[House Hearing, 111 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
VOCATIONAL REHABILITATION AND
EMPLOYMENT PROGRAMS
=======================================================================
HEARING
before the
SUBCOMMITTEE ON ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY
of the
COMMITTEE ON VETERANS' AFFAIRS
U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED ELEVENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
APRIL 2, 2009
__________
Serial No. 111-10
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Veterans' Affairs
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
48-424 WASHINGTON : 2009
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
For Sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office
Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800; (202) 512�091800
Fax: (202) 512�092104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402�090001
COMMITTEE ON VETERANS' AFFAIRS
BOB FILNER, California, Chairman
CORRINE BROWN, Florida STEVE BUYER, Indiana, Ranking
VIC SNYDER, Arkansas CLIFF STEARNS, Florida
MICHAEL H. MICHAUD, Maine JERRY MORAN, Kansas
STEPHANIE HERSETH SANDLIN, South HENRY E. BROWN, JR., South
Dakota Carolina
HARRY E. MITCHELL, Arizona JEFF MILLER, Florida
JOHN J. HALL, New York JOHN BOOZMAN, Arkansas
DEBORAH L. HALVORSON, Illinois BRIAN P. BILBRAY, California
THOMAS S.P. PERRIELLO, Virginia DOUG LAMBORN, Colorado
HARRY TEAGUE, New Mexico GUS M. BILIRAKIS, Florida
CIRO D. RODRIGUEZ, Texas VERN BUCHANAN, Florida
JOE DONNELLY, Indiana DAVID P. ROE, Tennessee
JERRY MCNERNEY, California
ZACHARY T. SPACE, Ohio
TIMOTHY J. WALZ, Minnesota
JOHN H. ADLER, New Jersey
ANN KIRKPATRICK, Arizona
GLENN C. NYE, Virginia
Malcom A. Shorter, Staff Director
______
SUBCOMMITTEE ON ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY
STEPHANIE HERSETH SANDLIN, South Dakota, Chairwoman
THOMAS S.P. PERRIELLO, Virginia JOHN BOOZMAN, Arkansas, Ranking
JOHN H. ADLER, New Jersey JERRY MORAN, Kansas
ANN KIRKPATRICK, Arizona GUS M. BILIRAKIS, Florida
HARRY TEAGUE, New Mexico
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
__________
April 2, 2009
Page
Vocational Rehabilitation and Employment Programs................ 1
OPENING STATEMENTS
Hon. Harry Teague................................................ 1
Chairwoman Stephanie Herseth Sandlin, prepared statement of...... 30
Hon. John Boozman, Ranking Republican Member..................... 2
Prepared statement of Congressman Boozman.................... 31
WITNESSES
U.S. Department of Labor, John M. McWilliam, Deputy Assistant
Secretary, Veterans' Employment and Training Service........... 17
Prepared statement of Mr. McWilliam.......................... 42
U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, Ruth A. Fanning, Director,
Vocational Rehabilitation and Employment Service, Veterans
Benefits Administration........................................ 18
Prepared statement of Ms. Fanning............................ 45
______
American Legion, Mark Walker, Assistant Director, Economic
Commission..................................................... 4
Prepared statement of Mr. Walker............................. 31
Veterans of Foreign Wars of the United States, Justin Brown,
Legislative Associate, National Legislative Service............ 5
Prepared statement of Mr. Brown.............................. 34
Wounded Warrior Project, Charles S. Ciccolella, Senior Fellow for
Economic Empowerment........................................... 7
Prepared statement of Mr. Ciccolella......................... 38
SUBMISSIONS FOR THE RECORD
Commission on Rehabilitation Counselor Certification, Patricia
Nunez, Chairwoman, statement................................... 48
MATERIAL SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD
Article:
Wounded Marines: School Didn't Deliver, Navy Times, by Gidget
Fuentes, March 9, 2009..................................... 50
Post-Hearing Questions and Responses for the Record:
Hon. Stephanie Herseth Sandlin, Chairwoman, Subcommittee on
Economic Opportunities, Committee on Veterans' Affairs, to
Peter Gaytan, Executive Director, American Legion, letter
dated April 15, 2009, and response from Mark Walker, Deputy
Director, National Economic Commission, American Legion,
letter dated May 27, 2009.................................. 52
Hon. Stephanie Herseth Sandlin, Chairwoman, Subcommittee on
Economic Opportunities, Committee on Veterans' Affairs, to
Colonel (ret.) Michael R. Turner, Chief, Congressional
Affairs, Wounded Warrior Project, letter dated April 15,
2009, and WWP responses.................................... 54
Hon. Stephanie Herseth Sandlin, Chairwoman, Subcommittee on
Economic Opportunities, Committee on Veterans' Affairs, to
Bob Wallace, Executive Director, Veterans of Foreign Wars
of the United States, letter dated April 15, 2009, and
response from Justin Brown, Legislative Associate, National
Legislative Service, Veterans of Foreign Wars of the United
States, letter dated May 13, 2009.......................... 57
Hon. Stephanie Herseth Sandlin, Chairwoman, Subcommittee on
Economic Opportunities, Committee on Veterans' Affairs, to
Hon. Hilda L. Solis, Secretary, U.S. Department of Labor,
letter dated April 15, 2009, and response from John
McWilliam, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Operations and
Management, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Veterans'
Employment and Training, U.S. Department of Labor, letter
dated July 17, 2009........................................ 58
Hon. Stephanie Herseth Sandlin, Chairwoman, Subcommittee on
Economic Opportunities, Committee on Veterans' Affairs, to
Ruth Fanning, Director, Office of Vocational Rehabilitation
and Employment, Veterans Benefits Administration, U.S.
Department of Veterans Affairs, letter dated April 15,
2009, and VA responses..................................... 60
VOCATIONAL REHABILITATION AND EMPLOYMENT PROGRAMS
----------
THURSDAY, APRIL 2, 2009
U.S. House of Representatives,
Committee on Veterans' Affairs,
Subcommittee on Economic Opportunity,
Washington, DC.
The Subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 1:02 p.m., in
Room 334, Cannon House Office Building, Hon. Stephanie Herseth
Sandlin [Chairwoman of the Subcommittee] presiding.
Present: Representatives Herseth Sandlin, Perriello,
Teague, Boozman.
OPENING STATEMENT OF CHAIRWOMAN HERSETH SANDLIN AS PRESENTED BY
HON. HARRY TEAGUE
Mr. Teague [presiding]. Good afternoon. The Veterans'
Affairs Subcommittee on Economic Opportunity oversight hearing
on vocational rehabilitation and employment (VR&E) programs
will come to order.
I received word that Chairwoman Herseth Sandlin is en route
and should be joining us shortly.
I would like to call to attention the fact that the
Commission on Rehabilitation Counselor Certification has asked
to submit a written statement for the hearing record. If there
is no objection, I ask for unanimous consent that this
statement be entered for the record. Hearing no objection, so
entered.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Nunez appears on p. 48.]
Mr. Teague. I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5
legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and that
written statements be made part of the record. Hearing no
objection, so ordered.
Today's hearing will give the Subcommittee the opportunity
to learn more about the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs'
(VA's) Vocational Rehabilitation and Employment Program and its
relationship with the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) in
assisting our veterans obtain meaningful employment while
healing from the wounds sustained while in military service.
Some of our panelists might recall that this Subcommittee
held 2 hearings on VR&E in the last Congress. These hearings
afforded the Subcommittee the opportunity to hear from
stakeholders on their concerns and recommendation to improve
upon existing programs.
It is very important that we continue to examine these
concerns, especially at a time when our country's veterans are
experiencing Post-traumatic stress disorder, Traumatic Brain
Injury (TBI), amputation, and severe burns that would have been
fatal in previous conflicts.
As a result of previous hearings, Congress successfully
passed Public Law 110-389, the ``Veterans' Benefits Improvement
Act of 2008,'' which waives the 24-month limitation on
independent living services for veterans who served after
September the 11th, 2001, increasing the cap on number of
veterans participating in the independent living from 2,500 to
2,600 veterans, requires the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to
conduct a 1 year study on measures to assist and encourage VR&E
Program completion; and requires the Secretary of Veterans
Affairs to conduct a 20-year longitudinal study on VR&E
participants.
I can assure our witnesses that we will continue to monitor
the VA as it implements these changes and works on providing us
the required reports. The men and women who serve our Nation
honorably deserve and should receive the best our country can
offer.
While the changes made in the 110th Congress are a step in
the right direction, we continue to hear from the veterans'
community concern that future improvements are needed.
At the suggestion of the Military Officers Association of
America and the veterans community, Mr. Bob Filner recently
introduced H.R. 1821, the ``Equity for Injured Veterans Act of
2009.'' Mr. Filner's legislation seeks to assist VR&E
participants by expanding VR&E participating eligibility for a
period of 15 years, augmenting housing stipend and assistance
to the same levels as Chapter 33 housing stipend recipients,
authorizing the Secretary to pay subsistence allowance for a
period of 6 months after program completion, authorizing the
Secretary to provide reimbursements for child care services,
and requiring the Secretary to modify its VR&E reporting
requirements.
I am pleased to hear that Secretary of Labor Hilda Solis
and Secretary of Veterans Affairs Eric Shinseki reaffirmed
their commitments to assisting our Nation's veterans during
their respective confirmation hearings.
I look forward to working with the Secretaries, Chairwoman
Herseth Sandlin, Ranking Member Boozman, Members of the
Committee, and stakeholders to evaluate legislative proposals
that seek to equip our veterans with the tools they need to
succeed after military service.
I now recognize the distinguished Ranking Member,
Congressman John Boozman, for any opening remarks he may have.
[The prepared statement of Chairwoman Herseth Sandlin
appears on p. 30.]
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN BOOZMAN
Mr. Boozman. Thank you, Mr. Teague.
And I would like to extend a special welcome to the former
Assistant Secretary of Labor for Veterans' Employment and
Training Service (VETS), Mr. Ciccolella. I suspect it was a lot
easier to have your testimony cleared today than it was with
the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) in your past life.
When I think of benefits to improve the lives of disabled
veterans, I am very proud of the vocational rehabilitation and
employment. VR&E is the most flexible and generous among the
programs for disabled veterans administered by VA.
I also suspect VR&E is the most effective disability
rehabilitation program offered by the Federal Government and it
should be.
Having said that, we still face significant challenges to
increase the number of disabled veterans who successfully
complete their rehabilitation program.
Whether it is their long-term education or intermediate job
placement services, I believe veterans continue to drop out of
the program for reasons within our control.
For example, increasing the stipend to $1,200 per month as
proposed by Ranking Member Buyer's H.R. 297, the ``Veterans
Vocational Rehabilitation and Employment Subsistence Allowance
Improvement Act of 2009,'' of which I am a co-sponsor, would be
a significant improvement by reducing the number of veterans
who drop out because of the need to work full time to support
their families.
Mr. Teague, if by some strange circumstances we might find
some PAYGO resources, I believe increasing the stipend should
be high on our list of uses for the money.
I am also concerned that in our zeal to rehabilitate
veterans and returning them to the workforce, the program
occasionally fails to consider all aspects of a potential
training program, including costs and availability of similar
resources and opportunities at much lower cost.
For example, recent press articles question the
appropriateness of a program to train wounded Marines for
careers in the entertainment industry. The article stated VA
paid over $88,000 for each of the 19 Marines who completed the
10-week course that had been offered originally as a free
course. The VA paid over $64,000 for each of the second group
of 8 wounded Marines who completed the course.
[The press article Wounded Marines: School didn't deliver,
Navy Times, by Gidget Fuentes, March 9, 2009, appears on page
50.]
Similar courses were available in the area for 80 percent
less and I note that the institution in question had previously
been denied approval for GI Bill benefits.
VA has a well-developed process that uses the State
Approving Agencies to approve courses for education benefits.
While I understand that VR&E staff have the authority to
approve education and training courses for their participants,
it is entirely appropriate that they seek the assistance of the
State Approving Agencies whenever veterans seek to use VR&E
benefits to attend unusual courses like the one I just
mentioned.
I still do not understand how VA calculates the
rehabilitation rate. To me, if you have about 100,000
participants and 12,000 are rehabilitated in a year, the rate
is 12 percent, not 75 percent.
I also believe that 12 percent is not necessarily bad given
that you are serving a group of disabled veterans whose needs
are much more difficult to solve.
Finally, I want to thank Director Fanning and her staff for
their efforts to put disabled veterans back to work. I
recognize that the case I just mentioned is very much an
exception to their standard practices and I am willing to work
with all the stakeholders to ensure that disabled veterans
receive the best possible opportunity to pursue their working
careers.
Thank you, Mr. Teague. I yield back.
[The prepared statement of Congressman Boozman appears on
p. 31.]
Mr. Teague. Thank you, Mr. Boozman, for those remarks.
I would like to welcome all of our witnesses testifying
before this Subcommittee today. I would like to also remind all
our witnesses that your complete written statements have been
made part of the hearing record.
Please limit your remarks so that we may have sufficient
time to follow-up with questions once everyone has had the
opportunity to provide their testimony.
Joining us in the first panel is: Mr. Mark Walker,
Assistant Director of the National Economic Commission for the
American Legion; Mr. Justin Brown, Legislative Associate of
National Legislative Service for the Veterans of Foreign Wars
of the United States (VFW); and the Honorable Charles
Ciccolella, who is the former Assistant Secretary for the
Department of Labor's Veterans' Employment and Training
Service. Secretary Ciccolella now serves as Senior Fellow for
Economic Empowerment for the Wounded Warrior Project (WWP). I
thank all of you all for being here.
Mr. Walker, welcome to the Subcommittee. You are recognized
for 5 minutes.
STATEMENTS OF MARK WALKER, ASSISTANT DIRECTOR, ECONOMIC
COMMISSION, AMERICAN LEGION; JUSTIN BROWN, LEGISLATIVE
ASSOCIATE, NATIONAL LEGISLATIVE SERVICE, VETERANS OF FOREIGN
WARS OF THE UNITED STATES; AND CHARLES S. CICCOLELLA, SENIOR
FELLOW FOR ECONOMIC EMPOWERMENT, WOUNDED WARRIOR PROJECT
STATEMENT OF MARK WALKER
Mr. Walker. Mr. Teague, Ranking Member Boozman, and
distinguished Members of the Subcommittee, thank you for the
opportunity to submit the views of the American Legion
regarding the Department of Veterans Affairs' vocational
rehabilitation and employment programs.
The mission of the VR&E Program is to help qualified
service-disabled veterans achieve independence in daily living
and to the maximum extent feasible obtain and maintain suitable
employment. The American Legion fully supports these goals.
The Vocational Rehabilitation Program has historically been
marketed to veterans as an education program and not an
employment program. Although the VR&E Program has focused more
on the employment side, eligible veterans who are enrolled into
the education and training programs receive a monthly
allowance.
Those veterans who use VR&E for assistance with immediate
employment do not. This policy leaves out needed assistance for
veterans looking for immediate employment, which could lead
them into a different track and miss out on early entry into
the civilian workforce.
Another problem hindering the effectiveness of the VR&E
programs is high workloads for the limited number of staff.
This hinders the staff's ability to effectively assist
individual veterans with identifying employment opportunities.
Without sufficient staffing, the overall success of VR&E
programs becomes extremely difficult, especially due to the
numbers of injured veterans returning from Iraq and
Afghanistan.
It is our experience that the interagency collaboration and
communication between the VR&E Program and the Department of
Labor Veterans' Employment and Training Service has been
lacking in the past. However, this relationship is steadily
improving.
A majority of Veterans' Employment and Training Service
representatives contacted spoke of an improved level of
communication between the 2 agencies along with other positive
developments such as improvement in local data sharing and
combined training at the local and national levels.
In addition, national representatives from the 2 agencies
are currently reporting a close and cooperative relationship
and an expectation that this relationship will continue to
improve.
The American Legion recommends Congress amend the VR&E
Program to allow participants to qualify for Chapter 33
benefits while receiving case management and other services
that lead to gainful employment.
The American Legion believes amending this program is the
fair and equitable way of honoring our most vulnerable veterans
who are seeking financial independence after being injured
while serving our country.
No VA mission is more important at this time in our
history, especially now when our country is at war and in
financial crisis, than enabling our injured soldiers, sailors,
airmen, and other veterans with disabilities to have a seamless
transition from military service to successful rehabilitation
and on to rewarding employment.
The success of the VR&E Program will significantly be
measured by these veterans' ability to obtain suitable
employment and achieve a high quality of life. To meet
America's obligation to these injured veterans, VA leadership
must continue to focus on improving the case management,
vocational counseling, and, most importantly, job placement.
The American Legion strongly supports the VR&E programs and
it is committed to working with VA and other Federal agencies
to ensure that America's wounded veterans are provided with the
highest level of service and employment assistance.
Again, thank you for the opportunity to submit the opinion
of the American Legion on this issue.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Walker appears on p. 31.]
Mr. Teague. Mr. Walker, thank you.
Mr. Brown, you are now recognized for 5 minutes.
STATEMENT OF JUSTIN BROWN
Mr. Brown. Thank you, Mr. Teague.
Mr. Teague, Ranking Member Boozman, Members of the
Subcommittee, on behalf of the Veterans of Foreign Wars of the
United States and our auxiliaries, I would like to thank this
Committee for the opportunity to testify. The issues under
consideration today are of great importance to our Members and
the entire veteran population.
During this economic recession, the number of unemployed
veterans has increased to nearly one million as of February
2009. That is an increase of nearly 160,000 veterans since we
testified before this Subcommittee 30 days ago.
There are twice as many unemployed veterans as there were 1
year ago and there are more unemployed Iraq and Afghanistan
veterans than there are men and women currently serving in
Iraq.
Of these one million veterans, we know that two-thirds of
them or 66,000 are ineligible for any educational programs that
are available, Chapter 30, Chapter 31, and Chapter 33.
What we do not know is how many of these veterans are
unemployed due to an injury they received in service to our
Nation. Nonetheless, we do know that there are veterans who
were injured and who are not receiving any rehabilitation
because of a 12-year delimiting date tied to the VR&E Program.
There is no delimiting date on a service-connected injury
and at no point does that injury stop being related to a
veteran's service to our Nation. Veteran service-related
injuries tend to progressively worsen over time and many
injuries will not even fully disable a veteran until long after
12 years.
Veterans did not ask to become disabled and we, as a
Nation, need to do more to help service-disabled veterans
rehabilitate for the entirety of their employable lives.
The VFW was asked by this Committee to develop 5 core
issues to make VR&E a better rehabilitation tool for America's
disabled veterans. We have done so and we believe that if these
recommendations were adopted, the VR&E Program would have
better long-term results for both veterans and our Government.
Number one, the delimiting date for VR&E needs to be
removed. Currently the delimiting date for VR&E is set to 12
years after separation from the military or 12 years following
the date a servicemember learns of their rating for a service-
connected disability. This fails to take into account the fact
that many service-related injuries will not hinder the veteran
to the point of needing help or rehabilitation until many years
following such injury.
Number two, VR&E's education stipend needs parity in
comparison to the new GI Bill. The discrepancy in benefits
between the new GI Bill and VR&E may have the latent
consequence of incentivizing the new GI Bill even though a
disabled veteran needs access to the additional rehabilitation
benefits VR&E provides.
For this reason, the VFW strongly urges Congress to create
a VR&E educational housing stipend that is in line with the new
GI Bill's housing allowance, which is E5 with dependents, basic
allowance for housing determined by the zip code of the
educational institution of interest. This would offer our
disabled veterans the best all around program and would return
the VR&E Program to offering the best overall services for the
rehabilitation of disabled veterans.
Number three, for many disabled veterans with dependents,
VR&E education tracks are insufficient.
Number four, VR&E performance metrics need to be revised to
emphasize long-term success.
Number five, VR&E needs to reduce time from enrollment to
start of services.
In conclusion, the Veterans of Foreign Wars believes that
VR&E is one of the best tools disabled veterans have. We hope
to see it upgraded to face the unique challenges of today's
veterans during these tough economic times.
The cost to our disabled veterans far exceeds the
recompense our Nation provides them as these injuries
drastically reduce their quality of life. However, we must not
forget disability does not just affect the solider or the
veteran. Families and children pay a price as well and it is
our responsibility to offer these veterans a robust, fair
rehabilitation program for their employable future.
Mr. Teague, Ranking Member Boozman, this concludes my
testimony and I will be pleased to respond to any questions you
or the Members of this Subcommittee may have. Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Brown appears on p. 34.]
Mr. Teague. Mr. Brown, thank you.
Secretary Ciccolella, you are now recognized for 5 minutes.
STATEMENT OF HON. CHARLES S. CICCOLELLA
Mr. Ciccolella. Thank you, Mr. Teague. And thank you,
Congressman Boozman, Ranking Member Boozman, for your kind
introduction.
Sir, I would like to point out that we actually have 2
Assistant Secretaries in Wounded Warrior Project and the
Honorable Christine Hill, former Assistant Secretary for
Congressional Affairs, is also in the hearing. And I do not
want you to think we are getting to be a top-heavy organization
or anything.
Well, thank you for inviting Wounded Warrior Project today
to address the important issue of vocational rehabilitation and
employment.
I would like to begin by saying that Wounded Warrior
Project has staff through the country assisting wounded
warriors on a day-to-day basis. This direct contact gives us a
unique perspective on the needs that they have and the
obstacles that they face as they reintegrate back into their
homes and back into their educational opportunities and
communities and certainly within the civilian workforce.
Our goal is to ensure that this the most successful, well-
adjusted generation of veterans in our Nation's history. We
take a no-nonsense approach to the programs and services that
we offer and we build programs that work. We measure outcomes
and we continually refine and adjust them to ensure the success
of our wounded warriors.
Our policy recommendations are guided by daily feedback
from our field staff who work directly with our wounded
warriors, but we also recognize they must be balanced by
independent, objective research.
Therefore, today we offer broad thoughts based on our
observed issues by our field service teams about how VR&E can
be improved. We will be able to make more specific suggestions
at a later date once we have completed our independent analysis
of the program.
Let me begin by saying that Wounded Warrior Project
believes the VR&E Program should be one of VA's crown jewels.
VR&E is critically needed and it is extremely valuable for the
disabled veterans seeking to adapt to what we call the new
normal of their daily living.
Clearly the VR&E Program has made significant progress
since the 2004 VA Task Force that has been noted by the other
witnesses for the recommendations for improving the program.
But Wounded Warrior Project believes more improvements are
needed. My written testimony outlines these improvements and
what we consider to be the shortcomings of the program. And I
will mention a few of those now.
First, our field teams report subsistence levels under the
program are inadequate and may actually discourage individuals
from enrolling and may also contribute to incompletion rates.
In many cases, subsistence is only paid in the education track.
Those in the employment tracks only receive payments when they
are in actual training.
Also, without an increase in subsistence, this will become
more problematic when the new GI Bill Program begins in August.
Next, far too many servicemembers are leaving active-duty
military and simply not getting the word about the benefits of
the VR&E Program. Enrollment may also be discouraged by an
application process which is burdensome because it takes an
average of 45 days to determine eligibility, but 90 percent of
those who apply are accepted into the program.
