Insurance Match Workgroup Conference Call
Meeting Minutes

Decisions/Discussion

Summary Notes from 9/25/07 Workgroup Meeting

No comments, changes or corrections.

Updating the IRG to include Insurance Match/Intercept Information

States and Insurers should email additional questions and comments to the OCSE team.

Insurance Match Web Application

Presented the following proposed high-level business requirements:

• The system must match insurance claim information with information about delinquent obligors.
• The system must allow search options by SSN or name and DOB, or name and address, or name, DOB and address.
• The system must allow insurers to enter data about a claim.
• The system must retain data about usage, and provide an audit trail of data to authorized users.
• The system must allow a user to identify matches or query past results i.e., obtain a history.
• The system must send insurance matches to State CSE agencies.

Reviewed draft mock-up screens

• Obligor address may differ between Insurers and CSE Agencies.
• Proposed process is not highly automated and does not appeal to the larger insurers, e.g., American Insurance Association and State Farm but may be better suited for smaller insurance companies.

Action Items

Insurance Match/Intercept Information on the IRG

1. Add contact information.
2. Expand question 14 to specify the particulars of the State's legislation and modify to discourage a simple "yes or no" answer.
3. Distribute updated questions to State Insurance Match Liaisons.
4. Work with the IRG team to add questions.

Insurance Match Web Application

1. General – Renumber screens.
2. Screens 5 and 11 - Insurance Match: Claimant Query Result
• Add a confirmation number for a match or no match.
• Add a print feature.
• Discuss the amount of data that may be included, e.g., obligor name, obligor name and DOB, all available information i.e., obligor name, DOB, SSN, address with OCSE policy.
• Consider adding a hyperlink for each State that matched data and provide the CSE worker contact information. Note: This might be feasible for administrative States but not judicial States.
3. Screens 6 and 7 –Insurance Match: Additional Data Entry
• Consider deleting the Settlement Amount because insurers do not want the information disclosed or keeping the Settlement Amount as optional because the information is required by law in some States, e.g., Massachusetts and Oklahoma.
4. Screen 8 – Insurance Match: Display/Print Data Entry
• Consider making this available as an electronic document rather than just a screen print.
5. Screen 10 – Insurance Match: Claimant Data Lookup Method
• Consider adding an Age block for use when the claimant's full DOB is unknown.
• Consider allowing matches on partial address information, e.g., City Name and State.
6. Screen 12 – Insurance Match: Additional Data Entry
• Consider pre-populating the screen with available information.
7. Screen 15 – Insurance Match: Single Query – Request (Insurer User), Screen 17 – Insurance Match: Multiple Query – Request (Insurer User), Screen 19 – Insurance Match Single Query – Request (CSE Agency User), Screen 21 – Insurance Match: Multiple Query – Request (CSE Agency User)
• Consider the purpose of the Time Period.
• Include the functionality in the design, although some Insurers may not use this feature.