Loading...
Loading...
Loading...
Loading...
Loading...
Loading...
Loading...
Some states require you to certify within certain time windows (as small as 30 minutes) as a way to balance web traffic load.
It increases the amount of times that someone is going to be able to mess up their claim: "It’s like running the gauntlet every week. If anything changes, one error will throw you down a path that will cause delays for the claimant and us that may require manual intervention Weekly certification is something that US DOL will not relax even though everyone has asked, maybe once every two weeks, because of sake of anti-fraud measures, they see this as another checks and balances in regards to certifying for benefits." - State B
Agencies should find alternative ways to balance traffic loads. The load generated by certification should be extremely small.
Certification questions are complex and difficult to understand and updating them requires the state to work with the Department of Labor. People are nervous that if they click the wrong option, they’ll lose their benefits.
"We identified questions that were confusing to claimants. Available to work and telework questions...the original language that DOL recommended and drafted was very confusing.” -- State C
"Systems haven’t been translated to serve underrepresented populations [or people] who don’t speak “UI language,” which is not human language, but it’s built into our system. Some of this language is mandated by DOL; it’s been adopted as the norm across policy and programs.” -- State F
US DOL should provide guidance and draft communications for states that has already been put into into plain language and usability tested for clarity in English, Spanish, and other key languages as requested by states.
If US DOL or one of its regional offices works with an individual state on changing any communications, that should be shared out with other states so everyone can benefit from that and doesn’t need to be re-done by others.
Many states limit how funds can be received, including only providing benefits via a prepaid debit card. Prepaid debit cards are targets for both physical and digital fraud, and enable banks to withhold or retract funds that they think were obtained fraudulently (without being asked by the state to do so).
"There’s also a challenge with new filers in the system who may have had a paid family leave or disability claim in the past four years. Those UI payments would go onto that same card. So if they lost that card or threw it away, there can be some challenges where the claims are crossing over to same benefit payment method but claimant doesn’t realize that and so there’s challenge" -- State B
People ask for Venmo more than they ask for checks --State B
"Direct deposit is great for people who are housing-unstable. Otherwise getting the debit card to people is a challenge. There are some non-traditional banks that act as direct deposit, and that’s helped. You can go into Walgreen’s and get a card that acts as a direct-deposit mechanism, so there are options for the unbanked." -- State F
Arizona, California, Maryland, Nevada, and Oklahoma should enable direct deposits of UI benefits without having to mail in a voided check or first get a debit card.
Claimants UI system accounts can be hacked and their bank account info changed so that someone else gets their benefits.
"We ask them to validate their identity using the exact same process every time we have an identity question. The process earlier, they’d do the same thing later, you can imagine how frustrating in the first place, and you had to do it again for opaque reasons, it might seem like we’re putting you on, in the nicest version of that. It’s a particularly frustrating point of the system for me. " -- State F
"The changing of bank accounts has been a strong indication of possible fraud, so there’s a two-day hold if people change bank account information. This can result in people in need of money being delayed." -- State F
Agencies should assume that bank account changes are hostile actions and require authentication beyond simply logging into the account. Be clear with the claimant about what is happening at that time and how to confirm legitimate changes.
Unemployment insurance is a complex system with many factors impacting eligibility and compensation amount. The way that UI agencies determine and communicate monetary and non-monetary eligibility independently is confusing: e.g., you’re told that your situation may qualify you for UI benefits, but also that you didn’t work enough hours in the base period to actually get any benefits -- or you’re told that you would get a certain amount if you qualify for UI benefits but that you don’t actually qualify.
The complication of UI systems was exacerbated when the 2020 CARES Act added three new programs to be administered through UI systems: Pandemic Unemployment Assistance (PUA), providing a base of benefits for gig workers and the self employed who are not eligible for standard UI; Pandemic Emergency Unemployment Compensation (PEUC), which extended the number of weeks someone could collect standard UI; and Federal Pandemic Unemployment Compensation (FPUC), which initially added an extra $600 to both UI and PUA for a period of time.
