Vocational Rehabilitation: VA Has Opportunities to Improve
Services, but Faces Significant Challenges (20-APR-05,
GAO-05-572T).
The Department of Veterans Affairs' Vocational Rehabilitation and
Employment (VR&E) program has taken on heightened importance due,
in large measure, to the number of servicemembers returning from
Afghanistan and Iraq with serious injuries and their need for
vocational rehabilitation and employment assistance. This
statement draws on over 20 years of GAO's reporting on VA's
provision of vocational rehabilitation and employment assistance
to American veterans and focuses primarily on the results of two
recent GAO reports. The first, issued in June 2004, commented on
the report of the VA-sponsored VR&E Task Force, which performed a
comprehensive review of VR&E activities and made extensive
recommendations that, if implemented, would affect virtually
every aspect of VR&E's operations. The second, issued in January
2005, focused on the steps VA has taken and the challenges it
faces in providing services to seriously injured veterans
returning from Afghanistan and Iraq.
-------------------------Indexing Terms-------------------------
REPORTNUM: GAO-05-572T
ACCNO: A22037
TITLE: Vocational Rehabilitation: VA Has Opportunities to
Improve Services, but Faces Significant Challenges
DATE: 04/20/2005
SUBJECT: Disabilities
Employee assistance programs
Employment of the disabled
Evaluation criteria
Evaluation methods
Information technology
Internal controls
Performance management
Performance measures
Persons with disabilities
Program evaluation
Program management
Veterans
Veterans benefits
Veterans employment programs
Vocational rehabilitation
VA Vocational Rehabilitation and
Employment Program
******************************************************************
** This file contains an ASCII representation of the text of a **
** GAO Product. **
** **
** No attempt has been made to display graphic images, although **
** figure captions are reproduced. Tables are included, but **
** may not resemble those in the printed version. **
** **
** Please see the PDF (Portable Document Format) file, when **
** available, for a complete electronic file of the printed **
** document's contents. **
** **
******************************************************************
GAO-05-572T
United States Government Accountability Office
GAO Testimony
Before the Subcommittee on Economic Opportunity, Committee on Veterans'
Affairs, House of Representatives
For Release on Delivery
Expected at 2:00 p.m. EDT VOCATIONAL
Wednesday, April 20, 2005
REHABILITATION
VA Has Opportunities to Improve Services, but Faces Significant Challenges
Statement of Cynthia A. Bascetta, Director Education, Workforce, and Income
Security
GAO-05-572T
[IMG]
April 20, 2005
VOCATIONAL REHABILITATION
VA Has Opportunities to Improve Services, but Faces Significant Challenges
What GAO Found
The past year has presented the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) with
an unprecedented opportunity to begin strengthening its provision of
vocational rehabilitation and employment services to veterans. The VR&E
Task Force has developed a blueprint for the changes needed to improve
numerous programmatic and managerial aspects of VR&E's operations. We
generally agree with the Task Force's three key findings.
Key VR&E Task Force Findings
Finding #1 VR&E has not been a VA priority in terms of returning veterans
with serviceconnected disabilities to the workforce.
Finding #2 VR&E has limited capacity to manage its growing workload.
Finding #3 The VR&E system must be redesigned for the 21st century
employment environment.
We also generally agree with the Task Force's key recommendations to
streamline eligibility and entitlement, institute a new employment-driven
service delivery process, expand counseling benefits, reorganize and
increase VR&E staffing, and improve information technology capabilities
and intra-and inter-agency coordination.
VR&E faces three overriding challenges as it responds to the Task Force
recommendations. First, providing early intervention assistance to injured
servicemembers returning from Afghanistan and Iraq is complicated by
o differences and uncertainties in the recovery process, which make it
difficult for VR&E to determine when a servicemember will be able to
consider its services;
o the Department of Defense's (DOD) concerns that VA's outreach could
work at cross purposes to the military's retention goals; and
o lack of access to DOD data that would allow VA to readily identify and
locate all seriously injured servicemembers.
