UIPL_9-18_Attachment-1_acc.pdf

ETA Advisory File Text

ATTACHMENT 1 Bene fit Accuracy Measurement BAM Paid C laims Accuracy Annual Report Report Definitions and Report Footnotes I-1 BENEFIT ACCURA CY MEASUREMENT PAID CLAIMS ACCURACY ANNUAL REPORT STATE ZZ Batch Range 201 727 - 201 826 Total Dollars Paid in Population 221 830 7 28 Sample Size 383 Percentage Of Dollars 95 Confidence Interval - Proper Payments 88.1 3.5 Overpayments 11.6 3.5 Total 100.0 Underpayments 0.3 0.2 Percentages apply to less than a complete year of UI payments the State did not pull a sample for 3 week s . The State completed 83.7 of the cases within 90 days. The Q uality Control QC program standard is 95 completed within 90 days. 15.9 of the sample cases were not completed when this report was prepared. This exceeded the QC program requirement that no more than 2 of the cases for the year remain incomplete. I-2 BENEFIT ACCURACY MEASUREMENT PAID CLAIMS ACCURACY ANNUAL REPORT Supplemental Data STATE ZZ Batch Range 201 727 - 201 826 Responsibility for Overpa yments Percent of Dollars Overpaid Claimant Only 51.6 Agency Only 15.6 Claimant Agency 10.6 Claimant Employer 10.5 Employer Only 8.6 Claimant Employer Agency 2.1 Claimant Other 1.7 Employer Agency 1.0 Other Only 0.0 Employer Other 0.0 Agency Other 0.0 Claimant Employer Other 0.0 Claimant Agency Other 0.0 Employer Agency Other 0.0 Claimant Employer Agency Other 0.0 Responsibility Not Specified 0.0 I-3 Cause for Overpayments Percent of Dollars Overpaid Be nefit Year Earnings Issues 39.1 Eligibility Issues Excluding Work Search 25.7 Separation Issues 20.5 Base Period Wage Issues 7.4 Other Issues 5.9 Work Search Issues 2.9 N O T E The percentages for the responsibilities or cause do not sum to 100 percent . You should check field h5 to verify that all cases have been coded correctly within your specified batch range. If cause and responsibility percentages do not add up to 100 percent state s should check for cases in which the key week amount overpa id coded in data element h5 in the b master table of the UI database does not equal the sum of dollars overpaid coded in data element ei1 for key week actions 10 11 12 13 and 15 in the b errisu table. The amount overpaid cannot exceed the amount paid coded in data element f13 in the b master table. I-4 BAM Annual Report Definitions Total Dollars Paid in Population Total UI benefits paid to the population of UI claimants who constitute the sampling frames for all weeks in IPIA 201 8 for which the State pulled a BAM sample adjusted to exclude UI payments that do not meet the definition of the BAM population for example supplemental payments or payments made for Extended Unemployment Compensation EUC claims . These excluded cases are coded 8 EUC o r 9 all other excluded records in the program code data element c1 in the b master table of the UI database. Sample Size Total number of UI payments selected during IPIA 201 8 BAM batches 201 727 through 201 826 and completed supervisor sign -off by COB October 2 8 201 8 excluding cases that do not meet the BAM population definition. This is the number of BAM sample cases from which the payment accuracy rates and confidence intervals are estimated. Proper Payments The weighted ratio estimate of total dollars properly paid to total dollars paid expressed as a percentage. Overpayments The weighted ratio estimate of total dollars overpaid to total dollars paid expressed as a percentage. Underpayments The weighted ratio estimate of total dollars underpaid to total dollars paid expressed as a percentage. Weighting Procedures UI benefits properly paid overpaid and underpaid for each batch with at least two completed paid claims cases are weighted by the batch population adjusted to exclude cas es that do not meet the BAM definition program code 8 or 9 . The accuracy rates are the ratios of these weighted benefits summed for all batches. Batches with only on e completed case are merged to ensure that each batch has a minimum of two complet ed cases. 