Search News


Browse Archives

News

Guidance on New GI Bill

December 29, 2008

Share This Story

FREE Daily News Alerts

Advertisement

In June, President Bush signed into law a new GI Bill, which is notable for its comprehensiveness and much more generous benefits, but also its complexity.

Last week, the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs issued eagerly anticipated guidance. The Federal Register published proposed rules for implementing the Post-9/11 GI Bill on Tuesday; the period for accepting comments extends through January 22.

"For the most part I’m impressed by the breadth of these regulations and the number of specific situations that they address directly. That makes me feel good that they have taken a serious look at how this GI Bill will affect veterans individually and not just as a whole," said Patrick Campbell, chief legislative counsel for Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America.

Under the Post-9/11 GI Bill, which goes into effect August 1, eligible veterans will receive a monthly housing allowance and book stipend, and their tuition and fees -- up to the rate charged undergraduates at the most expensive public institution in their state -- will be paid directly to their colleges. The cost of the expanded educational benefits is staggering: The rules estimate that the Post-9/11 GI Bill will cost $28.1 billion over the first five years and $78.1 billion through 2018 (presumably, educational costs will keep rising, and an increasing number of veterans will be shifting out of the old Montgomery GI Bill program into the Post-9/11 program over that time).

As for a subset of the GI Bill of great interest to private colleges -- the Yellow Ribbon Program -- the list of proposed regulations is short. The program is intended to help make up the difference between the amount of in-state public tuition covered under the GI Bill and the larger amount a particular independent college might charge. Under the rules, a college can elect to enter into a matching agreement with the VA, which would match each dollar provided by the college toward the outstanding balance, “but the combined amounts may not exceed the remainder of the full cost of the school’s established charges.”

The proposed rules impose a set of requirements on colleges participating in the Yellow Ribbon program. (“For the sake of equality,” the proposed rules state.) For instance, they would require that colleges provide contributions for eligible individuals who apply on a first-come, first-served basis, regardless of whether a student attends full or part time. The rules also state that the college’s contributions should be made “in the form of a waiver” -- prompting some potential accounting concerns, since, in providing financial assistance, colleges typically discount tuition as opposed to waiving the balance.

The rules note, too, that the same percentage of "unmet established charges" should be waived for all individuals eligible in a particular year. (In other words, one student shouldn't see 60 percent of outstanding charges waived, and a classmate 45.)

"The real truly novel part of this, and I'm not quite sure how I feel about it, is the VA is developing a new way of calculating [academic] progress, and they're calling it the 'rate of pursuit,' " said Campbell. The formula, according to the rules, is "obtained by dividing the number of course (credit or clock) hours an individual is enrolled in by the number of course (credit or clock) hours considered to be full-time training at the institution of higher learning." Campbell said he was curious to hear what those in higher education thought of the formula, and added, too, that he thought the definition of "fees" -- as "any mandatory charges (other than tuition) that are universally applied by the institution of higher learning to each and
every student enrolled in an undergraduate program for that quarter, semester, or term" -- might be too narrow.

“The big question I have: Is health insurance a mandatory fee? Everyone is required to have it, but people can opt out of it. Conversely if you have a fee for a specific program, let’s say, you have a lab fee. Well that’s universally applied to everyone who is enrolled in the lab but it’s not applied to each and every student. I’m not saying there's anything wrong with this, but this is going to be an important question that’s going to make a difference of hundreds of dollars per year for a veteran," Campbell said.

"The fact that comments are due back by January 22, this is going to take everyone sitting down and taking a hard look at it."

Giacomo Mordente, director of veterans' affairs at Southern Connecticut State University, said, for instance, that after reading the proposed rules, he still had questions about how the VA would collect benefit overpayments, which can occur when veterans cut back their course loads mid-semester -- when it would seek repayment from the college as opposed to the student? (Under the current Montgomery GI Bill, all payments have gone directly to the veteran, whereas under Post-9/11 the tuition payments go directly to the college, with the housing and book stipends going to veterans.)

