Candidates Respond

David Cummings

As I re-join the Board as President-Elect and ultimately assume the role as Chair of the Board, I will ensure that we have sought sufficient member input and have an appropriate communication plan for the decisions we make. I will also ask Board members to make themselves available to engage directly with members, employers, and other stakeholders, so they have opportunities to hear feedback directly from the membership.

In stating these commitments, I want to acknowledge that the topic of transparency has been actively considered by the board over the past few years. For example, I applaud the Board’s recent request for member input on the recommendations from the Governance Task Force. This demonstrates that the commitments I stated above are not new, but they require continued focus and commitment in order for them to maintain an appropriate culture of transparency and accountability for the Board.

John Aquino

As your independent Board representative, I would be in favor of transparency into the operations of the CAS. If elected, I will consider the transparency or lack thereof in the actions of the Board and the operation of the CAS and support the membership’s interest in improved transparency.

Emma Casehart

The goal of transparency is to give members more input into the professional organization they belong to while connecting their experiences and needs to strategy. Without a clear throughline from member feedback to strategic action, it can be easy to feel disconnected from the Board and the CAS. As a board member, I will continue to gather member feedback, host regular communication sessions with membership on strategic decisions, and highlight the contributions of members to ongoing initiatives.

There are many ways the Board is gathering member feedback: regular requests for feedback on the ATP, CAS contact information on explainer pages, and efforts to gather feedback from committee and working group participants. The CAS should continue to ask for feedback from members on proposed initiatives. The Board should conduct additional member surveys and provide a comment period on major strategic changes.

Just asking for feedback is not enough. Unless the Board considers and responds to member feedback, there is not true transparency. The Board of Directors is highly involved with CAS volunteers and staff, and considers many viewpoints before deciding to make a change to the strategy of the CAS. However, the closed nature of Board meetings means that members are not clear the extent of volunteer involvement in the process of change. The Board should provide enhanced meeting minutes and agendas beyond those currently publicly published, when appropriate, so members can understand how the Board considers member feedback and perspectives in regular meetings. The Board should also explore hosting quarterly Q&A sessions to allow members to pose questions to Board members about ongoing strategic initiatives.

Members are the heart of change at the CAS; strategic initiatives are not pursued without member and volunteer involvement. The Board should share additional resources for members to connect with the volunteers involved in strategic changes through “Meet The Volunteers” profiles and interviews to share the voices of members who are passionate about the changes they are leading. The Board should also present regular town-hall-style updates on strategic initiatives, member feedback, and additional context on the need for change.

True transparency means communication and feedback at all stages of the cycle of change. My proposals to provide additional transparency are about both communicating progress on existing initiatives and responding to feedback from members.

Wanchin Chou

As we continue the transition to a “new normal” following the many COVID-induced changes in how we work and interact, communication is critical! Virtual technology enables more frequent direct communication without requiring in-person meetings. The landscape is changing, and we need to get ahead of future changes. We could increase participation in our online communities, host a town hall potentially in conjunction with monthly communication meetings virtually.

I have led and participated in many NAIC committees and working groups since I joined CID as chief actuary. This is what NAIC committees and working groups do: After open discussion at the meetings, we expose documents for public comment before casting votes. The CAS should consider a similar approach for significant proposed changes. This would enhance the transparency and engagement but require extensive assistance from CAS staff: CAS staff would need to publicize the exposure draft and collect, disseminate, and summarize comments received.

Input across different ages and experience levels of our CAS members, across lines of business and across international boundaries will enhance our effectiveness and adaptability.

Mike Larsen

The material brought before the board to review should be made public with the exception of a limited number of items like lawsuits or the personnel reviews of CAS staff. It’s difficult to follow the board meeting discussions when the material being reviewed is not available before or during the meeting to non-board members that are attending.

Votes from each board member on items brought before the board should be recorded and made public.

The board should clarify what authority they have granted CAS staff to make decisions vs. what items require board approval or are under the control of CAS volunteers.

Sandy Lowe

I believe it is important to invite members into the decision-making process sooner, rather than once a final decision or strategy is set. I would advocate to continue to seek member input. I think the recent ask for member input on Governance Recommendations is a great example, but I think we should consider multiple methods for collecting feedback. Do we get more engagement and feedback via an online forum instead? Or through listening sessions/town hall meetings hosted by the Board? Is the timeframe long enough? Feedback is important, so we need to prioritize making it easier for members to share it.

