HomeMy WebLinkAbout20150526.tiff RESOLUTION
RE: APPROVE MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING FOR REEMPLOYMENT AND
ELIGIBILITY ASSESSMENT PROGRAM (REA) AND AUTHORIZE CHAIR TO SIGN
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Weld County, Colorado, pursuant to
Colorado statute and the Weld County Home Rule Charter, is vested with the authority of
administering the affairs of Weld County, Colorado, and
WHEREAS, the Board has been presented with a Memorandum of Understanding
between the County of Weld, State of Colorado, by and through the Board of County
Commissioners of Weld County, on behalf of the Department of Human Services, Employment
Services Division, and the Colorado Department of Labor and Employment, commencing April 1,
2015, and ending March 31, 2016, with further terms and conditions being as stated in said
memorandum of understanding, and
WHEREAS, after review, the Board deems it advisable to approve said memorandum of
understanding, a copy of which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County Commissioners of Weld
County, Colorado, that the Memorandum of Understanding for Reemployment and Eligibility
Assessment Program between the County of Weld, State of Colorado, by and through the Board
of County Commissioners of Weld County, on behalf of the Department of Human Services,
Employment Services Division, and the Colorado Department of Labor and Employment, be, and
hereby is, approved.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the Board that the Chair be, and hereby is, authorized to
sign said memorandum of understanding.
The above and foregoing Resolution was, on motion duly made and seconded, adopted
by the following vote on the 23rd day of February, A.D., 2015.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
WELD COUNTY, COLORADO
ATTEST: di qal0 K; t, EXCUSED
a Barbara Kirkmeyer, Chair
Weld County Clerk to the Board
Freeman, Pro-Tem
BY
I�ty Clerk tot e Bo I ' 'i s CUSED
Ris
an P. Con ay
ti
APPROVED AS TO FORM: ®t�°� "����
Julie A. ozad
County Attorney
Steve Moreno
Date of signature:
C� 156 3Iq 2015-0526
H R0086
t MEMORANDUM
IITEL,L 1\ DATE: February 12, 2015
G 0 U TO: Barbara Kirkmeyer, Chair, Board of County Corn 'ss' ners
L ep er
FROM: Judy A. Griego, Director, Human Servi Departmen u
RE: Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the
Department's Employment Services program and the
Division of Unemployment Insurance and the Division
of Employment and Training, Workforce Development
Programs
Enclosed for Board approval is a Memorandum of Understanding(MOU) between the Department's
Employment Services program and the Division of Unemployment Insurance and the Division of
Employment and Training, Workforce Development Programs. This MOU was reviewed under the
Board's Pass-Around Memorandum dated February 5, 2015, and was approved for placement on
the Board's Agenda.
This MOU sets forth the Parties' understanding and responsibilities to successfully implement
services under the Reemployment and Eligibility Assessment Program (REA) for qualified UI
claimants (REA Participants). These services include, but are not limited to, providing the
appropriate re-employment services to REA Participants, and providing the required data for
Employment and Training Administration (ETA) reports. Such services shall assist in returning
REA Participants to suitable employment.
The Parties performance shall commence on April 1, 2015 and shall terminate on March 31,
2016, unless previously terminated by one of the Parties pursuant to the terms of§9 of the MOU.
This MOU shall automatically renew for four (4), successive one year terms, contingent upon
initial and continued funding of the Unemployment Insurance REA grant, unless previously
terminated pursuant to the terms of§9 of the MOU. Funding is not currently associated with this
MOU: any notice of funding availability will be disclosed at that time.
If you have questions, please give me a call at extension 6510.
