Bleak Outlook = for GI Bill Implementation

Home

Benefits

News

Entertainment

Travel

Shop

Finance

Careers

Education

Join the Military

Community

Bleak=20 Outlook for GI Bill Implementation

March 18, = 2009

By Terry Howell

According to a March 12, 2009 Veterans Affairs Office of Inspector=20 General report, =E2=80=9Csuccessful implementation remains a = difficult and risky=20 challenge..." This rather bleak view of the implementation = process,=20 while more realistic than other recent VA reports, should not come as a = shock to=20 anyone paying attention to the details of the of the Post-9/11=20 GI Bill program.

The new GI Bill program (Chapter 33) has put a huge demand on an = already=20 overloaded agency. As the OIG report further denotes, = =E2=80=9C=E2=80=A6[the VA=E2=80=99s] projected=20 workload estimate did not include consideration of greater participation = because=20 of the current economic climate. Inadequate staffing can potentially = delay=20 claims processing.=E2=80=9D Considering that GI Bill claims can already = run 20 or=20 more weeks behind, this is not offer much hope.

"We have some concerns that the Veterans Benefits=20 Administration may need more staff than currently planned..." says=20 OIG. However, the OIG does say that the VA is considering = rehiring VA=20 annuitants [retirees] with the expertise needed to more quickly and = efficiently=20 process the expected flood of Post-9/11 GI Bill benefit claims.

Unfortunately the OIG report (excerpt below) failed to directly = address=20 the incredible number of benefit questions that will = result=20 when veterans are asked to make an irrevocable choice between GI Bill=20 programs. This choice is crucial and will determine which education = and=20 training programs, benefit payments, and limitations will apply to each = veteran.=20 In some situations veterans may find that sticking to the Montgomery=20 GI Bill (Chapter 30) would mean greater benefits.

For example, under current rules, veterans participating in 100 = percent=20 distance learning and online programs are excluded from receiving the = monthly=20 stipend =E2=80=93 a benefit which ranges from $800 to $2,700 a = month paid to=20 the veteran.

Post-9/11 GI Bill regulations and policy details are still being = worked=20 out. Relatively few of the soon-to-be-hired VA representatives will = be=20 properly equipped to give advice on which program each veteran should = apply for=20 by the Aug. 1, 2009 deadline.

Military.com has created a Guide=20 to Choosing the Right GI Bill, which offers a general view = of how=20 to compare the two benefits. It is important to note that some facts = still=20 remain sketchy and are subject to change. Stay tuned to either this blog = or the=20 VA=20 GI Bill Q&A site for future updates.

The OIG report concludes with the following statement: =E2=80=9CWe = [OIG] will focus=20 our efforts on identifying and evaluating potential weaknesses in = assumptions=20 underlying project feasibility determinations, schedule, costs, and risk = assessments.=E2=80=9D

The OIG has their work cut out for them.

# # # # #

The following is an excerpt from the DVA OIG report:

Office of Inspector General, Department of Veterans=20 Affairs
Statement before the Subcommittee on Military=20 Construction,
Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies
Committee on=20 Appropriations
United States House of Representatives
Hearing on=20 Department of Veteran Affairs Challenges
March 12, = 2009

The OIG has provided oral briefings to the relevant congressional = oversight=20 committees=E2=80=99 staff on VA=E2=80=99s progress in implementing the = Post 9/11 Veterans=20 Educational Assistance Act of 2008 (new GI Bill) (Public Law = 110-252).

After a long planning period, VA has made progress in the current = quarter;=20 however successful implementation remains a difficult and risky = challenge due to=20 the inherent difficulties in creating the software tools, limited VA = Office of=20 Information and Technology development resources, vulnerabilities = in=20 Veterans Benefits Administration staffing estimates, and aggressive = project=20 scheduling requirements. In the coming months, VA will need to complete = its=20 primary plans for software development and implement contingency = plans.

We have some concerns that VBA may need more staff than currently = planned=20 since officials have acknowledged reducing planned hiring by 48 = employees (8=20 percent) due to space limitations. Further, VBA=E2=80=99s estimate is = based on=20 annualized workload, rather than the peak seasonal workload expected = during the=20 beginning of the school year. Also, VBA=E2=80=99s projected workload = estimate did not=20 include consideration of greater participation because of the current = economic=20 climate. Inadequate staffing can potentially delay claims processing. = However,=20 VBA is exploring possible solutions, such as rehiring annuitants with = needed=20 expertise.

VA=E2=80=99s contingency plan identifies significant project risks, = mitigation=20 strategies, decision dates to deploy alternate plans, and estimated = resource=20 requirements. We are continuing to monitor the feasibility of some = mitigation=20 strategies that are more resource intensive, such as adding more = employees to=20 support the use of manual processes. For example, if the functionality = to make=20 recurring housing payments is delayed, the contingency plan calls for = hiring 263=20 additional employees to initiate these monthly education payments. = Clearly,=20 implementing a manual process would lack the controls an automated = system could=20 offer.

Completion of the business requirements for the long-term solution = may be=20 delayed because many VA subject matter experts are focused on the = interim=20 solution. We will continue to monitor plan adjustments and additional=20 planning/project deliverables, including the Integrated Master Schedule, = to=20 assess further potential impediments to program implementation. We will = focus=20 our efforts on identifying and evaluating potential weaknesses in = assumptions=20 underlying project feasibility determinations, schedule, costs, and risk = assessments.

Continue=20 reading =C2=BB

Comments=20 (2) =E2=80=A2 Permalink =E2=80=A2

Comments

BS from tap dancing bureaucrat is standard procedure. Alibi planning = for the=20 deluge of letters to Congress when implementation of G I Bill (Mark III = or=20 IV)goes sour is also standard procedure..."if you don't give me more = money and=20 personnel, how can we do this new thing..." Anyone 87 should have seen = it all=20 (from an old paper shuffler).

Posted by: rbrenzelsr | March=20 19, 2009 at 08:06 AM

I am 87 years old and have been around the block a few times but I = have never=20 bumped into this much BS before--A veteran

Posted by: Robert J.Moore | March=20 18, 2009 at 06:49 PM

Bleak=20 Outlook for GI Bill Implementation

Comments

Post a comment

Recent Comments

Archives

Categories

Relevant Links

Actions

Bleak=20 Outlook for GI Bill Implementation

Comments

Post a comment

Recent Comments

Archives

Categories

Relevant Links

Blogroll

Actions