U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402–0001

98–296PDF 2005

TO RECEIVE THE REPORT OF VA’S VOCATIONAL

REHABILITATION AND EMPLOYMENT SERVICE

TASK FORCE

HEARING

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON BENEFITS

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON VETERANS’ AFFAIRS 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

ONE HUNDRED EIGHTH CONGRESS

SECOND SESSION

APRIL 1, 2004

Printed for the use of the Committee on Veterans’ Affairs

Serial No. 108–36

(
COMMITTEE ON VETERANS’ AFFAIRS 

CHRISTOPHER H. SMITH, New Jersey, Chairman 

MICHAEL BILIRAKIS, Florida 

TERRY EVERETT, Alabama 

STEVE BUYER, Indiana 

JACK QUINN, New York 

CLIFF STEARNS, Florida 

JERRY MORAN, Kansas 

RICHARD H. BAKER, Louisiana 

ROB SIMMONS, Connecticut 

HENRY E. BROWN, JR., South Carolina 

JEFF MILLER, Florida 

JOHN BOOZMAN, Arkansas 

JEB BRADLEY, New Hampshire 

BOB BEAUPREZ, Colorado 

GINNY BROWN-WAITE, Florida 

RICK RENZI, Arizona 

TIM MURPHY, Pennsylvania 

LANE EVANS, Illinois 

BOB FILNER, California 

LUIS V. GUTIERREZ, Illinois 

CORRINE BROWN, Florida 

VIC SNYDER, Arkansas 

CIRO D. RODRIGUEZ, Texas 

MICHAEL H. MICHAUD, Maine 

DARLENE HOOLEY, Oregon 

SILVESTRE REYES, Texas 

TED STRICKLAND, Ohio 

SHELLEY BERKLEY, Nevada 

TOM UDALL, New Mexico 

SUSAN A. DAVIS, California 

TIM RYAN, Ohio

PATRICK E. RYAN, Chief Counsel and Staff Director 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON BENEFITS 

HENRY E. BROWN, JR., South Carolina, Chairman 

JACK QUINN, New York 

JEFF MILLER, Florida 

JEB BRADLEY, New Hampshire 

GINNY BROWN-WAITE, Florida 

MICHAEL H. MICHAUD, Maine 

SUSAN A. DAVIS, California 

SILVESTRE REYES, Texas 

CORRINE BROWN, Florida

(II) 
(III)

C O N T E N T S 

April 1, 2004

Page

To Receive the Report of VA’s Vocational Rehabilitation and Employment 

Service Task Force ............................................................................................... 1

OPENING STATEMENTS 

Chairman Brown ..................................................................................................... 1

Hon. Michael H. Michaud ....................................................................................... 2

Hon. Susan A. Davis ................................................................................................ 3

WITNESS 

Hardy, Dorcas R., Chairman, Vocational Rehabilitation and Employment 

Task Force, Department of Veterans Affairs ..................................................... 4

Prepared statement of Ms. Hardy, w/attachment .......................................... 13

MATERIAL SUBMITTED FOR RECORD 

Executive summary: 

2004 VR&E Task Force Report: The Vocational Rehabilitation and Employment Program for the 21st Century Veteran, submitted by Ms. 

Dorcas Hardy ................................................................................................ 24

(1)

TO RECEIVE THE REPORT OF VA’S VOCATIONAL REHABILITATION AND EMPLOYMENT SERVICE TASK FORCE 

THURSDAY, APRIL 1, 2004

U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON BENEFITS, 

COMMITTEE ON VETERANS’ AFFAIRS, 

Washington, DC 

The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:04 a.m., in room 

334, Cannon House Office Building, Henry E. Brown, Jr. (chairman 

of the subcommittee) presiding. 

Present: Representatives Brown, Miller, Michaud, and Davis. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF CHAIRMAN BROWN 

Mr. BROWN. Good morning. Thank you for your patience and for 

attending this hearing this morning. I am pleased to join Ranking 

Member Michaud and members of the subcommittee to receive the 

report of the independent Vocational Rehabilitation and Employment Service Task Force, which the Secretary of Veterans Affairs 

established last May. 

General Omar Bradley, chairman of the President’s Commission 

on Veterans’ Pensions, said in his 1956 report on veterans’ benefits 

that ‘‘In the modern concept of rehabilitation, disability compensation has an important but secondary role.’’ General Bradley’s views 

prevail today among VA customers. Disability compensation can 

help offset a veteran’s average loss of earning power. But long-term 

sustained employment and economic independence represent the 

aspirations of most disabled veterans, according to VA’s comprehensive 2001 National Survey of Veterans. 

