BAM Justification Part B 9 2012

/home/ec2-user/sec/disk/omb/icr/201209-1205-005/doc/35530401

JUSTIFICATION PART B

STATISTICAL METHODS

B-1. Respondent Universe and Sampling Methodology

a. Respondent Universe. The respondent universe for paid and denied claims comprises fifty-two State Workforce Agencies (SWAs), employers, and third parties. Within each SWA, the universe for paid claims is defined as all intrastate and interstate weeks paid (or offset) in the State Unemployment Insurance (UI), Unemployment Compensation for Federal Employees (UCFE), and Unemployment Compensation for Ex-servicemembers (UCX) programs. For denied claims, each SWA defines three universes of formal, documented denial decisions or determinations of ineligibility for benefits. These denial decisions are based on (a) monetary issues; (b) separation issues; and (c) nonseparation, or "continuing eligibility" issues.

2. Sampling Methodology.

BAM Paid Claims

SWAs select systematic random samples of paid UI claims each week and use the results of the BAM paid claims investigations to estimate accurately the number and dollar value of proper and improper payments (overpayments and underpayments), and their rates of occurrence. BAM paid claims also provides information that can be used for program improvement, including the type of payment error, error cause, responsible party, point of detection within the system, and the actions of claimants, employers, and agencies prior to the BAM investigation.

The Department has supplied each SWA with software that performs quality assurance edits of the sampling frames and randomly selects the BAM paid claims samples. Each week a random sample is selected of both intrastate and interstate original payments (including combined wage claims) made for a week of unemployment under the State UI, UCX or UCFE programs. A sample of 360 cases per year is pulled in the ten states with the smallest UI program workloads (defined as average annual UI weeks paid during the most recent five calendar years) and 480 cases per year in the other states. State BAM staff audit each selected claim, examining all aspects of a claimant's eligibility to receive unemployment compensation during the sampled week. In their investigation, staff verify wages used to establish monetary entitlements, the claimant's reason for being unemployed, efforts to find work during the week and any other factors which would have affected the claimant’s entitlement to a benefit during the sampled week or the amount of the benefit paid. Effective January 2008, paid claims selected for BAM must be matched with the National Directory of New Hires. The findings are then coded and entered into a database that is maintained on a computer located in each SWA. The Department uploads state BAM results (minus claimant Social Security Number) to a database maintained by the ETA Office of Workforce Security. The Department publishes annual performance results and uses the data for various analytical and evaluative purposes.

BAM Denied Claims

Each week, SWAs select systematic random samples from the three separate sampling frames constructed from the universes of claims for UI for which eligibility was denied for monetary, separation, or nonseparation reasons. Samples are selected using the same sampling frame edit and sample selection software used for paid claims. The Department estimates the accuracy of decisions to deny claimants UI, based on the results of the case investigations for these samples.

Investigation of BAM denied claims follows the paid claims case investigation methodology. It evaluates denials accuracy by investigating random samples of each of the three types of denials. All states sample a minimum of 150 cases of each type of denial in each calendar year. State BAM staff review agency records and contact claimants, employers, and all other relevant parties to verify information in agency records or obtain additional information pertinent to the determination that denies eligibility. Unlike the investigation of paid claims, in which all prior determinations affecting claimant eligibility for the compensated week selected for the sample are evaluated, the investigation of denied claims is limited to the issue upon which the denial determination is based.

The Department distributes a table of random start numbers to use with the BAM paid and denied claims sample selection software. A separate random number is provided for each sample pull (paid claims, monetary denials, separation denials, nonseparation denials) for each of the 52 weekly samples.

Scope: Both paid and denied intrastate and interstate claims in the State UI, UCFE, and UCX programs are included in the sampling frames. Paid and denied interstate claims are included in the sampling frames of the interstate liable state. The “liable” state is the state which pays the UI benefits (that is, that state’s Unemployment Trust Fund is charged). The “agent” state is the state that processes the UI claim.

Operational Definitions of Sampling Frames: Unless otherwise stated, definitions refer to those used in ET Handbook 401, 4th edition. ETA report cell references are those used in ET Handbook 402, 5th edition.

(1) Paid Weeks

Include only paid or compensated weeks that fall into all of the following: a) regular program type (UI, UCFE, UCX, or any combination thereof), b) weeks for which the payments/offsets are original payments (defined as the first valid payment/offset made by a state agency to a claimant for that week; offsets would normally recover overpayments established for previous weeks), c) weeks for which “total” or “part-total” payments/offsets are made, and d) weeks for which payments/offsets/intercepted payments are made to intrastate claimants, to interstate claimants by the liable state, or for combined wage claims.

Exclude weeks that all waiting weeks, weeks for which supplemental payments are made, weeks with stop payments, and all weeks paid under the Short Time Compensation (STC) [Workshare], Extended Benefits (EB), Trade Readjustment Allowance (TRA), Disaster Unemployment Assistance (DUA) programs, any temporary Federal-State supplemental compensation programs, or other special programs, such as Emergency Unemployment Compensation.

(2) Monetary Denials

Include all initial claims that meet the definition for inclusion in the ETA 5159 Claims and Activities report on lines 101 (State UI), 102 (UCFE, No UI), and 103 (UCX only), for item 2 (new intrastate, excluding transitional), item 6 (transitional), and item 7 (interstate received as liable state) and for which eligibility was denied because of:

• Insufficient wages,

• Insufficient hours/weeks/days,

• Failure of high quarter wage test,

• Requalification wage requirement, or

• Other state monetary eligibility requirement

Exclude denied claims made under the Short Time Compensation (STC) (Workshare), Extended Benefits (EB), Trade Readjustment Allowance (TRA), Disaster Unemployment Assistance (DUA), or any temporary Federal-State supplemental compensation programs.

(3) Separation Denials

Include all separation determinations that meet the definition for inclusion in the ETA 9052 Nonmonetary Determinations Time Lapse (Detection Date) report in cells c1 (intrastate), c5 (interstate), and c193 (multi-claimant) and for which eligibility was denied based on any of the following issues:

• Voluntary quit (either personal or work connected),

• Discharge,

• Labor dispute, or

• Other separation issue reportable under definitions in ET Handbook 401

Exclude denied claims made under the STC, EB, TRA, DUA, or any temporary Federal-State supplemental compensation programs.

(4) Nonmonetary-Nonseparation Denials

Include all nonmonetary-nonseparation determinations that meet the definition for inclusion in the ETA 9052 Nonmonetary Determinations Time Lapse (Detection Date) report in cells c97 (intrastate), c101 (interstate), and c193 (multiclaimant) and for which eligibility was denied based on any of the following issues:

• Able and/or available to work,

• Actively seeking work,

• Disqualifying/unreported income,

• Refusal of suitable work or offer of job referral,

• Refusal of referral to profiling services,

• Failure to report,

• Failure to register with the employment service, or

• Other nonseparation eligibility issue (for example, alien status, athlete, school employee, seasonality, removal of disqualification, and determination of whether claimant’s activities or status constitutes service or employment).

Exclude denied claims made under the STC, EB, TRA, DUA, or any temporary Federal-State supplemental compensation programs.

Frequency and Timing:

SWAs create a sampling frame file each week for all four universes. For paid claims, the survey population is selected from all weeks for which payments are made or offsets applied during a period that begins at 12:00 a.m. on Sunday and ends at 11:59 p.m. on Saturday. This interval is defined by the run time(s) of the computer programs that issue the checks or apply offsets.

The sampling frame for separation and nonseparation denied claims includes all decisions to deny UI claims issued during the period 12:00 a.m. Sunday to 11:59 p.m. Saturday. The date of the determination is the date printed on the determination notice. If no notice is issued, it is the date that the denial action was entered into the agency’s record system or that a permanent stop payment order was issued.

The sampling frame for monetary denied claims is constructed slightly differently as it is possible that a UI claim may initially be denied for insufficient wages but subsequently become monetarily eligible upon the addition of wages from out-of-state employers (combined wage claims), Federal wages (UCFE and/or UCX programs), or as a result of the application of alternate base period formulas. In order to allow time for SWAs to request and receive Federal, out of state, and recently earned wage credits, the sampling frame for monetary denials is constructed two weeks after the week ending date of the initial claim. For example, the sampling frame for batch 201210 (March 4 - 10, 2012) will consist of new initial and transitional claims filed on or before February 25 for which the most recent determination issued between February 19 and March 10 denies monetary eligibility.

c. Case Investigation. BAM paid and denied claims case investigations are conducted according to the methods and procedures documented in ET Handbook 395; case investigation procedures for both paid and denied claims are described in detail in chapter VI, except as noted in chapter VIII for denied claims investigations. The information that is collected is specified in the data collection instruments (DCIs) for both paid and denied claims.

