    [House Hearing, 114 Congress]
    [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

      A REVIEW OF THE PRESIDENT'S FISCAL YEAR 2016 BUDGET REQUEST FOR THE
      DEPARTMENT OF LABOR'S VETERAN EMPLOYMENT AND TRAINING SERVICE (VETS)

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

                                    HEARING

                                   before the

                      SUBCOMMITTEE ON ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY

                                     of the

                         COMMITTEE ON VETERANS' AFFAIRS
                         U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                        ONE HUNDRED FOURTEENTH CONGRESS

                                 FIRST SESSION

                                   __________

                          THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 12, 2015

                                   __________

                                Serial No. 114-8

                                   __________

           Printed for the use of the Committee on Veterans' Affairs

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

             Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.fdsys.gov

                                          _________

                             U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
      98-571 PDF                      WASHINGTON : 2016
    _________________________________________________________________________________
    For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Publishing Office,
          Internet:bookstore.gpo.gov. Phone:toll free (866)512-1800;DC area (202)512-1800
         Fax:(202) 512-2104 Mail:Stop IDCC,Washington,DC 20402-001

                         COMMITTEE ON VETERANS' AFFAIRS

                         JEFF MILLER, Florida, Chairman

    DOUG LAMBORN, Colorado               CORRINE BROWN, Florida, Ranking
    GUS M. BILIRAKIS, Florida, Vice-         Minority Member
        Chairman                         MARK TAKANO, California
    DAVID P. ROE, Tennessee              JULIA BROWNLEY, California
    DAN BENISHEK, Michigan               DINA TITUS, Nevada
    TIM HUELSKAMP, Kansas                RAUL RUIZ, California
    MIKE COFFMAN, Colorado               ANN M. KUSTER, New Hampshire
    BRAD R. WENSTRUP, Ohio               BETO O'ROURKE, Texas
    JACKIE WALORSKI, Indiana             KATHLEEN RICE, New York
    RALPH ABRAHAM, Louisiana             TIMOTHY J. WALZ, Minnesota
    LEE ZELDIN, New York                 JERRY McNERNEY, California
    RYAN COSTELLO, Pennsylvania
    AMATA COLEMAN RADEWAGEN, American
        Samoa
    MIKE BOST, Illinois
                           Jon Towers, Staff Director
                    Don Phillips, Democratic Staff Director

                      SUBCOMMITTEE ON ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY

                         BRAD WENSTRUP, Ohio, Chairman

    LEE ZELDIN, New York                 MARK TAKANO, California, Ranking
    AMATA RADEWAGEN, American Samoa          Member
    RYAN COSTELLO, Pennsylvania          DINA TITUS, Nevada
    MIKE BOST, Illinois                  AMATA COLEMAN RADEWAGEN, New York
                                         JERRY McNERNEY, California

    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.

                                      (II)

                                C O N T E N T S

                                  ----------

                          Thursday, February 12, 2015

                                                                       Page

    A Review of the President's Fiscal Year 2016 Budget Request for
      the Department of Labor's Veteran Employment and Training
      Service (VETS).................................................     1

                               OPENING STATEMENTS

    Brad Wenstrup, Chairman..........................................     1
        Prepared Statement of Chairman Brad Wenstrup.................    29
    Mark Takano, Ranking Member......................................     3

                                   WITNESSES

    Ms. Teresa W. Gerton, Deputy Assistant Secretary, Veterans'
      Employment and Training Service, U.S. Department of Labor......     4
        Prepared Statement...........................................    31

    Mr. Davy G. Leghorn, Assistant Director, The Veteran Education
      and Employment Commission, The American Legion.................    13
        Prepared Statement...........................................    47

    Mr. Rick Weidman, Executive Director, Government Affairs, VVA....    15
        Prepared Statement...........................................    51

    Mr. Paul R. Varela, Assistant National Legislative Director, DAV.    17
        Prepared Statement...........................................    61

                                 FOR THE RECORD

    Question and Responses, From: Paul Varela, DAV...................    67

      A REVIEW OF THE PRESIDENT'S FISCAL YEAR 2016 BUDGET REQUEST FOR THE
      DEPARTMENT OF LABOR'S VETERAN EMPLOYMENT AND TRAINING SERVICE (VETS)

                                  ----------

                          Thursday, February 12, 2015

                 U.S. House of Representatives,
                        Committee on Veterans' Affairs,
                          Subcommittee on Economic Opportunity,
                                                       Washington, D.C.
        The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 1:59 p.m., in
    Room 334, Cannon House Office Building, Hon. Brad Wenstrup,
    [chairman of the subcommittee] presiding.
        Present:  Representatives Wenstrup, Zeldin, Costello,
    Radewagen, Bost, Takano, Titus, Rice, McNerney.

              OPENING STATEMENT OF CHAIRMAN BRAD WENSTRUP

        Dr. Wenstrup. I want to welcome you all to the Subcommittee
    on Economic Opportunity's hearing today entitled A Review of
    the President's Fiscal Year 2016 Budget Request for the
    Department of Labor's Veteran Employment and Training Services,
    otherwise known as VETS.
        Just to say up front, I apologize if we may have to break
    to go to votes, but I thought we would get underway.
        DoL's VETS or Veteran Employment and Training Services
    manages several programs for servicemembers and veterans alike.
    Within VETS is the Jobs for Veterans State Grant Program which
    funds Disabled Veterans' Outreach Program specialists, DVOPs,
    and local veterans' employment representatives, LVERs.
        There is also the Homeless Veteran Retraining Program which
    provides grants to providers for job training services and
    stand-downs for homeless veterans, the employment workshop
    portion of the Transition Assistance Program, TAP, enforcement
    of the Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights
    Act, USERRA, and the promotion and outreach for veterans'
    hiring throughout the country and Federal Government, these are
    all very critical services and they are all vital to our
    servicemembers' and veterans' well-being after they leave
    active duty.
        As more and more men and women are returning from
    deployments or separating from the military, it is imperative
    that we place a focus on these individuals and the services
    that we provide to them through VETS programs while also
    helping veterans of past conflicts who face underemployment and
    unemployment issues.
        Unfortunately for years, it has been clear that senior
    leaders at the Department of Labor do not put the focus that is
    needed on the Veterans' Employment and Training Service. And to
    be quite frank, many in the veterans' community, and we will
    hear from them next, have said over and over again that more
    often than not, DoL has ignored the agency altogether.
        Now, this is not just a current issue and it is not a
    political one. This seems to have been a trend throughout many
    administrations regardless of party. I know we can all agree
    that the country's veterans deserve to be the top priority, yet
    I worry that DoL does not always prioritize and coordinate
    their services for veterans as well as they could and should.
        The President's fiscal year 2016 budget for the VETS
    Program is once again basically flatlined while the rest of the
    department is not. The budget as a tool is the ultimate list of
    an administration's priorities and it is clear where DoL's true
    priorities lie.
        In addition to reviewing the President's proposed budget
    for VETS, I also believe today's hearing is an important
    opportunity to examine the Department of Labor's ability to
    measure long-term outcomes and the department's efforts to
    coordinate with the Department of Veterans Affairs and the
    efficiency of the Jobs for Veterans State Grant and VETS State
    Program.
        JVSG which funds DVOPs and LVERs has been a constant
    concern of the subcommittee over the years and time and time
    again, we have heard concerns from the VSO community on the
    outreach or lack thereof that these DVOPs and LVERs are doing
    to help veterans find jobs.
        What is truly upsetting is that despite spending millions
    and millions of dollars on this program over the years, VETS is
    still unable to accurately track if the services provided by
    DVOPs and LVERs led to a veteran finding meaningful employment.
    Results matter.
        Reading through testimony for today's hearings and previous
    hearings held by this subcommittee, it is clear that VSOs and
    other stakeholders are ready for a change, a concrete change to
    bring better coordination between DoL and VA, better
    accountability and efficiency within VETS programs, and better
    data to show what VETS is doing to provide positive long-term
    outcomes for our Nation's veterans.
        We have been told by VETS time and time again that this
    time it will be different and this time they have a seat at the
    table at the Department of Labor, but it doesn't seem that
    anything is ever different. As the old saying goes, the
    definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over
    again and expecting a different result.
        So in this vein, it appears that many are pushing to create
    a fourth administration at VA and move VETS out of DoL to VA, a
    concept that has been discussed and included in legislation in
    previous Congresses.
        I look forward to hearing more about this proposal and
    discussion by the VSOs as well as other avenues we can explore
    to improve employment opportunities and consistency of services
    provided by DoL and the State Grant Program across the country.
        Before I turn it over to the ranking member, Mr. Takano, I
    just want to reiterate that I believe that the new senior
    leadership team at VETS is trying to turn the ship around and
    by and large, the employees of VETS do good work. But they are
    only a small piece of the puzzle at an agency as large as DoL.
        The problem is that no matter how small of a player VETS is
    within the larger mission of the department, the services they
    provide to our Nation's veterans are too important to be
    overlooked. And that is our challenge here today and I look
    forward to hearing from everyone about how we can improve the
    performance and focus of the program.

        [The prepared statement of Chairman Brad Wenstrup appears
    in the Appendix]

        I now recognize Ranking Member Takano for his opening
    comments.

