[Senate Hearing 119-384]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]


                                                      S. Hrg. 119-384

                 PROGRAMS FOR JUSTICE-INVOLVED VETERANS
=======================================================================

                                HEARING

                               BEFORE THE

                     COMMITTEE ON VETERANS' AFFAIRS
                          UNITED STATES SENATE

                    ONE HUNDRED NINETEENTH CONGRESS

                             SECOND SESSION

                               __________

                             APRIL 15, 2026

                               __________

       Printed for the use of the Committee on Veterans' Affairs
       
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]       

        Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.govinfo.gov
        
                                __________
                                
                   U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
63-515 PDF                WASHINGTON : 2026
=======================================================================
       
                 SENATE COMMITTEE ON VETERANS' AFFAIRS

                     Jerry Moran, Kansas, Chairman
John Boozman, Arkansas               Richard Blumenthal, Connecticut, 
Bill Cassidy, Louisiana                  Ranking Member
Thom Tillis, North Carolina          Patty Murray, Washington
Dan Sullivan, Alaska                 Bernard Sanders, Vermont
Marsha Blackburn, Tennessee          Mazie K. Hirono, Hawaii
Kevin Cramer, North Dakota           Margaret Wood Hassan, New 
Tommy Tuberville, Alabama                Hampshire
Jim Banks, Indiana                   Angus S. King, Jr., Maine
Tim Sheehy, Montana                  Tammy Duckworth, Illinois
                                     Ruben Gallego, Arizona
                                     Elissa Slotkin, Michigan

                     David Shearman, Staff Director
                Tony McClain, Democratic Staff Director
                           
                           C O N T E N T S

                              ----------                              

                             April 15, 2026

                                SENATORS

                                                                   Page
Hon. Jerry Moran, Chairman, U.S. Senator from Kansas.............     1
Hon. Richard Blumenthal, Ranking Member, U.S. Senator from 
  Connecticut....................................................    11
Hon. Thom Tillis, U.S. Senator from North Carolina...............    13
Hon. Mazie K. Hirono, U.S. Senator from Hawaii...................    15
Hon. Margaret Wood Hassan, U.S. Senator from New Hampshire.......    16
Hon. Angus S. King, Jr., U.S. Senator from Maine.................    19
Hon. Jim Banks, U.S. Senator from Indiana........................    30

                               WITNESSES
                                Panel I

Clyde ``Butch'' Tate II, Major General, U.S. Army (Ret.), Chief 
  Counsel, All Rise..............................................     3

The Honorable Lawton Nuss, Chief Justice (Ret.), Kansas Supreme 
  Court..........................................................     5

Corey Schramm, Veteran, U.S. Army................................     6

David ``Mac'' MacEwen, Brigadier General, U.S. Army (Ret.), 
  Director, Veterans Justice Commission, Council on Criminal 
  Justice........................................................     8

Rose Carmen Goldberg, Associate Teaching Professor and Director 
  of the Veterans Clinic, University of Washington School of Law.     9

                                Panel II

Dana DiGiacomo, Assistant Director, Reentry Services Division, 
  Federal Bureau of Prisons, U.S. Department of Justice..........    26

Thomas O'Toole, MD, Acting Assistant Under Secretary for Health 
  for Clinical Services, U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs.....    27

                                APPENDIX
                          Prepared Statements

Clyde ``Butch'' Tate II, Major General, U.S. Army (Ret.), Chief 
  Counsel, All Rise..............................................    39

The Honorable Lawton Nuss, Chief Justice (Ret.), Kansas Supreme 
  Court..........................................................    44

Corey Schramm, Veteran, U.S. Army................................    47

David ``Mac'' MacEwen, Brigadier General, U.S. Army (Ret.), 
  Director, Veterans Justice Commission, Council on Criminal 
  Justice........................................................    49

Rose Carmen Goldberg, Associate Teaching Professor and Director 
  of the Veterans Clinic, University of Washington School of Law.   131

Dana DiGiacomo, Assistant Director, Reentry Services Division, 
  Federal Bureau of Prisons, U.S. Department of Justice..........   139

Thomas O'Toole, MD, Acting Assistant Under Secretary for Health 
  for Clinical Services, U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs.....   142

                        Questions for the Record

Department of Veterans Affairs response to questions submitted 
  by:

  Hon. Richard Blumenthal........................................   147

                        Statement for the Record

Manuel ``Manny'' Gomez, U.S. Navy Veteran, IAVA Cavalry Member...   151

 
                              PROGRAMS FOR
                       JUSTICE-INVOLVED VETERANS

                              ----------                              


                       WEDNESDAY, APRIL 15, 2026

                                       U.S. Senate,
                            Committee on Veterans' Affairs,
                                                    Washington, DC.
    The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 3:38 p.m., in 
Room SR-418, Russell Senate Office Building, Hon. Jerry Moran, 
Chairman of the Committee, presiding.

    Present: Senators Moran, Tillis, Banks, Sheehy, Blumenthal, 
Hirono, Hassan, and King.

             OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JERRY MORAN,
               CHAIRMAN, U.S. SENATOR FROM KANSAS

    Chairman Moran. Everyone, welcome to the Senate Committee 
on Veterans' Affairs hearing today. I'm excited about the 
hearing that we're having. It's one I don't think we've--this 
topic is not one that has received a lot of attention. I'm glad 
it is at least receiving more today, and I thank our witnesses. 
Got enough room? Everybody good? Okay. I thank our witnesses 
for being here.
    I especially want to welcome two of my friends from my law 
school days. Both have had significant careers since we 
graduated. Major General ``Butch'' Tate, who is one of our 
witnesses today, and is one of the drivers of veterans courts 
in our state, along with the former chief justice of the Kansas 
Supreme Court, Lawton Nuss. Again, these two are the folks I 
know best when it comes to these issues, and they are 
relentless on behalf of veterans and veteran justice.
    All of our witnesses provide examples of why we should work 
to support veterans when they transition out of the military, 
and the value they add to communities and our country. After 
their service, when their transition goes well, all of us do 
that. We need to make certain that the veterans who carry scars 
of unhealed wounds, of visible and invisible, are not 
forgotten. When left untreated, these can often lead or 
contribute to veterans' involvement in the criminal justice 
system. According to the Veterans Justice Commission, 
represented today by General MacEwen, 31 percent of veterans 
report having been arrested at least once in their lives, 
compared to only 18 percent of the general population. Veterans 
with PTSD or TBI diagnosis are more than 50 percent more likely 
to experience criminal justice involvement.
    While there is no one-size-fits-all solution to this 
problem, I am encouraged by the array of community-based 
programs supporting justice-involved veterans and their 
families. I'm particularly supportive of the Veterans Treatment 
Court (VTC) models since Johnson County, a Kansas--it's a 
suburb of the Kansas side of Kansas City, opened its first 
veteran treatment court in 2016, and an additional five Kansas 
counties have followed suit. And I'm looking forward to hearing 
about the impressive journey that one Kansan, one veteran court 
graduate, Corey Schramm, who's with us here today, I'm 
interested in hearing his story. Thank you, Corey, for making 
the trip, and thanks to your team from Johnson County in 
joining you here today.
    According to All Rise, represented here by Chief Counsel 
General Tate, the average national completion rate for 
treatment courts is nearly 60 percent. Approximately, two-
thirds higher than probation, and more than twice the rate of 
probationers with substance use disorders. This data 
demonstrates that the cases of justice-involved veterans are 
best handled by experts who understand that a veteran's 
experience is different than that of a civilian.
    Veterans Treatment Courts are tangible investments in those 
who served our country, and the results that we've seen speak 
for themselves. I will continue to prioritize federal support 
for Veterans Treatment Courts in this Committee, as well as my 
role in the Senate Appropriations Committee. This year, the 
annual CJS appropriation, we provided--that bill provided $4 
million to the Department of Justice to establish the National 
Center for Veterans Justice. Through the National Center, I 
hope to see veterans in Kansas and across the country benefit 
from a coordinated DOJ resource designed to improve the 
outcomes of justice-involved veterans by closing the gap 
between research, policy, and the front line of practice.
    This afternoon, we'll discuss where Congress, DOJ, VA, and 
local communities where they've made strides in delivering on 
these promises that we've made to those who served. We'll also 
discuss where the improvements are needed to make programs 
stronger, more sustainable, and more successful by putting the 
veteran first.
    I was encouraged to see DOJ's March release of a notice of 
funding availability for Veteran Treatment Courts, followed by 
their commitment to brief the Committee on both their plans for 
the establishment of the National Center and the technical 
assistance funding to support the training of treatment court 
staff and their partners nationwide. These developments reflect 
a welcome focus on justice-involved veteran community. I look 
forward to hearing from federal, state, and local partners that 
are here with us today, and to learn more about how this 
Committee can support them.
    I'm going to--at this point, I normally yield to the 
Ranking Member, Senator Blumenthal. He's on his way. He will be 
here. He'll say his opening statement for that arrival. And let 
me introduce the panel. Testifying on today's first panel is 
Major General Clyde ``Butch'' Tate, retired, chief counsel of 
All Rise; Kansas Supreme Court Chief Justice Lawton Nuss, 
retired--there's a message here to me----
    [Laughter.]
    Chairman Moran [continuing]. As well as Corey Schramm, a 
veteran of the U.S. Army; Brigadier General David MacEwen, 
retired, director of Veterans Justice Commission; and Rose 
Carmen Goldberg, associate teaching professor, and director of 
the Veterans Clinic at the University of Washington School of 
Law.
    General Tate, you are now recognized for 5 minutes.

