GI Bill Legislation Enacted in the 114th Congress
Congressional research reportMar 2, 2017
Ask Donna
What actually matters in this document.
Text
GI Bill Legislation Enacted in the
114th Congress
Cassandria Dortch
Specialist in Education Policy
Updated March 2, 2017
Congressional Research Service
7-....
www.crs.gov
R44586
GI Bill Legislation Enacted in the 114th Congress
Summary
The GI Bills® provide financial assistance to individuals, whose eligibility is based on their or a
family member’s experience in the uniformed services, while they are enrolled in approved
programs of education, including training programs. In FY2017, the GI Bills are estimated to
provide over $14 billion in benefits to over 1 million veterans and servicemembers and their
dependents. The largest program, the Post-9/11 GI Bill, is estimated to account for approximately
93% of the benefits and 80% of the participants. This report provides a description of and
background information on selected provisions in three laws that amended the GI Bills in the
114th Congress.
The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2016 (P.L. 114-92) was enacted on
November 25, 2015. The bill effectively ends the Reserve Educational Assistance Program
(REAP) on November 25, 2019. It also prohibits nonexempt individuals from receiving a Post9/11 GI Bill allowance while receiving Unemployment Compensation for Ex-Servicemembers
(UCX).
The Department of Veterans Affairs Expiring Authorities Act of 2016 (P.L. 114-228) was enacted
on September 29, 2016. Among other purposes, the law authorizes the Department of Veterans
Affairs (VA) to treat a program of education as approved for 18 months in the event that the
Secretary of Education withdraws the recognition of the accrediting agency that accredited the
educational institution at which the program of education was offered. This authority applies to
those programs of education that were approved for GI Bill purposes on the basis of being offered
directly by an educational institution that is accredited by an ED-recognized accrediting agency.
The authority was intended to protect GI Bill participants attending approximately 900
educational institutions accredited by the Accrediting Council for Independent Colleges and
Schools (ACICS), which lost its ED recognition on December 12, 2016.
The Jeff Miller and Richard Blumenthal Veterans Health Care and Benefits Improvement Act of
2016 (P.L. 114-315) was enacted on December 16, 2016. The law enacted several provisions
considered throughout the 114th Congress, including some providing for enhanced benefits for
select individuals, others providing for more rigorous processes and standards for approving
programs of education for GI Bill purposes, and some aiming to enhance information gathering
and dissemination activities. Finally, the law was largely paid for ($56 million over 10 years) by
reducing the GI Bill reporting fees paid to educational institutions and training establishments.
Congressional Research Service
GI Bill Legislation Enacted in the 114th Congress
Contents
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2016 (P.L. 114-92) ........................................ 2
Termination of Reserve Educational Assistance Program (REAP) ........................................... 2
Prohibition on Concurrent Receipt of Unemployment Insurance and Post-9/11 GI Bill
Benefits .................................................................................................................................. 2
Department of Veterans Affairs Expiring Authorities Act of 2016 (P.L. 114-228) .......................... 3
Extension of the Veterans' Advisory Committee on Education ................................................. 3
Extension of Reduction in Reporting Fee ................................................................................. 3
Authority to Maintain Approval of Courses Following Withdrawal of Recognition of
Accrediting Agency................................................................................................................ 4
Jeff Miller and Richard Blumenthal Veterans Health Care and Benefits Improvement Act
of 2016 (P.L. 114-315).................................................................................................................. 5
Benefit Enhancements ............................................................................................................... 5
Equitable Access to Fry Scholarship Entitlement ............................................................... 5
Updated Process for Irrevocably Electing the Post-9/11 GI Bill ........................................ 6
Expansion of MGIB-SR Entitlement Preservation for Participants Called to
Active Duty...................................................................................................................... 6
Clarifying In-State Tuition Eligibility ................................................................................. 7
Requirements and Allowances for Educational Institutions and Training
Establishments ....................................................................................................................... 7
Required Reporting of Post-9/11 GI Bill Participant Academic Progress .......................... 8
Allowance of Centralized or Joint Enrollment Certifications ............................................. 8
Further Extension of Reduction in Reporting Fee .............................................................. 9
Processes and Standards for Approved Programs of Education................................................ 9
Expanded Role of State Approving Agencies in the Process for Approving
Programs of Education..................................................................................................... 9
Strengthened Requirements for Programs of Education that Lead to Licensure or
Certification ................................................................................................................... 10
Limitations on State-Defined Program Approval Requirements ....................................... 11
Update of Compliance Survey Requirements ................................................................... 12
Information Gathering and Dissemination .............................................................................. 12
Modified Composition of the Veterans' Advisory Committee on Education .................... 12
Reporting on Perceptions of GI Bill Participants.............................................................. 12
Promoting Counseling and Information on Articulation Agreements............................... 13
Contacts
Author Contact Information .......................................................................................................... 14
Congressional Research Service
GI Bill Legislation Enacted in the 114th Congress
he GI Bills®1 provide financial assistance to individuals, whose eligibility is based on
their or a family member’s experience in the uniformed services, while enrolled in
approved programs of education or training programs. In FY2017, the GI Bills are
estimated to provide over $14 billion in benefits to over 1 million veterans and servicemembers
and their dependents.2 The largest program, the Post-9/11 GI Bill, is estimated to account for
approximately 93% of the benefits and 80% of the participants.3
T
Throughout the 114th Congress, the House and the Senate committees on veterans’ affairs have
held several GI Bill oversight and legislative hearings. Congress has shown an interest in
ensuring the GI Bills help veterans and their dependents realize the goal of attaining successful
careers. The hearings have explored a variety of subjects, including, but not limited to, the
adequacy of the Post-9/11 GI Bill information technology (IT) claims processing system; the
adequacy of the processes and criteria used to approve programs of education for GI Bill
purposes; the adequacy and equity of GI Bill benefit levels; the applicability of benefit eligibility
requirements; abuse of the GI Bill programs; and the return on the GI Bill investment.4
This report discusses each of the measures enacted in the 114th Congress that made changes to GI
Bill programs. It presents a thematic discussion of the primary changes adopted, initially offering
contextual information on prior provisions and issues being addressed by amendments. It then
describes the amendments. One amendment terminates the Reserve Educational Assistance
Program (REAP). Several enacted provisions enhance GI Bill benefits. Several other provisions
are designed to improve the processes and standards for approving and reviewing programs of
education at which GI Bill benefits may be used by making the standards more rigorous and
giving some participants more time before their programs are disapproved. Finally, one of the
provisions enacted reduces benefit costs in order to help pay for the provisions that would
increase other benefit costs.
