    [House Hearing, 119 Congress]
    [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

                           PATH OF PURPOSE: RESTORING
                             THE VA VR&E PROGRAM TO
                           EFFECTIVELY SERVE VETERANS
    =======================================================================

                                    HEARING

                                   BEFORE THE

                      SUBCOMMITTEE ON ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY

                                     OF THE

                         COMMITTEE ON VETERANS' AFFAIRS

                         U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                        ONE HUNDRED NINETEENTH CONGRESS

                                 FIRST SESSION

                                   __________

                            WEDNESDAY, JULY 16, 2025

                                   __________

                               Serial No. 119-31

                                   __________

           Printed for the use of the Committee on Veterans' Affairs

    [GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                        Available via http://govinfo.gov

                                   __________

                       U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
    61-358                     WASHINGTON : 2025

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

                         COMMITTEE ON VETERANS' AFFAIRS

                         MIKE BOST, Illinois, Chairman

    AUMUA AMATA COLEMAN RADEWAGEN,       MARK TAKANO, California, Ranking
        American Samoa, Vice-Chairwoman      Member
    JACK BERGMAN, Michigan               JULIA BROWNLEY, California
    NANCY MACE, South Carolina           CHRIS PAPPAS, New Hampshire
    MARIANNETTE MILLER-MEEKS, Iowa       SHEILA CHERFILUS-MCCORMICK,
    GREGORY F. MURPHY, North Carolina        Florida
    DERRICK VAN ORDEN, Wisconsin         MORGAN MCGARVEY, Kentucky
    MORGAN LUTTRELL, Texas               DELIA RAMIREZ, Illinois
    JUAN CISCOMANI, Arizona              NIKKI BUDZINSKI, Illinois
    KEITH SELF, Texas                    TIMOTHY M. KENNEDY, New York
    JEN KIGGANS, Virginia                MAXINE DEXTER, Oregon
    ABE HAMADEH, Arizona                 HERB CONAWAY, New Jersey
    KIMBERLYN KING-HINDS, Northern       KELLY MORRISON, Minnesota
        Mariana Islands
    TOM BARRETT, Michigan

                           Jon Clark, Staff Director
                      Matt Reel, Democratic Staff Director

                      SUBCOMMITTEE ON ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY

                     DERRICK VAN ORDEN, Wisconsin, Chairman

    JUAN CISCOMANI, Arizona              CHRIS PAPPAS, New Hampshire,
    ABE HAMADEH, Arizona                     Ranking Member
    KIMBERLYN KING-HINDS, Northern       MORGAN MCGARVEY, Kentucky
        Mariana Islands                  DELIA RAMIREZ, Illinois
    TOM BARRETT, Michigan                TIMOTHY M. KENNEDY, New York

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

                             C  O  N  T  E  N  T  S

                                  ----------

                            WEDNESDAY, JULY 16, 2025

                                                                       Page

                               OPENING STATEMENTS

    The Honorable Derrick Van Orden, Chairman........................     1
    The Honorable Chris Pappas, Ranking Member.......................     3

                                   WITNESSES
                                    Panel I

    Ms. Margarita Devlin, Acting Principal Deputy Under Secretary for
      Benefits, Veterans Benefits Administration, U.S. Department of
      Veterans Affairs...............................................     5

                                    APPENDIX
                        Prepared Statements Of Witnesses

    Ms. Margarita Devlin Prepared Statement..........................    23

                           Statements For The Record

    U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, Office of the Inspector
      General Prepared Statement.....................................    29
    Veterans Education Success Prepared Statement....................    37

                           PATH OF PURPOSE: RESTORING
                             THE VA VR&E PROGRAM TO
                           EFFECTIVELY SERVE VETERANS

                                  ----------

                            WEDNESDAY, JULY 16, 2025

          Subcommittee on Economic Opportunity,
                        Committee on Veterans' Affairs,
                                 U.S. House of Representatives,
                                                        Washington, DC.
        The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:31 p.m., in
    room 360, Cannon House Office Building, Hon. Derrick Van Orden
    (chairman of the subcommittee) presiding.
        Present: Representatives Van Orden, Ciscomani, Barrett,
    Pappas, and McGarvey.

            OPENING STATEMENT OF DERRICK VAN ORDEN, CHAIRMAN

        Mr. Van Orden. The subcommittee will come to order. I want
    to thank everyone for being here today to discuss the Veterans
    Readiness and Employment Program, or VR&E.
        The purpose of this program is to assist veterans and
    servicemembers who have service-connected disabilities with on-
    the-job training, education, and skills they need in order to
    obtain meaningful employment to live full independent lives.
    When this program is appropriately administered, VR&E, it is
    more than just a benefits program. It is also a vital first
    step for disabled veterans to become more financially
    independent and give back to their community and achieve their
    own American Dream. I used VR&E to go to law school at the age
    of 50 and it led me to Congress, so maybe we should cancel this
    program. That is a joke. Seriously, this job, right? Yes, he
    got it. He is the only guy that got it.
        Unfortunately, VR&E has been at a crossroads for several
    years and, unfortunately, it has been abused by a lot of folks.
    I am very thankful that over this last year our team has been
    able to investigate some of these potential fraud, waste, and
    abuse cases. It includes site visits to Detroit, Muskogee,
    Buffalo, Baltimore, and just last week the folks got back from
    San Diego. What they found is truly disturbing.
        We are now seeing unprecedented increase in wait times and
    an increased burden on counselors with higher caseloads. There
    has got to be a better balance of priorities in the program to
    make sure that veterans get what they need while also ensuring
    that the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) is a
    responsible steward of the taxpayers' investment. I found that
    this is a responsibility that VA has a profound and constant
    inability to perform the oversight function. I am also going to
    point the finger this way. We have an oversight responsibility,
    you have an oversight responsibility, and I think both sides of
    this fence have not been meeting that.
        Finally, my staff has also seen some data that veterans
    have been in this program for over 20 years. Many veterans are
    using more than $250,000 in benefit payments, and one veteran
    in Boston spent over $350,000 in 18 months. Another veteran in
    Los Angeles has spent $895,000 in 6 years and is still in
    rehab-to-employment phase of the program. If anyone is
    concerned about funding for veterans, they need to be concerned
    about what is going on in this program, also. Cases like this
    are a direct result of VA granting entitlement extensions past
    the 48-month limit mandated by law for VR&E recipients; well
    over 99 percent of the time are not doing their due diligence
    on the program.
        In fact, the VA Committee last month found out that since
    Fiscal Year 2024, 62,355 extensions were approved while just 59
    requests for extensions were denied. That is statistically
    impossible for that to be a functioning number. It is just
    absurd.
        I am looking forward to hearing from the VA about the real-
    life examples that constitute granting a waiver. On paper,
    bureaucrats may just be completing a checking the box exercise
    instead of completing a thorough review.
        Additionally, we heard numerous concerns about long wait
    times. The current wait time for a veteran to be seen by a
    counselor in San Diego, Oakland, and Albuquerque is over 100
    days. 40 percent of regional offices take over 60 days for a
    veteran to meet a counselor for an initial evaluation, above
    the VA goal of a 60-day maximum wait time. A month is too long.
    Making a veteran put their lives on hold for nearly a year
    before even being seen by a counselor is ridiculous and has a
    negative impact on not only their lives, but their entire
    families.
        Finally, we found that 45 percent of participants within
    the VR&E program have successfully completed the program and
    subsequently re-entered it. That means that nearly half of the
    VR&E participants complete a program successfully only to
    return to the program. I understand the need for the veteran
    whose disability worsens or reenters the program with the goal
    of becoming gainfully employed again. However, 45 percent of
    individuals using a jobs program more than once is a failure,
    and this will not stand on my watch any longer.
        We have also heard from VR&E executive director himself
    that many veterans are retiring from their jobs and applying
    for VR&E to receive a substance allowance to supplement their
    income until they are able to receive retirement benefits and
    Social Security. In essence, some people are retiring from a
    job and then entering this program for a period of time to
    carry them into the age when they are eligible for Social
    Security. That is not what this program was designed for.
        VA knows that there is abuse in this program yet again I
    hear--until I hear otherwise, VA is not working to fix the
    holes in the system, period. We cannot ignore this because we
    cannot let this program fail.
        Finally, I recognize VR&E's latest Information Technology
    (IT) project of Readiness Employment System, or RES, was
    launched as a pilot in 2024, and early reports showed that the
    program has been received very well. I know the VA states they
    are finally on the right path with the new case management
    system. However, I am skeptical as this undertaking will now
    span a term of four administrations and we all know how good
    the VA is at wasting taxpayers' dollars for IT failures. As a
    matter of fact, they have a 0 percent rate of getting IT
    projects right.
        Ms. Devlin, I got to tell you, I know you just got here. We
    met the other day in our office and, as discussed, this is how
    I want this hearing to go. This is going to be a post-apartheid
    Truth and Reconciliation Commission, meaning, you know, we are
    not going to hold you to account. I know you just got here a
    month ago and I want to make sure that this is an open kimono
    discussion so that we can clearly identify, articulate, and
    brainstorm about how to fix these problems. Is that clear?
        Ms. Devlin. Yes, got it.
        Mr. Van Orden. Okay. With that, I would like to now yield
    to my very good friend and ranking member, Mr. Pappas, for his
    opening remarks.