                            PANEL I

                              ----------                              


      STATEMENT OF CLYDE ``BUTCH'' TATE II, MAJOR GENERAL,
           U.S. ARMY (RET.), CHIEF COUNSEL, ALL RISE

    General Tate. Chair Moran, Ranking Member Blumenthal, and 
distinguished Members of the Senate Committee on Veterans' 
Affairs, it's an honor to testify today.
    Senator Moran, we thank you and the Committee for 
recognizing that while saying, ``Thank you for your service,'' 
is important and appreciated, as a Nation, we must follow those 
words with the actions necessary to meet our core national 
obligation to care for our veterans. I'm honored to be here 
with this panel of veterans, innovators, thought leaders in our 
justice system, and especially Mr. Corey Schramm, an Army 
veteran who has witnessed our justice system at its very best.
    I'm a proud Army veteran, and equally proud to be the son 
of a 36-year combat-wounded Army infantryman who taught me how 
to take care of soldiers and their family members. It's a 
lesson that I hope I took both into the Army, and my life after 
the Army. A few months after joining All Rise as its chief 
counsel, I was visiting courts, training on best practices, 
speaking with stakeholders, and listening to veterans and their 
families, I realized then, and to this day strongly believe, 
that Veterans Treatment Courts showcase our government, 
judiciary, and communities at their very finest.
    To be sure, the vast majority of veterans thrive because of 
their military service. For many of us, it was the most 
rewarding time of our professional life, despite--or maybe 
because of its hardships and sacrifices. Yet, for a small 
percentage of our veterans, however, their experiences; the 
sights, the sounds, the events, the memories, the resulting 
trauma, the attempts to bury that trauma, are too much to 
overcome without help. Without our help, they are left behind, 
and some who straggle behind engage in increasingly risky 
behavior that puts them at the crossroads of the criminal 
justice system. In society, just like any military formation, 
you can only move as fast as your slowest runner. And like the 
military, we cannot and should not accept leaving someone 
behind.
    Today, as we move toward programs that provide solutions, 
let's be mindful that those veterans challenged by their 
service do not want to be seen as a percentage on a 
spreadsheet. They and their families are real people, who are 
in that very small segment of society, who chose to serve us, 
but who have experienced circumstances that altered who they 
are, how they think, and how they act.
    So, what do we do? I submit that as a Nation, we have a 
choice, and I hope we can learn from how we chose to treat my 
father's generation of Vietnam War and Vietnam-era veterans, 
and do better. That is, choose to implement programs structured 
to consider and address the unique experiences and 
circumstances of veterans, including those in our criminal 
justice system.
    The choice we make must be multifaceted and include 
Veterans Treatment Courts with the person-centered care they 
provide. Veterans Treatment Courts transform the way our system 
identifies, assesses, and treats veterans in the justice 
system, and assembles the resources and parties to directly 
serve veterans--and these courts work. Beyond the dedication 
and commitment of all involved, these courts work because they 
are multidisciplinary and non-adversarial, merging resources 
and stakeholders into a singular effort. They work because they 
are trained to follow key components and evidence-based 
practices. They are treatment- and accountability-focused. 
Public safety matters.
    Now, the community partners: housing, employment, 
counseling, transportation, education, pro bono legal clinics, 
and others are as key to making these courts work as the 
judges, prosecutors, defense counsel, law enforcement, 
probation supervision clinicians, veterans justice outreach 
(VJO) employees of the VA, and importantly, volunteer veteran 
mentors, the latter being our secret sauce.
    Now, like many complex challenges, there's no one solution 
fits all. That's why we are excited that today, in addition to 
Veterans Treatment Courts, there's yet another path forward to 
improve outcomes for our veterans, because of the congressional 
support for the National Center for Veterans Justice. We are 
excited at the possibilities of the Center. We are also excited 
about the synergy when current and future programs, such as 
Veterans Treatment Courts, law school veterans support clinics, 
and university-wide student veteran centers are located in 
proximity to each other, to make it less challenging for a 
veteran to receive the support they need.
    As I conclude--and I hope you'll indulge me one final 
military analogy to highlight the critical aspect of the path 
forward for current and future programs. There's a theme 
running through each of the programs and participants I've 
mentioned, including court teams, law enforcement, veteran 
mentors, VJOs, and that is the importance of training and 
expert assistance to the overall success of each. Military 
units, for example, may have personnel who are mission-
focused--the best equipment and technology, SOPs, tactics, 
skilled and experienced leadership, but to succeed, all units 
must be trained.
    And the proficiency gained from training can't be one and 
done. Success must be sustained. If we leave success to chance, 
we are not making the choice that will improve outcomes. As the 
data shows, training and technical assistance will improve 
graduation rates, which leads to decreased recidivism, and to 
the very reason that we are all assembled here today, and that 
is to improve the outcomes for justice-involved veterans.
    Chair, thank you again for your time, for convening this 
hearing, and for helping ensure that as a Nation, we make the 
right choice. Thank you.

    [The prepared statement of General Tate appears on pages 
39-43 of the Appendix.]

    Chairman Moran. Chief Justice Nuss.

  STATEMENT OF HON. LAWTON NUSS, CHIEF JUSTICE (RET.), KANSAS 
                         SUPREME COURT

    Mr. Nuss. A combat veteran told me he would have been 
better off being killed in Afghanistan, instead of coming home 
and being arrested for committing a civilian crime. As he 
described his shame to me, ``I went from hero to villain.'' 
This justice-involved veteran suffered from unhealed PTSD. As 
has been said about such veterans, the painful paradox is, that 
fighting for one's country can render one unfit to be its 
citizen. Fortunately, this veteran later became one of the 
first graduates of the Veterans Treatment Court, VTC, in 
Johnson County, Kansas. And I'll talk more about this and other 
Kansas VTCs, because our experience could be a model for how 
other jurisdictions establish new VTCs and enhance existing 
ones.
    Before doing that, let me say I'm a Marine Corps veteran, 
and, as was mentioned, I'm the former Chief Justice of the 
Kansas Supreme Court. What has not been said is that I left the 
court with three years remaining in my term, so I could devote 
more time to help my fellow veterans. Chairman Moran, Ranking 
Member Blumenthal, and Members of the Senate Committee on 
Veterans' Affairs, I'm honored to speak before you today in 
both of those capacities.
    Now, to begin, in 2015 Kansas had no VTCs. Today, we have 
six, and we are working to establish more. Johnson County was 
our first one. Now, some people insisted that because it is our 
state's wealthiest county, that only a few of its veteran 
residents could possibly have committed crimes. Until the 
sheriff was called, and he said 60 of his inmates were 
veterans. That fact helped expose the need for a VTC.
    Another VTC obstacle was funding. I had to tell judges the 
judicial branch had no funds available, but these and other 
creators agreed to take on extra, unpaid work and opened the 
first Kansas VTC in 2016. It has been thriving ever since, 
thanks in substantial part to later grants from the Bureau of 
Justice Assistance (BJA). So, we thank Congress for these 
appropriations.
    How do we know this VTC has been thriving? Well, consider 
that 89 veterans have graduated from this program, and only 
five of them have been arrested for committing later crimes. 
That means 84 have been rehabilitated, a nearly 95 percent 
success rate. 84 people who returned to being contributing 
members of their families, local communities, and American 
society.
    So, how did Kansas get five more VTCs? Well, for starters, 
this VTC encourages all those who are considering one, to come 
watch their court proceedings. There, the visitors also talk 
one-on-one with their peers, for example, the VTC judge with 
the visiting judge, and the VTC probation officer with the 
visiting probation officer. Along with that, this VTC tells 
these visitors just how beneficial All Rise's training and 
technical assistance had been for it, and will be for their 
future VTCs. I participated in three of those training sessions 
years before joining the All Rise board of directors, and I can 
independently confirm their worth.
    Also, BJA funding is helping to expand our VTCs statewide. 
The judicial branch's specialty court program manager gets All 
Rise's notices of BJA funding opportunities and, after 
informing all courts, she and her grant writer help the 
responding courts apply for these grants to establish and 
enhance VTCs. The judicial branch also hosts a statewide 
specialty court conference each fall. Additionally, a Supreme 
Court justice serves as liaison to the specialty courts. Either 
she, or I, or both attend the opening and graduation ceremonies 
of our VTCs, and people like Chairman Moran and Congresswoman 
Sharice Davids accept our speaking invitations there. So, word 
spreads of the Supreme Court's ongoing support of VTCs.
    We also emphasize the obvious money saved by avoiding 
incarceration and keeping a veteran in the community under 
court supervision, which promotes their rehabilitation. Without 
this opportunity, we face the resultant financial costs of 
future incarceration for their new crimes. We also face the 
hidden costs of these new crimes, such as the extra time and 
burdens imposed on those working in the criminal justice 
system.
    In response to such information, last fall our newest VTC 
was created in Douglas County, the home of the University of 
Kansas, also known as KU. And there, the VTC joined two 
existing KU veteran-helping entities to form the Kansas 
Trifecta. One is the KU Law School's Veterans Legal Support 
Clinic, and thanks to your Committee chair, this clinic was 
created with federal funding and provides free legal services 
to veterans across the state.
    The third in the trifecta is the Lt. Gen. William K. Jones 
Military-Affiliated Student Center where students, including 
current and former military and their families, can come for 
services such as support from the VA's VetSuccess on Campus 
program, and guidance and answers regarding the GI Bill and VA 
benefits, all while enjoying the camaraderie of a familiar 
military-connected environment. The trifecta entities can share 
information and refer clients to one another when necessary.
    To conclude, I thank you all again on behalf of my fellow 
veterans.

    [The prepared statement of Mr. Nuss appears on pages 44-46 
of the Appendix.]

    Chairman Moran. Justice, thank you very much. Now, to Mr. 
Schramm.

         STATEMENT OF COREY SCHRAMM, VETERAN, U.S. ARMY

    Mr. Schramm. Chairman Moran, Ranking Member Blumenthal, and 
Members of the Senate Committee on Veterans' Affairs, thank you 
for the opportunity to speak with you today. My name is Corey 
Schramm, I'm a husband and a father of two great kids, and I'm 
a proud veteran of the United States Army. Today, I serve as an 
adult case manager at the Johnson County Mental Health Center, 
and a member of the Johnson County Criminal Justice Advisory 
Council. I am also a grateful graduate of the Johnson County 
Veterans Treatment Court.
    After 9/11, I joined the Army and deployed to Iraq three 
times. I am proud of my service. In Iraq, we had structure and 
routine. We knew we had each other's backs, and the mission 
kept us focused. Back home, I was still learning how to be a 
husband and a father. Just when I felt I was beginning to build 
a relationship with my daughter, I would have to leave again. I 
understand now that my drinking and drug use was my way of 
coping with a life I didn't know how to live. In June 2020, 
things came to a breaking point. I spent five hours in a 
destructive episode at my house involving a weapon. I have no 
memory of the incident, but I woke up charged with a felony and 
facing incarceration. I didn't know if I would even be welcome 
back in my home again.
    This is where my story of recovery begins. A Veterans 
Justice Outreach specialist with the VA is who introduced me to 
the Veterans Treatment Court. Veterans Treatment Court changed 
my life and the life of my wife and children. My first day in 
Veterans Treatment Court happened to be a graduation ceremony. 
I watched veterans with similar backgrounds as mine hug the 
judge and thank the police officers who had arrested them. They 
were applauded and thanked for their service. It was like 
nothing I'd ever seen.
    The program gave me structure, accountability, and support. 
I knew where I needed to be and what was expected of me, and 
for the first time since leaving the military, I felt like part 
of a unit again. I received community-based services and VA 
care, including treatment and group therapy, and I started to 
see a future for myself and my family. The Veterans Treatment 
Court was with me every step of the way. When I needed help, 
they were there to provide it. When I stumbled, they held me 
accountable. One of the most important parts of my journey was 
my mentor, Navy veteran and retired Rear Admiral Ed Phillips, 
who is here with me today. He stood by me every step of the way 
and showed me what recovery could look like.
    Through the VA Vocational Rehabilitation Program, I went 
back to school and got an associate's degree in addiction 
counseling. I remember sitting at the kitchen table with my 
daughter doing our homework together, it was one of the small 
moments that helped us rebuild our relationship. This year, my 
wife and I will celebrate our 20th wedding anniversary, and we 
will also be taking our daughter to college at K-State, Kansas 
State University. My son and I are about to attend our sixth 
consecutive year attending NASCAR races at the Kansas Speedway.
    I was nervous to graduate, but the program prepared me for 
this challenge. I am sharing my story today because there are 
countless veterans who do not have access to Veterans Treatment 
Courts. Veterans Treatment Courts are not a shortcut; these 
programs are rigorous. They demand honesty, discipline, and a 
willingness to change. But they work.
    As you consider the future of Veterans Treatment Courts, I 
urge you to continue supporting and expanding these programs, 
because behind every statistic is a veteran like myself; 
someone who served, who struggled, and who, with the right 
combination of accountability and support, can find their way 
back. Or, as Ed would say, ``Get your good name back.''
    Thank you for the opportunity to share my story. I look 
forward to your questions.

