FY 2013 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
                                                          May 6, 2013


ADVISORY:             UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE PROGRAM LETTER NO. 17-13

TO:                   STATE WORKFORCE AGENCIES

FROM:                 JANE OATES /s/
                      Assistant Secretary

SUBJECT:              Fiscal Year (FY) 2013 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 2013 UI REA grants.

2. References.
   • Unemployment Insurance Program Letter (UIPL) No. 10-12, Fiscal Year (FY) 2012
      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 are
   high priorities for the U.S. Department of Labor’s (Department) Employment and Training
   Administration (ETA). The UI REA program provides claimants an entry point to a full

 RESCISSIONS                                             EXPIRATION DATE
 None                                                    Continuing

   array of services available at American Job Centers (AJCs), formerly known as One-Stop
   Career Centers (see TEGL No. 36-11), 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 2012, 42 states operated a UI REA
   program.

   REA services may be delivered by UI staff, Workforce Investment Act (WIA) staff, or other
   AJC staff. 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 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 workloads and activities, and on 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. This data is used to assess the value of the UI REA program
   in the states and nationally.

4. FY 2013 Funding. While funding is available to continue the UI REA program in FY 2013,
   it is at a level that is lower than FY 2012. Therefore, current REA states may not receive the
   same level of funding as previously received and ETA will be limited in its ability to fund
   program expansions or new states. States with existing UI REA programs are encouraged to
   apply for grants to continue their program. 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 interested in implementing a UI REA program may also apply for
   funding though the availability of funding for new programs is not certain.

   A. Continuing UI REA State Programs. The FY 2012 funds were intended to be
      obligated by the state by March 31, 2013. 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 is September 30, 2013. Funds must be liquidated within 90
      days of that obligation deadline.

       The performance period for FY 2013 UI REA grants began on April 1, 2013, and ends on
       March 31, 2014. Funding has been provided to states, as necessary, to allow for the
       continuation of their REA programs and these amounts must be included in the state’s
       FY2013 grant proposal. All estimated cost figures for proposals for FY 2013 UI REA
       grants should be based on this time period. Any prior year funds remaining unobligated
       after March 31, 2013, should be applied to UI REAs conducted before the beginning of
       the FY 2013 UI REA grant period.

       Funding of the FY 2012 UI REA grant was based upon the number of REAs that the state
       proposed to schedule and the costs estimated by the state. States that have not scheduled
       the number of REAs that were funded in FY 2012 should use the remaining FY 2012

                                                 2

   funds to complete the projected workload and request funding for the balance of the FY
   2013 UI REA grant period. All continuing UI REA states must determine whether any
   FY 2012 UI REA funds were not obligated on March 31, 2013, provide this information
   in their FY 2013 UI REA grant application, and ensure that all FY 2012 UI REA funds
   are obligated before obligating FY 2013 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 address and 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 data that the state has
   provided on the quarterly Reemployment and Eligibility Assessment Workload Report,
   describe the state’s plans to correct the data, and provide a schedule of actions to take to
   correct the data. In addition, states must identify errors in outcomes data reported on the
   state’s REA reports, describe steps that the state will take to address any negative
   outcome(s), and provide a schedule for corrective action(s).

   States experiencing ongoing difficulties in reaching the workload and/or minimum
   comparison group level projected in their FY 2012 UI REA proposals should request a
   lower level of funding in FY 2013 than was provided in FY 2012. Proposals will be
   reviewed based solely on the information required in the application. States should
   include only the information required.

B. 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 on Attachment B. States
   should include only the information required in their application.

   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).

   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.

                                             3

5. New UI REA Guidelines. Two new requirements have been added for FY 2013 UI REA
   grants. First, UI staff must be engaged in REA planning, administration, and oversight as
   well as appropriate staff training on UI eligibility requirements. States that have not had UI
   involvement in the REA team 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,
   states that have not had sufficient UI staff participation have been unable to submit accurate
   ETA required reports. A full-time position is not required, but UI staff must be designated to
   work with the REA team as needed and must be made available and included in the functions
   discussed above.

   Second, states must report 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 are also counted as another scheduled REA and the
   results are counted when the claimant participates or fails to participate.

