Actuarial Outpost
 
Go Back   Actuarial Outpost > Exams - Please Limit Discussion to Exam-Related Topics > SoA > Modules 6-8
FlashChat Actuarial Discussion Preliminary Exams CAS/SOA Exams Cyberchat Around the World Suggestions

ACTUARIAL SALARY SURVEYS
Contact DW Simpson for a Personalized Salary Survey

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1  
Old 02-24-2018, 09:43 PM
wonkalu wonkalu is offline
SOA
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Posts: 18
Default Fail FA twice

I got my fail grade last night, totally have no idea what I can improved for the 3rd try. Last time the comments on the task I need to improve are task 4 and 5, and this time they are 1 and 4. I think 1 and 4 are really straightforward, totally have no idea what I could improve further.

I want to request detailed feedback from them, but unfortunately, I need to wait until July. FA is the last requirement to get my ASA, continuously failing on it make me to rethink my exam plan. Does anyone have suggestion on FA 3rd try or exam plan?

Btw, I suspect if they really look over my report. Mad at it!
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 02-25-2018, 10:33 PM
Pkunforgivin's Avatar
Pkunforgivin Pkunforgivin is offline
SOA
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 25
Default

For Task 1, I followed the format of EOM 4 (with more specifics).

For Task 4, make sure you are performing a sensitivity test using reasonable impacts for each pricing assumption and more importantly, make sure you are providing the correct critical/least critical assumptions.

For Task 5, do not be too quantitative. When you receive a professional memo (for example Medicare Advantage memos), they are straight to the point and are not technical with their answers. They may explain in a few sentences the cause/drivers, but not show the derivation. Make sure you organize your paragraphs and structure them in a way that is easy to read. You want to be as clear as you can with few sentence backups.

Hope this helps.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 02-25-2018, 11:27 PM
cubanaggie12 cubanaggie12 is offline
SOA AAA
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
College: Texas A&M University Alumi
Posts: 12
Default

I would also say for Task 1 be specific to CDEF and chose key risks that are more easily mitigated and stuff you can tak about. Be careful about multiple risks that deal with the same thing.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 02-25-2018, 11:28 PM
cubanaggie12 cubanaggie12 is offline
SOA AAA
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
College: Texas A&M University Alumi
Posts: 12
Default

Also, you could just ask for feedback just in case.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 02-26-2018, 12:19 AM
arto83 arto83 is offline
Member
SOA
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: New York
College: Brooklyn College Alum
Posts: 546
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cubanaggie12 View Post
Also, you could just ask for feedback just in case.
Not till July!
__________________
ASA

Chuck Norris...
...is allowed to talk about Fight Club.
...lost both his legs in a car accident....and still managed to walk it off.
...understands the ending of 2001: A Space Odyssey.
...really DOES find gold when he picks his nose.
...is a stunt double for Optimus Prime.
...can dribble a football.
...can sneeze with his eyes open.
...CAN lick his elbow.
...can judge a book by its cover.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 02-28-2018, 06:32 PM
Arms91 Arms91 is offline
Member
SOA
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
College: Eastern Kentucky University Alumni
Posts: 158
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by wonkalu View Post
I got my fail grade last night, totally have no idea what I can improved for the 3rd try. Last time the comments on the task I need to improve are task 4 and 5, and this time they are 1 and 4. I think 1 and 4 are really straightforward, totally have no idea what I could improve further.

I want to request detailed feedback from them, but unfortunately, I need to wait until July. FA is the last requirement to get my ASA, continuously failing on it make me to rethink my exam plan. Does anyone have suggestion on FA 3rd try or exam plan?

Btw, I suspect if they really look over my report. Mad at it!
I'm in the same boat. Just found out I failed FA for the second time. My tasks needing the most improvement this time are 1 and 4. Last time they were 1 and 5.

I'm really struggling with how to improve task 1. I have 3-4 risks for each of the risk categories in my RCD tool, and they are all relevant to the fund and properly categorized according to Segal. Also, I feel like I've justified my key risks well. I included a second table with a qualitative analysis on the frequency and severity for each risk which helped me justify the key risks, and I also wrote a paragraph for each one further justifying why the risks I chose were "key".