Finally, we have received reports that some veterans with
low to moderate disabilities of TBI and Post-traumatic stress
disorder are not being allowed into the program. We do not know
if these are widespread trends or isolated instances. What we
do know is that our field service teams are concerned and
consequently we intend to examine the entire VR&E Program.
Now, I want to be clear that WWP does not attribute these
perceived weaknesses to be any failure on behalf of the
dedicated men and women who administer the program and
certainly not to the VR&E's Central Office which has provided
excellent leadership for the program since Ruth Fanning took
over but rather what appears to be a relatively low priority
that VA places on VR&E.
In fact, we believe VR&E's fundamental framework is sound
and it provides the basis for significantly improving the
program.
At this time, I will make 4 recommendations.
First, subsistence payments must be increased. Current
subsistence rates are simply inadequate.
Congressman Boozman, I know you are a sponsor of the
Congressman Buyer bill, but we believe that more study is
needed to determine what the proper rate should be. In our
view, they should be greater than those benefits of the new GI
Bill.
VR&E participants should also be fully reimbursed for
expenses like child care, community costs, and job hunting
expenses.
My written testimony also contains some other
recommendations.
Secondly, it should be mandated for every servicemember to
receive a VR&E briefing prior to separation.
Third, I think all of us agree that no wounded warrior
should be denied enrollment in the VR&E Program because of the
unique nature of their injuries. We have a high prevalence of
TBI and Post-traumatic stress disorder within our new
generation of wounded warriors and that further emphasizes the
need for VR&E to tailor the program to accommodate the needs of
these wounded warriors who have these diagnoses.
Finally, WWP believes it may be time to expand the focus of
the Independent Living Program to improve the quality of life
of severely disabled veterans who choose to live at home, as
well as helping them to become more employable.
And we are looking at this because Wounded Warrior Project
works every day with these wounded warriors who may never
satisfy the future employability criteria of VR&E. And we think
that this enhancement combined with comprehensive family
caregiver program legislation could have a profound impact on
those most in need.
Mr. Teague, we will be studying these issues further in the
months to come and we will be making more specific
recommendations when we complete our study so that VR&E can
truly be the crown jewel of VA for disabled veterans and so
that no wounded warrior who should be in VR&E should ever be
left behind.
Thank you for hearing my testimony, and I would be pleased
to respond to your questions.
[The prepared statement of Hon. Ciccolella appears on p.
38.]
Mr. Teague. Yes. I do have a few questions, first for Mr.
Brown.
In your testimony, you stated that for many disabled
veterans with dependents, VR&E education tracks are
insufficient. Why is it insufficient and what can be done to
improve on that program?
Mr. Brown. Thank you for the question, Mr. Teague.
You know, the Chapter 31 benefit as it is right now with
dependents in comparison to the GI Bill alone, I mean, just the
amount of money that a student using the new benefit in
comparison to Chapter 31, there is quite a discrepancy there.
But that is also not to include the fact that, you know, these
individual veterans have families. If they are disabled, if
they are only getting, you know, $700 a month, how are they
also supposed to be, you know, paying for child care or is
their spouse supposed to be picking up the other part of these
hindrances to the veteran?
You know, I think what is important and what we understand
here is that the major difference between vocational
rehabilitation and the GI Bill is that these guys are disabled
veterans and many of them are using these benefits not at their
own choice. You know, this is what they need to transition back
into society. And for many of these guys, it was not their
choice to leave the military.
And, you know, especially in the realm of child care or
spousal help, I mean, I think we can do a lot to really step it
up there and help them, help these veterans out.
Mr. Teague. Okay. Also, in your testimony, you state that
any time a veteran becomes unemployed during his employable
future, he should be counted as such. And how long do you
propose for VR&E to follow a veteran?
Mr. Brown. You know, I think that is a discussion that we
really need to sit down and have and discuss what is, you know,
the totality of, you know, how do we frame employable future.
But the main idea is, you know, that we need to really
start looking at some long-term measurements in consideration
of VR&E and really trying to track these veterans and help them
out as disabled veterans because over time, many of these
disabilities will progress and they may need additional
services 10, 15 years down the road, long after the delimiting
date, or they may need to look at a new educational track or
get additional vocational help.
Mr. Teague. Okay. Just a couple of more questions for you,
Mr. Brown.
Do you believe that the VR&E's current funding level is
sufficient to meet the needs of our veterans? Would you have
some ideas on how we can streamline the VR&E entitlement
determinations where it would benefit the veteran?
Mr. Brown. Thank you for the question, Mr. Teague.
To address the first point, no, we do not think that the
compensation is high enough. We think that it should be at
least, at least for the educational side, it should be at least
at the equivalent of Chapter 33, the new GI Bill.
In regards to entitlement and eligibility, I laid it out in
my testimony that we should, if eligibility is proven, then we
should assume entitlement. We have heard from VR&E that there
is a lot of time being spent proving entitlement and the
majority of these veterans are being found to have entitlement.
So it is really just making the VR&E Program take more time
from the time a veteran signs up for VR&E, is proven eligible,
to the time that they are actually receiving rehabilitation
services. So we think if you knock that out, you are going to
cut down the amount of time that a veteran is waiting for
services.
Mr. Teague. Okay. Thank you very much.
Mr. Walker, do you think that the VR&E needs more
counselors and personnel?
Mr. Walker. Yes. I think that they would benefit by having
more staff to deal with the numbers of current cases as well as
what we think will be an increase in the future with our
returning veterans from the 2 wars.
So we think staffing has been an issue and continues to be
an issue and that we hope they can get the adequate amount of
funding to do that.
Mr. Teague. Should veterans who use VR&E services to secure
immediate employment receive a monthly allowance?
Mr. Walker. We do think so. The American Legion thinks that
would be a way to keep those veterans in that track as well as
obviously provide for their daily living expenses.
So we think that is important because if this is an
employment track, we think it would help them to be able to
help them along as they search for employment. So we think this
allowance would be a big boost and have an advantage for them.
Mr. Teague. In your testimony, you state that VR&E needs
relevant data concerning the number of veterans who are
applying for benefits to project future workload. What data
should VA be looking at and where can this information be
found?
Mr. Walker. Well, I just think they could take data from,
you know, those who have already from the past fiscal years
that have applied for disability benefits and kind of help them
project. So that is all we are saying is to use the data that
is already there that VA may better forecast future workload so
they can have adequate staffing to assist our veterans as they
go on and get in one of the tracks within the program.
Mr. Teague. Okay. Thank you.
Mr. Ciccolella, according to your written testimony, your
field teams reported that the current subsistence levels under
VR&E are inadequate and discourage individuals from enrolling.
Can you explain how individuals are discouraged from enrolling
and how the subsistence levels are inadequate?
Mr. Ciccolella. Certainly, Mr. Teague.
The subsistence level is based on the allowance for
housing, which I believe for VR&E is $540 for single and about
$700 for a married individual.
What our field service teams tell us is that the feedback
they get from the warriors in VR&E says that the program is
simply not affordable. They do not have the money to actually
afford to be in the program. Hence, they may drop out of the
program and get into employment as quickly as possible.
Mr. Teague. Okay. Thank you.
At this time, I am going to yield to Ranking Member
Boozman, if he has some questions that he would like to ask.
Mr. Boozman. Thank you, Mr. Teague.
Let me ask you a couple things, Mr. Ciccolella, that are
related. In your testimony, you mention that the VR&E
counselors do not systematically monitor progress and provide
program assistance when needed.
And if you could just kind of tell us what you mean by
that.
And then the other thing is there has been various people,
and Mr. Buyer is talking about introducing legislation to
create a fourth administration at VA and put things like VR&E
in there.
Do you believe that getting the program out of the shadow
of the Compensation and Pension Program would increase its
visibility?
Mr. Ciccolella. Well, to your first point, Mr. Boozman,
first of all, let me say that counselors, to our knowledge, are
extremely well-trained. Most of them have Master's Degrees.
There are certainly areas where they can improve in terms of
training and so forth and so on.
I think one of the things that detracts from the
counselor's ability is the heavy caseloads and the second thing
is probably the administrative workload that is associated with
counseling. And that is huge.
So I think those are 2 issues that we are going to study
and we will certainly come back to the Committee and to the VA
with some recommendations.
Sir, to your second point, I would really have to defer to
Secretary Hilda Solis and Secretary Eric Shinseki on that
matter.
Mr. Boozman. Mr. Brown, you mentioned the 12 years from the
rating. Is that from the last rating you get? I mean, say a
person was rated at 10 percent and then they had some condition
that progressed and then they were rated later on at 50 percent
or 70 percent. Is it 12 years from that last rating or is it
from the initial rating?
Mr. Brown. I believe it is from the initial rating, but I
would have to get back to you on that. That is my understanding
is that it is from the initial rating and then also 12 years
after your end of service.
Mr. Boozman. Good. I think you raise a valid point if that
is the case in the sense you could start out with a condition,
and I am just thinking out loud, but it seems like you could
start out with a condition that perhaps, is fairly benign at
that point, but is a progressive condition as a result of being
service-connected. So I appreciate your bringing that out.
I want to thank all of you all for being here. We
appreciate the input. I think everyone, all of us agree that
this is a very, very good program. And certainly the purpose of
the hearing today is just to provide information so that we can
make it even a better program. And I think in reading your
testimony that you have done that and it has really been very
helpful.
So I yield back, Madam Chair.
Ms. Herseth Sandlin [presiding]. Thank you, Mr. Boozman.
I want to thank Mr. Teague for Chairing the Subcommittee
hearing in my absence.
I would like to recognize Mr. Perriello for any questions
he has for our panel.
Mr. Perriello. Thank you, Madam Chair.
A few questions for the panel. First of all, are there
particular issues in terms of the stipends and other issues you
have raised that affect those disabled veterans coming from
rural communities? My district is primarily rural. Are we
seeing some of these issues hit in these areas?
Mr. Ciccolella. Congressman, I am not certain I understand
the question.
Mr. Perriello. Well, let me start with a different thing
and then come back to that.
Mr. Ciccolella. Sure.
Mr. Perriello. You had mentioned that 160,000, I think,
veterans have lost work in the last 30 days. Are we seeing that
happen in particular sectors or are we seeing any particular
trends or is it mirroring the national economy which is, of
course, in horrible shape right now?
Mr. Brown. Thank you for the question.
It depends on what demographic you do look at. The Bureau
of Labor Statistics recently, just at the beginning of this
month, the new statistics come out tomorrow, but they showed
that there almost is a statistical significance between the
youngest age demographic veterans outpacing the general
population.
Overall they are about neck and neck for veterans and the
general population in consideration of employment. I do not
know if it is necessarily tied to the rural areas. I do not
have an answer for that.
Mr. Perriello. Okay. For Mr. Walker, I just wanted to ask,
you stated that veterans earn $32,000 after completing VR&E and
$5,641 before entering.
What do you think veterans were earning before entering the
program? Do we have those statistics?
Mr. Walker. No. The statistics that you are reading is
actually before they actually enter the program and you see the
huge difference that the program makes for the veteran who gets
into it.
So outside of that, I would not know the specific salaries,
but obviously you see there is a big gap between once they go
through the voc rehab program and the difference that it makes
with education, training, as well as job placement.
Mr. Perriello. Mr. Ciccolella, you were mentioning 90
percent of people who apply to the program enter the program.
What has been most effective in getting information out to
people to convince them to apply? What programs have been
successful that we might want to expand on in that area?
Mr. Ciccolella. Well, the most effective way, thank you for
the question, the most effective way to get that information is
to get it to the servicemembers while they are still in the
military. All servicemembers go through a transition assistance
process.
Unfortunately, sometimes the attendants and participation
is uneven and there are some servicemembers who leave the
military who do not get the benefit of that Transition
Assistant Program.
So on the one hand, the Department of Veterans Affairs and
all of us have to do a better job of educating veterans once
they leave the military. On the other hand, the U.S. Department
of Defense (DoD) and the military services also bear a
responsibility to ensure that every servicemember attends the
Transition Assistance Program and that there is a very
effective vocational rehabilitation and employment briefing as
part of that Transition Assistance Program, which there is, but
we also think that they should sign off on having received that
briefing.
Mr. Perriello. What would you say, Mr. Brown, is the top
priority in terms of the stipend issues you mentioned. Is the
12-year delimitation, really the thing that you think is the
primary barrier right now?
Mr. Brown. For the stipends?
Mr. Perriello. Right.
Mr. Brown. For the stipends, I think that they are just too
low for the educational stipends for VR&E.
You know, just in comparison to Chapter 33, if you have a
young Member who has access to both benefits, you have Chapter
33 that is going to pay you E5 BAH based on the zip code of
your home, or, I mean, I am sorry, of the educational
institution. And then you are looking at, you know, $500 or
$700 from vocational rehabilitation.
A lot of veterans might use Chapter 33 instead of the
vocational rehabilitation and forego the additional benefits
that do come with it.
Mr. Perriello. Thank you very much.
This is an issue I am keeping an eye on. A lot of the
returning veterans in my district in southern Virginia,
appreciate the new GI Bill but are particularly interested in
some of the vocational and skills training programs.
I have been working on a vet works bill to help support
veterans in some of the areas you have mentioned, so I would be
interested in following up with you to talk about ways we can
help veterans get on track to learn a trade.
So thank you very much for your time.
Madam Chair.
Ms. Herseth Sandlin. Thank you, Mr. Perriello.
Let us take Mr. Perriello's line of questioning a little
bit further just so I can hear from all 3 of you.
Secretary Ciccolella, it is nice to see you and that you
are in a position of continuing to serve our Nation's veterans.
Your testimony addressed this, renewed questions about VR&E
based on changes made to Chapter 33 in terms of Operation
Enduring Freedom and Operation Iraqi Freedom (OEF/OIF) veterans
in particular that they may qualify for both of the Chapter 33
and VR&E benefits.
What changes do we need to make? Is it all just related to
stipend and overall amount of the benefit or is it about
improving some of the programs?
Secretary Ciccolella, I believe you stated, that your
concern is that some of the OEF/OIF veterans are being steered
away from the education track into the employment track.
Can each of you elaborate more on your thoughts about
changes that may be necessary to VR&E programs or adjustments
that we would have to make legislatively? Perhaps balance some
of the changes that we made to Chapter 33 so that the VR&E
Programs do not become a neglected service that might be of a
greater benefit, and a better fit for some of our veterans.
Mr. Brown, why don't you start since you were responding to
Mr. Perriello?
Mr. Brown. Sure. And thank you for the question, Madam
Chair.
One of the big things that the VFW has recognized and
really would like to stress is that, you know, we do think that
there should be additional benefits, particularly in regards to
disabled veterans with spouses and children, you know, whether
this be in the form of child care, you know, or a subsidy for
child care or if their spouse is having to take off time from
her job, his job to help this disabled veteran, if there is
anything we can really step it up kind of with a family focus
that we think is lacking, whereas right now it is just very
veteran focused.
And, you know, to stress the incentive, if you have a
family, these guys are going to the employment tracks because
they need to make more money and, you know, they may not be
able to afford long-term educational rehabilitation at $700 a
month.
Thank you for the question.
Ms. Herseth Sandlin. Thank you.
Either----
Mr. Ciccolella. I think Mr. Brown makes a very good point.
Wounded Warrior's position is that the VR&E Program should
really be the crown jewel of VA's programs for serving veterans
who are afflicted by their wounds and injuries from combat and
disabilities.
The number one issue on the table today is obviously the
stipend. We have to make that program affordable. Our position
is the stipend should be more generous than what we receive in
the GI Bill or what they receive in the GI Bill.
And that is because we want to make certain that
servicemembers who are disabled get the advantages of all the
good things that go on in the Vocational Rehabilitation and
Employment Program, the day-to-day, in-person counseling and
the follow-up and all their tuition and books paid regardless
of where they go to school.
The specialized services like tutoring and the
rehabilitation counseling, those are just extraordinarily
important.
A second point, and made before, is that we just simply are
missing some of our disabled veterans who leave the military
and do not understand what VR&E is and what the program is.
And I think the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO)
report made clear that, you know, it is about 6 years when the
average servicemember takes up the opportunity to go to
vocational rehabilitation and employment.
And, thirdly, I think that our position is clearly that
service-connected disabled veterans should have access to their
full vocational rehabilitation and employment benefit and they
should also have access to their GI Bill benefit.
Ms. Herseth Sandlin. Mr. Walker?
Mr. Walker. Yes. We would like for the veteran who
qualifies for Chapter 33 to better use that benefit along with
the unique employment services that VR&E provides. I think that
is where we stand.
And also, if the veteran opts out of the education and
training program and goes exclusively with the employment
services track, that we would want that individual to receive
some sort of allowance as well. So that is where our focus has
been.
Ms. Herseth Sandlin. I have one more question and a comment
for this panel.
In a recent roundtable discussion that Speaker Pelosi held
with a number of veterans service organizations (VSOs), the
comment was made about VR&E and making necessary adjustments to
ensure that we are putting veterans on a path toward having a
career rather than just finding a job.
Could each of you comment on that remark and suggest ways
in which we might make necessary changes to VR&E to ensure that
it can be or can become once again the crown jewel as it
relates to the programs administered for disabled veterans?
Mr. Ciccolella. Well, for WWP's part, we really feel like
the VR&E Program is just such a terrific benefit. But, again,
it is absolutely critical that it be affordable.
You have asked what would make this program more effective?
Was that your question, ma'am?
Ms. Herseth Sandlin. Yes, or do you agree with the comment
that perhaps the way that the focus in recent years for some
veterans and their experience with VR&E is that it is just
about finding them employment. Its about getting them a job
versus getting them on a path for a career choice and
sustainable employment VR&E should be based on their choice of
career and the skills that go along with that.
Mr. Ciccolella. I see. We feel that the 5-track program is
very, very effective and that program clearly works. I think
truth be known, the majority of servicemembers who go to VR&E
want to get their college education.
Let us face it, servicemembers coming out of the military
in many cases feel a compelling need to go into the workforce
or for other reasons, they may be professionally qualified to
go into the workforce.
So whatever their decision is, we feel that they should be
empowered to make that decision in conjunction with a counselor
obviously, but they should be empowered to make that decision.
Ms. Herseth Sandlin. Either of the other witnesses care to
address that?
Mr. Brown. Thank you for the question, Madam Chair.
You know, our testimony really kind of focuses on this
issue and our idea is that VR&E really does need to have a very
long-term focus and that is career versus jobs. We do not think
that the performance measures should be successful if a veteran
is employed simply for 60 days with an employer. You know, we
think that these performance metrics need to mirror the
entirety of these disabled veterans' employable futures. So
that has to go with the performance metrics. That has to go
with changing the 12-year delimiting date and the amount of
time we are saying that these veterans can use services.
And that is our answer. Thank you.
Ms. Herseth Sandlin. Thank you.
Mr. Walker.
Mr. Walker. Well, we would think that once they would go
through the counseling and sort of the aptitude testing and all
those things that VR&E would kind of lead those veterans with
the proper skill sets into the right sort of career fields.
I think that is important because we want again not to have
jobs that can barely provide for our veterans because
ultimately it is about financial independence, so we want to
make sure the VR&E kind of keeps up with what is new, where the
jobs are, and that should be a part of the criteria within the
tracks and to help the veteran navigate that and put them on
the right path for a career.
Ms. Herseth Sandlin. Good point, Mr. Walker.
My final comment would just be on something that Mr.
Ciccolella mentioned and that is transition assistance. As you
know, the Ranking Member and I for years now have been focused
on the importance of making transition assistance more
available and more effective for veterans.
I think you raise an important point as it relates to the
GAO findings, that it should be more available, if not
mandatory, and with a focus on what is available, particularly
with the increased number of people that may be looking to take
advantage of these programs as they are transitioning not only
out of theater but perhaps out of military service.
We appreciate the testimony of all of our witnesses on the
first panel. Thank you for the great work that you do on behalf
of your Members, on behalf of all of our Nation's veterans and
their families.
Your insights that you have offered today are very
important for the oversight that we will continue to do as it
relates to the programs that come within our purview,
jurisdiction of our Subcommittee, including VR&E. I think it is
a timely hearing.
Again, your testimony is invaluable to our work. We look
forward to continuing to work with you. Thank you.
Joining us on our second panel is Mr. John McWilliam,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Veterans' Employment and
Training Service, U.S. Department of Labor, and Ms. Ruth
Fanning, Director of Vocational Rehabilitation and Employment
Service for the Veterans Benefits Administration, the U.S.
Department of Veterans Affairs.
We thank you both for being here at the Subcommittee. We
have copies of your written statements which are entered into
the hearing record. We will recognize you each for 5 minutes.
Mr. McWilliam, why don't we begin with you.
STATEMENTS OF JOHN M. McWILLIAM, DEPUTY ASSISTANT SECRETARY,
VETERANS' EMPLOYMENT AND TRAINING SERVICE, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF
LABOR; AND RUTH A. FANNING, DIRECTOR, VOCATIONAL REHABILITATION
AND EMPLOYMENT SERVICE, VETERANS BENEFITS ADMINISTRATION, U.S.
DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS
STATEMENT OF JOHN M. McWILLIAM
Mr. McWilliam. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman, Mr. Boozman.
Thank you for the opportunity to testify today.
I am pleased to discuss the collaborative efforts and the
partnership between the Department of Labor and the Department
of Veterans Affairs in our joint efforts to serve our Nation's
disabled veterans in need of VR&E services.
As the Committee is aware, senior leadership from both
Labor and the VA, including the Assistant Secretary in VETS and
the Director for VR&E, met with the Subcommittee staff in 2005
to discuss how the 2 agencies could better collaborate.
As a result of that meeting, a new memorandum of agreement
was executed and 3 work groups were established. I am pleased
to report that there is strong and continuing close
collaboration between our 2 agencies.
In 2008, we initiated monthly meetings with senior staff
from both agencies. In addition, the joint working group meets
periodically. The most recent meeting was just 2 weeks ago.
Most of the Department of Labor's interface with the
program is through the workforce investment system.
Accordingly, we continue to work in partnership with our State
Jobs for Veterans State Grant recipients on behalf of VR&E job-
ready veterans who are referred to and registered with the
State workforce agencies.
VETS is working toward ensuring that a veteran's employment
representative is out-stationed at each of VA's regional
offices. Currently we have people in 47 offices. Our standard
is one per office and that will be a requirement in 2010.
The joint working group has become a key to success of this
program. We have both taken an active role with the group. Ms.
Fanning and I have a personal interest in the issue and have
been involved in meetings with the joint working groups.
These groups have made significant accomplishments. They
facilitated an 8-site pilot program to identify and catalogue
best practices. They have developed roles and responsibilities
for all staff in the program, identified the major issues in
providing shared data collection, identified joint training
requirements, and wrote a joint technical assistance guidance
document that was published by both departments last December.
As we move into the implementation phase, the work group
will be developing joint training, conducting technical
assistance visits, and resolving the data collection issues.
Again, let me state that Labor is proud of our
collaboration with Veterans Affairs to increase employment
opportunities for service-disabled veterans.
This concludes my statement. I look forward to addressing
your questions.
[The prepared statement of Mr. McWilliam appears on p. 42.]
