[House Hearing, 109 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
HEARING ON THE DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS VOCATIONAL
REHABILITATION AND EMPLOYMENT PROGRAM
Wednesday, April 20, 2005
U.S. House of Representatives,
Subcommittee on Economic Opportunity,
Committee on Veterans� Affairs,
Washington, D.C.
The Subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:05 p.m., in Room 334,
Cannon House Office Building, Hon. John Boozman [Chairman of the
Subcommittee] presiding.
Present: Representatives Boozman, Herseth, Brown-Waite, Hooley,
Baker, Evans, and Nunes.
Opening Statement of Chairman Boozman
Mr. Boozman. Good afternoon. The first hearing of the Economic
Opportunity Subcommittee will come to order.
Before we begin, I would like to introduce the members of the
Subcommittee and share my thoughts on what the Subcommittee should
be about.
The Ranking Member is Ms. Stephanie Herseth, who represents the
whole state -- I emphasize the whole state -- of South Dakota.
She�s been a member of the Veterans Committee since winning a
special election, and we are very, very pleased to have the
opportunity to work with her as Ranking Member and I truly look
forward to working with her in a very bipartisan way so that we
can do some good things for veterans.
On this side of the aisle, Ms. Ginny Brown-Waite, from Florida�s
5th District, is the Vice Chair, and certainly she has proven to
be a true advocate for veterans, and we are very glad to have her
aboard and welcome her counsel.
And I am especially pleased that the Ranking Member of the full
committee, Lane Evans, will be joining us. Certainly Mr. Evans
has done a tremendous job for veterans� issues and his voice is
always a valuable addition to our work.
Mr. Richard Baker, from the 6th District in Louisiana, as the
Chairman of the Financial Services Subcommittee on Capital Markets
brings a great understanding of how VA loan guarantee programs
relate to real estate and financial markets.
Ms. Darlene Hooley comes to us from the 5th District of Oregon.
She brings a broad range of expertise in education, health care,
and finance to the Subcommittee, and, again, I appreciate her past
work on behalf of veterans.
Our final member is a second term member from California�s 21st
District, Devin Nunes. He was raised on a family farm and is a
man who knows what it is to grow up with dirt under his
fingernails and the value of those who are close to this great
nation�s soil. So, again, we welcome him aboard and his
commitment to veterans.
The Subcommittee title says what we are going to be about --
improving the economic opportunities for veterans. While the
Economic Opportunity Subcommittee has jurisdiction over several
other programs and will not ignore them, I intend to focus on
the programs run by the Vocational Rehabilitation and Employment
Service, and the Veterans Employment and Training Service.
That means we�re going to look very closely, with the help of
GAO, at the programs designed to put veterans to work or achieve
a maximum degree of independent living. It also means that VA
and DOL must gather the data necessary for them and us to
determine the effectiveness of existing programs and to justify
any new start I strongly believe the Voc Rehab and Employment
program should be the crown jewel of VA programs. As such, it
is vital that VA leadership place increased emphasis on the
program�s performance, especially in relation to its integration
with the Department of Labor�s programs managed by the Veterans
Employment and Training Service. I note the presence of the word
"employment" in the title of both programs, and if we accomplish
nothing else, I want to see the two so closely tied as to be
transparent to the disabled veteran.
Labor�s VETS has a special obligation to our veterans. We have
vested them with the responsibility of finding jobs for the
unemployed and disabled veterans. We�ve got many questions about
how well VETS is doing in that respect, and we will have an
oversight hearing to determine their performance in the near
future, as well as the performance of the Homeless Veterans
Reintegration Program, a grant program designed to get homeless
vets off the street and get them ready to reenter the workforce.
The Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act
(USERRA) and the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act also fall under
the jurisdiction of the Subcommittee. I want to make sure that
these important laws continue to protect the rights and
responsibilities of our returning servicemembers, and we will do
just that.
The GI Bill is perhaps the most famous piece of veterans�
legislation, and we look forward to ensuring it meets the goals
of preparing veterans for a lifetime of productive citizenship.
Finally, the Loan Guaranty program has a distinguished history
of improving home ownership for veterans. VA does a good job
running the program, and my goal is -- I think our goal is to
ensure that no one tarnishes that record.
Additionally, I want to look very closely at programs that make
it easier for disabled veterans to not only buy a home, but also
live comfortably in that home.
I now recognize the Ranking Member, Ms. Herseth, for any remarks
she has.
Opening Statement of Hon. Stephanie Herseth
Ms. Herseth. Thank you, and good afternoon, Mr. Chairman. I�m
very pleased to be here with you today as we commence the first
hearing for this newly established Subcommittee on Economic
Opportunity. I firmly believe that this Subcommittee will
provide a valuable forum to discuss, examine and develop federal
policy that will be a catalyst to enhanced economic and
financial conditions for our servicemembers, veterans and
military families.
Indeed, I can think of no other segment of society that has
sacrificed so much and requested so little in return throughout
this nation�s history, including and especially through the past
few years, than our troops, veterans and military families.
Mr. Chairman, before we begin, I want to congratulate you on
your leadership of this Subcommittee. I look forward to working
with you in a productive and bipartisan manner as we proceed
through this 109th Congress. I believe that we as well as everyone
in the room can agree that the vocational rehabilitation and
preparation for employment and reemployment of disabled veterans
should be a top priority for the Department of Veterans� Affairs.
On that note, let me welcome everyone here today. I�m very
interested in hearing the witnesses� testimony and appreciate your
willingness to participate and assist us in our congressional
oversight duties. I understand that the VA�s Vocational
Rehabilitation and Employment program has undergone serious
programmatic changes and continues to implement certain
recommendations from the Secretary�s VR&E Task Force Report. I am
pleased that the VA has taken this Task Force Report seriously,
and I look forward to monitoring the program�s next steps.
Clearly, we have an obligation to improve VR&E services, and I
hope the VA continues to make the necessary efforts, including
resource investments, to continue the progress that has been made.
Specifically, I�m interested in examining the following areas
during today�s hearing on the VR&E program: Accessibility of VR&E
services in rural areas; Seamless and accelerated transition
services, especially for returning members of the National Guard
and Reserve forces; The related issue of DoD and VA cooperation
with respect to VR&E; Data integrity; and Coordination of
employment counseling services with other federal job training
entities, as well as state vocational rehabilitation services.
Mr. Chairman, vocational rehabilitation and independent living
services are vitally important. We and our colleagues on the
Subcommittee all recognize this and are committed to making a
difference in the lives of veterans and their families. Given
the current military situation overseas and the current economic
situation in many states, this hearing is quite appropriate and
timely for a number of reasons. First, just as in South Dakota
and in Arkansas and other states, we have a number of National
Guard units that have been deployed, are waiting to deploy, have
returned home from their initial deployments. But at the same
time, vocational rehabilitation services and opportunities remain
limited as we do not want to do anything to neglect the needs of
veterans of past wars and military conflicts.
I strongly believe that a top quality VR&E program can assist in
addressing these types of concerns with the needs of a new
generation of veterans as well as those that have served in the
past. Moreover, in my opinion, it�s the least that a grateful
nation should provide to our disabled veterans.
Mr. Chairman, thank you again for holding this hearing and for
your leadership on the committee. I look forward to working with
you on this very important subject.
