Gotham Gazette

The Place for New York Policy and politics

Opinion

Opinion

Is The VA Ready For The Onslaught Of Returning Veterans?


obama vet handshake

(photo: Yuri Gripas/AFP/Getty Images)


In early May, the National Commander of the American Legion called for Veterans Affairs Secretary Eric Shinseki and other Under Secretaries in his agency to resign. It was the first time since 1941 that the veterans organization called for such a measure. The American Legion Commander cited poor oversight and failed leadership in the VA when explaining his position. He listed a number of recent high-profile scandals, which have "infected" the VA system as reasons for his public request.

In mid-May, the VA undersecretary for health, Dr. Robert Petzel resigned the day after testifying about the scandals on Capitol Hill. Some say the resignation was more like an early retirement, as he had planned to go later in 2014. By Memorial Day, Secretary Shinseki was also history, and a number of other changes and management staff shuffles have taken place since that time. While WWI veterans may never have received their bonuses, VA personnel certainly did while the VA number-fudging continued over time.

The list of VA problems is long and is not new to veteran advocates who continue to urge the government to do better. Advocate and VA watchdog Jim Strickland enumerates the current allegations at the Phoenix, AZ VA hospital and the VA clinic in Ft. Collins, CO, as well as problems at VA medical facilities in Fayetteville, Virginia, Brockton, MA and Dallas, TX. Government inquiries and reports on the VA are also listed on his website as they become available.

There have been other recent accounts of the long-standing backlogs of VA claims, which have been reduced by 44% to "just" 344,000 on March 31, resulting in "only" an average wait of 119 days to receive a decision on a claim, provided that all the "T"s are crossed and the "I"s dotted. Veterans and their Service Officers will tell you that they consider the claims of reduced processing times to be bogus.

With these current, unacceptable problems, we must ask: is the VA ready for the coming onslaught of newly discharged veterans?

According to the VA, the agency is currently involved with administering services for:
* 8.9M veterans enrolled in the health care system.
* 4.3M vets and survivors receiving compensation and pensions.
* 2M veterans with active home loans, with 950 applications approved daily.
* 1.6M veterans and dependents receiving education and training benefits under the new post-9/11 GI Bill.
* 120,000 who receive final honors or burial in one of the VA's 131 cemeteries.

According to the budget proposed in February by the Obama Administration, the Army is expected to soon shrink to pre-WWII levels. There are also calls to retire hundreds of aircraft and warships. National Guard units are also expected to be downsized.

Like the post-draft Vietnam Era drawdown, advocates worry that soldiers will be discharged to the streets just short of vesting for military pensions. In New York State alone, 44,027 newly discharged veterans are expected to return within the next five years. If trends hold, upwards of half this number can be expected to return to the City of New York.

These brave men and women will be in need of services and benefits, and will be filing claims in an already overwhelmed VA administrative system. They will be seeking health care in an already overwhelmed VA medical system. They will also be seeking housing, education and most importantly, jobs, in a most challenging economic climate.

Former Lt. Governor Betsy McCaughey said it best in a recent NY Post editorial: "Veterans' demand for medical care exceeds the VA's capacity. Again and again, VA bureaucrats have responded to that problem by lying, gaming the electronic-monitoring system and making false promises to the public."

The looming question as to whether the VA is up to the task, and whether the President and the Congress are ready to meet the challenge is one that I shudder to consider.

***
Lee Covino is a US Army veteran. He became an advocate for veterans affairs as a peer counselor while attending the College of Staten Island on the GI Bill from 1973-1977. From 1980-1984, he worked as an intervention counselor for the VA's Vietnam Veterans Outreach Center in Brooklyn and Staten Island. In 1990, he was appointed to the Borough President's Cabinet, where he served as the Veterans Affairs Advisor and Director of Contracts & Procurement until his retirement in 2014. In May 2002, Covino was appointed to the City's Veterans Advisory Board by Mayor Michael Bloomberg. He was re-appointed to the board by the mayor in 2007 and in 2012.

 

Community Schools Will Succeed If Parents Are Engaged


Gonzalez and Farina at a school

The author, left, and Chancellor Fariña make a school visit


Last week, Mayor de Blasio announced he is ready to move on his pledge to open 100 community schools by the end of his first term by utilizing a $52 million grant to create 42 new community schools in high-needs neighborhoods.