For many disabled veterans, VA’s Vocational Rehabilitation Program represents the final opportunity for long-term sustained employment. I want to note VA’s comprehensive analysis of 53,000 

veterans participating in the Vocational Rehabilitation Program in 

1999 submitted to former Benefits Subcommittee Chairman Jack 

Quinn. This analysis is referenced in the Task Force Report. It 

showed that the typical vocational rehabilitation applicant is 39 

years old, applying for vocational rehabilitation services a modest 

period of time after having served in the military. And 49 percent 

of vocational rehabilitation applicants are between ages 40 and 60 

when they reapply. 

Not only does VA’s vocational rehabilitation and employment 

programs work largely with an older population of disabled veterans, it is different than the rest of the Veterans Benefits Admin-
2

istration in another way, as well. Most of the VBA is a valued benefits processing and payment organization, one of the best in the 

world. However, VA’s Vocational Rehabilitation and Employment 

Service, staffed by 1,118 dedicated rehabilitation professionals at 

56 VA regional offices, is designed as a personalized, long-term 

human services delivery organization, much like the Veterans 

Health Administration. 

The Vocational Rehabilitation Program is unique as it provides 

valuable face-to-face help to disabled veterans over many years as 

they train for and seek jobs that overcome their disabilities. 

Notwithstanding the efforts of VA’s vocational rehabilitation professionals, job placement rates are not what we would like them to 

be. 

I look forward to Chairman Hardy’s testimony on how to put the ‘‘E’’—for employment—back into the VR&E program. And I applaud Secretary Principi and Under Secretary Cooper in creating 

the Task Force. 

I will ask the Secretary to furnish VA’s implementation plans on 

the report’s recommendations that he accepts within 60 days. Then 

I will also ask the Department’s chief operating officer, Deputy Secretary Mansfield, to brief subcommittee members and staff. 

I have the good fortune to work with the subcommittee’s ranking 

member, Mr. Michael Michaud. And now I recognize him for his 

opening statement. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. MICHAEL H. MICHAUD 

Mr. MICHAUD. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, and good 

morning. It is good to have the committee back in action. I look forward to having another very productive year working with you, Mr. 

Chairman. 

As our military personnel remain in harm’s way around the 

world and we begin the largest troop rotation since World War II, 

I believe this hearing is an appropriate way to start our schedule. 

Today, we receive the report of the Secretary’s Task Force on Vocational Rehabilitation and Employment. The report provides many 

recommendations on rebuilding, improving, and modernizing VA’s 

Vocational Rehabilitation Service. And I welcome Ms. Dorcas 

Hardy, Chair of the VR&E Task Force, and looking forward to 

hearing your testimony. 

I also want to thank the Task Force members, including John 

O’Hara, the Task Force executive director, for your hard work over 

the past year in developing and preparing this very important report. I believe everyone here today would agree with me when I say 

that the rehabilitation and preparation for employment and re-employment for disabled veterans should be as important as any other 

VA mission. 

It would have been nice if we could have actually received this 

report about a month ago. Your findings and recommendations 

would have provided important information and persuasive evidence to the committee in our efforts to develop our budget views 

and estimates for the coming fiscal year. For example, the President’s Budget actually calls for a cut of 103 FTEs within the VR&E 

program, while the Task Force actually recommends an additional 

200 FTEs. I do not believe that it will be possible to make all the 
3

significant change that you have recommended, as the administration-proposed budget provides a cut. 

The Task Force report appears to be thorough, thoughtful, and 

well-designed for immediate implementation of certain recommendations. I certainly hope that VA takes this report as seriously as I and my colleagues will do. 

I look forward to working with you, Mr. Chairman, to do all that 

we can to bring VR&E into the 21st century so that veterans completing or leaving the program will successfully transition into today’s workforce. 

We have an obligation to improve this program. We must direct 

its focus to disabled veterans’ abilities, not their disabilities. 

I am specifically interested in the Task Force’s findings and recommendations regarding VR&E’s workload stress; data integrity; 

seamless and accelerated transition services; and the coordination 

of employment counseling services throughout government. Above 

all else, I am concerned about VA’s willingness to accept the Task 

Force report and use it as a blueprint to rebuild the VR&E program. Without VA’s engagement and the administration’s support, 

this report will end up like all other reports on this issue, good in 

theory, flawed in effect, and collecting dust, which is very unfortunate. 

