From the Military to College Hill: The Undergraduate Experience of United States Veterans at Brown

Report of the Undergraduate Veterans Subcommittee of the Diversity Advisory Board

October 2012

Report of the Undergraduate Veterans Subcommittee of the Diversity Advisory Board

October 2012

In 2009, Chaney Harrison, RUE ’11.5 developed a report entitled “Policy Recommendations for Veterans at Brown University,” attached as Appendix A. Review and discussion of the report with the Office of Institutional Diversity resulted in issues related to undergraduate student veterans being placed on the agenda of the Diversity Advisory Board and the creation of a subcommittee for the 2011-12 academic year.

Charged with considering issues related to undergraduate student veterans, the subcommittee developed a plan of work to discuss and develop recommendations in four areas: admission and recruitment, financial aid, academic and campus life support, and institutionalization.

Throughout our conversations, a broader sense of the opportunities and challenges developed. We represent these here as themes that we hope will help the University and readers of this report to contextualize the specifics and details that follow.

1. Military service should and must be recognized by the University for the extraordinary service to our nation that it is. Policies, procedures, structures, and University ceremonies must all work together to reflect the University’s recognition of the service of veterans.

2. Recognition of this service requires that the University move from being reactive to proactive (e.g. building exceptions for veterans into policies rather than relying on the potential for waiving standard requirements) and from relying on volunteer efforts of students, alumni, faculty, and staff to institutionalized support.

3. Developing a critical mass of undergraduate student veterans should be a stated University priority and be accompanied by the allocation of appropriate resources and support in admission and financial aid.

4. A concerted, sustained effort is needed to enable Brown to move from being perceived as, at best, indifferent to military service to holding such service as valued in the University’s culture.

At our first meeting, we discussed the importance of also considering the experience of graduate and medical student veterans. Our subcommittee concluded that our task would be more successful by focusing on one population and its unique needs and challenges. We strongly recommend that the University undertake a similar effort as ours to consider opportunities for enhancing veteran recruitment, aid, and experiences in the graduate and medical schools.

Report of the Undergraduate Veterans Subcommittee of the Diversity Advisory Board, October 2012 p. 2

Admission and Recruitment

On November 14th, 2011 the subcommittee met with Jim Miller, Dean of Admission and Peter Newcomb, subcommittee member and Assistant Director of Admission. The following questions guided the discussion: ● What is undergraduate admission doing to recruit veterans? How is it going? ● What strategies are employed to increase applications and yield for other target populations? ● What recommendations and strategies can be identified to support the recruitment and matriculation of veterans?

There are three application processes through which a potential student may gain admission to Brown: the First-Year application, the Resumed Undergraduate Education program, or as a transfer student from another academic institution. The first-year application process is designed for and oriented toward traditionally-aged college applicants applying directly out of high school. The Resumed Undergraduate Education (RUE) program requires applicants to be at least six years out of high school with no more than two years of enrollment at another institution. Dean Miller noted that it is extraordinarily difficult to recruit for the RUE program, as there is no existing network with which Brown could connect. There is a general expectation that RUE applicants will find their own way to Brown. Students may also apply as a transfer student if they have studied at another institution for no more than two years. Generally, recruiting for transfer students is not a professional practice, except in the case of two-year institutions where transferring is expected. However, Brown currently has no formal relationships with any two-year institutions. It is worth noting that a majority of Rhode Island’s student veterans are currently, or have been at some time, enrolled at the Community College of Rhode Island.

There are different considerations regarding financial aid for each of the pathways to admission. Only the First-Year application process offers need-blind admissions. Both the RUE and transfer processes, the primary routes of matriculation for student veterans, are need-aware. This is significant as both prospective and current student veterans report that the perception of Brown as being unaffordable is one of the biggest barriers to applying to Brown. Brown’s practice has also been to deny admission to students with financial need in need-aware processes if the need cannot be met. The subcommittee notes that admitting without aid (or on a waitlist for aid if other admitted students decline) would at least give prospective student veterans the opportunity to self-fund, assume loans, and/or maximize their GI benefits. The potential of visiting students was also raised as a strategy for attracting veterans to Brown and/or permitting veteran applicants to be considered within multiple applicant pools (general, RUE, and transfer).

Of the eleven known student veterans of the past five years, one was admitted through the general first- year process, three as transfers, and seven in the RUE program. In the application cycle for admission to the 2011-12 academic year, Brown received 17 veteran student applications: 2 general first-year admission, 11 transfer, and 4 RUE. Of these, one transfer and one RUE were accepted. It is worth noting that the diversity of the admitted undergraduate student veterans since 2001 has been limited, with no minority students and just one woman.

Student veterans have identified that while RUE is a valuable program for the recruitment of veterans, veterans are unlikely to be unfamiliar with the phrase “resumed undergraduate,” creating a barrier to accessing information and understanding it as a potential pathway to enroll in Brown as a non- traditional student. Although exceptions are mentioned, such as a waiver for the six years out of high school requirement, the absence of clear guidelines for veteran applicants leads to confusion and

Report of the Undergraduate Veterans Subcommittee of the Diversity Advisory Board, October 2012 p. 3

uncertainty. Further complicating the issue of access to information is the relatively limited mention of veterans anywhere within Brown’s Web presence, including the absence of a link on the Brown A-Z listing. The current RUE program does include a strong asset to Brown’s recruitment efforts in that students in the program are full undergraduates that receive a degree from Brown University with, as one student put it, no “asterisks” (i.e. not from a continuing education or extension school).

The fact that RUE and transfer admissions processes have deadlines and acceptance decisions after the general first-year process creates another challenge for veteran applicants. As part of the of the Post 9/11 G. I. Bill (Chapter 33), Veterans Affairs offers the Yellow Ribbon Scholarship Program (YRSP), through which eligible veterans, and dependents of veterans (spouses or children), may obtain significant financial support for their education. The VA requires that YRSP funds be distributed on a first come, first served basis. Prior to each academic year the Office of Financial Aid determines the total number of YRSP scholarships it will offer as the VA requires the University to match the funds it provides. Brown’s current cap for undergraduate YRSP scholarships is twenty. Brown currently has more dependents of veterans than veterans; the current ratio is 14 to 3. This, coupled with the fact that dependents are more likely to be in the first-year applicant pool and veterans in later application processes, may lead to the perception that there may not be enough scholarships for new veteran matriculates. Given the substantial financial benefit offered by the YRSP, if veterans have concerns they may be unable to receive YRSP, they may be unlikely to consider Brown as a financially feasible option, depending on their level of financial need.

The Office of Admission establishes metrics and criteria that help to develop a sense of confidence related to an applicant’s ability to succeed at Brown. One of the barriers to successful admission is that many veteran applicants do not come with stellar high school records, making transferring from another institution of higher education a potential and likely avenue for proving their abilities to perform well academically. Members of the subcommittee inquired as to whether we can successfully apply traditional applicant admission standards to veterans. While Admission does take life experience into account, it is currently more a matter of judgment. The subcommittee discussed the need to develop and establish metrics that take into account the experience gained through military service as well as the growth and development that occurs (e.g., academic initiative prior to service is not necessarily a good predictor of academic initiative after service). It is also worth noting that military veterans may downplay their achievements. Brown has a rich history of supporting veteran students. Investigation into previous practices and policies may offer insight into metrics that could be established and applied to the current population of veteran applicants. The subcommittee also discussed the importance of being up front with potential veteran applicants during the recruiting process about the competitiveness of the pool and what criteria are used to identify successful candidates.

In response to the 2009 policy memo, the Office of Admission added information for veteran applications to its Website, identified Peter Newcomb as a volunteer veterans liaison, and conducted limited outreach at the CCRI transition fair in 2010. Admission also made attempts to connect with military education offices; however, in part due to unfamiliarity with military organization, these were largely unsuccessful. In the fall of 2011 a partnership was established with the Leadership Scholars Program, a non-profit that works to provide screening for potential applicants from the Marine Corps (www.leadershipscholarprogram.com/maredu/). A question was raised about if the liaison for veterans should be the same as the coordinator for RUE admission or if it is preferable for these to be two individuals.

Report of the Undergraduate Veterans Subcommittee of the Diversity Advisory Board, October 2012 p. 4

The Office of Admission receives direction from the Office of the Provost regarding its priorities and goals in recruiting and admitting each class. To date no specific guidance has been provided to the Office of Admission directing them to provide resources or to specifically target veterans with recruitment and admission efforts. Peter Newcomb has been identified as a liaison to veteran applicants, however, any efforts on his part are limited since no additional capacity has been added nor has there been a reallocation of resources within the Office of Admissions, including Mr. Newcomb’s portfolio, to support veteran applicants. The subcommittee feels it is important to stress that the nuances are vast, not only in understanding VA benefits and process but also Brown’s.

When the University identifies places where it is interested in growing or enriching its applicant pool (e.g. science students, students of color, etc.), one of the most effective and efficient strategies is to tap into existing mechanisms for identifying potential applicants. By using existing pipelines and data sources, Brown can target its recruitment efforts to places where a pool of qualified applicants is more likely to exist. Examples include partnering with the Leadership Scholars Program mentioned above or partnering with QuestBridge to reach a broader pool of applicants who might not previously have considered Brown as a college option.

Admission noted that it does not know where to find “qualified” veterans, nor does it have a clear definition for what “qualified” means for veteran applicants. The subcommittee discussed potential strategies for identifying potential applicants. In doing so we also discussed challenges created by Brown’s application cycles. Planning for separation from the service and potential gap time before the start of school can be major factors in dissuading veterans from pursuing education/applying to schools that do not offer more flexible admissions processes. For example, there is a commissioning program in the Navy for which candidates need to obtain Navy approval and a letter of admission within a certain period of time. Admission expressed a willingness to establish an additional application cycle or process if it is connected to the capacity to attract a likely applicant pool.

The subcommittee discussed statements made by President Simmons and the Corporation related to the importance and value of military leadership, and we discussed the importance of prioritizing recruitment and matriculation of veterans (as well as potential future military leaders through commissioning programs) to advance Brown’s capacity to educate and support individuals who engage in this leadership and service. It is also important that Brown reinvigorate its reputation as an institution that supports military service and veterans, especially if it is too look locally for applicants. As a final note, the subcommittee acknowledged the close relationship between admission and financial aid, the topic of our second meeting.

Following our meeting, an inquiry was sent to Admission as to whether or not we could have a policy that anyone with an "honorable discharge" from the military can apply via RUE even if they do not meet the six years beyond high school requirement. While a waiver of the six year requirement may be requested, it is preferable to expand the eligibility policy to be more veteran-friendly. Admission responded that this could be considered for the next admission cycle. Issues remain related to who can authorize a change in the RUE admission criteria and applicability to international veteran students. There would have to be a philosophical discussion of exactly what is intended by the six year requirement and if accepting an honorable discharge in its place substantially changes the nature or intent of the program. Another question involves identifying whether or not veteran-related policies will apply only to U.S. military veterans or to veterans of foreign nations as well. Note that several on the subcommittee commented that it may be better to have a policy using language that communicates the spirit of the policy without using the specific language of “honorable discharge.”