BAM investigators collect DCI information from SWA records, claimant questionnaires, and interviews with employers and other the parties with information relevant to the paid or denied claim. The investigator then records this information in an automated database, which consists of individual data records for each sampled paid claim and denial.

All paid and denied claims investigations involve one state investigator and one claimant. The person whose claim was either paid or denied is contacted in-person, by telephone, or by mail.

BAM investigators obtain Information from employers (and their representatives) and "third parties" -- persons other than the claimant or employer, such as a doctor, school, or labor union, who possess information pertinent to the paid or denied case.

Unlike the investigation of paid claims, in which all decisions affecting claimant eligibility that precede the compensated week selected for the sample are evaluated, the investigation of denied claims is limited to the issue upon which the denial decision was based. For example, if a continued week claim is denied because the agency determined the claimant was not available for work, then only the availability issue will be investigated. The monetary, separation and any other nonmonetary determinations which could have affected eligibility for the week claimed will not be investigated. SWAs have the flexibility to conduct the investigation of both paid denied claims for UI by in-person interview, telephone, mail or fax, as they deem appropriate.

B-2. Procedures for Collection of Information

a. Stratification and Sample Selection. For both paid and denied claims, each state’s sample is stratified by week (which BAM refers to as a batch). For denied claims, samples are selected from sampling frames for each of the three types of denials (monetary, separation, and nonseparation). Systematic samples are selected weekly using software and random start numbers provided by the Department. Annual estimates are weighted to reflect the sample stratification. The formulae used to produce weighted estimates for paid and denied claims accuracy rates are in Attachment B-1.

b. Estimation Procedure. See Attachment B-1 for the formulae used to estimate paid and denied claims accuracy rates and sampling variances.

c. Degree of Accuracy Needed. The Department has adopted a standard for data publication that the 95% confidence interval (roughly two times the standard error of estimate) will be estimated and displayed for each estimated accuracy rate. Attachment B-2 displays the estimated rates and sampling errors for calendar year (CY) 2011 BAM paid claims results for the following types of overpayments:

Annual Report Rate - The annual report rate includes fraud, nonfraud recoverable overpayments, nonfraud nonrecoverable overpayments, official action taken to reduce future benefits, and payments that are technically proper due to finality or other rules. The rate excludes payments determined to be "technically" proper due to law/rules requiring formal warnings for unacceptable work search efforts. All causes and responsible parties are included in this rate.

Operational Rate - The operational overpayment rate includes those overpayments that the states are reasonably expected to detect and establish for recovery -- fraud and nonfraud recoverable overpayments, excluding work search, employment service (ES) registration, base period wage issues and miscellaneous causes, such as benefits paid during a period of disqualification, redeterminations, and back pay awards.

Fraud - The definition of unemployment compensation fraud varies from state to state. The rate includes all causes and responsible parties.

Attachment B-3 displays the estimated rates and sampling errors for CY 2011 BAM denied claims results for monetary, separation, and nonseparation issues.

d. Unusual problems requiring specialized sampling procedures. BAM paid and denied claims does not involve any unusual problems requiring specialized sampling procedures.

e. Use of periodic data collection to reduce burden. Less frequent data collection cycles would not be an appropriate means for reducing burden. This issue is addressed in Part A of the Justification, section A-6. To make reliable estimates of accuracy in a highly seasonal program such as UI, sampling must occur continuously. BAM paid and denied claims samples are drawn weekly. The continuous investigation of these samples, with regular data entry, also provides up-to-date information on accuracy to facilitate continuous improvement. Because the samples are weekly, they can be aggregated over various time periods for analytical purposes.

B-3. Methods to Maximize Response Rates

Because claimants are required to provide information concerning their continued eligibility for UI benefits, nonresponse to the BAM claimant questionnaire can affect eligibility for benefit payments. The response rate for claimant contacts (that is, the percentage of claimant questionnaires completed) for BAM paid claims is approximately 93 percent. It is more difficult to obtain a complete questionnaire from claimants who were denied benefits. Some of these individuals have returned to work or have relocated and are unavailable for interview.

Even if claimant information cannot be obtained directly, BAM investigators can obtain sufficient information from SWA records, and other relevant parties in order to reach an informed decision concerning the accuracy of the decision to deny benefits. The BAM investigators verify all information provided by UI recipients or obtained from automated file systems and other agency records. They contact all employers for whom the claimant worked before becoming unemployed or who provided part-time work during the claims series or were contacted in job search, as well as interested third parties, such as labor unions or employment agencies. The national case completion rate when all contacts are considered has consistently been over 99 percent for both paid and denied claims.

In CY 2011, although the percentage of claimant questionnaires completed varied considerably by sample type, states were able to complete nearly all of their cases based on agency documentation, employer, and third party information. The following table summarizes claimant response by data collection method. Attachment B-4 displays the response rates for the CY 2011 BAM paid claims samples, and Attachment B-5 displays the response rates for the CY 2011 BAM denied claims samples.

BAM Case Completion and Claimant Interview Method -- CY 2011
Sample Type	Cases Sampled	Valid Cases*	Cases Completed	Percent Completed	In-Person	Tele-Phone	Mail	No Clmnt. Inter.
Paid Claims	24,728	24,677	24,676	99.99%	17.23%	39.82%	36.57%	6.39%
Monetary	8,562	8,119	8,105	99.83%	0.65%	51.25%	22.52%	25.58%
Separation	8,207	8,078	8,058	99.75%	0.72%	50.32%	23.22%	25.74%
Nonseparation	8,502	8,080	8,063	99.79%	0.69%	53.28%	25.15%	20.88%

^* Cases sampled minus cases deleted because they did not meet the definition for inclusion in the survey population and denied claims that were withdrawn by the claimant.

The Department is acutely aware of the importance of claimant response to the BAM questionnaire and has established a Federal-State workgroup to examine the issue of claimant nonresponse. The Department has drafted an advisory, which is currently in Department clearance, to issue guidance to address the specific issues of adjudicating work search and reporting errors when the claimant fails to respond to the BAM audit questionnaire.

In addition, in order to reduce nonresponse error and maintain coding consistency, the Department will continue to conduct training for BAM supervisors and investigators and hold Federal-State peer reviews of completed BAM audits to ensure that coding accurately reflects state law and policy and that states are following the BAM methodology.

In order to reduce respondent burden and maximize claimant response, the number of data elements collected for DCA is significantly smaller than the amount of data collected for BAM paid claims. Because only information relevant to the monetary, separation, or nonseparation denial issue is verified, the number of data elements per case is one-third or less of the number collected for BAM paid claims, which investigates decisions at all three points in the UI claims process. In addition, SWAs follow up the initial claimant contact with a sufficient number of call-backs and re-contact attempts to demonstrate that a reasonable attempt was made to obtain the information.

SWAs administering the BAM program are encouraged to:

• Use all available data collection methods -- in-person, telephone, mail, e-mail, and fax -- to complete their investigations;

• Be as flexible as feasible in accommodating the schedules of claimants, employers, and other relevant parties;

• Develop clear and concise questionnaires and scripts which clearly explain the purpose of the data collection effort and minimize the time commitment of the respondent. To this end the Department shares examples and prototype case investigation materials in order to disseminate best practices as widely as possible;

• Clearly inform the respondents that the confidentiality of the information they provide will be strictly maintained and that any information that can identify an individual, such as a claimant’s social security number, will not be shared with the Department’s or any other state’s record systems; and

• Emphasize to respondents that the major objective of the BAM program is the improvement of the UI system, and that their cooperation will contribute to insuring that individuals who are in fact eligible for UI benefits receive them.

B-4. Tests of Procedures or Methods

Paid Claims

In 1991 the Department of Labor completed a pilot test of the feasibility and cost-effectiveness of telephone contacts in lieu of in-person interviews with claimants, employers, and third parties. Four states participated in the pilot test, giving a wide range of economic, social and geographical environments. The pilot showed that the telephone was reasonably effective in detecting overpayment and underpayment errors: the patterns of erroneous payments by type and cause were basically the same as detected by the in-person control investigations. Although the rate of dollars overpaid discovered by the two methods in one state was virtually identical, in the other three the telephone estimate was only 60% of the in-person estimate. The pilot showed that the telephone methodology was very effective for certain aspects of BAM investigations, but less so for others. It also showed that BAM investigations could be done considerably less expensively by telephone--at about half the cost, confirming the estimate from a similar pilot project conducted in Idaho in the late 1980s.