95 Percent Confidence Interval A confidence interval expressed as - x percentage points is constructed for each of the three estimated rates. The actual rate is expected to lie within 95 percent of the intervals constructed from repeated s amples of the same size and selected in the same manner as the BAM sample. I-5 BAM Paid Claims Accuracy Footnotes Footnote 1 Claimants failing to conduct required work search were given formal warnings and n o overpayment was established. The proper paymen t rate would be lower and the overpayment rate would be higher if these cases were counted as erroneous payments. Condition Any IPIA 201 8 BAM case with key week actio n code 14 in field ei2 of the b errisu table of the UI database. Footnote 2 Percen tages apply to less than a complete year of UI payments due to the State not pulling a sample for x weeks. Condition There is no record in the b comparison table of the UI database for one or more BAM batches 201 727 through 201 826 . Note If the State requested and received permission from ETA to suspend BAM sampling temporarily due to a catastrophic event or another approved reason the footnote will reflect that ETA concurred with the suspension. Footnote 3 The State selected samples that were bel ow the minimum prescribed levels for x weeks. Condition State selected one or more BAM weekly samples below the minimum level prescribed in Benefit Accuracy Measurement State Operations Handbook ET Handbook No. 395 5th Edition chapter VI p. 11. Samp led cases that fail to meet the BAM population definition are counted toward meeting the minimum weekly sample. The minimum weekly and quarterly samples based on current annual sample allocations are Sample Annual Allocation Normal Weekly Minimum Weekl y Normal Quarterly Minimum Quarterly Paid Claims 360 7 5 90 81 Paid Claims 480 9 6 120 108 Denials 150 450 3 2 37 -38 32 Allocation for the ten smallest states in terms of UI workload. 150 cases each of monetary separation and non -separation d enials will be selected each year for a total of 450 Denied Claims Accuracy cases. Note If a state requested and received permission from ETA to reduce BAM sample sizes temporarily due to workload contingencies the footnote will reflect that ETA concu rred with the reduction. I-6 Footnote 4 Percentages based on data collection procedures that were not completely in accordance with the program methodology pr escribed in ET Handbook No. 395 5 th Edition. Condition ETA staff continuously monitor s state p erformance with respect to the BAM administrative requirements established in ET Handbook 395 5 th Edition for example minimum sample sizes population variances case completion percentages and timeliness and quality of the BAM audits . According to U IPL No. 21 -17 p. 12 states must address BAM program performance deficiencies in a Corrective Action Plan as a part of the State Quality Service Plan. Footnote 5 The state completed x percent of the cases within 90 days. The program standard is 95 perc ent completed within 90 days. Condition State failed to meet case completion objectives established in ET Handbook No. 395 5th Edition Benefit Accuracy Measurement State Operations Handbook chapter VI p. 11. Cases not meeting the BAM population def inition are not counted in calculating state time lapse rates. Footnote 6 x percent of the sample cases were not completed when this report was prepared. This exceeded the program requirement that no more than two 2 percent of the cases for the year remain incomplete. Condition The percentage is based on the number of BAM cases that were not completed no supervisor sign -off by COB October 2 8 201 8 divided by the number of valid cases selected for BAM weekly samples during IPIA 201 8 BAM batches 201 727 through 201 826 . Cases that do not meet the BAM population definition are not counted in calculating state case completion rates. Footnote 7 The annual sample for state is x cases below the allocated annual sample for the state . The precision of the data might be reduced due to the failure to sample at the prescribed level. Condition The state s annual sample selection is below its allocated annual sample. Cases that do not meet the BAM population definition are not counted toward meeting t he annual sample allocation. Note If a state requested and received permission from ETA to reduce BAM sample sizes temporarily due to workload contingencies the footnote will reflect that ETA concurred with the reduction. I-7 Footnote 8 The population from which the BAM sample was selected did not include all of the UI benefits paid. This limits the degree to which inferences about the population can be made from BAM data. Condition The dollars paid in the BAM population for IPIA 201 8 vary from the dollars paid reported in the state s ETA 5159 Claims and Payment Activities reports by more than the statistical control limit.