Data Systems Survey

Evaluation of the UC Provisions of ARRA

Mathematica Policy Research

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
(Insert State Name)_____

October 11, 2012

According to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, no persons are required to respond to a collection of information unless it
displays a valid OMB control number. The valid OMB control number for this information collection is 1225-0089. The time required
to complete this information collection is estimated to average 30 minutes per response, including the time to review instructions,
search existing data resources, gather the data needed, and complete and review the information collected. If you have any
comments concerning the accuracy of the time estimate(s) or suggestions for improving this form, please write to: U.S. Department
of Labor, Rm. S2312, 200 Constitution Ave., NW, Washington, DC 20210. If you have comments or concerns regarding the status of
your individual submission of this form, write directly to: The UCP Project.

Prepared by Mathematica Policy Research

(insert State Name)

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

(insert State Name)

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

□
□
□
□
□
□

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
Difficulty maintaining data quality (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?

□

State political leadership/support

MARK ONE ONLY

□

Agency leadership/support

n

□

Staff support

1

Leadership knowledge of UC ARRA
requirements

2

□

Staff knowledge of UC ARRA requirements

3

□

Resources available

4

Alignment of UC ARRA requirements with
existing state goals/initiatives

5

□

□
□

Nothing

□

Other (Specify)

Prepared by Mathematica Policy Research

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 specific reporting guidance
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

MARK ALL THAT APPLY

□

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 12/31/2012.

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 $2,400 in Benefits Free of Federal Income Tax (All 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
4

Unable to pay, track, adjust, or report on this
UC ARRA requirement

5

Other (Specify)

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
Difficulty maintaining data quality (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

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

□

Staff support

MARK ONE ONLY

□

Leadership knowledge of UC ARRA
requirements

□

Staff knowledge of UC ARRA requirements

□

Resources available

□

4.

n

1

2

Alignment of UC ARRA requirements with
existing state goals/initiatives
3

□

Nothing

□

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

5a.

□

$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 eligibility and
payments could be made, tracked, adjusted,
and/or reported?
MARK ALL THAT APPLY
1

2

3

4

5

Does this cost estimate include other UC ARRA
improvements?

6

□
0□
1

□
□
□
□
□

Yes
No

7

If yes, please specify which ones:
8

9

5b.

□

□
□
□

No changes needed, systems capacity already
existed
GO TO Q.6
Unable to capture, track, report on EUC08 Tier
1/Tier 2 requirements
GO TO Q.6
Added fields/flags/indicators to state claims
systems
Added screens to state claims systems
Benefit payment control (BPC) system changes
(for overpayments)
Linked UC and Employment Service (ES) data
or data systems to comply with UIPL 20-11
Handled outside state claims/BPC systems
(for example, ad hoc spreadsheets, databases)
Used TEUC system/screens as foundation for
capturing, tracking, and reporting EUC08
information
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 EUC08 Tier 1/Tier 2?
MARK ALL THAT APPLY

□
2□
3□
4□
1

□
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?

4.

MARK ALL THAT APPLY
1

□ Insufficient financial resources to make

MARK ONE ONLY

appropriate systems changes or establish
alternate systems
2

3

1

□ Insufficient personnel

2

□ Insufficient understanding of UC ARRA

3

requirements
4

□ Insufficient time to respond to legislative

4

changes
5

Was your state able to implement a process by
March 2012 for confirming EUC08 Tier 1/Tier 2
benefits eligibility in accordance with
UIPL 20-11?

□ Difficulty maintaining data quality (including

5

□

Yes, direct link between UI and ES in real time

□

Yes, periodic matching of UI and ES data

□
□
□

accuracy of benefit amounts)
6

6

□ Tracking EUC08 tiers within modified (tierless)

5.

9

□ Augmenting Tier 1 with Tier 2 (applying

MARK ONE ONLY
n

□ Paying on proper benefits claims (no

1

reachbacks)
11

□ No, process still not implemented

□ Lack of staff knowledge of TEUC/EUC08
supplements)

10

□ Allocating overpayment reconciliation activities

2

□

Not applicable, no systems changes needed

□

Yes, all benefits paid in timely manner

□

to general revenue instead of trust fund
12

13

□ Establishing proper weekly benefit amounts

3

□ Checking for wages/benefits at benefit year end

4

and quarter change for regular UI
14

5

□ Checking for wages/benefits at benefit year end

16

□ Withholding federal income tax
□ Matching individual identifiers across UI and ES
systems

17

18

□ No challenges encountered
□ Other (Specify)
____________________________________

Prepared by Mathematica Policy Research

Somewhat, some benefits paid on time and
some retroactively

□

No, all benefits paid retroactively

□

No, not all benefits due were paid

□

Other (Specify)
____________ ________________________

and quarter change for CWC-IS
15

No, process implemented, but not timely
5a □ Identify process:

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

TEUC system
8

Yes, self-attestation by claimants

________________________________

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

7

Yes, periodic matching of samples of claimants
between UI and ES

5

6.

