Process for setting UI PERFORMS Tier I criteria

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employment and Training Administration
Washington, D.C. 20210

Classification: UI
Correspondence Symbol: TEUDPR
Issue Date: July 23, 1998
Rescissions: None
Expiration Date: July 31, 1999

DIRECTIVE: UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE PROGRAM LETTER NO. 34-98
TO: ALL STATE EMPLOYMENT SECURITY AGENCIES
FROM: GRACE A. KILBANE, Director, Unemployment Insurance Service
SUBJECT: The Process of Setting Performance Criteria for UI PERFORMS Tier I Measures

1. Purpose. To provide information on the process of setting performance criteria for key UI performance measures.

2. Background. When the Performance Enhancement Workgroup (PEWG) established the outlines of the UI PERFORMS system for promoting continuous improvement in UI operational performance, it identified 10 key measures for which uniform national criteria would be set. It called these "Tier I" measures. Their criteria were to be interpreted as minima which States would be expected always to meet or exceed. The criteria which implement the Secretary's Standards for initial claims and appeals timeliness are interpreted the same way.

   The PEWG's successor group, the Performance Enhancement Group (PEG), ratified the meaning of the national criteria and further specified the criteria to be set (it also deferred setting a criterion for cashiering timeliness until that measure can be taken more uniformly). The measures for which criteria are to be set are included as Attachment I.

3. The Process for Setting Performance Criteria. The following process is envisioned for establishing the new criteria and promulgating them to the system.

   a. Specialist Groups. With the assistance of the Interstate Conference of Employment Security Agencies (ICESA), three workgroups--Benefits, Tax, and Appeals--were established to set draft criteria. Each of these groups includes Federal National Office, Regional Office, and at least two State representatives. The group members are identified in Attachment II. Although the groups' starting point is the definitions of measures and criteria given in Attachment I, they may suggest alternative measures or ways of constructing criteria (e.g., time lapse intervals). The groups began their task in early May and are expected to produce draft reports by late June-mid July.

   b. PEG Review of Recommendations. The reports of the criteria-setting groups will be presented to the PEG at its next meeting (scheduled for early September). The PEG will review the groups' recommendations in light of their cumulative burden and will recommend adjustments if appropriate.

   c. Solicitation of Comments. The draft criteria, their rationale, and phase-in schedule (if proposed) will be published for comment in a Federal Register Notice by the end of September. A 60-day comment period will be provided which will not conclude until after the discussion workshop(s) to be held at the October 1998 UI Directors' Meeting.

   d. Discussion Workshop(s). One or more workshops will be held at the UI Directors' meeting in Coeur D' Alene, Idaho, in early October. The workshops will not only allow for the presentation of the proposed levels and their rational, but also questions and discussion.

   e. Issuance. After all comments have been assimilated and the criteria modified as appropriate, the new criteria will be promulgated via a UIPL, probably early in January 1999.

4. Periodic Review and Affirmation or Revision. One of the PEWG's major recommendations was for the regular periodic review and revision of performance criteria. Accordingly, this first set of new UI PERFORMS criteria will be reviewed within 5 years of the date of issuance. By that time, more experience will have accumulated with the measures, and States will have had their first opportunity to validate the underlying data. Subsequent reviews will occur at approximately 5-year intervals.

5. Action Required. SESA Administrators are requested to provide this information to appropriate staff.

6. Inquiries. Please refer inquiries to the appropriate Regional Office or to Andrew Spisak of the National office (202) 219-5223 extension 157.

7. Attachments.

Attachment I (https://oui.doleta.gov/dmstree/uipl/uipl98/uipl_3498a1.htm): TIER I MEASURES: DEFINITIONS AND CRITERIA TO BE SET

Attachment II (https://oui.doleta.gov/dmstree/uipl/uipl98/uipl_3498a2.htm): PERFORMANCE CRITERIA WORKGROUPS

National Office Coordination and Technical Assistance

1. Andrew Spisak

   Burman Skrable

   Tom Stengle

Benefits Group

1. Terry Clark, National Office

   Bob Whiting, National Office

   Walter Harris, Region II

   William McGann, New Jersey Department of Labor

   Barbara Chandler, Ohio Bureau of Employment Services

Appeals Group

1. Jack Bright, UI National Office

   Pat O'Neal, Region X

   Dan Kassner, Alaska Department of Labor

   Robert P. McWilliams, Kentucky UI Commission

   Sonja Weisgerber, Kansas Department of Human Resources

Tax and Cash Management Group

1. Connie Peterkin, UI National Office

   Connie Carter, Region IV

   Cindy Guthrie, Missouri Division of Employment Security

   Wendy Tyson, Wyoming Department of Employment