MI DIFS Bulletin 2024-20-INS
Use of Artificial Intelligence Systems by Insurers _____________________________________
STATE OF MICHIGAN
DEPARTMENT OF INSURANCE AND FINANCIAL SERVICES
Bulletin 2024-20-INS
In the matter of:
Use of Artificial Intelligence Systems by Insurers
_____________________________________/
Issued and entered
this 7th day of August 2024
by Anita G. Fox
Director
This bulletin is issued by the Department of Insurance and Financial Services (Department) to remind
all Insurers, Nonprofit Health Service Plans, HMOs, and Dental Plan Organizations (herein after, collectively
“Insurers”) that hold certificates of authority to do business in the state that decisions or actions impacting
consumers that are made or supported by advanced analytical and computational technologies, including
Artificial Intelligence (AI) Systems (as defined below), must comply with all applicable insurance laws and
regulations. This includes those laws that address unfair trade practices and unfair discrimination. This
bulletin sets forth the Department’s expectations as to how Insurers will govern the development/acquisition
and use of certain AI technologies, including the AI Systems described herein. This bulletin also advises
Insurers of the type of information and documentation that the Department may request during an
investigation or examination of any Insurer regarding its use of such technologies and AI Systems.
SECTION 1: INTRODUCTION, BACKGROUND, AND LEGISLATIVE AUTHORITY
Background
AI is transforming the insurance industry. AI techniques are deployed across all stages of the
insurance life cycle, including product development, marketing, sales and distribution, underwriting and
pricing, policy servicing, claim management, and fraud detection.
AI may facilitate the development of innovative products, improve consumer interface and service,
simplify and automate processes, and promote efficiency and accuracy. However, AI, including AI Systems,
can present unique risks to consumers, including the potential for inaccuracy, unfair discrimination, data
vulnerability, and lack of transparency and explainability. Insurers should take actions to minimize these risks.
The Department encourages the development and use of innovation and AI Systems that contribute
to safe and stable insurance markets. However, the Department expects that decisions made and actions
taken by Insurers using AI Systems will comply with all applicable federal and state laws and regulations.
The Department recognizes the Principles of Artificial Intelligence that the National Association of
Insurance Commissioners (NAIC) adopted in 2020 as an appropriate source of guidance for Insurers as they
develop and use AI systems. Those principles emphasize the importance of the fairness and ethical use of
AI; accountability; compliance with state laws and regulations; transparency; and a safe, secure, fair, and
robust system. These fundamental principles should guide Insurers in their development and use of AI
Systems and underlie the expectations set forth in this bulletin.
Legislative Authority
The regulatory expectations and oversight considerations set forth in Section 3 and Section 4 of this
bulletin rely on the following laws and regulations:
• The Unfair and Prohibited Trade Practices and Frauds Act, Mich. Comp. Laws §§ 500.2001 to
500.2093 (UTPFA), regulates trade practices in insurance by: 1) defining practices that constitute
unfair methods of competition or unfair or deceptive acts and practices; 2) prohibiting the trade
practices so defined or determined; and 3) sets forth standards for the investigation and disposition
of claims arising under policies or certificates of insurance issued to residents of Michigan.
Actions taken by Insurers in the state must not violate the UTPFA, regardless of the methods the
Insurer used to determine or support its actions. As discussed below, Insurers are expected to adopt
practices, including governance frameworks and risk management protocols, that are designed to ensure
that the use of AI Systems does not result in unfair trade practices or unfair claims settlement practices, as
described in MCL 500.2001 to 500.2093.
•
The Corporate Governance Annual Disclosure Act, Mich. Comp. Laws §§ 500.1751 to 500.1767
(CGAD), requires Insurers to report on governance practices and to provide a summary of the
Insurer’s corporate governance structure, policies, and practices.
The requirements of CGAD apply to elements of the Insurer’s corporate governance framework that
address the Insurer’s use of AI Systems to support actions and decisions that impact consumers.
• 500.2403(1)(d) requires that property/casualty (P/C) insurance rates not be excessive, inadequate,
or unfairly discriminatory.