    [The prepared statement of Mr. Schramm appears on pages 47-
48 of the Appendix.]

    Chairman Moran. On the anniversary and off to college, and 
gratitude and expression of our support and thanks to the 
Admiral. General MacEwen, you are now recognized.

  STATEMENT OF DAVID ``MAC'' MACEWEN, BRIGADIER GENERAL, U.S. 
ARMY (RET.), DIRECTOR, VETERANS JUSTICE COMMISSION, COUNCIL ON 
                        CRIMINAL JUSTICE

    General MacEwen. Thank you, Chairman Moran, Ranking Member 
Blumenthal, and Members of the Committee. I'm Matt MacEwen, I 
served in the Army for 33 years, and retired 11 years ago as 
the Adjutant General of the Army. I'm here today representing 
the Council on Criminal Justice, where I serve as the Director 
of the Veterans Justice Commission. The Council is an 
independent, nonpartisan think tank and invitational membership 
organization that advances the understanding of the Nation's 
criminal justice policy choices and builds consensus for 
solutions.
    In 2022, the Council assembled the Commission to figure out 
why so many men and women who have served our country are 
winding up in the criminal justice system. It issued 11 
recommendations and several research publications. I've 
submitted the details of all the recommendations in my written 
testimony. Each year, about 200,000 service members leave the 
military. Most transition successfully, but some face 
challenges.
    Veterans are more likely than nonveterans to be arrested, 
and tens of thousands are incarcerated. This involvement is 
often driven by combat-related trauma, traumatic brain injury, 
loss of benefits, and gaps in identification and intervention. 
The way we currently manage struggling veterans undermines 
recruitment, jeopardizes the health and safety of our veterans, 
their families, their communities, and ultimately, national 
security.
    The Commission made several recommendations for changes at 
the Pentagon. One, creating an Under Secretary of Transition to 
mitigate the issues of fragmented delivery of services and 
creating accountability in one office. Two, creating a 
validated risk-needs assessment that identifies service members 
at the highest risk for post-transition problems, and 
incorporating evidence-based rehabilitative practices into the 
management of disciplinary and other performance issues. And 
three, establishing a network of joint transition centers, 
residential programs aligned with VA facilities to assist 
higher-risk service members before they leave service.
    A critical element of the Commission's plan addressed what 
we refer to as the ``commanders dilemma'', the tension 
commanders face between maintaining unit readiness versus 
supporting underperforming service members or supporting 
transition. To prioritize operational readiness, commanders 
look for the fastest way to replace service members who are not 
available for unit transition, disciplinary, or medical 
reasons. A commander may not have the flexibility to allow an 
individual to participate in congressionally mandated TAP, or 
receive evidence-based support for the kinds of minor 
disciplinary infractions seen in the civilian justice system.
    Instead, the system defaults to granting administrative 
discharges. An other-than-honorable discharge is an 
administrative death sentence, locking service members out of 
benefits that support a smooth transition. I speak from 
experience on this: I recommended or approved without knowing 
the full impact those kinds of discharges, and I regret that to 
this very day.
    The Commission made several recommendations for changes at 
the VA. First, Congress must direct a return to the plain text 
of the 1944 GI Bill, providing VA eligibility to all former 
service members not discharged under dishonorable conditions. 
Second, repeal of the 1999 rule change, and return to providing 
VA healthcare to incarcerated veterans. VA medical services are 
more appropriate and effective than standard correctional care. 
And third, eliminate administrative barriers to housing 
eligibility and prevent benefit arrearages.
    When veterans do enter the criminal justice system, they 
confront a patchwork of interventions. These programs vary 
substantially across jurisdictions, and many fall through the 
cracks. VTCs have been pioneering life-saving interventions for 
thousands of veterans. Yet, despite their expansion, we found 
that only about 15 percent of the veterans were able to take 
advantage of these courts. We developed a complementary policy 
framework for those without access to a VTC. It's been adopted 
by the American Legislative Exchange Council, and is under 
consideration in several states.
    Finally, regarding the National Center on Veterans Justice 
proposed by the Commission, Congress authorized $4 million for 
the Center in January, and we're grateful for that. The Center 
should act as a hub for improving the success of justice-
involved veterans by identifying and replicating best practices 
across the country and establishing proper program evaluation, 
so we can invest in what works. If implemented properly, it 
will revolutionize how the system treats the unique cases of 
our veterans.
    Most veterans return stronger from their service, but too 
many still need our help. It's nothing short of tragic that 
those who once wore the cloth of our Nation, now wear the cloth 
of incarceration. We sent them, we used them, now we must do 
better and stand by them, ensuring that we have the support to 
return them to their families, their communities, and their 
country. Thank you.

    [The prepared statement of General MacEwen appears on pages 
49-130 of the Appendix.]

    Chairman Moran. Thank you, sir. Professor Goldberg.

STATEMENT OF ROSE CARMEN GOLDBERG, ASSOCIATE TEACHING PROFESSOR 
 AND DIRECTOR OF THE VETERANS CLINIC, UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON 
                         SCHOOL OF LAW

    Professor Goldberg. Chairman, Ranking Member, and Members 
of the Committee, thank you for the opportunity to testify 
today on the pressing topic of how we can better serve justice-
involved veterans. The veterans clinic I teach at, the 
University of Washington School of Law, provides free legal 
services to low-income veterans. Many of our clients are 
justice-involved veterans. In this role, and my decade in 
veterans law, I have seen firsthand the significant harms and 
barriers that justice-involved veterans face, and how this too 
often results in incarceration.
    While these barriers are many, I will use my time to focus 
on three main points. First, while Veterans Treatment Courts 
are a highly effective intervention that improves outcomes for 
justice-involved veterans, not all veterans are allowed to 
participate. In some jurisdictions, veterans with less-than-
honorable discharges are locked out. This runs counter to the 
spirit of Veterans Treatment Court, which recognize that post-
service criminal conduct often stems from mental health 
conditions during service stemming from service traumas. The 
same is often true for military misconduct that results in a 
less-than-honorable discharge.
    In addition, veterans with less-than-honorable discharges 
stand to gain the most, in many instances, from the integrated 
and structured treatment that Veterans Treatment Court provide. 
They have higher rates of incarceration, higher rates of 
homelessness, and are at higher risk of suicide than other 
veterans.
    While many Veterans Treatment Courts connect veterans with 
VA services, there are a variety of options available for 
veterans with less-than-honorable discharges who the VA has not 
recognized as VA-eligible. VA provides care to other-than-
honorably discharged veterans for military sexual trauma-
related conditions, service-connected conditions, and to 
veterans who served at least 180 days and served in combat 
regardless of discharge status, with some very limited 
exceptions. Mental healthcare may also be available through 
local, state, and community sources.
    Second, justice-involved veterans are deprived of earned 
benefits. VA is supposed to reduce incarcerated veterans' 
benefits under certain conditions. For instance, for veterans 
convicted of a felony who are incarcerated for more than 60 
days, starting on day 61, if they are rated at 20 percent or 
more, their benefits are reduced all the way down to 10 
percent.
    However, VA does not consistently make these reductions. 
This results in what is known as an overpayment. Upon release, 
a veteran may receive the surprising news that they are 
indebted for these overpayments, and that VA is garnishing 
their benefits. Overpayments thus threaten veterans' successful 
reentry into society. In addition to preventing overpayments, 
VA should liberally waive overpayment debts linked to 
incarceration under its existing authority to waive debt as a 
matter of equity.
    Third, incarcerated veterans are urgently in need of VA 
mental healthcare. Veterans with service-connected mental 
health conditions are more likely to be incarcerated, and 
confinement aggravates their conditions. VA's current position, 
however, is that it cannot provide this care. This exclusion 
from basic care is inequitable and harmful.
    I was therefore pleased to see the Get Justice-Involved 
Veterans BACK HOME Act introduced recently and strongly support 
it.
    Senator King. By Senator King.
    Professor Goldberg. By Senator King, yes. The most 
important part.
    [Laughter.]
    Professor Goldberg. This bill would create a pilot program 
under which VA provides telemental health treatment to 
incarcerated veterans. This would fill an important gap as 
mental healthcare in correctional facilities is inadequate. And 
only VA provides specialized treatment for conditions unique to 
military service, such as post-traumatic stress disorder and 
traumatic brain injury linked to military sexual trauma or 
combat. I encourage the expansion of this important program to 
include veterans with less-than-honorable discharges. They 
stand to benefit greatly given their higher rates of 
incarceration and mental health conditions, and as noted, VA 
has options for providing this care.
    I also applaud Senator King's bill for requiring automatic 
resumption of VA benefits after incarceration ends. Timely 
resumption of benefits can mean the difference between living 
on the streets and a high risk of recidivism, versus safe 
housing as a launchpad for a healthy life. Yet, it can take 
many months and much advocacy for veterans to get their full 
benefits back.
    Finally, I enthusiastically support the launch of the 
National Center for Veterans Justice by DOJ as a hub for 
collecting and disseminating best practices. I hope this 
mission will encompass the different areas of policies that 
impact justice-involved veterans. I thank the Committee for 
your commitment to addressing the root causes of justice 
involvement by veterans. By focusing on building programs that 
heal veterans' service traumas instead of punishing them, we 
can truly achieve justice for veterans.

    [The prepared statement of Professor Goldberg appears on 
pages 131-138 of the Appendix.]

    Chairman Moran. Professor, thank you as well.
    I'm going to turn to Senator Blumenthal, the Ranking Member 
of the Committee, for his opening statement and the beginning 
of his questions.

         OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. RICHARD BLUMENTHAL,
         RANKING MEMBER, U.S. SENATOR FROM CONNECTICUT

