Printer Friendly Version

C O N T E N T S
July 10, 2008

Independent Living Program

OPENING STATEMENTS

Hon. John J. Hall
Chairwoman Herseth Sandlin, prepared statement of
Hon. John Boozman, Ranking Republican Member
        Prepared statement of Congressman Boozman

WITNESSES

U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, Ruth Fanning, Director, Vocational Rehabilitation and Employment Service, Veterans Benefits Administration
        Prepared statement of Ms. Fanning

American Legion, Mark Walker, Assistant Director, National Economic Commission
        Prepared statement of Mr. Walker
McCartney, Bruce, Midway, GA
        Prepared statement Mr. McCartney
National Council on Independent Living, John A. Lancaster, Executive Director
        Prepared statement of Mr. Lancaster
Paralyzed Veterans of America, Richard Daley, Associate Legislation Director
        Prepared statement of Mr. Daley

SUBMISSIONS FOR THE RECORD

Disabled American Veterans, Kerry Baker, Associate National Legislative Director, statement
Maui County Veterans Council, Wailuku, Maui, HI, Rogelio G. Evangelista, President, letter
National Rehabilitation and Rediscovery Foundation, Inc., Marianne Talbot, Ph.D., President, statement

MATERIAL SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD

Hon. Stephanie Herseth Sandlin, Chairwoman, Subcommittee on Economic Opportunity, Committee on Veterans' Affairs, to Ms. Ruth Fanning, Director, Vocational Rehabilitation and Employment Service, U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, letter dated July 11, 2008, and VA responses

INDEPENDENT LIVING PROGRAM

Thursday, July 10, 2008
U. S. House of Representatives,
Subcommittee on Economic Opportunity,
Committee on Veterans' Affairs,
Washington, DC.

The Subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 1:17 p.m., in Room 334, Cannon House Office Building, Hon. Stephanie Herseth Sandlin [Chairwoman of the Subcommittee] presiding. 

Present: Representatives Herseth Sandlin, Hall, Boozman, and Scalise.

OPENING STATEMENT OF CHAIRWOMAN STEPHANIE HERSETH SANDLIN, AS PRESENTED BY HON. JOHN J. HALL

Mr. HALL.  [Presiding]  Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen.  The Committee on Veterans’ Affairs Subcommittee on Economic Opportunity hearing on the Independent Living Program (ILP) will come to order.  First, I will ask you to join me in standing and saying the pledge.  The flag is at both ends of the room. 

[Pledge of Allegiance]

Mr. HALL.  Thank you, and thank you for joining us.  Thank you for your patience while we were voting.  Today’s hearing will give the Subcommittee the opportunity to learn more about the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Vocational Rehabilitation and Employment (VR&E) Independent Living Program and how it is assisting our veterans in a seamless rehabilitation into family and community life.  As many of you know, the goal of the Independent Living Program is to ensure that eligible disabled veterans are able to maintain maximum independence in their daily living by developing learned skills that may benefit them for future employment. 

Some of our panelists might recall this Subcommittee held its first hearing back in March of last year that gave our new Members the opportunity to learn about the programs under our jurisdiction.  One such program that was considered was the Vocational Rehabilitation and Employment.  But today, we are here to specifically review the Independent Living Program. 

As we will hear from our panelists, many of our most severely disabled veterans’ lives have been profoundly changed for the positive as a direct result of these independent living (IL) services.  Unfortunately, Members of this Subcommittee have also heard from veterans that have raised concerns that the VA staff is poorly trained to properly refer veterans to available resources, mismanagement of claims by VA personnel that cause a delay in service, and the need to increase the current statutory limit of 2,500 slots annually. 

Earlier this year, we received a letter from a veteran who urged the full Committee Chairman to consider reviewing independent living services for veterans with chronic and severe post traumatic stress disorder (PTSD).  Specifically, this veteran would like to see an expansion of the independent living services to provide Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF) and Operation Enduring Freedom (OEF) veterans with opportunities for employment services that can also benefit older veterans who have service connected psychiatric disabilities. 

I am interested in hearing from our panelists about this and other suggestions to determine how we can best serve all our veterans, especially in light of the Department of Veterans Affairs Office of Inspector General’s report dated December 17, 2007.  A few of the issues of concern raised in this report include VR&E rehabilitation rate calculations and information on total program participation and outcomes were not fully disclosed in the VA Performance and Accountability Report; the 2,500 statutory cap was underutilized in fiscal year 2006 and services to our veterans were delayed; and the VA should effectively monitor the number of new independent living participants and detailed information should be provided to Congress for review.  It is very important that we examine these concerns, especially at a time when the VA Secretary recognizes an increased need for independent living services over the next ten years. 

Today’s servicemembers are returning with PTSD, traumatic brain injury, amputations, and severe burns that would have been fatal in previous conflicts.  Congress must continue to reexamine the development and results of this program to provide the best services in a timely manner.  The men and women who serve our Nation honorably deserve, and should receive, the best our country can offer.  I look forward to working with Chairwoman Herseth Sandlin, Ranking Member Boozman, and other Members of this Subcommittee to explore how we can improve the VA’s Independent Living Program for our servicemembers and veterans.

I now recognize Mr. Boozman for his opening remarks. 

[The statement of Chairwoman Herseth Sandlin appears in the Appendix]

OPENING STATEMENT HON. JOHN BOOZMAN

Mr. BOOZMAN.  Thank you very much, Chairman Hall.  I think the first order of the day is to thank both members of our first panel for their service to their country.  I believe both Mr. Lancaster and Mr. McCartney are service-disabled veterans of the Vietnam War and they honor us with their presence here today.  So, we really do appreciate you very, very much.

