FY 2014 UI reemployment assessment grants

CLASSIFICATION
   EMPLOYMENT AND TRAINING ADMINISTRATION                UI-REAs
                 ADVISORY SYSTEM                         CORRESPONDENCE SYMBOL
          U.S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR                       OUI/DUIO
             Washington, D.C. 20210                      DATE
                                                         April 7, 2014


ADVISORY:             UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE PROGRAM LETTER NO. 10-14

TO:                   STATE WORKFORCE AGENCIES

FROM:                 ERIC M. SELEZNOW /s/
                      Acting Assistant Secretary

SUBJECT:              Fiscal Year (FY) 2014 Unemployment Insurance (UI) Reemployment
                      and Eligibility Assessment (REA) Grants

1. Purpose. To invite state workforce agencies to submit proposals for a grant to continue or to
   implement a UI REA program, and to provide guidelines for FY 2014 UI REA grants.

2. References.
   • Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2014, Public Law 113-76, Div. H, Title I;
   • Unemployment Insurance Program Letter (UIPL) No. 17-13, Fiscal Year (FY) 2013
      Unemployment Insurance (UI) Reemployment and Eligibility Assessment (REA) Grants;
   • Information Collection Request for the ETA 9128, Reemployment and Eligibility
      Assessment Workloads Report, and the ETA 9129, Reemployment and Eligibility
      Assessments Outcomes Report: (OMB number 1205-0456);
   • Employment and Training (ET) Handbook No. 401, 4th Edition, Revised ET Handbook
      No. 401, Unemployment Insurance Reports Handbook;
   • ET Handbook No. 402, 5th Edition, Revised ET Handbook No. 402, Unemployment
      Insurance Reports (UIR) User Manual – Web Version;
   • Training and Employment Guidance Letter (TEGL) No. 36-11, Announcement of
      American Job Center Network;
   • Training and Employment Notice (TEN) No. 31-09, Cross-Program Collaboration for
      Reemployment and Eligibility Assessment (REA) Grants;
   • Webinar - Nevada's Reemployment and Eligibility Assessment (REA) Program and
      Minnesota’s Advanced REA Automation Tool, available at
      https://www.workforce3one.org; and
   • Webinar - Reemployment and Eligibility Assessment (REA) Program Innovations in
      Tennessee and Utah, available at https://www.workforce3one.org.

3. Background. The UI program provides a core service in the comprehensive, integrated
   workforce system by providing temporary financial assistance to eligible workers during
   periods of unemployment. The reemployment needs of UI claimants and the prevention and
   detection of UI improper payments are addressed through the UI REA program. Both
   activities are high priorities for the U.S. Department of Labor’s (Department) Employment

 RESCISSIONS                                             EXPIRATION DATE
 None                                                    Continuing

   and Training Administration (ETA). The UI REA program provides claimants an entry point
   to a full array of services available at American Job Centers (AJCs), and ensures that
   claimants comply with all UI eligibility requirements. Individuals filing UI claims are active
   job seekers who, through the state’s UI REA program, are made aware of a variety of
   available reemployment services and are referred to services that are appropriate. In FY
   2013, a total of 41 states operated a UI REA program.

   REA services may be delivered by UI staff, Wagner-Peyser staff, Workforce Investment Act
   (WIA) staff, or other AJC staff. The UI eligibility review is a key part of the REA for
   program integrity purposes, and if UI staff does not conduct the eligibility review, the service
   delivery staff must be trained to identify all potential eligibility issues. Resolution of
   eligibility issues must be conducted by UI merit staff. All eligibility determinations and
   redeterminations are funded through the regular funding for non-monetary determinations
   and not through the UI REA grant.

   Data are collected on state UI REA workload activities and on program outcomes. States
   establish an REA treatment group and a comparison group to measure outcomes. ETA will
   continue working with states to improve the quality of UI REA data required for
   administration of the program. The data are used to assess the value of the UI REA program
   in the states and nationally.

4. FY 2014 Funding. The Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2014, appropriates a minimum of
   $80 million for 2014 UI REA funding. States interested in implementing a new UI REA
   program are strongly encouraged to apply for REA funding. States with existing UI REA
   programs are also strongly encouraged to apply for grants to continue their programs.
   Requests to expand an existing UI REA program may be funded if funds are available.
   Expansions may include adding AJCs that are not currently participating or providing
   assessments to a larger number of claimants in participating AJCs.

   States participating in the Department’s evaluation of the UI REA program may submit
   requests for a grant modification when their study design has been determined. Study
   designs may include a treatment group that receives a partial REA that does not include all of
   the required REA elements for a first/full REA and, thus, costs for these treatments will be
   less than costs for a full REA and a comparison of multiple vs single REAs. Modifications
   will address the time period during which the state participates in the study.

   A. New UI REA State Programs. Proposals for new UI REA programs should provide the
      information requested in Attachment A, Unemployment Insurance (UI) Reemployment
      and Eligibility Assessment (REA) Proposal Outline for First Year UI REA Grants, as well
      as an abstract of the proposal containing the elements listed in Attachment B. In the
      proposals states should include only the information identified in this UIPL.

      New proposals should include start-up costs and costs related to programming the UI
      Required Reports, the Reemployment and Eligibility Assessment Workload Report (ETA
      9128) and the Reemployment and Eligibility Assessments Outcomes Report, (ETA 9129)
      (OMB approval No. 1205-0456 for both reports).

                                                2

   New states should budget for the obligation of UI REA funds within one year of the date
   of program implementation. The program implementation date is the date that the first
   UI REA participant in the state is scheduled to report to an AJC for a UI REA. States
   should notify the appropriate ETA regional office when the program has been
   implemented, as this date is needed for monitoring purposes. Many of the start-up costs,
   such as costs for programming the required reports and training staff, will occur before
   the program has been implemented in the AJC and are included in the initial grant.

B. Continuing UI REA State Programs. The deadline specified by the Grant Officer on
   the Notice of Obligation for the obligation FY 2013 funds is September 30, 2014. Funds
   must be liquidated within 90 days of that obligation deadline.

   The performance period for FY 2014 UI REA grants begins on April 1, 2014, and ends
   on March 31, 2015. This is the time during which the funds are to be obligated.
   However, to allow for potential changes that might occur, the deadline specified by the
   Grant Officer on the Notice of Obligation for the obligation of these funds will be shown
   as September 30, 2015. All estimated cost figures for proposals for FY 2014 UI REA
   grants should be based on this time period. Any prior year funds remaining unobligated
   after March 31, 2014, should be applied to the ongoing UI REA workload before the
   using the FY 2014 UI REA grant funds.

   Each UI REA grant is based upon the number of REAs that the state proposes to schedule
   and the costs estimated by the state. States that have not scheduled the number of REAs
   that were funded in FY 2013 should use the remaining FY 2013 funds to complete the
   projected workload and request funding for the balance of the FY 2014 UI REA grant
   period. All continuing UI REA states must determine whether any FY 2013 UI REA
   funds will not be obligated by March 31, 2014, provide this information in their FY 2014
   UI REA grant application, and ensure that all FY 2013 UI REA funds are obligated
   before obligating FY 2014 UI REA funds.

