House Veterans Affairs subcommittee pushes VA on digital GI Bill timeline, Rudacille reviews and staffing

At a House Committee on Veterans' Affairs subcommittee hearing, Chair Derek Van Orden and members questioned Department of Veterans Affairs officials about delays in education-benefits delivery, the timeline for the Digital GI Bill (DGI) migration and the agency’s plan to process Rudacille-related claims.

The hearing centered on whether recent IT modernization work and internal staffing changes have improved service to veterans or diverted funds into headquarters bureaucracy. "Since 2020, the number of employees at the education services at VA's headquarters in DC has nearly doubled," Chair Derek Van Orden said, adding concerns that increased headquarters staff had not clearly translated into faster delivery of benefits. Van Orden listed a string of problems he said the committee has identified, including contract and oversight mistakes tied to the Digital GI Bill and other administrative errors.

Ken Smith, acting executive director of Education Services at the Veterans Benefits Administration, told the subcommittee the agency is taking steps to improve delivery and cited several modernization milestones. "We are on track for November 2025 to be off the BDN or the Benefits Delivery Network COBOL-based system," Smith said. He said VA had processed its first non‑Chapter 33 claims on the DGI platform and that the agency has automated roughly 50% of certificates of eligibility for new applicants and pushed supplemental-claims automation toward about 70%, up from roughly 40% in March 2021.

Smith described efforts to prioritize Rudacille claims — the case the witnesses said could affect about a million veterans and dependents — but cautioned the reviews are complex. "We are reviewing all the Rudacille claims with existing staff," he said, and that the agency is prioritizing claims for veterans who are currently enrolled or near exhaustion of entitlement. Smith said the agency had deployed overtime and seasonal capacity and emphasized procedural fixes, job aids and additional training for claims processors.

Ranking Member Pappas pressed whether the administration's hiring freeze would slow reviews or force the VA to request exemptions for mission‑critical positions such as VR&E counselors; Smith said claims-processing positions were exempted but that he was awaiting further guidance on other exemptions. "I am not sure what the secretary will choose to do, but I'd certainly await his guidance," Smith replied when asked whether the VA would seek exemptions.

Members from both parties also criticized past DGI contract and schedule performance. Representative Amodei said the program’s procurement and scope had produced large cost increases and repeated delays; he and others asked Smith to explain what immediate management actions he had taken since his arrival. Smith pointed to compliance with Office of Inspector General and Government Accountability Office recommendations, the creation of an integrated master schedule and a renewed emphasis on risk management, and he pledged to provide more detail to the committee.

Lawmakers raised several additional operational issues: staff workspace and remote-work policy at the Muskogee regional processing center, capacity for in‑person staffing and equipment shortages; whether customer call volumes had risen after recent executive orders; and constituent concerns about guidance stability. Smith said Muskogee staff were processing fall enrollments and Rudacille-related work and that the site was not remote but that he would obtain specifics about workspace and equipment for the committee.

The hearing closed with bipartisan statements of shared commitment to improving outcomes. "We all agree that we want to get our veterans the benefits they have earned and they were promised," Representative Morgan McGarvey said.

Ending: The subcommittee requested additional follow‑up materials from VA officials, including implementation timelines and staffing and workspace details. The witnesses’ written statements entered the record and the hearing was adjourned.