           OPENING STATEMENT OF CHRIS PAPPAS, RANKING MEMBER

        Mr. Pappas. Thank you very much, Chairman Van Orden, for
    holding today's hearing on the Veterans Readiness and
    Employment Program, otherwise known as VR&E.
        We know VR&E is designed to help disabled veterans gain
    meaningful employment and independent living after their time
    in service. However, this committee is rightfully concerned
    about the overall outcomes and effectiveness of the program
    based on data about its performance and issues veterans have
    raised about response and wait times, among others. I hope to
    learn more today about the ways in which we can improve the
    program so that service-connected disabled veterans are
    receiving the support they need and have earned and ensure that
    their transition to civilian life is a successful.
        One area that I would like to focus on is the caseload
    ratios for counselors, which, since 2018, VA established should
    be at 125 veterans per 1 counselor. Since the passage of the
    The Sergeant First Class Heath Robinson Honoring our Promise to
    Address Comprehensive Toxics (PACT) Act, however, caseloads
    exceed this ratio nationwide and in some areas the ratio is
    currently 204-to-1.
        Additionally, in many regional offices a veteran waits on
    average a month or more to meet with a counselor, with Boston
    experiencing an average wait time of 33 days, Phoenix 68 days,
    Atlanta 77 days, and San Diego 159 days. This means that
    veterans are waiting longer, counselors are being strained, and
    veterans are not receiving the best quality of services, and we
    need to fix that.
        While improvements can be made to the program overall, the
    solution to truly ensuring veterans are accessing and able to
    make the most of the VR&E program comes down to one critical
    factor: staffing. For example, VA recently brought down the
    wait times in Southern California, brought them down
    dramatically, and the solution was more staff to lessen
    workload per counselor, process veteran information faster, and
    give veterans specialized attention and resources that they
    require.
        I am also aware that VA is in the process of modernizing
    its case management system and implementing the use of
    Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools, such as the electronic
    virtual assistant to help schedule appointments with
    counselors. While these initiatives surely will help make
    casework more efficient, it is highly unlikely that this will
    be enough to help VA keep up with the expected increase in
    caseloads, as VA itself has forecasted.
        We also cannot expect VA to improve its performance in the
    already understaffed program, with VA's recent announcement
    projecting an expected loss of 30,000 employees by the end of
    this year. We also acknowledge that VA counselors in general
    have a high turnover rate, but that is mostly because their
    caseloads have become unmanageable.
        I share the chairman's concerns about veterans staying in
    the VR&E program for a long period of time, but I do not
    necessarily agree that instituting time limits is the correct
    course of legislative action. VR&E counselors do need
    flexibility in determining individual veterans' situations and
    circumstances rather than putting additional administrative
    burdens on them to prove why a veteran needs more time.
    Addressing the retention of counselors and getting their
    caseload down to VA's recommended ratio of 125-to-1 is a better
    use of our time.
        VA data shows that regional offices that are adequately
    staffed are performing well, both in terms of maintaining
    manageable caseload and number of days for veterans to have
    their initial meeting with a counselor. Unfortunately, only 28
    percent of regional offices are at or below the targeted
    caseload, with the national ratio currently at 175 cases per
    counselor. There is significant room for improvement there. I
    hope that this committee agrees that this is a problem that
    needs to be addressed.
        The services a veteran receives should not be dependent on
    where a veteran chooses to live after military life, nor should
    it depend on VA's plans to cut staffing that will undermine
    critical programs like VR&E that veterans rely on after having
    served their country. Leaving veterans to their own devices
    upon leaving the service or critically undermining the VR&E
    program effectiveness would be a terrible disservice to
    veterans and their families and, in the end, will only hurt
    veterans trying to secure the help that they deserve.
        I thank you, Mr. Chairman, for holding this hearing, and I
    yield back.
        Mr. Van Orden. The ranking member yields back. Thank you,
    Mr. Pappas.
        I will now introduce our witness panel. It is you. Ms.
    Margarita Devlin, acting principal deputy under secretary for
    Benefits at the Department of Veterans Affairs. Will you please
    stand and raise your right hand, ma'am?
        [Witness sworn.]
        Mr. Van Orden. Thank you. Let the record reflect that the
    witness answered in the affirmative.
        Ms. Devlin, you are now recognized for 5 minutes to deliver
    your testimony on behalf of the Department of Veterans Affairs.

                     STATEMENT OF MARGARITA DEVLIN

        Ms. Devlin. Chairman Van Orden, Ranking Member Pappas,
    thank you for this opportunity to testify on the Veteran
    Readiness and Employment Program.
        I have had the privilege of seeing personally the
    transformational effect that this program can have on veterans
    lives, both when I started as a voc rehab counselor myself in
    the field, through various leadership positions in the field
    ,and at national headquarters in Veterans Benefits
    Administration (VBA). At every level, I witnessed how important
    this program can be to their career goals or their independent
    living goals.
        During the first Trump administration, I served as the
    principal deputy undersecretary for Benefits, and at that time
    we worked diligently to get to the 1-to-125 ratio, so it was
    disheartening to see that that has unraveled. VR&E's workload
    has dramatically increased. In recent years, from October 2020
    to June 2025, the caseload grew by 52.3 percent, and that sharp
    increase was largely driven by an increase in the eligible
    veteran population due to the PACT Act. Staffing allowances in
    the past few years hypothetically allowed VR&E to hire 1
    counselor for every 140 veterans. However, this is in sharp
    contrast with VR&E's actual caseload ratio, as you mentioned,
    of 1-to-175 when factoring in the current caseload and the
    onboard number of counselors.
        Despite these challenges, VBA has made meaningful progress
    in the past couple of months. We have worked to accelerate
    eligibility determinations to make sure veterans are getting
    the timely support that they deserve, and we have increased
    oversight over the program. VBA leadership at all levels are
    being held accountable for the performance of this program so
    that veterans receive the care and benefits that they deserve.
        VBA is addressing the increased workload in several ways.
    We deployed a help team to reduce pending applications at
    several stations to help expedite entitlement determinations.
    We implemented a national workload assignment strategy where
    VBA assigns workload from offices with the highest caseload
    ratios to stations with lower caseload ratios. This national
    approach is supported by the fact that many veterans prefer the
    flexibility of a virtual appointment through telecounseling
    versus coming into a brick-and-mortar appointment. This helps
    us balance some of the workload demands across the available
    capacity. We also provided additional contract counselor
    support to help some stations with higher workloads.
        We have seen a huge difference across the Nation from the
    cumulative effects of these workload management strategies. For
    example, in one regional office we reduced the average days
    pending in applicant status from over 200 days in January to an
    average of 39 days as of the end of June. Veterans are seeing
    success through the program. As of the end of June, over 14,000
    veterans achieved positive outcomes through the VR&E program so
    far this year, which is 10 percent more than this time last
    year.
        Employment is tracked as a subset of all positive outcomes.
    An employment outcome is when a veteran finishes their training
    and gains suitable employment. As of the end of June, over
    7,000 veterans achieved successful employment outcomes through
    VR&E, which is 15 percent above VR&E's stated goal for this
    point in the year.
        VBA has successfully deployed the Readiness and Employment
    System, or RES, to all regional offices in the Southeast and
    Northeast districts, and we are on track to deploy the
    Continental and Pacific districts by the end of September. RES
    has already shown measurable results. RES application
    automation improved processing time from 7 days down to 3.4
    days in the pilot and currently is at 2.3 average days for an
    eligibility determination. This does not only expedite that
    decision-making, but gets veterans quicker to a counselor for
    their first appointment.
        In conclusion, the VA is fully committed to making the
    improvements necessary to strengthen the VR&E program. At the
    heart of all this is one goal: ensuring that veterans get the
    support that they need when they need it without lengthy wait
    times. My commitment is simple. I want to restore your trust in
    the VR&E program. More importantly, I want to make sure
    veterans and transitioning servicemembers understand this
    program is here for them and that they can trust that the
    program will take care of them. We have a lot more work to do
    and we are determined to get it right.
        Mr. Chairman, this concludes my statement and I welcome any
    questions you and the ranking member and any other committee
    members have for me.

