Regulatory change management for insurers — every bulletin mapped to your policy paragraph and an owner the day it is published
Each new rule mapped to its policy and owner the day it is published.
See one case, screen by screen ↓Software that tracks new bulletins, regulations, orders and data calls from the regulators an insurer answers to, decides which ones apply, and follows each change through to an owner, an updated policy and its effective date. Regulatory Change Management adds agents that read each publication, match it to earlier work and draft the policy change.
How to choose AI solutions for insurance →
Updated
A multi-state carrier answers to every insurance department it is licensed in, the NAIC's model laws and working groups, and any foreign regulator where it writes business. Each week they publish bulletins, regulations, orders, circular letters, emergency directives and data calls. A regulatory change analyst reads each one, decides whether it touches the states and lines written, then emails the business to ask who owns it.
The reading is the easy part. The days go on working out which paragraph of which policy is now wrong, and on chasing an owner by email. The same model bulletin gets assessed again in every state that adopts it, a moratorium is missed for two days, a claim letter still lacks a required notice at the market conduct exam, a vendor contract renews without the audit clause a bulletin asked for.
Estimated split, in working days, from publication to a named owner — by email and with the solution.
Six agents read, screen, compare and map every publication; the regulatory change lead assigns and each owner accepts.
Friday at 16:40, the Illinois Department of Insurance publishes Company Bulletin 2026-14 on AI systems in claims and underwriting. Corliss Ridge Insurance Group writes personal auto, homeowners, small business and umbrella in 14 states, Illinois among them. Here is Monday morning, screen by screen, in the working solution.
Nadia opens the impact matrix: this week's publications are the rows, the company's own policies are the columns. 23 publications read since Monday, 9 touch Corliss Ridge, 14 screened out. One row is new and unread — Illinois Bulletin 2026-14, effective January 1, 2027, 81 days out.
“One publication waits for you — Illinois Company Bulletin 2026-14 — click Read and map on its row.”
Nadia presses Read and map, and the run plays under the row. The Source watcher has the bulletin: 6 pages, 9 sections. The Relevance screener finds it touches Illinois personal auto and homeowners, claims and underwriting decisions, at a score of 0.94. The Rule reader finds 11 obligations, each with its section and passage.
“Policy mapper — 4 paragraphs, 4 drafted changes.” Finished in 18 s.
Seven of the nine sections are the NAIC model bulletin text the company implemented under CR-2024-061, for Connecticut and ten more states. They are marked already covered, with the change named. Only §5(c), notice to consumers, and §6(b), record retention, are new to Illinois.
A section is never marked covered without naming the earlier change — and any wording difference counts as new.
The row lights four cells: AI Systems Governance CP-AI-01 §3.4, Claims Handling Standards CL-07 §7.3, Records Retention Schedule RR-02 §2.4 and Third-Party Oversight TP-05 §3.1. Nadia opens CL-07 §7.3: the bulletin passage on top, the adverse decision letter paragraph below with the Illinois wording drafted in, and why this paragraph — two AI systems support claim decisions in Illinois.
Mapping confidence 93 %. Drafts only — the policy library does not change until the owner accepts.
UW-03 shows hatched as covered: the underwriting rule already changed under CR-2024-061. Nadia confirms the map and clicks Assign all four owners. Jun Takeda, Marcus Oyelaran, Elena Voss and Dana Whitfield each get the draft and the bulletin passage, due Wednesday, October 14 — two working days out.
“4 owners notified with their drafts — due Wed Oct 14.”
Elena opens RR-02 §2.4 as a redline: AI model testing results, validation reports and decision logs, keep 3 years struck, 5 years inserted. The schedule already applies the longest state period in all states, so one change covers Illinois without a state exception. Confidence 97 %.
Elena accepts the draft. RR-02 moves from version 3.7 to 3.8, recorded against change CR-2026-221, and the library now holds the new version. She could also have edited the draft or returned it with a comment.
“RR-02 v3.8 published — accepted by Elena Voss.”
Illinois lands on January 1, 2027 on the effective-date calendar, next to the six months of open changes. One date is flagged at risk: Colorado Regulation 10-1-1 for auto, effective November 1, where Priya Raman's UW-03 §4.3 draft is still in review.
The change report for the October 28 Compliance Committee is drafted from the matrix: 214 publications read since July 1, 61 touching the states and lines written, 58 of 61 owned within two working days, 0 effective dates reached unassigned, 7 repeat assessments avoided. Illinois is the first matter for the committee. Theo signs with the meaning of his signature recorded.
“I have reviewed this report and it is accurate to my knowledge.”
The same Illinois bulletin, seen by the people who carry it — the lead who assigns it, the owners who change their policies, and the CCO who signs for it.
Six agents read, screen, compare and map every publication; the regulatory change lead assigns and each owner accepts.
Checks 61 regulators and bodies every two hours — 56 insurance departments, the NAIC, the Federal Insurance Office, the FCA, the PRA and EIOPA — and pulls each new bulletin, regulation, order, circular letter and data call with its number and dates.
Tests each publication against the states, lines and products the company writes, and screens out the rest with a one-line reason, such as “Life — not written”.
Splits a publication into obligations — who must do what by when — each with its section, the passage, the date it bites and a plain summary.
