[House Hearing, 110 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]





                        ENDING HOMELESSNESS FOR

                         OUR NATION'S VETERANS

=======================================================================

                                HEARING

                               before the

                     COMMITTEE ON VETERANS' AFFAIRS

                     U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                       ONE HUNDRED TENTH CONGRESS

                             SECOND SESSION

                               __________

                             APRIL 9, 2008

                               __________

                           Serial No. 110-80

                               __________

       Printed for the use of the Committee on Veterans' Affairs










                   U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

43-046                     WASHINGTON : 2008
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing 
Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free(866) 512-1800; DC 
area (202) 512-1800 Fax: (202) 512-2104  Mail: Stop IDCC, 
Washington, DC 20402-0001












                     COMMITTEE ON VETERANS' AFFAIRS

                    BOB FILNER, California, Chairman

CORRINE BROWN, Florida               STEVE BUYER, Indiana, Ranking
VIC SNYDER, Arkansas                 CLIFF STEARNS, Florida
MICHAEL H. MICHAUD, Maine            JERRY MORAN, Kansas
STEPHANIE HERSETH SANDLIN, South     HENRY E. BROWN, Jr., South 
Dakota                               Carolina
HARRY E. MITCHELL, Arizona           JEFF MILLER, Florida
JOHN J. HALL, New York               JOHN BOOZMAN, Arkansas
PHIL HARE, Illinois                  GINNY BROWN-WAITE, Florida
MICHAEL F. DOYLE, Pennsylvania       MICHAEL R. TURNER, Ohio
SHELLEY BERKLEY, Nevada              BRIAN P. BILBRAY, California
JOHN T. SALAZAR, Colorado            DOUG LAMBORN, Colorado
CIRO D. RODRIGUEZ, Texas             GUS M. BILIRAKIS, Florida
JOE DONNELLY, Indiana                VERN BUCHANAN, Florida
JERRY McNERNEY, California           VACANT
ZACHARY T. SPACE, Ohio
TIMOTHY J. WALZ, Minnesota

                   Malcom A. Shorter, Staff Director

Pursuant to clause 2(e)(4) of Rule XI of the Rules of the House, public 
hearing records of the Committee on Veterans' Affairs are also 
published in electronic form. The printed hearing record remains the 
official version. Because electronic submissions are used to prepare 
both printed and electronic versions of the hearing record, the process 
of converting between various electronic formats may introduce 
unintentional errors or omissions. Such occurrences are inherent in the 
current publication process and should diminish as the process is 
further refined.



















                            C O N T E N T S

                               __________

                             April 9, 2008

                                                                   Page
Ending Homelessness for Our Nation's Veterans....................     1

                           OPENING STATEMENTS

Chairman Bob Filner..............................................     1
    Prepared statement of Chairman Filner........................    43
Hon. Ginny Brown-Waite...........................................     2
Hon. Stephanie Herseth Sandlin, prepared statement of............    43
Hon. Henry E. Brown, Jr., prepared statement of..................    44
Hon. Joe Donnelly, prepared statement of.........................    44
Hon. Timothy J. Walz, prepared statement of......................    45

                               WITNESSES

Congressional Research Service, Library of Congress, Libby Perl, 
  Analyst in Housing.............................................     7
    Prepared statement of Ms. Perl...............................    74
U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, Peter H. Dougherty, 
  Director, Homeless Veterans Programs, Veterans Health 
  Administration.................................................    37
    Prepared statement of Mr. Dougherty..........................    95

                                 ______

Catholic Charities Housing Development Corporation, Chicago, IL, 
  William G. D'Arcy, Chief Operating Officer.....................    30
    Prepared statement of Mr. D'Arcy.............................    92
Maryland Center for Veterans Education and Training, Inc., 
  Colonel Charles Williams, USA (Ret.), Executive Director.......    28
    Prepared statement of Colonel Williams.......................    88
National Coalition for Homeless Veterans, John Driscoll, Vice 
  President for Operations and Programs..........................     4
    Prepared statement of Mr. Driscoll...........................    45
Saunders, Michelle, Arlington, VA................................     9
    Prepared statement of Ms. Saunders...........................    82
Soldier On (United Veterans of America), John F. Downing, 
  President and Chief Executive Officer..........................    24
    Prepared statement of Mr. Downing............................    85
Veterans Village of San Diego, CA, Phil Landis, Chief Executive 
  Officer........................................................    29
    Prepared statement of Mr. Landis.............................    90

                       SUBMISSIONS FOR THE RECORD

American Legion, Ronald F. Chamrin, Assistant Director, Economic 
  Commission, statement..........................................   100
Miller, Hon. Jeff, a Representative in Congress from the State of 
  Florida, statement.............................................   104
Salazar, Hon. John T., a Representative in Congress from the 
  State of Colorado, statement...................................   105
Vietnam Veterans of America, Sandra A. Miller, Chair, Homeless 
  Veterans Committee, statement..................................   105

                   MATERIAL SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD

Reports:
CRS Report for Congress, entitled ``Veterans and Homelessness,'' 
  Updated April 4, 2008, Order Code RL34024, by Libby Perl, 
  Analyst in Housing, Domestic Social Policy Division, 
  Congressional Research Service.................................   110
CRS Report for Congress, entitled ``Counting Homeless Persons: 
  Homeless Management Information Systems,'' Updated April 3, 
  2008, Order Code RL33956, by Libby Perl, Analyst in Housing, 
  Domestic Social Policy Division, Congressional Research Service   131

Post Hearing Questions and Responses for the Record:
Hon. Bob Filner, Committee on Veterans' Affairs, to John 
  Driscoll, Vice President for Operations and Programs, National 
  Coalition for Homeless Veterans, letter dated April 10, 2008, 
  and Mr. Driscoll's responses...................................   143
Hon. Bob Filner, Committee on Veterans' Affairs, to Libby Perl, 
  Analyst in Housing, Domestic Social Policy Division, 
  Congressional Research Service, letter dated April 10, 2008, 
  and June 5, 2008, responses....................................   146
Hon. Bob Filner, Committee on Veterans' Affairs, to Michelle 
  Saunders, Veterans Moving Forward, letter dated April 10, 2008, 
  and Ms. Saunders' responses....................................   148
Hon. Bob Filner, Committee on Veterans' Affairs, to John F. 
  Downing, President/Chief Executive Officer, Soldier On, letter 
  dated April 10, 2008, and June 5, 2008, responses..............   156
Hon. Bob Filner, Committee on Veterans' Affairs, to Colonel 
  Charles Williams, USA (Ret.), Executive Director, Maryland 
  Center for Veterans Education and Training, Inc., letter dated 
  April 10, 2008, and Mr. Williams' responses....................   157
Hon. Bob Filner, Committee on Veterans' Affairs, to Phil Landis, 
  Chief Executive Officer, Veterans Village of San Diego, letter 
  dated April 10, 2008, and Mr. Landis' responses................   159
Hon. Bob Filner, Committee on Veterans' Affairs, to William G. 
  D'Arcy, Chief Operating Officer, Catholic Charities Housing 
  Development Corporation, letter dated April 10, 2008, and Mr. 
  D'Arcy's responses.............................................   161
Hon. Bob Filner, Committee on Veterans' Affairs, to Hon. James B. 
  Peake, Secretary, U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, letter 
  dated April 10, 2008, also transmitting questions from Hon. 
  Ciro D. Rodriguez, and VA responses............................   162

 
                        ENDING HOMELESSNESS FOR

                         OUR NATION'S VETERANS

                              ----------                              


                        WEDNESDAY, APRIL 9, 2008


                     U.S. House of Representatives,
                            Committee on Veterans' Affairs,
                                                    Washington, DC.

    The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:00 a.m., in 
Room 334, Cannon House Office Building, Hon. Bob Filner 
[Chairman of the Committee] presiding.
    Present: Representatives Filner, Hall, Rodriguez, Donnelly, 
Space, Walz, Brown of South Carolina, and Brown-Waite.

              OPENING STATEMENT OF CHAIRMAN FILNER

    The Chairman. Good morning and welcome to the Committee on 
Veterans' Affairs hearing on Ending Homelessness for Our 
Nation's Veterans. We have a lot of competition for attendance 
today. General Petraeus is testifying before the Armed Services 
Committee and many of our Members share membership with that 
Committee. And, in addition, one of the parties is holding a 
caucus meeting at this very moment, so hopefully, they will 
attend after the caucus is over. Mr. Brown, thank you for being 
here with us.
    I think we all know that homelessness in America is a 
national tragedy. Few people want to face the issues. Few 
people want to even look at the homeless. And if that is a 
national tragedy, the fact of homeless veterans is, I think, a 
moral disgrace for this Nation.
    This is not what we had in mind when we said we would help 
veterans, both adjust into civilian society and participate in 
the American dream. There are reasons why that occurs, many of 
which can be dealt with and prevented. We are going to look at 
what the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) and community 
organizations are doing, what we should be doing, and how we 
further the partnerships between the VA and these 
organizations.
    We see already that the current conflicts in Iraq and 
Afghanistan have produced homelessness. We have figures, I am 
not sure the reliability of them, but about 1,500 homeless 
veterans from these conflicts is what is now estimated, 
although, from what I see, statistics always underestimate the 
extent of the problem.
    We have to do a better job of dealing with these new 
veterans, and of course, the old veterans. The figures that I 
see indicate that probably half of the homeless on the street 
tonight are veterans, mainly from Vietnam. That is 200,000. And 
that is a disgrace.
    Many communities have participated in an annual event 
called Stand Down. It was started in San Diego, my hometown, in 
1987. I was at the first one. And what you saw there was an 
incredible outpouring of community support and a recognition 
that dealing with the issue is a holistic, multifaceted 
problem. Yes, we have to provide housing. And, yes, we have to 
provide clothes and food. We have to provide medical care and 
dental support, legal advice, alcohol and drug abuse 
counseling. All these issues are involved in dealing with the 
problem.
    Stand Down started 20 years ago and as I have said at the 
last few Stand Downs in San Diego, I am sick of going to Stand 
Downs, because what we show is that we know how to deal with 
the problem. For 3 days we bring the resources together and 
people have a sense of security, they have a sense of support, 
there is a sense of hope and progress. But it seems to me as a 
Nation, and what we have a VA for, is to do that 365 days a 
year. That is what we should be doing for our homeless 
veterans.
    So, I look forward to the panels this morning from the 
Department of Veterans Affairs, from community groups, from 
people who have dealt with this for a long, long time. Before 
the first panel I will recognize Ms. Brown-Waite for an opening 
statement.
    [The prepared statement of Chairman Filner appears on p. 
43.]

          OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. GINNY BROWN-WAITE

    Ms. Brown-Waite. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Every 
American should have a safe place to live, and unfortunately, 
that is not always the case. We have a serious problem with 
homelessness in our Nation. And while this problem is not just 
specific to veterans, it is deeply troubling that men and women 
who have served in uniform are over-represented in the homeless 
population.
    I want to thank all of our witnesses who are here today to 
present their expert views. Without the dedication and strong 
advocacy of many of you that have taken the time to be here 
today, we would not have such a successful program like the 
Maryland Center for Veterans Education and Training (MCVET) to 
help homeless veterans.
    Several research studies have been taken to determine why 
so many veterans are homeless, although they have been somewhat 
inconclusive. A number of contributing factors have been 
identified that contribute to a veteran becoming homeless. 
First, lack of support upon returning home; substance abuse 
disorder; inner personal relationships and psychiatric 
disorders. While psychiatric disorders are considered a 
contributing factor, I found it noteworthy the Rosenheck 
Fontana Study found, ``No unique association between combat-
related post traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and 
homelessness.'' Similarly, a direct connection between military 
service and homelessness has not necessarily been found.
    In 1987, Congress began a nationwide effort to end 
homelessness among veterans with the enactment of Public Law 
100-6. This law provided VA with $5 million for contract 
residential care and non-domiciliary care for homeless 
veterans. Since then, VA's homeless programs have expanded and 
grown. Under the Bush Administration, funding has doubled to an 
estimated $317 million this fiscal year.
    In addition to programs specifically targeted to help them 
obtain permanent housing, homeless veterans are also eligible 
for other VA services such as health and dental care. In total, 
VA estimates that it will spend more than $1.6 billion this 
year to treat homeless veterans. While actual numbers are 
difficult to assess, indications are that many of the programs 
are working. VA's latest estimates show that that number of 
homeless veterans dropped 21 percent this past year, still it 
is unacceptable that an estimated 154,000 veterans are on the 
street on any given night.
    With the increasing number of returning Operation Enduring 
Freedom/Operation Iraqi Freedom (OEF/OIF) veterans, it is 
especially important that we ensure that the VA has adequate 
resources and that it effectively uses those resources to help 
veterans reintegrate into society and lead productive lives. A 
superb example of such an efficient and effective program lies 
just a few minutes here up the I-95 corridor. As I mentioned, 
Colonel Williams, Executive Director of MCVET is here this 
morning. MCVET is a very successful program that provides 
housing, job training, and mental health and substance abuse 
counseling to homeless veterans. Most participants enter the 
system through an emergency housing unit and leave with 
permanent housing and a good paying job.
    The program utilizes military order and discipline to help 
veterans get their lives back on track by taking personal 
responsibility for their future. In 1997, the Department of 
Housing and Urban Development (HUD) declared MCVET the national 
model for seamless transition for homeless veterans.
    I believe that for a homeless veteran program to be 
successful, it must go beyond emergency shelters and free hot 
meals. We need more programs like MCVET and other programs that 
we will hear about today.
    Solider On, and the Veterans Village of San Diego, strive 
not only to provide housing and mental health services, but 
also 21st century job skills.
    Mr. Chairman, I too, go to the Stand Downs. And one of the 
things that we hear in the Florida area is that there are so 
many homeless veterans living in the National Forest and yet 
when we have the Stand Downs, I can just share with you that we 
don't find that many there. As a matter of fact, on almost a 
biweekly basis, we have a homeless veteran who comes into our 
Congressional Office in Brooksville. We try to get him 
services. We try to get him to the clinic. We have the local 
VSO come over and counsel him. And it is very frustrating that 
he continues to refuse services. They don't trust government 
and that is part of the problem. Mr. Chairman, I think you and 
I can probably agree on that.
    I look forward to the testimony of all the witnesses here 
today and yield back the balance of my time.
    The Chairman. Thank you, Ms. Brown-Waite. I ask unanimous 
consent that all Members have 5 legislative days to revise and 
extend their remarks and that written statements be made a part 
of the record.
    Hearing no objection, so ordered.
    The Chairman. If the first panel will take their seats. We 
have with us today John Driscoll who is the Vice President for 
Operations and Programs at the National Coalition for Homeless 
Veterans (NCHV). And he is here to discuss the programs in 
place to help America's homeless veterans.
    Libby Perl is an Analyst in Housing at the Congressional 
Research Service (CRS) and will discuss her recent reports, 
``Veterans and Homelessness,'' and ``Counting Homeless Persons 
Homeless Management Information Systems (HMIS).''
    And Michelle Saunders is a wounded veteran from Operation 
Iraqi Freedom who almost became homeless after being discharged 
from the military.
    We look forward to your statements. Your written statements 
will be made part of the record. And if you can summarize their 
orally, that would be great. John, thank you for what you do 
every day.
    Mr. Driscoll. Thank you, sir.

STATEMENTS OF JOHN DRISCOLL, VICE PRESIDENT FOR OPERATIONS AND 
PROGRAMS, NATIONAL COALITION FOR HOMELESS VETERANS; LIBBY PERL, 
ANALYST IN HOUSING, CONGRESSIONAL RESEARCH SERVICE, LIBRARY OF 
    CONGRESS; AND MICHELLE SAUNDERS, ARLINGTON, VA (VETERAN)

                   STATEMENT OF JOHN DRISCOLL

    Mr. Driscoll. Chairman Filner, distinguished Members of the 
Committee, the National Coalition for Homeless Veterans is 
honored to participate in this hearing. This Committee knows 
all too well that the price of our freedom necessarily includes 
tending to the wounds of the men and women who reserve some 
portion of their lives to preserve it.
    I would like to begin our testimony by expressing our 
sincere thanks and gratitude for the continuing their legacy of 
this Committee. For two decades you have engaged in a noble 
cause that few others have even wanted to acknowledge. You have 
asked the tough questions, you have demanded accountability, 
and you have shouldered this burden before Congress on behalf 
of the veterans that we represent and you have delivered on 
your promise. For all that, to us, you stand first among those 
who made the successes that I will talk about today possible.
    The Homeless Veterans Assistance Program that NCHV 
represents began in earnest in 1990. And I am glad to report 
that the battle has turned in our favor. This is the first time 
NCHV has been able to become before this Committee and said 
that we believe that is the case.
    The partnership with the Departments of Veterans Affairs, 
Labor, Housing and Urban Development supported by the 
legislation and funding measures championed by this Committee 
are community service providers have helped reduce the number 
of homeless veterans on any given night in America by 38 
percent in the last 6 years.
    The VA has presented an estimate of the wounded veterans, 
homeless veterans to this Committee every year since 1994. In 
2002, that number stood at about 314,000; in 2006 that number 
had dropped to 194,000. There are two non-government veteran 
specific programs serving the men and women who represent 
nearly a quart of this Nation's homeless population, and these 
programs are primarily responsible for this reduction in 
veteran homelessness. The VA's Homeless Providers Grant Per 
Diem Program and the U.S. Department of Labor's (DoLs) Homeless 
Veterans Reintegration Program (HVRP) were created in the late 
eighties to provide access to service for veterans who were 
unable to get help from federally funded mainstream homeless 
programs.
    The Grant Per Diem Program is the foundation of the 
nationwide VA and community partnership that funds nearly 
10,000 service beds in non-VA facilities in every State. The VA 
has quadrupled it's support for this partnership since 2002. 
The purpose of the program is to provide stable housing and 
supportive services necessary to help homeless veterans achieve 
self sufficiency to the maximum extent possible. Clients are 
only eligible for this assistance for up to 2 years and the 
client progress must be reported to the Grant Per Diem Office 
quarterly. All programs are required to connect financial and 
program performance audits annually.
    In September of 2007, after a year long review of this 
program, the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) 
reported that an additional 11,000 beds are needed to meet the 
demand presented by the Nation's homeless veterans. The VA 
concurred with that finding.
    We have two recommendations for this program. The first is 
to increase the annual appropriation to $200 million. The 
projected $137 million in the President's fiscal year 2009 
budget request will increase the number of beds in the program, 
but not really to the extent that the GAO report has found 
necessary.
    We know that some VA officials would be concerned about the 
administrative capacity to handle such a large infusion of 
funding, but we believe that the documented need to do so 
should drive the debate on this issue.
    In 2006, the VA created the position of Grant and Per Diem 
liaisons to provide additional administrative support. The VA 
published a comprehensive program to better instruct the 
grantees on funding and grant compliance issues. They expect to 
provide intensive training for these liaisons.
    Additional funding would increase the number of beds, but 
it could also increase the level of other services that have 
been strained by the budget constraints that they have been 
operating under. We need more money for drop in centers for 
homeless veterans. This is the first line of defense where 
veterans who feel they need help and are reaching out to 
somebody are going to be received and embraced and referred to 
the people who can help take care of their issues before they 
are threatened with homelessness.
    We need more grants for women who now account for 14 
percent of the combat personnel operating in Iraq and 
Afghanistan. The frail and elderly, which is as the Chairman 
eluded to the Vietnam veteran generation, we are all getting a 
little older.
    Veterans who are terminally ill and veterans with chronic 
mental illness need housing supports until the organizations 
helping them can find other longer-term housing options for 
them.
    The second program is the Department of Labor's Homeless 
Veterans Reintegration Program, which has been very near and 
dear to this Committee's heart. You know that approximately 
14,000 to 16,000 homeless veterans are placed into employment 
every year at less than $2,000 per placement. This program 
expires at the end of fiscal year 2009, Mr. Chairman. And even 
though it has been authorized at $50 million a year since 2005, 
less than half has been appropriated for it. So to whatever 
extent possible, we would ask that you could apply a little 
pressure on behalf of those veterans who need that service.
    Which brings us to the question of prevention of veteran 
homelessness. Everything that we have accomplished and all the 
successes that we have made, necessarily points to the next 
step in this campaign. The lack of affordable, permanent 
housing is sited as the number one unmet need of America's 
veterans according to the VA Challenge Report. We commend the 
work of the HUD and VA to make up to 10,000 HUD/VA supportive 
housing (HUD-VASH) vouchers available to veterans with chronic 
health and disability challenges and another increase in equal 
measure slated for fiscal year 2009.
    But the affordable housing crisis extends far beyond the VA 
healthcare system and it's community partners. Once veterans 
successfully complete their Grant Per Diem Programs, many of 
these veterans still cannot afford fair market rents, most of 
them will never be able to afford mortgages, even with the VA 
home loan guarantee. They are still essentially at risk of 
homelessness.
    NCHV supports two measures that would address these issues. 
The first is a ``Veterans Health Care Improvement Act,'' H.R. 
2874, which would provide grants to community and community 
agencies to provide services to low-income veterans in 
permanent housing to reduce their risk of homelessness. The 
services they would be eligible for would be case management, 
job counseling and training, transportation assistance, and 
child care needs.
    The second measure would make funds available to increase 
the availability of affordable housing units for low-income 
veterans and their families. The ``Homes for Heroes Act,'' 
introduced in both the House and the Senate, addresses this 
issue and NCHV has been privileged to work with staff in both 
Houses to support this Congressional action.
    In summary, most of the historic achievements of this broad 
coalition now engaged in the campaign to end homelessness among 
veterans have occurred in just the last 6 years. I am pretty 
emotional about this. I have been there for most of them.
    We believe the next critical step is to develop and 
implement a prevention strategy that addresses the health and 
social and economic needs of OIF/OEF veterans before they are 
threatened with homelessness.
    Never before in the history of this country have we 
concerned ourselves with preventing homelessness during a time 
of war for our veterans. For all our collective accomplishments 
and God willing with your support, I believe this will be our 
finest hour yet.
    Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    [The prepared statement of Mr. Driscoll and the VA 
Challenge Report appear on p. 45.]
    The Chairman. Thank you, Mr. Driscoll. Ms. Perl, we 
appreciate your being with us this morning.

                    STATEMENT OF LIBBY PERL

    Ms. Perl. Chairman Filner and Members of the Committee, 
thank you for the opportunity to testify here today. My name is 
Libby Perl and I am an analyst at the Congressional Research 
Service.
    As requested, in my testimony I will provide a brief 
summary of the Federal programs that assist homeless veterans, 
a brief overview of research regarding homeless veterans and 
funding levels for those programs. I have submitted a written 
statement that provides greater detail, for the record.
    Comprehensive national research regarding individuals who 
are homeless that includes detailed information about homeless 
veterans is rare. So much of the information researchers have 
relied on dates back to surveys from the 1980s and the 1990s. 
Despite this, each major study that has attempted to estimate 
veterans as a percentage of the homeless population has found 
that veterans are over represented among homeless individuals.
    What has been found is that male veterans are between 1.25 
and 1.38 times as likely to be homeless as non-veterans and 
women veterans are estimated to between 2.7 and 3.6 times as 
likely to be homeless as women who are not veterans. These 
estimates do not include veterans from the recent conflicts in 
Iraq and Afghanistan.
    Congress has created a number of programs targeted 
specifically to homeless veterans. There are three major 
categories of programs for homeless veterans that I will cover. 
First, permanent supportive housing; second, transitional 
housing; and third programs that provide services of some kind. 
I will describe five of these programs.
    First, the category of permanent housing. The only program 
that provides permanent supportive housing specifically for 
homeless veterans, that is, housing with no time limit together 
with various supportive services is administered through a 
collaboration between the VA and HUD called HUD-VASH and John 
mentioned it in his testimony.
    Homeless veterans receive Section 8 vouchers for permanent 
housing, while VA provides supportive services. With Section 8 
vouchers, veterans find apartments or rental units in the 
private market and pay about 30 percent of their income toward 
rent. Currently, there are somewhere around 1,000 HUD-VASH 
vouchers that were made available to veterans back in the early 
1990s. However, in the fiscal year 2008 Appropriations Act, an 
additional $75 million was appropriated for HUD-VASH vouchers 
which HUD estimates will fund about 9,800 vouchers. And the 
President has also requested $75 million more for fiscal year 
2009 for another 9,800 vouchers.
    The next category, transitional housing, is time limited 
depending on the program. The idea is for individuals in the 
transitional housing to have some time to get on their feet and 
find permanent housing. The Homeless Providers Grant and Per 
Diem Program that John mentioned is the major program for 
transitional housing for homeless veterans. The Grant and Per 
Diem Program allows veterans to stay in the housing for up to 
24 months and also provides supportive services. The Grant and 
Per Diem Program typically receives the most funding of any 
program targeted to homeless veterans and serves more than 
15,000 veterans a year.
    In the area of healthcare, the VA operates two programs 
that provide healthcare assessments and treatment for homeless 
veterans. The two programs, Healthcare for Homeless Veterans 
and Domiciliary Care for Homeless Veterans, assess and treat a 
large percentage of veterans who have mental health and 
substance abuse issues.
    In the Healthcare for Homeless Veterans Program, VA Medical 
Care staff conduct outreach to homeless veterans who don't 
typically use VA medical services and then they provide 
clinical assessments and referrals for treatment. In 2006, of 
the nearly 61,000 Healthcare for Homeless Veterans 
participants, 82 percent had a serious psychiatric or substance 
abuse issue.
    The Domiciliary Care for Homeless Veterans Program is a 
little different in that residents live on site while receiving 
treatment. In fiscal year 2006 veterans stayed in domiciliary 
care an average of 104 days and of the nearly 5,300 veterans 
who were admitted to domiciliary care programs, almost 93 
percent were diagnosed with a substance abuse disorder, and 
more than half, about 57 percent, were diagnosed with serious 
mental illness.
    In the area of employment services, the Homeless Veterans 
Reintegration Program administered through the Department of 
Labor provides grants to organizations that help homeless 
veterans find and maintain employment. In fiscal year 2006, 
HVRP placed about 8,700 veterans in employment, which was 65 
percent of those who entered the program.
    In 2001, a Demonstration Program through the Department of 
Labor and the VA was funded to provide job training for 
veterans who were leaving prison or other institutions. Before 
the authorization expired in fiscal year 2006, the program 
helped 1,100 veterans find employment, which was about 54 
percent of those who entered the program.
    I will conclude briefly with funding levels. There is a 
table attached to my statement that will provide more detail. 
In fiscal year 2008, about $317 million is expected to be 
either obligated or appropriated for these programs that I have 
described and a few others that I didn't mention. And that does 
not include the cost of the HUD-VASH vouchers that I discussed 
and it doesn't include the treatment cost of homeless veterans, 
such as hospital stays and long term care.
    As I mentioned, there is table attached and it will provide 
breakdowns of funding by program over the years. This concludes 
my remarks. Thanks, again, for the opportunity to speak here 
today and I would be happy to answer your questions.
    [The prepared statement of Ms. Perl appears on p. 74. The 
CRS Reports for Congress, authored by Ms. Perl, entitled 
``Veterans and Homelessness,'' Updated April 4, 2008, Order 
Code RL34024 appears on p. 109, and ``Counting Homeless 
Persons: Homeless Management Information Systems,'' Updated 
April 3, 2008, Order Code RL33956, appears on p. 130.]
    The Chairman. Thank you, Ms. Perl. Ms. Saunders, we 
appreciate your being here and it takes some courage to tell 
personal stories, so thank you for sharing with us.

                 STATEMENT OF MICHELLE SAUNDERS

    Ms. Saunders. Sir, thank you. Mr. Chairman, Members of the 
Committee, I just want to take this opportunity to thank you 
all for allowing me to speak about my personal experiences and 
for the veterans that have come before me and after me.
    I am coming from a little bit different perspective. I am 
not here to talk about how successful our programs are. I am 
here to basically talk about why they are not successful in my 
eyes, and why I think there is a lot of systemic issues that 
are not being addressed. We talk about programs that exist 
right now for homelessness and there are many issues that 
happen prior to them becoming homeless. And those, I think, are 
the issues that we have to address.
    My story, basically, is that I was wounded in Iraq in 2004. 
I spent 22 months at Walter Reed rehabilitating. Through that 
time, I was promised many different jobs and opportunities and 
I latched on to that. Maybe I was being a little bit naive, but 
I thought because I served my country for 10 years that I was 
going to have a great job when I got out of the military.
    The fact of the matter is that it was very, very hard to, 
especially in this town, to find a job. Being a servicemember 
that had 10 years of experience, I thought that I wouldn't have 
a problem at all. After almost 19 months I sat many nights with 
a loaded gun saying that I wasn't worth anything, because I 
didn't know who to turn to and I was too prideful to talk to my 
family about what was going on. I was dealing with a lot of 
post traumatic stress, a lot of survivors guilt and just didn't 
know what to do. Didn't know where to go and I just knew that I 
just wanted to be out of the military and get away from all the 
bureaucracy that was going on through my transition.
    After I retired in May of 2006, I finally I got a job by 
the grace of God, through the Department of Labor because I had 
called them every single day, probably about 5 times a day, 
until they finally said, ``Why don't you come down here. We 
will find you a job.''
    Ironically, I got a job working as an employment specialist 
to help other transitioning servicemembers. When I got into 
that job, I realized that I was really excited to get into the 
trenches and try to help my brothers and sisters who were 
transitioning. A lot of things happened. At first I was very 
excited and then I started to realize that how our successes in 
our programs were measured were based on numbers, not on 
quality of service, which was very frustrating to me because 
you don't measure success on a number. If I have 25 people that 
I am putting into a database just because I met with them and 
said, ``Okay, fine.'' That was a success.
    There are five major components that have to happen 
simultaneously that are not happening. And basically, they stem 
from identifying the servicemembers first. Identifying those 
who are coming back, informing them. Assessing their issues, 
assisting them and monitoring them. We have many, many 
different agencies right now doing multiple duplications of 
this.
    For 6 months while I was at Walter Reed, they had no clue 
where I was. It took them 6 months to find me after two 
extensive surgeries and multiple sessions of counseling. 
Finally, 6 months later, somebody came to me and said, ``Where 
have you been? Why haven't you been to formation? Well, sir, 
sorry I was incapacitated. I was in surgery.''
    I apologize for being all over the board. I have so much to 
say and sometimes I just get a little overwhelmed. We must 
ensure that our transition programs are better. Our transition 
programs right now basically are folks that are going through a 
transition assistance program are forced to go to a class for 2 
days. Most of our men and women that have been wounded are on 
multiple medications, they are not going to retain a whole lot. 
They have been in medical treatment facilities for ``X'' amount 
of months. All they want to do is go home. They want to be with 
their families.
    Most of them are receiving a Traumatic Servicemembers Group 
Life Insurance (TSGLI) policy from anywhere to $25,000 up to 
$100,000 payout. As a 20-year-old kid and $100,000 I don't care 
who are and how much counseling or how much financial 
counseling you have had, you are going to misspend that money. 
You are going to misuse that money.
    A lot of our servicemembers are going into debt so they are 
not thinking that they are not going to have a job when they 
get out. They got TSGLI, they are drawing Social Security 
Disability Insurance while they are in the medical treatment 
facilities. It is the last thing on their mind is getting a job 
and being able to take care of themselves when they get out. So 
they are not taking that proactive approach, because they don't 
know any better.
    It is a huge problem. It is a huge problem that our 
military or our U.S. Department of Defense cannot identify 
folks because there are multiple databases, are multiple months 
of information going into databases, and a lot of it is 
anecdotal so they can't find these folks when they get out. 
When they leave the military installations and the get put into 
a temporary retirement status, they put them into CVHCOs which 
are civilian based health organizations and completely forget 
about them. That is an issue, because by the time we find them, 
we are reading about them in the paper or watching them on the 
news.
    So identifying is a really big issue right now. Another big 
issue that we are running into is the lack of continuum of care 
through basically the VA and some of the programs. You know, if 
you are not completely blown up and you don't have a visible 
wound, then you go to the back of the list. Basically, you are 
on the bottom of the pile because we can't identify what is 
wrong with you.
    Some of these programs are reactive programs as opposed to 
proactive programs. Like, for instance, I know that the 
American Legion hire or not hire heroes, hometown to heroes. In 
order for them to help you, you have to already be in a 
homeless situation in order to be able to get provided grant 
money to help your family through these programs or through 
these problems you have to literally have to be homeless before 
they can help you.
    The criteria for some of these programs is completely 
backward and we are working in a vacuum and we are putting it 
basically, ``a band-aid on a sucking chest wound.'' And so I 
guess I am here more to talk about the systemic issues and to 
try to prevent homelessness as opposed to cleaning up the mess 
that is already out there and it is getting worse.
    And so that is kind of what I have to say.
    [The prepared statement of Ms. Saunders appears on p. 82.]
    The Chairman. Thank you. Thank you for sharing that with 
us. It gives a lot of information.
    Mr. Rodriguez, you have dealt with this issue in the 
civilian world and as a Congressman. We thank you for your 
leadership. And you have 5 minutes to address the panel.
    Mr. Rodriguez. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I just 
had the Secretary of the VA over to San Antonio to visit us. We 
took him to one of the few homeless shelters that we have there 
through the American GI Forum and they seem to be doing a 
pretty good job. But it is a small program in comparison to the 
need that is out there.
    I wanted to ask a couple of things. Ms. Saunders, thank you 
very much for your testimony. You talked about how there is a 
need for us to do some prevention in advance and not after, 
picking up the person after they become homeless. I was 
wondering, Mr. Driscoll, if the VA is engaged in home 
healthcare, where we reach out and work with the family in any 
way at the present time?
    Mr. Driscoll. Well, I am sure that they can fill you in 
better than that. What I do know is the VA Readjustment 
Counseling Centers Vet Centers, their purpose is to help be 
that first line of defense for combat veterans who feel 
strains, need help finding what access to whatever services 
they need, whether it is educational, whether it is housing 
supports.
    Mr. Rodriguez. But we do not provide any home healthcare 
that you are aware of? Because I know we provide it under 
Medicare, Medicaid, Medicare Advantage. And I am just talking 
about that because I just had a group of home healthcare 
professionals come over, and it seems like it might be a 
program that might be able to reach out before that person gets 
thrown out or finds himself out of the picture.
    Mr. Driscoll. Right. I am not aware of anything in that 
regard.
    Mr. Rodriguez. Okay. You mentioned the drop in centers. How 
many do we have, throughout the country? Do we know?
    Mr. Driscoll. Well, formally I could not answer that. I 
know that members of NCHV almost all of them to some degree 
have an open door policy. You come in and we will help you. You 
know, a lot of the communities where those organizations 
operate, the word gets around. Homeless people talk to other 
homeless people. VA used to fund those through the Grant and 
Per Diem funding on a higher level, and I may be misspeaking so 
I do not want to do that. But I do know that on the last few 
grant cycles for the Grant and Per Diem they have not been able 
to increase funding for the drop in centers.
    Mr. Rodriguez. The drop in centers?
    Mr. Driscoll. Right.
    Mr. Rodriguez. Ms. Perl, I know you mentioned jails, and I 
was glad because I never hear those comments and sometimes I 
feel like I am the only one who is mentioning this issue. I do 
not have any statistics to show this, but I think that a lot of 
our Vietnam veterans in the process of trying to deal with 
their post traumatic stress, self-medicated and found 
themselves taking illegal drugs and found themselves in jail. 
You mentioned a program that was working with them. Can you 
tell me a little bit about that?
    Ms. Perl. There are a couple programs that I mentioned. The 
Domiciliary Care for Homeless Veterans Program is run onsite at 
VA Medical Centers and veterans are able to stay there, not in 
the hospital but in residential care and receive treatment 
while living in the facilities for substance abuse issues or 
mental healthcare. As I mentioned, veterans stay in those 
facilities generally a little over 100 days based on the most 
recent estimates that I have from the VA.
    And the other one, Healthcare for Homeless Veterans, is 
more of an outreach program to try to find those veterans who 
are out there who are not coming into the VA maybe for the 
treatment of substance abuse issues and mental healthcare. And 
the VA does outreach, brings them in, does clinical assessment, 
and then refers for treatment.
    Mr. Rodriguez. I know, and I think it was indicated that we 
do not have good research to identify homeless veterans. There 
are questions as to the numbers that are out there based on the 
new way of determining who is homeless and who is not and how 
many are out there. And I recall very distinctly, because I 
taught a class in community mental health, the largest number 
of people, because I used to take people to the private sector, 
the public sector, and one of the things I taught my students 
is that the largest number of the mentally ill were in our 
prisons. And I presume that is still the case, in some of those 
areas. But there has got to be a way of not only dealing with 
the ones that are in there now as they are released. Maybe 
coming up with some programs, Ms. Saunders, where we can reach 
out so that it does not happen in the first place. I do not 
know if you want to comment on that.
    Ms. Saunders. Yes sir, I do, actually. The way, the problem 
is that, and this is from my perspective, and I am part of this 
generation. And I think anybody that has been, who has ever 
served can attest to, we have the same exact issues as we did 
when folks came back from Vietnam. The problem is that there 
was never a place to go after they leave the gates of the 
installations. There was not an environment created for them to 
go to be able just to breathe.
    A lot of people do not realize that when you go through a 
traumatic event like that, especially if you have a family, 
when you come home you are expected, you know, you get a pat on 
the back and you are expected to go out there and, you know, be 
productive in society. But what happens is when you go through 
something traumatic like that, we live in a society where 
murder is not normal, where killing is not normal. And so when 
you see things like that and you commit things like that, 
whether it is time of war or not, your spirit is broken. Your 
whole family as a unit is broken. And people are not 
understanding that. So when you come back you are forced to go 
out and find a job, go out and find a job, go out and find a 
job in order to take care of your family. But you cannot do 
that because you are stuck. You are stuck in a place where you 
are just broken and you do not know how to heal.
    So you just continue to shove it down, and shove it down, 
and shove it down, because you have other responsibilities to 
take care of, meaning your family, or you have to be productive 
in society because there are those things called bills that we 
have to pay. And so when you stuff all that down inside, it 
comes out of you. It surfaces later on and severe things 
happen. You fall into severe depression. You turn to alcohol, 
you turn to drugs because that is the only thing you know how 
to do, is to be numb because you do not want to feel. So there 
is not an environment created yet out there for that after you 
leave the gates of the installation. And it is the last stop 
for the next 10,000 miles and a lot of people get lost in that.
    I am in the process of developing a program right now. I 
started a foundation started Veterans Moving Forward. And what 
we do is we want to provide that continuum of care, that 
rehabilitation, that drug and alcohol counseling, but also have 
that educational component attached to it. Because when 
something like that happens you lose your self-worth. You do 
not know what you are worth anymore because the only thing you 
knew is what you did in the military. And you wore that uniform 
and you wore it proud. So when you lose that you are completely 
stripped of all your pride. So to rehabilitate is key, but we 
have to create that environment first. And that goes with 
transitional housing, rehabilitation, drug and alcohol, and 
education to give them another skill.
    Mr. Rodriguez. Thank you very much. I do want to just thank 
the whole panel. And Mr. Chairman, if I can, I know one other 
item that was brought up and it keeps bothering me. The fact 
that we have had a good 3,000 that have committed suicide while 
in the military just recently. And a good number, or higher, 
outside of the military. And when they commit suicide, and that 
just came to mind in terms of what you experienced when you 
were at night by yourself with the depression that you talked 
about. Having that gun and, and sometimes playing with it, we 
really need to look at how we treat the veterans that, the 
soldiers I should say, that have committed suicide while in the 
military.
    I had a young lady who committed suicide, or supposedly 
committed suicide, while she was in Iraq. And she got treated 
by our veterans and by the system extremely rudely. The family 
gets no benefits whatsoever. And I would hope that, when they 
commit suicide, afterward it is a different situation, but it 
is still the same. And so we really need to, I do not know what 
the answer is, look into this and how we can come to grips with 
it because we do not want to encourage that treatment while 
they are in the military. But at the same time we need to see 
how we can deal with it in a manner that is more just, to both 
those that are in the military as well as those that are out of 
the military in terms of the benefits that they might be 
entitled to and other things. And now I am talking more in 
terms of the family, also, that are left behind. And thank you 
very much. Yes ma'am.
    Ms. Saunders. May I address that? Is that possible?
    Mr. Rodriguez. If the Chairman would allow.
    The Chairman. Yes.
    Ms. Saunders. Again, going back to some of the systemic 
issues I know we went through that being at Walter Reed. There 
is a real inability for the services, the service components, 
all of them, to admit that post traumatic stress is an issue. 
Coming from a battalion commander down or a brigade commander 
down, if that commander stands in front of his trooper and 
says, ``Hey look it is okay to go through what you are going 
through right now. What you saw was not normal.'' That message 
is not being put out. And until that message is put out there 
is going to be a stigma. And my brother and my sister to the 
left and right of me are going to look at me different if I 
bring that to the surface.
    So again, you hide it. You do not want your peers to know, 
especially if you are going to be retained on active duty, 
because you are going to look at as, oh, as one of those. That 
is a huge, huge problem. And until our military stands up and 
addresses that as an issue, that will never, ever go away.
    The Chairman. Thank you. Mr. Boozman.
    Mr. Boozman. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I agree, Ms. 
Saunders, you know we have really got some problems in getting 
this thing sorted out. I believe very strongly, I am the 
Ranking Member on the Economic Opportunity, and a lot of these 
problems can be averted if we can get people where they can 
make a living wage along with solving the other problems that 
you are talking about. But you mentioned the Transition 
Assistance Program (TAP), and that is a pretty good program. 
You know, we worked hard and the people that administer that 
are good people and they are working hard to try to give good 
information. But it is difficult. You mentioned that they do 
not, you know, that they want to go home. You know, they are 
not really interested in getting the information. So, I mean, I 
think everyone would be willing to work with different ways of 
delivering that information, perhaps. But it really is a 
challenge.
    You mentioned the fact that a person gets a large sum of 
money. And, again, that is a problem whether you win the 
lottery, it is a problem if you are an athlete and all of a 
sudden you are successful, or a movie star, or whatever. You 
know, those really are core problems that are difficult to 
solve. So like I said, I guess I would be very interested in, 
rather than doing the 2-day TAP Program, how would we do that 
differently?
    Ms. Saunders. I actually am in the process of implementing 
a program, a pilot program at Walter Reed, a three-phase 
program to facilitate those needs. Again, like I said, you 
know, we are dealing with a different population right now in 
terms of, for the first time in our history of any war the 
American people are pushing back and saying, ``What is going 
on? Why are we not taking care of our veterans?'' And the fact 
of the matter is, we are. It is just there are so many out 
there that have already fallen through the cracks and now we 
are working in a vacuum.
    We are in a position where we are dealing with 
servicemembers who have been severely wounded, both emotionally 
and physically. Their time and stay in the military treatment 
facilities are, you know, a tremendous amount of months. Again, 
I was there for 22 months. There are folks that are still there 
today when I was there. Again, the last thing on their mind is 
finding a job. Especially if they are, and I hate to say this, 
and a lot of them are entitled to some of the monetary grants 
and funds that they are receiving right now. But when you are 
sitting in an outpatient room and you are drawing VAH and you 
are drawing Social Security Disability Insurance, and you are 
drawing traumatic group life insurance, and you are drawing any 
kind of grant that you can get your hands on because there are 
multiple programs out there that will give money, grant money, 
based on what their physical disability or emotional disability 
is, I sit there and I say, ``Well, I am making $6,000, $7,000 a 
month. Why the heck would I want to work right now?'' That is a 
huge problem. There is a lot of push back because of that. And 
that is our generation, that we have to take care of. I mean, 
there is a societal need right now to take care of them because 
we are giving them handouts. We are not giving them hand ups. I 
would rather show somebody the way than take them there.
    Mr. Boozman. I do not disagree. I mean, the reality is, is 
how do you do that? And I am the guy that would like very much 
as they rehabilitate physically, and mentally, and the other 
stuff, but you know, to get them busy starting their education, 
almost immediately. You know, doing things like that. But 
again, along with that you do have to figure out how to get the 
person themselves to want to do that. That is our challenge. 
And I think that is really what you are saying.
    Ms. Saunders. Well, that is what I have, I have been 
working very, very hard on trying to pilot this program. And 
basically what it is, the phase one starts out as a corporate 
immersion. I have over 200 companies across the country, most 
of them are Fortune 500 companies, that are willing to work 
with these guys. And I drive home to them, I say, ``Look, this 
is a mentorship. We have to mentor these folks. We cannot just 
create jobs for them and put them in a job where they are not 
going to grow. We have to mentor them and show them that they 
are worth something and they are able to grow.'' So that phase 
one is actually at the military treatment facility. And my 
ultimate goal is to be able to incorporate that as part of the 
TAP program. To get these guys stimulated, to get them out of 
their rooms, to get them out there and engaging in the 
communities. And that is where it is going to happen, is at the 
community levels. Because like I said, once they leave the 
gates of the installation, that is it.
    So if we can do that as a phase one, and then the phase two 
being a week-long mentor program. I have already started it. It 
is called Operation Real Transition, to take them out of that 
environment again, work them in the team environment with peers 
that are going through exactly the same things that they are 
going through. So that they can talk and they have mentors 
there at any time that they need to talk. Go through, we do 
mock interviews, we do the right questions to ask during, an 
interview and basically what it is like to be in the corporate 
environment, what it is like to get out there and work. And 
then once they find out, ``Wow, I could do this.'' Or, ``Wow, I 
did not know that I had this ability or these skill sets.'' 
Then they say, a light goes on and they say, ``Oh, okay, now I 
am motivated and I want to work.''
    And then obviously the phase three would be the facility, 
the transitional housing facility, if they want to work but 
they want to go to school at the same time. Or they just want 
to go to school and continue their care and rehabilitation. 
Give them a skill, make them marketable, for the 21st century 
workforce.
    Mr. Boozman. Can I ask one more thing, Mr. Chairman? I know 
I am running over the clock again. You are a bright gal that 
presents yourself very well today. You mention that you have 
been in the military for 10 years and you really had a tough 
time finding a job. And what was, what do you feel like was the 
reason for that? I mean, were you in an age group, or this or 
that, or did you not have the skills that you needed that they 
were looking for? Was it the fact that you had been injured or 
been in the military? Or, I mean all of those things, you know 
when I talk to corporate America, many of those things are a 
plus. I mean, they are, you know, but what in your particular 
case, how could we have prepared a 10-year person like yourself 
to be more employable?
    Ms. Saunders. Personally, I was scared. I was scared to go 
to an employer and, granted I sent my resume out there, but I 
was scared to go interview because I did not know, I had the 
hard skills but I did not have the soft skills. And that is 
what corporate America is looking for. They are looking for the 
soft skills. The hard skills are easy. You know, there are 
training curves and learning curves, but it is the soft skills 
that are really, really hard. And that is the whole intent and 
purpose of mentoring these guys and girls, is to show them what 
it is like to be in a corporate environment. You know, you 
cannot say certain things in a corporate environment that you 
would to your buddy sitting in your uniform. And it is that 
simple. It is such a simple, simple thing. But that is honestly 
the biggest step, over that threshold. Folks are just scared. 
They are very intimidated. They do not know the right questions 
to ask. They do not know how to act. So that it is up to us as 
veterans, ambassadors, to help them through that process.
    Mr. Boozman. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    The Chairman. Mr. Donnelly, do you have any questions?
    Mr. Donnelly. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. One of the concerns 
that I have is the number of OEF/OIF veterans that are already 
starting to show up at the homeless shelters. And what I am 
wondering, if any of you can help, is what are the steps you 
think we need to take now to try to provide for the veterans so 
they do not reach that point where they come to the homeless 
shelters? What are the things we are missing that have caused 
these veterans to arrive?
    Ms. Saunders. Can I answer that?
    Mr. Donnelly. Wide open.
    Ms. Saunders. I think that is basically what I have been 
saying, you know, for the past 10 minutes or so. It is we have 
to be proactive, or we have to get them before they get out of 
the gates. What is happening is, is that they are falling 
through the cracks. And after they leave the military we cannot 
catch them. Some of them do not want to be found. As Ms. Brown-
Waite said earlier, you know, there are folks out there that 
they do not want to be approached. They are so bitter they just 
do not know how to be. So they become numb, and they get into 
this really, really dark place. And so I think that we need to 
back up and somehow collaborate with the military or the 
Department of Defense and in the Transition Assistance Program. 
It cannot just be a 2-day class. There is a lot that has to 
happen and 2 days is just not cutting it.
    We need to start mentorships, we need to get interns, we 
started that with Operation War Fighter, where we got Federal 
agencies involved with the servicemembers that are 
rehabilitating at Walter Reed right now. We get them out of 
their rooms, we get their minds stimulated, we get them 
engaged, we get them active in the community within the agency 
where they learn that, ``Wow, I can have some pride in what I 
am doing right now.'' That is such a huge, huge key and it is 
such a huge part of their rehabilitation. And so by backing up 
before they leave the military, I think, is where we need to 
hit that head on.
    Mr. Driscoll. I would like to add something here. And one 
of my concerns, especially with OIF/OEF, is that it is 
appropriate to place the spotlight on this young veteran 
returning population. But I think we have to do it with respect 
to the greater population. Just as was the case after Vietnam, 
it is a tiny, tiny minority of troops that come home after Iraq 
and Afghanistan that immediately go and seek assistance outside 
of their families, outside of their communities. And I can only 
really speak to my own personal experience, just as you do. I 
really appreciate hearing your testimony.
    When I got home from Vietnam, I was decorated. It was the 
first time in my life I ever really thought that I amounted to 
anything. And I went to Walter Reed, worked on the surgical 
intensive care unit and, I mean, I was the man. But it was not 
until about 3 years later, I was home with my adopted family at 
Christmas, when Dr. Hake in all his wisdom took me aside and 
said, ``You know John, no matter how much I agree with you and 
I usually do, you have an intensity that scares people.'' And 
of course I thanked him, gave him a hug, and went outside and 
had a good cry because he had said basically what I knew all 
the time up to that point, is that as long as I am in that 
clinical environment, and life and death, and blood and guts up 
to my elbows, I am fine. But I could not walk out of that 
hospital and laugh and feel good having a, you know, pounding 
down a beer with my buddies.
    So I would say that there is no singular answer. Everybody 
has his own baggage, and everybody has his own way of 
responding. I think what we are seeing in the early going, 
because it still is in the early going for this cohort, is 
people who do not have those family support networks, those 
circle of friends, that real sense of purpose when they get 
home, they go through the anxiety of separation. Military is 
oftentimes the only family some of these young people have. And 
when they leave it, they are vulnerable. And even if they do 
not act like they are vulnerable, inside they feel they are 
vulnerable.
    This is why I alluded to the fact that the VA Readjustment 
Counseling Centers, that needs to be public, it is a huge 
resource but a lot of veterans do not realize it because, as my 
colleague said, when you are ready to go home, you are ready to 
go home. You do not need anybody telling you what you think you 
might need, or where to turn 4 or 5 years down the road. It is 
not until it all catches up with you. That is when you need to 
know that there is a VA Readjustment Counseling Center, or 
there is a community-based organization that no matter what 
your problem is and the reasons you have it, you will not be 
judged. You will not be turned away. And that is why these 
community-based organizations need to continue getting that 
funding. That is why the VA needs to really spruce up, I 
believe, the VA Readjustment Counseling Centers. But they have 
to publicize that so the veterans coming home, that do not have 
the family supports, know there is a lot of help out there. I 
think most of the time veterans who need help just do not know 
where to turn to get it. And there is a lot of help out there.
    Mr. Donnelly. Thank you very much for your service. Thank 
you, Mr. Chairman.
    The Chairman. Thank you. Ms. Brown-Waite.
    Ms. Brown-Waite. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. First of all, Ms. 
Saunders, I want to thank you for your service. Ten years of 
service and you are still obviously serving and trying to help 
others by being here today.
    In your written testimony, and also your oral testimony, 
you spoke about being an Employment Coordinator, and then you 
also mentioned that you have a foundation. Are you still an 
Employment Coordinator with the Department of Labor?
    Ms. Saunders. I am a consultant for the Department of 
Labor.
    Ms. Brown-Waite. Oh, okay.
    Ms. Saunders. So I am not a General Schedule employee. So 
there is really, it is not a conflict of interest, ma'am.
    Ms. Brown-Waite. No, no, no. That was not----
    Ms. Saunders. No, I know, I know.
    Ms. Brown-Waite [continuing]. In any way, shape or form 
what I was alluding to, please do not think that. It is just 
when you jumped to the foundation I just was not sure if you 
were still----
    Ms. Saunders. I am, I am still affiliated with the 
Department of Labor as an Employment Consultant. However, 
again, stepping back, there are so many programs out there that 
do not really have a lot of substance. And I got frustrated one 
night, I had a Jerry Maguire moment at 3:00 in the morning, and 
basically wrote out what I thought and how I would approach the 
problem, and how I could put my arms around it. So I built a 
program based on education training, rehabilitation, and 
transitional housing to create that environment. And we are in 
the process of developing that facility right now.
    Ms. Brown-Waite. Thank you. You had also mentioned that you 
did not have the soft skills, and that helping veterans coming 
back in employment interviews is absolutely necessary so that 
they have those skills. Have you been able to attract any 
corporate individuals who would help in that? Or corporate 
foundations, even, that would be able to send individuals to 
help the veterans to do that?
    Ms. Saunders. Yes ma'am, I have. I have over, like I said, 
over 200 companies, most of them which are Fortune 500 
companies. One of my biggest advocates is OSI, Outback 
Steakhouse, Incorporated.
    Ms. Brown-Waite. Whose original headquarters was in Tampa.
    Ms. Saunders. There you go. And they have been a huge 
advocate. And basically, we just had a very successful 
Operation Real Transition mentorship program a month ago in 
Tampa, Florida, actually, where I had multiple employers come 
out, HR folks come out, and basically spent the week out on a 
ranch with, we had 39 servicemembers, wounded servicemembers, 
that came out. We flew them in from all over the country. And--
--
    Ms. Brown-Waite. Was that the event at Chinsegut?
    Ms. Saunders. Yes. Yes, ma'am.
    Ms. Brown-Waite. I heard about it at the very last minute--
--
    Ms. Saunders. Yes.
    Ms. Brown-Waite [continuing]. And I could not get there but 
my District Director did.
    Ms. Saunders. That is exactly----
    Ms. Brown-Waite. I wish I had known about it before, 
because I would have been there.
    Ms. Saunders. Yeah----
    Ms. Brown-Waite. But----
    Ms. Saunders. Well, I will be sure to invite you to the 
next one, ma'am.
    Ms. Brown-Waite. Thank you for having it. It really, you 
know, a lot of good information was disseminated there.
    Ms. Saunders. Mm-hmm.
    Ms. Brown-Waite. How do we, and any one of the three of 
you, how do we get to the veterans like the one I described who 
is in my office every other week, who does not trust 
government, and we even tried to get him to a not-for-profit 
homeless shelter that works with men. Most of the men have 
substance abuse problems, be it alcohol or drugs, and it is a 
really good program. Even then, he will not go. And I am using 
my constituent as an example. I am sure everyone here, every 
Member of Congress has many, as I do. But this one makes a 
point of coming to my office. So in a way, he is trying to get 
help. But when it is offered, there is a pull back. How do we 
get to the homeless veteran? You know, Ronald Reagan once said 
the most feared words are, ``I am from the Federal Government. 
I am here to help.'' So we can overcome that fear of the 
government help? Mr. Driscoll. Or anyone.
    Mr. Driscoll. Well, one of the things that I have learned 
the hard way, I suppose, over the last 7 years at NCHV is no 
matter what is there an available, no matter how much of a 
perfect fit it is for the veteran in crisis, until he is ready 
to recognize, ``There is a big problem inside of me,'' that 
help is not going to reach him. And we have a 1-800 vet help 
line. So first of all, ma'am, I would invite you to hand your 
visitor a card that has our number on it.
    Ms. Brown-Waite. I did that.
    Mr. Driscoll. Oh, okay, well and maybe I have talked to him 
because there are several that call over and over again, and, 
you know, I mean I am like my friend over here. I respect, no 
matter what your issue is, you are a veteran, you call, I 
respect you. I will listen to you. But after about the third or 
fourth call, I do not have a problem saying, ``Why do you keep 
calling me?'' You know? I mean, I want to help you but you have 
to help yourself. And that is a very touchy thing to do. I do 
not do it with everybody. But you develop a rapport, and just a 
veteran helping veteran assistance programs are extremely 
successful for veterans in crisis. But the bottom line is, 
until they are ready to receive the help that is available they 
are not going to. I do not know what else I would say.
    Ms. Saunders. Can I piggyback on that? Ma'am, may I ask how 
old this person is? Is he younger or older?
    Ms. Brown-Waite. I do not----
    Ms. Saunders. From OIF/OEF, or----
    Ms. Brown-Waite. No, no. Late Vietnam.
    Ms. Saunders. Late Vietnam? What I have found, and this is 
just from a personal standpoint, there are many of us who do 
not want to talk to somebody in a suit. We do not want to talk 
to somebody who does not share the same backgrounds as we do. I 
have been able to break through to some veterans that many of 
my colleagues are like, ``I cannot get through to this 
person,'' just because I have been there and done that, and 
have the credibility to walk up to that person and throw my arm 
around them and say, ``Hey, what is going on? What is 
happening?'' It just, being in the same age group is such a 
huge deal. A lot of the Vietnam veterans, they do not want to 
talk to these younger guys. They want to talk to them about war 
stories, but they do not want to talk to them about their 
stories.
    So I guess it is a tough nut to crack because some of them 
really do not want to be, they do not want the help. They do, 
but they are too prideful to ask for it. And then when you try 
to drive it home, they say, ``No, thanks but no thanks.'' So I 
do not think there is really an answer to that. I mean, that is 
tough.
    Mr. Driscoll. Yeah, but especially in Tampa, I mean, it 
just, you know, I wish we were all in Tampa. And we get those 
veterans----
    Ms. Brown-Waite. Well----
    Mr. Driscoll. Yes, ma'am, absolutely. But more to the 
point, for veterans in crisis, because there are some 
tremendous programs there, that is the cradle of the Grant and 
Per Diem Program. And I think that it is incumbent upon us to 
recognize, and I say this to a lot of families. Do not assume 
responsibility for the choices of your loved one. But guide 
them to the opportunities that exist. If we in the service 
provider network, and particularly in partnership with the VA, 
because even in the most stressful times the military mind 
knows VA is there. They may not act like it, but they know. But 
all we can do, really, is make sure the opportunities are 
there. We cannot push them into the door. We can put our arms 
around their shoulders and try to nudge them in.
    Mr. Rodriguez. May I ask you to yield?
    Ms. Brown-Waite. Yes, I yield.
    Mr. Rodriguez. Let me tell you what Mr. Driscoll has just 
indicated, unless a military person takes ownership, it is just 
like any society or any community. If they take ownership of 
the problem, they can deal with it. If they do not take 
ownership they cannot. I had people come in and tell me, ``Mr. 
Rodriguez, I want to go to college.'' A year later they are 
telling me, ``Mr. Rodriguez, I want to go to college.'' You 
finally have to tell them, ``Look, do not tell me that anymore 
unless you register for school.'' Like with the alcoholic, 
until they realize that they have a problem, then they can deal 
with it. So they have to take ownership of that situation.
    Ms. Brown-Waite. Well, obviously he realizes, the 
particular gentleman realizes he has a problem because he will 
come in and indicate he wants help. But he goes just so far and 
he cannot go any further. But Mr. Chairman, thank you for 
indulging the overtime and I yield back.
    The Chairman. Thank you. And again, thank you for what you 
are doing. Mr. Driscoll, you said something about somebody 
estimated the need is 11,000 beds. Did I hear that right?
    Mr. Driscoll. Yes, sir. The Government Accountability 
Office, that was reported in September 2007 after a year long 
report----
    The Chairman. Yes, I know, I do not understand where they 
get this stuff.
    Mr. Driscoll. This was actually information they received 
from the Department of Veterans Affairs.
    The Chairman. No, I understand. I mean, in San Diego we 
need a few thousand right in San Diego, so----
    Mr. Driscoll. Oh, oh, I get your point.
    The Chairman. We seem to continually underestimate the 
problem because it is going to take some effort and some money 
to deal with it. In the Grant and Per Diem Program, that only 
goes to institutions that are providing services to a group 
where at least 75 percent are veterans. Is that right?
    Mr. Driscoll. There are two components, sir. For the 
capital, which is for the billing, construction, renovations, 
an organization has to have 75 percent of their clients as 
veterans. But the funding will only go to 65 percent of the 
capital costs. So it is actually, it is fair to say that is 
primarily a veterans. As far as the Per Diem, if you are a 
program that has 75 percent clients and you are qualified for 
Per Diem, you can get that if you have 75 percent veterans. But 
every Per Diem dollar has to be spent for a veterans, not for a 
non-veteran.
    The Chairman. Right. I mean, it would seem to me that, I do 
not know why we have this 75 percent requirement.
    Mr. Driscoll. In this day----
    The Chairman. We should follow the veteran.
    Mr. Driscoll. Right. But in this day and age, it is very 
important, with all of the citizen soldiers we have right now, 
Guardsmen, Reservists, if you do not have capacity to bring in 
spouses and children, dependent children, then you are breaking 
up families, basically, by having an exclusive treatment 
option.
    The Chairman. Yes, what I am saying is the Per Diem Grant 
ought to follow the veteran and not just the institution. Do 
you agree with that?
    Mr. Driscoll. I would, well, as an individual. I cannot 
speak to NCHV because I have not heard that. But as an 
individual I would have a concern with that, and it is because, 
and I hope you will back me up on this, veterans need more than 
just a cot and a check. I think that is the message that I 
heard from my colleague there.
    The Chairman. I understand that. But, I mean, we have 
shelters in San Diego that serve anybody.
    Mr. Driscoll. Right.
    The Chairman. They are always strapped for funds. If they 
are serving veterans in an emergency situation, why not help 
them? I mean, the Per Diem is not that great, as you pointed 
out.
    Mr. Driscoll. Correct. Correct.
    The Chairman. I do not know, is it $31 a day or something?
    Mr. Driscoll. But I feel that the need is more 
comprehensive than just shelter----
    The Chairman. I understand. But in an emergency, why should 
they not be given that help?
    Mr. Driscoll. Well----
    The Chairman. I mean, I understand the comprehensiveness 
but, you are just talking about basic shelter for a night.
    Mr. Driscoll. No, actually I am talking just the opposite.
    The Chairman. No I mean, if somebody needs basic shelter, 
and you are telling me, ``We have a bed here,'' or, ``We would 
give you a bed but we are not comprehensive enough.'' That 
seems to me rather cruel right there. What am I missing here?
    Mr. Driscoll. Maybe it is just a difference of perspective. 
Most people who walk into the community-based organizations 
that we represent are going to be given a needs assessment. 
They are not going to be just thrown in a corner and kicked out 
like shelters do in the morning. They are going to be referred 
to the services that they need, whether that is through the VA 
or whether that is through their own onsite service providers, 
or----
    The Chairman. Look, there are not enough beds in any city. 
And if somebody can get a bed for that night, why shouldn't our 
Federal Government help them? That is all I am saying.
    Mr. Driscoll. I agree, sir.
    The Chairman. Let me just make a suggestion. Ms. Saunders, 
if you could just react quickly, we have a couple of other 
panels here. It seems to me, when we send you, as a soldier, 
into the--were you in the Army?
    Ms. Saunders. Yes, sir.
    The Chairman. You went through boot camp.
    Ms. Saunders. Yes.
    The Chairman. In 12 weeks you learned how to be a soldier, 
and the kind of thinking, unit cohesion, and the psychology. 
But, when you get out we do not have a de-boot camp.
    Ms. Saunders. Correct, sir.
    The Chairman. Or a basic un-training. I think that as part 
of active duty, we should take 10 or 12 weeks, the same amount 
as boot camp, with the cooperation of VA and the Department of 
Defense to provide a de-boot camp. Take a company of soldiers 
so you have that cohesion and allow the family to participate, 
which is important in both diagnosis and treatment. Make sure 
everybody gets a professional evaluation for PTSD and traumatic 
brain injury (TBI), because virtually everybody in my 
estimation has it, and you have to prove to me you do not 
rather than come in and we prove you do. We would use that 
information for an immediate, diagnosis without any stigma. 
Early treatment is vital with the support of the family, 
comrades from the company. Then, address these other issues of 
education and vocational training, certification, and other 
options. Make it part of your active duty. I mean, everybody 
wants to get home but the last 10, 12 weeks. It could be 
utilized to address the problems our transitioning 
servicemembers may have.
    Ms. Saunders. Sir, you are so dead on. That is exactly what 
I am trying to do right now. And I do not care if it just takes 
me driving the bus I will make that happen.
    The Chairman. All right.
    Ms. Saunders. That is what I want.
    The Chairman. We are going to get the money and you are 
going to do it, okay?
    Ms. Saunders. Write me a check, sir, I will take care of it 
tomorrow.
    The Chairman. You know, it just seems----
    Ms. Saunders. It makes sense. It makes perfect sense. You 
know, we spend so much money on getting people in the military. 
And then you turn around and say, ``Well, thanks, here are a 
couple of medals.'' I have medals on my wall and I am like, 
``Wow, that is great.''
    The Chairman. You can be in Baghdad yesterday----
    Ms. Saunders. Exactly.
    The Chairman [continuing]. And taking your kids to soccer--
--
    Ms. Saunders. Exactly.
    The Chairman [continuing]. The next day. And you are going 
to respond to them in the way that you have been doing for the 
last----
    Ms. Saunders. Exactly.
    The Chairman [continuing]. Twelve months, right?
    Ms. Saunders. And they are spending tons and tons and tons 
of money on sign on bonuses, but what are they doing for them 
on the way out the door? And that is exactly the plan that I 
have. I would love for a military, for anybody to go into the 
military, and sign on, you know, sign their agreement. Okay, a 
three-year enlistment. At that 2\1/2\ year mark, that last 6 
months, or that last, whatever, 3 or 4 months, they have to go 
through a transitioning program where they can go into an 
internship or they can go into some sort of training program so 
that we give them the proper skills. We give them the proper 
education on the way out the door so that we set them up for 
success. We do not set them up for failure.
    The Chairman. Right. And it has got to take some time, as 
you said.
    Ms. Saunders. Absolutely.
    The Chairman. I mean, I have been to TAP classes and 
everybody, including the instructor, is asleep. And, you know, 
it is not the most effective----
    Ms. Saunders. It really is not.
    The Chairman. You have to keep the support system there 
with your soldiers and your family. Mr. Hall, you had a 
question.
    Mr. Hall. Yes, please. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I just have 
one and I am sorry for being late. But I will read all of your 
testimony, your written testimony. I wanted to ask Ms. Saunders 
relative to a hearing we are having later this week in the 
Subcommittee on Disability Assistance and Memorial Affairs, and 
to your testimony about PTSD. Do you believe that service in 
Iraq in particular, or that in a combat zone in general, should 
be considered an automatic stressor for presumption of PTSD?
    Ms. Saunders. One hundred percent, sir.
    Mr. Hall. Okay. Ms. Perl.
    Ms. Perl. No position on that.
    Mr. Hall. And Mr. Driscoll.
    Mr. Driscoll. I think there should be a presumption until 
proven otherwise.
    Ms. Saunders. It is just like anything else, sir. 
Regardless of if you are, in any traumatic event, if you see, 
if you are in a car accident or if you lose somebody in your 
family, you are going through very similar things. You are 
feeling some very similar feelings. You are having the same 
reactions. A lot of people do not know how to deal with death. 
When you see something that traumatic, or when you go through a 
traumatic event, again, it breaks the soul. Especially if you 
have to point a gun and shoot at women and children just to get 
out of a kill zone. Something happens there. And you are going 
to have residual effect. I do not care who you are. And if you 
do not, you are completely insane.
    Mr. Hall. I agree with you. And I am glad to hear your 
corroboration. I mean, just the fact that, I mean I, a 
protected, privileged Congressman slept one night in the Green 
Zone in October on a visit to Iraq in one of Saddam's pool 
houses. What I understand last week, or a couple of days ago 
when they were taking so much incoming----
    Ms. Saunders. Yes.
    Mr. Hall [continuing]. Rocket and mortar fire they were 
telling people, ``Sleep in your helmet and your body armor.''
    Ms. Saunders. Mm-hmm.
    Mr. Hall. And whether you are driving a truck from the 
airport to town, or whether you are flying low in a helicopter 
low over certain areas on the way out to Ramadi, Iraq, or 
whatever, you do not know from whence the attack might come. It 
is a situation where there is no front and no rear. And so for 
that reason alone I, you know, and I have heard this from so 
many veterans in my district who have come to our office for 
help. I am just trying to get one more, and I thank you for 
your answer, one more corroboration of that. Thank you, Mr. 
Chairman.
    The Chairman. We thank the panel and we look forward to 
working with you to end this scourge on our Nation. Thank you 
so much.
    Mr. Driscoll. Thank you.
    Ms. Saunders. Thank you.
    The Chairman. If panel two will step forward, we have 
representatives from different programs that seem to be working 
and we want to hear from them as to how and why. John Downing 
from Soldier On is with us; Charles Williams from the Maryland 
Center for Veterans Education and Training; Phil Landis from 
the Veterans Village of San Diego (VVSD); and William D'Arcy 
from the Catholic Charities Housing Development Corporation. 
Mr. Downing, if you will start? Again, your written statements 
will be made a part of the record and if you would summarize 
that statement, your oral testimony, that would be great.

