GDOL’s Unemployment Insurance Pandemic Response: Many factors contributed to payment delays (Georgia Special Examination Report No. 21-15, February 2022)
Summary
Georgia’s Performance Audit Division (State Auditor Greg S. Griffin) issued this special examination, Report No. 21-15 of February 2022, at the request of the House and Senate Appropriations Committees, which asked for an evaluation of unemployment insurance (UI) benefits administered by the Georgia Department of Labor (GDOL) during the COVID-19 pandemic. It found that the unprecedented volume of claims made delays inevitable, but that GDOL’s claims management and customer service systems were also factors. In most periods reviewed, half of initial payments took less than three weeks, but approximately 37,400 initial payments were made more than 120 days after initial eligibility. New initial claims spiked to approximately 716,000 within two months, and GDOL paid approximately $14.6 billion in benefits in fiscal year 2021, up from $302.3 million in fiscal year 2019.
Summary drafted by a model from the document's text below and checked by script against that text before publication. It is a navigation aid, not a reading of what the document proves. Where AI is used
Full text
SPECIAL EXAMINATION • REPORT NUMBER 21-15 • FEBRUARY 2022
GDOL’s Unemployment Insurance Pandemic Response
Many factors contributed to payment delays
Greg S. Griffin | State Auditor
Leslie McGuire | Director
February 2022
Special Examination Report No. 21-15
Performance Audit Division
Greg S. Griffin, State Auditor
Leslie McGuire, Director
Unemployment Insurance Pandemic Response
Why we did this review
Many factors contributed to payment delays
The House and Senate Appropriations
Committees requested an evaluation of What we found
the unemployment insurance (UI) During the COVID-19 pandemic, claims for unemployment
benefits administered by the Georgia insurance (UI) benefits increased significantly, and many
Department of Labor (GDOL). The claimants experienced lengthy delays in receiving payments.
committees were specifically interested The unprecedented volume of claims made delays inevitable,
in the timeliness of benefits during the but the Georgia Department of Labor’s (GDOL) claims
COVID-19 pandemic, as well as staff management and customer service systems were also factors.
hiring and training. GDOL should continue planned improvements to both.
Based on the request, we evaluated how
long it took GDOL to process claims and Many claimants experienced significant delays in
their UI benefit payments.
respond to claimant contacts, whether
Georgia UI claimants experienced significant delays during the
GDOL took reasonable steps to adjust
pandemic. Half of UI payments were made in less than three
staffing, whether technology challenges
weeks of the first week the claimant was eligible for benefits;
impacted timeliness, and whether
however, approximately 37,400 initial payments were made
claimants had access to clear and
sufficient GDOL communication.
more than 120 days after initial eligibility.
Claimants nationwide experienced payment delays due to the
About Unemployment
unprecedented increase in UI claims. During the pandemic,
Insurance
Georgia’s new initial claims spiked to approximately 716,000
Unemployment insurance provides within two months and remained elevated for more than a year.
payments to eligible individuals who By contrast, claims rose gradually during the Great Recession
become unemployed through no fault to a high of 76,000 over 14 months.
of their own. The program is
administered by GDOL and overseen Delays were driven by several underlying causes.
by the U.S. Department of Labor. GDOL could not provide reliable data that would allow an
evaluation of all factors contributing to processing and
In fiscal year 2021—the first full year payment delays. However, our review identified several
of the pandemic—GDOL paid
underlying issues, as described below.
approximately $14.6 billion in
benefits. This represented a significant • Limited Automation of Claims – GDOL’s process for
increase from the $302.3 million in determining eligibility and communicating with claimants
fiscal year 2019. Most benefits were requires significant staff involvement. In the years before
associated with federally funded the pandemic, the number of staff devoted to UI benefits
programs (approximately $12 billion), decreased by 32%, so fewer employees were available to
though regular state UI benefits also address the claim surge. GDOL increased UI hours by
increased—from nearly $300 million diverting staff, encouraging overtime, and hiring
in 2019 to $2.7 billion in 2021. In contractors and retirees. However, departures hindered
2021, these benefits were funded by efforts to increase staff numbers.
employer taxes and federal dollars.
• New Federal Programs – Several new programs were
created to expand payment eligibility, which required GDOL
270 Washington Street, SW, Suite 4-101 Atlanta, Georgia 30334 | Phone 404.656.2180 | audits.ga.gov
to create policies, train staff, and update IT systems. One prominent program—the Pandemic
Unemployment Assistance program—was particularly difficult to implement because it applied to
those not typically eligible for UI (e.g., self-employed).
• Risk of Fraud – UI fraud increased significantly during the pandemic. According to GDOL, the
controls to prevent fraud also catch unintended mistakes (e.g., incorrect Social Security Number),
causing delays in legitimate claims.
• Claimant and Employer Errors – The claim surge included many first-time filers who were
unfamiliar with UI, and errors were more likely because key communications were unclear and
claimants could not reach GDOL for assistance. Additionally, while GDOL’s requirement for
employers to file claims reduced processing times, delays occurred when employers failed to
timely certify unemployment.
GDOL was unable to adequately respond to claimants’ customer service needs.
Claimant inquiries to GDOL increased significantly during the pandemic, and many claimants’ attempts
were unsuccessful. For example, call volume in March 2020 (635,000) was six times higher than the
prior month and further increased to more than nine million in April and May. However, only 4% of calls
were answered; most were not connected due to limited phone system capacity. Data limitations
prevented us from analyzing additional call performance and from analyzing responsiveness to emails or
web inquiries, which also increased significantly.
Many calls and inquiries were directed to staff in the career centers and other GDOL divisions, who also
assisted with processing claims. In April 2021, GDOL expanded its dedicated customer service unit to 16
staff, who exclusively answer calls. While GDOL hired contract personnel to assist with various aspects of
the claims process, it contends that contract personnel would not have the experience required to
respond directly to claimants.
GDOL needs better data to manage the UI program, particularly when claims increase.
GDOL has significant information in its claims management system but does not produce sufficient
reporting to help evaluate performance, identify areas for improvement, or set priorities. We found that
the agency is not able to produce timely, reliable reports from the system.
Additionally, GDOL does not have sufficient information to manage customer service operations. For
example, it lacks information about call volume or typical metrics, such as answer rate. GDOL also has
no system to track and ensure that claimant emails and voicemails are addressed. Instead, staff must
review notes in the claims management system to determine whether a claimant has been contacted. In
some cases, this resulted in follow-ups from multiple staff, while other claimants received no response.
What we recommend
In addition to the information provided, we recommend GDOL collect additional, reliable information to
manage the UI program, particularly related to customer service. We also recommend GDOL increase
automation of its claims processing and improve its claimant communications regarding status and
document submission. We recommend GDOL incorporate lessons learned from the pandemic into a
formal recession plan to prepare for future increases in claim volume. See Appendix A for a detailed list
of recommendations.
Agency Response: GDOL stated that timeliness delays largely resulted from unprecedented claim
volume, new programs, and limited funding but disagreed that limited automation was a factor.
Regarding customer service, GDOL is using federal funding for a new customer service system. GDOL
agreed that additional information would assist UI management and said it is currently upgrading its
information and reporting systems. GDOL’s response included additional details and several points of
disagreement. These are included throughout the report, along with auditor responses.
270 Washington Street, SW, Suite 4-101 Atlanta, Georgia 30334 | Phone 404.656.2180 | audits.ga.gov
GDOL’s Unemployment Insurance Pandemic Response
Table of Contents
Purpose of the Special Examination 1
Background 1
COVID-19 Impact on Unemployment 1
Unemployment Insurance 2
GDOL Staffing 8
Financials 9
Timeliness of Payments 12
Finding 1: Benefit payment delays were driven by unprecedented volume, limited automation of
claims processing, and other factors. 12
Management Information and Planning 20
Finding 2: GDOL lacks information that would assist UI program management with planning and
decision making. 20
Finding 3: A documented plan would help GDOL better manage future increases in claim volume. 24
IT System 28
Finding 4: While GDOL has made key updates to its claims management system, the system could
better facilitate claims processing and communication with claimants. 28
Staffing 34
Finding 5: The number of GDOL employees has declined over time, resulting in fewer employees
to address the surge in claims. 34
Finding 6: GDOL’s staffing actions to address the claims increase were similar to strategies used by
other state UI programs. 35
Communications 43
Finding 7: Information available to claimants was not always clear and accurate, which
contributed to application errors, processing delays, and increased calls and emails
from claimants. 43
Policy Changes 48
Finding 8: GDOL adjusted policies to reduce claims processing times but could have considered
additional steps. 48
GDOL’s Unemployment Insurance Pandemic Response
Finding 9: GDOL’s requirement that employers file claims on behalf of certain claimants led to
faster processing of many claims but to delays or overpayments in some cases. 51
Finding 10: Career center closures allowed staff to focus on claims processing but increased
challenges for claimants. 54
Customer Service 56
Finding 11: The need for claimant assistance grew exponentially during the pandemic, but many
claimants were unable to obtain a response. 56
Finding 12: GDOL does not have systems in place to track claimant inquiries, which leads to
unfulfilled requests, delays in claims processing, and additional inquiries. 61
Appendices 64
Appendix A: Table of Recommendations 64
Appendix B: Objectives, Scope, and Methodology 66
Appendix C: Career Center Map 69
Appendix D: Timeliness 70
Appendix E: Staffing 72
GDOL’s Unemployment Insurance Pandemic Response 1
Purpose of the Special Examination
This review of the administration of Unemployment Insurance (UI) by the
Georgia Department of Labor (GDOL) during the COVID-19 pandemic was
conducted at the request of the House and Senate Appropriations Committees.
Our review focuses on the following questions:
• How long did GDOL take to process claims for each UI program?
• Did GDOL take reasonable steps to adjust staffing and training in
response to the high volume of UI claims during the pandemic?
• Did technological challenges impact GDOL’s timeliness of claims
processing?
• Did claimants have access to clear and sufficient communications
from GDOL?
• Did GDOL respond to contacts from claimants in a timely manner?
A description of the objectives, scope, and methodology used in this review is
included in Appendix B. A draft of the report was provided to GDOL for its
review, and pertinent responses were incorporated into the report.
Background
COVID-19 Impact on Unemployment
In early 2020, the COVID-19 pandemic significantly impacted unemployment
across the U.S. and in Georgia. The governor declared a statewide public health
state of emergency on March 14, and public schools were closed on March 16.
Some types of businesses were temporarily closed or capacity limited. On April 2,
a statewide shelter-in-place was issued that limited large gatherings and closed
non-essential businesses.
As shown in Exhibit 1, unemployment increased substantially and rapidly; by
April, Georgia’s statewide unemployment rate—as reported by the U.S.
Department of Labor (U.S. DOL)—rose to 12.5%, more than three times
February’s unemployment rate of 3.5%. The rate quickly declined from its peak
but remained higher than the pre-pandemic rate for 17 consecutive months.
GDOL’s Unemployment Insurance Pandemic Response 2
Exhibit 1
Statewide Unemployment Increased Sharply During the Pandemic,
January 2020 - June 2021
716K, 12.5%
New Initial Claims 1
Unemployment Rate
4.0%
3.5%
17K 45K
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun
2020 2021
1 Estimated new initial claims, excludes federal pandemic programs
Source: U.S. DOL Bureau of Labor Statistics, U.S. DOL Employment and Training
Administration, and GDOL claims data
Unemployment Insurance
Unemployment insurance (UI) helps address economic insecurity by providing
payments to eligible individuals who become unemployed through no fault of
their own. The Social Security Act of 1935 first established UI in the United
States, and Georgia’s state program was enacted by the Employment Security
Law of 1937.
UI is a joint state and federal program administered at the state level by the
Georgia Department of Labor (GDOL). The U.S. DOL provides oversight by
issuing operational guidance, establishing program standards, and conducting
audits. It also provides grants to states to assist with UI program administration.
State law establishes parameters for the state UI program, such as benefit
amounts and maximum weeks. However, during periods of economic recession,
the federal government has supplemented state UI with temporary programs that
extend and increase benefit payments.
In addition to the existing state UI program, GDOL began administering multiple
temporary federal programs created to combat the economic effects of the COVID
pandemic. Georgia discontinued the temporary federal programs in June 2021.
Georgia’s UI Provisions
To be eligible for Georgia state UI benefits, a claimant must be a legal U.S.
resident who:
• Became unemployed due to no fault of their own;
GDOL’s Unemployment Insurance Pandemic Response 3
• Earned sufficient wages within the last four or five quarters of
Claimant – An employment;
individual seeking
unemployment • Received wages from an eligible employer that pays UI payroll taxes;
benefits and
• Worked or earned wages in Georgia for the past two years.1
In Georgia, weekly benefit amounts for regular (state) UI range from $55 to
$365, based on the claimant’s wages received during their last four or five
quarters of employment. Benefits generally last up to 14 weeks but are extended
to up to 26 weeks during periods of high unemployment.
To continue receiving benefits, claimants must comply with certain requirements.
They must report earnings to GDOL, be available for and actively search for work,
and register for work with EmployGeorgia.com. Claimants can work less than
full-time while receiving benefits. However, benefits are reduced if they earn
more than a set amount per week. During the pandemic, GDOL suspended or
altered some provisions.
Georgia’s UI Claims Process
Most UI claims are filed by claimants, though employers can file on a claimant’s
behalf in limited circumstances. Regardless of the filer, GDOL must determine
whether the claimant is eligible prior to paying benefits. Each week, claimants (or
employers in some cases) must certify that they still meet eligibility
requirements.
GDOL officials indicated that before the pandemic claimants typically received a
benefit payment about three weeks after the initial filing, but the time frame was
shorter when the employer filed. The U.S. DOL has a timeliness standard that
87% of initial payments be made within that 21-day period.
Individual Claims
GDOL conducts two separate reviews to determine a claimant’s initial eligibility,
as shown in Exhibit 2. The monetary determination assesses whether the
claimant has enough wages to qualify for benefits, while the nonmonetary
determination assesses whether the claimant meets other eligibility
requirements, such as being unemployed through no fault of their own. Claimants
apply for benefits by filing an initial claim online, by phone, or in person at a local
career center.
1 Georgia residents who have only worked in another state must file UI claims in the state where they earned wages.
GDOL’s Unemployment Insurance Pandemic Response 4
Exhibit 2
Regular State UI Claims Process Typically Requires Two Determinations Prior to
Payment (Claimant Filings)1
Claimant files a claim.
GDOL mails UI Benefit
Determination
Are past wages (monetary) Determination
Monetary
NO sufficient?
YES letter indicating potential
benefit amount.
Benefits are not allowed.
Other potential issues
GDOL notifies the claimant
via mailed determination
identified (e.g., reason NO
for separation)?
letter.
YES
Determination
Nonmonetary
Benefits allowed. GDOL
Claims examiner
NO notifies the claimant via mailed
investigates. YES letter. Payments released in
Claimant eligible?
24-48 hours.
Claimant certifies
Claimant continues to receive
weekly and submits
Benefit payments stop. NO work search
YES weekly benefit amount
payment.
documentation
1
This is an overview for claims filed by individuals.
Source: GDOL interviews and documents
• Monetary Determination – A UI service specialist reviews each
claim to determine whether the claimant had sufficient wages to
qualify for benefits and to identify other potential eligibility issues.
Following initial review, GDOL mails the claimant a monetary
determination letter, known as the UI Benefits Determination letter,
which shows the claimant’s potential weekly benefit amount and the
maximum number of weeks benefits can be received. The letter does
not state whether the claimant has received final approval for benefits.
If eligibility issues are found during the initial review, the specialist
schedules a claims examiner review (nonmonetary determination).
GDOL’s Unemployment Insurance Pandemic Response 5
The specialist may also contact the claimant for missing information
or to address discrepancies in the application. The specialist also
sends the claimant’s most recent employer a fact-finding
questionnaire, which must be returned within 10 days.
• Nonmonetary Determination – After monetary review, a claims
examiner conducts a nonmonetary determination if GDOL cannot
verify separation is due to lack of work or if there are other eligibility
Lack of work – A issues (e.g., a severance package from the most recent employer, the
decrease in claimant’s unwillingness to accept a job similar to their prior job). The
workload that claims examiner reviews documentation, such as the employer’s
leads to a reduced completed questionnaire, and may call the claimant or employer for
staffing level more information. The claims examiner issues nonmonetary
determination letters that communicate the eligibility decision for
each issue reviewed. If benefits are allowed, payments should be
released 24 to 48 hours after the final determination is mailed.
To continue receiving benefit payments, claimants must certify eligibility weekly.
After issuing the monetary determination letter, GDOL notifies the claimant to
begin weekly certifications online or by phone. Claimants must certify for at least
one week before a claims examiner will conduct a nonmonetary determination.
During the certification, claimants attest that they have not refused suitable work
and report any wages earned. Claimants must also submit a form to confirm they
are available for and are actively searching for work. During the pandemic, the
work search requirement was waived, but the weekly certification was required.
Employer-Filed Claims
Employers may file the claim and certify weekly on the claimant’s behalf if the
claimant becomes partially unemployed (reduced hours or temporary layoff due
to lack of work). GDOL reported employer-filed claims generally require less staff
review because the employer has confirmed lack of work as the reason for the
claim. GDOL staff only need to ensure the employee has sufficient wages to
qualify for benefits. Partial unemployment benefits typically last up to six weeks
for a temporary layoff (the limit was extended during the pandemic). After the six
weeks, employers can convert the claim to an individual claim (discussed above),
and the employee is considered permanently laid off.
Beginning in March 2020, GDOL required employers to file partial
unemployment claims on behalf of their employees to speed claims processing.
Appeals
Claimants or employers not satisfied with GDOL’s determination can appeal
within 15 days of either determination. Appeals must be submitted in writing
online; by email, fax, or mail; or in person. There are three levels of appeals:
• Administrative Hearing Officer – The first appeal is heard by one
or more GDOL administrative hearing officers. The officer considers
testimony and evidence presented by each party. Hearings are
GDOL’s Unemployment Insurance Pandemic Response 6
generally held over the phone but may be conducted in person. After
the hearing, the officer mails the claimant and employer the decision
that affirms, reverses, or modifies the original determination.
• Board of Review – Either party can appeal the hearing officer’s
decision to GDOL’s board of review within 15 days of the decision
notice. The board consists of three governor-appointed panel
members. The board issues decisions based solely on evidence from
the initial appeals hearing, but it may agree to hear oral arguments.
• Judicial Appeal – Once all other appeals have been exhausted,
either party can file a petition for judicial review by the superior court
in the county where they were employed.
COVID-19 Federal UI Programs
Federal legislation and executive orders created new programs and benefits to
help mitigate the pandemic’s economic impact. As shown in Exhibit 3, multiple
programs were created or extended by law or a presidential order between March
2020 and March 2021.2 The Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security
(CARES) Act created UI benefit programs (see Exhibit 4). In August 2020, a
presidential memorandum authorized a temporary supplement program to
replace one that had expired. The Continued Assistance Act (CAA) extended all
original federal programs for three months and created Mixed Earner
Unemployment Compensation (MEUC). Finally, the American Rescue Plan Act
(ARP) extended all federal pandemic programs from March 2021 until September
6, 2021. Georgia ended its participation in federal UI programs on June 27, 2021.
Exhibit 3
Timeline of Federal Programs and Georgia Implementation, March 2020 - June 2021
December 27, 2020
March 27, 2020
CAA extends federal programs
Federal Programs
CARES Act creates August 8, 2020
and creates MEUC
three pandemic UI Presidential memorandum March 10, 2021
programs creates LWA ARP extends federal programs
Georgia April 24, 2020
First PUA payment
Implementation
June 27, 2021
Georgia ends
participation in federal
April 11, 2020 June 11, 2020
programs
First FPUC payment First PEUC payment
Source: Federal laws and agency documents
2 The high unemployment rate also triggered the State Extended Benefits (SEB) program, an existing federal-state program
activated in periods of high unemployment. The program provided an additional 13-20 weeks of UI benefits between weeks
ending July 4, 2020, to February 6, 2021. Eligible claimants were moved to SEB after exhausting regular (state) UI and
federal PEUC. During the pandemic, SEB was fully funded by the federal government.
GDOL’s Unemployment Insurance Pandemic Response 7
As shown in Exhibit 4, the programs created by the federal legislation and
presidential memorandum served three purposes. Pandemic Unemployment
Assistance (PUA) was a base benefit payment for individuals who do not typically
qualify for regular state UI, such as contract and gig workers. Other programs
extended the state UI for additional weeks or added a weekly supplement as long
as the claimant was eligible for the base benefit program.
Exhibit 4
Federal Actions Created Temporary Pandemic Assistance UI Programs
Weekly Maximum # of
Benefit Type Eligibility Process
Benefit Weeks
CARES Act (extended by CAA & ARP)
Claimants first submitted an
Pandemic Individuals who did not
initial claim. After denial for
Unemployment otherwise qualify for state UI Base benefit of 79 weeks2
regular state UI, they were
Assistance (i.e., self-employed; gig workers; $149 - $365 Ended June 27, 2021
emailed a link to apply for PUA
(PUA)1 1099 independent contractors)
benefits.
Pandemic Claimants were transferred into
Individuals who qualified but 24 weeks added to
Emergency PEUC automatically after Extension of
regular UI benefit
were not currently eligible for
Unemployment exhausting regular UI benefit Regular UI claim
period
regular state UI and who had
Compensation weeks. In some cases, claimants amount
(PEUC) exhausted benefits Ended June 27, 2021
had to file a new claim.
Federal As long as UI
Pandemic FPUC payments were
benefits are
Individuals who received any Supplement of
Unemployment automatically added to all UI
received3
type of UI benefits $300 3
Compensation benefit payments.
(FPUC) Ended June 27, 2021
Presidential Memorandum
Lost Wages Claimants attested to the
6 weeks
Individuals who received at Supplement of
Assistance reason for their unemployment
least $100 in weekly UI benefits $300 Ended Sept. 5, 2020
(LWA) through the My UI portal.4
Continued Assistance Act (extended by ARP)
Mixed Earner Same as regular UI if claimant
Unemployment also earned self-employment Claimants filed on the My UI Supplement of Ended June 27,
Compensation income portal $100 20215
(MEUC) (PUA recipients ineligible)
1
Although claimants could receive PUA and FPUC payments at the same time, they could not receive PUA payments at the same
time as regular UI, PEUC, or MEUC payments.
2
The CARES Act set the PUA maximum benefit period at 39 weeks; the Continued Assistance Act extended the maximum benefit
to 50 weeks, and the American Rescue Plan Act further extended it to 79 weeks.
3
The FPUC weekly benefit amount was initially $600 from April to July 2020 when the program expired. In January 2021, CAA
reinstated FPUC and lowered the weekly benefit amount to $300.
4
Claimants receiving PUA benefits did not need to attest to their reason for unemployment.
5
MEUC was implemented October 29, 2021, and eligible claimants were paid retroactively for weeks ending January 2 through
June 26, 2021.
Source: Federal laws and agency documents
GDOL’s Unemployment Insurance Pandemic Response 8
GDOL Staffing
Under the direction of the Commissioner of Labor, GDOL administers the UI
program and also works to reduce and prevent unemployment. Through job
training and placement, GDOL assists those seeking employment, as well as
employers needing qualified workers.
As shown in Exhibit 5, GDOL employed 1,080 staff across 13 divisions,3 with
staff in two divisions working on UI in June 2021. The UI division had 318
employees (29% of total staff) who process claims, collect employer taxes, and
provide customer service to claimants and employers. The largest division,
Statewide Operations, had 462 employees (43% of total staff), across 41 career
centers throughout the state (see Appendix C for a map of career centers).
Career center staff provide re-employment services, including services for
veterans, and process UI claims. GDOL indicated Statewide Operations staff
worked almost exclusively on UI claims during the pandemic. Across the two
divisions, there are approximately 375 service specialists, 65 claims examiners,
and 30 administrative hearing officers.
Exhibit 5
GDOL Employed 1,080 Staff Across 13 Divisions in June 2021
Commissioner of
Labor
Chief of Staff
Economic &
Office of the General Unemployment
Workforce Statewide Operations Workforce Solutions
Counsel Insurance
Development 462 staff 62 staff
9 staff 318 staff
7 staff
Labor Market Business Services Information
Communications Financial Services
Information Unit Technology
7 staff 39 staff
25 staff 47 staff 65 staff
Training & Staff Facilities & Admin
Human Resources
Development Services
11 staff
5 staff 21 staff
Source: Agency documents
3
Approximately 40 of the 1,080 staff are part-time.
GDOL’s Unemployment Insurance Pandemic Response 9
Financials
As claims increased during the pandemic, the cost of UI administration increased
as well. As shown in Exhibit 6, UI administration costs grew from $48.6 million
in fiscal year 2019 to $111.9 million in fiscal year 2021, an increase of 130%.
Personal services—which represent the majority of costs each year—increased by
nearly 110%. The largest percentage increases were computer charges (due to
software and equipment purchases) and contracts (primarily for temporary
staffing). These amounts are not limited to the UI Program as identified in the
Appropriations Act. They are associated with UI-related projects supported by
other programs (e.g., administration program contains IT.)
Exhibit 6
UI Expenditures Increased Significantly During the Pandemic, FY 2019 - FY 2021
Administration of UI1
Expenditures FY 2019 FY 2020 FY 2021 Change FY19-21
Personal Services $34,833,097 $44,010,442 $72,205,557 107%
Regular Operating $4,997,679 $5,635,931 $16,482,967 230%
Contracts $3,432,347 $4,399,945 $14,016,194 308%
Real Estate Rentals $2,405,205 $2,341,094 $3,004,019 25%
Telecommunications $1,046,326 $769,098 $1,246,952 19%
Computer Charges $810,688 $1,456,514 $4,509,988 456%
Equipment $391,299 $169,399 $466,846 19%
Transfers $713,840 $0 $0 N/A
Total Expenditures $48,630,481 $58,773,422 $111,932,523 130%
Revenue2
State Funds $8,325,897 $5,108,923 $4,996,338 -40%
Federal Funds $39,726,119 $50,732,149 $109,315,274 175%
Other Funds $24 $1,557,209 $28 14%
Total Revenue $48,052,040 $57,398,281 $114,311,639 138%
Benefits
FY 2019 FY 2020 FY 2021 % of FY 21
State UI Benefits3 $296,786,513 $2,030,576,394 $2,700,746,403 18%
Federal Benefits4 $5,528,676 $6,346,938,369 $11,899,972,557 82%
Benefits Paid $302,315,189 $8,377,514,763 $14,600,718,960
1
Administration expenditures include charges related to UI taxes. It also includes all charges to UI-related project
codes, regardless of the GDOL unit. This typically includes charges within UI, Statewide Operations, and Department
Administration.
2
Revenue associated with the UI-related project codes.
3
Regular (state) UI benefits. Georgia repaid $1.1 billion in federal advances for regular UI benefits with federal CARES
Act funding.
4
Includes federal UI programs, as well as State Extended Benefits (SEB), which were fully funded by the federal
government during the pandemic. SEB costs are normally split between the federal and state governments.
Source: TeamWorks Financials
Federal funds comprised an increasing majority of revenue for UI administration,
representing nearly all administration funding in fiscal year 2021. A small portion
of administration costs are funded by state appropriations.
GDOL’s Unemployment Insurance Pandemic Response 10
UI benefit payments also increased exponentially—from approximately $302.3
million in fiscal year 2019 to approximately $14.6 billion in fiscal year 2021.
Georgia’s UI benefits are typically funded by state employer payroll taxes, which
are collected by GDOL and deposited into the state unemployment insurance
trust fund. With the creation of federal programs during the pandemic, federal
dollars became the primary source of payments. In fiscal year 2019, nearly all
benefits were paid using the state employer payroll taxes collected by GDOL. In
contrast, approximately 82% of benefit payments in fiscal year 2021 were
associated with federally funded programs—increasing from $5.5 million to
nearly $12 billion. Regular state benefits also increased significantly (from nearly
$300 million to $2.7 billion). Many of these benefits were ultimately paid with
federal dollars due to the trust fund being exhausted and federal advances of $1.1
billion being repaid by a portion of the state’s CARES Act funds.
Recent History of Funding
In the years preceding the pandemic, funding to GDOL had steadily declined
before increasing slightly in fiscal year 2020 and significantly in fiscal year 2021
(see Exhibit 7). As shown below, federal funding represents the vast majority of
GDOL funding and was the primary driver of variation over the period. Funding
to the UI program (not shown) followed a similar trend, with the change largely
driven by federal fund changes. Federal funding for UI program administration is
primarily driven by claim volume, so funding fell in the years after the Great
Recession when unemployment rates were lower. (As noted above, funding and
expenditures related to UI are not limited to the UI program.)
Exhibit 7
GDOL Funding Declined Prior to Pandemic, FY 2013 – FY 20211
$200
$181
Millions
$171
$175
Total
$148Funding
$150
$125 $114 $146
$129
$100
Federal
$75 $89
$50
$30
State
$25 $14
Other
$0
2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
1 The fiscal year 2013 budget included a state fund transfer of $16.8 million from the
Governor's Emergency Fund to pay interest on a loan to the Unemployment Trust
Fund.
Source: Budgetary Compliance Reports; Governor's Executive Order
GDOL’s Unemployment Insurance Pandemic Response 11
State funding to GDOL was more stable over much of the period. It exceeded $20
million in fiscal years 2013 and 2014 but was between $13.0 million and $14.6
million the last seven years. State funding to GDOL is supported by an
administrative assessment paid by employers (in addition to the payroll tax). The
funding is deposited into the state treasury and subject to appropriations two
years later. Appropriations in fiscal years 2015-2018 were $11.3 to $14.4 million
below the corresponding collections each year. In fiscal years 2019-2021, they
were $6.3 to $7.6 million below collections.
GDOL’s Unemployment Insurance Pandemic Response 12
Timeliness of Payments
Finding 1: Benefit payment delays were driven by unprecedented volume, limited
automation of claims processing, and other factors.
UI claimants experienced significant delays during the pandemic in Georgia and
nationwide. Efforts to slow the spread of COVID-19 led to higher unemployment
and an unprecedented surge in UI claim volume. New federal programs required
state resources and added claimants not typically eligible for UI. In Georgia,
limited automation and the requirement for significant staff involvement in
claims processing also contributed to delays. While underlying causes could be
identified, GDOL could not provide detailed claims data that would have allowed
us to evaluate all factors that resulted in determination and payment delays.
Many claimants experienced increasing wait times before receiving their first
benefit payment during the pandemic.4 As shown in Exhibit 8, some claimants
received their first payment within a few days of their initial eligibility, and half of
the initial payments took less than three weeks in most periods reviewed.
However, after the pandemic began, the last 5% of claims paid (as of September
2021) took three to almost five months or more.5 Over the period reviewed,
approximately 127,000 claimants’ first payment occurred more than 60 days
after initial eligibility; approximately 37,400 claimants waited more than 120
days.6 The longest payment delays may be due to appeals that overturn an initial
denial. Additional details regarding first payment timeliness are shown in
Appendix D.
While first payment delays began with the surge of claims in April 2020,
claimants experienced longer first payment delays starting in the third quarter of
2020. GDOL staff indicated claims were more complex after the early surge,
when most claims resulted from lack of work. Later claims were reportedly more
likely to involve resignations or firings, which require a claims examiner’s review.
It should be noted that the largest claim volume occurred in April-June 2020, so
the final 5% of payments in this quarter represents approximately 35,300
claimants with payment times greater than 94 days. Other quarters had
significantly lower claim volume; therefore, the number of claimants waiting
declined despite the longer time frames.
4 As discussed in greater detail on pages 16 and 23, GDOL was unable to provide data that would allow us to evaluate the
timeliness of all claims (paid and denied), the time between other milestone dates (e.g., filing, monetary and nonmonetary
determinations), or the differences in performance across all UI programs. This analysis only includes paid claims and the
difference between the ending date of the first week the claimant was eligible for benefits and the check date for the first
payment.
5 It should be noted that these payment times may grow longer as additional claims are paid and more appeals are heard.
6 Our analysis excluded PUA claims with a first eligible week in the first quarter of 2020 because the CARES Act (passed
March 27) allowed claims to be backdated to weeks ending February 2.
GDOL’s Unemployment Insurance Pandemic Response 13
Exhibit 8
Half of Payments Took a Few Weeks, Others Took Several Months
January 2020 - June 2021
95% of Pymts Made
All UI Programs
50% of Pymts Made
Days from eligibility to first payment1
First Pymt Made
137 143
124
94 102
55
15 13 17 17 18 24
Jan-Mar Apr-Jun July-Sep Oct-Dec Jan-Mar Apr-Jun
(357K) (727K) (91K) (32K) (31K) (12K)
2020 Claims with Payments 2021 Claims with Payments
1 Difference between first week ending date for benefits and check date. Data as of September
2021. Ongoing claims processing and appeals could lead to additional payments that would
increase the 50% and 95% levels, especially for recent quarters.
Source: GDOL benefit payment data
Time to first payment varied by program, as shown in Exhibit 9. For regular
(state) UI, half of first payments were made in less than three weeks throughout
the pandemic, and 95% of payments were made within two and four months,
depending on the quarter reviewed. Approximately 26,000 claimants (paid as of
September 2021) waited more than 120 days.
PUA payments generally took longer, in part because claimants had to first apply
and be denied for regular UI before applying for PUA. GDOL officials were
unable to explain the reason for the trend in 2020, though timeliness improved
over the course of the year. After the Continued Assistance Act was passed in
December 2020, PUA claimants were required to verify their identities and
provide documentation to support their pre-pandemic earnings, which likely
delayed initial payments for some claims filed in 2021. Approximately 15,100
claimants paid through September 2021 waited more than 120 days for their first
payment.
GDOL’s Unemployment Insurance Pandemic Response 14
Exhibit 9
PUA Payments Generally Took Longer than Regular UI, January 2020 - June 2021
2
Regular Unemployment Insurance (State) Pandemic Unemployment Assistance
95% of Pymts Made
Days from eligibility to first payment1 220
50% of Pymts Made
First Pymt Made
143 150
130 123 122
102 100
66 75
55 59
24 23 20
15 12 13 17 18 17 6
Jan-Mar Apr-Jun Jul-Sep Oct-Dec Jan-Mar Apr-Jun Apr-Jun Jul-Sep Oct-Dec Jan-Mar Apr-Jun
(357K) (639K) (81K) (31K) (30K) (14K) (96K) (11K) (500) (7K) (400)
2020 Claims with Payments 2021 Claims with 2020 Claims with Payments 2021 Claims with Payments
Payments
1 Difference between first week ending date for benefits and check date. Data as of September 2021. Ongoing claims processing and appeals could
lead to additional payments that would increase the 50% and 95% levels, especially for recent quarters.
2 PUA effective dates in the first quarter were excluded because the CARES Act (passed March 27) allowed these claims to be backdated,, so time
between initial eligibility and first payment could be significantly longer than processing time.
Source: GDOL benefit payment data
Delayed benefit payments caused financial hardships and frustration for many
claimants. Media reports and thousands of web inquiry comments showed that
claimants risked eviction, foreclosure, and food insecurity. Others reported that
they were unable to pay utility bills or afford necessities. The frequency of
repeated calls and inquiries shows the desperation of some claimants. More than
225,000 claimants sent multiple web inquiries between January 2020 and May
2021; almost 11,000 sent more than 10 inquiries. Between January and May
2020, nearly 270,000 people placed 10 or more calls to GDOL.
Our review identified several issues contributing to the delays in processing
claims and issuing benefit payments. Additional details and areas for
improvement are discussed throughout the report.
• Unprecedented claim volume – The economic shutdowns in early
2020 led to historically high UI claims in an unusually short time.
New UI claims increased to approximately 716,000 in April,7 40 times
the 17,000 new claims filed in February 2020. The claim volume in
April alone was more than three times the number of claims in all of
2019 (approximately 218,000).
During a typical recession, unemployment rates rise over several
months, giving state labor departments time to respond. However, the
suddenness of the pandemic caused claims to surge more quickly,
straining states’ unemployment processing systems and leading to
7 We estimated new initial claim volume during the pandemic, using unduplicated counts from GDOL claim data. GDOL’s
reporting included approximately 1.2 million duplicate claims and 1.4 million additional claims during the pandemic, which
would have involved a significantly lower level of review.
GDOL’s Unemployment Insurance Pandemic Response 15
delays. Exhibit 10 shows monthly volume for new initial UI claims
for two time periods—the months around both the Great Recession
(began December 2007) and the pandemic recession (began February
2020). During the pandemic, unemployment claims spiked over a
two-month period and then remained elevated for more than a year.
In contrast, claims rose gradually over 14 months during the Great
Recession, peaking at approximately 76,000 in January 2009.
Exhibit 10
New UI Claims Surged Sharply During the Pandemic
Pandemic Peak
716K
(2020)
Great Recession Peak
76K
(2009)
January April July October January April
Source: U.S. DOL Employment and Training Administration and GDOL claims data
• Staff-intensive claims process – Manual processes hindered
GDOL’s management of the claim surge. GDOL’s system for
processing claims requires a high level of staff involvement, with
limited automation, as discussed on page 28. Additionally, certain
eligibility decisions (e.g., assessing a claimant’s reason for quitting)
must be made by an employee and cannot be automated. As a result,
GDOL needed to significantly increase UI staff to address the claim
surge. GDOL shifted many non-UI staff to claims processing and hired
contractors to provide support, as discussed on page 35. GDOL did
not significantly increase the number of agency employees, partly due
to the challenges of hiring and retaining employees.
