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) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001

73–290 2013

BUILDING BRIDGES BETWEEN VA 

AND COMMUNITY ORGANIZATIONS 

TO SUPPORT VETERANS AND FAMILIES 

HEARING 

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON HEALTH 

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON VETERANS’ AFFAIRS 

U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

ONE HUNDRED TWELFTH CONGRESS 

SECOND SESSION 

FEBRUARY 27, 2012 

Serial No. 112–45 

Printed for the use of the Committee on Veterans’ Affairs 

( 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING
ii 

COMMITTEE ON VETERANS’ AFFAIRS 

JEFF MILLER, Florida, Chairman 

CLIFF STEARNS, Florida 

DOUG LAMBORN, Colorado 

GUS M. BILIRAKIS, Florida 

DAVID P. ROE, Tennessee 

MARLIN A. STUTZMAN, Indiana 

BILL FLORES, Texas 

BILL JOHNSON, Ohio 

JEFF DENHAM, California 

JON RUNYAN, New Jersey 

DAN BENISHEK, Michigan 

ANN MARIE BUERKLE, New York 

TIM HUELSKAMP, Kansas 

MARK E. AMODEI, Nevada 

ROBERT L. TURNER, New York 

BOB FILNER, California, Ranking 

CORRINE BROWN, Florida 

SILVESTRE REYES, Texas 

MICHAEL H. MICHAUD, Maine 

LINDA T. SA ́ NCHEZ, California 

BRUCE L. BRALEY, Iowa 

JERRY MCNERNEY, California 

JOE DONNELLY, Indiana 

TIMOTHY J. WALZ, Minnesota 

JOHN BARROW, Georgia 

RUSS CARNAHAN, Missouri 

HELEN W. TOLAR, Staff Director and Chief Counsel 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON HEALTH 

ANN MARIE BUERKLE, New York, Chairwoman 

CLIFF STEARNS, Florida 

GUS M. BILIRAKIS, Florida 

DAVID P. ROE, Tennessee 

DAN BENISHEK, Michigan 

JEFF DENHAM, California 

JON RUNYAN, New Jersey 

MICHAEL H. MICHAUD, Maine, Ranking 

CORRINE BROWN, Florida 

SILVESTRE REYES, Texas 

RUSS CARNAHAN, Missouri 

JOE DONNELLY, Indiana 

Pursuant to clause 2(e)(4) of Rule XI of the Rules of the House, public hearing records 

of the Committee on Veterans’ Affairs are also published in electronic form. The printed 

hearing record remains the official version. Because electronic submissions are used to 

prepare both printed and electronic versions of the hearing record, the process of converting 

between various electronic formats may introduce unintentional errors or omissions. Such occurrences are inherent in the current publication process and should diminish as the process 

is further refined. 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING
iii 

C O N T E N T S 

February 27, 2012 

Page 

Building Bridges between VA and Community Organizations to Support Veterans and Families ............................................................................................... 1 

OPENING STATEMENTS 

Chairwoman Ann Marie Buerkle ........................................................................... 1 

Prepared statement of Chairwoman Buerkle ................................................. 39 

Hon. Michael H. Michaud, Ranking Democratic Member .................................... 2 

Prepared statement of Congressman Michaud .............................................. 39 

Hon. Silvestre Reyes, Democratic Member, prepared statement only ................ 40 

WITNESSES 

Andrew Davis, Veteran, Director, Saratoga County Veterans Service Agency, 

Saratoga County, New York ................................................................................ 3 

Prepared statement of Mr. Davis .................................................................... 40 

Chaplain John J. Morris, Joint Force Headquarters Chaplain, Minnesota 

National Guard .................................................................................................... 13 

Prepared statement of Chaplain Morris ......................................................... 43 

Shelley MacDermid Wadsworth, Ph.D., Director, Military Family Research 

Institute, Purdue University ............................................................................... 15 

Prepared statement of Ms. MacDermid Wadsworth ...................................... 46 

M. David Rudd, Ph.D., ABPP, Dean, College of Social and Behavioral 

Sciences, Scientific Director, National Center for Veteran Studies, University of Utah ........................................................................................................... 17 

Prepared statement of Mr. Rudd .................................................................... 49 

George Ake III, Ph.D., Assistant Professor of Medical Psychology, Duke University, American Psychological Association ..................................................... 19 

Prepared statement of Mr. Ake ....................................................................... 51 

Rev. E. Terri LaVelle, Director, Center for Faith-based and Neighborhood 

Partnerships, Office of the Secretary, U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs .. 29 

Prepared statement of Rev. LaVelle ............................................................... 54 

Chaplain Michael McCoy, Sr., Associate Director, National Chaplain Center, 

Veterans Health Administration, U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs ......... 31 

Prepared statement of Chaplain McCoy ......................................................... 56 

SUBMISSION FOR THE RECORD 

Consortium for Citizens with Disabilities, Veterans, and Military Families 

Task Force ............................................................................................................ 58 

MATERIAL SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD 

Post-Hearing Questions and Responses for the Record: 

Questions from Hon. Michael H. Michaud, Ranking Democratic Member, 

Subcommittee on Health, Committee on Veterans’ Affairs to Honorable 

Eric K. Shinseki, Secretary, U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs .............. 63 

Responses from Hon. Eric K. Shinseki, Secretary, U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs to Honorable Michael H. Michaud, Ranking Democratic 

Member, Subcommittee on Health, Committee on Veterans’ Affairs .......... 64 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING

dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING
(1) 

BUILDING BRIDGES BETWEEN VA 

AND COMMUNITY ORGANIZATIONS 

TO SUPPORT VETERANS AND FAMILIES 

MONDAY, FEBRUARY 27, 2012 

U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, COMMITTEE ON VETERANS’ AFFAIRS, SUBCOMMITTEE ON HEALTH, Washington, DC. 

The Subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 4:02 p.m., in 

Room 334, Cannon House Office Building, Hon. Ann Marie Buerkle 

[Chairwoman of the Subcommittee] presiding. 

Present: Representatives Buerkle, Roe, Runyan, Michaud, Reyes, 

and Donnelly. 

Also Present: Representative Walz. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF ANN MARIE BUERKLE, 

CHAIRWOMAN, SUBCOMMITTEE ON HEALTH 

Ms. BUERKLE. Good afternoon, and thank you all for being here 

this afternoon. 

Before we would begin, I would like to ask unanimous consent— 

although I don’t see him here yet, for our colleague, Mr. Tim Walz 

from Minnesota, to sit at the dais and participate in today’s proceeding. 

Without objection, so ordered. 

Today, we meet to discuss the role of faith-based and community 

providers in helping servicemembers, veterans, and their families 

transition from active duty to civilian life and the need to foster 

better communication, education, and collaboration between the 

Department of Veterans Affairs and these critical community resources. 

The responsibility for each one of us to care for those who have 

borne the battle has never been so strong with the brutal toll of 

a decade of war and a bad economy. We continue to hear stories 

of veterans from past conflicts and our recently returning veterans 

from Iraq and Afghanistan struggling to find a home, a job, or a 

helping hand. The need to meet these honored heroes where they 

are and provide them the care, the hope, and the help they earned 

has never felt so immediate. 

As a Nation, we are uniquely blessed to live in a country with 

a rich history of civic pride and responsibility, and it is to these 

communities where our veterans return home, where they have 

maintained their existing relationships, and, more often than not, 

where they first turn for help. 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING
2 

While the primary responsibility for caring for our veterans does 

and should lie with the VA, faith-based and community groups are 

playing an increasingly key role in supporting the varied needs of 

our servicemembers, veterans, and their families. They act as a 

bridge to accessing Federal, State, and local programs and services. 

Members of the clergy in particular are often the first point of 

contact with the veteran grappling with the wounds of war. Data 

from the VA National Chaplain Center indicates that four out of 

ten individuals with mental health challenges seek clergy assistance, more than any other mental health providers combined. 

We already know that faith-based and community groups can be 

effective in filling known gaps in VA care and supporting the dayto-day needs of a veteran population. However, a district symposium I held in my home district of Syracuse last December revealed 

to me a shameful lack of communication, collaboration, and coordination between the VA and these critical community resources and, 

subsequently, an urgent need to act to establish meaningful partnerships between the VA and nongovernmental organizations. 

With more of our servicemembers returning home each day, we 

cannot afford to let any opportunity to better support our veterans 

pass us by. Where partnerships exist, they need to be strengthened. Where they don’t, they need to be fostered. For a veteran or 

a loved one in need, every door should be an open door. 

Again, I thank all of you for joining us this afternoon. I look forward to a productive and ongoing conversation. 

I now recognize our Ranking Member, Mr. Michaud, for any remarks he might have. 

[The prepared statement of Ann Marie Buerkle appears on 

p. 39.] 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. MICHAEL H. MICHAUD, 

RANKING DEMOCRATIC MEMBER 

Mr. MICHAUD. Thank you very much, Madam Chair. 

I, too, would like to thank everyone for attending today’s hearing. 

This hearing is intended to open up the broader thought process 

and better understanding on how the VA and community organizations collaborate to support veterans and their families. 

More than 2 million servicemembers have been deployed since 

September of 2001, with hundreds of thousands of them being deployed more than once. As of February 2012, more than 6,000 

troops have been killed and over 47,000 have been wounded in action in the recent conflicts. 

When these servicemembers come home and take off the uniform, many of them have the expectation that life will just pick up 

where they left off before they were deployed. However, this is not 

the case. Many of them struggle to reconnect with their families 

and communities. They find themselves feeling isolated and unable 

to cope. The Department of Veterans Affairs reports that half of 

the OEF, OIF, and OND population that has access to VA health 

care has sought mental health treatment. Post-traumatic stress 

disorder is the number one reported mental health concern among 

this population. 

With so many OEF, OIF, OND servicemembers and veterans experiencing psychological wounds, reports suggest that there is an 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING
3 

increase in the rates of suicide, alcohol and drug abuse, homelessness, and domestic violence. For this reason, it is essential that our 

servicemembers, veterans, and their families receive the help they 

need and that they have necessary tools to rejoin their communities. These programs and resources would not be possible without 

the thousands of community organizations across the country that 

work in partnership with the VA. 

At this hearing, I want to hear more about the reintegration 

challenges that servicemembers, veterans, and veterans’ families 

face as well as the challenges the VA and community organizations 

face as well in providing support services. We need to identify potential solutions to these barriers and how we can strengthen these 

partnerships. 

Despite historic increases in the VA funding over the past 5 

years as the Nation prepares for an influx of returning veterans, 

reintegration efforts are simply not possible without collaboration 

between the Federal Government, business sector, and nonprofit 

organizations; and more needs to be done to facilitate these partnerships. 

I would like to take the time to thank our panelists for being 

here today, this afternoon, and I look forward to working with you 

as you support the Nation’s veterans. 

I would especially like to thank Mr. Morris and Mr. McCoy for 

their service as chaplains in the Minnesota National Guard and the 

VA’s National Chaplains Center respectively. 

In 2009, I led a congressional delegation to Afghanistan and 

came to learn that our servicemembers rely immensely on their 

chaplains for emotional support. Every trip since then I have come 

to respect the unique insight that our chaplains possess in terms 

of mental health, spiritual guidance, and the overall well-being of 

our servicemen and women. I look forward to hearing your testimony today as well. 

I want to thank you once again, Madam Chair, for having this 

very important hearing this afternoon. Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Michael Michaud appears on p. 39.] 

Ms. BUERKLE. Thank you, Mr. Michaud. 

Now I would like to invite our first panel to the witness table. 

With us today is Andrew Davis, a veteran of Operation Enduring 

Freedom and Operation Iraq Freedom, the Director of the Veterans 

Services for Saratoga County, New York, and the founder of the 

Saratoga County Veterans Resource Initiative. 

Mr. Davis served in both Afghanistan and Iraq with the U.S. 

Army 75th Ranger Regiment where he earned the Bronze Star 

with Valor, the Combat Parachutist Badge, and the Combat Infantryman’s Badge and is a true American hero. 

Mr. Davis, thank you for your service to this country. It is an 

honor to have you here today with us, and I very much look forward to hearing your testimony. You may begin. 

STATEMENT OF ANDREW DAVIS, VETERAN, DIRECTOR, SARATOGA COUNTY VETERANS SERVICE AGENCY, SARATOGA 

COUNTY, NEW YORK 

Mr. DAVIS. Good afternoon, Chairwoman Buerkle, Ranking Member Michaud, and Members of the Committee. Thank you for the 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING
4 

invitation to discuss the role of community providers and faithbased organizations in helping servicemembers transition to civilian life and the need for the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs 

to use these resources and collaborate. 

My name is Andrew Davis. I am currently the Director of the 

Saratoga County Veterans Service Agency and the founder of the 

Saratoga VRI. I have been a veterans advocate since separating 

from the service in 2004 where I served as a United States Army 

Ranger for 5 years, to include two tours of duty in Afghanistan and 

one in Iraq. 

Upon returning to my home in Minnesota to further my education, I was faced with my first taste of how little I knew about 

being a veteran. In fact, like many of my peers, I was unsure if I 

even was a veteran. I was on a campus of 40,000 students, and I 

didn’t know any veterans around me. Because of this, I founded a 

nonprofit veterans support organization on the campus of the U of 

M to aid returning veterans in connecting with earned benefits and 

services. 

In later roles as a congressional staffer and a Department of Defense Transition Assistance Advisor, I saw firsthand the disconnect 

between veterans, their families, and the systems that are intended 

to support them. For the past 3 years, I have spent my career as 

a veterans advocate, either training accredited benefits counselors 

or being one myself; and this has provided me a frontline view of 

what is lacking in outreach and networked support to our veterans 

and their families. 

Last, I am currently an enrolled patient with the Veterans 

Health Administration in VISN–2 and use both the Albany Stratton VA Medical Center and Clifton Park Community-Based Outreach Clinic regularly. 

Veterans and the ways they serve have changed significantly 

over the last decade, resulting in the need for changes in the way 

our country, in turn, serves them. The veterans of today tend to be 

more geographically dispersed and more mobile than previous generations. Families and communities are affected and changed differently than ever before with multiple deployments and the 

unique use of the Guard and Reserve. Many of these individuals 

suffer from a lack of a ‘‘Fort New York’’ or a ‘‘Fort Minnesota’’ or 

a central support system, making the local community even more 

crucial in the reintegration process. 

Despite a constant bombardment of media in all forms that afford the public access to our current wars, issues facing our neighbors, friends, family members, and other local veterans are often 

invisible to us as communities. Add to this a military culture that 

can encourage emotional toughness and self-sufficiency, and we 

face a large potential public health problem. 

Last, the uniqueness that makes our military and our veteran 

population great also means that there is not a one-size-fits-all support system that can be created nationwide. We must garner community support and use community services to serve our veterans 

and their families completely. 

First and foremost, the population of veterans that find their way 

into the VA system of care or benefits system merely by accident 

is staggering. I can safely say that approximately five to seven vetVerDate Mar 15 2010 12:41 Apr 02, 2013 Jkt 073290 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 I:\VA\73290.XXX 73290

dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING
5 

erans knock on my door weekly for some form of unrelated government service to find they are eligible for veterans benefits or care 

because of their service to this Nation. 

Just last week, a young Marine with two tours of duty in Afghanistan appeared in my office asking for directions to the office 

that handles unemployment benefits. This Marine outlined he had 

no idea what services he was eligible for or how to use his 5 years 

of free health care. So we sat down with him and helped him. If 

this Marine had not knocked on the wrong door, he would not have 

met with my staff to turn on his GI Bill benefits or learn where 

he could get health care. 

By all appearances, the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs has 

recognized the need for community outreach but holds their hopes 

in the idea that top-down, one-sided information will filter down to 

the grassroots folks at the bottom helping individuals. For example, 

in the VISN–2 of Upstate New York, a few competent and welltrained veterans justice coordinators have been hired and put in 

place. However, the operative words here are ‘‘a few.’’ These people 

are responsible for numerous counties and for interacting with 

courts, district attorneys, and law enforcement, when in fact the 

police officers on the beat may be able to help them immediately. 

The correct mindset for reaching veterans must transition to a 

‘‘no wrong door’’ approach. This can and should be created through 

a localized national training by VA, veterans advocates, and other 

experts to all members of the local communities. These newly created veteran-friendly communities would have the tools to make referrals to the proper resources, whether a veteran walks into a rectory, a tax assessor’s office, or is pulled over during a traffic stop. 

Additionally, outreach and assistance programs cannot be reactionary in nature. The time to begin helping a veteran in legal 

trouble, for example, is upon first interaction, not just at sentencing. In fact, in my own transition, it was a police officer who 

pulled me over for driving in Minneapolis like I had been in 

Haditha and Bagram and introduced me to my first veterans advocate and helped me to realize that difficulty transitioning was normal. Additionally, I now receive as an accredited service officer a 

large number of referrals from local police officers that I call my 

friends. 

In sum, we as a Nation must stand committed to ensuring that 

sustainable and quality supportive services are accessible to veterans and their families right in their communities. I believe this 

can be done by leveraging resources that largely already exist in 

a cost-effective manner. The VA has the geographical disbursement 

and expertise to lead change, but we must think outside the box 

and look to those who are ready and willing to assist in our own 

backyards. The requirements to make this successful are not numerous. In many cases, putting out outreach staff and community 

advance is all it will take. We must begin immediately leveraging 

relationships and expertise that has long existed. 

Thank you again to the Committee for allowing me to speak to 

these important issues. 

[The prepared statement of Andrew Davis appears on p. 40.] 

Ms. BUERKLE. Thank you very much, Mr. Davis; and, again, 

thank you for your service to our country. 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING
6 

I am going to begin by yielding myself 5 minutes for questions. 

In your written testimony, you remark that after leaving the 

military you, as well as some of your peers, were unsure if you 

were even a veteran. If you look at the overall scheme of things, 

that is incredible, with the service that you gave to our Nation. I 

would like you to, if you could, expand on that statement and give 

us some insight into that. 

Mr. DAVIS. Absolutely. I like to point that out, ma’am, at any 

chance I can. 

In my eyes, a veteran was my grandfather at the American Legion who was telling World War II stories when I was a young kid. 

Additionally, I think there is a large confusion among our Guard 

and Reserve population and even those who support these wars 

from the homeland who may not even think of themselves as a veteran when you consider the folks who are coming home missing 

limbs or who have served multiple tours in combat. 

So an important distinction I like to point out to community 

members who are interested in helping is asking somebody if they 

or a family member have ever served in the United States military, 

as opposed to are you a veteran, because that can be sort of a dicey 

question. 

Ms. BUERKLE. Thank you. 

Can you talk about how we can get to that veteran community 

when they are processing out and they are still active duty? How 

can we make it known to them that they would qualify for veteran 

assistance? 

Mr. DAVIS. Ma’am, I think one important thing to understand is 

that, no matter where we separate from, there is a very good possibility that is not where we are going to stay. I can tell you from 

my own experience separating in Fort Benning, Georgia, and returning to Minnesota, I got every resource available to me to stay 

in Fort Benning, Georgia, but I wasn’t staying there. 

So the veteran returning to Syracuse from Marine duty in Camp 

Pendleton needs to be provided in Syracuse that local contact, 

whether that is a veterans service agency director or whether it is 

a VA clinic contact. But they need the contacts at home, not where 

they are separating from. 

Ms. BUERKLE. Can you tell me how you think that the VA’s reluctance to integrate with community resources may have obstructed your transition or other veterans’ transitions into becoming a veteran? 

Mr. DAVIS. Yes, ma’am. I think the important thing that veterans need to understand when they are separating from duty is 

that every benefit needs to be turned on with the process of an application. For me, going to the University of Minnesota and having 

to use GI Bill benefits, I guess I just assumed somebody on campus 

was going to be there to help me, another veteran or somebody who 

was responsible for this benefit. But there wasn’t one out of 40,000 

that was there to assist with that effort. 

So if the VA had seen that this massive college campus was 

going to attract veterans, they may have put somebody proactively 

there or trained somebody. That is just education. But that person 

could also refer me to a health care resource or something similar. 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING
7 

Ms. BUERKLE. So now you are director of a community program; 

and I would like you to, if you could, describe for us your interactions with the VA now and what kind of relationship you have 

and how the VA is treating your group? 

Mr. DAVIS. Madam Chair, we come in quarterly to the VA hospital in Albany, and we do get to hear about departmental changes. 

We get a top-down budget overview of what the VA hospital director is dealing with. It does tend to be a fairly one-sided conversation. We hear about changes to the orthopedics ward or something 

like that, and we occasionally get to talk about an issue that is facing maybe one of our veterans. But as far as being able to have 

a two-way conversation about how to improve, that does not take 

place. 

In addition, I would point out that we hold events as county 

agencies that are for the purpose of outreach. The VA is invited to 

all of those, and I would be remiss if I told you that they were at 

all of those. They rarely take advantage of those community activities, at least in my area. 

Ms. BUERKLE. I don’t mean to ask you to speak or try to be in 

the mind of the VA, but why do you think there is a reluctance to 

collaborate with some of the outside groups rather than just the 

VA? 

Mr. DAVIS. Purely speculation, ma’am. I would say they may feel 

that they are the experts and the veterans should come to them 

and they can’t share that load. But, again, that is purely speculation. 

I also would say that maybe it has never happened before, so 

maybe there is some reluctance to jump in and try something new. 

Ms. BUERKLE. And last, if you could—and I just have a few seconds left—what barriers do you see for more effective relationships 

between the VA and some of the outside service groups? 

Mr. DAVIS. Ma’am, I think information sharing is obviously a 

fear among all agencies, how do we talk about veterans and get the 

proper consent for issues that they may be facing, whether it be 

mental or physical health care. 

But I also think staffing is something they always fall back on, 

and I have seen that take place in my area. 

Ms. BUERKLE. I thank you very much, Mr. Davis. 

I now yield 5 minutes to the Ranking Member, Mr. Michaud. 

Mr. MICHAUD. Thank you very much, Madam Chair. 

I also want to thank you, Mr. Davis, for your service to this great 

Nation of ours. I appreciate it. 

Speaking about mental health, do you have any suggestions for 

us or the VA on creative approaches to addressing the mental 

health needs of returning veterans and their families? 

Mr. DAVIS. Sir, I appreciate the question. I would say that one 

thing that comes up often among my veterans is a reluctance to go 

physically to a VA mental center or even to a VA vet center, which 

is even more comfortable for that mental care, and a strong leaning 

toward paying out of pocket for private providers in their own 

backyard. So if there was some way to leverage that outsourcing, 

for lack of a better term, I would say that would go a long ways. 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING
8 

But, too, also opening more mental health care to families and 

children out there where that family dynamic has changed through 

deployment, sometimes multiple deployments, sir. 

Mr. MICHAUD. Thank you. 

You mentioned the collaboration between the VA and the local 

community resources, some of the things that they should do. Is 

there anything in particular that you can tell this Subcommittee on 

what can we do to encourage more of that particular collaboration 

between the two? 

Mr. DAVIS. Sir, I think the VA needs to get out into the community a little more. My experience has been that there is not a shortage of people out in my communities that want to help, whether 

that be mental health providers on the private side or whether it 

be churches and law enforcement where I get a lot of my referrals 

from. They are ready to help, but they are not really sure where 

to send people to, because the VA, at least in my area, hasn’t been 

out in force giving them cards and saying what they do. 

Mr. MICHAUD. You made an interesting point, and I actually 

heard Judge Russell, who is a judge in New York for the Veterans 

Court, and he made a good point and you just reemphasized that 

point. A lot of times veterans don’t feel that they are veterans, and 

he rephrases the question now is how many people served in the 

military. 

When you look at outreach, I know the VA is trying to do more 

in outreach, getting veterans into the VA system, what do you 

think that we should do for more of an outreach type of program? 

Because a lot of veterans out there are not signing up because they 

don’t realize that they are eligible. How do you envision us doing 

a better job in getting people into the VA system? 

Mr. DAVIS. Sir, I believe the question does need to be rephrased 

across the board. I think anytime we are looking to help veterans 

we need to ask that, have you or a family member ever served in 

the United States military, and that really breaks the ice. But, too, 

it allows me as an advocate and all of my peers as advocates to 

really start to look at what benefits might be available. 

I hate to put it this way, but the thing that gets a lot of veterans 

in my door is you might be missing out on some significant savings 

financially or on some serious financial benefits, whether it be a 

property tax exemption or disability compensation or free health 

care. So money gets people in the door, unfortunately, but also asking the right questions. 

Mr. MICHAUD. Do you think the Governors of each State and 

probably the President ought to do an executive order requiring 

every Federal agency or State agency that has an interaction, 

whether it is unemployment benefits, Medicare, or Medicaid, that 

one of the first questions that they ask is have you ever served in 

the military and somehow getting that information to the VA so 

they can reach out to those types of individuals? 