 STATEMENTS OF JOHN F. DOWNING, PRESIDENT AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE 
   OFFICER, SOLDIER ON (UNITED VETERANS OF AMERICA); COLONEL 
  CHARLES WILLIAMS, USA (RET.), EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MARYLAND 
CENTER FOR VETERANS EDUCATION AND TRAINING, INC.; PHIL LANDIS, 
CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, VETERANS VILLAGE OF SAN DIEGO, CA; AND 
WILLIAM G. D'ARCY, CHIEF OPERATING OFFICER, CATHOLIC CHARITIES 
          HOUSING DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, CHICAGO, IL

                  STATEMENT OF JOHN F. DOWNING

    Mr. Downing. Thank you. Chairman Filner, Members of the 
Committee, on behalf of the hundreds of homeless veterans whom 
we serve every year at the United Veterans of America, I am 
honored by your invitation to be here today testifying on 
behalf of the homeless veterans of U.S. military service. I 
have the privilege of serving as President and CEO of the 
United Veterans of America, doing business as Soldier On. Based 
in Leeds, Massachusetts, with facilities serving homeless 
veterans in Pittsfield and Leeds, Soldier On serves upwards of 
250 homeless veterans every day. We run at 111 percent of 
capacity every day, 365 days a year.
    Our program is based on a continuum of care ranging from 
the treatment of trauma and mental health issues to substance 
abuse counseling, shelter, food and other necessities, job 
training and permanent housing. Our partners include the U.S. 
Department of Veteran Affairs, the U.S. Department of Labor, 
HUD, and many State and local agencies. Shelter, treatment, and 
hope are the cornerstones of what we do every day.
    Soldier On hosts 145 men and women in transitional living 
on site at the VA Medical Center in Leeds, Massachusetts, a 
section of North Hampton, Massachusetts. We rent cottages from 
the VA Hospital. We use the cottages for housing for female 
veterans and frail and elderly male veterans. We pay HUD's fair 
market rents to the VA for the privilege of housing these men 
and women, which means for a three bedroom, half of a cottage, 
I pay $750 a month to the local VA out of money given to me to 
serve homeless veterans. Sixty more vets live in transitional 
housing at our Berkshire veteran's residence in Pittsfield, 
Massachusetts, which opened in September 2004.
    There are ten new studio apartments funded through HUD in 
that facility and they provide permanent housing for homeless 
veterans with disabilities at that site. The turnover in those 
apartments in the 3 years that we have operated is, we had one 
individual who, unfortunately, died in our care and another 
individual whose wife was put into assisted living and he 
became eligible for public housing. Those are the two openings 
that I have.
    So we know that permanent, affordable housing with services 
works for formerly homeless veterans. Soldier On serves 
veterans primarily from the northeast of the United States of 
America. A few were referred to us from across the country. The 
average age of someone in our population is 54, but the mean 
age is trending younger as we see more veterans of Operation 
Enduring Freedom and Operation Iraqi Freedom. Approximately 88 
percent of our vets suffer mental health and/or substance abuse 
disorders. Some 10 percent are elderly at age 65 or older. Five 
percent of our veterans are women. More than 25 percent of our 
veterans have been diagnosed with post traumatic stress 
disorder. Twenty-eight percent are on parole or probation and 
42 percent of our veterans are minority. I could go on but I 
invite you to take a look at our Web site at 
www.wesoldieron.org and to learn more about our program. I am 
supported by a dedicated staff, a tremendously committed board 
of directors, and I enjoy a strong, collaborative relationship 
with our VA Medical Center and the VA Headquarters here in 
Washington, D.C.
    I think it is significant that I can sit in front of you 
after doing this work for 6 years and sometimes in a very 
adversarial position and still consider Pete Dougherty a 
friend. So I want to make that clear. It really does work and 
the VA has worked hard to build relationships with our program 
and understand that we are constantly pushing the limits of 
what we think they should do to accomplish the task for the 
people we think should be served.
    Currently, we are in the pre development stage of a 39-unit 
limited equity cooperative to be built on our site in 
Pittsfield, Massachusetts. The development will be owned and 
managed by formerly homeless veterans. Now, one of the things 
that makes our program unique is that our program is entirely 
run by formerly homeless veterans and the professional staff 
that works there, it is our job to serve them. So every 
facility, each building is managed by a team of formerly 
homeless vets that is self selected by the veterans in the 
living facility and they develop their own rules and own 
system.
    So our women's program, Building 6, Building 26, the 
Pittsfield facility, all have different teams of veterans that 
run them, all have some different rules and it is our job to 
support those rules and figure out ways for those who are so 
consistently labeled failures in their lives to be successful 
at managing their lives and learning how to respond also to the 
lives of the people in their care.
    So to give you an example of how that really operates, 
every facility that we operate has its own budget. The vets 
manage that budget. We cut the checks where they tell us to cut 
them. Our job is to work with them to be successful. Any money 
that is given to us for gifts goes into gift funds that they 
operate. We execute the checks. They tell us how the gifts will 
go.
    They decide tonight, if somebody in one of our buildings 
relapses, we do not have automatic penalties. The team of 
veterans decides what they think after they listen to the 
veteran would be the best outcome for them. And then it is our 
substance abuse counselors, our psychologists, our team of 
people come in and we execute that with them.
    So that when you fail with us, you do not leave. Failure is 
never final. We do not believe that pushing people out of the 
community makes them better. We believe that it is our job to 
continuously engage you and figure out ways to serve you so you 
want to stay with us. So what happens to us is that veterans 
who used to trickle back and forth between the community 
ricochet from one place to another are now settled down in 
programs long term with us. What we found was that the 
ricocheting system, the merry-go-round of services that used to 
exist does not work and that what our people needed was just 
what Michelle Saunders said earlier here, when she testified on 
the first panel, that the community of veterans becomes the 
family most veterans identify with, feel most secure with, and 
want to be a part of the rest of their life.
    One of the issues facing all of us is this horrible issue 
of homelessness in America and homelessness of veterans, but we 
need to frame up the problem with an understanding of what is 
really going on. In a capitalistic society, okay, there are 
some social statistic analysis that we must do on income to 
understand who are the people we serve.
    Those individuals who live at the poverty level or below in 
our society appear four times, are more likely to appear in 
negative social statistics than people in the same group above 
the poverty level regardless of gender or social origin. Now we 
take that same group at the poverty level or below and we add 
one overwhelming factor, single-parent families, and we almost 
double that number again. So what we need to see is that the 
people who are in our care, okay, in my facility, last night, 
64 percent of them were raised in single-parent families, and 
most of them from families that were marginal economically and 
this is by verbal memory of many of the individuals we work 
with.
    So what we found out was that when we got a homeless vet 
and 54\1/2\ years old, they came in our door with eleven open 
prescriptions. Eighty-eight percent were addicted. We are 
feeding them medicine on prescriptions. There is a clever idea, 
huh? How to keep you permanently homeless and then we ask them 
to come in and change, and what we found was we had to say not 
only do we want you to come in and change, but we will stand 
and be here for you. You will not have to leave again. You 
cannot fail here. We need to help you become successful.
    So when somebody chooses to leave us, our conversations 
with them is, how did we fail you? What could we do different? 
And so as a result of that process, what we became aware was we 
needed to have safe, affordable housing that was permanent that 
these folks could live in and succeed in.
    Last fall, the national alliance to end homelessness 
released a comprehensive report on the status of homeless 
Veterans. I know you all received that report and I really 
commend you to read it. You will read about poverty and 
unemployment among veterans. You will read about veterans with 
disabilities who are further burdened by severe housing costs 
especially among veterans who are renters and sadly you will 
read about veterans who fall into more than one high-risk 
category.
    The Chairman. Mr. Downing, we need you to conclude your 
testimony.
    Mr. Downing. Okay. Yes, sir. I would just say that I think 
that the other thing that I would like to do in closing then is 
add that we need to do a couple of things that really will 
effect what we do for homeless veterans. We need to amend the 
Fair Housing Act to include veterans of the U.S. Military 
Service as a protective class. I mention this because if we are 
successful in creating permanent housing for veterans, we run 
the risk of violating fair housing laws by giving veterans 
priority. Again, a catch 22 which I am sure is unintentional 
and which I am sure can be fixed. Other technical fixes are 
within our grasp as well.
    For instance, the VA's payment system is a nightmare. Good 
people in Congress working with good people of the VA passed 
legislation that changed the payment system last year but that 
legislation never made it to a final bill. If I could go out 
and raise money to improve service to homeless veterans, the VA 
is forced to reduce, as a result of the Office of Management 
and Budget circulars, it's payment to us. So our per diem rate 
falls when I am more successful in capturing other funding.
    So I am asking you to really look at that. I am asking you 
to also realize that I believe we want to welcome home the 
veterans of both OEF and OIF but our veterans deserve a system 
of care that is anchored in safe, affordable, permanent housing 
with services. Thank you.
    The Chairman. Thank you, sir. I am sorry to have to----
    Mr. Downing. That is okay.
    [The prepared statement of Mr. Downing appears on p. 85.]
    The Chairman. I mean we appreciate your passion and we need 
to hear it. Colonel Williams.

       STATEMENT OF COLONEL CHARLES WILLIAMS, USA (RET.)

    Colonel Williams. Oh. Yes, sir. Mr. Chairman, Members of 
the Committee, my name is Charles Williams, Colonel, U.S. Army 
retired, and I am the Executive Director of the Maryland Center 
of Veterans Education and Training, also known as MCVET. MCVET 
was established to provide homeless veterans and other veterans 
in need with comprehensive services that will enable them to 
rejoin their communities as productive citizens.
    We meet veterans where they are when they enter our program 
and through a smooth continuum of service, we reorder their 
lives. This also means partnering with Federal, State and local 
resources to provide the veterans with services they need to 
become productive. MCVET has about 15 years hands-on experience 
in dealing with homeless veterans with various issues such as 
drugs, alcohol, mental, physical health and, of course, under 
that come PTSD and TBI. MCVET owes its very existence to the 
Federal grants, to community-based organizations.
    We have uniquely married the housing services available 
from HUD, the medical and social services available from 
Veterans Affairs, and the job and training and education 
services available from the Department of Labor in order to 
move veterans into the societal main stream as supporting and 
contributing members to their families and their communities. 
Veterans returning from Afghanistan and Iraq face problems that 
can be overcome through the Veterans Affairs system. Many 
problems occur from an ineffective readjustment period after 
transitioning from the war zone.
    If the veteran is not connected to comprehensive services, 
then other problems take place, i.e., drugs, crime, and 
homelessness will surface. A unified service delivery system 
should be developed with Federal agencies that would address 
the major issues facing the returning veteran in a timely 
manner and I repeat timely.
    Over the years, MCVET has progressed to the point that it 
is considered a national model in reordering the lives of 
veterans with issues of homelessness. We have partnered with 
the Veterans Affairs Medical Centers who have placed medical 
staff at our facility and this staff includes but they are not 
limited to psychologists at the doctoral level and social 
workers.
    Additionally, a liaison person from the Grant Per Diem 
program is in our facility twice a week. These VA personnel 
assist in the admission process for veterans who are in 
immediate need of mental health services and are key in 
determining the level of care needed. Our students are able to 
access mental health services within 1 week of entering our 
program; this is the speed at which these people enter 
treatment.
    Also, psychosocial assessments are conducted at the agency 
within the first week in an effort to identify the level of 
mental health services that should be given to each student. 
Without the assistance of the VA medical health profession, the 
admission process becomes time consuming with a distinct 
possibility of losing a veteran to the street. Veterans Affairs 
has adequate resources to treat mental health issues once the 
veteran is admitted.
    MCVET also has partnerships with Johns Hopkins, University 
of Maryland Healthcare System, the Greater Baltimore Healthcare 
System, and Mercy Hospital in providing necessary treatment for 
the homeless veteran population. The key to reduction and/or 
elimiNation of homelessness among veterans is grounded in the 
speed and the effectiveness of access to treatment.
    So in closing, I would like to say thank you for the 
opportunity to appear before you and to share the MCVET story. 
Homeless veterans are likely to face greater challenges in the 
years ahead as scarce resources strain the delivery system that 
is already overburdened. I urge you in your deliberation to 
consider the plight of these young men and women who have been 
sent to defend the ideals of their country and many of them are 
returning home broken of body, mind and soul and this country 
needs to provide the resources so that these people too can 
share in the American dream, send their kids to school, and 
live where they choose to live. Thank you.
    [The prepared statement of Colonel Williams appears on p. 
88.]
    The Chairman. Thank you, Colonel. Mr. Landis, thank you for 
being here.

                    STATEMENT OF PHIL LANDIS

    Mr. Landis. Chairman Filner, Members of the Committee, 
thank you for the opportunity to share a few of my views with 
you and a little something about the organization that I am so 
humbled to be a part of. My name is Phil Landis. I am the 
current Chief Executive Officer of Veterans Village at San 
Diego. I have been a board member with that organization for 11 
years and as of September of last year I have had the truly 
unique and wonderful opportunity to head this organization.
    VVSD was formed 27 years ago by a small group of Vietnam 
combat vets who were struggling with their own issues and 
searching for ways in a desert, if you will, to develop means 
by which they can come to grips with their own demons and, 
hence, Vietnam Veterans of San Diego was born in that time. We 
have since changed our name to Veterans Village of San Diego 
because we truly are a village of all veterans. We currently 
have a veteran from World War I, formerly homeless, and he is 
88 years old. We have 130 other homeless veterans who are 
currently residing with us at our early treatment facility. Of 
those 131, eight are women, six are OIF/OEF veterans, and one 
of those six is female.
    In listening to some of the testimony earlier, it struck me 
at how the issues that we are struggling with today are the 
same issues that I and my fellow veterans of the Vietnam 
conflict struggled with for so long. One of the primary and 
significant differences between now and 40 years ago is a 
plethora of services available and the will, politically and 
economically, to support the OIF/OEF veterans. For that matter, 
all veterans of the Global War on Terrorism era that we are 
involved in now.
    I would like to talk a little bit about numbers. Veterans 
Village was the founder of Stand Down which is now replicated 
at some 200 locations around the country. In the late '90s, we 
saw the number attending Stand Down begin to dribble down. 
Starting about 3 years ago, it is beginning to dribble up.
    Last year, we had almost 800 in attendance at our 3-day 
event. That is about 60 more than we had the previous year. The 
population has changed to younger. We have more families 
attending Stand Down. These are veteran families with children 
attending Stand Down. We had 74 children aged under 16 at Stand 
Down last year. One of the commonalities between generations of 
servicemembers seems to be true at this time as it has in the 
past. You know, PTSD as we call it today, in the Civil War, 
they called PTSD soldier's heart and that is what gets broken 
in combat along with the soul and a lot of folks have 
difficulty with that and it is a long road home.
    One of the commonalities that all combat veterans--well, I 
would not say all. Many combat veterans have anger, addiction, 
disillusionment, despair, all of the catch words that lead to 
suicide, that lead to homelessness. I have been fortunate 
enough to sit in groups of our current group of homeless 
veterans, Iraq primarily. It is the same. It is the same 
message then that I hear from them that I heard in the groups 
that I was involved in when I was going through counseling for 
many, many years at our local Vet Center.
    My time is running short but quickly, what do we do? We 
have identified an outreach program which has recently been 
funded, which we call Warrior Traditions. Warrior Traditions 
will go into the communities with qualified facilitators and 
create atmospheres whereby these veterans can, amongst 
themselves, in an environment that is facilitated towards a 
helpful and progressive end begin to deal with some of these 
issues.
    So we are outreaching into the community. That is not our 
core mission but we find that it is significant to do that or 
they are going to fall through the cracks. The name of it is 
prevention and in closing, if I were to wish for anything, I 
would wish for more beds. I would wish for funding for more 
permanent housing. I would wish for funding for more 
transitional housing.
    If we had enough money, we would throw supportive services 
at it but the first element that we need is to get the folks 
off the street and get them into a bed, and then develop the 
services that go with that. Thank you for hearing my testimony.
    [The prepared statement of Mr. Landis appears on p. 90.]
    The Chairman. Thank you. Mr. D'Arcy.

                 STATEMENT OF WILLIAM G. D'ARCY

    Mr. D'Arcy. The rents that we collected paid for the 
property management but not the social services. Social 
services at St. Leo Residence are provided to chronically 
homeless and mentally ill veterans primarily from the Vietnam 
era. And Catholic Charities provides nine employees, more than 
originally planned, at a cost of $500,000.
    At the Auburn Gresham Clinic, the VA provided services to 
1,185 veterans in the first 9 months. And the Department of 
Labor assisted 312 veterans with job searches and 45 of them 
obtained employment.
    So what did we learn? The clinic was built with a public 
and private partnership that was extensive. Catholic Charities 
engaged seven governmental agencies and six private partners. 
And we learned that these partnerships are necessary, they are 
quite complicated, and they require a considerable time 
commitment.
    The second thing we learned was about financing. Ten layers 
of funding were assembled and six of them were from government 
agencies. The VA committed the first funding and that opened 
the door for all the funders.
    The State of Illinois awarded $10 million in Federal tax 
credits and Catholic Charities procured more than $4 million in 
grants and donations to fill the funding gaps.
    We learned that a simpler financing method must be found 
and we request an opportunity to renegotiate the terms of our 
VA loan.
    Operating revenue came from housing vouchers that provided 
only 35 percent of the funding. Plus, low rents collected from 
veterans provided 65 percent. Such a small revenue budget 
cannot pay for both property management and social services. We 
learned that more housing vouchers and/or grants are needed or 
this project will fail.
    And regarding social service outcomes, 79 percent of the 
residents obtained employment. That was nearly 50 percent in 
the first year. And nearly all veterans at St. Leo Residence 
are receiving benefits.
    We learned that Catholic Charities had to increase its 
staff to work with this challenging population in order to 
achieve these positive outcomes.
    Last, community response has been favorable and we learned 
that being in a neighborhood near public transportation is very 
important because ongoing support from local groups is critical 
to helping veterans.
    In conclusion, we at Catholic Charities believe that our 
country needs more housing to address the problem of 
homelessness among veterans. The St. Leo Residence and the 
Auburn Gresham Clinic have made a real contribution because 
formerly homeless veterans are becoming viable contributors to 
our society again.
    Mr. Chairman, we are willing to work with any group you 
designate to review this pilot project in order to make the 
next project even more successful. I urge the Congress to 
promote this program, to simplify its implementation, and to 
provide financial support for continued operations and social 
services.
    Thank you.
    [The prepared statement of Mr. D'Arcy appears on p. 92.]
    The Chairman. Thank you. Thank you all for what you are 
doing each and every day for our veterans.
    Mr. Rodriguez, do you have any comments?
    Mr. Rodriguez. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Let me also just thank you for the services that you are 
providing out there.
    Based on the figures, even if we have a disagreement over 
them, if we have 11,000 so-called individuals out there, what 
is the duration of time that they spend in your facilities? I 
know that it is difficult, but right now based on how much time 
we keep them, if we felt that we needed to transition them and 
allow that opportunity for them to get a job, say that it is a 
year, what is the cost that we are looking at overall, if that 
is the maximum number that are out there? What is the cost for 
any one of you right now for an individual at your place?
    The Chairman. Well, Mr. Rodriguez, I was going to ask for 
the operating budget for each agency. I was just trying to 
figure out----
    Mr. Rodriguez. Yes.
    Mr. Downing. Excuse me. My operating budget is 
approximately $4 million a year.
    Mr. Rodriguez. And that comes out to how much per veteran?
    Mr. Downing. It would probably average out around $80,000 a 
veteran.
    The Chairman. And you are serving about 250?
    Mr. Downing. Yes, sir.
    Mr. Rodriguez. Per year?
    Mr. Downing. Per year, but that number would be a total. In 
a total year, that would be about 900 veterans.
    Mr. Rodriguez. Okay.
    The Chairman. Four million dollars. Okay.
    Colonel Williams.
    Colonel Williams. My budget is about $3.6 million a year, 
but that is not the full story because we get our people jobs. 
Our average salary runs about over $13 an hour now.
    Because of the money that we get from HUD, not from HUD, 
but from the Department of Labor, we send our people to 
colleges, universities, and tech schools. And some of the jobs 
that we have been able to secure for them is master fitness 
trainer, web designer, and that web designer is making more 
money than I make. So he can afford to pay his rent. Okay.
    The Chairman. How many people do you serve per year?
    Colonel Williams. We run about 240 people a day. In the 
report that we sent in earlier, it has those numbers in it. And 
I keep thinking that we are going to run out of people, but 
they keep coming.
    But one of the keys to this whole thing is that we put 
people in a position to fend for themselves. About 2 or 3 years 
ago, we decided that we were going to take a look at the number 
of people who left the program and what they were doing. We 
found out that over 500 had purchased their own home and some 
of them had moved down to South Carolina or in Georgia and had 
little, small mansions out there with ponds in the back.
    So these people are not throwaways. These people, once you 
give them the tools to get on their feet, they can make it. 
They are different from the other population of homeless 
veterans because at one time, these people had been successful 
in their lives. At one time, they had aspirations and because 
of their experience in war, they may have lost some of it. But 
if you put them back on track, they can become very, very self-
sufficient and, you know, they can help other veterans on their 
way up.
    And we do have that because we have people with their own 
businesses and they come back to the organization and they hire 
their fellow veterans and take them out to their businesses.
    The Chairman. Mr. Landis, your annual budget?
    Mr. Landis. Yes, sir. Six point three million dollars. I 
was just thinking how to put a number to the veterans that we 
do serve if we include Stand Down.
    And we have a winter shelter that we have been providing 
for the City of San Diego for 8 years. This year alone, we had 
over 400 documented different Social Security numbers that we 
worked with.
    We operate out of seven different locations. We have 
transitional housing facilities in some of those locations as 
well. I would say conservatively 1,500 to 1,700 veterans a 
year.
    The Chairman. And, Mr. D'Arcy, you said it was $20 million 
to build the facility?
    Mr. D'Arcy. Right. But to operate----
    The Chairman. Social services is what?
    Mr. D'Arcy. Was $500,000 cost. But, Mr. Chairman, our 
operating budget is $1.7 million, which comes out to $12,000 
per veteran.
    The Chairman. How many people are in the----
    Mr. D'Arcy. 141.
    The Chairman. Okay. I am sorry, Mr. Rodriguez.
    Mr. Rodriguez. No. Thank you.
    Excuse me. I am trying to get a feel in terms of what might 
be needed in terms of serving. Mr. Landis.
    Mr. Landis. Yes, sir. If I may expand just a moment. The 
most critical component of what Veterans Village provides is 
our drug and alcohol treatment. That is our core mission. That 
is the most expensive component of treatment that we offer. It 
costs approximately $60 a day to treat the men and women that 
are in that facility.
    As you know, the Per Diem rates are $30 a day, which means 
we struggle to find the differential. And the differential is 
widening. It is not coming closer together. So we struggle with 
that as well.
    Mr. Rodriguez. So just to provide them housing, you are 
looking at what, $30 to $50 a day just for housing?
    Mr. Landis. Well, if I was providing transitional housing 
only, at $30 a day, sir, I would make a profit.
    Mr. Rodriguez. Okay.
    Mr. Landis. No question. When you couple that with 
supportive services, the costs go up. When you add to that drug 
and alcohol treatment, especially if you are doing it in the 
way that we choose to do it, which is all encompassing and very 
holistic, it is very expensive.
    So we struggle. In fact, our treatment facility which we 
call the VRC, Veterans Rehabilitation Center, every year runs 
at a slight loss.
    Mr. Rodriguez. Do we have any program that is looking at 
the veteran coming out of the prison system that is picked up? 
I know it was mentioned. Go ahead.
    Mr. Landis. Yes, sir. We have a large component of our men 
and women in a treatment facility that come straight from 
prison.
    Mr. Rodriguez. Okay.
    Mr. Landis. We also are involved in a pilot program called 
Optional Sentencing. So a judge has an opportunity, if they 
choose to, to sentence somebody, if you will, to our treatment 
facility as opposed to putting them in prison.
    Mr. Rodriguez. Okay. That is good.
    Mr. Downing. Twenty-eight percent of our people come out of 
prison on parole or probation. And we have a person who visits 
all the prisons in our region every week. I have an outreach 
person. That is all he does, visits all the shelters and all 
the prisons and we bring them in that way.
    Mr. Rodriguez. And I gather most of, I am stereotyping, but 
I gather most of the offenses have been drug-related?
    Mr. Downing. Drug or violence. You know, a number of our 
veterans are also men that batter women, adjustment disorders 
under which post traumatic stress disorder falls. There is a 
number of behaviors that seem to be pretty consistent with 
that.
    Colonel Williams. Sir, we coordinate with the prison system 
of Maryland and believe it or not, the veterans in the prison 
system have fundraisers for us. And once they get out, they 
come into the program.
    But we do not have people sentenced to us because that 
means that we have to account for their behavior and we have to 
account for their presence. But once they turn them loose, in 
most cases in the court, if they know that they are with us or 
coming to us, they will, instead of imprison them, will send 
them to us. We have a good relationship with them.
    And we have also met with the Chief of Police in Baltimore 
and was trying to arrange a meeting between the psychologist 
and psychiatrist to tell their people about the type of people 
that they are going to see coming back from Iraq so that they 
do not get involved with shooting these people for their 
behavior. And we are going to continue that.
    And also in dealing with the other problems, health and 
that sort of thing, we partner with Johns Hopkins who come in. 
All our men that are over 40, they give them prostate 
screening. And we are working on a plan now to get our females 
their mammograms because we found out that these people not 
only have problems with drugs and alcohol, but they have 
medical problems because of their stay on the streets and that 
sort of thing.
    And it really takes the community to help a veteran heal, 
so we go to the community and all of the hospitals cooperate 
with us in what we are trying to do.
    The Chairman. Thank you.
    Ms. Brown-Waite.
    Ms. Brown-Waite. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    I would like to ask two questions and if each of you could 
answer.
    The first question is, how do you verify the veteran status 
of an individual who is participating in the programs that you 
run? And the second question would be, how do you define a 
successful outcome for the individuals that you are helping?
    And we can start on either end.
    Mr. Downing. Okay. First of all, DD-214, everybody has a 
DD-214. We get them and we work to get them. The St. Louis 
Center is very good. We get them back in 24 hours.
    And the VA hospital does what they call a ``hink'' and they 
can run that for us immediately. And most of the time, that 
will show somebody who has been in the system and is VA 
eligible. So we do that.
    And then we have a number of people, especially a lot of 
our returning folks, who come back with bad paper because they 
were discharged for less than honorable, especially after 
violent activity or drug activity. And so those folks, we bring 
in and they are eligible for Per Diem and then we immediately 
start a process of appealing their paperwork and work with the 
various service groups to get them eligible for full VA 
services. So we do that.
    Secondly, a successful outcome for us is somebody who stays 
with us that is sober and safe, okay, and has developed some 
responsibility for their life.
    If you ask me today, I could say this to you. About 23 
percent of the people that come in my door today will be with 
me 2 years from now. I cannot tell you who they will be. I can 
tell you that. Okay?
    I mean, it is a very difficult process, but what we are 
looking for is stable behaviors, people who stay within the 
disciplines for their medical treatment, their psych treatment, 
and stay with the supportive services.
    The more services we provide, the busier we keep them, the 
more we stay in touch, the longer they stay. The average stay 
of a person in our program now is 17 months.
    Ms. Brown-Waite. Let me follow-up on one of the comments--
--
    Mr. Downing. Yes, ma'am.
    Ms. Brown-Waite [continuing]. That you made. If the 
individual coming out of the military has a less than honorable 
discharge----
    Mr. Downing. Yeah.
    Ms. Brown-Waite [continuing]. And you are simultaneously 
working to try to get that changed, are you offering them 
assistance during that period?
    Mr. Downing. Yes, ma'am. Oh, yeah. We say no to nobody, 
okay, even if we do not get reimbursed for them. We feel if you 
come in to us and you have had military service, even if you 
have a DD-214 with less than honorable, we are going to start 
to work with you.
    If at the end of that 3-month, 4-month period we find out 
that we cannot get it changed and it is not going to change, 
then we have to start to look for alternative long-term 
treatment facilities for you and we do that. Okay?
    Ms. Brown-Waite. Thank you.
    Colonel Williams. Ma'am, our mission is to provide services 
so that people can rejoin their communities as productive 
citizens. We have a very sophisticated system of accounting for 
the people. I can tell you where some of our people, the first 
20 people that we took in 14 years ago, I can tell you what 
they are doing.
    We do know that 71 percent of the people who stayed with us 
longer than 30 days, because 30 days is key, they bind to the 
program. We are returning 71 percent of those people to their 
communities with jobs and we are also dealing with families.
    We did a random study in which we pulled 50 records from 
the years we have been open to find out what those people were 
doing. We found out of the 50, 41 of them were still in a 
recovery program with jobs. But more important than that, 21 of 
them had reunited with their families, who had been separated 
from their families, had reunited with their families.
    Now, we have programs to encourage family reunification 
because we believe that if we can reunite these people with 
their families and get that connection, chances of them 
returning to the street is minimum.
    Now, I know when I came back from Vietnam, one of the 
things that probably saved me was a family who would not let me 
be by myself to think about this, but kept me moving. And we 
believe that.
    We have days when we bring the family in, the mother, the 
children, and especially things like Christmas and picnics and 
that sort of thing to sort of force that family unit so that 
the people will not return back to the streets.
    Ms. Brown-Waite. And your verification process is that the 
individual you are dealing with is a veteran?
    Colonel Williams. Oh, yes. We check that out with the DD-
214 and at one point, we had people from the Federal building 
coming down. And as we interviewed people, we checked the 
status.
    Ms. Brown-Waite. Thank you.
    Mr. Landis.
    Mr. Landis. Yes, ma'am. We also have access through the VA 
Regional Office and the VA hospital to determine eligibility or 
veteran's status within 1 day.
    We do see a lot of forms DD-214. However, our experience 
has led us to verify beyond that and that is what we do on a 
regular basis. So we know within 24 hours if the person we are 
dealing with is, in fact, a veteran.
    I mean, how do you determine success? Success if you are in 
our treatment program for drug and alcohol addiction is 
determined by the fact that you are clean and sober and you 
have a job and that you are an economic functioning part of 
society once again.
    The latest study that we had conducted determined that 6 
months after graduation from that program, we still had 72 
percent of our alumni clean and sober, no nights in jail, and 
economically employed.
    Mr. D'Arcy. The way we verify is also with the DD-214, plus 
we are in contact with the VISN 12 office at Hines, Illinois. 
And then the Jesse Brown VA Medical Center official oversees 
the clinic, which is across the street. And so we use them. So 
we have, like Mr. Landis here, we have good access to the VA 
data.
    And how do we determine outcomes? Well, we were pleased 
that in the first year, we had 14 percent move on to permanent 
housing.
    The goal of our project is the veteran has to commit to 
seeking and obtaining and maintaining employment. They have to 
pay rent and they have to agree to live in a drug-free 
environment.
    So our case managers are working with people on a weekly 
basis. We only had seven move out in the first year because 
they did not want to comply with the program. So 23 moved on. 
They got better jobs. They got financially stable and they 
moved out to permanent housing.
    Ms. Brown-Waite. Thank you.
    And I thank the Chairman for indulging me a little extra 
time.
    The Chairman. Thank you.
    When you were telling me the budget figures, I was doing 
some calculations to see, if we had everybody in your program 
that we think are homeless, how much it would cost this Nation.
    And I do not know what estimates have come to you. I get, 
in the order of $3 to $4 billion a year.
    Now, offhand, that sounds like a little bit of money. That 
is about 2 weeks of the War in Iraq, maybe less. So I am going 
to arrange to stop the war 2 weeks earlier and we are going to 
fund all to end the homeless situation.
    So, I mean, everything is relative, you know. This country 
has the money to solve this issue. It is a question of 
priorities. And if we can borrow hundreds of billions of 
dollars for war, we can borrow a few billion to deal with this, 
which is a moral crisis for America.
    I would say 90 percent, 95 percent or 98.6 percent--you 
cannot help every single person, but you can provide the 
conditions for virtually everybody to achieve success in the 
way each of you defined it.
    So your every-day work will recommit us to making sure you 
continue and we put in the money that is necessary to solve 
this issue.
    When Pete Dougherty from the VA comes up, he is offering $4 
billion. I want you to solve this problem in a year. Okay?
    Thank you all again for what you do.
    And, we will now have the VA Director come forward.
    Pete, there are not a lot of people who come up from the VA 
where everybody says they love you--we heard at least one 
testimony. I did not ask the other three. I did not want to get 
you in trouble. But you are well known around the Nation.
    I took from this second panel that you have your finger in 
a whole lot of things that are successful. And I think that is 
a testament to you and what you are doing. So we appreciate you 
being here today.

 STATEMENT OF PETER H. DOUGHERTY, DIRECTOR, HOMELESS VETERANS 
 PROGRAMS, VETERANS HEALTH ADMINISTRATION, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF 
                        VETERANS AFFAIRS

    Mr. Dougherty. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    I probably should say that I learned all those good traits 
by being a staff member of the House Veterans' Affairs 
Committee many years ago.
    It is my pleasure to be with you today. I appreciate the 
opportunity to come and to testify on behalf of the 
Department's programs and services that are helping homeless 
veterans.
    VA, as you know, is the Nation's largest single healthcare 
provider and we provide healthcare to more than 100,000 
homeless veterans each year. We are making unprecedented 
strides to expand current and to create new partnerships in 
service with others.
    We aggressively reach out and engage veterans in shelters, 
in soup kitchens, on streets, and under the bridges. We connect 
them with a complement of VA healthcare and benefits 
assistance.
    Our objective is to help these veterans receive coordinated 
care with VA benefits which in turn further enhances their 
opportunity to live independently and to gain gainful 
employment. Thousands of these veterans are returning to 
independent living each year.
    With your support, we have continued to make significant 
investments in provisions of services to homeless veterans. 
This year, we expect to spend over $2 billion in both veterans, 
homeless veterans' specific programs and healthcare services 
for veterans who are homeless.
    VA under the Veterans Benefits Administration has expedited 
over 21,000 claims from homeless veterans and, therefore, given 
thousands of veterans an income support and other eligibilities 
they may not otherwise have.
    We believe the best strategy to prevent homelessness is 
early intervention. Veterans returning from the present 
conflict in Iraq and Afghanistan have 5 years of eligibility 
for healthcare. We believe this eligibility policy allows our 
clinical staff to identify additional health problems that may, 
if left untreated, contribute to future homelessness.
    During the past 3 years, 556 veterans who served in Iraq 
and Afghanistan have been seen and served in residential 
treatment programs that we either run and operate or are run in 
partnership with us such as the panels that you have had here 
earlier today. Our best option is to reach these veterans early 
and to serve them early.
    Last year, we had over 9,000 people attend our community 
homeless assessment meetings across the country. We host those 
meetings at every VA medical center. They are called our 
challenge meetings. Those meetings help us to identify the met 
and unmet needs of homeless veterans. It also is one of the 
things that we use to get an estimate of the number of homeless 
veterans. Our 2007 report estimated the number of homeless 
veterans is going down. It is down to 154,000. That is a 
reduction, but we do not claim any great success. We are 
confident that our continued efforts will achieve our goal of 
ending chronic homelessness among veterans.
    It has been mentioned here, and I want to give you an 
update about what is going on with HUD-VASH. Last December, 
this Congress appropriated funds to HUD that will create more 
than 10,000 units of dedicated vouchers for permanent housing 
under the Housing Voucher Choice Program for homeless veterans 
and family members with a requirement that VA provide dedicated 
case managers to those veterans.
    We are currently working with our colleagues at HUD and 
expect that thousands of veterans will be able to move into 
that housing as early as this summer. We have already started 
the process to hire 290 case managers.
    The Administration's proposed budget for the Department of 
Housing and Urban Development also includes 75 million which is 
estimated to create nearly an additional 10,000 next year. If 
that occurs, obviously VA will need to hire additional case 
managers.
    You have mentioned Stand Downs and obviously you and I have 
both been to Stand Downs. Since San Diego started the Stand 
Down concept, VA has participated in over 2,000 of those 
events. Last year, we recorded participation in 143 events. 
More than 30,500 veterans and family members aided by over 
18,000 volunteers participated.
    VA has provided funding to more than 500 organizations to 
support the more than 9,000 operational beds in place today and 
ramping up to about 14,000 transitional housing beds. We have 
funded 23 service centers and more than 200 vans for 
transportation.
    The Notice of Funding Availability (NOFA) that is out and 
closes today, we expect will add several thousand additional 
Grant Per Diem beds. We expect to award funding by late summer.
    We have awarded technical assistance grants, homeless 
special needs funding. We have expanded our residential 
treatment programs, our domiciliary and other programs, and we 
have worked very diligently with the Multi-Family Housing Loan 
Guaranty Program.
    As was mentioned earlier, we have been participating with 
the Department of Labor on the Incarcerated Veterans Transition 
Program. And although it was a pilot, we have testified 
previously that we wish the Congress would extend that program 
because we estimate that nearly 40 to 45 percent of all 
veterans we see in homeless programs have previously been 
incarcerated.
    We appreciate the assistance of the Congress that you have 
given us and aiding us in this noble endeavor.
    Mr. Chairman, that would conclude my statement as such and 
I would be more than happy to answer questions.
    [The prepared statement of Mr. Dougherty appears on p. 95.]
    The Chairman. Thank you.
    Ms. Brown-Waite.
    Ms. Brown-Waite. Thank you.
    Some of the previous witnesses this morning discussed the 
need for permanent supportive housing. Do you agree that we 
should have this particular type of housing, and are there any 
plans, ideas, or recommendations that the VA has about 
developing permanent supportive housing for homeless vets?
    Mr. Dougherty. This initiative really began at the end of 
the first President Bush Administration. It was an initiation 
by Secretary Kemp of HUD at the time and the Director of Mental 
Health Services for VA.
    The idea was that many veterans, particularly those who 
have physical disabling conditions, long-term chronic mental 
illness, and other problems, the best thing we could do to them 
is to give them that safe environment in which to live without 
worrying about when they had to get out or where they were 
going next. They could address the physical and mental 
healthcare needs that they have.
    Our colleagues at the Department of Housing and Urban 
Development tell us that their Government Performance and 
Results Act (GPRA) performance requirement for that type of 
program is that people in that housing stay at about 74 
percent. The veterans that we have had in that program, in that 
pilot that continues, about 1,500 units today stay at a rate of 
about 94 percent.
    We have testified before and written reports on it before. 
We consider it one of the most successful programs that we 
have.
    In the new initiative, that is most helpful is that we will 
have an ability to target who will get this housing because you 
all put it in the law. That really is going to allow us to take 
not only that chronically homeless veteran, but also to give 
options and to provide services for veterans and their family 
members who need that kind of housing. We find many veterans do 
not come in and seek services from us if they still have a 
family.
    They are concerned about what is happening to my spouse or 
my child if I go into the VA healthcare system. This will give 
them a safe, stable place in which to stay. Many of the 
programs that we work with can work effectively as an 
outpatient program.
    It also will give us an opportunity to work with those 
veterans who are coming back from Iraq and Afghanistan who need 
some assistance as has been outlined as well.
    Ms. Brown-Waite. My last question relates to whether or not 
the VA participates in HUD's Homeless Management and 
Information System and, if not, why not, and have you taken any 
steps to become involved in this program?
    Mr. Dougherty. We do in some ways. Obviously, as you know, 
we have great restrictions as to providing information about 
veterans and their healthcare services. We are working with HUD 
all the time on trying to give aggregate information as opposed 
to specific information.
    Most continuums work where if you and Mr. Filner had two 
different programs in the same city that you would have the 
ability to access the information about people in his program 
and he people in your program so that if you were providing 
some support services and he was providing some other support 
services, you would know whether people are coming and going.
    In VA's case, we have a great deal of difficulty sharing 
that kind of level of information. One of the things we do 
appreciate is the Department of Housing and Urban Development 
has asked their continuums of care to collect data sources so 
we can help identify the number of veterans who are being seen.
    And what that does for us is--New York City is a good 
example. New York says if you are coming into the New York City 
system, what you have to do is if you identify yourself as a 
veteran, they give that information to the VA. And what that 
does for our folks is if we have 40 veterans, for example, who 
are living in a place, in a shelter, if you will, that gives us 
the opportunity to reach out to them, to give benefits 
assistance to them, and to get better placement.
    We are working with them, but, no, we are not fully engaged 
in the HMIS System.
    Ms. Brown-Waite. Could there not be a waiver that the 
veteran signs?
    Mr. Dougherty. Those are the kinds of things that we are 
working on, but waivers as we understand it, are only as good 
as the day I wrote the waiver. So if I gave you a waiver today, 
it might not be applicable tomorrow. And I can restrict what I 
may give in the waiver process as well. So I may want to share 
some information, but not others.
    Ms. Brown-Waite. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of 
my time.
    The Chairman. Let me give you some frank reaction to your 
testimony. The problem looks to me to be quite immense.
    I know what San Diego--I happened to be involved in the 
Veterans Village from the time I was on the City Council in San 
Diego. These guys have worked themselves, and in fact, the 
previous Director, almost to death year after year after year. 
They found money and they now have a few million dollars. They 
are serving 100, 200 veterans. I mean, they worked to the bone 
and they finally have millions of dollars. And, again, they are 
serving a few hundred.
    So to serve whatever the number is, and, I am not sure we 
have a handle on it, but let us say a couple hundred thousand 
veterans, you need billions of dollars. So we are not solving 
the problem. We are not ending the issue.
    And we know how much good you have done, but I wish one 
time somebody from the VA would come and testify and say here 
is what we need and here is what I would do with this much 
money. Let us help you do this job.
    You know, everybody is doing such a wonderful job and, yet, 
I go out every couple of weeks to downtown San Diego, to the 
ballpark, to some of the shelters, and I can find dozens of 
veterans in a few minutes whose story rends your heart. We need 
to get these folks in for some help.
    So I want to know what you need, what would you do, what 
can you not do? Is it just money? Is it local participation in 
a different way? Is it a commitment from all of your medical 
facilities? I mean, what do you need to do your job better?
    Mr. Dougherty. Well, I think one of the things, Mr. 
Chairman----
    The Chairman. What would you do? What would you do with 
more money?
    Mr. Dougherty [continuing]. Is we have a Grant and Per Diem 
Program for homeless service. We have a figure of $130 million 
as the authorized level. The Appropriations Committee 
appropriated $130 million and we will spend $130 million on 
that program this year.
    I think that was a ceiling to make us reach higher and has 
now been hit. So what we need if we are going to continue to 
move forward with that program is to break the ceiling that now 
exists for us.
    We need to have either an increased level of authorization 
for appropriation or we need to simply have a floor to spend at 
least $130 million so we can spend as much as we need after 
that. That is one thing very specifically you could do to be 
helpful.
    The other is that we do recognize both in the law, we 
referenced the fact about ending chronic homelessness. Now, we 
define chronic homelessness as a person who has been homeless 
for a year or more or who has had four or more times of 
homelessness over the past 3 years.
    We are not as prepared and not as well versed in doing more 
for homeless prevention. I certainly think that having some 
specific authority to do more homeless prevention would help.
    You mentioned the fact that if somebody comes in, we are 
trying to work very closely that we do not turn anybody who 
comes into us out on to the street, that we want to make sure 
they have a good place to go until they can get placement if 
they need placement or will accept placement.
    But we are limited at this point in what we can do in that 
arena. Having more homeless prevention authority would be 
helpful to us as well.
    I think beyond that, Mr. Chairman, the HUD-VASH Program, 
will help answer the need for permanent housing. I believe the 
last challenge report we had from community sources said we 
need 27,000 units of permanent housing in order to help meet 
the need as defined it for us.
    If we get this year's amount and next year's proposed 
amount, we will obviously go very significantly toward that 
goal. The 11,000 number that was used was for transitional 
housing. With what we have added to that now, if you use that 
figure, we are probably still three or four thousand away from 
where we need to be.
    We have thousands of units that we have approved that have 
not become operational. But obviously additional transitional 
housing in places is a significant need for us as well.
    The Chairman. Okay. We are going to continue to discuss 
this issue. I appreciate all the witnesses here today. Some of 
the stories you have told help us and recommit us to this issue 
that is one that just breaks your heart, when you are talking 
to people.
    And as a Nation, we can do a better job. I mean, the 
richest Nation in the history of the world does not need to 
have homeless people in our society.
    I thank you all for what you are doing.
    And all these people spoke to grants that they get from 
you. How much is the grant program that they are generally 
referring to?
    Mr. Dougherty. How much is the grant program under Grant 
Per Diem?
    The Chairman. How much money are you giving out in these 
grants?
    Mr. Dougherty. Last year, I think our budget figure; we 
spent $107 million in payments under the Grant and Per Diem 
Program.
    The Chairman. I mean, there are people all over the country 
who want to help, who have the ability to help, who have the 
creativity and the energy. And we have to let them do it. So I 
think we should significantly increase that amount of money.
    Thank you all. This hearing is adjourned.
    [Whereupon, at 12:25 p.m., the Committee was adjourned.]



                            A P P E N D I X

                              ----------                              

            Prepared Statement of Hon. Bob Filner, Chairman,
                  Full Committee on Veterans' Affairs
    Good morning and welcome to the House Veterans' Affairs Committee 
hearing on the effectiveness of VA's homeless programs.
    Last month, VA announced a 21 percent decrease in the homeless 
veteran population from more than 195,000 to about 154,000.
    Research tells us that veterans are over represented in the 
homeless population. VA is the largest single provider of homeless 
services reaching about 25 percent of that population.
    VA operates a wide variety of homeless veterans programs designed 
to provide outreach, supportive services, health care as well as 
counseling and treatment for mental health and substance use disorders. 
They rely heavily on their partnerships with the community and faith 
based organizations to provide these services.
    According to Health Care for Homeless Veterans Programs: The 
Nineteenth Annual Report, March 31, 2006, VA's homeless population 
demographics are:

      52 percent had a serious psychiatric problem defined as 
psychosis, mood disorder or PTSD.
      68 percent, or two-thirds, were dependent on alcohol and/
or drugs.
      38 percent, or over one-third, were dually diagnosed with 
serious psychiatric and substance abuse problems.
      57 percent, or over half, suffered from a serious medical 
problem.
      The number of homeless women veterans is rising.

    Prior to becoming homeless, a large number of veterans at risk have 
struggled with PTSD or have addictions acquired during, or worsened by, 
their military service. These conditions can interrupt their ability to 
keep a job, establish savings, and in some cases, maintain family 
harmony.
    Veterans' family, social, and professional networks may have been 
broken due to extensive mobility while in service or lengthy periods 
away from their hometowns and their civilian jobs. These problems are 
directly traceable to their experience in military service or to their 
return to civilian society without having had appropriate transitional 
supports.
    VA reports that approximately 1,500 homeless veterans are from OEF/
OIF. This is a growing population. It took roughly a decade for the 
lives of Vietnam veterans to unravel to the point that they started 
showing up among the homeless.
    Concern has been expressed by many that such an early showing of 
OEF/OIF veterans in the homeless population does not bode well. It is 
also believed that the intense repeated deployments leave newer 
veterans particularly vulnerable.
    We must do a better job of focusing on preventing homelessness, as 
well as ending it. This Committee must ensure that the current programs 
VA has implemented to end homelessness continue to be effective as well 
as adaptable to the newest generation's needs.
    The time to act is now. We cannot afford to let history repeat 
itself.

                                 
         Prepared Statement of Hon. Stephanie Herseth Sandlin,
      a Representative in Congress from the State of South Dakota
    Chairman Filner and Ranking Member Buyer, thank you for holding 
this hearing to examine the effectiveness of the Department of Veterans 
Affairs homelessness programs.
    Like all of my colleagues, I am troubled by the large number of 
veterans that are homeless. While I am thankful for the decline, during 
the past year, in the number of veterans homeless on a typical night, 
more must be done. For example, I believe we must also focus on efforts 
to help prevent veterans from becoming homeless.
    As you may know, I introduced the Services To Prevent Veterans 
Homelessness Act in May 2007 to authorize the Secretary of Veterans 
Affairs to provide financial assistance to nonprofit organizations and 
consumer cooperatives to provide and coordinate the provision of 
supportive services that addresses the needs of very low-income 
veterans occupying permanent housing.
    I would like to thank Health Subcommittee Chairman Michaud and 
Ranking Member Miller for including the Services to Prevent Veterans 
Homelessness Act in the Veterans' Health Care Improvement Act, which 
passed the full House of Representatives in July 2007. I believe this 
legislation will go a long ways toward helping prevent more veterans 
from becoming homeless.
    Thank you again to all of our witnesses for being here. I look 
forward to continuing to work with the Committee to examine the 
effectiveness of the Department of Veteran Affairs homeless programs 
and to support efforts to meet the housing assistance needs of our 
Nation's low-income veterans.

                                 
            Prepared Statement of Hon. Henry E. Brown, Jr.,
     a Representative in Congress from the State of South Carolina
    Thank you to all the witnesses who are here today, I look forward 
to hearing your testimony and I would like to also thank the Chairman 
and Ranking Member for holding this hearing. One of my greatest 
passions is correcting the problem of homelessness among veterans and I 
appreciate this opportunity to discuss this important topic.
    Though it is difficult to get an exact count, it is estimated that 
on any given night, over 150,000 veterans are homeless in this country. 
In my home State of South Carolina, we believe there are as many as 
1400 homeless veterans. While that number has been going down in recent 
years, it is still far too high.
    We don't always know why veterans become homeless, but we do know 
that veterans are overrepresented in the homeless population, studies 
suggest that 30-40% of all homeless are veterans. We also know that 
homeless veterans suffer from mental illness, substance abuse and other 
health problems at a higher rate than non-veterans. I am proud of the 
work we have been doing as a committee and as a Congress to combat this 
problem, but there is still a good deal of work to be done. We must 
continue to work with HUD to provide adequate housing and critical 
support services that address substance abuse problems many homeless 
veterans have. I hope that through discussions like this we can find 
the solutions to not only continue to reduce the number of current 
homeless veterans, but also prevent the soldiers serving in the current 
conflicts from becoming homeless.
    I thank you again for being here, I look forward to your testimony 
and I yield back the balance of my time.

                                 
                Prepared Statement of Hon. Joe Donnelly,
         a Representative in Congress from the State of Indiana
    Mr. Chairman and fellow members of the House Veterans' Affairs 
Committee. The topic of homeless veterans is one that is truly a 
national tragedy and should be treated with the utmost urgency. While 
we have made great strides in recent years to reduce the number of 
homeless veterans, with a 21 percent drop just in the last year, we 
still have a long way to go. Having over 150,000 homeless veterans on 
any given night, and over 300,000 veterans experience homelessness at 
some point in 2007 is just not acceptable, and we should not rest until 
that number comes down to zero.
    Additionally, it is clear that there is a systemic problem when 
military veterans comprise anywhere from 25 to 40 percent of the total 
homeless population. Therefore, in addition to programs for supporting 
veterans once they show up at our shelters, we must take steps to 
ensure that our brave men and women are not put in a situation where 
they have to show up at these shelters in the first place.
    It is particularly disturbing that, according to VA statistics, 
there are already an estimated 1,500 OEF/OIF veterans showing up at 
homeless shelters. This is unprecedented and an alarming signal for 
future veteran homeless trends. It took about a decade for Vietnam 
veterans to start showing up among the homeless--we should not and 
cannot accept that, with all our 21st Century capabilities and 
resources, our returning veterans may be doing worse finding and 
staying in a home than returning veterans in the 1970s. We must get to 
the root of the problem and address it before these numbers grow any 
further.
    The VA has also identified veterans with PTSD as a large group of 
at-risk veterans. With this knowledge, we must work to ensure that we 
provide them with additional transitional resources and counseling to 
avoid their ending up among the homeless.
    I look forward to working with Chairman Filner and members of this 
committee to continue to make strides toward ending homelessness of 
veterans of any era and offering a greater array of assistance programs 
in helping them find jobs and permanent housing. Our brave men and 
women are willing to make the ultimate sacrifice for their country, and 
as their hometown representatives, we owe them our greatest effort to 
help them get their lives back on track.

                                 
              Prepared Statement of Hon. Timothy J. Walz,
        a Representative in Congress from the State of Minnesota
    Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Buyer, members of the committee, thank 
you for the opportunity to speak. And thank you to the witnesses who 
are here today.
    As a 24-year veteran of the Army National Guard and the highest 
ranking enlisted man in Congress, I know that taking care of our active 
duty forces and our veterans is one of the most important issues facing 
this country and this Congress today. Making sure we can work toward 
eliminating homelessness among our veterans, and preventing a new 
generation of homeless veterans from emerging, is incredibly important. 
While we have made advances, I am concerned that we are not doing 
enough on either front.
    It is unacceptable that in the United States today that there is a 
single homeless veteran. The number of veterans who are homeless 
appears to have dropped somewhat recently, and that would be a very 
good thing. VA reports that on any given day in 2007 there were about 
154,000 homeless veterans, down from about 194,000 in 2006 and down 
even more from earlier years. But veterans are still over-represented 
among the Nation's homeless population. And there are troubling signs 
that veterans of our current conflicts may already be showing up 
homeless early. I am encouraged that some of the programs we have in 
place have been successful and efficient in serving homeless veterans 
and supporting providers of care to them. But at the same time I am 
concerned that some of those successful programs may not be getting the 
funding they deserve. The main question I have is how we can build on 
that success to reduce--ultimately to zero--the number of veterans who 
are homeless.
    I look forward to hearing from the witnesses today and to working 
with the members of this committee, the Congress and the VA to ensure 
that we succeed at eliminating homelessness among our veterans.

                                 
Prepared Statement of John Driscoll, Vice President for Operations and 
           Programs, National Coalition for Homeless Veterans
Chairman Filner, Ranking Member Mr. Buyer, and Distinguished Members of 
the Committee:
    The National Coalition for Homeless Veterans (NCHV) is honored to 
participate in this hearing to discuss the programs in place to help 
America's homeless veterans, to consider how they may be improved, and 
to offer insights on what we believe is a historic opportunity to 
capitalize on our collective successes to focus on and develop 
strategies that will prevent homelessness among the next generation of 
America's veterans.
    This Committee knows all too well that the cost of our freedom and 
prosperity necessarily includes tending to the wounds of the veterans 
who sacrifice some measure of their lives to preserve it. That we have 
been invited to offer testimony on these issues is, in itself, a 
testament to the leadership and devotion of this Committee to serve all 
veterans--including those who otherwise would have no hope of sharing 
in the peace and prosperity of the society they served to protect.
    We therefore begin our testimony by expressing our sincere 
gratitude for the commendable legacy this Committee has forged in the 
campaign to end and prevent homelessness among this Nation's military 
veterans. For two decades you have engaged in a noble cause few others 
have even wanted to acknowledge. You have asked the tough questions, 
demanded accountability, and you have shouldered the burden before 
Congress and delivered on your promise--and for all that you stand 
first among those who made possible the successes we celebrate today.
    The homeless veteran assistance movement NCHV represents began in 
earnest in 1990, but like a locomotive it took time to build the 
momentum that has turned the battle in our favor. In partnership with 
the Departments of Veterans Affairs (VA), Labor, and Housing and Urban 
Development (HUD)--supported by the funding measures this Committee has 
championed--our community veteran service providers have helped reduce 
the number of homeless veterans on any given night in America by 38% in 
the last six years.
    This assessment is not based on the biases of advocates and service 
providers, but by the Federal agencies charged with identifying and 
addressing the needs of the Nation's most vulnerable citizens.
    To its credit, the VA has presented to Congress an annual estimate 
of the number of homeless veterans every year since 1994. It is called 
the CHALENG project, which stands for Community Homelessness 
Assessment, and Local Education Networking Groups. In 2003 the VA 
CHALENG report estimate of the number of homeless veterans on any given 
day stood at more than 314,000; in 2006 that number had dropped to 
about 194,000. We have been advised the estimate in the soon-to-be 
published 2007 CHALENG Report shows a continued decline, to about 
154,000.
    Part of that reduction can be attributed to better data collection 
and efforts to avoid multiple counts of homeless clients who receive 
assistance from more than one service provider in a given service area. 
But in testimony before the House Committee on Veterans' Affairs in the 
summer of 2005, VA officials affirmed that the number of homeless 
veterans was on the decline, and credited the agency's partnership with 
community-based and faith-based organizations for making that downturn 
possible.
    Though estimates are not as reliable as comprehensive ``point-in-
time'' counts, the positive trends noted in the CHALENG reports since 
2003 are impressive. The number of contacts reporting data included in 
the assessments are increasing, while the number of identified and 
estimated homeless veterans is decreasing.
    Other Federal assessments of veteran homelessness that support our 
testimony are found in HUD's 2007 ``Annual Homelessness Assessment 
Report'' (AHAR)--which reported that 18% of clients in HUD-funded 
homeless assistance programs are veterans--and the 2000 U.S. Census, 
which reported about 1.5 million veteran families are living below the 
Federal poverty level. Earlier this year, the National Alliance to End 
Homelessness (NAEH) published a report, based on information from these 
resources, that estimated approximately 46,000 veterans meet the 
criteria to be considered as ``chronically homeless.''
Homeless Veteran Assistance Programs
    There are only two non-government veteran-specific homeless 
assistance programs serving the men and women who represent nearly a 
quarter of the Nation's homeless population. The over-representation of 
veterans among the homeless that is well documented and continues to 
this day is the result of several influences, most notably limited 
resources in communities with a heavy demand for assistance by single 
parents and families with dependent children, the elderly and the 
disabled.
    The Department of Labor Homeless Veterans Reintegration program 
(HVRP) and the VA Homeless Providers Grant and Per Diem were created in 
the late 1980s to provide access to services for veterans who were 
unable to access local, federally funded, ``mainstream'' homeless 
assistance programs.
    These programs are largely responsible for the downturn in veteran 
homelessness reported during the last six years, and must be advanced 
as essential components in any national strategy to prevent future 
veteran homelessness. We will touch on each separately, and briefly 
comment on how each may be enhanced.
Homeless Providers Grant and Per Diem Program (GPD)
    Despite significant challenges and budgetary strains, the VA has 
quadrupled the capacity of community-based service providers to serve 
veterans in crisis since 2002, a noteworthy and commendable expansion 
that includes, at its very core, access to transitional housing, 
healthcare, mental health services and suicide prevention.
    GPD is the foundation of the VA and community partnership, and 
currently funds nearly 10,000 service beds in non-VA facilities in 
every state. Under this program veterans receive a multitude of 
services that include housing, access to healthcare and dental 
services, substance abuse and mental health supports, personal and 
family counseling, education and employment assistance, and access to 
legal aid.
    The purpose of the program is to provide the supportive services 
necessary to help homeless veterans achieve self sufficiency to the 
highest degree possible. Clients are eligible for this assistance for 
up to two years. Most veterans are able to move out of the program 
before the two-year threshold; some will need supportive housing long 
after they complete the eligibility period. Client progress and 
participant outcomes must be reported to the VA GPD office quarterly, 
and all programs are required to conduct financial and performance 
audits annually.
    In September 2007, despite the commendable growth and success of 
this program and its role in reducing the incidence of veteran 
homelessness, the GAO reported that the VA needs an additional 9,600 
beds to adequately address the current need for assistance by the 
homeless veteran population. That finding was based on information 
provided by the VA, the GAO's in-depth review of the GPD program, and 
interviews with service providers. The VA concurred with the GAO 
findings.
Recommendations
    1. Increase the annual appropriation of the GPD program to $200 
million--The projected $137 million in the president's FY 2009 budget 
request will allow for expansion of the GPD program, but not nearly to 
the extent called for in the GAO report. While some VA officials may be 
concerned about the administrative capacity to handle such a large 
infusion of funds into the program, we believe the documented need to 
do so should drive the debate on this issue.
    In 2006, the VA created the position of GPD Liaisons at each 
medical center to provide additional administrative support for the GPD 
office and grantees. The VA published a comprehensive program guide to 
better instruct grantees on funding and grant compliance issues, and 
expects to provide more intense training of GPD Liaisons. This 
represents a considerable and continual investment in the 
administrative oversight of the program that should translate into 
increased capacity to serve veterans in crisis.
    Additional funding would increase the number of operational beds in 
the program, but under current law it could also enhance the level of 
other services that have been limited due to budget constraints. GPD 
funding for homeless veteran service centers--which has not been 
available in recent grant competitions--could be increased. These drop-
in centers provide food, hygienic necessities, informal social supports 
and access to assistance that would otherwise be unavailable to men and 
women not yet ready to enter a residential program. They also could 
serve as the initial gateway for veterans in crisis who are threatened 
with homelessness or dealing with issues that may result in 
homelessness if not resolved. For OIF/OEF veterans in particular, this 
is a critical opportunity to prevent future veteran homelessness.
    Additional funding could also be used under current law to increase 
the number of special needs grants awarded under the GPD program. The 
program awards these grants to reflect the changing demographics of the 
homeless veteran population. One grant targets women veterans, 
including those with dependent children--the fasted growing segment of 
the homeless veteran population. Women now account for more than 14% of 
the forces deployed to Iraq and Afghanistan, yet there are only eight 
GPD programs receiving special needs grants for women in the country.
    Other focuses include the frail elderly, increasingly important to 
serve aging Vietnam-era veterans--still the largest subgroup of 
homeless veterans; veterans who are terminally ill; and veterans with 
chronic mental illness. These grants provide transitional housing and 
supports for veteran clients as organizations work to find longer term 
supportive housing options in their communities.

    2. Change the mechanism for determining ``per diem'' allowances--
Under the GPD program, service providers are reimbursed for the 
expenses they incur for serving homeless veterans on a formula based on 
the rate of reimbursement provided to state veterans homes, and those 
rates are then reduced based on the amount of funding received from 
other Federal sources. The current ceiling is about $33.00 per veteran 
per day.
    This payment system is outdated for two reasons. The first is the 
difference in the cost of custodial care and the cost of comprehensive 
services that help individuals rebuild their lives. Whether provided on 
site or through contracts with partner agencies, the latter requires 
the intervention of highly trained professionals and intense case 
management. Revisions in the reimbursement formula should reflect the 
actual cost of services--based on each grantee's demonstrated capacity 
to provide those that are deemed critical to the success of the GPD 
program and veteran clients--rather than a flat rate based on custodial 
care.
    The second reason is less obvious but equally important. 
Discounting the amount of an organization's ``per diem'' rate due to 
funding from other Federal agencies contradicts the fundamental intent 
of the GPD program and undermines the ability of organizations to 
provide the wide range of services these veterans need. In order to 
successfully compete for GPD funding, applicants must demonstrate they 
can provide a wide range of supportive services in addition to the 
transitional housing they offer. They should not be penalized for 
obtaining funds to enhance the services they are able to provide, 
regardless of the source of that funding.
Homeless Veterans Reintegration Program
    HVRP is a grant program that awards funding to government agencies, 
private service agencies and community-based nonprofits that provide 
employment preparation and placement assistance to homeless veterans. 
It is the only Federal employment assistance program targeted to this 
special needs population. The grants are competitive, which means 
applicants must qualify for funding based on their proven record of 
success at helping clients with significant barriers to employment to 
enter the workforce and to remain employed. In September 2007 this 
program was judged by the Government Accountability Office (GAO) as one 
of the most successful and efficient programs in the Department of 
Labor portfolio.
    HVRP is unique and so highly successful because it doesn't fund 
employment services per se, rather it rewards organizations that 
guarantee job placement. Administered by the Veterans Employment and 
Training Service (VETS), the program is responsible for placing a range 
of 14,000 to 16,000 veterans with considerable challenges into gainful 
employment each year at a cost of about $1,500 per client. Those 
numbers meet or exceed the results produced by most other Department of 
Labor programs.
    Recommendation--The HVRP program is authorized at $50 million 
through FY 2009, yet the annual appropriation has been less than half 
that amount. For FY 2009, the proposed funding for the program is $25.6 
million. We would ask this Committee to prevail upon appropriators--to 
the extent possible--to fully fund this program. We believe the proven 
success and efficiency of HVRP warrants this consideration, and that 
DoL-VETS has the administrative capacity, will and desire to expand the 
program. We also urge the Committee to ensure reauthorization of the 
program FY 2009. Employment is the key to transition from homelessness 
to self sufficiency--this program is critical to the campaign to end 
and prevent veteran homelessness.
Addressing Prevention of Veteran Homelessness
    The reduction in the number of homeless veterans on the streets of 
America each night proves that the partnership of Federal agencies and 
community organizations--with the leadership and oversight of 
Congress--has succeeded in building an intervention network that is 
effective and efficient. That network must continue its work for the 
foreseeable future, but its impact is commendable and offers hope that 
we can, indeed, triumph in the campaign to end veteran homelessness.
    However, the lessons we have learned and the knowledge we have 
gained during the last two decades must also guide our Nation's leaders 
and policy makers in their efforts to prevent future homelessness among 
veterans who are still at risk due to health and economic pressures, 
and the newest generation of combat veterans returning from Operations 
Iraqi Freedom and Enduring Freedom.
    Again, NCHV bases its recommendations in this regard to the 
published findings of the Federal agencies already mentioned.
    The lack of affordable permanent housing is cited as the No. 1 
unmet need of America's veterans, according to the VA CHALENG report. 
We commend the work of HUD and VA to make up to 10,000 HUD-VA 
supportive housing (HUD-VASH) vouchers available to veterans with 
chronic health and disability challenges in FY 2008, and possibly 
another increase in equal measure in FY 2009. This is a historic and 
heroic achievement, and again we commend this committee for its 
leadership on this issue.
    The affordable housing crisis, however, extends far beyond the 
realm of the VA system and its community partners. Once veterans 
successfully complete their GPD programs, many formerly homeless 
veterans still cannot afford fair market rents, nor will most of them 
qualify for mortgages even with the VA home loan guarantee. They are, 
essentially, still at risk of homelessness. With another 1.5 million 
veteran families living below the Federal poverty level (2000 U.S. 
Census), this is an issue that requires immediate attention and 
proactive engagement.
    NCHV believes the issue of affordable permanent housing for 
veterans must be addressed on two levels--those veterans who need 
supportive services beyond the two-year eligibility for GPD; and those 
who are cost-burdened by fair market rents in their communities.
    Veterans who graduate from GPD programs often need supportive 
services while they continue to build toward economic stability and 
social reintegration into mainstream society. Those who will need 
permanent supportive housing--the chronically mentally ill, those with 
functional disabilities, families impacted by poverty--may be served by 
the HUD-VASH program. But the majority of GPD graduates need access to 
affordable housing with some level of follow-up services for up to two 
to three years to ensure their success.
    Many community-based organizations are already providing that kind 
of ``bridge housing,'' but resources for this purpose are scarce. NCHV 
supports two initiatives that would address this issue.
    The first is a measure to provide grants to government and 
community agencies to provide services to low-income veterans in 
permanent housing. Funds would be used to provide continuing case 
management, counseling, job training, transportation and child care 
needs. This is the intent of House bill H.R. 2874, the ``Veterans 
Health Care Improvement Act.''
    The second measure would make funds available to government 
agencies, community organizations and developers to increase the 
availability of affordable housing units for low-income veterans and 
their families. The ``Homes for Heroes Act''--introduced in both the 
House (H.R. 3329) and Senate (S. 1084)--addresses this issue and NCHV 
has worked with staff in both houses in recognition and support of 
Congressional action on this historic veteran homelessness prevention 
initiative.
    With respect to implementing a homelessness preventive strategy 
targeted to veterans returning from OIF/OEF, NCHV believes the first 
line of engagement is a strong partnership between the VA and community 
health centers in areas underserved by the Veterans Health 
Administration. While current practice allows a veteran to access 
services at non-VA facilities, the process is often frustrating and 
problematic, particularly for a veteran in crisis. Protocols should be 
developed to allow VA and community clinics to process a veteran's 
request for assistance directly and immediately without requiring the 
patient to first go to a VA medical facility.
    Beyond that, we believe that VA Readjustment Counseling Centers, 
known as VA Centers, must serve as the clearinghouse for information 
that steers combat veterans in crisis to appropriate assistance in 
their communities, not just to VA services. Housing assistance 
referrals, financial counseling, access to legal aid, family 
counseling, identifying educational and employment opportunities--all 
of these are critical in any campaign to prevent homelessness. We know 
that is the goal of VA Centers, but some serve better than others. This 
is where the battle to prevent homelessness among OIF/OEF veterans will 
be won, and we encourage the VA and Congress to ensure adequate funding 
and training to guarantee their success.
In Summation:
    The homeless veteran assistance movement is now 20 years old, but 
most of the historic achievements of the broad coalition now engaged in 
the campaign to end veteran homelessness have occurred in just the last 
six years. The partnership between the VA, Department of Labor, and the 
community-based organizations we represent has exceeded the most 
ambitious expectations of our founders, many of whom are still serving 
military veterans in crisis.
    With the leadership of this Committee, we have developed a national 
network of programs and service providers that saves lives and offers 
hope to hundreds of thousands of veterans each year. We know what 
works, and you have provided us with the means to guide these deserving 
men and women to a future of promise and opportunity.
    NCHV believes it is now time to take the next step in the campaign 
to end veteran homelessness. Developing a strategy that addresses the 
health and economic challenges of OIF/OEF veterans--before they are 
threatened with homelessness--should be a national priority. Never 
before in U.S. history has this Nation, during a time of war, concerned 
itself with preventing veteran homelessness. For all our collective 
accomplishments, this may yet be our finest moment.