Report of the Undergraduate Veterans Subcommittee of the Diversity Advisory Board, October 2012 p. 5

Recommendations

1. Institutional Value Statement: Establish the recruitment and admission of veterans as a University priority and direct the Office of Admission to allocate staff and financial resources to support the effort. The subcommittee advises that the Office of Student Veterans and Commissioning Programs draft and forward a statement on the value veterans have in enhancing the educational environment at Brown and the importance of investing in the leadership capacity of veterans – both within the military and in civilian fields.

2. Applicant Pipeline: Establish and implement strategies for identifying potential veteran candidates. The subcommittee discussed some potential strategies, including:

a. Recruit local veterans, potentially through partnership with CCRI and/or RIC, through working with Veterans Affairs and its hospitals, and community groups and networks. It is worth noting that given Brown’s goal of providing opportunities to residents of Rhode Island, in-state applicants experience a higher admission rate than the average. Note that such a letter was sent in February 2012 to top academic performers at CCRI prior to the RUE/transfer deadline. b. Develop a relationship/pipeline with one or more community colleges in the United States, preferably local institutions, including the potential to establish visiting student programs. c. Develop an understanding of how the military identifies strong candidates (i.e. data sources maintained by the military), including officer commissioning programs, tests (i.e. ASVAB), and awards, recognitions, and decorations. d. Analyze current and alumni veterans, including graduate and medical students, as a resource in developing potential strategies for identifying applicants. e. Examine existing strategies for recruiting for the general admission pool to determine if opportunities exist to either translate these strategies to the veteran population or to capitalize on these efforts to communicate Brown’s interest in receiving their application after serving, as well.

3. Veteran-friendly Application Processes: Depending on the strategies identified as being most likely to be successful, Brown needs to review current admission timelines and processes to establish veteran-friendly processes. Potential strategies might include:

a. Add honorable discharge for military service to the qualifiers for RUE applications to accommodate veterans discharged for medical or other service related reasons who are less than six years out of high school. Note that in January 2012 Admission has updated its Web information to state, “If you have less than two complete years of college credit, and have been out of high school for six years or more, you may apply under our Resumed Undergraduate Education (RUE) program. Veterans may request a waiver of the six years out of high school requirement, to be considered on a case by case basis.” b. Broaden the language around RUE to help guide potential applicants to this program. c. Establish a rolling admission process for veterans. This would allow veterans to determine their admissions status more quickly and thus facilitate transition planning and decision- making as they look to leave service or move from the workforce to academia. The significance of this should not be understated. Because G.I. Bill benefits only start upon enrollment, many qualified veterans base their choice of school on whichever institution allows for the most seamless transition from service to the classroom.

Report of the Undergraduate Veterans Subcommittee of the Diversity Advisory Board, October 2012 p. 6

d. Establish and/or enhance criteria, metrics, and strategies for reviewing veteran applications. e. Create a veteran admission program within or separate from RUE. Such a program would allow for increase in veterans admissions without compromising the RUE program for other non-traditional students. f. Ensure there is, and communicate information about, adequate capacity within the YSRP pool to eliminate any doubt that a student veteran would fail to obtain these funds. g. Permit veteran applicants to submit applications through any of the admission processes but review each application in any of the application cycles for which the individual qualifies. h. Identify student or alumni veterans as contacts and/or provide profiles within the Admission process. Most of our current veterans sought contact and information from veterans currently enrolled as they considered applying to Brown. Note that the Office of Student Veterans and Commissioning Programs has begun compiling student and alumni veteran profiles on its Website.

4. Web-based Information: Establish a strong Web presence related to student veterans, both through Admission and for the University more generally.

a. Doing what we might do for any group of students does not go far enough, particularly given the need to overcome the reputation that Brown may not be military-friendly. The goal is to go beyond just communicating that veterans are welcomed and to make it clear that they are wanted as a part of the community. A well put together Web site that coordinates information related to veterans communicates commitment and interest to veterans, who often rely on web based sources for primary information as deployments and base assignments limit physical ability to travel/visit. b. The subcommittee expressed concern that veterans information moved from what had been a link on the landing page on the old Office of Admission site to being included at the bottom of a page on “Special Programs” under “Apply to Brown” and recommends that “U.S. Military Veterans” be its own link under “Apply to Brown.” c. The subcommittee specifically recommended that profiles of current or recent student veterans would be helpful. Note that the Office of Student Veterans and Commissioning Programs Website launched in late April 2012.

5. Strengthen Brown’s Presence in Military Networks: Develop media and other strategies that will increase Brown’s presence in formal and informal military and veterans’ communities and networks. Potential applicants need a sense that Brown is looking for people like them. These may include:

a. Engaging the alumni, graduate, and medical veteran communities, including establishing an alumni network. b. Advertisements in print media targeting veterans such as ads in the Military Times. c. Establish visiting student programs. d. Visibility of veterans on campus, including public programs such as the Veterans Day Ceremony, and of Brown in veteran-related issues and organizations. e. Recruiter visits to military bases, hospitals, etc. (e.g., www.pcs-lodging.com/news/Columbia- University-recruiter-visits-Camp-Pendleton.aspx). f. Sponsoring Brown faculty to teach short summer/winter courses on bases, which can also serve to build veteran confidence about their ability to resume their education and expand awareness within Brown of military culture and confidence in the ability of service members to be successful at Brown.

Report of the Undergraduate Veterans Subcommittee of the Diversity Advisory Board, October 2012 p. 7

6. Gather Data: While mentioned within other recommendations, Brown needs better data and information related to alumni and current veteran students, including graduate and medical students. While the standard application for undergraduates does ask applicants to voluntarily report their veteran status, this is not the case for the graduate processes, and this data is not maintained or connected to records in Banner. The alumni database currently relies heavily on self- reporting. a. Develop a comprehensive strategy for gathering and recording information related to military status (active, veteran, reserve) including application processes, alumni databases, and necessary capacity to Banner and Self Service Banner. b. Hold focus groups with potential applicants from local agencies and community colleges to inform and assess our strategies.

7. Learning the Concepts and the Language: Successful interface between Brown, the military, and veterans requires Brown to become more conversant in military culture, language, and systems, which is made more complicated by variations across branches and specializations within the military. On staff expertise and training and development of staff are potential strategies. However, this requires an investment of university resources in order to dedicate staff time for training or the hiring of personnel who are experts in the field.

Financial Aid (and Other Financial Matters)

On December 5th, 2011 the subcommittee met with Erica Cummins, Assistant Director of the Office of Financial Aid and liaison to veterans. The meeting began with a review of the recommendations in the 2009 policy memo, summarized here: ● Increased familiarity with VA benefits to help student veterans and Brown make informed decisions, utilize available resources, and navigate the VA. ● Base financial aid on projected income for the school year, not on the previous year’s income, particularly as veterans are generally leaving their careers and primary source of income. ● Consider VA benefits/living stipends as income not as scholarships. As scholarships, they reduce university scholarship dollar-for-dollar and the university does not account for the fact that most veterans also have other financial responsibilities, including homes, families, etc. ● Create an emergency transition fund to assist veterans when the receipt of VA benefits is delayed due to bureaucratic delay.

The subcommittee spent most of the meeting attempting to understand how a typical financial aid package for a veteran would come together and the interaction between Brown aid and VA benefits. Veterans are not required to submit financial aid documentation in order to take advantage of their benefits through the VA and thus any match to these benefits from Brown. Please note that the subcommittee only concerned itself with benefits associated with the Post 9/11 G.I. Bill; however, it is important to keep in mind that these benefits are both more complicated and more generous than previous G.I. Bills. Brown policies should take into consideration that it remains possible that, through RUE, candidates may apply whose aid would be calculated on previous (or future) versions of the G.I. Bill.

The Post 9/11 G.I. Bill at Brown University has three major benefits: 1. Tuition benefit: 100% of tuition and fees up to the most expensive public institution in the state. At Brown, there is a fixed benefit of $17,500 that is paid directly to the school.

Report of the Undergraduate Veterans Subcommittee of the Diversity Advisory Board, October 2012 p. 8

2. Monthly Housing Allowance (MHA). The MHA is tied to the rate of military Basic Allowance for Housing (BAH) for an E-5 with dependents at the location of the school. At Brown the BAH rate for 2012 is: $1599 per month. MHA is prorated based on number of days in each academic term, with no payment for winter and summer breaks (unless student maintains enrollment). The MHA is paid directly to the student. 3. Book Stipend: A stipend of $1000 to assist with books and supplies paid directly to the student.

Veterans may receive anywhere between 0-100% of the benefits listed above based on their length of service and level of enrollment and may receive up to 36 months of entitlement. In addition, institutions can participate in the Yellow Ribbon Scholarship Program (YRSP). Brown participates. This means that institutions can offer an additional amount of institutional support towards tuition and fees that will be matched by Veterans Affairs up to a certain limit. Our understanding is that the limit of the YRSP is half of the amount that remains once the standard GI benefit of $18,077.50 is subtracted from the cost of tuition and fees for the 2012-13 academic year. Brown currently offers $10K, resulting in a total benefit of $20K to students. The $20K is less than the annual maximum allowed by the VA by an estimated $5680.50 (i.e. a Brown commitment of $2840.25). The question was also asked as to whether the $10K match from Brown increases by the same amount as tuition and fees each year. In effect, is the YRSP keeping pace with increases in tuition and fees? The subcommittee also questioned as to why the YRSP benefit decreased from the previous year. For students admitted for the 2009-10 year, Brown offered a YRSP benefit of $12,365 with an equal match from the VA. Each veteran can only use YRSP once either for themselves or for a dependent, and the subcommittee felt it important that Brown not require veterans to use their YRSP. Please note that post-9/11 GI Bill benefits must be used within 15 years of the last period of active duty of at least 90 consecutive days.

Both veterans and dependents of eligible veterans are eligible for the YRSP. It is our understanding that the GI Bill requires that YRSP must be offered on a first-come, first-served basis, with the order being determined by the completion of relevant documentation. As noted in the admission portion of this report, as RUE and transfer admission happens after regular admission cycles, dependents may have the first opportunity to obtain a scholarship. A portion of the documentation required of dependents of veterans cannot be submitted until the dependent graduates from high school, meaning that even though they are generally admitted later, if veterans are informed of the need and do submit their documentation as soon as possible, they are likely to be able to do so before new dependents are.

Brown currently offers a maximum of 20 YRSP scholarships. Currently Brown does not use its 20 person maximum; however, if the number of veterans increases, we anticipate this being an issue. The subcommittee was concerned about this issue, and our strong preference was to ensure that there are ample YRSP slots for both veterans and dependents of veterans. If that is not the case, then the University should explore if it is possible to segregate dependents and veterans within the YRSP pool to ensure slots are reserved for veterans. The subcommittee also notes that the VA YRSP list for 2011-12 indicates that only 10 scholarships were offered (gibill.va.gov/gi_bill_info/ch33/yrp/2011/states/ri.htm), understating Brown’s commitment on a site likely to be consulted by potential applicants.

At Brown, according to current Office of Financial Aid policy, all G.I. Bill benefits are treated as outside scholarship in the calculation of the financial aid package. This means that institutional aid that might otherwise be available is reduced dollar for dollar. The subcommittee felt that this process did not recognize the unique service performed by veterans. We recommend that G.I. Bill and VA benefits first accrue to the veteran up until the maximum amount before diminishing institutional aid for which they

Report of the Undergraduate Veterans Subcommittee of the Diversity Advisory Board, October 2012 p. 9

would otherwise be eligible. Doing so would maximize the potential benefits of both rather than using GI Bill benefits to reduce Brown’s obligations under its financial aid policies.

While the above seems relatively straightforward, the reality is that these are a complex set of benefits and require significant expertise in order to navigate both VA and University requirements and answer questions from veteran students. As outlined in the 2009 report, accessing and coordinating these benefits and managing the integration of VA and Brown benefits is complicated at best. In 2009, Financial Aid identified Ms. Cummins as a liaison for veterans. This has been helpful and a welcome addition; however, institutional and professional knowledge in this area remains limited. We also acknowledge that VA benefits and associated processes change regularly, that there can be significant delays in receiving responses from the VA, and that remaining knowledgeable of VA benefits requires staff to dedicate sufficient time and resources.

Student veterans are impacted by many of the same things as non-traditional (RUE students). The subcommittee was concerned that the assumptions in the construction of the financial aid packages may still be based on assumptions more appropriate for traditionally-aged students. Student veterans are, frequently, moving from a position of full-time employment to relative unemployment in the transition from service member to scholar. They may also have other commitments, such as a family, owning a home, etc. For a traditional undergraduate, enrollment is unlikely to include a significant change in their employment status (or that of their parents). Also, annual living expenses need to consider the cost of living off-semester as most veterans (as with most RUE students), do not live with their parents on breaks and may, instead, have either rent or potentially a mortgage. As a final note, the subcommittee questioned why Brown is charging RUE students a non-resident fee given that the assumptions built into the program include a high likelihood of living off-campus.

In our meeting, we worked with approximate numbers for Brown’s financial aid packages. Currently, the cost of Brown is approx. $54K. Of that, $40K is tuition and fees. For a veteran eligible for 100% of VA benefits, the GI Bill provides $17.5K. Of the remaining $22.5K, Brown’s YRSP program provides $20K ($10K Brown/$10K VA match). This amount is $2.5K short of the maximum eligible for the match. In implementing the integration of the two benefits packages, Brown uses the VA benefits to cover summer and academic year earnings amounts that are built into its financial aid package.

Of the $14K in living expenses, Brown considers the sum of the MHA as counting towards this amount even when a student may otherwise be eligible for institutional aid. Brown needs to determine definitively if it has the option of excluding MHA completely or in part as a means of recognizing the unique service performed by veterans by enabling them to receive VA benefits and Brown financial aid benefits and each to the maximum allowed possible. One recommendation made in the 2009 report is to count the MHA as income rather than scholarship as scholarship reduces institutional aid dollar for dollar whereas income is part of a calculation on the capacity for student contribution. After our meeting, the Financial Aid offered a response that the subcommittee still feels warrants review and additional confirmation from the VA about our current policies related to MHA:

“The VA living stipends are considered in the financial aid award as they are defined by the Veteran’s Affairs. The description provided by the VA regarding the monthly housing allowance received under the Post 9/11 benefits states: ‘A monthly housing allowance (MHA) based on the Basic Allowance for Housing for an E-5 with dependents at the location of the school.’ This definition states that the stipends are used for academic year living expenses, which must be used as an academic year resource not as income.”

Report of the Undergraduate Veterans Subcommittee of the Diversity Advisory Board, October 2012 p. 10

It is the opinion of current student veterans this interpretation of the MHA is not one supported by VA. Although paid only during periods of enrollment and based on a military allowance related to housing, the VA places no restrictions on how MHA funds may be used.

The subcommittee also discussed anecdotal information from students that they were concerned that they were not adequately advised of all their options. For example, there are benefits beyond the G.I. Bill for which aid may be available such as Pell Grants. In a recent example, one student veteran almost lost their car because they were unaware that they were eligible for additional funding. This situation was prevented only because it came to the attention of another student veteran who was familiar with the financial aid system. Information for veterans needs to be comprehensive and expert advice on helping them to maximize their packages is critical.

The subcommittee encouraged financial aid to have specific information available for veterans on how their package comes together at Brown. The subcommittee advised that having sample packages or calculations available or having a calculator that students could use would aid in communicating that Brown is affordable. Again, many applicants are more likely to assume the opposite to be the case. It is our understanding that Financial Aid is working with the University to improve information available, including creating videos, and encourages that the veteran population be included in this initiative through mention in other videos, or, preferably, through a tailored video for veterans.

More globally, the subcommittee had significant concern that the majority of veterans are likely to come in under need-aware policies as part of the RUE or transfer admission processes. The subcommittee encourages that the University become need-blind for all veteran applicants, regardless of the pool through which they apply. Such a statement would be significant in rebuilding the perception that the University is veteran-friendly. In being need-blind for veterans, the University must keep in mind that benefits may expire or, in the case of transfer students, may be fully expended before a degree is completed. Currently students who come in as an unaided transfer student are not eligible for institutional aid if there benefits expire. If a student were to otherwise be eligible, Brown should allow aid to commence if GI-Bill benefits expire for an individual veteran.

Additionally, as RUE admissions are need-aware with a limited pool of funds each year, the size of which has not seen an increase of significance in years, there is concern that as we work to increase the presence of veterans on-campus, we may adversely affect the diversity of perspective, experience, and thought that has been brought to Brown by RUE students from non-military backgrounds. More information is needed to evaluate this concern, including if the YRSP match from Brown comes from within the RUE financial pool or from outside of it. Also, we encourage the University to think long- term, including a time when we may have veteran applicants eligible for a future version of the G.I. Bill that may have less favorable financial aspects.

An invitation to join our meeting was extended to Financial Services as pieces of this puzzle relate to activities coordinated by the Bursar and/or Loan Office. Without the benefit of a representative from Financial Services, the subcommittee discussed the issue of the timing of payments from the VA. Students have experienced receiving bill reminders when VA payments have not yet been distributed. The subcommittee encouraged that if Brown determines that an individual is eligible for benefits that a system be developed that effectively credits the account to ensure no late fees or notices are distributed. Brown does waive the late penalty, but an adjustment here would contribute to an

Report of the Undergraduate Veterans Subcommittee of the Diversity Advisory Board, October 2012 p. 11

environment that proactively takes veterans into consideration rather than reacting to issues and/or requiring additional paperwork on the part of veterans.

Ms. Cummins offered that Financial Aid would provide to the subcommittee several mock-ups of how a financial aid package for a student veteran may come together and how it compares to non-veteran student populations.

In conclusion, the subcommittee acknowledges and stated its appreciation for the hard work and dedication of the staff of the Financial Aid office. While acknowledging that our discussions were critical of policies and procedures, we recognize that these issues are complicated and that Brown’s Financial Aid office has a large and complex responsibility.

Recommendations

The following recommendations have the collective goal of incorporating into financial aid policies and procedures institutional recognition of the unique service and sacrifice of veterans.

1. Need-Blind Admission: Perhaps the most significant change Brown could make is to ensure that veterans, regardless of the application process through which they enter the University, the GI-bill in effect, or amount of GI-bill benefits that remain, will be admitted need-blind.

2. Maximize VA and Institutional Aid: Evaluate Financial Aid policies with the goal of providing, to the extent possible, the opportunity for student veterans to maximize their institutional aid and VA benefits. In doing so, keeping in mind that VA benefits were earned through extraordinary sacrifice and institutional policy should endeavor to honor that sacrifice to the greatest extent possible. Strategies may include categorizing the MHA as income and receiving more definitive documentation from the VA about the limitations or flexibility of institutional decision-making regarding the use of MHA.

3. Get the Full Match: Currently Brown’s financial aid calculation does not enable student veterans to get the full Yellow Ribbon Scholarship Program match from the VA, resulting in a loss of scholarship and an increased cost of attendance for veterans. Going forward, the YRSP program also needs to be adjusted annually in order to keep pace with increases in tuition and fees.

4. Ensure YRSP Can Accommodate All Student Veterans: While this is currently not an issue, as the number of student veterans increases, Brown will need to expand its commitment to the Yellow Ribbon Scholarship Program. Note that the committee was concerned that, in the case of veteran applicants for which financial aid will be needed, a shortage of YRSP slots might result in the applicants not being offered admission even if they are otherwise eligible for admission.

5. Protect University Commitment to RUE: Efforts to increase veteran enrollment should not financially impact its commitment to non-veteran RUE students. As veterans represent an expanding demographic, additional financial resources should be contributed to the RUE financial aid budget or an additional veteran budget should be established.

Report of the Undergraduate Veterans Subcommittee of the Diversity Advisory Board, October 2012 p. 12

6. Embrace Non-Traditional Students in Formulation of Financial Aid Package: For both veteran and non-veteran non-traditional students, the assumptions in the financial aid package (student support of dependents/spouses, change in income due to departure from a career, etc.) need to be reevaluated to ensure they take into consideration the life circumstances of non-traditional students.

a. While it is possible for students to appeal the use of prior year income and tax returns in the calculation of institutional aid, the subcommittee recommends consideration of a more non- traditional-student-friendly calculation that does not rely on an additional appeal. The reasoning behind this is that potential candidates may reasonably assume that an appeal has a good chance of not being successful when we want to ensure that veterans are confident of the level of financial support they will receive from the outset. For veterans in particular, we recommend that income due to military service be considered as compensation for their service to the United States without then lessening institutional scholarship.

7. Student Advising and Staff Expertise: The intersection with VA benefits is complicated. Brown should proactively work with veterans to maximize their packages and provide dedicated and informed expertise. Also, if most veterans will continue to be RUE students, it may be advisable to have one liaison for both.

8. Web-based Information: As in the case of the area of admission, Web-based information is critical to this population, particularly for potential applicants. Particularly in the area of financial aid, Brown’s information needs to enable potential students to estimate their Brown and VA packages in advance of their application.

