EXHIBIT A

Report of DETR Rapid Response Strike Force

EXHIBIT A
Docket 81763 Document 2021-04567
Report of
Rapid Response
Strike Force
January 25, 2021

Report of Rapid Response Strike Force   1

CHAIR
Barbara Buckley
Former Speaker, Nevada State Assembly

MEMBERS
Vanessa Alpers
Department of Health & Human Services

David Axtell
Chief Enterprise Architect, State of Nevada

Elisa Cafferata
Director, Department of Employment, Training and Rehabilitation (DETR)

Alan Cunningham
Chief Information Officer, State of Nevada

Steve Fisher
Administrator, Division of Welfare and Supportive Services (DWSS)

Anthony Pearl
General Counsel and Chief Compliance Officer,
The Cosmopolitan of Las Vegas

Mike Schmitt
CEO and Owner, Clairvoyix

Chuck Short
Retired CEO, Eighth Judicial District Court
& President, CTS Business Solutions

Report of Rapid Response Strike Force   2

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Letter from Rapid Response Chair Barbara Buckley................................................................ 4

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY................................................................................................................... 7

ISSUES ANALYSIS & RECOMMENDATIONS................................................................................ 11

General System-Wide Issues.................................................................................................. 11
Issues Unique to UI Claims...................................................................................................... 13
Issues Unique to PUA Claims.................................................................................................. 14
General Organization-Wide Issues and Recommendations................................................ 15
Leadership Team of DETR & ESD....................................................................................................15
Recommendations......................................................................................................................16
Unemployment Claims Workload & Staffing....................................................................... 17
Recommendations........................................................................................................... 18
Backlog Elimination Plans...................................................................................................... 19
Recommendations........................................................................................................... 21
Fraud........................................................................................................................................ 22
Recommendations........................................................................................................... 23
Two Distinct Unemployment Assistance Claim
Processes and Duplication of Resources............................................................................. 24
Recommendations............................................................................................................. 24
Claims & Management Information Reporting.................................................................. 25
Recommendations............................................................................................................. 26
Business Process Review........................................................................................................ 26
Recommendations............................................................................................................. 27
Claimant Experience & Communication............................................................................ 27
Recommendations............................................................................................................. 28
Information Technology Infrastructure.................................................................................... 29
UI Claims Management Benefit Computer System............................................................ 29
PUA Claims Management Benefits Computer System...................................................... 30
Recommendations............................................................................................................. 30
Improve the UI Application System...................................................................................... 31
Recommendations............................................................................................................. 31
Phone System and Call Center Issues.................................................................................. 33
Recommendations............................................................................................................. 34
Preparing for Future Extraordinary Increases in Unemployment Applications................ 34
Recommendations............................................................................................................. 34
Working with our Congressional Delegation....................................................................... 35
Recommendations............................................................................................................. 35
CONCLUSION.............................................................................................................................. 36

Appendix A - Glossary of Terms and Definitions.................................................................... 37

Report of Rapid Response Strike Force   3

 Letter from Rapid Response Chair Barbara Buckley

In August 2020, I was honored to be asked by Governor Sisolak to chair a Rapid Response
Strike Force to identify issues and make recommendations regarding the State’s
unemployment compensation system. At the time, the Director of the Department of
Employment, Training and Rehabilitation (DETR) had resigned, as had the Deputy Director.
The Employment Security Division (ESD) was facing an unprecedented avalanche of claims:
from March 15, 2020 to July 31, 2020, 469,191 “regular” unemployment claims had been filed
and another 344,681 Pandemic Unemployment Assistance (PUA) claims had been filed,
totaling 813,872. In April 2020, it was estimated that the State’s unemployment rate was
30.1%, the highest unemployment rate ever recorded for any state in any month, including
in the Great Depression. By May, the rate began to decrease significantly, but by then,
ESD was facing a tidal wave of claims. It went from administering 20,000 unemployment
compensation claims a week in early March 2020 to processing over 300,000 claims a week
by August. By December 2020, 1.5 million initial unemployment claims had been filed since
the pandemic began. At the same time, the Division was hit with fraud at a rate never seen
before, receiving at least 400,000 fraudulent claims. The fraudulent claims used valid data,
a person’s correct name and social security number, and many of the claims were filed by
criminal networks. The result was a flood of claims and a striking level of fraud never seen
before that virtually paralyzed the Division.

The first task that Governor Sisolak and I undertook was to find a new Acting Director of
the Department. With two previous experienced Directors having left within the first six
months of the crisis, the latter one due to threats on her life, the Department desperately
needed leadership to face its unprecedented challenges. As you might imagine, it takes
a good deal of courage to accept a job where a Department is facing such extraordinary
challenges. Fortunately, Elisa Cafferata agreed to accept the position as Acting Director.

The second task undertaken was to create the Strike Force. Fortunately, the membership
of the Strike Force was quickly assembled. Anthony Pearl, General Counsel and Chief
Compliance Officer, The Cosmopolitan of Las Vegas, agreed to join. Mike Schmitt, CEO
and Owner of Clairvoyix, with his knowledge of technology and data systems, joined next.
Steve Fisher, Administrator of the Division of Welfare and Supportive Services also joined the
team. David Axtell, Chief Enterprise Architect, State of Nevada, and Alan Cunningham, the
Chief Information Officer for the State of Nevada, also joined to assist with the evaluation of
information technology issues. Chuck Short, former CEO of the Eighth Judicial District Court
and owner of CTS Business Solutions, a company that helps courts and judicial systems find
efficiencies and reduce backlog, joined next. Vanessa Alpers, Department of Health
& Human Services, agreed to act as policy staff/lead to organize the volunteer effort. All
members of the Strike Force volunteered to assist out of concern for out-of-work Nevadans,
and none received compensation from the Strike Force for their service.

The Strike Force and Director Cafferata then went to work. Leadership changes were made at
the Division, and two respected retired Division administrators agreed to return while permanent
leaders were hired. Jenny Cassleman was hired as Deputy Director of DETR, and Lynda Parven,
a long time experienced state deputy was hired as Administrator. In the Employment Security

Report of Rapid Response Strike Force   4

Division, two new Deputy Administrators, Nancy St. Clair and Karlene Johnson, were hired as
were two new Chiefs: Patricia Allander and Kris Boggs. Because of the time it would take to
hire and train state workers, a staffing plan was created to not only hire DETR employees, but
to bring on contract staff and recruit/train other state workers to work overtime to assist with
processing claims and reducing the backlog. Strike Force member Steve Fisher suggested the
idea of using eligibility workers within the Welfare Division to be cross-trained in unemployment
benefit administration and offer this assistance. It’s worth pointing out that the idea of Welfare
staff working overtime for DETR is a new idea which had never been attempted by a state
agency. Two hundred welfare eligibility workers agreed to assist, and this experiment bore
immediate success. By January 25, 2021, these workers processed 88,064 claims.

The Strike Force focused their attention on fraud which was rampant in both
unemployment programs:

❑ The “regular UI” program, the federally created program for payment of benefits for
employees who are laid off due to no fault of their own;
❑ The “PUA” program, the newly created program to assist individuals who were
not eligible for “regular UI” under federal law because they were independent
contractors or did not have sufficient work history to qualify but were out of work for
a COVID-related reason.

The Strike Force found ways to verify identity and recommended these measures be utilized by
the Division. The Team communicated with law enforcement to ensure information was received
on the extent of the fraud so that they could initiate prosecutions. Today, because of these anti-
fraud measures, fraud has been reduced significantly, and the Division is trying even more tools
to stay one step ahead of the criminal enterprises attacking the State’s benefit system.

The Strike Force worked on backlog elimination plans and prioritized sets of claims weekly.
Data was analyzed and metrics established. Slowly, the PUA backlog as of August 1, 2020,
was reduced from 217,000 to 16,874 as of January 21, 2021. The UI backlog of monetarily
eligible claims as of August 1, 2020, was reduced from 26,000 to 0 (as of January 11, 2021).
Changes outlined in this report were recommended to increase processing speeds of
incoming cases in order to keep the incoming claims from becoming backlogged.

Originally, the Strike Force planned to work for 60-90 days. However, as it continued its
in-depth analysis of Nevada’s unemployment system, it found that one of the biggest
problems facing the Division was lack of time and resources. The Strike Force decided
to extend its volunteer effort with a view towards providing more assistance to the DETR
leadership team as it attempted to not only focus on efforts to eliminate the backlog, but to
perform its other administrative functions such as:

❑ efforts to oversee the $8 billion in benefits paid,

❑ management of the two computer programs needed for issuing payments,
including one that is chronically slow and one that was still being built,
❑ borrow funding from the federal government,
❑ understand and implement new programs given to the Division from the federal
government,

Report of Rapid Response Strike Force   5

 ❑ interface with the U.S. Department of Labor and its complex guidance on how to
operate almost every facet of the State’s programs,
❑ prepare its budget for the next biennium,
❑ hire and train hundreds of staff,
❑ respond to a level of fraud never before seen in unemployment offices,
❑ deal with frequent COVID-related outbreaks, temporarily closing offices, and
❑ implement a new phone/claim system that would not only be more efficient but
allow employees to work remotely.

The attached report outlines the findings of the Strike Force after analyzing the Division
and the unemployment crisis. The report discusses some of the challenges the Strike Force
discovered, describes steps taken to address these challenges and offers suggestions on
how to improve the unemployment compensation program, both now and in the future.

I am grateful for the opportunity I was given by the Governor to lead this initiative. I want
to thank the Governor and his staff for giving us the authority to undertake a very thorough
review of the Department and to begin implementing reforms right away. I want to thank
Richard Whitley for his early critical advice and for suggesting that the Welfare Division join
this effort. I would like to thank Strike Force members Vanessa Alpers, David Axtell, Elisa
Cafferata, Alan Cunningham, Steve Fisher, Anthony Pearl, Mike Schmitt, and Chuck Short,
and volunteers Joe Garcia, Shannon Litz, Debbie Jacoby, and Tyler Winkler for volunteering
their time over these last several months. I would also like to thank Amber Hansen of the
Facebook group Nevada – Pandemic Unemployment Assistance - for volunteering her
time to help me better understand the issues facing claimants in Nevada. I am particularly
grateful for the experiences I had with claimants who reminded me every day why I
volunteered. And while there is still much to be done, we feel significant progress has been
made and a solid plan is in place to handle the work ahead.

Barbara Buckley
Rapid Response Chair

Report of Rapid Response Strike Force   6

 Executive Summary

In 2020, Nevada, the nation, and the world faced a worldwide pandemic. When the
pandemic arrived in Nevada in March 2020, Governor Sisolak was forced to take
emergency measures to protect the health of the State. A temporary shutdown of
businesses ensued to prevent the spread of the COVID-19 virus. Since that time, businesses
were forced to close or reduce their capacity at various intervals to protect the health of
the public with a resulting impact on the State’s unemployment rate and unemployment
compensation system.

Prior to the pandemic, Nevada’s unemployment rate hovered at less than 4%. At the time
of the shut-down, Nevada was managing 20,000 active weekly unemployment claims.
At the height of the pandemic crisis in April 2020, Nevada’s unemployment rate spiked to
30.1%, the highest unemployment rate in state history and the fastest rate of increase ever
recorded. Rates varied in subsequent months with changing circumstances, however,
since Nevada’s economy is so dependent on the travel and hospitality industry, it has
consistently had the second highest unemployment rate in the nation behind Hawaii.
By December 2020, Nevada had received over 1.5 million initial unemployment benefit
claims. The evolving volume of claims/month is profiled below.

Initial Claims by Program

250,000

UI

PUA
200,000

150,000

100,000

50,000

0
0

20

20

20

20

20

0
2

02

2
20

20

20

20

20

20

20

20

20

20

20
l2
n

ar

pr

ay

ug

ct

ov

ec
Ju
Ja

Ju
Fe

Se
M

N
M

Report of Rapid Response Strike Force   7

 Cumulative Initial Claims, UI

1,000,000

800,000

600,000

400,000

200,000

0
20

20

20

20

20

20

20

20

20

20

20
02
20

20

20

20

20

20

20

20

20

20

20
l2
n

ar

pr

ay

ug

ct

ov

ec
Ju
Ja

Ju
Fe

Se
M

N
M

D
Cumulative Initial Claims, PUA

800,000

700,000

600,000

500,000

400,000

300,000

200,000

100,000

0
20

20

20

20

20

20

20

20

20

20

20
02
20

20

20

20

20

20

20

20

20

20

20
l2
n

ar

pr

ay

ug

ct

ov

ec
Ju
Ja

Ju
Fe

Se
M

N
M

Report of Rapid Response Strike Force   8

 Cumulative Initial Claims, Combined

2,000,000

UI

PUA

1,500,000

1,000,000

500,000

0
20

20

20

20

20

20

20

20

20

20

20
02
20

20

20

20

20

20

20

20

20

20

20
l2
n

ar

pr

ay

ug

ct

ov

ec
Ju
Ja

Ju
Fe

Se
M

N
M

D
The dramatic increase in the volume and rate of claims created an immediate backlog
in the unemployment compensation system and delayed the timely payment of claims to
eligible Nevadans.