Denied Claims

In 1987 the Department completed a five-state pilot test of using the BAM field-check methodology for determining the accuracy of benefit denial decisions. Three different sampling designs were evaluated in the 1986-87 pilot: (1) separate sampling frames for monetary, separation, and nonseparation (continuing eligibility) denials and a single sampling frame for all paid claims; (2) separate sampling frames for denials and decisions to affirm eligibility at the monetary, separation, and nonseparation points of determination in the UI claims process; and (3) a longitudinal approach, in which claimants were sampled at the time that the initial claim was filed, and eligibility determinations (either to deny or affirm eligibility) were investigated as they occurred during the claims process. The 1997-98 DCA pilot was based on model 1, which was the simplest design and preserved the design used for BAM paid claims. As noted in Part A, the Department has relied on results of the 1997-98 DCA pilot to estimate case-completion times and burden hours for national implementation of DCA.

B-5. Consultations on Statistical Aspects of the Design

The following individuals assisted in the development of the statistical design of BAM paid and denied claims and may be contacted for further information:

Andrew Spisak

Employment and Training Administration

Office of Unemployment Insurance

Phone: 202-693-3196

E-mail: [email protected]

Estimation Procedure for Benefit Accuracy Measurement

BAM Paid Claims

1. Ratio Estimate of Overpayment Rate

The parameter to be estimated, R_o, is the ratio of Unemployment Insurance (UI) benefits overpaid to total UI benefits paid: R_o = Y/X, where Y = Total dollars overpaid in the population and X = Total UI benefits paid in the population.

R_o is estimated by the sample ratio:

r_o =

where:

H = Number of batches (weekly samples) in the period for which the estimate is being made.

N_h = Total number of UI payments in the population for batch h. (Note: This value is available from state automated record systems and does not have to be estimated.)

m_h = Number of completed sample cases in batch h.

x_hi = Amount of UI benefits paid/offset for the i^th case in batch h.

y_hi = Dollars overpaid for the i^th case in batch h.

Nonresponse is assumed to be random.

2. Sampling Variance of Ratio Estimate of Overpayment Rate

The following formula will be used to estimate the sampling variance of the ratio estimate of the BAM paid claims overpayment rate.

(Note: Because the sampling fractions, f_h=m_h/N_h, are negligible, the term (1-f_h) has been omitted from the equations.)

estVar(r_o)=

=

where:

is the sample variance of the dollars overpaid;

is the sample variance of the dollars paid/offset; and

is the sample covariance of the dollars overpaid and the dollars paid/offset.

X = Total population dollars paid/offset for the H batches.

(Note: This value is available from state automated record systems and does not have to be estimated.)

3. Ratio Estimate of Overpayment Rate for Subgroups

The parameter to be estimated, R_ok, is the ratio of Unemployment Insurance (UI) benefits overpaid to total UI benefits paid for population subgroup k: R_ok = Y_k/X_k, where Y_k=Total dollars overpaid in the population for the k^th subgroup and X_k=Total UI benefits paid in the population for the k^th subgroup.

R_ok is estimated by the sample ratio:

r_ok =

where:

x_hik = Amount of UI benefits paid/offset for the i^th case in the k^th subgroup in batch h.

x_hik = x_hi, for hi in the k^th subgroup, and

x_hik = 0, for hi not in the k^th subgroup

y_hik = Dollars overpaid for the i^th case in the k^th subgroup in batch h.

y_hik = y_hi, for hi in the k^th subgroup, and

y_hik = 0, for hi not in the k^th subgroup

Nonresponse is assumed to be random.

4. Sampling Variance of Ratio Estimate of Overpayment

Rate for Subgroups

The following formula will be used to estimate the sampling variances of the ratio estimate of the overpayment rate for subgroups.

(Note: Because the sampling fractions, f_h=m_h/N_h, are negligible, the term (1-f_h) has been omitted from the equations.)

estVar(r_ok)=

where:

is the sample variance of the dollars overpaid in the k^th subgroup;

is the sample variance of the dollars paid/offset in the k^th subgroup; and

is the sample covariance of the dollars overpaid and the dollars paid/offset.

is the estimated total dollars paid/offset for the H batches.

In the preceeding formulas,

x_hik = x_hi, for hi in the kth subgroup, and

x_hik = 0, for hi not in the kth subgroup;

y_hik = y_hi, for hi in the kth subgroup, and

y_hik = 0, for hi not in the kth subgroup

x_hk = Amount of UI benefits paid/offset in the k^th subgroup in the sample in batch h.

5. Ratio Estimate of Proper Payment Rate

The parameter to be estimated, R_p, is the ratio of Unemployment Insurance (UI) benefits properly paid to total UI benefits paid: R_p = Z/X, where Z = Total dollars properly paid in the population and X = Total UI benefits paid in the population.

R_p is estimated by the sample ratio:

r_p =

where H, N_h, m_h, and x_hi are defined as in 1., above, and

z_hi = Dollars properly paid (dollars paid - dollars overpaid) for the i^th case in batch h.

6. Sampling Variance of Ratio Estimate of Proper Payment Rate

The following formula will be used to estimate the sampling variance of the ratio estimate of the BAM paid claims proper payment rate.

(Note: Because the sampling fractions, f_h=m_h/N_h, are negligible, the term (1-f_h) has been omitted from the equations.)

estVar(r_p) =

where H, N_h, m_h, X, and s²_xh are defined as in 1. and 2., above;

s²_zh is the sample variance of the dollars properly paid; and

s_zxh is the sample covariance of the dollars properly paid and dollars paid.

7. Ratio Estimate of Proper Payment Rate for Subgroups

The parameter to be estimated, R_pk, is the ratio of Unemployment Insurance (UI) benefits properly paid to total UI benefits paid for population subgroup k: R_pk = Z_k/X_k, where Z_k=Total dollars properly paid in the population for the k^th subgroup and X_k=Total UI benefits paid in the population for the k^th subgroup.

R_pk is estimated by the sample ratio r_pk which is defined as the estimator r_ok in section 3, above, except that:

z_hik = Dollars properly paid (dollars paid - dollars overpaid) for the i^th case in the k^th subgroup in batch h.

z_hik = z_hi, for hi in the k^th subgroup, and

z_hik = 0, for hi not in the k^th subgroup

8. Sampling Variance of Ratio Estimate of Proper Payment

Rate for Subgroups

The following formula will be used to estimate the sampling variances of the ratio estimate of the proper payment rate for subgroups.

(Note: Because the sampling fractions, f_h=m_h/N_h, are negligible, the term (1-f_h) has been omitted from the equations.)

estVar(r_pk)=

where H, N_h, m_h, , and s²_xh(k) are defined as in 1.and 4., above;

s²_zh(k) is the sample variance of the dollars properly paid in the k^th subgroup; and

s_zxh(k) is the sample covariance of the dollars properly paid and dollars paid in the k^th subgroup.

9. Ratio Estimate of Underpayment Rate

The parameter to be estimated, R_u is the ratio of Unemployment Insurance (UI) benefits underpaid to total UI benefits paid: R_u = U/X, where U = Total dollars underpaid in the population and X = Total UI benefits paid in the population.

R_u is estimated by the sample ratio:

r_u=

where H, N_h, m_h, and x_hi are defined as in 1., above, and

u_hi = Dollars underpaid for the i^th case in batch h.

10. Sampling Variance of Ratio Estimate of Underpayment Rate

The following formula will be used to estimate the sampling variance of the ratio estimate of the BAM paid claims underpayment rate.

(Note: Because the sampling fractions, f_h=m_h/N_h, are negligible, the term (1-f_h) has been omitted from the equations.)

estVar(r_u) =

where H, N_h, m_h, X, and s²_xh are defined as in 1. and 2., above;

s²_uh is the sample variance of the dollars underpaid; and

s_uxh is the sample covariance of the dollars underpaid and dollars paid.

11. Ratio Estimate of Underpayment Rate for Subgroups

The parameter to be estimated, R_uk, is the ratio of Unemployment Insurance (UI) benefits underpaid to total UI benefits paid for population subgroup k: R_uk = U_k/X_k, where U_k=Total dollars underpaid in the population for the k^th subgroup and X_k=Total UI benefits paid in the population for the k^th subgroup.

R_uk is estimated by the sample ratio r_uk which is defined as the estimator r_ok in section 3, above, except that:

u_hik = Dollars underpaid for the i^th case in the k^th subgroup in batch h.

u_hik = u_hi, for hi in the k^th subgroup, and

u_hik = 0, for hi not in the k^th subgroup

12. Sampling Variance of Ratio Estimate of Underpayment

Rate for Subgroups

The following formula will be used to estimate the sampling variances of the ratio estimate of the underpayment rate for subgroups.