Mr. DAVIS. Yes, sir. I think every temporary assistance office, social services department, Medicaid, Medicare, but also every college 

application at a State-run school should have that question being 

asked and it should generate some sort of referral. Again, that nowrong-door approach is crucial in helping these folks. 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING
9 

Mr. MICHAUD. You had mentioned in your testimony that the VA 

interaction, that there is more of it dealt with on the VHA side 

versus the VBA side. How do you think the interaction between the 

two should be between VHA health and benefits side? 

Mr. DAVIS. Sir, I think one thing I am up against oftentimes with 

my clients is explaining the siloed barriers within the VA, that the 

cemetery administration and the health care administration and 

the benefits administration are not one entity. So you can actually 

theoretically get care at the VA hospital for 40 years and never 

have a disability claim put in, and vice versa, and I think that is 

confusing to veterans. And I think oftentimes when a veteran has 

a real problem with a claim within the VBA, they tend to blame 

the doctor at the hospital at the VHA, and vice versa, and it is not 

fair to the VA employees, but it is also not fair to the veteran to 

not understand that disparity. 

So I think having a more across-the-board understanding, but 

also, when we are talking to VHA, VBA and VCA should be in the 

room as well, and vice versa. 

Mr. MICHAUD. Thank you very much. 

I yield back, Madam Chair. 

Ms. BUERKLE. Thank you. 

I now recognize the gentleman from Tennessee, Dr. Roe. 

Mr. ROE. Thank you. 

I just have a couple of questions for Mr. Davis. Again, thank you 

for your service to our country. I appreciate that. 

I think probably the first time I ever realized I was a veteran 

was somebody asking me to stand up at a Lincoln Day dinner. I 

never really thought about it very much. And, obviously, until you 

need those benefits, you don’t. 

Last Congress, I went to Afghanistan with Mr. Michaud, and just 

got back from Afghanistan again on a CODEL I led about 4 months 

ago. And we stopped in Landstuhl. I think the DoD is doing a better job of informing, at least from when I got out. Really, it was 

a couple of days and you were gone, not really knowing what benefits you had, if any. So I think they are doing a better job today. 

Where is the breakdown? Because there is so much access to information. It is just that our soldiers, when you have made that determination that you are going home, you go home and you don’t 

think about it until you have a problem. Then, like you say, when 

you are at Benning or where I grew up near Fort Campbell, Kentucky, you have all kinds of support there. But if you move down 

to Hole in the Wall, Tennessee, you may not. 

We have a VA hospital in our community. People know where to 

go. But that is not necessarily for everyone, there are only three 

of them in the State of Tennessee. So how would you best get that 

information out to people? How do you do that? 

Mr. DAVIS. Well, sir, as my friend Colonel Morris will probably 

say, you are given the world’s most important information as a veteran at the world’s worst time by the world’s worst briefers. As you 

are attempting to move your family and your livelihood back home 

or to the new location in this country, you are not thinking about 

those benefits, as you say. So even just having a contact card printed out for you at your transition would be a lot more helpful than 

a 130-slide briefing on the big picture of benefits. 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING
10 

So the first thing I would say is we need to start teaching people 

how to be veterans at the beginning of their service and throughout 

their service, as opposed to right in the last 2 weeks. But the second piece is getting people in who are actually advocates to brief, 

as opposed to the payers of the benefits, meaning the big-picture 

VA folks giving us that long PowerPoint presentation. 

Mr. ROE. I know our veterans service officers where we are do 

a tremendous job. And people come in, they really don’t know the 

difference between these acronyms—VBA, VA. I mean, it is all one 

to them. They just think it is one. You are absolutely right. 

I see it all the time in my congressional office. If a disability 

claim is not moving forward and we get in on it, they don’t know 

that the VA has nothing to do it. The hospital where they are going 

doesn’t have anything to do with that. That is a totally different 

issue. I don’t know that that is important. All the veteran wants 

is their benefits taken care of. 

So you would suggest a simple thing to do would be just be some 

contact, just a card with contact information. We ought to be able 

to make that happen pretty easily, if you think that would be helpful. 

Mr. DAVIS. I do, sir. I think attached to that DD–214 when you 

leave Fort Campbell should be here is the six most important people in your home county you need to see: unemployment, veterans 

advocate at the service office. You know, you name it. But these 

are the go-to folks when you get home. 

Mr. ROE. If you need some help, if the issue comes up, contact 

one of these people; and, like you said, there is no wrong door. 

Mr. DAVIS. Yes, sir. 

Mr. ROE. Any of them can open the door. 

I am not going to disagree with anything you said, except for one 

thing. I don’t think the needs of veterans have changed at all. I 

had an aunt that knew my great-grandfather who survived the 

Civil War, and my great grandmother had said that he was never 

right after that war, meaning that he had problems. There just 

were no benefits then. I think veterans have experienced the same 

things. 

I think we are doing a better job. The GI Bill is spectacular. That 

is all I can say about it. It wasn’t kicked out very well, but the Secretary has smoothed out some of those bumps. When a person goes 

and gets their veterans’ benefit for their GI Bill, you are saying 

that the University of Minnesota, a huge, great university, didn’t 

have any help. I mean, they have thousands of people working at 

that college, and so do most colleges that are of any size like that. 

They had no one there who knew what to do for you, where to send 

you? 

Mr. DAVIS. No, sir. And I can say that that has improved greatly 

across the country. Just 2 years ago, we kicked off a veteran-friendly campus event around New York; and we saw great universities 

like Syracuse University who have full offices for veterans. But 

that was not in existence when I separated in 2004. 

Mr. ROE. So just in a short time you have been able to see that? 

Mr. DAVIS. Yes, sir. 

Mr. ROE. Once again, thank you for your service. 

I yield back. 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING
11 

Ms. BUERKLE. Thank you, Dr. Roe. 

Now I recognize the gentleman from Indiana, Mr. Donnelly. 

Mr. DONNELLY. Thank you, Madam Chair; and, Mr. Davis, I too 

want to thank you for everything you have done for our country. 

There is no way we can ever repay your hard work, your dedication, and everything you have done for us; and we are very much 

in your service and in your appreciation. 

I wanted to ask about the Saratoga County Veterans Resource 

Initiative. What role does the VA play in the gatherings that you 

have when you gather quarterly to check best practices? 

Mr. DAVIS. Sir, to date, we have had six meetings, and the VA 

has been present at one, and it was the second meeting, and that 

was in the form of the families outreach program that existed at 

the Albany VA Medical Center. The VHA and the Vet Center have 

been invited to every meeting and have yet to have much participation. 

Mr. DONNELLY. Did they tell you why? 

Mr. DAVIS. Every time, sir, it has been that they didn’t have the 

staff or they hadn’t gotten approval to attend. 

Mr. DONNELLY. Okay. And I apologize if I missed this early on 

in your testimony, but, at those gatherings, have they proved pretty fruitful for you? 

Mr. DAVIS. Yes, sir. At the very beginning, we learned how this 

room full of people that all knew each other had no idea what any 

of us did on behalf of veterans, so at that very level it started being 

helpful. 

In addition, I don’t go more than 3 days without a call from a 

fellow member of the Resource Initiative with a referral from a veteran who came into their office. So, yes. 

Mr. DONNELLY. So have you found that there is a lot of people 

trying real hard, but it is like a bunch of cars driving past each 

other and nobody knows what is going on in the other cars? 

Mr. DAVIS. Yes, sir. Exactly. 

Mr. DONNELLY. Okay. Well, I promise you we will work real hard 

with you, take the lessons you have given us, and try to make sure 

we can spread the things you are doing to the rest of the country. 

Thank you again, sir. 

Ms. BUERKLE. Thank you. 

I now yield to the gentleman from Florida, Mr. Bilirakis. 

Mr. BILIRAKIS. Thank you so much for holding this hearing, 

Madam Chair. I appreciate it. 

Thank you for your service, sir. 

We are pretty active in our congressional district. I have an advisory council. We have a resource fair on an annual basis. We just 

finished a jobs fair that was very well attended. I visit the VFWs, 

as does my staff, American Legions, what have you, and also go to 

the VA. 

But what more can we do as a congressional office. I know that 

one of the reasons you are here is to testify on behalf of how we 

can bring the VA closer to our veterans. What more can we do? Do 

you have any suggestions? You know, we can always do more. 

What can we do as a congressional office to further that goal? 

Mr. DAVIS. Sir, it sounds like you are doing a lot of the things 

that I would suggest. But one thing I often point out to congresVerDate Mar 15 2010 12:41 Apr 02, 2013 Jkt 073290 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 I:\VA\73290.XXX 73290

dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING
12 

sional staff is that veterans, when they come to a congressional 

staff member, have never, many times, filed a claim or even 

interacted with the VA for the first time. They are just under that 

assumption that they are a veteran who is eligible for something 

and in turn is not getting what they deserve. 

So that reverse referral to a local advocate, whether it be an 

American Legion service officer or whether it be a county person 

or a State person I think is the first step I would take. Because, 

oftentimes, your staff is very overwhelmed and may not know everything about the local benefits or the State benefits on top of the 

Federal, or vice versa. So a reverse referral would be a big suggestion I would make. 

Mr. BILIRAKIS. Thank you very much. 

I yield back, Madam Chair. 

Ms. BUERKLE. I now yield to the gentleman from New Jersey, 

Mr. Runyan. 

Mr. RUNYAN. No questions. I yield back. 

Ms. BUERKLE. Thank you. 

We will wait for Mr. Reyes. 

Mr. Reyes, I know you just joined us. We have Mr. Davis here, 

if you have any questions. 

Mr. REYES. I have no questions. 

Ms. BUERKLE. I guess that is it for questions, Mr. Davis. Again, 

thank you very much for your testimony and for your comments. 

You are now excused. 

Mr. DAVIS. Thank you, Madam Chair. 

Ms. BUERKLE. I invite the second panel to the witness table. 

With us today is Chaplain John Morris, the Joint Force Headquarters Chaplain from the Minnesota National Guard. 

Chaplain Morris is a Colonel in the Minnesota National Guard 

and is the co-founder of the Beyond the Yellow Ribbon Initiative 

which facilitates collaborations between the Minnesota National 

Guard, VA, and local faith-based and community resources to support the reintegration of Minnesota’s National Guard combat veterans. 

I would like to thank you, Chaplain Morris, for your service to 

our Nation and for your very important advocacy efforts. 

I will now yield to Mr. Donnelly to introduce our next witness. 

Mr. DONNELLY. Thank you, Madam Chair; and it is a great honor 

to have Dr. MacDermid Wadsworth. 

Madam Chair, fellow Health Subcommittee Members, I would 

like to introduce you to Dr. Shelley MacDermid Wadsworth, an Associate Dean of Purdue University’s College of Health and Human 

Sciences. As a Notre Dame grad, it pains me to mention Purdue, 

but I will do so anyhow. 

Dr. MacDermid Wadsworth also serves as director of Purdue’s 

Military Family Research Institute which works to improve the 

lives of servicemembers and their families in Indiana and across 

the country by strengthening and supporting the efforts of military 

and civilian organizations to provide services, education, and training to military families. I just want to mention Purdue has done 

an extraordinary job with this, and we are incredibly grateful. 

We are grateful to Dr. MacDermid Wadsworth, who knows how 

many people in our State serve and how dedicated the families and 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING
13 

everyone is. And I just want to say that your work is making a difference in the lives of everyone, not only in our State but in the 

country. Thank you very much. 

Ms. BUERKLE. Thank you, Mr. Donnelly, and welcome, Dr. 

MacDermid Wadsworth. 

Also joining our second panel is Dr. David Rudd and Dr. George 

Ake. Earlier in my opening comments I mentioned we had a symposium in Syracuse, and I was honored to welcome both of you to 

Syracuse for that event. I don’t believe it was snowing that day, 

and we had a very successful symposium. 

Dr. Rudd is the Dean of the College of Social and Behavioral 

Sciences at the University of Utah, where he also serves as Scientific Director for the National Center for Veterans Studies. In addition, he was recently elected Distinguished Practitioner and 

Scholar of the National Academies of Practice in Psychology. 

Dr. Rudd is also a Gulf War veteran, and I would like to thank 

him for his honorable service to our Nation in uniform and for his 

continued dedication to improving the lives of his fellow veterans 

through his research. Thank you, Dr. Rudd. 

Dr. Ake is an Assistant Professor of Medical Psychology at the 

Duke University Medical Center, and he is here today on behalf of 

the American Psychological Association. 

Dr. Ake is a child psychologist and has worked extensively with 

the National Child Traumatic Stress Network, where his work has 

focused on assisting children and families who have experienced 

stressful and traumatic life events, including a military deployment 

and its aftermath. He is a recent winner of the Durham, North 

Carolina, Police Department’s Community Service Award, and it is 

an honor to have him with us today. 

I thank you all very much for being here this afternoon. I am 

eager to begin our discussion. 

So, Chaplain Morris, we will start with you. Thank you very 

much. 

STATEMENTS OF CHAPLAIN JOHN J. MORRIS, JOINT FORCE 

HEADQUARTERS CHAPLAIN, MINNESOTA NATIONAL GUARD; 

SHELLEY MACDERMID WADSWORTH, PH.D., DIRECTOR, MILITARY FAMILY RESEARCH INSTITUTE, PURDUE UNIVERSITY; 

M. DAVID RUDD, PH.D., ABPP, DEAN, COLLEGE OF SOCIAL 

AND BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES, SCIENTIFIC DIRECTOR, NATIONAL CENTER FOR VETERAN STUDIES, UNIVERSITY OF 

UTAH; AND GEORGE AKE III, PH.D., ASSISTANT PROFESSOR 

OF MEDICAL PSYCHOLOGY, DUKE UNIVERSITY, AMERICAN 

PSYCHOLOGICAL ASSOCIATION 

STATEMENT OF CHAPLAIN JOHN J. MORRIS 

Colonel MORRIS. Chair Buerkle, Ranking Member Michaud, and 

Members of the Subcommittee, thank you for the honor of being 

here. 

I am Chaplain Morris. I am the State Chaplain of the Minnesota 

National Guard, and I am fortunate to be the co-founder of the Beyond the Yellow Ribbon Program that you made the national 

standard for the reintegration of the Reserve and the Guard. I am 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING
14 

a three-tour combat veteran. I am the son of a combat veteran. I 

am the father of two combat veterans. 

I am here as a fan of the VA. I am a customer. I am also a close 

collaborator, and my daughters are customers. The Minnesota 

Guard has had a very productive relationship with the VA, and I 

think we have something to share with the Nation, but I will encapsulate it in this story from Saturday. 

I was at an event for 2,500 of our families whose soldiers are 

now serving in Kuwait. We were feeding them. A mother came up 

to me and said, you don’t remember me. My son came home with 

a local infantry unit from Kosovo, and you were at the reintegration event, and I asked you to help my son. I want you to see him. 

He is doing so much better. 

I sat down with the young man. I indeed had pulled him out of 

the registration line that morning 30 days after returning from a 

9-month tour in Kosovo. He was high on crack. We immediately 

took him to the emergency room of the local hospital in Rochester, 

Minnesota. After a 72-hour hold there, he was taken to St. Cloud 

VA for inpatient chemical dependency treatment. And he was 

proud to tell me a year and a half later he was straight, he was 

sober, he was married, and introduced me to his wife, who was 

pregnant with twins, and he was facing a tremendous future. That 

is the collaboration that we have with the VA in Minnesota. 

We have done the RINGS 1 and 2 study with our First Brigade, 

which is on its second combat deployment. The Minneapolis VA has 

done a tremendous longitudinal study with our soldiers and their 

families that I think is going to set straight some of the mythology 

around PTSD and over-reporting of that problem and an under-reporting of the impact that healthy community reintegration-based 

programs can have on returning veterans. 

We have pushed VA teams far forward to enroll our demobilizing 

soldiers at demob sites around the country. We have had the VA 

actually train our command and staff—I was a part of this in 

2009—preparing to deploy to Iraq. We had the VA train our commanding general and all of our leading staff in the polytrauma unit 

in Minnesota. We got a first-hand look at what war is really like, 

the impact of the weaponry of war and on the human body and 

what combat trauma can do. 

So we have a good relationship, but I think the VA could do even 

better, and so I am here today to talk about some of those problems 

and some of the solutions. 

The VA suffers under the perception of being a very isolated institution, and it has a stigma. All we hear about it is bad things. 

We rarely hear the great things they do. From loss of laptops and 

compromise of our security to homeless veterans who commit suicide, the mantra of bad news about the VA is steady, and it really 

affects the community’s view of the VA. And I can say that as a 

person who deals every day with community leaders throughout 

Minnesota. 

The institutionalism of the VA which Andy Davis so well alluded 

to is a problem and it keeps the VA inside its building and not always out in the community sharing its knowledge with us who are 

on the ground working with the majority of the veterans. 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING
15 

I think, unfortunately, the steady mantra about PTSD, 25 percent—whatever it is, the CBO report that came out last week saying 21 percent—I think it is over-reported, and it is not substantiated, and it has created an impression that the VA is the only institution that can solve combat trauma, that all veterans have it, 

and it is contributing to a double-digit unemployment rate among 

our veterans—which is truly the problem we have. It is getting 

work. It is not getting mental health care. 

Minnesota is the land of 10,000 mental health and chemical dependency treatment centers. We like to say it is 10,000 lakes, but 

it is 10,000 treatment centers. There are plenty of people who want 

to help us with mental health. That is not our biggest problem. 

And we are caught in some kind of a loop between the VA and Congress trumpeting a problem, when the bigger problem is being underfunded and underaddressed. And we can fix it, and we can do 

it in Minnesota, and we are going to do it. 

We have gotten the VA to come out into the community and work 

with us, get on to our drill floors and talk to our families. We have 

had the VA come and meet with our physicians and share the 

knowledge that the VA has so that the provider out in rural America can take care of families and veterans. We have synchronized 

services so that when somebody leaves VA care they can tie into 

Yellow Ribbon communities to get the care they need. And we have 

asked the VA to not only publish what they know in academic journals but to share with lay people through veterans organizations 

and through our political and elected representatives so that news 

can get down and counter the steady stream of bad news. 

I think the VA’s one important part of the reintegration process—it is not the only part, and it is not the most important part— 

the most important part of the reintegration process is the community. It is our responsibility to bring our soldiers all the way home 

and to take care of their families. We sent them to war. It is our 

job to bring them back. The VA is a partner in that, but it is not 

a stand-alone partner. It is not the only partner. It is a partner. 

Every State that is empowered through its Governor to partner 

with its VA will be an effective State in reaching its communities 

and empowering them to bring their veterans all the way home. At 

the end of the day, we are going to live in communities, we are 

going to serve in communities, and if we can’t learn to be productive in our communities, it won’t matter how good the VA is. We 

still won’t be all the way home. 

Madam Chair, thank you for this privilege to be here; and, Committee Members, thank you for what you are doing. It is an honor 

to be here, and it has been a great privilege for me as part of my 

career to have this chance to share this with you. 

[The prepared statement of John Morris appears on p. 43.] 

Ms. BUERKLE. Thank you very much Chaplain Morris. 

Dr. MacDermid Wadsworth. 

STATEMENT OF SHELLEY MACDERMID WADSWORTH, PH.D. 

Ms. WADSWORTH. Thank you. 

Chairwoman Buerkle, Congressman Michaud, and distinguished 

Members of the Committee, thank you for convening this hearing; 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING
16 

and thank you to Representative Donnelly for such a kind introduction. 

I am proud to be a faculty member at Purdue University, the 

land grant institution for the great State of Indiana, and also to 

direct the Military Family Research Institute. I am pleased to report that we were involved in several innovative collaborations involving the VA. Our vision is to make a difference for families who 

serve. 

My institute has created or participates in collaborations involving VA partners in the areas of homelessness, higher education, vocational rehabilitation, behavioral health care, outreach to community partners, and research. Our higher education initiative, for example, is putting mechanisms in place that could help every student, servicemember, and veteran in Indiana and potentially reduce GI Bill costs with the help of VA certifying officials, the Indiana Commission on Higher Education, and others. 

The vocational rehabilitation effort for which we serve as the 

evaluation partner has been a national leader in placing wounded 

warriors in employment and keeping them there; and, again, without VA professionals at the table, this would not have occurred. 

Based on these experiences, I know that successful collaborations 

are possible, can benefit military and veterans’ families significantly, and can contribute substantively to the VA mission. 

I identify several keys to success in my written statement but 

will focus my remarks here on challenges and opportunities that 

might benefit from policy or legislative attention. 

Number one: Create clear points of entry for prospective collaborators in multiple VA tracks. Prospective community partners, particularly those located at a physical distance from a medical center, 

find it very difficult to determine whom to approach to partner, and 

the independence of the medical centers means that there must be 

a local connection. The VA Office of Faith-Based and Neighborhood 

Partnerships is very important, but there are still many untapped 

partners who can multiply the reach of the VA. 

Number two: Develop mechanisms to separate the ‘‘wheat’’ from 

the ‘‘chaff’’ among prospective partners. VA professionals are understandably wary of showing favoritism to particular organizations. Unfortunately, this means that reputable partners with 

much to offer may get held at arm’s length, the same as bad actors. 

Number three: Reduce structural barriers to collaboration. It is 

difficult to get information from the VA sometimes. It is difficult 

for outsiders to engage in research with VA populations. It is difficult for community partners to find and connect with military and 

veteran families, particularly in low-density areas. Sometimes it 

feels as though there is a fence around the VA. 

Number four: Provide tangible incentives and benefits to community and VA partners who collaborate effectively. Collaborations do 

take resources, but they also can generate resources by attracting 

additional contributions of skills, people, money, or information. 

Compared to the costs of services that don’t get used and clients 

who don’t get served, collaborations can be very cost-effective instruments. 

It has been our great honor to work to make a difference for military and veteran families. We are inspired by the commitment and 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING
17 

dedication shown by professionals in many sectors who share that 

mission, and we are eager to continue collaborating to make positive change. 

Thank you for all you do to try to make sure that our Nation’s 

veterans receive the care and support they have been promised. 

This concludes my statement. Thank you for your kind attention. 

[The prepared statement of Shelley MacDermid Wadsworth appears on p. 46.] 

Ms. BUERKLE. Thank you very much, Dr. MacDermid Wadsworth. 

Dr. Rudd, you may proceed. 

STATEMENT OF M. DAVID RUDD, PH.D., ABPP 

Mr. RUDD. Chairwoman Buerkle, Ranking Member Michaud, and 

Members of the Subcommittee, I very much appreciate the opportunity to testify on behalf of the National Center for Veterans 

Studies and the University of Utah. 

Chairwoman Buerkle, I am very pleased and would tell you enthusiastic about seeing you taking leadership on what I believe to 

be a critical issue on the reintegration of veterans into society after 

having served so admirably in terms of our Nation and our needs. 

You have my written statement. I am not going to repeat much 

of what is in the statement. I do want to highlight a few critical 

points. 

I want to comment on Colonel Morris’ note about the issue of reintegration and misunderstanding. 

I think it is important to recognize that, since the Gulf War, less 

than 1 percent of Americans have served in the Armed Forces. This 

is a tremendous shift from World War II when almost 9 percent 

served; Korea and Vietnam, both greater than 2 percent served. 

And as we have fewer and fewer Americans serving in the Armed 

Forces the possibility for misunderstanding, the possibility for difficulty in reintegration is compounded; and I think that probably 

speaks to the issue that was raised by Colonel Morris, which I 

think is a vital one. 

I would like to speak about a couple of areas of research and 

highlight a few things that I think sheds some light on the opportunity for reintegration, in two areas in particular: one, universities; and, two, organizations, communities of faith and local 

churches. 

Some recent work by the Pew Research Center revealed that 27 

percent of veterans reported that readjustment to civilian life was 

either difficult, somewhat difficult, or very difficult. The survey also 

revealed significant burdens of service identified by servicemembers, with 48 percent reporting strains in family relationships, 

47 percent frequently feeling irritable or angry, 44 percent reporting problems reentering civilian life, and 37 percent reporting posttrauma symptoms. This doesn’t necessarily mean post-traumatic 

stress disorder but trauma-related symptoms. Despite the fact that 

many veterans transition from military life with few problems, I 

think these data indicate the significance of the problem, and it has 

been fairly profound over the course of the last 5 years. 

The Pew data offer insight into the source of the problem as well, 

particularly in terms of emotional and psychological adjustment. 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING
18 

Among those having experienced combat, 50 percent or more report 

post-trauma symptoms, a difficulty with family relationships. When 

they were queried about factors reducing the probability for successful reentry into civilian life, veterans identified traumatic experiences and physical injury as the most significant variables. 

