[House Hearing, 114 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
ARMY FEE ASSISTANCE PROGRAM: PART II
=======================================================================
HEARING
BEFORE THE
SUBCOMMITTEE ON
GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS
OF THE
COMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT
AND GOVERNMENT REFORM
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED FOURTEENTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
__________
JANUARY 6, 2016
__________
Serial No. 114-90
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.fdsys.gov
http://www.house.gov/reform
________
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
22-471 PDF WASHINGTON : 2017
____________________________________________________________________
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Publishing Office,
Internet:bookstore.gpo.gov. Phone:toll free (866)512-1800;DC area (202)512-1800
Fax:(202) 512-2104 Mail:Stop IDCC,Washington,DC 20402-001
COMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT AND GOVERNMENT REFORM
JASON CHAFFETZ, Utah, Chairman
JOHN L. MICA, Florida ELIJAH E. CUMMINGS, Maryland,
MICHAEL R. TURNER, Ohio Ranking Minority Member
JOHN J. DUNCAN, Jr., Tennessee CAROLYN B. MALONEY, New York
JIM JORDAN, Ohio ELEANOR HOLMES NORTON, District of
TIM WALBERG, Michigan Columbia
JUSTIN AMASH, Michigan WM. LACY CLAY, Missouri
PAUL A. GOSAR, Arizona STEPHEN F. LYNCH, Massachusetts
SCOTT DesJARLAIS, Tennessee JIM COOPER, Tennessee
TREY GOWDY, South Carolina GERALD E. CONNOLLY, Virginia
BLAKE FARENTHOLD, Texas MATT CARTWRIGHT, Pennsylvania
CYNTHIA M. LUMMIS, Wyoming TAMMY DUCKWORTH, Illinois
THOMAS MASSIE, Kentucky ROBIN L. KELLY, Illinois
MARK MEADOWS, North Carolina BRENDA L. LAWRENCE, Michigan
RON DeSANTIS, Florida TED LIEU, California
MICK MULVANEY, South Carolina BONNIE WATSON COLEMAN, New Jersey
KEN BUCK, Colorado STACEY E. PLASKETT, Virgin Islands
MARK WALKER, North Carolina MARK DeSAULNIER, California
ROD BLUM, Iowa BRENDAN F. BOYLE, Pennsylvania
JODY B. HICE, Georgia PETER WELCH, Vermont
STEVE RUSSELL, Oklahoma MICHELLE LUJAN GRISHAM, New Mexico
EARL L. ``BUDDY'' CARTER, Georgia
GLENN GROTHMAN, Wisconsin
WILL HURD, Texas
GARY J. PALMER, Alabama
Jennifer Hemingway, Staff Director
David Rapallo, Minority Staff Director
Katie Bailey, Government Operations Subcommittee Staff Director
Patrick Hartobey, Counsel
Sharon Casey, Deputy Chief Clerk
------
Subcommittee on Government Operations
MARK MEADOWS, North Carolina, Chairman
JIM JORDAN, Ohio GERALD E. CONNOLLY, Virginia,
TIM WALBERG, Michigan, Vice Chair Ranking Minority Member
TREY GOWDY, South Carolina CAROLYN B. MALONEY, New York
THOMAS MASSIE, Kentucky ELEANOR HOLMES NORTON, District of
MICK MULVANEY, South Carolina Columbia
KEN BUCK, Colorado WM. LACY CLAY, Missouri
EARL L. ``BUDDY'' CARTER, Georgia STACEY E. PLASKETT, Virgin Islands
GLENN GROTHMAN, Wisconsin STEPHEN F. LYNCH, Massachusetts
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
Hearing held on January 6, 2016.................................. 1
WITNESSES
The Hon. Carol Fortine Ochoa, Inspector General, U.S. General
Services Administration
Oral Statement............................................... 4
Written Statement............................................ 6
Mr. Gerard Badorrek, Chief Financial Officer, U.S. General
Services Administration
Oral Statement............................................... 10
Written Statement............................................ 12
Ms. Stephanie L. Hoehne, Director, Family and Morale, Welfare,
and Recreation, G9, Installation Management Command, U.S. Army
Oral Statement............................................... 16
Written Statement............................................ 18
Ms. Lynette M. Faga, Ph.D., Executive Director, Child Care Aware
of America
Oral Statement............................................... 24
Written Statement............................................ 27
APPENDIX
Ranking Member Connolly Statement for the Record................. 48
2015-11-19 GSA to NARA re Army Childcare Subsidy Program Records. 50
RESPONSE from Mr. Badorrek to Questions for the Record........... 53
RESPONSE from Ms. Hoehne to Questions for the Record............. 65
RESPONSE from Dr. Fraga to Questions for the Record.............. 69
ARMY FEE ASSISTANCE PROGRAM: PART II
----------
Wednesday, January 6, 2016
House of Representatives,
Subcommittee on Government Operations,
Committee on Oversight and Government Reform,
Washington, D.C.
The subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 10:04 a.m., in
Room 2154, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Mark Meadows
[chairman of the subcommittee] presiding.
Present: Representatives Meadows, Jordan, Walberg, Carter,
Connolly, Maloney, and Lynch.
Mr. Meadows. The Subcommittee on Government Operations will
come to order.
Without objection, the chair is authorized to declare a
recess at any time.
Good morning. Today's hearing is an opportunity to examine
the efforts put forth by the GSA and the Army to fix a problem
that should never have occurred in the first place, a problem
that obviously was of their own making.
The Army Fee Assistance Program, or the AFA Program, as
it's commonly referred to, provides compensation to Army
families that must pay for base third-party child care where
on-the-base child care is not accessible. Army families rely on
this program to help ensure that their children are taken care
of so that their servicemember parents can continue to serve
our Nation.
In October of 2014, the Army transitioned administrative
control of the AFA Program from the private contractor Child
Care Aware to the GSA under the auspices of saving $4 million.
Obviously, we love to save money, but during the GSA's
administration of this program, it allowed the backlogs to
build to more than 25,000 items.
Thousands of phone calls and emails by families were left
unanswered. Thousands of these emails and voicemails were
deleted by GSA. And let me repeat that for those who may have
missed the last part: Those were deleted by GSA.
Thousands of invoices went unpaid, resulting in Army
families having to struggle to pay for the necessary childcare
services. At the time of the transition, these families had
been assured that there would be no disruption in the payments
and the transitions would be seamless. Sadly, this turned out
to be completely false.
The full committee held a hearing this past September in an
effort to get to the bottom of how the management of this
program went so wrong. Following that hearing, the GSA and Army
began to make major steps in rectifying the problem faced by
Army families under the GSA's administration.
These improvements included reductions or eliminations of
long-term backlogs in every major category and a transition
away from the GSA's administration back to Child Care Aware of
America, the contractor that had successfully managed the
program prior to the GSA taking control.
Now, while the work done so far deserves recognition,
including the paying completely of the 9,100-plus unpaid
invoices that existed, it does not mean that this program is
out of the woods yet. GSA still faces a substantial backlog in
the family actions category, a crucial first step in the AFA
Program participation, and, as of December 21, the family
action backlog stood at some 1,600.
This is unacceptable. It's something that we have to
address. And with the AFA Program at a new crossroad as it
prepares to begin transitioning administrative control back to
Child Care Aware in February, it is critical that the GSA work
even harder to completely eradicate this backlog.
The Army, the GSA, Child Care Aware are scheduled to begin
a roughly 7-month process of transitioning families from GSA
administration to Child Care Aware on February 22. Following
that transition, CCA families will gradually transition to
Child Care Aware based on the State in which they live, and I
understand from Ms. Hoehne that that's going to start here in
the D.C. metro area.
Although this transition is a welcome and positive step
towards getting the AFA Program back on track, it raises
additional new and pressing concerns. Already, the transition
is experiencing some delays in the rollout, and the structure
of how the Fee Assistance Program administration will
transition has a potential cause of--possibly causing confusion
and hardships for our Army families. It is my hope that today's
hearing will help ensure that those hardships and problems for
our Army families and the ones that they would experience
following the GSA transition will not reoccur and that this new
issue can be prevented during the Child Care Aware transition.