Chairman Hall, I believe you and I would agree that the VA’s Vocational Rehabilitation Employment Program should be the crown jewel of programs for disabled veterans.  The program is generous in its benefits and the law provides VR&E staff with wide latitude in determining who qualifies for the program.  It is important to note that employment is the goal of the VR&E Program and for the vast majority of those who participate in the Program a job is reasonable and achievable.

Unfortunately for our most severely injured, employment is sometimes not an option so the VR&E Program includes independent living services for those who cannot work because of their service connected disability.  Such a program is designed to enable such veterans to achieve maximum independence in daily living and VA may contract for these services with qualified providers.  Title 38 defines independence and daily living as “the ability of a veteran, without the services of others," or "with the reduced level of the services of others, to live and function within such veteran’s family and community.”  That is a fairly broad definition.  And I would hope that Ms. Fanning would describe how her staff determines what fits within the definition. 

I want to make a point about one way we judge the Program’s performance.  As an example of the difficulty we face in using VA data to determine the Program’s performance, I would call your attention to the latest Veterans Benefits Administration (VBA) Annual Benefits Report.  On pages 77 to 84, the report shows 884 veterans receiving independent living services, and on page 86, the data shows 949 participants and 2,957 veterans rehabilitated.  Clearly the inconsistency between the number of participants and the number of those rehabilitated, as well as the two different amounts of participants, does not give us a clear understanding of how the Program is doing.  So I hope that we can work together so that we can make the data a little bit more understandable for us. 

Finally, I am glad to have Mr. Lancaster, Executive Director of the National Counsel on Independent Living with us today.  I understand that the National Council on Independent Living (NCIL) is not represented on the Secretary’s Advisory Council on Rehab.  It seems to me that the NCIL should be a Member of the Committee because of their broad experience in independent living.  And I urge Secretary Peake to consider, in fact I urge him to invite, NCIL to become an active member in his Advisory Committee.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I yield back.

[The statement of Congressman Boozman appears in the Appendix]

Mr. HALL.  Thank you, Mr. Boozman.  Before I proceed, regarding consistency, I just want to mention that, the first time I mentioned the 2,500 statutory cap, I mistakenly misspoke and said dollars as opposed to people.  I intended to say 2,500 individuals. 

I would like to welcome our panels testifying before our Subcommittee today.  I remind all of our panelists that your complete written statements have been made part of the hearing record.  Please limit your remarks so that we may have sufficient time to provide follow up with questions once everyone has had the opportunity to provide their testimony.

Joining us in our first panel is Mr. Bruce McCartney, an Army veteran from Midway, Georgia; and Mr. John A. Lancaster, Executive Director of the National Council on independent living.  Mr. McCartney, thank you for your service.  Thank you for traveling from Georgia to be here with us today.  You are now recognized for five minutes. 

STATEMENTS OF BRUCE MCCARTNEY, MIDWAY, GA; AND JOHN A. LANCASTER, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, NATIONAL COUNCIL ON INDEPENDENT LIVING

STATEMENT OF BRUCE MCCARTNEY

Mr. MCCARTNEY.  Chairman Hall and Members, on behalf of the hundred or so disabled vets who know I am here, and the couple hundred thousand who do not, I welcome this invite.  My name is Bruce McCartney.  In 1986, I was medically retired from the United States Army under Chapter 61 after 17 and a half years of active-duty service. 

I served four combat tours in Vietnam as a DUSTOFF and ground pounding combat medic.  One-thousand four-hundred seven boots on the ground days.  It was my job to go to the wounded soldier who walked into a booby trap or was laced across the gut with an AK-47, try to keep him alive until we could get him to the hospital.  I was not always successful.  But more often than not, death was cheated of another victim. 

When I came home from Vietnam, there was little help available to transition the disabled veteran.  One day you are in the War, the next day you are back in the world trying to regain some semblance of normalcy.  If perchance you met or heard about a veteran who had acquired a particular VA service or program, then you applied.  Other than that, there was not much assistance offered by many.  I am one of the fortunate, or so I thought.  Had I known when I applied for the Independent Living Program in November of 2003 that it was leading me into a four-year nightmare that would affect me both mentally and physically, I would not be testifying before this Subcommittee today. 

In 1990, I was advised by the Savannah Vets Center to apply for Voc Rehab Services.  I met with a case manager, was aptitude tested, and advised I should seek a vocation as a registered nurse or a teacher.  With my experience in combat medics, the nursing course made sense.  Unfortunately, school exacerbated by PTSD and my education was sporadic at best and disruptions were the norm.  After many counseling sessions with him, his final statement to me was,  “If you ever get straightened out, come back and see me.” 

I languished for years, much like untold numbers of disabled veterans even as we speak.  In October of 2000, fate knocked on my door.  It was during the filming of the documentary, "In the Shadow of the Blade," that I was reunited with my friend and fellow DUSTOFF medic from Vietnam, Jake Bailado.  He told me of a cousin who was also a disabled Vietnam veteran who had applied for ILP.  They assisted him in obtaining a small tractor to help him work his farm.  After several years of PTSD therapy outside the VA system, in November of 2003 I met with Voc Rehab counselor Tina Hutchison in Savannah to apply for ILP.  My goal was to try to obtain an interest-free loan to replace my antiquated tractor so I could cultivate my nine-acre property.  Ms. Hutchison advised that my goal was out of the question because it was considered a vehicle.  But ILP would in fact assist me with acquiring a greenhouse.