Mr. Boozman. Thank you for those remarks. Let�s go ahead and get
started then. When we set up the hearing, we thought it would be
good to hear from veterans who had been through the voc rehab
program. We asked Sergeant Sean Lewis to be with us today, and
he�s currently at Walter Reed going through rehab there, and he�s
unable to make it today.
So, again, like I say, hopefully, maybe at some other time we�ll be
able to get him involved. And we certainly want to wish him a lot
of luck as he goes forward.
But we have Mr. Joseph Forney, a small businessman from California,
who went through the program several years ago. And then also, we
have Mr. Carl Blake from the Paralyzed Veterans of America, who
will provide us with the results of an informal survey that he did
on our behalf. So, welcome. Why don�t you go ahead, Mr. Forney.
STATEMENTS OF JOSEPH K. FORNEY, FORMER VOCA-
TIONAL REHABILITATION PARTICIPANT; AND CARL
BLAKE, ASSOCIATE LEGISLATIVE DIRECTOR, PARA-
LYZED VETERANS OF AMERICA
STATEMENT OF JOSEPH K. FORNEY
Mr. Forney. Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member, other
members of the committee. I appreciate it. It�s a privilege and
an honor to be here today. I was thinking of Sergeant Lewis unable
to make it is one of the prime examples of how hard it is to get
a traditional academic education. When I spoke to Mr. Brink about
my testimony, and when he invited me, it made me reflect on how
much fun it was to be in college, and how after 14 short years I
got my four-year degree.
A lot of the problem was because of my medical condition, which
would cause me to start and stop school. It�s hard to be tethered
to a time clock and a schedule when you have ongoing and changing
medical conditions, especially with persons who have had severe
disabilities or injuries. That was part of the reason, plus the
fact that I enjoyed college so much, that they had to pretty much
kick me out. But it took so long to obtain a degree.
Oftentimes with persons with disabilities, severe disabilities,
employment is very hard to get. Employers are not looking to take
on extra risks or to help to ease the fit of a person with a severe
disability into their company. It just doesn�t work. The joke is
besides my sparking personality, is I�m too unemployable to be
employed and I had to be self-employed.
I have nothing but good things to say about the VA and their voc
rehab program and helping me to attend college. I just believe as
an entrepreneur, if that option would have been made available to
me, I think we could have saved a lot of time and money for both of
us. As a matter of fact, in the last two years of school, I was
actively running my business in California. We�ve had a state law
for disabled veteran participation since 1990. And I was running
the same small business that I run today, and also attending
college. Because my degree to be a P.E. teacher was not something
that I was looking to actually engage in. It was a way to just
rehabilitate myself back into life. And when I started it in
1980, of course I had every intention of getting out and getting
right to it, but ongoing medical treatments, as I mentioned before,
would cause me to start and stop.
I think that if the VA was to look at entrepreneurship as a form of
rehabilitation and help severely disabled veterans who are going to
have a harder time finding employment because of their service-
connected disabilities, and then tie that into some sort of actual
on-the-job training or some sort of contractual basis, if the
individual wanted to sell widgets and the VA had a need for widgets,
if upon graduation of an entrepreneurial course they were to be
considered for providing those widgets as part of their
rehabilitation, I think that would be a good start to help build a
base from which they could then go on to the public sector and with
the -- I�ve been trained in buy low, sell high, and I provide these
widgets to the VA. I�d like to sell them to you as a private
corporation, I think that that would be an excellent way to help
expedite the matter. And there again, not that I didn�t enjoy 14
years of college, the fact that if there was something that was
more streamlined and geared for those who can�t be on a time clock,
as Sergeant Lewis. We all know how difficult it is to try to get
over the smallest restriction. But then to try to get over
something as difficult as an amputation or some sort of paralysis,
formal education and unemployment is just not a good --
entrepreneurial opportunities with the government might be a
better way to do that. I appreciate the committee�s time. If there�s
any questions I can answer, I�d be more than grateful.
[The statement of Mr. Forney appears on p. 31]
Mr. Boozman. Thank you very much.
Mr. Blake?
Before we go on, real quick, Mr. Evans has joined us, and
Mr. Evans is the Ranking Member, and he�s somebody that I�ve
really enjoyed working with. I�ve been on the committee since
I�ve been in Congress, and somebody that I�ve really enjoyed
working with Mr. Evans, and I know that nobody in Congress has a
greater heart for veterans than Lane
Evans, so.
Mr. Evans. Well, maybe I should just shut up and sit down. That�s
a very complimentary introduction.
So, let me yield back my time at this point.
Mr. Boozman. Thank you very much.
Mr. Blake.
STATEMENT OF CARL BLAKE
Mr. Blake. Chairman Boozman, members of the Subcommittee, PVA would
like to thank you for the opportunity to testify today on the VA�s
Vocational Rehabilitation and Employment program. Having submitted
my full statement for the record, I will limit my comments to the
informal survey which you referred to of selected newly injured
spinal cord injured veterans.
As many of you know, PVA is an organization that represents veterans
who have suffered a spinal cord injury or disease. Our members rely
on the services provided by VR&E, particularly the independent
living program, which helps them learn activities of daily living
prior to even trying to gain employment once again.
Because many of the recommendations of the Task Force Report
released in March of last year focused on the internal workings of
VR&E or on cultural changes within the service, it is difficult to
judge how the program has done at implementing some of the
recommendations made by the Task Force.
Furthermore, PVA is concerned that many of our members have not had
the access to the new information being put out by VA. Often,
severely disabled veterans needing DTAP services, the Disabled
Transition Assistance Program services, fall through the cracks,
especially spinal cord injured veterans who may already be getting
health care and rehabilitation at a VA medical center while still
on active duty.
Because these individuals are no longer located on or near a
military installation, they are often forgotten in the transition
assistance process. I can offer myself as an example of that,
albeit a few years ago.
In order to get a better idea of how the VR&E program is serving
veterans, PVA conducted the informal survey which I mentioned. The
veterans that we interviewed, ten of them to be exact, represent
approximately 20 percent of the total number of veterans who have
incurred spinal cord injuries within the last two years. I�d like
to say that that�s a positive thing, because we are one of the few
organizations where we really don�t encourage membership in our
organization, because the requirements are pretty drastic.
It must be noted that the first contact that most of these veterans
had with VR&E was prior to the release of the Task Force report last
year. We asked them a series of questions, which I outlined in my
full statement. I won�t go over them again.
Each of the veterans contacted had initially come in contact -- or
had initially come through a military medical facility prior to
moving to a VA medical center with spinal cord injury centers there.
Of the ten soldiers, four were Operation Enduring Freedom and Iraqi
Freedom veterans, and six were injured in the line of duty while at
their home stations.
One of the four individuals who served in OEF and OIF was a
National Guard member. And all of the soldiers who had been
interviewed had already received a service-connected rating from
the VA.
Three of the veterans interviewed were currently enrolled in the
VR&E program, but none of the veterans have actually completed the
program as of yet.
The other seven members were aware of the services provided by
VR&E but had chose not to participate at this time. There are
various reasons as to -- or conclusions as to why that might be.
I won�t go into that. We can discuss that if you�d like over
questions.
The four OEF/OIF soldiers actually found out about the VR&E program
through programs conducted at the Walter Reed Army Medical Center.
The six veterans who were injured at their home stations were
transferred from the medical facilities at their installation to a
VA spinal cord injury center that was nearest to their home or one
that they chose. None of them were informed about the VR&E service
at the military medical facility. However, all of them explained
that they had been approached once they got to a VA medical center
by a representative of VR&E.