Ms. Herseth Sandlin. Thank you, Mr. McWilliam.
Ms. Fanning, welcome. You are now recognized.
STATEMENT OF RUTH A. FANNING
Ms. Fanning. Madam Chairwoman, Ranking Member Boozman,
thank you for inviting me to appear before you today to discuss
VA's Vocational Rehabilitation and Employment Program.
VR&E's 1,100 employees and 57 regional offices and over 100
out-based offices provide career and independent living
services to veterans and servicemembers through our Coming Home
to Work and VETSuccess programs.
The Coming Home to Work Program is VR&E's aggressive
outreach program. It is focused on easing servicemembers'
transitions into their educational and career paths. Coming
Home to Work services include career counseling, training, and
work experience, and allows early entry into VR&E's services
during active-duty medical hold status.
Outreach is conducted at DoD facilities, VA medical
centers, and special homecoming events, with recent expansion
focused on outreach to Guard and Reserve Members during post-
deployment health reassessment events and yellow ribbon
functions.
Coming Home to Work coordinators are stationed full-time at
12 military treatment facilities and in every regional office.
VR&E VETSuccess services assist veterans to plan for their
careers, start their own businesses, complete training or
education, and successfully compete for suitable employment.
For those veterans whose disabilities are so severe that
employment is not possible, VR&E provides independent living
services.
VET Success services are tailored to meet each individual
veteran's needs and are provided within 5 tracks of services
that include: reemployment, rapid access to employment, self-
employment, employment through long-term services, and
independent living.
The typical VR&E participant is in the age range of 30 to
39, served during the Gulf War era, and most often has a
disability that results from an orthopedic injury, although I
will note that the typical OEF/OIF veteran is in the 20 to 29
age range.
Currently, over 106,000 veterans and servicemembers are in
the VR&E Program in statuses that range from applicant to job
placement. Over 71,000 new applications were received for our
program last year, representing over a 13-percent increase from
the prior year.
The primary VR&E performance goal is the rehabilitation
rate. Despite the current economic environment, the
rehabilitation rate has remained steady in both fiscal year
2008 and this year to date. The rehab rate is 75 percent. This
represents almost 8,800 veterans achieving their career goals
and another 2,200 reaching their independent living goals.
Average entry-level earnings are approximately $33,500 a
year and the average program cost for a rehabilitated veteran
is about $32,000.
Next, I would just like to highlight some of VR&E's
initiatives. First, our partnership with the Department of
Labor's Veterans' Employment and Training Service remains a top
priority. It is focused on advancing, improving, and expanding
employment of veterans with disabilities. Together VETS and
VR&E have established a Joint Work Group that you have just
heard about and the results have been that we have implemented
a best practice model.
This model has improved working partnerships between VETS,
VR&E, and State workforce agencies around the country and
strengthened our joint focus on helping veterans become
suitably employed.
Work is in progress to obtain contract support to conduct
the VR&E longitudinal study with VA scheduled to deliver the
first report about the 2010 cohort to Congress in July of 2011.
Next, in order to increase awareness of VR&E's services for
servicemembers, veterans, and the business community, we are
launching a marketing campaign. VR&E is branding our employment
and independent living services as ``VETSuccess'' and we are
redesigning our veteran-focused Web site, VetSuccess.gov, to
provide even more tools for veterans to achieve their career
and independent living goals.
As part of this redesign, VR&E partnered with
DirectEmployers and the National Association of State Workforce
Agencies to incorporate the Job Central database of over a half
million jobs into our Web site. VetSuccess.gov also contains a
specialized job bank for veterans receiving VR&E services.
VR&E is also focused on equipping our staff to meet the
needs of today's veterans through development of both live
training and computer-based training tools, new counselor
training, new manager training, and we are working with the
Council for the Certification of Rehabilitation Counselors to
support continuing education for our counselors who are
certified.
In closing, VR&E has made significant program improvements
in the past 4 years. The VR&E Program is veteran focused with
services directly linked to helping veterans enter suitable
careers and achieve maximum independence at home and in the
community.
We continue to work aggressively to improve and market the
VR&E Program in order to assist more veterans who achieve their
rehabilitation and employment goals, always very important, but
even more vital during the current economic downturn.
Madam Chair, this concludes my statement. I would be
pleased to answer any questions that you or any of the other
Members of the Subcommittee have.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Fanning appears on p. 45.]
Ms. Herseth Sandlin. Thank you, Ms. Fanning.
Mr. McWilliam, let us begin with you.
According to the written testimony submitted by the
American Legion today, some States report a total lack of
communication and information sharing, while other States enjoy
a strong relationship between the local VETS and VR&E office.
I have heard some of these same issues in some of the field
hearings that we have had over the last couple of years. Some
States just do better than others as it relates to the
interaction and programs administered by the Department of
Labor.
Can you explain why there seems to be that some States do
very well and other States seem to do very poorly when it
relates to information sharing and communication?
Mr. McWilliam. Madam Chair, that is one of the primary
lessons that we have learned from looking across the United
States at this.
Up until now, the relationship was really up to the VR&E
officer and the DOL's State Director, the DVET. That is why we
decided through the joint working group that we would clearly
identify the roles and responsibilities so that there was no
question any longer.
We have also created a data collection tool that will be
mandatory starting this fiscal year. It is being implemented
right now so that the joint working group can look at the
results, referrals, and registrations from office to office and
understand very clearly where the relationship is working well
and those areas that need further training.
Ms. Herseth Sandlin. How do you anticipate measuring
progress on that front then? Do you have something built-in
based on steps you are now taking as you just described to
overcome that? When will you reevaluate whether or not we have
seen progress in those areas where clearly there were problems?
Mr. McWilliam. We are continuing to meet, Madam Chair. The
joint working group is, as far as I am concerned, more or less
a permanent organization. We will start this collection tool.
It is starting this year. It will be mandatory starting in
October and we will look at it on a monthly basis to understand
the progress being made office by office.
Ms. Herseth Sandlin. Thank you.
One other question. In the table you provided on page 3,
you have 6,068 registered veterans, yet only 3,500, just over
3,500, entered employment.
Can you explain what the reason would be for such a steep
dropoff and what information we have on the veterans who did
not enter employment?
Mr. McWilliam. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman.
The unemployment rate is approximately 58 percent for this.
This report compares very favorably to that received for the
one-stop career center, for DVOPs who do intensive services.
The 58 percent is being looked at right now. We are looking
at it in the one-stop career centers to understand why people
do not have successful outcomes for their employment services.
I am sure that these lessons that we learn there will be
used to understand the VR&E process also.
Ms. Herseth Sandlin. Ms. Fanning, you heard in the
testimony of the prior panel a couple of issues being
discussed. So I just want to pose these questions to you and
see whether or not the administration has a position.
Should the VR&E Program have a housing stipend that is
equal to or better than the new GI Bill?
Ms. Fanning. This is an issue that we are studying. I
cannot provide a position to you today. I can tell you that we
do assist veterans during their participation in a vocational
rehabilitation program to obtain transitional employment that
is related to their ultimate career goal, that will make them
more employable as they progress through their program, and
also to meet any financial needs they may have that the
subsistence allowance does not offset.
Ms. Herseth Sandlin. But you are currently studying whether
or not that subsistence benefit is sufficient----
Ms. Fanning. Yes.
Ms. Herseth Sandlin [continuing]. In light of the changes
that we have made to Chapter 33?
Ms. Fanning. We are studying the recommendations made by
the Veterans Benefits Disability Commission, by the Dole-
Shalala group. We are looking at the study analysis that was
done by EconSys and looking at all of those recommendations,
not just in terms of the GI Bill stipend and housing allowance,
but more the global issue of the transition benefit and bonuses
and incentives that were recommended by all of those groups.
Ms. Herseth Sandlin. You also heard that some veterans
service organizations believe that the metrics used by VR&E to
measure success are at times inaccurate or at times misleading.
Do you believe that the time has come to reevaluate the metric
that is used to better reflect success from beginning to end in
the VR&E Program?
Ms. Fanning. That is one of the things that I am committed
to doing. VA actually is working currently with the Office of
Policy and Planning to do an overall program evaluation of the
VR&E Program.
Some of the research study questions that the group is
looking at is how do we effectively capture all of the outcomes
that are achieved through the program rather than just looking
at one isolated metric at the conclusion.
We are also currently looking at extending the follow-up
for the program out to the 1 year point. We are working with a
contractor to study this issue in terms of the most effective
way in reaching out to veterans after they have left our
program, what is their preference, what is the most effective
in terms of getting responses out to that 1 year point.
We have separated our rehabilitation rate now to also
include independent living rehabilitation rate and employment
rehabilitation rate to make it very clear what the various
components of the program results are.
I also think that we need to look at other services that we
provide during the course of the program, including career
guidance that leads to making appropriate decisions even if
that decision is that using the GI Bill is the best thing for
that individual veteran.
As you know, VR&E is a benefit program. It is not a
mandatory program. And we want to help veterans make informed
decisions about what is best for their lives.
So I think that we provide services along the way that do
provide much benefit and I do want to capture all of that.
Ms. Herseth Sandlin. Well, along that line in terms of the
fact that it is a benefit program and wanting veterans to know
what their options are and utilize the various programs most
effectively. As you know, last year, Congress passed a bill
clarifying the use of mass media. Is VR&E using mass media to
provide outreach to veterans and educate family Members about
these benefits?
Ms. Fanning. We are really just at the beginning of that.
We have recently put on YouTube 3 different videos that feature
3 veterans who have been in the VR&E Program and they are
branded with the VetSuccess.gov logo so that as veterans or
family Members look at these very concise little videos, they
will be directed back to the VA site to learn more about the
program.
We have designed a marketing campaign and as I mentioned in
my testimony, trying to work to brand our program to make the
services we offer much more clear to our stakeholders, to
veterans, and to the business community. Frankly, so that they
know what we are offering and will come in and take the benefit
of it.
I have been working with public affairs to get some press
releases out and to take advantage of some of the new
techniques for social media. So we are really at the beginning,
but I have staff back in my office working on a full marketing
campaign. And I think you will see a lot more to come from
that.
Ms. Herseth Sandlin. If you could keep the Subcommittee and
our staff apprised of those efforts, we would appreciate it.
Ms. Fanning. I would be happy to do so.
Ms. Herseth Sandlin. Another question before I recognize
Minority Counsel for some questions that I know the Ranking
Member wanted to pose before he had to leave.
As you heard from again testimony from the prior panel, the
Wounded Warrior Project recommends that counselors not exceed
30 to 40 cases per counselor for moderate to severely-disabled
veterans.
Do you agree with this recommendation and how many more
counselors would VR&E need if this idea were to be implemented?
Ms. Fanning. Well, I would need to go back and do the math
for that. I can tell you that currently the caseload per
counselor averages one to 135. So each counselor has about 135
veterans they are working with.
Now, having said that, some offices do specialize their
counselors, so they may have a counselor--for example, when I
worked in Florida and worked with Traumatic Brain Injury
veterans from James Haley, I had a much smaller caseload. So
the offices do have the ability to be flexible and specialize
certain counselors to work with veterans with significant
disabilities. But that does mean, of course, that other
counselors will have a heavier caseload of veterans to work
with.
Ms. Herseth Sandlin. Okay.
Ms. Fanning. We do have the flexibility currently to use
contractor services to supplement the services of our
counselors, but it also gives us a little more ability to focus
extensive and intensive resources for veterans who need more
than a counselor with a caseload of 135 could reasonably
provide.
So, again, as an example, in working with a veteran with a
Traumatic Brain Injury who is just transitioning out of
inpatient care and who may need very extensive services to get
back into their home, as well as their family may need services
to adapt to that disability, we have the ability to provide a
trained, highly competent contractor to work with that
individual 10, 20 hours a week, whatever is needed.
Ms. Herseth Sandlin. The minority counsel Mr. Brinck?
Mr. Brinck. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Ms. Fanning, good afternoon.
Does VA have any data on how disability ratings increase
over a vet's lifetime? And I know that is probably not
something you have and if you would like to provide that for
the record, that would be fine.
Ms. Fanning. I would be happy to go back and study that for
the record.
[The VA subsequently provided the following information:]
VA does not have data on how disability ratings change over
a Veteran's lifetime.
Mr. Brinck. Thank you.
In answering, Mr. McWilliam, in responding to the Chair's
question regarding the 58 percent unemployment rate, you
mentioned lessons learned that were going to be collected.
How soon do you expect that the Subcommittee could get a
copy of those lessons learned?
Mr. McWilliam. Mr. Brinck, I do not know the status of it
now, but I will certainly provide that to you.
[The DOL subsequently provided the following information:]
The best practices are contained in the Joint Working
Group's Final Report on the Pilot Sites. The Report was
forwared to the VA for their approval on August 14, 2009. The
Report will be retained in the Committee files when it has been
received by the Committee.
Mr. Brinck. Okay. Thank you.
Ms. Fanning, currently Chapter 36 counseling is limited to
about $6 million, if I remember correctly.
Is that sufficient to accommodate counseling all those that
are coming to you seeking that type of counseling?
Ms. Fanning. At this time, we are working within that
budget. We have not reached that threshold. I can tell you that
we are aggressively providing outreach, including not only
using Chapter 36 during the transition of those individuals on
medical hold or just getting out of the military, but also
providing services to veterans using education benefits who may
need career counseling or adjustment counseling during their
school programs.
We are okay now. We are not exceeding our budget or bumping
up against it. I cannot predict what the future growth may be
since I am personally putting a very large focus on outreach in
our program.
Mr. Brinck. Thank you.
Continuing on the contracting level, who will be
responsible for implementing the national counseling contract
at the local level? What implementation guidance will you
provide and how will you enforce that guidance? In other words,
who is going to implement the national contract? I believe you
have 8 contracts out there.
Ms. Fanning. Yes.
Mr. Brinck. How will that be implemented locally and what
guidance are you going to provide to the field as part of that?
Ms. Fanning. The new contracts were awarded last July and
before they were implemented, we had a national conference
where we pulled together all the contract specialists who act
as the quality managers for the contract. We have 19 of them
spread throughout the country, our contract specialists in
Central Office-we have 2 on staff, the contracting officer who
did the awards, and all the VR&E officers who serve as
Contracting Officers Technical Representatives (COTRs) for the
contracts. In addition, we brought the principals from the
prime contractors for those 8 contracts awarded throughout the
country.
We brought them in for a week. We provided extensive
training about the contract. We had breakout sessions for each
group in terms of what was required for the contract
administration, managing performance, meeting minimums, really
from start to finish.
We also trained the contract staff, the new prime
contractors on what we expected, what does it mean to serve a
veteran in VR&E, what are our expectations for a good
counseling, for a good rehabilitation plan that is recommended,
case management, et cetera.
In follow-up to that, we have had extensive work with our
field offices. We have had weekly, and now biweekly, calls to
make sure that implementation is effectively carried out and
that any problems that occur, because we are standing up
brandnew contracts that are now, you know, just a few months
old, that those problems are addressed proactively.
I hope that answers your question, Mr. Brinck.
Mr. Brinck. Just a follow-up.
What kind of data will you be collecting from these 8
contractors?
Ms. Fanning. The data that we are collecting is from our
COTR staff and Quality Assurance Management Staff (QAMS), the
contracting specialists, in terms of timeliness of services,
quality of services, any problems, any complaints, as well as
stories of good performance.
We want to track the performance both positive and
problematic so that we can be proactive and jump in to correct
any issues. Obviously in doing so, we are working with the
Office of Acquisition and Logistics where the contracting
officer resides to actually solve those problems and work them
through.
Mr. Brinck. Okay. With your indulgence, one more.
You mentioned, Ms. Fanning, working with the Commission on
Certification of Rehab Counselors (CRCC).
What percentage of your staff are certified by CRCC as
rehab counselors and how does VA's hiring qualifications for
counselors compare with the requirements for certification and
do you require your counselors to participate in continuing
education?
Ms. Fanning. Currently, 35 percent of our counselors,
including myself, have CRCC certification. We do have an
extensive training program that includes working with the CRCC
to get continuing education credits for those counselors on our
staff who are certified.
I looked at both our requirements for hiring as well as
those that CRCC requires. CRCC requires a counseling-related
degree for the minimum to qualify for CRC. We require a
Master's Degree in rehabilitation counseling or a closely
related degree.
And we will qualify an individual with a closely related
counseling degree if they have certain class work that relates
to the rehabilitation and counseling field, for example,
understanding the vocational implications of medical
disabilities.
So an individual with a guidance counseling degree as an
example could take additional course work and quality for our
positions. We do not require currently CRC as a part of the
criteria to apply and be hired for a VR&E position.
Mr. Brinck. Thank you for extending that courtesy, Madam
Chair.
Ms. Herseth Sandlin. Of course.
Just a couple more questions, Ms. Fanning.
The first one goes back to the issue of adequate number of
counselors and workload that they are carrying. Could you
respond to the recent GAO report that noted that 54 percent of
all 57 regional offices have fewer counselors than they need
and 40 percent said they had fewer employment coordinators than
they needed?
Ms. Fanning. Absolutely. Currently we have, as I said,
about 1,100 employees nationally. Just to break that down for
you, I mentioned the caseload for the counselors is 1 to 135
and we have just over 800 counselors and we have 133 employment
coordinators. Looking at just the job ready caseload, that is a
1 to 53 ratio for the employment coordinators of those veterans
who are in some kind of a job search phase.
The GAO study actually went out and surveyed our field
managers and asked them for their opinions about staffing and
qualifications. And we do have many new counselors on our
rolls. Last year alone, we trained over 150 new counselors in
centralized national training and we are currently planning to
train 100 more this year.
So we are hiring a lot of new individuals. In turn, that
requires a big investment in training and getting them--they
are highly competent in their fields of rehabilitation
counseling and related fields of counseling, but they need to
learn how to work with veterans. They need to learn about the
signature disabilities that our current veterans are facing and
how to specifically address the employment needs related to a
veteran who has PTSD or Traumatic Brain Injury.
That is where our focus is. We do not need to train them
how to do rehabilitation counseling, but we do need to train
them how to work effectively with veterans and understand their
life experience and the specific challenges they face.
Ms. Herseth Sandlin. So you would disagree with the GAO
report in terms of inadequate number of counselors in these
regional offices?
Ms. Fanning. I do not disagree that that is what they heard
from our field offices. The staff around the country are
working extremely hard and their passion is in serving
veterans.
Ms. Herseth Sandlin. So, of course, they would want more
help if they could get it.
Ms. Fanning. And who would not want more? The more staff we
have, of course, the more intensive services we can provide.
And it does not surprise me that my field managers would say
that. They want to be there and meet every need of the
veterans. And, of course, that is what I want them to do.
Ms. Herseth Sandlin. Okay.
Ms. Fanning. But I do think that part of the challenge, and
I apologize for interrupting you----
Ms. Herseth Sandlin. No.
Ms. Fanning [continuing]. I think part of the challenge is
that they have so many new counselors on their rolls and it
takes time for them to be fully proficient in their jobs. In
the meantime, they still have--you know, just this last year
alone, we had over a 13-percent increase in applicants. So they
are feeling that increase and struggling to make sure that they
still provide timely and complete services.
Ms. Herseth Sandlin. So you said VA has hired a lot of new
counselors. What percentage increase based on the number of
counselors that were in your regional offices and employment
coordinators from fiscal year, say, 2007? What was the increase
in hires to 2008 and then to this year? Do you have those
numbers?
Ms. Fanning. I apologize that I do not, but I will be glad
to provide those for the record.
[The information was provided by VA in response to Question
1 of the post-hearing questions and responses for the record,
which appear on p. 59.]
Ms. Herseth Sandlin. Okay. That would be helpful.
Some of what we are hearing from the testimony today and
some of what we have been hearing in the meetings that have
been going on about VR&E at the staff level working with the
different VSOs and folks like yourselves that are administering
these programs, is it we were able to find additional
resources, we need to know from you how you think they need to
be targeted to make VR&E an even better program for the
veterans that it is serving.
Should it go to a family focused benefit that helps cover
child care expenses, other issues? Should it go to some better
way of focusing on one or all of the 5 tracks? Should it be
toward adding additional counselors?
We need more information from you that if in the event that
we were able to find additional resources to improve this
particular benefit program, how from your perspective should
those additional resources be allocated?
My final questions goes to the Independent Living Program.
The cap in the Independent Living Program has never been met.
From your perspective why has this cap not been met and what
outreach is VR&E doing to inform potential users of this
particular program? Do you have what you need to do effective
outreach in this area and is the program being utilized to a
greater extent in certain parts of the country than others?
Ms. Fanning. Starting with the last part of your question,
I will need to go back and study that to see if there are any
geographic differences.
[The VA subsequently provided the following information:]
Yes, certain parts of the country utilize Independent
Living services to greater extents than other areas. We find
higher concentrations of IL utilization in States that draw
Veteran retirees, such as California, Florida, and warmer
southern States. We also find higher concentrations of IL
utilizations around polytrauma centers where these services can
contribute to the recovery of wounded OEF/OIF Veterans.
VR&E Service monitors and assesses IL utilization rates to
identify training needs for VR&E staff. We currently provide a
week long ``train the trainer'' workshop on IL services at the
VBA Academy in Baltimore, MD. This workshop highlights new IL
developments and projects, including services for seriously
injured OEF/OIF Veterans, home modifications, and IL referral
resources such as non-profit agencies and assistive
technologies. This workshop is just one part of our strategic
efforts to ensure Veterans receive the best possible support
form VR&E.
I think that, you know, part of our challenge, Madam Chair,
is that we are marketing our program. The name of our program
is Vocational Rehabilitation and Employment. We may not have
that clarity for some veterans about the independent living
services that we are providing and that are available to them.
So part of our marketing strategy in getting the word out
about the services that are available is in emphasizing all 5
tracks, not just the employment part of the program.
What we do in the Independent Living Program, although it
is a small program currently, is so vitally important. We are
serving the most seriously injured veterans through that
program. And we want to ensure that it is fully utilized and
that it is being taken advantage of.
Ms. Herseth Sandlin. We have a vote. We have about 8
minutes to get there. I have one more question.
There was a recent article about a film training and job
placement program created for wounded Marines and Corpsmen in
2007 and the article asserts that veterans were signing over
the bulk of their education benefits and were not being
employed.
Can you comment on the status of this school? Are you
familiar with what I am referring to and is it still certified
to accept VA benefits and are you looking into these
allegations?
Ms. Fanning. This is a new facility that was certified at
the end of 2007. One class, the first class, has gone through
the program and a second class is enrolled.
So, yes, we are working very closely with the Regional
Office who has jurisdiction of those programs where it is
located.
Ms. Herseth Sandlin. But they are still certified to accept
benefits?
Ms. Fanning. They are still certified and veterans and some
servicemembers are enrolled in the program. This program is
unique in that it was set up to serve servicemembers and
veterans with the most serious of disabilities to go through an
accelerated program with a cohort of servicemembers and
veterans who have similar issues, significant disability
issues.
It is an accelerated program that rather than going through
a long-term school program that may take 2 semesters or more,
it is concentrated with a high level of staff focus in a few
weeks.