People were getting information about these programs from the news, from their friends and family, and from various forums online in addition to what was made available by the administering UI agency; the lack of straightforward explanations led to incorrect expectations about what they are eligible for and how much they would receive.
"It’s like an evil MC Escher painting. You think you’re walking through one door of eligibility and end up on the stairs of something else" --State B
"There are so many programs [in addition to unemployment insurance]: disability, temporary leave, etc. It’s hard for a consumer to know [what is going to be the best fit for them] unless they go through fantastically designed charts or FAQs, which they don’t usually do" -- State B
"Just straight UI claims - people just say give me my money, [but] there are lots of eligibility requirements around both monetary [amount and situations] with rules and laws. It’s not just about the fact that you’re not working,” and that’s hard for people to understand. -- State B
Agencies should se plain language when explaining programs and eligibility.
When there are multiple programs that someone might be eligible for, agencies should ideally implement a benefits eligibility screening tool, but at the very least provide an eligibility checklist, or eligibility FAQ page to help guide claimants to the right program(s).
Agencies should make it clear that the benefit is taxable and provide an opportunity to withhold that amount (if state law doesn’t permit withholding, that should change in partnership with the state legislature). If the claimant chooses not to withhold, the implications of not doing so should be clear in the application.
Agencies should perform usability studies on how people are informed of their (in)eligibility determinations to understand what specific communications should be streamlined and/or re-written. Communicate benefits receipt as a clear approve/deny in a single letter, with additional information about benefit amount or reason(s) for not qualifying for any benefits.
To be eligible for Pandemic Unemployment Assistance (PUA), a claimant must first apply for standard unemployment insurance and be rejected before applying for PUA, many times with the same information as in the initial application. States did not do an effective job communicating this to claimants and helping them navigate the process.
The impact is an unknown decrease in benefits participation rate, which resulted in people not getting the help they need and are qualified for.
"There is a DOL requirement that we deny people UI before we give them PUA. So we have people understanding that they can apply for PUA, should apply for PUA, but why they were denied for UI is super confusing. [We should have been] able to do some assessment and offer you just the PUA link, that’s what you’re eligible for based on your application. [...] It’s amplified the risk that people don’t understand what’s happening. [...] There’s a pretty big drop-out rate there where they don’t then go to apply to PUA, but we haven’t spent time hunting that down." -- State F
Agencies should connect applications when possible: If there are programs whose eligibility depends on not qualifying for other programs, application information should be sent from one to the other so that claimants don’t need to re-enter information they’ve already provided.
If it is going to take any amount of time to determine whether they are eligible for the first program, agencies should communicate this clearly and let them know what to expect.
If someone is found to be ineligible for the first program, agencies should use the information already obtained to determine whether they might be eligible for the second program and help them through that process. Do not rely on them knowing that they need to apply for something else.
New programs take time to establish and they can be difficult for state agencies to set up. People get confused and angry about the delays, believing that benefits should be available as soon as the program is mentioned in media coverage.
Legislation doesn’t take into account the feasibility or ease of enacting programs: “Every time Congress sneezes, we catch a cold. We went through this during the last recession, too. Let’s figure out what this should look like next time; assistance should be built atop existing code that can just be activated" -- State C
"What people hear is that there’ll be $300 more in your account tomorrow. And that’s not how it works, we have to reprogram everything." -- State D
US DOL should consult with states when any federal timelines are established to ensure that there is a reasonable implementation period. US DOL should help states in communicating the implementation timeline, especially if the legislation did not provide sufficient time.
Agencies should be as clear as possible about when the program will be operational; communicate changes to that timeline as they happen. Remain empathetic about what the claimants might be experiencing as they await aid.
US DOL should engage with states in a user-centered policy making process to understand the challenges with implementing new programs during crisis. That information should then be used to inform emergency legislation in future crises, as well as grant programs for UI agencies to prepare for recession-era programs ahead of time.
