THE VA’S VOCATIONAL REHABILITATION 

AND EMPLOYMENT SERVICE CONTRACT 

SERVICES AND ITS COORDINATION WITH 

THE DEPARTMENT OF LABOR’S 

VETERANS’ EMPLOYMENT AND TRAINING 

SERVICE

Hearing

before the

Committee on 

Veterans’ Affairs

House of Representatives

Subcommittee on 

economic Opportunity

one hundred ninth congress

Second session

March 9, 2006

Printed for the use of the Committee on Veterans’ Affairs

Serial No. 109-38

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

u.s. government printing office

washington : 2006

26-676.PDF
Committee on Veterans’ Affairs

Steve Buyer, Indiana, Chairman

Michael Bilirakis, Florida Lane Evans, Illinois, Ranking

Terry Everett, Alabama Bob Filner, California

Cliff Stearns, Florida Luis V. Gutierrez, Illinois

dan burton, Indiana Corrine Brown, Florida

Jerry Moran, Kansas Vic Snyder, Arkansas

richard H. baker, Louisiana Michael H. Michaud, Maine

Henry E. Brown, Jr., South Carolina Stephanie Herseth, South 

Jeff Miller, Florida Dakota

John Boozman, Arkansas Ted Strickland, Ohio

Jeb Bradley, New Hampshire Darlene Hooley, Oregon

Ginny Brown-Waite, Florida Silvestre Reyes, Texas

Michael R. Turner, Ohio ShellEy Berkley, Nevada

John Campbell, California Tom Udall, New Mexico

 John T. Salazar, Colorado

JAMES M. LARIVIERE, Staff Director

Subcommittee on Economic Opportunity

John Boozman, Arkansas, Chairman Stephanie herseth, South 

Richard H. Baker, Louisiana Dakota, Ranking

Ginny Brown-Waite, Florida, Vice Chairwoman Darlene Hooley, Oregon

John Campbell, California Lane Evans, Illinois

 

Michael F. Brinck, Subcommittee Staff Director

(II)
CONTENTS

March 9, 2006

 Page

1

 1

20

2

25

3

26

7

31

13

37

50

58

66

The VA’s Vocational Rehabilitation and Employment Service

Contract Services and Its Coordination with the Department of Labor’s Veterans’ Employment and Training Service ..........................................................................................

OPENING STATEMENTS

Chairman Boozman .................................................................... 

Prepared statement of Chairman Boozman ..............................

Hon. Stephanie Herseth, Ranking Democratic Member .........

Prepared statement of Ms. Herseth .........................................

Witnesses

Lawrence, Brian E., Assistant National Legislative Director, 

 Disabled American Veterans .................................................

Prepared statement of Mr. Lawrence .......................................

Caden, Judith, Director, Vocational Rehabilitation and Empl-

  oyment Program, Veterans Benefits Administration  ..........

Prepared statement of Ms. Caden ............................................

Ciccolella, Charles S., Assistant Secretary for the Veterans’ 

 Employment and Training, U.S. Department of Labor .......

Prepared statement of Mr. Ciccolella .......................................

STATEMENTS FOR THE RECORD

Paralyzed Veterans of America .................................................

Greineder, David G., Deputy National Legislative Director, 

 AMVETS .................................................................................

Sharpe, Joseph C., Jr., Deputy Director, National Economic

Commission, The American Legion .......................................

 

(III)
(1)

THE VA’S VOCATIONAL REHABILITATION AND

EMPLOYMENT SERVICE CONTRACT SERVICES AND ITS

COORDINATION WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF LABOR’S

VETERANS’ EMPLOYMENT AND TRAINING SERVICE

Thursday, March 9, 2006

U.S. House of Representatives, 

Subcommittee on Economic Opportunity,

Committee on Veterans’ Affairs,

Washington, D.C.

 The Subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 10:00 a.m., in the Cannon House Office Building, Hon. John Boozman [Chairman of the

Subcommittee] presiding.

 Present: Representatives Boozman, Herseth, and Campbell.

 Mr. Boozman. The meeting will be in order. Today we will be receiving testimony regarding VA Vocational Rehabilitation and Employment contracting practices and integration with the Veterans’ 

Employment and Training service.

 Before we begin, I want to note that Hire a Hero, Coming Home to 

Work, and REALifelines all have similar goals of placing our wounded veterans in good jobs. While there are differences among these 

programs, there is no reason that we could not adopt perhaps a common title, set of goals, and coordinated management among the departments.

 For example, the title REALifelines has no intuitive connection 

with hiring disabled veterans. The existence of three similar federal 

programs is also causing confusion among the wounded and their 

families.

 Therefore, I am asking VETS to take the lead and to work with 

VR&E and DoD to begin the process of blending these programs into 

a single unified effort with a common title, perhaps Hire a Hero, that

really sounds good to me.

 It’s almost a cliche to say that VA’s Voc Rehab and Employment 

Program should be the crown jewel in the VA benefits program. Unfortunately, the reality over the past few years is that Voc Rehab and 

Employment has taken a back seat to other benefit programs and
2

issues.

 I want to be clear that all of us here share in that shortcoming. The 

Department and Congress respond to what the veterans organizations and others see as the major programmatic shortfalls.

 For the past several years, VSOs have been most vocal about the 

Compensation and Pension program. As a result, C&P has gotten 

the lion’s share of attention on the Hill and at the VA.

 That focus has resulted in Voc Rehab and Employment program 

underperforming to the point where former VA Secretary Anthony 

Principi felt compelled to establish a task force to review the program’s goals and performance and recommend improvements.

 The task force reported out over 100 recommendations including 

several on contracting. Contract services are vital to the success of 

the VR&E program as a way to augment permanent VA staff and to 

increase geographic access to program services. I have asked VA to 

come here today to discuss how they contract for services, the rates 

they pay, and how they conduct oversight of their contractors.

 We are also interested in how VA and the Veterans Employment 

and Training Service are implementing their most recent Memorandum of Agreement to improve employment services for disabled veterans in the Voc Rehab and Employment program.

 It is absolutely vital that these two agencies cooperate in the closest possible manner to achieve higher employment and retention 

rates among disabled veterans. Their recent MOA established several working groups and I look forward to hearing how this process 

is evolving.

 I now recognize our Ranking Member, Ms. Herseth for any opening 

remarks that she may have.

Ms. Herseth. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Good morning to you and 

to all those joining us here at the Subcommittee today. I thank you 

for holding today’s hearing to explore such important and timely subjects. Indeed, contract management and interagency communication 

are key for responsible stewardship of federal resources. And I want 

to thank the witnesses for being here today and look forward to your 

insightful testimony.

Vocational Rehabilitation and employment counseling services are 

a critical component of any disabled veterans’ seamless transition 

from military service to civilian life. The Department of Veterans’ 

Affairs Vocational Rehabilitation Employment Program and the Department of Labor’s Veterans Employment and Training Service play 

the primary and crucial roles in administering such services.