Second, VR&E needs to upgrade its information technology system. The Task
Force report pointed out that VR&E's IT system is limited in its ability
to produce useful reports. Third, VR&E needs to use new results-based
criteria to evaluate and improve performance. The Task Force recommended
that VR&E develop a new employment-oriented performance measurement
system, including measures of sustained employment longer than 60 days. In
fiscal year 2004, VR&E included four employment-based performance criteria
in its performance and accountability report. However, as of February
2005, VR&E had not yet reported results using these longer-term measures.
United States Government Accountability Office
Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee:
We are pleased to be here today to provide our views on efforts of the
Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) to help disabled veterans obtain
suitable employment through its Vocational Rehabilitation and Employment
(VR&E) program. This program is crucial to helping veterans with
disabilities caused or aggravated by their service in the military obtain
and maintain employment, especially now as servicemembers return from
Afghanistan and Iraq. Further, at a time when the American workforce is
shrinking, the importance of VA's VR&E program and other federal programs
that help individuals with disabilities return to work is paramount. For
this and other reasons, we have designated federal disability programs,
including VR&E, as "high risk."1
In 2003, the Secretary of Veterans Affairs established a VR&E Task Force2
to conduct an independent review of the agency's VR&E program and make
recommendations for improving its operation. At the time, there were
concerns regarding the management of the program. These concerns included,
among other things, the program's continued focus on education rather than
employment, the time it took participants to become rehabilitated, and the
program's poor track record for helping disabled veterans find suitable
employment.
As you requested, my comments are focused on GAO's views about key VR&E
Task Force findings and recommendations and challenges that the program
currently faces in meeting the needs of disabled veterans. My statement is
based largely on prior GAO reports and testimonies. Since 1984, we have
reported on the operation of VA's VR&E program, the VR&E Task Force
findings and recommendations, and VA's efforts to provide vocational
rehabilitation services to injured servicemembers returning from
Afghanistan and Iraq. We did our work in accordance with generally
accepted government auditing standards.
In summary, GAO's past work and the recent Task Force report point to the
need for VR&E to increase its emphasis on finding jobs for veterans
1GAO, High Risk Series: An Update, GAO-05-207 (Washington, D.C.: January
2005)
2VA Vocational Rehabilitation and Employment Task Force, Report to the
Secretary of Veterans Affairs: The Vocational Rehabilitation and
Employment Program for the 21st Century (Washington, D.C.: March 2004)
with disabilities and managing its operations. We reported as early as
19843 that the VR&E program primarily focused on training veterans and not
finding them suitable employment. Twenty years later, the Task Force
reached similar conclusions and recommended most notably that VR&E
institute an employment-driven system for providing services to veterans
that would re-emphasize the importance of employment. We noted that
implementing a system focused on employment would require a cultural shift
away from VR&E's long-standing emphasis on education. 4 VR&E would also
need to overcome the incentive for veterans to use its education benefits,
which provide more financial assistance than those available though other
VA education benefits programs. While we generally agreed with the Task
Force findings and recommendations, we also reported that VR&E faces three
important challenges. First, although intervening early after a disabling
injury increases the likelihood that a disabled veteran would return to
work, VA faces significant challenges in expediting VR&E services to
seriously injured servicemembers. We recommended in January 2005 that VA
improve its efforts to expedite services for veterans returning from
Afghanistan and Iraq and improve its policies and procedures to ensure
that veterans obtain the services they need, which VA is in the process of
doing. In addition, VR&E at this time does not have the information
technology systems needed to properly manage its operations. Furthermore,
it has just begun to initiate the process of using results-based criteria
to measure success; that is, whether its services help veterans with
disabilities achieve sustained employment.
Since the 1940s, VA has provided vocational rehabilitation assistance to
veterans with service-connected disabilities to help them find meaningful
work and achieve maximum independence in daily living. In 1980, the
Congress enacted the Veterans' Rehabilitation and Education Amendments,
which changed the focus of VA's vocational rehabilitation program from
providing primarily training aimed at improving the employability of
disabled veterans to helping them find and maintain suitable jobs. VA
estimates that in fiscal year 2004 it spent more than $670 million on its
VR&E program to serve about 73,000 participants. This
Background
3GAO, VA Can Provide More Employment Assistance to Veterans Who Complete
Its Vocational Rehabilitation Program, GAO/HRD-84-39 (Washington, D.C.:
May 23, 1984).