□
0□
1

6a.

7.

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

Did reporting EUC08 Tier 1/Tier 2 benefits
present any specific challenges?
MARK ALL THAT APPLY

□
2□

Yes
No

1

GO TO Q.6b

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

3

□

□
5□
4

MARK ALL THAT APPLY
1

2

3

4

5

□ Calculating exact overpayments
□ Establishing overpayments

0

□ Applying overpayments in proper order

8.

□ Offsetting overpayments

7

8

10

□ Offsetting fraud and nonfraud overpayments

□

□
3□
4□
5□
6□
7□
2

□ Reporting of overpayments
□ Tracking overpayment adjustments to general
□ None
□ Other (Specify)
8a.

6b.

Yes, revising prior ETA 218 and ETA 5159
reports to properly report for Tier 1 benefits
Yes, programming to complete new ETA 9128U
Yes (Other)

No

What was the approximate cost of making these
systems changes?

1

revenue instead of trust fund
9

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

MARK ONE ONLY

□ Distinguishing between existing and new
overpayments

6

□

Yes, lack of specific reporting guidance

Please provide the total amount of EUC08
Tier 1/Tier 2-related outstanding overpayments,
not including write-offs or waived overpayments,
as of 12/31/2012.

$0 (no systems changes)

GO TO
MODULE 4, Q.1

$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

Does this cost estimate include other UC ARRA
improvements?

□
0□
1

Yes
No

If yes, please specify which ones:

8b.

How were these systems changes financed?
MARK ALL THAT APPLY

□
2□
3□
4□
1

Prepared by Mathematica Policy Research

6

Modernization funds
State administrative grants
General revenue
Other (Specify)

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

□

3.

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

What challenges did you encounter in making
these systems changes?
MARK ALL THAT APPLY

1.

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?

1

appropriate systems changes or establish
alternate systems

□ Insufficient personnel
3 □ Insufficient understanding of UC ARRA

MARK ALL THAT APPLY
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

□
□
□
□
□
□
□

□ Insufficient financial resources to make

2

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

requirements

Added fields/flags/indicators to state claims
systems

4

Added screens to state claims systems

5

□ Insufficient time to respond to legislative
changes

□ Difficulty maintaining data quality (including
accuracy of benefit amounts)

Benefit payment control (BPC) system
changes (for overpayments)

6

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

7

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

□ Allocating overpayment reconciliation amounts
to stimulus funding instead of trust fund

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

Unable to capture, track, report on EUC08
Tier 3/Tier 4 requirement

8

Other (Specify)

and quarter change for regular UI
10

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

2.

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

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

11

MARK ALL THAT APPLY

□
2□
3□
1

4

□

□
6□
5

7

□

□
9□
8

State political leadership/support
Agency leadership/support
Staff support

4.

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

Leadership knowledge of UC ARRA
requirements

MARK ONE ONLY

□
1□
2□
n

Staff knowledge of UC ARRA requirements
Resources available
Alignment of UC ARRA requirements with
existing state goals/initiatives

□
4□
5□
3

Nothing
Other (Specify)

Prepared by Mathematica Policy Research

7

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

□
0□
1

5a.

7.

Yes
No

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

GO TO Q.5b

1

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

2

3

MARK ALL THAT APPLY
1

2

3

4

5

□ Calculating exact overpayments

4

□ Establishing overpayments

5

□ Applying overpayments in proper order

6

□ Offsetting overpayments

7

□ Distinguishing between existing and new

7a.

overpayments

$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

Does this cost estimate include other UC ARRA
improvements?

□
0□
1

□ Offsetting fraud and nonfraud overpayments
7 □ Reporting of overpayments
6

8

□

Yes
No

If yes, please specify which ones:

□ Tracking overpayment adjustments to stimulus
funding instead of trust fund

9

10

□ None
□ Other (Specify)
7b.

How were these systems changes financed?
MARK ALL THAT APPLY

5b.

Please provide the total amount of EUC08
Tier 3/Tier 4-related outstanding overpayments,
not including write-offs or waived overpayments,
as of 12/31/2012.

1

2

3

4

6.

