Final-BAM Justification Part B 2015 v2

/home/ec2-user/sec/disk/omb/icr/201901-1205-001/doc/88561701

Supporting Statement B

Collection of Information Employing Statistical Methods

1. Describe (including a numerical estimate) the potential respondent universe and any sampling or other respondent selection methods to be used. Data on the number of entities (e.g., establishments, State and local government units, households, or persons) in the universe covered by the collection and in the corresponding sample are to be provided in tabular form for the universe as a whole and for each of the strata in the proposed sample. Indicate expected response rates for the collection as a whole. If the collection had been conducted previously, include the actual response rate achieved during the last collection.

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.

2. Describe the procedures for the collection of information including:

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.

3. Describe methods to maximize response rates and to deal with issues of non-response. The accuracy and reliability of information collected must be shown to be adequate for intended uses. For collections based on sampling, a special justification must be provided for any collection that will not yield "reliable" data that can be generalized to the universe studied.

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 FY 2014, 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 -- IPIA 2014
Sample Type	Cases Sampled	Valid Cases*	Cases Completed**	Percent Complete	In-Person	Tele-Phone	Mail	No Clmnt. Inter.
Paid Claims	23,705	23,667	23,666	100.00%	11.87%	38.98%	40.80%	8.36%
Monetary	8,271	7,921	7,919	99.97%	0.50%	47.95%	21.63%	29.92%
Separation	7,971	7,879	7,879	100.00%	0.51%	44.45%	25.54%	29.51%
Nonseparation	8,083	7,859	7,852	99.91%	0.71%	48.12%	28.12%	23.02%
* 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. Valid cases exclude paid and denied claim cases for Florida batch range 201327 through 201426. **To meet IPIA reporting timetables, the database was frozen on 10/29/2014. The number of valid cases completed is those signed off by the BAM program’s supervisor by the close of business on 10/28/2014.

^* 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.

4. Describe any tests of procedures or methods to be undertaken. Testing is encouraged as an effective means of refining collections of information to minimize burden and improve utility. Tests must be approved if they call for answers to identical questions from 10 or more respondents. A proposed test or set of test may be submitted for approval separately or in combination with the main collection of information.

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.

5. Provide the name and telephone number of individuals consulted on statistical aspects of the design and the name of the agency unit, contractor(s), grantee(s), or other person(s) who will actually collect and/or analyze the information for the agency.

The following individuals collect and analyze the paid and denied claims data and may be contacted for further information:

Ross Miller

Employment and Training Administration

Office of Unemployment Insurance

Phone: 202-693-3178

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
IPIA 2014 (Batch Range 201327 to 201426)
			Over				Agency
		Amount	payment	95% CI	Oper.	95% CI	Responsible	95% CI	Fraud	95% CI
ST	Sample	Paid	Rate	+/-	Rate	+/-	Rate	+/-	Rate	+/-
US*	23,666	$35,989,801,018	12.360%	0.662	6.085%	0.496	2.693%	0.345	3.191%	0.406
AK*	482	$155,456,140	16.895%	3.664	6.991%	2.367	1.313%	1.132	2.593%	1.481
AL	480	$276,877,784	9.834%	2.76	6.032%	2.146	1.300%	0.946	2.724%	1.404
AR	481	$286,440,076	9.441%	2.543	8.380%	2.367	1.418%	1.08	4.389%	1.859
AZ	477	$333,794,215	13.455%	3.065	10.015%	2.735	3.915%	1.745	5.746%	2.152
CA	500	$6,148,511,685	7.013%	2.225	4.927%	1.858	1.595%	1.202	3.968%	1.691
CO	484	$542,230,599	14.182%	3.164	7.101%	2.219	5.660%	2.18	1.336%	1.023
CT	488	$775,885,683	3.433%	1.747	2.314%	1.251	0.686%	0.984	1.551%	1.172
DC	364	$155,516,603	18.102%	3.966	12.560%	3.284	3.463%	1.882	4.318%	2.205
DE	360	$98,441,616	15.488%	3.938	4.249%	2.134	4.280%	2.363	3.593%	2.018
FL*
GA	480	$607,305,090	18.663%	3.712	2.497%	1.338	3.117%	1.608	1.058%	0.896
HI	360	$216,003,201	7.336%	2.728	2.079%	1.308	4.075%	2.202	0.745%	0.918
IA	480	$401,927,540	10.007%	2.333	5.893%	1.647	3.147%	1.461	0.678%	0.604
ID	487	$130,837,571	15.614%	3.609	6.132%	2.209	3.272%	1.892	4.498%	2.039
IL	505	$2,091,813,652	18.038%	3.289	8.613%	2.274	1.564%	0.961	3.584%	1.497
IN	481	$474,718,332	11.932%	3.053	7.032%	2.384	5.113%	2.092	1.257%	1.083
KS	482	$294,067,778	21.904%	3.988	10.242%	2.812	5.989%	2.175	2.798%	1.409
KY	499	$415,030,505	7.830%	2.237	5.775%	1.882	1.483%	0.992	2.470%	1.139
LA	482	$164,353,252	11.363%	3.022	10.309%	2.867	3.908%	1.856	4.430%	1.97
MA*	529	$1,470,922,738	9.572%	2.632	5.998%	2.098	2.693%	1.394	2.608%	1.435
MD	489	$757,132,402	16.857%	3.485	8.373%	2.474	1.060%	0.842	2.246%	1.347
ME	485	$156,736,766	22.839%	4.05	4.968%	1.819	2.652%	1.328	0.382%	0.533
MI	480	$947,872,361	17.452%	3.776	7.180%	2.508	10.654%	3.084	3.354%	1.774
MN	486	$833,996,053	6.953%	2.333	6.255%	2.208	0.951%	0.873	3.830%	1.88
MO	480	$435,730,511	7.544%	2.406	6.279%	2.257	0.554%	0.774	3.398%	1.689
MS	502	$152,768,621	10.190%	2.663	8.405%	2.413	1.420%	1.051	5.383%	1.887
MT	361	$115,255,103	16.305%	3.992	7.477%	2.644	7.004%	3.031	3.368%	1.76
NC	518	$713,419,243	16.245%	3.459	6.077%	2.128	2.292%	1.249	2.157%	1.246
ND	361	$88,088,684	15.215%	4.513	4.573%	2.478	1.831%	1.337	0.825%	0.886
NE	360	$94,594,313	13.796%	3.603	7.039%	2.677	3.746%	1.971	0.669%	0.825
NH	363	$80,320,540	5.081%	2.142	4.008%	1.883	1.022%	1.118	0.521%	0.62
NJ	484	$2,316,808,809	21.097%	3.6	6.170%	2.113	2.197%	1.35	0.698%	0.819
NM	488	$196,232,719	29.401%	4.312	8.296%	2.586	7.734%	2.49	3.300%	1.742
NV	492	$376,721,013	27.705%	3.904	8.888%	2.627	1.414%	1.075	3.636%	1.661
NY*	483	$2,891,443,444	8.558%	2.575	4.779%	1.887	2.810%	1.553	4.042%	1.723
OH	481	$1,115,793,188	13.257%	3.164	2.193%	1.09	5.173%	2.165	1.429%	0.94
OK	487	$249,146,243	6.136%	2.106	5.544%	2.01	1.771%	1.119	1.485%	1.045
OR	486	$608,610,384	13.163%	3.38	7.151%	2.551	4.368%	2.174	7.350%	2.674
PA	520	$2,548,202,110	14.669%	3.22	10.715%	2.756	3.327%	1.835	7.945%	2.458
PR	490	$187,312,492	8.337%	2.594	6.931%	2.444	3.888%	1.887	1.864%	1.192
RI	480	$200,533,051	6.564%	2.313	3.521%	1.734	1.745%	1.233	2.797%	1.536
SC	520	$228,085,466	16.501%	3.254	7.166%	2.133	1.156%	0.888	3.963%	1.711
SD	360	$29,000,441	10.496%	3.277	3.321%	1.844	2.123%	1.558	3.436%	1.78
TN	480	$336,178,233	18.887%	3.691	6.966%	2.28	3.780%	1.801	2.569%	1.517
TX	482	$2,291,871,548	9.967%	2.797	4.419%	1.853	3.201%	1.7	1.001%	1.068
UT*	485	$205,431,669	10.089%	3.064	4.312%	1.807	1.883%	1.759	1.993%	1.293
VA	481	$567,717,660	7.277%	2.331	4.570%	1.806	2.168%	1.281	1.088%	0.923
VT*	360	$82,033,852	15.725%	4.115	3.714%	1.893	11.452%	3.799	2.108%	1.314
WA*	465	$1,084,260,724	10.311%	2.791	4.078%	1.81	0.586%	0.652	1.743%	1.376
WI	516	$770,831,473	23.090%	4.074	8.046%	2.484	1.462%	0.984	4.975%	2.123
WV	480	$220,532,007	6.305%	2.237	3.071%	1.364	1.939%	1.148	1.263%	0.928
WY	360	$67,005,835	13.041%	3.788	2.105%	1.416	2.189%	1.62	2.501%	1.558