For more detailed information on the GI Bills referenced and additional background on current
law, see
CRS Report R42755, The Post-9/11 Veterans’ Educational Assistance Act of 2008
(Post-9/11 GI Bill): A Primer, by Cassandria Dortch; and
CRS Report R42785, GI Bills Enacted Prior to 2008 and Related Veterans’
Educational Assistance Programs: A Primer, by Cassandria Dortch.
1 GI Bill® is a registered trademark of the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA).
2 President’s Budget Request, FY2017.
3 Ibid.
4 See for example, U.S. Congress, Senate Committee on Veterans’ Affairs, Pending Health and Benefits Legislation,
114th Cong., 1st sess., September 16, 2015; and U.S. Congress, House Committee on Veterans’ Affairs, Subcommittee
on Economic Opportunity, Examining VA’s Information Technology Systems that Provide Economic Opportunities for
Veterans, 114th Cong., 1st sess., November 3, 2015.
Congressional Research Service
R44586 · VERSION 9 · UPDATED
1
GI Bill Legislation Enacted in the 114th Congress
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2016 (P.L. 114-92)
The FY2016 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA; P.L. 114-92) was enacted on
November 25, 2015. The bill authorizes the Department of Defense (DOD) base budget,
including such items as procurement, research and development, operation and maintenance,
military personnel, and other activities such as atomic energy defense activities and overseas
contingency operations. The NDAA often includes GI Bill-related provisions.
Termination of Reserve Educational Assistance Program (REAP)
The Reserve Educational Assistance Program (REAP) was enacted by Section 527 of the Ronald
W. Reagan National Defense Authorization Act for FY2005 (P.L. 108-375). Prior to enactment of
the FY2016 NDAA, educational assistance benefits were available to eligible reservists and
Guard members who served after September 10, 2001. Passage of the program was a direct
reaction to the increased number and length of calls to active duty of reservists that occurred as a
result of operations in Afghanistan and Iraq. Because the Post-9/11 GI Bill, as passed in 2008,
also provides benefits to REAP-eligible individuals, the two bills have been considered
duplicative.
Section 555 of P.L. 114-92 effectively ends REAP on November 25, 2019. In general, no
educational benefits can be paid after November 25, 2015, although individuals who received
REAP benefits for the enrollment period immediately preceding November 25, 2015, may receive
benefits through November 25, 2019, or until exhausting their entitlement.
Prohibition on Concurrent Receipt of Unemployment Insurance
and Post-9/11 GI Bill Benefits
Unemployment Compensation for Ex-Servicemembers (UCX)5 provides income support to
former active duty military personnel or reservists, who were recently released from active duty,
while they search for work. Prior to enactment of the FY2016 NDAA, individuals were not
entitled to UCX for any period with respect to which the individual received a subsistence
allowance under the Vocational Rehabilitation and Employment (VR&E)6 program or an
educational assistance allowance under the Survivors’ and Dependents’ Educational Assistance
program (DEA).
Section 560 of P.L. 114-92 contains provisions that also prohibit those individuals receiving a
Post-9/11 GI Bill allowance from receiving UCX, unless the individuals
are otherwise entitled to UCX;
5 Established by the Ex-servicemen’s Unemployment Act of 1958 (P.L. 85-848, 5 U.S.C. §§8521-8525) in 1958. For
more information on unemployment benefits for ex-servicemembers, see CRS Report RS22440, Unemployment
Compensation (Insurance) and Military Service, by Julie M. Whittaker.
6 VR&E is an entitlement program that provides job training and other employment-related services to veterans with
service-connected disabilities. For more information, see CRS Report RL34627, Veterans’ Benefits: The Vocational
Rehabilitation and Employment Program, by Benjamin Collins.
Congressional Research Service
R44586 · VERSION 9 · UPDATED
2
GI Bill Legislation Enacted in the 114th Congress
are receiving Post-9/11 GI Bill benefits based on their own service or through the
Fry Scholarship;
are not receiving retired pay from the military retirement system;7 and
were discharged from the Armed Forces or Commissioned Corps of the National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) under honorable conditions,
but did not voluntarily separate.8
The exemption from the prohibition excludes individuals using transferred Post-9/11 GI Bill
benefits and individuals discharged from the Commissioned Corps of the Public Health Service
(PHS).
The prohibition on concurrent receipt of Post-9/11 GI Bill benefits and UCX was only written
into UCX law—and not into any federal law for regular state unemployment compensation (UC)
benefits (or other types of unemployment benefits). Therefore, there is no federal law prohibiting
the concurrent receipt of Post-9/11 GI Bill benefits and UC (or other types of unemployment
benefits aside from UCX). At the same time, states can generally set their own state law
provisions concerning receipt of UC and other types of income/benefits.
Department of Veterans Affairs Expiring Authorities
Act of 2016 (P.L. 114-228)
The Department of Veterans Affairs Expiring Authorities Act of 2016 (P.L. 114-228) was enacted
on September 29, 2016. It primarily extends certain provisions of law which are related to health
care, homeless veterans, and provisions related to GI Bill and other benefits administered by the
Department of Veterans Affairs (VA).
