Hearings to examine programs for justice-involved veterans.

The Committee on Veterans' Affairs hearing today, I'm excited about the hearing that we're having. It's one I don't think we've, this topic is not one that received, has received a lot of attention and I'm glad it is at least receiving more today. And I thank our witnesses. You got enough room? All right, good. Okay. I thank our witnesses for being here. I especially want to welcome two of my friends from my law school days. Both of had significant careers since we graduated. Major General Butch Tate, who is one of our witnesses today and is the, is one of the drivers of veterans' courts in our state along with the former Chief Justice of the Kansas Supreme Court Lawton Nuss. Again, these two are the folks I know best when it comes to these issues and they are relentless on behalf of veterans and veteran justice. All of our witnesses provide examples of why we should work to support veterans when they transition out of the military and the value they add to communities and our country after their service when the transition goes well. All of us do that. We need to make certain that the veterans who carry scars of unhealed wounds, visible and invisible, are not forgotten. When left untreated, these can often lead or contribute to veterans' involvement in the criminal justice system. According to the Veterans Justice Commission represented today by General McCaffrey, 31 percent of veterans report having been arrested at least once in their lives compared to only 18 percent of the general population. Veterans with PTSD or TBI diagnosis are more than 50 percent more likely to experience criminal justice involvement. While there's no one-size-fits-all solution to this problem, I am encouraged by the array of community-based programs supporting justice-involved veterans and their families. I'm particularly supportive of the veterans' treatment court models. Since Johnson County, a Kansas, it's a suburb of the Kansas side of Kansas City, opened its first veteran treatment court in 2016, an additional five Kansas counties have followed suit. And I'm looking forward to hearing about the impressive journey that one Kansan, one veteran court graduate, Corey Schramm, who's with us here today, I'm interested in hearing his story. Thank you, Corey, for making the trip and thanks to your team from Johnson County in joining you here today. According to All Rise represented here by Chief Counsel General Tate, the average national completion rate for treatment courts is nearly 60 percent, approximately two-thirds higher than probation and more than twice the rate of probationers with substance use disorders. This data demonstrates that the cases of justice-involved veterans are best handled by experts who understand that a veteran's experience is different than that of a civilian. Veteran treatment courts are tangible investments in those who served our country and the results that we've seen speak for themselves. I will continue to prioritize federal support for veteran treatment courts in this committee as well as my role in the Senate Appropriations Committee. In this year, the annual CJS appropriation, we provided, that bill provided $4 million to the Department of Justice to establish the National Center for Veterans Justice. Through the National Center, I hope to see veterans in Kansas and across the country benefit from a coordinated DOJ resource designed to improve the outcomes of justice-involved veterans by closing the gap between research, policy, and the frontline of practice. This afternoon, we'll discuss where Congress, DOJ, VA, and local communities, where they've made strides in delivering on these promises that we've made to those who served. We'll also discuss where the improvements are needed to make programs stronger, more sustainable, and more successful by putting the veteran first. I was encouraged to see DOJ's March release of a notice of funding availability for veteran treatment courts followed by their commitment to brief the committee on both their plans for the establishment of the National Center and the technical assistance funding to support the training of treatment court staff and their partners nationwide. These developments reflect a welcome focus on justice-involved veteran community. I look forward to hearing from federal, state, local partners that are here with us today and to learn more about how this committee can support them. I'm going to, would at this point normally yield to the ranking member, Senator Blumenthal, he's on his way, he will be here, we'll save his opening statement for that arrival and let me introduce the panel. Testifying on today's first panel is Major General Clyde Butch Tate, retired, Chief Counsel of All Rise. Kansas Supreme Court Chief Justice Lawton Nuss, retired. There's a message here to me. As well as Corey Schramm, the veteran, a veteran of the U.S. Army. Brigadier General David McCaffrey, retired, Director of Veterans Justice Commission. And Rose Carmen Goldberg, Associate Teaching Professor and Director of the Veterans Clinic at the University of Washington School of Law. General Tate, you are now recognized for five minutes.

Chair Moran, Ranking Member Blumenthal, and distinguished members of the Senate Committee on Veterans' Affairs, it's an honor to testify today. Senator Moran, we thank you and the committee for recognizing that while saying thank you for your service is important and appreciated as a nation, we must follow those words with the actions necessary to meet our core national obligation to care for our veterans. I'm honored to be here with this panel of veterans, innovators, thought leaders in our justice system, and especially Mr. Corey Schramm, an Army veteran who has witnessed our justice system at its very best. I'm a proud Army veteran and equally proud to be the son of a 36-year combat-wounded Army infantryman who taught me how to take care of soldiers and their family members. It's a lesson that I hope I took both into the Army and my life after the Army. A few months after joining All Rise as its Chief Counsel, I was visiting courts, training on best practices, speaking with stakeholders, listening to veterans and their families, I realized then and to this day strongly believe that veterans' treatment courts showcase our government, judiciary, and communities at their very finest. To be sure, the vast majority of veterans thrive because of their military service. For many of us, it was the most rewarding time of our professional life despite or maybe because of its hardships and sacrifices. Yet for a small percentage of our veterans, however, their experiences, the sights, the sounds, the events, the memories, resulting trauma, the attempts to bury that trauma are too much to overcome without help. Without our help, they are left behind and some who straggle behind engage in increasingly risky behavior that puts them at the crossroads of the criminal justice system. In society, just like any military formation, you can only move as fast as your slowest runner. And like the military, we cannot and should not accept leaving someone behind. Today as we move toward programs that provide solutions, let's be mindful that those veterans challenged by their service do not want to be seen as a percentage on a spreadsheet. They and their families are real people who are in that very small segment of society who chose to serve us but who have experienced circumstances that altered who they are, how they think, and how they act. So what do we do? I submit that as a nation we have a choice and I hope we can learn from how we chose to treat my father's generation of Vietnam War and Vietnam-era veterans and do better. That is choose to implement programs structured to consider and address the unique experiences and circumstances of veterans including those in our criminal justice system. The choice we make must be multifaceted and include veterans' treatment courts with the person-centered care they provide. Veterans' treatment courts transform the way our system identifies, assesses, and treats veterans in the justice system and assembles the resources and parties to directly serve veterans. And these courts work. Beyond the dedication and commitment of all involved, these courts work because they are multidisciplinary and non-adversarial merging resources and stakeholders into a singular effort. They work because they are trained to follow key components and evidence-based practices. They are treatment and accountability focused public safety matters. Now the community partners, housing, employment, counseling, transportation, education, pro bono legal clinics, and others are as key to making these courts work as the judges, prosecutors, defense counsel, law enforcement, probation, supervision, clinicians, veterans' justice outreach employees of the VA, and importantly, volunteer veteran mentors. The latter being our secret sauce. Now like many complex challenges, there's no one solution fits all. That's why we are excited that today in addition to veterans' treatment courts, there's yet another path forward to improve outcomes for our veterans because of the congressional support for the National Center for Veterans Justice. We are excited at the possibilities of the center. We are also excited about the synergy when current and future programs such as veterans' treatment courts, law school veteran support clinics, and university-wide student veteran centers are located in proximity to each other to make it less challenging for a veteran to receive the support they need. As I conclude, and I hope you'll indulge me one final military analogy to highlight the critical aspect of the path forward for current and future programs. There's a theme running through each of the programs and participants I've mentioned including court teams, law enforcement, veteran mentors, VJOs, and that is the importance of training and expert assistance to the overall success of each. Military units, for example, may have personnel who are mission focused, the best equipment and technology, SOPs, tactics, skilled and experienced leadership, but to succeed, all units must be trained. And the proficiency gained from training can't be one and done. Success must be sustained. If we leave success to chance, we are not making the choice that will improve outcomes. As the data shows, training and technical assistance will improve graduation rates which leads to decreased recidivism and to the very reason that we are all assembled here today and that is to improve the outcomes for justice-involved veterans. Chair, thank you again for your time, for convening this hearing, and for helping ensure that as a nation we make the right choice. Thank you.

Thank you, General. Chief Justice Nuss.