2015-0526 ( ( )
z4 /l�ss,e)
a -a3- /a
,ms COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF LABOR AND EMPLOYMENT
"> MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING
.! CMS 76572
!•vg:! Between the
Division of Unemployment Insurance,
And the
Division of Employment and Training,Workforce Development Programs,
And the
Employment Services of Weld County
FOR THE
REEMPLOYMENT AND ELIGIBILITY ASSESSMENT PROGRAM
1. PARTIES AND PURPOSE
This Memorandum of Understanding (MOU') is made between the Colorado Department of Labor and
Employment on behalf of the Division of Unemployment Insurance (UI'), located at 251 E. 12r° Avenue,
Denver CO 80203, and on behalf of the Division of Employment and Training/Workforce Development
Programs (`sVDP') located at 633 17th Street, Suite 700, Denver CO 80202 (collectively `CDLE'), and the
Employment Services of Weld County(Sen'ice Provider'), located at P.O. Box 1805, Greeley CO 80632(all
collectively the `Parties'), and sets forth the Parties understanding and responsibilities to successfully implement
services under the Reemployment and Eligibility Assessment Program(REA) for qualified UI claimants (`REA
Participants'), including, but not limited to, providing the appropriate reemployment services to REA Participants,
and providing the required data for Employment and Training Administration (ETA') reports. Such services shall
assist in returning REA Participants to suitable employment.
2. TERM
The Parties' performance under this MOU ('Effective Date' and 'Initial Term') shall commence on April 1, 2015, and
shall terminate on March 31,2016,unless previously terminated by one of the parties pursuant to the terms of§9 of this
MOU.
This MOU shall automatically renew for four (4), successive one year terms, contingent upon initial and continued
funding of the Unemployment Insurance Reemployment and Eligibility Assessment Grant, unless previously
terminated pursuant to the terms of§9 of this MOU.
3. SCOPE
The Parties to this MOU shall collaboratively provide the following reemployment services described in the
Unemployment Insurance Program Letter No. 10-14 (attached to this MOU as Exhibit A (not inclusive of Exhibit
A Attachments).
a) Orientation to help claimants access self-service core services offered at the Service Provider workforce
center location(s) through the resource room or virtually, with particular emphasis on accessing available
labor market and career information.
b) Registration with the State of Colorado's job bank, Connecting Colorado.
c) Referrals to appropriate services offered through the Service Provider workforce center locations such as
self-assessments, education and training information, interviewing techniques, networking, career
exploration, and online job and occupational resources.
d) Support for the development of the REA Participant's reemployment plan, which shall include a one-on-
one appointment to evaluate work-search activities and strategies; assessment of current skills, education,
and barriers to reemployment;and standardized assessment results..
4. UI RESPONSIBILITIES
• Coordinate technological and other communications to ensure that REA Participants have been identified
through a profiling model and shared with the Service Provider.
I
FINAL
• Coordinate technological system communications, written notifications, phone calls, policy and other
collaborative activities to ensure all appropriate information is communicated by and between UI, Service
Providers,and\\DP.
• Engage in REA planning,administration,and oversight of REA program.
• Train Service Provider/workforce center and U1 staff on UI eligibility requirements.
• Adjudicate all reported no shows.
• Adjudicate all reported potential eligibility issues.
• Provide and review UI data that is needed for the ETA required reports.
5. WDP RESPONSIBILITES
• Coordinate service delivery and prepare statewide policy for the workforce center system.
• Report activities and participation on the activities outlined within the REA Participant's reemployment
plan between UI, Service Providers, and \V'DP. Ensure that appropriate information is reported and
shared on a timely basis. The majority of the coordinated communications will occur in Connecting
Colorado;however, there may be times where other communication methods are accessed.
• Coordinate training on UT eligibility requirements, as well as the internal and external processes and
procedures that have been developed for all Parties
• Provide and review the workforce data that is needed for the E'l'A required reports.
6. SERVICE PROVIDER RESPONSIBILITIES
• Prepare and send out invitations to REA Participants to attend a mandatory REA orientation via regular
mail. REA Participants should attend the orientation no later than the fifth week from first payment of
unemployment insurance benefits.
• Assess UI Eligibility and refer to adjudication as appropriate,if a potential issue is identified; (see UIPL 10-
14, paragraph A,page 5).
• Provide REA Participant an orientation to all services offered through the workforce center.