                                 
           COMMUNITY HOMELESSNESS ASSESSMENT, LOCAL EDUCATION
              AND NETWORKING GROUP (CHALENG) FOR VETERANS
            THE FOURTEENTH ANNUAL PROGRESS REPORT ON PUBLIC
         LAW 105-114, SERVICES FOR HOMELESS VETERANS ASSESSMENT
                            AND COORDINATION
                           February 28, 2008
    John H. Kuhn, LCSW, MPH, National CHALENG Coordinator, VA New 
Jersey Health Care System, Lyons, NJ
    John Nakashima, Ph.D., Program Analyst, Community Care, West Los 
Angeles Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA

                            ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

    The CHALENG for Veterans project continues to be successful because 
of the work done by each of the CHALENG points of contact (POCs) who 
are listed in Appendix 8. The dedication of VA staffs and their 
community counterparts are often the difference between life and death 
for the homeless veterans found on our city streets and country back 
roads. Their tireless efforts to improve the lives of our veterans 
often go unrecognized and unappreciated. To each of these marvelous, 
caring, gentle, and hardworking persons, we say THANK YOU!
    We would like to thank Paul Smits, the Associate Chief Consultant, 
Homeless and Residential Rehabilitation and Treatment Services, for his 
assistance in the preparation of this report, and his leadership in 
addressing the health care needs of homeless veterans. We thank Peter 
Dougherty, Director of Homeless Programs Office for VA, for his endless 
dedication to the care of our Nation's homeless veterans. Paul and 
Pete's support, feedback and guidance to Project CHALENG are 
immeasurable.
    We would like to also thank Dr. Robert Rosenheck, Director of the 
Northeast Program Evaluation Center (NEPEC) at the VA Connecticut 
Healthcare System, West Haven, Connecticut, who provides valuable 
consultation to the CHALENG process. Aiki Atkinson, Research Assistant, 
scanned in and proofed over 9,000 CHALENG Participant Surveys for this 
report. Janice Gibson, Homeless Veteran Analyst, located at the VA 
Medical Center, Perry Point, Maryland, provided final document 
preparation for printing. Chelsea Watson, Program Specialist from VA's 
Homeless Providers Grant and Per Diem Program, provided technical 
assistance in the creation and maintenance of the CHALENG Web site 
which posts the most recent CHALENG report. Rhonda Simmons, 
Administrative Assistant for Project CHALENG, provided immeasurable 
support to the coordinator and to the entire CHALENG process. Thanks to 
all these people who make this process work so well.
    Finally, a special thanks to Dr. Jim McGuire who since 1997 was the 
lead CHALENG evaluator and researcher. Jim was instrumental in 
developing the current methodology and format for the annual CHALENG 
report. He set a high standard for us all.

John Kuhn
John Nakashima
February 28, 2008
                               __________
                         C O N T E N T S

_________________________________________________________________

                                                                   Page

Executive Summary................................................    52
Introduction.....................................................    53
Results from the Annual CHALENG Survey...........................    54
CHALENG Survey Respondents.......................................    54
Table 1. CHALENG Community Provider Respondent Function, FY 2007.    55
Table 2. VA Providers (staff), FY 2007...........................    55
Table 3. Years of Community Provider Involvement in CHALENG, FY      55
  2007.
Table 4. Consumer (Homeless Veteran) Status......................    56
Needs of Homeless Veterans.......................................    56
Table 5. Met and Unmet Needs of Homeless Veterans (All               56
  individuals who completed 2007, 2006 CHALENG Participant 
  Surveys).
Table 6. Top Ten Highest Unmet Needs Identified by Homeless          60
  Veterans, FY 2005-FY 2007.
Table 7. Top Ten Highest Unmet Needs Identified by VA and            60
  Community Providers, FY 2005-FY 2007.
Table 8. Top Ten Highest Met Needs Identified by Homeless            60
  Veterans, FY 2005-FY 2007.
Table 9. Top Ten Highest Met Needs Identified by VA and Community    61
  Providers, FY 2005-FY 2007.
Site Estimates of Numbers of Homeless Veterans and Housing           62
  Capacity.
Table 10. Bed Capacity and Bed Need Assessment...................    64
Table 11. Community Providers Respondent Ratings of Partnership      65
  Integration in CHALENG Participant Survey, FY 2006 and FY 2007.
Table 12. Community Provider Respondent Ratings of Partnership       65
  Implementation.
Table 13: Percentage of Point of Contacts (POCs) Indicating          66
  Interagency Collaborative Agreements with Select Program Types.
Table 14. New Interagency Collaborative Agreements and Outreach      67
  Sites for FY 2007.
Table 15: Subject of New Interagency Collaborative Agreements        68
  Between VA and Community Providers, FY 2007.
Table 16. Number of Veterans Served Through New Interagency          69
  Collaborative Agreements, FY 2007.
POC Action Plans.................................................    70
Figure 1. Top Needs Selected for POCs to Address for FY 2007.....    70
Figure 2. Outcomes for Top Ten FY 2007 Action Plan Topics with       70
  Percentages of POC Sites that were Successful.
Figure 3. Needs Selected For FY 2008 Plans.......................    72
Update on CHALENG Activities.....................................    72
Summary..........................................................    73

Appendices [will be retained in the Committee files.]
Appendix 1: 2007 CHALENG Needs Score by VA Facility--Provider (VA 
    and Community) Assessment
Appendix 2: 2007 CHALENG Needs Score by VA Facility--Consumer 
    (Homeless Veteran) Assessment
Appendix 3: 2007 CHALENG Needs Score by Network
Appendix 4: 2007 CHALENG Integration/Implementation Scores by VA 
    Facility--Community Providers Assessment
Appendix 5: FY 2007 Estimated Number of Homeless Veterans and 
    Information Sources by VISN and VA--POC Site Assessment
Appendix 6: VA Community Initiatives: Status of FY 2007 Action 
    Plans Addressing Homeless Veterans Needs
Appendix 7: Agencies Recognized for Assisting in Implementing FY 
    2007 Action Plans
Appendix 8: Points of Contact by VISN
    Fiscal Year (FY) 2007 Community Homelessness Assessment, Local 
     Education and Networking Groups for Veterans (CHALENG) Report
Executive Summary
    Since 1993, the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) has 
collaborated with local communities across the United States in Project 
CHALENG for Veterans. The vision of CHALENG is to bring together 
consumers, providers, advocates, local officials and other concerned 
citizens to identify the needs of homeless veterans and then work to 
meet those needs through planning and cooperative action.
    As in previous years, data collected during the FY 2007 CHALENG 
process are from questionnaires completed by VA staff, community 
providers, and homeless veterans. However, this year's CHALENG 
introduced a consumer specific survey. This effort is designed to 
empower consumers as active participants in the design and delivery of 
homeless services. Their involvement is consistent with the VA's 
recovery oriented approach to the delivery of mental health services. 
Judging by the level of participation in this year's CHALENG process, 
this change has been greeted enthusiastically. The following are 
highlights of the FY 2007 CHALENG report:

[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]



      Participation was excellent.
        There were 9,132 respondents to the FY 2007 Participant 
Survey, a 99 percent increase from the previous year, which had a total 
of 4,578 participants.
        Over half (55 percent) of the 2007 participants 
(n=5,046) were homeless or formerly homeless veterans. Consumer 
involvement went from 927 participants in 2006 to 5,046 participants in 
2007, a fourfold increase.

      Need remains high.
        It is estimated that on any given night there are 
approximately 154,000 homeless veterans. This is based on point-in-time 
estimates reported by the CHALENG points of contact (POCs). POCs are 
usually local VA homeless program coordinators from around the country.
        The number of accessible beds increased between FY 2006 
and FY 2007 from 72,196 to 73,430 emergency beds; 40,599 to 47,891 
transitional beds; and 31,724 to 35,941 permanent beds (these beds are 
often not veteran specific and are also open to the general homeless 
population). The estimated number of additional beds required to meet 
existing needs decreased for emergency and transitional housing, but 
increased for permanent housing.

      VA/Community partnerships continue to yield outcomes.
        87 percent of POC sites that had a nearby Department of 
Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Continuum of Care planning group 
participated in it.
        543 new interagency collaborative agreements between VA 
and community agencies were developed in FY 2007. Veterans received 
dental care, eye care, and mental health/substance abuse treatment as a 
result of these agreements.
        377 new outreach sites were served in FY 2007.
        98 POC sites (71 percent of all sites) reported seeing 
a total of 1,038 homeless veteran families. This was a 5-percent 
increase over the previous year of 989 families served.
        Preliminary data from the VA Northeast Program 
Evaluation Center from FY 2005 through FY 2007 suggests that the 
overall rate of homelessness among Operation Enduring Freedom (OEF) and 
Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF) veterans is 1.8 percent (unpublished 
data, NEPEC). Since OEF/OIF veterans represent about three percent of 
the overall veterans' population, they appear to be underrepresented in 
the homeless veteran population. However, as CHALENG POCs have 
prioritized services to this group, they indicate that more outreach, 
housing, and services are needed to help homeless veterans who recently 
served in Afghanistan and Iraq.
        POCs reported on their successes with their FY 2007 
action plans. Several local housing projects are increasing capacity 
for homeless veterans.
        CHALENG POC action plans for FY 2008 addressed priority 
needs such as permanent, transitional, and emergency housing, job 
finding, transportation, job training, re-entry services for 
incarcerated veterans, VA disability/pension, psychiatric services, and 
dental care.
        Dental care, which was cited by homeless veterans as 
one of the top 3 unmet needs for the past 4 years, dropped to 12th 
place. It seems reasonable to conclude that the Homeless Veterans 
Dental Program (HVDP), begun in 2006, has had a major impact. In FY 
2007, it is estimated that HVDP provided treatment to 7,666 eligible 
veterans at 129 CHALENG sites.
Introduction
    In 1993, VA launched Project CHALENG for Veterans. CHALENG is a 
program designed to enhance the continuum of services for homeless 
veterans provided by the local VA medical center and regional office 
and their surrounding community service agencies. The guiding principle 
behind Project CHALENG is that no single agency can provide the full 
spectrum of services required to help homeless veterans reach their 
potential as productive, self-sufficient citizens. Project CHALENG 
fosters coordinated services by bringing VA together with community 
agencies and other Federal, state, and local government programs to 
raise awareness of homeless veterans' needs and to plan to meet those 
needs. This helps improve homeless veterans' access to all types of 
services and eliminate duplication of efforts.
    The legislation guiding this initiative is contained in Public Laws 
102-405, 103-446 and 105-114. The specific legislative requirements 
relating to Project CHALENG are that local VA medical center and 
regional office directors:

      assess the needs of homeless veterans living in the area,
      make assessments in coordiNation with representatives 
from state and local governments, appropriate Federal departments and 
agencies and non-governmental community organizations that serve the 
homeless population,
      identify the needs of homeless veterans with a focus on 
healthcare, education, training, employment, shelter, counseling, and 
outreach,
      assess the extent to which homeless veterans' needs are 
being met,
      develop a list of all homeless services in the local 
area,
      encourage the development of coordinated services,
      take action to meet the needs of homeless veterans,
      inform homeless veterans of non-VA resources that are 
available in the community to meet their needs.

    At the local level, VA medical centers and regional offices 
designate CHALENG POCs who are responsible for the above requirements. 
These CHALENG POCs, usually local VA homeless program coordinators, 
work with local agencies throughout the year to coordinate services for 
homeless veterans.
    CHALENG was designed to be an ongoing assessment process that 
described the needs of homeless veterans and identifies the barriers 
they face to successful community re-entry. In the current report, data 
was compiled from 9,132 respondents including, 5,046 survey responses 
that were completed by homeless or formerly homeless veterans. The 
CHALENG process is the only ongoing comprehensive national effort to 
poll VA staff, community providers and consumers about the needs of 
homeless veterans. The results have assisted VA to identify specific 
interventions needed to effectively assist homeless veterans. In recent 
years, there have been several new VA initiatives based in part on 
input from CHALENG, including:

      The Homeless Veterans Dental Program (HVDP) that has 
greatly expanded access to care and ending dental services as a top 10 
unmet need among homeless veterans.
      The Healthcare for Re-Entry Veterans Program (HCRV), that 
is designed to help transition former veteran inmates back into the 
community.
      A demonstration project to help homeless veterans obtain 
eyeglasses.
      Continued expansion of the VA Grant and Per Diem 
transitional housing program.
      A major expansion of the HUD VA Supported Housing program 
(HUD-VASH), which will make thousands of new permanent housing vouchers 
and case management services available to homeless veterans.

    The annual CHALENG report is an important source of information on 
homeless veterans for policymakers. Copies are routinely distributed to 
Members of the House and Senate Veterans' Affairs Committees and 
Appropriation Committees. The report is also used by VA Central Office 
to respond to media inquiries about homeless veterans. The report helps 
to keep homeless veteran issues present in the minds of Federal 
officials and the general public.
    Finally, the CHALENG process has helped build thousands of 
relationships with community agencies, veterans groups, law enforcement 
agencies, and Federal, state, and local government. Local annual 
CHALENG meetings, where attendees complete the Participant Survey, 
represent important opportunities for VA, and public and private agency 
representatives to meet, network, and eventually develop meaningful 
partnerships to better serve homeless veterans.
Results from the Annual CHALENG Survey
    This Fourteenth Annual Progress Report on Public Law 105-114 
(Project CHALENG) is based on data collected from two surveys:
  1. The CHALENG POC Survey:
    This survey, distributed to POCs only, is a self-administered 
questionnaire requesting information on the needs of homeless veterans 
in the local service area, development of new partnerships with local 
agencies, and progress in creating/securing new housing and treatment 
for homeless veterans.
  2. The CHALENG Participant Survey:
    This survey is distributed by each POC at his or her local CHALENG 
meeting to: various Federal, state, county, city, non-profit and for-
profit agency representatives that serve the homeless in the POC's 
local service area; local VA medical center, Vet Center, VA regional 
office staffs; and to homeless and formerly homeless veterans. The 
self-administered survey requests information on the needs of homeless 
veterans in the local service area, and rates VA and community provider 
collaboration. There are two versions of the CHALENG Participant 
Survey: one for VA staff and community providers, officials, and 
volunteers, and a new homeless veteran version for 2007. The homeless 
veteran version is tailored for homeless veterans and includes only 
those questions pertinent to consumers and omits those questions 
appropriate only for providers.
CHALENG Survey Respondents
CHALENG Point of Contact Survey Respondents
    Point of Contact survey questionnaires were mailed to all 
designated CHALENG POCs. Out of 138 POC sites, 138 (100 percent) were 
returned.
CHALENG Participant Survey Respondents
    There were 9,132 respondents for the 2007 Participant Survey, 
nearly double (a 99 percent increase) the 4,578 respondents in 2006. Of 
the 9,132 respondents, 1,331 were VA providers (staff) and 3,409 were 
community providers/advocates (agency staff, local officials, 
interested individuals), and 4,392 respondents indicated no agency 
affiliation (many of these respondents were homeless veterans). Twenty-
one percent of community providers who represented an agency said their 
agency was ``faith-based.''
    There were 4,666 Participant Survey respondents who identified 
themselves as homeless veterans (51 percent of all participants) and 
380 participants identified themselves as formerly homeless veterans (4 
percent of the total sample). Collectively, consumers (homeless and 
formerly homeless veterans) represented 55 percent of all Participant 
Survey respondents. Consumer involvement went from 927 participants in 
2006 to 5,046 participants in 2007, an increase of 447 percent.
    Community provider respondents were asked to designate their 
organizational titles in the survey (see Table 1). As in prior years, 
survey respondents represented a range of service functions from top-
level executives and policymakers to line-level service providers.

    Table 1--CHALENG Community Provider Respondent Function, FY 2007
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                               Community Participants
                                                      (n=3,409)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Local service agency top managers                                   17%
 (Executive Directors, Chief Executive
 Officers)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mid-level managers, supervisors and                                 34%
 advocates (program coordinators, veteran
 service officers)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Clinicians and outreach workers (social                             30%
 workers, case managers, nurses)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Elected government officials or their                                1%
 representatives
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Board Members                                                        2%
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Other (financial officers, attorneys,                               16%
 office staff, planning staff, etc.)
------------------------------------------------------------------------


    VA representation in the Participant Survey was mainly through VA 
Medical Centers (see Table 2 below).

                 Table 2--VA Providers (staff), FY 2007
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 VA Agency                       VA Staff (n=1,331)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
VA Medical Center/Healthcare System staff                           75%
------------------------------------------------------------------------
VA Regional Office staff                                             4%
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Vet Center staff                                                     8%
------------------------------------------------------------------------
VA Outpatient Clinic staff                                          12%
------------------------------------------------------------------------
VA Other (National Cemetery                                          1%
 Administration, Central Office and VISN
 staff)
------------------------------------------------------------------------


    Community provider respondents were asked how long they had been 
personally involved in CHALENG (see Table 3). Over one-third (35 
percent) of the participants had been involved with CHALENG for at 
least 2 years or more. This suggests the maintenance of long-time 
relationships between VA and community providers.

  Table 3--Years of Community Provider Involvement in CHALENG, FY 2007
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                               Community Participants
         Involved in CHALENG . . .                    (n=3,409)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Since first local CHALENG meeting (12                                5%
 years ago)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Two to eleven years ago                                             30%
------------------------------------------------------------------------
One year ago                                                        10%
------------------------------------------------------------------------
First time today                                                    55%
------------------------------------------------------------------------


    Homeless veterans who participated in CHALENG came from many 
different stages in their recovery process (see Table 4 below). Over 
one-fifth (21 percent) were literally homeless (many of these veterans 
were contacted in initial outreach and Stand Down events). Nearly 
three-quarters (72 percent) were in a transitional housing program such 
as the VA Domiciliary or a VA Grant and Per Diem program. Seven percent 
were maintaining themselves in permanent housing (e.g., apartment, 
single room occupancy) in the community.

               Table 4--Consumer (Homeless Veteran) Status
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Where Homeless Veteran CHALENG Participant        Homeless Veterans
                  is Living                           (n=4,666)*
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Literally Homeless (on streets, in shelter,                         21%
 care)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
In VA Domiciliary                                                   26%
------------------------------------------------------------------------
In VA Grant and Per Diem or other                                   46%
 Transitional housing program
------------------------------------------------------------------------
In Permanent Housing (including Section 8                            7%
 Housing)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*753 of the homeless veteran participants did not indicate a residence


    Many homeless veteran CHALENG participants have been chronically 
homeless. Over half of the veterans (53 percent) had experienced 
homelessness at some time in their life for over a 1-year period. Over 
one-third (38 percent) had suffered four episodes of homelessness in 
the past 3 years.
Needs of Homeless Veterans
Rankings of Needs by All Participant Survey Respondents
    Participant Survey respondents were asked to rate how well pre-
identified homeless veteran service needs were met in their community, 
using a five-point scale ranging from ``Not Met'' (1) to ``Met'' (5). 
Table 5 shows the results for the entire sample of respondents for 2007 
(n=9,132) as well as the previous year.

 Table 5--Met and Unmet Needs of Homeless Veterans (All individuals who completed 2007, 2006 CHALENG Participant
                                                    Surveys)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                   Average Score*      Average Score*      2006
                   Need of homeless veterans                       2007 (n=9,132)      2006 (n=4,578)      Rank
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. TB testing (highest ``met'' need score)                                   3.97                3.68        3
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. Medical services                                                          3.93                3.76        1
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 3. Food                                                                      3.89                3.73        2
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 4. Treatment for substance abuse                                             3.79                3.50        8
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 5. Hepatitis C testing                                                       3.76                3.60        4
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 6. Help with medication                                                      3.71                3.44        9
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 7. Personal hygiene (shower, haircut, etc.)                                  3.68                3.42       11
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 8. AIDS/HIV testing/counseling                                               3.67                3.50        7
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 9. Clothing                                                                  3.64                3.59        5
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
10. TB treatment                                                              3.61                3.54        6
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
11. Detoxification from substances                                            3.60                3.32       14
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
12. Services for emotional or psychiatric problems                            3.59                3.43       10
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
13. Spiritual                                                                 3.53                3.37       13
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
14. Emergency (immediate) shelter                                             3.48                3.25       16
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
15. Help getting needed documents or I.D.                                     3.43                3.28       15
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
16. Treatment for dual diagnosis                                              3.39                3.25       18
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
17. Transitional living facility or halfway house                             3.31                3.02       25
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
18. Help with transportation                                                  3.24                3.01       26
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
19. Help with finding a job or getting employment                             3.22                3.20       19
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
20. Eye care                                                                  3.18                2.93       30
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
21. VA disability/pension                                                     3.16                3.38       12
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
22. Women's healthcare                                                        3.14                3.25       17
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
23. Glasses                                                                   3.12                2.92       31
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
24. Education                                                                 3.10                3.05       24
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
25. Drop-in center or day program                                             3.06                2.98       29
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
26. Help managing money                                                       3.03                2.86       32
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
27. Job training                                                              3.03                3.09       20
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
28. Family counseling                                                         3.01                2.98       28
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
29. Elder healthcare                                                          2.99                3.07       21
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
30. Discharge upgrade                                                         2.97                3.01       27
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
31. SSI/SSD process                                                           2.93                3.07       22
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
32. Dental care                                                               2.84                2.64       36
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
33. Welfare payments                                                          2.81                3.05       23
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
34. Legal assistance                                                          2.80                2.78       34
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
35. Guardianship (financial)                                                  2.77                2.83       33
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
36. Re-entry services for incarcerated veterans                               2.76                2.71       35
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
37. Long-term, permanent housing                                              2.57                2.46       38
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
38. Child care (highest ``unmet'' need score)                                 2.48                2.47       37
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*Need is met = score of 5
*Need is unmet = score of 1


    For FY 2007, Table 5 indicates that child care, long-term, 
permanent housing, re-entry services for incarcerated veterans, 
guardianship (financial), legal assistance, welfare payments, dental 
care, Supplemental Security Income/Social Security Disability (SSI/SSD) 
process, discharge upgrade, and elder healthcare were the ten highest 
unmet needs for homeless veterans as determined by all participants 
combined. It is important to note that there are significant 
differences between survey responses from homeless veterans and other 
participants. These differences are discussed on page 11, ``Consumer 
versus Provider Views on Homeless Veteran Needs.''
    Child care has been one of the highest unmet needs for several 
years. While large numbers of veterans do not need child care, when the 
need for child care is present, it is a particularly compelling and 
difficult-to-meet need and thus has consistently ranked high among 
unmet needs identified through CHALENG. Also, even though most homeless 
veterans are noncustodial parents, they remain deeply concerned about 
their children's care. In many cases, these veterans struggle with the 
knowledge that their absence has contributed to their children living 
in single-parent households, under the care of extended family, or 
being placed in foster care. As VA cannot directly serve a veteran's 
children, arranging family services is necessarily split between 
multiple agencies. Coordinating such care may prove difficult. However, 
with the recent expansion of the cooperative program between VA and 
HUD, thousands of Section 8 vouchers will soon be made available to 
veterans and their immediate families. CHALENG will track the impact of 
this program not only for its effect on permanent housing as an unmet 
need, but also for its potential impact on child care concerns.
    The need for long-term, permanent housing still remains high. This 
is not surprising, since developing this type of housing is expensive 
and time consuming, although local communities have been successful in 
creating permanent beds for homeless veterans. (Please see the 11th 
annual CHALENG report section ``Special Focus: Addressing Long-term, 
Permanent Housing Need in 2004 Action Plan'' for more discussion.)
    Guardianship (Financial), SSI/SSD) process, discharge upgrade, and 
welfare payments represent a cluster of needs. Those needs, if 
addressed adequately, can make a homeless veteran more economically 
viable and able to transition out of homelessness. Recent literature 
supports the need for more and better management of financial 
resources. In 2006, the national average rent of studio/efficiency 
apartments of $633 (O'Hara et al., 2006) was beyond the means of a 
disabled person whose primary source of income was SSI or a VA pension. 
Income assistance either through entitlements, subsidized housing, or 
vocational training will continue to play an important part in keeping 
veterans out of homelessness.
    Legal issues can often play a role in a veteran's finances. Credit 
problems and obligations stemming from debts, fines, and child support 
can prove especially burdensome, particularly for those recently 
released from prison. The typical incarcerated parent owes $20,000 in 
child support when released from prison, with payment schedules 
averaging $225 to $300 per month (Turetsky, 2007). Minimum wage workers 
have little hope of making these payments while supporting themselves 
in independent community living. Unresolved debts can result in liens 
against bank accounts, denial of credit, inability to secure a lease, 
failure in background checks commonly a part of job applications, 
forfeiture of driver's licenses, and ultimately re-arrest. In order to 
generate income without having funds garnished, these workers may enter 
the underground economy where income is often generated by involvement 
in illegal activities. Hence, legal assistance is one key to helping 
veterans meet their obligations to society, while still having the 
means to avoid relapsing to homelessness.
    Re-entry services for incarcerated veterans was a needs category 
introduced in the FY 2005 report and has made it to the top ten unmet 
needs list the past 3 years. Providing pre-release planning and after-
release services for incarcerated veterans is receiving increasing 
attention throughout the VA system. In FY 2007, VA launched its 
Healthcare for Re-entry Veterans (HCRV) Program. VA has designated a 
national HCRV Coordinator and has funded a Re-entry Specialist for each 
Veteran Integrated Services Network (VISN). The HCRV Coordinator and 
the Re-entry Specialists will establish working relationships with 
correctional institutions, to provide outreach services and follow-up 
linkages to VA and non-VA social, medical, and psychiatric services to 
veterans within 6 months of release to the community. In FY 2008, an 
additional 17 Re-entry Specialists have been funded to expand this 
effort.
    Dental care was the seventh highest unmet need, as identified by 
all survey participants, for homeless veterans this year. This marks a 
continued decline as it had been ranked second in 2004 and third in the 
previous 2 years. (NOTE: Homeless veterans surveyed no longer rate 
dental care as a top ten unmet need). VA medical centers have reported 
that more dental care services have been provided for homeless 
veterans. The HVDP offers medically necessary treatment to homeless 
veterans who have been in a VA-approved transitional housing or 
residential program for at least 60 consecutive days, and has had a 
significant impact. For FY 2007, 93 percent of CHALENG sites (129) 
indicated the HVDP was operational at their local VA medical center 
(some sites do not have qualifying VA transitional housing or 
residential programs). These CHALENG sites reported a total of 10,507 
veterans who needed dental care and were eligible for care because they 
had fulfilled residential treatment requirements. Of these 10,507 
individuals, 7,666 received care (73 percent of total) either through 
VA Dental Services or a community provider.
    For the first time, elder healthcare made the top ten list of 
highest unmet needs for homeless veterans. This may reflect the aging 
of the homeless veteran population. In FY 2007, 5 percent of all 
veterans accepted in VA homeless programs nationwide were 65 or older 
(U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, 2007). Currently, the average age 
of homeless veterans who receive VA services is 51 and this mean age 
has increased slowly over the past few years.
Highest Met Needs
    Turning to highest met needs as rated by the provider sample, many 
of the top ten categories were health services-related: Tuberculosis 
(TB) testing, medical services, substance abuse treatment, Hepatitis C 
testing, help with medication, HIV/AIDS testing/counseling and TB 
treatment. Most of these services are routinely offered by VA medical 
centers. Food, personal hygiene services, and clothing are basic needs 
addressed at virtually all homeless shelters and programs.
Consumer versus Provider Views on Homeless Veteran Needs
    Past CHALENG reports routinely compared need rankings of VA staff 
and community partners (i.e., local agency staff, public officials, 
volunteers, and community leaders). Due to the unprecedented number of 
homeless veterans involved in this year's CHALENG survey, however, it 
was believed it would be more meaningful to focus on comparing the need 
rankings of consumers (current and former homeless veterans) and 
providers (i.e., VA and community participants).
    In Tables 6 and 7, the ten highest unmet needs of homeless veterans 
as ranked by homeless and formerly homeless veterans are compared to 
the rankings by VA and community providers.
    For 2007, there are differences between homeless and formerly 
homeless veterans identification of highest unmet needs compared to 
service provider participants. Providers rank dental care as the third 
highest unmet need, homeless veterans--who for years identified dental 
care as a top ten unmet need--now rank it at #12 (not shown in the 
table). This suggests that rankings by providers may sometimes be 
``trailing indicators,'' reflecting beliefs that are no longer 
experienced by consumers.
    Unlike other respondents, homeless and formerly homeless veterans 
placed welfare payment, SSI/SSDI process, VA disability/pension and 
discharge upgrade in the top ten list of highest unmet needs. 
Thematically, this suggests the personal desire of veterans to secure 
financial resources in transitioning off the streets. Also, homeless 
and formerly homeless veterans placed elder healthcare in the list of 
top ten unmet needs, which may reflect a growing awareness of about the 
impact of the aging process.
    Homeless and formerly homeless veterans agreed with the CHALENG 
community participants that the following were among the top unmet 
needs: permanent housing, re-entry services for incarcerated veterans, 
and financial guardianship.
A Multi-year Overview of Needs
    Reviewing Tables 6 and 7, there is some concurrence between the 
views of homeless and formerly homeless veterans and other CHALENG 
participants across years. Long-term permanent housing, legal 
assistance, and child care rank among the top ten unmet needs for all 
participants from FY 2005-2007.
    It is noteworthy that homeless and formerly homeless veterans 
differ from providers in naming financial and legal needs as a major 
concern. They rate these needs more highly than the providers surveyed 
during the 2007 CHALENG process. Further, many of these needs have 
risen in rank on the consumer's list of top ten unmet needs between FY 
2006 and FY 2007. Consumers rank five financial and legal issues in the 
top ten: welfare payments (the number two unmet need), financial 
guardianship at four (up from five in 2006), SSI/SSDI at five (up from 
seven), legal assistance at seven (up from eight), and VA disability/
pension at the eighth ranked need (not on the top ten unmet need list 
for FY 2005 or FY 2006).
    Broadly, it suggests that consumers believe that having more 
personal resources is important in leaving homelessness. By contrast, 
providers are more likely to rank services such as eye care, glasses 
and help managing money among the top unmet needs. These results 
reflect an interesting difference in perspective between consumers and 
providers.
    In terms of highest met needs, homeless and formerly homeless 
veterans and other participants placed medical services, TB testing, 
Hepatitis C testing, substance abuse treatment, and food in the top ten 
list in FY 2005, FY 2006, and FY 2007 (see Tables 8 and 9). As 
mentioned previously, such medical and basic need services are usually 
addressed by VA or community providers.
      3-Year Comparison--Consumer and Provider (VA and Community)
               Assessment of Homeless Veteran UNMET Needs

              Table 6--Top Ten Highest Unmet Needs Identified by Homeless Veterans, FY 2005-FY 2007
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                       2005                                      2006                           2007
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. Child care                                                     1. Child care                  1. Child care
 2. Dental care                                              2. Welfare payments            2. Welfare payments
 3. Welfare payments                                              3. Dental care                            3. Long-term, permanent
 4. Legal assistance                                                         4. Long-term, permanent    housing
 5. Long-term, permanent housing                                         housing    4. Guardianship (financial)
 6. Re-entry services for incarcerated veterans      5. Guardianship (financial)             5. SSI/SSD process
 7. Guardianship (financial)                            6. Re-entry services for       6. Re-entry services for
 8. Discharge upgrade                                      incarcerated veterans          incarcerated veterans
 9. SSI/SSD process                                           7. SSI/SSD process                            7. Legal assistance
10. Job Training                                                             8. Legal  8. VA Disability/Pension
                                                            9. Discharge upgrade           9. Discharge upgrade
                                                           10. Family counseling           10. Elder healthcare
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


         Table 7--Top Ten Highest Unmet Needs Identified by VA and Community Providers, FY 2005-FY 2007
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                       2005                                      2006                           2007
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. Long-term, permanent housing                                             1. Long-term, permanent        1. Long-term, permanent
 2. Child care                                                           housing                        housing
 3. Dental care                                                    2. Child care                  2. Child care
 4. Re-entry services for incarcerated veterans                   3. Dental care                 3. Dental care
 5. Legal assistance                                    4. Re-entry services for       4. Re-entry services for
 6. Help managing money                                    incarcerated veterans          incarcerated veterans
 7. Glasses                                                                  5. Legal assistance            5. Legal assistance
 8. Eye care                                              6. Help managing money         6. Help managing money
 9. Guardianship (financial)                         7. Guardianship (financial)    7. Guardianship (financial)
10. Transportation                                                    8. Glasses                     8. Glasses
                                                                     9. Eye care                    9. Eye care
                                                         10. Transitional living        10. Transitional living
                                                       facility or halfway house      facility or halfway house
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

      3-Year Comparison--Consumer and Provider (VA and Community)
                Assessment of Homeless Veteran MET Needs

               Table 8--Top Ten Highest Met Needs Identified by Homeless Veterans, FY 2005-FY 2007
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                       2005                                      2006                           2007
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. Medical services                                         1. Medical services                  1. TB testing
 2. Substance abuse treatment                                      2. TB testing    2. Substance abuse treatment
 3. TB testing                                       3. Substance abuse treatment           3. Medical Services
 4. Food                                                                 4. Food                        4. Food
 5. Help with medication                                 5. Help with medication        5. Help with medication
 6. Hepatitis C testing                                   6. Hepatitis C testing            6. Personal hygiene
 7. Detoxification                                           7. Personal hygiene         7. Hepatitis C testing
 8. Personal hygiene                                           8. Detoxification              8. Detoxification
 9. Services for emotional or psychiatric problems   9. Services for emotional or          9. AIDS/HIV testing/
10. TB treatment                                            psychiatric problems                     counseling
                                                           10. AIDS/HIV testing/   10. Services for emotional or
                                                                      counseling           psychiatric problems
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


          Table 9--Top Ten Highest Met Needs Identified by VA and Community Providers, FY 2005-FY 2007
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                       2005                                      2006                           2007
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. Food                                                     1. Medical services            1. Medical services
 2. Medical services                                                     2. Food                        2. Food
 3. TB testing                                                     3. TB testing                  3. TB testing
 4. Clothing                                                         4. Clothing                    4. Clothing
 5. Hepatitis C testing                                   5. Hepatitis C testing         5. Hepatitis C testing
 6. TB treatment                                                 6. TB treatment                6. TB treatment
 7. VA disability/pension                                   7. AIDS/HIV testing/           7. AIDS/HIV testing/
 8. AIDS/HIV testing/counseling                                       counseling                     counseling
 9. Substance abuse treatment                           8. VA disability/pension       8. VA disability/pension
10. Services for emotional or psychiatric problems   9. Substance abuse treatment   9. Substance abuse treatment
                                                    10. Services for emotional or      10. Help with medication
                                                            psychiatric problems
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Homeless Veterans with Families
    CHALENG sites continue to report increases in the number of 
homeless veterans with families (i.e., dependent children) being served 
at their programs. Ninety-eight POC sites (71 percent of all sites) 
reported a total of 1,038 homeless veteran families seen. This was a 5-
percent increase over the previous year's 989 homeless veteran 
families.
    Homeless veterans with dependents present a challenge to VA 
homeless programs. Many VA housing programs are veteran-specific. VA 
homeless workers must often find other community housing resources to 
place the entire family or the dependent children separately. Access to 
family housing through the distribution of the thousands of new Section 
8 vouchers that will be made available through the HUD-VASH, will offer 
an important new resource allowing VA staff to assist the veteran and 
his family.
Homeless Veterans Returning from Afghanistan and Iraq
    For the first time, CHALENG asked POCs about the coordiNation and 
provision of services to homeless veterans who have served in Operation 
Enduring Freedom and Operation Iraqi Freedom (OEF/OIF). Ninety-five 
percent (95%) of the POCs said they have coordinated the care of OEF/
OIF homeless veterans with their local VA medical center Transition 
Patient Advocate. The Transition Patient Advocate is usually a social 
worker case manager assigned to work with recently returning veterans.
    Eighty-five percent of sites said they could provide same-day 
housing (emergency or transitional) to homeless OEF/OIF veterans. The 
most common reasons for those sites not able to provide same-day 
housing included: insufficient emergency or transitional housing 
available, long wait lists (33 percent of sites that could not provide 
same-day housing), or no housing available on site (also 33 percent).
    CHALENG POCs were asked how VA could improve services for OEF/OIF 
homeless veterans. The most mentioned themes included: outreach, 
housing, and services. The following lists specific suggestions:

    Outreach: Greater use of the Internet to inform returning veterans 
about VA services; outreach to National Guard, reserve units, armories 
and Vet Centers; general community outreach (including American Indian 
reservations); more welcome home events; hiring of OEF/OIF veterans to 
serve as peer outreach workers; and use of outreach workers to follow-
up with OEF/OIF veterans to help ensure they come to their initial VA 
appointments and get ``plugged into'' the system.
    Housing: Specific housing programs targeting OEF/OIF veterans were 
frequently suggested. Such programs would be less restrictive, more 
short-term, and emphasize quicker reintegration into the community 
through mental health outpatient counseling, vocational rehabilitation 
and job-finding assistance. Some sites have noted that many OEF/OIF 
homeless veterans cannot relate to current housing programs targeting 
chronically homeless and mentally ill veterans in their fifties and 
sixties. It is expected that the influx of thousands of veteran 
specific permanent housing units made available through the HUD-VASH 
program will have an impact on this need.
    Services: More case management, mental health, and employment 
services; more programs targeting women and veterans with families; 
more rapid eligibility determination; and greater coordiNation between 
homeless programs and the local VA medical center OEF/OIF specialist.
Site Estimates of Numbers of Homeless Veterans and Housing Capacity
Introduction: Challenges to Estimating the Number of Homeless Veterans 
        in America
    Counting the number of homeless people, specifically the number of 
homeless veterans is a difficult task. There have been few systematic, 
national efforts to count the homeless. Prior to 2005, the most highly 
regarded effort took place in 1996, the National Survey of Homeless 
Assistance Providers and Clients (NSHAPC). At that time, the NSHAPC 
estimated that 23 percent of the homeless population was composed of 
veterans (Burt, 1999).
    In 2005, HUD began organizing comprehensive, national counts of 
homeless persons. This major endeavor requires local Continuums of 
Care, to conduct point-in-time counts of homeless persons. Continuums 
of Care are local bodies composed of agencies addressing homelessness. 
These point-in-time counts not only tally the number of homeless 
persons, but also seek to determine a homeless person's veteran status. 
HUD's point-in-time count now occurs every 2 years and is the only 
nationwide process to estimate homeless individuals in the U.S. This 
process began because HUD is required by the McKinney-Vento Act to 
produce ``statistically reliable, unduplicated counts or estimates of 
homeless persons in sheltered and unsheltered locations at a 1-day 
point in time (HUD, 2008).''
    In conducting the point-in-time, Continuums of Care must rely 
heavily on local organizations and volunteers. It has been observed 
that the precision of local counts varies. In 2005, over half of the 
point-in-time counts of unsheltered homeless individuals did not 
collect information on veteran status (HUD, 2007). Also, some CHALENG 
POCs reported that their local point-in-time count missed certain 
places or areas (e.g., transitional housing programs, encampments) that 
homeless veterans are known to reside.
    Another challenge is the transience of homeless persons. Even over 
a short period of time, significant changes in the homeless population 
can occur due to seasonal variation and natural disasters. As the most 
recent Annual Homeless Assessment Report from HUD acknowledged: ``There 
is no evidence that the size of the homeless population has changed 
dramatically over the past 10 years. However, given the limitations of 
the Annual Homeless Assessment Report as well as the limitations of 
earlier studies, it is not possible to make a definitive conclusion on 
the change of the homeless population'' (U.S. Department of Housing and 
Urban Development, 2007).
CHALENG FY 2007 Homeless Veteran Estimate and Sources
    Despite procedural problems in counting homeless people, it is 
believed that a good-faith effort is made through the CHALENG process 
to estimate homeless veterans annually. Such estimates are important to 
guide the allocation of existing resources and services for veterans. 
HUD's notable work in developing a more accurate count of the 
assessment of homeless veterans has allowed the VA to improve its 
CHALENG estimate.
    For this CHALENG report, each POC was asked to estimate the number 
of homeless veterans in her or his service area. For the 2007 CHALENG 
survey, instructions emphasized that POCs were to provide a point-in-
time estimate. A point-in-time estimate asks for how many homeless 
veterans are in the service area during a given day of the year. A 
point-in-time estimate is different from estimating how many homeless 
veterans are in a service area during the year. For example, a POC may 
say there are 200 homeless veterans in her service area on any given 
day (point-in-time), but there are 400 homeless veterans total who are 
in the service area sometime during the year.
    This year, for the first time, CHALENG POCs were asked to provide a 
point-in-time estimate of the homeless veterans in their service area 
on any day during the last week of January 2007. This time period was 
selected so CHALENG estimates would coincide with the homeless point-
in-time counts executed by HUD Continuums of Care nationwide. It is 
believed that CHALENG should make every effort to base their estimates 
on the local point-in-time count, as it is the only nationwide homeless 
count conducted on an ongoing basis. For the first time, all CHALENG 
point-in-time estimates were compared to local HUD point-in-time 
estimates from 2005, the most recent data readily available. If there 
was a major difference between the estimates, the CHALENG POC provided 
an explaNation of why there were differences, such as the local HUD 
point-in-time not canvassing areas with known concentrations of 
homeless veterans, or utilization of data from a local, non-HUD 
homeless count.
Findings
    The 2007 CHALENG Report estimates that on any given night, 
approximately 154,000 veterans are homeless* (see NOTE below). This 
figure is a decrease of 21 percent from the estimate 195,827 given in 
the 2006 CHALENG report. Individual site estimates are presented in 
Appendix Table 5.

          *NOTE: The CHALENG estimate includes approximately 8,000 
        veterans currently residing in VA supported transitional 
        housing. VA, as does HUD, counts residents of transitional 
        housing in the estimates of homelessness. In addition, 
        approximately 2,000 homeless veterans included in the count are 
        currently receiving treatment in VA residential care programs. 
        The vast majority of all of these veterans are placed in 
        housing when discharged from these VA residential services.

    The reduction in the reported numbers of homeless veterans may be a 
result of improved methodology. As described above, CHALENG homeless 
veteran estimates were compared to local HUD point-in-time estimates. 
As a result, many sites adjusted their homeless estimates to be more 
consistent with the local HUD point-in-time count. When adjusted upward 
to account for gaps in its unsheltered count, the 2005 HUD point-in-
time still only indicates that on any given night approximately 15 
percent of the homeless population or 112,000 people are veterans.
    However, some VA sites were able to successfully document why their 
estimates were not the same as the HUD point-in-time count. For 
example, after consultation with community providers, some sites 
reported that their local HUD point-in-time count missed particular 
areas or transitional residences where homeless veterans are known to 
congregate. Some sites had data from local non-HUD homeless counts 
which they felt were more accurate. Homeless veteran estimates by 
CHALENG POCs included the following non-HUD sources: U.S. Census data 
(10 percent); VA low-income population estimates (7 percent); local 
homeless census studies (state, county, local university, etc.) (42 
percent); VA client data (36 percent); estimates from local homeless 
community coalition/providers (59 percent); and VA staff impressions 
(52 percent). (Note: of the sites that used staff impressions in their 
estimate, 94 percent used at least one additional source.) Seventy-one 
percent of POCs used more than one source.
    In summary, it is believed the HUD point-in-time data has resulted 
in a revised CHALENG count that is more aligned with the most extensive 
homeless estimate methodology currently available, while allowing for 
adjustments of local estimates based on VA staffs' first-hand knowledge 
of their service areas.
Other Possible Factors Related to a Drop in Veteran Homelessness
    In addition to changing methods of estimation noted, two 
significant factors have likely contributed to a continuing decline in 
the estimate of homeless veterans:
  1. VA Program Interventions
    Reductions in veteran homelessness may be due in part to the 
effectiveness of VA's programs that serve homeless veterans. In the 
past decade, major VA homeless initiatives on outreach, treatment, 
residential services and vocational rehabilitation have served tens of 
thousands of veterans. For example, VA's Grant & Per Diem program, 
which had just begun in the mid-nineties when the NSHAPC estimated that 
veterans composed 23 percent of the homeless population, has over 8,500 
operational beds today. In the past year alone, 15,000 veterans were 
provided Grant and Per Diem homeless residential services and an 
additional 5,000 plus veterans were treated in specialized VA homeless 
domiciliary residential care programs.
    These programs have demonstrated remarkable success at placing and 
keeping veterans in community housing. A recent study of VA discharges 
determined that 79 percent of those leaving Grant and Per Diem and 
homeless domiciliary programs remained housed 1 year after discharge 
(McGuire, Kasprow, & Rosenheck, 2007).
  2. Changing Demographics
    The overall population of veterans continues to decline as World 
War II and Korean war-era veterans age. In 1990, there were 27.5 
million veterans, a total that has decreased to 23.5 million today. 
Similarly, there has been a substantial reduction in the number of poor 
veterans, decreasing from 3 million in 1990 to 1.8 million in 2000. 
Since most homeless veterans are poor, it is believed there has been a 
corresponding drop in the number of homeless veterans as well.
Homeless Veteran Estimate Summary
    It is not possible to determine the relative impact of these causes 
(VA program interventions, changing demographics, or methodological 
refinement) upon the reported number of homeless veterans. Despite 
recent changes in methodology, when comparing current HUD and VA 
surveys to the 1996 NSHAPC data, it does appear that a significant, 
long term reduction in the numbers of homeless veterans has occurred.
Bed Accessibility and Need
    To aid in determining the need for housing for homeless veterans, 
POCs were asked to include an estimate of the number of beds, 
emergency, transitional, and permanent beds that are accessible to 
homeless veterans in their local area. It did not ask whether the beds 
are veteran-specific. POCs were also asked to report the number of beds 
needed beyond the present capacity to meet the local needs of homeless 
veterans. (Asking only about bed capacity, how many beds that can be 
accessed, would provide an incomplete picture of bed need for homeless 
veterans. For example, there may be several homeless beds in a 
community, i.e., capacity, but if they are always full and there is a 
lengthy waiting list, extra beds would still be needed to meet homeless 
veteran demand.)

   Table 10--Bed Capacity (these beds are often not veteran specific and are also open to the general homeless
                                       population) and Bed Need Assessment
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                          Needed Beyond         Needed Beyond
           Type of Bed             Available in FY   Available in FY    Present Capacity      Present Capacity
                                        2007              2006           (est.) FY 2007        (est.) FY 2006
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Emergency                                  73,430            72,196                 8,712                14,753
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Transitional                               47,891            40,599                10,328                11,067
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Permanent                                  35,941            31,724                25,662                24,364
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


    Comparing the data from FY 2006 and FY 2007, it appears that 
existing bed capacity has increased for all three housing types. This 
increased capacity may impact on the drop in estimated need for 
emergency and transitional housing.
    Estimated need for permanent housing, however, increased slightly. 
This may reflect the maturation of VA homeless programs nationwide. As 
more veterans transition out of emergency and transitional housing 
programs, which emphasize stabilization and rehabilitation, there is a 
growing need to place them into permanent housing. The need for 
permanent housing is being addressed through the Consolidated 
Appropriations Act of 2008 which provided funding for HUD to expand the 
HUD-VASH Program. Section 8 vouchers available through HUD-VASH will be 
utilized to provide housing and supportive services for homeless 
veterans. The Consolidated Appropriations Act also directed VA to 
provide sufficient funding for case managers to accommodate the 
increase in vouchers for this program. This initiative has the 
potential to reduce permanent housing demand in future CHALENG reports.
Assessment of VA and Community Partnering
    As stated in the introduction, the CHALENG mandate is to bring VA 
and community service providers together in partnership to encourage 
the development of coordinated services for homeless veterans. For this 
year's report, we examined three indicators of VA and community 
partnership. These are: (1) partnership integration and implementation 
measures; (2) VA involvement in community homeless coalitions; and (3) 
interagency collaborative agreements.
Partnership Integration and Implementation Measures
    Since FY 2000, CHALENG has used two sets of questions to ascertain 
the level of VA/community partnering as perceived by community (non-VA) 
providers: (A) Integration measures, and (B) Implementation measures. 
The questions were adapted from the nationwide Access to Community Care 
and Effective Services and Supports study of service system integration 
for homeless clients with severe mental illness (Randolph et al., 
1997).
    For this year's CHALENG report, the Integration measures consisted 
of two questions asking community providers from the Participant Survey 
to rate the following:

    1.  VA Accessibility: accessibility of VA services to homeless 
veterans.
    2.  VA Coordination: the ability of VA to coordinate clinical 
services for homeless veterans with the community provider respondent's 
agency.

    A five-point scale was used for each item (1=not accessible, not 
committed, etc., to 5=highly accessible, highly committed, etc.).
    Implementation measures consisted of 12 items pertaining to 
concrete activities associated with VA and community partnering. 
Community provider respondents were asked to rate the level of 
implementation of the following strategies between their agency and VA:

     1.  Regular Meetings: Formal, regular meetings of VA and the 
community participant's agency to exchange information and plan.
     2.  Service Co-location: Provision of services by VA and the 
community participant's agency in one location.
     3.  Cross-training: Training of VA and the community participant 
agency's staff on each others' objectives, procedures, and services.
     4.  Interagency Agreements: Agreements between VA and the 
community participant's agency regarding collaboration, referrals, 
client information sharing, and/or coordinating services.
     5.  Client Tracking: Computer tracking system enabling VA and the 
community participant's agency to share client information.
     6.  Joint Funding: Combined/layering funding between VA and the 
community participant's agency to create new resources or services.
     7.  Standard Forms: Standardized forms that clients fill out once 
to apply for services at the local VA and the community participant's 
agency.
     8.  Joint Service Teams: Service teams comprised of staff from 
both VA and the community participant's agency to assist clients with 
multiple needs.
     9.  Combined Programs: Combined programs from VA and the community 
participant's agency under one administrative structure.
    10.  Flexible Funding: Flexible funding to promote service 
integration between VA and the community participant's agency: for 
example, funds to pay for emergency services not usually available to 
clients.
    11.  Special Waivers: Waiving requirements for funding, 
eligibility, or service delivery to reduce service barriers, promote 
access, and/or avoid service duplication.
    12.  System Coordinator: Creation of a specific staff position 
focusing on improving system integration between VA and the community 
participant's agency.

    All implementation items used the same four-point scale: 1=none (no 
steps taken to initiate implementation of the strategy), 2=low (in 
planning and/or initial minor steps taken), 3=moderate (significant 
steps taken but full implementation not achieved), and 4=high (strategy 
fully implemented).
    Table 11 shows the results of the integration ratings by community 
providers (mean scores of aggregated sites). We compared the aggregated 
integration scores of each VA facility for FY 2006 versus FY 2007. 
Using paired t-tests, we found no statistically significant difference 
in the integration scores between FY 2006 and FY 2007.

  Table 11--Community Providers Respondent Ratings of Partnership Integration in CHALENG Participant Survey, FY
                                                2006 and FY 2007
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              Community Respondents FY  Community Respondents FY
                      Integration Items                           2006 (134 sites)          2007 (134 sites)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
VA Accessibility (1=not accessible . . . 5=highly                                3.64                      3.57
 accessible)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
VA Service CoordiNation (1=not able to coordinate . . .                          3.63                      3.58
 5=highly able)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


    Implementation scores for FY 2006 and FY 2007 were also reviewed. 
Again, data were aggregated by site and paired t-tests were conducted 
(see Table 12). There was one significant difference (p<.01): the 
implementation score for cross-training decreased from 2006 to 2007.

Table 12--Community Provider Respondent Ratings of Partnership Implementation in the CHALENG Participant Survey,
                                               FY 2006 and FY 2007
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              Community Respondents FY  Community Respondents FY
                  Implementation Items \a\                        2006 (133 sites)          2007 (133 sites)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regular Meetings                                                                 2.57                      2.56
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Service Co-location                                                              1.95                      1.89
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cross-training                                                                   1.97                    1.86**
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Interagency Agreements                                                           2.30                      2.26
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Client Tracking                                                                  1.65                      1.59
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Joint Funding                                                                    1.66                      1.67
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Standard Forms                                                                   1.79                      1.75
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Joint Service Teams                                                              2.19                      2.15
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Combined Programs                                                                1.97                      1.94
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Flexible Funding                                                                 1.64                      1.61
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Special Waivers                                                                  1.67                      1.62
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
System Coordinator                                                               1.88                      1.83
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
a 1=none, 2=low, 3=moderate, 4=high  ** p<.01


    There was no change in the two integration items which measure 
community provider perception of VA's accessibility to homeless 
veterans and VA's ability to coordinate homeless services with 
community partners.
    Overall, there has been no increase in community rating of the 12 
partnership implementation activities. Generally, there has usually 
been an increase in one or more activity scores. This suggests that VA 
and community progress in implementing partnership activities may have 
leveled off. (Note: It was reported in last year's CHALENG report that 
there were no significant changes between 2005 and 2006. It will be 
interesting to see if this leveling off in partnering is seen in next 
year's CHALENG report as well.)
VA Involvement in Local Homeless Coalitions
    Involvement in local homeless coalitions has been identified as a 
useful way for VA staff to network with local homeless service 
providers and develop partnerships. Ninety-six percent of the POC 
Surveys indicated participation in a local homeless coalition.
    As noted previously, the HUD sponsors local planning groups called 
Continuums of Care to help address the needs of the homeless. VA 
homeless programs are encouraged to participate in their local 
Continuum of Care. In FY 2007, 88 percent of POC sites that had a 
nearby HUD Continuum of Care planning group (111 of 127) participated 
in the local Continuum of Care planning efforts.
Interagency Collaborative Agreements
    Existing Interagency Collaborations Agreements: CHALENG POCs 
reported on VA efforts to serve homeless veterans through arrangements 
with local community agencies. CHALENG POCs were asked to identify 
whether they currently had interagency collaborative agreements with: 
correctional facilities; psychiatric and substance abuse inpatient 
programs; nursing homes and faith-based organizations. Table 13 shows 
the prevalence of current interagency collaborative agreements.

 Table 13--Percentage of POCs (n=138) Indicating Interagency Collaborative Agreements With Select Program Types
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                   Formal or
                                                          Formal 2007        Informal 2007      Informal* 2007
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Correctional Facilities (jails, prisons, courts)                    13%                 59%                 67%
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Psychiatric/substance abuse inpatient (hospitals,                   17%                 60%                 75%
 wards)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nursing homes                                                       28%                 19%                 45%
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Faith-based organizations                                           62%                 56%                 88%
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*Note: Some sites had both a formal and informal agreement with a program type.


    Eighty-eight percent of POC respondents indicated their VA medical 
care facility had an interagency collaborative agreement with a faith-
based organization. This is not surprising given the fact that many 
faith-based organizations have a long history of serving the poor and 
homeless. Seventy-five percent of sites reported ties with a 
psychiatric and/or substance abuse inpatient program, an indication of 
the link between mental illness and homelessness and the need to 
coordinate services between mental health and homeless agencies.
    Two-thirds (67 percent) of POCs had relationships with a local 
correctional facility. Incarcerated veterans are at high-risk for 
homelessness upon leaving jail or prison. Several VA homeless programs 
provide information to homeless veterans in local jails and prisons to 
help them arrange transitional housing and substance abuse or mental 
health treatment after their release. With the recent implementation of 
the HCRV program, including the hiring of a national HCRV Coordinator 
and HCRV specialists for every VISN, the percentage of medical centers 
which have agreements with correctional facilities should increase in 
the coming years.
    Forty-five percent of POCs had arrangements with a nursing home, 
usually through VA nursing home contracts. This reflects the aging of 
the homeless population and the need for facilities to address the 
multiple medical needs of older homeless veterans and chronically ill 
homeless veterans.
    New Interagency Collaborative Agreements and Outreach Efforts: VA 
staff continue to establish new interagency collaborative agreements 
and to identify and serve new outreach sites. Table 14 displays figures 
for new agreements (formal and informal arrangements) and outreach 
sites, broken down by VISN. Compared to 2006, there were increases in 
the number of agreements and outreach sites in 2007.

                Table 14--New Interagency Collaborative Agreements and Outreach Sites for FY 2007
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                Number of New
                  VISN                        Formal          Informal        Agreements      Homeless Outreach
                                            Agreements       Agreements        (total)              Sites
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          1                                          11               31               42                     8
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          2                                           5               13               18                     8
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          3                                           6               24               30                    28
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          4                                           7               19               26                    33
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          5                                           4               10               14                    24
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          6                                           3               21               24                    19
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          7                                           1               14               15                    27
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          8                                           2               26               28                    16
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          9                                           1               18               19                    16
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
         10                                           5               14               19                    15
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
         11                                           5                6               11                     2
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
         12                                           1               10               11                     9
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
         15                                           5               10               15                    12
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
         16                                          10               17               27                    18
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
         17                                           4               12               16                    14
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
         18                                           2               20               22                    17
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
         19                                           4                9               13                     6
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
         20                                          54               58              112                    21
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
         21                                           3               15               18                    15
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
         22                                           6               17               23                    42
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
         23                                           8               32               40                    27
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Totals, All VISNs (FY 2007):                        147              396              543                   377
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Totals, All VISNs (FY 2006):                         81              352              433                   343
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


    Nature of New Interagency Collaborative Agreements: 113 out of 138 
reporting POC sites (82 percent) had at least one new agreement with a 
community agency. The most frequent topic of the new agreements was 
transitional housing (see Table 15 below). Nearly half (49 percent) of 
the POC sites which reported a new agreement indicated that securing 
transitional housing for veterans was a focus. The other two of the top 
three topics of interagency collaborative agreements were emergency 
(immediate) shelter (27 percent) and re-entry services for incarcerated 
veterans (24 percent).

Table 15--Subject of New Interagency Collaborative Agreements Between VA
                    and Community Providers, FY 2007
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                         Percentage of POCs With New
                                         Collaborative Agreement who
                Need                   Indicated Need Was Addressed in
                                                  Agreement*
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Transitional living facility or                                     49%
 halfway house
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Emergency (immediate) shelter                                       27%
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Re-entry services for incarcerated                                  24%
 veterans
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Services for emotional or                                           22%
 psychiatric problems
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Food                                                                21%
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Long-term, permanent housing                                        21%
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Help with finding a job or getting                                  21%
 employment
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Job training                                                        20%
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Help with transportation                                            20%
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Clothing                                                            19%
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dental care                                                         18%
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Help managing money                                                 15%
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Help getting needed documents or                                    13%
 identification
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Treatment for substance abuse                                       11%
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Glasses                                                             11%
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Personal hygiene (shower, haircut,                                   9%
 etc.)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Detoxification from substances                                       9%
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Medical services                                                     9%
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Eye care                                                             8%
------------------------------------------------------------------------
VA disability or pension                                             8%
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Treatment for dual diagnoses                                         7%
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Help with medication                                                 7%
------------------------------------------------------------------------
SSI/SSD process                                                      7%
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Legal assistance                                                     7%
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Spiritual                                                            7%
------------------------------------------------------------------------
AIDS/HIV testing/counseling                                          6%
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Family counseling                                                    3%
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Women's healthcare                                                   3%
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Welfare payments                                                     3%
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Drop-in center or day program                                        2%
------------------------------------------------------------------------
TB testing                                                           2%
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Guardianship (financial)                                             2%
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Education                                                            2%
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Discharge upgrade                                                    2%
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Child care                                                           1%
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Elder healthcare                                                     1%
------------------------------------------------------------------------
TB treatment                                                         0%
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hepatitis C testing                                                  0%
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*Multiple needs addressed in the new interagency collaborative
  agreements may be identified by POCs


    Veterans Served Due to New Collaborative Agreements: CHALENG POCs 
were asked to report how many veterans received key services (mental 
health and/or substance abuse treatment, dental care, and eye care) as 
a result of new collaborative agreements in FY 2007 (see Table 16).

       Table 16--Number of Veterans Served Through New Interagency
                    Collaborative Agreements, FY 2007
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                     Number of Veterans Served as result
              Service                  of New Interagency Collaborative
                                                  Agreement
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mental Health/Substance Abuse-------------------------------------  344-
 Treatment
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dental Care                                                       1,131
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Eye Care                                                            500
------------------------------------------------------------------------

POC Action Plans
POC Success in Executing FY 2007 Action Plans
    As part of the CHALENG survey in FY 2007, POCs were asked to select 
the three highest priority needs in their areas and to indicate how 
they would address these needs in FY 2007. The most frequently selected 
needs included: permanent, transitional, and emergency housing; dental 
care; job finding; transportation; re-entry services for incarcerated 
veterans; substance abuse treatment; job training and psychiatric 
services.
     Figure 1--Top Needs Selected for Points of Contact to Address

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]



    For this CHALENG report, POCs were asked to indicate their success 
in implementing their plans to meet the top three needs that were 
identified. (See Appendix Table 6 for all POC progress reports.) For 
the purposes of this report, success was defined as achieving tangible 
outcomes such as securing additional transitional housing beds, 
negotiating a reduced or free bus fare for homeless veterans, or 
receiving grant funding for a project. Success did not include the 
beginning of processes such as starting initial planning or submitting 
a grant for funding.
    Figure 2 shows the percentage of sites that were successful in 
obtaining an outcome for the ten most frequently selected needs to 
address in FY 2007.
 Figure 2--Outcomes for Top Ten Action Plan Topics with Percentages of 
                     POC Sites that were Successful

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]



    Listed below are some examples of how POCs achieved success in 
addressing their priorities for FY 2007. This summary does not reflect 
the total level of CHALENG partnership activity in addressing these 
needs--only the activity from the sites that identified the need as one 
of its top three.

      Long-term, permanent housing: Community agencies opened 
new permanent housing (20 sites); VA used HUD Section 8/Shelter Plus 
Care vouchers (20 sites).
      Transitional housing: Community agencies opened VA Grant 
and Per Diem-funded beds or received VA Grant and Per Diem funding (39 
sites); VA accessed non VA-funded transitional housing (two sites); new 
VA Domiciliary opened (one site).
      Emergency housing: Shelter opened/expanded (ten sites), 
new agreements made with existing shelters (six sites), local motel 
used as temporary shelter (one site), new shelter database or directory 
facilitated better placement (two sites).
      Dental care: VA provided services under VHA Directive 
2002-080 (eight sites); local dental providers offered care (some being 
paid with special VA dental funding) (21 sites).
      Job finding: VA Compensated Work Therapy/Supported 
Employment programs started or expanded (11 sites); local Department of 
Labor Homeless Veterans Reintegration Program utilized (two sites); VA 
partnered with local private and public agencies for job finding (15 
sites).
      Transportation: VA or local transit authority offered new 
lines and services to accommodate veterans (nine sites); bus passes and 
tokens distributed (four sites); local agency purchased a van or hired 
a driver (two sites); veterans re-assigned to a VA clinic closer to 
their residence (one site).
      Job training: New VA employment program begun or 
vocational rehabilitation staff hired (five sites); job training 
provided through local community agencies (five sites).
      Substance abuse treatment: Added VA substance abuse staff 
(six sites); new VA Grant and Per Diem program serving dually diagnosis 
patients (one site); community agencies offered substance abuse 
treatment (three sites).
      Re-entry services for incarcerated veterans: New outreach 
worker/discharge planner hired (nine sites); local task force of VA and 
community agencies coordinated services for formerly incarcerated 
veterans (five sites).
      Psychiatric services: New programs started and new staff 
hired (two sites); existing VA mental health services restructured to 
improve treatment access and care (three sites); veterans referred to 
local community mental health program (two sites).

    Most commonly, POC sites that did not achieve success with their FY 
2007 plans mentioned lack of funding (grant proposals denied, loss/
reduction of existing program funding) as a factor.
    The least successful action plan topic was emergency housing or 
immediate shelter. Only 36 percent of all sites reported success in 
addressing this FY 2007 action topic. Many sites indicated they were in 
the early planning and development stages of creating shelters. Also, 
unlike transitional and permanent housing development, there has been 
difficulty in locating funding sources for the development of 
additional emergency shelters. For example, the VA Grant and Per Diem 
program has funded and maintained several transitional housing programs 
throughout the country; similarly HUD, through its Section 8 and 
Shelter Plus Care programs, has created permanent housing resources in 
many local communities.
    Similarly, some of the more successfully met needs were tied to 
specific funding and initiatives. Many sites mentioned the 
implementation of VHA Directive 2002-080 in addressing dental needs. VA 
Compensated Work Therapy and Supported Employment programs and 
Department of Labor Homeless Veteran Reintegration Programs addressed 
job training and job finding needs. New VISN HCRV program specialists 
provided a boost for local efforts to serve recently released 
incarcerated veterans.
Important CHALENG Partners
    CHALENG POCs were asked to identify community partners who helped 
them address their past year's action plan. Appendix 7 highlights and 
acknowledges the accomplishments of these partners in FY 2007.
POC Action Plans for FY 2008
    The 2007 POC survey requested that POCs outline their action plans 
for addressing top unmet needs of local homeless veterans in FY 2008. 
These unmet needs included: permanent, transitional, and emergency 
housing; dental care; job finding; transportation; psychiatric 
services; job training; re-entry services for incarcerated veterans, 
and VA disability and pension.
                   Figure 3--Needs Selected For Plans

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]



    In the CHALENG Participant Survey, respondents were asked to name 
the top three greatest unmet needs in their communities that they would 
like to address in FY 2008. Importantly, nine of the ten needs they 
wished to work on the most were on the top ten list for VA POC action 
plans for FY 2008.
    The CHALENG 2008 top ten list of needs to address is consistent 
with recent thought on addressing homelessness. A variety of reports 
have attempted to define the program elements necessary to end 
homelessness. Although these descriptions tend to be more general and 
may lack detailed input from consumers, they offer a framework for 
planning a comprehensive intervention. One important effort was made by 
The Federal Task Force on Homelessness and Severe Mental Illness 
(1992), which identified five critical service components essential to 
resolving homelessness: housing; employment; psychiatric and substance 
abuse treatment; medical care; and social support. Related, the 2008 
CHALENG action plan top ten list includes housing, employment and 
psychiatric care. As noted earlier, CHALENG participants rate medical 
care as a high met need for homeless veterans. VA currently provides a 
broad range of medical services for these veterans.
    While acknowledged as an important component of recovery, social 
support has never been officially listed by CHALENG as a specific, pre-
identified need to be ranked. Related to the report from The Federal 
Task Force on Homelessness, a recent Canadian survey (Russell, Hubley, 
& Palepu, 2005) of homeless persons concluded that in addition to 
access to basic necessities, relationships, self-respect, the respect 
of others, and having choices all influenced the quality of life of 
homeless persons. It is not known whether such quality of life 
indicators impact directly upon homelessness, but they are certainly 
clinically relevant to those veterans we treat. Social support will be 
measured in the 2008 CHALENG survey.
Update on CHALENG Activities
    Individualized CHALENG reports by POC site are now available on the 
Internet in draft form. Each report includes: an estimate of homeless 
veterans in the service area; an estimate of homeless veterans who are 
chronically homeless; bed counts; FY 2008 action plan, and need and 
integration/implementation rankings. The Web site address is: http://
www.va.gov/homeless/page.cfm?pg=17.
    Also on the site is the 14th Annual Progress Report on Public Law 
105-114 in its entirety. The current report and site profiles are 
useful for sites that are undergoing Commission on Accreditation of 
Rehabilitation Facilities (CARF) accreditation or have community 
partners that are applying for VA Grant and Per Diem funding. CARF 
requires programs to provide feedback from external stakeholders such 
as community partners and clients. As part of their VA Grant and Per 
Diem application, community agencies must document the local needs of 
homeless veterans in their area. Much information from stakeholders and 
their perception of homeless veterans needs is available in the annual 
CHALENG report.
Summary
Trends In Veteran Homelessness
    Over the short-term, the combiNation of demographic changes 
decreasing the overall veteran population and the increase of VA 
resources for the homeless should continue to reduce homelessness among 
veterans. At some point, changes already apparent in the active 
military force structure will likely be mirrored in the profile of 
homeless veterans. Although only 4 percent of all homeless veterans are 
women, this proportion will likely increase as currently 15 percent of 
all U.S. troops are women. The extensive use of the National Guards and 
Reserve units in Iraq and Afghanistan means that in addition to the 
typical influx of new, younger veterans expected from any conflict, a 
greater proportion of ``new'' veterans will be older and have families. 
VA will face significant challenges in addressing the needs of these 
veterans if they become homeless, unless it can meaningfully address 
their homelessness in the context of the family unit. The continued 
prominence of child care as an unmet need highlights the potential 
impact of this concern. Recognizing this need, the Consolidated 
Appropriations Act of 2008 provided funding for HUD to expand the HUD/
VASH Program. Section 8 vouchers available through HUD/VASH will be 
utilized to provide housing and supportive services for homeless 
veterans and their families.
    VA's success in reducing homelessness brings new demands. Although 
housing is obviously a critical step in ending homelessness, it is not 
a sufficient intervention to restore health and quality to life. 
Through CHALENG, VA continues to assess the needs of homeless veterans 
so that we may identify areas where the overall quality of life for 
these veterans may be improved. We believe this approach is not only 
the humane one, but the one most likely to result in long term 
solutions to homelessness. VA will continue to work to establish a 
continuum of care that meets the full spectrum of economic, vocational, 
legal, social, and spiritual needs identified by veterans and providers 
in this report.
Final Thoughts
    The annual CHALENG Survey documents the needs of homeless veterans 
identified by veterans, community agencies and VA staff. CHALENG also 
records how VA and community agencies work together to plan and meet 
those needs.
    Constructively, housing capacity increased between FY 2006 and FY 
2007 with emergency and transitional bed need decreasing. POC actions 
plan updates have documented many success stories in developing 
housing, particularly through the use of VA Grant and Per Diem funding 
for transitional housing and HUD Section 8/Shelter Plus Care funding 
for permanent housing.
    There is also evidence that non-housing initiatives have been 
successful. About 7,600 veterans received dental care through the HVDP 
in FY 2007. Ninety-two percent of sites that selected re-entry services 
for incarcerated veterans as a priority need in FY 2007 reported some 
success coordinating care with new VISN HCRV Program liaisons, prisons, 
and other community agencies.
    The estimated need for affordable permanent housing continues to 
increase even as capacity increased. Although growth in partnership 
activities as indicated by the report's 12 implementation measures 
remained flat, that may mask increasing collaborative activities 
through the expansion of existing partnerships. This will be a focus 
for assessment in future CHALENG reports. Significant new national 
initiatives, particularly the major expansion of the HUD-VASH program, 
are expected to make a marked difference in the coming year.
    In summary, there has been significant accomplishment in serving 
homeless veterans with our community partners, although the information 
obtained through CHALENG indicates that much work still remains. 
CHALENG will continue to examine the progress of VA and the community 
toward that goal.
References
    Burt, M., Aron, L., Douglas, T., Valente, J., Lee, E. and Iwen, B. 
(1999). Homelessness: Programs and the People They Serve. National 
Survey of Homeless Assistance Providers and Clients. Urban Institute.
    Federal Task Force on Homelessness and Severe Mental Illness. 
(1992). Outcasts on Main Street: A report of the Federal Task Force on 
Homelessness and Severe Mental Illness.
    McGuire J., Kasprow W., and Rosenheck R. (2007). Housing, Mental 
Health, and Employment Outcomes For Homeless Veterans--A Follow-up 
Evaluation of Three VA-Funded Transitional Residential Treatment 
Programs. VA Northeast Program Evaluation Center.
    O'Hara, A., Cooper, E., Zovistoski, A., and Buttrick, J. (2006). 
Priced Out in 2006. The Technical Assistance Collaborative. Consortium 
for Citizens with Disabilities, Housing Task Force.
    Randolph, F., Blasinsky, M., Leginski, W., Parker, L., and Goldman 
H. (1997). Creating integrated service systems for homeless persons 
with mental illness: The ACCESS Program. Psychiatric Services, 
48(3):369-373.
    Russell L., Hubley, A., and Palepu, A. (2005). What is Important to 
Quality of Life of Homeless or Hard-to-House Canadian Adults and Street 
Youth? A Multi-Site Study. Canadian Institutes for Health Research; 
Conference presentation, Toronto, Canada.
    Turetsky, V. (2007). Staying in Jobs and out of the Underground: 
Child Support Policies that Encourage Legitimate Work. Policy brief by 
the Center for Law and Social Policy (CLASP).
    U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (2008). A Guide to 
Counting Sheltered Homeless People. January 15, 2008.
    U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Office of 
Community Planning and Development (2007). The Annual Homeless 
Assessment Report to Congress. February 2007.
    U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (2007). Healthcare for Homeless 
Veterans Programs, Quarterly Report. November 8, 2007.

