Compliance Archives - Page 2 of 4

California PPA Rate Filing Moratorium: What Should Insurers Do?

As loss ratios for personal auto continue to climb in California, insurers are experiencing significant pressure to raise their rates. Frequencies have been increasing from the lows hit during the pandemic and severities trends are at levels not seen for decades – both of which are pushing loss costs above levels seen pre-pandemic. At the same time, the California Department of Insurance (“CDI”) has a rate filing moratorium on any increases for personal auto and has not approved any personal auto rate increase for over two years.

Many companies feel their hands are tied and there is nothing that can be done until the moratorium is lifted by the CDI. However, according to our actuarial consulting experts, there are several options available to insurers when it comes to addressing a needed rate change for personal auto in California.

Submitting a rate filing during the rate freeze

There is no debate that the pandemic has had an impact on personal auto. Behind the scenes, the CDI has been evaluating the most recent data available from insurers to determine the impact of the pandemic and how this should be addressed in personal auto rate filings. At this moment, the CDI has given no indication as to when they will complete their review. As a result, most companies are not spending the effort required to prepare and submit a rate increase filing for personal auto in California, which the CDI will just put on hold.

Over the last several years, the average time to approval for a rate filing in California has been steadily increasing and the problem has been made worse by a staffing shortage at the CDI. Prior to COVID-19, it took an average of 150 days to receive approval on rate increase filings for personal auto and homeowners – both of which are heavily regulated lines of business in California. Now, it is taking over 300 days to receive approval on rate filings for homeowners. Part of the reason for the lengthy review is that every rate filing for homeowners needs to be reviewed by upper management including the insurance commissioner. It is not unreasonable to anticipate the same treatment for personal auto. Which means if you submit a rate filing today, it might take a year to receive the approval. Any company that has adopted the “wait and see” approach and is taking no actions on their personal auto program will likely have subpar results in the next year and may be playing catch up for multiple years.

Several of the top 20 carriers have recently filed for rate increases on their California personal auto programs including the following companies: GEICO, Interinsurance Exchange of the Auto Club, Mercury, Progressive, Infinity and Wawanesa. The filings for these companies show strong support for a rate increase. Does this mean the CDI will start approving rate increases for personal auto soon? Nobody really knows the timing on this – the insurance commissioner will likely err on the side of keeping the rates low for consumers. However, eventually the freeze on rate increases will be lifted and the companies that have already filed will be first in line to receive approvals on rate increases. If an insurer anticipates needing a rate increase for personal auto within the next year in California and has not started the rate filing process, it is time to get moving on this.

Filing for a variance

Most insurers have not submitted a rate increase filing because they do not have sufficient data to support an increase using the CDI ratemaking methodology. For companies that do not have credible data in the last 12-months, the CDI requires multiple years of data, which includes the period impacted by the pandemic. Furthermore, the premium and loss trend calculations required by the CDI require at least 12-quarters of data and will also be impacted by the pandemic. As a result, a rate filing for personal auto may need a variance on the loss and premium trend. Filings for variances must make public notice, so it is important to include this in the initial filing or there could be delays in the approval of the filing.

When preparing a rate filing, our actuarial consulting experts recommend that insurers review recent competitor rate filings, which have valuable information, including their request for variances. Several of the large carriers have submitted filings with fully credible data for the last 12 months. For companies that do not have credible data, the trend data in the competitor filings may be helpful – especially given the lag in receiving available industry data. Additionally, the CDI has a COVID-19 questionnaire that is required with every rate filing for the lines of business impacted by the pandemic. The responses to the questionnaire include insight from the filing company on the impact of COVID-19 on their business, which companies may find helpful in preparing their own rate filings. Also, a review of the objections in these filings along with the corresponding responses may assist a company in preparing a filing that more thoroughly addresses all the CDI’s concerns, which will in the end speed up the filing review process.

Waiving or not waiving the deemer

Nowadays, the CDI requests a waiver of the 60-day deemer on virtually all rate filings in order to have more time to review the filing. Insurers have accepted this as part of the rate filing review process and have historically waived the deemer. Companies do have a choice when it comes to waiving the deemer. Most companies believe the filing will be disapproved without the waiver of the deemer, which is not true. If a company decides to not waive the deemer, the CDI’s only option is to issue a notice of hearing or let the filing be deemed approved. Since there is no chance that the CDI will let a rate filing be deemed approved, not waiving the deemer will result in a notice of hearing.

When the deemer has been waived on a filing, the insurer has the option to reactivate the demeer. Wawanesa has chosen to do this with their pending personal auto rate filing, which was submitted December 13, 2021. Since the CDI has a moratorium on rate increases for personal auto and was unable to complete their review of the rate filing before the deemer date, the CDI issued a notice of hearing for the Wawanesa filing on May 3, 2022 stating the following: “the Commissioner is currently still conducting his review of the Application and has not yet sufficient time to determine whether additional information is required or to determine whether the requested rate change is excessive, inadequate, and/or unfairly discriminatory.” The CDI and Wawanesa have subsequently held scheduling conferences and an order has been drafted with the date for the evidentiary hearing.

