Layered Identity Proofing: Fighting Unemployment Insurance Theft

by Eric Thompson 4 min read April 15, 2021

Recently, I wrote about how Experian is assisting NASWA (National Association of State Workforce Agencies) with identity verification to help mitigate the spike in fraudulent unemployment insurance claims. Because of this I was not all that surprised when I found a letter in my mailbox from the Texas Workforce Commission with a fraudulent claim using my identity, inspiring me to follow up on this topic with a focus on fraud prevention best practices.

Identity theft is on the rise

According to Experian data analysis and a recent study on unemployment insurance fraud, at least 25% of new claims are a result of identity theft. This is 50 times higher than what we have traditionally seen in the highest ID theft fraud use case, new credit card applications, which generally amounts to less than 0.5% of new applications.

Increasing digitization of the last few years—culminating in the huge leap forward in 2020—has resulted in a massive amount of information available online. Of that information, a reported 1.03 billion records were exposed between 2016 and 2020. There are currently approximately 330 million Americans, so on average more than three records per person have been exposed, creating an environment ripe for identity theft.

In fact, a complete identity consisting of name, address, date of birth, and Social Security number (SSN) can be purchased for as little as $8. This stolen data is then often leveraged by both criminal rings who are able to perpetrate fraud on a large scale and smaller scale opportunists – like the ones in Riverside, CA leveraging access to identities of prison inmates.

Fraud prevention through layered identity controls

In the 20 years that I have been combatting ID theft both in the private and public sectors, I’ve learned that the most effective identity proofing goes beyond traditional identity resolution, validation, and verification. To be successful, you must take advantage of all available data and incorporate it into a layered and risk-based approach that utilizes device details, user behavior, biometrics, and more. Below, I outline three key layers to design an effective process for ID proofing new unemployment insurance claims.

Layer 1: Resolve and Validate Identities

Traditional identity data consists of the same basic information—name, address, date of birth, telephone number, and SSN—which is now readily available to fraudsters. These have been the foundation for ID proofing in the past and are still critical to resolving the identity in question. The key is to also include additional identity elements like email address and phone number to gain a more holistic view of the applicant.

Layer 2: Assess Fraud Risk

Determining an identity belongs to a real-life subject is not sufficient to mitigate the risk of ID theft associated with a new unemployment insurance claim. You must go beyond identity validation to assess the risk associated with their claim. Risk assessment risk falls into two categories – identity and digital risk.

Identity Risk

When assessing a claim, it’s important to check the identity for:

Velocity: How often have you (or other states) seen the information being presented with this application? Has the information been associated with multiple identities?

Recency of change: How long has the identity been associated with the contact information (phone, email, address, etc.)?

Red flags: Has the subject been a recent victim of ID theft, or are they reported as deceased?

Synthetic Identity: Are there signs that the identity itself is fictitious or manipulated and does not belong to a real-life person?

Digital Risk

Similar to the identity risk layer above, the device itself and how the subject interacts with the device are significantly important in identifying the likelihood a new claim is fraudulent. Device risk can be assessed by utilizing geolocation and checking for inconsistent settings or high-risk browsers, while behavioral risk might check for mouse movement, typing speed, or screen pressure.

Layer 3: Verify Highest Risk Subjects

The final stage in this process is to require additional verification for the highest risk claims, which helps to balance the experience of your valid subjects while minimizing the impact of fraud. Additional steps might include:

Document verification: Scanning a government-issued ID (driver’s license, passport, or similar), which includes assessing for document security features and biometric comparison to the applicant.

One-time passcode (OTP): It is key to deploy this sparingly only to phone numbers that have been associated with the subject for a significant time frame and incorporate checks to determine if it is at high risk (e.g., recently ported or forwarded).

Knowledge-based verification (KBV): Leveraging non-public information from a variety of sources.

By adding additional, context-based identity elements, it becomes possible to improve the three main objectives of most agencies’ identity proofing process – get good constituents through the first time, protect the agency and citizens from fraud, and deliver a smooth and secure customer experience in online channels.

While there’s no quick fix to prevent unemployment insurance fraud, a layered identity strategy can help prevent it. Finding a partner that has a single, holistic solution empowers agencies to defend against unemployment insurance fraud while minimizing friction for the end-user, and preparing for future fraud schemes.

To learn more about how you can protect your constituents and your agency from unemployment insurance fraud request a call today.

Contact us

Related Posts

Ask the Expert: The Future of Lending Starts With Identity With Shawn Rife and Brian Cardona

Identity intelligence and alternative data can help lenders validate consumers and support more informed decisions across the customer lifecycle.