The requirements of MCL 500.2403 apply regardless of the methodology that the Insurer used to
develop rates, rating rules, and rating plans subject to those provisions. That means that an Insurer is
responsible for assuring that rates, rating rules, and rating plans that are developed using AI techniques and
Predictive Models that rely on data and Machine Learning do not result in excessive, inadequate, or unfairly
discriminatory insurance rates with respect to all forms of casualty insurance—including fidelity, surety, and
guaranty bond—and to all forms of property insurance—including fire, marine, and inland marine insurance,
and any combination of any of the foregoing.
An Insurer’s conduct in the state, including its use of AI Systems to make or support actions and
decisions that impact consumers, is subject to investigation, including market conduct actions. Section 4 of
this bulletin provides guidance on the kinds of information and documents that the Department may request
in the context of an AI-focused investigation, including a market conduct action.
SECTION 2: DEFINITIONS
For the purposes of this bulletin the following terms are defined:
“Adverse Consumer Outcome” refers to a decision by an Insurer that is subject to insurance regulatory
standards enforced by the Department that adversely impacts the consumer in a manner that violates those
standards.
“Algorithm” means a clearly specified mathematical process for computation; a set of rules that, if followed,
will give a prescribed result.
“AI System” is a machine-based system that can, for a given set of objectives, generate outputs such as
predictions, recommendations, content (such as text, images, videos, or sounds), or other output influencing
decisions made in real or virtual environments. AI Systems are designed to operate with varying levels of
autonomy.
“Artificial Intelligence (AI)” refers to a branch of computer science that uses data processing systems that
perform functions normally associated with human intelligence, such as reasoning, learning, and selfimprovement, or the capability of a device to perform functions that are normally associated with human
intelligence such as reasoning, learning, and self-improvement. This definition considers machine learning
to be a subset of artificial intelligence.
“Degree of Potential Harm to Consumers” refers to the severity of adverse economic impact that a
consumer might experience as a result of an Adverse Consumer Outcome.
“Generative Artificial Intelligence (Generative AI)” refers to a class of AI Systems that generate content
in the form of data, text, images, sounds, or video, that is similar to, but not a direct copy of, pre-existing data
or content.
“Machine Learning (ML)” Refers to a field within artificial intelligence that focuses on the ability of computers
to learn from provided data without being explicitly programmed.
“Model Drift” refers to the decay of a model’s performance over time arising from underlying changes such
as the definitions, distributions, and/or statistical properties between the data used to train the model and the
data on which it is deployed.
“Predictive Model” refers to the mining of historic data using algorithms and/or machine learning to identify
patterns and predict outcomes that can be used to make or support the making of decisions.
“Third Party” for purposes of this bulletin means an organization other than the Insurer that provides
services, data, or other resources related to AI.
SECTION 3: REGULATORY GUIDANCE AND EXPECTATIONS
Decisions subject to regulatory oversight that are made by Insurers using AI Systems must comply
with the legal and regulatory standards that apply to those decisions, including unfair trade practice laws.
These standards require, at a minimum, that decisions made by Insurers are not inaccurate, arbitrary,
capricious, or unfairly discriminatory. Compliance with these standards is required regardless of the tools and
methods Insurers use to make such decisions. However, because, in the absence of proper controls, AI has
the potential to increase the risk of inaccurate, arbitrary, capricious, or unfairly discriminatory outcomes for
consumers, it is important that Insurers adopt and implement controls specifically related to their use of AI
that are designed to mitigate the risk of Adverse Consumer Outcomes.
Consistent therewith, all Insurers authorized to do business in this state are expected to develop,
implement, and maintain a written program (an “AIS Program”) for the responsible use of AI Systems that
make, or support decisions related to regulated insurance practices. The AIS Program should be designed
to mitigate the risk of Adverse Consumer Outcomes, including, at a minimum, the statutory provisions set
forth in Section 1 of this bulletin.
The Department recognizes that robust governance, risk management controls, and internal audit
functions play a core role in mitigating the risk that decisions driven by AI Systems will violate unfair trade
practice laws and other applicable existing legal standards. The Department also encourages the
development and use of verification and testing methods to identify errors and bias in Predictive Models and
AI Systems, as well as the potential for unfair discrimination in the decisions and outcomes resulting from the
use of Predictive Models and AI Systems.