I also would advocate for and believe the CAS could benefit from some form of a Transparency Framework – which would outline the Board’s commitment to openness and accountability. Such guidelines would include steps and expectations for gathering feedback, making decisions, and communication. As it would not be effective for every single decision to be subject to this framework, the Board would have oversight into which major decisions would be in scope, but could be held accountable to these guidelines for larger decisions or changes.

Joe Milicia

First and foremost, we must leverage the existing mechanisms to seek member feedback. The CAS utilizes emails, posts notices to members on the website to seek feedback, publishes minutes/agendas of board meetings, etc. to enable transparency. Members must avail themselves to those methods to ensure that membership feedback is shared as the CAS must serve its members and cannot do so without active member participation. I will advocate that the board continue to use those mechanisms and seeks to improve upon current practices. Additionally, I am a frequent meeting attendee and speaker and would welcome personal feedback from the membership.

I personally do not believe there is a transparency issue, but like all organizations we should seek continual improvement to ensure that our work serves the membership. Like we all do in our professional careers, there is a healthy balance that must be struck between transparency and the ability to make progress and discuss topics confidentially. I am aware that there is a portion of the membership that feels unheard and while I may not agree, I do believe that in order to serve the membership we must engage and hear the concerns. I also believe that it is our duty to explain why we disagree with objections to the course of the CAS and clearly communicate where we are going and why. Further, we must continually evaluate the progress we’re making and not be afraid to change course as necessary. I view Board membership as service to the CAS and thus service to the membership including those with different views than my own. I am open to feedback and professional debate.

Kathleen Ores Walsh

Transparency is important and the board should continue to leverage it’s current forms of town halls, email communications, and maintain content on the CAS website. In addition, to a question below, I would support an open discussion forum with some guardrails in place. (See answer to Question 19)

Thomas Struppeck

Motivating this question may have been a particular board action; not knowing what that action was, I will address transparency in general:

I teach a senior-level class, Decision Analytics, here at UT. One of the theorems is that groups making decisions will over-purchase information – that is, they will continue purchasing information beyond the point where the marginal value of the information equals its cost. The larger the group, the worse this is¹. For that reason, the best strategy is to select a competent set of decision makers and let them do their jobs without too much second-guessing.

In short, some transparency is good, but too much is counterproductive.

¹ To see why this is true, imagine that you are trying to reach agreement with another group. You believe that they (they’re idiots) would agree with you if you just had more data to show them. Of course, they think the exact same thing about you. So, the only thing that you can agree on is to buy more data!

David Cummings

No. In my opinion, the CAS Board and leadership have stayed true to the Statement of Purpose. Over the past several years, they have needed to consider important topics in a time of significant societal change and disruption. Each of these topics was relevant to the CAS Purpose and Mission and necessary to be considered and decided. I participated in many of those discussions during my time on the Board (2018-2021), and I can affirm that Board discussions and decisions were grounded in the Purpose and Mission.

John Aquino

The Statement of Purpose is:

“ARTICLE II. - Statement of Purpose

The purposes of the Casualty Actuarial Society are to advance the body of knowledge of actuarial science applied to property, casualty, and similar risk exposures, to establish and maintain standards of qualification for membership, to promote and maintain high standards of conduct and competence for the members, and to increase the awareness of actuarial science.”

The Statement of Purpose is not presented directly at the CAS web site, except if one downloads the Constitution and reads it by choice. There is a Mission Statement at the CAS web site:
“The purposes of the Casualty Actuarial Society are:

• to advance the body of knowledge of actuarial science applied to general insurance, including property, casualty and similar risk exposures;
• to expand the application of actuarial science to enterprise risks and systemic risks;
• to establish and maintain standards of qualification for membership;
• to promote and maintain high standards of conduct and competence;
• to increase the awareness of actuarial science;
• and, to contribute to the well being of society as a whole.”

The Mission Statement draws upon the Statement of Purpose. It is not apparent that the Mission Statement is superior to the Statement of Purpose, and the Mission Statement changes the Statement of Purpose. The specific expansion of actuarial science to “enterprise risks and systemic risks” was already covered in the broader category of “similar risk exposures.” Actuaries practicing with high standards of conduct and competence according to the Statement of Purpose contribute to the “well being of society as a whole.” The unnecessary addition of the final “well being of society as a whole” in the Mission Statement calls into question the adequacy of the Statement of Purpose and opens the door for the CAS to undertake any project whether it relates to actuarial science or not. It is not apparent that the CAS has strayed too far from its Statement of Purpose, but it is apparent that the Mission Statement implies dissatisfaction by its drafters with the Constitutional Statement of Purpose.

