HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC Resolution 7738 (Risk Management Study)RESOLUTION NO. 7738
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE SIGNING OF A
CONTRACT, LEASE OR AGREEMENT
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL RESOLVES as follows:
The MAYOR and CITY CLERK are authorized to execute, on behalf
of the City of San Rafael, a contract, lease or agreement with
UNIRISK, Inc., for a Risk Management Study to be completed within
Ninety days of project inception for an amount not to exceed $8,975.001
a copy of which is hereby attached and by this reference made a part
hereof.
I, JEANNE M. LEONCINI, Clerk of the City of San Rafael, hereby
certify that the foregoing resolution was duly and regularly intro-
duced and adopted at a REGULAR meeting of the City Council of said
City held on MONDAY the SIXTEENTH day of MAY , 1988, by the
following vote, to wit:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Boro, Breiner, Thayer & Mayor Mulryan
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:Frugoli
h.�
JEAN69 M. LEONCINI,'ty Clerk
CONSULTANT CONTRACT
THIS AGREEMENT, made on this first day of July 1988, is a contract
for services between the City of San Rafael, hereinafter known as
"San Rafael", and UniRisk, Inc. hereinafter known as "UniRisk".
RECITALS
A. San Rafael understands it has extensive risk exposures as a
municipal corporation;
B. San Rafael has implemented some aspects of a risk management
program;
C. San Rafael wishes to undertake a comprehensive study of its
risk management program;
D. UniRisk is experienced and well qualified in the field of
risk management, and can conduct a comprehensive study of San
Rafael's risk management program;
E. UniRisk is aware that information may come into its
possession that might impact San Rafael in the event such
information were released to outside parties; and
F. San Rafael desires to employ UniRisk to provide professional
and technical services necessary to conduct the above
mentioned risk management study;
THEREFORE, San Rafael and UniRisk mutually agree as follows:
1. SCOPE OF WORK: The scope of work is generally described as
conducting a comprehensive study of San Rafael's risk
management program. Specifics of the scope of work for this
project are set forth in UniRisk's proposal, attached hereto
as Exhibit I and made a part hereof as though fully set forth
verbatim.
2. COOPERATION: San Rafael and its officers and employees shall
provide necessary information to UniRisk as required to
perform the services described herein and in accordance with
the scope of work set forth above.
3. COMPENSATION: Compensation for services under paragraph 1.
shall consist of a total payment of Eight Thousand Nine
Hundred Seventy -Five dollars ($8,975), to be paid as follows:
A fifty percent (50%) retainer of $4,487.50 to be paid
upon the signing of this agreement.
The balance of $4,487.50 to be paid upon receipt of
UniRisk's final report.
- 1 -
�~ � ` rl N�
UmRisk
The compensation set forth in this paragraph shall be the
total compensation for the services provided, unless
otherwise agreed to in writing by San Rafael and UniRisk.
4. PAYMENT: Except for the retainer to be paid prior to
commencement, UniRisk shall be paid by San Rafael for
services rendered after receipt by San Rafael of UniRisk's
reports. UniRisk shall submit to San Rafael an invoice for
work completed. Payment by San Rafael shall be made within
thirty (30) days after receipt and approval of UniRisk's
invoice.
5. STATUS OF CONSULTANT: This Agreement calls for the
performance of the services of UniRisk as an independent
contractor, and UniRisk will not be considered an employee of
San Rafael for any purpose.
6. CONFIDENTIALITY: During the term of this Agreement, UniRisk
may be privileged with sensitive information that might
significantly impact San Rafael if such information were
disclosed to outside parties. UniRisk fully respects the
confidentiality of such information, and will not disclose to
anyone, directly or indirectly, either during the term of
this Agreement or at any time thereafter, any such
information or use such information other than in the course
of services provided for San Rafael under this Agreement.
All documents that UniRisk reviews, or confidential
information that UniRisk receives during the course of their
services under this Agreement, are the exclusive property of
San Rafael and shall remain in San Rafael's possession.
Under no circumstances shall any such information or
documents be removed from San Rafael without San Rafael's
written consent.
7. TERM OF AGREEMENT: The term of this Agreement shall be for
ninety (90) days, commencing with the date this contract is
executed, unless San Rafael changes the scope of the work set
forth under "SCOPE OF WORK", in which case a new expiration
date will be agreed upon by San Rafael and UniRisk.
