Apr112013
Hearing Transcript on Vocational Rehabilitation and Employment Program.
|
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 ELEVENTH CONGRESS SECOND SESSION MAY 6, 2010 SERIAL No. 111-76 Printed for the use of the Committee on Veterans' Affairs
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office
|
|
|
|||||
|
|
CORRINE BROWN, Florida |
STEVE BUYER, Indiana, Ranking |
|
||
|
|
|||||
|
|
Malcom A. Shorter, Staff Director SUBCOMMITTEE ON ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY
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
May 6, 2010
Vocational Rehabilitation and Employment Program
OPENING STATEMENTS
Chairwoman Stephanie Herseth Sandlin
Prepared statement of Chairwoman Herseth Sandlin
Hon. John Boozman, Ranking Republican Member
Prepared statement of Congressman Boozman
WITNESSES
U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, Ruth A. Fanning, Director, Vocational Rehabilitation and Employment Service, Veterans Benefits Administration
Prepared statement of Ms. Fanning
SUBMISSIONS FOR THE RECORD
U.S. Department of Labor, Hon. Raymond M. Jefferson, Assistant Secretary, Veterans' Employment and Training Service, statement
American Legion, Catherine A. Trombley, Assistant Director, National Economic Commission, statement
Commission on Rehabilitation Counselor Certification, Ann Neulicht, Chairwoman, statement
Paralyzed Veterans of America, statement
Veterans of Foreign Wars of the United States, Eric A. Hilleman, Director, National Legislative Service, statement
MATERIAL SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD
Post-Hearing Questions and Responses for the Record:
VOCATIONAL REHABILITATION AND EMPLOYMENT PROGRAM
Thursday, May 6, 2010
U. S. House of Representatives,
Subcommittee on Economic Opportunity,
Committee on Veterans' Affairs,
Washington, DC.
The Subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:04 a.m., in Room 334, Cannon House Office Building, Hon. Stephanie Herseth Sandlin [Chairwoman of the Subcommittee] presiding.
Present: Representatives Herseth Sandlin, Perriello, Teague, Boozman, and Bilirakis.
OPENING STATEMENT OF CHAIRWOMAN HERSETH SANDLIN
Ms. HERSETH SANDLIN. Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. The Committee on Veterans' Affairs, Subcommittee on Economic Opportunity, hearing on the Status of Vocational Rehabilitation and Employment (VR&E) Programs will come to order.
During the 110th Congress, we held a series of hearings that focused on employment opportunities for veterans. These hearings included the VR&E programs that seek to assist our injured servicemembers and help veterans obtain employment after their military service. As a result of those productive hearings, we are able to expand the VR&E program by authorizing the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Secretary to provide waivers for severely injured veterans seeking to participate in the independent living program, increasing the cap for participation in the independent living program, requiring the VA to report to Congress on measures to assist veterans participating in VR&E, and authorizing a multi-year longitudinal study on VR&E.
Today's hearing will allow us to learn more about what the Administration is doing to implement these new changes, and to address the concerns raised over the past year. These include the need to reduce case management and workload for counselors, conduct more outreach to qualified veterans, streamline information provided to the Disabled Veterans' Outreach Program (DVOP), Local Veterans' Employment Representatives (LVERs), and VA staff, and implement the new national acquisition strategy. I look forward to hearing from our panelists today.
I now recognize the Ranking Member for his opening remarks.
[The prepared statement of Chairwoman Herseth Sandlin appears in the Appendix.]
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN BOOZMAN
Mr. BOOZMAN. Thank you, Madam Chair. The last time we met to discuss VR&E was to hear from VA representatives of companies that contracted for counseling services. At the hearing, VA testified that they would solicit new contracts in the fall of 2009. I believe those contracts are not in place yet and believe that VA is still negotiating vendors to close out the costs related to the counseling contracts terminated last summer. At the same time, VA proposed to put temporary contracts in place until the new national acquisition contracts were awarded, and we look forward to hearing today about VA's progress in both the short- and long-term counseling contracts.
The VR&E program is possibly the most flexible of all Veterans Benefits Administration (VBA) benefit programs. Counseling staffs have great latitude on how they design a rehab program; and therein lies both the positives and negatives of the program. On the positive side, veterans are eligible for nearly a limitless approach to returning to the workforce or enrollment in independent living. On the downside, there are sometimes unrealistic expectations by veterans on what they believe their course of rehabilitation should be. In short, I am very concerned about the time it takes to enter into rehab.
According to VA data, it takes on average about 54 days to determine eligibility, 118 days to develop a rehab plan, and 200 days to find a job following completion of the customized rehab program. That is 372 days. That does not include the average of 615 days spent completing the rehab program, which brings the total average time in rehab to employment to 987 days.
Since about 90 percent of VR&E participants are enrolled in degree programs, I understand the effect of long-term education or training on the average of 615 days in rehab. But since the vast majority of veterans are in college, I hope that we can better understand why it takes 118 days to send someone to school. Unfortunately, the VBA Annual Benefits Report does not show rehab data by track, and I would encourage VA to make that change in the fiscal year 2010 report.