   Proposals from states currently operating a UI REA program must provide an abstract of
   the proposal using Attachment B, Elements of an Unemployment Insurance (UI)
   Reemployment and Eligibility Assessment (REA) Grant Proposal Abstract, as well as the
   information requested in Attachment C, Unemployment Insurance (UI) Reemployment
   and Eligibility Assessment (REA) Proposal Outline for States Continuing a UI REA
   Program, and in Attachment D, The Unemployment Insurance (UI) Reemployment and
   Eligibility Assessment (REA) Data Concerns.

   Attachment D provides information on common data problems, which may help states
   currently operating a UI REA program to write about the accuracy of their UI REA data.
   States must review their UI REA data with a focus on identifying any inaccurate data.
   The state’s proposal must identify the errors in the quarterly Reemployment and
   Eligibility Assessment Workload Report (ETA 9128) and the quarterly Reemployment
   and Eligibility Assessment Outcomes Report (ETA 9129), describe the state’s plans to
   correct the data, and provide a schedule of corrective actions.

                                           3

       States experiencing ongoing difficulties in reaching the workload and/or minimum
       comparison group level projected in their FY 2013 UI REA proposals should request a
       lower level of funding in FY 2014 than was provided in FY 2013.

       Proposals will be reviewed based solely on the information required in the application.
       States should include only the required information.

5. Basic UI REA Guidelines. UI REA funds must be used to assess the continued eligibility
   and reemployment needs of UI claimants. These funds must not supplant ongoing UI grant
   funds devoted to the state’s eligibility review program. The Worker Profiling and
   Reemployment Services (WPRS) program remains mandatory and states must serve WPRS
   participants in addition to REA participants. WPRS claimants are identified as individuals
   most likely to exhaust their benefits and they are served under the WPRS program rather than
   the REA program. Claimants who are selected for WPRS must be excluded from both the UI
   REA treatment and comparison groups.

   States are not required to implement the UI REA program statewide. Assessments are to be
   conducted only for UI claimants who do not have a definite return-to-work date. States
   should also exclude claimants who secure work only through a union hiring hall.

   By applying for UI REA funding, states are agreeing to integrate the UI REA program with
   WIA and Wagner-Peyser funded reemployment services. Each completed REA will include
   a referral to a reemployment service and/or training. Reemployment services such as résumé
   writing or interviewing techniques workshops and job placement activities are an extension
   of the UI REA program, but they must be funded through other sources such as Wagner-
   Peyser or WIA funds. Costs for the delivery of reemployment services must not be included
   in the state’s proposed use of UI REA grant funds.

   UI staff must be engaged in REA planning, administration, and oversight as well as
   appropriate staff training on UI eligibility requirements. While a full-time UI position may
   not be required, UI staff must be available and involved in the REA functions discussed
   above. States that have not had UI involvement in the REA program have experienced
   problems. In some instances, REA staff members have had insufficient training to conduct a
   thorough eligibility review and detect eligibility issues requiring adjudication. This can
   result in improper payments. Further, many states that have not had sufficient UI staff
   participation have been unable to submit accurate ETA required reports. The ETA 9128,
   Reemployment and Eligibility Assessment Workloads Report and the ETA 9129,
   Reemployment and Eligibility Assessments Outcomes Report should be reviewed for
   accuracy each calendar quarter by the UI team member in addition to being reviewed by the
   REA team leader.

   UI REA programs are an integral part of states’ strategies for delivering reemployment
   services. ETA encourages states to develop a comprehensive and integrated service delivery
   model to ensure that UI claimants receive an enhanced level of services. The following
   guidelines also apply:

                                               4

A. Required REA Services. Each UI REA must include the following minimum core
   components:

       •   UI eligibility assessment and referral to adjudication, as appropriate, if a potential
           issue is identified;
       •   Requirement for the claimant to report to an AJC to receive the services identified
           in section C below;
       •   The provision of labor market and career information that is specific to the
           claimant’s needs;
       •   Registration with the state’s job bank;
       •   Orientation to AJC services;
       •   Development or review of an individual reemployment plan that includes work
           search activities, accessing services provided through an AJC or using self-service
           tools, and/or approved training; and
       •   Referral to at least one reemployment service and/or training.

   States must provide each UI REA participant one-on-one service for the eligibility review
   and the development of an individual reemployment plan during the initial UI REA and
   any subsequent UI REA.

B. Service Delivery Design. States may determine who is chosen for the UI REA treatment
   group with the following exceptions. Claimants who have a definite return-to-work date
   must be excluded. In addition, states must exclude claimants who seek work solely
   through a union hiring hall. Many states have elected to serve claimants who are at a
   mid-range in the WPRS model selection. These individuals may benefit from
   participation in the REA program and are not likely to need long-term and intensive
   services. Claimants with job skills that are in high demand may also be targeted. This
   methodology requires consistent updates as the labor market changes.

   States have flexibility in identifying staffing options for the delivery of UI REAs.
   Different skill sets are needed to do the UI eligibility assessment than those needed to
   develop a reemployment plan and make appropriate referrals to receive reemployment
   services at AJCs and/or training. If the state decides to use only UI or only Wagner-
   Peyser or WIA staff to do UI REAs, states must ensure that the staff assigned has the
   necessary training and that UI staff are involved in such training.

   States that conduct multiple UI REAs for the same individual(s) must provide cost
   estimates for both the initial and the subsequent UI REAs. In general, subsequent UI
   REAs require less time and resources to complete as it is not necessary to repeat the
   orientation session. Subsequent UI REAs must include an eligibility review; review and
   updating of the claimant’s individual reemployment plan; the provision of labor market
   information if changes so dictate; and referral to reemployment services or training.

   Once the state notifies a claimant that s/he has been selected for a UI REA, participation
   in the UI REA is mandatory. If a claimant fails to report for any UI REA without

                                             5

notifying the state beforehand, the state must refer the issue of the claimant’s failure to
report to the appropriate UI staff to be adjudicated under state law.

With respect the scheduled REAs, states must report initial outcomes for 100 percent of
the scheduled REAs that are reported on the ETA 9128 report. Each claimant scheduled
for an REA will either participate in the REA or fail to participate; therefore, each
scheduled REA must be reported in one of these two outcomes. Rescheduled REAs
should be counted as another scheduled REA and the results are reported when the
claimant participates or fails to participate in both the initial and the rescheduled REA.

UI claimants must report in person to an AJC for staff-assisted services for the initial UI
REA. If a subsequent UI REA is conducted by telephone, state UI REA staff must ensure
that both they and the claimant have access to the claimant’s individual reemployment
plan for review and updating. The proposal must identify activities that are conducted by
telephone and the associated costs. The claimant’s activities must be reviewed, and any
proposed changes, along with the concurrence of the claimant, must be documented.

States must contact UI REA participants no later than the fifth week of the claim and
promptly schedule them for a UI REA. The fifth week in the claim series means the
fourth week after the week in which the claimant files an initial claim. If the claimant has
not yet established monetary eligibility for benefits or is not yet eligible because, for
example, a nonmonetary issue is pending adjudication, the claimant may be selected
during the first week that s/he claims benefits after being determined eligible for benefits.
It is not required that claimants who are not initially eligible be included in the treatment
or comparison group.