8. TIME OF COMPLETION: The time for completion of this project
shall be as follows:
UniRisk shall begin the study within five (5) working
days following the execution of this Agreement and
the payment by San Rafael of UniRisk's retainer fee.
UniRisk shall complete the study and deliver a written
preliminary report within sixty (60) days following
UniRisk's commencement of work under this Agreement.
UniRisk shall deliver a written final report within
fifteen (15) working days after receipt by UniRisk of
- 2 -
UmRisk
the preliminary report containing San Rafael's comments,
suggestions and recommended changes.
9. NOTICES: All notices to either party shall be deemed to have
been provided by depositing the same, postage prepaid, with
the United States Postal Service, addressed as follows:
SAN RAFAEL: City of San Rafael
1400 Fifth Avenue
San Rafael, CA 94902
Attn: Ms. Suzanne Golt
UNIRISK: UniRisk, Inc.
One California Street
Suite 2780
San Francisco, CA 94111
Attn: Mr. Bruce Codding
10. INDEMNIFICATION: UniRisk agrees to hold harmless, indemnify,
including attorneys fees, and defend San Rafael, its
officers, agents and employees from any and all claims, loss,
liability and damages arising from its negligent or
intentional acts or omissions arising from UniRisk's work
performed under this agreement.
San Rafael agrees to hold harmless, indemnify, including
attorneys fees, and defend UniRisk, its officers, agents and
employees from any and all claims, loss, liability and
damages arising from its negligent or intentional acts or
omissions arising from San Rafael's activities related to
this agreement.
11. INSURANCE: UniRisk shall take out and maintain, during the
entire term of this Agreement, general liability,
professional liability, and workers' compensation insurance.
The limits of liability and coverage endorsements are as
follows:
General Liability -
Limit of liability of not less than One Million
dollars ($1,000,000).
Professional Liability -
Limit of liability of not less than One Million
dollars ($1,000,000).
Workers' Compensation -
Limit of liability for coverage A - statutory; and
Limit of liability for coverage B of not less than
One Hundred Thousand dollars ($100,000).
- 3 -
UmRisk
The general liability policy shall include contractual
liability coverage for this Agreement.
The general liability policy shall include San Rafael as an
additional insured for all coverages.
The workers' compensation policy shall include a waiver of
subrogation endorsement in favor of San Rafael.
All policies shall include an endorsement requiring the
insurance company to give San Rafael thirty (30) days prior
written notice of any cancellation, reduction in coverage, or
any other material change.
UniRisk shall not perform any work under this Agreement until
after they have furnished San Rafael certificates of
insurance evidencing the insurance required hereunder.
12. WAIVER OF DEFAULT: The failure of any party to enforce
against another a provision of this Agreement shall not
constitute a waiver of that party's right to enforce such a
provision at a later time, and shall not serve to vary the
terms of this Agreement.
13. FORUM: Lawsuits pertaining to any matter arising under or
growing out of this contract shall be instituted in the city
and county of San Francisco, California.
14. HEADINGS: All paragraph or section captions are for
reference only, and shall not be considered in construing
this Agreement.
15. ASSIGNMENT: This Agreement shall not be assigned by any
party, or any party substituted, without prior written
consent of all the parties.
16. BINDING EFFECT: This Agreement shall inure to the benefit of
and be binding on the successors in interest and assigns of
the parties.
17. ATTORNEY'S FEES: In any action to enforce the terms of this
Agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled to recover
its attorney's fees, court costs and other non -reimbursable
litigation expenses, such as expert witness fees and
investigation expenses.
18. TERMINATION: This Agreement may be terminated by either
party by giving ten (10) days written notice to the other
party. Upon termination, payment shall be prorated for the
amount of work done for any phase still in progress. Upon
termination, all work completed shall be turned over to
San Rafael.
- 4 -
Um Risk
19. MERGER AND MODIFICATION: This Agreement sets forth the
entire contract between the parties, and supersedes all other
oral or written provisions. This Agreement may be modified
or terminated only in a writing signed by all the parties.
20. CONTROL: All study activities performed by UniRisk under
this Agreement shall be under the control of and conducted
with the knowledge of San Rafael management.