I understand the staff has requested a post-hearing briefing on some of the details that Mrs. Fanning has indicated in her written testimony are not available. I hope the Department will put that briefing together expeditiously.
And, with that, I yield back. Thank you.
Ms. HERSETH SANDLIN. Thank you, Mr. Boozman.
I would now like to welcome our guest testifying before the Subcommittee today. Joining us is Ms. Ruth Fanning, Director of the Vocational Rehabilitation and Employment Service, Veterans Benefits Administration, U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs. I welcome you back to the Subcommittee. You are now recognized.
STATEMENT OF RUTH A. FANNING, DIRECTOR, VOCATIONAL REHABILITATION AND EMPLOYMENT SERVICE, VETERANS BENEFITS ADMINISTRATION, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS
Ms. FANNING. Thank you, Madam Chair, Ranking Member, Members of the Subcommittee. I really appreciate you inviting me to appear today to discuss VA's Vocational Rehabilitation and Employment Program.
Today I would like to discuss the employment services that VA provides to veterans, update you about the contracts, and discuss staffing initiatives that are supported by Congress's appropriation. Many of the issues that you raised in your invitation letter deserve further elaboration and quantitative analysis, and unfortunately I will need some time, as you noted, to completely and fully respond. I want to make sure that I provide you complete data and very accurate data, and I will be happy to come back in an expeditious manner to do that.
VR&E's primary mission is to assist veterans with disabilities to prepare for, obtain, and sustain suitable employment. Robust services are individually tailored to each veteran's needs. Services begin with a comprehensive evaluation to help veterans with understanding their own interests, aptitudes, and transferrable skills.
Next, vocational exploration focuses veterans' potential career goals with labor market demands, available training, and their individual needs and preferences. This process is designed to help each veteran make informed choices and, with the help of his or her counselor, develop a roadmap for their future or rehabilitation plan so that they can achieve their goals.
A broad range of employment services may be provided from direct job placement, short-term training, to college training or self-employment. The goal of each and every plan is to maximize the veteran's transferrable skills and help them enter the job market at a level that is on par with his or her peer group and in a career position which he or she can thrive, even if their disability conditions progress or worsen.
Disabled veterans and servicemembers receive VR&E services from two programs, the Coming Home to Work Program and the VetSuccess Program.
The Coming Home to Work Program focuses on early intervention to help wounded warriors planning and working toward their civilian career goals, reducing the risk of homelessness, underemployment, and unsuitable employment after discharge from the military.
Because many times, the first jobs that veterans get after discharge are transitional employment, VR&E Service also works very closely with the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL). As you know, the Department of Labor has an important program called REALifelines. They are there at the Transition Assistance Program (TAP) and Disabled Transition Assistance Program (DTAP) to help veterans get immediate employment. Many times, those first jobs are only transitional employment, and DOL works with us to link veterans back so that veterans can understand benefits available both through VR&E as well as the Post-9/11 GI Bill and other programs so that they can prepare for their long-term career, ensuring long-term stability, upward mobility, and jobs skills and futures, commensurate with their skill sets and interests.
We provide a multitude of employment assistance, including direct job placement assistance, which is wide-ranging, from developing resumes, interview skills, and specific skills targeted to each veteran's needs, training that ranges from internships to on-the-job training (OJT), certificate training, college training, and everything in between; self-employment assistance for veterans who are entrepreneurs and able to set up their own businesses; and outreach to government, private sector, and nonprofit organizations to market veterans as employees, to help them understand the value veterans bring as employees in their workplace, but also to help them understand the many other benefits, including tax credits, special employer incentives, and, for government, special hiring authorities.
For those veterans whose disabilities are too severe to make employment feasible, voc rehab provides a wide range of independent living services. Those include volunteer work placement, public transportation—the use of that—life skills coaching, counseling, and a myriad of other services, again, that are tailored to each person's needs.
To the extent possible, these services are integrated into employment plans. But, when necessary, these are stand-alone programs, with the ultimate goal of helping each individual be as independent as possible in their home and community, and then be able to consider employment, whatever that employment may mean for that person, whether it is a volunteer job, a part-time job, or a full-time competitive placement.
Next, I would like to talk a little bit about the contracts. As mentioned, over the past year, VR&E has been working very closely with VA's Office of Acquisition, Logistics, and Construction to develop and solicit new performance-based contracts. This solicitation was issued and has closed, and proposals currently are being evaluated. We have over 30 staff from around the country essentially locked down, in the Center for Acquisition Innovation-Frederick working very closely with General Counsel and with the acquisition staff to conduct past performance and technical evaluations. This process is near ending. We expect that it will be done within the next week, and then the actual pricing evaluation will commence and awards of the contracts are expected in the fall, in either August or September.
VR&E service is also working with the Office of Resource Management to develop automated invoicing, referral, and additional tracking tools, and this has been in progress for several months, and we expect will be in place when the contract is awarded and when performance commences.
Finally, to talk a little bit about staffing and initiatives. As you know, we have over 1,100 employees around the country, and they provide extensive services that are tailored to each veteran's needs. These services include comprehensive employment and independent living services, outreach assistance to the Coming Home to Work Program, and important support from VA to veterans who are in other VA education programs.
For example, the VetSuccess on Campus project is a new project. It began as a pilot at the University of South Florida; and this project is specifically geared to serve Post-9/11 GI Bill veterans on college campuses, to help them overcome any barriers they may encounter in college, stay in school, finish school, and then be able to enter into suitable careers. We have expanded this pilot to two additional campuses at San Diego State and Cleveland State, and we are in the addition of expanding to four more campuses currently.
In order to adapt to shifts in workload due to deployments of Reservists and National Guard units, quickly meet the specialized needs of the most seriously disabled veterans, provide community-based services to veterans in remote areas, fill the gap when we have staffing shortages so that timely services are not affected, VR&E has also supported, as you know, contract funding. And during fiscal year 2010 budget formulation, an additional $8 million in General Operating Expenses (GOE) was allocated to support those, and an additional $8.3 million in 2011 has been requested.
VR&E Service is also working very hard to develop new solutions that will further enhance employment and independent living services. Among these, we are equipping staff through the development of desktop training, testing methods that will support face-to-face counseling using secure and user-friendly technology, conducting a top-to-bottom business process reengineering (BPR) initiative to streamline and simplify service delivery. This is designed to ease entry into the program for veterans, and also simplify and streamline our process so that our core counseling staff are primarily focused on one-on-one service to veterans.
Now, more than ever, the employment needs of veterans are an urgent priority for VA. VA is showing leadership through our involvement in implementing the President's government-wide hiring initiative, and VR&E is pivotal to the success of this initiative, actively working with government agencies and departments to increase employment of veterans with disabilities. VR&E is leading through the development of a national job board on VA's VetSuccess.gov Web site with continual expansion of this site underway. We are actively collaborating with businesses in all sectors who identify employment opportunities, particularly with those sectors with deficits of qualified applicants, and we are working strategically to understand the future job trends to assist veterans to match their career plans with those future job market needs.
Finally, VR&E is working to use effective tools and innovations to meet the needs of transitioning servicemembers, reaching out early, developing effective contracts, maximizing important partnerships with Department of Labor and other government and nongovernment partners, and leveraging technology for training, case management, and veteran employment tools.
Madam Chairwoman and Members of the Subcommittee, this concludes my statement. I would be pleased to answer any questions you may have.
Ms. HERSETH SANDLIN. Thank you, Ms. Fanning.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Fanning appears in the Appendix.]
Ms. HERSETH SANDLIN. I will first recognize Mr. Perriello for questions.
Mr. PERRIELLO. Thank you very much, Madam Chair.
Thank you, Ms. Fanning. You know, I think we are all seeing a lot of interest in the VR&E Program, particularly in the job environment, where we are seeing the rather stark unemployment of returning veterans and a lot of interest. So I guess part of what I am trying to understand off the top is if we see that by increasing the per capita independent living cap, that we have increased demand in many ways for the program because of both the number of vets returning and the job environment, but reducing budget for the fiscal year, what is it that gives us the confidence to think that this is not going to lead a reduction in a program that really, right now, needs to be seeing a boost, in my mind?
Ms. FANNING. I think you are referring to the reduction of 9 full-time equivalents (FTEs) in the budget, which, really, were not a reduction from the VR&E Program, but of overall management support. And the reduction for overall management support for VBA was spread across all programs. I am not an Office of Resolution Management (ORM) expert, but that is what I can tell you. And if you need more detail, I would be happy to provide that.
What we were provided, though, was an additional $8 million in GOE funding to supplement contracting, which is a big help and does help us respond to those increases in workload and in a strategic manner so that if there is a large deployment in, for example, Ohio because a unit returns, we can respond to that increase.
Mr. PERRIELLO. So it is your feeling that $8.3 million from GOE will essentially cover whatever difference you have in the 1 percent decrease?
Ms. FANNING. I am continuing to watch it. And part of my job is to be aware of the trends, to always make the case for additional resources when that is needed. So at this point, I am pleased that we have the additional support, and I will continue to watch the workload trends and advocate for any additional needs are identical.
Mr. PERRIELLO. Will that possibly mean a shift from in-house employees to more contracting, and would that have any effect potentially on the quality of services?
Ms. FANNING. In the short term, with an increase of GOE funds it could possibly mean an increase in contracting funds. But we also have the flexibility during execution to look at using some of those funds for staffing, and that is something that I will definitely be working with leadership on.
Mr. PERRIELLO. Well, I will certainly be interested in looking at that in terms of the immediate budget impacts and the needs that are there right now, but also looking at medium-term capacity within the program as well.
One of the things that I think we are trying to track as well is some of the dynamics between this program and the new GI Bill, where we are seeing a tremendous amount of interest, which is a great thing. Are you seeing some people opting for the Post-9/11 GI Bill because of the housing stipend that is there or other dynamics? What are you seeing in terms of the relationship between those two programs?
Ms. FANNING. We have developed a way to track any decrease in our program because of a transition, specifically to the new GI Bill.