I want to thank each of the witnesses for appearing before
the subcommittee today, and I look forward to their assistance
in ensuring that our Army families in the Fee Assistance
Program receive the service that they earned and deserve.
And, with that, I now recognize the ranking member, Mr.
Connolly, the ranking member of the Subcommittee on Government
Operations, for his opening testimony.
Mr. Connolly. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And thank you for
this followup hearing.
We're looking at GSA's deplorable management of the Army's
subsidized childcare program. Thousands of military families
were saddled with the unacceptable financial hardships, not to
mention the emotional strain, of footing the bill for child
care that should and would have been subsidized if not for the
string of shockingly bad decisions made by both the Army and
the GSA.
Today, we'll receive an update on steps that have been
taken over the last few months to remedy this outrage and the
effort to transition the program back to the private-sector
company that had been successfully managing the program and
continues to successfully manage it for other branches of the
armed services.
I appreciate the bipartisan nature of this ongoing
investigation and your personal commitment to that, Mr.
Chairman, and our shared interest in ensuring our military
families receive the benefits that they've earned and the
proper stewardship of taxpayer dollars.
To briefly recap, the Fee Assistance Program helps
subsidize off-post child care for military families when on-
post care is unavailable. Each branch of the military operates
its own program, and, until 2014, the same company, Child Care
Aware of America, administered it for nearly all of the
branches.
The GSA, meanwhile, administered the program for
approximately 200 Army families and made the claim that it
could administer Army's entire program for half the existing
cost, saving $4 million annually. Despite performing no
analysis to support such a claim, the Army forged ahead with
that promise. To say that GSA was unprepared for the surge in
participation, from 200 to 9,000 families, is an
understatement.
The OIG cited serious lack of preparation with respect to
both personnel and technology. For example, GSA's cloud storage
for email and voicemail was inadequate to handle a 45-fold
increase in requests that needed to be processed. Staff was
quickly overwhelmed, and a backlog of parent and provider
requests began to grow. It included more than 9,100 unpaid
provider invoices, averaging $300 apiece per month, that
military families had to cover--military families often not in
a financial position to cover that kind of cash flow--more than
5,000 unprocessed family applications and recertifications;
more than 7,300 unreturned phone calls; and more than 4,500
unanswered emails.
Following our hearing, the GSA made what can only be
described as surprising progress in reducing those backlogs,
which, of course, was a precondition for Child Care Aware
resuming efficient management of the program.
GSA reports all backlog provider invoices were paid within
30 days, though we would like to know what steps are being
taken to address the one in five payments for which errors have
been detected. And while the GSA is still working to reduce the
backlog of family actions, including recertifications, it has
made considerable progress after the Army authorized the
suspension of those activities to focus immediate attention on
paying out invoices. As of December, GSA reports it has
eliminated the phone call and email backlogs.
I'd note the committee has requested the National Archives
and Records Administration open an inquiry into the actions of
GSA employees who apparently deleted various family
communications, though I understand those families have since
been contacted.
Mr. Chairman, while I'm pleased to see progress, I'm still
troubled by the actions that created the situation in the first
place. During our September hearing, we learned the Army had
already spent an additional $4.4 million to allow the GSA to
hire more contract personnel and update its IT systems. Have
further costs been incurred since then to eliminate those
backlogs?
I also want to hear about how we're applying lessons
learned as we move forward. The OIG cited GSA for lack of
preparation in advance of the program transfer in October 2014.
Has the Army certified that Child Care Aware has sufficiently
ramped up its personnel and IT services after having to scale
down when it lost the program management more than a year ago?
Mr. Chairman, to their credit, both GSA and the Army seem
to have recognized the error of transferring management of this
program, first by proactively engaging the inspector general
and now by transferring the program back to the initial
competent contractor. While there are still issues obviously to
be resolved, I certainly recognize that progress and commend it
and hope it will continue.
Mr. Chairman, I also want to say this is precisely the type
of bipartisan oversight for which our subcommittee increasingly
has become known, and I am very pleased to collaborate with you
in this endeavor today.
Mr. Meadows. Well, I thank my good friend, the ranking
member, Mr. Connolly, for his kind words and really for working
in such a hand-in-glove way to make sure that Army families in
this particular situation are taken care of.
I will hold the record open for 5 legislative days for any
members who would like to submit a written statement.
Mr. Meadows. We will now recognize our panel of witnesses.
I'm pleased to welcome the Honorable Carol Fortine Ochoa,
Inspector General of the U.S. General Services Administration;
Mr. Gerard Badorrek, Chief Financial Officer of the U.S.
General Services Administration; Ms. Stephanie Hoehne, Director
of the Family and Morale, Welfare, and Recreation at G9--quite
a title there--Installation Management Command of the U.S.
Army; and Dr. Lynette Fraga, executive director of Child Care
Aware of America.
Welcome to you all.
Pursuant to committee rules, all witnesses will be sworn in
before they testify, so if you would please rise and raise your
right hand.
Do you solemnly swear or affirm that the testimony you are
about to give will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing
but the truth?
Okay. Thank you. Please be seated.
Let the record reflect that all witnesses answered in the
affirmative.
And in order to allow time for discussion, I would ask that
you please limit your oral testimony to 5 minutes. Your entire
written statement, however, will be made part of the record.
And, Inspector General Ochoa, you are now recognized for 5
minutes.
WITNESS STATEMENTS
STATEMENT OF THE HON. CAROL FORTINE OCHOA
Ms. Ochoa. Good morning, Chairman Meadows, Ranking Member
Connolly, and members of the subcommittee. Thank you for
inviting me here today. I appreciate the opportunity to testify
about the Office of the Inspector General's ongoing work
monitoring the General Service Administration's administration
of the Army childcare subsidy program, or Army Fee Assistance
Program.
Since September, my office has been monitoring GSA's
metrics for the Army Fee Assistance Program. We released a
status report on Monday of this week that notes progress in the
following areas:
Our analysis of invoices and data from GSA's invoice system
supports GSA's report that by mid-October it had paid 94
percent of the provider invoices that were outstanding at the
date of the full committee hearing on this matter in September.
Additionally, GSA call logs reflect that GSA personnel
called back the nearly 2,000 telephone numbers corresponding to
the unreturned voicemails that were outstanding as of September
2015.
As of December 21, 2015, GSA had decreased its total
backlog to approximately 3,100 items from a high of nearly
26,000 items reported in our September report.
Also, the number of program complaints received by the OIG
significantly dropped since GSA paid off the backlogged
invoices.
Regarding the transition of the program, the interagency
agreement between the Army and the GSA was extended to March
2016, with further options to extend the GSA's administration
of the program through October 2016. GSA officials told us that
on December 23 the Army signed a final contract with Child Care
Aware of America for the administration of the program.
In addition, the Army has provided GSA with a transition
timeline, which we understand is subject to amendment, that
projects the beginning of the transfer to the new contractor on
February 22, next month. This transition schedule is lengthy.
It consist of seven phases taking place over approximately 8
months, with GSA continuing to manage Army families' accounts
until the transfer is complete in October 2016.
Thank you for the opportunity to testify and for this
committee's support of inspectors general. I ask that my
testimony and the OIG's report be made part of the record, and
I'd be happy to answer any questions.
[Prepared statement of Ms. Ochoa follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Mr. Meadows. Without objection. Thank you for your
testimony.
Mr. Badorrek, you're recognized for 5 minutes.
STATEMENT OF GERARD BADORREK
Mr. Badorrek. Thank you.
Good morning, Chairman Meadows, Ranking Member Connolly,
and members of the committee. My name is Gerard Badorrek, and I
am the Chief Financial Officer of the U.S. General Services
Administration. I have been the Chief Financial Officer of GSA
since December 29, 2014.
As you know, I was previously before the committee on
September 10 to testify about GSA's management of the Army Fee
Assistance Program. This program is a top priority at GSA so
that Army families receive the customer service they deserve. I
thank you for the opportunity to testify before you today about
the progress that has been made in this program.