21. ARBITRATION: UniRisk and San Rafael agree to submit any
claims arising under this Agreement to binding arbitration,
pursuant to the current provisions of the California Code of
Civil Procedure and any successor statutes.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement
to be executed by their duly authorized officers on the day and
year written below.
UNIRI;Iuce
,
By:
Coddiucfce President
Date: July 1, 1988
CITY .OF SAN RAFAEL
Byy
Lawrence E. Mulryan
Mayor
S7
Date: � 0- -7c , 1 7 �
ATTEST:
- 5 -
/��-�l'G�-9 � • '`tel � _T1�� w'''t^
.ff4a e M. Leoncini
City lerk
w a a � r-� �. w amu`•
EXHIBIT I
CITY OR SAN RAFAEL
RISKSTUDY PROPOSAL
CURRENT SITUATION
San Rafael, a city with a population of approximately 45,000
and an employee work force of nearly 325 has undertaken some
risk management techniques, such as self-insurance of liability
and workers' compensation losses. However, the city does not
have a comprehensive, centralized risk management program.
Although the city had an audit of its workers' compensation
claims administrator about two years ago, and an audit of the
liability claims administrator about three months ago, other
financial checks, such as actuarial studies, have never been
done. Also, there has never been a comprehensive study of all
aspects of risk management, including both internal and
contract administration.
GOALS AND OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY
Goals
We envision this study with three goals, which are to:
1. Provide the City of San Rafael with a comprehensive
evaluation of its risk management program;
2. Determine the most cost effective method of adminis-
tering the city risk management program, either
in-house or through outside contractors; and
3. Provide specific recommendations for establishing and
implementing an in-house administration program, so
the City may proceed with that option.
Objectives
The objectives are to:
I. Complete the study within 60 days of project
inception; and
2. Provide a preliminary report within 60 days of
project inception, and a final report within 30 days
thereafter.
UNIRISK'S BACKGROUND AND QUALIFICATIONS
UniRisk is an independent risk management consulting firm head-
quartered in San Francisco. We do not sell insurance, but
Page 1
1W
derive all our revenue from risk management and related consul-
ting services. We are not related to insurance brokers, under-
writers or claims administrators, and this independence allows
us to be totally objective when evaluating our clients' insur-
ance and claims programs.
CLIENT REFERENCES
UniRisk conducted a similar project for the City of
Bakersfield. We established a new risk management program,
including a comprehensive review of insurance coverages, estab-
lishment of administration procedures, development of a risk
management manual, and design of a loss control plan. We
trained the new risk manager, who was promoted from within.
We also act as contract risk managers for the Bay Area Air
Quality Management District. In that capacity we conducted a
feasibility study for self-insurance of automobile fleet
exposures, and later implemented the plan. We are currently
studying a second plan for workers' compensation
self-insurance.
A partial list of our public entity clients and contact names
follows:
ABAG PLAN
10 Twin Dolphin Drive, Suite B-315
Redwood City, CA 94065
415-598-9750
Mr. Brian O'Toole, Risk Manager
First Project
Underwriting surveys of candidate members to ABAG PLAN.
Length of engagement thirty days. Fee $7,200.
Second Project
Loss control plan design for ABAG PLAN. Project
currently in process. Fee $47,075.
Bay Area Air Quality Management District
939 Ellis Street
San Francisco, CA 94109
415-771-6000
Mr. Tom Bell, Director of Administrative Services
Proj ect
Contract risk management services, including insurance
coverages review and administration, fleet loss control
program design and internal claims administration
Page 2
%W ■ t t U -S WTQL:V%
assistance. Length of engagement one year. Fee for all
services $21,600.
City of Bakersfield
1501 Truxton Avenue
Bakersfield, CA 93301
805-326-3013
Mr. Kenneth R. Pulskamp, Assistant City Manager
Project
Design and implementation of a new risk management
program, including insurance coverages review, preparation
of a risk management manual, design of a loss control plan
and training of a new risk manager. Length of engagement
one year. Fee for all services $52,800.
UNIRISK'S PROJECT TEAM
Bruce Codding, vice president of UniRisk, was the first risk
manager for the City of Fresno, California. He set up the Risk
Management Division, within the Finance Department, and estab-
lished the city's liability, property and workers' compensation
self-insurance plans. He introduced computerized administration
programs that are still in use. As a consultant Mr. Codding
has reviewed and analyzed clients' insurance programs, insur-
ance administration procedures, and loss control and safety
methods.