And none of these six veterans participated in a TAP or a DTAP
program. This remains a serious concern, as I outline in my
statement, of PVA.
Two of the most recently injured veterans have actually seen the
new video that we were briefed on by the VA last week that they�ve
put out that details what the VR&E service offers. It focuses on
the new Five-Track employment process that was one of the major
recommendations of the Task Force report last year. They stated
that it was a very informative video and that it opened their
minds to possibilities that they had not considered, specifically
as Mr. Forney mentioned, self-employment.I don�t think it�s
something that crosses most young soldiers� minds right offhand
after they�ve been injured. And that opens up a whole new avenue
of long-term stability in their life and an employment avenue
that they can take.
The veterans who chose not to participate in the VR&E program
were given information on what to do if and when they decided to
enroll. And a couple of the veterans said that they were told that
VA staff would follow up at a later date. Each of the soldiers
who are currently enrolled in the VR&E program said that their
experience was positive, and that they discussed what they had
hoped to achieve with VR&E staff and they also had that discussion
with myself.
All three of the veterans entered in the program prior to the
implementation of the new Five-Track employment process, and they
indicated they were not familiar with this process that was
recommended by the Task Force. When I explained it to them,
though, they did, as I mentioned, express a lot of interest in it.
Two of those individuals were currently enrolled in college courses
and -- I see my time is up, Mr. Chairman. Could I have another
minute or so?
Mr. Boozman. Yes, very much.
Mr. Blake. The one remaining veteran who was enrolled in VR&E is
currently enrolled in the independent living program, which is
closer to PVA�s heart because of the activities that they focus on.
He explained that the independent living program staff has been very
professional with him and worked to overcome the significant
challenges that he faced. He was a C-6 quadriplegic, so you can
imagine the things that he has to face day to day. He even
expressed a desire to seek employment through self-employment
following completion of the independent living program, which is
something that we�ve been trying to encourage more of our members
to do because of the significant challenges that the severely
disabled face in trying to gain employment.
Although our survey does not provide clear evidence of what changes
the VA has made since the release of the VR&E Task Force report, it
does show that the VA is making I would say a good faith effort to
address the needs of these soldiers.
However, we still have concerns about the voc rehab program, as I
outlined in the independent budget for fiscal year �06 and as I
outline in my full statement. Many of these concerns were outlined
by the Task Force report last year, and they made recommendations
to address many of these deficiencies.
We feel that the VA must continue to move forward to implement the
recommendations made by the Task Force report. Ultimately, that can
only create a better VR&E service.
We look forward to working with you, Mr. Chairman, and the members
of the Subcommittee to ensure that the VA pursues meaningful
reforms to the VR&E service. And I�d be happy to answer any
questions that you might have.
Thank you.
[The statement of Mr. Blake appears on p. 32]
Mr. Boozman. Thank you. Mr. Forney, you expressed your dismay
about wanting to kind of follow a different track; that you were
actually kind of pushed into another one.
Your idea of the entrepreneurship training, how do you see that as
working, specifically? If you could set the program up, what
needs to be there that you were lacking in that regard
specifically?
Mr. Forney. With any good program, you would want to be able to
identify what the outcome is: Self-employment through
entrepreneurial means. And then with a contractor, some sort of
stabilizing base at the end of a predetermined time to see -- a
filtering mechanism.
Entrepreneurship is not for everyone. Out of all the veterans I
talk to every day that say that the government has to buy 3 percent,
I remind them, they don�t have to do anything.
If we could have a good filtering process to determine who is best
suited for entrepreneurship, and then with a contractual tie-in at
the end of graduation. It doesn�t take long to learn to buy low,
sell high. But all the experience in the world, if there�s no payoff
at the end, some direct reward for learning how to run and establish
a small business, it would never fly.
With all the things that the VA and the Department of Defense buys,
it would be easy to find areas where they need to have certain goods
and services. And who better to provide those goods and services
than the former employees of Department of Defense and veterans who
are going through entrepreneurial training from the VA?
So it would be a good filtering process to find out who not just
wants to but has the means and wherewithal to be in entrepreneurship.
I remember at the roundtable you said you had a business with your
brother. And you understand. You�re only working half days from 7
to 7. You�re the last one to get paid, and nothing�s guaranteed.
But if there was that stabilizing factor of a contract at the end to
provide that good or service, I think that would help to establish
the returning veteran, and then they could go look for stuff in the
private sector using that base contract as a starting point.
Mr. Boozman. Mr. Blake, tell me, you know, as a result of your study,
what specific recommendations do you think that we need to go
forward?
Mr. Blake. Well, Mr. Chairman, I would have to say that the one
downside to our survey is that the majority of the veterans that we
interviewed went through VR&E or had contact with VR&E prior to the
release of the study. I think the important thing is, we have to
start to identify individuals who have been injured just say in the
last year or so that would be more likely to have come in contact
with that program.
The downside to the survey that we conducted was the vast majority
of the members of our organization that I interviewed were injured
either in Afghanistan in 2002 or were injured in 2003. The OIF/OEF
veterans who we know that we have as our organization, part of our
organization, were injured during the initial stages of fighting in
Iraq.
The other problem that I think we face is, there�s been a lot of
discussion about the wonderful things going on at Walter Reed and
Bethesda, and I can�t help but second that. But I think what gets
lost in this is that there are veterans at home stations who are not
currently deployed overseas who are assigned to their units and who
are not -- just doing training or getting injured, and they don�t
have the same kind of access to the services.
They do have some and, you know, the TAP and the DTAP programs have
come under a lot of scrutiny in the last couple of years. In fact I
know you all I believe were supposed to have a hearing on it in the
near future on the VETS service. And I think we have to make sure
that it�s not lost that these veterans at their home stations should
be getting the same services.
We fully support the idea that the veterans who are in Walter Reed
and Bethesda and Brooke and some other facilities are getting these
services, but they�re like the center of the universe. Every --
all of the top notch services being directed there, and we can�t
lose sight of the other locations that are around this country
where veterans are at -- or soldiers are at every day. They should
be getting the same services, and I think it�s inconsistent,
particularly when it comes to the TAP program and even more so the
DTAP program.
As I mentioned with our members, the problem that our members face
in getting DTAP services is, almost as soon as they are injured,
get a spinal cord injury, they�re moved to a military medical
facility.
But almost immediately they�re identified for going to a VA spinal
cord injury center, because it�s just a fact that the Department of
Defense doesn�t have the capability to provide the type of rehab
services that the VA SCI centers have.
And so they want to move them as quickly as they can to ensure that
they get quality rehab right away. And somewhere in that transfer
process, some of the important steps get lost, like going to DTAP
programs and some of the other services that all of the men and
women going through the most obvious places right now are getting.
Mr. Boozman. Ms. Herseth?
Ms. Herseth. Thank you. Mr. Forney, I don�t have any questions,
just appreciate your testimony, because I think it always helps to
hear the specific examples and personal experiences that give us a
better appreciation for the need for flexibility, whether that�s
flexibility in the types of programs through the formal education
that�s offered, or beyond that in the type of structure that
you�ve described today that provide each individual the flexibility
to see which skill set and interest and motivation is best suited
for each individual service-connected disabled veteran, for what
is the best to pursue and what opportunities should be there as
you�ve described within both agencies, with the VA and the DoD.