Emma Casehart

For those not familiar with the CAS Constitution Statement of Purpose, I have shared it here in full:

The purposes of the Casualty Actuarial Society are to advance the body of knowledge of actuarial science applied to property, casualty, and similar risk exposures, to establish and maintain standards of qualification for membership, to promote and maintain high standards of conduct and competence for the members, and to increase the awareness of actuarial science

1. Advance the body of knowledge of actuarial science

The CAS has issued numerous calls for papers, and in 2020 created a strategic initiative on Race and Insurance Pricing. This initiative has produced multiple research papers on a matter of importance to actuaries, regulators, and the general public. Through this and other supported research, the CAS has continued to advance the knowledge of actuarial science in the profession.

I plan to increase the ability of all actuaries to contribute to research topics through the creation of a mentorship program so all actuaries can find a role model or mentor to guide them through the research process, and the exploration of a CAS-funded prize for research on bias-related topics.

2. Establish and maintain standards of qualification

The CAS has begun to implement the Admissions Transformation Plan (ATP), modernizing our credentialing process based on best practices across credentialing bodies. The Job Task Analysis completed in 2020 ensures that changes to the exam content reflects what CAS actuaries do in practice every day. As more demands are made of the actuarial profession, we are responding with additional requirements to ensure newly credentialed actuaries demonstrate they have the required skills. To that end, an additional project for ACAS will be introduced, requiring the creation of a predictive model. These changes to our credentialing model enhance the standards and rigor of our profession.

I will continue the transformation laid out in the ATP and promote additional transparency around future changes to exam content, structure, or requirements. 

3. Promote and maintain high standards of conduct and competence

All members of the CAS are required to uphold robust continuing education requirements. The CAS has a best-in-class continuing education program that includes multiple conferences a year on general insurance topics, ratemaking, reserving, and reinsurance. Regional groups provide additional continuing education opportunities for members to learn new skills and advance their personal actuarial knowledge. The CAS continues to hold its members to a high ethical standard through the Code of Professional Conduct.

4. Increase awareness of actuarial science

The CAS continues its university liaison program and participation in BeAnActuary. In recent years, the CAS has also created the Student Central Summer Program. I was a mentor in 2021, and loved connecting my daily work to the concerns of new students. The program provides CAS actuaries a direct connection with interested university students to engage them in the profession. Participation in the teaching relationship is rewarding for both students and mentors, and increases awareness of the profession. These are just a few of the programs directly targeted at college and high school students to increase awareness of the profession.

As a director, I would continue to support these programs and explore additional connections with actuarial diversity organizations to see how those organizations can increase the awareness of actuarial science among groups traditionally less aware of the profession.

As the CAS grows, the organization continues to support the purposes of the Constitution.

Wanchin Chou

No, I believe CAS aligns with the Constitution's Statement of Purpose. The purposes of the Society are to advance the body of knowledge of actuarial science applied to property, casualty, and similar risk exposures, to establish and maintain standards of qualification for membership, to promote and maintain high standards of conduct and competence for the members, and to increase the awareness of actuarial science.

Our growth strategy and keeping the society strong should be our focus aided with continued education on business best practices. As laid out in the third pillar of the Strategic Plan, there is a growing “global demand for the services and expertise of CAS members.” To stay relevant and maintain our high-quality designation, we need to continue to evolve with the field. Ensuring our members have the skillset to be industry-leading problem solvers will be key to remaining relevant in our expanding field.

Mike Larsen

If you look at the Statement of Purpose, there is no mention of DEI as a goal, yet that has been one of the primary topics of conversation at the Board level from what I can observe in recent years. The board set out a DEI policy which had a mixed reception from the membership, leading to a survey and a subsequent restatement of a DEI policy.

As a result, I would say that the CAS has strayed too far from our primary goals in the aftermath of the George Floyd case. Time spent on the DEI topic would have been far better used to talk about how to improve our basic education program or find a cost-effective means for members to keep up with changing technology in the workplace. (Corrected July 18, 2023)

Sandy Lowe

I do not believe the CAS has strayed from either the CAS Constitution’s Statement of Purpose or the Mission Statement. For example, of the 2021-2023 Strategic Plan, Pillar 1. Building Skills for the Future seeks to “advance the body of knowledge of actuarial science” and “expand [its] application” by emphasizing the need to build skills in analytics, problem solving and domain knowledge. Pillar 2. Diversifying the Pipeline works to “increase the awareness of actuarial science” by increasing outreach efforts. Lastly, Pillar 3. Expanding Globally supports “contributing to the well being of the society as a whole” as the current supply of CAS members within North America is not sufficient to support the insurance industry in areas of rapid growth. As such, I believe the CAS has appropriately focused its strategy and efforts in recent years.