Initially, we saw very little change. We had estimated that up to 13,000 veterans could switch immediately from voc rehab over to the new GI Bill, and that didn't occur. I don't have the exact number, I would be glad to provide that, but I can tell you it was less than 1,000 veterans.
Now, just over the last quarter, we are seeing a slight uptick of veterans moving over to the GI Bill and just a slight decrease in our applicants. One-quarter's worth of data is not a lot to base trend analysis on, particularly since we have been seeing an upward trend due to outreach and the current conflict and, of course, compensation’s production, and their hiring of staff. So we will continue to monitor that.
I am obviously concerned. I think veterans need to make informed choices about what benefit is most beneficial for each of them, but I am concerned that a veteran may select a program based only on the stipend when their living expense is of a great concern to them, rather than the more comprehensive services of VR&E, if those are really what they need.
[The VA subsequently provided the following information:]
Mr. PERRIELLO. And my last question, very quickly. You were talking about that the first jobs are often the transitional jobs going through this program. Can you give us an example that those that tend to be available the most often as those transitional jobs or types of jobs we are seeing people move into?
Ms. FANNING. Well, the types of jobs I think are about as big as the labor market, because at TAP sessions, many employers actually are there meeting with veterans. Job fairs occur. DOL is very active in helping veterans who want to get a job immediately, get into a job that hopefully is closely aligned with what their military occupational specialty was or what their previous work experience was.
Oftentimes, the first job, as we all know, isn't the right job or the best job. And we do know that veterans want to—they tell us, they want to get a job immediately after discharge just to normalize themselves back into civilian life. What our concern is, is that a veteran, while they need that job to transition back into the civilian market, doesn't get into a job that is not compatible with their disability conditions, doesn't get into a job that really has a future, that they are looped back to our program so that we can assist them if training is needed to augment their transferrable skills, if their transferrable skills are really no longer relevant because of their disability conditions to help them get new skills, and to help them catch up with their peer group. Because of their service, they may be a few years behind their peer group's career development. And I think they deserve that assistance to get into appropriate careers that they can grow into.
So that is the concern. And I hope that answers your question.
Mr. PERRIELLO. Thank you. We certainly want to keep an eye on this program at this point. Thank you so much.
Ms. HERSETH SANDLIN. Thank you, Mr. Perriello.
Mr. Boozman?
Mr. BOOZMAN. Let's go ahead, if it is okay with you, Madam Chair, and go ahead with Mr. Teague.
Mr. TEAGUE. Well, thank you. And thank you, Madam Chairwoman, for having this meeting, and Ranking Member.
Ms. Fanning, I want to thank you for coming also. I think it is very important what your organization does to help our men and women as they come back, to work them from the disabled veterans or disabled soldiers from the military to civilian life and what they have to do. But, you know, one of the things, earlier in your testimony you were saying there are five different programs that you work the troops to. When they do, are they limited to one of those five when they get started in that? Or can they pick and choose different things from each, and maybe participate in three or all five or something, using part of each program?
Ms. FANNING. Thank you, Mr. Teague, for that question.
Our program is very fluid, and it is really tailored to each person's needs. So, as an example, one thing that I mentioned in my testimony is that, in many cases, independent living services are integrated into a training program. So a veteran may be pursuing college, but also may need some assistance, because of a severe disability, in having full access to the community, learning to use public transportation, having his or her home modified so they can get in and out easily, and those kinds of things. So, as much as possible, we integrate whatever services are needed together.
And, yes, a veteran can come in, and may come in initially—let me use an example of a Guard or Reservist who comes in initially wanting just help getting back to their previous employer and perhaps needs ergonomic adaptation to their work site, maybe just a chair because of a lower-back injury, and we assist with that. The veteran returns to the employer and finds that, during the time that they were deployed, maybe a year, 2 years, the job has moved on, and they need some additional training in order to stay competitive and be eligible for promotions. We can provide additional training that they may need.
Perhaps a veteran comes back and we are providing direct job placement. But even though he or she received excellent training in the military—and often we see this with information technology (IT) skills—they may not have the certifications that the civilian market recognizes that will allow them to get the best jobs and move up in their occupation. So even though we may be helping them get back into the IT market, we also may be providing short-term training for those certifications so that they maximize their marketability.
Mr. TEAGUE. And, also, you know the 12-year, the delimiting date for the VR&E. Is that long enough, due to these considerations that they do come in behind their peer group? Do you think that time needs to be expanded and additional years added to that?
Ms. FANNING. Well, one of the good things about the way the program is designed by Congress is that a veteran can apply at any time regardless of whether the 12-year delimiting date has passed or not. Eligibility isn't based on the delimiting date, but entitlement may be. So if a veteran comes in and applies for a voc rehab, even if the delimiting date has passed, we may find him or her eligible, and they will be able to sit down with a counselor to evaluate their needs.
If they have a serious employment handicap, meaning that they have serious issues and need significant services to overcome them, we can waive the 12-year eligibility period and provide services. We can extend the 48 months of entitlement as well.
So the program is designed in a very generous manner that allows us to serve seriously disabled veterans beyond that delimiting period.
