[House Hearing, 113 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
A REVIEW OF THE EFFECTIVENESS OF VA'S VOCATIONAL REHABILITATION
AND EMPLOYMENT PROGRAM
=======================================================================
HEARING
before the
SUBCOMMITTEE ON ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY
of the
COMMITTEE ON VETERANS' AFFAIRS
U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED THIRTEENTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
__________
THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 27, 2014
__________
Serial No. 113-55
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Veterans' Affairs
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.fdsys.gov
______
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
87-668 WASHINGTON : 2015
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Publishing
Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800;
DC area (202) 512-1800 Fax: (202) 512-2104 Mail: Stop IDCC,
Washington, DC 20402-0001
COMMITTEE ON VETERANS' AFFAIRS
JEFF MILLER, Florida, Chairman
DOUG LAMBORN, Colorado MICHAEL H. MICHAUD, Maine, Ranking
GUS M. BILIRAKIS, Florida, Vice- Member
Chairman CORRINE BROWN, Florida
DAVID P. ROE, Tennessee MARK TAKANO, California
JEFF DENHAM, California JULIA BROWNLEY, California
BILL FLORES, Texas DINA TITUS, Nevada
JON RUNYAN, New Jersey ANN KIRKPATRICK, Arizona
DAN BENISHEK, Michigan RAUL RUIZ, California
TIM HUELSKAMP, Kansas GLORIA NEGRETE McLEOD, California
MIKE COFFMAN, Colorado ANN M. KUSTER, New Hampshire
BRAD R. WENSTRUP, Ohio BETO O'ROURKE, Texas
PAUL COOK, California TIMOTHY J. WALZ, Minnesota
JACKIE WALORSKI, Indiana
DAVID JOLLY, Florida
Jon Towers, Staff Director
Nancy Dolan, Democratic Staff Director
SUBCOMMITTEE ON ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY
BILL FLORES, Texas, Chairman
JON RUNYAN, New Jersey MARK TAKANO, California, Ranking
MIKE COFFMAN, Colorado Member
PAUL COOK, California JULIA BROWNLEY, California
BRAD WENSTRUP, Ohio DINA TITUS, Nevada
ANN KIRKPATRICK, Arizona
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
----------
Page
Thursday, February 27, 2014
A Review of the Effectiveness of VA's Vocational Rehabilitation
and Employment Program......................................... 1
OPENING STATEMENTS
Hon. Bill Flores, Chairman....................................... 1
WITNESS
Mr. Daniel Bertoni, Director, Education, Workforce, and Income
Security U.S. Government Accountability Office................. 3
Prepared Statement........................................... 23
Ms. Heather Ansley, Esq., MSW, Vice President of Veterans Policy
VetFirst....................................................... 5
Prepared Statement........................................... 36
Mr. Paul Varela, Assistant National Legislative, Director Disable
American Veterans.............................................. 7
Prepared Statement........................................... 46
Mr. Jack Kammerer, Director, Vocational Rehabilitation and
Employment Service, Veterans Benefits Administration, U.S.
Department of Veterans Affairs................................. 14
Prepared Statement........................................... 55
STATEMENT FOR THE RECORD
Paralyzed Veterans of America.................................... 57
Wounded Warrior Project.......................................... 60
QUESTION FOR THE RECORD
Question From: Hon. Flores to Jack Kammerer...................... 61
A REVIEW OF THE EFFECTIVENESS OF VA'S VOCATIONAL REHABILITATION AND
EMPLOYMENT PROGRAM
Thursday, February 27, 2014
U.S. House of Representatives,
Committee on Veterans' Affairs,
Subcommittee on Economic Opportunity,
Washington, D.C.
The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:01 a.m., in
Room 334, Cannon House Office Building, Hon. Bill Flores
[chairman of the subcommittee] presiding.
Present: Representatives Flores, Takano, Brownley, and
Kirkpatrick.
OPENING STATEMENT OF CHAIRMAN BILL FLORES
Mr. Flores. Good morning. The subcommittee will come to
order.
I want to begin by welcoming everyone to our first
subcommittee hearing of the second session of the 113th
Congress.
Like you, I look forward to a productive session working
with my friend and ranking member, Mr. Takano, and I want to
thank all of you for being here this morning.
Today the subcommittee will conduct an oversight hearing on
the Vocational Rehabilitation and Employment or VR&E program at
the Department of Veterans Affairs.
This program and its VR&E counselors provide a wide array
of rehabilitation and employment services through personalized
rehab plans to help the most severely wounded and disabled
veterans in employment or reach maximum independent living.
I believe the VR&E program should be the crown jewel of
benefits provided to veterans through the Veterans Benefits
Administration since this program has the opportunity to
provide veterans great services to transition them to
independence and employment.
While VR&E counselors continue to provide these vital
services to our veterans, I believe, and I am sure our
witnesses on the first panel would agree with me, that more
must be done to improve the performance and the effectiveness
of this program to ensure that veterans are receiving the
services they deserve in a timely manner.
A recent GAO report crystallized some of these concerns by
highlighting VR&E's problems with accurate performance metrics,
workload management issues, and consistency of services
throughout the nearly 400 VR&E office locations.
As I mentioned in our hearing last fall on VR&E's
independent living program, I do not fault the VA's central
office and field staff for many of these issues. I believe that
most of these issues stem from the lack of attention and
resources that are provided to the VR&E Service by senior VA
leaders which has been VA's practice through many
administrations regardless of party.
VA's own testimony states that it saw a 14 percent increase
in applications in fiscal year 2013 and as more and more
veterans apply for disability benefits, I am sure that this
number will only grow as budgets remain nearly flat.
It is because of this growth in workload and issues raised
by the GAO report that I recently introduced two pieces of
legislation to help modernize the VR&E program, H.R. 4037,
Improving Veterans Access to Vocational Rehabilitation and
Employment Act of 2014, which streamlines processes of VR&E to
help counselors tackle their ever-growing caseloads and ensure
that the most severely-disabled veterans have timely access to
the services that they need for maximum rehabilitation.
H.R. 4038, the Veterans Benefits Administration Information
and Technology Improvement Act of 2014, would require the VA to
allocate more funding to update VR&E's corporate IT system
called C-WINRS, C dash W-I-N-R-S, to improve oversight and
tracking of taxpayer resources and the outcome of VR&E
participants.
My concerns about VR&E's IT system continue to be validated
when I hear stories about VR&E's offices not having internet
connectivity for months at a time or offices who have to rely
on old, outdated fax machines and paper more than computers and
technology solutions.
I look forward to hearing testimony from our witnesses
today and I hope to learn more about VA's plans to update their
systems and implement the recommendations of the GAO's report.
We all agree that this program has the ability to greatly
improve the lives of veterans, but more work still needs to be
done so that we fulfill our promise to every eligible veteran.
With that, I will recognize the ranking member, Mr. Takano,
for his opening remarks.
Mr. Takano. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Today we will hear statements and testimony about the
effectiveness of the Department of Veterans Affairs' Vocational
Rehabilitation Employment program, otherwise known as VR&E.
This program was established to help eligible veterans find
gainful employment and to facilitate their successful
transition back into their communities.
The VR&E program helps return veterans back to the
workforce by employing a five-track model of one, reemployment;
two, rapid access to employment; three, self-employment; four,
employment through long-term services or through long-term
service; and, five, independent living for veterans unable to
return to work.
Servicemembers returning from war are coming home with
traumatic brain injuries, posttraumatic stress disorder, and
many serious physical injuries. The VR&E program is uniquely
positioned to assist our veterans in reintegrating them back
into their communities and finding meaningful employment.
With the major draw down of our Armed Forces, we need to
understand the impact of the growing wave of returning veterans
and to know if VR&E is properly staffed to meet the challenges
in 2014 and beyond.
I look forward to hearing the new VR&E director's goals for
the program as well as the program's financial needs. I also
look forward to hearing the GAO's detailed review of the
program and their recommendations on how we can improve the
program.
Nothing is more important than ensuring that our
transitioning servicemembers have access to the services like
VR&E that they need to succeed in civilian life.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for scheduling this hearing today
and I yield back.
Mr. Flores. I thank the ranking member.
I now invite our first panel to the table. With us today is
Mr. Daniel Bertoni with the U.S. Government Accountability
Office; Ms. Heather Ansley with VetsFirst; and Mr. Paul Varela
with DAV.
Your complete written statements will be made part of the
hearing record and each of you will be recognized for five
minutes for your oral statement.
Just as a reminder, you have to push the button in order to
be heard over the PA system, and also the green light means
that you are good to go. The yellow light means you have a
minute left and the red light means that you need to wrap up
soon.
So let's begin with Mr. Bertoni. You are now recognized for
five minutes.
STATEMENT OF DANIEL BERTONI
Mr. Bertoni. Chairman Flores, Ranking Member Takano,
Members of the subcommittee, good morning.
I am pleased to discuss our work on the Department of
Veterans Affairs' Vocational Rehabilitation and Employment
program which provided education, training, and job placement
services to over 120,000 veterans last year.
My remarks today are based on our January 2014 report which
examined outcomes for veterans seeking employment through the
VR&E program and progress VA has made in addressing critical
management issues.
In summary, we found that of almost 17,000 veterans who
entered the program in fiscal year 2003 and received
employment-related services, just under half obtained suitable
employment by the end of fiscal year 2012. Another 30 percent
discontinued the program, 20 percent were still receiving
services.
While the average time to obtain employment was about four
and a half years, time frames varied. For example, almost half
of all veterans completed the program within three to six
years, but nearly one-fourth achieved suitable employment in
years seven through ten.
One reason for the lengthy time frames is that a good
number of participants discontinued or interrupted their
programs along the way, sometimes more than once before
achieving success.
Veterans face several common challenges to completing the
program and obtaining employment. We found that veterans with
mental health conditions and those who worked with multiple
staff over time took considerably longer to complete their
programs.