Joe Milicia

I do not believe that the CAS has strayed from its Statement of Purpose. Part of the CAS’s purpose is to increase the awareness of actuarial science. To me, this includes promoting actuarial science in demographics that are underrepresented in CAS membership today.

Kathleen Ores Walsh

No, I do not believe the CAS has strayed too far.

Recall, the purposes of the Casualty Actuarial Society are to:

• advance the body of knowledge of actuarial science applied to property, casualty, and similar risk exposures,
• to establish and maintain standards of qualification for membership,
• to promote and maintain high standards of conduct and competence for the members, and
• to increase the awareness of actuarial science.

Our current strategic plan of building skills for the future, diversifying our pipeline, and expanding globally are all in line with this purpose, along with our statements of principles and standards of practice. That being said, given the pace of economic and climate risk changes, it is important that the CAS continues to help our profession march towards this purpose with an increased pace. If elected to the board, I will work to make sure that we have appropriate outcomes defined and measured in line with our purpose.

Thomas Struppeck

Just as ratemaking is purely prospective, so is serving on the Board. I will not opine on the past. I quote:

ARTICLE II. - Statement of Purpose

The purposes of the Casualty Actuarial Society are to advance the body of knowledge of actuarial science applied to property, casualty, and similar risk exposures, to establish and maintain standards of qualification for membership, to promote and maintain high standards of conduct and competence for the members, and to increase the awareness of actuarial science.

I think that this is quite clear.

David Cummings

The rapid implementation of Computer Based Testing (CBT) in 2020 stands out to me as great example of effective leadership and execution by the CAS. It is also an important example of the need for staff expertise for the CAS to accomplish its mission. Coming into the pandemic, the CAS had yet to successfully implement CBT and was still re-grouping from a failed attempt in 2018. It was a time when failure was not an option. We had recently hired our new CEO, Victor Carter-Bey, who had significant career experience in professional exam administration and computer-based testing. And we had other staff and member leaders who were ready to put lessons learned into practice. They worked together to enable all exams to be ready for CBT within 6 months from the start of the pandemic – something the CAS had been unable to do previously, despite years of effort.

As I look back on my time on the Board (2018-2021), there are times where I wish we had delayed decision in order to give members the opportunity to give us feedback before acting. The top example for me is when we voted to rescind the Statement of Principles on Ratemaking, which were ultimately re-instated. There were many reasons why various board members supported the rescission, and there was a very active debate in board meetings about the pros and cons. But we should have paused and communicated a proposal to the membership and other stakeholders before acting. This would have allowed us to respond to feedback and adjust the board action up front. I believe this approach would have built trust with members and US regulators, and it would have resulted in a better outcome. I will take these lessons learned and apply them as I prepare to assume leadership roles and ultimately chair the Board in 2025-2026.

John Aquino

As a new and independent Board candidate, without the benefit of experience on the Board, I am not prepared to offer a ranking of initiatives undertaken by the CAS.

My candidacy is motivated in part by concern with respect to one initiative: the By-Law and Constitution changes proposed for adoption in 2021. Specifically, the proposed Constitution changed Article III, Membership, to eliminate examinations as the basis for Admission. The current admission requirement is “successful completion of the examinations prescribed by the Board of Directors for Fellowship, subject to any further requirements the Board may prescribe,” and was to be replaced with “successful completion of the admission requirements prescribed by the Board of Directors.” The promotion of this radical change to the admission requirement, granting the Board of Directors authority to eliminate examinations in favor of any requirement that the Board deemed fit, was not adequately disclosed to the membership. It was not mentioned in the article in the Actuarial Review article promoting a vote in favor of the changed Constitution. In my discussion with several members who voted in favor of the By-Law and Constitution changes, they appeared to be unaware that the requirement for admission by examination was to be removed from the Constitution.

Emma Casehart

So far, the current governance updates have been handled effectively. I believe the CAS has heard feedback from members that we desire more transparency and is trying to deliver more context. The process began last year with a call for proposals that outlined the specific areas of interest to the Board and a single point of contact for member concerns or questions. The full request for proposals was available for member review along with a detailed timeline of milestones. Any interested or concerned member has ample opportunity to provide feedback on the initial proposal stage.

It’s appropriate that the consultant selection process and creation of recommendation were initially private to the Board and others in the CAS to allow time to prepare a strategic response to the recommendations. The recent governance release provided an appropriate level of summarization of the findings, along with a call for specific areas where member feedback is sought. This release also included appropriate contacts to submit feedback, a timeline of when feedback will be considered, and a commitment to provide updates on the process. For an initiative that changes our governance, this is an appropriate level of transparency and feedback from membership. I look forward to seeing the CAS’s continued commitment to transparency come forward in other initiatives.

