Self-Insuring Workers' Comp

Take Control of Your Costs

For hands-on employers, there are myriad benefits to self-insuring your workers' compensation program.
By: | April 25, 2016 • 2 min read
Stethoscope and money

Ever asked why would you self-insure your workers’ comp risks? I can think of two reasons.

First, if done right, it will provide better care for your employees and save money. Self-Insurance is a great way to accomplish the twin goals of the grand bargain, taking care of people and taking care of business.

Advertisement




Many employers also self-insure to align their workers’ compensation programs with their corporate values. They know that no vendor will have the same feel for their employees, their workplace or their business as they do. For the employer with the will to make the investment in time, the ROI is substantial.

Self-insurance is not an opt out plan. Rather, it is an alternative way for the employer to work within the workers’ compensation law, have some control over how their employees are handled in the system, and still retain exclusive remedy and common law defenses.

A self-insured employer is the carrier for workers’ compensation claims and can specify how, within the law, claims are handled. While most self-insureds use a TPA to administer claims, they can ensure their employees are treated with dignity and respect and can do away with many of the administrative frictions that irritate injured workers and employers alike.

Self-Insurance is a great way to accomplish the twin goals of the grand bargain, taking care of people and taking care of business.

This is for the hands-on employers, the ones who want to manage their business and reap the rewards. Like the rest of workers’ compensation there are several moving parts to self-insurance.

The employer’s investment is primarily the time it takes to manage their workers’ compensation program. Depending on the size of their organization, this can be an additional duty or a full-time position, but must be at a decision-making level to be fully effective.

Self-insured employers have a great deal of flexibility in structuring their programs. They can choose the level of exposure, who administers their claims, and vendors such as utilization review, bill review and case management.

Companies with a moderate to large number of employees will always pay their workers’ compensation losses over time. Premiums and experience modifications exist to make sure that happens.

The self-insurance option can sound a little scary, and many employers don’t really understand how it works. After all, premiums are a known cost and losses are a risk.

There is help available on the nuts and bolts through self-insurance associations in most jurisdictions. Information on who to contact about qualification and referrals to other companies currently self-insuring will be available for employers who want to explore this alternative.

Advertisement




Desire is the first step. Information is the second. If it sounds like a good idea for your company, do a little research and talk to other self-insureds. If you decide its right for you, your broker or an outside consultant can help you set up a program.

Many employers are just dissatisfied with the value proposition of how their injured employees are treated vs. the cost of insurance and lack of control.

Self-insurance can address all of those issues and put the success of the program squarely in the hands of the employer.

Sam McMurray is the Executive Director of the Texas Self Insurance Association and the Texas Certified Self Insurers Guaranty Association. McMurray has 22 years' experience managing a global workers' comp program for Lockheed Martin. He can be reached at [email protected]
Share this article:

RIMS 2016

Captives See Growth for Terrorism Risk

Captives can cover risks excluded from conventional terrorism policies and the potential gap left by the Terrorism Risk Insurance Act.
By: | April 13, 2016 • 2 min read
terrorism photo

An advance look at the “2016 Marsh Captive Benchmark Review” revealed a substantial growth in the number of captives targeted to terrorism coverage.

In the last three years, nearly 40 captives by Marsh clients were created to cover risks excluded from conventional terrorism policies and/or to provide access to reinsurance to cover the potential gap under the Terrorism Risk Insurance Act, said Ellen Charnley, San Francisco-based managing director, captive solutions, during a RIMS luncheon session on April 12.

“That’s a big growth area,” she said.

In addition, more than 20 other captives were formed to address international terrorism risks, she said.

Typically excluded perils include nuclear, biological, chemical and radiological risks, as well as cyber terrorism, and the captives provide access to the government backstop.

Other non-traditional coverages that are seeing captive growth are medical stop loss, cyber, international employee benefits, political risk, supply chain and crime, she said.

“We see a continued growth in non-traditional coverages,” Charnley said.

Chris Lay, London-based president, Marsh captive solutions, said the brokerage is seeing “a lot of activity tailoring captive programs to address cyber risks.”

Advertisement




In addition to evolving cyber risks and terrorism, other top risks being addressed by captives were catastrophic earth/weather events, economic downturn and political unrest, Lay said.

The top industry sectors that form captives remain financial institutions; health care; auto/manufacturing; retail/wholesale; and communications, media and technology.

However, Charnley noted, if premium dollars were used to rank the industries, communications, media and technology companies would probably rank second, below financial institutions.

Top-ranked unique or emerging industries forming captives were construction; energy; real estate; education; and sports, entertainment and events, she said.

For construction, the increased number is probably the result of improved economic conditions, she said.

For education, it’s more likely the reason is to seek access to reinsurance programs, said Art Koritzinsky, managing director, captive solutions, in New York.

He said Marsh expects to see continued growth in the number of 831(b) small captives, which have increased by 35 percent.

“That’s where a lot of the growth [in the captive market] is,” Koritzinsky said.

In December, the IRS rules regulating 831(b) captives increased the limit on direct premium from $1.2 million to $2.2 million and removed the ability of such captives to be used for estate planning, among other changes.

As for predictions, Marsh anticipates increased growth of captives for international employee benefits; terrorism, small captives; non-traditional risk; and in emerging markets such as Latin America and Asia Pacific.

They also anticipate companies beginning to use cash surpluses in captives for sophisticated investment strategies.

Marsh manages about 1,250 captives worldwide, with about $42 billion in premium. About 1,000 captive owners participated in the benchmark survey. Final results will be released in May.