VA staff and veterans we interviewed also cited family
obligations, financial difficulties, and civilian employers'
limited understanding of military work experience as barriers
to rehabilitation.
With regard to VA's progress in addressing critical
management issues, we identified several key weaknesses. First,
VA has identified limitations with its primary measure of
program success, the rehabilitation rate, and is considering an
alternative measure.
However, its proposed measure for individual staff reflects
only the number and not the rate of successful outcomes and
does not reflect the extent to which veterans are discontinued
from the program without rehabilitation. Thus, it does not
provide sufficient context for understanding overall program
performance both regionally or nationally.
Going forward, we have recommended that VA consider
additional measures to provide a fuller picture of program
success.
VA also lacks performance measures related to enhancing
veterans' long-term employment outcomes and currently considers
a job placement to be successful if employment is maintained
for only 60 days.
Research and practices at other federal employment programs
suggest that VA's measure may be insufficient to gauge long-
term employment success and VA may miss an opportunity to hold
staff accountable and make program adjustments to achieve such
outcomes.
With regard to workload management, VA's formula for
allocating staff among regional office's may also be
contributing to some ongoing workload challenges. We found that
the ratio of cases to staff varied widely among offices with
some averaging fewer than 100 cases per staff and others
averaging several hundred.
Currently the VA staff allocation formula does not take
into account workloads such as educational and vocational
counseling which are substantial in some locations, and
regional managers in five of the eight offices we contacted
raised concern that the formula which has not been revised
since 2003 may not effectively assign staff where they are most
needed.
VA also lacks information about the regional offices'
varied approaches to managing their caseloads. For example,
some offices have veterans work with a single staff person
throughout the rehab process and others may have veterans work
with multiple staff who specialize in specific phases for types
of cases.
Unfortunately, VA has not assessed the relative advantages
or disadvantages of these varied approaches which is concerning
given our finding that veterans who work with more staff over
time are less likely to achieve suitable employment.
And, finally, we identified some gaps in SSA's training
despite ongoing improvement initiatives. In particular, we
found that VA does not provide sufficient training on helping
veterans with job placement and workplace accommodations which
are key to a modern approach to ensuring veterans with
disabilities secure and maintain employment.
Mr. Chairman, this concludes my statement. I am happy to
answer any questions that you or other Members of the
subcommittee may have. Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Daniel Bertoni appears in the
Appendix]
Mr. Flores. Thank you, Mr. Bertoni.
Ms. Ansley.
STATEMENT OF HEATHER ANSLEY
Ms. Ansley. Thank you.
Chairman Flores, Ranking Member Takano, and distinguished
Members of the subcommittee, thank you for inviting VetsFirst
to share our views on the effectiveness of the Department of
Veterans Affairs' Vocational Rehabilitation and Employment or
VR&E program.
Access to quality vocational rehabilitation services is
critical to helping veterans with disabilities receive the
skills and training necessary to help them reintegrate into the
workforce.
The opportunity to participate in the workforce is critical
not only because of the financial benefits from employment but
also because of the intrinsic value of work. Without the
opportunity to continue participating in the workforce, many
veterans with disabilities may become disconnected from the
very society they pledged to preserve and protect.
Data from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics shows that
many veterans with VA disability ratings of 60 percent or
higher are not participating in the workforce. VetsFirst is
concerned about veterans with disability who like other people
with disabilities face barriers to employment that include
misinformation about disability and misperceptions about
required accommodations.
Even if they know about the Americans With Disabilities Act
or the ADA, many disabled veterans are unsure about disclosing
a disability to an employer and fear job-related discrimination
due to a disability.
VA's VR&E services are critical to helping servicemembers
and veterans with service-connected disabilities who need
assistance in developing and achieving a new path to
employment.
According to the Veterans Benefits Administration's fiscal
year 2012 annual report, 121,236 veterans received VR&E
services during fiscal year 2012. Approximately 79 percent of
these veterans served during the Gulf War era. VR&E considered
9,949 veterans in fiscal year 2012 to have successfully
completed their rehabilitation program.
The GAO's recent report on VA's VR&E program laid out many
challenges that hinder veterans in completing their VR&E
services. As was said already, these challenges include the
veteran's disability, the need for a realistic employment plan,
family obligations, and issues related to military transition.
The presence of an employment barrier due to a disability
is one critical factor that makes veterans who are seeking VR&E
services unique from other veterans returning to the workforce.
VetsFirst is concerned about VR&E's success in helping veterans
with disabilities make a successful return to the workforce.
According to GAO, veterans, especially those with mental
health issues, are facing challenges as they go through the
rehab process. These challenges were illustrated by the GAO's
finding that veterans with mental health conditions experience
a decreased likelihood of obtaining a successful outcome within
eight years of entering VR&E than those with other
disabilities.
To address the needs of these and other veterans, we are
pleased that VR&E is adding courses on mental health awareness
and techniques to their training regimen for all vocational
rehabilitation counselors.
VA must also ensure, however, that employees are properly
trained on other issues that hinder the return to work of
veterans with particularly significant disabilities.
We believe that these disabled veterans need more
information about how to approach the workplace as a person
living with a disability including understanding workplace
accommodations.
To help veterans address some of their fears about
approaching the workplace as a person with a disability, a
research study conducted by the Northeast ADA Center in
conjunction with the Army's Wounded Warrior program concluded
in part that information about the ADA, including disclosure
decisions and accommodation practices, should be included in a
veteran's vocational rehabilitation.
In its report, GAO noted the need for additional training
on accommodations for vocational rehabilitation counselors and
we urge VA to develop and implement as soon as possible
training on workplace accommodations.
We also encourage VA to partner with the Job Accommodation
Network which is a service of the Department of Labor to
facilitate training on these issues and to connect veterans for
future accommodation needs that they may have.
Once placed in employment, some veterans need more supports
to ensure their long-term success. VR&E considers a veteran to
be rehabilitated if he or she maintains employment for at least
60 days. Although some veterans' cases may be followed for
longer than 60 days, we believe that more must be done to
ensure the long-term success of veterans with disabilities in
the workforce, not only in placement but in retention and in
promotion.
Thus, we believe VR&E should consider developing more
partnerships with nonprofit organizations that provide the
intense long-term services needed to assist veterans living
with significant disabilities, including mental health
conditions, in returning to and remaining in the workforce.
Lastly, we support efforts to ensure that VR&E receives
increased supports which include additional staffing resources
and access to information technology to help them better meet
the needs of veterans.
For example, recent staffing increases have helped decrease
the VR&E counselor caseloads, but more must be done. Additional
gains will only come from more investment in VR&E and its
services.
Again, thank you for the opportunity to share our views
this morning. This concludes my testimony and I would be
pleased to answer any questions.
[The prepared statement of Heather Ansley appears in the
Appendix]
Mr. Flores. Thank you, Ms. Ansley.
And, Mr. Varela.
STATEMENT OF PAUL VARELA
Mr. Varela. Good morning, Chairman Flores, Ranking Member
Takano, and Members of the subcommittee. Thank you for inviting
DAV to testify at today's hearing to examine ways to maximize
the effectiveness of the Vocational Rehabilitation and
Employment voc rehab program.
We appreciate the subcommittee's continued interest in
oversight essential towards maintaining and enhancing this
vital program. The committee's work ensures that our Nation
continues to fulfill its promises to the men and women who
served. It is indeed a pleasure to offer our organization's
insights into the vocational rehabilitation program.
For over ten years, I had the distinct honor to serve as a
DAV national service officer in New York and Los Angeles and
witnessed firsthand the transformative effect of this program.
My oral remarks will summarize four key points from my
written testimony.
First, DAV feels and the recent GAO report confirms the
current voc rehab counselor to client ratio is too high and
disproportionate throughout VR&E. As we have recommended, VR&E
should maintain a voc rehab counselor to client ratio of no
more than one to 125.
We were concerned to learn that eight offices average a
ratio of one to 175 and in the Cleveland regional office, they
average one to 206. Voc rehab counselors have a very hands-on
approach with their participants and require the time and
ability to address the unique needs and concerns of program
participants more effectively.
The GAO report also confirmed what we had known before the
findings of the report were published that demand for VR&E
services is increasing and has done so steadily since 2008.
There were 95,000 program participants in 2008 and as of March
2013, roughly 130,000.
Other factors must also be considered when increasing voc
rehab counselor staffing levels to meet the one to 125 ratio to
include increasing their administrative and support staffs to
keep pace with increased VR&E participation. This includes
purchases, beneficiary payments, and infrastructure.
Therefore, VA must request and Congress must approve
sufficient resources to meet all the needs of the VR&E program.
Second, voc rehab is truly one of the more transformative
benefits available to wounded, injured, and ill veterans, and
enables them to overcome their service-connected disabilities.
The program provides essential tools and resources needed to
give them a sense of fulfillment as contributory members to
their families and communities.
With such a powerful benefit, why limit the time frame in
which a veteran can choose to use this benefit? In most cases,
VR&E benefits expire 12 years from the date of eligibility.
This is what is commonly known as the use it or lose it period.
We urge Congress to enact legislation that eliminates the 12-
year limit to use this benefit.
Third, much of the VR&E process is still paper based unlike
compensation and pension. Veterans still lack the ability to
file their voc rehab applications online as a paper application
is still required. As VBA moves forward with their electronic
processing, this will lead to confusion as to which method is
required to make certain applications for benefits.
Better IT systems also have the potential to increase
overall efficiency, provide better accountability of the entire
voc rehab program, could facilitate and enhance tracking
capabilities of all services and procurements, provide ready
access to data and include features that would allow for better
voc rehab counselor performance tracking.
At present, much of the information required to get a full
accountability of the program has to be done by examining local
VR&E folders and assembling data. It is vitally important that
VBA request and Congress approve the resources needed to make
these much needed IT enhancements to improve access, oversight,
and accountability throughout the entirety of the VR&E program.