    Senator Blumenthal. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I apologize 
that I was late being here, and I have to leave to go to the 
floor to speak there. But I want to thank all of our witnesses 
for being here and your leadership on this critically important 
issue. Special thanks to Professor Goldberg, who served on my 
staff for a while. Thank you for your continued service.
    You know, I became involved in this issue very hands-on 
through a veteran in New Haven. His name is Conley Monk. 
Conley, a Marine Corps veteran who served in Vietnam, got into 
trouble with his sergeant because he suffered from PTSD. Nobody 
knew what PTSD was at that time. Nobody had any idea that 
shell-shock, as it was called, or whatever the terminology of 
the time, might cause people to get into trouble. Conley got 
into a lot of trouble. He received a less-than-honorable 
discharge, and so he was ineligible for treatment.
    When he had a drug problem, he was unemployed. He was on 
the streets. And he turned his life around, and then brought a 
lawsuit against the Department of Defense through the Yale Law 
Clinic. I partnered with the Yale Law Clinic, trying to help 
him with that action, and went through several secretaries of 
defense who were sympathetic but felt they couldn't do anything 
about a ``bad paper'' discharge--even though it was factually 
and morally unjust--until Chuck Hagel. And Secretary Hagel did 
the right thing: he established that people could more easily 
and more accessibly come to the boards of review. And Conley 
upgraded his discharge, and he is now an advocate for all 
veterans. I saw him just a week or so ago.
    But there are probably thousands of Conley Monks out there 
who messed up. You know, they got into trouble. Maybe it was 
caused by trauma from their service, underlying risk factors 
that were never treated, obstacles to successful transition, or 
lack of structured environment. Everybody thinks veterans are 
these paragons of virtue, and many are. But there are also a 
lot of guys who just, you know, they come out of the service, 
and they had problems before they went in, and those problems 
may not have manifested then.
    So, my question to this panel is: how do we create more 
awareness about these opportunities? Because I find even now, 
years later, most veterans are unaware of the possibilities, 
the opportunities, to upgrade their discharges from less-than-
honorable. Obviously, we're not talking about dishonorable 
discharge. We're talking about bad paper, less-than-honorable 
discharges. And one of my hopes is that we can create more 
awareness. So, I'll just maybe turn that question over to the 
panel. I don't know who might want to start the answer. 
Professor Goldberg?
    Chairman Moran. Answer your former boss, please.
    [Laughter.]
    Professor Goldberg. Yes. I must, yes. Thank you for the----
    Senator Blumenthal. She was my boss.
    [Laughter.]
    Professor Goldberg. No, no. Definitely not. Thank you for 
the great question, Senator. My clinic works on a lot of 
discharge upgrades. So, first, I want to confirm that there is 
a great need for increased awareness. There are, unfortunately, 
a lot of rumors going around that are quite prevalent. One is 
the automatic 6-month discharge upgrade. I've heard this from 
veterans discharged decades ago. I've heard this from recently 
discharged veterans. They are put through the administrative 
separation process, they're told, ``Oh, don't worry, just sign 
on the line. No need to go to a hearing or anything. It'll be 
automatically upgraded. You'll get your benefits back.'' In 
fact, it was so prevalent--I'm not sure if it's still there--
but for a while on the Navy Discharge Review Board website, it 
had a big notice ``Beware. There is no automatic 6-month 
discharge upgrade.'' I have found that a lot of veterans are 
not aware that, as you mentioned, there are liberalized rules. 
There are memos known as the Hagel memo and the Kurta memo that 
require the discharge upgrade boards to provide liberal 
consideration to veterans who were discharged consequent to--
say, an undiagnosed mental health condition, or who experienced 
military sexual trauma, and the effects of that resulted in 
what was misinterpreted as misconduct. So, I think there is a 
great need to spread awareness about both the availability of 
discharge upgrades and the fact that there have been 
improvements under the law, as you said, thanks to the Yale Law 
School Veterans Legal Clinic, in large part, such that veterans 
who may not have had hope now have some hope.
    But I will say, I do think improvements need to be made in 
the process, and veterans are right to be somewhat hesitant. 
Wait times, I believe that the Army's right now is about four 
years, and there are some very serious due process issues. So, 
I think we need to raise awareness, particularly for veterans 
who were discharged consequent to mental health conditions, 
that this may be available to you, but also make it more 
timely, and enhance the due process protections.
    And just one additional point. I think a lot of awareness 
needs to be raised regarding an alternative remedy that I find 
very few veterans are aware of, which is that the VA has its 
own character-of-discharge review process that has its own 
issues, but tends to be faster. You have a right to a hearing. 
This process is where the VA makes an entirely separate 
determination where they can find a veteran what's called 
``honorable for VA purposes.'' They can't change the DD214, 
that's DoD property, but if they make this favorable finding, 
veterans gain access to disability benefits, healthcare, 
everything except the GI Bill. So, that can be literally life-
changing for veterans, but there's very little information out 
there.
    Senator Blumenthal. Thank you. Thank you all. I apologize. 
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Chairman Moran. Thank you. Let me call on Senator Tillis.

                       HON. THOM TILLIS,
                U.S. SENATOR FROM NORTH CAROLINA

    Senator Tillis. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you all for 
being here. And congratulations, Corey. I've actually had a 
long relationship with Veterans Treatment Courts in North 
Carolina. In fact, the first one we had created there was back 
in 2013, when I was speaker of the House, and man, they work. 
And I tell you, if my colleagues haven't been to a graduation 
of a Veterans Treatment Court, you owe it to yourself. It's 
like the swearing-in ceremony for citizenship, and it's really 
heartwarming, and it's a lot of fun to speak to the graduates.
    We actually--our strategy in North Carolina has been trying 
to encourage courts first, in and around VA facilities, because 
we know that they kind of work hand in hand. And I think we've 
done a good job of that all the way from near Fort Bragg out to 
Asheville. There's virtually no major VA facility in the State 
of North Carolina that doesn't have a VTC nearby, and I think 
it works. The thing that I think we need to do to get the scale 
and consistency, is start talking about best practices and 
models.
    In the bipartisan Safer Communities Act, a bill that I was 
part of leading the negotiations, we established additional 
funding for Veterans Treatment Courts. We need to make sure 
that the take rate is as high as it can be. That was a $14 
billion investment in behavioral health, and I want to make 
sure that we spend that money, particularly in family courts 
and Veterans Treatment Courts, because the money is there.
    And I should back up and say a part of that--this is a 
great cure for the veterans who can get access to it, but we've 
still got to work on prevention. And it goes back to what I've 
been saying for the 11 years that I've been on this Committee: 
we've got to get to a transition process that's an audience of 
one. We've got to get some stickiness, so that people like 
Corey, once he gets discharged, has some connection to a 
community. And we all know the ones who are most likely to run 
into trouble are the ones who are least likely to be connected 
to the VA. That's indisputable.
    So, you know, the question becomes: how can we--a lot of 
these things are initiated at the state and local level, 
although, as the example that I've used, we actually did 
congressional-directed spending for Rowan County just recently 
for another VTC in North Carolina. Is there some sort of a 
consensus around states that are doing it right? I'm not 
necessarily saying that North Carolina does it right. We're 
just one model that's creating good results. But how do we 
start coalescing around maybe a national standard based on best 
practices, since these courts have been out here for a while, 
and see to what extent we can do to encourage the state and 
local governments to build out more capabilities and provide 
more access?
    And then my second question really relates to every hearing 
I've ever gone to on transition. We all say the same thing. I 
don't feel like we've made measurable progress. So, either 
validate my theory that we've still got a lot of work to do, to 
really get to where we have the stickiness with the at-risk 
service members, or tell me I'm all wrong, we're making real 
progress, we just got to build on it. Mr. Tate, we'll start 
with you. General Tate.
    General Tate. Thank you. Excellent questions, both of them. 
I will tell you that the way we ensure fidelity to the model, 
the way we ensure best practices and evidence-based procedures, 
is through training and technical assistance. I can't 
understate the value that our training and technical assistance 
program creates when we talk to the teams about here's what 
works.
    Senator Tillis. And I think there's a clear correlation 
between that training and the efficacy of the court. People are 
well-intentioned, but they're not all executing as well, 
they're not getting the graduation rates we'd like to see. But 
please continue.
    General Tate. Yes, sir. And sometimes, when they think they 
know the right way to do it, they actually may do more harm 
than good. And so, I think through training and technical 
assistance, we can certainly avoid that happening. The states 
that seem to be doing it better than others are those that 
invest the time in training and technical assistance. So, it's 
sort of a related answer, but I think that's how we ensure that 
we move forward in the right direction and try not to do more 
harm than good.
    Senator Tillis. My time is going to go over, and I 
appreciate the chair recognizing me. But what I'd really like, 
if you all could think about it, and even Senator Blumenthal 
and I have worked on the issue over the years on bad paper, we 
know one of the things here is that veterans may not think that 
they have an option. We know that the VA has allowed some 
people in on an exception basis with a less-than-honorable 
discharge. We need more of that. We need certainty. But we also 
need to know where these veterans are before a problem. So, if 
you all could maybe submit for the Committee, but at least for 
my office, some suggestions around best practice models, things 
that are working, we'd be very happy, in my remaining time in 
the Senate, to see if we can move the ball a little bit further 
along. Mr. Chair, you have my support to that end. Thank you 
all.
    Chairman Moran. Thank you, Senator Tillis. Senator Hirono.

                     HON. MAZIE K. HIRONO,
                    U.S. SENATOR FROM HAWAII

    Senator Hirono. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. So, I know that 
there are a lot more veterans of--Justice Nuss said something 
like over 100,000 veterans are incarcerated, but maybe somebody 
has updated numbers, and only a small percentage of the 
incarcerated veterans go through this program. Can somebody 
explain to me why that is the case? And are there criteria for 
participating in the program? First of all, it sounds as though 
the program really works, and if so, more veterans should have 
the opportunity to participate. Would somebody like to respond?
    Mr. Nuss. Yes, Senator.
    Senator Hirono. Justice Nuss.
    Mr. Nuss. Yes. Thank you----
    Senator Hirono. Can you speak into the mic, please?
    Mr. Nuss. Yes. Is that better? Now it's on. Someone's 
trying to tell me something [laughter.] Does it work now?
    Senator Hirono. No.
    Mr. Nuss. Just have to be persistent. Several answers, I 
believe, Senator, to your question. First of all, there are 
just an awful lot of jails in this country where they have no 
idea if the people in their incarceration are veterans. And the 
simple matter of asking people when they are being booked, 
``Have you served in the military?'' You don't say, ``Are you a 
veteran?'' Because the younger folks think it's old guys like 
General Tate and me. And then if you say ``Have you served in 
the military?'' Sometimes they will still lie, because they are 
ashamed, because they basically took an oath to support you and 
me when they entered the military. And some of them are also 
afraid that the mere fact they've been arrested means that they 
will lose their VA benefits. So, asking the question helps, but 
then the check on that is to use two VA electronic programs: 
one is called VRSS, and the other is called SQUARES. You can go 
online using that program and find out if the person who is an 
inmate in your jail actually served in the military.
    The second thing is--and let me say that this then helps 
convince the local folks, the courts included, as to whether 
you have a need in your area for a VTC. As I said in my 
testimony, Johnson County thought we don't need one, and then 
they found out they had 60 veterans incarcerated in their jail. 
The same thing happens across the state--I'm sorry, across the 
country.
    And so, once you have established a need, then you should 
go forward and try to put something together. And what I have 
talked with my colleagues is, you don't have to wait until you 
have the deluxe version before you open a VTC. You can start 
very small and then over time increase what you want to do for 
these folks. You can admit people to your program who have bad 
paper discharges. If you don't care about the VA providing 
benefits, and you have a local community health center or 
something like that, then you can proceed. For example, that's 
something that Johnson County does.
    Senator Hirono. Thank you. I note that from the summary of 
the Commission's report--I think this is the report--that they 
don't know how many veterans are incarcerated. You don't have 
this kind of information. So, there must be some way to do 
better in terms of identifying the people who would benefit 
from this program. There are over 700 VTCs all across the 
country. There are four in Hawaii, and when they are 
participating in them--and I realize it's not one-size-fits-
all--it really decreases the recidivism rate and all of that. 
So, the more veterans who are able to participate, the better, 
right?
    General MacEwen. Senator, we absolutely agree that more 
VTCs are better, but we also know that they simply don't reach 
enough of the population----
    Senator Hirono. Yes.
    General MacEwen [continuing]. As you've described. Many 
VTCs exclude people with violent behavior, which is oftentimes 
the type of behavior that some of our veterans get involved in. 
Thirty-five percent exclude those with what we call bad paper. 
And so, we came up with a complementary thing to help bridge 
that gap in our recommendation, a model policy that gives a 
judge in a non-VTC jurisdiction the ability to act like a VTC 
without the bells and whistles, so to speak, of a full VTC, 
because we know that the VTC system works. So, like Chief Nuss 
said, if you don't have the VA capabilities, use community-
based stuff, and give a statutory background or backbone to a 
judge in a jurisdiction.
    Senator Hirono. So, we need to provide flexibility. So, for 
all of the panelists, I know that you all support VTCs, and so 
I will be reviewing the Commission's recommendations. And I 
take it that all of you would support the recommendations that 
the Commission came up with. Is that correct? Okay. Thank you, 
Mr. Chairman.
    Chairman Moran. Thank you. Senator Hassan.