So I appreciate hearing from you today.
And, Mr. Blake, I recently had a meeting with some folks in South
Dakota and Sioux Falls at our regional office,and we had folks from
North Dakota there as well, and the state president of South
Dakota�s PVA, Joel Neimeyer was there, and a few other folks that
had benefitted and participated in the vocational rehabilitation
program and echoed the point that you made that in the informal
survey, those that got enrolled had some pretty positive experiences
by and large within the program, and they couldn�t say enough
positive things about the folks that were administering the programs
in our region. So to come back to the whole issue of outreach,
early intervention, how do we reach the folks that you�ve described,
not only those that are active duty and deployed, but then those
that perhaps are injured at their home installations? Then we have
the National Guard and Reserve component here as well.
Do you know -- and maybe PVA has been involved in each state
National Guard and Reserve force has been handling this a little
bit differently, but do you see the need for the VA to reach out
on the regional level even more with each of the National Guard
and Reserve units or with the officers in each state to make sure,
especially with this group of folks that are transitioning back
to civilian life have the type of information that you�ve
described?
Mr. Blake. Yes, ma�am. I think the Guard and Reserve has taken a
lot of attention, and those are a lot of the folks who are really
getting lost in this. But the one thing to remember is, most if not
all of the National Guard and Reserve units, when they come back
from their deployment, they�re coming through a major military
installation. They�re not coming -- they don�t necessarily go
directly home. And this is the perfect opportunity to get that
information to them.
And sometimes it�s a struggle to decide, do we want to get these
soldiers home right away? Because that�s the foremost thing in
their mind. Or do we want to make sure that they get all of the
information that they need and all of their proper forms are
filled out and that they understand everything that�s available
to them before they�re let go?
And that�s an ongoing struggle that we face. But I think in the
interest of erring in favor of the long-term benefit of these
soldiers, we can�t let them get away before they have everything
that they need to know or we�ve inundated them with all the
information that they need.
Ms. Herseth. Well, I couldn�t agree more. And perhaps the
Chairman has heard this from some of the men and women he�s
talked to in his district. The folks that are coming back after
those lengthy deployments, and they�re coming back through a
major military installation like you said, whether it�s Fort Sill
or Fort Carson or wherever, they just want to get through that
process as quickly as possible. They haven�t seen their families
yet. You know, they�re there for that certain stage of
deactivation before they get home. And they�re getting a lot of
information at once.
And my concern is that, especially with staffing resources,
whether -- that it really be focused not only administering the
programs, but the outreach, so that these people don�t, once they
get home, once they start that transition back with their families
and what their needs may be, that it�s not just a one shot time
of providing information but rather being proactive and in part,
you know, learning from the lessons of how we treated some
Vietnam-era veterans, that we do what we can through the VA,
through organizations like yours, to be much more proactive but
dedicate the resources and the investments in doing that.
Mr. Blake. One of the points, ma�am, that I got out of it was a
number of them mentioned that they were told that there would be
follow-up.
And I think that that can be lost. The VA needs to understand that
these soldiers are expecting it, and they can�t shirk that
responsibility. I was watching the Senate committee�s hearing they
had yesterday, and they had a couple of the newly injured soldiers
that testified before the Senate Committee on Veterans Affairs, and
both of them brought up an interesting point that continuous
follow-up needs to be done withthese soldiers, even though they
might decline VR&E service initially, there�s so many things going
through their mind right now and so many things that they�re
focused on that that might not be at the forefront. And so the VA
has to continue to follow up with these soldiers and not
let them get away from them without absolute certainty that that�s
not what they want to do. We don�t want to run the risk of putting
these young men and women out there, and then they face
possibilities with mental health or substance abuse that results
from not being able to get employment, or they face homelessness. I
think the follow-up needs to be there so that we can stop -- head
off some of these problems before they occur. Mr. Boozman. We�ve
been joined by Ms. Ginny Brown-Waite from Florida,and she is the
Vice Chair of our committee. It�s really been great to get to work
with her, and we certainly appreciate her counsel Ms. Brown-Waite.
Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I know how dedicated you are to
this cause. I have a large number of veterans who -- a large number
of military who were called up through National Guard units. And
one of the things that I found, and maybe this isn�t nationwide
and this may be part of the problem, and I�m sure either one of
you gentlemen can help me, is that with the National Guard units
that that follow-up and the information is also supplied through
the family coordinators back home -- the wives, the mothers who
are very involved in family support.
Is that not being done nationwide? Is that part of the problem?
Because I can tell you that the mothers and the wives are very
interested in making sure that every possible benefit that the
veteran is entitled to, that they -- if applicable, that they
take advantage of. So I�ll just be quiet and ask for your counsel
and advice. Is it not being done nationwide? Mr. Blake. Well,
I would, Ms. Brown-Waite, I would offer up that that would be the
perfect question for another member of my staff who happens to be
deployed right now to Afghanistan with the National Guard, and he
could probably perfectly answer that question as to whether that
information is being put out through the family readiness groups
and the coordinators.
Having only served on active duty, I know when we were deployed,
a lot of information was pumped out through family readiness
groups. But that shouldn�t be the primary avenue. It all falls
back on making sure that the soldiers themselves get the
information. I haven�t heard stories about whether it�s
inconsistent or not. I�d be happy to ask via the wonders of the
Internet my colleague who is overseas, or when he comes back, I�m
sure he could give you a perfect answer to that question.
Ms. Brown-Waite. Mr. Forney?
Mr. Forney. I wouldn�t know about how they�re followed up with the
reserves, but here again with the veteran being the principal
breadwinner, an elongated educational course that could go on for
years as opposed to a shortened entrepreneurial, this is the
perfect example.
If you have a family to care for, to go through a long educational
process to end up with a degree to hope to work for a big company
somewhere down the line when the family is counting on you, I
think, again, this is another good argument for self-employment,
because we could start that and have a completion date and then
self-employment much sooner than years of -- and it is always the
wives and the daughters that try to -- because when you get out,
you just want to just go home. I -- when you said that. But then
when the reality sets in about I have to do something, now it�s
hard to make that choice.
Ms. Brown-Waite. Thank you.
Mr. Boozman. Mr. Evans?
Mr. Evans. Thank you very much. You�re a good person to follow,
because you bring up so many good points to us today. And one of
them is in 1970, �71, people getting out of the Marine Corps,
33 percent had less than honorable discharges. They weren�t
getting any support from home or the community. They weren�t in
a position to do so many things like we think they should do, so
people who have gone and defended this country in time of war,
should get better help.
It�s a problem we face today. And of course in the �70s, it was
the voter employment programs referred to the old OJ training
period, OJT. It didn�t help them because the veteran was
unqualified and wouldn�t be able to deal with the stress that
they�d been through, never had any business background, never
had a family that had that kind of situation.
So how do we correct that? You talked about entrepreneurial
decisions. But, you know, I think we get caught up in the old
rhetoric that the emergency -- I�m trying to think of the �70s,
the Emergency Veterans Employment. Already just in the title of
that bill there�s something that I think denigrates veterans
unintentionally, inflicted, self-inflicted perhaps. But how do
we get to the bottom of these things and make them work?
Mr. Forney. Again, that time element is so critical. If we could
get to the veteran with the severe disability, help them to see
something, a light at the end of the tunnel, much quicker than
the traditional education higher degree, but have something to
keep them, because of that disconnect.