Dr. Roland Dart, associate consultant, has over twenty-five
years direct experience in police management. He served as
police chief in Lafayette, Louisiana for two years, and in
Vallejo, California for twelve years. He has worked with
UniRisk as a subcontractor on projects requiring public safety
administration evaluation.
Donald Hayward, associate consultant, has more than twenty-five
years loss control experience. For sixteen years he has
managed the safety and loss control programs of two large,
diversified Fortune 500 corporations. He has developed and
implemented new loss control programs for several firms, both
at the corporate and subsidiary level.
We would also use one of our subcontractors, Ms. Katherine
Linnemann, for the specialized service of auditing workers'
compensation administration and claims management. References
and contact names for Ms. Linnemann appear below.
Ms. Linnemann has many years of workers' compensation claims
supervision and consulting experience. She specializes in
auditing large claims portfolios and periodic case management
review of serious claims.
Page 3
%Mv ■ 11 i--151%_ 4M W
Ms. Linnemann has worked extensively with:
Argonaut Insurance Company
250 Middlefield Road
Menlo Park, California 94025
415-326-0900
Ms. Marie Wardell, Assistant vice President - Workers'
Compensation
Hanna, Brophy, MacLean, McAleer i Jensen
595 Market Street
Suite 900
San Francisco, California 94105
415-543-9110
Mr. Bob MacLean
Kaiser Permanente Hospital
1900 Broadway
Oakland, California 94612
415-428-6510
Ms. Cheryl Lambert, Workers' Compensation Supervisor
Resumes for our team members appear in Appendix A.
STUDY METHODOLOGY
UniRisk uses a team approach because it provides greater objec-
tivity and breadth of experience than one consultant working
alone. It also allows us to complete projects faster, because
several tasks can be conducted simultaneously.
Our team would hold an initial meeting with the City Manager
and designated staff to plan a strategy for conducting the
study, and set out a schedule for interviews and site
inspections.
We would interview key department heads and city staff to get
an overview of city operations, risk exposures, loss prevention
and control efforts, and a sense of their attitude about risk
management. We would review current risk transfer standards
and procedures. Our emphasis would be on the current state of
risk management administration and endeavors, and where
improvements or cost efficiencies could be made.
We would contact the administrator workers' compensation
self-insurance claims, and conduct and audit of that program.
Our emphasis would be on determining the cost effectiveness of
this program, and pointing out how the City could stabilize or
reduce costs.
We would also review the recent liability claims audit report to
identify its recommendations and determine how they might be
incorporated with the recommendations emanating from our study.
Page 4
V00 5 a i W"i M it
k�
{l Simultaneously, we would contact the city's safety consultant
and audit the services provided. We would also review the
city's guidelines, personnel rules, and safety handbooks to
determine their accuracy, completeness, effectiveness. In
addition, we would inspect a sample group of city facilities to
test the effectiveness of loss prevention and safety measures.
ROTE
Inspections sometimes points up serious risk expos-
ures that have escaped management's attention. If we
discover any serious risk exposures during our study
we will notify city management immediately, without
waiting for publication of our written report.
We would meet with city management to discuss our preliminary
report, and hold an exit conference to discuss our final report
and recommendations.
SCOPE OF THE STUDY
This study would cover three major areas:
1. Risk management administration (see Exhibit I);
2. Self-insured claims administration, including an
audit of workers' compensation claims at the
administrator's offices (see Exhibit II); and
3. Safety services administration, including an audit
of contract safety services (see Exhibit III).
We have set out the criteria for each of these areas in
Exhibits I through III, so they may be separated and reviewed
by your staff more easily.
The major tasks we would conduct under this study include:
1. Analyze the structure of the internal risk management
program, including its placement within the city
organization, staffing, functions, and related
committees;
2. Evaluate the current capability, experience,
knowledge and performance level of the firms supply-
ing claims administration services and safety
services;
3. Perform an audit of self-insured workers' compensa-
tion claims;
4. Conduct a cost benefit analysis of in-house risk
management administration, versus the use of outside
Page 5
�t
}
Maw ••r--1 Nw-A
7
contractors, including the pros and cons of each method;
and
5. Outline specific methods for establishing a compre-
hensive risk management program, including in-house
administration, budget expense allocation, hazard
identification, loss control and safety, risk
transfer, and training.