Up to three UI REAs for each individual claimant may be funded by the UI REA grant.
States should focus their UI REA programs on helping claimants return to work as
quickly as possible by providing comprehensive guidance and assistance to claimants
during the initial UI REA. States must also provide clear and complete information that
claimants need to access appropriate reemployment services. A second and third REA
may be avoided if the claimant returns to work as a result of the initial REA. Additional
UI REAs for an individual who has received the initial UI REA and two subsequent UI
REAs cannot be funded under the grant.

Funding for each individual UI REA may not exceed 2 hours of staff time. This time
includes all activities that are a part of the delivery of the UI REA and the associated
documentation of claims records and correspondence. If a portion of the UI REA is
provided in a group setting, the staff time for that activity should be divided by the
number of UI REA participants that are likely to be a part of the group activity. For
example, if two staff members conduct a group orientation session that lasts one and one
half hours and ten UI REA participants are expected to attend, the staff time devoted to
each UI REA participant for this activity would be 18 minutes. This is calculated as
follows:




                                          6

   90 minutes per member X 2 staff members = 180 minutes = 18 minutes per REA
                                             10 participants

C. Administrative Processes. States must establish or renew an agreement or
   Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the selected service provider organization
   to address the requirements of the FY 2014 UI REA program. The MOU must identify
   reemployment service needs and provide, at a minimum, the following services:

       •   Orientation to help claimants access self-service core services offered at AJCs
           through the resource room or virtually, with particular emphasis on accessing
           available labor market and career information;
       •   Registration with the state’s job bank;
       •   Referrals to appropriate services offered through AJCs such as self-assessments,
           education and training information, interviewing techniques, networking, career
           exploration, and online job and occupations resources; and
       •   Support in the development of the claimant’s reemployment plan that must
           include work search activities, appropriate workshops on topics such as resume
           writing and job search strategies if needed, and/or approved training.

   New states must submit a copy of the MOU or provide the date when it will be submitted.
   Continuing UI REA states must certify that a MOU or other agreement has been signed
   by all service partners for the UI REA program and remains in place. The agreement or
   MOU must confirm that the UI and workforce service providers, including state and local
   service partners, have agreed to collaborate to ensure that the requirements of the UI
   REA program will be met. This includes providing appropriate reemployment services to
   REA participants and providing the data that is needed for the ETA required reports.

D. UI Feedback Loop and Adjudication. Once selected for an REA, claimants are
   required to participate in all components of the UI REA. Failure to report or participate
   in any aspect of the UI REA must result in referral to adjudication of these issues under
   applicable state law. Claimants who contact the appropriate agency before their UI REA
   appointment and request to change the scheduled UI REA date or time for good reasons,
   such as scheduled job interviews, may be accommodated. They should be counted on the
   ETA 9128 as a “scheduled UI REA” rather than as a “rescheduled UI REA,” as explained
   in ET Handbook No. 401. As explained in Attachment A and Attachment B and as
   previously required, states must include in their proposals:

       •   A feedback loop from the AJC to the UI system as to whether the claimants
           reported as directed and participated in the minimum activities outlined in their
           reemployment plan;
       •   A feedback loop must be established to refer any eligibility issues uncovered in
           the eligibility review for adjudication, and
       •   A process for referring to adjudication UI claimants selected for UI REAs who
           failed to report for them without contacting the agency.



                                            7

   E. Performance and Reporting. A measure of program effectiveness is derived from
      comparing outcomes of UI REA program participants with outcomes from a similar
      group of claimants who did not participate in the UI REA program. States must establish
      both a treatment group and a valid comparison group, as discussed in paragraph 6 below.
      New states must also implement this methodology. A description of the methodology to
      be used is not required to be included in the new state’s UI REA proposal. ETA staff will
      work with new states to develop an appropriate comparison group methodology prior to
      implementation. States may contact their ETA regional office to request that a
      conference call be conducted with ETA National Office staff for assistance. Once the
      design has been identified, new states should submit a description of the process to the
      ETA Regional and National offices.

      States must submit timely UI REA required reports, ETA 9128 and ETA 9129 (OMB
      approval No. 1205-0456). These reports are due on the 20th day of the second month
      following the end of the reporting quarter. Schedules for the submission of each report
      are provided in the Unemployment Insurance Reports Handbook, ET Handbook No. 401.
      These reports capture specific data about the UI REA program participants and the
      comparison group. States must create methods that provide the necessary cross-program
      coordination that ensures data quality. States submitting UI REA proposals for the first
      time should request funds to program these required reports. States that currently operate
      a UI REA program have previously received funds for the development of these reports.

      States must agree to participate in any ETA-funded evaluations of the effectiveness of the
      UI REA program. Results may be used for a report(s) to Congress. States selected to
      participate in the current REA evaluation should calculate costs based upon the study
      design that has been developed in conjunction with the evaluation contractor. In
      addition, states must participate in periodic UI REA conference calls and webinars to
      facilitate information sharing and technical assistance.

      States that have implemented a UI REA program must review their reported data for the
      most recent four-quarter period and confirm the accuracy of the data in a narrative
      attached to the FY 2014 UI REA grant proposal. The narrative should explain the steps
      the state is taking to correct any errors in the data identified by ETA and the state. It
      should also address negative results that occur over multiple reporting periods in
      measurements of average duration, benefits per claimant, percent exhausting, and percent
      reemployed for REA participants compared to the control group. The narrative should
      also address planned changes that will be implemented to improve data quality.
      Attachment D has been developed to help states identify reporting problems. The
      quarterly summary of data includes comparisons of the workload activities and of the
      outcomes. States should use these summaries in preparing the narratives for their
      proposals, and the National Office will use these summaries to evaluate the state’s
      proposal for a FY 2014 UI REA grant.

6. UI REA Methodology and Required Reports. Accurate reporting is critical to the success
   of the UI REA program. State funding is based upon the number of UI REAs scheduled;
   activities related to these UI REAs are reported on the ETA 9128. The outcomes report

                                              8

   measures the results of both the UI REA treatment group and the comparison group.
   Outcomes are reported on the ETA 9129. This measurement quantifies the differences
   between claimants who have been selected to participate in a UI REA and a group of
   claimants who have similar characteristics but have not been selected to participate.
   Claimants who have similar expectations of returning to work are assigned to the treatment
   or comparison group at the time that the REA treatment group is selected. Random selection
   of the comparison group provides the most valid means of measuring differences. The
   minimum size of the comparison group is 20 percent of the treatment group but some
   exceptions may be granted for small offices. States wishing to include small offices in which
   the population may be insufficient to provide a 20 percent control group should request
   assistance prior to programming the ETA 9129. Many states elect to use the WPRS model to
   select REA participants and the treatment group. Those claimants who are most likely to
   exhaust must be referred to WPRS services and are excluded from the REA program. After
   the WPRS claimants have been excluded the state may use an array of claimants with mid-
   range scores, selecting claimants in a sequence for the treatment or comparison group.
   Claimants served by any offices that are not providing REAs should be excluded both from
   the REA treatment and comparison groups. Claimants in the treatment and comparison
   groups should also be selected at the same week in the claims series to ensure an even
   comparison.

   These crucial data are used for reports to Congress on the UI REA program and for
   budgeting purposes. States submit both reports on a quarterly basis and are responsible for
   ensuring that the data reported are accurate and the reports are submitted timely. These data
   are entered into the UI Web-based reporting system. Reporting instructions for both reports
   are contained in ET Handbook No. 401, and the edit checks for these reports are contained in
   ET Handbook No. 402.

