Expanded 2009 unemployment technology funding opportunity

UIPL31-09c1acc.pdf (https://www.dol.gov/sites/dolgov/files/ETA/advisories/UIPL/2009/UIPL31-09c1acc.pdf)

                                                  CLASSIFICATION
  Employment and Training Administration          UI
             Advisory System                      CORRESPONDENCE SYMBOL
        U.S. Department of Labor                  DUIO/SBR
         Washington, D.C. 20210                   DATE
                                                  August 21, 2009


ADVISORY:        UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE PROGRAM LETTER No. 31-09
                 Change 1

TO:              STATE WORKFORCE AGENCIES

FROM:            JANE OATES /s/
                 Assistant Secretary

SUBJECT:         Unemployment Insurance (UI) Supplemental Funding Opportunity for
                 Automated Integrity Related Systems: Including Systems to Improve
                 Services and/or Performance


    1. Purpose. To notify state workforce agencies of the availability of Fiscal Year
     (FY) 2009 UI funds for automation acquisitions that will allow states to
     implement technological improvements to better serve UI beneficiaries and
     employers, to accommodate large fluctuations in UI workloads, and/or to improve
     program integrity and/or performance.

    2. References. Unemployment Insurance Program Letter (UIPL) No. 31 – 09; ET
     Handbook No. 336, 18th Edition, State Quality Service Plans Planning and
     Reporting Guidelines.

    3. Background. UIPL 31 – 09 notified states that FY 2009 funds are available for
     technology based overpayment prevention, detection, and collections investments
     to support payment integrity activities. This Change 1 amplifies that
     supplemental funding opportunity to include projects targeted to improving
     certain services to UI beneficiaries and employers and to improving overall
     system performance.

    4. Use of Funds. Use of these one-time funds should be geared toward investments
     that will provide future returns. In addition to the activities described in
     UIPL 31-09, states may propose IT projects that are directly related to the
     activities below:

      •   Planning for modernization of UI benefits and tax information technology
          systems.

 RESCISSIONS                                           EXPIRATION DATE
 None                                                  August 21, 2010

                                        -2-

   •   Updating call center and interactive voice response system technology and
       expanding capacity to reduce busy signals/wait times and improve service
       quality.

   •   Implementing or improving electronic processes to speed benefit payments
       and tax collections (e.g., Internet services for UI benefits and tax services
       including UI appeals).

   •   Educating UI beneficiaries who receive benefit payments via debit card of
       associated fees and how to avoid these fees. An example of this activity
       includes development of automated functions to generate appropriate letters
       and messages to claimants concerning debit card fees.

   Examples of some of the activities for which funds are to be provided are
   described more fully in Attachment B to this UIPL. States may also submit other
   automation projects not described in the examples.

5. Application, Award, and Expenditure of Supplemental Funds. States may submit
   individual proposals for one or more of the purposes described above in one SBR
   package. Each proposal will be considered a section of the state’s SBR, and each
   proposal will be evaluated individually. In some instances, identical expenditures
   may be proposed in two separate projects, but only need to be funded in one of
   the projects. In such instances, the state should provide a brief explanation of the
   duplication to ensure that the same cost(s) is not funded twice.

   The Supplemental Budget Request Outline (Attachment A) will be used to
   evaluate the proposal. Each element should be addressed succinctly providing the
   specific information requested. Due to the tight timeframe for developing and
   submitting SBRs, states are asked to provide only the information requested.
   Information such as an introductory narrative is not necessary and does not add to
   the SBR score. Proposals that do not meet a minimum standard score of 80 points
   will not be funded.

   Some projects have a cap on the amount of funds that will be provided and others
   do not. Proposed expenditures should be described to explain and justify all
   requests. Proposals for maintenance and support of the projects described in
   Section 4 of Attachment B require no description(s); only information in items
   number 1 through 3 of Attachment A are needed for the SBR.

   After projects have been approved, an award letter will be issued to states listing
   all projects to be funded, the funding level of each, and the total funding level for
   the state. States must submit one SF-424 (OMB No. 4040-0004) and one SF-
   424A (OMB No. 4040-006) covering all of the approved projects.

   States must obligate the funds by September 30, 2011, and liquidate the
   obligations within 90 days of that date. Upon written request from the state, no
   later than August 31, 2011, the grant officer may extend the liquidation period
   only if the funds have been obligated to an outside contractor. An extension can

                                       -3-

   not be granted if the funds are intended for use by State Workforce Agency staff
   or by another state agency (see 29 CFR § 97.3).