That is where the nightmare began.  To call it a run around is to put it mildly.  Delaying tactics became the norm.  Phone calls were not returned.  Application processes were delayed.  Emails went unanswered.  And years passed.  It was almost as if the people who were being paid to help were just hoping I would just die or go away.  During my ordeal, I talked with several other disabled veterans who also needed and were qualified for ILP.  I urged them to apply, but seeing the difficulty I was having and how it was affecting me both physically and mentally, they decided it was not worth their well being to go through with what I was going through.  I began to wonder if this was the whole point.  After all, when word gets around how difficult the process is, fewer veterans will pursue it. 

Sharing with them a letter I received with Atlanta Region Director L. R. Burkes in 2007 apologizing for his subordinates’ failures and promising needed improvements, these veterans did indeed apply for ILP.  They then began the experience the status quo.  Complete an application, it gets lost.  Complete another, it goes into a black hole some call the process.  Emails and phone calls again are not answered.  Sometimes when they are, the veteran is treated with disrespect and scorn as if he or she is asking for a handout instead of a benefit which they earned with their broken bodies. 

Now as I network with even more disabled veterans, it appears that ILP is a benefit that is being held close to the vest, not to be disseminated.  Is this because of the 2,500 cap, which equates to less than 1 percent of the eligible 100 percent disabled veterans population?  I cannot answer that.  I do know that malfeasance is being overlooked while the consequences of ineptitude are being suffered by the very deserving people the VA exists to serve, America’s disabled vets. 

The American people, through their Congress, have made it clear that they want to support the troops and they want to support veterans.  This body passes legislation for such programs, but when bureaucratic land mines prevent us from actually assessing the programs afforded the opportunity to make a difference for veterans is missed. 

Many years ago in the rice paddies of Vietnam, I aided the wounded.  Now these many years later, I have vowed to advocate for my wounded brothers, yet again.  It has become a formidable task that needs your involvement.  I am asking you to take this battle to task.  As American veterans both young and old have fought for you, we need you to fight for us now.  One-thousand four-hundred seven days fighting the enemy in Vietnam.  One-thousand four-hundred sixty-three days fighting the VA for an ILP.  Thank you.

[The statement of Mr. McCartney appears in the Appendix]

Mr. HALL.  Thank you, Mr. McCartney.  Mr. Lancaster, you are now recognized.

STATEMENT OF JOHN A. LANCASTER

Mr. LANCASTER.  Thank you, Chairman Hall and Ranking Member Boozman.  Thanks for this opportunity to testify before you on behalf of the National Council on Independent Living.  Mr. Boozman, if we did get an official request to serve on the VA’s Independent Living Program Committee we would gladly and honorably accept that role and do what we could.

I am a disabled vet as well, only I guess I am far more fortunate than Bruce next to me in that years ago, I did get relatively what I consider decent service from the VA system.  It sent me back to my alma mater where I was able to get a law degree.  It did great physical rehabilitation for me.  It even then, before there was an Independent Living Program per se, gave me a few independent living services.  They gave me driving lessons with hand controls on the car, which is a major part of independent living, being able to get around. 

Fortunately, I have had a successful life and a successful career and have not had to rely on such services.  And my career over the years has brought me to my current position as Executive Director of the National Council on Independent Living.  We are an association representing all the Centers for Independent Living and State Independent Living Councils around the country.  This Independent Living Program is, as you know, funded through Title 7 of the Rehabilitation Act and administered by the Rehabilitation Services Administration of U.S. Department of Education.  Three-hundred thirty-six centers receive direct Federal funding through Title 7 of the Rehab Act.  Another maybe 70 to 80 centers receive indirect funding through their State governments and through indirect Federal funding, making a little over 400 centers in this country providing independent living services to people with very severe disabilities in every Congressional district in the country, except five.  And we will get those other five sooner or later. 

Services they provide are peer counseling.  People with severe disabilities working with, mentoring, showing through steps other people with severe disabilities how to manage their lives, how to be fully included in the community, and how to be productive citizens.  They provide information and referral.  They do independent living skills training on everything from managing one’s life in their own home to balancing checkbooks, to navigating housing authority processes, to navigating employment service processes.  And then fourth, all of these centers are providing advocacy on some level or another.  Individual advocacy on behalf of the individual who might need that advocacy, and systems advocacy, working with the community to make sure that the community is more accessible to and inclusive of people with disabilities. 

And I have included in my written testimony the value of our program.  The number of people that have been able to get out of institutions; the number of people that they have prevented from going into institutions; the employment services that they have delivered; personal care attendant services; transportation services; assistive technology. 

We welcome the opportunity, and indeed some of our centers are starting to working closely with the VA on a number of independent living initiatives.  And I indeed, personally, have met with Ruth Fanning and we have had a successful, I hope, beginning in terms of continuing a dialogue. 

There are some differences in the way the VA approaches independent living to what we do.  At the core of our belief in our system is consumer control.  That you take the individual and you put them in control of their own services and their own lives, and you support them and teach them, and mentor them in getting to that point.  So that the veteran, in this case, the disabled veteran, would become the hub and the controller, if you will, of the things that that individuals needs to participate fully in the community and ideally to have a job.  If that means personal care attendant, personal care attendant.  If that means access to affordable, accessible, inclusive housing, then that gets provided or at least you work with a veteran to make sure that they get their Section 8 voucher if that is what they need, or whatever other support.  If it is home modifications, home modifications.  Those sorts of advice and suggestions.  So we have a much, I think, more expansive, broader view.  We feel that independent living does not stop with the ability to operate in your home.  That it really ends when the person has achieved full inclusion in their community and has achieved economic self-sufficiency.  Often, that means a job. 