By standardizing work, expanding resources, and fully
implementing an improved information technology system, we have
now eliminated the significant backlogs of family actions and
unpaid invoices.
The number of families enrolled in the program has reached
12,785, an increase of 25 percent since September. As of
December 18, the total inventory of family actions was 1,141,
excluding 426 recertifications. This total was significantly
reduced from over 5,000 at the time of the September hearing.
Out of these 1,141 family actions, all but 35 had been
evaluated, and the rest were in process. There are 724 actions,
or almost two-thirds of this inventory, that is back with
families or providers, awaiting information. The goal was to
reduce the inventory to 2,000 or less by the end of the year,
and we reached this goal on November 25.
The program also made progress toward providing customer
service levels that are aligned with Army-established quality
and timeliness standards. We have reduced the backlog of emails
and phone calls from approximately 4,000 in September to 299 by
December 18 and can respond to most phone calls and emails
within 24 hours.
GSA fulfilled its commitment to the committee to clear the
invoice backlog by October 10, and valid invoices are typically
being processed within 3 to 4 days. In addition, the Army has
worked very closely with GSA on policy changes that allowed us
to streamline processes, including temporarily modifying
payment policies and delaying recertifications. These changes
help to reduce the backlog of erred invoices and allowed the
program to focus on processing family actions. We are now
researching invoice discrepancies and completing
recertifications.
In response to concerns about the security of Army
families' personal information, GSA reopened free credit
monitoring services from the first week of October 2015 until
the transition is completed, and 243 families enrolled in
identity protection and credit monitoring services.
Shortly after the last hearing, we joined transition
planning efforts with the Army and Child Care Aware. We
participate in frequent meetings, and we will continue to
support family and provider webinars hosted by the Army. GSA
will support the Army and Child Care Aware in transferring
family and provider information to ensure that Army families
are not negatively affected by the transition.
GSA is committed to ensuring that the AFA Program is
staffed appropriately as the program transitions. We have
structured contractor and staff resources to accommodate
fluctuations in work volumes so that resources can be
redeployed as necessary.
The Army has developed a phased transfer of the program,
and, as scheduled, GSA provided the childcare providers list to
Child Care Aware on December 15. Later this month, GSA is
scheduled to transfer a sample of family data to Child Care
Aware to complete the data transfer testing. In February, we
are scheduled to begin a transfer of completed active families'
records. Childcare provider files will also be transferred so
that Child Care Aware can pay invoices for transferred
families.
We will repeat this process for subsequent phases of the
transition. GSA will continue to pay invoices received for
families who have not yet been transferred.
We will actively support this transition process until all
families and childcare providers have successfully transferred,
and we will work with the Army and Child Care Aware throughout
each phase of the data transfer to mitigate any disruption to
Army families.
Our goal is to continue to support the Army and Army
families to the greatest extent possible as the Army Fee
Assistance Program transitions. GSA is working diligently to
respond to family action requests and to provide a high level
of customer service during this transition. We share your
concern for the welfare of our military families and appreciate
your interest in and oversight of this important program.
I will be happy to answer your questions.
[Prepared statement of Mr. Badorrek follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Mr. Meadows. Thank you for your testimony.
Ms. Hoehne, you're now recognized for 5 minutes.
STATEMENT OF STEPHANIE L. HOEHNE
Ms. Hoehne. Good morning, Chairman Meadows, Ranking Member
Connolly, and distinguished members of the Government
Operations Subcommittee. I am Stephanie Hoehne, the Director of
Installation Management Command, G9, Family and Morale, Welfare
and Recreation Programs.
Thank you for the invitation to appear before you to
provide an update on the administration of the Army Fee
Assistance Program and share the measures taken to transition
the Fee Assistance Program management from the General Services
Administration to a private contractor, Child Care Aware of
America.
In September, the committee examined the factors leading to
a backlog of unpaid Fee Assistance invoices affecting
approximately 9,000 families. We acknowledge the lack of
oversight that allowed this type of impact to families, and we
are dedicated to putting trust back into the program and making
sure that it is on track as we transition the program to Child
Care Aware of America.
Since September, we have eliminated the backlog of unpaid
invoices and achieved steady state in processing family
actions. We have made significant progress in transitioning
Army Fee Assistance to Child Care Aware of America. The Army
has also increased the level of communication and support to
Army families.
Committed to our oversight role, the Army and GSA review
output metric reports daily and conduct weekly on-site visits
to the GSA offices to validate the reports and GSA operations.
The major focus of this oversight has been a combined emphasis
on invoice payment and family action processing. In addition, I
have directed retraining and a higher level of oversight on
contract acquisition and monitoring contract execution.
The timeline for the transition from GSA to Child Care
Aware of America was developed jointly after a prolonged,
deliberate process of discovery on the part of the contractor
to ensure that they were equipped, trained, and ready to manage
the workload and to ensure that families were kept well-
informed and tracked throughout the transition. We have had the
letter contract in effect since October and have now signed the
definitive contract, effective December 23, to support the
transition in full administration of the program.
The Army anticipates the formal transition of family
accounts to Child Care Aware will begin in late February and
will consist of seven geographically defined phases. All
families residing within a geographic region, defined by
States, will be transitioned as a group, averaging about 1,285
people per group.
In addition to transitioning the families already--in
addition, the families--to transitioning the families already
in the Fee Assistance Program by phase, Child Care Aware of
America will immediately, effective 22 February, take on any
new families that come into the program, regardless of their
location.
This phased approach will also allow GSA to incrementally
devote more assets to the annual recertification requirements
just reinstated after a 6-month suspension and to reconciling
invoice discrepancies. Recall that the 8,800 unpaid invoices
cited during previous testimony resulted from discrepancies in
what providers billed and what GSA records indicated was owed.
Those invoices have been paid, but we still have to settle the
accounting.
The formal transition timeline has recovery periods built
in. Each phase will be closely monitored. Success will be
validated before moving to the next phase. The timeline can be
shortened if we encounter no problems in each phase, but we
were deliberately conservative in planning because care of the
families is the priority driving this effort.
We expect Child Care Aware of America to assume full
administration of the Fee Assistance Program no later than
October 2016. Although this is not the quick transition that
the Army and the GSA would have preferred, it is one that will
protect our Army families. We have learned from previous
mistakes.
Thank you again for this invitation, and I look forward to
taking your questions.
[Prepared statement of Ms. Hoehne follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Mr. Meadows. Thank you for your testimony.
Dr. Fraga--is it ``Fraga'' or ``Fraga''?
Ms. Fraga. ``Fraga.''
Mr. Meadows. ``Fraga.'' Dr. Fraga.
STATEMENT OF LYNETTE M. FRAGA, PH.D.
Ms. Fraga. Chairman Meadows, Ranking Member Connolly, and
members of the subcommittee, good morning and thank you. I am
Dr. Lynette Fraga, and I serve as the executive director of
Child Care Aware of America. I am here today to provide
information and answer your questions about the transition of
the Army Fee Assistance Program from the General Services
Administration back to Child Care Aware of America.
This charge and responsibility is not only squarely within
the nonprofit mission of Child Care Aware of America; it is
also very personal. My father is a retired sergeant major who
proudly served in the Army for nearly 30 years. I was the
spouse of a former Active Duty soldier and reservist, and I
have worked, among other professional roles with the Army Child
and Youth Services, as the director of a child development
center.
Child Care Aware of America, formerly known as the National
Association of Child Care Resource and Referral Agencies, aims
to accomplish our vision in multiple ways, with one key
imperative: to provide excellent personalized customer service
to assist families looking for quality child care.
Since 2004, Child Care Aware of America has operated the
Navy, Marine, and Air Force Fee Assistance Programs as well as
the Exceptional Family Member Fee Assistance Program for the
Navy and Air Force since 2008 and 2011 respectively, and we are
proud to continue to serve in this capacity.
Through this work, we currently serve nearly 4,000 Navy,
Air Force, and Marine families, process payments in 5 days or
less, process completed application packages in 10 days or
less, and distribute approximately $3 million in monthly
subsidy payments. Most importantly, we build meaningful
relationships with both families and childcare providers.