   During the life of the project expenditures should be reported on the U. S. DOL
   ETA Fiscal Report (ETA 9130) in the remarks section. By applying for these
   individual projects, the state is agreeing that the projects will be completed with
   no additional Federal funding.

6. Project Management. If during the performance period states wish to move funds
   among categories within a project and the amount moved exceeds 20 percent of
   any category in the initially awarded amount for the project, a new SF-424A must
   be submitted to the Regional Office. These documents are then forwarded by the
   Regional Office for approval by the Grants Officer. The same requirement for
   approval applies to movement of funds between projects if the amount moved
   exceeds 20 percent of either the “donating” or “receiving” project as initially
   funded. States should consult with the Regional Office to determine the
   appropriate procedures for modifications of 20% or less.

   In addition states wishing to transfer funds in excess of $30,000 between projects
   must request approval by the Regional Office even if this transfer does not affect
   the reported categories on the SF-424A. States may not elect to abandon a single
   project that has been funded and move the funds to a different project that has
   also been funded. If an approved project is not undertaken by the state, the funds
   for that project must be returned to the Department.

7. OMB Approval. This Change 1 to UIPL 31-09 will be submitted (as an
   addendum to UIPL No. 31 – 09) to the Office of Management and Budget
   (OMB). ETA will notify states upon OMB approval and communicate any
   changes deemed necessary during the OMB approval process.

8. Action Requested. State Administrators are asked to:

   (a) Inform appropriate staff of this funding opportunity.

   (b) Determine activities for which the submission of SBRs would be appropriate.

   (c) Work with the Regional Office, as appropriate, to utilize their knowledge and
       technical expertise.

   (d) Submit SBRs to the National Office at [email protected], by September 2,
       2009, with a copy to the Regional Office. An e-mail response will be sent
       within 24 hours from the OWS SBR mailbox acknowledging receipt of the
       electronic document.

9. Inquiries. Inquiries should be directed to the appropriate Regional Office.

                                     -4-

10. Attachments.

   A.     Supplemental Budget Request Outline
   B.     Project Descriptions
                     1. Feasibility Studies – Modernization Planning for UI

                        Benefits and/or UI Tax Systems

                    2. Enhanced Call Center and/or Interactive Voice Response

                        System Technology

                    3. UI Appeals – Conversion from Tape to Digital Recordings

                        of Appeal Hearings

                    4. Maintenance and Support Costs for UI Automated Systems

                            a. SUTA Dumping Detection System (SDDS)

                            b. AutoCoder/OccuCoder™

                            c. State Information Data Exchange System (SIDES)

                    5. UI Data Validation for Benefits

                    6. UI Data Validation for Tax

                    7. Smart Schedulers and Related Automation for Appeals

                    8. State Information Data Exchange System (SIDES)

                            a. New Implementation

                            b. SIDES Employer Website (SEW) Enhancement for

                               Current Consortia States

                    9. AutoCoder Integration

                    10. Educating UI Beneficiaries about Debit Card Fees and How

                        to Avoid These Fees

                    11. Programming to Include Entire Name in UI Wage Records

UIPL31-09c1a1.pdf (https://www.dol.gov/sites/dolgov/files/ETA/advisories/UIPL/2009/UIPL31-09c1a1.pdf)

                                                                            Attachment A

                         Supplemental Budget Request Outline

1. Name of the Project:

2. Amount of Funding Request for this project: Provide the total dollars
requested for this proposal. By submitting this proposal, the state agrees to
complete this project without additional Federal funds.

3. State Contact: Provide name, telephone number and email address of the individual
who can answer questions related to this proposal.

4. Project Description: Explain in one paragraph what the funds will accomplish.

5. Project Timeline: The value of this element is 15 points. Provide a timeline
identifying the dates of significant steps in this project through the projected
implementation date.

6. Description of Costs: The value of this element is 15 points. States should use the
table format below to request state or contractor staff.

              Type of          Number of       Cost Per        Total
              Position         Hours           Hour            Cost


7. Hardware, Software, and Telecommunications Equipment: Provide an itemized
list of hardware, software and telecommunications equipment including the cost per item
and the number of each item requested. A description of each item should provide
information needed to identify the specific item and a description of the size and capacity
of each item, if applicable.

8. Other: Identify and explain the need for each item; provide expected cost per item.

9. Strategic Design: The value of this element is 35 points. Include a brief description
of the strategic project design identifying key reasons this project is needed. The
strategic design should provide evidence of a well-thought-out analysis of current
operations and show that the design will meet the state’s needs. Describe the current
problem(s) and how the project will address it, for example, a state may have a dropped
call rate of 30% of calls Monday/Tuesday due to the inability of the system to handle the
high call volume. Problems should be those that will be addressed through technology
rather than by just adding additional staff. For example, new/enhanced technology may
be needed before staff can be added to handle workload increases.

10. Measurable Improvements Expected in UI Operations: The value of this element
is 35 points. Identify which services or performance will be improved or on-going costs
reduced through implementation of the proposed project. Improvements and cost
reductions must be quantified and estimates must be reasonable (e.g., improvement might
be an estimated 20 percent decrease in the call drop rate of a Call Center taking claims).

UIPL31-09c1a2.pdf (https://www.dol.gov/sites/dolgov/files/ETA/advisories/UIPL/2009/UIPL31-09c1a2.pdf)

                                                                              Attachment B


                              PROJECT DESCRIPTIONS

1. Feasibility Studies - Modernization Planning for UI Benefits and/or UI Tax
Systems

Purpose: To provide funds for a state consortium to develop and administer a study to
determine the feasibility of designing, developing and implementing a core UI tax or a
core UI benefits system that could be used by multiple state workforce agencies. Many
state UI systems are out-of-date and in danger of failing. The cost to implement and
maintain these UI systems is considerable. A feasibility study would determine if a cost
effective model system could be developed that would contain UI tax or benefits core
functions which could subsequently be exported and implemented by other states without
the need to significantly customize the system, and/or be hosted in one state and
providing automated services to other states. The goal is for multiple states to share a
common core system that accommodates each state’s individual needs.

The states will jointly establish a project team to develop a planned approach for
collaboratively developing a Benefit or Tax system and will conduct a feasibility study to
evaluate the proposed plan. The system design, development and implementation
planning process as well as the feasibility study may require the assistance of one or more
contractors. One state must be willing to act as the lead contracting party for the
consortium for a given contract. The lead contracting state will be responsible for
developing and awarding a contract with the support and participation of the other
consortium states.

The consortium will be administered by a Steering Committee consisting of the Project
Lead from each of the participating states. Each state will provide project staff (program
and technical) to work as a Project Team. The Project Team will carry out the work of
the consortium based on the direction of the Steering Committee. The Project Team will
work with the other state consortium staff and contractor staff, as necessary, to provide
information that the contractor needs to develop, plan and design an approach for a
common Benefit or Tax system. The Project Team will seek input from and provide
feedback to other interested state staff as well as to regional and national office staff. The
consortium Project Team will be responsible for providing input for and reviewing the
Request for Proposal(s) (RFP) for any contract(s) and participating in or providing input
on the vendor selection, helping to define appropriate activities for the contractor(s), and
providing UI program and technical experts to support the feasibility study.

The consortium may also request via its SBR proposal that US Department of Labor re-
allot specific funds necessary for contracts to the lead state for that contract effort.

Examples of the lead state responsibilities:

                1. Coordinate all activities related to this effort with the other participating
          states.

                2. Develop, in consultation with participating states, an RFP for a feasibility
          study, lead in the selection of the contractor, and administer the grant award
          with the selected contractor.
                3. Host the selected contractor on-site to review tax or benefit operations and
          provide staff to support the effort and respond to requests for information.
                4. Develop and present the findings of the study (may include contractor
          participation) upon completion of the project.

Examples of the participating state responsibilities:

                1. Assist with development of the RFP.
                2. Attend meetings/conferences with lead and participating states.
                3. Host contractor on site to review tax or benefit operations and provide
          supporting staff to respond to specific requests for information.
                4. Assist in developing/presenting findings of the completed study.

To submit an SBR complete Attachment A (items #1 – 10)

2. Enhanced Call Center and/or Interactive Voice Response System Technology

Purpose: To meet the current needs of UI telephone systems. During periods of
extraordinarily high unemployment many call centers have been unable to withstand the
increased workload volume. Some states have call center technology that is out-dated
and in need of enhancements to provide quality service.

