ability of VR&E counselors to provide intensive services for
veterans with multiple barriers to employment. Under current resource
limitations, one way to maximize VR&E services is to increase
partnerships with community organizations that provide specialty
placement services and other Federal programs that provide employment
services for veterans with disabilities. For veterans who have complex
needs as a result of their disabilities and other circumstances, these
partnerships may provide the lifeline that results in long-term
employment success.
As a result of the barriers to employment faced by our members, PVA
launched its own vocational rehabilitation and employment program in
2007, Paving Access for Veterans Employment (PAVE). With offices now
co-located in VA medical centers in Tampa, Richmond, San Antonio,
Chicago, Minneapolis, Long Beach, and a new dedicated office in New
York City, PAVE serves all veterans nationwide using a hybrid,
integrated approach to assist veterans and transitioning service
members who face significant barriers to employment, as well as their
spouses and caregivers.
PAVE provides clients with one-on-one career counseling and
assistance. The program's services are available to any veterans with
disabilities, including those whose disabilities are not related to
their military service. PAVE counselors offer proactive, rapid
engagement to ensure newly injured or ill veterans quickly learn about
the services and supports available to help them return to work.
Importantly, the program is a partner for life to ensure clients'
continuing success. All services are provided at no charge.
Although PAVE counselors are serving some of the most difficult to
place clients, including those living with paralysis or serious
illness, they have a high rate of success in helping veterans return to
work. In 2016, the PAVE program had an average active caseload of 600
clients and averaged 350 placements. Most importantly, the average
retention rate for employed clients was 83 percent.
Continuing to foster new partnerships to ensure that veterans with
disabilities, particularly those who have catastrophic disabilities,
are able to be successful in returning to work is needed to stretch
VR&E's existing resources. For example, PAVE counselors have noted that
they are able to more quickly begin providing vocational assistance
because there are fewer procedural hurdles to clear for eligibility.
Another important aspect of these partnerships is the ability of
private partners, such as PVA's PAVE program, to serve veterans who are
ineligible for VR&E services, along with the caregivers and family
members of all veterans who may need these services. Thus, these
partnerships allow more veterans to receive high quality assistance.
VA's VR&E program must also continue to foster relationships with
other government programs that have responsibilities to help veterans
with disabilities obtain and retain employment. For example, the
Department of Labor's Veterans' Employment and Training Service (VETS)
administers programs that play a key role in assisting veterans with
disabilities in obtaining employment. We are pleased that VR&E now
reports that 100 percent of VR&E clients are referred to the state
workforce system and the assistance available through federally-funded
Disabled Veterans' Outreach Program (DVOP) specialists. We urge
continued and increased collaboration and an evaluation of the success
of these referrals for VR&E clients.
With the reality of continuing budgetary constraints, it is unclear
when, if ever, VR&E may have the counselors and other resources
necessary to adequately assist the increasing number of veterans who
are seeking VR&E services each year. Collaborating with public and
private partners is an important way to ensure that veterans with
disabilities will be able to receive the services and supports needed
to allow them to build successful employment outcomes. VR&E must
continue to do community outreach to find experienced, credible
partners to meet gaps that will result in more veterans with
disabilities being placed in competitive, integrated employment sooner.
Ensure Access to Services
A veteran's eligibility period for receiving services from VR&E is
for a 12-year period beginning on either: (1) the date of separation
from military service, or (2) the date the veteran receives a VA
disability rating. In order to receive services, a veteran must need
vocational rehabilitation to overcome employment barriers due to a
service-connected disability. A veteran's entitlement to participate in
VR&E services is 48 months.
PVA, along with our IB co-authors, has long supported the
elimination of the 12-year limit on eligibility for services available
through the VR&E program. For veterans who have incurred a catastrophic
disability, the 12-year delimiting date may not be sufficient to allow
them to meet their vocational rehabilitation goals. Furthermore, many
of these veterans have disabilities that may continue to evolve and
worsen over time, which may cause them to need additional assistance.
Veterans with service-connected disabilities must have access to the
vocational rehabilitation services that allow them to continue to work
throughout their lives.
Although a VR&E counselor may waive the 12-year limit for veterans
with serious employment barriers, veterans living with the wounds,
injuries, and illnesses associated with military service should have
certainty that if they need assistance in staying in or returning to
the workforce in the future that this program will be there to assist
them. Unnecessarily limiting eligibility harms veterans, particularly
those with catastrophic disabilities, by failing to foster the
conditions that allow them be a part of their communities and
contributing members to our nation's economy. Ensuring access to the
supports and services that help veterans with disabilities fulfill
their potential is integral to maximizing a veteran's potential.
Increase Follow Up Time
VR&E counselors typically follow veterans for 60 days once they are
placed in a job. After that time, VA will close the veteran's case and
the placement will be deemed a success. We are concerned, however, that
60 days is not enough time to determine whether or not a veteran who
has a catastrophic disability has successfully adjusted to working as a
person with a disability.
Most people find it at least somewhat challenging to settle into a
new job. For someone who has acquired a disability, there are
additional challenges that must be met including those related to
needed accommodations, evolving medical needs and appointments, and
other disability-related matters that can unfold over a period of time.
Furthermore, employee probationary periods may be longer than 60 days.
PVA, along with the co-authors of the IB, believe that, at the very
least, VR&E should study whether or not the current tracking standard
of 60 days is sufficient follow up time. For employees with
probationary periods over 60 days, longer follow up time may allow for
problems that could lead to dismissal to be addressed, resulting in the
veteran remaining employed. Regardless of the length of a probationary
period, if any, it makes sense to increase the follow up time to ensure
that the veteran has the supports, if needed, to ensure a successful
transition to the workforce. That's why PVA's PAVE counselors conduct
ongoing follow up for veterans placed through their program.
Long-term support may be needed to help a veteran with a
catastrophic disability to not only successfully transition back to the
workforce but also to remain in the workforce. If a veteran is not
successful in the workplace, then he or she may suffer setbacks to
include a belief that work is not possible, even when the problem was
lack of support. Not all jobs turn out to be the right fit, but no
veteran should feel that their only option is to leave the workforce
when the proper supports and assistance would allow him or her to be
successful. America cannot afford to waste the talent of these veterans
who have much to offer to our society.
Enhance Independent Living
Despite best efforts, veterans who have significant disabilities
may be unable to enter the labor market. In 1980, Congress passed a
pilot program designed to assist these veterans by providing them with
needed services and resources to increase their independence and
ability to participate in their families and communities. Through the
Independent Living program, VA is able to guide these veterans in
development of goals and provide the information, referrals, and
continuing case management needed for success in achieving them. A
number of creative alternatives to employment preparation can be
recommended, purchased, or approved by a veteran's counselor to enhance
a veteran's quality of life.
VA's Independent Living program was initially limited to 500
veterans. Over time, the program proved to be a critical option for
improving the rehabilitation experiences of catastrophically disabled
veterans. As a result, Congress increased the number of veterans who
could be served through this program. Today, however, the program
remains capped and VA may initiate no more than 2,700 cases per year.
The Independent Living Program must be able to accept any veteran
who could benefit without VA being forced to monitor enrollees to
ensure that the cap on new cases is not exceeded. In addition, VR&E
counselors must be well-versed in the Independent Living program to
ensure that those who are eligible and who would benefit most from
participation are given the opportunity to do so. Once a veteran is in
the program, counselors must also closely track referrals for VA
service and benefits to ensure that those referrals are addressed.
Otherwise, the program will fail the veterans it serves, and their
independence will be compromised.
In sum, without the proper services and supports, veterans with
catastrophic disabilities are in danger of following out of the
workforce. Such a loss means decreased financial security and social
opportunities. VA's VR&E program provides critical access to needed
services and supports for veterans with service-connected disabilities.
An investment in VR&E is an investment in helping veterans with
disabilities return to work and ensuring their long-term rehabilitation
and success.
PVA thanks you for this opportunity to express our views. We would
be happy to answer any questions that you may have.
Prepared Statement of Cassandra Vangellow, Esq.
Chairman Arrington, Ranking Member O'Rourke, and Members of the
Committee:
Thank you for inviting Student Veterans of America (SVA) to submit
our testimony on the Department of Veterans Affairs' (VA) Vocational
Rehabilitation and Employment Program (VR&E). With more than 1,500
chapters representing more than 1.1 million student veterans in schools
across the country, we are pleased to share the perspective of those
directly impacted by the subjects before this committee.
Established in 2008, SVA has grown to become a force and voice for
the interests of veterans in higher education. With a myriad of
programs supporting their success, rigorous research on ways to improve
the landscape, and advocacy throughout the nation, we place the student
veteran at the top of our organizational pyramid.
Introduction/History
The intent of VR&E is to provide services to eligible
servicemembers and veterans with service-connected disabilities to help
them prepare for, obtain, and maintain suitable employment, or to
achieve independence in daily living. \1\ The end goal of VR&E is
employment. Veterans work with a Vocational Rehabilitation Counselor to
select one of five employment tracks: (1) Reemployment with a Previous
Employer, (2) Rapid Access to Employment, (3) Self Employment, (4)
Employment Through Long-Term Services, and (5) Independent Living
Services. \2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, Vocational Rehabilitation
and Employment (VR&E), https://www.benefits.va.gov/vocrehab/
employment--tracks.asp (last visited Apr. 30, 2018).
\2\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
VR&E has been an important component of veterans' reintegration
since Congress instituted a veterans benefits system upon U.S. entry
into World War I in 1917. \3\ In 1953, the Department of Veterans
Benefits became part of the Veteran's Administration. \4\ The Veterans'
Benefits Act of 1962 authorized peacetime VR&E. The Vietnam Era
Veterans' Readjustment Assistance Act of 1974, which amended the 1962
law, provided similar benefits to those offered during other wars.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Disabled American Veterans, Paralyzed Veterans of America, and
the Veterans of Foreign Wars, The Independent Budget - Veterans Agenda
for the 115th Congress (Policy Recommendations for Congress and the
Administration), 120, http://www.independentbudget.org/2018/FY18--
IB.pdf (last visited Apr. 30, 2018).
\4\ Email correspondence with Scott Lajiness, VBA-VSO Liaison, May
10, 2018. We thank Scott and his team for assisting us with our VR&E
history inquiries. This correspondence provided the legislative history
and background for this section.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As part of the GI Bill Improvement Act of 1977, Congress required
VA to perform a study of its vocational rehabilitation program. In
response, Congress passed the Veterans' Rehabilitation and Education
Amendments of 1980. The program's purpose changed; focus turned to
enabling veterans with service-connected disabilities to achieve
maximum independence in daily living and to the maximum extent
possible, to become employable and able to maintain suitable
employment.
In 1986, the Vocational Rehabilitation and Counseling Service and
Education Service were combined into Vocational Rehabilitation and
Education Service. More changes followed the VA becoming a cabinet
agency in March 1989. In 1990, the Vocational Rehabilitation and
Education Service became the Vocational Rehabilitation Service. A
separate Education Service was created at this time. In 1999, the name
of the Central Office command and field structure became Vocational
Rehabilitation and Employment Service.
The Deputy Under Secretary for Field Operations, the Deputy Under
Secretary for Economic Opportunity, and the VR&E Director work together
to provide VR&E services. The VR&E Service Director, who reports to the
Deputy Under Secretary for Economic Opportunity, determines VR&E policy
and priorities. The Deputy Under Secretary for Field Operations through
five District Offices oversees and manages VR&E personnel in the 56
regional benefits offices. Importantly, the Office of Field Operations
allocates employees to the Regional Offices.
In 2003, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) identified
Federal disability programs, including VR&E, as high risk due to
program management difficulties. \5\ In March 2004, the Congressional
Commission on Service Members and Veterans Transition Assistance's VR&E
Task Force issued a report with 110 recommendations for program
improvement. \6\ Important Task Force takeaways included (1) VR&E not
being a Veterans Benefits Administration (VBA) priority in assisting
impacted veterans return to the workforce, (2) VR&E having a limited
capacity to manage its growing workload, and (3) VR&E needing a
redesign for the 21st century employment environment. \7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ U.S. Government Accountability Office, High-Risk Series: An
Update, January 2003, https://www.gao.gov/assets/240/237065.pdf
(reporting, ``The second new high-risk area involves Federal disability
programs, primarily those at the Social Security Administration and the
Department of Veterans Affairs. Already growing, disability programs
are poised to surge as baby-boomers age, yet the programs remain mired
in outdated economic, workforce, and medical concepts and are not well-
positioned to provide meaningful and timely support to disabled
Americans.'').
\6\ Disabled American Veterans, Paralyzed Veterans of America, and
the Veterans of Foreign Wars, The Independent Budget - Veterans Agenda
for the 115th Congress (Policy Recommendations for Congress and the
Administration), 120, http://www.independentbudget.org/2018/FY18--
IB.pdf (last visited Apr. 30, 2018).
\7\ U.S. Government Accountability Office, VA Vocational
Rehabilitation and Employment Program - GAO Comments on Key Task Force
Findings and Recommendations, June 2004, https://www.gao.gov/assets/
250/242861.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Although VA implemented nearly all of the Task Force's
recommendations, program concerns continue. The Veterans' Benefits
Improvement Act, which passed in 2008, included a provision requiring a
20-year longitudinal study focusing on outcomes for participants
beginning rehabilitation plans in fiscal years 2010, 2012, and 2014.
\8\ We appreciate VA's dedication to improving and enhancing VR&E and
other benefits through study and evaluation. \9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ 38 U.S.C. Sec. 3122 - Longitudinal study of vocational
rehabilitation programs.
\9\ U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, VR&E Longitudinal Study,
https://www.benefits.va.gov/VOCREHAB/VRELongitudinalStudy.asp (last
visited May 13, 2018).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
VR&E is an important program that continues to serve our nation's
veterans. We appreciate the Office of VR&E meeting with us to discuss
the program, and we look forward to ongoing collaboration to ensure the
program best serves our veterans as they transition following their
service. SVA appreciates the opportunity to share feedback on two VR&E-
specific bills.