A combat veteran told me he would have been better off being killed in Afghanistan instead of coming home and being arrested for committing a civilian crime. As he described his shame to me, I went from hero to villain. This justice-involved veteran suffered from unhealed PTSD. As has been said about such veterans, the painful paradox is that fighting for one's country can render one unfit to be its citizen. Fortunately, this veteran later became one of the first graduates of the Veterans Treatment Court, VTC, in Johnson County, Kansas. And I'll talk more about this and other Kansas VTCs because our experience could be a model for how other jurisdictions establish new VTCs and enhance existing ones. Before doing that, let me say I'm a Marine Corps veteran and as was mentioned, I'm the former Chief Justice of the Kansas Supreme Court. What has not been said is that I left the court with three years remaining in my term so I could devote more time to help my fellow veterans. Chairman Moran, Ranking Member Blumenthal, and members of the Senate Committee on Veterans' Affairs, I'm honored to speak before you today in both of those capacities. Now to begin. In 2015, Kansas had no VTCs. Today we have six and we are working to establish more. Johnson County was our first one. Now some people insisted because it is our state's wealthiest county that only a few of its veteran residents could possibly have committed crimes. Until the sheriff was called and he said 60 of his inmates were veterans. That fact helped expose the need for a VTC. Another VTC obstacle was funding. I had to tell judges the judicial branch had no funds available. But these and other creators agreed to take on extra unpaid work and opened the first Kansas VTC in 2016. It has been thriving ever since thanks in substantial part to later grants from the Bureau of Justice Assistance. So we thank Congress for these appropriations. How do we know this VTC has been thriving? Well consider that 89 veterans have graduated from this program and only five of them have been arrested for committing later crimes. That means 84 have been rehabilitated, a nearly 95 percent success rate. Eighty-four people who returned to being contributing members of their families, local communities, and American society. So how did Kansas get five more VTCs? Well for starters, this VTC encourages all those who are considering one to come watch their court proceedings. There the visitors also talk one-on-one with their peers. For example, the VTC judge with the visiting judge and the VTC probation officer with the visiting probation officer. Along with that, this VTC tells these visitors just how beneficial All Rise's training and technical assistance had been for it and will be for their future VTCs. I participated in three of those training sessions years before joining the All Rise Board of Directors, and I can independently confirm their worth. Also, BJA funding is helping to expand our VTCs statewide. The judicial branch's specialty court program manager gets All Rise's notices of BJA funding opportunities. And after informing all courts, she and her grant writer help the responding courts apply for these grants to establish and enhance VTCs. The judicial branch also hosts a statewide specialty court conference each fall. Additionally, a Supreme Court justice serves as liaison to the specialty courts. Either she or I or both attend the opening and graduation ceremonies of our VTCs. And people like Chairman Moran and Congresswoman Sharice Davids accept our speaking invitations there. So, word spreads of the Supreme Court's ongoing support of VTCs. We also emphasize the obvious money saved by avoiding incarceration and keeping a veteran in the community under court supervision, which promotes their rehabilitation. Without this opportunity, we face the resultant financial costs of future incarceration for their new crimes. We also face the hidden costs of these new crimes, and that is the extra time, the extra burdens by time imposed on those working in the criminal justice system. In response to such information, last fall our newest VTC was created in Douglas County, the home of the University of Kansas, also known as KU. And there, the VTC joined two existing KU veteran-helping entities to form the Kansas Trifecta. One is the KU Law School's Veterans Legal Support Clinic. And thanks to your committee chair, this clinic was created with federal funding and provides free legal services to veterans across the state. The third in the trifecta is the General William K. Jones Military-Affiliated Student Center. And there, students, including current and former military and their families, can come for services, such as support from the VA's VetSuccess on Campus program and guidance and answers regarding the GI Bill and VA benefits, excuse me, VA benefits. All while enjoying the camaraderie of a familiar military-connected environment. The trifecta entities can share information and refer clients to one another when necessary. To conclude, I thank you all again on behalf of my fellow veterans.

Justice, thank you very much. Now to Mr. Schramm, Corey.

Chairman Moran and Ranking Member Blumenthal and members of the Senate Committee on Veterans' Affairs, thank you for the opportunity to speak with you today. My name is Corey Schramm. I'm a husband and a father of two great kids and I'm a proud veteran of the United States Army. Today I serve as an adult case manager at the Johnson County Mental Health Center and a member of the Johnson County Criminal Justice Advisory Council. I am also a grateful graduate of the Johnson County Veterans Treatment Court. After 9/11, I joined the Army and deployed to Iraq three times. I am proud of my service. In Iraq, we had structure and routine. We knew we had each other's backs and the mission kept us focused. Back home, I was still learning how to be a husband and a father. Just when I felt I was beginning to build a relationship with my daughter, I would have to leave again. I understand now that my drinking and drug use was my way of coping with a life I didn't know how to live. In June of 2020, things came to a breaking point. I spent five hours in a destructive episode at my house involving a weapon. I have no memory of the incident, but I woke up charged with a felony and facing incarceration. I didn't know if I would even be welcomed back in my home again. This is where my story of recovery begins. A Veterans Justice Outreach Specialist with the VA is who introduced me to the Veterans Treatment Court. Veterans Treatment Court changed my life and the life of my wife and children. My first day in Veterans Treatment Court happened to be a graduation ceremony. I watched veterans with similar backgrounds as mine hug the judge and thank police officers for arresting, who had arrested them. They were applauded and thanked for their service. It was like nothing I'd ever seen. Veterans Treatment Court changed the life, my life and the lives of my wife and children. The program gave me structure, accountability, and support. I knew where I needed to be and what was expected of me and for the first time since leaving the military, I felt like part of a unit again. I received community-based services and VA care including treatment in group therapy, and I started to see a future for myself and my family. The Veterans Treatment Court was with me every step of the way. When I needed help, they were there to provide it. When I stumbled, they held me accountable. One of the most important parts of my journey was my mentor, Navy veteran retired Rear Admiral Ed Phillips, who is here with me today. He stood by me every step of the way and showed me what recovery could look like. Through the VA Vocational Rehabilitation program, I went back to school and got an associate's degree in addiction counseling. I remember sitting at the kitchen table with my daughter doing our homework together. It was one of the small moments that helped us rebuild our relationship. This year, my wife and I will celebrate our 20th wedding anniversary and we will also be taking our daughter to college at K-State, Kansas State University. My son and I are about to attend in our sixth consecutive year attending NASCAR races at the great Kansas Speedway. I was nervous to graduate, but the program prepared me for this challenge. I am sharing my story today because there are countless veterans who do not have access to Veterans Treatment Court. Veterans Treatment Courts are not a shortcut. These programs are rigorous, they demand honesty, discipline, and a willingness to change, but they work. As you consider the future of Veterans Treatment Courts, I urge you to continue supporting and expanding these programs. Because behind every statistic is a veteran like myself, someone who served, who struggled, and who with the right combination of accountability and support can find their way back, or as Ed would say it, get your good name back. Thank you for the opportunity to share my story. I look forward to your questions.

Mr. Schramm, thank you. Congratulations on the anniversary and off to college and gratitude and expression of our support and thanks to the Admiral. General McHawayne, you're now recognized.

Thank you, Chairman Moran, Ranking Member Blumenthal, and members of the committee. I'm Matt McHugh and I served in the Army for 33 years and retired 11 years ago as the Adjutant General of the Army. I'm here today representing the Council on Criminal Justice where I serve as the director of the Veterans Justice Commission. The council is an independent, nonpartisan think tank and invitational membership organization that advances the understanding of the nation's criminal justice policy choices and builds consensus for solutions. In 2022, the council assembled the commission to figure out why so many men and women who have served our country are winding up in the criminal justice system. It issued 11 recommendations and several research publications. I've submitted the details of all the recommendations in my written testimony. Each year about 200,000 service members leave the military. Most transition successfully, but some face challenges. Veterans are more likely than non-veterans to be arrested and tens of thousands are incarcerated. This involvement is often driven by combat-related trauma, traumatic brain injury, loss of benefits, and gaps in identification and intervention. The way we currently manage struggling veterans undermines recruitment, jeopardizes the health and safety of our veterans, their families, their communities, and ultimately national security. The commission made several recommendations for changes at the Pentagon. One, creating an Under Secretary of Transition to mitigate the issues of fragmented delivery of services and creating accountability in one office. Two, creating a validated risk needs assessment that identifies service members at the highest risk for post-transition problems and incorporating evidence-based rehabilitative practices into the management of disciplinary and other performance issues. And three, establishing a network of joint transition centers, residential programs aligned with VA facilities to assist higher risk service members before they leave service. A critical element of the commission's plan addressed what we refer to as the commander's dilemma, the tension commanders face between maintaining unit readiness versus supporting underperforming service members or supporting transition. To prioritize operational readiness, commanders look for the fastest way to replace service members who are not available for unit transition, disciplinary, or medical reasons. A commander may not have the flexibility to allow an individual to participate in congressionally mandated TAP or receive evidence-based support for the kinds of minor disciplinary infractions seen in the civilian justice system. Instead, the system defaults to granting administrative discharges. An other than honorable discharge is an administrative death sentence, locking service members out of benefits that support a smooth transition. I speak from experience on this. I recommended or approved without knowing the full impact those kinds of discharges and I regret that to this very day. The commission made several recommendations for changes at the VA. First, Congress must direct a return to the plain text of the 1944 GI Bill, providing VA eligibility to all former service members not discharged under dishonorable conditions. Second, repeal of the 1999 rule change and return to providing VA healthcare to incarcerated veterans. VA medical services are more appropriate and effective than standard correctional care. And third, eliminate administrative barriers to housing eligibility and prevent benefit arrearages. When veterans do enter criminal justice system, they confront a patchwork of interventions. These programs vary substantially across jurisdictions and many fall through the cracks. VTCs have been pioneering, life-saving interventions for thousands of veterans. Yet despite their expansion, we found that only about 15 percent of the veterans were able to take advantage of these courts. We developed a complementary policy framework for those without access to a VTC. It's been adopted by the American Legislative Exchange Council and is under consideration in several states. Finally, regarding the National Center on Veterans Justice proposed by the commission, Congress authorized $4 million for the center in January and we're grateful for that. The center should act as a hub for improving the success of justice-involved veterans by identifying and replicating best practices across the country and establishing proper program evaluation so we can invest in what works. If implemented properly, it will revolutionize how the system treats the unique cases of our veterans. Most veterans return stronger from their service, but too many still need our help. It's nothing short of tragic that those who once wore the cloth of our nation now wear the cloth of incarceration. We sent them, we used them, now we must do better and stand by them, ensuring that we have the support to return them to their families, their communities, and their country. And their country. Thank you.