We have three recommendations in this area, which our network certainly has a major responsibility for, at least in two of them.  Number one, there needs to be much great sharing of information between the Veterans Administration and the Independent Living Program, and State veterans organizations and the Independent Living Program.  And when I say the national VA, the Department of Veterans Affairs, we are talking more here about regional and local offices than a dialogue that might go on between, say, Ruth and I here in Washington.  It has got to live down in the communities across the country.  So, there are training programs we could be doing.  There is some, you know, encouragement from ideally up here in Congress to get parties talking together down at the local level.  But there needs to be a better understanding between the two systems.  And certainly we take responsibility for that.  And there are some things, good things going in that regard in States like Alaska, Minnesota, Michigan, in particular, Florida.  So we do have some things going there. 

Second—

Mr. HALL.  Mr. Lancaster, in the interest of time, please summarize?

Mr. LANCASTER.  Yeah, two final recommendations.  Second, the need for CILs to better understand, Centers for Independent Living, in our network, the whole veterans world and for lack of a better word the veteran culture and to establish relationship with veterans service organizations (VSOs) as well as State and Federal VA things.

Third, and I think this would go a long way, is in that system of 336 direct Federally funded centers out there around the country, if the money could be provided, and I figured it would be in the neighborhood of $25 million, frankly, to place one veteran, ideally a disabled veteran, as an employee in every single one of those centers with the primary responsibility of reaching to the veteran community and to disabled veterans in their community that need Independent Living Programs so that we do not have the type of misunderstanding and miscommunication that was so eloquently explained by Mr. Bruce McCartney here next to me.  So I think that would be a real solid recommendation that would go a long way to promoting the independent living of disabled veterans in this country.  Thank you. 

[The statement of Mr. Lancaster appears in the Appendix]

Mr. HALL.  Thank you, Mr. Lancaster.  Let me recognize myself for a few questions.  First Mr. McCartney, thank you for your service and for your moving testimony.  In your opinion, what would be the major change that the VA needs to make regarding the Independent Living Program?  If you could wave a magic wand and have one thing change, what would that be?

Mr. MCCARTNEY.  Directives need to come out that the Independent Living Program is something to be exploited by each case manager to every veteran that comes into the door, that it is explained to them.  All these 272,000 100-percent disabled veterans and the hundreds of thousands of others with 60 and 70 percent disabled, who are qualified for the Program.  And then they need to action these in a fast track.  It should not take a year, it should not take two years, three years, four years, for one person to get a Program.

Mr. HALL.  Thank you.  In trying to get assistance from the Independent Living Program, do you think that the VA personnel understood the Program and how it should help veterans? 

Mr. MCCARTNEY.  I think there is a break down from the lowest echelon to the highest echelon.  I have been in contact with each chain of command.  And at each level of command, from the Director’s Office down to the local case manager, is repeatedly delay, no answer.  Personally, I felt like I had the plague or they just wanted me to go away.

Mr. HALL.  And sir, what is the status of your application today?

Mr. MCCARTNEY.  It was completed in 2007, in December of 2007.  And there was supposed to be a one-year follow up between myself and my case manager.  I do not know who my case manager is.  Every month I fill out my report and I have it for them whenever they are ready for it. 

Mr. HALL.  What was the problem, or what was more the problem, your counselor or the program itself?

Mr. MCCARTNEY.  The personnel running the program.  Like I say, I think it is a close held program.  And the ILP is put at the bottom list of everything.  I have communications from the case manager that said, after two years in the process, in November of 2005, they say, “Well, I had a really extremely heavy caseload and I can finally get around to your case now.” 

Mr. HALL.  Thank you.  What do you think, Mr. McCartney, is the greatest benefit of the ILP?  Let us know when you—

Mr. MCCARTNEY.  Right now it is hard for me to see any benefits of it.

Mr. HALL.  I understand, sir.

Mr. MCCARTNEY.  Because I am advocating for eight veterans right now who are going through the same exact thing that I am.  Some of them it has been fifteen months since they submitted their application. 

Mr. HALL.  Mm-hmm.

Mr. MCCARTNEY.  And they were resubmitted.  So are there any real benefits?  Negligible.

Mr. HALL.  When you find some, you will come back and tell us?

Mr. MCCARTNEY.  I definitely will.

Mr. HALL.  Thank you.  Mr. Lancaster, how many referrals does NCIL get from the VA per month?

Mr. LANCASTER.  I do not have that information.  And I would suspect that with the exception of two or three States that the answer would be zero.  In Michigan I know there is, there is a direct linkage and a memorandum of understanding in place between the State of Michigan which includes the Independent Living Program.  And I do not know the number of referrals that that amounts to.  But we can find that information out.  But I know in a lot of States what we have learned from a survey that we did to ourselves that the number of veterans they are seeing is increasing dramatically.  Interestingly enough they are seeing a large number of Vietnam veterans and a smaller number of Iraqi/Afghani veterans, although it is our suspicion that in the future we will start seeing more of those as well.  But they are coming in off the street.  They are not coming in as referrals.  Or off the street may be the wrong word, but they are coming by a word of mouth referral or some other referral than through the VA. 