And I forgot all about how the mind starts to play tricks on you.
The substance abuse, the homeless issue. I forgot all about that.
We�ve got to keep these guys, these men and women busy and have
them something to shoot for as opposed to what seems to be the
brushoff. And if it was tied into once you get the career moving,
the house, the spouse, you get it all, and that American dream
that they�ve sacrificed for.
You�re exactly right. The time element is critical. If we could
get --and who better to buy things from disabled veterans than the
largest federal employer, the Department of Veterans Affairs?
Mr. Evans. Anybody else?
Okay. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, appreciate your time and your
interest. We�ll continue to look at this issue as time goes on.
And I do like the fact that you�re being flexible. What happened
to us, the generation, we�re not going to be able to follow
through and help everybody across the board. But the ones that
are saving, that can be saved.
It seems to me that when you have a ten-year delimiting date, you
hurt those people more than any other program I can think, because
that�s for their educational benefits, and then suddenly you don�t
have a plan. I�m not trying to personalize this, but I know so
many people that come back home, they had no plans, you know, been
discharged with less than honorable discharges. And it was a
tough time, the whole era.
And I think we should be glad that they were there when we did it,
but we ought to be giving us the help that we need when it�s our
turn to start those small businesses, those mom-and-pop operations
and so forth.
So thank you for your testimony. I appreciate it.
Mr. Boozman. Yes. Thank you very much. One of the things I kicked
around with staff yesterday was maybe the committee, and I need to
talk to Ms. Herseth and her staff about this, but maybe us
identifying a group, a small group, and not just the Walter Reed,
Bethesda, but as you said, the scattered around, maybe just
identify a very small group and then communicating periodically as
they start this process and then that way, that would be a way for
us to keep up besides all the other mechanisms that we have to see
the pitfalls, you know, that they�re going through, and to help us
better understand.
You know -- nobody understands, you do in the sense of going
through this. But I think that might be something that helps us
better understand as they run into the barriers that get erected.
So again that�s something that we�ll kick around and see if
that�s workable or not. But I think any help that we can get in
understanding what�s going on, how we can improve, we really would
be very grateful.
So thank you very much for your testimony.
Mr. Blake. Thank you, sir.
Mr. Boozman. Our second panel is comprised of from the Government
Accountability Office, the GAO, Ms. Cynthia Bascetta, Director of
Veterans Health and Benefits Issues, accompanied by Ms. Irene Chu,
Assistant Director of Veterans Affairs and Military Health Care
Issues. Ms. Bascetta, get yourself some water and get after it.
STATEMENT OF CYNTHIA A. BASCETTA, DIRECTOR OF
VETERANS HEALTH AND BENEFITS ISSUES, GOVERN-
MENT ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE; ACCOMPANIED BY
IRENE CHU, ASSISTANT DIRECTOR, VETERANS�
AFFAIRS AND MILITARY HEALTH CARE ISSUES
Ms. Bascetta. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of the
Subcommittee. I appreciate your invitation for me to speak to you
today about GAO�s views on the VR&E program. The individual
experiences of servicemembers from Iraq provide compelling reasons
to expedite assistance to help them overcome their combat-related
injuries. But from a societal point of view, given the projected
slowdown in the growth of the nation�s labor force, it is of
paramount importance that we support people with disabilities,
including veterans, to maximize their ability to participate in
the paid labor force. Our work is based on GAO reports dating back
to 1984 when we first expressed concerns about VR&E�s focus on
education rather than employment. Notably, 20 years later, the
task force highlighted the need to establish an employment-driven
process and to give VR&E services priority within VBA, which has
been dominated by claims processing rather than face-to-face
service delivery. The task force also found that VR&E has limited
capacity to manage its growing workload and that it needs to
redesign its program for the modern employment environment.
My written statement provides the details of our broad agreement
with the task force�s other findings and recommendations, so I�d
like to direct my comments today to the challenges VA faces in
transforming VR&E to a program for the 21st Century veteran.
First, in accordance with rehabilitation principles, the VA needs
to find ways to provide services as early as possible,
particularly for servicemembers newly injured in combat. Unlike
previous wars, battlefield medicine and body armor are saving the
lives of more servicemembers, although often at the price of
severe disabilities.
While technological advances such as new prosthetics are making it
possible for some of these disabled servicemembers to return to
military occupations, other will transition to veteran status and
look for employment in the civilian economy. Consequently, VR&E
has a significant opportunity to assist them in overcoming their
impairments and making a smooth transition.But individual
differences and uncertainties in the recovery process are
inherent challenges in determining the earliest time to begin
voc rehab. And in addition, VA and DoD have not yet reached an
agreement for VA to have access to information that both agencies
agree is needed to promote servicemembers� recovery and their
return to work, either in the military or in the civilian life.
Also, VA needs policies and procedures for its staff to follow up
with seriously injured servicemembers or veterans once they leave
military hospitals. We reported that some regional offices on
their own initiative followed up to remind veterans who may not
have been ready for services that they were still eligible for
VR&E. For those who might be receptive to VR&E at a later date,
policies and procedures from the central office for the regional
offices to use in following up would help prevent these
servicemembers from falling through the cracks.
The second challenge is VR&E�s outmoded information technology
systems. Like the task force, we are concerned that VR&E IT
systems are not up to the task of producing the information and
analyses needed to manage the program, although we are aware that
they are working on this issue. For example, many of their
outbased locations still use slow and unreliable dial-up
connections to access their automated case management system.
Moreover, this system can generate only a snapshot of veterans
in the program, but cannot now track their progress over time.
Managing workload is also complicated because the IT system cannot
track the number of veterans who drop out of the program or who
interrupt their rehabilitation plans.
The third challenge VR&E faces is the development of better
results-oriented criteria to measure the long-term effectiveness
of its services. Currently, VR&E still counts veterans as
successfully rehabilitated if they maintain gainful employment for
60 days. This relatively short-term measure, however, may not
accurately predict sustained employment over longer timeframes.
In fact, in a 1993 report on state vocational rehabilitation
agencies, we found that the 60-day measure may not be rigorous
enough because gains in employment and earnings of clients who
appear to have been successfully rehabilitated actually faded
after about two years. The task force recommended longer-term
measures, and the VSO�s independent budget suggested that VR&E
track rehabilitated veterans for at least two years.
We are pleased to see that VA�s Fiscal Year 2004 Performance and
Accountability Report included two long-term, employment-based
measures of effectiveness, the percentage of participants employed
for 90 days and then for 270 days. We also encouraged VA to
continue to work with its federal partners, including the
Departments of Labor and Education, to develop better common
measures of the effectiveness of voc rehab. This concludes my
remarks, and I�d be happy to answer your questions.
[The statement of Ms. Bascetta appears on p. 44]
Mr. Boozman. Thank you very much. Let me start. As far as levels
of cooperation between the voc rehab staffs at the regional
offices and the Department of Labor�s network of disabled
veterans outreach program specialists and local veterans
employment reps in each state, are you finding that the level
of cooperation, is it staying the same? Is it increasing,
decreasing? Ms. Bascetta. We have not looked at that recently,
but I could note that the task force report from last year found
that they were still not working together very well. And as I�m
sure you are aware, this is a long-standing problem. We noted it
in our first report on VR&E back in 1984. Some locations, however,
according to the task force, do work well together, and they found
that one of the problems was that the Department of Labor programs
don�t require any standardized processes to work with their VA
counterparts. And as a result, there�s a great deal of
inconsistency across the nation. But in some locations, the task
force had noted that different federal agencies were working well
together.