9. Make a Health Insurance Scholarship Part of Every Veteran’s Package: See conversations relating to Health and Psychological Services under the Academic and Campus Life section of this report.

10. Review Financial Services: As the subcommittee did not meet with a representative of Financial Services, we recommend that the Office of Student Veterans and Commissioning Programs and representatives of the Brown University Student Veterans Society meet with Financial Services to extend this report to include these services.

a. Administratively Manage Delays in Receipt in VA Benefits: Options include crediting student account, aiding in follow-up with VA, and/or forgiving any fees automatically. Establish and publish a policy.

Academic and Campus Life

On February 10, 2012 the subcommittee met with J. Allen Ward, Senior Associate Dean for Student Life, Dr. Edward Wheeler, Director of Health Services, and Belinda Johnson, Director of Psychological Services. The meeting began with a review of a focus group with undergraduate veterans that had been held earlier in the week (see Appendix C for these notes) and was focused on three broad areas: ● Orientation and transition: setting student veterans up for success ● Academic policies, advising ● Out of the classroom environment: maximizing the educational opportunities for veterans

Report of the Undergraduate Veterans Subcommittee of the Diversity Advisory Board, October 2012 p. 13

Our discussion began with getting a sense of where there may be transitions between military and Brown culture. Overall, student veterans report their military service to be an asset to their enrolling as a student, arriving with a sense of self-discipline, pride, high motivation, capacity to work hard, and a dedication to succeed. The subcommittee noted that in an important way military veterans are uniquely positioned for success in Brown’s open curriculum – the military encourages its members to take ownership and responsibility. However, as stated in the article Coming Home, “The rigid structure of the military precipitate[s] an interesting paradox: Student veterans, who proclaim self-reliance and pride, ha[ve] to learn how to take the initiative and self-direct their re-enrollment.”

It is also the case that the military encourages the development of focus. Focus may present challenges for student veterans to then take full advantage of the open curriculum and, in particular, the opportunities afforded by the out-of-the-classroom experience. As one student noted, they worked hard in the military, and veterans are now looking to study hard, however, it is critical to emphasize that the experiences and skills developed out-of-the-classroom are a fundamental part of the residential collegiate experience and aid in the development of broad leadership skills for civilian contexts. As student veterans are more likely to live off campus, they are more likely to experience issues such as social isolation and not taking advantage of campus resources and opportunities.

There are other dynamics within the Brown culture that may require more of a transition. One of the students commented that he was used to a system (the military), where “I get an answer and that’s how it goes.” At Brown, there is more of a sense that “everything is a negotiation,” which represents a significant shift from the de-emphasizing of individual recognition and accomplishment that occurs in the military. While self-reliance is developed in the military, self-advocacy is not.

The subcommittee also raised concerns around the use of the word “help.” When we use the word help, as noted by one of the students, we may be encouraging students to reject that framework and opt instead for, “I can gut my way through it.” The focus should be on normalizing the practice of accessing resources as a component of student success. This is made more challenging by the strong culture of self-reliance and the sense of pride that is developed in the military.

Peer advising and mentorship were thought to be the most effective means of aiding in the transition of incoming students and addressing some of the potential cultural shifts. As it relates to peer advising, the subcommittee expressed concern that Brown is not delivering adequate levels of institutional support, relying instead on members of the small student veteran community to support one another. Students are being asked to “carry the weight of their community,” including providing peer support and community events and awareness. One student noted, “If I don’t do it, who will?” There was also a specific comment about Meiklejohns and how it can be hard for a student veteran, given their experience, to take advice from a Meiklejohn. Additionally, while most if not all student veterans reported reaching out to current student veterans both as part of their application process and prior to arrival, a protocol of outreach from the University would be another means of being proactive rather than reactive or reliant on student initiative.

In response to a question about if it mattered if faculty or staff mentors or advisors were veterans, students felt that there was a significant distinction between their experience in the military and that of those prior to 9/11. Students also felt that sometimes the veteran connection may be more a connection to the past, when they most desired faculty and others who could be guides to their futures. It was also noted that it is important for non-veteran faculty and administrators to be part of the support network and that many are eager to be so. It was felt; however, that a dedicated staff person

Report of the Undergraduate Veterans Subcommittee of the Diversity Advisory Board, October 2012 p. 14

would be perceived as a partner in success at Brown and not limiting, as much to clearly signal institutional commitment as providing advocacy, practical support and guidance. The subcommittee noted that the Dean of the College’s current on-line system for advising preferences does not give advisors the option to express interest in RUE and/or veteran student advisees and recommends this be added in future years.

With mentoring and advising, the group discussed the importance of it being both academic and non- academic in nature. Students also felt that mentorship was better when it developed organically. The group discussed some strategies for doing so, including having opportunities for regular contact with potential mentors and information about resources that could lead to the development of mentor- mentee relationships.

Orientation and the welcoming process is a critical time for addressing transition. It was noted that the military has on-boarding programs, like the Navy’s Welcome Aboard Program. Emulating some of these programs could be an effective strategy. One student noted that Orientation places too much emphasis on implying that the workload will be difficult (i.e. “I wouldn’t take five classes if I were you”) and encouraged, instead, that the focus be on how to be a strong student, such as strategies for approaching schedule and workload and strategic use of S/NC.

Current veterans found the RUE counselor and orientation programs to be very important. As a follow- up to our meeting, Dean Bhattacharyya, RUE advisor and member of our subcommittee, provided the following list of features of the RUE program: ● Can choose to live on or off-campus and be on or off meal plan. ● Can choose part-time or full-time enrollment (though the University strongly encourages being full- time). ● If admitted with financial aid, a commitment from Brown to meet their need -- out-of-pocket bottom line expenses may be less than attending a state school despite Brown's higher tuition costs. ● Participate in new student orientation with transfer students and transfer counselors, rather than orientation with first-years, but have several RUE-specific orientation sessions and have RUE Counselors. ● Are contacted by the RUE dean and RUE Counselors and receive orientation materials prior to arrival and are welcomed by the RUE Dean, RUE Counselors, and the leadership of RUSA the Resumed Undergraduate Education Association. Receive the RUE calendar of annual events. ● Have specific contacts in the Admission Office, Dean of College Office, CareerLab, and Office of Financial Aid. ● Receive a Brown Undergraduate Degree on completion.

While the RUE orientation and peer advisors were assets, it was also felt that an institutionally supported additional set of programs for veterans would be helpful. Such programs would specifically target areas of cultural transition and on setting an expectation of success through effective strategies.

At the focus group student veterans, as a whole, communicated coming in with a strong sense of their strengths and weaknesses. Many of them found their way to opportunities that smoothed their transition to Brown and social integration with a much younger peer group. Many found the Brown Outdoor Leadership Training (BOLT) Program and/or participation in athletics as opportunities to find a close-knit community that resemble the cohesiveness of the military, offers needed structure, and/or created small structured opportunities for social transition. The subcommittee encouraged Brown to provide advice on these opportunities to incoming students.

Report of the Undergraduate Veterans Subcommittee of the Diversity Advisory Board, October 2012 p. 15

In terms of campus community and engagement with other students, generally student veterans felt experiences with their peers were good. At the same time, more campus awareness would be helpful, particularly as their non-veteran peers tend to come with preconceived assumptions and frameworks. Generally Brown students not only haven’t been in the military themselves, but our student veterans have an overall sense that most don’t even know a veteran (family, friends, etc.). There is a sense that most at Brown never even considered the military and may stereotype the experience as one of “last resort for troubled youth.” Engagement with student veterans helps to combat such stereotypes, but Brown should also play a greater leadership role instead of relying on student initiative. There is also a sense that peer thinking about veterans tends to be binary: veterans as heroes or victims.

The subcommittee acknowledged that Brown has progress to make on its reputation vis-à-vis the military. One-on-one interactions with faculty, staff, and peers were noted as nearly universally positive; however, the public perception of Brown is one that is, at best, indifferent, and, at worst hostile. This perception might lead many prospective students to see it as a place not worth pursuing amidst all the other choices.

Representatives of the Student Veterans Society discussed their work to build a community of veterans across Ivy League institutions as a way of both encouraging veteran student success more broadly and creating a greater support network. Social media outlets were identified as effective means for doing so.

The subcommittee also discussed Health and Psychological Services. Both offices and their services are described in summer orientation mailings, but the subcommittee felt there was a need to repeat, clarify, and emphasize information relevant to this population. In the past, the directors of the two services would present as part of RUE orientation, and it was encouraged that we consider doing so again. This in-person opportunity would help encourage use of Psychological Services and emphasize the differences between using Health Services on campus and a health insurance policy off-campus. There was some concern expressed that doing so might inadvertently communicate that we believe this to be a population that requires these services. One possible solution would be to have a broader panel or program or to offer a tour that includes these resources. Particularly as we look to increase veteran enrollment, encouraging the provision of counseling rather than self-reliance with a population that may have individuals suffering from TBI (Traumatic Brain Injury) and/or PTSD (Post Traumatic Stress Disorder) may be critical, particularly as a symptom of both is an inability to focus. While we do not want our systems to assume that individuals may be arriving with issues, it was noted that the military has a strategy of post-deployment counseling when coming back from the frontlines that may make a standard intake process, including screening for TBI or PTSD, possible. Finally, we were advised that including a Health Insurance Scholarship as part of veteran financial aid packages would ensure that all students have access to Health Services without having to work with the complexities of the VA health care system and insurance program.

We also discussed aspects of intersecting identities, including student veterans being non-traditional students and, potentially, first generation. There is also a sense among the student veterans that they differ from many of their peers in socio-economic class. This led to a discussion of the importance of connecting various support networks into a more comprehensive program and the need to have identified liaisons and Web information in critical offices. As it is now, there can be too many advisors that can make it confusing to know who to go to for what and when. Also, the subcommittee was concerned that Brown resources and advisors be well-connected to one another to help “case manage”

Report of the Undergraduate Veterans Subcommittee of the Diversity Advisory Board, October 2012 p. 16

our student veteran population and ensure policies and procedures are veteran-friendly. Importantly, the subcommittee wanted to emphasize that there is significant diversity within the veteran student population, necessitating that services be necessarily generalized and also designed with the capacity to be tailored to the individual.

While the subcommittee did not delve into statements about leave policies and procedures related to being a reservist, the subcommittee notes that at least one veteran reported, “I haven’t felt like Brown is very prepared to deal with my co-responsibilities as a reservist and a student.” While students have reported that individual faculty and deans have been helpful, this is an area where there is an opportunity for Brown to be more explicitly and proactively veteran-friendly.