VR&E services are important, and this Task Force report is very 

timely, given the situation overseas and the economic situation 

here at home. There are actually, last year, a lot of labor market 

areas, one labor market area particularly in Maine that had an 

over 35 percent unemployment rate. I submit that a top-quality Vocational Rehabilitation and Employment Program is the least a 

grateful nation should provide to these brave men and women. And 

I think it is very important that we do that. 

Mr. Chairman, I want to thank you for holding this hearing and 

for your leadership not only on this issue but your leadership on 

issues as they relate to veterans. So thank you very much. I look 

forward to working with you this year on this important issue. 

Thank you. 

Mr. BROWN. Thank you very much, Mr. Michaud. I appreciate 

very much your opening statement and I certainly am supportive 

of being absolutely sure when the report comes back that we have 

some input into implementing whatever those necessary changes 

might be. And it is certainly a pleasure working with you in a nonpartisan way. We feel that the veterans’ issues are not partisan, 

and we are grateful to have you as part of this team. 

I notice Ms. Davis has come in. Did you have an opening statement, Ms. Davis? 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. SUSAN A. DAVIS 

Mrs. DAVIS. No, Mr. Chairman. Thank you very much. I am 

pleased that we are having this hearing and look forward to it. I 

think that San Diego may be mentioned once or twice because we 

do have a program there that really has built on some partnerships, and that is really what we need to be doing. 

Now, Mr. Chairman, I think the men and women who join the 

military and fight on our behalf do that because they want to make 

a real contribution to this country. And I think it is absolutely crit-
4

ical that we find a way to enable them to do that when they return 

to our country. If we don’t do that, then we really haven’t kept 

faith with them. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. BROWN. Well, thank you. And thank you for serving on this 

committee. 

I had the privilege back in January to actually go to Iraq and to 

meet with some of our military serving there. I had lunch with one 

group in Baghdad and dinner with another group up in Tikrit. By 

and large it is a different kind of a military. These aren’t the average 18, 19-year-olds that we have found in other wars. These are 

seasoned reservists or National Guard folks. And it is a different 

clientele in the military today, and so I think this is something we 

are going to have to address, too, as they return back into their 

normal civilian settings. 

Ms. Hardy, before we ask you to give your report, I am so delighted you would come and participate this morning that I feel it 

fitting that we ought to at least identify you in this introduction, 

so if you will be patient as I try to fittingly introduce you. 

The Honorable Dorcas Hardy is chairman of the VA’s Vocational 

Rehabilitation and Employment Service Task Force, is president of 

Dorcas R. Hardy and Associates, a government relations and public 

policy firm which represents a diverse portfolio of clients in health 

services, insurance, strategies, entitlement reform policies, and retirement and disability financing. 

Ms. Hardy served as the U.S. Commissioner of the Social Security Administration from 1986 to 1989. As the chief executive officer of the nation’s social insurance programs, she was responsible 

for providing monthly income to more than 40 million people at an 

annual cost of nearly $400 billion, and overseeing 67,000 employees. Ms. Hardy also served as assistant secretary of Human Development Services for the U.S. Department of Health and Human 

Services and was chairman and president of a Tucson rehabilitative technology company. 

Ms. Hardy is a member of the Virginia Board of Rehabilitative 

Services and is a writer and advisor to Stroke Magazine, a monthly 

publication associated with the American Heart Association. 

Thank you for coming. We welcome you now, Ms. Hardy. 

STATEMENT OF DORCAS R. HARDY, CHAIRMAN, VOCATIONAL 

REHABILITATION AND EMPLOYMENT TASK FORCE, DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS 

Ms. HARDY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. It is a pleasure to be here 

and address you and the members of the subcommittee. I have a 

fairly lengthy report. We are not going to start from page one and 

go to the end. I am going to try and be brief and give you some 

highlights of the report entitled ‘‘The Vocational Rehabilitation and 

Employment Program for the 21st Century Veteran.’’ It is extremely comprehensive and is a good blueprint for the future. 

