Unemployment Insurance (UI) and Reemployment Services and Eligibility Assessment (RESEA)

Policy context: In 2015, DOL instructed states to use their RESEA grants to implement programs that would require new UI claimants to undergo an eligibility review to confirm that they are compliant with state UI work-search requirements and receive services that would help them connect to available jobs. Missouri was among many states that adopted DOL’s recommendations.

Research design: Conduct an RCT impact study that randomly assigns RESEA-eligible UI claimants into three groups: (1) program group A (required to attend an RESEA session in week 2 of their UI claim); (2) program group B (required to attend an RESEA session in week 6 of their UI claim); and (3) control group (no requirements). Use Missouri administrative data to estimate the impacts of the RESEA program on participant UI spells, UI benefit amounts collected, employment rates, and earnings. Of particular interest is to identify the relative value of requiring a one-time meeting early in participants’ claims versus later in their claims. The study also includes an implementation study that uses information from stakeholder interviews, document reviews, and program observations to examine how Missouri RESEA was implemented and the processes used for delivering services. 

Policy impact. The Bipartisan Budget Act of 2018 authorized the permanent and nationwide implementation of the RESEA program and encouraged states to conduct evaluations to build evidence that meet the CLEAR high or moderate causal evidence rating requirement set by DOL. The current study will produce evidence that meet the high causal evidence CLEAR criteria, thereby contributing to the portfolio of evidence-based practices in this policy area and justifying continued Federal funding for the Missouri RESEA program. In addition, this study will establish the relative value of providing RESEA services to participants early in their UI claims versus later in their UI claims (i.e., before and after most of them had time to engage in meaningful search activities).

Policy context: In 2015, DOL instructed states to use their RESEA grants to implement programs that would require new UI claimants to undergo an eligibility review to confirm that they are compliant with state UI work-search requirements and receive services that would help them connect to available jobs.  

Research design. Conduct an RCT impact study of Colorado’s RESEA program to determine whether the impacts found in Nevada replicate in Colorado. The study will randomize approximately 30,000 RESEA-eligible claimants, of whom roughly half will be assigned to the RESEA program and the other half to the control group. The RCT will measure the effect of the Colorado RESEA program on (i) total earnings in the 18-month period following program entry; and (ii) the total benefit amount collected before UI exit in order to determine whether the program produced net savings for the state. If effects are found at the 18-month follow-up, the study will be extended to measure earnings through 45 months following program entry.  

Policy impact. The Bipartisan Budget Act of 2018 authorized the permanent and nationwide implementation of the RESEA program and encouraged states to conduct evaluations to build evidence that meet the CLEAR high or moderate causal evidence rating requirement set by DOL. The current study will produce evidence that meet the high causal evidence CLEAR criteria, thereby contributing to the portfolio of evidence-based practices in this policy area and justifying continued Federal funding for the Colorado RESEA program. 

Policy context: In 2015, DOL instructed states to use their RESEA grants to implement programs that would require new UI claimants to undergo an eligibility review to confirm that they are compliant with state UI work-search requirements and receive services that would help them connect to available jobs. Kansas was among many states that adopted DOL’s recommendations.

Research design. Conduct an RCT impact study that randomly assigns RESEA-eligible UI claimants into two groups: (1) RESEA group to participate in RESEA; and (3) control group (no requirements). Use Kansas administrative data to estimate the impacts of the RESEA program on participant UI spells, UI benefit amounts collected, employment rates, and earnings. Of particular interest is to identify the relative value of the following to increase RESEA participation rates:  1) offering virtual services and 2) self-scheduling the RESEA appointment.  The study also includes an implementation assessment that uses information from stakeholder interviews, document reviews, and program observations to examine how the Kansas RESEA was implemented and the processes used for delivering services. 

Policy impact. The Bipartisan Budget Act of 2018 authorized the permanent and nationwide implementation of the RESEA program and encouraged states to conduct evaluations to build evidence that meets the CLEAR high or moderate causal evidence rating requirement set by DOL. The current study will produce evidence that meets the high causal evidence CLEAR criteria, thereby contributing to the portfolio of evidence-based practices in this policy area and justifying continued Federal funding for the Kansas RESEA program. In addition, this study will establish the relative value of offering virtual vs. in-person services and self-scheduling of the RESEA meeting.

Policy context: In 2005, the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) offered grants to states to implement the Reemployment and Eligibility Assessment (REA) program, which required new UI claimants to undergo an eligibility review to confirm compliance with work search requirements. Nevada was among the first states to implement REA but, in addition to the eligibility review, the Nevada REA program provided claimants with job counseling. In 2015, following promising evidence on the effects of the Nevada program, DOL instructed states to use their Federal RESEA grants to implement programs that required new UI claimants to both undergo an eligibility review and receive job counseling.

Research design: Conduct an RCT impact study that randomly assigns RESEA-eligible UI claimants into the program group (required to participate in the RESEA program) or into the control group (exempt from program requirements). Use Nevada administrative data to estimate the impacts of the program on UI spells, UI benefit amounts collected, employment rates, and earnings. Also, conduct an implementation study that uses information form stakeholder interviews, document reviews, and program observations to examine how Nevada RESEA was implemented and the methods and processes used for delivering services. 

Policy impact: The Bipartisan Budget Act of 2018 authorized the permanent and nationwide implementation of the RESEA program and encouraged states to conduct evaluations to build evidence that meet the high or moderate causal evidence rating requirement of DOL’s Clearinghouse for Labor Evaluation and Research (CLEAR). The current study will produce evidence that meet the high causal evidence CLEAR criteria, thereby contributing to the portfolio of evidence-based practices in this policy area and justifying continued Federal funding for the Nevada RESEA program.

Click here for the Nevada RESEA Interim Report.

Click here for the Interim Report infographic.

Policy context: In 2015, DOL instructed states to use their RESEA grants to implement programs that would require new UI claimants to undergo an eligibility review to confirm that they are compliant with state UI work-search requirements and receive services that would help them connect to available jobs. Iowa was among the first states to implement a program that met these requirements; however, while most states implemented RESEA programs that required participants to attend a one-time meeting, Iowa required participants to attend weekly RESEA meetings throughout their UI spells.

Research design: Conduct an RCT impact study that randomly assigns RCM/RESEA-eligible UI claimants into the program group (required to receive services) or the control group (no program requirements). Use Iowa administrative data to estimate the impacts of the RESEA program on participant UI spells, UI benefit amounts collected, employment rates, and earnings. The study also includes an implementation study that uses information from stakeholder interviews, document reviews, and program observations to examine how Iowa RCM/RESEA was implemented and the processes used for delivering services. 

Policy impact: The Bipartisan Budget Act of 2018 authorized the permanent and nationwide implementation of the RESEA program and encouraged states to conduct evaluations to build evidence that meet the CLEAR high or moderate causal evidence rating requirement set by DOL. The current study will produce evidence that meet the high causal evidence CLEAR criteria, thereby contributing to the portfolio of evidence-based practices in this policy area and justifying continued Federal funding for the Iowa RCM/RESEA program. This study will also identify the impact of requiring participants to attend meetings throughout their UI spells relative to the usual practice of requiring a one-time meeting.

Policy context: In 2015, DOL instructed states to use their RESEA grants to implement programs that would require new UI claimants to undergo an eligibility review to confirm that they are compliant with state UI work-search requirements and receive services that would help them connect to available jobs. Wisconsin was among the first states to implement a program that met these requirements.

Research design: Conduct an RCT impact study that randomly assigns RESEA-eligible UI claimants into three groups: (1) RESEA group (required to attend a one-time RESEA session); (2) RESEA+ group (required to attend an initial and a follow-up RESEA session); and (3) control group (no requirements). Use Wisconsin administrative data to estimate the impacts of the RESEA program on participant UI spells, UI benefit amounts collected, employment rates, and earnings. Of particular interest is to identify the relative value of requiring a one-time meeting or multiple meetings. The study also includes an implementation study that uses information from stakeholder interviews, document reviews, and program observations to examine how Wisconsin RESEA was implemented and the processes used for delivering services. 

Policy impact: The Bipartisan Budget Act of 2018 authorized the permanent and nationwide implementation of the RESEA program and encouraged states to conduct evaluations to build evidence that meet the CLEAR high or moderate causal evidence rating requirement set by DOL. The current study will produce evidence that meet the high causal evidence CLEAR criteria, thereby contributing to the portfolio of evidence-based practices in this policy area and justifying continued Federal funding for the Wisconsin RESEA program. In addition, this study will establish the relative value of requiring participants to attend a follow-up meeting after their initial meeting relative to the standard practice of requiring participants to attend a one-time meeting. 

Click here for the Wisconsin RESEA Second Annual Evaluation Report.

Click here for the second Annual Report infographic.

Policy context: In 2015, DOL instructed states to use their RESEA grants to implement programs that would require new UI claimants to undergo an eligibility review to confirm that they are compliant with state UI work-search requirements and receive services that would help them connect to available jobs. North Carolina was among many states that adopted DOL’s recommendations.

Research design. Conduct an RCT impact study that randomly assigns RESEA-eligible UI claimants into the RESEA group (required to participate in the program) or the control group (exempt from program requirements). Use North Carolina administrative data to estimate the impacts of the program on UI spells, UI benefit amounts collected, employment rates, and earnings. Also, conduct an implementation study that uses information from stakeholder interviews, document reviews, and program observations to examine how North Carolina RESEA was implemented during the period of random assignment and the processes used for delivering services. 

Policy impact. The Bipartisan Budget Act of 2018 authorized the permanent and nationwide implementation of the RESEA program and encouraged states to conduct evaluations to build evidence that meet the CLEAR high or moderate causal evidence rating requirement set by DOL. The current study will produce evidence that meet the high causal evidence CLEAR criteria, thereby contributing to the portfolio of evidence-based practices in this policy area and justifying continued Federal funding for the North Carolina RESEA program.