6. Basic UI REA Guidelines. UI REA funds must be used to assess the continued eligibility
   and reemployment needs of UI claimants. They are not to supplant ongoing UI grant funds
   devoted to eligibility reviews for claimants who are not selected for a UI REA. 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. The Worker Profiling
   and Reemployment Services (WPRS) program remains mandatory. 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.

   By applying for UI REA funding, states are agreeing to integrate the UI REA program with
   WIA and Wagner-Peyser funded services. Each completed REA will include a referral to a
   reemployment service and/or training. Reemployment services such as resume 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 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:

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




                                                4

       •   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;
       •   Registration with the state’s job bank;
       •   Orientation to AJC services;
       •   Development or review of a 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 the REA treatment within very limited
   restrictions. Claimants who have a definite return-to-work date must be excluded. In
   addition, states should 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 states decide to use only UI or only or only
   Wagner-Peyser or WIA staff to do UI REAs, states must ensure that the staff assigned
   has the necessary training.

   Many states elect to use the WPRS model to select REA participants and the treatment
   group. Those claimants who are most likely to exhaust their benefits must be referred to
   available WPRS services and are excluded from the UI REA program. After the WPRS
   claimants have been excluded, the state may use an array of claimants with mid-range
   scores selecting claimants 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 should also be selected at the same week in the
   claims series to ensure an even comparison.

   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


                                             5

   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 the UI REA without
   notifying the state beforehand, the state must refer the issue of the claimant’s
   non-reporting to the appropriate UI staff to be adjudicated under state law.

   UI claimants must report in person to an AJC for staff-assisted services as a part of 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 reemployment
   plan for review and updating and 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 should be selected
   during the first week that s/he claims benefits after being determined eligible for benefits.

   Up to three UI REAs for each individual claimant may be funded by the UI REA grant.
   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 two 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:

   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 2013 UI REA program. The MOU must identify
   reemployment service needs and provide, at a minimum, the following services:




                                            6

       •   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.

   States must submit a copy of the MOU or other agreement that is developed with service
   partners for the UI REA program with the REA proposal. 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 have been met.

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 to or to
   participate in any aspect of the UI REA should 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
   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 in UIPL No. 10-12, 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; and
       •   A process for referring to adjudication UI claimants selected for UI REAs who
           fail to report for them without contacting the agency.

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 7 below.
   New states must also implement this methodology. A description of the methodology to
   be used is not required to be included in the 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.


                                            7

       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 are expected to 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 studies of the effectiveness of the UI
       REA program. Results may be used for a report(s) to Congress. States are also expected
       to 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 2013 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 in measurements of average duration, benefits per
       claimant, percent exhausting, and percent reemployed over multiple reporting periods
       such as a reemployment percentage that is lower for REA participants than for 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 2013 UI REA grant.

7. 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
   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

                                                8

   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 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 is 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. We will be reviewing the comparison group methodology and the
   possible use of the WIA common measures (entered employment, retention, and earnings) to
   determine the most useful method of measuring outcomes for the UI REA program during
   2013 and welcomes input from states regarding the best method of measuring UI REA
   outcomes.

8. 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 (OMB 4040-0004) and SF-424A (OMB 4040-006) 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. 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; and
       D. Fund new state UI REA programs at a level greater than 10,000 REAs in increments
          of 10,000.

   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:


                                               9

       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.

10. 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.

11. 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.

12. UI REA Proposal Procedures. States are encouraged to work with ETA Regional office
    staff while they are developing their proposals and should ensure that:

   •   The UI REA program design meets 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.

13. Timelines.

   •   States must submit proposals to the National Office by June 7, 2013.
   •   Award notifications will be issued by June 28, 2013.
   •   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.

14. 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].

15. Inquiries. Questions should be directed to the appropriate Regional Office.

16. Attachments.

   •   Attachment A - Unemployment Insurance (UI) Reemployment and Eligibility
       Assessment (REA) Proposal Outline for First Year UI REA Grants


                                               10

•   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/2013/UIPL_17_13_Att_A.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 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 helpful and does not 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 one 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. 1205-0456). 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.