The controls and processes that an Insurer adopts and implements as part of its AIS Program should
be reflective of, and commensurate with, the Insurer’s own assessment of the degree and nature of risk
posed to consumers by the AI Systems that it uses, considering: (i) the nature of the decisions being made,
informed, or supported using the AI System; (ii) the type and Degree of Potential Harm to Consumers
resulting from the use of AI Systems; (iii) the extent to which humans are involved in the final decision-making
process; (iv) the transparency and explainability of outcomes to the impacted consumer; and (v) the extent
and scope of the insurer’s use or reliance on data, Predictive Models, and AI Systems from third parties.
Similarly, controls and processes should be commensurate with both the risk of Adverse Consumer
Outcomes and the Degree of Potential Harm to Consumers.
As discussed in Section 4, the decisions made as a result of an Insurer’s use of AI Systems are
subject to the Department’s examination to determine that the reliance on AI Systems are compliant with all
applicable existing legal standards governing the conduct of the Insurer.
AIS Program Guidelines
1.0
General Guidelines
1.1
The AIS Program should be designed to mitigate the risk that the Insurer’s use of an AI
System will result in Adverse Consumer Outcomes.
1.2
The AIS Program should address governance, risk management controls, and internal audit
functions.
1.3
The AIS Program should vest responsibility for the development, implementation,
monitoring, and oversight of the AIS Program and for setting the Insurer’s strategy for AI Systems with senior
management accountable to the board or an appropriate committee of the board.
1.4
The AIS Program should be tailored to and proportionate with the Insurer’s use and reliance
on AI and AI Systems. Controls and procedures should be focused on the mitigation of Adverse Consumer
Outcomes and the scope of the controls and procedures applicable to a given AI System use case should
reflect and align with the Degree of Potential Harm to Consumers with respect to that use case.
1.5
The AIS Program may be independent of or part of the Insurer’s existing Enterprise Risk
Management (ERM) program. The AIS Program may adopt, incorporate, or rely upon, in whole or in part, a
framework or standards developed by an official third-party standard organization, such as the National
Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Artificial Intelligence Risk Management Framework, Version
1.0.
1.6
The AIS Program should address the use of AI Systems across the insurance life cycle,
including areas such as product development and design, marketing, use, underwriting, rating and pricing,
case management, claim administration and payment, and fraud detection.
1.7
The AIS Program should address all phases of an AI System’s life cycle, including design,
development, validation, implementation (both systems and business), use, on-going monitoring, updating
and retirement.
1.8
The AIS Program should address the AI Systems used with respect to regulated insurance
practices whether developed by the Insurer or a third-party vendor.
1.9
The AIS Program should include processes and procedures providing notice to impacted
consumers that AI Systems are in use and provide access to appropriate levels of information based on the
phase of the insurance life cycle in which the AI Systems are being used.
2.0
Governance
The AIS Program should include a governance framework for the oversight of AI Systems used by
the Insurer. Governance should prioritize transparency, fairness, and accountability in the design and
implementation of the AI Systems, recognizing that proprietary and trade secret information must be
protected. An Insurer may consider adopting new internal governance structures or rely on the Insurer’s
existing governance structures; however, in developing its governance framework, the Insurer should
consider addressing the following items:
2.1
The policies, processes, and procedures, including risk management and internal controls,
to be followed at each stage of an AI System life cycle, from proposed development to retirement.
2.2
The requirements adopted by the Insurer to document compliance with the AIS Program
policies, processes, procedures, and standards. Documentation requirements should be developed with
Section 4 in mind.
2.3
The Insurer’s internal AI System governance accountability structure, such as:
a) The formation of centralized, federated, or otherwise constituted committees comprised
of representatives from appropriate disciplines and units within the Insurer, such as
business units, product specialists, actuarial, data science and analytics, underwriting,
claims, compliance, and legal.
b) Scope of responsibility and authority, chains of command, and decisional hierarchies.
c) The independence of decision-makers and lines of defense at successive stages of the
AI System life cycle.
d) Monitoring, auditing, escalation, and reporting protocols and requirements.
e) Development and implementation of ongoing training and supervision of personnel.
2.4
Specifically with respect to Predictive Models: the Insurer’s processes and procedures for
designing, developing, verifying, deploying, using, updating, and monitoring Predictive Models, including a
description of methods used to detect and address errors, performance issues, outliers, or unfair
discrimination in the insurance practices resulting from the use of the Predictive Model.
3.0
Risk Management and Internal Controls
The AIS Program should document the Insurer’s risk identification, mitigation, and management
framework and internal controls for AI Systems generally and at each stage of the AI System life cycle. Risk
management and internal controls should address the following items:
3.1
The oversight and approval process for the development, adoption, or acquisition of AI
Systems, as well as the identification of constraints and controls on automation and design to align and
balance function with risk.
3.2
Data practices and accountability procedures, including data currency, lineage, quality,
integrity, bias analysis and minimization, and suitability.
3.3
Management and oversight of Predictive Models (including algorithms used therein),
including:
a) Inventories and descriptions of the Predictive Models.
b) Detailed documentation of the development and use of the Predictive Models.
c) Assessments such as interpretability, repeatability, robustness, regular tuning,
reproducibility, traceability, model drift, and the auditability of these measurements
where appropriate.
3.4
Validating, testing, and retesting as necessary to assess the generalization of AI System
outputs upon implementation, including the suitability of the data used to develop, train, validate and audit
the model. Validation can take the form of comparing model performance on unseen data available at the
time of model development to the performance observed on data post-implementation, measuring
performance against expert review, or other methods.
3.5
The protection of non-public information, particularly consumer information, including
unauthorized access to the Predictive Models themselves.
3.6
Data and record retention.
3.7
Specifically with respect to Predictive Models: a narrative description of the model’s intended
goals and objectives and how the model is developed and validated to ensure that the AI Systems that rely
on such models correctly and efficiently predict or implement those goals and objectives.
4.0
Third-Party AI Systems and Data
Each AIS Program should address the Insurer’s process for acquiring, using, or relying on (i) thirdparty data to develop AI Systems; and (ii) AI Systems developed by a third party, which may include, as
appropriate, the establishment of standards, policies, procedures, and protocols relating to the following
considerations:
4.1
Due diligence and the methods employed by the Insurer to assess the third party and its
data or AI Systems acquired from the third party to ensure that decisions made or supported from such AI
Systems that could lead to Adverse Consumer Outcomes will meet the legal standards imposed on the
Insurer itself.
4.2
Where appropriate and available, the inclusion of terms in contracts with third parties that:
a) Provide audit rights and/or entitle the Insurer to receive audit reports by qualified auditing
entities.
b) Require the third party to cooperate with the Insurer with regard to regulatory inquiries
and investigations related to the Insurer’s use of the third-party’s product or services.
4.3
The performance of contractual rights regarding audits and/or other activities to confirm the
third-party’s compliance with contractual and, where applicable, regulatory requirements.
SECTION 4: REGULATORY OVERSIGHT AND EXAMINATION CONSIDERATIONS
The Department’s regulatory oversight of Insurers includes oversight of an Insurer’s conduct in the
state, including its use of AI Systems to make or support decisions that impact consumers. Regardless of the
existence or scope of a written AIS Program, in the context of an investigation or market conduct action, an
Insurer can expect to be asked about its development, deployment, and use of AI Systems, or any specific
Predictive Model, AI System or application and its outcomes (including Adverse Consumer Outcomes) from
the use of those AI Systems, as well as any other information or documentation deemed relevant by the
Department.
Insurers should expect those inquiries to include (but not be limited to) the Insurer’s governance
framework, risk management, and internal controls (including the considerations identified in Section 3). In
addition to conducting a review of any of the items listed in this Bulletin, a regulator may also ask questions
regarding any specific model, AI System, or its application, including but not limited to requests for the
following types of information and/or documentation:
1.
Information and Documentation Relating to AI System Governance, Risk Management, and
Use Protocols
1.1.
Information and documentation related to or evidencing the Insurer’s AIS Program,
including:
a) The written AIS Program.
b) Information and documentation relating to or evidencing the adoption of the AIS
Program.
c) The scope of the Insurer’s AIS Program, including any AI Systems and technologies not
included in or addressed by the AIS Program.
d) How the AIS Program is tailored to and proportionate with the Insurer’s use and reliance
on AI Systems, the risk of Adverse Consumer Outcomes, and the Degree of Potential
Harm to Consumers.
e) The policies, procedures, guidance, training materials, and other information relating to
the adoption, implementation, maintenance, monitoring, and oversight of the Insurer’s
AIS Program, including:
i.