7. Proposal Format and Instructions. The format and instructions for preparing the UI REA
   grant proposals are provided in the attachments to this UIPL. Attachment A provides
   guidance for states that have not received a UI REA grant before this fiscal year. Attachment
   B contains the elements that must be included in an abstract that must accompany all
   proposals. Attachment C is the information required from states currently operating a UI
   REA program. All pages in the state’s proposal should be numbered.

   Each proposal should contain both the name and telephone number of the state Administrator
   who is to be notified of approval of the grant and the name, telephone number, and email
   address of the individual who can respond to questions about the proposal.

   Standard Form (SF)-424 and SF-424A must be submitted for all UI REA grants. The SF-
   424A requires a breakout of object class categories in item 6 of section B - Budget
   Categories. The breakouts must match the proposed expenditures.




                                               9

8. Funding Priority. Funds will be awarded in the following priority:

       A. Fund continuing state UI REA programs at their current REA level;
       B. Fund new state UI REA programs at the minimum level (see Attachment A. Section
          2.A.);
       C. Fund continuing state UI REA programs currently funded at 10,000 REAs or below
          to expand to a higher level in increments of 10,000 REAs or less;
       D. Fund new state UI REA programs at a level greater than 10,000 REAs in increments
          of 10,000 or less,
       E. Fund continuing state UI REA programs currently funded in excess of 10,000 to
          expand to a higher level in increments of 10,000 REAs or less.

   Expansions will be based upon the state’s percentage of the national initial claims workload.
   States may be denied an expansion of funding if they:

       A. Have not implemented the program as required;
       B. Have significant reporting errors and/or an incorrect control group; or
       C. Have not demonstrated positive results for multiple reporting periods.

9. UI REA Grant Scoring Criteria for New UI REA Programs. The UI REA scoring
   criteria are explained in Attachment A and apply to states that have not previously operated a
   UI REA program. The highest scoring proposal will be funded first, followed in sequence by
   those with lower scores until all available funds are exhausted. Proposals scoring fewer than
   80 points will not be funded.

10. UI REA Grant Awards to States to Continue UI REA Programs. As described in section
    4, states currently operating a UI REA program should submit an abstract containing the
    information in Attachment B and provide the information requested in Attachment C. These
    proposals will not be scored but will be evaluated and funded after review and consultations
    with the states, if needed.

11. UI REA Proposal Procedures. We encourage states to work with ETA regional office staff
    in developing their proposals to ensure that:

   •   The UI REA program is designed to meet the needs of UI claimants;
   •   UI and AJC staff work cooperatively in planning, developing, testing, and implementing
       this program;
   •   The proposed expenditures are justified and appropriate; and
   •   The state is prepared to develop systems for collecting data for the required reports.

12. Timelines.

   •   States must submit proposals to the National Office by April 11, 2014.
   •   Award notifications will be issued by April 30, 2014.



                                               10

   •   States must submit an SF-424 signed by the state Agency Administrator and an SF-424A
       with the proposal. If any changes are required after review of the proposal, revised forms
       or proposals will be required before award of the grant funds.

13. Action Requested. State Administrators are requested to:

   •   Provide information contained in this UIPL to appropriate staff.
   •   Send, via email, an electronic copy of the proposal and a summary of the UI REA Grant
       proposal to [email protected].

14. Inquiries. Please direct questions to the appropriate Regional Office.

15. Attachments.

   •   Attachment A - Unemployment Insurance (UI) Reemployment and Eligibility
       Assessment (REA) Proposal Outline for First Year UI REA Grants
   •   Attachment B - Elements of an Unemployment Insurance (UI) Reemployment and
       Eligibility Assessment (REA) Grant Proposal Abstract
   •   Attachment C - Unemployment Insurance (UI) Reemployment and Eligibility
       Assessment (REA) Proposal Outline for States Continuing a UI REA Program
   •   Attachment D - The Unemployment Insurance (UI) Reemployment and Eligibility
       Assessment (REA) Data Concerns




                                               11

Attachment 1 (official PDF: https://www.dol.gov/sites/dolgov/files/ETA/advisories/UIPL/2014/UIPL_10_14_Attachment_A_Acc.pdf)

Attachment A

    UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE (UI) REEMPLOYMENT AND ELIGIBILITY
    ASSESSMENT (REA) PROPOSAL OUTLINE FOR FIRST YEAR UI REA GRANTS


1. UI REA Grant Project Summary. States applying for a UI REA grant for the first time
   must use this outline to develop their proposal to implement the UI REA program. All
   proposals must include an abstract of the UI REA grant proposal containing the elements
   described in Attachment B, Elements of an Unemployment Insurance (UI) Reemployment
   and Eligibility Assessment (REA) Grant Proposal Abstract. Proposals should include only
   the information required in this outline. Additional narrative is not needed and does not help
   or enhance the state’s proposal.

2. Project Costs. Proposals must include a description of all proposed expenditures and a
   projected schedule for significant project activities. The costs should be identified separately
   as start-up costs and projected costs for 1 year of operation. The expenditures for the start-up
   activities are part of the grant and are subject to its rules. Start-up costs include the costs of
   staff training, program implementation, automation costs related to the delivery and record
   keeping necessary for the UI REA program, and the costs of completing the ETA 9128 and
   the ETA 9129 (OMB approval No. 1205-0353). ETA will not fund any proposal until the
   state has provided all of the required cost information to support its proposed expenditures.

   A. Fixed Minimum Costs: The proposal should include fixed minimum costs. As a part of
      the fixed minimum costs, the proposal should describe the costs to implement the UI
      REA program and to conduct the first 10,000 REAs. States may propose to conduct
      fewer than 10,000 assessments and should calculate costs accordingly. Fixed costs
      should also include the projected costs for programming the ETA 9128 and ETA 9129
      reports as a one-time cost. Reporting instructions can be found in Employment and
      Training (ET) Handbook No. 401, 4th Edition, and edits for these two reports can be
      found in ET Handbook No. 402, 5th Edition. These instructions should assist in
      determining the approximate programming time needed to develop these required reports.
      The costs for programming these reports should be clearly identified in the project costs.

       Incremental Costs: States should provide the number of REAs that they propose to
       conduct. If the state proposes to conduct more than 10,000 UI REAs, the proposal should
       also include incremental costs. These costs should be expressed as costs per 10,000 UI
       REAs or if the state is proposing to conduct fewer than 10,000 REAs the proposal should
       include the cost per REA. States that do not wish to perform more than 10,000 UI REAs
       do not need to submit this information. Incremental costs for additional REAs in excess
       of 10,000 consist of costs related to conducting the UI REA rather than costs such as
       development of management information systems. Regardless of the total number of
       proposed UI REAs, states should ensure that costs are provided in increments of 10,000
       UI REAs or less. It may be possible to fund a partial increase above the base of 10,000
       but not possible to fund a very large increase in the number of UI REAs. For example, a
       state proposing to schedule 40,000 UI REAs in Fiscal Year 2014 must provide costs
       associated with providing 10,000, 20,000, 30,000 and 40,000 UI REAs.

   B. Initial and Subsequent UI REAs: The total projected number of individual initial and
      subsequent (if any) UI REAs should be provided along with the projected cost for each
      type of UI REA. In addition, states should provide the number of projected UI REAs for
      which the claimant does not report along with the cost of rescheduling the UI REA.
      Claimants who do not report as scheduled must be referred to adjudication. They may
      also be rescheduled for a UI REA if the state chooses to do so. Rescheduling is not
      required.

