2021-12-3 Meeting Agenda
Date
Dec 3, 2021
This is a weekly series for The Regulatory Reporting Data Model Working Group. The RRDMWG is a collaborative group of insurers, regulators and other insurance industry innovators dedicated to the development of data models that will support regulatory reporting through an openIDL node. The data models to be developed will reflect a greater synchronization of data for insurer statistical and financial data and a consistent methodology that insurers and regulators can leverage to modernize the data reporting environment. The models developed will be reported to the Regulatory Reporting Steering Committee for approval for publication as an open-source data model.
openIDL Community is inviting you to a scheduled Zoom meeting.
Join Zoom Meeting
https://zoom.us/j/98908804279?pwd=Q1FGcFhUQk5RMEpkaVlFTWtXb09jQT09
Meeting ID: 989 0880 4279
Passcode: 740215
One tap mobile
+16699006833,,98908804279# US (San Jose)
+12532158782,,98908804279# US (Tacoma)
Dial by your location
+1 669 900 6833 US (San Jose)
+1 253 215 8782 US (Tacoma)
+1 346 248 7799 US (Houston)
+1 929 205 6099 US (New York)
+1 301 715 8592 US (Washington DC)
+1 312 626 6799 US (Chicago)
888 788 0099 US Toll-free
877 853 5247 US Toll-free
Meeting ID: 989 0880 4279
Find your local number: https://zoom.us/u/aAqJFpt9B
Attendees
@Peter Antley (Deactivated)
@Ken Sayers (Deactivated)
@Chudwick, Susan R
@Harris, Dale
@Eric Lowe
@James Madison
@Kristin McDonald (Deactivated)
Libby Crews
@Lori Dreaver Munn (Deactivated)
@Megan Ebling
@Sandra Darby
Stephen Lee
@Truman Esmond (Deactivated)
@Ruturaj Waghmode (Deactivated)
Recording:
Goals
Develop the min requirements for stat reporting
Discuss items from: Attributes Index
Discussion items
Time | Item | Who | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|
1 | Anti Trust | Peter |
|
5 | Agenda | Peter | We can add items |
44 | Discuss Attributes | Group | |
5 | Discuss content for progress report to RRSC | Group | Peter will create a deck |
Notes
Attendee Introductions
Discuss Attributes
Attributes Index reviewed
Minimum vs expanded vs. regulatory vs. rejected
Susan: Derived fields vs raw list.
Example: Written premium must be provided but earned can be calculated
Dale: Explain how derived items are derived. Primary vs. minimum
Eric Lowe: Start at bottom, deal with basic data needed in HDS, leave rest (derivation) to smart contract. Identify just basic data collection
For each derived field, explain the columns that feed it.
Debate on NAIC equivalent or something more, better, different
Eric Lowe: Just emulating NAIC misses opportunities for better data. How do we make this one row (record) in a table in HDS then regulators
James Madison: Concerned that baking in a transactional model now, will keep it from getting broader, better later.
Truman: Monthly snapshot is the operational tempo of the data not the grain of it.
James: Grain comes down to key.
Ruturaj: Recommends continuing this exercise as is.
Attributes List discussed
Territory
Carriers often use proprietary ones so may not provide.
Sandra: Consider developing a standardized list.
Eric Lowe: Just use zip code to cross different mappings.
Agreed on 9 digit zip.
Carriers don’t want to provide where these policies are.
Ruturaj: This list is based on current stat plan, thus they are de facto essential. But should these be put onto openIDL? Question to remain open to next week.
Dale: Do we need business rules? Yes.