We have some broader concerns about VA working well with all its
federal partners, including the state vocational rehabilitation
agencies. And I guess I�d just observe that it�s possible that
through the development of the common measures, which is in a
pretty early stage right now, perhaps this collaboration would
improve.
Mr. Boozman. Okay. Thank you. As a result of the -- you mentioned
the task force recommendations -- VA added specialists to the
skills mix and services provided by VR&E. I think voc rehab has
hired over 50 employment specialists nationwide. Should the
employment specialist be primarily a job finder or VR&E�s link to
the veterans� employment and training services network of
disabled veterans outreach program specialists and local
veterans employment representatives?
Ms. Bascetta. That�s a good question. I think ultimately what we
want to do is get the veteran hooked up with the person who is
connected to the employer. In other words, we really are looking
for -- whether it�s in the VR&E service itself, or whether it�s in
concert with the DVOPs and the LVERs, while indirect training,
resume preparation, job coaching are all fine, it�s really that
job contact with an employer that�s needed.
And I think they need to sort out once they�ve figured out what
their own workload is how they�re situated in the different
locations and, you know, after they have a better handle on what
the situations are in the local economies that they figure out
whether they have the skills in house to make those contacts or
whether they should use the DVOPs and LVERs.
Mr. Boozman. Do you have any idea why the voc rehab grads�
performance faded after two years?
Ms. Bascetta. I would have to go back to that report. I don�t
have the details at the top of my head right now. I think that
part of it, though, is simply that oftentimes people with
disabilities need to have continuing support. And I�m pretty
certain that in the state vocational rehabilitation agencies,
which is what that report was about, follow-up was not part of
the program.
So to the extent that they might have faced difficulties at
certain milestones in their labor force participation and didn�t
get the kind of support they needed and didn�t know where to turn
to to get it, they would exit employment.
Mr. Boozman. Thank you. Ms. Herseth.
Ms. Herseth. Thank you, and thank you for your testimony. I�ve
got a specific question that is related but slightly different than
the Chairman�s as it relates to coordination and collaboration by
the VA with other agencies.
And the Chairman�s question focused on Department of Labor. And
I�d like to focus a little bit on the Department of Defense, and to
share with you an example, and then more as a segue into you
addressing this issue and the need for early intervention and
the communication between the agencies.
When I was up at Walter Reed Hospital visiting with a young man
from South Dakota, Elk Point, South Dakota, had graduated from
West Point last spring, the spring of last year, and then became
the head of this battalion in Iraq, was part of the Fallujah
campaign, and was severely injured, and was receiving treatment
at Walter Reed. I went there to visit with him, and he was
inquiring, since he was going to be going home for Thanksgiving,
how he would go about the best route to go about getting a ramp at
their home to assist him in what those short-term needs were
going to be while he was home before he returned to Walter Reed
for another three surgeries.
And we were talking with the official that was accompanying us
during our trip to Walter Reed, and there was this discussion that
took place about the fact that since he was still active duty,
that the VA was going to be limited in what they could do perhaps,
or there was going to have to be some sort of coordination or some
sort of process whereby the VA was dealing with the DoD and the
timeframe that that was going to occur. And so I ended up
encouraging his mother to just contact our president with the DAV
in Sioux Falls, who could be of some assistance in the short term.
But we had another lengthier discussion then just about this
transition for those suffering disabilities, that process and that
timetable whereby they have to make a decision whether or not
they�re going to stay active duty and come under the DoD versus
making a decision to leave the service and to then start accessing
care and programs from the VA.
And so the need for early intervention, in addition to your report
and findings of this month, you had a report in January of this
year that dealt precisely with this collaboration that�s needed to
expedite the services for seriously injured servicemembers. And so
in your opinion, has any progress been made on this matter since
January?
Ms. Bascetta. To my knowledge, VA and DoD have still not signed the
Memorandum of Understanding that would allow them to share what we
view as some of the most basic data that VA would need to do a
systematic job in keeping track of servicemembers or servicemembers
who transition to veteran status who would need VA�s services and
who could benefit from their services.
But they are still actively working on the MOU. I hope that,
shortly it will be agreed upon, but it has been more than a year.
Ms. Herseth. Thanks for sharing that information with us. In the
process of examining and evaluating the VR&E program, has GAO
encountered any programmatic issues that may need legislative
remedies? Ms. Bascetta. I don�t recall any. I would like to look
back at our reports though and answer more fully for the record.
None of our reports recommend legislative remedies, In addition,
the task force did not
make recommendations that required legislative change.
Ms. Herseth. Okay. I appreciate it. Thank you.
Ms. Bascetta. Mm-hmm.
Mr. Boozman. Ms. Brown-Waite?
Ms. Brown-Waite. Perhaps I should ask this question of the next
witness from the VA, but what exactly is the problem? What are
the stumbling blocks on the Memorandum of Agreement between DoD
and VA? Ms. Bascetta. To our knowledge, and unfortunately, it has
been very difficult to get clear information, primarily from DoD,
there are two obstacles that we reported on in January.
The first is that DoD was concerned about retention. They were
concerned that if the VA approached servicemembers while they were
still on active duty status and outreached to them about VA
benefits that they might choose to leave the service.
The other issue was HIPAA and the Privacy Act, and that was with
regard to sharing health information. So part of what they were
trying to do in the MOU was to ask only for names and SSNs and
much less on health care information unless they knew that the
veteran was going to actually transfer to the VA, in which case
they could get that information if the veteran or, you know,
still servicemember, signed a release, or they could get the
information under continuity of care.
Mr. Boozman. Mr. Evans?
Mr. Evans. No questions.
Mr. Boozman. Thank you all very much for your testimony, and we
appreciate your hard work.
Ms. Bascetta. Thank you.
Mr. Boozman. Thank you. Our final panel is from the VA and is
comprised of Ms. Judy Caden, Director of the Vocational
Rehabilitation and Employment Program, and is accompanied by
Mr. Jerry Braun, her Deputy Director, and Mr. Michael McLendon, a
Deputy Assistant Director for VA Policy, who was a member of the
Voc Rehab and Employment Task Force.
We welcome you here. I understand that this is your first time to
testify as the head of the voc rehab. Well, we have something in
common. This is my first --
Ms. Caden. Good.
Mr. Boozman. -- outing as Chairman of the committee. So, go ahead,
proceed.
Ms. Caden. Great. Thank you.
Mr. Boozman. It�s good to have you here.
STATEMENT OF JUDITH CADEN, DIRECTOR, VOCATION-
AL REHABILITATION AND EMPLOYMENT PROGRAM,
VETERANS BENEFITS ADMINISTRATION; ACCOMPAN-
IED BY JERRY BRAUN, DEPUTY DIRECTOR, AND
MICHAEL MCLENDON, DEPUTY ASSISTANT SECRE-
TARY FOR POLICY
Ms. Caden. Thank you, and thank you for providing me with this
opportunity.
I�ll begin by discussing the progress we�ve made on implementing
the VR&E Task Force recommendations, and then I�m going to discuss
how we�re partnering with DOL and the VETS program, and then
finally just give you a summary of the state of the VR&E program
today.