 Accordingly, Mr. Chairman, I am very pleased that we are going to 

be exploring the VR&E program’s contract -- contracting and management services and processes as well as the costs for oversight and 

management of these contract services.

 I am also interested in hearing from the witnesses, as you men-
3

tioned, about the progress related to the implementation of the recent 

Memorandum of Agreement between VR&E and VETS concerning 

improved -- more coordination and communication between the agencies.

 The State of South Dakota has National Guard soldiers activated in support of operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. Some of these 

brave servicemembers have returned injured and are now currently 

or will in the near future seek vocational rehabilitation and employment services. They are like all disabled veterans from around the 

country who deserve our best efforts to provide that seamless and 

effective transition from military service to civilian life and to the 

workforce.

 Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back.

Mr. Boozman. Thank you, Ms. Herseth. Our first panel is an important player in the Voc Rehab and Employment process. DAV has 

a long history of interest in the program and Mr. Brian Lawrence 

the Assistant National Legislative Director is here today to present 

DAV’s testimony. Brian, you are now recognized.

STATEMENT OF BRIAN E. LAWRENCE, ASSISTANT NATION-

 AL LEGISLATIVE DIRECTOR OF THE DISABLED AMERICAN

VETERANS

Mr. Lawrence. Thank you, Chairman Boozman. Good morning, 

Chairman and Ranking Member Herseth. On behalf of the 1.3 million 

members of the DAV, I am pleased to present our views pertaining 

to the Department of Veterans’ Affairs Vocational Rehabilitation and 

Education Contract Services in its coordination with the Department 

of Labor Veterans’ Employment and Training Services, or VETS. We 

thank you for holding today’s hearing.

  The DAV was founded on the principle that our nation’s first obligation to veterans is rehabilitation of its wartime disabled. Along 

with quality health care and adequate compensation, this principle 

envisions gainful employment as a primary step toward that goal.

 The VR&E program is responsible for providing services and assistance that will enable disabled veterans to obtain and maintain 

stable and gainful employment. The importance of its mission is 

heightened during the war on terror on thousands of servicemembers 

who are returning from Afghanistan and Iraq with serious injuries.

 Primarily, DAV’s recommendations regarding contract services 

and coordination of efforts between VR&E and VETS reflect those

made in the 2004 VR&E task force report. We are pleased that most 

of the steps to implement those recommendations have been taken. 

And we encourage VR&E and VETS to continue their progress in 

that regard.

 The VETS an VR&E are two separate agencies. Their concerted 
4

efforts are necessary to maximize disabled veterans’ opportunities 

for gainful employment. Coordinating such efforts likely poses some 

complex challenges. I have been with the DAV for more than a decade and throughout my tenure I have witnessed the internal challenges VA faces in trying to coordinate efforts between its benefits

administration and its health administration.

 Since VETS and VR&E are completely separate departments it’s 

easy to see why maintaining open lines of communication is an even 

greater challenge. But they are challenges that can be overcome and 

among other recommendations to aid in that regard we recommend 

that each VR&E office should include at least one DVOP, which is a

Disabled Veteran Outreach Professional, among its staff.

 We also recommend that the coordination of efforts between VR&E

and VETS must also continue to ensure the establishment of the fivetrack system of services available to disabled veterans. The five-track

system provides an array of services that recognize the variant needs 

of individual disabled veterans. To be fully effective, the five-track

system will require teamwork between the two agencies to ensure 

that disabled veterans receive appropriately suited services.

 Thank you, Mr. Chairman. That completes my statement and I

will be happy to answer any questions you may have.

  [The statement of Brian E. Lawrence appears on p. 26]

Mr. Boozman. Thank you very much, Mr. Lawrence. You just recommended that a DVOP be assigned to every VR&E office. Has your

field staff, noticed any resistance to that on the part of the state employment services?

Mr. Lawrence. No, sir. I think that would probably be welcome by 

most of the offices.

Mr. Boozman. Okay. AMVETS states for the record that VA does 

not give priority within the Voc Rehab and Employment program to 

those veterans with severe disabilities. Do you agree with that statement?

Mr. Lawrence. That has not been my experience. There is probably different case scenarios for as many different offices as there

are. But, I have worked with the Salt Lake regional office as a service officers and also Bay Pines in Florida. And I also have -- am a

product of vocational rehabilitation myself. And I worked with the 

Iowa department. And all of the -- all of my experiences they have 

been very helpful and go out of their way to help veterans regardless 

of how severely disabled they are.

Mr. Boozman. Should they triage?

Mr. Lawrence. Pardon me?

Mr. Boozman. Should they triage?

Mr. Lawrence. Should they triage?

Mr. Boozman. Yes, those applying for the Voc Rehab benefits.
5

Mr. Lawrence. I think that every disabled veteran coming before 

them should receive the same amount of services and attention. Yes, 

I imagine probably there should be some level of prioritization that 

would -- I mean they are going to have to do different things for various veterans, which is part of what the five-track system recognizes

from the task force recommendation.

Mr. Boozman. Thank you. Ms. Herseth.

Ms. Herseth. Well thank you very much for your testimony. And, 

you know, you had addressed some things in both your written statement and the testimony you just provided. But, perhaps if you could 

elaborate in your opinion, from your perspective, and from the organization’s perspective, since the completion of the VR&E task force 

report, do you see improvement by the VR&E program with respect 

to vocational rehabilitation services as well as the communication 

coordination with the Department of Labor? I mean you identify 

that there would be some challenges. Do you see that since last fall 

when the memorandum was signed that some of those challenges 

have already been overcome? Or at least can you sense whether or 

not there is a strategic plan in place to address and overcome those 

challenges?

Mr. Lawrence. I spoke with my service staff members prior to coming over here today to get their opinions as well and see if they had 

any feedback from the field. And it was thought that there might be a

slight improvement in that regard as far as the coordination of efforts 

between the two agencies, but there were not really any noteworthy 

examples to indicate that great leaps and bounds had been made in 

that regard.

 I do think that there has been an improvement since the task force 

report with viewing vocational rehabilitation as an employment program. It used to be just kind of viewed, I think, as an education program and, you know, was thought of, you know, it was a different way 

for people to get through college. And I do think a lot more emphasis 

has been placed on not only education, but employment as well. So 

we are pleased to see that.

Ms. Herseth. And you would say that that is the case with both 

agencies?

Mr. Lawrence. Yes.

Ms. Herseth. Okay. Are you hearing anything from your membership in particular for those that may live in more rural areas about 

any difficulties they may be having in accessing vocational rehabilitation services? Is that something that you can assess very well in 

terms of membership and geographic distinctions?

Mr. Lawrence. Yes. I think that rural veterans probably in comparison have maybe slightly better services then what some of the 

larger centers would have. Maybe it’s a little more individualized 

and we recommend in the IV that counselors be limited to a certain 
6

number of clients. And I think that maybe some of the rural veterans 

that their counselors are not as busy with, you know, a vast number 

of clients. Or maybe able to provide a little more individualized attention.

