Download

7 Biases Customers Have About Risks

To provide insurance services based on consumers' needs, we should pause and try to understand deeply how they measure risks.

|

Although risk is at the center of insurance, there is a question that is not asked enough: How do we measure risks?

When you ask an actuary to measure the likelihood of occurrence for a specific risk in a year, (s)he uses models based on various data sets. However, none of us use actuarial models in our daily life to measure risk (including actuaries). We simply tap our memories about that risk. If memories are vivid, we think that risk is higher.

Using memories does not sound like the best way to measure a risk, so why are we so simple and superficial in our daily lives?

Contrary to popular belief, our brains often mislead us, and the problems also affect hard missions like measuring the probability of an event occurrence. Here are seven cognitive bias and shortcuts that lead us to make wrong decisions about risks.

1. Availability Heuristic

The stronger our memories, the stronger our emotions. While measuring the probability of a risk, we check our memories based on:

  • Recent events
  • Frequent events
  • Tragic events
  • Unexpected events

Negative events are easier to remember. It is quite possible that we exaggerate risks in such cases. For this reason, car insurance, which has high loss frequency, is one of the biggest lines.

2. Myopia

No matter how healthy our eyes are, our brains have trouble seeing the distant future. Because our most basic instant is survival, we focus too much on today and do not pay attention to risks in the future.

Even if we do not save enough today for retirement, we do not think that we will face income problems. This explains why people tend to buy mobile phones instead of life insurance.

3. Amnesia

Even as we exaggerate recent events, we forget them quickly. Insurance penetration increases rapidly after a natural disaster but declines to the previous level in few years.

After Hurricane Katrina, the number of flood insurance policies in the U.S. grew by 14%, which is three to four times the growth rates observed in previous years. Policy numbers dropped to pre-Katrina levels in just three years.

4. Overconfidence

Another bias is the tendency to exaggerate our talent and performance. Self-confidence is usually a good thing, but having too much of it can cause us to underestimate the risks. 

Among car drivers in the U.S., 90% said they were better than average.

5. Illusion of Control

Thinking we have full control in our lives can make us insensitive to risks. There are people who afraid to travel by plane on one side, and people who drive motorcycles on the other…. Sometimes one person can belong to both groups.

Being injured or dying while riding a motorcycle is much more likely than an airplane crash, but we might take that risk because we have the illusion of control.

See also: COVID-19: Actuaries Now All Wrong  

6. Optimism

Being optimistic about the future is one of the most beneficial features of humankind. Based on optimism, we make long-term investments, have children and go to work every day. But when it comes to risk management, being optimistic can be misleading.

People are more balanced when considering good things and bad things in their past. But while thinking about the future we generally give weight to good things. This optimism might prevent us from seeing possible risks.

7. Black Swans

All swans were thought to be white until the Australian continent was discovered. Black swans appeared on the continent, and this term is used as a metaphor for hard-to-predict, tragic and rare events: 9/11 attacks, the 2008 economic crisis and now COVID-19.

Black swans are ignored until they happen. After thatm the effects are highly exaggerated. Finally, at some point, they are ignored again. That means today's black swan COVID-19 is a great opportunity for the insurance industry, at least for the next 10 years, just as the terror insurance market was in the U.S. after the 9/11 attacks.

Behavioral Insurance

To provide an insurance service based on consumers' needs, we should stop for a bit and try to understand deeply how they measure risks. As the gap increases between insurers' and consumers' considerations about risks, it becomes much more difficult to meet their expectations.

Behavioral economic theories can help insurers in many areas, from product development to pricing, from marketing to claim managements. It is time to meet with the “behavioral insurance” approach beyond the traditional insurance practice based on statistics and calculations.


Hasan Meral

Profile picture for user HasanMeral

Hasan Meral

Hasan Meral is the head of product and process management at Unico Insurance. He has a BA in actuarial science, an MA in insurance and a PhD in banking.

A Quarantine Dispatch on the Insurtech Trio

Let’s be frank. Of Lemonade, Root and Metromile, only the latest figures from Root show the trajectory expected for a startup in growth phase.

||||||

Since the first “Five Dispatches from InsurTech Survival Island,” I've been partnering with Adrian Jones and in recent months with Sri, to analyze quarterly statutory statements of the most relevant U.S. P&C full-stack insurtech carriers. The principal goal has been to influence the dialog, debate and deliberations in the insurtech space debate, and to promote a fact-based perspective for the discussion. Even as we continue to write about the future of insurance, about a year ago, I declared my love for “old insurance KPIs” in this widely read article. While futurologists distanced from assessing P&L statements might disagree, many readers have liked the usage and explanation of insurance KPIs (key performance indicators) in the context of innovation. We are pleased to see more industry experts and authors join us in crunching numbers, assessing issues and taking a fact-based view on insurance innovation. We were especially pleased to see even some executives of insurtech startups talk about core KPIs in the context of their innovative business models. So, we entered 2020 with a belief we had accomplished our mission to spark a P&L, fact-based dialog in the insurance innovation space.

Surprisingly, neither Q3 ‘19 nor Q4 ’19 financials got any attention from analysts, and some friends pinged us suggesting we continue the series for the foreseeable future. We hear you loud and clear, and we will continue to publish these digests based on assessing the fundamentals of the insurtech players in the context of the broader insurance industry. We are back!

Our journey continues here today with an analysis of the insurtech trio’s financial performances and to share our humble assessment of the competitive posture and advantage for these three innovative startups.

Key Financials

Let’s start as we typically do, with a look at the core financials. Frequent readers might recall our snapshot view that lists the core financial metrics for the three players. As you read this summary, we would like to remind you that we do not comment on the cost side of the equation and that we suggest our readers not believe in the cost side because of the “goals seek triumph” issue I discussed in this article from last year.

Observations:

“To each his own.” This phrase probably sums up best how we view the distinction between Lemonade, Root and Metromile. We see the three players take three different paths to customer relevance and financial performance:

  • Metromile: An auto insurer with modest growth that has only partially closed the profitability gap with the market (73% loss ratio vs 64% market average). This, to us, does not seem the story you would expect from a startup in the growth phase.
  • Lemonade: A home insurance company that has improved the technical sustainability of its business, partially closing the profitability gap with the market (66% vs 58% for the market) and showing a promising trajectory. However, it has sacrificed along this journey the expectations many had for this “market disruptor.” The $480 million of funding has created a book of business that still accounts for just 0.1% for the U.S. homeowners insurance market. The $115 million in revenue is a far cry from the “massive disruption effect” that was expected during the debut.
  • Root: An auto insurer that continues its journey of exponential growth (the portfolio is three times bigger at the end of 2019 than it was at the end of 2018) but is paying in claims the same amount collected as premium. The company appears to be using the $350 million Series E funding from DST Global and Coatue in August 2019 to cover expenses. This company, too, accounts for less than 0.2% of the auto insurance market. 