Of importance for this hearing, veterans identified attending 

church at least weekly as the most important variable associated 

with an easy and successful reentry into civilian life. A remarkable 

67 percent identified attending church once a week or more as 

making reentry easier. 

Clearly, the social connections and support offered by religious 

communities and institutions around the Nation are essential for 

our veterans. I would tell you that they really possess enormous 

opportunity to help veterans transition. I think that Colonel Morris 

spoke to this issue in terms of stigma that is associated with mental health problems, with PTSD in particular. The opportunity for 

intervention, the opportunity for assistance in local churches is 

truly remarkable. 

I would tell you that, of the veterans that I know, the veterans 

that I have worked with would much rather go to local clergy than 

to go to a clinical psychologist, to go to a psychiatrist, to go to a 

mental health specialist. With the right training, with the right resources, that kind of a partnership is precisely one that we need 

to pursue; and I would like to see the VA take a lead in that area. 

Now, I can tell you a little bit about my own work that I think 

has helped clarify the severity and the magnitude of the problems 

in terms of emotional and psychological issues faced by veterans, 

and a very specific subset of veterans that I would speak to are 

student veterans. 

We recently did a national survey looking at student veterans 

transitioning from the service back on to university campuses, and 

I would tell you that, arguably, this is the second-best place to capture veterans, is on university campuses, that outside of the medical centers, outside of the Veterans Benefit Administration, this is 

where you will find veterans. 

If you look at the data that are in my statement, you will find 

that the numbers are fairly profound in terms of the rates and the 

magnitude of the reported problems. Now, what is interesting is 

that those veterans are on campus, those veterans are functioning 

on campus, and I would tell you that they are functioning quite 

well, but they need assistance. Making sure that campuses are well 

prepared is something that is critical for us to do. 

So I would encourage you, in terms of looking for partnerships 

and expanding partnerships that the VA has already pursued, universities are a wonderful place, communities, organizations, institutions of faith, local churches are a wonderful place. Those are 

places where veterans will go, those are places where veterans 

don’t feel the severity and the magnitude of stigma, and the opportunity to help is tremendous. So I would encourage you to think 

about those two areas specifically. 

I would be happy to talk to you in a little bit more detail if you 

have questions afterward. But, Chairwoman Buerkle, thank you 

very much for your time. 

[The prepared statement of David Rudd appears on p. 49.] 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING
19 

Ms. BUERKLE. Thank you, Dr. Rudd. 

Dr. Ake. 

STATEMENT OF GEORGE AKE III, PH.D. 

Mr. AKE. Good afternoon, Chairwoman Buerkle, Ranking Member Michaud, and Members of the Subcommittee. Thank you for 

the opportunity to testify on behalf of the 154,000 members and affiliates of the American Psychological Association regarding the collaboration between the Department of Veterans Affairs and community organizations to support veterans and their families. 

As a child psychologist at Duke University Medical Center and 

with the National Child Traumatic Stress Network, my work focuses on assisting children and families who have experienced 

traumatic life events, including military combat and its aftermath. 

I am honored to speak with you today about the collaborative work 

that I and my colleagues are engaged in to support our Nation’s 

military and veteran families. 

Collaboration among all sectors of society is needed to support 

the health and well-being of veterans and their families. This includes key partnerships with policymakers, government agencies, 

universities, the health care community, and the faith-based community. 

Scientific evidence continues to identify psychological and neurological disorders, including post-traumatic stress disorder, depression, suicidal ideation, and traumatic brain injury as some of the 

signature wounds of recent conflicts. While psychologists and other 

health professionals play an essential role in helping veterans and 

families to address these challenges, partnerships and collaborations with other sectors of society are also critical. 

While there are numerous specific programs for veterans and 

their families, many families rely upon the support of faith-based 

providers as a first point of contact. The members of this community who are here today will address these issues, but I want to 

underscore the extraordinary value of our collaborative mental 

health work with faith-based providers related to military and veteran families, a partnership which enriches our work in many 

ways. 

I would like to express my deep appreciation to you, Chairwoman 

Buerkle, for your leadership in advancing collaboration between 

the mental health faith-based communities and military and veteran families. The unique military and veterans mental health 

workshop that you hosted for faith-based providers in your district 

in December served as a wonderful example of the collaboration 

that is possible across sectors. I was honored to join the distinguished panel of experts that you assembled. Such events help to 

break down barriers and foster partnerships that benefit veterans 

and their families. Replicating this training in other congressional 

districts could serve as a valuable resource. 

Collaboration between military and faith-based and other community systems is especially important as we consider 2010 Department of Defense data which estimates that 44 percent of the 

1.4 million active duty and National Guard-Reserve personnel who 

deployed to combat missions as a part of OEF, OIF, and OND are 

parents. DoD also estimates that nearly 2 million children in the 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING
20 

United States have parents who are active duty or Reserve personnel, many of whom have experienced multiple combat deployments. 

Some military families face severe challenges during reintegration, such as a parent who returns changed due to the winds of war 

or financial hardship, homelessness, marital discord or violence 

and other difficulties. Still other families experience the grief and 

loss associated with their loved one’s fatal combat injury or even 

suicide. These findings highlight the necessity of considering the 

context and challenges for children and families of veterans, as 

well as the role of the family in facilitating a successful transition 

to stateside service or civilian life. 

To support veterans, their families need easy access to collaborative programs and supports through VA and many other service 

sectors. As a member of the National Child Traumatic Stress Network, we are proud to contribute to such efforts. 

The NCTSN is an initiative launched by Congress in 2000 to develop a national collaborative network to improve best practices 

and standards of care for children and families affected by traumatic stress, including military families. Our 130 centers in 40 

States collaborate with many organizations, including the VA, DoD, 

the National Guard, the American Psychological Association, faithbased organizations, and many others. 

We offer evidence-based interventions, educational materials, 

curriculum for civilian providers, and much more, all available on 

the Web site. My written testimony offers many specific examples 

of this work, including a Welcome Back Veterans program at the 

Duke University for training community clinicians, a collaboration 

with the VA’s National Center for PTSD to train providers, including military chaplains, on acute stress interventions, collaboration 

with the military chaplains, and a family resilience program called 

FOCUS now being used at more than 20 military installations, a 

partnership with the TAPS program to help military families after 

the death of a loved one, and the ADAPT parenting program for 

Reserve families in Minnesota. 

In conclusion, we have seen the collaborative efforts between the 

military and veteran communities and partners such as faith-based 

providers, mental health professionals, and others have yielded effective services for our military and veteran families. The American 

Psychological Association, Duke University Medical Center, and 

the National Child Traumatic Stress Network all stand ready to 

continue our collaborative efforts with the Subcommittee, the VA, 

the DoD, our community-based partners, and the military and veteran community to address these important issues. 

Thank you for the opportunity to speak with you today and for 

your leadership and commitment to our Nation’s veterans and their 

families. 

[The prepared statement of George Ake appears on p. 51.] 

Ms. BUERKLE. Thank you all very much. 

I will now yield myself 5 minutes for questions. I will start with 

Chaplain—Colonel Morris. As an experienced chaplain and someone who has been in the military and a veteran, first of all, do you 

think there is value with the faith-based community; but, beyond 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING
21 

that, how can we integrate that transition using faith-based services? 

Colonel MORRIS. Madam Chair, there certainly is value in collaboration between faith-based institutions and the VA and being 

a part of the reintegration process. We do this in Minnesota in a 

variety of ways. We train clergy in every community that wants to 

be a yellow-ribbon community in how to help military families during deployments, and then how to help returning combat veterans 

reintegrate into their community and into their family. 

Another thing that faith-based organizations can do is be a part 

of the employment process. The military does not provide guidance 

counseling, nor should it, to veterans preparing to leave in how to 

reenter this free market globally oriented economy. It is a tough 

transition to find a job here when you have been hauling a rifle 

around the mountains of Afghanistan. Faith-based organizations 

have employed people who have done it. Life-to-life transfer, those 

skills, job-seeking support groups and faith-based organizations are 

a grass-roots, easy-to-tap sort of a resource that doesn’t cost anybody anything, and it provides that sense of community that a veteran needs to hang in there to find that job. This is just a couple 

of examples. There are plenty more that can be done to tap that 

virtually untapped segment of our community. 

Ms. BUERKLE. Thank you. Dr. Ake, what is, if any, the VA’s involvement with the National Child Traumatic Stress Network? 

Mr. AKE. To my knowledge there are many different collaborative 

efforts, including a Webinar tomorrow, a master speaking series 

from Zero to Three, and the National Child Traumatic Stress Network focused on making sure services are available to veteran families. And so the network often draws on the expertise of many different entities working with military and veteran families to speak 

on their perspective on how to help them. 

Ms. BUERKLE. So that is your group, not the VA. Are you working directly with the VA? 

Mr. AKE. I think that is one example as far as drawing on VA 

speakers for the master speaker series, but there are others related 

to the Adapt program in Minnesota where there is an after-deployment adapting parenting tools program pulling from several different groups, but I would need to defer to the partners that are 

actually doing those initiatives. 

Ms. BUERKLE. Thank you. Dr. Wadsworth, in your testimony you 

talk about structural barriers more so with the veteran population. 

Can you expand on that a little bit? 

Ms. WADSWORTH. Yes. I think because the Veterans Administration and those who care about the Veterans Administration care a 

lot about making sure that veterans privacy is protected, making 

sure that veterans are never subjected to care that is of substandard quality. There are many rules and policies and restrictions and checks and balances in place to try to ensure that all 

those things happen, but the result is that it can make it very difficult to move forward in collaboration. 

My primary identity is as a researcher. If I would like to conduct 

a study of a VA population, the study must be led by a Veterans 

Administration principal investigator, and that is a structural barVerDate Mar 15 2010 12:41 Apr 02, 2013 Jkt 073290 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 I:\VA\73290.XXX 73290

dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING
22 

rier because it means I have to find somebody who would agree to 

let me partner with them to do the study. 

We have a partner who we work with to do outreach. They actually arranged for us to receive the funding instead of them, because 

we can work with hotels and do logistics more easily than they can. 

So people find creative workarounds. But these same policies, in 

many cases that are put in place to protect, end up serving as barriers. 

Ms. BUERKLE. Thank you. And last, Dr. Rudd, you mentioned 

education being the second-best place to serve as a safety net to locate veterans. Do you have any suggestions for how we can integrate that piece into education with our universities and our colleges and our community colleges? 

Mr. RUDD. Well, I think there are a number of things we can do. 

The VA has already implemented the Vet Success on Campus program, which provides actually benefits counselors and rehabilitation counselors that work on university campuses, so they are hired 

and employed by the VA but actually are placed on the university 

campus, which is a very good program. 

But I would tell you that the kind of barrier that exists is a really simple one. So if you take that program as an example of which 

the University of Utah just started participating this year, the VA 

has broadly expanded that program over the course of the last 

year. One of the issues for us, we ultimately were able to work 

through it, was that we didn’t actually get to be involved in the 

interview process for the hiring of that employee. So we had two 

employees hired. We didn’t get to participate in the interview process because it is a VA employee, but yet they are going to work full 

time on our campus. Real partnering means that you participate 

fully. It doesn’t mean we get to make the decision, but it means 

we get to be intimately involved in that partnership, and I think 

expanding that program would be wonderful. 

The VA is also experimenting with the placement of psychologists in counseling centers, and so if you look in the University of 

Texas at Austin, this past year they hired a VA psychologist to 

work specifically in the counseling center to provide therapy, given 

issues of stigma at local VA medical centers, and these are individuals that are trained very specifically in the treatment of combatrelated trauma. That is a wonderful program. It would be nice to 

see that expanded and, again, to have that be a true partnership 

so that you don’t necessarily get to dictate who is hired but you are 

involved in the process of hiring and making sure that it is the 

right person for the campus. 

The last thing that I would suggest is that universities as a 

whole could do a better job at probably the issue that Colonel Morris spoke to, which is really giving credit for military experience. 

We need to do a better job at giving soldiers credit for life experiences and technical training that they have, and providing college 

credit for that that facilitates employment. 

So I would tell you on the university side, we can do a better job. 

And actually our center is going to pursue some effort nationally 

about trying to coordinate that in terms of giving academic credit, 

facilitating the employment picture for veterans. 

Ms. BUERKLE. Thank you all very much. 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING
23 

I now yield 5 minutes to the Ranking Member, Mr. Michaud. 

Mr. MICHAUD. Thank you, Madam Chair. Once again I would 

like to thank the four panelists for your testimony this afternoon. 

Colonel Morris, what would you say is the biggest difference 

there is between reintegration between Guard and Reserves as opposed to the Active military? 

Colonel MORRIS. Sir, I have done it both ways. Andy and I spent 

a lot of time talking about this. I think that the Federal soldier, 

sailor, airman, and marine, the Active Duty or the reservist, have 

the most difficult challenge. Generally they are returning to a place 

different than they served, and often if they are a Reservist, their 

unit has been pulled together from diverse geographic locations, 

and they are going home alone or in ones and twos. I have gone 

to war as a person all by myself, the Army of one, and it is not 

fun to come home as the Army of one. Guard units generally return 

as a community, out of an armory located in a community; they 

have built-in camaraderie and community support. I think the 

Guard actually has an advantage in terms of reintegration. 

I think the toughest organization for reintegration is the United 

States Marine Corps, an elite, proud group. And elite warriors 

across the services that are serving on Active Duty have a very 

tough challenge coming back. They leave a very community, they 

have a lot of secrets, and they come back to a public that absolutely 

does not understand what they have done, and they are by themselves. They have the hardest challenge, no doubt. 

Mr. MICHAUD. Thank you. 

Dr. Rudd, you mentioned the Pew Research Center, and part of 

the study had talked about—you mentioned 44 percent of the post9/11 veterans say their readjustment to civilian life was difficult by 

contrast to just 25 percent of veterans who served in earlier eras. 

What do you distinguish—or do you know in this study why the 

difference? Is it because if you look at what is happening in Iraq 

and Afghanistan, a huge influx of Guard and Reserves, or do you 

think there is a distinction between Guard and Reserves in the readjustment versus Active military? 

Mr. RUDD. I think that is a great question. I would tell you, it 

is somewhat speculative, it is probably a combination of those 

things. I think reintegration is problematic from one perspective in 

that fewer and fewer Americans serve in the Armed Forces, and so 

fewer and fewer understand the issues that military face. 

I think, too, I think a larger portion of the combat mission has 

fallen to Guard and reservists, which makes it a little bit more difficult in terms of reintegration. The primary problem, if you look 

at the West, if you look at Utah as an example, one of the challenges for our Guard individuals is the dispersion after they return, 

that they are dispersed into relatively low populated areas, limited 

access to service, and limited access to one another, so that there 

is limited access to one another. 

One of the wonderful things about student veterans is that they 

have an opportunity to gather on a campus, they have an opportunity to identify on a campus, and that helps. And I think that 

that is a part of what churches do. I think that they provide an 

opportunity to gather, provide that critical emotional support. 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING
24 

So I think it is probably a confluence of factors and that these 

have been unique wars. It is a unique time in our history, and the 

way that we structured the military is very much unique relative 

to Vietnam, relative to Korea, and relative to World War II, and 

as a result I think the reintegration challenges are unique. 

Mr. MICHAUD. Thank you. 

Dr. Wadsworth, you discussed in your testimony the structural 

barriers to collaboration as it pertains to the VA system. Do you 

find the same barriers are there dealing with the Department of 

Defense? 

Ms. WADSWORTH. There certainly are some barriers. I would say 

that over the course of this war, DoD has really come to understand that they cannot rely on simply their own resources to meet 

the needs, particularly of the Reserve component, and with the 

closing of bases and the increased reliance on the Reserve component, they must partner with communities. I think they still are 

working out their models, but there are many, many examples of 

partnerships really permeating throughout the country. For example, an extensive partnership with the cooperative extension system, which means that DoD now has a reach into every county in 

the country. 

Mr. MICHAUD. My last question is for Colonel Morris. How many 

community organizations does Beyond the Yellow Ribbon Initiative 

work with? Is it pretty much throughout your State? 

Colonel MORRIS. Sir, we have 73 communities that the Governor 

has officially recognized as yellow-ribbon communities, dozens of 

corporations and different entities, faith-based organizations, that 

have been recognized as well. 

The adjutant general’s plan is that every community in Minnesota that has a National Guard, Army Reserve, Navy Reserve facility will be a yellow-ribbon community. We anticipate being well 

over a hundred. Each community has to train every aspect of their 

community: faith-based, law enforcement, behavioral mental 

health, education and employers. So it is an extensive effort to get 

every community online to do what they really want to do, and that 

is go Beyond the Yellow Ribbon and take care of their military families and their veterans. 

Mr. MICHAUD. Great. Thank you. Thank you very much, Madam 

Chair. 

Ms. BUERKLE. Thank you, Mr. Michaud. I now yield to the gentleman from New Jersey, Mr. Runyan. 

Mr. RUNYAN. Thank you, Madam Chair. I know, Dr. Rudd just 

kind of answered my question in just giving the opportunity to 

meet and talk, but I can tell you firsthand in my district there is 

actually a faith-based hospital system that does a lot of the mental 

health for the joint base there in my district. And it has been a tremendous help because it really comes on—especially when you talk 

about the West, but in my district, too, access to care is a huge part 

of it. And I think what the chaplain is really saying, and I want 

to ask you this, because that is the ultimate issue is the access, 

whether it is religious based or whether it is on a college campus. 

In the programs you run, what is that initial hurdle? What got 

that ball rolling to make this a community-based—to get the community involved? Because I know the community on many levels 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING
25 

in the Guard—in dealing with the Guard is involved. But on this 

aspect of it, what was the one thing that got the ball rolling and 

allowed it to happen? 

Colonel MORRIS. Well, two things, sir. Our previous adjutant general hired me with this statement: I don’t want my soldiers treated 

the way I was when I came home from Vietnam. Go fix that. 

Pretty big challenge. But what he was saying is I don’t want my 

soldiers stigmatized by the people who sent them to war. So that 

put it right down at the community level. 

It is very obvious in Minnesota where we have a lot of trained 

behavioral mental health professionals, chemical dependency professionals, that anybody needing that kind of care is much more 

comfortable using their TRICARE benefits in their backyard, with 

people that they know and trust, versus traveling to a large institution that is unfamiliar to them. But helping those people understand what our peculiar set of issues might be, how to get that 

training, that was a challenge for us at first, because the people 

with that training are inside the VA. So getting them to come out 

and share the wealth of experience with the provider at the local 

level was initially a tough hurdle to overcome, and we have overcome it; and now maybe too well, because now we have a constant 

message of, ‘‘You are mentally ill, you are a victim. You went to 

war.’’ 

Most of us are not mentally ill, most of us were not traumatized 

in war. The fact of the matter is, after three combat tours, I can 

certify most of us were bored to death. We never saw anybody to 

shoot, and we never fired our weapon. We were never fired at. So 

we have a whole different set of issues to deal with. But we have 

trumpeted that issue so well that I have a steady stream of mental 

health providers offering me help, more than I could probably use. 

Good collaboration with the VA; I just don’t have enough employers. That is my next hurdle. 

Mr. RUNYAN. I think we would all agree on that as we continue 

to—our unemployment in our men and women coming home continue to rise. And with that I yield back, Chairman. 

Ms. BUERKLE. Thank you. Mr. Donnelly. 

Mr. DONNELLY. Thank you, Madam Chair. 

This would be to Dr. Rudd and Dr. Wadsworth. When you talk 

about college programs and college models that you have, is there 

any effort being put in now to, in effect, almost putting like a college, here is a model college program together, something that can 

be used at IU or at TCU or at Rice or at any other schools that 

are out there that they can almost get a turnkey program? 

Mr. RUDD. I think there are. I can tell you that actually our center is leading an effort on two fronts. One on the mental health 

front; but also more broadly, just on student reintegration, we are 

actually trying to initiate forming a national consortium to do that 

very thing, to say here are best practices on college campuses both 

in terms of how you work with distressed students, but more importantly, how you work with transitioning students from their 

education to employment. And really trying to create community 

partnerships is a piece of that, so that we can help individuals find 

jobs and make the transition. So I would tell you that there is some 

effort. 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING
26 

The other thing I would tell you is that the VA actually has been 

very proactive in this area. We have the Assistant Secretary for 

Policy and Planning is going to come visit our campus at the end 

of March for this very issue. We are looking at exploring how do 

we partner, how do we get models in place, and then how do we 

distribute and, most importantly, how do we do that quickly? 

Mr. DONNELLY. Dr. Wadsworth. 

Ms. WADSWORTH. Yes, I think the data are still not completely 

clear about exactly which strategies work the best, but we do know 

promising practices. In Indiana we have actually been working 

with institutions across the State, so we approached it right from 

the beginning at a systemic level, and we try to think about it from 

a life-cycle perspective: What do colleges and universities have to 

do to be well prepared for students when they first get there, including transfer credit; how do they best support them while they 

are there; and how do they ease the transition from the campus? 

And so we are working with systems of higher education to try 

to help them remove some of the structural barriers, and that is 

where the transfer credit issue really can come in. 

We also work closely with student veteran organizations who are 

a key element, I think, in providing a sense of home on campus 

where student veterans can find each other and help each other. 

Mr. DONNELLY. Thank you very much. 

Dr. Morris, or Chaplain Morris, one of the areas that has continued to break everyone’s hearts here is the suicide of vets, and a lot 

of these cases you hear afterwards say, Well, I saw one or two people, but they never really understood me. 

I just wonder if you have any ideas on what organizations or 

what people or what are the critical elements to best have someone 

who can understand that person when they talk to them? 

Colonel MORRIS. Sir, first of all, after Indiana beat Minnesota 

twice this year in basketball, I am struggling with depression. 

Mr. DONNELLY. Well, sir, we haven’t won a national championship in about 25 years, so we give it a good run ourselves. 

Colonel MORRIS. Minnesota tragically leads the Nation in terms 

of the National Guard in suicide, so this is an issue that has got 

the entire focus of our Governor, adjutant general, and all the staff. 

I wish I had a magic answer for you, sir. We have thrown everything against this problem that we possibly can. 

I think General Chiarelli, before he retired, his exhaustive report 

to the Army on this issue highlighted several things. We need to 

do a better job screening before people come into the military because we know that we have seen suicides of people who brought 

preexisting conditions to us. In the Minnesota Guard, most who 

committed suicide never had deployed. Some committed suicide 

prior to ever going to basic training. Something was going on in 

their lives before they came to us. 

Now, how can we all be more alert? We focus most of our effort 

on that. Is it the first sergeant, the first line leader, is it the company commander, is it the chaplain? We have decided to train them 

all down to the squad level leader. 

We have also decided to train families, and so we are working 

aggressively in all our reintegration academies to train our families 

in suicide prevention. That is a step we have never considered beVerDate Mar 15 2010 12:41 Apr 02, 2013 Jkt 073290 PO 00000 Frm 00030 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 I:\VA\73290.XXX 73290

dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING
27 

fore. We are doing that full fledged. We train local clergy, we train 

the local behavioral mental health providers. But, again, we are 

cognizant that we are fearful that we are going to create a stigma 

against the people we are actually trying to help, that, again, we 

are all mentally ill, and we know we are not. We know that society 

has a suicide problem, not just the military, but we are owning this 

problem, and we are facing it head on because these are precious 

soldiers who we have invested so much in and want so much to retain, but we haven’t found the magic bullet of the person to solve 

the problem. 

Mr. DONNELLY. Well, thank you very much for your efforts on 

this, and obviously it is a concern to all of us because these men 

and women come back having served our country, and they reach 

out, and what you hear time after time is, ‘‘I couldn’t find anybody 

who really understood what I am going through.’’ 

And so we will stay after it, but thank all of you for your help. 

Madam Chair, I yield back. Thank you. 

Ms. BUERKLE. Thank you, Mr. Donnelly. I now yield to the gentleman from Texas, Mr. Reyes. 

Mr. REYES. Thank you, Madam Chair. I appreciate the opportunity to be here. I am wondering, if we go back even to the days 

of the Romans, if they didn’t deal with these same kinds of issues. 

And I say that because I came back from Vietnam after serving 

with some really bad guys that society had said, ‘‘You have a 

choice, go to jail or go to the Army.’’ And those were very good soldiers that exemplified, the bad cards that they were dealt for many 

different reasons. 

Obviously I don’t know what happened to them after we came 

back from Vietnam. I can only use my example that having come 

back under the circumstances that we came back under, where we 

weren’t received well, we each individually wrestled with the question, what I did for the past 13 months, was that worth it for these 

people that are ungrateful? But what got me through was my family. My family and a priest that my mom said, You know, you need 

to go to Father Velazquez and have him help you through this. So 

community and family are an important part of the healing process. 

But I am wondering, for those soldiers that were dealt the bad 

hand, that went and excelled under the most difficult circumstances anybody who has been in combat can tell you it sucks. 

It is the most difficult challenge you will ever face. But they did 

it, and they excelled. I don’t know if it was because they came from 

the inner cities or they came from gangs, or whatever the situation 

was. I can tell you, they were very good soldiers that knew how to 

fight, and fought and distinguished themselves. 

So you fast-forward to today, and the situation is dramatically 

different. The country appreciates the all-volunteer force. I am a 

little bit troubled, Chaplain, by the fact that you make a statement 

that some of these people had issues when they joined the military. 

I thought we had a way of screening, because these are all volunteers in today’s military. They are supported, at least in my community, 110 percent by the people of El Paso, Texas; including Fort 

Bliss, White Sands, and Holloman. 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING
28 

So I am wondering, should the VA be doing some kind of research that includes either case histories or organizations or a community’s role in how you embrace your soldiers? Wel send them 

into combat on the drop of a hat and therefore, we better be there 

for them when they come back with nightmares and, all the things 

that a lot of us experienced but got through because of our family 

and because of a priest or a rabbi or another religion figure. Sometimes a buddy would do help get you through an experience. 

So should the VA be doing some kind of comprehensive research? 

You know, here it is centuries after the Roman legions, and before 

that the Vikings. I am just thinking, if you were in combat, no matter whether it is modern or ancient, that is pretty tough stuff that 

you have to deal with. So anybody have any thoughts on that? 

Colonel MORRIS. Sir, Chaplain Morris. First of all, thank you for 

your service and welcome home. I want to tell you something about 

your generation, sir. Referring back to my general’s challenge to 

me, don’t let this generation be treated like me. It was pointed out 

to me very quickly by Vietnam veterans that despite the stigma of 

America, you now lead this Nation in every area of productivity; 

you run our universities, our hospitals; you are our political leaders; you have attained the highest offices in the land despite the 

stigma heaped on you. And I keep using that illustration with my 

young veterans: If you could attain the position you have today, despite all you went through, we should be able to go to Mars and 

back with all the goodwill that we have today, and all the gains 

we have today are because of the pain of the Vietnam veteran. So, 

sir, I salute you and your colleagues. Welcome back, you have done 

a great job. 

Should the VA study this issue? They are, sir. The Minneapolis 

VA, the RINGS 1 and RINGS 2 study will be the definitive study 

on the challenges of reintegration, and has within it the seeds for 

understanding how to successfully bring soldiers all the way back. 

This brigade that is in Iraq today from the Minnesota Guard is 

under the research of the Minneapolis VA, and I think when this 

longitudinal study is put together, we are going to have the answers to the questions that you raise. But I do think, sir, we have 

to do a better job in the all-volunteer Army screening for prior 

mental health issues. 

I intervened personally in Iraq in five cases where soldiers were 

suicidal. They were on medication prior to enlisting in the military, 

knew they couldn’t enlist if they took and owned up to what they 

were on under the care of a psychiatrist. They stopped taking the 

medication, made it through basic, made it through advanced individual training, got into combat, and spiraled to become suicidal. 

They should have never been on the battlefield. 

We do not provide much screening for mental health issues other 

than to ask you, Do you have a history and are you taking any 

medication? That is a pretty low bar. So undoubtedly, I am telling 

you from firsthand, we have taken people in and we are taking people in who should not be in the military because of conditions that 

they are afflicted with. We have to do a better job on the front end 

if we want to see that suicide rate go down. 

Mr. REYES. Thank you. Madam Chair, maybe that is something 

that we can pursue via a hearing at a later date, because I really 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING
29 

do think it is important, especially if we have that sense that there 

are those that are coming into an all-volunteer force. Maybe we 

ought to find out what percentage you would think that they were. 

But it is something worth pursuing. 

Ms. BUERKLE. It certainly is worth pursuing. Thank you all very 

much for your testimony and for answering our questions, and you 

are all dismissed. Thank you. 

I invite the third panel to the witness table. Joining us on our 

third panel is Reverend E. Terri LaVelle, director of the Center for 

Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships in the Office of the 

Secretary for the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs; and Chaplain Michael McCoy, Sr., associate director for the National Chaplain Center for Veterans Health Administration in the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs. 

Before we begin your testimonies, I would like to thank Chaplain 

McCoy for his service to the Navy. 

Reverend LaVelle, you may proceed. 

STATEMENTS OF REV. E. TERRI LAVELLE, DIRECTOR, CENTER 

FOR FAITH-BASED AND NEIGHBORHOOD PARTNERSHIPS, 

OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS; AND CHAPLAIN MICHAEL MCCOY, SR., ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR, NATIONAL CHAPLAIN CENTER, VETERANS HEALTH ADMINISTRATION, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF 

VETERANS AFFAIRS 

STATEMENT OF REVEREND E. TERRI LAVELLE 

Reverend LAVELLE. Chairman Buerkle, Ranking Member 

Michaud, and Members of the Subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today to discuss VA’s outreach to 

faith-based, nonprofit community leaders and organizations to better equip them to work with our veterans, their family survivors, 

and caregivers. 

As director of the Center for Faith-Based and Neighborhood 

Partnerships since September 2009, every day I draw on my experience as a registered nurse, ordained minister, and program director to connect faith-based nonprofit and community leaders to the 

people, programs, and services VA offers our veterans. Our primary 

goal, focus, and mission is to get our veterans the help they need 

and deserve. 

The Center for Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships, 

along with VA colleagues from across the country, work hard to develop strong partnerships with faith-based, nonprofit and community leaders and to provide them with the information on VA services and invite them to participate in VA programs. 

Every day, servicemembers are returning home to stay, some 

after multiple deployments. After returning home—returning home 

can be challenging. Often I hear stories about how difficult it is for 

these veterans to connect with family, settle into a new routine, 

and find work. These challenges may seem commonplace to us, but 

they represent unique stresses for our veterans. Many veterans 

seek help and support from family, their place of worship, or their 

community. When they do, we at the Center for Faith-Based and 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING
30 

Neighborhood Partnerships make sure these individuals are well 

equipped to provide information on VA’s programs and services. 

Just as important, we make sure that every leader knows at 

least one VA staff person he or she can call on when working with 

a veteran, someone who can act as a resource and help them help 

the veteran in need and find useful VA programs and services. We 

do this by cohosting outreach events across the country to introduce faith and community leaders to the programs and services VA 

provides. We try to help these leaders understand how to work 

with VA and other partners and, in doing so, expand and enhance 

the ministries and programs they currently have in place that can 

serve veterans. 

For example, sometimes the only thing keeping a veteran from 

getting the health or mental health or benefit services he or she 

needs from the VA is not having a way to get to the necessary clinic or office, so an organization may want to provide transportation 

through their existing transportation ministry, providing each veteran with a dependable free ride. The organization can work with 

VA’s voluntary service office, which is located at every VA medical 

center, to coordinate a volunteer transportation program. Volunteer 

services is ready with all the information the organization needs to 

spring into action. 

In addition, many faith-based organizations have counseling ministries or programs unfamiliar with the unique challenges veterans 

face returning home—and their families. VA chaplains and social 

workers will provide training to community leaders, pastors, lay 

leaders, and support staff to help them understand the unique 

needs and challenges veterans may be facing. In all of our outreach 

efforts, VA includes both local and regional VA staff as panelists 

and roundtable participants and a VA chaplain who can provide an 

understanding on the special needs of veterans returning from deployment. 

We grow our relationships with community and faith-based leaders by hosting quarterly conference calls, maintaining an informative Web site, and sending information out on a regular basis to 

over 1,200 Listserve members, and our Listserve is growing all the 

time. We know our veterans come from a variety of different backgrounds, cultures, and faith traditions and that they represent the 

diversity that makes up our great country, so we continue to expand our outreach by developing new relationships with diverse 

communities. 

Madam Chairwoman, I believe that, without a vision, that people 

perish; but under the leadership of Secretary Shinseki and the 

Center for Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships, our veterans will not perish. We offer a vision and a plan for preparing 

faith-based and community leaders with the tools they need to 

serve our veterans in their communities. 

I would also like to extend my thanks to all of my fellow panelists and our elected officials who have served in our military for 

your service and your sacrifice. 

I am now prepared to answer any questions. 

[The prepared statement of Reverend LaVelle appears on p. 54.] 

Ms. BUERKLE. Thank you very much, Reverend LaVelle. 

Chaplain McCoy, you may proceed. 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING
31 

STATEMENT OF 

LIEUTENANT COMMANDER MICHAEL MCCOY, SR. 

Lieutenant Commander MCCOY. Chairwoman Buerkle and Ranking Member Michaud, and Members of the Subcommittee, thank 

you for the opportunity to speak about the Department of Veterans 

Affairs (VA) Chaplain Service’s outreach efforts with community 

and faith-based organizations. 

As a VA chaplain over the last 21 years and a former Navy chaplain, I have found one of my greatest joys has been working with 

veterans and providing meaningful programs to aid them in their 

healing. My testimony today will cover three programs created by 

VA chaplains to help build bridges between VA, the faith-based 

communities, and neighborhood leaders to aid in the spiritual care 

of our returning veterans and their families. 

The VA National Chaplain Center started the Veterans Community Outreach Initiative to educate community clergy about the 

spiritual and emotional needs of our returning veterans and their 

families. Nationwide, VA chaplains have conducted over 200 training events and provided education to approximately 10,000 clergy 

through this effort. As a result, clergy across the Nation are learning to help veterans identify and cope with readjustment challenges the veterans and their families face following deployment, 

identify the psychological and spiritual effects of war trauma on 

survivors, and serve as a trusted and knowledgeable resource for 

veterans to use to connect with VA. 

Just a week ago I received a phone call from a local pastor in 

Virginia who had attended one of our outreach events. He said, ‘‘I 

am very impressed by the passionate commitment and excellent resources available to veterans, and I need your help. Today a member of my church, whose son recently returned from deployment in 

Iraq, called me, hopeless, his father did, and in despair. He said 

the young man had just been arrested and put in jail in Richmond, 

Virginia. His father said his son was clearly experiencing PTSD, 

but he didn’t know how to help him. Can you help me link the veteran to the VA services he needs?’’ I promptly made the call linking 

the veteran to VA providers who could most effectively care for 

him. 

This is just one among many veterans who has benefited from 

the Veteran Community Outreach Initiative events that our chaplains are sponsoring to establish collegial relationships between VA 

chaplains and community clergy. I truly believe that a worthy goal 

of this program is for local clergy across the Nation to say, ‘‘I know 

the local VA MC chaplains. They are devoted to care for veterans 

and their families. If I call them, they will help me connect families 

who have come to me for guidance to the VA resources they need.’’ 

Each clergy who attends a VCOI event receives a tool kit, prepared by the National Chaplain Center, of books, brochures, information packets and important phone numbers and Web sites to aid 

them in providing a helpful support to the veterans and his or her 

family. 

My time here is short, so I will just briefly mention two other important VA programs. Our marriage enrichment program was developed based on concerns over the large number of stress marriages experienced by our veterans who are returning. We have disVerDate Mar 15 2010 12:41 Apr 02, 2013 Jkt 073290 PO 00000 Frm 00035 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 I:\VA\73290.XXX 73290

dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING
32 

covered that all too often the spouse who has gone to war and returned may have physical, emotional, and spiritual wounds that 

have not yet healed. These stresses often led to family crisis and 

divorce, so we began a program called Getting It Back, reclaiming 

your relationship after combat deployment. It is designed to help 

married couples develop healthy ways of interacting and relating 

with one another. Community leaders and faith-based volunteers 

collaborating with VA chaplains, psychiatrists, and social workers 

have contributed in making the program a success. 

Finally, I will mention our Heal the Healer program for returning National Guard and Reserve chaplains home from recent deployment. The program offers an open forum to share the experience and emotions associated with employment, introduces them to 

other chaplains with similar experience, and offers insight on how 

we may intervene in the future to provide appropriate and timely 

care for our chaplains returning from combat zones. The stories 

and tears in these sessions are many. And we, working and caring 

for our veterans, they too have changed our chaplains who have 

worn our uniforms in caring for partnerships and creating partnerships with local clergy, our faith group endorsers and community 

faith group leaders, working together to reach out and offer support 

to returning chaplains, veterans, and family. 

Madam Chair, thank you for the opportunity to share this opportunity with you to speak on these concerns, and I am now prepared 

to answer any questions. 

[The prepared statement of Reverend McCoy appears on p. 56.] 

Ms. BUERKLE. Thank you both very much for your testimony. I 

will now yield myself 5 minutes for questions. 

Reverend McCoy, the 200 or so training events that were conducted throughout the country, can you just expand on that a little 

bit? How do you choose the sites, how many people attend, and is 

followup done after those events? 

Lieutenant Commander MCCOY. Yes, thank you for the opportunity to respond to that question. We have offered actually 233 of 

these training events throughout the country really, where our VA 

medical centers primarily are located. What we have done in these 

particular programs is to identify the readjustment challenges that 

veterans and their families face following deployment. The goal is 

to identify psychological and spiritual effects of war trauma, of survivors, consider appropriate pastoral care interventions with the 

local clergy so they can have some idea, when we talk about PTSD 

and when we talk about brain injury, that they kind of understand 

something about these and the signs of these particular diseases. 

We had a community clergy to brainstorm with us how we can 

partner together in order that we can provide the best of care to 

our returning warriors. We refer veterans to local VA health care 

facilities. We always give them a packet of information, Web sites, 

phone numbers, and books that they can have, that is free, and 

these have been very beneficial in making veterans connect to the 

VA, and it created relationships among the chaplains with local 

clergy throughout their various communities. 

Ms. BUERKLE. Thank you very much. 

Does the VA chaplain group have a strategic plan? For instance, 

I have a VA facility in my district. We have a wonderful VA hosVerDate Mar 15 2010 12:41 Apr 02, 2013 Jkt 073290 PO 00000 Frm 00036 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 I:\VA\73290.XXX 73290

dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING
33 

pital in Syracuse, and we had an event where we targeted the clergy. We had a distinguished panel come in and instructed our clergy 

as to what to look for, what the signs and symptoms are, family 

involvement. It was very comprehensive. Now, we probably invited 

maybe 600 members of the clergy, all denominations. No one mentioned your organization. So maybe this is where the disconnect is. 

We are talking about all these parallel initiatives going on. How 

do you get your word out? Do you have a strategic plan to hit all 

of the communities throughout the country? 

Lieutenant Commander MCCOY. Yes, we are expanding that, 

Madam Chairman. We have a strategic plan, and we have efforts, 

and the local clergy at that particular VA, and we have a template 

for them to follow. Our numbers for this outreach is increasing. 

I understand you are from the New York area. I think we have 

had 22 of these veteran outreach programs with clergy in the New 

York area to this date. 

Ms. BUERKLE. We are in Upstate, so that may be different than 

the New York area. We are in the country. 

Lieutenant Commander MCCOY. One of the things we are, if I 

can—we have started a rural program, and our initiative, rural initiative, is to target some of the rural areas where there is not perhaps VA hospitals, but perhaps where we can use—where we can 

go near CBOCs or various clinics and so forth where we can offer 

these services. We always bring in various speakers, not just chaplains, but the clergy. We also have a psychiatrist, a social worker, 

somebody perhaps from the faith-based community, all to intersect 

in creating this partnership with us. 

Ms. BUERKLE. Thank you very much. 

Reverend LaVelle, I understand that much of your outreach efforts center on educating the community about programs and services available through the VA. How do you—what kind of outreach 

is done with the VA so that they know that you exist and that they 

know of your services that are available? 

Reverend LAVELLE. Well, we have a steering committee, and all 

three administrations are represented on our steering committee. 

A representative from the three VA administrations and the VA 

program and staff offices, and our steering committee meets quarterly. We also do quarterly conference calls where we have internal 

and external partners that are a part of our Listserve, which includes VA staff. We also work with veterans benefits administrations, vocational rehabilitation and employment service, and four 

times a year we do outreach events at four different regions 

throughout the country in partnership with the regional office in 

that host city. So that is how we get the word out and work collaboratively within VA. 

Ms. BUERKLE. Thank you both very much. I now yield to the 

Ranking Member, Mr. Michaud. 

Mr. MICHAUD. Thank you, Madam Chair. This question is for 

both. Colonel, you touched upon it, but what is being done specifically to address the support needs of our veterans that reside in 

rural areas or underserved areas of the country? Let’s start with 

Reverend LaVelle. 

Reverend LAVELLE. Well, one thing. Last year I requested from 

the Vocational Rehabilitation Employment Services field office that 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING
34 

when they choose the four sites for the fiscal year 2012 

roundtables, that one of those sites be a rural area. So that is the 

one thing we have done. But I also know that our Chaplain Service 

has had a rural initiative where they have been working with rural 

clergy. 

The other thing I did is that in our quarterly conference call in 

September of 2011, there is a VA medical center chaplain in Arkansas, in Little Rock, who has started an initiative with rural 

clergy. We had him as a guest speaker so that he could describe 

his program so that others on the call could learn how to work with 

rural clergy. 

So those are some of the things that our center has done as relates to outreach to the rural areas. 

Lieutenant Commander MCCOY. Thank you for that opportunity 

to respond. We as chaplains have begun a rural clergy program 

with a strategy, and this—as a matter of fact, next week we are 

having one, I think it is going to be in the Roanoke area, and we 

are moving throughout the country and we will expand that program, and I think there will be several this year, but we will expand it in rural areas. We are actually targeting these areas. We 

are sending out hundreds of invitations and letters. We are working with the community clergy to also—sometimes, I found out, 

when other clergy sometimes talk to other clergy, you get better attendance. So we are using word of mouth and using the presidents 

of some of the clergy associations to help us bridge this gap. 

Mr. MICHAUD. Reverend LaVelle, you mentioned the four areas. 

Which area is the rural area? You mentioned you did outreach in 

four areas. What one is going to be in the rural area? What is your 

definition of what area is the rural area? 

Reverend LAVELLE. Well, I don’t have—I don’t know the definition of a rural area. But I just made the request to the field office 

for Veterans Benefits Administration to say one of the areas needed to be a rural area, and the four cities that they gave us back 

for this year was Huntington, West Virginia; Albuquerque, New 

Mexico; Lincoln, Nebraska; and Boston, Massachusetts. And if I am 

not mistaken, it is the Huntington—— 

Mr. MICHAUD. I think there is a definition problem because those 

are not—none of them are rural. 

Reverend LAVELLE. Okay. Then I will go back and check with 

them, but I specifically requested. 

The other problem is that—it is not a problem, I shouldn’t say 

that. They sent me an email maybe a week ago, and I have been 

away on travel, that some of those cities are changing. So they 

must have—because I reiterated, but those are the initial cities 

they sent me for fiscal year 2012. I apologize. I don’t have in my 

head the definition of ‘‘rural.’’ 

Mr. MICHAUD. Well, I mean, when you mentioned one of those 

four areas should be rural, I mean the fact that you just said all 

four are cities, you know, that is not rural. When you look at what 

is happening with our Active military as well as the veterans that 

actually do live in rural areas, I think they should not be left behind. So since you are the director of the VA Center for FaithBased and Neighborhood Partnerships within the VA system, have 

you talked to the Office of Rural Health? 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING
35 

Reverend LAVELLE. Yes, I have met with them once. Yes, I met 

with them, and I will go back, and really for my own benefit get 

the—what they define as rural, so that I make sure when I get the 

information again from the field office that there is a meeting of 

the minds and that we are both speaking the same language. 

Mr. MICHAUD. You said you met with them once? 

Reverend LAVELLE. When I first came on board. 

Mr. MICHAUD. How long have you been on board? 

Reverend LAVELLE. It has been 21⁄2 years. 

Mr. MICHAUD. Two-and-a-half years. 

Reverend LAVELLE. But the field offices are the people that actually work with them and provide me with the locations. I don’t 

make that determination. But I will definitely follow up, and if you 

want me to, I can get back to your office with the definitive information. 

Mr. MICHAUD. Thank you. You talk about collaboration with 

faith-based organizations. To the best of your knowledge, do these 

faith-based organizations, do they charge veterans to access whatever help that they might need, do you know? 

Lieutenant Commander MCCOY. May I answer that? No. Most 

are volunteers. They actually, out of their compassion and their 

love and willingness to help the veterans, they have went into their 

pockets often to provide services for our veterans, either transportation or various types of programs that they are offering in the 

communities. 

Reverend LAVELLE. The organizations that I have worked with, 

the churches that have transportation ministries, have said we are 

more than willing to say that so many days a week, so many hours, 

we will use our current transportation ministry to get veterans to 

and from appointments. Churches that have counseling ministries 

or support groups have said, ‘‘We are more than willing to develop 

a support group if you can provide us with people to come in and 

talk to us specifically about the unique challenges of veterans returning from combat.’’ 

Like my home church here in D.C., our entire counseling ministry consists of Ph.D.s and licensed clinical social workers, but 

their expertise has not been in dealing with veterans per se, so 

they are open to having VA chaplains and/or our social workers 

come in and do training so that they are better equipped as our 

veterans return and become a part—and return to the church, to 

work with them and their families without any charge. 

Mr. MICHAUD. Thank you. I see my time has run out. Thank you 

very much. 

Ms. BUERKLE. I now yield to the gentleman from Texas, Mr. 

Reyes. 

Mr. REYES. Thank you, Madam Chair. You mentioned the four 

cities in 2012. Did you have four cities in 2011? 

Reverend LAVELLE. Yes, the Center for Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships has been collaborating with VBA, Vocational 

Rehabilitation and Employment Service since 2005 in these efforts, 

yes. 

Mr. REYES. So in 2011 what were those cities; do you have that 

information? 

Reverend LAVELLE. Yes, I do. 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING
36 

Mr. REYES. The reason I ask is because, traditionally, Texas and 

California have the most veterans and the most Active Duty—— 

Reverend LAVELLE. The center was in Waco, Texas, twice. Once 

in Waco, Texas, as a result of VBA and the center’s collaboration, 

but then the Waco Foundation requested that we come back and 

do another roundtable. And so then when I came on board we went 

back to Waco, Texas. We were in—— 

Mr. REYES. Just out of curiosity, why can’t your outreach programs be part of every VA director’s duties? For instance, I have 

a VA clinic, what they call a super clinic, in El Paso. Joan Ricard 

is our director. Why can’t your programs be part of the menu of 

services, or have her be responsible to provide information? As the 

chairwoman said, in her case she actually convened people at a 

meeting and your programs never came up. I find that a little bit 

troubling. 

So why can’t it be part of every Veterans Administration director? Albuquerque is good, they are 386 miles northwest of El Paso, 

but they serve a different clientele than the El Paso VA clinic. And 

if not by the VA director, why not the VISN? But there has got to 

be a way to send the information out because veterans desperately 

need these kinds of support systems. 

Lieutenant Commander MCCOY. Thank you for that question because we are collaborating with the Office of Rural Health and 

with our programs and chaplains, and we also are collaborating 

with mental health and other agencies. All of our chaplains who 

worked for various VA medical centers have been basically mandated to provide this type of program. 

Now, in terms of the rural health, we at the National Center, 

with chaplains of course, move out into various other areas. 

Mr. REYES. So is the closest chaplain to El Paso in Waco? 

Lieutenant Commander MCCOY. Yes. 

Mr. REYES. It is? That is 600 miles. Albuquerque is closer to me 

than Waco, and that is what—— 

Lieutenant Commander MCCOY. Now, you do have clinics. And 

so we have chaplains that will visit occasionally those clinics. And 

we also are going to expand the program where we will have—actually, hopefully, we will have programs in the clinics—that is our directions—and to go out to the various locations. 

Now, all of the faith-based activities do not happen, or these clergy events do not happen in a VA hospital or a VA facility. They 

are happening in churches, educational buildings, and that type of 

thing. 

Mr. REYES. I understand that, but I have a veterans meeting 

every month. It is a citizens advisory panel for veterans. 

Lieutenant Commander MCCOY. Yes. 

Mr. REYES. And Joan Ricard goes there every month. She is very 

good about attending. But the times that I have been, we have 

never heard the information about your programs. So is there a 

reason why you can’t designate the VA directors in our respective 

areas to provide information and a process? I think it makes perfect sense for Joan Ricard to have these programs and to select 

maybe a clergy board or some other system where there is a chaplain or chaplains, because we have a facility that is going to grow 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING
37 

to 45,000 soldiers and they are all coming back from multiple tours 

in Iraq and Afghanistan. 