It is also unique in that at the end of the program,
veterans receive a union card which is really the ticket to
employment in the film industry. And the film industry is also
one of the growth industries that is out there.
Ms. Herseth Sandlin. But of those who have been
participating in this program, we have a number of veterans who
have completed it, correct?
Ms. Fanning. Yes. The first group did graduate.
Ms. Herseth Sandlin. What is the employment rate? I mean,
they have their card, but we have some serious allegations
being made here.
Ms. Fanning. Yes.
Ms. Herseth Sandlin. It is an unfortunate fact of life that
when benefits are available and particularly among those most
vulnerable who are recipients of those benefits that there are
people out there looking to create something that just simply
takes advantage of the resources without providing an essential
service to the veteran.
I want to be assured that you are taking seriously the
allegations that are being made and that while, yes, this is a
new program, it is a unique program, their intentions may very
well be a good one, at the same time, we have to stay on top of
programs like this to ensure that ultimately the successful
outcome is employment.
Ms. Fanning. Oh, I could not agree with you more. And we
certainly do take this very seriously. The staff at the
Regional Office meet with the school officials and with the
veterans weekly.
Ms. Herseth Sandlin. Okay.
Ms. Fanning. They have an ongoing dialog and they are very
responsive to any problem issue that is brought up, including
this recent media attention. They are looking at the first
group and they are studying, and I apologize that I do not have
that data with me in terms of the first group who graduated,
what is their placement status at this point. I would be glad
to provide that.
Ms. Herseth Sandlin. Yes, if you could.
[The information was provided by VA in response to Question
3 of the post-hearing questions and responses for the record,
which appear on p. 61.]
Ms. Fanning. But I can assure you that the staff are
working very hard to make sure that this is the right program
for these individuals and they are not signing over their VA
benefits.
I think even through the testimony of the panel before me,
you got a very clear idea of the scope of benefits that are
available to veterans. They do have 48 months of benefits
available to them within that basic 12-year period.
But most of the veterans and servicemembers who are engaged
in this program, as I understand, would meet the category of
being severely disabled and benefits could be extended even
beyond those 48 months or that delimiting period.
Ms. Herseth Sandlin. Okay.
Ms. Fanning. But I assure you that I am very engaged in
this and I will remain so.
Ms. Herseth Sandlin. Okay. Thank you.
I thank you both for your testimony and your responses to
our questions.
I want to thank our other witnesses that were here earlier
for their testimony and insights.
For the both of you, we value your expertise, your
dedication in administering these programs, your ideas that you
shared today, and other information and other suggestions that
you will hopefully continue to make to us on an ongoing basis
because of the importance of the VR&E Program to so many of our
Nation's veterans and the importance of that program to those
who are newly returned.
Again, thank you for being with us today. The hearing is
now adjourned.
[Whereupon at 2:29 p.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.]
A P P E N D I X
----------
Prepared Statement of Hon. Stephanie Herseth Sandlin, Chairwoman,
Subcommittee on Economic Opportunity
Today's hearing will give the Subcommittee the opportunity to learn
more about the Department of Veterans Affairs' Vocational
Rehabilitation and Employment Program and its relationship with the
Department of Labor in assisting our veterans obtain meaningful
employment while healing from the wounds sustained while in military
service.
Some of our panelists might recall that this Subcommittee held 2
hearings on VR&E in the last Congress. These hearings afforded us the
opportunity to hear from stakeholders on their concerns and
recommendations to improve upon existing programs.
It is very important that we continue to examine these concerns,
especially at a time when our country's veterans are experiencing post-
traumatic stress disorder, Traumatic Brain Injury, amputations and
severe burns that would have been fatal in previous conflicts.
As a result of previous hearings, we successfully passed Public Law
110-389, the Veterans' Benefit Improvement Act of 2008 which:
Waives the 24-month limitation on Independent Living
services for veterans who served after September 11, 2001;
Increases the cap on number of veterans participating in
Independent Living from 2,500 to 2,600 veterans;
Requires the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to conduct a
1-year study on measured to assist and encourage VR&E program
completion; and
Requires the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to conduct a
20-year longitudinal study on VR&E participants.
I can assure our panelists that we will continue to monitor the VA
as it implements these changes and works on providing us the required
reports. The men and women who serve our Nation honorably deserve and
should receive the best our country can offer.
While the changes we made in the 110th Congress are a step in the
right direction, we continue to hear from the veterans' community
concerned that further improvements are needed. At the suggestion of
the Military Officers Association of America and the veterans'
community, Chairman Bob Filner recently introduced H.R. 1821, the
``Equity for Injured Veterans Act of 2009.'' Mr. Filner's legislation
seeks to assistance VR&E participants by:
expanding VR&E participating eligibility for a period of
15 years;
augmenting housing stipend assistant to the same levels
as Chapter 33 housing stipend recipients;
authorizing the Secretary to pay subsistence allowance
for a period of 6 months after program completion;
authorizing the Secretary to provide reimbursements for
child care services; and
requiring the Secretary to modify its VR&E reporting
requirements.
I am pleased to hear that Secretary Hilda Solis and Secretary Erik
Shinseki reaffirmed their commitment to assisting our Nation's veterans
during their respective confirmation hearings. I look forward to
working with the Secretaries, the Members of this Subcommittee and
stakeholders to evaluate legislative proposals that seek to equip our
veterans with the tools they need to succeed after military service.
Prepared Statement of Hon. John Boozman, Ranking Republican Member,
Subcommittee on Economic Opportunity
Good afternoon Madam Chair and to everyone. I would like to extend
a special welcome to the former Assistant Secretary of Labor for the
Veterans' Employment and Training Service Mr. Chiccolella and I suspect
it was much easier to have your testimony cleared for today's hearing
than it was with OMB.
When I think of benefits to improve the lives of disabled veterans,
I am very proud of the Vocational Rehabilitation and Employment. VR&E
is the most flexible and generous among the programs for disabled
veterans administered by VA. I also suspect VR&E is the most effective
disability rehabilitation program offered by the Federal Government.
And it should be.
Having said that, we still face significant challenges to increase
the number of disabled veterans who successfully complete their
rehabilitation program, whether through long-term education or
immediate job placement services.
I believe veterans continue to drop out of the program for reasons
within our control. For example, increasing the stipend to $1,200 per
month as proposed in Ranking Member Buyer's H.R. 297, Veteran
Vocational Rehabilitation and Employment Subsistence Allowance
Improvement Act of 2009 and which I am a cosponsor of, would be a
significant improvement by reducing the number of veterans who drop out
because of the need to work full time to support their families. Madam
Chair, if by some strange circumstance we find some PAYGO resources, I
believe increasing the stipend should be high on our list of uses for
the money.
I am also concerned that in our zeal to rehabilitate veterans and
return them to the workforce, the program occasionally fails to
consider all aspects of a potential training program including cost and
availability of similar opportunities at much lower cost. For example,
recent press articles questioned the appropriateness of a program to
train wounded Marines for careers in the entertainment industry.
The articles stated VA paid over $88,000 for each 19 wounded
Marines who completed the 10-week course that had been offered
originally as a free course. The VA paid over $64,000 for each of a
second group of 8 wounded Marines who completed the course. Similar
courses were available in the area for 80 percent less and I note that
the institution in question had been previously denied approval for GI
Bill benefits.
VA has a well-developed process that uses the State Approving
Agencies to approve courses for education benefits. While I understand
that VR&E staff have the authority to approve education and training
courses for their participants, it is entirely appropriate that they
seek the assistance of the State Approving Agencies whenever veterans
seek to use VR&E benefits to attend unusual courses like the one I just
mentioned.
I still do not understand how VA calculates the rehabilitation
rate. To me, if you have about 100,000 participants and 12,000 are
rehabilitated in a year, the rate is 12 percent, not 75 percent. I also
believe that 12 percent is not necessarily bad, given that you are
serving a group of disabled veterans whose needs are more difficult to
solve.
Finally, I want to thank Director Fanning and her staff for their
efforts to put disabled veterans back to work. I recognize that the
case I just mentioned is likely an exception to their standard
practices and I am willing to work with all the stakeholders to ensure
that disabled veterans receive the best possible opportunity to pursue
their working careers.
I yield back.
Prepared Statement of Mark Walker, Assistant Director,
Economic Commission, American Legion
The mission of the VR&E program is to help qualified, service-
disabled veterans achieve independence in daily living and, to the
maximum extent feasible, obtain and maintain suitable employment. The
American Legion fully supports these goals. The Vocational
Rehabilitation program has historically been marketed to veterans as an
education program and not an employment program. A majority of veterans
attended universities and colleges with few enrolled in training
programs, such as apprenticeships and on-the-job training that can lead
to direct job placement. Eligible veterans who are enrolled into the
education and training programs receive a monthly allowance; those
veterans who use VR&E for assistance with immediate employment do not.
This policy leaves out needed assistance for veterans looking for
immediate employment, which could lead that veteran into a different
track and miss out on early entry into the civilian workforce. Another
problem hindering the effectiveness of the VR&E programs as cited in
reports by the Government Accountability Office (GAO) is exceptionally
high workloads for the limited number of staff. This hinders the
staff's ability to effectively assist individual veterans with
identifying employment opportunities. Without sufficient staffing, the
success of VR&E programs becomes extremely challenging, especially due
to the returning veterans from Iraq and Afghanistan and their more
complex cases. VR&E also needs relevant data concerning the number of
veterans who are applying for disability benefits, so they can project
future workload and hire staff accordingly.
The American Legion recommends Congress amend the VR&E program to
allow participants to qualify for Chapter 33 benefits while receiving
case management and other services that lead to gainful employment. The
American Legion believes amending this program is the fair and
equitable way of honoring our most vulnerable veterans, who are seeking
financial independence after being injured while serving our country.
No VA mission is more important at this time in our history--
especially now when our country is at war and in financial crisis--than
enabling our injured soldiers, sailors, and airmen and other veterans
with disabilities to have a seamless transition from military service
to a successful rehabilitation and on to suitable employment after
service to our Nation. The success of the VR&E program will
significantly be measured by these veterans' ability to obtain gainful
employment and achieve a high quality of life. VR&E's services are more
critical than ever based upon more than 33,000 servicemembers being
injured in Iraq and Afghanistan since 2001. To meet America's
obligation to these wounded veterans, VA leadership must continue to
focus on marked improvements in case management, vocational counseling,
and most importantly, job placement.
__________
Madame Chairwoman and distinguished Members of the Subcommittee,
thank you for the opportunity to submit the views of The American
Legion regarding the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Vocational
Rehabilitation and Education (VR&E) programs.
VOCATIONAL REHABILITATION AND EMPLOYMENT SERVICE (VR&E)
Since the 1940s, VA has provided vocational rehabilitation
assistance to veterans with disabilities incurred during military
service. The Veterans Rehabilitation and Education amendments 1980,
Public Law (PL) 96-466, changed the emphasis of services from training,
aimed at improving the employability of disabled veterans, to helping
veterans obtain and maintain suitable employment and achieve maximum
independence in daily living. Vocational Rehabilitation and Employment
(VR&E) program employment goals are accomplished through training and
rehabilitation programs authorized under Chapter 31 of title 38, U.S.
Code. Title 38 provides a 12-year period of eligibility after the
veteran is discharged or first notified of a service-connected
disability rating. To be entitled to VR&E services, veterans must have
at least a 20 percent service connected disability rating and an
employment handicap or less than a 20 percent disability and a serious
employment handicap.
The mission of the VR&E program is to help qualified, service-
disabled veterans achieve independence in daily living and, to the
maximum extent feasible, obtain and maintain suitable employment. The
American Legion fully supports these goals. As a Nation at war, there
continues to be an increasing need for VR&E services to assist
Operations Iraqi Freedom and Enduring Freedom veterans in reintegrating
into independent living, achieving the highest possible quality of
life, and securing meaningful employment.
The success of the rehabilitation of disabled veterans is
determined by the coordinated efforts of every Federal agency
(Department of Defense, VA, Department of Labor, Office of Personnel
Management, Department of Housing and Urban Development, 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 veteran, as well
as his or her family.
Administration of VR&E and its programs is a responsibility of the
Veterans Benefits Administration (VBA). Providing effective employment
programs through VR&E must become a priority. Until recently, VR&E's
primary focus has been providing veterans with skills training, rather
than providing assistance in obtaining meaningful employment. Clearly,
any employability plan that doesn't achieve the ultimate objective--a
job--is falling short of actually helping those veterans seeking
assistance in transitioning into the civilian workforce. Eligible
veterans who are enrolled into the education and training programs
receive a monthly allowance; those veterans who use VR&E for assistance
with immediate employment do not. This policy leaves out needed
assistance for veterans looking for immediate employment, which could
lead that veteran into a different track and miss out on early entry
into the civilian workforce.
Another problem hindering the effectiveness of the VR&E program as
cited in reports by the Government Accountability Office (GAO) is
exceptionally high workloads for the limited number of staff. This
hinders the staff's ability to effectively assist individual veterans
with identifying employment opportunities. A recent GAO report noted
that 54 percent of all 57 regional offices stated they have fewer
counselors than they need and 40 percent said they have fewer
employment coordinators than they need. As in the past, achieving ample
staffing in VR&E is a major concern. Without sufficient staffing, the
success of VR&E programs becomes extremely challenging, especially due
to the returning veterans from Iraq and Afghanistan with more complex
cases. VR&E also needs relevant data concerning the number of veterans
who are applying for disability benefits, so they can project future
workload and hire staff accordingly.
Vocational counseling also plays a vital role in identifying
barriers to employment and matching veterans' transferable job skills
with those career opportunities available for fully qualified
candidates. Becoming fully qualified becomes the next logical objective
toward successful transition. Veterans' preference should play a large
role in vocational counseling as well. The Federal Government has
scores of employment opportunities that educated, well-trained, and
motivated veterans can fill given a fair and equitable chance to
compete. Working together, all Federal agencies should identify those
vocational fields, especially those with high turnover rates, suitable
for VR&E applicants. Career fields like information technology, claims
adjudications, and debt collection offer employment opportunities and
challenges for career-oriented applicants that also create career
opportunities outside the Federal Government.
INTERAGENCY COOPERATION BETWEEN DOL-VETS AND VA
It is our experience that the interagency collaboration and
communication between the VR&E program, and the Department of Labor
(DOL) Veterans Employment and Training Service (VETS) has been lacking
the last several years; however, this relationship is steadily
improving.
In recent years, many States did not refer veterans from the VR&E
program to VETS for assistance in obtaining employment. Veterans with
high-tech skills and advanced education were referred to expensive
commercial placement agencies that do not specialize in employment
assistance for veterans, and difficult to place veterans were sent to
VETS. Therefore, to assist in the correction of these deficiencies a
memorandum of understanding (MOU) between VA and DOL was developed and
signed in October 2005 stating that each agency would work for the
smooth transition of veterans to the civilian workforce. This agreement
is authorized in accordance with section 4102A(b)(3), title 38, U.S.C.
In discussions with numerous VETS representatives across the
country, The American Legion is hearing a variety of opinions on the
current implementation process and progress of the MOU. Some States
report a total lack of communication and information sharing, while
other States enjoy a strong relationship between the local VETS and
VR&E offices.
A majority of VETS representatives contacted spoke of a markedly
improved level of communication between the 2 agencies, along with
other positive developments such as improvement in local data sharing
and combined training on the local and national levels. In addition,
national representatives from the 2 agencies are currently reporting a
close and cooperative relationship, and the expectation is this
relationship will continue to improve over time.
In some States, however, it has been reported that the MOU has not
led to an improvement in cooperation between the 2 agencies. Some
problems cited were a difference in the perceptions of the primary
mission, differing education levels of VA case managers and DVOPs and
LVERs, and the unenforceable mandate for the 2 agencies to communicate
and cooperate on a local level. DVOPs and LVERs are controlled by each
individual State and have their own requirements making a State and
Federal program difficult to synchronize.
While poor coordination between some VR&E counselors and their VETS
counterparts has contributed to the shortfalls of the VR&E program, a
number of States have begun to improve communications. A majority of
VETS representatives have commended their VR&E counterparts for their
willingness to ensure the successful implementation of the MOU that is
designed to improve rehabilitation, training and employment outcomes
for disabled veterans.
REHABILITATION AND EMPLOYMENT OUTCOMES
Numbers of Rehabilitated/Employed Veterans
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Veterans successfully
Year Veterans successfully employed with suitable
rehabilitated jobs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FY 2003 9,549 17,525
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FY 2004 11,129 8,392
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FY 2005 12,013 9,279
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FY 2007 11,008 8,252
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FY 2008 11,066 8,831
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In fiscal year (FY) 2008, VR&E funding was $770 million, and the
program served 97,116 veterans. The average annual salary for the 8,831
veterans rehabilitated in suitable employment was $32,359. Please note,
the veterans average annual salary before entering VR&E was $5,641.
POST 9/11 GI BILL
The American Legion recommends Congress amend the VR&E program to
allow participants to qualify for Chapter 33 benefits while receiving
case management and other services that lead to gainful employment. The
American Legion believes amending this program is the fair and
equitable way of honoring our most vulnerable veterans, who are seeking
financial independence after being injured while serving this country.
CONCLUSION
No VA mission is more important at this time in history--especially
now when the country is at war and in financial crisis--than enabling
injured soldiers, sailors, and airmen and other veterans with
disabilities to have a seamless transition from military service to a
successful rehabilitation and on to suitable employment after service
to the Nation. The success of the VR&E program will significantly be
measured by these veterans' ability to obtain gainful employment and
achieve a high quality of life. To meet America's obligation to these
service-connected veterans, VA leadership must continue to focus on
marked improvements in case management, vocational counseling, and most
importantly, job placement.
VR&E's services are more critical than ever based upon more than
33,000 servicemembers being injured in Iraq and Afghanistan since 2001.
The American Legion strongly supports VR&E programs and is committed to
working with VA and other Federal agencies to ensure that America's
wounded veterans are provided with the highest level of service and
employment assistance.
Again, thank you for the opportunity to submit the opinion of The
American Legion on this issue.
Prepared Statement of Justin Brown, Legislative Associate, National
Legislative Service, Veterans of Foreign Wars of the United States
MADAM CHAIRWOMAN AND MEMBERS OF THIS SUBCOMMITTEE:
On behalf of the 2.2 million Members of the Veterans of Foreign
Wars of the United States and our Auxiliaries, I would like to thank
this Committee for the opportunity to testify. The issues under
consideration today are of great importance to our Members and the
entire veteran population.
During this economic recession the number of unemployed veterans
has increased to nearly 1 million as of February 2009. That is an
increase of nearly 160,000 veterans since we last testified before this
Subcommittee. There are twice as many unemployed veterans as there were
1 year ago and there are more unemployed Iraq and Afghanistan veterans
as there are men and women currently serving in Iraq. Of these 1
million veterans we know that two-thirds of them, or 666,000, are
ineligible for any educational programs that are available--Chapter 30,
Chapter 31, or Chapter 33. What we don't know is how many of these
veterans are unemployed due to an injury they received in service to
our Nation. Nonetheless, we do know that there are veterans who are
injured and who are not receiving any rehabilitation because of a 12
year delimiting date tied to the VR&E program.
There is no delimiting date on a service connected injury and at no
point does that injury stop being related to or caused by your service
to our Nation. Veterans' service related injuries tend to progressively
worsen over time and many injuries won't even fully disable a veteran
until long after 12 years. Veterans did not ask to become disabled and
we as a Nation need to do more to help service disabled veterans
rehabilitate for the entirety of their employable lives.
VR&E Brief Overview
The sole purpose of the Department of Veterans Affair's Veterans
Benefits Administration's Vocational Rehabilitation and Employment
(VR&E), as authorized under Chapter 31 of 38 USC, is to provide
comprehensive services to address the employment handicaps of service-
connected disabled veterans in an effort to achieve maximum
independence in daily living, and to obtain and maintain gainful
employment. Furthermore, VR&E provides services to severely disabled
veterans with an eye toward helping them achieve the highest quality of
life possible, including future employment when feasible.
In 1918, Congress passed the Vocational Rehabilitation Act to
increase the probability for a seamless transition into suitable
employment that is consistent with a qualifying veteran's competencies
and interests through successful rehabilitation. This program was
administered by the Federal Board for Vocational Education. On August
24, 1921, VR&E was transferred to the soon-to-be created Department of
Veterans Affairs. Legislation would later expand VR&E, specifying that
any eligible veteran may receive up to 4 years of training specifically
directed to rehabilitation and the restoration of employability.
Currently, to be eligible for VR&E, the veteran must have been
discharged under circumstances other than dishonorable; have a
disability rating or memo rating of 10 percent or more, which was
incurred in or aggravated by such service for which a pension is
payable under the laws administered by the VA or would be but for the
receipt of retirement pay; and be in need of vocational rehabilitation
to overcome employment handicaps caused by such service-connected
disability. VR&E provides for 48 months of entitlement and the program
may be utilized within 12 years from the date of initial VA disability
rating notification, with an exception for those with a serious
employment handicap.
The process begins when a case manager is assigned to each
recipient of VR&E services. The case manager works with a Vocational
Rehabilitation Counselor (VRC) to determine the extent of a disabled
veteran's employment handicap(s). A written rehabilitation plan is then
developed by the VA and the veteran, describing the goal of the VR&E
program and the means through which the goal will be achieved. The VRC
and the case manager then help the veteran for up to 18 months through
on-going case management to achieve the goals of the agreed upon
written plan for employment or independent living. Services provided
include, but are not limited to: referrals for medical and dental
services, coordination of training allowances, education counseling for
children and spouses of veterans who have a permanent and total
service-connected disability, testing for aptitude and tutorial
assistance.
Under the current VR&E program, a veteran whose eligibility and
entitlement have been established must not only complete the
rehabilitation plan, but he or she will also be tracked to attainment
of suitable employment based on the plan's goals. This is called the
``Five-Track Service Delivery System.'' The tracks are: Re-employment;
Rapid Access to Employment; Self-Employment; Employment through Long-
Term Services; or Independent Living Services.
Briefly, the Re-employment Track helps veterans and Members of the
National Guard and the Reserves return to jobs held prior to active
duty. The Rapid Access to Employment Track emphasizes the goal of
immediate employment and is available to those who already have the
skills to compete in the job market in appropriate occupations. Self-
Employment is a track for veterans who have limited access to
traditional employment and need flexible work schedules and a more
accommodating work environment because of their disabling conditions or
other special circumstances. Under the Employment through Long-Term
Services track, VR&E assists veterans who need specialized training or
education to obtain and maintain suitable employment. Finally, the
Independent Living Services Track is for veterans who may not be able
to work immediately and need additional rehabilitation to enable them
to live more independently.
From its conception, VR&E has been adapted to better reflect
veterans' current circumstances. For example, the cap on the number of
veterans eligible for the Independent Living track has been modestly
increased. What defines ``successful rehabilitation'' has also been
restructured. Before 1980, completion of a training program for
suitable employment and not actual job placement was considered a
success. This was identified as a problem area, and improved.