• New federal programs – Implementing several new federal
pandemic programs took time and required a redirection of staff
resources for creation of policies, training, or IT requirements. To
begin implementation, GDOL needed guidance from U.S. DOL, which
typically took one to two weeks to issue. GDOL’s UI and IT staff then
worked to develop new programming to ensure adherence to federal
guidance. Additional programming changes were necessary later as
GDOL’s Unemployment Insurance Pandemic Response 16
GDOL could not provide data for a comprehensive evaluation
While the broad underlying causes of delays are known, GDOL could not provide the data necessary for us to
evaluate the extent to which specific claim types or agency processes contributed to delays. We were told that
our original request for comprehensive data on all claims submitted would take several weeks for each program,
or a total of three to four months. Given the report timeline, we agreed to use a smaller data set GDOL was
providing to the U.S. DOL Inspector General, despite it allowing only a more limited analysis. However, the data
GDOL provided contained errors such as blank fields and claims paid before they were filed (as discussed on
page 23). Any analysis based on this data would not have accurately represented processing times.
Ultimately, we were limited to the payment data GDOL provided to our financial auditors. This data allows an
analysis of the time to first payment by program but does not permit an analysis of pending claims, denied claims,
the characteristics of claims processed more slowly, or the types of claims most frequently appealed.
We also considered using data that GDOL regularly reports to U.S. DOL to evaluate the timeliness of claims
processing compared to other states. However, as discussed on pages 20 and 22, this reporting is limited and
had reliability issues, such as including duplicate claims and underreporting the number of appeals filed. Other
states also experienced data issues, making comparisons between states problematic.
Congress passed subsequent legislation and U.S. DOL issued new or
revised guidance. Staff also needed training on the new programs to
process claims and answer claimant questions. GDOL reported that
PUA was especially difficult to implement because it covered groups
not typically eligible for UI in Georgia (e.g., self-employed, gig
workers). PUA claims were also prone to delays because claimants had
to file for regular state UI and be denied before filing for PUA.
• Mistakes by claimants and employers – Mistakes during the
application and weekly certification processes delayed processing,
caused missed payments, and likely led to denials. The claim surge
included many first-time filers who were unfamiliar with UI, and
errors were more likely because claimants could not reach GDOL with
questions. As discussed on page 43, claimants frequently
misunderstand communications from GDOL, including application
questions and determination letters. Additionally, GDOL required
employers to take responsibility for filing and certifying partial
unemployment for their workers, and many were not equipped to do
so (discussed on page 51).
• Increased fraud – Fraudulent claims increased during the
pandemic nationwide, and some legitimate claims were delayed or
denied as a result. News reports indicated that organized crime
targeted UI programs using stolen identities to file fraudulent claims.
When individuals later attempted to file a legitimate claim, the system
would identify the earlier claim using their identity, leading to denial
or delays while the issue was addressed. GDOL employs a number of
controls in an attempt to prevent fraud, but these controls may also
catch unintended mistakes. For example, a claimant may enter their
Social Security Number incorrectly, causing their claim to be flagged,
requiring manual staff review and additional claimant action.
GDOL’s Unemployment Insurance Pandemic Response 17
• Inadequate customer service – Unanswered inquiries increased
GDOL’s workload and led to payment delays. Career center staff split
time between processing claims and answering inquiries during the
pandemic, and staff from other divisions also provided assistance.
However, GDOL has only a small unit (16 staff in April 2021) that
exclusively answers phone calls. As discussed on page 56, many
claimants were unable to reach GDOL staff for information on their
claim status. As a result, some claimants filed duplicate claims or
invalid appeals in an attempt to obtain benefits, creating more work
for GDOL staff. Other claimants were unable to reach GDOL to
provide information necessary to process their claims, resulting in
delays or incorrectly denied claims.
Agency Response: GDOL generally agreed with the factors that
contributed to delays, though it emphasized several and disagreed that
automation was a significant factor.
GDOL considered the primary factors to be unprecedented claim volume,
new and changing federal programs, and inadequate administrative
funding between the Great Recession and the pandemic.
• GDOL noted the increase in claims was “unprecedented and
unforeseeable,” indicating it had paid out more in UI benefits during
the pandemic than in its entire 84-year history.
• GDOL stated that Congress created “poorly designed programs” it
knew states would struggle to implement, especially PUA, which
significantly increased both claims and identity fraud. Additionally,
U.S. DOL “was slow in issuing guidance and repeatedly changed it,
causing delays to state implementation.”
• GDOL noted the negative impact of insufficient funding prior to the
recession. It stated that “Commissioner Butler repeatedly warned the
legislature that if the full administrative assessment was not restored
to match the amounts being collected, the next recession would have
a devastating impact on Georgia. The state repeatedly ignored
Commissioner Butler’s many requests for additional funding.”
GDOL said that “increased fraud, mistakes by claimants & employers, and
staffing challenges also contributed to delays.” It indicated that claimants
who submitted all the necessary information in their application “generally
saw their claims processed promptly.” It pointed to identity verification
requirements to address PUA fraud and noted that if claimants “delayed in
verifying their identities, payments could not be released.” Additionally, it
noted the difficulty of maintaining adequate staffing with insufficient
funding.
GDOL disagreed that lack of automation was a primary cause for delays. It
argued that it had “utilized automation where permitted” by U.S. DOL and
noted that electronic filing in bulk by employers was an innovation
recognized as a success by U.S. DOL. It stated that a majority of claims were
automated in early 2020 due to the nature of the job separations.
Furthermore, it contended that states with more automation than Georgia
GDOL’s Unemployment Insurance Pandemic Response 18
did not have better results. However, it did agree that “opportunities exist
for increased automation of claims processes.”
Auditor’s Response: While GDOL stated that it had already
automated processes where permitted, it also acknowledged
additional automation was in place in other states and was planned
in Georgia. As discussed in the report, we identified tasks that could
be automated to reduce the need for staff involvement during initial
processing, which would have helped GDOL handle the pandemic
claim surge with fewer staff. Several years ago, Minnesota
determined that increasing staffing to deal with its significant
seasonal fluctuations in UI claims was impractical. It increased
automation of the UI process, allowing easier scale up for higher
volume, and consistently ranks highly in first payment timeliness.
Agency Response: GDOL contended that the data provided to the audit
team and publicly available data should have allowed for a thorough
evaluation of timeliness. It also stated that the audit work duplicated U.S.
DOL’s auditing efforts and the data requests were overly burdensome. It
suggested that the audit team’s request demonstrated a lack of
understanding of complex process because claims data does not fit into a
neat chronology easily produced and analyzed in the manner desired.
Regarding the reported problems with claims data, GDOL said that U.S.
DOL OIG did not indicate there were problems with the data.
Auditor’s Response: As noted in the report, we identified
inconsistencies and inaccuracies in GDOL’s claims data and federal
reporting that prevented us from using these sources to report on
timeliness. Results based on inaccurate data would not have
presented an accurate portrayal of timeliness. When we reviewed a
sample of claims with senior GDOL staff, the dates and amounts
shown in the data set did not always reflect what was shown in the
claim record, and the official was unable to explain the information
in the dataset.
After discussing the time needed to fulfill our initial data request and
the types of analyses we wanted to perform, GDOL proposed that we
utilize data being provided to the U.S. DOL OIG for the timeliness
analysis. This dataset, recommended by GDOL, was not reliable for
assessing timeliness. Months after suggesting the dataset (and after
receiving a report draft), GDOL determined that the attempted use of
the data it provided signified the auditors’ lack of understanding of
the program’s complexities.
Finally, we spoke with the U.S. DOL OIG after receiving GDOL’s
response and determined that the data GDOL provided to the audit
team was not used to analyze timeliness.
Agency Response: GDOL also stated the audit timeliness metrics used in
the report were “novel” and that they reflected DOAA auditors’ lack of
understanding about complex UI processes. GDOL believes that the analysis
also does not appropriately distinguish appeals that reverse earlier
disqualifications from other paid claims and that the limitations of the
analysis are not explained.
GDOL’s Unemployment Insurance Pandemic Response 19
Auditor’s Response: Without claims data to assess timeliness, we
used the payment data as a last resort to answer the questions posed
by the Georgia House and Senate Appropriations Committees. The
data reported is simply the time between the first week the claimant
was eligible for benefits and the first payment, using a similar
calculation to what is used for the federal first-payment timeliness
measure GDOL referenced in its response (see below), and using
data that GDOL provides to the financial auditors every year. When
we notified GDOL that we planned to use this data to report on
timeliness, as well as the method and data points we planned to use,
it did not express concerns.
Agency Response: Finally, GDOL stated the audit should have used
federal timeliness standards and compared Georgia to other states using the
data states reported to U.S. DOL, as other auditors had done. It pointed to
U.S. DOL first-payment timeliness measures showing that during the
pandemic, Georgia frequently ranked in the top three of eight states in the
South region and in the top three of ten large states.
Auditor’s Response: As noted in the finding, we identified issues
with the reliability of key data points in the U.S. DOL reports that
prevented us from using it for analysis. More importantly, auditors
frequently obtain the underlying data to ensure that agencies’
reports are accurate.
Additionally, it should be noted that federal timeliness reporting
reflects only regular UI (no federal programs) and that Georgia
failed validation testing for payment data. Additionally, other states
experienced similar data reliability issues during the pandemic,
making such comparisons problematic. While some audits may
include these comparisons, we spoke with performance auditors in
other states who had reached the same conclusion and avoided
reporting on the federal data for this reason.
GDOL’s Unemployment Insurance Pandemic Response 20
Management Information and Planning
Finding 2: GDOL lacks information that would assist UI program management with
planning and decision making.
GDOL needs additional and reliable information to better manage the UI claims
and customer service processes. Despite the UI program’s size and complexity,
management primarily relies on informal information gathering (rather than
data-driven reporting), and available data may be inaccurate. During the
pandemic, additional information regarding claim workload status, processing
challenges, inquiry volume, and the reasons for claimants’ inquiries would have
better informed GDOL’s staffing and communication strategies.
Timely and accurate analysis of program data can help management evaluate
performance, identify areas for improvement, and set priorities. With the right
information, management can better understand the issues the program faces
and the impacts of options being considered, which improves decision making.
Instead of using data-driven reports, GDOL often relies on informal processes
and discussions for decision making. The agency does not have sufficient
reporting in place, and new reports cannot be provided in a timely manner.
Additionally, in some available reports, key data are not sufficiently reliable for
management use.
Limited Information Available for Program Management
GDOL needs additional information to systematically manage its claims process
and customer service operations. Informal information gathering may alert
management to some issues that staff have observed, but other problems may be
overlooked.
• Claims – GDOL’s claims management system contains dozens of
data points that could provide valuable information for UI
management, but this data is not fully utilized. Regular reporting on
UI claims is limited to summary data required by U.S. DOL, such as
claim volume and first payment timeliness.8 These reports do not
provide other information that would be useful for UI management.
For example, the reports do not include data on staff productivity, the
timeliness of monetary determinations, or performance measures for
programs other than state UI (e.g., PUA, PEUC). The reports also omit
claim characteristics (e. g., non-English speakers, employer-filed
versus claimant-filed) that could impact denial rates or processing
times.
Up-to-date information is difficult to obtain. UI management can
request reports from IT when they identify an issue. However, GDOL
8 GDOL also has real-time data about the total number of pending claims, but this does not provide the type of reporting that
can be used for trend analysis or process evaluations.
GDOL’s Unemployment Insurance Pandemic Response 21
IT stated it takes a minimum of four to six weeks to generate the
reports, which limits their usefulness.
• Customer service – While analysis of performance trends and
workloads could help improve customer service, GDOL does not use
regular reporting or performance metrics to manage its operations.
Currently, staff may obtain reports on the number of calls answered or
sent to voice mail, but no reporting is currently available on common
metrics, such as total volume, answer rate, or caller hold times.
Finally, GDOL does not track performance information related to web
inquiries, emails, or voice mails, including whether or how quickly
staff responded. Without this information, GDOL cannot properly
evaluate its responsiveness to claimant inquiries.
GDOL also does not track why many individuals contact the agency,
which could help improve its communications. Currently, no data is
collected for why claimants call career centers or send emails. Broad
topics are collected for a limited number of calls, but these fields are
either not required or not reliable for analysis.9 With more and better
data, GDOL could improve the information it provides to claimants
and staff. For example, claimant questions could suggest new
information for the website’s Frequently Asked Questions or
additional clarification to include in letters or application questions.
(GDOL staff indicated they did alter the FAQs using data from a
chatbot added during the pandemic.) These types of changes can
reduce the need for claimants to request assistance. GDOL could also
use this data to adjust training and ensure staff have the information
they need to help claimants.
Additional management information would help GDOL better plan for future
claim surges. As discussed on page 24, a recession plan outlines predetermined
strategies to quickly implement when UI claims increase. Better information and
ongoing analysis could help GDOL identify whether changes are needed and
which strategies to implement. For example, GDOL needs additional staff when
claim volume rises, and productivity information would help management
understand how many claims and inquiries staff in each role can handle. This
would inform decisions about whether to hire new staff, shift work to other staff,
or use contractors for particular roles (e.g., claims processing, customer service).
Current Information Not Always Reliable
To improve decision making, management information must be based on
accurate and complete data. Some data currently available from GDOL is not
reliable enough to be used by management. We attempted to use two sources—
GDOL’s reports to U.S. DOL and data extracts GDOL produced for this special
examination—to answer questions about claims processing timeliness and
responsiveness to claimants. However, the issues described below prevented us
9 The central customer service line had general topic data for 5% of calls. The dynamic scheduler appointment system also
included general topics, but staff indicated the fields were not reliable.
GDOL’s Unemployment Insurance Pandemic Response 22
from completing the planned analyses and indicate UI management may not
always receive accurate information.
• Inaccurate reporting to U.S. DOL during the pandemic – Key
data points in GDOL’s federal reporting were inaccurate, including the
number of claims and appeals filed. As a result, neither GDOL nor the
public had an accurate picture of the pandemic workload and
resulting backlogs. The system issues that led to the discrepancies
were not caused by the pandemic, but they were likely exacerbated by
the increased claim volume. It should be noted that GDOL failed 8 of
11 data validation tests for UI benefits that were required by U.S. DOL
in 2021. Many states also failed validation tests during the pandemic.
o Claims filed – GDOL reported significantly higher claims
filed than it actually received. Federal reporting shows
approximately 3.9 million initial claims were filed during the
pandemic but only 2.7 million went through initial processing,
a difference of 1.2 million (40%). Staff indicated the difference
occurred because the reporting system counted duplicate
claims as new claims. Pandemic conditions likely increased the
number of duplicates due to employer-filed claims (e.g.,
multiple employers filing for one person) and processing
delays that led claimants to file multiple claims.10
o Pending appeals – GDOL reported significantly fewer
pending appeals than the actual number awaiting decisions.
Federal reporting showed 2,393 appeals pending in October
2021; however, GDOL staff indicated there were
approximately 61,000 appeals awaiting processing at that
time, a difference of approximately 59,000 (96%).11 Staff
indicated that the remaining appeals had been received but
were not yet processed and entered into the system. The
pandemic volume increased the number of appeals, which
meant a large number had not yet been entered.
o Other data – Other data in the federal reports also showed
discrepancies, indicating underlying problems. For example,
PUA reporting showed that less than 1% of claimants found
eligible in the fall of 2020 received a first payment, which staff
indicated was not accurate. Reporting for state extended
benefits and federal PEUC show appeal decisions were made
but no appeals were filed. Data quality issues also affected the
performance measure for nonmonetary determination
10 An analysis performed in July 2020 by the University of Tennessee Boyd Center for Business and Economic Research
noted that “industry-level claims data from Georgia suggests that 163% of leisure and hospitality workers have filed initial
claims since the pandemic began.” (Understanding the Accuracy of Unemployment Insurance Data, by Marianne Wanamaker
and Evan Newell)
11 Some portion of these will be determined to be invalid, meaning the claimant did not yet have a determination to appeal.
GDOL’s Unemployment Insurance Pandemic Response 23
timeliness. This issue was included in GDOL’s corrective
action plan prior to the pandemic.
• Inaccurate data provided for the special examination –
Problems with data GDOL produced for the special examination
indicate there would likely be problems with ad hoc reports produced
for UI management.
o Claims data – GDOL had difficulty providing complete and
accurate information for the audit team to evaluate the
timeliness of claims processing and payments. As discussed on
page 16, we had to significantly reduce our data request to
obtain claims data within the necessary time frame. When the
dataset was obtained, problems included missing records,
blank filing dates, and inaccurate benefit amounts.
Additionally, thousands of records had illogical date orders—
for example, first payment dates that occurred before the
claimant filed or before GDOL staff had reviewed the claim.
(This does not necessarily indicate problems with claims
processing but with the ability to pull system information into
reports.) Over the next three months, GDOL provided revised
data three more times. While these data sets improved, they
still exhibited similar problems.
o Customer service data – Some data related to claimant
communications also suggested reliability problems. For
example, the call data showed calls that appear to be answered
in the middle of night or that lasted a few seconds. GDOL
stated the “data cannot be assumed to be accurate or
complete.” Additionally, while the Dynamic Scheduler data
included general call topics, staff indicated these fields were
not reliable.
RECOMMENDATION
1. To manage the UI program more systematically, GDOL should
collect additional information and ensure all information is
reliable and accurate.
Agency Response: “GDOL agrees that having more information available
during the pandemic would have greatly assisted UI management with
planning and decision making” but indicated that reduced federal and state
funding after the Great Recession had prevented expansion of system
reporting capabilities. It noted that, while federal funding declined over the
past decade, it had applied for federal administrative grant money to make
UI system improvements. GDOL further declared that the state had diverted
$100 million in administrative assessment funding from the agency between
2010 and 2020, which it contends is inconsistent with O.C.G.A. 34-8-182(b).
It stated that the additional funds would have resulted in fewer deferred
improvements to reporting and information systems, as well as additional
GDOL’s Unemployment Insurance Pandemic Response 24
staffing. GDOL indicated that the agency consistently asked for the full
assessment collections to be provided but that the commissioner’s “requests
and warnings were consistently ignored” by the legislature. Finally, GDOL
stated that the special examination ignores the loss of federal and state
funding as a key factor in the pandemic response.
Additionally, GDOL agreed that available data is limited to the data and
metrics required by U.S. DOL but disagreed that additional data and
metrics noted in the finding, such as claimant characteristics and timeliness
of monetary determinations, were necessary. It stated claimant
characteristics (e.g., non-English speakers) are not relevant for reporting
because they play no role in processing times. GDOL added that decisions
are “informed by leaders with decades of experience analyzing workforce
and economic data and trends.”
Auditor’s Response: During the audit, GDOL officials made various
assertions but could not provide requested data to allow for evaluation
of these statements (e.g., delays caused by incomplete applications or
missing wages). These assertions may be accurate, but as the finding
points out, additional data can provide a better understanding of the
issues to facilitate process improvement and resource prioritization. For
claims that take longer to process than others, detailed claim data may
indicate the characteristics or factors impacting timeliness.
Recommendation: GDOL noted that it is currently using federal
pandemic grant funding “to upgrade information and reporting systems”
but some improvements would require ongoing funding (e.g., licensing fees).
These upgrades will include “a customer relations management system and
a virtual agent to improve customer inquiry tracking and resolution as well
as enhanced reporting and monitoring.”
Finding 3: A documented plan would help GDOL better manage future increases in
claim volume.
While the pandemic led to an unprecedented increase in claims, UI programs
regularly experience fluctuations due to economic expansions and contractions.
GDOL does not have a documented plan to address such fluctuations. Developing
a plan would help GDOL prepare for future claim surges, reduce the need to
quickly develop strategies during a crisis, and ensure that lessons learned are
available for future GDOL managers.
The cyclical nature of UI requires proactive planning to address changing claim
volume. The UI program is closely tied to economic conditions—unemployment
claims are expected to fall during expansions and rise during recessions. The
changing claim volume necessitates different approaches based on varying
economic conditions. In particular, the increased workload during recessions that
occur every several years is likely to strain an unemployment agency’s capacity
without proper planning.
GDOL does not have a documented recession plan for expected increases in claim
volume. Because the pandemic claim surge was unprecedented in its size and
GDOL’s Unemployment Insurance Pandemic Response 25
speed, it is unrealistic to expect that a plan would have prevented all delays.
However, a predetermined plan requires evaluating and selecting strategies that
can be more quickly implemented once conditions warrant. GDOL staff indicated
that advance planning is not possible because the federal government creates new
programs for each recession. While new applications and training cannot be
developed before new federal programs are passed, GDOL can prepare for
operational changes that may be necessary for any recession or claim surge. For
example, a plan could outline when and how to ensure sufficient phone
capacity—at the beginning of the pandemic, 78% of calls (approximately 15.1
million) were dropped before May 2020, when GDOL indicated they increased
call capacity.
Without a formal plan, GDOL had to rapidly develop strategies to address the
claim surge, which prevented comprehensive evaluation of the options. UI staff
indicated they did not have time to conduct analyses or research other states’
strategies, instead relying on informal decision making and limited formal data.
For example, GDOL could not significantly increase its ability to respond to
claimant calls without using individuals that would otherwise assist with claims
processing. Many months after the initial claims surge, GDOL modified its
training program to allow new employees to begin answering claimant calls.
Lessons learned during the pandemic should be incorporated into the recession
plan. These lessons could include:
• Documenting Effective Strategies – The plan should document
strategies GDOL used that were effective and specify preparation or
improvements that should be made. For example, GDOL was able to
incorporate additional staff quickly by hiring prior UI employees (i.e.,
retirees) and using cross-trained career center employees who
typically worked on re-employment services. GDOL can prepare to use
these strategies by ensuring the necessary support (e.g., refresher
training) is already in place and updated regularly.
• Identifying Areas for Improvement – A review of pandemic
strategies should also identify areas for improvement. For example,
employer-filed claims helped speed claims processing but led to
problems for some claimants, as discussed on page 51. GDOL should
determine the best methods to address these issues and incorporate
those methods into its planning.
• Researching Alternative Strategies – As noted throughout the
report, other states took different approaches to the claims surge or
used different methods for regular operations. Agency staff may also
provide alternatives for consideration. GDOL should gather
information from other states and its staff and evaluate whether other
strategies may be effective in Georgia.
GDOL’s Unemployment Insurance Pandemic Response 26
UI Recession Plan Components
A recession plan should provide guidance to agency staff on how to address challenges that typically occur during
a recession. An effective plan should consider the following:
• Areas affected – Recession workloads may require the agency to make changes in multiple areas,
including staffing, technology, communications, and policies.
• Regular updates – Management should review the plan on a regular basis (e.g., quarterly) and edit the
plan as needed or prepare for operational changes based on economic conditions.
• Task assignments – To ensure clarity and speed in implementation, tasks should be assigned to specific
roles. For example, an IT project manager may be tasked with assessing phone capacity.
• Economic indicators – Monitoring economic indicators can help detect an approaching recession and
trigger early action. Staff should review leading indicators, such as durable goods orders and consumer
purchases, as well as labor market information, such as layoffs and UI claim volume.
• Decision parameters – Data can help guide agency actions. For example, the plan could recommend
when to begin the hiring process and how many staff to hire based on pre-determined thresholds in
economic indicators and claim volume.
• Preparation – Some actions should occur before the recession begins. For example, human resources
may maintain regular contact with law schools so that it can quickly reach out to identify students who
could help with appeals.
• Task prioritization – Management should identify less critical tasks that can be paused during a crisis and
then develop a process for stopping, and later restarting, these tasks.
A documented recession plan would also help reduce knowledge loss resulting
from staff turnover. Current UI management has significant experience in the
nuances of a complex program, and they gained additional, valuable insight
during the pandemic. Incorporating current management’s experience into a
formal plan would allow them to transfer this knowledge to future management.
This element of succession planning is particularly important due to UI’s staffing
challenges, which include the percentage of employees eligible to retire
(approximately 25%) and high turnover in some positions.
As discussed on page 20, GDOL must collect additional information to allow for
more analysis and to manage the program systematically. This information
should be used to help develop a recession plan.
RECOMMENDATION
1. To prepare for future increases in claim volume, GDOL should
create a formal recession plan that considers lessons learned
during the pandemic.
Agency Response: “GDOL agrees that compiling a list of ‘lessons learned’
could assist in agency planning.” However, it did not believe that any
planning would have prepared GDOL for the pandemic. Furthermore, it
stated that it “implemented several innovative strategies in record timing
during the pandemic to increase response time.”
GDOL’s Unemployment Insurance Pandemic Response 27
GDOL said the state “should also implement a statewide pandemic/recession
plan” that includes reallocating staff between agencies. It stated that lessons
have been learned and will be applied to future plans. It noted that
recessions are typically more gradual and that events such as the pandemic
“are impossible to predict and plan for by their very nature.”
GDOL stated that it made numerous improvements over the course of the
pandemic to better serve customers. It pointed to employer-filed claims,
waiving in-person visits, automated ID verification, waiving of work search
requirements, deployment of the claimant portal, and use of virtual agents
and chat bots. It also noted that due to “timely system capacity upgrades,”
the GDOL system did not crash when those of many other states did.
GDOL also noted that, in recent preliminary audit findings, a U.S. DOL OIG
contractor concluded that it was prepared for a future similar situation.
Recommendation: “GDOL agrees that a formal recession plan is a good
idea, but it would not have prepared GDOL for this pandemic and the
unforeseeable volume of claims.” With recent and planned improvements,
“GDOL will be more prepared to respond to a future recession.”
GDOL’s Unemployment Insurance Pandemic Response 28
IT System
Finding 4: While GDOL has made key updates to its claims management system, the
system could better facilitate claims processing and communication with
claimants.
GDOL’s claims management system lacks features of more modern UI systems—
more efficient claims processing, automated communication with claimants, and
better data reporting capabilities. These features reduce the amount of staff
needed and can help direct management decisions, which is especially important
when claim volume rapidly increases.
GDOL’s claims management system was initially created in the 1970s. The agency
has incrementally added features to benefit both staff and claimants. In contrast
to a full system replacement chosen by some states, an incremental approach
results in smaller improvements over time without a large change to UI
operations. While GDOL also has more control over short-term expenditures, the
state does not benefit from some of the features of a fully modernized system. As
shown in Exhibit 11, GDOL’s system does not yet provide many of the benefits
expected from a modern system.
Exhibit 11
Additional Work is Needed on Key System Features
Automated Automated Sufficient Ability to Reporting
Claims Communications Capacity Implement Capability
Feature
Processing Changes
Claimant portal
Process is shows information Insufficient
Needed Implementing
largely manual, such as benefit reporting is
Description
upgrades were federal programs
though lack of amount and available due to
made to server was difficult due to
work claims are payments, but lengthy turnaround
and storage insufficient
partly automated times and reliability
capacity resources
automated communications are concerns
limited
Key features of modernized UI systems include the following:
• Automated claims processing – A high degree of automation can
make the claims process more efficient, improve accuracy, and
minimize staff involvement, which reduces the need for additional
staff when claim volume rises. For example, Minnesota’s system uses
extensive automation to obtain necessary information from claimants
while they are completing the application and then flags eligibility
issues. It will then send additional questions to employers to reconcile
GDOL’s Unemployment Insurance Pandemic Response 29
claimant information when necessary. The degree of automation
enabled Minnesota to eliminate the claims processor position entirely.
In contrast, GDOL’s process for determining eligibility is very manual.
Staff must perform a search for each claimant’s wage history, check
for claims in other states, and manually review application questions,
which could be automated. For example, to ensure claimants are
willing to accept similar job conditions as their previous job, GDOL
staff manually check whether the miles the claimant is willing to travel
are greater than or equal to the miles traveled to their previous job.
When issues are identified, staff must call the claimant—and
potentially the employer—for more information, which can cause
additional delays. Eligibility reviews also require staff to repeatedly
switch between computer programs12 and manually type the
claimant’s Social Security Number into each.
Staff also reported numerous claimants attempted to force an
eligibility decision by filing appeals before receiving a determination
that could be appealed. These invalid appeals contributed to the
current backlog. To reduce these types of errors that increase
workloads, GDOL could incorporate new system rules, such as only
allowing claimants to file appeals after receiving a determination.
During the pandemic, Georgia partially automated certain lack-of-
work claims. Staff perform the initial review and request separation
information from the employer. If the employer indicates the
separation reason is lack of work (i. e., no work is available for the
employee), the system can match their response with the claimant-
reported reason in the application and process the claim for payment.
• Automated communications – Greater use of automated
communications helps reduce the need for staff resources while
GDOL made significant IT upgrades during the pandemic
GDOL has made other upgrades not directly tied to the five key capabilities discussed in this finding. These
upgrades likely improved performance and helped address fraud during the pandemic. Examples include:
• Multi-claimant upload capability for employer-filed claims – This feature allows for easier filing of bulk
claims. Employers can file online for multiple employees simultaneously instead of submitting a separate
form for each employee or mailing a disk with multiple employee claims.
• PIN resets – Claimants can use a self-service feature to reset their PINs online. Previously, claimants had
to call GDOL and ask staff to reset the PIN.
• Fraud detection – GDOL created checks for duplication in claimant-provided information (e.g., phone
numbers) to help identify fraud.
• ID.me implementation – ID.me is a third-party vendor that allows most claimants to verify their identities
online instead of providing documents to GDOL.
12 These programs include different applications within the claims management system, the wage database, and ICON, an
interface with other states’ unemployment agencies, where staff check for wages and claims in other states.
GDOL’s Unemployment Insurance Pandemic Response 30
providing claimants more timely information. Automating requests
for documentation and allowing claimants to upload it directly would
reduce staff intervention and improve efficiency. Automated status
information also helps claimants understand the steps they need to
take and reduces the need to contact the agency for updates. For
example, Maryland has a claim tracker with information such as
upcoming hearings and open items the claimant needs to complete.
Maryland’s claimant portal also allows claimants to upload
documentation for adjudication and appeals.
Currently, GDOL staff call the claimant if additional information is
needed after the application is submitted. For example, staff may ask
the claimant to mail, email, or fax a copy of the separation form
provided by their employer. Staff then link the document to the
correct claim and resume the claim process. Additionally, if claimants
want to know the status of their claim (e. g., awaiting a claims
examiner review), they must call GDOL for updates. This issue
contributed significantly to the increase in claimant inquiries during
the pandemic (discussed on page 56).
GDOL has taken steps to automate some communications. In spring
2020, GDOL implemented a claimant portal providing information
such as payment history and remaining benefit balance. Staff
indicated plans for additional upgrades to allow greater use of the
portal for communications and uploads, which would also improve
the security of confidential information in claimant documents.
• Sufficient capacity – A UI claims management system should be
able to handle incoming claim volume without significant
performance issues. In 2017, GDOL began to upgrade its server and
storage capacity, which was completed in spring 2020. These
upgrades helped prevent the system from being overloaded and
crashing under increased traffic. Other states experienced capacity
issues such as website and claim system outages, particularly early in
the pandemic when claims surged suddenly.
To avoid maintaining the necessary capacity internally, many states
have moved to the cloud to use vendor capacity accessible over the
internet. The cloud allows agencies to scale capacity up or down as
needed and avoid maintaining excess capacity. While cloud security
has been a concern in the past, GDOL indicated it would likely move
to the cloud in the future, noting it would help decrease costs and
improve efficiency.
• Ability to implement changes and new programs – A
modernized UI system can help states more readily accommodate law
changes and new UI programs, which became especially important
during the pandemic. Once U.S. DOL issued guidelines for its new
programs, each state had to develop programming to ensure
guidelines were followed. Although there was some variation, states
GDOL’s Unemployment Insurance Pandemic Response 31
with fully modernized systems implemented the federal programs
more quickly than other states, which meant claimants received their
benefits more quickly.
GDOL IT officials stated that implementing new federal programs
required significant time and resources, though data was unavailable
to isolate costs. Georgia issued its first PUA13 payments 28 days after
the passage of the CARES Act, 10 days faster than the national
average. However, Georgia did not issue its first PEUC payments for
76 days, 26 days slower than average. Additionally, Georgia
implemented MEUC (a $100 a week supplement for non-PUA
claimants with significant income from self-employment) after the
program ended. The program was effective in Georgia for the weeks
ending January 2 through June 26, 2021, so claimants applied and
were paid retroactively, with the first payments issued November 12.
It should be noted that the IT system is one factor in the speed of
program implementation, and some states with more modernized
systems also experienced delays in implementing federal programs.
While system improvements are planned, GDOL staff indicated that
none would specifically help reduce the resources needed to
implement statutory changes and new programs.
• Reporting capability – A state’s UI system should efficiently and
accurately produce reporting to inform management decision making.
As discussed on page 20, timely analysis of accurate program data can
help management better understand the issues the program faces. For
example, Alabama DOL officials stated that staff can generate reports
to inform management decisions more quickly than before
modernization. The system allows the creation of reports without an
IT programmer writing and running the query, a process that took up
to three days prior to modernization.
GDOL cannot provide new, reliable reports in a timely manner.
GDOL needs four to Regular reporting on UI claims is limited to data points that U.S. DOL
six weeks to generate requires. Any additional reporting must be programmed by IT staff
new reports upon request, which can take four to six weeks per program. This
means it would take months to provide any new reporting on regular
(state) UI, PEUC, and PUA during the pandemic. As a result, UI
management could not use the reports to inform decision making.
Additionally, we found significant errors in the data GDOL provided
to the audit team and in the regular reporting to U.S. DOL. The data
we received contained obvious errors such as blank fields and claims
that were paid before they were approved. Data reported to U.S. DOL
included duplicate claims and underreported the number of appeals
filed. Like many other states, Georgia failed federal data validation
13 Staff noted that PUA required more resources to implement than the other programs because GDOL created a new
application and process for requirements that differed from previous UI programs.
GDOL’s Unemployment Insurance Pandemic Response 32
tests during the pandemic, indicating the data was not reliable for
analysis or management use.
GDOL indicated its modernization efforts have been hampered by limited
funding. Federal funding for UI program administration generally follows the
volume of claims, with funds increasing during recessions and decreasing during
periods of economic growth. As a result, continued low unemployment rates after
the Great Recession in 2009 led to lower federal funding for the program. In
addition to federal funding, GDOL indicated that a state administrative
assessment14 on wages was intended to supplement federal funding and support
GDOL program administration. GDOL collects the assessment from employers
and transmits it to the state treasury, and funding from the assessment is
appropriated annually by the General Assembly. GDOL has requested the full
amount of the assessment collected, with a significant portion dedicated to IT
projects in several years. In fiscal years 2018-2020, the appropriation was
approximately $7.3 to $11.3 million below the assessment collected.15
Additionally, the underlying programming for much of GDOL’s system is old and
contributes to GDOL’s technological challenges. GDOL uses COBOL16 program
language as the basis of its claims management system, and staff indicated that
code for some components was written in the 1970s. GDOL reported that these
components function as intended; however, it is difficult to hire COBOL
programmers to make system changes and generate new reporting. While still in
use in many industries, COBOL is no longer used for new programming and most
students do not learn it. GDOL must compete with other organizations for a
declining number of COBOL programmers, who continually become more
expensive. GDOL indicated it is replacing COBOL language with newer
programming languages (such as Java) as it updates components of the system.
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. GDOL should increase automation of its claim processing.
2. GDOL should continue to improve its communications with
claimants through the portal—particularly with regard to status
updates and document submission.
3. The General Assembly should consider additional funding to
upgrade/modernize GDOL’s UI systems. The General Assembly
could require a list of planned projects and periodic status reports
for the additional funds provided, similar to oversight reports
found in O.C.G.A. 50-25-7.1 (d).
Agency Response: “GDOL agrees that it has made a number of key
improvements to its case management system during the Pandemic,”
14 The assessment is currently scheduled to expire on January 1, 2023.
15 These amounts indicate the difference between the appropriation for a given fiscal year and the collections for two years
earlier. This delay allows time for GDOL to collect and submit the assessment and the General Assembly to appropriate it.
16 COBOL is used by other states’ unemployment agencies, other Georgia state agencies, and the private industry.
GDOL’s Unemployment Insurance Pandemic Response 33
largely paid for with federal pandemic funding. GDOL indicated that
additional upgrades to reporting and information systems would have
occurred if the full administrative assessment had been appropriated. It also
stated it had implemented the suggestion regarding limiting appeals to
those with a determination. Regarding COBOL, GDOL said it has converted
parts of its system into more modern languages like Java.
GDOL disagreed that other states with more modernized systems were able
to implement federal programs faster than Georgia. It stated that while the
U.S. DOL OIG had found that states with “ostensibly more modernized IT
systems generally implemented federal programs faster,” that was not true
with respect to GDOL. It added that some states with these modernized
systems had recently decided to replace those systems.
Auditor’s Response: Additional IT modernization helps states
implement required changes more quickly and/or with fewer resources.
The May 2021 U.S. DOL OIG report cited older IT systems as a key
factor in states’ struggles to implement the CARES Act programs. It
found that states with more modernized systems implemented PEUC 15
days faster and PUA 8 days faster, on average, than other states. The
report did not include the IT resources (hours and funding) required to
implement a new program.
Agency Response: GDOL stated that not all additional reports would take
four to six weeks, noting that the audit request was very complex. It stated
that ad hoc reports take programming, and the amount of time depends on
the request and the volume of other pending requests.