The Task Force was the idea of Under Secretary of Benefits Admiral Cooper, who in the fall of 2002 was concerned about the 

VR&E program. Secretary Principi concurred and the Task Force 

was chartered in May of 2003. The Secretary was very clear he 

wanted an unvarnished look at this program top to bottom and he 
5

asked us very clearly whether it met the intent of the law: Were 

veterans with service-connected disabilities getting and keeping 

suitable jobs or achieving independent living goals? We do provide 

a comprehensive detailed blueprint for building a new employmentdriven service delivery system that is responsive to the 21st Century needs of our service-connected disabled veterans, and especially those with the most urgent needs. Our report is detailed; we 

did attempt to leave nothing to chance. 

The background of all of this is that the VR&E, as you stated in 

your opening comments, is the only business line within the Veterans Benefit Administration claims processing culture that deals 

eye to eye with the veteran. And that means there are different approaches and skills from this tiny little program versus a larger 

claims processing culture that it resides in. It is important to understand that for good delivery of services to a veteran, we need 

both of those skills, both of those kinds of cultures, but they are 

not always easy to put together in the same place. That is not to 

say that VR&E cannot be well-managed or measured but we are 

dealing with a different approach, a social services delivery system 

versus a check-the-box claims processing system. I think we need 

both skills; the challenge, to provide that seamless integrated service to the veteran. 

VR&E has been criticized over many years. Many concerns about 

Chapter 31 employment goals have been raised, but I think this 

new system that we are proposing responds to those concerns. 

We did find that the demands and expectations of VR&E are significant. However, they are often unclear and conflicting. As a result, the entire organizational structure and staff are under stress. 

On the other hand, the system does do many things right. And its 

downside, if you will, is needing to put the ‘‘E’’ back into VR&E and 

employment focus on employment. 

The sense of urgency your colleague referred to is especially 

acute at this time because of the Guard and Reservists who may 

want to return directly to employment or to college. 

I am going to go quickly through three charts here, and I expect 

that if I can speak loudly enough, you all can see them and hear 

me. They are also in your hearing materials. Today, we have a 

VR&E process that has averaged 1,000 up to 1,500 days to get 

through. You start over here, you apply, you get entitled, you go 

through the system, (over 75 percent of the veterans, go into a 

long-term training program). You hopefully become job ready and 

you hopefully get employment. There are about 100,000 people out 

here in some place within the system. And there are 10,000 who 

are those who are successfully ‘‘rehabed.’’ Seventy-five hundred of 

them go into employment. And the rest into independent living. 

The process is long. It is sequential. It doesn’t always provide that, 

which is our problem, employment focus. And you have got to get 

to here before you talk about employment. 

The veterans who are in independent living are generally the 

most severely disabled and often have mental health issues. I believe independent living is a transitional stage, meaning someone 

may take longer to achieve rehabilitation but they still can have a 

hope for employment, maybe not enough to totally support them-
6

selves but to be able to be, as the Congresswoman stated, a productive member of society in some way. 

What the Task Force said is we do not think the linear approach 

is the only way to achieve rehabilitation in the 21st Century. Veterans need informed choices. They also need to be able to have a 

track where they can go if they are returning Guard and Reserve 

to assist them to go back to their old employer or similar employment, or assist them to go back to college. Therefore we have suggested that two new program tracks be added. 

The other pieces of this current program should also be improved. This five-track employment process is the core of this whole 

new service delivery system. Some veterans would have priority for 

services because their needs are greater. Those who have a 50 percent disability rating and those who have been medically boarded 

out of the military. There is no reason for one branch of government to say you cannot work here anymore and then go over to another branch of government that says, ‘‘Oh, well, I am not sure I 

agree with that. Let’s start all over again.’’ Once they are medically boarded out, they are eligible and are 

entitled to walk right into VR&E as would be those with a 50 percent disability rating and those who have special compensation for 

loss of use or loss of limb. the severely disabled veteran should become a priority.. 

We also think the returning Guard and Reserve should be able 

to go directly into a re-employment track to quickly get back into 

work. They may need some assistive technology to work better in 

their regular environment, or counseling. 

Access to rapid employment track is for those returning Guard 

and Reserve who have skills and need assistance in returning to 

employment? 

Self-employment and employment in long-term services tracks 

are what we have now. 

I will comment briefly on self-employment. Some say that that is 

not a job of these social service people who are the counselors in 

this program. On the other hand, we do not expect them to help 

write a business plan. We do expect them to have the knowledge 

to figure out how to integrate what is in that community that focuses on self-employment, the small business crowd, the CEOs in 

the community who are looking at business plans and are providing community service to those veterans. 