Processes and procedures for the development, adoption, or acquisition of AI
Systems, such as:
(1) Identification of constraints and controls on automation and design.
(2) Data governance and controls, any practices related to data lineage, quality,
integrity, bias analysis and minimization, suitability, and Data Currency.
ii. Processes and procedures related to the management and oversight of Predictive
Models, including measurements, standards, or thresholds adopted or used by the
Insurer in the development, validation, and oversight of models and AI Systems.
iii. Protection of non-public information, particularly consumer information, including
unauthorized access to Predictive Models themselves.
1.2.
Information and documentation relating to the Insurer’s pre-acquisition/pre-use diligence,
monitoring, oversight, and auditing of data or AI Systems developed by a third party.
1.3.
Information and documentation relating to or evidencing the Insurer’s implementation and
compliance with its AIS Program, including documents relating to the Insurer’s monitoring and audit activities
respecting compliance, such as:
a) Documentation relating to or evidencing the formation and ongoing operation of the
Insurer’s coordinating bodies for the development, use, and oversight of AI Systems.
b) Documentation related to data practices and accountability procedures, including data
lineage, quality, integrity, bias analysis and minimization, suitability, and Data Currency.
c) Management and oversight of Predictive Models and AI Systems, including:
i.
The Insurer’s inventories and descriptions of Predictive Models, and AI Systems
used by the Insurer to make or support decisions that can result in Adverse
Consumer Outcomes.
ii.
As to any specific Predictive Model or AI System that is the subject of investigation
or examination:
(1) Documentation of compliance with all applicable AI Program policies, protocols,
and procedures in the development, use, and oversight of Predictive Models
and AI Systems deployed by the Insurer.
(2) Information about data used in the development and oversight of the specific
model or AI System, including the data source, provenance, data lineage,
quality, integrity, bias analysis and minimization, suitability, and Data Currency.
(3) Information related to the techniques, measurements, thresholds, and similar
controls used by the Insurer.
d) Documentation related to validation, testing, and auditing, including evaluation of Model
Drift to assess the reliability of outputs that influence the decisions made based on
Predictive Models. Note that the nature of validation, testing, and auditing should be
reflective of the underlying components of the AI System, whether based on Predictive
Models or Generative AI.
2.
Third-Party AI Systems and Data
In addition, if the investigation or examination concerns data, Predictive Models, or AI Systems
collected or developed in whole or in part by third parties, the Insurer should also expect the Department to
request the following additional types of information and documentation.
2.1
Due diligence conducted on third parties and their data, models, or AI Systems.
2.2
Contracts with third-party AI System, model, or data vendors, including terms relating to
representations, warranties, data security and privacy, data sourcing, intellectual property
rights, confidentiality and disclosures, and/or cooperation with regulators.
2.3
Audits and/or confirmation processes performed regarding third-party compliance with
contractual and, where applicable, regulatory obligations.
2.4
Documentation pertaining to validation, testing, and auditing, including evaluation of Model
Drift.
The Department recognizes that Insurers may demonstrate their compliance with the laws that
regulate their conduct in the state in their use of AI Systems through alternative means, including through
practices that differ from those described in this bulletin. The goal of the bulletin is not to prescribe specific
practices or to prescribe specific documentation requirements. Rather, the goal is to ensure that Insurers in
the state are aware of the Department’s expectations as to how AI Systems will be governed and managed
and of the kinds of information and documents about an Insurer’s AI Systems that the department expects
an Insurer to produce when requested.
As in all cases, investigations and market conduct actions may be performed using procedures that
vary in nature, extent, and timing in accordance with regulatory judgment. Work performed may include
inquiry, examination of company documentation, or any of the continuum of market actions described in the
NAIC’s Market Regulation Handbook. These activities may involve the use of contracted specialists with
relevant subject matter expertise. Nothing in this bulletin limits the authority of the Department to conduct any
regulatory investigation, examination, or enforcement action relative to any act or omission of any Insurer
that the Department is authorized to perform.
Any questions regarding this bulletin should be directed to:
Department of Insurance and Financial Services
Office of Appeals, Legal Research, and Market Regulation
530 W. Allegan Street – 7th Floor
P.O. Box 30220
Lansing, Michigan 48909-7720
Toll Free: (877) 999-6442
/s/
____________________________
Anita G. Fox
Director