            OPENING STATEMENT OF RANKING MEMBER MARK TAKANO

        Mr. Takano. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Thank you. Thank you to our witnesses and welcome to them
    all.
        I am happy to say that the job market for veterans and
    other Americans is continuously improving. We are now in our
    59th consecutive month of private sector job growth. Eleven
    point eight million jobs have been added to our economy in the
    longest uninterrupted period of private sector job creation in
    our history.
        However, we must not confuse positive employment numbers
    with the need to provide our servicemembers with a successful
    transition from the military. We must remain vigilant in
    ensuring that we are providing our servicemembers with the
    tools and training that they need to successfully navigate this
    transition.
        Let me be clear. A servicemember's transition is incredibly
    challenging. I would ask you to consider a servicemember that
    joins the military at 18 years of age, deploys to a war zone on
    numerous occasions, and four years later at the age of 22 is
    leaving the service.
        She has received a great deal of training, had significant
    life experiences, some good, some bad. She may or may not have
    physical disabilities. She probably has never written a resume.
    Short of a job in high school, she has never had an interview.
        She has financial needs. She likely has a car, cell phone,
    maybe a mortgage, maybe a child. She will most likely go home
    or stay at the location of her last duty station. More likely
    than not, she will become unemployed.
        So while our country's economic situation is arguably
    better than it has ever been, if transitioning servicemembers
    are having trouble finding jobs, there is a problem.
        Veterans spend three days in employment workshops designed
    by the Department of Labor prior to exiting the military, but
    their effectiveness is unclear.
        I am pleased to hear that the Administration has created
    the military life cycle to provide continuous touch points in a
    servicemember's career to prepare them for this transition. How
    it is integrated with the Veterans Administration for a
    seamless transition is also unclear.
        The bottom line remains more needs to be done. With regards
    to the bottom line, DoL-VETS budgets largely reflect the
    continued request to fund states to hire employees that focus
    on assisting veterans with employment.
        While laudable in theory, I remain concerned that the
    impact this resource provides is unclear. I encourage DoL VETS
    to strongly consider what its intended outcomes are and then
    determine how you can measure those outcomes to drive those
    results.
        I look forward to working with DoL VETS in moving forward.
    You have a substantial budget to help veterans transition and
    find employment. I look forward to hearing on how you plan to
    make great things happen for veterans with this substantial
    budget.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I yield back.
        Dr. Wenstrup. I thank the ranking member.
        And I now welcome our only witness on the first panel to
    the witness table. We do welcome Ms. Teresa Gerton, the Deputy
    Assistant Secretary for Policy, Veterans' Employment and
    Training Services, U.S. Department of Labor.
        Unfortunately, they have called votes and there is about
    seven minutes left on the vote. So at this time, we will break
    and come back. And I apologize for the inconvenience to
    everyone. And we will see you back after votes.
        [Recess.]
        Dr. Wenstrup. Well, again, we welcome Ms. Teresa Gerton,
    Deputy Assistant Secretary for Policy, Veterans' Employment and
    Training Services, U.S. Department of Labor.
        Thank you for being here with us today, Ms. Gerton. Thank
    you for your service to veterans and for your service to our
    country and uniform as well. It is appreciated.
        You are now recognized for five minutes for your opening
    statement.

                     STATEMENT OF TERESA W. GERTON

        Ms. Gerton. well, Good afternoon, Chairman Wenstrup,
    Ranking Member Takano, and distinguished Members of the
    subcommittee.
        Thank you for the opportunity to participate in today's
    hearing. I appreciate the invitation to discuss the
    Department's fiscal year 2016 budget submission supporting our
    programs and initiatives pertaining to veterans' employment.
        VETS is the Federal Government's leader on veteran
    employment. The coordinated actions and collaborative
    relationships between VETS and the 12 other departments in DoL
    create synergy through the integration of all departmental
    resources and expertise on veterans' employment, bringing all
    of DoL's resources to bear for America's veterans and
    servicemembers.
        VETS mission is focused on four key areas, preparing
    veterans for meaningful careers; providing them with employment
    resources and expertise; protecting their employment rights;
    and promoting the employment of veterans and related training
    opportunities to employers across the country.
        VETS prepares veterans for meaningful careers through the
    Transition Assistance Program where DoL teaches a mandatory and
    comprehensive three-day employment workshop at U.S. military
    installations around the world. We provide a vast array of
    services to transitioning servicemembers, veterans, and their
    spouses to help them with job searching, accessing training
    programs to bridge skill gaps, and identifying employment
    opportunities.
        At the center of the department's efforts are two VETS
    administered grant programs: the Jobs for Veterans State Grants
    or JVSG and the Homeless Veterans' Reintegration Program, or
    HVRP.
        HVRP offers competitive grants to nonprofit organizations
    to provide employment and training services to homeless
    veterans so that they can be reintegrated into the labor force.
    There are currently 154 of these grantees across the Nation.
        JVSG funds are provided to fund two staff positions:
    Disabled Veterans' Outreach Program specialists, known as
    DVOPs, and the Local Veterans' Employment Representatives, or
    LVERs. These staff work for state governments at the Nation's
    nearly 2,500 American Job Centers.
        DVOP specialists provide intensive services to eligible
    veterans and spouses to meet their employment needs,
    prioritizing service to special disabled or other disabled
    veterans, and to other eligible veterans in accordance with
    priorities determined by the Secretary. DVOPs must place
    maximum emphasis on assisting veterans who are economically or
    educationally disadvantaged.
        In response to concerns expressed by the Veteran Service
    Organizations regarding constraints in meeting the number of
    veterans eligible for DVOP services, VETS recently modified
    definitions for the duration of unemployment and ex-offenders
    to expand the population eligible for those services.
        LVERs perform a wide variety of duties specifically related
    to outreach to the employer community. They advocate for all
    veterans served by the AJC with local businesses and other
    community-based organizations. We recently released clarifying
    guidance about the role of the LVER in order to address
    concerns raised by our VSO partners.
        VETS protects veterans' employment rights by receiving,
    investigating, and resolving claims arising under the Uniformed
    Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act. We also
    investigate claims of violations of veterans' preference in
    federal hiring.
        In a related effort, VETS collects annual reports on
    veteran employment from federal contractors and partners
    closely with the Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs
    to ensure that federal contractors understand their obligations
    regarding veteran hiring. We then connect these employers with
    employment ready veterans to help them meet their hiring goals.
        VETS Office of Strategic Outreach promotes engagements with
    federal, state, and local governments; private sector employers
    and trade associations; institutes of higher learning,
    nonprofit organizations; and Veteran Service Organizations to
    establish and develop a network that enables service members,
    veterans, and families to successfully integrate into their
    communities.
        VETS continues to work closely with our partners across the
    government to support veteran employment initiatives. We also
    work with industry-wide veteran hiring efforts and have
    participated in numerous job summits in military installations
    around the country.
        Additionally, we have partnered with over 50 major
    companies to help institutionalize their veteran hiring by
    connecting them with local AJCs to bring in job ready veteran
    talent.
        VETS is making a difference. Our veterans are obtaining
    meaningful employment. With the veteran unemployment rate
    continuing to trend lower than the national average and
    significant improvement amongst our youngest veterans, we would
    have strong concerns with any legislation that would interrupt
    our progress or constrain our ability to help veterans,
    transitioning service members, and their families continue to
    achieve positive employment outcomes.
        We look forward to working with the Subcommittee to ensure
    that our transitioning service members, veterans, and families
    have the resources and training they need to successfully
    transition to the civilian workforce.
        Thank you for the opportunity to be part of this hearing. I
    welcome any questions you may have.

        [The prepared statement of Teresa W. Gerton appears in the
    Appendix]

        Dr. Wenstrup. Thank you, Ms. Gerton.
        I am now going to yield myself five minutes for questions.
        And the first concern I have or one of the most common
    concerns that we have heard from VSOs and from Members alike is
    the lack of real solid performance data for DVOPs and LVERs
    that truly show if the services they provide actually lead to a
    veteran receiving a meaningful job.
        And that really is the bottom line of where we want to be,
    and I know you understand that. And I understand that one of
    the issues that prevents DoL from having this data is the
    myriad of state IT and data systems that DoL relies on for that
    information which I understand to be very complicated.
        But can you describe to us some of the challenges you have
    with tracking these types of performances and then, if you
    would, how will or will not the department's fiscal year 2016
    budget request, address these challenges that you face?
        Ms. Gerton. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Data is a very important piece of our agenda. And, of
    course, as we all want to be able to track outcome-related
    metrics for the performance of DVOPs and LVERs, I think we are
    making some progress and especially under the Workforce
    Innovation and Opportunity Act that will drive changes in those
    reporting systems.
        We expect to continue to see improvement, but right now we
    do track three department-wide common measures for outcome. We
    track the entered employment rate, that is do veterans or
    Americans who receive services through the job center secure
    employment within 90 days after their last service in the job
    center. We track the retained employment rate which is do they
    retain employment for the following two quarters after they
    have obtained employment. And then we also track their six-
    month earnings.
        Within those, those are common measures tracked across the
    entire workforce system, we are able to segregate out the
    population of veterans who have received services at an
    American Job Center and further below that the population that
    has received services from a DVOP so that we can differentiate
    between the levels of service.
        We have great performance measures right now. We are
    continuing to see an upward trend in the entered employment
    rate for veterans, for all veterans who are served at the job
    center and then within that, the JVSG rates are even higher.
    For fiscal year 2014, the entered employment rate for veterans
    who received services through the JVSG Program was at 55
    percent and the retained employment rate was at 80 percent. And
    those numbers have continued to trend upward.
        We also just this week released a study commissioned by our
    chief evaluator's office that laid out more specifics in
    detail. They took the first look at the new reporting structure
    and they looked at over 20 million employment records. Two
    million of those were veterans. So we have a very large
    statistical sample.
        Dr. Wenstrup. Let me ask a question. I mean, those are good
    statistics, obviously helpful to follow, and DoL tracks those
    types of statistics.
        But I am not certain that I am hearing that these
    employment numbers are a result of those programs. Like you may
    have said they took part in the program, but did the employment
    that they end up with, is that a result of being in those
    programs?
        Ms. Gerton. I think you are correct in saying that they are
    correlated and it is difficult to track causality, but the
    correlation is very close and very tight. And that is
    especially prominent in the Summit Report which, again, we just
    released. It has over two million veteran records in it, so we
    have a very statistically sound sample there.
        Dr. Wenstrup. From our standpoint here, we want to know if
    the program that we are endorsing is actually having the result
    or is the result coming from somewhere else?
        And so with the budget constraints and no uptick in this
    budget proposal, are we really going to be able to track that?
    Are there any changes that let us know if these programs are
    working? It is nice to see the numbers go up. I agree with you
    there. But what is the cause? And you addressed that to some
    degree. So how can we get that information?
        Ms. Gerton. I think there is another indicator of the level
    of service and the involvement of the DVOPs, particularly in
    supporting veterans as they are getting job ready, and that is
    the level of intensive services. So that measures how much time
    DVOPs are spending with their clients in the JVSG Program.
        A few years ago, that number was down around 20 percent.
    When we implemented the JVSG refocusing effort, we set some
    pretty ambitious goals. By the end of fiscal year 2015, we
    expect to be at 75 percent. We are at 55 percent right now
    across the program.
        We know that as a result of the refocusing, the DVOPs are
    able to spend more time with their clients. They are spending
    more time with their clients. And as that happens and the
    numbers are trending upward, we believe that there is a really
    strong correlation between those two factors.
        Dr. Wenstrup. Thank you.
        I now recognize the ranking member, Mr. Takano, for
    questions he may have.
        Mr. Takano. Great. I have a number of 53 percent of
    veterans who are experiencing a period of unemployment are
    adequately being trained during the DoL workshop, employment
    workshop.
        Ms. Gerton. I am sorry, sir. Is your question whether or
    not the training is adequate to prevent unemployment?
        Mr. Takano. No. The 53 percent of veterans that we know are
    experiencing--that is the number of I have--who are
    experiencing a period of unemployment are adequately being
    trained during the Department of Labor employment workshop.
        Ms. Gerton. I do believe that the training that is within
    the Employment Workshop does address the skills that those
    transitioning servicemembers need to begin to be introduced to
    the job search program.
        I think there is an important part in that the way we track
    those is not only do we teach that in the Employment Workshop,
    but now as a result of the military life cycle, we touch those
    servicemembers again at their capstone counseling just before
    they are transitioning. So we now have another point at which
    we can enforce the preparation and make sure that they are
    adequately prepared.
        And in partnership with DoD, we have a memorandum of
    understanding that allows us to execute what we call a warm
    handover so that if individuals at that point are determined
    not to be career ready by their chain of command, they are
    handed directly over to an American Job Center for additional
    support prior to that transition.
        We have also taken aggressive action over the last year to
    help servicemembers understand their eligibility under the
    dislocated worker provisions. And Congress has helped us by
    allowing us to provide DVOP services to transitioning
    servicemembers who may be determined to be at risk of securing
    civilian service.
        So that 53 percent number which was recently in the VA's
    economic opportunity report is true. But since those samples
    were taken, we have implemented a number of programs to help
    remediate those. We look forward to seeing the numbers in the
    next go round.
        Mr. Takano. Well, are there redundancies between the work
    done at DoL, DoL VETS and the VA Office of Economic
    Opportunity?
        Ms. Gerton. So we partner very closely with the Office of
    Economic Opportunity. They administer two very important
    benefits that help veterans and servicemembers in that
    transition, the GI Bill and the Vocational Rehabilitation and
    Employment Program.
        We partner with them to make sure that transitioning
    servicemembers and veterans are adequately apprised of those
    and know how to leverage those benefits.
        In the Vocational Rehabilitation Program, in fact, we are
    just at the point of signing an updated memorandum between the
    two organizations that addresses data sharing that clarifies
    responsibilities so that the Department of Labor has the
    employment responsibility piece and provides labor market
    information to the VA so that they can provide clear guidance
    to their clients about what job opportunities might be
    appropriate for them in job growth areas or local labor market
    information.
        So that partnership is very tight. It is tight on the pre-
    transition side. It is tight on the post-transition side and
    along the way for veterans. And it is absolutely critical to
    delivering the best possible support that we can for veterans.
        Mr. Takano. But I know that you have a tight relationship,
    but are there redundancies?
        Ms. Gerton. We are working hard to make sure that there
    aren't. I think it is important to differentiate the counseling
    responsibility and the administration of benefits of the VA
    side from the actual job training and employment services
    provided on the Department of Labor side.
        Mr. Takano. Okay. So there are redundancies from what I am
    hearing?
        Ms. Gerton. There could be if we are not careful, but we
    try to be again very clear and transparent in those
    relationships.
        Mr. Takano. Well, let's go back to TAPs since we have some
    experience with it. If we were to start all over and build a
    new transition and veteran employment program, transition and
    veteran program which goes beyond TAPs that would be funded at
    the current $233 million, how would it differ from the program
    we have today if you were to try and rebuild it?
        Ms. Gerton. There is a challenge with the TAP Program in
    all of the things we would like to be able to teach
    servicemembers while they are going through that and the amount
    of time that they can spend away from their unit to
    participate. The balance of that right now sits at a five-day,
    eight-hour-a-day class. Within that, you are constrained in
    terms of the amount of material that you can provide.
        I think we are in partnership with DoD and VA trying to
    maximize not only what we teach in that class, but then to
    offer alternative classes, additional modules. For example, the
    career and technical training track or the entrepreneurial
    track that servicemembers may take in addition to the core
    curriculum.
        And the other piece of that is we do an annual curriculum
    review to make sure that what we are teaching reflects current
    state of the art, that we are capturing as many of the
    resources as possible, and that we can make the resources
    available for review as servicemembers proceed through and into
    their veteran status. They may need to go back and reference
    that material, so it is important to make sure that it is
    always online as well.
        Mr. Takano. Well, thank you.
        My time is up, Mr. Chairman.
        Dr. Wenstrup. Mr. Costello, you are recognized for five
    minutes.
        Mr. Costello. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Ms. Gerton, thank you for your testimony.
        I want to focus on the Transition Assistance Program. Two-
    part question or two elements of that program that I would ask
    that you share some of your observations on.
        First, the $100,000 in the budget that is intended to
    develop a mobile application, is that intended to supplant the
    classroom or is that intended to be a supplement to the
    classroom?
        And I ask that question because one of the issues raised
    about TAP is that at the end of the program, there is
    oftentimes, at least the thought that the returning
    servicemember might actually want to refer back. And so it is
    oriented around whether that mobile app may actually be the
    conduit through which TAP can live on after the classroom.
        So if you would offer even beyond that any content that you
    might be thinking of putting in that mobile app in order to
    accomplish that objective.
        The second part of the question or the second question is
    Military Compensation and Retirement Modernization Commission,
    that is a mouthful, specifically recommended having DVOPs and
    LVERs more involved with TAP. What are your views on those
    recommendations?
        Ms. Gerton. Thank you, sir.
        Let me take the first one, the $100,000 for the mobile TAP
    app. Our vision for that is that it would be in addition to the
    classroom curriculum, that it would be a way for servicemembers
    to continue to refer to it either while they are in class or
    after.
        One of the opportunities that we are hoping to take
    advantage of is making it modular so that each part of the
    curriculum is accessible on its own so that individuals who
    come back later and maybe just want to review the resume
    writing piece, for example, can just look at the resume writing
    piece without having to scroll through the entire curriculum
    deck that is currently available online.
        We hope to make it much more accessible not only to
    transitioning servicemembers while they are going through the
    class but to veterans at any point after their separation. And
    as we do right now with the online curriculum, we make it
    available to anyone, not just servicemembers and veterans and
    families, but anyone who can access the material online.
        We would envision this being a global application. The
    content would be whatever is in the curriculum at the time we
    develop it and then we would continue to modernize it as we
    change curriculum. Does that answer your question, sir?
        Mr. Costello. Yes.
        Ms. Gerton. All right. So let me take the second question,
    the proposal about allowing DVOPs and LVERs to work more
    closely with the on-base Transition Assistance Programs.
        In September of last year, in fact, DoL VETS published a
    veterans' program letter out to our workforce and to the
    employment and training workforce actually encouraging that
    engagement. There is a limit to what we can direct those state
    employees to do.
        But we did especially encourage them to be responsive to
    the on-base TAP administrator so that when there were capstone
    programs, for example, that they could be invited to too
    attend, if at all possible, to be active with the transition
    assistance centers there on the base and to build that working
    relationship. So we have already published that guidance and
    that was after our initial interviews with the folks on the
    commission.
        Mr. Costello. So just to clarify your second answer, you've
    made that recommendation; however, there's nothing that you can
    do to compel, for lack of a better term, the DVOPs or LVERs
    becoming more involved. It's on a state by state basis; is that
    what you are saying?
        Ms. Gerton. It is dependent upon the work loads and the
    work forces at the individual centers. But in most cases those
    folks who are in American Job Centers who are proximate to
    military installations already have a great relationship and
    there's certainly nothing that prohibits them from being more
    involved. We published that guidance specifically to encourage
    them to be more involved in the Capstone opportunities.
        Mr. Costello. Thank you.
        Dr. Wenstrup. Mr. McNerney, you are recognized for five
    minutes.
        Mr. McNerney. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And I'm thrilled to
    be back on the veterans committee and your sub-committee.
        Dr. Wenstrup. Welcome back.
        Mr. McNerney. Ms. Gerton, thank you for your work and I
    want to compliment you on your presentation a few minutes ago.
    My first question has to do with federal contractors, they are
    required to make reports on their hiring practices on
    compliance. What's the enforcement mechanism and how do they
    cooperate? Is the information you get from them accurate?
        Ms. Gerton. Sir, we partner very closely with the Office of
    Federal Contractor Compliance programs, that executes the
    reporting mechanism, and then the Office of Federal Contractor
    Compliance monitors compliance with that. If you will give me a
    moment, I think I have statistics on that. But it's through the
    VETS 100 report which we are modifying in fiscal year 2015 to
    be the VETS 4212, and we are clarifying a lot of the reporting.
        In the old version the characteristics of covered veterans
    were overlapping, so it's very difficult to tell exactly how
    many veterans had been hired. The new version that goes into
    effect this year will be much clearer and will allow for much
    greater and more accurate compliance on the part of OFCCP.
        So those numbers were 14,000 federal contractors submitted
    veteran hiring filings in fiscal year 2014 and they
    demonstrated over half a million veterans employed by those
    federal contractors, including over a hundred thousand disabled
    veterans.
        Mr. McNerney. So you feel that that is an effective
    program?
        Ms. Gerton. We do. And one of the things that we have
    expanded on with the Office of Federal Contractor Compliance is
    outreach to those federal contractors so that when they are
    having difficulty meeting the floors that are now set in the
    new federal rules that we can help introduce them to the job
    center network so that they can help expand their affirmative
    action plans with regard to veteran hiring. And we think that's
    going to have a very positive effect.
        Mr. McNerney. And one of the things that kind of struck me
    about your presentation is it seemed to me you were saying that
    your programs are effective and you don't want legislation to
    be written that will mess those up. Did I hear that? Am I
    interpreting that correctly?
        Ms. Gerton. So we absolutely believe that VETS is an
    integral part of the Department of Labor. And that to
    understand the veteran programs, you have to take a whole of
    department approach to it and understand the relationship of
    the programs in the Employment and Training Agency, for
    example, Office of Federal Contract Compliance and others to
    get a whole grasp of all of the things that DoL is doing on
    behalf of veterans employment.
        Mr. McNerney. That sounded a little weird to me and I think
    the Secretary said something like that yesterday, well, he
    really didn't need our help, he will let us know when he did.
    And that kind of makes me nervous, so I would like you to keep
    that in mind.
        Ms. Gerton. Sure.
        Mr. Regner. Do you have statistics on veterans' job
    retention?
        Ms. Gerton. The most recent statistics for fiscal year 2014
    tell us that 80 percent of the veterans who received service
    through an American Job Center retained their employment for at
    least six months after gaining it. We do only have statistics
    on the veterans who receive services through the American Job
    Center network.
        Mr. McNerney. Well, do you have any quantitative
    information on what might be the biggest barriers that veterans
    that are seeking employment, what are their biggest barriers?
        Ms. Gerton. It is difficult to have quantitative
    information, but I can tell you based on the feedback that we
    have from the DVOPs and folks out in the field, there are
    really two areas where our transitioning service members are
    challenged, and perhaps also longer term separated veterans.
        The first is really an understanding of the civilian job
    search process. As the Chairman said in his opening statement,
    these are folks who have never really had that experience
    before, and so the transition process is especially important
    in preparing them to navigate that sort of uncertain world for
    them.
        And a recognition on their part that the job search process
    can take months, not just days or weeks. We think it is
    especially important in the transition process as DoD
    implements the military life cycle and that concept of
    transition becomes an ongoing one, to keep them engaged in
    that. But also then to help them post transition with one-on-
    one assistance through the American Job Center. That can very
    much ease the transition process. But I think that's the first
    piece.
        The second piece is actually working with the veteran to
    help understand the technical skills gap that they may have
    coming out of the military, and looking to target specific
    training solutions, so that, especially in the short-run, we
    can find short-term training that magnifies and amplifies their
    military skills training and delivers to them the civilian
    credentials that businesses are looking for.
        Sometimes that is a full four-year degree and we certainly
    encourage the maximum opportunity for folks to take advantage
    of the G.I. Bill. But for many, that middle skills space may be
    the more important short-term solution. Learning how to
    leverage the entire workforce system to deliver the right
    training to the right person to get them the credentials that
    that employer is looking for is really a powerful tool. We are
    trying to maximize the department's investment in job-driven
    training to help support that objective.
        Mr. McNerney. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Dr. Wenstrup. Ms. Radewagen, you are recognized for five
    minutes.
        Ms. Radewagen. Welcome back, Ms. Gerton.
        Ms. Gerton. Thank you.
        Ms. Radewagen. It's good to see you. I have a couple of
    questions for you. Do you have a VA rep from the Department of
    Labor in American Samoa working employment issues for our
    veterans?
        Ms. Gerton. Ma'am, we do not have a JVSG grant funded
    individual in American Samoa.
        Ms. Radewagen. Why not?
        Ms. Gerton. Well, in fact, we were just looking at that
    before we came over to the hearing. It is certainly something
    we would welcome the opportunity to discuss with your office.
        Ms. Radewagen. Thank you. Secondly, are American Samoan
    veterans eligible for re-employment rights under USERRA? Every
    state and territory except for American Samoa has an ESGR rep.
    Why doesn't American Samoa have one?
        Ms. Gerton. Ma'am, I don't know the answer to that question
    and I will have to take it for the record.
        Ms. Radewagen. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Dr. Wenstrup. Well, thank you. If there are no other
    questions, I want to thank you, Ms. Gerton. You are now
    excused, and I appreciate your being here today to answer our
    questions.
        Mr. Gerton. Thank you, sir, it has been my pleasure.
        Dr. Wenstrup. I now invite our second and final panel to
    the witness table. Joining us is Mr. Davy Leghorn, Assistant
    Director of the Veterans Employment and Education Division for
    the American Legion. Mr. Rick Weidman.
        Dr. Wenstrup. Executive Director of Government Affairs for
    the Vietnam Veterans of America. And Mr. Paul Varela, Assistant
    Legislative Director for Disabled American Veterans. I thank
    you for being with us today, and for all of your service in
    uniform, and your continued service to our nation's veterans.
        Mr. Leghorn, let us begin with you. You are now recognized
    for five minutes.