Between 2004 and 2014, Child Care Aware of America operated
the Army Fee Assistance Program, ensuring quality providers
were available and assisting families in identifying providers
that best meet their needs.
In September 2014, the Army Fee Assistance Program was
transitioned from Child Care Aware of America to the GSA. After
the committee's hearing in September, we began discussions with
the Army regarding transition of the program back to Child Care
Aware of America.
These discussions included a discovery period so all
involved parties could effectively plan for an informed,
deliberate, and orderly transition of all programmatic
activities. A phased approach to transition will be employed to
ensure we uphold our commitment to high-quality services for
military families, communicate with both families and providers
effectively, and ensure this transition is as smooth and
seamless as possible.
Since initial discussions with the Army, Child Care Aware
of America has been developing the required infrastructure to
ensure programmatic success. This includes a family-centered
approach, exceptionally trained and experienced staff, and
robust work flow and data management systems and protocols.
High-quality customer service is the cornerstone of Child
Care Aware of America and critical for the families and
providers that participate in the programs that we administer.
This includes the use of our very successful family-centered
case management approach in working with families and
providers. Our family case managers and provider case managers
build relationships to help serve Army families and effectively
meet their needs.
We have assembled a high-performing team that includes
staff who formerly worked on the Army Fee Assistance Program
prior to its transition to GSA and leadership with many years
of fee assistance and military experience.
Child Care Aware of America has also implemented an in-
depth, 80-plus-hour training and mentoring program for new
staff, spanning customer service and Fee Assistance Program
policy to State-by-State childcare licensing and accreditation
standards and supports. The expectation is that our staff are
not only experts on the Army Fee Assistance Program but also in
the field of childcare resources, armed with information to
effectively meet Army family needs for child care.
We have put into place systems and supports to ensure an
effective transfer of parents and providers from GSA to Child
Care Aware of America. Of paramount importance, we are working
diligently to ensure we have the proper level of data
protection. Child Care Aware of America is taking steps to
ensure all documents containing personally identifiable
information are kept strictly confidential and limited to the
staff that work on the project. This includes keeping documents
in a secure system with permissions only granted to high-level
managers and only giving access to employees who have undergone
a full, comprehensive background check.
In order to facilitate consistent and effective
communication throughout the transition, Child Care Aware of
America, the Army, and GSA have developed a multilayered
communications plan and schedule. This communication plan
includes over 28 communications to parents and providers during
the transition period and in multiple formats, including a
dedicated Web site, webinars with chat functions, email and
phone outreach, social media, and other forms of electronic
communication.
Under the terms of our contract with the Army, Child Care
Aware of America will accept all new family and provider
applications beginning February 22, 2016. For current cases,
transition will occur in several phases by State groupings. As
Child Care Aware of America assumes processing of applications
by phase, GSA will relinquish administration of the program.
We are confident that the full transition will be complete
and Child Care Aware of America will be fully operating the
program by 28 October 2016. We are excited to continue our
tradition of excellence in operating the Army Fee Assistance
Program.
In conclusion, I would like to thank the subcommittee for
the opportunity to testify today. We appreciate the sacrifices
that military families make for our country, and Child Care
Aware of America is proud to do our small part to support them
in their mission-critical work. I am immensely proud and
appreciative of the military servicemembers in my own family,
and you have my personal commitment that we will do whatever it
takes to ensure our military families have access to quality
and affordable child care.
I'm happy to answer any questions you may have.
[Prepared statement of Ms. Fraga follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Mr. Meadows. Thank you.
Thank you all for your testimony.
And before I recognize the gentleman from Georgia, Mr.
Carter, for a series of questions, I would just like to say, no
matter how we focus on the particular questions during this
particular hearing, I don't want to undermine the progress that
has been made. And, specifically, it doesn't matter what you
think. It really doesn't matter what we think. It matters what
people like Captain Dyches think. And so, in talking to her
before this hearing, I was able to hear that her particular
situation has been solved.
And so, as long as we do that across the board for Army
families, that's what really matters. And so I would just like
to say, coming out of the full hearing, for those of you that
testified before and made commitments and have followed up on
those commitments, I thank you.
And we'll go ahead and recognize the gentleman from
Georgia, Mr. Carter, for 5 minutes for a series of questions.
Mr. Carter. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
And thank all of you for being here. We appreciate your
presence here today.
I represent the First Congressional District of Georgia,
and we are very blessed to have two Army installations in our
district. We have Hunter Army Airfield, and we have Fort
Stewart. We care very much about our military and those
installations and particularly the families. In fact, we have
about 500 families that are participating in the Army Fee
Assistance Program. And providing for our military families, as
I say, is very important to me and to my staff and to all the
citizens of the First Congressional District.
Dr. Fraga, I want to ask you, is Child Care Aware of
America ready to take on full administration of this program
starting this year? Are you ready?
Ms. Fraga. Thank you for the question.
We have been working very diligently with the GSA and with
the Army to ensure during our discovery period that we were
able to unpack any questions, concerns, information that was
necessary for us to put forward our recommendation on a
timeline in the transition.
We feel that we have worked very hard in addressing the
ramp-up of taking back a program such as this. We understand
its importance and its urgency, and we also want to ensure we
do it right.
We have been very successful in implementing this program
in the past, not only for the Army but for the other military
services. And we do believe we have created a transition plan
that's deliberate, in coordination with the Army and with the
GSA, that will reap success on the timeline we've described.
Mr. Carter. Great.
You're aware, of course, that you may acquire some of the
backlog that existed. Now, are you prepared to take on that
backlog as well as start administering the program?
Ms. Fraga. As we have described the transition process in
partnership with the GSA and with the Army, we actually are
going to be taking on new families and new providers on
February 22. And working in collaboration with GSA and with the
Army over the course of the transition in phases, that would
not necessarily include taking on a backlog but, rather,
ensuring that we are taking on new families and providers and
families that have, in phases, been able to take on--that we
are going to be able to take on families in phases over time
that have been addressed by GSA and their work over time. So we
don't----
Mr. Carter. Okay. So what you're telling me is that you're
ready to take on the new families----
Ms. Fraga. Yes.
Mr. Carter. --but the backlog, you're not necessarily going
to concentrate on that initially.
Ms. Fraga. The backlog--no, we are not going to be focused
on the backlog at the outset.
Mr. Carter. Will you at any point?
Ms. Fraga. By phase. So each of the phases----
Mr. Carter. And those phases are--how much time are we
talking about?
Ms. Fraga. Each phase is approximately 1 month.
Mr. Carter. Okay. So in a matter of months you will be
accepting that backlog.
Ms. Fraga. Yes. And we are prepared and feel that, by the
end of the 7-month to 8-month period, by October, we will be
fully operating the Fee Assistance Program, which would include
all families across the country.
Mr. Carter. And all backlogged?
Ms. Fraga. And hopefully all--there will be no backlog. But
we do anticipate that, by the end of October of 2016, that all
of those families will be within our system and we will be
fully operating the Army Fee Assistance Program.
Mr. Carter. Okay.
Has the Army authorized you to use the pay and chase
system?
Ms. Fraga. I am not familiar with that system.
Mr. Carter. The pay and chase system. Ms. Ochoa, are you
familiar with that system? Are any of you familiar with the pay
and chase, where you go ahead and pay and then you go back and
try to recoup any payments, any overpayments?
Ms. Hoehne. Sir, that's what we did in order to pay the
8,800 backlog of provider invoices. We authorized GSA to pay
the invoiced amount, and we are in the process of now
reconciling what we paid against what updated records show was
actually owed.
Mr. Carter. Show what was actually owed.
Ms. Hoehne. Yes, sir.
Mr. Carter. So were there any overpayments in that?
Ms. Hoehne. There were both overpayments and underpayments,
and we're not through with the reconciliation process.
Mr. Carter. When do you think you'll be finished with that
process?
Ms. Hoehne. It's an ongoing process. As families transition
to GSA, that gives more resources that our families----
Mr. Carter. Can you be more specific than ``ongoing''? Come
on, you got to give me something.