Mr. HALL.  Thank you, sir.  Now I will recognize Ranking Member Boozman and also acknowledge the presence of our Chair, Chairwoman Herseth Sandlin, and turn the Chair back over to her at the same time.  Mr. Boozman?

Mr. BOOZMAN.  Thank you, Mr. Hall.  I was reading, and you mentioned in your testimony, your caseworker saying something to the effect that if you ever get straightened out come back and see me.  So we are glad that you have gotten straightened out and that you are here seeing us.  At first you wanted a tractor, and then, you were persuaded, or pushed into the greenhouse.  Has that been helpful?  I know you have gone through this tremendous ordeal.  But is that something that, you know, if we could forget about that, is that entity being helpful to you in what you are trying to get done?

Mr. MCCARTNEY.  Initially, I wanted an interest free loan, or assistance getting an interest free loan, so I could buy my own tractor.

Mr. BOOZMAN.  Right.

Mr. MCCARTNEY.  And then pay it back.  After four years, four years and a couple of days, my greenhouse was completed.  Unfortunately, the contractors were not paid as they should have been and they kept showing up at my door.  And I took out a line of credit and paid them off.  And when they got paid then they reimbursed me.  I felt morally that I had to do that because I had a good relationship with all three contractors that worked on this project.  Since the project has been completed I have had—

Mr. BOOZMAN.  That is my next question.  Have they subsequently reimbursed you?  Is that—

Mr. MCCARTNEY.  The contractors?

Mr. BOOZMAN.  Have you gotten paid for—

Mr. MCCARTNEY.  Yes, sir, I have.  The day after they got the check they came to my door and said, “We appreciate you putting this money up front for us.”  You know, 75, 80 days is too long to pay a contractor.

Mr. BOOZMAN.  But since that time the VA has reimbursed you?

Mr. MCCARTNEY.  Yes, sir.  The VA?

Mr. BOOZMAN.  You got your—

Mr. MCCARTNEY.  No, the contractors.  The contractors reimbursed me, yes, sir.

Mr. BOOZMAN.  Okay, very good. 

Mr. MCCARTNEY.  Since we have been completed, I have had three 4-H clubs come to the greenhouse.  I am doing all hydroponics.  That is unheard of in southeast Georgia.  I have had a couple master gardeners come and emulate my hydroponics system.  We have had two high school horticulture classes come.  And it is an educational process for them in that I make them determine the volume of a four by eight pool, and how much chemicals or nutrients to add to this.  So it is a good learning process for them.  It is really been good for me that I am in my comfort zone and I can do what I like to do in my comfort zone.

Mr. BOOZMAN.  Very good.  Mr. Lancaster, Mr. McCartney has very well, in detail, been able to deduce his experience through the years.  In your experience with dealing with other veterans, have they had the same problems?  Or is it a regional phenomenon?  Or—

Mr. LANCASTER.  No, I would say that there are a number of veterans who experienced significant disabilities, often one similar to Mr. McCartney, like PTSD, who have had similar experiences over the years.  There has been some fairly good efforts through the Vets Centers to deal with some of the counseling issues.  But in terms of getting some of the hard support issues towards independent living and productivity like Mr. McCartney is talking about, I think there is some real issues going on.

Mr. BOOZMAN.  You deal with these things.  We can see how long this takes.  What would be a reasonable time factor to get a greenhouse?  To accomplish that task that he was trying to get done?

Mr. LANCASTER.  I would say from application point to when he is up and running, not knowing a lot about Mr. McCartney’s business I have to, you know, confess there.  So I do not know what the start up time.  But I would think in terms of application to approval, you know, a reasonable time might be in the area of a, you know, maybe a month.  And then immediately start getting that, you know, assistance going.

Mr. BOOZMAN.  Right.

Mr. LANCASTER.  I mean, I cannot see why it should take all that long.

Mr. BOOZMAN.  Do you agree, he mentioned, one of the things that Mr. McCartney mentioned was the fact that lots of veterans do not know about the program.  That we need a better education program to, so that veterans in this situation will be aware.  Is that a fair statement?

Mr. LANCASTER.  I would say that is a very fair statement.  I would also say, as I said in my testimony, our system, the Independent Living Program, needs to know more about the VA’s Independent Living Program so that we can better serve veterans.  And that is a shortcoming on our part.  Our centers are stretched pretty thin.  So it would be really good to have some sort of training program that we could implement, or the VA could implement, or somebody could implement, to be systematically training Centers for independent living on what is available through the VA.  So that when a veteran comes in we can appropriately refer if the referral has them coming from us.  And then also people need to look at what our system, which has been around since 1978, can do for veterans.  It is already an established system funded in part by the Federal Government through the Rehabilitation Services Administration.  And, you know, it is a, it is a really good system that empowers people into taking responsibility for their own lives and getting involved in the community and achieving economic self-sufficiency. 

So let us not reinvent the wheel, here.  Let us create the linkages and the support systems to make what is out there work.

Mr. BOOZMAN.  Right.  Again, I thank both of you for your service to your country.  Your testimony today was very helpful.  Thank you, Madam Chair.

Ms. HERSETH SANDLIN [Presiding].  Thank you, Mr. Boozman.  I just have one quick follow up before turning over to Mr. Scalise for his questions.  Mr. Lancaster, then, I know that the Centers for Independent Living conducted a survey on some of what you were just discussing in terms of this need for a more formal connection—

Mr. LANCASTER.  Mm-hmm.