• Upon completion of the orientation, provide one-on-one service, which includes the UI eligibility review,
standardized assessments, interviews, an update to Connecting Colorado registration information, and the
development of an individualized reemployment plan to include work search activities, appropriate
workshops on topics such as resume writing and job search strategies, if needed, and/or approved training
as needed (reference UIPI,10-14).
• Provide career and labor market information, as well as other assessments that are specific to the REA
Participant's need.
• Refer all REA Participants to at least one other reemployment services and/or training.
• Track and report REA Participants' engagement in reemployment plan activities in Connecting Colorado.
• Track and report all REA Participant no shows and potential eligibility issues requiring adjudication to UI.
7. CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION
Service Provider recognizes that the information provided under the REA by CDLE is confidential and subject to
the provisions of C.R.S. S8-72-107as amended. If Service Provider is an Intergovernmental entity, the provisions of
each Service Provider's Data-Access Contract and/or Grant Agreement regarding use of Provider Information
Systems and/or Confidential Information, executed between Service Provider and CDLE, shall be applicable to
this MOU. This shall survive expiration and termination of this MOU.
FINAL
8. CONTACT INFORMATION
For purposes of this MOU, the Parties notice and contact information is:
For UI
Rita Sanchez, UI Policy Contract Coordinator
251 E. 1211,Ave, Denver CO 80203
rita.sanchez@sstate.co.us
For WDP
Elise Lowe-Vaughn, Director\X/DP
633 17001 Street, Suite 700, Denver, CO 80202
elise.lowe-vaughn@state.co.us
For Service Provider
Linda Perez,Director
P.O. Box 1805, Greeley CO 80632
Iperez@co.weld.co.us
9. TERMINATION
Intergovernmental Service Providers may terminate this MOU for convenience upon written notice to UI and
\VDP. UI and \VT)P may terminate this MOU for convenience upon written notice to Intergovernmental Service
Providers. Notice shall be sent via LISPS mail or electronic mail, and termination shall be effective thirty-five (35)
calendar days after notice date. This MOU shall automatically terminate between all Parties if funding is not
obtained or provided in subsequent years for the Unemployment Insurance Reemployment and Eligibility
Assessment Grant.
10. COMPLIANCE WITH LAWS
At all times during the term of this MOU, the Parties shall comply with all applicable federal and state laws,
regulations, rules, or procedures, as these provisions currently exist or may hereafter be amended, all of which arc
incorporated herein by reference and made a part of the terms and conditions of this MOU.
11. SIGNATURE IN COUNTERPARTS
This MOU may be executed in multiple identical counterparts, all of which shall constitute one agreement.
12. ACCEPTANCE OF FACSIMILE OR SCANNED SIGNATURES
This MOU is considered signed when the signature of a party is delivered by facsimile transmission or delivered by
scanned image (e.g., pdf, or tiff file extension name) as an attachment to electronic mail (email). Such facsimile or
scanned signature shall be treated in all respects as having the same effect as an original signature.
THE REST OF THIS PAGE LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK
FINAL.
13. SIGNATURE PAGE
THE PARTIES HERETO HAVE EXECUTED THIS MOU
SERVICE PROVIDER COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
AND EMPLOYMENT
Signature: By:
J ff irector
v Un ployment Insurance
Print Name &Title: _ Date: (l a /15
Mike Freeman, P roTem (01:0-
Elise
Board of WeldCount:y Commissioners By: _.... ._ ._
Lowe-Vaug ,Director
Workforce Development Programs
Date: FEB 2 3 2015"
Date: l'2/—A
6720/..17-- T,`So2.Co (/)
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING
FOR REEMPLOYMENT AND ELIGIBILITY ASSESSMENT PROGRAM
PAGE 4(A)
ATTEST: G: ', BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Weld C. nt' er o he :•. 1rr WELD COUNTY, COLORADO
\ f .
Deputy C k to the .9r• �7O, . I Mike Freeman, Pro-Tern FEB 2 3 2015
r /
APPROVED AS TO FUNS . i--.'1‘
A, AP ROVED AS T -SUBSTANCE:
__,
Controller El to,to
or rpartmnt Head
APPROV D AS TO FORM: N(f1 ,
Director of General Services
✓
County Attorney
do/.5= 6026(i
Exhibit A
UIPL_10_14.
