[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]