Examples of the use of funds may include:

        1. Modifying call center systems to reroute calls in a virtual call center system;

        2. Revising automated messages for claimants on the interactive voice response
      system;

        3. Implementing enhanced security systems;

        4. Linking call center systems to automated job listings;

        5. Implementing automated scheduling systems for adjudication, worker profiling
      and reemployment services, UI scheduling of claimants for interviews and/or
      appeals (see Smart Scheduler for Lower Authority Appeals in Section 7 of this
      Attachment);

        6. Implementing enhanced technology that will handle increased workload volume;

        7. Replacing out-of-date equipment for telephone claims taking: and

        8. Implementing automated out bound calling during off peak times for other UI
      activities like BPC overpayment recovery calls or job openings information for
      claimants.

To submit an SBR complete Attachment A (items #1 – 10)

3. UI Appeals - Conversion from Tape to Digital Recordings of Appeal Hearings

Purpose: Clear and reliable audio recordings of hearings are crucial to the UI Appeals
process. Recordings made from magnetic tape are archaic, cumbersome to store, and
most importantly, the quality deteriorates over time. The digital audio recording should
be able to capture, maintain, index, share, and archive a clear and accurate recording of
the Lower Authority Appeals (LAA) hearing. The system could also be used for Higher
Authority Appeals proceedings including hearings, reviews, additional testimony, etc.

The transformation from tape to digital recordings may include hardware, software,
sound integration and support. Proposed solutions need to integrate with the state’s LAA
processes, procedures, and policies.

Examples of the use of funds may include:

                1. Developing and issuing a Request for Proposal (RFP) to procure a vendor to
          purchase hearing audio recording equipment necessary to implement the new
          system.
                2. Purchasing and implementing a digital audio system for the state’s appeals
          hearing proceedings including both the purchase of necessary equipment and
          the development of the automated system to meet the state’s specific needs.
                3. Training staff in the use of the automated equipment and writing procedures,
          as necessary, to use the equipment efficiently.

To submit an SBR complete Attachment A (items #1 – 10)

4. Maintenance and Support Costs for UI Automated Systems

The amount of funding available is specified for the three (3) maintenance and support
projects listed below. For any of the 3 projects, states only need to provide information
in items #1 through #3 from the Supplemental Budget Request Outline (Attachment A).
States may submit a request for these funds using the examples below and may request
that the funds be deobligated to the Maryland Department of Labor, Licensing &
Regulation, which is the lead state for these projects.

a. SUTA Dumping Detection System (SDDS) – Maintenance/Support Consortium

Purpose: To provide states with funds for 2 years of support for their SDDS. The
existing SDDS state support agreements expire on September 30, 2009. A designated
lead state will be responsible for continued SDDS software and system support after
September 30, 2009.

Available Funds: Up to $7,000 is available for each state for 2 years of maintenance
and support ($3,500 per year) for its SUTA Dumping Detection System (SDDS). The 43
states that use the SDDS (designed by the State of North Carolina on behalf of USDOL)
may continue support through a designated lead state.

USDOL strongly encourages all 43 SDDS states to take advantage of this opportunity to
acquire system support for the next 2 years as it will provide access to the upgraded and
enhanced version of the original 2006 SDDS software. Most importantly, version 3 of
the software provides states the ability to remove older quarterly data from their SDDS
data base to create room to add new quarters. The ability to roll-off older data is critical
for continuing SDDS operations. Every state that obtains system support through this
SBR will have access to the new software release.

The continuing costs for maintenance and support of SDDS are $3,500 per year for each
state. The funds provided by this SBR will provide maintenance and support from
October 1, 2009 through September 30, 2011. The support funds will pay for
maintaining the system.

               Maintenance costs 10/1/09 – 9/30/10           $3,500
               Maintenance costs 10/1/10 – 9/30/11           $3,500
               Total                                         $7,000

The state may request funding as follows:

       The [State Workforce Agency Name] requests $7,000 for maintenance and
       support of the SUTA Dumping Detection System and requests that the U. S.
       Department of Labor reallot these funds to the Maryland Department of Labor,
       Licensing & Regulation to enter into an agreement with the Information
       Technology Support Center to provide the support for the SDDS software.

