[House Hearing, 117 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]


 
                         [H.A.S.C. No. 117-37]

                      KEEPING OUR SERVICE MEMBERS

                   AND THEIR FAMILIES SAFE AND READY:

                     THE MILITARY'S PREVENTION AND

                     RESPONSE TO DOMESTIC VIOLENCE

                               __________

                                HEARING

                               BEFORE THE

                   SUBCOMMITTEE ON MILITARY PERSONNEL

                                 OF THE

                      COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES

                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                    ONE HUNDRED SEVENTEENTH CONGRESS

                             FIRST SESSION

                               __________

                              HEARING HELD

                              May 25, 2021


                                     
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] 

                               __________

                    U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE                    
47-356                      WASHINGTON : 2022                     
          
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                   SUBCOMMITTEE ON MILITARY PERSONNEL

                 JACKIE SPEIER, California, Chairwoman

ANDY KIM, New Jersey                 MIKE GALLAGHER, Wisconsin
CHRISSY HOULAHAN, Pennsylvania       STEPHANIE I. BICE, Oklahoma
VERONICA ESCOBAR, Texas, Vice Chair  LISA C. McCLAIN, Michigan
SARA JACOBS, California              RONNY JACKSON, Texas
MARILYN STRICKLAND, Washington       JERRY L. CARL, Alabama
MARC A. VEASEY, Texas                PAT FALLON, Texas

                        Hannah Kaufman, Counsel
                       Forrest McConnell, Counsel
                           Sidney Faix, Clerk
                           
                           
                           C O N T E N T S

                              ----------                              
                                                                   Page

              STATEMENTS PRESENTED BY MEMBERS OF CONGRESS

Gallagher, Hon. Mike, a Representative from Wisconsin, Ranking 
  Member, Subcommittee on Military Personnel.....................     3
Speier, Hon. Jackie, a Representative from California, 
  Chairwoman, Subcommittee on Military Personnel.................     1

                               WITNESSES

Barron, Patricia, Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense, Military 
  Community and Family Policy, Office of the Secretary of 
  Defense; accompanied by COL Steve Lewis, USA, Family Advocacy 
  Program Manager, Department of the Army; Col Andrew A. Cruz, 
  USAF, Chief, Air Force Family Advocacy Program, Department of 
  the Air Force; Crystal Griffen, Deputy Director Family Support, 
  Commander, Navy Installations Command; and Lisa Eaffaldano, 
  Assistant Branch Head, Prevention and Clinical Services, United 
  States Marine Corps............................................    20
Farrell, Brenda, Director, Defense Capabilities and Management, 
  Government Accountability Office...............................     8
Logan, Amy, Survivor.............................................     4
Strong, Jessica, Co-Director of Applied Research, Blue Star 
  Families.......................................................     6

                                APPENDIX

Prepared Statements:

    Barron, Patricia.............................................    83
    Cruz, Col Andrew A...........................................   104
    Eaffaldano, Lisa.............................................   118
    Farrell, Brenda..............................................    70
    Griffen, Crystal.............................................   111
    Lewis, COL Steve.............................................    95
    Logan, Amy...................................................    40
    Speier, Jackie Hon...........................................    37
    Strong, Jessica..............................................    53

Documents Submitted for the Record:

    [There were no Documents submitted.]

Witness Responses to Questions Asked During the Hearing:

    Ms. Houlahan.................................................   131
    Ms. Speier...................................................   129

Questions Submitted by Members Post Hearing:

    Mrs. McClain.................................................   135
                     
                     
                     
                     KEEPING OUR SERVICE MEMBERS

                   AND THEIR FAMILIES SAFE AND READY:

      THE MILITARY'S PREVENTION AND RESPONSE TO DOMESTIC VIOLENCE

                              ----------                              

                  House of Representatives,
                       Committee on Armed Services,
                        Subcommittee on Military Personnel,
                           Washington, D.C., Tuesday, May 25, 2021.
    The subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 3:00 p.m., via 
Webex, Hon. Jackie Speier (chairwoman of the subcommittee) 
presiding.

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JACKIE SPEIER, A REPRESENTATIVE FROM 
   CALIFORNIA, CHAIRWOMAN, SUBCOMMITTEE ON MILITARY PERSONNEL

    Ms. Speier. Good afternoon. My name is Jackie Speier, I 
chair the Military Personnel Subcommittee, and we are now going 
to bring this committee hearing to order. I want to welcome 
everyone. This is going to be a completely virtual hearing, and 
we have a very important topic to talk about today.
    But, first, let me welcome our new ranking member to the 
committee, Congressman Mike Gallagher. He has completed 4 years 
in the House of Representatives. Previously, he was a U.S. 
Marine captain, served 7 years in the Marine Corps and was 
deployed twice to Iraq. He also has the distinction of being 
the fastest man in Congress in a 3K race. I am not going to 
challenge [inaudible].
    We are going to talk about a very, very important, serious 
and troubling topic today. It is the military's prevention and 
response to domestic violence. The startling statistics, 
according to the CDC [Centers for Disease Control], suggest 
that one in four women, and one in seven men will experience 
what is called quote, ``severe physical violence'' by spouses 
or intimate partners in their lifetimes. That is 25 percent of 
women in this country who will be battered and bruised, 
strangled, and stabbed, shocked, and maybe even killed. It is a 
scourge that we must pull out of the shadows because we know if 
it is 25 percent of women who are victims of severe physical 
violence, so, too, are the women that make up our military and 
military families.
    The first step in curing any ill is to define a problem. 
And for over 20 years, Congress has asked the Department of 
Defense [DOD] to do just that, but it has not done it. The 
problem remains undefined. In fact, earlier this month the GAO 
[Government Accountability Office] released a study that found 
that despite a statutory requirement since 1999, DOD has not 
collected comprehensive data on the number of allegations of 
domestic violence, a subcategory of different types of domestic 
abuse that constitute offenses under the Uniform Code of 
Military Justice, and related actions taken by commanders. And 
even though we know the data is inaccurate, we know that over 
40,000 incidents met DOD criteria for domestic abuse between 
2015 and 2019, and that 74 percent of these incidents were 
physical abuse. How many more were never counted by the 
Department? How many were never reported? For more than 20 
years, no one can say.
    According to the DOD annual report on child abuse and 
neglect and domestic abuse in the military, most of the 
perpetrators and victims are our most junior service members 
and spouses. They are the young, the inexperienced, they are 
away from home, many for the first time, isolated from family 
and friends and support systems, and, in many cases, struggling 
financially. Often, we know the data shows that COVID-19 
pandemic has only exacerbated the isolation and the financial 
stressors suffered by these families. It is too easy to hide 
behind facts and figures.
    I want to be very clear about what physical abuse is. 
According to the National Domestic Violence Hotline, it is an 
intimate partner or spouse who pulls your hair or punches or 
slaps or kicks or bites, chokes, or smothers you; it is a 
person who forbids or prevents you from eating or sleeping, who 
uses weapons against you, including firearms, knives, or bats; 
who prevents you from contacting emergency services, including 
medical attention or law enforcement; who harms your children, 
your pets; who drives recklessly or dangerously while you are 
in the car, or abandons you in an unfamiliar place; who traps 
you in your home or prevents you from leaving; who throws 
objects at you or prevents you from taking prescribed 
medication, or denies you necessary medical treatment. That is 
physical abuse.
    There is also emotional and verbal abuse, financial abuse, 
stalking, sexual abuse, and sexual and reproductive coercion.
    To put a human face to this epidemic, Ms. Amy Logan has 
bravely agreed to tell her story. Her testimony is riveting and 
exposes all the flaws in the military's handling of domestic 
violence. It also reminds all of us that there is a mother, a 
father, a sister, a brother, a child behind those 40,000 
incidences of domestic abuse recorded by the DOD.
    We can no longer ignore this. The safety and well-being of 
our service members and their families is at risk. So, to DOD 
and the services, my question is, what are you doing about it? 
How are you addressing the shortfalls GAO has presented? How 
are you educating our service members and their families about 
the resources that we have? How do they know who to call to get 
help?
    I am pleased Congress has made some progress in addressing 
this issue. In fiscal year 2021, in NDAA [National Defense 
Authorization Act], the subcommittee provision to establish a 
thorough review of the military's response to domestic violence 
was included to provide Congress with additional independent 
findings and recommendations to address intimate partner 
violence.
    However, much more must be done. I will specifically point 
out that last Congress, a provision that I offered that created 
a military court protective order that are enforceable across 
jurisdictions was unnecessarily stripped out in Congress. I am 
sorry, in conference. Witnesses today will testify why court 
protective orders are so necessary.
    Now, Ranking Member Gallagher, you are recognized for your 
opening remarks.

    STATEMENT OF HON. MIKE GALLAGHER, A REPRESENTATIVE FROM 
 WISCONSIN, RANKING MEMBER, SUBCOMMITTEE ON MILITARY PERSONNEL

    Mr. Gallagher. Thank you so much, Chairwoman Speier. It is 
an honor to join the subcommittee, and I look forward to 
working together. And today's hearing addresses an issue of 
supreme importance of domestic violence, which, I think we can 
all agree, has absolutely no place in our military. And I want 
to welcome both panels to today's hearing. I specifically want 
to thank Ms. Logan for volunteering to be a witness today. I 
can't stress how grateful that I am for the courage and your 
willingness to tell your story.
    As a former Marine Corps officer, I had to deal with issues 
involving domestic violence. In my unit, I found it important 
to discuss and define domestic violence with my Marines, also 
called intimate partner violence. It includes four types of 
appalling behavior: physical violence, sexual violence, 
stalking, and psychological aggression.
    Speaking of the magnitude of the problem, the latest CDC 
statistics indicate that about one in four women, and nearly 
one in seven men, have experienced sexual violence, physical 
violence, and/or stalking by an intimate partner during their 
lifetime, and reported some form of domestic violence-related 
impact. Over 43 million women and 38 million men experienced 
psychological aggression by an intimate partner in their 
lifetime. These numbers are, quite simply, staggering.
    In my home State of Wisconsin, for example, domestic 
violence claimed 72 lives in 2019. In my hometown of Green Bay, 
we have a number of organizations like the Golden House and the 
Wise Women Gathering Place that provides safety and support for 
victims of domestic violence. Unfortunately, these services are 
always in critical demand, and demand outstrips supply.
    In the military, the fiscal year 2020 Report On Child Abuse 
and Neglect and Domestic Abuse in the Military showed the rate 
of those types of incidents have decreased over the past 10 
years, but the numbers, overall, are still very concerning.
    Additionally, unmarried intimate partner abuse and adult 
sexual abuse increased at an alarming rate. There are also six 
intimate partner abuse fatalities in fiscal year 2020. We need 
to do everything we can to drive these numbers down. One case 
is one too many when it comes to domestic violence, in my 
opinion.
    And, so, we also need to commit to the affected families 
that we will provide them with the resources they need to get 
through these very difficult situations.
    But this is only part of the issue with the domestic 
violence. The other part is trying to prevent domestic violence 
from ever occurring in the first place. The prevention part is 
what I want to understand. Our service representatives on our 
second panel, in particular, what are we doing, and how are we 
getting after these issues? Do we truly understand the data, 
and are the services reporting incidents in the same manner so 
we know how many cases there are, and the magnitude of this 
issue in the military? I also want to learn about any new 
initiatives that may improve domestic violence abuse prevention 
and response.
    And so on Panel 1, I look forward to hearing from our 
witness that is a survivor of domestic violence and understand 
your experiences better, and your thoughts on what can be done 
to improve the process. We will also hear from a military 
service organization on their role in domestic violence, and 
from the GAO, which just completed an in-depth report of 
domestic abuse in the military.
    So thank you, again, for all being available for this 
hearing. I look forward to the discussion and the questions and 
answer.
    Ms. Speier. The member completed his remarks. Thank you. 
Each witness will provide a brief opening statement, and each 
member will have an opportunity to question the witnesses for 5 
minutes. We respectfully ask the witness to summarize their 
testimony in 5 minutes, and the statement will be made part of 
the hearing record.
    Welcome. Our first panel is Ms. Amy Logan. Ms. Jessica 
Strong is the co-director of Applied Research, Blue Star 
Families. Ms. Brenda Farrell, Director of Defense Capabilities 
and Management Team of the Government Accountability Office. 
Thank you all for your time today. I look forward to hearing 
from you.
    We will start with Ms. Logan. And, Ms. Logan, let me--
before you made your opening statement, when I read that, I 
couldn't believe how strong you were then and are now, how you 
exposed what are gaping holes in our system in terms of 
responding to the victims [inaudible].