6. Meet with city management to discuss our preliminary and
final reports, and recommendations.
No comprehensive survey of liability, property or workers'
compensation exposures or hazards would be conducted under this
study, only inspections sufficient to test the loss prevention
and safety measures in use.
REPORTS
UniRisk would provide the City of San Rafael with a preliminary
report of our findings and recommendations within thirty (60)
days following commencement of the study. City staff and
department heads would be given ample opportunity to review our
report and make comments. We would then issue our final
report, including responses to the comments of city personnel,
within fifteen (15) days after receipt of the city's response.
Our reports would cover the criteria set out in Exhibits I
through III for each major aspect of the study, with specific
recommendations for improving programs and effecting cost
savings.
In addition to the workers' compensation audit report, we would
provide an individual comprehensive caption report on each
claim with total indemnity and medical reserves of twenty-five
thousand ($25,000) or more.
PROJECT MANAGEXKNT
Bruce Codding would be the project manager throughout the
entire study. He would direct and supervise the activities of
the other team members, and act as liaison with the city staff.
Bruce Codding would review the city's risk management
administration, risk transfer policies and procedures, and
conduct the majority of interviews with the City Manager's
staff and department heads. He would prepare the preliminary
and final reports.
Katherine Linnemann would conduct the workers' compensation
audit.
Page 6
•=r■ 0 W"vvW.0V%
Roland Dart would interview public safety personnel on risk
management issues, and work with Katherine Linnemann on
workers' compensation claims of public safety employees.
Donald Hayward would interview the city's safety consultant,
review the city's safety policies and manuals, and conduct site
inspections to test loss control and safety measures.
TIMING AND LENGTH OF THE STUDY
We can begin this study within five (5) working days of accep-
tance of this proposal. We anticipate the study would be com-
plete within ninety (90) days, which allows sufficient time for
city staff to review our preliminary report and make comments,
before publication of the final report.
FEES AND BILLING SCHEDULE
Fees
UniRisk has a standard hourly billing rate for professional
services of seventy-five dollars ($75.00) for all public entity
clients. Our fee for travel time and for report writing is
twenty-five dollars ($25.00) per hour. These fees include all
overhead costs, so there are no additional charges.
The total cost of the project is $8,975.00. The following
summary outlines a breakdown of our fees:
Fee Summary
Activity
Hours
Rate
Fee
Meetings a interviews
34.0
$75
$2,550
Inspections
4.0
75
300
Research i analysis
22.0
75
1,650
Report preparation
12.0
75
900
Report writing
4.0
25
100
Travel time
19.0
25
475
Workers' compensation audit
3,000
Total Fees $8,975
UniRisk is willing to negotiate its fees, if the City of San
Rafael wants to de-emphasize any part of this study in order to
reduce costs.
Billing Schedule
We would invoice fifty percent (50%) of the study fee at incep-
tion of the study, to be paid within thirty (30) days. The
balance of the fee would be invoiced upon delivery of our final
Page 7
q.. ■..-e R3 V%
v
�= report. We are willing to negotiate this billing schedule, if
the city desires.
UNIRISKIS INSURANCE COVERAGE
UniRisk maintains appropriate automobile, general and profess-
ional liability insurance, and workers' compensation insurance.
We would supply the City of San Rafael with a certificate,
outlining the policy limits of each coverage, following
execution of this agreement and before commencement of any
activities.
ADDITIONAL SERVICES
UniRisk can provide services in addition to those outlined in
this proposal. If the City of San Rafael agrees further action
should be undertaken, we would be glad to submit a proposal for
services such as the following:
Actuarial analysis of self-insurance funds;
Analysis of risk financing alternatives;
Analysis of claims cost trends and preparation of budget
cost projections;
Development of claims settlement strategies on serious
cases;
Periodic audits of contract claims administrators;
koss prevention and safety training for department heads,
supervisory personnel and non -supervisory employees;
Advice on risk transfer guidelines and compliance
procedures;
Setting up risk management systems and procedures,
including computerized administrative systems;
Designing risk management expense allocation systems for
budgeting;
Participation on oral review boards for selection of
risk management personnel;
Training new risk management personnel;
'Designing risk management policy statements;
Writing risk management manuals;
Page 8
%no n I s% r.., st
conducting liability, property and vorkars' compensation
exposure surveys;
Designing and implementing hazard identification systems;
Designing model general orders related to risk management
for public safety administration;
Review and analysis of insurance coverages;
Conducting an insurance broker selection;
Conducting a claims administrator selection;
Writing annual risk management reports;
Analysis of employee benefit plans; and
Design and implementation of an Employee Assistance Plan
( EAP) .