I hear it from the priests, the ministers, and the rabbis of the 

work that they are doing to support the military, both soldiers and 

their families. And I also hear it from judges that are working in 

the family courts where there are divorces going on, and they are 

asking me why isn’t there some kind of an intervention program 

that provides counseling for these families that are being torn 

apart because of multiple tours and things like that? I think this 

would be a great way to at least try to do that, and I don’t understand why the VA wouldn’t want to impart that authority or that 

responsibility to our VA directors. I certainly hope you would take 

that back, and maybe we can follow that up and make that happen 

somehow. 

Reverend LAVELLE. I can—I will definitely send an email to the 

chief of staff for VHA, who is someone I have worked with closely 

when I am getting VA staff to speak at these regional events, and 

bring this issue to her attention. 

The other thing, though, is that at every medical center there is 

what is called a minority veterans program coordinator, and as an 

ancillary duty, it is not part of their paid job. But every medical 

center has a coordinator, minority mentors program coordinator, 

who part of their responsibility is to do outreach. So maybe sometimes we are not getting the information to the right person. 

What would be helpful for my center is if we could find out who 

the faith liaison is at either here in D.C. for every congressional office, because then we could at least let them know what we are 

doing and, when we have events, get the information to them to 

say let the faith leaders of your community know this is what we 

are doing, and we can get information out that way. That would 

be one step to kind of bridge this divide between at least your Representatives within the congressional districts or at least starting 

here in D.C. or in your congressional district. Like there are some 

people that I know in different offices, so I automatically send them 

stuff just because I have known them. 

Mr. REYES. That tells me that there needs to be—— 

Reverend LAVELLE. We need to broaden that. I will contact the 

staff of VHA and say this is an idea that came up, how do we get 

some kind of relationship going with your medical center directors 

so they have our information on hand and can disseminate it and 

work more closely with the faith communities, and then keep us 

abreast, and we figure out how to help them develop those relationships. 

Mr. REYES. Especially when, as Congressman Michaud was talking about, when it is the rural areas, there are huge gaps out 

there. You are talking about States like Idaho, Wyoming, Colorado 

that have a lot of rural areas. Texas in the panhandle and all of— 

most of West Texas that is not El Paso, that is all rural area. 

Lieutenant Commander MCCOY. Yes. And, sir, I agree that we 

need—we can expand that. But I think that one of the things, that 

all chaplains in the VA work for a director of a VA medical center. 

So I think with that in mind and with our policy from the National 

Chaplain Center, I have went to many—several of these events, 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING
38 

and the director has been the one who has given the opening welcome at the event for the clergy. 

Mr. MICHAUD. Thank you, Madam Chair. 

Ms. BUERKLE. Thank you both very much. I must say I am a bit 

chagrined, and, maybe worse than that, concerned because when 

we did our symposium on faith-based providers and invited the 

clergy, we did have the VA there because we wanted them to be 

able to tell the clergy members what services are available. And 

even the VA didn’t mention your offices. They made no mention of 

it at all, that either program existed. I think we have a really big 

disconnect here in knowing what is available and what is out there. 

If I could, Chaplain McCoy, I would ask that you provide for us 

the template that you spoke about earlier and the tool kit that you 

spoke about earlier so we can see what it is you are doing. 

Lieutenant Commander MCCOY. Yes. 

Ms. BUERKLE. To make sure we get our veterans the services 

they need. 

Lieutenant Commander MCCOY. I will. 

Ms. BUERKLE. Thank you both very much for your time and answering our questions. You are both excused. Thank you. 

In closing here today, I think that Chaplain Morris said it best: 

we really do need a community effort to make sure that our veterans have what they need. We expect and look to the VA to be 

a leading partner in this. That is their mission. 

It is going to be important for all of us to look to our communities and make sure every section is covered. And Mr. Runyan has 

left, but I think his comments, and Chaplain Morris’ comments 

about employment and making sure our economy gets back on 

track so when our veterans come home, there is a good, viable alternative and that they can seek an engaging good job. With regard 

to the universities—those who choose to go back to the universities 

and be educated—that there be that safety net that Dr. Rudd spoke 

of, and that they are equipped to know and appreciate and understand what the veterans are up to—and what they are up against, 

I should say. 

With that, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days to revise and extend remarks and include extraneous 

material. Without objection, so ordered. 

Ms. BUERKLE. Thank you again to all of our witnesses and to our 

veterans who have served our Nation so courageously, and to each 

of our audience members for joining today’s conversation. This 

hearing is now adjourned. 

[Whereupon, 6:04 p.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.] 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING
(39) 

A P P E N D I X 

Prepared Statement of Hon. Ann Marie Buerkle, 

Chairwoman, Subcommittee on Health 

Good afternoon and thank you all for being here. 

Today, we meet to discuss the role of faith-based and community providers in 

helping servicemembers, veterans, and their families transition from active-duty to 

civilian life and the need to foster better communication, education, and collaboration between the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) and these critical community 

resources. 

The responsibility of each one of us to ‘care for those who have borne the battle’ 

has never felt so poignant with the brutal toll of a decade of war and a bad economy. 

We continue to hear stories of veterans from past conflicts and our recently returning veterans from Iraq and Afghanistan struggling to find a home, a job, or a 

helping hand. The need to meet these honored heroes where they are and provide 

them the care, the hope, and the help they earned has never felt so immediate. 

As a Nation, we are uniquely blessed to live in a country with a rich history of 

civic pride and responsibility and it is to these communities where our veterans return home, have maintained existing relationships, and, more often than not, where 

they first turn for help. 

While the primary responsibility for caring for our veterans should and does lie 

with VA, faith-based and community groups are playing an increasingly key role in 

supporting the varied needs of our servicemembers, veterans, and their families. 

They act as a bridge to accessing Federal, State, and local programs and services. 

Members of the clergy in particular are often the first point of contact with a veteran grappling with the wounds of war. Data from the VA National Chaplain Center 

indicates that four out of ten individuals with mental health challenges seek clergy 

assistance, more than all other mental health providers combined. 

We already know that faith-based and community groups can be effective in filling known gaps in VA care and supporting the day-to-day needs of the veteran population. 

However, a district symposium I held in my home district of Syracuse, New York, 

last December, revealed to me a shameful lack of communication, collaboration, and 

coordination between VA and these critical community resources. And, subsequently, an urgent need to act to establish meaningful partnerships between VA 

and nongovernmental organizations. 

With more of our servicemembers returning home each day, we cannot afford to 

let any opportunity to better support our veterans pass us by. 

Where partnerships exist, they need to be strengthened. Where they don’t, they 

need to be fostered. For a veteran or loved one in need, every door should be an 

open door. 

Again, I thank you all for joining us this afternoon. I look forward to a productive 

and ongoing conversation. 

f 

Prepared Statement of Hon. Michael H. Michaud, 

Ranking Democratic Member, Subcommittee on Health 

I would like to thank everyone for attending today’s hearing. This hearing is intended to open up the broader thought process and better understand how the VA 

and community organizations collaborate to support veterans and their families. 

More than 2 million servicemembers have been deployed since September 2001, 

with hundreds of thousands of them being deployed more than once. As of February 

2012, more than 6,000 troops have been killed and over 47,000 have been wounded 

in action in the recent conflicts. 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING
40 

When these servicemembers come home and take off the uniform, many of them 

have the expectation that life will just pick up where it left off before being deployed. However, this is just not the case. 

Many of them struggle to reconnect with their families and communities. They 

find themselves feeling isolated and unable to cope. The Department of Veterans Affairs reports that half of the OEF/OIF/OND population that has accessed VA health 

care sought mental health treatment. 

Post-traumatic stress disorder is the number one reported mental health concern 

among this population. With so many OEF/OIF/OND servicemembers and veterans 

experiencing psychological wounds, reports suggest that there is an increase in the 

rates of suicide, alcohol and drug abuse, homelessness, and domestic violence. 

For this reason, it is essential that our servicemembers, veterans, and their families receive the help they need and that they have the necessary tools to rejoin their 

communities. These tools, programs, and resources would not be possible without 

the thousands of community organizations across the country that work in partnership with the VA. 

At this hearing, I want to hear more about the reintegration challenges that 

servicemembers and veterans face, as well as the challenges the VA and community 

organizations face in providing support services. And we need to identify potential 

solutions to these barriers and how we can strengthen these partnerships. 

Despite historic increases in VA funding over the past 5 years, as the Nation prepares for the influx of returning veterans, reintegration efforts are simply not possible without collaboration between the Federal Government, business sector, and 

nonprofit organizations. And more needs to be done to facilitate these partnerships. 

I would like to take the time to thank our panelists for being here with us this 

afternoon and for the work that you do every day to support our Nation’s veterans. 

I would especially like to thank Mr. Morris and Mr. McCoy for their service as 

Chaplains in the Minnesota National Guard and at VA’s National Chaplain Center, 

respectively. 

In 2009, I lead a Congressional delegation to Afghanistan and came to learn that 

our servicemembers rely immensely on their chaplains for emotional support. And 

on every visit since, I’ve come to respect the unique insights that our chaplains possess in terms of mental health, spiritual guidance, and the overall well-being of our 

service men and women. 

I look forward to hearing from all of our distinguished guests today. Thank you, 

Madam Chair, and I yield back. 

f 

Prepared Statement of Hon. Silvestre Reyes, 

Democratic Member, Subcommittee on Health 

Thank you Chairwoman Buerkle and Ranking Member Michaud for convening 

this hearing. 

Over the past decade, our Nation has seen the effects of two wars in both Iraq 

and Afghanistan. Over 2 million servicemembers have been deployed to these regions during that time period and have selflessly served our Nation. These brave 

men and women and their families have endured a lot. 

After completion of their honorable service, many of these men and women will 

leave our military and return to civilian life. The process of reintegration into the 

local community is nothing new, as we have had countless numbers of veterans 

leave military service over the years to seek civilian employment. 

Unfortunately, this process of reintegration has not always gone smoothly. Many 

Vietnam veterans did not receive the care and respect they deserved once they left 

the military. This cannot occur with our veterans today. Therefore, we must ensure 

that our servicemembers, veterans, and their families receive the help they need 

and that they have the necessary tools to re-join their communities. 

Reintegration is a cooperative effort among the Federal Government, the business 

sector, and community organizations, ensuring that our veterans are welcomed back 

into the local communities where they can contribute as proud, hard-working citizens. They must receive the care and consideration they have earned. 

f 

Prepared Statement of Andrew Davis, Veteran 

Good afternoon, Chairwoman Buerkle, Ranking Member Michaud and Members 

of the Committee. Thank you for the invitation to discuss the role of community providers and faith-based organizations in helping servicemembers transition to civilian 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING
41 

life and the need to foster better communication, education, and collaboration between The U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) and these resources. 

My name is Andrew Davis, and I am currently the Director of the Saratoga County, NY Veterans Service Agency and the Founder of the Saratoga County Veterans 

Resource Initiative. I have been a Veterans Advocate since separating from service 

in 2004. I served as a United States Army Ranger for 5 years to include two tours 

of duty in Afghanistan and one in Iraq. 

Upon returning to my home in Minnesota to further my education, I was faced 

with my first taste of how little I knew about being a veteran. In fact, like many 

of my peers, I was unsure if I even was a veteran. Because of this, I founded a nonprofit veteran support organization on the campus of the University of Minnesota 

to aid returning veterans in connecting with earned benefits and services. In later 

roles as a congressional staffer and Department of Defense Transition Assistance 

Advisor I saw firsthand the disconnect between veterans, their families, and the systems that are intended to support them. For the past 3 years I have spent my career 

as a veterans advocate either training accredited benefits counselors or being one 

myself. This has provided me a frontline view of what is lacking in outreach and 

networked support to our veterans and their families. 

Last, I am currently an enrolled patient with the Veterans Health Administration 

(VHA) in VISN–2 and use both the Albany-Stratton Veterans Administration Medical Center (VAMC) and the Clifton Park, NY Community-Based Outreach Clinic 

(CBOC) regularly. 

Opening Remarks: 

Veterans and the ways they serve have changed significantly over the last decade, 

resulting in the need for changes in the way our country, in turn, serves them. The 

veterans of today tend to be more geographically dispersed and more mobile than 

previous generations. Families and communities are affected and changed differently than ever before with multiple deployments and the unique use of the 

guard and reserve. Many of these individuals suffer from the lack of a ‘‘Fort New 

York’’ or central support system, making the local community even more crucial in 

the reintegration process. 

Despite a constant bombardment of media in all forms that affords the public access to our current wars, issues facing our neighbors, friends, family members and 

other local veterans are often invisible to us as communities. Add to this, a military 

culture that can encourage emotional toughness and self sufficiency, and we face a 

large potential public health problem. 

Last, the uniqueness that makes our military and our veterans population great, 

also means that there is not a one-size-fits-all support system that can be created 

nationwide. We must garner community support and use community resources to 

serve our veterans and their families completely. 

Accessing Traditional Veterans Resources: 

Issue 

First and foremost, the population of veterans that find their way into the VA system of care or benefits delivery system, merely by accident, is staggering. I can safely say that approximately 5–7 veterans knock on our door weekly for some form of 

unrelated government service(s) to find that they are eligible for veterans benefits 

because of their service to this Nation. Just last week a young Marine with two 

tours of duty in Afghanistan appeared in my office asking for directions to the office 

that handles unemployment benefits. This Marine outlined, that although his home 

of record on his discharge stated Saratoga Springs, NY, he had no idea who his local 

contacts in Veterans Services were, or where he could take advantage of his 5 years 

of free health care from the VA. Nobody, from his pastor, to his friends and family 

in the community knew how to connect him to his earned benefits and services. If 

this Marine hadn’t knocked on the ‘‘wrong’’ door he would not have met with my 

staff to turn on his GI Bill benefits or learn where he could enroll in health care. 

By all appearances, the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs has recognized the 

need for community outreach but holds their hopes in the idea that top down, one 

sided information will filter down to the grassroots folks at the bottom. For example, 

in the VISN–2 area of upstate NY, a few competent and well trained veterans justice coordinators have been hired and put in place. However, the operative words 

here are ‘‘a few veterans justice coordinators.’’ These people are responsible for numerous counties and for interacting with courts, district attorney’s and law enforcement, when in fact the police officers on the beat and on our streets and highways 

are where the first difference can be made. 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING
42 

Solution 

The correct mindset for reaching veterans must transition to a ‘‘no wrong door’’ 

approach. This can and should be created through a localized, national training by 

VA, Veterans Advocates and other experts to all members of local communities. 

These newly created ‘‘Veteran Friendly Communities’’ would have the tools to make 

referrals to the proper resources whether a veteran walks into a rectory, a tax assessor’s office or is pulled over during a traffic stop. 

Additionally, outreach and assistance programs cannot be reactionary in nature. 

The time to begin helping a veteran in legal trouble for example, is upon first interaction, not just at sentencing. In fact, in my own transition, it was a police officer 

who pulled me over for driving in Minneapolis like I had in Hadithah and Bagram 

that introduced me to my first veterans advocate and helped me realize that difficulty transitioning was normal. Additionally, I now receive as an accredited service 

officer, a large number of referrals from local police officers that I call my friends. 

Local Solutions to a National Issue: 

While much of our conversation has always revolved around what VA and DoD 

does, can do and should do better, the reality is that much of the care delivered to 

veterans in NY and across this country is done through private providers and other 

not for profit and public sector providers or other forms of government assistance. 

By urging VA to reach out to these providers, a referral and information sharing 

system can be implemented to ensure veterans are maximizing their earned benefits 

and services. 

As a veterans advocate, I can and do certainly play a role in culling these local 

resources. For example, we have created the Saratoga County Veterans Resource 

Initiative, which gathers local elected officials, college administrators, veterans advocates, private mental health providers, non-profits and others on a quarterly basis 

to familiarize all with what we do and how referrals can work between organizations. However this is an uphill climb for us because the impression that most of 

the citizenry has, is that taking care of veterans is solely a VA or Federal Government role. When in reality the transition back to civilian life is a community process. I believe this to be caused by the generally one-sided dissemination of information by the VA to the general public as opposed to community engagement. 

Local Engagement Opportunities: 

1. The VA has in place a network of county and State veterans benefits counselors 

that when given a level of training and funding, can and should serve as community liaisons. While the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs may be our Nations 

experts on veterans related issues, our community leaders will be who brings veterans back into the fold of everyday life. My experience as a veterans advocate 

has been that the information sharing is largely one-sided from the VHA to us 

with little opportunity to engage with the Veterans Benefits Administration 

(VBA) and the VHA on real issues and improvements. Veteran’s advocates are 

on the ‘‘front lines’’ doing a large amount of VA’s enrollment and benefits delivery 

and are a valuable and many times an undervalued asset. 

2. Our country is filled with competent mental health care professionals that are 

constantly volunteering to treat and see veterans. VA reluctance to use these 

community-based providers in many instances turns veterans and their families 

away from treatment at all. VA should look for ways to engage these highly 

trained professionals so veterans can be treated comfortably in their community. 

3. In our county’s communities, local law enforcement, clergy and educators have 

been more than willing to learn about veterans issues and provide referrals to 

care and benefits. This is merely the first step, but giving those who are willing 

and able to help an education can go a long ways in figuring out where the legitimate gaps are in the Federal systems. Simply put, existing organization many 

times do not realize they are already serving veterans. Understanding veterans 

perspectives and service needs will improve the overall delivery of benefits and 

services at all levels. 

4. Associations such as PBA’s, Association of Sheriffs, First Responders and Firefighters typically meet annually and regionally. In both Minnesota and New York 

we have had little difficulty getting in front of these groups to introduce ourselves and what we do as advocates. The VA should be at these events to not 

only help veteran members, but to continue to expand their ‘‘free’’ outreach team. 

5. The VA has come a long ways in a short amount of time in the use of technology, 

social media and non-traditional forms of outreach. However, VA must continue 

to leverage these resources at a localized level to engage a new generation of veterans who is mobile and tech-savvy. 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING
43 

6. The VA can work together with service organizations with mutual benefit to VA, 

veterans and local posts and chapters to modernize an out-dated model. Veterans 

of this generation no longer find themselves gathering in mass at their local Legion, but instead gathering via Facebook and Skype. However, the power of gathered voice and advocacy these national organizations provide could be crucial if 

used properly. 

7. The VA’s implementation of MyHealtheVet and E–Benefits portals is a step in 

the right direction, but the centralized and physical nature of enrollment have 

made it difficult for a financially and employment challenged veterans population 

to take advantage of these systems. Providing enrollment in the community or 

even outsourcing enrollment to CBOC’s and accredited veterans advocates would 

assist in these matters greatly. 

8. My experience to date has shown me that VA employees in any part of the VA 

lack a basic understanding of local and State benefits and services. These can 

range from veterans property tax exemptions like we have in NY to local transportation to medical appointments. Not only are the numerous people taking advantage of these benefits a good place to find potential patients and enrollees, 

but they are simple, quality of life benefits that can really help a veteran engage 

the system for the first time. 

Conclusion: 

In sum, we as a Nation must stand committed to ensuring that sustainable and 

quality supportive services are accessible to veterans and their families’ right in 

their communities. I believe this can be done leveraging resources that largely already exist and in a cost effective manner. The VA has the geographical disbursement and expertise to lead this charge, but must think outside the box and look 

to those who are ready and willing to assist in our own backyards. The requirements to make this successful are not numerous. In many cases putting outreach 

staff at community events is all it will take. We must begin immediately leveraging 

relationships and expertise that has long existed. 

Thank you again to the Committee for allowing me to speak to these important 

issues. 

f 

Prepared Statement of Chaplain John J. Morris 

Chairman Buerkle, Ranking Member Michaud, distinguished Members of the 

Subcommittee, I am honored to appear before you today. 

I am the State Chaplain for the Minnesota National Guard. I am the co-founder 

of the Beyond the Yellow Ribbon initiative. I have spent the last 7 years of my military service facilitating the collaboration of the Minnesota National Guard, faithbased and community organizations and the VA resources of the Midwest VA 

Health Network (VISN 23) to support the reintegration of over 20,000 Minnesota 

National Guard combat veterans. 

I am a consumer of VA medical care as an enrolled veteran with the Minneapolis 

VA. I am the father of two combat veteran daughters who are receiving medical care 

through the VA system. 

I am an ardent supporter of the VA and the resources it provides to our veterans. 

The Minnesota National Guard Beyond the Yellow Ribbon Collaboration 

With the VA 

In 2005 Major General Larry Shellito, then Adjutant General of the Minnesota 

National Guard, hired me to create a reintegration program to help the Minnesota 

National Guard combat veterans successfully transition from warriors to productive 

citizens. 

The first institution we turned to for help was the Minneapolis VA medical center. 

We wanted our veterans to receive medical care if needed and benefits if earned. 

We knew that the demobilization process used at that time was ineffective in connecting veterans with the VA process. We were concerned that a majority of our veterans would not access all that was available to them in terms of VA services. 

We found a very willing partner in the Minneapolis VA medical center. Our partnership grew to include the VA medical centers in St. Cloud, MN; Fargo, ND; Twin 

Ports in Superior, WI and Sioux Falls in SD. We expanded our partnership to include the Vet Centers in Fargo, ND; St. Paul, MN; Sioux Falls, SD and Duluth, MN. 

Today we enjoy a close collaboration with the leadership of VISN 23 and all the VA 

entities in Minnesota. 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING
44 

We have successfully collaborated with the VA on the following initiatives in support of our returning combat veterans: 

1. Expedited enrollment of our demobilizing soldiers, at their demobilization site, 

by MN VA personnel. This is insures our veterans are enrolled in the VA in 

the catchment area they live in and they are provided initial appointments. 

2. RINGS 1 and RINGS 2, (Readiness and Resilience in National Guard Soldiers), 

Research studies on the soldiers/families of the 1st Brigade, 34th Infantry Division. These longitudinal studies have focused on the role of the community in 

facilitating successful reintegration and mitigating the effects of combat stress. 

3. Collaborative training of local clergy utilizing VA Chaplains and Vet Center 

staff. 

4. Collaborative training of Minnesota Army National Guard Chaplains and Chaplain Candidates in Clinical Pastoral Education utilizing the Supervisory Chaplain of the St. Cloud, MN VA. We have trained 15 chaplains and chaplain candidates, to date. 

5. VA Behavioral Mental Health providers from the OIF/OEF outreach clinic providing satellite service at Camp Ripley, MN during annual training periods of 

the Minnesota Army National Guard. 

6. Vet Center Staff and VA OIF/OEF outreach personnel present at every Minnesota National Guard reintegration event, pre- and post-deployment. 

7. Minneapolis VA Suicide Prevention Specialists regularly provide training to the 

Minnesota National Guard and participate in clergy outreach training with the 

Minnesota National Guard Chaplain Corps. 

8. The Minneapolis VA Polytrauma Center Staff provided training for the 34th Infantry Division Command and Staff prior to their deployment to Iraq in 2009. 

9. The Recruiting Command of the Minnesota Army National Guard provides soldiers trained by the Minneapolis VA to visit wounded warriors in the Minneapolis VA polytrauma unit. 

10. The Vet Centers of Minnesota have collaborated with the Minnesota National 

Guard to provide training for marriage and family therapists, as well as licensed social workers, and psychologists at community outreach events hosted 

by the Minnesota National Guard Beyond the Yellow Ribbon program. 

11. The Minnesota National Guard and the Minneapolis Regional Pension and Disability Claims Office work collaboratively to provide the medial records of soldiers seeking disability compensation. 

The Minnesota National Guard Beyond the Yellow Ribbon Program and 

Community Partnerships 

The underlining operating principle of the Minnesota National Guard reintegration initiative, (also known as, ‘‘Beyond the Yellow Ribbon’’) is that it takes the entire community to help a warrior return from war, reunite with his/her family and 

resume a productive life as a civilian. Consequently, while partnering with the VA 

the Minnesota Guard has also worked to partner with business, social service, education, and faith-based organizations in every community in Minnesota that is host 

to National Guard facility. 

The Beyond the Yellow Program, under the purview of Governor Pawlenty (2005– 

2010) and Governor Dayton (2011-present), thru the Minnesota National Guard as 

program manager, has a formal process for synchronizing the services of Federal, 

State and county agencies for the benefit of returning combat veterans and their 

families. In addition the program provides training for community organizations on 

how to support military members, veterans and their families. To date twenty-five 

Minnesota communities have been certified by the Governor’s office as ‘Yellow Ribbon’ communities. The program synchronizes the good will and services of the agencies of the government and community organizations to support military families 

during the duress of deployments and the returning combat veteran during reintegration, post combat. 

We have garnered tremendous support for our military families and returning 

combat veterans. The Beyond the Yellow Program has synchronized the agencies of 

the Federal, State, and local government with the services of our communities to 

result in providing the support needed by our military families. This has resulted 

in more productive combat veterans and reduced pathology as demonstrated by the 

VA’s Rings 1 study. 