Many insurers and our actuarial consulting team will be actively following the Wawanesa filing to see how it plays out. The hearing may force the CDI to review the filing and the supporting data within a certain timeframe and determine whether any rate increase is actuarially justified by the company. Other insurers have chosen to waive the deemer on their rate filings and have continued discussions with the CDI with the hopes that the CDI will change its position at some point. Normally, the CDI and insurers want to avoid a hearing and work together to find a solution, which ultimately may have an insurer agreeing to a rate change lower than the filed amount. Depending on the outcome of the Wawanesa hearing, there may be more companies choosing the Wawanesa route and opting for a hearing with the CDI. That said, the CDI may also change its position at some point and start allowing rate increases for personal auto.

Class plan filings are an option

Although the CDI is not currently approving rate filings for personal auto, insurers are able to file and receive approval of revenue-neutral class plan changes. In a time where the rate level on an overall basis may be below target, insurers should be carefully reviewing their class plan and ensuring the rate adequacy is the same across all class risks. Otherwise, companies may see shifts in the mix business into classes that are less adequately priced resulting in a further deterioration of the overall loss ratio on the program. Additionally, insurers can update their auto physical damage model years and add the latest model year through a class plan filing. When submitting the model year filing, our actuarial consulting experts advise insurers to also include the annual symbol filing in the class plan filing.

Use an expert with years of California experience

Having an expert with years of experience preparing personal auto rate filings in California could improve the time to approval and potentially save a company a substantial amount of money. Whether it is preparing the actual rate filing or performing a review of a rate filing prepared by the company, an expert can provide guidance that will increase the chance of having the most successful filing.

Perr&Knight is a leading provider of actuarial and state filing services to insurers in California. Our actuarial consulting team actively follows the California market and is very familiar with all the filing requirements in the state. We prepare and submit more California filings than any other company. Our actuarial consulting experience includes expert testimony on rating filings and providing guidance to industry associations.

Please contact us for any insurance filings support that is needed with your California insurance products.

2022 Workers’ Compensation Financial Data Calls: What You Should Know

by Chris Curry

The 2022 reporting season is underway for workers’ compensation financial data calls to the National Council on Compensation Insurance (NCCI) and independent state workers’ compensation rating bureaus. This is a very busy season for reporting analysts and data quality staff who will need to aggregate, validate, and submit all the policy and claims financial detail for the year countrywide.

While there are very few changes in the calls and data capture this year, it remains important to keep tabs on updates from the bureaus. For instance:

The New Jersey rating bureau has issued a data call to collect COVID-19 pandemic data.
The California rating bureau is requiring the reporting of premium detail by month instead of year, starting with 1^st Quarter, 2022.
Other rating bureaus have updated their front-end and back-end processes. For instance, NCCI updated its system interface slightly, and the NCCI template for uploading data into the financial call system has also been modified.

These are not significant changes but could affect your workflow and timing.

Companies should use the financial call reporting season as an opportunity to closely review their data collection, aggregation, and submission processes for weaknesses and to make updates accordingly.

Closer scrutiny

The rating bureaus have been implementing more edits and cross-reporting reconciliations in recent years and are therefore catching more data reporting inconsistencies. The risk of incomplete or incorrect data has always been an issue for carriers—deadlines are strict and penalties for late reporting can be substantial. With even greater scrutiny from the rating bureaus, carriers are under even more pressure to ensure accurate, on-time reporting.

Statistical and financial data analysis and reporting are non-revenue-generating tasks that can consume precious bandwidth. Timely, accurate reporting draws time and attention from staff whose focus is generally directed toward high-value tasks. As a result, many carriers opt to partner with reporting specialists like Perr&Knight. Delegating reporting to insurance data services experts alleviates the stress and seasonal time crunch of accurate data preparation and submission.

Common reporting problems

During decades of providing insurance data services for workers’ compensation carriers across the nation, we have seen companies run into issues that can complicate reporting and compromise accuracy. Here are some of the most common pitfalls companies experience:

Calculating designated statistical reporting (DSR) premium levels—specifically, applying rating modifications and loss-cost multipliers correctly—can be challenging. Different policy types, rating bureaus, and loss-cost adoptions can create different methods of calculation. Lack of experience with this calculation can result in incorrect DSR premium level reporting.
Difficulty understanding how deductible programs work. Some portions of deductible policies are not reported to the bureau. For example, large deductible policies and claims must be excluded from most calls, whereas small deductible policies are generally included. Pay close attention to whether premiums and claims are reportable net of the deductible versus gross of the deductible when reporting. Plenty of carriers get tripped up here.
Issues related to comparisons between financial data and policy/claims data. Disconnects between unit statistical reporting (detailed audited premiums and claims reporting) and financial data calls will cause problems. Companies must uncover discrepancies and clear up edits in financial-to-statistical data reports before submission or risk penalties.

A head-start on accuracy

Working with experienced third-party support teams for reporting also ensures the cleanliness of data before submission to the rating bureaus. Before the Perr&Knight teams even submit data to bureaus, we aggregate all the required information and perform reconciliations to a company’s NAIC Annual Statement. If there is a difference, we work with our clients to resolve the error or create a detailed explanation for the bureau.

Offloading reporting to the experts at Perr&Knight protects against inaccuracy by ensuring all state-specific updates and requirements are taken into consideration. Our financial call reporting specialists make sure all the bases are covered.