                STATEMENT OF AMY LOGAN, SURVIVOR

    Ms. Logan. Thank you, Madam Chair. I want to start by 
thanking the committee for the work you are doing around such a 
difficult and important issue. My hope is that in hearing my 
testimony, the committee considers adopting real changes in how 
the military handles reports of domestic violence in its ranks.
    I am the ex-spouse of a soldier who was an E-9 in the 
United States Army. I met him toward the end of his military 
career, and we always lived off base. What I knew of the 
military and their resources was what he shared with me.
    Two years into our relationship, I realized I was in an 
emotionally and verbally abusive marriage. Three years into our 
marriage, things turned physical, shortly after moving to a new 
city and a new installation. I was a stay-at-home mom with no 
family nearby, and not a lot of friends. One night, my ex-
husband charged at me, grabbing my shoulders, and he knee-
striked me in the leg. That night, he shattered and completely 
damaged my cell phone, leaving holes and dents on the floor 
from the impact. He told me, I would rather go to prison than 
let you leave with our child.
    I took this as a verbal threat to my life. The police 
arrived after receiving a disturbance call, and my ex-husband 
charmed the male police officer into believing that I broke my 
cell phone and that we just had an argument.
    The next day I went to the local magistrate's office and 
was told that based on the police report, I would more than 
likely not be granted a restraining order. A few days after 
this incident, I went with our child to a women's safe shelter 
while my ex-husband was at work. My ex-husband tracked my 
location and came to the shelter. The police came, gave him a 
warning, and he was asked to leave.
    Through this whole process, the police were called three 
times regarding my ex-husband, and it is my understanding that 
the local Army base was never notified.
    During our divorce process, the brigade military and family 
life counselor who worked with my ex-husband attended every 
court hearing we had and testified on behalf of my ex-husband 
at our divorce hearing. This was the third person in the 
military who heard of the physical abuse, and higher command 
was still not notified of the situation. It wasn't until my 
divorce hearing after gaining knowledge of the history of 
potential abuse my ex-husband had done to other individuals, 
that I gained the strength to come forward to the military.
    I went to the family advocate office and shared all that 
had happened. I requested to receive a military protection 
order. I was not granted one. The case review committee [CRC] 
met and did determine that my case met the criteria for 
emotional and physical abuse.
    The colonel who led the committee was my ex-husband's 
brigade commander and his command partner. It is my 
understanding that the colonel did not feel that my ex-husband 
needed any treatment, and that my ex-husband stayed in his 
command the whole time.
    After the CRC ruling, I filed a report with the Inspector 
General's Office regarding how the colonel handled my case as 
well as the MFLAC [Military and Family Life Counseling] 
actions. I remember one individual telling me, It is our job to 
make sure this doesn't end up on CNN.
    The IG [Inspector General] Department determined that the 
chain of command can best address the matters presented. I was 
shocked. The IG Department took my complaint straight to the 
person my complaint was against.
    I proceeded to file a Congressional Inquiry to assist in 
looking into my concern. From this inquiry, the commanding 
major general started a 15-6 investigation. I believe some 
changes were made, however, I do not know the full outcome.
    Throughout all of these military investigations, I felt 
they questioned the validity of my complaint based on what I 
did not do instead of what was done to me.
    Individuals in the military responsible for decisions 
regarding domestic abuse need to learn more about abuse. It is 
rarely ever an isolated incident. It is rare that just one form 
of abuse is being used. They need to understand that fear keeps 
you trapped and isolated. You experience what someone can do to 
you, and you constantly live in a state of fear. This plays a 
part in every decision that a victim does or does not make.
    I have a few suggestions for the committee to consider. 
Commanders and colonels who directly work with someone accused 
of domestic violence should not oversee any investigation or 
committee regarding this issue. Soldiers who commit acts of 
domestic violence do not need anger management; they have a 
control and an abuse issue. Any treatment plan, investigation, 
or committee, needs to include both talking to the alleged 
abuser and the alleged victim. When IG Departments communicate 
with the military spouse, I recommend someone be present who 
can explain the process. Commanders, colonels, and military 
personnel need to properly report all allegations and conduct 
proper investigations.
    My story is not just my story. It represents the stories of 
victims and survivors who are too afraid to come forward. It 
represents individuals who work with victims in the military 
who feel they are constantly hitting roadblocks when trying to 
help. I hope today, this testimony can be a voice for them, 
too. I thank the committee for your time.
    [The prepared statement of Ms. Logan can be found in the 
Appendix on page 40.]
    Ms. Speier. Thank you again, Ms. Logan. That was, again, 
remarkable testimony and very important to us. Next, we will 
hear from Ms. Jessica Strong.

 STATEMENT OF JESSICA STRONG, CO-DIRECTOR OF APPLIED RESEARCH, 
                       BLUE STAR FAMILIES

    Ms. Strong. Chairwoman Speier, Ranking Member Gallagher, 
and distinguished members of the Subcommittee on Military 
Personnel, thank you for the opportunity to testify before you 
today. My name is Dr. Jessica Strong, and I am the co-director 
of Applied Research for Blue Star Families, a national 
nonprofit organization dedicated to supporting military and 
veteran families. Blue Star Families is nationally recognized 
for our Annual Military Family Lifestyle Survey, which covers a 
wide variety of topics that impact military and veteran 
families.
    Today, I am here to share with you what our previous 
surveys have revealed about intimate partner violence, or IPV. 
In Blue Star Families 2015, 2016, and 2017 surveys, 
approximately 1 percent of Active Duty spouse and service 
member respondents reported being hit, kicked, punched, or 
otherwise hurt by their significant other in the past year. 
However, as Ms. Logan mentioned, this physical violence is not 
the only, but the most obvious symptom of intimate partner 
violence.
    Perhaps more alarming is that approximately 9 to 15 percent 
of our Active Duty family respondents reported that they did 
not feel safe in their current relationship. This is a 
potential warning sign of abuse.
    Finally, in our 2019 survey, approximately 2 percent of 
both spouses and service member respondents reported they had 
experienced intimate partner violence within the past year. 
These findings corroborate data gathered by Department of 
Defense in 2019, which reported incidents of spouse abuse at 
about 1.1 percent. This seems small, but the rate is over twice 
that of the national population at 0.42 percent.
    Many factors that are endemic to the military lifestyle 
face military spouses at greater risk of experiencing IPV, 
including economic vulnerability, social isolation, mental 
health concerns, and military culture itself. I will say a few 
words just about each.
    Military spouses are uniquely vulnerable to economic abuse, 
wherein abusive partners use their financial power to control 
their spouse's behavior. Because of that frequent relocation, 
limited childcare, and the service member's job demand, 
military spouses face significant challenges to employment. The 
unemployment rate for military spouses is many times that of 
their similar civilian peers. And of those who are employed, 
two-thirds of the Active Duty spouse respondents to our 2020 
survey indicated they were underemployed, working in positions 
that are not commensurate with their education, experience, 
salary history, or desires. Others have simply left the 
workforce.
    Consequently, military spouses frequently do not have a 
sufficient independent source of income in which to support 
themselves and their children, should they choose to leave 
their abusive partner.
    Another risk factor for IPV mentioned by Ms. Logan is 
social isolation. This is also too often a natural byproduct of 
the military lifestyle. Active Duty families relocate, on 
average, once every 2 to 3 years. This requires families to 
separate from their established support systems. In fact, 
almost half of our families in our 2020 survey reported that 
isolation from family and friends was a top stressor during the 
military time. The COVID-19 pandemic with its associated 
shutdowns, restriction movement orders, and mandatory 
quarantines, may have intensified this concern.
    A third risk factor is mental health issues such as PTSD 
[post-traumatic stress disorder]. These have also been 
repeatedly linked to IPV. While certainly not the singular 
cause, the prevalence of PTSD in the military may increase the 
incident of IPV. In our 2020 survey, 11 percent of our Active 
Duty service members, and 7 percent of their spouse respondents 
reported they had a current diagnosis of PTSD.
    Finally, military culture itself may contribute to the 
relative prevalence of IPV due to its essential normalization 
of violence and predominantly masculine culture. Any plan to 
reduce IPV must address the underlying factors that make 
families vulnerable, and, therefore, must seek to, A, empower 
military spouses financially; B, eliminate sexist attitudes 
within the military; and C, combat social isolation.
    We must collectively work to address the upstream causes of 
military spouse unemployment, including a lack of affordable 
childcare, the unpredictability of service member day-to-day 
job demand, and hiring and promotion discrimination.
    Eliminating sexism from the military will require systemic 
cultural reform. We, therefore, encourage Congress to implement 
the recommendations made by the Fort Hood Independent Review 
Committee to alleviate instances of sexual harassment, assault, 
and gender discrimination across the services.
    Finally, to combat social isolation, Congress ought to work 
with community-based military support organizations to bolster 
Active Duty military family members a sense of belonging to 
their local civilian community.
    I would, again, like to thank the distinguished members of 
this subcommittee for their efforts to address this deeply 
troubling issue.
    IPV is a crime, and it is neither a normal nor an 
acceptable byproduct of military lifestyle. Blue Star Families 
applaud this subcommittee's work to protect military family 
members from these acts of violence.
    [The prepared statement of Ms. Strong can be found in the 
Appendix on page 53.]
    Ms. Speier. Thank you, Ms. Strong. Your data was 
compelling. We want to hear from Brenda Farrell, a previous 
witness of our committee. She is the director of Defense 
Capabilities and Management Team for the GAO. Ms. Farrell.

STATEMENT OF BRENDA FARRELL, DIRECTOR, DEFENSE CAPABILITIES AND 
       MANAGEMENT TEAM, GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE

    Ms. Farrell. Madam Chair, Ranking Member Gallagher, and 
members of the subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to 
discuss GAO's recently issued report on domestic abuse 
prevention and response in the military.
    Domestic abuse can result in devastating personal 
consequences and is a significant public health issue that 
causes substantial societal costs. DOD has stated that domestic 
abuse is incompatible with military values and reduces mission 
readiness.
    My written statement today summarizes a report issued 
earlier this month on domestic abuse in the military, which 
included 32 recommendations to DOD. DOD concurred with each of 
the recommendations. My statement focuses on some of the key 
findings in that report. Let me briefly summarize it.
    My statement is divided into two parts: The first addresses 
the extent that DOD has met statutory requirements to collect 
and report data on reports of domestic abuse. DOD met a 
statutory requirement to collect and report data for incidents 
that met its criteria for domestic abuse. But as noted earlier 
by the chair, it was not collected and reported accurate data 
for the number and type of all domestic abuse allegations we 
are seeing. As a result, DOD is unable to assess the scope of 
alleged abuse and the rate of substantiation.
    To address these challenges, we recommended that DOD 
clarify its guidance to the services for submitting data and 
develop a quality control process to ensure complete and 
accurate data on allegations of abuse.
    In addition, we found that while there has been a statutory 
requirement since 1999, DOD has not collected comprehensive 
data on allegations of domestic violence, a subset of domestic 
abuse that constitutes criminal offenses under the Uniform Code 
of Military Justice, and related actions taken by commanders.
    Since 2015, DOD has made an effort to aggregate these data 
at the Department level. However, the data collected by DOD do 
not cover the full scope of acts that may be considered 
domestic violence.
    Further, nearly half of the non-pending command actions 
were categorized as ``other,'' making it impossible to know if 
these allegations were unfounded, or if the incidents were not 
prosecutable for other reasons. To address these challenges, we 
recommended that DOD evaluate, and if needed, clarify, or 
adjust the responsibilities for tracking domestic violence 
allegations and related command actions.
    The second part of my statement addresses the extent that 
DOD and the military services have implemented and overseen 
domestic abuse prevention and response activity. We found that 
gaps exist in key areas, including creating awareness of 
domestic abuse, reporting options and resources, allegation 
screening, victim risk assessment, and commanders' disposition 
of incidence. For example, we found that the military services 
perform limited oversight of commanders' disposition of 
domestic violence incidents referred to as command actions. 
These command actions can have significant implications for 
victims and alleged abusers.
    For example, a commander's decision to pursue a court 
martial, nonjudicial punishment, administrative action, or no 
action, can impact victims' eligibility for transitional 
compensation benefits, and whether the alleged abusers are 
subject to the Lautenberg Amendment restricting firearms 
possession.
    Currently, the Uniform Code of Military Justice authorizes 
commanders at the lowest level to determine the initial 
disposition for nonsexual domestic violence incidents. A DOD 
official told us that as of November 2020, officials were not 
aware of any initiatives within DOD to study risks associated 
with the current disposition model, or the feasibility of 
potential alternatives. Performing such an assessment could 
provide the Department and the military services with a better 
understanding of such risks and their resulting potential 
impacts.
    As a result, we recommended that DOD assess the potential 
risks associated with its current disposition model for 
domestic violence incidents and the feasibility of potential 
alternatives that may respond to such risks. Madam Chair, that 
concludes my statement. I will be pleased to take questions 
when you or the other members are ready.
    [The prepared statement of Ms. Farrell can be found in the 
Appendix on page 70.]
    Ms. Speier. Thank you for your presentations. Now, I have 
the opportunity to ask questions of our panelists.
    Let me start by asking Ms. Logan. It appears from your 
testimony that [inaudible] were and the resources [inaudible] 
an accurate statement?
    Ms. Logan. I am sorry, Congresswoman Speier, it cut up a 
little bit, the question. Could you repeat that, please?
    Ms. Speier. Of course. Based on your testimony, it appears 
that for that shouldn't be [inaudible] resources were misused. 
[Inaudible] and I am wondering is there any kind of resource 
that is truly there for you. [Inaudible].
    Ms. Logan. I believe your question is in regards to 
resources that were shared with me and what resources I used. 
Is that correct?
    Ms. Speier. Yes.
    Ms. Logan. Okay. I am sorry. There seems to be a bit of a 
delay. So the living off base, and only hearing what my ex-
spouse of the military, I did not know of resources. I, at that 
time, did not know that I can go to the family advocacy office. 
It wasn't until actually a counselor that my ex-husband agreed 
to go to, when she reached out to the family advocacy because 
she was concerned for my safety, when they reached out to me, 
then I became familiar with that resource.
    The--my ex-husband's command did not share that resource 
with me. And, so, it was at that time that I found out about 
that. I was--I did not know many resources outside of that. 
When I did decide to bring things forward, what I knew was of 
my family advocate advisor, and they were a great resource. I 
will say that she was a great resource. But outside of that, I 
was not offered any other resources.
    Ms. Speier. [Inaudible] a long time, is that correct?
    Ms. Logan. Yes. He was in--I did not meet him until later 
in his career. He had been in the military, I believe, since--
he went in shortly after high school, after he got his GED 
[General Educational Development Test], I believe. So he had 
been in the military for quite some time. I met him when he was 
an E-8 going into E-9.
    Ms. Speier. Your testimony for other spouses as well 
[inaudible] term military that witness [inaudible] reported?
    Ms. Logan. No. So around the time of our divorce, I was 
able to connect with some of the previous relationships, and 
they shared their testimony with me, and it was at that time 
that I found out that each one of them had experienced alleged 
abuse by my ex-husband. They each shared they were too afraid 
to bring things forward to the military. We all were told that 
he could lose his job, he could lose his right to carry, he 
could lose everything. And as Ms. Strong shared, you rely--you 
don't have a job, you don't know what you are going to do. And 
so, you are a bit afraid of bringing things forward because of 
that fear that they could lose their job, and then you could 
lose your support. At the same time, you just want it to stop, 
and you want help.
    They--I believe one did mention something to a higher 
command. I do not believe--she did not bring things fully. A 
full--she didn't file a full complaint is my understanding. But 
she did mention something to a higher command. They, I believe, 
made him go to anger management. I believe my ex-husband 
laughed it off and didn't take it seriously.
    [Audio malfunction.]
    Ms. Escobar. Madam Chair, I think we might have lost you. 
Is anyone else hearing the chairwoman's audio?
    Mr. Gallagher. I cannot hear the audio.
    Mr. Veasey. I cannot hear.
    Ms. Escobar. Okay. So staff, could you alert the chairwoman 
and offer some guidance?
    Ms. Strong. She is back.
    Ms. Speier. Actually, I have moved now to a secure location 
here. Thank you, Ms. Logan. Again, we will now move to Ranking 
Member Gallagher.
    Mr. Gallagher. Thank you so much. Ms. Logan, again, thank 
you for sharing your story and, you know, the courage that that 
takes. Do you think our local installation commander should 
engage the local community to better understand the resources 
off base in the local community that might be available? Might 
that have helped in your case or in other cases?
    Ms. Logan. I think there can be better communication 
between the local resources and the military resources. In, you 
know, civilian-wise when I brought stuff forward, too, I don't 
think the full resources were shared with me, too, because one 
of the police officers didn't fully believe my incident. But, 
yes, I agree there could be better communication between the 
two.
    Mr. Gallagher. And then in your testimony, you indicated 
that you didn't charge--you didn't file charges of domestic 
abuse immediately after the incident. Based on what you know 
now, how would you advise victims in a similar situation?
    Ms. Logan. I would advise to do so. I think, initially, as 
I shared, you are very scared, and you are very scared of how 
they might react. You are very scared. I was not shared that I 
could file charges of that. That was not told to me by the 
civilian police officers or my lawyer at the beginning. So, I 
would advise to do so because, you know, from my experience, I 
was questioned, well, why didn't you? Why didn't you? Why 
didn't you?
    Mr. Gallagher. Thank you. Ms. Farrell, thank you for your 
testimony. A number of the recommendations in the GAO report on 
domestic abuse indicate, as you alluded to in your testimony, 
that DOD has significant issues with data, with domestic 
violence data in terms of reporting, collection, tracking, 
guidance, standardization, the quality control. As we sift 
through all of the recommendations, in your opinion, you know, 
what should be the first actions, the priority actions that DOD 
takes to fix these issues?
    Ms. Farrell. Thank you for that question. There is much 
work for DOD to do, and we hope they use the report as a 
roadmap to correct the deficiencies that we are pointing out. 
But I would think that if you tried to characterize solutions 
for the issues related to the data, they basically fall into 
two categories: guidance and accountability. As we noted, we 
don't know the full scope of all the allegations and the types 
of allegations of domestic abuse in the military because the 
services use different approaches to count the allegations. Two 
of the services, you know, count each allegation associated 
with a report separately. The other two count multiple 
allegations from that one report. So two of the services could 
be undercounting, and there is other coding issues with the 
Navy that prevent us from understanding what the type of abuse 
is being performed.
    So clarifying the guidance to make sure you know what you 
want to collect. And in the case of domestic violence, putting 
someone in charge that can work across boundaries to obtain the 
information on domestic violence, because that data does exist 
on domestic violence. It just hasn't been going forth to the 
right office to manage it.
    Mr. Gallagher. Thank you. That is very helpful. And in the 
short time I have left, Ms. Strong, are you aware of any 
programs in the civilian community that are comparable to DOD's 
domestic violence programs that could be used perhaps as 
benchmarks for success, as kind of gold standards that we might 
emulate?
    Ms. Strong. Thank you, Ranking Member Gallagher. I am not 
aware of any gold standard programs. I know that there are 
many, many community programs that support victims of domestic 
violence and intimate partner violence, but I am not aware of 
any in particular that should be held up as exemplars.
    Mr. Gallagher. Well, I appreciate it, and I yield my 
remaining seconds back.
    Ms. Speier. I thank the gentleman. Ms. Houlahan is now 
recognized for 5 minutes.
    Ms. Houlahan. Thank you, Madam Chair. And I hope that my 
visiting puppies are not going to be too much of a problem. 
They are just starting to bark right now. I really also want to 
say thank you to all for coming today and sharing your story, 
particularly, Ms. Logan. It actually brought me back to being a 
military kid, to having a military mom, moving a lot, and to 
being a family who were under an enormous amount of stress. And 
my mom was kind of always the squadron, you know, wife, the 
squadron XO's [executive officer's] wife, the CO's [commanding 
officer's] wife, the commanding officer of the base wife. And 
all of the kinds of things that you are talking about have 
brought back really difficult memories, and I am appreciative 
of you sharing them.
    I want to associate myself with Mr. Gallagher's questions 
and remarks, which is what is it that we can do to find best 
practices and standards of other industries and environments 
that are similar to the very isolating environment that goes to 
be a military spouse? Is there anything that we can, you know, 
rack our brains on to find something that is quite so 
singularly isolating? It is a perfect word as it is to be alone 
and moving possibly every single year to a new environment 
separated from your family. So I will put that to the side.
    My questions, however, one question is for Dr. Strong. In 
your testimony, you talked about, you know, kind of the idea of 
gender tropes and the correlation, the strong correlation that 
there is a military gender discrimination to female members of 
the service. And I want to make sure that we acknowledge that 
that is an issue. That this issue of kind of gender tropes, 
writ large, is an issue in our military that is increasingly 
having more and more members who are female.
    Beyond the acknowledgment that we should make that this 
exists, is there anything else that the services can do about 
kind of changing that culture, that--well, frankly, toxic 
culture that involves gender tropes, traditional gender tropes? 
And that is for Dr. Strong.
    Ms. Strong. Yes, ma'am. Thank you for the question. I very 
much appreciate the attention that you are bringing to the 
environment and the military culture. I do think that that is--
if we are going to prevent intimate partner violence in a 
number--any number of other issues, that is one of the places 
that we do have to start.
    As I mentioned in my testimony, looking at the 
recommendations from the Fort Hood Independent Review 
Commission, is a great place to start. They have a lot of 
really good recommendations to implement across not only the 
Army, but the other services as well.
    Also, I would suggest looking at ways to continue to build 
belonging in the community and finding support for those 
military families so that there is a place to go. As Ms. Logan 
mentioned, there is--often the communication that they get is 
from the service member. And if the service member is the 
person who is perpetrating, then they are not going to be 
getting good information there. So building that sense of 
belonging for spouses and families, so they know the resource, 
and they have a place to go is also a good place to start. 
Thank you.
    Ms. Houlahan. You are welcome. And I also wanted to add my 
support for trying to find a way to harmonize data to the 
degree that we can across the DOD to make sure that even in our 
system, to Ms. Farrell, to make sure that we are standardizing 
the way that we assess data. I was fortunate enough to be on 
the trip with the chairwoman to Fort Hood, and one of the 
things I was struck by was an increased awareness of the fact 
that the police force outside of the base needed to be better 
at communicating within the base to talk about things like 
soldiers who were AWOL [absent without leave]. I am wondering 
what the analog is there to make sure that we are communicating 
across base lines or, post lines, from the service MPs 
[Military Police] to the police as well. And maybe this is 
something, Ms. Farrell, I was wondering if you can comment on 
how we can standardize or harmonize that across the DOD?
    Ms. Farrell. Are you talking in terms more about the data, 
or are you talking in terms more about that civilian military 
coordinated response?
    Ms. Houlahan. It is both in the sense that the data is an 
aggregation of a lot of people's experiences. And there are the 
individual, you know, incidences or contacts between civilian 
law enforcement and spouses or military families. And, you 
know, that is the one-on-one thing, but there also is the 
aggregate, which is--you kind of wish--I was struck by the fact 
that the Fort Hood law enforcement sort of withdrawning their 
information over the wall and wondering what happened to it 
after it went over the wall. I can imagine that it would be the 
same kind of concern with this kind of information as well.
    Ms. Farrell. There needs to be better military-civilian 
coordination. I mean, it is known that it is an effort on both 
parts for the prevention and the response. And there are 
numerous examples along the lines that we are talking about, 
especially protective orders which has come up earlier. Some 
within the military, including the commanders, do not realize 
that a violation by an Active Duty service member of a civilian 
protective order is punishable under the Uniform Code of 
Military Justice. And that is something that could be corrected 
with the services, the Army, the Navy, and the Air Force 
putting in their regulations as is required by the DODI 
[Department of Defense Instruction], the process to punish 
violators of both military and civilian protective orders.
    So, to date, only the Marine Corps has done that. So that 
is a big gap. And because those regulations don't define the 
responsibilities for prosecuting those who have violated those 
military and civilian orders, some spouses, or intimate 
partners, would not think about going to the military for help 
when there has been a violation of that civilian order. There 
is much more, but I know you have got other questions.
    Ms. Houlahan. Thank you. No, I appreciate it. In fact, I 
have to yield back, but thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair.
    Ms. Speier. The gentlelady's time has expired.
    Ms. Farrell, just for clarification purposes, you have made 
recommendations to the Department as a result of this report. 
Have they responded yet?
    Ms. Farrell. Yes, they have. They were provided a draft 