NATT.pdf
G
FINAL
CLASSIFICATION
EMPLOYMENT AND TRAINING ADMINISTRATION UI-REAs
ADVISORY SYSTEM CORRESPONDENCE SYMBOL
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR ODUDIJIO
Washington, D.C. 20210 DATE
April 7,__2014
ADVISORY: UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE PROGRAM LETTER NO. 1 0-1 4
TO: STATE WORKFORCE Act , CIES
FROM: ERIC M. SELEZNO - ' " ' Ai v
Acting Assistant Sec :
SUBJECT: Fiscal Year(FY)2014 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 2014 UI REA grants.
2. References.
• Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2014,Public Law 113-76, Div. II, Title I;
• Unemployment Insurance Program Letter(UIPL)No. 17-13,Fiscal Year (FY)2013
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: (O1\4B 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(TELL)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.ora; and
• Webinar-Reemployment and Eligibility Assessment(REA) Program Innovations in
Tennessee and Utah, available at https://www.workforce3one.ore.
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 L11 improper payments are addressed through the UI REA program. Both
activities are high priorities for the U.S. Department of Labor's (Department)Employment
RESCISSIONS EXPIRATION DATE
None Continuing
and Training Administration (ETA). The UI REA program provides claimants an entry point
to a frill array of services available at American Job Centers(AJCs), 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 arc referred to services that are appropriate. In FY
2013, a total of 41 states operated a UI REA program.
REA services may be delivered by UI staff, Wagner-Peyser staff, Workforce Investment Act
(WIA) staff, or other AJC staff The UI eligibility review is a key part of the REA for
program integrity purposes,and 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 eligibility determinations and
redeterminations are funded through the regular funding for non-monetary determinations
and not through the UI REA grant.
Data arc collected on state UI REA workload activities and on program 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. The data are used to assess the value of the UI REA program
in the states and nationally.
4. FY 2014 Funding. The Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2014,appropriates a minimum of
$80 million for 2014 U1 REA finding. States interested in implementing a new UI REA
program are strongly encouraged to apply for REA funding. States with existing UI REA
programs are also strongly encouraged to apply for grants to continue their programs.
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 participating in the Depai intent's evaluation of the UI REA program may submit
requests for a grant modification when their study design has been determined. Study
designs may include a treatment group that receives a partial REA that does not include all of
the required REA elements for a first/full REA and,thus, costs for these treatments will be
less than costs for a full REA and a comparison of multiple vs single REAs. Modifications
will address the time period during which the state participates in the study.
A. 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 in Attachment B. In the
proposals states should include only the information identified in this UIPL.
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
UT 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. Many of the start-up costs,
such as costs for programming the required reports and training staff,will occur before
the program has been implemented in the AJC and are included in the initial grant.
B. Continuing UI REA State Programs. The deadline specified by the Grant Officer on
the Notice of Obligation for the obligation FY 2013 funds is September 30, 2014. Funds
must be liquidated within 90 days of that obligation deadline.
The performance period for FY 2014 UI REA grants begins on April 1, 2014,and ends
on March 31,2015. This is the time during which the funds are to be obligated.
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 will be shown
as September 30, 2015. All estimated cost figures for proposals for FY 2014 UI REA
grants should be based on this time period. Any prior year funds remaining unobligated
after March 31, 2014, should be applied to the ongoing UI REA workload before the
using the FY 2014 UT REA grant funds.
Each UI REA grant is based upon the number of REAs that the state proposes to schedule
and the costs estimated by the state. States that have not scheduled the number of REAs
that were funded in FY 2013 should use the remaining FY 2013 funds to complete the
projected workload and request funding for the balance of the FY 2014 UI REA grant
period. All continuing UI REA states must determine whether any FY 2013 UI REA
funds will not be obligated by March 31, 2014,provide this information in their FY 2014
UI REA grant application, and ensure that all FY 2013 UI REA funds are obligated
before obligating FY 2014 UI REA funds.