4GAO, VA Vocational Rehabilitation and Employment Program: GAO Comments on
Key Task Force Findings and Recommendations, GAO-04-853 (Washington, D.C.:
June 15, 2004).
amount represents about 2 percent of VA's $37 billion budget for
nonmedical benefits, most of which involves cash compensation for service
connected disabilities.
VR&E services include vocational counseling, evaluation, and training that
can include payment for tuition and other expenses for education, as well
as job placement assistance. Interested veterans generally apply for VR&E
services after they have applied and qualified for disability compensation
based on a rating of their service-connected disability. This disability
rating-ranging from 0 to 100 percent in 10 percent increments-entitles
veterans to monthly cash payments based on their average loss in earning
capacity resulting from a service-connected injury or combination of
injuries. To be entitled to VR&E services, veterans with disabilities
generally must have a 20 percent disability rating and an employment
handicap as determined by a vocational rehabilitation counselor. Although
cash compensation is not available to servicemembers until after they
separate from the military, they can receive VR&E services prior to
separation under certain circumstances.5 To make these services available
prior to discharge, VA expedites the determination of eligibility for VR&E
by granting a preliminary rating, known as a memorandum rating.
Implementing Task Force Recommendations Should Improve VR&E Services
We generally agree with the Task Force's key findings, which broadly
address three areas of VR&E's operations. (See table 1.)
5Hospitalized military personnel pending discharge may receive all
vocational rehabilitation and employment benefits-such as counseling,
evaluation, and training-except for the monthly subsistence allowance. 38
U.S.C. S:S: 3102, 3104, and 3113.
Table 1: Key VR&E Task Force Findings
Finding #1 VR&E has not been a Veterans Benefits Administration (VBA)
priority in terms of returning veterans with service-connected
disabilities to the workforce.
Finding #2 VR&E has limited capacity to manage its growing workload.
Finding #3 The VR&E system must be redesigned for the 21st century
employment environment.
Source: GAO.
First, the Task Force found that VR&E has not been a priority in terms of
returning veterans with service-connected disabilities to the workforce.
Between 1984 and 1998, we issued three reports all of which found that the
VR&E program had not emphasized its mandate to find jobs for disabled
veterans. In 1992,6 we found that over 90 percent of eligible veterans
went directly into education programs, while less than 3 percent went into
the employment services phase. We also found that VA placed few veterans
in suitable jobs. We reported in 19967 that VA rehabilitated less than 10
percent of veterans found eligible for vocational rehabilitation services
and recommended switching the focus to obtaining suitable employment for
disabled veterans. VA program officials told us that staff focused on
providing training services because, among other reasons, the staff was
not prepared to provide employment services because it lacked adequate
training and expertise in job placement. Years later, the Task Force
similarly reported that top VR&E management had not demonstrated a
commitment to providing employment services and lacked the staffing and
skill resources at the regional offices to provide these services.
The Task Force also found that VR&E has a limited capacity to manage its
growing workload. The Task Force had concerns about, among other things,
VR&E's organizational, program, and fiscal accountability; workforce and
workload management; information and systems technology; and performance
measures. In our report on the Task Force, we stated that, although we
have not specifically reviewed VR&E's capacity to manage its workload, we
agree that many of the VR&E
6GAO, Vocational Rehabilitation: VA Needs to Emphasize Serving Veterans
With Serious Employment Handicaps, GAO/HRD-92-133 (Washington, D.C.: Sept.
28, 1992)
7GAO, Vocational Rehabilitation: VA Continues to Place Few Disabled
Veterans in Jobs GAO/HEHS-96-155 (Washington, D.C.: Sept. 3, 1996)
management systems identified by the Task Force as needing improvement are
fundamental to the proper functioning of federal programs, regardless of
workload.
In addition, the Task Force found that the VR&E system must be redesigned
for the 21st century employment environment. The Task Force reported that
the VR&E program does not reflect the dynamic nature of the economic
environment and constant changes in the labor market. The report suggested
that, as a result, only about 10 percent of veterans participating in the
VR&E program had obtained employment. We agree with the Task Force finding
that the VR&E system needs to be modernized. Our high risk report
emphasized that outmoded criteria used to establish eligibility need to be
updated.