                   HON. MARGARET WOOD HASSAN,
                U.S. SENATOR FROM NEW HAMPSHIRE

    Senator Hassan. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman. I really 
appreciate this hearing, and I am grateful to all of the 
witnesses not only for being here today, but for your advocacy 
and for your service. Thank you very much.
    I want to follow up really on the question that Senator 
Hirono had just posed to Chief Nuss. But I want to ask General 
Tate if he has anything to add, which is really we know the 
value of these courts, we know how they decrease recidivism, 
but we also know that not every jurisdiction, as we were just 
talking about, has one of these courts, and it can be hard to 
ensure that eligible veterans are identified and connected to 
treatment.
    So, Chief Nuss, you just talked about some of the things we 
can do. General, I just wanted to kind of add on to that. Are 
there other things we can do to identify veterans who are 
eligible for these courts and for the connected services?
    General Tate. Thank you. Excellent question, because that 
is an age-old problem.
    Senator Hassan. Yes.
    General Tate. I think it starts with--again, I go back to 
training and technical assistance. Part of our training at All 
Rise includes law enforcement who are likely to be the parties 
at first contact with the offender, and training them to 
understand to ask the right questions, and training them to 
appreciate what this veteran may be going through. So, 
education is part of it. Advocacy is part of it. We've talked 
about the National Center for Veterans Justice. Part of that 
will be a state and local engagement, it will be convening at 
the national level. It'll be all of these stakeholders who 
really, really want to make a difference coming together and 
learning: Okay, this is how we identify; this is how we assess; 
and this is how we treat. And I think that leads to success.
    To Senator Tillis's question, he wanted to know when do we 
get to the bottom line? When are we there? I think the answer 
is, we are there when there is a veterans treatment court 
within reach of every eligible veteran. And to be sure, they 
are not for every veteran who's in trouble. That's where the 
assessment part comes in. The high-risk, high-need, that's who 
will benefit the most. If it's a veteran who isn't high-risk or 
high-need, then let's--don't put them through such a high-
accountability, high-touch sort of environment. Let's get them 
treated; they don't have to face the same sort of 
accountability that someone embedded in that treatment program 
faces. So, it's not necessarily for every veteran who gets in 
trouble. We have to be careful on how we assess. Thank you.
    Senator Hassan. Well, I appreciate that very much, and I 
think that's something we can all work on together. I was 
struck--I think it was when Chief Nuss was talking about not 
asking somebody if they are a veteran. We found when we were 
trying to increase access to veteran-informed care in New 
Hampshire, that we had to really train medical providers to 
ask, ``Have you ever served?'' Or, ``Were you ever in the 
military?'' Not, ``Are you a veteran?'' And that was for me, a 
civilian, a revelation.
    So, Chief Nuss, I wanted to ask you another question. You 
are doing incredible work, and I love the story about how the 
effort in Kansas has grown. You mentioned that grants from the 
Bureau of Justice Assistance have helped overcome funding 
obstacles. What more can Congress do to help facilitate the 
creation and operation of Veterans Treatment Courts? And 
Brigadier General, you were also talking about that. What can 
we do to support our state and local partners?
    Mr. Nuss. Well, thank you, Senator. The first answer that 
comes to my mind is increase the appropriations that would go 
to BJA.
    Senator Hassan. Okay.
    Mr. Nuss. And as the Chair pointed out, those recent 
figures came out, I think maybe three or four weeks ago, I 
believe $26 million has been appropriated. And for some reason, 
there are some entities around the country who do not apply for 
those grants. I don't know why, but they somehow need to be 
educated that the money would be available.
    I have also spoken with some federal court judges, and they 
are not covered by those appropriations. One of them told me 
that they don't have the money for an additional probation 
officer who can handle veterans and a Veterans Treatment Court 
program, and so they don't have any program for them other than 
trying to put that veteran defendant in contact with the VA----
    Senator Hassan. Okay.
    Mr. Nuss [continuing]. So, a VJO can come provide some 
services. But they don't have a program where they say if you 
are a veteran, you come in, we can divert you from this crime 
if you go through our 18-month program.
    Senator Hassan. Okay.
    Mr. Nuss. And several courts have said the federal courts 
don't get the benefit of those appropriations through BJA. And 
for some reason, even though the tribal nations are--and we 
have, I think, 575 federally recognized tribal nations in the 
country--very few of them apply for these funds. So, I don't 
know if Congress can do anything to try to stir their interest 
or their notice of this availability.
    Senator Hassan. All right. Well, I appreciate that. I'm 
going to submit one more question to the record for all of you. 
And just to kind of highlight something that I had hoped to get 
to is, we have been talking about Veterans Treatment Court for 
veterans who get involved with the criminal justice system. I 
think it's important to note that we often overlook how civil 
legal issues can impact veterans. So, I'm going to ask all of 
you for your thoughts about the benefits that veterans can gain 
from receiving help with civil legal issues, and how that can 
help reduce recidivism rates, and perhaps prevent involvement 
with the criminal justice system, too.
    Senator Hassan. Thank you very much. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
    Senator King [Off mic.]--fine with me.
    Senator Hassan. That'd be great. Thank you. Yes--I mean, 
it's everything from housing to----
    Chairman Moran. I'm interested in--like, is this legal aid? 
I mean, where does this go?
    Senator Hassan. Yes. It's housing, family law, I mean--so, 
I'd love to explore that.
    General Tate. Senator, my experience is you won't find a 
veteran in veterans treatment court with just one problem.
    Senator Hassan. Right.
    General Tate. You will find layers of problems, all of 
which led to that unfortunate intersection with law 
enforcement. We're talking housing, employment, education, 
counseling, substance use disorder treatment. Every possible--
landlord-tenant issues, because; if I get kicked out on the 
street; I no longer have a place to live; my employer fired me 
because I don't have any place to live; I can't get to work; 
can't get my car; et cetera, so I've got to do something to 
feed my family, and that's how this happened.
    So, that's why it's so critical to have the involvement of 
these community partners. As I said at the outset, I believe 
government, the judiciary, and community partners have never 
looked better than they look with Veterans Treatment Courts. 
So, we've got to get all those partners together, get them in 
the courtroom, along with the veterans justice outreach officer 
to start coordinating, to swarm, if you will, to remove those 
obstacles. So, you're exactly right, incredibly important to 
address those issues. And that's where the pro bono clinics, 
the law school clinics, all come in handy. Thank you.
    Senator Hassan. Thank you.
    General MacEwen. And, Senator, the one thing the Commission 
found was we start looking at this way too late.
    Senator Hassan. Yes.
    General MacEwen. We start looking at it when they become 
justice-involved, and we have to start looking at it while 
they're still in the military. Because when you think about it, 
we spend $9 billion a year taking individual people, civilians, 
and transforming them into warriors----
    Senator Hassan. Right.
    General MacEwen [continuing]. Into 800 different 
specialties, from firefighters to fighter pilots, over a period 
of weeks. And then we put them in front of things, and do 
things to them, and expose them to things. And then at the end, 
we spend a couple of days--maybe 40 percent get through it--and 
we spend $140 million on transition and don't spend any amount 
of effort to transition them from warrior back to civilian, and 
then we don't use any evidence-based process to look at who's 
at risk. So, then we're surprised that some have a problem. So, 
we ought to spend a little bit of time looking at those--and 
that's what the Commission found--we ought to spend some time 
looking at those things that could cause someone to turn into--
have a problem with justice involvement.
    Senator Hassan. Well, again, first of all, Mr. Chair, 
thanks for the indulgence, and Senator King as well. And thank 
you all for your expertise, and I look forward to continuing to 
work with all of you.
    Chairman Moran. Senator King.