Fourth, an often overlooked portion of the voc rehab
program, independent living also requires proper resourcing. We
reiterate our recommendations regarding this benefit as
highlighted in our hearing in November 2013. We urge Congress
to support legislation to remove the cap and eliminate the
current restriction placed upon program participation.
Mr. Chairman, vocational rehabilitation embodies DAV's
central purpose of empowering veterans to lead high-quality
lives with respect and dignity. If we do not strengthen VR&E,
it runs the risk of compromising that purpose. How can a
wounded, injured, or ill veteran achieve such a fulfilling life
when it takes months to even begin the program and is then
adversely affected by staffing and resource limitations
essential towards effective participation?
In closing, Mr. Chairman, despite some of the management
and oversight challenges discussed in our testimony and the GAO
report, we continue to believe that voc rehab is a vital and
transformative benefit, essential and empowering, that has and
should continue to make a tremendous difference in the lives of
thousands of veterans every year.
DAV stands ready to work with the subcommittee and VA to
offer our expertise, insight, and experience to enhance the
program.
Mr. Chairman, this concludes my testimony and stand ready
to answer any questions the committee may have.
[The prepared statement of Paul Varela appears in the
Appendix]
Mr. Flores. Thank you, Mr. Varela.
And I thank the panel for their testimony.
I now recognize myself for five minutes for questions.
Mr. Bertoni, in your report, you mention that each regional
office differs in how they monitor and how they distribute the
caseloads to VR&E counselors.
What are your suggestions as to how the VA can improve
management to ensure that there is consistency and appropriate
workload management at all the VR&E locations which would help
ensure better service to veterans?
Mr. Bertoni. A couple things, but it is no surprise that
the field offices have a lot of discretion to configure their
staff and manage their caseload that cuts across many different
lines of work in the regional offices.
But in this case, we did see a lot of variation in terms of
how they were organizing these modules to process cases. We
have specialization versus generalization. There were clearly,
you know, indications that there were advantages and
disadvantages of each.
But it was concerning to us and in our analysis, we found
that those who work with multiple counselors tend to have a
lower success rate. You know, if you had four counselors, you
were 27 percent less likely to be successful in your rehab.
So it just begs additional analysis. We have recommended
that VA study some of these workload models, identify the
advantages and disadvantages, and come up with some specific
guidelines or best practices that they can share with the
regions so they can apply those to their own operations to be
more effective.
Mr. Flores. Uh-huh.
Mr. Bertoni. The resource allocation model needs to be
looked at. We have got staffing based on performance that can
disadvantage lower performing offices. We have got workloads
that are fairly substantial in some offices that are excluded,
that are not giving proper credit.
And that leads to FTE ceilings. And if you do not have the
proper FTE ceilings regardless of the workload mix, you are
going to have deterioration in service.
So those two areas looking at how they are configured and
factor that into your staffing allocation model to ensure that
the appropriate staff are on the ground is important. And we
have got two recommendations that should get them there.
Mr. Flores. Okay. I want to dig into the weeds a little bit
on this. Mr. Varela, I would like to follow-up with you because
you had a recommendation as to caseload management. I think you
said one to 125 was your or DAV's recommendation.
So, Mr. Bertoni, it seems to me like there is a difference
in the degree of resources required for a rehab case versus an
education case.
Can you tell me, should there be different metrics for
those, two, in terms of VA staff to caseload?
Mr. Bertoni. VA is the expert here in terms of the----
Mr. Flores. Okay.
Mr. Bertoni [continuing]. Work credit measurement system.
And I would say you are correct. If you looked at the work
credit measurement system, different workloads receive
different credit. I do not know if what they are getting for
voc rehabilitation, developing a rehab plan is sufficient or
not. I think it is something that the agency needs to look at
to ensure that they are getting equitable or just credit for
various workloads.
Mr. Flores. Mr. Varela, do you have any comments, any
thoughts about that?
Mr. Varela. Yes, Mr. Chairman. In terms of the workload
credit, obviously there is an incentive to get a veteran to the
completion of the program.
Mr. Flores. Sure.
Mr. Varela. And that is where they are going to give most
of the credit. So there may be a precedence now that is not
allowing VR&E to get the credit that they deserve for
everything that they do. There is a lot of client contact that
takes place. There is a lot of needs that have to be addressed.
Circumstances are continually changing. There may have to be
some coordination between VHA services----
Mr. Flores. Yeah.
Mr. Varela [continuing]. And other outside entities. So all
of that needs to be built in to determine how effective the
program is. And if somebody does not complete the program, that
may not be the fault of the voc rehab counselor themselves. And
they would get dinged for that. You know, that would be a
smudge on their record. But that does not mean that they did
not work with that veteran for a year----
Mr. Varela [continuing]. Two years or three years. And that
credit should be recognized.
Mr. Flores. I am going to try to get in one more question
in my remaining few seconds. This is for all of the panel, but,
Ms. Ansley, let's start with you.
Can you tell us what your thoughts are for the C-WINRS
Program? Try to keep it in about 20 seconds and tell me what
you think the improvements should be, the IT system.
Ms. Ansley. Thank you.
We agree that we need better improvements that will help to
track the metrics as people are moving through the system to
know where people are at as they are tracking through and to be
able to highlight some of these points as was mentioned by DAV
as people step through the process, where are they at and are
there ways to provide credit and to identify problems.
So if people are noting that they are at a particular
level, you are seeing a high level of problem, what can we do
to go back and fix that.
Mr. Flores. Okay. Mr. Varela, regarding C-WINRS, what are
your thoughts about the system?
Mr. Varela. I know there are recommendations to enhance C-
WINRS, but VA going forward, their major emphasis is VBMS.
Mr. Flores. Right.
Mr. Varela. Will C-WINRS be able to communicate with VBMS
or will it continue to be a stand-alone platform? They
obviously need to make those IT enhancements. Can C-WINRS be
enhanced to the point where it gives us all the data that we
are looking for? I do not have the answer to that question.
That is really going to require some examination.
Mr. Flores. Well, thank you.
Mr. Ranking Member, I am sorry I went over my time, but I
recognize you for five minutes.
Mr. Takano. Well, just consider this sort of my little
birthday gift. I understand Tuesday was your birthday and happy
birthday belatedly.
Well, Mr. Chairman, thank you for recognizing me.
My first question goes to Mr. Varela and Ms. Ansley. How
should the VA measure success or failure of the VR&E program?
Do we have the right measures and the measures that would
incentivize the right sort of actions?
Ms. Ansley. I do think that we need to make sure that we
are not just looking at a particular time in point which was
mentioned about you are now rehabilitated. I think that it is a
process that veterans are going to go through.
So looking at the process as they are going through the
stages to look for metrics there, but then also once you are
considered rehabilitated, you have remained in employment, I
would like to see some follow-up about what happens in out
years.
Does the veteran--are they able to remain in the workforce?
Are there things that develop as they move through their work
career? It is really more about--the ultimate outcome and
metric for me is a veteran remaining an active, productive
member of the workforce and then how you measure that really
requires more of a longitudinal process.
Mr. Takano. Great. Thank you.
Mr. Varela. Any metrics implemented going forward has to
have the input of the participant. The veteran has to have the
opportunity to say whether this is working or whether it is not
working.
And in our written testimony, we alluded to the new GI Bill
complaint procedures that they have in place if you are having
issues with a school or so on. You can go online and you can
log these complaints.
Veterans need to be part of that process. And there was a
2004 task force that reviewed the VR&E program and that was one
of the recommendations from that time was you need that
individual's input to determine if you are on the right course,
what changes need to be made, and if that veteran feels that
they are getting the services that they actually sought.
Mr. Takano. Ms. Ansley, I want to return back to your
suggestion that we look at the process. Can you give me some
idea of what additional measures you would do so we do not just
look at a simple outcome?
Ms. Ansley. Well, we certainly do need to when we are
checking the process connect with that veteran and see if they
got what they needed to actually return to the workforce.
And so being able, I think, to do surveys and outcomes of
the veteran, what he or she was looking for in the process, did
they remain employed, if so, were the VR&E services helpful to
them, I think, are some key measures that we need to be
connected with.
It is always difficult to look at, you know, metrics that
come out from a program as you are going through the steps and
then how did that really implement in someone's life as they
are now taking that process and moving forward?
I would also suggest that there may be other programs that
could be looked at within VR&E and vocational rehabilitation,
you know, other systems that exist that might provide some
guidance on standards.
Mr. Takano. Great. Thank you.
Mr. Varela, can you explain in more detail why it is so
important to lift or at least extend the eligibility period for
VR&E?
Mr. Varela. Yes, Congressman. A veteran's situation is
likely going to change over time. What was true today may not
be true 12 years from now. And a veteran's service-connected
disability is going to play a big part in that.
The conditions may change, get worse. There may be new
disabilities that are identified. And so this veteran that had
the time frame--may not have had the time to use it during that
12-year period. They may not have needed it during that 12-year
period.
Now fast forward 13, 14 years when their circumstances have
changed and they come to Vocational Rehabilitation and
Employment and say I would like to utilize this program. If
they had not met that 12-year requirement, they could be
denied.
Now, there are ways around that, but that requires
additional administrative review. They have to determine if a
serious employment handicap exists. It should be open-ended.
And when the need arises, they should be able to use it.
Mr. Takano. Thank you.
Mr. Chairman, I stopped right on the clock.
Mr. Flores. Okay. You are very good. Thank you.
By the way, I just want to comment on the extension of the
time period. As you know, your bill was incorporated with H.R.
357, which passed a couple of weeks ago, which extended the
time period from 12 years to 17 years.
So the ranking member has been a champion of this and we
have had some progress in the House. And hopefully our friends
on the north side of the campus will take that up soon.
Ms. Brownley, you are recognized for five minutes for
questions.
Ms. Brownley. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Appreciate it.