        [The Prepared Statement Of Margarita Devlin Appears In The
    Appendix]

        Mr. Van Orden. Thank you, Ms. Devlin. The written statement
    of Ms. Devlin will be entering into the record.
        We are going to proceed to question you now. Everyone is
    going to stick to the 5-minute rule.
        I now recognize Ranking Member Pappas for 5 minutes for
    questions.
        Mr. Pappas. Well, thank you, Ms. Devlin for joining us. I
    appreciate you being here and I appreciate you also relating
    your experience as a voc rehab counselor. That is all valuable
    perspective, but I also notice that the executive director of
    the program, the one program that we are discussing today, is
    not at this hearing.
        Mr. Pamperin led the program during record-setting
    enrollment during the PACT Act, the development of the RES
    scheduling system. In fact, the reason I think we are holding
    this hearing is because the chairman and Mr. Pamperin had a
    back-and-forth line of questioning at a hearing a few weeks
    ago. I am wondering if you can answer the question why Mr.
    Pamperin is not at this hearing today.
        Ms. Devlin. Yes, sir. Thank you for that question.
        Mr. Pamperin is in charge of the VR&E service program, but
    as I am currently performing the delegable duties of the under
    secretary for Benefits, I am also responsible not only for the
    VR&E program, but for the Office of Field Operations. VR&E
    service controls the policymaking, the quality assurance, and
    many other functions in VR&E, but it is field operations that
    we are typically talking about that we have concerns with. It
    is the staffing in the field. It is the counselors doing the
    work on the ground.
        The VR&E program leaders are just one group of leaders that
    are responsible for implementing the program. We are also
    talking about VA regional office directors and district
    directors. Those people do not report to Mr. Pamperin. They
    report to me.
        Mr. Pappas. Well, I do not doubt your oversight and your
    involvement in the program, but he is the named executive
    director of the program. There are four additional seats at
    that table and one of them should have been filled by him.
        I am wondering if we can get into the detail of some of
    your testimony and talk about the extended enrollment times
    that we have seen. The chairman has brought to this committee's
    attention a few cases in which veterans have been in VR&E for
    far longer than the policy ever intended. Can you help us
    understand why there are times that veterans might need to stay
    in the program longer than just the average time?
        Ms. Devlin. Yes, there are many reasons that a veteran
    might be in a program for a long time. Sometimes it is because
    they are in and out of the program. Maybe they began their
    program and life circumstances took over. It could be a
    worsening of their disability conditions. It could be some
    other life circumstances. It could be a geographic relocation.
    It could be an accident. It could be a family emergency. It
    could be a whole host of reasons that could interrupt that
    veteran's program and then they can return when those issues
    are resolved.
        You know, I have seen a case, just a veteran who was
    rehabilitated just July 8th, and that veteran was in the
    program for a few years, had to take time off because of
    disability conditions, and then came back years later and was
    able to finish, graduate the program in May--sorry, get a job
    in May as a human resources manager, and is successfully
    rehabilitated. You might look at that on the surface and say,
    well, why was that veteran in the program so long? They needed
    to take the time off for those medical conditions to restore
    their health.
        Mr. Pappas. Well, thanks. Are veterans paid by VA for the
    entire time period that they are in the program?
        Ms. Devlin. Veterans receive subsistence allowance only for
    the time that they are actively pursuing training.
        Mr. Pappas. Okay. Is there an average number of months that
    benefits are paid out?
        Ms. Devlin. Veterans are typically entitled to up to 48
    months of entitlement for payment of subsistence unless an
    extension is granted.
        Mr. Pappas. Okay. Are there just the most common reason why
    a veteran might exceed that 48-month timeframe?
        Ms. Devlin. Typically it is because they have what we call
    a serious employment handicap, which means they have
    significant barriers to employability above an employment
    handicap that requires them to have additional months of
    training that they might need to become employable----
        Mr. Pappas. Okay.
        Ms. Devlin [continuing]. and compete with other people for
    that same occupation.
        Mr. Pappas. When a veteran enrolls in VR&E, what is the
    process and how are counselors assigned to that veteran?
        Ms. Devlin. Counselors are typically assigned based on
    geography, where the veteran applies. As I indicated earlier,
    however, because of our capacity issues, we have assigned
    veteran applicants to counselors that have availability so that
    they do not have to wait. Those counselors would meet with that
    veteran either virtually or in person, depending on the
    circumstances, to determine their entitlement and review
    whether they--what type of rehabilitation program they might
    need.
        Mr. Pappas. We do hear complaints from veterans sometimes
    about the difficulty in getting in contact with their
    counselor. If a veteran moves to a college in a different
    location, do they keep the same counselor or are they assigned
    a new one?
        Ms. Devlin. It depends on the changes and the capacity of
    the VR&E office. If a veteran is having a hard time reaching
    their counselor and they have left a voicemail message and not
    gotten a return call, I would encourage them to call our main
    number because we can warm transfer them to the VR&E office and
    see if somebody else in that office can make sure that they get
    taken care of.
        Mr. Pappas. Okay. My time is limited, so maybe we will come
    back in a second round, but thank you.
        I yield.
        Mr. Van Orden. The gentleman yields back.
        The chair now recognizes Mr. Barrett for 5 minutes.
        Mr. Barrett. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you for
    being here today. Appreciate your testimony.
        I am learning a little bit more about this program along
    with several others that certainly VA has and continue the
    mission that we owe to our veterans. I know you mentioned to
    the ranking member a 48-month eligibility window. That is the
    months of eligibility in the program, not the calendar months
    it would take to necessarily progress through the program. Is
    that fairly accurate?
        Ms. Devlin. That is correct.
        Mr. Barrett. Then an individual could be eligible for an
    extension of that due to a life circumstance or a geographical
    change or a worsening of their condition, another additional
    months for a new training for maybe a new job or something of
    that sort?
        Ms. Devlin. In certain circumstances, yes, there are
    criteria for those extensions.
        Mr. Barrett. A person may somewhat--not to compare this
    directly to the GI Bill, but maybe they would use 12 months of
    eligibility, have a break in time where they were not using it,
    and then come back and use it again sometime later?
        Ms. Devlin. Yes. If they still have remaining months of
    entitlement, they can do that.
        Mr. Barrett. Okay. I know that--I believe in some of my
    analysis before me, it said something like there were some
    veterans in this program for like--since the 1990's, I think.
    Is that some of what--is that starting and stopping or is that
    people getting new benefits that have been awarded to them due
    to a change in circumstance?
        Ms. Devlin. Yes, thank you for the question. In my
    oversight we have--I have been looking at those cases and I
    have been asking the regional office directors to look at those
    cases. What we found is a combination of things. Some of the
    cases of veterans who seem to have been in for many, many
    years, they have been in and out of the program to the point of
    actually having their cases closed where they are no longer an
    active case in our program. Then they come back sometimes years
    later and they reapply. When we look at their cases, we see the
    life of their participation even if they left the program for
    several years and came back.
        Mr. Barrett. Okay. The individual I think from 1991 or 1992
    that we were alerted to would be somebody most likely, without
    speaking in that case specifically, but in general would be
    somebody who may have had some number of benefits 30 years ago
    and then had time off from that and then maybe had either a
    worsening of their condition, a geographic relocation, or
    another change of life circumstance that would necessitate them
    re-entering the program and reopening that up at some point
    more recently?
        Ms. Devlin. Right. Without seeing the case specifically, I
    cannot speak to that case.
        Mr. Barrett. Yes.
        Ms. Devlin. Yes, it could be any host of those things.
        Mr. Barrett. The window of time would suggest that this
    person had been in the program since 1990-whenever, when, in
    fact, they may have had possibly some months of eligibility
    then, and then some months of eligibility today. The entirety
    of that would be shown up on a report somewhere?
        Ms. Devlin. Yes, that is correct.
        Mr. Barrett. Okay. I appreciate that background. Then could
    an individual use this, is this just for upskilling or could it
    be for higher education, advanced degree fields, things of that
    sort as well, sort of like the GI Bill?
        Ms. Devlin. The way the statute is written is it is for a
    vocational goal. Whatever that veteran's career goal, it is the
    educational level that they need to be able to compete for
    entry into that occupation. If that occupation that is within