                                 
         Prepared Statement of Libby Perl, Analyst in Housing,
          Congressional Research Service, Library of Congress
    Chairman Filner, Ranking Member Buyer, and members of the 
Committee, my name is Libby Perl and I am an analyst at the 
Congressional Research Service (CRS). Thank you for the opportunity to 
testify today. As requested, in my testimony I will provide a summary 
of research regarding homeless veterans, a brief overview of Federal 
programs that assist homeless veterans, and funding levels for those 
programs.
Research Regarding Homeless Veterans
    Research that has captured information about the entire national 
homeless population, including veteran status, is rare. While the 
Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) is engaged in ongoing 
efforts to collect information about homeless individuals, the most 
extensive information about homeless veterans specifically comes from 
earlier studies. Possibly the most comprehensive national data 
collection effort regarding persons experiencing homelessness took 
place in 1996 as part of the National Survey of Homeless Assistance 
Providers and Clients (NSHAPC), when researchers interviewed thousands 
of homeless assistance providers and homeless individuals across the 
country.\1\ Prior to the NSHAPC, in 1987, researchers from the Urban 
Institute surveyed nearly 2,000 homeless individuals and clients in 
large cities nationwide as part of a national study.\2\ The data from 
these two surveys serve as the basis for more in depth research 
regarding homeless veterans. No matter the data source, however, 
research has found that veterans make up a greater percentage of the 
homeless population than their percentage in the general population.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ Martha R. Burt, Laudan Y. Aron, et al., Homelessness: Programs 
and the People They Serve: Findings of the National Survey of Homeless 
Assistance Providers and Clients, Technical Report, December 1999, 
available at [http://www.huduser.org/publications/homeless/
homeless_tech.html].
    \2\ Martha R. Burt and Barbara E. Cohen, America's Homeless: 
Numbers, Characteristics, and Programs that Serve Them (Washington, DC: 
The Urban Institute Press, July 1989).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Research from the 1980s and 1990s. Two studies--one published in 
1994 using data from the 1987 Urban Institute survey (as well as data 
from surveys in Los Angeles, Baltimore, and Chicago), and the other 
published in 2001 using data from the 1996 NSHAPC--found that male 
veterans were overrepresented in the homeless population. In addition, 
researchers in both studies determined that the likelihood of 
homelessness depended on the ages of veterans.\3\ During both periods 
of time, the odds of a veteran being homeless were highest for veterans 
who had enlisted after the military transitioned to an all-volunteer 
force (AVF) in 1973.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \3\ See Robert Rosenheck, Linda Frisman, and An-Me Chung, ``The 
Proportion of Veterans Among Homeless Men,'' American Journal of Public 
Health 84, no. 3 (March 1994): 466; Gail Gamache, Robert Rosenheck, and 
Richard Tessler, ``The Proportion of Veterans Among Homeless Men: A 
Decade Later,'' Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology 36, no. 
10 (October 2001): 481.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In the earlier study, researchers found that 41% of adult homeless 
men were veterans, compared to just under 34% of adult males in the 
general population. Overall, male veterans were 1.4 times as likely to 
be homeless as nonveterans.\4\ Notably, though, those veterans who 
served after the Vietnam War were four times more likely to be homeless 
than nonveterans in the same age group.\5\ Vietnam era veterans, who 
are often thought to be the most overrepresented group of homeless 
veterans, were barely more likely to be homeless than nonveterans (1.01 
times).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \4\ ``The Proportion of Homeless Veterans Among Men,'' p. 467.
    \5\ Ibid
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In the second study, researchers found that nearly 33% of adult 
homeless men were veterans, compared to 28% of males in the general 
population. Once again, the likelihood of homelessness differed among 
age groups. Overall, male veterans were 1.25 times more likely to be 
homeless than nonveterans.\6\ However, the same post-Vietnam birth 
cohort as that in the 1994 study was most at risk of homelessness; 
those in the cohort were over three times as likely to be homeless as 
nonveterans in their birth cohort. Younger veterans, those age 20-34 in 
1996, were two times as likely to be homeless as nonveterans. And 
Vietnam era veterans were approximately 1.4 times as likely to be 
homeless as their nonveteran counterparts.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \6\ ``The Proportion of Homeless Veterans Among Men: A Decade 
Later,'' p. 483.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Like male veterans, women veterans are more likely to be homeless 
than women who are not veterans. A study published in 2003 examined two 
data sources, one a survey of mentally ill homeless women, and the 
other the NSHAPC, and found that 4.4% and 3.1% of those homeless 
persons surveyed were female veterans, respectively (compared to 
approximately 1.3% of the general population who are women 
veterans).\7\ Although the likelihood of homelessness was different for 
each of the two surveyed populations, the study estimated that female 
veterans were between two and four times as likely to be homeless as 
their nonveteran counterparts.\8\ Unlike male veterans, all birth 
cohorts were more likely to be homeless than nonveterans. However, with 
the exception of women veterans age 35-55 (representing the post-
Vietnam era), who were between approximately 3.5 and 4.0 times as 
likely to be homeless as nonveterans, cohort data were not consistent 
between the two surveys.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \7\ Gail Gamache, Robert Rosenheck, and Richard Tessler, 
``Overrepresentation of Women Veterans Among Homeless Women,'' American 
Journal of Public Health 93, no. 7 (July 2003): 1133.
    \8\ Ibid, p. 1134.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    HUD's Annual Homeless Assessment Reports. HUD is engaged in an 
ongoing effort to establish database systems at the local level to 
collect information about persons experiencing homelessness. Using 
these data, HUD has released two Annual Homeless Assessment Reports 
(AHARs), one in 2007 using data from 2005, and one in 2008, using data 
from 2006. While both AHARs provide information about homeless veteran 
status, there are limitations. Both report the number of sheltered 
homeless individuals, so persons living on the street are not captured, 
and in both reports, data regarding veteran status are incomplete. The 
first AHAR estimated that 18.7% of the adult homeless population was 
made up of veterans, compared to 12.6% of the general population.\9\ Of 
the records used, however, 35% were missing information on veteran 
status. The second AHAR estimated that 14.3% of the homeless adult 
population were veterans compared to 11.2% of the general 
population.\10\ In this case, 20% of records were missing information 
on veteran status.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \9\ U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, The Annual 
Homeless Assessment Report to Congress, February 2007, p. 31, available 
at [http://www.huduser.org/Publications/pdf/ahar.pdf].
    \10\ U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, The Second 
Annual Homeless Assessment Report to Congress, March 2008, p. 23, 
available at [http://www.hudhre.info/documents/
2ndHomelessAssessmentReport.pdf].
    \11\ For more information about HUD's efforts to collect 
information about homeless individuals, see CRS Report RL33956, 
Counting Homeless Persons: Homeless Management Information Systems.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Federal Programs Targeted to Homeless Veterans
    The majority of the Federal programs that target services 
specifically to homeless veterans are part of the Department of 
Veterans Affairs. One program, the Homeless Veterans Reintegration 
Program, is a Department of Labor (DoL) program. In addition, HUD 
collaborates with the VA to provide permanent supportive housing for 
homeless veterans through the HUD-VA Supported Housing, or HUD-VASH 
program. HUD also provides services to homeless veterans through its 
Homeless Assistance Grants, though these funds are not targeted to 
veterans.

    HUD-VASH. Beginning in 1992, through a collaboration between HUD 
and the VA, funding for approximately 1,753 Section 8 vouchers was made 
available for use by homeless veterans with severe psychiatric or 
substance abuse disorders.\12\ Section 8 vouchers are subsidies used by 
families to rent apartments in the private rental market. Through the 
program, called HUD-VA Supported Housing (HUD-VASH), local Public 
Housing Authorities (PHAs) administer the Section 8 vouchers while 
local VA medical centers provide case management and clinical services 
to participating veterans. HUD distributed the vouchers to PHAs through 
three competitions, in 1992, 1993, and 1994. Prior to issuing the 
vouchers, HUD and the VA had identified medical centers with 
Domiciliary Care and Healthcare for Homeless Veterans programs that 
were best suited to providing services. HUD does not separately track 
these vouchers. However, the VA keeps statistics on veterans with 
vouchers who receive treatment through the VA. In FY2006, 1,238 
veterans with HUD-VASH vouchers received treatment during the year, 
with 1,028 veterans still receiving treatment at the end of that 
year.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \12\ The first announcement of voucher availability was announced 
in the Federal Register. See U.S. Department of Housing and Urban 
Development, ``Invitation for FY1992 Section 8 Rental Voucher Set-Aside 
for Homeless Veterans with Severe Psychiatric or Substance Abuse 
Disorders,'' Federal Register vol. 57, no. 55, p. 9955, March 20, 1992.
    \13\ Wesley J. Kasprow, Robert A. Rosenheck, Diane DiLello, Leslie 
Cavallaro, and Nicole Harelik, Healthcare for Homeless Veterans 
Programs: Twentieth Annual Report, U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs 
Northeast Program Evaluation Center, March 31, 2007, pp. 272-273.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In 2001, Congress codified the HUD-VASH program (P.L. 107-95) and 
authorized the creation of an additional 500 vouchers for each year 
from FY2003 through FY2006.\14\ A bill enacted at the end of the 109th 
Congress (P.L. 109-461) also provided the authorization for additional 
HUD-VASH vouchers. However, not until FY2008 did Congress provide 
funding for additional vouchers: the Consolidated Appropriations Act 
(P.L. 110-161) included $75 million for Section 8 vouchers for homeless 
veterans. HUD has estimated that this will fund between 9,800 
additional vouchers.\15\ The Administration has also requested an 
additional $75 million for HUD-VASH vouchers in FY2009.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \14\ 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1437f(o)(19).
    \15\ Testimony of Alphonso Jackson, Secretary of Housing and Urban 
Development, House Appropriations Committee, Subcommittee on 
Transportation and Housing and Urban Development, FY2009 
Appropriations, 110th Cong., 2nd sess., February 13, 2008.
    \16\ See Budget of the U.S. Government FY2009--Appendix, Department 
of Housing and Urban Development, p. 541, available at [http://
www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/fy2009/pdf/appendix/hud.pdf].
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Research has found that permanent supportive housing, like that 
provided through the HUD-VASH program, improves outcomes for formerly 
homeless individuals. HUD-VASH specifically has been found to result in 
both improved housing and improved substance abuse outcomes among 
veterans who received the vouchers over those who did not.\17\ Veterans 
who received vouchers experienced fewer days of homelessness and more 
days housed than veterans who received intensive case management 
assistance or standard care through VA homeless programs alone.\18\ 
Analysis also found that veterans with HUD-VASH vouchers had fewer days 
of alcohol use, fewer days on which they drank to intoxication, and 
fewer days of drug use.\19\ HUD-VASH veterans were also found to have 
spent fewer days in institutions.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \17\ Robert Rosenheck, Wesley Kasprow, Linda Frisman, and Wen Liu-
Mares, ``Cost-effectiveness of Supported Housing for Homeless Persons 
with Mental Illness,'' Archives of General Psychiatry 60 (September 
2003): 940. An-Lin Cheng, Haiqun Lin, Wesley Kasprow, and Robert 
Rosenheck, ``Impact of Supported Housing on Clinical Outcomes,'' 
Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease 195, no. 1 (January 2007): 83.
    \18\ ``Cost-effectiveness of Supported Housing for Homeless Persons 
with Mental Illness,'' p. 945.
    \19\ ``Impact of Supported Housing on Clinical Outcomes,'' p. 85.
    \20\ Ibid

    Health Care for Homeless Veterans. The first Federal program to 
specifically address the needs of homeless veterans, Health Care for 
Homeless Veterans (HCHV) was created as part of an emergency 
appropriations act for FY1987 (P.L. 100-6) in which Congress allocated 
$5 million to the VA to provide medical and psychiatric care in 
community-based facilities to homeless veterans suffering from mental 
illness.\21\ Through the HCHV program, VA medical center staff conduct 
outreach to homeless veterans, provide care and treatment for medical, 
psychiatric, and substance abuse disorders, and refer veterans to other 
needed supportive services.\22\ In some cases, veterans may stay in 
residential treatment facilities while receiving treatment. According 
to the most recent data available from the VA, in FY2006, the HCHV 
program treated approximately 60,857 veterans.\23\ Of those, 82% had 
either a serious psychiatric or substance abuse problem.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \21\ Shortly after the HCHV program was enacted in P.L. 100-6, 
Congress passed another law (P.L. 100-322) that repealed the authority 
in P.L. 100-6 and established the HCHV program as a pilot program. The 
program was then made permanent in the Veterans Benefits Act 1997 (P.L. 
105-114). The HCHV program is now codified at 38 U.S.C. Sec. Sec. 2031-
2034.
    \22\ 38 U.S.C. Sec. 2031, Sec. 2034.
    \23\ Healthcare for Homeless Veterans Programs: Twentieth Annual 
Report, p. 25.

    Domiciliary Care for Homeless Veterans. The Domiciliary Care 
Program for homeless veterans was implemented to reduce the use of more 
expensive inpatient treatment, improve health status, and reduce the 
likelihood of homelessness through employment and other assistance. The 
DCHV program operates at 38 VA medical centers and has 1,991 beds 
available.\24\ In FY2006, the number of veterans completing treatment 
was 5,282.\25\ Of those admitted to DCHV programs, 92.7% were diagnosed 
with a substance abuse disorder, more than half (56.7%) were diagnosed 
with serious mental illness, and 52.5% had both diagnoses.\26\ The 
average length of stay for veterans in FY2006 was 104.4 days, in which 
they received medical, psychiatric and substance abuse treatment, as 
well as vocational rehabilitation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \24\ Sandra G. Resnick, Robert Rosenheck, Sharon Medak, and Linda 
Corwel, Eighteenth Progress Report on the Domiciliary Care for Homeless 
Veterans Program, FY2006, U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs Northeast 
Program Evaluation Center, March 2007, p. 1.
    \25\ Ibid, p. 9.
    \26\ Ibid, p. 10.

    Compensated Work Therapy/Therapeutic Residence Program. Through the 
Compensated Work Therapy Program, the VA enters into contracts with 
private companies or nonprofit organizations which then provide 
disabled veterans with work opportunities.\27\ Veterans must be paid 
wages commensurate with those wages in the community for similar work, 
and through the experience the goal is that participants improve their 
chances of living independently and reaching self sufficiency. The CWT 
program also provides work skills training, employment support 
services, and job development and placement services. The VA estimates 
that approximately 14,000 veterans participate in the CWT program each 
year.\28\ In addition, a transitional housing component provides 
housing to participants in the CWT program who have mental illnesses or 
chronic substance abuse disorders and who are homeless or at risk of 
homelessness.\29\ As of September 2006, the VA operated 66 transitional 
housing facilities with 520 beds.\30\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \27\ The Compensated Work Therapy program was authorized in P.L. 
87-574 as ``Therapeutic and Rehabilitative Activities.'' It was 
substantially amended in P.L. 94-581, and is codified at 38 U.S.C. 
Sec. 1718.
    \28\ VA Fact Sheet, ``VA Programs for Homeless Veterans,'' 
September 2006, available at [http://www1.va.gov/opa/fact/docs/
hmlssfs.doc] (hereafter ``VA Programs for Homeless Veterans'').
    \29\ The VA's authority to operate therapeutic housing is codified 
at 38 U.S.C. Sec. 2032.
    \30\ ``VA Programs for Homeless Veterans.''

    Grant and Per Diem Program. Initially called the Comprehensive 
Service Programs, the Grant and Per Diem program was introduced as a 
pilot program in 1992 through the Homeless Veterans Comprehensive 
Services Act (P.L. 102-590). The law establishing the Grant and Per 
Diem program, which was made permanent in the Homeless Veterans 
Comprehensive Services Act of 2001 (P.L. 107-95), authorizes the VA to 
make grants to public entities or private nonprofit organizations to 
provide services and transitional housing to homeless veterans. 
According to the most recent data available from the VA, in FY2006 the 
Grant and Per Diem program funded more than 300 service providers. 
These providers had a total of 8,200 beds available and served more 
than 15,000 homeless veterans.\31\ The Grant and Per Diem program is 
permanently authorized at $130 million (P.L. 109-461).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \31\ Healthcare for Homeless Veterans Programs: Twentieth Annual 
Report, p. 154.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The program has two parts: grant and per diem. Eligible grant 
recipients may apply for funding for one or both parts. The grants 
portion provides capital grants to purchase, rehabilitate, or convert 
facilities so that they are suitable for use as either service centers 
or transitional housing facilities. The capital grants will fund up to 
65% of the costs of acquisition, expansion or remodeling of 
facilities.\32\ Grants may also be used to procure vans for outreach 
and transportation of homeless veterans. The per diem portion of the 
program reimburses grant recipients for the costs of providing housing 
and supportive services to homeless veterans using the domiciliary care 
per diem rate. The per diem rate increases periodically; the FY2007 
rate was $31.30 per day.\33\ The supportive services that grantees may 
provide include outreach activities, food and nutrition services, 
healthcare, mental health services, substance abuse counseling, case 
management, child care, assistance in obtaining housing, employment 
counseling, job training and placement services, and transportation 
assistance.\34\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \32\ 38 U.S.C. Sec. 2011(c).
    \33\ U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, Department of Geriatrics 
and Extended Care, Description of the State Veterans Home Program, 
available at [http://www1.va.gov/geriatricsshg/docs/
FY07STATEVETHOMEPROGRAMHistory.doc].
    \34\ 38 CFR Sec. 61.1.

    Grant and Per Diem for Homeless Veterans with Special Needs. In 
2001, Congress created a demonstration program to target grant and per 
diem funds to specific groups of veterans (P.L. 107-95). These groups 
include women, women with children, frail elderly individuals, those 
veterans with terminal illnesses, and those with chronic mental 
illnesses. The program was initially authorized at $5 million per year 
for FY2003 through FY2005. P.L. 109-461, enacted on December 22, 2006, 
reauthorized the program for FY2007 through FY2011 at $7 million per 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
year.

    Loan Guarantee for Multifamily Transitional Housing Program. The 
Veterans Programs Enhancement Act 1998 (P.L. 105-368) created a program 
in which the VA guarantees loans to eligible organizations so that they 
may construct, rehabilitate or acquire property to provide multifamily 
transitional housing for homeless veterans.\35\ Eligible project 
sponsors may be any legal entity that has experience in providing 
multifamily housing.\36\ The law requires sponsors to provide 
supportive services, ensure that residents seek to obtain and maintain 
employment, enact guidelines to require sobriety as a condition of 
residency, and charge veterans a reasonable fee.\37\ Supportive 
services that project sponsors provide include outreach; food and 
nutritional counseling; healthcare, mental health services, and 
substance abuse counseling; child care; assistance in obtaining 
permanent housing; education, job training, and employment assistance; 
assistance in obtaining various types of benefits; and 
transportation.\38\ Not more than 15 loans with an aggregate total of 
up to $100 million may be guaranteed under this program.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \35\ 38 U.S.C. Sec. Sec. 2051-2054.
    \36\ U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, Multifamily Transitional 
Housing Loan Guarantee Program: Program Manual, April 6, 2007, p. 9, 
available at [http://www1.va.gov/homeless/docs/
Loan_Guarantee_Program_Manual_4-6-07.pdf].
    \37\ 38 U.S.C. Sec. 2052(b).
    \38\ Multifamily Transitional Housing Loan Guarantee Program: 
Program Manual, p. 10.

    Acquired Property Sales for Homeless Veterans. The Acquired 
Property Sales for Homeless Veterans program is operated through the 
Veterans Benefits Administration (VBA). The program was originally 
enacted as part of the Veterans Home Loan Guarantee and Property 
Rehabilitation Act 1987 (P.L. 100-198); it is authorized through 
December 31, 2008.\39\ Through the program, the VA is able to dispose 
of properties that it has acquired through foreclosures on its loans so 
that they can be used for the benefit of homeless veterans. 
Specifically, the VA can sell, lease, lease with the option to buy, or 
donate, properties to nonprofit organizations and state government 
agencies that will use the property only as homeless shelters primarily 
for veterans and their families. The VA estimates that over 200 
properties have been sold through the program.\40\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \39\ The program was most recently authorized in the Veterans 
Healthcare, Capital Asset, and Business Improvement Act of 2003 (P.L. 
108-170). The program is codified at 38 U.S.C. Sec. 2041.
    \40\ ``VA Programs for Homeless Veterans.''

    Homeless Veterans Reintegration Program. Established in 1987 as 
part of the McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act (P.L. 100-77), the 
HVRP is authorized through FY2011 as part of the Veterans Benefits, 
Healthcare, and Information Technology Act of 2006 (P.L. 109-461) and 
is administered through the Department of Labor (DoL). The program has 
two goals. The first is to assist veterans in achieving meaningful 
employment, and the second is to assist in the development of a service 
delivery system to address the problems facing homeless veterans. 
Eligible grantee organizations are state and local Workforce Investment 
Boards, local public agencies, and both for- and non-profit 
organizations.\41\ Grantees receive funding for one year, with the 
possibility for two additional years of funding contingent on 
performance and fund availability.\42\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \41\ Veterans Employment and Training Service Program Year 2007 
Solicitation for Grant Applications, Federal Register vol. 72, no. 71, 
April 13, 2007, p. 18682.
    \42\ Ibid, p. 18679.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    HVRP grantee organizations provide services that include outreach, 
assistance in drafting a resume and preparing for interviews, job 
search assistance, subsidized trial employment, job training, and 
follow-up assistance after placement. Recipients of HVRP grants also 
provide supportive services not directly related to employment such as 
transportation, provision of or assistance in finding housing, and 
referral for mental health treatment or substance abuse counseling. In 
program year (PY) 2006, HVRP grantees served a total of 13,346 homeless 
veterans, of whom 8,713, or 65%, were placed in employment.\43\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \43\ Presentation of Charles S. Ciccolella, Assistant Secretary for 
Veterans' Employment and Training, U.S. Department of Labor, to the VA 
Advisory Committee on Homeless Veterans, January 31, 2008.

    Incarcerated Veterans Transition Program Demonstration Grants. The 
Homeless Veterans Comprehensive Assistance Act of 2001 (P.L. 107-95) 
instituted a demonstration program to provide job training and 
placement services to veterans leaving prison.\44\ Authorization for 
the incarcerated veterans transition program expired on January 24, 
2006 and no additional funding has been provided. The DoL reported that 
grant recipients enrolled 2,191 veterans in the program from FY2004 to 
FY2006 and that of these enrollees, 1,104 (54%) entered employment.\45\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \44\ 38 U.S.C. Sec. 2023.
    \45\ Presentation of Charles S. Ciccolella.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Funding for Targeted Federal Programs
    In FY2008, total funding for targeted Federal programs for homeless 
veterans is estimated to be about $317 million. In FY2007, 
approximately $282 million was obligated or appropriated for these 
programs. (See Table 1.) This total does not include the HUD funds used 
for HUD-VASH vouchers. The costs of Section 8 vouchers vary based on 
the size of a unit rented and fair market rents across the country. The 
average cost of a Section 8 voucher in 2007 was between $6,000 and 
$7,000, however, the amount needed for a HUD-VASH voucher could be 
different. In addition, the estimate does not include VA funds for 
treatment of homeless veterans, including inpatient medical, surgical, 
psychiatric, and long term care.
HUD Homeless Assistance Grants
    Though the HUD Homeless Assistance Grants do not specifically 
target homeless veterans, homeless veterans benefit from the grants. 
The Homeless Assistance Grants account was established in 1987 as part 
of the Stewart B. McKinney Homeless Assistance Act (P.L. 100-77). The 
grants, administered by HUD, fund housing and services for homeless 
persons. There are four Homeless Assistance Grants: the Emergency 
Shelter Grants (ESG) program, Supportive Housing Program (SHP), the 
Shelter Plus Care (S+C) program, and the Section 8 Moderate 
Rehabilitation Assistance for Single-Room Occupancy Dwellings (SRO) 
program.
    In FY2007, approximately $1.3 billion was awarded to homeless 
services providers through the Homeless Assistance Grants. A total of 
5,911 projects received funding.\46\ Of the grantees, HUD estimates 
that 149 were veteran specific projects, meaning that 70% or more of 
those served are veterans. These veteran specific organizations 
received approximately $135 million. Veterans may also be served by 
projects where veterans make up less than 70% of clients.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \46\ U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, FY2007, 
Summary of Competition Awards Report, available at [http://
www.hudhre.info/documents/2007_NationalHomeless AwardsSummary.pdf].
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In addition, since 2003, HUD has participated with the VA and the 
Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) in the Collaborative 
Initiative to Help End Chronic Homelessness, coordinated through the 
Interagency Council on Homelessness. Through the initiative, HUD funds 
permanent supportive housing for chronically homeless individuals while 
the VA and HHS fund supportive services. The initiative has provided 
housing for 1,242 individuals; according to an evaluation of the 
initiative, 30% of program participants who took part in the evaluation 
surveys were veterans.\47\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \47\ Alvin S. Mares and Robert A. Rosenheck, Evaluation of the 
Collaborative Initiative to Help End Chronic Homelessness, Northeast 
Program Evaluation Center, February 26, 2007, Table 4, available at 
[http://www.hudhre.info/documents/CICH_ClientOutcomesReport.pdf].
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    For more information about the programs described in this report, 
please see CRS Report. RL34024, Veterans and Homelessness. Thank you 
again for the opportunity to speak here today, and I look forward to 
your questions.

                                                  Table 1--Funding for Selected Homeless Veterans Programs FY1988-FY2008 (dollars in thousands)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                   Obligations (VA Programs)                                            Budget Authority (DoL
                                       ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------        Program)
                                                                             Compensated Work                                       Loan Guarantee for ----------------------- Total Funding for
              Fiscal Year                Healthcare for   Domiciliary Care       Therapy/        Grant and Per         HUD-VA          Multifamily                             Selected Programs
                                            Homeless        for Homeless       Therapeutic        Diem Program       Supported         Transitional       Homeless Veterans
                                            Veteransa         Veterans          Residence                             Housing            Housing        Reintegration Program
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1988                                           $12,932           $15,000b                 NA                 NA               NA                   NA                $1,915            $29,847
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1989                                             13,252            10,367                 NA                 NA               NA                   NA                  1,877             25,496
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1990                                             15,000            15,000                 NA                 NA               NA                   NA                  1,920             31,920
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1991                                            15,461c            15,750                --c                 NA               NA                   NA                  2,018             33,229
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1992                                            16,500c            16,500                --c                 NA            2,300                   NA                  1,366             36,666
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1993                                             22,150            22,300                400                 NA            2,000                   NA                  5,055             51,905
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1994                                             24,513            27,140              3,051              8,000            3,235                   NA                  5,055             70,994
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1995                                            38,585d            38,948              3,387                --d            4,270                   NA                   107e             85,297
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1996                                            38,433d            41,117              3,886                --d            4,829                   NA                      0             88,265
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1997                                            38,063d            37,214              3,628                --d            4,958                   NA                      0             83,863
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1998                                             36,407            38,489              8,612              5,886            5,084                   NA                  3,000             97,478
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1999                                             32,421            39,955              4,092             20,000            5,223                   NA                  3,000            104,691
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2000                                             38,381            34,434              8,068             19,640            5,137                  661                  9,636            115,957
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2001                                             58,602            34,576              8,144             31,100            5,219                  366                 17,500            155,507
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2002                                             54,135            45,443              8,028             22,431            4,729                  528                 18,250            153,544
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2003                                             45,188            49,213              8,371             43,388            4,603                  594                 18,131            169,488
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2004                                             42,905            51,829             10,240             62,965            3,375                  605                 18,888            190,807
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2005                                             40,357            57,555             10,004             62,180            3,243                  574                 20,832            194,745
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2006                                             56,998            63,592             19,529             63,621            5,297                  507                 21,780            231,324
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2007                                             71,925            77,633             21,514             81,187            7,487                  613                 21,809            282,168
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2008 \f\                                         74,802            80,738             22,375            107,180            7,786                  660                 23,620            317,161
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sources: Department of Veterans Affairs Budget Justifications, FY1989-FY2009, VA Office of Homeless Veterans Programs, Department of Labor Budget Justifications FY1989-FY2009, and the FY2008
  Consolidated Appropriations Act P.L. 110-161.
\a\ Healthcare for Homeless Veterans was originally called the Homeless Chronically Mentally Ill veterans program. In 1992, the VA began to use the title ``Healthcare for Homeless Veterans.''
\b\ Congress appropriated funds for the DCHV program for both FY1987 and FY1988 (P.L. 100-71), however, the VA obligated the entire amount in FY1988. See VA Budget Summary for FY1989, Volume
  2, Medical Benefits, p. 6-10.
\c\ For FY1991 and FY1992, funds from the Homeless Chronically Mentally Ill veterans program as well as substance abuse enhancement funds were used for the Compensated Work Therapy/Therapeutic
  Residence program.
\d\ For FY1995 through FY1997, Grant and Per Diem funds were obligated with funds for the Healthcare for Homeless Veterans program. VA budget documents do not provide a separate breakdown of
  Grant and Per Diem Obligations.
\e\ Congress appropriated $5.011 million for HVRP in P.L. 103-333. However, a subsequent rescission in P.L. 104-19 reduced the amount.
\f\ The obligation amounts for FY2008 are estimates.


                                 
    Prepared Statement of Michelle Saunders, Arlington, VA (Veteran)
    Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I want to thank you for 
allowing me the opportunity to testify on behalf of myself and my 
fellow veterans both current and future. My name is Michelle Saunders 
and I am a wounded veteran from Operation Iraqi Freedom. I went through 
my transition from the military to the civilian sector in May of 2006. 
Prior to my getting injured on May 1st, 2004, I was motivated, proud, 
extremely physically fit and ready to wear the uniform for at least 
another 20 years of my life, I was a career soldier. After hearing the 
words ``your military career has come to a halt'' I went through some 
serious hardships that I never imagined going through, as most veterans 
do today.
    The military had taught me some of the most valuable tools and how 
to apply them in order to be a successful leader; I thought for sure I 
was going to be ok in my transition because of all the ``promises'' 
that had been made by veteran service providers and folk who already 
transitioned and had jobs. The day I left the gates of Walter Reed, I 
never imagined in a million years that I would ever look back. The 
reality was and still is, it's by far the worst relationship I had to 
walk away from. Aside from being angry, broken and in complete 
emotional turmoil, I fell into serious financial hardship and a serious 
state of depression to the point where I held a loaded gun to my head 
on many lonely nights. The only thing that stopped me was my lack of 
selfishness and what it would do to my family. I have always been a 
person of pride and strength, I felt like I was completely stripped of 
every shred down to the core. I had literally lost my own self worth.
    After many months of trying so desperately to find a job and barely 
escaping homelessness, by the grace of god I was fortunate enough to be 
at the right place at the right time. I was offered a job at the 
military severely injured center as an employment coordinator for the 
Department of Labor, it seemed a bit ironic since I had just gone 
through the trials and tribulations of finding a job. I was interviewed 
on a Tuesday afternoon, that night I was asked to attend a wounded 
summit conference that following Thursday in Alabama. I was so excited 
just to know I had a job that I forgotten about the fact I had no money 
to make travel arrangements. I thought to myself how incredibly 
embarrassing it would be to ask for a cash advance just to cover my 
travel expenses on my first day of work. I had literally exhausted all 
of my resources and had no time. I hung my head and called my new boss 
at ten pm and explained my situation, he soon became my angel as he 
told me to breathe and took care of everything.
    Finally, I arrived in Alabama at 3 am and I was able to sleep for 
three hrs before having to get up for the conference, the conference I 
knew nothing about. Little did I know that I was going to be asked to 
speak in front of many of our senior military and government 
leadership. I was asked to speak about my experiences of being wounded 
and the struggles I faced in the after math. I remember having severe 
anxiety about speaking and exposing my living hell, let alone in front 
of such a large crowd however; the scariest part was having to speak 
next to, two other wounded veterans--veterans with visible 
disabilities, veterans with amputations.
    That feeling of losing self worth had started to surface again 
because for so long, I didn't feel worthy or injured enough to be 
standing next to them. Sure I had been in a combat zone accompanied by 
multiple mortar attacks, serious fire fights, loss of good friends and 
sustained serious back injuries, but I had all my limbs and some sense 
of sanity. At that moment I realized that if I were to run out of that 
room, I would never have an opportunity to release all of what I was 
harboring. This was clearly a major pivotal point in my life.
    I decided to speak last, so I was clear in my thoughts, as I had no 
idea what to expect. After listening to the two amputees ahead of me I 
realized at that moment, that I was different, I was in a totally 
different category--the category that clearly over shadows our visible 
wounded heroes. People fail to realize that a visible wounded hero has 
someone by their bedside twenty-four hrs a day seven days a week. Where 
as the ``invisible'' wounded heroes are overlooked on a daily basis. 
These thoughts were circling my head over and over but in a good way, 
good because I was in a position to finally embrace the hard ``stuff'' 
and help those who can't voice the pain that is eating them alive, so I 
thought anyway . . .
    I felt liberated after I walked off that stage, I felt as though my 
voice finally penetrated the core of the systemic issues that so many 
of us veterans share day to day. I had Viet Nam and other era veterans 
coming up to me in tears, just to say ``thank you, you have said all 
the things that we could not say, or find the words to say''
    When I left the conference, I was so eager to get in the trenches 
and start figuring the best strategic approach on how to stop the 
bleeding, but little did I know it was like trying to put a band-aid on 
a sucking chest wound. I soon started to see the blackness of 
bureaucracy from the inside as opposed to being the victim on the 
outside. I started to see how a ``success'' was measured by a number, 
how a problem would disappear when it was time to report to the higher 
chain of command, how the ``collaborating'' agencies would point 
fingers at each other of all the pitfalls and the hiccups, but would 
leverage each other for the ``successes''. After reading that, one may 
ask or presume I am bitter. The answer is, I am not bitter, I am 
disappointed and I am embarrassed. I am disappointed because I stand 
next to people every day who are in the positions to make effective 
change, who make six plus figure salaries a year and are able to go 
home at night and provide for their families just to start over the 
next day. I am embarrassed because I can't financially afford to bite 
the hand that feeds me. For me, it's a little different, I go home at 
night and I am in pain because I know that my brothers and sisters who 
once stood by my side at arms and always covered me, are gasping for 
air because they're worried about where the next pocket of money is 
coming from, their VA appeal claims, their lack of credentials, because 
of what their families may think of their, once proud American soldier. 
These are the parts of the transition that holds the needed healing of 
the broken soul, how do you heal when you can't stop firing squad?
    We are still repeating history in a sense that during the 1970s and 
1980s, our streets were crawling with Vietnam War veterans with the 
same issues. The only difference today is our veterans are not being 
ignored by society and the government is being held accountable. For 
the first time Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI) and Post Traumatic Stress 
Disorder (PTSD) are being recognized as issues and they are abnormal 
conditions caused by combat trauma and combat stress. We live in a 
society that does not accept murder as something ``normal''. We live in 
a society that is spiritual and compassionate by nature regardless of 
religious beliefs. When these horrific acts are witnessed or are 
performed by an American soldier in a time of war, it breaks the spirit 
in a way that can't be defined. However, we are expected to act 
``normal'' when we arrive back to our home soil. In addition our peers 
are forced to look at us different and weak because of the mentality of 
our senior military leadership, we are ``STRONG'' warriors that aren't 
supposed to feel, yet we must follow the rules of the Geneva Convention 
because our morals and beliefs as a Nation dictate. Yes there are 
services in place for those who ``need it'' but there is a silent voice 
that is extremely loud that puts those who ``need it'' in a corner. 
Fortunately, the American population as a whole is finally pushing back 
because they understand what our eyes see across the water is not 
``normal'' however; there is still an uncomfortable stigma that is 
associated with this. Society as a whole wants to help, but that help 
must happen away from their children and their neighborhoods. We are 
making a difference however, the flood gates have been opened and an 
enormous amount of water has fractured the backbone of our 
infrastructure. It is up to those who can speak for the ones who can 
not. WE MUST INFORM, EDUCATE AND PROMOTE AWARENESS. The blind eye 
approach is NOT working; it is MUCH bigger than us, so we must take a 
different approach.
    The million dollar question is ``how do we fix it?'' First, we must 
understand our veterans are fighting two wars, one across the water and 
one here on the home front. The concept and words ``Support our 
Troops'' seems to be everywhere you look today, from yellow ribbons to 
American flags to the ``support the troops'' bumper stickers, but do we 
really know what the reality of ``support'' means. We will never know 
how to properly support the veteran population as long as the ``right'' 
questions are not being asked and we will continue to have those 
veterans who will ``fall'' through the cracks and become a statistic in 
the homeless veteran population.
    I will attempt to illustrate where the flood gates are broken, the 
following line items are currently staring us in the eye of the 
systemic core:

    Inability for the services to admit that ``PTSD'' is an issue: 
Until the senior leadership of the military comes forward and 
recognizes that combat trauma is not normal then we as a society will 
continue to see it as a stigma and continue to work in a vacuum.

      How do we heal if we can't sleep?
      How do we heal if we are hyper vigilant in every facet of 
our days?
      How do we heal if we have social withdrawal because we 
feel so disconnected?
      How do we heal when our own leaders keep us at an arms 
distance and call this disorder a ``personality disorder''--in turn 
ending in an even bigger stigma?

    Lack of accountability and collaboration of agencies: We are 
finding that more and more agencies and service components are wanting 
to ``take care of their own'' however, what the services/service 
providers are missing is that there must be case management across all 
lines, that is the only approach when dealing with physical and 
psychological wounds. No matter what a person's situation, there is a 
history and it must be captured. In the case of the VA, the military 
must make that ``warm'' hand off. In the case of the Department of 
Labor, the VA must determine someone employment ready, there are many 
steps that must take place before a subject matter expert can consider 
someone ``employment ready'' We also must stop counting numbers as a 
measurement of success. Just because a veteran request services doesn't 
mean they're a success because they were entered into a data base. 
There is way too much anecdotal information that is being reported as 
successes in order to continue the fluff that is delivered to congress 
in the exchange of funding. This is clear reason why congress and our 
administration are being bastardized on a daily basis not only here in 
our own country but across the world, this is why we as a Nation are so 
divided and we're repeating history yet again.

    Program Qualifications: All programs must have a certain criteria 
in place in order to provide and deliver services, of course for their 
continuity. However, when the criteria's are different across the board 
even though the mission is the same, it can seriously complicate 
matters. Examples:

      Who is the authorizing authority to determine someone 
``seriously injured''
      If someone is not able to work because of serious PTSD 
why should he or she have to prove time and time again their condition, 
if it is clearly stated in their VA disability record?
      Why do almost all current providers only work with OIF/
OEF, when we have other veterans from other eras that desperately need 
services?
      Why do veterans have to be homeless before they receive a 
grant? We should not be taking the re-active approach; we should be 
taking the pro-active approach. That is why we as a government spend so 
much money on R&D to better the future; we are a much smarter society 
to allow these pitfalls.
      We MUST understand that the entire family is fractured 
when a service member is injured physically and or psychologically and 
we MUST treat and provide services to the whole family

    Identification Issues: When a service member is injured down range 
and medically evacuated, the service member still carries their 
original unit identification code (UIC). This particular issue is 
creating long-term identification issues. Because of this standard 
operating procedure it creates problems for the following reasons:

      Once the service member has arrived at the medical 
treatment facility there is a determiNation made whether or not that 
service member will be attached to a wounded transition brigade (WTB) 
or they will be assigned.
      Attached and assigned are two different categories. This 
means that if a wounded service member is attached, then he or she will 
then carry two UIC codes until he or she has been assigned due to long-
term care needs or identified for separation.
      Those who have been augmented from other Active, Reserve 
and National Guard units fall between the cracks almost automatically 
because these individuals were never considered permanent party in the 
first place and once they are considered ``broken'' they're no longer 
wanted on the roster, so the unit in combat can fill that billet 
immediately.
      Service members who are put into a temporary retired 
disabled category (TRDL) are sent to a civilian based health care 
organization (CBCHO). Once in this category a lot of service members 
are being put out of the service and not followed up through the VA or 
the military therefore resulting in ``falling through the cracks.'' 
This particular population often times are forgotten and are unaware of 
their benefits and services available to them.

          Recommendation: Once a service member is injured, he or she 
        should automatically be assigned a second identifier that will 
        allow the outgoing unit and the potential incoming unit to keep 
        one hundred percent accountability. Recovery coordinators must 
        be assigned immediately to maintain continuity. (On a personal 
        note it took Walter Reed six months to realize I was even 
        there. In addition my unit informed me that if I wanted to go 
        back to Hawaii I could and they would arrange with or without 
        the facilitation of Walter Reed, not a bad deal if you just 
        want to run away because you just can't deal mentally.)

    Veterans struggle to find employment: Currently the average age of 
our veterans today are between the ages 19-25. It is the reality that 
of being in such a young age group which often masks the very 
accomplishments and career progression that also reflects the 
approximate time and grade of a service member anywhere between the 
ranks of private through sergeant. In the eyes of the military a 
sergeant has the ability to lead, manage and supervise approximately 6-
8 people under multitudes of stress however, in the corporate world 
this is something foreign. There are many challenges in the way of 
disabled veterans finding gainful employment, to include the 
competition of young college graduates chomping at the bit for sinking 
their teeth into the best corporate positions possible. With today's 
competitive society, power is knowledge and often equates to increased 
earning potential. Realistically without these tools/credentials our 
veterans are automatically at a disadvantage the minute they leave the 
gates of the military installations. Being a Nation at war, with back 
to back deployments our military do not have the option to go to 
school. After being discharged, many are relegated to lower paying jobs 
simply to make ends meet and will not have the time to utilize and 
maximize their educational benefits due to the stress of keeping food 
on the table and a roof over their families' heads. Coupled with a 
disability and a competitive labor market many of our heroes are 
falling into homelessness. We as a Nation need not only protect our 
veteran population but we need to equip them with the proper tools and 
an environment to ensure they're ready for the 21st century workforce.

    Traumatic Service member's Group Life Insurance (TSGLI): This one 
time payout of $25k up to $100k is causing SERIOUS debt for our wounded 
coming back. Regardless of the financial counseling, a person who has 
never received this kind of money is going to spend it the way they 
want to, in addition the financial decisions being made while under 
heavy narcotics and other medications are creating serious financial 
hardships. A large number of our younger service members are over 30k 
in debt due to the misuse of funds.

    Recommendation: If the payment is made through the VA insurance 
provider, then perhaps have the money added to the veterans already 
disability pay. In the event that a wounded service member while still 
on active duty falls under financial hardship, then they should be able 
to file for a cash advance to cover the vital expenses at that current 
time. This should also apply to veterans that are already receiving 
disability compensation. Keep in mind most of our newly discharged 
veterans are between the ages 19-25 years of age.
    We as a country are protected by the gate keepers who wear the 
uniform for the purpose of keeping peace of such a great nation. We as 
a country can not and must not fail those who didn't fail us. We can do 
no less, we owe them that, we owe them a future.

                                 
                 Prepared Statement of John F. Downing,
                 President and Chief Executive Officer,
                Soldier On (United Veterans of America)
    Chairman Filner, Representative Buyer, and Members of the 
Committee: on behalf of the hundreds of homeless veterans served every 
year by United Veterans of America, I am honored by your invitation to 
be here today testifying on the subject of homelessness among veterans 
of U.S. military service.
    I have the privilege of serving as President and CEO of United 
Veterans of America, Inc., doing business as Soldier On. Based in 
Leeds, Massachusetts, with facilities serving homeless veterans in 
Pittsfield and Leeds, Soldier On serves upward of 250 veterans every 
day. Our program is based on a continuum of care, ranging from the 
treatment of trauma and mental health issues to substance abuse 
counseling, shelter, food and other necessities, job training, and 
permanent housing. Our partners include the U.S. Department of Veterans 
Affairs, the U.S. Department of Labor, HUD, and many state and local 
agencies. Shelter, treatment, and hope are our cornerstones.
    Soldier On hosts one hundred and forty-five men and women in 
transitional living on site at the VA Medical Center campus in the 
Leeds section of Northampton, Massachusetts. Soldier On rents from the 
VA a few of the old staff ``cottages'' where we have created 
appropriate housing for women veterans and for frail, elderly male 
veterans. We pay HUD's fair market rent to the VA for the privilege of 
housing these men and women. Sixty more vets live in transitional 
housing at our Berkshire Veterans Residence in Pittsfield, 
Massachusetts, which opened in September, 2004. Ten new studio 
apartments, funded through the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban 
Development, provide permanent housing for homeless veterans with a 
disability at the Pittsfield site.
    Soldier On serves veterans primarily from the northeast United 
States. A few are referred to us from across the country. The average 
age of our population is 54, but the mean age is trending younger as we 
see more veterans of Operation Enduring Freedom and Operation Iraqi 
Freedom. Approximately eighty-eight percent of our vets suffer mental 
health and/or substance abuse issues. Some ten percent are elderly, at 
age 65 or older. Five percent of our vets are women. More than twenty-
five percent of our vets have been diagnosed with post traumatic stress 
disorder (PTSD); twenty-eight percent are on parole or probation; 
forty-two percent of Soldier On's vets are minority.
    I could go on, but I would invite you to take a look at our Web 
site at www.wesoldieron.org to learn more about our program. I am 
supported by a dedicated staff and a committed board of directors, and 
I enjoy a strong, collaborative relationship with our VA Medical Center 
and with VA Headquarters here in Washington.
    Currently we are in the pre-development stage of a 39 unit limited 
equity cooperative, to be built on our site in Pittsfield, 
Massachusetts. The development will be owned cooperatively and managed 
by formerly homeless veterans. These apartments will meet the highest 
standards of ``green'' building, incorporating energy efficiency, 
renewable energy, and alternative fuels. This housing will be 
sustainable in perpetuity for low income veterans. Additionally, with 
reasonable support from the Federal government, we can dedicate a 
portion of each veteran's rent to an Individual Development Account 
(IDA), thus enabling formerly homeless veterans to realize the American 
dream of homeownership and building wealth through equity. This changes 
the end of the story for homeless veterans of U.S. military service.
    I mentioned changing the end of the story for homeless veterans, 
and I'd like to go back to that. Typically, the veterans in our care, 
both men and women, cycle from the streets to shelter, back to the old 
neighborhood and, ultimately, back to shelter. Along the way, these men 
and women lose everything. It's hard to imagine but, typically, every 
contact with family and community has been lost. Jobs, houses, family 
ties, self-respect, sobriety, mental health, personal hygiene--all 
gone. Dignity--gone. At Soldier On our vets come to see each other as 
their community. Only by creating permanent, affordable housing for 
veterans can we change that pattern. By creating permanent, affordable 
housing opportunities, whether it's rental, cooperative, or 
homeownership, and by bringing comprehensive support services to the 
veterans in this housing, we can change the end of that story once and 
for all. In the long run, permanent supportive housing is less 
expensive than shelter. And, finally, our veterans deserve better than 
what we're doing today.
    Why is all this necessary? How is it that nearly one hundred fifty 
thousand veterans of U.S. military service are homeless on any given 
night? How is it that so many men and women who have worn the uniform 
can end up on the streets of America's cities and towns? Lately, we 
have seen somewhat of a downturn in those numbers, which leads us to 
believe that our efforts have been successful to some degree. But, 
sometime soon, we hope, the GIs serving bravely today in Iraq and 
Afghanistan will return home, and we know that the rate of homelessness 
among veterans will increase. What are we doing to get ready for our 
returning GIs? Soldier On's 39 units in Pittsfield, Massachusetts will 
be occupied fully the day we cut the ribbon. What is our plan?
    Last fall the National Alliance to End Homelessness released a 
comprehensive report on the status of homeless veterans. I know you've 
all received that report, and I commend it to you. You will read about 
poverty and unemployment among veterans. You will read about veterans 
with disabilities who are further burdened by severe housing costs, 
especially among veterans who are renters. And, sadly, you will read 
about veterans who fall into more than one of these high risk 
categories. Factor in such variables as substance abuse, mental 
illness, and arrest or incarceration history, and the picture is bleak, 
indeed. But the situation is not hopeless. Just as we, as a country, 
have been able to marshal resources to take the battle to terrorists 
abroad, so can we mobilize to meet the needs of those who, in the words 
of Lincoln, ``shall have born the battle.'' Last week The Boston Globe 
reported the story of a disabled OIF veteran whose wife has had to quit 
her job a number of times as they have moved around to be near a VA 
Medical Center. She is saving the system a lot of money by taking care 
of her husband at home, but the family is suffering. The child has been 
moved from school to school, the wife--a flight attendant--has devoted 
herself to her husband, whose brain injury makes him difficult to live 
with, and the family now is impoverished. What kind of future do they 
have? Don't that veteran and his family deserve our help? What's wrong 
with us? Must they become homeless before we help them?
    The answer to the homelessness issue is not complicated. This 
congress, in this year's budget, funded the HUD VASH rental assistance 
program. In your wisdom, you eliminated much of HUD's red tape, thus 
providing developers of housing for veterans with more project-based 
rental subsidies. In the coming years we will need more HUD VASH 
subsidies, and many of them will be used as project-based subsidies as 
we develop new units. HUD VASH should be allowed to be used as 
Homeownership Section 8 subsidies, as well as for limited equity 
cooperative developments, such as the project we are developing in 
Pittsfield. The beauty of HUD VASH is, of course, that VA case managers 
accompany the subsidy, improving the veteran's chances of a successful 
tenancy.
    But we'll need more help. In general, to the best of my knowledge, 
the Federal government has no program that supports exclusively the 
creation of permanent, affordable housing for veterans. I realize that 
this is a policy decision for the consideration of the entire Congress 
and the Administration. If we truly are to be successful, we must 
embark on a production program to create new units of safe, decent, 
affordable housing for veterans--not only for individual veterans, but 
for veterans with families as well. Recently, Soldier On has developed 
a partnership with the AFL-CIO Housing Investment Trust, which is based 
here in Washington, D.C. The Housing Investment Trust is eager to work 
with us to develop housing for veterans; beginning in Massachusetts, 
and working with MassHousing, our state's housing finance agency, we 
will create homeownership opportunities for veterans, as well as more 
limited equity cooperative apartments. And, although the Housing 
Investment Trust has considerable human and financial resources to 
invest, we will need an equity partner in that enterprise. The most 
appropriate equity partner is the very Nation that our veterans have 
served. Fortunately, a precedent exists that provides a model for that 
equity partnership. Now, Federal earmarks get a bad rap, and some of 
that might be deserved. But our representative in this body, 
Congressman John Olver of the First Massachusetts Congressional 
District, has secured for us two direct Federal appropriations, without 
which our project in Pittsfield would not be feasible. We would ask 
that Congress create programs that provide long-term, soft deferred 
loans, along the lines of the Federal HOME program that would work as 
equity and reduce the debt load of these projects--a HUD-VA-HOME 
program, if you will. The simple fact is that, by providing 
homeownership opportunities, case management, and affordable rental 
housing, we could eliminate most of the VA's shelter programs. And we 
know that an investment in permanent housing, whether homeownership or 
rental, is a better investment than spending money year after year on 
shelter programs. We need housing first.
    Back home, the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, under both Governor 
Romney and Governor Patrick, is stepping up to the plate with state 
money and a willingness to support the project with Federal resources, 
such as project-based Section 8 subsidies, VASH subsidies, and HOME 
funds. At this point, however, Federal participation has been limited 
to a relatively small direct appropriation from HUD, procured through 
the good offices of Congressmen John Olver and Richard Neal. For 
Soldier On to complete this project with a reasonable, minimal debt 
load, the Federal government must be more of a partner with us.
    The beauty of the project we're building in Pittsfield is that it 
is replicable. With a little help from the banks and state and Federal 
government, this type of housing can be adapted for any part of the 
country. We are working now with the VA Medical Center in Leeds, 
Massachusetts to create another limited equity cooperative on the 
grounds of the Medical Center. Across the country, VA Medical Center 
campuses typically enjoy lots of unused green space. A project like 
ours could be built on the grounds of any VA Medical Center. Working 
with the VA, non-profit developers could lease the land at a nominal 
rate, while taking the entire responsibility for building and operating 
the permanent housing on that land. No additional expense would accrue 
to the VA, and the VA Medical Center would have a new out-patient 
population on its doorstep. But the best reason for doing this is that 
it serves veterans. And that's what we're talking about today--serving 
veterans.
    I would add, parenthetically, that, although not the purview of 
this committee, I would ask Congress to amend the Fair Housing Act to 
include veterans of U.S. military service as a protected class. I 
mention this because, if we are successful in creating permanent 
housing for veterans, we run the real risk of violating Fair Housing 
laws by giving veterans priority--again, a Catch-22 situation which I'm 
sure is unintentional, and which I'm sure can be fixed. Other technical 
fixes are within our grasp as well. For instance, the VA's payment 
system is a nightmare. Good people in this Congress, working with good 
people at the VA, passed legislation to change the payment system last 
year, but that legislation never made it to a final bill. If I go out 
and raise money to improve service to homeless veterans, the VA is 
forced to reduce as result of OMB Circulars its payments to us. We 
would like to see the Secretary of the Department of Veterans Affairs 
be allowed to create a system of payments for approved providers of 
services that allows reasonable funding to insure appropriate care and 
services are provided. The Secretary should be allowed to consider the 
higher costs of doing business in certain geographical areas. If I can 
get donations to cover the high cost of heating our buildings in 
western Massachusetts, the Secretary of the VA should not be forced to 
penalize me for that initiative. Services for homeless veterans within 
a community are most effective when a recipient can augment payments 
from the VA with funds from any source, including Federal, state, 
local, and private sources.
    Soon, we hope, we will be welcoming home the veterans of Operation 
Enduring Freedom and Operation Iraqi Freedom. Each Veteran deserves a 
system of care that is anchored in safe, affordable permanent housing 
that he or she can own.

                                 
      Prepared Statement of Colonel Charles Williams, USA (Ret.),
            Executive Director, Maryland Center for Veterans
                      Education and Training, Inc.
    Mr. Chairman, members of the subcommittee, my name is Charles 
Williams and I am the Executive Director of the Maryland Center for 
Veterans Education and Training, Inc., commonly referred to as MCVET.
    MCVET was established approximately 15 years ago with a mission to 
provide homeless veterans, and other veterans in need, with 
comprehensive services that will enable them to rejoin their 
communities as productive citizens. MCVET operates a militarily 
structured facility where veterans are reintroduced to the military 
type of discipline that they were accustomed to through their service. 
The services offered during a veteran's stay in our facility are 
designed to remove barriers to recovery. These barriers include but are 
not limited to, debts, courts, child support, discharge upgrades and 
physical/mental health issues.
    The reawakening of the routine military discipline enhances MCVET's 
ability to stabilize and reorder the lives of these veterans. Each 
student attends substance abuse classes and alcoholics/narcotics 
anonymous meetings, and works in conjunction with a case manager in the 
development of an Individual Service Strategy plan which is a long-
range plan used as a tool in remaining drug and alcohol free.
    Services include:

      Outreach
      Day drop-in, emergency, transitional and permanent 
housing
      Substance abuse counseling
      Assistance with physical and mental health issues, 
including post traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and traumatic brain 
injury (TBI)
      Education
      Job training and placement
      Aftercare

          MCVET owes its very existence to the Federal Grants to 
        community based 501(c)(3) organizations. We have uniquely 
        married the housing services available from HUD, the medical 
        and social service support available from Veterans Affairs, and 
        the job training/education services available from the 
        Department of Labor in order to move homeless veterans into the 
        societal mainstream as self-supporting and contributing members 
        to their families and their communities.

    Veterans returning from Afghanistan and Iraq face problems that can 
be overcome through the Veterans Affairs system. Many problems occur 
from an ineffective readjustment period after transitioning from war 
zones. If the veteran is not connected to comprehensive services, then 
other problems, e.g., drugs, crime and homelessness, will surface.
    A unified service delivery system should be developed with HUD, VA 
and DOL participating in an effort to create a one stop application 
process. This process would be designed to eliminate the barriers which 
have been put in place that severely limit and discourage the veterans' 
efforts at accessing services in a timely manner.
    In discharging soldiers from active duty, there should be a 
``handoff'' system whereby their final physical, specifically their 
psychosocial and mental health issues, are documented and forwarded to 
their nearest VA medical center in their home areas. This should 
eliminate duplication of efforts and accelerate the time that treatment 
can begin.
    MCVET is uniquely positioned because of the presence of Veterans 
Affairs' staff who are stationed at the agency. The staff includes but 
is not limited to psychologists and psychiatrists at the doctoral level 
and social workers. Additionally, a liaison from the Grant and Per Diem 
program is in the office during the week.
    These VA personnel assist in the admissions process for veterans 
who are in immediate need of mental health services and are key in 
determining the level of care needed. Our students are able to access 
mental health services within one week of entering our program. Also, 
psychosocial assessments are conducted at the agency within the first 
week in an effort to identify for MCVET staff the level of mental 
health services that should be given to each student. Without the 
assistance of VA mental health professionals, the admissions process 
becomes time consuming with a distinct possibility of losing the 
veteran to the streets. Veterans Affairs has adequate resources to 
treat mental health issues once the veteran is admitted. We can 
recommend that Veterans Affairs develop the ability to use its 
resources and expand the utilization of the Vet Centers. Vet Centers 
can be found in most major population centers.
    MCVET's job placement office has placed veterans in high profile 
jobs such as drafting, certified computer systems administrator, and 
maintenance technician for a municipal transportation system, master 
fitness trainer, web designer, and schoolteacher. MCVET strives to 
place veterans in situations where they can succeed rather than fail.

      For FY 2007, the retention rate after 90 days for 
veterans placed in employment was 96 percent.
      After 180 days, the retention rate for FY 2007 was 90 
percent.
      For FY 2006, it was 79 percent.

    We have placed 97 percent of the veterans seeking employment for FY 
2007. (See chart below) We are committed to developing careers for our 
veterans rather than dead-end jobs that tend to perpetuate the cycle of 
poverty and homelessness.
    Veterans who are educated, gainfully employed and independent are 
assets to their communities. They are reunifying with families, 
purchasing their own homes, starting their own businesses and 
participating in the economy. Because of our work with veterans, HUD 
declared the program a national model on 7 May 1997. This occurred 
after we had been serving veterans a little less than 3 years.
    In closing, I would like to thank you for this opportunity to 
appear before you and to share MCVET's story. Homeless veterans are 
likely to face greater challenges in the years ahead as scarce 
resources strain a service delivery system that is already 
overburdened. I urge you, in your deliberations, to consider the plight 
of those young men and women who have been sent to defend the ideals of 
this country. Many of them are returning home broken of body, mind and 
soul and this country needs to provide them with resources to enable 
them to share in the American dream.

                                    Department of Labor Performance Measures
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                 Percentage of    Department of
               Category                    Year     MCVET Goal  Accomplishment        Goal          Labor Goal
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                         FY 06-07
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Assessments                                               300            313              104%              85%
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Enrollments                                               200            208              104%              85%
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Placements                                                160            154               97%              85%
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
90-Day Retention                                          112            107               96%              85%
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Average Hrly. Wage                                      $9.00         $13.12              146%              85%
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                         FY 05-06
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Assessments                                               300            321              107%              85%
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Enrollments                                               200            202              101%              85%
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Placements                                                160            155               97%              85%
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
90-Day Retention                                          112            109               97%              85%
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Average Hrly. Wage                                      $9.00         $12.03              134%              85%
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                         FY 04-05
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Assessments                                               300            309              103%              85%
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Enrollments                                               200            204              102%              85%
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Placements                                                160            159               99%              85%
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
90-Day Retention                                          112            118              105%              85%
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Average Hrly. Wage                                      $9.00         $12.17              135%              85%
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


                                 
      Prepared Statement of Phil Landis, Chief Executive Officer,
                   Veterans Village of San Diego, CA
    Chairman Filner, Congressman Buyer, Committee Members, My name is 
Phil Landis and I am the Chief Executive Officer of the finest 
homeless, veteran-only, drug and alcohol treatment facility in the 
United States. Prior to assuming duties as CEO, for the previous 11 
years I was blessed to be a member of the Board of Directors and 
ultimately chair of Veterans Village of San Diego (VVSD), formerly 
known as Vietnam Veterans of San Diego. In addition to the Veteran 
Recovery Center, VVSD is the founder of the National Stand Down which 
annually, for three days in July, hosts over 700 homeless veterans and 
their families in a tent city where they can access medical and dental 
services, employment services, VA, Social Security, and have available 
to them the services of other providers in the San Diego area. While at 
Stand Down, veterans also have the opportunity to have legal issues 
examined and potentially have misdemeanors and their records cleared at 
``Homeless Court'', also founded by VVSD in partnership with the San 
Diego Public Defenders Office. As you can readily see, I have been 
involved with/in the homeless veteran issue for many years.
    First, let me say that homelessness in the United States of America 
is a fact of life that we as the richest Nation in the world should be 
ashamed of. Further, the fact that in San Diego County alone there are 
over 2000 homeless veterans each and every night is a national 
travesty. Our veterans should not be relegated to a life on the streets 
with no hope for a return to a healthy, sober and productive life.
    Homelessness and drug/alcohol addiction go hand in hand and they 
are not limited to any one socio economic level. At Veterans Village of 
San Diego, we count among our successful alumni a Medal of Honor 
recipient, navy fighter pilots, army helicopter pilots, officers and 
enlisted, senior and junior, infantry to administration.
    Until the last couple of years, most of our clients have been 
Vietnam Veterans, Cold War Era Veterans, Gulf War Veterans, most with a 
time lag before they seek help of up to several years. Recently, we are 
seeing a startling trend with our young OIF/OEF/GWOT veterans, the time 
between separation from the service and becoming homeless and addicted 
is diminishing from years to, in some cases, months. The issues are 
remarkably similar to those carried by their predecessors, drug/alcohol 
abuse and addiction, mixed with post traumatic stress disorder or some 
other treatable mental illness. We cannot let this happen again, the 
lessons we learned from our Vietnam Veterans should be applied to our 
OIF/OEF veterans through early identification of mental health issues, 
specifically PTSD and Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI). If this early 
treatment is available for not only veterans but active duty as well, 
and they are encouraged to participate in the treatment, then perhaps 
we can stop the cycle before it has a chance to become an embarrassment 
to our great country.
    For the last 20 years, VVSD has sponsored the National Stand Down. 
Each year the number of veterans participating has continued to grow to 
over 700 this past year, with at least that number anticipated this 
July. If the number continues to grow, we as a Nation are not 
addressing the needs of our veterans and this generation of combat 
heroes will relive what their comrades in arms from past conflicts have 
lived, more homelessness and addiction.
    For the last 8 years the city of San Diego has funded an emergency 
shelter program, two shelters, one for the general population and one 
for veterans only. VVSD has operated the Veteran Only Winter Shelter 
for the city each year of operation. This year's shelter program ended 
on April 2, 2008 and over 400, non-duplicated Social Security numbers 
of veterans were recorded. What does this mean, the issue of homeless 
veterans is not going away and may in fact be growing.
What can we do?
    VVSD is just a small part of the answer, currently we operate 224 
early treatment beds where homeless addicted veterans receive 
residential recovery services, mental health therapy and a safe 
environment to learn how to stay clean and sober. Once clean and sober, 
our employment services department enters the game, skills and aptitude 
assessment, training if required, assistance with writing a resume, and 
finally placement in a job with a life sustaining wage. After 
employment, VVSD provides 64 beds in three sober living facilities 
where the veteran can stay for up to 24 months. All of this, and more, 
information is available on our Web site, www.vvsd.net.
What do we need?
    After becoming clean and sober, gaining life sustaining employment, 
and getting physically healthy, our veterans need affordable supportive 
housing, both transitional and permanent. Studies have demonstrated 
that the longer a person stays in a supportive environment, the greater 
the likelihood of long term success is. We need additional funding to 
build or purchase additional transitional/permanent housing beds, not 
just in San Diego or California, but throughout the United States, in 
any city where there resides a veteran who for what ever reason must 
spend the night on the street, under a bridge or in a doorway. We also 
need additional funding to expand the supportive services that are 
provided, specifically weekly case management and therapy.
    The Department of Veteran Affairs is meeting the challenge of 
providing services and treatment of our newest veterans head on. 
However, resources seem to be limited and the need continues to 
escalate. Though the VA budget for healthcare has steadily increased, 
more needs to be done. I am sure that Secretary Peak would happily 
provide the committee with the budget needed to meet the growing 
requirements. Again, this is step one, treat the veteran before he 
falls into the cycle of drug/alcohol addiction and ultimately 
homelessness. Our veterans deserve no less.
    New to the homeless veteran issue is prevention. Armed with the 
lessons learned from treating Vietnam Era veterans, many with post 
traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), now is the time to act to prevent the 
veterans of the Iraqi and Afghanistan Theatres of war from entering the 
cycle that leads to homelessness and addiction. To that end VVSD has 
embarked on a new program, privately funded by a grant, called the 
Warrior Tradition Program. This program will be targeted to our most 
recent veterans and active duty service members, to provide them with a 
safe place to voice their concerns, receive peer support and guidance 
from experienced facilitators who have experienced the rigors of combat 
and PTSD and referral to other services as the needs are identified.
    On a slightly different note, I would like to address a VA policy 
that impacts service providers to veterans such as VVSD.
    The VA Grant and Per Diem program is the largest government funder 
of homeless veteran programs in America. This important and successful 
program provides transitional housing and services to thousands of 
homeless veterans through over 300 programs across America.
    Approximately one year ago, the VA Grant and Per Diem Program 
informed grantee that to open any new beds or to receive a per diem 
rate increase, agencies are now required to provide a valid, Indirect 
Cost Rate to determine the cost of administrative overhead. This 
requirement is difficult for homeless veteran providers like VVSD to 
meet for three reasons:

    1.  The amount of work to determine this rate is overwhelming. It 
took our Chief Financial Officer, who has both a Bachelors and Masters 
in Accounting, four months to put the required information together.
    2.  The Indirect Cost Rate places a huge financial burden on the 
resources of homeless veteran agencies. Some agencies such as HUD have 
a maximum Administrative Rate of 5%. Others, like some city grants, pay 
no administrative overhead. Some government funders provide up to a 20% 
rate. Under the Indirect Cost Rate, a small nonprofit like VVSD must 
use its precious and limited non-governmental funds to subsidize a 
grant that pays less than the agency's average Indirect Cost Rate.
    3.  Because of this requirement, VVSD was near walking away from a 
foundation grant of almost $1 Million., that helps Iraqi and 
Afghanistan veterans and active duty members cope with PTSD. Only after 
the Foundation unhappily agreed to include an Indirect Cost Rate and 
budget realignments was the grant saved. Currently, VVSD is in danger 
of discontinuing our contract with the City of San Diego for the 4 
month long, 150 bed Emergency Winter Shelter for Veterans for the same 
reason: being required to operate the program at a deficit. This would 
be tragic.