I had a question, I think, directed to Mr. Varela and
perhaps Ms. Ansley as well.
I want to thank all of you first for your continued work
and service on behalf of our Nation's veterans.
In the testimony of the Paralyzed Veterans of America and
their written testimony, they expressed some concern about the
independent living program and it certainly has come up in my
district in California in Ventura County.
They state in their testimony that although the program has
proven to benefit disabled veterans during their
rehabilitation, existing legislation continues to limit or cap
the yearly enrollment. More than a decade of combat has
produced many veterans that could benefit from assistance from
the independent living option. Congress should remove the cap
of 2,700 per year for independent living enrollment and
vocational rehabilitation. Counselors should be trained and
encouraged to recommend the IL program when it could benefit a
veteran's rehabilitation.
So that is what they stated in their testimony. Certainly
in my district, we have veterans that are calling our office
pretty routinely who have been unable to attain services within
the independent living program because of the cap and even
probably more importantly in the 12-year statutory limit on
veterans for attaining VR&E benefits.
So I was just wondering if either one of you could comment
on where you stand on that and do you believe the 12-year limit
is a problem. Do you believe the cap on enrollees for
independent living, the independent living program is a
challenge?
Ms. Ansley. We would certainly align ourselves with our
friends from PVA in their comments on the independent living
program. It is a program designed to assist those veterans that
are in the most need of benefits and it seems to us as though
if someone is meeting that need, why would we limit it based on
an arbitrary cap, that, you know, these are the veterans that
are most in need of service. And if you meet that need, that
service should be there.
So we would support the independent living program being
available as needed to veterans and also the 12-year delimiting
period we would say, you know, again, if the services are
needed, a veteran's circumstances may change, you know, we
would not want to limit access to something that is going to
help someone rehabilitate, return to the workforce, and be a
productive member of their community.
Mr. Varela. Congresswoman, there are two parts to that, so
I will take the 12-year period first.
Obviously we would like to see the cap removed. I think
this also would free up some VR&E resources as well. For those
veterans that come in after the 12-year period and then have to
prove to a voc rehab counselor that they have a serious
employment handicap, that is one less administrative procedure
that they would have to undertake.
Again, the 12-year period, these disabilities are not going
to last for just 12 years. You know, these are disabilities
that are going to be ongoing for the rest of their lives. So
why limit access to that benefit for 12 years? Their
disabilities do not have a 12-year shelf life nor should the
benefit.
The independent living program, again, there should not be
an arbitrary cap. It should be open to all veterans that need
it. It is one of the more intricate tracks in the voc rehab
program. As I mentioned in my oral remarks that VR&E services
require a hands-on approach with their participants. It is even
more so with those in the independent living program.
So that would be more time consuming as well. So you may
want to look at whether VR&E stations require independent
living specialists if we remove that cap more people enter the
program.
I would also like to commend this committee and the VA for
your oversight and the VA VR&E program because they have just
instituted, I think it is a 14-hour training program on
independent living services. So there are VR&E counselors who
will have what looks like an in-depth training on the
independent living program.
Ms. Brownley. Thank you.
My time is about to run out, but I just am wondering if
either one of you have any data at all with regards to this in
terms of veterans who need this program and are not able to
have access to it. Just yes or no and if you do, I can follow-
up with you later.
Mr. Varela. No, we do not have that data on hand at
present.
Ms. Ansley. No, we do not have that data.
Ms. Brownley. Thank you.
And I will yield back.
Mr. Bertoni. We just issued a report a couple months back
on sort of the numbers around the program, so we can get you
that.
Ms. Brownley. That would be great. Thank you.
Mr. Flores. I want to thank the first panel for their
testimony and I appreciate your efforts on behalf of our
Nation's veterans. You are now excused.
I now invite our second and final panel for the day to come
to the witness table. On our second panel, we have Mr. Jack
Kammerer, who is the new director of Vocational Rehabilitation
and Employment Service at VA.
Before he came to the VA, Mr. Kammerer had a long and
distinguished career in the U.S. Army and I was pleased to
learn yesterday that he served with my friend from Texas, Mr.
Guerin.
Thank you for your service to our country, Mr. Kammerer,
and you are welcome to the subcommittee. You are now recognized
for five minutes for your testimony. I realize I called you up
here in a hurry, so take your time to get ready.
STATEMENT OF JACK KAMMERER
Mr. Kammerer. Mr. Chairman, Mr. Takano, subcommittee
Members, I appreciate the opportunity to discuss the Department
of Veterans Affairs' Vocational Rehabilitation and Employment
program.
In my brief tenure as VRE director, I have already seen how
the VRE team is engaged in multiple initiatives which will
result in better support for veterans.
Through VetSuccess on Campus, we have collaborated with 94
schools across the country to provide additional education and
vocational counseling and other services to over 80,000 veteran
students.
We also collaborate with the Department of Defense to
provide assistance to servicemembers through the Integrated
Disability Evaluation System and we have expanded counseling
and other services for over 28,000 transitioning
servicemembers.
We continue to work with federal, state, and local
government agencies and private sector employers to increase
veteran employment opportunities. VRE Service is currently
developing new performance metrics to more effectively evaluate
the full scope of VRE work activities at the local, regional,
and national levels. VRE is also partnering with the Veterans
Health Administration to develop video tele-counseling.
The VRE program assists servicemembers and veterans with
service-connected disabilities to prepare for, find, and keep
suitable employment. For veterans with service-connected
disabilities so severe they are unable to work, the independent
living program or IL offers services to improve their ability
to live independently.
The VRE program also provides education and career
counseling to transitioning servicemembers and veterans
eligible for VA educational benefits and dependents of veterans
who have permanent and total service-connected disabilities as
authorized under Title 38, Chapter 36.
VRE has nearly a thousand professional vocational
rehabilitation counselors and delivers service through a
network of 420 office locations. Our service delivery model
supports veterans where they are located with operations at 56
regional offices, 198 out-based offices, 71 IDES installations,
and 94 VSOC sites.
In fiscal year 2013, VRE successfully rehabilitated over
10,000 veterans with service-connected disabilities with over
8,500 of those rehabilitated to suitable employment and the
balance veterans whose rehabilitation gave them greater
independence through IL services.
VRE had a 14 percent increase in applicants in fiscal year
2013. We are completing data validation for fiscal year 2013
and we believe we have supported over 130,000 veterans with
Chapter 31 services.
The Corporate WINRS system is the VRE case management
application. C-WINRS records the application and adjudication
of VRE claims, rehabilitation planning services, and
disposition of cases.
The current C-WINRS enhancements focus on developing a
subsistence allowance module to eliminate VRE's reliance on the
legacy BDN system and move to payment through the corporate
financial accounting system (FAS). The new FAS corporate module
is being beta tested in eight regional offices. We are
finalizing development for national deployment.
VRE has also built requirements for a new case management
system that will expand in the functionality of the VBMS
system.
GAO made six recommendations in its January 2014 report on
VR&E. The first recommendation suggested revisions of national
and regional performance measures for the VRE program. We are
currently engaged in redesigning local, regional, and national
performance measures to include a range of broader spectrum
performance data to more effectively evaluate program success.
The second recommendation from GAO was to develop new
measures of long-term employment to go beyond the minimum 60
days of post placement monitoring. VRE provides comprehensive
counseling, training, and rehabilitative services to remove
employment barriers that challenge veterans in obtaining and
maintaining suitable employment. VRE works with participants
over a multi-year period with training and education and up to
18 months of employment services. VRE counselors use judgment
in determining when veterans have adequately adjusted to their
employment and in certain circumstances will follow veterans
beyond the 60 days.
VRE is exploring different ways to follow-up with employed
veterans after their formal departure from VR&E. A post outcome
case management tool is now in development.
GAO's third recommendation was to conduct non-response
analysis of the results of VA's ongoing Voice of the Veteran
surveys. While VA's current Voice of the Veteran program does
not include non-response bias analysis, the survey findings are
statistically valid. Contingent on resource availability, VBA
will modify the survey contract to include non-response
analysis of the results.
GAO's fourth recommendation focuses on VA's allocation of
VRE staff among the regional offices. VR&E Service works
closely with VBA's Office of Field Operations in determining
resource allocations. VRE Service is designing a staffing model
to account for regional factors and with the Office of Field
Operations will revisit the metrics used in the resource
allocation model.
The fifth recommendation from GAO was to collect
information on the regional offices' approaches for managing
the VRE workloads, assess the advantages and disadvantages, and
use the results of this assessment to provide guidance to the
offices on best practices.
VRE Service allows managers to decide how best to manage
their workloads but agrees that there is merit in analyzing
data and communicating best practice.
The final recommendation was to provide additional
training. The VRE Service has provided multiple training
activities and curriculums on job placement and job
accommodations and we will continue to develop and deploy
additional training products.
Mr. Chairman, VRE Service will continue to assess and
improve vocational rehabilitation services to servicemembers
and veterans who have incurred a service-connected disability
and we will continue to focus on enhancing both our service
delivery and the actual services we provide.
This concludes my statement and I would be pleased to
answer the questions from the subcommittee.
[The prepared statement of Jack Kammerer appears in the
Appendix]
Mr. Flores. Thank you, Mr. Kammerer. I appreciate your
testimony, and I guess you have been drinking from a fire hose
the last few weeks as you get your arms around this.
I know that you agree with me and I think you indicated
this in your testimony that there is a need to improve the C-
WINRS program or to create some other IT tool to better track
the cost of participants.
You mentioned in your testimony that VR&E has built a set
of requirements for a new case management system that will
expand the functionality of the veterans benefits management
system or the VBMS as it is more commonly called to better
support the VR&E program.
Based on what you have learned so far, when do you expect
that these requirements will be funded and once they are
funded, how long will it take for the final product to be
delivered and implemented?
Mr. Kammerer. Thank you for your question, Mr. Chairman.