Proposals from states currently operating a Ul 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 (Ul) Reemployment
and Eligibility Assessment (REA) Proposal Outline for States Continuing a UI REA
Program, and in Attachment 1), 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 to 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 quarterly Reemployment and
Eligibility Assessment Workload Report(ETA 9128)and the quarterly Reemployment
and Eligibility Assessment Outcomes Report (ETA 9129), describe the state's plans to
correct the data, and provide a schedule of corrective actions.
3
States experiencing ongoing difficulties in reaching the workload and/or minimum
comparison group level projected in their FY 2013 UI REA proposals should request a
lower level of funding in FY 2014 than was provided in EY 2013.
Proposals will be reviewed based solely on the information required in the application.
States should include only the required information.
5. Basic III REA Guidelines. UI REA funds must be used to assess the continued eligibility
and reemployment needs of UI claimants. These funds must not supplant ongoing UI grant
funds devoted to the state's eligibility review program. The Worker Profiling and
Reemployment Services (WPRS)program remains mandatory and states must serve WPRS
participants in addition to REA participants. 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.
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.
By applying for UI REA funding, states are agreeing to integrate the UI REA program with
WIA and Wagner-Peyser funded reemployment services. Each completed REA will include
a referral to a reemployment service and/or training. Reemployment services such as résumé
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 staff must be engaged in REA planning, administration,and oversight as well as
appropriate staff training on UT eligibility requirements. While a full-time UI position may
not be required, UI staff must be available and involved in the REA functions discussed
above. States that have not had UI involvement in the REA program 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, many states that have not had sufficient Ul staff
participation have been unable to submit accurate ETA required reports. The ETA 9128,
Reemployment and Eligibility Assessment Workloads Report and the ETA 9129,
Reemployment and Eligibility Assessments Outcomes Report should be reviewed for
accuracy each calendar quarter by the Ul team member in addition to being reviewed by the
REA team leader.
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:
4
A. Required REA Services. Each UT REA must include the following minimum core
components:
• 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 that is specific to the
claimant's needs;
• Registration with the state's job bank;
• Orientation to AJC services;
• Development or review of an individual 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 who is chosen for the UI REA treatment
group with the following exceptions. Claimants who have a definite return-to-work date
must he excluded. In addition, states must 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 UT eligibility assessment than those needed to
develop a reemployment plan and make appropriate referrals to receive reemployment
services at A.TCs and/or training. If the state decides to use only Ul or only Wagner-
Peyser or WIA staff to do UI REAs, states must ensure that the staff assigned has the
necessary training and that UI staff arc involved in such training.
States that conduct multiple UI REAs for the same individual(s)must provide cost
estimates for both the initial and the subsequent UT 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
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 UT REA is mandatory. If a claimant fails to report for any UI REA without
5
notifying the state beforehand, the state must refer the issue of the claimant's failure to
report to the appropriate ill staff to be adjudicated under state law.
With respect the scheduled REAs, states must report initial 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
should be counted as another scheduled REA and the results are reported when the
claimant participates or fails to participate in both the initial and the rescheduled REA.
UI claimants must report in person to an AIC for staff-assisted services for 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 individual reemployment
plan for review and updating. 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 may be selected
during the first week that s/he claims benefits after being determined eligible for benefits.
It is not required that claimants who are not initially eligible be included in the treatment
or comparison group.
Up to three UI REAs for each individual claimant may be funded by the UI REA grant.
States should focus their UI REA programs on helping claimants return to work as
quickly as possible by providing comprehensive guidance and assistance to claimants
during the initial UI REA. States must also provide clear and complete information that
claimants need to access appropriate reemployment services. A second and third REA
may be avoided if the claimant returns to work as a result of the initial REA. Additional
UI REAs for an individual who has received the initial UT REA and two subsequent UI
REAs cannot be funded under the grant.
