Employment and Training Administration
Washington, D. C. 20210






March 13, 1990




March 31, 1991











for Regional Management




UI/QC -- Procedures to Establish Good Cause for not Meeting Case Completion Timeliness Requirements


  1. Purpose. To offer procedures for State Employment Security Agencies (SESAs) to provide the Department with justification for not meeting the Quality Control (QC) case completion timeliness requirements.

  2. Reference. ET Handbook No. 395

  3. Background. The following time limits have been published in ET Handbook No. 395 for completion of QC cases:

    The Department's Annual QC Administrative Determination process includes a finding on timeliness of case completion. Failure to achieve the requirement could result in a SESA being asked to complete a corrective action plan (CAP) to be submitted with its annual Program and Budget Plan (PAP). It could also result in a footnote in the QC Annual Report stating the deficiency.

    However, ET Handbook No. 395 offers the following relief from the above-stated actions:

    If a SESA's rates for completion of cases sampled for investigation for any 12-month period ending December 31 are less than the time lapse requirements, the Department will determine, based upon information supplied by the SESA, whether or not good cause existed for not achieving the requirements.

    Therefore, if a SESA fails to complete 9S percent of the cases within 90 days, and it believes that such failure was attributable to reasons beyond its control, it may provide a written analysis to the Department as described in the procedures below. If the Department concurs with the SESA's conclusion that the requirement could not have been achieved, the CAP will not be required; and the footnote will not be published in the CC Annual Report.

  4. Criteria for Justification. To obtain relief from the actions for, failure to achieve the timeliness requirement during calendar year 1989, a SESA must submit an analysis by April 13, 1990 of the reasons cases were delayed beyond 90 days. The analysis must cover all delayed cases if there are 30 or fewer. If the number of delayed cases exceeds 30, a random selection of 30 cases will be sufficient. The analysis must demonstrate that the requirement has been met when the uncontrollable cases are excluded from the time lapse. calculation. The following formula, which excludes delays outside SESA control by revising the base, demonstrates the calculation:

    Adjusted Timeliness = Timely Cases/Timely + Controllable Delays

    Example: SESA completed 774 of 900 eases timely (86%) Analysis of a sample of 30 of the 126 delays revealed that 7 (23.3%) were controllable by SESA.

    Compute controllable delays for entire sample:

    126 x 23.3 = 29 controllable delays

    Compute revised base:

    774 timely + 29 controllable delays = 803

    Adjusted timeliness = 774/803 = 96.3%

    If the analysis reveals that the "adjusted percentage timely" is at least 95 percent, the request can be accepted by the Department, providing the results (methodology and conclusion) can be verified by the Department.

  5. Procedures. The analysis must utilize a sample frame of delayed cases from the entire calendar year. In order to include all such cases, the selection cannot be made until 90 days have lapsed from either (1) the last batch of the year or (2) the last delayed case. SESAs should plan accordingly in order to complete the analysis and submit it by the date prescribed.

    Each Regional Office (RO) possesses a software diskette that SESAs may obtain to facilitate gathering the data. This software identifies the delayed cases and provides individual worksheets for analyzing each case. Instructions for using this software are given in Attachment No. 1. (Note that the software contains additional instructions which are extraneous to this exercise.)

    Using these instructions, generate the printout of cases delayed over 90 days, then generate-worksheets for each of these cases. (If the number of cases delayed over 90 days exceeds 30 and the SESA chooses to sample, use the instructions in Attachment No. 2 to identify the 30 cases for the sample.)

    For each case, the worksheet contains identifying information and several dates from the record. Use the instructions in Attachment No. 3 to complete the worksheets. (It is important to note the distinction between what is controllable and uncontrollable by the SESA as opposed to the QC unit, as explained in section 4 of the instructions.) Attachment No. 4 is an example of a completed worksheet. Upon completion of the analysis of cases, compute the "projected percentage timely" via the instructions contained in section 4, above.

  6. Action Required. SESA Administrators are requested to:

    1. Provide this information to appropriate staff,

    2. Determine whether or not an analysis of relayed QC cases is necessary, and if so,

    3. Complete the analysis and submit the results (including worksheets) to the RO by April 13, 1990.

  7. Inquiries. Questions should he directed to the appropriate Regional Office.

  8. Attachments 

    No: 1 - Instructions for Using Diskette

    No. 2 - Instructions for Choosing Sample

    No. 3 - Instructions for Completing Worksheet

    No. 4 - Example of Completed Worksheet