(Note: Because the sampling fractions, f_h=m_h/N_h, are negligible, the term (1-f_h) has been omitted from the equations.)

estVar(r_uk)=

where H, N_h, m_h, , and s²_xh(k) are defined as in 1.and 4., above;

s²_uh(k) is the sample variance of the dollars underpaid in the k^th subgroup; and

s_uxh(k) is the sample covariance of the dollars underpaid and dollars paid in the k^th subgroup.

Confidence Intervals

The 95% confidence interval for any estimated ratio r_θ (1, 3, 5, 7, 9, or 11, above) is:

Coefficient of Variation

The coefficient of variation (cv) of an estimate r_θ is:

BAM Denied Claims

Equations for Case Error Estimates

The following notation will be used:

H = the number of weeks (batches) in the period for which the estimate is

being made.

N_h = the number of denied claims in week h.

X_h = the number of claims in week h which were erroneously denied.

P_h = X_h/N_h = the proportion of claims in week h which were erroneously

denied.

N_ = = total number of denied claims in the period.

X_ = = total number of claims erroneously denied in the period.

The parameter to be estimated, P, is the proportion of claims erroneously denied during the period. Estimates will be made for each of the three denial universes -- monetary, separation, and nonseparation. We wish to estimate:

P = X_/N_ =

Now let

m_h = the number of completed sample claims for week h.

m_ = = total number of completed sample claims in the period.

x_h = the number of claims in week h which were erroneously denied.

= proportion of sample claims in week h which were erroneously denied.

If it is assumed that non-response is "at random", then .

It follows that is unbiased for P. Furthermore, as sampling is independent within each week (stratum), it follows that

where f_h = m_h/N_h. The usual estimator for is

.

If f_h is negligible then

can be used for variance estimation.

Proportions for Subgroups

The proportion of denial actions which were incorrectly decided may be estimated for population subgroups, for example UI program (State UI, UCFE, UCX), filing method (in-person, telephone, mail), or demographic classifications.

Building on the notation above, for the k^th subgroup and the h^th week let

N_hk = the number of denied claims.

X_hk = the number of claims were erroneously denied.

P_hk = X_hk/N_hk = the proportion of claims which were erroneously denied.

Then for the k^th subgroup we have

N_k = = total number of denied claims in the period.

X_k = = total number of claims erroneously denied in the period.

The parameter to be estimated, P_k, is the proportion of claims erroneously denied during the period for subgroup k. Analogous to previous work, we can write

P_k = X_k/N_k = .

Note that neither X_k nor N_k is known. For the k^th subgroup, h^th week, let

m_hk = the number of completed sample claims for week h.

x_hk = the number of claims in week h which were erroneously denied.

Assuming nonresponse is "at random", is unbiased for X_k and is unbiased for N_k. The ratio estimator is approximately unbiased for P_k, and

where f_hk = m_hk/N_hk and θ_hk = N_hk/N_h. Assuming that f_hk is negligible, an estimate for the variance is given by

where

and

{  .

Confidence Intervals

The 95% confidence interval for any estimate (u) is:

Coefficient of Variation

The coefficient of variation (cv) of an estimate u is:

UI Benefit Accuracy Measurement Rates and Sampling Errors

January 2011 to December 2011

Annual

Amount Report 95% CI Oper. 95% CI Fraud 95% CI

ST Sample Paid Rate +/- Rate +/- Rate +/-

__ _______ ________________ _______ ______ ______ ______ ______ ______

AK 487 $181,657,517 13.238% 3.338 5.879% 2.378 1.916% 1.330

AL 490 $402,348,664 13.730% 3.070 3.600% 1.504 1.601% 1.085

AR 480 $391,593,072 12.726% 2.889 11.47% 2.739 6.487% 2.107

AZ 496 $566,048,626 17.567% 3.334 12.96% 3.007 7.413% 2.274

CA 998 $7,397,950,097 5.342% 1.532 3.634% 1.292 3.184% 1.246

CO 486 $689,991,604 14.221% 3.116 7.473% 2.361 1.000% .940

CT 467 $858,316,728 3.274% 1.350 3.083% 1.328 2.055% 1.092

DC 371 $173,558,235 8.850% 2.875 5.998% 2.309 2.963% 1.649

DE 360 $130,996,402 10.220% 3.300 8.636% 3.090 4.519% 2.313

FL 489 $1,672,882,995 7.789% 2.420 6.790% 2.270 .272% .364

GA 490 $1,002,680,738 8.639% 2.696 2.232% 1.259 1.214% .931

HI 367 $284,181,714 4.274% 2.067 .642% .556 .716% .748

IA 480 $485,922,981 12.877% 3.027 7.219% 2.315 .909% 1.082

ID 508 $228,936,723 10.246% 2.637 4.714% 1.643 2.589% 1.349

IL 485 $2,362,451,410 12.274% 3.031 7.769% 2.360 2.236% 1.264

IN 486 $883,455,404 54.940% 4.685 7.975% 2.449 4.059% 1.778

KS 499 $422,407,140 4.420% 1.701 3.449% 1.527 1.671% 1.145

KY 494 $568,578,086 9.768% 2.454 7.362% 2.196 2.876% 1.295

LA 498 $339,883,551 20.981% 3.768 15.28% 3.301 7.589% 2.370

MA 509 $1,772,911,383 4.379% 1.595 3.624% 1.514 1.342% .870

MD 483 $844,133,050 12.735% 3.043 7.311% 2.314 3.507% 1.621

ME 488 $192,380,727 16.770% 3.498 5.149% 1.943 2.107% 1.334

MI 480 $1,498,203,302 9.523% 2.734 6.809% 2.305 3.079% 1.684

MN 488 $958,317,077 9.627% 2.908 7.658% 2.669 1.180% .685

MO 480 $669,114,124 7.678% 2.559 7.330% 2.540 3.169% 1.654

MS 494 $220,183,794 13.769% 3.142 10.44% 2.812 7.229% 2.377

MT 360 $146,571,027 9.102% 2.940 6.556% 2.528 .563% .548

NC 530 $1,483,193,682 9.797% 2.637 6.229% 2.091 3.976% 1.700

ND 364 $62,905,457 9.256% 3.464 3.152% 1.863 .983% 1.136

NE 360 $155,415,185 16.049% 4.040 9.089% 3.092 .999% .908

NH 373 $113,634,349 5.001% 2.211 4.071% 1.921 2.181% 1.465

NJ 485 $2,617,507,618 10.496% 2.568 7.210% 2.289 .386% .506

NM 484 $266,216,624 16.535% 3.288 12.25% 2.908 7.043% 2.382

NV 485 $580,814,562 11.640% 2.989 9.909% 2.778 3.156% 1.537

NY 483 $3,665,750,997 6.985% 2.317 5.212% 2.030 4.206% 1.815

OH 484 $1,393,712,385 18.194% 3.368 6.833% 2.287 2.372% 1.274

OK 486 $306,526,694 5.584% 2.126 4.682% 1.965 1.245% 1.086

OR 487 $831,139,240 13.178% 3.328 8.193% 2.690 4.875% 1.903

PA 480 $3,167,669,022 11.107% 2.924 7.973% 2.514 5.376% 2.245

PR 482 $239,586,895 12.511% 3.143 10.21% 2.854 9.729% 2.795

UI Benefit Accuracy Measurement Rates and Sampling Errors

January 2011 to December 2011

Annual

Amount Report 95% CI Oper. 95% CI Fraud 95% CI

ST Sample Paid Rate +/- Rate +/- Rate +/-

__ _______ ________________ _______ ______ ______ ______ ______ ______

RI 480 $284,030,910 8.443% 2.506 6.341% 2.233 5.638% 2.155

SC 530 $456,678,469 17.409% 3.323 10.01% 2.487 6.785% 2.135

SD 360 $41,325,579 14.005% 3.746 4.958% 2.406 4.894% 2.259

TN 480 $516,608,692 14.165% 3.325 7.913% 2.465 2.758% 1.667

TX 490 $2,465,002,749 12.289% 3.007 5.127% 1.864 1.844% 1.339

UT 481 $302,541,300 14.583% 3.510 6.561% 2.397 3.408% 1.774

VA 483 $664,619,382 19.187% 3.889 6.309% 2.142 1.595% 1.090

VT 363 $120,934,830 3.473% 1.807 2.397% 1.515 1.501% 1.355

WA 488 $1,422,976,354 10.510% 2.889 5.592% 2.160 2.739% 1.532

WI 485 $1,079,448,202 12.804% 3.199 6.231% 2.130 2.084% 1.280

WV 480 $201,340,712 5.349% 1.995 2.999% 1.577 .880% .701

WY 360 $89,534,283 9.230% 3.148 3.046% 1.690 .978% .876

US 24,676 $47,874,770,343 10.687% .521 6.145% .421 2.924% .325

Prepared By ETA Office of Unemployment Insurance on 16 May 12

Denied Claims Accuracy Rates and Sampling Errors -- CY 2011

Adjusted

Samp Improper 95% C.I. Improper 95% C.I.