Ms. Herseth. Okay. And I guess I just would have one followup 

question along the lines of what the Chairman was asking. Would 

-- in your response about feeling that some prioritization would have 

to occur, do you say that because of your experience in how these 

programs are just generally administered without funding considerations? Or do you say that because of any of the budget constraints 

that we have been facing within the last couple of years?

Mr. Lawrence. No. I -- 

Ms. Herseth. Just given the increase in the number of veterans 

that are returning from Iraq and Afghanistan that have suffered 

some very serious injuries.

Mr. Lawrence. No. I, in no way, was considering budget constraints 

in saying that there should be a prior -- I was merely thinking of the 

array of needs posed by individual veterans. And that would be the 

only categorization that we would recommend.

 And obviously somebody with catastrophic level disabilities is going to require a different focus than somebody with a 20 percent or a 

30 percent injury to their leg. And that goes along with what I said 

about the five-track program. That would be the only type of, well,

categorization that I would recommend.

Ms. Herseth. Thank you, Mr. Lawrence. I would yield back to the 

Chairman.

Mr. Boozman. Thank you very much for your testimony today, Mr. 

Lawrence. We appreciate the input and appreciate all that the DAV 

is doing in advocacy, thanks for your testimony.

Mr. Lawrence. Thank you, sir.

Mr. Boozman. Let’s have the second panel now. We are really 

pleased to have Ms. Judy Caden, Director of the Vocational Rehab 

and Employment Service with us. She is accompanied by Mr. Jerry 

Braun, her Deputy Director and Mr. Jan Frye, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Acquisition and Material Management.

 The Honorable Charles Ciccolella -- I have been working on that 

all morning so that I will get that right. You are like me, Booze-man, 

Boozman, whatever. I know I am not the first one that struggled a

little bit. But it is good to have you here. The Department of Labor’s 

Assistant Secretary for Veterans Employment and Training. And we 

look forward to getting your view on how we progress. Ms. Caden, go 

ahead and start if you would. Thank you.
7

STATEMENTS OF JUDITH CADEN, DIRECTOR, VOCATIONAL

 REHABILITATION AND EMPLOYMENT PROGRAM VET-

 ERANS BENEFITS ADMINISTRATION ALONG WITH JERRY

 BRAUN, DEPUTY DIRECTOR VOCATIONAL REHABILITA-

 TION AND EMPLOYMENT, VOCATIONAL BENEFITS ADMIN-

 ISTRATION AND JAN FRYE, DEPUTY ASSISTANT SECRE-

 TARY FOR ACQUISITION AND MATERIAL MANAGEMENT, 

 DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS

Ms. Caden. Mr. Chairman and members of the Subcommittee, 

thank you for inviting me to appear before you today to discuss specific elements of the Department of Veterans’ Affairs Vocational Rehabilitation and Employment, VR&E, Program.

 In keeping with your request, I will begin by talking about VR&E’s 

contracting process, costs, and management and then I will discuss 

our partnering activities with VETS.

 The Vocational and Rehabilitation and Employment program utilizes contractors to supplement and complement the services provided by VR&E staff to veterans participating in each of the VR&E

programs.

 A national acquisition strategy, or NAS, was instituted in order to 

standardize and streamline the acquisition procedures used to certify 

contractors. The NAS resulted in a list of providers for each regional 

office for initial vocational assessments and evaluations, case management and rehabilitative services, and employment services.

  The Office of Inspector General recently conducted an evaluation of

the contract and identified several vulnerabilities. And as a result we

have decided not to go forward with the final option year of the NAS.

And instead we are in the process of issuing a new NAS for a five-year

period beginning in fiscal year 2007. The vulnerabilities identified by

the IG, in combination with our past experience will help to ensure 

that we improve upon the previous NAS contracts.

 Expenditures under the current NAS average approximately $8.3 

million per year. The VR&E officers in the field are responsible for

management and oversight of the contracting activities at each of 

their stations. Proposed expenditures are obligated by the VR&E officers. The work performed by the contractors is monitored by counselors. And payments are approved by the VR&E officer.

  Overall contract expenditures at a given regional office are tracked

via our corporate management reports. And VR&E officers closely

monitor their funds and expenditures to ensure their balance is adequate to provide services throughout the fiscal year.

  In order to manage contracting activities, each regional office is

required to have two basic level warranted contracting officers and

at least two contracting officer technical representatives, which are

called COTRs. Contracting officers are the VR&E officers and their
8

assistants. And these individuals are issued warrants upon successful completion of a mandatory 40 hour training requirement.

VR&E counselor serve as COTRs, and the COTRs are responsible 

for quality assurance, contract monitoring, conducting quality assurance reviews, and serving as the primary point of contact for the contractor. And to date we have 256 COTRs in the field.

 We have expanded the VR&E site visit protocol to require a review 

of contracting activities to ensure the station is adhering to the contracting guidelines for local and NAS contracts. And additionally the 

site visit team reviews contract documentation to ensure required 

justifications for contractor selection are in place.

 I will now discuss our interaction with VETS. On October 3, 2005, 

we signed a revised Memorandum of Agreement with the goal of improving service delivery to veterans with service-connected disabilities. The new agreement expands and solidifies our cooperation as

partners in case management, employment services, reporting, oversight, and monitoring. Joint work groups will develop recommendations to overcome the critical challenges facing the partnership in the 

area of performance measures, joint training, and joint data collection analysis and reporting.

 Implementation of the agreement with VETS has been made easier with the co-location of 72 disabled veterans outreach program, or 

DVOP, specialists at 36 of our VA regional offices and 36 outbased

facilities. VR&E’s employment coordinators partner with the DVOP

specialists and local veterans employment representatives to assess 

the feasibility of employment services, recommend an appropriate vocational rehabilitation plan, and deliver job readiness training and 

job placement services.

 We have included our DOL partners in our national deployment 

of the five-track employment model, which is an employment driven

service delivery system focusing on presenting employment options 

early in the rehabilitation planning process. And VR&E staff have 

presented briefings at many of DOL’s conferences and we have also

jointly produced and presented satellite training broadcasts. Also, 

DOL representatives delivered presentations at our last two VR&E

management training conferences.

 I believe we are making progress forging an effective partnership 

with VETS. Veterans with service-connected disabilities are benefitting from that progress through the availability and delivery of more 

comprehensive employment services. Mr. Chairman, this concludes 

my testimony. I greatly appreciate being here today and look forward 

to answering any questions you or other members of the Subcommittee may have.

  [The statement of Judith Caden appears on p. 31]

Mr. Boozman. We are joined by Mr. Campbell of California. He 
9

is our newest member on the Committee. And we really appreciate 

your willingness to serve on the Veterans’ Affairs Committee in general. And we are really excited about having you on this Subcommittee that is so important. Do you have any comments?

Mr. Campbell. No. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Boozman. Thank you. The regional sites that have cooperation between DVOPS and LVERs and VR&E staff, in some, cooperation is good. However, The American Legion states that Texas and 

Alabama, as sites, perhaps have less than satisfactory cooperation, 

coordination between DVOPS and LVERs and VR&E staff. I guess I

would assume that perhaps those two states are rare, hopefully they 

are, but perhaps we have some problems, with other states as well? I

guess what we would like to know is your views as to what are some 

of the causes and then maybe some of the solutions to that situation.