report before it was publicly issued, and they did agree with 
all of the recommendations. We will continue to monitor those 
recommendations, as you know, to understand that they do take 
actions to meet the intent.
    Ms. Speier. All right. Thank you.
    Mrs. Bice, you are recognized for 5 minutes.
    Mrs. Bice. Well, thank you, Madam Chair, for hosting 
today's important hearing. And thank you to all of the 
witnesses for being here today.
    Domestic abuse and domestic violence impacts far too many 
Americans. The CDC estimates that 1 in 4 women and 1 in 10 men 
will experience some form of domestic violence or abuse in 
their lifetime. And I think it is imperative that we diligently 
work to address this issue within the DOD to ensure that the 
policies and the programs are in place to prevent these 
horrific incidents from occurring and to rapidly address them 
when they do occur.
    My first question is to Ms. Logan. You mentioned in your 
testimony that you had an advocate that helped guide you after 
you started the process of charges against your ex-husband. Do 
you believe that appointing an advocate early on to help a 
spouse in a domestic violence or domestic abuse situation would 
be helpful? Maybe someone who is independent of the military?
    Ms. Logan. Yes, I think what helped me with her instance is 
that she had also experienced domestic abuse, and she was 
familiar with the military. So her knowledge of both avenues 
was very beneficial for me. And because I did not know a lot of 
the military protocol and resources, she was able to provide 
that. So, yes, I do believe that would be a benefit.
    Mrs. Bice. So providing something like that DOD-wide do you 
think may be a great, sort of, assistance for those victims?
    Ms. Logan. Yes, I believe that--what I came across is it 
was either somebody that knew the military or knew about abuse 
and didn't know about both. So the more that you could appoint 
that know about both I think would help find those solutions 
and find those gaps, and even discover, you know, knowing that 
history of abuse, knowing what the signs are and what the red 
flags are to maybe try to bring it to light earlier before an 
incident happens.
    Mrs. Bice. Great. Thank you for that.
    Dr. Strong, you mentioned in your testimony that there is a 
connection with PTSD and domestic abuse and domestic violence. 
My question to you--and maybe it is a little bit of conjecture, 
but do you believe that we are addressing the PTSD issues so 
that we don't see DV [domestic violence] or domestic assault on 
the back end?
    Ms. Strong. I appreciate the question. Thank you. I am not 
certain that we are doing all that can be done to address PTSD 
and other issues of mental health because it isn't simply PTSD, 
it is also other mental health diagnoses and substance abuse. 
And I think that also involves only addressing the stigma of 
accessing services for those conditions or issues, but also 
addressing--providing resources so that those substance abuse 
mental health underlying disorders can be addressed prior to 
before something extends into a domestic violence or intimate 
partner violence incident. Thank you for the question.
    Mrs. Bice. Thank you. And then my last question is really 
for any of you. If you--could you share your perspectives on 
whether the DOD is doing enough to protect children in 
households where domestic or intimate partner violence is 
occurring. We have talked a lot about spouses, but children are 
sort of, I think, behind the scenes, and that is such a crucial 
piece. So what can we be doing to make sure that those children 
are being protected as well?
    Ms. Farrell. I will go first. Can you hear me?
    Mrs. Bice. Yes.
    Ms. Farrell. We actually issued a report related to this 
topic on child abuse. I think you are talking about children 
whose parents could be abused. But after we did issue a report 
looking at military children who were victims of child abuse 
and found many of the similar findings that we are talking 
about today connected with the framework to manage things. Like 
the Incident Determination Committee at the installation level, 
when they first get an incident, they determine if it should be 
counted as child abuse, just as the same if they would look at 
domestic abuse to see if it should be counted. And we found 
problems with that structure. That committee last year and made 
recommendations about the composition of that committee. We 
thought medical personnel should be included to make sure a 
victim needed medical services, that those would be rendered.
    So we had a host of recommendations in that report as well 
to address that issue. But there is definitely some overlap 
about protection of the children, whether they are in the 
household, experiencing this with the other family members, or 
they are the victims themselves.
    Mrs. Bice. Thank you, Ms. Farrell.
    Madam Chair, I yield back.
    Ms. Speier. The gentlelady's time has expired.
    The gentlelady from Texas is recognized for 5 minutes. Ms. 
Escobar.
    Ms. Escobar. Thank you so much, Madam Chair. And I want to 
express my gratitude to our chairwoman for having such an 
important hearing. And to our panelists, for sharing this 
really critical information, information, frankly, that 
confirms what so many of us already know and understand about 
the failures that exist within the military organization.
    Ms. Logan, I would like to start my questions with you, and 
I want to thank you for sharing your painful experiences with 
this committee, and as well as with the public that is watching 
at home. I represent a congressional district that is home to 
Fort Bliss, one of the biggest military installations in the 
United States. And so, you know, I know from having spoken with 
constituents, and as well, with service members, that this is a 
problem everywhere, including here on our military 
installation.
    But, Ms. Logan, one of the things that you mentioned that I 
would like to focus on a little bit, you mentioned talking 
about other survivors, and about what they had heard back. And 
I wrote down that what they heard back was the fears around 
losing--the spouse losing the job, or the career essentially 
being over if abuse was reported. And, you know, obviously, it 
has to get reported. We don't want it to--we also want to try 
to address it as quickly as possible.
    Do you think that if folks on military installations, if 
support that was available for you, if there had been 
intervention with your husband, do you think that could have 
helped address the abuse situation? Is there something that we 
can do, or that the DOD can do at the very front end that tries 
to help mitigate, not just the abuse, but things spiraling out 
of control?
    Ms. Logan. Thank you for your question. And I apologize for 
the lawnmower noise going on. It is a difficult question to 
answer. My understanding is research with individuals who are 
abusive. It is such a small percentage that actually changed. 
So it is very hard to say that if they were to come in and 
intercede and try to bring some source of treatment, it is hard 
to say that that would--could have potentially slowed down or 
stopped other incidences after the fact.
    I think knowledge to know that there is protection that can 
be offered for people to come forward, you live in such a state 
of not wanting to do anything to make them upset that coming 
forward is just one--another thing that will--so to know that 
there is some protection offered to keep you safe in coming 
forward, I don't know how to get that to the victims. That is a 
difficult question. But I think that is important to know that 
there is stuff in place to help protect them in bringing things 
forward.
    Ms. Escobar. I appreciate that. You make a very valid 
point. You know, one of the other areas of concern is that 70 
percent of married Active Duty service members live off 
installations, making it very easy for them to feel isolated 
from resources and outreach programs.
    Obviously, you did not have--you know, you weren't provided 
with the kind of support and programs that you needed. What can 
we do for families who live off of installations to ensure that 
you do have access to that information about resources that can 
protect you, keep you and your children safe?
    Ms. Logan. That is a great question, and one that I have 
thought over and over to try to come up with an answer to 
myself, because I know there is programs there, I know the 
information is there, I know we can't always go to the, you 
know, open houses that they have to welcome new people to an 
installation. I don't know if mailing stuff to the home, that 
can get lost. I apologize. I don't think I have a clear answer. 
It is something I continue to think about on an ongoing basis, 
because there needs to be a solution to reach them. But it is--
I don't have that clear answer as to how yet, and I apologize.
    Ms. Escobar. Oh, no, no. No apology. Amy, it is on us. We 
have got to figure this out for you.
    Dr. Strong, I think I saw your hand go up. Did you want to 
respond to that?
    Ms. Strong. I would love that. Thank you very much for the 
opportunity.
    Ms. Speier. Can you do it in 30 seconds, please.
    Ms. Strong. I will be as quick as I can. I think one of the 
keys is building connections in the community. When we ask in 
our survey where you go for help, people don't go to resources, 
they go to their families and friends, they go to their local 
connections. So we need to build those connections for spouses 
in the communities that they live in, so that they can go to a 
neighbor and say, I am having this issue, what do I do? The 
neighbors, the friends, the local connections are the ones who 
have those resources.
    Ms. Escobar. Thank you so much. And thank you for 
indulging, Madam Chair. I yield back.
    Ms. Speier. Of course. Ms. Logan, were you ever required to 
provide your email address to the installation, to the command?
    Ms. Logan. I don't remember. I apologize. I know--I am 
assuming they had when I got my spousal--the ID 
[identification]. I am trying to recall. I don't remember. I 
know I would meet command, and my only interaction with them 
would be at certain functions. My ex-spouse did not like going 
to those functions, so we didn't always go to every function. I 
was invited--yeah.
    Ms. Speier. All right. Thank you. I think that is part of 
the solution is requiring that the spouse has--that their email 
is provided so that the family advocacy program can actually, 
you know, provide information to them, whether they need it or 
not.
    All right. Mr. Fallon is recognized for 5 minutes. Mr. 
Fallon, I see your camera is on, but you are AWOL. All right. 
All right.
    Is Mr. Jackson available? Mr. Jackson?
    All right. Well, we will turn to both of them once they 
return.
    I think Ms. Strickland is next. Ms. Strickland, I think you 
are muted.
    Mr. Fallon does not have questions.
    Ms. Strickland.
    Ms. Escobar. Madam Chair, I don't see her on the----
    Ms. Speier. Yeah, she was here earlier.
    Mr. Veasey is next. You are recognized for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Veasey. Thank you, Madam Chair. I wanted to ask Dr. 
Strong, specifically, about just how the military handles, you 
know, incidents as they occur on a single basis. A personal 
story. I can remember years ago, I was about 20, 21 years old 
at a friend's house, and we all had to leave the house because 
her mom had her friend coming over. And the friend was in some 
kind of distress. And when we left, I asked what was happening, 
and she said that her husband is a police officer and he beats 
her up really badly. And whenever she calls the police, they 
come over and say, we are going to walk around the corner with 
him so he can cool off.
    And when we were at Fort Hood recently--I was on the CODEL 
[congressional delegation] to Fort Hood a couple of weeks ago--
and one of the MPs that we spoke to said something that 
reminded me of that day. And I still couldn't believe it, 
because now, police departments don't routinely do that. I am 
not saying it never happens anymore, but now even if the person 
doesn't want to press charges, if they see that there has been 
evidence of a domestic abuse, somebody is going to go to jail.
    And so, when the MP told us that oftentimes he has to tell 
people hey, you know, why don't we, why don't we cool off, or 
there is a cooling off period. And, really, it kind of 
surprised me.
    How prevalent is it to have people say, you know, we are 
just--you just need to cool off? And if the person that is 
being abused doesn't want to cooperate, what are the protocols 
put in place for the military to still act, even if there is no 
cooperation like can sometimes happen in the civilian world?
    Ms. Strong. Thank you for that question, Representative 
Veasey. I am afraid I don't have the answer to that. I don't 
know enough about the protocols for the MP response or the 
civilian police or law enforcement response.
    Ms. Speier. Ms. Farrell, do you have any response?
    Mr. Veasey. Yeah. I would love to hear if Ms. Farrell has a 
response, yeah.
    Ms. Speier. You are muted. Ms. Farrell, you are muted.
    Ms. Farrell. I can address part of it, sir. I don't know 
the protocol if it comes through the law enforcement, except 
once law enforcement, including the MPs are aware of it, that 
should trigger some type of investigation, even if it--after 
the investigation, it doesn't go anywhere. But the first step 
is that it should be reported to the family advocacy program at 
the installation level. And sometimes at the installation 
level, it is coming from law enforcement. Sometimes it is 
coming from the command. There are different avenues.
    It is at that screening that often we found incidents are 
being screened out inappropriately, that that initial screening 
says that all incidents should go forward to the Incident 
Determination Committee unless there is no possibility that the 
incident meets the DOD criteria. It is very basic at that 
stage, but we found incidents where officials at installations 
were acknowledging that if they felt there had been no impact 
to the victim, they did not move that incident forward to the 
committee.
    If they felt that there was pushing and shoving and it 
could have been self-defense, they did not move it forward. In 
both of those incidents, the Incident Determination Committee 
is supposed to determine that.
    So, it should be reported, but regardless of whether it is 
the MP that is witnessing it or some other person that is with 
law enforcement. I hope that----
    Mr. Veasey. Even if the person is not cooperating, you are 
saying there should still be something?
    Ms. Farrell. Yes.
    Mr. Veasey. Okay.
    Ms. Farrell. That is another situation with the screening 
that often the people at the installation level will say, well, 
the individual recanted, and so there was nothing to it, but it 
still should go forward to that Incident Determination 
Committee.
    Mr. Veasey. Thank you.
    Madam Chair, I yield back.
    Ms. Speier. The gentleman yields back.
    We can do a brief second round if anyone has any additional 
questions they would like to ask of the panel. Doesn't appear 
to be. I have one last question.
    Ms. Farrell, you talked just now about the Incidents Review 
Committee. It sounds like, from what I have read, that they are 
not being instituted appropriately, or not being instituted at 
all. Is that correct?
    Ms. Farrell. The Incident Determination Committee is an 
algorithm that is required by DOD for all the services. It has 
been for years. The Army is the only service that has not fully 
implemented the IDC. So there could be some inconsistencies in 
outcomes or treatments that are provided to the victims, for 
example, because of that inconsistency right now with the Army 
lagging behind the other services.
    Ms. Speier. All right. And, finally, you indicated that 50 
percent of the incidents are reflected as ``other.'' That would 
mean that about half of these cases are subject to NJP [non-
judicial punishment] or some other form of review or penalty 
or----
    Ms. Farrell. No. It is actually 43 percent. It is over 
7,000 cases that have been decided. We don't know. The category 
is so broad, it could be that the command did not think the 
evidence was there. It could be it is not the right 
jurisdiction. It could be death. It could be a variety of 
reasons why there was no action taken. Our point is, you don't 
know which ones were unfounded by the command in other reasons. 
There is a category for court martials and non-judicial 
punishments and admin actions.
    Ms. Speier. So this is--the other category is what--we 
really just don't know what it is.
    Ms. Farrell. That is correct. It is so broad, and that is 
the reason we say there is very limited oversight because the 
percentage is so high. Obviously, there is going to be some in 
that category, but we wish we had more information in order to 
actually understand the command actions.
    Ms. Speier. Thank you. I see that Mr. Kim has joined us. Do 
you have any questions you would like to ask the first panel?
    Mr. Kim. No questions at this point, Chairwoman.
    Ms. Speier. Thank you. All right. I want to thank all of 
our panelists. You have been generous with your time and your 
testimony and compelling, so very much appreciate all of your 
information that you have provided. If you have additional 
thoughts you want to share with us, please feel free to contact 
us. We are certainly going to incorporate much of your 
recommendations as we consider the NDAA this year. So thank you 
again.
    We will now transfer to our next panel, and the members of 
our next panel include Ms. Patricia Barron, who is the Deputy 
Assistant Secretary of Defense for Military Community and 
Family Policy at DOD; Colonel Steve Lewis, the Family Advocacy 
Program Manager of the Army; Colonel Andrew Cruz, the Chief, 
Air Force Family Advocacy Program at the Air Force; Mrs. 
Crystal Griffen, the Deputy Director of Family Support at the 
United States Navy; and Ms. Lisa Eaffaldano who is the 
Assistant Branch Head of Prevention and Clinical Services at 
the U.S. Marine Corps.
    Welcome, all of you. We will begin with your testimony, Ms. 
Barron. Ms. Barron, are you with us?
    Ms. Barron. Can you hear me now?
    Ms. Speier. We can hear you now. Yes, we can. Thank you.