See also: Cloud Computing Wins in COVID-19 World  

Let’s take a closer look at the loss ratios:

  • Metromile’s loss ratio has been stable in the lower 70s for all of 2019. The company started selling its claims tools to other insurers, but the performances on its own book do not tell a great story for this new business. More broadly, the usage of telematics data on claim processing has shown potential to reduce the loss ratio at an international level. If an insurer has to choose a provider for telematics-based claims, it makes more sense to use one that has achieved results. A carrier would probably feel more comfortable using something like the G-evolution services that have already provided competitive advantages on Groupama Italy’s auto portfolio.
  • Root ended 2019 with a 100% loss ratio, paying out in claims effectively an amount equivalent to the premiums received. While Q4 '19 saw a loss ratio at 93% compared with 113% in the prior quarter, and 91% in the second quarter, the technical profitability has not yet shown a consistent improvement. It is interesting to see how the loss ratios are fairly consistent in the core lines of business: auto liability and auto physical damage. In 2018, auto liability showed a loss ratio not too far from the market average, but physical damage showed a terrible loss ratio, above 120%. The folks at Root are smart, and we believe they are deliberately underpricing the risks to attract customers. Theoretically, telematics could allow them to improve their loss ratio through behavioral change, and the use of data in claims processing could let them anticipate the FNOL and enhance the effectiveness of the claim handling processes. It seems they have still ignored this potential, instead focusing only on a few weeks of monitoring, but these strategic options seem achievable.
  • Lemonade has been on a trajectory of improving loss ratios over the last few quarters. From a loss-ratio of 88% in Q4 ‘18 to a loss-ratio of 61% in Q4 ‘19, loss-ratios have always improved. Lemonade celebrated the use of advanced, AI-powered fraud detection in ensuring "bad risks”are caught, assessed and filtered out. Looking to the slowdown of their growth, an increase in pricing seems to be the main driver of this technical profitability recovery.

In the last article, we highlighted the “pricing war.” So, let’s take a closer look at the top line generated by these different approaches to reach a sustainable loss ratio:

  • Root’s quarter-over-quarter growth rate appears to have “settled” at around 20%, which is lower than past performances. Looking back over a two-year horizon, 2019's quarter-over-quarter growth rate seems rather sedate compared with 2018. However, in absolute numbers, in the latest quarters the company has increased written premium by $20 million (from $99 million to $119 million) and $24 million (from $119 million to $144 million). These represent their third and second best quarterly increases, after the $38 million increase achieved in Q1 ’19 (from $51 million to $89 million). With Root now available to more than 65% of the U.S. driving population (‘18 new states contributed 29% of the ‘19 growth, and ‘19 states for a further 17%), it remains to be seen how the company can continue to capture customers switching for cheaper prices. Root has also started to cross sell the customer base with renter insurance.
  • Lemonade's growth has slowed: After healthy growth quarter over quarter from Q1 ‘19 through Q3 ‘19, we saw a reversal in Q4 ‘19. The 13% reduction in Q4 ‘19 was worse than the 10% reduction between Q4 ‘18 and Q3 ‘18. One year ago, Lemonade said, we “messed up an entire quarter” because premium growth turned negative, when in fact the company generated its best quarterly loss ratio ever (and it has happened again!).
  • Metromile underwritten premiums grew only by $3 million in Q3 ‘19 (compared with Q2 ‘19), and in Q4 ’19 the company had, in absolute numbers, its worst quarter since Q3 ’18. This to us is a clear sign that the company's product likely attracts only users who drive infrequently or never drive. 

Cost Position

We are also not able to compare their real costs. As we discussed earlier, the companies are not reporting all of their costs in the yellow book any more, and therefore true cost positions cannot be judged. As an example, Metromile's stated underwriting expenses in the fourth quarter of the year went down, similar to movement we saw in the fourth quarter of 2017.

Our humble opinion

Let’s be frank. From these figures only Root is showing the trajectory expected for a startup in the growth phase. Even with gaps on the technical sustainability of its portfolio, the company has a profitability improvement opportunity driven by better usage of telematics data. If the team builds mastery in usage of telematics data for behavior change and claims management, this venture could find the “root” for sustainable growth. With this focus and strategy, the company really wouldn’t need to invent anything fundamentally different. There are best practices on behavior change and claims management the company can emulate from players like Allstate (U.S.) and Discovery Insure (South Africa) and UnipolSai and Groupama (Italy) respectively.

Continuing on the telematics topic, Metromile’s equity story seem less exciting. Customer appeal toward pay-per-use continues to be limited at best. Uncertainty of a fluctuating premium over the period of coverage is a barrier for adoption. This model is attracting only customers who drive infrequently and focus on saving on their insurance premium costs.

The long tail of excitement with the disruption buzzword continues to characterize Lemonade’s march in this trio. The charity giveback - which has fascinated many commentators over the past years and which I described in detail in one past article with Steve Anderson - accounted for 1.3% of the 2018 premiums last year and 1.8% of the 2017 premiums; i.e., a pretty inexpensive public relations and marketing tool. On a different note, plans to cross-sell and offer pet insurance appear to be well thought out and fit with the equity story for a startup at their stage. Finally, the expansion into the German market generating appears to be another checkmark on the “to do list” of the “perfect startup.” Net-net, Lemonade’s story appears to excite industry commentators more than it excites customers! 

(I've already earned the title of “cynic” from the Lemonade founder for a similar statement a year ago.)

What paths will each of these insurtechs take now, and how will they get there? Will COVID-19 change everything?

See also: Will COVID-19 Disrupt Insurtech?  

Another question on everyone’s mind is probably this: What will be the impact of the temporary lockdowns? As we look ahead into expected results from Q1-2020, we expect to see COVID-19 play out in a few different ways:

  • We expect Metromile to be the most affected because its product is based on a "per mile" computation basis. Analysts are already reporting, that mid-March to the end of the April, "miles driven" were reduced by 50%. With millions of U.S. residents spending a couple of months in lockdown, we expect the Metromile top line will shrink in Q1 ’20. The company has already laid off employees, including the entire marketing team.
  • Root has announced a "stay at home" bonus similar to many other auto insurance carriers. Root's incentives are based on a measured 20% or more reduction in driving in April and May. With the lockdown, the company's try-before-you-buy approach probably takes more time to be completed, so their growth will be affected.
  • We do not currently expect any change in the coverage needs or customer behavior for the core products that Lemonade provides. We do, however, expect that macroeconomic issues like increasing unemployment, underemployment and reduction in disposable incomes will lead on one side to some customers seeking lower prices through competitive shopping but, on the other hand, customers who have never considered or bought renters insurance policies possibly continuing to ignore the need and shun the product. Industry watchers will recall Lemonade’s claim on effectively attracting first-time buyers of rental insurance. We expect this claim to be tested.

From a broader P&L perspective, we also expect to see Q1 ’20 investment income to be depressed.

Looking ahead to the rest of the year from my exile in a downtown Atlanta hotel, I have already articulated my thoughts about futurologists who are designing a future based on their own self-image over the past few weeks. (Note: There have been tons of articles and webinars claiming that “nothing will be as before” and announcing the triumph of both digital distribution channels and pay-per-use telematics.) I am skeptical about any long-term structural changes brought about by a few weeks of lockdown. Sri, on the other hand, believes that, while the “target state” of consumer behavior and expectations may not be known for a while, the COVID-19 crisis will cause at least some segments of consumers to fundamentally rethink their risk management and insurance solution needs. He also expects changes in sectors like commercial real estate to push commercial insurance companies to rethink products, pricing and positioning in the commercial sector.

As we sign off this quarterly dispatch, many U.S. states are reopening their economies. We hope to be back soon to discuss insurance innovation on the stage of a big conference and to never have to comment again on the impact of a lockdown!

Strategies to Reopen Your Business Safely

Employers must mitigate workplace transmission of COVID-19 and prepare for a range of safety challenges with the workforce and consumers.

As states reopen, businesses will have to grapple with the challenges of creating a safe environment for both workforce and consumers. Employers have to address a range of issues, like how to mitigate workplace transmission of COVID-19, what workforce challenges to prepare for and how to demonstrate to consumers that they can safely shop at the business.

I enlisted the help of the following three public health experts to discuss best practices for reopening businesses safely:

  • Dr. Scott Benson — associate professor, Division of Public Health and the Division of Infectious Diseases | University of Utah
  • Dr. Steven Lacey — professor and chief, Division of Public Health | University of Utah School of Medicine
  • Dr. Kimberley Shoaf — professor and associate chief, Community Engagement | University of Utah

Facility Hazards

Water intrusion and mold. If a building has been left unattended or with a skeleton crew, water intrusions may go unnoticed and result in mold growth. A certain amount of heat load is typically expected with people in the building, and, without it, water and lack of heat can contribute to mold. 

Water systems. Most large buildings have cooling towers and other evaporative cooling systems. With water not circulating in these systems, naturally occurring legionella bacteria can grow. Turning systems back on can create exposure to the bacteria. Talk to facilities personnel about purging and disinfecting water systems before reactivating. 

HVAC systems. Higher ventilation rates, zone pressurization of fresh air and systems that run longer can help protect employees. Talk to the building manager about optimizing airflow patterns and directional flow to keep contaminated air away from employees. Enhancements such as upgrading to MERV-13 filters to capture viral particles, ensuring that relative humidity ranges between 40% and 60%, will further control exposures to the virus. 

Cleaning and disinfection. Despite the use of these terms interchangeably, there is a significant difference between the two. Cleaning uses a detergent to remove dirt physically from the surface but does not kill all germs. Disinfection is the destruction of those germs at a high percentage, rendering them incapable of reproducing. For guidance on the most effective disinfectants in fighting the SARS-CoV-2 virus, refer to the EPA’s List N

Preparation for a Returning Workforce

Establish an Infectious Disease Preparedness and Response Plan. Characterize potential routes for exposure, task-specific risk factors, available control strategies and a plan for communicating expectations with employees and customers.

Follow location-specific guidelines. Use resources like federal, state and local guidelines to determine the parameters for your office’s readiness. States vary significantly in terms of their guidelines for reopening, so, if you have locations across the nation, be aware of the differences. Some locations will require a smaller percentage to return to a physical workspace, so have a phasing plan prepared.

See also: Firms’ Priorities During Pandemic  

Understand employee risks. Exposure potential will vary greatly depending on job type and other factors. Follow CDC guidelines, and communicate with your HR team to understand which individuals may be at higher risk. 

Know how to handle a sick employee. If someone comes to work sick or falls ill while at work, you need to have a plan to safely isolate and move them out of the workplace while maintaining their confidentiality. Provide onsite responders with the appropriate training and personal protective equipment (PPE) to protect them from potentially sick employees. 

Understand changes to sick leave policies. The Families First Coronavirus Response Act (FFCRA) extends coverage under certain circumstances for employers with fewer than 500 employees but more than 50. If your organization is not a part of the FFCRA coverage, flexibility with paid sick leave and extended family and medical leave is crucial to your response. 

Prepare your communication strategy. Communicate your pandemic response to your employees and the general public. Use resources like social media channels, call centers, text messages, emails and recorded video messages to make your response widely known.

Protecting the Workforce and Consumers

Worker social distancing. For this to be effective, you need compliance from your workforce. Communicate with your employees why it is critical to protect their health as essential members of the business. The goal should be to enable a minimum of six feet of space between individuals. To make it easier to comply, create gender-neutral and single-occupancy bathrooms and close off common gathering areas. 

Consumer social distancing. Just like with your employees, communication with consumers is key to the effectiveness of social distancing. Use passive prevention through design and engineering controls, like arrows on flooring and easy-to-read guidance. Use preferred mechanisms like contactless delivery and curbside pick-up. Separate your entry and exit with barriers between them, directing traffic away from each. Create physical barriers (cough and sneeze guards) at high-contact points, like checkouts and drive-thrus, and limit credit card or cash transactions and encourage no-touch checkouts.

Personal protective equipment (PPE). Providing necessary PPE to your workforce is crucial to their safety, but it is essential to understand the different types. N95 respirators protect the wearer and should be reserved for healthcare workers at the highest risk of exposure because they are in short supply. Surgical masks protect those around the wearer and are generally used by healthcare workers and other frontline workers at higher risk of exposure from their job. Cloth face coverings help slow the spread of the virus, and the general public is encouraged to wear these. 

See also: Access to Care, Return to Work in a Pandemic  

Hand hygiene. Make it easy to maintain hand hygiene by stocking paper towels in the bathroom, keeping a trashcan close to the door to discard paper towels and making hand sanitizer readily available. 

Employee education and communication. Provide your employees with the information they need to comply with guidelines. Ensure all information complies with OSHA guidelines and is consistent. Explain the benefits to your employees and consumers.

To listen to the full Safety National webinar on this topic, click here. View the complete library of Safety National’s webinar topics here.


Vikrum Ramaswamy

Profile picture for user VikrumRamaswamy

Vikrum Ramaswamy

Vikrum Ramaswamy is a senior risk control manager at Safety National. He is responsible for managing risk control services for policyholders written out of the Pacific Northwest, Northern California and Southeast territories.

COVID-19: 'The End of the Beginning'?

We seem to be moving into a new phase of the pandemic, in which the economy will reopen in fits and starts, and insurers will need to be unusually agile.

Over the past few weeks, as I've watched the developments in the pandemic and its repercussions in the global economy, I keep coming back to one of my favorite Winston Churchill quotes. It came in November 1942, after the Allies had won the Second Battle of El Alamein, setting them up to sweep German troops out of North Africa and starting to reverse the tide that had run so hard against the Allies for more than three years. Putting the victory in context, Churchill said, in his blunt way: "Now, this is not the end. It is not even the beginning of the end. But it is, perhaps, the end of the beginning."

That's about where I think we are now. We certainly aren't at the end of devastation from the pandemic and can't even see the beginning of the end from here, but we may have reached the end of the beginning.

The danger of the pandemic itself isn't even remotely gone, and we need to be very careful that it doesn't come sweeping back. But I suspect that we're entering a new stretch that will last six months or so, until we either learn that we have a vaccine or learn that we don't. During that stretch, I think the insurance industry will need to adopt a sort of hybrid approach both for how companies view internal operations and for how they view customers, many of which will be open for business -- but only cautiously.

The best news is that the lockdowns seem to have worked. A study just published in the journal Nature estimated that they prevented 60 million COVID-19 cases in the U.S. -- some 30 times the roughly 2 million that have been diagnosed -- and 285 million cases in China. Another study published in Nature took a different approach but found a similar effect in 11 European countries: The study estimated that lockdowns saved 3.1 million lives, including 500,000 in the U.K., and reduced infection rates by 82%.

We're also learning things about this mysterious killer that could help us manage its dangers. For instance, it now seems that we're unlikely to pick up the virus by touching surfaces and that we're much less likely to contract it from people with whom we interact outdoors. Though no magic drug or other treatment has appeared, doctors are learning a great deal about how COVID-19 kills and are fine-tuning their approaches. For example, we've learned that this coronavirus doesn't just attack the lungs, as other coronaviruses do; ventilators aren't as crucial as once thought, while treatments for blood clots and "cytokine storms" can be important.

Still, the pandemic continues to expand globally, with more than 7 million cases now reported and over 400,000 people dying. Even in the U.S., where the curve has been bent well downward, there isn't the sort of straight-up, straight-down path seen in some countries that acted earlier or were stricter about their lockdowns. Here is the latest count of daily deaths from the Washington Post:

When you break the count down by state, the slow decline looks even weaker. You see that the vast majority of the improvement nationally has come because hot spots, especially in the Northeast, have been extinguished. Much of the rest of the country has been flat or even seen increases in the daily count of new cases and in deaths. While dire predictions about Florida and Georgia don't seem to have been borne out despite relatively lax lockdowns, Arizona and Texas, both of which reopened early, have seen surges in cases and hospitalizations.

National capability for testing has steadily improved but still isn't where health authorities have said it needs to be. In the face of massive complexity, government officials seem to have given up on even trying to build massive networks for contact tracing. So the tools aren't even in place yet to deal quickly and decisively with new outbreaks.

Yet the country seems to have decided to move on. So, move on we will, in however halting a fashion (at least unless there is a dramatic resurgence in COVID-19 cases).

What will this world look like in what seems likely to be several months of limbo, and how should we manage our businesses during this stretch?

From an internal standpoint for insurers, I'm not sure that much will change. Some people will return to some offices, but much of the work will continue to be done remotely. As much as possible, sales will still be handled remotely. So will claims. Companies will continue to take this opportunity to accelerate their move to digital and become more efficient -- this McKinsey article lays out an aggressive agenda for the next 90 days and says companies have a rare opportunity to shape the behavior of their customers; insurers should note that 35% of their customers now interact with them online, up from 27% just since the start of the pandemic.

How the rest of the economy functions is much harder to predict. Restaurants and hotels are reopening, but at maybe half-speed or even quarter-speed. Offices will reopen -- sort of. The healthcare system will head back toward normal, as those who deferred care will return to their doctors; there will likely be pent-up demand for a while. Stores will re-emerge, especially if no evidence contradicts the current thinking about the lack of transmissibility from brief contact with surfaces, but restrictions will apply. (So, yes, Jeff Bezos will still win.) In the fall, it seems that schools will have to reopen, because distance learning didn't work.

And so on. From a business standpoint, the only answer I know of for uncertainty is agility, so I think insurers will have to be unusually agile for the next several months. You don't want to zag when your customers zig. I suspect that workers' comp carriers will face particular pressure, as we see just how many COVID-19 claims are filed against employers and how regulators and courts treat defenses. Auto insurers will also be flying somewhat blind for a while because driving patterns will be in flux. Yes, traffic will pick up, but it likely won't be the same -- you get lots of fender benders in rush-hour traffic, so what happens if rush hour goes away, or at least changes because fewer people go to the office and go at staggered times to minimize clustering that might lead to infections?

There seems to be some optimism about how quickly the economic recovery will happen, especially if you trust stock markets. (Here is a piece from Fortune that takes a much more sophisticated look at the various scenarios for recovery.) But I don't see a firm recovery until the virus is vanquished, whether through a vaccine, a treatment or some other huge diminution of the danger. The hope seems to be that lifting the lockdowns will make the economy snap back, but we learned this week that the U.S. recession actually began in February, before the lockdowns. People won't act a certain way just because we tell them they can; they have to feel safe doing so, and I don't think we're there yet.

While it's not entirely clear what comes next, even if we really are at the end of the beginning, it's safe to say that we're in a phase where rapid change is happening and big opportunities are in front of us. Although I'm far more likely to quote Churchill than Lenin, I think a Lenin quote pretty well summarizes what we're going through: "There are decades where nothing happens; and there are weeks where decades happen."

"Weeks" is too strong, but I'd say we're in a stretch of months where decades may happen.

Stay safe.

Paul

P.S. Here are the six articles I'd like to highlight from the past week:

10 Tips for Moving Online in COVID World

As cyberattacks on small to mid-size businesses escalate, cyber insurance presents an opportunity to rebuild an agency book of business.

How to Train Remote Workers as Teams

While we may not be playing golf or having an office party for a while, let your team bond over a virtual activity on Zoom or Skype.

How to Fight Rise in Cyber Criminals

IT security standards have sometimes been lowered or suspended for work at home in the pandemic, resulting in cyber security exposures.

BCPP Proposal: Summary, Key Risks

The industry's proposal for a Business Continuity Protection Program raises risks related to compensating businesses during pandemic lockdowns.

Addressing the Rise in Topical Prescriptions

Insurers must help injured workers on topical prescriptions and compounds with the ultimate goal of returning them to work and more productive lives.

Tech Lets Freight Adjust to Pandemic

Freight carriers face extraordinary pressure to rush essential goods to market. Traditional human- and phone-driven processes can't keep up.


Paul Carroll

Profile picture for user PaulCarroll

Paul Carroll

Paul Carroll is the editor-in-chief of Insurance Thought Leadership.

He is also co-author of A Brief History of a Perfect Future: Inventing the Future We Can Proudly Leave Our Kids by 2050 and Billion Dollar Lessons: What You Can Learn From the Most Inexcusable Business Failures of the Last 25 Years and the author of a best-seller on IBM, published in 1993.

Carroll spent 17 years at the Wall Street Journal as an editor and reporter; he was nominated twice for the Pulitzer Prize. He later was a finalist for a National Magazine Award.

BCPP Proposal: Summary, Key Risks

The industry's proposal for a Business Continuity Protection Program raises risks related to compensating businesses during pandemic lockdowns.

On May 21, the National Association of Mutual Insurance Companies (NAMIC), the American Property Casualty Insurance Association (APCIA) and the Independent Insurance Agents & Brokers of America (Big “I") released their proposal to address future pandemics: the Business Continuity Protection Program (BCPP).

The attached document summarizes this proposal and identifies several key risks to consider as this proposal is debated and compared with other concepts.

The Proposal

In a nutshell, insurance agents and brokers may elect to sell a FEMA-administered protection agreement to businesses and nonprofits. If a business purchased this protection and its industry was later ordered closed due to a pandemic, the business would receive an immediate payout of a previously determined amount. 

See also: PRIA: A Tale of 2 Policyholders  

The payout amount is a percentage (e.g., 80%) of three months of the business’s payroll and operating expenses as reported in its last tax returns filed prior to purchasing the protection agreement. At the time it buys the protection agreement, the business would promise to spend any payouts on retaining its employees and covering other business expenses.

Key Risks

The BCPP concept raises several risks to consider in this and any other proposal intended to compensate businesses during pandemic lockdowns.

  • Risk to State Role in Pandemic Response –The BCPP would require lockdown orders to either come from the federal government or follow an approach dictated by the federal government. In contrast, the states have taken responsibility to shape their own COVID-19 lockdown orders based on local needs and metrics subject to high-level guidance from the federal government.
  • Basis Risk – Because payouts under the BCPP are based on out-of-date financial metrics, businesses face a significant risk that payouts would not match their actual needs. Failing businesses would tend to get more than their current expenses while successful businesses would get less.
  • Moral Risk – The BCPP would pay out based on a business’s self-assigned NAICS industry classification code. Businesses could improve their chances of receiving a payout by selecting a higher-risk code before a pandemic or lobbying for the inclusion of their NAICS code in a lockdown order during a pandemic.
  • Regulatory Risk – Although state licensed insurance agents and brokers would sell the BCPP product, it is not an insurance contract. Accordingly, insurance agents and brokers would face the risk of having to obtain an appropriate license and implement additional training, processes and controls.

Jason Schupp

Profile picture for user JasonSchupp

Jason Schupp

Jason Schupp is the founder and managing member of the Centers for Better Insurance. CBI is an independent organization making available unbiased analysis and insights about key regulatory issues facing the industry for use by insurance professionals, regulators and policymakers.

How to Fight Rise in Cyber Criminals

IT security standards have sometimes been lowered or suspended for work at home in the pandemic, resulting in cyber security exposures.

Coronavirus is changing how people work and interact every day. Many companies have needed to expand their remote working capacity as a result of the outbreak – and usually at very short notice. To provide as many employees as possible with easy access to operating software and systems quickly, in some cases IT security standards have had to be lowered or suspended, resulting in potential cyber security exposures for companies.

One consequence of potentially laxer security may be that cybercriminals and hackers may find it easier to penetrate previously protected corporate systems, causing data breaches, cyber blackmail intrusions and IT system failures.

According to the Allianz Risk Barometer, an annual survey of more than 2,700 risk management experts around the globe, cyber risk already ranked as the number one threat for businesses in 2020 before the coronavirus outbreak, driven by concerns about data breaches becoming larger and more expensive; ransomware incidents bringing increasing losses and business email compromise (BEC) or spoofing attacks, which typically involve social engineering and phishing emails to dupe employees into revealing confidential or valuable information. BEC attacks have resulted in fraudulent losses in excess of $20 billion since 2016.

Unfortunately, the significant increase in home workers accessing the corporate network with a virtual private network (VPN) connection because of the coronavirus pandemic only exacerbates these risks, providing a perfect opportunity for cyber criminals, as recent events demonstrate only too well.

It is estimated that anywhere between 50% and 90% of data breaches are caused or abetted by employees, be it by simple error or by falling victim of phishing or social engineering. Recent events demonstrate the vulnerability only too well. In April, Google detected and blocked more than 18 million malware and phishing emails and 240 million daily spam messages related to the coronavirus pandemic in a single week. In total, Google blocks more than 100 million phishing emails each day.

See also: Coronavirus Boosts Cyber Risk  

If remote workers fall victim to a cyberattack, it puts their work network at risk. There are several effective security measures businesses can apply to help remote employees combat internet attacks.

Keep Software Up to Date

Check whether you can use current versions of operating systems and installed programs. If possible, use the automatic update feature, which is often the default setting. Otherwise, immediately install security updates for your software, especially for your web browser and operating system.

Use Virus Protection and Firewalls

Check activation of virus protection and firewalls, but keep in mind that this measure can only be effective as an accompanying measure with other security procedures. Its application does not reduce the importance of the other tips in this article.

Create Different User Accounts

Malicious programs have the same rights on the PC as the user account through which they entered the computer. You should, therefore, only work with administrator rights if absolutely necessary.

Be Cautious About Sharing Personal Data

Online fraudsters increase their success rates by addressing their victims individually: Previously spied-on data, such as surfing habits or personal names, are used to inspire confidence. Today, personal data is considered a currency on the internet and is traded in this way. If possible, use a VPN connected to your home network in public wireless local area network (WLAN) hotspots.

Otherwise, unencrypted transmitted data can be read by third parties. At the same time, a VPN also protects against a number of other attacks on the PC and the data stored on it.

Use Up-to-Date Web Browsers

Check whether to disable components and plug-ins in your browser settings. First, enter the addresses for security-critical websites, such as for online banking, manually in the address line of the browser and save the address entered in this way as a bookmark, which you can then use for secure access.

Two-Factor Authentication

Where two-factor authentication is offered, use it to secure access to your account. A password manager can facilitate the handling of different passwords. Do not share your passwords with third parties.

Protect Your Data Through Encryption

Protect your confidential emails with encryption. If a WLAN is used, subject to the information security guidance of your entity, pay attention to the encryption of the wireless network. Subject to higher standards as per individual guidance of the respective individual security officer (ISO), in your router, select the WPA3 encryption standard or, if this is not yet supported, WPA2, until further notice. Choose a complex password of at least 20 characters.

Identify All Participants in Online Sessions

It is particularly easy for unauthorized persons who have obtained the dial-in data to join large online meetings with many participants. That’s why everyone who appears in the meeting needs to briefly identify themselves, especially when discussing sensitive topics and sharing presentations on screen.

Be Extremely Careful With Suspicious E-mails or Attachments, Especially if the Sender Is Unknown

Especially in the familiar environment of your home office, you must be wary of suspicious e-mails. Take your time and check each email thoroughly before you open it.

Please see  CORONAVIRUS: STAYING CYBER-SECURE THROUGH THE PANDEMIC for a complete list of IT security measures.

See also: New Enhancements for Cyber Coverage  

COVID-19 is one of the many crises that hackers and scammers leveraged to exploit vulnerable businesses, and they will find more innovative ways in the future. More than ever, it is vital for organizations to protect themselves from malicious cyberattacks by educating employees about how to identify and prevent cyberattacks and implementing home security policies for remote workers.


Kelly Castriotta

Profile picture for user KellyCastriotta

Kelly Castriotta

Kelly Castriotta is the North American head of product development (all financial lines) and the interim North American head of cyber/tech/media underwriting for Allianz Global Corporate Specialty.

COVID: U.K. Financial Authority Response

The U.K. insurance law imposes a duty to “pay due regard to the interests” of customers and “treat them fairly.”

SUMMARY

In the U.K., separate regulatory bodies are accountable to supervise prudential matters (solvency) and consumer protection (conduct). The Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) recently took several actions with respect to consumer protection in the context of COVID-19 using different tools than those available to U.S. insurance regulators.

Resolution of Business Income Coverage Disputes

The FCA has retained a law firm to represent the interests of policyholders in a proposed “test case” to be filed in court by the FCA against representative insurers. The FCA has requested insurers, intermediaries and policyholders to submit examples of disputed policy wordings and the respective positions of the parties.

It appears the action will be commenced before the end of July and is expected to result in binding outcomes as to the interpretation of selected wordings and guidance as to the interpretation of other wordings.

At least initially, the FCA’s statements suggested this litigation would be limited to a few rarely purchased coverage options not requiring “property damage.” It is now unclear whether the scope will expand to include coverages that are only triggered in the event of property damage.

Assessment of Product Value

In the U.K., insurance companies do not typically files forms or rates with the insurance supervisor. Instead, the insurance law imposes a duty to “act honestly, fairly and professionally in accordance with the best interests of its customer” on the insurer and its key executives. That duty includes an obligation to provide products that offer a reasonable value to customers.

The FCA plans to require insurers to assess whether and how the value of their products have been affected by the COVID-19 crisis. To the extent a product is no longer delivering the expected value (e.g., the insured risk no longer exists), the insurer must take appropriate action.

Insurers have six months to complete the assessment and take appropriate action. Insurers must be able to demonstrate to the FCA how they have discharged their obligations to customers.

Assistance to Customers in Financial Difficulty

The U.K. insurance law also imposes a duty to “pay due regard to the interests” of customers and “treat them fairly.” The FCA has issued guidance applying this duty in the context of the potential of temporary financial distress resulting from COVID-19 of individual and small business customers.

The FCA obligates firms to discuss options with policyholders that reach out to the insurer for that reason or who have missed a payment, inquired about making a COVID-19 business interruption claim or have asked for a reduction in coverage.

Options may include a reduction or waiver of premium, deferral of premium payments, replacing the policy with a less expensive product or reducing coverages.

Insurers must take steps to make policyholders aware of these possible options including in their websites.

DETAILS

Business Income Coverage Disputes

The FCA announced on May 1, 2020, its intention to commence a court action with respect to coverage for business income loss under policies issued to small and medium-sized businesses. Specifically, the FCA plans to seek a declaration on “key contractual uncertainties.” The insurance industry supports the FCA’s initiative and is working with the FCA to define the disputed issues.

FCA’s View of Business Income Coverage

In a “Dear CEO” letter of April 15, the FCA expressed its understanding that “most policies have basic cover [that does] not cover pandemics and therefore would have no obligation to pay out in relation to the COVID-19 pandemic.”

However, the FCA expects “where it is clear that the firm has an obligation to pay out on a policy . . . it is important that claims are assessed and settled quickly.”

See also: Business Continuity During COVID-19  

Two weeks later, the FCA acknowledged coverage decisions may be more complicated:

  • “[A]t least in the majority of cases, insurers are unlikely to be obliged to pay out in relation to the coronavirus pandemic.”
  • “[F]irms may consider there is no doubt about wording and decline to pay a claim, but customers may still consider there is genuine uncertainty about whether their policy provides cover.”

FCA’s Intention to Seek Resolution

The FCA has reached out to a small number of insurers (reportedly including QBE, Axa, Zurich and Hiscox). FCA has requested from each typical policy wordings and positions on coverage under several available but typically not purchased optional coverage extensions for:

  • Non-damage denial of access
  • Public authority closures/restrictions
  • Infectious/notifiable diseases

The FCA will “put forward policyholders’ arguments to their best advantage” and has hired an external law firm to do so. On May 15, the FCA asked policyholders to submit examples of disputed wordings and their arguments for coverage.

For its part, the Association of British Insurers called the FCA’s action a “welcome step” and indicated insurers are expected to pay some £900 million in undisputed business income claims.

The FCA has expressed the view that most policies do not cover COVID-19 because they only have “basic cover for BI as a consequence of property damage.” The coverage extensions FCA initially selected for litigation cover “BI losses arising other than from property damage.”


Jason Schupp

Profile picture for user JasonSchupp

Jason Schupp

Jason Schupp is the founder and managing member of the Centers for Better Insurance. CBI is an independent organization making available unbiased analysis and insights about key regulatory issues facing the industry for use by insurance professionals, regulators and policymakers.

How to Train Remote Workers as Teams

While we may not be playing golf or having an office party for a while, let your team bond over a virtual activity on Zoom or Skype.

With COVID-19 disrupting business, most employees in the insurance and insurtech industries have been forced to work from home. We are on week 12 of having most of our employees working remotely. 

Working from home has its challenges on the best of days. Now throw in your partner working beside you and perhaps add some children into the mix. Or maybe you’re living alone and talking to your house plants.

Longtime physical distance can lead to emotional isolation and stress, especially during a pandemic, with all the health worries about children, parents and grandparents. It behooves employers to make a human connection to their people when they most need it.

We emphasize team-building and connection as a key component of our corporate culture. Implementing tools and activities that keep employees connected, interested and feeling heard is critical to long-term success, now more than ever. Teams large and small worldwide have had to dramatically shift operations and quickly adapt to how they work. 

Remote work culture is here to stay, with many technology organizations expressing long-term interest in work-from-home options for their staff. Some of the team-building activities recommended in our first blog may not be feasible with social distancing. But there are several ways companies can leverage digital tools to check in on employees and promote active participation and keep them engaged and still feeling part of the team.

Fortunately, we’ve always had staff working remotely using web-based tools. We had tested all of our teams remotely before the outbreak. So we were ready, and the process was almost seamless. 

Here are a few activities and tools that you too can use to maintain a sense of team connection while we work apart. 

Check in with your employees 

With everyone at home, you aren’t organically interacting with your team throughout the day. Infrequent email correspondence removes a layer of connection and can also increase miscommunication. 

Instead, make sure employees are kept up to date with consistent communication that works for your business, such as daily video touchpoints and weekly emails. This is a turbulent time for many, affecting everyone in different ways. Make a point to check in with individual team members to see how they are doing and ensure they are properly supported. 

Make virtual meetings fun

Virtual teams don’t get to enjoy coffee-break talk, foosball or quick chatter between meetings. Maintaining fun social interactions between team members is crucial. 

Use video calls, meetings and touchpoints with teams to have a little fun and foster connection among your team. 

See also: Building a Virtual Insurer Post-COVID  

As well as continuing video meetings with our clients, we hold internal companywide video calls on Tuesdays and Fridays to touch base with everyone and provide internal updates. On Fridays, we set aside about 15 to 20 minutes to have a little fun. Some of the activities we’ve built into our meetings that any team could easily incorporate include:

  • Costume contests, dress-up formal Fridays, holiday themes, ‘80s, etc.
  • Games such as trivia, truth or lie, sharing bucket lists, etc. 
  • Group stretching
  • Contests to see who can come up with the best Zoom background
  • Fundraising for the local hospital and food bank

Encourage your team to take breaks

Not having a designated office to separate work from one’s personal life and responsibilities is a significant adjustment. Encourage your team to take breaks and give them the flexibility they need to manage their schedule and make their days productive. Clearly communicate expectations to demonstrate trust in your team’s ability to be accountable for their work and deadlines without having to prove they’re online all the time. 

Take bonding activities online

Creative team-building games and events are key elements of fostering a startup culture. Fun activities help employees feel challenged and valued. While we may not be playing golf or having an office party for a while, let your team bond over a virtual activity on Zoom or Skype. 

There are a slew of options popping up, from virtual escape rooms to livestream classes. So far, we’ve held a few optional virtual events to bring our team closer together, including a fundraiser, an Easter contest, a recipe exchange (recipe book coming soon) and a jam session put on by our resident musicians. 

These activities can be short and simple--just something genuine that makes your team feel valued and gives them a little break. 

We may be physically isolated, but, thanks to technology, we need not be alone.

Addressing the Rise in Topical Prescriptions

Insurers must help injured workers on topical prescriptions and compounds.

Across the country, healthcare providers are shifting their prescribing practices in response to the opioid epidemic. According to IQVIA Institute’s Medicine Use and Spending in the U.S. — A Review of 2018 and Outlook for 2023, prescription opioid volume declined 43%, from 246 billion morphine milligram equivalents in 2011 to 141 billion in 2018. Many factors have driven the decline, including news media coverage, state and federal initiatives (e.g., prevention, intervention, treatment and recovery support), the Center for Disease Control and Prevention’s 2016 guidelines for prescribing opioids for chronic pain, healthcare provider education, lawsuits against companies that manufacture and distribute opioids, the arrest and prosecution of healthcare providers and efforts taken by insurers to reduce opioid prescribing.

Although there has been significant progress in some ways, unintended consequences periodically emerge in the fight to reduce opioid dependency and addiction. For example, in early efforts to address the emerging opioid epidemic, law enforcement officials aggressively targeted and shut down opioid pill mills overnight. This abruptly left many opioid-dependent patients without access to opioids, resulting in a spike in heroin use. As another example, several states and private companies have successfully implemented policies to limit opioid prescriptions on initial fills to seven days or less under specific circumstances. In response, some healthcare providers have avoided these limitations by prescribing 30 days (or more) of pills in the shortened time frame. Lastly, as prescribers look for alternatives to opioids, the healthcare industry has seen a dramatic increase in the use of topical and compounded pain relievers. This has increased the cost of providing care in a healthcare system already struggling to contain medical costs. Despite the increased spending, these options often fail to demonstrate a corresponding desired therapeutic outcome.

This article will share some strategies being used by insurance companies to help injured workers receive cost-effective and therapeutically effective pain management drugs, with the ultimate goal of returning them to work and more productive lives.

Topical vs. Compounded Pain Reliever

By definition, a topical medication is a medication administered externally. Commercially available topical pain relievers usually contain one or more of the following ingredients: lidocaine, menthol, methyl salicylate, capsaicin and camphor.

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) defines drug compounding as “combining, mixing or altering ingredients to create a medication tailored to the needs of an individual patient.” It notes: “[c]ompounded drugs are not FDA-approved.” Compounded medications can be made into a variety of dosage forms (e.g., oral, injectable, topical, etc.), but the majority of compounded medications we have seen in workers’ compensation are topical (i.e., applied to your skin).

Coventry and First Scripts 2018 Drug Trend Series Report noted that topicals represent 5.1% of high-impact drug classes by volume but 14% of costs. 68 of every 1,000 workers were using topical prescription analgesics, and nearly eight of every 1,000 workers were using private label topical analgesics. As Coventry’s Director of Pharmacy Product Development Nikki Wilson noted, retail, mail-order and out-of-network prescriptions for compounds costs and use decreased while topical costs and use increased in 2018. Topical costs increased due to the use of private label topical analgesics (PLTA), some of “[w]hich add little to no value clinically but increase costs exponentially” according to Wilson.

Studies Making News

In November 2016, CVSHealth published The Rise and Fall of Compound Spend – Ongoing Monitoring Enables Early Identification of Lidocaine Spend, which noted that gross costs per compounded claim “increased nearly 1,700 percent for employer clients” from January 2011 to March 2014, while the “[a]verage gross cost per 30-day script increased more than 10-fold over a three-year period.” Leveraging a multidisciplinary team that included pharmacists and physicians, CVSHealth developed criteria to provide “coverage consistent with labeling, FDA guidance, standards of medical practice and evidence-based drug information to help ensure patient safety and appropriate utilization.” Their strategies drove the use of lidocaine products down on average by more than 80%.

In the August 2018 Office of Inspector General (OIG) report, Questionable Billing for Compounded Topical Drugs in Medicare Part D, OIG found that about 550 pharmacies and 124 prescribers had questionable Part D billing for compounded topical drugs in 2016 based on five measures that OIG has developed as indicators of possible fraud, waste and abuse. The study was driven by the 625% increase in compounded drugs from 2006 through 2015. OIG made several recommendations, including clarifying Part D coverage policies, conducting training for Part D sponsors on fraud schemes and safety concerns related to compounded topical drugs, clarifying that sponsors may apply utilization management tools, and following up with the pharmacies and prescribers identified in the report.

Workers Compensation Efforts

Several insurance companies have been monitoring and addressing compound spending across the country. The Connecticut Interlocal Risk Management Agency (CIRMA) has achieved success curtailing prescription costs and opioid use by adopting a comprehensive managed care program that combines communication, education, collaboration and data. Through nurse collaboration, prior authorizations, managing the use of compound drugs, excluding long-acting opioids, discussing best practices with prescribers, addressing claims with high morphine equivalent doses and using generic drugs over brand drugs, CIRMA significantly lowered utilization of opioids and compounds. For compound drugs, CIRMA and Coventry created a dedicated drug evaluation team that managed compound drugs and prevented processing of such medications without adjuster approval and clinical input. The effort included providing adjusters with recommendations for appropriate management of compound prescriptions, which “led to a decrease in both compound spending and utilization,” where “the percentage of compound costs dropped 42% from 4.0% in 2015 to 2.3% in 2017.” 

According to CompPharma’s 15th Annual Survey Prescription Drug Management in Workers’ Compensation, the survey of 29 state funds, insurers, TPAs and self-insureds showed that there has been a 49% reduction in compound usage among survey respondents with data for 2016 and 2017. Of the respondents who provided figures, only one had an increase in total compounds reimbursed. A number of reasons were cited for the decline in total drug costs, including a continued focus on improving clinical management programs, expanding utilization review and prior authorization, dramatic reductions in compounds, changes in prescribing patterns driven by physician awareness of opioid risk, state formularies and more structured drug alerts and alert management processes.

Effective July 1, 2018, the Texas Division of Workers Compensation revised Title 28 Texas Administrative Code, amending the definition of the closed formulary to exclude “any prescription drug created through compounding” and “required pre-authorization for all prescription drugs created through compounding.” The background section stated that reimbursements per compounded drug increased 141% from calendar year 2010 to 2015, with ingredient costs for a selected group of 10 commonly compounded drugs increasing between 82% and 1,474% from 2010 to 2014.

Chesapeake Employers’ History with Opioids

For more than a decade, Chesapeake Employers has been trying to turn the tide against the opioid epidemic. In 2009, a dedicated pain management review nursing position was established within the Health Services department to identify and monitor concerning claims. Since that time, the scope of the internal pain management program has evolved and expanded greatly. Now, in addition to a dedicated pain management nurse, Chesapeake Employers’ leverages the data analytics from its Pharmacy Benefit Manager (PBM) Express Scripts and the expertise of an in-house pharmacist, physicians and nurses to stay cutting edge in the approach to care. While there are many indicators of success, the above efforts have helped reduce the dollars spent on dispensing opioids by almost 76% over a five-year period and seen the number of injured workers receiving opioids decrease by 66%. 

Some of the most notable initiatives provide necessary resources to raise awareness for providers, the public and our employees. In 2016, Chesapeake Employers gave $750,000 to the Department of Health to be used for the state’s prescription drug monitoring program (PDMP), which allows prescribers and pharmacists to review opioid fills from all sources within the state. In 2017, Chesapeake Employers launched the STOPIOID addiction campaign via radio ads, safety kits and online safety posters to help educate Maryland about the dangers of opioid abuse and addiction. The Chesapeake Employers’ Communication Department won four awards from the Public Relations of America – Maryland Chapter, including “Best in Show” for our Let’s Work to Stop Opioid Addiction Now campaign in 2018.

See also: Access to Care, Return to Work in a Pandemic  

A final highlight was the 2019 rollout of the Opioid Overdose Response Naloxone (Narcan) training authorized by the Maryland Department of Health, which teaches employees and the public about opioids and overdose and provides materials and training to save lives. 

Chesapeake Employer’s Compound and Topical Strategy

As stated earlier, a costly effect of reduced opioid prescribing seen throughout the industry has been a proliferation of prescribing for topical and compounded pain medications. A recent analysis of Chesapeake data reveals hundreds of thousands of dollars, a larger share of annual drug expenditures, is spent on compounded or topical medications. Similar to trends seen in the industry, Chesapeake Employers’ has observed an increase in cost and use of these medications. Since 2016, pharmacy-dispensed topicals have increased from 2.8% of scripts to 4.4% and from 6.1% to 9.3% of total costs in 2019. This does not include costs for compounded medications and physician-office dispensed topical medications, which further inflate costs. 