    Most nonprofits receive funding from multiple government agencies: 
Federal, state and local, and they each have different rules and 
allowances for administration. The Indirect Cost Rate places the burden 
of covering administrative overhead on the usually small nonprofit that 
is juggling these grants to provide the best possible services to 
veterans. The Indirect Cost Rate requirement reduces services for 
homeless veterans and should be discontinued.
    This concludes my remarks.

                                 
   Prepared Statement of William G. D'Arcy, Chief Operating Officer,
    Catholic Charities Housing Development Corporation, Chicago, IL
Hello, Mr. Chairman, honorable committee members and guests.
    My name is William D'Arcy. I am honored to be invited to offer 
testimony on the status of the St. Leo Residence for Veterans that was 
developed as a pilot project under Public Law 107-95, the Homeless 
Veterans Comprehensive Assistance Act of 2001.
    I am employed at Catholic Charities of the Archdiocese of Chicago 
and serve as the Chief Operating Officer of the Catholic Charities 
Housing Development Corporation in Chicago, IL. I will give testimony 
about the pilot project at the St. Leo Residence for Veterans and 
Auburn Gresham Community Based Outpatient Clinic (Clinic) that Catholic 
Charities developed in Chicago, IL by working with the U.S. Department 
of Veterans Affairs (VA).
    We at Catholic Charities of Chicago are committed to work toward 
the national goal to end chronic homelessness among veterans. I am 
happy to report that we had a successful first year of operations at 
the St. Leo Residence and Auburn Gresham Clinic in Chicago, IL. I will 
summarize my comments in three sections: Project Planning & 
Construction, First Year of Operations, and Lessons Learned.

              Section One--Project Planning & Construction

    In November 2002, representatives of the Department of Veterans 
Affairs requested Catholic Charities of the Archdiocese of Chicago to 
join in a national pilot program aimed at developing affordable housing 
for homeless veterans. Specifically, the pilot project included 
building a residence of 141 studio apartments for homeless veterans and 
an outpatient clinic for veterans partially funded through the Veterans 
Affairs Loan Guarantee program (P.L. 107-95).
    The Catholic Charities Housing Development Corporation (CCHDC) is 
the project sponsor. CCHDC has developed and managed affordable housing 
in Cook County, IL since 1985. Presently Catholic Charities manages 24 
affordable and federally assisted housing properties that serve more 
than 1,700 seniors, adults and families on a daily basis. Veterans live 
in many of our buildings and three properties serve veterans by design.
Mission and Vision
    The mission of the St. Leo Residence is to furnish housing for 
homeless veterans, and the Auburn Gresham Clinic provides medical 
services, mental health counseling, job search assistance and case 
management supportive services.
    The vision is to attract homeless veterans to live at St. Leo 
Residence in a safe and sober environment while they obtain employment, 
improve their ability to live independently and attain financial 
stability. It is also expected that thousands of veterans from the 
south side of Chicago will travel to the nearby Auburn Gresham Clinic 
to receive primary care, mental health, benefits assistance, employment 
assistance and related services.
The Unmet Need
    The Department of Veterans Affairs estimates there are as many as 
154,000 homeless veterans in the United States and approximately 800 
homeless veterans in the Chicago area.
    In addition, the Veterans Integrated Service Network 12 reported 
that a zip code analysis of Chicago veteran patients found over 70,000 
veterans residing on the south and southeast sides of Chicago. This 
group is served by the Auburn Gresham Clinic.
Building Sites and Construction
    The St. Leo Residence is located at 7750 S. Emerald Avenue, 
Chicago, IL and was built on the site of a closed Catholic church 
procured from the Archdiocese of Chicago. The Auburn Gresham Clinic is 
one block away at 7731 S. Halsted Street, Chicago, IL.
    These sites were chosen because public transportation is available 
at the intersection of 79th Street and Halsted Street on the south side 
of Chicago. Catholic Charities purchased the land and buildings of the 
former St. Leo Church complex. The Church tower was saved but the old 
church, convent and school were demolished to make way for the 
apartment building. Catholic Charities purchased land on Halsted Street 
for the Clinic and its parking lot.
    Construction at the St. Leo Residence began in June 2005. Homeless 
veterans began moving in January 18, 2007 and the building was fully 
occupied in two weeks. The Auburn Gresham Clinic was completed in late 
April 2007 and the Jesse Brown VA Medical Center began offering 
services at the Clinic on May 15, 2007.
Project Description
    At St. Leo Residence, the formerly homeless veterans live in 141 
studio units, each containing its own kitchen and full bathroom. The 
65,632 square foot apartment building has four floors and provides 
common recreational, exercise and meeting areas. The front door is 
monitored at the main desk on a 24 hour per day, 7 days per week 
schedule. Off-street parking is provided.
    The Auburn Gresham Clinic is a two-story 15,800 square foot 
building. The primary care and mental health services are located on 
the first floor. Offices and meeting rooms on the second floor provide 
spaces for the Illinois Department of Employment Security, Veterans 
Benefits Administration, Veterans Resource Center, a computer training 
room, and an Illinois AMVETS service officer. Off street parking is 
provided.
Purposes of the Housing
    St. Leo Residence houses 141 formerly homeless veterans. It 
provides supportive services and counseling with the goal of making 
them self-sufficient. Each veteran is required to seek/obtain/maintain 
employment. Veterans are charged a reasonable fee for rent and must 
maintain strict guidelines about sobriety as a condition of occupancy.
Financing
    Catholic Charities structured its financing plan with 10 layers of 
funding. The cost for the St. Leo Residence and the nearby Auburn 
Gresham Clinic was approximately $20 million.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
                       Source                               Amount
------------------------------------------------------------------------
U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs loan                     $4,900,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Illinois Low Income Housing Tax Credits                      $9,821,498
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Park National Bank purchase of doNation tax credits          $1,855,287
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Illinois Housing Development Authority Trust Fund              $750,000
 loan
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Federal Home Loan Bank loan                                    $750,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
McKinney Supportive Housing Program grant                      $400,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chicago Community Trust grant                                  $250,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Illinois Dept. Commerce & Economic Opportunity                 $129,882
 energy grant
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hilton Chicago Hotel donation                                   $19,250
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Catholic Charities contribution                              $1,030,463
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                  To        $19,906,380
 tal budget cost
------------------------------------------------------------------------


Subsidized Rental Income
    Operating revenue is greatly enhanced through project based Housing 
Choice Vouchers from the Chicago Housing Authority for 50 units. 
Recently, an additional 10 vouchers were received from the Rental 
Subsidy Program of the Chicago Low Income Housing Trust Fund.
Partners
    This pilot project became a reality because it grew out of a public 
and private partnership. Collaborators included: U.S. Department of 
Veterans Affairs, Archdiocese of Chicago, Catholic Charities Housing 
Development Corporation, Illinois Housing Development Authority, 
National Equity Fund, Park National Bank, Federal Home Loan Bank of 
Chicago, Chicago Community Trust, Illinois Department of Commerce & 
Economic Opportunity, City of Chicago Department of Housing, U.S. 
Department of Housing & Urban Development, U.S. Department of Labor and 
Hilton Chicago Hotel.

                 Section Two--First Year of Operations

    The St. Leo Residence and Auburn Gresham Clinic project are viewed 
as quite successful in the first year of operations. The project has 
been recognized by three groups already: the Chicago Neighborhood 
Development Awards gave ``Special Recognition;'' the Institute of Real 
Estate Management presented its ``Affordable Housing'' award; and the 
2007 Charles L. Edson Tax Credit Excellence Awards gave ``Honorable 
Mention'' to St. Leo campus.
Property Management
    Catholic Charities Housing Development Corporation is the property 
manager for St. Leo Residence and the Auburn Gresham Clinic. Catholic 
Charities provides five full-time staff plus two part-time staff, three 
of whom are veterans living at the residence.
Occupancy
    St. Leo Residence averaged 98% occupancy in its first 12 months of 
operation. One measure of success is that 23 veterans (14%) moved out 
into permanent housing. Only seven veterans (4%) left the program 
because they broke the lease requirements. Another success is that St. 
Leo Residence operated at breakeven financially after funding the 
escrow and reserve accounts.
Social Services
    Catholic Charities provides four case managers, a job developer, a 
community liaison and supervisory staff that serve a tenant population 
comprised of chronically homeless and mentally ill veterans who are 
highly eligible and highly connected to veteran's services. In the 
first year, Catholic Charities found a need to expand its social 
service staff in response to the personal needs presented by the 
veterans. Case managers maintained frequent contact with the veterans.
Clinic Services
    Jesse Brown VA Medical Center reports that Auburn Gresham Clinic 
served 1,185 veterans in the first nine months of operation. These same 
veterans had 4,951 encounters of service at the Clinic, including: 
medical health care, mental health counseling, Vet Center counseling 
and a computer training program.
    The Illinois Department of Employment Security reports that it 
assisted 312 veterans in job searches and that 45 (14%) obtained 
employment in the first nine months of operation.

                     Section Three--Lessons Learned

    Several components of the project contribute to its overall 
success, namely:
Public & Private Partnership
    Part of the success of the St. Leo Residence and Auburn Gresham 
Clinic stems from the public and private partnership that developed to 
support the project. It must be noted that the VA's commitment to this 
project was vital in assisting Catholic Charities to recruit others to 
join. The project engaged 4 Federal agencies, 2 State of Illinois 
agencies and the City of Chicago to participate. In addition, private 
participants were 2 faith based groups, a foundation, a bank, the tax 
credit syndicator and a hotel. Public and private partnerships are 
necessary but they can be quite complicated and require a considerable 
time commitment.
Financing
    Part of the success relates to the 10 layers of funding that were 
assembled. The VA's ability to commit the first funding for the project 
was the key that opened the door to other sources of funding. In 
addition, the commercial component of the Auburn Gresham Clinic is a 
stabilizing factor. The State of Illinois provided $10 million in 
Federal low income housing tax credits to this project--one of its 
largest allocations ever. Catholic Charities procured more than $4 
million in donations to fill funding gaps. If other pilot projects are 
to be built, a simpler financing approach must be found.
Housing Vouchers
    Part of the success comes from having project-based housing 
vouchers to ensure operational funding. While the first year had a 
breakeven financial outcome, housing vouchers provided only 35% of the 
rental income. Low rents collected from veterans provided 65% of 
funding. Such a small revenue budget cannot pay for both property 
management and social services. More housing vouchers and/or grants are 
needed or it is likely this project will fail.
Social Services
    Part of the success comes from the large Catholic Charities social 
service team. In the first year, 79 residents (48.5%) of St. Leo 
Residence obtained some employment--seasonal, part-time or full-time. 
Nearly all the veterans are receiving benefits. This is a great 
achievement. However, the cost of social services was in excess of 
$500,000. These funds came from grants and donors--not from collecting 
rents from the veterans. It is doubtful that Catholic Charities can 
sustain the first year level of social services for subsequent years 
because most grants and donations were one-time events. Without social 
services, positive outcomes for the veterans are unlikely, thus, 
funding for social services is vital to future success.
Community Response
    Part of the success comes from community acceptance of St. Leo 
Residence and the Auburn Gresham Clinic. Being located in a 
neighborhood and near transportation is very important. Benefactors of 
St. Leo Residence come from various areas: local businesses, church 
groups, and veterans groups are frequently generous with donations of 
food, clothing and financial support of social activities. Ongoing 
support from these groups is critical to helping the veterans.

                               Conclusion

    We at Catholic Charities believe that our country needs more 
housing to address the problem of homelessness among veterans. The St. 
Leo Residence and Auburn Gresham Clinic have made a real contribution 
to the national plan to end homelessness. The formerly homeless 
veterans are becoming viable contributors to our society. We are 
willing to work with anyone you designate to review this pilot project 
in order to make the next project even more successful. I urge the 
Committee to promote this program, find a way to simplify its 
implementation and provide financial support for social services. Thank 
you.

                                 
          Prepared Statement of Peter H. Dougherty, Director,
      Homeless Veterans Programs, Veterans Health Administration,
                  U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs
    Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I am pleased to be here 
today to discuss the Department of Veterans Affairs' programs and 
services that help homeless veterans achieve self-sufficiency. Thank 
you for inviting us to testify today.
    Mr. Chairman, as you and this Committee know, homelessness for any 
person is unacceptable; however, for those who have honorably served 
our Nation in the military, homelessness should be inconceivable. VA's 
commitment to end chronic homelessness among veterans gains strength 
every day. To meet that goal, VA is making unprecedented strides to 
create opportunities to bring together veterans in need of assistance 
with the wide range of services and treatment VA provides directly as 
well as those services we offer in partnership with others.
    As the largest integrated health care system in the United States 
and, as such, the largest provider of homeless treatment and assistance 
services to homeless veterans in the Nation, VA provides health care 
and services to more than 100,000 homeless veterans each year. We do 
this by aggressively reaching out and engaging veterans in shelters and 
in soup kitchens, on the streets and under bridges. By not waiting for 
veterans to contact us and by proactively offering services, VA helps 
some 70,000 of these veterans each year who would not otherwise know of 
their eligibility for assistance. We connect homeless veterans to a 
full complement of VA health care and benefits, including compensation 
and pension, vocational rehabilitation, loan guaranty and education 
services.
    We continuously work to reach and identify homeless veterans and 
encourage their utilization of VA's health care system. Once they are 
enrolled, we furnish timely access to quality primary health care, as 
well as psychiatric evaluations and treatment and engagement in 
treatment programs for substance abuse disorders. In addition, it is 
extremely important that these veterans are seen by mental health 
specialists and a case manager. Our objective is to help these veterans 
receive coordinated needed care and other VA benefits, which, in turn, 
furthers their chances of obtaining and maintaining independent housing 
and gainful employment. The provision of such VA assistance should 
enable most veterans to live as independently as possible given their 
individual circumstances.
    We work very closely with our Federal partners at the Departments 
of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Health and Human Services (HHS) 
and Labor (DOL) specifically DOL's Veterans' Employment and Training 
Service, to ensure those homeless veterans who want and need housing, 
alternative access to health care and supportive services and 
employment have an opportunity to become productive, tax-paying members 
of society. Housing and employment are very important because we 
understand from many formerly homeless veterans that having 
opportunities for gainful employment were vital to their being able to 
overcome psychological barriers that contributed to their homelessness.
    With the support of Congress, VA continues to make a significant 
investment in the provision of services for homeless veterans. We 
expect to spend nearly $300 million this year. VA expects to spend 
nearly $1.6 billion to cover homeless veteran treatments and programs 
to assist homeless veterans supported through the Veterans Health 
Administration (VHA).
    Services and treatment for mental health and substance use 
disorders are essential both to the already homeless veteran and to 
those at risk for homelessness. VA's overall mental health funding 
increased by nearly $200 million this year, and we use those funds to 
enhance access to mental health services and substance use treatment 
programs. Increasing access and availability to mental health and 
substance use treatment services are critical to ensure that those 
veterans who live far away from VA healthcare facilities are able to 
live successfully in their communities.
    Equally important is the work of the Veterans Benefits 
Administration (VBA). VBA's Loan Guaranty Service program allows non-
profit entities to purchase VA foreclosed properties. More than 200 
homes have been sold to non-profit and faith-based organizations that 
are helping to provide thousands of nights of shelter to homeless 
veterans and other homeless individuals. I also want to note that VBA's 
Compensation and Pension Service strives to provide timely processing 
and payment of benefits claims to homeless veterans. As a result of 
VBA's efforts, 21,000 veterans' claims were expedited to allow these 
veterans to receive the benefits to which they are entitled.
    As part of VA's efforts to eradicate homelessness among veterans, 
we work in a variety of venues with multiple partners at the Federal, 
state, territorial, tribal and local government levels. We have 
hundreds of community non-profit and faith-based service providers 
working in tandem with our healthcare and benefits staff to improve the 
lives of tens of thousands of homeless veterans each night. We have 
about 2,000 beds for homeless veterans specifically available under our 
domiciliary care and other VA operated residential rehabilitation 
programs.
    A year-long follow-up study of 1,350 veterans discharged from VA's 
residential care programs indicates that we are achieving long-term 
success for the well-being of these veterans. Four out of five veterans 
who completed these programs remain appropriately housed one year after 
discharge. Through such effective, innovative and extensive 
collaboration, VA is able to maximize opportunities for success.
    We firmly believe that the best strategy to prevent homelessness is 
early intervention. As the Subcommittee knows, combat-theater veterans 
returning from the present conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan have, 
depending on their date of discharge, enhanced enrollment priority for 
up to five years in VA's health care system and extended eligibility 
for VA health care at no cost for conditions possibly related to their 
combat service. We believe that this eligibility allows our clinical 
staff to identify additional health problems that may, if otherwise 
left untreated, contribute to future homelessness among those veterans. 
During the past two years, 556 returning veterans have needed VA 
residential services either in VA-operated programs or in the community 
transitional housing programs under our Homeless Grant and Per Diem 
Program. The best option is to reach out and to treat those in need who 
are willing to seek services today to prevent more acute problems 
later.
Interagency Council on Homelessness (ICH), Intergovernmental and Local 
        Relationships
    VA has always been an active partner with nearly all Federal 
departments and agencies that provide services to homeless veterans. 
Last month, Secretary Peake was passed the chair of the Interagency 
Council on Homelessness (ICH), demonstrating his and VA's commitment to 
working collaboratively. We participate in a variety of interagency 
efforts to assist homeless veterans. During Secretary Peake's tenure as 
ICH Chair, VA will continue hosting regular meetings of the ICH Senior 
Policy Group. These efforts have brought VA to an unprecedented 
involvement in State and local plans to end chronic homelessness.
    In the past, VA has worked closely with HUD and HHS to assist the 
chronically homeless with housing, healthcare and benefits 
coordination. Under this initiative, funding was provided to 11 
communities that developed quality plans to house and provide 
wraparound services. As a result of our collaboration, nearly 1200 
individuals were enrolled in the program during the first year of the 
project, and nearly 600 were housed. Thirty percent of those receiving 
services under this initiative are veterans. This effort is based on 
the premise that housing and treating those who are chronically 
homeless will decrease total costs for healthcare, emergency housing, 
related social services and the court system. VA is pleased to be a 
partner in this effort. We are also pleased to lead the effort to 
evaluate this project, in partnership with HUD and HHS, and look 
forward to sharing with you our findings regarding the subsequent year 
of the project when they become available.
    VA has a long tradition of engaging and working with local 
providers in their communities. VA collaborates annually with 
communities across the United States in Project CHALENG (Community 
Homelessness Assessment, Local Education and Networking Groups) for 
veterans. At regularly scheduled CHALENG meetings, VA works with faith-
based and community homeless service providers, representatives of 
Federal, state, territorial, tribal and local governments, and homeless 
veterans, themselves. Our meetings and annual reports are designed to 
identify met and unmet needs for homeless veterans, aid in the 
community effort to aid homeless veterans, and develop local action 
plans to address those identified needs.
    Last year our CHALENG meetings had over 9,000 participants, 
including nearly 5,000 current or formerly homeless veterans at 
meetings sponsored by VA medical centers and supported by regional 
offices to strengthen their partnerships with community service 
providers. This leads to better coordiNation of VA services as well as 
the development of innovative, cost-effective strategies to address the 
needs of homeless veterans at the local level. It shows us what is 
being done effectively and what pressing unmet needs remain.
    This process also helps us to establish, as part of local needs, 
the number of veterans who are homeless on any given night. You should 
be pleased to know that the number of homeless veterans is going down. 
Two years ago we estimated there were approximately 195,000 homeless 
veterans on any given night. Last year we believe that number dropped 
to 154,000, a 21-percent reduction. While there are still far too many 
veterans among the homeless, we are making progress, and their numbers 
are coming down. This progress demonstrates to us that this scourge is 
not unmanageable and that our collective efforts are realizing success. 
We are confident that our continued efforts will achieve our goal of 
ending chronic homelessness among veterans.
VA Involvement in Stand Downs
    VA's involvement in stand downs began more than 20 years ago when 
the first stand down for homeless veterans was held in San Diego. We 
have participated in over 2,000 events since then. Participating in 
stand downs for homeless veterans is another avenue by which VA 
continues its collaborative outreach at the local level through 
coordiNation of our programs with other departments, agencies, and 
private sector programs. In calendar year 2007, VA, along with hundreds 
of veteran service organization representatives, community homeless 
service providers, state and local government offices, faith-based 
organizations, and health and social service providers, provided 
assistance to more than 27,000 veterans. The latest information shows 
that more than 3,500 spouses and children attended these events. Nearly 
18,000 volunteers and VA employees participated in last year's stand 
downs.
Homeless Providers Grant and Per Diem Program
    VA's largest program involving local communities remains our 
Homeless Providers Grant and Per Diem Program. As you are aware, this 
highly successful program allows VA to provide grants to state and 
local governments as well as faith-based and other non-profit 
organizations to develop supportive transitional housing programs and 
supportive service centers for homeless veterans. The current Notices 
of Funding Availability (NOFA) has $37 million available: $12 million 
for per diem only programs and $25 million for new grant programs. 
Organizations may also use VA grants to purchase vans to conduct 
outreach and provide transportation for homeless veterans to health 
care and employment services.
    Since the Grant and Per Diem Program was authorized in 1992, VA has 
fostered the development of nearly 500 programs with more than 9,000 
operational beds today and with plans already approved or in process to 
develop more than 14,000 transitional housing beds. We already have 23 
independent service centers and provided funding for 200 vans to 
provide transportation for outreach and connections with services.
    We are currently accepting applications to create 2,200 new 
transitional housing beds. Applications will be accepted until April 
11, 2008 and will be promptly reviewed, with awards expected by this 
summer.
Technical Assistance Grants
    With the enactment of Public Law 107-95, VA was authorized to 
provide grants to entities with expertise in preparing grant 
applications. We have awarded funding to two entities that are 
providing technical assistance to non-profit community and faith-based 
groups that are interested in seeking VA and other grants relating to 
serving homeless veterans. Grants were awarded to National Coalition 
for Homeless Veterans (NCHV), Public Resources, Inc., and the North 
Carolina Governor's Institute on Alcohol and Substance Abuse, Inc. to 
aid us in this effort. VA will continue to expand and improve services 
to connect veteran-specific service providers to other governmental and 
non-government resources.
Grants for Homeless Veterans with Special Needs
    VA also provides grants to its health care facilities and existing 
grant and per diem recipients to assist them to serve homeless veterans 
with special needs, including women, women who care for dependent 
children, the chronically mentally ill, frail elderly, and, the 
terminally ill. We initiated this program in FY 2004 and have provided 
special needs funding totaling $15.7 million to 29 organizations. We 
issued two notices of funding availability on February 22, 2007. That 
call resulted in $8.8 million to continue to fund both existing special 
needs grants and new awards.
Residential Rehabilitation and Treatment Programs (RRTPs)
    VA's Domiciliary Care for Homeless Veterans (DCHV) Program, which 
was recently renamed the ``Residential Rehabilitation and Treatment 
Program,'' provides a full range of treatment and rehabilitation 
services to many homeless veterans. Over the past 17 years, VA has 
established 34 DCHV programs providing 1,873 beds. There have been over 
71,000 episodes of treatment in the DCHV program since 1987. VA 
continues to improve access to the services offered through these 
programs. In FY 2007, DCHV programs treated 5,905 Homeless veterans, 
while VA funded the development of nine new DCHV programs offering a 
total of 400 new beds. In FY 2006, VA funded the development of two 
additional DCHV programs totaling 100 beds. In addition to the DCHV 
program, homeless veterans receive treatment and rehabilitation 
services in the Psychosocial Residential Rehabilitation Treatment 
Program (PRRTP). Currently there are 72 PRRTP programs with a total of 
2,020 beds.
Staffing at VBA Regional Offices
    Homeless Veterans Outreach Coordinators (HVOCs) at all VBA regional 
offices work in their communities to identify eligible homeless 
veterans, advise them of VA benefits and services, and assist them with 
claims. The coordinators also network with other VA entities, veteran 
service organizations, local governments, social service agencies and 
other service providers to inform homeless veterans about other 
benefits and services available to them. In FY 2007, VBA staff assisted 
homeless veterans in 28,962 instances. They contacted 4,434 shelters, 
made 5,053 referrals to community agencies, and made 4,006 referrals to 
VHA and DoL's Homeless Veterans Reintegration Programs (HVRP).
    Since the beginning of FY 2003, regional offices have maintained an 
active record of all compensation and pension claims received from 
homeless veterans. Procedures for the special handling and processing 
of these claims are in place. From FY 2003 through FY 2007, VBA 
received 21,366 claims for compensation and pension from homeless 
veterans. Of those claims, 59 percent were for compensation and 41 
percent were for pension. Of the compensation claims processed, 42.04 
percent were granted, with an average disability rating of 44.85 
percent, and 15.24 percent of claimants were rated at 100 percent 
disabled. Of the total claims denied, 42.66 percent were due to the 
veteran's disability not being service connected. The average 
processing time for all compensation claims of homeless veterans was 
155 days. Of the pension claims processed, 76.60 percent were granted. 
Nine percent of the claims denied were due to the veteran's disability 
not being permanent and total. The average processing time for all 
pension claims of homeless veterans was 123 days.
Multifamily Transitional Housing Loan Guaranty Program
    Public Law 105-368 authorized VA to establish a pilot program to 
guarantee up to 15 loans, up to an aggregate loan amount of $100 
million, for multifamily transitional housing. Many complex issues, 
often varying from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, surround 
implementation, and VA has worked closely with veteran service 
organizations, veteran-specific housing providers, faith-based 
organizations, clinical support service programs, VA medical care 
staff, state, city and county agencies, homeless service providers, and 
finance and housing experts. We are also using consultants to assist us 
with our evaluation of potential sites and providers of housing 
services.
    VA has issued a final commitment under this program for a project 
to provide 144 new beds for homeless veterans through the Catholic 
Charities of Chicago. The Catholic Charities' project opened in January 
2007 and was full within a week. At present we do not have any 
additional loans that appear to be approved
CoordiNation of Outreach Services for Veterans At Risk of Homelessness
    VA, together with DoL and with additional assistance from the 
Department of Justice (DOJ), has helped develop demonstration projects 
providing referral and counseling services for veterans who are at risk 
of homelessness and are currently incarcerated. Through FY 2007, VA and 
DOL had seven sites that provided referral and counseling services to 
eligible veterans at risk of homelessness upon their release from 
correctional institutions. Local staffs from VHA and VBA provided 
veterans at each demonstration site with information about available VA 
benefits and services.
    DOL provided funding for these seven sites under its Homeless 
Veterans Reintegration Programs (HVRP) for the Incarcerated Veterans' 
Transition Program (IVTP). VA and DOL are reviewing this program 
carefully and will provide a report on its effectiveness.
HUD-Veterans Affairs Supported Housing (HUD-VASH)
    VA recognizes HUD's longstanding support of the HUD-VASH program. 
This very successful partnership links the provision of VA case 
management services with permanent housing in order to assist the 
homeless veterans. HUD and VA hope to continue this valuable program, 
subject to the availability of resources. Last December, Congress 
appropriated funds to create about 10,000 units of permanent housing 
under the Housing Voucher Choice program. We are working closely with 
our colleagues at HUD and expect that thousands of veterans will be 
able to use these vouchers to move into housing by summer. We are 
starting to hire nearly 300 case managers who will provide case 
management services to those veterans who are eligible for VA health 
care to ensure that they have access to all needed health care and 
services.
    The Administration has proposed in HUD's budget adding an 
additional 9,800 units of permanent housing next year. If that occurs, 
we will make sure these additional veterans receive the appropriate 
case management services.
Recently Discharged Veterans (Operation Enduring Freedom/Operation 
        Iraqi Freedom, OEF/OIF, Veterans)
    During the past three fiscal years, 556 veterans who served in Iraq 
and Afghanistan have been treated in one of VA's homeless-specific 
residential treatment programs. Currently, there are approximately 90 
OEF/OIF veterans in homeless-specific residential treatment programs. 
It is clear to us that there is a strong need for VA to be extremely 
diligent in insuring that these veterans get immediate attention. VA, 
with a host of external partners, seeks out these veterans. I want to 
be abundantly clear that our mission is to serve all eligible veterans 
who need our services.
    I should note that these veterans, like all veterans who enter VA's 
homeless specific services, get access to primary care, but also as 
needed, to appropriate mental health and substance abuse services. Our 
efforts to reach out, find, and appropriately serve these veterans will 
do nothing but increase in the months and years ahead.
Summary
    VA continues to make progress to prevent homelessness and treat our 
homeless veterans. Each year, we provide an annual report to Congress 
that outlines our activities for homeless veterans. VA collaborates 
closely with other Federal agencies, state and local governments and 
community and faith-based organizations to ensure that homeless 
veterans have access to a full range of health care, benefits and 
support services. We still have much to do to end chronic homelessness 
among veterans in America, and we are eager to work with you to meet 
that challenge. Developing appropriate links to health care, housing, 
benefits assistance, employment and transportation are all components 
that help bring these veterans out of despair and homelessness. We 
appreciate all of the assistance the Congress gives us to aid in this 
noble effort.
    Mr. Chairman that concludes my statement. I am pleased to respond 
to any questions you or the subcommittee members may have.

                                 
          Statement of Ronald F. Chamrin, Assistant Director,
                  Economic Commission, American Legion
Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee:
    Thank you for this opportunity to submit The American Legion's 
views on the issue of homelessness among America's veterans. The 
American Legion commends the Committee for addressing this important 
issue.
    The Fiscal Year (FY) 2007 Veterans Affairs (VA) Community 
Homelessness Assessment, Local Education and Networking Groups 
(CHALENG) report estimates that there are nearly 154,000 veterans who 
are homeless at any point in time, down from 195,000 in FY 2006. We 
must be wary of the VA's claim of a decrease of a 21 percent (41,000) 
of homeless veterans over the past year. According to the February 2007 
Homeless Assessment Report to Congress from the U.S. Department of 
Housing and Urban Development 2007, veterans account for 19 percent of 
all homeless people in America. The National Alliance to End 
Homelessness (NAEH) reports that there are 195,827 homeless veterans on 
the street each night. This accounts for 26 percent of all homeless 
people. The Alliance also estimates that 336,627 veterans were homeless 
in 2006.
    According to a report on homelessness released by the Urban 
Institute in 2000, ``Homelessness: Programs and the People They Serve, 
Findings of the National Survey of Homeless Assistance Providers and 
Clients'' the spike in homelessness among veterans during the eighties 
was attributed to: ``the recession 1981-1982, and would go away when 
the economy recovered, while others argued that the problem stemmed 
from a lack of affordable housing and that homeless clients were simply 
a cross section of poor Americans.'' This 2000 study stated that of 
current homeless veterans: ``21 percent served before the Vietnam era 
(before August 1964); 47 percent served during the Vietnam era (between 
August 1964 and April 1975); and 57 percent served since the Vietnam 
era (after April 1975). Many have served in more than one time 
period.''
    In order to prevent a national epidemic of homeless veterans in the 
upcoming years, measures must be taken to assist those veterans who are 
homeless. Steps must also be taken to prevent the future veterans and 
their families from facing homelessness.
THE AMERICAN LEGION HOMELESS VETERANS TASK FORCE
    The American Legion coordinates a Homeless Veterans Task Force 
(HVTF) amongst its 55 departments. Our goal is to augment existing 
homeless veteran providers, the VA Network Homeless Coordinators, and 
the Department of Labor's (DoL) Homeless Veterans Reintegration Program 
(HVRP), Veterans Workforce Investment Program (VWIP), Disabled 
Veterans' Outreach Personnel (DVOPs) and Local Veterans' Employment 
Representative (LVERs). In addition to augmentation, the Task Force 
attempts to fill in the gaps where there is no coverage. Many of The 
American Legion's Departments contain an HVTF chairman and an 
employment chairman. These two individuals coordinate activities with 
The American Legion's local posts within their state. The three-tiered 
coordiNation of these two chairmen and numerous local posts attempts to 
address the needs of homeless veterans in the local community, while 
identifying those at risk and preventing homelessness.
    The American Legion has conducted training with the assistance of 
the National Coalition for Homeless Veterans (NCHV), DoL-Veterans 
Employment and Training Service (VETS), Project Homeless Connect, and 
VA on how to apply for Federal grants in various assistance programs, 
most notably the ``Stand Down'' and Grant and Per Diem programs. It is 
our goal to assist the Grant and Per Diem program by enabling 
individual posts and homeless providers to use The American Legion as a 
force multiplier.
    The American Legion augments homeless veteran providers with 
transportation, food, clothing, cash and in-kind donations, technical 
assistance, employment placement, employment referral, claims 
assistance, veterans' benefits assistance, and in some cases housing 
for homeless veterans. The American Legion department service officers 
are accredited representatives that assist homeless veterans with their 
VA compensation and pension claims.
    A separate program administered by The American Legion that assists 
veterans in need is our ``Heroes to Hometowns'' program. ``Heroes to 
Hometowns'' is a transition program for severely injured service 
members returning home from Operation Enduring Freedom and Operation 
Iraqi Freedom. The ``Heroes to Hometowns'' establishes a support 
network and coordinates resources for severely injured service members 
returning home.
    ``Heroes To Hometowns'' can provide a welcome home celebration, 
temporary financial assistance, pro-bono financial planning, housing 
assistance, home and vehicle adaptation, government claims assistance, 
transportation to hospital visits, entertainment options, childcare, 
counseling, family support, and other benefits.
    The ``Heroes To Hometowns'' program has proven successful in 
preventing many veterans and their families from losing their homes by 
providing financial assistance.
POTENTIAL HOMELESS VETERANS OF OPERATION ENDURING FREEDOM (OEF) AND 
        OPERATION IRAQI FREEDOM (OIF)
    Returning OEF/OIF combat veterans are at risk of becoming homeless. 
Combat veterans of OEF/OIF and the Global War on Terrorism (GWOT) in 
need of assistance are beginning to trickle into the nation's 
community-based veterans' service organizations' homeless programs. 
Already stressed by an increasing need for assistance by post-Vietnam 
Era veterans and strained budgets, homeless services providers are 
deeply concerned about the inevitable rising tide of combat veterans 
who will soon be requesting their support.
    VA's Health Care for Homeless Veterans (HCHV) operates at 133 sites 
and reports assisting 1,819 OIF/OEF era homeless veterans over the past 
three years with an average age of 33. Nearly half of them, 859, were 
seen in the past year alone. The HCHV conducted physical and 
psychiatric health exams, treatment, referrals and ongoing case 
management to these homeless veterans with mental health problems, 
including substance abuse. Now treating combat veterans from Iraq and 
Afghanistan daily, VA is reporting that a high percentage of those 
casualties need treatment for mental health issues. That is consistent 
with studies conducted by VA and other agencies that conclude anywhere 
from 15 percent to more than 35 percent of combat veterans will 
experience some clinical degree of post traumatic stress disorder 
(PTSD), depression or other psychosocial problems.
    Unemployment, underemployment, difficulty translating military 
skills to the civilian sector and the state of our economy all 
contribute to conditions that could lead to homelessness. Younger 
veterans of OIF/OEF are experiencing employment obstacles at an 
alarming rate. A report by the DOL-VETS finds that 11.3 percent of 
veterans ages 20 to 24 were unemployed in 2007, compared to only 8.1 
percent of nonveterans in the same age group. Moreover, a separate 
report by VA (Employment Histories Report Final Compilation Report, 
Associates Inc. September 28, 2007) shows a rise in the figure for 
those who stopped looking for work because they couldn't find jobs or 
returned to school from just 10 percent of young veterans in 2000 to 23 
percent in 2005. The VA even reports a higher percentage of unemployed 
veterans, 18 percent of veterans aged 20-24 who sought jobs within one 
to three years of discharge were unemployed.
    According to the Department of Defense's (DOD's) Manpower Data 
Center, since 9/11, over 1.7 million U.S. service men and women have 
deployed in support of OIF/OEF. Rotations of troops returning home from 
Iraq and Afghanistan are a common occurrence. Military analysts and 
government sources say the military deployments, then the reintegration 
of combat veterans into the civilian society, is unlike anything the 
Nation has experienced since the end of the Vietnam War.
    The DoD has reported that in the support of OIF/OEF from FY 2002 to 
February 29, 2008:

      2.6 million deployment events;
      1.7 million service members have been deployed;
      Currently there are 258,000 service members deployed;
      600,000 service members have more than one deployment;
      468,591 National Guard and Reservists have been deployed 
to Iraq or Afghanistan since 2001
      Out of 600,000 service members with more than one 
deployment, 115,000 are members of the Reserve components

DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS HOMELESS SERVICES
    The signs of an impending crisis are clearly seen in VA's own 
numbers. Under considerable pressure to stretch dollars, VA estimates 
it can provide assistance to about 100,000 homeless veterans each year, 
70,000 are currently receiving services in specialized VA homeless 
programs. Yet, this accounts for less than 20 percent of the more than 
400,000 who will need supportive services during the course of a year. 
Hundreds of community-based organizations nationwide struggle to 
provide assistance to the other 80 percent, but the need far exceeds 
available resources.
    Opponents of additional funding of homeless veteran programs 
frequently state that homeless veterans are all rated a Total 
Disability based upon Individual Unemployability (TDIU) and receive 100 
percent compensation payments. They further argue that because these 
veterans are already receiving enough money to put them on their feet, 
more funding is not needed. In stark contrast to this absurd claim, VA 
reports that only 41 percent of homeless veterans are receiving 
compensation and pension benefits and even then it cannot be assumed 
that all of those 41 percent are receiving the full 100 percent Total 
Disability they often need.
    In addition to this low number of homeless veterans receiving 
monthly benefit payments, many of their claims remain in the enormous 
backlog of all veteran claims. Identification and expedition of claims 
by homeless veterans has the potential to allow for a quicker 
adjudication process and ultimately, money to veterans and in turn 
assisting their transition to a more stable housing situation. VA has 
expedited 21,800 claims for homeless veterans since 2003 and 
approximately 44 percent of compensation claims and 77 percent of 
pension claims of homeless veterans have been approved annually.
VA HOMELESS PROVIDERS GRANT AND PER DIEM PROGRAM REAUTHORIZATION AND 
        APPROPRIATIONS
    In 1992, VA was given authority to establish the Homeless Providers 
Grant and Per Diem (GPD) Program under the Homeless Veterans 
Comprehensive Service Programs Act 1992, Public Law 102-590. The GPD 
Program is offered annually, as funding permits, by VA to fund 
community agencies providing service to homeless veterans. VA can 
provide grants and per diem payments to help public and nonprofit 
organizations establish and operate supportive housing and/or service 
centers for homeless veterans. VA's Central Office staff needs 
additional full-time employees to expand the program to reach even more 
participants.
    Funds are available for assistance in the form of grants to provide 
transitional housing (for up to 24 months) with supportive services. 
Funds can also be used for supportive services in a service center 
facility for homeless veterans not in conjunction with supportive 
housing, or to purchase vans. VA can provide up to $33.10 for each day 
of care a veteran receives in a transitional housing program approved 
under VA's Homeless Providers GPD Program. This token amount is far too 
little to fully assist a single veteran. Finally, all providers must 
justify that their costs are attributed to veterans.
    The American Legion is concerned with the ebb and flow of the 
homeless veteran population and asserts that measures should be enacted 
that allow a provider to always maintain a space for a homeless 
veteran. Due to the transient and drifting nature of chronically 
homeless veterans, seasonal weather changes that allow more homeless 
veterans to venture outside, and other factors, there are periods when 
GPD providers may have an empty bed. If a provider has an empty space 
dedicated for a homeless veteran under the program and, due to factors 
out of their control, a bed remains empty for a period of time, they 
have occasional difficulty justifying the grant and therefore may be 
penalized.
    The application process for grants must be streamlined. The 
accounting process currently required for reimbursement is in constant 
flux during the year and the strain of accurately reporting is placed 
on small community-based providers. Additionally, there are other 
Federal programs that can provide monetary assistance to homeless 
veterans, yet the GPD does not allow these funds to be used as a match 
for VA programs. This often discourages participation. However, other 
Federal programs do allow VA funds to be used as a match. VA's GPD 
program requires unique flexibility due to the nature of the funding, 
homeless veteran providers, and homeless veterans.
    VA reports success in their performance measures to increase access 
and availability to both primary health care and specialty care within 
30 and 60 days. Short-term assistance, between 30 to 60 days, is 
imperative in order to prevent chronic homelessness. Many times, a 
veteran may be in transition due to loss of a job, a medical problem, 
poor finances, or some other factor and only requires a short-term 
transitional shelter that can be provided by the GPD program. In FY 
2006, VA reported that they provided transitional housing services to 
nearly 15,500 homeless veterans. It is imperative that the number of 
veterans served by transitional housing services continues to increase 
and be adjusted to meet the demand. The consequences of inaction will 
be a stagnant, steady number of homeless veterans rather than a 
decrease of the number of homeless veterans.
    The American Legion strongly supports funding the Grant and Per 
Diem Program for a 5-year period (instead of annually) and supports 
increasing the funding level to $200 million annually.
DEPARTMENTS OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT--VETERANS AFFAIRS 
        SUPPORTIVE HOUSING (HUD-VASH) HOMELESS PROGRAM
    The American Legion supports mandatory funding for the Departments 
of Housing and Urban Development (HUD)-Veterans Affairs Supportive 
Housing (HUD-VASH) Homeless Program.
    The Homeless Veterans Comprehensive Assistance Act of 2001 (P.L. 
107-95) codified the HUD-VASH Program, which provides permanent housing 
subsidies and case management services to homeless veterans with mental 
and addictive disorders. Under the HUD-VASH Program, VA screens 
homeless veterans for program eligibility and provides case management 
services to enrollees. HUD allocates rental subsidies from its Housing 
Choice Voucher program to VA, which then distributes them to the 
enrollees. A decade ago, there were approximately 2,000 vouchers 
earmarked for veterans in need of permanent housing.
    The American Legion is pleased to see $75 million appropriated for 
the HUD-VASH program which will create 10,000 units of Section 8 
housing dedicated for veterans and their families. An influx of 300 VA 
staff will assist the residents of these units by providing case 
management.
CHANGING DEMOGRAPHICS OF TRADITIONAL HOMELESS VETERANS
    The Federal definition of a homeless person is: ``An individual who 
(1) lacks a fixed, regular, and adequate nighttime residence and (2) 
has a primary nighttime residence that is (a) a supervised, publicly or 
privately operated shelter designed to provide temporary living 
accommodations (including welfare hotels, congregate shelters, and 
transitional housing for the mentally ill), (b) an institution that 
provides a temporary residence for individuals intended to be 
institutionalized, or (c) a public or private place not designed for or 
ordinarily used as a regular sleeping accommodation for human beings.'' 
McKinney Act (P.L. 100-77, sec 103(2) (1), 101 stat. 485 (1987).
    No longer can a homeless veteran be easily identified as the 
McKinney Act defines. The American Legion is not advocating for an 
expanded definition of a homeless individual, but rather indicating 
that this country needs to help those normally financially secure 
veterans who continue to lose their homes.
    The stereotypes and faces of veterans on the road to homelessness 
are drastically changing. Professionals, the middle-class, blue collar 
and white collar veterans, students, and more middle-aged veterans are 
all affected by the current housing and economic crisis. Each day, 
external factors are affecting a more vulnerable population and thus 
creating different tiers and descriptions of those who are homeless 
veterans. Living with neighbors and relatives, staying short-term in 
hotel rooms, and in vehicles are the realities of those who are 
unemployed and homeless. To quote a veteran who wishes to remain 
anonymous: ``I've been crashing on my buddy's couch for 6 months while 
trying to find a job.'' It is important to note that this veteran is 
not accounted for in the classic definition of homeless.
HOUSING COST BURDEN AMONGST VETERANS
    The American Legion is very concerned with the ever-growing gap of 
housing expenses versus veterans' income. The National Alliance to End 
Homelessness (NAEH) report, ``Vital Mission, Ending Homelessness Among 
Veterans'' reports that currently, over 930,000 veterans pay more than 
50 percent of their income toward housing, be it renting or owning a 
home. (476,877 rent/ 453,354 own).

          ``There is a subset of veterans who rent housing and have 
        severe housing cost burden (paying more than 50 percent of 
        their income toward housing costs). Of all veterans who rent 
        housing (476,877), approximately 10 percent pay more than 50 
        percent of their income for rent. Of those with severe housing 
        cost burden, 20 percent are very low income (have incomes at or 
        below 50 percent of area median income) and 67 percent are 
        extremely low income (have incomes at or below 30 percent of 
        area median income). More than half of veterans with severe 
        housing cost burden (55 percent) fall below the poverty level 
        and 43 percent are receiving foods stamps. Using bivariate 
        analysis, the National Alliance to End Homelessness found a 
        number of statistically significant differences among veterans 
        with severe housing cost burden and those paying less than 50 
        percent of their income for housing.''

    The 2006 American Community Survey (ACS) conducted by the U.S. 
Census Bureau reports that the median monthly housing costs for 
mortgaged owners was $1,402, non-mortgaged owners $399, and renters 
$763. Approximately 37 percent of owners with mortgages, 16 percent of 
owners without mortgages, and 50 percent of renters in the United 
States spent 30 percent or more of household income on housing. The 
2006 ACS further states that the median income for veterans in the past 
12 months of their survey was $34,437.
    Numerous mortgage consultants and financial advisors recommend 
adhering to the 28 percent/36 percent debt to income qualifying ratio. 
That is, in order to safely own a home or rent, an individual should be 
within the 28/36 range in order to withstand emergency financial 
situations without becoming delinquent in payments. Using his ratio, 
the median monthly cost of $1,402 for housing expenses is approximately 
$400 greater than what the average veteran can afford.
    Debt to Income Example (28/36 qualifying ratio model)
        Yearly Gross Income = $34,437 / Divided by 12 = $2,870 per 
        month income
        $2,870 Monthly Income  .28 = $803 allowed for housing 
        expense
        $2,870 Monthly Income  .36 = $1,033 allowed for 
        housing expense plus recurring debt

    The VA Loan Guarantee service has a very strong program, but even 
they report that the median income of all of their veteran loan holders 
is $60,276, or an average of $5,023 a month. However, they have 
reported a drop in loan initiations every month since 2003 (50,000 in 
August 2003 to 10,000 at the end of FY 2007). This could indicate that 
recently discharged and younger veterans may not be able to afford a 
home even using the VA Loan Guarantee program. Research should be 
conducted to ascertain the average age of a veteran homeowner and the 
correlation between the median income, affordability of homes, and the 
impact of the VA Loan Guarantee Program.
CONCLUSION
    The Homeless Grant and Per Diem program is effective, but should be 
augmented with additional HUD-VASH Program vouchers. With 300,000 
service members becoming veterans each year the availability of 
transitional housing must be increased. Our observations have shown 
that when the GPD program is allocated money, they are successful in 
distributing grants and administering their program and are only 
limited by the total dollar amount of funds available.
    Affordable housing, transition assistance, education, and 
employment are each a pillar of financial stability. They will prevent 
homelessness, afford veterans to compete in the private sector, and 
allow this nation's veterans to contribute their transferable military 
occupational skills and education to the civilian sector. Homeless 
veterans have answered the call of duty for this country and are not 
asking for a handout, but rather a hand up.
    The American Legion looks forward to continue working with the 
Committee to assist the nation's homeless veterans and to prevent 
future homelessness. Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee, this 
concludes my statement.

                                 
                     Statement of Hon. Jeff Miller,
         a Representative in Congress from the State of Florida
Thank you Mr. Chairman.
    Homelessness among our nation's veterans is a concern that Congress 
has been diligently working to address. Understanding the needs of this 
special population--including food, clothing, shelter, medical 
services, job training, and transportation--is critical to ending 
homelessness among veterans.
    The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) is the largest Federal 
provider of direct assistance to the homeless, and has been providing 
specialized services to homeless veterans for over 20 years. And, it is 
encouraging to note that VA reports a 21 percent drop in the number of 
homeless veterans from 2006 to 2007. Yet, we still are a long way from 
meeting our goal to end chronic homelessness in this decade.
    Sadly, my home state of Florida has the third highest population of 
homeless veterans in the country. That is why ensuring that programs 
available through VA are effective and monitoring programs to help 
veterans reach and maintain their independence is so important to me.
    I want to note that VA is planning at least 10 ``Stand Downs'' in 
Florida this year. Stand Downs are collaborative events, coordinated 
between local VA's, other government agencies, and community agencies 
who serve the homeless. These events are important to reaching out to 
homeless veterans. They provide food, shelter, clothing, health 
screenings, VA and Social Security benefits counseling, and referrals 
to a variety of other necessary services, such as housing, employment 
and substance abuse treatment.
    The veteran population is becoming more diverse and we have a 
special obligation to ensure that VA adapts their programs to meet the 
needs of all of our veterans. While a majority of homeless veterans are 
male, we are seeing an increase in the number of women serving in our 
military, and women veterans are also overrepresented among the 
homeless population. Additionally, over 400 veterans from Operation 
Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom have sought VA services 
for homeless veterans. These men and women have served us honorably, 
and it is now our turn to serve them, and give them the tools they need 
to reintegrate into civilian life.
    I look forward to hearing from our witnesses today and their view 
of what we must do to combat the vicious cycle of homelessness and 
prevent those veterans at risk of homelessness from becoming homeless.

                                 
                   Statement of Hon. John T. Salazar,
        a Representative in Congress from the State of Colorado
    Good morning Chairman Filner, Ranking Member Buyer and 
distinguished members of this Committee.
    I thank the witnesses joining us here today and look forward to 
hearing their expert testimony and their personal experiences with 
homelessness across our nation.
    Our servicemen and women willingly serve our Nation to ensure that 
our rights and freedoms are preserved.
    At times, their service places them in harm's way.
    It is a tragedy when a veteran loses his or her life in the service 
of our nation.
    It is also tragic when these brave individuals return from the 
battlefield without the ability or the tools to reintegrate into 
civilian life.
    This has resulted in dedicated and talented individuals falling 
victim to poverty and homelessness.
    According to the Veterans' Administration, nearly one-quarter of 
all homeless adults are veterans.
    In addition, many of our veterans who live in poverty are at risk 
of becoming homeless.
    I know that homelessness is a major issue for Veterans in the Third 
District of Colorado.
    The issue of homelessness among veterans is particularly moving.
    It is unbelievable to think that in our Nation, individuals who 
gave so much of themselves can end up without such a basic human need.
    We are fortunate to have such a courageous group of people serving 
in our armed forces.
    They deserve to know that after serving our Nation, there are 
programs in place to help them enter into civilian life.
    I look forward to working with the committee, the VA, community 
groups and others to address the issue of homelessness among our 
Veteran population.
    Mr. Chairman, I thank you and the members of this committee for 
giving us the opportunity to discuss these issues that are so important 
to the well-being of our veterans.

                                 
                 Statement of Sandra A. Miller, Chair,
        Homeless Veterans Committee, Vietnam Veterans of America
    Mr. Chairman, and members of the House Veterans' Affairs Committee, 
my name is Sandra A. Miller. I served as a senior enlisted woman in the 
U.S. Navy from 1975 until 1981 and I currently chair Vietnam Veterans 
of America's (VVA) Homeless Veterans Committee. Perhaps more 
importantly, I work with homeless veterans as the daily Program 
Coordinator of a transitional residence, one of the many programs 
provided by The Philadelphia Veterans Multi-Service & Education Center. 
Our transitional residence receives funding from the Department of 
Veterans Affairs Homeless Grant and Per Diem Program (HGPD) and 
operates under a shared lease agreement on the grounds of the 
Coatesville VA Medical Center.
    On behalf of VVA, I thank you and your colleagues for this 
opportunity to submit testimony sharing our views on the status of 
homeless assistance programs for veterans conducted by the VA.
    Homelessness continues to be a significant problem for veterans. 
The VA estimates about one-third of the adult homeless population have 
served their country in the Armed Services. Current population 
estimates suggest that about 154,000 veterans (male and female) are 
homeless on any given night and perhaps twice as many experience 
homelessness at some point during the course of a year.
    Federal efforts regarding homeless veterans must be particularly 
vigorous for women veterans with minor children in their care. And 
those Federal agencies that have responsibilities in addressing this 
situation, particularly the Departments of Veterans Affairs, Labor, and 
Housing and Urban Development, must work in concert and should be held 
accountable for achieving clearly defined results.
VA HOMELESS GRANT & PER DIEM PROGRAM
    The VA's Homeless Grant & Per Diem Program has been in existence 
since 1994. Since then, thousands of homeless veterans have availed 
themselves of the programs provided by community-based service 
providers. In some areas of this country, the VA and community-based 
service providers work successfully in a collaborative effort to 
actively address homelessness among veterans. The community-based 
service providers are able to supply much needed services in a cost-
effective and efficient manner. The VA recognizes this and encourages 
residential and service center programs in areas where homeless 
veterans would most benefit. The VA HGPD program offers funding in a 
highly competitive grant round. Because financial resources available 
to HGPD are limited, the number of grants awarded and the dollars 
granted are restrictive and hence many geographic areas in need suffer 
a loss that HGPD could address.
    It has been VVA's position that VA Homeless Grant and Per Diem 
funding must be considered a payment rather than a reimbursement for 
expenses, an important distinction that will enable the community-based 
organizations that deliver the majority of these services to operate 
more effectively. Per diem dollars received by services centers are not 
capable of obtaining or retaining appropriate staffing to provide 
services supporting the special needs of the veterans seeking 
assistance. Per diem for service centers is provided on an hourly rate, 
currently only $3.91 per hour. The reality is that most city and 
municipality social services do not have the knowledge or capacity to 
provide appropriate supportive services that directly involve the 
treatment, care, and entitlements of veterans.
    Veterans are disproportionately represented among the homeless 
population, accounting, according to most estimates, for one in three 
homeless persons on any given night--and roughly 400,000 veterans over 
the course of a year. VA's Grant and Per Diem program is effective in 
creating and aiding local shelters by providing transitional housing, 
vocational rehabilitation, and referrals for clinical services.
    VVA is recommending that Congress go above the authorizing level 
for the Homeless Grant and Per Diem program and fund the program at 
$200 million and not the $138 million authorized. Additionally, VVA 
supports and seeks legislation to establish Supportive Services 
Assistance Grants for VA Homeless Grant and Per Diem Service Center 
Grant awardees.
VA HOMELESS DOMICILIARY PROGRAMS
    Domiciliary programs located within various medical centers 
throughout the VA system have proven costly. As stand-alone programs, 
many do not display a high rate of long-term success. Additionally, not 
all VISNs even have Homeless Domiciliary programs.
    Programs assisting homeless veterans need to show a cost/benefit 
ratio in order to survive. Due to the Federal pay scales and other 
indirect cost factors, VA Homeless Domiciliary programs generally cost 
twice as much per homeless veteran participant (often over $100 per day 
per veteran) as programs of community-based organizations. If the 
operational cost of the VA Homeless Domiciliary program is to be 
justified, then an assurance of success, including a diminished rate of 
recidivism, should be expected. This is not always the case and is 
especially true if the veteran has no linked transitional residential 
placement at time of discharge. A linkage with non-profit community 
programs will enhance outcomes in a cost-effective manner and openly 
speak to the belief in the ``continuum of care'' concept embraced by 
the VA. HGPD has increased transitional placement possibilities in a 
number of areas, but more are desperately needed.
    Where no VA Homeless Veteran Domiciliary exists, VVA urges the VA 
to form an active linkage with community-based organizations for 
extended homeless veteran transitional services at the conclusion of VA 
Homeless Domiciliary care.
HOMELESS VETERANS SPECIAL NEEDS
    VVA urges the Presidential Interagency Council on Homeless to 
recognize homeless veterans as a Special Needs Population. Further, we 
urge Congress to require all entities/agencies, including non-profit 
and governmental, that receive Federal program funding dollars, to 
report statistics on the number of veterans they serve, their 
residential status, and the services needed and provided. Additionally, 
VVA supports legislation that would incorporate a ``fair share'' dollar 
approach for the Federal funding of all homeless programs and services 
to specifically target homeless veterans.
HOMELESS WOMEN VETERANS
    Women comprise a growing segment of the Armed Forces, and thousands 
have been deployed to Iraq and Afghanistan. Of the 154,000 homeless 
veterans estimated by the VA, women make up 3 percent of that 
population. The VA must be prepared to provide services to these former 
servicemembers in appropriate settings.
    One of the confounding factors with homeless women veterans is the 
sexual trauma many if not most of them suffered during their service to 
our Nation. Few of us can know the dark places in which those who have 
suffered as the result of rape and physical abuse must live every day. 
It is a very long road to find the path that leads them to some 
semblance of ``normalcy'' and helps them escape from the secluded, 
lonely, fearful, angry corner in which they have been hiding. Not all 
residential programs are designed to treat mental health problems of 
this very vulnerable population. In light of the high incidence of past 
sexual trauma, rape, and domestic violence, many of these women find it 
difficult, if not impossible, to share residential programs with their 
male counterparts. They openly discuss their concern for a safe 
treatment setting, especially where the treatment unit layout does not 
provide them with a physically segregated, secured area. In light of 
the nature of some of their personal and trauma issues, they also 
discuss the need for gender-specific group sessions. The VA requests 
that all residential treatment areas be evaluated for the ability to 
provide and facilitate these services, and that medical centers develop 
plans to ensure this accommodation.
    While some facilities have found innovative solutions to meet the 
unique needs of women veterans, others are still lagging behind. VVA 
believes that to adequately serve this growing special population of 
veterans, additional funding is required. We recommend an additional 
$10 million over FY08.
HUD-VASH
    In 1992, the VA joined with HUD to launch the HUD-VASH program. HUD 
funded almost 600 vouchers for this program. Through the end of FY'02, 
4,300 veterans had been served by the program, and had participated for 
an average of 4.1 years. Of veterans enrolled in the program, 90 
percent successfully obtained vouchers and 87 percent moved into an 
apartment of their own. This partnership highlights the success of 
linking ongoing clinical care to permanent housing to assist homeless 
chronically mentally ill veterans. This program was given additional 
HUD-VASH vouchers with the passage of P.L. 107-95, which authorized 500 
HUD/VASH vouchers in FY'03, 1,000 in FY'04, 1,500 in FY'05, and 2,000 
in FY'06. The program was reauthorized under section 710, Rental 
Assistance Vouchers for Veterans Affairs Supported Housing Program, 
with the passage of PL 109-461, which authorized 500 vouchers for 
FY'07, 1,000 vouchers for FY'08, 1,500 vouchers for FY'09, 2,000 
vouchers for FY'10 and 2,500 vouchers for FY'11.
    VVA applauds the Senate Appropriations Committee for having funded 
$75,000,000 for the HUD-VASH Program in Public Law 110-161. The 
vouchers created by this funding will prove paramount in addressing the 
permanent housing needs of our less fortunate veterans. By allocating 
this funding, Congress has given providers the greatest tool possible 
in our fight to end homelessness among our veterans. VVA supports the 
FY'09 appropriations request from the Department of Housing and Urban 
Development for $75,000,000, which will provide an additional 10,000 
vouchers. If enacted into law, some 20,000 vouchers will now be 
available to assist homeless veterans. VVA urges this Committee to 
reach out to your colleagues and request their support of these 
vouchers.
``SUPPORTIVE SERVICES ONLY'' PROGRAMS
    VVA realizes that, to a certain extent, the budget drives the 
ability of the VA to fund HGPD programs. Consider these few items: the 
VA's limited funding ability; the decreasing desire of HUD to fund 
Supportive Services programs; the disincentives placed by HUD on cities 
to renew the McKinney-Vento supportive services program; the impact 
that lost supportive service programs will have on the local social 
service system. Drop-in centers are one type of program that utilize 
homeless grants for what is known as ``Supportive Services Only'' (SSO) 
funding. HUD funds these SSO programs via the local agency's inclusion 
on their city's priority list for its annual HUD McKinney-Vento 
submission. When originally funded, an agency was required to commit to 
a 20-year operational program. SSO programs targeting homeless veterans 
are included in this evolving funding atmosphere. Our question is: To 
what extent are the cities responsible for the continued renewals of 
programs that were previously vital to the local continuum?
    We ask this in light of the 20-year financial burden of commitment 
required by small non-profit agencies when they are originally awarded 
grants and led to believe they are a crucial component and partner to 
the comprehensive approach to the elimiNation of homelessness. To 
suggest the non-profits find alternate funding in order to continue and 
satisfy a commitment of over 20 years seems unrealistic in light of the 
very limited grant funding available for these programs. In some 
instances, this could ultimately lead to the death of some non-profit 
agencies--the life line of not only the agencies' homeless clients, but 
also some of the city social service agencies that depend on the agency 
to assist with clients in an already over-burdened local service 
system.
    At a time when the big push is on permanent housing for the 
homeless, with wraparound supportive services, is it logical to 
eliminate these programs on the community level? In light of this 
situation, and as a logical fit, VVA believes it is time for the 
Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to enter this arena. We 
urge this Committee to encourage HHS to work with the VA in 
establishing a unique partnership, creating a joint program in an 
effort to provide enhanced opportunities to homeless veterans. VVA 
urges a continuing dialog between these two agencies to reach a viable 
option to the situation that is facing the non-profits gravely 
concerned about their own potential demise. What a terrible loss this 
would be to the structure of community involvement that has been so 
encouraged.
PERMANENT HOUSING NEEDS FOR LOW-INCOME VETERANS
    Although the Federal government makes a sizeable investment in home 
ownership opportunities for veterans, there is no parallel national 
rental housing assistance program targeted to low-income veterans. 
Veterans are not well served through existing housing assistance 
programs due to their program designs. Low-income veterans in and of 
themselves are not a priority population for subsidized housing 
assistance. And HUD devotes minimal attention to the housing needs of 
low-income veterans. This has been made abundantly clear by the 
longstanding vacancy for special assistant for veterans programs within 
the Office of Community Planning and Development. It is imperative that 
Congress elevate national attention to the housing assistance needs of 
our Nation's low-income veterans.
    P.L. 105-276, The Quality Housing and Work Responsibility Act of 
1998 under Title III, permanently repealed Federal preferences for 
public housing and allowed the Public Housing Authority to establish 
preference for low-income veterans applying for public housing. In 
accordance with the GAO report, ``Rental Housing Information on Low-
Income Veterans Housing Condition and Participation in HUD's 
Programs,'' only a few of the PHAs surveyed were using veterans' 
preference criteria to assist low income veterans with housing. VVA has 
found no mention of these guidelines in any of the 5-year plans issued 
by the PHAs since the law was passed in 1998, which means HUD is once 
again creating homeless veterans by not abiding by and instead 
overlooking laws mandated by Congress.
    VVA is requesting that this committee support H.R. 3329, the Homes 
for Heroes Act of 2007 introduced by Representative Al Green, which 
would repeal the 1998 decision and provide additional benefits and 
services to homeless veterans. VVA also encourages this committee to 
begin open dialog with your colleagues on the House Appropriations 
Subcommittee on Transportation, Housing and Urban Development and 
Related Agencies, for they are a willing partner in ending homelessness 
among veterans.
    Lastly, VVA urges full funding to the authorized level of $50 
million for the Homeless Veterans Reintegration Program (HVRP) 
administered by the Department of Labor. This training/employment 
program has long suffered the consequences of limited funding. How can 
the DOL extol a commitment to the training of homeless veterans and 
deny them the full funding that has been requested under P.L. 107-95 
and P.L. 109-233?
    Former Congressman Lane Evans, in a 1994 statement before the full 
House of Representatives, explained, ``Veterans are veterans no matter 
what else has transpired in their lives. These men and women served our 
nation. Providing them with their rightful benefits can only remind 
them of their prior commitment to society, promote their sense of self, 
and further their rehabilitation.''
    VVA strongly believes that homeless veterans have perhaps the best 
possibility for achieving rehabilitation because at an earlier point in 
their lives they did have a steady, responsible job and lifestyle in 
the military. We hope to recoup these individuals in the most efficient 
manner, thereby saving Federal resources. And we must do so with 
bipartisan support from our Congressional leaders.

                                 
                     CONGRESSIONAL RESEARCH SERVICE
                          LIBRARY OF CONGRESS
                         CRS REPORT TO CONGRESS
                           Order Code RL34024
                       Veterans and Homelessness
                         Updated April 4, 2008
    Libby Perl, Analyst in Housing, Domestic Social Policy Division
                               __________

                         C O N T E N T S

_________________________________________________________________

                                                                   Page

Summary..........................................................   111
Introduction.....................................................   111
Overview of Veterans and Homelessness............................   112
  Definition of ``Homeless Veteran''.............................   112
  Counts of Homeless Veterans....................................   113
    The Department of Veterans Affairs...........................   113
      CHALENG Estimates FY1998-FY2006............................   113
      CHALENG Estimate FY2007....................................   113
    The Department of Housing and Urban Development..............   114
  Characteristics of Homeless Veterans...........................   114
Overrepresentation of Veterans in the Homeless Population........   115
  Overrepresentation of Male Veterans............................   115
  Overrepresentation of Female Veterans..........................   116
  Why Are Veterans Overrepresented in the Homeless Population?...   117
    Factors Present During and After Military Service............   118
      Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD)......................   118
    Factors that Pre-Date Military Service.......................   118
Federal Programs that Serve Homeless Veterans....................   119
  The Department of Veterans Affairs.............................   122
    Health Care for Homeless Veterans............................   122
      Program Data...............................................   122
    Domiciliary Care for Homeless Veterans.......................   122
      Program Data...............................................   123
    Compensated Work Therapy/Therapeutic Residence Program.......   123
    Grant and Per Diem Program...................................   123
      Program Rules and Data.....................................   124
      Grant and Per Diem for Homeless Veterans with Special Needs   124
    HUD-VASH.....................................................   124
      Program Evaluations........................................   125
    Loan Guarantee for Multifamily Transitional Housing Program..   125
    Acquired Property Sales for Homeless Veterans................   126
  The Department of Labor........................................   126
    Homeless Veterans Reintegration Program......................   126
      Program Data...............................................   127
      Stand Downs for Homeless Veterans..........................   127
      Incarcerated Veterans Transition Program Demonstration        127
        Grants.
Emerging Issues..................................................   128
  Permanent Supportive Housing...................................   128
  Veterans of the Wars in Iraq and Afghanistan...................   128
  Female Veterans................................................   129

List of Tables
Table 1. Results from Four Studies: Veterans as a Percentage of     116
  the Homeless Population and Likelihood of Experiencing 
  Homelessness.
Table 2. Funding for Selected Homeless Veterans Programs, FY1988-   120
  FY2008.