NOTE: A state that developed its own detection system for SUTA Dumping activities
may request up to $7,000 for maintenance and support costs for that system. Attachment
A (items #1 – 3) must be completed to request funds.

b. AutoCoder/OccuCoder™ – Maintenance/Support Consortium

Purpose: To provide states with funds for 2 years of support for their AutoCoder/
OccuCoder™ software. The existing AutoCoder support agreements expire on
September 30, 2009. USDOL will pay for continuing AutoCoder/OccuCoder™
software and system support after September 30, 2009.

Available Funds: Up to $14,000 is available for each state for 2 years of maintenance
and support ($7,000 per year) for its AutoCoder/OccuCoder™ software. The states that
use the AutoCoder/OccuCoder™ will obtain support through a designated lead state.

USDOL strongly encourages all states using AutoCoder/OccuCoder™ to take advantage
of this opportunity to acquire system support for the next 2 years as it will provide access
to an enhanced version of the original AutoCoder/OccuCoder™ system. Every state that
obtains system support through this SBR will have access to new software releases issued
during this time period.

The continuing costs for maintenance and support of SDDS are $7,000 per year for each
state. The funds provided by this SBR will provide maintenance and support from
October 1, 2009 through September 30, 2011. The support funds will pay for
maintaining the system.

               Maintenance costs 10/1/09 – 9/30/10           $7,000
               Maintenance costs 10/1/10 – 9/30/11           $7,000
               Total                                        $14,000

The state may request funding as follows:

       The [State Workforce Agency Name] requests $14,000 for maintenance and
       support of AutoCoder/OccuCoder™ and requests that the U. S. Department of
       Labor reallot these funds to the Maryland Department of Labor, Licensing &
       Regulation to enter into an agreement with the Information Technology Support
       Center to provide the support for the AutoCoder/OccuCoder™ software.

c. State Information Data Exchange System (SIDES) - Operations, Maintenance,
Enhancement and Support

Purpose: To provide states with funds for 2 years of operations, maintenance,
enhancement and support for SIDES for those states that are currently participating in
this initiative. Support activities will include: ensuring system availability and acceptable
system performance, defect correction, associated system testing, enhancements
approved by the consortium, technical assistance, and help desk support. These funds
will provide support the SIDES system through September 30, 2011.

Available Funds: Up to $300,000 is available for each state for 2 years of maintenance
and support ($150,000 per year) of the SIDES and the SIDES Employer Website (SEW).
The states that use the system will obtain support through the National Association of
State Workforce Agencies (NASWA), which provides for maintaining the system on
behalf of the consortium.

USDOL encourages all states to take advantage of this opportunity to acquire system
support for the next 2 years. Every state that obtains system support through this SBR
will have access to any new software releases issued during this time period. Further,
states that want USDOL to obligate these funds directly on their behalf to the designated
lead state should indicate this in their request.

The continuing costs for maintenance and support of SIDES are $150,000 per year for
each state. The funds provided by this SBR will provide maintenance and support from
October 1, 2009 through September 30, 2011. The support funds will pay for
maintaining the system.

               Maintenance costs 10/1/09 – 9/30/10         $150,000
               Maintenance costs 10/1/10 – 9/30/11         $150,000
               Total                                       $300,000

The state may request funding as follows:

       The [State Workforce Agency Name] requests $300,000 for maintenance and
       support of SIDES and requests that the U. S. Department of Labor reallot these
       funds to the Maryland Department of Labor, Licensing & Regulation to enter into
       an agreement with the Information Technology Support Center to provide the
       support for the SIDES software.

To submit SBR(s) the state may complete Attachment A (only information in items
#1 – 3 are needed for these support and maintenance projects); indicate whether the
state requests that USDOL reallot funds to the lead state (requests to reallot funds
may be transmitted via an email message (similar to the examples above) or
included on Attachment A).

5. Unemployment Insurance (UI) Data Validation for Benefits

Purpose: To obtain an independent (third party) verification that the state’s data validation
extract files meet Federal UI data validation requirements for benefits related reports. The basic
UI data validation design is for states to reconstruct the numbers/counts reported to USDOL’s
Employment and Training Administration on UI required reports. To do this, states write
computer programs that search their electronic databases and extract all transactions that should
have been reported.

This SBR funding is for states to obtain an independent verification that their computer programs
are extracting the correct transactions for each data validation “population.” States must submit
a copy of the independent verification certification to their respective Regional Office upon
completion. States that choose to obtain an independent verification may use any funds not
needed for the verification to correct errors in data validation extract files, complete data
validation implementation, train staff, and correct reporting errors discovered through data
validation.