Anne Freedman is managing editor of Risk & Insurance. She can be reached at [email protected]
Share this article:

Sponsored Content by CorVel

Advocacy: The Impact of Continuous Triage

Claims management is never stagnant. Utilizing a continuous triage model keeps injured employees on track to recovery.
By: | May 4, 2016 • 6 min read

SponsoredContent_CorVel

Introduction

In the world of workers’ compensation, timing is everything. Many studies have shown that the earlier a workplace incident or injury is acted upon, the more successful the results*. However, there is further evidence indicating there is even more of an impact seen when a claim is not only filed promptly, but also effective triage is conducted and management of the claim takes place consistently through closure.

Typically, every program incorporates a form of early intervention. But then what? While it is common knowledge that early claims reporting and medical treatment are the most critical parts of a claim, if left alone after management, an injured worker could – and often does – fall through the cracks.

All Claims Paths are Not Created Equal

Even with early intervention and the best intentions of the adjuster, things can still go wrong. What if we could follow one injury down two paths, resulting in two entirely different outcomes? This case study illustrates the difference between two claims management processes – one of proactive, continuous claims triage and one of inactivity after initial intervention – and the impact, or lack thereof, it can have on the outcome of a claim. By addressing all indicators, effective triage can drastically change the trajectory of a claim.

The Injury

While working at a factory, David, a 40-year-old employee, experienced sudden shoulder pain while lifting a heavy box. He reported the incident to his supervisor, who contacted their 24/7 triage call center to report the incident. After speaking with a triage nurse, the nurse recommended he go to an occupational medicine clinic for further evaluation, based on his self-reported symptoms of significant swelling, a lack of range of motion and a pain level described as greater than “8.”

The physician diagnosed David with a shoulder sprain and prescribed two weeks of rest, ice and prescription strength ibuprofen. He restricted David from any lifting over his head.

By all accounts, early intervention was working. Utilizing 24/7 nurse triage, there was no lag time between the incident and care. David received timely medical attention and had a treatment plan in place within one day.

But Wait…

A critical factor in any program is a return to work date, yet David was not given a return to work date from the physician at the occupational medicine clinic; therefore, no date was entered in the system.

One small, crucial detail needs just as much attention as when an incident is initially reported. What happens the third week of a claim is just as important as what happens on the day the injury occurs. Involvement with a claim must take place through claim closure and not just at initial triage.

The Same Old Story

After three weeks of physical therapy, no further medical interventions and a lack of communication from his adjuster, David returned to his physician complaining of continued pain. The physician encouraged him to continue physical therapy to improve his mobility and added an opioid prescription to help with his pain.

At home, with no return to work in sight, David became depressed and continued to experience pain in his shoulder. He scheduled an appointment with the physician months later, stating physical therapy was not helping. Since David’s pain had not subsided, the physician ordered an MRI, which came back negative, and wrote David a prescription for medication to manage his depression. The physician referred him to an orthopedic specialist and wrote him a new prescription for additional opioids to address his pain…

Costly medical interventions continued to accrue for the employer and the surmounting risk of the claim continued to go unmanaged. His claim was much more severe than anyone knew.

What if his injury had been managed?

A Model Example

Using a claims system that incorporated a predictive modeling rules engine, the adjuster was immediately prompted to retrieve a return to work date from the physician. Therefore, David’s file was flagged and submitted for a further level of nurse triage intervention and validation. A nurse contacted the physician and verified that there was no return to work date listed on the medical file because the physician’s initial assessment restricted David to no lifting.

As a result of these triage validations, further interventions were needed and a telephonic case manager was assigned to help coordinate care and pursue a proactive return to work plan. Working with the physical therapist and treating physician resulted in a change in David’s medication and a modified physical therapy regimen.

After a few weeks, David reported an improvement in his mobility and his pain level was a “3,” thus prompting the case manager’s request for a re-evaluation. After his assessment, the physician lifted the restriction, allowing David to lift 10 pounds overhead. With this revision, David was able to return to work at modified duty right away. Within six weeks he returned to full duty.

With access to all of the David’s data and a rules engine to keep adjusters on top of the claim, the medical interventions that were needed for his recovery were validated, therefore effectively managing his recovery by continuing to triage his claim. By coordinating care plans with the physician and the physical therapist, and involving a case manager early on, the active management of David’s claim enabled him to remain engaged in his recovery. There was no lapse in communication, treatment or activity.

CorVel’s Model

After 24/7 nurse triage is conducted and an injured worker receives initial care, CorVel’s claims system, CareMC, conducts continuous triage of all data points collected at claim inception and throughout the life of a claim utilizing its integrated rules engine. Predictive indicators send alerts to prompt the adjuster to take action when needed until the claim is closed ­– not just at the beginning of the claim.

This predictive modeling tool flags potentially complex claims with the risk for high exposure, marking claims that need intervention so that CorVel can assign appropriate resources to mitigate risk.

Claims triage is constant – that is the necessary model. Even on an adjuster’s best day, humans aren’t perfect. A rules engine helps flag things that people can miss. A combination of predictive systems and human intervention ensures claims management is never stagnant – that there is no lapse in communication, activity or treatment. With an advocacy team in the form of an adjuster empowered by a powerful rules engine and a case manager looking out for the best care, injured employees remain engaged in their recovery. By perpetuating patient advocacy, continuous triage reduces claim severity and improves claim outcomes, returning injured workers to the workforce and reducing payors’ risk.

*WCRI.

This article was produced by CorVel Corporation and not the Risk & Insurance® editorial team.



CorVel is a national provider of risk management solutions for employers, third party administrators, insurance companies and government agencies seeking to control costs and promote positive outcomes.
Share this article: