Data Systems Survey

APPENDIX D
DATA SYSTEMS SURVEY

Reference No.: 06863

Evaluation of the
Unemployment
Compensation Provisions
of the American Recovery
and Reinvestment Act of
2009
Data Systems Survey
May 20, 2011

Prepared by Mathematica Policy Research

Mathematica and the Urban Institute are conducting an evaluation for the U.S. Department
of Labor (DOL) about the implementation and effectiveness of the Unemployment
Compensation (UC) provisions contained in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of
2009 (ARRA) legislation. As part of this study, our research team will be visiting your state and
19 others to learn about how states decided which optional provisions to adopt and to learn about
their experiences implementing all ARRA-related UC provisions. In this advance survey, we’d
like to gather information about your state’s experience implementing any information systems
changes needed to comply with the UC ARRA requirements. If you have any questions
regarding this survey, please contact Grace Roemer of Mathematica Policy Research at
[email protected]
or
(609)
936-2782,
or
Brandon
Kyler
at
[email protected] or (609) 716-4381.

State Name:
Respondent(s):
Respondent Title(s):
Respondent Department(s):
Date:
(Prefilled by Mathematica here and in modules)
EMERGENCY UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION (UC) TIERS
3 AND 4 IN STATE SINCE 2008?

□ Yes
0 □ No

IF “NO,” SKIP MODULE 4

□ Yes
0 □ No

IF “NO,” SKIP MODULE 5

□ Yes
0 □ No

IF “NO,” SKIP MODULE 6

1

1

EXTENDED BENEFITS (EB) IN STATE SINCE 2008?

ANY AMERICAN RECOVERY AND REINVESTMENT ACT
(ARRA) MODERNIZATION FUNDS RECEIVED?

Prepared by Mathematica Policy Research

1

Module 1—Federal Additional Compensation (FAC) (All Respondents)
1.

What systems changes did your state make so
that Federal Additional Compensation (FAC)
benefits payments could be made, tracked,
adjusted, and/or reported?

3.

MARK ALL THAT APPLY

MARK ALL THAT APPLY
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

□
□
□
□
□
□
□

What challenges did you encounter in making
these systems changes?

1

No changes needed, systems capacity already
existed
GO TO Q.5
2

Added fields/flags/indicators to state claims
systems

3

Added screens to state claims systems
4

Made benefit payment control (BPC) system
changes (for overpayments)
5

Handled outside state claims/BPC systems
(for example, ad hoc spreadsheets, databases)
6

Unable to capture, track, report on FAC
UC ARRA requirement
7

Other (Specify)

8

2.

What facilitated your state’s efforts to make the
changes needed for FAC?

4.

MARK ALL THAT APPLY
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

□

State political leadership/support

□

Agency leadership/support

□

Staff support

□

Staff knowledge of UC ARRA requirements

□

Resources available

□

Nothing

□

Other (Specify)

Prepared by Mathematica Policy Research

□
□
□
□

Insufficient personnel
Insufficient understanding of UC ARRA
requirements
Insufficient time to respond to legislative
changes
Data quality/data validation (including
accuracy of benefit amounts)
Unable to create, track and report FAC
benefits payments

□

No challenges encountered

□

Other (Specify)

Was your state able to complete necessary
systems changes so that timely FAC benefits
payments could be made?

n

1

2

3

4

Alignment of UC ARRA requirements with
existing state goals/initiatives

□

□

Insufficient financial resources to make
appropriate systems changes or establish
alternate systems

MARK ONE ONLY

Leadership knowledge of UC ARRA
requirements

□

□

5

1

□

Not applicable, no systems changes needed

□

Yes, all benefits paid in timely manner

□

Somewhat, some benefits paid on time and
some retroactively

□

No, all benefits paid retroactively

□

No, not all benefits due were paid

□

Other (Specify)

5.

Did FAC overpayments present any specific
systems challenges?

□
0□
1

5a.

7.

Yes
No

What was the approximate cost of making the
FAC-related systems changes?
MARK ONE ONLY

GO TO Q.5b

1

If yes, which FAC overpayments-related systems
changes were challenging to implement?

2

3

MARK ALL THAT APPLY
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

5b.