Ms. Caden. Well, we have started to look into that. I read that in 

the testimony. We talk on a regular basis to our VR&E officers. We

talk on a regular basis with DOL and VETS. And in many areas it’s 

working very well. Sometimes it’s just a matter of is someone available to be in our office. Is the communication -- but I would like to

explore it some more if we can and report back to you.

Mr. Boozman. You can do that. Again, I was going to follow up and 

say that perhaps, that would be very appropriate. If you could give 

us some status, as to what is going on in that area.

  In your testimony you mentioned that the IG identified several vulnerabilities in the current national acquisition strategy. Can you 

talk to us a little bit more specifically about what the vulnerabilities

were and did the IG find any instances of fraud, waste, or abuse?

 Ms. Caden. Sure. No, there were no instances in that report of 

fraud, waste, or abuse. It went to the process that was in place for the 

most part. And they pointed out things like that some of the contract 

specifications, the statements of work, were not as clear and concise

as what they should be.

 Inadequate follow up on our part on the VR&E part of internal 

quality assurance and doing the oversight that is needed and necessary. And in some cases inadequate justification for selection of

higher price contractors to perform the work.

 And what we have done since that report, we have a pretty detailed 

plan for reacting to each of those instances. We beefed up to a considerable degree our oversight and the quality assurance. I mentioned 

in my testimony, we now go out and visit the offices. That is one of

the things we are looking at. We are also getting reports on a regular basis on contracting. And we review, in the case of the contract 

specifications, we review that to make sure they are clear and what

they should be, as well as reviewing those price justifications. And

it’s also because of what the IG found and our own concerns that we 

are going to re-compete the contracts.
10

Mr. Boozman. I am an optometrist, an eye doctor, so any of you all 

that are here, if you are having problems with your glasses or your 

contacts or advice on your cataracts, I can do that after the Committee meeting is over. But one of the things that we were governed 

with were the Stark Rules it prevented self-dealing. Is the VA, under 

those same sort of rules? Are you familiar with the Stark Rules?

Ms. Caden. I am not. No.

Mr. Boozman. Okay. Basically, as an eye doctor, you could not do 

things with medicare and medicaid, as far as, having your own labs, 

so that you order tests that the government’s paying for that is basically your business also. For instance, if you were a psychiatrist and 

on the counseling service, then you couldn’t refer to your own counseling service. Does that make sense?

Ms. Caden. Well, what Dr. Braun was just saying and I will answer 

this is that there is a code of ethics involved with our own counselors and what they can and can’t do. But, did you want to expand on 

that?

Mr. Braun. Mainly to say, yes, that we are not necessarily familiar 

with the acronym or the phrasing that you are using, but the effort 

to make sure that individuals are not referring to their own practice 

and things of that sort is an effort of oversight that we do have in 

place or are working on.

Mr. Boozman. So you mentioned ethics. And sadly, we had ethics 

too. But some people are not ethical and so in the early ‘90’s, we had 

to adopt the Stark. The sad thing is that there is always people out 

there gaming the system. And if we just do have an ethic situation, 

then I think it’s important that we don’t have situations where you 

self-deal. And so I would like to know a little bit more about what we 

are doing about that. And then if we do need to address that maybe 

some advice where we specifically say we are not going to self-deal

and here is the penalty if you do do it.

Ms. Caden. We can develop that for you. I do want to say that 

every time we have a conference, and we do those yearly, we have a 

fairly detailed session on ethics. And we bring in a guest speaker to 

talk about that. And then there are certifications that have to come

from that. But I will provide more information for you.

Mr. Boozman. Well, we are all having fairly detailed conversations 

about ethics. And then also the statutes that are in place that if you 

go beyond that, that you get yourself in big trouble, which is appropriate. Ms. Herseth.

Ms. Herseth. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Ms. Caden, thank you 

for your testimony today and the insights. And I do appreciate your 

willingness to provide us with status updates on how the relationship 

is working as you seek to overcome some of the challenges that were 

mentioned before between the two agencies.

 I remember last year a lot of back and forth. And I remember when 
11

GAO was here, I mean, we kind of kept the pressure on to get that 

memorandum signed and in. And I think what is most important 

for our follow up, you had mentioned, you know, your department’s 

follow up as it related to the contracting services and oversight. The 

Subcommittee’s follow up has to be, you know, that we continue to 

get some information from you that others have input on how we are 

overcoming the challenges, what the strategic plans are. If there is 

one agency or the other that is not being quite as responsive as the 

other one, those are things that we need to know, follow up with on a 

fairly regular basis.

 So I appreciate your willingness to do that. And, you know, perhaps, Mr. Ciccolella you certainly work with us in that regard as well. 

And I appreciate the Chairman spoke to asking you to further describe the vulnerabilities that the IG report identified. So I appreciate that elaboration on your part.

 And you had mentioned in terms of the new NAS that you are going to be starting to improve, not only from the IG report, but your 

own sense of what needed to happen. You described some of the steps 

that you are going to take to improve those contract management 

oversight plans, including the additional site visits, further review. 

Which leads me to the question of whether or not to your knowledge 

VA has ever conducted a study on the cost associated with providing oversight and management of VR&E contract services, including 

staff resources and the training for both areas of the site visits for the 

review and elsewhere?

Ms. Caden. I have not seen a study like that. We could probably go 

back and start to breakout those costs for you in those different areas, 

but I have not seen it laid out that way. But we can do that.

Ms. Herseth. Thank you. And Mr. Chairman, I would yield back.

Mr. Boozman. Thank you. Mr. Frye, how would you describe VA’s 

overall contracting processes and how many warranted contracting 

officers does the VA have? How many of those are directly in your

chain of command?

Mr. Frye. The VA has over 701 contracting officers. With regard

to this contract, or these contracts, 241 contracts, there was one warranted contracting officer that put 241 contracts in place in a central

office. And these were IDIQ contracts, Indefinite Delivery Indefinite

Quantity contracts. And then orders are placed against those contracts out in the field.

  Those orders are placed by warranted contracting officers. They

hold warrants that equate to $100,000 or less. And they place orders 

against these contracts, these 241 contracts, for the services that are 

needed out in the field.

Mr. Boozman. Does the 40 hour training courses for contracting 

officers technical representatives, does that include testing? Who supervises the course and the testing?
12

Mr. Frye. Is the question to me, Mr. Chairman?

Mr. Boozman. Just to whoever. Whoever knows the answer.

Mr. Frye. I do not know if these contracting officers take a test.

They do receive 40 hours of training. And they are warranted by the 

head of the contracting activity out in the field. They are not warranted by me because their warrants are $100,000 or less.

Mr. Boozman. You mentioned a number of contracting warranted 

VR&E and assistant VR&E officers. You have a number currently. 

Are you comfortable with the number of folks that you have got?

