Former Employees Say Grew Too Fast, Got Too Careless With Users And Their Data

from the just-throwing-humans-under-the-growth-bus dept hasn’t always been a government contractor powerhouse. For more than a decade, it wasn’t really on anybody’s radar. The personal identification software began as a Craigslist for military personnel before morphing into an ID service designed to combat fraud and ensure military members could access the many government programs available to them.

Not exactly the humblest of beginnings (considering the number of active and retired military members the service could potentially access) but managed to stay off the public radar for most of a decade. Then, the pandemic hit.

Suddenly, there were tons of government programs accessible by those affected by the unexpected rollout of COVID v.19.0. jumped into the breach, selling dozens of states on its verification software, promising to limit benefit fraud. Unfortunately, its facial recognition tech was underwhelming. But due to its nature as the only (government) game in town, people were stuck using a system that separated people from their unemployment payments while simultaneously separating them from any useful tech support.

Some unemployment applicants have said that’s facial recognition models fail to properly identify them (generally speaking, facial recognition technology is notoriously less accurate for women and people of color). And after their applications were put on hold because their identity couldn’t be verified, many should-be beneficiaries have had to wait days or weeks to reach an “trusted referee” who could confirm what the technology couldn’t.

As people continued to struggle to access their benefits, the company’s CEO, Blake Hall, continued to claim’s tech support staff was tip-top while blaming users for their own negative experiences with the company.

In his statement to Motherboard, Hall said that facial recognition failures are not a problem with the technology but with the people using it to verify their identity. “For example, if someone uploads a selfie that only shows half their face.”

At the point that article was published, 21 states were using as their preferred ID verification provider. expanded its business quickly after that, hooking up with the IRS while using inflated claims of COVID-related fraud to drive its business.

The IRS soon decided to move away from as a sole provider for taxpayer verification following these publications and pressure applied by Senator Ron Wyden. Soon after that, reports began trickling in alleging the explosive demand for’s services had apparently caught the company unprepared. The dearth of human backstops for its automated ID verification services led to more unemployment fraud — like one person wearing a bad wig availing himself of $900,000 in benefits by duping’s supposedly awesome facial recognition AI.

Employees unfortunate enough to become part of’s mid-pandemic, understaffed dystopia have been speaking with Business Insider’s Caroline Haskins. It’s definitely not pretty. Throw that many people into the mix during a period of exponential growth and bad stuff happens.

As it grew rapidly, so did errors, technical hurdles, and strain on its relatively new staff of customer service representatives, nine former employees told Insider. Helpline queues for the millions of Americans who relied on unemployment benefits in 2020 and 2021 would sometimes number in the thousands because of these strains, they said.’s rush to hire and train nearly 1,500 new workers at this time also led to lax verification practices and poor user privacy protections, these people said. Information like passports and social security numbers were often posted in internal Slack channels, and some employees were hired and given access to confidential data without completed background checks. Some chattered about how easy it would be to steal users’ information.

Demands escalated for government benefit recipients during this surge as well. With access to the usual verification methods disappearing rapidly as expanded its reach, millions of Americans were stuck dealing with an understaffed government contractor that forced benefit seekers to interact with faulty facial recognition tech.

Meanwhile, back at, the crisis continued. The limited staff was unable to handle the influx of recipients experiencing problems, forcing those who needed help the most to try to get by without any of the financial assistance they were entitled to. Employees who had been on the job for only a few weeks were tasked with training new hires. Still understaffed (and definitely undertrained), employees were given mere seconds to make calls on submitted ID documents.

Document reviewers were expected to rule on a document every 20-30 seconds, video chat agents were expected to verify about 40 people a day, and email representatives were expected to send around 70 emails a day, according to the former employees. Team “leads” would show workers a top-to-bottom ranking of employees based on how many accounts or documents they verified that week, sometimes every day, they said.

You can’t verify actual humans in that amount of time. Placing time limits on activities that are supposed to reduce fraud only makes it more likely actual fraudsters will be able to manipulate the system. Enacting quotas tends to lead to people doing more busywork than actual work, encouraging customer service reps to solve the easy problems and ignore complaints that might be more time-consuming. And, lest this get forgotten in the rush, actual people relying on benefits to survive were at the other end of the arbitrary time limits/quotas set by the company.

Not only was failing to verify benefit recipients in a timely fashion, it was apparently incapable of verifying its own employees before handing them access to millions of Americans’ personal information.

One former employee told Insider that training for the job was remote, and everyone was allowed to take company-issued laptops home with them, but after a couple days of training, told this person they had to complete training in the office because the company hadn’t finished running background checks on the new hires. This shocked them.

“It was disturbing to me that my background check wasn’t completed and that I was allowed to take home a computer with people’s information on it,” the former employee said. “I could have, as I was going through my training, been taking pictures of people’s things. Nobody was watching me.”

You can only get away with this sort of thing when your user base is locked in. And it very much was in multiple states, with access to state and federal benefits locked up behind’s verification tech. While it’s understandable governments will seek the assistance of private contractors to handle things like verification, making companies like the only option separates taxpayers from their benefits and leaves them at the mercy of a company that was entirely unprepared to handle the amount of business it had managed to drum up during the pandemic.

What should have done is rein in its expansion plans if it was incapable of handling increased demand. And more government agencies should have ensured the company was capable of handling millions of concurrent users before spending taxpayers’ money on services that left taxpayers high and dry.

Filed Under: , , ,

Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “Former Employees Say Grew Too Fast, Got Too Careless With Users And Their Data”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
Anonymous Coward says:

Team “leads” would show workers a top-to-bottom ranking of employees based on how many accounts or documents they verified that week, sometimes every day, they said.

As with so many customer service / tech support metrics, it is “how many calls did you answer” rather than “how many problems did you solve that won’t come back to bite us”.

Anonymous Coward says:


Way, way back in my days in Tech Support for a medium-sized company, we were given the quota of 25 calls per day.

(Un)fortunately for them, the guy who trained me was the King of the Slackers. He taught me how to race through my queue and get my 25 before lunch. That let me take the rest of the day doing nothing.

If, instead of having a quota, they required us to solve the customers’ problems solved, then I would’ve been forced to actually do my job. That would also mean I would not always get 25 calls logged, but you can’t have both quality and quantity in a fixed amount of time.

Darkness Of Course (profile) says:

In a Corpo a long time ago

In my life before not-working I had a fun little project. Provide microfiche of source code of a small code base. Small by today’s standards anyway.

Finance got involved, we went to the facilities of the shop that I chose to do the actual production. I did a test run, several if I’m remembering correctly. I mean, micro-fiche time ago.

But, I groused about it. All that time, effort and we weren’t going to have huge sales. However, our stuff worked flawlessly. Developed the process on our side, make a tape (in EPCDIC), send it to them, couple days later, get boxes of film that we stuffed in binders and shipped out to customers.

I understood why it was necessary. Yet, these companies not being up for the job. The failures are endless these days.

The clowns at never would have cleared the bar.

Anonymous Coward says:


This company is awful and I’ve literally seen someone get promoted to fraud with no background experience in fraud or even a degree.
Her boss decided to promote her because she pretended to be a friend.
Meanwhile, tons of people were overlooked for this position with skills, experience, and educational background who could’ve been a company asset…but they promoted someone who has never made a slideshow in their life.
The HR person hasn’t even graduated college and wears balenciagas around the office.
This is the company that has people like this handling the public’s sensitive information.
No wonder bad documents come though all The time. The leaders encourage you to accept them to meet quotas. Sad.

Add Your Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop »

Follow Techdirt

Techdirt Daily Newsletter

Techdirt Deals
Techdirt Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...