Prepared By ETA Office of Unemployment Insurance on 16 December 2014

Denied Claims Accuracy Rates and Sampling Errors-- IPIA 2014
July 2013 through June 2014
			Estimated			Adjusted
	Sample		Denial	Improper	95% C.I.	Improper	95% C.I.
st	Type	Sample*	Population	Denial	(+/-)	Denial#	(+/-)
US	Monetary	7,518	1,499,260	15.35%	0.81	12.15%	0.72
US	Separation	7,879	1,846,105	9.51%	0.61	5.92%	0.48
US	Nonseparation	7,852	2,596,413	14.11%	0.69	10.11%	0.62
AK	Monetary	158	8,049	7.26%	5.77	5.68%	5.41
AK	Separation	151	11,404	12.05%	5.44	8.78%	4.8
AK	Nonseparation	150	29,845	15.21%	5.48	12.54%	5.11
AL	Monetary	182	32,990	2.84%	2.22	1.97%	1.93
AL	Separation	153	32,056	2.02%	2.3	1.40%	1.96
AL	Nonseparation	150	20,020	4.34%	6.4	4.34%	6.4
AR	Monetary	125	4,863	21.27%	8.69	15.74%	7.32
AR	Separation	150	29,371	0.00%	0	0.00%	0
AR	Nonseparation	150	14,667	3.64%	2.82	3.64%	2.82
AZ	Monetary	152	60,975	7.93%	4.41	7.93%	4.41
AZ	Separation	151	24,106	4.99%	3.51	2.35%	2.35
AZ	Nonseparation	151	27,666	11.75%	5.5	10.97%	5.28
CA	Monetary	136	201,206	24.39%	7.79	19.16%	6.97
CA	Separation	152	204,973	20.97%	6.16	12.81%	4.96
CA	Nonseparation	159	326,556	22.51%	7.14	17.76%	6.69
CO	Monetary	122	3,726	44.51%	14.13	42.35%	14.32
CO	Separation	154	59,451	10.28%	4.97	7.40%	4.38
CO	Nonseparation	157	42,563	8.69%	4.06	6.95%	3.68
CT	Monetary	153	17,116	1.32%	2.05	1.10%	2
CT	Separation	151	14,259	7.03%	4.12	1.53%	2.14
CT	Nonseparation	146	18,506	3.87%	3.02	2.26%	2.55
DC	Monetary	143	8,053	9.40%	3.97	4.97%	2.67
DC	Separation	163	3,441	9.38%	4.59	7.73%	4.32
DC	Nonseparation	162	9,166	24.87%	7.11	24.17%	7.12
DE	Monetary	147	1,353	31.31%	8.08	14.97%	6.93
DE	Separation	154	5,901	1.99%	2.22	1.34%	1.84
DE	Nonseparation	155	8,939	2.44%	2.48	1.85%	2.2
GA	Monetary	137	38,130	17.16%	7.46	15.35%	7.17
GA	Separation	156	73,089	5.45%	3.52	3.67%	2.98
GA	Nonseparation	156	39,662	6.92%	3.89	6.24%	3.65
HI	Monetary	152	1,156	20.39%	6.43	16.29%	5.94
HI	Separation	155	6,928	11.88%	5.42	7.38%	4.51
HI	Nonseparation	154	19,613	12.09%	5.3	8.85%	4.65
IA	Monetary	144	11,414	7.58%	4.18	5.82%	3.66
IA	Separation	153	23,235	13.69%	5.59	6.58%	3.9
IA	Nonseparation	153	15,554	14.81%	6.48	9.02%	5.04
ID	Monetary	149	3,451	6.39%	4.76	6.39%	4.76
ID	Separation	149	10,060	4.65%	3.29	3.46%	3.13
ID	Nonseparation	150	45,428	9.24%	5.81	7.80%	5.58
IL	Monetary	157	24,292	51.05%	9.39	33.14%	7.5
IL	Separation	155	44,195	13.16%	5.91	6.70%	4.32
IL	Nonseparation	155	53,015	9.92%	4.9	4.33%	3.52
IN	Monetary	149	43,951	8.12%	4.52	8.12%	4.52
IN	Separation	151	23,909	7.92%	4.45	5.98%	3.81
IN	Nonseparation	151	66,312	29.94%	8.37	27.76%	8.04
KS	Monetary	144	13,138	3.29%	2.89	2.89%	2.78