The least effective CAS initiative in recent years was rescinding the ratemaking principles. While the decision to rescind the ratemaking principles is a considered, appropriate choice, the first communication many members heard about the decision was a press release removing the principles from use. The principles had been a core part of actuarial work for over 30 years, so any changes to the principles should have been handled delicately. The reasons to remove the principles are sound, but the shock of the announcement was profound because the need for change was not clear. Only after backlash to the decision did the Board provide a space for member feedback and detailed context. At that point, the Board extensively outlined why change was necessary, including their duplicative nature with ASOPs, a decade-long history of consideration of removing the principles, and state insurance regulations in the United States.

I would have sent an initial communication to all members about why the Board was considering removal of the principles and the history of the principles and the need for change now. With that communication, I would invite a discussion with members to gather their thoughts. After a reasonable comment period, I would publicly respond to comments and share with members whether their comments changed or expanded upon the initial strategy. In that communication, I would make a final determination and provide the next steps. After six months, I would revisit the discussion and provide a press release updating membership on initiatives related to the decision, like removing discussion of the principles in exam content or the Course on Professionalism. In general, this initiative felt unsuccessful because of a lack of early, clear communication on the decision and its history. As a director, I commit to transparency and feedback on our strategic direction.

Wanchin Chou

When the SOA created its General Insurance track, the CAS leadership, along with the membership, rallied to reinforce our high standards and to send the message to all who would listen that we are the Gold Standard for General Insurance (P&C) actuaries. As a result, this incursion only helped the CAS to reinforce its core principles and to strengthen society. This was, and still is, an effective effort.

Diversity is a real opportunity, not only in the standard ways that we think of it but also in the educational institutions from which we recruit our talented candidates and in the perspectives that are heard. Efforts to improve the diversity in the pipeline of candidates and to better understand the wide variety of backgrounds in our membership are a good outcome from these events. However, the initial approach was not effective. When the leadership plowed ahead with the DE&I efforts and statements, the membership was caught off guard. The push back has resulted in a clearer approach, but many members are still skeptical of this initiative. This could have been communicated better and demonstrated stronger leadership. A better way would be to solicit input from the membership and to provide a full discussion of options. In addition, we should not let new waves of political and social issues drive the core value of the CAS and its members as an organization devoted to the advancement of actuarial science in General Insurance.

Mike Larsen

Most Effectively

Moving the exams to Pearson testing centers to keep the exam process going during COVID would be the initiative that was handled most effectively. We had to adapt a number of parts of the exam process at a time when meeting face to face was impractical in a brief time period.

Least Effectively

Updating the syllabus to stay current with changing technology is the initiative that the board has handled least efficiently.

The Syllabus and Exam Committee leadership group had started a process to update the Fellowship exams in the summer of 2019 to integrate the MAS exam topics, but that initiative was put on hold at the end of 2019 pending completion of the Job Task Analysis process (JTA) by the CAS board. The board accepted a JTA process under the control of the newly hired members of the CAS Admissions staff and the Syllabus and Exam Committee/volunteers were excluded. The JTA did not work for an assortment of reasons that would be too numerous to recount in this forum. It’s now July of 2023 and we may have an update for the Fellowship exams in place sometime in 2024 to 2025. We have made changes to the MAS exam content in 2023 which should have been subject to comment and peer review by the membership before being implemented.

I believe there are four steps we should have taken:

• Identify what are the goals of our syllabus and exam process and obtain CAS member buy in before starting to change our syllabus and exam process.
• Seek outside review of how we design our syllabus content and the exams but treat those comments as advice to the volunteer group rather than the definitive word of how we should proceed.
• Open up the review of syllabus content process to general membership comments similar to how the American Academy of Actuaries treats new ASOPs.
• Alter the syllabus review process to use focus groups as the underlying basis of formulating material in areas where material changes are warranted and publish those results for comment before implementation.

The issue of the lack of clear goals is worth expanding on since I view that as a key responsibility of the board. There is a wide range of potential goals, and they can be quite different. Examples include:

• Credentialing exams are based solely on observing what most of our members say they do today.
• Credentialing exams and a syllabus have the goal of balancing what members do today with the need to improve new members’ grasp of predictive analytics beyond the level of most practitioners today.
• Credentialing exams and the syllabus are designed to ensure the skill level of new members in programming and predictive analytics enables them to compete with the data science group with minimal attention on current actuarial techniques.