Ms. HERSETH SANDLIN.  —and relationship, and the ideas of systematic training, and understanding among the Centers are stretched thin.  What has been the attempt in the past to improve the relationship between the Centers and the VA?  Is this primarily a budgetary matter?  Or are there some bureaucratic issues as it relates to identifiable individuals within the VA that are here to help establish a more formal connection?  You had mentioned in your response to Mr. Boozman that maybe there is some responsibility on the part of the Centers.  I mean, what has been done in the past?

Mr. LANCASTER.  Well frankly, to be real honest, not a lot has been done.  There has been a big, how shall I say it, lack of understanding between what our system has to offer and our lack of understanding and knowledge of the VA system.  Traditionally and in past years veterans tended to turn to  veterans service organizations for most of their needs and service and advocacy, or directly to the VA.  Recently we have been seeing a major shift in that.  That is why we did this survey.  That is why we are starting to really look at these issues where we are starting to see significant numbers of veterans coming for the first time, Vietnam era ones are the largest number, but now more and more of the Iraqi/Afghani veterans coming to us for assistance in accessing housing, for peer support and mentoring, for employment-related services, for personal care attendant services.  And also for other services, like access to assistive technology and good advice in that regard.  So there is a variety of different things that these veterans are starting to come to.

Now we feel they are coming to the right place.  Then again, we also know that some veterans are not looking at us as a support system and a place where they can get services that will empower them and help them access what they need because we are not veterans.  I am, personally, and some are, but for the most part it is not like a VSO.  And that is where our system needs to reach out and better understand, for lack of a better word, kind of the veteran community culture, and the brother- and sisterhood, if you will, that exists among veterans. 

And why the recommendation that I made I think would be so valuable.  If there could be resources made available for every single one of those 336 directly Federally funded centers to have the funds to hire a veteran, preferably a disabled veteran, to work in their centers, to do outreach to veterans service organizations, to the State Veterans Affairs Agencies, and the VA, to broker and work with and help put together the services, I think it could go a long towards developing a, kind of a more seamless system, if you will, that would be far more responsive.  And that could cover the myriad of opportunities that are available between the VA, State veterans organizations, and State veterans benefits, and what veterans service organizations have to provide. 

Ms. HERSETH SANDLIN.  Thank you very much.  Mr. Scalise, you are recognized. 

Mr. SCALISE.  Thank you, Madam Chair.  Sergeant McCartney, your testimony had mentioned VA has some contract counselors.  What is your experience been with them compared to the regular staff?

Mr. MCCARTNEY.  The consultants?

Mr. SCALISE.  Yeah.

Mr. MCCARTNEY.  Superb.  My consultant was a veteran.  That made it easier.  He, he could empathize with what I had been through and what I was going through.  And he was a shoulder that I often went to when I was having problems with the Regional Office or the Director’s Office, or even my local case manager. 

Mr. SCALISE.  Still followed the same procedures?  I guess what I would be curious to find out is what was he doing differently than the other staff?  Or what were they not doing within the guidelines that they are all supposed to follow why would you maybe get one experience—

Mr. MCCARTNEY.  He did not come on board until after Congressman Barrow endorsed a letter to Congressman Filner about getting this project started.  It was way overdue.  Only then was he contacted by the Director, who said, “Let us get on this one and let us get it done soon.”  So that is when he came aboard.  I have only been in contact with him for a matter of months.  And everything was professional and aboveboard.  And when I called him or emailed him with a question or a concern, I got immediate replies.  So—

Mr. SCALISE.  And why do you not think you got that same kind of response from some of the staff that you dealt with in the past?

Mr. MCCARTNEY.  Malfeasance.  Ineptitude.  Caseload.  Lack of caring for disabled veteran needs. 

Mr. SCALISE.  So you could sense not only procedurally maybe they approached things differently, but just from maybe a sense of urgency to want to help?  You did not find that from some of that staff that you did find with the contract person?

Mr. MCCARTNEY.  Not only could I sense it.  I felt it.  I lived it.

Mr. SCALISE.  Now, you said you are also helping some other veterans.  Eight other, I think you said, at the current, at present time.

Mr. MCCARTNEY.  Yes, sir.

Mr. SCALISE.  Now, are you going through the consultant with them?  Or is this going through a different channel?

Mr. MCCARTNEY.  Everything starts at the local case manager level.  From there they get their application from the case manager.  The case manager sends it to the Regional Office.  The Regional Office sits on it for a period of time.  Then it goes back to the case manager and says, “Okay, well we are going to approve this.  You know, we have found that this veteran would be qualified.”  Now that is a change in the system from when I first applied.  The case manager went into the computer, looked at my records and says, “Yes, you are qualified for independent living.”  That is when the process started then.  Now we have got a delay, that the case manager has to send to Regional, Regional might take a month or two or three or six or seven, as is the case with a couple of the veterans that I am working with now, before they send anything back down.

Mr. SCALISE.  Is that a policy change?

Mr. MCCARTNEY.  I cannot answer that.  I would presume it would be.  Because like I say, when I applied, when I applied with the case manager in November of 2003 she said, “Well, you are qualified.”  Now the veterans are applying with the case manager, they do a small interview, a bio, and it, they might get called back in a month or two. 

Mr. SCALISE.  So they are not able to get that immediate response?

Mr. MCCARTNEY.  Pardon me?

Mr. SCALISE.  They are not able to get that immediate response—

Mr. MCCARTNEY.  No.