This crisis was the reason for the creation of the Strike Force and this report details its process
in addressing the crisis as well as its findings and recommendations with respect to DETR’s
unemployment program leadership, staffing, legal requirements complicating claimant’s
application process, the state of both UI and PUA claims and payment, efforts to discover
and stop fraud, and the current status of the infrastructure used to support Nevada’s
unemployment benefits process.

In a collaborative effort with DETR leadership, the Strike Force’s effort and analysis
has resulted in recommendations that have expedited resolution of cases, reduced
backlogs, reduced time to payment of valid claims, improved processes and put in
place administrative structures that will improve service well beyond the current crisis.
These recommendations address leadership requirements, staffing patterns and training
(both in emergencies and long term), funding priorities, technology replacements and
enhancements, revisions to data collection and utilization in management decisions,
processing protocols, fraud identification and prosecution, and legislative action. Some
recommendations require future action as well and are set forth below. Among the many
detailed recommendations, several broad areas of recommendation should be noted:

Report of Rapid Response Strike Force   9

 ❑ Need for better focus on customer experience – Throughout the project, the
Strike Force has noted the difficulties and frustrations experienced by members
of the public. Complex forms, confusing instructions, complicated processes, and
conflicting information are only some of the complaints identified. Serious attention is
needed to listen and respond to these public concerns.
❑ Need for better business practices and staff training – The Strike Force work
uncovered many instances where business practices could be streamlined and
made more efficient. Hand in hand with improvements in processes would be
adequate and updated training across the staff groups responsible for public
interaction and system operation.
❑ Technology updates – Many issues encountered related to outdated hardware and
software supporting the unemployment insurance systems. In “normal” times these
might have been adequate even though outdated, but in the crisis that emerged
they were completely overwhelmed. Only timely and continuing updates and
continuing update can ensure that these problems do not recur to the detriment of
the citizens involved.
❑ Need for better crisis planning and plans – If this crisis produces nothing else, it should
produce a commitment to and funding for a robust plan for future situations that
might be encountered. A careful assessment of threats and a plan for emergency
response are critical to future success and in prevention of the kinds of disruption to
the system that were encountered in this most recent pandemic.

Securing unemployment benefits which claimants deserve and to which they are entitled in
the current crisis (in a timely manner) has been an unimaginably frustrating road for Nevada’s
claimants; one that has caused significant hardship for the state’s hardest hit families. Though
not smooth or yet as timely as needed, significant progress has been made in reducing
the backlog. With the new department leadership in place, additional trained state and
contract claims examiners, adjudicators and fraud prevention staff, and a state managed
call center, the Strike Force feels confident that the Department has the ability to better
manage its significant workload and responsibilities. The Governor, in his State of the State
address, has committed support for a new IT infrastructure to better serve our State, and the
Division can request additional necessary positions at the upcoming Legislative session. The
Department has the necessary stability to move forward to serve the State’s citizens.

Report of Rapid Response Strike Force   10

 Issues Analysis & Recommendations

Overview

The Governor directed the Strike Force to assist the Department of Employment, Training
and Rehabilitation (DETR) and focus on efficiently and effectively resolving the processing
of Unemployment Insurance (UI) Claims as well as the backlog of Pandemic Unemployment
Assistance (PUA) claims. Recognizing the urgency of the situation, the Strike Force was
convened and immediately began working with DETR leadership to gather and analyze the
various elements that had collectively contributed to the creation of the backlog.

A first look showed that while the regular UI program was overwhelmed by the sheer volume
of claims, the regular staff and processes were still moving forward, just at a very slow pace.
Given the explosive growth of the program, it is noteworthy that the state’s UI program did
not crash or experience day/week long outages.

On the other hand, PUA was a brand new program that had been created by Congress in a
short period of time. Early on in the pandemic, DETR staff made the decision that its internal
IT department could not both add new programs to the regular UI system AND build the new
PUA program at the same time. A decision was made to bring in a vendor to build the PUA
system. The process of building the PUA system one module at a time meant that PUA claims
could only be processed in batches to a certain point, and then they might be delayed
waiting for the next module to be completed.

Some of the challenges DETR encountered in the timely distribution of benefits were issues
that states were experiencing nationwide, whereas some were unique to Nevada. The issues
that emerged during August, the first month of the Strike Force’s efforts, are characterized as
issues that apply to all claims or issues that are unique to the form of unemployment benefits
requested. Issues in each category are noted herein.

General System-Wide Issues:

❑ Save for one contract employee, key leadership positions in the Department were
either filled with inexperienced leaders or were vacant.
❑ The staff at DETR was overwhelmed with the amount of work, but did their best to
manage the 1400% increase in work. Some staff dedicated themselves to resolving
case after case, working overtime weekend after weekend to try to make a dent in
the backlog. Others worked while hospitalized with COVID-19. These staff deserve a
great deal of gratitude for their commitment to the State.
❑ The number of vacant positions, the lack of immediately productive staff available
for assignment, and the sudden influx of claims all contributed to the creation
of significant backlogs for both UI and PUA claims. Essentially the volume of
unemployment claims exceeded the throughput capacities of both the UI and PUA
claims processes. In March, 2020, ESD had only 181 employees, enough to manage
20,000 cases. By August, the Division received over 800,000 applications, and there
were not enough staff to keep up. By August 6, 2020, staff had grown to 482 claims
examiners and adjudicators, (120 of these were Alorica contract positions). Lack of

Report of Rapid Response Strike Force   11

 staff caused serious delays in claims processing. Furthermore, hiring of new staff and
contract staff was constrained by the need to assign the limited number of seasoned
ESD adjudication staff to train and serve as mentors to new hires.
❑ Employment Security Division staff quickly advised the Strike Force that fraud existed
in both systems with the PUA system attracting epidemic levels of fraud. However,
data was not available to determine the volume of fraud. Defining the level of fraud
by claims type and implementing enhanced detection methods quickly became a
priority for both the Strike Force and DETR Leadership.
❑ The Strike Force recognized that the decision to set up separate unemployment
programs created many challenges including duplication of effort and a potential
for claimants to be shuttled back and forth between the systems. Unemployment
Insurance (UI) Claims were processed by a state-employee-staffed call center,
distinct claims case management software, and an assigned team of claims
representatives and adjudicators. In contrast, the PUA claims process was handled
by a new contract-staffed call center, new partially-operational claims case
management software, and a handful of state employee claims representatives/
adjudicators to process tens of thousands of PUA claims.
❑ The CARES Act contains a provision that PUA is the benefit of last resort. If a Claimant
had prior employment as an employee in one of the previous 5 quarters, they are
required by federal law to file and exhaust or be denied regular UI benefits before
filing for PUA. Thousands of PUA claimants whose incomes were primarily earned in
the “gig” economy waited to file in the PUA system only to be told they needed to
file in the UI system. Many of the applicants in the PUA system did not want to apply
for UI because UI was not their primary income source, and the benefit amounts
were lower in the UI system. This confusing federal mandate caused much frustration
and backlog.
❑ It was extremely difficult to get clear-cut data on the size of the backlog. For the
entire first month of the Strike Force’s existence, data identifying what claims were
in what status of review was inconsistent and not reliable. Even today, the case
management tools available to DETR are inadequate.
❑ The Strike Force worked with staff to develop a Backlog Elimination Plan to
organize team efforts, develop a strategy to address the mounting inventory of
unemployment assistance claims, prioritize limited resources, identify additional staff
and set out plans to train them. Beginning in September, this plan was updated
weekly allowing the team to 1) prioritize resources and 2) create a sequence of
activities to support the expedited review, payment or denial of outstanding PUA
and UI claims.
❑ In some cases, the Strike Force identified business processes or policy guidance that
appeared to be inconsistent with DOL guidance or state statutes. The Strike Force
worked with DETR staff to be sure the agency was in compliance. In some cases,
additional guidance or training was put in place.
❑ Working together to figure out how to report issues for the backlog report, the Strike
Force and DETR identified and resolved several issues that hindered the resolution
of cases. This in-depth review allowed the Backlog Elimination Plan to be more
targeted and precise. Some of these concerns had been brought to the attention
of the previous DETR leadership team and at times institution inertia delayed
acceptance and resolution of an issue.

Report of Rapid Response Strike Force   12

 ❑ Direct customer contact/assistance for unemployment claim applications and
status was limited or non-existent, in part due to past practice and in part due to
the pandemic.
❑ Before the pandemic, there were essentially two programs DETR administered: regular
UI and State Extended Benefits (SEB). The CARES Act created several additional
programs: Pandemic Extended Unemployment Compensation (PEUC) – an additional
13 weeks of benefits; Pandemic Unemployment Assistance (PUA) – unemployment
benefits for formerly self-employed and gig workers; and Federal Pandemic
Unemployment Compensation – an additional $600 per week benefit for certain
weeks. Later, the President created the Lost Wages Assistance (LWA) program by
executive order – an additional $300 per week for certain weeks. And at the end of the
year, Congress passed and ultimately the President signed the Continued Assistance
Act which extended many of these programs for up to 11 weeks while adding many
new requirements. Each change required new computer programming as well as new
guidance and training for staff.

Issues Unique to UI Claims:

❑ Typically, in unemployment insurance, claims are processed and resolved, but they
are not “closed.” These claims, once established, can exist in the Nevada UI system
for years as a person moves from employed to unemployed to re-employed. During
the pandemic, this meant that some claimants had issues from previous years that
stopped payment on their current claim.
❑ A UI claim can have more than one issue that would stop payment; some claims
have as many as six issues – not all of which hold up payment.
❑ As noted, the UI system tracks issues and not individuals. These characteristics made
it difficult to report on the outstanding workload in a way that was understandable
to the general public. Until recently DETR leadership has questioned the usefulness of
a 38- page UI claims status report titled “State of Nevada Unemployment Insurance
Claims – Adjudications Pending”. Distilling the total number of UI claims and issues to
a one or two page management summary was a priority. Beginning in November,
an ad hoc UI statistical report provided DETR and the Strike Force the ability to timely
represent claims facts and trends which became critical for leadership to target staff
claim resolution efforts.
❑ A new phenomenon created more confusion. Before the pandemic, most cases
of fraud in the UI system consisted of claimants misrepresenting the facts in order to
get a larger benefit amount. During the pandemic, the predominant type of fraud
has been false identification: as of this report, there are approximately 50,000 UI
claims with questionable identity characteristics. The federal rules require that notice
be given to these individuals, but it is not possible to contact a claimant who is
fraudulent or is a bot. This is just one example where state and federal laws were not
up to the unprecedented challenges of the pandemic.
❑ The UI claims management software consists of core applications and third party
applications (Oracle database, for example). The system’s hardware architecture
operates on a large computer server farm. The system is a “single environment,” so
any programming to change or update the system that runs while claimants are
using the system slows the entire process down. Heavy duty processes, for example

Report of Rapid Response Strike Force   13

 running the calculations on each claim to generate the payments for the week, are
done using batch processing. Because it is a “single environment,” the system can
only process one mass production task at a time.

Issues Unique to PUA Claims:

❑ The new PUA claims management software was partially complete in August but
had no overpayment or claims appeal hearing capability at that time. While this
functionality now exists and the system is working hard to schedule and reconcile
appeals, the delayed rollout by the vendor hindered DETR’s efforts. Even now, the
system still has cross reference interfaces which are not yet 100% installed.
❑ PUA claims have no employer to dispute whether the loss of a job was a result of
a layoff or the result of the employee quitting. This distinction and the reasons to
deny a PUA claim are different than those for a UI claim. Even experienced state
UI employees needed additional training in the new PUA program in order to
effectively process and adjudicate PUA claims.
❑ At the beginning of the pandemic, the PUA Call Center was outsourced. Originally,
DETR contracted with Alorica to run an informational call center with 100% contract
staff. Many claimants complained that the call centers could only pick up a call
and say “Yes, I see your claim in the system and there appear to be no issues; I will
elevate your claim to an adjudicator.”
❑ By September, DETR leadership brought the PUA call center back under DETR
management. This gave DETR the flexibility to add staff as needed with a
combination of Maximus contract staff, redeployed Job Connect staff, and DETR
employees. This effort was a huge undertaking. During its earliest days, the call
volume resulted in too many callers not being able to get through. More staff were
added, and the Call Center is now handling more callers. It is recommended,
however, that call center staff be given more authority to resolve simple issues arising
in cases such as clearing up claimant identity issues.

Report of Rapid Response Strike Force   14

 General Organization-Wide Issues and Recommendations

Leadership Team of DETR & ESD

Prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, Nevada had experienced relatively low unemployment.
DETR’s UI program staff had been getting smaller for years due to the decreased workload. As
with many state agencies, retirements, turnovers, and vacancies further impacted the staff.

The unprecedented spike in unemployment created immediate challenges for the

program in both volume and capacity to handle the influx of UI claims. Additionally, the
implementation of a new and separate PUA program further exacerbated the challenges.
Because it is a global pandemic, all of the states were competing for technology solutions
and staffing resources.