We did need to change procedures to open up the discussion of syllabus content beyond the syllabus part specialists, but the syllabus and exam committee members should have been full-fledged partners in all stages of the JTA process from the start.

Sandy Lowe

I thought that CAS leadership handled the Approach to Race and Insurance well. It was a timely response to parallel discussions occurring outside of our profession, and an appropriate step given the impact to our work. From my seat, there seemed to be a clear plan on what was within scope and ownership, and felt that presentations and research reached a wide audience and were well advertised.

Unfortunately, I felt that the transition to Computer-Based Testing (CBT) was a rocky one that the CAS missed the mark on. As we all know, the topic of exams is rightfully sensitive, and we owe it to our candidates to ensure that no sitting ‘goes wrong’. I was not part of CAS leadership at the time, so I cannot speak to what checks were done, what back-up plans were set, and what concerns existed when Exam 5 was first administered on the computer. Having a ‘transition sitting’ might have been a better way to test the new platform – with both in-person proctors present in addition to the virtual proctors that were used at the time. It’s hard for me to say what was considered or even possible. However, while we have made strides since then, there still continues to be issues with the current solution. As a CAS Board Member, I would prioritize resolving the issues candidates continue to face – instead of chalking it up to ‘technological difficulties’ that happen at the expense of the candidate. We need to keep working to find solutions and back-up plans that candidates also find suitable, and be transparent with those efforts.

Joe Milicia

The greatest amount of CAS controversy in my entire career has been the uproar around the CAS’ DE&I initiatives. There are elements of that initiative that could be cited for both most effective and least effective. One the most effective side, the CAS has not allowed the uproar to distract from continuing to advance our mission of promoting the actuarial profession. To those ends, we have progressed in making sure the CAS is welcoming to all and have actively sought to increase awareness in underrepresented communities. Remaining steadfast to our mission despite loud criticism and making progress is commendable.

On the other hand, this has left a portion of the membership feeling as though they are unheard. America has become a more polarized country, and this is seemingly seeping into the CAS. We need to break down the echo chambers and thus the CAS has to overaccommodate by making leadership/staff available to hopefully break down the misconceptions about what the CAS DE&I policy means, what the CAS is hoping to achieve and how we all can play a role in furthering those objectives. The discourse on this subject is so focused on buzzwords and needs to be more specific. I do not believe that many people would object to the actual actions the CAS is taking on the DE&I front if they could get past the terminology that they find offensive.

Kathleen Ores Walsh

In late 2020, the speed at which the CAS defined an approach to Race & Insurance Pricing was an effectively led initiative. With transparent communication in various venues, they aligned on key areas of focus and goals, published research methods and compared with other industries best practices. This allowed the profession and members to have a set of timely information to align to and work with, allowing our membership base to have access to pertinent and fact-based information for our profession.

In the recent past was when the CAS made a decision to eliminate the Statement of Principles on Ratemaking and then changed the decision and re instituted it, members did not feel like they had understood why or that they had a chance to give input. I believe the CAS adapted well and learned from the feedback committing to improved input and communication to the membership.

Thomas Struppeck

Until shown otherwise, my assumption is always that the Board made what they considered to be the best decision given the information that they had at the time. It simply isn’t fair to point to an alternative action that purely in retrospect would have worked better.

David Cummings

I would say that the current staff-volunteer model is approaching a proper balance, although it needs some refinements. Over the past 5-7 years, there has been a much-needed shift to better leverage highly qualified staff to do many things that we as volunteers either are not qualified to do or do not have the time to do. This is appropriate for an organization that continues to grow as we are, and it should not diminish our volunteer-focused culture that makes our community strong. We need staff with expertise in administering a professional credentialing organization who also are committed to serving the membership and partnering with member volunteers. And we need to continue to have experienced member-leaders and other volunteers to provide expertise, vision, and direction to programs that enable the CAS and its members to be highly sought after. I look forward to leading the CAS as we refine the staff-volunteer model in this way.

John Aquino

I have not formed an opinion on this question.

Emma Casehart

I worked side by side with CAS staff on the Admissions Transformation Plan to modernize our credentialing pathway. As a candidate and later, a fellow, I used my experiences and knowledge to shape the direction of our organization. My focus was the big picture of our organizational strategy, admissions, and future actuaries. I did not have to consider how the changes would be funded, how they would be staffed, or detailed timelines for producing a final work product. With the volunteer-staff model we have in place, members use their actuarial expertise to guide the strategy of initiatives, and staff execute on the vision.