    their interests, aptitudes, and abilities requires a bachelor's
    degree or a master's degree or, in some cases, a noncollege
    degree, some technical training----
        Mr. Barrett. Right.
        Ms. Devlin [continuing]. that would be the level of
    training that they would be approved for to participate in.
        Mr. Barrett. I know we have a lot of GI Bill eligibility of
    differences and things like that. Is there a lot of overlap
    between a program that would be GI Bill-qualified and would be
    qualified under this program as well?
        Ms. Devlin. Recently, actually, VR&E tightened up those
    guidelines based on an Office of Inspector General (OIG)
    review. The only types of training programs that a VR&E
    counselor can authorize for a veteran must be also approved for
    the GI Bill. The only exception is if they want to approve a
    special school, it has to come up all the way to the VR&E
    service director for review.
        Mr. Barrett. Okay. It would have--it is not the other way
    around, though. The GI Bill does not have to be through VR&E.
    The VR&E would have to be a GI Bill-approved institution----
        Ms. Devlin. That is correct.
        Mr. Barrett [continuing]. for qualifying. Okay. Do we pay
    the full freight for that program if it is GI Bill-eligible, if
    you are VR&E-eligible?
        Ms. Devlin. The GI Bill has different rules in place for
    how much tuition can be paid for.
        Mr. Barrett. Yep.
        Ms. Devlin. A VR&E participant would get 100 percent of all
    tuition, books, fees, and supplies that are necessary for them
    to complete the program.
        Mr. Barrett. The living stipend, as well?
        Ms. Devlin. As well as the living stipend, which they can
    elect the Chapter 33 rate if they have that eligibility.
        Mr. Barrett. Okay. Up to 48 months of eligibility, which
    could be academic months, not calendar months?
        Ms. Devlin. Correct. It is academic months. It is the
    months that they actually receive subsistence allowance.
        Mr. Barrett. Okay, thank you. Then my last question, in
    just the brief time I have available, some of the automation
    that you have in the replacement of legacy systems, you feel
    that that is going to offload some of your staff workload to
    kind of open up more bandwidth for them?
        Ms. Devlin. It is definitely going to help. We are already
    showing that it is limited to about----
        Mr. Van Orden. The gentleman's time has expired.
        Ms. Devlin [continuing]. 6,000 hours.
        Mr. Van Orden. The gentleman's time has expired.
        The chair now recognizes Mr. McGarvey for 5 minutes.
        Mr. McGarvey. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and Ms. Devlin for
    being with us today.
        I would like to take a moment to talk about a piece of
    bipartisan legislation I am working on and proud to be co-
    leading out of this committee, the Focused Assistance and
    Skills Training for Veterans Employment and Transition Success.
    We call it FAST VETS for short. It is one of the several
    efforts coming out of this committee aimed at making the VR&E
    program work better for the people it is meant to serve: our
    veterans.
        The FAST VETS Act is not about overhauling VR&E. It is
    about restoring integrity and ensuring counselors are not given
    unnecessary workloads. This bill puts in place commonsense
    guardrails. They respect veterans' time, counselors' capacity,
    and taxpayer investment because a well-crafted plan is more
    than a piece of paper. It is a promise.
        Ms. Devlin, let us say that Jane Yoakum from Veterans of
    Foreign Wars of the United States (VFW) Post 8639 in
    Louisville, Kentucky, is approved for a vocational
    rehabilitation plan, but later wants to change it. Something
    happens. What exactly are the counselors looking at when
    deciding whether to approve that change?
        Ms. Devlin. That is a really great question. That is
    considered a redevelopment of a plan and the counselors do have
    the authority to review the plan with the veteran. In fact,
    they must review the plan with the veteran at least once a year
    to make sure the veteran is on track. A veteran who wishes to
    change their program simply because they wish to must undergo a
    review by the counselor to determine that they are not going to
    be wasting basically months of entitlement on training that
    would no longer be viable.
        What usually happens is there is a change in circumstances
    in that veteran's life. It could be disability-related, it
    could be geography-related. Occupations are different in
    different, you know, parts of the country. In those cases, the
    VR&E counselor would work with the veteran to make sure that
    they can leverage the months of entitlement they have used
    while redeveloping their plan to the new vocational goal.
        Mr. McGarvey. Right, because things happen, life happens.
    Are those criteria consistent across regional offices? Or is,
    my example I use Jane Yoakum from Louisville, Kentucky, is that
    going to experience going to depend on where the veteran lives?
        Ms. Devlin. It really depends on that veteran's
    circumstances. This is a program for veterans who are all
    individuals with their own unique circumstances and the career
    goals that they are interested are unique as well. I would say
    it is tailored to the individual.
        Mr. McGarvey. Let us say that FAST VETS is enacted and
    plans are only changed if there is a real need, like when the
    plan is not workable or no longer fits their situation, like
    you were just describing. What new protocols would the VA need
    in place within the first year?
        Ms. Devlin. That is a great question. If this was enacted
    into law, we would need to put procedures in place that would
    have the counselor documenting why there was a circumstance
    that required this change versus it being just a request by the
    veteran, which is, I believe, what you are aiming to achieve
    with this bill, if I understood you correctly.
        Mr. McGarvey. It is. Also, I think, you know, we are
    worried about this actually going into effect. Right? Again,
    this cannot be a piece of paper. We are trying to make a
    program workable for our vets. This is a bridge to their
    independence that we want to have happen. At least if this gets
    going, can you commit to issuing updated guidance for
    counselors and sharing that data with this committee on the
    redevelopment rates and rationales?
        Ms. Devlin. Absolutely, yes.
        Mr. McGarvey. Perfect. In your written testimony, you noted
    that the VA is currently short 387 vocational rehabilitation
    counselors that is necessary to meet the VA's 1-to-125 target
    counselor-to-veteran ratio. Given that only vocational
    rehabilitation counselors are authorized to make redevelopment
    decisions for veterans' rehabilitation plans and not other
    employees like vocational rehabilitation specialists, what
    steps is VA taking to prevent burnout and to ensure these
    important decisions are not being rushed or missed?
        Ms. Devlin. Thank you for the question. That is one of the
    reasons we implemented the national strategy of caseload
    assignment, so that we can make sure we are not burning out the
    counselors in the jurisdictions where we have increased veteran
    workload that they cannot manage. I will tell you that the
    President's budget for Fiscal Year 2026 does allow for an
    additional 403 counselors.
        Mr. McGarvey. Thank you. Like I said, this is about keeping
    promises. Right? This is about making sure that our veterans
    have the resources they need to get back into the workforce to
    build that bridge to independence. If we want VR&E to be a
    bridge to that independence, we need clarity. We need
    consistency. We need accountability. I know this FAST VETS bill
    lays the foundation, at least a stone in the foundation for
    that.
        Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I yield back.
        Mr. Van Orden. The gentleman yields back the remainder of
    his time.
        The chair now recognizes my friend from the great State of
    Arizona, Mr. Ciscomani.
        Mr. Ciscomani. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you also,
    Ms. Devlin, for being here today and thank you for your
    testimony and thank you for the time with us for coming over
    and testifying.
        I have been very interested in learning more about the VR&E
    program as you have been talking about its success and how we
    can best improve it to ensure veterans with disabilities or
    barriers to employment are properly trained and also educated
    in that process. I was proud to see you mentioned my bill, H.R.
    3579, the Veterans Readiness and Employment Program Integrity
    Act, in your testimony and that there is a benefit in having
    success metrics such as participants, the employment status,
    and the annual wages tracked. I think any kind of metric in
    every area in government is important, but definitely here to
    make sure that our veterans are being served properly, and for
    the average wait times to see a counselor be published online.
    I think that transparency is also very important and it points
    to something that we can improve and do a better job at.
        A quick question here. One key issue that I often hear
    about from my constituents are the long wait times associated
    with VA services overall. At the Phoenix VA in my home State of
    Arizona, the average wait time for a VR&E appointment is around
    114 days. One hundred and 14 days to meet with a vocational
    rehab counselor, VRC obviously, which well exceeds the VA's
    goal of the 60-day maximum that we have talked about.
        What do you believe accounts for this and what is the VA's
    plan of action to reduce these wait times, specifically in
    Arizona, where the wait times in the Phoenix VA is different
    than the one in the Tucson, the Southern Arizona VA, which they
    happen to be on different sides of the wait time spectrum here?
    What are your thoughts on that?
        Ms. Devlin. Thank you for the question. I will tell you,
    though, we have improved the wait times in Arizona. It is down
    to just a little over 41 days now.
        Mr. Ciscomani. The Phoenix VA specifically?
        Ms. Devlin. Arizona as a whole.
        Mr. Ciscomani. Arizona as a whole?
        Ms. Devlin. Yes.
        Mr. Ciscomani. Yes.
        Ms. Devlin. What we are doing to improve that is we are
    using a national strategy for reassigning signing cases. We
    have some stations where the counselors are at either 1-to-125
    ratio or less than that. We have greater capacity there. We are
    using virtual counseling capability where the veteran has a
    virtual counseling appointment with a counselor. It does not
    have to be a counselor in Arizona. It can be a counselor in any
    one of our stations that has capacity. The goal being to get
    them their entitlement decision quickly so they do not have to
    wait to get into a rehabilitation program.
        Mr. Ciscomani. They take this from home or----
        Ms. Devlin. Yes.
        Mr. Ciscomani. Yes? Excellent. Okay. Well, that is good.
    Thank you for informing me of that. You know, the experiences
    that I hear about from our veterans at home between one of the
    VAs, the Tucson one or the Phoenix one, sometimes is very
    different. I am interested in looking more into the 41-day
    average, I am assuming, that is between both VAs, which I am
    assuming that the wait times in the Tucson VA help the average
    out from what I am hearing from Phoenix. The wait times
    specifically in the Phoenix one continue to be high from what I
    am--from the information that I have. I want to make sure that
    we tackle that.
        I think I may have time for one more question. As I
    mentioned previously, I believe that it is our role to ensure
    individuals participating in this program are getting a good
    return on the investment. Some of the recent statistics show
    that what appears to be a high number of veterans re-enrolling
    in the program, about 45 percent from the information that I
    have. What do you believe is the cost of this high re-
    enrollment rate? What does that say about the success metric of
    the program and its ability to prepare and connect disabled
    veterans to meaningful careers?
        Ms. Devlin. Thank you for the question. The statute does
    allow for veterans who were previously rehabilitated to,
    obviously, reapply and to be considered for the program again.
    If their disabilities worsened or that for some other reason
    they can no longer perform the occupation, they may be found
    entitled to another program of services. It is not a
    continuation of their previous program. It is a new program
    because that employment that they were suitably employed in is
    no longer going to work for them.
        Mr. Ciscomani. It is considered a re-enrollment, but it is
    in nature a new experience, a new enrollment, a new result I am
    assuming that they are waiting for?
        Ms. Devlin. It does require--yes, it requires a new
    rehabilitation plan with a new goal.
        Mr. McGarvey. Okay, excellent. Well, that is all. I have
    got one more, but we can do that later.
        Thank you, sir. Appreciate it. Yield back.
        Mr. Van Orden. The gentleman yields back.
        Ms. Devlin, I just want to--what happened, like, what
    happened over the last, you know, insert months where this
    seemed to kind of spiral out of control? Can you, you know,
    give me the Reader's Digest on that one?
        Ms. Devlin. Well, the main thing is the ballooning of the
    workload because of the PACT Act making more veterans eligible
    to apply. Those veterans are predominantly in--certain states
    have a higher, you know, veteran population. Those stations got
    impacted more.
        Mr. Van Orden. I was not here. Were you here for the PACT
    Act, Chris?
        Mr. Pappas. Mm-hmm.
        Mr. Van Orden. Was that thought of? I mean, was this
    predicted in the PACT Act? By the way, we are going to have
    more guys and gals, and, therefore, we are going to have to
    have more counselors for VR&E?
        Mr. Pappas. I am sure it was anticipated, yes.
        Mr. Van Orden. Okay. Then we are just failing somewhere
    along the lines.
        I want to talk to you for a second. You said you need 387
    additional counselors on top of what is in the President's
    budget?
        Ms. Devlin. Yes, sir. That would be to get us to the 1-to-
    125 ratio.
        Mr. Van Orden. Okay. You are saying you need roughly 800
    counselors, is that right?
        Ms. Devlin. We currently have 1,056 performing this work.
        Mr. Van Orden. You need 1,400 or 1,500 total? Okay. How
    many vets have been in this program for longer than 48 months?
        Ms. Devlin. I do not have that number off the top of my
    head, sir.
        Mr. Van Orden. Right here. It is big. This is, I mean,
    Chris cannot read this, by the way. I can. I mean, it is really
    small. I did take my glasses off to read it, but we got some
    people here that have been receiving these benefits for like 82
    months in a row and 461,000 bucks, we got $895,000. The list
    goes on and on and on and on and on. I am just wondering, you
    know, has anyone been held accountable to your knowledge, and I
    know you just got there, for this?
        I mean, imagine how much medical benefits we could give to
    folks or how many more of these people we could hire if we were
    not spending $900,000 for an individual to get 72 months of
    training doing I do not know what. To your knowledge, has
    anyone been held accountable for this?
        Ms. Devlin. We have increased oversight over the last
    couple of months in looking into those cases to make sure that
    the right things are being done. Either the veteran needs to be
    re-engaged and finish their program or----
        Mr. Van Orden. Ma'am, I understand. I am talking about at
    the Veterans Affairs Administration, to your knowledge, has
    anyone been held accountable for this absolute buffoonery?
        Ms. Devlin. We have to look at the individual cases. It is
    not necessarily incorrect for that veteran to be in the program
    that long.
        Mr. Van Orden. Ms. Devlin, where do you go to college where
    you spend $900,000 for a degree?
        Ms. Devlin. One of those cases that I looked at in my
    oversight capacity was actually an independent living case
    where the veteran needed adaptation to their home to be able to
    navigate their home effectively.
        Mr. Van Orden. Okay. Now, this is what we talked about
    previously, and we are talking about splitting pools of money,
    but is that the case with this guy? We do not know. It is
    interrupted. We need to really get into this because this
    committee is also responsible for adaptive housing, so we need
    to have very clear funding lines.
        There is another thing. How do you establish the Basic
    Allowance for Housing (BAH) rate for a student? What is it
    based on?
        Ms. Devlin. The BAH rate is established in the Chapter 33
    guidelines, and VR&E simply uses those tables.
        Mr. Van Orden. Okay. If a person's home of record is in
    Michigan and they fly to San Diego to take a single class, they
    get San Diego per diem?
        Ms. Devlin. They would get their rate----
        Mr. Van Orden. Or BAH.
        Ms. Devlin. Yes, sir. They would get the rate based on the
    facility they are attending in person.
        Mr. Van Orden. Okay. See, this is an issue because that is
    $4,000. BAH, you know, having been in the military for a long
    time, is based on where you live or your duty station. This is
    something that Chris and I have to work on because that is
    fraudulent, in my opinion. You know, you are living in a place
    where the cost of living is so small, and then you fly in for a
    single class to do something, and you are, you know, making
    three times the BAH. That is something we need to look at from
    an oversight perspective, because that is legislative.
        Ms. Devlin. That is legislative. That is correct, sir.
        Mr. Van Orden. That is why we need to do our job. I am
    telling you, it is frustrating a little bit. What do you think?
    Like, right now, you have a magic wand, what do you do to fix
    this program? We got 19 seconds.
        Ms. Devlin. I do not have a magic wand. What we are doing
    is increasing internal controls to make sure that we can more
    closely monitor these things and hold our leaders accountable
    for monitoring the program.
        Mr. Van Orden. Okay. Well, my time has expired.
        Mr. Pappas, do you have more questions?
        Mr. Pappas. Yes, thank you.
        Mr. Van Orden. All right. We will do a second round of
    questioning. Mr. Pappas, you are now recognized for 5 minutes.
        Mr. Pappas. Thanks very much. I know our friend Mike Levin
    used to sit in the seat and was very much focused on what was
    happening in San Diego, where the numbers were far greater in
    terms of wait times than what I would see in my region of the
    country. The regional office for VR&E in my region in Boston,
    the wait time is 33 days. I understand that progress has been
    made at San Diego. I know that was in your testimony. Can you
    drill down a little bit on that in terms of what tools have
    proven successful there? I know you talked about the virtual
    counseling capabilities and redistributing work, and if you
    could also talk about whether that has met with veteran
    acceptance along the way, and that is a path that veterans are
    okay with choosing, it would be great to hear that.
        Ms. Devlin. Yes. With San Diego specifically, we deployed a
    help team of 11 people. These are people who were recently put
    into quality assurance positions. They are some of our best
    counselors, and they dug in and helped San Diego first, and
    then we also did the reassignment of work for the virtual
    counseling.
        We have not heard any complaints. Veterans seem to really
    appreciate the availability of virtual counseling. Truthfully,
    it is seamless to them where their counselor sits as long as
    they get the counseling appointment that they need to get
    entitlement and get a rehabilitation plan developed.