Extension of the Veterans' Advisory Committee on Education
The Veterans' Advisory Committee on Education (VACOE) provides advice to the VA and makes
recommendations to improve the administration of the GI Bills. VACOE was authorized until
December 31, 2016.
Section 201 of P.L. 114-228 extends VACOE until December 31, 2017.
Extension of Reduction in Reporting Fee
The VA is authorized to pay educational institutions and training establishments a reporting fee
based on the number of GI Bill participants enrolled in or pursuing training. The fee is intended to
offset the costs of the institution and establishment for administering GI Bill benefits and
supporting veterans. Through amendments adopted in P.L. 111-377, the fee was increased from
$7 to $12 for each GI Bill participant enrolled in a program of education or pursuing training, and
from $11 to $15 for each GI Bill participant for whom the institution received an advanced GI
7 For more information on the military retirement system, see CRS In Focus IF10483, Defense Primer: Military
Retirement, by Kristy N. Kamarck.
8 The Department of Labor published guidance on the amendment at http://wdr.doleta.gov/directives/attach/UIPL/
UIPL_14-16.pdf.
Congressional Research Service
R44586 · VERSION 9 · UPDATED
3
GI Bill Legislation Enacted in the 114th Congress
Bill payment, effective October 1, 2011.9 Through further amendments, the fee was reduced to $9
and $13, respectively, for the two-year period beginning on September 26, 2014.10
Section 413 of P.L. 114-228 extends the recent fee reduction for the three-year period beginning
on September 26, 2014. The extension is estimated to save $3 million in FY2017.11
Authority to Maintain Approval of Courses Following Withdrawal
of Recognition of Accrediting Agency
In order to receive GI Bill benefits, an eligible individual must be pursuing an approved program
of education. Statutory provisions establish the approval criteria depending on the type of
program of education (e.g., accredited, nonaccredited, or flight). Programs of education offered
directly by an educational institution that is accredited by an agency recognized by the U.S.
Department of Education (ED) are required to meet a shorter list of approval criteria than
programs of education offered directly by an educational institution that is not accredited by an
ED-recognized accrediting agency.
On September 22, 2016, ED made a determination to withdraw its recognition of the Accrediting
Council for Independent Colleges and Schools (ACICS).12 ACICS accredits approximately 900
educational institutions that offer GI Bill approved programs of education. On December 12,
2016, ED upheld its September decision following consideration of ACICS’s appeal of the
decision.
Section 415 of P.L. 114-228 authorizes the VA to continue to treat a program of education that
was previously approved on the basis of being offered directly by an educational institution that is
accredited by an ED-recognized accrediting agency as approved for 18 months in the event that
ED withdraws the recognition of the accrediting agency. Despite this authority, such a program of
education may be disapproved if it fails to meet other approval criteria. In addition, the VA is
required to notify GI Bill participants of the approval status of the program of education.
Congress indicated that this provision was intended to ensure that GI Bill participants attending
ACICS-accredited institutions would not immediately lose GI Bill benefits and would be
provided the same protections as students receiving ED federal student aid funds authorized
under Title IV of the Higher Education Act (HEA).13 The HEA similarly authorizes ED, upon
ED’s withdrawal of an accrediting agency’s recognition, to permit those institutions accredited by
such agency to continue to participate in the Title IV student aid programs for up to 18 months
under additional conditions.
If a program of education is disapproved, there are several possible ramifications for the affected
GI Bill participants. Individuals enrolled in the disapproved program of education will
immediately cease receiving GI Bill benefits based on their enrollment in or pursuit of the
9 Post-9/11 Veterans Educational Assistance Improvements Act of 2010 (P.L. 111-377). An advance payment is
available to individuals who are planning to enroll more than half-time and who have not received educational
assistance benefits in 30 days or more. The advance payment provides the first partial and first full month of the
housing allowance and is sent to the educational institution for disbursal to the student.
10 Department of Veterans Affairs Expiring Authorities Act of 2014 (P.L. 113-175), as amended by the Department of
Veterans Affairs Expiring Authorities Act of 2015 (P.L. 114-58).
11 Congressional Budget Office, Estimate of Direct Spending for H.R. 5985, the Department of Veterans Affairs
Expiring Authorities Act of 2016 as Transmitted to CBO on September 12, 2016, September 13, 2016.
12 For more information, see CRS Insight IN10582, Department of Education’s Withdrawal of Its Recognition of
ACICS as an Accrediting Agency, by Alexandra Hegji.
13 Reps. Miller and Takano, “Department of Veterans Affairs Expiring Authorities Act of 2016,” House debate,
Congressional Record, daily edition, September 13, 2016, p. H5390.
Congressional Research Service
R44586 · VERSION 9 · UPDATED
4
GI Bill Legislation Enacted in the 114th Congress
disapproved programs. In addition, the GI Bill participants may be required to return GI Bill
payments for which they are no longer eligible. Finally, there are no statutory provisions that
permit the individual to regain GI Bill entitlement used at a disapproved institution.
Affected educational institutions have a few options to maintain approval of their programs of
education for GI Bill purposes. Institutions may apply to have their programs approved as if
offered by a nonaccredited institution. Alternatively, institutions may seek accreditation by
another ED-recognized entity. Finally, institutions may await an appeal by ACICS to the federal
courts, which, if successful and timely, could remedy their program approval status.
Jeff Miller and Richard Blumenthal Veterans Health
Care and Benefits Improvement Act of 2016 (P.L.