As our society grows, there are additional operational considerations that need to be handled by staff so volunteers can focus on the most important elements of our organization - the strategy and content. We should provide volunteers more opportunities to influence the strategic direction of the CAS, rather than having them focus on specific details of implementation. I support providing members more ways to engage with ongoing strategic initiatives through long-term and micro-volunteering opportunities.

Members should use their volunteering to share their actuarial expertise and desires for the future of the profession, rather than being bogged down in administrative considerations. To support a volunteer-led organization, a professional staff is required to coordinate the logistics of things like conferences, high-stakes exam delivery, and administration of professional education, for example. Members should guide the content and direction of the experiences facilitated by staff. I agree that the best use of our limited time as volunteers is to focus on areas that need the most review by actuaries and members, and to leave organizational or logistical considerations to staff.

For those interested in learning more about the volunteer-staff model, see the FAQ exploring some of these topics in more detail.

Wanchin Chou

CAS’s current distribution of power between staff and volunteers is appropriate. Collaboration is important to optimize the effectiveness of the CAS operations. It is no different from running a successful company which requires many people from different functional areas to team up effectively, and CAS is doing just that. The CAS is a professional membership. I believe all governance and strategic direction matters are decided by the membership currently and it is appropriate for the membership to delegate the business operations to CAS staff, with proper oversight from the Board.

However, to optimize the effectiveness of the CAS operations, CAS should continue identifying areas for improvement and reviewing the distribution of power and functions annually to adapt to future challenges and make necessary changes as a professional actuarial organization. Per my understanding, CAS actuaries are involved in setting learning objectives needed to meet the collective bar needed for our profession and for regulatory purposes. However, actuaries are not all experts in the administrative functions and best practices in the exam question formats and standards in the industry, and it is beneficial opening to staff and other experts to help us with the “how” - including setting tenable objectives, improving testing methods, as well as exam delivery and experience.

Mike Larsen

My response varies by activity:

• In terms of activities like accounting/budgeting or the logistics of setting up conventions, I think we have the right balance.
• If we look at the syllabus and exam process, I think we still have too much authority in the hands of CAS staff.

There are a number of complex administrative tasks like accounting or dealing with the lengthy list of actions to be taken to set up the hotel reservations and deal with collecting the presentations for sessions at those meetings that require full-time staff and do not require an actuarial background.

I believe that starting in 2022 there has been a gradual move giving back of some control of the syllabus and exam process to the volunteers, yet the balance is still not where I think it should be. The simplest example I can think of is that at the Spring 2023 meeting, we saw one volunteer and three CAS staff members on the panel that spoke about exam and syllabus changes.

Sandy Lowe

I believe the distribution of power is close to just right. I think that having the support of the staff to focus on operational execution is key to maximizing and freeing up the capacity of our volunteers to focus on strategic action or actuarial issues. However, I am less concerned on the balance of power between staff and volunteers, but rather more concerned on if we have enough volunteers to keep up with the needs of our organization. We need to find more ways to engage our community and inspire new volunteers, while supporting current volunteers to prevent burn-out.

Joe Milicia

Having a mix of volunteers from the membership that the CAS must serve working alongside staff that is full time and only devoted to the CAS is a must for the success of the CAS. While having that mix just right is a high bar, I do not believe that there is an obvious imbalance of power at the moment. As a member of the board, I will continue to evaluate the mix of responsibilities and will react and adjust as I view appropriate.

For those who feel as though volunteers do not have enough power, I would strongly encourage you to volunteer, run for the Board or other leadership positions and otherwise make your voice heard. The more volunteers the CAS has the better and if volunteer capacity increases, that would be an argument to shift more power and responsibility to the volunteers.

Kathleen Ores Walsh

What matters to me on this topic is that both the staff and volunteers are all focused on the same outcomes and aligned to achieving them together. In addition, we should have the right skill sets doing the right roles and as we’ve shifted the CAS staffing vs volunteering model, we have seen a faster pace of change in our ability to optimize the strength of the volunteers and staff. With any operational model, there are likely ways we can continue to refine if elected, I look forward to help shape this model together for the next strategic horizon.

Thomas Struppeck

(By “power” I assume that you mean “decision making authority”. I will respond on that basis.)

Recently the New York Times had a piece on flat organizational structures. While there are definite benefits to them, they are subject to some problems and these problems grow with size. Having a professional staff creates more of a hierarchical structure with its inherent efficiencies. As we grow, having staff assistance with certain tasks becomes more and more necessary. Some tasks are purely administrative and should be done by staff; others are more actuarial and should be done mostly by actuaries (either staff actuaries or volunteers). We want to stay closely connected to our membership, so I would favor erring on the side of having more volunteers, provided that we can get them.