As I mentioned in my written statement and my oral
statement, currently we have completed the development of
business requirements for the next generation of a case
management system.
At the same time, Mr. Chairman, we are improving the
functionality of our current C-WINRS system to include a focus
on the back end, the business side of it. And as I mentioned,
we are piloting the subsistence allowance module.
The budget works in cycles. As you know, previous to the
release of the President's budget and the upcoming oversight
committee hearings, I could not give you any specifics on
funding specifically, but I look forward to keeping the
committee informed on the progress of our new system.
We are currently validating the requirements that we
developed for the new system with our other business lines
within VBA and VA and we will certainly keep you informed of
progress.
Mr. Flores. Okay. That would be good.
The President's budget will be delivered on Monday, the
4th, I believe. So I am hoping you will follow-up with us and
let us know what the ranking is of these C-WINRS program and
the VR&E IT resources following the release of that budget.
Mr. Kammerer. Yes, sir.
Mr. Flores. I am sorry. Go ahead. Okay.
The GAO report and the VSOs that were testifying here today
have shown that they are concerned about the tracking, the 60-
day tracking system that the VA currently has in place to track
successful rehabilitation.
According to the GAO's report, the VA commented that it
found little to be gained from directing limited resources to
implementing and executing additional post placement measures.
You know, the ultimate goal, you and I both share this, the
ultimate goal of VR&E is the long-term employment and
rehabilitation of our veterans.
And so I was going to ask you why does the VA find it
important to not extend that 60-day mark to truly support these
veterans over the longer term.
We did also do a check a bit ago to make sure that these
limits were not built in the statutes or not. So the VA has the
flexibility to change this if it elected to do so.
Mr. Kammerer. Yes, sir. Mr. Chairman, I understand your
question. It is an important question.
As GAO mentioned in their report on our programs, Mr.
Chairman, we are seeing veterans in our programs for an
extended period of time. As you know, veterans have the 48-
month training period for training and education as we in many
cases train and educate them for future employment. And then we
have the 18 months of employment services.
And as you mentioned, sir, the 60-day period is to
stabilize a particular veteran in employment and then once that
stabilization is complete, then we would in a dialogue with the
veteran say that employment and rehabilitation is complete.
The challenge, Mr. Chairman, with that six-year or extended
period of time is, I think we are sensitive to further
extending the period of time and the formal relationship
between the counselor and the veteran.
As I mentioned in my oral and written statement, we are
looking at a post outcome case management tool to try to be
able to measure beyond that 60-day period. And I look forward
to looking at other ways to measure that as well. As. you know,
Mr. Chairman, the congressionally directed long-term study is
measuring three cohorts over a 20-year period. So we look
forward to benefitting from that as well.
Mr. Flores. Okay. Again, I realize you are new at the job,
but if I were in your shoes, I would consider trying to extend
that a little bit. And it could be something as simple as 120
days out, 180 days out, a phone call to the veteran saying how
are you doing, you still employed, things like that. So, again,
we are not talking about a giant resource sink here, I do not
believe.
One last question. Have the VA's voc rehab counselors
participated in the VA all employee survey and, if so, what
were the results of the survey?
Mr. Kammerer. I do not know the answer to that question,
Mr. Chairman. I would have to take that for the record and get
back to you.
Mr. Flores. Okay. That will be great.
I now recognize the ranking member for his questions.
Mr. Takano. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
And thank you, Mr. Kammerer, for your service to our
country.
Mr. Kammerer, can you tell me, are VR&E counselors trained
on how to assist both the veterans with physical wounds and
those with mental health issues or does the training treat
these type of disabilities as the same, so----
Mr. Kammerer. If I understood your question, Mr. Takano, it
is our counselors, are they trained on both physical and mental
health aspects of the veteran's rehabilitation?
Mr. Takano. Right. Or do they have the capacity to do both?
Mr. Kammerer. Yes, sir, that is a great question. Thank you
for that question.
As you know, Mr. Takano, Mr. Ranking Member, our vocational
rehabilitation counselors have master's degrees in counseling
and they have extensive training and in many cases extensive.
I just visited a regional office. In fact, I met one of the
counselors who had worked at the state level, had worked with a
couple of our nonprofit partners and was now working with the
VA.
But to specifically answer your question, they are trained
and able to assist veterans both with physical needs and on the
mental health side. We certainly, in many and most cases defer
to the mental health and the clinical experts. So in many
cases, our counselors would make the appropriate referrals to
assist those veterans with formal mental health services on the
clinical side with VHA, or another agency. The Veterans Health
Administration.
We have recently developed some mental health training that
we are working on for our VRE workforce, sir, to better assist
them with identifying and doing the proper referrals on mental
health.
So, again, sir, we assist veterans with their
rehabilitative needs and that is true on the physical side,
too. I would say that we in many cases, as you know, make
referrals to the proper physical rehabilitation means in many
cases through VHA again.
Mr. Takano. But I think I heard from the GAO representative
before that part of the retention problem is the inability to
address some of these mental health issues of the veterans in
the program; is that correct?
Mr. Kammerer. Absolutely. And it is a very critical aspect
of a veteran's rehabilitation. I think the other thing I would
say is, as I mentioned in my statements, in my written and my
oral statements, sir, that we also have VetSuccess on campus
counselors who are also vocational rehabilitation counselors.
We have been partnering with VHA in their VITAL program
which provides mental health assistance to veterans on campus
in some cases based on their availability. So it is, as
mentioned in the statements and in the GAO report, it is a
critical aspect of the veteran's rehabilitation.
I just want to be careful that I say that we make the
proper referrals, but we certainly deal with and recognize and
support the mental health aspects of a veteran's
rehabilitation.
Mr. Takano. Thank you.
Is the VR&E program prepared for the influx of veterans
that will result from the anticipated drawn down of our troops?
What does the program need to ensure it is prepared to assist
these transitioning servicemembers?
Mr. Kammerer. As I mentioned in my statements, we do
provide support to transitioning servicemembers. In some cases,
as you know, they would become Chapter 31 clients. And if they
are eligible and entitled, we would facilitate their assistance
through the Chapter 31 services that we have spoken about.
Also, we provide the Chapter 36 education and employment
counseling which is very important for many servicemembers. So
we are working on our outreach for the Chapter 36 counseling
services to make sure that we reach the right veterans.
And as I mentioned also, we have approximately 200 on
military installations, Vocational rehabilitation counselors,
helping in IDES and other tasks.
Mr. Takano. But, I mean, do you have any projections as to
if there is going to be any increase in the numbers of
servicemembers needing the VR&E program because of the
anticipated draw down and are you prepared----
Mr. Kammerer. That is a great question, too, and I am sorry
if I did not directly----
Mr. Takano. That was my----
Mr. Kammerer [continuing]. If I misunderstood your
question. I think as the chairman mentioned in his opening
statement, as we continue to see a reduction, as the backlog
goes down and we continue to see adjudicated claims, we would
expect to see an increase in applications for VRE services
under Chapter 31 to include in some cases from transitioning
servicemembers.
My boss, Deputy Under Secretary Curt Coy, has given me
three specific tasks as the new VRE director. He has told me to
understand the current and the future population to include
transitioning servicemembers. He has told me, as we heard in
the GAO report, to make sure we get the right performance
metrics. And, sir, he has told me to make sure that we get the
right service delivery and service delivery models.
So as part of your question about transitioning
servicemembers, I am working very hard right now to understand
the future population, as we have more adjudicated claims, make
sure that we are prepared in the places we are and the places
we need to be to support those transitioning servicemembers and
veterans.
Mr. Takano. All right. Thank you so much.
Mr. Flores. Ms. Brownley, you are recognized for five
minutes.
Ms. Brownley. Thanks, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Mr. Kammerer.
I wanted to continue sort of my line of questioning on the
independent living program. And I am just wondering, because my
veterans are having issues with it in my district, and I am
just wondering if you have any data on, you know, how many
veterans applied in 2013 for the program and has the VA ever
considered lifting the cap and have you done any kind of cost
analysis on, you know, what it would cost if we did eliminate
the cap?
Mr. Kammerer. Yes, ma'am. Thank you for your question.
I would have to get back to you for the record on the exact
number of veterans that were rehabilitated through independent
living in 2013. I would say it is approximately two and a half
percent of the workload. Total rehabilitations which as I
mentioned in my statement was over 10,000. But I will get you
the exact number for the record.
I am not able to talk about pending legislation outside the
views process. I know Ms. Devlin, the former acting director of
the VRE program, as mentioned earlier, did testify extensively
in November about the IL program. So I have no specific
comments beyond Ms. Devlin's testimony about the cap because I
know that was previously addressed.
And if you need additional information, ma'am, I would be
happy to get back to you on the record on that as well.
Ms. Brownley. Well, that would be great. I would like to
follow-up on that.
And, I mean, just in your position with the VA, are you
hearing about this particular program and----
Mr. Kammerer. No. I am certainly happy to comment on that.
I did not mean to not more specifically answer your question. I
just did not want to provide specific----
Ms. Brownley. Correct. I understand.
Mr. Kammerer. [continuing]. Numbers without having those--
--
Ms. Brownley. Thank you, sir. I appreciate that.
Mr. Kammerer [continuing]. Right at my fingertips. I think
generally speaking that we have been, as I understand, right
below the cap for the past several years. And so we have not
currently had an issue with the cap. I think several years ago,
we were close and we did some outreach several years ago.
So it certainly, as you mentioned, ma'am, and in my
experience, in my brief experience in this position, it is a
very critical aspect of what we do because if--and particularly
with older veterans or veterans with very difficult challenges,
physical and otherwise, while it is a very small population,
most of those veterans, as you well know, to qualify for that
program have to have a serious employment handicap and not be
able to seek and maintain employment.