114-315)
The Jeff Miller and Richard Blumenthal Veterans Health Care and Benefits Improvement Act of
2016 (P.L. 114-315) was enacted on December 16, 2016. The law represents a compilation of
original and revised versions of proposals included in several bills introduced throughout the
114th Congress under the jurisdiction of the veterans’ affairs committees. Among the law’s
provisions are those intending to improve veterans’ disability compensation procedures, expand
veterans’ burial benefits, improve veterans’ health care administration, expand and improve
benefits for homeless veterans, and enhance GI Bill benefits. The GI Bill provisions have been
grouped into four categories: benefit enhancements, requirements and allowances for educational
institutions and training establishments, processes and standards for approved programs of
education, and information gathering and dissemination.
Benefit Enhancements
The following provisions aim to allow participants to maximize their GI Bill benefits by ensuring
full access to those benefits.
Equitable Access to Fry Scholarship Entitlement
The Veterans Access, Choice, and Accountability Act of 2014 (P.L. 113-146) expanded eligibility
for the Fry Scholarship program to the spouse of an individual who, on or after September 11,
2001, dies in the line of duty while serving on active duty as a member of the Armed Forces. P.L.
113-146 entitled a spouse to the Fry Scholarship until the earlier of 15 years following the
servicemember’s death or remarriage, effective for academic terms beginning after December 31,
2014. Because the effective date of P.L. 113-146 was almost 15 years after the beginning of the
eligibility period, some spouses would have an abbreviated period to use the Fry Scholarship.
Finally, P.L. 113-146 required each dually eligible spouse to make an irrevocable election to
receive benefits under either the Fry Scholarship or the Survivors’ and Dependents’ Educational
Assistance program (DEA).
Section 401 of P.L. 114-315 contains provisions that provide special consideration for the spouses
of individuals who died in the line of duty while serving on active duty during the period
beginning on September 11, 2001, and ending on December 31, 2005. It entitles such spouses to
the Fry Scholarship until the earlier of 15 years following January 1, 2006, or remarriage. This
change allows such spouses additional time to use the benefit. The section also allows such
spouses to change a previously irrevocable election for either the Fry Scholarship or DEA. The
Congressional Research Service
R44586 · VERSION 9 · UPDATED
5
GI Bill Legislation Enacted in the 114th Congress
Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates that the provision will cost $16 million over five
years, after which it will have no appreciable cost.14
Updated Process for Irrevocably Electing the Post-9/11 GI Bill
As originally enacted, the Post-9/11 GI Bill included several provisions establishing the rules for
individuals to irrevocably elect the Post-9/11 GI Bill when also entitled to benefits under another
GI Bill. The provisions were not codified.
Section 405 of P.L. 114-315 codifies the provisions in the original enacting legislation. It also
enacts an amendment providing for VA involvement in certain election decisions. The law
authorizes the VA, beginning January 1, 2017, to make an irrevocable election decision on behalf
of an individual who fails to do so and authorizes the VA to change an election it deems to be
contrary to the individual’s interests. After notification by the VA of the VA’s election, individuals
will have 30 days to change such an alternative election. This provision was recommended by VA
staff to streamline claims processing.
Expansion of MGIB-SR Entitlement Preservation for Participants Called to
Active Duty
Generally under the GI Bills, a participant is not charged entitlement if a call to qualifying active
duty service results in the participant discontinuing pursuit of a course and failing to receive
credit or training time. Active duty under the following authorities qualifies for all of the GI Bills:
10 U.S.C §§12301(a), 12301(d), 12301(g), 12302, or 12304.15
Prior to passage of P.L. 114-315, an individual’s entitlement under the MGIB-SR was extended
for periods when the individual served on active duty under 10 U.S.C §§12301(a), 12301(d),
12301(g), 12302, or 12304 and for four additional months for each such period.
Section 416 of P.L. 114-315 amends the MGIB-SR to expand the list of qualifying authorities to
include 10 U.S.C §§12304a and 12304b. Both of these authorities were added by the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 (P.L. 112-81), and the Army has increased
mobilizations under §12304b from 0 in FY2013 to an estimated 1,878 in FY2017.16 Section
12304a authorizes the Secretary of Defense to involuntarily order units and individuals of the
Army Reserve, Navy Reserve, Marine Corps Reserve, and Air Force Reserve to active duty for up
to 120 days “when a governor requests federal assistance in responding to a major disaster or
emergency.”17 Section 12304b allows involuntary activations of Selected Reserve units for up to
14 Congressional Budget Office, Congressional Budget Office Estimate of Effects on Direct Spending for H.R. 6416, the
Jeff Miller and Richard Blumenthal Veterans Health Care and Benefits Improvement Act of 2016, as passed by the
House of Representatives on December 6, 2016, December 7, 2016.
15 A call to active duty under §688 also qualifies for individuals participating in the GI Bills authorized under Title 38
of the U.S. Code.
16 See the Army’s Military Personnel budget justification book, FY2015-FY2017, available at http://asafm.army.mil/
offices/BU/BudgetMat.aspx?OfficeCode=1200.
17 The language does not limit the activations only to the Selected Reserve, so it appears that members of the Individual
Ready Reserve can be activated under this authority. National Guard forces are not included in this authority, but state
governors already have the ability to activate their state National Guard forces and to request support from other state
National Guards under the Emergency Management Assistance Compact. The Coast Guard Reserve uses 14 U.S.C.
§712 for short-term disaster response activations.
Congressional Research Service
R44586 · VERSION 9 · UPDATED
6
GI Bill Legislation Enacted in the 114th Congress
365 consecutive days of active duty. DOD FY2016 legislative proposals recommended such
inclusion of the above authorities.18
Section 416 only affects the MGIB-SR. It would not similarly expand relief to participants under
the other GI Bills called to active duty under such provisions. CBO estimates that this provision
would increase spending by less than $500,000 over 10 years.19
Clarifying In-State Tuition Eligibility
Under current law, the VA is required to disapprove a course at a public institution of higher
learning (IHL) if it charges tuition and fees above the in-state rate for that course to a covered
Post-9/11 GI Bill or MGIB-AD participant who is living in the state in which the IHL is located.
