“We used to have a slogan in [the Defense Commissary Agency] that it’s ‘worth the trip.’ Well, sometimes, it’s not,” said Bill Moore, director of the commissary agency, in comments provided to Military Times. “That’s been a complaint from our customers. If we can’t get the patron to the store, then we’ve got to get the benefit to the patron. That’s what Click2Go delivery is really about at these eight locations” where the test is being conducted.

Since the agency began home deliveries at eight stores in June, they’ve had an average increase of 43% in their Click2Go sales at those stores. The home delivery program is an expansion of the Click2Go program, where customers at stores worldwide order online and pick up their groceries curbside at their commissary.

But this test takes the groceries a step farther — to the customer’s front door.

“So far, it’s working extremely well at [Fort] Belvoir. We’re knocking it out of the park there,” Moore said.

The pilot continues through Aug. 30 at eight locations: Scott Air Force Base, Illinois; Fort Bragg South, North Carolina; MacDill Air Force Base, Florida; Belvoir and Naval Station Norfolk, Virginia; Joint Base Lewis-McChord, Washington; and Marine Corps Air Station Miramar and Naval Station San Diego in California.

Customers who live within a 20-mile radius of one of those commissaries can order groceries to be delivered.

After the pilot ends, officials will assess and make decisions about moving forward, said DeCA spokesman Kevin Robinson. He said it’s premature to discuss any lessons learned that could affect the solicitation process going forward.

The delivery fee in most cases is less than $4. That’s in addition to the cost of groceries, the commissary 5% surcharge, and any tips customers provide for the delivery driver.

The average dollar amount for a typical delivery order is $116, Robinson said. Customers can use online and mobile options to browse items, submit orders, schedule delivery and pay for their groceries from their computer, phone, tablet or mobile device.

The 43% increase in sales includes the cost of the groceries and the surcharge, but not fees or tips, Robinson said.

The majority of the deliveries are going to off-base locations, Robinson said. Foot traffic in those commissaries hasn’t changed; the delivery test is bringing new Click2Go customers and previous Click2Go customers who are choosing delivery instead of curbside pickup.

Numbers aren’t available yet on deliveries to barracks, Robinson said. But officials said they “turned up the volume on convenience after hosting focus groups with new young, single enlisted service members who value convenience as much as their savings, and they want low-cost, healthy options.”

Home delivery is also a viable option for families, and for disabled veterans who may find it more difficult to visit their store.

Those eligible for doorstep delivery, within a 20-mile radius of the eight commissaries include: active duty, Guard and reserve members; military retirees; Medal of Honor and Purple Heart recipients; former prisoners of war; 100 percent disabled veterans and those with a VA-documented service-connected disability rating; authorized family members; and VA-approved and designated primary family caregivers of eligible veterans.

We tested the delivery

Military Times conducted our own test to see how the home delivery works from Fort Belvoir, Virginia, to a location within 20 miles in Virginia, and found it works as advertised.

If you are an authorized customer, you log on to shop.commissaries.com, and hit the Click2Go button. After authentication, you select your store and choose from that store’s full assortment of grocery or center-store, items.

Frozen foods are available, as well as fresh fruits and veggies. In some cases, there’s a smaller, more refined selection online than what you find in the store of top selling items such as fresh meat, deli and bakery items and fresh seafood. As you shop online, the virtual shopping basket is updated, reflecting the items and prices.

If you’re uncertain whether you’re within the 20-mile radius, you might want to put a few items in your shopping cart and move to checkout to make sure you get the delivery option. Customers must give a minimum lead time of four hours from the time the order is submitted. During checkout, you’ll see the available delivery times, and select the most convenient time frame. In our experience, the delivery happened exactly within the two-hour window chosen.

Delivery windows vary from store to store.

You’ll pay online. The commissary accepts debit, Visa, MasterCard, American Express and Discover payments. They don’t accept cash, check or Electronic Benefit Transfer or / WIC (Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children) vouchers for the doorstep delivery. They’re working on the ability to accept EBT and WIC vouchers.

Note that the commissary will require you to authorize a higher amount on your card than the estimated total, which shows up pending on your debit/credit card. But only the actual amount of your order is charged. In our case, it was lower than anticipated because some of the items we ordered were not available. We noticed that it initially looked like we were getting charged twice, but we were only charged once.

Our delivery fee was $3.97. Aside from the commissary savings, the amount of money we saved on gas alone was worth it.

You have the ability to ask for substitutions if your first choice isn’t available, such as “best comparable,” “same brand, different size.” You can also make substitutions by adding notes to your order. Commissary employees will pick the items from the shelves to fill the customers’ orders, so contractors delivering the groceries just pick up the order from the stores and deliver them to the customer.

You can shop for your groceries using a variety of filters, such as brand name, items on sale, and categories, such as produce or health and beauty.

The produce we ordered was good. The bananas were “more yellow than green,” exactly as we specified. Asparagus was good.

Have you tried out the commissary doorstep delivery? Send your comments and tips to staff reporter Karen Jowers at kjowers@militarytimes.com.

And the auditors are questioning the accuracy of DoD’s report on the number of children who are screened and tested for lead exposure.

“Without oversight, [Defense Health Agency] cannot ensure that pediatric lead screening, testing, treatment and reporting are being implemented consistently” across all military treatment facilities, auditors with the Government Accountability Office said in their report released July 26.

In DoD’s 2021 report to Congress, officials reported that 30,412 children were screened for lead exposure; 12,044 children were tested for elevated blood lead levels; and 83 children had elevated blood lead levels for the eight-month period that was covered in the report. But that report was likely an “undercount,” auditors stated, because it didn’t include data from some military treatment facilities, and had incomplete data from others.

For years, military families have questioned whether the military was properly tracking and treating health issues related to military housing, including blood lead levels in their children.

“DoD needs to be on top of this,” said Kelly Hruska, government relations director for the National Military Family Association. “We’ve had far too many problems in military housing to let this slide. Checking the lead levels in military children is very important.

“We all need to draw that line to readiness,” Hruska added. “The service member’s head is not going to be on the mission if they’re worried their children are being exposed to lead-based paint.”

The most common source of lead exposure for children is in buildings built before 1978.

Lead-based paint exposure for children is just one issue lawmakers have tackled in response to numerous problems with the military’s privatized housing, ranging from mold to vermin.

The fiscal 2020 National Defense Authorization Act required DoD to establish guidelines for its military treatment facility providers on screening, testing and reporting blood lead levels in children; to provide the guidelines to its facility providers and submit a report to Congress on the number of children screened and found to have elevated blood lead levels.

There is no safe blood lead level in children, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Lead exposure can cause serious health problems in children, such as brain damage, slowed development and growth, and learning and behavioral health problems. DoD has developed guidelines which adopt the CDC recommendations for lead screening and testing and DoD provided those guidelines to the military services in September 2021.

Screening and testing is important to detect the problem early and provide treatment. Recommendations for treatment vary based on the amount of lead found in the child’s blood.

The GAO was tasked with reporting on the effectiveness of DoD’s pediatric lead processes.

They found that the Defense Health Agency doesn’t oversee providers’ adherence to the guidelines. DHA officials agreed with GAO’s recommendation that they develop a plan to oversee the military treatment facilities to make sure they’re following the guidelines related to pediatric lead screening, testing and reporting. The plan will include time frames.

Military service officials told GAO they previously relied on peer reviews as a method to ensure children were properly screened and tested for elevated lead levels. But these officials also said oversight is no longer their responsibility after the military treatment facility is under control of the DHA.

DoD is in the process of moving the MTFs from the authority of the military services to the authority of the DHA, and the full alignment of the MTFs under DHA will likely be finished in late 2023.

In March 2022, DHA officials told GAO they added specific lead-related questions to the mandatory pediatric intake forms in the new electronic health record, called MHS Genesis. That Genesis system is scheduled to be implemented in all MTFs by the end of fiscal year 2023, DHA officials told GAO.

DoD has developed guidelines for its military treatment facility providers regarding the pediatric lead processes. For example, DoD’s standardized pediatric lead screening questions include questions about whether the child lives in a “high lead risk ZIP code”; has a sibling or playmate who has had lead poisoning; lives in or visits a house or child care facility built before 1950; or lives in or visits a house or child care facility built before 1978 that has peeling and chipping paint or has been renovated or remodeled within the previous six months.

This risk assessment should be completed on children at the ages of six months, nine months, 12 months, 18 months and 24 months, and then annually through age six. DoD guidelines expect providers to identify children for risk of lead exposure, and test children for elevated blood lead levels, according to state or local health jurisdiction guidelines.

If they’re located in states and localities that don’t have formal pediatric lead testing requirements, MTF providers should refer to recommendations and guidelines from other professional organizations, such as the American Academy of Pediatrics.

Besides missing data, GAO also questioned the methodology DoD used to collect the data for the 2021 report to Congress.

“As a result, GAO could not determine the extent to which the data in the report were complete or if the data were accurate, and therefore reliable,” auditors stated. DoD officials told the auditors they couldn’t replicate the screening methods because they didn’t know all the criteria used to collect the data.

They also told auditors that DoD staff involved in compiling the data no longer work for DoD.

The Military Child Care in Your Neighborhood-Plus program will expand to the Miami-Dade County area in September, to Texas in October and to Colorado in November, said Gilbert Cisneros, Jr., undersecretary of defense for personnel and readiness.

The program, which began in 2019 in Maryland and Virginia, expanded to Nevada in September 2021, and to Washington state in February.

“We’ll continue our concerted effort to educate states on what Military Child Care In Your Neighborhood-Plus can do and encourage their participation, especially in those states where our military families are stationed,” Cisneros said during the Military Child Education Coalition’s Global Summit Wednesday. “We are looking forward to more states joining us in the coming days.”

He said DoD officials are in discussions with officials in California, North Carolina and additional counties in Florida.

“It’s certainly no secret that in certain regions and installations around the country we have challenges in meeting the child care needs of some military parents, especially those who would prefer to get their children into child development centers where they know their children will receive expert care and wonderful developmental and early educational support,” he said.

The Military Child Care In Your Neighborhood-Plus initiative started in October 2019 as a two-year pilot program limited to Maryland and five regions of Virginia.

The current long-standing military fee assistance programs offset the cost of child care in the civilian community when child care isn’t available on the installation. It helps those in locations with long waiting lists for child care, as well as those in assignments that aren’t near a military installation.

The program is meant to bring parents’ child care costs in the community more in line with what they would pay for on-base child care. Child care fees on military installations are based on total family income, and the cost of child care is subsidized by DoD.

The ongoing military fee assistance programs pay the subsidy to nationally-accredited child care providers in the community as the first choice.

The difference in the MCCYN-Plus program is that it pays the subsidy to providers in locations where nationally accredited care isn’t available, to help include more centers and family child care providers. However, if they aren’t nationally accredited, the child care providers must participate in that state’s quality improvement program. That’s over and above required state licensing.

As Cisneros noted, the child care providers have to meet DoD’s “standards for quality, and ensure our military children are cared for in safe and supportive environments.”

The fee assistance subsidy for community-based child care is the difference between what the service member would pay for child care in DoD programs, and the community-based child care provider’s rate, up to a provider rate cap for full-time care.