Ms. Hoehne. Sir, we have 8,800 invoices to reconcile. At
this point, we have reconciled about a thousand invoices. So
it's going to take some time to reconcile all of them. Many are
due to incomplete records that have to be researched.
As families transition to Child Care Aware, GSA can devote
more assets to reconciliation and speed up the process, but I
can't give you a definitive timeline at this point. By the time
everything is transferred to Child Care Aware, we will have the
full scope of what needs to be reconciled within the backlog.
Mr. Carter. Okay.
Ms. Ochoa, it's been reported that there was an 18-percent
error rate in over 40,000 invoices. This would be some 7,200
errors, correct?
Ms. Ochoa. That was as of our September report, yes.
Mr. Carter. Now, do you know how many of those were
overpayments?
Ms. Ochoa. I do not. The reconciliation process that we've
been hearing about is one that's controlled by Army procedures
and policy. Army did instruct the GSA to go ahead and pay off
the invoices whether or not they met the authorized amounts in
the system. And GSA is taking their instructions about the
reconciliation process from Army.
Mr. Carter. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate you being liberal
with my time here, but I just want to make this point, okay?
Obviously, we had a mess here.
Dr. Fraga, you got an opportunity to start off anew and to
get this right, and I hope that you will do that and not get
into the situation that we find ourself in here, a very
embarrassing situation, where we've got over 7,200 errors that
we got to somehow try to reconcile during this time. So, you
know, get it right the first time. That's the most important
thing, okay?
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back.
Mr. Meadows. I thank the gentleman.
The chair recognizes the ranking member, Mr. Connolly, for
5 minutes for questions.
Mr. Connolly. I thank the chair. I'm going to yield my time
to Mr. Lynch, my friend from Massachusetts.
I also want to welcome Captain Dyches myself. You snuck in
before I got to see you. Welcome. Glad you rejoined us.
And, with that, I would ask that my time go to Mr. Lynch
right now.
Mr. Meadows. Mr. Lynch, you're recognized.
Mr. Lynch. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I want to start off by saying thank you and well done to
the chairman, Mr. Meadows, and Mr. Connolly. When I was here in
September at this hearing, we were in a much different place.
And I know that everything hasn't gone as, you know, as well as
possible, but we've made tremendous strides. From digging a
hole, I think we've stopped that, and we're actually climbing
out of the hole, and we're helping families.
And I think that you all--I'm the caboose on this train.
You know, Mr. Meadows and Mr. Connolly, you've taken a lead on
this. And sometimes bureaucracy is just so frustrating in terms
of trying to turn it around, but you've done a great job here
in a relatively short time. Four months is not a long time in
Congress.
And I want to thank the witnesses, as well. You've all
chipped in and done a commendable job.
And I do not want to neglect both Captain Dyches and Kaela
Hensley, who came before the committee back in September and
told about their family situation and really put a personal
face on this problem.
So, Inspector General Ochoa, you've done a very good job, I
think. And I just want to go back. In the previous hearing when
we had a conversation, you said, ``In the event this program is
transferred elsewhere, GSA should obtain Army agreement and the
transferee's agreement on conditions for program transfer.''
Was that in fact done?
Ms. Ochoa. Yes. The GSA has been working closely with the
Army and with Child Care Aware on this transition plan.
Mr. Lynch. Okay.
Ms. Ochoa. There remains a lot of work to be done,
obviously, but they have been coordinating.
Mr. Lynch. Understood. Understood.
You also recommended that GSA should establish--and I'm
going to quote you again--``a plan with performance indicators,
benchmarks, and implementation strategies to eliminate the
backlog,'' which we've talked about and the gentleman from
Georgia has talked about, ``and achieve customer service
timelines that are satisfactory to the Army and to ensure the
security of Army families' sensitive information.''
Would you agree that the GSA has made significant progress
on that?
Ms. Ochoa. Yes. GSA submitted action plans to us which we
approved.
Mr. Lynch. All right.
Is there anything more that can be done, in your view, to
tighten this up?
Ms. Ochoa. Well, what remains is for GSA to continue to
support the transition efforts, to do everything in its power
to make sure there's no further disruption to Army families in
the course of this lengthy transition.
Mr. Lynch. Right.
I do want to spend a little bit more time on the security
of families' personal information, because that was such a
disaster.
Dr. Fraga, you've gone over some of that in your testimony,
and I just want to sort of amplify that issue again. What is
being done now to prevent, you know, breaches and the improper
dissemination of families' personal information?
Ms. Fraga. The first steps that are taken are the screening
and background checks of staff. And that's a very first
important step. And second is in regards to staff training in
handling PII data as being critical. Finally, to ensure that
access to those systems are limited and the details of ensuring
that how the data is input and stored are protected. So those
are the major areas that we have implemented at this point.
Mr. Lynch. Okay. And we're going to continue to monitor
that. Is that correct?
Ms. Fraga. Yes.
Mr. Lynch. Okay.
I don't have much more than that other than, Ms. Ochoa,
your recommendations and your view of the problem and, again,
your recommendations to fix this were instrumental in this
whole process. So I really want to thank you for your service
and your help here in putting the energy and the attention
where it needed to be. So you did a great job.
Thank you all for your service to our country.
Thank you. I yield back.
Mr. Connolly. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming that time, I just
want to thank my friend from Massachusetts for his gracious
remarks. It is a reminder, I think, Mr. Chairman, that
sometimes, you know, just bashing people and calling for their
heads doesn't solve problems. And I so much thank Mr. Lynch for
noting that, because there's a process this committee, on a
bipartisan basis, can set in motion in a collaborative way with
the executive branch to try to actually resolve or address
problems rather than belabor them. And I really thank Mr. Lynch
for noting that.
Mr. Meadows. The chair recognizes himself for a series of
questions.
And I would echo that, Mr. Lynch. Thank you. Obviously,
having a compliment coming from the other side of the aisle is
rare. It may affect reelection, but--no. I do thank you because
I know the heart that it represents, and I appreciate it,
because you have been an advocate not only for Army families
but for the Federal workforce families each and every time. And
when you see something is wrong, you have consistently spoken
up loudly and clearly without any regards to politics. And that
is certainly appreciated by the ranking member and I, and I
thank you.
I want to go forward, and let's talk a little bit about
logistics, because we've made great progress. What I don't want
to do is be in the red zone and fumble the ball. And I think
that that is the key. And we're hearing great reports today in
a very short period of time. I thank you both, because
commitments were made in that hearing that have been fulfilled.
There were commitments made in the hearing that haven't
been fulfilled, as well, and part of that has to do with this
transitioning period. And so let me ask the question, because
I'm concerned about our phased-in approach. You know, we took
one approach and said, all right, last November 2014, and it
all went to GSA.
And so, Ms. Hoehne, I'm hearing that you learned from that
mistake and said that that was not the best way to do it and
that we're going to phase it in.
I'm really concerned about the phased-in approach because
of the ambiguity for our military men and women on who do they
go to--do they go to GSA? Do they go to our contractor?--and
how that all transitions. Because they move around, as well.
And so I'm looking at the phased-in approach. And so we're
going to start here with Maryland and District of Columbia,
being big, and go out to Wyoming, Vermont. Why the diversity
geographically, Ms. Hoehne?
Ms. Hoehne. Sir, I'm glad you asked that question. One of
the lessons that--to answer the first----
Mr. Connolly. Could you please turn on your mic or bring
the microphone to your face?
Mr. Meadows. Yeah, just get the mic close to you.
Ms. Hoehne. Okay.
I'm glad you asked that question. One of the lessons that
we learned from the previous system was families were
apparently not clear on where they could go for help. And we
have established the capability to have two-way communication
with our families at multiple venues--through Facebook, through
Twitter, through email, and through phone calls--and directly
to us, in addition to GSA, in addition to Child Care Aware,
setting up Web sites and capability. So if a family is confused
about where they should go for help, they can come to us, and
we can clarify for them.
We've established a webinar that we've already held once
for the families and once for the providers announcing the
transition and talking about the phases and giving them the
information on who's in what phase. We will have another
webinar at the beginning of each phase for those families
affected to address their specific concerns.