Funding for each individual UI REA may not exceed 2 hours of staff time. This time
includes all activities that are a part of the delivery of the U 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:
6
90 minutes per member 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 2014 UI REA program. The MOU must identify
reemployment service needs and provide, at a minimum, the following services:
• 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.
New states must submit a copy of the MOU or provide the date when it will be submitted.
Continuing UI REA states must certify that a MOU or other agreement has been signed
by all service partners for the UI REA program and remains in place. 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 will be met. This includes providing appropriate reemployment services to
REA participants and providing the data that is needed for the ETA required reports.
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 or participate
in any aspect of the UI REA must 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 good 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, states must include in their proposals:
• A feedback loop from the AJC to the UT system as to whether the claimants
reported as directed and participated in the minimum activities outlined in their
reemployment plan;
• A feedback loop must be established to refer any eligibility issues uncovered in
the eligibility review for adjudication, and
• A process for referring to adjudication Ul claimants selected for UI REAs who
failed to report for them without contacting the agency.
7
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 6 below.
New states must also implement this methodology. A description of the methodology to
be used is not required to be included in the new 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
E'I'A Regional and National offices.
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 must create methods that provide the necessary cross-program
coordination that ensures data quality. States submitting UI REA proposals for the first
time should request fiords 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 evaluations of the effectiveness of the
UI REA program. Results may be used for a report(s)to Congress. States selected to
participate in the current REA evaluation should calculate costs based upon the study
design that has been developed in conjunction with the evaluation contractor. In
addition, states must 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 2014 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 that occur over multiple reporting periods in
measurements of average duration, benefits per claimant,percent exhausting, and percent
reemployed for REA participants compared to 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 2014 UI REA grant.
6. El 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 Ill REAs are reported on the ETA 9128. The outcomes report
8
measures the results of both the LT 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
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 arc not providing REAs should be excluded both from
the REA treatment and comparison groups. Claimants in the treatment and comparison
groups 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 are 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.
7. 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 and SF-424A must be submitted for all UI REA grants. The SE-
424A requires a breakout of object class categories in item 6 of section B -Budget
Categories. The breakouts must match the proposed expenditures.
9
•
8. 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 or less;
D. Fund new state UI REA programs at a level greater than 10,000 REAs in increments
of 10,000 or less,
E. Fund continuing state UI REA programs currently funded in excess of 10,000 to
expand to a higher level in increments of 10,000 REAs or less.
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:
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.
9. UI REA Grant Scoring Criteria for New UI REA Programs. The Ul 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 he 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.
10. 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.
11. UI REA Proposal Procedures. We encourage states to work with ETA regional office staff
in developing their proposals to ensure that:
• The UI REA program is designed to meet the needs of U1 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.
12. Timelines.
• States must submit proposals to the National Office by April 11, 2014.
• Award notifications will be issued by April 30, 2014.
10
• 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.
13. 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 ows.sbr@doLeov.
14. Inquiries. Please direct questions to the appropriate Regional Office.
15. Attachments.
• Attachment A-Unemployment Insurance(U1) Reemployment and Eligibility
Assessment(REA)Proposal Outline for First Ycar UI REA Grants
• Attachment B - Elements of an Unemployment Insurance (1/1) 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
I1
Attachment A
UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE(UI)REEMPLOYMENT AND ELIGIBILITY
ASSESSMENT (REA)PROPOSAL OUTLINE FOR FIRST YEAR III REA GRANTS
1. UI REA Grant Project Summary. States applying for a UI REA grant for the first time
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 needed and does not help
or 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 1 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. 1205-0353). 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, 4` 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.
Incremental Costs: States should provide the number of REAs that they propose to
conduct. 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 or if the state is proposing to conduct fewer than 10,000 REAs the proposal should
include the cost per REA. States that do not wish to perform more than 10,000 TJI 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
Ul 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 2014 must provide costs
associated with providing 10,000,20,000, 30,000 and 40,000 UI REAs.
B. 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. They may
also be rescheduled for a UI REA if the state chooses to do so. Rescheduling is not
required.
