UI Separation Information Data Exchange System SIDES

1
UISeparation Information Data Exchange System
(SIDES)

• National UI Directors Conference
• Nashua, NH
• October 23, 2007

2
CY2006 Benefit Payment Accuracy

• 30.2 Billion UI Benefits Paid
• 9.99 or 3.021 Billion Overpaid
• Separation Issues are 2nd largest cause of
  Overpayments

3
Overpayment Causes
4
National Performance LevelsNon-Monetary
Determination

• Separation Determination Time Lapse CY2006
• 68.2 of the separation determinations issued
  within 21 Days. (Criteria 80)
• Separation Determination Quality CY2006
• 66.5 of the separation determinations scored 80
  points or more. (Criteria 75)

5
Standardized UI Separation Information Effort

• ITSC looked at UI separation information needs.
• Employers and Third Party Administrators very
  interested in improving the process.
• NASWA UI Committee Sub Committee formed. (WI, CO,
  GA, OH, MI, MD, ID, IN, VA, OK, UT, NH)
• Working Group to develop standard format. (WI,
  CO, GA, OH, MI, MD, ADP, TALX, GM, JC Penny,
  Kelly Services, CVS, Employers Unity)
• Test the format and approach. (Low Tech Test)
  (WI, CO, GA,ID, ADP/Diamond Bar, TALX, GM, JC
  Penny Kelly Services)
• UI SIDES State Consortium formed (WI, CO, GA, OH,
  UT)

6
UI SIDES Project Goal

• Establish a standard electronic format that a
  significant number of states, employers, and
  third party administrators would accept and
  implement.
• Detailed and timely separation information which
  would allow a significant percentage of
  determinations to made without the need for
  further contact between the state and
  employer/TPA.

7
Issues / Concerns

• High-level workload
• Shrinking resources / funding
• Increased volume of information exchange between
  Employers, Third Party Administrators (TPAs), and
  State Workforce Agencies (SWAs)
• Increasing concentration of TPAs in the market
• No Standard Data Format among SWAs, TPAs and
  Employers
• SWAs quest for efficiencies, timeliness and
  quality of work
• Reduce postage costs

8
Opportunities

• Standardize Data Formats - easier for parties to
  collect and transmit standard data vs. multiple
  formats and requirements
• New technology tools available (Internet, e-mail,
  electronic storage and retrieval, high volume
  scanning, security of data)
• Realization that there exist better alternatives
  to doing business

9
Low Tech Test (LTT) Objectives

• Determine the percentage of the UI claim
  non-monetary determinations that can be made
  using only the separation information provided by
  the employer or TPAs without having to make a
  telephone call
• Determine whether the data items and their
  associated business rules and edits are workable
• Determine whether the processes for gathering and
  supplying the required information are workable
  for the employers, TPAs, and SWAs
• Determine whether the separation data exchange
  improves the timeliness, quality and efficiency
  of the non-monetary determinations
• Determine any factors that would affect the
  design and implementation of the final separation
  data exchange system

10
LTT Process

• Initial participants
• Four State Agencies
• Five large employers / TPAs
• Manual process used for the test
• Limited Case selection process
• Used Standard format w/ edits and validations
• LTT Legacy Systems run in parallel
• Activities / results monitored and recorded
• No attachment allowed

11
LTT - Context Level Diagram
Employers/TPAs
State Agencies (SWAs)
Data Requests, Reports Conclusions
Data Requests
Data Responses and Compiled Reports
Data Responses Compiled Reports
Separation Information Data Exchange
Recommendations Infrastructure
Tracking Reports
ITSC
12
LTT Results

• Faster turn-around of Fact Finding (FF)
• More Complete FF
• Fewer call-backs
• Better Decisions
• Fewer Appeals
• Guaranteed receipt of documents in both directions

13
LTT - Lessons Learned

• Benefits
• Postal savings
• Shortened turn-around times
• Guaranteed receipt works
• Electronic storage and retrieval faster and
  easier
• Standardized form is easier for large multi-state
  employers and TPAs
• Improved quality of responses

14
LTT - Lessons Learned (contd)

• Considerations
• Response quality more a function of
  standardization than technology
• Business rules associated with Required fields
  needed fine tuning
• Potential savings in time and money alone justify
  deployment

15
Employer and TPA Perspective

• Employer Community Expectations
• Experience With The Pilot
• Future Direction

16
Employer Community Expectations

• Electronic Data Exchange
• Faster receipt and response by employer
• Eliminates timely response issues
• One point of delivery
• Gives more time to gather information

17
Employer Community Expectations

• Standardized Separation Data
• Data base application possible
• Most information gathered on date of separation
  vs after the fact collection
• Faster storage and retrieval
• Most questions anticipated because of standard
  format
• Should help with wage and payroll questions

18
Employer Community Expectations

• Reduce Unnecessary Benefit Charging
• Employers and TPAs prefer avoiding benefit
  charges
• Dont want to subsidize state funds
• Reduced Labor Costs
• Increased efficiency
• Can better train staff to respond
• Less disruptive to workforce

19
Emp./TPA Experience with Pilot

• Claims received faster
• On average 3-7 days before paper copy
• More time to gather needed information
• Responded sooner because better prepared more
  time
• Basic data available time to find detail
• Claimant statement helpful
• Allowed Emp/TPA to focus on issue

20
Emp./TPA - Experience with Pilot

• Standard questions
• Eliminated confusion among various state forms
• Better answers for the agency
• Easily understood by employers
• Faster/better training of employees
• Would have liked more claim volume during test
• Use of 99 code helpful
• Need to incorporate attachments

21
Future Direction UI SIDES

• Quality Timeliness
• Test shows promise
• Reduced benefit overpayments
• A natural result of the program
• Efficiency
• Improved operations for agency and employers
  alike
• Return on investment
• State agencies and employer community need to see
  the value

22
Progress

• State Consortium has been formed.
• Have made adjustments to the standard data
  elements and finalize the format design.
• Included Attachments for both States and
  Employers/TPAs
• Finalize the Concept of Operation for an
  electronic process using the standard format.
• Finalized a Statement of Work and
  Implementation Plan.
• Completed the basic Technical Design of UI SIDES
• Ready to start development and implementation
  effort.

23
UI SIDES Design
24
Contact Information

• John Sharkey, Executive Director
• Information Technology Support Center
• Phone [phone]
• E-mail sharkey.john_at_itsc.org
• YOU CAN REQUEST ELECTRONIC COPIES OF
• SIDES Standard Format w/ edits and validations
• SIDES Issue Matrix