                                Summary

    The current conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan have brought renewed 
attention to the needs of veterans, including the needs of homeless 
veterans. The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) estimates that it has 
served approximately 400 returning veterans in its homeless programs 
and has identified over 1,500 more as being at risk of homelessness. 
Both male and female veterans are overrepresented in the homeless 
population, and as the number of veterans increases due to the current 
wars, there is concern that the number of homeless veterans could rise 
commensurately.
    Congress has created numerous programs that serve homeless veterans 
specifically, almost all of which are funded through the Veterans 
Health Administration. These programs provide health care and 
rehabilitation services for homeless veterans (the Health Care for 
Homeless Veterans and Domiciliary Care for Homeless Veterans programs), 
employment assistance (Homeless Veterans Reintegration Program and 
Compensated Work Therapy program), transitional housing (Grant and Per 
Diem and Loan Guarantee programs) as well as other supportive services. 
Through an arrangement with the Department of Housing and Urban 
Development (HUD), approximately 1,000 veterans currently use dedicated 
Section 8 vouchers for permanent housing, with supportive services 
provided through the VA. These are referred to as HUD-VASH vouchers. In 
FY2007, it is estimated that approximately $282 million was used to 
fund programs targeted to homeless veterans.
    Several issues regarding veterans and homelessness have become 
prominent, in part because of the current conflicts. One issue is the 
need for permanent supportive housing for low-income and homeless 
veterans. With the exception of HUD-VASH vouchers, there is no source 
of permanent housing specifically for veterans. In FY2007, the Veterans 
Benefits, Health Care, and Information Technology Act (P.L. 109-461) 
authorized funding for additional HUD-VASH vouchers. Although these 
vouchers were not initially funded, the FY2008 Consolidated 
Appropriations Act (P.L. 110-161) included $75 million for Section 8 
vouchers for homeless veterans. In addition, proposed legislation in 
the 110th Congress would both fund additional vouchers and provide 
resources for the acquisition, rehabilitation, and construction of 
permanent supportive housing for very low-income veterans and their 
families.
    A second emerging issue is the concern that veterans returning from 
Iraq and Afghanistan who are at risk of homelessness may not receive 
the services they need. Efforts are being made to coordinate services 
between the VA and Department of Defense to ensure that those leaving 
military service transition to VA programs. Another emerging issue is 
the needs of female veterans, whose numbers are increasing. Women 
veterans face challenges that could contribute to their risks of 
homelessness. They are more likely to have experienced sexual abuse 
than women in the general population and are more likely than male 
veterans to be single parents. Few homeless programs for veterans have 
the facilities to provide separate accommodations for women and women 
with children.

                              Introduction

    The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have brought renewed attention to 
the needs of veterans, including the needs of homeless veterans. 
Homeless veterans initially came to the country's attention in the 
seventies and eighties, when homelessness generally was becoming a more 
prevalent and noticeable phenomenon. The first section of this report 
defines the term ``homeless veteran,'' discusses attempts to count 
homeless veterans, and presents the results of studies regarding the 
characteristics of homeless veterans.
    At the same time that the number of homeless persons began to grow, 
it became clear through various analyses of homeless individuals that 
homeless veterans are overrepresented in the homeless population. The 
second section of this report summarizes the available research 
regarding the overrepresentation of both male and female veterans, who 
are present in greater percentages in the homeless population than 
their percentages in the general population. This section also reviews 
research regarding possible explanations for why homeless veterans are 
overrepresented.
    In response to the issue of homelessness among veterans, the 
Federal government has created numerous programs to fund services and 
transitional housing specifically for homeless veterans. The third 
section of this report discusses eight of these programs. The majority 
of programs are funded through the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). 
Within the VA, the Veterans Health Administration (VHA), which is 
responsible for the health care of veterans, operates all but one of 
the programs for homeless veterans. The Veterans Benefits 
Administration (VBA), which is responsible for compensation, pensions, 
educational assistance, home loan guarantees, and insurance, operates 
the other. In addition, the Department of Labor operates one program 
for homeless veterans. In FY2007, approximately $282 million funded the 
majority of programs targeted to homeless veterans.
    Several issues regarding homelessness among veterans have become 
prominent since the beginning of the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan. 
The fourth section of this report discusses three of these emerging 
issues. The first is the need for permanent supportive housing for 
homeless and low-income veterans. A second issue is ensuring that an 
adequate transition process exists for returning veterans to assist 
them with issues that might put them at risk of homelessness. Third is 
the concern that adequate services might not exist to serve the needs 
of women veterans. This report will be updated when new statistical 
information becomes available and to reflect programmatic changes.

                 Overview of Veterans and Homelessness

    Homelessness has always existed in the United States, but only in 
recent decades has the issue come to prominence. In the 1970s and 
1980s, the number of homeless persons increased, as did their 
visibility. Experts cite various causes for the increase in 
homelessness. These include the demolition of single room occupancy 
dwellings in so-called ``skid rows'' where transient single men lived, 
the decreased availability of affordable housing generally, the reduced 
need for seasonal unskilled labor, the reduced likelihood that 
relatives will accommodate homeless family members, the decreased value 
of public benefits, and changed admissions standards at mental 
hospitals.\1\ The increased visibility of homeless persons was due, in 
part, to the decriminalization of actions such as public drunkenness, 
loitering, and vagrancy.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ Peter H. Rossi, Down and Out in America: The Origins of 
Homelessness (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1989), 181-194, 
41. See, also, Martha Burt, Over the Edge: The Growth of Homelessness 
in the 1980s (New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 1992), 31-126.
    \2\ Down and Out in America, p. 34; Over the Edge, p. 123.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Homelessness occurs among families with children and single 
individuals, in rural communities as well as large urban cities, and 
for varying periods of time. Depending on circumstances, periods of 
homelessness may vary from days to years. Researchers have created 
three categories of homelessness based on the amount of time that 
individuals are homeless.\3\ First, the transitionally homeless are 
those who have one short stay in a homeless shelter before returning to 
permanent housing. In the second category, those who are episodically 
homeless frequently move in and out of homelessness but do not remain 
homeless for long periods of time. Third, the chronically homeless are 
those who are homeless continuously for a period of one year or have at 
least four episodes of homelessness in three years. Chronically 
homeless individuals often suffer from mental illness and/or substance 
abuse disorders. Although veterans experience all types of 
homelessness, they are thought to be chronically homeless in higher 
numbers than nonveterans.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \3\ See Randall Kuhn and Dennis P. Culhane, ``Applying Cluster 
Analysis to Test a Typology of Homelessness by Pattern of Shelter 
Utilization: Results from the Analysis of Administrative Data,'' 
American Journal of Community Psychology 26, no. 2 (April 1998): 210-
212.
    \4\ Martha R. Burt, Laudan Y. Aron et al., Homelessness: Programs 
and the People They Serve, Technical Report, Urban Institute, December 
1999, p. 11-1, available at http://www.huduser.org/Publications/pdf/
home_tech/tchap-11.pdf. Of homeless male veterans surveyed, 32% 
reported being homeless for 13 or more months, versus 17% of nonveteran 
homeless men.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Homeless veterans began to come to the attention of the public at 
the same time that homelessness generally was becoming more common. 
News accounts chronicled the plight of veterans who had served their 
country but were living (and dying) on the street.\5\ The commonly held 
notion that the military experience provides young people with job 
training, educational and other benefits, as well as the maturity 
needed for a productive life, conflicted with the presence of veterans 
among the homeless population.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \5\ Marjorie J. Robertson, ``Homeless Veterans, An Emerging 
Problem?'' in The Homeless in Contemporary Society, ed. Richard J. 
Bingham, Roy E. Green, and Sammis B. White (Newbury Park, CA: Sage 
Publications, 1987), 66.
    \6\ Ibid, pp. 64-65.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Definition of ``Homeless Veteran''
    Although the term ``homeless veteran'' might appear 
straightforward, it contains two layers of definition.\7\ First, the 
definition of ``veteran'' for purposes of Title 38 benefits (the Title 
of the United States Code that governs veterans benefits) is a person 
who ``served in the active military, naval, or air service'' and was 
not dishonorably discharged.\8\ In order to be a ``veteran'' who is 
eligible for benefits according to this definition, at least four 
criteria must be met. (For a detailed discussion of these criteria see 
CRS Report RL33113, Veterans Affairs: Basic Eligibility for Disability 
Benefit Program, by Douglas Reid Weimer.)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \7\ The United States Code defines the term as ``a veteran who is 
homeless'' as defined by the McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act. 38 
U.S.C. Sec. 2002(1).
    \8\ 12 U.S.C. Sec. 101(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Second, veterans are considered homeless if they meet the 
definition of ``homeless individual'' established by the McKinney-Vento 
Homeless Assistance Act (P.L. 100-77).\9\ According to McKinney-Vento, 
a homeless individual is (1) an individual who lacks a fixed, regular, 
and adequate nighttime residence, and (2) a person who has a nighttime 
residence that is:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \9\ The McKinney-Vento definition of homeless individual is 
codified at 42 U.S.C. 11302(a).

      a supervised publicly or privately operated shelter 
designed to provide temporary living accommodations (including welfare 
hotels, congregate shelters, and transitional housing for the mentally 
ill);
      an institution that provides a temporary residence for 
individuals intended to be institutionalized; or
      a public or private place not designed for, nor 
ordinarily used as, a regular sleeping accommodation for human beings.

Counts of Homeless Veterans
    The Department of Veterans Affairs. The exact number of homeless 
veterans is unknown, although attempts have been made to estimate their 
numbers. In every year since 1998, the VA has included estimates of the 
number of homeless veterans receiving services in its ``Community 
Homelessness Assessment, Local Education and Networking Groups'' 
(CHALENG) report to Congress.\10\ The estimates are made as part of the 
CHALENG process, through which representatives from each local VA 
medical center called ``points of contact'' (POCs) coordinate with 
service providers from state and local governments and nonprofit 
organizations as well as homeless or formerly homeless veterans 
themselves to determine the needs of homeless veterans and plan for how 
to best deliver services.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \10\ For the most recent CHALENG report, see John H. Kuhn and John 
Nakashima, The Fourteenth Annual Progress Report on Public Law 105-114: 
Services for Homeless Veterans Assessment and CoordiNation, U.S. 
Department of Veterans Affairs, February 28, 2008 (hereafter Fourteenth 
Annual CHALENG Report). Congress required the VA to issue the report as 
part of the Veterans Benefits Improvement Act 1994, P.L. 103-446 (38 
U.S.C. Sec. 2065).

    CHALENG Estimates FY1998-FY2006. In the first six years of CHALENG 
estimates (FY1998 through FY2003), the VA asked POCs to estimate the 
number of veterans homeless at any time during the year. Starting in 
FY2004 and continuing through FY2006, the VA changed its methodology, 
and asked POCs from each medical center to provide estimates of the 
highest number of veterans who are homeless on any given day during the 
year. The new methodology used in the FY2004-FY2006 CHALENG estimates 
is a point-in-time count and is not meant to reflect the total number 
of veterans who might experience homelessness at some time during the 
year. The VA considers the estimates from FY2004 to FY2006 to be more 
reliable than earlier estimates.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \11\ Government Accountability Office, Homeless Veterans Programs: 
Improved Communications and Follow-up Could Further Enhance the Grant 
and Per Diem Program, GAO-06-859, September 2006, p. 13, available at 
http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d06859.pdf.

    CHALENG Estimate FY2007. During the FY2007 CHALENG process, the VA 
again asked POCs to provide a point-in-time estimate, just as they had 
in FY2004-FY2006. However, for the first time, the VA asked that POC 
estimates of homeless veterans coincide with the Department of Housing 
and Urban Development (HUD) counts of homeless individuals. Every other 
year HUD directs local jurisdictions called ``Continuums of Care'' 
(CoCs) \12\ to conduct a count of sheltered and unsheltered homeless 
persons on one night during the last week of January (though some CoCs 
conduct counts every year). The most recent HUD count in which all CoCs 
participated took place in January 2007.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \12\ Continuums of Care are typically formed by cities, counties, 
or combinations of both. Representatives from local government agencies 
and service provider organizations serve on CoC boards, which conduct 
the business of the CoC. HUD first required these Continuums of Care to 
conduct counts of sheltered and unsheltered homeless persons in 2005.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    To arrive at the FY2007 CHALENG estimate, POCs estimated the number 
of veterans experiencing homelessness on one night during the same 1-
week period used by HUD. In order to bring the VA count in line with 
HUD estimates, POCs compared their 2007 estimates to the 2005 HUD 
estimates (the most recent data available at that time); if there were 
``major differences'' between the two estimates, the POCs provided an 
explaNation of why this might be the case.\13\ In some jurisdictions, 
POC estimates were adjusted to be more consistent with HUD's estimates. 
In addition to consulting HUD estimates, some POCs (71%) used more than 
one source to arrive at their estimates of homeless veterans. These 
included U.S. Census data (10%), VA low-income population estimates 
(7%), local homeless census studies (42%), VA client data (36%), 
estimates from local homeless assistance providers (59%), and VA staff 
impressions (52%).\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \13\ Fourteenth Annual CHALENG Report, p. 16.
    \14\ Ibid, pp. 16-17.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The most recent CHALENG report estimated that 154,000 veterans were 
homeless on one day during the last week of January 2007.\15\ This 
estimate is down from 2006 and 2005 estimates of 195,827 and 194,254 
respectively. The VA hypothesizes that improved methodology, VA program 
interventions for homeless veterans, and the changing demographics of 
the veteran population could account for the reduction in the CHALENG 
estimate.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \15\ Ibid, p. 16.
    \16\ Ibid, pp. 16-17.

    The Department of Housing and Urban Development. In addition to the 
CoC point-in-time counts, described above, HUD is engaged in an ongoing 
process to count homeless persons, including homeless veterans, through 
its Homeless Management Information Systems (HMIS). Continuums of Care 
collect and store information about homeless individuals they serve, 
and the information is aggregated in computer systems at the CoC level. 
Eventually the HMIS initiative is expected to produce an unduplicated 
count of homeless individuals as well as a summary of demographic 
information. HUD has released two Annual Homeless Assessment Reports 
(AHARs), in which it used HMIS data to estimate the number of 
individuals nationwide who were homeless during particular periods of 
time. The most recent AHAR was released in March 2008 and estimated the 
number of individuals who experienced homelessness at some point during 
a six-month period, from January 1 to June 30, 2006.\17\ These 
estimates did not include homeless persons who were not residing in 
emergency shelters or transitional housing during the relevant time 
periods.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \17\ U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, The Second 
Annual Homeless Assessment Report to Congress, March 2008, available at 
http://www.hudhre.info/documents/2ndHomelessAssessmentReport.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The first and second AHARs did not provide estimates of the number 
of homeless veterans, though they did provide estimates of the 
percentage of the adult homeless population who are veterans. There are 
limitations to these data, however. The second AHAR estimated that 
14.3% of adults who were homeless during the 6-month period from 
January 1 to June 30, 2006, were veterans (while 11.2% of the general 
population were veterans).\18\ These data do not include persons living 
on the street or other location not meant for human habitation. In 
addition, 20% of records were missing data on veteran status. The first 
AHAR estimated that 18.7% of the homeless population were veterans 
(compared to 12.6% of the general population) in the three-month period 
between February 1 and April 30, 2005. Of the records submitted, 35% 
were missing information on veteran status.\19\ (For more information 
about efforts to count homeless persons, see CRS Report RL33956, 
Counting Homeless Persons: Homeless Management Information Systems, by 
Libby Perl.)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \18\ Ibid, p. 23.
    \19\ U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, The Annual 
Homeless Assessment Report to Congress, February 2007, p. 31, available 
at http://www.huduser.org/Publications/pdf/ahar.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Characteristics of Homeless Veterans
    Homeless male veterans differ from homeless men who are nonveterans 
in a variety of ways. According to data from several studies during the 
1980s, homeless male veterans were more likely to be older and better 
educated than the general population of homeless men.\20\ However, they 
were found to have more health problems than nonveteran homeless men, 
including AIDS, cancer, and hypertension.\21\ They also suffered from 
mental illness and alcohol abuse at higher rates than nonveterans. A 
study published in 2002 found similar results regarding age and 
education. Homeless male veterans tended to be older, on average, than 
nonveteran homeless men.\22\ Homeless veterans were also different in 
that they had reached higher levels of education than their nonveteran 
counterparts \23\ and were more likely to be working for pay. They were 
also more likely to have been homeless for more than one year, and more 
likely to be dependent on or abuse alcohol. Family backgrounds among 
homeless veterans tended to be more stable, with veterans experiencing 
less family instability \24\ and fewer incidents of conduct 
disorder,\25\ while also being less likely to have never married than 
nonveteran homeless men.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \20\ ``Homeless Veterans,'' pp. 104-105.
    \21\ Ibid, p. 105.
    \22\ Richard Tessler, Robert Rosenheck, and Gail Gamache, 
``Comparison of Homeless Veterans with Other Homeless Men in a Large 
Clinical Outreach Program,'' Psychiatric Quarterly 73, no. 2 (Summer 
2002): 113-114.
    \23\ Veterans averaged 12.43 years of education completed, versus 
11.21 for nonveterans.
    \24\ Family instability is measured by factors that include 
parental separation or divorce and time spent in foster care.
    \25\ Conduct disorder is measured by factors such as school 
suspensions, expulsions, drinking, using drugs, stealing, and fighting.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Homeless women veterans have also been found to have different 
characteristics than nonveteran homeless women. Based on data collected 
during the late 1990s, female veterans, like male veterans, were found 
to have reached higher levels of education than nonveteran homeless 
women, and also more likely to have been employed in the 30 days prior 
to being surveyed.\26\ They also had more stable family backgrounds, 
and lower rates of conduct disorder as children.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \26\ Gail Gamache, Robert Rosenheck, and Richard Tessler, 
``Overrepresentation of Women Veterans Among Homeless Women,'' American 
Journal of Public Health 93, no. 7 (July 2003): 1133-1134 (hereafter 
``Overrepresentation of Women Veterans Among Homeless Women'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

       Overrepresentation of Veterans in the Homeless Population

    Research that has captured information about the entire national 
homeless population, including veteran status, is rare. Although HUD is 
engaged in ongoing efforts to collect information about homeless 
individuals, the most extensive information about homeless veterans 
specifically comes from earlier studies. Possibly the most 
comprehensive national data collection effort regarding persons 
experiencing homelessness took place in 1996 as part of the National 
Survey of Homeless Assistance Providers and Clients (NSHAPC), when 
researchers interviewed thousands of homeless assistance providers and 
homeless individuals across the country.\27\ Prior to the NSHAPC, in 
1987, researchers from the Urban Institute surveyed nearly 2,000 
homeless individuals and clients in large cities nationwide as part of 
a national study.\28\ The data from these two surveys serve as the 
basis for more in depth research regarding homeless veterans, described 
below. No matter the data source, however, research has found that 
veterans make up a greater percentage of the homeless population than 
their percentage in the general population.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \27\ Martha R. Burt, Laudan Y. Aron, et al., Homelessness: Programs 
and the People They Serve: Findings of the National Survey of Homeless 
Assistance Providers and Clients, Technical Report, December 1999, 
available at http://www.huduser.org/publications/homeless/
homeless_tech.html.
    \28\ Martha R. Burt and Barbara E. Cohen, America's Homeless: 
Numbers, Characteristics, and Programs that Serve Them (Washington, DC: 
The Urban Institute Press, July 1989).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Both male and female veterans are more likely to be homeless than 
their nonveteran counterparts.\29\ This has not always been the case, 
however. Although veterans have always been present among the homeless 
population, the birth cohorts that served in the military more 
recently, from the Vietnam \30\ and post-Vietnam eras, have been found 
to be overrepresented. Veterans of World War II and Korea are less 
likely to be homeless than their nonveteran counterparts.\31\ (The same 
cohort effect is not as evident for women veterans.) Four studies of 
homeless veterans, two of male veterans and two of female veterans, 
provide evidence of this overrepresentation and increased likelihood of 
experiencing homelessness.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \29\ See Gail Gamache, Robert Rosenheck, and Richard Tessler, ``The 
Proportion of Veterans Among Homeless Men: A Decade Later,'' Social 
Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology 36, no. 10 (October 2001): 481 
(hereafter ``The Proportion of Homeless Veterans Among Men: A Decade 
Later''). ``Overrepresentation of Women Veterans Among Homeless 
Women,'' p. 1134.
    \30\ Generally, the Vietnam era is defined as the period from 1964 
to 1975. 38 U.S.C. Sec. 101(29)(B).
    \31\ Alvin S. Mares and Robert A. Rosenheck, ``Perceived 
Relationship Between Military Service and Homelessness Among Homeless 
Veterans with Mental Illness,'' The Journal of Nervous and Mental 
Disease 192, no. 10 (October 2004): 715.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Overrepresentation of Male Veterans
    Two national studies--one published in 1994 using data from the 
1987 Urban Institute survey (as well as data from surveys in Los 
Angeles, Baltimore, and Chicago), and the other published in 2001 using 
data from the 1996 NSHAPC--found that male veterans were 
overrepresented in the homeless population. In addition, researchers in 
both studies determined that the likelihood of homelessness depended on 
the ages of veterans.\32\ During both periods of time, the odds of a 
veteran being homeless was highest for veterans who had enlisted after 
the military transitioned to an all-volunteer force (AVF) in 1973. 
These veterans were age 20-34 at the time of the first study, and age 
35-44 at the time of the second study.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \32\ See Robert Rosenheck, Linda Frisman, and An-Me Chung, ``The 
Proportion of Veterans Among Homeless Men,'' American Journal of Public 
Health 84, no. 3 (March 1994): 466 (hereafter ``The Proportion of 
Homeless Veterans Among Men''); ``The Proportion of Veterans Among 
Homeless Men: A Decade Later,'' p. 481.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In the first study, researchers found that 41% of adult homeless 
men were veterans, compared to just under 34% of adult males in the 
general population. Overall, male veterans were 1.4 times as likely to 
be homeless as nonveterans.\33\ Notably, though, those veterans who 
served after the Vietnam War were four times more likely to be homeless 
than nonveterans in the same age group.\34\ Vietnam era veterans, who 
are often thought to be the most overrepresented group of homeless 
veterans, were barely more likely to be homeless than nonveterans (1.01 
times). (See Table 1 for a breakdown of the likelihood of homelessness 
based on age.)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \33\ ``The Proportion of Homeless Veterans Among Men,'' p. 467.
    \34\ Ibid
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In the second study, researchers found that nearly 33% of adult 
homeless men were veterans, compared to 28% of males in the general 
population. Once again, the likelihood of homelessness differed among 
age groups. Overall, male veterans were 1.25 times more likely to be 
homeless than nonveterans.\35\ However, the same post-Vietnam birth 
cohort as that in the 1994 study was most at risk of homelessness; 
those veterans in the cohort were over three times as likely to be 
homeless as nonveterans in the same cohort. Younger veterans, those age 
20-34 in 1996, were two times as likely to be homeless as nonveterans. 
And Vietnam era veterans were approximately 1.4 times as likely to be 
homeless as their nonveteran counterparts. (See Table 1.)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \35\ ``The Proportion of Homeless Veterans Among Men: A Decade 
Later,'' p. 483.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Overrepresentation of Female Veterans
    Like male veterans, women veterans are more likely to be homeless 
than women who are not veterans. A study published in 2003 examined two 
data sources, one a survey of mentally ill homeless women, and the 
other the NSHAPC, and found that 4.4% and 3.1% of those homeless 
persons surveyed were female veterans, respectively (compared to 
approximately 1.3% of the general population).\36\ Although the 
likelihood of homelessness was different for each of the two surveyed 
populations, the study estimated that female veterans were between two 
and four times as likely to be homeless as their nonveteran 
counterparts.\37\ Unlike male veterans, all birth cohorts were more 
likely to be homeless than nonveterans. However, with the exception of 
women veterans age 35-55 (representing the post-Vietnam era), who were 
between approximately 3.5 and 4.0 times as likely to be homeless as 
nonveterans, cohort data were not consistent between the two surveys. 
(See Table 1 for a breakdown of likelihood of homelessness by cohort.)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \36\ ``Overrepresentation of Women Veterans Among Homeless Women,'' 
p. 1133.
    \37\ Ibid, p. 1134.

    Table 1--Results from Four Studies: Veterans as a Percentage of the Homeless Population and Likelihood of
                                            Experiencing Homelessness
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                 Odds Ratio
                                                   Veterans as a         Veterans as a         (Likelihood of
                Veteran Group                    Percentage of the     Percentage of the     Homelessness among
                                                      General         Homeless Population       Veterans vs.
                                                   Population\a\                                Nonveterans)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Men (data 1986-87)\b\                                         33.6                  41.2                   1.38
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Age 20-34                                                   10.0                  30.6                   3.95
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Age 35-44                                                   36.9                  37.2                   1.01
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Age 45-54                                                   44.8                  58.7                   1.75
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Age 55-64                                                   69.9                  61.7                   0.69
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  > Age 64                                                    46.3                  37.4                   0.71
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Men (data 1996)\c\                                            28.0                  32.7                   1.25
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Age 20-34                                                    7.7                  14.5                   2.04
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Age 35-44                                                   13.8                  33.7                   3.17
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Age 45-54                                                   38.4                  46.5                   1.39
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Age 55-64                                                   48.7                  45.8                0.89\f\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  > Age 64                                                    62.6                  59.5                0.88\f\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Women (data 1994-98)\d\                                        1.3                   4.4                   3.58
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Age 20-34                                                     --                    --                   3.61
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Age 35-44                                                     --                    --                   3.48
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Age 45-54                                                     --                    --                   4.42
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Age 55 and Older                                              --                    --                1.54\f\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Women (data 1996)\e\                                           1.2                   3.1                   2.71
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Age 20-34                                                     --                    --                1.60\f\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Age 35-44                                                     --                    --                   3.98
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Age 45-54                                                     --                    --                2.00\f\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Age 55 and Older                                              --                    --                   4.40
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sources: Robert Rosenheck, Linda Frisman, and An-Me Chung, ``The Proportion of Veterans Among Homeless Men,''
  American Journal of Public Health 84, no. 3 (March 1994): 466-469; Gail Gamache, Robert Rosenheck, and Richard
  Tessler, ``The Proportion of Veterans Among Homeless Men: A Decade Later,'' Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric
  Epidemiology 36, no. 10 (October 2001): 481-485; Gail Gamache, Robert Rosenheck, and Richard Tessler,
  ``Overrepresentation of Women Veterans Among Homeless Women,'' American Journal of Public Health 93, no. 7
  (July 2003): 1132-1136.
\a\ Data are from the Current Population Survey.
\b\ Data are from the Urban Institute Study and three community surveys conducted between 1985 and 1987.
\c\ Data are from the National Survey of Homeless Assistance Providers and Clients (NSHAPC).
\d\ Data are from the Access to Community Care and Effective Services and Supports sample of women with mental
  illness.
\e\ Data are from the NSHAPC.
\f\ Not statistically significant.


Why Are Veterans Overrepresented in the Homeless Population?
    As the number of homeless veterans has grown, researchers have 
attempted to explain why veterans are homeless in higher proportions 
than their numbers in the general population. Factors present both 
prior to military service, and those that developed during or after 
service, have been found to be associated with veterans' homelessness.
    Most of the evidence about factors associated with homelessness 
among veterans comes from The National Vietnam Veterans Readjustment 
Study (NVVRS) conducted from 1984 to 1988.\38\ Researchers for the 
NVVRS surveyed 1,600 Vietnam theater veterans (those serving in 
Vietnam, Cambodia, or Laos) and 730 Vietnam era veterans (who did not 
serve in the theater) to determine their mental health status and their 
ability to readjust to civilian life. The NVVRS did not specifically 
analyze homelessness. However, a later study, published in 1994, used 
data from the NVVRS to examine homelessness specifically.\39\ Findings 
from both studies are discussed below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \38\ The NVVRS was undertaken at the direction of Congress as part 
of P.L. 98-160, the Veterans Health Care Amendments of 1983.
    \39\ Robert Rosenheck and Alan Fontana, ``A Model of Homelessness 
Among Male Veterans of the Vietnam War Generation,'' The American 
Journal of Psychiatry 151, no. 3 (March 1994): 421-427 (hereafter ``A 
Model of Homelessness Among Male Veterans of the Vietnam War 
Generation'').

    Factors Present During and After Military Service. Although 
researchers have not found that military service alone is associated 
with homelessness,\40\ it may be associated with other factors that 
contribute to homelessness. The NVVRS found an indirect connection 
between the stress that occurs as a result of deployment and exposure 
to combat, or ``war-zone stress,'' and homelessness. Vietnam theater 
and era veterans who experienced war-zone stress were found to have 
difficulty readjusting to civilian life, resulting in higher levels of 
problems that included social isolation, violent behavior, and, for 
white male veterans, homelessness.\41\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \40\ See, for example, Alvin S. Mares and Robert Rosenheck, 
``Perceived Relationship Between Military Service and Homelessness 
Among Homeless Veterans With Mental Illness,'' Journal of Nervous and 
Mental Disease 192, no. 10 (October 2004): 715.
    \41\ Richard A. Kulka, John A. Fairbank, B. Kathleen Jordan, and 
Daniel S. Weiss, Trauma and the Vietnam War Generation: Report of 
Findings from the National Vietnam Veterans Readjustment Study 
(Levittown, PA: Brunner/Mazel, 1990), 142.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The 1994 study of Vietnam era veterans (hereafter referred to as 
the Rosenheck/Fontana study) evaluated 18 variables that could be 
associated with homelessness. The study categorized each variable in 
one of four groups, according to when they occurred in the veteran's 
life: pre-military, military, the 1-year readjustment period, and the 
post-military period subsequent to readjustment.\42\ Variables from 
each time period were found to be associated with homelessness, 
although their effects varied. The two military factors--combat 
exposure and participation in atrocities--did not have a direct 
relationship to homelessness. However, those two factors did contribute 
to (1) low levels of social support upon returning home, (2) 
psychiatric disorders (not including post traumatic stress disorder 
(PTSD)), (3) substance abuse disorders, and (4) being unmarried 
(including separation and divorce). Each of these four post-military 
variables, in turn, contributed directly to homelessness.\43\ In fact, 
social isolation, measured by low levels of support in the first year 
after discharge from military service, together with the status of 
being unmarried, had the strongest association with homelessness of the 
18 factors examined in the study.\44\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \42\ The first category consisted of nine factors: year of birth, 
belonging to a racial or ethnic minority, childhood poverty, parental 
mental illness, experience of physical or sexual abuse prior to age 18, 
other trauma, treatment for mental illness before age 18, placement in 
foster care before age 16, and history of conduct disorder. The 
military category contained three factors: exposure to combat, 
participation in atrocities, and non-military trauma. The readjustment 
period consisted of two variables: accessibility to someone with whom 
to discuss personal matters and the availability of material and social 
support (together these two variables were termed low levels of social 
support). The final category contained four factors: post traumatic 
stress disorder (PTSD), psychiatric disorders not including PTSD, 
substance abuse, and unmarried status.
    \43\ ``A Model of Homelessness Among Male Veterans of the Vietnam 
War Generation,'' p. 424.
    \44\ Ibid, p. 425.

    Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). Researchers have not found a 
direct relationship between PTSD and homelessness. The Rosenheck/
Fontana study ``found no unique association between combat-related PTSD 
and homelessness.'' \45\ Unrelated research has determined that 
homeless combat veterans were no more likely to be diagnosed with PTSD 
than combat veterans who were not homeless.\46\ However, the NVVRS 
found that PTSD was significantly related to other psychiatric 
disorders, substance abuse, problems in interpersonal relationships, 
and unemployment.\47\ These conditions can lead to readjustment 
difficulties and are considered risk factors for homelessness.\48\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \45\ ``A Model of Homelessness Among Male Veterans of the Vietnam 
War Generation,'' p. 425.
    \46\ Robert Rosenheck, Catherine A. Leda, Linda K. Frisman, Julie 
Lam, and An-Me Chung, ``Homeless Veterans'' in Homelessness in America, 
ed. Jim Baumohl (Phoenix, AZ: Oryx Press, 1996), 99 (hereafter 
``Homeless Veterans'').
    \47\ Robert Rosenheck, Catherine Leda, and Peggy Gallup, ``Combat 
Stress, Psychosocial Adjustment, and Service Use Among Homeless Vietnam 
Veterans,'' Hospital and Community Psychiatry 42, no. 2 (February 
1992): 148.
    \48\ ``Homeless Veterans,'' p. 98.

    Factors that Pre-Date Military Service. According to research, 
factors that predate military service also play a role in homelessness 
among veterans. The Rosenheck/Fontana study found that three variables 
present in the lives of veterans before they joined the military had a 
significant direct relationship to homelessness. These were exposure to 
physical or sexual abuse prior to age 18; exposure to other traumatic 
experiences, such as experiencing a serious accident or natural 
disaster, or seeing someone killed; and placement in foster care prior 
to age 16.\49\ The researchers also found that a history of conduct 
disorder had a substantial indirect effect on homelessness.\50\ Conduct 
disorder includes behaviors such as being suspended or expelled from 
school, involvement with law enforcement, or having poor academic 
performance. Another pre-military variable that might contribute to 
homelessness among veterans is a lack of family support prior to 
enlistment.\51\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \49\ ``A Model of Homelessness Among Male Veterans of the Vietnam 
War Generation,'' p. 426.
    \50\ Ibid
    \51\ Richard Tessler, Robert Rosenheck, and Gail Gamache, 
``Homeless Veterans of the All-Volunteer Force: A Social Selection 
Perspective,'' Armed Forces & Society 29, no. 4 (Summer 2003): 511 
(hereafter ``Homeless Veterans of the All-Volunteer Force: A Social 
Selection Perspective'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The conditions present in the lives of veterans prior to military 
service, and the growth of homelessness among veterans, have been tied 
to the institution of the all volunteer force (AVF) in 1973. As 
discussed earlier in this report, the overrepresentation of veterans in 
the homeless population is most prevalent in the birth cohort that 
joined the military after the Vietnam War. It is possible that higher 
rates of homelessness among these veterans are due to ``lowered 
recruitment standards during periods where military service was not 
held in high regard.'' \52\ Individuals who joined the military during 
the time after the implementation of the AVF might have been more 
likely to have characteristics that are risk factors for 
homelessness.\53\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \52\ Testimony of Robert Rosenheck, M.D., Director of Northeast 
Program Evaluation Center, Department of Veterans Affairs, Senate 
Committee on Veterans' Affairs, 103rd Cong., 2nd sess., February 23, 
1994.
    \53\ ``Homeless Veterans of the All-Volunteer Force: A Social 
Selection Perspective,'' p. 510.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

             Federal Programs that Serve Homeless Veterans

    The Federal response to the needs of homeless veterans, like the 
Federal response to homelessness generally, began in the late eighties. 
Congress, aware of the data showing that veterans were 
disproportionately represented among homeless persons,\54\ began to 
hold hearings and enact legislation in the late eighties. Among the 
programs enacted were Health Care for Homeless Veterans, Domiciliary 
Care for Homeless Veterans, and the Homeless Veterans Reintegration 
Projects. Also around this time, the first (and only) national group 
dedicated to the cause of homeless veterans, the National Coalition for 
Homeless Veterans, was founded by service providers that were concerned 
about the growing number of homeless veterans.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \54\ Senate Committee on Veterans' Affairs, Veterans' 
Administration FY1988 Budget, the Vet Center Program, and Homeless 
Veterans Issues, 100th Cong., 1st sess., S.Hrg. 100-350, February 18 & 
19, 1987, p. 2-6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    While homeless veterans are eligible for and receive services 
through programs that are not designed specifically for homeless 
veterans, the VA funds multiple programs to serve homeless veterans. 
The majority of homeless programs are run through the Veterans Health 
Administration (VHA), which administers health care programs for 
veterans.\55\ The Veterans Benefits Administration (VBA), which is 
responsible for compensation and pensions,\56\ education 
assistance,\57\ home loan guarantees,\58\ and insurance, operates one 
program for homeless veterans. In addition, the Department of Labor 
(DoL) is responsible for one program that provides employment services 
for homeless veterans. In FY2007, funding of approximately $282 million 
was provided for homeless veterans programs,\59\ eight of which are 
summarized in this section. Table 2, below, shows historical funding 
levels for seven of these eight programs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \55\ For more information about the VHA, see CRS Report RL33993, 
Veterans' Health Care Issues, by Sidath Viranga Panangala.
    \56\ For more information about veterans benefits, see CRS Report 
RL33985, Veterans Benefits: Issues in the 110th Congress, coordinated 
by Carol Davis.
    \57\ For more information about educational assistance, see CRS 
Report RL33281, Montgomery GI Bill Education Benefits: Analysis of 
College Prices and Federal Student Aid Under the Higher Education Act, 
by Charmaine Mercer.
    \58\ For more information about VA home loan guarantees, see CRS 
Report RS20533, VA-Home Loan Guaranty Program: An Overview, by Bruce E. 
Foote and Meredith Peterson.
    \59\ The amount of funding is based on FY2007 VA obligations for 
its homeless programs and the amount appropriated for the Department of 
Labor's Homeless Veterans Reintegration Program.

                                                  Table 2--Funding for Selected Homeless Veterans Programs FY1988-FY2008 (dollars in thousands)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                   Obligations (VA Programs)                                            Budget Authority (DoL
                                       ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------        Program)
                                                                             Compensated Work                                       Loan Guarantee for ----------------------- Total Funding for
              Fiscal Year                Health Care for  Domiciliary Care       Therapy/        Grant and Per         HUD-VA          Multifamily                             Selected Programs
                                            Homeless        for Homeless       Therapeutic        Diem Program       Supported         Transitional       Homeless Veterans
                                           Veterans\a\        Veterans          Residence                             Housing            Housing        Reintegration Program
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1988                                           $12,932         $15,000\b\                 NA                 NA               NA                   NA                $1,915            $29,847
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1989                                             13,252            10,367                 NA                 NA               NA                   NA                  1,877             25,496
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1990                                             15,000            15,000                 NA                 NA               NA                   NA                  1,920             31,920
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1991                                          15,461\c\            15,750              --\c\                 NA               NA                   NA                  2,018             33,229
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1992                                          16,500\c\            16,500              --\c\                 NA            2,300                   NA                  1,366             36,666
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1993                                             22,150            22,300                400                 NA            2,000                   NA                  5,055             51,905
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1994                                             24,513            27,140              3,051              8,000            3,235                   NA                  5,055             70,994
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1995                                          38,585\d\            38,948              3,387              --\d\            4,270                   NA                 107\e\             85,297
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1996                                          38,433\d\            41,117              3,886              --\d\            4,829                   NA                      0             88,265
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1997                                          38,063\d\            37,214              3,628              --\d\            4,958                   NA                      0             83,863
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1998                                             36,407            38,489              8,612              5,886            5,084                   NA                  3,000             97,478
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1999                                             32,421            39,955              4,092             20,000            5,223                   NA                  3,000            104,691
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2000                                             38,381            34,434              8,068             19,640            5,137                  661                  9,636            115,957
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2001                                             58,602            34,576              8,144             31,100            5,219                  366                 17,500            155,507
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2002                                             54,135            45,443              8,028             22,431            4,729                  528                 18,250            153,544
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2003                                             45,188            49,213              8,371             43,388            4,603                  594                 18,131            169,488
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2004                                             42,905            51,829             10,240             62,965            3,375                  605                 18,888            190,807
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2005                                             40,357            57,555             10,004             62,180            3,243                  574                 20,832            194,745
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2006                                             56,998            63,592             19,529             63,621            5,297                  507                 21,780            231,324
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2007                                             71,925            77,633             21,514             81,187            7,487                  613                 21,809            282,168
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2008\f\                                          74,802            80,738             22,375            107,180            7,786                  660                 23,620            317,161
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sources: Department of Veterans Affairs Budget Justifications, FY1989-FY2009, VA Office of Homeless Veterans Programs, Department of Labor Budget Justifications FY1989-FY2009, and the FY2008
  Consolidated Appropriations Act P.L. 110-161.
\a\ Health Care for Homeless Veterans was originally called the Homeless Chronically Mentally Ill veterans program. In 1992, the VA began to use the title ``Health Care for Homeless
  Veterans.''
\b\ Congress appropriated funds for the DCHV program for both FY1987 and FY1988 (P.L. 100-71), however, the VA obligated the entire amount in FY1988. See VA Budget Summary for FY1989, Volume
  2, Medical Benefits, p. 6-10.
\c\ For FY1991 and FY1992, funds from the Homeless Chronically Mentally Ill veterans program as well as substance abuse enhancement funds were used for the Compensated Work Therapy/Therapeutic
  Residence program.
\d\ For FY1995 through FY1997, Grant and Per Diem funds were obligated with funds for the Health Care for Homeless Veterans program. VA budget documents do not provide a separate breakdown of
  Grant and Per Diem Obligations.
\e\ Congress appropriated $5.011 million for HVRP in P.L. 103-333. However, a subsequent rescission in P.L. 104-19 reduced the amount.
\f\ The obligation amounts for FY2008 are estimates.

The Department of Veterans Affairs
    The majority of programs that serve homeless veterans are part of 
the Veterans Health Administration (VHA), one of the three major 
organizations within the VA (the other two are the Veterans Benefits 
Administration (VBA) and the National Cemetery Administration).\60\ The 
VHA operates hospitals and outpatient clinics across the country 
through 21 Veterans Integrated Services Networks (VISNs). Each VISN 
oversees between five and eleven VA hospitals as well as outpatient 
clinics, nursing homes, and domiciliary care facilities. In all, there 
are 157 VA hospitals, 750 outpatient clinics, 134 nursing homes, and 42 
domiciliary care facilities across the country. Many services for 
homeless veterans are provided in these facilities. In addition, the 
VBA has made efforts to coordinate with the VHA regarding homeless 
veterans by placing Homeless Veteran Outreach Coordinators (HVOCs) in 
its offices in order to assist homeless veterans in their applications 
for benefits.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \60\ For more information about the organization of the VA, see 
U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, Organizational Briefing Book, May 
2007, available at http://www.va.gov/ofcadmin/ViewPDF.asp?fType=1.

    Health Care for Homeless Veterans. The first Federal program to 
specifically address the needs of homeless veterans, Health Care for 
Homeless Veterans (HCHV), was initially called the Homeless Chronically 
Mentally Ill veterans program.\61\ The program was created as part of 
an emergency appropriations act for FY1987 (P.L. 100-6) in which 
Congress allocated $5 million to the VA to provide medical and 
psychiatric care in community-based facilities to homeless veterans 
suffering from mental illness.\62\ Through the HCHV program, VA medical 
center staff conduct outreach to homeless veterans, provide care and 
treatment for medical, psychiatric, and substance abuse disorders, and 
refer veterans to other needed supportive services.\63\ Although P.L. 
100-6 provided priority for veterans whose illnesses were service-
connected, veterans with non-service-connected disabilities were also 
made eligible for the program. Within two months of the program's 
enactment, 43 VA Medical Centers had initiated programs to find and 
assist mentally ill homeless veterans.\64\ The HCHV program is 
currently authorized through December 31, 2011.\65\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \61\ In 1992, the VA began to refer to the program by its new name. 
VA FY1994 Budget Summary, Volume 2, Medical Benefits, p. 2-63.
    \62\ Shortly after the HCHV program was enacted in P.L. 100-6, 
Congress passed another law (P.L. 100-322) that repealed the authority 
in P.L. 100-6 and established the HCHV program as a pilot program. The 
program was then made permanent in the Veterans Benefits Act of 1997 
(P.L. 105-114). The HCHV program is now codified at 38 U.S.C. 
Sec. Sec. 2031-2034.
    \63\ 38 U.S.C. Sec. 2031, Sec. 2034.
    \64\ Veterans Administration, Report to Congress of member agencies 
of the Interagency Council on Homelessness pursuant to section 
203(c)(1) of P.L. 100-77, October 15, 1987.
    \65\ The program was most recently authorized in the Veterans 
Benefits, Health Care, and Information Technology Act of 2006 (P.L. 
109-461).

    Program Data. The HCHV program itself does not provide housing for 
veterans who receive services. However, the VA was initially authorized 
to enter into contracts with non-VA service providers to place veterans 
in residential treatment facilities so that they would have a place to 
stay while receiving treatment. In FY2003, the VA shifted funding from 
contracts with residential treatment facilities to the VA Grant and Per 
Diem program (described later in this report).\66\ Local funding for 
residential treatment facilities continues to be provided by some VA 
medical center locations, however. According to the most recent data 
available from the VA, 1,131 veterans stayed in residential treatment 
facilities in FY2006, with an average stay of about 58 days.\67\ The 
HCHV program treated approximately 60,857 veterans in that same 
year.\68\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \66\ FY2004 VA Budget Justifications, p. 2-163.
    \67\ Wesley J. Kasprow, Robert A. Rosenheck, Diane DiLello, Leslie 
Cavallaro, and Nicole Harelik, Health Care for Homeless Veterans 
Programs: Twentieth Annual Report, U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs 
Northeast Program Evaluation Center, March 31, 2007, pp. 117-118 
(hereafter Health Care for Homeless Veterans Programs: Twentieth Annual 
Report).
    \68\ Ibid, p. 25.

    Domiciliary Care for Homeless Veterans. Domiciliary care consists 
of rehabilitative services for physically and mentally ill or aged 
veterans who need assistance, but are not in need of the level of care 
offered by hospitals and nursing homes. Congress first provided funds 
for the Domiciliary Care program for homeless veterans in 1987 through 
a supplemental appropriations act (P.L. 100-71). Prior to enactment of 
P.L. 100-71, domiciliary care for veterans generally (now often 
referred to as Residential Rehabilitation and Treatment programs) had 
existed since the 1860s. The program for homeless veterans was 
implemented to reduce the use of more expensive inpatient treatment, 
improve health status, and reduce the likelihood of homelessness 
through employment and other assistance. Congress has appropriated 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
funds for the DCHV program since its inception.

    Program Data. The DCHV program operates at 38 VA medical centers 
and has 1,991 beds available.\69\ In FY2006, the number of veterans 
completing treatment was 5,282.\70\ Of those admitted to DCHV programs, 
92.7% were diagnosed with a substance abuse disorder, more than half 
(56.7%) were diagnosed with serious mental illness, and 52.5% had both 
diagnoses.\71\ The average length of stay for veterans in FY2006 was 
104.4 days, in which they received medical, psychiatric and substance 
abuse treatment, as well as vocational rehabilitation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \69\ Sandra G. Resnick, Robert Rosenheck, Sharon Medak, and Linda 
Corwel, Eighteenth Progress Report on the Domiciliary Care for Homeless 
Veterans Program, FY2006, U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs Northeast 
Program Evaluation Center, March 2007, p. 1.
    \70\ Ibid, p. 9.
    \71\ Ibid, p. 10.

    Compensated Work Therapy/Therapeutic Residence Program. The 
Compensated Work Therapy (CWT) Program has existed at the VA in some 
form since the thirties.\72\ In the most current version of the 
program, the VA enters into contracts with private companies or 
nonprofit organizations that then provide disabled veterans with work 
opportunities.\73\ Veterans must be paid wages commensurate with those 
wages in the community for similar work, and through the experience the 
goal is that participants will improve their chances of living 
independently and reaching self sufficiency. Most CWT positions are 
semiskilled or unskilled, and include work in clerical, retail, 
warehouse, manufacturing, and food service positions.\74\ In 2003, the 
Veterans Health Care, Capital Asset, and Business Improvement Act (P.L. 
108-170) added work skills training, employment support services, and 
job development and placement services to the activities authorized by 
the CWT program. The VA estimates that approximately 14,000 veterans 
participate in the CWT program each year.\75\ The CWT program is 
permanently authorized through the VA's Special Therapeutic and 
Rehabilitation Activities Fund.\76\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \72\ Senate Veterans Affairs Committee, report to accompany S. 
2908, 94th Cong., 2nd sess., S.Rept. 94-1206, September 9, 1976.
    \73\ The Compensated Work Therapy program was authorized in P.L. 
87-574 as ``Therapeutic and Rehabilitative Activities.'' It was 
substantially amended in P.L. 94-581, and is codified at 38 U.S.C. 
Sec. 1718.
    \74\ VA Veterans Industry/Compensated Work Therapy web pages, 
available at http://www1.va.gov/vetind/.
    \75\ VA Fact Sheet, ``VA Programs for Homeless Veterans,'' 
September 2006 (hereafter ``VA Programs for Homeless Veterans'').
    \76\ 38 U.S.C. Sec. 1718(c).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In 1991, as part of P.L. 102-54, the Veterans Housing, Memorial 
Affairs, and Technical Amendments Act, Congress added the Therapeutic 
Transitional Housing component to the CWT program. The purpose of the 
program is to provide housing to participants in the CWT program who 
have mental illnesses or chronic substance abuse disorders and who are 
homeless or at risk of homelessness.\77\ Although the law initially 
provided that both the VA itself or private nonprofit organizations, 
through contracts with the VA, could operate housing, the law was 
subsequently changed so that only the VA now owns and operates 
housing.\78\ The housing is transitional--up to 12 months--and veterans 
who reside there receive supportive services. As of September 2006, the 
VA operated 66 transitional housing facilities with 520 beds.\79\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \77\ The VA's authority to operate therapeutic housing is codified 
at 38 U.S.C. Sec. 2032.
    \78\ The provision for nonprofits was in P.L. 102-54, but was 
repealed by P.L. 105-114, section 1720A(c)(1).
    \79\ ``VA Programs for Homeless Veterans.''

    Grant and Per Diem Program. Initially called the Comprehensive 
Service Programs, the Grant and Per Diem program was introduced as a 
pilot program in 1992 through the Homeless Veterans Comprehensive 
Services Act (P.L. 102-590). The law establishing the Grant and Per 
Diem program, which was made permanent in the Homeless Veterans 
Comprehensive Services Act of 2001 (P.L. 107-95), authorizes the VA to 
make grants to public entities or private nonprofit organizations to 
provide services and transitional housing to homeless veterans.\80\ For 
the last four fiscal years (FY2004-FY2007) the Grant and Per Diem 
program has received more funding than any of the other eight VA 
programs that are targeted to homeless veterans (see Table 2). The 
Grant and Per Diem program is permanently authorized at $130 million 
(P.L. 109-461).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \80\ The Grant and Per Diem program is codified at 38 U.S.C. 
Sec. Sec. 2011-2013.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The program has two parts: grant and per diem. Eligible grant 
recipients may apply for funding for one or both parts. The grants 
portion provides capital grants to purchase, rehabilitate, or convert 
facilities so that they are suitable for use as either service centers 
or transitional housing facilities. The capital grants will fund up to 
65% of the costs of acquisition, expansion or remodeling of 
facilities.\81\ Grants may also be used to procure vans for outreach 
and transportation of homeless veterans. The per diem portion of the 
program reimburses grant recipients for the costs of providing housing 
and supportive services to homeless veterans. The supportive services 
that grantees may provide include outreach activities, food and 
nutrition services, health care, mental health services, substance 
abuse counseling, case management, child care, assistance in obtaining 
housing, employment counseling, job training and placement services, 
and transportation assistance.\82\ Organizations may apply for per diem 
funds alone (without capital grant funds), as long as they would be 
eligible to apply for and receive capital grants.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \81\ 38 U.S.C. Sec. 2011(c).
    \82\ 38 CFR Sec. 61.1.

    Program Rules and Data. The per diem portion of the Grant and Per 
Diem program pays organizations for the housing that they provide to 
veterans at a fixed dollar rate for each bed that is occupied.\83\ 
Organizations apply to be reimbursed for the cost of care provided, not 
to exceed the current per diem rate for domiciliary care. The per diem 
rate increases periodically; the FY2007 rate is $31.30 per day.\84\ The 
per diem portion of the program also compensates grant recipients for 
the services they provide to veterans at service centers. Grantee 
organizations are paid at an hourly rate of one eighth of either the 
cost of services or the domiciliary care per diem rate, however 
organizations cannot be reimbursed for both housing and services 
provided to the same individual. Organizations are paid by the hour for 
each veteran served for up to eight hours per day. Any per diem 
payments are offset by other funds that the grant recipient receives. 
The Advisory Committee on Homeless Veterans has recommended that the 
per diem reimbursement system be revised to take account of actual 
service costs instead of using a capped rate.\85\ Legislation has been 
introduced in the 110th Congress that would make changes to the way in 
which grant recipients are reimbursed. For more information about 
proposed legislation, see CRS Report RL30442, Homelessness: Targeted 
Federal Programs and Recent Legislation, by Libby Perl et al.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \83\ 38 CFR Sec. 61.33.
    \84\ U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, Department of Geriatrics 
and Extended Care, Description of the State Veterans Home Program, 
available at http://www1.va.gov/geriatricsshg/docs/
FY07STATEVETHOMEPROGRAMHistory.doc.
    \85\ Advisory Committee on Homeless Veterans Fifth Annual Report, 
p. 11.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    According to the most recent data available from the VA, in FY2006 
the Grant and Per Diem program funded more than 300 service providers. 
These providers had a total of 8,200 beds available and served more 
than 15,000 homeless veterans.\86\ According to a 2006 Government 
Accountability Office report, an additional 9,600 Grant and Per Diem 
transitional beds are needed to meet the demand.\87\ The VA has stated 
that an additional 3,000 beds are expected to become available once 
construction and renovation of various facilities is completed.\88\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \86\ Health Care for Homeless Veterans Programs: Twentieth Annual 
Report, p. 154.
    \87\ Government Accountability Office, Homeless Veterans Programs: 
Improved Communications and Follow-up Could Further Enhance the Grant 
and Per Diem Program, September 2006, p. 12, available at http://
www.gao.gov/new.items/d06859.pdf.
    \88\ Statement of Pete Dougherty, Director, Homeless Veterans 
Programs, Department of Veterans Affairs, House Committee on Veterans' 
Affairs, Subcommittee on Health, U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs 
Grant and Per Diem Program, 110th Cong., 1st sess., September 27, 2007.

    Grant and Per Diem for Homeless Veterans with Special Needs. In 
2001, Congress created a demonstration program to target grant and per 
diem funds to specific groups of veterans (P.L. 107-95). These groups 
include women, women with children, the frail elderly, those veterans 
with terminal illnesses, and those with chronic mental illnesses. The 
program was initially authorized at $5 million per year for FY2003 
through FY2005. P.L. 109-461, enacted on December 22, 2006, 
reauthorized the program for FY2007 through FY2011 at $7 million per 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
year.

    HUD-VASH. Beginning in 1992, through a collaboration between HUD 
and the VA, funding for approximately 1,753 Section 8 vouchers was made 
available for use by homeless veterans with severe psychiatric or 
substance abuse disorders.\89\ Section 8 vouchers are subsidies used by 
families to rent apartments in the private rental market.\90\ Through 
the program, called HUD-VA Supported Housing (HUD-VASH), local Public 
Housing Authorities (PHAs) administer the Section 8 vouchers while 
local VA medical centers provide case management and clinical services 
to participating veterans. HUD distributed the vouchers to PHAs through 
three competitions, in 1992, 1993, and 1994. Prior to issuing the 
vouchers, HUD and the VA had identified medical centers with 
Domiciliary Care and Health Care for Homeless Veterans programs that 
were best suited to providing services. PHAs within the geographic 
areas of the VA medical centers were invited to apply for vouchers. In 
the first year that HUD issued vouchers, 19 PHAs were eligible to 
apply, and by the third year the list of eligible VA medical centers 
and PHAs had expanded to 87.\91\ HUD does not separately track these 
vouchers. However, the VA keeps statistics on veterans with vouchers 
who receive treatment through the VA. In FY2006, 1,238 veterans with 
HUD-VASH vouchers received treatment during the course of the year, 
with 1,028 veterans still receiving treatment at the end of that 
year.\92\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \89\ The first announcement of voucher availability was announced 
in the Federal Register. See U.S. Department of Housing and Urban 
Development, ``Invitation for FY1992 Section 8 Rental Voucher Set-Aside 
for Homeless Veterans with Severe Psychiatric or Substance Abuse 
Disorders,'' Federal Register vol. 57, no. 55, p. 9955, March 20, 1992.
    \90\ For more information about Section 8 in general, see CRS 
Report RL32284, An Overview of the Section 8 Housing Programs, by 
Maggie McCarty.
    \91\ U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, ``Funding 
Availability (NOFA) for the Section 8 Set-Aside for Homeless Veterans 
with Severe Psychiatric or Substance Abuse Disorders,'' Federal 
Register vol. 59, no. 134, p. 36015, July 14, 1994.
    \92\ Wesley J. Kasprow, Robert A. Rosenheck, Diane DiLello, Leslie 
Cavallaro, and Nicole Harelik, Health Care for Homeless Veterans 
Programs: Twentieth Annual Report, U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs 
Northeast Program Evaluation Center, March 31, 2007, pp. 272-273.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In 2001, Congress codified the HUD-VASH program (P.L. 107-95) and 
authorized the creation of an additional 500 vouchers for each year 
from FY2003 through FY2006.\93\ A bill enacted at the end of the 109th 
Congress (P.L. 109-461) also provided the authorization for additional 
HUD-VASH vouchers. However, not until FY2008 did Congress provide 
funding for additional vouchers: the Consolidated Appropriations Act 
(P.L. 110-161) included $75 million for Section 8 vouchers for homeless 
veterans. HUD has estimated that this will fund between 9,000 and 
10,000 additional vouchers.\94\ The Administration has also requested 
an additional $75 million for HUD-VASH vouchers in FY2009.\95\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \93\ 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1437f(o)(19).
    \94\ Testimony of Alphonso Jackson, Secretary of Housing and Urban 
Development, House Appropriations Committee, Subcommittee on 
Transportation and Housing and Urban Development, FY2009 
Appropriations, 110th Cong., 2nd sess., February 13, 2008.
    \95\ See Budget of the U.S. Government FY2009--Appendix, Department 
of Housing and Urban Development, p. 541, available at http://
www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/fy2009/pdf/appendix/hud.pdf.

    Program Evaluations. Long-term evaluations of the HUD-VASH program 
have shown both improved housing and improved substance abuse outcomes 
among veterans who received the vouchers over those who did not.\96\ 
Veterans who received vouchers experienced fewer days of homelessness 
and more days housed than veterans who received intensive case 
management assistance or standard care through VA homeless programs 
alone.\97\ Analysis also found that veterans with HUD-VASH vouchers had 
fewer days of alcohol use, fewer days on which they drank to 
intoxication, and fewer days of drug use.\98\ HUD-VASH veterans were 
also found to have spent fewer days in institutions.\99\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \96\ Robert Rosenheck, Wesley Kasprow, Linda Frisman, and Wen Liu-
Mares, ``Cost-effectiveness of Supported Housing for Homeless Persons 
with Mental Illness,'' Archives of General Psychiatry 60 (September 
2003): 940 (hereafter ``Cost-effectiveness of Supported Housing for 
Homeless Persons with Mental Illness''). An-Lin Cheng, Haiqun Lin, 
Wesley Kasprow, and Robert Rosenheck, ``Impact of Supported Housing on 
Clinical Outcomes,'' Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease 195, no. 1 
(January 2007): 83 (hereafter ``Impact of Supported Housing on Clinical 
Outcomes'').
    \97\ ``Cost-effectiveness of Supported Housing for Homeless Persons 
with Mental Illness,'' p. 945.
    \98\ ``Impact of Supported Housing on Clinical Outcomes,'' p. 85.
    \99\ Ibid

    Loan Guarantee for Multifamily Transitional Housing Program. The 
Veterans Programs Enhancement Act 1998 (P.L. 105-368) created a program 
in which the VA guarantees loans to eligible organizations so that they 
may construct, rehabilitate or acquire property to provide multifamily 
transitional housing for homeless veterans.\100\ Eligible project 
sponsors may be any legal entity that has experience in providing 
multifamily housing.\101\ The law requires sponsors to provide 
supportive services, ensure that residents seek to obtain and maintain 
employment, enact guidelines to require sobriety as a condition of 
residency, and charge veterans a reasonable fee.\102\ Veterans who are 
not homeless, and homeless individuals who are not veterans, may be 
occupants of the transitional housing if all of the transitional 
housing needs of homeless veterans in the project area have been 
met.\103\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \100\ 38 U.S.C. Sec. Sec. 2051-2054.
    \101\ U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, Multifamily Transitional 
Housing Loan Guarantee Program: Program Manual, April 6, 2007, p. 9, 
available at http://www1.va.gov/homeless/docs/
Loan_Guarantee_Program_Manual_4-6-07.pdf.
    \102\ 38 U.S.C. Sec. 2052(b).
    \103\ Ibid
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Supportive services that project sponsors are to provide include 
outreach; food and nutritional counseling; health care, mental health 
services, and substance abuse counseling; child care; assistance in 
obtaining permanent housing; education, job training, and employment 
assistance; assistance in obtaining various types of benefits; and 
transportation.\104\ Not more than 15 loans with an aggregate total of 
up to $100 million may be guaranteed under this program. The VA has 
committed loans to two projects and released a notice of funding 
availability for additional applications.\105\ One project, sponsored 
by Catholic Charities of Chicago, opened in January 2007 with 141 
transitional units for homeless veterans.\106\ A second project in San 
Diego is also expected to provide 144 transitional housing units.\107\ 
According to the VA, the agency has been slow to implement the program 
due to service providers' concerns that they may not be able to operate 
housing for such a needy population and still repay the guaranteed 
loans.\108\ The VA has stated that it plans to review the program to 
determine whether it should be modified, discontinued, or replaced by 
another program.\109\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \104\ Multifamily Transitional Housing Loan Guarantee Program: 
Program Manual, p. 10.
    \105\ The Notice of Funding Availability is available at Federal 
Register 71, no. 10, April 12, 2006, p. 18813.
    \106\ See U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, ``Multifamily 
Transitional Housing Loan Guarantee Program: Program Overview,'' 
Presentation by Claude B. Hutchinson, Jr., July 2007, available at 
http://www1.va.gov/homeless/docs/
Loan_Guarantee_Informational_Video_Slides.ppt.
    \107\ Statement of Pete Dougherty, Director, Homeless Veterans 
Programs, Senate Veterans Affairs Committee, Looking At Our Homeless 
Veterans Programs: How Effective Are They?, 109th Cong., 2nd sess., 
March 16, 2006.
    \108\ Testimony of Pete Dougherty, Director, Homeless Veterans 
Programs, Department of Veterans Affairs, House Appropriations 
Committee, Subcommittee on Military Construction and Veterans Affairs, 
FY2008 Appropriations, 110th Cong., 1st sess., March 8, 2007.
    \109\ Advisory Committee on Homeless Veterans Fifth Annual Report, 
p. 14.

    Acquired Property Sales for Homeless Veterans. The Acquired 
Property Sales for Homeless Veterans program is operated through the 
Veterans Benefits Administration (VBA). The program was enacted as part 
of the Veterans Home Loan Guarantee and Property Rehabilitation Act of 
1987 (P.L. 100-198). The current version of the program was authorized 
in P.L. 102-54 (a bill to amend Title 38 of the U.S. Code), and is 
authorized through December 31, 2008.\110\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \110\ The program was most recently authorized in the Veterans 
Health Care, Capital Asset, and Business Improvement Act of 2003 (P.L. 
108-170). The program is codified at 38 U.S.C. Sec. 2041.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Through the program, the VA is able to dispose of properties that 
it has acquired through foreclosures on its loans so that they can be 
used for the benefit of homeless veterans. Specifically, the VA can 
sell, lease, lease with the option to buy, or donate, properties to 
nonprofit organizations and state government agencies that will use the 
property only as homeless shelters primarily for veterans and their 
families. The VA estimates that over 200 properties have been sold 
through the program.\111\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \111\ ``VA Programs for Homeless Veterans.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Department of Labor
    The Department of Labor (DoL) contains an office specifically 
dedicated to the employment needs of veterans, the office of Veterans' 
Employment and Training Service (VETS). In addition to its program for 
homeless veterans--the Homeless Veterans Reintegration Program (HVRP)--
VETS funds employment training programs for all veterans. These include 
the Veterans Workforce Investment Program and the Transition Assistance 
Program.

    Homeless Veterans Reintegration Program. Established in 1987 as 
part of the McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act (P.L. 100-77), the 
HVRP was authorized through FY2011 as part of the Veterans Benefits, 
Health Care, and Information Technology Act of 2006 (P.L. 109-461). The 
program has two goals. The first is to assist veterans in achieving 
meaningful employment, and the second is to assist in the development 
of a service delivery system to address the problems facing homeless 
veterans. Eligible grantee organizations are state and local Workforce 
Investment Boards, local public agencies, and both for- and non-profit 
organizations.\112\ Grantees receive funding for one year, with the 
possibility for two additional years of funding contingent on 
performance and fund availability.\113\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \112\ Veterans Employment and Training Service Program Year 2007 
Solicitation for Grant Applications, Federal Register vol. 72, no. 71, 
April 13, 2007, p. 18682.
    \113\ Ibid, p. 18679.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    HVRP grantee organizations provide services that include outreach, 
assistance in drafting a resume and preparing for interviews, job 
search assistance, subsidized trial employment, job training, and 
follow-up assistance after placement. Recipients of HVRP grants also 
provide supportive services not directly related to employment such as 
transportation, provision of or assistance in finding housing, and 
referral for mental health treatment or substance abuse counseling. 
HVRP grantees often employ formerly homeless veterans to provide 
outreach to homeless veterans and to counsel them as they search for 
employment and stability. In fact, from the inception of the HVRP, it 
has been required that at least one employee of grantee organizations 
be a veteran who has experienced homelessness.\114\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \114\ ``Procedures for Preapplication for Funds; Stewart B. 
McKinney Homeless Assistance Act, FY1988'' Federal Register vol. 53, 
no. 70, April 12, 1988, p. 12089.

    Program Data. In program year (PY) 2006, HVRP grantees served a 
total of 13,346 homeless veterans, of whom 8,713, or 65%, were placed 
in employment.\115\ The percentage of participants placed in employment 
has grown nearly every year since PY2000, when 52.8% of veterans 
participating in HVRP entered employment.\116\ In PY2004, the most 
recent year for which more extensive data are available, of those who 
became employed, an estimated 64% were still employed after 90 days, 
and 58% after 180 days.\117\ The average wage for participants has 
grown steadily from $8.73 per hour in PY2000 to $9.55 per hour in 
PY2004.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \115\ Presentation of Charles S. Ciccolella, Assistant Secretary 
for Veterans' Employment and Training, U.S. Department of Labor, to the 
VA Advisory Committee on Homeless Veterans, January 31, 2008.
    \116\ U.S. Department of Labor, Office of the Assistant Secretary 
for Veterans' Employment and Training, FY2005 Annual Report to 
Congress, March 23, 2007, p. 9, available at http://www.dol.gov/vets/
media/FY2005_Annual_Report_To_Congress.pdf.
    \117\ Ibid, p. 9.

    Stand Downs for Homeless Veterans. A battlefield stand down is the 
process in which troops are removed from danger and taken to a safe 
area to rest, eat, clean up, receive medical care, and generally 
recover from the stress and chaos of battle. Stand Downs for Homeless 
Veterans are modeled on the battlefield stand down and are local 
events, staged annually in many cities across the country, in which 
local Veterans Service Organizations, businesses, government entities, 
and other social service organizations come together for up to three 
days to provide similar services for homeless veterans. Items and 
services provided at stand downs include food, clothing, showers, 
haircuts, medical exams, dental care, immunizations, and, in some 
locations where stand downs take place for more than one day, shelter. 
Another important facet of stand downs, according to the National 
Coalition for Homeless Veterans, is the camaraderie that occurs when 
veterans spend time among other veterans.
    Although stand downs are largely supported through donations of 
funds, goods, and volunteer time, the DoL VETS office allows HVRP grant 
recipient organizations to use up to $8,000 of their grants to fund 
stand downs. The VETS program also awards up to $8,000 to HVRP eligible 
organizations that have not received an HVRP grant. According to the 
most recent data available, $364,460 was used to serve 10,155 veterans 
at stand downs in FY2005.\118\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \118\ Ibid, p. 12.