Mr. SCALISE.  All right.  That is all I have for now.  Thank you.  And thank you both for your service. 

Ms. HERSETH SANDLIN.  Thank you.  I do not have any further questions.  I do want to thank you, Mr. McCartney, for being here and sharing your experience.  I can certainly appreciate the level of frustration with the lack of responsiveness, which oftentimes can be a lot more frustrating than not getting the desired outcome such as having some sort of forward progress and resolution to the needs under the ILP program.  We appreciate the insights you have been able to offer today.  Mr. Lancaster, we appreciate your testimony as well, your service to the country, and for being here today and for offering your testimony.  Thank you very much. 

Mr. LANCASTER.  Madam Chairwoman and Ranking Member, thank you for this Subcommittee bringing attention to this matter and holding this hearing.  Thank you very much.

Ms. HERSETH SANDLIN.  Thank you.

Mr. BOOZMAN.  Absolutely. 

Ms. HERSETH SANDLIN.  I would now like to invite our second panel to the witness table.  Joining us is Mr. Richard Daley, Associate Legislation Director of the Paralyzed Veterans of America; who is accompanied by Ms. Theresa Barnes Boyd, Vocational Rehabilitation Consultant of the Paralyzed Veterans of America; and Mr. Mark Walker, Assistant Director of the Economic Commission for the American Legion.  We thank you all for joining us today.  Mr. Daley, I think we will go ahead and begin with your testimony.  You are recognized for five minutes. 

STATEMENTS RICHARD DALEY, ASSOCIATE LEGISLATION DIRECTOR, PARALYZED VETERANS OF AMERICA, ACCOMPANIED BY THERESA BARNES BOYD, VOCATIONAL REHABILITATION CONSULTANT, PARALYZED VETERANS OF AMERICA; AND MARK WALKER, ASSISTANT DIRECTOR, NATIONAL ECONOMIC COMMISSION, AMERICAN LEGION

STATEMENT OF RICHARD DALEY

Mr. DALEY.  Chairwoman Herseth Sandlin, Ranking Member Boozman, and Members of the Subcommittee, I would like to thank you for this opportunity for Paralyzed Veterans of America to discuss the Department of Veterans Affairs Independent Living Program which is administered by VA’s Vocational Rehabilitation and Employment (VR&E) Program.  PVA believes that the VR&E Program is one of the most critical programs that the VA administers in assisting veterans with disabilities to successfully transition to civilian life.   

The primary mission of the VR&E Program is to provide veterans with service connected disabilities all the necessary services and assistance to achieve maximum independence in daily living to the maximum extent feasible, to become employable, and obtain and maintain suitable employment.  In 1980, when the Independent Living Program was first developed, it was a pilot program.  It had a 500 cap maximum to the program.  The program was successful and the 500 cap seemed to be forgotten.  And they went, actually went beyond the 500.  Years after dealing with the 500 case cap, the VA met with Congressional staff members to request the case cap be removed.  Congress at that time would not remove the cap because they wanted the VA to implement stronger guidelines for the program.  However, Congress did accede to increase the case cap from 500 to 2,500 in 2001. 

Even though the new case cap was increased, the VA continued to bump up against the case cap for many years.  This caused a slow down in delivery of services.  They had to request counselors when they got close to the cap to send their applications into the national office for review, and the review took some time.  And so they never quite finished all the applications for that year and they ran over into the next fiscal year, then they could approach the cases and open them up again.  The cause in the delay also placed a burden on the VR&E staff because they had to take the time to review the applications and they had to also monitor the number of people that were actually applying so they did not reach the 2,500 or exceed it. 

PVA strongly opposes any unnecessary delay in services, especially services to severely disabled veterans.  PVA is extremely disappointed that VR&E staff is still forced to abide by the arbitrary 2,500 new case cap.  At this time when the continuation of our military efforts in Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom are unfortunately resulting in ever increasing numbers of veterans who sustain serious injuries, any limit imposed on the delivery of services to the severely disabled veterans is at best contrary to the intent of Congress and the American people.

To achieve the successful outcome with the approximately 95,000 veterans each year, VR&E has made progress through continual improvement of its programs.  In 2004, VR&E hired an Independent Living Coordinator to manage the Program.  In 2005, the Independent Living Standards of Practice were issued for the VR&E field staff and provided guidance for them.  And over the last three to four years VR&E has not met their limit in that gap, but that is probably because of the slow down in procedures that you heard about earlier.

The removal of the IL cap, the greater attention directed to serving veterans with severe disabilities, PVA recommends that VR&E be given additional, professional, full-time employee positions for the Independent Living Specialist counselors.  These experienced counselors should be fully devoted to delivering the service to those veterans determined to have serious employment handicaps and partnering with other programs in the community to bring to  the veteran the full range of independent living services available. 

Madam Chairwoman, that concludes my testimony.  I would be happy to answer any questions you may have.

[The statement of Mr. Daley appears in the Appendix]

Ms. HERSETH SANDLIN.  Thank you, Mr. Daley.  Mr. Walker, you are now recognized for five minutes. 

STATEMENT OF MARK WALKER

Mr. WALKER.  Madam Chairwoman, Ranking Member Boozman, and distinguished Members of the Subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to present the views of the American Legion regarding the Independent Living Program.  The Independent Living Program serves severely disabled veterans who VA determined at that time were unable to pursue an employment goal.  The Independent Living Program provides the veteran with an evaluation and counseling, prosthetic appliances, adaptive automobile equipment, wheelchair training, and other services necessary to enable a severely disabled veteran to achieve maximum independence in daily living.  Veterans may remain in an Independent Living Program for a maximum of thirty months. 