  STATEMENT OF PATRICIA BARRON, DEPUTY ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF 
DEFENSE FOR MILITARY COMMUNITY AND FAMILY POLICY, OFFICE OF THE 
  SECRETARY OF DEFENSE; ACCOMPANIED BY COL STEVE LEWIS, USA, 
 FAMILY ADVOCACY PROGRAM MANAGER, DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY; COL 
ANDREW A. CRUZ, USAF, CHIEF, AIR FORCE FAMILY ADVOCACY PROGRAM, 
 DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE; CRYSTAL GRIFFEN, DEPUTY DIRECTOR 
FAMILY SUPPORT, COMMANDER, NAVY INSTALLATIONS COMMAND; AND LISA 
  EAFFALDANO, ASSISTANT BRANCH HEAD, PREVENTION AND CLINICAL 
              SERVICES, UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS

    Ms. Barron. Thank you. Chairwoman Speier, Ranking Member 
Gallagher, and members of the subcommittee, my colleagues and I 
thank you for your steadfast support of our service members and 
their families, and we appreciate this opportunity to appear 
before you today to discuss the Department's efforts in 
addressing this very serious issue of domestic abuse within the 
military community.
    Collectively, we represent the many dedicated family 
advocacy program professionals across the Department of Defense 
who do work tirelessly every day to support our service members 
and their families, to keep them safe and resilient.
    Ma'am, you have already introduced my panel, so I won't 
take up time there, but I do want to say to the witnesses on 
the previous panel, and especially to Ms. Logan, please know 
that we appreciate this opportunity to hear from you firsthand. 
And we will take your stories, your recommendations, and 
personal experiences back to our respective teams to inform our 
important work, so thank you so much again.
    The Department of Defense is committed to enhancing the 
welfare and well-being of our service members and their 
families which includes preventing and responding to domestic 
abuse and serious harm to our children. As well as it being the 
very right thing to do, it is also imperative to the readiness, 
wellness, and resiliency of our force.
    As a 30-year military spouse, a registered nurse working in 
the community mental health field, a lifelong advocate for 
service members and their families, and a parent of a former 
female soldier who is now a military spouse herself, I do 
consider this issue of the utmost importance to the department. 
And I have seen the tremendous negative impacts that can result 
when not properly prevented, recognized, and treated. I believe 
my breadth of experience, coupled with the continued close 
collaboration of the services and our service colleagues, will 
help bring a balanced approach and a renewed energy to 
addressing this issue.
    I do know I speak for all of us today when I say that we 
are fully committed to serving our service members and families 
in this regard. We have made some good progress, and positive 
strides since the last time we appeared before the 
subcommittee, but I do acknowledge that there is more work to 
be done. I can share with you collectively that we have focused 
on upstream prevention, incorporating evidence-informed 
strategies, and approaches recommended by the Centers for 
Disease Control, and we have also focused on oversight. We have 
been working hard on standardizing processes and procedures, 
and we wholeheartedly support the conclusions reached in the 
GAO report. The Department concurs with all 32 recommendations 
which impact the Office of the Secretary of Defense and 
individual services.
    Again, we appreciate this opportunity to speak with you 
today on these issues and others within the family advocacy 
portfolio. And before I close, I know I speak for my colleagues 
when I say thank you to the members of the first panel for 
their advocacy and for sharing their respective experiences, 
and Ms. Logan, especially you for having the courage to come 
forward and sharing your story. Your voice will help us as we 
move forward.
    Chairwoman Speier, Ranking Member Gallagher, and the 
members of the subcommittee, thank you again. We stand ready 
for your comments and questions.
    [The prepared statement of Ms. Barron can be found in the 
Appendix on page 83.]
    [The prepared statements of Colonel Lewis, Colonel Cruz, 
Mrs. Griffen, and Ms. Eaffaldano can be found in the Appendix 
beginning on page 95.]
    Ms. Speier. All right. Thank you, Ms. Barron. You have 
spoken on behalf of all of the services, as I understand it, so 
we will now go to questions.
    Let me ask you. Despite being a statutory requirement for 
decades, can you explain why we still don't have an accurate 
picture from DOD on the amount of domestic abuse incidents as 
reported by GAO? What does the DOD need to get this done so we 
can have a complete picture? And if you could respond to that 
in a minute, please.
    Ms. Barron. It is a great question, ma'am, and I want to 
tell you that I received a briefing on this very subject when I 
first got here in January of 2021. And I am personally 
committed to making sure that this solution gets to fruition. 
And we would be happy to get you--we have started on some of 
the procedures that we need in order to get this done, and we 
would be happy to inform your staff a little bit better--a 
little bit later.
    Ms. Speier. All right. We are going to stay on this because 
we need to have complete data, and we are going to require 
another meeting with you, maybe a briefing format, in the next 
couple of months because this is--it is just really 
unacceptable.
    Ms. Barron. Yes, ma'am.
    Ms. Speier. Colonel Lewis, the Army is the only service 
that has not fully implemented the Incident Determination 
Committee process that is required by law, and that all the 
other services adopted in 2014. The Army continues to ask DOD 
for extensions. I find that totally unacceptable. What are you 
doing about it? Please unmute yourself.
    Colonel Lewis. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman. Yes. The Army 
is the service behind for the Incident Determination Committee. 
However, I do want to say that prior to the policy being 
published, we asked for and received an exception to policy to 
do a comprehensive study of the Incident Determination 
Committee.
    Ms. Speier. Actually, Colonel, we are not interested in 
more studies. We want you to set up--this is required by law. 
You should be setting up this Incident Determination Committee. 
It should be populated, as is required by law, by medical 
professionals, and by others within the service, and it is not 
acceptable to do another study.
    Colonel Lewis. Yes. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman. The study 
was completed, and we have drafted our policy, and it is now 
sitting with senior leaders awaiting its final approval. We 
also have a fully resourced implementation plan that we have 
briefed to DOD, and we provide DOD quarterly updates on the 
implementation plan. So, we are--when this policy is signed, we 
are ready to launch our implementation to transition the 
remaining installations that don't have an IDC.
    We did launch the Incident Determination Committee at 10 
installations which had the majority, 70 percent, of our cases 
reviewed by the Incident Determination Committee when we did 
the pilot study.
    Ms. Speier. All right. I would like to ask each of the 
services to weigh in on this question. The GAO report indicated 
that 2,100 incidences between 2015 and 2019 met the DOD 
criteria for severe, I underscore severe, physical abuse. Yet, 
in 43 percent of these cases, command took no action against 
the abuser. Installation officials told GAO that in some cases, 
commanders looked the other way because they are too focused on 
how the incident will affect the abuser's career, or the 
command's operational need and not the victim's need or the 
need to hold the abuser accountable. There is a conflict of 
interest here that we have seen for years in the sexual assault 
area.
    If lower level commanders are conflicted and unwilling to 
take decisive action against service members who engage in 
severe physical abuse, then why shouldn't this disposition be 
elevated to O6 or higher? Can I have your response? Colonel 
Lewis.
    Colonel Lewis. Yes. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman. We do 
acknowledge the findings of the GAO in looking at disposition 
decisions, and we do look forward to working with DOD in 
reviewing that, but it is premature for me to bring forward 
policies, recommendations without having reviewed that with 
Army senior leaders.
    [The information referred to can be found in the Appendix 
on page 131.]
    Ms. Speier. Okay. But you didn't answer the question. Are 
you not alarmed by the fact that in 43 percent of these cases, 
that no action was taken, and it met the definition of severe 
physical abuse? There is no need to answer that.
    Mrs. Griffen, you are recognized. Your response.
    Mrs. Griffen. Yes. Thank you, Chairwoman Speier. Basically, 
this is outside of our area of responsibility, but we would 
like to take the information to our proper Navy leadership for 
an action.
    [The information referred to can be found in the Appendix 
on page 130.]
    Ms. Speier. Well, I guess, then, the question is to Ms. 
Barron. Why would you have someone here at this hearing who 
can't respond to that question? Ms. Barron? My time is expiring 
here, and I still want to hear from Ms. Eaffaldano from the 
Marine Corps and Colonel Cruz.
    [The information referred to can be found in the Appendix 
on page 129.]
    Ms. Eaffaldano. Thank you, Chairwoman Speier. This is Lisa 
Eaffaldano from the Marine Corps. I would like to also thank 
Ms. Logan for sharing her powerful testimony. FAP's [The Family 
Advocacy Program's] primary focus is prevention and response, 
which includes advocacy. FAP does not make recommendations to 
the commander on how they hold a service member accountable. So 
as far as that portion, I would have to defer to legal counsel 
or the commanders. Thank you.
    [The information referred to can be found in the Appendix 
on page 130.]
    Ms. Speier. All right. Colonel Cruz? You are muted, I 
believe. We still can't hear you. All right. Maybe you can give 
me a response that is written. Let me now move to Ranking 
Member Gallagher.
    [The information referred to can be found in the Appendix 
on page 129.]
    Mr. Gallagher. Thank you, Chairwoman Speier.
    For all the witnesses, but starting with Ms. Barron and 
then the service representatives. So we have a GAO report, 
including 32 recommendations for actions that GAO just 
testified they hope is sort of a blueprint for action. Is there 
a plan of action at DOD with milestones that we can track your 
progress on implementing GAO's recommendations?
    Ms. Barron. Thank you for the question. We actually had 
started implementing some of the recommendations before they 
were even reported, if you will. So we have made some progress 
on some, and actually getting close to fruition, currently 
working on others. And we would be happy to give you, provide 
you kind of a status, if you will, at a later time.
    Mr. Gallagher. That would be helpful. And I assume you, 
then--that process of tracking and implementation would be 
standardized across the services?
    Ms. Barron. We are working on standardizing across the 
services, yes, sir.
    Mr. Gallagher. Okay.
    Ms. Barron. It is a challenge, as you know, but we are 
working on it.
    Mr. Gallagher. And I am not sure quite who to direct this 
to, so Ms. Barron, maybe you can help me. How do you maintain 
contact with the victims that you serve, so that you know your 
programs are hitting the mark, and get feedback from the 
communities most affected by this?
    Ms. Barron. So, in general, and the services can answer 
more specifically. In general, part of what needs to happen is 
a good feedback mechanism for the victims that we serve. That 
is done through the installation staff offices, but we also 
have military family life counselors at all installations; as a 
matter of fact, 2,300 of them at the moment. And that is 
another avenue where families can give us the feedback that we 
need.
    Mr. Gallagher. Well, I guess I would direct that same 
question to the services, because it is bound up in a bigger 
question, I think, of how do you--how are we measuring the 
effectiveness of our domestic violence programs. And it strikes 
me that getting feedback from the people most affected is one 
way to gauge whether we are actually having an impact. So I 
just would ask that question on maintaining contact with the 
victims we serve, and by extension, measuring our effectiveness 
to the services. I will start with the Army, just because, you 
know, it is a big Army.
    Colonel Lewis. Thank you, Congressman Gallagher. I would 
like to say that as Ms. Barron mentioned, so at the 
installation level, the Family Advocacy Committee, led by the 
garrison commander, has representatives from the coordinated 
community response. And they look at, at least at the 
installation level, program outcomes, mainly, and to hear the 
voices of the victim from the victim advocates that are 
communicating in that forum as well as the family advocacy 
program managers. At the headquarters level, we do look at the 
trends of reporting, but we also work with our medical 
counterparts in looking at overall measures like treatment 
completion as well.
    Mr. Gallagher. Okay. Who--Marine Corps. Since I am a 
Marine, I am going to pick on you.
    Ms. Eaffaldano. Thank you, Congressman, for the question. 
It is a very important one. So, the Marine Corps has just 
completed, in calendar year 2020, an evaluation of our Family 
Advocacy Program and New Parent Support Programs, and it was a 
comprehensive evaluation that consisted of needs assessment, 
provider surveys, measures of performance, and some measures of 
effectiveness. So we just completed that, and we are preparing 
to start some working groups with our installation Family 
Advocacy Program and New Parent Support Programs.
    Mr. Gallagher. And then, Colonel Cruz, I don't know if your 
mute problems got fixed, but I would invite you to comment as 
well.
    Colonel Cruz. Thank you, sir. Hopefully you can hear me?
    Mr. Gallagher. Yeah. Loud and clear.
    Colonel Cruz. Yes, sir. So the Department of the Air Force 
Family Advocacy Program uses domestic abuse victim advocates 
that are vital to both coordinated community response to family 
law treatment, and provide 24-hour, 7 days a week 
administrative care to the victims. Along with that, we do have 
client satisfaction surveys that we give to our families. We 
also measure our effectiveness in our treatment by having child 
abuse potential inventories and couple satisfaction inventories 
pre and post, after they received treatment, and also feedback-
informed treatment. So those are some of the things we do in 
the Air Force. Thank you.
    Mr. Gallagher. Well, the Navy may be saved by the bell 
here, because I have 15 seconds, and it is my first hearing as 
ranking member, and I don't want to test the patience of the 
chairwoman. So I will follow up with the Navy on that question 
going forward, and yield back the 4 seconds I have remaining.
    Ms. Speier. Actually, Ranking Member, you can certainly ask 
the question, so----
    Mr. Gallagher. Okay. Well, then, thank you. Thank you. 
Let's hear from the Navy.
    Mrs. Griffen. Thank you, Ranking Member Gallagher, and I 
appreciate the question. And so the Navy is very concerned 
about ensuring that our family members and our spouses and 
victims have a voice. And the CNO [chief of naval operations] 
directed the Navy family framework of governance board that 
actually looks at the services that we provide to families. We 
conducted a survey. 20,000 people, family members, responded, 
basically identifying the need----
    Ms. Speier. I think you are muted.
    Mr. Gallagher. Yeah.
    Ms. Speier. Unmute, please. There you go. So after the 
20,000 surveyed, we lost you.
    Mrs. Griffen. Yes. Thank you. And so we have the Navy 
Family Framework, and we identified 22,000 people, family 
members, that participated in the survey, both virtual and in 
person. And we identified the need that we needed to have a 
better connection with our families, and we developed an app 
from that. And it contains all the resources that they need in 
order to ensure that they are fully aware of the resources that 
is available throughout the Navy, as well as giving them a 
voice on providing us with feedback as to things that we need 
to do as a service to support them.
    Mr. Gallagher. Thank you very much. My time has expired.
    Ms. Speier. All right. The gentleman's time has expired. 
Let's move now to the gentlewoman from Texas, Ms. Escobar, for 
5 minutes.
    Ms. Escobar. Thank you, Madam Chair, and many thanks to our 
witnesses.
    For the services, I want to ask you a little bit more about 
the metrics that you use to evaluate the effectiveness of your 
respective military service domestic abuse awareness campaigns 
and ask you also about your overall resources and outreach. Can 
you each please detail those two things, the metrics that you 
use to evaluate the effectiveness of your awareness programs, 
and how do you get resources and outreach to our families. 
Whoever wants to go first.
    Colonel Lewis. Thank you, Ms. Escobar. This is Colonel 
Lewis from the Army. So, I, first of all, want to say we heard 
and we learned a lot from the hearing you had in 2019 and took 
action from that where we talked about outreach to families. We 
actually initiated a study with the RAND Corporation in order 
to help us better understand the best practices to reach 
families living off the installation, recognizing that 70 
percent of the families lived off the installation, as well as 
isolated families were more at risk. So, we have received some 
initial findings from that study as it is going into its second 
year of the study. And we continue to recognize that it is 
important for us to reach out to families where they work, 
play, and pray, stealing their words, and get to them there so 
that we can provide services.
    In terms of measuring the effectiveness of our programs, we 
continue to look at just utilization rates of the information 
shared, whether it is clicks on websites or information 
distributed and disseminated at public gatherings.
    Ms. Escobar. Okay. Thank you, Colonel Lewis.
    Colonel Cruz.
    Colonel Cruz. Yes, ma'am. Thank you for the question. So 
the Department of the Air Force Family Advocacy Program gets 
information to the spouses through the Department of the Air 
Force Key Spouse Program, Newcomers Orientation, Patient and 
Family Partnership Councils, collaboration with the community 