In 2022, the monthly fee assistance provider rate cap is $1,500 per child per month. In fiscal 2023, all of the military service branches plan to increase the monthly provider rate cap to $1,700 per child per month.

The fee assistance programs can make a substantial difference for families.

For example, if a family is in category 5, making between $60,001 to $70,000 a year in total family income, their monthly fee would be $516 for full-time DoD child care. If their approved community child care provider charges more — up to $1,500 a month — the parent would pay $516, and the rest is subsidized by the military service branch in payments to the provider.

The MCCYN-Plus program means more child care centers and family child care providers could participate in the fee assistance program.

In Virginia, for example, MCCYN-Plus meant a possible expansion to more than 800 additional eligible child care centers in regions with military presence. In Maryland, there are more than 4,600 child care programs that can participate.

The fee assistance programs are administered by Child Care Aware, which also helps families find accredited community based child care providers as the first choice. The child care providers in the MCCYN-Plus program who have a quality level of three or higher in their state’s quality improvement program are made available to families as an alternative.

For more information on military child care fee assistance, families should visit ChildCareAware.org.

As of July 19, the stock rates across commissaries in the continental U.S. are hovering around 61%, compared to about 50% in early June. Overseas, the stock rates are about 72%, compared to 55-to-60% in early June, said Kevin Robinson, spokesman for the Defense Commissary Agency.

The availability of infant formula for all commissaries is still fluid, and evolving daily, he said. Patrons may still see some shortages for the time being. But commissary officials are optimistic, Robinson added, noting, “our availability of the limited infant formula products on hand is relatively consistent, and we expect our shelf stockage rates will being to normalize in the next 90 days.”

Commissaries continue to put limits on how much infant formula customers can purchase in order to help provide equal access to all customers, he said. Customers should check with their local commissary for information on limits.

“Until the supply chain provides more product, we will continue to work with our distributors to get what’s available and put it on our stores shelves as fast as possible,” Robinson said. “As always, we will ensure all orders for overseas and remote stores receive priority for infant formula shipments.”

Officials are working with suppliers daily to increase the amount of baby formula products, and the suppliers are working to increase production, he said.

In mid-February, Abbott, the largest U.S. maker of infant formula, to include Similac, announced it was recalling various lots of three powdered infant formulas from their Sturgis, Michigan plant after federal officials began investigating rare bacterial infections in four babies who were fed formula. The company also shut down the plant, triggering the nationwide infant formula shortage, especially with specialty baby formulas. Abbott produces about 40% of the baby formula in the U.S., and that Michigan plant is a big producer. There had already been some supply chain issues with baby formula.

The Michigan Abbott plant reopened June 4 to restart production, but then had to shut down two weeks later because of flooding caused by heavy storms. It reopened July 1, and has been initially manufacturing EleCare. Abbott officials announced July 15 they expect to begin releasing EleCare products in the coming weeks, and will restart the production of Similac at the plant as soon as possible.

Meanwhile, other manufacturers have been ramping up production, including suppliers of the commissary brand formula under the private label name Tippy Toes.

Fewer military, veterans and spouses are likely to recommend military service, according to the findings, and the reasons are related to their own well-being, said Shannon Razsadin, president and executive director of the Military Family Advisory Network.

“At the end of the day, families are having a hard time making ends meet, and that’s affecting their overall well-being,” she said. “We see the connection between well-being and loneliness, well-being and housing, well-being and food security. When you layer that on top of the fact that fewer people are likely to recommend military service, it paints a very clear picture of concern related to the future of the all-volunteer force.”

This is the fourth survey fielded by the organization, generally every two years. This time, the biggest surprise, said Razsadin, was the drop in the percentage of survey respondents who said they would recommend military life – from 74.5% in 2019 to 62.9% in 2021.

The online Military Family Support Programming Survey was fielded from Oct. 4 to Dec. 15, 2021, with 8,638 participating. The largest group of respondents was spouses of active duty members, at 44%, followed by active duty members, at 14%. Nearly 60% of the respondents overall were between the ages of 25 and 39.

“This was troubling for us,” Razsadin said. “It was really the fact that families do not feel like military life lines up with family life.”

Based on their answers, the reasons were related to frequent separations, and the fact that military life is not conducive to family life, she added, noting that the fact that the survey was conducted on the heels of the U.S. military’s exit from Afghanistan in 2021 didn’t show up in the findings, however.

In general, over the years, a number of military children have followed in their parents’ footsteps, but there are indications those trends were waning, with other surveys finding that military parents are increasingly unlikely to recommend service to their children. But a recent survey of military teens found that 65 percent still want to serve in the military.

The MFAN report also pointed to a root cause of many problems that military families have understood for years: the military move. In 2021, those who had recently experienced a permanent change of station reported negative or very negative experiences with the reimbursement of moving costs, at 40%; effects on spouse employment, at 38%; and change in cost of living, at 56%. In the future, the organization will further look at these negative experiences, researchers stated.

Burden of housing costs

The survey provided more data on the impact of rising housing costs. Nearly half, 45%, of currently serving families experienced a severe housing burden, spending more than 50% of the household income on housing costs, such as mortgage or rent and utilities. That compares to 20% of veteran and retiree families.

During an MFAN panel discussion of the results, Marine Corps wife Hana Romer said she and her husband are making rent and mortgage payments now, in order to secure housing when they move from Monterey, California, to Camp Lejeune, North Carolina. They’re set to PCS in December, and were being outbid by cash offers while house hunting in North Carolina. So they made the decision to build a house — and to lock in their interest rate in March.

Meanwhile, in Monterey, some families who arrived in June were still living in hotels by mid-July, waiting for housing, she said.

The survey found that the situation of the local housing market ranked among the top five reasons for living on base in 2021, but wasn’t noted in previous years’ surveys. In 2021, and continuing into 2022, military families have been affected by skyrocketing housing prices. For those who lived off base, the poor condition of military housing has been the top reason in the surveys since 2019, but the lack of available military housing has also consistently been among the top reasons.

There was a bright spot regarding privatized military housing, Razsadin said. Residents are seeing better responsiveness on repair issues from their housing companies. But the results show issues with the military commands’ responsiveness to military privatized housing issues. Legislation enacted in the last two years has aimed to require better response from housing companies, and improve the conditions, as well as improve oversight of this housing by the military.

Most of those who lived in privatized housing, 64%, said the condition of their housing is unchanged. But 28% said conditions have gotten better; 8% said they have gotten worse.

Financial stress

The survey this year asked about total household income. Of the currently serving military families who participated, 44% have a combined household income of between $25,000 and $75,000, before taxes. That includes Basic Allowance for Housing.

Hunger and food insecurity are more common in families that experience high stress due to finances, according to the findings.

In 2021, one in six, or 16.6%, of military and veteran families were experiencing food insecurity or hunger, compared to about 15% in 2017. The highest frequency of those experiencing food insecurity was among currently serving, including Guard and Reserve families, at 18.4%, Razsadin said. In addition, 9.6% of the population were experiencing very low food security or hunger, she said.

Of those who had problems with food insecurity, 96% used federal assistance programs such as the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) and the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC), and 70% of those said they found those programs helpful.

Overall, veteran and currently-serving military families have trouble saving money. In veteran families, 38% have less than $500 in emergency savings. In currently serving military families, 22 percent have less than $500 in emergency savings. For military retiree families, 17% have less than $500 in emergency savings. Enlisted families were most likely to have low or no emergency funds.

At the other end of the spectrum, 29% of currently serving families; 34% of military retiree families; and 21% of veteran families reported having $10,000 or more in emergency savings funds.

The most significant hurdle reported in saving money was income, but respondents also cited increased cost of living and inflation.

“This survey was fielded when some of the COVID protections were still in place, before this massive inflation,” Razsadin said. “It’s a really big concern of ours. We’re hearing from families, especially families overseas right now, about major problems making ends meet, with issues of gas prices and COLA changes, and things like that.”

Recommendations

*Increase the availability of health care and mental health appointments. “Addressing this issue requires a close look at the reimbursement rates to ensure that community-based providers are appropriately compensated for their time, in a way that is commensurate with the civilian community,” they wrote.

*Increase the availability of child care.

*Right-size Basic Allowance for Housing to decrease the housing cost burden on military families.

*Review the pay structure. With the challenges of frequents moves, military spouse unemployment and child care, many military families must make ends meet on the service member’s pay alone. “These data show that relying on a single income to sustain the household is problematic for many,” the researchers stated.

In a recently released report detailing plans to address food insecurity in the military and longer-term economic security, Defense officials outlined some steps such as increasing child care options, working to increase employment opportunities for spouses, and reviewing the housing allowance and other allowances.

In addition, DoD is working with the White House to initiate the 14th Quadrennial Review of Military Compensation (QRMC) later this year.

Officials said in a new report that they will focus on helping service members and families get the food they need, while also improving their economic security over the long term.

For longer term economic security of service members, officials will analyze the Basic Allowance for Housing benefit; evaluate the feasibility of Dependent Care Flexible Spending accounts for service members; and review options to increase the dislocation allowance to further defray out-of-pocket costs for service members during a permanent change of station move.

Other efforts range from improving the availability of affordable, healthy food on military installations, to improving employment opportunities for military spouses and availability of affordable child care.

Officials are also putting together a plan for implementing the new Basic Needs Allowance, set to start in January 2023, as a safety net for families in need.

Efforts also expand and build on many programs and resources that have been available for years, and part of the work will involve more outreach and education to troops and families.

The focus of this strategy “is to equip our service members and families with the tools, skills, and resources necessary to ensure they have access to sufficient nutritious food to meet the myriad demands of the military mission, without having to endure undue hardship or make difficult financial and personal decisions that may impact their quality of life,” wrote Gilbert R. Cisneros, Jr., under secretary of defense for personnel and readiness, in the report.

Problems with financial security show up in a variety of ways, including food insecurity. Food insecurity is defined as a situation in which “a person or a household doesn’t have enough nutritious food to live an active, healthy life, and can range from relying on cheaper, less-nutritious foods to skipping meals,” according to the report. There’s also a difference between food security and hunger.

“Hunger describes a physiological condition, while food security measures economic access to food rather than the experience of being hungry,” the report says.

DoD officials have abandoned their previous method for determining the prevalence of food insecurity in the military, which used the percentage of service members enrolled in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program — also previously known as food stamps. The 13th Quadrennial Review of Military Compensation completed in 2020 reported that between 0.08% and 0.1% of service members — between 880 and 1,100 members — use SNAP benefits.

The new analysis comes from the survey of active duty members, fielded from Oct. 26, 2020, through Jan. 25, 2021, which asked questions related to their experience over the previous 12 months, using the standardized U.S. Department of Agriculture measure of food security.

That survey was fielded to a random, representative sampling of 125,000 active duty members. The response rate was 12%. It was fielded in the first year of the pandemic, and also before the current high levels of food inflation.