Ms. Caden. Well, I can answer for VR&E. I think we are comfortable with the number, but we are looking to maybe shift some 

of those responsibilities. As FTE becomes available we would like 

to have maybe some contract specialists in each of the offices or a

combination of offices and let the counselors get back, because these

are counselors who are acting in this capacity, and let them get back 

to working with the veteran on an actual counseling basis and shift 

some of the responsibility for the management of contracts to a different individual. But right now, I think, because we have at least 

two in each office and a number of others that work as the COTRs,

we are okay.

Mr. Boozman. Who oversees the contracting actions?

Ms. Caden. Well basically it would be the VR&E officer. But there

is a contracting specialist in my office that I have asked to kind of

oversee everything going on out there. And then they also work very 

much with Mr. Frye’s organization.

Mr. Boozman. So is that person the national contracting officer?

Ms. Caden. The national contracting officer is part of that organization. I have a contracting specialist on my staff who works very 

closely with them.

Mr. Boozman. Okay. Very good. Have you got any other things, 

Ms. Herseth?

Ms. Herseth. No, I don’t.

Mr. Boozman. Have you got any other things? Mr. Campbell, have 

you got any questions?

Mr. Campbell. Yes, please. Go ahead.

Mr. Boozman. Okay. Just a couple of more things and then we 

will get you out of here. What are the range of costs associated with 

each of the three categories of contract services and did VA conduct 

market surveys to determine what the should cost process for each 

category and region?

Ms. Caden. We did do market surveys. And we have been updating 

those as much as possible. Especially getting ready for the next generation, the next NAS. I do not know the pricings. Jerry, do you?

Mr. Braun. We do not have specific numbers on that right now. 

But I think we could get it.

Mr. Boozman. Okay. In follow up can you provide us a copy of the 
13

draft of the statement of work now under the departmental review?

Ms. Caden. It’s with Mr. Frye’s office right now. But I am sure we

can do that. It’s been drafted and it’s going through the concurrence 

process.

Mr. Boozman. Good. Thank you. Well, thank you all very much 

for your testimony. And I do appreciate your hard work. And I really 

want to commend VR&E for responding to the Inspector General’s 

findings as a means to maintain the integrity of their program.

 You know, the function that we are tasked with is oversight, of 

these things. And then you are tasked with that also. We very much 

want to give you the tools. I have got all the confidence in the world,

our duty is to ask the questions and find out what is going on. Your

duty is to do the same thing and make sure that it is going right. And 

then like I say, we do want to give you the tools that you need to do 

that function. That is what the American public expects out of us.

 So, we are a little bit concerned about, I think, the larger issue 

within VR&E regarding contract management and things. So, probably we will come back and do some more things in the not too distant 

future specifically concerning that and the contracting programs at

VA.

 We are also a little concerned, or just really want some more information about the VR&E that is staffed at the local levels. And I think 

what we would like to do, and you all can perhaps help us maybe 

in brainstorming, facilitating. You know, if we can get the states 

together and try and foster a little bit more cooperation and really 

would like to hear from VA and VETS as to how that might be done. 

Things like the differences in the educational levels. You know, what 

we are seeing, and how that affects things. So, again, that is something that we would also like to follow up on. So, unless Ms. Herseth 

has anything else.

Ms. Herseth. Did Mr. Ciccolella testify yet?

Mr. Boozman. No. He is just here.

Mr. Campbell. He needs to speak.

Mr. Boozman. Okay. I am sorry. We almost left you out. It is your 

turn to speak.

STATEMENT OF CHARLES S. CICCOLELLA, ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR THE VETERANS’ EMPLOYMENT AND TRAINING, 

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Mr. Ciccolella. Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Herseth.

Congressman Campbell. Thank you very much for the opportunity 

to appear before the Committee and talk about the relationship and 

the new cooperation between the Department of Veterans’ Affairs 

and their Vocational Rehabilation employment program and the Department of Labor’s Veterans Employment and Training Service.
14

VR&E and VETS have a history of cooperation. We had an MOA

in the 1990’s. We have done a partnership guide. There has been 

joint training. But with the signing of the Memorandum of Agreement that Judy and I signed in October, I think it’s a dramatic step 

forward. And I think it’s a dramatic step forward because I think we 

have the commitment of both agencies to bring the resources of both 

of the agencies together to improve employment outcomes. And not 

only outcomes, but also improve the quality of employment for the 

VR&E participants.

 In other words, employment in the jobs that are going to last. The 

jobs of the Twenty-first Century. And to make that work better, we

have to also get the active participation of the state workforce agencies because the American workforce system, which centers on that 

one stop career center, is an integrated delivery system for which 

business and the employers are the customer. That is something that 

VETS and the Department of Labor brings to the table.

 Now with regard to the performance of the VR&E program and 

the VETS cooperation, I think we are doing better. The numbers 

are up for fiscal year 2005. As part of the MOA, as Judy mentioned,

we are also working on three work groups; the data sharing work 

group, I think that will be very important; performance measures for 

the partnership, I am very interested in seeing how that will go; and 

the national Veterans’ National Training Institute Development of a 

training curriculum is a work group. And that will be, if not the most 

important work group, probably one of the most important.

 I would also like to say that the cooperation between the Department of Labor and the VA extends beyond just VR&E and VETS. We 

sit on the VA advisory Committee on rehabilitation; advisory Committee on women veterans; and their advisory Committee on homeless veterans. I personally sit on that Committee. We participate in 

the VR&E development of the five-track program.

 And I think similarly the VA participates on our transition assistance program steering Committee. And that is an extremely important Committee. It’s becoming more and more important as more 

service members come back through the military and transition into 

civilian life.

 I think our collaborative efforts will continue to improve and expand. I personally see our mutual goals, not only in terms of more 

successful employment outcomes, and increased outcomes for the 

VR&E clients, but also in working together to significantly improve

the smooth transition of our servicemembers from the military, and 

particularly those who have been injured, wounded, or disabled and 

moving them into the workforce.

 I believe the commitment of both agencies to this goal is absolute. 

I think that every one today realizes that no one agency can do this 

alone. And it’s only by working across agency lines that we will get 
15

anything done and we will improve the outcomes.

 Mr. Chairman, that concludes my oral statement. I would be happy to take your questions.

  [The statement of Charles S. Ciccolella appears on p. 37]

Mr. Boozman. Thank you very much. Ms. Herseth.

Ms. Herseth. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And thank you, Mr. Ciccolella. And thank you for further elaborating in your testimony the 

working relationship between the agencies how it goes beyond VR&E

and VETS, as you just described. We appreciate that and the commitment of the resources to go beyond, as you mentioned, improving 

the outcomes to the quality of those employment opportunities.

 And as we were discussing earlier with Ms. Caden, I mean, in terms 

of our oversight responsibility and as you begin to maybe break some 

of these costs for oversight down, we need to make sure that you have 

the resources that you need to do precisely what you at this increase 

coordination that the MOA requires.