violence prevention integrator. And with the violence 
prevention integrator at each installation, they are to provide 
information to families. We also work with all the helping 
agencies in the community action team. And what we do is we 
provide all available resources and put pamphlets together for 
the installations.
    Our metrics, as mentioned before, for treatment are how to 
use potential inventories, and, also, a couple of satisfaction 
inventories. We also have some secondary prevention tools that 
we use in the New Parent Support Program to look at measures 
and protectiveness as well. Thank you.
    Ms. Escobar. Thank you, Colonel Cruz.
    Mrs. Griffen.
    Mrs. Griffen. Yes. Thank you for the question. In terms of 
looking at what we provide in terms of getting outreach to our 
families, we have a fleet and family support website at the 
headquarters level where it identifies all of the resources 
that we provide through our web pages. We also utilize 
resiliency workshops that are available across the fleet, and 
those workshops invite family members to be a part so we can 
hear what about the needs are and address those at that time.
    We also have family readiness groups that also work 
directly with families to provide resources and information 
across our portfolio to ensure that they have all the resources 
and information they need, and we also have our ombudsman. Our 
ombudsman serves the same purpose, but they do a little bit 
more closer contact with the families to ensure that the 
support is needed. Their integration into the military life is 
significant and central to their role. We also look at metrics. 
Our awareness campaigns, we do not look at doing a 1-year 
campaign--I mean, a one-month campaign, but we really look at 
an enduring effort.
    And so those metrics are counted throughout the year where 
we are identifying the number of surveys that we receive, and 
how we are able to still do effectiveness in our outreach 
regarding awareness months, and that is for child abuse as well 
as domestic abuse.
    Ms. Escobar. Thank you.
    Ms. Eaffaldano, we only have about 10 seconds.
    Ms. Speier. Go ahead and complete a few sentences.
    Ms. Eaffaldano. Yes, ma'am. I will just highlight a few of 
the effective campaigns that we do. We have a centralized 
marketing strategy in the Marine Corps that we use, and we also 
use a collaborative community response coordinated effort with 
our partners on and off the installations. Additionally, we 
highlight our national awareness months that is domestic 
violence and child abuse, and we know in our mission, we have a 
goal to continue to outreach our family members.
    We do have measures of performance that we collect with our 
feedback forms, and measures of effectiveness are really 
difficult to get for prevention efforts and outreach. So that 
is something that we are opening to hear how others do that and 
to improve our efforts.
    Ms. Escobar. Thank you, Madam Chair. I yield back.
    Ms. Speier. The gentlewoman yields back. We now will 
recognize Mrs. Bice from Oklahoma for 5 minutes.
    Mrs. Bice. Thank you, Madam Chair.
    This question is directed at Colonel Cruz. I represent 
thousands of service members and civilian personnel who work at 
Tinker Air Force Base. Could you tell me about how the Air 
Force Family Advocacy Program works with the military families 
where there is a known history of domestic abuse or domestic 
violence, particularly as it pertains to ensuring the welfare 
of children?
    Colonel Cruz. Thank you for that question, ma'am. So the 
Department of the Air Force mission with the Family Advocacy 
Program is to build healthy communities through implementing 
programs designed for prevention and treatment of domestic 
violence and child abuse and neglect. So what happens at each 
base is each incident is taken to our Incident Determination 
Committee, which is our central registry board. And from the 
central registry board, which is an administrative board, a 
recommendation is made for--to see whether or not criteria was 
met using DOD definitions for domestic abuse. And if the 
definitions were met for criteria, then treatment is provided 
for the family.
    Throughout this process, we have domestic abuse victim 
advocates that will be there for the victims and their families 
to ensure that they get the resources they needed with 
collaboration with the other base agencies like the legal 
office, law enforcement, and some of the other helping 
agencies, like chaplain and those other resources that are 
available at each Air Force base. Thank you.
    Mrs. Bice. Thank you. And, then, this question is for any 
of our panelists here. Can you talk a little bit about the 
differences with how your offices interact with families based 
on whether they are on or off base and how that relationship 
may influence the types of services that they are receiving?
    Ms. Barron. If I might start. This is Patti from OSD 
[Office of the Secretary of Defense]. Ma'am, what we really try 
to do is reach our families that are off the installations 
through Military OneSource, which is our very full program of 
resources and information. Now, I know that it is not always 
easy to access Military--it is very easy to access Military 
OneSource, but it is not always easy to get the word out about 
Military OneSource. And that is where we are thinking outside 
the box about different opportunities and different ways that 
we can make sure that our families, especially those outside--
that live outside the installation, are aware of Military 
OneSource. It can lead to all sorts of support, all sorts of 
help. It really is a great program. So let me let my service 
counterparts talk a little bit more specifically.
    Mrs. Bice. Thank you.
    Colonel Lewis. Thank you, Congresswoman Bice. I want to say 
that the COVID pandemic really gave us an opportunity to learn 
some great lessons learned about reaching out to families, 
especially when they are isolated, or in their shutdown period. 
And we truly recognize that, one, we expanded on our virtual 
presence using Facebook platforms to provide prevention 
education and information, reaching out to families.
    But the other thing that we found out was that virtual care 
was very welcome by--virtual services was welcomed by victims, 
especially those that had transportation problems or maybe 
daycare problems. So we continue to use virtual care, virtual 
healthcare delivery as needed to support the families as long 
as the interviews and the sessions are not compromised by maybe 
a perpetrator or offender that is overwatching or standing over 
the victim during those assessments. But we still work through 
those as part of our assessment with the victim.
    Mrs. Bice. And if I may follow up, Colonel, do you expect 
to continue to utilize those resources even after we have seen 
an improvement in the pandemic?
    Colonel Lewis. Yeah. That, again, was one of the great 
lessons learned, that we have to continue to expand our virtual 
presence, both for prevention efforts but also for our 
treatment efforts. So that remains available for families as 
they request.
    Ms. Bice. Any of the other services want to comment?
    Colonel Cruz. Ma'am, for the Department of the Air Force 
Family Advocacy Program, we utilize services both on and off 
base. We have mutual agreements with law enforcement, also 
child protective services, and domestic shelters. So we work 
hand in hand with the community to ensure that we provide a 
safe environment for our victims and that we provide optimal 
treatment as well, but we are always looking at ways to 
improve.
    And so, during the pandemic, we did have to use virtual 
platforms, so what we have learned to do is virtual, like, 
parenting training and virtual anger management and some 
couples communication classes, all virtually, and also, the new 
parent support program. We were all to meet moms at their homes 
during the pandemic using virtual platforms as well. So that 
has turned into be something that we will probably be using in 
the future as we continue with the pandemic. Thank you.
    Ms. Bice. Thank you, Madam Chair.
    Ms. Speier. The gentlewoman's time has expired.
    Ms. Bice. I yield back.
    Ms. Speier. The gentlewoman from Pennsylvania, Ms. 
Houlahan, is recognized for 5 minutes.
    Ms. Houlahan. Hi, and thank you. And if it is okay, I would 
like to start with a question for all of the service members 
and maybe go kind of around the horn with this simple kind of 
yes-or-no question. From the data that we understand right now, 
are the rates of intimate partner violence higher in the 
military than they are in the civilian sector? And if it is 
okay, I will start with Colonel Lewis to say if they are, to 
your knowledge, higher or lower or the same.
    Colonel Lewis. Thank you, Congresswoman Houlahan, for the 
question. I am going to have to take that for the record. I 
don't have that data on hand.
    [The information referred to can be found in the Appendix 
on page 132.]
    Ms. Houlahan. And to Colonel Cruz.
    Colonel Cruz. So, ma'am, as far as the rates, I will have 
to take that for the record. But the Department of the Air 
Force Family Advocacy Program, you know, we are not sure what 
the correlation is or what the factors are, but the Department 
of the Air Force Family Advocacy Program, we will monitor the 
situation and continue to respond and provide domestic violence 
support to the victims to ensure they are safe.
    [The information referred to can be found in the Appendix 
on page 131.]
    Ms. Houlahan. And from the Navy for Mrs. Griffen?
    Mrs. Griffen. Yes. Thank you for the question. And this, 
too, is out of our area of responsibility, but we will 
certainly take it for the record and defer.
    [The information referred to can be found in the Appendix 
on page 131.]
    Ms. Houlahan. And the Marine Corps, Ms. Eaffaldano. I hope 
I pronounced that right.
    Ms. Eaffaldano. Eaffaldano, ma'am.
    Ms. Houlahan. Eaffaldano.
    Ms. Eaffaldano. Thank you, Congresswoman. That is a great 
question. I also will have to take that for the record as I 
don't have the data on hand. However, we will not lose sight, 
even if our numbers are lower, of offering the services that we 
have available.
    [The information referred to can be found in the Appendix 
on page 131.]
    Ms. Houlahan. And I ask these questions because I believe 
that there is data, and I will welcome it when it comes back, 
that would indicate that the level of sexual violence as well 
as domestic violence is higher in our services than it is in 
the civilian population. And I think that is one of the things 
that I am interested in in following in my circular logic. 
Societies that have higher domestic violence and family 
conflict resolution tend to be more violent and more involved, 
more than those who have lower family violence rates.
    So this is something that is really concerning when your 
business, you know, and I'm Air Force, when your business is 
national security and readiness. And so, this is something that 
really deserves our attention to kind of suss this out. And 
assuming that we are, you know, a place that does care, 
regardless of high, low, or in between, what kinds of steps are 
we taken to address what is a culture, frankly, of kind of 
toxic gender tropes to make sure that we are ready, and that 
our military who are women who serve in uniform and their 
families and the men who serve in uniform and their families 
are safe? What are the specific steps that we are able to do to 
address this masculinity, the issue that we are talking about 
of domestic violence?
    Ms. Barron. Ma'am, if I may. For OSD, we have contracted 
with the RAND Corporation to look into just exactly that. What 
are the factors of military family life or military life that 
might lend themselves to domestic abuse and intermittent 
partner violence, but the services might have more.
    Ms. Houlahan. With my remaining time, are any of the 
service members able to help me with that question? Our prior 
panelists talked a little bit about sort of a culture of 
gender, effectively stereotypes, male versus female 
relationships and those sorts of things. And, so, I am trying 
to follow up in the real world, you know, in the real service 
to understand whether her testimony aligns with what we are 
doing to address this issue.
    Colonel Lewis. Congresswoman Houlahan, Colonel Lewis again. 
Thank you. I think the Fort Hood Independent Review Committee, 
along with the testimony today, that we heard today, again 
points out that--it gives us an opportunity to really take a 
deep look at the climate and culture of the Army. And the 
Secretary of the Army did establish the people's first task 
force to assess an action on the Fort Hood independent 
recommendations, and climate and culture is part of that.
    Ms. Houlahan. Thank you, sir. And any other folks?
    Colonel Cruz. Ma'am.
    Ms. Houlahan. Yes.
    Colonel Cruz. For the Department of the Air Force Family 
Advocacy Program, the victim-centric service and safety are 
paramount. So no matter who the victim is, we are always 
striving to improve our services to ensure airmen, guardians, 
and their families are getting the best care possible. We will 
continue to look at our processes and collaborate with our OSD 
staff and other services to make sure that we meet the victims' 
needs. Thank you.
    Mrs. Griffen. Yes. I would like to speak on behalf of the 
Navy. And so we have the culture of excellence, which basically 
embodies an approach that we are looking at what right looks 
like, and really spending more time on developing our sailors 
and ensuring that we have them noted as signature behaviors, 
and that is something that we are continuing to work at.
    Ms. Houlahan. Thank you.
    And with that, I yield back, and thank you, Madam Chair.
    Ms. Speier. The gentlewoman yields back.
    Do any of my colleagues wish to do a second round? Are 
there any questions that any of you would like to follow up 
with? Ranking Member Gallagher.
    Mr. Gallagher. I have none. Thank you.
    Ms. Speier. All right. I just have a couple.
    Colonel Cruz, GAO found that the Air Force's training for 
service members about domestic abuse does not cover the 
required topics. What have you done to fix that?
    Colonel Cruz. Yes, ma'am. So we are currently working on a 
PowerPoint template to ensure that all of the topics are in the 
template. One of the issues is the inconsistency, so we do 
have--it is in our AFI [Air Force Instruction] to ensure that 
this training is conducted, but it is not in our AFI, and so, 
we are going to include in our AFI all the required topics.
    The other thing that we are going to do to ensure 
consistency is we are going to make it part of our 
certification process. So it is basically our inspection 
process, and we are going to monitor it to ensure that each 
base and each installation has the training that the commanders 
and senior enlisted are supposed to be getting.
    Ms. Speier. Thank you. Thank you, Colonel.
    Mrs. Griffen, the GAO report says that the Navy delivers 
periodic training on domestic abuse at, quote, ``commander's 
discretion,'' which sends me through the roof. Why is this 
critical training discretionary, and will the Navy commit to 
making it mandatory?
    Mrs. Griffen. Yes. We currently have an updated policy 
which was updated May 2020, and it does direct senior leader 
advisors, those are our sailors that are E-7 and above, as well 
as our commanders when they assume command, within 90 days to 
receive this training. And this training does align with DOD 
policies, and we have created a curriculum that covers all of 
the 13 elements that are required for the training.
    Ms. Speier. All right. So if I went back to the GAO, they 
would say that you are now providing that as a mandatory 
training, not at the discretion of the commander.
    Mrs. Griffen. Yes, ma'am, Congresswoman Speier.
    Ms. Speier. All right. My final question is for you, Ms. 
Barron. One aspect of the Family Advocacy Program that 
generates confusion among service members is its dual role in 
providing support to victims and as a disciplinary institution. 
This is especially dicey when both the intimate partners accuse 
each other of abuse. Abused women have called my office who 
have sought support services from family advocacy, and then 
have been treated as though they were the perpetrator. Is this 
a fundamental flaw in the design of the program, or are there 
ways that the services could better clarify the various roles 
and responsibilities that that has to service members and 
military family members who seek services?
    Ms. Barron. I think I am unmuted now. Yes. Ma'am, that is--
I agree with you. That is a very frustrating situation to be 
in, when you go to get support, and then you get blocked 
somehow. What I think we need to do is what we have started to 
do, and that is making the commanders, making senior NCOs [non-
commissioned officers] aware of what staff does, how we support 
victims, how every victim that comes to--anyone that comes 
through that door that is reporting an incident needs to be 
talked to, have the advocacy counselor create the safety plans, 
and then move on to the Incident Determination Committee, so 
that all reports of abuse are collected, and we can paint a 
better picture to our command and to our services about what 
might be going on, what trends are going on, and how to get 
support to anyone that is telling us that there is an issue and 
there is a problem, and they do not feel safe at home.
    Ms. Speier. All right. But it does, I think, help us 
recognize that you cannot serve, in this case, both the victim 
and the servicemember or vice versa, so I think we are going to 
have to look at that more closely. Those are all my questions.
    Again, anyone else with questions? All right. Thank you all 
for participating. This is an area that we are very concerned 
about. I don't know that we solved every question here. I know 
that GAO's report is something we are going to follow very 
closely and really require compliance. It is not good enough to 
say we are working on a plan or we are studying it. We need to 
see consistency across the services. We need to see data that 
is consistent, and every one of you should be prepared to 
answer the question that Ms. Houlahan asked, which was, is it 
worse in the military than in the civilian population, and the 
answer is yes. So that should increase our interest in wanting 
to try and fix this.
    And with that, we will conclude the hearing. And we stand 
adjourned. Thank you all for your participation.
    [Whereupon, at 4:46 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]

    
=======================================================================

                            A P P E N D I X

                              May 25, 2021
    
=======================================================================


              PREPARED STATEMENTS SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD

                              May 25, 2021

=======================================================================
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
      
=======================================================================


              WITNESS RESPONSES TO QUESTIONS ASKED DURING

                              THE HEARING

                              May 25, 2021

=======================================================================

      

             RESPONSE TO QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY MS. SPEIER

    Ms. Barron. As disposition decisions are an authority designated to 
the Service level, respectfully refer the Committee to the Services' 
responses.   [See page 23.]
    Ms. Barron. As disposition decisions are an authority designated to 
the Service level, respectfully refer the Committee to the Services' 
responses.   [See page 23.]
    Colonel Cruz. The Department of the Air Force Family Advocacy 
Program (DAF FAP) Incident Determination Committee (e.g., Central 
Registry Board for the DAF FAP) is chaired by an O-6, the Vice Wing 
Commander, where a determination is made as to whether or not an 
allegation meets DOD definitions for domestic abuse or child 
maltreatment. This determination activates treatment recommendations, 
it is not associated with administrative or judicial punishment. The 
DAF FAP itself is a prevention and treatment program for domestic abuse 
and child maltreatment, when it occurs among members of the household, 
or intimate partners of our active duty service members. As such, we 
support and protect victims and we provide evidence-informed treatment 
to rehabilitate offenders who remain in the DAF and are not 
incarcerated. The DAF FAP shares information with the service member's 
Commander and the staff Judge Advocate about what occurred in the 
family maltreatment incident. That information is then used by the 
member's squadron commander and the military staff Judge Advocate to 
take administrative or judicial action against service members who 
engage in domestic abuse or child maltreatment.
    This question falls in the Judge Advocate's purview, please also 
see the JA's additional response below:
    Combatting domestic violence is an item of great importance to the 
Services and our service members, and we all have a role in ensuring 
the proper outcome in every case. Regardless of rank, commanders at all 
levels and the JAGs who advise them must be guided by the state of the 
evidence in making determinations as to which course of action is 
appropriate. A commander must evaluate the totality of the 
circumstances and available evidence in order to make a fair judgment. 
We understand that victims of domestic abuse are caught in a cycle of 
trauma and fear, and can understandably be concerned about whether and 
how to participate in prosecuting their spouse or intimate partner. We 
are committed to continuing our efforts to combat domestic violence 
through prevention, education, and accountability measures, and to 
aiding victims of domestic violence through victim-based services, 
including the expanded availability of Special Victims' Counsel.   [See 
page 22.]
    Colonel Cruz. I understand the concerning numbers you have 
referenced. The Family Advocacy Program focuses on prevention and 
clinical treatment. We relay pertinent information to the command team 
and Judge Advocate for consideration to determine appropriate 
administrative or judicial actions. This question falls in the Judge 
Advocate's purview, please also see the JA's additional response below: 
Individual cases and outcomes are the result of a unique combination of 
facts and evidence and the appropriateness of disposition and 
prosecution decisions cannot and should not be evaluated by the 
``limited utility'' data (as described by the GAO). The DAF 
acknowledges that the GAO report found insufficiencies in the method by 
which the Department of Defense (Department) is collecting domestic 
violence incident data across the Department, which calls into question 
the quality of the available data. The DAF supports the Department's 
efforts to evaluate the current processes for tracking data and adjust 
policy and responsibilities as necessary. That said, of the available 
DOD data for fiscal years 2015 through 2019 reviewed by the GAO, the 
military services reported 2,114 non-pending command actions related to 
incidents that met DOD's criteria for severe physical abuse. Sixteen 
percent were categorized as prosecuted by court-martial, 14 percent as 
nonjudicial punishment, 27 percent as administrative action, and 43 
percent as ``other.'' Incidents classified as ``other'' were not 
prosecuted. According to DOD guidance, some of the reasons a case may 
be classified as ``other'' include: the victim declined or refused to 
cooperate with the investigation or prosecution; evidence was 
insufficient; lack of jurisdiction; statute of limitations expired; the 
subject died or deserted; or the allegation was unfounded by the 
command, meaning it was false or did not meet the elements/criteria of 
a domestic violence offense/incident. Without doing a case-by-case 
analysis, it is not possible to determine the specific basis in each 
case where a commander, advised by their staff judge advocate, 
determined they were unable to, or elected not to, take any action. 
However, where there is a lack of jurisdiction over the offender or 
offense, the statute of limitations has expired, or the subject died or 
deserted, military services are prohibited from taking any action by 
operation of law. Barring such prohibitions, commanders and staff judge 
advocates must evaluate whether admissible and sufficient evidence 
supports both that a crime was committed and that the suspect committed 
it. Domestic violence cases almost always rely on the testimony of the 
victim to establish the required legal elements to prosecute suspected 
offenders. However, domestic violence victims differ from victims of 
other crimes in that the domestic violence victim and the offender are 
never strangers. Instead, victims of domestic violence have an intimate 
relationship that is often spousal, romantic, sexual, parental, social, 
psychological, and/or financial. Further, domestic violence victims 
often recant, minimize, or deny their abuse as a result of the power 
and control that permeates their intimate partner relationship, 
resulting in a refusal to participate in prosecution. A victim's 
nonparticipation may be associated with the victim's financial 
dependence on their abuser; psychological vulnerability; emotional 
attachment to the offender; family, cultural, or religious pressure to 
remain with their abuser; shame or embarrassment; fear of deportation; 
and feelings of guilt. The DAF acknowledges the plethora of 
understandable reasons and concerns that may lead to victim 
nonparticpation in prosecutions. However, without victim testimony, 
prosecution in a criminal court is rendered nearly impossible without 
other independent, admissible evidence. This is a concern that exists 
not only in the military, but in civilian jurisdictions across the 
country. In the military there are additional ways to hold an offender 
accountable, such as nonjudicial punishment or administrative actions 
such as discharge or reduction in rank, but those options are also 
often limited when a victim refuses to cooperate.   [See page 22.]
    Ms. Eaffaldano. In determining the appropriate way to handle 
allegations of domestic violence, commanders must consider a multitude 
of factors that are not relevant when an installation's Incident 
Determination Committee (IDC) decides whether an incident constitutes 
abuse under DOD Family Advocacy Program guidance. Such factors include 
the admissibility of evidence, statutes of limitation, jurisdictional 
requirements, the availability of additional information not available 
to the IDC at the time of determination, the ability of the alleged 
abuser to provide evidence in rebuttal, and the willingness of the 
victim to participate in the investigation and prosecution of the case. 
These factors may preclude a commander from taking punitive action on a 
reported incident that an IDC has substantiated. There is no evidence 
that O-5 level commanders prioritize improper considerations in cases 
where no punitive action was taken. Therefore it is not clear that 
raising disposition authority to the O-6 level or higher would improve 
the disposition process. Further, the ability to render these 
determinations at the O-5 commander level improves efficiency, as the 
number of O-5 level commanders greatly exceeds the number of O-6 level 
commanders. However, the Marine Corps is not opposed to requiring O-6 
disposition authorities in domestic violence cases and is coordinating 
with the other services to consider the advisability of implementing 
such a policy.   [See page 22.]
    Ms. Eaffaldano. As detailed in the response to Question 1, there 
are numerous appropriate considerations that may preclude commander 
from taking punitive action where an IDC has substantiated an abuse 
incident. There is no evidence that O-5 level commanders prioritize 
improper considerations in cases where no punitive action was taken. 
However, the Marine Corps is not opposed to requiring O-6 disposition 
authorities in domestic violence cases and is coordinating with the 
other services to consider the advisability of implementing such a 
policy.   [See page 22.]
    Mrs. Griffen. Under the Fiscal Year (FY) 2019 National Defense 
Authorization Act (NDAA), Article 128b, Domestic Violence, was added as 
a punitive article of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ). If a 
commander receives a report of a violation of this article, or any 
other article of the UCMJ, per Rule for Courts-Martial (R.C.M.) 303, 
Manual for Courts-Martial (M.C.M.) (2019 ed.), the commander must 
conduct an inquiry regarding the suspected offense if the offense could 
be tried by court-martial. Furthermore, Department of Defense (DOD) 
regulations require commanders to refer any incident of domestic abuse 
reported or discovered independent of law enforcement to military law 
enforcement or the appropriate investigative organization for possible 
investigation. In the Navy, OPNAVINST 1752.2C, Navy Family Advocacy 
Program, requires all commanders, regardless of rank, to take 
appropriate action on all alleged or known incidents of domestic or 
child abuse.
    As discussed in the GAO Report on Domestic Abuse from May 2021, the 
FY 2021 NDAA requires the DOD to seek to contract an independent study 
of a range of issues related to prevention of and response to domestic 
violence, including the potential effect on prevention of elevating the 
disposition authority for domestic abuse. The Department of the Navy 
will utilize the results of this study to further inform policy 
decisions concerning domestic violence within the Navy.   [See page 
22.]
    Mrs. Griffen. Under the Fiscal Year (FY) 2019 National Defense 
Authorization Act (NDAA), Article 128b, Domestic Violence, was added as 
a punitive article of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ). If a 
commander receives a report of a violation of this article, or any 
other article of the UCMJ, per Rule for Courts-Martial (R.C.M.) 303, 
Manual for Courts-Martial (M.C.M.) (2019 ed.), the commander must 
conduct an inquiry regarding the suspected offense if the offense could 
be tried by court-martial. Furthermore, Department of Defense (DOD) 
regulations require commanders to refer any incident of domestic abuse 
reported or discovered independent of law enforcement to military law 
enforcement or the appropriate investigative organization for possible 
investigation. In the Navy, OPNAVINST 1752.2C, Navy Family Advocacy 
Program, requires all commanders, regardless of rank, to take 
appropriate action on all alleged or known incidents of domestic or 
child abuse. As discussed in the GAO Report on Domestic Abuse from May 
2021, the FY 2021 NDAA requires the DOD to seek to contract an 
independent study of a range of issues related to prevention of and 
response to domestic violence, including the potential effect on 
prevention of elevating the disposition authority for domestic abuse. 
The Department of the Navy will utilize the results of this study to 
further inform policy decisions concerning domestic violence within the 
Navy.   [See page 22.]
    Colonel Lewis. The Army defers the issue to the Secretary of 
Defense review of Independent Review Commission recommendations to 
determine whether to remove disposition authority from the chain of 
command.   [See page 21.]
    Colonel Lewis. The Army defers the issue to the Secretary of 
Defense review of Independent Review Commission recommendations to 
determine whether to remove disposition authority from the chain of 
command.   [See page 22.]
                                 ______
                                 