The analysis of the 2020 Status of Forces Survey of Active Duty Members showed:

• 76% of total active duty service members were food secure, and 24% had experienced food insecurity at some point in the preceding year of the survey. Food security as defined by USDA means access at all times to enough food for an active, healthful life for all household members.
• 14% reported experiencing low food security. That means reduced quality, variety or desirability of diet. There’s little or no indication of reduced food intake.
• 10% reported experiencing very low food security. That means there were multiple indications of disrupted eating patterns and reduced food intake.
• Junior enlisted members, who have typically less than four years of service, are at the highest risk of food insecurity.

Analysis of the 2018 survey of active duty members, and the 2021 survey of active duty spouses, showed similar trend lines. For enlisted members with an unemployed spouse, 43% reported food insecurity at some point in the previous year. Overall, military spouses who were unemployed reported higher rates of food insecurity, 41%, than spouses who were employed, 22%.

Officials are taking a broad approach to address the problem, even as they continue to gather data and conduct analysis of the root causes and impact of food insecurity.

Cisneros will provide progress reports on each of six lines of effort to the deputy secretary of defense. The lines of efforts are:

• Increase access to healthy food. Actions include the Defense Commissary Agency’s at-home grocery delivery pilot at eight locations, with agency-wide expansion expected soon after; the commissary agency’s efforts to increase access to on-the-go, ready-to-eat, economical and healthy food options; and the military departments’ reviews of dining facility hours and access to healthy options and the effectiveness of their meal card programs.
• Review service member pay and benefits. DoD is analyzing the Basic Allowance for Housing benefit and will evaluate the feasibility of implementing Dependent Care Flexible Spending accounts for service members. Advocates have long urged these steps. Officials are also reviewing ways to increase the dislocation allowance that troops receive to further defray the out-of-pocket costs troops incur when making a PCS move. Officials are also making plans to implement the Basic Needs Allowance in January 2023.
• Enhance spouse employment opportunities. DoD officials will categorize job opportunities offered by partners in the Military Spouse Employment Partnership program to identify gaps, find ways to increase employment in specific fields, and find ways to better connect spouses with job opportunities. They’ve been working on interstate licensure compacts for seven professions since last year. DoD will also expand the Military Child Care in Your Neighborhood Plus program to additional states and finalize a near-term agreement with the Department of State to allow military spouses employed by the federal government to work remotely from overseas locations.
• Reinforce financial resources and awareness. Among other things, DoD and the services will launch a self-guided financial well-being assessment tool to help service members find resources.
• Encourage service members and families to seek resources and services. Among other things, DoD will develop a “Resources at the Ready” campaign to increase awareness of all military benefits and quality of life resources available to troops and their families. They’ll work with military-connected organizations to set up outreach sessions for service members and families.
• Expand data collection and reporting. Officials seek more data and analysis to understand the scope and reasons for food insecurity. One screening tool has been added to the Military Health System to identify those at risk of being food insecure. Parents answer questions about the child’s family, including food insecurity. All Military and Family Life Counselors will screen for food insecurity when they meet with service members and families.

DoD will conduct research to get information at the installation level about food insecurity, but they’ll also work with a number of federal agencies in various research efforts.

While the military services have banned the use of TikTok from government devices, troops and family members do use the app on personal devices.

TikTok is owned by the Beijing-based ByteDance, said Brendan Carr, the senior Republican on the Federal Communications Commission. And he’s concerned about the amount of non-public sensitive data Americans upload that could be flowing into the hands of the Chinese government.

TikTok has grown in popularity in the military community. For example, troops often upload videos of barracks, military equipment and maneuvers, Carr said in testimony Wednesday before the House Oversight Committee’s panel on national security.

“With TikTok, this is a device right in your pocket. It’s going inside the military installation, looking at location data, which can give people information on troop movements,” Carr said. “There’s a range of ways that that sensitive data going back to Beijing with their sophisticated [artificial intelligence] can ultimately be used to harm U.S. national security.”

The hearing was held to explore financial fraud targeting service members and veterans. The threats to active duty and veterans come from a variety of sources, according to Carr, and many of the frauds seen on other online platforms are also perpetrated on TikTok. But there are unique national security concerns when it comes to this video-sharing app.

“TikTok has engaged in a pattern of misrepresentation regarding both the amount and extent of data it’s collected as well as how much has been accessed from inside China,” Carr said.

He cited a recent BuzzFeed News report of leaked audio from 80 internal TikTok meetings that showed China has repeatedly accessed Americans’ user data.

“The flow of this non-public sensitive data into China is particularly troubling given the [People’s Republic of China’s] track record of engaging in espionage and other nefarious acts,” Carr said.

“At its core, TikTok functions as a sophisticated surveillance tool that harvests extensive amounts of sensitive data from search and browsing history, keystroke patterns, location data, and biometrics including face prints and voice prints,” Carr added. “All of the concerns with TikTok are heightened in the military context.”

Rep. Glenn Grothman, R-Wisc., proposed that the military should be proactively urging troops to not use the app.

“Should the military be doing more to tell our members to stay off of TikTok?” he asked.

The federal government should be doing more, Carr said. The government “should address the continued use of TikTok on military installations, as well as any use that depicts U.S. military operations,” he added.

Ongoing national security reviews of TikTok, currently being conducted by officials in the Treasure and Commerce departments, should be finished soon, according to Carr.

Leaders of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, chairman Sen. Mark Warner, D-Va., and vice chairman Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fl., called on the Federal Trade Commission in a July 5 letter to initiate an investigation of TikTok.

In light of reports about the Chinese government’s access to the data, they wrote, the FTC should immediately launch an investigation “on the basis of apparent deception by TikTok, and coordinate this work with any national security or counter-intelligence investigation that may be initiated by the U.S. Department of Justice.”

Carr has also called on Google and Apple to remove TikTok from their app stores. In a July 5 blog, a TikTok official addressed the company’s approach to keeping U.S. data secure.

“The security of the data our community entrusts us with is a top priority at TikTok, despite recent reports questioning that commitment,” wrote Michael Beckerman, TikTok’s head of public policy for the Americas.

TikTok recently stood up a new U.S. data security division “to bring heightened focus and governance to our ongoing efforts to strengthen our data protection policies and protocols, further protect our users, and build confidence in our systems and controls in the United States,” he stated.

The creation of that division was an important milestone in the goals they previously laid out, he said: “minimizing access to U.S. user data and minimizing data transfers across regions – including to China.”

Service and defense officials have taken steps to mitigate the impact of higher costs and are looking at some longer-term solutions.

“Financial strain due to inflation can create stresses on our teammates, and it is our responsibility as leaders at all levels to do everything we can to use available programs and resources to provide relief, and where appropriate, advocate for additional resources,” Air Force Secretary Frank Kendall said in announcing help available for airmen and Guardians, as well as some ongoing efforts the service is undertaking with the Defense Department.

The military relief societies have long stepped in to help service members and families with a variety of emergency financial assistance, such as car repairs, travel for unexpected events such as funerals and basic living expenses such as rent and utilities.

But recently, relief society programs have also targeted the cost of shipping infant formula, the costs to get housing in this highly competitive market, and the high cost of shipping pets to and from overseas on permanent change of station orders.

Housing and PCS-related expenses

♦ Installation officials can request extensions of entitlements for temporary lodging expenses beyond the traditional 10 days as service members wait for housing following a permanent change of station move. Under the Joint Travel Regulation, installations can ask for TLE extensions of up to 60 days.

♦ The DoD mileage rate for PCS travel has increased from $0.18 per mile to $0.22 per mile, as of July 1. The mileage rate for TDY travel increased from $0.585 to $0.625 per mile.

♦ Unaccompanied service members who are directed to move out of government quarters, barracks or dormitories are now authorized a partial dislocation allowance of $840.07, according to a recent change in the Joint Travel Regulation. The moves may be required because of a shortage of housing or because of work being done on the barracks, for example.

Previously, this allowance applied only to those directed to move from family housing. It provides partial reimbursement of the expense of relocating the household. It doesn’t apply to a move between unaccompanied housing units.

♦ Defense officials are conducting a one-year pilot program to get additional data for calculating the Basic Allowance for Housing. They’ll accept local market rental data from military privatized housing companies as an additional way to increase the sample size and help ensure a correct calculation. It will be used in the process to calculate the 2023 BAH rates. The process for setting BAH has been criticized by some, including troops, families and the Government Accountability Office.

♦ Coast Guard Mutual Assistance has expanded its housing and PCS assistance in response to the housing and supply-chain issues that persist this year. Coast Guard members can receive an interest-free loan of up to $9,000 to help cover the cost of fees associated with getting a rental home, such as first and last month’s rent and security deposit. Coast Guard members can also get an interest-free loan of up to $9,000 to help with closing costs when buying a new home. Previously, these loans were capped at $6,000. Other PCS-related loan programs include household furnishing loans and utility startup loans.

Like last year, housing prices have been a big concern to many service members searching for homes during a PCS move. “The average closing cost in the United States in 2017 was $4,200. The average closing cost in 2021 was $6,300, an increase of 50%,” said retired CWO2 Sean Fennell, chief operating officer of Coast Guard Mutual Assistance, in the announcement about the expanded assistance.

“It is noteworthy that these averages are based on the entire country. The coastal states where our Coasties live and work generally have much higher rates.”

More help on the horizon?

While some efforts are helping military families now, there are also studies, proposals and changes underway that could impact troops’ finances in the future.

♦ DoD has requested a 4.6% pay raise for service members in 2023, but lawmakers are also considering a plan to help troops deal with rising costs. Under the plan, troops who receive less than $45,000 in basic pay would be eligible for monthly payouts of 2.4% of their salary.

♦ Starting in 2023, DoD is authorized to pay a Basic Needs Allowance as supplemental income for military members and their family members whose gross household income falls below 130% of federal poverty guidelines. To deal with issues of food insecurity, military families are encouraged to talk to their leaders and their family centers for information about food-security-related grants and loans, and for referrals to government assistance programs, the Air Force said. Local food banks near military installations and other organizations have also been helping military families.

♦ Later this year, DoD will start the 14th Quadrennial Review of Military Compensation to review and assess the military compensation system to strengthen troops’ economic security.

♦ Because of the shortage of infant formula, some military families have been reaching out to relatives and friends around the country, asking them to scour their local stores for infant formula. That means the formula must be shipped to the military family. So Coast Guard Mutual Assistance set up a new temporary grant program to reimburse families up to $750 for any costs for the shipment of baby formula, whether from a retail purchase or a family or friend. The grant program runs through Nov. 30.

Army Emergency Relief activated a loan program that reimburses for the costs of shipping formula, but there are exceptions where soldiers can receive money upfront to pay to ship formula. While the program is set up as a loan, grants will be considered when repayment of a loan would cause financial hardship.

Check with your other military relief societies. While Navy-Marine Corps Relief Society doesn’t have a specific program for this, “it’s something we have always been able to provide assistance for through our quick-assist loans and traditional interest-free loans,” said Gillian Gonzalez, spokeswoman for the society.

♦ Military families have many needs that are exacerbated by the rising costs. The Air Force and the other service branches have been mounting efforts to educate their service members and families about the resources available. Families are encouraged to contact their family centers on base; MilitaryOneSource.mil online, by phone or chat; and their military relief society. The Air Force Aid Society and other military relief societies can provide assistance through grants or interest-free loans for a variety of needs.