The Task Force made 105 recommendations, which we grouped into six
categories. (See table 2.) The first category of recommendations was
directed at streamlining VR&E program eligibility and entitlement for
veterans in most critical need, including (1) servicemembers who have been
medically discharged or are pending medical discharge; (2) veterans with a
combined service-connected disability rating of 50 percent or greater; and
(3) veterans receiving compensation for the loss, or loss of the use, of a
limb. In our report, we commented that, among other things, VA's outmoded
disability criteria raise questions about the validity of its disability
decisions because medical conditions alone are generally poor predictors
of work incapacity. For example, advances in prosthetics and technology
for workplace accommodations can enhance work capacity by compensating for
impairments. As a result, the Task Force recommendation to focus on
severity of disability rather than on employability may not ensure that
veterans with the most severe employment handicaps receive priority
services from VR&E.
Table 2: Key VR&E Task Force Recommendations
Category Recommendation
#1 Streamline eligibility and entitlement for those veterans in most
critical need.
#2 Replace the current VR&E process with a 5-track employment-driven
service delivery process.
#3 Expand counseling benefits to provide VR&E services to pre-discharge
servicemembers and post-discharge service members.
#4 Reorganize VR&E and increase staffing.
#5 Improve the capacity of the information technology systems.
#6 Improve intra-and interagency coordination.
Source: GAO.
Second, the Task Force sought to replace the current VR&E process with a
5-track employment-driven service delivery system. The five tracks include
rapid access employment for veterans with skills, self-employment,
reemployment at a job held before military service, traditional vocational
rehabilitation services and, when employment is not a viable option,
independent living services.8 We commented that the 5-track process could
help VR&E focus on employment while permitting the agency to assist
veterans less likely to obtain gainful employment on their own. We added,
however, that the new system would require a cultural shift from the
program's current emphasis on long-term education to more rapid
employment. We also observed that, as long as the education benefits
available under VR&E provide more financial assistance than those
available through other VA educational benefits programs, eligible
veterans will have strong incentives to continue to use VR&E to pursue
their education goals.
Third, the Task Force recommended that VR&E expand counseling benefits to
provide VR&E services to servicemembers before they are discharged and to
veterans who have already transitioned out of the military. We agreed that
providing vocational and employment counseling prior to military discharge
is essential to enable disabled servicemembers to access VR&E services as
quickly as possible after they are discharged.
8The Independent Living program is tailored to the veteran whose
service-connected disability or disabilities or overall condition make
employment goals infeasible at the time of application. The program might
incorporate such devices or services as assistive technology, Independent
Living skills training, or connection to community-based support services
to improve quality of life with the possibility of employment later.
In prior reports, we highlighted the importance of early intervention
efforts to promote and facilitate return to the workplace. In 1996, for
example, we reported research findings that rehabilitation offered as
close as possible to the onset of disabling impairments has the greatest
likelihood of success. 9 In addition, receptiveness to participate in
rehabilitation and job placement activities can decline after extended
absence from work.
Fourth, the Task Force made several recommendations directed at
redesigning the VR&E central office to provide greater oversight of
regional office operations and to increase staff and skill sets to reflect
the new focus on employment. We agreed that program accountability could
be enhanced through more central office oversight. We pointed out that,
over the past 3 years, VA Inspector General reports had identified VR&E
programs at regional offices that did not adhere to policies and
procedures and sometimes circumvented accountability mechanisms, such as
those for managing and monitoring veterans' cases and those requiring the
development of sound plans prior to approving purchases for those veterans
seeking self-employment. 10
Fifth, the Task Force recommended that VR&E improve the capacity of its
information technology systems. Many of the Task Force's recommendations
in this area are consistent with GAO's governmentwide work reporting that
agencies need to strengthen strategic planning and investment management
in information technology. In addition, we recognized that VR&E would
benefit from a more systematic analysis of current information technology
systems before making further investment in its current systems.
Finally, the Task Force recommended that VR&E strengthen coordination
within VA between VR&E and the Veterans Health Administration, and
9GAO, SSA Disability: Program Redesign Necessary to Encourage Return to
Work, GAO/HEHS-96-62 (Washington, D.C.: Apr. 24, 1996).