3. Scoring Elements. The following elements are used to score the proposal. Scoring will be
based on how well the elements listed below are addressed (i.e., information should clear,
thorough, and relevant). 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 must 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 all staff costs for developing UI REA reports and programming requirements
separate from the costs for providing UI REAs to claimants. 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 j#Flours !Cost Per Hour Total Cost
DUI REA Interviewer 120 $50 $6,000
States must charge all staff time used for the UT 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 may 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.
2
c. Total Costs. The proposal must include the total funding request. Spreadsheets used
to calculate and total these costs must be included.
B. Project Design (45 percent of total score): The description of the UI REA program
should address 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.
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.
h. The geographic locations where the UI REA program will be implemented.
c. The proposal should identify the target group for the UI REA program. For example,
states have tried various methods, including focusing on those claimants more 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 arc in high demand. In deciding which population to target with the UI
REA program states should reflect on the two goals of the UI REA program,which
are to help claimants return to work quickly,thus reducing Trust Fund expenditures
and to reduce improper payments.
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. The
state should strive for random assignment to the comparison group to provide an
automated means of determining the success of the UI REA program.
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 5 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
3
registration in the state's job bank,make other referrals to AJC services, and support
the development of the claimant's reemployment plan.
j. A copy of the agreement or Memorandum of Understanding (MOU)must be
submitted with the implementation proposal (this applies to first year states). 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 4 below.
k. A description of how staff will be trained to identify eligibility issues and how these
issues will be referred to Ul adjudication staff.
I. A description of how eligibility assessments will be structured.
m. A description of the proposed individual reemployment plan, including the elements
of the plan and the arrangements for completing the plan (i.e., the claimant will
complete a form which will be reviewed and revised as necessary during the REA
interview).
n. A description of how information will be shared among Ul, Wagner-Peyser, and WTA
staff and workforce staff and how the work search plan and related activities will be
documented.
o. A description of the processes that will make up the feedback loop to provide
information to the UI program staff, as appropriate, about the results of referrals to
reemployment services, issues that arise during the eligibility review interview,
and/or any failure to report for the REA.
In addition, states must 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 Ul 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 each element of the UI REA will be conducted on an individual basis or in a group
setting, and the average time required for each activity. Both the eligibility review and the
development of an individual reemployment plan must be provided on a one-on-one basis.
Claimants may be provided fonns in a group setting which they will discuss with staff one on
one after completion. States must identity the program office in which the staff works such
as LI, 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 Ul REA.
•
•
Initial REAs
Individual/ Average
Activity Staff Group Time
Ehg lit Review
Labor Market Information
Individual Reemployment Plan
Orientation
Referral to Reemployment Services
States planning to conduct multiple UI REAs for individual claimants 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 Ul, 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.
Subsequent REAs
Individual or Check if by Average
Activit Staff Group Telephone Time
Eli ibilit 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): 'ffic
proposal must include an estimate of the time and the cost requirements for each UI REA.
The total time funded for an individual Ul 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 or UI REAs that could be accomplished based upon the
grant amount requested.
S
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
E'I'A 9128 and the ETA 9129), and the date that the first UI REAs will be offered.
Scoring will be based upon the thoroughness of 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.
The MOU mast include a commitment of the staff necessary to perform the REA 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. The agreement or MOU
must contain:
• Names of all parties to the agreement;
• A brief description of the collaborative process jointly developed;
• Identification of the types of staff responsible for providing 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 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:
LII 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, $
2014
"Total UI REA Project Cost $
The total amount of funds re uested.
Total Service Delivery Staff Cost $
The total amount of funds requested for staff solely to
conduct the Ui REAs excluding management costs
and other costs that are not related to service delivery
such as programming.
Total Management Costs $
The total amount of funds requested for management costs
excluding cost of staff who will conduct the UI REAs.
Total Information Technology(TT)Staff Costs $
The total amount of funds requested for programming and
other IT staff costs
Staff and Management Costs for a Single Initial UT REA $
The sum of service delivery staff costs and management
costs divided by the number of planned initial ill
REAs.
Staff and Management Costs for a Single Subsequent UI I $
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. If costs for the second and third
REA are expected to differ please rovide both.