   B. Incremental Costs: 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. 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 2013 must provide costs
      associated with providing 10,000, 20,000, 30,000 and 40,000 UI REAs.

   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 cost of rescheduling the UI REA.

       Claimants who do not report as scheduled must be referred to adjudication and they may
       be rescheduled for a UI REA.

3. Scoring Elements. The following elements are used to score the proposal. 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 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 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, separately, all staff costs for developing UI REA reports and programming
          requirements separate from the costs for providing UI REAs to claimants. Projects
          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 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 providing UI REAs to claimants.

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

   B. Project Design (45 percent of total score): The description of the UI REA program
      should address in detail 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.
                                               2

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 process for selecting UI claimants to be assessed. The proposal should identify
   the target group for the UI REA program. For example, states have tried various
   methods, including focusing on those claimants most 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.

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.

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 6 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
   registration in the state’s job bank, make other referrals to AJC services, and support
   the development of the claimant’s reemployment plan.

j. An explanation of how the state will secure a written agreement or Memorandum of
   Understanding (MOU) with participating AJCs. A copy of the agreement or MOU
   must be submitted with the proposal. 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 F 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.
                                         3

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

   m. 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.

   n. A description of the processes that will make up the feedback loop that will provide
      information to the UI program staff about the results of referrals to reemployment
      services.

   o. A description of any additional factors not covered in this list that will be a part of the
      project.

In addition, states are asked to 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 UI REAs will be conducted on an individual basis or in a group setting, and the
average time required for each activity. States should 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.

                                       Initial REAs

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

If the state plans to conduct multiple UI REAs for individual claimants it 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.




                                             4

                                       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.

   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 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. In
   addition, states in which the UI partner has entered into an agreement with AJC staff to
   provide the UI REA must gain a commitment of staff to perform the necessary 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. In addition, the agreement
   or MOU must contain:

                                                 5

   •   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.

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/2013/UIPL_17_13_Att_B.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,     $
    2013
The total amount of funds projected to remain from FY
    2012 (if applicable).
Total UI REA Project Cost                                  $
The total amount of funds requested.
Total Service Delivery Staff Cost                          $
The total amount of funds requested for staff to conduct
    the UI REAs excluding management costs.
Total Management Costs                                     $
The total amount of funds requested for
    administrative/management costs excluding cost of
    staff who will conduct the UI REAs.
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.
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.
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
The total number of UI REAs the state will schedule
     during the grant period.
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
Is the document attached? (Yes or No)
If no, provide the estimated date of submittal.
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 this
     was done by indicating “yes.”




                                                  2

Attachment 3 (official PDF: https://www.dol.gov/sites/dolgov/files/ETA/advisories/UIPL/2013/UIPL_17_13_Att_C.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 2012.

   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.
          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) which staff conducts 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; 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 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 Service Plan
       Orientation
       Referral to Reemployment Services

       If the state conducts multiple UI REAs for individual claimants, provide the following:
       1) 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
                                                2

   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 Service Plan
 Orientation
 Referral to
     Reemployment
     Services


B. Service Delivery Staff. Provide information about the type of staff managing the REA
   project and the staff conducting the UI REA. In accordance with the new UI REA
   guideline, 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
   labor market information, development of the reemployment plan) and what format is
   used (group or individual).

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
                                            3

   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 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 states
   rescheduling policy and processes.

H. Collaboration with Service Providers. An agreement or Memorandum of
   Understanding (MOU) must be developed or renewed by UI and appropriate service
   providers who partner with UI for the UI REA program. This ensures that the necessary
   partners commit to providing reemployment services as required by the grant. In
   addition, states in which the UI partner has entered into an agreement with AJC staff to
   provide the UI REA must gain a commitment of staff to perform the necessary 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. 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
   of some of the relationships between the data elements and the probable outcomes. In
   addition, the 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

                                            4

   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/2013/UIPL_17_13_Att_D.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 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 2013. 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 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. Claimants who have returned to work are 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. Under the new
guidelines, 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 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, as on average it is anticipated that the UI REA
program may reduce benefit duration by up to one week.

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