        Mr. Pappas. Okay. It appears that progress was made in part
    by making sure that ratios were in a much more acceptable place
    than they previously had been in San Diego. Is that right?
        Ms. Devlin. Yes. Ratios were adjusted based on moving the
    workload to the people that we have on board.
        Mr. Pappas. Okay. It appears that you cannot fully get
    there nationally and address those ratios without the
    additional people that you indicated you need for the program.
        Ms. Devlin. That is correct.
        Mr. Pappas. Okay. As enrollments increased since the
    passage of PACT, obviously staffing became a challenge and did
    not keep pace. I am wondering if you can reflect a little bit
    more on why that was the case.
        Ms. Devlin. The VR&E Division and the field offices did do
    some hiring over the last few years, but they also had some
    attrition. I will say that the field of rehabilitation
    counseling as a whole is not a growing occupation. That is why
    the new position of voc rehab specialist was created, so that
    different bachelor's degrees, for example, in other human
    services occupations could be considered.
        The previous administration had to make decisions, and they
    made decisions about hiring based on disability claims
    processing. The priority was given to hiring of disability
    claims processors versus voc rehab counselors.
        Mr. Pappas. In terms of the work that counselors do,
    obviously you can look at it in terms of numbers and having
    caseloads in the right place that might provide them with a
    better working environment and an ability to help veterans in a
    more timely fashion. Are there other ways you are thinking
    about retention and holding on to those qualified counselors
    that you have and working to avoid burnout?
        Ms. Devlin. Yes, I am very concerned about retention with
    our counselors. I have recently convened a group of leaders
    from the field, regional office directors, assistant directors,
    and VR&E officers to meet with me to give me recommendations on
    how we can make improvements in the field. VR&E service has
    done some great work, but really the field is where the rubber
    meets the road. Those are the people that I need to hear from
    directly. We have started meeting and discussing what to do to
    improve the program as a whole and also to improve things like
    retention and recruitment.
        Mr. Pappas. Okay. That is it for me. I will yield back, Mr.
    Chairman.
        Mr. Van Orden. Thank you, Ranking Member Pappas.
        Can you explain to me the difference between a veterans
    rehabilitation specialist and a veterans rehabilitation
    counselor?
        Ms. Devlin. Yes, sir. A vocational rehabilitation counselor
    has a master's degree in rehabilitation counseling, and so it
    is a specific industry. Then a vocational--and they can make
    decisions, like entitlement decisions, and they can do the full
    gamut of services. They can get a veteran all the way from the
    very beginning of application, all the way through to
    declaration of rehabilitation.
        A vocational rehab specialist can be at a bachelor's level,
    similar types of educational credentials, but at the bachelor's
    level. They cannot make entitlement decisions, but they can
    help the veteran. Once the rehabilitation plan has been
    developed by a voc rehab counselor, they can help the veteran
    throughout the lifetime of their case, all the way through
    declarations of rehabilitation or discontinuance if the veteran
    stops participating.
        Mr. Van Orden. What is the ratio between a specialist and a
    counselor? Like, how many specialists do you have compared to
    counselors?
        Ms. Devlin. Well, you know, I have the combined number. It
    is 1,056 of the two combined. I am sorry, I do not have the
    ratio between the two.
        Mr. Van Orden. In your professional opinion, do you think
    you need a master's degree to pull this off?
        Ms. Devlin. I think that what the master's degree gives us,
    I have a master's degree in rehabilitation counseling, and the
    training that you get in those master's degrees is how to
    really take a look at the disability conditions and the
    occupational areas and all of the support that a veteran might
    need to achieve rehabilitation and overcome those barriers.
    Other occupations, such as social work, for example, might be
    more comprehensive in the clinical sense, but less focused on
    the occupational sense.
        Mr. Van Orden. Well, Ms. Devlin, I would posit that if you
    have a 45 percent recidivism rate, that is the wrong term
    because they are not going to jail, but if 45 percent of our
    veterans are returning, I would say that maybe we are not
    getting the money--or the bang for the buck with a master's
    degree. If someone is--if they are missing the mark 45 percent
    of the time. What we are trying to do, if you need an
    additional 400 folks, you know, that is going to be really hard
    to produce these people.
        What I need from you is I need the ratio and I would like
    to see the specific differences. If you do not have in front of
    you right now, just get it to me. I want to see the specific
    differences in authorities. Having done this myself, and my
    counselor, her first name was Ann, I will not say her name, but
    was awesome. You know, I do not know if she had a master's
    degree or a bachelor's degree. She was great. Then seeing
    people along the way, I just think that what we are doing is we
    are requiring an educational--we are setting a standard for an
    education that is actually limiting our ability to hire people.
    I do not see an appreciable difference between the two right
    now.
        I do not want this to be a program that is hampered by an
    artificial requirement. The Secretary of Defense and some other
    folks have removed these requirements for GS levels. You know,
    you have to have a bachelor's to be this and a master's. Okay.
    That has been removed through a lot of these different career
    fields. I think that is something we need to look at here just
    because of these things. I mean, we got real--we have empiric
    knowledge, you know, experience-based knowledge now that this
    is something that needs to be looked at. You know, to my
    ranking member friend's point, you know, we want to make sure
    that we can get everybody what they need.
        You are good? Okay. Well, I want to thank you for coming
    today, Ms. Devlin. We do have a lot of work ahead of us. I want
    this to be an open line of communication and, again, I accept
    full responsibility for my lack of oversight being the chairman
    of the subcommittee in the last Congress. That is on me and I
    am not running away from that. I know that you have personally
    assured me and I am going to take you at your word that you
    will increase your oversight and I would like to be able to
    exchange ideas on this.
        Again, this is a fantastic program, but it is rife for
    abuse and it is too easy to defraud this program. We want to
    make sure that we hyper focus these dollars because this, I
    mean, how much is it, 72,000 bucks a year? I mean, we could
    essentially fund everybody you need if we got rid of what is
    clearly fraud. I mean, we can say whatever you want, but you do
    not spend $900,000, not have a bachelor's degree. It is just
    not it.
        Then we are also going to work on splitting off the
    adaptive home things because those are super important, too. I
    mean, that veteran loses their legs or arms or whatever, that
    is--we need to do that and I do not care how much it costs.
    That is a debt that we owe to the veterans. I just want to be
    able to clean up our funding lines so we know exactly what we
    are spending it on, so we can maximize these dollars to give
    every veteran that earned these benefits exactly what they need
    to thrive.
        I would now like to yield to my ranking member if you have
    any closing comments, sir.
        Mr. Pappas. No, thanks. I think we generally agree on the
    challenges here, and I am, you know, grateful to hear some of
    the ways that you have made some progress at realizing better
    numbers in certain locations around the country, including San
    Diego. I think they are important lessons to be learned.
        In addition to rebalancing caseloads and having better
    internal controls and providing the best training possible, it
    is clear this is an issue where we need more people. We need
    more counselors and support staff in order to get to those
    ratios that are acceptable so that veterans are not waiting far
    too long and are getting the help that they deserve.
        I know I want to work with you on that to help get you the
    support that you need and deserve there. I am grateful for your
    reflections and want to continue to make sure we are engaging
    the veteran community in terms of their own satisfaction and
    trust with respect to this program, which is a real game-
    changer, as you said, Mr. Chairman. I am glad that this support
    is there.
        We have got a ways to go to make it better. Certainly we
    have to pay attention to those cases where fraud is possible or
    where it may be happening. As you say, there are complex cases
    out there, and I think we need to make sure that we are focused
    on the big challenge here, which is ensuring that the increased
    number of veterans that are moving through this program get the
    help they need. You cannot get there without people and having
    the right staff. I remain committed to providing that as best I
    can.
        I yield back.
        Mr. Van Orden. The gentleman yields back.
        Ms. Devlin, again, thank you so much for coming today. I
    appreciate it. It is kind of lonely sitting out there by
    yourself, but you did a bang up job.
        I ask unanimous consent that all members may have 5
    legislative of days to revise and extend their remarks and
    include extraneous materials.
        Without objection, so ordered.
        The hearing is now adjourned.
        [Whereupon, at 3:21 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]