Key Successes
Before discussing our concerns and sharing our insights for program
improvement, we want to highlight several positive reforms occurring at
VR&E. VR&E's new case management system is replacing its Corporate
WINRS system that has been in place for two decades. \10\ By utilizing
a Microsoft management platform, veterans will be able to receive more
efficient and effective services. After hearing from our constituents
about issues coordinating and traveling to and from appointments, we
are also encouraged by VR&E's increasing use of tele-counseling based
on a successful St. Petersburg Regional Office pilot. \11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, Volume III - Benefits and
Burial Programs and Departmental Administration, Congressional
Submission, FY 2019, VBA-246, https://www.va.gov/budget/docs/summary/
fy2019VAbudgetvolumeIIIbenefitsBurialProgramsAndDeptmentalAdministration
.pdf [hereinafter FY 2019 Congressional Submission].
\11\ FY 2019 Congressional Submission, at VBA-247.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As an organization that works on behalf of service-affiliated
students getting ``to, through, and beyond higher education,'' we also
applaud VR&E for the expansion of the VetSuccess on Campus Program from
94 to 105 campuses. \12\ We look forward to the continued growth of
this program.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ FY 2019 Congressional Submission, at VBA-249.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Current Challenges
In recent years, we have collected stakeholder feedback on this
program. Specifically, we performed a deep-dive analysis of VR&E over
the past five months, including targeted feedback from stakeholders.
Individual situations varied, but we classified hurdles into five main
categories: (1) counselor concerns, (2) program administration, (3)
process subjectivity, (4) career concerns, and (5) benefits
misconceptions. The next several sections include a mix of individual
anecdotes and systemic barriers permeating the program.
Counselor Issues
Counselor quality is consistently cited as the top challenge our
students face. Large caseloads contribute to the lacking quality and
veteran dissatisfaction. Public Law 114-223 specifies a ratio of one
counselor for every 125 veterans in the program. \13\ VA acknowledges
that this counselor ratio is not being met, noting how the average
counselor caseload ratio was 136.4 in 2017. \14\ This average also
reflects that some counselors may be serving less than 125 veterans
while other counselors are serving much more. In March 2013, seven
offices averaged fewer than 100 cases per staffer, yet eight offices
averaged more than 175 cases per staffer. \15\ Although the 2017 case
per counselor ratio is lower than it was in 2015 (138.3) and 2016
(140.0), VA must enforce the ratio requirement specified in the 2016
law.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ Continuing Appropriations and Military Construction, Veterans
Affairs, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2017, and Zika
Response and Preparedness Act, Public Law 114-223, Sept. 29, 2016,
https://www.congress.gov/114/plaws/publ223/PLAW-114publ223.pdf.
\14\ FY 2019 Congressional Submission, at VBA-244.
\15\ U.S. Government Accountability Office, VA Vocational
Rehabilitation and Employment Program - Further Program Management
Improvements Are Needed, 9, Feb.27, 2014, https://www.gao.gov/assets/
670/661184.pdf.
Katherine S., Fort Worth, TX, University of Texas -
Arlington: ``As it stands, the future of a veteran depends on the
opinion of a counselor. The trouble with opinions are, not only are
they subjective for the counselor and relative to each veteran, but, in
my experience, neither the veteran or a substantiated medical opinion
seems to be able to influence the counselor's belief. No one person
should have that much sovereignty over another, especially when it is
based on the whim of a personal opinion.''
Wayne M., Los Angeles, CA, California State - Los
Angeles: Underscoring the need for more counselors, he says, ``they
want to help more, but all of them in California are overloaded.''
Students also experience counselor continuity hurdles. The GAO
determined that VR&E participants who work with more VR&E personnel
over time are less likely to achieve suitable employment, revealing
``veterans who worked with four staff were 27 percentage points less
likely to achieve success within 8 years of program entry, compared to
those who worked with only one staff member.'' \16\ Addressing this
counselor staffing disparity would presumably also help lower the
number of program re-entries, which included 37 percent across three
studied cohorts in FY 2016. \17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ U.S. Government Accountability Office, VA Vocational
Rehabilitation and Employment Program - Further Program Management
Improvements Are Needed, 5, Feb.27, 2014, https://www.gao.gov/assets/
670/661184.pdf.
\17\ EconSys, Vocational Rehabilitation and Employment (VR&E)
Longitudinal Study (PL 110-389 Sec. 334), E-10, July 31, 2017, https://
www.benefits.va.gov/VOCREHAB/docs/2016LongStdy.pdf. [hereinafter 2017
Longitudinal Study].
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We are concerned by VA's 2019 VR&E budgetary request for $257.6
million as this request is $59.3 million lower than the 2018 level.
\18\ VA states that the sizable decrease in the VR&E funding request is
a result of the favorable pricing of the new Transition Assistance
Program contract. \19\ While we recognize the potential cost savings
associated with a new program, we do not accept the rationale for not
requesting additional Full-Time Employees to help with the program.
\20\ The current estimate for 2018 is 1,589 Total FTE, and the request
for 2019 is also 1,589. \21\ In light of continued feedback about not
enough counselors, we question why more funding and resources are not
being maximized to address this staffing gap.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ 2019 Congressional Submission, at VBA-239.
\19\ FY 2019 Congressional Submission, at VBA-240.
\20\ FY 2019 Congressional Submission, at VBA-240.
\21\ FY 2019 Congressional Submission, at VBA-240.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Counselor training is another area of serious concern. We support
VA's requirements for counselors and counseling psychologists to hold a
master's degree or higher in Rehabilitation Counseling or a related
field with a minimum of 30 hours of specific coursework. \22\ We also
appreciate the growing emphasis on professional credentialing,
including Certified Rehabilitation Counselor, Certified Veterans
Rehabilitation Counselor, Licensed Professional Counselor, and National
Certified Counselor. \23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\22\ FY 2019 Congressional Submission, at VBA-241.
\23\ FY 2019 Congressional Submission, at VBA-241.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition, counselors would benefit from track-specific training.
Receiving training about entrepreneurship and changing academic
requirements and demands would contribute to program satisfaction and
successful rehabilitations. GAO previously reported ongoing training
deficiencies, \24\ including knowledge gaps regarding job placement and
workplace accommodations. We were extremely discouraged by a senior
VR&E Official's response to our inquiry about track-specific training.
One VA program official stated, ``The counselors know the tracks
extremely well without having a VA specific training on each one of
them.'' \25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\24\ U.S. Government Accountability Office, VA Vocational
Rehabilitation and Employment Program - Further Program Management
Improvements Are Needed, 10, Feb.27, 2014, https://www.gao.gov/assets/
670/661184.pdf.
\25\ Email correspondence with Senior VA Official, Apr. 16, 2018.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Such response directly contradicts what individual veterans are
experiencing in many cases. One student emphasizes how counselors need
to be trained about the self-employment track, ``It seems like one of
the biggest obstacles is that my counselor doesn't know how to go
forward with the self-employment track mostly because she has never
done it before.'' Another student says VR&E must ``hold VR&E counselors
accountable for working outside their scope of practice.''
Program Administration
Program control and ownership is a major barrier. Although VR&E is
supposed to be a collaborative effort between VR&E and the Office of
Field Operations, divided responsibility and authority is ineffective.
The Office of Field Operations maintains oversight responsibility and
management for the field operation. \26\ While VR&E can implement
policy and procedures, VR&E does not have control over regional office
structure and individual counselors.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\26\ Email correspondence with Scott Lajiness, VBA-VSO Liaison, May
10, 2018. Mr.Lajiness noted how this organizational structure is noted
in Office of Field Operations Letter 20-02-41, VBA Reorganization.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The M28R, VR&E Employment Manual, \27\ as well as VR&E Job Support
Tools, \28\ are available resources to help educate and inform
counselors and other personnel about their roles and responsibilities.
Such resources provide important information regarding application
processing, evaluation and entitlement, as well as plan development.
However, policies and manuals are only successful when combined with
management, oversight, and enforcement mechanisms.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\27\ U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, M28R, Vocational
Rehabilitation and Employment Service Manual, https://
www.benefits.va.gov/WARMS/M28R.asp (last visited May 13, 2018).
\28\ U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, Vocational Rehabilitation
& Employment Job Support Tools, https://www.vba.va.gov/bln/vre/epss/
VRE--JST/index.html (last visited May 13, 2018).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
VA agreed with the GAO recommendation that the VR&E Office must
work with the Office of Field Operations to collect information about
the varying approaches and report on which approaches are most
successful in terms of suitable employment and veteran satisfaction.
\29\ Before this Subcommittee on February 27, 2014, VR&E Director Jack
Kammerer stated, ``VR&E Service is designing the staffing model to
account for regional factors impacting performance, and together with
the Office of Field Operations, we will revisit the metrics used in the
resource allocation model to ensure continued validity and data
integrity.'' \30\ We request an update on the metrics and resource
allocation model being used because problems persist more than four
years later.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\29\ See U.S. Government Accountability Office, VA Vocational
Rehabilitation and Employment Program - Further Program Management
Improvements Are Needed, 10, Feb.27, 2014, https://www.gao.gov/assets/
670/661184.pdf (noting how VA concurred with GAO's recommendation that
``VA collect information on the regional offices' approaches for
managing their VR&E workloads, assess their advantages and
disadvantages, and use the results of this assessment to provide
guidance to the offices.'').
\30\ Jack Kammerer, Prepared Statement RE Oversight Hearing on the
Topic of ``A Review of the Effectiveness of VA's Vocational
Rehabilitation and Employment Program,'' HOUSE SUBCOMMITTEE ON ECONOMIC
OPPORTUNITY, 57, Feb. 27, 2014, https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CHRG-
113hhrg87668/pdf/CHRG-113hhrg87668.pdf.
Johnny P., McGaheysville, VA, Vermont College of Fine
Arts: ``Never before have I seen a VA program seemingly designed to
prevent veterans from using it - the hoops to clear to participate are
daunting, and eligible veterans in need suffer during the time
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
consuming application process.''
The recent VA Office of the Inspector General Audit of VR&E
Subsistence Allowance Payments \31\ raises concerns. After evaluating a
sample of 120 subsistence allowances for November 2016 and identifying
four errors of overpayments and underpayments in 120 payments, the
Office decided to limit the audit's scope and to offer no
recommendations. \32\ This report release on March 15, 2018 came out
weeks after 11,000 VR&E participants experienced disbursement delays.
\33\ These late disbursements impact whether our students are able to
pay for basic living necessities like housing and food. We encourage
VR&E to identify what caused this delay and ensure it does not happen
again.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\31\ VA Office of Inspector General, Audit of Vocational
Rehabilitation and Employment Program Subsistence Allowance Payments,
VETERANS BENEFITS ADMINISTRATION, Mar. 15, 2018, https://www.va.gov/
oig/pubs/VAOIG-16-05121-110.pdf.
\32\ Id. at 3.
\33\ Emily Wax-Thibodeaux, 11,000 disabled student veterans left
without rent and expense money due to computer glitch, THE WASHINGTON
POST, Feb. 2, 2018, https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/checkpoint/wp/
2018/02/02/11000-disabled-student-veterans-left-without-rent-and-
expense-money-due-to-computer-glitch/.
Jill W., Ada, OK, East Central University:
``[C]onsistently, VR&E's procedure for processing invoices is not
effective. Our school takes from first available funds when processing
financial aid, and VR&E is always the last to pay.. I understand that
VR&E counselors have to check the invoices, especially for books and
supplies, before forwarding them to finance, but the amount of time it
is taking puts VR&E participants at a huge disadvantage compared to
Post-9/11 students, whose tuition and fees are paid in a timely
manner.''
Mark B., Washington, D.C., Johns Hopkins University: ``My
student loans were held by Johns Hopkins for 8 months because it took
Voc Rehab 8 months to pay tuition to Hopkins.''
Process Subjectivity
VR&E is marked by inconsistent treatment for similarly situated
parties. While individualized plans are a VR&E positive, the emphasis
on individualization often results in students receiving different
approvals based on who their counselors are.
Cristy B., Waterford, MI, Wayne State University: In
referencing the inconsistencies, she discusses a common situation,
```My VRC did this for me but didn't do that,' while others are getting
this and that.''
Francheska S., Annapolis, MD, Anne Arundel Community
College: ``There is a huge disparity in equality between vocational
rehabilitation programs. For example, Voc Rehab will only pay for my
associates since I am employable as a paralegal. In contrast, my fellow
veterans are able to attend law school courtesy of Voc Rehab. When I
addressed this disparity with my counselor, the answer I consistently
received is as follows: `We are here to employ you not educate you.'"
Bruno M., Las Vegas, NV, University of Nevada Las Vegas:
After seeing many of his friends and colleagues able to use VR&E for
graduate school, he emphasizes the need for clarity regarding ``access
to graduate level degrees.''
Career Concerns
Career concerns fall into three main categories: (1) failing to
identify high-demand career fields, (2) pressuring recipients into
paths/careers they do not want, and (3) missing soft skills
development, including interviewing and LinkedIn instruction. Students
consistently cite the lack of guidance about suitable employment. Some
veterans are also pushed toward employment paths that will aggravate
their disabilities.
Adam L., Syracuse, NY, Syracuse University: ``As a medic
with medic related PTS I wasn't going to be able to become a physician
assistant with cadaver labs being a part of the undergrad and grad
education plan.''
Donalita B., Gilbert, AZ: ``Counselors need to take
veterans' disabilities into consideration when selecting a track.''
Gilbert B., Marina, CA, California State University -
Monterey Bay: Regarding employment training and supports, he desires
``more time to go over employment services in more detail instead of
just the 30 minute meetings.''
In addition to counselors, Employment Coordinators work out of the
Regional Offices. \34\ Although such coordinators are supposed to help
with resume preparation, this is an area that demands improvement.
Veterans report confusion and difficulty \35\ in translating their
military experiences into the civilian workforce context, which clearly
seems like an opportunity for counselors and coordinators. Having a
professional and polished resume is not enough in today's competitive
job market - Program participants must know how to leverage job
resources like LinkedIn. Veterans are eligible for a free one-year
LinkedIn Premium Careers subscription, \36\ and counselors and
coordinators could be instrumental in helping recipients use these
resources.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\34\ FY 2019 Congressional Submission, at VBA-242.