                    HON. ANGUS S. KING, JR.,
                    U.S. SENATOR FROM MAINE

    Senator King. General, to follow up, I also serve on the 
Armed Services Committee. And for the last 10 or 12 years, my 
repeated urging is I believe that the Defense Department should 
spend as much time, money, and effort on transition out as they 
do on recruiting in. We're making some progress, but nothing 
like what it ought to be. Let me ask you about the bill that 
was mentioned, the ``Get Justice-Involved Veterans BACK HOME'' 
pilot program for VA to provide mental health services for 
incarcerated veterans. To me, that's a give me. I mean, that's 
obvious. But we have to start with a pilot program. I 
understand the Commission has recommended returning to the 1944 
GI Bill, the plain language, which would allow most veterans to 
access VA services. Why did the Commission make that 
recommendation? Give me a little background on that.
    General MacEwen. Thank you, Senator. The Commission made 
that recommendation because there was a huge discussion. We had 
researchers take a look at this as the Commission did its work. 
In 1944, the Congress spent weeks looking at who should be 
eligible for VA benefits when they were establishing the 
original GI Bill, and they said only the worst of the worst 
should not get benefits: dishonorable discharge. That was----
    Senator King. That was the cutoff.
    General MacEwen. That was the cutoff. And so, that was the 
rule. And then over time, by rule, not by the intent of 
Congress, by rule, it's been chipped away. And so, all of a 
sudden----
    Senator King. Narrowing them.
    General MacEwen [continuing]. Narrowing the class of 
citizen who had served that no longer was eligible for 
benefits. So, what happened over time is those most in need of 
benefits are denied benefits. And so, we said, well----
    Senator King. Like someone that's incarcerated.
    General MacEwen [continuing]. That doesn't make sense. 
Well, someone incarcerated with a felony conviction loses it. 
But someone who--an example I would use for you, sir, someone 
who had military sexual trauma and then becomes a ``bad 
soldier'' because they're dealing with that military sexual 
trauma, and so they're not showing up to formation. And so, the 
commander says this is not a good soldier, and so they 
administratively discharge him and give him bad paper. They 
give him bad paper because he's not showing up at work, not 
because of the underlying condition, because they don't have an 
evidence-based process to take a look at them. They discharge 
him, and he or she doesn't get healthcare at the VA.
    Senator King. Well, just for the record, do all of you 
agree that VA mental health benefits should be available to 
incarcerated veterans?
    Professor Goldberg. Yes, sir.
    General MacEwen. Yes.
    Senator King. That's a yes from everybody. Thank you. And 
the other thing that's in this bill, and it goes to one of the 
points we were talking about before, is requiring the VA to do 
the research to find out how many incarcerated veterans there 
are. I mean, to me, that makes a lot of sense. Does that--
Chief, is that a sensible proposal?
    Mr. Nuss. I believe it is. And as kind of a piggyback to 
that, Senator, I'm in favor. I'm not sure who had proposed this 
during the past year, but as you leave the military, you are 
automatically enrolled with the VA. You don't have to have 
that----
    Senator King. You're saying that should be the case.
    Mr. Nuss. Should be the case.
    Senator King. It is not the case.
    Mr. Nuss. It is not the case. Correct.
    Senator King. We're working on legislation to allow 
veterans to enroll in VA healthcare before they leave active 
duty. I think that's a sensible----
    General MacEwen. Senator, we--the Commission recommended 
automatic enrollment for a 2-year period.
    Senator King. Right.
    General MacEwen. Currently, they can voluntarily enroll on 
what's called an EZ form, which everyone that I've ever spoken 
to the form is called ``easy'' but it's not.
    Senator King. Well, the other thing, Professor, that I'm 
interested in is--I think you touched upon this--having the 
process of restoring benefits after release be automatic and 
timely. As I understand your testimony, that can often take 
months and a lot of paperwork and difficulty. Is that the case?
    Professor Goldberg. Yes. What I've seen happen is the onus 
is on the veteran, both on the front end, to notify the VA that 
they are incarcerated as a change in life circumstances. You 
can imagine many veterans may not be aware that they are 
supposed to do this, and as they are incarcerated, it may not 
be easy to actually do that.
    And then on the tail end, it is supposed to be an easy 
process for the veteran to notify the VA that they have been 
released. But what often happens is there is a very long tail 
to that. The veteran may call in, and then there's this very 
slow back-and-forth where the VA is contacting correctional 
facilities. And again, the onus falls back on the veteran to go 
back to the prison to get some kind of documentation. It can 
just kind of spiral into months.
    But, as has been mentioned, there are data-sharing 
capabilities that are underutilized. This is a government-to-
government process. They are entitled to have that restoration 
on day one, and they do get--are supposed to get--back pay if 
it does take many months or a year, as it sometimes happens. 
But there's no reason that should be the case.
    Senator King. And I would mention that we made some 
progress, because it was in the Defense Bill that passed last 
year, it's now law, if the veteran has an opportunity to opt 
out of whether their home state veteran service organization is 
notified that they're coming home. In other words, instead of 
having to opt in--which people often don't do because they've 
got so many forms--now it's an opt out. And we think, we 
believe and hope, that that will significantly increase. My 
vision is to have somebody to meet them at the airport, have 
somebody from one of the VSOs or from the state veterans 
office, and start the process of here's what's available, here 
are the services, and is there a way we can help you find a 
job? Or all of those kinds of things. So, I did want to mention 
that. It was sort of an obscure provision in a 2,000-page bill, 
but I think that we're hoping that now that that's the law, 
we'll see some progress on that. Thank you very much, Mr. 
Chairman. Thank you for having this hearing.
    Chairman Moran. Thank you, Senator King. I just now have a 
few questions. Let me first start with this conversation that 
has involved several members, including Senator King's just 
recently. The Transition Assistance Program, TAP, is supposed 
to help veterans move from active duty to life after active 
duty. I don't think--I'll speak for myself, the program has not 
been sufficiently utilized, supported, or emphasized, and I 
think we're missing a lot of opportunity. And I never thought 
about this in regard to the veteran treatment court until 
today.
    But we've been pushing, particularly the military, to have 
a higher priority in assisting their active-duty men and women 
during transition. And a lot of that conversation originates 
with the concern about at what point in time a service member, 
soon to be a veteran, most vulnerable to commit suicide or 
mental health issues? And I think the conclusion is that's the 
most fragile time. And so, for a different reason, we've been 
pushing greater efforts by the VA, but perhaps more 
importantly, greater efforts by the military, the Department of 
Defense, to implement a solid TAP program.
    But the conversation we have been having suggests to me 
that there may be another opportunity or another purpose for 
TAP, related to what you all are trying to advocate for, is the 
connection between those who serve and the world after their 
service. Anyone want to assist me in fleshing out that thought?
    General MacEwen. Sir, if I could--I think two things on the 
TAP program and why it maybe doesn't work. And I ran the TAP 
program for the Army--excuse me for criticizing, and so I'm 
criticizing myself in some ways. When the Commission did its 
report, we understood that the military classified 41 percent 
who transitioned in a year's period as not fully prepared 
through the TAP program. Twenty-two percent of those never even 
attended TAP, even though they were congressionally mandated 
to. TAP has never been fully, robustly evaluated. Many with 
other-than-honorable discharges don't attend TAP.
    And so, we know that we don't use a validated risk-needs 
assessment tool. And part of the reason TAP doesn't exist is 
because of what we call the ``commanders dilemma.'' I talked 
about it briefly. But what we do is we put the commanders in an 
impossible position. And it is a position where we say, 
``Commander, worry about readiness, and, oh, by the way, send 
them to TAP.'' I was talking to a staffer today whose husband 
works at Davidson Army Airfield. He's an aircraft crew chief 
now, and he's thinking of getting out. Is his commander going 
to say take care of your aircraft for missions, or is he going 
to send him to TAP? When push comes to shove, he's going to 
send him to take care of that aircraft, and he may not send him 
to TAP.
    Now, what we said is, in the case where he really is at 
risk, if you do a valid risk-needs assessment tool, you pull 
him out of the operational force like he was in basic training, 
where he's not available for an operation. You've got to pull 
him out, put him in a joint transition center, get him the help 
he needs, and then send him on his way.
    Chairman Moran. Is the key, General, what you said is if 
they do a valid assessment?
    General MacEwen. It absolutely is, but you have to do it. 
This is revolutionary. It has to be revolutionary, because, 
otherwise, you can throw more money at it. You can say 
SkillBridge, and SkillBridge is a wonderful program, if you're 
available. That's always the caveat. Send them to SkillBridge, 
if operational readiness allows.
    Senator King. Under the law, aren't they required--[off 
mic.]
    General MacEwen. Sure, it does, but they don't comply. 
That's what we found time and time again.
    Chairman Moran. And I think I've heard this before about 
the dilemma. You had a phrase for it. I've heard this dilemma 
probably from generals I know in the neighborhood is that the 
focus is defending the country.
    General MacEwen. Yes. And so, what we've done is tried to 
come up with a logical solution that solves the problem, so you 
don't put this commander in a paradox that you're asking him to 
fail.
    Chairman Moran. So, is--let me go back. Even though TAP has 
its challenges today for this evident reason, you've got to 
prioritize what a soldier is doing in the last time of service. 
If TAP is occurring, if the transition program is taking place, 
is there a role in that process that affects veteran treatment 
court availability and knowledge?
    General MacEwen. I don't believe so. I'd leave that to your 
classmates to answer.
    Chairman Moran. They were smarter than I was then, too.
    [Laughter.]
    General Tate. I don't think so, because it'll be an issue 
of timing. I want us to also----
    Chairman Moran. At that point, the problems are not 
evident.
    General Tate. They probably are, they just aren't 
discovered yet. Because even the service member and her family 
don't know the baggage that they are carrying. It will take 
time for that to manifest. And I think we also have to be 
sensitive to the notion that these service members just want to 
go home. Number one, you're going to put a burden on the 
commander: ``Oh, here's something else to put on your list. 
This is top priority.'' I'll put it on there with all the other 
top priorities. But then second, the mindset of the service 
member: ``I just want to go home. I don't know what all this 
stuff is about.'' So, that's why the solution has to be really 
carefully crafted. But I don't think part of the separation 
will be: ``And hey, don't forget, there are Veterans Treatment 
Courts out there.''
    It'd just be really hard to do, but that sort of advocacy 
can come elsewhere. It can come from the creation of this 
Center, thanks to Congress. Part of that creation will be state 
and local convenings, national convenings, and advocacy, where 
it'll become more widespread that the existence of those courts 
would be a tool to assist that service member. Thank you, sir.
    Chairman Moran. If you all would help me, or help the 
Committee. In a moment, we're going to dismiss you and we're 
going to have two other witnesses take the table where you are. 
They are both high-level officials, one at the Department of 
Veterans Affairs, the other at the Department of Corrections. 
Is there something that you would want to make sure that we 
hear from you that would lend itself to an appropriate, useful 
question and answer from our next panel?
    General Tate. I would simply like to highlight what an 
extraordinary program the VJO program is for the VA. These are 
young men and women who are dedicated, committed social workers 
who just every day get after it. So, it's a real plus for the 
VA, and that ought to be sung to the mountaintop about how good 
they are.
    I think critical to their continued success, their 
sustained success, will be training tailored to the VJOs, so 
that we ensure that not only are they trained when they're new 
to the job because it's super demanding, especially if that VJO 
has not got military culture in their background. But it's not 
only that newcomer training, it's also the training to sustain 
their skill set. So, that's all I would ask. That really is, to 
me, a two-thumbs-up for the VA and that VJO program. Thank you, 
Senator.
    Chairman Moran. Yes, ma'am.
    Professor Goldberg. If I may echo that, and add to that. I 
also would like to enthusiastically support VJOs and the 
critical role they play. The latest I've heard--and don't quote 
me on this--I believe there may be around 400 VJOs in the 
country, so I'd want to know from VA how many there are 
currently and whether the staffing is adequate?
    My local VJO is amazing, does terrific work on the streets, 
in the jails, every step of the way with veterans in Veterans 
Treatment Court, This very much ties back to our conversation 
about Veterans Treatment Courts. And VJOs are largely part of 
the success of veterans going through that. My understanding is 
that they are understaffed and overworked, and I don't believe 
their numbers have been increased in a number of years. I know 
there have been proposals, so I'd be interested to know both 
the number and whether there are plans to increase the number 
of VJOs?
    Chairman Moran. Thank you. Notes were being taken.
    Mr. Nuss. Mr. Chairman, if I could add to what they both 
have said. I've told VJOs this to their face. I said, ``What I 
like about you is that too many times a government agency says, 
`Oh, you've come to us for help. Well, here's a stack of 
documents or pamphlets or booklets for you to read. And if you 
see something in here you think might apply to you, come back 
and tell me, and then we'll talk about it.' '' The VJO takes 
the opposite approach. They say, `Here's the stack of pamphlets 
and documents, but I've looked through them also, and based 
upon my interview of you, here are two programs that I think 
you could benefit from. Let's talk about them and see which one 
would work best for you.' ''
    The other thing I would say, I think Senator Tillis said 
earlier, if you've never been to a VTC graduation ceremony, 
it's well worth your time. And as far as the VJOs go, in 
Johnson County VTC, when the VTC graduate is allowed to speak 
and say how much it's meant to them, they always go over and 
hug their VJO--at least the ones I've been to. And I just think 
that speaks volumes for how important the VJOs are, how well-
trained they should be, and how much they care about the 
veterans. And I'd like to see more of them. Thank you.
    General MacEwen. Yes. I would say to both government folks, 
as a former government folk, to please be involved in the 
process for the National Center with the Department of Justice, 
because this has to be a whole-of-government approach, and it 
can't be stovepiped inside DOJ. It has to involve everyone if 
it's going to work to take care of our veterans.
    Chairman Moran. Okay. Thank you. Mr. Schramm, we just heard 
how important certain people have had a role in your life in 
this process. I wanted to give you the chance to maybe do a 
couple of things. If you'd like to expand on what the program 
was like that you went through. And if you'd like to take a 
moment, how were you treated differently than someone who is 
not in the Veteran Treatment Court? You may not know that, but 
what were the aspects of that court that made a difference in 
your life? And it may just be that you want to tell us about 
your mentor, and I want to give you the chance to do that.
    Mr. Schramm. I think the program keeps you accountable. 
Like, I was on and off probation before I went to Veterans 
Treatment Court, and when I showed up to Veterans Treatment 
Court, I thought I was just going to play the system and go 
through the motions. And boy, was I ever wrong.
    And to go back on what everyone was saying about VJOs, my 
VJO, Michelle Parsons, is the standard VJO. She's an amazing 
person. She gave me the best piece of advice when I was going 
through, when she told me I didn't have to do this. That wasn't 
really the words I was looking for, but it just showed me the 
path that I was going to take. And as far as Ed, Ed's a legend. 
He's a great human being. He's the reason why my tie looks so 
good today. And he was just an absolute--going through the 
program, he kept me guided. He used a term called ``jungle 
rules'' that I had to google because I didn't understand what 
it was, but it just meant, you know, the court--that's their 
rules, and you just have to abide by it.
    And that was a great deterrent, even from the smallest 
sanction. I couldn't believe how upset I got over the smallest 
sanction. But his words, ``jungle rules,'' completely took my 
train of thought elsewhere and started thinking about my 
actions instead of the overall punishment--like, what could I 
do better. Thank you.
    Chairman Moran. All the questions, the story Senator 
Blumenthal told, your witness to the Committee, it reminds us--
at least it reminds me, I speak for myself--that we changed the 
world one person, one soul at a time. And we need to have that 
kind of approach to how we deal with people. It's not about a 
process; it's about a relationship. And the Veterans Treatment 
Court demonstrates to me--and your testimony shows--that when 
people care about other people, you can change a life. And it's 
a great story for us to hear.
    We're going to change panels. Incidentally, I'm trying to 
demonstrate my leadership. I think it's hot in here, and they 
turned off the air conditioning because there was some loud 
noise in the background. I said the loud noise was continuing--
it's worth having the noise than to have the air conditioning. 
So, it's supposedly coming back on.
    Mr. Nuss. Mr. Chairman, can I say one thing in response to 
Senator King's question about what can be done to make veterans 
aware? This story comes from a VTC graduate in Minnesota, and 
he later deployed after he had graduated and been 
rehabilitated. And he told the troops in his company about his 
experience in the VTC. And he said, ``There is no shame in 
asking for help, but there is shame in being in handcuffs.'' 
And he was telling them, ``if you are struggling, go seek help. 
Don't wait until it eats you up and you commit some crime.'' 
Thank you.
    Chairman Moran. Thank you. Senator Banks, we were ready to 
move to the second panel. That all right?
    Senator Banks. It's all right.
    Chairman Moran. Thank you all for your testimony. Thank you 
for being here, and thanks for the work that you do.