ST Type Sample* Population Denial (+/-) Denial# (+/-)

__ ____ _______ __________ ________ ________ ________ ________

AK MON 158 18,124 1.997% 1.753 1.997% 1.753

SEP 152 12,664 10.347% 4.442 8.976% 4.021

NS 154 32,375 10.930% 5.040 9.323% 4.695

AL MON 155 67,467 1.966% 1.950 1.430% 1.644

SEP 152 36,367 7.627% 4.272 5.974% 3.943

NS 153 23,857 10.300% 5.689 10.300% 5.689

AR MON 141 5,634 38.009% 9.321 32.986% 8.186

SEP 150 34,296 3.088% 2.712 3.088% 2.712

NS 150 16,541 5.720% 3.717 5.720% 3.717

AZ MON 161 56,783 4.068% 3.464 2.476% 2.949

SEP 155 35,834 7.501% 4.739 6.120% 4.288

NS 156 46,448 9.651% 4.646 6.293% 4.237

CA MON 196 334,533 11.038% 4.657 5.933% 3.713

SEP 199 239,524 11.767% 4.703 9.920% 4.408

NS 203 435,054 25.915% 6.115 17.528% 5.458

CO MON 143 7,083 31.747% 8.199 27.013% 7.467

SEP 151 51,214 11.818% 5.313 6.654% 4.145

NS 152 33,384 20.840% 6.953 19.763% 6.783

CT MON 157 47,216 1.958% 2.970 1.416% 2.774

SEP 155 15,613 2.703% 2.666 .555% 1.082

NS 157 18,559 1.954% 2.205 .674% 1.315

DC MON 136 6,603 21.586% 6.723 18.502% 6.260

SEP 156 3,607 9.675% 5.183 7.272% 4.577

NS 157 4,947 2.404% 2.076 1.858% 1.792

DE MON 130 1,533 21.302% 7.959 4.791% 3.577

SEP 151 6,901 .551% 1.065 .551% 1.065

NS 151 8,012 .615% 1.193 .615% 1.193

Footnotes

---------

* Excludes cases not meeting DCA definition for inclusion in population,

withdrawn claims, and claims for which monetary eligibility was

established upon receipt of CWC, UCFE, and/or UCX wage credits.

# Adjusted rate excludes erroneous denials that were corrected by agency

and claims for which eligibility was established through appeal prior

to DCA case completion.

Denied Claims Accuracy Rates and Sampling Errors -- CY 2011

Adjusted

Samp Improper 95% C.I. Improper 95% C.I.

ST Type Sample* Population Denial (+/-) Denial# (+/-)

__ ____ _______ __________ ________ ________ ________ ________

FL MON 152 165,854 2.324% 2.825 1.712% 2.558

SEP 159 91,789 18.682% 6.456 2.180% 2.141

NS 159 124,992 13.408% 6.733 6.499% 4.622

GA MON 149 38,772 24.566% 9.027 21.019% 8.453

SEP 158 83,592 7.853% 4.148 1.788% 2.049

NS 158 38,234 5.087% 3.291 2.523% 2.483

HI MON 136 1,343 5.895% 3.960 4.219% 3.276

SEP 135 7,247 4.871% 3.646 3.749% 3.292

NS 137 16,653 5.792% 4.385 4.730% 3.862

IA MON 138 20,593 17.505% 6.956 12.574% 6.153

SEP 153 28,562 15.027% 5.960 10.547% 5.109

NS 151 15,949 18.695% 6.772 16.001% 6.603

ID MON 161 21,637 5.964% 4.419 5.964% 4.419

SEP 161 12,632 3.114% 2.474 .652% 1.270

NS 160 36,811 12.240% 5.974 10.130% 5.477

IL MON 153 117,725 6.278% 4.249 6.278% 4.249

SEP 158 6,494 18.542% 11.379 5.319% 2.977

NS 151 16,795 10.477% 4.637 8.771% 4.235

IN MON 151 111,327 2.851% 2.301 2.464% 2.172

SEP 151 40,287 18.092% 6.422 14.123% 5.927

NS 152 55,656 29.799% 7.815 28.470% 7.664

KS MON 158 74,281 .198% .387 .198% .387

SEP 155 23,526 .290% .564 .000% .000

NS 156 19,648 8.366% 5.526 4.456% 3.368

KY MON 141 12,600 14.312% 6.396 10.513% 5.912

SEP 155 32,985 1.666% 2.306 1.666% 2.306

NS 157 20,081 2.807% 2.550 1.733% 2.032

Footnotes

---------

* Excludes cases not meeting DCA definition for inclusion in population,

withdrawn claims, and claims for which monetary eligibility was

established upon receipt of CWC, UCFE, and/or UCX wage credits.

# Adjusted rate excludes erroneous denials that were corrected by agency

and claims for which eligibility was established through appeal prior

to DCA case completion.

Denied Claims Accuracy Rates and Sampling Errors -- CY 2011

Adjusted

Samp Improper 95% C.I. Improper 95% C.I.

ST Type Sample* Population Denial (+/-) Denial# (+/-)

__ ____ _______ __________ ________ ________ ________ ________

LA MON 158 41,911 13.413% 5.234 10.430% 4.771

SEP 159 38,659 8.317% 4.597 8.317% 4.597

NS 159 36,041 24.385% 6.579 24.385% 6.579

MA MON 167 8,416 13.199% 5.683 11.931% 5.460

SEP 167 28,473 16.337% 5.637 2.175% 1.921

NS 167 16,914 11.443% 5.096 6.408% 3.727

MD MON 148 46,233 8.146% 5.058 5.922% 4.522

SEP 151 52,437 4.472% 3.059 3.643% 2.593

NS 150 44,278 5.567% 3.954 5.050% 3.829

ME MON 155 12,955 16.459% 7.019 12.265% 5.930

SEP 152 8,347 3.791% 3.066 2.665% 2.636

NS 154 13,535 6.388% 3.631 4.649% 2.693

MI MON 150 56,417 8.784% 5.109 7.778% 4.899

SEP 150 61,901 3.912% 3.184 1.870% 2.164

NS 150 99,722 4.946% 3.393 2.760% 2.269

MN MON 148 5,037 13.664% 5.061 13.664% 5.061

SEP 153 26,458 18.027% 6.253 4.650% 3.495

NS 149 59,385 7.290% 4.259 5.810% 3.737

MO MON 149 71,849 5.275% 3.100 4.617% 3.099

SEP 151 50,214 10.737% 5.145 2.675% 2.629

NS 150 93,649 31.070% 7.926 21.124% 7.203

MS MON 151 52,084 1.568% 1.864 1.568% 1.864

SEP 157 33,774 5.860% 3.775 2.019% 2.024

NS 159 20,784 5.178% 3.314 2.118% 2.080

MT MON 133 4,442 29.863% 9.371 26.824% 8.862

SEP 150 9,616 6.310% 3.882 4.726% 3.212

NS 150 9,757 14.861% 6.020 10.602% 5.272

Footnotes

---------

* Excludes cases not meeting DCA definition for inclusion in population,

withdrawn claims, and claims for which monetary eligibility was

established upon receipt of CWC, UCFE, and/or UCX wage credits.

# Adjusted rate excludes erroneous denials that were corrected by agency

and claims for which eligibility was established through appeal prior

to DCA case completion.

Denied Claims Accuracy Rates and Sampling Errors -- CY 2011

Adjusted

Samp Improper 95% C.I. Improper 95% C.I.