But we recognize that communication was an absolutely
essential element to making this work, but, this time, two-way
communication so the questions come back to us.
Mr. Meadows. Well----
Ms. Hoehne. The first webinar generated 70 questions.
Mr. Meadows. Yeah. And I guess here's my concern with that,
is with that it all sounds great when we have all this
wonderful conversation, but it doesn't really do anything
unless it's producing results. And I think your Twitter
followers are 17 and your Facebook is 310, and that's a very
small fraction of the overall population. I mean, we're looking
at 1,600 in backlog.
And so the question becomes, is the communication
meaningful, meaning that does it produce results? Or are we
going about the system--you know, so let's say North Carolina,
which is in phase two, you have somebody there. How do they
know that they come to GSA and you or they go to Dr. Fraga? How
do they know that today?
Ms. Hoehne. Sir, today, it doesn't matter if they come to
us, if they go to Child Care Aware----
Mr. Meadows. So you're going to be the conduit that gets
them one way or the other.
Ms. Hoehne. We are all talking to each other. I am getting
copies of IG issues sent to GSAIG. I am getting copies of that
so that my folks can be involved in helping to work the issues.
Fortunately, those have dropped off recently.
Mr. Meadows. So would it be better for the 1,600 that are
in backlog currently with GSA, or with you, I guess,
technically with you--but would it be better for those 1,600 to
just reapply with Dr. Fraga?
Ms. Hoehne. No, sir, they should come to us. They should
come to----
Mr. Meadows. I understand they should come to you, but
would it be quicker if they go to her, if she's going to be
accepting new applications?
What is the timeline between when a family comes to you and
they get approved? What's the length of time?
Ms. Hoehne. The length of time for Child Care Aware is
going to be, let's see, 5 days for a family action as long as
the paperwork is complete; 3 days to notify----
Mr. Meadows. Okay. And what is it under GSA right now?
Ms. Hoehne. Ten days is the goal.
Mr. Meadows. So your testimony here today is we've got a
1,600-person backlog and that can be eliminated in 10 days?
Ms. Hoehne. Sir, that is not all new family actions. It is
a variety of actions. Some of them are recertifications, which
are done in----
Mr. Meadows. Okay. Well, help us then, because----
Ms. Hoehne. Okay.
Mr. Meadows. --what I'm getting at are the 1,600. How do we
get rid of those? Are they better off going with her or going
with GSA?
Ms. Hoehne. Sir, of the 1,600--there's a certain span of
time allowed to work an action. And if----
Mr. Meadows. And what is that?
Ms. Hoehne. Depending on the action. If it is a new
application, the standard had been get it within 10 days for
GSA. They are making progress towards achieving that standard.
They are generally getting it within 2 weeks at this point.
Mr. Meadows. So your testimony here today, Ms. Hoehne, is
that a military mom or dad can come in, they can fill out the
application, and within 10 days they can get approved?
Ms. Hoehne. If the application is complete. If it is not
complete, they have to be notified of what is missing and be
given an opportunity to provide that. That is the sort of thing
that causes a lag in getting approval.
Mr. Meadows. So it's their fault that it's not getting----
Ms. Hoehne. Not always.
Mr. Meadows. Okay. All right.
Ms. Hoehne. But that can contribute----
Mr. Meadows. I see Mr. Badorrek is wanting to jump in here.
Do you want to clarify any of this?
Mr. Badorrek. Yes. I can talk to the 1,600. That includes
roughly, I believe, about 400 recertifications. The key----
Mr. Meadows. So what is a recertification? I'm ignorant.
What are we talking about? Is it making sure that their child
is still with them or----
Mr. Badorrek. That they're still eligible to participate in
the program. The family actions, which I said was an inventory
of just over 1,100, are actions that are requested by families
to add a child, to change a rate, to----
Mr. Meadows. So how long does that take?
Mr. Badorrek. Okay. Today, it takes us 2 to 3 days to
evaluate the application, and if the application is complete,
it's taking us roughly another 7 or 8 days to complete the
application.
The 1,600 that you're talking about, we have about a
thousand that are back with families or providers for more
information. So if we are--and we have already evaluated them
and sent them back to families. The number of applications that
we haven't evaluated is running about a day or two worth of
inventory.
Mr. Meadows. So your testimony here today is, if those
families get you the needed information, you can make a
determination within 10 days. Is that your testimony?
Mr. Badorrek. If they get us the information----
Mr. Meadows. Because that's fast.
Mr. Badorrek. --and the application is complete, we should
be able to process that within 10 days.
Mr. Meadows. Okay.
Well, I've gone way over my time, so I'm going to recognize
the ranking member, Mr. Connolly.
Mr. Connolly. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, but I'm going to
yield to my good friend from New York, the gentlelady, Mrs.
Maloney.
Mrs. Maloney. Thank you, Mr. Connolly, for yielding and the
chairman and all of the participants today.
So, as I understand it, the Army decided they were going to
transfer this program to GSA in order to save $4 million, but
it turned out that they spent $4 million more, $4.4 million by
September, and that the backlog grew dramatically and the
services to the families diminished.
Is that a fair assessment, Dr. Ochoa?
Ms. Ochoa. If you're looking at our September report, I
think that is a fair assessment. There has been progress since
then in meeting the commitments made to this--made to the full
committee in September.
Mrs. Maloney. But they did transfer it to save $4 million
and they ended up spending $4 million more. Is that correct?
Ms. Ochoa. That is correct.
Mrs. Maloney. And, also, the backlog became longer, right?
Is that correct?
Ms. Ochoa. The backlogs grew continually through the summer
of 2015.
Mrs. Maloney. Well, who made this decision that cost the
taxpayers more money and hurt the families and their services?
Who made the decision to move away from a program that was
providing services on time and on budget without a backlog to
GSA that then cost so much more money?
Why does it cost so much more money under GSA than it did
under the Child Care Aware of America program?
Ms. Hoehne. Ma'am, I'll take that one.
The Army at the time was looking for ways to save money. We
were facing sequestration.
Mrs. Maloney. I know that was difficult.
Ms. Hoehne. The decision was a good decision at the time.
It was going to an interagency agreement, eliminating a
contract at an apparent savings bid of $4 million vice $8
million to provide the service from an entity that was known to
already be providing the service.
The problem was in the execution and the oversight of the
transfer and the oversight of ensuring that GSA was prepared to
take on the full volume of work. But the decision itself was a
good decision at the time.
Mr. Connolly. Would my friend yield?
Mrs. Maloney. Absolutely.
Mr. Connolly. Ms. Hoehne, you say the problem was in the
execution. Wasn't some of the problem in the due diligence as
to capability in the first place? There's a prior concern here,
what is the capability of GSA to accept this transfer from Ms.
Fraga's organization? And isn't it fair to say that that
assessment was, at the very best, quite loose and ultimately
inadequate?
Ms. Hoehne. Sir, I agree with you. I consider that--the
problem in execution of the transfer is--verifying the
capability was one component of it, certainly.
Mr. Connolly. Okay.
I thank my friend for yielding.
Mrs. Maloney. But now we're transferring it back to CCAOA,
and let's hope that this transition is a more seamless, better
one. I am sure that the families gaining the service are going
to be thrilled that they're going back to one that will process
their claims within the 10-day limit.
Ms. Hoehne, prior to GSA, the Child Care Aware of America
operated a large portion of the AFA Program for 10 years, from
2004 to 2014, and, by all statistics, appeared to be operating
appropriately. Is that a correct statement?
Ms. Hoehne. Overall, yes, ma'am.
Mrs. Maloney. Yeah.
And, during that time, Dr. Fraga, CCAOA provided AFA
Program benefits to approximately how many families?
Ms. Fraga. I don't have the answer to that question, ma'am,
but it was a number of families--thousands.
Mrs. Maloney. Thousands. Okay. And during those 10 years,
had you received any indication--did the Army ever tell you
that they were unhappy with your services?
Ms. Fraga. Over the time of our contract, as far as I
understand it, we received very high accolades about the work
that we did, particularly from testimonials from families.