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. If times for the second and third REA
are expected to differ please provide both.
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 se arately funded.
Total Number of UI REAs Projected to be Completed
The total number of UI REAs the state will schedule
during the grant period for which the claimant will
re ort and artici ate in an REA.
Total Number of UI REM Projected for which the
Claimant will Fail to Report
The total number of UI REAs the state will schedule
during the grant period for which the claimant will fail
to report and will not partici ate in an REA.
Total Number of UI REA Sites
The total number of sites where UI REAs will be
conducted. States requesting funds to expand the
numbers ofUl 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 (MOU)
Ts it signed and operational? (Yes or No)
If no, provide the estimated date that the MOU will be
2
signed and operational. New states should submit a
copy of the MOU when it has been signed.
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 a
narrative has been included by indicating"yes."
Attachment C
UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE (UI) REEMPLOYMENT AND ELIGIBILITY
ASSESSMENT(REA)PROPOSAL OUTLINE FOR STATES CONTINUING A UI
REA PROGRAM
1. III 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 2013.
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 REM: The total projected number of individual initial and
subsequent(if any) El REAs should be provided along with the projected cost for each
type of III 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 UT REA and should not exceed two hours for an individual UI REA.
Management costs should also be identified, as appropriate. States should include
information in the following format for all staff requests:
Position Title
if/ Hours 1Cost Per Hour ITotal Cost I
UI REA Interviewer 120 t$50 i$6,000
States must charge all staff time used for the UT 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 UT 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) the type of staff conducting each
of the III REA key components for the initial UI REA; 2) whether the UI REA is
conducted on an individual basis or in a group setting(the eligibility review and the
development of the individual reemployment plan must be done on an individual basis);
and 3)the average time required for each LI REA activity. Both the eligibility review
and the development of an individual reemployment plan must be provided on a one-on-
one basis. Claimants may be provided forms in a group setting which they will discuss
with staff one on one after completion. Staff identification should contain the name of
the program office for these staff such as Ul, 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 Reemployment Plan
7
Orientation
Referral to Reemployment Services
If the state conducts multiple UI REAs for individual claimants, provide the following:
1) the type of 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 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
Reemployment Plan
Orientation
Referral to
•
Reemployment
Services
B. Service Delivery Staff. Provide information about the type of staff managing the REA
project and die type of staff conducting the UI REA. In accordance with the new UI
REA guidelines 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 Ul REA(provision of
3
labor market information,development of the reemployment plan) and what format is
used (group or individual). Please include a copy of the form that is used to develop the
individual reemployment plan.
F. 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
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 REM. Identify whether the state plans to conduct single or
multiple Ul 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 the 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 III
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
state's rescheduling policy and processes.
H. Collaboration with Service Providers. An agreement or Memorandum of
Understanding(MOO)must be renewed by UI and appropriate service providers who
partner with UI for the UI REA program. This ensures that the necessary partners
commit the staff necessary to provide reemployment services as required by the grant.
States that have previously submitted a copy of the agreement do not need to 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 he 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
4
of some of the relationships between the data elements and the probable outcomes. In
addition, the ETA national office sends a quarterly summary of LI 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
the date after which the state's data was correct/valid as a result of the changes should be
included
K. LI 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 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 ETA 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 2014. 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 and rescheduled
•
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 depending on why the claimant failed to participate and how the issue was addressed
by the state. Claimants who have returned to work are not disqualified. Claimants who could
not report due to ajob interview are also 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. 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 UI 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. UiREAs Scheduled (Item 2)
This number should be compared to the number of Ul 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 Ul 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 off)] 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 la and for the UI REA group in Item 2a. The number in Item la
should not be less than 10 percent of the number in Item 2a,as the comparison group must, at a
minimum, he 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 Ell Benefit Year in the Report Quarter. These elements are located in items
la and lb 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 la
and I e for the Comparison Group and in items 2a and 2c for the UT 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 he 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 III REA Treatment Group is two weeks
or greater, there may be programming problems.
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
Hello