They’re cutting back on purchases, settling for cheaper but lesser quality items in some products like diapers, doing more cost comparisons, stretching their food purchases into multiple meals, combining trips and driving less in their efforts to fight skyrocketing inflation. Many said vacations are simply out of the question this year. One wife of a deployed Marine said that among the many things they’ve given up is their international cell phone plan, which they’ve used during past deployments.

Some are seeing their savings dwindle or evaporate — if they had savings to begin with. And whether they’re officers or enlisted, many are worried about how the junior enlisted families are going to make it. A number said they are relying more on the commissary for their food shopping, but some cited continuing problems with shortages on their commissary’s shelves. Some are going to food banks, if they’re available.

Consumer prices were up by 8.6% in the year ending in May. Service members and families are doing what they can to squeeze their own budgets, but some are also offering suggestions to the powers-that-be for helping all troops, such as providing more base housing, higher housing allowances, and a temporary Cost of Living Allowance for all service members, regardless of their location.

Military Times put out a call for service members and family members to tell us how inflation is affecting them.

An Army master sergeant with a family of six said, “our head is above water, but I’m not sure for how long. We will be dipping into our savings at this rate.”

An officer stationed in Hawaii said her family is struggling. “We have blown through our savings already and there is no way we can afford to take a vacation this year….. The cost of living here is insane. With rising rental and fuel costs we are also considering moving on post to cut expenses, even though we PCS in less than a year.”

They spend $200 a week on gas driving to work, medical appointments, school and sports. “We now shop exclusively at the commissary although the shelves are often empty due to supply issues,” she said.

“We would like another child but we just can’t see how we could afford it. We are very stressed out about finances and something needs to change quickly,” said the officer, an O4.

“My husband and I say often, ‘We’ve never earned so much but felt so poor.’ "

Those who responded all cited food and gas prices as a top concern, and there are plenty of ripple effects.

The wife of a Marine sergeant at Twentynine Palms, California, wrote that “thankfully my family is still barely breathing, but I know many that are not making it due to inflation rates and high gas prices.” She said she has started canning, “because we think this inflation is only going to get worse.

“My husband is also looking into getting a bicycle to ride back and forth to work so we can save money on gas… It’s crazy because we are down to $150 to $200 left over in [his] paycheck, when it used to be close to $500,” she said.

Their grocery bill for a family of three has gone from between $400 and $500 a month to between $600 and $700. Two years ago it took about $60 to fill their car’s gas tank; now it’s almost $120.

An Air Force technical sergeant who recently moved to Germany said, “With such a large family to feed we are not purchasing as much healthy foods as before, and unfortunately have been eating more prepackaged foods.”

His family of seven includes three school-age children, and they’re already thinking about the need to purchase school supplies, with prices constantly increasing. Their family also includes two pets, and airlines have increased the cost for transporting “our beloved family members,” he said.

“A PCS in the middle of record inflation, combined with the lowering of COLA (it is nearly gone) in Germany, is a double whammy for my family,” he wrote.

On top of that, jobs are scarce for his wife, a registered nurse, who had been an elementary school nurse for the last eight years in Idaho.

Many of those in the process of making a military move are facing additional financial stressors of high housing prices and shortages of housing in the U.S.. Last year in response to the skyrocketing cost of housing, DoD authorized a temporary increase in Basic Allowance for Housing for 56 housing areas, from October through December, before the new housing allowance rates took effect in January.

Stephanie Trask, the wife of a Marine staff sergeant, said her family is in the process of moving from Fort Worth, Texas, to Jacksonville, North Carolina, and “it has been a nightmare from hell.” Her husband will be stationed at New River Marine Corps Air Station.

Their housing allowance in Texas is manageable, and they are currently paying $179 out of pocket for rent. But the waitlist for base housing in Jacksonville is 12 months, and the rental market is expensive.

“We are basically being forced to buy a house in this sellers’ market AND come out of pocket hundreds of dollars [a month] or be homeless,” she wrote. “On top of this housing crisis is all the inflation we are experiencing, so now we have to come out of pocket hundreds of dollars just to put a roof over our heads, then deal with higher gas prices and food. We won’t have any money left.”

After their first three offers on houses were turned down because other buyers were offering $25,000 or more over the asking price, their fourth offer was accepted. “To make the payment somewhat manageable we had to do a $20,000 down payment and bring almost $6,000 to closing to get a ‘decent’ rate for these days. We will still be coming out of pocket almost $300 a month, all just for our house.

“We will also be farther from town because the houses out there were cheaper, so it will be about 15 to 30 minutes, depending on where we need to go,” she said, which means more money for gas.

During this process, she added, “I can’t tell you how many times I’ve cried about all of this. The fact that the military, DoD, government officials are not doing anything is just absolutely ridiculous.”

An active duty E4 sailor who is a single mother of a toddler said she was on a well-managed budget while stationed in Virginia, but that budget suffered when she moved to Florida in October. “That budget has gotten much tighter. Not only does living in Florida cost more, but the current economy has made it worse.

“I have sought help with WIC (Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children), but they claim I make too much, yet I make barely enough. I’ve tried applying for second jobs, but with my active duty hours, no one is willing to hire me,” she said.

She also has to drive her personal vehicle to the various air fields they support, which means more money out of pocket. “Many of us are just feeding our paycheck to the pumps,” she said.

“I wish I had advice for someone, especially new sailors on how to stay afloat, but I don’t. The only thing I’m blessed for during these hard times is being able to spend more time with my daughter outside. Air is free, dirt is free, and enjoying this Florida sun is free,” she said. “As a service member, my advice is utilize your base gyms (free), go to the commissary more, and something that has helped me a lot with gas is downloading gas station apps.”

Being in remote areas can hurt, as well.

One Marine wife at Twentynine Palms, California, said inflation has forced them to stay home. “Any entertainment we can afford, is at least an hour’s drive away,” she said.

“Not including ticket prices, but with gas prices as they are, it can cost much more money just to drive anywhere,” she added.

They also rely on the commissary nearby, because other grocery stores out in town are 15 to 20 minutes away.

But it’s also affecting necessities like medical appointments. Her son has been referred to a medical specialist, but the only audiologist they were able to get an appointment with is about 100 miles away from their home at Twentynine Palms — and that’s a full tank of gas for the round trip.

“I have to save money just to transport my children to their medical appointments,” she said.

The military commissary system is suffering from an identity crisis, according to government auditors. Are military stores a benefit or a business?

The two primary objectives of the Defense Commissary Agency are competing against each other — providing a benefit to service members through savings on groceries, yet operating like a business and marking up prices to reduce the amount of taxpayer dollars it requires, according to a Government Accountability Office report released Tuesday.

Defense Commissary Agency officials agreed there is an “inherent tension” between maintaining customer savings and generating a profit margin, and that “DeCA likely cannot meet both the target of 23.7% savings rate and reduce its reliance on appropriations through margin as intended,” the report stated.

The auditors also raised questions about the way commissary savings are calculated, the amount of savings customers are actually getting, and how reforms have affected those savings. Congress and DoD decision makers “don’t have the assurance that DeCA is meeting its savings target and that commissary customers are reliably receiving their intended benefit,” auditors found.

DoD and Congress need to clarify the benefit the commissary should provide, auditors stated. Savings for commissary customers in the continental U.S. have been consistently lower than the global target of 23.7%. In 2021, the CONUS commissary savings rate was 17.7% compared to commercial retailers outside the gate. And the overall global savings rate missed the 23.7% target in 2021, with an overall savings rate of 22.5%.

“In this time of rising prices and DoD efforts to reduce food insecurity, the ability of DeCA to provide service members, their families and retirees reduced-price groceries is especially important,” the auditors stated.

DeCA also needs to fix the way it calculates savings for commissary customers overseas, auditors said. While the method for calculating CONUS savings is reliable, auditors said, they described the current overseas method as both “unreliable and inaccurate.” Stateside commissary customers account for 81% of commissary sales worldwide, and get consistently less than 23.7% savings overall. But the overseas savings rate has consistently been calculated at 42% or higher, which the GAO says is an unreliable number, Moreover, the global commissary savings average gets propped up by the savings numbers in the overseas commissaries. DeCA only meets its global target by relying on the savings rate in commissaries outside the U.S.

The commissary agency’s calculated customer savings rate for fiscal 2021, with weights:

Commissary officials changed to a savings calculation method using the overseas Cost of Living Allowance in 2017, because a consulting firm hired to support their business reforms, Boston Consulting Group, advised them to do so. So the commissary agency has been relying on data associated with the COLA to calculate the savings rate OCONUS, although the COLA reflects more than just the price of groceries bought in overseas locations, the auditors stated.

Commissary reforms have affected savings

Some reforms DoD started implementing in the commissary agency in 2017 have been in competition with customer savings, auditors noted. Before that time, by law, commissaries sold products at cost plus a 5% surcharge, so that the cost of operating commissaries wasn’t included in the price customers paid. The commissary system received about $1.7 billion in taxpayer dollars in 2012 to operate the stores, but over the past several years it’s been about $1.2 billion. The 5% surcharge customers pay is used primarily for renovation and construction of stores.

Since 2017, the agency has used variable pricing, a pricing method used by commercial grocery stores to set prices over the cost of the product, thereby generating a profit margin. The goal is to create some profit margin in order to reduce the amount of taxpayer dollars that are used to operate commissaries.

Therein lies the conflict. GAO auditors noted that “lowering prices to increase savings decreases DeCA’s margin, while raising prices to generate a greater margin reduces customer savings.”

Family advocates have questioned the system of marking up commissary prices, noting that in the past, customers could rely on the price of their commissary products across the board to be at the cost from the supplier plus 5%. “Now isn’t the time to try to turn a profit, especially with the high inflation and supply chain issues,” said Kelly Hruska, government relations director for the National Military Family Association.

She said she appreciates GAO’s deep dive into the issue. “Families are struggling. We need to be looking at every area where we can save families money,” she said.

Lawmakers have asked DoD to stop requiring commissaries to generate a profit, in order to provide some relief for military families from rising food prices.

The commissary agency needs to analyze the tradeoffs associated with meeting one of these competing objectives over the other, auditors said. That will help Congress make informed oversight decisions to provide clear direction on how to best provide the benefit. Those tradeoffs would specifically identify the customer savings rate and related benefits, such as the number, location and operating hours of commissaries. They also recommended DeCA improve its strategic plan; the current plan is lacking in key business reform efforts and lacks information needed to implement and measure success, auditors found. In its response to GAO, DoD officials agreed with the recommendations.

A provision passed by the House Armed Services Committee would add another $500 million to the commissary budget for fiscal 2023. It must make its way through the legislative process, but it would help the commissary agency avoid tradeoffs to provide the benefit for the troops, said Steve Rossetti, president of the American Logistics Association, an organization whose members include suppliers to commissaries and exchanges. That congressional action “would solve a key problem identified by the GAO,” he said. “The committee recognized that tradeoffs shouldn’t have to be made, especially in an era of inflation and food insecurity.”

Pointing to the need for more documentation about the success of commissary reforms, GAO auditors noted that commissary sales have fallen by more than $1 billion over the past six years — from about $6 billion in fiscal 2015, to about $4.4 billion in FY 2021 — as those reforms were being implemented. Currently, only 1.5 million out of 8 million eligible customers shop at the commissaries regularly.