The 2022 financial data calls show reporting is becoming more robust as it is further digitized. Data is under closer scrutiny and edits are stricter than ever. For many companies, working with a third-party insurance data services partner is the most efficient, cost-effective solution to ensure data accuracy and receive added support for this essential and resource-consuming task.

Offload this year’s NCCI data call to the reporting specialists at Perr&Knight. Contact us today to learn how we help.

A&H Insurance Advertising: Rules & Compliance Overview

by Susan Cornett

Advertisements are an integral part of any A&H insurance marketing plan. Insurance companies must find ways to get and keep the attention of a prospective insured. Given that the average American sees more than 4,000 advertisements each day, insurance companies look for creative ways to attract prospective insureds. However, it’s not as simple as writing a clever ad. Insurance companies are subject to various levels of regulation and process requirements.

What is an advertisement?

An advertisement is any material that is published, printed, scripted, or displayed to a consumer. This includes, but is not limited to, postcards, electronic communications, billboards, radio or TV ads, and websites. It can also include sales talks and presentations for use by agents, brokers, producers, and solicitors.
Advertisement includes advertising material sent with a policy when the policy is delivered and material used in the solicitation of renewals and reinstatements. It also extends to the use of all media for communications to the general public, to the use of all media for communications to specific members of the general public, and to the use of all media for communications by agents, brokers, producers and solicitors. The definition of advertisement casts a wide net.

What rules apply?

Insurance advertisements are subject to federal, state, and in some cases, local statutes, regulations, and ordinances. At the federal level, insurance companies must review HIPAA marketing regulations and the CAN-SPAM Act.
The HIPAA regulation defines marketing materials as a communication about a product or service that encourages recipients of the communication to purchase or use the product or service. Applicability of the act depends on the recipient and the service or product in the communication.
CAN-SPAM sets the rules for commercial email, establishes requirements for commercial messages, and provides penalties for violations.
In addition to the federal requirements, most states have adopted some version of the NAIC’s Advertisements of Accident and Sickness Insurance Model Regulation. This regulation defines advertisements and sets forth requirements for content, control, and filing requirements. Most states require insurance companies to file Medicare Supplement and long-term care ads, but some states require that all advertisements be filed. At the local level, city and county ordinances control signage, such as those seen in traffic medians or attached to light poles.

Who controls advertisements?

Insurance companies have a duty to maintain control of their advertisements, whether those ads are created by a home office employee, a broker, or an independent agent. Insurance companies must have procedures in place to establish and maintain a system of control over the content, form, and method of dissemination of all of its advertisements.
According to our insurance support services experts, best practices include a formal advertising approval process, tracking, and record retention. States rely on insurance companies to self-monitor their advertising procedures and require a signed certification of compliance each year with the annual statement filing.
While A&H advertising requirements can be overwhelming, it’s also important to note that most states have adopted the same basic requirements with respect to content. It’s usually not necessary to create 51 versions of an ad, although there are almost always state variations.

Next steps

Whether the advertising campaign is one jurisdiction or fifty-one jurisdictions, insurance companies must understand requirements for content, filing, and distribution. Contact the insurance consultants at Perr&Knight to learn how we can provide insurance support services for advertising review and the development of processes and procedures to manage advertising.

South Dakota Springing Forward with Innovation Waiver

by Ieisha James

Set to take effect on July 1, 2021, Senate Bill 55 will allow a waiver on some requirements for regulated access to South Dakota’s insurance market to allow insurers to test innovative insurance products or services.
The changes are primarily for property & casualty. Currently, the Department is not granting waivers for life insurance, health insurance, workers’ compensation insurance, or title insurance. The full list can be found in Senate Bill 55.
To participate in this market, interested parties need to submit an application to the Director of Insurance with information specific to the testing and provide the information detailed in the bill. A $2000 non-refundable fee applies to the application but, at the discretion of the director, may be reduced or removed if the applicant holds a license.
The term “innovation” and other key phrases are defined in the Senate Bill to avoid any vagueness.
Other states with similar enactments include Utah, with its “regulatory sandbox” program, which also allows for certain laws or regulations to be waived, and Arizona. Arizona’s House Bill 2277 is similar to South Dakota’s but is specific to the health care market and caters to individual and small group markets.
The concept of the sandbox is to allow new and small businesses the opportunity to test new and innovative ideas without all the heavily enforced regulation.
As we are seeing more states allow for modern initiatives such as the innovation waiver and regulatory sandbox, this is a pretty clear indication that this is a step in the right direction for the future of the insurance world. This provides some relief for start-ups and small businesses that took a hit during the pandemic by allowing trial and error to test insurance products or services without as much regulatory restraint.
Interested in finding out more about our services? Please contact Perr & Knight for guidance and assistance on all your insurance needs including but not limited to state filing submissions and actuarial services.