Covered Post-9/11 GI Bill and MGIB-AD participants are those who were discharged or released
from a period of not fewer than 90 days of service in active military, naval, or air service less than
three years before the date of enrollment in said course, and their Post-9/11 GI Bill-eligible
dependents and survivors. Thus, dependents of active duty servicemembers are not covered
individuals.
Intended as a technical amendment, Section 417 amends the definition of covered individual to
include
Post-9/11 GI Bill and MGIB-AD participants who were discharged or released
from a period of not fewer than 90 days of service in active military, naval, or air
service less than three years before the date of enrollment;
Marine Gunnery Sergeant John David Fry Scholarship recipients;
individuals using Post-9/11 GI Bill benefits transferred from a covered
individual; and
individuals using Post-9/11 GI Bill benefits transferred from a member of the
uniformed services who is serving on active duty.
The provision goes into effect for academic terms beginning after July 1, 2017. CBO estimates
that this provision will save $9 million over 10 years.20
Requirements and Allowances for Educational Institutions and
Training Establishments
The following provisions either require additional reporting by educational institutions or aim to
facilitate more efficient reporting by educational institutions, and one provision reduces future
administrative reporting fees that such institutions and training establishments may receive.
18 U.S. Congress, Senate Committee on Veterans’ Affairs, 21st Century Veterans Benefits Delivery Act, To accompany
S. 1203, 114th Cong., 1st sess., October 19, 2015, S.Rept. 114-153.
19 Congressional Budget Office (CBO), S. 1203 21st Century Veterans Benefits Delivery and Other Improvements Act,
21st Century Veterans Benefits Delivery and Other Improvements Act on July 22, 2015, October 1, 2015.
20 Congressional Budget Office, Congressional Budget Office Estimate of Effects on Direct Spending for H.R. 6416, the
Jeff Miller and Richard Blumenthal Veterans Health Care and Benefits Improvement Act of 2016, as passed by the
House of Representatives on December 6, 2016, December 7, 2016.
Congressional Research Service
R44586 · VERSION 9 · UPDATED
7
GI Bill Legislation Enacted in the 114th Congress
Required Reporting of Post-9/11 GI Bill Participant Academic Progress
Prior to P.L. 114-315, the VA did not have authority to require that educational institutions or
training establishments report on academic progress or outcome data on GI Bill participants.
Because reporting was voluntary and existing databases of postsecondary education were not
designed specifically to collect data on veterans or GI Bill participants, the data available on
participant educational and employment outcomes were limited.21 This led to concerns regarding
the return on the federal GI Bill investment, especially given the increased spending on GI Bills
with the passage of the Post-9/11 GI Bill. Congress and other stakeholders have shown interest in
ensuring that the government is an effective steward of taxpayer dollars and that GI Bill
participants are achieving the education and workforce integration expected.22
Section 404 of P.L. 114-315 authorizes the Secretary to disapprove courses at educational
institutions that do not provide annual academic progress information on Post-9/11 GI Bill
participants. Section 404 also requires that the VA’s annual report to Congress on the Post-9/11
GI Bill and DEA include such academic progress information, in addition to the requirements that
preceded passage of P.L. 114-315. Prior to P.L. 114-315, the Secretary’s annual report was
required to include information on participation, expenditures, student outcomes, and appropriate
recommendations for administrative and legislative changes.
Allowance of Centralized or Joint Enrollment Certifications
Prior to P.L. 114-315, each educational institution was required to certify and recertify, as
necessary, the enrollment of participants under Vocational Rehabilitation & Employment
(VR&E), the Post-Korean Conflict and Vietnam Era GI Bill (Korean GI Bill), and Survivors’ and
Dependents’ Educational Assistance (DEA). Regulations also require that the enrollment of Post9/11 GI Bill and Post-Vietnam Era Veterans Educational Assistance Program (VEAP) participants
be certified and recertified, as necessary, by educational institutions. The certifications are used to
determine benefit payment amounts.
A provision included in Section 407 of P.L. 114-315 allows a group, district, or consortium of
separately accredited educational institutions to certify the enrollment of GI Bill participants as if
the group were a single educational institution. To be eligible, all of the educational institutions in
the group, district, or consortium have to be located in the same state and be organized in a
manner that facilitates the centralized reporting of the enrollments. In addition, the section
codifies the regulatory requirement that educational institutions also certify and recertify, as
necessary, the enrollment of Post-9/11 GI Bill and VEAP participants. This provision goes into
effect upon enactment of the bill.
The provision is intended to simplify GI Bill administration for educational institutions, such as a
community college district. The VA and VSOs have generally supported it.23
21 For example, see C.A. Cate, Million Records Project: Research from Student Veterans of America, Student Veterans
of America, Washington, DC, 2014. This report used data from the VA and National Student Clearinghouse to report
on cohorts of veterans who earned a postsecondary education credential during a time period. A major limitation is that
the report cannot distinguish individuals who earned the credential before, during, or after using the GI Bill.
22 For more information, see the section entitled “Quality of Programs of Education” and Table 3 in CRS Report
R42755, The Post-9/11 Veterans’ Educational Assistance Act of 2008 (Post-9/11 GI Bill): A Primer, by Cassandria
Dortch.