3. Scoring Elements. The following elements are used to score the proposal. Scoring will be
   based on how well the elements listed below are addressed (i.e., information should clear,
   thorough, and relevant). Proposals must have a score of 80 points or more to be
   recommended for funding. Therefore, each element is important and should be addressed
   fully in the proposal. Proposals should use the following format.

   A. Project Costs (15 percent of total score):

       a. Staff Costs. The proposal must identify both state staffing needs and any contract
          staff needs. Staff needs should include the type of position, the expected number of
          staff hours, and the projected hourly cost. Staff cost estimates should reflect only
          actual hours to be worked on the REA program. Staff may be assigned to work part-
          time on the UI REA program, thus charging only the applicable hours to the UI REA
          grant. Staff costs for new UI REA programs may include costs to conduct the UI
          REA, costs for staff training, and costs for development of procedures. States should
          identify all staff costs for developing UI REA reports and programming requirements
          separate from the costs for providing UI REAs to claimants. Costs for administering
          the program may include management hours attributed directly to the REA program
          including UI staff as appropriate. States should include information in the following
          format for all staff requests.

                 Position Title        # Hours Cost Per Hour       Total Cost
                 UI REA Interviewer 120            $50             $6,000

          States must charge all staff time used for the UI REA program to a UI REA project
          code. Both management and other staff may be working on the UI REA program on
          a part-time basis while assuming other duties. Only the portion of work that accrues
          to the UI REA initiative may be funded under this grant. Thus, the proposal should
          identify only the project time that will be devoted solely to the UI REA project for all
          staff hours for which funding is requested.

          If contract staff is requested, documentation should include the type of position,
          estimated contract staff hours, anticipated costs per hour, and total cost.

       b. Other. The proposal may include costs for other activities and/or equipment not
          identified above. Each cost should be broken down to the specific cost item with a
          description of each cost and the associated costs for each item requested. All costs
          must be related to providing UI REAs to claimants.


                                               2

   c. Total Costs. The proposal must include the total funding request. Spreadsheets used
      to calculate and total these costs must be included.

B. Project Design (45 percent of total score): The description of the UI REA program
   should address the processes that will be put in place to ensure that all core components
   described in the guidelines of this UIPL are met. Proposals should include a brief
   narrative that addresses each of the following project design elements.

   a. A description of the collaborative process used to develop the UI REA design and/or
      to adapt the design to meet the new requirements and the types of partners engaged.

   b. The geographic locations where the UI REA program will be implemented.

   c. The proposal should identify the target group for the UI REA program. For example,
      states have tried various methods, including focusing on those claimants more likely
      to exhaust their benefits, focusing on claimants with a lower profiling score who
      might be likely to return to work more quickly, and focusing on claimants who have
      job skills that are in high demand. In deciding which population to target with the UI
      REA program states should reflect on the two goals of the UI REA program, which
      are to help claimants return to work quickly, thus reducing Trust Fund expenditures
      and to reduce improper payments.

   d. The point(s) in time in the claims series when claimants will be notified of their
      scheduled UI REA(s).

   e. A description of whether the state will conduct single or multiple UI REAs for
      individual claimants. If multiple UI REAs are conducted for claimants, provide the
      projected schedule and the number of UI REAs the state anticipates scheduling for
      each claimant who remains unemployed.

   f. An explanation of how claimants from the target group will be assigned to the UI
      REA treatment group and how they will be assigned to the comparison group. The
      state should strive for random assignment to the comparison group to provide an
      automated means of determining the success of the UI REA program.

   g. A description of how the various UI REA components will be staffed. This should
      include a description of how UI staff expertise will be included in the management
      team. States should ensure that proposed staffing arrangements have been agreed
      upon by all parties before submitting the UI REA proposal.

   h. A description of how the state will leverage UI REA funds with funding under the
      Workforce Investment Act (WIA), Wagner-Peyser, and other programs to better serve
      the UI claimants.

   i. An explanation of how American Job Centers (AJCs) will provide the services
      identified in the Guidelines section (Section 5 of this UIPL), to identify
      reemployment needs, orientation to help claimants access self-service core services
      offered through the AJC (including labor market and career information), ensure

                                            3

       registration in the state’s job bank, make other referrals to AJC services, and support
       the development of the claimant’s reemployment plan.

   j. A copy of the agreement or Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) must be
      submitted with the implementation proposal (this applies to first year states). In the
      event that the MOU is under development and has not yet been finalized, states
      should provide the anticipated date of completion and should submit a copy of the
      MOU soon after that date. The requirements for MOUs are discussed in more detail
      in paragraph 4 below.

   k. A description of how staff will be trained to identify eligibility issues and how these
      issues will be referred to UI adjudication staff.

   l. A description of how eligibility assessments will be structured.

   m. A description of the proposed individual reemployment plan, including the elements
      of the plan and the arrangements for completing the plan (i.e., the claimant will
      complete a form which will be reviewed and revised as necessary during the REA
      interview).

   n. A description of how information will be shared among UI, Wagner-Peyser, and WIA
      staff and workforce staff and how the work search plan and related activities will be
      documented.

   o. A description of the processes that will make up the feedback loop to provide
      information to the UI program staff, as appropriate, about the results of referrals to
      reemployment services, issues that arise during the eligibility review interview,
      and/or any failure to report for the REA.

In addition, states must provide brief answers to the elements below. This information will
be shared with states seeking assistance to implement or change a UI REA project. It will
also be used to provide information, as needed, for UI management staff. The information
will be compiled and will be available to all states. This information is not used for scoring
purposes and an extensive narrative is not needed.

Identify which staff will conduct each of the UI REA key components on the initial UI REA,
whether each element of the UI REA will be conducted on an individual basis or in a group
setting, and the average time required for each activity. Both the eligibility review and the
development of an individual reemployment plan must be provided on a one-on-one basis.
Claimants may be provided forms in a group setting which they will discuss with staff one on
one after completion. States must identify the program office in which the staff works such
as UI, Employment Service (ES), or other. Any additional activities should be included in
the table. The sum of the average time for each activity below should be equal to the time for
the complete initial UI REA.




                                             4

                                      Initial REAs

                                                                 Individual/   Average
          Activity                                  Staff          Group        Time
     Eligibility Review
     Labor Market Information
     Individual Reemployment Plan
     Orientation
     Referral to Reemployment Services

States planning to conduct multiple UI REAs for individual claimants should provide the
activities, type of staff involved, whether an individual or group service(s) and the average
time for a subsequent UI REA(s). States should identify the program office in which the
staff works such as UI, ES, or other. Any additional activities should be included in the
table. The sum of the average time for each activity below should be equal to the time needed
to complete a subsequent UI REA.

                                   Subsequent REAs

                                                 Individual or     Check if by Average
           Activity                  Staff         Group           Telephone Time
     Eligibility Review
     Labor Market Information
     Individual Service Plan
     Orientation
     Referral to
         Reemployment
         Services

C. Performance Accountability and Reporting (15 percent of total score): The proposal
   should identify areas in which UI program performance is expected to improve as a result
   of the UI REA program, such as increasing the numbers of UI claimants receiving
   workforce services, improved employment outcomes, reductions in average benefit
   duration, and reductions in improper payments. The proposal should also explain how
   expected performance improvements will be measured. In addition, the narrative should
   contain an affirmation that the state will comply with the UI REA reporting requirements
   as described in section 7 of this Unemployment Insurance Program Letter (See Handbook
   No. 401, 4th Edition).

