VA UPDATE on GI Bill

Office of Public and Intergovernmental Affairs

Post-9/11 GI Bill Housing Payment Rates Update

November 28, 2018

Post-9/11 GI Bill Housing Payment Rates Update

WASHINGTON – Today the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) announced key changes in the processing of GI Bill benefits payments under the Harry W. Colmery Veterans Educational Assistance Act of 2017 (Forever GI Bill).Because of continued information technology difficulties with implementing sections 107 and 501 of the law, both of which change the way monthly housing allowance payments are calculated, VA Secretary Robert Wilkie has directed Under Secretary for Benefits Paul R. Lawrence to take the following actions:

• Effective Dec. 1, the Veterans Benefits Administration (VBA) will reset its implementation efforts for sections 107 and 501 of the law to give the department the time, contracting support and resources necessary to develop the capability to process Spring 2020 enrollments in accordance with the law by December 1, 2019.

• This includes soliciting bids from contractors for support in the areas of program integration, systems implementation, and software development. 

• During this time, VBA will pay monthly housing allowance rates for the Post-9/11 GI Bill at the current academic year uncapped Department of Defense (DoD) Basic Housing Allowance (BAH) rates.

• For many students, this DoD BAH rate will be equal to or higher than their current payment.

• VBA will also correct retroactively any underpayments resulting from section 107 and 501 implementation problems.

• If a student was overpaid due to the change in law or because of VBA’s challenges in implementing the law, the student will not be held liable for the debt.

• Also, for the current academic year (2018-2019), VBA will pay housing allowances based on the location of a school’s main campus, rather than the physical location of the student.

• This interim policy will terminate by December 1, 2019, upon implementation of a fully developed IT solution for sections 107 and 501 of the law.

• Finally, VBA will define a training site as a “campus” when the following conditions are true: the physical site of the training is either owned or leased by the school, and the school has ownership or control over the student’s classroom instruction or the faculty conducting the instruction. This approach reduces the administrative burden for schools and students from VBA’s initial interpretation of the law.

As these changes are implemented, VBA will remain in continuous contact with Veterans, Congress, Veterans Service Organizations and other stakeholders to ensure everyone is informed and knows what to expect. 

“Redesigning the way VBA calculates Post 9/11 GI Bill housing rates during a busy academic season was like flying a plane while building it, and that was unfair and frustrating to Veterans and taxpayers. That’s why we are resetting our implementation of the law for the next year to ensure we get the technology and formula right to put Veterans first,” said Secretary Wilkie. “In the meantime, beneficiaries receiving Post 9/11 GI Bill housing allowances will be paid at the DoD BAH rate, which in many cases will be equal to or higher than their current payment.” 

While VBA’s pending education claims inventory was three times higher than normal in early September, that figure is back to normal levels. For more information on VBA’s pending education claims inventory, see here.

VBA strongly encourages schools to begin submitting enrollments immediately for the Spring 2019 term to help VBA process them in a timely fashion. This will ensure that Veteran students receive their housing payments promptly and schools receive tuition and fee payments. VBA expects to maintain timeliness standards of an average 28 days for a new enrollment and 14 days for a re-enrollment.

If students require assistance with their GI Bill benefit or experience a financial hardship due to a delay in payment, we ask them to contact our Education Call Center at 888-442-4551 between 8 a.m. - 7 p.m. Eastern Time, Monday-Friday.  Students may also keep in contact with VA on our social media sites; on Facebook at www.facebook.com/gibillEducation/ or on Twitter at VAVetBenefits.

Share Your Thoughts On New Caregiver Act

Department of Veterans Affairs wants to know what we think about the new Caregiver Act

Request for Information

Through this notice, we are soliciting information on certain changes made to PCAFC by the MISSION Act. We ask respondents to address the following questions, where possible, in the context of the discussion in this document. Commenters do not need to address every question and should focus on those that relate to their expertise or perspectives. To the extent possible, please clearly indicate which question(s) you address in your response. As previously mentioned, responses to this request will inform our updates to PCAFC.

Accordingly, we request comments on the following:

1. How should VA define “a need for regular or extensive instruction or supervision” in the new 38 U.S.C. 1720G(a)(2)(C)(iii)?

a. Should this be based upon frequency of intervention needed by the veteran or level of complexity of intervention? Should this be based upon the impact to the veteran if such instruction or supervision is not provided? If so, how should this be measured?

b. What constitutes “regular” instruction or supervision?

c. What constitutes “extensive” instruction or supervision?

2. How does “a need for regular or extensive instruction or supervision without which the ability of the veteran to function in daily life would be seriously impaired” differ from “a need for supervision or protection based on symptoms of residuals of neurological or other impairment or injury?”

a. How should VA define and assess “a need for supervision or protection based on symptoms of residuals of neurological or other impairment or injury”?

b. Are there established standards VA should model?