Furthermore, in partnership with the Department of Labor (DOL),
employers, and other relevant Federal agencies, efforts have been made
by the VA to increase employment opportunities for program
participants. Finally, outreach and early intervention efforts have
been expanded and integrated into the U.S. Army Wounded Warrior Program
(AW2) and Warrior Transition Units (WTU) command.
The Veterans of Foreign Wars has identified 5 primary areas of
concern. We believe that if these recommendations were adopted, the
VR&E program would have better results and increased investment for
veterans and our Government.
1. The Delimiting Date for VR&E Needs to be Removed
2. VR&E's Educational Stipend Needs Parity in Comparison to
Chapter 33
3. For Many Disabled Veterans with Dependents VR&E Education
Tracks are Insufficient
4. VR&E Performance Metrics Need to be Revised to Emphasize Long-
term Success
5. VR&E Needs to Reduce Time from Enrollment to Start of Services
The Delimiting Date for VR&E Needs to be Removed
Currently, the delimiting date for VR&E is set to 12 years after
separation from the military, or 12 years following the date a
servicemember learns of their rating for a service connected
disability. This fails to take into account the fact that many service
related injuries will not hinder the veteran to the point of needing
help or rehabilitation until many years following the injury.
Eliminating VR&E's delimiting date would allow veterans to access
the VR&E program on a needs basis for the entirety of their employable
lives. Veterans would still have to be approved by VR&E as having an
employment handicap resulting from their service connected disability
and would still be subject to the total cap of services. However,
dropping the arbitrary delimiting date would insure rehabilitation for
veterans should their service connected disability negatively progress
over time.
VR&E's Educational Stipend Needs Parity in Comparison to Chapter 33
With the passage of the new GI-Bill, the discrepancy in benefits
between Chapter 31 and Chapter 33 may have the latent consequence of
incentivizing chapter 33 even though a disabled veteran needs access to
the additional rehabilitation benefits chapter 31 provides. For this
reason the VFW strongly urges Congress to create a Chapter 31
educational housing stipend that is in line with the Chapter 33's
housing allowance; which is E-5, with dependents, basic allowance for
housing (BAH) determined by the zip code of the educational institution
of interest. This would offer our disabled veterans the best all-around
program and would return the VR&E program to offering the best
available overall services to rehabilitating veterans.
For Many Disabled Veterans with Dependents
VR&E Education Tracks are Insufficient
For many veterans with dependents the VR&E educational track
provides insufficient support. Veterans with dependents are the second
largest group seeking assistance from VR&E and they are often those
with the most pressing needs to secure meaningful long-term employment.
There are many seriously disabled veterans that are unable to pursue
all of their career options or goals due to the limited resources
provided to disabled veterans with children and spouses. We must not
forget that these veterans are utilizing VR&E because of a disability
they incurred in service to our country. Unfortunately these heroes
utilize VR&E's employment track at a rate higher than disabled veterans
without dependents. The VFW believes this is likely due to the fact
that immediate employment, while possibly not the best long-term
rehabilitation outlook, immediately provides higher resources to the
family that cannot afford long-term educational rehabilitation.
The Veterans of Foreign Wars would like to see VR&E institute a
program to help veterans with dependents while they receive training,
rehabilitation and education. This could be achieved by establishing a
sufficient allowance to assist with the cost-of-living and in some
cases by providing childcare vouchers or stipends. Childcare is a
substantial expense for many of these veterans. Without aid of some
form, many disabled veterans will be unable to afford the costs
associated with long-term educational rehabilitation.
By assisting these veterans with these expenses, we can increase
the likelihood they will enjoy long-term success and an increased
quality of life. This will lead to decreased usage of VA services and
is a worthwhile proactive approach.
VR&E Performance Metrics Need to be Revised to
Emphasize Long-term Success
Currently VR&E measures the ``rehabilitation rate'' as the number
of veterans with disabilities that achieve their VR&E goals and are
declared rehabilitated compared to the number that discontinue or leave
the program before achieving these goals. ``Rehabilitated'' within the
employment track means that a veteran has been gainfully employed for a
period of 60 days following any VR&E services they received. This form
of performance measure could have the latent consequence of
incentivizing short-term employment solutions over long-term
strategies.
The VFW would like to see all VR&E performance metrics changed to
reflect the employable future of the veteran. At anytime if a veteran
becomes unemployed, during his employable future, he would be counted
as such. A veteran's success in completing a rehabilitation program
followed by his employment does not necessarily mean he has been
rehabilitated for the course of his employable future. Changing the
metrics to reflect a career long standing will incentivize long-term
approaches to VR&E programs. If an injury is aggravated following
rehabilitation then a servicemember may need to additional
rehabilitation to make him employable.
VR&E Needs to Reduce Time from Enrollment to Start of Services
The current VR&E program can take up to several months to begin a
program of training. This occurs primarily because VR&E is required to
validate that entitlement is present. In a recent conversation with
VR&E's central office, the VFW learned that it is extraordinarily rare
that entitlement is not found for the VR&E program. If a veteran has
proven eligibility for VR&E, the VFW believes entitlement ought to be
assumed thereby minimizing veterans time in gaining access to VR&E
programs.
The Vocational Rehabilitation Counselor makes entitlement
determinations on the basis of whether the veteran's employment
problems have been caused by
The veteran's service connected disabilities
The veteran's non service-connected disabilities
Deficiencies in education and training
Negative attitudes about people with disabilities
The impact of alcoholism and/or drug abuse
Consistency with abilities, aptitudes, and interests
Other pertinent factors
If entitlement were assumed, veterans would still have to be
considered eligible. To be considered eligible for VR&E services, a
veteran must
Have received, or will receive, a discharge under
conditions other than dishonorable;
Have served on or after September 16, 1940;
Have a service-connected disability employment handicap
rating of at least 20 percent or a serious employment handicap rating
of 10 percent;
Need vocational rehabilitation to overcome an employment
handicap; and
Submit a completed application for VR&E services on VA
Form 28-1900
In conclusion the Veterans of Foreign Wars believes that VR&E is
one of the best tools disabled veterans have. We hope to see it
upgraded to face the unique challenges of today's veterans during these
tough economic times. The cost to our disabled veterans far exceeds the
recompense our Nation provides them as these injuries drastically
reduce their quality of life. However, we must not forget disability
does not just affect the soldier or the veteran. Families and children
pay a price as well and it is our responsibility to offer these
veterans a robust, fair, rehabilitation program for their employable
future.
Madam Chairwoman, this concludes my testimony and I will be pleased
to respond to any questions you or the Members of this Subcommittee may
have. Thank you.
Prepared Statement of Charles S. Ciccolella, Senior Fellow for Economic
Empowerment, Wounded Warrior Project
Chairwoman Herseth Sandlin, Ranking Member Boozman and Members of
the Subcommittee:
Thank you for inviting Wounded Warrior Project (WWP) today to
address the Subcommittee about the Department of Veterans' Affairs
Vocational Rehabilitation and Employment (VR&E) program. Our
organization has staff throughout the Nation assisting wounded warriors
on a daily basis. This direct contact gives Wounded Warrior Project a
unique perspective on the needs and obstacles faced by wounded warriors
as they reintegrate back into their homes, communities, educational
opportunities and the civilian workplace. Our goal is to ensure that
this is the most successful, well-adjusted generation of veterans in
our Nation's history. That perspective provides the framework for our
testimony this morning.
Because we are so regularly and intimately involved with the
rehabilitation challenges of our alumni, we have created within the
Wounded Warrior Project team a no-nonsense approach to the programs and
services we offer. Stated simply, we build programs that work, we
measure their outcomes, and we continually refine, adjust, and
recalibrate as needed to ensure the success of our wounded warrior
participants. This, then, is the institutional lens by which we measure
all programs designed to assist disabled veterans. Does the program
work, and can one prove that it works by the measurable successes of
those the program seeks to help?
Wounded Warrior Project believes the Vocational Rehabilitation and
Employment program should be one of VA's ``crown jewels.'' Vocational
rehabilitation and employment assistance is a critically needed and
extremely valuable tool for disabled veterans seeking to adapt to what
we call the ``new normal'' of their daily living. Through education,
counseling, job-skills training, and coaching, the program should offer
all disabled veterans a uniquely tailored rehabilitation plan to enable
them to return to healthy, happy, and productive civilian lives.
Before discussing the VR&E program, we believe a clear distinction
should be made between recipients of new G.I. Bill benefits and
enrollees in the VR&E program. Specifically, every veteran is entitled
to new G.I. Bill benefits by virtue of their service. However, every
disabled veteran should also be entitled to participate in the VR&E
program by virtue of their disability. The VR&E program is designed to
accommodate specifically the compelling physical, emotional, and
psychological needs of disabled veterans as they transition back into
civilian life. It is in our Nation's best interest to help make that
transition in as smooth and rewarding a manner as possible. Disabled
veterans should have full access to both their G.I. Bill benefits and
their VR&E benefits.
As noted in a January 2009 GAO report, the VR&E program has made
progress since a 2004 VA task force made recommendations for improving
the program, but much improvement is still needed. We do not attribute
this to any failure on behalf of the dedicated men and women who
administer the program but rather to what appears to be the relatively
low priority VA places on VR&E and weaknesses in the current program.
For example, our field teams report current subsistence levels
under the program are inadequate, discourage individuals from
enrolling, and may contribute to incompletion rates. This may become
even more problematic with the implementation of the new G.I. Bill.
Additionally, only very limited subsistence payments are made for
enrollees in the reemployment track, the rapid employment track, and
the self-employment track.
Tutoring, counseling, and program support for enrollees-often
critical to their success--varies significantly from community to
community. Our field staff has also reported that, in some cases, VR&E
counselors do not systematically monitor participants to document
progress and provide program assistance when needed.
Three other weaknesses in the program warrant comment. First, the
program provides only limited temporary support payments for graduates
as they move from active duty, through rehabilitation, into gainful
civilian employment. Second, there are no long-term measurement
mechanisms to quantify program success. Finally, enrollees are not
reimbursed to cover expenses which can act as a significant impediment
to program completion.
Despite these limitations, VR&E's fundamental framework is sound
and provides the basis for significantly improving VR&E. By enhancing
critical aspects of VR&E while retaining the fundamental value of the
Five-Track Employment Program, VR&E could become the showcase VA
program our wounded warriors clearly deserve. Such a model should
contain the following elements:
Increased Subsistence Payments and Reimbursed Expenses for VR&E
Participants
The VR&E program currently pays veterans who receive education or
training monthly subsistence payments. The rate is currently $541.05
per month for a veteran without dependents who is attending full time
in an institution of higher learning. The maximum monthly amount
distributed to a veteran with 2 dependents is $761.18. That amount is,
frankly, inadequate and may not be enough even when combined with
disability compensation. We believe this contributes to high
incompletion rates among VR&E participants because program
participation is simply not affordable for them. More study is needed
to determine what the proper rates should be. In our view, VR&E
subsistence rates should be greater than those specified in the new
G.I. bill. Like the new G.I. bill, subsistence rates should also be
adjusted to reflect the local cost-of-living. Additionally, VR&E
enrollees should be reimbursed for expenses which, if unreimbursed,
would adversely affect the participant's ability to complete their
education or training. Expenses like child care, commuting costs,
resume preparation, and appropriate job-search attire would likely fall
into this category.
At present, enrollees in the first 3 tracks (reemployment, rapid
employment, and self-employment tracks) of the Five-Track Employment
Program generally do not receive any subsistence, although subsistence
is occasionally paid for specific training programs associated with
these tracks. Even when paid in the employment tracks, subsistence is
only paid for the actual days in training. We believe VR&E should pay a
full month of subsistence for every partial month the disabled veteran
is enrolled in the first 4 tracks of the program.
Disabled Veterans Should Receive Both G.I. Bill and VR&E Benefits
Veterans have earned their G.I. Bill benefits by virtue of their
service, but disabled veterans have earned their VR&E enrollment by
virtue of their disability. Wounded Warrior Project recommends allowing
eligible veterans to use their VR&E benefits as well as their G.I. Bill
benefits and permitting those combined benefits to remain available
throughout the 12-year eligibility window which currently exists for
both programs.
VR&E Outreach
Many service-connected disabled veterans do not fully understand or
are unaware of the value of the VR&E program. VA should be required to
provide a VR&E briefing to all servicemembers prior to separation or
retirement. This should be provided in cooperation with the Department
of Labor, Transition Assistance Program (TAP) at all military
installations, and especially with the military's warrior transition
units and medical treatment facilities. The briefing should include a
detailed discussion of VR&E programs, their benefits, and how the
program compares to the new G.I. Bill. We also believe more service-
connected disabled veterans would apply to participate in VR&E if they
had the advantage of a Memorandum Rating for their disability
conditions prior to receiving these mandatory briefings.
As part of their Transition Assistance Programs, servicemembers
should be required to acknowledge, in writing, their receipt of the
VR&E program briefing. Additionally, when the disabled veteran receives
his or her initial disability rating and any time that disability
rating changes, VA should be required to specifically inform the
veteran about VR&E programs, their benefits, and how they compare to
the G.I. bill. Disabled veterans should be required to acknowledge they
understand the availability and benefits of the VR&E program in each of
these instances.
Eligibility and Enrollment
At present, veterans are eligible for enrollment in VR&E if they
are at least 10 percent disabled. To be enrolled, veterans must be
interviewed by a Vocational Rehabilitation Counselor who then makes a
decision based on that evaluation of the veteran's disability, whether
or not to enroll the veteran, and, in many cases, whether a veteran
should or should not be placed into a particular track. Wounded Warrior
Project is receiving a significant number of anecdotal reports that
disabled veterans diagnosed with TBI, PTSD, and/or an injury at the
lower end of the disability rating scale (in the 20-50 percent range)
are being denied access to VR&E ostensibly because counselors may not
think employment plans are feasible for them.
Our field staff is also reporting that, possibly in response to a
recent emphasis on the employment tracks, some disabled veterans
applying for the education track are being denied entry into that track
and are being required by their counselor to enter one of the
employment tracks.
The Five-Track Employment Program is a good program. Wounded
Warrior Project believes that, with some enhancements, VR&E could be
made to accommodate rehabilitation training and education for every
disabled veteran regardless of the nature of the individual's
disability. However, track choice should be left to the veteran except
in extreme cases. The ability to choose how to shape one's future is a
vital element of any holistic rehabilitation strategy and lies at the
heart of empowerment for a disabled veteran. Counselors should shape
but should not decide the VR&E track for the veteran except in rare
cases.
Regarding the current enrollment process, Wounded Warrior Project
recommends a study be conducted to determine why an increasing number
of OEF/OIF veterans are apparently being denied entry into the program.
The study should also examine the feasibility of streamlining the
enrollment process entirely. If the VR&E program could feasibly be
expanded to allow for universal eligibility and a universal enrollment
opportunity for any disabled veteran, VR&E would come much closer to
realizing its greatest potential.
Ongoing Tutoring, Counseling, and Monitoring
Through its Training, Rehabilitation, and Advocacy Center--the
``TRACK'' program--Wounded Warrior Project has developed a holistic
rehabilitation program which seeks to ensure each wounded warrior's
total body, mind, and spiritual fitness. We understand the vital role
tutoring, counseling, and monitoring play in each enrollee's progress.
Like our TRACK program, VR&E enrollees may experience academic or other
problems and may fall behind or need extra help to avoid failure in
their program. Others may choose to change tracks midway through the
VR&E 5-track program. We appreciate that VR&E's goal is to provide each
enrollee with continuous tutoring, counseling, and other assistance as
needed. Yet, Wounded Warrior Project field staff report that VR&E
counselors often have large caseloads or additional administrative
duties which reduce the time available to provide the necessary ``hands
on'' attention needed by some enrollees. Current counselor caseloads
are averaging about 130 cases per counselor. Wounded Warrior Project
believes caseloads for counselors must be reduced and, depending on the
track, should not exceed 30-40 cases per counselor for moderate to
severely disabled veterans. VA must ensure that adequate numbers of
qualified employment coordinators and counselors are available to meet
the total rehabilitation needs of participants.
Extended Subsistence Payments
Veterans who successfully complete their VR&E education or training
program should receive extended subsistence payments tailored to each
track of the VR&E program. The VR&E program exists specifically to ease
a wounded warrior's passage from active duty to gainful civilian
employment. It is unrealistic to expect any VR&E enrollee to move from
the VR&E education and training environment, particularly in the
employment tracks, to stable civilian employment in one step. Extended
subsistence payments tailored to the specific circumstances of each of
the 5 tracks would significantly ease that process. These extended
subsistence payments would help defray the uncertain costs associated
with acclimating into the civilian workforce.
Currently, the subsistence allowance ends 2 months after the
completion of the VR&E education track and there are very limited or no
subsistence payments for those in the 3 employment tracks. In an
alternative model, monthly subsistence could be paid to all tracks
during any period of enrollment and would extend for a period following
the completion of each track. The extended subsistence period could
vary by track. For example, extended subsistence payments for an
individual in the self-employment track might extend for 6 months after
course completion, whereas extended subsistence payments for those
veterans returning to a previously held job, might only last for 1
month or even not at all.
Continued Close Collaboration with the Department of Labor and an
Expanded VA Work-Study Program
WWP applauds the close collaboration of the Departments of Labor/
VETS and VR&E in improving placement rates and employment outcomes for
VR&E participants. This collaboration must continue, especially at the
completion of the program. Much of this interface takes place through
the workforce investment system in partnership with State Workforce
Agencies (SWAs). VR&E job-ready veterans who are referred to and
registered with the SWAs may receive intensive services and access to
the Direct Employers Job Central Job Bank, which lists over \1/2\
million jobs in all State job boards. Additionally, VETS-funded veteran
employment representatives assist service connected disabled veterans
who take jobs soon after they leave service but later find themselves
underemployed and who may not be aware that they are still eligible to
get VR&E education and job training.
The VA Work-Study Program currently allows VR&E enrollees to be
paid for work with the VA while they are enrolled in a VR&E training
program. This program should be expanded to enable VR&E enrollees to be
paid for work within any Federal agency.
Remove Congressionally Mandated Limits on Independent Living (IL)
Programs
Given the large number of Vietnam-era veterans now approaching
their senior years and an unknown number of OEF/OIF veterans entering
the system over the next few years, Congress should remove the current
enrollment cap on VA's Independent Living Program. VA and the VSO
community have sought removal of this cap several times during past
congressional sessions. While the current program is operating under
the cap, Vietnam-era veterans are approaching a threshold where more of
these veterans may seek to enter the IL program. If this increase
begins to approach the limits of the current cap, OEF/OIF veterans also
seeking to enter the IL program may be denied entry. The cap is an
artificial limit which serves no obvious purpose.
The counselor caseload addressed earlier is also a serious concern
as it relates to the unique needs of counselors supporting the IL
program. A caseload of 1 to 130 is probably 3 to 4 times higher than it
should be for a counselor serving an IL enrollee.
Additionally, discussions with Wounded Warrior alumni and their
families indicate that there is a growing population of young, severely
disabled veterans who will never meet the stated criteria of enrollment
in the VR&E IL program, namely, future employability. Andyet, the IL
program could profoundly enhance the quality of life of these severely
disabled veterans with little or no modification. Wounded Warrior
Project recommends that VA examine this program to determine if
enhanced quality of life rather than future employability should become
a principal focus of the IL program.
Specialized Training to Enable Disabled Veterans to Become Certified
Rehabilitation Counselors (CRCs)
The VR&E program is continually expanding its counseling staff to
accommodate the unique needs of the newest generation of wounded
warriors. VA may want to consider developing a specialized training
program to enable disabled veterans to become CRCs. Also, preferential
hiring should be offered by VR&E to these individuals to become
permanent VR&E counselors.
Long-Term Outcomes Measurement
Finally, we applaud the VR&E program's ongoing efforts to implement
a long-term outcomes measurement system to quantify the program's
success. As noted in the GAO report, however, more work is required.
Wounded Warrior Project believes strongly in measurable outcomes to
include 6-month, 1-year, and 2-year follow-up evaluations which focus
on employment retention and earnings. VA should also implement lifelong
longitudinal assessments to ensure the next generation of wounded
warriors benefits from the lessons we are learning today. The
individual stakes are high. In a very real sense, the lives of the men
and women who have given so much to their country may depend on this
program's effectiveness. Every effort must be made to ensure that the
VR&E program is having the impact and results intended.
Conclusion
The VR&E program can and should become one of the most successful
and sought-after VA programs serving disabled veterans, one of the
``crown jewels'' of VA. Creating the Five-Track Employment Program was
the right idea. It offers the framework to accommodate the urgent
rehabilitation needs not just of our current veterans, but of our
future wounded warriors as well. However, the VR&E program must be
improved. With the improvements WWP has recommended and commitment by
all involved, VR&E can achieve its vital objectives.
Wounded Warrior Project knows firsthand how successful these types
of programs can truly be. Our TRACK, Warriors-to-Work, and Transition
Training Academy are all designed to provide a complete range of
education, counseling, vocational training, physical rehabilitation,
and education through a holistic approach to the rehabilitation
journey. Bi-directional feedback between our staff and our wounded
warrior alumni is continuous, and program adjustments are made in real
time. Most importantly, we establish benchmarks to measure the success
of our programs. We believe the VR&E program has similar potential for
success. We invite Members of the Committee to visit our TRACK program
and the Wounded Warrior Project headquarters in Jacksonville, FL, at
any time. (bell-a to prevent bad break) deg.
Thank you for allowing Wounded Warrior Project to participate in
this important hearing. I would be happy to respond to any questions.
Prepared Statement of John M. McWilliam, Deputy Assistant Secretary,
Veterans' Employment and Training Service, U.S. Department of Labor
Madam Chairwoman Herseth Sandlin, Ranking Member Boozman, and
Members of the Subcommittee:
I am pleased to appear before you today to discuss the
collaborative efforts and the partnership between the Department of
Labor's (DOL) Veterans' Employment and Training Service (VETS) and the
Department of Veterans Affairs' (VA) Office of Vocational
Rehabilitation and Employment (VR&E) Service, and our joint efforts to
serve our Nation's disabled veterans in need of VR&E services that lead
to employment.
In 2005 senior leadership from VETS and VR&E, including the
Assistant Secretary for VETS and the Director for VR&E, met with the
Subcommittee staff to discuss how the 2 agencies could better
collaborate. As a result of that meeting, a new Memorandum of Agreement
(MOA) between DOL and VA was executed and 3 work groups were
established. Those 3 work groups have now been combined into a Joint
Working Group (JWG).
I am pleased to report that there is strong and continuing close
collaboration between our 2 agencies. In FY 2008, we initiated monthly
meetings with senior staff from both agencies. In addition, the JWG
meets periodically and the most recent meeting was March 16-19, 2009.
During FY 2008, VETS continued to focus on serving those disabled
veterans who participate in the VR&E program, which is administered by
the VA. The ultimate goal in this partnership is successful job
placement and adjustment to employment for disabled veterans without
duplication, fragmentation, or delay in the services provided.
Interagency initiatives to increase the employment opportunities
and placements for service-connected disabled veterans who participate
in VR&E continue to improve. DOL/VETS and VA/VR&E have been
implementing the updated MOA outlining the process--and
responsibility--to work together to maximize the services both agencies
provide on behalf of disabled veterans.