4

□

Calculating exact overpayments

□

Establishing overpayments

□

Applying overpayments in proper order

□

Offsetting overpayments

□

5

6

7

Distinguishing between existing and new
overpayments

7a.

$50,001 to $100,000

□

$100,001 to $250,000

□

$250,001 to $500,000

□

$500,001 to $1,000,000

□

Greater than $1,000,000

□

Accounting and reporting of overpayments

□
0□

□

None

If yes, please specify which ones:

□

Other (Specify)

7b.

□
□

4

Yes, lack of designated Unemployment
Insurance Required Reports (UIRR) forms or
cells on existing forms
Yes (Other)

□

No

Prepared by Mathematica Policy Research

No

MARK ALL THAT APPLY

Yes, lack of specific reporting guidance

□

Yes

How were these systems changes financed?

3

0

□

1

Did FAC reporting present any specific
challenges?

3

$1 to $50,000

Offsetting fraud and nonfraud overpayments

2

2

□

□

Please provide the total amount of FAC-related
outstanding overpayments, not including writeoffs or waived overpayments, as of 9/30/2011.

1

$0 (no FAC-related systems
changes)
GO TO MODULE 2, Q.1

Does this cost estimate include other UC ARRA
improvements?

1

6.

□

2

□

Modernization funds

□

State administrative grants

□

General revenue

□

Other (Specify)

Module 2—First
2— First$2,400
$2,400in
inBenefits
BenefitsFree
Freeof
ofFederal
FederalIncome
IncomeTax
Tax(All
(AllRespondents)
Respondents)
1.

What systems changes did your state make to
ensure that the first $2,400 in benefits payments
in 2009 would be paid, tracked, adjusted, and/or
reported as free of federal income tax?

3.

MARK ALL THAT APPLY

MARK ALL THAT APPLY
1

2

3

4

5

□
□
□
□
□

What challenges did you encounter in making
these systems changes?

1

No changes needed, systems capacity already
existed
GO TO MODULE 3, Q.1
2

Added fields/flags/indicators to state claims
systems

3

□
□

Added screens to state claims systems
Unable to pay, track, adjust, or report on this
UC ARRA requirement

4

Other (Specify)

5

6

2.

□

What facilitated your state’s efforts to make the
changes needed for this ARRA requirement?

7

□
□

Insufficient financial resources to make
appropriate systems changes or establish
alternate systems
Insufficient personnel
Insufficient understanding of UC ARRA
requirements
Insufficient time to respond to legislative
changes
Data quality/data validation (including
accuracy of benefit amounts)

□

No challenges encountered

□

Other (Specify)

MARK ALL THAT APPLY
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

□

State political leadership/support

□

Agency leadership/support

□

Staff support

□

4.

Was your state able to complete necessary
systems changes so that benefits payments
could be properly adjusted in a timely manner?
MARK ONE ONLY

Leadership knowledge of UC ARRA
requirements

n

□

Staff knowledge of UC ARRA requirements

1

□

Resources available

□

2

Alignment of UC ARRA requirements with
existing state goals/initiatives

□

Nothing

3

□

Other (Specify)

4

5

Prepared by Mathematica Policy Research

3

□
□
□

Not applicable, no systems changes needed
Yes, all benefits properly adjusted in timely
manner
Somewhat, some benefits properly adjusted
on time and some retroactively

□

No, all benefits properly adjusted retroactively

□

No, not all benefits due were properly adjusted

□

Other (Specify)

5.

What was the approximate cost of making these
systems changes?

Module 3—EUC08 Tiers 1 and 2 (All Respondents)
1.

MARK ONE ONLY
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

□

$0 (no systems changes)

□

$1 to $50,000

□

$50,001 to $100,000

□

$100,001 to $250,000

□

$250,001 to $500,000

□

$500,001 to $1,000,000

□

Greater than $1,000,000

GO TO
MODULE 3, Q.1

What systems changes did your state make so
that EUC08 Tier 1/Tier 2 benefits payments could
be made, tracked, adjusted, and/or reported?
MARK ALL THAT APPLY
1

2

3

4

5

5a.

Does this cost estimate include other UC ARRA
improvements?