Community schools hold the power to tackle the tale of two cities in our school system—where deep educational disparities have meant 80% of students graduating college-ready in Tribeca and only 8% in Mott Haven. The innovative model will turn schools into community hubs that bring together social-emotional, medical, adult education, recreational, and job training services, and, along with a positive school climate, can address the needs of students, families and the entire community.

As a parent of two sons, I've experienced the best of times, and the worst of times, through two very different New York City public schools. Based on my experience, I believe parent engagement is the key to making the mayor's community schools initiative succeed. In turn, the community schools initiative can serve as the guiding vision to support all public schools to succeed.

The worst of times was at PS 73 in the South Bronx, a school left to struggle and which my sons no longer attend. Under the Bloomberg administration, the school stood at risk of closing for poor performance, while being underfunded and neglected. Students, parents, teachers and staff were kept on the edge of their seats, with repeated threats of phase-out and closure. In the end, they never closed the school. But, they also never provided any additional resources or supports, and the majority of parents were shut out from any meaningful role in school improvement.

The year my sons graduated from PS 73, the Campaign for Fiscal Equity commitment, which had promised us billions of added classroom dollars for struggling schools across the state, was put on hold for a third year. I was forced to accept budget cuts, instead of high quality education for my two sons.

Why should parents have to accept that their children receive an unequal education? I didn't, and no parent should.

Now in the best of times, my sons attend the New Settlement Community School, with the community schools model that Mayor de Blasio is going to expand. The school has everything: a clinic if they have a cavity or any other health needs; strong academics; swimming, ballet, and music programs; parent workshops regarding school involvement and nutrition; and so much more—all under one roof.

My sons now get up early in the morning to play basketball in a full, well-maintained court and stay after-school for reinforcements in math and reading. I have never seen either of them more focused or motivated. The community school makes both of my sons' education complete.

The key to the success of this school, which should be applied to each of the mayor's 100 community schools, is strong parent engagement from the beginning in both design and evaluation. Unlike at PS 73, parents at New Settlement are treated as full partners. The doors are open, there is mutual trust among teachers, administrators, and parents, and constant outreach is made to parents to get us involved.

In the mayor's initiative, each school will receive a full-time resource coordinator. They will recruit partnerships and resources for the school, working with the principal and school community to create a well-designed and effective community school. I strongly believe that this is a job for people with passion—for individuals who truly believe transforming education is possible.

The engagement of parents must be a large part of measuring the success of these resource coordinators. They must meet parents where they are, and reach out especially to parents who aren't involved in the school through home visits, phone calls, community meetings, whatever it takes. They should listen to parents' ideas, their anxieties and their vision. Parents should be offered clear pathways to become leaders in the school and the community.

My optimism for real improvements in our education system is now revived. The community schools model transformed the education of my two sons, and now our mayor and chancellor are committed to expand this model and move the public school system in a direction that is focused on educating the whole child.

***
Jose Gonzalez is a parent leader with United Parents of Highbridge and the NYC Coalition for Educational Justice. His two sons attend the New Settlement Community School in the South Bronx.

At A Hearing On Veterans Affairs, Missed Opportunities


mova hearing

MOVA Commissioner Terrance Holliday & his deputy at Monday's hearing (Mario Figueroa of United War Veterans)


On Monday, the New York City Council Committee on Veterans, chaired by Council Member Eric Ulrich, held an oversight hearing on the Mayor's Office of Veterans Affairs (MOVA) and its role in serving New York City's roughly 200,000 veterans.

Since Mayor de Blasio was elected in November, there have been renewed discussions in the veterans community regarding MOVA, its resources, and its direction. Beside awaiting the mayor's decision on an appointment to head MOVA, the community has been lobbying the administration to allocate $250,000 dollars in the new budget to continue MOVA's benefit counselor initiative. The City Council also asked the mayor for additional funding toward mental health, employment, and legal assistance services for veterans.

So the lead-up to the first oversight hearing of MOVA in a number of years was filled with anticipation and concern. Would this be a hearing about MOVA's role in helping veterans or a popularity hearing from those who want Mr. Terrance Holliday to stay as MOVA commissioner? It turned out to be both.