Mordente, who is also liaison to the Department of Defense for the National Association of Veterans' Program Administrators, pointed out that many people who work with veterans' educational benefits do so as only part of their job in a financial aid office, for instance. "What we do, at our level, face-to-face with veterans, we've got to really know our stuff," Mordente said.

"It's more complicated with this bill than I've ever seen it, so that's a concern."

The proposed rules also provide guidance on transferring educational benefits to spouses and children. The regulations note, for instance, that in transferring benefits to a child, “the child is not subject to the transferor’s 15-year period of eligibility.” The child must use the benefits before age 26, however.

See all postings »
Advertisement
Advertisement

Matching Jobs

Comments on Guidance on New GI Bill

  • A weak link in the New GI Bill
  • Posted by Dr. Russell Kitchner , Director of Regulatory and Governmental Relations at American Public University System on December 29, 2008 at 12:20pm EST
  • Its well-intended dimensions aside, and they are not insignificant, the recently enacted GI Bill also contains a significant flaw – that being the exclusion from the so-called “housing allowance” to any veteran taking courses at an on-line institution. There is simply no justification for this provision, which in the Montgomery Bill that preceded this one was simply referred to as a “living allowance.” Regrettably, a very likely and unfortunate effect of the Webb version will be to deprive thousands of deserving veterans of equal support for living expenses they would and should otherwise be entitled.

    Approximately 60% of active duty military who are enrolled in college level classes are doing so on-line. While the logistical reasons for this fact are obvious, there are a variety of legitimate and powerful academic and vocational reasons as well. Unfortunately, this provision would have the effect of forcing a person transitioning from active duty status to veteran status either to forego the living allowance, or change programs. Surely no one would force such choices on civilian students as a condition of Federal financial aid, nor can we justify imposing such choices on veterans.

    These are not the 1940’s, 50’s or 60’s, when soldiers returning from World War II, Korea and Viet Nam were much younger and often without dependents. Today’s soldiers – both men and women - are typically older, and with families to support. They want to return to their home communities, provide for their families and get an education to secure their futures. There may or may not be a local college that offers the program in which they may be currently enrolled, or that offers their preferred course of study. And frankly, very few of them are planning to leave home and check into a dormitory, contrary to the implicit assumptions of this bill. For these countless veterans, on line learning not only enables them to pursue their education without disrupting their home and work schedules, but it most often reflects the preferred mode of learning to which they have become accustomed.

    Consider this scenario: Two veterans live next door to one another, and one walks down the street to attend classes at a community college (thereby qualifying for a housing stipend). The other, a disabled neighbor paying the same property taxes and with comparable living expenses, but who does not qualify for that stipend. What is the sole reason for withholding living benefits? It is because in the latter case he or she wants to continue taking advantage of the convenience - and, I would add, the quality, program relevance, and other academic attributes - inherent to on-line learning offered through accredited colleges and universities.

    While no one to my knowledge is suggesting that Congress intentionally created this dilemma, thousands of veterans who have devoted years - in some cases many years – to serving and protecting their civilian counterparts would respectfully ask that Congress now act to eliminate the effects of this exclusionary provision. Moreover, everyone who is genuinely committed to promoting the educational interests of those who have served in our Nation’s military should consider asking their representatives to address this issue before this new GI Bill is enacted in August, 2009.

  • The benefit of the original GI Bill
  • Posted by Randall Hansen on December 29, 2008 at 12:20pm EST
  • I enlisted in the U.S. Navy at 17 years old. I am now 81. I used the GI Bill at the U of Wisconsin. I sincerely hope that the new GI Bill becomes real.

    The original GI Bill changed America.