There is no more important key to handling a crisis than ensuring the best leadership at the
very top. To be an effective leader, one must not only know the substantive parts of the
organization but must recognize there is a crisis and oversee ways to solve the crisis. After the
departure of the ESD Administrator in September 2020, DETR brought back the former Deputy
Administrator of the Division, Jeff Frischmann, and the Chief of Benefits for the Division, Scott
Kennedy. Both agreed to come back to review operations and right the ship. Notably, during
the recession of 2009, both men were lauded for their handling of operations. Indeed, they hit
the ground running in September, working with the Strike Force to prioritize critical tasks, train
new staff, fine-tune business processes, and identify emerging issues for resolution.

Acting Director, Elisa Cafferata, at the urging of the Strike Force, prioritized the hiring of a
new leadership team for the Department and the Employment Security Division. On October
12, 2020, Jenny Casselman was hired as the new Deputy Director for DETR and given the
responsibility for ensuring quality delivery of the state’s employment and training programs
and executive oversight of the Nevada Equal Rights Commission, Employment Security
and Vocational Rehabilitation Divisions, and the state’s Research and Analysis Bureau. Ms.
Casselman brings more than 15 years of experience in management, finance, and strategic
planning to increase efficiencies and strengthen service levels to the team.

On November 5, 2020, Lynda Parven was named Administrator of ESD and Chris Sewell was
named COO of DETR. Lynda Parven is a graduate of University of Nevada, Las Vegas with a
Bachelor of Science and a Master of Business Administration degree. She has been with the
State of Nevada for 29 years and began her career in public service with the Welfare Division
in 1991. She is an experienced manager, having formerly held the position of Administrator
of the Nevada Equal Rights Commission. Chris Sewell started his state experience with the
Nevada Transportation Authority and with the Public Utilities Commission as a financial
analyst, senior compliance investigator and manager. He then moved to Las Vegas and
worked for the Division of Insurance and Real Estate Division.

DETR named Kristine Boggs as Chief of Benefits, a position she started on November 16, 2020.
Ms. Boggs has been employed by DETR since 2006. She has a broad base of unemployment
assistance experience having worked as a claim examiner, adjudicator, supervisor, business

Report of Rapid Response Strike Force   15

process analyst, and manager. Prior to DETR, she was as an engineer in the medical device
and aerospace industries for almost 30 years. Ms. Boggs earned a BS degree in Engineering
and Computer Science from Cal State University Northridge.

Nancy St. Clair was hired as Deputy Administrator in UI on January 11, 2021. Ms. St.
Clair has a 25-year history with the State of Nevada and was originally hired in 1996 as
an unemployment representative. Rising through the ranks, Ms. St. Clair spearheaded
many workforce and employment initiatives, including those that focused on training,
implementation, and technology. Karlene Johnson was hired as Deputy Administrator
of Workforce and Appeals on January 11, 2021. Ms. Johnson began her career with the
State in 1987 and brings 19 years of experience in grant management, monitoring, and
coordination of programs. Ms. Johnson moves from JobConnect where she worked
with state employment programs and programs under the Workforce Innovation and
Opportunity Act to Workforce Investment Support Services.

In November, Patricia Allander was named the Unemployment Insurance Services (UISS)
Chief. As UISS Chief, Ms. Allander is responsible for unemployment insurance program
development and brings over 11 years of experience within unemployment including UI
claims, Adjudication, Fraud Investigation and Business Processes. Prior to her promotion,
Ms. Allander was the Lead Program and Support Analyst and coordinator for the federal
PUA program where she interpreted and managed policies and procedures, programming
requirements and processes with the vendor, and maintained operational efforts during high
volume and heavy workloads.

No organization can be run effectively without quality leadership. Since the Strike Force
began, the entire leadership team of DETR and ESD have been replaced with experienced
proven administrators: the Director and Deputy Directors of the agency as well as the
Administrator, Deputy Administrators and Chiefs of the ESD. The credentials of this team
are impressive, and the Strike Force believes they can effectuate the remaining changes
needed to ensure that Nevadans are connected with the benefits and resources they are
eligible for, both now and in the future.

Recommendations

DETR has been through incredible changes, and the staff needs stability. The new ESD
leadership team needs time to come together and bring their plans to fruition. The Strike
Force recommends:

❑ That DETR continue to seek a balance of experienced hands and people with
outside experiences and perspectives when hiring. The promotions in the ESD
leadership team have created additional vacancies in the team. A high priority
must be to recruit/retain diverse new leaders to fill out the ESD team to continue to
address the backlog and incoming claims.

Report of Rapid Response Strike Force   16

Unemployment Claims Workload & Staffing

It cannot be overstated that the biggest cause of the backlog was volume. From March
15, 2020 to July 31, 2020, 469,191 “regular” unemployment claims were filed along with
another 344,681 PUA claims for a total of 813,872 claims. Remarkably, by August 1, 2020, ESD
had paid at least one week of earned benefits to 510,244 claimants. The system went from
managing 20,000 claims a week to over 300,000 claims a week. By the end of 2020, over 1.5
million initial claims were filed and received.

Unemployment staffing is counter-cyclical. When the economy is good, the need for staff
to process claims goes down. At the beginning of the pandemic, the ESD staffing level was
extremely low. At the same time, the unemployment insurance program has always been
complex and the knowledge required to handle claims as prescribed by federal law is high.
It typically takes a new claims examiner up to two years to be proficient in interpreting and
applying the federal and state unemployment compensation laws and regulations. There
were a limited number of qualified staff to handle the sudden and dramatic influx of cases.

At the beginning of the pandemic, DETR retrained and redeployed staff in other units
outside of unemployment to take and process new claims. Staff from the Job Connect
offices, as well as the Nevada Equal Rights Commission and Vocational Rehabilitation all
began assisting with the backlog in April 2020.

One of the greatest challenges with reducing the backlog was still the immediate need
for hundreds more trained staff. The typical process to recruit, select, train and mentor UI
staff to get them up to speed could not begin to address the short-term need. ESD had
to move the most productive UI Adjudicators off of claims processing to serve as trainers
and mentors to the new hires. The Division of Welfare and Supportive Services (DWSS)
Administrator and Strike Force member Steve Fisher recommended tapping into the DWSS
eligibility staff who have a similar background in eligibility determinations. Subsequently,
DWSS eligibility staff were surveyed to determine their interest to help their sister agency
during the crisis and hundreds committed to work evenings and weekends on top of
their regular DWSS shifts. Due to DWSS eligibility staffs’ general experience in reviewing
welfare claims, this dramatically reduced the need for extensive training prior to these
employees becoming productive unemployment claims examiners. This unprecedented
recommendation ended up being one of the key solutions in helping eliminate the
PUA backlog. DWSS Programs Operations Support & Training staff led the effort to bring
DWSS staff up to speed. DWSS employees went through a three-week training program,
presented by DETR’s trainer, that covered UI, PUA and adjudication rules. While they
were in training, DETR’s IT department set up permissions that would allow them to access
DETR’s unemployment systems. Once they had completed their training, DWSS employees
spent a week reviewing cases under the supervision of DETR mentors. Within a few weeks,
they had enough experience to begin reviewing, resolving, and adjudicating cases on
their own. From October through today, each DWSS staff member worked about 20 hours
a week on PUA claims. The DWSS team reviewed and resolved 88,064 PUA claims, resulting
in thousands of eligible gig workers receiving benefits and thousands more fraudulent
claims stopped. The 200+ staff will soon transition to assisting ESD with processing any
remaining UI claims.

Report of Rapid Response Strike Force   17

DWSS also volunteered to contact recently retired DWSS staff to see if they might be willing
to return to state service for a short period of time to help with the backlog. As a result, 20
retirees were brought back to assist with the backlog. Training of the 200 DWSS workers and
retirees was conducted by DETR staff.

In addition to state workers, contract workers were also enlisted to work on the backlog. In
May, DETR entered into a contract with Alorica, authorizing them to employ as many as 100
workers to staff the PUA Call Center. As noted in more detail later in this report, one of the
dilemmas with contracting for this service is that it required experienced PUA adjudicators
to take time off from adjudicating cases to train and mentor these contract employees.
Training typically required about 40 hours per group of 20 contract employees.

In September, the DETR leadership determined that a change in Call Center support was
needed and Alorica’s contract ended. In early October, DETR brought the Call Center
back into the state system to manage, utilizing both Maximus (contract) employees and
state staff. Maximus contract employees were eventually placed in both UI and PUA
adjudication, with 62 adjudicators assigned to review cases and contract staff assigned to
support the call centers.

While contract staff served part of the immediate need, permanent employees were also
recruited, trained, and hired. Prior to the pandemic, 181 positions were filled in ESD. Today,
766 positions support the operation. It is important to note that after March 31, 2021, non-
state staff may not be used to process unemployment claims after the expiration of the
CARES Act (although this may be extended). In the next biennium, it is clear to the Strike
Force that staffing is still insufficient, and that DETR should request additional positions to
sustain its operations through 2021.

Recommendations

The Strike Force has several recommendations related to staffing:

❑ DETR should continue to use temporary staff and contract staff to temporarily
handle this unprecedented volume of applications. DETR should work with the
Governor’s Finance Office to project the appropriate number of permanent staff
to be hired to address ongoing claims as the economy recovers.
❑ DETR should continue to cross-train all claims examiners, adjudicators and fraud staff to
be knowledgeable on all programs and benefits, including UI and PUA, PEUC, FPUC,
SEB, LWA, etc. The training should include training in both policy and computer systems.
❑ DETR should proceed with hiring full-time state employees as soon as possible since
the flexibility to use contract staff and welfare staffing may end as soon as March
2021 unless Congress passes new legislation.
❑ Continue as a matter of long-term state policy the cross training of some DWSS
eligibility employees in unemployment assistance. When the unemployment
assistance workload subsides, cross-train some ESD claims examiners and
adjudicators in the welfare eligibility processes. Such an approach may be
unorthodox, but it will provide the state’s executive branch the ability to quickly
surge this cross-trained staff to those claims where a backlog is emerging.

Report of Rapid Response Strike Force   18

 ❑ When DETR’s staff was reduced to its lowest levels, there was no need for a robust
training program. The ESD program will need a larger and more formal training
program for the foreseeable future. DETR should hire or designate a training
manager and staff to ensure consistency and quality control for new hires. It is
essential that manuals be provided and updated regularly for each program.
Training should be recorded and innovative updates provided to ensure further
consistency. (See the Employment Security Division Quality Assurance & Business
Process Review Section for more information)
❑ DETR should request funding to hire a Claimant Liaison to lead efforts (see the
following recommendation) to improve communications with applicants for UA
benefits, ensuring DETR is addressing issues most important to claimants.
❑ DETR should evaluate and implement technology and programming changes
to improve communications with claimants. Currently, there is limited ability to
communicate informally with UI claimants; some states have the ability to email or
text claimants as an example. DETR is dependent on the vendor to implement mass
notifications in the PUA system. (See the Claimant Access & Communication Section)
❑ The Strike Force recommends that Congress and the Department of Labor
continue offering staffing flexibility to states until the claims generated by the
pandemic are resolved.

Backlog Elimination Plans

No task was deemed more critical to the Strike Force than doing all it could to make
recommendations on resolving the claims backlog as soon as possible. There are three ways
to resolve cases faster: streamline business processes, add more staff, or use a combination
of both approaches. When the Strike Force began, DETR had 362 employees (not counting
the 120 Alorica contractors) to process claims. As stated above, Strike Force member Steve
Fisher, an experienced state Administrator, cognizant of the amount of time that it takes to
onboard new state staff, suggested the training of welfare eligibility workers to work overtime
on unemployment claims to augment staff quickly.

The Strike Force and DETR leadership decided to identify all potentially eligible cases from
the beginning of the pandemic to the time the Strike Force was created and prioritize them
for resolution. Because the processing of PUA cases slowed due to the incredible amount
of fraud encountered and the need to scrutinize so many applications, the decision was
made to have the DWSS workers address PUA claims first, and then, if deemed prudent,
assigned to regular UI claims. Additionally, it was noted that most UI adjudication requires
speaking to both an employer and a claimant, and this was difficult to do for employers
after business hours, the time when DWSS staff were working.

In approaching the backlog of PUA claims, the level of fraud was breathtaking. When PUA
was created, DETR estimated that Nevada might have between 85,000 and 150,000 “gig”
workers based on Census estimates and Secretary of State business records. Even doubling
that number to allow for people who had both regular and gig jobs, Nevada could have
reasonably expected up to 300,000 PUA claims. From March 15, 2020 to December 31, 2020,
there were 785,000 initial claims filed in PUA. Without any additional analysis, the Strike Force
could see that DETR had to review and process as many as 485,000 possibly fraudulent

Report of Rapid Response Strike Force   19

applications. DETR had to create a series of queries and reviews to attempt to cut through
the massive volume. And the PUA system was still being built, including some modules that
were needed to resolve cases (specifically appeals and overpayments), a process akin to
performing heart surgery while the patient is simultaneously running a marathon.