Auditor’s Response: The audit team specifically asked whether a
reduced request could be pulled more quickly; GDOL offered no
suggestions for expediting the data extract. (This data request was
similar to what we would request from other state agencies for
performance audits.) The length of time to produce ad hoc reports for
management is also lengthy. GDOL staff indicated they sometimes must
identify work arounds to avoid asking IT to run a query for them.
Finally, the U.S. DOL OIG’s May 2021 report noted that Georgia’s
required reporting was delayed for the new programs. Georgia was one
of five states that had not reported any PUA or PEUC claims through
August 2020, although it had already begun to pay these claims.
Recommendation 1: GDOL agreed that additional automation is possible
as funding allows but noted there are limits on what can be automated.
Recommendation 2: “GDOL agrees that opportunities exist to offer
additional services to customers through the claimant portal. GDOL has
numerous improvements under development.” It cited improvements made
to the claimant portal during the pandemic. It also noted plans for
additional improvements for more automated communications, which will
include a visual progress bar to show claim status and greater access to
claim documents.
Recommendation 3: “GDOL agrees that the General Assembly should
consider allocating additional funding to upgrade and modernize GDOL’s
UI IT system,” noting that new improvements would require ongoing
funding for maintenance and licensing fees, especially when federal funding
falls.
GDOL’s Unemployment Insurance Pandemic Response 34
Staffing
Finding 5: The number of GDOL employees has declined over time, resulting in fewer
employees to address the surge in claims.
The number of GDOL personnel assigned to the UI benefit unit and the statewide
operations division declined in the years preceding the pandemic. With fewer
staff, the two units responsible for processing unemployment claims had less
capacity to respond to the pandemic surge in claims. The IT division, which is
also integral to UI claims processing, also experienced a decline in personnel.
However, the effect of the decline is less clear because the division’s significant
use of contractors predates the pandemic.
Records from the Department of Administrative Services indicate that the
number of GDOL personnel significantly declined in the years before the
pandemic. Overall, GDOL had 1,719 employees at the end of fiscal year 201317 but
just 1,042 at the end of fiscal year 2019, about eight months before the pandemic.
As shown in Exhibit 12, the units with primary responsibility for processing UI
claims—statewide operations and UI benefits—had fewer employees in 2019 than
2013. Statewide operations staff, which includes career center personnel,18
declined 41% from 2013 to 2019. UI benefits staff declined 32% over the same
period. Both units attempted to add staff during the pandemic with mixed
success (see page 41).
Exhibit 12
Primary Units Supporting UI Had Staff Declines Prior to the Pandemic,
FY 2013 – FY 2021
823 Pandemic Begins
Statewide Operations
657
484 531 505
285 UI Benefits 258
226
194 194
113 IT
76 65 65 65
2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
Source: GDOL documents
17 All years include full- and part-time personnel, as well as those classified as temporary. In addition, GDOL had over 3,000
employees prior to the fiscal year 2013 transfer of Vocational Rehabilitation employees into a separate agency.
18 Career center personnel are typically responsible for UI claims and re-employment services. They have directed more time
to UI claims since the beginning of the pandemic.
GDOL’s Unemployment Insurance Pandemic Response 35
The decline in staffing coincides with a decline in funding to GDOL. From 2013 to
2019, GDOL’s budget dropped from $180.7 million19 to $113.8 million, with $40.1
million of the decline being a reduction of federal funds. GDOL officials indicated
that federal funds for various services decline in periods of low unemployment,
such as the one experienced in the years between the Great Recession and the
pandemic.
In addition to the units discussed above, GDOL’s IT unit is vital to claims
processing. It is responsible for maintaining and updating the information
systems used by claimants, employers, and GDOL employees. As shown in
Exhibit 12, IT personnel declined by approximately 42% during the 2013-2019
period, but the impact of the decline is less clear. Unlike UI benefits and
statewide operations, IT was already supported by outside staffing agencies prior
to the pandemic. As a result, a decline in agency employees does not necessarily
mean an equal decline in staff supporting the function (i.e., staff declines could be
offset by increased contractors). As discussed on page 40, IT significantly
increased its use of contractors when the pandemic began.
Agency Response: “GDOL agrees that the number of its employees
declined over time beginning in 2012, consistent with other state agencies
due to budget cuts, lack of raises for a number of years, and reduced
retirement benefits.” GDOL stated that it “had less than half the number of
employees during the pandemic as during the Great Recession.” It indicated
that additional administrative funding in the period after the Great
Recession would have helped maintain “administrative staffing levels to
better meet the challenges of the Pandemic.” GDOL also noted that, during
the pandemic, many UI staff were paid less than what many claimants
received in UI benefits.
Finding 6: GDOL’s staffing actions to address the claims increase were similar to
strategies used by other state UI programs.
In response to the increase in UI claims, GDOL took several actions to increase
the number of work hours devoted to UI, including redirecting staff, encouraging
overtime, hiring contractors, and rehiring retired employees. Staffing strategies
alone were unlikely to significantly improve claims processing times because of
the manual processing and training required for many aspects of the work.
Every state UI program faced a historic increase in claims at the beginning of the
pandemic. The increase was larger and quicker than those of a cyclical recession,
when an agency can increase staffing over a longer period. Rapidly increasing
staff was more challenging due to the amount of training for new employees who
make claim determinations. GDOL did not modify the training to accelerate
19 The fiscal year 2013 budget included a state fund transfer of $16.8 million from the Governor’s Emergency Fund to pay
interest on a loan to the Unemployment Trust Fund.
GDOL’s Unemployment Insurance Pandemic Response 36
employees’ ability to process claims. Instead, strategies focused on using existing
or former staff with UI experience and hiring contractors in support roles.
Over the course of the pandemic, GDOL increased the number of hours devoted
to UI claims processing significantly (see Exhibit 13). Prior to the pandemic,
GDOL staff spent less than 65,000 hours per month on UI claims. After a
moderate increase in the pandemic’s first month (March 2020), staff hours for UI
increased to approximately 110,000 in April. Hours typically remained between
100,000 and 125,000 in subsequent months, peaking above 140,000 on two
occasions. In June 2021, GDOL hours dedicated to UI claims were still double the
number in the months before the pandemic. Nearly 2.1 million hours were spent
on UI claims between January 2020 and June 2021.
Exhibit 13
Staff Hours1 for UI Claims Processing More than Doubled During the Pandemic,
January 2020 – June 2021
1
Chart includes regular hours for claims processing staff, as well as additional hours resulting from
the staffing actions discussed below.
Source: TeamWorks HCM, GDOL contractor records
To increase staff hours for claims processing, GDOL used many of the strategies
common in other states (Exhibit 14). We also found a limited number of
differences in how the strategies were implemented. Each strategy is discussed
below the exhibit.
GDOL’s Unemployment Insurance Pandemic Response 37
Exhibit 14
GDOL Employed Most Strategies Used by Other States
Use of Retired Significant
Redirect Staff Use of Use of
GDOL Increase of GDOL
to UI Work Overtime Contractors
Action
Employees Employees
By August 2020, GDOL attempted
More than 20K
Georgia Use
More than 20K 15K-20K hours per 51 retirees hired but could not
hours per
hours per month month for UI between April greatly expand
month (before
across GDOL 8K-15K hours per 2020 and mid- staff due to new
overtime)
spent on UI month for IT 2021 hires being offset
redirected to UI
No call center by departures
Redirecting Staff to UI
GDOL officials stated the increase in claims required an “all-hands-on-deck”
approach. Prior to the pandemic, UI benefits staff processed claims with support
from career center staff who also provided re-employment services. In March
2020, career center staff re-directed significant hours to UI. Staff in other units
were also redirected to UI tasks. Those with UI experience helped with claim
determinations; others answered phones or helped gather supporting documents.
As shown in Exhibit 15, redirected time to UI totaled approximately 375,000
hours (not including overtime) between March 2020 and June 2021. This
represents 18% of the total UI hours during the 18-month period reviewed.
Beginning in April 2020, the redirection of staff time from their normal duties
routinely contributed more than 20,000 additional hours each month.
Exhibit 15
GDOL Redirected Over 20,000 Hours Monthly to UI, Jan. 2020 – June 2021
Source: TeamWorks HCM, GDOL contractor records
GDOL’s Unemployment Insurance Pandemic Response 38
The redirection of staff time occurred throughout GDOL, though most occurred
in statewide operations’ career centers. Career center staff already devoted a
portion of their time to UI but redirected re-employment time to UI when the
pandemic began. In February 2020, career center staff charged 22,700 hours to
UI. Beginning in April, they typically redirected an additional 15,000 to 25,000
hours to UI each month (before overtime). UI tax personnel were also spending
approximately 4,500 monthly hours to administer federal UI programs by fall
2020. See Appendix E for total UI hours by program.
Use of Overtime
According to GDOL, employees were “strongly encouraged” to work overtime to
address the increase in claims. The agency recently began limiting the practice by
reinstating its practice of requiring division directors to obtain approval before
allowing overtime. For our analysis, overtime includes any extra time worked and
recorded by salaried or hourly employees. The time may have been compensated
or non-compensated.20
After working approximately 2,000 UI overtime hours in the two months prior to
the pandemic, GDOL employees logged an additional 358,000 overtime hours
between March 2020 and June 2021 (Exhibit 16). Beginning in April 2020,
overtime frequently exceeded 20,000 hours a month and reached nearly 36,000
in October 2020.
Exhibit 16
UI Overtime Hours Immediately Increased and Remained Above 20,000 in Most
Months Reviewed, Jan. 2020 – June 2021
Source: TeamWorks HCM, GDOL contractor records
20 Most employees in Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) non-exempt roles were permitted to work overtime. Non-exempt
employees must be compensated for overtime, either through additional pay or the granting of compensatory time. FLSA
does not require that exempt employees be granted compensation, but compensatory time may be provided.
GDOL’s Unemployment Insurance Pandemic Response 39
Career center staff and UI benefits staff accounted for most overtime hours
(approximately 288,000); however, more than 70,000 overtime hours were
logged by department administration and UI tax personnel. See Appendix E for
total UI hours by program.
Use of Contractors
Between May 2020 and June 2021, GDOL hired six contract staffing companies
to assist with initial claim processing, benefit payments, appeals, and integrity
efforts (i.e., combatting fraud). Because contract staff are not permitted to make
the actual claim determinations, they served in various support roles. This
included data entry, imaging documents, scheduling appeals, fact-finding to
resolve discrepancies, and investigating overpayments.
As shown in Exhibit 17, UI contractors worked approximately 215,000 hours
between May 2020 and June 2021. Contractor hours were approximately 1,600
in May 2020 but are estimated at 15,000 to 20,000 for all months after August
2020. The number of contractors working each month is unknown given the
format of GDOL’s records.
Exhibit 17
Contractors Began Supporting UI in May 2020 but Hours Peaked in September,
Jan. 2020 – June 2021
Source: TeamWorks HCM, GDOL contractor records
While GDOL hired contractors for several UI tasks, it did not contract for call
center services. The agency noted a negative experience with a contract call
center in the past and stated the program’s complexity limits the ability of less-
experienced staff to address claimant questions. (See page 41 for more
information on customer service staffing.)
GDOL’s Unemployment Insurance Pandemic Response 40
While not included in the hours spent on processing claims, GDOL’s IT unit also
greatly increased its use of contractors during the pandemic. Contracted staff
supported the rollout of the new federal programs and other changes made
during the pandemic (e.g., ID.me identify verification). In the two months prior
to the pandemic, IT contracted for an average of approximately 5,600 hours
monthly. Average contractor hours increased to approximately 9,100 for the rest
of 2020 and 12,400 for the first six months of 2021. The number of contract
employees more than doubled from 37 in January 2020 to 87 in June 2021.
Use of Retired GDOL Employees
To eliminate the need to provide extensive training to new staff, GDOL officials
hired retired employees with UI claims processing experience. Statute limits the
number of hours that a state retiree can work in an agency covered by the
Employees’ Retirement System (ERS). The retiree loses retirement benefits for
the remainder of the calendar year if their work hours exceed 1,040.21 Unlike
some other states, Georgia did not waive the statutory work limit for retirees.
GDOL hired 47 retirees between April 2020 and early 2021, most within the first
three months of the pandemic.22 As shown in Exhibit 18, rehired retirees
worked approximately 72,600 hours on UI projects between January 2020 and
June 2021. Eight employees worked more than 1,040 hours in 2020 (one
exceeded the limit in December), suggesting that the employees continued to
work after temporarily losing retirement benefits. As a group, rehired retirees
typically worked between 4,000 and 5,000 hours in most months.
Exhibit 18
Rehired Retirees Often Worked 4,000-5,000 Hours a Month, Jan. 2020 – June 2021
Source: TeamWorks HCM, GDOL contractor records
21 ERS limits do not restrict the number of hours worked in a week or month; therefore, an employee hired on July 1 could
work 40 hours per week through the end of the year.
22 Four retirees were working before March 2020. A total of 51 retirees worked at some point during the 18-month period.
GDOL’s Unemployment Insurance Pandemic Response 41
GDOL did not add significant dedicated customer service staff
GDOL did not significantly expand its UI customer service unit or contract for call center services at the beginning
of the pandemic. During the period with the highest volume of contacts, responding to calls, emails, and web
inquiries was primarily assigned to staff throughout the department, including many with other UI duties, such as
claims processing. Officials stated that a decision to expand its customer service unit was made in May or June
2020. While recruiting began in August, GDOL indicated it did not receive enough qualified applicants. A staff of
16, many hired in April 2021, began taking phone calls after a modified three-week training program.
GDOL indicated that it did not contract for call center services due to a negative experience with a contract call
center, as well as the program’s complexity, which limits the ability of inexperienced staff to address claimant
questions. As such, contract staff would not be able to answer the complex questions posed by many claimants.
We found that strategies such as hiring additional agency customer service personnel or contracting for call center
services were common among other states we reviewed. Wisconsin increased its customer service unit from 90 to
approximately 800 in the first four months of the pandemic by hiring staff and contracting for call services.
California, Kansas, and Virginia also added hundreds of staff during 2020. The responsibilities of the contractors
may have varied, with some answering basic questions about programs (instead of individual claims) and others
answering phone lines dedicated to the new federal programs.
Hiring of New Employees
GDOL hired additional staff in UI benefits and statewide operations during the
pandemic. However, employee departures resulted in limited growth in the
number of agency employees.
To reduce the impact of recruiting on program staff, the hiring process for UI
benefits and statewide operations was changed to decrease program employees’
required time. For example, HR personnel conducted interviews on behalf of
statewide operations for career center positions. Statewide operations
management only needed to approve those selected.
GDOL officials stated that recruiting efforts were challenging due to pay and
COVID-19. Specifically, agency officials had difficulty obtaining qualified
personnel for a planned customer service center to handle phone calls and staff
(or even interns) with a legal background to assist with the appeals process.
TeamWorks HCM data indicates that 137 employees were hired or rehired in
those programs between April 2020 and June 2021. However, as shown in
Exhibit 12 on page 34, UI benefits grew by 32 employees between the end of
fiscal years 2019 and 2021; statewide operations had 21 more employees. Agency
officials stated that employees continued to depart during the pandemic, blunting
attempts to increase staffing.
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. GDOL should work with the General Assembly to create an
exception to the retiree work limit during periods of high
unemployment. In future situations like the public health
emergency, GDOL could work with the Office of the Governor to
include a waiver in any related executive order.
GDOL’s Unemployment Insurance Pandemic Response 42
Agency Response: “GDOL used all available resources in a similar
manner that other state UI services did. The most experienced staff were
utilized to do claims examining, adjudication, and appeals; retirees were
rehired; staff were repurposed; overtime hours approved; and contractors
were engaged to fill in the gaps.”
GDOL disagreed with the report’s discussion of the customer service unit. It
wanted to clarify that employees throughout the department contribute to
customer service, not only the dedicated customer service unit. “At no time
did GDOL have only 16 employees dedicated to answering customer calls or
providing customer service.” GDOL stated that customer service “has
always been and continues to be an agency wide collaborative effort…Each
unit and career center continue to have dedicated staff assigned to assist
with customer calls.”
GDOL noted that the agency requested funding for additional call centers in
2020 but did not receive it and that federal funding made available during
the pandemic was what allowed the eventual expansion of the customer
service unit. GDOL reiterated its contention that contract call centers are
ineffective, based on a prior unsuccessful experience and conversations with
other states that utilized them during the pandemic. They noted that
seasoned GDOL employees would be needed to support a contract call
center.
GDOL stated it has made a “concerted effort to ‘right-size’ the agency’s
statewide operations and align services more efficiently. As part of a larger
strategic effort to realize cost savings and make UI more accessible to
customers, GDOL is shifting to call centers as the primary point of contact to
obtain UI Services rather than physical locations like career centers. This
strategic effort preceded the pandemic.” GDOL further stated that, during
the pandemic, it “focused on utilizing technology to better assist our
customers,” which included use of a dynamic scheduler for scheduling calls
with career center staff, a chat bot on the website, online tutorials, and
enhanced social media presence.
Recommendation: GDOL agreed with the recommendation and noted
that it requested an exception to the retiree work limit through an executive
order since the General Assembly was not in session.
GDOL’s Unemployment Insurance Pandemic Response 43
Communications
Finding 7: Information available to claimants was not always clear and accurate, which
contributed to application errors, processing delays, and increased calls
and emails from claimants.
While GDOL expanded communications during the pandemic, some information
provided to UI claimants has been unclear or even contradictory. This has
resulted in claimants answering application questions incorrectly,
misunderstanding actions they need to take, or failing to understand their claim’s
status. Addressing these issues led to delays in the proper processing of
claimants’ applications and receipt of benefits. It also requires additional staff
resources for increased claimant calls and emails, as well as increased appeals.
Because the UI program is complex, clear and accurate instructions are critical to
ensure claimants provide the information necessary to process a claim. This
became more important during the pandemic because new federal programs
were added and many individuals were filing for UI for the first time. When there
are misunderstandings, claimants may answer questions incorrectly or fail to
provide required documentation, which typically requires GDOL staff to contact
the claimant. Incorrect or incomplete information may cause a claim to be
incorrectly denied, resulting in an appeal and benefit delays. Additionally, when
communications are unclear, claimants may attempt to contact GDOL for
clarification, which requires additional GDOL resources to respond.
During the pandemic, GDOL increased its communications to claimants. The
agency added several pages to its website, including a general COVID-19
information page and Frequently Asked Questions pages for COVID-19 eligibility,
PUA, and PEUC. A chatbot was also added to automatically answer pre-
programmed questions. Additionally, GDOL created a video tutorial that
provided claimants information such as how to locate the claim application and a
description of initial emails sent after application submission. Finally, GDOL
used social and traditional media to provide guidance on claims, including
common claimant mistakes and reasons for delays.