Mr. TEAGUE. Another question just about efficiency and cost. You know there is going to be a 1 percent cut, but there is also an extra $8 million out there. So I was just curious, what is the average caseload for the caseworker? And, you know, if we are reasonably staffed, then why are we hiring contractors to do those jobs?
Ms. FANNING. We have used contractors for a number of years, as long as I remember, since my first exposure to the voc rehab program was as a subcontractor before I worked for the VA. And so that has always been a tool that has been used. It allows VR&E to be agile and to respond to changes and staffing needs. Because VR&E is a small program and we are community-based, there may be an office that has only one counselor in a remote area, the use of contractors, if there is turnover of that counselor, allows those veterans to continue to be served while the person is still behind.
So I think, contracting will always be there as a need and VR&E will continue to need it, and use it.
I would, if you wouldn't mind, ask you to repeat the first part of your question, because I don't think I fully answered.
Mr. TEAGUE. I was concerned about the average caseload, for the caseworker.
Ms. FANNING. Thank you. I apologize. I started remembering my old days and I got distracted.
The average caseload right now is around 1 to 145 for each counselor. And that is in all statuses, from applicant through veterans who are ready to be rehabilitated.
Mr. TEAGUE. Thank you. Thank you for your service, and thanks for answering those questions.
Ms. FANNING. Thank you.
Ms. HERSETH SANDLIN. Thank you, Mr. Teague.
Mr. Boozman?
Mr. BOOZMAN. Thank you, Madam Chair. You mentioned efforts to streamline and simplify service delivery. Can you give us some examples of perhaps what you are thinking in that area?
Ms. FANNING. Yes, I can. I would be delighted to.
We are doing a number of things right now to really take a hard look at the program and see how we can continually improve it. One thing that we are doing, that goes to Mr. Teague's question, is we are currently doing a work measurement study; and that is basically a time in motion study. We have a contractor assisting us to look at what each other professional staff isdoing, how much time does it take, so that we have analytical data that we can use to determine what the appropriate counselor-to-veteran caseload should be. You know, we all have our guesses or our estimates based on experience. And I do have experience in the field. But I would like to know from more of a scientific method.
We have just engaged in an end-to-end look at the program with contract support, first identifying our as-is process; what are we doing. And, in looking at where the opportunities for us to go in using advanced technology or simple business reprocessing, and streamline the program. That same contractor then developed a to-be state, and presented us with several recommendations from very simple improvements that we could make, all the way through to the paperless environment, which is where we ultimately want to be and we think will be a huge help.
As an example, something simple like using an automated reminder system for appointments. I can admit to you that if I don't get a reminder appointment the night before my dentist appointment, I am probably not going to be there the next day. With a busy schedule, and I think veterans have extremely busy schedules. Many of them are job searching or already looking.
We want to also, with our appointment scheduling, develop a system so that veterans could go online and select their own appointment time that is convenient for them, similar to going on and choosing your own airline seat. These are available in choosing what is best for them.
So from that very simple kind of process all the way, like I said, to paperless and everything in between. We are looking at all the forms, the processes we use, and looking at how we can simplify the paperwork that counselors are required to do so that we can get the same quality of work and ensure that the same level of service is provided to veterans, but perhaps not require so much paperwork, make sure we have enough, but that we are not over-requiring of the counselors.
Another initiative that we are currently engaged in is a pilot into regional offices, testing technology for remote counseling. And this is really something that we expect to be successful because of the success the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) has had with their telehealth program. So we know that technology can be used effectively and safely; but what we are really interested in is, since this is a counseling relationship, how does it affect the counseling relationship? Are there portions of the relationship that really are best face-to-face, one-on-one? Perhaps the initial appointments. And then, are there portions that really the technology would work just as effectively? And when veterans are a couple hundred miles away, it would keep them from driving to our office, and it would use the staff's time more effectively by not sending them 200 miles just to meet with one veteran. They could see many more veterans.
We are doing a lot of other things, but those are some examples.
Mr. BOOZMAN. Very good. And I think what we would like to do is perhaps have staff follow up on that and see how we can be helpful in that regard.
Do you have any idea about the kind of a ballpark figure, about the PAYGO cost to allow VR&E participants to use chapter 33 just as current law allows them to use chapter 30 while receiving VR&E services?
Ms. FANNING. I don't have that cost with me. It is—
Mr. BOOZMAN. Is that a bunch of people? Is that a huge population or a small population?
Ms. FANNING. When the bill was first passed and we looked at it, it was around 13,000 potentially. I haven't looked at what the population is in the recent months. You know, I looked at that data at that time just so that I could be prepared of what the potential impact may be. I am not a budget expert, but it is something that I have looked at. And from my thoughts, there wouldn't be a significant cost other than FTE, because the veteran will be using services from one program or the other. And chapter 33 obviously now has a larger price tag associated.
So with what we call the crossover program with chapter 30, which allows the veteran to receive the full scope of chapter 31 case management and assistance and support while electing the monetary benefits of chapter 30, the only additional cost is the staff who are doing the case management.
Mr. BOOZMAN. Again, I think that is something else that perhaps we will follow up on and see if we can get some numbers and things. So thank you, Madam Chair.