□
0□
1

6

Yes
7

No

If yes, please specify which ones:
8

2.
5b.

How were these systems changes financed?

□
□
□
□
□
□
□
□

No changes needed, systems capacity already
existed
GO TO Q.5
Added fields/flags/indicators to state claims
systems
Added screens to state claims systems
Benefit payment control (BPC) system
changes (for overpayments)
Handled outside state claims/BPC systems
(for example, ad hoc spreadsheets, databases)
Unable to capture, track, report on EUC08 Tier
1/Tier 2 requirement
Used TEUC system/screens as foundation for
capturing, tracking, and reporting EUC08
information
Other (Specify)

What facilitated your state’s efforts to make the
changes needed for EUC08 Tier 1/Tier 2?
MARK ALL THAT APPLY

MARK ALL THAT APPLY
1

2

3

4

□
2□
3□
4□
1

□

Modernization funds

□

State administrative grants

□

General revenue

□

Other (Specify)

□
6□
7□
5

□
9□
8

Prepared by Mathematica Policy Research

4

State political leadership/support
Agency leadership/support
Staff support
Leadership knowledge of UC ARRA
requirements
Staff knowledge of UC ARRA requirements
Resources available
Alignment of UC ARRA requirements with
existing state goals/initiatives
Nothing
Other (Specify)

3.

What challenges did you encounter in making
these systems changes?

5.

□
0□

MARK ALL THAT APPLY
1

1

□ Insufficient financial resources to make
appropriate systems changes or establish
alternate systems

5a.

□ Insufficient personnel
3 □ Insufficient understanding of UC ARRA
2

requirements

4

□ Data quality/data validation (including

2

□ Tracking more than 26 weeks (up to 34 weeks)

3

of payments

7

□ Tracking EUC08 tiers within modified (tierless)

4

TEUC system

5

□ Lack of staff knowledge of TEUC/EUC08
9 □ Augmenting Tier 1 with Tier 2 (applying

6

supplements)

□ Paying on proper benefits claims

7

(no reachbacks)
11

□ Allocating overpayment reconciliation activities

8

□ Establishing proper weekly benefit amounts
13 □ Checking for wages/benefits at benefit year end

9

12

10

and quarter change for regular UI

5b.

□ Withholding federal income tax
16 □ No challenges encountered
17 □ Other (Specify)____________
15

Was your state able to complete necessary
systems changes so that timely EUC08
Tier 1/Tier 2 benefits payments could be made?
MARK ONE ONLY

□
1□
2□
n

□
□
5□
3
4

□ Establishing overpayments
□ Applying overpayments in proper order
□ Offsetting overpayments
□ Distinguishing between existing and new
□ Offsetting fraud and nonfraud overpayments
□ Reporting of overpayments
□ Tracking overpayment adjustments to general
□ None
□ Other (Specify)

□ Checking for wages/benefits at benefit year end
and quarter change for CWC-IS

4.

□ Calculating exact overpayments

revenue instead of trust fund

to general revenue instead of trust fund

14

GO TO Q.5b

overpayments

8

10

No

If yes, which EUC08 Tier 1/Tier 2 overpaymentsrelated systems changes have been challenging
to implement?

1

accuracy of benefit amounts)
6

Yes

MARK ALL THAT APPLY

□ Insufficient time to respond to legislative
changes

5

Did EUC08 Tier 1/Tier 2 overpayments present any
specific systems challenges?

Not applicable, no systems changes needed
Yes, all benefits paid in timely manner
Somewhat, some benefits paid on time and
some retroactively
No, all benefits paid retroactively
No, not all benefits due were paid
Other (Specify)____________

Prepared by Mathematica Policy Research

5

Please provide the total amount of EUC08
Tier 1/Tier 2-related outstanding overpayments,
not including write-offs or waived overpayments,
as of 9/30/2011.

6.

Did reporting EUC08 Tier 1/Tier 2 benefits
present any specific challenges?
1

2

3

4

□
□
□
□

Module 4—EUC08 Tiers 3 and 4 (Some Respondents)

□

Yes, lack of specific reporting guidance
Yes, lack of designated UIRR forms or
cells on existing forms
1.

