Testimony 

Before the Subcommittee on Economic 

Opportunity, Committee on Veterans' 

Affairs, House of Representatives

United States Government Accountability Office

GAO

For Release on Delivery 

Expected at 2:00 p.m. EDT 

Wednesday, April 20, 2005 VOCATIONAL 

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 
What GAO Found

United States Government Accountability Office

Why GAO Did This Study

Highlights

Accountability Integrity Reliability

www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-05-572T.

To view the full product, including the scope 

and methodology, click on the link above. 

For more information, contact Cynthia A. 

Bascetta at (202) 512-7215 or 

bascettac@gao.gov. 

Highlights of GAO-05-572T, a testimony 

before the Subcommittee on Economic 

Opportunity, Committee on Veterans' 

Affairs, House of Representatives 

April 20, 2005

VOCATIONAL REHABILITATION

VA Has Opportunities to Improve 

Services, but Faces Significant 

Challenges 

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 

• 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; 

• the Department of Defense’s (DOD) concerns that VA’s outreach could 

work at cross purposes to the military’s retention goals; and 

• 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. 

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. 

What GAO Recommends

This statement contains no 

recommendations. 
Page 1 GAO-05-572T 

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 

 1

GAO, High Risk Series: An Update, GAO-05-207 (Washington, D.C.: January 2005) 

2

VA 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) 
Page 2 GAO-05-572T 

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 

 3

GAO, VA Can Provide More Employment Assistance to Veterans Who Complete Its 

Vocational Rehabilitation Program, GAO/HRD-84-39 (Washington, D.C.: May 23, 1984). 

4

GAO, VA Vocational Rehabilitation and Employment Program: GAO Comments on Key 

Task Force Findings and Recommendations, GAO-04-853 (Washington, D.C.: June 15, 

2004). 

Background 
Page 3 GAO-05-572T 

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. 

We generally agree with the Task Force’s key findings, which broadly 

address three areas of VR&E’s operations. (See table 1.) 

 5

Hospitalized 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. §§ 3102, 3104, and 3113. 

Implementing Task 

Force 

Recommendations 

Should Improve 

VR&E Services 
Page 4 GAO-05-572T 

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 

 6

GAO, Vocational Rehabilitation: VA Needs to Emphasize Serving Veterans With Serious 

Employment Handicaps, GAO/HRD-92-133 (Washington, D.C.: Sept. 28, 1992) 

7

GAO, Vocational Rehabilitation: VA Continues to Place Few Disabled Veterans in Jobs

GAO/HEHS-96-155 (Washington, D.C.: Sept. 3, 1996) 
Page 5 GAO-05-572T 

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. 
Page 6 GAO-05-572T 

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. 

 8

The 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. 
Page 7 GAO-05-572T 

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 

 9

GAO, 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. 04-

03200-96 (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). 
Page 8 GAO-05-572T 

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 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) 

VA Continues to Face 

Significant Challenges 

in Improving Its 

VR&E Program 

VR&E Challenged to 

Provide Services as Early 

as Possible 
Page 9 GAO-05-572T 

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. 
Page 10 GAO-05-572T 

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. 

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. 

Outmoded Information 

Technology Systems Pose 

a Challenge 
Page 11 GAO-05-572T 

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. 

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. 

VR&E Faces the Challenge 

of Developing Meaningful 

Outcome Measures 
Page 12 GAO-05-572T 

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. 

For further information, please contact Cynthia A. Bascetta at (202) 512-

7215. Also contributing to this statement were Irene Chu and Joseph 

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. 

Contact and 

Acknowledgments 
Page 13 GAO-05-572T 

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-04-

853, 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) 

Related GAO Products 

(130472) 
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. 
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.” 

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 

Contact: 

Web site: www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm 

E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov

Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470 

Gloria Jarmon, Managing Director, JarmonG@gao.gov (202) 512-4400 

U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7125 

Washington, D.C. 20548 

Paul Anderson, Managing Director, AndersonP1@gao.gov (202) 512-4800 

U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7149 

Washington, D.C. 20548 

GAO’s Mission 

Obtaining Copies of 

GAO Reports and 

Testimony 

Order by Mail or Phone 

To Report Fraud, 

Waste, and Abuse in 

Federal Programs 

Congressional 

Relations 

Public Affairs 

PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER