Veterans’ Use of Programs and Services as They Transition to Civilian Life: Baseline Assessment for the Veteran Metrics Initiative
Abstract
A substantial minority of veterans struggle as they reintegrate into civilian life, reporting problems with vocational attainment, legal/financial/housing challenges, physical and mental health conditions, and social/interpersonal issues. While there are thousands of programs and services offered to veterans, little is known about which ones they use. In the current exploratory study, veterans separated from active duty in the prior three-months (48,965) were invited to complete a survey. Two primary questions were addressed: What programs/services did veterans use to assist in their reintegration to civilian life? What specific components/attributes of those programs did veterans report using? A total of 9566 veterans completed the survey. Approximately, two-thirds of veterans used at least one program to enhance their well-being, while one-third reported using multiple programs across multiple domains. Veterans primarily sought assistance for employment and educational advancement. Fewer veterans sought assistance for legal/financial/housing, health, and social functioning challenges. Social service providers and policy makers should be aware of the resources veterans use as they reintegrate into civilian life. Future research should examine factors that predict the use and nonuse of veteran reintegration programs, how use changes over time, and what factors predict program/service use, particularly among veterans at risk for poor transition outcomes.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
An overwhelming majority of veterans report interest in support services for adjustment post-separation.
“Military transition research has also shown that an overwhelming majority of veterans report interest in support services for adjustment post-separation [1, 7, 8].”
From Feasibility, acceptability, and initial outcomes of a psychological adjustment and reintegration program for transitioned military veterans (2024) · cites this paper as [8]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 43 · Cited by 53
- Authors
- Perkins, D. F., Aronson, K. R., Morgan, N. R., Bleser, J. A., Vogt, D., Copeland, L. A., Finley, E. P., & Gilman, C.
- Affiliations
- Pennsylvania State University (US)
- University of Massachusetts Chan Medical School (US)
- Boston University (US)
- The University of Texas at San Antonio Health Science Center (US)
- Henry M. Jackson Foundation (US)
- Corresponding author
- Perkins, Daniel F.
- ORCID
- Venue
- Journal of Social Service Research
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2019-01-10
- Volume
- 46
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 241-255
- ISSN
- 0148-8376 (ISSN-L)
- 1540-7314
- OpenAlex
- W2910167166
- Cited by
- 53
- References
- 43
- Citations by year
- 2026: 5 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 2
- FWCI
- 17.54
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Social Service Research (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Education › Education and Military Integration
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Criminal Justice and Corrections Analysis
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Homelessness and Social Issues
- Keywords
- veterans, transition to civilian life, reintegration, veterans' services, program use, employment support, educational progress, housing assistance, mental health, social functioning, baseline assessment
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review