10For recent examples, see Department of Veterans Affairs, Office of
Inspector General, Combined Assessment Program Review of the VA Regional
Office, Providence, Rhode Island, Report No.04-00731-110 (Washington,
D.C.: March 24, 2005); Combined Assessment Program Review of the VA
Regional Office, Sioux Falls, South Dakota, Report No. 0403200-96
(Washington, D.C.: March 3, 2005); and Combined Assessment Program Review
of the VA Regional Office, Indianapolis, Indiana, Report No. 04-00603-65,
(Washington, D.C.: Jan. 10, 2005).
VA Continues to Face Significant Challenges in Improving Its VR&E Program
between VR&E and the Departments of Defense (DOD) and Labor.11 Improving
coordination with agencies that have a role in assisting disabled veterans
make the transition to civilian employment should help these agencies more
efficiently use federal resources to enhance the employment prospects of
disabled veterans.
While VR&E responds to the Task Force recommendations, it faces immediate
challenges associated with providing vocational rehabilitation and
employment services to injured servicemembers returning from Afghanistan
and Iraq. As we reported in January 2005,12 VR&E is challenged by the need
to provide services on an early intervention basis; that is, expedited
assistance provided on a high priority basis. VR&E also lacks the
information technology systems needed to manage the provision of services
to these servicemembers and to veterans. In addition, VR&E is only now
beginning to use results-based criteria for measuring its success in
assisting veterans achieve sustained employment.
VR&E Challenged to Provide Services as Early as Possible
VR&E faces significant challenges in expediting services to disabled
servicemembers. An inherent challenge is that individual differences and
uncertainties in the recovery process make it difficult to determine when
a seriously injured service member will be able to consider VR&E services.
Additionally, as we reported in our January 2005 report, given that VA is
conducting outreach to servicemembers whose discharge from military
service is not yet certain, VA is challenged by DOD's concerns that VA's
outreach about benefits, including early intervention with VR&E services,
could adversely affect the military's retention goals. Finally, VA is
currently challenged by a lack of access to DOD data that would, at a
minimum, allow the agency to readily identify and locate all seriously
injured servicemembers. VA officials we interviewed both in the regional
offices and at central office reported that this information would provide
them with a more reliable way to identify and monitor the progress of
those servicemembers with serious injuries. However, DOD officials cited
privacy concerns about the type of information VA had requested.
11The Department of Labor provides vocational rehabilitation services
through Local Veterans' Employment Representatives and the Disabled
Veterans' Outreach Program.
12GAO, Vocational Rehabilitation: More VA and DOD Collaboration Needed to
Expedite Services for Seriously Injured Servicemembers, GAO-05-167
(Washington, D.C.: Jan. 14, 2005)
Our January 2005 report found that VR&E could enhance employment outcomes
for disabled servicemembers, especially if services could be provided
early in the recovery process. Unlike previous conflicts, a greater
portion of servicemembers injured in Afghanistan and Iraq are surviving
their injuries-due, in part, to advanced protective equipment and
intheater medical treatment. Consequently, VR&E has greater opportunity to
assist servicemembers in overcoming their impairments. While medical and
technological advances are making it possible for some of these disabled
servicemembers to return to military occupations, others will transition
to veteran status and seek employment in the civilian economy. According
to DOD officials, once stabilized and discharged from the hospital,
servicemembers usually relocate to be closer to their homes or military
bases and be treated as outpatients by the closest VA or military
hospital. At this point, the military generally begins to assess whether
the servicemember will be able to remain in the military-a process that
could take months to complete. The process could take even longer if
servicemembers appeal the military's initial disability decision.
We also reported that VA had taken steps to expedite VR&E services for
seriously injured servicemembers returning from Afghanistan and Iraq.
Specifically, VA instructed its regional offices to make seriously injured
servicemembers a high priority for all VA assistance. Because the most
seriously injured servicemembers are initially treated at major military
treatment facilities, VA also deployed staff to these sites to provide
information on VA benefits programs, including VR&E services to
servicemembers injured in Afghanistan and Iraq. Moreover, to better ensure
the identification and monitoring of all seriously injured servicemembers,
VA initiated a memorandum of agreement proposing that DOD systematically
provide information on those servicemembers, including their names,
location, and medical condition.