3. How should VA assess whether the ability of the veteran to function in daily life would be seriously impaired without regular or extensive instruction or supervision?

a. Are there existing tools or assessments that could be used?

b. How should “seriously impaired” be defined?

i. For example, should there be a standard of time in which a veteran is expected to be able to function without the need for a caregiver, and once that period of time is exceeded, a need for a caregiver is required due to the impairment of the veteran? Is there a minimum period of time lapse that a veteran should be expected to be able to function and upon exceeding that time, might meet this eligibility criterion?

ii. Are there standards that should or could be used to determine when a veteran's ability to function in daily life is considered seriously impaired without regular or extensive instruction or supervision?

iii. How should “ability to function in daily life” be defined?

4. What specific financial planning services relating to the needs of injured veterans and their caregivers should be made available to primary family caregivers under the new 38 U.S.C. 1720G(a)(3)(A)(ii)(VI)(aa)?

a. Should entities provide these services for free?

b. Are there specific financial planning services that should be excluded?

c. How should these services be made available and/or delivered? Should these be provided in person, online, and/or via telephone?

d. Should there be a limit as to how many times a primary family caregiver has access to these services? If yes, should it be an annual limit or lifetime limit? Should it be limited by some other measure?

e. What types of private organizations provide these services?Start Printed Page 60968

i. What services do they provide?

ii. How are the services provided?

iii. Do these organizations provide these services for free?

iv. Do these organizations contract with other entities to provide these services? Do these organizations receive grants to provide these services?

f. What other Federal/state/local agencies offer these services?

i. What services do they provide?

ii. How are the services provided?

iii. Do these agencies provide these services for free?

iv. Do these agencies contract with other entities to provide these services? Do these agencies receive grants to provide these services?

5. What specific legal services relating to the needs of injured veterans and their caregivers should be made available to primary family caregivers under the new 38 U.S.C. 1720G(a)(3)(A)(ii)(VI)(bb)?

a. Should entities provide these services for free?

b. Are there specific legal services that should be excluded?

c. How should these services be made available? Should these be provided in person, online, and/or via telephone?

d. Should there be a limit as to how many times a primary family caregiver has access to these services? If yes, should it be an annual limit or lifetime limit? Should it be limited by some other measure?

e. What types of private organizations provide these services?

i. What services do they provide?

ii. How are the services provided?

iii. Do these organizations provide these services for free?

iv. Do these organizations contract with other entities to provide these services? Do these organizations receive grants to provide these services?

f. What other Federal/state/local agencies offer these services?

i. What services do they provide?

ii. How are the services provided?

iii. Do these agencies provide these services for free?

iv. Do these agencies contract with other entities to provide these services? Do these organizations receive grants to provide these services?

Paperwork Reduction Act

This request for information constitutes a general solicitation of public comments as stated in the implementing regulations of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 at 5 CFR 1320.3(h)(4). Therefore, this request for information does not impose information collection requirements (i.e., reporting, record keeping or third-party disclosure requirements). Consequently, there is no need for review by the Office of Management and Budget under the authority of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).

Signing Authority

The Secretary of Veterans Affairs approved this document and authorized the undersigned to sign and submit the document to the Office of the Federal Register for publication electronically as an official document of the Department of Veterans Affairs. Robert L. Wilkie, Secretary, Department of Veterans Affairs, approved this document on November 19, 2018, for publication.

Dated: November 19, 2018.

Jeffrey M. Martin,

Assistant Director, Office of Regulation Policy and Management, Office of the Secretary, Department of Veterans Affairs.

[FR Doc. 2018-25763 Filed 11-26-18; 8:45 am]

Do you think Congress should have figured all this out ahead of time?

North Carolina Veteran Population Dropping, VA Enrollment Growing

Veteran Population In NC Steadily Declining

WUNC 91.5 NPR
Jay Price
November 26, 2018

Despite the downturn in the number of veterans, the VA here has been seeing its enrollment grow, as a higher percentage of veterans sign up for VA care.

North Carolina is home to two of the world’s largest military bases — the Army’s Fort Bragg and the Marine Corps’ Camp Lejeune — but the state’s population of veterans is steadily declining.

Last year the number of veterans in North Carolina dropped to about 656,000. That’s down nearly 90,000 from a decade earlier, according to US census bureau estimates.

The number has steadily fallen from a plateau a decade ago. That’s despite the substantial rise in the state’s overall population, according to a new report from UNC.

A big reason that the population is falling off so much is that the veterans of the draft-fueled buildup during the Vietnam War era now dominate the veteran population, but are “aging out ” said Rebecca Tippett is the director of Carolina Demography at the Carolina Population Center.