The Challenges and Opportunities the Beyond the Yellow Ribbon Program 

Presents for the VA System 

The VISN 23 VA organizations and institutions have been significant partners in 

our Beyond the Yellow Ribbon initiative. I believe they could play even more significant roles. They have vital information to share with civilian medical providers, clinVerDate Mar 15 2010 12:41 Apr 02, 2013 Jkt 073290 PO 00000 Frm 00048 Fmt 6604 Sfmt 6621 I:\VA\73290.XXX 73290

dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING
45 

ical social workers and faith-based leaders. They have expertise to share with community-based organizations. The involvement of the VA and their synchronization 

into Beyond the Yellow Ribbon reintegration efforts will enhance the initiative and 

result in healthier combat veterans and their families. 

There are significant challenges to overcome, however, in order for the VA to truly 

be a ‘community partner.’ I will outline those challenges: 

1. Perception and Stigma.—My experience with community leaders has been that 

they perceive the VA to be a distant and closed institution. By virtue of the fact 

that relatively few citizens are veterans most Minnesotans have no experience 

with the VA, thus the ‘mystery’ surrounding the institution. Combined with anecdotes shared by the media of controversy with the VA, (e.g., inadequate care, lack 

of resources, theft of computers resulting in Social Security numbers of veterans 

being lost, etc.) and perception becomes reality in the minds of community leaders. 

2. Institutionalism.—The VA is a Federal bureaucracy. Consequently, its system is 

foreign to outsiders. This is a significant bar to inclusion in community outreach 

and synchronization of services with community-based organizations. I can illustrate this in several ways: 

a. The Minneapolis VA has a world-class polytrauma unit providing the finest 

medical care to our most severely injured warriors. It has deservedly received 

positive media coverage and accolades. However, on numerous occasions, when 

community organizations have wanted to donate goods, gifts and goodwill to 

the families/wounded warriors they have met with hurdles too high to overcome. At the core of the problem is HIPA. The VA’s understandable need to 

protect truly vulnerable wounded warriors’ results in them being shut off from 

the support of the community. I have personally witnessed this on at least a 

dozen occasions. From inability to donate professional sports team tickets to 

wounded soldiers to the recent inability of Best Buy Corporation to personally 

deliver care packages to wounded warriors the community is shut off from 

working closely with this world class program. 

b. The VA is not staffed to conduct effective community outreach. While mandated to provide training for civilian providers and clergy I have personally attended ten VA outreach events, none of which was able to garner more than 

a handful of community members. The VA does not know how to effectively 

meet, greet and share with the community the tremendous work they do and 

the wonderful services they offer. 

c. The VA appears to lack a means to share their vast experience of working with 

veterans with their civilian counterparts in the fields of medicine, behavioral 

mental health and faith-based institutions. An example would be the growing 

body of knowledge surrounding traumatic brain injury. Health care providers 

in the greater community need to know what the VA knows about this wound, 

its symptoms, impact and treatment. Symposiums, media messaging, training 

outreach events and community forums would be ideal means for transmitting 

the VA experience to the greater community. To date, I know of few of these 

events. In a similar vein VA chaplains have much to share with their colleagues in the civilian community. 

d. The VA lacks the means to connect returning wounded warriors, that have received in patient care in their hospitals, with the greater community. I have 

personally witnessed four severely injured OIF/OEF veterans struggle tremendously in readjusting within the community, post VA care. They were isolated 

and the VA social worker was unable, due to large case load, to meet often 

enough with the veteran to help them connect successfully to community. 

PROPOSED SOLUTIONS 

In Minnesota the simplest way to address the issues I have outlined would be for 

the VA, in all of its configurations, to become an official Beyond the Yellow Ribbon 

partner under Governor Dayton’s model of partnership. 

—Have the VA receive the community training all community leaders receive and 

have the VA meet all the program requirements that other partners in the community meet. 

—Have VA leadership join their civilian colleagues at Beyond the Yellow Ribbon 

community leaders’ events. 

—Have the VA partner with community and faith-based organizations for more effective synchronization of support for veterans and military families. 

In the area of working with faith-based organizations the VA needs to invite faithbased leaders onto their campuses and into their facilities for orientation tours, seminars and collaborative sharing of information about the needs of veterans and pastoral care of veterans. 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING
46 

Minnesota is blessed to be the home of four major theological seminaries that 

train faith-based leaders. The VA would be well served to introduce itself to the 

leadership of the seminaries and to find ways to partner in the sharing of knowledge. 

—Have the VA officially partner with the Guard leadership in each State. In Minnesota the Adjutant General, Major General Nash, has a personal relationship 

with the VA Medical Center directors in Minneapolis, MN; St. Cloud, MN and 

Fargo, ND. He has been in their facilities and knows their capabilities. He has 

personally authorized the Rings 1 and 2 studies of his soldiers. He monitors the 

results of the study and insures its findings inform the best practices of the Minnesota National Guard. He has invited the VA to the drill floors of his units and 

relies on the VA for the first class service they can provide. This type of senior 

leader partnership results in great access to service, smoother facilitation of the 

claims process and greater care of veterans. This could be replicated nationwide. 

—In times of fiscal austerity the Fischer Houses of the VA system could easily synchronize their efforts with the Family Programs Office of the Guard. This would 

result in the families of veterans residing at the Fischer Houses receiving the 

good will of the communities that flows through the Family Programs of the 

Guard. The Guard, as America’s local military force, most immediately receives 

the support of the community. The Guard Family Programs has access to community resources that the Fischer Houses need, but often have to find on their own, 

with limited knowledge of the local community capabilities. Collaboration saves 

money, helps families and enhances the effectiveness of the VA and the Guard 

Family Programs. 

Closing Remarks 

In closing I would like to reiterate my support and admiration for the men and 

women of the Veterans Administration. As a veteran I know we are truly blessed 

by their service. I believe they have a vital role in the reintegration of our veterans 

and welfare of the families of our veterans. I believe the VA’s effectiveness can be 

increased by its inclusion in our greater community and enhanced collaboration with 

all segments of the community that seek to support our military families and combat veterans. 

I appreciate the opportunity to be here today and invite your questions and comments. 

f 

Prepared Statement of Shelley MacDermid Wadsworth, Ph.D. 

Chairwoman Buerkle, Congressman Michaud, and distinguished Members of the 

Committee, thank you for convening this hearing today and for inviting me to share 

my thoughts about ‘‘Building Bridges between VA and Community Organizations to 

Support Veterans and Families.’’ 

I am proud to be a faculty member at Purdue University, the land grant institution for the State of Indiana. I am also proud to direct the Military Family Research 

Institute and the Center for Families at Purdue. Each of those organizations works 

to address all three missions of the university: generating new research knowledge, 

helping students to learn, and most important for this hearing, reaching beyond the 

campus to collaborate with others to solve community challenges. I will speak today 

based on my own experiences and those of my staff, however; I am not speaking 

on behalf of the university. 

The Military Family Research Institute (MFRI) was created at Purdue in 2000 

through funding awarded competitively by the Department of Defense’s Office of 

Military Community and Family Policy. Today we continue to have significant funding from DoD and other Federal sources, but are funded primarily by private philanthropy. I mention this because it is this funding that has made it possible for 

us to invest so heavily in community collaborations. Our mission is to ‘make a difference for families who serve.’ 

We are located in West Lafayette, Indiana, which is in VISN 11, along with parts 

of Michigan, Illinois, Indiana, and Ohio. I am pleased to be able to report that MFRI 

is engaged in many collaborations with organizations in the civilian, military, and 

veteran communities. We carry out an average of more than one event or activity 

each week aimed at helping to make our State a better place for military and veteran families. Our recent collaborations involving VA partners include the following: 

a. With regard to homelessness, in November 2011, as part of our university’s 

participation in President Obama’s Interfaith and Community Service Campus 

Challenge, we organized the first Stand Down for homeless and nearly homeless 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING
47 

veterans in our community, and the first organized by a university in our State. 

More than 100 community organizations participated, including both campus and 

community faith-based groups, and more than 100 student volunteers, including 

students from Hospitality and Tourism Management who managed food service, and 

students from the School of Nursing who provided an onsite health clinic guided by 

several of their faculty including a military veteran. A number of VA entities joined 

in this effort, including representatives from the Illiana Suicide Prevention, Healthcare, and Minority Programs offices. VA Roudebush Medical Center sent representatives, as did VA benefits, and a VA Mobile Veteran Center. We were very pleased 

at this initial effort and are seeking out collaborators to make this a statewide effort 

with Stand Downs in several communities leading up to Veterans Day 2012. 

b. As researchers, we are collaborating with VA colleagues in Minneapolis and 

Ann Arbor, working together to obtain funding and gather data. c. In the area of higher education, we work with colleges and universities 

throughout our State to help them strengthen their supports for student servicemembers and veterans. In that capacity, we work closely with VA certifying officials, 

the Indiana Commission on Higher Education, institutional leaders, the Servicemembers Opportunity Colleges, and others. 

d. In the area of vocational rehabilitation, we work with the Career Learning 

and Employment Center, a pilot project set up in our State as a collaboration established initially between community groups, the Crane Naval Station and the 

NAVSEA command, VA vocational rehabilitation officials, and several State offices. 

This project for which we are the evaluation partner, helps servicemembers who 

must leave their military careers because of life-altering wounds or injuries, transition to education and employment in an environment of full support and assistance 

for their families and themselves as they relocate, enter or re-enter educational 

training, leave their military careers, and begin new jobs as civilians. e. In the area of behavioral health, we serve as a training partner for the Indiana Veterans Behavioral Health Network. Funded by a grant from the Health Resources and Services Administration, IVBHN is a network of community-based behavioral health clinics working to extend services to rural veterans using telehealth 

technologies. We also are working together to create a designation for agencies to 

indicate to military and veteran families that providers within the agency have received significant training in working with that population, to complement a training system and registry we have already created with the Indiana National Guard 

to improve the behavioral health infrastructure in our State. VA collaborators include the Department of Mental Health Patient Care Services, the Psychiatry Ambulatory Care Clinic, the Seamless Transition Clinic, and the Information Technology Department at Roudebush VA Medical Center, as well as the VISN 11 Medical and Information Technology staff. 

f. Finally, in the area of outreach, we work closely with the Seamless Transition 

Team at the Roudebush VA Medical Center to implement an annual statewide 

meeting focused on growing awareness, motivation, and skills among helping professionals in a variety of communities to support veterans and their families. In September 2011, this meeting was attended by over 250 professionals from Indiana, Illinois, and Kentucky. The Indiana National Guard director of family programs reported that his staff described this as the best training event they had attended in 

many years. 

Based on these experiences, what are some lessons we’ve learned about successful 

collaborations between community organizations and the VA? 

First, there are great opportunities for success, and I know that there are success 

stories happening around the country. I have been pleased by the enthusiasm we 

have experienced from many of our VA partners. 

Second, all of the successful partnerships we know involve partners who have 

come to know and trust each other. Until partners know each other well enough, 

it is difficult to trust. Without trust, it is very hard to collaborate. It can take several years to exchange sufficient knowledge and build sufficient trust to be willing 

to embark on a more extensive collaboration. Without that ground work, it is much 

less likely that the collaboration will be successful and sustainable. 

Third, we have learned that mutual transparency, responsiveness, and accountability are important for successful collaborations. Each of these of course ties back 

to basic trust—perhaps ‘trust but verify’ is an apt phrase. 

Fourth, we think successful collaborations do a good job of taking advantage of 

each organization’s unique strengths. MFRI contributes something different to each 

of the collaborations I described earlier—sometimes our research expertise, sometimes our skills as educators, sometimes our convening power, and in each case our 

VA partners are contributing expertise that complements ours. 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING
48 

Fifth, I believe that successful collaborations result when each partner can enthusiastically pursue their self-interest while they work together to achieve a shared 

goal. Collaborations that require one or both partners to work against their self-interest will not last long. 

Sixth, in the spaces in which we operate, cultural translators are very important. 

Partners who can explain military or veteran experiences and culture to civilians, 

or who can explain the environment within which civilian community organizations 

operate to members of military or veteran organizations, play key roles in helping 

collaborative partners learn to see the world through one another’s eyes. 

A final ingredient for success is leadership, but we believe that it may be servant 

leadership that is the most important. At MFRI we believe that leadership is as 

much about taking and distributing minutes, arranging meetings, and sending out 

reminders as it is about crafting vision and facilitating strategic planning. We are 

just as happy to try to be the glue that holds initiatives together and the lubricant 

that keeps them moving forward, and we are fortunate to have found funders who 

share our belief. 

Although the scientific literature about collaborations among community organizations or with the VA is quite limited, the studies that are available reinforce our 

observations. For example, one study of collaborations between faith-based and 

health organizations found that passion and commitment for their shared goals, mutual trust and respect, and the convening power of faith-based organizations were 

seen as key to their success (Kegler, Hall, & Kiser, 2010). 

Policy-Related Challenges and Barriers 

What about the challenges and barriers that make it difficult for community collaborations with the VA to become established or successful? Many of these are no 

doubt familiar to you. 

The landscape both inside and outside the VA can be very crowded and confusing. 

Prospective community partners, particularly those located at a physical distance 

from the VA facility with which they would like to collaborate, can find it very difficult to determine whom in the institution to approach. As a test, I conducted a 

search for the word ‘collaborate’ on the main VA Web site, which yielded a single 

hit, for the Center of Excellence on Implementing Evidence Based Practice. From 

vantage points inside the VA it may be just as difficult, again particularly in farflung communities. The not-for-profit sector is full of agencies with alphabet-soup 

names, sometimes with considerable turnover, and idiosyncratic local variations. VA 

professionals are understandably wary of showing favoritism to particular organizations, getting involved with organizations that might prove unreliable, or taking 

time away from other duties to establish and maintain community partnerships. 

These challenges could be reduced by making sure that there are clear points of 

entry and information for prospective collaborators on key Web sites, and some regular mechanism for prospective partners and VA leaders to learn about one another. 

There are structural barriers to collaboration. For researchers, these come in the 

form of requirements that projects involving the VA be led by VA researchers. For 

all collaborators, a serious barrier is the inability to share data. Sometimes this impediment makes it very difficult to connect VA patients and their families with community services; for researchers, it is very difficult to gain access to data for analyses. In our work with higher education, we have found it very difficult to get information about schools in our State, or even our State as a whole, because only data 

aggregated across an entire region are available. We have also found it very challenging to secure answers to questions from at least one office, even though some 

of the information we are seeking is not at all sensitive and could probably be made 

publicly available on the Web. Community collaborators find it very frustrating 

when they train up to increase their capacity to serve military and veteran families, 

but then can never find any of those families to serve nor be sure those families 

will learn about their availability. This is especially frustrating when it is so clear 

that there is far more work to do than the VA can handle alone. I’m not certain 

how this problem can be solved, but I believe it is resulting in a staggering waste 

of resources, with more work to do than the VA can manage by itself, servicemembers and families who want help, and community partners who want to be of 

use, all separated by gaps and barriers that should be avoidable. We are working 

on a collaboration with the Indiana National Guard that is aimed at addressing this 

problem for military families, but the challenge for veterans is much larger and 

even more complex. 

Of course securing resources is always a challenge. Community collaborators may 

not have excess capacity sitting unused on the shelf that can easily be diverted to 

military or veteran families, and need to know that if they incur expense to serve 

servicemembers and veterans that they can recoup those costs. While DoD and VA 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING
49 

have seen their budgets grow significantly in recent years, many community-based 

not-for-profits have seen their resources decline. VA professionals who want to collaborate with community partners may have to do so ‘out of their back pockets’ and 

on top of their regular duties. Building the bridges of collaboration that you seek 

will require resources, and ideally those resources will be made readily apparent to 

community partners so that proposals can be solicited, evaluated, and selected. 

Ideally, resources will be structured to provide tangible incentives and benefit to 

community and VA partners who collaborate effectively. 

It has been our great honor to work to make a difference for military and veteran 

families. We are inspired by the commitment and dedication shown by military and 

veteran professionals in many sectors who share that mission, and we are eager to 

continue collaborating to make positive change. Thank you for all you do to try to 

make sure that our Nation’s veterans receive the care and support they have been 

promised. 

References 

Abdul-Adil, J., Drozd, O., Irie, I., Rachel, R., Alexis, S., A, F.D., et al. (2010). University-community mental health center collaboration: Encouraging the dissemination of empirically based treatment and practice. Community Mental Health Journal, 46, 417–422. 

Garrow, E., Nakashima, J., & McGuire, J. (2011, March). Providing human services in collaboration with government: Comparing faith-based and secular organizations that serve homeless veterans. Review of Religious Research, 52(3), 266–281. 

Gray, B. (1989). Collaborating: Finding common ground for multiparty problems. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. 

Guo, C., & Acar, M. (2005). Understanding collaboration among nonprofit organizations: Combining resource dependency, institutional and network perspectives. 

34(3). 

Kauffman, L. (2010, July). Veterans Rural Health Resource Center—Western Region: Fostering innovations in mental health care for rural veterans. NARHM Notes, 2(1). National Association for Rural Mental Health. 

Kegler, M.C., Hall, S.M., & Kiser, M. (2010, Aug. 9). Facilitators, challenges and 

collaborative activities in faith and health partnerships to address health disparities. Health Education and Behavior, 37, 665. 

Kudler, H., Batres, A.R., Flora, C.M., Washam, T.C., Goby, M.J., & Lehmann, L.S. 

(2011). The continuum of care for new combat veterans and their families: A public 

health approach. In Combat and Operational Behavioral Health (Ch. 20). Borden Institute. http://www.bordeninstitute.army.mil/published_volumes/combat_operational/ 

CBM-ch20-final.pdf. 

London, S. (1995). Collaboration and Community. Scott London. 

MOAA–Zeiders Enterprises. (2011). Wounded warrior and family-caregiver support: DoD–VA–Community collaborations

f 

. Roundtable Discussion Summary. 

Prepared Statement of M. David Rudd, Ph.D., ABPP 

Good afternoon, Chairwoman Buerkle, Ranking Member Michaud, and Members 

of the Subcommittee. I greatly appreciate the opportunity to testify on behalf of the 

National Center for Veterans Studies at the University of Utah and the countless 

American veterans that have served and sacrificed. I want to thank Chairwoman 

Buerkle for providing much needed leadership on an issue that will become increasingly important given the end of combat operations in Iraq and the planned reduction of forces in Afghanistan. The successful reintegration of many of our troops into 

civilian life will require thoughtful and coordinated efforts between the Department 

of Veterans Affairs (VA) and community organizations, with communities of faith 

offering particular promise. I am grateful for Chairwoman Buerkle’s efforts to draw 

attention to the problem of reintegration, particularly given that there is an intellectual and emotional disconnect between those that have served and the rest of society. Since the Gulf War, less than 1 percent of Americans have served in the armed 

forces, a dramatic shift from World War II (almost 9 percent), Korea, and Vietnam 

(both greater than 2 percent). The remarkably small number of Americans choosing 

to serve in the Armed Forces compounds the potential for misunderstanding. 

As a veteran of the Gulf War era and a clinical psychologist, I am keenly aware 

of the issues faced by servicemembers both engaged in combat and returning from 

war. Over the last decade, I have been involved in the treatment of servicemembers 

experiencing emotional and psychological problems secondary to combat and serving 

during wartime. In particular, I have directed treatment research focusing on active 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING
50 

duty servicemembers that have made suicide attempts. Although my research is 

only partially complete, what has become clear is that many servicemembers (and 

families) need assistance in order to make a successful transition from military life. 

My work has been focused on that portion of the veteran population that has struggled and experienced emotional and psychological problems. It’s important to point 

out, though, that this is only a portion of the population, with many making a seamless transition to civilian life. 

A recent survey of veterans by the Pew Research Center (2012) revealed that 27 

percent of veterans reported that readjustment to civilian life was either ‘‘somewhat 

difficult’’ or ‘‘very difficult.’’ The survey also revealed significant ‘‘burdens of service’’ 

with 48 percent reporting ‘‘strains in family relations,’’ 47 percent ‘‘frequently feeling irritable or angry,’’ 44 percent reporting ‘‘problems re-entering civilian life,’’ and 

37 percent reporting ‘‘post-trauma symptoms.’’ Despite the fact that many veterans 

transition from military life with few problems, these data indicate that many have 

difficulty making the shift. 

The Pew data offer insight into the source of the problems as well, with emotional 

and psychological adjustment at the forefront. Among those having experienced combat, 50 percent or more report post-trauma symptoms and difficult family relations. 

When queried about factors reducing the probability for successful re-entry into civilian life, veterans identified traumatic experiences and injury as the most significant variables. Of importance for this hearing, veterans identified ‘‘attending church 

at least weekly’’ as the most important variable associated with an easy and successful re-entry into civilian life. A remarkable 67 percent identified attending 

church ‘‘once a week or more’’ as making re-entry easier. Clearly, the social connection and support offered by religious institutions around the Nation are essential 

for our veterans. The Pew study also reported that churches were second only to 

the military itself as ‘‘institutions’’ in which veterans have a ‘‘great deal’’ or ‘‘quite 

a lot’’ of confidence. Clearly, communities of faith offer a unique and critical opportunity to connect with veterans transitioning from military life. If aware and appropriately trained, clergy can serve a critical role in assisting veterans struggling with 

emotional and psychological symptoms. Available data suggest communities of faith 

as a critical linchpin in helping veterans transition to civilian life. 

My own work has helped clarify the severity and magnitude of the emotional and 

psychological issues faced by a particularly large subset of the veteran population, 

student veterans. Nearly two million veterans will return home from overseas deployments as part of Operation Iraqi Freedom, Operation Enduring Freedom and 

Operation New Dawn. A large number of them will make use of the Post-9/11 GI 

Bill and transition quickly to college and university campuses. My recent study of 

student veterans nationwide revealed that many student veterans struggle with 

psychological symptoms, consistent with the data reported in the Pew survey. More 

specifically, I found that almost 35 percent of participants reported suffering ‘‘severe 

anxiety,’’ 24 percent experienced ‘‘severe depression’’ and 46 percent reported ‘‘significant symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder.’’ Somewhat alarming, my data 

indicate that 46 percent reported thoughts of suicide, with 20 percent having a plan. 

Further, 10.4 percent reported thinking about suicide ‘‘often or very often’’ and almost 8 percent reported making an attempt, almost six times the frequency of the 

general student population. 

From the limited data available to date, it would appear that problems with psychological and emotional adjustment are perhaps the single greatest barrier faced 

by returning veterans transitioning to civilian life. Of particular importance for this 

Committee, two community resources offer a unique opportunity to engage and connect with veterans, communities of faith and college and university campuses. Veterans hold religious institutions in high regard, reporting that regular contact and 

participation help ‘‘ease’’ their transition, offering critical support and assistance. 

Similarly, college and university campuses are arguably second only to the VA itself 

as institutions where the largest numbers of veterans gather. 

The VA has already expanded efforts to actively collaborate with college and universities around the country, including an increase in positions allocated to the Vet 

Success on Campus program and the new VA campus grant program funding 

projects meant to extend services to student veterans and extend outreach on campus, with five projects funded to date (Veterans Integration to Academic Leadership 

Initiative—VITAL). I would also like to mention and applaud VA efforts to explore 

additional partnerships with colleges and universities. I recently participated in a 

meeting with the Assistant Secretary of the VA for Policy and Planning, Dr. Henze, 

along with a collection of other campus leaders to discuss possible collaborations to 

meet identified veteran needs. The VA has been proactive on this front, an effort 

that should be commended. 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING
51 

Let me emphasize my support for efforts on both fronts; that is, working directly 

with communities of faith around the Nation, along with college and university campuses. There is empirical evidence indicating a significant need, along with data to 

suggest these two domains offer unique opportunities and promise to help ease the 

transition to civilian life. Training is needed in order for communities of faith to effectively respond to the demand. Many clergy members are already aware, sensitive 

to, and equipped to respond to the psychological and emotional needs of veterans. 

Large numbers, however, are not. Given the serious nature of the problems identified (e.g. suicidality) thoughtful and thorough training is needed. The National Center for Veterans Studies would welcome the opportunity to assist in any such effort. 

As with communities of faith, many colleges and universities around the country 

are unprepared to meet the psychological and emotional needs of student veterans. 

Although some entities offer training for college counseling centers, such as the Department of Defense Center for Deployment Psychology, resources are limited. 

Greater resources are needed to meet the growing demand. In response to this need, 

The National Center for Veterans Studies will be launching an effort to form a national higher education consortium targeting student veterans. We would welcome 

the chance to partner with any similar efforts around the country, including any 

launched by this Subcommittee. 

Thank you again for the opportunity to address the Subcommittee. These issues 

are critical and the needs of many of our veterans transitioning to civilian life are 

profound. The National Center for Veterans Studies is poised to help. I am happy 

to respond to any and all questions. 