Recommendations

1. Enhance Orientation and Transition Advising a. Add one or more veteran-specific sessions to the RUE, Visiting, and Transfer Orientation program and ensure such sessions are open to veterans arriving in the regular admission pool. b. Ensure students are introduced to the services and philosophies of Health and Psychological Services, potentially through a “guide to success” program including others such as Academic Support and Student and Employee Accessibility Services. c. Offer targeted information about other opportunities for transition, such as the BOLT program. d. Consider the viability and desirability of an intake process that could include preliminary assessment of TBI or PTSD.

2. Institutionalized Peer Support: Particularly given the small numbers of student veterans and our desire to ensure peer support is institutionalized, ensure a cohort of trained peer advisors that includes summer outreach. For student veterans who are engaged in the additional responsibility of peer support, provide student employment opportunities for this work through the Office of Student Veterans and Commissioning Programs.

3. Veteran Services Network: Identify offices and programs that are critical to the experience of veteran services and ensure a system of communication and coordination among offices. One potential strategy is to have a veteran-liaison in key offices with occasional meetings of these liaisons. The network should also be connected to systems of support for other aspects of a student’s identity given the various intersections – religion, race, gender, first generation, etc. Additionally, the network can create opportunities for professional development for faculty, advisors, and staff in effective veteran support.

4. Policies and Procedures for Reservist Activities: Such policies and procedures, if not already developed, should be developed and readily available and should support, to the greatest extent possible, a student’s commitment as a reservist.

5. Advising/Mentorship for the Future: Develop a cohort of faculty, staff, and alumni who are informed of veterans services, are visible participants in veterans programs and activities, and have occasional interaction with student veterans. Ensure the network encourages non-veteran participation. One potential strategy would be to have a stipend for a faculty fellow affiliated with

Report of the Undergraduate Veterans Subcommittee of the Diversity Advisory Board, October 2012 p. 17

the Office of Student Veterans and Commissioning Programs to serve as a point person for hosting such opportunities, encouraging connections, and inviting other faculty to participate.

6. Campus Programming and Collaboration: Funding and support for staffing and initiatives that provide institutional support to raising awareness of the diversity of the veteran experience and advance institutional goals related to engagement across difference.

7. Gaining Critical Mass Beyond Brown: Given our small veteran population, the subcommittee encouraged continued development of networks of student veterans outside of Brown including with other Ivy League institutions and across Rhode Island.

Institutionalization

On Monday, April 23, the subcommittee met with Russell Carey ‘91, Senior Vice President for Corporation Affairs and Governance; Paula Deblois RUE ‘89, Director of Volunteer Support in Alumni Relations; Amy Carroll, Director of Government Relations and Community Affairs; and Marisa Quinn, Vice President for Public Affairs and University Relations. Our conversation centered on the following questions: ● As the working group concludes its work, what opportunities exist or should be created within the University's governance structure to maintain a commitment to student veterans, including ongoing advocacy and review of recommendations and progress? ● A consistent theme in our discussions to date is a sense that within the campus community, there are positive interactions between student veterans and faculty, staff, and students; however, there is also a sense that the institution as a whole is not supportive or potentially even hostile. What recommendations can we make to address this issue? ● There is a sense that the annual Veterans Day Ceremony has been a positive example of visibility and leadership by the institution. Is there more that can be done? What opportunities exist for Brown to be a more visible leader on veterans’ issues within Rhode Island?

We began our meeting by summarizing the draft recommendations developed through our first three meetings for our invited guests. There were a few points where the potential of alumni involvement and leadership were mentioned, including serving as mentors (resulting in our adding alumni to that section of the report). Ms. Deblois discussed the ongoing project between her office, the Brown University Student Veterans Society, and the Office of Student Veterans and Commissioning Programs to retroactively code veterans in the alumni database.

Our invited guests framed alumni perspective on the University’s stance on the military service as “neglectful.” This discussion focused on “the gap” years – between Vietnam and 9/11, when support of the development of military leadership by the University was not prioritized. There was a sense that the older alumni are the most concerned about this issue. The Veterans Day Ceremony was noted as a program that was receiving positive response from alumni and with appreciation that the University was once again showing regard for veterans and their service.

The issue of ROTC and its presence on campus was discussed. There were some that felt that the absence of a campus-based ROTC program would continue to counter any University efforts to communicate its support of military service. As noted by one of the students, it is one thing to say we

Report of the Undergraduate Veterans Subcommittee of the Diversity Advisory Board, October 2012 p. 18

tolerate the experience of those who have served and it is another thing to be communicating that Brown doesn’t want people graduating into the military. Others commented that if our goal is to change people’s hearts and minds, we are best advised not to fight a particular issue but rather engage in what Brown does best – education, research, convening, teaching – to encourage nuance of thought and perspective. We returned to this topic later in our meeting.

Our conversation then turned to the first of our questions – University governance. Senior Vice President Carey stated that having a group committed to advocating and supporting this work is critical. Without this, the work done to date, including this report, has a high likelihood of diminishing quickly. He offered several suggestions, including having a permanent subcommittee of either the Campus Life Advisory Board or the Diversity Advisory Board. Another strategy would be to establish an advisory board under the auspices of the office itself. Such a group would be important to establishing and maintaining institutional ownership and encouraging ongoing accountability (e.g. the process for annually reviewing financial aid policies and practices).

Ricky shared with the subcommittee that the Corporation Committee on Campus Life had asked to receive a report at its May meeting, and he also anticipated that the Diversity Advisory Council (comprised of alumni) would also ask for a report at some point. As the work represented by the Office of Student Veterans and Commissioning Programs is both part of the Division of Campus Life & Student Services and a component of Brown’s nondiscrimination policy, both of these bodies would continue to have some involvement at a broad level.

The subcommittee discussed untapped opportunities that already exist at Brown. We have a rich history, memorials and plaques throughout campus, the Anne S. K. Brown Military Collection at the John Hay Library, and Manning Chapel, for example. We discussed ways these could be highlighted, including referencing them on admission-led tours and through Web and print materials. It was also noted that the military employs more than veterans and the question was asked about the extent to which civilian career options in the military are included in CareerLAB materials and information.

Vice President Quinn advised the subcommittee on qualities of programs that make them effective for public outreach efforts. The program has to have layers that work well for building a story and capturing compelling images. The Veterans Day Ceremony was noted as a perfect example, including dignitaries, ceremony, and Brown symbolism. There is a richness of imagery and speech that translate well to a variety of media forms and outlets. Recommendations were made on how we could better leverage the ceremony. The current structure of the ceremony works well for its purpose, location, variability of the weather, difficulty hearing speakers, etc. It was recommended that we not add more to the existing ceremony but, instead, use it as a springboard for other programming. Students discussed their efforts to do so this past year and the challenge of coordinating programs by so few students. Recommendations were made to expand co-sponsorships and collaborations and to continue to ensure that the wall has visibility beyond the ceremony.

We discussed other opportunities for the University’s culture to express comfort and pride with military service. The suggestion was made that there be a major program in the spring, perhaps a lecture, to complement the visibility provided by the Veterans Day Ceremony. A lecture would provide an opportunity to continue to break down stereotypes and/or provide a rich intellectual project for campus engagement such as societal decision-making around the deployment of military forces in today’s global world.

Report of the Undergraduate Veterans Subcommittee of the Diversity Advisory Board, October 2012 p. 19

Commencement and Reunion Weekend was also discussed as an important time of symbolism and communication of University values. While the Weekend now concludes before Memorial Day, we discussed how we might commemorate Memorial Day as part of the Weekend. The lack of visibility of commissioning ceremonies was also noted and suggestions to address this concern included adding information about commissioning officers in the Commencement book, including ceremonies in the official schedule, inviting/involving alumni in the ceremonies, having a veterans/military-focused forum or alumni panel, considering military service in selection of honorary degree recipients, having a badge or other identifier for student or alumni veterans to wear throughout the Weekend, and inclusion of commissioning officers and veterans in the Commencement Day procession. As noted by a member of the subcommittee, what could carry more Brown symbolism than having veterans and commissioning students walk through the Van Wickle gates at the head of the student procession? While this specific idea has not been included in the recommendations section, the thinking behind it provides good insight into opportunities Brown has to message its support for military service by its students.

We then turned to the question of ways Brown could be more visible in veterans’ issues in Rhode Island? Vice President Quinn noted that veterans’ issues are at the forefront of Senator Reed’s interests and that his office might have ideas for what Brown could do.

In wrapping up our final meeting, the subcommittee offered strong endorsement of the establishment of the Office and the need to hire a dedicated staff person. The subcommittee felt there was much to learn and that dedicated expertise would be critical to any University efforts. We also felt strongly that advancing this issue on campus and ongoing evaluation and implementation of the recommendations of the subcommittee necessitate the availability of significant time and focused attention.

After the final meeting of the subcommittee, members David Salsone RUE ‘12.5, Margaret Klawunn, and Ricky Gresh, as well as Paula Deblois RUE ‘89, met with George Billings ‘72, President of the Brown Alumni Association; Nancy Hyde ’80, President-elect of the BAA; John Hillman ’09; Todd Andrews ’83, Vice President for Alumni Relations; and Katherine Bergeron, Dean of the College. An overview of the work of the subcommittee was provided. The meeting focused on how alumni could best participate in and support the work of the University to support veterans and student participants in commissioning programs. The discussion concluded in a recommendation to be considered by the Brown Alumni Association to form a short-term task force or working group of alumni to evaluate and make formal recommendations on alumni engagement, including supporting recommendations of this subcommittee and an ongoing structure for networking alumni veterans.

Recommendations

1. Dedicated Staffing and Resources for the Office: A dedicated staff member with appropriate expertise is critical to advancing most if not all of the recommendations in this report and assessing their impact. Recommendations in the report related to peer advising, faculty mentorship, and community events require the allocation of program funds.

2. Assumption of Responsibility for Ongoing Advocacy within the University’s Governance Structure: While the subcommittee did not endorse a specific recommendation, it is advised that the Dean of the College, Division of Campus Life & Student Services, and the Office of Institutional Diversity determine which board(s) and/or councils of the University should consider advancing veterans’ issues in their formal charge or establish a new board or council for doing so.

Report of the Undergraduate Veterans Subcommittee of the Diversity Advisory Board, October 2012 p. 20

a. The University should also work to support the initiative of the Brown Alumni Association to develop recommendations on alumni engagement.

3. Establish an Annual Calendar of University Events and Ceremonies: Events and ceremonies are an important avenue for communicating values, engaging the campus community, and creating materials that can be used in outreach to the alumni community and general public.

a. Continue the annual Veterans Day Ceremony and establish additional programming that uses the Ceremony as an anchor. b. Integrate recognition of Memorial Day, student and alumni veterans, and graduates who are commissioning into the ceremonies and materials of Commencement and Reunion Weekend. c. Establish an annual spring program, such as a lecture.