                      STATEMENT OF DAVY G. LEGHORN

        Mr. Leghorn. Chairman Wenstrup, Ranking Member Takano, and
    distinguished members of the sub-committee, on behalf of our
    National Commander Michael Helm and the 2.4 million members of
    the American Legion, we thank you for this opportunity to
    testify on the President's budget request for DoL-VETS, and on
    the recommendations offered by the Military Compensation and
    Retirement Modernization Commission regarding DoL programs.
        Among the 15 recommendations offered in the Commission
    report was a recommendation to better prepare service members
    for transition to civilian life by expanding education and
    granting states more flexibility to administer the Jobs for
    Veterans State Grants program.
        The American Legion believes that these recommendations are
    common sense ideas that would ensure that service members are
    able to transition smoothly and successfully into civilian
    careers, and that veterans are adequately cared for should they
    require employment assistance.
        We would, however, recommend that Congress consider adding
    the Department of Education and the Small Business
    Administration to those who review the TAP curriculum, given
    that they contribute important content to the curriculum and
    they maintain expertise in those areas covered by that content.
        Furthermore, while the American Legion agrees with the
    recommendation that Congress amends relevant statutes to permit
    state Departments of Labor to work directly with state
    Veterans' Affairs, we would add that these departments should
    work together to ensure that operations of the one-stop centers
    exceed the federally mandated priority of service for eligible
    veterans.
        We find that the model employed by Texas, consolidating
    veterans' employment services within a state's veterans
    commission is effective in addressing the needs of veterans.
    Texas currently sees the lowest unemployment rate for veterans
    of any state in the Union, and as such we would encourage
    Congress to examine that model and to consider touting it as an
    example to other states that are looking to effectively serve
    their veterans population.
        Bluntly stated, we were disappointed when we examined the
    budget request offered by the Administration on behalf of DoL-
    VETS. We were even more disappointed when we compared their
    requests with the requests on behalf of VA. The latter
    represented a nearly eight percent increase on a previous year,
    while the former represented a marginal increase over the
    previous years, with JVSG and the Homeless Veterans
    Reintegration Program receiving almost no increase in funding.
        Additionally, VA has stepped up their presence in the
    employment arena and invested in increasing the number of
    veterans employment specialists and creating the Veterans
    Employment Center, a single point of entry which offers online
    tools such as a skills translator, a resume builder, and a
    searchful veterans job bank.
        Looking at the Small Business Administration. Their office
    for veterans business development's budget has increased over
    400 percent and their entrepreneurial services to veterans have
    more than doubled since fiscal year 2013.
        At a time when seemingly every agency with veterans
    programs is increasing their capacity to provide services to
    more veterans and transitioning service members, VETS budgets
    requests have nearly flatlined even as other portions of
    Labor's budget requests have increased. This indicates to us
    that VETS is either unwilling or unable to fight to secure
    their requisite funding to meet the high volume of demand for
    Veterans Employment Services, or to meet the Administration's
    goal of effectively ending homelessness by the end of 2015.
        The American Legion has long supported DoL-VETS because we
    believe that when it comes to employment, no one has more
    expertise and experience. For our efforts, we have been
    rewarded with ongoing program management problems, a lack of
    accountability in oversight, an agency too truculent to make
    sensible policy changes, and a veterans office within the
    agency that fails to view veteran service organizations as
    partners for all working in tandem toward similar goals.
        It has become transparent that DoL is either unable or
    unwilling to give the requisite attention to veterans'
    employment issues that the American Legion knows our veterans
    deserve.
        In short, the American Legion believes that the best way to
    improve DoL-VETS is to transfer the JVSG and HVRP program to
    VA. While we continue to believe that there is a place for VETS
    within the Department of Labor to handle the ancillary
    functions with that office, we know that veterans will be
    better served if these two programs were administered by the
    Department of Veteran Affairs.
        The American Legion understands that our proposal is
    neither an easy task nor is it amendable to all the
    stakeholders, but we know that this is the right thing to do
    and the right time to do it because, frankly, our veterans
    deserve better.
        The American Legion is ready to work with DoL, VA, and
    especially this sub-committee to ensure that interagency
    transition of the JVSG and HVRP programs occur as seamlessly as
    possible. Thank you, and I look forward to any questions you
    may have.
        Dr. Wenstrup. Thank you, Mr. Leghorn. Mr. Weidman, you are
    now recognized for five minutes.

        [The prepared statement of Davy G. Leghorn appears in the
    Appendix]

