A Claims Tale Of Three Little Managers And Their Review Programs

My Take On The Old Story Of The Three Little Pigs

Once upon a time there were three claims managers who were told by their CEO to go out and make sure they have the best organization possible. Since they all knew that the best way to a good organization was to develop process and procedures and make sure all who worked there understood them, that’s just what they did.  Each built an oversight program to ensure all was well and to prevent being attacked by all those wolves out there.

The first manager built a review program out of straw, the second out of sticks and the third out of bricks…..

Please work with me here as I am trying to be metaphorical.

The Manager Review of Straw

The first manager was a proud manager. She knew she had a good group and they worked just fine. She had instructed them on her way of doing things and had provided sufficient training to let them know was expected. Her “straw” review program was to wait for something to happen and then if there was a problem to fix it.  One day a huge claim showed up on her desk. She had never seen or heard of this claim, but it was big – the type of claim that could really cause her a problem. Well that claim, it turns out, had been in the office for over a year. Information had been received to provide sufficient warning for everyone to make sure the company was ready. If only she had known about it.

After dealing with “fixing” the problem a knock came on the door. It was the manager’s big reinsurance company.  This reinsurer was large and seemed to come out of no where.  The manager was shocked.  This reinsurer said….”manager, manager, let me come in”  the manager responded “not by the hair of my chinny chin chin!” The reinsurer responded, “then I will huff and I will puff and I will blow your department down.”  And that’s exactly what the reinsurer did.

The manager lost his house of straw and somehow landed a new job at her manager friend who said come on over you will feel protected in my department of sticks.

The Manager Review of Sticks

The Manger of Straw’s friend, the Manager of Sticks, sat her down and told her how it was going to be.  We here in the land of sticks are prepared for any possible problem. We have a wonderful review program made of sticks.  This program is so good we can prevent all those problems that got you blown down in the house of straw. We also have procedures in place, the Manager of Sticks said, but we oversee it all with regular reviews. We spend time reviewing claim files and recoding all that information on these sheets of paper.  We catch it all before a problem arises so he told the Manager of Straw that she will be fine here in the house of sticks.

The stick reviews went on every quarter. The sticks were filled with all this great information and captured all this detail about the claims and what was working and not working. The problem is the sticks piled up and once they were in that pile it was hard to understand what was working. Someone had to put the sticks in an order to really understand how many problem sticks there were. Low and behold a day came when a whole series of claims came in all seemingly insignificant.  It turns out there was a trend and a real problem brewing with a particular type of claim.  Individually they seemed fine, collectively they were significantly under reserved. Those sticks had the information but it was so spread out and disorganized that the information was lost. Without the information available, the company rewrote that book of business and was now going to face a very big problem to explain to the shareholders.

The Manager of Sticks was about to get a knock on the door!

Knock knock….”who is it” asked the Manager of Sticks?  It’s the Chief Underwriting Officer, the Chief Financial Officer and the CEO. See it turns out that they had some explaining to do to the board about a reserve charge that seemed to have come out of no where. “Manager Manager please let us in” with the Manager of Straw next to him nodding her head thinking oh I know what’s next, the Manager of Sticks responded “not by the hair of my chinny chin chin.” Well those executives were not about to be shut out and said “then we will huff and we will puff and we will blow your house in!” and that is exactly what they did.

Amazingly, the Manager of Sticks and the Manager of Straw were able to find jobs again in their friend the Manager of Brick’s company.

The Manager Review of Bricks

Working for the Manager of Bricks was actually not as bad as people thought it would be. Yes he was a tough manager and expected a lot from his people, but in the end he wanted them and the organization to succeed. The Manager of Bricks was keenly aware that when procedures were working and followed there was less of a chance of surprise. He also knew that the way to avoid those surprises was to have a very specific audit and oversight program in place. Because the Manager of Bricks also knew that using technology in the right way was a benefit, he made sure he had an oversight tool in place to manage the review process and make sure he captured, and not wasted, all the hard work performed by his reviewers.

The Manger of Straw and the Manager of Sticks had never seen anything like it.  All the reviews were coordinated in one place online (of course they used the Audit Portal).  Issues were categorized and follow-ups documented.  Trends just popped off various dashboards and made it so simple to proactively run the department.

Then one day there was a knock on the door.  It was the big bad mean regulator trying to find a violation.  “Manager, manager let me come in” the regulator yelled.  The manager of Bricks responded….”sure come on in and look around.” The regulator had apparently wanted to see the offices the Managers of Straw and Sticks but there was nothing left there to see.  The Manager of Bricks had nothing to fear.  When the regulator asked for controls and a plan it was all ready to be shown.  Issues that had been identified and corrective action plans were clearly in place and the regulator was pleasantly surprised. After giving the Manager of Bricks a clean bill oh health he left with no adverse claims findings.

Don’t you love a good story? Maybe if we were all like the Manager of Bricks things would be better!

At Lanzko we can help shore up operations to become more like the Manager of Bricks using our Audit Portal application. Give us a call to learn more.

 

Claim Reviews Empower Better Decisions By Putting Critical Information In Hand

Are making blind decisions the way to go?

Insurance is as much about having the right information at the right time as anything. Whether it’s an underwriting choice to price a risk correctly or a claim decision to when to pay a claim, having the best data available can make or break an organization. Despite this fact, many organizations fail to take advantage of tools and rights available to them prior to making critical business decisions (see our previous post “The Importance of the Pre Bind Claims Review in the Reinsurance Context“).

A reinsurance company looking to bind a new risk, or an excess carrier following the fortunes of a primary, should not leave decision making to what is found on a loss run or in an application.  Loss runs can be misleading without an understanding of what is behind them. At Lanzko we recently found an audit where the underlying carrier failed to reserve for expense in what was a well run claims department.  In that particular company, expense reserves were handled by actuarial. Our client had not been aware of this and was able to adjust pricing accordingly, avoiding a significant underpricing of the risk.

It is important to understand that most reinsurance or excess contracts allow companies to inspect the organizations they underwrite.  If this right is available then why not take advantage of it to learn more information? Data runs can give you a basic overview of a firm’s existing losses, but they will do little to give you an understanding of the underlying organization that created those numbers.  To get a complete picture of how a claims department functions one has to go beyond the numbers and conduct a claims department and file review.

Resources, Resources, Resources

Not every account can be reviewed.  Whether you in-source or outsource claims reviews, the costs can add up. There are also other things that come to mind when determining when a review is cost effective.  If you conduct reviews using claims staff focused on handling claims there is a risk that the time out of the office is not as valuable as the time spent on existing file management. It should also be noted that in-house claims staff may not be properly equipped to understand other parts of the operation they are reviewing.

If you outsource, it may increase your costs and your vendor may not provide enough value for the report they provide. Unfortunately, many companies do not even budget for a review program. It was suggested to me that if you had a $100 million book of business and set a budget of  0.0025% of premium you would be able to conduct an outsourced reviews of your top 15 accounts.

Is 0.0025% of premium a reasonable cost to pay to get better information about the risks you underwrite?

8 reasons when a claims review becomes critical

Whether it’s a resource allocation issue, or just simply enough time, getting to conduct reviews regularly may be difficult. Nonetheless, there are times when a review must be done and should seriously be considered in these situations:

  1. Account Renewal
  2. Late, inadequate or infrequent claim reports
  3. Significant management changes or turnover
  4. Financial problems with Cedent or Primary
  5. Loss results are too good to be true
  6. Unexpected claims in lines of business
  7. Historically volatile product lines
  8. Change in company participation

A successful review means going beyond the claims files

Reviewing the highest exposure claims is certainly of value, however it will not give you a complete picture of the organization and their ability to consistently manage claims. High exposure claims are almost always reviewed by various layers of management and are usually well worked up. Despite this, many organizations only choose to review those files that may impact their layer.  What about the files that don’t make it to the senior level?

Understanding the process for how claims move through the system is critical to ensuring they are properly reserved and manged. Consistent claims handling comes from an organization that has good process, strong systems, good technical results and an oversight program. When looking at a claims department you need to look at the whole operation to learn more about:

  • Organizational overview and structure
  • Authority levels
  • Systems
  • Management/Staff Experience
  • Reserve Management and Expense Control
  • Quality, Controls and Compliance
  • Best practices
  • Spend management (vendors and counsel)

Doing a claims review is not just smart business, it is becoming a requirement

In Europe, new risk management standards are being implemented as part of sweeping regulatory changes contained in Solvency II. As part of these new regulations, companies that rely on others for their claims are going to be more responsible to ensure those third parties are operating effectively. This will effect everyone from reinsurance companies to cover holders to those who outsource claims to third-party administrators. The United Kingdom’s Financial Services Authority (FSA) described it best in a proposed CEO letter about reserve adequacy when they wrote:

[W]e expect firms to take a considered and proportionate approach to the reserve-setting process, and have robust processes in place which adequately capture the risks associated with an increasingly challenging claims environment. We expect such processes to include, as a minimum, the monitoring and assessment of:

  • The adequacy of individual case reserves;
  • Underlying claims processes;
  • The adequacy of data quality; and,
  • The reserve projection and selection process.

Claim reviews, if not already being done, will be a requirement in order to truly understand the “underlying claims process” as well as the “adequacy of individual case reserves.”  If you are not able to answer these questions you may be subjecting yourself to significant regulatory scrutiny.

Create a process around your process

The importance of these reviews cannot be overstated. But having accepted the fact that you need to do more reviews, make sure you are managing that process properly.  Develop a “best practices” guideline for claims reviews which should include:

  • When reviews are done and what are triggering events for the reviews (see examples above)
  • How are files selected for claim reviews
  • Outline different types of reviews with standard objectives
  • What department criteria will be reviewed and what claim file criteria will be examined
  • Understand who will be doing the reviews (claim handlers may be good at reviewing a claim file but may lack in experience when it comes to other operational aspects of a department)
  • Have a standard understandable rating system
  • Manage your claim reviews in a central location
  • Document the process to be able to respond to inquires from interested parties (regulators and stakeholders)

Even if you decide to outsource your claim reviews, it is important that you ensure your vendors have a documented process to provide consistent reviews and can maintain appropriate records.

When managed correctly, a proper claims review program can save the company from making bad decisions. Given that the costs, relative to the risk, are relatively minor, along with changes in regulation and oversight requirements, failing to make claims reviews a regular part of your organization could be a critical mistake.

The Need For Claim Auditing In Catastrophe Loss Situations Such As The Gulf Tragedy

Claim auditing is an essential tool to ensure best practices and timely claim payouts

Obviously the tragedy caused by the Deepwater Horizon accident will be felt for years, if not decades to come. I have previously commented on claims issues surrounding this loss that have yet to hit the industry in my Commentary: Expect Gulf Oil Slick Claims To be Extensive And Impact Multiple Lines of Business. Recently there have been numerous reports about the speed and adequacy of claim payments being made by BP, including a statement by President Obama, that White House will be watching the claims process closely (see White House Statement of June 7, 2010).  On June 9, 2010 it was reported that Admiral Thad Allen met with BP to ensure “every legitimate claim is honored and paid in an efficient manner” (see UPI – Allen, BP Meet on Claims Process). And even more recently, the administration is seeking BP to establish a compensation fund so the Federal Government can manage the claims process (see White House: Obama poised to take claims processing away from BP unless it changes system).

Managing this enormous claims undertaking won’t be easy and will be criticized for years to come. Regardless, claims auditing is a way to ensure ongoing claims practices are fair and expeditious.

The enormity of the claims process

While changing daily, there are some reports, BP has processed over 51,000 claims and paid over $62 million (see BP Oil Spill Claims Reach $1.6 Billion). With over 25 claims offices and some 600 claims professionals working to resolve matters, this is one of the largest claims organizaitons operating in this country focused on one event.

From a claims management perspective, handling this many claims is an enormous task that is fraught with potential problems and criticisms.  It is a massive undertaking rivaling claims organizations for some of the largest insurance companies for all lines of business. Keep in mind that it all had to be established in a matter of a few short weeks.

While there is no easy way to manage such an onslaught, there are a few things that can be done to make sure best practices and timely compliance is occurring: Internal reviews and audits.

Audit to ensure compliance and look for waste

There are a variety of Audits that should be explored when faced with a large catastrophe situation. A proper audit can look for weaknesses in the operation, provide valuable feedback to improve those weaknesses and further protect against waste and mismanagement. In a large CAT loss situations, such as in the Gulf tragedy, audits should be an essential element of the process.

3 Claim audits that should be done, preferably by a third party not associated with those managing the claims, can include:

  1. Best practices and procedural reviews to ensure there are no delays in payments, the claims staff is appropriately trained, and to identify inefficient processes.  When done correctly, and regularly, these reviews can save money and ensure appropriate payments are being processed timely and appropriately.
  2. Anti-fraud assessments are needed to ensure fraud is identified and prevented. The reality is in any catastrophe situation the unscrupulous will come out of the wood works to claim all sorts of false damages. Fraud diverts resources away from legitimate claims and will only create further delays in the claims process. Ensuring fraud is properly detected, and ensuring law enforcement aggressively prosecutes those involved, is essential.
  3. Vendor selection and compliance must be reviewed to ensure appropriate vendors are being hired and “kept honest” to help those who have been damaged. Many vendors will say they can handle certain types of losses or repairs when the reality is they are not staffed nor experienced in the areas they claim to be.  A proper vetting process and regular audits of those vendors, is the best way to ensure compliance and prevent waste (see How Do You Effectively Manage A TPA? Speak Up And Be Active!).

Audits performed periodically can ensure ongoing quality claims services, and help to see if claims are being handled consistently from office to office. Successes from one office can then be passed to others, and failures can be used as learning experiences to prevent future problems.

What other audits should be done in the Catastrophe loss situation?