D. Estimated Time and Cost for Each Assessment (15 percent of total score): The
   proposal must include an estimate of the time and the cost requirements for each UI REA.
   The total time funded for an individual UI REA cannot exceed two hours. If appropriate,
   varying levels of service may be specified in conjunction with varying costs, e.g., it may
   cost less to serve claimants who are determined to be "job ready." Enough information
   should be provided to explain how the state determined the projected staff costs and
   projected staff time for the various components of the assessment that were used to
   determine the maximum number of UI REAs that could be accomplished based upon the
   grant amount requested.
                                             5

   E. Project Timeline (10 percent of total score): A timeline of the project must be
      included that identifies significant milestones in implementing the program, including
      project design, and any staff training. The timeline should include a projected date for
      completion of programming the selection of participants and tracking of participants. It
      should also include the projected completion date of the UI REA required reports (the
      ETA 9128 and the ETA 9129), and the date that the first UI REAs will be offered.
      Scoring will be based upon the thoroughness of the timeline provided by the state.

4. Collaboration with Service Providers. UI and appropriate service providers who partner
   with UI for the UI REA program must develop an agreement or MOU. This ensures that the
   necessary partners commit to providing reemployment services as required by the grant.
   The MOU must include a commitment of the staff necessary to perform the REA tasks.
   States must submit a copy of the agreement or MOU. If the agreement/MOU has not been
   finalized, the state must provide the estimated date of submission. The agreement or MOU
   must contain:

   •   Names of all parties to the agreement;
   •   A brief description of the collaborative process jointly developed;
   •   Identification of the types of staff responsible for providing the specific services;
   •   Description(s) of how feedback will be provided; and
   •   Description(s) of the role of the service providers.

F. Supporting Materials: States may attach additional materials that will support the proposal.




                                                 6

Attachment 2 (official PDF: https://www.dol.gov/sites/dolgov/files/ETA/advisories/UIPL/2014/UIPL_10_14__Attachment_B_Acc.pdf)

Attachment B


          ELEMENTS of an UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE (UI)
  REEMPLOYMENT and ELIGIBILITY ASSESSMENT (REA) GRANT PROPOSAL
                             ABSTRACT



State Name:

Name and Title of the State Agency Administrator:
Name:
Title:
Address:
UI REA Program Lead/Contact                                    Name:
    The person who can answer questions about the UI
    REA proposal.                                              Telephone:

                                                               E-mail:

UI Program Lead/Contact                                        Name:
   The person who can answer questions about the UI
   aspects of the REA proposal. This person may also be        Telephone:
   the UI REA Program Lead/Contact.
                                                               E-mail:


Total UI REA Funds Projected to Remain after March 31,         $
2014

Total UI REA Project Cost                                      $
The total amount of funds requested.
Total Service Delivery Staff Cost                              $
The total amount of funds requested for staff solely to
    conduct the UI REAs excluding management costs
    and other costs that are not related to service delivery
    such as programming.
Total Management Costs                                         $
The total amount of funds requested for management costs
    excluding cost of staff who will conduct the UI REAs.
Total Information Technology (IT) Staff Costs                  $
The total amount of funds requested for programming and
    other IT staff costs
Staff and Management Costs for a Single Initial UI REA         $
The sum of service delivery staff costs and management
    costs divided by the number of planned initial UI
    REAs.

Staff and Management Costs for a Single Subsequent UI           $
     REA
The sum of service delivery staff costs and
     management costs divided by the number of planned
     subsequent UI REAs, not to exceed 2 subsequent UI
     REAs per claimant. If costs for the second and third
     REA are expected to differ please provide both.
Staff Training Costs                                            $
The total amount of funds requested for staff training to
     conduct UI REAs.
Projected Time for a Single Initial UI REA, Including
     Paperwork
The total time spent preparing for and conducting a single
     initial UI REA, recording results, and other
     documentation. The funded time cannot exceed 2
     hours.
Projected Time for a Single Subsequent UI REA,
     Including Paperwork
The total time spent preparing for and conducting a single
     subsequent UI REA, recording results and other
     documentation. If times for the second and third REA
     are expected to differ please provide both.
Projected Costs for a Single UI REA for which the               $
     Claimant Fails to Report
The total costs spent preparing for a single UI REA for
     which the claimant subsequently fails to report. This
     estimate should not include the costs of adjudication
     which are separately funded.
Total Number of UI REAs Projected to be Completed
The total number of UI REAs the state will schedule
     during the grant period for which the claimant will
     report and participate in an REA.
Total Number of UI REAs Projected for which the
     Claimant will Fail to Report
The total number of UI REAs the state will schedule
     during the grant period for which the claimant will fail
     to report and will not participate in an REA.
Total Number of UI REA Sites
The total number of sites where UI REAs will be
     conducted. States requesting funds to expand the
     numbers of UI REAs should provide the number of
     sites at both the current and the expanded levels.
Type of Staff Conducting UI REAs
Description of the staff that will conduct the UI REAs
     (e.g., UI, American Job Center, or a combination).
Memorandum of Understanding (MOU)
Is it signed and operational? (Yes or No)
If no, provide the estimated date that the MOU will be
                                                  2

   signed and operational. New states should submit a
   copy of the MOU when it has been signed.

UI REA Required Reports
If a state does not include a narrative regarding how it will
     address any data problems, the Supplemental Budget
     Request will not be funded. Please confirm that a
     narrative has been included by indicating “yes.”




                                                  3

Attachment 3 (official PDF: https://www.dol.gov/sites/dolgov/files/ETA/advisories/UIPL/2014/UIPL_10_14_Attachment_C_Acc.pdf)

Attachment C


    UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE (UI) REEMPLOYMENT AND ELIGIBILITY
     ASSESSMENT (REA) PROPOSAL OUTLINE FOR STATES CONTINUING A UI
                            REA PROGRAM


1. UI REA Grant Project Summary. States should follow this outline to develop proposals to
   continue the UI REA program. All proposals must include an abstract of the UI REA grant
   proposal containing the elements listed in Attachment B, Elements of the Unemployment
   Insurance (UI) Reemployment and Eligibility Assessments Proposal Abstract. Proposals
   should include only the information required in this outline. Additional narrative is not
   helpful and does not enhance the state’s proposal.

   Proposals from continuing UI REA states are not scored. Requests to expand a state’s UI
   REA program are subject to funding availability.

2. Project Costs. Proposals must include a description of all proposed expenditures and a
   projected schedule for significant project activities. States may elect to provide UI REAs at
   the same level as the prior year or they may elect to expand the UI REA program. If the state
   is implementing at the current level, incremental costs are not needed.

   A. Fixed Costs: Include fixed costs related to conducting an equal number of UI REAs as
      funded in Fiscal Year 2013.

   B. Incremental Costs: If the state proposes to increase the number of UI REAs, the
      proposal should also include incremental costs. These costs should be expressed as costs
      per 10,000 REAs or less.

