[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.