ST Type Sample* Population Denial (+/-) Denial# (+/-)

__ ____ _______ __________ ________ ________ ________ ________

NC MON 148 96,613 7.656% 4.671 3.165% 2.675

SEP 159 77,073 4.295% 3.192 3.024% 2.661

NS 159 27,148 9.337% 4.507 7.594% 4.118

ND MON 146 2,660 6.215% 5.723 5.751% 5.656

SEP 155 4,457 3.904% 2.529 3.313% 2.529

NS 155 14,817 5.129% 3.571 3.701% 2.974

NE MON 150 9,741 1.427% 2.035 1.427% 2.035

SEP 150 34,730 2.334% 2.765 2.334% 2.765

NS 150 26,273 16.412% 5.633 13.145% 5.191

NH MON 162 6,559 7.603% 4.481 6.251% 4.074

SEP 160 5,042 6.723% 3.786 3.590% 2.908

NS 159 19,317 12.713% 5.008 10.375% 4.861

NJ MON 151 63,060 9.277% 5.087 8.359% 4.762

SEP 159 68,425 8.000% 4.394 8.000% 4.394

NS 159 44,068 13.534% 5.132 11.614% 5.132

NM MON 101 3,537 27.409% 10.217 19.371% 8.554

SEP 155 16,189 2.841% 2.960 1.711% 1.969

NS 152 8,160 7.504% 4.677 7.504% 4.677

NV MON 115 6,014 18.640% 8.709 10.634% 7.603

SEP 155 25,608 13.946% 5.461 5.674% 3.803

NS 155 44,158 38.282% 8.280 26.627% 7.494

NY MON 143 104,174 16.059% 6.953 14.795% 6.901

SEP 154 83,266 3.486% 2.838 3.027% 2.696

NS 157 53,948 4.930% 3.295 4.930% 3.295

OH MON 151 108,202 13.433% 5.594 11.163% 4.907

SEP 156 54,603 14.731% 5.354 11.436% 4.802

NS 155 45,929 24.462% 7.233 21.887% 7.070

Footnotes

---------

* Excludes cases not meeting DCA definition for inclusion in population,

withdrawn claims, and claims for which monetary eligibility was

established upon receipt of CWC, UCFE, and/or UCX wage credits.

# Adjusted rate excludes erroneous denials that were corrected by agency

and claims for which eligibility was established through appeal prior

to DCA case completion.

Denied Claims Accuracy Rates and Sampling Errors -- CY 2011

Adjusted

Samp Improper 95% C.I. Improper 95% C.I.

ST Type Sample* Population Denial (+/-) Denial# (+/-)

__ ____ _______ __________ ________ ________ ________ ________

OK MON 154 34,479 14.796% 6.074 12.330% 5.592

SEP 159 31,711 8.592% 4.405 1.630% 1.873

NS 158 26,994 5.581% 3.726 4.849% 3.440

OR MON 165 8,398 20.907% 7.467 18.185% 7.095

SEP 176 30,672 6.295% 3.773 3.209% 2.843

NS 175 42,394 12.065% 4.943 9.682% 4.416

PA MON 149 100,505 14.337% 5.569 7.771% 4.358

SEP 150 85,978 14.229% 5.669 13.997% 5.650

NS 153 25,628 15.329% 6.173 15.329% 6.173

PR MON 146 34,324 22.974% 7.542 18.471% 7.498

SEP 150 7,122 1.048% 1.579 1.048% 1.579

NS 149 16,929 15.559% 5.979 15.311% 5.960

RI MON 144 6,209 6.437% 3.161 4.714% 2.873

SEP 149 6,712 .000% .000 .000% .000

NS 148 5,334 2.000% 2.779 2.000% 2.779

SC MON 156 63,446 10.720% 5.076 10.720% 5.076

SEP 151 48,802 5.272% 3.886 3.580% 3.096

NS 154 21,508 4.616% 3.763 4.616% 3.763

SD MON 150 2,358 8.837% 4.631 5.599% 4.223

SEP 150 4,975 4.824% 3.290 3.592% 2.822

NS 150 7,408 10.655% 5.320 8.347% 4.819

TN MON 151 41,760 29.527% 7.670 16.470% 6.535

SEP 151 49,372 12.681% 5.377 9.254% 4.915

NS 151 5,124 16.055% 5.974 11.345% 5.225

TX MON 159 125,314 4.937% 3.236 4.937% 3.236

SEP 159 202,894 10.198% 4.741 8.937% 4.401

NS 158 294,491 9.186% 4.370 9.186% 4.370

Footnotes

---------

* Excludes cases not meeting DCA definition for inclusion in population,

withdrawn claims, and claims for which monetary eligibility was

established upon receipt of CWC, UCFE, and/or UCX wage credits.

# Adjusted rate excludes erroneous denials that were corrected by agency

and claims for which eligibility was established through appeal prior

to DCA case completion.

Denied Claims Accuracy Rates and Sampling Errors -- CY 2011

Adjusted

Samp Improper 95% C.I. Improper 95% C.I.

ST Type Sample* Population Denial (+/-) Denial# (+/-)

__ ____ _______ __________ ________ ________ ________ ________

UT MON 148 7,506 5.465% 3.029 5.465% 3.029

SEP 150 17,190 8.484% 4.151 5.756% 3.119

NS 151 78,562 27.250% 7.275 25.034% 7.013

VA MON 144 47,128 8.315% 4.558 6.862% 4.308

SEP 156 51,974 11.648% 5.006 8.107% 4.421

NS 156 33,723 9.060% 4.609 6.781% 4.023

VT MON 126 1,931 11.526% 5.224 9.713% 4.975

SEP 151 5,010 4.471% 3.298 1.903% 2.155

NS 151 5,412 13.260% 6.099 7.751% 4.747

WA MON 139 21,377 15.819% 6.602 15.819% 6.602

SEP 154 47,559 15.266% 6.081 12.875% 5.407

NS 154 70,107 26.130% 7.619 20.839% 6.972

WI MON 149 45,678 11.045% 6.764 9.348% 6.645

SEP 153 39,785 18.143% 6.308 15.069% 6.106

NS 152 76,540 19.730% 7.292 15.980% 6.638

WV MON 145 8,560 8.544% 5.793 7.504% 5.619

SEP 150 12,538 3.600% 2.904 2.643% 2.585

NS 150 4,954 17.235% 5.977 16.697% 5.977

WY MON 141 3,210 10.925% 6.982 7.685% 5.965

SEP 150 4,985 5.774% 4.322 3.567% 3.537

NS 150 11,408 7.016% 4.513 6.382% 4.339

US MON 7,708 2,361,195 9.301% .741 7.005% .663

SEP 8,058 2,089,685 9.628% .601 6.412% .481

NS 8,063 2,368,396 16.253% .718 12.569% .654

Footnotes

---------

* Excludes cases not meeting DCA definition for inclusion in population,

withdrawn claims, and claims for which monetary eligibility was

established upon receipt of CWC, UCFE, and/or UCX wage credits.

# Adjusted rate excludes erroneous denials that were corrected by agency

and claims for which eligibility was established through appeal prior

to DCA case completion.

Prepared by ETA Office of Unemployment Insurance on 16 May 12.

BAM Case Completion and Time Lapse -- CY 2011

Cases Percent 60 Day 90 Day 60 Day 90 Day

ST Sample Compl. Completed TL TL TL & TL &

__ ______ ______ _________ ______ ______ ______ ______

AK 487 487 100.00% 99.79% 100.0% 99.59% 100.0%

AL 490 490 100.00% 96.73% 100.0% 96.73% 100.0%

AR 480 480 100.00% 98.96% 100.0% 98.13% 100.0%

AZ 496 496 100.00% 98.59% 100.0% 98.39% 100.0%

CA 998 998 100.00% 96.69% 100.0% 96.59% 100.0%

CO 486 486 100.00% 91.56% 98.77% 90.74% 97.94%

CT 468 467 99.79% 92.31% 97.86% 91.67% 97.44%

DC 371 371 100.00% 75.74% 94.07%+ 75.74% 94.07%+

DE 360 360 100.00% 69.44%* 97.78% 69.44%* 97.50%

FL 489 489 100.00% 100.0% 100.0% 99.80% 100.0%

GA 490 490 100.00% 96.12% 100.0% 96.12% 100.0%

HI 367 367 100.00% 89.10% 96.46% 89.10% 96.46%

IA 480 480 100.00% 62.29%* 89.79%+ 62.29%* 89.79%+

ID 508 508 100.00% 94.49% 96.46% 94.29% 96.46%

IL 485 485 100.00% 87.84% 99.79% 87.22% 99.59%

IN 486 486 100.00% 94.44% 97.33% 94.44% 97.33%

KS 499 499 100.00% 81.16% 98.80% 79.56% 98.20%

KY 494 494 100.00% 96.15% 100.0% 96.15% 100.0%

LA 498 498 100.00% 52.81%* 70.88%+ 52.61%* 70.68%+

MA 509 509 100.00% 86.64% 96.86% 86.05% 96.86%

MD 483 483 100.00% 86.34% 100.0% 85.92% 100.0%

ME 488 488 100.00% 94.47% 99.39% 94.06% 99.39%

MI 480 480 100.00% 90.42% 99.17% 88.75% 98.13%

MN 488 488 100.00% 97.54% 99.80% 96.31% 99.18%

MO 480 480 100.00% 89.79% 99.79% 89.58% 99.79%

MS 494 494 100.00% 62.55%* 85.83%+ 62.55%* 85.83%+

MT 360 360 100.00% 89.72% 97.78% 88.06% 96.39%

NC 530 530 100.00% 89.06% 99.62% 89.06% 99.62%

ND 364 364 100.00% 73.35% 97.53% 72.80% 96.70%

NE 360 360 100.00% 99.72% 100.0% 99.72% 100.0%

Note: Time lapse percentages are based on all sampled cases,

excluding cases not meeting BAM population definition

* Failed to meet 60 day time lapse standard of 70 percent complete.