September 16, 2026 by Julie Lee
Financial Institutions Are Rethinking Customer Acqusition

Customer acquisition strategies are constantly evolving toward more precise targeting. From a marketing lens, you can track every step, optimize communication channels and still miss the person most likely to convert. Attribution can tell us which channels work and automation can make marketing spend more efficient. But both assume we know who is actually on the other end. Financial institutions are learning that finding audiences and targeting them is no longer the biggest challenge. As acquisition optimization marketing becomes more sophisticated, teams can measure and act on more signals than before. What they can't always know is whether the person on the receiving end is real. Customer acquisition has evolved into an identity problem. The challenge is not that every questionable signal represents malicious activity. It's that acquisition systems must make increasingly intelligent decisions with an imperfect understanding of who they're actually engaging. When identities are fragmented, duplicated, temporary or synthetic, optimization becomes a question of trust as much as targeting. When your signals don't reliably identify customers The customer journey often includes searching, filling out a form, creating an account, requesting a quote and subscribing. All of these signals work well when identity is relatively stable.  However, financial institutions are finding that these signals are becoming less reliable. A single person can operate across multiple personas, devices, browsers, aliases, accounts and intermediaries while several apparent “people” may actually represent one underlying actor. Financial instituions are finding: Fragmented customer signals Difficulty distinguishing an old account from a new one Different digital pathways associated with the same individual Signals that are generated by automation Real customers getting flagged because signals are too thin to evaluate confidently Legacy signals continue to be challenged Marketing has historically treated intent as a valuable signal because intent was relatively difficult to produce. A search required human intent. A form required someone to fill it out. An inquiry implied a meaningful amount of human effort. Financial institutions are already combating AI-enabled fraud, and now marketing teams are starting to face it on a massive scale. AI can mimic human behavior by researching products, comparing prices, filling out forms, creating accounts and signing up for services. A valid email address is no longer enough. Marketers need to know: How long has it existed? How recently has it been active? Does its activity appear consistent or suddenly anomalous? Has it gone dormant and returned? Is it associated with patterns that suggest stability or unusual behavior? How to build on your strongest signal Email remains one of the most persistent identifiers in digital commerce, following people across devices, platforms, transactions, subscriptions, accounts and years of activity. For over two decades, this has shaped how AtData thinks about identity. Now, as part of Experian, it’s shaping how an entire platform and team approach identity. A marketer doesn’t need every prospect to have existed online for twenty years. But understanding whether a newly acquired prospect has meaningful identity context can dramatically improve the quality of the decision being made around it. Better identity intelligence can help organizations reduce unnecessary friction by improving their ability to recognize legitimate customers. With a strong identity foundation, marketing teams can better address: Which audiences are more likely to convert? Which leads are high quality? Which channels are driving incremental growth? What do the best prospects look like? The value isn't simply having an email address. It's understanding the history and behavioral context associated with it. That context can provide a stronger digital identity signal, helping marketers understand how long they have been active, whether its behavior is consistent with that of a real person and whether current activity aligns with past patterns. It continues to be one of the most persistent identifiers in digital commerce. An infrastructure built for what's coming The acquisition of AtData by Experian reflects a fundamental shift in how identity infrastructure needs to work. Experian's scale and decisioning capabilities, combined with AtData's real-time email intelligence, create a strong platform. Read more about the why behind the acquisition and see how email works as an identity anchor for fraud prevention. Contact us to learn about our customer acquisition solutions

September 15, 2026 by Zohreen Ismail
As Electric Vehicle Adoption Eases, Dealers Can Find New Opportunities To Reach Consumers

After years of rapid growth, new electric vehicle (EV) registrations have moderated, and the EV market has entered a new chapter. But slower growth shouldn’t be mistaken for disappearing demand, with data suggesting the reality is much more nuanced. According to Experian Automotive’s Automotive Consumer Trends Report: Q2 2026, battery EVs accounted for 8.21% of new retail registrations in the last 12 months, down from 9.23% a year earlier. However, consumers aren’t simply walking away from electrification. In fact, more than one million new EVs were registered during the past 12 months and the used EV market recorded more than 540,000 registrations over the same period. The opportunity may be less about waiting for the EV market to grow and more about understanding where EV demand is present, who is driving them, and how to reach those consumers more effectively. Who is likely to purchase an EV and what vehicle types are they interested in? Understanding who’s in the market for an EV can allow dealers to position themselves around consumers’ needs as they choose a vehicle that fits their everyday lifestyle. In the second quarter of 2026, Millennials and Gen X accounted for 67.83% of new EV registrations, nearly 10 percentage points above their combined share of all new, retail registrations. Millennials were also the largest generational audience across both new and used EV market share, coming in at 35.76% and 38.42%, respectively. It’s important to consider that the EV shopper isn’t necessarily looking for an unfamiliar or new type of vehicle. In many cases, they’re seemingly looking for an electric version of the practical vehicle they already know. For instance, SUVs accounted for 77.47% of new EV registrations in Q2 2026, which was similar to SUVs’ 63.49% share of all new retail registrations. For these shoppers, creating messaging around value, practicality, and available choices may resonate differently than premium technology messaging aimed at some new-EV prospects. The more precisely dealers can identify those audiences, the less they need to depend on broad EV market momentum to generate demand. To learn more about EV insights, view the full Automotive Consumer Trends Report: Q2 2026 presentation.

September 15, 2026 by Kirsten Von Busch

Subscribe to our Newsletter

Enter your name and email for the latest updates.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Subscribe to our Newsletter

Don't miss out on the latest industry trends and insights!
Subscribe