You Better Watch Out, You Better Not Cry, State Filing Requirement Changes Are Already Here!

by Jessica Witvoet

Authors: Neresa Torres, Jessica Witvoet, API, AIS, AINS, AIT, and Diane Karis,AINS, CPCU
At Perr&Knight, we submit thousands of product filings (rate, rule and form) a year to the various state Departments of Insurance (“DOIs”) – and 2020 has been no exception. In fact, in addition to our normal annual volume of insurance product filings, COVID-19 has increased the number of state filings for pandemic-related submissions.
Throughout the course of this year, we have noticed a few trends in how states’ DOIs are reviewing product filings. Since we handle a high volume of submissions across all jurisdictions and all lines of business, we are able to quickly identify variations from previous years.
Here’s what we have discovered.

States are getting pickier about the rules

Though states have always clearly articulated their filing guidelines, in preceding years DOIs were more likely to excuse minor deviations and process those filings anyway. DOIs in the past may have been inclined to give some leeway. This year, however, many states are opting to exercise their right to issue an objection or reject a filing outright if every detail is not spot on. Small errors that may have been “no big deal” in the past are now grounds for review or disapproval.
For example, Idaho is now closely scrutinizing the status of the filing in the domicile state. In the past, a “pending” entry or concurrent submission of domicile state was acceptable. Now, it is required that the program being filed is approved by the domiciliary state prior to submitting the filing in Idaho. Unless there is a reasonable explanation as to why, the filing will be rejected or subject to a 7-day turnaround for correction. If the information is not included at all, the filing is often disapproved without any opportunity for correction. Kansas has become more finicky, too, requiring each rule filing to have an accompanying form, or an objection will be issued. Other states have implemented guidance tools and checklists to ensure compliance with changing rules and requirements. For example, Massachusetts has created a four-part instruction guide to cover what is required for a filing to be considered acceptable.
The point is: don’t rely on DOIs being as forgiving as they have been in previous years. Make sure all your filing details are correct and complete.

Objections, rejections, and time-to-approval are increasing

Insurers are not the only ones experiencing administrative delays due to the pandemic. Many state DOIs shifted to remote working scenarios as well, and this has impacted their ability to issue speedy approvals. In California, for example, commercial, homeowners’, and other personal policies are taking longer to receive approval than in years past. The number of “pending” approvals has also increased.
Closer scrutiny by state DOIs is resulting in a higher number of rejections for minor issues. On the bright side, turnaround times for re-submitting are also faster. In many instances, we have seen DOIs allow re-submission within 7 to 10 days.
If your filing is rejected, correct the problem immediately and resubmit right away. Sophisticated software solutions like Perr&Knight’s StateFilings.com can help your teams keep a closer eye on filing status.

Other events impacting 2020

In addition to the disruptions caused by the pandemic, social unrest, and an election year, insurers are facing other challenges, such as recertification of the Terrorism Risk Insurance Act (TRIA), which requires all companies to update their language. Travel insurance products are also changing quickly as travel restrictions are lifted and added on a rolling basis worldwide.
This year’s regulatory requirements compel insurers to take a closer look at forms to make sure each meets the DOI’s current standards, which may have been updated recently.

Keeping track of the trends

2020 has been a year of surprise rejections for some insurance companies. It makes sense: companies only submitting a few filings per year – or who haven’t updated their product in recent years – lack the macro perspective to spot trends in DOI behavior.
When a rejection is received, it is important to determine as quickly as possible if the rejection is a unique occurrence or due to a change in a procedural requirement by the DOI. When submitting new filings, comparing against historical filings is no longer enough. Instead, it will be important to keep close track of current trends, as well as to look deeper into the DOI’s reasoning. This insight will help you avoid costly, time-consuming errors moving forward.
Internally, the Perr&Knight state filings department takes note of every rejection/objection we encounter and evaluates it to discover if it is part of a larger directional shift for that DOI, or simply a one-off. When we have questions about a particular DOI action, we contact the reviewer immediately and obtain a more thorough explanation. Because we handle such a high volume of nationwide filings, we remain in regular communication with every state DOI. These strong relationships enable us to obtain clarification on department actions that guide future filings on behalf of our clients.

Work with an experienced partner

Staying compliant today presents more of a challenge than it has in years past. Because the landscape is shifting quickly (as quickly as the insurance industry can shift), insurers are at higher risk of receiving rejections – especially those who submit a relatively low number of filings per year.
This is where working with an external insurance filings support partner can deliver a dramatic difference. Experienced state filings teams manage filings day-in and day-out. Their level of intimate knowledge of each transmittal requirement, variations between states, and regulatory expectations for each line of business can mean the difference between a smooth approvals process or being sent back to square one.
As 2020 draws to a close, the winds of change continue to shift. We expect more deviations from the status quo in the coming year. We’ll keep our clients posted on what we discover and how they can stay ahead of the game.

Questions about how to improve the efficiency of your rate filings? Our state filings experts can help.

Pioneering Insurance Automation

by Perr&Knight

The automation of time-consuming manual processes has unlocked ever-increasing levels of efficiency for businesses across the insurance industry. At Perr&Knight, we have long recognized the value of offloading process-heavy tasks to machines in order to free up actuaries, agents, and filing teams to focus on tasks requiring human judgment.
Let’s take a look at how our own automation evolution has opened up greater efficiencies internally, as well as for our clients.