                       STATEMENT OF RICK WEIDMAN

        Mr. Weidman. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of this
    committee, for allowing us to participate in this hearing
    today.
        For over 30 years VVA has believed in a wellness model
    which is that all, and I mean all, services offered by the VA
    and by other entities should be directed to the flashpoint of
    assisting veterans to get to the point where they can obtain
    and sustain meaningful employment at a living wage.
        And that is really the heart of the readjustment process,
    particularly for those more recently separating veterans, but
    also for veterans who, at a later point in their life, have
    been hit with neuropsychiatric wounds coming to the fore, et
    cetera, and it (indiscernible) serious problems.
        VETS centers can help, but they can't help, and you are
    asking people to go through what happened to you on the field
    of combat, to get all dressed up, all cleaned up, dried out,
    drug free, in order to do what? To stand on the corner and not
    be unemployed again? That's not going to work and it's going to
    focus into a recycle or a churning, if you will, of our intent.
        In regard to the $175 million, I was interested, and I
    apologize to you, I was told that I would be out in time to, at
    the clay hut signing, to be here by 2:00, Mr. Chairman, and
    that turned out not to be the case. A lot of people fight to
    get in the White House; I was in a position where I couldn't
    get out. So I apologize.
        But the point is, is that all the readjustment counseling
    and the millions we spend, billions, on VHA to help people get
    up-to-speed, if we can't help them get a job and keep that job,
    then it all is for naught. Directly affects, and I'm sure you
    know, Doctor, from your own practice, that people who are
    unemployed don't go to the podiatrist when they should, they
    don't go to the dentist when they should, they don't do all
    kinds of things when they should, and they don't eat right
    because they don't have money.
        So the best readjustment program that we can have ever is
    meaningful work at a living wage. It's as simple as that. And
    that's true for disabled vets of any generation, for veterans
    who are at risk who have run into difficulties later in their
    life, often related back to their military service, and it
    certainly is true for the young people coming home today.
        A hundred and seventy-five million is probably not enough
    for the DVOP, LVER, or the State Grants as they now call them.
    I did notice, and maybe it was in the verbal testimony, but in
    the statement it didn't say how many DVOPs and LVERs they get
    for $175 million, and it didn't say anything at all in there.
        The other thing is I would like to bring your attention to
    the fact that there are no good measures for how effective they
    are on enforcement of USERRA. The problem there is it often
    takes too long, and justice delayed is justice denied when it
    comes to getting your job back. The same is true of the other
    enforcement functions that Labor has. There's no real
    monitoring on all of that.
        The HVRP program, or Homeless Veterans Reintegration
    Program, is the most cost-efficient, cost-effective program
    operated by the Department of Labor. And they actually do
    placements as opposed to what the rest of them do, which is go
    look at UI tax reports the quarter later, and you may or may
    not have gotten a job because something somebody did at a DoL
    facility or a DVOP or LVER did, but there's no way of putting
    that together because they don't measure placements.
        If you look on Page 5 of my testimony about the vision and
    mission statement of VETS, this is straight from their Web
    site, sir, ``Meaningful and successful careers for all vets.
    VETS proudly serve veterans and service members. We provide
    resources and expertise to assist and prepare them to obtain
    meaningful careers, maximize their employment opportunities,
    and protect their employment rights.''
        Nowhere in that does it say we exist to help get vet jobs.
    It's as simple as that. And that is the task at hand. The proof
    is in the pudding. The proof is in the action. And it used to
    be, once upon a time, placements over there at the Department
    of Labor and the state workforce development agencies, but they
    have gotten out of that business a long time ago.
        Just to reinforce Mr. Leghorn and the Legion, it is past
    time to move this function out of the Department of Labor where
    we are always in the position of tugging at somebody's sleeve,
    and usually being ignored. And it is an anti-veteran atmosphere
    that is driven by the Employment and Training Administration,
    ETA. It's been that way all of my adult life, since I first
    started to try and help other vets with employment problems in
    the early `70s, and it continues to be that way today.
        The cast of characters, the persons change, but the
    corporate culture continues on. We need a fourth division of VA
    and I encourage the committee to do that before this Congress
    is up. I thank you very much, distinguished Members of the
    committee, and for the opportunity, and look forward to working
    with you on solving some of these problems. Thank you.
        Dr. Wenstrup. Thank you, Mr. Weidman. Mr. Varela, you are
    now recognized for five minutes.

        [The prepared statement of Rick Weidman appears in the
    Appendix]

                      STATEMENT OF PAUL R. VARELA

        Mr. Varela. Chairman Wenstrup, Ranking Member Takano, and
    members of the sub-committee, good afternoon. On behalf of
    Disabled American Veterans and our 1.2 million members, all of
    whom were wounded, injured, or made ill in wartime military
    service, I am pleased to testify today on issues related to the
    release of the President's fiscal year 2016 budget request for
    DoL's--VETS program.
        The Administration requests $271 million in funding to
    operate the VETS program for fiscal year 2016, an increase of
    roughly $1 million over that requested for fiscal year 2015. A
    hundred and seventy-five million dollars is requested to
    support the JVSG program which funds DVOP and LVER activities.
    A hundred and seventy-five million dollars was also requested
    for fiscal year 2015.
        Veterans who are seriously wounded, injured, or made ill as
    a consequence of military service face daunting challenges and
    sometimes outright barriers to obtaining and maintaining
    substantial and gainful occupations and trades. Adequate,
    reliable, and effective support and services must be provided
    to ensure their economic prosperity.
        DAV understands the vital role employment plays for all
    veterans, and especially for our wartime disabled veterans.
    Realizing the challenges they continue to face in the
    employment marketplace, we established the new national
    employment department in 2014. One key element of this mission
    is a partnership DAV formed with RecruitMilitary, a full-
    service military-to-civilian recruiting firm providing free
    online and offline products to connect employers, franchisers,
    and educational institutions with veterans and their spouses.
        Chairman Wenstrup, and members of this sub-committee, in
    order to achieve better outcomes for veterans, VA programs
    designed to promote veterans' financial security such as those
    focused on employment, training, vocational rehabilitation, and
    education should be consolidated into a fourth new
    administration within the VA equivalent to VA's Health
    Administration, Benefits Administration, and National Cemetery
    Administration.
        Headed by a new Undersecretary, facilitation of these
    federal programs dealing with economic opportunity assistance
    for veterans, their dependents, and survivors would fall within
    this administration's purview. We envision the new VA
    administration consolidating existing programs and offices in
    VA with responsibility for veterans vocational rehabilitation,
    employment, training, transition, and economic empowerment as
    well as the transfer of the VETS program in its entirety along
    with all its resources and personnel from DoL to VA.
        Within DoL's VETS program, DVOPs provide intensive services
    to targeted veterans, primarily to the service disabled, and
    LVERs conduct local employer outreach to assist veterans in
    gaining employment. Within VA, vocational rehabilitation
    specialists, VRSs, provide veteran services that are almost
    identical to those provided with their DVOP and LVER
    counterparts. But VRS services are provided only within the VA
    setting.
        VRSs identify and provide suitable training and placement
    services for individual veterans being served by the program.
    To guide and monitor individual progress and then provide
    follow-on support throughout the training and job adjustment
    periods.
        The VRSs provides personalized services that involve
    ascertaining the training requirements to meet individual
    objectives, and also provide placement services that involve
    identifying suitable employment opportunities or maintaining
    day to day contact with employers, and keeping alert for job
    and small business opportunities.
        DVOPs, LVERs, and VRSs display many commonalities. However,
    VRSs primarily provide assistance to veterans with compensable
    service connected conditions. The VRS is empowered to authorize
    VA payments for expenses associated with a service disabled
    veteran's participation in courses of education and employment
    training.
        Given the nature of their shared responsibilities,
    collaborations should be occurring among DVOPs, LVERs, and VRSs
    but generally they operate in separate spheres. Because VA and
    VETS are actively engaged in providing similar services which
    can appear to be overlapping or even competing at times,
    veterans often must negotiate between two federal entities to
    obtain individualized services, a situation that can become
    cumbersome and confusing for the individual veteran, and
    thereby discourage participation.
        Finally, we believe that a new VA administration
    responsible for managing these programs is logical, responsible
    through a legislative mandate. Plus, important to DAV,
    consolidation offers the potential to streamline and enhance
    the prospects in training possibilities for wounded, injured,
    and ill veterans for them to overcome employment obstacles and
    provide meeting opportunities in their post-service lives.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and members of this sub-committee.
    DAV welcomes the opportunity to work together to see this
    justified reform enacted into law. This concludes my testimony,
    and I am prepared to answer any questions the sub-committee may
    have.

        [The prepared statement of Paul R. Varela appears in the
    Appendix]