\35\ U.S. Government Accountability Office, VA Vocational
Rehabilitation and Employment Program - Further Program Management
Improvements Are Needed, 6, Feb.27, 2014, https://www.gao.gov/assets/
670/661184.pdf.
\36\ LinkedIn, LinkedIn for Veterans - Free Premium Career
Subscription and Eligibility, https://www.linkedin.com/help/linkedin/
answer/14803/linkedin-for-veterans-free-premium-career-subscription-
and-eligibility?lang=en (last visited May 7, 2018).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Benefits Misconceptions
We consistently hear from students about persisting confusion
regarding the use of multiple education benefits. VR&E specifies a
duration of 48 months. \37\ GI Bill beneficiaries may use their
education benefit for up to 36 months. \38\ For students using both
benefits, how do these months of eligibility interact? VA specifies on
its Post 9/11 GI Bill FAQ page, that while a beneficiary may be
eligible for more than one VA education benefit program, ``[Y]ou may
only receive payments from one program at a time. You can receive a
maximum of 48 months of benefits under any combination of VA education
programs you qualify for.'' \39\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\37\ See 38 U.S.C. Sec. 3105(b)(1) - Duration of rehabilitation
programs.
\38\ 38 U.S.C. Sec. 3312(a) - Educational assistance: duration.
\39\ U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, Can I be eligible for two
or more education benefits?, GI BILL CUSTOMER HELP, Answer Updated Mar.
14, 2018, https://gibill.custhelp.va.gov/app/answers/detail/a--id/523//
can-i-be-eligible-for-two-or-more-education-benefits%3F.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Students indicate this seemingly clear-cut policy is problematic in
practice. Some students are able to use the remaining 12 months
(difference between 48 months of maximum eligibility and 36 months of
GI Bill benefits) to continue educational pursuits, while others are
not. Third party sources identify how nuanced this policy can be. \40\
In recognizing that VR&E is an employment program, we request clearer
guidance about benefits overlap to ensure students are maximizing their
benefits in pursuit of their educational and employment goals. Such
guidance is imperative as a majority of VR&E participants are pursuing
the Employment through Long-Term Services track, specifically 83
percent for Longitudinal Study Cohort I, 88 percent for Cohort II, and
92 percent for Cohort III. \41\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\40\ Benjamin Krause, Does VA Voc Rehab Chapter 31 Take Away From
Your GI Bill?, DISABLEDVETERANS.ORG, Oct. 30, 2013, https://
www.disabledveterans.org/2013/10/30/va-voc-rehab-take-away-gi-bill/
(noting how the blog author is a VR&E alumnus who has submitted
testimony to the House Veterans Affairs Committee).
\41\ 2017 Longitudinal Study, at 3-13.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Recommended Improvements
Immediate Recommendations
Expectation Management. First, many VR&E obstacles originate from
unclear expectations about what the program provides. This can be
addressed by revamping how the program is publicized. Although we
generally received positive feedback about the application form being
intuitive and easy to fill out, policy guidance about how the program
works is scattered on multiple webpages.
We appreciate that the Client Relations Team \42\ is available to
respond to inquiries from veterans, as well as outside organizations
like ours. As inquiries come in, patterns of questions are likely to
emerge. We recommend the VR&E Office prepare a Frequently Asked
Question resource to be updated annually. Providing this resource would
enable prospective and current participants' understanding of program
objectives.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\42\ FY 2019 Congressional Submission, at VBA-249.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Employer Partnerships. Identifying employer partnerships is another
opportunity for the VR&E program to flourish. Many entities are looking
to hire veterans, and several of the VR&E existing tracks, including
Reemployment with a Previous Employer and Rapid Access to Employment
demonstrate this. VA and the Department of Labor maintain a Memorandum
of Understanding to best serve those with service-connected
disabilities, which includes providing labor market information to VR&E
participants. \43\ We think further inter-agency collaboration with the
Department of Labor's Veterans' Employment and Training Service will
foster greater leveraging of opportunities and resources, \44\
including almost 2,500 American Job Centers. \45\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\43\ See Jack Kammerer, Statement RE A Review of VA's Vocational
Rehabilitation and Employment Program, HOUSE SUBCOMMITTEE ON ECONOMIC
OPPORTUNITY, 5-6, JULY 8, 2015, https://docs.house.gov/meetings/VR/
VR10/20150708/103656/HHRG-114-VR10-Wstate-KammererJ-20150708.pdf.
\44\ U.S. Department of Labor, About VETS, https://www.dol.gov/
vets/aboutvets/aboutvets.htm (last visited May 10, 2018).
\45\ CareerOneStop, How can an American Job Center help you?,
https://www.careeronestop.org/LocalHelp/AmericanJobCenters/american-
job-centers.aspx#AJC%20Types (last visited May 10, 2018).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subsistence Allowances. Establishing appropriate subsistence
allowances would also be a beneficial program development. Many of our
surveyed constituents share concerns about not being able to afford
basic necessities like food and rent while pursuing their
individualized training and education plans. Subsistence rates are
based on rate of attendance (full time, three quarter time, half time),
number of dependents, and the training type. \46\ Regional Office
insights also echo these challenges where managers report that veterans
may discontinue their plans before obtaining suitable employment
because of financial pressures. \47\ Although some VR&E participants
may be able to receive the higher Post 9/11 Chapter 31 Subsistence
Allowance Rate if pursuing their educations, this funding does not
apply to all VR&E participants.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\46\ U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, VR&E Subsistence
Allowance Rates, https://www.benefits.va.gov/vocrehab/subsistence--
allowance--rates.asp (last visited May 13, 2018).
\47\ U.S. Government Accountability Office, VA Vocational
Rehabilitation and Employment Program - Further Program Management
Improvements Are Needed, 6, Feb.27, 2014, https://www.gao.gov/assets/
670/661184.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Participant Satisfaction. Implementing satisfaction surveys for
participants and employers would make it easier for VR&E to monitor the
program and assess issues as they arise, as compared to having to wait
for results from the Longitudinal Study. We question the rationale for
no longer externally reporting Veterans' Satisfaction with VR&E that is
measured in the J.D. Power & Associates Voice of the Veteran Continuous
Measurement Survey. \48\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\48\ FY 2019 Congressional Submission, at VBA-245.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Strategic Recommendations
Economic Opportunity Administration. The creation of the VA
Economic Opportunity Administration will provide economic opportunity
programs like VR&E with the champion these programs need and deserve.
Creating an Under Secretary for Economic Opportunity and Transition to
oversee these programs would also give this Committee and other
legislative bodies a central point of contact for accountability and
oversight. \49\ SVA is proud to support the bipartisan Veterans'
Education, Transition, and Opportunity Prioritization Plan (VET OPP)
Act of 2018, which was introduced in the House by Subcommittee Members
Brad Wenstrup and Mark Takano. \50\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\49\ MG Robert M. Worley II USAF (Ret.), Testimony RE An Update on
the Implementation of the Forever GI Bill, the Harry W. Colmery
Educational Assistance Act of 2017, HOUSE SUBCOMMITTEE ON ECONOMIC
OPPORTUNITY, Dec. 12, 2017, https://veterans.house.gov/calendar/
eventsingle.aspx?EventID=2006 (Noting how in the Exchange with Rep.
Kathleen Rice (D-NY), Mr. Worley consistently expressed how he could
not answer questions relating to other Economic Opportunity Programs
not under the Education Service purview. An Under Secretary for
Economic Opportunity and Transition would oversee VR&E programs,
educational assistance programs, veterans' housing loan and related
programs, and other critical programs that serve our veterans. A person
holding this role would serve a crucial role for keeping the lines of
communication and oversight between VA and Congress open).
\50\ Press Release - Wenstrup, Takano, Rubio, and Hassan Introduce
Legislation to Prioritize Veterans' employment and Education Programs
at the VA, BRAD WENSTRUP WEBSITE, Apr. 26, 2018, https://
wenstrup.house.gov/updates/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=400271.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As SVA's Director of Policy Lauren Augustine testified at the Joint
Subcommittee Oversight Hearing on the Fiscal Year 2019 Budget, this
fourth administration would create ``a refocusing of existing resources
that modernizes VA and creates greater accountability for economic
opportunity and transition programs.'' \51\ Similarly SVA's Vice
President of Government Affairs William Hubbard emphasized how moving
VR&E and other programs to the new administration will increase
accountability, elevate economic opportunity issues, reduce
bureaucracy, create a VA counterpart for positions already established
at the Department of Labor and the Department of Defense, as well as
supporting ``whole health.'' \52\ We look forward to testifying at the
upcoming legislative hearing on the VET OPP Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\51\ Lauren Augustine, Testimony RE Oversight Hearing on the Topic
of ``Fiscal Year 2019 Budget Submission of the Department of Veterans
Affairs,'' HOUSE SUBCOMMITTEE ON ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY AND SUBCOMMITTEE
ON DISABILITY ASSISTANCE AND MEMORIAL AFFAIRS OF THE COMMITTEE ON
VETERANS' AFFAIRS, 5, Mar. 15, 2018, http://studentveterans.org/images/
pdf/will/Legislative-Hearing-VA-FY19-Budget-3.15.18.pdf.
\52\ William Hubbard, Testimony RE Legislative Hearing on the Topic
of: ``Pending Legislation,'' HOUSE SUBCOMMITTEE ON ECONOMIC
OPPORTUNITY, 6-7, Mar. 20, 2018, http://studentveterans.org/images/pdf/
will/Legislative-Hearing--HVAC-Subcommittee-on-Economic-Opportunity-
March-20-2018.pdf (noting how ``It appears maintenance of bureaucracy
is the chief concern for those opposing this proposal, placing an
emphasis on preserving `the way things are' for the sake of doing so,
versus the prioritization of the customer: veterans.'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Authority Restructure. The VR&E Office should be given
responsibility and authority over counselors and other staff
administering the VR&E program. Having this authority under the Office
of Field Operations inhibits oversight and effective service to our
veterans. Giving the power to VR&E will enable more effective counselor
and personnel allocation to each regional office.
Eligibility Requirements. Reconsidering VR&E's eligibility
criteria, which is specified in statute, would require a legislative
fix. As it currently stands, a veteran is VR&E eligible (1) if he/she
has a service-connected disability of at least 20 percent with an
employment handicap or a service-connected disability of 10 percent
with a serious employment handicap and (2) be discharged or released
from military service under other than dishonorable conditions. \53\
The most recent VR&E Longitudinal Study released on July 31, 2017,
revealed that cohort members (Cohort I includes 10,791 members; Cohort
II includes 15,396 members; Cohort III includes 21,082 members) have an
average service-connected disability of about 60 percent. \54\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\53\ See 38 U.S.C. Sec. 3102 - Basic entitlement. See also U.S.
Department of Veterans Affairs, Vocational Rehabilitation and
Employment (VR&E) - Eligibility and Entitlement, https://
www.benefits.va.gov/vocrehab/eligibility--and--entitlement.asp (last
visited May 1, 2018).
\54\ 2017 Longitudinal Study, at E-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
It is interesting to note how VR&E participants who re-entered the
program from a discontinued or rehabilitated status have a higher
combined disability rating - 69 percent as compared to 64 percent,
which can likely be attributed to a worsening disability condition.
\55\ By increasing the service-connected disability rating requirement,
we can ensure that VR&E services are being received by the veterans
truly in need of assistance obtaining suitable employment, defined as
``employment that does not aggravate the Veteran or Servicemember's
disabilities, is stable, and is consistent with his or her pattern of
abilities, aptitudes, and interests.'' \56\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\55\ 2017 Longitudinal Study, at E-10.
\56\ U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, Vocational Rehabilitation
and Employment (VR&E) - Program Definitions, https://
www.benefits.va.gov/vocrehab/program--definitions.asp (last visited May
1, 2018).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Funding Reform. The VR&E funding structure demands attention. VR&E
Director Jack Kammerer emphasized VR&E importance before this
Subcommittee, stating ``VR&E employees across the country are committed
to and engaged in multiple initiatives to extend VR&E's outreach
capabilities, gain a better understanding of our current and future
Veteran population, increase program efficiencies, enhance our
supporting technologies, and reframe performance metrics.'' \57\ VA's
VR&E budget request fails to indicate that VR&E is a priority.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\57\ Jack Kammerer, Statement RE A Review of VA's Vocational
Rehabilitation and Employment Program, HOUSE SUBCOMMITTEE ON ECONOMIC
OPPORTUNITY, 1, JULY 8, 2015, https://docs.house.gov/meetings/VR/VR10/
20150708/103656/HHRG-114-VR10-Wstate-KammererJ-20150708.pdf.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5489.001
Total appropriations for Fiscal Year 2016 totaled $1,532,061,000 -
$217,379,000 for salaries, rent, travel, other services; $573,346,000
for subsistence allowances paid to veterans, and $741,336,000 for
vocational training, including tuition, books, supplies, etc. paid on
behalf of veterans. \58\ Due to VR&E's expected increasing program
demand, we emphasized during previous testimony that counselor salaries
be increased to attract high-quality counselors. \59\ Glassdoor
indicates a salary range of $49,799-$95,000 based on salary reports and
statistical methods. \60\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\58\ 2017 Longitudinal Study, at 1-15.
\59\ Lauren Augustine, Testimony RE Oversight Hearing on the Topic
of ``Fiscal Year 2019 Budget Submission of the Department of Veterans
Affairs,'' HOUSE SUBCOMMITTEE ON ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY AND SUBCOMMITTEE
ON DISABILITY ASSISTANCE AND MEMORIAL AFFAIRS OF THE COMMITTEE ON
VETERANS' AFFAIRS, 4, Mar. 15, 2018, http://studentveterans.org/images/
pdf/will/Legislative-Hearing-VA-FY19-Budget-3.15.18.pdf.
\60\ Glassdoor, U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs Vocational
Rehabilitation Counselor Salaries, https://www.glassdoor.com/Salaries/
vocational-rehabilitation-counselor-salary-SRCH--KO0,35.htm (last
visited May 1, 2018).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Paired with our anecdotal evidence from our constituents, recent
work by the Department of Justice and U.S. Attorney's Office for the
District of Columbia highlight additional issues. Atius Technology
Institute's owner paid a counselor a 7 percent cash kickback on all VA
payments to Atius, which amounted to a kickback of approximately
$155,000. \61\ In exchange for the kickback, the counselor encouraged
VR&E participants to attend Atius. While this particular situation is
likely limited in scope, it shines a light on the need for better
compensation to attract higher quality personnel to take care of and
support our veterans.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\61\ Office of Public Affairs, School Owner Pleads Guilty to $2
Million Bribery Scheme Involving VA Program for Disabled Military
Veterans, Apr. 16, 2018, https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/school-owner-
pleads-guilty-2-million-bribery-scheme-involving-va-program-disabled-
military (also noting how ``These bribery payments were hand-delivered
by Poawui or an Atius employee to the VR&E counselor or the counselor's
assistant, a veteran who was enrolled in the VR&E program.'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Data Collection and Analysis. The congressionally-mandated
Longitudinal Study is a positive step in data collection, but we are
concerned with how VR&E is measuring results. At SVA, we are driven by
data, especially outcomes. Based on our National Veteran Education
Success Tracker (NVEST), which is the first comprehensive study of the
academic successes of student veteran use of the Post-9/11 GI Bill, we
are able to report that students have earned 453,000 degrees and
certificates using the Post-9/11 GI Bill since 2009. \62\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\62\ Cate, C.A., Lyon, J.S., Schmeling, J., & Bogue, B.Y. (2017).
National Veteran Education Success Tracker: A Report on the Academic
Success of Student Veterans Using the Post-9/11 GI Bill. Student
Veterans of America, Washington, D.C., 42, http://
nvest.studentveterans.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/NVEST-Report--
FINAL.pdf (noting how 63.4 percent of the completed degrees were at the
bachelor's degree level or higher).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Although VR&E's 15,528 positive outcomes for 2017 sounds
impressive, ``positive outcome'' is broadly defined as achieved a
rehabilitation plan goal, pursued higher education, obtained suitable
employment, or became employable through VR&E. \63\ Does pursuit of
higher education mean signing up for a class? Completing a course with
a passing grade? Starting but not completing a course? We question
whether the positive outcome includes those veterans who achieved a
maximum rehabilitation gain, which is a status applied to veterans who
attained vocational skills or some other benefit from VR&E
participation even though suitable employment was not achieved. \64\
While each of these attainments may benefit a participant, VA must
monitor outcomes, successes, and issues in a way that allows the
program to be evaluated.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\63\ FY 2019 Congressional Submission, at VBA-242.
\64\ U.S. Government Accountability Office, VA Vocational
Rehabilitation and Employment Program - Further Program Management
Improvements Are Needed, 2 n.7, Feb.27, 2014, https://www.gao.gov/
assets/670/661184.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Outcome Tracking. Another strategic goal is to track employment
outcomes for longer periods. Currently, veterans are considered
rehabilitated once suitable employment has been maintained for 60 days.
For comparison, the Department of Labor measures job retention for its
employment and training programs over a 180-day period. \65\ Monitoring
employment six months and one year, which VA has previously considered,
\66\ would enable VA to better assess rehabilitation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\65\ Id. at 8.
\66\ Id. at 8.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We thank the Chairman, Ranking Member, and the Committee members
for your time, attention, and devotion to the cause of veterans using
VR&E and other economic opportunity programs. As always, we welcome
your feedback and questions, and we look forward to continuing to work
with this Subcommittee, the House Veterans' Affairs Committee, and the
entire Congress to ensure the success of all generations of veterans
through education and beyond.
Information Required by Rule XI2(g)(4) of the House of Representatives
Pursuant to Rule XI2(g)(4) of the House of Representatives, Student
Veterans of America has not received any Federal grants in Fiscal Year
2018, nor has it received any Federal grants in the two previous Fiscal
Years.
APPENDIX A
The following feedback comes directly from student veterans and
other constituents who filled out our survey. Such feedback includes
hurdles, as well as suggestions for improvement. Narratives include
participants' first name and last initial.
Counselor Issues
Jonathan H.: I had an awful Voc Rehab Counselor who
refused to let me attend the university of my choosing, which I was
already enrolled at and instead pushed for me to instead, drop out and
enroll in community college. She said, ``there is no difference between
Harvard and a community college'' and I stood up and left the room
never to go back and make use of their services. After I left no one
even attempted to make contact with me. Before this I also informed the
counselor I want to be a lawyer and she informed me that the best I
would be able to do is Paralegal.
Kierston W.: We are required to meet with our counselor
once per semester to discuss our education track, however, the last 2
appointments that I had with our VSOC were cancelled. Also, our
(Syracuse University) VSOC was highly disorganized with not returning
emails or being available for the veterans on campus.
Mark H.: More of a hands-on approach to the counselors.
Most students on VR&E don't get the much-needed help from counselors
here at UNLV.
Jim B.: More counselors to better understand participant
needs as most counselors are completely over booked which takes away
from their knowledge of the veterans they are trying to assist. Often
allowing individuals to fall through the cracks.
Samantha R.: More accessibility - VR&E counselors
available on campus.
Daniel C.: Better communication between vets &
counselors/supervisors at VR&E. I have to call & email several times to
get a response & most of the time I don't receive all the information
available on a particular subject. It feels like they have all the
information & I have the ask the right question the right way at the
right time to get an answer with all the content I need. To put it
simple, I feel like I don't matter. I feel like I am a bother to the
counselor.
Daniel P.: The entire system is broken. Counselors are
incompetent and unwilling. Their superiors do not get involved and are
nonexistent as it relates to helping student veterans. I was placed on
the program over three years ago, and I have gone through four
different counselors that have no idea what's going on. The right hand
doesn't know what the left hand is doing. This program is a complete
waste of time and I would advise any fellow veteran to stay clear and
pursue education on their own using other resources.
Robert O.: The responsiveness of counselors, they are not
equipped to solve most issues.
Robert A.: Either fewer veterans assigned to a specific
counselor so that it doesn't take an act of congress to get them to at
least email you back within a three week time period after you've
attempted to contact them, or who actually have a background in career/
personal development or something to that extent so that neither the
Veterans Administration or veteran wastes their time, TAX PAYERS
dollars, or start being more selective on who you hire as a counselor.
Wayne M.: Reduce work load for counselors - they want to
help more, but all of them in California are overloaded.
Katherine S.: As it stands, the future of a veteran
depends on the opinion of a counselor. The trouble with opinions are,
not only are they subjective for the counselor and relative to each
veteran, but, in my experience, neither the veteran or a substantiated
medical opinion seems to be able to influence the counselor's belief.
No one person should have that much sovereignty over another,
especially when it is based on the whim of a personal opinion.
Program Administration
Robert R.: Subsistence allowance is not enough to
survive.
Kierston W.: We are encouraged to attend school full
time, and many of us have families, we all have monthly payments that
need to be made whether classes are in session or on break. As non-
traditional students it is difficult for us to find part-time
employment while classes are in session, that can transfer to a full
time position while on break that will supplement the housing
allowance.
Christopher G.: Making it simpler for Vets to access
benefits and not have it hard to jump through hoops to get
reimbursement.
Carlos S.: Manage expectations of participants. This is
not a ``get everything I want'' program. - Better explanation of the
benefit and eligibility. Too many veterans think this is an automatic
benefit.
Mark B.: Pay bills in a decent amount of time. My student
loans were held by Johns Hopkins for 8 months because it took Voc Rehab
8 months to pay tuition to Hopkins.
Kassandra F.: Cost of living pay - I think that the
prorated money is not beneficial for those who are in school and trying
to pay for housing or any bills.
Dean Z.: Equal monthly stipend to post 9-11, as a student
attending college in the DC Metro area being married with 2 children, I
get approx $971 a month for housing and food, veterans at my college
using post 9-11 as single Unmarried get approx $2100 a month. I've had
to take out loans to pay for housing because I could not afford to live
in the local area.
Arthur H.: Better stipend to help with the cost of
living.
Hannah J.: I would like to share my experience with
attempting to apply for an MSW internship with the VA hospital in Des
Moines Iowa. Upon acceptance to my MSW program with Simmons College in
Boston, online accredited and prestigious brick mortar in its own
right, I immediately contacted the local VA in Des Moines to acquire
the steps I needed to complete in order to apply. I was informed that I
was not qualified to apply for the VA internship due to my programs
``online'' status. I contacted my VR&E counselor, and the MSW VA
program director in Des Moines, and was informed that there was nothing
that I could do about this.
Jill W.: I am the director of Veteran Student Support
Services (Dept. of Education TRIO program) at a small university in
Oklahoma. My coworkers and I have discussed advising our new intakes to
utilize the Post-9/11 GI Bill rather than VR&E, even though we know
that our disabled veterans really need the case management services
provided by VR&E. This is because, consistently, VR&E's procedure for
processing invoices is not effective. Our school takes from first
available funds when processing financial aid, and VR&E is always the
last to pay. Right now, I still have seven students for whom VR&E has
not processed payments, and the school has applied the Pell Grants and/
or loan money of those students to their accounts, leaving them with
little resources to pay rent, utilities, etc. The past several
semesters, we have had students who did not receive their released Pell
grants/loans until the week before finals! (A few semesters ago, every
single payment for the State of Oklahoma was sent to Texas, and the
government had to wait for that money to be returned before they would
reissue payments!!! Another semester, the VA was changing payment
systems, and again, our students suffered.) I understand that VR&E
counselors have to check the invoices, especially for books and
supplies, before forwarding them to finance, but the amount of time it
is taking puts VR&E participants at a huge disadvantage compared to
Post-9/11 students, whose tuition and fees are paid in a timely manner.
Patrick H.: The book reimbursement is very outdated with
hard copies and invoices being mailed between colleges and state
offices. Tuition and fees need to be reimbursed faster, especially for
those colleges that hold back the Pell Grant Money until the Ch. 31
money comes in.
Johnny P.: Never before have I seen a VA program
seemingly designed to prevent veterans from using it - the hoops to
clear to participate are daunting, and eligible veterans in need suffer
during the time consuming application process.
Process Subjectivity
Cristy B.: Training for counselors - Counselors all need
to receive the same training so that they can provide quality service
to veterans. This whole ``My counselor did this for me but didn't do
that'' while others are getting this and that.
Shane: Most of the time the Counselors deny applications
based on how they feel. They do not follow the CFR regulations. They
neglect to provide a reason behind their actions. There is no one to
check and monitor what they are doing. There is a lot of abuse and
neglect of veterans needs that exists within the program.
Tarshica R.: Some get approved for bachelor & master
programs while some do not. Really hard to gain employment with
Associates.
Helen H.: Some places allow services while others do not.
Huge inconsistencies. Veterans suffer.
Francheska S.: There is a huge disparity in equality
between vocational rehabilitation programs. One is location and the
second inequality depends on your vocational rehabilitation specialist.
For example, VR&E will only pay for my associates since I am employable
as a paralegal. In contrast, my fellow veterans are able to attend law
school courtesy of VR&E. When I addressed this disparity with my
counselor, the answer I consistently received is as follows: We are
here to employ you not educate you.
Kevin T.: Make it simpler to get the degree one is
working toward instead of having to fight with counselors to get
answers without being belittled or having to make a trial ready case.
I've almost completed my B.A. We planned to get me licensed IF I did
well enough to go forward. A master's is needed to get licensed. Well,
I didn't flunk out of the first year, actually, I've held near a 4.0
with this being my senior year. Still it has been a fight to get any
information about moving forward. Others are doing it, and it seems
dependent on who one is assigned as to how easy or hard it is to get
anything.
Career Concerns
Adam L.: Realistic VR&E counselor - As a medic with medic
related PTS I wasn't going to be able to become a physician assistant
with cadaver labs being a part of the undergrad and grad education
plan.
Kierston W.: While this is a great benefit that allows a
student to search for the right job after graduating, it is not only
not advertised but also not available until the student is ``job
ready.'' As an accounting major on a CPA track I am not ``job ready''
until I've passed all 4 parts to the CPA exam, however, can work as an
accountant for 2 years while preparing for and taking the exams. I have
a job after graduation, 2 months after graduation and will not be able
to receive this benefit until I've finished all parts, which means I am
searching for a job for 2 months that will pay me enough to survive.
Mario H.: Listen to the needs of the recipient. - I was
put into an Business Administration AA program against the advice of my
school counselor and my wishes with the promise of a continuation upon
completion. After program completion, I was told I did not qualify to
continue and my degree was not transferable so I had to go back to
school at my own expense to be able to transfer which took me an
additional two years.
Charles P.: There is no job placement program nor is
there a way to link with other who may want to hire veterans for job.
Outside of the school aspect, the program is useless. My counselor was
never in the office, never very helpful, we had monthly calls which
were a waste. - Like other job placement areas, they need to get out
there and look for companies and people to help find veterans jobs. I
mean bigger companies not just Walmart, good paying jobs with a future.
Joshua M.: When initially signing up for the VR&E don't
make individuals pick 3 jobs they think they would want in order to
receive any benefits. As many of us are just getting out of the
military and don't know exactly what we want to do. If Individuals are
leaning towards a field guide them, but if they are unsure allow those
using chapter 31 to take gen eds that they will eventually need. This
would give them time to choose a specific career field or even career.
This would not waste tax payers money as they have at least a years
worth of time to decide what they want to do while getting credits they
would need for any degree later down the road.
Logan B.: It feels like I'm fighting tooth and nail to
take the self-employment route. I wish they would be more open to me
making my own choices and how VR&E can help me instead of trying to put
me on whatever track is easiest.
Brenton I.: A comprehensive list of employment
opportunities in the local area either through work-study or privately
owned companies.
Donalita B.: Counselors need to take veterans'
disabilities into consideration when selecting a track.
Gilbert B.: More time to go over employment services in
more detail instead of just the 30 minute meetings
Benefits Misconceptions
Heidi O.: The eligibility could be extended beyond the 48
months so if there was a need to get a Masters degree in a career field
it would be covered.
Donald W.: For those of us who use 9/11, who qualify for
vocrehab, ensuring that they know that they should switch before they
run out so that they can continue at the higher GI bill rate. Make it
easier to access once you are in school.
APPENDIX B
VR&E statutory and regulatory authority are included below.
38 USC Ch. 31: TRAINING AND REHABILITATION FOR VETERANS WITH SERVICE-
CONNECTED DISABILITIES
From Title 38-VETERANS' BENEFITS
PART III-READJUSTMENT AND RELATED BENEFITS
Sec. 3100. Purposes
The purposes of this chapter are to provide for all services and
assistance necessary to enable veterans with service-connected
disabilities to achieve maximum independence in daily living and, to
the maximum extent feasible, to become employable and to obtain and
maintain suitable employment.
Sec. 3101. Definitions
For the purposes of this chapter-
(1) The term ``employment handicap'' means an impairment, resulting
in substantial part from a disability described in section 3102(1)(A)
of this title, of a veteran's ability to prepare for, obtain, or retain
employment consistent with such veteran's abilities, aptitudes, and
interests.
(2) The term ``independence in daily living'' means the ability of
a veteran, without the services of others or with a reduced level of
the services of others, to live and function within such veteran's
family and community.
(3) The term ``program of education'' has the meaning provided in
section 3452(b) of this title.
(4) The term ``program of independent living services and
assistance'' includes (A) the services provided for in this chapter
that are needed to enable a veteran to achieve independence in daily
living, including such counseling, diagnostic, medical, social,
psychological, and educational services as are determined by the
Secretary to be needed for such veteran to achieve maximum independence
in daily living, and (B) the assistance authorized by this chapter for
such veteran.
(5) The term ``rehabilitated to the point of employability'' means
rendered employable in an occupation for which a vocational
rehabilitation program has been provided under this chapter.
(6) The term ``rehabilitation program'' means (A) a vocational
rehabilitation program, or (B) a program of independent living services
and assistance authorized under section 3120 of this title for a
veteran for whom a vocational goal has been determined not to be
currently reasonably feasible.
(7) The term ``serious employment handicap'' means a significant
impairment, resulting in substantial part from a service-connected
disability rated at 10 percent or more, of a veteran's ability to
prepare for, obtain, or retain employment consistent with such
veteran's abilities, aptitudes, and interests.
(8) The term ``vocational goal'' means a gainful employment status
consistent with a veteran's abilities, aptitudes, and interests.
(9) The term ``vocational rehabilitation program'' includes-
(A) the services provided for in this chapter that are needed for
the accomplishment of the purposes of this chapter, including such
counseling, diagnostic, medical, social, psychological, independent
living, economic, educational, vocational, and employment services as
are determined by the Secretary to be needed-
(i) in the case of a veteran for whom the achievement of a
vocational goal has not been determined not to be currently reasonably
feasible, (I) to determine whether a vocational goal is reasonably
feasible, (II) to improve such veteran's potential to participate in a
program of services designed to achieve a vocational goal, and (III) to
enable such veteran to achieve maximum independence in daily living,
and
(ii) in the case of a veteran for whom the achievement of a
vocational goal is determined to be reasonably feasible, to enable such
veteran to become, to the maximum extent feasible, employable and to
obtain and maintain suitable employment, and
(B) the assistance authorized by this chapter for a veteran
receiving any of the services described in clause (A) of this
paragraph.
Sec. 3102. Basic entitlement
(a) In General.-A person shall be entitled to a rehabilitation
program under the terms and conditions of this chapter if-
(1) the person-
(A) is-
(i) a veteran who has a service-connected disability rated at 20
percent or more which was incurred or aggravated in service on or after
September 16, 1940; or
(ii) hospitalized or receiving outpatient medical care, services,
or treatment for a service-connected disability pending discharge from
the active military, naval, or air service, and the Secretary
determines that-
(I) the hospital (or other medical facility) providing the
hospitalization, care, services, or treatment is doing so under
contract or agreement with the Secretary concerned, or is under the
jurisdiction of the Secretary of Veterans Affairs or the Secretary
concerned; and
(II) the person is suffering from a disability which will likely be
compensable at a rate of 20 percent or more under chapter 11 of this
title; and
(B) is determined by the Secretary to be in need of rehabilitation
because of an employment handicap; or
(2) the person is a veteran who-
(A) has a service-connected disability rated at 10 percent which
was incurred or aggravated in service on or after September 16, 1940;
and
(B) is determined by the Secretary to be in need of rehabilitation
because of a serious employment handicap.
(b) Additional Rehabilitation Programs for Persons Who Have
Exhausted Rights to Unemployment Benefits Under State Law.-(1) Except
as provided in paragraph (4), a person who has completed a
rehabilitation program under this chapter shall be entitled to an
additional rehabilitation program under the terms and conditions of
this chapter if-
(A) the person is described by paragraph (1) or (2) of subsection
(a); and
(B) the person-
(i) has exhausted all rights to regular compensation under the
State law or under Federal law with respect to a benefit year;
(ii) has no rights to regular compensation with respect to a week
under such State or Federal law; and
(iii) is not receiving compensation with respect to such week under
the unemployment compensation law of Canada; and
(C) begins such additional rehabilitation program within six months
of the date of such exhaustion.
(2) For purposes of paragraph (1)(B)(i), a person shall be
considered to have exhausted such person's rights to regular
compensation under a State law when-
(A) no payments of regular compensation can be made under such law
because such person has received all regular compensation available to
such person based on employment or wages during such person's base
period; or
(B) such person's rights to such compensation have been terminated
by reason of the expiration of the benefit year with respect to which
such rights existed.
(3) In this subsection, the terms ``compensation'', ``regular
compensation'', ``benefit year'', ``State'', ``State law'', and
``week'' have the respective meanings given such terms under section
205 of the Federal-State Extended Unemployment Compensation Act of 1970
(26 U.S.C. 3304 note).
(4) No person shall be entitled to an additional rehabilitation
program under paragraph (1) from whom the Secretary receives an
application therefor after March 31, 2014.
Sec. 3103. Periods of eligibility
(a) Except as provided in subsection (b), (c), (d), or (e) of this
section, a rehabilitation program may not be afforded to a veteran
under this chapter after the end of the twelve-year period beginning on
the date of such veteran's discharge or release from active military,
naval, or air service.
(b)(1) In any case in which the Secretary determines that a veteran
has been prevented from participating in a vocational rehabilitation
program under this chapter within the period of eligibility prescribed
in subsection (a) of this section because a medical condition of such
veteran made it infeasible for such veteran to participate in such a
program, the twelve-year period of eligibility shall not run during the
period of time that such veteran was so prevented from participating in
such a program, and such period of eligibility shall again begin to run
on the first day following such veteran's recovery from such condition
on which it is reasonably feasible, as determined under regulations
which the Secretary shall prescribe, for such veteran to participate in
such a program.
(2) In any case in which the Secretary determines that a veteran
has been prevented from participating in a vocational rehabilitation
program under this chapter within the period of eligibility prescribed
in subsection (a) of this section because-
(A) such veteran had not met the requirement of a discharge or
release from active military, naval, or air service under conditions
other than dishonorable before (i) the nature of such discharge or
release was changed by appropriate authority, or (ii) the Secretary
determined, under regulations prescribed by the Secretary, that such
discharge or release was under conditions other than dishonorable, or
(B) such veteran's discharge or dismissal was, under section 5303
of this title, a bar to benefits under this title before the Secretary
made a determination that such discharge or dismissal is not a bar to
such benefits, the twelve-year period of eligibility shall not run
during the period of time that such veteran was so prevented from
participating in such a program.
(3) In any case in which the Secretary determines that a veteran
has been prevented from participating in a vocational rehabilitation
program under this chapter within the period of eligibility prescribed
in subsection (a) of this section because such veteran had not
established the existence of a service-connected disability rated at 10
percent or more, the twelve-year period of eligibility shall not run
during the period such veteran was so prevented from participating in
such a program.
(c) In any case in which the Secretary determines that a veteran is
in need of services to overcome a serious employment handicap, such
veteran may be afforded a vocational rehabilitation program after the
expiration of the period of eligibility otherwise applicable to such
veteran if the Secretary also determines, on the basis of such
veteran's current employment handicap and need for such services, that
an extension of the applicable period of eligibility is necessary for
such veteran and-
(1) that such veteran had not previously been rehabilitated to the
point of employability;
(2) that such veteran had previously been rehabilitated to the
point of employability but (A) the need for such services had arisen
out of a worsening of such veteran's service-connected disability that
precludes such veteran from performing the duties of the occupation for
which such veteran was previously trained in a vocational
rehabilitation program under this chapter, or (B) the occupation for
which such veteran had been so trained is not suitable in view of such
veteran's current employment handicap and capabilities; or
(3) under regulations which the Secretary shall prescribe, that an
extension of the period of eligibility of such veteran is necessary to
accomplish the purposes of a rehabilitation program for such veteran.
(d) In any case in which the Secretary has determined that a
veteran's disability or disabilities are so severe that the achievement
of a vocational goal currently is not reasonably feasible, such veteran
may be afforded a program of independent living services and assistance
in accordance with the provisions of section 3120 of this title after
the expiration of the period of eligibility otherwise applicable to
such veteran if the Secretary also determines that an extension of the
period of eligibility of such veteran is necessary for such veteran to
achieve maximum independence in daily living.
(e)(1) The limitation in subsection (a) shall not apply to a
rehabilitation program described in paragraph (2).
(2) A rehabilitation program described in this paragraph is a
rehabilitation program pursued by a veteran under section 3102(b) of
this title.
(f) In any case in which the Secretary has determined that a
veteran was prevented from participating in a vocational rehabilitation
program under this chapter within the period of eligibility otherwise
prescribed in this section as a result of being ordered to serve on
active duty under section 688, 12301(a), 12301(d), 12301(g), 12302,
12304, 12304a, or 12304b of title 10, such period of eligibility shall
not run for the period of such active duty service plus four months.
Sec. 3104. Scope of services and assistance
(a) Services and assistance which the Secretary may provide under
this chapter, pursuant to regulations which the Secretary shall
prescribe, include the following:
(1) Evaluation, including periodic reevaluations as appropriate
with respect to a veteran participating in a rehabilitation program, of
the potential for rehabilitation of a veteran, including diagnostic and
related services (A) to determine whether the veteran has an employment
handicap or a serious employment handicap and whether a vocational goal
is reasonably feasible for such veteran, and (B) to provide a basis for
planning a suitable vocational rehabilitation program or a program of
services and assistance to improve the vocational rehabilitation
potential or independent living status of such veteran, as appropriate.
(2) Educational, vocational, psychological, employment, and
personal adjustment counseling.
(3) An allowance and other appropriate assistance, as authorized by
section 3108 of this title.
(4) A work-study allowance as authorized by section 3485 of this
title.
(5) Placement services to effect suitable placement in employment,
and postplacement services to attempt to insure satisfactory adjustment
in employment.
(6) Personal adjustment and work adjustment training.
(7)(A) Vocational and other training services and assistance,
including individualized tutorial assistance, tuition, fees, books,
supplies, handling charges, licensing fees, and equipment and other
training materials determined by the Secretary to be necessary to
accomplish the purposes of the rehabilitation program in the individual
case.
(B) Payment for the services and assistance provided under
subparagraph (A) of this paragraph shall be made from funds available
for the payment of readjustment benefits.
(8) Loans as authorized by section 3112 of this title.
(9) Treatment, care, and services described in chapter 17 of this
title.
(10) Prosthetic appliances, eyeglasses, and other corrective and
assistive devices.
(11) Services to a veteran's family as necessary for the effective
rehabilitation of such veteran.
(12) For veterans with the most severe service-connected
disabilities who require homebound training or self-employment, or both
homebound training and self-employment, such license fees and essential
equipment, supplies, and minimum stocks of materials as the Secretary
determines to be necessary for such a veteran to begin employment and
are within the criteria and cost limitations that the Secretary shall
prescribe in regulations for the furnishing of such fees, equipment,
supplies, and stocks.
(13) Travel and incidental expenses under the terms and conditions
set forth in section 111 of this title, plus, in the case of a veteran
who because of such veteran's disability has transportation expenses in
addition to those incurred by persons not so disabled, a special
transportation allowance to defray such additional expenses during
rehabilitation, job seeking, and the initial employment stage.
(14) Special services (including services related to blindness and
deafness) including-
(A) language training, speech and voice correction, training in
ambulation, and one-hand typewriting;
(B) orientation, adjustment, mobility, reader, interpreter, and
related services; and
(C) telecommunications, sensory, and other technical aids and
devices.
(15) Services necessary to enable a veteran to achieve maximum
independence in daily living.
(16) Other incidental goods and services determined by the
Secretary to be necessary to accomplish the purposes of a
rehabilitation program in an individual case.
(b) A rehabilitation program (including individual courses) to be
pursued by a veteran shall be subject to the approval of the Secretary.
To the maximum extent practicable, a course of education or training
may be pursued by a veteran as part of a rehabilitation program under
this chapter only if the course is approved for purposes of chapter 30
or 33 of this title. The Secretary may waive the requirement under the
preceding sentence to the extent the Secretary determines appropriate.
(c)(1) The Secretary shall have the authority to administer this
chapter by prioritizing the provision of services under this chapter
based on need, as determined by the Secretary. In evaluating need for
purposes of this subsection, the Secretary shall consider disability
ratings, the severity of employment handicaps, qualification for a
program of independent living, income, and any other factor the
Secretary determines appropriate.
(2) Not later than 90 days before making any changes to the
prioritization of the provision of services under this chapter as
authorized under paragraph (1), the Secretary shall submit to the
Committees on Veterans' Affairs of the Senate and House of
Representatives a plan describing such changes.
Sec. 3105. Duration of rehabilitation programs
(a) In any case in which the Secretary is unable to determine
whether it currently is reasonably feasible for a veteran to achieve a
vocational goal, the period of extended evaluation under section
3106(c) of this title may not exceed twelve months, except that such
period may be extended for additional periods of up to six months each
if the Secretary determines before granting any such extension that it
is reasonably likely that, during the period of any such extension, a
determination can be made whether the achievement of a vocational goal
is reasonably feasible in the case of such veteran.
(b)(1) Except as provided in paragraph (2) and in subsection (c),
the period of a vocational rehabilitation program for a veteran under
this chapter following a determination of the current reasonable
feasibility of achieving a vocational goal may not exceed forty-eight
months, except that the counseling and placement and postplacement
services described in section 3104(a)(2) and (5) of this title may be
provided for an additional period not to exceed eighteen months in any
case in which the Secretary determines the provision of such counseling
and services to be necessary to accomplish the purposes of a
rehabilitation program in the individual case.