“It is clear that the reform efforts imposed upon DeCA have failed to achieve the desired results,” said Tom Gordy, president of the Armed Forces Marketing Council, which represents more than 400 manufacturers who supply goods to military stores. “From the beginning, DeCA was put in a no-win situation, and those most adversely affected in this experiment have been military families who need the savings the most.”

The proposal, an amendment introduced by Rep. Mark Green, R-Tenn., was approved by the House Armed Services Committee Wednesday.

“We cannot in good conscience fill post exchanges with products created with slave labor and sponsored by and benefiting financially the authoritarian regime of the Chinese Communist Party,” Green said during the markup of fiscal 2023 defense policy bill. In addition, he said, “The Chinese Communist Party believes they can steal our military technology without consequence. We need to show them that isn’t the case.

“The last thing we want to do is financially contribute to their tyranny. They’re laughing at the idea of American soldiers funding their schemes by filling the shelves of our PXs and BXs with their products.”

The proposal would prohibit the sale of goods in commissaries and exchanges that are manufactured in China, assembled in China or imported into the U.S. from China.

At least half of the products sold in exchanges, if not more, are made in China, noted Rep. Salud Carbajal, D-Calif. While the idea of banning these products “sounds good and is patriotic,” he said, “it would have an adverse effect on our military families.” It would mean they would have to go out to stores in the civilian community to find the products they rely on that would no longer be sold in exchanges, he said.

The ban would affect only military stores, not stores in the civilian community. If a ban on Chinese-made products were to apply to civilian retailers outside the gate, industry figures indicate it would likely affect 80% to 90% of all retail goods sold, said Courtney Williams, spokeswoman for the Navy Exchange Service Command.

Walmart spokesman Payton McCormick said nearly two-thirds of the products Walmart sells in the U.S. are made, grown or assembled domestically. The company doesn’t break out sourcing data by country, but Walmart sources from many countries around the world.

It’s not clear whether the proposed legislation would ban any part of an item made in China — or only products made entirely in China.

Navy Exchanges “would face an impact of 50% in direct retail sales, strictly on those prohibited products alone,” said Williams. But in addition to that impact, there would likely be a far greater percentage of loss because the lack of those products would mean fewer customers.

Sometimes there are just no acceptable alternatives to products made in China. The lack of alternatives would also mean the potential removal of entire categories of items from the exchanges, not just one brand, Williams said.

“As a retailer, we offer freedom of choice for customers to purchase merchandise they want or need, and not all products desired by our customers are available from a U.S. manufacturer. The NEX serves a wide variety of military customers and we work very hard to carry a merchandise selection that appeals to this wide customer base,” Williams said.

“This practice of [lawmakers] doing to the exchanges and the troops what they don’t have the will or votes to do to the general citizenry has got to stop,” said Steve Rossetti, president of the American Logistics Association, an association representing companies that supply products to military stores.

The impact this proposal would have on military exchanges “isn’t significant, it’s devastating,” Rossetti said. “We should be feeding this golden goose instead of killing it.”

Rep. Kai Kahele, D-Hawaii, and others said they support the concept of buying American products, but are concerned about the impact on the stores, especially making a move so quickly. Kahele said the move would negatively affect military families who depend on this benefit to purchase everyday household items, especially those in remote locations where there are already supply chain issues.

“I believe this would put our commissaries and exchanges at risk,” he said. “I’m all about buying American, but I don’t think we can flip the switch overnight.”

Rep. Adam Smith, D-Washington, chairman of the committee, described the concept as “unworkable,” given the number of products made in China, “even though I’m not unsympathetic to the sentiment behind it.”

It’s not clear what impact the proposal would have on commissaries, although it would affect any over-the-counter health items coming from China, Rossetti said.

At Navy Exchanges, the ban would affect products across the board, especially clothing, footwear and baby items like strollers; housewares and home products made by Ninja, Cuisinart, Shark, Bissell, iRobot and Calphalon; home appliances like washers, dryers and refrigerators; entertainment electronics from Samsung; computers and phones from Apple; video game consoles by PlayStation and Xbox; bicycles and fitness equipment from Schwinn and Nordic Trak;, and seasonal merchandise like Christmas trees and Halloween costumes.

Navy Exchanges, like the other exchange systems, seek to provide quality goods and services at a savings to service members and their families. “Whenever possible, the NEX purchases goods made in America,” Williams said. “In fact, 40% or our Navy Pride products are purchased or assembled in America.”

The proposal will now have to be considered by the full House as part of the 2023 authorization bill. The House and Senate are expected to pass their separate authorization bill drafts sometime in the next month. They will then negotiate on a compromise authorization bill.

“I’d argue it’s not that hard to fill the shelves of our PXs with American-made goods,” said Rep. Mike Walz, R-Fla. “President Biden has put forward a Buy American provision. … If DoD needs to lead the way and be a little more difficult, then let’s do it.

“I’d be willing to bet they could do without some T-shirts or socks or other items if they know we have to stop funding our adversary,” he said.

The mixed messages they’ve received are causing confusion around the world about whether it’s going to happen or not.

But it is not a done deal.

“The Defense Department’s support to our military community is a top priority, and we are reviewing this issue to ensure authorized military postal service patrons are provided access worldwide,” said DoD officials in a statement provided to Military Times.

Many retirees are questioning why this change is being considered in the first place, after decades of being able to use FPO/APO addresses overseas,

A major concern among military retirees is that they would no longer be able to get their prescription medications through the Tricare Express Scripts mail-order pharmacy. Express Scripts Pharmacy can only mail prescriptions to U.S.-based addresses, State Department Pouch Mail and APO/FPO/DPO addresses. The Military Postal Service Agency provides postal services to DoD personnel and their families at locations around the world.

In May, Defense Department officials published a policy change that has been interpreted to mean that the only people authorized to use the FPO/APO system are military members and their dependents, DoD civilians and their dependents, and contractors who are authorized to accompany the force. That leaves out military retirees and others, such as Red Cross employees. The possible change was first reported by Stripes.com.

After the May DoD policy change, Military Postal Service Agency officials notified their overseas postal communities that affected patrons will be given 90 days advance notice that they will no longer be able to use FPO/APO service, according to a Military Postal Service Agency email obtained by Military Times.

According to DoD statistics, there are about 40,000 military retirees living overseas. That number doesn’t include family members of retirees who would also be affected. Retirees who now work as DoD civilians overseas would not lose their privileges.

Because postal service officials in different parts of the world have been putting out conflicting messages, confusion has run rampant, as well as speculation about the reasons behind the possible change. Some retirees have questioned whether it is driven by budget concerns; some have accused the Biden administration of “voter suppression” due to the impact the move could have on the absentee ballot process during this year’s midterm elections. And some retirees are calling the whole thing a hoax, because of the mixed messages.

It’s also not clear where the idea originated — the Military Postal Service Agency or someone higher up in the DoD chain.

Agency officials “recognized the need to clarify authorized users of the [military postal system] after a legal review determined that some MPS patron categories included over time are either not authorized by law or not permitted by host nation agreement,” according to the DoD statement to Military Times.

Those officials also acknowledged that money is a factor. “The same review was also unable to locate established fiscal authority for seven of the listed categories” of patrons, DoD officials stated.

But the MPSA email stated that this was a DoD policy change, and that the Military Postal Service Agency doesn’t make policy — MPSA just enforces it. The MPSA reports to the Army, and is the single mail manager for the Defense Department.

Before the change was published, Military Postal Service Agency officials sent a memo to Army officials asking them to alert DoD officials about the impacts of the impending policy change, according to the MPSA email.

But there have been conflicting messages from official sources, with some stating that retirees will continue to be able to use the Military Postal Service and others the opposite. This is creating “massive confusion throughout the world,” wrote Mark Favreau, volunteer director of the U.S. Military Retiree Support Services Office for Metro Manila, in a letter to the Military Postal Service Agency. He said he received a message Tuesday from Naval Supply Systems Command, Yokosuka, Japan, stating that the change would take effect Aug. 24, and those who are not authorized postal privileges would lose those privileges at the end of the day on Aug. 23.

In some countries, options are limited for receiving prescription drugs locally. For example, there are no U.S. military medical clinics in the Philippines, said Jack Walker, a retired Marine first sergeant who serves as the volunteer director of the Retired Activities Office in Subic Bay. He said those who have service-connected conditions can use the VA’s Foreign Medical Program, but that doesn’t include everyone.

John Quinn, a retired Navy master chief with 30 years of service, has been living in the Philippines for 15 years. “I depend on the FPO here for my maintenance medications sent from Tricare Express Scripts,” he said. Without access to an FPO box, he said, “I will now have to purchase my medications locally at a much higher price and with questionable quality.”

There’s a limit of one pound for mail through the military mail system, Walker said. He said it may take FPO mail about a week to get to the Philippines, but mail takes several weeks or longer to get through the Philippines mail system. “If FPO goes away, we may or may not get mail,” he said.

Some retirees and widows still get paper checks in the mail for things like Social Security payments, and they get mail from the Social Security Administration and the VA about scheduled appointments and other necessary information. If the letters don’t get there in time and the veteran doesn’t make the appointment — for an exam related to a disability claim, for example — their case may be closed.

For retirees voting absentee in states that don’t have the ability to send or receive absentee ballots online, this could affect retirees’ ability to vote, Walker said.

In addition to the issues associated with absentee ballot voting by mail, Quinn listed other effects, such as no longer being able to receive government-supplied COVID testing kits. And he foresees problems getting replacements for expired debit or credit cards. “Some financial institutions won’t send a card to a foreign address, while others insist on sending by DHL or FEDEX,” he said, which is costly.

The moves signal further congressional support for keeping the military pay raise at 4.6% for next year while lawmakers look for other ways to help boost military families finances amid increasing gas and grocery prices.

The bonuses were included in an amendment by the House Armed Services Committee’s annual authorization bill adding $37 billion to the president’s $773 billion defense spending proposal.

That total includes about $7.4 billion to counter inflation, with $1.4 billion for personnel issues like housing stipend boosts, commissary support, and the monthly bonuses proposal.

Under the plan, troops who receive less than $45,000 in basic pay would be eligible for monthly payouts of 2.4% of their salary. That would mean up to $90 extra each month for those service members.

The bonuses would only be available from January to December 2023. Senate lawmakers did not include the idea in their draft of the authorization bill, meaning it would have to survive negotiations between the two chambers before it could become law.

Military advocates in recent months have warned that even though the planned 4.6% pay raise would be the largest for troops in 20 years, it may not be enough to offset rising costs for troops and their families.

But thus far, House and Senate lawmakers have rejected calls for a higher pay raise, saying in part that it could create a massive disparity with other federal civilian employees unless their salaries are also pulled higher, a costly budget proposition.

In debate before the House Appropriations Committee on Wednesday, Rep. Mike Garcia, R-Calif., for the second year in a row offered a proposal to require a base pay of $15 an hour — $31,200 a year — for all troops, arguing that target should be the minimum for any individual serving in the ranks.