        Dr. Wenstrup. Thank you, Mr. Varela, and I thank you all
    for your testimony today. And I just have to say in response to
    one of the things that Mr. Weidman brought up. I would agree
    that the best social reform or opportunity for an independent
    life that anyone has is a job. That is the best way out. And
    very often, people, either veterans or non-veterans, they make
    their budget and adapt it by giving up healthcare, and that is
    a problem as well. And I recognize that and appreciate your
    comments.
        With that I am going to yield myself five minutes for
    questions. And my question is, can you comment on your opinion
    or how you perceive the level of funding for fiscal year 2016
    for the VETS program, and what this might say about the
    priority of that program within DoL?
        Mr. Weidman. We are at the bottom of the totem pole, if we
    are on the pole at all. And in terms of priorities, the only
    time we are a priority is when they hold ceremonies and to
    salute the all American veterans that they hold in various
    venues and in Frances Perkins buildings are empty exercises.
    They are by invitation only. No homeless veterans or unemployed
    veterans get an invitation.
        And the rhetoric rings hollow, as hollow and echoes in the
    great hall of the Perkins building, at least to us. And, to me,
    I frankly, I don't mean anybody ill or disrespect, but I flat
    quit going because it was ashes in one's mouth to hear them
    saying things that I knew they weren't trying to achieve.
        And that's what we need. We need an agency that pays
    attention and takes your role and Mr. Takano's role, and all of
    distinguished members of this committee serious as a heartbeat
    when it comes to whether or not they are doing the right thing
    by veterans in the field.
        So I will just say that because of a lack of
    accountability, we can't recommend an increase in any part of
    that budget, with the exception of HVRP which should be at the
    fully authorized level of 56 million as opposed to 37. I mean I
    never understood what part of this people don't get? Jobs for
    veterans who are homeless to get off the tax dole and onto the
    tax rolls. I mean it makes no sense to me. So that is where we
    ought to be putting our money where we are getting the bang for
    the tax payer dollar, sir.
        Mr. Leghorn. So with regards to the budget, it clearly
    shows that Labor's priority is in funding other programs and
    not JVSG or HVRP. We understand that the Secretary is
    responsible for employment for everyone and not just for
    veterans, so we understand to a certain degree why that isn't
    given the time of day where they are within Labor.
        And one thing we would like to note is that if DLS is
    correct and unemployment is relatively low now compared to
    where it was before, what we don't understand is what would
    account for the massive increases in budget requests for other
    non-veterans' employment programs.
        You know, 70 percent of our transitioning service members
    claim some sort of service connected disabilities, and even if
    under a current model where DVOPs are only seen, 20 percent of
    the veterans population that are disabled or have various new
    employment with the anticipated draw down, that 20 percent is
    about to grow and the current budget request is not getting our
    DVOPs ready for that.
        Dr. Wenstrup. Mr. Varela.
        Mr. Varela. Thank you, Chairman. My colleague to my right
    here put on a very good point. We have about 250,000 service
    members that are leaving active military service every year,
    and I think around 2017 or 2020 we are excepting to see about a
    million of them to have separated between 2013 and that time
    frame.
        So how many of them are going to require employment
    services? And we feel there is going to be a great number of
    them that require employment services. And looking at their
    budget, we don't feel that that displays a sense of urgency, we
    don't feel it is adequate.
        Dr. Wenstrup. Well, I thank you all. And now recognize
    Ranking Member Mr. Takano for any questions he may have.
        Mr. Takano. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. This is a very
    informative hearing, I really appreciate that we are doing it.
    Mr. Weidman, you mentioned that there is no placement, can you
    elaborate on that some more?
        Mr. Weidman. Concerning as to what, sir?
        Mr. Takano. You were referring to a lack of job placement.
    Did I hear you correctly in your testimony?
        Mr. Weidman. You did. And if you look carefully, they don't
    actually measure placements anymore and they haven't for a long
    time. If you press them hard at Employment and Training
    Administration or at the state workforce development agencies
    what business they are in, they will tell you they are in the
    information-sharing business. That is not what our vets need.
    They need one-on-one counseling, particularly the priorities
    that we should be focusing on.
        This is true for 40 years that folks have been trying to do
    this on the cheap, particularly for combat veterans returning
    or veterans with multiple problems, and you can't do it on the
    cheap. Trying to serve--we serve hundreds and thousands or
    hundreds of thousands of people. All those stats they put out
    are post hoc ergo propter hoc numbers. What I mean by that,
    they are saying, they look at the UI tax rolls and if you go
    into a career center in your district and you enroll, they call
    that counseling. And if you then show up three months later
    after they have done nothing else on the UI tax rolls as being
    employed, they take a positive termination and they said, well,
    they have a job because of us. Well, no, you don't, you know.
        And we need to focus particularly on the veterans with
    problems and that is why the veterans staff is there. And they
    are not allowed to do their job and that is why we need to move
    much better control over to VA. Many of them will stay with the
    state workforce development agencies if the state workforce
    development agencies will finally let them do their job, but if
    not, then they should contract with whoever in the community.
    And it is just as simple as that. The job is not getting done
    and the bottom line for us is does it work in California and
    does it work in Ohio and does it work wherever people are
    delivering this service, and it is not happening. And that is
    not a rap on the DVOPs and LVERs. Some of the finest people I
    have ever met are DVOPs and LVERs who work their tail off and
    do great things for vets no matter how much they are punished
    for doing the right thing, and that is what we have to get away
    from.
        Mr. Takano. Are you familiar with a program in California
    out of the National Guard called Work for--it is called Work
    for Warriors, right? Work for Warriors that does direct
    placement. It has now been expanded to include our veterans
    population. If you are not, I mean, I just wanted to be--I am
    interested in--you caught my ear, because I know that this
    program does direct placement for the Guard and it has been
    very successful for about $500 per placement, which is fairly
    inexpensive compared to the other programs that are out there.
    But you also--so you can answer. Have you heard of it at all
    or----
        Mr. Weidman. I'm sorry?
        Mr. Takano. Have you heard of the program Work for Warriors
    in California?
        Mr. Weidman. Actually, I have. I haven't worked as much
    recently with--but when I was in New York, which was at that
    time the second largest program, DVOP/LVER program in the
    country, I had a lot of contact with EDD in California and with
    my counterpart in California. And we did a lot of things
    together, including putting together outreach programs that
    went to blinded veterans and worked in terms of getting people
    substantive jobs, they were placements. But it is intensive,
    you know, you can't do it on the cheap and expect it to work.
        I will check out the program that you are talking about,
    sir.
        Mr. Takano. Okay.
        Mr. Weidman. And I will be happy to talk----
        Mr. Takano. I appreciate your feedback to us.
        Mr. Leghorn, you mentioned that you would like to see in
    the TAPs some work with the Education Department. Can you
    elaborate on what you mean by that?
        Mr. Leghorn. As you know, it is an educational track within
    TAP GPS and the American Legion has always felt that the
    Department of Education needed to take a larger role in coming
    up with that curriculum, so that is what we were referring to.
        Mr. Takano. And why? What do you find that is missing that
    you are asking for that to happen?
        Mr. Leghorn. Mr. Takano, can I take this question for the
    record? I am actually not the person that works the education--
    --
        Mr. Takano. Sure. I am curious, because I want to know what
    is missing. That is fine.
        Mr. Leghorn. Absolutely, I will provide those answers for
    you.
        Mr. Takano. That is fine, that is fine.
        Dr. Wenstrup. my time is up.
        The Chairman. Mrs. Radewagen, you're recognized for five
    minutes.
        Mrs. Radewagen. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And I want to
    thank the panel.
        Mr. Varela, I want to applaud DAV for taking initiative to
    partner with RecruitMilitary to help transitioning service
    members find employment. Have you coordinated your efforts with
    DVOPs and LVERs? And if you have, do you find their services to
    be helpful or harmful to your efforts?
        Also, how do you market this new service to service
    members?
        Mr. Varela. Congresswoman, the feedback that we get from
    the field relative to DVOP and LVER activities is they don't
    work well with us. And what I mean us, DAV and potentially
    maybe some other VSOs as well. Again, they are kind of
    isolated.
        We do recognize an outstanding DVOP and LVER within the
    community. It is part of DAV's annual award program, but those
    are the two that rise to the top and are really engaged with us
    trying to help veterans find employment. But oftentimes there
    is a big disconnect, so the relationships aren't that stable,
    aren't that effective.
        And the second question you had about RecruitMilitary that
    relationship and how we market it and how we----
        Mrs. Radewagen. Yes.
        Mr. Varela. Okay. So basically what we will do is we use
    our media online services to pump out information. We will send
    out notices within the communities. That is the extent of my
    knowledge, that is how deep I go with it. I can certainly get
    you more information on the full extent of our outreach within
    communities.
        Mrs. Radewagen. Thank you, Mr. Varela.
        Mr. Varela. Yes, ma'am.
        Mrs. Radewagen. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Dr. Wenstrup. Mr. McNerney, you are recognized for five
    minutes.
        Mr. McNerney. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Some interesting
    testimony. Thank you.
        My first question. Mr. Weidman, you were pretty clear about
    your feeling that the employment services should be run out of
    the VA instead of the Department of Labor. Mr. Leghorn, do you
    concur with that assessment?
        Mr. Leghorn. So currently the American Legion believes that
    there is still a place for vets within the Department of Labor.
    However, the two programs, HVRP and JVSG, must move. And then
    the reason why we believe that there should still be a veterans
    office within Labor is that during the transition there still
    needs to be a go-between and having an entity there would
    provide that go-between.
        Mr. McNerney. Mr. Varela?
        Mr. Varela. Congressman, I was taking down some notes from
    the Congresswoman. If you wouldn't mind repeating the question?
        Mr. McNerney. Sure. Mr. Weidman was pretty clear about his
    belief that the employment services ought to be run out of the
    VA instead of the Department of Labor, I was wondering if you
    concurred with that.
        Mr. Varela. We do concur with that.
        Mr. McNerney. Thank you.
        Mr. Leghorn, I was going to follow up on one of your
    comments. How effective do you feel that Web sites can be in
    helping vets find meaningful employment with living wage?
        Mr. Leghorn. Congressman, did you say the VEC?
        Mr. McNerney. No, no. How effective do you think Web sites
    can be in helping veterans find meaningful employment?
        Mr. Leghorn. Web sites help some people, and at other times
    it doesn't. As we have seen in a particular state where a large
    swath of its population is in rural areas, the folks that the
    DVOPs and LVERs need to help most don't have Internet
    connectivity. And so in that instance, it doesn't work. And we
    also know that the Internet doesn't exactly help people, it
    doesn't triage people for priority of service adequately. You
    really need another veteran or a DVOP to do it. Just a veteran
    job seeker punching in some information sometimes, a lot of
    times, are precluded from DVOP services from the get-go when
    they are registering on a jobs link Web site.
        Mr. McNerney. So is the availability of personal services,
    is that sort of a barrier then which forces people to go to a
    Web site or try to go to a Web site?
        Mr. Leghorn. Can you repeat that question, sir?
        Mr. McNerney. Well, we are talking about whether Web sites
    can be effective or not, but what would make a veteran go to a
    Web site as opposed to going to seek personal service from the
    Department of Labor?
        Mr. Leghorn. Well, when you are talking about services,
    most veterans I know would go out and seek face-time type
    services. But in terms of job search, the vast majority of
    veterans I know do that online.
        Mr. McNerney. Well, I think--go ahead.
        Mr. Weidman. I was just going to make the comment, sir,
    there is no single silver bullet. It is not one way, it is all
    of these together. I will use as an example Veterans
    Entrepreneurship Task Force has joined with VETS Group, which
    is the Veterans Employment Training outfit. And we are having
    job fairs around the country working with the airline industry
    and also small business matchmaking with larger employers in
    that area. We always make sure to involve the local workforce
    development agency and give them every chance, the local vet
    center and VocRehab from VA, and also everybody who comes to
    these is registered with vetjobs.com, which was selected by
    Business Week as the top Internet job board, period. Not for
    vets, but the top board, period, because it works and there are
    a lot of tools on there. It works for a lot of people, but as
    Mr. Leghorn said, there are many people who need one-to-one
    contact.
        Mr. McNerney. Thank you. Mr. Chairman.
        Dr. Wenstrup. Miss Rice, you are recognized for five
    minutes.
        Miss Rice. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Mr. Leghorn, so I guess all three of you agree that you
    would rather see the employment aspect of helping veterans be
    run out of the VA instead of the Department of Labor. My
    concern is that the VA is, as we all know, the largest
    consolidated healthcare provider in the country. How and why do
    you think they are best suited or qualified to run an
    employment training program?
        Mr. Leghorn. The reason why the American Legion believes
    that VA is the right home for JVSG and HVRP is because Labor is
    not giving these programs the right type of attention that our
    veterans deserve. And so----
        Miss Rice. Why is that? Why do you think that is?
        Mr. Leghorn. So the American Legion looks at transitioning
    services for veterans in a holistic way and, you know, what
    better way to do it than to put employment services with
    healthcare services. I mean, it just makes sense because, as
    Mr. Weidman said before, one of the best ways to help somebody
    recover is to get them a job. And not to mention that the
