Open Insurance Data Standard White Paper Work Group - 1/13/25

Open Insurance Data Standard White Paper Work Group - 1/13/25

 

AntiTrustSlide_LF.jpg

Attendees

  • Peter Antley

  • Jim Bamberger

  • Rob Clark

  • Andy Mielke

  • Lanaya Nelson

  • Nathan Southern

  • Jenny Tornquist

  • Greg Williams

Logistics

Peter Antley (PA) read the LF Antitrust Statement and welcomed attendees.

Discussion

A. Peter’s outline for the White Paper - assessment and group discussion

  1. PA has been working steadily on the outline - backfilling it, but also doing some related free-form writing to flesh it out.

  2. He wants to start with why we need another data standard, before the paper gets into the topic of extensibility. This will mean flipping the order of these two items. The rationale behind this: The extensibility section, by default, answers the question of why another data standard is needed.

  3. The initial discussion focused on two matters - a review of the copy that Peter has written, and a discussion of sections 2(c) and 2(d).

    1. Review of the content/copy Peter has already written, per the screenshot below:

Screenshot 2025-01-14 at 11.26.41 AM.png

i. Rob Clark suggestion: modifying the tense in the first sentence in the second paragraph of section 2(f) above - from OIDS “will be different” to OIDS “is different” - makes it more current, and more persuasive. Also establishes stylistic/tense consistency with section 2(e).

ii. Jenny Tornquist suggestion: in 2(b) above - the policy admin is explicitly called out, the claims side should be called out as well. Change to “Policy and Claim Administrative Systems” and “Carrier Administrative Systems.”

  1. Discussion of 2(c)

    1. 2(c) How can I learn more about (OIDS)?

      1. Peter is unclear how to flesh this out and what information should be placed here.

      2. Currently, there is an openIDL wiki.

      3. Soon there will also be an openIDS page on the website - Lanaya Nelson ecosystem mgr. is working on designing this. The layout is close to completion. Lanaya has asked Peter to share the outline content and freeform writing with her, so that she can use it to populate said webpage (see action items below). Currently, Lanaya is structuring it around Werner Kruck’s content. Her goal is to have the webpage/new web content ready in time for the Cloverleaf/reThought press release. LF will release this press release on the wire Mon. or Tue. of next week.

      4. There are additional channels alongside this - including mailing lists about the project, slack channels, etc.

      5. In terms of the new content on the website, Peter expressed a desire for a landing page and a subdomain (page) exclusively devoted to documentation. For instance, the landing page might specifically include information about a module for an HTML parser, who is maintaining and who is working on it. But then it would also include implementation documentation for those who want to do a deeper dive.

    2. 2(d) - How is (OIDS) managed?

      1. Two domains of management: How do we manage human capital that controls OIDS, and the standard itself - two different matters.

      2. PA asked the group how he should speak (in the white paper) to management of the data standard by OIDS - i.e., what committees do we have? How does something move from not being a part of the standard to being a part of the standard?

      3. PA also sought clarity on how - within our telematics plan - the commonly-used extensions become part of the core - as discussed in the prior meeting. PA asked for clarification on what the process looks like for the Technical Governing Body to approve these modifications.

      4. Cory clarified that proposals must be written along these lines and must get formal signoff from the managing body (likely the TSC in this case - though the white paper group rolls up into OIDS working group and that rolls up into the TSC).

      5. Rob: When the augmentation at hand is a requirement for regulatory reporting or statutory reporting, it’s a no-brainer, but when it comes to data being used for rating that they want to capture that isnt necessarily an industry standard, that necessitates a review by the formal technical body (TSC, etc.)

  2. Discussion of Section 3 - Case Studies - Jennifer Tornquist

    1. Jenny and her team are working on this section - drafting copy about what the first regulatory reporting case study will look like.

    2. Case Study 2 - about Bordereau Reporting. Cory Isaacson agreed to draft this.

GMT20250113-160147_Recording_1920x1080.mp4

Logistically, the group will resume meeting on Mon. 1/27.

  1.  

Action Items

Peter Antley - Share outline content and freeform writing content with Lanaya Nelson.

Lanaya Nelson - Draw on outline content and freeform writing content to populate the new openIDS webpage as you add a specific section on the white paper. Website should be done in time for Cloverleaf and reThought press release announcement. Peter would like a basic landing page and a subpage that exclusively contains OIDS documentation. (See Peter’s directives in the above minutes).

Per Jenny’s request, transparency about the content on said webpage(s) is critical - so there should be a back-and-forth about the information that is being incorporated.

Lanaya Nelson: Send out (to the group) an example of another project and what they include on their landing pages, to give everyone a sense of what we have in mind for openIDL/OIDS.

Jenny Tornquist and Team: Begin drafting Section 3 of the white paper about the Regulatory Reporting Case Study/POC, and corresponding use cases.

Cory Isaacson - Begin drafting the portion of Section 3 of the white paper that deals with the Bordereau Report case study/POC.

Jenny Tornquist and Peter Antley: Get agenda for Thursday’s call to Nathan and he will disseminate on Wed.

 

 

 

 

Related content