Below is a description of all claims filed, those resolved timely, those in the backlog and
resolution of same.

UI OR “REGULAR UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION CLAIMS”

FILED BEFORE AUGUST 1, 2020:

Total UI applicants 3/1-8/1 with 1 week claimed 469,191

Total claims paid 3/1-8/1 387,499

Total claims denied 22,687

Number of claims with monetary eligibility and in backlog as of 8/1/20 26,470

Number of claims with monetary eligibility filed before 8/1/20 and still 0
pending as of 1/25/21

PUA CLAIMS FILED BEFORE AUGUST 1, 2020:

Total PUA applicants filed 5/16-8/1 with at least 1 claimed week 344,681

Total applicants paid 5/16-8/1 122,745

Total applicants denied 5/16-8/1 4,739

Number of potentially eligible claims pending as of 8/1 217,197

Number of claims pending on 1/25/21 16,874*

*None of these claims have documents uploaded and are potentially fraudulent.

The above reductions were for the pre-August 1, 2020 applications. From August 1, 2020
through December 31, 2020, 114,121 additional UI applications and 300,000 additional PUA
applications were received. It is estimated that the overwhelming majority of these PUA
applications are fraudulent.

Report of Rapid Response Strike Force   20

Recommendations

❑ Continue backlog elimination efforts. For PUA, there are 183,199 PUA applications
pending more than 8 weeks. Only 7,709 have uploaded identity documents and
are estimated to potentially be eligible claims. The Strike Force recommends that
ESD do the following to completely eliminate this backlog:
• Process the 7,709 cases where the claimant uploaded proof of identity and
other required documents. At the current resolution rate of claims, we estimate
3,083 of claims or 40% are likely eligible. At the current rate of processing, these
cases will be resolved in 1 ½ weeks.
• Mass resolve the cases where no documentation has been uploaded by
February 7, 2021.
• The entire PUA inventory not yet processed by 12/31/20 can be processed by
February 7, 2021.
❑ For UI, there are 26,353 cases pending more than 8 weeks. With resources existing
at this time in the UI system, approximately 8,000 cases are being processed a
week. The Strike Force recommends that ESD do the following to completely
eliminate this backlog:
• Reassign a portion of the 200 DWSS workers to the UI backlog. DWSS workers
have been adjudicating approximately 5,000 PUA cases per week. While they
must be trained in UI adjudication, they have already been trained in UI, and if
their rate of speed once trained is similar to their PUA backlog clearance rate
of 5,000 a month, in addition to the UI staff’s clearance of 8,000 a month, the
entire UI backlog could be eliminated in two months.
❑ Continue the new weekend project to review cases being held for adjudication
to see which issues can be cleared prior to adjudication. For example during the
weekend of January 6, 2021, the team cleared 1,071 issues.
❑ Once inventory backlog is resolved, keep it current for all new applications.
Continue weekly meetings to quantify the backlog and shift resources to resolve
the maximum number of claims. Chart progress weekly.
❑ Periodically focus on cases with issues that are less complex to resolve in order to
more quickly process cases.
❑ Consider options for streamlining the UI adjudication process by shortening
interviews or decision-writing process.
❑ To the extent possible, the UI team should continue to work claims, not issues. It
wastes time to have multiple workers working the same case for different issues.
❑ For cases remaining in the UI backlog, continue the use of “strike teams” to resolve
those cases that may be quickly adjudicated, thereby maximizing the amount of
benefits reaching eligible Nevadans
❑ The Continued Assistance Act requires identity verification for new applications be
implemented by January 26, 2021. Monitor the success of the tools used to identify
verification to be sure cases do not accumulate.
❑ Continue training PUA call center staff to resolve additional issues, so more claims
can be resolved without requiring escalation or call backs.

Report of Rapid Response Strike Force   21

Fraud

As with virtually every other state in the nation, fraudsters quickly assessed the state’s
vulnerabilities and inundated the system with false claims. While states acted quickly to
get benefits to claimants in need, a tidal wave of fraudulent claims were filed around the
country to illegally receive benefits. As DETR grappled to sift through the volume, identify
legitimate claims, and pay eligible Nevadans, in late June, the State temporarily stopped
processing new PUA claims to minimize the impact of the fraudulent claims.

As context, in the regular UI system, the employer serves as a deterrent to fraudulent benefit
claims. If an employer disagrees with a claimant’s eligibility for the program or a false claim
is filed, they can file an appeal. In the PUA system, there is no employer of an independent
contractor to review the claim and disagree with the application for benefits. Also,
Nevada has no state income tax, and so the state had no way to validate to see whether
an individual had self-employment income or not. Fraudulent actors quickly realized this
inability to cross-check against state income tax records and began to file claims. This level
of fraud was not unique to Nevada. See https://www.wsj.com/articles/wave-of-attempted-
fraud-hits-state-unemployment-claims-programs-11608633000, https://www.cnbc.
com/2020/06/16/states-hit-hardest-by-coronavirus-scams.html, and https://www.govtech.
com/blogs/lohrmann-on-cybersecurity/widespread-unemployment-fraud-is-overwhelming-
state-systems.html.

In August, Mike Schmitt, CEO, Clairvoyix and Strike Force member offered fraud detection
technology solutions designed to sort through volumes of data to separate high probability
legitimate claims from those which possess one or more characteristics strongly suggestive
of fraud. DETR leadership embraced this offer of voluntary assistance, recognizing that DETR
did not have the in-house software tools nor the staff or time to perform technical data
matching and validation. The partnership with Clairvoyix enabled the ESD to streamline and
expedite the questionable identity work that had to be done in order to release valid claims
for review and issue payments. Clairvoyix’s work also identified claims to receive ineligibility
notices requiring the likely fraudster to appeal. In keeping with the agency’s expectations,
a test run of 9,000 claims showed that less than 10% of claimants with some indications
of fraud responded to a request for validation. Ultimately, less than 1% of questionable
applications in this time period represented a valid PUA claim. Following this success, DETR
contracted with “ID.me” to validate claimant identities. Overall, 109,814 identity verification
emails were sent in both the UI and PUA programs. Out of those 109,814 requests, 7,526
identities were verified as actual claimants, a 7% validity rate. Based on this screening, ESD
prevented 102,288 fraudulent applications from receiving benefits.

For some context of the extent of the fraud which was perpetrated on the system, the
chart below shows the IP addresses for PUA claims. Recognizing this level of fraud existed
for the PUA claims, in late summer DETR contacted the State Attorney General’s Office.
Subsequently, the national and international scope of the issue became starkly real and the
United State Department of Justice was engaged along with appropriate law enforcement
to investigate, arrest and charge those who committed fraud via Nevada’s unemployment
assistance processes.

Report of Rapid Response Strike Force   22

Subsequently, the DETR Director convened a round table to focus on fraud prevention
strategies/technologies. This effort included all senior management as well as
representatives from GeoSol, the software firm that supports the PUA software claims
management system. With several states as clients, Geosol has developed a broad array of
fraud detection software tools ranging from relatively simple physical address confirmation
to more sophisticated cross referenced data driven checks to confirm authenticity of
certain information required in an unemployment assistance claim for benefits.

With the Strike Force’s encouragement and support, in the last few months DETR has
enhanced its internal fraud prevention review processes and integrated more sophisticated
fraud prevention tools designed to verify the identity of all claimants to ensure that
fraudulent applications are not being funded. Additionally, DETR ended the practice of
sending debit cards out to claimants before their identities were verified.

Recommendations

DETR should continue to explore more sophisticated fraud detection methods to

prevent improper payments to non-eligible claimants. In this regard the following is
recommended:

❑ Continue to prioritize efforts to identify fraud that occurred with the payment of
CARES Act claims and share all appropriate data with appropriate legal authorities
in support of their effort to hold those who perpetrated these crimes accountable.
❑ Organize biannual workshops involving all DETR senior leadership, their claims
management software vendor(s), fraud prevention vendor(s) and a nationally
recognized expert in claims benefit fraud prevention to review opportunities for
enhanced fraud prevention practices/software tools.
❑ Complete implementation of the PUA Claims Management Software interfaces
which include by example, the Department of Corrections, Child Support payment
and Bureau of Statistics (Death Certificate Registry).

Report of Rapid Response Strike Force   23

 ❑ Perhaps the most critical of these recommendations would be the continued
implementation of fraud detection tools upon receipt of a complete application
of UI/PUA Benefits. The quicker potentially valid unemployment assistance claims
can be separated from fraudulent claims, the less staff time expended on those
trying to effectively steal taxpayer dollars and the more time spent reviewing and
processing valid claims for benefits on those claimants who are eligible.

Status: At the time of this report, DETR is finalizing a long-term contract with a vendor that
can verify identity on the front-end of the claim as well as analyze the probability a claim is
fraudulent on the back end.

Two Distinct Unemployment Assistance Claim Processes and Duplication of Resources

The unemployment assistance processes were (and continue to be) bifurcated with
Unemployment Insurance (UI) Claims processed through a separate call center staffed
by state employees, distinct claims case management software, and an assigned group
of claims representatives and adjudicators. In contrast, the CARES Act created a new gig
worker unemployment assistance process termed “Pandemic Unemployment Assistance”
(PUA) and unemployment for those whose employment was affected by COVID but do
not qualify or who exhausted their UI benefits. As stated earlier, DETR decided in March/
April that the existing UI claims management software was not capable of being modified
without risking catastrophic failure for all Unemployment Insurance claims processing. The
PUA system, created virtually from scratch in the late spring, was partially functional in May.
Today, a combination of Maximus contract staff and reassigned Job Connect program
state employees operate the PUA call center. The GeoSol claims case management
software is fully operational, and a total of 16 state employees, 62 Maximus adjudicators,
and 200 DWSS workers are reviewing and adjudicating PUA claims.

The two unemployment systems generally require staff to access both systems before
making a decision on a claim. In the PUA system, for example, staff must first look for
employer wages over the last five quarters in the UI system. If the claimant has UI wages,
they should be directed to file in UI; if required the staff may need to manually create a UI
claim to replace the PUA claim. This is redundant, inefficient and at times dramatically slows
legitimate claimants from receiving the benefits they are legally entitled to receive.

Recommendations

A few recommendations are noted below to transition from the two separate
unemployment assistance system processes to one system that can support both UI and
PUA claims processing.

❑ Evaluate the claimant demand for both PUA and UI call centers and insure that
the UI or a successor phone system has the capacity to absorb the volume of calls
experienced during the pandemic for both. See the Infrastructure Section for more
detail on this recommendation.
❑ As soon as practical and assuming the call center phone system has the capacity
referenced above, eliminate contract employees from the PUA call center. (As

Report of Rapid Response Strike Force   24

 context, the Federal Law normally requires merit personnel selected employees to
support unemployment assistance claims processing. The CARES Act and CARES
Act II gave state unemployment assistance agencies a temporary exemption from
this provision. The exemption is set to expire March 13, 2021 and would require DETR
to replace the PUA contract staff with merit personnel selected state employees at
that time anyway.)
❑ The GeoSol PUA claims management system is new technology supporting an
unemployment claims type that could end, effective April 2021. However, the
Strike Force anticipates that some form of permanent “gig worker” unemployment
benefit system is likely to emerge as a claims type in future years. As noted
in the Infrastructure Section of this report, a new unemployment UI Claims
Management/Processing software system is recommended. Any new DETR claims
management software system should include the requirements for PUA worker
claims processing functionality to best position Nevada for this potential public
policy enacted change.

Claims & Management Information Reporting

For much of August, and even thereafter, the Strike Force and DETR leadership struggled
with identifying what claims were in what status of review. In “regular” unemployment
insurance, claims are processed and resolved, but they aren’t “closed” if an outstanding
issue exists. These claims, once established, can exist in the Nevada UI system for years as a
person moves from employed to unemployed to re-employed. During the pandemic, this
meant that some claimants had issues from previous years that stopped payment on their
current claim. In the UI system, issues are tracked, not claims. A UI claim can have more
than one issue that would stop payment; some claims have as many as six issues – not all
of which hold payment. This data management system made it difficult to report on the
outstanding workload in a way that was understandable to the Strike Force, much less the
general public.

Going forward, it is important that management reports clearly represent the number of
outstanding unresolved UI claims and the number of issues preventing a claim’s approval or
resolution. Ensuring that managers can easily identify issues which delay or release payment
is fundamental to such a report’s value to decision-makers.

Another data issue that must be resolved involves UI claims with a “Questionable Identity”
flag. The percentage of open claims with the characteristics of a questionable identity was
essentially zero on March 15, 2020. However, by January 4, 2021, about 33% of the roughly
120,000 UI open claims were flagged for questionable identity (about 40,000 claims).
These cases are not being actively worked; they are on hold since the claim is most likely
fraudulent but are still included in the inventory report. DETR will need to exclude these
cases from the report in the future in order to clearly assess the backlog.