Thank you, sir. Professor Goldberg.

Chairman, Ranking Member, and members of the committee, thank you for the opportunity to testify today on the pressing topic of how we can better serve justice-involved veterans. The Veterans Clinic I teach at University of Washington School of Law provides free legal services to low-income veterans. Many of our clients are justice-involved veterans. In this role and my decade in veterans law, I have seen firsthand the significant harms and barriers that justice-involved veterans face and how this too often results in incarceration. While these barriers are many, I will use my time to focus on three main points. First, while veterans treatment courts are a highly effective intervention that improves outcomes for justice-involved veterans, not all veterans are allowed to participate. In some jurisdictions, veterans with less-than-honorable discharges are locked out. This runs counter to the spirit of veterans treatment courts, which recognize that post-service criminal conduct often stems from mental health conditions during service stemming from service traumas. The same is often true for military misconduct that results in a less-than-honorable discharge. In addition, veterans with less-than-honorable discharges stand to gain the most in many instances from the integrated and structured treatment that veterans treatment courts provide. They have higher rates of incarceration, higher rates of homelessness, and are at higher risk of suicide than other veterans. While many veterans treatment courts connect veterans with VA services, there are a variety of options available for veterans with less-than-honorable discharges that the VA has not recognized as VA eligible. VA provides care to other-than-honorably discharged veterans for military sexual trauma-related conditions, service-connected conditions, and to veterans who served at least 180 days and served in combat regardless of discharge status with some very limited exceptions. Mental healthcare may also be available through local, state, and community sources. Second, justice-involved veterans are deprived of earned benefits. VA is supposed to reduce incarcerated veterans' benefits under certain conditions. For instance, for veterans convicted of a felony who are incarcerated for more than 60 days, starting on day 61, if they are rated over 20 percent or more, their benefits are reduced all the way down to 10 percent. However, VA does not consistently make these reductions. This results in what is known as an overpayment. Upon release, a veteran may receive the surprised news that they are indebted for these overpayments and VA is garnishing their benefits. Overpayments thus threaten veterans' successful reentry into society. In addition to preventing overpayments, VA should liberally waive overpayment debts linked to incarceration under its existing authority to waive debt as a matter of equity. Third, incarcerated veterans are urgently in need of VA mental healthcare. Veterans with service-connected mental health conditions are more likely to be incarcerated and confinement aggravates their conditions. VA's current position, however, is that it cannot provide this care. This exclusion from basic care is inequitable and harmful. I was therefore pleased to see the Get Justice-Involved Veterans Back Home Act introduced recently and strongly support it. By Senator King, yes. The most important part. [Laughter.] This bill would create a pilot program under which VA provides telemental health treatment to incarcerated veterans. This would fill an important gap as mental healthcare in correctional facilities is inadequate. And only VA provides specialized treatment for conditions unique to military service, such as post-traumatic stress disorder and traumatic brain injury linked to military sexual trauma or combat. I encourage the expansion of this important program to include veterans with less-than-honorable discharges. They stand to benefit greatly given their higher rates of incarceration and mental health conditions and as noted, VA has options for providing this care. I also applaud Senator King's bill for requiring automatic resumption of VA benefits after incarceration ends. Timely resumption of benefits can mean the difference between living on the streets and a high risk of recidivism versus safe housing as a launchpad for a healthy life. Yet it can take many months and much advocacy for veterans to get their full benefits back. Finally, I enthusiastically support the launch of the National Center for Veterans Justice by DOJ as a hub for collecting and disseminating best practices. I hope its mission will encompass the different areas of policies that impact justice-involved veterans. I thank the committee for your commitment to addressing the root causes of justice involvement by veterans. By focusing on building programs that heal veterans' service traumas instead of punishing them, we can truly achieve justice for veterans.

Professor, thank you as well. I'm going to turn the to Senator Blumenthal, the ranking member of the committee, for his opening statement or his beginning of his questions.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I apologize that I was late being here and I have to leave to go to the floor to speak there. But I want to thank all of our witnesses for being here and your leadership on this critically important issue. Special thanks to Professor Goldberg who served on my staff for a while. Thank you for your continued service. You know, I became involved in this issue very hands-on through a veteran in New Haven. His name is Conley Monk. Conley was Marine Corps veteran, served in Vietnam, got into trouble with his sergeant because he suffered from PTS. Nobody knew what PTS was at that time. Nobody had any idea that shell shock, as it was called, or whatever the terminology of the time might cause people to get into trouble. Conley got into a lot of trouble. He received a less-than-honorable discharge and so he was ineligible for treatment when he had a drug problem. He was unemployed, he was on the streets, and he turned his life around and then brought a lawsuit against the Department of Defense through the Yale Law Clinic. I partnered with the Yale Law Clinic trying to help him with that action and went through several Secretaries of Defense who were sympathetic but felt they couldn't do anything about a bad paper discharge even though it was factually and morally unjust until Chuck Hagel. And Secretary Hagel did the right thing. He established that people could more easily, more accessibly come to the boards of review and Conley upgraded his discharge. And he is now an advocate for all veterans. I saw him just a week or so ago. But there are probably thousands of Conley Monks out there who messed up. You know, they got into trouble. Maybe it was caused like caused by trauma from their service, underlying risk factors that were never treated, obstacles to successful transition, or lack of structured environment. Everybody thinks veterans are these paragons of virtue and many are. But they're also a lot of guys who just, you know, they come out of the service and they had problems before they went in and those problems may not have manifested then. So my question to this panel is how do we create more awareness about these opportunities? Because I find even now, years later, most veterans are unaware of the possibilities, the opportunities to to upgrade their discharges from less than honorable. Obviously we're not talking about dishonorable discharge, we're talking about bad paper, less-than-honorable discharges. And one of my hopes is that we can create more awareness. So I'll just maybe turn that question over to the panel. I don't know who might want to start the answer. Professor Goldberg.

Answer your former boss, please.

I must, yes. Thank you for the she was my boss. Oh, no, definitely not. Thank you for the the great question, Senator. My clinic works on a lot of discharge upgrades, so first want to confirm that there is a great need for increased awareness. There unfortunately are a lot of rumors growing around that are quite prevalent. One is the automatic six-month discharge upgrade and I've heard this from veterans discharged decades ago, I've heard this from recently discharged veterans. They are put through the administrative separation process, they're told, oh, don't don't worry, just sign on the line, you know, no need to go to a, you know, a hearing or anything, it'll be automatically discharged, you'll get your benefits back. In fact, it was so prevalent, I'm not sure if it's still there, but for a while on the Navy discharge review board website, it's, you know, had a big beware, there is no automatic six-month discharge upgrade. I have found that a lot of veterans are not aware, as you mentioned, there are liberalized rules, there's memos known as the Hagel memo and the Kurta memo that require the discharge upgrade boards provide liberal consideration to veterans who were discharged consequent to, you know, say an undiagnosed mental health condition or they experienced military military sexual trauma and the, you know, the effects of that resulted in what was misinterpreted as misconduct. So I think there is a great need to spread awareness about both the availability of discharge upgrades and that there have been improvements under the law, as you said, thanks to the Yale Law School Veterans Clinic in large part, such that veterans who may not have had a hope have some hope. But I will say I do think improvements need to be made in the process and veterans are are right to be somewhat hesitant. Wait times, I believe that the Army right now are about four four years and there's some very serious due process issues. So I think we need to raise awareness, particularly for veterans who were discharged consequent to mental health conditions, you know, this may be available to you, but also make it more timely, you know, enhance the the due process protections. And just one additional point, I think a lot of awareness needs to be raised regarding the an alternative remedy that I find very few veterans are aware of, which is the VA has its own character of discharge review process that has its own issues, but it tends to be faster, you have a right to a hearing, and that's where the VA makes an entirely separate determination where they can find a veteran, what's called honorable for VA purposes. They can't change the DD-214, that's DOD property, but they can, if they make this favorable finding, veterans would access to disability benefits, healthcare, everything except for GI Bill. So that can be literally life-changing for veterans, but there's very little information out there.

