1. The UI Federal/State Partnership At Work REENGINEERING UI BENEFIT ACCOUNTABILITY PROCESSES

2. WHY REENGINEERING NOW?  Diminished System Capacity/Resources  New Program Challenges  Loss of Experienced Staff  Evolving Methods of Program Administration  Need for Greater Focus on Program Operations

3. REENGINEERING GUIDING PRINCIPLES  Processes must ensure program integrity  Maximize the use of specific program expertise within the UI system  Eliminate duplication where feasible  Need new processes to address program operations comprehensively, not by program or individual function  Greater support for states in addressing operational/administrative issues that lead to poor program performance/integrity  Support improvements in UI staff capacity system-wide  Must take things “off the table” if adding new things  Automate where feasible

4. REENGINEERING FRAMEWORK Taking Things Off the Table:  Changes to SQSP Process  Move to 2 year cycle  Changes to Frequency and Logistics for Federal/State Peer Reviews for BAM/BTQ/Appeals  Elimination of BPC Peer Reviews

5. REENGINEERING FRAMEWORK New Accountability Features  Focus on program operations impacting program performance/integrity  TPS-like state self assessment process  ETA monitoring to include operational elements  New “At Risk” Determination Process/Still Focused on Technical Assistance  Use of UI System (federal & state) program experts to support continuous improvement in accountability processes  Including More Formalized Training Components to Peer Review Processes

6. WHAT DO WE MEAN BY PROGRAM OPERATIONS?  Business processes that support program administration in key functional areas:  Initial claims  Non-Monetary Adjudications  Appeals  Benefit Payment Control  Call Center Operations  Information Technology Infrastructure  Management Controls

7. REENGINEERING PROCESS Structure:  Executive Committee  Steering Committee  Working Groups Timing:  New SQSP Cycle Implemented for FY 2015  Target for New Operational Assessments and Expert UI Teams is FY 2016  Cycles for Peer Reviews - Will be Staggered in FY 2015 and FY 2016

8. STATE ENGAGEMENT A MUST!  State Participation on Workgroups  Opportunities for All States to Review and Comment on Key New Accountability Features  Consultation with NASWA UI Committee  Opportunity for All States to Provide Comments to Federal Register Notices Related to Paperwork Reduction Act Clearance  Webinars To Introduce New Reengineered Processes

9. WHAT’S IN IT FOR YOU?  We all gain an improved UI system that meets the needs of our customers and carries out the mission of the program.  Opportunities for states to continuously assess opportunities for improvement.  New ways to capture state best practices related to program administration that can be shared.  New structure to enable state peer-to-peer technical assistance by including state SMEs on expert teams supporting “at risk” states.

10. CHANGES TO BAM/BTQ PEER REVIEW FREQUENCY  We recognize the need to reduce the frequency and focus on a national approach.  Reducing the frequency will allow time to address operational functions identified by BAM/BTQ case reviews.  National approach will provide better opportunities for training/peer- to-peer sharing and greater consistency across the UI system.  Specifics still being worked out, we need your input and help!

11. OPERATIONAL REVIEWS OF BENEFITS ADMINISTRATION  Based on TPS model, state self- assessment approach puts states in control of their own continuous improvement  Propose to provide dedicated funding for 1 FTE to be independent reviewer to conduct self assessment.  Approach will promote State identification of benefits operational issues, help target TA and help build a robust collection of best practices for dissemination throughout the UI system.  This element needs your help and input!

12. NEW “AT-RISK” DEFINITION/PROCESS  Currently, two different processes and definitions.  Propose one definition that is clear and consistent, based on UI’s rich data and input from operational assessments.  Objective is the same: provide targeted technical assistance to states with challenges to improve system performance.

13. LEVERAGING OF UI SYSTEMS SKILLS  With reduced resources and talent turnover, we will better leverage UI talent throughout the UI System (Federal and State) for better impacts.  Propose to deploy “expert” teams to most “At-Risk” states to provide better assistance.  Want to include State experts for peer guidance and expertise.  Need your help and input on this element!

14. NEXT STEPS AND COMING MONTHS  Outreach to States for Workgroup Members Based on Nominations from NASWA and ETA’s Regional Offices  Onboarding contractor to support the development of the State Self-Assessment Tool  Workgroups are heads-down fleshing out the strategies in each area  Periodic “touch bases” with the system to provide additional information and enable input from all states  Guidance to states as new processes are finalized  Federal Register Notices and opportunity to provide comment related to PRA clearance.  Routine updates to NASWA UI Committee

15. Questions???