    [Recess.]

    Chairman Moran. The Committee will reconvene for our second 
panel. The Senate has votes at 5:30, so. Dr. O'Toole is looking 
at his watch to see that he only has to be here--put up with 
this process for a short period of time. Let me welcome Ms. 
Dana DiGiacomo, assistant director of reentry services for the 
Federal Bureau of Prisons, United States Department of Justice, 
and Dr. Thomas O'Toole, welcome back. He's the Acting Assistant 
Under Secretary for Health and Clinical Services at the 
Department of Justice--I'm sorry, at the Department of Veterans 
Affairs. And I thank you both for your appearance here today. 
And we'll start with you, and let's hear what the Bureau of 
Prisons has to say, Ms. DiGiacomo.

                            PANEL II

                              ----------                              


   STATEMENT OF DANA DIGIACOMO, ASSISTANT DIRECTOR, REENTRY 
 SERVICES DIVISION, FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS, U.S. DEPARTMENT 
                           OF JUSTICE

    Ms. DiGiacomo. Good afternoon, Chairman Moran, Ranking 
Member Blumenthal, and distinguished Members of the Committee. 
It's a pleasure to appear before this Committee to share the 
work that the Federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP) is doing to meet 
the needs of our incarcerated veterans.
    My name is Dana DiGiacomo, and I am a career employee with 
nearly 19 years of service in the Bureau of Prisons, including 
the last eight years in the Reentry Services Division, where I 
currently serve as the assistant director. On behalf of the 
Agency, I want to thank you for the opportunity to be here 
today. It's both an honor and a privilege to speak with you. I 
would also like to take a moment to acknowledge the many 
veterans who are part of my life, my family, friends, and 
colleagues within the Bureau of Prisons. Their service and 
sacrifice is deeply respected and appreciated.
    The BOP recognizes veterans represent a unique population 
within our federal prison system. Currently, the Bureau of 
Prisons houses approximately 7,600 incarcerated veterans, many 
of whom face service-related challenges, including physical and 
mental health conditions, as well as difficulties adjusting to 
life after military service.
    Veterans in the BOP reflect a diverse population across all 
security levels, with the majority classified as low or medium 
security. Many maintain strong family connections, and a 
significant portion have achieved a high school diploma or 
equivalent. These characteristics highlight both the needs and 
the potential of this population, reinforcing the importance of 
targeted programming and support.
    The BOP's Program Statement on the ``Management of Inmate 
Veterans'' provides a framework for identifying and supporting 
incarcerated veterans. This policy outlines staff 
responsibilities, training requirements, and service delivery 
expectations to ensure veterans are properly identified and 
connected to resources. Identification begins early in our 
intake process, where staff verify veteran status through 
documentation such as pre-sentence reports and military 
discharge records. This information is entered into the BOP 
systems and tracked through a centralized database, allowing 
the agency to monitor trends and ensure continuity of care.
    Once identified, veterans are supported through a 
structured three-tier service delivery model designed to meet 
their needs at every stage of incarceration. Tier One services 
provide a foundational support through self-help resources and 
informational sessions in collaboration with the Department of 
Veterans Affairs. Tier Two services include structured 
workshops and support groups that address resilience, wellness, 
and service-related challenges such as post-traumatic stress 
and traumatic brain injury. Psychology Services plays a key 
role in delivering individualized treatment based on these 
assessed needs.
    Tier Three services represent the most intensive level of 
programming, through our Veterans Education Transitional 
Services, what we call our VETS Unit. This is a residential 
program that operates on a community-based model, where 
participants engage in daily programming focused on education, 
skill development, and peer support. Institutions such as FCI 
Englewood and the developing unit at FCI Seagoville demonstrate 
the BOP's commitment to expanding these structured 
environments, and improving continuity of care as veterans 
transition back into the community.
    In addition to programming, the BOP emphasizes staff 
training to ensure employees understand military culture and 
the unique needs of our incarcerated veterans. This training 
supports consistent service delivery and reinforces the BOP's 
commitment to this population. Collaboration with external 
partners is also critical to the success. The BOP maintains 
strong partnerships with the Department of Veterans Affairs and 
the Department of Labor to help support reentry planning and 
access to benefits, employment services, and community 
resources.
    Additionally, veterans transitioning to residential reentry 
centers or home confinement are provided the opportunity to 
engage in activity with the Veterans Affairs representatives to 
access benefits, secure services, and establish continuity of 
care upon release. These efforts align with the goals of the 
First Step Act by encouraging participation in recidivism-
reducing programs and productive activities.
    Veteran-specific programming supports skill development, 
strengthens support networks, and improves outcomes for 
individuals preparing to return to the community. Supporting 
justice-involved veterans is not just a policy priority, it's a 
responsibility. Every individual in our custody deserves a 
second chance and the opportunity to make meaningful change in 
their lives. Our goal is to ensure that the time in our care is 
not just time served, but time that serves a purpose, equipping 
them with the tools, the support, and the opportunities needed 
to successfully return to their communities.
    And I'm happy to respond to any questions that the 
Committee may have.

    [The prepared statement of Ms. DiGiacomo appears on pages 
139-141 of the Appendix.]

    Chairman Moran. Thank you very much. Dr. O'Toole.

    STATEMENT OF THOMAS O'TOOLE, MD, ACTING ASSISTANT UNDER 
SECRETARY FOR HEALTH FOR CLINICAL SERVICES, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF 
                        VETERANS AFFAIRS

    Dr. O'Toole. Chairman Moran, Ranking Member Blumenthal, and 
Members of the Committee, thank you for the opportunity to 
testify today. I'm honored to highlight the work the Department 
of Veterans Affairs is doing to support justice-involved 
veterans as they navigate the legal system and reenter their 
communities.
    VA's Veterans Justice Program (VJP) ensures that justice-
involved veterans are identified early and connected to VA 
services that support accountability, recovery, and long-term 
stability. VJP specialists engage veterans in courts, jails, 
prisons, or community settings to encourage responsible 
decision-making, facilitate behavioral health, and other needed 
care, and support reintegration consistent with community 
safety. In fiscal year 2025, VJP served more than 60,000 
veterans through more than 500 specialists nationwide. For 
many, meeting a VJP specialist can be a turning point that 
opens the door to recovery. Early engagement helps veterans 
take responsibility while accessing treatment and supporting 
rehabilitation.
    For nonviolent offenders, the Veterans Treatment Court 
occupy a critical role in supporting justice-involved veterans 
by offering a structured, treatment-focused alternative to 
incarceration. These courts pair judicial oversight with VA-
supported treatment and case management. VJP specialists work 
alongside court teams to ensure veterans receive the 
healthcare, housing, and support needed to complete their 
court-defined program successfully.
    The Veterans Health Administration (VHA) Health Care for 
Reentry Veterans (HCRV) program conducts outreach in federal 
and state prisons or jails to support veterans preparing for 
release. HCRV specialists assist with healthcare enrollment, 
identification documents, follow-up appointments, and 
reconnection to VA systems that may have lapsed during 
incarceration. This pre-release engagement is essential to 
ensuring successful community reintegration.
    VA's Legal Services for Veterans program strengthens access 
to civil legal assistance, helping veterans address outstanding 
legal issues such as housing disputes, benefits matters, or 
family law concerns that may impede stability and successful 
reintegration. These services do not remove lawful 
accountability, but rather, they assist veterans to better 
understand their rights and responsibilities under the law and 
navigate available resources so they can meet legal 
obligations, rebuild stability, and pursue self-sufficiency.
    The VBA complements VHA's clinical and reentry services by 
ensuring justice-involved veterans receive information about VA 
benefits and how to apply. Through its justice-involved veteran 
coordinators and homeless veteran outreach coordinators, VBA 
tailors outreach to local needs and refers veterans to federal, 
state, and community organizations. All VA regional offices 
conduct quarterly in-person or virtual outreach to veterans who 
are incarcerated at federal, state, or local facilities. 
Benefit information is disseminated to incarcerated veterans. 
VBA also provides information and training on VA benefits and 
services to community service providers and correctional 
officials.
    From October to March of this past year, VBA conducted 425 
justice-related outreach events, reaching more than 14,000 
participants. VBA outreach personnel also coordinate outreach 
efforts for veterans at risk for homelessness who are being 
discharged or released from a facility after imprisonment, 
coordinating with VHA to provide outreach within 60 days of 
release to assist with establishing eligibility for VA benefits 
and services.
    VA strongly supports the Department of Justice's National 
Center for Veterans Justice. It provides a national opportunity 
to standardize veteran identification, strengthen data and 
research capacity, and improve coordination across the criminal 
justice system. VA's long-standing collaboration with courts, 
jails, and prisons forms a strong foundation for this expanded 
effort, and these collaborations support VA's commitment to the 
rule of law, safe communities, and our commitment to veterans 
and their capacity to return to their communities. We 
appreciate the Committee's attention to these issues, and look 
forward to continuing our work with federal, state, and 
community organizations.
    And this concludes my testimony. I'm happy to answer any 
questions.

    [The prepared statement of Dr. O'Toole appears on pages 
142-144 of the Appendix.]