Page 9
.0'4 : 0
V
RISK NANA4ZWM. ADHMSTRATION RVALVATION
�_vYtRxao a ADKINISTRATION
1. Internal
A. Analysis of current organization
1. Placement within city organization
2. Analysis of program functions
3. Role of the City Manager's office
4. Role of the City Attorney's office
5. Role of the Personnel Department
6. Role of committees
a. Analysis of committee functions
i. Risk Management Committee
ii. City-wide Safety Committee
7. Evaluation of risk management policies and
procedures
a. Risk financing
i. Insurance purchasing
ii. Self-insurance
iii. Other
b. Risk identification
i. Identification systems
ii. Quality assurance procedures
C. Risk control
i. Analysis of safety policies, personnel
rules, safety handbooks and related
material
ii. Coordination with contract safety
services
1
EE=BIT I
V�•
RISK XA AGENENT AMUNISTRATION EVALUATION
d. Risk transfer
i. Contractual provisions
ii. Insurance certificate compliance
8. Evaluation of staffing
a. Number of staff involved
b. Education and experience in risk management
activities, i.e., insurance, claims
management, and loss control and safety
C. Time allocated to risk management
9. Integration of risk management activities
10. Overall evaluation of internal administration
efficiency and effectiveness
II. External
A. Evaluation of services provided by insurance brokers,
contract claims administrators and safety service
firms
1. Staff education and experience
2. Capability
3. Performance service level
4. Cost effectiveness
III. IN-HOUSE ADKINISTRATION
A. Pros and cons of in-house administration
B. Cost benefit analysis of in-house administration
versus current system
C. Development of an in-house program
1. Staffing needs
2. Personnel classifications
3. Position salary ranges
is
%noi 51W-I%/►b IR
EXHIBIT I
RISK NANA4.wW,6. AEKINISTRATION ZVAL40ATION
4. Personnel search Qualifications
5. Position duties summaries (job specifications)
6. Contract services necessary under in-house
administration
7. Recommendations on:
i. Risk management policies
ii. Risk management systems and procedures
iii. Risk management manual
iv. Risk management expense allocation systems
for budgeting
V. Training
3
V w I i
WMIBIT ZI
SELF-INSURED CLXM ADKINISTRATION EVALUATION
I. LIABILITY CLAIMS AMINISTRATION
Since an audit of the liability claims administrator was
conducted recently, we would review that audit report with our
claims management standards in mind. These standards are
similar to those listed below for workers' compensation claims
management.
II. WORKERS' COMPENSATION CLAIMS ADMINISTRATION
We review claims administration in each of the following major
categories:
A. Organizational;
B. Claims and litigation management;
C. Reporting and contract compliance; and
D. Service and cost effectiveness.
A. Organizational
1. Review systems and procedures for receipt, logging
and processing of claims, including reserving and
payment.
2. Determine the training and experience level of
the administrator's claims examiner(s), and whether
their settlement authority is commensurate with such
training and experience.
3. Determine if the workload of the administrator's
claims examiner(s) is excessive.
4. Evaluate the administrator's diary system for review-
ing claims files. How often are files reviewed? Are
benefit payments audited quarterly?
B. Claims and Litigation Management
1. Review the timeliness and adequacy of claims
investigations. Are AOE/COE determinations made?
Are injuries properly determined and defined?
2. Determine that injured employees are properly advised
of their compensation benefits in a timely manner.
1
Vi7iMM-K
EEBIB+. ZI
SELF-INSURED CIAIM AOl MSTRATION WAIMATION
3. Determine that injured employees receive compensation
benefit payments within the time frame set out by
law. Are initial payments made within 14 days?
4. Evaluate the accuracy and adequacy of indemnity and
medical reserves.
5. Determine if reserve changes are made in a timely
manner.
6. Determine if negative reserves appear in the claims
database and what procedures the administrator
follows to respond to such reserves.
7. Determine if claims files contain adequate
documentation, i.e., reports, statements, records,
photographs and diagrams, to support case management
decisions.
