410 likes | 540 Vues
This seminar delves into the role of actuarial and claims reserves in managing casualty losses. Key concepts include the distinction between case reserves, IBNR (Incurred But Not Reported), and actuarial reserves. Participants will explore effective case reserving practices, the importance of qualitative and quantitative assessments, and how consistency in reserving impacts loss evaluations. Case studies highlight common misconceptions, operational changes, and the actuarial analysis required to ensure robust financial outcomes in the insurance industry.
E N D
Actuarial & Claims — Strange Partners? Casualty Loss Reserve Seminar Lisa G. ChanzitPatrick R. NewlinRuth E. Winnicki
Claim Reserves — What Do We Mean? • Case reserves • IBNR (incurred but not reported)
Big Differences • Case reserves • Actuarial reserves
Case Reserves — What Are They? • Dollar estimates of loss • Determined by claim staff • Placed on individual claims
Case Reserves • Dependent upon currently available information and specific fact that are subject to change (usually for the worse) as cases develop
Case Evaluation and Reserving, e.g., WC $35,000 Resolution Verify MMI and impairment rating $25,000 Analyze official reports, e.g., medical Follow-up contacts Value Field Investigation $15,000 Verify injury and disability Initial contacts with injured worker,medical provider(s), witness(es) $10,000 Verify employment $0 Assignment 0 1 month 3 months 6 months 9 months 12 months Time
Case Reserving Practices • A common misconception or pitfall assessing the effectiveness and consistency of case reserving practices • “Stepladder/Stair Step” reserving
Claim Reserves • The actuary takes over where case reserving ends
Actuarial Reserves • Determined by statistical projections of historical loss data, i.e., aggregate information • Subject to a higher degree of objectivity and accuracy compared to case reserve estimates • Involves considerable judgment
Actuarial Reserves (continued) • Takes into consideration • Claims not yet reported • Reopened claim reserves • Consistency of case reserving practices • Reinsurance • Shock losses
What Actuaries Like From Claim Staff • Effective, consistent case reserving practices • Candid communication — Changes in case reserving philosophy — Any changes that may influence case reserving consistency — Claim trends
Effective and Consistent Case Reserving Practices • If effectiveness and consistency is important — if you don’t have it, how can you get it?
Effective and Consistent Case Reserving Practices • Ensure sound case evaluation and reserving practices
Sound Case Evaluationand Reserving Practices • Case reserving philosophy • Probable or expected total cost of the claim, based on current, available information
Sound Case Evaluationand Reserving Practices • Case reserving methodology • Separate dollar amounts for the types of loss • Case evaluation and reserve worksheet
Sound Case Evaluationand Reserving Practices • Monitor and manage the practices • Establish appropriate authority levels • Conduct qualitative assessment, i.e., individual claim file reviews • Perform quantitative analysis • Link results of analyses to an individual’s performance appraisal
Case Studies: Two Types • Actuary notices something unexpected in data • Management or claims staff notifies actuary of change in operation
Case Study #1 • Claim management changed general liability TPA a year ago to improve case evaluation/reserving practices • Claim management is also improving oversight and management of TPA’s performance • Financial results • Customer service measures • Quality/compliance with company standards • Efficiency of operations evaluation
Case Study #1 (Continued) • Changes in case reserving practices — actuary assesses these changes • Actuarial Analysis • Validate change • paid-to-incurred ratios • average paid claims • average outstanding claims • Adjust analysis
Case Study #1 (Continued) • Validation • Increase in paid-to-incurred ratios • Stable paid loss trends • Decrease in average outstanding • Follow up • Confirm with interviews and/or claim file review • Development factors based on unadjusted case reserves could be understated
Case Study #2 • Actuary sees decreasing case reported workers compensation severity Decreasing Severity
Case Study #2 (Continued) Average Outstanding Claim
Case Study #2 (Continued) • Possible explanations: • Company management/operational • Environmental, e.g., legislative reform
Case Study #2 (Continued) • Interview claim manager • Recent centralization of claim administration function • Delays setting up and assigning claims • decrease in reported severity appears to be result of delays
Case Study #2 (Continued) • Adjust actuarial analysis: • Short-term, use trended historical frequency, severity to project 1998 ultimate losses
Case Study #2 (Continued) • Action Items • Determine if the new structure is effective • Conduct claim operational review • business process analysis • quantitative assessment (overpayment study) • Outcome • Recommendations • Improve work processes • Implement “how to” monitor/measure results • Long-term actuarial adjustments depend on nature of actions taken
Case Study #3 CFO advises actuary over past several years: • Greater proportion claims reported earlier • Case reserves established earlier and at more adequate levels • Greater proportion of claims paid earlier and closed earlier
Case Study #3 (Continued) • Evidence • Outstanding average claim value • Paid average claim value • Paid-to-reported ratio • Closed claim counts to reported claim counts
Case Study #3 (Continued) • Results of claim review as respects case reserve strengthening • High claim staff turnover • New adjusters inexperienced • Regular case reserve reviews? • Recent strengthening represents 50% (or less) of cases
Case Study #3 (Continued) • Case reserve strengtheningImplications: • Possible future adverse development • Claims: • conduct case reserve review — levels sufficient? • conduct staffing analysis • Actuarial: • depends on results of review Action Items:
Case Study #3 (Continued) • Results of claim review as respects faster settlement rate • Some evidence of faster settlement rate • Claim department “closing campaign” • quickly lower pending caseloads • Questionable cases settled prematurely?
Case Study #3 (Continued) • Faster settlement rateImplications: • Paying too much to close claims? • Claims: • assess the basis for the closing campaign • conduct qualitative and quantitative claim review • Actuarial: • use operational analysis to adjust reserve calculation Action Items:
Claim Reserving • Claim reserving is a shared enterprise between company management, claim and actuarial functions • Claim Person — Case reserving practices • Actuary — Supplements case reserves and projects ultimate total claim reserve needs • Company Management — • Develops policies/procedures • Monitors and manages practices/procedures • Advises actuary of changes