Much of VETS' interface with the VR&E program is through the
workforce investment system. Accordingly, VETS continues to work in
partnership with its Jobs for Veterans State Grant (JVSG) recipients on
behalf of VR&E job-ready veterans who are referred to and registered
with the state workforce agencies (SWA) for intensive employment
services.
Current status of DOL support to the VR&E program
VETS is working toward ensuring a veterans' employment
representative is outstationed at each of the 57 VR&E Regional Offices.
Preferably, these offices will have a Disabled Veteran Outreach Program
(DVOP) specialist or a Local Veterans' Employment Representative (LVER)
outstationed at least half time. As identified in the following chart,
there is currently either a DVOP specialist or LVER outstationed at
least half time in 49 of their Regional Offices and 19 satellite
offices. This equates to 52 FTE DVOP and 7\1/2\ FTE LVER for a total
FTE of 59\1/2\ as shown in the following chart.
Our standard is for one DVOP at every VR&E office. The State's JVSG
5 Year Strategic Plan (FY 2010-2015) will require the States to
outstation a DVOP specialist at each VR&E Regional Office. These
individuals will assume the new title of Intensive Service Coordinators
(ISC) to differentiate between the duties and responsibilities at a One
Stop Career Center (DVOP/LVER) and a VR&E location (ISC). The table
below shows the number of DVOPS/LVERS outstationed at VR&E sites.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
National Roll-up DVOP & LVER Staff Outstationed at VR&E Locations (As of March 26, 2009)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DVOP LVER
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
# of FT # of HT # of FT # of HT
# of FT # of HT Pos @ Pos @ # of FT # of HT Pos @ Pos @
State Pos @ Pos @ Satellite Satellite Pos @ Pos @ Satellite Satellite
VR&E RO VR&E RO or Sub- or Sub- VR&E RO VR&E RO or Sub- or Sub-
Office Office Office Office
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NAT TOTAL 37 8 10 2 1 1 5 2
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total FTE 52
7.5
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
59.5
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The following table displays program results for FY's 2007 and
2008. It compares the levels of referral, registration, and entry into
employment for FY 2006, FY 2007, and FY 2008 for disabled veterans who
have completed VR&E and have been referred to the State Workforce
Agency for intensive employment services. Retention data has not been
collected in the past. However, as a result of the pilot project
retention is now being collected and will be available this year. These
results indicate that from FY 2007 to FY 2008 that the number of
veterans referred by VA increased by 8 percent and the number
registered by the SWAs increased by 9 percent. We are pleased to report
there was an increase of 18 percent in the average entry hourly wage.
Key Measures of VR&E Performance for FY 2007 and FY 2008
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Veterans Veterans Veterans
Fiscal Year Referred from Registered by Entered Average Entry Wage*
VA to SWA SWA Employment
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2006 6,658 5,801 3,189 $14.91 per hour
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2007 6,520 5,549 3,662 $13.64 per hour
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2008 7,060 6,068 3,516 $16.16 per hour
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The VA/DOL Joint Working Group
As mentioned earlier the Joint Working Group evolved from the 3
work groups that were charted in the 2005 MOA. The goal of the JWG is
to improve the quality of employment services and job placements for
veterans enrolled in VR&E programs.
DOL and VA leadership have taken an active role with the JWG. I
have taken a personal interest in this issue and have been involved in
meetings with the joint work groups. I take this cooperative effort
very seriously.
The 3 work groups were established to execute the requirements of
the MOA. VETS' participants have included one individual from each of
our 6 regions and at least 3 individuals from the national office. The
3 work groups are organized to deal with the following subjects:
Performance Measures for Assessment of Partnership
Program Results;
Curriculum Design; and
Joint Data Collection, Analysis, and Reports.
These groups have made significant accomplishments; they have:
Facilitated a pilot program to identify and catalogue
best practices from existing sites. This was a 1-year pilot that
involved 8 locations.
Developed roles and responsibilities for the major
agencies involved in the VR&E process.
Identified the major data collection issues to provide
shared data collection between the VA and DOL.
Identified the joint training requirements needed for
this program.
Published joint VA/DOL guidance. This technical
assistance guidance document was published by both the VA and DOL in
December 2008.
As a result of the initiative to clearly identify roles and
responsibilities, we have designated the outstationed DVOP position as
an Intensive Service Coordinator. This designation, with new duty
requirements, clearly differentiates the work required at VR&E sites
from the roles of the DVOP at a One Stop Career Center.
In December 2008, the end of the pilot program was marked by a
webcast to all VR&E locations that initiated the implementation phase
of this project.
The next steps for the working group include:
Development of joint training for all agencies. This is
expected to be completed within 12 months.
Conduct technical assistance visits to field locations to
ensure the consistency of application of the new procedures.
Resolve the shared data collection issues.
Moving forward, the work groups will continue to monitor
information, such as that presented above, and on the new data
collection tool, and provides much needed technical assistance in order
to increase entered employment rates.
We are proud of our collaboration with theVA to increase employment
opportunities for service-disabled veterans. That positive working
relationship has also carried over into other initiatives and
strengthened cooperation and coordination between VETS and our State
workforce partners.
Participation on Joint Committees and Task Forces
In addition to implementing the MOA, VETS works with VR&E and VA in
other ways:
A VETS' staff person is a Member of the Veterans Advisory
Committee on Rehabilitation (VACOR). This Committee reviews and makes
recommendations to the Secretary of Veterans Affairs on all
rehabilitation issues including those affecting policies and programs
administered by VR&E.
A staff Member represents VETS on the VA Advisory
Committee on Women Veterans. This Committee reviews and makes
recommendations on issues specifically related to women veterans.
A staff Member represents VETS on the VA Advisory
Committee on Education. This Committee makes recommendations on issues
related to education and training issues including the GI Bill.
A staff Member represents VETS on the VA Advisory
Committee on Homeless Veterans. This Committee makes recommendations on
issues related to homeless veterans.
The VA's Undersecretary for Benefits represents VA on
DOL's Advisory Committee on Veterans Employment, Training, and Employer
Outreach.
VETS works closely with VR&E, as well as the Department
of Defense, on issues involving transition of active duty
servicemembers. VETS chairs a Transition Assistance Program Steering
Committee with the Department of Defense, on which VR&E and other VA
interests are represented.
VETS also participated on the VR&E Task Force on
Vocational Rehabilitation. This group developed the Five Track System
currently being implemented at allVA Regional Offices.
Other collaborative efforts
VETS senior staff participated in VR&E's last 4 National training
conferences. A VETS' staff Member also presented VETS' programs at the
VA Employment Coordinator conference in September 2008. VR&E staff also
frequently participates in LVER and DVOP State training conferences. I
have met with the VA's Under Secretary for Benefits, and can tell you
that we share a commitment to improving employment outcomes for VR&E
participants. In addition, VETS' senior staff now have a standing
schedule for regular monthly meeting with the VR&E to discuss current
issues of mutual concern and to enhance our joint partnership.
While not specifically a VR&E or VETS initiative, staff from both
agencies participated in the 34th Institute on Rehabilitation Issues
(IRI) sponsored by the George Washington University Center for
Rehabilitation Counseling Research and Education (CRCRE). The report
When Johnny (or Jeannie) Comes Marching Home . . . and Back to Work was
recently released and is available at http://www.gwu.edu/iri/
publications.htm. This monograph discusses linking Veterans Affairs and
State Vocational Rehabilitation (VR) services for service men and
women. The role played by VETS is also well delineated.
This concludes my statement and I would be happy to respond to any
questions.
Prepared Statement of Ruth A. Fanning, Director, Vocational
Rehabilitation and Employment Service, Veterans
Benefits Administration, U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs
Madam Chairwoman and Members of the Subcommittee, thank you for
inviting me to appear before you today to discuss VA's Vocational
Rehabilitation and Employment (VR&E) program. My testimony will provide
an overview of the VR&E Program and the services we provide, a review
of performance statistics, status of the relationship between VA and
the Department of Labor (DOL), progress on the congressionally mandated
20-year longitudinal study, and improvements to VR&E programs.
Overview of VR&E
VR&E provides career and independent living services to Veterans
and Servicemembers through 2 programs, Coming Home to Work (CHTW) and
VetSuccess. Approximately 1,100 employees in 57 regional offices and
over 100 out-based offices provide services to Servicemembers and
Veterans with disabilities resulting from their military service, as
well as to certain family Members. Servicemembers and Veterans are
assisted in obtaining and maintaining suitable careers and living as
independently as possible in their homes and communities. We provide
interested Servicemembers and Veterans career and adjustment counseling
during their transition from active duty and throughout their
enrollment in VA sponsored education programs. Career counseling is
available to children and spouses or widows of Veterans who have
permanent and total service-connected disabilities or who died during
military service or as a result of their service-connected disability.
Additionally, children of certain Veterans who served in Vietnam or
Korea are eligible for services under Chapter 18 to mitigate spina
bifida disabilities and complete training leading to a suitable job.
Coming Home to Work
VR&E is engaged in aggressive outreach through the Coming Home to
Work (CHTW) program. This program provides expedited entry into the
VR&E program and eases Servicemembers' transition into their
educational and career paths. Outreach is conducted at Department of
Defense (DoD) facilities, VA medical centers, and special homecoming
events. CHTW was recently expanded to outreach to Guard and Reserve
Members during Post Deployment Health Reassessment events and Yellow
Ribbon functions. To make sure Servicemembers on medical hold have easy
access to VR&E services, 13 full-time vocational rehabilitation
counselors are stationed at 12 DoD military treatment facilities. VA
has also appointed a CHTW coordinator in every regional office.
VetSuccess
VR&E's VetSuccess program assists Veterans to prepare for and enter
careers, and live as independently as possible at home in their
communities. Counseling and employment staff assists Veterans to plan
for their future careers, receive necessary training or education, and
successfully compete for careers. For those Veterans whose disabilities
are too severe to make employment feasible, VR&E provides a wide range
of independent living services, including volunteer work placement,
assistance using public transportation, life skills coaching,
counseling, and other services.
VR&E services are tailored to meet each individual Veteran's needs
and are provided within 5 general ``tracks'' or types of services.
These tracks include re-employment with a previous employer; rapid
access to employment through job-readiness preparation and incidental
training; self-employment, for those who wish to own their own
businesses; employment through long-term services that include formal
training and education programs leading to suitable employment; and
services to maximize independence in daily living, for veterans who are
currently unable to work or participate in other programs of vocational
rehabilitation. Independent living services may also be provided
concurrently with another track if needed to meet individual Veteran
needs.
Program Statistics
The typical VR&E participant is a male Army Veteran, 30 to 39 years
old; the typical OEF/OIF participant is 20 to 29 years old. The most
common period of service is the Gulf War Era, and the most typical
disability results from an orthopedic injury. Currently 106,000
Veterans and Servicemembers are receiving VR&E services. Over 71,522
new applications were received for the VR&E program last year--over a
13-percent increase from 2007.
Veterans participating in the VR&E program are monitored based on
case statuses. Case statuses correspond to the 5 tracks of services,
with Rehabilitation to Employability (RTE) being the training or Long-
Term Services track; Job Ready (JR) including the job placement tracks
of Reemployment, Rapid Access to Employment, and Self-Employment; and
the Independent Living (IL) status corresponding to the IL track.
Currently, the average time in training is 613 days, the average time
for job placement services is 203 days, and the average time for
independent living services is 310 days.
Because services are tailored to Veterans' needs, there is
crossover between the tracks; for example, a Veteran receiving services
in a job placement track may require short-term training to obtain
certifications in the IT industry prior to starting to look for work.
Further, as Veterans' needs change, the types of services provided may
also change.
VR&E Service implemented a track selection identifier in its
corporate database in 2007 and is working to develop corresponding
reports to collect information about which tracks of services are most
commonly used. Because rehabilitation planning is a dynamic process
that changes based on Veteran needs, VR&E is currently evaluating
system changes needed to also capture changes in programs of services
in order to gain a full understanding of services received by
individual Veterans.
Despite the current economic environment, the rate of veterans
getting jobs and achieving independent living goals has remained
steady. This rehabilitation rate is measured as the percentage of
Veterans completing their VR&E program who achieve their VR&E goals and
are declared rehabilitated as compared with all veterans leaving the
program, including those discontinuing the program prior to completing
their VR&E plan of services. In FY 2008 and this fiscal year to date,
the rehabilitation rate was 75 percent. This represents almost 8,800
veterans reaching their career goals last year, with another 2,200
reaching independent living goals.
Average entry-level earnings were approximately $33,500 yearly,
with 76 percent entering careers in the professional, managerial or
technical fields. The average total program cost for a rehabilitated
Veteran is $32,088. Costs include tuition, books, fees, equipment,
subsistence allowance, and contracted services.
About 14,000 of the over 28,000 OEF/OIF Veterans enrolled in the
VR&E program are eligible for the new Post-9/11 GI Bill program. The
new GI Bill program pays tuition, within program limits, and also
provides a book stipend and housing allowance. As the new Post-9/11 GI
Bill is implemented, VA will need to monitor participation to ensure
that these programs are coordinated to best serve Veterans' success.
As previously noted, VR&E is engaged in active outreach to inform
Veterans about the various benefits available to them in order to
assist Veterans to select VR&E or GI Bill programs best suited to their
needs. Additionally, VR&E Service is studying recommendations made by
various study groups that have proposed transition and incentive
benefits for Veterans participating in programs of rehabilitation to
help more Veterans complete VR&E programs and enter suitable careers.
VA and DOL Partnership
VR&E has an active partnership with the Department of Labor's
Veterans' Employment and Training Service (VETS) program, focused on
advancing, improving, and expanding employment of Veterans with
disabilities. Through this partnership, VR&E and VETS established a
joint workgroup that designed, tested, and implemented a best practice
team model. This model has improved working partnerships between VETS,
VR&E, and State Workforce Agencies (SWA) around the country. A post
implementation joint workgroup is in place to look for additional
process improvements; changes needed due to evolving employment needs
of Veterans with disabilities; and assistance needed by specific VETS,
SWA, or VR&E sites to effectively collaborate to help Veterans become
employed.
20-Year Longitudinal Study
The longitudinal study mandated by Public Law 110-389, section 334,
is expected to be awarded no later than September 30, 2009. A statement
of objectives has been developed and an Integrated Project Team (IPT)
is being established. The IPT's role is to expedite award of the
contract to implement the longitudinal study. The contract includes
logistical work necessary to set up the study, as well as data
collection and analysis necessary to deliver the first report due to
Congress in July 2011.
Improvements to the VR&E Program
Coming Home to Work
As previously discussed, the CHTW program was expanded in February
2008 to become VR&E's primary outreach and early intervention program.
This expansion includes establishment of an outreach team in VBA
Headquarters to ensure a continued focus with DoD in providing
transition services to Servicemembers on medical hold, as well as
ensuring continued outreach to all Veterans in need of assistance with
career or independent living issues resulting from their disability
conditions. To date, these collaboration efforts have resulted in an
increase in Servicemembers and veterans applying for VR&E services,
with over 13 percent more applications for VR&E services received last
year.
Marketing of the VR&E Program
In order to increase Servicemember and Veteran awareness of the
services provided by the VR&E program, VR&E is launching a marketing
campaign. This campaign will focus on branding the employment and
independent living services provided through the VR&E program as
``VetSuccess.'' VR&E Service redesigned its Veteran-focused Web site--
VetSuccess.gov. The VetSuccess.gov Web site provides Veterans with
access to a variety of program and online tools to assist them in
achieving their career goals.
In partnership with Direct Employers and the National Association
of State Workforce Agencies, the Job Central database of over 500,000
jobs has been incorporated into the VetSuccess.gov Web site. In
addition, VetSuccess.gov contains a specialized job bank for Veterans
receiving Chapter 31 services. This feature allows employers to list
job openings and search through the VetSuccess resume bank for
candidates to match their staffing needs. This Web-based tool also
provides resume support, career resources, program information, access
to online applications for various VA benefit programs, and other
resources. Future enhancements will focus on tools related to success
in training programs, independent living services, and other resources
to help Veterans make a successful transition to work and home.
In addition, transparency of VR&E program results for stakeholders
and the public has been expanded through development of additional
outcome metrics that separate outcomes for employment and independent
living successes.
Training
Equipping VR&E staff to meet the needs of today's Veterans is vital
to the success of the VR&E program. VR&E's training team is actively
developing and deploying computer-based training job aids and programs.
These tools are designed to provide desktop access to just-in-time work
aids and training guides for every function of the counselor and
employment specialist roles. In addition, national training for new
counselors is provided, with over 150 counselors trained in 2008 and
training planned in 2009 for over 100 additional counselors. A new-
manager training program was also launched in 2008, and a management
enhancement program is being planned in 2009 to identify and begin to
develop new leaders. VR&E is working with VA's Education, Development,
and Training Office, to assess skills of professional staff. This
information will be used to target training on topics most relevant to
helping Veterans return to suitable careers and be as independent as
possible.
VR&E also works with the Council for the Certification of
Rehabilitation Counselors (CCRC) to provide certified VR&E professional
staff with continuing education credits. Support of the CCRC continuing
education credit process encourages vocational rehabilitation
professionals to maintain professional certifications and stay current
in the rehabilitation field.
Conclusion
VR&E has made significant program improvements in the past 4 years.
The VR&E program is Veteran-focused, with services directly linked to
the achievement of suitable careers and/or maximum independence at home
and in the community. We continue to work aggressively to improve and
market the program to our Veterans in order to assist more Veterans to
achieve their rehabilitation and employment goals--particularly during
the current economic downturn.
Madam Chairwoman, this concludes my statement. I would be pleased
to answer questions from you or any of the other Members of the
Subcommittee.
Statement of Patricia Nunez, Chairwoman,
Commission on Rehabilitation Counselor Certification
Madam Chairwoman and Members of the Subcommittee, thank you for
inviting me to present testimony related to the Vocational
Rehabilitation and Employment (VR&E) Programs. Although the Commission
on Rehabilitation Counselor Certification (CRCC) is unable to provide
verbal testimony, we appreciate the opportunity to provide this written
testimony. My testimony will highlight the continued need for qualified
services through the Vocational Rehabilitation and Employment programs
and how Certified Rehabilitation Counselors (CRCs) are uniquely
qualified to provide such services to veterans.
CRCC Supports the Benefits of the VR&E Programs
The mission of CRCC is to promote quality rehabilitation counseling
services to persons with disabilities through the certification of
rehabilitation counselors and to provide leadership in advocating for
the rehabilitation counseling profession. Veterans who have a service-
connected disability are a growing population of individuals. They need
services from those who are uniquely qualified to provide effective
vocational rehabilitation services so that veterans may transition from
military service to suitable employment or, for those who with severe
disabilities who are unable to work, to independent living. We
understand the VR&E to be conscientious about continually assessing its
programs and services to ensure that veterans are receiving quality
services from the point of initial evaluation to the end goal of
suitable employment or independent living. Likewise, VR&E leadership is
fully supportive of ensuring that the VR&E staff are equipped with the
most up-to-date knowledge by providing and supporting their continual
learning and development.
The Department of Veterans' Affairs is an Employer of Choice for CRCs
Certified Rehabilitation Counselors are increasingly seeking
employment within the VR&E programs, as these programs provide them
with the ability to provide the full scope of rehabilitation counseling
services for which they are trained. CRCs, through formal education and
training, demonstrate that they have met the national standard for
rehabilitation counseling and have the unique skills to assist
individuals with disabilities as they seek re-employment with a
previous employer, rapid access to employment through job-readiness
preparation, self-employment, employment via long-term training and
education, and services to maximize independence in daily living for
those unable to work. The VA is also an employer of choice for CRCs due
to the favorable pay and benefits offered by the Department. Benefits
are inclusive of the commitment to supporting and providing continuing
education for staff, which is also a requirement for those who are
certified as CRCs.
While the VA does employ CRCs, we recognize that the VA has
established hiring requirements based on specific education and
coursework, which some CRCs may not meet who are otherwise very highly
qualified and skilled in providing services offered by VR&E. Other
practice settings are experiencing a shortage of qualified staff and
are in a position of re-examining hiring standards as a result. We
would urge the VA, and any other practice setting experiencing the same
shortage of qualified staff, to maintain high standards by considering
the many qualified CRCs who may not meet the exacting educational
standards currently in place.
Benefits for Veterans
The VR&E's commitment to quality services, and thus a benefit for
the veterans they serve, is certainly highlighted in their continual
program assessment and commitment to continued training and education
for staff. CRCC likewise supports these aspects by requiring that CRCs
maintain their certification through a program of continuing education
or by re-examination. CRCs are uniquely qualified to provide the full
range of services provided by VR&E including:
comprehensive rehabilitation evaluation to determine
abilities, skills, interests, and needs
vocational counseling and rehabilitation planning
employment services such as job-seeking skills, resume
development, and other work readiness assistance
assistance finding and keeping a job, including the use
of special employer incentives
if needed, training such as On the Job Training (OJT),
apprenticeships, and non-paid work experiences
if needed, post-secondary training at a college,
vocational, technical or business school
supportive rehabilitation services including case
management, counseling, and referral
independent living services
Concluding Remarks
In anticipation of an increasing demand for services for the many
deserving veterans, CRCC fully supports the continuing need for the
VR&E programs, their continued development and advancement, and the
advancement of hiring standards to recognize CRCs. The population of
veterans is not only increasing but the severity of disabilities is
also increasing. It is important that quality services be provided by
those who are uniquely qualified to provide them--Certified
Rehabilitation Counselors.
Madam Chairwoman, this concludes my written testimony. I would be
pleased to respond to questions from you or any of the other Members of
the Subcommittee.
MATERIAL SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD
Wounded Marines: School Didn't Deliver
By Gidget Fuentes--Staff writer
Posted: Monday Mar 9, 2009 19:02:10 EDT
http://www.navytimes.com/news/2009/03/marine_schoolsuit_030609w/
SAN DIEGO--A film-training and job-placement program created for
wounded Marines and corpsmen by a foundation with Hollywood connections
looked like a sweet deal when the first class graduated last year.
But some participants say Wounded Marine Careers Foundation Inc.
fell short on its promise of a free, 10-week training program with
guaranteed employment and Membership in a key Hollywood union.
Instead, some claim the private, nonprofit foundation charged the
Department of Veterans Affairs for $88,000 in vocational rehabilitation
benefits for some students, but didn't deliver on a variety of
promises.
Now, one former Marine has filed a nearly $300,000 civil suit
against the group, and some graduates are weighing their options.
Giving something back
Wounded Marine Careers Foundation was established in 2007 by Emmy
award-winning filmmaker Kevin Lombard and his wife, Judith Paixao, to
teach filmmaking skills--including photography, editing and audio--to
disabled veterans, with costs expected to be covered by donations and
other fundraising. The goal ``was to do a seamless transition for them
into the workforce,'' Paixao said.
The group signed up a blue-chip roster of trustees, including 2
former commandants, retired Generals P.X. Kelley and James L. Jones,
the latter now national security adviser to the Obama Administration.
The foundation transformed a studio warehouse building in San Diego
into a well-equipped school and graduated 19 students in the first
class.