            RESPONSES TO QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY MS. HOULAHAN
    Ms. Barron. Establishing prevalence rates of abuse remains a 
challenge for the Department of Defense and the civilian sector alike.
    Intimate partner violence (IPV) is underreported worldwide, for a 
myriad of factors including the personal and societal stigma associated 
with abuse and the fear of reprisal victims of abuse experience. These 
factors that contribute to underreporting are not unique to the 
military; the military is a microcosm of the larger society. As a 
result, unfortunately neither the civilian sector nor the military can 
definitively and comprehensively state the rate of IPV.
    The Department of Defense reports annually on domestic abuse in the 
military, which represents a larger spectrum of behaviors than the 
civilian reports tracked by law enforcement. As such, DOD numbers are 
more encompassing than many statewide or federal estimates of IPV. 
Comparing the two numbers is therefore an incomplete picture.
    The Department of Defense welcomes any opportunities to partner 
with the civilian domestic abuse community, and any associated support 
from Congress, to conduct further research.   [See page 28.]
    Colonel Cruz. There is no standardized or centralized entity or 
mechanism to track civilian rates at the federal level. In most cases, 
civilian communities only track serious cases of domestic violence in 
their law enforcement databases and in the domestic abuse shelters, 
while Family Advocacy takes all reports of domestic abuse, to include 
emotional abuse and less serious allegations of physical abuse that may 
or may not have had law enforcement or medical responses. Therefore, we 
are unable to compare the rates of domestic abuse in the DOD with 
civilian rates.   [See page 28.]
    Ms. Eaffaldano. The Marine Corps focuses on providing supportive 
services to all victims of abuse. We know that intimate partner 
violence is underreported for a myriad of reasons, both in the Marine 
Corps and the civilian sector. There is no standardized entity to track 
civilian rates of intimate partner violence at the federal level and 
data is collected differently, using different definitions of abuse in 
each state. While the Marine Corps uses definitions provided by the 
Department of Defense, we have not compared Marine Corps rates of 
intimate partner violence with each individual state.   [See page 29.]
    Mrs. Griffen. Establishing prevalence rates of abuse remain a 
challenge for the Department of Defense and the civilian sector alike. 
Intimate partner violence (IPV) is underreported worldwide, for a 
myriad of factors including the personal and societal stigma associated 
with abuse and the fear of reprisal victims of abuse experience. These 
factors that contribute to underreporting are not unique to the 
military; the military is a microcosm of the larger society. As a 
result, neither the civilian sector nor the military can definitively 
and comprehensively state the rate of IPV.
    There is no standardized or centralized entity or mechanism to 
track civilian rates at the federal level. Each state has different 
laws and different definitions of IPV, which makes aggregating 
statewide data to arrive at a single national civilian rate 
challenging, if not impossible. Many state and federal estimates of IPV 
measure criminal acts of violence or reports to law enforcement (e.g. 
Bureau of Justice Statistics). The Department of Defense reports 
annually on domestic abuse in the military, which represents a larger 
spectrum of behaviors than the civilian reports tracked by law 
enforcement. As such, DOD numbers are more encompassing than many 
statewide or federal estimates of IPV. Comparing the two numbers is 
therefore an incomplete picture. Aside from measuring actual reported 
incidents of IPV, the U.S. civilian gold standard for estimating the 
prevalence of IPV through anonymous self-report, is the Centers for 
Disease Control and Prevention's National Intimate Partner and Sexual 
Violence Survey (NISVS). The Department of Defense collaborated with 
CDC on the 2010 NISVS to examine the prevalence of IPV, stalking, and 
sexual violence and to compare those military-related prevalence 
estimates to the U.S. general population. Survey results showed overall 
that the prevalence of IPV, stalking, and sexual violence were similar 
among women in the U.S. population, active duty women, and wives of 
active duty men; however these results are dated and do not include 
active duty men, husbands of active duty women, or unmarried intimate 
partners of active duty men or women. The Department is awaiting the 
release of the updated 2016/2017 NISVS military report. Given these 
conditions, the Department of Defense welcomes any opportunities to 
partner with the civilian domestic abuse community, and any associated 
support from Congress, to conduct further research to answer this 
question.   [See page 28.]
    Colonel Lewis. Establishing prevalence rates of abuse is a 
challenge for the Army and the civilian sector. Intimate partner 
violence (IPV) is underreported worldwide, for a myriad of factors 
including the personal and societal stigma associated with abuse and 
the fear of reprisal victims of abuse experience. These factors that 
contribute to underreporting are not unique to the military; the 
military is a microcosm of the larger society. As a result, neither the 
civilian sector nor the military can definitively and comprehensively 
state the rate of IPV. There is no standardized or centralized entity 
or mechanism to track civilian rates at the federal level. Each state 
has different laws and different definitions of IPV, which makes 
aggregating statewide data to arrive at a single national civilian rate 
challenging, if not impossible. Many state and federal estimates of IPV 
measure criminal acts of violence or reports to law enforcement (e.g. 
Bureau of Justice Statistics). The Army reports annually on domestic 
abuse in the military, which represents a larger spectrum of behaviors 
than the civilian reports tracked by law enforcement. As such, Army 
numbers are more encompassing than many statewide or federal estimates 
of IPV. Comparing the two numbers is therefore an incomplete picture. 
Aside from measuring actual reported incidents of IPV, the U.S. 
civilian gold standard for estimating the prevalence of IPV through 
anonymous self-report, is the Centers for Disease Control and 
Prevention's National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey 
(NISVS). The Department of Defense collaborated with CDC on the 2010 
NISVS to examine the prevalence of IPV, stalking, and sexual violence 
and to compare those military-related prevalence estimates to the U.S. 
general population. Survey results showed overall that the prevalence 
of IPV, stalking, and sexual violence were similar among women in the 
U.S. population, active duty women, and wives of active duty men; 
however, these results are dated and do not include active duty men, 
husbands of active duty women, or unmarried intimate partners of active 
duty men or women. The Army is awaiting the release of the updated 
2016/2017 NISVS military report. Given these conditions, the Army 
welcomes any opportunities to partner with the civilian domestic abuse 
community, and any associated support from Congress, to conduct further 
research to answer this question.   [See page 28.]
     
=======================================================================


              QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY MEMBERS POST HEARING

                              May 25, 2021

=======================================================================

      

                  QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY MRS. McCLAIN

    Mrs. McClain. Recently my office was contacted by a father who lost 
his young Marine daughter to suicide. He later discovered that she had 
filed a complaint of sexual abuse with the Marine Corps. This family is 
still waiting for the Naval Criminal Investigative Service (NCIS) to 
complete its investigation into her case and finalize the report. It 
has been over 2 years since her she filed her report. The family is 
desperate for answers and closure on their daughter's case. Mrs. 
Griffen, your background both as Deputy Director for Family Support at 
CNIC as well as your past work in the Family Advocacy Program at the 
USMC might provide some guidance for families on this issue.
    Is it common for sexual abuse cases in the marine corps, and 
military in general, to take over two years to be investigated? If so, 
why is this the case? Is it a lack of resources that drag these 
investigations out? Is there an institutional philosophy of protecting 
bad actors? If this case is uncommon, can you work with my office to 
provide the status of the NCIS investigation and when her family can 
expect a conclusion?
    Mrs. Griffen. Question has been deferred and tasked to the Marine 
Corps.
    Mrs. McClain. Recently my office was contacted by a father who lost 
his young Marine daughter to suicide. He later discovered that she had 
filed a complaint of sexual abuse with the Marine Corps. This family is 
still waiting for the Naval Criminal Investigative Service (NCIS) to 
complete its investigation into her case and finalize the report. It 
has been over 2 years since her she filed her report. The family is 
desperate for answers and closure on their daughter's case. Mrs. 
Griffen, your background both as Deputy Director for Family Support at 
CNIC as well as your past work in the Family Advocacy Program at the 
USMC might provide some guidance for families on this issue. Is it 
common for sexual abuse cases in the marine corps, and military in 
general, to take over two years to be investigated? If so, why is this 
the case? Is it a lack of resources that drag these investigations out? 
Is there an institutional philosophy of protecting bad actors? If this 
case is uncommon, can you work with my office to provide the status of 
the NCIS investigation and when her family can expect a conclusion?
    Ms. Eaffaldano. The Marine Corps takes all allegations of sexual 
misconduct seriously and works diligently with NCIS to ensure every 
allegation is properly investigated. Two years is a long time to 
complete an investigation in most cases, however the amount of time 
required to complete an investigation is dependent on numerous factors, 
including the necessity to conduct forensic exams, the examination of 
electronic media and devices, and the willingness of the victim and 
witnesses to cooperate with the investigative process. In accordance 
with the Privacy Act of 1974, we are unable to publicly disclose 
specific details concerning the investigation of this particular 
incident. However, the Marine Corps will work to identify a date and 
time during which an appropriate representative can speak with you or 
your staff about this case.

                                  [all]