[M T]

By random testing, I presume you mean where the state forces a random set of people to take the test when they don't desire to and don't medically need to.  I think I understand why the states don't do that.
-----
If all the numbers backed up for 2 weeks are going to be dumped into the states, put on your seat belts.  This will be a bumpy ride.
I don't see how the state can deal with this for their monitoring list unless they keep the list frozen for 2 more weeks.  They could switch to cases by date of sample, or average this deluge over 14 days (ie, increase each of the last 14 days by 1/14 of this bump.)
-----
SCC has marked all case data since July 16 as impacted by the data problems.  That's a bit earlier than I noticed, but it could be.  As of early Saturday, Aug 8, I see no signs that the numbers are flowing back to SCC properly yet. (That is, (Aug 6) Thursday's data (reported by SCC Friday) don't show the flow.)  If the Qwest data was the issue and it was cleared before August 5 (as reported), then those numbers should be back.

The claim that the problems stemmed from a July 25th server outage seems possible.  That means that by the end of July 24th, they had only processed a bit over half of the samples collected on July 20th for SCC.  I suppose that is possible.  The Cases by Date (of sample) dataset I downloaded on July 25 (meaning, data as of July 24; last date in data is July 23) showed this many cases (with 1 week earlier numbers in parentheses, and % of that week-earlier number processed this week)
July 16: 275 (July 9: 275, 100%)
July 17: 158 (234, 68%)
July 18: 62   (171, 36%)
July 19: 40   (118, 34%)
July 20: 57   (174, 33%)
July 21: 57   (319, 18%)
July 22: 23   (305, 8%)
July 23: 8     (275, 3%)

[M T]

By random testing, I presume you mean where the state forces a random set of people to take the test when they don't desire to and don't medically need to.  I think I understand why the states don't do that.
-----
If all the numbers backed up for 2 weeks are going to be dumped into the states, put on your seat belts.  This will be a bumpy ride.
I don't see how the state can deal with this for their monitoring list unless they keep the list frozen for 2 more weeks.  They could switch to cases by date of sample, or average this deluge over 14 days (ie, increase each of the last 14 days by 1/14 of this bump.)
-----
SCC has marked all case data since July 16 as impacted by the data problems.  That's a bit earlier than I noticed, but it could be.  As of early Saturday, Aug 8, I see no signs that the numbers are flowing back to SCC properly yet. (That is, (Aug 6) Thursday's data (reported by SCC Friday) don't show the flow.)  If the Qwest data was the issue and it was cleared before August 5 (as reported), then those numbers should be back.

The claim that the problems stemmed from a July 25th server outage seems possible.  That means that by the end of July 24th, they had only processed a bit over half of the samples collected on July 20th for SCC.  I suppose that is possible.  The Cases by Date (of sample) dataset I downloaded on July 25 (meaning, data as of July 24; last date in data is July 23) showed this many cases (with 1 week earlier numbers in parentheses, and % of that week-earlier number processed this week)
July 16: 275 (July 9: 275, 100%)
July 17: 158 (234, 68%)
July 18: 62   (171, 36%)
July 19: 40   (118, 34%)
July 20: 57   (174, 33%)
July 21: 57   (319, 18%)
July 22: 23   (305, 8%)
July 23: 8     (275, 3%)