23 U.S. Congress, House Committee on Veterans’ Affairs, Subcommittee on Economic Opportunity, Legislative
Hearing on H.R. 331, H.R. 821, H.R. 1357, H.R. 1796, H.R. 1842, H.R. 2011, H.R. 2150, H.R. 2210, H.R. 2327, and
draft Legislation “To amend title 38, United States Code, to codify and improve the election requirements for the
Congressional Research Service
R44586 · VERSION 9 · UPDATED
8
GI Bill Legislation Enacted in the 114th Congress
Further Extension of Reduction in Reporting Fee
As described earlier in the “Extension of Reduction in Reporting Fee” section of this report, the
VA is authorized to pay educational institutions and training establishments a reporting fee based
on the number of GI Bill and VR&E participants enrolled or pursuing training. Prior to passage of
P.L. 114-315, the fee was authorized to increase from $9 to $12 for each GI Bill and VR&E
participant enrolled in a program of education or pursuing training and from $13 to $15 for each
GI Bill participant for whom the institution received an advanced GI Bill payment on September
26, 2017.
Amendments adopted through Section 412 of P.L. 114-315 reduce the fee per GI Bill and VR&E
participant to $6 and $12, respectively, from the date of enactment to September 25, 2017. The
fees are adjusted to $7 and $12, respectively, for September 26, 2017, through September 25,
2026. Thereafter, the fee increases to $12 and $15. The Senate Committee on Veterans’ Affairs
indicated in its report that the Department of Education only provides a fee level of $5 per Pell
Grant recipient.24 CBO estimates that this provision will reduce spending by $56 million over 10
years.25 This provision represents the largest cost savings in P.L. 114-315.
Processes and Standards for Approved Programs of Education
The following provisions are intended to make the processes and standards for approving
programs of education for GI Bill purposes more rigorous. For background information on the
current processes and standards for approving programs of education, see CRS Report R44728,
The Role of State Approving Agencies in the Administration of GI Bill Benefits, by Cassandria
Dortch.
Expanded Role of State Approving Agencies in the Process for Approving
Programs of Education
Since the 1940s, most programs of education have been approved for GI Bill purposes by state
approving agencies (SAAs). The approval criteria have been specified in statutory provisions. In
2011, Congress reduced the approval responsibilities of SAAs by deeming approved
accredited standard college degree programs offered at public or private not-forprofit educational institutions that are accredited by an agency or association
recognized by the Secretary of Education, and
other programs of education approved by other federal agencies or states.26
This change was intended to (1) free SAAs to conduct more compliance and oversight of
approved programs of education, and (2) reduce duplicative approval efforts by multiple federal
receipt of educational assistance under the Post-9/11 Educational Assistance program of the Department of Veterans
Affairs,” 113th Cong., 1st sess., June 26, 2013.
24 U.S. Congress, Senate Committee on Veterans’ Affairs, 21st Century Veterans Benefits Delivery Act, To accompany
S. 1203, 114th Cong., 1st sess., October 19, 2015, S.Rept. 114-153. For information about the Pell Grant program, see
CRS Report R42446, Federal Pell Grant Program of the Higher Education Act: How the Program Works and Recent
Legislative Changes, by Cassandria Dortch.
25 Congressional Budget Office, Congressional Budget Office Estimate of Effects on Direct Spending for H.R. 6416, the
Jeff Miller and Richard Blumenthal Veterans Health Care and Benefits Improvement Act of 2016, as passed by the
House of Representatives on December 6, 2016, December 7, 2016.
26 The Post-9/11 Veterans Educational Assistance Improvements Act of 2010 (P.L. 111-377).
Congressional Research Service
R44586 · VERSION 9 · UPDATED
9
GI Bill Legislation Enacted in the 114th Congress
agencies.27 The change did not specify approval standards for non-college degree programs
(NCDs) at accredited public and private not-for-profit educational institutions, and it
automatically approved degree programs at accredited public and private not-for-profit
educational institutions without any SAA or VA review. Subsequently, the National Association of
State Approving Agencies expressed concern “with the recent proliferation of transition and
training programs at accredited institutions of higher learning, particularly community colleges,
as well as certifications that may or not meet industry standards or have real earning power.”28
The VA issued guidance to ensure all NCD and degree programs of education undergo an
approval process by the SAAs or VA.29
Section 408 of P.L. 114-315 codifies the VA guidance by requiring that SAAs, or the VA when
acting as an SAA, determine which degree and nondegree programs meet the statutory definition
of deemed approved and approve them. Such deemed approved programs undergo an abbreviated
approval process that reduces duplicative approval efforts by multiple federal agencies. Section
408 also establishes the approval standards that SAAs, or the VA when acting as an SAA, will use
for accredited programs that are not deemed approved.
Strengthened Requirements for Programs of Education that Lead to Licensure
or Certification
Statutory provisions specify the criteria for approving programs of education for GI Bill purposes.
The media, government agencies, and veterans’ service organizations have provided evidence of
GI Bill participants who were unable to secure employment following graduation because their
program of education did not meet the standards required for licensure, certification, state board
approval, or employment.30 In response, Section 541 of the National Defense Authorization Act
for Fiscal Year 2014 (P.L. 113-66) limited the eligible programs of education under the
Montgomery GI Bill-Selected Reserve (MGIB-SR; 10 U.S.C., Chapter 1606) and Reserves
Educational Assistance Program (REAP; 10 U.S.C., Chapter 1607) to those at Title IVparticipating institutions of higher education, as defined in the Higher Education Act; licensure or
certification programs that meet state requirements; and state approved or licensed programs
leading to state licensure or certification.31
Amendments adopted through Section 409 of P.L. 114-315 are intended to ensure that GI Bill
approved programs of education meet the standards required for state licensure, certification, or
27 U.S. Congress, Senate Committee on Veterans’ Affairs, Post-9/11 Veterans Educational Assistance Improvements
Act of 2010, To accompany S.3447, 111th Cong., 2nd sess., October 26, 2010, S.Rept. 111-346.
28 U.S. Congress, House Committee on Veterans’ Affairs, Subcommittee on Economic Opportunity, Legislative
Hearing on H.R.456; H.R.473; H.R. 474; H.R.475; H.R.476; H.R.643; H.R.1038; H.R.1141; H.R.1187; H.R. 1313;
H.R. 1382, 114th Cong., 1st sess., March 24, 2015.