Mrs. Maloney. And did the families themselves face the type
of backlogs and hardships that they are confronting now, with
the backlogs and hardships that were reported in testimony
today?
Ms. Fraga. Certainly not during my tenure at Child Care
Aware of America, which began in October of 2012.
Mrs. Maloney. And was CCAOA, or your organization,
regularly processing subsidy payments within Army's
requirements of 10 days?
Ms. Fraga. We were.
Mrs. Maloney. So, I mean, I fail to understand. I'm
mystified that they transferred it in the first place. So here
you have a contract performing well, on time, providing
services. Okay. And you got praise for it. You were literally
praised by the Army.
As far as you know, did CCAOA's performance level have any
impact on Army's decision to transfer the contract to GSA in
2014?
Ms. Fraga. Ma'am, I had no indication that there was a
performance challenge to the contract.
Mrs. Maloney. Okay.
And so, Ms. Hoehne, do you dispute what she's saying? Do
you agree with what she's saying?
Ms. Hoehne. I have no basis to dispute what she's saying.
The decision occurred in 2013, late 2013. I came on board in
March of 2014 when the beginning of the transition was
occurring. But the driving force for the decision to transfer
was not dissatisfaction with Child Care Aware. It was the
opportunity to save $4 million when the Army was scrambling to
look for ways to save money.
Mrs. Maloney. But it didn't save money. They obviously did
not do a proper analysis. It ended up costing $4 million. And
there was no reason to transfer when, by the testimony, unless
it's disputed, the services were being provided on time, on
budget, and as prescribed by the contract, with families being
pleased and with getting high applause.
So approximately how many families, combined, are enrolled
in the Fee Assistance Program for these three military
branches? Apparently, the Navy, Air Force, and Marines, they
all contract with the CCAOA, correct? They're all with the
CCAOA?
Ms. Fraga. Yes, ma'am.
Mrs. Maloney. Okay. Well, I don't think that anyone would
deny that CCAOA has established really, I would say, a stellar
record in managing this program. I would say congratulations to
you. You should have been given a raise instead of losing the
business that then ended up costing much, much more.
So, in light of their proven track record, I hope that the
Army families are pleased to learn that the program is
returning to the CCAOA's capable hands. And it's wonderful in
this Oversight Committee to hear a report of services being
provided on time, on budget, with families pleased with the
services they're getting, and on time and under the 10-day
rule. Now we have backlogs of thousands of people, backlogs of
months and months behind. So I'm pleased that it's transferring
back. And I trust that you will be vigilant in this transfer
and management.
I yield back.
Mr. Meadows. I thank the gentlewoman.
The chair recognizes the gentleman from Virginia's 11th
District, the Honorable Mr. Connolly.
Mr. Connolly. I thank my friend from North Carolina's 11th.
Following up on Mrs. Maloney's line of questioning, Ms.
Fraga, putting a human face on this, what does it cost per
month for the average family to have a child in your program,
per month?
Ms. Fraga. Are you asking how much child care is per
family----
Mr. Connolly. Yes.
Ms. Fraga. --per month? It varies across the country.
Mr. Connolly. Okay, but give me a number. Give me an
example.
Ms. Fraga. So a family may pay a thousand dollars a month
for child care.
Mr. Connolly. So if there's a backlog in processing
reimbursement for subsidies, how much of a financial burden
would a thousand dollars unreimbursed going for perhaps months
at a time and getting multiplied during that time period be on
your clients?
Ms. Fraga. The impact, the financial impact, on families
who receive subsidy under this program absent receiving their
subsidy payment is extensive. It can be a significant hardship
for families.
The calculation of how much subsidy a family would receive
varies by family, as well, with the highest-need families
obviously receiving a higher subsidy. So with the amount of
cost of child care for a family in their family's budget being
very high, not receiving subsidy could be an incredible
hardship on families.
Mr. Connolly. It could, in fact, make it unaffordable to
continue with the care.
Ms. Fraga. It would absolutely make it unaffordable.
Mr. Connolly. Yes.
Ms. Ochoa, when we had you here in September, you talked
about 26,000 action items in the backlog by July of last year.
Is that correct?
Ms. Ochoa. Correct.
Mr. Connolly. Where are we today? 26,000 in September. What
is it now?
Ms. Ochoa. As of December 21, it was at 3,100 total items.
Mr. Connolly. 3,100?
Ms. Ochoa. Yes.
Mr. Connolly. Okay. Great. I thought for a minute you were
going to say 31,000. I thought, ``Uh oh.'' But that's good to
hear.
Mr. Badorrek, we talked about the--with the best of
intentions, we hoped to save $4 million. And, in fact,
unfortunately, we didn't save that. We, in fact, expended an
additional $4.4 million above what we thought we would spend
for this program. Is that correct?
Mr. Badorrek. Yes. We had approval to spend an additional
$4.4 million in fiscal year 2015.
Mr. Connolly. What additional costs have we incurred since
we had our hearing in September? Between September and December
31, do we know how much over that $4.4 million we, in fact,
are?
Mr. Badorrek. For fiscal year 2015----
Mr. Connolly. And if I could ask you to pull that in front
of you, just like Ms. Hoehne.
Mr. Badorrek. Yes.
Mr. Connolly. That way, we can hear you perfectly. Thank
you.
Mr. Badorrek. The $4.4 million raised the projected cost
for GSA for fiscal year 2015 to $8.4 million. We spent $6.7
million during fiscal year 2015, so we came in below the
projection that we had provided to Army. Since----
Mr. Connolly. Well, excuse me. What you mean is--correct me
if I'm wrong. $6.7 million actually is additional cost, but
it's less than the projected additional cost.
Mr. Badorrek. Less than the projected. It's $2.7 million
above what we had intended to--we had originally agreed to in
the initial agreement. It was not the entire $4.4 million. That
is what we spent in fiscal year 2015.
Mr. Connolly. Okay.
I'm looking at the backlog of family actions. And, again,
Ms. Ochoa, your report to us was in September. And that figure
was 5,000 at that time. Is that correct?
Ms. Ochoa. That's correct.
Mr. Connolly. And what is that number today?
Ms. Ochoa. Again, as of December 21, 1,600.
Mr. Connolly. Okay. So, again, progress.
There were unpaid invoices of 8,000, also in your report in
September.
And, Mr. Badorrek, at that time, you committed to paying
those invoices, all of them, within 30 days. Where are we on
that today?
Mr. Badorrek. We paid all of those invoices. All the
invoices were valid. We've been able to keep up with the
invoices that are coming in. We are processing invoices within
a few business days.
The IG report I believe showed a couple thousand invoices
that needed to be processed. On a given day, we could get 1,200
invoices in. We average about 600 a day. So that's a few days'
worth of inventory that we have not yet processed.
Mr. Connolly. Okay. But are you on an expedited schedule to
make sure that they are?
Mr. Badorrek. Absolutely.
Mr. Connolly. Can you make a commitment, at least a
tentative commitment--we understand things happen--but can you
make a tentative commitment to us today in terms of getting
that to zero?
Mr. Badorrek. I have to explain the difference between
inventory and backlog. If we receive a thousand invoices today,
we may not process them today, but we will process them in the
next 3 or 4 business days.
Mr. Connolly. Okay.
Mr. Badorrek. So if we happen to get 2,000 in a day, that
number could be 2,000. And the reason that--this number can
range between 500 to 2,000. It just depends how many come in.
But we want to make sure we process the invoices in a timely
fashion.
Mr. Connolly. Okay. Thank you. I appreciate the
distinction.
Just one more followup, if I may, to Mr. Meadow's question
to you, which--understanding recertification. We were talking
about a 10-day window in which to process. If it's a
recertification, presumably all of the legwork was done on the
original application. So we're checking to make sure you still
live where you live, the income is the same, the number of
children you've got is the same, the child or children in
daycare are who they were in the original application--no
changes. Isn't that right, on a recertification?
Mr. Badorrek. Yes. We are revalidating the information.