Ms. HERSETH SANDLIN. Thank you, Mr. Boozman. That is a very helpful response in light of the fact of your experience and looking at the additional costs associated with chapter 30, and obviously some proposals on the table, as it relates to the new benefit.
Let me just follow up from some of what Mr. Boozman mentioned in his opening statement as well as questions that Mr. Perriello and Mr. Teague asked. The Independent Budget for fiscal year 2011 makes the assertion that VA has a limited number of VR&E counselors and case managers to handle a growing caseload. Now, you had mentioned that it is about 1 to 145. And does that include contractors?
Ms. FANNING. No. That is VA staff only.
Ms. HERSETH SANDLIN. VA staff only. Do you know what it is with the contractors?
Ms. FANNING. With contractors, it is hard to define. Because contractors may have numerous employees working for them. And in some cases, when they are working with subcontractors—as I can say in my own experience, when I was self-employed as a rehab counselor, VA work was only one thing that I was doing. I was also working in a number of other sectors. So it is harder to quantify, because they may be only working one case a month, they may be full-time. We can try to equate dollars to people, and I would be glad to do that math to give you an estimate.
Ms. HERSETH SANDLIN. I think it would be good to have a measure. I think there are some legitimate questions being raised about the use of the dollars and the results that we are getting. Any time we can look at something and try to craft some measure, I think it would be helpful. If you could do that, and we can talk more, just so we have a better sense of the veterans being served by the contractors and how that compares with some of the concerns we have had about the workload for the VA staff.
Is that 1 to 145, has that been consistent over the last number of years? Did you see a significant jump early in the last decade? Do you have the trends that show us what the workload has been, average workload, on an annual basis?
Ms. FANNING. I would have to go back in time to tell you over the last decade; during the time that I have been here in Washington, which has been about 2-1/2 years now.
Ms. HERSETH SANDLIN. But do we have that?
Ms. FANNING. It has been a slight increase. It was as low as 1 to 119 a couple years ago. So we have seen an increase of about 20 or so cases per counselor.
[The VA subsequently provided the following information:]
During the course of the NAS-II contracts, 29,976 referrals were made to prime contractors. The number of referrals varies by regional office depending on services needed. The prime contractor was responsible for assigning work and tracking the cases referred to each subcontractor. Prime contractors assigned work to subcontractors based on their own criteria and type of service needed. Contracted services included the following service groups: Initial Evaluation, Case Management, Employment Services, and Ed/Voc Counseling.
VA counselors continued to perform case-management functions while the subcontractor performed the assigned work. The VA counselor is ultimately responsible for all decisions pertaining to individual cases. The contract restricted any one contractor to a VA caseload of no more than 125 cases.
Ms. HERSETH SANDLIN. Does that, in any way, mirror some of what the Ranking Member mentioned in terms of the time to actually receive services in terms of the amount of time for the application? We are going into—how many days did you say—900 days from the time of application to completion of the program?
Ms. FANNING. The actual time of the program really depends more on what track the veteran is in. And we know that the majority of veterans who come to VR&E are looking for services to prepare them for a career. And since they are going through TAP, and DOL is so active in the process, many veterans who already are employable or who think they are may never come and apply for voc rehab. They may come back to us later when they realize that their disability isn't compatible with that job. And that is one of the reasons we are working so closely with the Department of Labor.
Ms. HERSETH SANDLIN. I guess the question is, there does seem to be some concern among veterans about the average time it takes once they submit an application to start receiving services. I am wondering if that tracks with the uptick that you have seen.
Ms. FANNING. We have seen a slight uptick in terms of our goal for making an entitlement decision. We are within 10 percent of the goal. We are not currently at the goal. We are about 10 percent over. The same is the case with the day to develop a rehabilitation plan. And there is overlap with those two cycles. They are not linear, that the entitlement ends and then the evaluation portion starts. There is some overlap in those two cycles.
But there is a slight uptick. We are still—within 10 percent, which is not bad. It is something that we can get down; and we are actively working with the Office of Field Operations and with our staff to try to reduce that timeliness. And I can tell you, that is a part of my reasoning behind launching into the BPR and looking for ways to streamline. I think that some of the paperwork could be reduced, and that could make the timeliness a little more effective.
I would like, though, to also mention that the time to develop a rehabilitation plan—which currently we are allowing 105 days, so just 3-1/2 months, approximately. That there is always going to be a need for some time on average for that process. We are working with veterans to look at the labor market, to understand their skills and aptitudes, to understand their interests, to understand the transferrable skills that they bring to the table and how they can build on those, to understand all the options that they have for their futures, and then to make some decisions.
That is a process. And so we don't want to be prescriptive and tell a veteran when he comes in the door what job he or she should seek. We want them to go through that process and make informed decisions that are best for them. So there always will be some time in that process because it is a counseling process.
Now, saying that, do I think it could be shortened? I do. And that is something that I am very committed to finding every way possible that we can to make it shorter. Because if a veteran comes to us who is not employed and needs work, I don't want him to wait 3 months, I don't want him to wait 3 weeks if we can avoid that. We want to get services started as quickly as we can.