    Incarcerated Veterans Transition Program Demonstration Grants. The 
Homeless Veterans Comprehensive Assistance Act of 2001 (P.L. 107-95) 
instituted a demonstration program to provide job training and 
placement services to veterans leaving prison.\119\ By 2005, the 
program awarded $1.45 million in initial grants to seven recipients, 
and extended these seven grants through March 2006 with funding of $1.6 
million.\120\ The Department of Labor reported that these grant 
recipients enrolled 2,191 veterans in the transition program in fiscal 
years 2004 through 2006 and that of these enrollees, 1,104, or 54%, 
entered employment.\121\ The average wage for those veterans entering 
employment was $10.00 per hour.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \119\ 38 U.S.C. Sec. 2023.
    \120\ DoL VETS FY2005 Annual Report to Congress, p. 13.
    \121\ Presentation of Charles S. Ciccolella.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Authorization for the incarcerated veterans transition program 
expired on January 24, 2006 and no additional funding has been 
provided. However, service providers encourage continued involvement in 
making arrangements for veterans leaving correctional facilities.\122\ 
And in its report for 2007, the Advisory Committee on Homeless Veterans 
recommended that the program be continued.\123\ Legislation that would 
remove the program's demonstration status and authorize it has been 
introduced in the 110th Congress. For more information about pending 
legislation, see CRS Report RL30442, Homelessness: Targeted Federal 
Programs and Recent Legislation, by Libby Perl et al.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \122\ See National Coalition for Homeless Veterans, ``FY2007 Public 
Policy Priorities,'' January 24, 2007, available at http://
www.nchv.org/content.cfm?id=24.
    \123\ U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, Advisory Committee on 
Homeless Veterans, Advisory Committee on Homeless Veterans Fifth Annual 
Report, 2007, p. 16 (hereafter Advisory Committee on Homeless Veterans 
Fifth Annual Report).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                            Emerging Issues

Permanent Supportive Housing
    With the exception of Section 8 vouchers provided through the HUD-
VASH program, the Federal programs for homeless veterans offer funding 
only for transitional housing developments; they do not fund permanent 
supportive housing. The permanent supportive housing model promotes 
stability by ensuring that residents receive services tailored to their 
particular needs, including health care, counseling, employment 
assistance, help with financial matters, and assistance with other 
daily activities that might present challenges to a formerly homeless 
individual.
    Although veterans are eligible for permanent supportive housing 
through HUD programs for homeless persons, they are not prioritized 
above nonveteran homeless individuals. Some members of Congress, 
service providers, and the VA Advisory Committee on Homeless Veterans 
support the creation of permanent supportive housing dedicated to 
veterans. According to local government and community participants in 
the last five VA CHALENG surveys, permanent supportive housing is the 
number one unmet need of homeless veterans.\124\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \124\ The Fourteenth Annual CHALENG Report, p. 12.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In a report released in August 2007, the Government Accountability 
Office (GAO) found that low-income veteran renter households were less 
likely to receive HUD rental assistance than other low-income 
households.\125\ GAO estimated that 11% of low-income veteran renter 
households received HUD rental assistance compared to 19% of low-income 
nonveteran renter households.\126\ Limited resources are available to 
house low-income families, and veterans must compete with other needy 
groups including elderly residents, persons with disabilities, and 
families with young children. Due to a lack of permanent housing 
options, when veterans complete programs that have transitional housing 
components, there is not always a place for them to go. Another concern 
is that, as Vietnam-era veterans age, there is a reduced chance that 
they will be able to find employment and support themselves. Permanent 
supportive housing would serve that population.\127\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \125\ Government Accountability Office, Information on Low-Income 
Veterans' Housing Needs Conditions and Participation in HUD's Programs, 
GAO-07-1012, August 17, 2007, p. 29, available at http://www.gao.gov/
new.items/d071012.pdf.
    \126\ Ibid
    \127\ Testimony of Cheryl Beversdorf, Director, National Coalition 
for Homeless Veterans, before the House Appropriations Committee, 
Subcommittee on Military Construction and Veterans Affairs, FY2008 
Appropriations, 110th Cong., 1st sess., March 8, 2007.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    As discussed previously, Congress appropriated $75 million for up 
to 10,000 additional Section 8 vouchers for homeless veterans in the 
FY2008 Consolidated Appropriations Act (P.L. 110-161). The President's 
FY2009 budget request also proposed $75 million to fund additional 
vouchers. Legislation has been introduced in the 110th Congress that 
would provide funds for additional HUD-VASH vouchers, as well as funds 
for permanent supportive housing for very low-income veterans and their 
families. For more information about proposed legislation, see CRS 
Report RL30442, Homelessness: Targeted Federal Programs and Recent 
Legislation, by Libby Perl et al.
Veterans of the Wars in Iraq and Afghanistan
    As veterans return from Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF) and Operation 
Enduring Freedom (OEF), just as veterans before them, they face risks 
that could lead to homelessness. To date, approximately 400 OEF/OIF 
veterans have used VA services for homeless veterans, and the VA has 
classified 1,500 as being at risk of homelessness. The National 
Coalition for Homeless Veterans, in an informal survey of service 
providers, estimated that 1,260 veterans of the Iraq War sought 
assistance from Grant and Per Diem programs in 2006.\128\ Approximately 
751,273 OEF/OIF troops have been separated from active duty since 
2002.\129\ If the experiences of the Vietnam War are any indication, 
the risk of becoming homeless continues for many years after service. 
After the Vietnam War, 76% of Vietnam era combat troops and 50% of non-
combat troops who eventually became homeless reported that at least 10 
years passed between the time they left military service and when they 
became homeless.\130\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \128\ Conversation with Cheryl Beversdorf, Director, National 
Coalition for Homeless Veterans, April 10, 2007 (hereafter 
``Conversation with Cheryl Beversdorf'').
    \129\ Since October 2003, DoD's Defense Manpower Data Center (DMDC) 
has periodically (every 60 days) sent VA an updated personnel roster of 
troops who participated in OEF and OIF, and who have separated from 
active duty and become eligible for VA benefits. The roster was 
originally prepared based on pay records of individuals. However, in 
more recent months it has been based on a combiNation of pay records 
and operational records provided by each service branch. The current 
separation data are from FY2002 through May 2007.
    \130\ See ``Homeless Veterans,'' p. 105.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Among troops returning from Iraq, between 15% and 17% have screened 
positive for depression, generalized anxiety, and PTSD.\131\ Veterans 
returning from Iraq also appear to be seeking out mental health 
services at higher rates than veterans returning from other 
conflicts.\132\ Research has also found that the length and number of 
deployments of troops in Iraq result in greater risk of mental health 
problems.\133\ Access to VA health services could be a critical 
component of reintegration into the community for some veterans, and 
there is concern that returning veterans might not be aware of 
available VA health programs and services.\134\ The VA has multiple 
means of reaching out to injured veterans and veterans currently 
receiving treatment through the Department of Defense (DoD) to ensure 
that they know about VA health services and to help them make the 
transition from DoD to VA services. (For more information about these 
efforts see CRS Report RL33993, Veterans' Health Care Issues, by Sidath 
Viranga Panangala.) However, for some veterans, health issues, 
particularly mental health issues, may arise later. A study of Iraq 
soldiers returning from deployment found that a higher percentage of 
soldiers reported mental health concerns six months after returning 
than immediately after returning.\135\ Legislation has been introduced 
in the 110th Congress that would attempt to identify returning members 
of the armed services who are at risk of homelessness. For more 
information on this legislation and its status, see CRS Report RL30442, 
Homelessness: Targeted Federal Programs and Recent Legislation, by 
Libby Perl et al.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \131\ Charles W. Hoge, Carl A. Castro, Stephen C. Messer, and 
Dennis McGurk, ``Combat Duty in Iraq and Afghanistan, Mental Health 
Problems, and Barriers to Care,'' New England Journal of Medicine 351, 
no. 1 (July 1, 2004): Table 3.
    \132\ Charles W. Hoge, Jennifer L. Auchterlonie, and Charles S. 
Milliken, ``Mental Health Problems, Use of Mental Health Services, and 
Attrition from Military Service After Returning from Deployment to Iraq 
or Afghanistan,'' JAMA 295, no. 9 (March 1, 2006): 1026, 1029.
    \133\ Office of the Surgeon Multi-National Force--Iraq and Office 
of the Surgeon General United States Army Command, Mental Health 
Advisory Team V, February 14, 2008, pp. 42-43, 46-47, available at 
http://www.armymedicine.army.mil/news/mhat/mhat_v/Redacted1-MHATV-OIF-
4-FEB-2008Report.pdf.
    \134\ See, for example, Amy Fairweather, Risk and Protective 
Factors for Homelessness Among OIF/OEF Veterans, Swords to Plowshares' 
Iraq Veteran Project, December 7, 2006, p. 6.
    \135\ Charles S. Milliken, Jennifer L. Auchterlonie, and Charles W. 
Hoge, ``Longitudinal Assessment of Mental Health Problems Among Active 
and Reserve Component Soldiers Returning from the Iraq War,'' JAMA 298, 
no. 18 (November 14, 2007): 2141, 2144.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Female Veterans
    The number and percentage of women enlisted in the military have 
increased since previous wars. In FY2005, approximately 14.4% of 
enlisted troops in the active components of the military (Army, Navy, 
Air Force, and Marines) were female, up from approximately 3.3% in 
FY1974 and 10.9% in FY1990.\136\ The number of women deployed to war is 
also on the rise. To date, over 165,000 female troops have been 
deployed to Iraq and Afghanistan,\137\ compared to 7,500 in the Vietnam 
War, and 41,000 in the Gulf War.\138\ The number of women veterans can 
be expected to grow commensurately. According to the VA, there were 
approximately 1.2 million female veterans in 1990 (4% of the veteran 
population) and 1.6 million in 2000 (6%).\139\ The VA anticipates that 
there will be 1.8 million female veterans in 2010 (8% of the veteran 
population) and 1.9 million (10%) in 2020. At the same time, the number 
of male veterans is expected to decline.\140\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \136\ U.S. Department of Defense, Office of the Under Secretary of 
Defense, Personnel and Readiness, Population Representation in the 
Military Services, FY2005, Appendix D, Table D-13, available at http://
www.defenselink.mil/prhome/poprep2005/contents/contents.html.
    \137\ The Joint Economic Committee, Helping Military Moms Balance 
Family and Longer Deployment, May 11, 2007, p. 2, available at http://
www.jec.senate.gov/Documents/Reports/MilitaryMoms05.11.07Final.pdf.
    \138\ U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs.
    \139\ Robert A. Klein, Women Veterans: Past, Present, and Future, 
U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, Office of the Actuary, updated 
September 2007, pp. 8-9, available at http://www1.va.gov/vetdata/docs/
Womenveterans_past_present_future_9-30-07a.pdf.
    \140\ Ibid
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Women veterans face challenges that could contribute to their risks 
of homelessness. Experts have found that female veterans report 
incidents of sexual assault that exceed rates reported in the general 
population.\141\ The percentage of female veterans seeking medical care 
through the VA who have reported that they have experienced sexual 
assault ranges between 23% and 29%.\142\ Female active duty soldiers 
have been found to suffer from PTSD at higher rates than male 
soldiers.\143\ Experience with sexual assault has been linked to PTSD, 
depression, alcohol and drug abuse, disrupted social networks, and 
employment difficulties.\144\ These factors can increase the difficulty 
with which women veterans readjust to civilian life, and could be risk 
factors for homelessness (see earlier discussion in this report).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \141\ Jessica Wolfe et al., ``Changing Demographic Characteristics 
of Women Veterans: Results from a National Sample,'' Military Medicine 
165, no. 10 (October 2000): 800.
    \142\ Anne G. Sandler, Brenda M. Booth, Michelle A. Mengeling, and 
Bradley N. Doebbeling, ``Life Span and Repeated Violence Against Women 
During Military Service: Effects on Health Status and Outpatient 
Utilization,'' Journal of Women's Health 13, no. 7 (2004): 800.
    \143\ Laurel L. Hourani and Huixing Yuan, ``The Mental Health 
Status of Women in the Navy and Marine Corps: Preliminary Findings from 
the Perceptions of Wellness and Readiness Assessment,'' Military 
Medicine 164, no. 3 (March 1999): 176.
    \144\ Maureen Murdoch et al., ``Women and War: What Physicians 
Should Know,'' Journal of General Internal Medicine 21, no. s3 (March 
2006): S7.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Women veterans are estimated to make up a relatively small 
proportion of the homeless veteran population. Among veterans who use 
VA's services for homeless veterans, women are estimated to make up 
just under 4% of the total.\145\ As a result, programs serving homeless 
veterans may not have adequate facilities for female veterans at risk 
of homelessness, particularly transitional housing for women and women 
with children. As of 2007, eight Grant and Per Diem programs provide 
transitional housing for female veterans and their children.\146\ The 
VA Advisory Committee on Homeless Veterans noted in its 2007 report 
that ``the needs and complexity of issues involving women veterans are 
increasing'' and recommended continued support through the Grant and 
Per Diem Special Needs grants.\147\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \145\ Health Care for Homeless Veterans 20th Annual Report, p. 26.
    \146\ Conversation with Cheryl Beversdorf.
    \147\ Advisory Committee on Homeless Veterans Fifth Annual Report, 
p. 13.

                                 
                     CONGRESSIONAL RESEARCH SERVICE
                          LIBRARY OF CONGRESS
                         CRS REPORT TO CONGRESS
                           Order Code RL33956
   Counting Homeless Persons: Homeless Management Information Systems
                         Updated April 3, 2008
    Libby Perl, Analyst in Housing, Domestic Social Policy Division
                               __________

                         C O N T E N T S

_________________________________________________________________

                                                                   Page

Summary..........................................................   132
Introduction.....................................................   132
What Are Homeless Management Information Systems?................   133
HUD's Continuing Role in Collecting Information About Homeless      133
  Persons.
Development of the HMIS Network..................................   134
  Congressional Direction........................................   134
  HUD Actions....................................................   134
    HMIS Data and Technical Standards............................   135
    Confidentiality of Domestic Violence Victims.................   135
Status of the HMIS Network.......................................   135
    HMIS Implementation..........................................   136
    Participation of Service Providers in HMIS...................   136
Counts of Homeless Persons.......................................   136
  CoC Counts of Homeless Individuals.............................   137
    2005 CoC Counts..............................................   138
    2006 CoC Counts..............................................   138
  The Annual Homeless Assessment Report (AHAR)...................   138
    Estimates from the First AHAR Using HMIS Data................   138
    Estimates from the Second AHAR Using HMIS Data...............   139
    AHAR Estimates Using CoC Point-in-Time Counts................   140
  Previous Attempts to Count Homeless Persons....................   140
    The Urban Institute (1987)...................................   140
    The National Survey of Homeless Assistance Providers and        140
      Clients (1996).
Sources of Demographic Information About Homeless Persons........   141

List of Tables
Table 1. National Estimates of the Number of Homeless Individuals   141

                                Summary

    In 1998, Congress directed the Department of Housing and Urban 
Development (HUD) to develop a process for collecting data about 
homeless persons. Together with local communities, HUD began in 2001 to 
implement a series of Homeless Management Information Systems (HMIS). 
Two categories of Federal fund recipients are required to participate 
in HMIS: organizations that receive grants through the Housing 
Opportunities for Persons with AIDS (HOPWA) program and organizations 
that receive HUD Homeless Assistance Grants. The HOPWA program provides 
housing and supportive services for persons living with AIDS, while the 
Homeless Assistance Grants fund transitional and permanent housing, as 
well as services, for homeless individuals.
    Local jurisdictions called ``Continuums of Care'' (CoCs)--typically 
cities, counties, or combinations of both--are the entities that 
implement HMIS. Homeless service providers in these CoCs collect and 
store information about homeless individuals they serve, and the 
information is aggregated in computer systems at the CoC level. HUD 
anticipates that information about homeless individuals from CoCs 
across the country eventually will help it to better serve their needs.
    HUD released its second analysis of data from a sample of 
participating HMIS jurisdictions--the second Annual Homeless Assessment 
Report (AHAR)--in March 2008. The second AHAR used HMIS data from a 
sample of 74 communities to derive national-level estimates of the 
number of homeless persons for three points in time during the six-
month period from January 1 to June 30, 2006, as well as an estimate of 
the total number of people who experienced homelessness at least once 
during this same period. It is expected that data from HMIS eventually 
will provide an unduplicated count of the number of persons 
experiencing homelessness from communities across the country.
    Congress initially allocated funds for data collection regarding 
homeless persons in the FY2001 HUD Appropriations Act (P.L. 106-377), 
and has continued to allocate funds in all HUD spending bills from 
FY2002 to FY2008. Local communities can then apply to HUD for available 
funds that they may use to implement HMIS. Community implementation of 
HMIS increased from 2005 to 2006. According to the most recent HUD 
progress report to Congress regarding HMIS, 91% of local CoCs were 
implementing HMIS in 2006, meaning that they had established systems 
into which data are entered (compared to 72% in 2005). Approximately 9% 
of CoCs had decided to implement an HMIS, and were in the process of 
planning the system (compared to 20% in 2005), and 1% of CoCs were not 
yet planning an HMIS (compared to 7% in 2005).
    This report describes the development of HMIS, reports on the 
continuing progress of HMIS, summarizes information released in the 
first and second AHARs, and describes previous attempts to count 
homeless persons. It will be updated as events warrant.

                              Introduction

    It is difficult to ascertain the number and characteristics of 
persons experiencing homelessness due to the transient nature of the 
population, although attempts to count and describe homeless 
individuals have been made in recent decades.\1\ Beginning in the mid-
1990s, for example, the Department of Housing and Urban Development 
(HUD) required its grant recipients to provide information about the 
homeless clients they served. In addition, comprehensive attempts to 
count homeless individuals were made in both the 1980s and 1990s, first 
via Census data and then through a national collaborative survey called 
the National Survey of Homeless Assistance Providers and Clients. 
However, no systematic method for tracking homeless persons has existed 
until now. In response to a directive from Congress in 1998, HUD began 
in 2001 to develop a system to track homeless individuals; the 
processes of data collection, organization, and storage systems, which 
take place at the local level, have been termed Homeless Management 
Information Systems (HMIS). In March 2008, HUD released results of its 
second analysis of HMIS data--the second Annual Homeless Assessment 
Report (AHAR). This CRS report describes the development of HMIS, the 
results of the first and second AHARs, and previous attempts to count 
homeless individuals.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ As defined by the McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act (P.L. 
100-77), a homeless person is ``(1) an individual who lacks a fixed, 
regular, and adequate nighttime residence; and (2) an individual who 
has a primary nighttime residence that is--(A) a supervised publicly or 
privately operated shelter designed to provide temporary living 
accommodations (including welfare hotels, congregate shelters, and 
transitional housing for the mentally ill); (B) an institution that 
provides a temporary residence for individuals intended to be 
institutionalized; or (C) a public or private place not designed for, 
or ordinarily used as, a regular sleeping accommodation for human 
beings.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

           What Are Homeless Management Information Systems?

    Homeless Management Information Systems (HMIS) are databases 
established at the local level through which homeless service providers 
collect, organize, and store information about homeless clients who 
receive services. HUD is implementing the HMIS initiative through local 
``Continuums of Care'' (CoCs), which acquire and process data from all 
participating local service providers. CoCs are local boards formed by 
communities--typically cities, counties, or combinations of both--made 
up of representatives from nonprofit service providers, advocacy 
groups, local government, and other interested organizations.\2\ Local 
boards identify the needs of homeless persons in their communities and 
try to ensure that they receive the appropriate mix of preventative 
assistance, emergency services, transitional housing, supportive 
services, and permanent housing. Local homeless services providers 
submit requests for funding to their local CoC boards, which each in 
turn submit single consolidated applications to HUD. As of FY2007, 
there were approximately 467 CoCs, including those in the 
Territories.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \2\ States may also constitute CoCs to coordinate funding in 
sparsely populated areas.
    \3\ ``HUD-Defined CoC Names and Numbers Listed by State,'' Revised 
March 15, 2007, available at http://www.hud.gov/library/bookshelf12/
supernofa/nofa07/coclist.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Two types of organizations are required to participate in HMIS: 
those that receive funding through the Housing Opportunities for 
Persons with AIDS (HOPWA) program and those that receive Homeless 
Assistance Grants. The HOPWA program, enacted in 1990 (P.L. 101-625) 
provides housing and supportive services for persons living with HIV/
AIDS.\4\ The Homeless Assistance Grants, enacted as part of the 
McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act (P.L. 100-77),\5\ consist of 
both formula grants, which are distributed through the Emergency 
Shelter Grants program, and competitive grants, which are available 
through the Shelter Plus Care program, Supportive Housing Program, and 
Section 8 Moderate Rehabilitation Assistance for Single Room Occupancy 
Dwellings program.\6\ Other service providers that serve homeless 
individuals and families but do not receive Federal funds from these 
sources are also encouraged to participate in HMIS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \4\ For more information on the HOPWA program, see CRS Report 
RS20704, Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS (HOPWA), by Libby 
Perl.
    \5\ P.L. 100-77 is codified at 42 U.S.C. Sec. Sec. 11301-11435.
    \6\ For more information about the Homeless Assistance Grants, see 
CRS Report RL33764, The HUD Homeless Assistance Grants: Distribution of 
Funds, by Libby Perl.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

 HUD's Continuing Role in Collecting Information About Homeless Persons

    Even prior to the congressional directive to implement HMIS 
(described in the next section of this report, ``Development of the 
HMIS Network''), HUD began efforts to collect information about 
homeless clients served in the communities that receive HUD Homeless 
Assistance Grants. Beginning in the mid-nineties, about the time that 
the Continuum of Care system developed, HUD required applicants for 
Homeless Assistance Grants to include in their applications information 
about the number of persons receiving assistance and the type of 
assistance they received. Initially this was done in narrative form. 
However, by 2003, the grant application required CoC applicants to 
complete a housing activity chart that included a point-in-time count 
of homeless individuals and families receiving services, though HUD did 
not specify when this count should take place.\7\ The 2003 application 
also asked applicants to categorize subpopulations served, including 
the number of chronically homeless individuals, veterans, those with 
severe mental illnesses, those with HIV/AIDS, and victims of domestic 
violence. Some CoCs used database systems similar to HMIS to keep track 
of homeless individuals who were served; these predecessor systems are 
sometimes referred to as ``legacy systems.'' \8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \7\ The FY2003 application is available on HUD's website, http://
www.hud.gov/library/bookshelf12/supernofa/nofa03/cocapp.doc.
    \8\ See U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, The 
Annual Homeless Assessment Report to Congress, February 2007, p. 2, 
available at http://www.huduser.org/Publications/pdf/ahar.pdf 
(hereafter First AHAR).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The 2005 HUD point-in-time count of homeless persons marked the 
first time that HUD required all CoCs to conduct a count of both 
sheltered and unsheltered homeless individuals, and to do it at a 
particular time of year. HUD directed CoCs to conduct a one-night count 
during the last week of January of both clients who used homeless 
services and those who were on the street.\9\ HUD continues to require 
CoCs to conduct point-in-time counts every two years, though some CoCs 
choose to conduct counts every year. In 2006, 61% of CoCs voluntarily 
conducted counts.\10\ The most recent point-in-time count in which all 
CoCs participated occurred in January 2007. The results of these counts 
are described later in this report, in the section ``CoC Estimates of 
Homeless Individuals.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \9\ Ibid, p. 16.
    \10\ U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, The Second 
Annual Homeless Assessment Report to Congress, March 2008, p. 12, 
available at http://www.hudhre.info/documents/
2ndHomelessAssessmentReport.pdf (hereafter Second AHAR).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                    Development of the HMIS Network

Congressional Direction
    HUD's ongoing attempts to count homeless individuals were given 
greater direction beginning in 1998, when Congress instructed HUD to 
count homeless persons and gather data about both their characteristics 
and use of homeless assistance services. The FY1999 HUD spending bill 
(P.L. 105-276) set aside up to 1% of the total appropriation for 
Homeless Assistance Grants for systems to track those persons 
experiencing homelessness. Specifically, Congress directed HUD to 
produce an unduplicated count of homeless persons and to collect 
information about homeless individuals surveyed such as age, race, sex, 
disability status, health status, and income; the types of services 
that homeless clients received; and client outcomes such as length of 
stay in transitional housing, success in acquiring permanent housing, 
and employment status.\11\ Congress concluded that this information 
would allow HUD to better assess the quality of service programs 
supported with Federal funds.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \11\ See House Committee on Appropriations, Department of Veterans 
Affairs and Housing and Urban Development and Independent Agencies 
Appropriations Act 1999, report to accompany H.R. 4194, H.Rept. 105-
610, 105th Cong., 2nd sess., July 8, 1998. The FY1999 HUD 
Appropriations Act referred to the House Committee Report language for 
specific requirements.
    \12\ Ibid
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Congress provided further direction to HUD in the HUD 
Appropriations Act for FY2001 (P.L. 106-377). The law made Supportive 
Housing Program funds available for local CoCs to implement management 
information systems.\13\ Congress directed HUD to work with local 
jurisdictions to develop a system to collect data, and to be ready to 
analyze the data within three years of passage of the appropriations 
bill.\14\ Congress also requested that HUD provide Congress with a 
report on its findings containing an unduplicated count of homeless 
persons and a descriptive profile of the population.\15\ The FY2001 
Appropriations Act once again allocated funds to pay for data 
collection, this time setting aside 1.5% of the total appropriation for 
Homeless Assistance Grants of $1.02 billion. Congress has continued to 
allocate funds for homeless data collection in spending bills from 
FY2002 to FY2008.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \13\ The provision allowing HMIS funding from the Supportive 
Housing Program (SHP) is codified at 42 U.S.C. Sec. 11383(a)(7). HUD 
enumerated the ways in which CoCs may use SHP funds for management 
information systems in Federal Register, volume 69, no. 146, July 30, 
2005, p. 45890.
    \14\ See Conference Committee, Department of Veterans Affairs and 
Housing and Urban Development and Independent Agencies Appropriations 
Act 2001, conference report to accompany H.R. 4635, H.Rept. 106-988, 
106th Cong., 2nd sess., October 18, 2000.
    \15\ See Senate Committee on Appropriations, Department of Veterans 
Affairs and Housing and Urban Development, and Independent Agencies 
Appropriations Act 2001, report to accompany H.R. 4635, S.Rept. 106-
410, 106th Cong., 2nd sess., September 13, 2000.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
HUD Actions
    In the time since Congress directed HUD to implement a system to 
count homeless persons and collect information on their 
characteristics, HUD has issued six annual reports to Congress updating 
its progress. In an initial report, dated August 2001, HUD stated that 
it would help CoCs collect homelessness data through four means: \16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \16\ U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Report to 
Congress: HUD's Strategy for Homeless Data Collection, Analysis and 
Reporting, August 2001, p. 1, available at http://www.hud.gov/offices/
cpd/homeless/hmis/strategy/congressreport.pdf.

      flexibly implementing the new Homeless Management 
Information System (HMIS) eligible activity under the Supportive 
Housing Program in the 2001 McKinney-Vento competition;
      initiating a comprehensive technical assistance program 
to help local jurisdictions collect unduplicated client-level data by 
2004;
      developing an approach to obtaining meaningful data for 
an Annual Homeless Assessment Report from a nationally representative 
sample of jurisdictions; and
      analyzing the most viable approaches to obtaining 
homeless client-level reporting.

    Since issuing this 2001 report, HUD has initiated a number of 
activities to follow through on its pledge to assist CoCs. It specified 
that CoCs may use Supportive Housing Program funds for computer 
hardware, software, and personnel to manage and operate information 
systems, analyze HMIS data, and produce reports. HUD technical 
assistance teams hold training sessions for CoCs across the country. In 
each year from 2004 to 2007, HUD sponsored national conferences in 
which it provided sessions on a wide range of topics, including data 
entry, strategies for including data on domestic violence clients and 
chronically homeless individuals, and how to use HMIS to evaluate 
program performance and improve services to persons experiencing 
homelessness. HUD established a website--HMIS.Info--where information 
about HMIS implementation across the country can be disseminated.\17\ 
Since October 2004, the HMIS.Info site has published a newsletter, 
managed a listserv, and hosted conference calls. In addition, a number 
of publications on implementing management information systems are 
available on the HMIS.Info website.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \17\ The website is http://www.hmis.info.

    HMIS Data and Technical Standards. On July 30, 2004, HUD released 
its final notice on HMIS data and technical standards that local CoCs 
are expected to follow when they collect information about their 
homeless clients.\18\ The standards describe two levels of data 
collection--universal data, which homeless service providers must 
collect from all clients, and program-specific data, which programs 
that receive certain types of funding must collect, but that other 
programs are encouraged to collect as well.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \18\ Federal Register vol. 69, no. 146, July 30, 2004, pp. 45888-
45934.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    All participants must report on universal data elements, which 
include name, date of birth, race, ethnicity, gender, veteran status, 
Social Security Number, prior residence, and disabling conditions.\19\ 
In general, all programs that receive funds under the McKinney-Vento 
Homeless Assistance Act and HOPWA are required to provide program-
specific data; this requirement is not new, as HUD already requires 
grantee organizations to provide this information in their Annual 
Progress Reports.\20\ Included in program-specific data elements are 
amount and sources of income, receipt of non-cash benefits, physical 
and developmental disabilities, HIV status, mental illness, substance 
abuse status, and domestic violence status.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \19\ Ibid, p. 45905.
    \20\ Ibid, pp. 45913-45914.
    \21\ Ibid, p. 45914.

    Confidentiality of Domestic Violence Victims. Due to the sensitive 
nature of much of the information that homeless service providers must 
collect, some groups that provide services to domestic violence victims 
raised privacy concerns to HUD after its release of proposed data and 
technical standards but prior to release of final standards in 2004. 
These organizations requested that information about domestic violence 
victims not be included in HMIS.\22\ At the time, HUD acknowledged the 
sensitivity of certain information, but concluded that CoCs could 
collect the information in such a way that would protect the identity 
of those in the system. To this end, HUD included privacy and security 
standards in the data and technical standards that all organizations 
must follow.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \22\ Ibid, p. 45891-45892.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    However, on January 5, 2006, President Bush signed the Violence 
Against Women and Department of Justice Reauthorization Act (P.L. 109-
162), which included provisions to (1) amend the McKinney-Vento 
Homeless Assistance Act to prevent victim service providers from 
disclosing personally identifying information through HMIS, and (2) 
permit disclosure of non-personally identifying information only after 
a public notice and comment period. On March 16, 2007, HUD released a 
notice regarding HMIS and the amendments to McKinney-Vento made by P.L. 
109-162.\23\ In the notice, HUD confirmed that it would require 
disclosure of non-personally identifying information only after going 
through a notice and comment period. Until HUD does so, it has 
instructed organizations that provide services to domestic violence 
victims not to input information about their clients into HMIS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \23\ U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, ``The 
Violence Against Women and Department of Justice Reauthorization Act of 
2005: Applicability to HUD Programs,'' 72 Federal Register 12695-12700, 
March 16, 2007.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                       Status of the HMIS Network

    Two aspects of HMIS implementation contribute to a CoC's ability to 
capture data regarding homeless persons. The first aspect is whether a 
data collection system has been established at the CoC level, and the 
second is the degree to which homeless service providers within a CoC 
are participating in the system. Although almost all CoCs have 
established an HMIS system into which data may be entered, the extent 
to which data are actually entered into these systems remains 
incomplete, on average. Once established, a comprehensive HMIS network 
is meant to improve the ability of communities to provide services to 
homeless persons as well as to help HUD determine how best to allocate 
resources.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \24\ First AHAR, p. 1.

    HMIS Implementation. HUD's initial goal was that every CoC 
implement an HMIS by October 2004--meaning establish a system into 
which communities are entering data. Although this goal was not 
accomplished by 2004, the number of CoCs participating in HMIS has 
increased in every year since 2001.\25\ Between 2005 and 2006, the 
percentage of CoCs that had implemented an HMIS (meaning they were 
actually inputting data) increased from 72% to 91%.\26\ From 2005 to 
2006, the percentage of CoCs that had decided to implement an HMIS but 
were still in the planning stages decreased from 20% to 9%, and the 
percentage that were not yet planning an HMIS dropped from 7% to 
1%.\27\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \25\ U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Report to 
Congress: Sixth Progress Report on HUD's Strategy for Homeless Data 
Collection, Reporting and Analysis, May 2007, p. 4, available at http:/
/www.hud.gov/offices/cpd/homeless/library/improvingDataCollection.pdf 
(hereafter Sixth Progress Report to Congress).
    \26\ Ibid
    \27\ Ibid
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    At the local level, CoCs have several options for implementing and 
maintaining their HMIS databases. Not all CoCs are implementing their 
own HMIS. Some are collaborating to create a multi-jurisdictional HMIS 
with two or more CoCs. Others are planning to make individual CoC data 
accessible at the state level, while 19 states have decided to 
implement a state-level HMIS.\28\ Local initiatives also differ in 
their methods of incorporating service providers into HMIS. Local CoCs 
may use one central HMIS, into which all service providers input client 
information. Another option is to allow service providers to use 
different database systems, but to have technical specialists available 
at the CoC level to merge all data into one unified system. A third 
option is to use side-by-side systems where individual service 
providers enter data into their own systems, and also enter data into a 
CoC-wide HMIS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \28\ Ibid, p. 5.

    Participation of Service Providers in HMIS. Even where CoCs have 
successfully implemented HMIS, coverage of homeless service providers 
may be incomplete. HUD uses the term ``bed coverage'' to describe the 
rate at which local service providers within a CoC participate in HMIS. 
The term refers to the percentage of available beds in a CoC that are 
actually accounted for in HMIS. If not all service providers within a 
CoC participate in HMIS, then bed coverage may be low. Issues with bed 
coverage may arise in cases of domestic violence shelters that are 
reluctant to report data due to confidentiality concerns, or where 
service providers do not receive HUD funds and are not required to 
participate in HMIS. In addition, even when service providers report 
data to HMIS, they might not include all clients served, which could 
result in another limitation on the usefulness of the data.\29\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \29\ First AHAR, p. 13.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    HUD keeps track of bed coverage rates both by the type of shelter 
provided, such as emergency shelter, transitional housing, and 
permanent housing, and by household type, such as homeless individuals 
and homeless families. From 2005 to 2006, the average number of beds 
across CoCs that were included in HMIS increased in all categories.\30\ 
HUD reports bed coverage as an average rate--the average of all CoCs' 
bed coverage rates.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \30\ Sixth Progress Report to Congress, p. 5.

      Emergency Shelter: The average bed coverage rate for 
shelters serving individuals went from 43% in 2005 to 55% in 2006. For 
shelters serving homeless families, the average bed coverage rate went 
from 45% in 2005 to 51% in 2006.
      Transitional Housing: The average bed coverage rate for 
transitional housing serving homeless individuals increased from 41% in 
2005 to 50% in 2006. Average bed coverage rates for homeless families 
increased from 51% to 62%.
      Permanent Housing: Average bed coverage rates for 
permanent supportive housing for individuals went from 46% in 2005 to 
58% in 2006. Average bed coverage rates for homeless families went from 
54% in 2005 to 58% in 2006.

                       Counts of Homeless Persons

    Since the eighties, a number of attempts have been made to estimate 
the total number of homeless persons in the country as well as to 
describe their characteristics. Although the specific methods used in 
the studies have varied, in most, researchers surveyed a sample of the 
homeless population and used the sample to estimate the total number of 
homeless persons in the country. The time periods covered by these 
counts vary. Some are ``point-in-time'' counts that estimate the number 
of homeless people on a single night during the year. Others estimate 
the number of persons who are homeless during longer periods--a week or 
span of months. Researchers have also used samples to estimate the 
total number of persons who are homeless at some point during the 
year.\31\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \31\ For an explaNation of how annual counts are estimated using 
data from point-in-time counts, see Martha R. Burt and Carol Wilkens, 
Estimating the Need: Projecting from Point-in-Time to Annual Estimates 
of the Number of Homeless People in a Community and Using this 
Information to Plan for Permanent Supportive Housing, Corporation for 
Supportive Housing, March 2005, available at http://documents.csh.org/
documents/pubs/csh_estimatingneed.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The HMIS initiative differs from these previous efforts to count 
homeless people and gather information. Instead of sampling only 
certain communities or counting homeless individuals on only a single 
night, CoCs gather information from all homeless assistance providers 
regarding all homeless individuals who use their services each day of 
the year. Eventually, once communities have fully implemented HMIS, the 
network of systems is expected to provide an annual unduplicated count 
of homeless persons from each jurisdiction. Counting homeless 
populations on the street might continue to be important, however, as 
their use of services is unknown.\32\ HUD released its first report to 
Congress using HMIS data, the Annual Homeless Assessment Report (AHAR), 
in February 2007. In March 2008, HUD released the second AHAR. Because 
HMIS is not fully implemented in all jurisdictions around the country, 
the two AHARs, like previous efforts to count homeless persons, rely on 
a sample of jurisdictions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \32\ U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, HUD's 
Homeless Assistance Programs: A Guide to Counting Unsheltered Homeless 
People, Second Revision, January 15, 2008, p. 14, available at http://
www.hudhre.info/documents/counting_unsheltered.pdf (hereinafter A Guide 
to Counting Unsheltered Homeless People).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    This section describes several efforts to estimate the number of 
homeless individuals over the years. These include CoC point-in-time 
counts that take place every two years, estimates in the two AHARs 
using HMIS data, and previous estimates from the eighties and nineties. 
This section also includes resources that describe homeless demographic 
data.
CoC Counts of Homeless Individuals
    As mentioned earlier in this report, in 2005 and 2007, HUD required 
all CoCs to conduct point-in-time counts of both the sheltered and 
unsheltered homeless individuals in their jurisdictions. In 2006, 61% 
of CoCs voluntarily conducted point-in-time counts. Although currently 
most CoCs conduct counts without using HMIS,\33\ eventually HUD expects 
the HMIS initiative to be part of this point-in-time collection of 
information about homeless individuals. As HMIS programs develop, CoCs 
will be able to use the systems as part of the data collection process 
in estimating the number of sheltered homeless people.\34\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \33\ First AHAR, p. 17.
    \34\ Ibid
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The reliability of CoC point-in-time data vary by Continuum, 
particularly in the case of estimates of unsheltered homeless 
individuals. Unsheltered individuals are those living in places not 
meant for human habitation, such as cars, abandoned buildings, highway 
underpasses, and public parks. Although HUD has published guidance on 
how to conduct street counts \35\ and provides technical assistance to 
CoCs, the task is complicated, and not all CoCs are able to conduct 
statistically reliable surveys of those individuals who are not 
sheltered.\36\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \35\ A Guide to Counting Unsheltered Homeless People.
    \36\ First AHAR, p. 18.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    During the point-in-time counts, HUD also asks participating CoCs 
to collect information about homeless individuals, which is referred to 
as ``subpopulation information.'' CoCs are to ask homeless individuals 
whether they are chronically homeless; have severe mental illnesses, 
substance abuse disorders, or HIV/AIDS; are veterans; have experienced 
domestic violence; or are unaccompanied youth. CoCs are not always able 
to gather this information, and even when they do, according to HUD, 
the subpopulation information is less reliable than the estimates of 
the number of homeless individuals.\37\ Further, in the required 2005 
CoC count, it was optional for CoCs to provide information regarding 
unsheltered homeless subpopulations. Information about homeless 
subpopulations is available on HUD's website.\38\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \37\ Ibid
    \38\ For 2005, see http://www.hud.gov/offices/cpd/homeless/05local/
05StatesHomelessData.pdf. For 2006, see http://www.hud.gov/offices/cpd/
homeless/local/reports/06StatesHomelessData.pdf.

    2005 CoC Counts. In both 2005 and 2007, HUD directed all CoCs to 
conduct counts on one night during the last week of January.\39\ As of 
the date of this report, the results of the 2007 count are not 
available. The HUD website provides a breakdown of these point-in-time 
estimates for each CoC from 2005.\40\ The 2005 results for the states 
and territories are as follows: \41\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \39\ Because HUD directed CoCs to conduct a point-in-time count of 
homeless individuals during the last week of January 2005, not all CoC 
point-in-time counts took place on the same day in January.
    \40\ The counts are available at http://www.hud.gov/offices/cpd/
homeless/local/index.cfm.
    \41\ For these results, see http://www.hud.gov/offices/cpd/
homeless/05local/05CoCHomelessData.pdf.

      the sheltered homeless population consisted of 418,165 
persons on a single day during the last week of January 2005;
      the unsheltered homeless population numbered 344,845;
      the total number of homeless individuals counted on one 
day during the last week of January 2005 was 763,010.\42\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \42\ The AHAR estimates using HMIS data, described in the next 
section of this report, do not include data from the territories. For 
comparability purposes, the CoC point-in-time counts in the states only 
were 415,366 sheltered homeless individuals, 338,781 unsheltered 
individuals, and 754,147 total individuals. See http://www.hud.gov/
offices/cpd/homeless/05local/05StatesHomelessData.pdf.

    2006 CoC Counts. In 2006, 277 out of 448 CoCs, or just under 62%, 
voluntarily conducted point-in-time counts. HUD added the 2006 results 
from these 277 CoCs to the 2005 results of the CoCs that did not 
conduct counts to arrive at a total number of homeless individuals. HUD 
refers to this number as the 2006 estimate although some of the results 
come from 2005 point-in-time counts. The 2006 results for the states 
and territories are as follows: \43\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \43\ The CoC point-in-time counts of homeless individuals in the 
states only were 424,932 sheltered individuals, 323,899 unsheltered 
individuals, and 748,831 total individuals. See http://www.hud.gov/
offices/cpd/homeless/local/reports/06StatesHomelessData.pdf.

      the sheltered homeless population consisted of 427,971 
persons on a single day during the last week of either January 2005 or 
January 2006;
      the unsheltered population numbered 331,130; and
      the total number of homeless individuals counted on 1 day 
during the last week of either January 2005 or January 2006 was 
759,101.\44\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \44\ For these results, see http://www.hud.gov/offices/cpd/
homeless/local/reports/06CoCHomelessData.pdf.

The Annual Homeless Assessment Report (AHAR)
    On February 28, 2007, HUD released the first Annual Homeless 
Assessment Report, in which HMIS data were analyzed for the first 
time.\45\ A year later, in March 2008, the second AHAR was 
released.\46\ For both the first and second AHARs, researchers relied 
on HMIS data collected from a sample of communities during a period of 
time and used these data to derive national-level estimates of the 
number of homeless persons. The two reports provide point-in-time 
estimates of the number of homeless individuals, estimates of the 
number of homeless persons during a longer period (three months during 
the first AHAR and six months during the second AHAR), and a 
description of characteristics of those persons experiencing 
homelessness.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \45\ The first AHAR is available at http://www.huduser.org/
Publications/pdf/ahar.pdf.
    \46\ The second AHAR is available at http://www.hudhre.info/
documents/2ndHomelessAssessmentReport.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The HMIS data in the two AHARs provide estimates only of the 
sheltered homeless population--individuals living in emergency shelter 
and transitional housing--and do not include estimates of individuals 
living on the street or other places not meant for human habitation. As 
a result, both AHARs also reported data collected from CoCs during 
their one-night counts of homeless persons in January 2005 and January 
2006, which included individuals and families who were on the street or 
similar location.
    In the coming years, the AHAR is expected to include data from a 
larger number of service providers, cover nonresidential populations, 
examine longitudinal data over a time period greater than three months, 
and include more information about the clients served.\47\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \47\ First AHAR, p. 53.

    Estimates from the First AHAR Using HMIS Data. Initially, data from 
a nationally representative sample of 80 CoCs were expected to be used 
in the first AHAR. However, minimum HMIS requirements meant that some 
sample communities were excluded from the analysis. In order to 
participate, each jurisdiction was required to have a minimum level of 
bed coverage--only CoCs in which at least 50% of beds in at least one 
of four categories (emergency shelter for individuals, emergency 
shelter for families, transitional housing for individuals, and 
transitional housing for families) could participate in the AHAR.\48\ 
As a result, data from 64 rather than 80 sample communities were used 
to arrive at estimates in the first AHAR.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \48\ Ibid, p. 13.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Using HMIS data, the first AHAR reported two point-in-time 
estimates of the number of sheltered homeless persons, as well as an 
estimate of the number of persons who were homeless in the three-month 
period from February 1 to April 30, 2005. (See Table 1.) These 
estimates do not include homeless people who were not residing in 
emergency shelters or transitional housing during the relevant time 
periods. Nor do the estimates include the territories. Data from the 
HMIS sample communities provided that

      an estimated 313,722 persons in the country were homeless 
on April 30, 2005; \49\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \49\ The 95% confidence interval for this estimate is 218,890 to 
408,554, meaning that researchers are 95% sure that the actual number 
of homeless individuals on this date was somewhere in this range. See 
First AHAR, p. 22.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
      an estimated 334,744 persons were homeless on an average 
day between February 1 and April 30, 2005; \50\ and
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \50\ The 95% confidence interval for this estimate is 235,315 to 
434,233. First AHAR, p. 22.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
      an estimated 704,146 persons were homeless on at least 
one day between February 1 and April 30, 2005.\51\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \51\ The 95% confidence interval for this estimate is 399,244 to 
1,009,048. First AHAR, p. 28.

    The first AHAR did not attempt to use these numbers to estimate the 
total number of persons who were homeless at some point during the 
year.
    The HMIS data collected over the three-month period in 2005 also 
provided information about the characteristics of the homeless persons 
surveyed. Information from the sampled jurisdictions was used to 
estimate that 65.7% of homeless persons were individuals or households 
without children, while 34.4% consisted of households with children. 
Unaccompanied adult males made up the largest percentage of the 
population (47.4%). Children made up 21.2% of the population. The 
majority of homeless individuals in the three-month count were members 
of minority groups, 58.9%. Of the adult homeless population counted 
during the three-month period, 18.7% were veterans and 25.0% were 
disabled. However, 35% of the HMIS records were missing information on 
veteran status and 55% of records were missing information on 
disability status.\52\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \52\ First AHAR, p. 31.

    Estimates from the Second AHAR Using HMIS Data. The second AHAR 
relied on data from a total of 74 communities that were collected from 
January through June 2006. As in the first AHAR, communities were 
required to meet bed coverage requirements of 50% in at least one of 
four categories in order to participate.\53\ Also, like the first AHAR, 
the second AHAR estimated the number of sheltered homeless 
individuals--those living in transitional housing or emergency 
shelters--and did not include those living in places not meant for 
human habitation. Unlike the first AHAR, the sample communities did not 
include any data from domestic violence shelters.\54\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \53\ Second AHAR, p. 61.
    \54\ Second AHAR, pp. 4-5. As explained earlier in this report, the 
Violence Against Women and Department of Justice Reauthorization Act 
(P.L. 109-162) prevented domestic violence service providers from 
participating in HMIS. The first AHAR data collection period occurred 
prior to enactment of P.L. 109-162, and some of these providers were 
still participating in HMIS at that time.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The second AHAR reported three point-in-time estimates and an 
estimate of the total number of persons who were homeless during the 
six-month period from January 2006 through June 2006. The estimates 
include only the states and do not include the territories: \55\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \55\ Second AHAR, p. 18.

      an estimated 338,000 persons were homeless on January 25, 
2006; \56\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \56\ The 95% confidence interval for this estimate is 248,900 to 
426,400. Second AHAR, p. 12.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
      an estimated 339,000 persons were homeless on April 26, 
2006; \57\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \57\ The 95% confidence interval for this estimate is 249,100 to 
428,500. Second AHAR, p. 12.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
      an estimated 337,000 persons were homeless on an average 
day between January 1, 2006, and June 30, 2006; \58\ and
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \58\ The 95% confidence interval for this estimate is 249,200 to 
424,900. Second AHAR, p. 12.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
      an estimated 1,150,866 persons were homeless at some time 
during the period January 1, 2006, and June 30, 2006.\59\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \59\ The 95% confidence interval for this estimate is 691,129 to 
1,610,603. Second AHAR, p. 20.

    The second AHAR did not attempt to estimate the total number of 
people who were homeless in 2006.
    The HMIS data for the second AHAR collected over the six-month 
period in 2006 also provided information about the characteristics of 
the homeless persons surveyed. Information from the sampled 
jurisdictions was used to estimate that 72.8% of homeless persons were 
individuals or households without children, while 27.2% were households 
with children.\60\ Unaccompanied adult males made up the largest 
percentage of the population (53%).\61\ Children made up 17% of the 
population, and unaccompanied youth were 3%.\62\ The majority of 
homeless individuals in the six-month period were members of minority 
groups, 66.3%.\63\ Of the adult homeless population counted during the 
six-month period, 14.3% were veterans and 38.4% were disabled. However, 
20% of the HMIS records were missing information on veteran status and 
43% of records were missing information on disability status.\64\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \60\ Second AHAR, p. 20.
    \61\ Ibid, p. 22.
    \62\ Ibid
    \63\ Ibid, p. 23.
    \64\ Ibid

    AHAR Estimates Using CoC Point-in-Time Counts. Because the HMIS 
data used for the two AHARs did not include information about 
individuals and families who were unsheltered, both reports included 
estimates of sheltered and unsheltered homeless persons collected as 
part of CoCs point-in-time counts. The estimates summarized in the 
previous section of this report ``CoC Estimates of Homeless 
Individuals'' were reported in the first and second AHARs.\65\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \65\ See First AHAR, pp. 23-24 and Second AHAR, pp. 11-12.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Previous Attempts to Count Homeless Persons
    Previous attempts have been made both to arrive at an accurate 
count of the number of homeless persons in the United States and to 
describe their characteristics. The first national count occurred in 
1983, when HUD reported an estimate of homeless individuals by asking 
service providers to estimate the number of homeless individuals in 
their area.\66\ Through this process, HUD estimated that between 
250,000 and 350,000 individuals were homeless at a given point in time. 
Two more recent, comprehensive estimates are described below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \66\ For a short description of HUD's 1983 count, see First AHAR, 
p. 3.

    The Urban Institute (1987). In March 1987, the Urban Institute 
conducted interviews of a sample of homeless individuals living in 34 
different cities with a population of 100,000 or more and who used soup 
kitchens and shelters.\67\ The researchers estimated that the number of 
homeless persons during an average seven-day period in March 1987 
ranged from 496,000 to 600,000.\68\ They used this seven-day estimate 
to project that approximately one million individuals were homeless at 
some time during 1987.\69\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \67\ Martha R. Burt and Barbara E. Cohen, America's Homeless: 
Numbers, Characteristics, and Programs that Serve Them (Washington, DC: 
The Urban Institute Press, July 1989).
    \68\ Ibid, p. 29. The range varies based on estimates of homeless 
individuals who did not use homeless services, and therefore were not 
counted.
    \69\ Ibid, p. 32.

    The National Survey of Homeless Assistance Providers and Clients 
(1996). The Urban Institute released a second estimate in 2000 using 
data collected in 1996 by the Census Bureau as part of the National 
Survey of Homeless Assistance Providers and Clients (NSHAPC). The 
NSHAPC surveyed both homeless individuals and service providers. 
Surveys were conducted in 76 communities of varying size and included 
clients and staff of numerous organizations such as emergency shelters, 
transitional and permanent housing facilities, soup kitchens, food 
pantries, and drop-in centers.\70\ Although the purpose of the NSHAPC 
was not to arrive at a count of homeless individuals,\71\ researchers 
used the data to arrive at an estimate of the number of homeless 
individuals who relied on homeless services during two different seven-
day periods in 1996.\72\ During a seven-day period in the fall 1996, an 
estimated 444,000 clients used homeless assistance services,\73\ and 
during a seven-day period in the winter of that year, the number was 
estimated to be 842,000.\74\ The researchers used these numbers to 
estimate that during all of 1996, between 2.3 million and 3.5 million 
individuals were homeless at some time.\75\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \70\ Martha R. Burt, Laudan Y. Aron, et al., Homelessness: Programs 
and the People They Serve: Findings of the National Survey of Homeless 
Assistance Providers and Clients, Technical Report, December 1999, 
Chapter 2, p. 2-1, available at http://www.huduser.org/publications/
homeless/homeless_tech.html.
    \71\ Ibid, p. 1-7.
    \72\ Martha Burt and Laudan Y. Aron, America's Homeless II: 
Population and Services, The Urban Institute, February 1, 2000, 
available at http://www.urban.org/UploadedPDF/900344_ 
AmericasHomelessII.pdf.
    \73\ The estimate for one week during the fall of 1996 was based on 
service usage by homeless individuals.
    \74\ The estimate for one week during winter of 1996 was based on 
service provider estimates.
    \75\ America's Homeless II: Population and Services.

                        Table 1--National Estimates of the Number of Homeless Individuals
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                      Time Period                             Source          Population Sampled       Estimate
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Data from Second Annual Homeless Assessment Report
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
One Day, January 2006                                     CoC Counts \a\    Sheltered Persons Only      424,932
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
One Day, January 2006                                         CoC Counts             Sheltered and      748,831
                                                                               Unsheltered Persons
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
January 24, 2006                                                    HMIS    Sheltered Persons Only      338,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
April 26, 2006                                                      HMIS    Sheltered Persons Only      339,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Average Day, January--June 2006                                     HMIS    Sheltered Persons Only      337,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Six Months, January--June 2006                                      HMIS    Sheltered Persons Only    1,150,866
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Data from Previous Estimates
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Average Week, March 1987                                 Urban Institute    Persons Using Shelters     496,000-
                                                                                 and Soup Kitchens      600,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Average Week, October 1996                                        NSHAPC     Persons Using Various      444,000
                                                                                          Services
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Average Week, February 1996                                       NSHAPC     Persons Using Various      842,000
                                                                                          Services
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Full Year, 1996                                                   NSHAPC     Persons Using Various      2.3-3.5
                                                                                          Services      million
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sources: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, The Second Annual Homeless Assessment Report to
  Congress, March 2008, available at http://www.hudhre.info/documents/2ndHomelessAssessment Report.pdf; Martha
  R. Burt and Barbara E. Cohen, America's Homeless: Numbers, Characteristics, and Programs that Serve Them
  (Washington, DC: The Urban Institute Press, July 1989), 32; and Martha Burt and Laudan Y. Aron, America's
  Homeless II: Population and Services, The Urban Institute: February 1, 2000, at http://www.urban.org/
  UploadedPDF/900344_AmericasHomelessII.pdf.
\a\ Although the second AHAR reported the results of CoC point-in-time counts that included counts from the
  territories, for comparability purposes (because HMIS estimates did not include the territories), the numbers
  in this table are for the states only. For these numbers, see HUD's website http://www.hud.gov/offices/cpd/
  homeless/local/index.cfm.


       Sources of Demographic Information About Homeless Persons

    A number of surveys have been conducted to collect information to 
describe the characteristics of the national homeless population. The 
NSHAPC data resulted in demographic, income, and other information 
about homeless individuals in 1996.\76\ Among the findings were that 
homeless clients were predominantly male (68%) and nonwhite (53%); 23% 
of homeless clients were veterans.\77\ Large proportions of homeless 
adults had never married (48%) and had not received a high school 
diploma (38%).\78\ The NSHAPC also found that although 48% of homeless 
adults had minor children, only 31% of those with children lived with 
them.\79\ Thirty-eight percent of homeless clients reported alcohol 
problems during the past month, and 39% reported mental health problems 
during that period.\80\ Over one-quarter (27%) of homeless clients had 
lived in foster care, a group home, or other institutional setting for 
part of their childhood.\81\ Twenty-five percent reported childhood 
physical or sexual abuse.\82\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \76\ Homelessness: Programs and the People They Serve.
    \77\ Ibid, p. 3-4.
    \78\ Ibid, pp. 3-5 to 3-7.
    \79\ Ibid, p. 3-3.
    \80\ Ibid, pp. 8-3 to 8-8.
    \81\ Ibid, p. 10-2.
    \82\ Ibid, p. 10-10.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The U.S. Conference of Mayors has issued an annual report since 
1984, in which between 20 and 30 large cities survey their social 
service providers' efforts to combat hunger and homelessness and 
provide housing.\83\ In 2007, the U.S. Conference of Mayors appointed 
25 Mayors to serve on its Task Force on Hunger and Homelessness. The 
cities where those 25 Mayors serve were surveyed for the organization's 
annual report on hunger and homelessness between November 1, 2006, and 
October 31, 2007; 23 cities responded.\84\ Regarding the demographics 
of the homeless population, the surveyed cities estimated that 76% of 
homeless persons were single individuals, 23% were members of a family 
with children, and 1% were unaccompanied youth. Among single 
individuals and unaccompanied youth, an estimated 67.5% were men, 22.4% 
had mental health issues, 37.1% had substance abuse issues, and 16.9% 
were veterans.\85\ The single homeless population was estimated to be 
50.0% white, 45.7% African American, 12.8% Hispanic, 2.5% American 
Indian, and 1.6% Asian. Among homeless families with children, 60.6% of 
all members were estimated to be under age 18, 65% of adults were 
female, and 12.0% of adults were victims of domestic violence. Members 
of homeless families with children were estimated to be 47.0% white, 
47.0% African American, 24.0% Hispanic, 4.0% American Indian, and 2.0% 
Asian.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \83\ For the most recent U.S. Conference of Mayors report, see U.S. 
Conference of Mayors, Hunger and Homelessness Survey: A Status Report 
on Hunger and Homelessness in America's Cities, December 2007, 
available at http://www.usmayors.org/HHSurvey2007/hhsurvey07.pdf.
    \84\ The cities surveyed were Boston, Charleston, Charlotte, 
Chicago, Cleveland, Denver, Des Moines, Detroit, Kansas City, Los 
Angeles, Louisville, Miami, Nashville, Philadelphia, Phoenix, Portland 
(OR), Providence, Salt Lake City, San Francisco, Santa Monica, Seattle, 
St. Paul, and Trenton.
    \85\ Ibid, p. 15.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The Census Bureau released a report using data collected during the 
2000 Census of individuals living in emergency and transitional 
housing. The information was collected on one day in March 2000 and 
captured information from nearly 171,000 respondents. The report 
described some basic demographic characteristics of those who were 
included in the survey.\86\ Of those persons who were interviewed, 74% 
were adults (age 18 and older), and of the entire population (adults 
and children), 61% were male and 39% were female.\87\ The most 
respondents were white (41%), slightly fewer were African American 
(40%), and 20% reported that they were Hispanic.\88\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \86\ Annetta C. Smith and Denise I. Smith, Emergency and 
Transitional Shelter Population: 2000, U.S. Census Bureau, October 
2001. The report is available from the Census Bureau website, at http:/
/www.census.gov/prod/2001pubs/censr01-2.pdf.
    \87\ Ibid, p. 6.
    \88\ Ibid, p. 8.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In the area of veterans who experience homelessness, the Department 
of Veterans Affairs (VA) annually estimates the number of veterans who 
are homeless through the ``Community Homelessness Assessment, Local 
Education and Networking Groups'' (CHALENG) process. The estimates are 
based on a variety of sources, although the VA is attempting to make 
its process consistent with HUD's CoC counts of homeless individuals. 
In its most recent report, the VA estimated that in 2007 approximately 
154,000 veterans were homeless on one day during the last week of 
January.\89\ For more information about the CHALENG process and 
estimates, see CRS Report RL34024, Veterans and Homelessness, by Libby 
Perl.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \89\ John H. Kuhn and John Nakashima, The Fourteenth Annual 
Progress Report on Public Law 105-114: Services for Homeless Veterans 
Assessment and CoordiNation, U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, 
February 28, 2008.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                 

                                     Committee on Veterans' Affairs
                                                    Washington, DC.
                                                     April 10, 2008

John Driscoll
Vice President for Operations and Programs
National Coalition for Homeless Veterans
333\1/2\ Pennsylvania Ave., SE
Washington, DC 20003-1148
Dear John:
    In reference to our Full Committee hearing on ``Ending Homelessness 
for Our Nation's Veterans'' on April 9, 2008, I would appreciate it if 
you could answer the enclosed hearing questions by the close of 
business on June 5, 2008.
    In an effort to reduce printing costs, the Committee on Veterans' 
Affairs, in cooperation with the Joint Committee on Printing, is 
implementing some formatting changes for materials for all Full 
Committee and Subcommittee hearings. Therefore, it would be appreciated 
if you could provide your answers consecutively and single-spaced. In 
addition, please restate the question in its entirety before the 
answer.
    Due to the delay in receiving mail, please provide your response to 
Debbie Smith by fax your responses at 202-225-2034. If you have any 
questions, please call 202-225-9756.

            Sincerely,
                                                         BOB FILNER
                                                           Chairman
                               __________
       John Driscoll, Vice President for Operations and Programs
                National Coalition for Homeless Veterans
           ``Ending Homelessness for Our Nation's Veterans''
                             April 9, 2008
          Questions from House Committee on Veterans' Affairs
    Question 1: In your testimony you devote quite a bit of time 
talking about the Grant and Per Diem Program and the fact that the 
payment system is outdated. You state that the reimbursement formula 
should reflect the actual cost of services--based on each grantee's 
demonstrated capacity to provide those that are deemed critical to the 
success of the GPD program and veteran clients--rather than a flat rate 
on custodial care.

    Question 1(a): Please explain to the Committee how that would work 
and how that is different than what is now being done.

    Response: Grant and Per Diem Payment Restructuring

    Currently the reimbursement an organization receives under the 
Grant and Per Diem Program (GPD) is based on the state veterans' home 
rate--which is generally custodial care--and limited to about $31 per 
day. That rate is then discounted based on additional Federal funding 
an organization receives. The original intent of the GPD program was to 
provide beds in a safe, substance-free environment for veterans 
transitioning out of homelessness. Experience has shown this transition 
also requires intense case management; counseling for substance abuse 
and behavioral problems; treatment for physical and mental illnesses; 
employment preparation, placement and follow-up services; lifeskills 
training; legal assistance; family reunification services, child care 
assistance. Access to these services is vital to successful transition 
out of homelessness; and these all represent additional costs to the 
service provider.
    Many organizations receive grants from the Departments of Housing 
and Urban Development, Labor, Justice, Health and Human Services, and 
Education to provide specialized services for their homeless clients, 
but the amount of reimbursement under the GPD program is reduced if 
homeless veteran programs receive other Federal funding. The guidelines 
of the GPD program make it clear that successfully competing for funds 
requires links to other community-based and local government agencies, 
yet penalize organizations that receive Federal funds to do so.
    A payment system based on the scope of services available at a 
facility rather than simply a daily amount for a veteran in a bed would 
allow VA to better coordinate and regulate the GPD program. VA would, 
as it does now, continue to monitor activities at GPD providers and 
audit their annual reports. However, organizations that provide on-site 
case management, 24-hour emergency psychiatric assistance, on-site 
employment preparation and placement services, on-site kitchen and 
meals, transportation assistance, child care facilities for dependent 
children and other supportive services would be able to incorporate 
those necessary costs in their grant applications as ``allowable'' 
costs chargeable to the VA under the Grant and Per Diem Program.
    The list of supportive services allowable under the grant would 
have to be revised, but not the application process. Organizations 
would have to clearly indicate the number of veterans their programs 
would serve, acceptable housing and employment ``placement targets,'' 
as they do now, but also an estimation of the cost and reach of their 
supportive services offerings. Annual audits would validate reported 
expenses and certify program outcomes. The audits are currently 
required, and GPD liaisons at all VA Medical Centers are responsible 
for completing these oversight functions, so there would be no 
significant increase in administrative burden for the program. 
Applicants would be evaluated on the number of veterans they help, the 
breadth of services they provide, and success reaching or exceeding 
their goals.
    While the prime objective of this recommendation is to help 
organizations provide the best level of care and continuity of services 
possible, it would also provide more financial stability to 
organizations--mostly nonprofits--focusing on service gaps that the 
government needs help to fill. That is the fundamental purpose of the 
Grant and Per Diem Program, and we now have an appreciable body of 
evidence that supports revising the payment system.

    Question 1(b): What are the barriers to updating the Grant and Per 
Diem payment system?

    Response: Barriers to updating the Grant and Per Diem Payment 
System

    Our greatest concern with respect to revising the GPD payment 
system is the equitable distribution of limited funds between larger 
organizations and smaller, less sophisticated homeless service 
providers. The larger GPD organizations that have social workers, 
psychiatric specialists, counselors, and employment specialists on 
staff will demonstrate a much larger services portfolio and much higher 
costs than the small organization that must refer clients to partner 
agencies for most of those services. The great majority of current GPD 
funding goes to renewal applications and special needs grants. Any move 
to increase funding for large organizations without increasing the 
annual appropriation will strain funding available for smaller 
programs--the vast majority of GDP programs nationwide. One possible 
solution is to introduce a new competitive level under the GPD 
program--Comprehensive Service Centers--that would apply for funding 
under a ``services-focused'' approach rather than a simple ``client 
census'' basis, with additional funding infused into the program for 
that purpose.
    We believe modifying the repayment system is a more pressing issue. 
Currently, service providers spell out in their applications what they 
are going to do, and submit a detailed program budget that must be 
approved by the VA. Then they provide services according to that 
agreement, and apply for reimbursement after the services are rendered. 
Payments are received as a ``reimbursement'' only, which means smaller 
organizations cannot draw on their approved funds to provide approved 
and critical support. They must sometimes go into debt while waiting 
for VA reimbursement payments. We have also heard of organizations not 
receiving their full funding, or having to pay back money they spent on 
previously approved activities that subsequent auditors ruled were 
unallowable.
    Grantees should be allowed to draw down the funds they need to 
provide services they are contractually obligated to provide while they 
are providing those services--not one to three months later. And once 
an agreement between the VA and a community-based service provider is 
executed, the VA should be responsible for monitoring the provider's 
activities closely enough to safeguard against major disagreements on 
allowable expenses at a later date that could threaten the survival of 
the service provider.

    Question 2: In your testimony you state that the lack of affordable 
permanent housing is cited as the number one unmet need of America's 
veterans, according to the CHALENG report.

    Question 2(a): What is your agency's view on how to best address 
this shortfall?

    Response: Addressing the Lack of Affordable Housing

    Congress, with the help of several members of this committee, has 
already taken the first monumental step in this regard with the passing 
of the 10,000 HUD-VASH vouchers for veterans with chronic mental 
illness, disabilities and extreme poverty in FY 2008; and HUD's 
inclusion of another 10,000 vouchers in FY 2009. This will go a long 
way in providing housing for nearly half of the 46,000 chronically 
homeless veterans (National Alliance to End Homelessness) in the Nation 
today.
    We worked closely with both House and Senate staffs to address this 
issue in the Homes for Heroes Act (H.R. 3329, S. 1084). More than 1.5 
million veteran families live below the Federal poverty level, and most 
of them are one catastrophic economic or health event away from 
homelessness. This act would direct the HUD Secretary to provide 
assistance to private nonprofit organizations and consumer cooperatives 
to expand the supply of supportive housing for very low-income veteran 
families (that is, families with incomes not exceeding 50% of the area 
median income). The bill would also provide emergency funding and 
services for families in crisis. Administered through the VA, services 
could include rental assistance, child care, employment services, 
personal and financial counseling, case management, etc. The bills 
would increase housing stability by addressing health and economic 
problems of veterans before they result in an increased risk of 
homelessness.
    We also believe there needs to be greater participation by state 
and local governments to ensure the development of more affordable 
housing stock for special needs clients--the disabled, the elderly, the 
chronically ill, and low-income families. Much of the individual and 
family supportive work is being done by nonprofits, but developing 
housing options within a community is government's work. We are 
currently working with the development and finance communities to study 
public-private partnerships to help local authorities understand the 
social and economic incentives of building these supported housing 
developments.
    A strategy to produce more affordable housing stock for low-income 
and homeless veterans must include a renewed focus on the VA Enhanced 
Use Lease Program. The program allows government and community-based 
service providers to enter into a lease agreement with the VA to use 
surplus or ``underutilized'' facilities for purposes that benefit 
veterans. It is our understanding the VA is already doing this with the 
hope of entering into agreements with homeless service providers in 
several locations this year. We will be following these developments 
closely.
    ReexamiNation of the purpose of the VA Multifamily Transitional 
Housing Loan Guarantee Program is another option. This initiative 
authorizes VA to guarantee 15 loans with an aggregate value of $100 
million for construction, renovation of existing property, and 
refinancing of existing loans to develop transitional housing projects 
for homeless veterans and their families. First authorized in 1998, 
only two projects have survived beyond the initial planning stages--in 
Chicago and San Diego--and only St. Leo's in Chicago has been 
developed.
    While we believe this program seemed promising in its original 
design and intent, the real-life difficulties in long-term coalition 
building, planning and economic hardships developers have encountered 
to date strongly suggest a much more practical and streamlined program 
should be developed to address the critical supportive housing needs of 
homeless veterans and those at serious risk of homelessness due to 
chronic health problems and poverty.
    The need for increased service capacity is immediate, and many 
community-based providers have successfully developed additional 
transitional and longer term residential opportunities for their 
clients. We believe the resources earmarked for the Multifamily 
Transitional Housing Loan Guarantee Program might be better allocated 
to support projects that can be developed and brought online more 
swiftly.

    Question 2(b): What are the other unmet needs of America's 
veterans?

    Response: The ``Other'' Unmet Needs of Homeless Veterans

    Each year since 1994, the VA publishes the CHALENG Report, which 
gives an estimate of the number of homeless veterans across the Nation, 
as well as a list ranking how well the needs of homeless veterans are 
being met. This listing of ``met'' and ``unmet'' needs of veterans has 
been surprisingly consistent over the years, with the lack of 
affordable long-term housing firmly established in the top two or three 
``unmet'' needs for the last five years. From the 2006 CHALENG Report, 
the most recent posted on the VA website:
    Top unmet needs of homeless veterans nationwide (5 = need is met):

     1.  Long-term, permanent housing (2.46)
     2.  Child care (2.47)
     3.  Access to dental care (2.64)
     4.  Re-entry services for incarcerated veterans (2.71)
     5.  Legal assistance (2.78)
     6.  Guardianship (financial) (2.83)
     7.  Helping manage money (2.86)
     8.  Eyeglasses (2.92)
     9.  Eye care (2.93)
    10.  Drop-in day centers (2.98)

                                 

                                     Committee on Veterans' Affairs
                                                    Washington, DC.
                                                     April 10, 2008

Libby Perl
Analyst in Housing
Domestic Social Policy Division
Congressional Research Service
101 Independence Avenue, SE
Washington, DC 20540-7500
Dear Libby:
    In reference to our Full Committee hearing on ``Ending Homelessness 
for Our Nation's Veterans'' on April 9, 2008, I would appreciate it if 
you could answer the enclosed hearing questions by the close of 
business on June 5, 2008.
    In an effort to reduce printing costs, the Committee on Veterans' 
Affairs, in cooperation with the Joint Committee on Printing, is 
implementing some formatting changes for materials for all Full 
Committee and Subcommittee hearings. Therefore, it would be appreciated 
if you could provide your answers consecutively and single-spaced. In 
addition, please restate the question in its entirety before the 
answer.
    Due to the delay in receiving mail, please provide your response to 
Debbie Smith by fax your responses at 202-225-2034. If you have any 
questions, please call 202-225-9756.