This funding is available for states that have not yet received full funding of $100,000 (the
amount that was made available in a previous year’s SBR opportunity) for this purpose.

Examples of the use of funds may include:

                1. Developing a Request for Proposal (RFP) for data validation services from an outside
          vendor.
                2. Working with the selected vendor to provide information needed and to secure
          necessary data files including:
                 • writing programs to create the population 1-14 datasets,
                 • modifying existing computer systems to add new fields needed for data
                      validation, and
                 • updating the data validation Module 3 document – the state specific set of
                      instructions for the data validator, and
                3. Correcting reporting errors and ensuring that the corrections pass data validation
          guidelines.

To submit an SBR complete Attachment A (items #1 – 10)

6. Unemployment Insurance (UI) Data Validation for Tax

Purpose: To obtain an independent (third party) verification that state’s data validation extract
files meet Federal UI data validation requirements. The basic UI data validation design is for
states to reconstruct the numbers/counts reported to the Employment and Training
Administration on UI required reports. To do this, states write computer programs that search
their electronic databases and extract all transactions that should have been reported.

The data on the ETA 581, Contributions Operations, report is used for a variety of national and
programmatic purposes, including: Tax Computed Measures for UI Performs, BLS statistical
information, and workload measures for UI budget allocation. It is important for all states to
report the ETA 581 data on a consistent and comparative basis. Data validation ensures that
states report the same data elements by validating the logic used to identify the data elements.
For this reason, states have been required to validate certain data on the ETA 581 for 5 tax data
validation populations since 2006.

This funding is available for states that have not yet received full funding of $100,000 (the
amount that was made available in a previous year’s SBR opportunity) for this purpose.

Examples of the use of funds might include:

                1. Developing a Request for Proposal (RFP) for data validation services from an outside
          vendor,
                2. Working with the selected vendor to provide information needed and to secure
          necessary data files including:
                 • writing programs to create the population 1-5 datasets,
                 • modifying existing computer systems to add new fields needed for data
                      validation, and
                 • updating the data validation Module 3 document – the state specific set of
                      instructions for the data validator, and
                3. Correcting reporting errors and ensuring that the corrections pass data validation
          guidelines.

To submit an SBR complete Attachment A (items #1 – 10)

7. Smart Schedulers and Related Automation for Appeals

Purpose: UI Appeals hearings preparation activities in a state’s Lower Authority Appeals
(LAA) process are an important variable in achieving timeliness and meeting appeals
performance standards. Assessments of the LAA preparation activities should include a review
of the intake process, reviewing how a case file is created, what it contains, and how it is
scheduled as well as the mailing procedures and processes, and case management processes.
Many of these functions can be automated. Posting appeals electronically, supporting
documentations, and assigning docketing information should assist states in decreasing the time
from when an appeal is first received to when the hearing is actually held. An automated
docketing and scheduling system can allow states to better fill gaps in scheduling so hearing
officers minimize lost time/downtime. States can also consider automating the issuance of
hearing notices and LAA decisions.

Examples of the use of funds may include:

                1. Issuing a Request for Proposal (RFP) for an automated system of recordkeeping,
          filing procedures, case-flow processing, and scheduling orders.
                2. Managing the contract with the vendor ensuring that all system needs are clearly
          identified and incorporated into the proposed system.
                3. Implementing the case management software, hardware and peripherals, network and
          communications for in-house customization.
                4. Training staff and writing operational procedures addressing use of the new
          automated system.

To submit an SBR complete Attachment A (items #1 – 10)

8. State Information Data Exchange System (SIDES)

a. New Implementation of SIDES

   Purpose: The UI State Information Data Exchange System (SIDES), formerly called the
   Separation Information Data Exchange System, is a secure electronic-based system that
   enables communication and transmission of UI separation information, and other
   information, between UI agencies and large multi-state employers or third party agents
   (TPAs).

   The SIDES Employer Website (SEW) provides additional functionality to the web service-
   based SIDES system that allows an Employer/TPA to enter separation information into the
   system for the requesting state to electronically collect. The SEW is intended for
   Employers/TPAs that have a low volume of separations such that developing a web service
   connector solution is not cost effective, yet want to improve their separation response process
   in terms of effort, timeliness, and quality.