   C. Initial and Subsequent UI REAs: The total projected number of individual initial and
      subsequent (if any) UI REAs should be provided along with the projected cost for each
      type of UI REA. In addition, states should provide the number of projected UI REAs for
      which the claimant does not report along with the estimated cost of rescheduling the UI
      REA. Claimants who do not report as scheduled must be referred to UI adjudication.
      They may also be rescheduled, as appropriate.

       a. Staff Costs. The proposal should identify both state staffing needs and any contract
          staff needs. Staff needs should include the type of position, the expected number of
          staff hours, and the projected hourly cost. Staff cost estimates should reflect only
          actual hours to be worked. Staff may work on the UI REA program part-time and on
          other projects part-time and must charge their time to each task based on hours
          worked. Staff costs for continuing states should primarily include costs for
          conducting the UI REA and should not exceed two hours for an individual UI REA.
          Management costs should also be identified, as appropriate. States should include
          information in the following format for all staff requests:

                 Position Title        # Hours Cost Per Hour       Total Cost
                 UI REA Interviewer 120            $50             $6,000

          States must charge all staff time used for the UI REA program to a UI REA project
          code. Both management and other staff may be working on the UI REA program on
          a part-time basis while assuming other duties. Only the portion of work that accrues
          to the UI REA initiative may be funded under this grant. Thus, the proposal should
          identify only the project time that will be devoted solely to the UI REA project for all
          staff hours for which funding is requested.

          If contract staff is involved, documentation should include the type of position,
          estimated contract staff hours, anticipated costs per hour, and total cost.

       b. Other. The proposal should include costs for other activities and/or equipment not
          identified above. Each cost should be broken down to the specific cost item with a
          description of each cost and the associated costs for each item requested. All costs
          must be related to conducting UI REAs for UI claimants.

       c. Total Costs. The proposal should include the total funding request. Spreadsheets
          used to calculate and total these costs should be included.

3. Information about the UI REA Program. States should provide brief answers to the
   elements below. This information will be shared with states seeking assistance to implement
   or change a UI REA program. It will also be used to provide information, as needed, for UI
   management staff. The information will be compiled and will be available to all states. An
   extensive narrative is not needed.

   A. UI REA Staffing and Time. Identify the following: 1) the type of staff conducting each
      of the UI REA key components for the initial UI REA; 2) whether the UI REA is
      conducted on an individual basis or in a group setting (the eligibility review and the
      development of the individual reemployment plan must be done on an individual basis);
      and 3) the average time required for each UI REA activity. Both the eligibility review
      and the development of an individual reemployment plan must be provided on a one-on-
      one basis. Claimants may be provided forms in a group setting which they will discuss
      with staff one on one after completion. Staff identification should contain the name of
      the program office for these staff such as UI, the Employment Service (ES), or other.
      Any additional key activities should be included in the table. The sum of the average
      time for each activity below should be equal to the time required to complete the initial
      UI REA.

                                          Initial REA

                                                                Individual/     Average
                Activity                            Staff         Group          Time
       Eligibility Review
       Labor Market Information
       Individual Reemployment Plan

                                               2

    Orientation
    Referral to Reemployment Services

   If the state conducts multiple UI REAs for individual claimants, provide the following:
   1) the type of staff conducting the subsequent UI REA; 2) whether it is conducted on an
   individual basis or in a group setting; and 3) the average time required for each UI REA
   activity. Staff identification should contain the name of the program office for these staff
   such as UI, the ES, or other. Any additional key activities should be included in the
   table. The sum of the average time for each activity below should be equal to the time
   required to complete the subsequent UI REA.

                                    Subsequent REA

                                                 Individual/      Check if by Average
         Activity                Staff             Group          Telephone    Time
 Eligibility Review
 Labor Market
     Information
 Individual
     Reemployment Plan
 Orientation
 Referral to
     Reemployment
     Services


B. Service Delivery Staff. Provide information about the type of staff managing the REA
   project and the type of staff conducting the UI REA. In accordance with the new UI
   REA guidelines implemented in 2013, a UI staff member must be available to work on
   program management. Provide an explanation of the UI staff role in management. The
   delivery of the UI REA may be assigned to the staff designated by the state, e.g., UI staff,
   Wagner-Peyser staff, Workforce Investment Act (WIA) staff, or some combination. If
   Wagner-Peyser or WIA American Job Center (AJC) staff members conduct the UI REA,
   briefly describe how they are trained to conduct the UI eligibility review.

C. Selection of UI REA Participants. Identify the pool from which both UI REA
   participants and the comparison group are selected. Describe how claimants are assigned
   to these two groups and at what point in the claims series these selections are made. If
   the Worker Profiling and Reemployment Services (WPRS) program is used, states must
   explain which claimants in the WPRS pool are selected for the UI REA treatment group
   and comparison groups. Note that claimants selected for the WPRS program cannot be
   selected for the UI REA treatment group or the comparison group for the UI REA
   program.

D. Description of a UI REA. Provide a brief description of the state’s UI REA, including
   the elements of the UI REA and how the key components identified in this
   Unemployment Insurance Program Letter are implemented. In addition, please describe
   the type of staff that will provide each of the components of the UI REA (provision of
                                             3

   labor market information, development of the reemployment plan) and what format is
   used (group or individual). Please include a copy of the form that is used to develop the
   individual reemployment plan.

E. Scheduling the UI REA in the Claims Series. Claimants should also be selected at the
   same week in the claims series to ensure an even comparison. Claimants must be
   contacted and notification must be sent to the claimant advising of a scheduled UI REA
   by the fifth week in the individual’s claim series. The fifth week in the claim series
   means the fourth week after the week in which the claimant files an initial claim. If the
   claimant has not yet established monetary eligibility for benefits or is not yet eligible
   because a nonmonetary issue is pending adjudication, the claimant should be selected
   during the first week that s/he claims after being determined eligible for benefits.

F. Single or Multiple UI REAs. Identify whether the state plans to conduct single or
   multiple UI REAs for each claimant and indicate the timing within the claim series when
   the UI REA and any subsequent UI REA(s) will be conducted. Multiple UI REAs that
   exceed one initial UI REA and two subsequent UI REAs per individual claimant will not
   be funded.

G. Failure to Report for a UI REA. Describe the actions taken when claimants fail to
   report for UI REAs, including how claimants will be notified of the potential
   consequences of their failure to report as scheduled and/or failure to participate in the UI
   REA. Also, states must describe how it provides claimants information such as a contact
   number to notify the state in advance that s/he will be unable to attend the scheduled UI
   REA. Describe the feedback system that is in place to notify appropriate UI adjudication
   staff when claimants fail to report for scheduled UI REAs. In addition, describe the
   state’s rescheduling policy and processes.

H. Collaboration with Service Providers. An agreement or Memorandum of
   Understanding (MOU) must be renewed by UI and appropriate service providers who
   partner with UI for the UI REA program. This ensures that the necessary partners
   commit the staff necessary to provide reemployment services as required by the grant.
   States that have previously submitted a copy of the agreement do not need to submit a
   copy of the agreement or MOU. If the agreement/MOU has not been finalized, the state
   must provide the estimated date of submission. In addition, the agreement or MOU must
   contain:

   •   Names of all parties to the agreement;
   •   A brief description of the collaborative process jointly developed;
   •   Identification of those who will provide the specific services;
   •   Description(s) of how feedback will be provided; and
   •   Description(s) of the role of the service providers.