Chesapeake Employers leverages a multi-disciplinary team approach when managing pharmacy cost and utilization. This includes the in-house pharmacist, physicians, nurses, claims and legal professionals. The goal is to facilitate rapid injured worker recovery by using cost-effective and therapeutically effective drugs and appropriate means. 

In 2011, Chesapeake Employers’ began researching and educating our claims and health services professionals on compounded medications. The research included documenting the available medical literature and outlining the circumstances under which the use and payment for a compounded medication may be considered reasonable. The research is updated periodically and peer-reviewed by an external independent medical expert.

Closed formulary states, such as Texas, Arizona and Tennessee, only cover drugs on the adopted Official Disability Guidelines (ODG) Workers’ Compensation Drug Formulary list. According to the NCCI’s June 2019 Research Brief Formulary Implementations and Initial Impacts on Workers Compensation, use of topical and compound drugs in Tennessee decreased 35% following the requirement of pre-authorization for all topicals and compound drugs, regardless of the ODG Formulary status. By contrast, Maryland is an open formulary state, which allows physicians to prescribe any medication available on the market. In an effort to address the use of costly topicals and compounds, Chesapeake Employers leverages established medical policy supported by evidence-based medicine and guidelines to help educate healthcare providers. Assessment of the topical’s therapeutic value becomes necessary in continuing its use with our injured workers. Research shared from the American Medical Association (AMA) Opioid Task Force, medical journals and the Federal Drug Administration’s Opioid Analgesic REMS Educational Blueprint shows healthcare providers are less likely to prescribe medication when educated about the risk, especially when guidance is supported by medical guidelines and continuing medical educational training focused on opioid prescribing, non-opioid alternatives and pain management. An educated prescriber provides another layer of protection to the process, because providers are asked to provide the rationale that supports medical necessity and appropriateness. 

In addition to discussions with providers, Chesapeake Employers has implemented other successful initiatives. The company partners with a local compounding pharmacy to meet the prescription needs of injured workers at a lower cost. The company also provides educational letters to prescribers for high-cost topicals for which there are therapeutically equivalent alternatives at a much lower cost. Some individual claim recommendations generate cost savings of greater than 85% without compromise of the desired clinical outcomes.

Conclusion

Educating patients, educating prescribers, using a multi-disciplinary team, enhancing data analysis and reporting, in addition to using peer reviews and independent medical evaluations (IMEs), offer a cohesive approach to evaluating the medical necessity and therapeutic effectiveness of compounds and topicals.

In the face of rising use and cost, insurance companies must help injured workers receive cost-effective and therapeutically effective drugs so they can receive the care they deserve and ultimately return to work and more productive lives. 

See also: Can AI Solve Health Insurance Fraud?  

However, there is still a lot of work to be done when it comes to taking care of our injured workers. It is strongly believed that healthcare professionals are conscious of prescription costs when they are educated about the cost ramifications of their prescribing habits. Greater awareness and transparency about topical pain medications results in better, informed patient care decisions. As Larry Winget said in his book "It’s Called Work for A Reason," “Knowledge is not power. The implementation of that knowledge is power.”

When all parties involved in the workers’ compensation system understand the therapeutic equivalence, effectiveness and cost savings from using alternatives; and the importance of only prescribing drugs when it is medically necessary for the injured worker, everyone wins.


Kevin Bingham

Profile picture for user KevinBingham

Kevin Bingham

Kevin Bingham, ACAS, CSPA, MAAA, is the chief results officer of subsidiary initiatives at Chesapeake Employers’ Insurance. He has over 27 years of industry experience, including 21 years of consulting.

Key Advantage in Property Underwriting

With AI and high-resolution geospatial imagery, it has become possible to achieve high-precision, nationwide, building-based geocoding.

In the real estate market, it is often said that the three most important factors are location, location and location. For underwriting, it is essential to also have data on many specific characteristics of the property such as square footage, exterior and interior building materials, roof shape, foundation type and size, the presence of pools or fences -- and there is a lot of buzz in the industry about creating comprehensive property attributes. However, these data points must be associated with the correct address before any adequate analysis can be conducted. This is where geocoding comes into play.

Geocoding provides a set of coordinates for each address, with the goal of allowing the insurer to understand the location of each building that is being insured and its proximity to various peril zones. Geocoding solutions have long been used by insurers for underwriting and risk assessment. Over time, new approaches and technologies have enabled increasing precision as solutions evolved from postal code centroids to street level centroids to land parcel centroids. These geocoding solutions have each endeavored to estimate where the building on each property is located by using crude estimates such as the center of a ZIP code, center of the parcel or side of the street – all of which may be far away from the building’s actual physical location.

Now, enter the most precise geolocation of all: building-based geocoding. With the advent of AI technology and high-resolution geospatial imagery, it has recently become possible to achieve high-precision nationwide building-based geocoding – correctly providing geocodes on top of buildings across the country. The foundation of this solution is a complete and recent set of building footprints (a polygonal representation of the base of each building derived from satellite or aerial imagery), to which a comprehensive set of address points is then attributed. This ensures that each geocode is placed on top of the correct building – not an estimation. 

Unfortunately, many insurers still use the older geocoding methods, which result in non-trivial portfolio risk. Recent research conducted by Ecopia.AI revealed an estimated $43 billion of value at-risk across the U.S. resulting from inaccurate geocoding based on earlier, less precise methods. Without accurate location information, underwriters could quote and write property risk based on a completely different set of factors versus what exists in reality. On a given property, the exposure that a building has to various perils might vary significantly based on where it resides.

Two examples illustrate the potential problems with traditional geocoding and the power of building-based geocoding.

In the first example, there may be two homes on adjacent properties on a river. One home may be near the river within the flood zone, while the next home may be farther away from the riverbank and out of the flood zone. In this scenario, the home nearer the river would have a much higher risk of flooding. If underwriters are using the street-level geocoding solutions that were popular in earlier times, or even parcel centroids, the two homes may both be identified as having the same risk profile.

Another example would be two homes that are near a forest subject to wildfire risk. One home may be positioned farther away from the forest on the lot and have a natural firebreak between the structure and the forest edge. The next home may be close by but positioned closer to the forest, diminishing the firebreak. These two homes would have very different fire risk profiles.

Other scenarios may have to do with how close a building is to buildings on adjoining lots, how close they are to a street or highway, how the location on the lot relates to the nearest fire hydrant or many other factors.

See also: 3 Key Enablers for Better Underwriting

Geocoding may seem like a standard capability that every insurer uses, providing no competitive differentiation, but nothing could be further from the truth. The precision offered by building-based geocoding that leverages transformational technologies can produce variations in results that are dramatic.  

For a deeper dive into building-based geocoding and its power for insurers, join me on a webinar with Ecopia Tech. Register at this link for Geocoding: The often overlooked foundation of underwriting & risk assessment.


Mark Breading

Profile picture for user MarkBreading

Mark Breading

Mark Breading is a partner at Strategy Meets Action, a Resource Pro company that helps insurers develop and validate their IT strategies and plans, better understand how their investments measure up in today's highly competitive environment and gain clarity on solution options and vendor selection.