    Department of Veterans Affairs has only one singular focus and
    that is on veterans, spouses and their orphans, period. Labor
    has a lot of other focuses and things that they have got to
    worry about, whereas the Department of Veterans Affairs, again,
    does not.
        Miss Rice. I don't ask the question because I necessarily
    disagree with that, but obviously we have seen, we have had
    hearings about the problems within the VA themselves and, while
    a great Secretary in charge, it is still a lot of reforms that
    have to take place.
        Mr. Weidman, if the VA were to establish a fourth
    administration, as you have suggested, to oversee veterans
    employment, any claim coming under USERRA, who would handle
    that claim? And I ask this because we have seen claim backlogs
    at the VA before in the past and would this just be piling more
    claims onto a plate that is already full?
        Mr. Weidman. Well, a lot of these things were add-on duties
    to the DVET and they weren't set up to do them. And that is why
    there is no enforcement of veterans preference with federal
    facilities across the states for two reasons. One is, nobody
    measures and gets on the DVETs whether they do a good
    investigation or an investigation at all and, number two, it
    takes forever. If I come home and I don't get my job back, I am
    not going to be able to wait. I have got to make car payments,
    I have got to feed the kids, I have got to make mortgage
    payments. If they blow me off while I file that complaint, I am
    going to go take three other jobs but don't pay that much while
    I look for a good one in order to be able to meet my daily
    needs. And people hear about this stuff, the vets know. They
    ask them, why didn't you file a complaint? And they said
    because I didn't have a year and a half to wait around, I had a
    family to feed. So, I mean, that is just one example.
        The implication is, do we think that the VA is a perfect
    solution? And the answer to that I can assure you is--my family
    gets worried that sometimes I get so agitated about VA that I
    am going to have the big one, as they say, and that is going to
    be the end of me just dealing with them. And as a matter of
    fact clinicians literally say that dealing with veterans
    benefits administration is contraindicated for the PTSD
    patients, because it sets them back six to twelve months in
    therapy because it is so crazy.
        We have got to take the empowering functions and get it
    away from comp and pen and establish a corporate culture of
    accountability, of independence in the new administration. And
    if you have got to let go 48 SESs and 60 GS-13s in order to be
    able to create that culture of independence, then so be it, but
    it needs to be physically and culturally separated from what is
    in there now and wherever it is and certainly when you move
    over there. That is why the redress mechanism of the 800 number
    is absolutely essential. Without that redress mechanism that is
    effective, I don't care where you put the services, it is not
    going to be for real at the local level.
        So what we are saying is several things.
        Miss Rice. Mr. Weidman, and forgive me, because I apologize
    for coming in late, but my question and I don't believe it has
    been asked, has the DoL-VETS 100 federal contractor reporting
    resulted in increased hiring of veterans? And, if not, what can
    be done? Or Mr. Varela?
        Mr. Weidman. Are you asking is it effective? The answer is
    no. It is certainly not what Gerry Solomon envisioned. And it
    was Mr. Solomon from upstate New York and active in the
    Republican House leadership at the time who carried the ball on
    that. And, unfortunately, there is no bang for the buck and a
    lot of that has to do with the Office of Federal Contract
    Compliance, which is not particularly useful. Nobody takes that
    information and does anything with it, even asking for job
    listings.
        And so it once again has to do with the lassitude of the
    Department of Labor as an institution--I am not attacking
    individuals--as an institution towards veterans as a group, we
    are just another group. Well, we are not just another group. We
    cut across every other subset of the American population. We
    are black, we are white, we are women, we are men, we are
    Native American, we are Irish, we are Jewish, we are whatever
    it is, and we are of all economic strata. And they don't get
    that and so veterans are not a priority for them. We at least
    have a fighting chance if we put it at VA.
        Miss Rice. Well, I want to thank you all so much for your
    incredibly passionate advocacy. And I yield back my time, Mr.
    Chairman. Thank you.
        Dr. Wenstrup. Thank you. We have time for a couple more
    questions and, with that, I would like to ask one.
        Mr. Leghorn, you talked about the Texas model and, Mr.
    Weidman, you talked about a corporate culture. And in corporate
    culture, you look for best practices and things that are
    working. So I would like to take a second to talk about
    something that is working well and also get your opinion. Is
    the methodology of what Texas is doing the reason it is working
    well or is the Texas economy a part of it, or both?
        Mr. Leghorn. Well, I definitely believe the oil industry in
    Texas has something to do with it. But you still can't ignore
    that, when they put everything within one commission. I mean,
    that is what the American Legion has been talking about all the
    time with the holistic approach. That commission becomes a
    clearinghouse of services from healthcare to employment and it
    is all exclusively there for veterans. And, again, with a
    Veterans Commission they too, like the Department of Veterans
    Affairs, have a singular focus and that is veterans. And they
    also operate I believe independent from other agencies, which
    makes them a little bit less susceptible to state politics.
        Now, I also know that Texas puts their own money into the
    program at the services level, so that every veteran that walks
    through the door is at least greeted or triaged by a veterans'
    representative and that is something that the American Legion
    has always asked for. With the Commission, we also know that
    they have better accountability of the dollars from JVSG,
    because that comes straight from federal and goes directly to
    the Commission, as opposed to any other agencies, and their
    line of reporting is also a little more linear than a lot of
    other states.
        Now, the only other state I know that has a Veterans
    Commission is the State of Wisconsin. I just wanted to add
    that.
        Dr. Wenstrup. Thank you very much, I appreciate that.
        Do you want to add something?
        Mr. Weidman. I did. Texas is a little bit different, but it
    is a model that could be adapted to other states. And as you
    know, unlike most states, they have set up many commissions. So
    that the Texas Railroad Commission, the Texas Veterans
    Commission doesn't report to the governor actually, it reports
    to the commission. And certainly they take seriously what the
    governor says, but that is because of their respect for whoever
    is occupying the governor's chair. But it is the same thing of
    independence that you are not being--your resources aren't
    being purloined to go to other purposes other than vets. It is
    a sharp focus and they maintain a sharp focus and have
    communicated over the last three, four years via social media
    with the folks who actually work at the service delivery point
    across Texas and I find them just amazing. They have created
    the corporate culture that we are talking about.
        Dr. Wenstrup. Thank you very much.
        Mr. Takano, you are recognized for five minutes.
        Mr. Takano. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Mr. Weidman, you used the word, you know, in Texas the
    independence prevents resources from being purloined. Are you
    saying that what is going on with DoL-VETS, this $250 million--
    billion dollar--it is $250 million, is it? So a quarter of a
    billion dollars is going over to DoL, that the focus is not
    there on veterans, there is a kind of diffusion of that
    resource somehow into its other mission, the larger mission of
    DoL?
        Mr. Weidman. Well, I am, and it is particularly true at the
    state workforce delivery level. You have got admin overhead,
    indirect admin overhead that ranges to over 30 percent. And I
    believe the Congress finally had to cap it, because in one
    state it went up to 39 percent. Indirect, that doesn't account
    for direct overhead that was taken out of the grant. So the
    grants were not going very far and you really only had with the
    DVETs the nuclear option, they don't have any other power. They
    can yank the grant and declare the state noncompliant and shut
    off the money all together, but at that point governors get
    involved, senators get involved, and you better really have
    your ducks in a row. So you can't pit the nuclear option, so
    you can't do anything about an office manager who is misusing
    DVOPs and LVERs.
        Mr. Takano. Okay. So you helped clarify. So the chunk of
    money that goes to the states in the form of grants, you have
    all these local employment offices and you are saying that is
    where you were painting the picture of how this money loses its
    focus on vets.
        Mr. Weidman. In 1980, DVOPs and LVERs made up about between
    five and eight percent of the staff in the local job services
    office. Today, it is often half the staff. And so they are
    paying much more of the high proportion of keeping the lights
    on, the rent, the parking lot plowed, et cetera, than we were
    in years past. We get less and less bang for the buck every
    year, because it is not going into personnel who are trained
    and backed up to actually meet with veterans.
        Mr. Takano. But is that because we are failing to fund the
    DoL function? The DoL funding that funds the non-veteran
    portion of it, you are saying that the veteran portion has
    become a greater percentage of the personnel that is funded
    there and they are not dedicating their attention and time to
    the veterans as they should?
        Mr. Weidman. It is two things. Wagner-Peyser funding
    continues to go down and, if you have 100 people coming into
    the office and 20 of them are vets and half of your staff is
    DVOP and LVER, what are you going to do? You are going to tell
    the people to serve the people who are walking through the door
    as opposed to concentrating on the mission. And so what happens
    is people get into the people-processing business as opposed to
    what all the folks in that office are supposed to be doing,
    which is helping people get a job, an actual job. Not a
    program, a job.
        Mr. Takano. Okay. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back.
        Dr.Wenstrup. Mrs. Radewagen, you are recognized.
        Mrs. Radewagen. I have one last question for Mr. Varela and
    Mr. Weidman. Can you please tell us how you believe a fourth
    administration would streamline the delivery of education and
    training benefits to veterans and bring greater visibility to
    these vital programs?
        Mr. Varela. It is a win-win situation, in our opinion.
    First, it will alleviate the claims and appeals
    responsibilities already being managed by the Veterans Benefits
    Administration. So right now, kind of circling back to the
    Congresswoman's question about VA's plate being full, right now
    they have three plates, we would be adding a fourth plate
    potentially. And on that fourth plate they would handle
    education, employment, vocational rehabilitation, USERRA
    matters, as was mentioned earlier. It would be again taking
    that staff from DoL that performs those functions and using
    them under the fourth administration. Also, veterans requiring
    education services and employment services would go one place.
    They would go to the VA and they would deal with that
    administration for all of those needs.
        Mr. Weidman. Twenty five percent of DVOPs are supposed to
    be out-stationed at another facility, veterans facility, they
    have never hit that 25 percent of DVOPs nationally at other
    facilities. And where you really need them is in the VA vet
    centers or readjustment counseling centers and we now have 280
    of those across the country. Without the employment function as
    part of the treatment modality and the treatment team, the team
    is flying on one wing, if you will, because all of the efforts
    of the vet centers, good vet centers over the years has been to
    keep people employed and to keep families together. People went
    to the hospital if they wanted to get comp, they went to the
    vet centers to get well and to keep their families together and
    to keep their jobs. So if it is all part of VA then it will be
    much easier to have DVOPs stationed in those vet centers and as
    part of the treatment team, and same with VocRehab, which are
    supposed to be working together. It happens maybe three or four
    places in the country where they really work together all the
    time.
        Mrs. Radewagen. Thank you, gentlemen. Thank you, Mr.
    Chairman.
        Dr. Wenstrup. Mr. McNerney, you are recognized for five
    minutes.
        Mr. McNerney. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Mr. Weidman, I appreciate when you spelled out that you
    thought the employment services should be run out of the VA,
    but at the same time the VA often drives you crazy and it is a
    big bureaucracy, you know. Do you believe that the VA is
    improving now and in such a way that it could take on another
    function like that and actually be effective? Or do you think
    it is just in the nature of the VA since it is focused, as Mr.
    Leghorn said, toward veterans that would make it more
    effective?
        Mr. Weidman. Is it actually going to work? The answer to
    that, Congressman, is I don't know. Do I know that what we have
    now ain't working? I do know that what we have now ain't
    working. We have made all kinds of suggestions, we have tried
    to get legislation through that would have money follow
    performance, and we have failed on that for the last 20 years.
    So it is time to try something new, because the young people
    separating need a job now, they don't need a job in 15 years.
    By that time the die will be cast, they will either have a
    career or they won't.
        So it is not just putting it at VA, we resisted that when
    they tried to do that in 2003 of just throwing it over there
    under VocRehab. And VocRehab has improved dramatically in the
    last 15 years. But it still needs to be a separate division, if
    you will, and away from comp and pen and away from the gimme
    mind set and with a whole new corporate culture. So it is the
    corporate culture that you are talking about and the focus on
    accountability of this number. This number also holds managers
    accountable. It is not just the DVOPs and LVERs, it holds the
    whole operation accountable and if it is all under VA.
        Mr. McNerney. Mr. Chairman.
        Dr. Wenstrup. Thank you. Miss Rice, you are recognized for
    five minutes. No further questions?
        If there are no further questions, I want to thank everyone
    here today for taking time to come out and share your views on
    the President's proposed fiscal year 2016 budget for vets, and
    for discussing how we can better improve employment outreach at
    the local level and long-term outcomes for our service members
    and veterans.
        And, Mr. Weidman, if you have the big one here, I will do
    my best to bring you back.
        Mr. Weidman. I am grateful for that, sir.
        Dr Wenstrup. Thank you. And, finally, I ask unanimous
    consent that all members have five legislative days to revise
    and extend their remarks and include extraneous materials.
        Without objection, so ordered.
        This hearing is now adjourned.
        [Whereupon, at 4:02 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]