29 Letter from Robert M. Worley, II, Director, Department of Veterans’ Affairs, Veterans Benefits Administration,
Education Service, to School Official, October 1, 2013; and CRS interviews of staff from three SAAs in July and
August 2016.
30 For example, see Federal Trade Commission, “Ashworth College Settles FTC Charges it Misled Students About
Career Training, Credit Transfers,” press release, May 26, 2015, https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/press-releases/2015/
05/ashworth-college-settles-ftc-charges-it-misled-students-about; New York State Office of the Attorney General,
“A.G. Schneiderman Announces Groundbreaking $10.25 Million Dollar Settlement With For-Profit Education
Company That Inflated Job Placement Rates To Attract Students,” press release, August 19, 2013,
http://www.ag.ny.gov/press-release/ag-schneiderman-announces-groundbreaking-1025-million-dollar-settlementprofit; and U.S. Congress, Senate Committee on Veterans’ Affairs, Pending Health and Benefits Legislation, Veterans
Education Success Statement, 114th Cong., 1st sess., September 16, 2015.
31 As of June 2016, neither the Department of Defense (DOD) nor the VA had implemented the provision.
Congressional Research Service
R44586 · VERSION 9 · UPDATED
10
GI Bill Legislation Enacted in the 114th Congress
employment if the programs are intended to prepare an individual for state licensure, certification,
or employment.32 They add the following approval requirements to accredited and nonaccredited
courses, regardless of whether the course is deemed approved:
The courses must meet state instructional curriculum licensure or certification
requirements if designed to lead to state licensure or certification.
The courses must be accredited by an ED-recognized accrediting agency if
designed to prepare an individual to practice law.
The courses must meet the standards developed by the relevant state board or
agency if designed to prepare an individual for employment in an occupation that
requires such state approval, licensure, or certification.
Provisions enacted through Section 409 also permit the VA to waive the aforementioned
additional requirements for programs of education intended to prepare an individual for state
licensure, certification, or employment when all of the following apply:
the educational institution is not accredited by an ED-recognized accrediting
agency;
the program did not meet the aforementioned requirements at any time during the
two-year period preceding the date of the waiver;
the waiver furthers the purpose of the GI Bills or GI Bill participants; and
the educational institution does not provide any commission, bonus, or other
incentive payments based on enrollments or financial aid, except for the
recruitment of foreign students residing in foreign countries who are not eligible
to receive federal student assistance.
Provisions enacted through Section 409 also require that the VA or SAA disapprove an
unaccredited course designed to lead to state licensure or certification or to prepare an individual
for an occupation that requires such approval or licensure if the educational institution does not
meet specified disclosure requirements. The educational institution must publicly disclose any
additional conditions (e.g., a successful criminal background check) required before individuals
may obtain the intended licensure, certification, or approval. The disclosure would have to meet
VA specifications, as described in regulations. GI Bill participants enrolled in a program of
education that is subsequently disapproved in accordance with this provision are permitted to
remain continuously enrolled.
CBO estimates that a similar provision will not affect direct spending or revenues.33
Limitations on State-Defined Program Approval Requirements
Prior to passage of P.L. 114-315, SAAs were authorized to subject nonaccredited courses to
additional approval criteria they deemed necessary. Some educational institutions were concerned
that the state criteria were not applied equally to private for-profit educational institutions and
public or private not-for-profit educational institutions. Some SAAs expressed an interest in
applying additional criteria to accredited courses based on their state needs.
32 “Joint Explanatory Statement For H.R. 6416, The Jeff Miller and Richard Blumenthal Health Care and Benefits
Improvement Act of 2016,” Congressional Record, daily edition, December 9, 2016, p. S7114.
33 Congressional Budget Office, H.R. 2360 Career-Ready Student Veterans Act, As ordered reported by the House
Committee on Veterans’ Affairs on September 17, 2015, October 22, 2015.
Congressional Research Service
R44586 · VERSION 9 · UPDATED
11
GI Bill Legislation Enacted in the 114th Congress
Amendments adopted through Sections 409 and 410 of P.L. 114-315 permit SAAs to subject
accredited and nonaccredited courses that are not deemed approved to additional state-defined
(nonfederal) approval criteria as deemed necessary. P.L. 114-315 limits the additional state
criteria to those that are in accordance with VA regulations; are deemed necessary by the VA; and
treat public, private not-for-profit, and private for-profit educational institutions equitably. The
limitation goes into effect for additional criteria developed on or after January 1, 2013.34
Update of Compliance Survey Requirements
Prior to passage of P.L. 114-315, the Secretary of Veterans Affairs (Secretary), with the assistance
of SAAs (as appropriate), was required to conduct annual compliance surveys of educational
institutions enrolling at least 300 GI Bill or VR&E participants and institutions offering NCDs.35
Compliance surveys were intended to ensure that the institution and approved courses were in
compliance with all applicable statutory provisions.
Provisions enacted through Section 411 of P.L. 114-315 change the criteria for determining
institutions at which to conduct annual compliance surveys and modify the nature of the survey.
Annual compliance surveys will be required at educational institutions and training
establishments enrolling at least 20 GI Bill or VR&E participants. Provisions in Section 411 also
authorize the Secretary, in consultation with SAAs, to revise the areas of review on the
compliance survey annually. Additionally, under these provisions the list of institutions to be
surveyed must be released by the Secretary to the SAAs by September 1, prior to the fiscal year
in which the surveys will be conducted.
Information Gathering and Dissemination
The following provisions increase the disclosure of information on the GI Bills.