At the packed hearing, Commissioner Holliday gave fairly standard testimony by addressing all the good things MOVA does. He spoke on how MOVA provides "advocacy, referral and short-term case management services to veterans." He talked about MOVA's coordination of the city's Veterans Advisory Board (VAB) and the establishment of a Women's Advisory Committee. He talked about the Indigent Burial Program, the City's Agency Liaisons; the office's veterans clothing initiative and the office's coordination of City Services.

Despite the commissioner's presence, this hearing was no different from others. The commissioner concluded his remarks and Council Member Andrew Cohen started asking a few questions. His question regarding the veteran liaisons at city agencies and their periodic training should warrant a future hearing - no one followed up by asking what the liaisons were trained in, who trained them, or even how they could verify the training actually took place.

However, it was when Council Member Paul Vallone asked the commissioner for his thoughts on his budget that everyone really leaned in. The community has known for many years that MOVA is underfunded. Every director or commissioner I have known has had to deal with the problem of underfunding. So when the Commissioner was asked if he was comfortable with his budget and what the Council could do to help, he incredibly stated that he has not needed money to get things done and that he obtains needed resources from other city agencies.

This comment came back to hurt him on a couple of occasions. When Council Member Vallone asked if MOVA has offices in the outer boroughs, the commissioner stated he only has an office of four individuals, at which point Council Member Vallone brought him back to his point of the office needing more money.

This happened again when the discussion turned to the benefit counselors and Council Member Vallone asked what the plan was when the Robin Hood funding that supports the counselors ends. The commissioner's response was: "I'm still thinking about it, still trying to figure it out, how to work it out."

Again, Council Member Vallone brought him back to the office needing money.

And as if to drive home the point, the Council Member asked for the current budget breakdown between salaries and services. The commissioner's response was that just about the entire budget goes to salary.

What the committee members and everyone in the room wanted to hear the commissioner say was that he wants and needs more money – not that he has to ask other agencies for help or that he would take money if it was given to him. How can MOVA provide more services and better assist veterans without better funding?

The commissioner's continued reiteration of getting it done without additional funding, but then talking about expanding services was conflicting and is detrimental to how MOVA can better help veterans. Sadly, this was then compounded by the commissioner leaving the hearing after he finished his testimony.

The remainder of the hearing consisted of several panels made of up people who gave testimony on how MOVA can better address the needs of veterans; why the city needs to fund the benefit counselors program; or that the commissioner is doing a great job. This last one was apparent as Council Member Ulrich asked all who testified to rate MOVA's performance on a scale of 1 to 10 (10 being the best) and several individuals rated it a 10. This rating was more out of fondness for the commissioner and wanting to see him stay on than the role MOVA serves in helping veterans.

If the commissioner had stayed, he would have seen that the majority of those who testified agreed that MOVA's current mission as defined in the City Charter is too broad and too vague and everyone who testified agreed that MOVA needs more money.

The United States has been at war for over a decade and while veterans are shown respect by our local elected officials, we're still trying to find a seat at the political table. Testimony from Coco Culhane of the Veterans Advocacy Project said it best: "The Mayor's budget proposal, which offered a paltry few extra dollars to MOVA, sent a message about the priority of veteran's issues for this administration."

Veterans need help with housing, education, jobs, health care, and, most of all, knowledge of the array of programs that are available to them. MOVA still has the potential to do great things, but it is underfunded. Speaker Melissa Mark-Viverito and Council Members Ulrich and Vallone represent a change in direction - and they showed that with their budget commitments to veterans services. As the son of a veteran, Mayor de Blasio needs to get onboard though. MOVA is, after all, the "Mayor's Office of Veterans Affairs." I know we can do better.

***
Joe Bello served 11 years in the US Navy/Naval Reserve and has been a veteran's advocate in New York City for almost two decades. He is the founder of NY MetroVets.



Print Friendly and PDF

Editor's Choice


Gotham Gazette: New York Voters Approve $4.2 Billion Environmental Bond Act
New York Voters Approve $4.2 Billion Environmental Bond Act
Gotham Gazette: 
New York City Voters Approve Racial Justice Ballot Measures
New York City Voters Approve Racial Justice Ballot Measures
Gotham Gazette: 
Housing Development in New York City Slows to a Crawl as Officials Debate Tax Incentives
Housing Development in New York City Slows to a Crawl as Officials Debate Tax Incentives
Gotham Gazette: 
City Council Examines Low Voter Turnout, Moving Local Elections to Even Years City Council Examines Low Voter Turnout, Moving Local Elections to Even Years