Yes, revising prior 218 and 5159 reports to
properly report for Tier 1 benefits
Yes (Other)

NO EUC08 TIERS 3 AND 4 IN STATE.
IF CHECKED, SKIP MODULE 4

What additional systems changes did your state
make so that EUC08 Tier 3/Tier 4 benefits
payments could be made, tracked, adjusted,
and/or reported?
MARK ALL THAT APPLY

0

7.

1

No

What was the approximate cost of making these
systems changes?

2

MARK ONE ONLY

3

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

7a.

□

□

$0 (no systems changes)

□

$1 to $50,000

□

$50,001 to $100,000

□

$100,001 to $250,000

□

$250,001 to $500,000

□

$500,001 to $1,000,000

□

Greater than $1,000,000

GO TO
MODULE 4, Q.1

4

5

6

7

2.

Does this cost estimate include other UC ARRA
improvements?

□
0□
1

□
□
□
□
□
□
□

□
2□
3□
4□

Yes

1

No

□
6□
7□

How were these systems changes financed?

□
2□
3□
4□

Modernization funds

□
9□

State administrative grants

8

General revenue
Other (Specify)

Prepared by Mathematica Policy Research

Added screens to state claims systems
Benefit payment control (BPC) system
changes (for overpayments)
Handled outside state claims/BPC systems
(for example, ad hoc spreadsheets, databases)
Unable to capture, track, report on EUC08 Tier
3/Tier 4 requirement
Other (Specify)

What facilitated your state’s efforts to make the
changes needed for EUC08 Tier 3/Tier 4?

5

1

Added fields/flags/indicators to state claims
systems

MARK ALL THAT APPLY

If yes, please specify which ones:

7b.

No changes needed, systems capacity already
existed
GO TO Q.5

6

State political leadership/support
Agency leadership/support
Staff support
Leadership knowledge of UC ARRA
requirements
Staff knowledge of UC ARRA requirements
Resources available
Alignment of UC ARRA requirements with
existing state goals/initiatives
Nothing
Other (Specify)

3.

What challenges did you encounter in making
these systems changes?

5.

□
0□

MARK ALL THAT APPLY
1

1

□ Insufficient financial resources to make
appropriate systems changes or establish
alternate systems

5a.

□ Insufficient personnel
3 □ Insufficient understanding of UC ARRA
2

requirements
4

Did EUC08 Tier 3/Tier 4 overpayments present
any specific systems challenges?

□ Insufficient time to respond to legislative

1

□ Data quality/data validation (including

2

3

□ Tracking more than 26 weeks (up to 53 weeks)

4

of payments
7

□ Allocating overpayment reconciliation amounts

5

□ Calculating exact overpayments
□ Establishing overpayments
□ Applying overpayments in proper order
□ Offsetting overpayments
□ Distinguishing between existing and new
overpayments

to stimulus funding instead of trust fund

□ Establishing proper weekly benefit amounts
9 □ Checking for wages/benefits at benefit year end

6

8

7

and quarter change for regular UI
10

□ Checking for wages/benefits at benefit year end

8

□ Offsetting fraud and nonfraud overpayments
□ Reporting of overpayments
□ Tracking overpayment adjustments to stimulus
funding instead of trust fund

and quarter change for CWC-IS

□ None
10 □ Other (Specify)

□ Withholding federal income tax
12 □ No challenges encountered
13 □ Other (Specify)

9

11

4.

GO TO Q.5b

MARK ALL THAT APPLY

accuracy of benefit amounts)
6

No

If yes, which EUC08 Tier 3/Tier 4 overpaymentsrelated systems changes have been challenging
to implement?

changes
5

Yes

5b.

Please provide the total amount of EUC08
Tier 3/Tier 4-related outstanding overpayments,
not including write-offs or waived overpayments,
as of September 30, 2011.

6.

Did reporting EUC08 Tier 3/Tier 4 benefits
present any specific challenges?

