House Veterans' Affairs panel presses tech and policy fixes for transition assistance as DOD skips hearing

The House Committee on Veterans' Affairs heard testimony on gaps in the Transition Assistance Program (TAP) and private-sector technology pilots that aim to streamline veterans' access to benefits and jobs, while committee leaders criticized the Department of Defense for declining to appear to explain a recent memorandum of understanding between DOD and VA.

Chairman Mike Bost opened the hearing by placing TAP at the center of the panel’s work: “But today, we're gonna focus on the importance of the TAP, our transition assistance program (TAP), and broader themes of service members' transition experience,” he said. Ranking Member Mark Takano said the committee has driven earlier TAP reforms but warned that parts of the 2019 National Defense Authorization Act are still not implemented and that key improvements remain unfinished.

Why it matters: About 200,000 service members separate from the military each year and multiple witnesses and members said TAP frequently feels like a checklist rather than a tailored, measurable pathway to civilian stability. Members highlighted a congressionally mandated report showing only about 52% of service members met the one-year TAP timeline and cited long-term underemployment and delayed psychosocial adjustment as indicators that current processes fall short.

Witnesses described private- and nonprofit-sector technology platforms that they say could be “force multipliers” for TAP if federal agencies share data and align on outcomes. Manish Gupta, chief technology officer of Combined Arms, told the committee his organization’s platform “integrating 650 vetted organizations” and serving “over 85,000 veterans and military families” could personalize referrals and track outcomes if DOD, VA and the Department of Labor agreed on data sharing and technical integration. Gupta recommended pilots and funding for interoperable technology that links early DOD service data to TAP planning.

Ross Dickman, chief executive officer of Hire Heroes USA, said outcome measures should replace output metrics for TAP: “Success cannot be measured solely by TAP course completion or number of attendees,” he said, adding that junior enlisted veterans face the steepest employment barriers and that skills‑based hiring should be incentivized.

Joseph Loomis, founder and CEO of TurboVets, described a veteran‑facing, end‑to‑end digital record intended to follow service members from enlistment through separation and beyond. Loomis said a centralized platform could automate eligibility checks and reduce veterans’ exposure to fee‑for‑service “claim sharks.” Rebecca Burgess, senior fellow at the Yorktown Institute, urged stronger interagency coordination, data transparency and standardized outcome metrics, saying, “We need better coordination, data sharing, and outcome measurement of existing programs and initiatives.”

Absent agencies and a contested memorandum: Several members, led by Rep. Takano, criticized the Department of Defense for declining to testify after earlier commitments. Takano asked that a recent memorandum of understanding between DOD and VA, described in committee remarks as “strengthening our partnership in service to those who serve,” be entered into the record; Chairman Bost said it was included. Members said the MOU raises questions—particularly whether VA enrollment could shift from an opt‑in to an opt‑out model during transition—and asked for DOD and VA representatives to explain operational details and data flows.

Policy proposals and requests from the panel: Witnesses and members repeated several recurring suggestions: start individualized TAP planning earlier (witnesses recommended beginning as early as 12 months before separation), expand data sharing among DOD, VA and other federal sources, create measurable outcome metrics (for employment, mental health and education), and fund technology integration pilots. Rep. Takano described his eVest Act, a bill to change VA health enrollment from opt‑in to opt‑out at transition, and requested agency detail on whether the MOU aligns with that approach.

Points of disagreement and caution: Members debated the proper role for private vendors and nonprofits, whether Federal or philanthropic funding must sustain service‑delivery partners, and the risks of overreliance on commercial platforms. Witnesses said most of their organizations operate with little or no federal funding and argued that stable public‑private contracting or grants would preserve nonprofit capacity. Committee members raised data‑privacy concerns and asked witnesses to describe safeguards for veteran records; Joseph Loomis said data transfers would rely on secure government cloud infrastructure and veteran consent mechanisms.

What the hearing produced: The session produced no formal votes or agency directives. Lawmakers requested that DOD and VA brief the committee on the MOU’s details, recommended pilots for technology integration be funded, and pressed for clearer outcome metrics for TAP. Several members said they would pursue jurisdictional or House‑rule changes to place transition squarely under the Veterans’ Affairs Committee’s authority.

The hearing record will include written testimony from the witnesses and the MOU that members asked to be entered into the record. The committee adjourned after members said they would continue pursuing legislative and oversight steps to strengthen TAP outcomes and agency cooperation.