Ms. HERSETH SANDLIN. I appreciate that. And you had responded to a question from Mr. Perriello about the transitional jobs, and your response was very impressive in terms of recognizing that that oftentimes is not a good fit, that transitional job, and the importance of keeping the veteran sort of looped back into your program.
Do you track that somehow? I mean, is the transitional job separate from the rehabilitation plan and the career development stage? Is this just what—they go through TAP, maybe your office, your program helps identify that transitional job. Are they in the transitional job then during the time that they are working to develop a rehabilitation plan?
Ms. FANNING. A good majority of veterans in voc rehab are in transitional jobs. Most of them, even if they are only supporting themselves—and a good majority of them have families, they need to work even if they are pursuing voc rehab. As generous as the VR&E program is, the stipend that we have is not sufficient to pay rent and buy food and pay all the expenses for daily life. So most veterans are working at least part-time, some in work-study programs, some in transitional full-time jobs.
Obviously, from a rehab counselor perspective, some kind of work that is continuing to build their resume is a good thing. But we don't want—ideally, we don't want to see someone having to work full-time while they are in college. It extends the period of time before they can really get into that right career.
So a happy medium would be good. But we recognize and understand that veterans need transitional jobs. If we are helping them find them or we are working with DOL in that process, what we are focused on is, let's make sure that it is a job that is aligned with the ultimate career goal so that it is a job that will make them more marketable when they are ready to enter that career.
Ms. HERSETH SANDLIN. Let me ask one more question before recognizing Mr. Bilirakis. When and how does the VR&E program determine or declare as such that a veteran has been rehabilitated?
Ms. FANNING. We track suitable employment, first of all. So many veterans actually enter suitable employment while they are still in training, and that is the ideal scenario. They are hired as a co-op and they are completing college, and also in a job leading toward the job that they really want.
A lot of veterans get jobs in their last semester of college when they are ready to graduate. So as soon as they enter suitable employment, we start tracking it in our data system. We don't declare a veteran rehabilitated until they have completed the goals of their program and we can determine that they are suitably employed and that the employment is stable, and for at least a 60-day period.
So a veteran may graduate on May 1, get a job on June 1. Maybe they have some initial bumps in the road and we learn that they need some adaptation or some kind of accommodation on the job. We assist with that. Once that stability has been gained, then 60 days beyond that point we can close the case as rehabilitated.
Ms. HERSETH SANDLIN. Thank you. Mr. Bilirakis, do you have any questions?
Mr. BILIRAKIS. Thank you, Madam Chair. I have a couple questions.
Currently, the date for completing the VR&E is set to 12 years following the date of rating for a service-connected disability. For some veterans, their disability progresses over time. And I have a two-part question.
First, is it accurate to say that a disabled veteran who received his rating years ago who wanted to participate in the VRE simply does not have that option? And, second, would it also be accurate to say that a 20-year-old Afghan or Iraq war veteran discharged with a disability today would not be able to participate in the VR&E when he is 32 even though the disability has progressed?
And then, as a follow-up, what is the VA's position on eliminating the VR&E's 12-year delimiting date to allow veterans access to the VR&E on a needs basis when necessary?
Ms. FANNING. Thank you, sir, for those questions. First of all, as you mentioned, the 12-year delimiting date, that clock starts on the date of first notification of any disability rating by Compensation and Pension (C&P). That opens the door for vocational rehabilitation services. Veterans, however, can apply at any time during their life regardless if that 12-year delimiting period has expired.
Eligibility is based solely on having at least a 10-percent disability rating; or, if a rating hasn't been established, a 20-percent memorandum rating.
So veterans are able to come in, sit down with a counselor, discuss their needs. And if the counselor finds that the veteran has a serious employment handicap, meaning that because their disability is so significant, that they need services to be rehabilitated to meet their goals, whether that is employment, or we find that they are not feasible for employment and independent living service needs are identified, we can waive the 12-year delimiting period. So, in both scenarios that you described—
Mr. BILIRAKIS. How often do you do that, though? How often do you waive it?
Ms. FANNING. I am going to talk off the top of my head now, and I can give you a specific ratio in my follow-up. But about half of the veterans we are serving have serious employment handicaps.
Now, that doesn't mean that all of those individuals needed that period, that 12-year period extended. It just means that we find a high number of veterans who come in to us for services to have significant needs. If a veteran only has an employment handicap, which means they do have a disability that is related to their service-connected disability, they do have impairments related to their service-connected disability that, in some way, impact their work, their ability to obtain a job or maintain a job, but it doesn't rise to the level of a serious disability, meaning that they need significant services and that 12-year period has passed, those are the cases when we can't provide services, and, unfortunately, would have to find the veteran not to be entitled.
Mr. BILIRAKIS. So the VA's position is that they would not, at this time, eliminate the 12-year delimiting date?