Did reporting EUC08 Tier 3/Tier 4 benefits
present any specific challenges?
1

2

3

0

□
□

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

□

Yes (Other)

□

No

Prepared by Mathematica Policy Research

8

□

Modernization funds

□

State administrative grants

□

General revenue

□

Other (Specify)

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

□

3.
NO EXTENDED BENEFITS (EB) IN
STATE. IF CHECKED, SKIP MODULE 5

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

1.

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

appropriate systems changes or establish
alternate systems
2

MARK ALL THAT APPLY
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

□
□
□
□
□
□
□

□ Insufficient financial resources to make

3

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

□ Insufficient personnel
□ Insufficient understanding of UC ARRA
requirements

4

Added fields/flags/indicators to state claims
systems

□ Insufficient time to respond to legislative
changes

5

Added screens to state claims systems

□ Difficulty maintaining data quality (including
accuracy of benefit amounts)

Benefit payment control (BPC) system
changes (for overpayments)

6

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

7

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

8

Unable to capture, track, report on UC ARRA
EB requirement

9

Other (Specify)

10

□ Implementing both EUC08 and EB
□ Taking applications for EB
□ Tracking payments to interstate claimants
□ Collecting and verifying EB work search
documents

2.

11

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

12

□
2□
3□
4

□

□
6□
5

7

□

□
9□
8

□ Checking for wages/benefits at benefit year end
and quarter change for regular UI

MARK ALL THAT APPLY
1

□ Establishing proper weekly benefit amounts

State political leadership/support

13

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

Agency leadership/support
14

Staff support
15

Leadership knowledge of UC ARRA
requirements

16

Staff knowledge of UC ARRA requirements
Resources available
Alignment of UC ARRA requirements with
existing state goals/initiatives
Nothing
Other (Specify)

Prepared by Mathematica Policy Research

9

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

4.

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

6.

Did reporting EB present any specific
challenges?

□
2□
1

MARK ONE ONLY

□
1□
2□
n

□
4□
5□
3

Not applicable, no systems changes needed

□
4□

Yes, all benefits paid in timely manner

3

Somewhat, some benefits paid on time and
some retroactively
No, all benefits paid retroactively

0

7.

Other (Specify)

□
0□
5a.

No

3

4

5

□
3□
4□
5□
6□
7□

GO TO Q.5b

6

7

8

9

□

Calculating exact overpayments

□

Establishing overpayments

□

Applying overpayments in proper order

□

Offsetting overpayments

□

7a.

No

□
0□
1

Distinguishing between existing and new
overpayments

□

Offsetting fraud and nonfraud overpayments

□

Reporting of overpayments

□

None

□

Other (Specify)

GO TO

$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

Yes
No

If yes, please specify which ones:

7b.

How were these systems changes financed?
MARK ALL THAT APPLY

□
2□
3□
4□

Please provide the total amount of EB-related
outstanding overpayments, not including writeoffs or waived overpayments, as of 12/31/2012.

Prepared by Mathematica Policy Research

$0 (no systems changes)
MODULE 6, Q.1

Does this cost estimate include other UC ARRA
improvements?

1

5b.

□

2

Yes

MARK ALL THAT APPLY

2

Yes (Other)

What was the approximate cost of making these
systems changes?

1

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

1

Yes, reporting both EUC08 and EB

MARK ONE ONLY

Did EB overpayments present any specific
systems challenges?
1

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

No, not all benefits due were paid

_____________________________________
5.

□

Yes, lack of specific reporting guidance

10

Modernization funds
State administrative grants
General revenue
Other (Specify)

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

□

Made 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........

n

□

1

□

2

□

3

□

4

□

5

□

6

□

7

□

8

□

________________

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

n

□

1

□

2

□

3

□

4

□

5

□

6

□

7

□

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

□

Nothing

□

Other (Specify)

4a.

□

$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.

Insufficient personnel

How were the UI modernization systems
changes financed?
MARK ALL THAT APPLY

Insufficient understanding of UC ARRA
requirements

1

Not enough to respond to legislative changes

2

Difficulty maintaining data quality (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
of 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

□

________________

Prepared by Mathematica Policy Research

14

6.2

Please provide the total amount of outstanding UC benefits overpayments, before deductions for write-offs and waived overpayments, as of
December 31, 2012, for each of the following modernization provisions.
MARK ONE ONLY
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.

n

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

d. Dependency allowances .............................................................................................................................
7.

n

Unable
to
calculate

Enter dollar
amount

□

$ __________________

□

$ __________________

□

$ __________________

□

$ __________________

□

1

□

1

□

1

□

1

Did reporting on the following modernization provisions present any specific challenges?
MARK ALL THAT APPLY
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

□