We want to make it very clear when somebody walks in the door 

that this is an employment program. VR&E will help you with 

rehab and will help you with counseling. But this is an employment program. 

So how do we get there? I think that is really one of the issues 

that you all want to figure out. The Task Force looked at program 

organization, work processes, and integrating capacity and made 

many recommendations. The service delivery system is based on 

the VR five-track system. It is just as important to build the capacities of Central Office, and we think that the Chapter 31 veterans 

will be better served because of that. 

There are many recommendations listed in my formal testimony, 

but I am going to highlight a few of them. On the program side, 

I want to emphasize the more rapid entitlement process. There 
7

needs to be two new employment oriented tracks, especially for the 

Guard and Reserve. There need to be additionally staff who are 

trained in employment readiness as well as marketing and placement. There is a difference between getting a veteran ready to go 

to work and creating jobs in the private markets where a veteran 

can be employed. Two different types of people are needed to accomplish the employment objective. 

The Task Force focused a lot on trying to bring together one VA. 

The VHA needs to better integrate with VBA in order to help the 

more severely disabled veteran. We did visit the Tampa VA Medical Center and they have an excellent model there where veterans 

who are in the SCI Center are receiving vocational rehab services 

with the goal to move into an employment situation. 

The Task Force recommended a lot more integration with state 

VA directors and state VR directors. There was no reason for this 

small program to operate in a vacuum and they need to be able to 

leverage their community resources and the business community to 

generate employment opportunities for the veteran. 

Organizational recommendations extend from the IT side to Central Office capacities, new contracting and purchasing procedures. 

Our work process recommendations also went into functional capacity evaluation, using that new technology for selected individuals, measuring their function and therefore their ability to participate in a particular job. A lot of private industry use functional capacity assessment; the Government should be doing that as well. 

We also recommend that VR&E take the lead role in the Disabled Transition Assistance Program, the DTAP program. 

The Task Force has asked VR&E work with general counsel to 

publish updated regulations and manuals within the next 6 to 9 

months. 

In closing, I would just like to say that the restructuring of the 

VR&E program should be an urgent focus by the Veterans Benefit 

Administration and by VR&E. They have already begun to respond 

to that urgency, implementing many of these recommendations as 

we were finishing writing the report. VR&E agrees that there can 

be significant improvements. 

Our country is at war. Service to our injured servicemembers 

must become priorities. We think this sense of urgency is particularly critical given the 350,000 mobilized or deployed Guard and 

Reserve personnel. As one of our Task Force members stated, after 

every war, programs need to adjust to the needs of the new veteran 

and the new environment. And for us that means providing the employment-driven services that are needed today. We also need to 

understand that there is a demand for service and knowledgebased skills as well as demand for some labor-intensive skills. So 

we must put that knowledge together and determine how do you 

guide the veteran to the best job possible. 

The Task Force report also states that VR&E has been in many 

cases in a vacuum in their communities, that they need to reach 

out, use the benefits that have come from ADA and reclaim, that 

it is not a question of disabilities, it is a question of abilities. I 

think it can be done. I believe the veteran will be better served because of this. I am most appreciative that Secretary Principi and 
8

Admiral Cooper asked me to chair this Task Force. We are going 

to get a lot of good jobs for these guys. 

Thank you very much. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Hardy appears on p. 13.] 

Mr. BROWN. Thank you, Ms. Hardy. As I looked at this chart 

that you just explained, ‘‘The Task Force proposed a five-track employment process is not something that is old and has been refashioned.’’ It looks like you proposed a front-loading of the employment 

process by putting in two new options: re-employment and rapid 

access employment, along with some additional emphasis on selfemployment, is that correct? 

Ms. HARDY. That is correct. And one of the other highlights is informed choice. We don’t want to be paternalistic. We don’t want to 

say to somebody: ‘‘you did ‘‘X’’ in the military, therefore you should 

only do ‘‘Y.’’ It is a question of these are your choices. These are 

your options. You are a young gentleman, a young lady or an older 

gentleman, older lady, and you can make choices for yourself. And 

here are the options. And we will provide the counseling and the 

assistance as you need it to obtain employment. We want you to 

get a job. 

Mr. BROWN. Thank you very much. Mr. Michaud, did you have 

a question? 