Thank you.

Well, thank you all. I I apologize. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Senator Blumenthal, thank you. Let me call on Senator Tillis.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you all for being here and congratulations, Corey. The I've actually had a long relationship with veterans treatment courts in North Carolina. In fact, the first one we had created there was back in 2013 when I was Speaker of the House. And man, they work. And I tell you, if my colleagues haven't been to a graduation of a veterans treatment court, you owe it to yourself. It's like the swearing-in ceremony for citizenship. It is really heartwarming and it's a lot of fun to speak to the graduates. We actually our strategy in North Carolina has been trying to encourage courts in and around first, in and around VA facilities because we know that they kind of they work hand in hand and I think we've done a good job of that all the way from near Fort Bragg out to Asheville. There's virtually no major VA facility in the state of North Carolina that doesn't have a VTC nearby. And I think it works. The thing that I think we need to do to get the scale and consistency is start talking about best practices and models. We in the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act, a bill that I was part of leading the negotiations, we established additional funding in there for veterans treatment courts. Need to make sure that the take rate is as high as it can be. That was a $14 billion investment in behavioral health and I want to make sure that we spend that money particularly in family courts and veterans treatment courts because the money's there. So what and I should back up and say a part of this is a great cure for the veterans who can get access to it, but we've still got to work on prevention. And it goes back to what I've been saying for the 11 years that I've been on this committee. We've got to get to a transition process that's an audience of one. We've got to get some stickiness so that people like Corey, once he gets discharged, has some connection to a community. And we all know the ones who are most likely to run in trouble are the ones who are most likely to be connected to the VA. It's indisputable. So you know the question becomes how how can we a lot of these things are initiated at the state and local level, although as the example that I've used, we actually did congressional directed spending for Rowan County just recently for another VTC in North Carolina. Is there some sort of a consensus around states that are doing it right? I'm not necessarily saying that North Carolina does it right, we're just one model that's creating good results. But how do we start coalescing around maybe a national standard based on best practices since these courts have been out here for a while and see to what extent we can do to encourage the state and local governments to build out more capabilities, provide more access? And then second question really relates to every hearing I've ever gone to on transition, we all say the same thing. I don't feel like we've made measurable progress. So either validate my theory that we've still got a lot of work to do to really get to this where we have the stickiness with the at-risk service members or tell me I'm all wrong, we're making real progress and we've just got to build on it. Mr. Tate, we'll start with you.

Senator, thank you. Excellent questions, both of them. I will tell you that the way we ensure fidelity to the model, the way we ensure best practices and evidence-based procedures is through training and technical assistance. I can't understate the value that our training and technical assistance program creates when we talk to the teams about here's what works.

And I think there's a clear correlation between that training and the efficacy of the court. People are well-intentioned, but they're not all executing as well, they're not getting the graduation rates we'd like to see, but please continue.

Yes, sir. And sometimes when they think they know the right way to do it, they actually may do more harm than good. And so I think through training and technical assistance, we can certainly avoid that happening. The states that seem to be doing it better than others are those that invest the time in training, training and technical assistance. So it's sort of a related answer, but I think that's how we ensure that we move forward in the right direction and try not to do more harm than good.

My time's going to go over and I appreciate the chair recognizing me. But what I'd really like if you all could think about it, if even Senator Blumenthal and I worked on the issue over the years on bad paper. We know one of the things here is that veterans may not think that they have an option. We know that the VA has allowed some people in on an exception basis with a less than honorable discharge. We need more of that, we need certainty. But we also need to know where these veterans are before a problem. So if you all could maybe submit for the committee, but at least for my office, some suggestions around best practice models, things that are working, we'd be very happy in my remaining time in the Senate to see if we can move the ball a little bit further along. Mr. Chair, you have my support to that end. Thank you all.

Thank you, Senator Tillis. Senator Hassan.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. So I know that there are a lot more veterans, Justice Nuss said something like over 100,000 veterans are incarcerated, but maybe somebody has updated numbers, and only a small percentage of the incarcerated veterans go through this program. Can somebody explain to me why that is the case and is it, there must be criteria for participating in the program. So first of all, it sounds as though the program really works and if so, more veterans should have the opportunity to participate. Would somebody like to respond?

Yes, Senator.

Justice Nuss?

Yes, thank you.

Can you speak into the mic, please?

Yes, is that better?

No. Is it on? It says talk. You have to push the red, push the button.

Now it's off. Now it's on.

Okay, that's a little better. Someone trying to tell me something? Does it work now? Okay.

All right, just have to be persistent. Several answers, I believe, Senator, to your question. First of all, there are just an awful lot of jails in this country where they have no idea if the people in their incarceration are veterans. And the simple matter of asking people when they are being booked, have you served in the military? You don't say are you a veteran because the younger folks think it's old guys like General Tate and me. And then if you say have you served in the military, sometimes they will still lie because they are ashamed because they basically took an oath to support you and me when they entered the military. And some of them are also afraid that the mere fact they've been arrested means that they will lose their VA benefits. So asking the question helps, but then the check on that is to use two VA electronic programs, one is called VRSS and the other is called SQUARES, and you can go online using that program and find out if the person who is an inmate in your jail actually served in the military. The second thing is, well, let me say that that then helps convince the local folks, the courts included, as to whether you have a need in your area for a VTC. As I said in my testimony, Johnson County thought we don't need one, and then they found out they had 60 veterans incarcerated in their jail. The same thing happens across the state, I'm sorry, across the country. And so once you have established a need, then you should go forward and try to put something together. And what I have talked with my colleagues is you don't have to wait until you have the deluxe version before you open a VTC. You can start very small and then over time increase what you want to do for these folks. You can admit people to your program who have bad paper discharges. If you don't care about the VA providing benefits and you have a local community health center or something like that, then you can proceed. For example, that's something that Johnson County does.

So thank you. I note from the summary of the commission's report, I think this is the report, that you don't know how many veterans are incarcerated, you don't have this kind of information, so there must be some way to do better in terms of identifying the people who would benefit from this program. There are over 700 VTCs all across the country, there are four in Hawaii, and when they are participating in them, and I realize it's not one size fits all, but they really decrease the recidivism rate and all of that, so the more veterans who are able to participate, the better, right?

Senator, we absolutely agree that more VTCs are better, but we also know that they simply don't reach enough of the population as you've described. Many VTCs exclude people with violent behavior, which is oftentimes the type of behavior that some of our veterans get involved in. 35 percent exclude those with bad, what we call bad paper. And so we came up with a complementary thing to help bridge that gap in our recommendation of model policy that gives a judge in a non-VTC jurisdiction a ability to act like a VTC without the VTC, all the bells and whistles, so to speak, of a full VTC because we know that the VTC system works. So like Chief Nuss said, if you don't have the VA capabilities, use community-based stuff and give a statutory background or backbone to a judge in a jurisdiction.

So we need to provide flexibility. So for all of the panelists, I know that you all support VTCs and so I will be reviewing the commission's recommendations and I take it that all of you would support the recommendations that the commission came up with. Is that correct? Okay. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, Senator. Senator Hassan.

Well, thanks, Mr. Chairman. I really appreciate this hearing and I am grateful to all of the witnesses not only for being here today but for your advocacy and for your service. Thank you very much. I want to follow up really on the question that Senator Hirono had just posed to Chief Nuss, but I want to ask General Tate if he has anything to add, which is really we know the value of these courts, we know how they decrease recidivism, but we also know that not every jurisdiction, as we're just talking about, has one of these courts and it can be hard to ensure that eligible veterans are identified and connected to treatment. So Chief Nuss, you just talked about some of the things we can do. General, I just wanted to kind of add on to that, are there other things we can do to identify veterans who are eligible for these courts and for the connected services?

Thank you. Excellent question because that is an age-old problem. I think it starts with, again, back I go back to training and technical assistance. Part of our training at All Rise includes law enforcement who are likely to be the parties at first contact with the offender, we'll just say, and training them to understand to ask the right questions and training them to appreciate what this veteran may be going through. So education is part of it, advocacy is part of it. We've talked about the National Center for Veterans Justice. Part of that will be a state and local engagement, it'll be convening at the national level, it'll be all of these stakeholders who really, really want to make a difference coming together and learning, okay, this is how we identify, this is how we assess, and this is how we treat. And I think that leads to success. To Senator Tillis's question, he wanted to know when do we get to the bottom line, when are we there? And I think the answer is we're there when there's a veterans treatment court within reach of every eligible veteran. And to be sure, they are not for every veteran who's in trouble. That's where the assessment part comes in, the high-risk, high-need. That's who will benefit the most. If it's a veteran who doesn't isn't high-risk or high-need, then let's not put them through such a high accountability, high-touch sort of environment. Let's let's get them treated. They don't have to to sort of face the same sort of accountability that someone embedded in that treatment program. So it's not necessarily for every veteran who gets in trouble. We have to be careful on how we assess. Thank you.