A Breakthrough in Automation: Ratefilings.com

Anyone who has been in the insurance industry a few decades shudders to think of the inefficient early process of obtaining publicly available insurance company filings from the Department of Insurance for competitive analysis.
Perr&Knight was the first in the industry to aggregate these filings on RateFilings.com. In the early days, we physically sent someone down to the state department of insurance (DOI) building, equipped with a scanner. The rep would spend all day buried in the stacks, scanning documents until the job was done. From there, the person would head back to our office and transfer the scanned PDFs to the Data Entry Department, then spend hours manually entering metadata into the database. The average number of documents that could be entered per day was capped at about thirty per person.
Around 2005-06, NAIC launched the System for Electronic Rates & Forms Filing (SERFF), which greatly reduced the number of paper filings requiring scanning. SERFF also standardized many formats, further streamlining the process by increasing the uniformity of filing requirements.
As DOIs posted publicly-available filings to their websites, we did less scanning and more and more downloading – itself an important time-saver. The new downloadable, standardized SERFF format enabled our Data Entry department to copy and paste data instead of manually typing it out, further increasing accuracy and speed.
The massive breakthrough in automation came in 2008, when we developed “The Auto-Indexer,” a PDF parsing software program that could read a PDF document and copy and paste the data from the PDF directly to our RateFilings.com database.
Now, instead of entering the data, our human staff member was tasked only with auditing and validating that the data entered by the system was correct. Though all filings were reviewed by human eyes, the computer could automatically process straightforward filings as long as there were no errors. Complicated, high-priority filings received closer scrutiny from our staff.
With this advancement, productivity skyrocketed by 1,000%. We could now complete up to 300 rate filings per day per person, instead of a mere thirty.

Statefilings.com Expands the Scope of Automation

Perr&Knight’s StateFilings.com shares a similar history, but took automation even further. When StateFilings.com was launched in 2003, we would manually enter filings, objections, responses, and all correspondence into the system. Then we used similar parsing technology from the Auto Indexer to automate much of the data entry.
Further building on our process, Perr&Knight began talking with the NAIC, ultimately becoming the first vendor to integrate a new RESTful API developed by the NAIC into our StateFilings.com software.
Not only did this drastically reduce the amount of uploading and manual labor required to enter data, but the updates were virtually instant. The API also gave us easy access to granular filing data. For example, forms and rules could now be broken out from the filings. As such, Perr&Knight was the first company with an automated, real-time forms library and rule library.
Our clients could now access and search DOI documents and company forms instantly from any web-enabled device. The fees our clients paid to license the software were offset by time savings and ease of searching and segmenting data from a single, cloud-based location.

The Future of Automation at Perr&Knight

In the coming years, we envision increased use of automation for two-way data exchange.
As of right now, using the SERFF API, we have the ability to extract data from the DOI websites, but the information flow is limited to one direction. With two-way integration, we’ll begin to automate the filing creation process. Imagine one-click Bureau adoption filings and auto-generated actuarial support for rate change filings.
Perr&Knight is continuing to develop software tools that will ultimately become a bridge between Statefilings.com and an insurance company’s IT systems thus eliminating the need for manual handoff and reducing the chance of errors.
Working with rate filing teams, actuaries, and IT departments, we’re developing and brainstorming new software and systems that offload more time-consuming burdens to machines, so valuable human teams can direct their focus where it’s needed most.

Looking for ways your company can streamline state filings or other operational procedures? Our insurance technology experts are here to help.

Monitor Agent Licensing in Real Time with License Reporter

by Diane Karis

Maintaining current licensing information for insurance-producers is a crucial but time-consuming task. Many agencies are still tracking upcoming renewals and expirations on spreadsheets housed on internal servers or individual computers. This approach might work reasonably well, provided agents are licensed in a limited number of jurisdictions.
However, when more agents are added to the roster (or an agency expands their services into more territories, or the one person who has been tasked with monitoring renewals for the last decade leaves the organization), keeping track of the details can quickly devolve into a paperwork nightmare.
Perr&Knight has been offering renewals as part of our insurance licensing services for years. Our team submits, monitors and tracks producer licensing in all jurisdictions across all lines of business. Eight years ago, we developed software enabling us internally to track and monitor licensing status. We have recently released an updated version that our insurance licensing clients now have the ability to access via online portal.

Introducing the new License Reporter

LicenseReporter.com is Perr&Knight’s online license reporting solution for our current insurance licensing services clients. This web-based software permits clients to log in via any web-enabled device to check the status of recent, past, and upcoming renewals. While our licensing department team continues to manually manage the submission of forms to state Departments of Insurance (DOI) on behalf of insurance agents and agencies, LicenseReporter.com enables our clients to access a transparent view of the various licensing processes.
Using LicenseReporter.com, license and appointment data can be searched by a range of key criteria, including:

Agent Name
Agency Name
Agency & Affiliated Agents
State
Expiration Dates (date range)
Line of Authority
License Type

Increase transparency, reduce risk

LicenseReporter.com provides a new level of transparency into the insurance licensing and renewals timeline on a nationwide scale. By increasing insight into the licensing process, agencies establish more control, thus reducing the risk of information falling into a black hole or becoming trapped in administrative purgatory upon in-house staff turnover.
LicenseReporter.com was developed to increase efficiency for Perr&Knight’s insurance licensing services teams, but also provides the following valuable benefits for our clients:
Eliminate email back-and-forth – Answer questions immediately by letting HR managers or licensing analysts view the current status of all submissions, 24/7, from any web-enabled device
Reduce the risk of accidental expiration – Ensure all agents are operating with current licenses
Become aware of upcoming renewals – Monitor upcoming renewals
Ensure correct jurisdictional licensing – Confirm agents are properly licensed in all areas before expanding business into new territories
Access proof of current license – LicenseReporter.com enables us to attach relevant documents, including a copy of the agent’s current license, or web verification from the state, saving space in the file cabinet and the time required to access a copy of the license, if necessary

Who should use Perr&Knight’s producer licensing and appointment services?