Pending an agreement, VA instructed its regional offices to establish
local liaison with military medical treatment facilities in their areas to
learn who the seriously injured are, where they are located, and the
severity of their injuries. Reliance on local relationships, however, has
resulted in varying completeness and reliability of information. In
addition, we found that VA had no policy for VR&E staff to maintain
contact with seriously injured servicemembers who had not initially
applied for VR&E services. Nevertheless, some regional offices reported
efforts to maintain contact with these servicemembers, noting that some
who are not initially ready to consider employment when contacted about
VR&E services may be receptive at a future time.
To improve VA's efforts to expedite VR&E services, we recommended that VA
and DOD collaborate to reach an agreement for VA to have access to
information that both agencies agree is needed to promote servicemembers'
recovery to work. We also recommended that the Secretary of Veterans
Affairs direct that Under Secretary for Benefits to develop a policy and
procedures for regional offices to maintain contact with seriously injured
servicemembers who do not initially apply for VR&E services, in order to
ensure that they have the opportunity to participate in the program when
they are ready. Both VA and DOD generally concurred with our findings and
recommendations.
Outmoded Information Technology Systems Pose a Challenge
GAO's governmentwide work has found that federal agencies need to
strengthen strategic planning and investment management in information
technology. The Task Force expressed particular concern that VR&E's
information technology systems are not up to the task of producing the
information and analyses needed to manage these and other activities. The
Task Force pointed out that VR&E's mission-critical automated
casemanagement system is based on a software application developed by four
VA regional offices in the early 1990s and redesigned to operate in the
Veterans Benefits Administration's information technology and network
environments.
The Task Force identified specific concerns with the operation of VR&E's
automated case management system. For example, 52 of VR&E's 138 outbased
locations13 cannot efficiently use the automated system because of VBA's
policy to limit staff access to high-speed computer lines. As a result of
this policy, many VR&E locations use dial-up modem capabilities, which can
be unreliable and slow. The Task Force concluded that VR&E's automated
system is so intertwined with the delivery of VR&E services that lack of
reliable access and timely system response has degraded staff productivity
and its ability to provide timely services to veterans.
In addition, the Task Force pointed out that the number of reports that
VR&E's automated case management system can generate is limited. For
example, workload data available from the automated system provide only a
snapshot of the veterans in the VR&E program at a given point in time. The
automated system cannot link a veteran's case status with the fiscal
13VR&E has staff in locations other than VR&E central office and VA
regional offices. These out-based personnel may be located in government
buildings or in leased space.
year in which the veteran entered the program so that the performance of
veterans entering the program in a fiscal year can be measured over a
period of time. Also, the Task Force reported that VR&E does not have the
capabilities it needs to track the number of veterans who drop out of the
program or interrupt their rehabilitation plans.
VR&E Faces the Challenge of Developing Meaningful Outcome Measures
VA faces the challenge of using results-oriented criteria to measure the
long-term success of the VR&E program. The Task Force recommended that
VR&E develop a new outcomes-based performance measurement system to
complement the proposed 5-track employment-driven service delivery system.
Currently, VR&E still identifies veterans as having been successfully
rehabilitated if they maintain gainful employment for 60 days. In its
fiscal year 2004 performance and accountability report, VR&E included four
employment-based performance measures: the percentage of participants
employed during the first quarter (90 days) after leaving the program, the
percentage still employed after the third quarter (270 days), the
percentage change in earnings from pre-application to post-program, and
the average cost of placing a participant in employment. However, as of
February 2005, VR&E was still in the process of developing data for these
measures and had not reported results.
Until VR&E is farther along in this process, it will continue to measure
performance using the 60-day criteria, which may not accurately predict
sustained employment over the long-term. In 1993,14 we reported that the
60-day measure of success used by state vocational rehabilitation agencies
may not be rigorous enough because gains in employment and earnings of
clients who appeared to have been successfully rehabilitated faded after 2
years.15 Moreover, the earnings for many returned to pre-vocational
rehabilitation level after 8 years. As VR&E further develops its four
employment-based performance measures, it will also face challenges
associated with coordinating its efforts with those of other federal
14GAO, Vocational Rehabilitation: Evidence for Federal Program's
Effectiveness Is Mixed, GAO/PEMD-93-19 (Washington, D.C.: Aug. 27, 1993)
15The Social Security Act states that people applying for disability
benefits should be promptly referred to state vocational rehabilitation
agencies for services in order to maximize the number of such individuals
who can return to productive activity. The 60-day measure used by state
agencies is less rigorous than the criterion used by the Social Security
Administration-9 continuous months of employment in any substantial
gainful activity.
agencies, including the Departments of Labor and Education, as they seek
to develop common measures16 of vocational rehabilitation success.