Was your state able to complete necessary
systems changes so that timely EUC08
Tier 3/Tier 4 benefits payments could be made?
MARK ONE ONLY
n

1

2

3

4

5

□

Not applicable, no systems changes needed

□

Yes, all benefits paid in timely manner

□

Somewhat, some benefits paid on time and
some retroactively

□

No, all benefits paid retroactively

□

No, not all benefits due were paid

□

Other (Specify)

□
2□
1

3

0

Prepared by Mathematica Policy Research

7

Yes, lack of specific reporting guidance
Yes, lack of designated UIRR forms or
cells on existing forms

□

Yes (Other)

□

No

7.

Module 5—Extended Benefits (EB)
(Some Respondents)

What was the approximate cost of making these
systems changes?
MARK ONE ONLY
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

7a.

□

$0 (no systems changes)

□

$1 to $50,000

□

$50,001 to $100,000

□

$100,001 to $250,000

□

$250,001 to $500,000

□

$500,001 to $1,000,000

□

Greater than $1,000,000

□

GO TO
MODULE 5, Q.1
1.

□
0□

What systems changes did your state make so
that Extended Benefits (EB) payments could be
made, tracked, adjusted, and/or reported?
MARK ALL THAT APPLY
1

2

Does this cost estimate include other UC ARRA
improvements?
1

3

Yes

4

□
□
□
□

No
5

If yes, please specify which ones:

6

7

7b.

NO EXTENDED BENEFITS (EB) IN
STATE. IF CHECKED, SKIP MODULE 5

□
□
□

No changes needed, systems capacity already
existed
GO TO Q.5
Added fields/flags/indicators to state claims
systems
Added screens to state claims systems
Benefit payment control (BPC) system
changes (for overpayments)
Handled outside state claims/BPC systems
(for example, ad hoc spreadsheets, databases)
Unable to capture, track, report on UC ARRA
EB requirement
Other (Specify)

How were these systems changes financed?
2.

MARK ALL THAT APPLY
1

2

3

4

□

Modernization funds

□

State administrative grants

□

General revenue

□

Other (Specify)

What facilitated your state’s efforts to make the
changes needed for EB?
MARK ALL THAT APPLY

□
2□
3□
4□
1

□
6□
7□
5

□
9□
8

Prepared by Mathematica Policy Research

8

State political leadership/support
Agency leadership/support
Staff support
Leadership knowledge of UC ARRA
requirements
Staff knowledge of UC ARRA requirements
Resources available
Alignment of UC ARRA requirements with
existing state goals/initiatives
Nothing
Other (Specify)

3.

What challenges did you encounter in making
these systems changes?

5.

□
0□

MARK ALL THAT APPLY
1

1

□ Insufficient financial resources to make
appropriate systems changes or establish
alternate systems

□ Insufficient personnel
3 □ Insufficient understanding of UC ARRA

5a.

2

□ Insufficient time to respond to legislative

1

□ Data quality/data validation (including

2

accuracy of benefit amounts)
6

No

GO TO Q.5b

If yes, which EB overpayments-related systems
changes have been challenging to implement?

changes
5

Yes

MARK ALL THAT APPLY

requirements
4

Did EB overpayments present any specific
systems challenges?

3

□ Tracking more than 26 weeks (up to 99 weeks)
of payments

4

□ Implementing both EUC08 and EB
8 □ Taking applications for EB
9 □ Tracking payments to interstate claimants
10 □ Collecting and verifying EB work search
7

5

6

7

documents

□ Establishing proper weekly benefit amounts
12 □ Checking for wages/benefits at benefit year end

8

11

9

□

Calculating exact overpayments

□

Establishing overpayments

□

Applying overpayments in proper order

□

Offsetting overpayments

□

Distinguishing between existing and new
overpayments

□

Offsetting fraud and nonfraud overpayments

□

Reporting of overpayments

□

None

□

Other (Specify)

and quarter change for regular UI
13

□ Checking for wages/benefits at benefit year end
and quarter change for CWC-IS

□ Withholding federal income tax
15 □ No challenges encountered
16 □ Other (Specify)

5b.

Please provide the total amount of EB-related
outstanding overpayments, not including writeoffs or waived overpayments, as of 9/30/2011.

6.

Did reporting EB present any specific
challenges?

14

4.