On PUA cases, the sheer volume of cases made it difficult to identify which cases were
ready for review. The Strike Force and DETR leadership began requesting reports by date
and by identifying cases where claimants had uploaded documents, starting with the
oldest cases first.

Report of Rapid Response Strike Force   25

As of this report, management information reporting has improved. However, there is still
room to improve and clarify reporting to show changes in the status of unemployment
claims at various stages of review/payment/resolution.

Recommendations

❑ Continue to refine the UI and PUA claim/issue management information report to

best reflect claim volumes and trends.
❑ DETR staff should continue to provide leadership with weekly updated PUA and UI
claims statistics indicating claims in various states of review/denial/appeal as well
as Hearing Referee decisions.
❑ As the systems are improved and/or integrated, build in improved management
reporting tools to help leadership understand the status of claims.

Business Process Review

The Employment Security Division had worked with the U.S. Department of Labor over the
years to confirm that their processes and practices for claims application, claims customer
assistance and claims determination complied with statutory and regulatory guidance.
There are instances where the Strike Force identified a procedure or practice that had
come to deviate from full compliance with a statute or regulation over time. These types
of inconsistencies were brought to the attention of previous DETR leadership and at times
resolution was delayed due to staff reluctance to accept that the agency needed a more
refined procedure or different data definition for processing or measuring the claims backlog.

Business processes for any state agency should be regularly reviewed. Every agency
should strive for continuous improvement. While ESD must comply with federal laws and
procedures, its processes do not seem as efficient as they could be.

In light of the pandemic, and the likelihood of high levels of unemployment, DETR should
review its business processes to see if the decisions and trade-offs in place still make sense.
For example, in several situations, when a claimant speaks to a person on the claims line,
it turns out that they have an issue that requires review by an adjudicator to resolve the
claim. Some issues of adjudication are faster to resolve than others, yet all are referred to an
adjudicator and processed in order. DETR should review this process to determine if any of
these issues could instead be resolved by claims examiners on the phone.

The volume of claims added to the confusion and inconsistency in processing claims. The
influx of new staff to process the flood of claims understandably created situations where
contradictory decisions were made on files, confusing and upsetting claimants. When
claimants called in, redeterminations were made in many cases, confusing claimants who
relied on the prior determination. It was noticed that one worker might approve a claim,
while another, with the same facts, might deny the claim.

Existing processes were also confusing. In both the PUA and UI programs, the first step in the
process is a review of monetary eligibility. If a claimant meets that first level of eligibility, they
receive a “Notice of Monetary Eligibility.”

Report of Rapid Response Strike Force   26

Virtually every claimant thought that notice meant they were approved for the program,
when the notice only meant that if the claimant were able to prove the income they
claimed, and also met all the other program eligibility factors, they would be approved for
benefits. While this is the standard practice in unemployment, it is confusing to applicants.
The State of Utah chose not to utilize this form just for this reason.

Recommendations

DETR is an organization that has experienced years of relatively low unemployment claim
volumes and certain practices and processes with some inherent weakness were only
revealed when they were stressed by the flood of pandemic related unemployment
claims. As a result, the following is recommended:

❑ Contract with a vendor and/or DWSS to provide an operational business process

review to analyze the current business model and potentially help revamp and
streamline work processes and protocols to be as optimally efficient as possible.
As context, explore the successful business process redesign that DWSS went
through in 2013.
❑ It is essential that a training manager be hired to ensure consistency and overall
quality control (See the Employment Security Division Unemployment Claims
Volume & Staffing Sections).
❑ Manuals should be provided on each program and updates should be made
regularly. Training should be recorded and updates incorporated to ensure further
consistency in the treatment of claims by staff.
❑ DETR should review the calls process to determine if any of the call issues currently
being referred to adjudicators could instead be resolved by claims examiners on
the phone. For example, the team might begin with issues involving verification of
identity, allowing adjudicators to focus on more complex issues.
❑ DETR should evaluate and implement technology and programming changes
to improve communications with claimants. Currently, there is limited ability to
communicate informally with UI claimants; some states have the ability to email
or text claimants as an example. DETR is dependent on the vendor to implement
mass notifications in the PUA system.
❑ Improve communication and outreach to help claimants navigate the systems.
Create modern claimant handbooks and implement use of videos, FAQs, chatbot
self-help technology, tips etc. on a regular basis.
❑ Create a mechanism to allow claimants to flag broken links and system issues.
Often, claimants on Facebook knew of system issues before the Administrators did.

Claimant Experience & Communication

Direct customer contact/assistance for unemployment claim applications and status is

limited or non-existent, in part due to past practice and technology limitations, and in
part due to the pandemic. Overall access and communication with claimants should be
improved. Today, people get their information from Facebook, Twitter, and other types
of social media. ESD should more aggressively utilize technology as a way to reach out to
people. Chat or chatbot options might be utilized on the website to reduce phone traffic.

Report of Rapid Response Strike Force   27

The Chair of the Strike Force was in frequent communication with a founding member of
the Nevada Pandemic Unemployment Facebook group. This individual shared valuable
information with the Chair who passed these insights from a claimant feedback loop to
ESD. This type of communication should occur with DETR and community stakeholders just
as other state agencies do with their stakeholders. Perhaps that was not possible when
the crisis was at its highest peak as there was no one available to do it. However, this is an
essential role that should be created in the future.

Recommendations

The Strike Force chose to separate claimant access and communication from the
description and recommendations contained in the section titled “Employment Security
Division Business Process Review” not because it should be excluded from a Business
Process Review, but due to the importance of claimants and the need to transform the
unemployment application process and call center experience from a maze of frustration
into a more user-friendly, self-help, one-time contact for a claim’s resolution. DETR’s
purpose is to serve employers and employees. These are their customers. Accordingly,
DETR’s first contact with an employer and out of work employee, for better or worse,
creates the impression of either competence, caring, and professionalism or inversely, the
perception of inaccessibility, or the feeling that the claimant is a number rather than a
person with real life struggles.

❑ In the business review analysis, ensure that a review of all procedures is evaluated
from the point of view of a claimant and employer.
❑ Hire a Claimant Liaison whose sole job function is to ensure that the concerns
of claimants are heard, information is timely provided, and the system centers
around claimants.
❑ Create modern claimant handbooks and implement use of videos, FAQs, Chatbot
self-help technology, tips etc. on a regular basis.
❑ Create a mechanism to allow claimants to flag broken links and system issues.
Claimants on Facebook knew of system issues before the Administrators did in
many cases.

Report of Rapid Response Strike Force   28

 Information Technology Infrastructure

UI Claims Management Benefit Computer System

The Strike Force began its work with an analysis of the computer systems used to process
benefits. The computer system for “regular UI” went online in 2013. As is often the case for
state systems, it relied on updating programming from other states. Although the system is
fairly new, some of the coding in the system is actually more than 20 years old. Therefore,
DETR’s system has been limited by its coding.

The UI claims management software consists of core applications and third-party

applications (Oracle database, for example). The system’s hardware architecture operates
on a large computer server farm. The system is a “single environment,” so any programming
to change or update the system that runs while claimants are using the system slows the
entire process down. Heavy duty processes, for example running the calculations on each
claim to generate the payments for the week, are done using batch processing. Because it
is a “single environment,” the system can only process one mass production task at a time.
At no time was this more apparent than in the implementation of week 5 of the Lost Wages
program. The UI system had to be slowed down so many times that payment of these
“extra” payments was sent in “batches” of 10,000 an hour. Necessary security upgrades
routinely affect the system, preventing timely payment of claims. Another example of
this shortcoming: On October 21, 2020, the Governor signed emergency regulations to
streamline claims processing of regular UI claims, and the regulations were filed with the
Secretary of State on November 2, 2020. Again, because the computer system can only
withstand one update or program running at a time, the implementation was delayed
behind security updates and Lost Wages upgrades and were not “run” in the UI computer
system until January 4, 2021. If the computer system were able to “run” these jobs quicker,
this part of the backlog could have been eliminated sooner.

The UI system was never designed to handle the unprecedented volume of claims caused
by the reaction to the pandemic: a 1,455% increase in claims. To ensure Nevada’s claims
management system can handle the combined volumes of UI and PUA claims processing
will require a complete redesign to take advantage of “elastic” cloud information
technology processing resources. This will take time and a significant financial investment.
Other considerations include the fact that the State’s overall IT management system,
EITS, has little or no visibility into the DETR infrastructure. DETR is a “siloed” agency, and this
prevents the State’s other IT resources from assisting in a time of crisis. A more centralized
or blended IT approach where resources could easily be “transferred” to assist DETR as
a situation changes should be evaluated for inclusion in any new UI claim management
system’s procurement and implementation.

DETR contracted with the National Association of State Workforce Agencies (NASWA) to
undertake an independent assessment of the UI IT system. NASWA reviewed Nevada’s UI
claims processing system and shared its report with DETR in January of 2021. Highlights from
the report are provided below.

Report of Rapid Response Strike Force   29

DETR’s system has positive attributes. Notably, DETR’s system was not offline for days at a
time despite the flood of applications. At the same time, there are many concerns and
limitations with the system:

❑ DETR’s system relies on highly complex, costly, and sometimes under used 3rd party
products that require extensive maintenance by DETR IT staff.
❑ The system’s software design is based on older programs and is therefore complex
and “brittle” – meaning extremely difficult to upgrade or adapt. This creates a need
for constant use of consultants. DETR staff have also created hundreds of work-
arounds to address issues in the system.
❑ Some of the code in the system is over 20 years old. As is often the case, there is little
documentation for the system, making it difficult for staff to improve.

NASWA noted specifically that “the DETR Information Development & Processing (IDP)
Developer and Database Administrator (DBA) staffing levels are at the very low range
compared to other States that have modernized systems.” NASWA acknowledged this was
due to the difficulty of attracting skilled staff to support computer systems at the state level. The
report notes that the growing IDP workloads will be difficult to catch up with existing staffing.

PUA Claims Management Benefits Computer System

After the new system was open for PUA applications in May, other modules of the program
were not operational. For example, the appeals module was not operational until
November 2020. Claimants had to wait months for a hearing, preventing timely review of
claims. Even worse, some of the claimants who filed claims in the PUA system, were in fact
eligible or required to apply for “regular UI” claims before filing in the PUA systems. Some
claimants were bounced back and forth between the two systems which did not interface.

Recommendations

Because the separate computer system for PUA was already in operation, it did not
make business sense to change out that system. The Strike Force urged DETR to begin
training its staff immediately on both systems, so that each claims representative could
address a single claimant with issues in both systems. This training was incorporated into
operations in September 2020.

The independent assessment of the UI system performed by NASWA produced several

recommendations that the Strike Force supports:

❑ In the near term, DETR can implement a series of updates to improve the
performance of the UI system including:
• Survey the business staff to prioritize areas where improvement in the UI
system is most needed; arrange the IDP work item backlog by priority, not
chronological order;
• Review the bottom-line annual cost to maintain the UI system to be clear on
the real cost to maintaining the system;
• Improve IDP staff ability to maintain the system in the interim – including

Report of Rapid Response Strike Force   30

 continuing weekly trainings for developers and the creation and use of
development standards
❑ Because it is likely that the PUA program will continue through 2021 in some form
and may become a permanent addition to the unemployment program, DETR
should develop a short term plan to build an interface to allow sharing of data
between the PUA system and the UI system. NASWA agreed to consider this issue
and provide additional recommendations for DETR.
❑ DETR must go through the state process to replace the current UI system:
• Develop RFP
• Secure funding
• Solicit bids
• Create a project management team to oversee the project
• Select a vendor
• Modernize the system

NASWA estimates the cost of modernization of the UI system, based on recent

experiences of other states and an understanding of the market would be as follows:

COSTS DOLLARS
Vendor development costs $20-30 million

Other costs (staffing, consultant support) $10-12.5 million

Annual sustainment costs $3-5 million

The price ranges depend on the customizations needed to meet state and federal
requirements and agency processing guidelines.

The Strike Force recommends that the Governor include funding in his 2022-23 budget for
the recommendations, and that the Nevada Legislature approve it.

Improve the UI Application System

The UINV computer system could be improved to reduce claimants selecting a wrong
option, leading to adjudication and delays. A number of suggestions were received from
community groups on how to improve the UI computer system. The Strike Force recognizes
that it may make more sense to implement these changes in the new system. However,
DETR should put changes in place immediately if possible.

Recommendations

ESD should update its UI system to enhance the user experience and make answers to
questions easier to understand, thereby preventing claims from being unnecessarily sent
to adjudication. These improvements include:

❑ Accessibility: Provide a Spanish-language version of the online claim system.

Update: Expect this functionality to be operational shortly.

Report of Rapid Response Strike Force   31

Employer List
❑ On the “Please provide your Employer Information” page, display the DBA names
of employers in addition to their legal entity names. A claimant might not be able
to recall the legal entity name of a past employer.
❑ Make more prominent the warning about the need to match the employer’s legal
entity name on W-2 form or paycheck.
❑ Do not lock people out for selecting their wrong past employer, or at least allow
more than one attempt, especially if the system has not been modified to display
employers’ DBA names.