Mr. Connolly. Right. And in light of that, I would assume,
to your answer to Mr. Meadows, there's less time on a
recertification being validated than on an original application
being validated. Or there should be, shouldn't there?
Mr. Badorrek. We go through the same process. It's more
likely with a recertification, because the family is familiar
with the program, they're able to provide us with all the
information that's needed to process it. The 10 days is our
goal for processing applications once we have deemed them to be
complete.
Mr. Connolly. Irrespective of whether it's an original
application or a recertification?
Mr. Badorrek. Yes.
Mr. Connolly. Really? The same 10 days?
Mr. Badorrek. Yes.
Mr. Connolly. That puzzled me, Mr. Chairman.
Because I would have guessed there actually is a difference
between the two, and you're saying there really isn't.
Mr. Badorrek. No. I believe that we have to receive just
about all the information that we receive in an initial
application when we recertify.
Mr. Connolly. All right.
Mr. Chairman, thank you.
Mr. Meadows. I thank you.
Mr. Badorrek, let me--before I do that, I've got a letter
here from the GSA to Mr. Beers with the National Archives and
Records Administration. And I would ask unanimous consent that
we'd just put this forward for the record.
Without objection, so ordered.
Mr. Meadows. Mr. Badorrek, let me follow up, because you
mentioned a word that is a concern. You mentioned that your
goal was 10 days. Now, your testimony earlier said that you did
them in 10 days. And you just, in talking to Mr. Connolly, said
your goal is 10 days.
So let's look at the 1,600, because I'm curious with the
backlog. Ms. Ochoa said that the original backlog was 5,000 and
that it is now 1,600. Those are round numbers, and so the round
numbers typically suggest that we're guessing at backlog
numbers. But maybe they're exactly accurate and we just happen
to have exactly 5,000 and exactly 1,600.
But what are the oldest--of the 1,600, what are the oldest
ones that are there waiting to have a determination made? You
said your goal is 10 days. So if I were to find the oldest one
in the 1,600, how long has it been there?
Mr. Badorrek. I don't know that. I can get that to you. I
would expect that has to do with those that are back with
families. I can give you the specific numbers. They're round
numbers, but we have specific numbers in the inventory on a
daily basis.
Mr. Meadows. So are you averaging 10 days for a
determination? That's your goal.
Mr. Badorrek. Yes. We did a review in the middle of
November, and once the application was complete, we were
processing--based on the review we did, we were processing it
within just under 8 days.
Mr. Meadows. Because, you know, this particular situation
was news to the ranking member and I. You know, if it hadn't
been for NBC and Mr. MacFarlane doing a report and raising the
issue, a lot of us would not have realized the significance of
this problem.
And then going forward from there, what I don't want us to
do is to talk in generalities and negate all the positive stuff
that we've been able to make, this progress, with, you know,
leaving here singing ``Kumbaya'' and saying everything is nice,
while we have military families that are still saying that
hearing may or may not have been accurate.
So your testimony here today is that, out of the 1,600, if
the family gets you what you need, you can get a determination
in 10 days. Is that correct?
Mr. Badorrek. Yes. If we have all the information, we'll
process it----
Mr. Meadows. All right.
So, Dr. Fraga, let me come to you. This phased-in approach
that we're doing, is it true that your group is not capable of
taking everybody on February 22?
Ms. Fraga. That is correct.
Mr. Meadows. So you have recommended, along with Ms.
Hoehne, this phased-in approach.
Ms. Fraga. Yes. In collaboration with the Army and with the
GSA, our staff team has determined that a phased approach is
the most appropriate way forward to ensure that Army families
are taken care of.
Mr. Meadows. Okay.
I do see that the vice chair of the subcommittee has
returned, and so I recognize him for a series of questions at
this time.
Mr. Walberg. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman. And thanks to
the committee. I'm sorry I had to leave. I had the EEOC
Commissioner in my office. Not a violation on my staff, but
doing my due diligence for my chairmanship.
But I did have a question, Ms. Fraga, for you. What did
Child Care Aware's build-up for assuming administrative control
of the AFA Program entail? In other words, did Child Care Aware
have to lay off staff following the transition of AFA Program
administration to GSA, and if so, how many?
Ms. Fraga. Yes, we did experience a reduction in force post
the transition of the Army Fee Assistance Program from the
organization. Upwards of over 50 staff were reduced from the
organization.
In preparation for the transition of the Army Fee
Assistance Program back to Child Care Aware of America, one of
the obvious necessities was to build back up our staff
capacity. And we have done, I think, a tremendous job of
identifying and screening staff who have a profile that is
supportive of the kind of quality and skills that we need for
these important staff positions.
We have a leadership team, however, over 90 percent of whom
were experienced in any of the other military fee assistance
programs, as well as former staff on the Army Fee Assistance
Program in past years. So we have a management team that is
well versed in the Army Fee Assistance Program.
Mr. Walberg. On the staffing level, the lower staffing
level, what is it at present now, and what will it need to
become?
Ms. Fraga. So we are on-boarding, currently, approximately
50 staff. And those staff----
Mr. Walberg. Fifty beyond what you have now?
Ms. Fraga. Right. These are 50 staff--approximately 50
staff who we are currently on-boarding.
We anticipate up to 80 staff at a steady state and
potentially and likely more staff during the transition year to
ensure that we have the capacity necessary to alleviate and
mitigate any challenges, unforeseen or foreseen, over the
coming year. But we anticipate about an 80-staff capacity in a
steady state once the transition is complete.
Mr. Walberg. Do you expect the annual program cost to be
equal to the $8 million that it was before the GSA transition?
Ms. Fraga. At this time, we have a contract that was just
recently signed with the Army. And I am more than happy to
provide you information--it's proprietary and confidential at
this point, and I'm more than happy to provide information
subsequent to the hearing.
Mr. Walberg. I appreciate that. If you could provide that
to the committee, that would be helpful.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back.
Mr. Meadows. I thank the vice chair.
We're going to go ahead and wrap this up. But, Mr.
Badorrek, before we do that, I want to follow up on one
particular thing that I covered in my opening statement, and it
had to do with deleted emails and phone calls, voicemails.
And I guess my question is, can you explain why the GSA
feels that deleting all those does not violate, you know, NARA
requirements?
Mr. Badorrek. We did an investigation after the last
hearing. The emails that were in question were transferred to
the system of record, which was ImageNow. That was a system
that was being used to retain documents and process documents
related to child care. They were deleted from the original
email system. That was a process that was in place. And they
were transferred to ImageNow. So while the emails were deleted
from the email system, they were retained in the system of
record.
Today, we use Salesforce. The emails are automatically
captured in that system, so we don't have to do that transfer.
Mr. Meadows. And so what about the voicemails?
Mr. Badorrek. The information in the voicemails, the caller
number and the date were retained in a call log. The process
was to work off the call log to call families back. That was
the process that was in place. As we know, GSA had a backlog.
The IG, in the recent report, confirmed that we did call the
families back that were on the call log.
Mr. Meadows. So it's your sworn testimony here today that
there were no records, Federal records, that were ever deleted
or done away with.
Mr. Badorrek. To the best of our knowledge, no records were
deleted. The process was to transfer emails to the system of
record and to record the calls on the call log so that we could
call them back.
Mr. Meadows. All right.
I'm going to go ahead and close out. I want to thank all of
you for your time, for your dedication to our military
families.
And I would ask this. And I believe that I speak for the
ranking member. As we look at this phased-in approach, let's be
as diligent with that as we had at trying to fix this
particular problem. I don't want--because originally we said we
were going to have transfer done by January.
And I'm going to hold you to, Ms. Hoehne, your October
deadline. And what I would ask from you and Dr. Fraga is that,
if you see that that is not going to be met, that you let this
committee know the minute that you see a problem and the reason
why it is so that we can go to work in a bipartisan way to make
sure that Army families are supported in the manner that they
have earned and that they deserve.
And so, with that, I thank you for your commitment to the
families. I thank all of you for your testimony.
And, without objection, if there's no further business, the
subcommittee stands adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 11:20 a.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]
APPENDIX
----------
Material Submitted for the Hearing Record
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]