Was your state able to complete necessary
systems changes so that timely EB payments
could be made?
MARK ONE ONLY

□
1□
2□
n

□
4□
5□
3

1

Not applicable, no systems changes needed
2

Yes, all benefits paid in timely manner
Somewhat, some benefits paid on time and
some retroactively

3

No, all benefits paid retroactively

4

□
□

Yes, lack of specific reporting guidance
Yes, lack of designated UIRR forms or
cells on existing forms

□

Yes, reporting both EUC08 and EB

□

Yes (Other)

□

No

No, not all benefits due were paid
Other (Specify)___________
0

Prepared by Mathematica Policy Research

9

7.

What was the approximate cost of making these systems changes?
MARK ONE ONLY
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

7a.

□

$0 (no systems changes)

□

$1 to $50,000

□

$50,001 to $100,000

□

$100,001 to $250,000

□

$250,001 to $500,000

□

$500,001 to $1,000,000

□

Greater than $1,000,000

GO TO MODULE 6, Q.1

Does this cost estimate include other UC ARRA improvements?

□
0□
1

Yes
No

If yes, please specify which ones:

7b.

How were these systems changes financed?
MARK ALL THAT APPLY
1

2

3

4

□

Modernization funds

□

State administrative grants

□

General revenue

□

Other (Specify)

Prepared by Mathematica Policy Research

10

Module 6—UI Modernization Incentives
(Some Respondents)

□
1.

NO MODERNIZATION INCENTIVES IN STATE. IF CHECKED, SKIP MODULE 6

What systems changes did your state make so that modernization provisions could be made, tracked, adjusted, and/or reported?
MARK ALL THAT APPLY

Provision
not
applicable
in this state

a. ABP eligibility calculations ......

n

□

No changes
needed,
systems
capacity
already
existed
1

□

Added fields
to state
claims
systems
2

□

Added flags/
indicators to
state claims
systems
3

□

Added
screens to
state claims
systems
4

□

Benefit
payment
control (BPC)
system
changes (for
overpays)
5

□

Handled
outside state
claims/BPC
systems (for
example,
ad hoc
spreadsheets,
databases)
6

□

Unable to
capture,
track,
and/or
report on
UC ARRA
requirement
7

□

Other
(Specify)
8

□

__________
__________

b. UC benefits payments for
workers seeking part-time
employment ............................

n

□

1

□

2

□

3

□

4

□

5

□

6

□

7

□

8

□

__________
__________

c.

UC benefits payments for
workers with voluntary job
quits for compelling family
reasons ...................................

n

□

1

□

2

□

3

□

4

□

5

□

6

□

7

□

8

□

__________
__________

d. UC benefits payments for an
additional 26 weeks for
workers enrolled and making
satisfactory progress in
certain training programs........

e. Dependency allowances ........

n

n

□
□

1

1

□
□

2

2

□

3

□

3

□
□

4

4

□
□

5

5

□
□

6

6

□
□

7

7

□
□

8

□

__________
__________
8

□

__________
__________

Prepared by Mathematica Policy Research

11

2.

What helped your state make the systems
changes needed for the UI modernization
provisions adopted by your state?

4.

MARK ALL THAT APPLY
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

3.

What was the approximate cost of making the UI
modernization systems changes made by your
state?
MARK ONE ONLY

□

State political leadership/support

1

□

Agency leadership/support

2

□

Staff support

3

Leadership knowledge of UC ARRA
requirements

4

□

5

□

Staff knowledge of UC ARRA requirements

□

Resources available

□

6

7

Alignment of UC ARRA requirements with
existing state goals/initiatives
4a.

□

Nothing

□

Other (Specify)

□

$0 (no systems changes)

□

$1 to $50,000

□

$50,001 to $100,000

□

$100,001 to $250,000

□

$250,001 to $500,000

□

$500,001 to $1,000,000

□

Greater than $1,000,000

GO TO Q.6.2

Does this cost estimate include other UC ARRA
improvements?

□
0□
1

Yes
No

If yes, please specify which ones:

What challenges did you encounter in making
these systems changes for UI modernization?
MARK ALL THAT APPLY
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

□
□
□
□
□
□

Insufficient financial resources to make
appropriate systems changes or establish
alternate systems

4b.

How were the UI modernization systems
changes financed?