Well, I appreciate that very much, and I think that that's something we can all work on together. I was I was struck, I think it was when Chief Nuss was talking about don't ask somebody if they're a veteran. We found when we were trying to increase access to veteran-informed care in New Hampshire that we had to really train medical providers to ask, have you ever served? Were you ever in the military? Not are you a veteran? And that was for a civilian a revelation. So Chief Nuss, I wanted to ask you another question. You're doing incredible work, and I love the story about how the effort in Kansas has grown. And you mentioned that grants from the Bureau of Justice Assistance have helped overcome funding obstacles. What more can Congress do to help facilitate the creation and operation of veteran treatment courts? Brigadier General there was also talking about that. And what can we do to support our state and local partners?

Well, thank you, Senator. The first answer that comes to my mind is increase the appropriations that would go to BJA. And as the chair pointed out, those recent figures came out I think maybe three, four weeks ago. I believe $26 million has been appropriated. And for some reason, there are some entities around the country who do not apply for those grants. I don't know why, but they somehow need to be educated the money would be available. I have also spoken with some federal court judges, and they are not protected by that those appropriations. And one of them told me that they don't have the money for an additional probation officer who can handle veterans in a veterans treatment court program. And so they don't have any program for them other than trying to put that veteran defendant in contact with the VA so a VJO can come provide some services, but they they don't have a program where they say, if you are a veteran and you come in, we can divert you from this crime if you go through our 18-month program. And several courts have said the federal courts don't get the benefit of those appropriations through BJA. And for some reason, even though the tribal nations are, and we have I think 575 federally recognized tribal nations in the country, very few of them apply for these funds. So I don't know if Congress can do anything to try to stir their interest or their notice of this availability.

Right. Well, I appreciate that. I'm going to submit one more question to the record for all of you and just to kind of highlight something that I had hoped to get to is we have been talking about veteran treatment courts for veterans who get involved with the criminal justice system. I think it's important to note that we often overlook how civil legal issues can impact veterans. So I'm going to ask all of you for your thoughts about the benefits that veterans can gain from receiving help with civil legal issues and how that can help reduce recidivism rates and perhaps prevent involvement with the criminal justice system too. Thank you very much. Thanks, Mr. Chair.

That would be great. Thank you.

Yeah, I mean, it's everything from housing to I'm interested in like is this legal aid? I mean, where where does this go? Yeah, it's housing, family law, I mean, so I'd love to explore that.

Senator, my experience is you won't find a veteran in veterans treatment court with just one problem. You will find layers of problems, all of which led to that unfortunate intersection with law enforcement. We're talking housing, employment, education, counseling, substance use disorder treatment, every possible landlord-tenant issues because I get kicked out on the street, I no longer have a place to live, my employer fired me because I don't have any place to live, I can't get to work, can't get my car, etc. So I got I got to do something to feed my family, and that's how this happens. So that's why it's so critical to have the involvement of these community partners as I said at the outset. I believe government and the judiciary and community partners have never looked better than they look with veterans treatment court. So we got to get all those partners together, get them in the courtroom along with the veterans justice outreach officer to start coordinate, to swarm if you will, to remove those. So you're exactly right. Incredibly important to address those issues, and that's where the pro bono clinics, the law school clinics all come in handy. Thank you.

Thank you.

And Senator, the one thing the commission found was we start looking at this way too late. We start looking at it when they become justice-involved. And we have to start looking at it while they're still in the military. Because when you think about it, we spend $9 billion a year taking individual people, civilians, and transforming them into warriors. And into 800 different specialties from firefighters to fighter pilots over a period of weeks. And then we put them in front of things and do things to them and expose them to things, and then at the end, we spend a couple of days, maybe 40 percent get through it, and we spend $140 million on transition. And don't spend any amount of effort to transition them from warrior back to civilian. And then we don't use any evidence-based process to look at who's at risk. So then we're surprised that some have a problem. So we ought to spend a little bit of time looking at those, and that's what the commission found. We ought to spend some time looking at those things that could cause someone to turn into have a problem with the just with justice involvement.

Well, again, first of all, Mr. Chair, thanks for the indulgence and Senator King as well. And thank you all for your expertise, and I look forward to continuing to work with all of you.

Senator King.

General, to follow up, I also serve on the Armed Services Committee, and for the last 10 or 12 years, my repeated urging is I believe that the Defense Department should spend as much time, money, and effort on transition out as they do on recruiting in. And it's a we're making some progress, but but nothing like what what it ought to be. Let me ask you, my the bill that was mentioned, the Back Get Justice Involved Veterans Back Home pilot program for VA to provide mental health services for incarcerated veterans. To me, that's a gimme. I mean, that's obvious. But we have to start with a pilot program. I understand the commission has recommended returning to the 1944 GI Bill, the plain language which would allow most veterans to access VA services. Why did the commission make that recommendation? Give me a little background on that.

Thank you, Senator. The commission made that recommendation because there was a huge discussion. We had researchers take a look at this as we were as the commission did its work. In 1944, the Congress spent weeks looking at who should be eligible for VA benefits when they were establishing the original GI Bill. And they said only the worst of the worst should not get benefits, dishonorable discharge. That was the that was the cutoff. And so that was the rule, and then over time by rule, not by the intent of Congress, by rule, it's been chipped away. And so all of a sudden narrowing the narrowing the class of citizen who had served that no longer was eligible for benefits. So what happened over time is those most in need of benefits are are denied benefits. And so we said, well, that doesn't make sense.

Like somebody that's incarcerated.

Someone well, someone incarcerated with a felony conviction loses it, but someone who let's an example that I'd use for you, sir, is someone that had military sexual trauma and then becomes a bad soldier because they're dealing with that military sexual trauma. And so they're not showing up to formation. And so the commander says, this is not a good soldier. And so they administratively discharge him, and they give them bad paper. They give them bad paper because he's not showing up at work, but not because of the underlying condition that because they don't have an evidence-based process to take a look at them, they discharge him, and he doesn't he or she doesn't get health care at the VA.

Well, just for the record, do all of you agree that VA mental health benefits should be available to incarcerated veterans?

Yes, sir.

Yes.

That's a yes from everybody. Thank you. And the other thing that's in this bill, and it goes to one of the points we were talking about before, is requiring the VA to do the research to find out how many incarcerated veterans there are. I mean, to me, that makes a lot of sense. Does that Chief, is that is that a sensible proposal?

I believe I believe it is, and as kind of a piggyback to that, Senator, I'm in favor, I'm not sure who had proposed this during the past year, but as you leave the military, you are automatically enrolled with the VA. You don't have to have that

You're saying that's should be the case.

Should be the case.

It's not the case.

It is not the case, correct.

We're working on legislation to allow veterans to enroll in VA health care before they leave active duty. I think that's a sensible tack to go.

Senator, we we recommended in the commission recommended automatic enrollment for a two-year period. Currently, they can voluntarily enroll on what's called an EZ form, which everyone that I have ever spoken to, the form is called EZ, but it's not.

Well, the other thing, Professor, that I'm interested in, and I think you touched upon this, is to have the process of restoring benefits after release automatic and timely. As I understand your testimony, that can often take months and a lot of paperwork and difficulty. Is that is that the case?

Yeah, what I've seen happen is the onus is on the veteran, both on the the front end to notify the VA that they are incarcerated as a change in life circumstance. As you can imagine, many veterans may not be aware that they are supposed to do this, and as they are incarcerated, it may not be easy to actually do that. And then on the tail end, it is supposed to be an easy process for the veteran to notify that the VA that they have been released, but what often happen is there is a very long tail to that. The veteran may call in, and then there's this very slow back and forth where the VA is contacting correctional facilities, and again the onus falls back on the veteran, you know, go back to the the prison to get some kind of documentation, and it can just kind of spiral spiral into months. But as as has been mentioned, there is data sharing capabilities that are underutilized. This is a government-to-government process. So it, you know, they are entitled to have that restoration on on day one, and they do get they're supposed to get back pay if it does take many months or a year as it sometimes happens, but there's no reason that that should be the case.

One thing I would mention that we made some progress on because it was in the defense bill that passed last year that's now law. If the veteran has an opportunity to opt out of whether their home state veteran service organization is notified that they are coming home. In other words, instead of having to opt in, which people often do not do because you have got so many forms, now it is an opt out. And we think, we believe and hope that that will significantly increase my vision is have somebody to meet them at the airport. Have somebody from one of the VSOs or from the state veterans office and start the process of here is what is available, here are the services, and is there a way can we help you find a job or all of those kind of things. So I did want to mention that that was sort of an obscure provision in a 2,000-page bill, but I think that we are hoping that now that that is the law, that we will see some progress on that. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Thank you for having this hearing.

Thank you, Senator King. I just now have a few questions. Let me first start with this conversation that has involved several members, including Senator King's just recently. So the Transition Assistance Program, TAP, is supposed to help veterans move from active duty to life after active duty. I do not think I will speak for myself the program has not been sufficiently utilized, supported, emphasized, and I think we are missing a lot of opportunity. And I never thought about this in regard to the veteran treatment court until today, but we have been pushing particularly the military to have a higher priority in assisting their active duty men and women during transition. And a lot of that conversation originates with the concern about at what point in time is a service member soon to be a veteran most vulnerable to commit suicide or mental health issues. And I think the conclusion is that is the most fragile time. And so for a different reason, we have been pushing greater efforts by the VA, but perhaps more importantly, greater efforts by the military, the Department of Defense, to implement a solid TAP program. But the conversation we have been having suggests to me there may be another opportunity or another purpose for TAP related to what you are all trying to advocate for is the connection between those who serve and the world after their service. Anyone want to assist me in fleshing out that thought?

Sir, if I could. On the I think two things on the TAP program and why it maybe does not work. And I ran the TAP program for the Army. Excuse me for criticizing. And so I am criticizing myself in some ways. When we when the commission did its report, we understood that the military classified 41 percent who transitioned in a year's period as not fully prepared through the TAP program. Twenty-two percent of those never even attended TAP, even otherwise they were congressionally mandated to. TAP has never been fully robustly evaluated. Many with other than honorable discharges do not attend TAP. And so we know that we do not use a validated risk needs assessment tool. And part of the reason TAP does not exist is because what we call the commander's dilemma. I talked about it briefly, but what we do is we put the commanders in an impossible position. And it is a position where we say, commander, worry about readiness. And oh, by the way, send them to TAP. And if and I was talking to a staffer today whose husband works at Davidson Army Airfield. He is an aircraft crew chief. Now is he and he is thinking of getting out. Is his commander going to say, take care of your aircraft for missions, or is he going to send him to TAP? When push comes to shove, he is going to send him to take care of that aircraft, and he may not send him to TAP. Now what we said is in the case where he really is at risk, if you do a valid risk needs assessment tool, you pull them out of the operational force, like he was in basic training, where he is not for an operational you got to pull them out, put them in a joint transition center, get them the help he needs, and then send them on his way.

Is the key, General, what you said is if they do a valid assessment?

It absolutely is. But you have to do valid this is revolutionary. It has to be revolutionary because otherwise, you can throw more money at it, you can say SkillBridge, and SkillBridge is a wonderful program if you are available. That is always the caveat. SkillBridge, send them to SkillBridge if operational readiness allows.

Under the law, though, do they not have to require them to go to TAP?

Sure it does. But they do not comply. That is what we found time and time again.

And I think that is I have heard this before about the dilemma. I do not know you had a phrase for it. I have heard this dilemma probably from generals I know in the neighborhood is that the focus is defending the country.

Yeah, and so what we have done is we tried to come up with a logical solution that solves the problem so you do not put this commander in a paradox that you are asking him to fail.

So is let me go back to even though TAP has its challenges today for this evident reason, you got to prioritize what a soldier is doing in the last time of service. But is there a if if TAP is occurring, the transition program is taking place, is there a role in that process that affects veteran treatment court availability, knowledge?

I do not believe so. I would leave that to your classmates to answer, but they were smarter than I was then too.

I do not I do not think so because it is it will be an issue of timing. At that point, the problems are not evident. They probably are, they just are not discovered yet because even even the service member and her family do not know the baggage that they are carrying, so it will take time for that to manifest. And I think we also have to be sensitive to the notion that these service members just want to go home. And so number one, you are going to put a burden on the commander. Oh, here is something else to put on your list, this is a top priority. You all put it on there with all the other top priorities. But then secondly, the mindset of the service member, that is, I just want to go home. I do not know what all this stuff is about. So that is why the solution has to be really carefully crafted. But I do not think, you know, we I do not think part of the separation will be, and hey, do not forget there is veteran treatment veteran treatment courts out there. It would just be really hard to do, but that sort of advocacy can come elsewhere. It can come from the creation of this center, thanks to Congress. Part of that creation will be state and local convenings, national convenings, advocacy, where it will become more widespread that the existence of those courts would be a tool to assist that service member. Thank you, sir.

If you all would help me or help the the committee, in a moment, we are going to dismiss you and we are going to have two other witnesses take the table where you are. One they are both high-level officials, one at the Department of Veterans Affairs, the other at the Department of Corrections. Is there something that you would want to make sure that we hear from you that would lend itself to a appropriate, useful question and answer from our next panel?

I would simply like to highlight what an extraordinary program the VJO program is for the VA. These are young men and women who are dedicated, committed social workers who just every day get after it. So it is a it is a real plus for the VA that ought to be just sung to the to the mountaintop about how good they are. I think critical to their continued success, sustained success, will be training tailored to the VJOs so that we ensure that not only are they trained when they are new to the job because it is super demanding, especially if that VJO is not got military culture in their background, but it is not only that newcomer training, but it is also the training to sustain their skill set. So that that is all I would add. That really is a to me a thumbs up for the two thumbs up for the VA and that VJO program. Thank you, Senator.

If I may echo that and and add to that, I also would like to enthusiastically support VJOs and the critical role they play. The latest I heard, and do not quote me on, I believe there may be around 400 VJOs in the country, so I would want to know from VA how many there are currently and if the staffing is adequate. My local VJO is amazing, does terrific work, is, you know, on the streets, in the jails, every step of the way with veterans in veterans treatment courts, so it very much ties back to our conversation about veterans treatment courts, and VJOs are largely part of the success of veterans going through that. My understanding is that they are understaffed and overworked, and I do not believe their numbers have been increased in a number of years. I know there have been proposals, so I would be interested to know both the number and if there are plans to increase the number of VJOs.

Thank you. Notes were being taken.

Mr. Chairman, if I can add to what they both have said, and I have told VJOs this to their face. I said, what I like about you is that too many times a government agency says, oh, you come to us for help, well, here is a stack of documents or pamphlets or booklets for you to read, and then if you see something in here you think that might apply to you, come back and tell me, and then we will talk about it. The VJO takes the opposite approach. They can say, here is the stack of pamphlets and documents, but I have looked through them all also, and based upon my interview of you, here are two programs that I think you could benefit from. Let us talk about them and see which one would work best for you. The other thing I would say, I think the Senator Tillis said earlier, if you have never been to a VTC graduation ceremony, it is well worth your time. And as far as the VJOs go, in Johnson County VTC, when the VTC graduate is allowed to speak and say how much it's meant to them, they always go over and hug their VJO, at least the ones I've been to. And I just think that speaks volumes for how important the VJOs are, how well trained they should be, how much they care about the veterans, and I'd like to see more of them. Thank you.

Thank you.

Yeah, I would say to both government folks, as a former government folk, to please be involved in the process for the National Center with Department of Justice. Because this has to be a whole-of-government approach, and it can't be stovepiped inside DOJ. It has to involve everyone if it's going to work to take care of our veterans. Okay, thank you.

Mr. Schramm, we just heard how important certain people have had a role in your life in this process. I wanted to give you the chance to maybe do a couple of things if you'd like to expand on what the program was like that you went through. And if you'd like to take a moment, how were you treated differently than someone who is not in the veteran treatment court? You may not know that, but what were the aspects of that court that made a difference in your life? And it may just be that you want to tell us about your mentor, and I want to give you the chance to do that.

I think the program, it keeps you accountable. Like I've been, I was on and off probation before I went to veterans treatment court. And when I showed up to veterans treatment court, I thought I was just going to play the system and go through the motions. And boy, was I ever wrong. And to go back on what everyone was saying about VJOs, my VJO, Michelle Parsons, is the standard as VJO. She's an amazing person. She gave me the best piece of advice when I was going through, when she told me I didn't have to do this. That wasn't really the words I was looking for, but it just showed me where the path that I was going to take. And as far as Ed, Ed's a legend. He's a great human being. He's the reason my tie looks so good today. And he was just absolute, going through the program, he kept me guided. He used a term called jungle rules that I had to Google because I didn't understand what it was. But it just meant, you know, the court, it's their rules and you just have to abide by it. And that was a great deterrent from even the smallest sanction. I couldn't believe how upset I got over the smallest sanction. But his words with jungle rules just completely took my train of thought elsewhere and started thinking about my actions instead of like the overall punishment, like what I could do better. Thank you.