So what we want to do for them is to restore their
activities of daily living. So anywhere providing them work to
help them with modifications to their home and visiting their
home and helping them with their rehabilitation is very, very
critical, as I mentioned, again, for a very small but important
population of veterans. And hopefully some of them at some
point would be able to return to employment opportunities.
So I look forward to working with you and the subcommittee
and GAO and others to make sure that we continue to strengthen
that program.
Ms. Brownley. Likewise. And I think for our vets in Ventura
County in California, it is the 12-year statutory limitation
that is the--it is the bigger issue because they are older vets
and, you know, because of the 12-year limitation, they have
exceeded and do not have access to the program for that. So
that is another area that I would like us to look into.
Mr. Kammerer. Yes, ma'am.
Ms. Brownley. Thank you very much.
I yield back.
Mr. Flores. Thank you, Ms. Brownley.
Mrs. Kirkpatrick, you are recognized for five minutes for
questions.
Mrs. Kirkpatrick. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
You have a challenging job and I appreciate the good work
you are doing. I just want to talk a little bit about the jobs
portion of that.
I recently took a combined Armed Service Veterans' and
Affairs Committee trip to some military bases overseas. And my
role in that was talking with active-duty members who are going
to transition out of the military very soon and how we can have
a seamless transfer when they become veterans.
And the two most frequent questions I got from service
members was how am I going to find a job? What kind of job am I
going to have? So I am interested in your Title 36 counseling
that you start with active duty.
At what point do you start reaching out to those members
who are going to transfer out?
Mr. Kammerer. Thank you, ma'am, for that question. And as
you mentioned, it is a very important discussion. It is a very
important question.
I think the first answer I would provide is through the
revised Transition Assistance Program, we do have content that
describes our programs and services. And we are, as I mentioned
in a response to Mr. Takano, we are working to be as aggressive
as possible to reach out to transitioning servicemembers to
provide them information on Chapter 36.
If I could answer your specific concern about jobs as well,
the one thing that is critical with the VRE programs and
services is in many and most cases and as I was discussing with
Ms. Brownley about the IL, in most of our veteran clients, we
are interested in making sure that we achieve an employment
outcome for them.
If we help them participate in an educational or training
program, at the end of the experience, we want to be able to
help them gain and maintain the right employment for them based
on their knowledge, their abilities, their military
experiences. So that is absolutely critical.
I would say I visited an RO recently and we have an
employment coordinator in the VRE program, in the RO, and I
discussed with him----
Mrs. Kirkpatrick. And may I just interrupt because----
Mr. Kammerer. Yes.
Mrs. Kirkpatrick [continuing]. My time is running out? What
I really want to know are they present on the military bases
and do they make contact with active duty service members?
Mr. Kammerer. I am sorry I did not----
Mrs. Kirkpatrick [continuing]. Is there contact a year out
or eight months out?
Mr. Kammerer. And I should have more specifically addressed
that. We do have the 200 IDES counselors that are physically on
military installations and they are vocational rehab counselors
that have the master's degree in counseling.
And we do provide that content that I mentioned in the
transition program. And we also have other contract and other
counselors that support transitioning servicemembers that sign
up for the Chapter 36 services. So we reach them when they are
going through their transition. We make our content available
through social media.
Mrs. Kirkpatrick. So that could be just within the last
week of their being in active duty, right? That is my concern.
Mr. Kammerer. Oh, I understand your question. Yes.
Mrs. Kirkpatrick. And, actually, if the contact does not
happen until they start the transition process, that only
leaves a week or so, right?
Mr. Kammerer. I think the military services, ma'am, and the
revised TAP program are working to reach servicemembers earlier
in their transition.
Mrs. Kirkpatrick. That would be my request based on my
conversation with service members.
Mr. Kammerer. And I would not want to speak for the DoD
side.
Mrs. Kirkpatrick. Right.
Mr. Kammerer. But I know on the transition activities, the
VA supports that we are connecting with servicemembers earlier
either through e-benefits or in the TAP program. And I think
your concern is are we reaching and providing information to
servicemembers as early as possible.
Mrs. Kirkpatrick. Right.
Mr. Kammerer. And I will make sure that I continue to work
towards that working with DoD and----
Mrs. Kirkpatrick. Thank you.
Mr. Kammerer [continuing]. Making sure that we do that.
Mrs. Kirkpatrick. I think that is really important. Thank
you very much.
I yield back.
Mr. Flores. Thank you, Ms. Kirkpatrick.
And, Mr. Kammerer, I appreciate your testimony today. And,
again, I appreciate your service to our country and to our
veterans. You are now excused.
I thank everyone for their attendance today and this frank
discussion on how to improve this important program for our
Nation's veterans.
Finally, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have five
legislative to revise and extend their remarks and to include
any extraneous material in the record of today's hearing.
Hearing no objection, so ordered.
If there is nothing further, this hearing is adjourned.
Thank you.
[Whereupon, at 11:03 a.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]
APPENDIX
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Prepared Statement of Jack Kammerer
Mr. Chairman and members of the Subcommittee, thank you for
inviting me to appear before you today to discuss the Department of
Veterans Affairs (VA) Vocational Rehabilitation and Employment (VR&E)
program. As I near the end of the first 90 days as the Director of VR&E
Service, I have already seen how VR&E staff in Washington DC, and VR&E
staff in the field offices are committed to and engaged in multiple
initiatives to extend our outreach capabilities, increase program
efficiencies, and enhance our current technologies, all of which will
result in better support for Veterans.
Through our VetSuccess on Campus (VSOC) program, we have
collaborated with 94 schools across the country to provide educational
and vocational counseling and other on-site services to over 80,000
Veteran students. Under the VSOC program, Veterans have the opportunity
to succeed through coordinated delivery of on-campus benefits
assistance and adjustment counseling to assist Veterans in completing
their college education and entering the labor market in viable
careers. We also collaborate with the Department of Defense to provide
services to Active Duty, Reserve, and National Guard Servicemembers
through the Integrated Disability Evaluation System (IDES). Through our
involvement in the IDES program, we have expanded early intervention
counseling and other available services for over 28,000 transitioning
Servicemembers at 71 military installations.
We also continue to work with Federal, state, and local government
agencies, as well as private-sector employers, to increase Veteran
employment utilizing special employer incentives, special hiring
authorities, on-the-job training, and non-paid work experience for
those Veterans in our program. VR&E Service is currently developing new
program performance metrics that will more effectively evaluate the
full scope of VR&E work activities at the local, regional, and national
levels. VR&E Service is partnering with the Veterans Health
Administration (VHA) to develop video telecounseling for nationwide
implementation. VR&E intends to use the same, secure technology
currently in use in VHA's telehealth initiative.
My testimony today will provide an overview of the VR&E program,
performance summary, discussion of VR&E's case-management information
technology system, and information on actions taken to implement the
Government Accountability Office's (GAO) recommendations for the VR&E
program provided in its January 2014 report.
VR&E Program Overview
The Veterans Benefits Administration's (VBA) VR&E program assists
Servicemembers and Veterans with service-connected disabilities to
prepare for, find, and keep suitable employment. For Veterans with
service-connected disabilities so severe that they cannot immediately
consider employment, the independent living (IL) program offers
services to improve their ability to live as independently as possible.
The VR&E program also provides educational/career counseling to
transitioning Servicemembers and Veterans that are eligible for VA
educational benefits, and children, widows, and spouses of Veterans who
have permanent and total service-connected disabilities, as authorized
under Title 38, United States Code, Chapter 36. Additionally, VR&E
provides vocational and rehabilitation benefits to children born with
spina bifida for certain Veterans with service in Vietnam or Korea.
VR&E employs nearly 1,000 professional vocational rehabilitation
counselors and delivers services through a network of 420 office
locations. Our service delivery model works to support Veterans where
they are located, and includes operations at 56 regional offices, the
National Capital Region Benefits Office, 198 VR&E out-based offices, 71
IDES installations, and 94 VSOC schools/sites.
VR&E Program Data
In fiscal year (FY) 2013, VR&E successfully rehabilitated over
10,000 Veterans with service-connected disabilities. Over 8,500 were
rehabilitated into suitable employment, a 6.6 percent increase from FY
2012. The remaining were Veterans with disabilities so severe that they
could not currently pursue employment, but were rehabilitated after
they were able to gain greater independence through the delivery of IL
services. VR&E also had a 14.2 percent increase in applicants in FY
2013, rising from over 72,000 to almost 83,000, demonstrating that our
outreach efforts are reaching Servicemembers and Veterans in need of
assistance.
Information Technology
Corporate WINRS (CWINRS) is the VR&E case-management software
application (named after the stations that collaborated to develop the
original version:
Waco, Indianapolis, Newark, Roanoke, and Seattle). CWINRS is used
to record the adjudication of VR&E claims, rehabilitation planning,
provision of services, and the disposition of cases. CWINRS tracks a
Veteran's rehabilitation progress through the VR&E program. This
includes establishing the Veteran's entitlement to benefits, tracking
appointments, and forwarding transactions to the financial management
systems for vendor payments. CWINRS utilizes VBA's corporate database
to maintain participant information, and interfaces with VBA's Benefits
Delivery Network (BDN) and other financial systems to process payment
and accounting transactions. Case-specific information for participants
in all five rehabilitation tracks available through the VR&E program
(re-employment, rapid access to employment, employment through long-
term services, self-employment, and independent living) is managed
through the CWINRS application.
Current CWINRS enhancements focus on developing a subsistence
allowance module, which will eliminate VR&E's reliance on the legacy
BDN system and move towards payment through the corporate Financial
Accounting System (FAS). The new FAS corporate payment module is being
beta tested in eight regional offices, and is currently successfully
making subsistence payments to more than 350 Veteran participants in
the VR&E program. VR&E Service is finalizing development of this module
to enable national deployment.
VR&E Service has also partnered with VHA to develop and pilot an
online medical referral tracking system. This system promotes
communication between VR&E and VHA and improves the coordination of
services to Veterans. The new system was recently piloted at nine
sites. We are analyzing data to help us develop a future deployment
plan.