    Chairman Moran. Thank you. Ms. DiGiacomo, do you believe 
the VA's engagement at the Bureau of Prisons is adequate, 
sufficient? How would you describe it?
    Ms. DiGiacomo. Thank you for that question. Yes, we have a 
great partnership with the Department of Veterans Affairs. 
Actually, their staff or their contracted staff come into our 
facilities quarterly to be able to meet the needs of our 
incarcerated veterans.
    Chairman Moran. And Dr. O'Toole, as evidenced by the number 
of times you appear before this Committee, you have lots of 
responsibilities. There's lots of things that you need to pay 
attention to. Tell me why I should be assured that Veterans 
Treatment Courts and the associated programs around them are 
not something that slips through the cracks.
    Dr. O'Toole. Thank you, Senator, and it's a great question. 
The short answer is because they work, and because they work 
for our veterans in bringing them back into their communities, 
allowing them to lead their fullest lives possible, and it's 
important. We have 515 veteran justice outreach specialists 
currently who do God's work. And having been a primary care 
provider in the VA for 20 years, and a shout-out to Rich Flynn 
at the Providence VA, these guys make a huge difference in 
reconnecting veterans, keeping them from becoming homeless, 
getting them back into the workforce, bringing them back and 
connected with their communities. And I think our first panel 
really just reinforced all the reasons why this is what makes 
the VA a special place.
    Chairman Moran. Tell me about staffing. There's been a lot 
of talk in this Committee, since the beginning of last year, 
about staffing at the VA. We're assured by the Department of 
Veterans Affairs that the people necessary to fulfill the 
responsibilities are sufficient, adequate, and doing their job. 
Is that true in this program?
    Dr. O'Toole. I think it is, sir. I think--you know, just to 
level set with some numbers, we currently have 515 veteran 
justice outreach specialists employed in the VA. We have about 
a 9 percent vacancy rate, which for most programs is kind of 
within the norm of expecting an influx and efflux out. Each 
medical center is required to have at least one veterans 
outreach specialist, and obviously, we have many more in most 
of our facilities. And we currently staff 747 Veteran Treatment 
Courts, as well as go to upwards of 3,000 prisons and jails 
with that staff.
    We have a budget of $75 million appropriated from Congress 
to be able to do that, and we spend all that money. The issue, 
however, I do want to emphasize is that this is a program we 
would love to see grow. Those 747 treatment courts, there is a 
capacity for many more. As the program grows, we will staff 
accordingly. This is a priority for us, and I do hope that we 
can grow this program.
    Chairman Moran. My understanding is that fiscal year 2025 
is the $75 million that you mentioned. Fiscal year 2026 is $82 
million. So, there is--and that's grown since the numbers I 
have go back to fiscal year 2022 when it was $53 million. So, 
there is interest in Congress in support, through the 
appropriations process, for this program.
    Let me ask you a couple of specific questions, and I'll 
turn to my colleague, Mr. Banks. Incarcerated veterans lose 
access to VA-delivered care while in custody. How does the VA 
provide continuity of care for veterans with serious mental 
health or substance use conditions upon release?
    Dr. O'Toole. Thank you. And it's, obviously, with Senator 
King's legislation, that's something that he's looking at as 
well, and I appreciate Congress's interest on this. I know I 
previously testified on the Hill on the House side for similar 
legislation.
    When a person is incarcerated, they become a ward of the 
state in where they are incarcerated, and so the VA does not, 
by legal authority, have the ability to provide direct clinical 
care while they are incarcerated. Our job, in the context of 
the Veterans Justice Outreach effort, is to make sure that we 
can create a seamless transition from when they are released to 
get them back into the VA as quickly and seamlessly as 
possible, and this is where the VJO specialists play a very, 
very critical role. And as I mentioned, in my own experience, 
having the VJO specialist directly participate in bringing that 
patient to clinic and making sure that they are plugged in and 
getting the care they need, is a critical case management step 
that really makes a difference. And that's just one element of 
all the work that they do to reconnect people, and that's why 
the program works.
    Chairman Moran. Finally, you mentioned your support for the 
National Center for Veterans Justice. Is there a plan in place 
to coordinate with DOJ in that effort?
    Dr. O'Toole. There is. I can't speak to all of the 
specifics of that plan, but we have dedicated leadership within 
VA that have a long-standing history of working with DOJ and 
helping develop the center and staffing it to those needs, and 
we look forward to that continued collaboration.
    Chairman Moran. Thank you. Senator Banks.

                        HON. JIM BANKS,
                   U.S. SENATOR FROM INDIANA

    Senator Banks. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Ms. DiGiacomo--did 
I say that right?
    Ms. DiGiacomo. Yes, sir----
    Senator Banks. Close?
    Ms. DiGiacomo [continuing]. DiGiacomo.
    Senator Banks. You talk more generally about the 
relationship between the Bureau and the VA, but can you be more 
specific? Is it just the two of you who communicate? Are there 
task forces between the two departments? Can you be more 
specific about what that rhythm of communication looks like 
between the two?
    Ms. DiGiacomo. Absolutely. So, as I mentioned in my opening 
statement, we have that three-tiered model. We have veterans 
scattered all across the Bureau of Prisons, and those that are 
at institutions under our tiered models. We have self-help 
resources. We have staff dedicated at our institutions, such as 
our special population coordinators. These are individuals 
helping our special populations such as our incarcerated 
veterans. We also have reentry affairs coordinators who are 
also assisting that population. So, those individuals are 
reaching out directly to those local VA points of contact that 
they have, who are working collaboratively together at that 
local level in the community in which our institutions reside.
    Senator Banks. Is this new or is this what we've always 
done? I mean, help me----
    Ms. DiGiacomo. Honestly, I don't know the history. I know 
that as long as I have been in the Reentry Services Division, 
this has happened as far as this collaboration and working 
directly with the VA. I think that's what separates the Bureau 
of Prisons, maybe, from some of the state systems, you know, 
that we are both at this federal level, so we have the ability 
to share data more easily such as when individuals come into 
our custody. You know, not only are we asking them if they 
served and looking at their pre-sentence report--but we're also 
making that outreach to the VA through data sharing to cross-
reference (VRRS), which makes our communication between the 
two, I think, a little bit easier than maybe from at a state 
level.
    Senator Banks. Would you say it works?
    Ms. DiGiacomo. Absolutely.
    Senator Banks. And what would you say we need to do better? 
Where do we need to do better between communication and 
collaboration between the two?
    Ms. DiGiacomo. I think communication.
    Senator Banks. What are you working on?
    Ms. DiGiacomo. Well, I would say one of the things that 
we're working on is resources, right? I think it's no surprise 
the Bureau of Prisons is in desperate need of resources. We 
need more people to help in this area. What we'd love to have 
is special population coordinators at every single one of our 
institutions to be able to help the population, because----
    Senator Banks. Specifically, to work with veterans?
    Ms. DiGiacomo. Yes, sir.
    Senator Banks. Good. I think what you do is really 
important, and I know that you know this because you said 
homelessness drives incarceration, and incarceration leads to 
homelessness. So, it's true among veterans, true among 
everybody else. Can you talk about the Bureau of Prisons 
national reentry strategy, and how that aims to break that 
cycle?
    Ms. DiGiacomo. Absolutely. And this goes for everyone in 
our custody. The Bureau of Prisons takes a holistic approach to 
each individual that comes into our custody, looking at what 
their needs are. Everyone comes in with a different set of 
needs, and we try to build off the strengths that they have. 
So, we start there by looking at: what are the needs, what got 
them here, and what are the gaps that need to be filled, and 
how do we approach filling those gaps? Whether it be with 
educational programming, programming as it relates to trauma or 
PTSD, or those things that do affect our incarcerated veterans, 
and making sure that they get the programming that's going to 
set them up.
    Another great thing about the Bureau of Prisons, I think, 
that separates us from some of the state correction agencies is 
the fact that we do have a reentry transition into the 
community. Individuals in our custody, all of our offenders, 
have the ability under the Second Chance Act, to transition to 
their community before they actually release. So, we give them 
an opportunity to live in the community before they actually 
release, and that makes that transition and that reentry much 
easier.
    Senator Banks. Good. Dr. O'Toole, I introduced legislation 
to permanently authorize the Health Care for Homeless Veterans 
(HCHV) program. It provides medical care for homeless veterans 
and connects them to housing. How important is it to make that 
program permanent?
    Dr. O'Toole. Thank you, Senator. I think it's very 
important. VA has made significant strides in reducing 
homelessness, and one of the reasons why is because we are an 
integrated system and an integrated model that is able to 
connect housing with needed healthcare services, needed legal 
services, as demonstrated here, and needed social services.
    Just to emphasize that point. Within the context of the 
Veterans Justice Program, 81 percent of individuals enrolled in 
the Veterans Justice Program are diagnosed with a mental health 
problem, and 56 percent with a substance abuse problem. As a 
result of being enrolled in this program, 94 percent of those 
individuals with a mental health diagnosis go on to receive 
healthcare within the VA system. In mental health the previous 
year, that's 17 visits per patient. For substance use 
treatment, it's 15 visits per patient. That's a real, very 
meaningful, and significant difference that wouldn't occur if 
we didn't have an integrated approach. And so, absolutely, I 
endorse what you're saying.
    Senator Banks. Thank you. My time has expired.
    Chairman Moran. Let me make sure I understand something. 
Most of our conversation about Veterans Treatment Courts, the 
vast extent of it, is going to be about Veterans Treatment 
Courts in state courts. Is that true? This may not be the panel 
to ask this question, but I think that's true. And in fact, I 
think there are very few federal courts that have a Veteran 
Treatment Court. And so, what you're talking to us about 
federal corrections facilities, they are dealing with veterans 
absent a veteran treatment court. You are just taking care of 
veterans without the services that come in a courtroom, between 
a veteran and the state district court judge. That would be 
where we are. Is that right?
    Ms. DiGiacomo. Well, I'm probably not the appropriate 
person to speak about how the courts work. What I can say is, 
I'm sure some of these individuals may have made their way 
through some type of veterans court previously before coming 
into our system, but oftentimes, their military service is 
taken into account in any recommendation that's being given by 
that federal judge in regards to the services that that 
incarcerated veteran may need. The Bureau of Prisons does our 
very best to make sure that we're responding to those 
recommendations from the court.
    Chairman Moran. So, the veterans you deal with in the 
Federal Bureau of Prisons are veterans who you learn are 
veterans and then try to provide them additional support and 
help, or you're trying to follow a federal judge's direction on 
how that veteran should be cared for?
    Ms. DiGiacomo. Yes, sir.
    Chairman Moran. Okay. Anything else, Senator Banks?
    Senator Banks. No, thank you.
    Chairman Moran. I want to once again thank our witnesses, 
both this panel and the previous, for their testimony today, 
our Committee, and Members that were here, and our audience 
that participated as well. Each member has five legislative 
days in which to submit statements or questions for the record. 
Any Senator who would like to submit a question for the record, 
please do so in a timely manner, and ask our witnesses to 
respond to any questions they have received following today's 
hearing in a timely manner as well.
    With that, the hearing is adjourned. Thank you.
    [Whereupon, at 5:29 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.]

                            A P P E N D I X

                          Prepared Statements
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                        Questions for the Record
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                        Statement for the Record
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
 
                                  [all]