+ Failed to meet 90 day time lapse standard of 95 percent complete.

& Time lapse includes code 3 reopen cases.

BAM Case Completion and Time Lapse -- CY 2011

Cases Percent 60 Day 90 Day 60 Day 90 Day

ST Sample Compl. Completed TL TL TL & TL &

__ ______ ______ _________ ______ ______ ______ ______

NH 373 373 100.00% 96.25% 99.46% 96.25% 99.46%

NJ 485 485 100.00% 82.47% 98.76% 81.44% 98.14%

NM 484 484 100.00% 76.24% 98.35% 75.41% 98.35%

NV 485 485 100.00% 94.64% 99.79% 94.02% 99.79%

NY 483 483 100.00% 95.45% 100.0% 95.24% 100.0%

OH 484 484 100.00% 97.31% 99.79% 96.69% 99.79%

OK 486 486 100.00% 96.30% 100.0% 96.09% 100.0%

OR 487 487 100.00% 98.15% 99.79% 98.15% 99.79%

PA 480 480 100.00% 98.96% 100.0% 98.96% 100.0%

PR 482 482 100.00% 74.48% 98.76% 72.61% 97.10%

RI 480 480 100.00% 67.08%* 90.00%+ 67.08%* 90.00%+

SC 530 530 100.00% 99.06% 99.62% 99.06% 99.62%

SD 360 360 100.00% 75.00% 97.78% 75.00% 97.78%

TN 480 480 100.00% 79.38% 97.71% 79.38% 97.71%

TX 490 490 100.00% 85.10% 100.0% 81.02% 99.59%

UT 481 481 100.00% 89.40% 95.63% 88.77% 95.43%

VA 483 483 100.00% 95.03% 99.38% 94.41% 98.96%

VT 363 363 100.00% 12.67%* 80.44%+ 12.40%* 80.17%+

WA 488 488 100.00% 90.78% 97.34% 90.78% 97.13%

WI 485 485 100.00% 94.02% 99.79% 94.02% 99.79%

WV 480 480 100.00% 97.29% 100.0% 97.29% 100.0%

WY 360 360 100.00% 100.0% 100.0% 98.89% 100.0%

US 24,677 24,676 100.00% 87.76% 97.54% 87.29% 97.35%

Note: Time lapse percentages are based on all sampled cases,

excluding cases not meeting BAM population definition

* Failed to meet 60 day time lapse standard of 70 percent complete.

+ Failed to meet 90 day time lapse standard of 95 percent complete.

& Time lapse includes code 3 reopen cases.

Prepared by Office of Unemployment Insurance on 16 May 12

BAM DCA Case Completion and Time Lapse -- CY 2011

Sample DCA Cases Percent 60 Day 90 Day

ST Type Sample Cases Compl. Completed TL & TL &

__ __________ ______ ______ ______ _________ ______ ______

AK Monetary 159 158 158 100.00% 100.0% 100.0%

Separation 159 152 152 100.00% 100.0% 100.0%

Nonsep. 170 154 154 100.00% 99.35% 100.0%

AL Monetary 199 155 155 100.00% 99.35% 100.0%

Separation 154 152 152 100.00% 99.34% 100.0%

Nonsep. 156 153 153 100.00% 98.04% 100.0%

AR Monetary 156 150 150 100.00% 98.00% 99.33%

Separation 152 150 150 100.00% 99.33% 100.0%

Nonsep. 152 150 150 100.00% 96.67% 99.33%

AZ Monetary 164 164 164 100.00% 100.0% 100.0%

Separation 157 155 155 100.00% 99.35% 100.0%

Nonsep. 156 156 156 100.00% 100.0% 100.0%

CA Monetary 202 197 197 100.00% 99.49% 100.0%

Separation 208 199 199 100.00% 98.49% 100.0%

Nonsep. 206 203 203 100.00% 100.0% 100.0%

CO Monetary 186 184 184 100.00% 91.85% 98.37%

Separation 152 151 151 100.00% 91.39% 100.0%

Nonsep. 152 152 152 100.00% 94.08% 100.0%

CT Monetary 158 157 157 100.00% 95.54% 99.36%

Separation 159 155 155 100.00% 90.97% 98.06%

Nonsep. 164 159 157 98.74% 89.94% 95.60%

DC Monetary 160 159 159 100.00% 77.36% 91.82%

Separation 159 156 156 100.00% 74.36% 90.38%

Nonsep. 162 157 157 100.00% 80.25% 95.54%

DE Monetary 184 150 150 100.00% 78.00% 98.00%

Separation 157 151 151 100.00% 86.09% 100.0%

Nonsep. 174 151 151 100.00% 82.12% 100.0%

FL Monetary 159 154 154 100.00% 100.0% 100.0%

Separation 159 159 159 100.00% 100.0% 100.0%

Nonsep. 159 159 159 100.00% 100.0% 100.0%

GA Monetary 211 155 155 100.00% 94.19% 100.0%

Separation 158 158 158 100.00% 96.84% 100.0%

Nonsep. 158 158 158 100.00% 95.57% 100.0%

Note: Case completion and time lapse percentages exclude deleted cases

(Program Code = 8 or 9) and withdrawn claims (Action Flag = 8).

* Failed to meet 60 day time lapse standard of 60 percent complete.

+ Failed to meet 90 day time lapse standard of 85 percent complete.

& Time lapse includes code 3 reopen cases.

BAM DCA Case Completion and Time Lapse -- CY 2011

Sample DCA Cases Percent 60 Day 90 Day

ST Type Sample Cases Compl. Completed TL & TL &

__ __________ ______ ______ ______ _________ ______ ______

HI Monetary 158 153 139 90.85% 74.51% 80.39% +

Separation 155 155 135 87.10% 65.16% 72.90% +

Nonsep. 156 152 137 90.13% 75.00% 79.61% +

IA Monetary 155 153 153 100.00% 65.36% 89.54%

Separation 155 153 153 100.00% 61.44% 92.16%

Nonsep. 161 151 151 100.00% 63.58% 91.39%

ID Monetary 169 161 161 100.00% 98.76% 99.38%

Separation 162 161 161 100.00% 96.89% 98.14%

Nonsep. 160 160 160 100.00% 97.50% 98.75%

IL Monetary 215 155 155 100.00% 85.16% 100.0%

Separation 165 158 158 100.00% 95.57% 100.0%

Nonsep. 174 151 151 100.00% 89.40% 100.0%

IN Monetary 152 151 151 100.00% 98.68% 100.0%

Separation 152 151 151 100.00% 99.34% 100.0%

Nonsep. 152 152 152 100.00% 98.03% 100.0%

KS Monetary 161 160 160 100.00% 90.63% 98.75%

Separation 158 155 155 100.00% 90.97% 99.35%

Nonsep. 163 156 156 100.00% 92.31% 99.36%

KY Monetary 167 160 160 100.00% 97.50% 100.0%

Separation 159 155 155 100.00% 98.06% 100.0%

Nonsep. 167 157 157 100.00% 94.27% 100.0%

LA Monetary 159 158 158 100.00% 60.13% 75.95% +

Separation 159 159 159 100.00% 100.0% 100.0%

Nonsep. 159 159 159 100.00% 98.74% 98.74%

MA Monetary 167 167 167 100.00% 94.01% 99.40%

Separation 168 167 167 100.00% 91.62% 100.0%

Nonsep. 171 167 167 100.00% 94.61% 98.80%

MD Monetary 153 151 151 100.00% 90.73% 99.34%

Separation 151 151 151 100.00% 91.39% 99.34%

Nonsep. 154 150 150 100.00% 92.67% 100.0%

ME Monetary 172 160 160 100.00% 98.13% 99.38%

Separation 153 152 152 100.00% 99.34% 100.0%

Nonsep. 155 154 154 100.00% 97.40% 100.0%

Note: Case completion and time lapse percentages exclude deleted cases

(Program Code = 8 or 9) and withdrawn claims (Action Flag = 8).