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

                             A  P  P  E  N  D  I  X

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

                        Prepared Statements of Witnesses

                                  ----------

                     Prepared Statement of Margarita Devlin

        Chairman Van Orden, Ranking Member Pappas, and distinguished
    members of the Subcommittee, I appreciate the opportunity to appear
    before you today to discuss the Veteran Readiness and Employment (VR&E)
    Program.
        I had the privilege of seeing the transformational impact of the
    VR&E program from multiple vantage points. I began my journey as a
    counselor working directly with Veterans to navigate their career paths
    and achieve their goals. I then had the honor of holding several
    leadership positions in VR&E in the field and at headquarters. At every
    level I witnessed how the program can truly change lives--helping
    Veterans rediscover purpose, achieve independence, and thrive in their
    post-service careers. During the first Trump administration, I served
    as the Principal Deputy Under Secretary for Benefits.
        One of our top priorities at that time was to address staffing
    shortfalls in VR&E by working diligently to achieve the counselor-to-
    Veteran ratio of 1 to 125. That is why it was especially disheartening
    to see much of that progress eroded over the past 4 years.

    Challenges and Change

        One of the challenges we face is the result of programmatic
    mismanagement over the past few years, which diverted critical funding
    away from hiring much needed counselors. Under this Administration's
    leadership, I developed a resourcing plan to ensure that resources
    allocated to VR&E through the President's budget are fully directed to
    the mission they are intended to support. Bottom line--not having focus
    on the program and ignoring the challenges it faced was unacceptable.
        Despite these challenges, we made meaningful progress in the past
    couple of months. I understand that your staff recently visited our San
    Diego Regional Office. I hope you saw there that we are working hard to
    make changes to better serve Veterans.
        Other significant changes currently in progress include improving
    workload management, which you highlighted in previous hearings--high
    wait times and cases so old due to lack of proper oversight.
        We also are accelerating eligibility decisions and making sure
    Veterans are getting the timely support they deserve. We deployed help
    teams, streamlined processes, and focused squarely on service delivery.
        Under new leadership, my commitment is simple. I want to restore
    your trust in the VR&E program and earn the trust of the Veterans and
    transitioning Service members who earned this benefit and deserve only
    the best.

    Program Overview

        The mission of the Veterans Benefits Administration (VBA) VR&E
    program is to assist Service members and Veterans with a service-
    connected disability that limits their ability to work or prevents them
    from finding or maintaining suitable careers or living more
    independently. VBA achieves this mission by providing direct counseling
    services to ensure participants' goals are not only achievable but
    attained.
        VR&E assists Service members and Veterans to find a suitable career
    goal or to live more independently through its five tracks of service:
    (1) rapid access to employment, (2) re-employment, (3) employment
    through long-term services, (4) self-employment, and (5) independent
    living. VR&E works directly with Service members and Veterans to
    identify suitable goals and develop a highly individualized plan for
    them. VR&E also monitors their progress and provides professional
    counseling and support by trained Vocational Rehabilitation Counselors
    (VRCs) and Vocational Rehabilitation Specialists (VRS).

    Program Growth, Staffing, and Workload Management

        VA consistently monitors Veteran participation in VR&E services to
    ensure that the program provides dedicated and focused counseling that
    leads to successful employment outcomes. From October 2020 to June
    2025, the VR&E caseload grew significantly. The caseload was 112,627 in
    October 2020 and is 186,826 as of June 2025, reflecting a total growth
    of 52.3 percent. This sharp increase underscores the escalating demand
    for VR&E services, driven by an increase in the eligible Veteran
    population due to the PACT Act and Benefits Delivery at Discharge
    program, as well as successful outreach efforts aimed at informing more
    Veterans about the program. This includes the program name change in
    June 2020, to better reflect the program's focus on helping Veterans
    achieve their employment goals and reduce any stigma or confusion
    associated with the previous name.
        Staffing allowances in the past few Fiscal Years allowed VR&E to
    hire 1 counselor for every 140 Veterans in the program. However, with
    VBA's current counselors onboard, VR&E is at a national caseload ratio
    at 1 to 175. VR&E currently requires an additional 387 counselors to
    meet the growing demand for VR&E services and drive the staffing toward
    1 to 125 counselor to caseload ratio. While VA is reviewing the
    staffing levels and budget, VR&E is actively taking steps to ensure
    that every Veteran receives the care and benefits they earned.
        VBA is addressing the increasing VR&E workload through several
    approaches. In recent months, we implemented a help team approach to
    reduce pending applications at several stations. In this model we take
    a team of 11 Quality Review Specialists and partner them with station
    resources to conduct group orientation sessions and expedited
    entitlement determinations in the initial stages of the VR&E claims
    process. This implementation allows us to reduce the pending work at
    the application and evaluation and planning stages, thus providing
    faster decisions to Veterans. The San Diego Regional Office (RO) used
    this approach, and recently other stations used this approach to assist
    pending workload. Quality Assurance results will be monitored to
    determine if there is an impact to claim quality.
        We implemented brokering strategies to address geographical demand
    and make the most efficient use of our national resources to process
    pending claims timelier. Stations with the highest caseload ratios
    broker work to stations with lower caseloads, thus allowing the pending
    work to be addressed more efficiently. We shift work strategically to
    balance demands and resources nationwide, thus improving the timeliness
    of services to Veterans. We employ a combination of a regular brokering
    cadence and supplement this by addressing surges in workload as needed.
    We conduct a regular analysis of all workload stages and make
    adjustment as needed.
        We also address our increasing claims inventory by using
    contracting funds. We are using contracting funds to target assistance
    to stations with high workloads. The primary focus is on the reduction
    of the applicant workload but also focuses on cases in the interrupted
    status. We assign contract dollars as needed for this effort to ensure
    the funds are allocated based on greatest workload need. Initial
    results of this new effort are positive.
        We are taking advantage of technology to improve our service to
    Veterans participating in the VR&E program. We launched the Electronic
    Virtual Assistant (eVA) system on June 20, 2020, which increased
    efficiencies in administrative duties like requesting and collecting
    documents in support of the claim and sending appointment reminders. We
    began implementation of our new Readiness and Employment System (RES)
    nationwide on May 19, 2025. RES is a new modern case management system
    that will ultimately replace the legacy system, CWINRS.\1\ RES will
    increase automation and reduce manual calculations, reduce the time
    needed to perform case management activities, display real-time
    eligibility and benefit information, and improve business processes to
    name a few. We will complete this staged implementation roll out by the
    end of September 2025. Once RES is fully deployed, it will capture
    additional efficiencies in the establishment of new cases, automate
    certain financial functions, and provide a more efficient VRC user
    interface. Veterans will experience reduced wait times and faster
    decisions.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ Corporate Winston-Salem, Indianapolis, Newark, Roanoke, and
    Seattle System. The name is derived from the first letter of the names
    of the five pilot test stations that tested the original program. It is
    an automated case management system supporting the VR&E program
    (legacy).
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        To address the growing demand for VR&E services, we designed these
    multiple approaches to mitigate against the current staffing shortage.
    In addition to these efforts, we use and leverage overtime funds for
    addressing high priority areas, conduct monthly calls with stations for
    discussing the status of aging cases, and increase oversight and
    management support for improving efficiency, applying best practices,
    and ensuring agile workload strategies are in place.