                                    APPENDIX

                  Prepared Statement of Chairman Brad Wenstrup

        Good afternoon everyone and I want to welcome you all to the
    Subcommittee on Economic Opportunity's hearing today entitled, ``A
    Review of the President's Fiscal Year 2016 Budget Request for the
    Department of Labor's Veteran Employment and Training Service (VETS).''
        DoL's VETS manages several programs for servicemembers and veterans
    alike.
        Within VETS is the Jobs for Veterans State Grant program which
    funds Disabled Veterans Outreach Program Specialists--DVOPS--and Local
    Veterans Employment Representatives--LVERs; the Homeless Veteran
    Retraining Program which provides grants to providers for job training
    services and stand downs for homeless veterans; the employment workshop
    portion of the Transition Assistance Program (TAP); enforcement of the
    Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act (USERRA); and
    the promotion and outreach for veterans hiring throughout the country
    and Federal Government.
        These are all very critical services and they are all vital to our
    servicemembers' and veterans' wellbeing after they leave active duty.
    As more and more men and women are returning from deployments or
    separating from the military, it is imperative that we place a focus on
    these individuals and the services that we provide to them through
    VETS' programs while also helping veterans of past conflicts who face
    under-employment and unemployment issues.
        Unfortunately, for years, it has been clear that Senior Leaders at
    the Department of Labor do not put the focus that is needed on the
    Veterans Employment and Training Service.
        And to be quite frank, many in the veterans' community have said
    over and over again that more often than not, DoL has ignored the
    agency all together. This is not just a current issue and it is not a
    political one, this seems to have been a trend throughout many
    administrations, regardless of party.
        I know we can all agree that this country's veterans deserve to be
    the top priority, yet I worry that DoL does not always prioritize and
    coordinate their services for veterans as well as they could and
    should. The President's FY 2016 budget for VETS is once again basically
    flat-lined while the rest of the Department is not. The budget is the
    ultimate list of an Administration's priorities and its clear where
    DoL's ``true'' priorities lie.
        In addition to reviewing the President's proposed budget for VETS,
    I also believe today's hearing is an important opportunity to examine
    DoL's ability to measure long-term outcomes and the Department's
    efforts to coordinate with the Department of Veterans Affairs and the
    efficiency of JVSG-VETS' state grant program.
        JVSG, which funds DVOPS and LVERs, has been a constant concern of
    this subcommittee over the years, and time and time again we have heard
    concerns from the VSO community on the outreach, or lack thereof, that
    these DVOPS and LVERs are doing to help veterans find jobs. What is
    truly upsetting is that despite spending millions and millions of
    dollars on this program over the years, VETS is still unable to
    accurately track if the services provided by DVOPS and LVERs led to a
    veteran finding meaningful employment.
        Reading through testimony for today's hearing, and previous
    hearings held by this subcommittee, it is clear that VSOs and other
    stakeholders are ready for a change; a concrete change, to bring better
    coordination between DoL and VA, better accountability and efficiency
    within VETS' programs, and better data to show what VETS is doing to
    provide positive long term outcomes for our nation's veterans.
        We have been told by VETS time and time again that this time it
    will be different, and that this time they have a seat at the table at
    the Department of Labor. But it doesn't seem that anything is ever
    different. As the old saying goes, the definition of insanity is doing
    the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result.
        In this same vein, it appears that many are pushing to create a 4th
    administration at VA and move VETS out of DoL to VA, a concept that has
    been discussed and included in legislation in previous Congresses. I
    look forward to hearing more about this proposal mentioned by the VSOS
    as well as other avenues we can explore to improve employment
    opportunities and consistency of services provided by DoL and the State
    Grant Program across the country.
        Before I turn it over to the Ranking Member, I just want to
    reiterate that I believe that the new Senior Leadership team at VETS is
    trying to turn the ship around and by and large the employees at VETS
    do good work, but they are only a small piece of the puzzle at an
    agency as large as DoL. The problem is that no matter how small of a
    player VETS is within the larger mission of the Department the services
    they provide to our nation's veterans are too important to be
    overlooked.
        That is our challenge here today and I look forward to hearing from
    everyone about how we can improve the performance and focus of this
    program.

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                   QUESTION FOR THE RECORD, Paul Varela, DAV

        Question 1:

        Do you think the state level veteran employment specialists funded
    by DOL are a means of last resort for veterans seeking employment?

        Answer:

        Whether state level employment specialists are considered a first
    or last resort is difficult to assess. Nowadays, veterans seek
    employment through the internet. If a veteran seeks assistance through
    a state employment specialist, that contact could be an indication that
    other avenues of securing employment were unsuccessful, so the veteran
    is seeking a more hands-on approach.

        Question 2:

        If we were to start all over, and build a new transition and
    veteran employment program that would be funded at $233 million
    dollars, how could it differ from the program we have today?

        Answer:

        The current TAP GPS program is a good model. If we were to start
    all over, however, improvements would most likely need to be made. When
    the TAP GPS program was initiated, VSOs lost a major foothold. Prior to
    TAP GPS, DAV's Transition Service Officers (TSOs) performed additional
    services, free of charge, during TAP benefit briefing classes.
        Our TSOs provided presentations at these briefings to explain the
    value of VSO representation in navigating the complexities of the
    Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). DAV TSOs also performed treatment
    record reviews to determine whether medical evidence supported a
    disability claim. Also, private interviews were conducted to ascertain
    if the service member had existing or potential disabilities that may
    not have been disclosed.
        VSOs should be an equal partner in the TAP GPS program and if it
    were to start over from scratch, we would have been part of the plan
    all along, not an afterthought or viewed as an inconvenience or an
    intrusion. However, we see our role growing and there is an opportunity
    to increase our involvement.
        There would have been heavy utilization of web-based TAP GPS
    involvement to ensure that separating service members and their
    dependents could access information remotely. This would not supplement
    the requirement to participate in a class environment, but function to
    complement the TAP GPS program. The information would also be made
    available on-line to veterans so they could go back and review the
    information at a later time if they chose to do so.
        With respect to employment programs, we also recommend that all
    services and programs be consolidated in a new fourth administration
    within the VA that would include the transfer and integration of the
    Department of Labor's Veterans Employment and Training Service as
    discussed in our prepared testimony.

        Question 3:

        Do you believe that money spent on public media to highlight
    veterans' positive characteristics and values to employers, would be
    money well spent?

        Answer:

        Yes. Also, it would be good to showcase veterans who are currently
    working in the private sector and other contributions they are making
    within our communities.

        Question 4:

        Do you think the $175 million requested for veteran employment
    specialists reflects a high expectation for a return on investment?

        Answer:

        No. As stated in our testimony, this flat-line actually does not
    signify any expectations for the program. Furthermore, with nearly
    250,000 service members leaving active duty each year, employment
    services must be adequately resourced to meet their needs.

        Question 5:

        There have been some conversations about creating a fourth
    administration at the VA, to handle the veterans' employment programs
    currently administrated by the Department of Labor. Many members of
    this committee and many of our friends in the VSO community have been
    critical of aspects of the VA in almost every hearing or meeting we've
    held. Do any of you have concerns about adding to the VA's workload?

        Answer:

        It is true that VSOs and others have been critical when it comes to
    certain aspects of the VA; at times criticisms are warranted, such as
    in the case of some very harsh criticism regarding the change in policy
    requiring the use of standardized forms. In fact, this change is so
    egregious that DAV will be filing a federal lawsuit against the VA
    regarding these changes to the claims and appeals process. This is a
    prime example in which such harsh criticism is warranted.
        In terms of creating a fourth administration within the VA, while
    this would add to VA's overall workload, it would also add commensurate
    resources through shifting DOL's current VETS resources to VA. The
    added responsibilities within the new administration would be supported
    by the additional staff and resources transferred. In addition, it
    would reorganize and rebalance VA's workload by removing economic
    opportunity programs from within the VBA and placing them within the
    new administration. There is also the added benefit of focusing more
    closely on the claims and appeals aspects of VBA's mission.

        Question 6:

        Have any of you looked at how different states utilize the grant
    funding they receive from these programs? Are there some states that
    are more efficient and have better results? Does the DoL effectively
    monitor and audit how the states are using their funding?

        Answer:

        We have not looked at individual states and how they utilize funds
    for the programs and cannot comment on the success or failures using a
    state-by-state analysis.
        To date, we have seen no evidence of comprehensive monitoring
    pertaining to the use of funds provided to states through DoL's Jobs
    for Veterans State Grant (JVSG) program. The JVSG facilitates DVOP and
    LVER programs throughout the states and there has been concern that
    accountability and oversight of state DVOP and LVERs is inadequate.
        Furthermore, it is essential that DVOPs and LVERs focus on veteran-
    related employment activities. Routine oversight must be performed to
    ensure they stay focused on improving employment opportunities and
    outcomes for veterans.