Junior enlisted service members can make as little as $21,000 a year in basic pay, but that calculation does not include other stipends such as housing allowances, specialty pays and subsistence assistance.

Depending on where troops are stationed, the housing and food payouts combined can effectively double younger troops’ total military compensation.

Garcia’s measure would have boosted pay for about 23,000 troops, but it was defeated during the appropriations debate because of concerns about cost offsets and related accounting issues. He called that a disappointment.

“No service member should be asked to defend our country and struggle near or even below the poverty line,” he said in a statement. “If the government is paying for our servicemembers to live on food stamps, we may as well pay them through base pay on the front end instead.”

For junior enlisted troops, the planned 4.6% pay raise would mean about $1,300 more next year in take-home pay. For senior enlisted and junior officers, the hike equals about $2,500 more. For an O-4 with 12 years’ service, it’s more than $4,500 in extra pay.

House Armed Services Committee members also included in their authorization bill language requiring a study into current military pay policies, and whether they are keeping pace with both the private sector and families’ financial needs.

Lawmakers have said they are particularly concerned with junior enlisted pay and whether that is sufficient for military recruiting and retention goals.

The House and Senate are expected to pass their separate authorization bill drafts sometime next month, and work on negotiations for a compromise bill through the rest of the summer.

The two records systems use the same software platform and are designed to work together.

On June 11, DoD’s rollout passed the halfway mark, reaching 72 military treatment facility commands in about 1,590 locations. With the deployment of the system, called MHS Genesis, at William Beaumont Army Medical Center at Fort Bliss, Texas, and Eisenhower Army Medical Center at Fort Gordon, Georgia, the rollout is 52% complete, officials said.

The purpose is to have a single, common health care record for military members, veterans and their families. DoD and VA have been working together to ensure that as service members transition to veteran status, their electronic health record follows them whenever and wherever they need health care.

The DoD electronic health record allows health care providers to share information about patients with other health care providers, both inside and outside the military health system. And through the MHS Genesis Patient Portal, military health care beneficiaries have secure, 24/7 online access to their health information, including managing appointments and exchanging messages with their health care providers. The Genesis portal replaces the Tricare Online Secure Patient Portal.

The DoD and VA both use the Oracle Cerner software platform for their electronic health record systems. The VA has deployed its system, called Millenium, at three sites. But the VA rollout at some locations has been plagued by unanticipated outages and system problems. On June 17, VA officials notified Congress they were delaying implementation to additional sites until 2023.

Meanwhile, defense health officials said during a media call Tuesday that they are on budget and on schedule to complete the worldwide rollout of Genesis by the end of 2023.

For DoD, procedures are in place to ensure health care operations can continue in the event there’s any Genesis down time, said Holly Joers, program executive officer of Defense Healthcare Management Systems. Officials also continually monitor the quality of the system, looking at the metrics about what data is available.

DoD has taken actions to avoid some of the problems the VA has had. For example, they haven’t physically loaded patients’ legacy health care information into the new Genesis system, but make it available separately going forward. Officials also took time to understand workflows, Joers said. “One person’s job affects the next one down the line. … We took some time to really appreciate that as we rolled out.”

Beyond those initial growing pains, she said, “We’re in a different place in terms of users we have and the maturity of the system,” she said. There are more than 114,00 active users at these 1,590 locations, officials said.

Genesis has had its growing pains over the years. As recently as May, the DoD Inspector General’s Office issued a report citing health care providers’ concerns about the accuracy and completeness of information.

While officials are closing in on deployments of Genesis over the next 18 months, Joers said, “this is not just about deploying a health IT system. It’s about health care outcomes.”

Army Maj. Gen. (Dr.) George “Ned” Appenzeller, director of staff at the Defense Health Agency, also holds the title of MHS electronic health record functional champion.

“As a provider … I’ve always expected all my electronic systems to go down” at some point, he said, noting that every facility has procedures in place to take care of patients in the event of that down time. “The electronic health health record is an awesome system for helping us provide safe, standardized, effective patient care. …

“As medical providers we take care of patients no matter what the circumstances and we always take the best care of patients we can,” he said.

“I love the tools, and I love having the electronic health record,” he said. “I’m an emergency medicine physician, so being able to see what has gone on in someone’s record is pretty important to me.”

That includes what’s happened in inpatient wards, outpatient clinics, in health care out in the community, in pharmacies and elsewhere.

“This is a phenomenal improvement over what we had 20 or 25 years ago when I started taking care of patients,” he said. “As a provider, I really appreciate what this is doing for the safety of our patients and the outcomes of our patients.”

The proposals are part of the chairman’s mark of the House Armed Services Committee’s draft of the annual defense authorization bill. Committee members are expected to spend all day Wednesday marking up that proposal, with an eye towards a full House vote on the measure next month.

The bill details $802.4 billion in defense spending next year, including a 4.6% pay raise for troops to start in January. Both of those figures match proposals outlined by the White House earlier this year.

Outside advocates have said the pay raise — the largest for troops in two decades — may not be enough to counter higher prices for gas, groceries and other household goods caused by rising rates of inflation in recent months.

But Officials from the House and Senate Armed Services Committees have said that raising military pay even higher is problematic, because the mark is also used to set pay raise levels for civilian federal workers.

House panel Chairman Adam Smith, D-Wash., in his authorization bill released Monday includes nearly $250 million earmarked for housing stipend improvements and another $500 million for commissary support, both designed to get more money into military families’ pockets.

Committee staff said the extra housing stipend would increase the monthly payouts to troops by 1%. Currently, Basic Allowance for Housing rates cover about 95% of local rent and housing costs. The authorization bill change would lift that to 96%.

Housing rates are calculated based on rank, location and family status. For a mid-career enlisted service member with dependents living in Texas, the extra 1% would mean about $170 more in housing support next year. For the same service member living near San Diego, it would mean about $350 more a year.

Military housing allowances were increased by an average of 5.1% in January, but some families saw even higher boosts. Last fall, as rent rates climbed nationwide, military leaders used existing budget flexibility to temporarily raise rates in 56 markets.

Committee officials said the military could do that again, but the 1% boost included in the authorization bill draft was designed to help all troops instead of just those in especially expensive areas.

The commissary support is also designed to provide financial support for families.

Committee staff said the money would be used to defray costs throughout the system, allowing administrators to keep consumer prices low. They offered no specifics on which items would see lower prices or how much the decreases could amount to.

Both the housing and commissary provisions would have no impact until 2023, and the proposals will have to survive multiple rounds of congressional debate in coming weeks. The Senate Armed Services Committee adopted its opening draft of the authorization bill last week, without either provision but with $45 billion more in spending for the Defense Department in fiscal 2023.

Committee officials said the move comes in response to both rising inflation costs and sagging recruitment efforts for the military. Lawmakers did not specify exactly how much money will be allotted to the effort, but said it will be included in the $45 billion in additional military spending outlined in the bill above what the White House requested for fiscal 2023 needs.

The provision does not mandate any changes to recruiting bonuses, retention incentives or specialty pays, but would give military commanders the authority to raise current levels if they deem the moves necessary to maintain force readiness.

Military officials have told Congress they are already maximizing available incentives in an attempt to keep up personnel numbers. They have publicly dubbed 2022 as “the most challenging recruiting year” for the military in decades.

Earlier in 2022, in testimony before the committee, leaders from the Navy, Marine Corps and Space Corps said they expected to reach recruiting goals by the end of fiscal 2022 on Oct. 1, but just barely. Army and Air Force officials said they may miss targets by a few hundred recruits.

Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness Gil Cisneros Jr. told senators that the post-pandemic labor market — where private companies are competing for a smaller pool of job candidates — has been the biggest challenge for military recruiting and retention.

Army recruits can collect a combination of bonuses totaling $50,000 for enlisting. Navy leaders announced in April that it would offer $25,000 to any new active-duty enlistees as a way to get more individuals into the ranks. The other services have made similar offers.

Senate lawmakers opted against using the extra funding plans to boost the military pay raise higher than the 4.6% requested by the White House, even as some outside advocates have warned that raise may not be enough to counter higher costs for gas, groceries and other family needs.

The extra recruiting money will be paired with additional funding to help with retention incentives, including potential increases in specialty pay and hardship pay.

But those funds will not be available until 2023, and only if House and Senate appropriators agree with the Senate committee’s plans.

The House Appropriations Committee is expected to vote on its first draft of the fiscal 2023 defense bill Wednesday, the same day that the House Armed Services Committee will mark up its version of the annual defense authorization bill.

Both of those plans right now call for a smaller defense budget for fiscal year 2023 (although still up 4% from fiscal 2022 spending levels). Senate appropriators have not yet released any drafts of their military spending plans.

The Senate Armed Services Committee’s authorization bill draft is expected to be voted on by the full chamber in coming weeks.

There’s long been a shortage of military child care, and of child care nationwide.

A Defense Department policy issued just before the pandemic and implemented in September 2020 gave working military families, including Coast Guard families, higher priority for spaces in child development centers and school-age child care programs.

But for the first time, it also allowed officials to supplant, or displace, children who already were in a child development program, whose parents were in a lower priority category, if the military family was expected to be on a waitlist for more than 45 days after the time they need child care.

DoD officials allowed a pause in the supplanting process during the height of the COVID-19 pandemic; not all the service branches paused the process.

The Navy announced the restart of its supplanting process on Tuesday. That change comes in the peak of moving season for military families, when many families are searching for child care as they move to a new duty station. Air Force officials restarted the service‘s supplanting policy earlier in 2022. The Army never stopped its supplanting procedures during the COVID-19 pandemic.

In June, the Navy has restarted the supplanting procedures at six fleet concentration areas with long child care waitlists: Norfolk, Virginia; San Diego; Naval Base Kitsap and Naval Air Station Whidbey Island, Washington; Naval Air Station Jacksonville and Naval Station Base Mayport, Florida, said Coleen R. San Nicolas-Perez, spokeswoman for Navy Installations Command.

In July, all other Navy installations will restart the supplanting policy.

Across DoD, working active duty families and certain others can’t be displaced from the child development centers. Families who are displaced receive notice at least 45 days in advance if their child or children must leave the child development center, so they can attempt to find child care elsewhere.

Families who are supplanted also are allowed to reapply for space through MilitaryChildCare.com, which is the DoD’s website for military and DoD-affiliated families seeking child care ranging from the centers, school-age care, family child care homes and fee assistance programs for child care in the civilian community.

Navy officials will review all school-age care programs in the fall to determine if any supplanting will be required, San Nicolas-Perez said.

Some military families felt they were at a disadvantage because they move frequently, while others, such as DoD civilians, don’t move frequently, so those child care spots were locked up. The policy allows lower-priority families to be displaced so that there is more room for military children.

For example, the policy change moved DoD civilians down on the priority list. If a military family moving into the area is expected to be on a waitlist for more than 45 days, a DoD civilian family’s child could be displaced from the DoD child care program to make room for that military child, with a minimum of 45 days notice to the civilian family.

The priorities are as follows:

* Priority 1A ― Child development program staff.

* Priority 1B ― Single/dual military members and military members with a full-time working spouse, including active duty Coast Guard.

* Priority 1C ― Military members with a part-time working spouse or those with a spouse seeking employment.