Mr. MICHAUD. Thank you very much for your testimony. I will 

look forward to further reviewing the report in further detail. And, 

as you stated, it is very important that veterans do get into these 

programs. What are you doing as far as making veterans aware of 

this particular program and how do you deal with a state like the 

State of Maine, for instance, where it is a very rural state and if 

these services are provided at Togus, which is in the southern part 

of the state, particularly for a disabled veteran, when you look at 

the area, as I mentioned earlier, there are a lot of labor market 

areas in the State of Maine with double-digit unemployment numbers. And when you look at the Guard in Maine, Maine is one of 

the states that has the highest percentage of Guards over in Iraq 

and Afghanistan that has been hit pretty hard. 

So how do you deal with a situation where the economy is lousy? 

It is a rural state. And how to make these programs easily accessible for a rural state like Maine? 

Ms. HARDY. Well, I do believe we cannot fix everything overnight. 

But one of the comments that was made to me by staff yesterday 

was similar to that. And when we look at employment specialists 

and marketing to employers, if I were in Maine, I would ask that 

my employment specialist and my employment marketing folks, 

would probably be located in the Portland and the Augusta area 

and larger places where you are going to have a few more jobs, despite downturn in the State’s economy. 

But that doesn’t mean that there aren’t jobs. Maybe it is a question of trying to figure out where that veteran belongs, how do we 

make sure they are trained for that job. And then we figure out 

how to get them there. Veteran or non-veteran, it is the same for 

everybody in terms of getting to the place or having the employer 

get you to the place that you need to be to work. 

So my initial thought on Maine was to make sure the employment people are in Portland or in the larger cities in the areas 
9

where veterans can access services more easily rather than going 

to see a counselor in Togus. 

But I think it speaks to all of the issues of employment throughout the country. There also should be somebody in Boston who is 

serving the southern part of your state, because you are all together up there. And New Hampshire is going to ask me the same 

questions, and so is Vermont, and how do we look at things differently than just we have to have 22 people in one office in this 

place. And so I think it is a new paradigm for many of these veterans. 

Mr. MICHAUD. I appreciate your comment, but actually, it concerns me when you say Augusta or Portland, particularly when you 

look at Maine. It is a four-and-a-half-hour drive to Augusta. And 

if you have got a disabled veteran, it is very, very difficult. Have 

you looked at probably having these reps be mobile and actually go 

to different regions of a rural state to— Ms. HARDY. Yes. 

Mr. MICHAUD.—offer the services versus having all the burden 

placed on the veteran? If the veterans came back and they are disabled, they are going through a lot of trauma and family situations 

on their own, and to say you have got to go to Portland or you have 

got to go to Augusta, in the State of Maine, it is very difficult. And 

I think we ought to make sure that these services are made available to a lot of the veteran communities. 

I haven’t done an analysis to find out where all the veterans are 

in the State of Maine. Sixteen percent of Maine’s population are 

veterans. And it is very high. And a lot of those are in the rural 

areas. So hopefully, I think it is important to make sure that they 

do get out there, be more mobile and make it as easy as possible 

for the veterans. 

Ms. HARDY. I think Judy Caden, the new director of Vocational 

Rehabilitation and Employment, is very aware of that, and I am 

confident that will be addressed in their implementation plan. It 

should be different in different parts of the country. 

Mr. MICHAUD. Thank you very much. And I couldn’t agree more 

with that statement. Every state is different, even within a state 

it is different. And I think we have got to make sure that we have 

the flexibility to address the needs of the veteran. So thank you 

very much. 

Mr. BROWN. And with that, with the flexibility of this committee, 

we have been joined by Mr. Miller from Florida, and we have California and Maine and South Carolina represented here today. So 

we have got a pretty good cross-section of the United States. 

Mr. Miller, do you have a question? 

Mr. MILLER. I thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I appreciate Chairman Hardy being here to testify. I apologize for being late, I was 

in another subcommittee meeting. 

In reviewing the documents, it would appear that some of the 

recommendations are going to require some legislation. And I 

apologize if you have discussed this before I came into the room, 

but could you provide us some specific examples of what type of 

legislative fixes the recommendation would be looking for? 

Ms. HARDY. We think that the need for legislative fixes, if you 

will, is minimal, but there are a few. One would be prioritization 
10

of services. The statute would need to be changed to say that veterans are automatically eligible and entitled to VR&E services if 

they have more than a 50 percent disability rating; if they have a 

special monthly compensation of loss of use or loss of limb; and if 

they have been medically boarded out from the military. So those 

are definitional issues that I put on the technical side. 