References: 

Pew Research Center, The Military-Civilian Gap: War and Sacrifice in the Post9/11 Era, January 13, 2012. 

Rudd, M.D., Goulding, J., & Bryan, C.J. (2011). Student veterans: A national survey exploring psychological symptoms and suicide risk. Professional Psychology: Research & Practice, 42(5), 354–360. 

f 

Prepared Statement of George Ake III, Ph.D. 

Good afternoon, Chairwoman Buerkle, Ranking Member Michaud, and Members 

of the Subcommittee. I wish to thank you for the opportunity to testify on behalf 

of the 154,000 members and affiliates of the American Psychological Association 

(APA) regarding collaboration between the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) and 

community organizations to support veterans and their families. As a child psychologist at Duke University Medical Center and with the National Child Traumatic 

Stress Network, my work focuses on assisting children and families who have experienced stressful and traumatic life events, including military deployment and its 

aftermath. I am honored to speak with you today about the collaborative work that 

I and my colleagues are engaged in with a variety of partners around the country 

in support of our Nation’s military and veteran families. 

Collaboration among all sectors of society is needed to support the health and 

well-being of veterans and their families. This includes key partnerships with policymakers, government agencies, universities, the health care community, and the 

faith-based community. Scientific evidence continues to identify psychological and 

neurological disorders, including post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), depression, 

suicidal ideation, and traumatic brain injury (TBI), as some of the signature wounds 

of the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan. While psychologists and other health professionals play an essential role in helping veterans and families to address these 

challenges, partnerships and collaborations with others sectors of society are also 

critical. 

Despite a proliferation of programs for Active Duty, National Guard, Reserve 

Component, and veterans and their families, many families rely upon the support 

and counsel of faith-based providers as a first point of contact. In some communities, particularly small towns and rural areas, faith-based services are more prevalent and accessible than health care services. In theatre, on base or post, at the 

VA, and in local communities, veterans and their families not only approach faithbased providers on spiritual, religious, and moral issues, but also issues of reintegration, spousal relationships, and parenting. Chaplains and other faith-based 

providers can play a key role in addressing concerns about stigma related to mental 

and behavioral health services and supports as well as providing linkages and referrals to appropriate community and professional resources. 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING
52 

I would like to express my deep appreciation to you, Chairwoman Buerkle, for 

your leadership in advancing collaboration between the mental health and faithbased communities with regard to military and veteran families. The unique military and veterans mental health workshop that you hosted for faith-based providers 

in your district in December served as a wonderful example of the collaboration and 

partnership that is possible across sectors. I was honored to join the distinguished 

panel of experts that you assembled, including Dr. David Rudd of the University of 

Utah’s National Center for Veterans Studies, Drs. Judy Hayman and Caitlin 

Thompson from the VA, Jason Hansman of the Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of 

America, and Retired Air National Guard Chaplain Tim Bejian. Such events help 

to break down barriers and foster partnerships that benefit veterans and their families. Replicating this training in other congressional districts could serve as a valuable resource. 

The importance of collaboration between military and community systems, and 

among health professionals and faith-based providers, is especially important as we 

consider data from the 2010 Department of Defense (DoD) Profile of the Military 

Community, which estimates that 44 percent of the 1.4 million Active Duty and National Guard/Reserve personnel, who have deployed to combat missions as part of 

Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF), Operation Enduring Freedom (OEF), and/or Operation New Dawn (OND), are parents. This same report noted that there are almost 

2 million children in the U.S. who have parents in Active Duty or Reserve services. 

Many of these children and families have seen their military parents and spouses 

serve multiple combat deployments to Iraq and Afghanistan. A number contend 

with a parent who returns changed due to the wounds of war. Some of these families suffer financial hardship, homelessness, marital discord, violence, and other difficulties during their reintegration into civilian life. Still other families experience 

the grief and loss associated with their loved one’s fatal combat injury, or even suicide. Taken together, these findings highlight the necessity of considering the context and challenges for children and families of veterans returning from combat, as 

well as the role of the family in facilitating a successful transition to stateside service or civilian life. 

To support the veteran and strengthen the family, veteran families need easy connection to collaborative programs and supports through VA medical centers, vet centers, community mental health and faith-based services, and professionals from a 

variety of disciplines, such as psychologists, pediatricians, clergy, educators, and 

case managers who are familiar with the military/veteran culture. 

As a member of the National Child Traumatic Stress Network (NCTSN), I would 

like to highlight some of our efforts to support such collaboration. The NCTSN is 

an initiative launched by Congress in 2000 with the goal of developing a national 

collaborative network to improve best practices and standards of care for children 

and families affected by traumatic stress. Since 2001, the NCTSN, which is administered by the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, has delivered direct services to children and families who have experienced all forms of 

traumatic stress, including our Nation’s military families. Between 2002 and 2009, 

NCTSN members reported serving over 320,000 children through direct clinical 

services, with many more reached through outreach efforts, community educational 

programs, and provider training and consultation. Our work is done in partnership 

with all child-serving systems, including military service branches, faith-based organizations, child welfare, and community mental health agencies. 

In 2008, the National Center for Child Traumatic Stress (NCCTS), the NCTSN 

coordinating center co-located at Duke University and the University of California 

Los Angeles (UCLA), embarked on a partnership with the Center for the Study of 

Traumatic Stress of the Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences, to 

expand and enhance the level of support provided to military children and their 

families. Other major government partners include the VA, the DoD, and the National Guard. Civilian partners include the American Psychological Association, the 

National Association of Social Workers, and other community health care providers. 

Of the more than 100 NCTSN funded and affiliate member sites in 40 States, 

more than 60 percent serve military children and families. The NCTSN Military 

Families Program brings together high-level experts from multiple disciplines (i.e., 

mental health, military, and public health) to address the challenges facing military 

children, their families, and the providers who serve them. The NCTSN has modified interventions to meet the unique needs of military families, has conducted outreach to them in a variety of settings, and has produced educational and informational materials designed especially for their needs. Using Web-based, interactive 

media (e.g., podcasts, speakers series, and teleconferencing), the NCTSN Military 

Families Program offers more than a dozen educational presentations developed by 

key experts on psychological trauma and military issues. The NCTSN has developed 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING
53 

a useful curriculum for civilian providers, called Essentials for Those Who Care for 

Military Children and Families, which addresses subjects such as military culture, 

the impact of combat on families, the needs of children, programs and services for 

veterans and National Guard and Reserve members and their families, behavioral 

health services, frameworks for interventions, and family violence. Further, we created a Web-based Master Speaker Series cosponsored by the NCTSN and Zero to 

Three, which provides an opportunity for leading authorities from the VA, DoD, and 

university settings to discuss military culture, mental health issues, resilience, and 

wellness. In fact, tomorrow, the topic of our monthly webinar will be Expanding 

Services to Veteran Families and includes panelists from the VA and Zero to Three. 

These resources are available on the NCTSN Web site. 

In addition to providing evidence-based, trauma-informed treatment, the 27 sites 

of the NCTSN Military Families Program are actively engaged in research, community outreach, and partnerships with State and local agencies that serve Active 

Duty military, Guard, Reserve, and veterans. My colleagues at Duke University are 

implementing a Welcome Back Veterans program, which is an initiative of the 

McCormick Foundation, Major League Baseball, and the Entertainment Industry 

Foundation. This national program is intended to develop models for training community clinicians to offer accessible and effective mental health services to military 

and veteran families in local communities. 

Other colleagues with the Duke Evidence Based Implementation Center have 

been leading quality improvement collaboratives with VA teams. One of these 

collaboratives is based at the Durham VA Medical Center with teams focused on 

improving coordination between mental health services and veteran-centered care to 

improve access to services. The other collaborative based out of VISN 6 with Community-Based Outpatient Clinic teams focuses on increasing patient access to services and enhancing workflow efficiencies. 

Our NCTSN partners at UCLA developed and disseminated a program called 

Families OverComing Under Stress (FOCUS). The FOCUS program is designed to 

enhance the inherent resiliency of military families. The program has addressed 

family adjustment to parental deployment at more than 20 U.S. military installations, including Camp Lejeune, for which I provided consultation to their resiliency 

trainers on the implementation of FOCUS. The NCTSN has also collaborated with 

the VA’s National Center for PTSD to train military and civilian providers on acute 

stress interventions such as Combat Operational Stress First Aid that address principles of safety, connectedness, hope, calming, and self-efficacy. Our NCTSN and VA 

colleagues have provided training specifically to military chaplains as the training 

has embedded components relevant to the work of clergy working with servicemembers and veterans. 

Further, other NCTSN colleagues at Allegheny General Hospital in Pennsylvania 

have partnered with the Tragedy Assistance Program for Survivors (TAPS), the National Military Family Association, Zero to Three, the Center for the Study of Traumatic Stress, and the Center for Health and Health Care in Schools to educate professionals about the most appropriate resources for aiding families coping with the 

death of a loved one in the military. Resources from this program have been widely 

disseminated and are available on the NCTSN Web site for faith-based organizations to use or adapt when working with military and veteran families in the aftermath of loss. 

The NCTSN also has a strong program in support of military families through the 

Ambit Network at the University of Minnesota, which has developed the ADAPT 

(After Deployment, Adaptive Parenting Tools) program. This groundbreaking initiative specifically meets the needs of Reserve Component servicemembers and their 

families. The 14-week, Web-enhanced group parenting program addresses key challenges faced by deployed parents and their partners, including dealing with the 

transitions of deployment, responding to emotional challenges of deployment and reintegration, and enjoying children during stressful times. The program is now being 

tested in a National Institutes of Health-funded randomized controlled trial of 400 

families with children ages 4–12. 

Finally, Catholic Charities of Hawaii, an NCTSN Community Treatment Services 

Center, has reached out to military partners at Tripler Army Medical Center and 

Schofield Barracks to provide training on evidence-based treatments for children experiencing traumatic stress. 

In conclusion, we have seen that collaborative efforts between partners such as 

chaplains and faith-based providers, mental health professionals, physicians, educators, and the military and veterans community have resulted in a growing evidence base and increasingly high quality services for our military and veteran families. The American Psychological Association, Duke University Medical Center, and 

the National Child Traumatic Stress Network all stand ready to continue our colVerDate Mar 15 2010 12:41 Apr 02, 2013 Jkt 073290 PO 00000 Frm 00057 Fmt 6604 Sfmt 6621 I:\VA\73290.XXX 73290

dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING
54 

laborative efforts with this Subcommittee, the VA and DoD, our community-based 

partners, and the military and veterans community to address these important 

issues. 

Thank you for the opportunity to speak with you today and for your leadership 

and commitment to our Nation’s veterans and their families. 

f 

Prepared Statement of Reverend E. Terri LaVelle 

Chairwoman Buerkle, Ranking Member Michaud, and Members of the Subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to speak about the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Center for Faith-based and Neighborhood Partnerships’ (CFBNP) 

outreach efforts to and with faith-based and community organizations. As Director 

of VA’s CFBNP since September 14, 2009, I have had the opportunity to engage 

first-hand with faith-based, non-profit and community leaders and organizations. 

My testimony today will provide background information on the VA CFBNP, the 

collaborative outreach work the Center has engaged in beginning in 2005 with faithbased, non-profit and community leaders and organizations, internal VA partners, 

and the White House Office of Faith-based and Neighborhood Partnerships. 

Background 

VA’s Center for Faith-based and Community Initiatives was established on June 

1, 2004, by Executive Order 13342. The objective was to coordinate agency efforts 

for the elimination of regulatory, contracting, and other programmatic obstacles to 

enable faith-based and community organizations to access resources they need to 

provide social and community services. 

In February 2009, President Obama amended Executive Order 13199 to establish 

the White House Office of Faith-based and Neighborhood Partnerships (OFBNP). 

The name change reflects the emphasis and importance of developing and cultivating partnerships, through intentional outreach, with those in the community that 

already provide services and meet the needs of so many of our citizens. 

The VA CFBNP is one of thirteen Faith-based and Neighborhood Partnerships 

Centers in the Federal Government. 

Mission 

The mission of VA’s CFBNP is to develop partnerships with and provide relevant 

information to faith-based and secular organizations and expand their participation 

in VA programs in order to better serve the needs of veterans, their families, survivors and caregivers. VA’s CFBNP cultivates and develops relationships with faithbased and secular organizations, working with them as collaborative partners to 

serve our veterans, their families, survivors and caregivers. CFBNP outreaches to 

external partners to expand their understanding of, and participation in, VA programs. 

Outreach Collaboration 

Since 2005, nationwide, VA CFBNP has conducted pro-active outreach events 

interacting with over 1,200 faith-based, nonprofit and community leaders and organizations. The outreach events consisted of roundtables, conferences, and workshops. 

Since its inception in 2009, VA’s CFBNP has proactively outreached to faithbased, nonprofit and community leaders and organizations, often collaborating and/ 

or partnering with internal and external stakeholders. The internal partners for 

outreach events include the Veterans Benefits Administration (VBA) Vocational Rehabilitation and Employment (VR&E) Service, VA Chaplain Service, VA Homeless 

Program Office, National Cemetery Administration (NCA), Veterans Health Administration (VHA) Operation Enduring Freedom (OEF) and Operation Iraqi Freedom 

(OIF) Coordinators, and VA’s Voluntary Service. The Center’s external partners include Good Will International; American Red Cross; Habitat for Humanity; Salvation Army, USA; State Veterans Organizations; and Catholic Charities in Chicago, 

IL. 

Fiscal Year (FY) 2011 and 2012 Internal Outreach Collaborations 

VA CFBNP and VBA VR&E Service have partnered with local VBA Regional Offices to co-host Veterans Roundtables with the target audience being faith-based, 

nonprofit and community leaders and organizations. Local and regional VA staff 

serve as panelists and roundtable discussion participants. These events provide 

members of the local community an opportunity to meet and interact with VA staff 

and to know their local contacts and resources for assisting veterans. The Veterans 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING
55 

Roundtables were held in Jackson, MS; Seattle, WA; Newark, NJ; Waco, TX; Las 

Vegas, NV; Cleveland, OH and Louisville, KY. The attendee total at the Veterans 

Roundtables was 450. These VA Regional Roundtables have two primary goals: 

• To facilitate collaborative working relationships among faith-based and secular 

organizations, VBA, NCA, and VHA so that holistic service can be provided to 

veterans, their families, and survivors in the community where the Roundtable 

is held. 

• To inform attendees of the number of veterans in their community, what their 

current needs are, and potential funding available to faith-based and secular organizations who can demonstrate an ability to meet those needs in collaboration 

with the VA. 

VA CFBNP is coordinating with VBA to co-host roundtables in FY 2012 at VBA 

VR&E Service and Regional Offices in Montgomery, AL; Lincoln, NE; Albuquerque, 

NM; and Boston, MA. 

FY 2011 and 2012 External Outreach Collaborations 

The VA CFBNP helped plan and conduct workshops at two outreach events with 

external partners. One was with the State of California Department of Veterans Affairs and the California Statewide Collaborative for Our Military and Families and 

held in San Jose. The other was the ‘‘Battlemind to Home II’’ Symposium conducted 

with the local VA medical center, the Department of Labor and the Military Family 

Research Institute (MFRI) of Purdue University in Indianapolis, IN. The number of 

persons who attended these workshops respectively was 120 and 95. 

The VA CFBNP participated in five ‘‘Connecting Communities for the Common 

Good’’ Conferences in collaboration with the White House OFBNP, local officials 

from the host city, and the Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnership Centers from 

other Federal agencies. The conferences were held in Philadelphia, PA; Detroit, MI; 

New Orleans, LA; Chicago, IL; and Denver, CO. 

In order to support local organizations as they tackle community challenges, the 

regional events have three key goals: 

• To build and strengthen relationships between community and faith-based 

groups, and with local, regional and Federal Government partners; 

• To highlight relevant Federal and public/private partnership opportunities, and 

to connect groups to these opportunities; and 

• To open the door and tell the story of the Faith-based and Neighborhood Partnerships. 

At each ‘‘Connecting Communities for the Common Good’’ Conference, VA CFBNP 

moderates a workshop and facilitates a roundtable discussion. Each workshop and 

roundtable consists of local and regional VA staff as panelists and roundtable participants. Having local and regional VA staff present begins building relationships 

at the local level between VA and the faith-based, nonprofit and community leaders 

and organizations in attendance. The average attendance at each VA CFBNP workshop and roundtable discussion was 50 people. The CFBNP reached over 300 faithbased, nonprofit and community leaders and organizations. 

As the CFBNP Director, I have attended, presented, and conducted training on 

VA programs and services at the following events. These outreach events provide 

information about the needs of our veterans, their families, survivors, and caregivers. Information is also presented on the opportunities available to faith-based, 

nonprofit, and community leaders and organizations to become collaborative partners with VA to meet the needs of veterans, their families, survivors and caregivers. 

Examples of my activities as CFBNP Director include: 

• Speaker at the MFRI’s November 2011 conference ‘‘Battlemind to Home II Symposium.’’ The goal of the conference was to reduce community reintegration barriers for returning servicemembers and their families by increasing community 

knowledge and awareness of challenges faced and the supports available from 

a collaborative perspective. 

• Participant at the Working Together to Strengthen Guard and Reserve Couples 

and Families Forum sponsored by the Annie E. Casey Foundation and the National Healthy Marriage Resource Center. The Forum was held in Charlotte, 

NC, August 15–16, 2011. 

• Presenter at the Church of God in Christ (COGIC) AIM (Auxiliary in Ministries) Conference held in Houston, TX, August 6–9, 2011. 

• Speaker at the Veterans Roundtable sponsored by the CA Collaborative for 

Military and Families of San Jose, CA, March 23–24, 2011. This is a collaborative of over 200 faith-based and community organizations. 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING
56 

• Keynote speaker at a Douglas Memorial United Methodist Church’s Pastor’s 

Forum—Veteran Women Resource Center. The Pastor’s Forum was held in 

Washington, DC, March 26, 2011. • Panelist at Forging the Partnerships: DoD/USDA Family Resilience Conference 

held in Chicago, IL, April 27–28, 2011. This was a clergy panel with representatives from the National Guard, Air Force, Army, Marines and Coast Guard. 

The VA CFBNP will join the White House OFBNP ‘‘Connecting Communities for 

the Common Good’’ Conference in several cities beginning in March 2012. Center 

staff is serving on the ‘‘Battlemind to Home II’’ Symposium 2012 planning team. 

The CFBNP joins with the local VA medical center, the Department of Labor and 

the Military Family Research Institute (MFRI) of Purdue University in Indianapolis, IN, to convene and co-host the 2012 Symposium. 

Conclusion 

The VA CFBNP increases veterans participation in VA programs through outreach to, and partnerships with, faith-based, and community organizations. CFBNP 

collaborates with internal and external partners, creates partnerships between government agencies and faith-based and community organizations. CFBNP uses outreach events and internal and external partnerships to provide VA’s program information to faith-based and community organizations which enables them to inform 

and serve veterans, their families, survivors and caregivers. 

The VA CFBNP is consistently reaching out to, engaging, and educating faithbased, nonprofit and community leaders and organizations on the role and work of 

the Center. The Center is open to diverse ways for developing collaborative partnerships with faith-based, nonprofit, and community leaders and organizations that 

will best serve our veterans, their families, survivors and caregivers. 

Madam Chairwoman, this concludes my prepared statement. I am prepared to answer your questions at this time. 

f 

Prepared Statement of Chaplain Michael McCoy, Sr. 

Chairwoman Buerkle, Ranking Member Michaud, and Members of the Subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to speak about the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Chaplain Service’s outreach efforts with community- and faithbased organizations. As an Associate Director of VA’s National Chaplains Center 

and a past President of the Military Chaplains Association of the United States of 

America, I have had the opportunity to engage first-hand with community and faithbased organizations. 

My testimony today will provide an overview of three programs: The VA National 

Chaplain Center’s Veteran Community Outreach Initiative (VCOI); the marriage enrichment retreats; and the ‘‘Heal the Healer’’ program. VA chaplains have created 

these initiatives to collaborate and build bridges between VA, the faith-based communities, and neighborhood leaders to aid in the spiritual care of our returning veterans and their families. 

VA National Chaplain Center’s Veteran Community Outreach Initiative 

(VCOI) 

In 2007, the VA National Chaplain Center started the VCOI to educate community clergy about the spiritual and emotional needs of our returning veterans and 

their families. Nationwide, VA chaplains have conducted over 200 training events 

and provided education to approximately 10,000 clergy through this effort. As a result, clergy across the Nation are learning to: 

1. Identify readjustment challenges that veterans and their families face following deployment; 

2. Identify psychological and spiritual effects of war trauma on survivors; 

3. Consider appropriate pastoral care interventions for the spiritual and theological issues that veterans and families often encounter; 

4. Brainstorm ideas for a community clergy partnership between VA chaplains 

and local clergy; and 

5. Refer veterans to local VA health care facilities by being a trusted and knowledgeable resource for veterans to use to connect with VA. 

In 2011, VA’s National Chaplain Center made available to the Chaplain Services 

in VA’s 152 medical centers clergy training materials, program brochures, curriculum and slides, and DVDs on spirituality. These materials were presented to 

local clergy for use as resources to support returning veterans and provide informaVerDate Mar 15 2010 12:41 Apr 02, 2013 Jkt 073290 PO 00000 Frm 00060 Fmt 6604 Sfmt 6621 I:\VA\73290.XXX 73290

dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING
57 

tion on referring veterans and their family members to local VA medical centers, 

community-based outpatient clinics, Vet Centers, and other related resources. 

Marriage Enrichment Program 

Our marriage enrichment program began in February of 2009 and was initiated 

by the Chaplain Service at the Charlie Norwood VA Medical Center in Augusta, GA. 

This program was developed based on concerns over the large number of stressed 

marriages experienced by our returning veterans; these stresses often led to family 

crises and divorce. For example, in June 2005 an article in the USA Today stated, 

‘‘The number of active-duty soldiers getting divorced has been rising sharply with 

deployments to Afghanistan and Iraq. The trend is severest among officers. Last 

year, 3,325 Army officers’ marrages ended in divorce—up 78 percent from 2003, the 

year of the Iraq invasion, and more than 31⁄2 times the number in 2000, before the 

Afghan operation, Army figures show. For enlisted personnel, the 7,152 divorces last 

year were 28 percent more than in 2003 and up 53 percent from 2000. During that 

time, the number of soldiers has changed little.’’ 

Centered on the theme, ‘‘Getting It Back: Reclaiming Your Relationship After 

Combat Deployment,’’ the program is designed so that married couples can develop 

healthy ways of interacting and relating with one another. We have discovered that 

all too often, the spouse who has gone to war and returned may have physical, emotional, or spiritual wounds that have not yet healed. On the other hand, the spouse 

who was not deployed also needs support, understanding, and relief from the stress 

of trying to maintain some kind of normalcy at home. Family and friends mean well 

as they try to offer support, but they often do not understand what the couple is 

experiencing. This program use material from the Practical Application of Intimate 

Relationship Skills (PAIRS) Foundation to help couples address these issues. The 

program focuses on topics such as constructive conflict resolution, emotional literacy, and communication and intimacy in stressful situations. Facilitators spend an 

average of 17 hours working with the couples over a 2.5 day weekend. Two VA 

chaplains developed this ministry by using community resources and collaborating 

with local organizations to sponsor these programs. The community leaders and 

faith-based volunteers, collaborating with VA chaplains, have contributed in making 

the programs a success. More information, including some best practices for the program, is available online at: www.va.gov/chaplain. 

Heal the Healer 

In August 2008, VA’s National Chaplain Service introduced the ‘‘Heal the Healer’’ 

program for our returning National Guard and Reserve chaplains. Some of these 

chaplains have served multiple deployments. After realizing that several were experiencing trauma from their experiences overseas, we developed a program designed 

to: 

1. Help those returning from deployment in Operation Enduring Freedom/Operation Iraqi Freedom/Operation New Dawn (OEF/OIF/OND) as military reserve 

chaplains be assured that the chaplain community at home cares about them 

and their families; 

2. Provide chaplains returning from deployment as military reserve chaplains in 

OEF/OIF/OND with the opportunity to share openly their experiences and 

emotions associated with their deployment; 

3. Meet other chaplains with similar experiences from the theater of operations; 

4. Provide an educational awareness of combat operational stress and how to deal 

with it; 

5. Build a network for military reserve chaplains who were deployed in support 

of OEF/OIF/OND and a support system upon which they may call; 

6. Provide a realistic review of lessons learned; and 

7. Gain insight on how we may intervene in the future to provide appropriate and 

timely care for our chaplains returning from combat zones. 