Ms. FANNING. We haven't evaluated that issue. And I would be happy to do so. Basic rehab law, I mean, aside from the law that mandates the voc rehab and employment program, is to ensure that the most seriously disabled individuals are served first. And the way that chapter 31 has been developed by Congress, that intent is certainly met. Because regardless of the time that a veteran comes back in the continuum of his disability—and, as you know, and you mentioned, disability can be a continuum. A veteran with diabetes, as an example, may be quite stable early in his or her life, and as they age and complications arise, they can be quite significant. And so later in life they really may need assistance. And so the way title 38 and chapter 31 has been designed under title 38, it allows us to serve those most seriously disabled individuals. What it doesn't allow is for those veterans who have an employment handicap, for us to serve them if the delimiting date has passed.
Mr. BILIRAKIS. Thank you very much. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Ms. HERSETH SANDLIN. Thank you, Mr. Bilirakis.
Ms. Fanning, perhaps you could get us, in addition to some of the other information that we have requested, that you could get us in terms of the caseload for contractors vis-à-vis those for your VA staff, and kind of the trend of that average caseload over the past decade, could you also get us information about how many veterans have been allowed into the VR&E program who passed the 12-year delimiting period?
Ms. FANNING. Yes, ma'am.
[The VA subsequently provided the following information:]
Currently, 18,867 Veterans are past the eligibility termination period of 12 years. These Veterans are in various stages of the program, including some who are still in applicant status. Veterans in applicant and evaluation statuses may not have yet been rendered an entitlement determination. Other veterans in this population may have been found entitled during their 12-year eligibility period with an employment handicap and later found to have a serious employment handicap based on additional evidence submitted or a worsening of their disabilities.
Ms. HERSETH SANDLIN. I just have a couple of questions on the independent living program. My office has received reports from veterans who have experienced wait times exceeding 1,000 days for approval of their independent living program. Are you aware of those concerns?
Ms. FANNING. I have seen concerns from one—raised from one particular individual. I can tell you that the time frames for developing any kind of plan. As I mentioned, the average is within 10 percent of our goal of 105 days. So those certainly would be significant outliers. I mean, I can go back and run our database to see if we have any case that is an outlier in that manner and report back to you.
Ms. HERSETH SANDLIN. Specifically, in the independent living program?
Ms. FANNING. Yes.
Ms. HERSETH SANDLIN. I would appreciate that. I will submit to your office a list of specific veterans and their concerns regarding the independent living program. Not all of them face the 1,000 day or more concern about approval of the program.
Ms. FANNING. That would be helpful.
Ms. HERSETH SANDLIN. I would then appreciate if you and your staff could sort of get us some up-to-date information responding to the concerns of that list of veterans.
I guess, if you are aware of the one particular case, I guess I am wondering what sort of management or oversight the Central Office provides to the regional office as it relates to management of the independent living program. Because I think the application procedure has proven to be exceedingly onerous with repeated requests for further documentation, according to some of the reports I am getting for veterans.
Ms. FANNING. I am aware that one particular veteran is raising these concerns. As I said, I would have to research to see if any particular case actually is at that time limit, or if it is a perception based on a rehabilitation plan being developed and then ongoing services taking additional time. And, from a veteran's perspective, I can see that, until everything that is expected has been completed, that they may consider that clock ticking and may be looking at it from a time perspective differently than we are. So it would be helpful for me to look at the cases, and I appreciate you providing me the opportunity.
[The VA followed up with Chairwoman Herseth Sandlin's office regarding this issue.]
Ms. HERSETH SANDLIN. I guess my question is, what oversight are you providing to the regional offices as it relates to streamlining the process, so perhaps there don't have to be these further requests of additional documentation? We could maybe make the assumption that the veteran has fallen short in providing some of the documentation, but sometimes that is directly related to the guidance and the efficiency and effectiveness of the guidance they are getting from someone working out of a regional office.
Ms. FANNING. The independent living program receives a lot of attention. And independent living, as you know, is—it is a separate track, as we described the five tracks, but it is actually a subset of our program. VR&E is an employment program. And until we actually determine that a veteran is not feasible for employment, at that point, we then proceed to look at solely independent living needs.
Now, as I mentioned earlier, we can also look at independent living needs as a part of any program. But I think you are talking about solely independent living needs at this point. So that it is going to take a little longer because it is adding an additional step to the process. We determine a veteran is not feasible. The next step is, this veteran can't work, but are they independent? Do they need any services to maximize their independence?
We have a process in place that, first of all, the counselor evaluates their independent living needs. And it is a pretty structured process that has been put in place in response to some of the concerns that you are raising over the last few years, prior to my arrival, but not very much prior.
In addition, if the needs that are identified are significant, an in-home visit is done. And that in-home visit may even include bringing in experts such as an occupational therapist or a rehabilitation engineer. Not in every case, because obviously if the veteran's disability is a mental health issue, we may not be looking at adapting their home. We may be looking at more functional issues that would help them be more successful at home.
Ms. FANNING. The process is overseen in Central Office. We actually have an independent living coordinator who works really closely as a consultant to the field, and I have doubled that staff so she now has another person working with her. We are doing—since I have arrived, we are doing yearly "train the trainer" sessions with the field offices specifically about independent living, and we are currently reviewing all of the office's use of independent living and preparing to do some site visits to offices eithe
Sign Up for Committee Updates
Stay connected with the Committee