The only thing I can think of that the graders must have had an issue with are my mitigation strategies. Here are a couple of examples (I had 3 total key risks):

Employed population risk (risk that employed population declines and does not remain stable): I gave mitigation strategies for this risk such as implementing tax breaks in other areas or federally reimbursed daycare expenses for members of the employed population to encourage people to remain in the workforce despite the new CDEF tax.

Fertility rates risk (risk that couples start having more children since the overall cost is lower due to the new CDEF fund covering college expenses):
I described a mitigation strategy for this risk involving modifying the CDEF parameters slightly so that a couple's first child who is eligible for the fund will get 100% of the benefit, however the couples second child will only get 50% of the benefit if eligible.

Does anyone agree that the risk mitigation approaches I provided are off base since they don't really have to do with the how the fund is managed? If so, does anyone have ideas for other mitigation approaches for these risks? I'm drawing a blank. Maybe I should change my key risks to be ones that I can think of solid mitigation techniques for? Although I kind of hate to do that since I feel like I've done a good job justifying these risks to be "key" out of all the ones listed in my RCD tool.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 02-28-2018, 06:42 PM
LunchBox LunchBox is offline
Member
Non-Actuary
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 203
Default

edit - I think fertility risk is a bad choice.

Last edited by LunchBox; 02-28-2018 at 06:45 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 02-28-2018, 06:42 PM
Sir Issac's Avatar
Sir Issac Sir Issac is offline
Member
SOA
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 432
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Arms91 View Post
I'm in the same boat. Just found out I failed FA for the second time. My tasks needing the most improvement this time are 1 and 4. Last time they were 1 and 5.

I'm really struggling with how to improve task 1. I have 3-4 risks for each of the risk categories in my RCD tool, and they are all relevant to the fund and properly categorized according to Segal. Also, I feel like I've justified my key risks well. I included a second table with a qualitative analysis on the frequency and severity for each risk which helped me justify the key risks, and I also wrote a paragraph for each one further justifying why the risks I chose were "key".

The only thing I can think of that the graders must have had an issue with are my mitigation strategies. Here are a couple of examples (I had 3 total key risks):

Employed population risk (risk that employed population declines and does not remain stable): I gave mitigation strategies for this risk such as implementing tax breaks in other areas or federally reimbursed daycare expenses for members of the employed population to encourage people to remain in the workforce despite the new CDEF tax.

Fertility rates risk (risk that couples start having more children since the overall cost is lower due to the new CDEF fund covering college expenses):
I described a mitigation strategy for this risk involving modifying the CDEF parameters slightly so that a couple's first child who is eligible for the fund will get 100% of the benefit, however the couples second child will only get 50% of the benefit if eligible.

Does anyone agree that the risk mitigation approaches I provided are off base since they don't really have to do with the how the fund is managed? If so, does anyone have ideas for other mitigation approaches for these risks? I'm drawing a blank. Maybe I should change my key risks to be ones that I can think of solid mitigation techniques for? Although I kind of hate to do that since I feel like I've done a good job justifying these risks to be "key" out of all the ones listed in my RCD tool.
Your fertility risk mitigation technique does not align with the CDEF objective. They want to pay 100 percent of eligible students tuition not 50 percent.

Also fertility risk is part of student growth rate assumption. You can just use student growth rate as a risk, where the risk is that the growth rate is higher than expected. This can be catoegeized as insurance risk
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 02-28-2018, 06:43 PM
ao fan's Avatar
ao fan ao fan is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: hating the ao
Studying for EA-2L
Posts: 110,422
Blog Entries: 1
Default

I could be wrong, but I'm not sure "fertility rate risk" counts as a risk. It seems like the actual risk is that the student growth rate assumption is inadequate and the reason being that fertility rates increased.
__________________
Be prepared to be overwhelmed by cuteness!!!!
Spoiler:
awesome, crazy, badass maltese (compliments of booger):
Spoiler:
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 02-28-2018, 06:43 PM
ao fan's Avatar
ao fan ao fan is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: hating the ao
Studying for EA-2L
Posts: 110,422
Blog Entries: 1
Default

ninja'd
__________________
Be prepared to be overwhelmed by cuteness!!!!
Spoiler:
awesome, crazy, badass maltese (compliments of booger):
Spoiler:
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 10:52 PM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, 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 0.46810 seconds with 9 queries