  In your opinion, since the implementation of the VR&E five-track

system at the pilot project sites, has VETS seen a corresponding improvement in placing such rehabilitated disabled veterans into employment since the five-track has been implemented?

Mr. Ciccolella. Well, when the five-track, as I understand it, it’s

still in a demonstration phase. It has not been implemented fully. Is 

that right?

Ms. Caden. Well the pilot period is finished. We are rolling it out

-- 

Mr. Ciccolella. Rolling it out now.

Ms. Caden. -- now in all the offices.

Mr. Ciccolella. Well, let me put it this way. All of our state directors, we have state directors of veterans’ employment and training 

in each one of the states and territories. All of them are very much 

aware of the importance and the priority we put on the relationship 

between the voc rehab people in the states and the VETS sponsored 

DVOPS and LVERS. We are requiring every one of, our state directors, to update their Memorandum of Agreement. And Judy Caden 

is requiring the same thing. We have seen an increase for program 

year 2005 in the number of placements through the employment system. In other words, the active involvement of the disabled veteran 

outreach program specialists has been beneficial.

 But I don’t know whether it’s too early to tell if this is really having an impact. It’s going to work where people drop the barriers and 

work across agency lines and agree that the most important thing is 

to serve our disabled veterans. And there are certain pockets, and 

you mentioned Texas, Alabama, there are a couple of other states 

that are not doing as well as other states.

 But, we are seeing some really, really good ideas and innovative 
16

practices. In your own state, in South Dakota, for example, and in 

other states, where the program is working very well. And it’s working very well because we have got good leadership out there on both 

sides.

Ms. Herseth. Well, I appreciate that. And I think you answered 

my second question and perhaps started to allude to addressing my 

third. The second question was just going to be in your opinion how 

important it is to involve the state workforce agencies in the plan, 

in the coordination, in the discussions regarding that inter-agency 

interaction. And so I would assume that based on what you said you 

feel it’s very important in part to overcome any of those barriers that 

may still exist by being very inclusive. To talk about what is most 

important and serving the constituency here to improve those employment results.

Mr. Ciccolella. Well, that is absolutely correct. You know, we 

have a workforce system in this county. It’s a $14/$15 billion investment every year. There is some great training opportunities in that. 

Not all the states use all their workforce investment act money.

 The kind of neat thing about the situation today is that Congress, 

in its wisdom and I think great foresight, when they passed Public 

Law 107-288, they established priority of service for veterans. And 

within that priority of service for all workforce training programs, 

there are priorities for special disabled, disabled, and then veterans.

  So I think we are making significant progress there also in terms

of making certain that the workforce system understands that when 

veterans come in for services, they get priority services. And I travel 

a lot and I talked to an awful lot of people in Career One Stops, the 

delivery service people, and I am seeing a lot of improvement in that 

regard.

Ms. Herseth. Very good. I would yield back, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Boozman. Are you getting any resistance from the state employment services regarding DVOP station or the VR&E officers.

Mr. Ciccolella. Not at all. We have not had that and frankly, Mr. 

Chairman, we have got it written into the solicitation for grant applications. And we do have a hammer, a lever on that, because we 

have got the grant money and we have got the state director who is 

monitoring that.

Mr. Boozman. This is really for both groups. Can you describe the 

cross-training you are doing and your plans to expand the initiative? 

I am sorry, I am mumbling. The cross-training. Yes, ma’am.

Ms. Caden. Well, as an example, we have got training going on 

right now to roll out our five-track system. And the DVOP and LVERs

and other people from DOL have been part of that training, they are 

participating in it as we do it in regional areas. And they have also 

been presenting that training. One of the work groups that we have 

got formed is to develop joint training opportunities working through 
17

the NVTI and a curriculum where we can both partake of it. We did a 

couple of broadcasts as kind of a kickoff of that joint training effort to 

make sure that the VR&E counselors in the field, as well as the VETS

people in the field, got the same message on things like USERA and

priority hiring authorities that are out there. So we are trying to get 

the message out to both.

Mr. Ciccolella. I would agree with what Judy has said. It’s important for both sides to understand the resources that the other side 

brings to the table. And it also, knocks down some barriers when you 

get these folks out and they realize that they are really focused on the 

same mission.

Mr. Boozman. One of the things I know that myself and my staff, 

Ms. Herseth and her staff, are really worried about are these areas of 

hiring and employment. You know, we are blessed. The un-employment rate overall is down. But we have got these pockets. I am a 

member of the NATO Congress. And NATO -- those are our great allies. That thing has served with time and doing very, very well. And 

yet right now they are in the process of becoming a rapid deployment 

force to respond to the needs as opposed to the old cold war, when we 

had all the troops amassed to prevent a tank invasion. So they are 

reinventing themselves.

 I guess what I am wondering is, do we have the ability when we 

hear of General Motors laying off 5,000 people or 3,000 people, events 

like that, do we have to wait until we get that somehow reported 

through the system and then months later it comes out, that we have 

a problem there. Where literally, we know there is a problem from 

the day that the announcement is made. Is there ability or is there 

any thinking of how we could maybe respond to those areas quicker 

than we are doing? Does that make sense?

Mr. Ciccolella. Yes. It does. I think you have to respond to it I

believe in the context of, you know, what the workforce system can 

do. And specifically with the veterans. With the GM layoffs and the

Ford layoffs we need to, track that pretty carefully. It’s not like 14 or 

30,000 people are going to be laid off right away like in Youngstown, 

Ohio, I think 18,000 people lost their jobs up there in the steel mills. 

But it happens over time.

  So that certainly gives the workforce system a sufficient amount of

time to respond. For example, in Virginia and North Carolina when 

the PillowTex folks went under and they were bought out. We put 

a team from the Department of Labor down there in advance of the 

closings to do training and re-skill the workers in both North Carolina and Virginia. And we had a veterans component for that effort. 

And it’s not easy to do when people are my age, like in their 50’s, to 

change jobs. But it’s just the way things are today. Where our jobs go 

away and we have jobs in this country, five million, that we can’t fill

because we don’t have the workers with skills, then that workforce 
18

system needs to be responsive to that.

 And so that is what we did at PillowTex. We have done it in a 

couple of other places. So if the question is does the system have a 

capability to respond, you bet, it does have that capability to respond. 

And should respond.

Mr. Boozman. I guess what I would like to see, and again as a very 

informal this is what we do in those situations. Almost like FEMA

goes in in an emergency. Because the situation that we are in now is 

a little different with our manufacturing and things than it has been 

in the past decades. The problem is, if you lose 5,000 jobs at the local 

auto plant, then the reality is that transfers to probably 15,000 jobs 

throughout the system because there is so many small vendors that 

are dependent in servicing that and the whole deal.

 So, again, it’s just something that I would like to see us do, and we 

would be glad to help in any way that we can, but I do think that -- 

and I think FEMA is a good example of just in an emergency that you 

go in. And we would like to see that happen with a strong veterans 

component as part of that. Would you all agree with that?

Mr. Ciccolella. We would be happy to respond to that, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Boozman. Again, something that perhaps we can look at later 

on. So, do you have any -- Mr. Campbell, have you got anything you 

would like to add?