The additional communications did not address all issues. Claimants reported
that they did not have needed information and could not reach GDOL staff for
assistance. In reviewing GDOL’s correspondence to claimants, we identified
language that was unclear and/or out of date, as discussed below.
Key Communications Are Not Clear
While UI is a complex program, claimant communications should explain the
process using non-technical, easy-to-understand language. Best practices for
readability suggest an 8th grade level for communications to the public. However,
GDOL’s UI communications are frequently written at a 12th grade reading level or
higher. GDOL has not surveyed claimants or analyzed common errors made by
claimants to identify and address areas of confusion.
GDOL’s Unemployment Insurance Pandemic Response 44
Additionally, we identified instances of unclear language in key communications,
such as the UI application and determination letters, as described below.
• Application Questions – GDOL staff report that claimants often
misunderstand certain application questions. For example, GDOL
staff indicated claimants frequently misunderstand the work history
question23 at the beginning of the UI application. If the claimant
indicates they have no work history to report, the remainder of the
application is skipped. Staff must then call the claimant, verify the
error, and complete all remaining application questions based on
responses given by phone. In addition, some application questions
may be answered illogically (e.g., claimants indicating they are
unwilling to work any day of the week). These instances must also be
verified with the claimant. If GDOL staff cannot reach the claimant to
get accurate information, the claims examiner must decide eligibility
based on the information available, which may result in a denial.
During the pandemic, the PUA application included confusing
questions related to income verification, as shown in Exhibit 19. The
first option indicates the claimant agrees to provide proof of earnings
after confirming they have no proof of earnings. Additionally, the use
of check boxes allows for more than one selection, but the choices
conflict and it is not clear what happens if the claimant does not
submit supporting documents. When asked, GDOL staff could not
clarify the intent of the language used.
Exhibit 19
Unclear Language Used in PUA Application
Agrees to provide proof
of earnings after
confirming they have
no proof of earnings
Choices conflict, but
the use of check
boxes allows for more
than one choice
Conflicting
consequences of
failure to provide
proof
Source: Application screenshots provided by GDOL
23 The work history question reads, “Have you worked for any employer(s) in the past 18 months?”
GDOL’s Unemployment Insurance Pandemic Response 45
• Determination Letters – GDOL letters to communicate monetary
and nonmonetary determination decisions do not clearly state
whether the individual’s claim has received overall approval and what
steps remain in the process. While GDOL provides clarification on its
website or in the handbook, the letters that communicate eligibility
decisions do not provide the claimant with adequate information.
o Monetary – Monetary determination letters do not specify
that this first step is to determine whether the individual has
sufficient wages to establish a claim. Instead of a clear “yes” or
“no”, the letter only shows a weekly benefit amount that
represents what the claimant would receive if later determined
eligible. Absent additional language, claimants with a weekly
benefit amount of $0 do not always understand that this
means their claim has been denied due to lack of wages.
Similarly, some claimants with a positive weekly benefit
amount do not understand this is the first determination and a
nonmonetary determination may be necessary. Instead, they
believe this is a final approval and expect to begin receiving
payments within days. During the pandemic, some claimants
expressed frustration at payment delays when in fact their
claim was still awaiting a claims examiner’s nonmonetary
determination. The claimant handbook describes the steps
GDOL takes prior to final approval, but this information is not
clearly disclosed in the letter.
o Nonmonetary – Claimants may receive conflicting
information when separate nonmonetary determination letters
are sent for each eligibility issue identified. Each nonmonetary
determination letter addresses a single issue, and the number
of issues varies by claimant. For example, the claims examiner
could determine the claimant quit their job for good cause
(eligible) and determine that they are not available to work
because they need to care for a child (ineligible). The second
determination supersedes the first, making the claimant
ineligible for benefits. However, no letter communicates an
overall approval or denial decision, and the claimant could
receive the conflicting letters at different times. Clarification
about conflicting letters is provided on the website and in the
handbook but not in the letters themselves.
• Claimant Handbook – GDOL’s claimant handbook provides
detailed information about the claims process but may be difficult for
claimants to follow. The handbook is 60 pages long and is written at
an 11th grade reading level. Additionally, the handbook was not
updated with policy changes during the pandemic, as discussed below.
GDOL’s Unemployment Insurance Pandemic Response 46
Claimants Received Outdated Information During the Pandemic
GDOL did not update all communications to reflect changes made during the
pandemic, resulting in inaccurate communications. According to news reports,
the conflicting information led to claimant confusion. GDOL staff indicated email
correspondence was updated during the pandemic, but letters and the claimant
handbook were not.
• Career Center Closures – GDOL closed its career centers to the
public in March 2020, but various communications still directed
claimants to visit a career center to provide documents or address
certain eligibility issues. For example, the application confirmation
page indicated claimants must visit a career center to complete an
applicant status affidavit and provide identification and other
documents. Additionally, a letter sent to active claimants in the
summer of 2021 instructed them “take this letter to your career
center” if still unemployed at the end of their benefit year.24 The letter
did not provide an alternative way to address the issue.
• Work Search Requirement – In March 2020, GDOL waived the
requirement for claimants to search for work. The correct information
was provided in the COVID Frequently Asked Questions on the
website, but other communications continued to indicate a search was
required. For example, the application and claimant handbook
indicated claimants must submit work search records to GDOL each
week.
• Expected Time Frames – During the pandemic, the time for each
phase of the claims process took longer than usual, but the time
frames posted on the GDOL website were not updated. For example,
the Frequently Asked Questions web page indicated that appeals are
usually heard within 2 ½ weeks, but GDOL reporting indicated many
claimants waited a year or more before the appeal was heard. Clearer
messaging could have tempered claimants’ expectations, reducing
frustration and the number of inquiries GDOL received about the
delays.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
1. GDOL should identify and implement ways to make the
application process clearer for claimants (e.g., clarifying language
for questions, verification prompts for illogical answers).
2. GDOL should provide plain language explanations in its
determination letters.
3. GDOL should use surveys or focus groups to test the clarity of
language with claimants and/or employers.
24 Unemployment claims are valid for 52 weeks (a benefit year), after which claimants must file a new claim to receive
additional benefits.
GDOL’s Unemployment Insurance Pandemic Response 47
4. When changes are made to processes, GDOL should ensure all
communications are updated so claimants understand what steps
they should follow.
Agency Response: GDOL agreed that information provided to claimants
was not always clear but indicated U.S. DOL often requires specific
language to be used. It stated that with additional time, it believes that it
would be able to produce additional examples of U.S. DOL requiring specific
language.
Auditor’s Response: Our review concluded that U.S. DOL had not
dictated the language in most of the communications we reviewed, based
on our review of U.S. DOL program letters to the states and statements
made by GDOL staff. We shared this conclusion with GDOL staff during
the audit; they expressed no disagreement and provided only the
example of language requirements for separation reasons in the PUA
application.
Agency Response: GDOL also noted that it expects to be awarded funding
under U.S. DOL’s plain language initiative that will allow it to speed up its
recent work in this area. It also stated that it “initiated a plain language
project with the National Association of State Workforce Agencies
(NASWA)” that include templates for claimant handbooks using plain
language and short video scripts of the UI Claim process. The first video will
be on the GDOL website, with a plan “to integrate into the UI online claims
application.”
GDOL noted that it used a “multi-faceted communication approach to
explain and communicate UI processes and changes to the programs.”
GDOL indicated it communicated UI processes and program changes
through various means—social media, website, podcasts, conference calls,
press conferences and releases, and videos. Finally, GDOL disagreed that
there is a “conflict in the language used in the PUA Application.”
Recommendations 1 and 2: GDOL indicated U.S. DOL had only recently
begun allowing plain language in determination letters. It added that it will
be modifying claimant communications but stated that “this alone will not
solve all problems as customers often do not fully read the communications
sent” to them.
Recommendation 3: GDOL agreed “that use of surveys or focus groups
can test the clarity of language.”
Recommendation 4: GDOL stated that every communication would be
updated in an ideal world but that it is not cost effective to update
permanent documents with temporary information. Instead, it said it had
“made various program changes and employed a multi-faceted
communication approach in an effort to reach every claimant.”
GDOL’s Unemployment Insurance Pandemic Response 48
Policy Changes
Finding 8: GDOL adjusted policies to reduce claims processing times but could have
considered additional steps.
GDOL modified several policies to address the increased claim volume during the
pandemic. Significant actions included requiring employers to file claims for
certain claimants and waiving the work search requirement. Though GDOL could
have implemented additional policy changes that would have reduced delays for
some, it is unlikely that they could have prevented all delays. Additionally, some
policy changes used by other states may not have been advisable. It should be
noted the discussion below is limited to policies and processes; actions related to
staffing, technology, and communications are discussed in other findings.
The significant increase in UI claims required states to consider modifying
policies and processes so claimants received the assistance they needed in a
timely manner. However, any changes to UI policies were limited by federal and
state requirements to ensure only eligible claimants received benefits.
We identified two significant GDOL policy changes that helped reduce claims
processing times, as shown in Exhibit 20. We also reviewed other states’
practices and identified additional changes that could have been incorporated to
further reduce delays. The surge in claims early in the pandemic led to an
increase in delayed payments nationwide. We found no policy change that would
have prevented all delays.
Exhibit 20
Georgia Implemented Some Policies to Reduce Delays
Employer Work Single Use of
Claim Filing Search Waiver Application Redetermination
Feature
Not Adequately
Implemented –
Implemented – Not Implemented – Communicated –
Georgia Use
Employers required
Waived claimants’ U.S. DOL allowed the Claimants can
to file partial
requirement of use of a single request additional
unemployment
weekly job contact application for regular reviews of monetary
claims on behalf of
reporting UI and PUA or nonmonetary
employees
determinations
• Employer Claim Filing – GDOL required employers to file partial
unemployment claims on behalf of their employees to help speed
claims processing. On March 16, 2020, GDOL mandated that
employers file partial unemployment claims for employees with
GDOL’s Unemployment Insurance Pandemic Response 49
reduced hours or temporary layoffs resulting from the public health
Partial unemployment – emergency. The rule also mandated online filing (eliminating the
A claim resulting from mail-in option) and expanded the process to part-time employees.
reduced hours or a
Employer-filed claims have fewer steps in the eligibility review
temporary layoff, due solely
process, which typically allows benefits to be paid more quickly. When
to lack of work (i.e.,
the employer files a partial unemployment claim, it acknowledges that
employer has less or no
the claim has resulted from lack of work. As such, GDOL staff no
work for the employee)
longer need to contact the employer or interview the claimant to verify
the reason for unemployment. The benefits and problems that
occurred with employer-filed claims are discussed further on page 51.
• Waiving the Work Search Requirement – GDOL waived the
requirement that claimants make three reportable job contacts (e.g.,
submitting a job application or resume) each week to remain eligible
for unemployment. GDOL implemented the emergency rule on March
16, 2020, after U.S. DOL allowed states to waive the work search
requirement. The waiver eliminated the need for GDOL staff to audit
work searches and investigate deficiencies, freeing staff to work on
claims processing instead. Given the state of the job market and
ongoing public health concerns, work searches may have caused
unnecessary work for both claimants and staff.
• Single Application for Regular UI and PUA – The federal
Pandemic Unemployment Assistance (PUA) program provided UI
benefits to workers who are not normally eligible, including the self-
employed, gig workers, and independent contractors.25 Because PUA
was only available to claimants not eligible for regular UI, states had
to make a UI determination first. U.S. DOL allowed states to use a
single application for regular UI and PUA. By adding questions to
their existing regular application, a state could evaluate claimants for
PUA as soon as it determined they were ineligible for regular UI. A
claimant was not required to take additional action.
GDOL used separate applications for each claim type, which required
claimants to first apply for and be denied for regular UI before they
could apply for PUA. Additionally, some claimants appealed the
regular UI decision before they were approved for PUA, which
contributed to the backlog of appeals. GDOL indicated it had already
begun creating a separate PUA application and did not adjust plans
when U.S. DOL updated its guidance.
• Use of Reconsiderations and Redeterminations – If a claimant
disagrees with a monetary or nonmonetary determination, they can
request a reconsideration or redetermination, respectively.
Reconsiderations or redeterminations require fewer resources than an
appeal and provide GDOL staff the opportunity to educate claimants
25 Georgia ended its participation in PUA and other federal programs effective June 27, 2021.
GDOL’s Unemployment Insurance Pandemic Response 50
on the eligibility decision, which can reduce an appeals backlog.26 The
Reconsideration – options would have been particularly helpful during the pandemic,
Additional review of a when GDOL reported difficulty hiring appeals officers with the
monetary determination necessary experience and/or legal background. By contrast,
reconsideration or redetermination is handled by the claims
processors or examiners who made the initial decision.
Redetermination –
While Georgia does allow for reconsideration or redetermination, it
Additional review of a
does not sufficiently notify claimants of this option. Rather, GDOL’s
nonmonetary
determination letters indicate the decision is final unless the claimant
determination
files an appeal within 15 days. The claimant handbook and the initial
application’s confirmation page mention the option for
reconsideration if wage information is incomplete, but GDOL does not
notify claimants of the option for redetermination.
It should be noted that a request for reconsideration or
redetermination must be filed within 15 days of the decision, so it
cannot be used retroactively to address the current appeals backlog.
(As of October 28, 2021, approximately 61,000 appeals were awaiting
processing, although some portion will be determined invalid.)
In addition to the items discussed above, some states reduced eligibility reviews
to speed benefit payments; however, this led to overpayments and increased
fraud. For example, California and Virginia suspended review of several eligibility
issues, such as determining whether a claimant who reported voluntarily quitting
a job did so with good cause. As a result, some ineligible claimants were paid
benefits. Because U.S. DOL did not waive these eligibility requirements, states
that took these or similar actions must review these past questionable claims,
which redirects resources from claims processing. Claimants found ineligible
typically must repay their benefits, which they may have already spent.
Additionally, states with significantly relaxed eligibility reviews became easier
targets for organized fraud. If reviewed claims are found to be fraudulent, the
agencies may be unable to recover the benefits paid.
Unlike some other states, GDOL did not reduce its eligibility reviews. While
conducting the reviews required time and resources, it likely prevented payments
to ineligible claimants and reduced the likelihood of fraud.
RECOMMENDATION
1. GDOL should include language in the determination letters to
notify claimants of the option to request a redetermination or
reconsideration.
Agency Response: “GDOL agrees it adjusted policies and these changes
greatly helped GDOL process claims more quickly.” It pointed to employer-
26 A claimant can still request an appeal after a reconsideration or redetermination.
GDOL’s Unemployment Insurance Pandemic Response 51
filed claims and work search waiver included in the finding, as well as IT-
related changes noted on page 29.
GDOL disagreed that a single application for UI and PUA would have
reduced processing times, arguing it would have delayed the launch of the
PUA program and slowed down the process for those not filing for PUA. It
also stated that the report contained no evidence that a single application
reduced processing times in other states.
Recommendation: GDOL disagreed with the recommendation to notify
claimants of the option for redetermination or reconsideration. It stated the
language is already included in the monetary determination letter and
indicated that a pilot of redeterminations was counterproductive and
unsuccessful. It stated that greater use of the redetermination or
reconsideration process would not save time but only shift work from one
unit to another.
Auditor’s Response: Both the monetary and nonmonetary
determination letters tell claimants that GDOL’s determination is final
unless an appeal is filed. There was no mention of redetermination or
reconsideration in the sample letters GDOL provided to the audit team.
As noted in the report, other communications mention the option for
reconsideration, but GDOL does not notify claimants of the option for
redetermination, even though it is allowed by state law. Additionally,
GDOL officials regularly pointed to the difficulty in staffing appeals
positions; therefore, shifting some level of work from appeals to claims
examiners seems reasonable.
Finding 9: GDOL’s requirement that employers file claims on behalf of certain
claimants led to faster processing of many claims but to delays or
overpayments in some cases.
When unemployment claims began to increase, GDOL required employers to file
claims for employees with reduced hours or temporary layoffs due to lack of
work. The change shifted responsibility for the claim from claimant to employer,
which eliminated some verification steps and allowed GDOL to process claims
more quickly. However, if employers did not file as required or had incomplete
information on their employees, payment delays or improper payments could
occur.
In March 2020, GDOL issued emergency rules that expanded the use of
employer-filed claims (Exhibit 21). Before the pandemic, employers could file
unemployment claims for their full-time employees during periods of partial
unemployment, when the employee’s hours are reduced to less than full-time or
when the employee is laid off temporarily. These employer filings were optional
and could be filed online or by mail. However, during the pandemic, GDOL
required employers to file online for all applicable employees, including part-time
employees. At the outset of the pandemic, GDOL implemented multi-claimant
upload capabilities that allowed employers to file online for multiple employees
simultaneously by uploading a spreadsheet, instead of submitting a separate form
for each employee or mailing a disk with multiple employee claims.
GDOL’s Unemployment Insurance Pandemic Response 52
Exhibit 21
GDOL Expanded Employer-Filed Claims During the Pandemic
Pre-Pandemic During Pandemic1
Applicable claimants Full-time and part-time
Full-time employees
employees
Work status Reduced hours or temporary layoff
Maximum weeks for Typically 6, up to 10
Unlimited
temporary layoffs may be allowed
Employer filing Optional Required
Filing method Online or mail Online only
Reason for unemployment Lack of work
1
Table shows rules in place at the beginning of the pandemic. In July 2020, employers were
no longer required to file for part-time employees, and pre-pandemic requirements were
fully reinstated in March 2021.
Source: GDOL rules
The rule change increased the proportion of claims filed by employers. GDOL
reported that the percentage of claims filed by employers rose from
approximately 47% of claims in January and February 2020 to 73% of claims in
March to May.
Expanding employer-filed claims helped reduce the claims backlog by allowing
GDOL to process claims more quickly with fewer staff resources. For these
claims, the employer acknowledges that a lack of work led to the reduced hours
or temporary separation, which eliminates the GDOL staff resources and time
needed to verify the claimant is unemployed through no fault of their own.27 This
would allow claimants to receive their first payments more quickly. Additionally,
a May 2020 change allowed claimants who were permanently laid off to take over
their employer-filed claims. This conversion eliminated the previous need for
claimants to refile their own claim and restart the process.
While employer-filed claims helped speed claims processing, it created problems
for some claimants. As described below, payments were delayed when employers
did not certify each week as required, and some ineligible individuals received
payments when an employer filed on their behalf. GDOL could not provide the
audit team the data necessary to evaluate the extent of these issues.
• Payment Delays – Claimants experienced interruptions in their
benefit payments when employers did not consistently certify on their
behalf. Employers were required to certify weekly that their employees
were still eligible for unemployment. Some employers instead certified
based on their payroll cycle (e.g., biweekly) or stopped certifying
entirely. Because the claim was filed by the employer, the claimant
could not certify on their own behalf. Instead, the claimant was
27 When a claim is filed by the claimant, staff typically request a separation form from the claimant and/or send the
employer a questionnaire to be returned within 10 days. A claims examiner may also interview claimants and employers
before approving or denying the claim.
GDOL’s Unemployment Insurance Pandemic Response 53
instructed to contact their employer to either resolve the issue or
request the claim be converted to an individual claim.
• Overpayments – Some individuals with employer-filed claims
received benefits even though they were not eligible. During weekly
Claimants laid off
certifications, employers were asked to attest that their employees had
from part-time jobs
no additional earnings. However, employers may not have devoted the
received benefits,
resources to ensure they had this information. As a result, some
despite having other,
claimants incorrectly received benefits, despite having other
full-time employment
employment that should have disqualified them.
Overpayments impact both GDOL and the recipients. If claimants
received benefits they were not eligible for, GDOL staff must
investigate and request the benefits be repaid. Additionally, claimants
must pay taxes on unemployment benefits. Primarily due to this issue,
GDOL created a portal for claimants to report and repay
overpayments in February 2021.
These problems can largely be attributed to the design that shifted primary
responsibility for claim filing and weekly certifications from claimants to
thousands of employers. Employers did not have the same incentive as claimants
or the knowledge of claimants’ other sources of income. While GDOL provided
guidance to employers, if even a small portion of employers did not adhere to the
guidelines, a significant number of claimants could be impacted. In December
2021, GDOL modified the employer-filed claim process to require additional
claimant responsibility prior to payment. Claimants must verify their identity and
answer other questions, though employers remain responsible for weekly
certification of continuing claimant eligibility.
Agency Response: “GDOL agrees that ‘employers file claims on behalf of
certain claimants led to faster processing’ but disagrees that it led to delays
or overpayments in some cases.” GDOL stated that delays only resulted if
employers entered incorrect information or did not certify, and it indicated
that the overwhelming majority did not have any issues. “When an
employer stopped filing, it was usually because the claimant refused to
return to work.” GDOL also indicated that, during the pandemic, 80% of
overpayments were associated with claimant errors and 5% from employer
errors.
Auditor’s Response: The report clearly describes the issues that
individuals experienced related to employer-filed claims, including those
GDOL mentioned in its response. The audit team intended to evaluate
the extent of these problems, but due to data limitations described on
page 16, we were unable to do so. The figures cited by GDOL may
provide insight into the extent to which employer errors contributed to
overpayments, though we do not have enough information to validate
the classification of errors. In addition, the figures cited relate to
overpayments, not to any payment delays experienced by claimants.
GDOL’s Unemployment Insurance Pandemic Response 54
Finding 10: Career center closures allowed staff to focus on claims processing but
increased challenges for claimants.
GDOL career centers have been closed to the public since March 2020. While
GDOL contends the closures better served UI claimants because staff could focus
on claims processing, individuals were also unable to access career center
resources or to seek answers to UI claim questions.
GDOL operates 41 career centers28 that typically provide in-person UI claims
assistance and re-employment services throughout the state. Re-employment
activities include holding job search workshops, assisting with resumes, and
providing veterans-specific services. Individuals could also visit a career center to
file UI claims using on-site computers, ask questions about their claim, or submit
required documentation to support a claim. According to GDOL staff, most other
states do not have similar in-person UI services.
GDOL closed its career centers to the public on March 18, 2020—four days after
the governor declared a public health state of emergency. GDOL indicated the
career centers were closed to allow staff to focus on processing claims and
communicating with claimants via phone and email. Additionally, the closures
helped protect the health and safety of agency staff and the public. GDOL has
since reopened some career centers on an appointment basis. While the plan was
to provide only re-employment services, GDOL officials said that both re-
employment and UI services may be provided.
While GDOL indicated that career centers are not necessary for UI, claimants
46% visited career centers more than 600,000 times in 2019 and filed many claims in
person. Before the pandemic began (2017-2019), the largest proportion (46%) of
initial UI claims were filed at the career centers. During the pandemic, however,
UI filings made filing shifted primarily to online claims and GDOL-mandated employer filing.
in career centers The percentage of claims originating by phone remained relatively small.
prior to
pandemic While GDOL indicated it could assist claimants more efficiently remotely than in
person, career center closures created challenges for those filing claims. For
example:
• Eliminated Source for Answers – In addition to eliminating a
method by which claims could be filed, career center closures removed
a source of contact for claimants with questions or concerns. Without
the career centers, claimants could attempt to contact GDOL via
phone, email, or web inquiry. However, claimants reported that they
were frequently unable to reach GDOL through these methods and
that career center phone numbers went straight to voice mail. As
discussed in the finding on page 56, GDOL officials acknowledge that
they were overwhelmed by the volume of contacts, which made it
difficult for many claimants to obtain or share necessary information.
28 One career center in Cairo was closed permanently during the pandemic.
GDOL’s Unemployment Insurance Pandemic Response 55
• Less Secure Documentation Submission – Before the
pandemic, GDOL frequently required claimants to visit career centers
to provide certain documents, such as an employer separation form or
identity verification, which may include the claimant’s Social Security
Number or confidential tax or wage information. Because claimants
had previously provided GDOL these documents in person, many
documents were sent via less secure methods, such as email or fax.
GDOL has since implemented ID.me for most identity verification and
created an option on the claimant portal to upload certain documents,
such as PUA income verification. However, other sensitive documents
are still sent via email or fax.
• Reduced Access to Technology - In addition to filing UI claims,
individuals may use career center computers to prepare resumes,
conduct job searches, and research employers. For individuals without
internet access and computers, the closures presented a particular
hardship. Poor and rural individuals are most likely to lack these
resources and would have been most affected by the closures. GDOL
indicated staff provided some re-employment services virtually.
It should be noted that GDOL did not update all communications with the closure
information, as noted on page 46. As a result, claimants were still directed to visit
career centers to file certain types of claims or provide required documentation.
Agency Response: GDOL disagreed with the use of the term “closed” and
stated that the career centers continued to provide services throughout the
pandemic. It indicated it was better able to meet customers’ needs by
transitioning “from a primarily in-person service delivery model to the
more modernized virtual model used by most states.” It further stated it
“carefully evaluated, strategically adjusted, and intentionally implemented
a modernized service delivery model throughout the pandemic.”
GDOL contended that the new model had a number of benefits. It allowed
the agency to address the volume of claims and protected both staff and the
public from greater exposure to the COVID-19 virus. The agency noted that
it received many violent threats, that staff were threatened while leaving
career centers and within the community, and gunshots were fired into
career centers at night. “In light of these challenges, GDOL stands by the
service delivery model throughout the pandemic, having leveraged virtual
and in-person services as the situations required.”
Finally, GDOL noted that other agencies were still closed to the public but
GDOL “resumed in person appointments at career centers in October 2021.”
GDOL later added that it will serve individuals who show up at a career
center without an appointment.
Auditor’s Response: The finding is intended to acknowledge both
GDOL’s reasoning for closing the career centers to the public and the
impact it had on claimants, not to advocate for a particular approach.
Because the career centers had been an integral part of GDOL’s UI
processes before the pandemic, the sudden elimination of in-person
services would clearly impact those who had used or depended on them.
GDOL’s Unemployment Insurance Pandemic Response 56
Customer Service
Finding 11: The need for claimant assistance grew exponentially during the pandemic,
but many claimants were unable to obtain a response.
As claims surged during the pandemic, claimant inquiries to GDOL increased
significantly. Many claimants were unable to contact GDOL using any channel
(phone calls, emails, and web inquiries), leading to claimant frustration and more
inquiries. It also likely led to the filing of duplicate claims and unnecessary
appeals. While some information is available on the volume of contacts, GDOL
does not track whether most claimants receive a response to their inquiries. This
prevented us from a comprehensive evaluation of response rates and timeliness.
Based on web Claimants needing assistance can use a variety of methods to contact GDOL. This
inquiries, claimants includes calling one of the local career centers or a central UI unit (e.g., appeals,
had questions about interstate claims), as well as scheduling a callback appointment to speak with a
benefit amounts, staff member. Claimants can also send an email, web inquiry, or fax to a career
payment issues, claim center or central UI unit. As described below, the volume of requests across all
status, and PUA. channels increased significantly during the pandemic.
While data is not available to evaluate GDOL’s responsiveness,29 news reports
indicate many claimant inquiries were unaddressed. Additionally, thousands of
web inquiry comments indicated that claimants were unable to reach GDOL
through any method. GDOL staff indicated the agency did not have the capacity
to answer every inquiry due to the unprecedented volume. Factors discussed in
other findings—such as delays in processing, limited information about claim
status, and unclear communications—contributed to the volume increase.
Unaddressed inquiries about claim status likely led to claimant frustration,
improper denials, and additional work for GDOL. Many claimants unable to
reach GDOL staff filed duplicate claims or invalid appeals (before there was a
determination to appeal) in an attempt to obtain benefits. Other claimants were
unable to reach staff to provide information needed for claims processing, which
could lead to a denial based on incomplete information and an appeal of that
decision. Both situations resulted in frustrated claimants, payment delays, and
additional work for GDOL.
Phone Calls
GDOL experienced a significant increase in call volume when the pandemic
began. As shown in Exhibit 22, GDOL received millions of calls during the
pandemic. In March 2020, the number of calls reached approximately 635,000 —
nearly six times more than the prior month’s total. Volume grew to 9.4 million
calls in April and remained above 9.0 million in May. Answering all calls received
in April would have required each of the 670 career center and central UI benefits
staff members to answer approximately 672 calls per day, in addition to
29 GDOL provided volume data for most contact types (with the exception of fax). However, it could not provide data to
calculate response rates for methods other than phone calls. Staff generally respond to web inquiries and emails by phone,
but data limitations prevented us from matching the outgoing calls to the original inquiries.
GDOL’s Unemployment Insurance Pandemic Response 57
processing claims. As noted in the exhibit, call volume was not available for much
of the pandemic. GDOL could not provide data on calls received between June
2020 and February 2021, and the data provided for subsequent months was not
reliable because GDOL stopped tracking certain types of calls, as discussed below.
Exhibit 22
UI Call Volume Increased Significantly Early in the Pandemic,
January 2020 – May 20201
Pandemic Begins
9,448,205
Data Not Data Not
Available Reliable
June 20 - March -
Feb 21 May 21
158,873
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Mar May
2020 2021
1
GDOL staff said data was not available for June 2020 to February 2021, due to data
storage issues, and data for subsequent months did not include all calls. It should also be
noted GDOL could not verify the accuracy of incoming call data provided.
Source: GDOL call data
During the first half of 2020, most calls went unanswered; however, data
limitations prevented us from evaluating call outcomes for later time periods. In
the two months before the pandemic began, GDOL answered approximately 19%
of incoming calls—most calls (67%) were sent to voice mail. The answer rate fell
early in the pandemic, with only 4% of calls being answered by GDOL staff.30
Most calls (78%) never reached a person or voice mail due to system capacity.
These calls are shown as Not Connected in Exhibit 23. GDOL staff indicated
that they expanded system capacity in May 2020 and hired additional dedicated
customer service staff in April 2021. We were unable to verify the impact of these
actions. GDOL stopped tracking calls that were Not Connected or Abandoned
(i.e., caller hung up), so the current percentage of calls that GDOL answered or
sent to voice mail is unknown.
30 It should be noted that many other states had low answer rates during the pandemic. For example, Virginia answered 6%
of calls it received in June 2020.
GDOL’s Unemployment Insurance Pandemic Response 58
Exhibit 23
Most Calls Went Unanswered Before and During the Pandemic, January 2020 – May 20201
Pandemic Begins
9%
16%
42%
Data Not Data Not
77% 81% Available Reliable
Not Connected
71%
64%
VM June 20 - March -
49% Feb 21 May 21
Answered
19% 15%
19% 19%
8% 3% 4%
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Mar May
2020 2021
1
GDOL staff said data was not available for June 2020 to February 2021 due to data storage issues, and
data for subsequent months did not include all calls. It should also be noted GDOL could not verify the
accuracy of incoming call data provided. Additionally, the percent of abandoned calls (i.e., caller hung
up) was less than 1% and thus too small to show in the above chart.
Source: GDOL call data
Data limitations also prevented us from analyzing additional call performance.
GDOL does not track the calls it makes in response to voice mails, preventing us
from evaluating response rates and timeliness. GDOL also does not track hold
times.
Scheduled appointments with GDOL were difficult to obtain
In November 2020, GDOL created an online appointment system that guarantees a callback from GDOL staff to
further assist claimants. Beginning each Monday at 8:00 a.m., individuals can schedule an appointment using
GDOL’s online Dynamic Scheduler on a first-come, first-serve basis. The number of appointments each week is
contingent upon staff schedules.
Between November 2020 and July 2021, there were approximately 38,200 Dynamic Scheduler callback
appointments—an average of 980 calls per week. However, the limited number of appointments filled up quickly,
typically within 10 minutes. By late September 2021, appointment scheduling windows stayed open for several
hours, which likely indicates it had become easier to reach GDOL staff.
Approximately 5,200 appointments were scheduled for November 2020 (when slots first became available). This
dropped 20% to approximately 3,800 by July 2021. GDOL staff indicated that the number of appointments were
reduced so that staff could better manage the incoming career center calls.
GDOL’s Unemployment Insurance Pandemic Response 59
Web Inquiries
Claimants can also request assistance by submitting contact forms, or web
inquiries, posted on GDOL’s website. Completed forms are directed to specific
offices or subjects and are forwarded to the respective GDOL email inbox.
The number of web inquiries GDOL received grew significantly at the onset of the
pandemic. As shown in Exhibit 24, between March 2020 and May 2021, GDOL
received approximately 1.3 million UI web form inquiries. The number of
submissions increased from nearly 1,800 in February 2020 to nearly 150,000 in
April.
Exhibit 24
Web Inquiries Increased Significantly at the Beginning of the Pandemic,
January 2020 - May 2021
Source: GDOL web inquiry form data
Emails
Due to GDOL’s retention policy, we were unable to analyze the number of emails
received in the early months of the pandemic. As shown in Exhibit 25, however,
we estimate that GDOL received an average of 48,000 emails between December
2020 and May 2021, with monthly decreases beginning in June 2021. (As shown
in Exhibit 24, for a similar method of written communication to GDOL—web
form inquiries—early 2021 volume was less than half of the peak in the spring of
2020.) This estimate is based on a sample of 17 career centers and all central UI
email inboxes.
GDOL’s Unemployment Insurance Pandemic Response 60
Exhibit 25
Email Volume Fell in Mid-2021, December 2020 - September 20211
Pandemic Begins 50,910
44,161
Data Not Available
21,979
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep
2020 2021
1
GDOL staff indicated that email data was not retained for earlier months and therefore was
not available for analysis. Additionally, these values were estimated based on a sample of 17
career centers and all central UI email inboxes.
Source: GDOL email data
Agency Response: “GDOL agrees that the need for claimant assistance
grew exponentially during the pandemic.” It stated that it was not able to
answer every live call but “returned voice mails, met with claimants
virtually, responded to emails, and had live chats with claimants.” It further
stated that when the agency responds to phone calls by another method
(e.g., email), the phone system would not capture the response.
GDOL stated that it had implemented new call software just prior to the
pandemic and the contracted storage was quickly filled when the surge in
calls occurred. When the system was upgraded, the vendor did not turn on
an important reporting mechanism, causing potential inaccuracies in the
data. GDOL did not believe accuracy of the call data analysis showing 78%
of calls were dropped.
GDOL stated that customers were calling phone lines beyond those used in
the analysis; therefore, the incoming call volume was “most likely
exponentially higher than what was used…which would make the
percentage of calls answered and serviced significantly higher than any
analysis has captured.”
Auditor Response: The audit team used call data and data
definitions provided by GDOL and discussed the methodology with
agency staff in advance. The staff expressed no concerns. Results
were shared with UI management, though they acknowledged they
GDOL’s Unemployment Insurance Pandemic Response 61
did not know the agency’s call volume or outcomes (see need for data
discussed in finding 2) and could not speak to the accuracy of the
results. We deemed the call periods reported to be sufficiently
reliable, partly due to the consistency with GDOL statements (large
increase in calls, calls not connected, few calls answered). GDOL
officials are unable to determine the accuracy of the results because
they were not monitoring customer service data when we began our
inquiry.
Finding 12: GDOL does not have systems in place to track claimant inquiries, which
leads to unfulfilled requests, delays in claims processing, and additional
inquiries.
GDOL does not have systems in place to ensure that claimant inquiries have been
effectively and efficiently addressed. The large volume of inquiries during the
pandemic coupled with a decentralized customer service system led to customer
service failures. While many claimants’ emails, web inquiries, and voice mails
went unanswered during the pandemic, others may have received responses from
multiple GDOL staff.
GDOL has a strategic goal to provide claimants with high-quality and responsive
services that exceed customer expectations. For UI, this means operating a
system that ensures claimants understand whom to contact and that their
inquiries receive a timely response. Many organizations centralize incoming calls
to fewer phone numbers, then redirect the call to the most appropriate personnel
to receive and respond to the request.
GDOL does not currently have a customer relationship management (CRM)
system to monitor claimant communications. Without a dedicated system for
tracking customer responses, staff instead review notes in the UI claims
management system to determine whether a claimant has been contacted. Some
claimants received multiple follow-up calls from different staff if the call was not
documented, they had not yet filed a claim, or notes were unclear. This caused
confusion for claimants and duplication of effort for GDOL staff. Many other
claimants did not receive any response—for example, approximately 227,000
claimants sent multiple web inquiries, indicating their first inquiry was not
addressed.
Ensuring that all customer inquiries are addressed is made more challenging by
GDOL publishes the large number of contact points for the public. While other states’ labor
more than 150 UI departments and Georgia agencies have centralized contact information, GDOL
contact points publishes more than 150 UI contact points on its website and in correspondence.
The large number of contact methods encourages claimants to call multiple
phone numbers and email multiple career centers.
GDOL’s Unemployment Insurance Pandemic Response 62
During the pandemic, claimants reached out to several different points of contact
requesting assistance, which created additional work for GDOL staff. For
example, approximately 610,000 claimants called more than one GDOL phone
number between January and May 2020. As shown in Exhibit 26, this increased
the volume of inquiries and led to duplication of effort, which further strained
staff resources needed to process claims and respond to contacts. As discussed on
page 56, unanswered claimant inquiries led to processing delays, duplicate
claims, and invalid appeals.
Exhibit 26
Decentralization Increased Contact Volume and Caused Confusion for Claimants
Jane was approved for benefits but still has not received a payment. She submits a web form
inquiry to her local career center about her lack of payments.
After receiving no response, Jane resends the same web form inquiry to 10 career centers,
further adding to the volume of contacts.
Jane receives a response from three GDOL employees at three different career centers.
Source: Hypothetical scenario based on GDOL web inquiry data & staff interviews
GDOL attributed the lack of tracking to limited funding and antiquated
technology. However, staff indicated they are taking steps to create a centralized
UI number and implement an integrative CRM system that will track responses.
It should be noted that tracking responsiveness will enable GDOL to better
monitor customer service operations, which will help inform management
decisions regarding staff workloads and hiring. This can further improve
responsiveness.
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. GDOL should develop a system to track which contacts have
received a response to ensure timely responses and to minimize
duplication of effort.
GDOL’s Unemployment Insurance Pandemic Response 63
2. GDOL should centralize communications to improve efficiency.
Agency Response: “GDOL agrees customer service system limitations did
not permit comprehensive tracking of claimant inquiries,” but it stated that
it “lacked sufficient funding prior to the pandemic to upgrade the
telecommunications system.”
Recommendation 1: GDOL agreed and is implementing an improved
customer service system. “The solution leverages artificial intelligence,
telephony software and hardware upgrades, and the implementation of a
customer relationship management system. This multi-tool approach will
allow GDOL to better serve customers by enhancing self-service options,
leveraging technology to strategically route customer inquiries to staffing
resources, and increasing data collection on customer communications and
response.”
Recommendation 2: GDOL noted that it is “currently implementing
centralized call scheduling which will route calls to available staff
throughout the state, not just the central office, to reduce call waiting time.”
GDOL reported that it is using federal pandemic funding for the upgrades.
GDOL’s Unemployment Insurance Pandemic Response 64
Appendix A: Table of Recommendations
Finding 1: Benefit payment delays were driven by unprecedented volume, limited automation of
claims processing, and other factors. (p. 12)
No recommendations
Finding 2: GDOL lacks information that would assist UI program management with planning and
decision making. (p. 20)
1. To manage the UI program more systematically, GDOL should collect additional information and
ensure all information is reliable and accurate.
Finding 3: A documented plan would help GDOL better manage future increases in claim
volume. (p. 24)
2. To prepare for future increases in claim volume, GDOL should create a formal recession plan that
considers lessons learned during the pandemic.
Finding 4: While GDOL has made key updates to its claims management system, the system
could better facilitate claims processing and communication with claimants. (p. 28)
3. GDOL should increase automation of its claims processing.
4. GDOL should continue to improve its communications with claimants through the portal—particularly
with regard to status updates and document submission.
5. The General Assembly should consider additional funding to upgrade/modernize GDOL’s UI system.
Finding 5: The number of GDOL employees has declined over time, resulting in fewer
employees to address the surge in claims. (p. 34)
No recommendations
Finding 6: GDOL’s staffing actions to address the claims increase were similar to strategies
used by other state UI programs. (p. 35)
6. GDOL should work with the General Assembly to create an exception to the retiree work limit during
periods of high unemployment. In future situations like the public health emergency, GDOL could work
with the Office of the Governor to include a waiver in any related executive order.
Finding 7: Information available to claimants was not always clear and accurate, which
contributed to application errors, processing delays, and increases calls and emails from
claimants. (p. 43)
7. GDOL should identify and implement ways to make the application process clearer for claimants (e.g.,
clarifying language for questions).
8. GDOL should provide plain language explanations in its determination letters.
9. GDOL should use surveys or focus groups to test the clarity of language with claimants and/or
employers.
GDOL’s Unemployment Insurance Pandemic Response 65
10. When changes are made to processes, GDOL should ensure all communications are updated to
claimants understand what steps they should follow.
Finding 8: GDOL adjusted policies to reduce claims processing times but could have considered
additional steps. (p. 48)
11. GDOL should include language in the determination letters to notify claimants of the option to
requires a redetermination or reconsideration.
Finding 9: GDOL’s requirement that employers file claims on behalf of certain claimants led to
faster processing of many claims but to delays or overpayments in some cases. (p. 51)
No Recommendations
Finding 10: Career center closures allowed staff to focus on claims processing but increased
challenges for claimants. (p. 54)
No recommendations
Finding 11: The need for claimant assistance grew exponentially during the pandemic, but many
claimants were unable to obtain a response. (p. 56)
No recommendations
Finding 12: GDOL does not have systems in place to track claimant inquiries, which leads to
unfulfilled requests, delays in claims processing, and additional inquiries. (p. 61)
12. GDOL should develop a system to track which contacts have received a response to ensure timely
responses and to minimize duplication of effort.
13. GDOL should centralize communications to improve efficiency.
GDOL’s Unemployment Insurance Pandemic Response 66
Appendix B: Objectives, Scope, and Methodology
Objectives
This report examines the unemployment insurance (UI) program at the Georgia Department of Labor
(GDOL). Specifically, our examination set out to answer the following questions:
1. How long did GDOL take to process claims for each UI program?
2. Did GDOL take reasonable steps to adjust staffing and training in response to the high volume
of UI claims during the pandemic?
3. Did technological challenges impact GDOL’s timeliness of claims processing?
4. Did claimants have access to clear and sufficient communications from GDOL?
5. Did GDOL respond to contacts from claimants in a timely manner?
Scope
This special examination generally covered activity related to UI claims filed January 2020 through
June 2021, with consideration of earlier or later periods when relevant. Information used in this report
was obtained by reviewing relevant laws, rules, and regulations; interviewing GDOL officials and staff;
reviewing agency documents; analyzing data and reporting from GDOL; conducting a career center site
visit, including observing staff process claims; reviewing media coverage of UI during the pandemic;
reading industry publications and audits conducted in other states; reviewing other states’ UI websites
and documents; and interviewing UI staff in other states.
Government auditing standards require that we also report the scope of our work on internal control
that is significant within the context of the audit objectives. We reviewed internal controls as part of our
work on Objectives 1 and 5. This work was related to understanding how GDOL’s internal controls
affected the timeliness of claims processing and the quality of the customer service data. The work
provided context for multiple findings, but it also resulted in a finding about the inadequate
management information and monitoring, as well as a finding about insufficient communication with
claimants.
We were unable to fully address objectives 1 and 5 due to data limitations. As described below and
throughout the report, GDOL either did not have data, provided data that was not reliable, or was
unable to provide data in the timeframe required for the report. In addition, we could not conduct
significant on-site visits due to COVID-19 precautions and cases at GDOL, limiting our ability to obtain
complete and timely information from staff at all levels. Finally, limited written documentation
available from GDOL (e.g., documentation of claims processes, strategies used during the pandemic)
led to greater reliance on testimonial evidence.
Methodology
To evaluate how long it took GDOL to process claims, we requested GDOL provide claims data
that would allow for a comprehensive evaluation of timeliness, as well as factors that may have
contributed to processing delays. GDOL indicated it would take at least three to four months to provide
the requested data. Due to the report deadline, the audit team agreed to accept a more limited data set.
However, as noted on pages 16 and 23, the claims data GDOL provided was not sufficiently reliable for
GDOL’s Unemployment Insurance Pandemic Response 67
analyzing the timeliness of claims processing. The audit team also attempted to use GDOL reporting to
the U.S. Department of Labor (U.S. DOL) but determined this data was also not sufficiently reliable.
Without claims data, first payment timeliness was estimated using payment data provided for financial
audit purposes. We calculated the number of days between each claimant’s first eligible week ending
date and the check date for the corresponding payment. While this provides information for payments
made through the date of the data extract (September 2021), additional payments continue to be made
for claims beginning in the quarters reported, especially for more recent quarters. Additionally, we
excluded PUA payments for claims with initial eligibility in the first quarter of calendar year 2020. The
CARES Act allowed for PUA claims to be backdated prior to the passage of the law, so claimants could
be paid for weeks that occurred well before they were able to file a claim.
To estimate the number of new initial claims filed during the pandemic, we used unduplicated counts
from the claims data provided by GDOL. While the claims data was not sufficiently reliable to evaluate
timeliness, the data provided the best estimate of new initial claims filed.31 Because the data included
duplicate records, we used unduplicated counts of Social Security Numbers for the periods of March
2020 to February 2021 and March 2021 to June 2021. We used these two time periods because a
claimant can have one new initial claim per 12-month period. By using two time periods, we were able
to include individuals who might have filed a legitimate second initial claim in their new benefit year.
To determine whether GDOL took reasonable steps to adjust staffing and training, we
interviewed UI, statewide operations, and human resources personnel. We used Department of
Administrative Services’ Human Resources Administration data to analyze staffing changes at GDOL
from fiscal years 2013 through 2021 and TeamWorks HCM data to determine the employee hours
redirected to UI and overtime, as well as to assess hiring during the pandemic. To determine the
number of contractor hours spent on UI and IT, we requested that GDOL provide records documenting
contractor hours for the review period.
To determine how technology impacted the timeliness of claims processing, we compared
GDOL’s system capabilities with best practices for UI systems. We identified best practices by reviewing
industry literature, audits from other states, and federal audits. We also interviewed staff from other
states’ workforce agencies. To assess GDOL’s system capabilities, we interviewed agency staff, reviewed
agency documents, and observed staff processing claims while onsite.
To assess GDOL communications to claimants, we reviewed written communications sent to
claimants, application screenshots, the claimant handbook, and the GDOL website. To determine the
reading grade level of the documents reviewed, we used the Flesch-Kincaid grade level tool in Word. We
also interviewed GDOL staff and read media reports to identify areas of potential confusion. We
intended to evaluate claimant answers to application questions as part of our review of claims data, but
data limitations discussed on page 16 prevented us from doing so.
To determine the impact of career center closures, we reviewed agency documents to determine what
resources the career centers offered and the level of visitation from UI claimants before the pandemic
began. To determine how frequently claims were filed in person at the career centers, we reviewed
Benefit Accuracy Measurement data published on the U.S. DOL website.
31 As noted on page 22, claim numbers that GDOL reported to U.S. DOL contained significant duplicates, and as such, did not
provide a reliable source for the number of claims filed.
GDOL’s Unemployment Insurance Pandemic Response 68
To determine whether GDOL responded to contacts from claimants in a timely manner,
we requested responsiveness data from GDOL for phone calls, emails, and web inquiries.32 While we
analyzed volume across these channels, data was not available to determine responsiveness across most
channels. As discussed on page 61, GDOL does not track whether staff have responded to voice mails,
emails, or web inquiries, and available data was not sufficient for us to identify responses.
For phone calls, GDOL provided incoming call records for UI-related phone numbers for two separate
time periods: January to May 2020 and March to May 2021. GDOL staff indicated that data for the
intervening time period was not available because of data storage issues. We used the available data to
analyze call volume and call outcomes for these time periods; however, data issues affected what we
were able to report. For example, the data indicated calls that were sent to voice mail but did not
indicate whether the caller had left a voice mail, so we could not match actual voice mails with
outbound calls to assess responsiveness. Additionally, there were concerns with the call data that affect
its reliability. GDOL staff indicated that this data “cannot be assumed to be accurate or complete.” We
identified problems such as calls that are categorized as “answered” in the middle of the night or that
only last a few seconds. While we determined the 2020 time period was sufficiently reliable to report,
we determined that the 2021 data was not, due to missing records. GDOL staff indicated that the agency
had stopped tracking calls with outcomes of Not Connected or Abandoned, so the call volume and
outcome analysis results for 2021 were inaccurate.
For emails, we analyzed data for incoming emails received between December 2020 and September
2021 for a sample of UI-related inboxes. Due to its retention policy, GDOL no longer had email records
for earlier time periods. Additionally, GDOL staff indicated it would be a significant logistical challenge
to pull data for all requested inboxes. As a result, we reduced our request to the five central UI inboxes
and a sample of 12 career centers and then projected the volume to the remaining 30 career centers.
While we reported volume, it was not possible to evaluate email responsiveness. GDOL staff typically
respond to emails via phone, but outgoing call data could not be matched to specific emails.
For web inquiries, we analyzed data for UI-related inquiries submitted between January 2020 and May
2021. As with emails, GDOL staff generally respond to web inquiries by phone, so we could not evaluate
responsiveness.
We also analyzed call appointment data from GDOL’s online scheduling system (known as the Dynamic
Scheduler) between its implementation in November 2020 and July 2021. In addition, we monitored
appointment availability on GDOL’s website between August and October 2021.
We conducted this special examination in accordance with generally accepted government auditing
standards, with the exception of obtaining the evidence necessary to fully address objectives 1 and 5 as
intended and as discussed in the scope and methodology sections above. Those standards require that
we plan and perform the audit to obtain sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis
for our findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives. We believe that the evidence obtained
provides a reasonable basis for our findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives.
32 GDOL staff indicated that claimants also communicated with them via fax; however, the resources required made it
impractical to pull fax data for analysis.
GDOL’s Unemployment Insurance Pandemic Response 69
Appendix C: Career Center Map
Catoosa Towns
Dade Fannin Rabun
Union
Murray
Whitfield
Walker Gilmer
White Habersham
Lumpkin
Stephens
Chattooga Gordon
Pickens
Dawson Banks Franklin
Hart
Hall
Floyd Bartow Cherokee Forsyth
Jackson Madison Elbert
Polk
Barrow
Gwinnett Clarke
Paulding Cobb
Oglethorpe
Oconee
Haralson Lincoln
Walton
DeKalb Wilkes
Douglas Fulton
Carroll Greene
Clayton Morgan Taliaferro
Newton Columbia
McDuffie
Henry
Fayette
Warren
Coweta Richmond
Heard Jasper Putnam
Spalding Butts Hancock
Glascock
Pike
Lamar Baldwin
Monroe Burke
Troup Meriwether Jones Jefferson
Washington
Upson Wilkinson
Bibb
Jenkins
Harris Screven
Talbot Crawford Johnson
Twiggs
Emanuel
Taylor Peach
Muscogee
Bleckley Laurens Bulloch
Houston Treutlen Candler
Effingham
Chattahoochee Marion Macon
Schley
Pulaski
Evans
Dooly Dodge Wheeler Toombs
Bryan
Stewart
Webster Sumter Tattnall
Wilcox Chatham
Crisp Telfair
Quitman Liberty
Randolph Terrell Jeff Davis
Lee Ben Hill
Appling Long
Turner
Clay Irwin Bacon
Calhoun Dougherty Wayne
Worth Coffee McIntosh
Tift
Early Pierce
Baker
Berrien Atkinson
Glynn
Mitchell Brantley
Miller Colquitt
Cook Ware
Lanier
Seminole
Clinch Camden
Decatur Grady Charlton
Thomas Lowndes
Brooks
Echols
GDOL’s Unemployment Insurance Pandemic Response 70
Appendix D: Timeliness
Number of Days from Initial Eligible Week to First Payment 1
All Programs
2020 2021
Jan-Mar* Apr-Jun Jul-Sep Oct-Dec Jan-Mar Apr-Jun Total %
Total Claims
with Payments 356,981 727,100 91,446 32,474 30,914 12,405 1,251,320
Up to 30 Days 284,106 534,778 57,579 20,126 20,429 6,892 923,910 74%
31-60 Days 57,038 115,443 17,489 4,517 3,323 2,603 200,413 16%
61-90 Days 6,929 37,416 5,274 1,409 1,228 1,818 54,074 4%
91-120 Days 3,235 20,460 4,176 2,627 4,180 843 35,521 3%
121-150 Days 1,460 5,757 3,288 2,485 813 193 13,996 1%
151-180 Days 1,174 3,975 1,306 659 459 56 7,629 1%
More than 180
Days 3,039 9,271 2,334 651 482 - 15,777 1%
*Claims from the first quarter exclude programs from the CARES Act.
Regular (State) UI
2020 2021
Jan-Mar Apr-Jun Jul-Sep Oct-Dec Jan-Mar Apr-Jun Total %
Total Claims
with Payments 356,976 639,200 80,569 31,024 29,994 13,507 1,151,270
Up to 30 Days 284,108 514,556 54,009 20,149 20,343 7,602 900,767 78%
31-60 Days 57,033 88,188 14,567 3,523 2,841 2,806 168,958 15%
61-90 Days 6,929 20,042 3,531 1,215 1,033 1,914 34,664 3%
91-120 Days 3,234 6,832 3,166 2,548 4,152 922 20,854 2%
121-150 Days 1,459 2,607 2,647 2,395 737 204 10,049 1%
151-180 Days 1,174 1,755 927 614 422 59 4,951 0%
More than 180
Days 3,039 5,220 1,722 580 466 - 11,027 1%
GDOL’s Unemployment Insurance Pandemic Response 71
Appendix D: Timeliness (continued)
Number of Days from Initial Eligible Week to First Payment 1
Pandemic Unemployment Assistance
2020 2021
Jan-Mar Apr-Jun Jul-Sep Oct-Dec Jan-Mar Apr-Jun Total* %
Total Claims
with Payments 194,602 96,489 11,155 476 6,733 434 115,287
Up to 30 Days 24,478 5,947 285 4,600 250 35,560 31%
31-60 Days 26,548 2,819 155 981 100 30,603 27%
61-90 Days 17,485 991 13 545 53 19,087 17%
91-120 Days Data Not 14,223 442 7 252 21 14,945 13%
Reported*
121-150 Days 3,386 399 8 182 10 3,985 3%
151-180 Days 2,388 228 2 85 - 2,703 2%
More than 180
Days 7,981 329 6 88 - 8,404 7%
*Claims with initial eligibility in the first quarter of 2020 were not reported and were excluded from the Total column.
The CARES Act (passed March 27) allowed for PUA claims to be backdated to weeks ending February 2, so time
between initial eligibility and first payment could be significantly longer than processing time.
1
Difference between first week ending date for benefits and check date. Data as of September 2021. Ongoing
claims processing and appeals could lead to additional payments that would increase the 50% and 95% levels,
especially for recent quarters.
Source: GDOL benefit payment data
GDOL’s Unemployment Insurance Pandemic Response 72
Appendix E: Staffing
Statewide Operations UI Benefits
Regular Hours Overtime Hours Regular Hours Overtime Hours
70 70
Thousands Thousands
60 60
50 50
40 40
30 30
20 20
10 10
0 0
Jan Apr July Oct Jan Apr June Jan Apr July Oct Jan Apr June
2020 2021 2020 2021
UI Tax
Regular Hours Overtime Hours
70
Thousands
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Jan Apr July Oct Jan Apr June
2020 2021
Please note the change in scale in the following charts
Departmental Administration Labor Market
Regular Hours Overtime Hours Regular Hours Overtime Hours
10 10
Thousands
Thousands
8 8
6 6
4 4
2 2
0 0
Jan Apr July Oct Jan Apr June Jan Apr July Oct Jan Apr June
2020 2021 2020 2021
Source: TeamWorks HCM, GDOL contractor records
This page intentionally left blank
File and source
- File
- GA_DOAA_UI_pandemic_response.pdf
- Size
- 1,376,499 bytes
- SHA-256
- d1e51322b75436bb026c8e3d24a8ee8a9f1a849fff0df0f4f999030318da5b54
- Our copy
- GA_DOAA_UI_pandemic_response.pdf
- Original
- No public link identified.