4. Bring Greater Attention and Focus to Brown’s History with Military Veterans: Tap into and maximize the impact of existing resources such as memorials, the Anne S. K. Brown Military Collection at the John Hay Library, and Manning Chapel, including auditing campus tour content.

th a. As Brown prepares for its 250 anniversary and the writing of its history, the historical connections between Brown and the military should be well-represented.

5. Leadership in Veterans’ Issues: The University should endeavor to play a visible role in veterans’ issues, with Rhode Island being the most likely context. Such efforts would also continue to build a perception of the University as having a culture that is supportive of military service. We recommend ongoing conversation with Public Affairs and University Relations, the Swearer Center for Public Service, and others to identify such opportunities.

6. Graduate and Medical Students: The subcommittee concludes this report by noting that our review was, by choice and by necessity, focused primarily on undergraduates. Needs and concerns related to graduate and medical students did emerge at various points, and we recommend that a similar effort to the one undertaken here be done to examine what the University can do to increase graduate and medical student veteran enrollment, aid, and their experiences while on campus.

Report of the Undergraduate Veterans Subcommittee of the Diversity Advisory Board, October 2012 p. 21

Subcommittee Membership

Jabbar Bennett Sam McNeal, Ph.D. ‘13 Associate Dean Pathobiology Graduate School and Graduate Student Veteran The Warren Alpert Medical School

Maitrayee Bhattacharyya Peter Newcomb Associate Dean for Diversity Programs Assistant Director Office of the Dean of the College Office of Admission

Rev. Janet Cooper Nelson Elena Oancea Chaplain of the University Assistant Professor Office of the Chaplains and Religious Life Medical Science

Ricky Gresh, Chair Robert Pelcovits Senior Director for Student Engagement Professor Campus Life and Student Services Physics

Chaney Harrison, RUE ’11.5 David Salsone, RUE ’12.5 Undergraduate Student Veteran Undergraduate Veteran

Margaret Klawunn R. Tyson Smith Vice President Postdoctoral Fellow Campus Life and Student Services Sociology

Elizabeth Love Academic Project Manager Office of the Provost

Philip Crean ‘14 and Lauren Rouse ‘15, both undergraduate student veterans, also made substantial contributions to the work of our subcommittee.

Report of the Undergraduate Veterans Subcommittee of the Diversity Advisory Board, October 2012 p. 22

Appendix A: Policy Recommendations for Veterans at Brown University, Chaney Harrison ’11.5 (June 2009)

Policy Recommendations for Veterans At Brown University

09 June 2009

Chaney Harrison ’11 RUE

President, Brown University Student Veterans Society

Report of the Undergraduate Veterans Subcommittee of the Diversity Advisory Board, October 2012 p. 23

Executive Summary

There have no doubt been a great many inquiries as to what role Brown should carve out for itself regarding the education of the latest generation of veterans. The recent passage of a new G.I. Bill that will take effect in August of 2009 has led to a renewed interest and has given rebirth to the question: “What will Brown do for the veteran?” President Henry Wriston answered this best with two words: “Educate him.”

By committing to the education of the veteran Brown recognizes that those individuals the experience of military service who have the intelligence and motivation necessary to gain acceptance into a university such as Brown is very likely the same individuals who will go on to hold important roles of civic engagement and prominence. Brown has long recognized that it has a vested interest in developing these individuals and a responsibility for guiding and shaping their success.

In order for Brown to be at the forefront of veteran education it needs to embrace new policies that are directed towards two goals:

1. Increasing Brown’s visibility and representation among our nation’s servicemembers. 2. Increasing Brown’s ability to meet the unique needs of student veterans.

To address the goal increased visibility and representation there are four recommendations:

1. Develop a veterans’ webpage. 2. Increase the visibility of the RUE program. 3. Actively advertise and recruit among servicemembers. 4. Support public veterans events on campus.

To address the goal of increasing Brown’s ability to meet the unique needs of student veterans, nine recommendations have been broken down into three categories:

1. Application process a. Utilize rolling deadlines for admissions. b. Create a veterans’ section of the RUE Program 2. Transition to academia a. Appoint a single contact for transitioning and student veterans. b. Recognize accredited military trainings for the transfer of academic credit. c. Create transition programming for veterans. d. Create an emergency transition fund. 3. Financial aid a. Familiarity with VA benefits. b. Base financial aid on projected income for the school year, not on the previous year’s income. c. Consider VA benefits/living stipends as income, not as scholarships.

Brown already has in place existing structures and an institutional culture that position it to become a model for peer institutions in its commitment to veterans. The policies recommended above draw from

Report of the Undergraduate Veterans Subcommittee of the Diversity Advisory Board, October 2012 p. 24 our existing strengths and help address our few weaknesses in this area. Implementing these changes would make it possible for Brown to again set a national standard for veteran’s policies while increasing the diversity of its student body and reaffirming its commitment to public service.

Introduction

A person with military experience who has the intelligence and motivation necessary to gain acceptance into a university such as Brown is very likely the same person who will go on to hold important roles of civic engagement and prominence. Brown has long recognized that it has a vested interest in developing these individuals and a responsibility for guiding and shaping their success.

Dating all the way back to the Revolutionary war, Brown University’s long and distinguished tradition of supporting both active members of the Armed Forces and veterans has made it a leader among its peers. At the height of WWII Brown’s student enrollment in military training programs was the largest in the Northeast. The incredible success of the Veteran’s College following the war not only enhanced Brown’s national reputation, it established the university as a leader in veteran’s education.

However, in recent years Brown has failed to live up to its own historic example. Now, with the largest G.I. Bill since WWII set to take effect in August, Brown finds itself far behind its peers when it comes to the presence of veterans on campus; Columbia University, for example, has nearly fifty undergraduate veterans, while Brown has but five.

Veterans have long proved to be invaluable members of the Brown community, their presence enhancing Brown’s goal of being a diverse institution devoted to the public service. Professors and fellow students alike have often claimed that veterans help ground discussions of important global issues and offer unique perspectives on leadership and collaboration.

There are numerous aspects of Brown university that appeal to the veteran community: its prestige; the independence and opportunity afforded undergraduate students; and the support of non- traditional students exemplified by the Resumed Undergraduate Education (RUE) program. By drawing from our strengths and implementing veteran sensitive policies Brown would be able to support student veterans, benefit from their contributions to our community, and regain its national reputation as a champion of veteran’s education.

Goals for New Veteran Policy

Improving veteran’s policy at Brown consists of two closely intertwined goals:

1. Increasing Brown’s visibility and representation among our nation’s servicemembers. 2. Increasing Brown’s ability to meet the unique needs of student veterans.

The need for Brown increase its visibility and representation among servicemembers is rooted the widespread perception—among the armed forces—that the Brown campus is a hostile environment for those who have chosen to serve in the military. Primarily, this feeling stems from the rhetoric of students at Brown—who are well known for their vocal and outspoken opposition to the military and lack of any institutional voice or policies in support of veterans to counteract that expression. These things combined communicate a message to the veteran community that they are unwelcome.

Report of the Undergraduate Veterans Subcommittee of the Diversity Advisory Board, October 2012 p. 25

Further complicating this situation is the fact that our veterans come from diverse backgrounds, many which do not prepare them—academically or emotionally—to consider an Ivy League education with their grasp. While their experiences in the military provide exceptional preparation for academic excellence, it is unsurprising that in the current university environment veterans are suspicious of their own abilities and their place on campus.

Additionally, there is the gap in experience between students and their peers who have gone into service. This results in a classic clash between the abstract and the tangible. Imagine how difficult it might be for the soldier who has spent months on the ground in Afghanistan navigating the intricacies of the tribal councils under the constant threat of ambush or attack to envision himself in classroom of privileged peers abstractly discussing IR theory, and vice versa what it would take to convince a young student to leave the classroom for the harsh reality of a daylight patrol on the streets of Fallujah.

Efforts to bridge this gap must be made on both sides in order to facilitate transition in both directions. Just as the military puts forth extraordinary effort to recruit graduates from elite schools, Brown should put forth a similar effort to attract those elite veterans who will continue to serve their communities and their nation.

As Brown becomes more successful in reaching out to veterans and their presence on campus grows, additional efforts to support them will be needed. Brown has proven its ability to reach out and provide for its students’ need time and time again. It will not require any great effort for Brown to succeed here as well.

In fact, most veterans already have very positive experiences as students at Brown. However, these experiences do nothing to improve Brown’s reputation as, unfortunately, there is currently no way for this, or any other information, to get out to the military community at large. Once Brown invests in making itself understood to the veterans (that they are welcome and supported), resources invested in the second goal—improving Brown’s ability to meet the needs of veterans—will bear fruit, and the continued positive experiences of veterans will further enhance its reputation among our nation’s servicemembers.

Visibility and Representation

The following recommendations are prioritized to address Brown’s lack of visibility and poor representation among our nation’s servicemembers.

1. Develop a veteran’s webpage. Brown needs to establish a webpage for veterans that is linked directly with the Admissions main page. This link should be highly visible and the page should provide comprehensive information regarding admissions policies, financial aid, transition programs, transferring military and academic credit, housing, and campus support. This webpage could also include statements by current student veterans about their experiences at Brown.

Rationale: There is currently no information, whatsoever, on Brown’s website for potential student veterans. This places Brown leagues behind peer institutions. The development of a comprehensive website is absolutely crucial to capturing their attention and communicating Brown’s strengths. Since military members will often find it difficult to explore schools in person,

Report of the Undergraduate Veterans Subcommittee of the Diversity Advisory Board, October 2012 p. 26

providing this information on the website is even more vital when it comes to establishing connections with these potential students. Veterans are a highly motivated and highly independent group of students; by providing as much information as possible up front, we are allowing veterans to effectively determine whether or not Brown is a good decision for them, and regardless of that decision establishing a standard of candid communication on the part of Brown will enhance its reputation throughout the veteran community.

2. Increase the visibility of the RUE program. Brown needs to boast about its RUE program and its RUE students, as they are exemplary. Unfortunately, there is currently little more than a vague webpage announcing its existence to those looking for such a program. Brown should immediately commit to building a comprehensive website that describes the program from top to bottom and advertising it nationally. This program offers an ideal route for those qualified veterans looking to attend an institution of Brown’s caliber.

Rationale: The RUE program is one of the nation’s best programs for nontraditional students, but it is under-advertised and underutilized. By leveraging this existing structure, Brown would be poised to strengthen one of its strongest undergraduate programs and therefore attract and educate those veteran students who will be leaders of tomorrow.