We manage licensing services for agencies of all sizes and scope. However, for certain agencies, our licensing services (including LicenseReporter.com) can be especially beneficial. These agencies include:

Insurance start-ups
Insurtech companies
Agencies with limited in-house support
Agencies operating in 5 or more states

Peace of mind managing license renewals

We developed LicenseReporter.com to solve an important issue that drains valuable time and resources from insurance agencies. By offloading the licensing process onto Perr&Knight’s experienced producer licensing services team then monitoring progress via online portal, insurance agencies can make sure all agent licenses are up to date while freeing their internal teams from managing minutiae.

Is your agency staff getting buried by license renewals? Let our licensing department lighten your burden.

Why Stat Reporting Shouldn’t Be an Afterthought

by Jason Hudson

Authors: Jason Hudson, Principal Director, Statistical Reporting Services, and Mark Nawrath, Principal Director, Account Management
When insurance companies prepare to implement new software for policy and claims administration, regulatory reporting of the data captured is an afterthought. What appear to be turnkey systems often turn out to require more retrofitting and configuration than initially expected to meet statistical reporting requirements, resulting in an increase in investment and a longer timeline to launch.
Here’s why it’s necessary to consider statistical reporting needs throughout the entire development and implementation process.

Powerful and flexible modern systems…they require more configuration

Legacy technology (early mainframe systems) demanded a ton of programming to account for every possible scenario required for policy and claims administration. Building the complex logic required to encode, transform and format data into compliant statistical plan formats was an assumed part of the implementation process.
However, when client server technology started to take off in the 1990s and 2000s, new client-server-based technology vendors decided not to invest in complex logic to comply with statistical reporting mandates. These new products were like warm Jell-O waiting to be molded: they had the ingredients to perform policy and claims administration processing, but required heavy configuration and customization, not just to write insurance business (that is, all the transaction sets in a business life cycle—endorsement transactions, change renewals, cancellations, etc.), but to conform to the regulatory mandates for statistical reporting. It was up to insurance companies to make sure they were covered.
In plain terms: many of today’s systems are set up for collecting information, but how they store data on the back end is not designed to meet statistical reporting requirements.

Set yourself up for stat reporting success

In the rush to get new products to market, insurance companies often get caught up in launching their new system (or product or policy) as quickly as possible. Today’s client-server-based systems are not less capable than previous systems, they’re just more malleable. In providing insurance companies with more flexibility, the vendors put the onus on the insurance companies to configure their systems to perform and ensure compliance. Unfortunately, companies tend to focus on business functions (product rating, forms, coverages, claims handling, etc.) and overlook the importance of collecting and formatting specific transaction sets and data points needed to meet regulatory standards. This is why it’s so crucial to consider statistical reporting requirements from the very outset of your new technology implementation. Here are some strategies that work:

Involve the right people from the start

Bringing statistical reporting compliance stakeholders to the table late in the game increases the odds of revealing functionality and data needs previously unaccounted in defining implementation specifications. Therefore, it’s important to have statistical reporting subject matter experts work together with experts in rating, underwriting and claims, early in the process to understand what products, coverages and claim events are contemplated and to define the transaction sets and data elements required.

Account for configuration in your budget

Because of the heavy amount of programming required for legacy systems, it was very difficult to ascertain exactly how much was invested in programming for statistical reporting. These days, it’s easier to identify and quantify. Avoid sticker shock on the final project by earmarking a section of the budget for statistical reporting requirements definition, configuration and testing.

Clarify your specifications

Identify the statistical file generation processes you’re currently using to inform your needs for your new system. From there, generate a comprehensive list of specifications and make sure they are reviewed by the teams who will be responsible for statistical reporting. Statistical reporting subject matter experts and third-party reporting consultants can come in handy here, as they can make you aware of current industry best practices and other information “you don’t know that you don’t know.”

Produce usable test policy data

One part of the transition that is often overlooked is the availability of “production like test data”, essential to ensure completeness in the encoding/transformation process and often required in bureau electronic testing certifications. A number of statistical agents and rating bureaus require you to compare the captured and encoded statistical data (for risks, coverages, policy and claims transactions) to what is being produced on front-end for the insured. That means classifications of business, coverages being offered, rates and premium amounts must be a direct replica on the back end for statistical reporting process. Account for this in your roll-out plan and dedicate appropriate resources for it.

Don’t rely on your data warehouse for stat reporting

Data warehouse solutions are typically not architected to satisfy statistical reporting mandates (including rating, premium and claims detail at the line/subline/coverage/transaction level, policy and endorsement form data and onset/offset entries for regular and out of sequence endorsements). Rather than making your data warehouse too complex and robust, let your statistical reporting experts and programmers work with native data that comes from policy and claims administration systems.