   In particular, SIDES and SEW capability are expected to improve the quality and timeliness
   of non-monetary determinations. They provide a common format that employers can use to
   quickly respond to requests for separation information from various states.

   Examples of the use of funds may include:

        1. Developing a Request for Proposal (RFP) for a contractor or state staff to implement
   programming changes to -
                • Construct tables, which can be expanded as needed to identify
                    employers/TPAs participating in SIDES.
                • Suppress separation information request mailings to SIDES participants.
                • Construct output file to SIDES host (secure transmission).
                • Pick-up data from SIDES.
                • Construct tables to receive SIDES information.
                • Integrate SIDES responses to automatically set separation issues and
                    assign cases in adjudication management system.
                • Integrate SIDES responses into adjudication fact-finding procedures.
                • Integrate the SEW into the adjudication management system.

States requesting to implement the SIDES initiative should include a request for support and
maintenance costs of $200,000 to cover maintenance and support through September 30, 2011.
States only need to submit a request for the funds and request that the funds be deobligated to the
Maryland Department of Labor, Licensing & Regulation, which is the designated lead state for
this project. The request should read as follows:

       The [State Workforce Agency Name] requests $200,000 for maintenance and support of
       the State Information Date Exchange System and requests that the U. S. Department of
       Labor reallot these funds to the Maryland Department of Labor, Licensing & Regulation
       to enter into an agreement with the Information Technology Support Center to provide

       the support for State Information Date Exchange System software as a part of the
       consortium for this project.

b. SIDES Employer Website (SEW) Enhancement for Current Consortia States

States currently participating in the SIDES consortium may request funds to implement the SEW
if they have not yet done so. It is not necessary to complete the entire Supplemental Budget
Request Outline (Attachment A) for this enhancement. States need to complete the project
timeline and provide a description of costs as defined in the Supplemental Budget Request
Outline (Attachment A).

To submit an SBR complete Attachment A (only items #1 –3 and items #5 - 7 are needed)

9. AutoCoder/OccuCoder™ Integration

Purpose: To provide automated access to claimants who are receiving UI payments and to
employers to a cost effective system that allows them to select Occupational Codes that are
appropriate for the claimants’ experience and skills. States may elect to provide this information
in an interactive voice mail system or over the Internet. Costs incurred in this function must be
related to the development of the appropriate delivery system. States may install and maintain
AutoCoder themselves or obtain technical assistance and support from the Information
Technology Support Center (ITSC) or other vendors. When completing the SBR application,
states should indicate whether ITSC technical support and maintenance are desired.

Available Funds: Up to $250,000 is available for the integration/interface of occupational
coding software within the UI benefits system.

Examples of the use of funds might include:

        1. Issuing a Request for Proposal (RFP) for necessary programming.
        2. Programming changes including testing.
        3. Maintaining the system.

To submit an SBR complete Attachment A (items #1 – 10)

10. Educating UI Beneficiaries about Debit Card Fees and How to Avoid these Fees

Purpose: To provide information to claimants who are receiving benefit payments via a debit
card about how to effectively use the debit card at no cost. Education and outreach efforts may
include information on how to avoid fees, locations where the debit cards are accepted, and
related information. Costs incurred for this project must be related to the development of an
appropriate automated delivery system.

Examples of the use of funds might include:

                1. Studying problems experienced by current users.
                2. Developing voice messages and automated text to advise claimants of cost effective
          debit card usage.
                3. Programming and testing the appropriate messages.

To submit an SBR complete Attachment A (items #1 – 10)

11. Programming to Include Entire Name in UI Wage Records

Purpose: To provide states with funds to upgrade their wage record systems to capture the
complete/entire name associated with UI quarterly wage records, and to transmit the entire name
to the National Directory of New Hires (NDNH). States may revise their wage record systems
for capture, storage and transmission of wage record data. A wage record file that contains the
entire name for each wage record will allow the Social Security Administration (SSA) to perform
integrity related activities including a name match on the social security number, thereby
improving the integrity of the wage record files. Examples of permissible uses for these funds
include:

        1. Revising wage record data gathering systems, such as paper/OCR forms, internet
      reporting systems, electronic wage formats.
        2. Revising data base structure to accommodate full name.
        3. Revising computer wage record system to process and display the entire name.
        4. Revising outbound wage record transmission to NDNH to include the entire name.

To submit an SBR complete Attachment A (items #1 – 10)