Public-entity excess is law-enforcement liability, auto and a self-insured retention. The submission is municipal GL and WC schedules by function, facilities, and a loss run led by law-enforcement and fleet claims over a $25M lead. We ran a real regional authority, Tri-County Regional Authority, through InsightXtract.

Insured: Tri-County Regional AuthorityRevenue $186M GL payroll $64.9MWC payroll $65.6M Facilities 22Named insureds 12 5-yr claims 44 / $13.4M incurredLead umbrella $25M

Why public entity is an excess casualty risk

A public entity's excess sits over a self-insured retention and a lead umbrella, covering a broad book — public works, parks, utilities, transit, and law enforcement. Law-enforcement liability (civil-rights claims) and fleet exposure drive severity; sovereign-immunity considerations shape the structure. The retention, the SIR erosion and the by-function exposure all have to be read cleanly.

The submission packet

A real public entity placement is rarely one clean file. This one is five, in four different shapes — the everyday reality an underwriting team has to re-key by hand today:

  • broker_email.pdf — the renewal narrative: account description, requested limits, exposure snapshot, and the excess-layer options to quote.
  • rfq.pdf — the umbrella/excess application: general information, coverage requested, and the exposure bases.
  • exposure_workbook.xlsx — the heart of the file: municipal GL exposure by function (public works, parks, utilities, transit), a facility schedule, WC payroll by class, and an entity schedule.
  • loss_run.pdf — five years of currently-valued losses, led by law-enforcement civil-rights claims and fleet collisions (44 claims).
  • schedule_of_underlying.pdf — the primary casualty and lead umbrella the excess attaches over.

Step 1 — Classification

Every file is routed to a document type first — evidence-bearing, with a confidence, not a black-box label:

Document
Classified as
Conf.
broker_email.pdf
excess_casualty_submission_email
0.98
rfq.pdf
excess_casualty_application
0.97
exposure_workbook.xlsx
excess_casualty_exposure_workbook
0.99
loss_run.pdf
excess_casualty_loss_run
0.98
schedule_of_underlying.pdf
excess_casualty_schedule_of_underlying
0.96

Step 2 — Coverage structure, with citations

The requested tower is read from the email and application, every value grounded to its page:

CoverageRequestedSource
General Liability — each occurrence$1,000,000rfq p.2
General Aggregate$5,000,000rfq p.2
Products / Completed-Ops Aggregate$5,000,000rfq p.2
Commercial Auto — CSL$1,000,000rfq p.3
Employers Liability$1,000,000rfq p.3
Lead Umbrella$25Memail p.1

Step 3 — Exposure schedules, typed & normalized

The workbook is where template OCR falls over — many sheets, hundreds of rows, broker-specific wording. InsightXtract reads every sheet, maps each to a typed schedule, and normalizes the codes against governed glossaries. A slice of the GL exposure schedule:

StateWC CodeDescriptionRevenuePayroll
IL us_state_codes66600 ncciMunicipal operations - general$22,400,000$4,032,000
IL us_state_codes48925 ncciParks & recreation$8,900,000$1,602,000
IL us_state_codes98090 ncciPublic works / streets$12,700,000$2,286,000
… 38 GL rows · workers_compensation 50 · named_insured_mix 12 · location_list 22

Column bindings: state → us_state_codes, class → ncci_wc_class_codes / iso_gl_class_codes, occupancy → occupancy_types. Out-of-vocabulary values are flagged by validation, not silently kept — and fuzzy column resolution means a rule written for payroll still binds a broker’s “Total Payroll” column.

Step 4 — Derived exposures (deterministic, not guessed)

The account is rated on totals. Rather than ask a model to eyeball-sum hundreds of rows, the document type declares deterministic sum / count / group_by rules that reduce the extracted schedules exactly — the same numbers every run, each traceable to its source table:

$64.9M
GL payroll
∑ general_liability.payroll
$65.6M
WC payroll
∑ workers_compensation.payroll
22
Facilities
count(location_list)
12
Named insureds
count(named_insured_mix)

Step 5 — The loss run

A municipal loss run is led by law-enforcement civil-rights claims and fleet collisions, with premises and sidewalk/road-defect claims and a public-works WC book. Every claim is extracted — coverage line, status and cause normalized — and rolled up, with a by-line split for the loss pick:

Claim #CoverageCauseStatusIncurred
TRI-1110GL coverage_linesLaw enforcement - civil rightsOpen claim_statuses$560,000
TRI-1088AL coverage_linesFleet collisionOpen claim_statuses$310,000
TRI-1051GL coverage_linesSidewalk/road defectClosed claim_statuses$88,000
TRI-1033WC coverage_linesPublic-works injuryClosed claim_statuses$120,000
… 44 claims across 5 policy years, currently valued
44
Claims (5 yr)
count(claims)
$13.4M
Total incurred
∑ claims.incurred
by line
Incurred split
group_by coverage_line

What the underwriter reads first

The coded record surfaces exactly the drivers that move this class of business:

  • Law-enforcement liability — civil-rights claims are the dominant severity driver.
  • Fleet exposure across departments, from the auto schedule.
  • Self-insured retention & SIR erosion — where the excess actually attaches.
  • Sovereign-immunity considerations, noted from the narrative.
  • A 44-claim loss run extracted in full, coded and by-line.

Why it holds up in production

  • Every value is cited — page/region provenance on fields and schedules; a file review can click any number to its source.
  • Codes are normalized against governed glossaries; out-of-vocabulary values are validated, not hidden.
  • Totals are computed, not guessed — deterministic derived fields over the extracted rows, exact and reproducible.
  • Configuration is versioned — document types, glossaries and rules pinned to a published version, so an output made today reproduces tomorrow.
  • Nothing is dropped — the all-sheets extractor surfaces every schedule, even ones the base schema didn’t anticipate.