(2) The period of a vocational rehabilitation program pursued by a
veteran under section 3102(b) of this title following a determination
of the current reasonable feasibility of achieving a vocational goal
may not exceed 12 months.
(c) The Secretary may extend the period of a vocational
rehabilitation program for a veteran to the extent that the Secretary
determines that an extension of such period is necessary to enable such
veteran to achieve a vocational goal if the Secretary also determines-
(1) that such veteran had previously been rehabilitated to the
point of employability but (A) such veteran's need for further
vocational rehabilitation has arisen out of a worsening of such
veteran's service-connected disability that precludes such veteran from
performing the duties of the occupation for which such veteran had been
so rehabilitated, or (B) the occupation for which such veteran had been
so rehabilitated is not suitable in view of such veteran's current
employment handicap and capabilities; or
(2) under regulations which the Secretary shall prescribe, that
such veteran has a serious employment handicap and that an extension of
such period is necessary to accomplish the purposes of a rehabilitation
program for such veteran.
(d)(1) Except as provided in paragraph (2), the period of a program
of independent living services and assistance for a veteran under this
chapter (following a determination by the Secretary that such veteran's
disability or disabilities are so severe that the achievement of a
vocational goal currently is not reasonably feasible) may not exceed
twenty-four months.
(2)(A) The period of a program of independent living services and
assistance for a veteran under this chapter may exceed twenty-four
months as follows:
(i) If the Secretary determines that a longer period is necessary
and likely to result in a substantial increase in the veteran's level
of independence in daily living.
(ii) If the veteran served on active duty during the Post-9/11
Global Operations period and has a severe disability (as determined by
the Secretary for purposes of this clause) incurred or aggravated in
such service.
(B) In this paragraph, the term ``Post-9/11 Global Operations
period'' means the period of the Persian Gulf War beginning on
September 11, 2001, and ending on the date thereafter prescribed by
Presidential proclamation or by law.
(e)(1) Notwithstanding any other provision of this chapter or
chapter 36 of this title, any payment of a subsistence allowance and
other assistance described in paragraph (2) shall not-
(A) be charged against any entitlement of any veteran under this
chapter; or
(B) be counted toward the aggregate period for which section 3695
of this title limits an individual's receipt of allowance or
assistance.
(2) The payment of the subsistence allowance and other assistance
referred to in paragraph (1) is the payment of such an allowance or
assistance for the period described in paragraph (3) to a veteran for
participation in a vocational rehabilitation program under this chapter
if the Secretary finds that the veteran had to suspend or discontinue
participation in such vocational rehabilitation program as a result of
being ordered to serve on active duty under section 688, 12301(a),
12301(d), 12301(g), 12302, or 12304 of title 10.
(3) The period for which, by reason of this subsection, a
subsistence allowance and other assistance is not charged against
entitlement or counted toward the applicable aggregate period under
section 3695 of this title shall be the period of participation in the
vocational rehabilitation program for which the veteran failed to
receive credit or with respect to which the veteran lost training time,
as determined by the Secretary.
Sec. 3106. Initial and extended evaluations; determinations regarding
serious employment handicap
(a) The Secretary shall provide any veteran who has a service-
connected disability rated at 10 percent or more and who applies for
benefits under this chapter with an initial evaluation consisting of
such services described in section 3104(a)(1) of this title as are
necessary (1) to determine whether such veteran is entitled to and
eligible for benefits under this chapter, and (2) in the case of a
veteran who is determined to be entitled to and eligible for such
benefits, to determine-
(A) whether such veteran has a serious employment handicap, and
(B) whether the achievement of a vocational goal currently is
reasonably feasible for such veteran if it is reasonably feasible to
make such determination without extended evaluation.
(b) In any case in which the Secretary has determined that a
veteran has a serious employment handicap and that the achievement of a
vocational goal currently is reasonably feasible for such veteran, such
veteran shall be provided an individualized written plan of vocational
rehabilitation developed under section 3107(a) of this title.
(c) In any case in which the Secretary has determined that a
veteran has a serious employment handicap but the Secretary is unable
to determine, in an initial evaluation pursuant to subsection (a) of
this section, whether or not the achievement of a vocational goal
currently is reasonably feasible, such veteran shall be provided with
an extended evaluation consisting of the services described in section
3104(a)(1) of this title, such services under this chapter as the
Secretary determines necessary to improve such veteran's potential for
participation in a program of services designed to achieve a vocational
goal and enable such veteran to achieve maximum independence in daily
living, and assistance as authorized by section 3108 of this title.
(d) In any case in which the Secretary has determined that a
veteran has a serious employment handicap and also determines,
following such initial and any such extended evaluation, that
achievement of a vocational goal currently is not reasonably feasible,
the Secretary shall determine whether the veteran is capable of
participating in a program of independent living services and
assistance under section 3120 of this title.
(e) The Secretary shall in all cases determine as expeditiously as
possible whether the achievement of a vocational goal by a veteran
currently is reasonably feasible. In the case of a veteran provided
extended evaluation under subsection (c) of this section (including any
periods of extensions under section 3105(a) of this title), the
Secretary shall make such determination not later than the end of such
extended evaluation or period of extension, as the case may be. In
determining whether the achievement of a vocational goal currently is
reasonably feasible, the Secretary shall resolve any reasonable doubt
in favor of determining that such achievement currently is reasonably
feasible.
(f) In connection with each period of extended evaluation of a
veteran and each rehabilitation program for a veteran who is determined
to have a serious employment handicap, the Secretary shall assign a
Department of Veterans Affairs employee to be responsible for the
management and followup of the provision of all services (including
appropriate coordination of employment assistance under section 3117 of
this title) and assistance under this chapter to such veteran.
Sec. 3107. Individualized vocational rehabilitation plan
(a) The Secretary shall formulate an individualized written plan of
vocational rehabilitation for a veteran described in section 3106(b) of
this title. Such plan shall be developed with such veteran and shall
include, but not be limited to (1) a statement of long-range
rehabilitation goals for such veteran and intermediate rehabilitation
objectives related to achieving such goals, (2) a statement of the
specific services (which shall include counseling in all cases) and
assistance to be provided under this chapter, (3) the projected date
for the initiation and the anticipated duration of each such service,
and (4) objective criteria and an evaluation procedure and schedule for
determining whether such objectives and goals are being achieved.
(b) The Secretary shall review at least annually the plan
formulated under subsection (a) of this section for a veteran and shall
afford such veteran the opportunity to participate in each such review.
On the basis of such review, the Secretary shall (1) redevelop such
plan with such veteran if the Secretary determines, under regulations
which the Secretary shall prescribe, that redevelopment of such plan is
appropriate, or (2) disapprove redevelopment of such plan if the
Secretary determines, under such regulations, that redevelopment of
such plan is not appropriate.
(c)(1) Each veteran for whom a plan has been developed or
redeveloped under subsection (a) or (b)(1), respectively, of this
section or in whose case redevelopment of a plan has been disapproved
under subsection (b)(2) of this section, shall be informed of such
veteran's opportunity for a review as provided in paragraph (2) of this
subsection.
(2) In any case in which a veteran does not agree to such plan as
proposed, to such plan as redeveloped, or to the disapproval of
redevelopment of such plan, such veteran may submit to the person
described in section 3106(f) of this title a written statement
containing such veteran's objections and request a review of such plan
as proposed or redeveloped, or a review of the disapproval of
redevelopment of such plan, as the case may be.
(3) The Secretary shall review the statement submitted under
paragraph (2) of this subsection and the plan as proposed or as
redeveloped, and, if applicable, the disapproval of redevelopment of
the plan, and render a decision on such review not later than ninety
days after the date on which such veteran submits such statement,
unless the case is one for which a longer period for review, not to
exceed 150 days after such veteran submits such statement, is allowed
under regulations prescribed by the Secretary, in which case the
Secretary shall render a decision no later than the last day of the
period prescribed in such regulations.
Sec. 3122. Longitudinal study of vocational rehabilitation programs
(a) Study Required.-(1) Subject to the availability of appropriated
funds, the Secretary shall conduct a longitudinal study of a
statistically valid sample of each of the groups of individuals
described in paragraph (2). The Secretary shall study each such group
over a period of at least 20 years.
(2) The groups of individuals described in this paragraph are the
following:
(A) Individuals who begin participating in a vocational
rehabilitation program under this chapter during fiscal year 2010.
(B) Individuals who begin participating in such a program during
fiscal year 2012.
(C) Individuals who begin participating in such a program during
fiscal year 2014.
(b) Annual Reports.-By not later than July 1 of each year covered
by the study required under subsection (a), the Secretary shall submit
to the Committees on Veterans' Affairs of the Senate and House of
Representatives a report on the study during the preceding year.
(c) Contents of Report.-The Secretary shall include in the report
required under subsection (b) any data the Secretary determines is
necessary to determine the long-term outcomes of the individuals
participating in the vocational rehabilitation programs under this
chapter. The Secretary may add data elements from time to time as
necessary. In addition, each such report shall contain the following
information:
(1) The number of individuals participating in vocational
rehabilitation programs under this chapter who suspended participation
in such a program during the year covered by the report.
(2) The average number of months such individuals served on active
duty.
(3) The distribution of disability ratings of such individuals.
(4) The types of other benefits administered by the Secretary
received by such individuals.
(5) The types of social security benefits received by such
individuals.
(6) Any unemployment benefits received by such individuals.
(7) The average number of months such individuals were employed
during the year covered by the report.
(8) The average annual starting and ending salaries of such
individuals who were employed during the year covered by the report.
(9) The number of such individuals enrolled in an institution of
higher learning, as that term is defined in section 3452(f) of this
title.
(10) The average number of academic credit hours, degrees, and
certificates obtained by such individuals during the year covered by
the report.
(11) The average number of visits such individuals made to
Department medical facilities during the year covered by the report.
(12) The average number of visits such individuals made to non-
Department medical facilities during the year covered by the report.
(13) The average annual income of such individuals.
(14) The average total household income of such individuals for the
year covered by the report.
(15) The percentage of such individuals who own their principal
residences.
(16) The average number of dependents of each such veteran.
Title 38: Pensions, Bonuses, and Veterans' Relief PART 21-VOCATIONAL
REHABILITATION AND EDUCATION Contents Subpart A-Vocational
Rehabilitation and Employment Under 38 U.S.C. Chapter 31
Sec. 21.1 Training and rehabilitation for veterans with service-
connected disabilities.
(a) Purposes. The purposes of this program are to provide to
eligible veterans with compensable service-connected disabilities all
services and assistance necessary to enable them to achieve maximum
independence in daily living and, to the maximum extent feasible, to
become employable and to obtain and maintain suitable employment.
(Authority: 38 U.S.C. 3100)
(b) Basic requirements. Before a service-disabled veteran may
receive training and rehabilitation services under Chapter 31, Title 38
U.S.C., three basic requirements must be met:
(1) The Department of Veterans Affairs must first find that the
veteran has basic entitlement to services as prescribed by Sec. 21.40.
(Authority: 38 U.S.C. 3102)
(2) The services necessary for training and rehabilitation must be
identified by the Department of Veterans Affairs and the veteran.
(Authority: 38 U.S.C. 3106)
(3) An individual written plan must be developed by the Department
of Veterans Affairs and the veteran describing the goals of the program
and the means through which these goals will be achieved.
Prepared Statement of Shane L. Liermann
Chairman Arrington, Ranking Member O'Rourke and Members of the
Subcommittee:
Thank you for inviting DAV (Disabled American Veterans) to testify
at this oversight hearing of the Subcommittee of Economic Opportunity
regarding the Vocational Rehabilitation and Employment (VR&E) program
of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA).
Mr. Chairman, as you may know, DAV is a congressionally chartered
national veterans' service organization of more than one million
wartime veterans, all of whom were injured or made ill while serving on
behalf of this nation. To fulfill our service mission to America's
injured and ill veterans and the families who care for them, DAV
directly employs a corps of more than 260 National Service Officers
(NSOs), all of whom are themselves wartime service-connected disabled
veterans, at every VA regional office (VARO) as well as other VA
facilities throughout the nation. Together with our chapter,
department, transition and county veteran service officers, DAV has
over 4,000 accredited representatives on the front lines providing free
claims and appeals services - including for VR&E services - to our
nation's veterans, their families and survivors.
We represent over one million veterans or survivors, making DAV the
largest veterans service organization (VSO) providing claims
assistance. This testimony reflects the collective experience and
expertise of our thousands of dedicated and highly trained service
officers who provide free claims and appeals assistance to hundreds of
thousands of veterans and survivors each year.
Our mission includes the principle that this nation's first duty to
veterans is the rehabilitation and welfare of its wartime disabled.
This principle envisions vocational rehabilitation and/or education to
assist disabled veterans to prepare for and obtain gainful employment
and enhanced opportunities for employment and job placement so that the
full array of talents and abilities of disabled veterans are used
productively.
In fact, all of DAV's National Service Officers have received or
are currently receiving services through VR&E as part of the DAV
National Service Officer Apprentice Program through a Memorandum of
Understanding (MOU) with VA's VR&E program.
For example, in July 1998, I started my career with DAV and
received services through VR&E. I successfully completed the DAV NSO
Training Program through VR&E in December 1999. Not only am I a
successful outcome of these specialized services &E, but also, as a DAV
NSO Supervisor, I personally assisted over 15 DAV Apprentices with VR&E
Services to include meetings with their counselors, discussion of their
plans, and use of VR&E other resources. As a DAV NSO, I assisted
hundreds of veterans with VR&E, to include applications, meetings with
their counselors, resolution of differences of opinion, representation
in Notice of Disagreements with Decision Review Officers and before
Veterans Law Judges at the Board of Veterans Appeals (BVA).