The stories and tears that are shared in these sessions reinforce the importance 

of our ongoing role to support the chaplains who have worn our Nation’s uniform. 

These men and women have voluntarily placed themselves in harm’s way to provide 

the full range of ministry for our warriors. In caring for our veterans, they too have 

changed. Some also bear the wounds of war. Chaplains fill a vital role, and we must 

be prepared to help those who assist others in the process of spiritual healing. VA 

chaplains, in partnership with local clergy, our faith group endorsers, and community faith group leaders, work together to reach out and offer support to returning 

chaplains and their families. 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING
58 

1 U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs Press Release, February 13, 2012 (http://www.va.gov/ 

opa/pressrel/pressrelease.cfm?id=2263). 

Conclusion 

In conclusion, these three programs develop community partnerships and work 

with faith-based and community organizations to bring attention to the needs of our 

veterans and their families. Today, we understand better the evils and horrors of 

war that can afflict them. We recognize that their service-related experiences can 

cause deep wounds to the spirit, conscience, and soul. Chaplains, community clergy, 

and communities of faith can make a great difference in helping to heal our warriors and the families who love them. 

Madam Chairwoman, this concludes my prepared statement. I am prepared to answer your questions at this time. 

f 

Statement for the Record, Consortium for Citizens With Disabilities, 

Veterans, and Military Families Task Force 

Chairwoman Buerkle, Ranking Member Michaud, and other distinguished Members of the Subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to submit testimony for the 

record on behalf of the Consortium for Citizens with Disabilities (CCD) Veterans 

and Military Families Task Force regarding efforts to establish meaningful relations 

between the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) and community organizations to 

assist disabled veterans and their families. 

CCD is a coalition of over 100 national consumer, service provider, and professional organizations which advocates on behalf of people with disabilities and chronic conditions and their families. The CCD Veterans and Military Families Task 

Force works to bring the disability and veterans communities together to address 

issues that affect veterans with disabilities as people with disabilities. Task force 

members include veterans service organizations and broad based disability organizations, including organizations that represent consumers and service providers. 

Since its creation, the CCD Veterans and Military Families Task Force has sought 

to connect veterans and military service organizations with the disability community to allow for cross collaboration and the application of lessons learned to new 

populations of people with disabilities. Because of the intersection of the disability 

and veterans communities that occurs when a veteran acquires a significant disability, the task force is uniquely suited to bring a holistic perspective to issues impacting disabled veterans. 

Many CCD member organizations provide vital services to veterans with disabilities that might not otherwise be readily accessible to them. These programs complement the wide array of services and supports available to our Nation’s veterans 

through VA, but should be viewed as supplementary. We believe that disabled veterans must have access to needed health care services through the VA health care 

system, including accessible physical and appropriate mental health services, as 

well as long-term services and supports. Specifically, we recognize the concerns expressed by the veterans’ community in documents such as The Independent Budget 

(IB) about proposals to contract out core missions of the VA health care system. 

At the same time, however, the IB acknowledges that veterans will always receive 

health care services through multiple sources but recommends that VA retain a role 

in coordinating that care. The CCD Veterans and Military Families Task Force believes that public-private partnerships allow VA to effectively augment services 

available to veterans, particular those who live in rural and remote areas. Increased 

development of these partnerships allows VA to go to the veteran. 

These partnerships also allow VA to ensure that disabled veterans have access 

to the support models that are widely available in the community, but with VA’s 

oversight. For example, community-based organizations have developed best practice models to facilitate the long-term support needs of people with disabilities. 

Through partnerships with community organizations, the VA can integrate new 

services into the existing VA systems for populations that are requiring new types 

of services, including veterans with significant disabilities. 

The Need for Community and Faith-Based Organizations 

VA estimates that more than 1 million active-duty personnel will join the ranks 

of America’s 22 million veterans during the next 5 years.1 In many cases, these men 

and women will return home with unique challenges that often go unmet despite 

the enormous effort and reach of VA. This Subcommittee has focused on some of 

these challenges, including recent hearings on the suicide rate among veterans and 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING
59 

2 U.S. Government Accountability Office, VA Mental Health Report, October, 2011 (http:// 

www.gao.gov/new.items/d1212.pdf). 3 U.S. Government Accountability Office, Homeless Women Veterans December 2011 Report, 

(http://www.gao.gov/assets/590/587334.pdf). 4 Joining Forces for Women Veterans Summary Report, Business and Professional Women’s 

Foundation, February 2011, (http://www.bpwfoundation.org/documents/uploads/JFWV_Final_ Summit_Report.pdf). 5 Executive Order 13342 (http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/WCPD-2004-06-07/pdf/WCPD-2004-06- 

07-Pg980.pdf). 6 U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs Press Release, January 7, 2009 (http://www1.va.gov/opa/ 

pressrel/pressrelease.cfm?id=1639). 7 U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs Congressional Budget Justification (http://www.va.gov/ 

budget/docs/summary/Fy2013_Volume_III-Benefits_Burial_Dept_Admin.pdf). 

their lack of access to mental health services. The U.S. Government Accountability 

Office (GAO) reported 2 that ‘‘logistical challenges’’ was one factor that may hinder 

veterans from accessing mental health care. The report cited ‘‘distances to obtain 

treatment’’ as one of the barriers, particularly for veterans who live in rural areas. 

Another increasing concern is the homeless problem among women veterans. The 

GAO reported in a December 2011 study 3 that the number of homeless women veterans has doubled in 4 years and found that women veterans lacked awareness of 

VA programs, services, and benefits. A separate 2011 report 4 echoed those findings 

and recommended that solutions to address women veterans’ transition challenges 

should be ‘‘informed, holistic, collaborative, and community-based.’’ 

The unmet needs of current veterans combined with the projected rise in the veteran population make leveraging the existing social services community to supplement the VA network more critical than ever. We believe that no veterans or their 

families should suffer from a lack of access to or understanding of how to navigate 

reintegration services. Many community service providers have the expertise, experience, and local capacity to more fully partner with VA through its important veterans initiatives. 

Since the issuance of an executive order in 2004,5 VA has made working with the 

nongovernmental organizations (NGO), nonprofits, and faith-based communities a 

priority. The objective of the VA’s Center for Faith Based and Neighborhood Partnerships is to coordinate agency efforts for the elimination of regulatory, contracting, and other programmatic obstacles that often prevent these organizations 

from providing community-based veterans’ services through VA funding and contracts. In 2009, VA announced a new NGO Gateway Initiative 6 to ‘‘tap the power 

of communities’’ and help NGOs extend services to veterans. The VA reiterated its 

commitment to fostering and expanding partnerships with Federal, State, and private sector agencies and faith-based and community organizations in its fiscal year 

2013 budget request to Congress.7

Examples of Successful VA and Community-Based Organization Partnerships 

Members of the CCD Veterans and Military Families Task Force have successfully partnered with VA in certain areas to meet the needs of disabled veterans and 

their families. Below are three examples that illustrate the positive impact that VA 

partnerships with community-based organizations can have on addressing the issues 

facing today’s veterans and their families. 

Center for Independent Living Care Coordination 

An example of a successful care coordination model between VA and a community-based organization involves the Veteran Directed Home and Community-Based 

Services (VDHCBS) program offered through the Sioux Falls VA Medical Center 

(VAMC). Launched in August 2010, the VAMC contracted with the local Minnesota 

River Area Agency on Aging (MnRAAA) to provide case management, fiscal management services, and assessment services for veterans seeking to obtain long-term 

services and supports in the community. 

Because of previous outreach efforts by the South WestCenter for Independent 

Living (SWCIL) to the VAMC, National Guard Family Assistance Center and other 

veterans’ groups, the MnRAAA program managers were familiar with SWCIL and 

its services to people with disabilities in rural Minnesota. The Agency on Aging subcontracted with the Center for Independent Living to conduct the actual assessments of veterans and provide certain case management services because of the 

CIL’s expertise in this arena under its mandate to offer similar assistance through 

the Rehabilitation Act. 

A licensed social worker with SWCIL serves as the liaison with nursing staff at 

the VAMC when a veteran is referred through MnRAAA for evaluation for 

VDHCBS. The SWCIL sends the veteran a packet of materials describing the consumer-directed program and schedules a follow up visit with the veteran if he/she 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING
60 

is interested in VDHCBS. A VA nurse determines what services the veteran needs 

that are available through VA and works with the SWCIL social worker to identify 

additional services that must be engaged to fully implement a home and community-based care plan. For example, SWCIL has used several other community options to obtain services or needed home modifications for veterans. The Center for 

Independent Living receives a one-time fee for each assessment and bills for case 

management under its subcontract with MnRAAA. As a result of this project, approximately 18 veterans have been successfully enrolled in VDHCBS. 

AbilityOne® Serves Employment Needs of Veterans 

The AbilityOne® program is a Federal initiative to help people who are blind or 

have significant disabilities, including wounded veterans, find employment by working for nonprofit agencies (NPAs) that provide products and/or services to the U.S. 

Government. With a national network of 600 NPAs, which work through NISH and 

the National Industries for the Blind, and AbilityOne® projects in every State of 

the Nation, the AbilityOne® program is the largest single source of employment for 

people who are blind or have other significant disabilities in the United States. The 

U.S. AbilityOne® Commission is the Federal agency authorized to administer the 

AbilityOne® program. 

The AbilityOne® program employs over 50,000 people who are blind or have significant disabilities, of which 3,300 are veterans and 1,700 were veterans with disabilities. Through National Industries for the Blind and NISH, the AbilityOne® program’s NPAs also support and employ thousands of veterans within their community outside their AbilityOne® workforce. The AbilityOne® program can offer increased community career transition support, exploration, and direct training for 

veterans in transition to management opportunities. 

In 2003, VA’s Compensated Work Therapy program (CWT) signed an MOU with 

the AbilityOne® program as the referral conduit between VA CWT and the 

AbilityOne® NPAs to collaborate with VA beneficiaries who have a disability. Approximately 2,100 veterans with disabilities have been employed since the partnership’s inception. The partnership agreement promotes local relationships between 

NPAs and VA CWT offices. This allows VA to pre-screen veterans to match 

AbilityOne® job requirements and to refer qualified veterans with significant disabilities to participate in AbilityOne® job coaching programs. 

Easter Seals Serves Veterans and Their Families 

Easter Seals has a long-standing record of service to veterans, military servicemembers, and their families. Easter Seals expanded its mission at the end of World 

War II to include adult services specifically to address the growing number of soldiers returning home with disabilities. Recognizing the new and unmet needs of the 

hundreds of thousands of men and women returning from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, Easter Seals launched its Military and Veterans Initiative in 2005 to address serious gaps in service for veterans and military families by mobilizing its national community-based provider network. Today, Easter Seals touches the lives of 

America’s heroes and their families through its more than 70 affiliates across 48 

States and its network of 24,000 professional staff and 40,000 local volunteers. 

Since the passage of the Veterans Millennium Healthcare Act in 1999, Easter 

Seals has worked closely with VA at the national, regional and local level to both 

raise awareness about access to adult day services for veterans and to contract locally to provide the direct service. In 2010, Congress approved the Caregivers and 

Veterans Omnibus Health Services Act that authorized a range of new services to 

support caregivers of eligible post-9/11 veterans, including the establishment of the 

National Veteran Caregiver Training program. In April of 2011, VA contracted with 

Easter Seals for its caregiving expertise in working with individuals with serious 

disabilities to develop and provide the training. Easter Seals operates the VA caregiver contract with Atlas Research, a veteran-owned small business, and three of 

the country’s leading caregiving organizations: the National Alliance on Caregiving, 

the National Family Caregiver Association, and the Family Caregiver Alliance. 

Easter Seals and its partners offer in-person, Web-based and self-study caregiver 

training through the contract to family members of seriously injured, post-9/11 veterans who receive their care at home and are eligible under VA program guidelines. 

The training includes topics on caregiver self-care, home safety, caregiver skills, veteran personal care, managing difficult behaviors and support resources. 

Easter Seals’ experience with VA has been very positive throughout the implementation of the caregiver contract. Under the contract management and direction 

of VA, Easter Seals and its partners have met the targets and exceeded expectations. Feedback has been overwhelmingly positive, including from a mother of a seVerDate Mar 15 2010 12:41 Apr 02, 2013 Jkt 073290 PO 00000 Frm 00064 Fmt 6604 Sfmt 6621 I:\VA\73290.XXX 73290

dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING
61 

riously injured veteran who wrote: ‘‘Thank you for re-inspiring us and for all you 

continue to do to be a part of healing American heroes.’’ 

Recommendations for Expanding Partnership Success 

The CCD Veterans and Military Families Task Force believes that these examples 

of successful partnerships between VA and community-based organizations clearly 

support our position for increased collaboration. Specifically, we believe that there 

are opportunities to foster additional collaboration to meet the needs of disabled veterans living in their communities. Consequently, VA should expand communitybased, supportive services models (similar to the Supportive Services for Veteran 

Families program) that leverage the existing social service network to help assist 

VA in achieving its goals. 

As an example, veterans with disabilities often need assistance obtaining appropriate community-based services to allow them to live and work independently in 

the community. Navigating the many different services for people with disabilities 

and veterans, such as health benefits, transportation, and vocational rehabilitation 

services, can be complex. Organizations like the Protection and Advocacy agencies 

located in every State and territory have expertise and experience navigating these 

programs and often advocate for veterans with disabilities to receive appropriate 

services from community-based and faith-based organizations. 

For instance, the New York Commission on Quality of Care and Advocacy for People with Disabilities has been working with the New York State Department of 

Health to create an advisory board of veterans to address the need of veterans to 

receive community-based health care services, and to help monitor the services that 

veterans receive. Disability Rights California holds weekly training and information 

sessions for veterans in the San Diego area to provide them information and assistance obtaining community-based services. Protection and Advocacy agencies are 

eager to work with VA to ensure veterans with disabilities receive the services and 

supports necessary to live and work in the community. 

The National Disability Rights Network (NDRN), a CCD member organization, is 

available to assist with coordinating collaboration efforts between VA and the Protection and Advocacy Network. The CCD Veterans and Military Families Task Force 

encourages VA to work with the Protection and Advocacy agencies, NDRN, and 

other organizations to provide these unique advocacy services to veterans with disabilities. 

We commend VA’s NGO Gateway Initiative aimed at helping qualified nonprofits 

who are interested in assisting VA in a variety of service areas and VA’s establishment of a dedicated liaison in the Office of the Secretary to support VA/NGO information sharing and collaboration. However, VA should elevate the profile of this initiative and include readily available guidance on the VA Web site regarding how 

interested organizations would receive assistance through this initiative. We believe 

that organizations interested in partnering with VA, must be able to easily relay 

their interest and abilities to VA. 

The ability to augment VA services by linking VA with established community 

and faith-based organizations represents an opportunity to greatly increase access 

to a variety of services needed for veterans with disabilities and their families in 

transitioning to and remaining active members of their communities. The need to 

expand access to services, particularly for veterans in rural and remote areas, shows 

the need to increase collaboration to meet the concerns of today’s veterans with disabilities. Qualified community and faith-based organizations represent a clear pathway to augmenting VA services for our Nation’s veterans. 

Thank you for the opportunity to submit testimony regarding the views of the 

CCD Veterans and Military Families Task Force concerning collaboration between 

VA and community-based organizations. We encourage the Subcommittee to continue its exploration of this topic and commend your leadership on behalf of our Nation’s veterans with disabilities. We are ready to work in partnership to ensure that 

all veterans are able to reintegrate in to their communities and remain valued, contributing members of society. 

Information Required by Clause 2(g) of Rule XI of the House of 

Representatives 

Heather Ansley, Esq., MSW 

Vice President of Veterans Policy 

VetsFirst, a program of United Spinal Association 

1660 L St., NW, Suite 504 

Washington, DC 20036 

(202) 556–2076 Ext. 7702 

hansley@vetsfirst.org 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING
62 

Susan Prokop 

Associate Advocacy Director 

Paralyzed Veterans of America 

801 18th St., NW 

Washington, DC 20006 

(202) 416–7707 

susanp@pva.org 

Leonard Selfon, J.D., CAE 

Associate General Counsel 

Paralyzed Veterans of America 

801 18th St., NW 

Washington, DC 20006 

(202) 416–7629 

lens@pva.org 

Receipt of Federal grants or contracts: 

The Consortium for Citizens with Disabilities Veterans and Military Families 

Task Force has not received any Federal grants or contracts during the current or 

two preceding fiscal years. 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING
63 

MATERIAL SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD 

Post-Hearing Questions and Responses for the Record: 

Questions from Hon. Michael H. Michaud, Ranking Democratic Member, 

Subcommittee on Health, Committee on Veterans’ Affairs 

to Honorable Eric K. Shinseki, Secretary, 

U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs 

February 29, 2012 

Honorable Eric K. Shinseki 

Secretary 

U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs 

810 Vermont Avenue, NW 

Washington, DC 20420 

Dear Secretary Shinseki: 

In reference to our Subcommittee on Health hearing entitled, ‘‘Building Bridges 

Between VA and Community Organizations to Support Veterans and Families,’’ that 

took place on February 27, 2012, I would appreciate it if you could answer the enclosed hearing questions by the close of business on Wednesday, April 11, 2012. 

In an effort to reduce printing costs, the Committee on Veterans’ Affairs, in cooperation with the Joint Committee on Printing, is implementing some formatting 

changes for materials for all full Committee and Subcommittee hearings. Therefore, 

it would be appreciated if you could provide your answers consecutively and singlespaced. In addition, please restate the question in its entirety before the answer. 

Due to the delay in receiving mail, please provide your response to Jian Zapata 

at jian.zapata@mail.house.gov, and fax your responses to Jian at 202–225–2034. If 

you have any questions, please call 202–225–9756. 

Sincerely, 

Michael H. Michaud 

Ranking Democratic Member 

Subcommittee on Health 

CW/jz 

Questions for the Record from the 

House Committee on Veterans’ Affairs Subcommittee on Health 

February 27, 2012 

Hearing on Building Bridges Between VA and Community Organizations to 

Support Veterans and Families 

Question for Rev. E. Terri LaVelle, Director, VA Center for Faith-based and 

Neighborhood Partnerships 

1. What is being done to specifically address the support needs of servicemembers 

and veterans that reside in rural or underserved areas? 

Questions for Chaplain Michael McCoy, Associate Director, National Chaplain Center 

1. Within the 200 training events that the National Chaplain Center has conducted, 

how many clinics have been included in this outreach? 

2. How is the National Chaplain Center measuring success in terms of outreach 

and training? 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING
64 

Responses from Hon. Eric K. Shinseki, Secretary, 

U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs 

to Honorable Michael H. Michaud, Ranking Democratic Member, 

Subcommittee on Health, Committee on Veterans’ Affairs 

February 27, 2012 

Hearing on Building Bridges Between VA and Community Organizations to 

Support Veterans and Families 

Question for Rev. E. Terri LaVelle, Director, VA Center for Faith-based and 

Neighborhood Partnerships (CFBNP) 

Question 1: What is being done to specifically address the support needs 

of servicemembers and veterans that reside in rural or underserved areas? 

Response: 

The VA CFBNP hosts quarterly conference calls for members of the Center’s 

listserv. The quarterly conference call provides listserv members with updates on 

the work of VA’s CFBNP especially focusing on sharing the Center’s collaborative 

efforts with internal and external stakeholders working with or on behalf of veterans. The call also provides updates on VA programs and services that will assist 

listserv members in serving the needs of veterans, their families, survivors, and 

caregivers. 

Some members of the listserv represent and or work with organizations that provide services to veterans in rural communities. 

Realizing the need to provide additional information to those serving veterans in 

rural communities, the Center’s final call for FY 2011 provided information on a collaborative community program for veterans and clergy living and working in rural 

communities. 

For the September 15, 2011 quarterly conference call, the speaker was Rev. Steve 

Sullivan, Chaplain Arkansas VA Medical Center and Director of the VA/Clergy 

Partnership for Rural Veterans. Chaplain Sullivan shared information about Project 

South (Serving Our Units at Home). Chaplain Sullivan shared how Project South 

came into existence, how to effectively engage and work with local clergy and ways 

to reach the veterans and their families. 

Project SOUTH is an inter-denominational cooperative effort between local 

churches, the National Guard and U.S. Army Reserve local units, and the Arkansas 

Veterans Affairs to provide basic support and care for local soldiers and National 

Guardsmen who are preparing to be or are already deployed, and to their families. 

Project SOUTH works with faith leaders in El Dorado, Arkansas and other surrounding rural communities. 

The VA CFBNP co-hosts four regional Veterans Roundtables annually with Veterans Benefits Administration (VBA) Vocational Rehabilitation and Employment 

(VR&E) Service and the VR&E Regional Office (RO) of the host city. 

In previous Veterans Roundtables, it became apparent that information and training programs must be taken to where the needs are; one place is to our rural communities. Rural communities often lack adequate transportation and other resources 

to get meaningful numbers of participants to such event. 

One of the VA Veterans Roundtables for FY 2012 will be held in a rural community. 

The VA Veterans Roundtable has two primary goals; the first is to facilitate collaborative working relationships among faith-based and secular organizations working in the host city and with Veterans Benefits Administration, National Cemetery 

Administration, and Veterans Health Administration so that holistic services can be 

provided to veterans, their families, survivors, and caregivers. 

The second goal is to inform attendees of the number of veterans in their community, what their current needs are, and potential funding available to faith-based 

and secular organizations who can demonstrate an ability to meet those needs in 

collaboration with the VA. 

To strengthen and expand the CFBNP support to rural veterans, the Director of 

the CFBNP met with the Director of Veterans Health Administration’s (VHA) Office 

of Rural Health on March 22, 2012. They discussed VHA rural health needs and 

how VA’s CFBNP an assist veterans by working with faith-based and community 

leaders in rural communities. The next step is for VA’s CFBNP to work in collaboration with VA’s Community-Based Outpatient Clinics (CBOCs). Together, these ‘‘networks’’ can directly inform and assist rural veterans to secure services they may 

need. 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING
65 

Questions for Chaplain Michael McCoy, Associate Director, National Chaplain Center 

Question 1: Within the 200 training events that the National Chaplain Center has conducted, how many clinics have been included in this outreach? 

Response: 

The majority of the 233 Veterans Community Outreach Initiative (VCOI) programs have been hosted at or near VA medical centers. Outpatient clinical program 

personnel are invited to participate in the day-long clergy training events. The 

Rural Clergy Training program, cosponsored by the VA National Chaplain Center 

and the VA Office of Rural Health, is an initiative to create Best Practices in training rural clergy in very rural settings. The eight Rural Clergy Training events 

planned for 2012 (listed below), will be held near VA CBOCs. We anticipate that 

VA clinic personnel, as well as VA Mobile Vet Center staff personnel will participate. 

Elizabeth City, NC—March 6, 2012 

Danville, VA—March 8, 2012 

Staunton, Virginia; 

Beckley, West Virginia; 

Carrolton, Kentucky; 

Richmond, Kentucky; 

Rogersville, Tennessee; and 

Cookeville, Tennessee. 

The five objectives of these Rural Clergy Training events are for VA Chaplains 

to: 

1. Train rural clergy to recognize the holistic needs of veterans and their families; 

2. Train rural clergy to be able to respond sensitively to the needs of returning 

rural veterans; 

3. Train rural clergy to be equipped to make referrals to VA facilities; 

4. Encourage rural clergy to establish ministry programs specifically for veterans 

living in rural communities; and 

5. Encourage rural clergy to use their influence in the community to help reduce 

the stigma attached to mental health issues. 

Question 2: How is the National Chaplain Center measuring success in 

terms of outreach and training? 

Response: 

We are developing practices and measurement tools for the Rural Health Clergy 

Training Project that will assist local clergy and Veterans Service Organizations 

representatives to identify problems of returning veterans. These tools will aid veterans in receiving the appropriate assistance in rural communities. Outcome evaluation is designed in a pre/post framework and is based on three measures: (1) before 

training, (2) immediately after training, and (3) at yet-to-be-determined periods (potentially 3 months, 6 months, and 12 months) after training. There are seven discrete measures related to outcomes, all related to expanded services in local communities. 

We continue to improve the outcome evaluation tools by developing best practices 

and measurement devices that can be utilized at VCOI events. Some specific questions among the 33-question evaluation forms distributed following each of the 

training events are: How many referrals have you made to a Veterans Affairs facility in the past 12 months? If you have made a referral to a Veterans Affairs 

facility, how would you rate your satisfaction with the experience? How many referrals have you made to a community mental health facility in the past 12 months? 

In your ministry, do you ever interact with: Veterans Affairs Chaplains? Do you 

ever interact with Veterans Affairs Mental Health Providers? Have you spoken 

about military/veteran needs from the pulpit? 

Æ 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with HEARING