8. Review claims files to see if the history of
indemnity and medical payments is displayed.
9. Determine if settlement benefits are paid timely.
10. Assess the medical management program. Is medical
care properly controlled and are medical examinations
utilized in a timely manner? Do claims files reflect
a case plan? Is there a return to work or light duty
program and is the administrator utilizing it
effectively?
11. Evaluate the utilization and effectiveness of outside
medical professionals.
12. Evaluate vocational rehabilitation management. Is
rehabilitation being evaluated at the proper point of
medical development? Are rehabilitation referrals
made promptly? Do the files reflect a vocational
rehabilitation plan?
13. Determine if vocational rehabilitation expenses are
being properly controlled. Are rehabilitation bene-
fits being concluded as soon as possible?
14. Evaluate the utilization of rehabilitation services
and the effectiveness of such service.
15. Analyze the litigation ratio and determine if there
is an excessive number of litigated claims.
N
9J I 1 190% 9*4. JL
MMM ZI
k -
SELF -INSURED CIAMW AMMISTRATION EVALUATION
16. Evaluate litigation management. Are litigation
issues recognized early? Are referrals made promptly
to legal counsel? Do claims files contain a litiga-
tion plan? Are legal expenses being controlled
properly?
17. Evaluate the effectiveness of outside legal counsel
in defending litigated claims and disposing of liti-
gated claims in an expeditious manner.
18. Determine if there is timely recognition of settle-
ment possibilities. Are claims properly evaluated
for settlement? Are various settlement forms
considered, i.e., Compromise and Release, stipulated
award, findings and award?
19. Verify that all subrogation possibilities are consid-
ered and pursued.
20. Analyze whether bills for services are being paid
within a reasonable time period.
C. Reporting and Contract Compliance
1. Assess whether serious claims are reported to the
excess insurer(s) within the requirements set out by
the excess insurance policies or standard claims
administration practices.
2. Determine if the excess insurer(s) is kept informed
in a timely manner of developments in serious claims,
after initial reporting.
3. Verify the accuracy of loss runs by comparison with
selected claims files.
4. Evaluate the administrator's method for keeping San
Rafael informed of the status of their claims.
5. Determine if the administrator is following the terms
set forth in their contract with San Rafael.
D. Service and Cost Effectiveness
I. Evaluate responsiveness of administrator to San
Rafael's request for information on administration,
fees, status of specific claims, etc.
3
%N/ If 1 i r% Rcr JCC
EEIiI sn II
1u„
SELF-INSURED CIAM ADlSINISTRATION EVAWATION
2. Evaluate reasonableness of administrator's charges.
UniRisk will review the following in San Rafael's workers'
compensation claims portfolio:
1. All open claims with combined indemnity and medical
reserves of $25,000 or more;
2. All open claims reported to excess insurance
companies;
3. Twenty-five percent (25%) of all open indemnity
claims, in addition to the files outlined in 1.
above;
4. Fifteen percent (15%) of all open claims with medical
reserves, commonly referred to as "medical only";
and
5. Ten percent (10%) of all files closed within the last
two (2) years.
In addition to our written report, we would prepare a compre-
hensive caption report on each case with combined indemnity and
medical reserves of $25,000 or more.
4
i,
V X11 i"'� �lJC
2 ! SIT III
SAFETY SERVICES EVALUATION
I. STAFF
A. Education
B. Knowledge
K':
1. General safety
2. Public entity risk exposures
3. Governmental regulations, i.e., California
Government Code, Federal EPA, NIOSH, OSHA
C. Professional experience
1. Identifying loss exposures and hazards
2. Designing and implementing hazard identification
and loss control systems
3. Conducting safety training
A. Compliance with their contract with San Rafael
III. SERVICE AND COST EFFECTIVENESS
A. Inspections
1. Frequency of inspections of city facilities
2 Comprehensiveness of inspections and reports
B. Special requests
1. Level of responsiveness to San Rafael's requests
for service
C. Cost effectiveness
1
y r I I NM% I, in V1
BRUCE CODDING
Vice President
During nearly twenty years in the insurance industry Mr. Codding
has held a number of claims and risk management positions. He
was the first Risk Manager for the City of Fresno, California,
and Director of Risk Management for Varian Associates, a Fortune
500 company.