VOCATIONAL REHABILITATION AND EMPLOYMENT PROGRAM
The VR&E program, also known as the Chapter 31 program, assists
veterans and service members with service-connected disabilities and an
employment barrier to prepare for, obtain, and maintain suitable
employment. Veterans with at least a 20 percent disability evaluation
or a 10 percent evaluation with a serious employment handicap meet the
eligibility criteria. VR&E provides comprehensive services to include
vocational assessment, rehabilitation planning, and employment
services. For veterans with service-connected disabilities so severe
that they cannot immediately consider work, the VR&E program offers
services to improve their ability to live as independently as possible
within their families and communities. VR&E also administers Chapter
36, Chapter 35, and Chapter 18 benefits under title 38, United States
Code. These programs provide benefits to eligible dependents, spouses,
and beneficiaries.
VR&E administers these benefits through a decentralized service-
delivery network comprised of nearly 350 offices. As of the end of
fiscal year (FY) 2016, the field network included a VR&E workforce of
1,335 staff, including Vocational Rehabilitation Counselors (VRC),
Employment Coordinators, support staff, and managers. The network also
included nearly 200 Integrated Disability Evaluation System counselors
on 71 military installations, 79 VetSuccess on Campus counselors at 94
college locations, and 142 out-based VR&E offices.
VR&E's Chapter 31 workload is predominately driven by three
factors: (1) the number of veterans applying for rehabilitation
benefits and services; (2) the number of veterans who enter into the
development and implementation of a rehabilitation plan; (3) the
associated growth of disability claims consistent with the ongoing
reduction of the claims backlog; (4) changes to total volume of
military separations due to military end-strength policy; and (5)
frequency/severity of service-related injuries/illnesses. Once a
veteran or service member applies and is determined eligible for
services, the veteran meets with a VRC to complete a comprehensive
vocational assessment. The VRC will then make an entitlement
determination. If the veteran or service member is not entitled, the
counselor will assist with any necessary referrals for other services
such as referrals to state vocational rehabilitation programs, local
employment agencies, or other local or state training programs.
VR&E requires regular face-to-face interactions with veterans to
deliver benefits and services, this is in contrast to VBA's other lines
of business that focus primarily on claims processing. They are the
largest out-based network of any VBA business line with nearly 350
locations nationwide.
The cycle of an active VR&E case may extend up to and beyond six
years. This is necessary to provide adequate training for veterans so
that they can obtain employment that accommodates their disabilities
and provides a career foundation that is appropriate.
VR&E SERVICE STUDIES
In 2008, Congress passed the Veterans' Benefits Improvement Act,
which required VA to conduct a 20-year longitudinal study of veterans
who applied for and entered into a plan of services in the VR&E program
in FY 2010, FY 2012, and FY 2014. These three cohorts are being
followed annually for 20 years each. Survey data collection started in
2012 for the first two cohorts and in 2014 for the last cohort. The
primary focus of the VR&E Longitudinal Study is on the long-term
employment and standard of living outcomes for VR&E participants after
they exit the program.
A 2014 Government Accountability Office (GAO) Vocational
Rehabilitation and Employment Report (GAO-14-61) noted that further
performance and workload management improvements were needed. GAO
recommended that VA reflect success rates in revised performance
measures, ensure the reliability of its customer satisfaction survey
results, re-visit its staff allocation formula, study staff
assignments, and close certain gaps in its training for staff.
VR&E implemented new program performance measures in FY 2015 that
place a greater focus on veteran outcomes and their accomplishments.
These new measures of veterans' success are driven by positive outcomes
and active participation. Positive outcomes include employment and
independent living rehabilitation; rehabilitation for further
education; and maximum rehabilitation gains, as either employed or
employable. These new metrics effectively measure veterans' outcomes at
every stage of their progression through the program and more
accurately account for veterans' multi-year participation in the VR&E
program.
On July 31, 2017, the VR&E Longitudinal Study annual report was
released for FY 2016. It noted that the average combined disability
evaluation is 60 percent, indicating the program is benefiting those
with significant disabilities.
The most substantive finding of the study to date is that
regardless of the length of time since they began their VR&E program,
veterans who have achieved rehabilitation have substantially better
employment and standard of living outcomes than those who discontinued
services. Rehabilitation remains one of the most dominant variables
driving positive financial outcomes compared to those veterans who were
discontinued.
The study also found that veterans who have achieved rehabilitation
reported higher annual income amounts than discontinued participants,
at least $15,000 higher for individual income and at least $24,000
higher for household income. Compared to non-VR&E participants, those
who achieved rehabilitation had an annual income almost 50 percent
higher: $46,000 versus $31,000, dramatically demonstrating its
successful outcomes for the veteran population VR&E serves. The study
also reveals that roughly 90 percent of veterans report a moderately to
highly satisfying experience with VR&E.
VR&E SERVICE PERSONNEL
In 2016, Congress enacted legislation (P.L. 114-223) that included
a provision recognizing the need to provide a sufficient client-to-
counselor ratio to appropriately align veteran demand for VR&E
services. Section 254 of that law authorizes the VA Secretary to use
appropriated funds to ensure the ratio of veterans to VRCs does not
exceed 125 veterans to one full-time employment equivalent (FTEE).
Unfortunately, for the past three years, VA has requested no new
personnel for VR&E to reach this ratio.
The Administration's proposed budget for FY 2019 reflected that
over the past four years, VR&E program participation had increased by
an estimated 16.8 percent, while VR&E staffing has risen just 1.8
percent, VA projects program participation will increase another 3.1
percent in FY 2019; however the current rolling average counselor-to-
client ratio is 136.4.
RECOMMENDATIONS TO IMPROVE RATIO OF VETERANS TO VRC
1. Provide an additional 143 FTEE
In order to achieve the 1:125 counselor-to-client ratio established
by Congress, we estimate that VR&E will need another 143 FTEE in FY
2019 for a total direct workforce of 1,585, to manage an active
caseload and provide support services to almost 150,000 VR&E
participants. At a minimum, three-quarters of the new hires should be
VRCs dedicated to providing direct services to veterans. This would
require an increase of $18 million for FY 2019.
Unfortunately, the Administration's budget proposal called for a
decrease of $257 million for VR&E in FY 2019. While this is partly due
to lower pricing for the Transition Assistance Program (TAP) for those
separating from service, it disregards the increased need of VR&E
services veterans may require many years after separation. The
Administration has acknowledged that since 2013, participation in this
program increased by nearly 17 percent and noted a rolling average
counselor to caseload ratio of 136.4; however, their budget request
fails to request additional FTEE to move closer to a 1:125 counselor-
to-client ratio.
2. Leveraging Technologies to Improve Efficiency of VRCs
Each rehabilitation plan in the VR&E program is essentially a
partnership between the veteran and the VRC. For any plan or
partnership to be successful, both parties need clear expectations and
the required time for successful completion. Studies and feedback from
both veterans and VRCs indicate that time is an essential element to
success and that VRCs spend a large amount of time with administrative
functions that could be spent more effectively on counseling.
Leveraging technologies could improve the efficiency and time
requirements for VRCs, thus allowing more time for actual counseling.
Time Study
VR&E has indicated its intention to conduct a time study in the
very near future to measure the amount of time each VRC spends
completing administrative tasks versus counseling veterans. We applaud
VR&E for this initiative to help determine if VRCs can be more
effective for the veterans in the program.
Tele-counseling
As previously noted, VR&E requires regular face-to-face
interactions with veterans to deliver benefits and services. VR&E
previously had access to the same online video service, JABAR, as used
by VHA. However, recently VR&E started a pilot at the St. Petersburg
VARO using a new service, PEXIP. VR&E will be adding other VAROs to the
pilot in the near future with an expectation to be VA wide by the end
of the fiscal year.
This technology has the potential to decrease the current 45-day
processing time from application to rehabilitation plan. The required
face-to-face interactions can also be scheduled via PEXIP, which will
increase the efficiency of the VRC. The veteran will spend less time
traveling to appointments with less interference with educational and
employment requirements. This is a great example of leveraging
technology to improve the veteran experience.
Electronic Reminders of Appointments
Even with the use of PEXIP, VRCs have reported that approximately
50 percent of veterans fail to appear for scheduled appointments. VR&E
is planning to roll out text message reminders for appointments on a
nationwide basis to increase the number of veterans appearing for their
appointments, further increasing the time each VRC spends counseling
versus performing administrative tasks.
School Payment System
Many VRCs utilize education services to help achieve veterans'
employment goals, which lead to another administrative function for VRC
who must ensure payment of those educational centers. The payment
process currently in use is cumbersome and time-consuming for the VRC
and payment for schools is an ongoing challenge.
However, the Post 9-11 GI Bill has already developed a school
payment system that is streamlined and efficient. Because approximately
97 percent of the schools used by VR&E counselors are GI Bill approved
schools, we recommend that VR&E receive permission to utilize the same
financial system as the GI Bill in order to greatly reduce the amount
of administrative time expended by VRCs.
Automate and Digitize VR&E Records
VR&E Services require VRCs to keep notes, applications, documents,
and other evidence as part of the veteran's file. Although VBA has gone
to digital claims files, VR&E still maintains paper files. Efforts have
been started to digitize all VR&E files and place them inside VBA's
Veterans Benefits Management System (VBMS). This will give all VRCs
greater access to veterans VR&E files as well as their claims folders.
Automation of VR&E applications and required documentation by VRCs
would also reduce their time spent on administrative actions. VR&E is
obtaining voice recognition software that will allow counselors to make
their notes by speaking; another example of VR&E's initiative to
improve the effectiveness of VRCs.
3. Increased Resources for VA IT Services
VA IT Services have many requirements and priorities for all of VA
to include the Veterans Health Administration, VBA, and the National
Cemeteries Administration. However, in order to meet requirements and
initiatives as noted above, VR&E needs an increase in its information
technology resources in order to automate and digitize VR&E records and
to streamline the school payment system.
4. Training for VRCs
In 2017, VR&E conducted a pilot for a new training platform,
Competency Based Training System (CBTS). All newly employed VRCs will
receive 80 hours of training. CBTS will gauge each VRC's understanding
and knowledge about the program on an annual basis. Remedial training
will be provided on areas or subjects that need additional focus.
This training system can be used to provide uniformity and some
standardization because inconsistency between VAROs and VRCs is common
within VR&E. At the same time, we urge VR&E to use this training to
ensure each VRC understands the flexibility they have to address the
individualized needs of their veteran clients while remaining
consistent within the overall VR&E system.
5. Increase Awareness of VR&E Services
During service members' transition to civilian life, VA provides
information regarding VR&E Services. Many transitioning veterans may be
eligible for both Post 9-11 GI Bill and VR&E Services; however, few may
be aware of how much data exists about the proven benefits, such as the
50 percent increase in annual earnings for those who complete the
program. We recommend that VR&E consider conducting a national
awareness campaign, in collaboration with VSOs, in order to provide
information on eligibility, the various benefits offered by VR&E
services and the differences between the education and employment
services available.
6. Retain Current Eligibility Standards
In recent years there have been some suggestions that the VR&E
program should be scaled back by limiting the number of veterans who
are eligible and we note that restricting eligibility to VR&E could
potentially decrease the counselor-to-veteran client ratio. However,
DAV will adamantly oppose any legislation or policies that would
restrict existing VR&E eligibility criteria. As VR&E is an employment
program, any changes to eligibility will negatively impact disabled
veterans' ability to obtain and maintain employment.
7. Eliminate 12-Year Eligibility Period
Finally, DAV supports H.R. 5452, Reduce Unemployment for Veterans
of All Ages Act of 2018. Currently, veterans with service-connected
disabilities or other employment challenges are able to receive career
development services through the VA's Vocational Rehabilitation and
Employment program up to 12 years after they separate from the service.
H.R. 5452 would eliminate the 12-year period of eligibility. In
agreement with DAV Resolution No. 250, we support this legislation to
eliminate the 12-year period of eligibility, which will provide
veterans the flexibility to receive the support they have earned and
deserve throughout their lifetime and thus help reduce unemployment for
service-connected veterans.
Mr. Chairman, this concludes my testimony on behalf of DAV. I would
be happy to answer any questions you or other members of the
Subcommittee may have.
Statements For The Record
VETERANS OF FOREIGN WARS OF THE UNITED STATES
PATRICK MURRAY, ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR
Chairman Arrington, Ranking Member O'Rourke and members of the
Subcommittee, on behalf of the men and women of the Veterans of Foreign
Wars (VFW) and its Auxiliary, thank you for the opportunity to present
our views on this important benefit.
The Vocational Rehabilitation and Employment Service (VR&E)
provides critical counseling and other adjunct services necessary to
enable service-disabled veterans to overcome barriers as they prepare
for, find, and maintain gainful employment. VR&E offers services on
five tracks: re-employment, rapid access to employment, self-
employment, employment through long-term services, and independent
living.
The VFW views VR&E as a critical tool in promoting success for our
veterans. It is at the forefront in ensuring veterans can remain in the
workforce and stay employed in meaningful careers. Once a veteran
receives a disability rating, and cannot continue along their original
path in the work force, they must choose a different route for their
career. This is where VR&E is critical because it helps veterans remain
employed by providing training and education for an alternative career.
The VFW has nearly 2,000 service officers across the country, and
representatives on 24 military installations. Our service officers
train twice a year on VR&E and have assisted on over 4,000 of those
claims resulting in $37.6 million in 2017 alone. We are fully
supportive of how vitally important this program is, but we are also
keenly aware of areas that need improvement.
The vital part of the VR&E program is the counselors who assist
veterans with their claims. The counselors are the key component in
assisting veterans with their rehabilitation plan for VR&E. However,
while the counselors are one of the biggest assets for veterans seeking
to use VR&E they are also one of the largest areas that needs
improvement.
Far too often our service officers have to work with veterans who
are eligible to receive VR&E benefits but were originally denied by the
VR&E counselors. The subjectivity of approving eligibility leads to
veterans being denied the benefit, when in fact they should have been
approved immediately. There needs to be a more standardized way to
approve the eligibility of veterans, and further training of
counselors, so deserving recipients do not have to fight for a benefit
they have already earned.
The other issue concerning VR&E counselors is the need for more of
them. Additional funding needs to be authorized in order to ensure the
program can keep up with demand. Counselors who have an increased
workload cannot give the proper attention to the clients they deserve
if counselors have too many clients to serve.