Compares each section with NAIC model laws and bulletins and with earlier state adoptions the company has already implemented, and marks only what is new.
Searches the 412 policies and procedures — 3,180 numbered paragraphs — for the paragraphs each new obligation changes, drafts the smallest change as a redline, says why that paragraph and gives a confidence.
Proposes the owner and a due date two working days after publication from the routing rules, sends each draft with its passage, reminds on day two and flags any effective date within 30 days without an accepted draft.
Confirms every map; owners accept. The agents propose; a named person decides.
The regulatory change lead can ask in plain words what a publication changes, what is due, or whether it was already done for another state — or tell it how changes should be routed. Every answer cites its source.
What does Illinois 2026-14 change for us?
Two things that are new to Illinois; the rest you already did. Seven of its nine sections are the NAIC model bulletin text you implemented under CR-2024-061. New: §5(c) — adverse claim and underwriting letters must say an AI system was used and offer review by a person, which changes CL-07 §7.3; and §6(b) — keep AI testing and decision records five years, not three, which changes RR-02 §2.4. Effective January 1, 2027 — 81 days.
Which changes take effect in the next 90 days?
12, and every one has an owner. One needs attention: Colorado Regulation 10-1-1 for auto takes effect November 1 (20 days) and Priya Raman's draft for UW-03 §4.3 is still in review. The next two after it are Michigan 2026-21-INS (Nov 15) and the NAIC #674 comment letter (Nov 20).
Have we already done this for another state?
Mostly, yes. CR-2024-061 implemented the NAIC AI model bulletin for Connecticut in February 2024 and has since covered ten more of your states. In Illinois 2026-14, sections §1–§5(b), §6(a) and §7 are the same text, so UW-03 §4.1 shows as covered on the matrix rather than as new work.
Copy Jun Takeda on every AI bulletin
Done. New routing rule: “Any publication on AI systems, in any topic → also Jun Takeda (CP-AI-01).” It applies to publications read from now on. You can change it in Settings.
13 screens from the working solution, on its sample data. Pick one to see it large.
What the agents watch, how they decide relevance and who owns what are settings the regulatory change lead can change.
| Setting | Default | Choose from |
|---|---|---|
| Where we write | 14 states × 4 lines | Tick each state and line written |
| Named owner within | 2 working days | 1 · 2 · 3 working days |
| Remind the owner on | Day 2 | Day 1 · day 2 |
| Escalate to the Chief Compliance Officer | Day 4, or 30 days before the effective date | Your escalation rule |
| Check sources every | 2 hours | 1 · 2 · 4 hours |
| Screen out below | 0.60 | Relevance score 0.30–0.90 |
| Always keep, whatever the score | Emergency orders · moratoriums · data calls | Always kept, whatever the threshold |
| Routing rules | Topic → policy → owner | Add a rule in plain words |
Every figure is labelled: a target the solution is built to, an estimate, a typical published result, or a proven one.
“demo” = seen in the working solution, on its sample data · “target” = the design goal, measured in the live solution · “estimated” = our estimate · “typical” = published figures (NAIC: 56 member jurisdictions; NAIC adoption map of the AI model bulletin, 29 jurisdictions, Oct 2026). People, companies, publication numbers and policies named on this page are fictional — characters and sample data in the working solution; regulators are named only as sources a carrier watches.
Software that tracks new bulletins, regulations, orders and data calls from the regulators an insurer answers to, decides which ones apply, and follows each change through to an owner, an updated policy and its effective date. Regulatory Change Management adds agents that read each publication, match it to earlier work and draft the policy change.
The Relevance screener tests each publication against the states, lines and products you write, set in Settings. Below the threshold it screens the item out with a one-line reason; emergency orders, moratoriums and data calls for a state you write are always kept, and any screened item can be brought back.
Yes. The Prior-adoption matcher compares each section with NAIC model laws and the adoptions you have already implemented. Same text is marked covered with the earlier change named; any wording difference counts as new. In the Illinois example, 7 of 9 sections were already covered.
No. The Policy mapper drafts the change as a redline against the exact paragraph; nothing in the policy library changes until the policy owner accepts it. The owner can also edit the draft or return it with a comment.
Yes. The regulatory change lead confirms every map and every owner before anything is sent, each policy owner accepts their own change, and the Chief Compliance Officer signs the committee report with the meaning of the signature recorded.
61 sources: the 56 NAIC member jurisdictions, the NAIC itself, the Federal Insurance Office, the FCA, the PRA and EIOPA, checked every two hours. A source that fails to load is shown as unchecked.
Yes. Routing rules map topics to policies and owners, and the clocks — owner within two working days, a reminder on day two, escalation at day four or 30 days before the effective date — are settings.
The Agentic Solution Engine builds and deploys it from your requirements and documents — your policy library, your footprint and your owners — and it goes live once every quality gate has passed. We will walk you through it on your own recent publications first.
Every state answered side by side, each with the statute that says so.
1-min demoMarket Conduct Exam ManagementEvery examiner request tracked to its due date, answered from the file.
1-min demoInsurance Complaint ManagementEvery complaint logged on its legal clock and answered from the file.
1-min demoWe'll run Regulatory Change Management on last quarter's publications against your own policy library.