Mr. Chairman, this concludes my prepared remarks. I will be happy to
answer any questions that you or other Members of the Subcommittee may
have.
Contact and For further information, please contact Cynthia A. Bascetta at
(202) 5127215. Also contributing to this statement were Irene Chu and
JosephAcknowledgments Natalicchio.
16VR&E is working with the Office of Management and Budget and other
federal agencies to develop common measures of performance for vocational
rehabilitation.
Related GAO Products
VA Disability Benefits and Health Care: Providing Certain Services to the
Seriously Injured Poses Challenges (GAO-05-444T, Mar. 17, 2005)
Vocational Rehabilitation: More VA and DOD Collaboration Needed to
Expedite Services for Seriously Injured Servicemembers (GAO-05-167, Jan.
14, 2005)
VA Vocational Rehabilitation and Employment Program: GAO Comments on Key
Task Force Findings and Recommendations (GAO-04853, Jun. 15, 2004)
Vocational Rehabilitation: Opportunities to Improve Program Effectiveness
(GAO/T-HEHS-98-87, Feb. 4, 1998)
Veterans Benefits Administration: Focusing on Results in Vocational
Rehabilitation and Education Programs (GAO/T-HEHS-97-148, Jun. 5, 1997)
Vocational Rehabilitation: VA Continues to Place Few Disabled Veterans in
Jobs (GAO/HEHS-96-155, Sept. 3, 1996)
Vocational Rehabilitation: Evidence for Federal Program's Effectiveness Is
Mixed, (GAO/PEMD-93-19, Aug. 27, 1993)
Vocational Rehabilitation: VA Needs to Emphasize Serving Veterans With
Serious Employment Handicaps (GAO/HRD-92-133, Sept. 28, 1992)
VA Can Provide More Employment Assistance to Veterans Who Complete Its
Vocational Rehabilitation Program (GAO/HRD-84-39, May 23, 1984)
This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright
protection in the United States. It may be reproduced and distributed in
its entirety without further permission from GAO. However, because this
work may contain copyrighted images or other material, permission from the
copyright holder may be necessary if you wish to reproduce this material
separately.
GAO's Mission
Obtaining Copies of GAO Reports and Testimony
The Government Accountability Office, the audit, evaluation and
investigative arm of Congress, exists to support Congress in meeting its
constitutional responsibilities and to help improve the performance and
accountability of the federal government for the American people. GAO
examines the use of public funds; evaluates federal programs and policies;
and provides analyses, recommendations, and other assistance to help
Congress make informed oversight, policy, and funding decisions. GAO's
commitment to good government is reflected in its core values of
accountability, integrity, and reliability.
The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no cost
is through GAO's Web site (www.gao.gov). Each weekday, GAO posts newly
released reports, testimony, and correspondence on its Web site. To have
GAO e-mail you a list of newly posted products every afternoon, go to
www.gao.gov and select "Subscribe to Updates."
Order by Mail or Phone The first copy of each printed report is free.
Additional copies are $2 each. A check or money order should be made out
to the Superintendent of Documents. GAO also accepts VISA and Mastercard.
Orders for 100 or more copies mailed to a single address are discounted 25
percent. Orders should be sent to:
U.S. Government Accountability Office 441 G Street NW, Room LM Washington,
D.C. 20548
To order by Phone: Voice: (202) 512-6000 TDD: (202) 512-2537 Fax: (202)
512-6061
To Report Fraud, Contact:
Waste, and Abuse in Web site: www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm
E-mail: [email protected] Programs Automated answering system: (800)
424-5454 or (202) 512-7470
Gloria Jarmon, Managing Director, [email protected] (202)
512-4400Congressional U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street
NW, Room 7125 Relations Washington, D.C. 20548
Public Affairs Paul Anderson, Managing Director, [email protected] (202)
512-4800 U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7149
Washington, D.C. 20548
PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
*** End of document. ***