* Priority 1D ― Military members with a spouse enrolled full-time in a post-secondary institution.

* Priority 2 ― Single/dual Department of Defense civilians or with a full-time working spouse.

* Priority 3 ― Space available.

Those who can’t be supplanted are:

• Child development program direct care staff.

• Active duty combat-related wounded warriors.

• Single/dual active duty military/Coast Guard.

• Single/dual Guard/Reserve on active duty or inactive duty training status.

• Active duty military/Coast Guard with a full-time working spouse.

• Guard/Reserve on active duty or inactive duty training status with a full-time working spouse.

• Gold Star spouses (combat-related).

For the full matrix of who can be supplanted, and by whom, visit MilitaryChildCare.com https://www.mcccentral.com/system/files/downloads/training-center/resources/MilitaryFamilyTypes_Supplanting_0.pdf

Have you had to cut back on the amount of groceries you’re buying? Are you giving up some previous indulgences, buying cheaper cuts of meat — or no meat? Scouring for coupons? Doing more comparison shopping? Shopping the commissary more often? Driving less, and combining trips? Changing vacation plans?

If you’re making a permanent change of station move this summer, has inflation had an impact on that move? Or do you expect it to have an impact? In what way?

Tell us about your experience, and include some of your advice and tips that we can share with others in the military community.

Include your rank, branch of service, location and how many people are in your family. We may publish it online or in print.

Email reporter Karen Jowers, kjowers@militarytimes.com.

Rep. Adam Smith, D-Wash., in a roundtable with reporters on Wednesday said that boost troops’ paychecks by more than 4.6% — the level recommended by the White House earlier this year — will depend in part on whether similar boosts can be found not only for defense civilian workers, but all federal employees.

“There are a whole lot of people on the non-defense side who are working in other departments and doing other work that is important as well,” he said. “The general rule that we’ve tried to stick to is to give federal employees the same pay raise even with the military. So if we want to go above that, how do we meet that need?”

The federal budget proposal unveiled by the White House in March includes an average pay increase of 4.6% for civilian federal workers, matching the planned military pay raise. The House Appropriations subcommittee on Financial Services and General Government backed that level in budget documents released Wednesday morning.

The civilian worker raise for 2022 was 2.7%, also the same as what service members saw.

For years, outside advocates have pushed unsuccessfully to formally link the two figures. Despite that, lawmakers generally have matched the two, with a few exceptions.

In the early 2010s, for example, military members saw pay raises around 1% annually, while federal workers had their salaries held flat for three consecutive years.

The planned 4.6% pay raise would be the largest annual increase for both troops and civilian workers in 20 years.

Outside defense advocates have argued that lawmakers should bump up military pay even higher, to counter increasing inflation costs in recent months. Lawmakers on the Senate and House Armed Services Committee are expected to consider those ideas in coming days.

In April, a group of 62 congressional Democrats endorsed a plan to grant all federal workers a 5.1% pay raise in 2023, citing “a history of chronic underinvestment” in the federal workforce.

The financial services panel of the House Appropriations Committee is expected to vote on its appropriations draft on Thursday. The House Armed Services Committee will debate the military pay raise further next week, as part of a day-long authorization mark-up on June 22.

On Tuesday morning, in its initial draft of the defense budget proposal for fiscal 2023, members of the House Appropriations Committee included the 4.6% pay increase — equal to the White House’s request unveiled earlier this spring — as part of their $762 billion spending plan.

The panel’s subcommittee on defense issues is expected to advance the plan on Wednesday in a closed session, and the full committee will debate the package on June 22.

A few hours later, during the Senate Armed Services Committee’s deliberations on the annual defense authorization bill, members also backed the same 4.6% pay raise plan. Last week, the House Armed Services Committee approved similar initial language for that pay boost.

If approved later this year, the 4.6% pay raise will be the largest troops have received in 20 years. But advocates have said the figure may not be high enough to counter rising costs of goods and services seen across America over the past year.

In a statement, House Appropriations Committee Chairwoman Rosa DeLauro, D-Conn., called the 4.6% figure — which is based on a federal formula synching military pay raises with civilian-sector wages — a “strong military pay raise” which “honors our soldiers and their families.”

For junior enlisted troops, the 4.6% hike would mean about $1,300 more next year in take-home pay. For senior enlisted and junior officers, the hike equals about $2,500 more. For an O-4 with 12 years’ service, it’s more than $4,500 in extra pay.

The pay raise still could be adjusted in coming weeks as the involved committees debate their respective drafts of the defense policy and spending bills.

The Senate Appropriations Committee, the last of the four committees that set the annual military pay raise, has not yet weighed in publicly on the 2023 paycheck boost.

In their initial draft, House Armed Services Committee members included language with the pay raise provisions which would mandate a series of studies into the issue of military pay to ensure the wages are keeping pace with both the private sector and families’ financial needs.

House lawmakers have said they are particularly concerned with junior enlisted pay and whether that is sufficient for military recruiting and retention goals.

The newest Federal holiday was signed into law on June 17, 2021, by President Joe Biden to commemorate the end of slavery in the U.S. following the conclusion of the Civil War.

The day has been celebrated annually around the country since 1865 when a Union General arrived in Galveston, Texas, and informed the enslaved African Americans that the Confederacy had lost the war and that they were free as per the Emancipation Proclamation, which was inked in 1863. In many parts of the country, the proclamation was not implemented until the army enforced it.

Texas was the first state to codify the date into law in 1980 and was the only state to have the day as a paid holiday for state employees in 2020. Since then, at least eight states — New York, Maine, Louisiana, Virginia, Massachusetts, New Jersey, Washington and Illinois — have followed, according to AP.

The next federal holiday is Independence Day on Monday, July 4th. The holiday commemorates the signing of the Declaration of Independence on the same day in 1776 marking the colonies unified intention to secede from the British Empire. Fighting in the Revolutionary War would continue until 1783 when the Treaty of Paris was signed in September and the United States was officially separate from the empire.

It also affects other trailing federal spouses — federally employed spouses who accompany their spouses on their government assignments overseas.

Two senators have written to Secretary of State Antony Blinken asking for clarity about confusing guidance.

“Our understanding is that these recent changes to the policy guidance have had a negative impact on federally employed spouses who are accompanying their spouses on government assignment or military orders overseas,” wrote Sens. Marsha Blackburn, R-Tenn., and Maggie Hassan, D-N.H..

They asked for specifics on the changes, and clarity. “We are concerned that this policy denies all telework requests for federal employees assigned to or near military installations,” they wrote. “We understand that [these agreements] are rare in the federal government due to increased security concerns and costs to employing agencies.”

A number of military spouses who moved overseas with their service member on permanent change of station orders have been denied their requests for approval to work for their federal agency overseas under the Domestic Employees Teleworking Overseas program. In other cases, their DETO agreements have been rescinded. It’s costing spouses tens of thousands of dollars in income, and affects primarily younger spouses with three to five years of service with their federal agency, according to one overseas spouse.

The federal agency employers may be supportive of the spouse continuing employment through telework, but the process for getting the required DETO agreement isn’t.

It appears to be related to the fact that more spouses are requesting teleworking agreements, and State Department officials in some overseas areas don’t have the personnel to go out and check houses to make sure security requirements are being met, according to spouses interviewed.

The good news is that the departments of State and Defense “are working to address the issue and will notify all interagency partners through [the Office of Personnel Management] when a resolution is reached,” a State Department spokesman said, in an email response to Military Times. “In the meantime, agencies are encouraged to reach out to the State Department on a case-by-case basis for advice in navigating military spouses’ DETOs.”

Military spouse advocates are pleased to see the questions are being asked, said Sue Hoppin, president of the National Military Spouse Network. “During the pandemic, people were seeing that remote work was viable, and so more people were open to the notion of remote work,” she said. Limiting the DETO agreements “runs counter to the Biden/Harris administration’s goal of making the federal government an ‘employer of choice’ for military spouses,” she said. “We have an opportunity to make things work in terms of military spouses in federal jobs working [overseas] who could work through PCS, and now we’re putting up an artificial barrier?”

Some spouses interviewed said it’s the military family having to foot the bill for security requirements for a DETO, such as bomb- and shatter-proof glass, specific door locks and an alarm system to notify the State Department if there is a break-in. One spouse said she spent $15,000 on security requirements.

“The safety and security of U.S. personnel are among our highest priorities,” the State Department spokesman said. “We can’t speak to any costs incurred by individuals, as the Overseas Security Policy Board — with members from all executive branch agencies stationed overseas — agrees upon standards that must be met, to include residential security standards.”

State Department officials did not provide a number of how many spouses are working under these federal teleworking agreements overseas. But spouses interviewed said they estimate “hundreds” are affected, and some are on leave without pay waiting for a DETO to be approved.

The confusion is related to official communications late last year, including written communication to State Department officials in Germany that no more DETO agreements would be approved, according to military spouses interviewed.

In some other countries, the situation is uncertain. Some spouses are being denied their application or their DETO agreements are being pulled, although there is no written communication about local policy changes.

Spouses interviewed asked to remain anonymous for fear of reprisal, although they noted their federal employers have been supportive in trying to help them get and keep their telework agreements.

They say they’ve been told the reason for the change is the increase in the number of requests for these teleworking agreements. There’s a lack of personnel to go out and check houses to ensure they meet security requirements.

The standards apply whether the spouse lives on a military installation overseas or outside the base. But the houses outside the gate have to meet the military’s security and safety requirements for service members and their families to live there, spouses said.

Under federal law and presidential directive, all DETO agreements, including those of military spouses, fall under the authority and security responsibility of the State Department chief of mission, the State Department spokesman stated. “Spouses of DoD service members assigned to military installations are eligible for DETO arrangements. However, when the sponsoring employee is not under [chief of mission] security responsibility, it is difficult for the relevant U.S. mission (nearest embassy or consulate) to provide adequate security services and ensure required residential security and safety standards are met,” he said in the email response.

“The security standards are already there,” said one spouse. “The logical answer is that we’re under the Defense Department’s responsibility. The security standards are already there. This is redundant.”

In effect, this gives spouses unfavorable options: Stay behind in the U.S. and pay for two separate households, with yet another forced military separation; or be forced to resign from their federal job, losing tens of thousands of dollars or more in income, as well as career progression, years of Thrift Savings Plan and retirement benefits and life insurance.

More roadblocks

Meanwhile, DoD officials have reported to Congress that it’s not feasible to provide telework facilities on overseas military bases for military spouses working for private companies.

In the fiscal 2018 National Defense Authorization Act, Congress required DoD to establish a pilot program to determine whether the idea was feasible, but no such pilot program was undertaken.

“There are multiple insurmountable challenges involved in the establishment of telework facilities overseas,” DoD officials stated in a report provided to Congress, obtained by Military Times.

Among the challenges: military spouses working for a U.S.-based company may be required to pay both host nation and U.S. taxes. There are also security concerns. “Military spouses would be unable to utilize DoD networks for connectivity. Some companies have expressed hesitancy in having spouses use host nation Internet service providers,” DoD officials stated.

DoD is conducting a study on co-working spaces for military spouses on installations in the U.S., and the Army launched its first co-working space at Fort Belvoir, Virginia, in 2021.