* Failed to meet 60 day time lapse standard of 60 percent complete.

+ Failed to meet 90 day time lapse standard of 85 percent complete.

& Time lapse includes code 3 reopen cases.

BAM DCA Case Completion and Time Lapse -- CY 2011

Sample DCA Cases Percent 60 Day 90 Day

ST Type Sample Cases Compl. Completed TL & TL &

__ __________ ______ ______ ______ _________ ______ ______

MI Monetary 157 150 150 100.00% 98.67% 100.0%

Separation 160 150 150 100.00% 98.00% 100.0%

Nonsep. 172 150 150 100.00% 99.33% 100.0%

MN Monetary 163 154 154 100.00% 100.0% 100.0%

Separation 156 153 153 100.00% 99.35% 100.0%

Nonsep. 177 149 149 100.00% 99.33% 100.0%

MO Monetary 159 149 149 100.00% 97.32% 100.0%

Separation 154 151 151 100.00% 95.36% 100.0%

Nonsep. 156 150 150 100.00% 95.33% 100.0%

MS Monetary 202 154 154 100.00% 72.73% 90.91%

Separation 159 157 157 100.00% 71.97% 94.27%

Nonsep. 164 159 159 100.00% 69.81% 90.57%

MT Monetary 159 150 150 100.00% 92.00% 98.67%

Separation 151 150 150 100.00% 93.33% 100.0%

Nonsep. 151 150 150 100.00% 92.00% 98.00%

NC Monetary 167 153 153 100.00% 96.08% 99.35%

Separation 159 159 159 100.00% 93.08% 99.37%

Nonsep. 168 159 159 100.00% 97.48% 100.0%

ND Monetary 155 154 154 100.00% 75.32% 99.35%

Separation 155 155 155 100.00% 73.55% 96.13%

Nonsep. 155 155 155 100.00% 77.42% 97.42%

NE Monetary 151 150 150 100.00% 100.0% 100.0%

Separation 154 150 150 100.00% 100.0% 100.0%

Nonsep. 152 150 150 100.00% 100.0% 100.0%

NH Monetary 163 162 162 100.00% 100.0% 100.0%

Separation 163 160 160 100.00% 100.0% 100.0%

Nonsep. 163 159 159 100.00% 99.37% 100.0%

NJ Monetary 159 157 157 100.00% 87.26% 96.82%

Separation 159 159 159 100.00% 86.16% 98.11%

Nonsep. 159 159 159 100.00% 87.42% 99.37%

NM Monetary 164 150 150 100.00% 81.33% 99.33%

Separation 157 155 155 100.00% 87.10% 100.0%

Nonsep. 155 152 152 100.00% 87.50% 100.0%

Note: Case completion and time lapse percentages exclude deleted cases

(Program Code = 8 or 9) and withdrawn claims (Action Flag = 8).

* Failed to meet 60 day time lapse standard of 60 percent complete.

+ Failed to meet 90 day time lapse standard of 85 percent complete.

& Time lapse includes code 3 reopen cases.

BAM DCA Case Completion and Time Lapse -- CY 2011

Sample DCA Cases Percent 60 Day 90 Day

ST Type Sample Cases Compl. Completed TL & TL &

__ __________ ______ ______ ______ _________ ______ ______

NV Monetary 166 153 153 100.00% 93.46% 100.0%

Separation 155 155 155 100.00% 98.06% 100.0%

Nonsep. 155 155 155 100.00% 96.77% 100.0%

NY Monetary 154 152 152 100.00% 96.71% 100.0%

Separation 175 154 154 100.00% 97.40% 100.0%

Nonsep. 214 157 157 100.00% 96.82% 100.0%

OH Monetary 169 151 151 100.00% 97.35% 99.34%

Separation 156 156 156 100.00% 100.0% 100.0%

Nonsep. 158 155 155 100.00% 100.0% 100.0%

OK Monetary 159 156 156 100.00% 98.72% 100.0%

Separation 159 159 159 100.00% 99.37% 100.0%

Nonsep. 159 158 158 100.00% 100.0% 100.0%

OR Monetary 180 178 178 100.00% 97.75% 100.0%

Separation 180 176 176 100.00% 98.86% 100.0%

Nonsep. 180 175 175 100.00% 100.0% 100.0%

PA Monetary 153 150 150 100.00% 99.33% 99.33%

Separation 151 150 150 100.00% 100.0% 100.0%

Nonsep. 212 153 153 100.00% 100.0% 100.0%

PR Monetary 150 150 150 100.00% 84.67% 99.33%

Separation 150 150 150 100.00% 96.67% 100.0%

Nonsep. 150 149 149 100.00% 79.87% 99.33%

RI Monetary 149 148 148 100.00% 67.57% 97.30%

Separation 149 149 149 100.00% 88.59% 99.33%

Nonsep. 149 148 148 100.00% 72.97% 97.97%

SC Monetary 159 157 157 100.00% 100.0% 100.0%

Separation 159 151 151 100.00% 98.68% 100.0%

Nonsep. 218 154 154 100.00% 100.0% 100.0%

SD Monetary 155 150 150 100.00% 99.33% 99.33%

Separation 152 150 150 100.00% 96.67% 100.0%

Nonsep. 157 150 150 100.00% 96.67% 99.33%

TN Monetary 151 151 151 100.00% 85.43% 97.35%

Separation 151 151 151 100.00% 85.43% 94.04%

Nonsep. 151 151 151 100.00% 78.81% 94.70%

Note: Case completion and time lapse percentages exclude deleted cases

(Program Code = 8 or 9) and withdrawn claims (Action Flag = 8).

* Failed to meet 60 day time lapse standard of 60 percent complete.

+ Failed to meet 90 day time lapse standard of 85 percent complete.

& Time lapse includes code 3 reopen cases.

BAM DCA Case Completion and Time Lapse -- CY 2011

Sample DCA Cases Percent 60 Day 90 Day

ST Type Sample Cases Compl. Completed TL & TL &

__ __________ ______ ______ ______ _________ ______ ______

TX Monetary 159 159 159 100.00% 93.08% 99.37%

Separation 159 159 159 100.00% 93.08% 99.37%

Nonsep. 159 158 158 100.00% 87.97% 97.47%

UT Monetary 158 150 150 100.00% 97.33% 98.00%

Separation 153 150 150 100.00% 94.67% 96.67%

Nonsep. 153 151 151 100.00% 91.39% 96.69%

VA Monetary 159 155 155 100.00% 89.68% 95.48%

Separation 159 156 156 100.00% 98.08% 99.36%

Nonsep. 159 156 156 100.00% 97.44% 100.0%

VT Monetary 151 151 151 100.00% 23.18% * 85.43%

Separation 151 151 151 100.00% 16.56% * 83.44% +

Nonsep. 152 151 151 100.00% 20.53% * 84.11% +

WA Monetary 154 152 152 100.00% 96.05% 99.34%

Separation 154 154 154 100.00% 98.05% 100.0%

Nonsep. 157 154 154 100.00% 96.10% 98.70%

WI Monetary 160 153 153 100.00% 94.77% 100.0%

Separation 155 153 153 100.00% 96.08% 100.0%

Nonsep. 158 152 152 100.00% 95.39% 100.0%

WV Monetary 160 158 158 100.00% 98.73% 100.0%

Separation 150 150 150 100.00% 96.67% 100.0%

Nonsep. 151 150 150 100.00% 98.00% 100.0%

WY Monetary 151 150 150 100.00% 100.0% 100.0%

Separation 151 150 150 100.00% 99.33% 100.0%

Nonsep. 157 150 150 100.00% 100.0% 100.0%

US Monetary 8,562 8,119 8,105 99.83% 90.54% 97.77%

Separation 8,207 8,078 8,058 99.75% 91.92% 98.29%

Nonsep. 8,502 8,080 8,063 99.79% 91.35% 98.30%

Note: Case completion and time lapse percentages exclude deleted cases

(Program Code = 8 or 9) and withdrawn claims (Action Flag = 8).

* Failed to meet 60 day time lapse standard of 60 percent complete.

+ Failed to meet 90 day time lapse standard of 85 percent complete.

& Time lapse includes code 3 reopen cases.

Prepared by Office of Unemployment Insurance on 16 May 12.

B-8