And then there are also limiting periods for use of Chapter 36 

benefits, even before you have been accepted into the program. 

Chapter 36 has a time limit on it that is not in sync with the Transition Assistance Program and the Disabled Transition Assistance 

Programs from the military. So they need to be put together. It 

would mean that you would have a longer time to take advantage 

of Chapter 36. Those are the two that we have identified. 

Mr. MILLER. Also, I just want to add a comment that I appreciate 

the leadership of both Secretary Principi and Under Secretary Cooper and what they have been doing as far as converting the vocational rehabilitation from just classroom training to more of a jobstype program, and not just any job but long-term sustained employment. And I appreciate their leadership and yours as well. 

Mr. BROWN. Ms. Davis, do you have a question? 

Mrs. DAVIS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you very 

much, Chairman Hardy, for being here. You mentioned that you 

obviously weren’t looking for a one-size-fits-all solution, and in fact 

that has been one of the problems that we have had. But of all the 

recommendations that you have noted, and it is fairly exhaustive, 

I think, and comprehensive, is it possible to single out one or two 

that are just absolutely key and that things would not flow unless 

we do that? And I guess my follow-up to that would be, number 

one, do we have the resources to do that? And what would be the 

key obstacles in making that happen? Is it partly cultural? Is it resources? Is it the lack of partnerships in the community? What do 

you think is going to be the real problem? 

Ms. HARDY. How about all of the above? As I said to the Admiral, 

you have to do all of this at once. It is not sequential. 

I think the most important, would be the Five Track Employment Process. It will mean doing things differently in offices and 

also giving the offices, as many of them have now, some standards 

of performance, and also letting them understand the need for consistency. In your district, you have a large population, something 

like 14 percent of the workload. In St. Petersburg, FL, it is the 

same thing. So there are about five or six offices in this country 

that have the vast amount of workload. 

Perhaps a kind of a tiered approach in terms of performance 

measures should be considered based upon the population served. 

I think communication with persons in vocational rehabilitation 

outside of VA is extremely important. The veteran service organizations have been very supportive of this program as it has gone 

along. They are talking to their members. And they need to understand the ‘‘E’’ is employment, ‘‘E’’ is not education. And I think 

those are the two, I could go on and talk about more. 

Mrs. DAVIS. Is this going to require some, it is not necessarily 

money but it is time, it is time away from the tasks that people 

are doing in order to regroup, in order to re-train themselves? 
11

Sometimes we want to re-train our veterans but we forget to retrain that staff who is working with them. 

Ms. HARDY. Well, Ms. Caden has already set a May training session for a week for all the senior managers throughout the country. 

She has already stepped out on that to get them trained on the IT 

issues and a lot of the external and, internal communication issues. 

And I did chat with some of the Veterans Administration state 

directors of Veterans Affairs this week and asked each one of them 

to take their state vocational rehab director to coffee. We have got 

to get this group together. We cannot get this job done unless everybody is working together. 

So I appreciate your concern, but I think there is a lot of enthusiasm. This is a good staff. It is not a lazy staff. They are trying 

hard, and they just have to focus on what is important. 

Mrs. DAVIS. Thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you, Mr. 

Chairman. 

Mr. BROWN. Thank you, Ms. Davis. 

Mrs. DAVIS. And I am sorry, Mr. Chairman, but I am going to 

have to go to another committee meeting. 

Mr. BROWN. I understand. Thank you for being with us today. 

Ms. Hardy, I see this report as a modern day version of the report of the Omar Bradley Commission, because of its wisdom and 

foresight in proposing to put the ‘‘E’’—for employment—back into 

the VA’s VR&E program, and I certainly applaud you for your efforts in this. Further, I would like to ask your appendix to the report, titled, ‘‘More Challenges Await, A Final Word from the Task 

Force Chairman’’ is very instructive to me regarding some of the 

policy issues that Congress may have to address in the future. And 

with your permission, I would like to enter your words into the 

Congressional Record. 

Ms. HARDY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. You certainly have my 

permission. 

Mr. BROWN. Thank you very much. 

[The information appears in the Congressional Record.] 

(Submitted by Rep. Brown (SC) on July 22, 2004.) 

Mr. BROWN. And thank you for being with us today. This concludes our meeting. 

[Whereupon, at 10:45 a.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.] 

13

A P P E N D I X 
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34Æ