    Program Oversight

        VA's dedication to improving the VR&E program led to several
    initiatives aimed at enhancing service delivery for Veterans. Our
    comprehensive plan to enhance VR&E program compliance underscores our
    strong commitment to proper oversight, regulatory adherence, and
    consistent service delivery across all regional offices. Due to the
    increased demand for services, national compliance required additional
    oversight for workload management and customer service strategies.
    Consequently, we adjusted auditing processes to ensure field leaders
    had the necessary knowledge and skills to meet larger workload demands.
        As part of this initiative, we designed revamped site visit
    protocols to ensure consistency and thorough workload management. We
    structure these visits to identify best practices, address challenges,
    and ensure compliance with regulations, policies, and procedures. The
    goals are to guarantee consistent service delivery across all VR&E ROs,
    provide comprehensive workload management and oversight, highlight and
    share best practices, and promptly address challenges. These measures
    reflect our dedication to improving the VR&E Program and offering
    Veterans the highest quality of service.
        VA is committed to ensuring that congressional intent is carried
    out in a fiscally responsible and responsible manner to honor Veterans
    enrolled in the program. An example of VA's responsiveness is
    demonstrated by the quick actions taken as a result of a 2023 Office of
    Inspector General (OIG) report. VA demonstrated proactive leadership
    and commitment to compliance by implementing significant reforms to
    ensure adherence to Chapter 31-only program requirements. OIG
    identified that VR&E did not correctly implement the law requiring
    individual waivers from the executive director for each participant in
    a Chapter 31-only program.
        VA updated its guidance, emphasizing that VRCs must use approved GI
    Bill programs to the maximum extent. VA worked to ensure only Veterans
    in unique circumstances received approval to attend a program with this
    limited authority. VA provided training, updated national procedures,
    and discontinued facilities outside of congressional intent in less
    than a year. We complemented these efforts with the establishment of
    robust monitoring processes, including the implementation of compliance
    surveys and Department-wide auditing, thus ensuring all Chapter 31-only
    programs align with legislative intent. VA's proactive actions reflect
    a dedicated effort to enhance program integrity and ensure that
    Veterans receive the highest standard of service. These initiatives
    fortified VA's compliance framework and reaffirmed its commitment to
    accountability and oversight of Veteran service delivery.
        VBA also conducts monthly national quality assurance (QA) reviews
    on random samples from each RO, alongside individual case manager
    performance assessments through QA reviews conducted at each local
    office. As of May 2025, VR&E exceeded the outstanding target in all
    national performance metrics including Fiscal Accuracy (96 percent),
    Case Management Accuracy (84 percent), and Program Outcome Accuracy (98
    percent).

    VR&E related legislation

        VA testified before the House Committee on Veterans' Affairs
    Subcommittee on Economic Opportunity on June 11, 2025, on several bills
    that would impact the VR&E program. VA supported the proposed
    legislation that would limit the extension of a vocational
    rehabilitation program under Chapter 31 to 96 months unless the
    Secretary determines that extraordinary circumstances apply and submits
    written notices of the extension and the extraordinary circumstances to
    the House and Senate Committees on Veterans' Affairs. The limitations
    on extensions in the proposed bill would ensure that resources are used
    effectively and fairly. The goal of the VR&E program is to provide
    personalized support tailored to each Veteran's rehabilitation
    objectives, thus helping them achieve suitable employment or live more
    independently within a reasonable timeframe rather than extending
    benefits indefinitely. Furthermore, VA proposed an amendment to align
    the calculation of entitlement for the VR&E program with other VA
    education programs. This amendment aims to reduce the disparity in the
    order of usage and address reductions of entitlement in the VR&E
    program resulting from the transfer of entitlement to a dependent.
        VA also supported H.R. 3579, the Veterans Readiness and Employment
    Program Integrity Act. This proposed legislation would require the
    Secretary to report on the employment and annual wages of its
    participants, thus ensuring Veterans are achieving meaningful
    employment. It also would require the Secretary, on an annual basis, to
    publish on a VA website the average wait time from when a Veteran
    requests a vocational rehabilitation program under Chapter 31 to when
    the Veteran first meets with a counselor as part of the Veteran's
    program.
        Additionally, H.R. 3579 proposes a 1-year limit on employment
    assistance for Veterans who have previously participated in the VR&E
    program or a similar vocational rehabilitation service. Research
    indicates that the highest engagement in employment services typically
    occurs within the first 3 to 6 months. Most participants find
    employment during this timeframe. VA suggested an amendment to apply a
    similar limitation to counseling and placement and postplacement
    services addressed in section 3105(b)(1), which currently allows for
    assistance for up to 18 months. This limitation aims to ensure that
    services and resources are used more efficiently and effectively.
        The VR&E program acknowledges that collecting and reporting data is
    crucial for demonstrating the program's effectiveness and improving its
    services. The program recently achieved split positive outcomes to show
    those metrics on Veterans who obtain employment and those who have
    achieved rehabilitation to the point of employability. The program
    constantly seeks ways to demonstrate a good return on investment and
    ensure that it effectively meets the needs of Veterans participating in
    the VR&E program.

    Employment Metrics

        Veterans who complete a program of rehabilitation show
    significantly better outcomes compared to those who stop participating
    such as higher employment rates (73 percent vs. 43 percent), greater
    income earnings ($80k vs. $50k), and increased home ownership (77
    percent vs. 62 percent).\2\ In addition, their reliance on supplemental
    programs decreased (35 percent vs. 58 percent), thus highlighting
    participants successful transition and reduced need for further
    support.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \2\ Fiscal Year 2023 Veteran Readiness and Employment (VR&E)
    Longitudinal Study
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Continuing our commitment to helping more Veterans successfully
    transition into the workforce, VR&E focuses on employment outcomes. An
    employment outcome represents a rehabilitation when a Veteran completes
    their program and is successful in gaining suitable employment. From
    Fiscal Year (FY) 2020 to Fiscal Year 2024, VR&E Service recorded a
    consistent number of employment outcomes, over 10,000 each fiscal year,
    and 10,501 in Fiscal Year 2024 alone. In Fiscal Year 2025, 7,486
    employment outcomes were achieved through June 20, 2025, which is
    currently 9 percent over the established target for Employment
    Outcomes.

    Readiness and Employment System

        As noted earlier in this testimony, VR&E began implementation of
    the RES nationwide. A significant leap toward enhancing efficiency and
    service delivery, VR&E successfully automated the eligibility
    determination process through the RES. This process, previously
    requiring the effort of two employees, was streamlined to require only
    one employee, thanks to the integration with the Master Person Index
    and VA Profile. When an application arrives in RES, it is immediately
    matched with enterprise data to automate previously manual data entry,
    thus ensuring all necessary information is readily available. The
    system's intuitive design processes the data and uses green checkmarks
    and red X's to visually represent eligibility decisions, thus
    simplifying the validation process for field staff. This automation not
    only expedites decision-making but also allows staff to focus on more
    critical aspects of their roles. Accepted applications lead directly to
    case creation and the assignment of a VRC, thus ensuring timely service
    for Veterans. By the end of the pilot, RES automation demonstrated an
    average processing time for Eligibility of 3.4 days, versus over 7 days
    in the legacy CWINRS platform.
        RES significantly increases the availability of real-time data,
    thus enabling more informed and accurate entitlement decisions through
    automated business rules. By consolidating various data sources and
    providing comprehensive insights into each Veteran's profile, RES helps
    address individual needs more effectively and optimizes the support
    provided. In addition, RES's embedded analytics and robust tracking of
    case management enable more effective decision-making and workload
    management.
        Since October 9, 2024, the automation processes within RES
    eliminated 5,903 hours of manual data entry, thus allowing field staff
    to dedicate more time to directly supporting Veterans. The automated
    eligibility determinations transformed a two-person intake process into
    a simplified one-person review, which greatly improved efficiency. In
    addition, the automation of calculation and case approval processes
    reduces the need for out-of-system procedures, thus simplifying data
    management. The implementation of a modern user interface based on
    human-centered design principles minimizes fatigue and ensures easy
    access to information within correct workflows, thus further reducing
    administrative constraints.

    Conclusion

        In conclusion, VA is fully committed to making the improvements
    necessary to strengthen the VR&E program from ensuring fiscal
    stewardship and filling critical vacancies to modernizing how we
    deliver services. At the heart of all this work is one goal: ensuring
    that Veterans receive the support they earned, when they need it,
    without lengthy wait times. We know we have work to do, and we are
    determined to get it right. Our Veterans deserve nothing less. Mr.
    Chairman, this concludes my statement. I would be happy to answer any
    questions you or other members of the Subcommittee may have.

                           Statements for the Record

                                  ----------

     Prepared Statement of U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, Office of
                             the Inspector General
    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                Prepared Statement of Veterans Education Success
    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                                     [all]