3. Actively advertise and recruit among servicemembers. Brown should be making every effort to attract the best veterans to the university. The first step is working to increase awareness of Brown in the military community. The Admissions Office can begin by utilizing base education offices and military separation programs to inform servicemembers of Brown’s veteran policies and programs. By utilizing these preexisting platforms, Brown could reach a large number of veterans with relatively little effort and expense. Brown could also utilize its own student veterans to provide recruiting briefings to servicemembers around the country, as well as serve as liaisons between the veteran community and the university.

Rationale: Despite the current dearth of veterans on Brown’s campus there is little, if any, effort spent on recruiting veterans. Though admissions officers visit hundreds of high schools every year, there are no presentations on bases and there are no written materials in base education offices. As a result, many veterans who may be eligible and qualified to attend Brown simply are not aware such an opportunity exists. Brown cannot be considered a veteran friendly school until recognizes the need to reach out to this population—as it has increasingly done for other minorities over the years, in recognition of the value of diverse experiences. Use of current student veterans to aid in this process would lend both invaluable credibility to these efforts and be making the best use of Brown’s local resources.

4. Support public veterans events on campus. Brown needs to greatly expand its role in supporting public awareness of veterans’ issues. In recent years Brown has held small Veteran’s Day services on campus. Though a good tribute to the service of Brown’s veterans, these events did little to promote awareness beyond the campus. In addition to expanding its current activities, Brown has many other platforms at its disposal that it can leverage; these include sponsoring panel discussion, speakers, and other presentations that foster understanding on topics related to veterans and the military. A simple example would be a public showing of the film “Culture Warriors” (a Watson Institute project) followed by discussion by professors, veterans, and active duty military on the integration of academic research and military policy.

Report of the Undergraduate Veterans Subcommittee of the Diversity Advisory Board, October 2012 p. 27

Rationale: Brown University’s prominent position both in the state of Rhode Island and the city of Providence is one of both honor and responsibility. As a highly visible institution whose actions are observed and imitated across the nation, it is in Brown’s best interest to utilize its resources to expand awareness of veteran’s issues. In doing so Brown fulfills its mission to serve its community and the nation and enhances its reputation as an institution that supports and inspires discussion and awareness of veterans’ issues.

Meeting the Needs of Student Veterans

Veterans are a vital component of the student population. Their distinct background affords them a perspective from which their peers can benefit enormously. However, their distinct background also provides them with a range of concerns that are not shared by the general student population and are therefore unfamiliar to university staff, faculty, and administration. These concerns are most commonly in the following areas:

1. Application process 2. Transition to academia 3. Financial aid

The following recommendations would inject empathy for veterans’ unique circumstances into the application process.

Veterans attempting to make the transition into college face challenges unlike those of traditional students. By facilitating the application process Brown demonstrates a deep understanding those challenges and reveals a commitment to the education of qualified veterans.

1. Utilize rolling deadlines for admissions. Brown should develop rolling or flexible deadlines for admission of veteran students. By creating three admission cycles per year (March, July, November for example) and allowing servicemembers to matriculate in either the spring or fall, Brown would communicate an unparalled understanding of the difficulties facing veterans in transitioning from military to academic life.

Rationale: Due to the nature of overseas deployments and training exercises veterans have extremely irregular schedules that make it difficult to meet a single, fixed application deadline. Currently, any service member unable to make Brown’s application deadlines must wait until the next admission cycle to reapply. By creating a more flexible application and matriculation schedule Brown acknowledges the constraints of military service and the difficulty of transitioning into civilian life. For an number of reasons—from extending one’s military contract to ensuring availability of G.I. Bill benefits—rolling deadlines will allow veterans to better plan for the transition and reduce the financial risk of extended time between separation and matriculation.

2. Create a veterans’ section of the RUE program. Assuming that it is in the best interest of Brown to strengthen existing programs rather than create new ones, Brown should consider creating section within RUE exclusively for veterans. The admissions process for veterans should reflect the value of their distinct background and the experiences. Utilizing the policies that have been proven in the RUE program, only small tweaks will be needed. One

Report of the Undergraduate Veterans Subcommittee of the Diversity Advisory Board, October 2012 p. 28

key aspect of this new program would be to remove the age requirement (currently you must be 25) to allow access to veterans who conclude their service at a younger age and also to those who leave service early due to an injury or disability.

Rationale: With the implementation of a new G.I. Bill in August of 2009 and a large population of veteran alumni to draw on for the creation of scholarships, it would be in the be in the best interest of Brown, student veterans, and the RUE program to create a separate section for veterans. While this might be considered unfair, or at least unusual, Brown has a tradition setting the standard on how to support of those in military service: President Henry Wriston understood that the demand for higher education among veterans following WWII required a unique response and in 1946, under the banner of the Veteran’s Extension Program, he created a path exclusively for veterans who demonstrated the depth of their personal experiences and their motivation to learn and excel. As a result over 700 veterans who would have otherwise been denied a college education went on to receive a Brown diploma.

The following recommendations would promote a successful transition “from wearing green to the main green.”

Brown has long set the standard among institutions of higher education for supporting transitioning veterans. At the end of World War I, Brown University worked with six other colleges in Rhode Island to provide a Veterans’ Guidance Center at 70 Waterman Street that was the first of its kind in the country. This new center provided comprehensive testing and vocational guidance for returning veterans. Supported by the regional manager of the Veteran’s Administration, this program was an important service for veterans throughout Rhode Island seeking to utilize the benefits available under the newly minted G.I. Bill of Rights and acknowledged the vital role institutions of higher education can play in helping the veteran transition back into civilian life. Although the following recommendations are on the university, through their implementation Brown can once again become a state and national leader in veteran’s education.

3. Appoint a single contact for transitioning and student veterans. A dedicated Veterans Coordinator position should be created to ensure that student veterans have access to the most recent and relevant information regarding their benefits and Brown’s policies. By serving as a liaison between veteran students and the various other administrative departments on campus this person can elevate awareness of veteran’s issues, develop and implement new policies that support veterans, and act as an advisor and campus resource for veteran students at Brown. It is highly recommended that this person either have experience working with veterans or be a veteran.

Rationale: In a recent survey, current Brown student veterans cited the lack of single point of contact as their most serious concern. One veteran spoke of the experience of trying to find the VA certifying official (an essential step in receiving benefits). While speaking with one administrative office, the veteran was told, “I don’t think we have anyone who does that because Brown doesn’t have any veterans.” This kind of conversation leaves a lasting impression on student veterans and it is crucial that this situation is remedied. \

Report of the Undergraduate Veterans Subcommittee of the Diversity Advisory Board, October 2012 p. 29

4. Recognize accredited military trainings for the transfer of academic credit. In order for Brown to stand out as a leader among schools that support veterans it would do well to adopt an active approach to recognizing accredited military training, especially leadership schools or courses taken through civilian institutions. To deny credit merely because of unfamiliarity with the program is clearly unacceptable. Brown could demonstrate its dedication to educating veterans by developing a database of accepted military training that it recognizes for credit and publishing that on the veteran’s webpage of the university’s site.

Rationale: Every veteran student in our experience has had extraordinary difficulties in transferring credit from accredited military training. This training often requires very high academic standards, and in many cases is recognized as the best training in the country within that specific field. The current method of approving credits on a “case-by-case” basis discourages veterans who are understandably eager to complete their degree as quickly as possible.

5. Create transition programming for veterans. As the number of veterans increases, it would serve this population well for Brown to create some sort of transition program that provides a refresher of basic techniques such as note taking, the construction of academic essays, and familiarizes them with the tools and resources available at the university. Additionally, it could be combined with a mentor program (working with on campus student vets and specially trained faculty) that would continue help incoming veterans integrate themselves and develop skills necessary for academic life. Finally, it would be an easy way for all of the student veterans on campus to get to know and learn from each other; veterans, due to privacy requirements, currently rely on luck and circumstance to learn about other veterans on campus.

Rationale: While Brown offers a number of transition programs for various groups of students, there is no program that supports veterans in their transition from “wearing green to the main green.” Competent and capable individuals, many veterans have been out of academia for a number of years and would benefit a greatly from an opportunity to review the skills mentioned above. Support networks are important for every student, and veterans are no different. A transition program provides the foundation for such a network bringing new and existing students together through a common process.

6. Create an emergency transition fund. Many veterans depend upon VA benefits to help them cover the costs of attending school. When these funds are delayed, an emergency transition fund can help those veterans in need continue to focus on their academic work. Without such aid, veterans can find themselves torn between providing for basic needs and meeting the demands of the classroom.

Rationale: Often, through no fault of the student, VA benefits are delayed, sometimes for weeks or months at the beginning of the school year. As veterans often have financial obligations associated with adulthood such as rent, utilities, food, childcare, etc. immediately due, these delays can put significant stress on the student that compromises their ability to be academically successful. If it was known that Brown would be able to help veterans make it through difficult times, Brown would both have a fantastic recruiting tool and set a standard for commitment to this community.

Report of the Undergraduate Veterans Subcommittee of the Diversity Advisory Board, October 2012 p. 30

The following recommendations would help financial aid calculations reflect veterans’ reality.

History has shown that the leading cause for veterans failing to engage in or to complete their studies is financial stress. While there should be no expectation that Brown will provide full financial support, it should be expected that the university will make every effort to help veterans leverage those resources at their disposal.

7. Familiarity with VA benefits. Brown needs to have a designated person in the financial aid office who is intimately familiar with the issues presented by veterans, the GI Bill, and military tuition assistance. This person would serve as a primary contact for information regarding VA benefits, work with student veteran’s to help them make best use of their resources, and develop financial aid policies that address veterans’ needs.

Rationale: There is currently no one in the Office of Financial Aid who is familiar with veterans’ issues and benefits. As a result there is frequent confusion and frustration among both student veterans and aid officers as they attempt to navigate the aid process. Since nearly all veterans at Brown receive some amount of financial aid, the effect of having a designated person to address veterans’ issues will be substantial and immediate.

8. Base financial aid on projected income for the school year, not on the previous year’s income. In calculating financial aid packages the current formula includes the veterans previous years income. While this process has proven valid for calculating aid for most undergraduates—whose parents are expected to continue their current employment—it poorly serves the veteran community. The Office of Financial Aid should develop a process that takes into account the fact that most veterans’ financial status will radically change the moment that they separate from service.

Rationale: It must be understood that veterans are often leaving their career and their only source of income. Including the previous year’s income only serves to put the veteran at a disadvantage and creates additional work and complications for the financial aid office when veterans seek to have their aid recalculated. Additionally, for veteran students, time that could be better spent on academic work must be invested in addressing this issue. Financial concerns represent the single largest threat to veterans both beginning and successfully completing higher education. Therefore, addressing this issue is of the utmost importance in supporting veterans at Brown.