All of the questions, the stories Senator Blumenthal told, your witness to the committee reminds us, at least reminds me, I speak for myself, I believe we change the world one person, one soul at a time. And we need to have that kind of approach to how we deal with people. It's not about a process, it's about a relationship. And the veteran treatment court demonstrates to me, and your testimony shows, when people care about other people, you can change a life. And it's a great story for us to hear. We're going to change panels. Incidentally, I'm trying to demonstrate my leadership. I think it's hot in here. And they turned off the air conditioning because there was some loud noise in the background. I said the loud noise was continuing, it's worth having the noise to have the air conditioning. So it's supposedly coming back on. The Russians? Yeah.

Mr. Chairman, could I say one thing in response to Senator King's question, what can be done to make veterans aware? This story comes from a VTC graduate in Minnesota. And he later deployed after he had graduated and been rehabilitated. And he told the troops in his company about his experience in the VTC. And he said, there is no shame in asking for help, but there is shame in being in handcuffs. And he was telling them, if you are struggling, go seek help. Don't wait until it eats you up and you commit some crime. Thank you.

Senator Banks, we were ready to move to the second panel. Is that all right? All right. Thank you all for your testimony. Thank you for being here and thanks for the work that you do. Committee will reconvene for our second panel. The Senate has votes at 5:30, so Dr. O'Toole is looking at his watch to see that he only has to be put up with this process for a short period of time. Let me welcome Ms. Diane DeGiacomo, Assistant Director, Reentry Services for the Division for the Federal Bureau of Prisons, United States Department of Justice. And Dr. Thomas O'Toole, welcome back. He's the Acting Assistant Under Secretary for Health and Clinical Services at the Department of Justice, I'm sorry, the Department of Veterans Affairs. And thank you both for your appearance here today. And we'll start with you and let's hear what the Bureau of Prisons has to say, Ms. DeGiacomo. Thank you.

Good afternoon, Chairman Moran, Ranking Member Blumenthal, and distinguished members of the committee. It's a pleasure to appear before this committee to share the work that the Federal Bureau of Prisons is doing to meet the needs of our incarcerated veterans. My name is Dana DeGiacomo, and I am a career employee with nearly 19 years of service in the Bureau of Prisons, including the last eight years in the Reentry Services Division, where I currently serve as the Assistant Director. On behalf of the agency, I want to thank you for the opportunity to be here today. It's both an honor and a privilege to speak with you. I would like to also take a moment to acknowledge the many veterans who are part of my life, my family, friends, and colleagues within the Bureau of Prisons. Their service and sacrifice is deeply respected and appreciated. The BOP recognizes veterans represent a unique population within our federal prison system. Currently, the Bureau of Prisons houses approximately 7,600 incarcerated veterans, many who face service-related challenges, including physical and mental health conditions, as well as difficulties adjusting to life after military service. Veterans in the BOP reflect a diverse population across all security levels, with the majority classified as low or medium security. Many maintain strong family connections, and a significant portion have achieved a high school diploma or equivalent. These characteristics highlight both the needs and the potential of this population, reinforcing the importance of targeted programming and support. The BOP's program statement on the management of inmate veterans provides a framework for identifying and supporting incarcerated veterans. This policy outlines staff responsibilities, training requirements, and service delivery expectations to ensure veterans are properly identified and connected to resources. Identification begins early in our intake process, where staff verify veteran status through documentation such as the presentence reports and military discharge records. This information is entered into the BOP systems and tracked through a centralized database, allowing the agency to monitor trends and ensure continuity of care. Once identified, veterans are supported through our structured three-tier service delivery model designed to meet their needs at every stage of incarceration. Tier one services provide a foundational support through self-help resources and informational sessions in collaboration with the Department of Veteran Affairs. Tier two services include structured workshops, support groups that address resilience, wellness, and service-related challenges such as post-traumatic stress and traumatic brain injury. Psychology services plays a key role in delivering individualized treatment based on these assessed needs. Tier three services represent the most intensive level of programming through our Veterans Education Transitional Services, what we call our VETS unit. This is a residential program that operates on a community-based model where participants engage in daily programming focused on education, skill development, and peer support. Institutions such as FCI Englewood and the developing unit at FCI Seagoville demonstrate the BOP's commitment to expanding these structured environments and improving continuity of care as veterans transition back into the community. In addition to programming, the BOP emphasizes staff training to ensure employees understand military culture and the unique needs of our incarcerated veterans. This training supports consistent service delivery and reinforces the BOP's commitment to this population. Collaboration with external partners is also critical to the success. The BOP maintains strong partnerships with the Department of Veteran Affairs and the Department of Labor to help support the reentry planning and access to benefits, employment services, and community resources. Additionally, veterans transitioning to residential reentry centers or home confinement are provided the opportunity to engage in activity with the Veteran Affair representatives to access the benefits, secure services, and establish continuity of care upon release. These efforts align with the goals of the First Step Act by encouraging participation in recidivism-reducing programs and productive activities. Veteran-specific programming support skill development, strengthens support networks, and improves outcomes for individuals preparing to return to the community. Supporting justice-involved veterans is not just a policy priority, it's a responsibility. Every individual in our custody deserves a second chance and the opportunity to make meaningful change in their lives. Our goal is to ensure that the time in our care is not just time served, but the time that serves a purpose, equipping them with the tools, the support, and the opportunities needed to successfully return to their communities. And I'm happy to respond to any questions that the committee may have. Thank you very much.

Thank you very much. Dr. O'Toole.

Chairman Moran, Ranking Member Blumenthal, and members of the committee, thank you for the opportunity to testify today. I'm honored to highlight the work the Department of Veterans Affairs is doing to support justice-involved veterans as they navigate the legal system and reenter their communities. VA's Veteran Justice Program ensures that justice-involved veterans are identified early and connected to VA services that support accountability, recovery, and long-term stability. VJP specialists engage veterans in courts, jails, prisons, or community settings to encourage responsible decision-making, facilitate behavioral health and other needed care, and support reintegration consistent with community safety. In fiscal year 2025, VJP served more than 60,000 veterans through more than 500 specialists nationwide. For many, meeting a VJP specialist can be a turning point that opens the door to recovery. Early engagement helps veterans take responsibility while accessing treatment and support supporting rehabilitation. For non-violent offenders, the Veteran Treatment Courts occupy a critical role in supporting justice-involved veterans by offering a structured, treatment-focused alternative to incarceration. These courts pair judicial oversight with VA-supported treatment and case management. VJP specialists work alongside court teams to ensure veterans receive the healthcare, housing, and support needed to complete their court-defined programs successfully. The Veteran Healthcare Administration, Healthcare for Reentry Veterans program conducts outreach in federal and state prisons or jails to support veterans preparing for release. HCRV specialists assist with healthcare enrollment, identification documents, follow-up appointments, and reconnection to VA systems that may have lapsed during incarceration. This pre-release engagement is essential to ensuring successful community reintegration. VA's Legal Services for Veterans program strengthens access to civil legal assistance, helping veterans address outstanding legal issues such as housing disputes, benefits matters, or family law concerns that may impede stability and successful reintegration. These services do not remove lawful accountability, but rather they assist veterans to better understand their rights and responsibilities under the law and navigate available resources so they can meet legal obligations, rebuild stability, and pursue self-sufficiency. The VBA complements VA's VHA's clinical and reentry services by ensuring justice-involved veterans receive information about VA benefits and how to apply. Through its justice-involved veteran coordinators and homeless veteran outreach coordinators, VBA tailors outreach to local needs and refers veterans to federal, state, and community organizations. All VA regional offices conduct quarterly in-person or virtual outreach to veterans who are incarcerated at federal, state, or local facilities. Benefit information is disseminated to incarcerated veterans. VBA also provides information and training on VA benefits and services to community service providers and correctional officials. From October to March of this past year, VBA conducted 425 justice-related outreach events reaching more than 14,000 participants. VBA outreach personnel also coordinate outreach efforts for veterans at risk for homelessness who are being discharged or released from a facility after imprisonment, coordinating with VHA to provide outreach within 60 days of release to assist with establishing eligibility for VA benefits and services. VA strongly supports the Department of Justice's National Center for Veterans Justice. It provides a national opportunity to standardize veteran identification, strengthen data and research capacity, and improve coordination across the criminal justice system. VA's long-standing collaboration with courts, jails, and prisons form a strong foundation for this expanded effort. And these collaborations support VA's commitment to the rule of law, safe communities, and our commitment to veterans and their capacity to return to their communities. We appreciate the committee's attention to these issues, look forward to working continuing our work with federal, state, and community organizations, and this concludes my testimony, happy to answer any questions.

Thank you. Ms. DeGiacomo, do you believe the VA's engagement at the Bureau of Prisons is adequate, sufficient? How would you describe it?

Thank you for that question. Yes, we have a great partnership with the Department of Veteran Affairs. Actually, their staff or their contracted staff come into our facilities quarterly to be able to meet the needs of our incarcerated veterans.