Create a comprehensive game plan

Develop a proactive strategy to test how your system will issue policies and transactions once policies become enforced. Don’t make the mistake of testing front-end functionality without an end-to-end review of how those policies and claims get formulated in comparison to the statistical data that you will also be collecting on the back end.
Involving an outside insurance reporting and development consultant to guide you through the process can be especially valuable here. At Perr&Knight, we offer workshops as a part of our Statistical Reporting Solution service offering. These workshops involve all relevant stakeholders and cover key topics that will inform the game plan that guides you forward.
In these multi-day workshops, we discuss with your teams the interlacing of statistical reporting file creation and testing processes into your information technology objectives, the risks associated with delivering an improved statistical reporting capability, and the coordination of your team and third-party participants to schedule projects related to the implementation of an enhanced statistical reporting solution. The final deliverable to you is an evaluation of strengths, potential vulnerabilities, and a plan for moving ahead that includes clear roles and responsibilities, cost projections and duration estimates. Whether you decide to partner with us or not, you end up with impartial strategy for implementation that you can use as a roadmap.
Because statistical reporting is not seen as revenue-generating aspect of the business, it’s often overlooked during technology development. However, doing so only short-changes you on the back end of your project implementation, as teams scramble to retrofit new systems to meet statistical reporting mandates. Instead, keep statistical reporting requirements in mind straight from the start and save yourself the headache of having to go back and make costly corrections – or being fined for non-compliance.

Want to discuss how to make statistical reporting more manageable for your in-house staff? Our insurance technology experts can help.

4 Hurdles to Overcome When Considering a Cannabis Product Offering

by Kyle Hales

The times certainly are a-changin’. As of this publication, thirty states have legalized cannabis use in some form, with eight approving marijuana outright for recreation. As new avenues open up for production and distribution of plants, oils, edibles and the wide variety of other cannabis-related consumer products and medicines, new insurance product development opportunities emerge for companies to provide coverage for every corner of this fledgling market.
As cannabis widens in legal acceptance, the insurance industry is realizing that the market demand for coverage will continue to grow (no pun intended). Before wide-spread legalization, cannabis coverage was part of the non-admitted market; however, as legalization spreads, more and more regulators want companies to write coverage on an admitted basis, which will increase regulation.
The road to cannabis-related insurance product development is still under construction. There are bumps and unforeseen detours along the way. Here are four hurdles to prepare for as you gear up to offer coverage for cannabis products.

Hurdle #1: State vs. federal laws

No matter what is happening on a state level, the bottom line is: according to the federal government, marijuana is still a schedule I controlled substance. It occupies the same classification as heroin, LSD, and peyote. This throws a measure of uncertainty into the entire line of coverage. What if the Feds start cracking down on cannabis companies? If your company pays a claim, could your organization be held liable for participating in what the federal government considers to be a black market? Meanwhile, on a more niche level, certain insurance coverages are regulated under federal standards, such as terrorism and most types of flood insurance. Would your clients be eligible to purchase TRIA or flood insurance? As of now, the answers are unclear.
Just because an insurance product is approved at the state level doesn’t mean you’re fully in the clear to proceed. When the state governing body approves the legality of a product, from an insurance standpoint, the product is fine. However, it’s up to the judicial branch to interpret the contracts. The courts will determine the mechanics of coverage, and those outcomes are still being decided.

Hurdle #2: A long learning curve

Cannabis coverage is uncharted territory, with a lengthy education process for everyone involved. Agents need to be informed as to how the product works, what it covers, what it doesn’t, etc. This information must be sorted out, then communicated to policyholders. Regulators, claims handlers, underwriters—everyone along the entire insurance pipeline is tasked with learning about the new norms and standards for this unconventional product. There are still many ambiguities that require clarification and dissemination among insurance professionals.

Hurdle #3: Product development and pricing challenges

Cannabis insurance product development and pricing are wide open at this point since there is no specific historical information to reference regarding the frequency and severity of claims. It’s also difficult to ascertain an accurate exposure base. Yes, borrowing from other industries that are similar in scope and nature such as tobacco, agriculture and liquor liability can provide the broad strokes. However, when you’re developing a form or trying to determine rates, there’s no specific past data from which to draw. Rate and form development in the cannabis business require a “use your best guess for now” approach.

Hurdle #4: Clarifying what/whom you want to cover

The cannabis industry has three main categories that will require coverage: producers (growers), processors, and distributors. Depending on who you’re insuring, coverage offerings could differ greatly.
Growers and processors require a product liability-type coverage. They will be most concerned with coverage related to product contamination, accidental or deliberate tampering, or recalls. They’ll also need coverage for equipment, general liability, building structure coverage, non-employee slip-and-falls—standard manufacturing-type policies that have nothing to do with cannabis itself.
On the other hand, distributors will need coverage that relates mostly to their place of business, not unlike the types of coverage that apply to a bar or liquor store. As the public consumes the product on their premises, distributors will want to protect themselves against liability from over-serving, fights between customers, product spoilage, etc.

Where do you go from here?