Fifty-one of the more than 100 recommendations submitted by the
Task Force have been implemented, and the single most important
recommendation and the cornerstone of the Task Force�s blueprint
for redesigning the VR&E program is that of the 5-Track Employment
Model. This improved approach refocuses us, the VR&E program, on
the main goal of employment.
To prepare for national implementation of the 5-Track Employment
Model, we have established job resource labs at four of our
regional offices, which are piloting the new focus. A 30-minute
video has been developed to provide an orientation and ensure
that veterans receive clear, concise and accurate information
about the program.
Specialized training for the new employment coordinators at the
pilot sites has been completed, and we�ve recently purchased a
web-based tool to assist in the delivery of effective employment
services within those labs.
This tool will assist veterans to develop their interview, resume
preparation skills, and it will also help them research the job
market in their area, career fields and potential employers. We
expect national deployment of the 5-Track Employment Model to
begin early in Fiscal Year 2006.
The Task Force recommended redesigning VR&E�s central office staff,
and central office positions have been created to focus on
employment, independent living services, training and outreach
activities, contract management, policy development and data
collection and analysis.
The Task Force recommended the continued use of trained
professional contract counselors, improved management of contract
services, and improve the administration of the Disabled
Transition Assistance Program or DTAP.
We have put in place a contract management training program for
field staff that requires annual skills updates and certification,
and in January, we distributed to the field stations a quick
reference guide called a Quick Book, highlight the VR&E program.
And this enables the field staff to present information about the
VR&E program to separating servicemembers in an easily understood
manner. And it�s something that they can walk away with.
To further improve the DTAP briefings, we�ve developed a Powerpoint
presentation with an accompanying briefing script. And so along
with the Powerpoint, the script, the Quick Books and the
orientation video that I mentioned, will greatly improve the
quality and consistency of our outreach briefings for separating
servicemembers.
The Task Force proposed that we improve training and seek
partnerships to help us deliver this benefit. We�ve conducted
training for field managers on policy, procedures and data analysis.
We have had week-long classes on independent living and self-
employment. We have done satellite broadcasts for the field and
also for DOL field people on traumatic brain injury, spinal cord
injury and PTSD.
We are actively seeking to partner with a wide variety of
organizations. We�re working with the Council of State
Administrators of Vocational Rehabilitation, and we have agreements
with Home Depot, YMCA and Helmets to Hard Hats that focus
specifically on employment.
We�re actively participating with other organizations to strengthen
our coordination and outreach efforts with the goal of achieving a
seamless transition for OIF and OEF veterans. And we�re also
working with our counterparts in VHA, within the VA, to develop and
issues policies on priority medical care and services for veterans
that are participating in the VR&E program.
We have an ongoing partnership with the Department of Labor. We have
VR&E staff in the 57 regional offices and more than 100 outbased
offices that work very closely with DOL�s DVOPs and LVERs. There
are currently 71 DVOPs and LVERs co-located in 35 of our regional
offices and in 26 of our outbased locations. And we also have VR&E
personnel in three of the DOL offices.
We�ve collaborated with DOL on training for case managers as well
as for DVOPs and LVERs. We�re working on a draft Memorandum of
Understanding -- it�s really an updated MOU -- with DOL, and we are
meeting with them on a frequent basis to look at what we�re doing
now and what we can do in the future together.
We think our efforts have proven to be steps in the right direction.
We�ve seen improvements in the quality, accuracy and timeliness of
work performed at the field stations.
I just have a little bit more.
Mr. Boozman. No, no. Go ahead. You can take whatever time you need
is fine.
Ms. Caden. For example, in that area, the average number of days
that a veteran spends in evaluation and planning status decreased from
more than 150 days at the end of February �04 to less than 120 days in
February of 2005. And in that same period, there was an increase in the
number of veterans successfully leaving the program after completing
either their employment or their independent living goals. That figure
was up from 9,636 at the end of February of �04 to close to 12,000 at
the end of February of 2005. So we think the initiatives we have going
on and what we have planned will continue to have a positive impact on
the services we provide.
Mr. Chairman, that concludes my statement, and I�d be happy to
respond to any questions you or other members might have.
[The statement of Ms. Caden appears on p. 61]
Mr. Boozman. Thank you very much for your testimony, and we really
do appreciate your hard work. I know you and your staff are working
very hard to solve some of these problems.
I understand recently that you met with a company looking into
hiring disabled veterans. Can you tell us a little bit about that?
Ms. Caden. We did. In fact, we�ve been approached by a number
of companies, and it�s proven to be very fruitful, but yesterday we
met with a company that they specifically run call centers, but
they�re looking to partner with other companies with other types of
jobs in managerial positions.
But what intrigued me and another member of my staff the most was
for the veterans that we have in our independent living program, that
employment right now isn�t feasible, isn�t the right approach, but we
would hope down the road, when they mentioned that with a call center
you can do the work at home, that clicked. And so we�re definitely
going to look at that and try and pursue that and maybe get some of
the independent living.
I think as we heard the gentleman from PVA mention, that that
would be something that might really benefit some people, and that�s
a group we really need to concentrate on. So I think it will be really
helpful in the future.
Mr. Boozman. The regional office voc rehab staffs, do they have a
formal relationship with the state adjutant generals, or how does that
work?
Ms. Caden. We have -- it varies from office to office. About 45
of our offices have formal agreements with the state programs, working
with the DVOPs and the LVERs. What I hope to get out of this next
generation of the Memorandum of Understanding with DOL is that we�ll
have that everywhere, and that we will strength that relationship and
basically make it a requirement. Pretty much it�s been left up to the
states.
Mr. Boozman. Mr. McLendon, do you think that the level of data
collected by all of the VBAs business lines is sufficient to provide
rigorous program analysis and evaluation?
Mr. McLendon. I think the simple answer to that question is no.
Historically, if you go back and look at the various reports that our
friends from the General Accounting Office have written about VA and a
lot of internal reports from VA that one of the issues that�s always
been a challenge for us has been data.
And there�s been quite a bit of work that has been done in the
last couple of years to try to begin to address that program. In VBA,
they�ve invested quite a bit in IT modernization to work on those
issues. VHA of course has got VISTA and a lot of systems. But,
Mr. Chairman, that remains one of our challenges.
Mr. Boozman. Ms. Herseth?
Ms. Herseth. I�ll just echo the appreciation that the Chairman
expressed for the work that you do on behalf of our veterans and their
families and with all of the folks that work with you out of the
regional offices around the country.
I�ll just start out with -- I�ve got a couple of questions, but
I�ll just start out with the one that I posed a little bit earlier to
the prior panel, and that is, Ms. Caden, can you say today, and are
you in a position, the folks that you work with there at the VA, if
the Memorandum of Understanding with the DoD was sort of in front of
us today, is the VA ready to sign it?
Ms. Caden. I checked on that before I came here today, and my
understanding, it is ready to be signed. I think that we have cleared
the hurdles with both DoD and at VA, our own, and I�m told it should
be signed any time.
Ms. Herseth. Okay. If you could, just as soon as it is, or if you
have any updated information to share with the Chairman and other
members --
Ms. Caden. Sure. Absolutely.
Ms. Herseth. -- of the committee, I�d appreciate that.
Ms. Caden. Absolutely.
Ms. Herseth. And could you discuss the staffing, both short-term
and long-term staffing plans? Because I�m a little concerned, and I
think part of what we discussed with the first panel was this need for
follow-up with newly injured servicemembers.
And part of the discussions we had in a very productive way with the
Chairman of the full committee and with Mr. Boozman and myself about
the full-time employees to make sure that we were able to request
retaining the 14 or so that had been proposed to be cut out of the
administration�s proposed budget.
But I�m concerned that, you know, that we have the adequate
resources so as not to hinder the full implementation of the Task
Force�s recommendations, and to particularly address this issue of
follow-up in the outreach in addition to administering the programs,
particularly in light of plans set forth five, six years ago for
attrition of those who may retire and the need now to pass along that
wisdom and institutional expertise to new full-time employees to take
over the program.
Ms. Caden. Okay. A couple different things I can say in there.
First of all, I would like to address the follow-up issue.
We recently put in place a requirement -- we did it in March in a
letter that went out to all the field stations, and specifically for
VR&E requiring follow-up with OIF/OEF individuals who have at the point
we do that initial contact with them, if they decline VR&E services
because of their medical issues, it�s not the right point in their
life to start the program, that we are requiring follow-up within one
year.
And it can happen earlier, it could happen at several times during
that year, but we are requiring our VR&E staff in the field to perform
that follow-up, because we don�t want to lose anybody, and we do want
them to remember that the program is there for them when they�re able
to take advantage of it.
As far as staffing goes, we�re not losing any. We�re not gaining a
lot right now, but we think we�re in a good place. As we roll out the
5-Track model and we see how that works, we will be probably looking to
leverage maybe some of the Task Force recommendations for staffing.
They recommended an increase of about 200 FTE for the VR&E program.
They recommended an increase in central office staff which I was
able to increase my staff by about 10 to get us the expertise we needed
in those areas I mentioned of independent living, outreach, data
analysis and that type of thing, and employment of course.
But I think the most important area we want to look at is that
employment coordinator position that we are going to be testing that
will have to work with DOL, with the LEVRs and the DVOPs, and we�ll
see how that rolls out and how successful it is. And at that point,
we�ll see what we need in that area.
Ms. Herseth. I appreciate that. I was hoping maybe we�ll still see
some sort of increase, but given those recommendations, and as you�ve
heard from some of the other questions posed, particularly with the
National Guard and Reserve, I think there are just some unique issues
there as it relates to outreach and administering the programs and
when that follow-up occurs.
And I appreciate the fact that there is a requirement now just
to -- there�s just so much going on with these folks.
Ms. Caden. Absolutely.
Ms. Herseth. That it�s important to let them ease into things and
reevaluate what their needs and what they might want to take advantage
of with the programs available.
And if I might, I think the time is running short, but one last
question. You made reference to the independent living program as it
relates to some of the companies that have approached you and that
you�re in conversations with. How does the independent living program
fit into VR&E�s future plans beyond what you�ve discussed? And do you
support an increase to the annual cap on participants?
Ms. Caden. We�re looking at the annual cap all the time, and we
haven�t gone over it, and sometimes that�s because we�re very careful
towards the end of a fiscal year, we will be watching it.
And I think this year will be very important to watch, because
with more people coming back from OIF/OEF, there may be a need_and I
would like to be able to get back to you on that as we watch our
numbers and look at where we�re going. And the independent living is
a very important part of our program. It�s one of the five tracks.
And we�re trying to concentrate on it, but we also want to keep
employment as a goal. And so we really want to work and see how that
works out. That�s why this conversation we had yesterday on a call
center was quite interesting.
Ms. Herseth. Thank you very much.
Mr. Boozman. Mr. Evans?
Mr. Evans. No questions.
Mr. Boozman. Let me follow up a little bit, and Ms. Herseth, if
she�d like to follow up also it would be great. The Task Force
recommended that the VBA field offices revise the resource allocation
model to base the regional offices� funding for contract services on
local estimates of the volume and types of services and the actual
cost of the services rather than the RO�s percentage of the national
workload.
I guess my question is, can you tell us, how you allocate things
now, so we can better understand? And then, two, if you�ve
implemented this change, and if so, great. You know, if you haven�t,
what�s the deal, or?
Ms. Caden. Okay. I�m probably going to turn over this to
Dr. Braun, because he�s been on the team that�s worked on the resource
allocation. But just very quickly, it�s a joint effort done -- my
staff, central office staff, works with our office of field operations.
And, Jerry, do you want to talk a little bit about the process?
Mr. Braun. There�s two VR&E field officers, field managers that are
on the resource allocation management team, as well as the folks
representative from central office.
Currently, that�s -- the percentage of workload is a prime indicator
in terms of what resources are allocated both in the contract arena as
well as in the FTE arena. Among the factors we look at are pending
workload as well as outcome-type factors.
The concept of inviting -- and as Mrs. Caden referenced, this team
meets once a year prior to the fiscal year, the new fiscal year, the
concept of inviting the input of the field in terms of what they spent
last year, what they expect to spend in the upcoming years, and what
their special needs are, will be incorporated into our -- this year�s
summer meeting on the matter.
Ms. Caden. Just to follow up, we do look at what they spent in the
past year. This year we�ll probably delve into that in some more detail.
Mr. Boozman. Ms. Herseth? I want to thank all of the witnesses who
came here today. We�ve heard about some really good successes and some
challenges facing the voc rehab and employment program and suggestions
on how the program can improve.
I think we can note with pleasure the examples of VR&E, VETS
cooperation. I would offer that the GAO�s comments and continual
findings concerning the VR&E�s inability to put disabled vets in jobs
and the lack of the necessary staff skills to meet that goal is somewhat
troubling. And while progress is being made, I hope that the VA will
accelerate its efforts to achieve a more transparent relationship with
VETS.
I don�t think anyone expects VA Voc Rehab to replicate the services
offered by the Department of Labor�s VETS. Rather, it�s common sense
that VR&E develop a close working relationship with the VETS national
staff and the regional office staff blends their operations with the
DVOPs and LVERs.
I look forward to significant progress in the future. And we
would appreciate you mentioned the Memorandum of Understanding. If you
could send that over. And I feel like we need to have a signing, where
we can all get together and you can give us each a pen. In fact, you
ought to do that, is sign a little bit and just sign with -- so we can
all have a pen that you do it with.
So, we want to assure you that we�re going to press the Department
of Labor to meet its obligations in its regard also.
I want to thank the testimony of Mr. Forney and especially in the
sense of coming over. I want to thank him for his service. And then
also I�d like say that any member of the committee also has the
opportunity to submit written statements.
Ms. Herseth?
Ms. Herseth. Again, thank you, all of you for being here, those
that testified on today�s panels and those that are here as advocates
for and concerned about our nation�s veterans. I think as it relates
to the fact that this is our first Subcommittee hearing with this new
committee is an important one to ask these types of questions to see
what the progress has been in light of the Task Force recommendations,
in light of the need for making limited resources go as far as we can
make them go.
And it�s the coordination and communication between agencies like
the Department of Labor and like the Department of Defense that are
going to help us in that respect, and so I appreciate getting some
updated information on those two areas in particular.
But thank you for your work. We�ll look forward to working with
you in the future. And in the questions that we all posed today, as
you come across information that you think may be helpful to us or to
our staffs, if you could forward that along to maintain kind of this
ongoing dialogue on particularly the primary issues we focused on today
in the VR&E program.
Thank you very much. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Boozman. Thank you. The meeting is adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 3:20 p.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.]