``I wanted to give back to these guys,'' said Lombard, whose father
was a Marine and who has spent 38 years as a cinematographer, director
and producer.
In a Feb. 19 interview, Lombard and Paixao said they initially
believed donations would be enough to cover the training costs for the
students.
``We didn't think that a wounded veteran would have to pay for a
wounded warrior program,'' Lombard said. ``I thought, being in the
motion picture industry for 30 years . . . once people found out about
this, we'd be funded. To me, it seemed like making a small-budget
independent film.''
But they didn't realize how tough it would be to get $2 million in
donations, the amount Lombard estimates is needed annually to run the
training center for the 3-year ``pilot'' program.
``The equipment is expensive, and the personnel who teach you to
learn on the equipment is expensive,'' Lombard said. ``The technology
is changing so quickly, you've got to be able to keep up with them.''
Lombard said he didn't know about the VA program until one of the
students in the first class mentioned it. The Vocational Rehabilitation
and Employment Service covers tuition, fees, books, supplies and
equipment for eligible service-disabled veterans and provides a monthly
stipend for temporary housing. Benefit amounts vary case by case, and
the VA pays the approved school or training program directly.
The foundation applied to become a certified training center, and
the VA reviewed and approved the course curriculum, budget, programs,
faculty and the facility.
Suspicions and questions
Former Lance Cpl. Brent Callender was sold on the program when he
first heard about it from Paixao and Lombard, who visited him as he
recuperated at Camp Pendleton.
``They pitched this idea to us as a gift to us, that they would be
using private funding,'' said Callender, 23, a former combat engineer
who suffered extensive injuries in Iraq from a roadside bomb. ``I was
like, `OK, that sounds like a good idea.' I just wanted to work in TV
and film.''
When the course began, an employee asked students if they would use
vocational rehabilitation benefits, and distributed forms ``just in
case we needed it,'' Callender said. He signed the form as part of the
larger enrollment process, but believed donations would cover the
costs, he said.
Program brochures said semesters cost $10,000 for each student.
Several people associated with the foundation questioned the use of VA
benefits, including cinematographer Levie Isaacks, a former Army
infantry platoon commander and Vietnam veteran, who helped teach the
first class.
``To watch these guys learn the creative process, they just come
alive. These guys were living in hospitals, they were isolated,''
Isaacks said. ``It's just a question of the money.''
Isaacks, who received $27,500 for teaching the first class, was
furious that students had ``signed over all their rehab benefits.'' He
said he's taught courses that cost $1,500 a week, but ``$88,000, I'll
tell you, is just outrageous.''
Isaacks said he complained in a letter to the VA but has not
received any response.
VA benefits add up
In 2007, the VA approved the foundation and later recertified the
school for the current class that began in January, said Tristan
Heaton, a VA spokesman in San Diego.
According to VA records, the foundation has received $1,223,808 in
benefits so far. The VA paid the foundation $88,550 for tuition costs
for each of 8 students among the 19 in the first class and $64,426 for
each of 8 students in the current class, Heaton said.
Neither the VA nor the foundation has explained how that figure was
determined, or what changed to drive the price down by $24,000 per
student.
It remains unclear whether this represents the only VA rehab
benefits available to the students. Each case is tailored to the
veteran, Heaton said, but he did not elaborate on whether available
benefits are capped at a certain amount.
Paixao said a VA counselor visits each Friday and meets with
beneficiaries. She said veterans are not forced into using their VA
benefits.
``Many of them do use their own benefits for the program,'' she
said. ``It's completely elective.''
Donations cover other students' tuition, as was the case for the
first group, where about half of participants did not apply for VA
benefits.
Lombard said the couple put up most of their own money to help
start the San Diego center. Paixao said they just received their first
paychecks in mid-February, but would not disclose the amount.
The foundation received some healthy donations--the couple would
not specify those amounts, either--but most donors have given a few
hundred dollars at most, Paixao said. Times have seemed ``tremendously
bleak,'' she said.
But former Cpl. Joshua Frey, a graduate of the inaugural class,
isn't feeling sorry for the foundation. Eager to begin a new career
after suffering devastating injuries in Fallujah in 2004 as a Member of
3rd Battalion, 1st Marines, Frey signed up after program brochures
indicated donations would cover expenses.
``I wasn't expecting that I had to pay it,'' said Frey, 32.
He used his VA training benefits but today fears he wasted it.
``We've got nothing to show for it.''
Former Lance Cpl. Mike Passmore said he ``didn't know too much
about Voc-Rehab, other than it did pay for school. It turned out it was
$88,000. You pay that for a 4-year college degree.''
Passmore, wounded in Iraq with 2nd Battalion, 7th Marines, is
bitter. A VA rep told him his benefit ``is a one-time deal,'' he said.
``In the end, we didn't get what we were promised,'' he said. For
instance, students didn't get a video camera package he believed they'd
get at graduation, and several complained the union cards they received
were only good for work as a film loader, an entry level job in the
industry.
Passmore took a job last April with Fox Sports in Los Angeles, but
found he had to learn a different editing system, so he quit.
The couple defends the course. Paixao said students got to keep a
digital camera, an editing system and software, and donated laptops,
but the foundation didn't give them the $5,000 Panasonic video cameras
used in the course. Membership with the International Association of
Theatrical Stage Employees, Lombard said, is valued and key to getting
different types of work.
Defending the curriculum, Lombard said some systems taught in the
class might be different than what a student has to use on a job at a
television station or on a film set.
Passmore, now an apprentice at a tattoo shop, remains angry.
``They took advantage of Marines who were wounded,'' he said.
Lawsuit pending
The second class began in early January, with a dozen students in a
revamped 14-week course that will graduate students ``qualified to work
at higher than entry-level, union-qualified jobs,'' according to a
recent program brochure.
``It's much more than just the basics,'' Paixao said. Older
students make up the newest class--it includes 2 soldiers, a Navy
officer, a corpsman and an airman.
Paixao said ``the mission is still pure: Train in media skills and
help them find jobs.''
She said it's been a tough road. The couple hears accusations that
they're only in it for the money. Some relationships with people once
associated with the center have soured. Their friends wonder why they
moved from Connecticut to devote time to the center.
``It's taking its toll, physically and emotionally, with the 2 of
us,'' Lombard said.
They have transformed the course for the second class, adding an
extra month of instruction and more hands-on training, while driving
down the price.
Lombard said they're talking with a university about giving
graduates college credits. The foundation has strengthened its ties
with the 50,000-member IATSE union, which recently reiterated its
support to waive the $3,500 initiation fees for each graduate and help
them find jobs, he said.
``We're even more impassioned now. . . . But there's a lot of
heartache with the growing process,'' Lombard said.
Others are feeling heartache too, including those who feel betrayed
by Lombard and Paixao.
Cpl. Philip Levine, 34, was a mortarman with 3rd Battalion, 5th
Marines, and joined the foundation in early 2007 as a co-founder and
representative for wounded warriors on its board of directors.
``I thought it would be a great thing, so I gave 100 percent,'' he
said. He planned to attend the first class.
Levine, wounded in Fallujah in 2004, recalled that donations were
supposed to cover tuition.
``We're a foundation,'' he said. ``Why should a recipient have to
use his benefits?''
His questions led to growing ``friction'' with Lombard and Paixao
by year's end, he said, and he was voted off the board and barred from
taking the course. Levine sued the couple and the foundation in San
Diego Superior Court and is seeking nearly $3,000 of unreimbursed
expenses plus damages of $290,000 over the failed partnership. The
trial begins in April.
The couple declined to answer questions about the lawsuit.
``He's never been paid a dime, and they've never even paid his
expenses,'' said Levine's attorney, Dick Lynn of San Diego. Levine met
once with Commandant General James Conway and helped draw attention and
encourage donations for the foundation, Lynn said.
``He worked day and night on this thing for a year.''
Ultimately, Levine said his case isn't just about the money.
``I'm looking for answers. . . . I gave so much,'' he said. ``I
trusted them.''
Committee on Veterans' Affairs
Subcommittee on Economic Opportunity
Washington, DC.
April 15, 2009
Mr. Peter Gaytan
Executive Director
American Legion
1608 K Street, NW
Washington, DC 20006
Dear Mr. Gaytan:
I would like to request that The American Legion respond to the
enclosed questions I am submitting in reference to a hearing from our
House Committee on Veterans' Affairs Subcommittee on Economic
Opportunity hearing on Oversight of Vocational Rehabilitation and
Employment Programs on April 2, 2009. Please answer the enclosed
hearing questions by no later than Wednesday, May 27, 2009.
In an effort to reduce printing costs, the Committee on Veterans'
Affairs, in cooperation with the Joint Committee on Printing, is
implementing some formatting changes for material for all Full
Committee and Subcommittee hearings. Therefore, it would be appreciated
if you could provide your answers consecutively on letter size paper,
single-spaced. In addition, please restate the question in its entirety
before the answer.
Due to the delay in receiving mail, please provide your response to
Ms. Orfa Torres by fax at (202) 225-2034. If you have any questions,
please call (202) 226-4150.
Sincerely,
Stephanie Herseth Sandlin
Chairwoman
__________
American Legion
Washington, DC.
May 27, 2009
Honorable Stephanie Herseth Sandlin, Chair
Subcommittee on Economic Opportunity
Committee on Veterans' Affairs
U.S. House of Representatives
335 Cannon House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
Dear Chair Herseth Sandlin:
Thank you for allowing the American Legion to participate in the
Subcommittee hearing on Vocational Rehabilitation and Employment (VR&E)
Programs on April 2, 2009. I respectfully submit the following in
response to your additional questions:
1. Is the VR&E funding level adequate? If not, then at what level
should VR&E be funded?
The American Legion believes VR&E is not funded adequately. VR&E
needs to have an additional 200 (combined total) counselors and
coordinators in order to function at maximum capacity. At approximately
$100,000 per counselor/coordinator, an additional $20 million would be
needed for these key positions.
2. In your testimony you state that VR&E needs relevant data
concerning the number of veterans who are applying for benefits to
project future workload. What data should VA be looking at, and where
can this information be found?
The American Legion believes that through seamless transition
efforts between DoD and VA there could be identification of potential
VR&E participants in order to project future workload and overall
staffing needs. Another approach to receiving relevant data could come
from servicemembers who attend the Transition Assistance Program (TAP)
along with referrals from job services that feature veterans.
3. In your testimony you state that VA leadership must continue to
focus on improvements in case management, vocational counseling, and
job placement. What improvements should the VA be making to case
management, vocational counseling and job placement?
In relationship to case management and vocational counseling,
many VR&E Regional Office staff reported they still do not have enough
staff with the right skills to properly administer the program. VA
needs to adequately train its staff in these offices so veterans can
receive the best education and employment services possible, which will
lead to meaningful employment and a high quality-of-life that veterans
deserve. The American Legion recommends that participants in the VR&E
program be identified in a career path as early as possible.
The American Legion also recommends that veterans be trained and
guided in the direction of some of the more difficult positions that
need to be filled within the Federal Government. Career Fields like
information technology, claims adjudications, and debt collection offer
gainful employment and great opportunities for veterans who participate
in the VR&E program. This focus would also greatly assist with the job
placement piece of the VR&E program. Job placement through VR&E is
vital for veterans' financial independence. Clearly, any employability
plan that does not achieve the ultimate objective--a job--is falling
short of actually helping those veterans seeking assistance in
transitioning into the civilian workforce.
While VR&E has focused more on employment, program incentives
still haven't been updated to reflect this emphasis. VR&E program
incentives remain directed toward education and training. Veterans who
receive those services collect an allowance, but those who opt
exclusively for employment services do not. The American Legion
believes incentives toward the employment services would greatly assist
and encourage eligible veterans to remain in vocational rehabilitation
programs, search for employment, and assist with living expenses.
Additionally, The American Legion recommends exploring possible
training programs geared specifically for VR&E counselors through the
National Veterans Training Institute (NVTI). Contracting for
standardized or specialized training for VR&E employees could very well
strengthen and improve overall program performance. NVTI serves as a
valuable resource for Department of Labor, Veterans Employment and
Training Service (DOL-VETS) employment specialists and has contributed
to a marked improvement in DOL-VETS performance.
Sincerely,
Mark Walker, Deputy Director
National Economic Commission
Committee on Veterans' Affairs
Subcommittee on Economic Opportunity
Washington, DC.
April 15, 2009
Colonel (ret.) Michael R. Turner
Chief, Congressional Affairs
Wounded Warrior Project
10 G Street, NE
Washington, DC 20002
Dear Colonel Turner:
I would like to request that the Wounded Warrior Project respond to
the enclosed questions I am submitting in reference to a hearing from
our House Committee on Veterans' Affairs Subcommittee on Economic
Opportunity hearing on Oversight of Vocational Rehabilitation and
Employment Programs on April 2, 2009. Please answer the enclosed
hearing questions by no later than Wednesday, May 27, 2009.
In an effort to reduce printing costs, the Committee on Veterans'
Affairs, in cooperation with the Joint Committee on Printing, is
implementing some formatting changes for material for all Full
Committee and Subcommittee hearings. Therefore, it would be appreciated
if you could provide your answers consecutively on letter size paper,
single-spaced. In addition, please restate the question in its entirety
before the answer.
Due to the delay in receiving mail, please provide your response to
Ms. Orfa Torres by fax at (202) 225-2034. If you have any questions,
please call (202) 226-4150.
Sincerely,
Stephanie Herseth Sandlin
Chairwoman
__________
Wounded Warrior Project Responses to Questions For the Record
Representative Stephanie Herseth Sandlin
Chairwoman, Subcommittee on Economic Opportunity
House Veterans' Affairs Committee
Oversight Hearing on Vocational Rehabilitation
and Employment Programs
April 2, 2009
Question #1: How can long-term measurement mechanisms used to
quantify program success be improved?
According to its January, 2009 Report (GAO-09-34) the Government
Accountability Office noted that VR&E reports an overall rehabilitation
rate for all participants. The GAO recommended separate outcome
measures for those seeking employment and those in the Independent
Living track, in order to measure overall program effectiveness.
Wounded Warrior Project agrees with the GAO recommendation because
different program services are needed for veterans who are seeking
employment and veterans who are learning to live independently.
With regard to performance outcomes for the 3 VR&E employment
tracks and the education track, Wounded Warrior Project notes the
Department of Labor and the Department of Veterans Affairs have begun
to collaborate more closely in improving employment services to VR&E
participants and WWP believes this continued cooperation is also
essential to improving employment outcomes since the DOL is VA's
primary employment services partner.
The 2 agencies have recently developed and begun to implement joint
performance measures and tracking systems for VR&E participants. These
measures include:
Entered Employment Rate
Employment Retention Rate
Earnings Upon Employment
These measures, if properly implemented, provide the minimum
outcome measurements to judge program success. They are also consistent
across other programs in Government.
In addition to these primary performance outcomes, Wounded Warrior
Project believes supplemental short-term and long-term outcome
measurements are needed.
The short term outcome measurements could include (but not be
limited to):
1. Number of participants who complete training as planned;
2. Number of participants who complete a modified rehabilitation
plan;
3. Number of participants who fail to complete their plan and why;
4. Number of participants who complete their plan and find
employment in their planned field;
5. Number of participants who complete their plan but find
employment in a different field.
The long-term outcomes measurements should seek to quantify
employment success at the 6-month, 1-year, and 2-year point. If
employment assistance payments were extended to at least 6 months after
employment for the employment tracks, a change Wounded Warrior Project
supports, monthly online survey completion could be added as a
requirement to remain eligible to receive those payments. Questions at
the 6-month, 1-year, and 2-year point could include:
1. How long after completion of VR&E did it take for the
participant to first become employed?
2. Is the participant still employed?
3. How many employers has the participant had since completing
VR&E?
4. Is the employment in a field identified in the participant's
VR&E rehabilitation plan?
5. Rate the value of the VR&E training the participant received in
obtaining their first job after completing VR&E.
6. Rate the value of the VR&E training the participant received in
obtaining their current job.
7. Rate the employee's current job satisfaction.
8. Provide the employee's current salary.
Question #2: Do you think that the new GI Bill could render VR&E
obsolete unless it is improved?
This depends on the course of study sought by the enrollee and the
location of the training. Because VR&E has no education assistance cap
like the new GI Bill, if the enrollee is seeking education at a
particular school not available under the new GI Bill, then VR&E is the
better option. However, inadequate subsistence rates in VR&E are a
significant detractor and, if left unchanged, will probably result in
even lower enrollment in VR&E.
The core elements of the current VR&E program make it far superior
to the new GI Bill, however significant enhancements to the program are
needed.
First, subsistence levels must be raised to at least that of the
new GI Bill. Simply put, if new subsistence rates are needed for the
New GI Bill, they are certainly needed for VR&E participants.
Otherwise, the perception is that VR&E participants are being penalized
if they want to attend a higher tuition school. Subsistence should be
paid in whole month increments when any training is received during a
month (e.g. vocational training for partial months in the employment
tracks). Subsistence payments should extend for 6 months after
completion of the VR&E program to assist the veterans with their job
search activities.
Secondly, VR&E's unlimited education assistance should be
protected.
Thirdly, other expenses like child care, commuting, peer tutors,
etc. should be considered on an as needed basis for VR&E participants.
Fourth, counseling and tutoring--critical to VR&E participants'
success, varies widely. It should be far more responsive and available.
Finally, and most importantly, it should be mandatory that VA
provide VR&E briefing for every servicemember prior to separation from
the military. In addition, VA should also inform veterans about VR&E
opportunities when the veteran receives his/her disability rating, and
each time that rating changes.
With these relatively easy to implement enhancements, VR&E can
become the `crown jewel' of employment programs so richly deserved by
our disabled veterans. However, without these changes, enrollment may
very likely drop significantly.
Question #3: In your testimony you state that VR&E counselors do
not systematically monitor participants to document progress and
provide program assistance. Is this due to poor management, high
caseload or some other reasons?
Wounded Warrior Project believes the caseload is probably the major
factor. VR&E staff acknowledges that the current, average caseload is
about 130 cases per counselor. We think this is too high, although the
load should vary by track. 130 cases for a counselor monitoring the
reemployment track may be an acceptable ratio. However, the same number
of cases for a counselor monitoring the education track is probably
not. Such a caseload for the IL track is absolutely too high.
Furthermore, counseling across tracks is probably not optimum. It is
difficult to equate the counseling skills required to support an IL
enrollee, someone working toward a Masters degree, and someone
attending a small-business startup program.
Participant access to and contact with counselors will obviously
vary by track and should reflect an overall counseling plan unique to
each track. In the education track, counselors should have an academic
counseling background. They also should monitor each student's academic
progress, and they should intervene immediately when it is apparent the
student is experiencing difficulty with their particular program.
Employment tracks other than the education track should be supported by
career counselors, and IL counselors clearly should be specialists in
assisting the severely disabled.
Question #4: You state that VR&E should pay a full month of
subsistence for every partial month a veteran is enrolled. Can you
elaborate on what you mean by partial month?
Within the VR&E program, subsistence is paid whenever a participant
is enrolled in a formal training program consistent with his or her
rehabilitation plan. If this is a partial month, VR&E pays a prorated
month. For example, if an enrollee in the rapid access to employment
track attends a formal certification course which lasts 10 days, he
will be paid subsistence only for those 10 days, not the full month.
Three of the 4 employment tracks are generally so short that limited,
if any, subsistence is ever paid.
Enrollment in a track should, by itself, be the basis for awarding
subsistence, not the duration of the actual training received within
that track. In addition, if a veteran enters the rapid access to
employment track and takes 2\1/2\ months to find a job, he should be
paid subsistence for 3 full months even if no formal training is
received. Obviously, the VR&E counselor should ensure that the enrollee
is actively seeking employment during that entire time.
A simplified and slightly more generous subsistence structure such
as this for the 3 non-college tracks--tracks which are used far less
frequently than the education track--would likely add some cost to the
program although participant levels in these 3 tracks are significantly
less than the education track (e.g., the recent GAO review we
previously cited indicated that 22 percent of VR&E participants are
currently enrolled in these 3 tracks). More importantly, this
subsistence structure would create a very meaningful incentive for non-
college bound veterans to use the VR&E program.
Question #5: You state in your written testimony that an increasing
number of OEF/OIF veterans are apparently being denied entry into the
program. Did these veterans meet the criteria and therefore should not
have been denied entry into the program?
Yes, the Wounded Warriors referred to in our testimony did indeed
meet the criteria and should not have been initially denied entry into
the program. The fact that they were later enrolled in the program
serves as further evidence that the difficulties these OEF/OIF warriors
had in gaining entry into the program were unwarranted. Wounded Warrior
Project has worked on multiple occasions to remedy specific case-by
case VR&E eligibility issues.
While we can currently provide anecdotal instances of these issues,
in order to best portray the realities in the field, WWP will be
formally surveying our warriors to garner the statistical data
necessary to establish the systemic trends we believe we are seeing.
Upon completion of this survey we will gladly relay our findings to the
Committee or others who request them.
Question #6: on average, how much contact should a VR&E counselor
have with a veteran enrollee and how much time should be spent during
each interaction.
Currently, Wounded Warrior Project does not have enough data to
definitively recommend an appropriate number of contacts nor do we have
enough information to provide an informed opinion as to the time each
counselor should spend with each enrollee.
WWP does believe the counselors should be track specialists and we
recognize the average number and duration of interactions would
generally vary by track. It is also necessary to recognize that
counselor interaction with participants should reflect an overall
counseling plan unique to each track.
Committee on Veterans' Affairs
Subcommittee on Economic Opportunity
Washington, DC.
April 15, 2009
Mr. Bob Wallace
Executive Director
Veterans of Foreign Wars of the United States
200 Maryland Ave., SE
Washington, DC 20002
Dear Mr. Wallace:
I would like to request that the Veterans of Foreign Wars of the
United States respond to the enclosed questions I am submitting in
reference to a hearing from our House Committee on Veterans' Affairs
Subcommittee on Economic Opportunity hearing on Oversight of Vocational
Rehabilitation and Employment Programs on April 2, 2009. Please answer
the enclosed hearing questions by no later than Wednesday, May 27,
2009.
In an effort to reduce printing costs, the Committee on Veterans'
Affairs, in cooperation with the Joint Committee on Printing, is
implementing some formatting changes for material for all Full
Committee and Subcommittee hearings. Therefore, it would be appreciated
if you could provide your answers consecutively on letter size paper,
single-spaced. In addition, please restate the question in its entirety
before the answer.
Due to the delay in receiving mail, please provide your response to
Ms. Orfa Torres by fax at (202) 225-2034. If you have any questions,
please call (202) 226-4150.
Sincerely,
Stephanie Herseth Sandlin
Chairwoman
__________
JUSTIN BROWN, LEGISLATIVE ASSOCIATE
NATIONAL LEGISLATIVE SERVICE
VETERANS OF FOREIGN WARS OF THE UNITED STATES
RESPONSE TO QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY
CHAIRWOMAN HERSETH SANDLIN
COMMITTEE ON VETERANS' AFFAIRS
SUBCOMMITTEE ON ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY
Oversight of Vocational Rehabilitation and Employment Programs
Submitted on May 13, 2009
1. What is the major complaint that you hear from veterans about
the VR&E program?
The VFW's most frequent complaint in regards to VR&E
comes from disabled veterans who are upset that they are
ineligible for the VR&E program due to its arbitrary delimiting
date. Many of these disabled veterans site the fact that their
injury did not worsen to the point of needing rehabilitation
until long after the delimiting date had passed.
2. In your testimony you state that, ``for many disabled veterans
with dependants, VR&E education tracks are insufficient.'' Why is it
insufficient and what can be done to improve the program?
VR&E's education track is insufficient for veterans
with dependants because it does not provide them with the
necessary amount of resources to raise a family while pursuing
an education. Instead of utilizing education tracks, which will
more often provide a higher quality of life and higher rates of
long term rehabilitation and employment options, many veterans
with dependants are opting into immediate employment to address
immediate needs.
3. According to your written testimony, VFW is concerned with how
the VR&E ``rehabilitation rate'' is reported. Is their current
reporting method not accurately portraying the ``rehabilitation rate''?
A. How should this be changed
VR&E's rehabilitation rate might be considered
accurate if you are recording short-term job placement. The
rehabilitation does not utilize a focus that concentrates on
the long-term rehabilitation rate of the veteran. Many
veterans' injuries negatively progress over time and may
require further rehabilitation. The current figures fail to
take this into account and do not consider the long-term
effects of the VR&E program. By changing the concentration of
the VR&E's results from the short term to the entirety of a
veteran's employability an emphasis on long-term results and
rehabilitation will be prioritized and veteran's will have a
better rehabilitation program.
Committee on Veterans' Affairs
Subcommittee on Economic Opportunity
Washington, DC.
April 15, 2009
The Honorable Hilda L. Solis
Secretary
U.S. Department of Labor
200 Constitution Ave., NW
Washington, DC 20210
Dear Secretary Solis:
I would like to request that the U.S. Department of Labor respond
to the enclosed questions I am submitting in reference to a hearing
from our House Committee on Veterans' Affairs Subcommittee on Economic
Opportunity hearing on Oversight of Vocational Rehabilitation and
Employment Programs on April 2, 2009. Please answer the enclosed
hearing questions by no later than Wednesday, May 27, 2009.
In an effort to reduce printing costs, the Committee on Veterans'
Affairs, in cooperation with the Joint Committee on Printing, is
implementing some formatting changes for material for all Full
Committee and Subcommittee hearings. Therefore, it would be appreciated
if you could provide your answers consecutively on letter size paper,
single-spaced. In addition, please restate the question in its entirety
before the answer.
Due to the delay in receiving mail, please provide your response to
Ms. Orfa Torres by fax at (202) 225-2034. If you have any questions,
please call (202) 226-4150.
Sincerely,
Stephanie Herseth Sandlin
Chairwoman
__________
U.S. Department of Labor
Office of the Assistant Secretary for
Veterans' Employment and Training
Washington, DC.
July 17, 2009
The Honorable Stephanie Herseth Sandlin
Chairwoman
Subcommittee on Economic Opportunity
Committee on Veterans' Affairs
U.S. House of Representatives
Washington, DC 20515
Dear Chairwoman Sandlin:
Thank you for the opportunity to respond to your follow-up
questions to the hearing at which I testified on April 2, 2009. As
requested, I have restated the questions in their entirety and provided
the respective answers.
1. Currently you have personnel at 49 regional offices and 19
satellite offices. In your testimony you state that your standard is
one per office. When do you expect to reach this goal and what would be
your budgetary implications?
Response: The outstationing of Veterans' Employment and Training
Service (VETS) funded personnel at the Department of Veterans Affairs'
Veterans Rehabilitation and Employment (VR&E) service locations is a
work in progress. VR&E currently has 57 regional offices and 120
satellite offices. We currently have personnel at 47 of the 57 VR&E
regional offices, and are continuing our work with the VA to provide
support to the remaining 8 regional offices. Although we only have
personnel at 19 of the 120 satellite offices, the location of those
personnel was determined in consultation with the VA. It was never our
intention to have personnel at all 120 locations, but rather to provide
our personnel to those locations identified by the VA as most in need.
Additional reasons for not having personnel at every VR&E site are:
staff turnover, which leaves temporary vacancies; and, in some
instances, VR&E does not have physical space for additional personnel.
However, we continue to work with VR&E and the State Workforce Agencies
to accomplish the outstationing necessary to service our disabled
veterans.
2. In the table you provided on page 3 you have 6,068 registered
veterans, yet only 3,516 entered employment. What is the reason for
this steep dropoff and what information do we have on the veterans that
did not enter employment?
Response: The reasons for this steep dropoff include: some return
to school to further their education; some find jobs on their own; some
decline our services after they register with the One-Stop Career
Center. Although the percentage of those that actually enter employment
has remained rather constant over several years, we continue to work to
assist as many veterans as possible in funding gainful employment, and
are very encouraged by the average entry wage which has ranged from
$13.64-$16.16 from FY 2006-2008.
Hopefully, my responses to your thoughtful questions will provide
additional information on the work that VETS and VA, through the VR&E
program, continue to pursue. Our collaborative efforts to implement an
updated Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) outlining the process and
responsibility to work together to maximize the services both agencies
provide, will hopefully result in an increase in placements and
employment opportunities for our disabled veterans and their
dependents.
Thank you for the opportunity to provide this information for the
record.
Sincerely,
John McWilliam
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Operations and Management
Committee on Veterans' Affairs
Subcommittee on Economic Opportunity
Washington, DC.
April 15, 2009
Ms. Ruth Fanning
Director, Office of Vocational Rehabilitation and Employment
Veterans Benefits Administration
U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs
810 Vermont Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20420
Dear Ms. Fanning:
I would like to request that the U.S. Department of Veterans
Affairs respond to the enclosed deliverables and questions for the
record I am submitting in reference to a hearing from our House
Committee on Veterans' Affairs Subcommittee on Economic Opportunity
hearing on Oversight of Vocational Rehabilitation and Employment
Programs on April 2, 2009. Please answer the enclosed hearing questions
by no later than Wednesday, May 27, 2009.
In an effort to reduce printing costs, the Committee on Veterans'
Affairs, in cooperation with the Joint Committee on Printing, is
implementing some formatting changes for material for all Full
Committee and Subcommittee hearings. Therefore, it would be appreciated
if you could provide your answers consecutively on letter size paper,
single-spaced. In addition, please restate the question in its entirety
before the answer.
Due to the delay in receiving mail, please provide your response to
Ms. Orfa Torres by fax at (202) 225-2034. If you have any questions,
please call (202) 226-4150.
Sincerely,
Stephanie Herseth Sandlin
Chairwoman
__________
Questions for the Record
The Honorable Stephanie Herseth Sandlin
Chairwoman
Subcommittee on Economic Opportunity
House Committee on Veterans' Affairs
Vocational Rehabilitation and Employment Program
April 2, 2009
Question 1: What is the percentage increase based on the number of
counselors that were in your regional offices and employment
coordinators in 2007? What was the increase in hires in 2008 and 2009?
Response: Vocational Rehabilitation and Employment (VR&E) Service
increased the number of counselors nationwide by 10.3 percent since
fiscal year (FY) 2007. The number of employment coordinators has
remained relatively constant since FY 2007.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
FYTD 2009 (4/
FY 2007 FY 2008 11/09)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Counselors 737 802 813
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Increase from FY 2007 -- 8.8% 10.3%
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Employment Counselors 88 87 89
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Increase from FY 2007 -- -1.1% + 1.1%
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Overall staffing level has increased as follows:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
FY 2007 FY 2008 FY 2009
------------------------------------------------------------------------
VR&E Staff 1,020 1,111 1,073
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Increase from FY 2007 -- 8.9% 5.2%
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Question 2: If we were able to find additional resources how should
those additional resources be allocated?
Response: VR&E Service currently operates within the allocated
budget to deliver high quality employment and independent living
services for servicemembers and Veterans with disabilities. We have
forecasted new funding needs in FY 2010 to study new ways to motivate
Veterans to enter VR&E programs and ways to improve outreach to new
Veterans.
Question 3: What is the placement status of the first group who
graduated from Wounded Marine Careers Foundation, Inc?
Response: Of the 7 individuals supported in the first Wounded
Marine Careers Foundation (WMCF) class, one was rehabilitated based on
his employment with a production company. He has recently been laid off
and has an interview scheduled with another production company. Three
individuals are in continued training programs toward rehabilitation.
One Veteran discontinued his rehabilitation program due to worsening of
his disability. The remaining 2 Veterans are in interrupted status
after relocating to other parts of the country. Contact has been made
with staff at the Veterans' new locations to ensure outreach is
conducted to offer job placement assistance and other services as
needed.
Question 4: In reviewing the Performance and Accountability Report,
Table 1 for Serious Employment Handicap (S.E.H.) Rehabilitation Rate,
the target was 74 percent in 2007 and 75 percent in 2008 and the
strategic target was 80 percent in 2007 and 2008, but VR&E scored a 73
percent in 2007. Why was the target not met in 2007 and why is the
target so low for 2007 and 2008?
Response: The serious employment handicap (S.E.H.) rehabilitation
rate measures the success of Veterans with the most serious employment
handicaps in achieving their employment or independent living
rehabilitation goals. The S.E.H. rehabilitation rate was developed to
ensure the program's primary focus is on assisting those Veterans with
the most significant employment handicaps. This is measured not only by
achievement of the S.E.H. rehabilitation rate target but by comparison
with the general rehabilitation rate target, which includes all
Veterans served, regardless of the severity of their disabilities. In
FY 2007, the S.E.H. rehabilitation rate for the Nation was 73 percent,
which was 1 percentage point below the target. Assisting 73 of every
100 seriously disabled Veterans to achieve their rehabilitation goals
is significant. The nonsuccess portion of the rate (27 of every 100
Veterans) includes Veterans who dropped out of the program for personal
reasons, Veterans whose disabilities worsened, or Veterans who could
not continue to participate for financial reasons. Some attrition is
usual for a benefit program designed for Veterans to use as an option
in their transition process. Therefore, the targets for both fiscal
years are considered appropriate.
Question 5: What more can we do to assist Veterans with serious
employment handicaps?
Response: The VR&E program does provide a full array of services.
As authorized by title 38 U.S.C., the VR&E program is designed to
ensure that the highest priority service is provided to Veterans with
serious employment handicaps. Intensive and individually tailored
services are provided to seriously disabled Veterans to help them
achieve employment goals. Additional services include support of higher
level training to help Veterans be more competitive in the labor
market; specialized support during training, such as tutorial
assistance or tailored testing arrangements; more frequent case
management services at the training site; special employer incentives
to employers who hire Veterans; and job coaching to assist Veterans
maintain employment. Veterans with serious employment handicaps who are
not employable due to the severity of their disabilities are eligible
for independent living services. These services help Veterans be as
autonomous as possible in their home and communities and include
services such as life skills coaching to help them independently
perform activities of daily living; assistance in establishing a
volunteer job to increase community involvement; and help connecting
with community supports, such as centers for independent living,
support groups, or the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) Vet Center
programs. Counselors also coordinate with VHA resources to address
mental health, medication compliance, and enrollment in programs to
improve living with a chronic illness (such as diabetes).
Question 6: In reviewing the Performance and Accountability Report
Table 1 for 2007, the report cites that common measures data was
projected to be received from DOL in January 2008, but the table in the
2008 Performance and Accountability Report states the data was to be
received from DOL in December 2008. Have you received this data from
DOL?
Response: VR&E is working with the Department of Labor to obtain FY
2008 data. The expected completion date is June 30, 2009.
Question 7: Does VR&E have an IT challenge that we should be aware
of?
Response: Yes, challenges exist because we are reliant on the
benefits delivery network (BDN) legacy system for payment of the VR&E
subsistence allowance, eligibility determinations, and related data
tracking. VR&E is working to transition these functions from the BDN
legacy system into the Veterans Benefits Administration's (VBA)
existing corporate database. This initiative includes modernization of
work processes and development of a more robust system of reports to
further enhance our ability to analyze trends and respond to
stakeholder requests for information. VR&E is also engaged in the
Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) paperless delivery of Veterans
benefits Initiative currently being developed. This initiative is
designed to employ enhanced technology platforms that include imaging,
computable data, electronic workflow capabilities, rules-based
technology, and enterprise content and correspondence management
services to support Veteran-focused end-to-end benefits delivery.
Question 8: Has any follow up or a survey been done as to why
Veterans enter VR&E and then drop out before completion?
Response: VR&E Service worked with Office of Policy and Planning
(OP&P) to gather information about this issue through the 2007 Veterans
employability research survey (VERS). The study results were used to
identify barriers to retention and develop strategies to increase
Veterans' completion of vocational rehabilitation programs. VR&E
service is currently working with OP&P to complete a program
evaluation, which will include further analysis of program retention
and completion.
Question 9: In your opinion can a Veteran with a family
realistically complete the VR&E program with the benefits at its
current level?
Response: Veterans with families are enrolled in VR&E programs and
successfully achieve career and independent-living goals; however, some
struggle to complete VR&E programs for a number of reasons. These
reasons are similar to the concerns faced by any individual with a
family who pursues education toward a new career and include such
issues as child care, balancing home responsibilities against
educational pressures, and the necessity to maintain employment during
training due to financial concerns. These issues are understandably
magnified for single parents. VR&E provides supportive services during
Veterans' rehabilitation programs to assist them in overcoming these
barriers and completing their programs, including subsistence
allowance; transitional employment such as work study placements, part-
time employment, or full-time employment that assists financially and
also builds their resume; individual case-management services to assist
them in resolving any barriers that could potentially impact completion
of their rehabilitation programs; and special services such as short-
term loans or financial counseling, as needed.
Question 10: VR&E will help a Veteran start a business if this is
the route they choose to follow. Is a business plan required?
Response: Yes, business plans are required for self-employment
plans, and an extensive review of the viability of business plans is
conducted. This process includes consultation with SCORE (counselors to
America's small business) and the Small Business Administration (SBA).
Question 10(a): If yes, then who reviews the business plan and what
background does the reviewer have in business?
Response: Vocational rehabilitation counselors (VRC) assist
Veterans with the development of business plans. During this process,
the VRC ensures that the Veteran is provided access to a professional
business consultant, most often through the SCORE program.
Additionally, VR&E works with SBA, small business development center
(SBDC), Center for Veterans Enterprise (CVE), and other private small
business consulting agencies. These resources have experience in
working with Veterans and provide additional expertise in evaluating
the viability of business plans and assisting developing small
businesses.
Question 10(b): What is the maximum amount of funding Veterans can
get to start their own businesses?
Response: There are no established maximums related to the startup
of a business for the most severely disabled Veterans. If appropriate
for a Veteran with a serious employment handicap, VR&E provides the
funding as allowed by regulations and as necessary to support the start
up of the business. There are statutory prohibitions on the purchase of
land, buildings, lease or rental payments, vehicles, and the stocking
of a farm for husbandry or a fishery. In addition, management approval
is required for small business plans and related expenditures.
Question 10(c): What has been the success of Veteran
entrepreneurship?
Response: VR&E does not have data on the success rate of Veterans
electing to pursue a program of self-employment.
Question 10(d): Does VA try to dissuade a Veteran from business if
the counselor believes it is not a good idea?
Response: VR&E counselors assist Veterans in the development of an
individualized program of services designed to overcome the limitations
of their employment handicaps. If it is determined that self-employment
provides the greatest opportunity to achieve their rehabilitation
goals, assistance is provided toward that objective.
Question 10(e): How many times can a Veteran attempt to start a
business with VA help?
Response: VR&E does not limit the number of times a Veteran may
attempt to start a business. The VRC will work with the Veteran to
conduct a thorough analysis of the feasibility and viability of a
subsequent self-employment program. Additionally, the VRC will help the
Veteran to identify any concerns or barriers that may have led to the
failure of the previous self-employment plan, including assisting the
Veteran to determine if self-employment is a good fit.
Question 11: On average how many times does a counselor speak or
meet with a Veteran?
Response: Throughout the rehabilitation process, VR&E counselors
provide individualized one-on-one services to Veterans. This begins
with the initial interview and meetings to complete the entitlement
determination. Meetings continue for test administration, if needed, to
determine aptitudes and abilities, interpretation of test results,
vocational counseling, and rehabilitation plan development.
Once the Veteran has entered a rehabilitation plan, the VRC meets
with the Veteran at the rehabilitation or training site at least once a
term or once a quarter. If the Veteran's needs dictate, the counselor
meets more frequently with him or her, for example, counselors meet
with Veterans at least monthly if they are having difficulty in
training or if they are participating in the following types of
rehabilitation plans: on-the-job training, independent living, extended
evaluation, self-employment, or employment assistance. In addition,
counselors speak with Veterans by phone or email on a frequent basis to
meet emerging needs, such as the need for medical referrals.
Question 11(a): In each encounter, approximately how much time is
spent with the Veteran?
Response: Although the times of meetings vary in accordance with
individual Veteran's needs, the average face-to-face visit with a
Veteran during the counseling process is 90 minutes. The average case-
management meeting is 45 minutes.
Question 12: Does VR&E track the number of Veterans who drop out
from all programs?
Response: VR&E tracks the number of Veterans who exit or
discontinue participation in the VR&E program without completing their
individualized rehabilitation plans in our database system. This system
also captures the reasons for discontinuance with designated ``reason
codes.''
Question 12(a): If you do, what is that number?
Response: In FY 2008, 5,103 Veterans discontinued participation in
their individualized rehabilitation plans.
Question 13: From the date a Veteran applies for a program, on
average how long does it take a Veteran to begin a program?
Response: Veterans who applied during FY 2008 took an average of 95
days from date of application to plan development and entrance into
their program of rehabilitative services.
Question 14: On average how long does it take VR&E to validate
entitlement for a Veteran?
Response: Currently, the time from date of application to
entitlement determination is 49\1/2\ days.
Question 15: What are some of the unmet needs that Veterans
encounter when they sign up for VR&E?
Response: Although the VR&E program, as authorized under title 38,
is a very generous program to assist Veterans to attain and sustain
suitable gainful employment, it does not allow for Veterans to cross
enroll in the new Chapter 33 GI Bill program as is possible for
Veterans using both Chapter 30 and Chapter 31. The subsistence
allowance payable by the VR&E program is not sufficient for an enrolled
Veteran to support his/her core living expenses during participation in
a rehabilitation program. The VR&E program does not support subsistence
allowance for employment only programs or for employment-related
expenses such as interview clothing. Further, the VR&E program does not
support additional financial needs for Veterans attending training,
such as child or dependent care expenses.
Question 16: In your testimony you talk about the Coming Home to
Work program. What outcomes can you share with us about this program?
Response: VR&E's coming home to work (CHTW) program was expanded in
February 2008 to become VR&E's outreach and early intervention program.
Through this program, VR&E has dedicated 13 full-time VRCs at 12
Department of Defense (DoD) facilities and appointed a CHTW coordinator
in each of the 57 regional offices. VR&E has increased outreach
activities to National Guard and Reserve Members by collaborating with
DoD to provide outreach at post deployment health reassessment events
and Yellow Ribbon Reintegration Program events. Over 2,000 disabled
transition assistance program briefings were conducted for almost
38,000 Servicemembers, Veterans and dependents, resulting in over 6,000
career counseling (Chapter 36) sessions and over 3,000 applications for
VR&E services. Increased outreach efforts contributed to a 13-percent
increase in applications for VR&E services in FY 2008 over the previous
year, with continuing trends for increased Veteran and servicemember
application and participation in FY 2009.
Question 17: How many participants did VR&E have in 2008?
Response: At the close of FY 2008, 97,000 Veterans were engaged in
VR&E services in statuses ranging from applicant to job-ready, and
11,000 were closed as rehabilitated. During FY 2008:
84,646 Veterans were carried over in open statuses from
FY 2007.
71,000 Veterans applied and were found eligible for VR&E
services. Of those applicants, 46,000 attended their first counseling
appointment and 38,000 participated in the program to the point of an
entitlement decision being made.
35,000 Veterans were found entitled, and 27,000 elected
to work with a rehabilitation counselor to develop and enter a
rehabilitation plan.
Of the total Veterans participating in rehabilitation
plans, 16,000 completed rehabilitation plans during FY 2008; 11,000
after completing rehabilitation goals, 3,500 after being discontinued
prior to achieving rehabilitation goals, and 1,500 after achieving some
rehabilitation gain, but not fully meeting rehabilitation goals.
97,116 Veterans continued services into FY 2009.
Question 17(a): Of that number, how many were rehabilitated?
Response: 11,000 Veterans were rehabilitated in FY 2008.
Question 18: In reviewing the Program Assessment Rating Tool, it
states that VR&E helped Veterans find suitable employment. Why is it
measured from those who exit the VR&E program instead of those who
enter the program?
Response: The VR&E employment rehabilitation rate is an outcome
measure, captured after Veterans have received services and have
achieved--or failed to achieve--their rehabilitation goals. Until
Veterans complete services, they remain in an active status in their
rehabilitation programs. Because VR&E's focus is on assisting Veterans
to achieve careers, programs of services may extend for multiple years.
It is not possible to assess success based upon services provided until
completion of services because VR&E's outcome goals are based upon
achievement and successful maintenance of suitable employment for a
minimum of 60 days.
Question 19: In rating the program's success from those who exit
and not from those who enter, are we getting a skewed report on the
program's success?
Response: No, it is appropriate to rate the VR&E program's success
based on those who exit following their participation in a
rehabilitation program. The VR&E program is a benefit program, not a
mandatory program. Veterans enter the program based upon their personal
needs and choice. In FY 2008, 35 percent of Veterans who applied and
were found eligible for services subsequently opted not to pursue
services. Calculating those Veterans who chose not to pursue, to even
their first scheduled VR&E appointment, into VR&E's overall success
rate would negatively skew program data. This would inappropriately
correlate the Veteran's choice not to use VR&E services with program
failure. Further, once Veterans engage in VR&E services, they may be
found not entitled for services or may elect not to enter a plan of
rehabilitation services.
Factoring in Veterans' decisions not to use the VR&E benefit
program instead of assessing the success of those Veterans who were
provided programs of rehabilitation through the VR&E program would
provide an inaccurate and negatively skewed evaluation of VR&E
services.
Question 20: The VA has partnered with FAA to provide Veterans with
new training opportunities. What other partnerships has VA formed with
other agencies or entities?
Response: VR&E is currently working with many organizations to
provide services to Veterans and servicemembers that assist them to
transition from military to civilian careers, attain and sustain
employment following a worsening of disability conditions, and achieve
the maximum level of independence in the community. A few of these
partnerships include: the DoD Army Wounded Warriors Program, the DoD
Yellow Ribbon Reintegration Program, Easter Seals, Goodwill Industries
of America, Centers for Independent Living, VA's Prosthetics and
Compensated Work Therapy programs, VA's Blind Services programs, the
DOL VETS program, the National Association of State Workforce Agencies,
Social Security Administration, Internal Revenue Service, the House of
Representatives Wounded Warrior Program, and the Council of State
Administrators of Vocational Rehabilitation.