Congressional reporter Leo Shane III contributed to this report.

James M. Branham resigned from his position as the No. 2 official at the Defense Department’s Armed Forces Retirement Home Nov. 9, 2021, according to the report, released Wednesday. A new COO was appointed in December.

“We find his behavior particularly egregious given his position as the AFRH COO and the authority he held over the subordinate female employees,” the investigators wrote.

Officials at the Armed Forces Retirement Home declined to comment on whether any legal action will be pursued against Branham, citing policy. The DoD investigators stated they will forward their report to Washington Headquarters Services for inclusion in Branham’s personnel file.

The headquarters is a DoD field activity that provide administrative and management support to multiple DoD components and military departments in the National Capital Region.

“I commend the three employees who cooperated in this investigation and reported what was happening to them,” said Armed Forces Retirement Home CEO Stephen T. Rippe in an email to Military Times. “No one should be harassed in the workplace — ever. This case is especially troubling because it involved the Home’s leadership. Our employees and residents should expect the very best from their leaders, who should hold themselves to the highest possible standard.

“As this report makes clear, that did not happen in this case and I stand firmly by the report’s conclusion.” He noted that “despite this failure of leadership by an individual, the report did not fault the Home’s polices and procedures nor offer any recommendations for improvement.”

Branham could not be reached for comment.

“Mr. Branham’s actions created an intimidating, hostile and offensive work environment that made these female employees uncomfortable or caused them distress,” the DoD IG report stated. They also found that he made reprisals against one of the employees, treating her differently from others when it came to quarantining and being allowed to telework during the first months of the pandemic.

Branham, a retired Army lieutenant colonel, started as COO at the Armed Forces Retirement Home in February 2018, in the midst of financial turmoil at AFRH. The previous COO was fired in September, 2017 by a DoD official who cited his unwillingness to shore up the finances of the agency’s two homes.

AFRH is open primarily to certain retired and former enlisted members and their spouses, with campuses in Washington, D.C., and Gulfport, Mississippi. Branham worked at the Washington campus.

In addition to residents’ fees, revenue sharing and leasing agreements, donors and the AFRH trust fund, the homes relies on the 50- -a-month paycheck deduction from active-duty enlisted members and the revenue from fines imposed on enlisted members for disciplinary violations.

The DoD hotline received a complaint against Branham Aug. 15, 2020, alleging he had sexually harassed subordinate female employees and took reprisal actions against one of the employees because she rejected his sexual advances. After initiating the investigation on Nov. 10, 2020, the inspector general reviewed more than 200,000 DoD records, including emails and attached documents and photos, and interviewed the person who filed the complaint as well as eight other employees.

The investigators made no recommendations regarding any remedies for the employee who suffered reprisals — identified as Employee 2 — because she has left the organization for another full-time position elsewhere.

Branham began dating one of his subordinates in 2019, identified as Employee 1, after he asked her to dinner. Investigators reviewed numerous emails between she and Branham, who used his official government email. They also found five photographs that Branham forwarded from his personal email account to his government email account that appeared to be that employee “in various states of dress or undress.”

Investigators’ analysis showed that Branham sent the photographs from his mobile phone to his government email address “within minutes or hours of sending highly sexually explicit emails” to the employee. They ended their relationship in March 2020, at the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic. Employee 1 told investigators that after the physical relationship ended, she felt their personal and professional relationship was “awkward” and “weird” because of the previous physical relationship.

Branham declined to be interviewed by investigators, but in his response to their preliminary conclusions, he agreed that he had engaged in an inappropriate relationship with the employee, but disagreed with some of their conclusions, according to the report.

“Mr. Branham believed that his relationship with Employee 1 was consensual and did not constitute sexual harassment. We disagree,” the investigators wrote. “Mr. Branham initiated, pursued and engaged in an intimate relationship with a subordinate employee. The subordinate employee told us that she felt uncomfortable and awkward and did not think she could say no.”

The employee described that relationship with Branham as inappropriate and wrong, they stated.

Branham also agreed that his written communications to a second and third employee were “unprofessional and regretted that the communications made these employees feel uncomfortable,” and that he shouldn’t have written the comments, according to the report.

The investigators stood by their initial conclusions. “Mr. Branham’s overall course of conduct interfered with the individual performance of subordinate female employees within his organization and created an intimidating, hostile and offensive work environment that made these female employees uncomfortable or caused them distress,” they wrote.

The woman identified as Employee 2 told investigators she repeatedly rebuffed or ignored Branham’s sexual harassment, in incidents between August 2018 and March 2020. That included shrugging his hands off her shoulders multiple times when he attempted to massage her. Although Branham told investigators that her physical gestures rejecting his sexual advances “could not constitute a disclosure to him that he had engaged in an abuse of authority,” he is incorrect, they stated.

That employee alleged that Branham took four personnel actions against her in reprisal, and investigators agreed with three of her allegations. Those allegations involved him refusing to allow her to isolate and quarantine by teleworking, after exhibiting COVID-19 symptoms or managing COVID-19 exposure in incidents in April, July and August 2020.

The investigators found that in multiple similar situations, other employees were treated differently. Branham himself self-quarantined and teleworked.

The employee was eligible for telework, and her job was not essential to the functioning of the AFRH residential care facilities, investigators found. “Branham sexually harassed Employee 2 repeatedly throughout her time, and treated her differently than other telework-eligible employees when it came to teleworking during the pandemic,” they wrote.

The investigators interviewed six other employees at Armed Forces Retirement Home; five of whom had frequent contact with Branham.

Four of the six employees said the allegations surprised them. Another employee said the allegations were “hard to believe,” and the sixth employee called the allegations “preposterous.” Some of the employees said they heard Branham tell jokes or make humorous comments, but none heard him tell a joke that contained sexual innuendo.

Chronic traumatic encephalopathy, or CTE, has been linked with contact sports, especially football and boxing. More recently, the military experience, to include blast exposure, has been discussed as a potential risk factor for the disease.

But a study of 225 donated brains of deceased active duty and retired service members by researchers at the Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences, set to be published Thursday in the New England Journal of Medicine, says CTE in service members is more strongly linked to civilian traumatic injuries.

“Our study suggests that CTE is rather rare in U.S. service members and when seen, it tends to be rather mild in terms of brain involvement and is typically associated with prior participation in contact sports, especially football,” said Dr. Dan Perl, one of the study’s lead researchers and a professor of pathology.

Perl is director of the Department of Defense/Uniformed Services University Brain Tissue Repository, which is essentially a brain bank. The brains studied had been donated for use in research.

Scientists found 10 of 225 brains, or 4.4%, had CTE. All 10 of those service members had a history of participation in contact sports.

In comparison, the researchers cited a Boston University study, published in the Journal of the American Medical Association in July 2017, which found the progressive, degenerative disease in 87% of the brains of 202 former U.S. football players. CTE was found in 99 percent of the brains obtained from National Football League players, 91 percent of college football players and and 21 percent of high school football players.

The brain disease can only be diagnosed after death with an examination of the brain. It is believed that those with CTE develop a range of cognitive, behavioral, mood and motor issues later in life.

Of the 45 brains of service members who had a history of blast exposure, three had CTE, compared with seven brains out of 180 from those who didn’t have a history of blast exposure.

But the researchers included important caveats.

“It should be kept in mind that most of the individuals studied in this report who had been heavily exposed to combat and especially to blast, died at a relatively young age,” Perl said. “Studies of CTE in contact sport athletes show that there is a considerable period of [time] between when they are exposed to head trauma during their athletic careers and when they become symptomatic with the disease. …

“In coming years, we may identify additional cases of CTE in former service members who served in the 20-year-period of the War on Terror (2001 to 2021) and who were so extensively exposed to blast.

“Only time and further studies will tell.”

Because of the small number of CTE cases, definitive conclusions can’t be made regarding the links between blast exposure and CTE, the researchers stated. But their findings suggest that the prevalence of CTE is rather low.

Another caveat is that gathering accurate traumatic brain injury information in military and civilian settings is a challenge; some aspects of the individuals’ histories were obtained retrospectively from next of kin.

CTE is identified by a distinct pattern of pathology in the brain. Scientists looked for characteristic lesions that are only seen in this disease, Perl said. The lesions aren’t the immediate result of any head injury, and have been mostly reported in people who had repeated head injuries such as former boxers or professional football players.

“The CTE lesions are thought to be later degenerative responses to the numerous blows to the head, not to any individual injury,” he said.

This study also indicates that CTE is not a significant contributor to psychiatric disorders, alcohol and substance abuse, and suicide in these service members. While four of the 10 brains came from service members who died of suicide, the majority of the suicide cases they examined in the study didn’t show evidence of CTE. The study included 49 brains from service members who died of suicide, and four of those had CTE.

“Accordingly, we could not conclude that CTE was an important contributor to this important problem,” Perl said. ”We feel that continuing study of biologic underpinning of military suicide is a very important part of our mission and we will be continuing to study it.”

♦ Researchers found that 10 of the 225 brains had CTE. All 10 of those had participated in contact sports. But there was an additional factor for eight of those: They’d had a non-sports-related traumatic brain injury in civilian life. Overall, the disease was present in eight of 44 brains from service members who had had non-sports-related TBI in civilian life.

♦ Of the 21 brains of those who had a head injury during military service caused by the head striking a physical object without blast exposure, three had CTE.

♦ Of the 60 brains of service members who had participated in contact sports participants, 10 had CTE, compared with none of the 165 who had not participated in contact sports.

As part of the House Armed Services Committee’s personnel section of the annual military policy legislation, officials are backing the White House call for a 4.6% pay raise to go into effect Jan. 1 of next year.

That recommendation follows federal formulas calculating the yearly rise in civilian sector wages and would be the highest pay raise for troops in 20 years.

For junior enlisted troops, the 4.6% hike would mean about $1,300 more next year in take-home pay. For senior enlisted and junior officers, the hike equals about $2,500 more. For an O-4 with 12 years’ service, it’s more than $4,500 in extra pay.

But some critics have said those numbers may not be high enough to account for inflation spikes over the last several months and amid the rising cost of groceries, gas and other essentials. The Congressional Budget Office has predicted a 6.1% jump in the consumer price index this year.

Lawmakers plan to include in the bill a closer look at how military pay raises are calculated, with an eye towards future adjustments if Pentagon officials see growing gaps between troops’ paychecks and civilian salaries.

In recent months, committee ranking member Rep. Mike Rogers, R-Ala., has voiced concerns that enlisted pay rates may be too low to ensure stable recruiting and retention levels for the services.

The new studies will also take into account how military housing allowances are calculated and awarded, and whether changes may be needed there.

Last fall, the Defense Department boosted housing allowances for troops living in 56 markets with soaring rent rates, to ensure those individuals weren’t being priced out of quality housing.

Lawmakers still could push for a higher pay raise during the committee’s full-day mark-up of the authorization bill, which is scheduled for June 22.

Meanwhile, officials on the Senate Armed Services Committee are expected to unveil their plays for the annual pay raise as part of their initial authorization drafts next week. Appropriations proposals from House lawmakers on the defense budget are expected to be released later this month.