Chapter 31 of Title 38, United States Code, limits the number of veterans who can be placed in Independent Living Program to 2,500 annually.  The American Legion supports the removal of this cap.  VA should effectively manage and monitor the number of new Independent Living Program participants and provide detailed information to Congress on delays in veterans services until a decision has been made to remove the annual statutory cap. 

Severely disabled veterans state that the independent living services assisted them in adjusting to home life and participating with family and community at a higher level.  The Program has provided severely disabled veterans much needed assistance and possible hope for future employment.  In February 2007, the VA Secretary stated that the Vocational Rehabilitation and Employment Program anticipates a steady increase in the demand for independent living services over the next ten years.  At this time in the Nation’s history, it is paramount that we ensure the VA is capable of enabling veterans with disabilities to have a seamless transition from military service to successful rehabilitation and on to suitable employment after military service. 

For severely disabled veterans this success will be measured by their ability to live independently, achieve the highest quality of life possible, and realize the hope for employment given advances in medical science and technology.  To meet America’s obligation to these specific veterans and other eligible vocational rehabilitation employment veterans, VA leadership must continue to focus on marked improvements in case management, vocational counseling, and most importantly job placement. 

The American Legion strongly supports the Independent Living Program and is committed to working with VA and other Federal agencies to ensure that America’s severely disabled veterans are provided with the highest level of service and employment assistance.

Again, thank you for the opportunity to present the opinion of the American Legion on this issue.

[The statement of Mr. Walker appears in the Appendix]

Ms. HERSETH SANDLIN.  Thank you, Mr. Walker.  Let me start with a question to both of you, just to clarify.  Is your organization’s position that the statutory cap should be removed entirely or increased?  If the organization’s position is that it should be increased rather than removed, do you have a number?  A projected number that you would suggest?

Mr. DALEY.  PVA believes at this time it should be removed.  There is a bill in the Senate to actually remove it.  And we probably do not know what will happen.  We do not know about the caseload that we will get from the current conflict.  There are probably many, many people out there that could qualify for the program if it is removed. 

Ms. HERSETH SANDLIN.  Mr. Walker?

Mr. WALKER.  The American Legion also desires for the cap to be removed. 

Ms. HERSETH SANDLIN.  Have your organizations both held this position for many years?  Or was this a modification of the position in light of the increased numbers of severely disable veterans we are seeing returning home from OIF and OEF, as well as some of the more severely disabled veterans from past conflicts, particularly those Vietnam veterans who may be suffering from PTSD and have a high degree of service-connected disability?

Mr. DALEY.  I was not as familiar with the legislative goals of PVA in, say, 2000, 2001.  I was working with the organization in another capacity.  But why should we have a cap on any program that is for the severely service-disabled veteran?  And say, “Well, sorry, thanks for serving your country.  Come back in October 1st, our new fiscal year, so we can deliver benefits to you.”  No, I do not think that we should ever have a cap and we have probably felt that way all along.

Ms. HERSETH SANDLIN.  I appreciate that and I am asking a question that goes back.  I am asking the question because prior to this hearing, this particular program has not gotten the attention we think it warrants.  A number of other veterans service organizations felt that they were not in a position to provide testimony as they do in other hearings because this program is one that VSOs are not as familiar with.  This occurrence sort of goes to the issue of Mr. Lancaster’s testimony, and perhaps both of you could comment on it.  As he recognized the issue, he said, “Look, well there is just sort of a general lack of understanding of everybody’s systems, whether it is the VA’s system program, whether it is the systems with the Centers of Independent Living, or whether it is the VSOs, and how to make those referrals smooth and what everyone can provide."  I mean, would either of you like to comment on Mr. Lancaster’s statements?

Mr. DALEY.  To address what you are referring to, Chairwoman, about if people do not know about, I called several service officers that are out in the field for PVA and asked them about the program.  And of course our service officers, they deal with paraplegics and quadriplegics, so of course they qualify for Independent Living Programs.  And they knew nothing about it.  They said, “I know of it, and it exists somewhere within the VA.  But I cannot tell you much about it.”  One service officer with more than twenty years experience, he said, “Well, let us look it up in the VA publication and see what it says.”  This is the publication of all the Federal benefits.  And you go to the index, independent living is not in there.  So how would a veteran know about it?  How would the parent or the spouse that is taking care of the severely disabled veteran even say, “Well, there is a program here where you may be able to receive help.”  It is a secret.

And too, since I did not know much about the program, I asked my colleague Theresa Boyd to accompany me because she has been very instrumental in putting together several vocational employment programs for PVA, the one that you have heard about in Richmond, Virginia.  And we have two more on the drawing board now and she is responsible for that.  But she is familiar with the Independent Living Program also.  She has had many years with the VA.  So I wish you could get a little knowledge from her. 

Ms. HERSETH SANDLIN.  Well, I will seek some insight from her afterwards.  Maybe Mr. Walker wants to comment, and then I am going to turn it over to my colleagues.  But it is good to know of Ms. Boyd’s experience with the VA as well and perhaps particularly with this program?  With the Independent Living Program?  Okay.  Mr. Walker?

Mr. WALKER.  Well, the American Legion has found the same things.  There is not a lot of outreach with this program.  And there is just a lot of severely disabled veterans that do not know it even exists.  So I think there needs to be some outreach, obviously, a