I. UI REA Required Reports. States must review both the ETA 9128s and the ETA 9129s
   focusing primarily on the most recent four calendar quarters to address the accuracy of
   the reports. Attachment D, The Unemployment Insurance (UI) Reemployment and
   Eligibility Assessment (REA) Data Concerns, provides some guidelines for detecting
   problems; and states have been provided a quarterly summary that includes calculations
                                             4

   of some of the relationships between the data elements and the probable outcomes. In
   addition, the ETA national office sends a quarterly summary of UI REA data to each state
   and the ETA regional offices, which includes some calculations of outcomes and data
   relationships. This quarterly summary will be used during the review of the proposal.

J. Narrative Description of Data Reporting Problems. In a narrative, states should
   identify problems that they are having with any of the required reports and provide a plan
   to improve their reporting accuracy and timeliness. If in the past the state made
   significant corrections to these required reports, the date the corrections were made and
   the date after which the state’s data was correct/valid as a result of the changes should be
   included.

K. UI REA Activities to Share with Other States. If the state has implemented practices
   that would be helpful to share with other states, the state is requested to provide a brief
   summary of the practice. This information will be compiled and shared with other states.




                                             5

Attachment 4 (official PDF: https://www.dol.gov/sites/dolgov/files/ETA/advisories/UIPL/2014/UIPL_10_14_Attachment_D_Acc.pdf)

Attachment D

 THE UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE (UI) REEMPLOYMENT AND ELIGIBILITY
                ASSESSMENT (REA) DATA CONCERNS

The list below has been developed to help states in reviewing their Employment and Training
Administration (ETA) UI REA required reports. The list identifies data problems that have
occurred in some states and that must be corrected. Each quarter, the ETA national office
provides states and Regional Offices a spreadsheet that summarizes the UI REA data. States
should use the spreadsheets and the list below to assess whether they have data problems.
Proposals by states must address, in the narrative description of data reporting problems, all
problems identified in these data spreadsheets; the state’s response to these concerns will be
evaluated before funding UI REA grants for Fiscal Year 2014. States must describe their plans
to implement corrections and include a projected timeline for completion in the supplemental
budget request.

The Department has added a new guideline this year addressing the outcomes of claimants
scheduled for an REA. States should account for 100 percent of the scheduled and rescheduled
REAs on the ETA 9128. If the state is not meeting this percentage a narrative should explain the
steps that will be taken to correct this problem.

Each claimant that is scheduled for an REA may participate in the REA or fail to participate. If
the claimant fails to participate in the scheduled REA, the claimant may or may not be
disqualified depending on why the claimant failed to participate and how the issue was addressed
by the state. Claimants who have returned to work are not disqualified. Claimants who could
not report due to a job interview are also not disqualified. States are required to use the National
Directory of New Hires to determine whether the claimant failed to report due to employment. If
the claimant fails to participate in the REA, states are required to adjudicate the claimant’s
eligibility. It is not required that the claimant be rescheduled. The number of claimants
scheduled for an REA must be equal to the number of claimants who completed a UI REA and
the number of claimants who failed to complete a UI REA. If this total is not 100 percent of the
scheduled REAs, the state should examine the population that is not explained by the data. Since
the UI REA may be scheduled in one quarter and the claimant may report or fail to report in a
subsequent quarter, these percentages should average out over multiple calendar quarters.

                             ETA 9128 UI REA Workloads Report

A. UI REAs Scheduled (Item 2)

   This number should be compared to the number of UI REAs for which the state received
   funding. States should be scheduling quarterly UI REAs at a sufficient level to ensure that
   they will reach their funded level at the end of the year.

   UI REAs Scheduled should be approximately the sum of Item 3 UI REAs Completed and
   Item 15 No-shows. Note: Although there is some variation between quarters, this difference
   should even out over the year.

B. Reemployment Services or Training (Item 4)

   All UI REAs must include referral to a reemployment service. If the count in this item (Item
   4) is significantly less than the count in Item 3 UI REAs Completed, claimants may not be
   reporting as directed, they may not be referred as required, or the reemployment service
   providers may not be providing the appropriate workload count.

C. Disqualifications or Overpayments (Item 7)

   If this number is large compared to the number of UI REAs completed it is possible that the
   state is counting disqualifications or overpayments that are not a part of the UI REA. Both
   disqualifications and overpayments must be based on issues that were discovered as a result
   of the UI REA.

D. Separation Issues (Item 8)

   If this number is large compared to the number of UI REAs completed, it is possible that the
   state is counting disqualifications that are not a part of the UI REA. If the number is correct,
   the state should evaluate the initial claims process to determine if questions asked are not
   sufficient to identify separation issues.

E. Other Disqualifications (Item 12)

   If this number is large compared to the number of UI REAs completed, the state should
   review the disqualification codes to ensure that these issues should not instead be counted in
   items 8, 9, 10 or 11. The category Other should be used only when the disqualification does
   not fit in these other categories.
F. No-Shows (Item 15)

   Each claimant who fails to report for a UI REA should be referred to adjudication to
   determine whether they had good cause for failing to report and if they were able and
   available for work. This item should be approximately equal to the sum of items 16, 17, 18
   and 21.

G. Disqualifications for Failure to Report (Item 17)

   If the count is significantly lower than the number of no-shows, the state should ensure that
   those claimants who fail to report are being referred to adjudication.

H. No Disqualification (Item 21)

   All claimants who both failed to report and were not disqualified and not rescheduled should
   be counted.

I. Returned to Work (Item 22)

   The Social Security Number of claimants counted in Item 21 should be matched to the
   National Directory of New Hires to determine whether they have returned to work.


                                                2

                              ETA 9129 UI REA Outcomes Report


The number of claimants who established a UI benefit year in the report quarter is provided for
the Comparison Group in Item 1a and for the UI REA group in Item 2a. The number in Item 1a
should not be less than 10 percent of the number in Item 2a, as the comparison group must, at a
minimum, be 10 percent of the UI REA treatment group to provide a reasonable measurement.

The average duration is calculated by dividing the Total Weeks Compensated by the Number
Who Established a UI Benefit Year in the Report Quarter. These elements are located in items
1a and 1b for the Comparison Group and in items 2a and 2b for the UI REA Treatment Group.
The exhaustion rate is calculated by dividing the Number Exhausting Benefits by the Number
Who Established a Benefit Year in the Report Quarter. These elements are located in items 1a
and 1e for the Comparison Group and in items 2a and 2e for the UI REA Treatment Group. Both
the average duration and exhaustion rate should be reasonably similar to the state’s average
duration and exhaustion rate for the report quarter. If the duration is higher than the maximum
number of regular UI weeks, the program may be incorrectly including Extended Benefit
payments. If the duration and exhaustion rate are very low, the program may be incorrectly
including only one calendar quarter rather than the complete benefit year. If the difference of the
average duration between the Comparison Group and the UI REA Treatment Group is two weeks
or greater, there may be programming problems.

There should be some correlation between the average duration and the benefits per claimant.
For example, if the average duration differs between the two groups by one week, then the
benefits per claimant should differ by an amount approximately equal to the average weekly
benefit amount for the state. If not, it is likely that there are programming problems.

If there are very large variances in the percentages between quarters, it is likely that there are
programming problems.




                                                  3