Mr. Campbell. One thing.

Mr. Boozman. Sure.

Mr. Campbell. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. One of the things being 

the new guy, this may be a silly question. But being the new guy, I

probably will do that frequently for at least a little while. But one of 

the things you said, Mr. Ciccolella, I believe, if I have not butchered 

your name too badly, was that one agency cannot do this alone. What 

are the things -- why is that? What are the things that -- you are collaborating I am hearing on a lot of things -- what are the things that 

you cannot collaborate on?

Mr. Ciccolella. Sure. Well, Congressman, if you use the example 

of our partnership, the VA brings certain things to the table with 

regard to the services that they can provide for the servicemember, 

the injured servicemember or disabled servicemember. They bring 

case management. They bring counseling. They bring the medical 

efforts so that the individual is stabilized. They bring the program 

that provides the tuition and the stipend so that the individual can 

go through the training.

 Now, VA is not necessarily an employment agency, although they 

have employment coordinators. And some of their participants, a 

number of them, are placed into employment. And their jobs are 

lined up by the employment coordinators, but not all of them.

 And so we have a system in the country, we have had it since 1944, 
19

we had the veterans’ employment representative in the job centers or 

the unemployment centers at that time. And in the 1980’s because we 

had so many veterans from the Vietnam era who were unemployed, 

that is what created the disabled veteran outreach program specialists. So we have two categories of veteran employment representatives in the workforce system.

 And that DVOP or disabled veteran outreach program specialist, 

his or her job is to focus on veterans with barriers. But when you 

have significant disabilities, such as the Chapter 31 clients do, then

the DVOP is trained to do a high level of case management as well. 

And more importantly, that person has access to the services of the 

workforce system. And that is not only the job counseling and job 

searches and the resume writing and the training for interviewing 

skills and things like that, but also the all of the resources of America’s workforce system that he or she can bring to bear for that veteran.

 So the functions, the missions are truly complimentary. And if 

you are not working across agency lines collaboratively, then frankly 

some people in this program, the VR&E program, will fall through 

the crack because they will have to get their own jobs, or they will go 

back home

and do whatever, or they will go, back to school. 

 And it will be a while before they get into employment. And that 

is real important, especially with young veterans because young veterans have a tough time making the transition. And if they are disabled, or severely wounded or injured, then it’s even more difficult.

They have got significant barriers to employment.

VA can address some of those barriers and the Labor Department 

can address some of those. But if we work together we are going to 

be a lot more successful.

Mr. Campbell. Okay. Thank you.

Mr. Boozman. Do you have anything else Ms. Herseth? Very good. 

I appreciate the testimony from you, Mr. Ciccolella and Ms. Caden 

and Mr. Braun and Mr. Frye. I really do appreciate your working 

together in the spirit that you are trying to get these things done. 

And certainly, again, that is our mission is to help you in any way 

that we can. And to move these things forward. So, thank you very 

much for appearing. We appreciate your testimony and the meeting 

stands adjourned.

Mr. Ciccolella. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

  [Whereupon, at 11:00 a.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.]

 
(20)

APPENDIX
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31

Statement of Judith Caden

Director, Vocational Rehabilitation and Employment Service

Before the Committee on Veterans’ Affairs

Subcommittee on Economic Opportunities 

United States House of Representatives

March 9, 2006

Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee, thank you for 

inviting me to appear before you today to discuss specific elements

of the Department of Veterans Affairs’ Vocational Rehabilitation 

and Employment (VR&E) Program. In keeping with your request, 

I will begin by talking about VR&E’s contracting process, costs, and 

management. Then, I will discuss our partnering activities with the 

Department of Labor’s Veterans Employment and Training Service 

(VETS). I am pleased to be accompanied by Mr. Jerry Braun, Deputy 

Director of VR&E Service, and Mr. Jan Frye, Deputy Assistant Secretary, Office of Acquisition and Materiel Management.

VR&E Contracting Process

The Vocational Rehabilitation and Employment program utilizes 

contractors to supplement and complement the services provided 

by VR&E staff to veterans participating in the each of the VR&E

programs. A National Acquisition Strategy (NAS) was instituted in 

order to standardize and streamline the acquisition procedures used 

by VR&E staff to obtain contractors who provide these services to 

veterans. The NAS resulted in a list of qualified service providers

for each regional office for the following three categories of services: 

Initial Vocational Assessments and Evaluations, Case Management 

and Rehabilitative Services, and Employment Services. 

Two hundred and forty-one firm, fixed-priced, indefinite delivery/indefinite quantity contracts were awarded as a result of the NAS. The

contractors were selected by region to ensure veterans would have 

access to the services within a 50 to 100 mile radius of their residence. The initial base period of the current NAS contract’s period of 

performance was October 1, 2002 through September 30, 2003. VA

has renewed the contract in each of the next three years of a fouryear option.

The Office of Inspector General (OIG) recently conducted an evaluation of the contract and identified several vulnerabilities in this contracting process. As a result, we have decided not to go forward with 

the final option year. Instead we are in the process of issuing a new

NAS for a five-year period starting in fiscal year 2007. The vulnera-
32

bilities identified by the OIG in combination with our past experience

will help to ensure that we improve upon the previous NAS contracts. 

We are currently developing a market research strategy to determine 

price reasonableness and VR&E’s negotiation position. We are also 

reviewing modifications made to existing contracts to fully define our

contracting requirements. A draft statement of work has been developed and is currently being reviewed within the Department.

Contracting Costs

Expenditures for the base year under the current NAS (October 1, 

2002, through September 30, 2003) were $8.7 million. Expenditures 

for the first option year (October 1, 2003, through September 30, 2004)

were $7.2 million. Expenditures for the second option year (October 

1, 2004, through September 30, 2005) were $8.3 million. We expect 

to spend $8.9 million this fiscal year. Funds are monitored and an

appropriate distribution of allowances is made throughout the fiscal

year to the Regional Offices.

Contract Management and Oversight

VR&E Officers are responsible for management and oversight of the

contracting activities at their stations. They ensure that acquisition procedures requiring separation of duties are followed and that 

vocational rehabilitation counselors make appropriate use of these 

contracting resources. Proposed expenditures are obligated by the 

VR&E Officer, the work performed by the contractors is monitored by

counselors, and payments are approved by the VR&E Officer. 

VR&E Officers review a representative sample of cases each month

which includes an assessment of work conducted by the contractors 

as well as a review of fiscal activity including contract payments. In

addition, VR&E Officers conduct systematic analyses of operations

on a regular basis. One of the required reviews is on contracting 

activity.

Overall contract expenditures at a given regional office are tracked

via our corporate management reports. Each station receives an allocated contract budget for the fiscal year. Funds are obligated against

the station’s allocation. VR&E Officers must closely monitor their

funds and expenditures to ensure that their balance is adequate to 

provide services throughout the fiscal year.