And Dr. O'Toole, as evidenced by the number of times you appear before this committee, you have lots of responsibilities. There's lots of things that you need to pay attention to. Tell me why I should be assured that this is that veteran treatment courts and the associated programs around them are not something that slips through the cracks.

Thank you, Senator, and it's a great question. The short answer is because they work. And because they work for our veterans and bringing them back into their communities, allowing them to lead their fullest lives possible. And it's important. We have 515 veteran justice outreach specialists currently who do God's work. And having been a primary care provider in the VA for 20 years and a shout-out to Rich Flynn at the Providence VA, these guys make a huge difference in reconnecting veterans, keeping them from becoming homeless, getting them back into the workforce, bringing them back and connected with their communities. And I think our first panel really just sort of reinforced all the reasons why this is what makes the VA a special place.

Tell me about staffing. There's been a lot of talk in this committee since the beginning of last year about staffing at the VA. We're assured by the Department of Veterans Affairs that the people necessary to fulfill the responsibilities is sufficient, adequate, and doing their job. Is that true in this program?

I think it is, sir. I think, you know, just to level set with some numbers. We currently have 515 veteran justice outreach specialists employed in the VA. We have about a 9 percent vacancy rate, which for most programs that's kind of within the norm of expecting an influx and efflux out. Each medical center is required to have a veterans outreach at least one veterans outreach specialist, and obviously we have many more in most of our facilities. And we currently staff 747 veteran treatment courts as well as go to upwards of 3,000 prisons and jails with that staff. The thing that I would and we have a budget of $75 million appropriated from Congress to be able to do that, and we spend all that money. The issue, however, I do want to emphasize is this is a program we would love to see grow. Those 747 treatment courts, you know, there is a capacity for many more. As the program grows, we will staff accordingly. This is a priority for us. And I do hope that we can grow this program.

My understanding is that FY 25 is the 75 million that you mentioned, FY 26 is 82 million. So there is and that's grown since the numbers I have go back to FY 22 when it was 53. So there is interest in Congress and support through the appropriations process for this program. Let me ask a couple of specific questions and then I'll turn to my colleague Mr. Banks. Incarcerated veterans lose access to VA-delivered care while in custody. How does the VA provide continuity of care for veterans with serious mental health or substance use conditions upon release?

Thank you, and it's obviously with Senator King's legislation that's something that he's looking at as well. And I appreciate Congress's interest on this, and I know I previously testified on the Hill on the House side for similar legislation. When a person is incarcerated, they become a ward of the state in where they are incarcerated. And so the VA does not by legal authority have the ability to provide care while they direct clinical care while they are incarcerated. Our job in the context of the veteran's justice outreach and effort is to make sure that we can create a seamless transition from when they are released to get them back into the VA as quickly as possible and as seamlessly as possible. And this is where the VJO specialists play a very, very critical role. And as I mentioned in my own experience, having the VJO specialist directly participate in bringing that patient to clinic and making sure that they are plugged in and getting the care they need is a critical case management step that really makes a difference. And that's just one element of all the work that they do to reconnect people. And that's why the program works.

Finally, you mentioned your support for the National Center for Veterans Justice. Is there a plan in place to coordinate with DOJ that effort?

There is. I can't speak to all of the specifics of that plan, but we have dedicated leadership within VA that have a long-standing history of working with DOJ in helping develop the center and staffing it to those needs, and we look forward to that continued collaboration.

Mr. Banks.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Ms. DeGiacomo, did I say that right?

Yes, sir. DeGiacomo.

Can you you talked more generally about the relationship between the Bureau and the VA, but can you be more specific? Is it just the two of you who communicate? Are there task forces that are between the two departments? Can you be more specific about what that rhythm of communication looks like between the two?

Absolutely. So as I mentioned in my opening statement, like we have that three-tiered model. We have veterans scattered all across the Bureau of Prisons. And those that are at institutions under our tier one model, we have self-help resources. We have staff that are dedicated at our institutions, whether it be our special population coordinators. These are individuals that are helping our special population such as our incarcerated veterans. We also have reentry affair coordinators who are also assisting that population. So those individuals are reaching out directly to those local VA points of contact that they have who are working collaboratively together at that local level in the community in which our institutions sit.

Is this new or is this what we've always done? I mean, help me.

Honestly, I don't know the history. I know as long as I have been in the Reentry Services Division, this has happened as far as this collaboration and working directly with the VA. I think that's what separates the Bureau of Prisons maybe from some of the state systems, you know, that we are both at this federal level. So we have the ability to share data more easily, such as when our individuals come into our custody. Not only are we asking them if they served and we're looking at their presentence report, but we're also making that outreach to the VA through data sharing to cross-reference, which makes our communication between the two, I think, a little bit more easier than maybe from a state level.

You say it works?

Absolutely.

And what would you say we need to do better? Where do we need to do better between communication and collaboration between the two?

I think communication...

What are you working on?

Well, I would say one of the things that we're working on is, you know, resources, right? I think it's no surprise the Bureau of Prisons is in need of desperate resources. We need more people to help in this area. What we'd love to have is support coordinators at every single one of our institutions to be able to help the population because...

Specifically work with veterans?

Yes. Yes, sir.

Good. I think what you do is really important. And I know that you know this because you said it, homelessness drives incarceration and incarceration leads to homelessness. So it's true among veterans, true among everybody else. Can you talk about the Bureau of Prisons' national reentry strategy and how that aims to break that cycle?

Absolutely. And this goes for everyone in our custody. You know, the Bureau of Prisons takes that holistic approach at each individual that comes into our custody, looking at what their needs are. Everyone comes in with a different set of needs and we try to build off the strengths that they have. So we start there by looking at what are the needs, what got them here, and what are the gaps that need to be filled? And how do we approach filling those gaps, whether it be with educational programming, is it with programming as it relates to trauma or PTSD or those things that do affect our incarcerated veterans and making sure that they get that programming that's going to set them up? Another great thing with the Bureau of Prisons, I think, that separates us from some of the state correction agencies is the fact that we do have a reentry transition into the community. So individuals in our custody, all of our offenders, have the ability under the Second Chance Act to transition to their community before they actually release. So we give them an opportunity to make their way, they're able to live in the community before they actually release, that makes that transition and that reentry much easier.

Good. Dr. O'Toole, I introduced legislation to permanently authorize the Health Care for Homeless Veterans program. It provides medical care for homeless veterans and connects them to housing. How important is it to make that program permanent?

Thank you, Senator. I think it's very important. VA has made significant strides in reducing homelessness. One of the reasons why is because we are an integrated system and an integrated model that is able to connect housing with needed healthcare services, needed legal services as demonstrated here, needed social services. Just to emphasize that point within the context of the Veteran Justice Program, 81 percent of individuals enrolled in the Veteran Justice Program are diagnosed with a mental health problem, 56 percent with a substance abuse problem. As a result of being enrolled in this program, 94 percent of those individuals with a mental health diagnosis go on to receive healthcare within the VA system. In mental health in the previous year, that's 17 visits per patient. For substance use treatment, it's 15 visits per patient. That's a real, very meaningful and significant difference that wouldn't occur if we didn't have an integrated approach. And so absolutely, I endorse what you're saying.

Thank you. My time is expired.

Senator Banks, thank you. Let me, this conversation, let me make sure I understand something and that is, I mean, most of our conversation about veteran treatment court, the vast extent of it is going to be veteran treatment courts in state courts. Is that true? This may not be the panel to ask this question, but I think that's true. In fact, I think there's very few federal courts that have a veteran treatment court. And so what is what you're talking to us about the federal corrections facilities, they are dealing with veterans absent a veteran treatment court. You are just taking care of veterans without the services that come in a courtroom between a veteran and the state district court judge would be what I think where we are. Is that right?

Well, I'm probably not the appropriate person to speak of how the courts work. What I can say is I'm sure some of these individuals have maybe made their way through some type of veterans court maybe previously before coming into our system. But oftentimes their military service is taken into account and any recommendation that's being given by that federal judge in regards to the services that that incarcerated veteran may need, the Bureau of Prisons does our very best to make sure that we're responding to those recommendations from the court.

So the veterans you deal with in the Federal Bureau of Prisons are veterans who you learn are veterans and then try to provide them additional support and help or you're trying to follow a federal judge's direction on how that veteran should be cared for?

Yes, sir.

Okay. Okay. Anything else, Senator Banks? I want to once again thank our witnesses, both this panel and the previous, for their testimony today. Our committee and members that were here and our audience that participated as well. Each member has five legislative days in which to submit statements or questions for the record. Any Senator who would like to submit a question for the record, please do so in a timely manner and ask our witnesses to respond to any questions they have received following today's hearing in a timely manner as well. With that, the hearing is adjourned. Thank you.