Current UI systems are not designed to simplify the claimant’s experience. Application questions are complex and difficult to understand. People are nervous and worry that clicking the wrong option will result in losing their benefits by mistake. They don’t always provide the correct information; claimants might send over too much information, which can confound and complicate decision making, or not enough information, which lengthens the process. Online applications are not always mobile-optimized and frequently aren’t translated into the languages needed for the state’s population.
Agencies should use plain language in the tools to help claimants better understand what is expected of them. US DOL should provide plain language guidance for common scenarios that States can use.
Agencies should explain the outcome of actions that the claimant takes or of answers they provide.
When additional information is needed, agencies should be very clear about what that information is and why it is needed. Uploading attachments should be available to claimants in the context of a targeted request for information from the agency, or as part of an issue creation/appeals workflow that the claimant initiates.
From “Centering Workers - How to Modernize Unemployment Insurance Technology”, agencies should update their applications according to the following:
Create a substantive, accessible claimant portal.
Go for a professional look.
Make your website mobile-optimized.
Design a sensible password reset process.
Make online and mobile systems available 24/7.
Automatically save incomplete applications, and provide a warning before timing out.
Allow customers to choose email or texting as a communications method.
Permit customers to email in or upload documents from a computer or mobile device.
Avoid automated decision-making.
Use plain language and smart questioning.
Translate the application and other online materials into Spanish and other commonly spoken languages.
Minimize the paperwork burdens associated with work search.
Some systems were not built for increased web traffic load. This has resulted in some states trying to limit what days or times individuals can apply or do their weekly certification in order to balance web traffic load.
Agencies should pt in place scaling plans and determine what will change in the system when there are large spikes in traffic. Take into account DDOS attacks as well as bot traffic.
Not everyone has access or sufficient digital skills to use the website.
"The people impacted by this pandemic are blue collar, they’re in socioeconomic groups that may be put at disadvantage as particular industries, educational background, they’re at a disadvantage due to complexity of system and ability to apply for claims, plus a language barrier that’s highlighted." -- State B
Agencies should create a process for phone applications and certifications and make sure that a phone line is available specifically for that purpose. This phone line should be separate from getting help with online applications or handling existing application or status issues.
Agencies should maintain a process for handling paper applications.
When possible to do safely, agencies should consider in-person “pop up” offices in targeted locations can help provide assistance. Think through the time commitment and resource constraints before setting expectations with the public.
Agency websites should eable claimants to schedule phone callback appointments to preemptively avoid long hold times.
Unlike most of the online interactions people have, UI systems frequently aren’t able to tell you right away what the status of your application is. If an issue is detected, or the application needs to be processed by the mainframe in a batch overnight, a claimant is left wondering what’s going on. When the system doesn’t tell them what is going to happen next or on what time frame, then claimants have undue anxiety and confusion, as well as calls to the help center.
“You’ll enter a claim but it doesn’t update until tomorrow. We have batch processes with the mainframe, so it’s not real time, it’s as of 24h ago. The dashboard might still say that there’s a problem even if the issue is resolved.” --State B
"Unemployment works differently from every other experience you have in the world, where you are approved until we change our minds about it. That can happen at any time. People assume they’re walking into a system where they’re going to fill out paperwork and payments are going to start. That’s just not an accurate representation of how unemployment meaningfully works. It’s an ongoing relationship where we’re constantly checking in. The term “eligible” here means something different to our customers than it does for us. It’s something we’re checking every week before issuing a payment" -- State F
Where possible, agency sites should seamlessly transition users in between processes. (E.g., if someone’s application is flagged immediately upon submission because more information is needed about their self-employment, go directly from that submission to a form/questionnaire.)
When information is submitted, agencies should let claimants know what will happen next and when they should expect to hear back.
Phone lines make it hard for agencies to prioritize work in a strategic way; you have to work with whoever calls in rather than, e.g., working on the oldest applications first.
Any published phone number is going to get inundated with calls, even if it’s intended to serve a particular purpose, because most states’ systems don’t provide people with enough information online.
