Actuarial Outpost
 
Go Back   Actuarial Outpost > Actuarial Discussion Forum > Health - Disability
FlashChat Actuarial Discussion Preliminary Exams CAS/SOA Exams Cyberchat Around the World Suggestions


Fill in a brief DW Simpson Registration Form
to be contacted when new jobs meet your criteria.


Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1  
Old 12-08-2014, 01:50 PM
SelfOrgCrit SelfOrgCrit is offline
SOA
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Michigan
Posts: 21
Default Health Reserves: How do you treat "large claims" for IBNR?

I'm new to the reserving department of a health insurance company. I don't have previous health reserving experience, so I'm wondering if folks can share what tools/techniques/methods/advice they have for treating claims in the lags that are abnormally large.

Currently, our company leaves the large claims in the lags while calculating a base level of IBNR, and accrues separately an additional amount for large claims that are over a certain threshold (e.g., $100,000). The downside to this, from my perspective, is that the large claims are "noise" in the lags that are used to calculate the base level of IBNR.

Is this a common approach?

Thanks in advance for the advice.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 12-08-2014, 02:11 PM
Dr T Non-Fan Dr T Non-Fan is offline
Member
SOA AAA
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Just outside of Nowhere
Posts: 94,345
Default

How large are they relative to the size of a single cell in the triangle, and of the total incurred claims paid thus far?

This approach implies that large claims happen, and that other large claims will happen in about the same frequency (though the timing is not so precise).
I.e., some month after that large claim's incurred month might get a large claim. Unknown is which incurred month it will be, nor how much it will be for.
If you're using the IBNR or the completion factors or the estimated ultimate incurred claims of each month for some other project, then yeah, maybe you shouldn't.
But as an estimate of the current IBNR, not so bad.

The alternatives are much more complex and don't, IMO, add much accuracy.
Here's an alternative approach:
1. Get your lag triangle.
2. Define "large claims" and remove them from the lag triangle.
3. Determine completion factors of no-large-claims lag triangle.
4. Determine no-large-claims IBNR.
5. Estimate large claims for each month. (Yeah, you figure out how to do this, and make sure it's an actuarially sound method. Because, auditors.)
6. Add unpaid large claims to IBNR.
7. Spread unpaid large claims somehow across the lag months.
8. Update completion factors, in case someone wants to use them for their projects.

Repeat every month.
__________________
"Facebook is a toilet." -- LWTwJO
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 12-16-2014, 03:56 PM
SelfOrgCrit SelfOrgCrit is offline
SOA
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Michigan
Posts: 21
Default

Great, thanks for the insight!
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 03-19-2018, 11:08 PM
psp-fifa-fan psp-fifa-fan is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 679
Default

Hi, I'm new to reserves and I have a question.

For standard practice, do we usually calculate the IBNR with large claims removed (i.e. step #4 from Dr T Non-Fan), let's call it $X; then estimate unpaid large claims, let's call it $Y; then include $X and $Y in an IBNR letter?

Thanks,
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 03-20-2018, 12:47 PM
Dr T Non-Fan Dr T Non-Fan is offline
Member
SOA AAA
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Just outside of Nowhere
Posts: 94,345
Default

Disclaimer: I do not know what "an IBNR letter" is.

But, sure, add the two. That would be total IBNR, after all.

You'll want to keep track of your X's and Y's and compare them to what really happened. If you're off by a lot every month, might want to think about improving the process.
__________________
"Facebook is a toilet." -- LWTwJO
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 03-21-2018, 12:32 AM
mathmajor's Avatar
mathmajor mathmajor is online now
Member
SOA AAA
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Nowhere in particular
Studying for Japanese
College: B.S. Applied Math
Favorite beer: La Croix Grapefruit
Posts: 10,076
Default

It's the deliverable in consulting.

Yes, remove large claims in developing lag factors. Many of my clients had stop-loss and it was a no-brainer... you didn't need to add them back in.

In insurance we usually had good insight into large claims coming down. We had a central group that took nurse reports and cost estimates in. Hard to not know about a $500,000 claimant without some kind of preauth, ongoing condition, etc.
__________________
3.14159 26535 89793 23846 26433 83279 50288 41971 69399 37510 58209 74944 59230 78164 06286 20899 86280 34825 34211 70679 82148 08651 32823 06647 09384 46095 50582 23172 53594 08128 48111 74502 84102 70193 | THIS IS CNN | 85211 05559 64462 29489 54930 38196 44288 10975 66593 34461 28475 64823 37867 83165 27120 19091 45648 56692 34603 48610 45432 66482 13393 60726 02491 41273 72458 70066 06315 58817 48815 20920 96282 92540
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:36 PM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
*PLEASE NOTE: Posts are not checked for accuracy, and do not
represent the views of the Actuarial Outpost or its sponsors.
Page generated in 0.38160 seconds with 9 queries