Separation Issues
❑ Provide a pop-up glossary on the “Separation” page that explains the many options
on the drop-down menu for answering the “Reason Employment Ended” question.
❑ Explore options to “pre-verify” eligible separations. For example, employers could
be required to provide a list of employees to be laid off when they send DETR a
WARN Act notice. If done in a systematic way, the separation verification for such
employees’ UI claims can be done before they file for UI, thus expediting the approval
process. This kind of mass filings by employers is the practice, in different forms, in states
such as Georgia, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Kansas, and Alabama.

Non-Citizen Claimants
❑ Program the system to accept Permanent Resident cards or equivalent documents
that do not have an expiration date and/or an A number.
❑ Provide instructions for how individuals with such documents should complete the
UI application. For example, “Enter your USCIS # or I-94 number if you don’t have
an A number” or “Enter ‘None’ if your immigration document does not have an
expiration date.”

Prior Overpayments
❑ Allow claimants with overpayment issues in the past to be approved for the
current claim with the condition that they may “return” the prior overpayment
in part from new benefits. Currently, a claimant in this situation is required to pay
back the historical overpayment before their current claim is processed. However,
when someone applies for unemployment, they are likely already facing financial
challenges and are likely unable to pay back previously owed amounts before
they are provided financial support such as UI benefits.

Contesting Wages
❑ Provide clear instructions for how someone can protest their wages on the
“Unemployment Insurance Benefits Estimator” page in the online claim filing system.

UI Claims Application Question and Need to Clarify Meaning of Union Members

❑ Our understanding is the “union with a hiring hall” as used in this question only refers
to arrangements where jobs are filled exclusively through union referrals. To avoid
confusion for members of other unions that do not function like this, the question
should be rephrased. For example, “Are you a member in good standing of a
union with an exclusive hiring hall such as in the construction industry?”

Report of Rapid Response Strike Force   32

 Technical Fixes
❑ Allow past phone filers to register online.
❑ Allow claimants to send required documents by email or mail. Only providing a fax
number makes it difficult for most claimants to fulfill documentation requests.
❑ Requests for documentation from the Unemployment online system can be
communicated to claimants in a more effective and more helpful way. Currently,
after answering a question on Fact Finding, red text appears telling someone to fax
their information or call a number. These messages are often missed by applicants
and should be displayed in a more prominent way. These requests should also
show up in the claimant account’s “My Documents” area and be automatically
sent to the claimant by email and/or regular mail.

Phone System and Call Center Issues

The State’s Enterprise Information Technology Services (EITS) proposed a state Unified
Communication (UC) platform to allow agencies to modernize away from old phone
systems, but the State has not yet invested in this infrastructure. If Nevada does not
fully fund a replacement communications system statewide for all agencies, boards,
and commissions in all three branches, the state will continue to face severe difficulties
operating effectively in the face of economic and public health crises.

When the pandemic hit, DETR was in the early stages of a phone system update. In 2018,
EITS replaced their Avaya 6 version phone system with an upgrade to version 8. Many DETR
units are still either Avaya 4 or 5. Last biennium, EITS partnered with DETR and tried to move
forward with a UC platform phone system and both initiatives were unfunded. DETR is only
part way through upgrading their phone system and EITS staff suspects there are significant
limitations existing with DETR’s outdated system plus limited maintenance support that likely
makes the cost of support and parts to maintain it very expensive.

All state agencies have independent phone systems (DETR, LCB, NDOT, Supreme Court, Welfare,
DMV, and DOC); however, all agencies ride the same ATT Legacy circuits between Reno and
Carson City. As DETR’s call volume skyrocketed as the pandemic intensified, it saturated the ATT
pipe between Reno to Carson City which affected everyone in Carson City using those circuits.
This caused the “fast busy” so many claimants experienced. The only agency/independent
system that was not affected was NDOT which is off the legacy circuits and using Session Initiation
Protocol (SIP) a form of voice-over-internet system. EITS Telecom staff worked with AT&T to replace
the legacy ISDN trunk line with two new SIP trunk lines, one from Reno to Carson City, and one
in Las Vegas. The northern trunk line was operational by May 2020 and the Las Vegas trunk line
was operational by June 2020. This reduced the incidence of the fast busy signal and provided
saleable phone circuitry in case of recurrence of large call volume in the future. The Department
of Administration ensured CARES Act funding was available for this unbudgeted expenditure.

Besides the technical issues with ESD’s phone system, early on, a decision was made to
bifurcate the call centers for UI and PUA, resulting in confusion for claimants when a PUA
claim should have been a UI claim or a UI claim should have been a PUA claim. Employees
were not cross-trained. These silos are gradually being broken down; a claimant should be
helped no matter where they call.

Report of Rapid Response Strike Force   33

 Recommendations

The ESD Call Centers are bifurcated into two separate operations and its employees are
not cross-trained. Complicating the call center operations is the system’s reliance on
outdated phone system technology.
❑ Integrate the PUA call center into the UI call center to facilitate the creation of one
UA call center for claimants.
❑ Request a sufficient number of new state employee positions to prepare for the
end of the use of Maximus staff working at the PUA call center.
❑ Cross train all call center staff to either be specialized in UI or PUA claimant phone
call response, while providing the flexibility to assign staff to surges in one or the
other forms of UA call volume.
❑ Continue to coordinate with EITS effort to fund the state Unified Communication
platform which will allow agencies to modernize away from their old phone systems

Preparing for Future Extraordinary Increases in Unemployment Applications

While we hope we will never see another pandemic in our lifetime, we know that a
high unemployment spike will arise again in the future when there is a downtown in the
economy. The Strike Force and DETR leadership believe a plan is needed on how to ramp
unemployment assistance services up efficiently and effectively for situations of rapid
increases in unemployment claims. The steps that the Strike Force and DETR leadership took
here should be catalogued for a future event.

Recommendations:

Develop a written plan on how to address a future sharp uptick in unemployment claims,
including:

❑ Investigate implementing a pilot program with employers/employees so that

the employer may assist in inputting all necessary information for employment
claims upon lay-off. This approach may yield tremendous benefits and is being
employed in at least one state. If done in a systematic way, the separation
verification for such employees’ UI claims can be done before they file for UI,
thus expediting the approval process. This kind of mass filings by employers is the
practice, in different forms, in states such as Georgia, South Carolina, Tennessee,
Texas, Kansas, and Alabama.
❑ Continually cross-train internal DETR staff as well as other state workers including
the DWSS eligibility workers.
❑ Immediately hire retirees for a short period of time.
❑ Maintain contracts with staffing companies.
❑ Have a leader in training and training materials including recorded trainings ready
to go.
❑ Bring in a strike force immediately. Having leadership from various state agencies
departments, the Governor’s office, and individuals from private sector working
together is invaluable.

Report of Rapid Response Strike Force   34

Working with our Congressional Delegation:

Delays in delivering benefits would have been minimized if Congress and the Administration
would have written laws and policies in a different manner. Today, many workers have
independent contracting and regular W2 employment. The new federal legislation provided
that if any independent contractor had even a small amount of W2 wages, they had to
apply for “regular” unemployment. No independent contractor understood that as it was
counter-intuitive – most of their income was from independent contracting. This one section
in the bill caused claims to have to be considered in both programs and caused delays for
thousands of mixed income claimants. Eliminating provisions like this would reduce staff time
to process claims, thereby preventing delays. Numerous examples of this exist.

Recommendations:

❑ Work with our Congressional delegation to ensure that Congress does not
complicate the delivery of benefits in their rush to deliver them.
❑ Recommend to Congress that if you want to quickly get income to Nevadans,
provide that income directly through stimulus checks so that States do not have to
set up new computer systems and subject claimants to complex rules which render
certain individuals ineligible for payment.
❑ Recommend to the Administration that they not set up different unemployment
payment systems such as Lost Wages which requires reprogramming which
delays benefits.
❑ If Congress reauthorizes the PUA program past April, urge Congressional leadership
to consider the following changes:
• Allow a person to apply and receive PUA if their income is primarily from
independent contracting. As stated above, the PUA program requires that
if a claimant has any amount of W2 wages, the claimant must be paid from
the UI system, not the PUA system. In its most recent change in the CARES
Act extension, Congress is allowing claimants with W-2 income to receive an
additional $100 a week for 11 weeks if they can demonstrate they received
more than $5,000 in self-employment income in the previous tax year. This will
take a great deal of time to implement; it would be much easier to implement
the suggestion made above.
• Do not require a reassessment of UI eligibility at each “quarter” change. The
current federal statute requires each system to reassess claimants’ eligibility
at each quarter change, i.e., April 1, July 1, and October 1. While this is the
standard process in UI, it created a huge backlog in PUA. In addition, countless
PUA claimants ended up having to leave the PUA program for a quarter if they
had managed to find a temporary job to help them get through the crisis. In
those cases, their UI benefits were significantly lower than their PUA benefits.
And the process created incredible confusion and frustration for claimants.

Report of Rapid Response Strike Force   35

 Conclusion

When the pandemic hit our nation, The Strike Force quickly went to work,
Nevada’s unemployment office, like many logging hundreds of hours over the last
in our nation had staffing to serve the several months. Working with Director Elisa
claimants it currently had – 20,000 at the Cafferata, a new leadership team was
time. Rushing to assist, Congress created installed at DETR. An innovative staffing plan
a brand new program to help certain was implemented, adding staff to process
unemployed workers who never qualified the claims that were stalled. Anti-fraud
for “regular” unemployment before – gig measures were explored and implemented
workers. At the same time, claims came so as to get benefits to legitimate Nevadans.
flooding into the Nevada system. Within Backlogged cases were analyzed and
five months of the pandemic striking prioritized, reducing the pre 8/1 backlog
Nevada, Nevadans filed 469,191 “regular” from 243,667 to 16,874. A future backlog
unemployment claims and 344,681 PUA elimination plan was formed to reduce
claims, a total of 813,872 applications. cases filed since the Strike Force was formed.
At the same time, Nevada was hit with
fraudulent applications, unlike anything it While many challenges remain, with the
had ever seen before. Criminal networks hit new department leadership in place, and
unemployment offices across the country, the measures taken by Director Cafferata
using legitimate names, social security and the Strike Force, we are confident that
numbers, and employers, but included their the Department will meet these challenges,
own bank account. and continue to improve its processes
and systems to serve Nevadans in need.
Despite dealing with this unprecedented Nevadans deserve nothing less.
level of volume, and this unprecedented
level of fraud, the State paid an astonishing
510,244 claims without any delays. But by
August, claims processing, especially with
PUA claims, had slowed down as the state
struggled with an extraordinary level of fraud.

Report of Rapid Response Strike Force   36

 Appendix A – Glossary of Terms and Definitions

Adjudication / Adjudicator Department of Gig Workers

Adjudication is the process Employment, Training Gig workers are
the unemployment and Rehabilitation (DETR) independent contractors,
insurance system uses The Department of online platform workers,
to resolve claim issues Employment, Training contract firm workers,
in both its traditional or and Rehabilitation is the on-call workers and
regular “UI” program and state’s lead workforce temporary workers. Gig
in the PUA program. The development agency. workers may enter into
individual who completes It consists of divisions formal agreements with
the fact gathering and that offer workforce- on-demand companies to
resolves the claim issues is related services, job provide services to clients.
called an adjudicator. placement and training,
services for people with Lost Wages Assistance
Alorica disabilities, investigation of (LWA)
Alorica was one of claims of discrimination, The Lost Wages Assistance
Nevada’s contracted unemployment insurance program is a temporary
partners for assisting the benefits, labor market data unemployment benefit
Employment Security and more. created by Executive
Division (ESD) with the Order. LWA was established
PUA call center. Alorica Division of Welfare and and administered in
was originally contracted Supportive Services (DWSS) partnership with FEMA.
to answer phone calls The Division of Welfare LWA provides a plus-up of
and assist claimants and Supportive Services $200 per week for up to six
with general questions is housed under the weeks. LWA could only be
related to the Pandemic Department of Health and paid to claimants receiving
Unemployment Assistance Human Services and is at least $100 per week of
(PUA) program filing responsible for providing benefits during the weeks
process. public assistance benefits covered by the program.
and support for children
Coronavirus Aid, Relief with absentee parents. Maximus
and Economic Security Maximus is one of Nevada’s
(CARES) Act Employment Security contracted partners for
The Coronavirus Aid, Relief Division (ESD) assisting the Employment
and Economic Security Act The Employment Security Security Division (ESD) with
provides direct economic Division is housed under the unemployment claims
assistance for American the Department of backlog. Maximus assists with
workers, families, and Employment, Training providing remote agents to
small businesses, and and Rehabilitation (DETR) answer questions, support
helps preserve jobs for and is responsible for the initial claims processing,
American industries. In state’s unemployment and support adjudication
unemployment, the CARES compensation program, of Unemployment
Act established PUA, PUEC, workforce development, Insurance and Pandemic
and FPUC. and the Commission on Unemployment Assistance
Postsecondary Education. (PUA) claims.

Report of Rapid Response Strike Force   37

 Appendix A – Glossary of Terms and Definitions

Ombudsman Pandemic Unemployment Unemployment

An ombudsman is an Assistance (PUA) Insurance (UI) /
official who is charged with Pandemic Unemployment Regular Unemployment
representing the interests of Assistance is a newly Insurance (UI)
the public by investigating created program that Unemployment Insurance
and addressing complaints temporarily expands also referred to a “Regular
from an agency’s clients or unemployment benefits UI” is the regular federally
constituents. to self-employed, 1099 created program for
contract workers, gig payment of benefits for
Onboard/Onboarding workers, employees who employees who are laid off
To onboard is to go have not earned enough due to no fault of their own.
through procedures to wages or worked enough
effectively integrate a hours to be eligible for Worker Adjustment
new employee into an regular unemployment and Retraining Notification
organization. For DETR, benefits, or individuals who (WARN) Act
onboarding includes were going to start work The Worker Adjustment
not only training but also but could not due to the and Retraining Notification
the requirement to give COVID-19 pandemic. Act helps ensure advance
staff the credentials and notice is given to
technology needed Strike Force employees and the state
to access DETR’s Established by Governor in cases of qualified plant
unemployment computer Sisolak, the Strike Force closings and mass layoffs.
systems. refers to the group of After receiving a WARN
volunteers that assisted notice, DETR works with
in identifying issues and the employer to set up
making recommendations assistance for soon to be
regarding the State’s released employees to file
unemployment for benefits and/or sign up
compensation system. for new training.

Report of Rapid Response Strike Force   38

 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA

Supreme Court Docket Number: 81763

AMETHYST PAYNE, IRIS PODESTA- Electronically Filed
MIRELES, ANTHONY NAPOLITANO, FebDistrict
16 2021 04:49 p.m.
ISAIAH PAVIA-CRUZ, VICTORIA Second Judicial Court
WAKED, CHARLES PLOSKI, DARIUSH Elizabeth A. Brown
Case No.: CV20-00755
Clerk of Supreme Court
NAIMI, TABITHA ASARE, SCOTT
HOWARD, RALPH WYNCOOP,
ELAINA ABING, and WILLIAM APPELLANTS’ MOTION FOR
PERMISSION TO FILE
TURNLEY behalf of themselves and all SUPPLEMENTAL AUTHORITY TO
others similarly situated, SUPPLEMENT THE RECORD IN
REPLY IN SUPPORT OF APPEAL
Appellants, AND RESPONSE TO APPELLEES’
CROSS-APPEAL
v.
NRAP 31(e) and 10(b)(c)
STATE OF NEVADA ex rel NEVADA
DEPARTMENT OF EMPLOYMENT,
TRAINING AND REHABILITATION (DETR)
HEATHER KORBULIC in her official capacity
only as Nevada Director of Employment,
Training and Rehabilitation, DENNIS PEREA
in his official capacity as Deputy Director of
DETR, and KIMBERLY GAA in her official
capacity only as the Administrator for the
Employment Security Division (ESD); and
DOES 1-100, inclusive,
Appellees.

THIERMAN BUCK LLP 7287 Lakeside Drive

Mark R. Thierman, Nev. Bar No. 8285 Reno, Nevada 89511
mark@thiermanbuck.com Tel. (775) 284-1500
Joshua D. Buck, Nev. Bar No. 12187 Fax. (775) 703-5027
josh@thiermanbuck.com Attorneys for Appellants
Leah L. Jones, Nev. Bar No. 13161
leah@thiermanbuck.com
Joshua R. Hendrickson, Nev. Bar. No. 12225
joshh@thiermanbuck.com

1
APPELLANTS’ MOTION FOR PERMISSION TO FILE SUPPLEMENTAL AUTHORITY
TO SUPPLEMENT TO THE RECORD
PAYNE V. DETR – CASE NO. 81763 
Docket 81763 Document 2021-04567
 COME NOW Appellants AMETHYST PAYNE, IRIS PODESTA-

MIRELES, ANTHONY NAPOLITANO, ISAIAH PAVIA-CRUZ, VICTORIA

WAKED, CHARLES PLOSKI, DARIUSH NAIMI, TABITHA ASARE, SCOTT

HOWARD, RALPH WYNCOOP, ELAINA ABING, and WILLIAM TURNLEY

on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated (hereinafter “Appellants”),

by and through their attorneys of record, Thierman Buck, LLP, and hereby 1) gives

notice of supplemental authority pursuant to Nevada Rules of Appellate Procedure

(NRAP) Rule 31(e), or in the alternative 2) hereby moves the Court to allow

Appellants to file supplemental evidence in the form of the January 28, 2021

“Report of DETR Rapid Response Strike Force” as evidence supporting

Appellants’ position that Appellees, STATE OF NEVADA ex rel NEVADA

DEPARTMENT OF EMPLOYMENT, TRAINING AND REHABILITATION

(“DETR” or “Appellees”) have failed to provide due process to over 100,000

Nevada CARES Act benefit claimants.

MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES

I. INTRODUCTION

Appellants hereby submit the January 25, 2021 “Report of DETR Rapid

Response Strike Force,” a true and correct copy of which is attached hereto as

Exhibit A. As this is an official published document of the State of Nevada,

2
APPELLANTS’ MOTION FOR PERMISSION TO FILE SUPPLEMENTAL AUTHORITY
TO SUPPLEMENT TO THE RECORD
PAYNE V. DETR – CASE NO. 81763 
Appellants believe notice of supplemental authority is appropriate under NRAP

Rule 31(e). If the Court determines that the document does not qualify as an

“authority”, then Appellants seek leave from the Court to supplement the record

with a true and correct copy of the January 25, 2021 “Report of DETR Rapid

Response Strike Force.” Under either case, the report is a party admission that the

case is not moot, and judicial relief is required because DETR remains

constitutionally deficient in its practices in the same manner asserted in Appellants’

Writ of Mandamus in the Second Judicial District Court and as originally outlined

in the Special Master’s Report.

Accordingly, Appellants seek to supplement the record based on three rules.

First, because the Strike Force Report is a published document by the State of

Nevada, it should be considered a supplemental authority pursuant to Nevada Rule

of Appellate Procedure (“NRAP”) 31(e). Second, should the Court determine that

the Strike Force Report is not an authority pursuant to NRAP 31(e), Appellants ask

the Court to supplement the record pursuant to NRAP 10(b)(c) as a correction to

the record because it corrects and modifies the record in the District Court. And/or

third, pursuant to the Nevada Revised Statute, Appellants ask the Court to take

judicial notice of the Strike Force Report as further support to Appellants’

arguments because the Strike Force Report’s accuracy cannot reasonably be

questioned, so that the facts therein are not subject to reasonable dispute. See NRS

3
APPELLANTS’ MOTION FOR PERMISSION TO FILE SUPPLEMENTAL AUTHORITY
TO SUPPLEMENT TO THE RECORD
PAYNE V. DETR – CASE NO. 81763 
47.150, NRS 47.130(2)(b); cf. Mack v. Estate of Mack, 125 Nev. 80, 206 P.3d 98

(Mar. 26, 2009).

II. ARGUMENT

A. The Strike Force Report Findings and Recommendations

In late August 2020 Governor Sisolak asked former Speaker, Barbara

Buckley “to chair a Rapid Response Strike Force to identify issues and make

recommendations regarding the State’s unemployment compensation system.” See

EX A at p. 4, opening paragraph.1 On January 28, 2021, the Governor’s Office

released the “Report of DETR Rapid Response Strike Force” (hereinafter “Strike

Force Report”) dated January 25, 2021 Id. at p. 1. Appellants now seek to

supplement their Reply In Support Of Appeal and Response to Appellees’ Cross

Appeal with authority that was not available at the time of filing because it is

relevant to this Court’s analysis.

The following admissions, findings, and recommendations were made in the

Strike Force Report:

 “Securing unemployment benefits which claimants deserve and to which

they are entitled in the current crisis (in a timely manner) has been an

 
1
The Strike Force Report states, “The attached report outlines the finding of
the Strike Force after analyzing the Division and the unemployment crisis. The
report discusses some of the challenges the Strike Force discovered, describes steps
taken to address these challenges and offers suggestion on how to improve the
unemployment compensation program, both now and in the future.” See EX A at
Report p. 6 (emphasis added).
4
APPELLANTS’ MOTION FOR PERMISSION TO FILE SUPPLEMENTAL AUTHORITY
TO SUPPLEMENT TO THE RECORD
PAYNE V. DETR – CASE NO. 81763 
 unimaginably frustrating road for Nevada’s claimants; one that has caused
significant hardship for the state’s hardest hit families.” Id. at p. 10
(emphasis added, parenthetical in original);

 The Strike Force Report admits DETR has not acted promptly, stating,
“Though not smooth or yet as timely as needed …” Ibid. (emphasis added);

 “The new PUA claims management software was partially complete in

August, but had no overpayment or claims appeal hearing capability at that
time.” Id. at p. 14 (emphasis added);

 “[t]he [PUA] appeals module was not operational until November 2020.” Id.
at p. 30 (emphasis added);

 “Claimants had to wait months for a hearing, preventing timely review of

claims.” Ibid. (emphasis added);

 “For PUA, there are 183,199 PUA application pending more than 8 weeks.”
Id. at p. 21;

 At least “7,709 have uploaded identity documents and are estimated to

potentially be eligible claims. The Strike Force recommends that:
o Process the 7,709 cases … ;
o Mass resolve the cases where no documentation has been uploaded
…” Ibid.
o [DETR] workers have been adjudicating approximately 5,000 PUA
cases per week.” Ibid.;

 DETR uses the “strongly suggestive of fraud” standard not the clear and
convincing standard. Id. at p. 22;

 DETR used the electronic “ID.me” to validate identities. Id. at p. 22;

 “At the time of this report, DETR is finalizing a long-term contract with a
vendor that can verify identity on the front-end of the claim as well as
analyze the probability a claim is fraudulent on the back end.” Id. at p. 24;

5
APPELLANTS’ MOTION FOR PERMISSION TO FILE SUPPLEMENTAL AUTHORITY
TO SUPPLEMENT TO THE RECORD
PAYNE V. DETR – CASE NO. 81763 
 “[I]n late June, the State temporarily stopped processing new PUA claims to
minimize the impact of fraudulent claims.” Id. at p. 22;

 “Slowly, the PUA backlog as of August 1, 2020, was reduced from 217,000
to 16,874 as of January 21, 2021.” Id. at p. 5;

 “[t]he decision to set up separate unemployment programs (UI and PUA)

created many challenges including duplication of effort and a potential for
claimants to be shuttled back and forth between systems.” Id. at p. 12
(emphasis added);

 “Thousands of PUA claimants whose incomes were primarily earned in the

‘gig’ economy waited to file in the PUA system only to be told they needed
to file in the UI system.” Ibid. (emphasis added; creating the UI/PUA
whirlpool);

 “When claimants called in, redetermination were made in many cases … [i]t
was noticed that one worker might approve a claim, while another, with the
same facts, might deny the claim.” Id. at p. 26.

 “Even worse, some of the claimants who filed claims in the PUA system,
were in fact eligible or required to apply for ‘regular UI’ claims before filing
in the PUA systems. Some claimants were bounced back and forth between
the two systems which did not interface.” Id. at p. 30 (the UI/PUA
whirlpool/loop);

 Not until “September [was a] plan updated weekly allowing the team to 1)
prioritize resources and 2) create a sequence of activities to support the
expedited review, payment or denial of outstanding PUA and UI claims.”
Ibid.;

 “[B]y January 4, 2021, about 33% of the roughly 120,000 UI open claims
were flagged for questionable identity (about 40,000 claims). These cases
are not being actively worked …” Id. at 25;

 “For UI, there are 26,353 cases pending more than 8 weeks … ” Ibid.

6
APPELLANTS’ MOTION FOR PERMISSION TO FILE SUPPLEMENTAL AUTHORITY
TO SUPPLEMENT TO THE RECORD
PAYNE V. DETR – CASE NO. 81763 
  “[t]he UI team should continue to work claims, not issues. It wastes time to
have multiple workers working on the same case for different issues.” Ibid.;

 “[T]here are approximately 50,000 UI claims with questionable identity

characteristics. The federal rules require that notice be given to these
individuals but it is not possible to contact a claimant who is fraudulent or is
a bot.” Id. at p. 13;

 DETR admits that “As of this report” it still does not know “the status of
unemployment claims at various stages of review/payment/resolution.” Id.
at p. 26.

B. Nevada Rule Of Appellate Procedure 31(e) Supports Inclusion Of

The Strike Force Report

NRAP 31(e) states in full:

Supplemental Authorities. When pertinent and significant authorities

come to a party’s attention after the party’s brief has been filed, but
before a decision, a party may promptly advise the Supreme Court or
Court of Appeals by filing and serving a notice of supplemental
authorities, setting forth the citations. The notice shall provide
references to the page(s) of the brief that is being supplemented. The
notice shall further state concisely and without argument the legal
proposition for which each supplemental authority is cited. The notice
may not raise any new points or issues. Any response must be made
promptly and must be similarly limited. If filed less than 14 days before
oral argument, a notice of supplemental authorities shall not be assured
of consideration by the court at oral argument; provided, however, that
no notice of supplemental authorities shall be rejected for filing on the
ground that it was filed less than 14 days before oral argument.2

 
2
Appellees response is due February 17, 2021, oral argument has not yet
been scheduled, and thus Appellants’ request is timely. Appellants made a request
to Respondents to agree to inclusion of the Strike Force Report in the record, prior
to filing this Motion, but Respondents refused to so agree.
 
7
APPELLANTS’ MOTION FOR PERMISSION TO FILE SUPPLEMENTAL AUTHORITY
TO SUPPLEMENT TO THE RECORD
PAYNE V. DETR – CASE NO. 81763 
See NRAP 31(e).

Appellants’ Writ petition and Reply argue that DETR has failed to (1)

promptly determine PUA or other program eligibility; (2) either (a) pay benefits

immediately based upon that determination, or (b) provide a prompt due process

hearing for the claimant to challenge the denial with written decision by an Appeal

Tribunal within 30 days of filing of an appeal; (3) if an initial determination is

appealed then maintain all existing payments of benefits until and unless an adverse

determination is timely rendered by an Administrative tribunal; and (4) refrain from

demanding or collecting any repayments of allegedly incorrectly paid sums before

receiving a final decision from an impartial Appeals tribunal after a fair hearing.

See Opening Brief at pp. 4-5 and in general; Appellants’ Reply in support and

Response to Cross Appeal at pp. 19-51. Appellants’ Opening Brief was filed on

November 24, 2020 and Appellants’ Reply in support and Response to Cross

Appeal was filed on January 20, 2021. DETR’s Response and Cross-Appeal was

filed on December 30, 2020 and incorrectly asserted DETR does not have a clear

duty to provide claimants with due process once and eligibility determination is

made. See Response/Cross Appeal at p. 4.

C. The Court Should Include The Strike Force Report Pursuant To

NRAP 10(b)(c) Because It Corrects Or Modifies The Record

8
APPELLANTS’ MOTION FOR PERMISSION TO FILE SUPPLEMENTAL AUTHORITY
TO SUPPLEMENT TO THE RECORD
PAYNE V. DETR – CASE NO. 81763 
 The relevant part of NRAP 10(b)(c) states - The Record on Appeal –

Correction or Modification of the Record. If any difference arises about whether

the trial court record truly discloses what occurred in the district court, the

difference shall be submitted to and settled by that court and the record conformed

accordingly. Questions as to the form and content of the appellate court record

shall be present to the clerk.

At the time of the District Court’s Orders, the Strike Force had not even been

created and had not made the attached Report and recommendations.

In direct conflict with DETR’s position in its brief, and in direct support of

Appellants’ claims throughout this action, the Strike Force Report explicitly and

clearly refutes DETR’s arguments. Accordingly, the Strike Force Report is

relevant and should be added to the record.

D. The Court Should Take Judicial Notice Of The Strike Force

Report Pursuant To NRS 47.150 And/Or NRS 47.130(2)(b)

NRS 47.150 states: Discretionary and mandatory notice – 1. A judge or court

may take judicial notice, whether requested or not. 2. A judge or court shall take

judicial notice if requested by a part and supplied with the necessary information.

NRS 47.130(2)(b) states: Matters of fact – 2. A judicially notices fact must

be: (b) Capable of accurate and ready determination by resort to sources whose

9
APPELLANTS’ MOTION FOR PERMISSION TO FILE SUPPLEMENTAL AUTHORITY
TO SUPPLEMENT TO THE RECORD
PAYNE V. DETR – CASE NO. 81763 
accuracy cannot reasonably be questioned, so that the fact is not subject to

reasonable dispute.

NRS 52.247 states in pertinent part: Admissibility of … certain records of

governmental agency deemed public records – 1. Unless held in a fiduciary or

custodial capacity or unless specifically prohibited by a federal or state statute or

regulation, by a local ordinance or by an order or judgment of a court of competent

jurisdiction, if any business or governmental agency has, in the regular course of its

business: (a) Produced, kept or maintained any document, memorandum, writing,

entry, print or other record of any act, transaction, occurrence or event relating to the

conduct of its business; Any rerecorded, copied or reproduced record specified in

subsection 1 is admissible to the same extent as an original, regardless of whether

the original is available for inspection or has been lost or destroyed, if the rerecorded,

copied or reproduced record is sufficiently authenticated.

Appellants ask the Court to take judicial notice of the Strike Force Report

because the Strike Force Report’s accuracy cannot reasonably be questioned, so

that the facts therein are not subject to reasonable dispute. See NRS 47.150, NRS

47.130(2)(b); cf. Mack v. Estate of Mack, 125 Nev. 80, 206 P.3d 98 (Mar. 26, 2009).

In this case, the judicial notice of the administering agency’s failure to provide due

process in determinations of entitlement to benefits is relevant on appeal based on

Appellants’ assertion in briefs that DETR’s failure to promptly make benefit

10
APPELLANTS’ MOTION FOR PERMISSION TO FILE SUPPLEMENTAL AUTHORITY
TO SUPPLEMENT TO THE RECORD
PAYNE V. DETR – CASE NO. 81763 
determinations, pay benefits when eligible or deny benefits and provide due process

is confirmed by the Strike Force Report.3

As alleged in Appellants’ brief and confirmed by the Strike Force Report,

DETR has failed to make prompt eligibility determinations and act on them by

either, promptly paying eligible claimants, or if denied, provide for prompt appeal.

Because the tenants of due process are part of the bedrock of the judicial system,

and because the Strike Force Report admits that DETR has failed to and continues

to fail to provide due process to claimants, the Strike Force Report supports the

finding in the Special Master’s Reports and further demonstrates that the District

Court erred in denying Appellants’ writ.

The following chart provides the Court with specific instances where the

Special Master’s Report is confirmed by the Strike Force Report and provides

further contradictory authority that refutes DETR’s arguments.

SPECIAL MASTER REPORT STRIKE FORCE REPORT

See Appellants’ Opening Brief and P. 14: PUA claims management

EOR: Pp. 16-17 citing EOR 943 and system was only “partially complete in
EOR 1133-1136 recommending August but had no overpayment of
DETR afford claimants due process claims appeal hearing capability”; p.
through a working appeals process. 30: the “PUA appeals module was not
operational until November 2020”; p.
30: “Claimants had to wait months for

 
3
Should Appellees are that the Strike Force Report is inadmissible hearsay
pursuant to NRS 51.035, Appellants assert that the Strike Force Report is a party
admission and is thus admissible.
11
APPELLANTS’ MOTION FOR PERMISSION TO FILE SUPPLEMENTAL AUTHORITY
TO SUPPLEMENT TO THE RECORD
PAYNE V. DETR – CASE NO. 81763 
 a hearing, preventing timely review of
claims”; p. 13: there are 50,000 UI
claims that require notice to be given
but have not had any notice; p. 26 :“As
of this report” DETR still does not
know “the status of unemployment
claims at various stages of
review/payment/resolution.”
P. 16 at fn. 17 from the SMR P. 30: DETR created the UI/PUA loop
recommending a “one-stop shop” to where claimants were “bounced back
prevent UI/PUA whirlpool. and forth between two systems”; p. 12:
claimants were actually told to apply in
wrong program.
P. 16 at fn. 17, from the SMR P. 10: DETR has not acted “in a timely
recommending more user friendly manner … [which has] caused
processes and communication to significant hardship for the state’s
prevent scrivener-type errors resulting hardest hit families” and the process is
in needless denials. “not smooth or yet as timely as
needed”); p. 21: there are 183,199
PUA applications pending more than 8
weeks and at least “7,709 have
uploaded identity documents and are
estimated to potentially be eligible
claims; p. 25: there are 120,000 open
UI claims “not being actively worked”
and there are 26,353 UI cases pending
more than 8 weeks; p. 26 (“As of this
report DETR still does not know “the
status of unemployment claims at
various stages of
review/payment/resolution.)
See Appellants Reply/Response to P. 14: PUA claims management
Cross at p. 20 fn. 13 from SMR, EOR system was only “partially complete in
2801 indicating no appeal mechanism. August but had no overpayment of
claims appeal hearing capability”); p.
30: the PUA appeals module was not
operational until November 2020; p.
30: “Claimants had to wait months for
a hearing, preventing timely review of
12
APPELLANTS’ MOTION FOR PERMISSION TO FILE SUPPLEMENTAL AUTHORITY
TO SUPPLEMENT TO THE RECORD
PAYNE V. DETR – CASE NO. 81763 
 claims; p. 13: there are 50,000 UI
claims that require notice to be given
but have not had any notice; p. 26 :“As
of this report DETR still does not
know “the status of unemployment
claims at various stages of
review/payment/resolution.
Pp. 24-25 citing SMR at EOR 925-931 P. 10: DETR has not acted “in a timely
providing descriptive overview of manner … [which has] caused
DETR’s own portal requiring significant hardship for the state’s
claimants to provide weekly self- hardest hit families” and the process is
certifications and continued pandemic “not smooth or yet as timely as
related unemployment which allows needed”); p. 22 DETR actually
for real-time eligibility determination stopped processing PUA claims in
of claims. June for an unknown period of time; p.
21: there are 183,199 PUA
applications pending more than 8
weeks and at least “7,709 have
uploaded identity documents and are
estimated to potentially be eligible
claims; p. 26: “When claimants called
in redeterminations were made in
many cases … one worker might
approve a claim, while another, with
the same facts, might deny the claim”;
p. 25: there are 120,000 open UI
claims “not being actively worked” an
there are 26,353 UI cases pending
more than 8 weeks; p. 13: there are
50,000 UI claims that require notice to
be given but have not had any notice;
p. 26 (“As of this report DETR still
does not know “the status of
unemployment claims at various
stages of review/payment/resolution.)

13
APPELLANTS’ MOTION FOR PERMISSION TO FILE SUPPLEMENTAL AUTHORITY
TO SUPPLEMENT TO THE RECORD
PAYNE V. DETR – CASE NO. 81763 
III. CONCLUSION

There is nothing in the rules that prohibit supplementation of the record with

the Strike Force Report. The Strike Force appointed by the Governor, and the

corresponding Report issued by the Strike Force is relevant to this Court’s analysis.

Indeed, Appellees, though the Strike Force Report have admitted that they have

failed to (1) promptly determine PUA or other program eligibility; (2) either (a) pay

benefits immediately based upon that determination, or (b) provide a prompt due

process hearing for the claimant to challenge the denial with written decision by an

Appeal Tribunal within 30 days of filing of an appeal; (3) if an initial determination

is appealed then maintain all existing payments of benefits until and unless an

adverse determination is timely rendered by an Administrative tribunal; (4) refrain

from demanding or collecting any repayments of allegedly incorrectly paid sums

before receiving a final decision from an impartial Appeals tribunal after a fair

hearing.

///

///

///

14
APPELLANTS’ MOTION FOR PERMISSION TO FILE SUPPLEMENTAL AUTHORITY
TO SUPPLEMENT TO THE RECORD
PAYNE V. DETR – CASE NO. 81763 
 Accordingly, even though it was issued after this appeal was taken, this Court

should grant Appellant’s Motion to Supplement the Record and consider Appellants’

arguments herein.

February 16, 2021 Respectfully Submitted,

THIERMAN BUCK LLP

/s/ Mark R. Thierman

Mark R. Thierman, Bar No. 8285
Joshua D. Buck, Bar No. 12187
Leah L. Jones, Bar No. 13161
Joshua R. Hendrickson, Bar No. 12225
Attorneys for Appellants

15
APPELLANTS’ MOTION FOR PERMISSION TO FILE SUPPLEMENTAL AUTHORITY
TO SUPPLEMENT TO THE RECORD
PAYNE V. DETR – CASE NO. 81763 
 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I am a resident of the State of Nevada, over the age of eighteen years, and not a

party to the within the action. My business address is 7287 Lakeside Drive, Reno,

Nevada, 89511. On February 16, 2021, the APPELLANTS’ MOTION FOR

PERMISSION TO FILE SUPPLEMENTAL AUTHORITY TO SUPPLEMENT

THE RECORD IN REPLY IN SUPPORT OF APPEAL AND RESPONSE TO

APPELLEES’ CROSS-APPEAL was served on the following by using the

Supreme Court of Nevada’s eFlex System:

Jeff Conner
Greg Ott
Robert Whitney
By electronic transmission to the following email accounts:
JConner@ag.nv.gov
GOtt@ag.nv.gov
RWhitney@ag.nv.gov
I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.

Executed on February 16, 2021.

/s/ Jennifer Edison-Strekal

16
APPELLANTS’ MOTION FOR PERMISSION TO FILE SUPPLEMENTAL AUTHORITY
TO SUPPLEMENT TO THE RECORD
PAYNE V. DETR – CASE NO. 81763