Phones are a very expensive way for people to get the help they need
"People can’t self-cure almost anything on their application, even when they realize they’ve made a mistake, they can’t do anything about it until they talk to an agent" -- State B
"You can look up generalities, how to file, what to do, but once the claim is filed, someone generally wants claim specific, and the only way we can provide that is by speaking to someone, and we’re way outnumbered. The ability to get to a live agent, sure it’s a problem." -- State B
People who might actually need the phone (i.e., those without proficiency in or access to the digital tools) can’t access them because “we are clogging the lines with UX issues because it’s not clear or understandable to anyone.” -- State F
"There are escalation queues for people with disabilities, for people whose primary language isn’t English, people with significant hardships, etc. But if they advertise any of those routes, calls will come in and fill that up. Specialty phone lines don’t work." -- State F
Agencies should have clear processes in place to regularly learn from its customer support mechanisms (FAQ traffic, chatbot interactions, call center topics) and leverage that to update website and chatbot content.
Agencies should conduct usability testing of the key parts of their experiences to identify opportunities for improvement so that people don’t need to call in order to understand the system or find out what’s going on with their claim.
US DOL should provide states with , usability-tested content (graphics, FAQs, descriptions, social media posts, etc.) of the concepts that are the same across states, especially: how the different UI programs relate to each other, how to understand eligibility, what the impact of responding to weekly certification questions is, etc.
Agencies should implement , , , and other tools to reduce the need for people to call in.
State UI systems often have no digital status-checking method as it can be hard for the website to display succinct information across multiple backend systems. This requires claimants to call customer support to find out what is going on with their claim.
"People also think of many of these apps similar to a bank loan. They expect to put in information and then see a status. Our system and laws and regulations, it’s not that simple. So there’s a disconnect between what people expect to see and expect to be able to understand about their app and their benefits, and what we’re able to give them based on the restrictions in our system" - State B
“People at the call center are looking at 7 different systems: this one says you got paid this way, there’s [an issue over here, so it’s] hard to give clear claim status. We want to give people a weekly or monthly statement of what you got paid. Doing that right now combines a bunch of system and not easy to do.” -- State C
"It’s not obvious whether you’re waiting for the state to do something, or if the state is waiting for you to do something. You don’t have visibility into what’s going to happen next. Anybody with much anxiety is going to call in order to confirm information" -- State F
Agencies should iterate toward a complete status-checking experience - they shouldn’t try to do it all at once. E.g., it’s impactful to show someone their initial application status even if you can’t yet show weekly certification status or vice versa, or to show that a weekly certification was deemed eligible even if you can’t yet show how much/whether they have been paid.
Agencies should consider providing claimants with a way to check their status via automated phone, web chat, or SMS in addition to (or even as a step before) being able to check their status on the website.
The language used to convey application status is often meaningless to claimants; “application pending” could mean any number of different things
"When we send out letters to use this language like adjudication or pending issues or ICON, no one knows what that means. One of the problems is there are so many different details that we need to work out to process their claim to describe them in easily understandable language." -- State A
"There are generic statuses, like ‘pending.’ But you wouldn’t know why. If we are waiting for missing wages, the claimant would have no idea what’s happening. This is a big pain point for the claimant and for us. It generates a lot of calls. The Domino's app approach (you can see the pizza being made, you can see it being delivered) would be a lot better. Right now it’s a black hole." -- State F
Agencies should communicate in plain language what the status is; statuses should be descriptive yet concise. US DOL should provide guidance that all agencies should use.
Agencies should ensure that their claim and payment statuses are contextualized within the whole process, e.g. a progress bar. Statuses should also include the following supporting information:
Any decisions that have been made, and ideally the ability to begin an appeals process on that decision from that point.
What issue(s) are set on the claim, as well as what (if anything) is needed from the claimant; claimants shouldn’t be left wondering if they’ve missed a communication.
What payments have been disbursed, if any.