VR&E Officers complete a Past Performance/Quality Assurance

Questionnaire on a quarterly basis for the NAS Contracts. The ques-
33

tionnaire documents contractor performance and ensures corrective 

actions are taken in the event that performance is deficient.

In order to manage contracting activities, each Regional Office is required to have 2 Basic Level Warranted Contracting Officers (COs)

and at least 2 Contracting Officer’s Technical Representatives (COTRs). The Basic Level Warranted COs are VR&E Officers and Assistant VR&E Officers who may bind the Government to the extent

of the authority delegated to them, which is not to exceed $100,000. 

These individuals were issued warrants upon successful completion 

of a mandatory 40-hour training requirement. To meet the training requirement, VR&E Service disseminated training materials and 

instruction to complete the Simplified Acquisition Procedures (SAP)

Training on CD-ROM (16 hours) and the 24-hour online COTR Training. To date, 115 warrants have been issued to qualified VR&E Officers and Assistant VR&E Officers.

The COTRs assist the Contracting Officer in the administration and

coordination of VR&E contracts. The COTRs are responsible for quality assurance, contract monitoring, conducting quality assurance reviews, and serving as the primary point of contact for the Contractor. 

Upon successful completion of the training, the National Contracting 

Officer issues a Letter of Delegation. To date, 256 COTR Letters of

Delegation have been issued.

We have expanded the VR&E Site Visit protocol to require a review 

of contracting activities, such as contract agreements and disbursements, to ensure the station is adhering to the contracting guidelines 

for local and NAS contracts. Additionally, the site visit team reviews 

contract documentation to ensure required justifications for contractor selection are in place. 

Implementation of MOA with DOL VETS

The second topic you requested that I address is the Memorandum 

of Agreement (MOA) VA has with the Department of Labor (DOL). 

VR&E and DOL’s Veterans’ Employment and Training Service 

(VETS) continue to work in partnership to provide comprehensive 

employment services with a focus on providing veterans with serviceconnected disabilities access to suitable employment opportunities. 

On October 3, 2005, VR&E and VETS signed a revised MOA with 

the goal of improving service delivery to veterans with service-connected disabilities. The MOA expands and solidifies our cooperation

as partners in case management, employment services, communication, reporting, oversight and monitoring, and accountability. These 
34

activities are all necessary to assist veterans to successfully achieve 

their rehabilitation goals. 

Associated with the MOA, VR&E in partnership with VETS provided 

the guidelines and parameters for three workgroups that will develop 

recommendations to overcome the critical challenges facing the partnership. They are:

• Developing and implementing effective performance measures for 

assessing the results of partnership activities;

• Developing a joint training curriculum design for use at the National Veterans’ Training Institute (NVTI); and 

• Developing a methodology for joint data collection, analysis, and 

reporting. 

Each workgroup is comprised of three members from VR&E and 

VETS, and is co-chaired by both VR&E and VETS staff. By early 

to mid-summer each workgroup is expected to submit its final report which will include recommendations to address these gaps in the 

partnership process.

Implementation of the MOA with VETS has been made easier with 

the co-location of 72 Disabled Veterans Outreach Program (DVOP) 

specialists at 36 VA Regional Offices and 36 outbased facilities. At

these offices, DVOP specialists and VR&E staff work together to provide efficient and effective delivery of employment services. Both

groups are able to access the same resources and online technologies 

such as the VR&E job resource labs and VetSuccess.gov. 

VR&E’s goal of achieving excellence in the delivery of employment 

services requires that we establish and maintain close working relationships with our VETS partners. VR&E’s Employment Coordinators are an integral resource in the delivery of employment exploration, job readiness, and job placement services. To ensure that these 

services are provided in a comprehensive, timely, and individualized 

manner, Employment Coordinators partner with DVOP specialists 

and Local Veterans Employment Representative (LVER) staff. As 

partners, they assess the feasibility of employment services, recommend an appropriate vocational rehabilitation plan with the goal of 

suitable employment or independent living, and deliver job readiness 

skills training and job placement services. Our Employment Coordinators are helping to build a better VR&E/ VETS partnership structure by performing critical liaison activities between VR&E rehabilitation counselors and the DVOPs/LVERs at the local level. 

Earlier I mentioned VetSuccess.gov, VR&E’s newly developed “online’’ employment resource that enables users to explore the features 
35

and benefits offered by the VR&E Program and apply for benefits.

Users benefit from orientation to VR&E programs, expert vocational

advice, rich labor market resources, and career development tools. 

The website also expands career networking relationships through 

our working partnership module. This module integrates the support of employers, VETS staff, educators, and faith and communitybased resources for veterans seeking comprehensive online career 

solutions. VetSuccess.gov is an important tool for VR&E and we are 

pleased that our VETS partners are included as both users and as a 

resource under the partnership module.

We have also included our VETS partners in the national deployment 

of the 5-Track Employment model. The 5-Track Employment model 

is an improved integrated, employment-driven service delivery system that renews the focus on presenting employment options early 

in the rehabilitation planning process. At our invitation, VETS staff 

have attended and participated in training sessions implementing the 

model – three DVOP specialists attended the pilot training sessions, 

six VETS regional and state representatives attended the Employment Coordinators’ Training at NVTI this past November, and more 

recently, six representatives attended the Southern Area training 

conference held last month. Additionally a VETS senior staff person 

addressed each conference. We look forward to our VETS partners 

participating in the remaining three area training sessions.

VR&E has enjoyed success in several other partnership activities 

with VETS. In addition to what has already been mentioned, VR&E

staff coordinated with VETS staff and shared resources at the New 

York Times Job Fair held on November 10, 2005; presented a briefing

on VR&E services at VETS’ Homeless Veterans Reintegration Grantees Program conference and jointly produced and presented satellite training broadcasts on the Disabled Veterans’ Hiring Initiative 

(DVHI) and the Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment 

Rights Act. Also, VETS’ representatives delivered presentations at 

the last two VR&E Management Training Conferences. Additionally, VR&E presented a briefing on the 5-Track Employment Model

at the National Association of State Workforce Agencies (NASWA) 

conference. NASWA represents the State Workforce Agencies and is 

a partner/stakeholder with VETS.

Mr. Chairman, I believe we are making progress in forging an effective partnership with VETS, and veterans with service-connected 

disabilities are benefiting from our progress through the availability

and delivery of more comprehensive employment services. My staff 

and I meet with our VETS counterparts on an on-going basis. We 

have developed the VR&E Employment Model so that from a service 
36

delivery point of view, local DVOP specialists, LVER staff and VETS

federal staff consultation/assistance is detailed and emphasized in 

each of the 5 tracks. Finally, we look forward to receiving and acting upon the recommendations we receive from the three joint workgroups on the critical issues which currently challenge the partnership. 

From our standpoint Mr. Chairman, the VR&E/VETS partnership 

is alive and well and continuing to gain momentum and strength 

through our ongoing communications and joint participation in training activities and development of effective employment policies. 

Mr. Chairman, this concludes my testimony. I greatly appreciate 

being here today and look forward to answering any questions you or 

other Members of the Subcommittee may have.
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75