VR&E has also built requirements for a new case-management system
that will expand upon the functionality in the Veterans Benefits
Management System to support the VR&E program, including our VSOC and
IDES programs.
Update on Implementation of GAO Recommendations
GAO made six recommendations in its January 2014 report titled,
``VA Vocational Rehabilitation and Employment: Further Performance and
Workload Management Improvements are Needed.'' First, GAO recommended
that ``any revised set of national and regional performance measures
for the VR&E program include measures of (a) the proportion of program
participants successfully rehabilitated into employment, and (b) the
proportion of participants who obtain other benefits from VR&E
services.'' As described earlier, VR&E is currently engaged in
redesigning local, regional, and national performance measures that
will include collection of a broader spectrum of performance data to
more effectively evaluate program success. As a part of the redesign
process, VR&E is investigating all viable options for capturing and
reporting on not just positive program outcomes, but also on the
outcomes of all program participants. Some measures may most
appropriately be gathered at the national level, but all measures will
be designed to align with each other and support effective oversight of
the entire program.
GAO's second recommendation was to ``develop new measures of long-
term employment that go beyond the minimum 60 days of post-placement
monitoring that is currently required. In developing measures, consider
the feasibility of using results from planned post-closure surveys of
Veterans as a data source.'' VR&E provides comprehensive counseling, as
well as training and rehabilitative services, to remove employment
barriers that challenge a program participant's ability to both obtain
and maintain suitable employment. Unlike many other vocational
rehabilitation and training programs, VR&E has the opportunity to work
with participants over a multi-year period, including providing
training and education, and up to 18 months of employment services
focused on ensuring employment readiness and outcomes. Additionally,
VR&E counselors use professional judgment in determining when Veterans
have adequately adjusted to their employment positions and, in certain
circumstances, will follow Veterans beyond the 60-day minimum post-
employment period. Currently, VR&E is exploring different mechanisms
and processes to follow up with employed Veterans after their formal
departure from the VR&E program. A post-outcome case management tool is
in development that will facilitate VR&E follow up with Veterans months
after case closure to determine if additional services are needed to
maintain employment or to sustain maximum independence in daily living.
VR&E's ongoing Longitudinal Study is currently tracking three cohorts
of Veterans (2010, 2012, 2014) over a 20-year period, and it will
provide data to assess the long-term success of participation in the
program and post-service outcomes.
GAO's third recommendation was to ``conduct nonresponse analysis of
the results of VA's ongoing Voice of the Veteran customer satisfaction
surveys.'' While VA's current Voice of the Veteran Continuous
Measurement Satisfaction Research Program does not currently include
non-response bias analyses, the survey findings are statistically
valid. However, contingent on resource availability, VBA will modify
the survey contract to include non-response analyses of the results.
Fourth, GAO recommended that VA, ``in revisiting VA's formula for
allocating VR&E staff among the regional offices, (a) assess the
inclusion of factors related to regional office performance and, if
warranted, remove them from the formula, and (b) assess the exclusion
of any factor related to the number of educational counseling cases in
each regional office and, if warranted, add such a factor.'' VR&E
Service works closely with VBA's Office of Field Operations in
determining how resources are allocated. VR&E Service is designing the
staffing model to account for regional factors impacting performance,
and together with the Office of Field Operations, we will revisit the
metrics used in the resource allocation model to ensure continued
validity and data integrity.
GAO's fifth recommendation was to ``collect information on the
regional offices' approaches for managing their VR&E workloads, assess
the advantages and disadvantages of these approaches, and use the
results of this assessment to provide guidance to the offices on
potential best practices or options to consider.'' VR&E Service allows
local managers to decide how best to manage their workloads, but agrees
that there is merit in collecting and analyzing data and communicating
best practices on workload management.
GAO's final recommendation was ``to provide additional training to
all individual Vocational Rehabilitation Counselors (VRCs) on job
placement strategies and workplace accommodations, potentially as part
of the effort to develop a competency-based training approach.'' VR&E
Service has provided multiple training activities and curriculums
focused on job placement and job accommodations. VR&E conducted
Employment Coordinator classroom training in 2012 and deployed Training
and Performance Support System modules on Employment Services in June
2013 and Self-Employment in July 2013. VR&E Service also provided field
offices with training modules on posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD),
traumatic brain injury (TBI), and employment training on November 29,
2013. The training includes information about job accommodations for
Veterans with TBI and PTSD, and answers common questions regarding the
Americans with Disabilities Act as it pertains to TBI and PTSD.
Additionally, training on special employer incentives was released on
January 29, 2014, and is accessible nationwide to all VR&E staff.
VR&E's Electronic Performance Support System (EPSS) has a section
that offers essential guidance to VR&E employees on employment and job
accommodations. EPSS is a portal designed to assist local VRCs in
performing the essential functions of their job, to include employment-
related duties. The employment section of EPSS offers assistance on
procedures for identifying Veterans' job-accommodation needs, provides
training to counselors to help them work with Veterans on their ability
to overcome challenges in obtaining and maintaining employment, and
provides VR&E employees appropriate intervention and monitoring
strategies to help Veterans adjust to their new position and the
workforce. These job aids are updated continuously based on feedback or
changes in law, regulation, and VR&E Service policies.
Efforts are currently underway to update and convert existing
training materials into web-based training on job accommodations and
employment service delivery to better serve VR&E employees and
Veterans.
Concluding Remarks
VR&E Service will continue to assess and improve the delivery of
vocational rehabilitation services to a most deserving active military
and Veteran population: those men and women who have incurred a
service-connected disability. We have developed and fielded
comprehensive and detailed training, conducted significant oversight,
and continue to focus on efforts to enhance both service delivery and
the actual services we provide.
Mr. Chairman, this concludes my statement. I would be pleased to
answer questions from you or any of the other members of the
Subcommittee.
Statement For The Record
PARALYZED VETERANS OF AMERICA
Chairman Flores, Ranking Member Takano, and members of the
Subcommittee, Paralyzed Veterans of America (PVA), thanks you for the
opportunity to submit our views pertaining to the VA's Vocational
Rehabilitation and Employment (VR&E) program. PVA appreciates the fact
that you are reviewing this program that is intended to help those
veterans that sustained disabilities as a result of their military
service that may be inhibiting their progress as they consider future
employment, or work towards improving their quality of life. We support
this Subcommittees concern and effort as it recommends improvements for
this program that can help the men and women that have honorably served
their nation and are making an effort to transition back to the
civilian world.
The purpose of the VR&E program, as authorized under Chapter 31 of
title 38 USC, is to provide comprehensive services to address the
employment barriers of service-connected disabled veterans in an effort
to achieve maximum independence in daily living, and to obtain and
maintain gainful employment. Ultimately, a goal of the VR&E program is
to provide services to severely disabled veterans that will help them
achieve the highest quality of life possible.
Information from the recent GAO report ``VA VOCATIONAL
REHABILITATION AND EMPLOYMENT, Further Performance and Workload
Management Improvements Are Needed,'' (GAO-14-61) highlights some
issues that will require attention and continued oversight of this
important VA program. PVA generally concurs with the findings of the
report and we likewise support the recommendations presented in the
report. The members of PVA, veterans with spinal cord injury or
disorder, tend to be higher volume users of VR&E services. As such, we
would like to offer a few areas that could be improved in VR&E.
Eligibility Period
Currently, to be eligible for VR&E a veteran must have been
discharged under circumstances other than dishonorable and have a
disability rating of 20 percent or more that was incurred in, or
aggravated by their service. The eligibility period to receive VR&E
services is within a 12-year period beginning on either: (1) the date
of separation from military service, or (2) the date the veteran
receives a disability rating from the VA. The veteran must be in need
of vocational rehabilitation in an effort to overcome employment
barriers caused by such service-connected disability. VR&E provides for
48 months of entitlement to participate in the program. Unfortunately
veterans only have twelve years from the date of the initial VA
disability rating notification to utilize the program, with an
exception for those with a serious employment disability. Although the
eligibility period for VR&E was not a specific component of the GAO
report this limiting factor could be detrimental to the success of a
veteran's rehabilitation.
PVA and the other co-authors of the The Independent Budget,
Disabled American Veterans, AMVETS, and Veterans of Foreign Wars,
strongly believe that this 12-year eligibility period should be
eliminated and all veterans with employment impediments should qualify
for VR&E services. Many veterans are not aware of the VA's VR&E program
and how it can be used by disabled veterans' to improve their lives.
Often veterans learn of the VR&E services while talking to a VSO
service officer or from information received from a service
organization several years after their discharge. At that time they may
have very few years remaining to utilize the program, or may be past
the eligibility period.
After severe injuries such as traumatic brain injury (TBI) or
spinal cord injury (SCI) a veteran requires years to complete
rehabilitation and make the adjustment to basic activities of daily
living. During this time he or she is focused on recovery and the
activity of returning to work is not a top priority for the veteran.
Nevertheless, the veteran's eligibility is elapsing.
Additionally, as many disabled veterans grow older, their service
connected disability may impose further restrictions on the veteran,
thus preventing him or her from continuing their civilian work
activities. The veteran may still have the economic need and the desire
to work for an additional ten or twenty years. With the 12-year time
limitation, service connected disabled veterans become disqualified and
not able to utilize the VR&E services later in life to maintain their
active productive lifestyles.
Remove the Cap on Independent Living
The Independent Living (IL) Program, established by Congress in
1980 as an option within the Vocational Rehabilitation and Employment
program to facilitate the provision of services, training, or equipment
to veterans with severe disabilities. This program began as a pilot
program with a limited enrollment of 500 severely disabled veterans
each year. Since its beginning the program has seen periodic
incremental increases in the maximum enrollment. Although the program
has proven to benefit disabled veterans during their rehabilitation,
existing legislation continues to limit, or cap the yearly enrollment.
