The core-versus-outsource split that regulators, capacity providers, and policyholders actually want to see before your first claim
Summary
New insurers, MGAs, and syndicates routinely underinvest in claims design compared to underwriting design, treating it as a headcount problem to solve once volume justifies it. That’s backwards: a start-up carries more claims risk per policy in its first eighteen months than an established one, precisely because its processes are unproven, and regulators know it. This whitepaper argues the answer isn’t building a full in-house claims department before launch, nor outsourcing claims wholesale. It’s drawing a precise line: a narrow set of functions, including coverage determination, reserve setting, complaints handling with regulatory reporting duties, fraud referral, and litigation authority, must stay inside the regulated entity because accountability can’t be delegated. Everything else, from intake to medical bill review, is a legitimate candidate for a supporting delivery model, provided the right controls exist before day one.
What you’ll learn:
- Which claims functions must legally stay in-house, and which are safe to hand to a delivery partner, laid out in a working framework you can adapt to your own regulatory regime and class of business
- The pre-launch controls regulators expect to see before your first claim arrives, including SLA/KPI frameworks, escalation matrices, audit cadences, and vulnerable-customer protocols
- How to pass Lloyd’s authorization and delegated authority review with a claims plan as detailed as your underwriting plan, and why vague claims narratives trigger extra scrutiny
- What MGAs and insurtechs specifically need to prove to carriers and customers, including why claims governance should be a capacity-negotiation asset, not a compliance afterthought
- How to select and govern a claims support partner, from due diligence checkpoints to contract clauses like escalation triggers, audit rights, and transition-out provisions that keep you from becoming dependent on a single vendor
- A phased roadmap for scaling claims operations from a lean pre-launch governance core through full operational maturity, so you never over-build fixed cost against an unproven book
Get the Free Whitepaper now!
Fill out the form and we'll send the full whitepaper straight to your inbox — ready to read offline or share with your team.
The Challenge
A company-wide hiring freeze left the client’s project teams without enough in-house estimators to keep pace with a growing pipeline of construction and engineering bids. In an industry where precise cost estimating is the foundation of effective project budgeting and resource allocation, every delayed estimate risked a missed submission deadline — and a lost contract.
The Approach
More White Papers
Govern the whole portfolio without running every portco’s team
Operating partners want one offshore standard across the portfolio without taking over day-to-day hiring at every portco. This guide gives them a two-layer model: the five things the sponsor sets at every portco (security baseline, data access, KPI definitions, reporting cadence, change-of-control terms) and the four things each portco keeps (roles, tools, culture, daily direction). Includes a shared KPI dictionary, a CX partner vetting module, and a quarterly portfolio scorecard that separates one-portco problems from portfolio-level fixes.
Find out more
The offshore staffing RFP kit
Compare offshore staffing providers with 45 vetted questions, a weighted scoring framework, and SLA language that holds up past month six.
Find out more
Accountants will become business translators, not just financial experts
See the eight-point framework CFOs use to turn accountants into business translators, with a readiness assessment and a real client example. Free guide.
Find out more