KS	Separation	151	24,105	7.15%	4.14	3.24%	2.48
KS	Nonseparation	151	18,927	11.79%	5.16	10.16%	4.87
KY	Monetary	132	13,341	10.25%	6.36	4.20%	4.31
KY	Separation	160	29,580	3.62%	2.83	2.00%	2.32
KY	Nonseparation	159	20,871	7.23%	4.2	3.57%	2.89
LA	Monetary	150	17,483	7.94%	4.29	7.37%	4.29
LA	Separation	156	25,469	14.22%	5.53	10.53%	4.74
LA	Nonseparation	155	63,636	11.43%	4.92	8.25%	4.04
MA	Monetary	156	73,460	23.58%	5.65	19.76%	5.13
MA	Separation	155	33,388	14.00%	5.79	9.21%	4.84
MA	Nonseparation	151	76,702	20.92%	7.28	18.99%	7.11
MD	Monetary	156	26,590	20.67%	7.54	15.11%	6.74
MD	Separation	158	46,616	10.66%	4.27	5.30%	3.92
MD	Nonseparation	158	47,675	9.81%	5.27	8.35%	4.87
ME	Monetary	145	7,648	12.99%	7.3	11.33%	7.03
ME	Separation	150	7,056	4.87%	3.39	2.50%	2.49
ME	Nonseparation	150	13,017	9.78%	4.81	7.62%	4.33
MI	Monetary	150	76,563	34.39%	9.51	29.64%	9.23
MI	Separation	150	100,342	8.12%	6.66	3.84%	5.47
MI	Nonseparation	150	303,293	11.86%	7.87	3.40%	3.49
MN	Monetary	148	8,736	8.63%	5.35	4.54%	4.17
MN	Separation	158	25,133	12.31%	5.04	3.87%	3.33
MN	Nonseparation	159	91,736	3.92%	2.76	2.84%	2.31
MO	Monetary	150	39,803	4.65%	3.66	3.56%	3.33
MO	Separation	150	41,127	8.15%	4.5	1.03%	1.5
MO	Nonseparation	150	86,879	39.68%	7.24	22.22%	7.09
MS	Monetary	169	9,538	5.77%	3.35	5.16%	3.14
MS	Separation	170	27,774	4.98%	3.57	2.02%	2.34
MS	Nonseparation	169	38,003	4.18%	3.72	2.75%	3.33
MT	Monetary	126	3,489	11.88%	8.89	10.62%	8.69
MT	Separation	152	7,383	4.02%	3.37	4.02%	3.37
MT	Nonseparation	152	12,437	10.53%	5.97	8.86%	5.6
NC	Monetary	152	64,151	9.80%	4.94	5.53%	3.68
NC	Separation	156	61,577	6.24%	3.78	5.67%	3.61
NC	Nonseparation	151	33,341	4.06%	3.34	3.53%	3.18
ND	Monetary	145	2,653	10.71%	4.72	8.67%	4.37
ND	Separation	153	5,326	5.59%	3.64	2.45%	2.4
ND	Nonseparation	153	20,072	6.43%	3.84	5.82%	3.66
NE	Monetary	150	4,810	3.70%	3.23	2.78%	2.69
NE	Separation	151	42,192	6.33%	3.96	5.09%	3.55
NE	Nonseparation	150	39,347	3.88%	3.14	3.88%	3.14
NH	Monetary	153	3,022	13.07%	5.54	5.98%	4.13
NH	Separation	153	3,906	6.75%	3.72	1.54%	2.18
NH	Nonseparation	154	14,248	9.69%	4.93	7.47%	4.17
NJ	Monetary	143	46,729	12.73%	4.67	12.73%	4.67
NJ	Separation	156	64,098	10.52%	4.68	9.18%	4.5
NJ	Nonseparation	156	43,388	13.69%	5.46	12.30%	5.37
NM	Monetary	157	9,964	14.83%	11.48	10.77%	9.82
NM	Separation	163	10,129	8.95%	4.69	3.39%	2.49
NM	Nonseparation	166	19,420	5.38%	3.53	3.39%	2.76
NV	Monetary	148	11,144	5.52%	3.54	3.64%	2.6
NV	Separation	155	24,452	11.29%	4.84	1.93%	1.77
NV	Nonseparation	156	28,448	20.39%	6.61	17.18%	6.06
NY	Monetary	139	74,891	19.64%	7.48	14.26%	6.18
NY	Separation	154	81,261	12.94%	5.48	7.80%	4.25
NY	Nonseparation	151	89,350	5.34%	3.53	5.34%	3.53
OH	Monetary	155	67,400	20.57%	6.61	17.59%	6.39
OH	Separation	152	44,061	8.84%	4.3	6.67%	3.78
OH	Nonseparation	153	51,773	14.07%	5.95	11.83%	5.35
OK	Monetary	150	14,194	11.33%	5.1	7.22%	4.04
OK	Separation	159	25,639	1.59%	1.85	0.00%	0
OK	Nonseparation	159	22,031	4.76%	3.22	4.01%	3.22
OR	Monetary	150	7,162	23.18%	8.53	18.28%	8.04
OR	Separation	174	24,460	4.34%	3.02	3.20%	2.58
OR	Nonseparation	166	38,056	7.62%	3.87	5.78%	3.3
PA	Monetary	143	155,509	9.50%	5.86	8.33%	5.78
PA	Separation	155	74,660	12.78%	5.46	11.38%	5.1
PA	Nonseparation	154	37,046	14.72%	5.76	12.99%	5.38
PR	Monetary	147	25,814	33.93%	9.03	23.31%	8.37
PR	Separation	147	11,224	0.00%	0	0.00%	0
PR	Nonseparation	146	17,946	8.83%	5.12	7.90%	4.79
RI	Monetary	152	5,260	4.73%	3.03	3.94%	2.61
RI	Separation	152	6,159	5.12%	3.68	2.61%	2.6
RI	Nonseparation	152	5,579	4.56%	3.24	3.25%	2.68
SC	Monetary	146	37,659	7.66%	4.49	6.68%	4.28
SC	Separation	156	51,443	5.39%	3.81	3.72%	2.98
SC	Nonseparation	157	59,537	4.08%	3.01	1.22%	1.44
SD	Monetary	149	1,333	7.32%	4.38	4.98%	3.79
SD	Separation	150	3,447	3.48%	3.02	2.05%	2.28
SD	Nonseparation	150	5,871	8.35%	4.52	7.83%	4.41
TN	Monetary	141	19,683	11.79%	5.44	7.13%	4.09
TN	Separation	150	35,100	12.58%	5.74	7.64%	4.34
TN	Nonseparation	150	11,486	12.77%	5.93	12.26%	6.02
TX	Monetary	153	111,233	5.48%	3.73	2.75%	2.83
TX	Separation	156	187,779	3.31%	2.91	1.99%	2.26
TX	Nonseparation	154	287,163	18.39%	6.15	12.58%	5.16
UT	Monetary	148	3,477	11.22%	5.78	8.62%	4.99
UT	Separation	152	14,134	7.34%	4.29	6.27%	3.74
UT	Nonseparation	152	67,707	7.05%	4.01	4.78%	3.01
VA	Monetary	138	23,988	7.66%	4.73	4.25%	3.55
VA	Separation	156	45,837	9.49%	5	6.74%	4.22
VA	Nonseparation	154	32,568	7.82%	4.22	7.37%	4.12
VT	Monetary	129	1,272	23.28%	7.8	11.44%	5.74
VT	Separation	150	4,379	8.54%	4.45	4.31%	3.59
VT	Nonseparation	151	5,054	11.61%	5.76	6.58%	4.08
WA	Monetary	150	22,953	8.92%	4.33	8.20%	4.26
WA	Separation	143	35,827	14.56%	6.33	7.60%	4.64
WA	Nonseparation	142	54,292	24.30%	7.05	19.45%	6.66
WI	Monetary	174	30,490	8.36%	4.7	8.36%	4.7
WI	Separation	179	38,886	11.55%	4.76	8.94%	4.53
WI	Nonseparation	173	82,760	10.42%	4.73	7.15%	3.55
WV	Monetary	129	2,196	14.18%	6.59	12.37%	6.51
WV	Separation	149	11,308	6.80%	3.08	6.21%	2.86
WV	Nonseparation	149	5,507	11.09%	8.04	10.60%	7.99
WY	Monetary	145	1,759	14.36%	6.96	11.95%	6.68
WY	Separation	150	4,472	1.66%	1.85	1.11%	1.51
WY	Nonseparation	150	13,735	6.60%	4.13	6.60%	4.13
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 02 Dec 14.

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