Over the past four years, program participation has increased by an
estimated 16.8 percent, while VR&E staffing has risen just 1.8 percent.
VA projects program participation will increase another 3.1 percent in
FY 2019, and it is critical that sufficient resources are provided not
only to meet this rising workload, but also to expand capacity to meet
the full, unconstrained demand for VR&E services.
In 2016, Congress enacted legislation (P.L. 114-223) that included
a provision recognizing the need to provide a sufficient client-to-
counselor ratio to appropriately align veteran demand for VR&E
services. Section 254 of that law authorizes the Secretary of Veterans
Affairs to use appropriated funds to ensure the ratio of veterans to
Vocational Rehabilitation Counselors (VRC) does not exceed 125 veterans
to one full-time employment equivalent. Unfortunately, for the past
three years, VA has requested no new personnel for VR&E to reach this
ratio.
In order to achieve the 1:125 counselor-to-client ratio established
by Congress, the VFW estimates that VR&E will need another 163 Full
Time Equivalent Employees (FTEE) in FY 2019 for a total workforce of
1,585, to manage an active caseload and provide support services to
almost 150,000 VR&E participants. At a minimum, three-quarters of the
new hires should be VRCs dedicated to providing direct services to
veterans.
A suggestion the VFW has that could improve the accuracy of
reporting the counselor-to-client ratio is to change from a national
average to an average of VA Regional Offices (RO). This change would
help identify areas of need for the specific offices, rather than
having one area of the country drastically affect the average of the
other RO's. Changing the reporting of the counselor-to-client ratio
would help identify offices that are meeting the requirements and those
offices that need significant help.
We are disappointed by the Administration's proposal for a decrease
of $257 million for VR&E for FY 2019. While we understand this is
partly due to lower pricing for the Transition Assistance Program for
those separating from service, this disregards the increased need of
VR&E services veterans may require many years after separation. The
Administration acknowledges that since 2013, participation in this
program increased by 17 percent and noted a rolling average counselor-
to-caseload ratio of 136.4; however, their budget request fails to
request additional FTEE to move closer to a 1:125 counselor-to-client
ratio.
THE AMERICAN LEGION
Chairman Arrington Ranking Member O'Rourke and distinguished
members of the Subcommittee, on behalf of National Commander Denise
Rohan and our 2 million members, we thank you for the opportunity to
share the views of The American Legion regarding the Department of
Veterans Affairs' Vocational Rehabilitation and Education (VR&E)
program.
The Vocational Rehabilitation and Employment (VR&E) Program
provides comprehensive services and assistance enabling veterans with
service-connected disabilities and employment handicaps to achieve
maximum independence in daily living, become employable, and maintain
suitable employment. After a veteran is authorized to utilize VR&E, a
vocational rehabilitation counselor helps the veteran identify a
suitable employment goal and determines the appropriate services
necessary to achieve their goal.
As our nation's servicemembers transition to the civilian sector,
there is an ongoing need for retraining to independent living,
achieving the highest possible quality of life, and securing meaningful
employment. To meet America's obligation to these specific veterans and
other eligible VR&E veterans, VA leadership must focus on marked
improvements in case management and effective vocational counseling.
The successful rehabilitation of our severely disabled veterans is
determined by the coordinated efforts of every Federal agency
[Department of Defense (DoD), Veterans Affairs (VA), Department of
Labor (DOL), Office of Personnel Management (OPM), Housing and Urban
Development (HUD), etc.] involved in the seamless transition from the
battlefield to the civilian workplace. Timely access to quality health
care services, favorable physical rehabilitation, vocational training,
and job placement play a critical role in the seamless transition of
each and every veteran, as well as his or her family.
Administration of VR&E and its programs is a responsibility of the
Veterans Benefits Administration (VBA). Historically, VBA has placed
emphasis on the processing of veterans' claims and the reduction of the
claims backlog, which is extremely important. However, providing
effective employment programs through VR&E must become a priority as
well.
Until recently, VR&E's primary focus has been providing veterans
with skills training, rather than obtaining meaningful employment.
Clearly, any employability plan that doesn't achieve the ultimate
objective of a job is an injustice to those veterans seeking assistance
in transitioning into the civilian workforce.
Vocational counseling plays a vital role in identifying barriers to
employment that must be overcome, as well as matching veterans' skills
with those career opportunities available to qualified candidates.
Becoming fully qualified becomes the next logical objective towards
successful transition.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Category 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
VR&E New Claims 80,812 87,094 88,439 112,155 107,200
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Caseload 135,815 148,229 166,511 173,606 172,323
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Participants 112,659 123,383 131,607 137,097 132,218
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Positive Outcomes 12,418 13,106 13,476 14,350 15,528
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Case per Counselor Ratio 136.2 131.8 138.3 140 136.4
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Between FY13 and FY17, VR&E applicants rose from 80,812 to 112,115,
creating increased workloads for VR&E counselors tasked with developing
employment goals and services for beneficiaries. The American Legion
recognized the escalating problems associated with VR&E, and at our
2016 National Convention passed Resolution No. 345: Support for
Vocational Rehabilitation and Employment Program Hiring More Counselors
and Employment Coordinators \1\. Congress also recognized these
problems, and sought to address them in Public Law 114-223.
Specifically, Section 254 mandates that the Secretary of Veterans
Affairs ``may use amounts appropriated.... to ensure that the ratio of
veterans to full-time employment equivalents within any program of
rehabilitation conducted under chapter 31 of title 38, United States
Code does not exceed 125 veterans to one full-time employment
equivalent.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ American Legion Resolution No. 345: https://archive.legion.org/
bitstream/handle/123456789/5663/2016N345.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
By 2017, the average caseload of a typical VR&E counselor was 136.4
veterans. With actual participants expected to rise by 17,000, it does
not appear that VBA intends to meet this congressionally requested
ratio. In order to fulfill the 1:125 counselor-to-client ratio in FY
2018, it has been estimated that VR&E would need 266 new full-time
employees (FTE), for a total workforce of 1,550 FTE. Instead, VBA added
only 61 FTE, and froze the VR&E request for direct personnel at 1,442
through 2019. Further, budgeted funds for estimated overtime have been
slashed from $996,000 to $500,000, depriving overworked counselors the
opportunity to help veterans.
Additionally, improvements made to veterans' claims, such as
modernizing the appeals process, can only accelerate participation in
the vocational rehabilitation program. Over $135.5 million has been
requested for the Board of Veterans Appeals and related information
technology initiatives to reduce the pending appeals inventory. An
additional $74 million has been requested in President Trump's FY 19
budget to hire an additional 605 full-time VBA employees to assist in
decreasing and processing veterans' claims. The American Legion's fears
that the unintended consequence of increasing the applicant pool for
VR&E without increasing support staff for the critical program itself
will cause further strain.
BUDGET REQUEST TRANSPARENCY
The FY 2019 VA Budget Request proposed a cut of $59.8 million -
over 18 percent - to the Vocational Rehabilitation and Employment
Program. The wide majority of these cuts are outlined squarely in
VR&E's second largest line item: Other Services. The budget proposal
attributes this cut to ``favorable pricing of a new Transition
Assistance Program (TAP) contract which provides the required level of
support at a considerably lower cost.'' Further review shows greater
fluctuation in ``Other Services'':
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 (projected)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
$64,360,000 124,785,000 124,785,000 43,244
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
While The American Legion appreciates the explanation for this
reduction, it believes that greater detail needs to be provided.
Questions remain as to why a renegotiated TAP contract is under
Vocational Rehabilitation and Employment funding, and why this funding
could not have been used as an offset to increase FTE for VR&E
counselors.
PERFORMANCE MEASURES
The American Legion applauds the efforts of VR&E to continue to
focus on designing performance measures to drive continuous improvement
and achieve optimal outcomes for veterans. The FY19 budget request will
continue to calculate Class Achievement Rate, which measures the
percentage of veterans who after six years obtain a positive outcome
and the number of veterans persisting in their enrollment, measured
against all veterans in their cohort (class).
Based on the Vocational Rehabilitation and Employment Longitudinal
Study Annual Report for FY 2016, 90% of VR&E participants have reported
moderate to high program satisfaction \2\. While The American Legion
applauds the success and focus that VBA has placed on customer service,
we urge Congress to not discount the experiences of veterans
dissatisfied with the program. Compared to other VA education and
training benefits, the mishandling of a veteran's case in the VR&E
program carries significant consequences.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Vocational Rehabilitation and Employment (VR&E) Longitudinal
Study (PL 110-389 Sec. 334). Vocational Rehabilitation and Employment
(VR&E) Longitudinal Study (PL 110-389 Sec. 334).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As an example, a veteran enrolled in the Post 9/11 GI Bill may
categorize their satisfaction with the VA as ``poor'' if they have
encountered multiple late payments. This could potentially impact their
enrollment times, and at worst, delay their graduation .
A veteran enrolled in the Vocational Rehabilitation Program may
categorize satisfaction with the VA as ``poor'' if their entire course
of study was rejected by their Vocational Rehabilitation Counselor,
despite the knowledge of other veterans in the program who are pursuing
comparable rehabilitation plans. The result of this experience thus has
life-altering implications.
While the JD Power & Associates Voice of the Veteran Continuous
Measurement Surveys do not indicate that this is a widespread problem,
The American Legion has received enough anecdotal evidence from our
members across the country that leads us to believe this still warrants
attention. It is clear that the individualized nature of developing
employment plans makes for incredibly difficult decisions on the part
of Vocational Rehabilitation Counselors. In addition to assessing the
veteran's needs, skills and abilities, the counselors also have to
reconcile economic conditions and employment trends to determine the
best course of action for the veteran. Often times these counselors
must be the bearers of bad news, and they should be adequately
empowered to make these judgments. However, appropriate recourse for
veterans concerned with the decisions of their counselors needs to be
improved.
Evidence of the need for this can be found as recently as April of
2018 in the case of Atius Technology Institute. The owner of Atius
Technology Institute (``Atius''), a privately owned, non-accredited
school specializing in information technology courses, plead guilty to
bribing a Vocational Rehabilitation Counselor in exchange for the
public official's facilitation of payments that were supposed to be
dedicated to providing vocational training for vocational
rehabilitation. Over the life of the scheme, Atius defrauded the
Department of Veterans Affairs, veterans, and the American taxpayer out
of $2.2 million dollars. The counselor certified veterans attending
Atius were enrolled in up to thirty two hours of class per week, when
it fact, Atius offered a maximum of six weekly class hours. In order to
do this, it is likely that many veterans were manipulated into
attending the fraudulent institution.
While the case of Atius is extraordinary, the lessons that can be
drawn from it are important: if a veteran enrolled in the Vocational
Rehabilitation Program believes that something is not right with the
decisions or conduct of his or her counselor, intentional or otherwise,
that appropriate recourse is available to address potential inequity.
Conclusion
In closing, The American Legion supports this important program,
that has helped thousands of veterans become better trained and capable
of obtaining quality employment. Further, The American Legion is
committed to working with the Department of Veterans Affairs and this
committee to ensure that America's veterans are provided with the
highest level of employment assistance.
Chairman Arrington, Ranking Member O'Rourke, and distinguished
members of this committee, The American Legion thanks this committee
for holding this important hearing and for the opportunity to explain
the views of the 2 million members of this organization. For additional
information regarding this testimony, please contact Mr. Jonathan
Espinoza, Legislative Associate of The American Legion's Legislative
Division at (202) 861-2700 or jespinoza@legion.org
[all]
| MEMBERNAME | BIOGUIDEID | GPOID | CHAMBER | PARTY | ROLE | STATE | CONGRESS | AUTHORITYID |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bilirakis, Gus M. | B001257 | 7881 | H | R | COMMMEMBER | FL | 115 | 1838 |
| Bilirakis, Gus M. | B001257 | 7881 | H | R | COMMMEMBER | FL | 115 | 1838 |
| Walz, Timothy J. | W000799 | 8001 | H | D | COMMMEMBER | MN | 115 | 1856 |
| Coffman, Mike | C001077 | 7864 | H | R | COMMMEMBER | CO | 115 | 1912 |
| Roe, David P. | R000582 | 8148 | H | R | COMMMEMBER | TN | 115 | 1954 |
| Brownley, Julia | B001285 | H | D | COMMMEMBER | CA | 115 | 2106 | |
| Takano, Mark | T000472 | H | D | COMMMEMBER | CA | 115 | 2110 | |
| Peters, Scott H. | P000608 | H | D | COMMMEMBER | CA | 115 | 2113 | |
| Esty, Elizabeth H. | E000293 | H | D | COMMMEMBER | CT | 115 | 2114 | |
| Kuster, Ann M. | K000382 | H | D | COMMMEMBER | NH | 115 | 2145 | |
| Wenstrup, Brad R. | W000815 | H | R | COMMMEMBER | OH | 115 | 2152 | |
| Wenstrup, Brad R. | W000815 | H | R | COMMMEMBER | OH | 115 | 2152 | |
| O'Rourke, Beto | O000170 | H | D | COMMMEMBER | TX | 115 | 2162 | |
| Bost, Mike | B001295 | H | R | COMMMEMBER | IL | 115 | 2243 | |
| Poliquin, Bruce | P000611 | H | R | COMMMEMBER | ME | 115 | 2247 | |
| Rice, Kathleen M. | R000602 | H | D | COMMMEMBER | NY | 115 | 2262 | |
| Correa, J. Luis | C001110 | H | D | COMMMEMBER | CA | 115 | 2312 | |
| Dunn, Neal P. | D000628 | H | R | COMMMEMBER | FL | 115 | 2315 | |
| Rutherford, John H. | R000609 | H | R | COMMMEMBER | FL | 115 | 2316 | |
| Banks, Jim | B001299 | H | R | COMMMEMBER | IN | 115 | 2326 | |
| Higgins, Clay | H001077 | H | R | COMMMEMBER | LA | 115 | 2329 | |
| Bergman, Jack | B001301 | H | R | COMMMEMBER | MI | 115 | 2333 | |
| Arrington, Jodey C. | A000375 | H | R | COMMMEMBER | TX | 115 | 2350 | |
| Lamb, Conor | L000588 | H | D | COMMMEMBER | PA | 115 | 2367 |
Disclaimer:
Please refer to the About page for more information.