Bill Overview
Title: Veterans Rapid Retraining Assistance Program Restoration Act of 2022
Description: This bill prohibits the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) from charging any entitlement to retraining assistance under the Veteran Rapid Retraining Assistance Program in situations where an individual was unable to complete a course or program as a result of the closure of an educational institution or the disapproval of a program by the state approving agency or the VA. The period for which retraining assistance is not charged must be equal to the full amount of retraining assistance provided for enrollment in the program of education. In the event of a closure or disapproval, the educational institution must not receive any further payments under the program.
Sponsors: Rep. Davis, Danny K. [D-IL-7]
Target Audience
Population: Veterans who are beneficiaries of the Veterans Rapid Retraining Assistance Program
Estimated Size: 1800000
- The Veterans Rapid Retraining Assistance Program provides retraining assistance primarily to veterans who are unemployed due to the COVID-19 pandemic for enrollment in high-demand occupations.
- According to recent estimates, there are over 18 million veterans in the United States as of recent data from the U.S. Census Bureau.
- Not all veterans would be enrolled in the Veterans Rapid Retraining Assistance Program as it is targeted at those seeking rapid retraining, predominantly unemployed veterans.
- The Department of Veterans Affairs reaches beneficiaries who are directly affected by educational institution closures or program disapprovals.
- Assuming that about 10% of eligible veterans are actually enrolled in programs benefiting from this retraining assistance gives us an estimated figure of impacted veterans worldwide.
Reasoning
- This analysis considers the target population affected by the Veterans Rapid Retraining Assistance Program, specifically unemployed veterans seeking retraining due to educational institution closures or disapproved programs which have left them ineligible for completion. Given the funding restrictions, predominantly affecting veterans aid and education cycles, the interviews cover individuals most probable to be influenced either directly or indirectly by these policy shifts.
- The interviews incorporate a cross-section of veterans including those already enrolled, those potentially enrolling, and those who would remain unaffected by the policy. We have ensured a diversity of profiles including age, gender, career aspirations, and current employment status.
- The implications of cost limitations and program size are accounted for by including scenarios where policy effects are either low or none. Additionally, due to a high veteran population and specific program targeting constraints, not all perceive high changes in wellbeing, aligning with the policy's scoped impact. Therefore, respondents vary in wellbeing scores post-policy according to personal context and policy alignment.
Simulated Interviews
Unemployed, former serviceman (Florida)
Age: 32 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy is a relief as it ensures I can resume my courses without worrying about costs if disruptions happen.
- I was concerned about not being able to complete the program amidst endless district closures.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 3 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 4 | 2 |
Veteran Transition Counselor (Texas)
Age: 45 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy will enable many veterans I work with to complete their training without financial setbacks due to closures.
- It's crucial for building confidence in educational investments.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 4 |
Registered Nurse (California)
Age: 50 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I don't expect much change since I'm not enrolled in any retraining program.
- However, it's reassuring for peers transitioning to new careers.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
Electrician Apprentice (Ohio)
Age: 28 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 1.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This increases my confidence in enrolling for further training as it mitigates risks of sudden school closures.
- Looks like a good safety net.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Tech Consultant (Washington)
Age: 38 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy could benefit many as I've seen similar closures adversely affect veterans.
- It's a necessary backup plan.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Retired (New York)
Age: 55 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 18/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I personally won't be affected, but it's positive news for those still aiming for career shifts due to earlier job losses.
- Ironclad policies like this can reduce fears.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Part-Time Student (Michigan)
Age: 26 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- On already tight budgets, anything that keeps my training funded is appreciated.
- It's reassuring to know I can focus more on learning than on the 'what-ifs'.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 3 |
Student, Business Administration (Illinois)
Age: 34 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I hope this policy ensures smooth course completion if unexpected institution changes occur.
- I plan to start a new job with these skills so reliability is key.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 3 |
Software Developer (Colorado)
Age: 43 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 14/20
Statement of Opinion:
- No immediate personal value from this policy, but supportive of initiatives ensuring continued access to education.
- It doesn't affect my current standing directly.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
Personal Trainer (Nevada)
Age: 30 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 1.5 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy is a bolster against program mishaps affecting solid student plans.
- It's a boost to veterans' trust in using these educational benefits freely.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $150000000 (Low: $100000000, High: $200000000)
Year 2: $150000000 (Low: $100000000, High: $200000000)
Year 3: $150000000 (Low: $100000000, High: $200000000)
Year 5: $150000000 (Low: $100000000, High: $200000000)
Year 10: $150000000 (Low: $100000000, High: $200000000)
Year 100: $150000000 (Low: $100000000, High: $200000000)
Key Considerations
- Estimates exclude severe unplanned influxes in closures of educational facilities, though unlikely, as temporary external contingencies.
- Policy relies on consistent, qualifying delivery by educational partners under existing Veterans Education Benefit protocols.
- Population estimates of veteran retraining are based on Census data assumptions of direct eligibility influenced by unemployment or market transitions compounded by immune scenarios like closures.