He is proficient at designing and implementing complete risk
management programs. He has acquired expertise in a variety of
areas including:
o Analysis of insurance coverages, limits and
retentions.
o Conducting feasibility studies of risk retention
plans, including self-insurance and pooling;
o Establishment of self-insurance claims administration
systems;
o Designing and directing loss control programs;
o Analysis of claims data and projection of future losses;
o Development of claims and risk management systems for
microcomputers;
o Selection and auditing of brokers, adjusters and
contract claims administrators;
o Analysis of captive insurance programs, including
association, single owner and multiple owner
captives;
Mr. Codding holds the Associate in Risk Management (ARM)
diploma.
He has been affiliated with, and lectured at, the following
insurance associations:
o Public Risk & Insurance Management Association
(PRIMA);
o Public Agency Risk Managers Association (PARMA);
o Risk and Insurance Management Society (RIMS), where
he served as an officer in the Santa Clara Valley
Chapter, as well as on national committees; and
o Machinery and Allied Products Institute (MAPI) Risk
Management Council.
Tor ■ a a s -S W' e, at %
ROIAND C. DART, DPA
Consultant/Public Safety and Security Specialist
Dr. Dart has more than twenty-six years experience in public
safety and security. He served over twelve years as police chief
in two municipalities, most recently the City of Vallejo. He has
extensive experience in:
o Consulting for the California Commission on Peace
Officers Standards and Training (POST) in workers'
compensation, discipline and police management;
o Conducting management and planning studies for
municipalities, counties, state and federal law
enforcement agencies in the United States, Canada,
Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands; and
o Serving the International Association of Police
Chiefs in a variety of responsibilities and special
projects.
Dr. Dart specializes in workers' compensation management. He
conducts the following seminars for POST:
o "Workers' Compensation Cases - Management and Control
of Workers' Compensation Disability"; and
o "Managing the Workers' Compensation Process and
Dealing with the Problem Employee".
He has also lectured before the following organizations:
o California District Attorney Association;
o Association of Criminal Justice Research;
o The Sino -American Institute on Criminal Justice; and
o Taipei and Tunghi University, Tichung, Taiwan.
Roland Dart holds a Doctorate of Public Administration from the
University of Southern California. In 1974 he was honored as
Police Chief of the Year by the International Association of
Police Chiefs.
Consultant/Safety & Loss Control Specialist
V
Mr. Hayward has twenty-five years of loss control experience as
a corporate safety manager. He has spent the last ten years as
safety manager with a Fortune 500 corporation. In addition, as a
consultant, he has provided loss control assistance to smaller
organizations.
He is proficient in designing safety plans, both on a
corporate -wide basis and on an individual location basis. He has
developed and implemented loss control programs with proven cost
savings.
Mr. Hayward's experience includes:
o conducting safety and loss control audits;
o analyzing loss trends from accident and claims data;
o designing company and work place safety programs;
o determining loss causes and providing sound corrective
measures;
o conducting safety training; and
o interacting with senior management and line management
in designing and implementing safety programs.
Mr. Hayward holds a bachelor of science degree in chemical
engineering from San Fernando State University. He is a member
of the California Safety Management Society, and the National
Safety Management Society.
Mr. Hayward is a recognized expert in rocket safety, and has
given presentations to the National Rocket Society.
V(..V%1�, 44L
KATHERDM S. LINNEXANN
Workers' Compensation Claims Specialist
c
With over twelve years in casualty claims management, Katherine
Linnemann has developed specialized skills in workers'
compensation claims. She has extensive expertise in evaluating
and reserves, and designing case management strategies. She is a
certified self-insurance administrator.
Ms. Linnemann has held claims management positions with two
major insurance companies. She has consulted with large workers'
compensation insurance companies and third party self-insurance
administrators.
Her experience includes companies in diverse industries, such as:
o Agricultural cooperatives;
o Commercial insurance;
o Computer and computer peripherals manufacturing;
o Construction;
o Diary production;
o Electronics manufacturing;
o Foundries;
o Hotels;
o Pharmaceutical manufacturing;
o Public entities; and
o Retail stores.
She is the past Secretary and Treasurer of the Industrial Claims
Association, and served as a member of the Executive Committee.
Ms. Linnemann has taught many classes for the Industrial Claims
Association and the Insurance Education Association. Ms.
Linnemann has taught at the university level, and is a guest
lecturer at San Francisco State University.