More than a decade of combat has produces many veterans that could
benefit from assistance from the Independent Living option. Congress
should remove the cap of 2,700 per year for Independent Living
enrollment and vocational rehabilitation counselors should be trained
and encouraged to recommend the IL program when it could benefit a
veteran's rehabilitation.
Reduce Counselor Caseload
As of March 2013, the VR&E field staff totaled 1,281, of which 890
were vocational rehabilitation counselors. The average caseload for
counselors at that time was 139 veterans, a decline from 152 reported
in FY 2009. We believe this caseload is excessive to achieve the
results that could be realized. PVA has a vocational rehabilitation
employment program that is currently located in six metropolitan
areas--Long Beach, Augusta, Boston, Minneapolis, San Antonio, and
Richmond. Each office is located in a VA hospital, at the spinal cord
unit to work primarily with spinal cord injured veterans and other
seriously disabled veterans. Although spinal cord injured veterans are
considered seriously disabled by the rehab industry standards, thus
difficult to place in employment, PVA's program has had a remarkable
success rate for placing disabled veterans in employment. Since the
rehab profession considers a caseload of 125 for one counselor to be
the maximum, PVA has strived to keep councilors' workloads below that
number. This has allowed each counselor to spend more time with each
veteran, explore all impairments to employment such as day care for
children or transportation problems, and work to find solutions for
these issues. They also develop employment contacts throughout the
region that are interested in hiring veterans for full-time employment,
or perhaps part-time employment. Reintroduction to employment often
starts as part time, allowing the veteran to become oriented back into
the workplace. This individual attention and guidance requires extra
time from the counselor, time that is not available if their caseload
is excessive. For this reason, we believe Congress should authorize
sufficient staff and appropriate sufficient dollars to reduce the
caseload.
Increased Funding for VR&E
The number of servicemembers, including National Guard and
Reservists who have recently separated, and over the next 5 years will
leave active duty is an unprecedented total. Many will leave active
duty with a service connected disability, while others will develop a
disability related to their service after leaving active duty.
Congressional funding for the VR&E program must keep pace with
veterans' demand for this service. Our veterans have made a sacrifice
for our nation, which is why our leaders must make a concerted effort
to ensure that access to education, employment, and training
opportunities are available for their transition to the civilian job
market. There is a need for increased funding for additional staffing
for VR&E including additional vocational rehabilitation counselors and
employment coordinators. The current counselor to client ratios of
approximately 139 veterans to one counselor is an unacceptable ratio.
With many seriously injured service members returning from Iraq and
Afghanistan who will need this assistance, PVA believes the funding for
VR&E should be increased.
Chairman Flores, Ranking Member Takano, and members of the
Subcommittee, PVA would like to thank you for this opportunity to
express our views on the VA's VR&E program. We thank you for continuing
the work in this Subcommittee to ensure that veterans have the best
available programs, options, and opportunities as they transition to
the civilian world.
Information Required by Rule XI 2(g)(4) of the House of
Representatives
Pursuant to Rule XI 2(g)(4) of the House of Representatives, the
following information is provided regarding federal grants and
contracts.
Fiscal Year 2013
National Council on Disability--Contract for Services--$35,000.
Fiscal Year 2012
No federal grants or contracts received.
Fiscal Year 2011
Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims, administered by the Legal
Services Corporation--National Veterans Legal Services Program--
$262,787.
WOUNDED WARRIOR PROJECT
Chairman Flores, Ranking Member Takano, and Members of the
Subcommittee:
Wounded Warrior Project (WWP) appreciates your holding this hearing
and welcomes the opportunity to share our perspective on VA's
Vocational Rehabilitation and Employment (VR&E) Program.
With WWP's mission to honor and empower wounded warriors, our
vision is to foster the most successful, well-adjusted generation of
veterans in our nation's history. With military careers often cut short
by life-altering injuries, it is particularly important that this
generation of wounded warriors be afforded the tools, skills,
resources, education, and support needed to find their new passion,
secure employment, and develop fulfilling careers in ways that matter
to them and their families. But, for a variety of reasons, vocational
rehabilitation, education, and employment programs designed to give
disabled veterans the help they need to gain success in the workforce
are too often failing them. The VA's VR&E program, in particular,
should be a key transitional pathway for wounded warriors.
Wounded warriors and WWP's field staff--who work daily with our
wounded warriors across the country--report wide-ranging variability in
program administration and education/employment plan approvals,
counselor skills, experience, understanding of TBI and PTSD, and
interpretation and knowledge of the program's services. Though some
warriors report positive experiences and have worked with dedicated
counselors, this represents the exception and not the norm.
WWP annually surveys our alumni of servicemembers and veterans
wounded after 9/11 to learn more about their physical and mental well-
being and progress toward achieving economic self-sufficiency. In 2013
of those pursuing an education--only about 20 percent were using VR&E
while 54 percent opted to use the Post 9/11 GI Bill to finance their
education.\1\ Given that VR&E provides counseling and other supports
and is limited to service-connected disabled veterans, it is striking
that the majority of our alumni are selecting the Post 9/11 GI Bill--
which does not provide the counseling and assistance that VR&E offers.
Some warriors and field staff offer the reasoning that the Post 9/11 GI
Bill is easy access and a swifter means to get an education. Many
others report it is because they would have ``more freedom to pursue
what they want, not what the vocational counselor tells them.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Franklin, et al, 2013 Wounded Warrior Project Survey Report,
71 (July 2013). The percentage of alumni using the Post 9/11 GI Bill
has continued to increase (53% in 2012, some 46% in 2011, and nearly
28% in 2010) while the percentage of alumni reporting the use of VR&E
continues to decline (21% in 2012, down from almost 25% in 2011, and
some 36% in 2010).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Warriors have reported instances of VR&E counselors challenging
their employment aspirations by denying them access to their program of
choice and pressing them instead to pursue ``any job'' as a goal. In
other instances, wounded warriors seeking to go back to school to earn
a second degree--to better compete in the job market--have met
objection from counselors who view VR&E simply as a ``jobs program.''
Still, others, particularly those with TBI and PTSD, have had to try to
convince VR&E counselors--who do not adequately understand TBI and PTSD
(and the broad spectrum of these disabilities and their impact on an
individual's abilities and functional limitations)--that they would be
able to handle and even succeed in higher education or employment. The
prevalence of TBI and PTSD among this generation's warriors underscores
the importance of ensuring that programs like VR&E are responsive to
the unique circumstances associated with those conditions.
Additionally, warriors report delays in receiving VR&E services,
difficulty communicating and scheduling with their counselors, and
reduced opportunities to achieve successful and timely rehabilitation.
The size of counselors' caseloads has particularly limited their
ability to provide adequate on-going support and assistance to veterans
throughout the course of their education or training program,
especially to those with TBI and PTSD who need such supports.
The following comments are emblematic of the experiences of many:
``In my experience working with Voc Rehab counselors, many of my
veterans were exasperated by their counselors and oftentimes felt as
though their counselors had such a large caseload that they were not
getting the attention needed . . . and more often than not being
brushed off when they asked for assistance.''
``While many of the Voc Rehab staff are sensitive to the veteran's
needs, they do not seem to, as a whole, have an understanding of where
the veteran is coming from . . . they are quick to write off a
veteran's career choice due to their disability rather than take into
account things such as passion, determination, and drive.''
``Many veterans have to justify why they want a specific degree or
[employment goal] and that doesn't always match up with what the
counselor believes that veteran can be successful at based on their
history or [medical] diagnosis.''
The recent Government Accountability Report on VR&E highlights
VR&E's workload management challenges and gaps in VR&E staff
training.\2\ The wide variability in counselor caseloads among the
regional offices is particularly concerning, as is the fact that the
program is just now--at the end of 2013 and into 2014--providing new
staff training courses on mental health to improve counselors' ability
to assist veterans with PTSD and other mental health issues.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ U.S. Government Accountability Office, ``VA Vocational
Rehabilitation and Employment: Further Performance and Workload
Management Improvements are Needed,'' GAO-14-61 (2014).
\3\ Id. at 27 and 32.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
VR&E counselors need to be sensitive and not only understand the
struggles, but also the strengths, of warriors with TBI and PTSD so
that they, in turn, can help warriors recognize that they are not
``broken,'' but continue to have great potential. They must be partners
in the warriors' rehabilitation, not critical gatekeepers who too
readily dismiss ``unrealistic'' aspirations. In working with this
generation, counselors must also understand the very profound
disorientation experienced by warriors whose lives and life-plans have
been upended and out of their control. As one put it, the ``For me the
most difficult part [of the transition] is finding purpose. [I] never
really had to think about my purpose when I was in the Corps.'' \4\ A
VR&E counselor must have the sensitivity, training and experience to
help that warrior find new purpose, or to link him to appropriate
professional help. But even the most capable, empathetic counselor--
challenged with 150 other ``cases'' to manage--is unlikely even to have
sufficient time to provide that warrior the needed level and kind of
support. More appropriate staffing levels must be a component of
refocusing and re-energizing this important program. In all, we urge
the Subcommittee to make the VR&E program a greater priority through
budgetary, programmatic, and outcomes-based action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ Franklin, et al, 2013 Wounded Warrior Project Survey Report,
108 (July 2013).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Question For The Record
At the HVAC EO 2/27 hearing on the VR&E program, Chairman Flores
asked VA witness Jack Kammerer the ranking of the CWINRS program in the
VR&E program IT program resourcing for FY15.
The following is VA's response:
Response: Funding for CWINRS enhancements to develop the next
VR&E case management system remains on the list of IT development
requirements for resourcing. VA continuously reviews its overall list
of IT requirements to determine if projects can move forward as
additional funding becomes available. It is not possible to project if
and when funding will become available, as requirements continue to
evolve. Currently, this development project is not funded in FY14 or
FY15.