            Sincerely,
                                                         BOB FILNER
                                                           Chairman
                               __________
                     Questions from Hon. Bob Filner
                   For Libby Perl, Analyst in Housing
                     Congressional Research Service
                              June 5, 2008
    Question 1: The counting of the veteran homeless population has 
been a challenge for many years. The fact is we just don't know how 
many veterans there are that are homeless.

      How can we better design a program or instrument that 
would help us to more accurately capture the veteran homeless 
population?

    Response: Homeless Management Information Systems. Currently the 
most comprehensive attempt to count homeless persons occurs through the 
Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). HUD has developed a 
system through which local communities collect data on homeless persons 
served by recipients of HUD Homeless Assistance Grants and through the 
Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS (HOPWA) program. This 
effort has been termed ``Homeless Management Information Systems'' 
(HMIS) and its purpose is to develop an unduplicated count of homeless 
people, which, in turn, is expected to improve the effectiveness of 
homeless assistance services.\1\ Although HMIS currently has some 
limitations in its ability to count all homeless persons, including 
homeless veterans, it could at some point serve as a source for 
accurately capturing the homeless veteran population.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ See House Committee on Appropriations, Department of Veterans 
Affairs and Housing and Urban Development and Independent Agencies 
Appropriations Act 1999, report to accompany H.R. 4194, H.Rept. 105-
610, 105th Cong., 2nd sess., July 8, 1998. The FY1999 HUD 
Appropriations Act referred to the House Committee Report language for 
specific requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Once HMIS is fully implemented, veterans who are served by 
participating homeless service providers should be identified because 
veteran status is one of the required data elements that service 
providers are to collect. (Other information includes name, date of 
birth, race, ethnicity, gender, and presence of a disabling condition). 
However, currently there are several reasons that some veterans might 
not be counted as part of the HMIS initiative:

      HMIS implementation is incomplete. As of 2006, 
approximately 91% of communities, called ``Continuums of Care'' that 
receive homeless assistance funds through HUD were implementing HMIS--
meaning they had established a system into which service providers are 
entering data.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \2\ U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Report to 
Congress: Sixth Progress Report on HUD's Strategy for Homeless Data 
Collection, Reporting and Analysis, May 2007, p. 4, available at 
[http://www.hud.gov/offices/cpd/homeless/library/
improvingDataCollection.pdf].
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Participation of service providers, even among those 
communities in which HMIS is being implemented, is incomplete. Even 
when service providers report data to HMIS, they might not include all 
clients served, which could result in another limitation on the 
usefulness of the data. HUD keeps track of the percentage of persons 
included in HMIS through what it terms ``bed coverage rates.'' These 
bed coverage rates are categorized both by the type of shelter 
provided, such as emergency shelter, transitional housing, and 
permanent housing, and by household type, such as homeless individuals 
and homeless families. In 2006, the average level of bed coverage for 
service providers ranged from 50% to 62%, depending on the type of 
shelter and household type served.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \3\ Ibid, p. 5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
      If service providers do not receive HUD funds, they might 
not participate in HMIS. This could preclude the identification of 
veterans who are being served by service providers that do not receive 
HUD funds. However, many communities are attempting to integrate all 
homeless service providers in their communities into HMIS, no matter 
the sources of their funding.

    Limitations on the usefulness of these data regarding homeless 
veterans can be seen in HUD's Annual Homeless Assessment Report (AHAR) 
to Congress. HUD has released two AHARs since the implementation of 
HMIS; these reports use HMIS data to arrive at estimates of the number 
of individuals who are homeless during several different time periods. 
In the first AHAR, released in 2007 and using data from 2005, HUD 
estimated that 18.7% of homeless individuals were veterans. However, 
35% of the HMIS records were missing information on veteran status.\4\ 
In the second AHAR, 20% of HMIS records were missing information on 
veteran status.\5\ Once service providers are able to collect better 
information about clients served, including whether they are veterans, 
HMIS could serve as a good measure of the number of homeless veterans. 
In addition, the ability of communities to include non-HUD funded 
service providers that assist homeless veterans in the HMIS initiative 
could improve the ability to capture the homeless veteran population.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \4\ See U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, The 
Annual Homeless Assessment Report to Congress, February 2007, p. 31, 
available at [http://www.huduser.org/Publications/pdf/ahar.pdf].
    \5\ U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, The Second 
Annual Homeless Assessment Report to Congress, March 2008, p. 23, 
available at [http://www.hudhre.info/documents/
2ndHomelessAssessmentReport.pdf].

    Street Counts of Homeless Individuals. Even when HMIS is fully 
implemented, street counts of homeless individuals would still be 
necessary to identify those individuals who are not seeking out 
homeless services, including veterans. Every other year, HUD requires 
Continuums of Care to conduct point-in-time counts of both the 
sheltered and unsheltered homeless individuals in their jurisdictions 
on one night during the last week of January. HUD issues guidance on 
how to do this in a statistically reliable way.\6\ In its most recent 
CHALENG (Community Homelessness Assessment, Local Education and 
Networking Groups) report, the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) 
coordinated its estimate of the number of homeless veterans with these 
HUD-directed point-in-time counts. Greater collaboration between 
service providers and the VA at the local level should help in making 
counts of homeless individuals, including veterans, more accurate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \6\ See U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, A Guide 
to Counting Unsheltered Homeless People, revised January 2008, 
available at [http://www.hudhre.info/documents/
counting_unsheltered.pdf].

    Question 2. According to your testimony, HUD is engaged in an 
ongoing effort to establish database systems at the local level to 
collect information about persons experiencing homelessness. There seem 
to be many issues surrounding this effort to include only sheltered 
individuals and not those on the street, as well as a large portion of 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
the records were missing information on veteran status.

    Question 2(a): Is VA engaged in an attempt to accurately count ALL 
homeless veterans?

    Response: VA CHALENG. In response to the first question, VA 
attempts to estimate the number of homeless veterans each year through 
the annual CHALENG process. However, the CHALENG estimate is not a 
physical count of homeless veterans in the same way that communities 
count homeless individuals during HUD point-in-time counts. In FY2007, 
the VA asked ``points of contact'' (POCs) at local VA medical centers 
to estimate the number of veterans who were homeless on one night 
during the last week of January. POCs arrive at estimates in a variety 
of ways, one of which includes consulting with local HUD Continuums of 
Care about their counts of homeless individuals. In fact, FY2007 was 
the first year in which the VA asked POCs to compare their estimates to 
the results of the 2005 HUD point-in-time counts conducted by 
Continuums (the most current data available at the time). In addition, 
some POCs (71%) used more than one source to arrive at their estimates 
of homeless veterans.\7\ These included U.S. Census data (10%), VA low-
income population estimates (7%), local homeless census studies (42%), 
VA client data (36%), estimates from local homeless assistance 
providers (59%), and VA staff impressions (52%).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \7\ John H. Kuhn and John Nakashima, The Fourteenth Annual Progress 
Report on Public Law 105-114: Services for Homeless Veterans Assessment 
and CoordiNation, U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, pp. 16-17, 
February 28, 2008.

    Question 2(b): Do VA and HUD work together to ensure the most 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
accurate information is captured?

    Response: In answer to the second question, this most recent 
CHALENG estimate is an effort to bring CHALENG estimates in line with 
HUD counts of homeless individuals. According to the VA, they chose the 
last week in January for their estimate so that ``CHALENG estimates 
would coincide with the homeless point-in-time counts executed by HUD 
Continuums of Care nationwide. It is believed that CHALENG should make 
every effort to base their estimates on the local point-in-time count, 
as it is the only nationwide homeless count conducted on an ongoing 
basis.'' \8\ The VA goes on to say that ``In summary, it is believed 
the HUD point-in-time data has resulted in a revised CHALENG count that 
is more aligned with the most extensive homeless estimate methodology 
currently available, while allowing for adjustments of local estimates 
based on VA staffs first-hand knowledge of their service areas.'' \9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \8\ Ibid, p. 16.
    \9\ Ibid, p. 17.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                 

                                     Committee on Veterans' Affairs
                                                    Washington, DC.
                                                     April 10, 2008

Michelle Saunders
Veterans Moving Forward
5008 South 12th Street
Arlington, VA 22204
Dear Michelle:
    In reference to our Full Committee hearing on ``Ending Homelessness 
for Our Nation's Veterans'' on April 9, 2008, I would appreciate it if 
you could answer the enclosed hearing questions by the close of 
business on June 5, 2008.
    In an effort to reduce printing costs, the Committee on Veterans' 
Affairs, in cooperation with the Joint Committee on Printing, is 
implementing some formatting changes for materials for all Full 
Committee and Subcommittee hearings. Therefore, it would be appreciated 
if you could provide your answers consecutively and single-spaced. In 
addition, please restate the question in its entirety before the 
answer.
    Due to the delay in receiving mail, please provide your response to 
Debbie Smith by fax your responses at 202-225-2034. If you have any 
questions, please call 202-225-9756.

            Sincerely,
                                                         BOB FILNER
                                                           Chairman
                               __________
                     Questions from Hon. Bob Filner
                         For Michelle Saunders
           Before the Committee on Veterans' Affairs Hearing
           ``Ending Homelessness for Our Nation's Veterans''
                             April 9, 2008
    Question 1: During my transition did anyone sit me down and ask me 
if I had a job lined up and a place to live? Do I believe this would 
have helped my transition?

    Response: No, no one asked me as a formality during any part of my 
out processing period. If someone had, I do believe it would've helped 
my transition, if in fact there was a simple answer/answers for me to 
help myself e.g. a place where I could go to get assistance for 
financial, employment, education and emotional counseling. During the 
transition phase there are a series of out processing blocks that need 
to be checked prior to a service member being discharged. Just because 
the blocks are ``checked'' doesn't justify services actually being 
provided. Keep in mind the service member also plays the game in order 
``to JUST go home'' Our service members do NOT experience the struggles 
and hurdles of the transition until already transitioned out of the 
military for numerous reasons already stated in my testimony.

    Question 2: In my estimation, how do I think DOD and VA can best 
work together in order to prevent other veterans falling through the 
crack and or even becoming homeless?

    Response: First, DOD and VA must collaborate prior to our service 
members being discharged from the military. Although they work together 
after and during the transition process they are failing in the 
aftermath. The aftermath is where the MOST assistance is needed. The 
process of a transitioning service member is parallel to a victim of 
trauma that acts out when he or she has time to actually get passed the 
initial trauma and the adrenaline calms down. This is when everything 
seems to surface and bleed through, by this time things have already 
manifested themselves into a fragile and tragic state. If there such a 
place where veterans could go after the transition or even start their 
transition process while still on active duty (a week is NOT enough) 
through the continuum of care that is currently lacking but also the 
rehabilitation and education needed to provide the skills in order to 
make them successful for the 21st century workforce.

    Question 3: What would have made my transition easier?

    Response: Having a place to go and receive the counseling without 
having to worry about just jumping into the workforce/paying bills and 
having to put all of my therapy on the backburner along with all other 
realities. This happens to a lot of our returning combat veterans. We 
are forced to ``adapt and overcome'' by finding ``meaningful'' 
employment without the proper education and training. There are 
benefits out there to help assist with education, however, how does one 
go to school and provide for his or her family at the same time, while 
trying to figure out why they are SO angry and disconnected from the 
rest of society? This is a very complex process and it is complex 
because we as a government are working in a vacuum instead of paving 
the road from the beginning. I have mentioned my idea to build 
transitional housing facilities on college campuses in order to provide 
the continuum of care and the education and training needed to be 
productive. I am more than willing to share these ideas if asked.
    I am also attaching my business plan/idea on how I think we could 
better prepare ourselves in the future and also address the present.

            Thank you,
                                                  Michelle Saunders
                               __________
                        Veterans Moving Forward
The Reality and the Challenge
    There are approximately 32,000 wounded in the Global war on terror, 
not including service members with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder 
(PSTD) or traumatic brain injuries which may not manifest for months or 
years after a soldier returns from combat. Our Military services are 
faced with processing more wounded than existing facilities have room 
to accommodate; troops are being rushed through their rehabilitation 
process, thus exacerbating the long-term effects of their injuries. 
Given this large number of wounded, it is also an expected reality that 
the number of single and multiple amputees will be much higher than in 
other conflicts. The need for an intensive care, in-house, 
rehabilitation facility is now more vital and immediate than ever 
before. Our goal is to be able to facilitate as many projects as we can 
across the country, by laying the foundation and footprint of the 
Northeast Veteran Training and Rehabilitation Center (NVTRC).
The ``Hope for the Future''
    The Veterans Moving Forward Foundation addresses this new reality 
and associated challenge through the creation of the Northeast Veteran 
Training and Rehabilitation Center (NVTRC). All veterans at the NVTRC 
will have serious injuries, including, but certainly not limited to, 
the loss of limbs, disfiguring burns, traumatic brain injuries and deep 
personal psychological wounds. The center will provide these wounded 
veterans with both the time and the resources needed to first cope and 
then to successfully transition into a new career and way of life, 
essentially making the veteran population more marketable. The NVTRC is 
the first such facility to simultaneously offer education, counseling, 
therapy and vocational skill building which are so vital for the 
successful futures of our wounded service members. Providing ``Hope for 
the future'' is what the NVTRC is all about. More specifically, the 
NVTRC will provide:

      Rehabilitation services to restore the ``whole person'' 
to a life in which he or she can live and interact with friends and 
family while addressing the psychological baggage that so often 
accompanies our disabled Veterans;
      Physical, occupational and psychological therapies with 
an emphasis on family counseling and the life and recreational skills 
that are so often taken for granted;
      Support for Veterans suffering from PTSD, providing them 
and their families the information and therapy necessary to cope with 
this debilitating condition.

The Facility
    The facility will have room for up to twenty (20) veterans and 
their families at one time. Located on 10+ acres of the Wachusett 
Community College campus in Gardner, MA, the NVTRC will offer extensive 
state-of-the-art physical and occupational therapy facilities, 
including a golf simulator, an indoor swimming pool, a jogging track, a 
weight/exercise room, a gymnasium, a trout pond and a variety of other 
amenities designed to prepare residents for a life in which their 
disability will be more of a mere annoyance than a burden. Veterans and 
their families will be housed in 1000 sq. ft. town homes near the 
college campus. These housing units will have two bedrooms, one bath, a 
kitchen and living area. This concept allows disabled veterans to 
practice their living skills and provides privacy and on-going support 
during the rehabilitation process.
Intake, Assessment, and Planning
    Upon arrival, an individual treatment plan, sculpted to each 
veteran's needs, will be developed by state certified counselors. All 
therapy, counseling, educational/vocational pursuits, and estimated 
length of stay will be determined and outlined within the plan. 
Veterans who choose to pursue a degree while obtaining new life skills 
will be permitted to stay in the program for up to two years. The 
NVTRC, along with Veterans Moving Forward will collaborate with the 
Veterans Administration and other appropriate veteran service 
organizations to coordinate benefit and entitlement programs.
    All individual treatment plans will contain milestones and measures 
of success. All caseworkers will work with their assigned Veteran 
resident to measure progress and ensure success by addressing any 
unforeseen difficulties along the way. Upon completion of the treatment 
plan, there will be a number of follow up contacts in order to increase 
the effectiveness of the program.
    Providing ``Hope for the future, is what ``Veterans Moving 
Forward'' is all about. Michelle Saunders, founder and co-chairman 
Msaunders@veterans movingforward.org
    Approximate Total Cost of Each Project
    $5,000,000
                               __________
                           Executive Summary
    Military veterans are returning from the battlefields of Iraq and 
Afghanistan with severe, debilitating physical and mental injuries. 
Eighty percent of the wounded face a lifetime of recovery, two-thirds 
will have post-traumatic stress disorder, and 59 percent of blast 
victims (if diagnosed) will have traumatic brain injuries. At 15.8 
percent, the unemployment rate for this population has tripled the 
national average. In addition the homeless rate of our veterans is 
currently increasing at a staggering 1 in every 4 in the United States.
    To address this crisis, Veterans Moving Forward has partnered with 
the Veterans Homestead in Massachusetts and has developed an exemplary 
model that will be used as the template for the service portion of this 
Program. The model is based on the work of the organization's founder, 
Leslie Lightfoot, and Michelle Saunders, a wounded veteran of the Iraq 
conflict. This holistic approach has addressed two major challenges 
faced by wounded veterans assimilating back into their community and 
family environments (often where the family becomes the caretaker); and 
acquiring the job skills needed in today's 21st century workforce.
    Education, job- and life-skills training are central to the model: 
a lack of a higher education or job training coupled with their wounds 
places many veterans at a disadvantage when seeking employment.
    The Program's mission statement reflects both the support services 
and housing required to help America's veterans.
The Problem
    Military veterans are returning from the battlefields of Iraq and 
Afghanistan with severe, debilitating physical and mental injuries. 
According to industry research, 80 percent of wounded veterans face a 
lifetime of recovery, two-thirds of them will have post-traumatic 
stress disorder (PTSD), and 59 percent of blast victims (if diagnosed) 
will have traumatic brain injuries (TBIs). Returning wounded veterans, 
many of whom are 19 to 25 years old, face a 15.8-percent unemployment 
rate, which is triple the national average. In addition the homeless 
rate of our veterans is currently increasing at a staggering 1 in every 
4 in the United States.
The Solution
    Given these staggering figures, there is a societal need to help 
these wounded veterans. In partnership with the Veterans Homestead (a 
service provider), Veterans Moving Forward will first build a facility 
in Massachusetts and use the footprint to replicate facilities across 
the U.S. that will provide supportive services to help these heroes 
attain self-sufficiency, and move forward with dignity and pride.
    A key component to the services aspect of this program is education 
and job- and life-skills training. Many wounded veterans entered the 
Armed Services at an early age, frequently straight from high school. A 
lack of a higher education or specific job training coupled with their 
wounds places many veterans at a distinct disadvantage when attempting 
to secure gainful, skills-appropriate employment.
The Mission
    To create an environment that allows our wounded heroes and their 
families the opportunity to utilize and maximize their educational 
benefits without financial burden. This environment will also have the 
nurturing support and job skills training needed to properly transition 
our veterans back to a productive life.
The Outcome
    As a result of participating in this Program, each veteran will be 
more confident, more marketable, and more professionally prepared to 
enter the 21st century workforce and transition back into their 
families and communities with success and sustainability.
    Each Veteran will be able to achieve his or her full intellectual, 
physical, and professional capacity unhindered by a lack of education, 
by insufficient skill levels required for the career field of their 
choice, or by fears relating to their own capabilities.
    This Program will differ for each veteran, just as their injuries 
differ. Some may have physical wounds: these veterans will learn how to 
live with the condition emotionally and physically--both internally and 
in a family and community setting. Some may have emotional wounds: they 
will receive support and coaching that enable them to live to their 
full capacity. Some may need job skills training in order to succeed in 
today's workforce: they will receive job-skill assessments, learn new 
professional skills, and receive job placement help. Referrals will be 
made for those who need extended care and supportive services.
Program's Design
    Short-term Goal: to create the model footprint in Massachusetts, as 
we have already acquired 10.5 acres of land on Mount Wachusett 
Community College, courtesy of the college. In addition to researching 
the most capable veterans' service providers in the surrounding area to 
help facilitate the needs and resources needed.

    Long-term Goal: the Program will build multi-unit transitional 
housing across the country and donate it to the best Service Providers 
(charities/social service agencies) who will house veterans returning 
from Iraq and Afghanistan. The Service Providers will offer on-site 
services that include emotional support, physical rehabilitation, and 
education/job skills training. The facilities will be built as 
individual town homes or apartments with enough space for single 
veterans or veterans with their families. Engaging veterans in 
rehabilitation while they are in a family setting not only strengthens 
the veteran but the family unit as well.
    Where possible, housing will be built near community colleges or 
universities; and where space allows, housing will be constructed 
directly on the campus. Education is a central, integral part of the 
Program's design in order to address a vital need of returning 
veterans: employability. Current statistics show today's veterans have 
three to four times the national unemployment rate! Therefore, to avoid 
long-term dissolution of the family structure for these veterans--and 
to avoid future homelessness for this population--education is a 
critical component of this Program.
Service Providers and the Support Services Function
    Service Providers will operate the housing facilities after the 
Program donates the facilities to them. They are responsible for 
providing (directly or through subcontracts) the emotional and 
intellectual services, the physical rehabilitation services, and the 
professional skills training that enable veterans to live to their full 
capacity.
    A ``Support Services'' function has been established to define the 
criteria for evaluating which Service Providers will be eligible to 
receive the Program's housing donations. Support Services will use a 
``gap analysis'' approach to establishing the criteria.
Management and Operations
    This program was co-developed by Michelle Saunders (wounded OIF 
veteran and Dept. of Labor employment specialist) and Leslie Lightfoot 
(Vietnam Veteran and Director of Veterans Homestead Inc.). 
Operationally the program will be guided and directed by both Michelle 
and Leslie. Through the partnership and collaboration of Veterans 
Moving Forward and Veterans Homestead we have developed a holistic 
approach for veteran care that will be discussed throughout this plan. 
Through the guidance and coaching of this partnership it is anticipated 
that this model will be replicated across the country, so that multiple 
services providers will be able to replicate this model. The ultimate 
goal will be to serve as many veterans as possible.
Direct Project Costs vs. Administrative Costs
In-Kind Donations
    Veterans Moving Forward and Veterans Homestead will engage local 
construction companies in the surrounding communities and solicit in-
kind donations of labor and materials for the housing they build. For 
conducting this effort the Project will be paid 5% of the in-kind 
donations obtained in order to cover operational costs. For example, if 
the project receives $500,000 in donations, the project will receive 
$25,000--a savings of $475,000 for the Project's future Projects!
Tax Deductions for Donations
    For donors to receive tax credit for their contributions, Veterans 
Moving Forward-501(c)(3) will provide a Federal tax exempt form 
including the foundation Federal tax identification. The Veterans 
Homestead has successfully implemented this procedure for over fifteen 
years and will be pleased to utilize its experience (and documentation) 
on behalf of Veterans Moving Forward.
    In-kind donations of time and materials that are contributed during 
construction require a very specific method of tracking in order to:

      Reflect accurate IRS reporting
      Provide accurate records/receipts to the donors so that 
they receive recognition from the Program, the veterans, and the 
general public; and that they receive IRS credit
      Reflect accurate contribution levels for the Project to 
use in marketing, communication, and fund development.

    The Veterans Homestead has over fifteen years' experience 
perfecting this system and will use it on behalf of the Project.

      Veterans Homestead audits are conducted annually by 
Boisselle, Morton and Assoc., LLP, of Hadley, MA.
      Additional audits are welcomed if VMF's Steering and 
Finance Committees require.

Funds
    All funding received for the Project must be used for either direct 
project costs or administrative costs directly related to the building 
and operational costs of the project.
Two Project Bank Accounts
    A checking account has been established specifically for the 
Veterans Moving Forward organization with Bank of America. This account 
will be restricted to Project funding and can only be drawn upon with 
signatures from representatives that are authorized by the Project's 
Finance Committee.
    This account will be linked to a separate Program account that will 
be opened: a treasury money market (sweep account). Funds in excess of 
$100,000 will be automatically transferred on a daily basis (each 
night) into the interest bearing treasury account and will transfer 
back into the checking account each morning. Interest is calculated by 
Bank of America on a daily basis and is reported to VMF at the end of 
each month. Interest earned is automatically deposited into the account 
on the 1st of each month. Interest earned may be used for general VMF 
operations and is not considered restricted funds, unless otherwise 
specified by the Veterans Project's donors. The unopened monthly bank 
statement shall be given to VMF and VH Executive Directors and the 
Project's Finance Committee for review before being forwarded to the 
Finance Department for processing.
Donations Received
    Checks received in the mail will be logged on a daily basis by the 
Office Manager. Copies and original documents are sent to the Finance 
Manager for deposit into checking account (all deposits are made within 
24 hours of receipt). Deposits are entered into both QuickBooks 
(accounting package) and Donor Perfect (donor database) by the Finance 
Manager and Office Manager respectively and are posted to a general 
ledger account number that will be specific to the Project.
Expenses
    All costs related to the Project will be tracked in accounting 
system using a specified set of general ledger account numbers. These 
account numbers will be classified under the ``Strategic Initiatives 
Department'' and will have an ``a.1'' extension after the main account 
number. All invoices will be coded by the Finance manager and approved 
by both VMF and VH Executive Directors. All checks over $10,000 will 
require two signatures (Executive Director and the Project's Finance 
Committees).
    Note: Any Veterans Project expenses paid via the VMF operations 
general checking account shall be reimbursed to the operations checking 
account monthly once revenue streams are established.
VMF Credit Cards Used
    All credit card holders are authorized to charge all travel-related 
expenses. This includes airfare, meals, ground transportation, lodging, 
and unanticipated meeting supplies or copying expenses. In addition to 
the above, credit card holders are authorized to charge up to $100 (per 
purchase) for non-travel related expenses without prior approval. If 
the expenditure is over $100, credit card holders must submit an 
approved Request for Purchase Form to the Finance Department before 
charging the expense to their credit card.
Milestones and Timelines
Phase 1 Pre-Planning
      Create vision and mission--Completed (Apr 2007)
      Define tangible and non tangible outcomes--Completed (Jun 
2007)
      Identify essential participants and their roles--
Completed (Nov 2007)

Phase II Planning
      Develop business plan--Completed (Nov 2007)
      Distribute circulation of business plan to proper 
participants--In process
      Obtain celebrity and/or Corporate endorsement--In process
      Begin short-term fund development (marketing costs)--In 
process

Phase III Implementation
      Launch program--Completed (work in progress)
      Hire and orient staff; develop project plans--In progress
      Begin long-term fund development and associated 
marketing--In progress

Phase IV Success and Assurance
      TBD during Phase III

Overall Marketing Goals
    The overall marketing goals for VMF are to elevate the Project's 
brand and to increase market awareness and development opportunities 
through the following:

      Generate brand awareness for the Project between four 
development segments: builders, building industry suppliers and 
manufacturers, non-building industry partners, and possible government 
entities
      Position the Project and its spokespeople as authorities 
on the topic of rehabilitation for wounded veterans from Iraq and 
Afghanistan; and
      Produce/Initiate positive national trade and local press 
coverage for the Project's work

Target Markets and Audiences
    The Project will achieve its goals through the following target 
markets and audiences:

      Builders and their trade partners--To secure in-kind 
donations of time, expertise, resources, and cash donations to perform 
building projects and service providers' resources
      Building industry suppliers and manufacturers--To secure 
in-kind and cash donations to perform building projects and service 
providers' resources
      Non-building industry partners, such as corporations, 
sports leagues, consumer product companies, etc.--To secure in-kind and 
cash donations to perform building projects and service providers 
resources
      Federal Government entities, including the Department of 
Veterans Affairs, the Department of Labor, the Department of Housing 
and Human Services and Congress--To secure cooperative assistance in 
providing funds, intelligence, land, partnerships, etc. at the national 
level
      State government entities--To secure cooperative 
assistance in providing funds, intelligence, land, partnerships, etc. 
at the state level
      City and county (local) government entities--To secure 
cooperative assistance in providing funds, intelligence, land, 
partnerships, permits, etc. at the community level
      Veterans service providers--To secure organizations to 
operate facilities that are constructed for wounded veterans and their 
families
      Other veterans nonprofit organizations--To secure cash or 
in-kind support for building projects and necessary resources
      National, trade, and local media--To raise national, 
trade, and local awareness of the work performed by the Project and its 
partners at all levels
      General public--To raise mainstream awareness of the work 
performed by the Project and its partners, and to obtain cash 
donations.

Strategic Messaging
    A common tool to encapsulate and focus all of the high-level 
messaging for a communications initiative is a positioning framework. 
The following positioning framework has been created for the Veterans 
Project.

    Positioning Statement: The project creates an environment with 
dignified housing and educational services, nurturing support and job 
skills training to enable today's wounded veterans to return to and 
maintain a full productive life.

    Tagline: Building hope for today's wounded heroes and their 
families

    Target Audiences: Builders and their trade partners; building 
industry suppliers and manufacturers; non-building industry partners, 
such as corporations, professional sports organizations, consumer 
product companies etc.; national, state, and local government entities, 
including the Veterans Administration; veterans service providers; 
other veteran non-profit organizations; national, trade, and local 
media; and the general public.
Key Benefits:
      Dignified housing and quality living environments
      Camaraderie shared environment for veterans and their 
families
      Continuum of care that is currently lacking
      Family unit support (whole family)
      Non-Government solution to a dire societal need
      Opportunity for widespread involvement

Marketing Messaging
    From within the positioning framework, high-level marketing 
messages can be derived through the following sample messages:

      With 80 percent of U.S. wounded veterans facing a 
lifetime of recovery, we as American citizens owe it to them to do as 
much as possible in helping their recovery and it starts with providing 
a basic roof over their head.
      Led by a celebrity and or corporate champion (e.g. Tiger 
Woods), Veterans Moving Forward and its partners will build multi-unit 
housing facilities across the country that offer education as well as 
job and life-skills training as part of the rehabilitation process.
      With 3 out of every 5 veterans responsible for their 
family, family counseling is a critical component of the rehabilitation 
process and the Projects unique model for housing accommodates a family 
environment as part of the healing process.

Fund Development Messaging
    The development process will leverage the above-stated marketing 
message. In addition, there are primary ROI messages that can appeal to 
prospective partners/donors; they are as follows:

      Increase corporate social responsibility profile through 
association with a highly visible cause
      Leverage Project involvement through marketing and sales 
efforts with the following industries: Government; Military/defense; 
Academia/college institutions/trade schools; building industry
      Leverage association in the Project to ``give back'' to 
wounded veterans: Conduct corporate fundraising efforts; create 
scholarship programs to promote education among wounded veterans and or 
their caretakers; offer internships to wounded veterans and/or 
caretakers; employee voluntarism etc.
      Gain network access to the nation's leading builders 
through the organizations' leadership and partners

Core Value Prerequisites
    It is critical for all potential partners/affiliates and donors to 
understand the value they will receive from their association with this 
Project. These benefits are described in the following sections: WHAT 
Partners/Affiliates and Donors can leverage and HOW Partners/Affiliates 
and Donors can leverage.
    However, before proceeding to these sections, it is crucial to 
define an underlying philosophical approach that all Partners/
Affiliates and Donors will require in order to maximize their alliance 
with the Veterans Moving Forward Project. This approach includes:

    Sincerity: Partners/Affiliates and Donors must have a true desire 
to help wounded veterans and their families get back on their feet and 
attain self-sufficiency. A lack of this desire will be evident in their 
marketing-related activities, especially with the media.

    Co-Branding Vision: They must have the vision to see that they are 
not contributing to the Project, but rather the wounded veteran 
population in which is being served. This vision enables Partners/
Affiliates and Donors to more effectively utilize their association 
with the cause for their own marketing and communications purposes. In 
other words, they are serving a ``long overdue'' vital societal need, 
and co-branding with the project is a form of publicizing their giving 
back to not only the communities in which they live and work.

                                 

                                     Committee on Veterans' Affairs
                                                    Washington, DC.
                                                     April 10, 2008

John F. Downing
President/Chief Executive Officer
Soldier On
421 North Main Street, Bldg. 6
Leeds, MA 01053
Dear John:
    In reference to our Full Committee hearing on ``Ending Homelessness 
for Our Nation's Veterans'' on April 9, 2008, I would appreciate it if 
you could answer the enclosed hearing questions by the close of 
business on June 5, 2008.
    In an effort to reduce printing costs, the Committee on Veterans' 
Affairs, in cooperation with the Joint Committee on Printing, is 
implementing some formatting changes for materials for all Full 
Committee and Subcommittee hearings. Therefore, it would be appreciated 
if you could provide your answers consecutively and single-spaced. In 
addition, please restate the question in its entirety before the 
answer.
    Due to the delay in receiving mail, please provide your response to 
Debbie Smith by fax your responses at 202-225-2034. If you have any 
questions, please call 202-225-9756.

            Sincerely,
                                                         BOB FILNER
                                                           Chairman
                               __________
                              June 5, 2008
              Submitted by: John F. Downing, President/CEO
             Ending Homelessness for Our Nation's Veterans
                             April 9, 2008
          Questions from House Committee on Veterans' Affairs
    Question 1: Over the past 20 years there has been an intense focus 
on helping the homeless become productive citizens again. It seems that 
through the programs offered primarily through VA, that we have been 
somewhat successful in that area. My immediate concern, however, is 
that we do not repeat the last 20 years and stand by as the newest 
returning veterans fall into the same cycle. It is past time to make a 
concerted shift to the prevention of homelessness.

    Question 1(a): What has been done out in the field to tackle this 
issue?

    Response: The VA Program has increased its focus on outreach by 
assigning personnel to visit community based shelters, correctional 
institutions, and detox facilities with a primary focus of identifying 
veterans in need of services.

    Question 1(b): Rather than playing catch-up, what can we do to be 
proactive in identifying the ``at risk'' veterans?

    Response: Individuals who were raised in one parent families, at or 
below the poverty level are 4 or 5 times more likely to be a homeless 
veteran than an individual raised in a two parent family above the 
poverty level. The exposure to combat, periods of intense vigilance, 
and living in areas where enemy combatants cannot be identified from 
the indigenous population escalate the adjustment disorders, mental 
illness; addiction which lead to homelessness.

    Question 2: What type of new programs do you believe VA should be 
looking at implementing to address the needs of the OEF/OIF veteran 
returning from combat?

    Response: Every member of the armed forces should receive his/her 
VA enrollment card ninety (90) days before discharge. It should be 
received at the point of duty to heighten the importance of this 
opportunity.
    The Department of Defense should award each returning member of the 
Armed Forces a $1,000 a month bonus for the first three months post 
discharge if he/she has a 15 minute conversation with a Veterans 
Affairs Intake or Case Manager. This would increase by seven fold the 
likelihood of an individual contacting the VA personnel at the time of 
crisis.

    Question 3: What do you believe is the biggest challenge facing the 
Department today regarding the homeless programs?

    Response: Department of Veterans Affairs must be able to take 
complete control of the service delivery system to veterans. The 
inability to stay cost effective and remain competitive with cost/
quality of community based health care is essential. The implementation 
of a ``Smart Card'' system that would have an individual's benefits 
loaded in and give the veteran the ability to choose the VA or a 
community based provider is the only way all returning veterans will be 
able to be served.

    Question 4: The Grant and Per Diem Program is the VA's biggest 
program that helps veterans. However, the program is somewhat outdated. 
The Committee has heard from many community-based providers about some 
improvements that, in their estimation, need to be made. Many of you 
addressed this issue in your testimony.

    Question 4(a): What is the number one issue for each of your 
organizations regarding the Grant and Per Diem Program?

    Response: The Grant and per Diem Program needs to be able to 
support with services individuals in safe-affordable housing. The need 
to be able to convert transitional housing funds into permanent housing 
opportunities must be developed. The increasing acceptance and 
viability of the ``Housing First'' model will continue to increase the 
need for GPD to be able to sweep unused transitional funds into 
permanent housing opportunities. If we want to decrease the dependence 
on ``institutional care'' as a long term expensive option we must find 
a way to fund safe affordable housing with services.

    Question 4(b): If you could change the Grant and Per Diem program 
what would it look like?

    Response: Continue to appear as a multi-disciplined service system 
to disenfranchised and un-served veterans and continue to shelter and 
support the current intervention. The need to embrace the ``10 Year 
Program to End Homelessness'' will require the ability to develop, 
support and create new affordable housing with services for veterans.

                                 

                                     Committee on Veterans' Affairs
                                                    Washington, DC.
                                                     April 10, 2008

Colonel Charles Williams, USA (Ret.)
Executive Director
Maryland Center for Veterans Education and Training, Inc.
301 North High Street
Baltimore, MD 21202
Dear Charles:
    In reference to our Full Committee hearing on ``Ending Homelessness 
for Our Nation's Veterans'' on April 9, 2008, I would appreciate it if 
you could answer the enclosed hearing questions by the close of 
business on June 5, 2008.
    In an effort to reduce printing costs, the Committee on Veterans' 
Affairs, in cooperation with the Joint Committee on Printing, is 
implementing some formatting changes for materials for all Full 
Committee and Subcommittee hearings. Therefore, it would be appreciated 
if you could provide your answers consecutively and single-spaced. In 
addition, please restate the question in its entirety before the 
answer.
    Due to the delay in receiving mail, please provide your response to 
Debbie Smith by fax your responses at 202-225-2034. If you have any 
questions, please call 202-225-9756.

            Sincerely,
                                                         BOB FILNER
                                                           Chairman
                               __________
        The Maryland Center for Veterans Education and Training
                       response to questions from
     Honorable Bob Filner, Chairman, Committee on Veterans' Affairs
           Before the Committee on Veterans' Affairs Hearing
           ``Ending Homelessness for Our Nation's Veterans''
                             April 9, 2008
    Question 1: Over the past 20 years there has been an intense focus 
on helping the homeless become productive citizens again. It seems that 
through the programs offered primarily through the VA, that we have 
been somewhat successful in that area. My immediate concern, however, 
is that we do not repeat the last 20 years and stand by as the newest 
returning veterans fall into the same cycle. It is past time to make a 
concerted shift to the prevention of homelessness.

    Question 1(a): What has been done out in the field to tackle this 
issue?

    Response: Traditionally, a period of time has elapsed before 
veterans returning from conflicts show up on the ``radar screen'' in 
need of assistance. Currently, agencies dealing with veterans have been 
servicing Vietnam veterans, in the main. OIF/OEF returning veterans, 
with the exception of those who are gravely injured and housed at 
Walter Reed Hospital, are not presenting themselves in great numbers 
for assistance. PTSD and TBI cases are trickling in. By the time they 
present themselves for treatment, many or all of them have fallen into 
cycles of addiction and homelessness. The VA, once the veterans have 
presented themselves, provides the care needed to address substance 
abuse, housing and mental health treatment programs.

    Question 1(b): Rather than playing catch-up, what can we do to be 
proactive in identifying the ``at risk'' veterans?

    Response: Veterans returning from Afghanistan and Iraq face 
problems that can be overcome through the Veterans Affairs system. Many 
problems occur from an ineffective readjustment period after 
transitioning from war zones. If the veteran is not connected to 
comprehensive services, then other problems, e.g., drugs, crime and 
homelessness, will surface.
    A unified service delivery system should be developed with HUD, VA 
and DOL participating in an effort to create a one stop application 
process. This process would be designed to eliminate the barriers which 
have been put in place that severely limit and discourage the veterans' 
efforts at accessing services in a timely manner.
    In discharging soldiers from active duty, there should be a 
``handoff'' system whereby their final physical, specifically their 
psychosocial and mental health issues, are documented and forwarded to 
their nearest VA medical center in their home areas. This should 
eliminate duplication of efforts and accelerate the time that treatment 
can begin. The unified service delivery system should be automatic 
which both the active duty health service system and the VA health 
service system can access. A system of this kind would also be of use 
for those applying for benefits.
    Psychosocial assessments should be done before the soldier leaves 
active duty service, especially if the soldier has served in a combat 
zone. Factors such as PTSD and TBI are not readily identifiable because 
physical trauma, i.e. loss of limbs and other visible wounds are not 
present. If factors that could adversely affect the individual leaving 
active duty are determined to be present prior to separation from the 
military, treatment and counseling should be provided to that 
individual.

    Question 2: What type of new programs do you believe the VA should 
be looking at implementing to address the needs of the OEF/OIF veteran 
returning from combat?

    Response: VA has developed a thrust to treat veterans returning 
from combat that is designed to ameliorate the effects of significant 
psychological trauma. It is recommended that they partner with 
community providers who service veterans as a priority group. The 
Maryland Center for Veterans Education & Training, Inc. is in the 
process of partnering with the Veterans Affair Medical Center in 
Baltimore, MD and the Veterans Affair Medical Center in Perry Point, MD 
in identifying participants in the MCVET program who are OEF/OIF 
veterans so that comprehensive services can be brought to bear. MCVET 
is partnering with the medical centers in an effort to stabilize those 
veterans who are in need of an inpatient stay in the hospital and those 
who can function on an outpatient basis while receiving stabilizing 
treatment. Meetings have been held and more are being planned.
    Additionally, it is recommended that local police departments be 
briefed on OEF/OIF veterans returning to their respective cities and 
many have not had transitioning services that will prepare them for 
civilian life. Incidents have been recorded where returning veterans 
have been shot by local police during an altercation. MCVET has met 
with the Police Commissioner, at the time, to discuss the problems that 
could occur on Baltimore streets between returning veterans and the 
police. It is recommended that local police departments began a dialog 
with service providers and the local Veterans Affairs Medical Centers 
in efforts to develop programs designed to sensitize police and other 
first responders to the needs of our returning veterans.

    Question 3: What do you believe is the biggest challenge facing the 
Department today regarding the homeless programs?

    Response: Veterans Affairs (VA), Housing and Urban Development 
(HUD), and the Department of Labor (DOL) should develop a process that 
provides a seamless track for a veteran in need of services. That is, 
there should be a ``pass through'' referral system for the veteran that 
would expedite his access to services and the need to complete a number 
of applications. Since the aforementioned departments are crucial in 
the fight against homelessness, funding schemes would have to be 
developed that would involve satisfying the fiscal responsibility of 
each department.

    Question 4: The Grant and Per Diem Program is the VA's biggest 
program that helps veterans. However, the program is somewhat outdated. 
The Committee has heard from many community-based providers about some 
improvements that in their estimation need to be made. Many of you 
addressed this issue in your testimony.

    Question 4(a): What is the number one issue for each of your 
organizations regarding the Grant and Per Diem Program?

    Response: No problem.

    Question 4(b): If you could change the Grant and Per Diem program 
what would it look like?

    Response: No changes.

                                 

                                     Committee on Veterans' Affairs
                                                    Washington, DC.
                                                     April 10, 2008

Phil Landis
Chief Executive Officer
Veterans Village of San Diego
4141 Pacific Highway
San Diego, CA 92110
Dear Phil:
    In reference to our Full Committee hearing on ``Ending Homelessness 
for Our Nation's Veterans'' on April 9, 2008, I would appreciate it if 
you could answer the enclosed hearing questions by the close of 
business on June 5, 2008.
    In an effort to reduce printing costs, the Committee on Veterans' 
Affairs, in cooperation with the Joint Committee on Printing, is 
implementing some formatting changes for materials for all Full 
Committee and Subcommittee hearings. Therefore, it would be appreciated 
if you could provide your answers consecutively and single-spaced. In 
addition, please restate the question in its entirety before the 
answer.
    Due to the delay in receiving mail, please provide your response to 
Debbie Smith by fax your responses at 202-225-2034. If you have any 
questions, please call 202-225-9756.

            Sincerely,
                                                         BOB FILNER
                                                           Chairman
                               __________
              Responses from Veterans Village of San Diego
                     Questions from Hon. Bob Filner
                Chairman, Committee on Veterans' Affairs
    Question 1: Over the past 20 years there has been an intense focus 
on helping the homeless become productive citizens again. It seem that 
through the programs offered primarily through the VA, that we have 
been somewhat successful in that area. My immediate concern, however, 
is that we do not repeat the last 20 years and stand by as the newest 
returning veterans fall into the same cycle. It is past time to make a 
concerted shift to the prevention of homelessness.

    Question 1(a): What has been done out in the field to tackle this 
issue?

    Response: Organizations such as Veterans Village of San Diego 
(VVSD) have initiated programs, funded by private funds, to help meet 
the needs of the returning combat veteran, both those still on active 
duty and those who have left the service. This program, Warrior 
Tradition, provides a safe environment for OIF/OEF combat veterans to 
meet, share their issues, frustrations and problems and receive 
referral services for counseling, both individual and family if 
required.

    Question 1(b): Rather than playing catch-up, what can we do to be 
proactive in identifying the ``at risk'' veterans?

    Response: All combat veterans and support personnel who have 
experienced the rigors of war should be interviewed and counseled 
regarding their experiences, how to recognize the symptoms of PTSD, and 
the resources available both to active duty and those who have left the 
military. Should a veteran require treatment/therapy he should receive 
it prior to separation, and once separated, referred to the VA Hospital 
nearest his home of record or the area he/she intends on living in.

    Question 2: What type of new programs do you believe VA should be 
looking at implementing to address the needs of the OEF/OIF veteran 
returning from combat?

    Response: Programs that focus on identification and treatment of 
those veterans whose combat experiences are likely to result in PTSD or 
other treatable mental illness. This will require making sure that all 
veterans receive out briefings from the combat theaters while still on 
active duty, and for those leaving the military, separation briefings 
that insure they have an accurate list of resources for the veteran and 
his family.

    Question 3: What do you believe is the biggest challenge facing the 
Department today regarding the homeless programs?

    Response: Public awareness and continued funding by Congress when 
paired are the biggest issues I see today. If we as a Nation continue 
to ignore the plight of our veterans who are homeless today, we will 
continue to experience as we do today, the inclusion of the OIF/OEF 
combat veterans, not 5-10 years later, but 1-2 years after service.

    Question 4: The Grant and Per Diem Program is the VA's biggest 
program that helps veterans. However, the program is somewhat outdated. 
The Committee has heard from many community-based providers about some 
improvements that, in their estimation, need to be made. Many of you 
addressed this issue in your testimony.

    Question 4(a): What is the number one issue for each of your 
organizations regarding the Grant and Per Diem Program?

    Response: VVSD spends approximately $50.00 per day per client. Per 
diem is presently only $30.00 per day. An increase in the daily rate of 
reimbursement would help reduce the need for matching funds and 
potential operating deficits.

    Question 4(b): If you could change the Grant and Per Diem program 
what would it look like?

    Response: The Grant would be separate from the Per Diem, not tied 
together as they are now. Also, as an organization grows, there should 
be a mechanism in place to retain the same contract number and just 
modify the existing contracted bed numbers. For example, VVSD has four 
different Grant and Per Diem or Per Diem only contracts, each with its 
own rate.

                                 

                                     Committee on Veterans' Affairs
                                                    Washington, DC.
                                                     April 10, 2008

William G. D'Arcy
Chief Operating Officer
Catholic Charities Housing Development Corp.
721 N. LaSalle, 5th Floor
Chicago, IL 60610-3574
Dear William:
    In reference to our Full Committee hearing on ``Ending Homelessness 
for Our Nation's Veterans'' on April 9, 2008, I would appreciate it if 
you could answer the enclosed hearing questions by the close of 
business on June 5, 2008.
    In an effort to reduce printing costs, the Committee on Veterans' 
Affairs, in cooperation with the Joint Committee on Printing, is 
implementing some formatting changes for materials for all Full 
Committee and Subcommittee hearings. Therefore, it would be appreciated 
if you could provide your answers consecutively and single-spaced. In 
addition, please restate the question in its entirety before the 
answer.
    Due to the delay in receiving mail, please provide your response to 
Debbie Smith by fax your responses at 202-225-2034. If you have any 
questions, please call 202-225-9756.

            Sincerely,
                                                         BOB FILNER
                                                           Chairman
                               __________
                   Responses from Catholic Charities
                Questions from the Honorable Bob Filner
                Chairman, Committee on Veterans' Affairs
           Before the Committee on Veterans' Affairs Hearing
           ``Ending Homelessness for Our Nation's Veterans''
                             April 9, 2008
    Question 1: Over the past 20 years there has been an intense focus 
on helping the homeless become productive citizens again. It seems that 
through the programs offered primarily through VA, that we have been 
somewhat successful in that area. My immediate concern, however, is 
that we do not repeat the last 20 years and stand by as the newest 
returning veterans fall into the same cycle. It is past time to make a 
concerted shift to the prevention of homelessness.

    Question 1(a): What has been done out in the field to tackle this 
issue?

    Response: Counseling, case management, and housing with the Grant 
and Per-Diem Program.

    Question 1(b): Rather than playing catch-up what can we do to be 
proactive in identifying the ``at risk'' veterans?

    Response:

    1.  At enlistment in the military, there is often a battery of 
exams that the recruits go through. At military discharge use that 
battery to capture some of the effects of their military experience. 
Use that info to offer service to the discharged personnel. Do follow 
up after 1 year, 2 years, 3 years post duty to see if any symptoms of 
PTSD or substance abuse problems develop rather than waiting for 
homelessness to occur.
    2.  Do incremental follow ups with vets who served in military 
action zones. Perhaps create a system of 6 mo. follow up for 2-3 years. 
The follow-up questions would include info re: family and marital 
satisfaction; employment and employment satisfaction; financial 
stability; social/community satisfaction (vs isolation) as noted by 
involvement in church, community, circle of friends, and other social 
activities outside of the family circle.
    3.  Good medical workups post military service and for a period of 
time afterward to diagnose appropriately any organic effects from their 
service.

    Question 2: What type of new programs do you believe VA should be 
looking at implementing to address the needs of the OEF/OIF veterans 
returning from combat?

    Response: The VA should increase their HUD VASH program, and 
emergency financial assistance to keep families and individuals out of 
homelessness.

    Question 3: What do you believe is the biggest challenge facing the 
Department today regarding the homeless program?

      Develop community based Permanent Supportive Housing in 
partnership with private entities.
      Affordable housing with rental subsidy.
      Trained staff to operate the housing programs
      Employment reintegration--marketable skills--following 
military service to provide income to stay housed.
      Employment maintenance following military service to 
provide income to stay housed.

    Question 4: The Grant and Per Diem Program is the VA's biggest 
program that helps veterans. However, the program is somewhat outdated. 
The Committee has heard from many community-based providers about some 
improvements that, in their estimation, need to be made. Many of you 
addressed this issue in your testimony.

    Question 4(a): What is the number one issue for each of your 
organizations regarding the Grant and Per Diem Program?

    Response: The 24 months lifetime limit presents a barrier for same 
veterans.

    Question 4(b): If you could change the Grant Per Diem program what 
would it look like?

    Response: Extend the length of stay with criteria.

                                 

                                     Committee on Veterans' Affairs
                                                    Washington, DC.
                                                     April 10, 2008

Hon. James B. Peake, M.D.
Secretary
U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs
810 Vermont Ave., NW
Washington, DC 20420
Dear Mr. Secretary:
    In reference to our Full Committee hearing on ``Ending Homelessness 
for Our Nation's Veterans'' on April 9, 2008, I would appreciate it if 
you could answer the enclosed hearing questions by the close of 
business on June 5, 2008.
    In an effort to reduce printing costs, the Committee on Veterans' 
Affairs, in cooperation with the Joint Committee on Printing, is 
implementing some formatting changes for materials for all Full 
Committee and Subcommittee hearings. Therefore, it would be appreciated 
if you could provide your answers consecutively and single-spaced. In 
addition, please restate the question in its entirety before the 
answer.
    Due to the delay in receiving mail, please provide your response to 
Debbie Smith by fax your responses at 202-225-2034. If you have any 
questions, please call 202-225-9756.

            Sincerely,
                                                         BOB FILNER
                                                           Chairman
                               __________
                        Questions for the Record
                     From the Honorable Bob Filner
                Chairman, Committee on Veterans' Affairs
                             April 9, 2008
             Ending Homelessness for Our Nation's Veterans
    Questions 1(a): For five years we have had veterans returning from 
combat, both men and women, who have to reintegrate into society. I 
know the agency has held round tables and/or focus groups with this 
cohort. Realizing that they represent a smaller contingent than 
Vietnam: What has the Department learned about the needs of these 
veterans?

    Response: The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) has learned a 
great deal about the needs of homeless veterans during the past 20 
years, having seen more than 400,000 homeless veterans during that 
time. We have learned that the needs are complex and to be effective we 
need to have a wide array of services. We have learned that all 
homeless veterans need shelter (emergency, drop-in centers, 
transitional and permanent), food, clothing, personal hygiene, 
employment, transportation, education, job training and assistance in 
finding a job, assistance in getting documentation, financial 
assistance (welfare payments, VA or Social Security disability/pension 
benefits, and money management), legal assistance, child care, and 
medical/mental health services. The medical/mental health services 
required include testing and treatment for contagious diseases 
(tuberculosis, hepatitis C, and AIDS/HIV), medication, dental and eye 
care, substance abuse treatment, detoxification, counseling for 
emotional and psychiatric problems both individual and family.
    We have identified specific differences in the Operation Enduring 
Freedom/Operation Iraqi Freedom (OEF/OIF) veterans that contributed to 
differing needs. These differences are OEF/OIF veterans are far more 
likely to be women, thus a need for shelters for women and a need for 
child care. OEF/OIF veterans are far more likely to have had combat 
participation; less likely to have alcohol abuse/dependency; less 
likely to have drug abuse/dependency, and far more likely to have 
combat post traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). So there need for 
substance abuse treatment, detoxification is diminished but there need 
for mental health services to treat PTSD is greater, as is there need 
for assistance in applying for disability benefits for service 
connected PTSD. These veterans are younger and are far more 
technologically savvy, so we have other opportunities to reach out to 
these veterans (beyond classic outreach--walking the streets, etc.).

    Questions 1(b): What types of proactive activities have you 
implemented to ensure that a repeat of the past 20 years does not 
happen?

    Response: In 1994, VA launched Project CHALENG (Community 
Homelessness Assessment, Local Education and Networking Groups) for 
Veterans, a program designed to enhance the continuum of care for 
homeless veterans provided by VA and its surrounding community service 
agencies. VA medical centers and regional offices designate CHALENG 
Points of Contact (POCs) who are responsible for

      assess the needs of homeless veterans living in the area,
      identify the needs of homeless veterans with a focus on 
health care, education and training, employment, shelter, counseling, 
and outreach,
      assess the extent to which homeless veterans' needs are 
being met,
      develop a list of all homeless services in the local 
area, and
      inform homeless veterans of non-VA resources that are 
available in the community to meet their needs. Project CHALENG brings 
VA together with community agencies and other Federal, State, and local 
governments who provide services to the homeless to raise awareness of 
homeless veterans' needs and to develop plan to meet those needs.

    Other proactive activities VA has undertaken include:

    Homeless Providers Grant and Per Diem Program. Provides funds to 
community-based agencies providing transitional housing or service 
centers for homeless veterans.

    Loan Guarantee Program for Multifamily Transitional Housing. 
Provides loan guarantees for large-scale self-sustaining transitional 
multifamily housing. Eligible transitional project are those that: 1) 
provide supportive services including job counseling; 2) require 
veteran to seek and maintain employment; 3) require veteran to pay 
reasonable rent; and 4) require sobriety as a condition of occupancy.

    Stand Downs. VA staff participated in the Stand Downs for Homeless 
Veterans run by local coalitions in various cities each year. Stand 
Downs give homeless veterans 1-3 days of safety and security where they 
can obtain food, shelter, clothing, and a range of other types of 
assistance, including VA provided health care, benefits certification, 
and links to other programs.

    Veterans Industries. Disadvantaged, at-risk, and homeless veterans 
live in community-based supervised group homes while working for pay in 
VA's Compensated Work Therapy Program (also known as Veterans 
Industries). Veterans in VA's Compensated Work Therapy/Transitional 
Residence program work about 33 hours per week, earning approximately 
$732 per month, and paying an average of $186 per month toward 
maintenance and up-keep of the residence. The average length of stay is 
about 174 days. VA contracts with private industry and the public 
sector for work done by these veterans, who learn new job skills, 
relearn successful work habits, and regain a sense of self-esteem and 
self-worth.

    Domiciliary Care for Homeless Veterans. Provides residential bio-
psychosocial treatment to homeless veterans with health problems, 
average length of stay in the program is 4 months. The domiciliaries 
conduct outreach and referral; vocational counseling and 
rehabilitation; and post-discharge community support.

    Department of Housing and Urban Development_VA Supported Housing 
Program (HUD-VASH). Provides permanent housing and ongoing treatment 
services to the harder-to-serve homeless mentally ill veterans and 
those suffering from substance abuse disorders. VA staff provide 
outreach, clinical care and ongoing case management services. Rigorous 
evaluation of this program indicates that this approach significantly 
reduces days of homelessness for veterans plagued by serious mental 
illness and substance abuse disorders.

    Supported Housing. VA staff help veterans find permanent housing 
and providing clinical support needed to keep veterans in permanent 
housing. Staff in these programs operate without benefit of the 
specially dedicated Section 8 housing vouchers available in the HUD-
VASH program but are often successful in locating transitional or 
permanent housing through local means, especially by collaborating with 
veterans service organizations.

    Drop-In-Centers. Provide a daytime sanctuary where homeless 
veterans can clean up, wash their clothes, and participate in a variety 
of therapeutic and rehabilitative activities.

    Special Outreach and Benefits Assistance. Specially funded staff 
provide dedicated outreach, benefits counseling, referral, and 
additional assistance to eligible veterans applying for VA benefits. 
These homeless veterans coordinators make over 4,700 visits to homeless 
facilities and over 9,000 contacts with non-VA agencies working with 
the homeless and provide over 24,000 homeless veterans with benefits 
counseling and referrals to other VA programs on an annual basis.

    Acquired Property Sales for Homeless Providers. Makes properties VA 
obtains through foreclosures on VA-insured mortgages available for sale 
to homeless providers at a discount of 20 to 50 percent, depending on 
time of the market.

    VA Excess Property for Homeless Veterans Initiative. Distributes 
Federal excess personal property, such as hats, parkas, footwear, 
socks, sleeping bags, and other items to homeless veterans and homeless 
veteran programs.

    Program Monitoring and Evaluation. VA has built program monitoring 
and evaluation into all of its homeless veterans' treatment initiatives 
and it serves as an integral component of each program. These 
evaluations provide important information about the veterans served and 
the therapeutic value and cost effectiveness of the specialized 
programs. Information from these evaluations also helps program 
managers determine new directions to pursue in order to expand and 
improve services to homeless veterans.

    Questions 1(c): Are you working with the Department of Defense on 
this issue?

    Response: The Department of Defense (DoD) serves as a member of 
VA's Advisory Committee for Homeless Veterans. VA and DoD participate 
in and encourage service members leaving military service to 
participate in transition assistance programs. We believe the more 
departing members know about VA benefits and services the less likely 
they are to becoming homeless.

    Question 2(a): Many of the community based providers are advocating 
for a change in the Grant and Per Diem Program. There is concern out 
there that the program is ``pushing'' providers out due to the low per 
diem rate and the onerous administrative duties to name a few. Does the 
VA believe this program needs to be ``updated''?

    Response: The Homeless Grant and Per Diem Program was authorized in 
1992 and while much has changed over the past 16 years the basic 
approach and objective of that program is as relevant today as it was 
when authorized. The need for transitional housing for veterans that 
largely uses a veteran helping veteran approach in large and small 
program across the Nation still exists.
    We know that the initial concept of payments to providers was 
patterned after the State home program and its provider base and the 
needs of the veterans each program serves are different.

    Question 2(b): How many of the community based providers have you 
lost because of these issues?

    Response: We have found that most of the ``lost'' providers were 
programs that we initially awarded funding that did not ever begin 
operating. We have found most did not anticipate the time and obstacles 
they would encounter when obtaining an appropriate location; site 
control and additional costs needed to complete their project. These 
are regrettable loses but are issues largely beyond our control.

    Question 3: Effective outreach is a very important part of the 
homeless program. Please explain your outreach program to the homeless 
veteran population.

    Response: VA has hundreds of staff based in our health care and 
benefits administrations who reach out to veterans who are homeless and 
at-risk. That effort is enhanced by thousands of community service 
providers, state and local veteran service officers and members of 
veteran service organizations. All have a common goal to help that 
veteran obtain needed health care and benefits assistance. Our staff 
goes to shelter, soup kitchens, food pantries, transitional housing 
program, under bridges, into parks; into the woods and other places 
where veterans are likely to seek shelter or daily living assistance. 
Each year between our outreach and health care services we engage more 
than 100,000 of these veterans.
    VA staff participated in the Stand Downs for Homeless Veterans run 
by local coalitions in various cities each year. Stand Downs give 
homeless veterans 1-3 days of safety and security where they can obtain 
food, shelter, clothing, and a range of other types of assistance, 
including VA provided health care, benefits certification, and links to 
other programs.
    Homeless veterans coordinators provide dedicated outreach, benefits 
counseling, referral, and additional assistance to eligible veterans 
applying for VA benefits. These homeless veterans coordinators make 
over 4,700 visits to homeless facilities and over 9,000 contacts with 
non-VA agencies working with the homeless and provide over 24,000 
homeless veterans with benefits counseling and referrals to other VA 
programs on an annual basis.

    Question 4: What do you believe is the single biggest challenge 
facing the Department in addressing the homeless veteran issue?

    Response: Engaging that veteran who want and needs our assistance 
to participate is a major challenge. While that may sound simple many 
veteran are reluctant due to bad information and mental illness to 
engage in active treatment. That also creates pressure on us to 
continue to provide a comprehensive array of needed services: outreach; 
residential care; robust access to mental health and substance abuse 
and benefit assistance. That is why we constantly strive to improve our 
services at all levels at all locations.

    Question 5: Can you name three things that we have learned over the 
last 20 years of running homeless programs that may help us to prevent 
an epidemic of homeless OEF/OIF veterans?

    Response: Early intervention; comprehensive health care and 
benefits; transitional and long term housing with services is a key to 
getting veterans healthy and preventing homelessness.

    Question 6: It is my understanding that many of the community-based 
providers do not have accommodations for women with children. Yet, many 
of our newest veterans are women who have served in combat or combat 
like conditions. Many of our women veterans have children. What 
positive steps is the agency taking to address the growing homeless 
women veteran population?

    Response: For the past 5 years VA has targeted funding under our 
notices of funding availability (NOFA) for programs that provide 
transitional housing for women veterans. The NOFA that is being 
reviewed has that same targeting mechanism. We recognize that many 
women veterans are uncomfortable in male dominated programs. Based upon 
feedback from veterans we believe women only programs are effective. We 
have enhanced physical security and privacy for women in our 
residential treatment programs. The new HUD-VASH program that will 
offer permanent housing to more than 10,000 homeless veterans. That 
housing has a target to find women veterans including women veterans 
with children. We believe HUD-VASH will allow us to serve women who are 
more likely to have children. Our experience shows these veterans are 
reluctant to seek services from VA until the needs of their children 
are addressed.

    Question 7(a): VA recently reported that there has been a decline 
in the homeless veteran population of 21 percent. You are to be 
commended on that. I know many people work very hard for this cause. VA 
attributed some of the decline to the effectiveness of current programs 
and some of it was attributed to other factors such as counting 
methods. What definition does VA use to determine if a veteran is 
considered homeless?

    Response: VA defines homeless veterans as a category of people who 
meet the criteria as a veteran under title 38 and who lack housing and 
food, usually because they cannot afford a regular, safe, and adequate 
shelter. This may also include veterans whose primary nighttime 
residence is a homeless shelter.

    Question 7(b): Please explain to the Committee how the methodology 
with this count differed from the last one.

    Response: The previous counts lacked a consistent nationwide 
methodology which was one of the problems that result in reliability 
issues with these counts. Our efforts each year are to develop 
consistent methodologies and to develop as precise a count as possible. 
For example our earlier reports did not have a point in time estimate 
and lacked the comprehensive data now collected by HUD. The methods 
used to arrive at the number of homeless veterans in the Nation, employ 
the following elements:

    1.  Each VA local point of contact (POC) for Project CHALENG are 
tasked to develop the best estimate of homeless veterans locally in 
their service areas based on a variety of data available.
    2.  Each POC was directed to use as a standardized reference the 
local HUD Continuum of Care count, with specific reference to the 
percentage of homeless veterans.
    3.  For the CHALENG estimates, POCs adjusted the HUD numbers, if 
needed, by taking into account input from community sources, local 
surveys, community leaders, and their own knowledge of veterans not 
covered within their service area by the HUD count.

    Question 7(c): Is the decline indicative of the percent of formerly 
homeless veterans who now have jobs and are productive citizens?

    Response: The 2007 CHALENG Report estimates that on any given 
night, approximately 154,000 veterans were homeless. This figure is a 
decrease of 21 percent from the estimate 195,827 given in the 2006 
CHALENG report. This decline is in part a result of more precise 
estimates. VA homeless program interventions and changing demographics 
also contributed to this decline.
    Reductions in veteran homelessness are also due in part to the 
effectiveness of VA's and other community programs that serve homeless 
veterans reaching more veterans than ever before. VA's Grant & Per Diem 
(GPD) program, which had just begun in the mid-nineties, has over 8500 
operational beds today; 15,000 veterans were provided homeless 
residential services and an additional 5000 plus veterans were treated 
in specialized VA homeless domiciliary residential care programs in FY 
2007. These programs have demonstrated remarkable success at placing 
and keeping veterans in community housing. Some of which have 
employment and others are receiving government financial assistance.
    The overall population of veterans continues to decline as the 
World War II; Korean and Vietnam veterans' age. In 1990, there were 
27.5 million veterans, a total that has decreased to 24 million today. 
Similarly, there has been a substantial reduction in the number of poor 
veterans, decreasing from 3 million in 1990 to 1.8 million in 2000.
                               __________
                        Questions for the Record
                  From the Honorable Ciro D. Rodriguez
    Question 1: Why did the Department of Veterans Affairs recently 
change its methodology for counting homeless veterans?

    Response: Counting the number of homeless people, specifically the 
number of homeless veterans, is a difficult task. There have been few 
systematic, national efforts to count the homeless. Prior to 2005, the 
most highly regarded effort took place in 1996, the National Survey of 
Homeless Assistance Providers and Clients (NSHAPC). In 2005, Housing 
and Urban Development (HUD) began organizing comprehensive, national 
counts of homeless persons. This year, for the first time, Community 
Homeless Assessment, Local Education and Networking Groups for Veterans 
(CHALENG) points of contact (POCs) were asked to provide a point-in-
time estimate of the homeless veterans in their service area on any day 
during the last week of January 2007. This time period was selected so 
CHALENG estimates would coincide with the homeless point-in-time counts 
executed by HUD Continuums of Care nationwide. It is believed that 
CHALENG should make every effort to base their estimates on the local 
point-intime count, as it is the only nationwide homeless count 
conducted on an ongoing basis. In response to your inquiry about the 
methods used to arrive at the number of homeless veterans in the 
Nation, the following are the elements employed. Each VA local POC for 
Project CHALENG each year is tasked to develop the best estimate of 
homeless veterans locally in their service areas based on a variety of 
data available.

    1.  Each POC was directed to use as an important reference the 
estimated local HUD Continuum of Care count, with specific reference to 
the percentage of homeless veterans.
    2.  For the CHALENG estimates, POCs adjusted the HUD numbers, if 
needed, by taking into account input from community sources, local 
surveys, community leaders, and their own knowledge of veterans not 
covered within their service area by the HUD count.

    Comprehensively using the HUD Continuum of Care counts as a 
standardized reference has helped to improve our CHALENG estimates. We 
do not believe that our methodology has really changed just 
incrementally improved.

    Question 2: Is there a possibility that the marked decrease in 
homeless veterans from last year to this year had anything to do with 
the change in methodology?

    Response: The 2007 CHALENG Report estimates that on any given 
night, approximately 154,000 veterans were homeless. This figure is a 
decrease of 21 percent from the estimate 195,827 given in the 2006 
CHALENG report. We believe that improvements in methodology may a have 
contributed to the reduction in numbers, but we also believe the 
validity of the numbers has increased.
    VA homeless program interventions and changing demographics also 
contributed. Reductions in veteran homelessness are due in part to the 
effectiveness of VA's and other community programs that serve homeless 
veterans reaching more veterans than ever before. VA's Grant & Per Diem 
(GPD) program, which had just begun in the mid-nineties, has over 8500 
operational beds today; 15,000 veterans were provided homeless 
residential services and an additional 5000 plus veterans were treated 
in specialized VA homeless domiciliary residential care programs in FY 
2007. These programs have demonstrated remarkable success at placing 
and keeping veterans in community housing.
    The overall population of veterans continues to decline as the 
World War II; Korean and Vietnam veterans' age. In 1990, there were 
27.5 million veterans, a total that has decreased to 24 million today. 
Similarly, there has been a substantial reduction in the number of poor 
veterans, decreasing from 3 million in 1990 to 1.8 million in 2000.

                                  