Now that you’re aware of the hurdles, the smartest step is to start drafting a plan. Consider getting approval for products related to one aspect of the industry (production, processing or distribution), then expanding from there. Like all aspects of insurance, regulatory requirements differ by state. Add to that the push-and-pull between state and federal legality, and suddenly the variables multiply exponentially. As mentioned above, there is not a lot of precedent here to draw from, so it’s important to time and proceed carefully. If your company is not set up internally to handle the mountain of research required, work with a proven insurance services provider who already possesses experience drafting policies. Their deliberate methodology and expertise can save you from a significant drain on time and resources.
Cannabis insurance is still uncharted territory with a lot of work to be done. However, if you take your time and proceed carefully, you’ll be in the best position to break in early to this “budding” market opportunity.

At Perr&Knight, our insurance product development experts have already received approvals in a number of states for cannabis-related insurance product. If you are thinking of expanding into cannabis coverage, contact us today to discuss your strategy.

California Personal Auto Filings: Avoiding the Pitfalls

by Dee Dee Mays

Any companies with a personal auto program in California who haven’t submitted a rate or class plan filing within the last couple of years may be in for a surprise when they submit their next filing.
Personal auto filings have been coming under increased scrutiny by the California Department of Insurance (“the Department”) as the state has taken a stricter view of the existing personal auto regulations. This is likely in part due to the pressure from Consumer Groups to ensure that the premiums charged to consumers are fair and are not excessive.
Most notably, ProPublica published a report stating that poor and minority communities face significantly higher premiums than their counterparts in more affluent neighborhoods. Although the validity of the results has been questioned, the ProPublica report has brought this issue to the forefront, which has caused the Department to take a closer look at zip code rating. Other Consumer Groups have also raised concerns about other items in personal auto filings. All of this combined with the Department’s internal review has resulted in changes that will have a material impact on personal auto filings in California. Many companies are learning this the hard way by submitting California auto filings without taking into consideration the latest changes made by the Department.

Unfamiliarity with Changes Can Result in Undesirable Revisions

If your company is not aware of the latest requirements for California auto filings, you may be required to make significant, unexpected changes during the filing review process. These could include costly revisions such as reducing rate levels below proposed rate levels; reducing existing fees used with the program; revising rates charged by zip code without consideration of the competitor information; revising class plan factors to be consistent with the Department’s request; or paying for a consumer group’s intervention on the filing.
In order to make sure that possible changes required during the filing review will be in your company’s best interest, companies should review the pros and cons that could result from submitting a filing.

Consumer Group Intervention

A review of California rate change filings shows that many companies file rate changes of +6.9%. This is due to the regulation stating that the commissioner must hold a rate hearing upon timely request by a Consumer Group for a rate change that exceeds +7% in a personal lines filing. However, filing a rate change less than +7% will not prevent a consumer group from intervening in the filing if they think the proposed rates are excessive or unfairly discriminatory, even if the filing is for a proposed rate decrease. Also, the commissioner at his discretion can decide that a rate hearing is necessary for any rate change including ones below +6.9%. That said, the Department does its best to mediate between all parties involved in the filing so that a rate hearing can be avoided. For rate increase filings at or above the +7% threshold, the Department and the Consumer Group must be satisfied with the support for the proposed rate change to avoid a rate hearing.
The following link contains a list by year of the filings that have been intervened on by consumer groups, along with the cost that was paid by the insurance company.

Beware of the Recent Change in the Filing Review Process

One of the biggest changes that has occurred is with the Frequency and Severity Band assignments by zip code. Even if you are not proposing changes to these class plan factors, the Department will require a review of them, which is likely to result in needed changes. This review will need to be done strictly in accordance with regulations, including the requirements for use of an alternative dataset for any zip codes that lack credibility. Companies should also be aware that the Department has been relying more heavily on the indications from the sequential analysis and the proposed factors need to be consistent with the indications for all class plan factors, including class plan factors where the company may not have been intending to propose any changes.
Companies should also take note of the following items regarding the review of rate filings:

All rate changes must be within the range of allowable changes for each coverage;
Calendar year or calendar quarter data derived from the development triangles should be consistent with the corresponding data in the trend exhibits or it will be questioned by the Department; and
Fee amounts charged to policyholders may need to be supported based on underlying expenses even if no changes are proposed, particularly if the fees are high.

The above are just some of the most important items when it comes to a California personal auto rate and class plan filing. As always, it is important to stay abreast of the latest changes in the California auto filings review process.

What You Don’t Know Might Hurt You

In complex jurisdictions like California, it’s smart to partner with experts who can provide insurance filing support that helps you carefully navigate the regulatory environment. For example, the Department regulations have been amended to reflect the new 21% federal corporate income tax rate, effectively lowering the maximum allowable rates for all P&C lines subject to Proposition 103. Excessive rates may not remain in effect under California regulations. If your company needs to take a rate decrease, you should be filing one. The Department does annual reviews of the financial results of all companies by line of business and has required companies to submit filings supporting that their filed rates are not excessive.
To assist you with personal auto programs and avoid the pitfalls of filing in California, work with experienced consulting actuaries who have a complete understanding of the Department’s latest positions and whose insurance filings support service includes an active dialog with the Department. Look for partners who have assisted other insurance companies in achieving the best possible results on filings that have been intervened on by consumers groups.