The veteran population is older than the average, she said.

“The result of that is that you’re going to see much higher mortality rates, and overall population decline because young veterans are not replacing older veterans at a fast enough rate and are not likely to,” Tippett said.
read more here

Missing veteran's body found at Fort Hood

Body found on Fort Hood identified

KWTX News

FORT HOOD, Texas - ​Fort Hood Directorate of Emergency Services personnel discovered a body in the vicinity of Belton Lake and Outdoor Recreation Area last Tuesday.

The man has been identified as Retired Navy Seaman Craig Nobel.

Nobel was registered at the BLORA Deer Park RV Lot and was reported missing by a family member. Law enforcement officials later found Nobel’s remains in a wooded area near the park.
read more here

PTSD Netherlands Veterans Survived Combat, But Country Can Kill Them?

Netherlands Euthanasia for PTSD?

Combat PTSD Wounded Times
Kathie Costos
November 27, 2018

One of my co-workers walked over to my desk with a very stunned expression. She showed me a printout of an article she saw on FOX. "Belgian officials are investigating whether doctors improperly euthanized a woman with autism, the first criminal investigation in a euthanasia case since the practice was legalized in 2002 in the European nation." 

Three doctors from East Flanders are being investigated on suspicion of having "poisoned" Tine Nys in 2010. The 38-year-old had been diagnosed with Asperger's syndrome, a mild form of autism, two months before she died in an apparently legal killing by a doctor that she had asked for.

The article went on with this piece of news. "In the 15 years since doctors were granted the right to legally kill patients, more than 10,000 people have been euthanized. Only one case has previously been referred to prosecutors; that case was later dropped."

I looked up what I could find from journals and official reports.

Actually it seems the Netherlands has a problem with citizens with in any of these health issues.

This is from JAMA research

Euthanasia and Assisted Suicide of Patients with Psychiatric Disorders in the Netherlands 2011–2014

If you have PTSD, they can help you die? Seriously? If you are grieving and depressed they can help you die? If you have Autism?

If their citizens are given up on that easily, then safe bet their veterans are as well.

Smoky Mountain News has this about PTSD and "The Last Post bugle."

“The Last Post bugle call originated in the late 1600s when Britain was campaigning in the Netherlands,” said Ulrich. “Every night they would go to each of the camps, and make sure the outposts were set up so they wouldn’t be attacked. They would have drummers play to signal their movements from camp to camp. At the very last one, ‘The Last Post’ was played, and that meant that it was time to return. It signaled the end of a soldier’s day, but now it commemorates the end of a soldier’s life.”

Ulrich’s collection of relics will also be on display, along with those of others; rounding out the event will be members of the school’s English department, who’ll read poetry and other works, as well as history professor David Dorondo, who’ll be on hand to answer questions about the war.One of them might be on the historical perspective of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder, or PTSD; Ulrich said that although PTSD has been recognized since antiquity, it’s evolved from being called “shell shock” during WWI and “battle fatigue” during WWII.

But it seems the Netherlands has a problem with veterans and PTSD.

Srebrenica massacre army veterans drop damages claim against Dutch state
Dutch News NL
June 22, 2018

A group of army veterans who were suing the Dutch state for compensation for the trauma they suffered after being sent on ‘an impossible mission’ in Srebrenica have dropped their claim, the Telegraaf said on Friday. Some 230 men in 2017 launched their campaign for a ‘symbolic’ €22,000 each – or €1,000 for every year since the Srebrenica massacre took place. The soldiers were serving in the Dutch battalion Dutchbat III protecting the Muslim enclave in 1995 when it was over-run by Bosnian Serbs. They rounded up and massacred some 8,000 men and boys while under the control of Dutch soldiers.

Part of the Srebrenica Genocide Memorial. Photo: Dinos Michail via Depositphotos.com

Trust

Their lawyer Michael Ruperti has now told the Telegraaf that they now had sufficient trust that the defence ministry would give them sufficient support to drop the claim. ‘This has never been about money. This was a lever to make the defence ministry realise that something needs to be done to do justice to this group,’ he said. The veterans claimed the Dutch government could have known the mission was impossible to execute and say the outside world has blamed them for not being able to prevent the massacre. This, they says, has caused them social, emotional and financial damage. The defence ministry currently only compensates soldiers who can prove that they are suffering from post-traumatic stress syndrome.

It has bothered me for a long time that I do not seem to find reports out of the Netherlands on veterans with PTSD. Now I know why. Really odd considering that I heard from University of Rotterdam back in 2006.

Which shows they were way ahead of many other countries around the world. So how did they arrive at this heartbreaking decision that mental health patients are so hopeless and helpless that death is fine with them?