9. Consider VA benefits/living stipends as income, not as scholarships. The university currently utilizes federal guidelines that allow the Office of Financial Aid to consider some VA education benefits as outside scholarship and not as income. This policy results in the reduction university scholarship dollar for dollar and does not account for the fact that this money is intended to aid the veteran with all the costs of attending college, not just tuition.

Rationale: Veterans often have financial responsibilities far exceed those of regular students. Veterans’ benefits are meant not only to help with tuition, but also to help defray living costs and expenses that might otherwise prevent the veteran from attending school. These expenses include such things as off-campus rent, mortgage payments, childcare, health insurance, and other costs that are not covered by university scholarship or other aid.

Report of the Undergraduate Veterans Subcommittee of the Diversity Advisory Board, October 2012 p. 31

Continuing the current policy can put the veteran into a financial situation where the likely outcomes are increased debt, conflict between academic and financial requirements, and an increased risk of the student leaving the university for financial reasons. While federal law governing financial aid may prevent certain actions, developing financial aid policy that actively helps veterans make the best use of their limited resources would help Brown set itself apart as a clear leader for veteran’s issues.

Conclusion

The presence with veterans of the military campus benefits both students and ex-soldiers. For students, engaging with soldiers in classes and dining halls discourages a perception of the military as an abstract structure. It reminds them that our wars are fought not by mindless killers, but by their peers. It helps them to understand that wars, such as those in Iraq and Afghanistan, are not chosen by the military, but instead they are a direct result of our civic participation and the politicians we elect. For veterans, working side by side with students challenges them to step back and analyze their existing perspectives through a new lens. Students’ questions help veterans learn to think critically about their experiences, identify significant ideas, and communicate them effectively. This dialogue between student and veterans ultimately facilitates a deeper level of understanding by both groups and provides an invaluable contribution to their education.

Brown already has in place existing structures and an institutional culture that position it to become a model for peer institutions in its commitment to veterans. The policies recommended above draw from our existing strengths and help address our few weaknesses in this area. Implementing these changes would make it possible for Brown to again set a national standard for veteran’s policies while increasing the diversity of its student body and reaffirming its commitment to public service.

Report of the Undergraduate Veterans Subcommittee of the Diversity Advisory Board, October 2012 p. 32

Appendix B: Subcommittee Plan of Work and Recommended Readings List

The Sub-Committee will explore issues pertaining to student veterans and will report to the Diversity Advisory Board (DAB). In turn, the DAB will deliberate and make recommendations to the Associate Provost for Institutional Diversity. Subsequently, the Associate Provost will make recommendations to the senior officers of the University. Also, the Associate Provost and the faculty co-chair of the DAB will report to the Faculty Executive Committee (FEC). At a designated time, the faculty co-chair will make a report to the faculty and senior administrators at a regularly scheduled monthly Faculty Meeting.

Timeline/Process November: First Meeting – Admission & Recruitment ● Invited guest: Jim Miller, Dean of Admission

November 11: Veterans Day (ceremony at 12 noon on the Main Green & Lincoln Field)

December: Second Meeting – Financial Aid (VA benefits, calculation assumptions, emergency funds, etc.) ● Invited guest: Jim Tilton, Director of Financial Aid (Erica Cummins attended in Jim’s place)

February: Third Meeting – Academic & Campus Life (transition to college, support, community, policies and protocols, advising/advisor) ● Invited guests: J. Allen Ward, Senior Associate Dean for Student Life; Belinda Johnson, Director of Psychological Services; and Ted Wheeler, Director of University Health Services

April: Fourth Meeting – Institutionalization (visibility, leadership, ongoing oversight, events, etc.) ● Invited guests: Russell Carey, Senior Vice President for Corporation Affairs and Governance; Paula Deblois, Director of Volunteer Support in Alumni Relations; Amy Carroll, Director of Government Relations and Community Affairs; Marisa Quinn, Vice President of Public Affairs and University Relations; and Lina Fruzzetti, interim Associate Provost for Institutional Diversity.

End of April: Submit final report to the Diversity Advisory Board (in advance of the May 3 meeting)

May 3: Final meeting of the DAB for 2011-12

Reference Materials

Peer institution resources ● University of Michigan’s U-M Student Veterans Assistance Program ● UC Berkeley’s Transfer, Re-entry & Student Parent Center’s Student Veterans @ Cal ● Dartmouth’s Undergraduate Veterans Association (The Dartmouth, May 20, 2010) ● Veteran’s Sanctuary, affiliated with Cornell’s Center for Transformative Action

Student experiences ● Student Veterans: 3 Columbia College of General Studies students speak about their experience (The Brian Lehrer Show, November 11, 2009) ● Samuel Crist, Dartmouth class of 2010 (Dartmouth News podcast, May 22, 2008) ● From Battlefield to Ivy League, on the G.I. Bill (New York Times, January 8, 2010) ● Combat to College (New York Times, October 30, 2008)

Report of the Undergraduate Veterans Subcommittee of the Diversity Advisory Board, October 2012 p. 33

● From Soldier to Student, a Bumpy Road written by a Georgetown student (NYT blog, 2011)

Articles [in shared Google doc collection for the sub-committee] ● Diversity On Campus: Ten-Hut. The Americans are coming. The Americans are coming. (in Today’s Campus, January/February 2012). ● Coming Home: Student Veterans’ Articulation of College Re-enrollment (Journal of Student Affairs Research and Practice, 2011) ● Enhancing Veteran Success in Higher Education (in PeerReview Winter 2011) ● US Military Veterans Transition to College: Combat, PTSD, and Alienation on Campus (Journal of Student Affairs Research and Practice, 2011) ● A Comparative Analysis of Student Service Member/Veteran and Civilian Student Drinking Motives (Journal of Student Affairs Research and Practice, 2011)

Report of the Undergraduate Veterans Subcommittee of the Diversity Advisory Board, October 2012 p. 34

Appendix C: Notes from January 31, 2012 focus group of current and recent student veterans on academic and campus life

Participants: Chaney Harrison, David Salsone, Eric Dahlbom, Philip Crean, Nicholas Gesualdo, and Lauren Rouse (Lauren not in attendance but offered comments electronically)

Transition and Readiness

How did your military experience prepare you, or set you back, for taking on academic studies at Brown? (Examples might include increased maturity, discipline, etc.) ● Discipline ● New GI Bill offers the chance for a veteran to go to almost any school that they want to go (it makes it affordable). The opportunity to go where I am inspired to go motivates me to succeed. ● Military training schools often enforce rigorous training consequences (if you fail, you immediately get kicked out). This reinforces dedication to succeed. ● The responsibilities placed upon veterans in their service, encourage taking ownership ● One student talked about the change the military brought within him == desire to succeed (willingness to take advantage of opportunities) ● Encouraging veterans to participate in existing campus groups helps to facilitate the transition into integrating socially with a much younger peer group. ○ BOLT, Rugby, and Crew are all examples of places where current vets found close communities that resemble the cohesiveness of their military, found needed structure, or created small structured opportunities for social transition. ● Work ethic: work real hard, don’t make waves, don’t seek credit. ● It is important to keep in mind the mindset of enlisted military. This is not a community that is trained be self-reliant, not to self-advocate. If a veteran is used to working in the culture of top- down instruction, they may not understand the self-advocacy necessary to successfully navigate an open platform like Brown. ● Keep in mind that there are very different subcultures within the military. ● Example given of seeing a non-Vet, first-year student advocate for a better grade. In the military, work is not about you/the individual. One student emphasized that this was an especially hard lesson to learn. Part of it is just personal growth and adjustment but it’s been helpful to have guidance from people who have dealt with both of these drastically different systems.

Importance of veteran contacts prior to arrival, during application ● Most referenced seeking out veterans on campus, primarily via search engines. Several referenced BDH article with Chaney several years ago and reaching out to him.

You went through RUE/Transfer orientation, was it helpful in facilitating your transition? ● Failed to effectively integrate the RUE & RUE-like cohort. We need to see what we look like and know who each other are. ● How veterans prepare for the academic rigor varies, but each seems to find some way to engage with their perceived weaknesses. ● Importance of emphasizing the campus experience as integral -- not just about getting the in the classroom education. Need to really drive that home for veterans. Leadership in the military is different; cultivating leadership skills for the civilian world requires social engagement, group work, etc. One student discussed commuting 30 minutes and living off-campus as an example.

Report of the Undergraduate Veterans Subcommittee of the Diversity Advisory Board, October 2012 p. 35

Do you feel like you belong here? ● I don’t really feel like I identify with Brown, or, that Brown is part of my identity as much as a normal freshman. ● Most days I don’t. It’s just something I’m doing because it’s the smart thing to do and who would turn down an Ivy League school? I know that has more to do with my own transition than with this particular school, and the veteran community helps with that.

Classroom/academic environment ● All generally felt that faculty have been very supportive, including when needing to plan for training weekends, etc. ● Not clear that students know policies/protocols facilitate training, deployments, etc. -- students have felt supported as they have navigated this on their own with faculty, etc. ● Two paths -- come to Brown out of military and those that transfer from another college. One student talked about putting his mind to it, and coming with the attitude that if he worked hard he could do anything. If he didn’t do well at first, then he would just work harder. ● Only one experienced a faculty member making political statements regarding wars and veterans; the class was dropped, mostly because the student felt the class was being poorly taught.

Notes about other services ● Beverly in Career LAB has been a valuable RUE resource.

How comfortable do you feel about revealing your veteran status? ● People ask and you get to become a pro at telling your story. ● I don’t usually volunteer to talk about my background, but I don’t have any problems talking about it. ● There aren’t many older students, and among those, even among the RUE community, there aren’t many veterans. Additionally, there is some sense that many of the students here, either through their inexperience in the world or their liberal leanings, look askew at anything related to the military. Somewhat negative view of the military that many younger students seem to have. I get the sense that some of them view the military as a last resort for unintelligent or misguided young people. Telling people I’m a veteran doesn’t create any issues but it can be frustrating trying to communicate with people who think that way. ● There isn’t a problem interacting with students. Most seem interested and ask questions -- sometimes a lot of questions and need to communicate desire to move on and talk about other topics.

Brown, as an institution, values my military service? • I have seen a bit of distinction between feelings towards policy and feelings toward me as an individual. • No. It’s clear where resources and energy are directed and in my work in advocating for student veterans I have not seen anything that indicates veterans are valued on campus. • I haven’t felt like Brown is very prepared to deal with my co-responsibilities as a reservist and a student. • I don’t think Brown values military service in general. I don’t take Brown’s lack of support for the military personally. At the same time, it’s a bit disheartening to see such a close-minded policy coming from this university. I was also surprised at the lack of information I got from the administration prior to my arrival when I was trying to determine the financial aid I would be getting. Getting a veterans’ office together is a big step.

Report of the Undergraduate Veterans Subcommittee of the Diversity Advisory Board, October 2012 p. 36