Modified Composition of the Veterans' Advisory Committee on Education
The Veterans' Advisory Committee on Education (VACOE) provides advice to the VA and makes
recommendations to improve the administration of the GI Bills. VACOE members are eminent
persons in the fields of education, labor, and management; representatives of institutions and
establishments educating and training GI Bill participants; and veterans.
Provisions enacted through Section 413 of P.L. 114-315 modify the list of possible veteran
members to be individuals who have or may use GI Bill benefits. The prior list catalogued
veterans of every major conflict since World War II. The Obama Administration recommended
this change in the President’s Budget, FY2017 to increase flexibility.
Reporting on Perceptions of GI Bill Participants
The VA is required to annually report to Congress
the level of Post-9/11 GI Bill and DEA utilization and expenditures,
academic outcomes of Post-9/11 GI Bill and DEA participants, and
recommendations for administrative and legislative changes, as appropriate.36
34 The new limitations also apply to an investigation that is covered by a reimbursement of SAA expenses paid on or
after October 1, 2015.
35 The Secretary may waive this requirement based on the institution’s demonstrated record of compliance.
36 38 U.S.C. §3325.
Congressional Research Service
R44586 · VERSION 9 · UPDATED
12
GI Bill Legislation Enacted in the 114th Congress
Provisions enacted through Section 414 of P.L. 114-315 require the VA to contract for a
statistically valid survey of current and past Post-9/11 GI Bill, DEA, Montgomery GI Bill-Active
Duty (MGIB-AD; Title 38 U.S.C., Chapter 30), and Post-Vietnam Era Veterans Educational
Assistance Program (VEAP; Title 38 U.S.C., Chapter 32) participants. The survey will collect
information such as educational attainment and goals, employment status, military service,
opinions about the transition assistance program,37 how individuals made decisions with respect
to using GI Bill benefits, experiences of and opinions about GI Bill participation, and experiences
of educational pursuit. CBO estimates that the survey will cost approximately $1 million in
FY2017.38
Promoting Counseling and Information on Articulation Agreements
Statutory provisions have attempted to ensure potential GI Bill participants have the information
necessary to make the most informed decisions regarding the use of their GI Bill benefits at
institutions of higher learning. The VA is required to provide information via the Internet to
veterans and servicemembers on school credit transfer policies, accreditation, cohort default rates,
and more.39 Generally, individuals eligible for or receiving GI Bill benefits may request
educational and vocational counseling from the VA. The counseling may include, but is not
limited to, assistance selecting a program of education, resolving personal problems, and
resolving academic difficulties. The House Committee on Veterans Affairs has indicated that
school credit transfer policies (articulation agreements) are a critical piece of counsel because
many GI Bill participants attend more than one school.40
Section 415 of P.L. 114-315 enacts provisions requiring that the VA certificate of eligibility
(COE) include information on requesting education counseling services and on articulation
agreements. Prior to P.L. 114-315, the VA issued a COE to an individual stating his or her
entitlement to Post-9/11 GI Bill benefits; informing the individual on the next steps for using the
benefits; and indicating the individual’s benefit level and remaining entitlement. In addition,
Section 415 enacts a requirement that individuals who receive VA counseling services receive
information about the articulation agreements of each IHL in which the individuals are interested.
The provision goes into effect 90 days after the date of enactment. CBO estimates that collecting
information on the articulation agreements will cost less than $500,000 in discretionary
appropriations over five years.41
37 The military Transition Assistance Program (TAP) provides counsel to servicemembers as they transition from active
service, particularly with respect to employment, education, financial health, and general well-being. For more
information, see CRS In Focus IF10347, Military Transition Assistance Program (TAP): An Overview, by Kristy N.
Kamarck.
38 Congressional Budget Office, Congressional Budget Office Estimate of Effects on Direct Spending for H.R. 6416, the
Jeff Miller and Richard Blumenthal Veterans Health Care and Benefits Improvement Act of 2016, as passed by the
House of Representatives on December 6, 2016, December 7, 2016.
39 38 U.S.C. §3698.
40 U.S. Congress, House Committee on Veterans' Affairs, Protecting Veterans' Educational Choice Act of 2016 , To
accompany H.R. 5047, 114th Cong., 2nd sess., November 14, 2016, H.Rept. 114-813.
41 The provision would go into effect on or after the date of enactment . Congressional Budget Office, H.R. 5047:
Protecting Veterans’ Educational Choice Act of 2016, As ordered reported by the House Committee on Veterans’
Affairs on September 21, 2016, October 12, 2016.
Congressional Research Service
R44586 · VERSION 9 · UPDATED
13
GI Bill Legislation Enacted in the 114th Congress
Author Contact Information
Cassandria Dortch
Specialist in Education Policy
/redacted/@crs.loc.gov
, 7-....
Congressional Research Service
R44586 · VERSION 9 · UPDATED
14
EveryCRSReport.com
The Congressional Research Service (CRS) is a federal legislative branch agency, housed inside the
Library of Congress, charged with providing the United States Congress non-partisan advice on
issues that may come before Congress.
EveryCRSReport.com republishes CRS reports that are available to all Congressional staff. The
reports are not classified, and Members of Congress routinely make individual reports available to
the public.
Prior to our republication, we redacted phone numbers and email addresses of analysts who
produced the reports. We also added this page to the report. We have not intentionally made any
other changes to any report published on EveryCRSReport.com.
CRS reports, as a work of the United States government, are not subject to copyright protection in
the United States. Any CRS report may be reproduced and distributed in its entirety without
permission from CRS. However, as a CRS report may include copyrighted images or material from a
third party, you may need to obtain permission of the copyright holder if you wish to copy or
otherwise use copyrighted material.
Information in a CRS report should not be relied upon for purposes other than public
understanding of information that has been provided by CRS to members of Congress in
connection with CRS' institutional role.
EveryCRSReport.com is not a government website and is not affiliated with CRS. We do not claim
copyright on any CRS report we have republished.
This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.