  • New G.I Bill
  • Posted by Kevin K Dean , Academic Assessment specalist at Empire State College on December 29, 2008 at 4:40pm EST
  • Most colleges have an online programs at this point in higher education. According to the Sloan consortium “More than two-thirds of all higher education institutions now have some form of online offerings, with the majority of these providing programs that are fully online.”

    I note that Dr. Russell Kitchner made the point in the above comment that 60 % of active duty take classes currently and this is an interesting point because the active duty components fully support online learning through programs such as the Navy Distance Learning Partnership and EArmyU but the V.A has decided that online learning somehow would have less validity once the veteran is out of the service and therefore the student wouldn’t require the benefit a housing allowance.

    Veterans according to one Rand report earn 10% less than their civilian counterparts because of stepping outside of the workforce and they have less of a chance of attending college than their civilian counterparts even with the additional benefits therefore any incentive that can be given to nudge, push or pull or a wanting veteran towards a college degree should be afforded.

  • Current online veteran students
  • Posted by Dr. Randy Plunkett at DeVry University on December 30, 2008 at 12:10am EST
  • The commentators proceeding me make valid points - One other issue here is the key that was a hallmark for the GI Bill in WWII, Korea, Viet Nam, and the Montogomery version all permitted the location and type of training to be decided by the veteran. For example, of the almost 8 million WWII vets who used the bill, only about 2.2 million used it for public and private colleges and universities. Approximately 5.8 million used it for career schools, on-the-job training, and apprenticeships. The fantastic appeal was the veteran made the choice of what to use it for as each pursued their desired educational credential or outcome.

    Today of the top 11 schools that receive the most VA money from the GI BIll, 7 have a significant online population. The most popular form of gaining an education today for veterans is distance and/or online education.

    So, that leads me to speculate. Is this a way for the VA to save money as onlilne students will not receive the living allowance? I can only assume the framers expect GIs to live on campus and have to pay for room and board, or that those who live off campus will have a significant amount of expenses for travel that will not be incurred by distance students. There are many other questions that veterans have on this issue.

  • CLEP credit for Veterans
  • Posted by Pamela Kerouac , Manager : CLEP State Systems Outreach on December 30, 2008 at 11:25am EST
  • I have concerns that credit by exam has not been clearly detailed in the article in terms of credit calculations for the ‘rate of pursuit”. As noted, the formula, according to the rules, is “obtained by dividing the number of course (credit or clock) hours an individual is enrolled in by the number of course (credit or clock) hours considered to be full-time training at the institution of higher learning.”
    Nearly 72, 000 “funded” CLEP exams were administered to active military and veterans in 07-08. CLEP exam fees ($70) are fully reimbursed to veterans by the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs; providing opportunities to earn college credit and expedite progress to degree, thereby increasing the “rate of pursuit”. It seems that veterans will expect and need clarification as to how their CLEP exam scores will count/transfer for college credit as well as how that credit will count toward establishing full-time enrollment status. It is important that credit earned through qualifying scores on CLEP exams is calculated in the total for semester credit hours necessary for full time enrollment status to meet housing allowance qualifications.

  • Guidance on New GI Bill
  • Posted by Carolyn Cook , Vice President for Enrollment Management at Life University on January 5, 2009 at 7:15am EST
  • Where will one be able to get guidance regarding administration of the new guidelines. Where should comments about the bill be forwarded?

  • Let's see how it works
  • Posted by Kay Borders on February 1, 2009 at 7:55pm EST
  • I think the new GI bill is good. The GI's are going to have to stay in classes to get the financial aid, though. After the first week, most of the schools keep 25% of the financial aid. Then there is a withdrawal date that you can get 50% of it back before this date. This benefits the school by trying to keep students enrolled in class the whole semester. There are always loopholes and I know the GI's will find it, but they will not be getting/keeping more of their financial aid money by dropping out of classes anymore. Also, the fact that the government is going to look at retention/graduation rates is a good thing. No one wants to take classes for four years and not end up with a degree. That helps no one and wastes our federal dollars.