UI Eligibility Review Program ERP

1
UI Eligibility Review Program(ERP)

• Dale Ziegler
• Deputy Administrator
• Office of Workforce Security
• June 27, 2007

2
UI Claims Processing Change

• Initial claims-taking 10 years ago was
• 88.4 -- in person
• 6.8 -- telephone
• 0.0 -- internet
• Today
• 13.9 -- in person
• 50.4 -- telephone
• 31.1 -- internet
• Result Reduced opportunities to link One-Stop
  staff and UI claimants for referring claimants to
  services

3
Strategies for Linking UI Claimants to
Reemployment Services

• Reemployment and Eligibility Assessments (REAs)
• Worker Profiling and Reemployment Services (WPRS)
• Eligibility Review Program (ERP)

4
Origins of Eligibility Review Program

• 1974-1975 - High claims loads/High duration
• 1976 - Eligibility Review Program initiated
• Goals
• Ensure claimants are actively seeking work
• Link claimants to reemployment services
• Ensure no other eligibility issues exist

5
ERP What Is It?

• Generally, Quick Interview to classify UI
  claimants
• Labor force attachment
• Reemployment prospects
• Detect issues and restrictions on availability
• Communicate with UI claimants on their continued
  eligibility for benefits and job search
  responsibilities

6
Who Gets an Eligibility Review Program Interview?

• State Choice
• Originally aimed at those in demand occupations
  and still unemployed.
• Determined to need help finding work at IC
• Are suspected to no longer be eligible for
  benefits,
• TIP/lead
• Remaining unemployed after return-to-work date
• Claiming benefits longer than states average
  duration
• May occur any time during claim

7
Informal Survey of States in 1998

• 28 States Surveyed
• ERP carried out
• In person 40
• Mail/in-person 19
• Mail/in person /telephone 17
• In person/telephone 12
• Mail/telephone 10
• Telephone only 2
• 100

8
Research Studies

• Social Policy Research Associates
• The Urban Institute
• The Lewin Group, Johns Hopkins University,
  Capital Research Corporation

9
Social Policy Research Associates (SPRS)
StudyUnemployment Insurance in the One-Stop
System1999

10
SPRA Findings

• Surveyed 3 states Md, NC and CT
• Scheduling of ERP Interviews
• In CT the 6th or 7th week
• In NC every 4-5 weeks
• In MD during the 6th week

11
SPRA Study Recommendations

• States allowing remote filing should design ways
  to connect claimants to reemployment services.
• One-Stop Systems need to ensure that UI claimants
  have access to appropriate services
• States and local areas should ensure that both
  One-Stop and UI staff are knowledgeable about
  each others program

12

• The Urban Institute
• Wayne Vroman
• Low Benefit Recipiency in State Unemployment
  Insurance Programs
• June 2001

13
Findings

• Used state data from 1977 to 1999
• A 1 increase in ERPs as a of claimant contacts
  reduces average duration by 0.07 weeks
• Savings of 140 million

14

• The Lewin Group
• Unemployment Insurance Non-Monetary Policies and
  Practices How Do They Affect Program
  Participation
• July 2003

15
Study of 8 States

• 3 states did not perform ERP interviews
• Had the longest duration
• 2 states were more rigorous in using ERP
  interviews than the nation as a whole
• Result had relatively short duration
• In 5 states, claimants were penalized with
  indefinite denial of their benefits for failure
  to report for ERP

16
Study Conclusions

• Frequent eligibility reviews appear to be linked
  to shorter duration and lower receipt of benefits

17
OWS Actuarial Analysis of ERP

• Used state RJM and ETA 5159 data for 2005
• Found that a 1 increase in Eligibility Review
  Interviews as a of weeks claimed reduces
  average duration by about 0.2 weeks
• Savings of 400 million
• Administrative cost of increasing ratio by 1 is
  16 million(251 return)

18
(No Transcript)
19
ERP Funding

• Resource Justification Model (RJM) collects time
  charges for ERPs in the weeks claimed function
• States receive additional funding for ERPs to the
  extent that they charge time
• This increases the weeks claimed MPU

20
Advantages of ERPs

• Cost effective means of serving claimants who
  should have little difficult finding work
• Can implement by telephone
• Claimants may be able to use self-service,
  automated tools with little help
• Flexible program - allows states to decide who
  they want to serve and to change as appropriate
• Suitable for intervention later in the claim
  period
• To review claimants search for work and
  continued eligibility for benefits

21
Eligibility Review Interview Program in New
Hampshire

• Doris Lachance, Director
• Employment Service Bureau,
• New Hampshire Department of Employment Security
• Diane Carpenter, Director
• Unemployment Compensation Bureau
• New Hampshire Department of Employment Security