Insufficient personnel
MARK ALL THAT APPLY

Insufficient understanding of UC ARRA
requirements

1

Not enough to respond to legislative changes

2

Data quality/data validation (including accuracy
of benefit amounts)

3

4

Accessing most recent wage records for
ABP calculations

□

None

□

Other (Specify)

Prepared by Mathematica Policy Research

12

□

Modernization funds

□

State administrative grants

□

General revenue

□

Other (Specify)

5.

Was your state able to complete necessary systems changes so that the state could make timely…?

MARK ONE ONLY

Provision not
applicable in
this state

a. ABP eligibility calculations .........

n

□

Not applicable,
no systems
changes
needed
na

□

Yes, all
benefits paid in
timely manner
1

□

Somewhat,
some benefits
paid on time
and some
retroactively
2

□

No, all benefits
paid
retroactively
3

□

No, not all
benefits due
were paid
4

□

Other (Specify)
5

□

_____________

b. UC benefits payments for
workers seeking part-time
employment ...............................

n

□

na

□

1

□

2

□

3

□

4

□

5

□

_____________

c.

UC benefits payments for
workers with voluntary job quits
for compelling family reasons ....

n

□

na

□

1

□

2

□

3

□

4

□

5

□

_____________

d. UC benefits payments for an
additional 26 weeks for workers
enrolled and making satisfactory
progress in certain training
programs ...................................

n

□

na

□

1

□

2

□

3

□

4

□

5

□

_____________

e. Dependency allowances ...........

n

□

na

□

1

□

2

□

3

□

4

□

5

□

_____________

Prepared by Mathematica Policy Research

13

6.1

Did overpayments of UC benefits payments related to the modernization provisions listed below present any specific systems challenges?
MARK ALL THAT APPLY

Provision not
applicable in
this state

a. Workers seeking
part-time
employment ..........

n

□

Calculating
exact
overpayments

1

□

Establishing
overpayments

2

□

Applying
overpayments
in proper order

3

□

Offsetting
overpayments

4

□

Distinguishing
between
existing
and new
overpayments

5

Offsetting fraud
and nonfraud
overpayments

□

6

Accounting
and reporting
overpayment
differences

□

7

□

Other (Specify)

8

□

__________

b. Workers with
voluntary job quits
for compelling
family reasons ......

n

□

1

□

2

□

3

□

4

□

5

□

6

□

7

□

8

□

__________

c. Additional 26
weeks for workers
enrolled and
making
satisfactory
progress in certain
training programs .

n

□

1

□

2

□

3

□

4

□

5

□

6

□

7

□

8

□

__________

d. Dependency
allowances............

n

□

1

□

2

□

3

□

4

□

5

□

6

□

7

□

8

□

__________

6.2

Please provide the total amount of outstanding UC benefits overpayments, before deductions for write-offs and waived overpayments, as of
September 30, 2011, for each of the following modernization provisions.
Provision not
applicable in
this state

a. Workers seeking part-time employment...............................................................................................................

n

b. Workers with voluntary job quits for compelling family reasons...........................................................................

n

c.

Additional 26 weeks for workers enrolled and making satisfactory progress in certain training programs .........

n

d. Dependency allowances ......................................................................................................................................

n

Prepared by Mathematica Policy Research

14

□
□
□
□

Unable to
calculate

Enter dollar
amount

□

$__________

□

$__________

□

$__________

□

$__________

1

1

1

1

7.

Did reporting on the following modernization provisions present any specific challenges?
Yes, lack of
specific
reporting
guidance

a. UC benefits payments for workers seeking
part-time employment ...................................

1

□

Yes, lack of
designated UIRR
forms or cells on
existing forms

2

□

Yes
(Other)

3

□

No

0

□

__________
__________
b. UC benefits payments for workers with
voluntary job quits for compelling family
reasons .........................................................

1

□

2

□

3

□

0

□

__________
__________
c.

UC benefits payments for an additional
26 weeks for workers enrolled and making
satisfactory progress in certain training
programs .......................................................

1

□

2

□

3

□

0

□

__________
__________
d. Dependency allowances ...............................

1

□

2

□

3

□

__________
__________

Prepared by Mathematica Policy Research

15

0

□