David Cummings

For more than 10 years, it has been necessary for the CAS to engage directly with universities and students to ensure they continue to consider CAS exams and credentials. We have built a strong network of university engagement volunteers supported by staff that ensure the CAS is visible and considered by students in their career choices. As we make significant changes in our admissions process through the Admissions Transformation Plan, we will need to refresh our engagement to ensure they understand the opportunities these changes present to them. We will need to train our university liaisons and mobilize them, as we have done before, to ensure we attract motivated and talented candidates. As we do this, I would like us to not only focus on actuarial science programs. We should also engage with the rapidly growing data science programs, where our exam path should be seen as more relevant than other actuarial programs.

John Aquino

It is not clear to me that the CAS needs to encourage college students to pursue CAS exams as opposed to SOA exams. As a Board member, I would consider evidence to support the need for encouragement if it is presented.

Emma Casehart

The CAS can increase visibility on college campuses, share the value proposition of our work through direct mentorship and conversation, and expand the preparation support we provide for candidates studying for early-pathway exams.

The CAS is more than just our exam structure, and that is the key to attracting and retaining motivated candidates. When I was deciding whether to take a property and casualty internship versus one in health insurance, I thought about the type of work I would be doing, not the exams I would be studying for. I was excited by the dynamic, responsive work CAS actuaries did, so I knew it was the right path for me. In my personal journey, hearing from CAS actuaries at my university discuss their exciting work helped me consider property and casualty as a profession. The CAS can continue to leverage the University Liaison program to share the profession with students and academics at over 200 universities. Through university liaisons, members can share the value proposition of the CAS with faculty who can connect with future students and administrations to advocate for additional CAS content at their universities.

Connecting with a mentor or role model can help candidates see themselves as future CAS actuaries, not just students. As a member of the Board, I propose to create a formal mentorship and networking program for university students to meet on a one-time or recurring basis with CAS members. Making a connection with a practicing actuary to learn about their work and passions can help drive students to choose the CAS. The CAS should also provide additional BeAnActuary testimonials from newer actuaries on why they chose the CAS for those who are at an earlier stage in their professional journey.

Outside of promoting the work we do, the CAS can modernize the credentialing process for candidates. The CAS has already started to improve our exam pathway. Instead of proposing college students take actuarial statistics exams after exams 1 and 2, they are encouraged to sit for DISCs that provide an experience similar to academic coursework. By providing candidates a familiar experience to start, they gain confidence they can tackle CAS exam content. We should continue to explore novel ways to support candidates as they enter the career.

I also support expanding the role the CAS plays in educating candidates. As updates to exam content outlines are introduced, candidates often feel less prepared for their exams due to the changes from prior exam material. The CAS can provide candidates additional preparation materials, either through the CAS directly or through partnerships with third-party vendors. If preparation materials are clearly connected to existing and upcoming exam content, candidates may feel more confident taking the exams without a corresponding college course. Exams, as always, should maintain their high standards and rigor, but supporting candidates exploring the profession is key to attracting the best future actuaries to the CAS

The CAS should make every effort to ensure candidates are aware of and engaged in the profession, even before they become members. Candidates are drawn to the CAS when they hear about the interesting work property and casualty actuaries do every day and feel supported in their first forays into self-study.

Wanchin Chou

While working on my MAS degree at Georgia State University, I was lucky to learn from Professor Steve Kellison and Professor Robert Batten. Many actuaries in the 90s had courses with Professor Batten for actuarial mathematics and Professor Kellison for interest theory. I respected and learned so much from Professor Batten, but it was Professor Kellison who introduced me to the P&C actuarial profession via the P&C ratemaking seminars he initiated at GSU. The seminars invited the CAS actuaries from Tillinghast, Milliman, MA rate bureau, and others to discuss their P&C ratemaking practices in different product lines regarding the best practices and regulations. I also had the honor to work with U Conn adjunct professor Pat Teufel in the past and hired her students as interns since 2017. We have many students interested in the P&C actuarial profession and some of them are working with the P&C companies now.

We need to step up how we’ve been marketing ourselves to students. We could better highlight the range of opportunities working as a P&C actuary in AI and big data, climate change, cyber risks, Covid-19 supply chain disruption caused inflation and social inflation, etc., Our field is important and impactful in this regard, but we need to tell the story more effectively. We also need to invite all CAS actuaries to volunteer teaching or speaking in the colleges or high school to open the P&C actuarial profession to our potential candidates.

Mike Larsen

We may be fighting yesterday’s war by thinking of this as competing with the SOA for college students given their early exam candidate numbers are dropping. Rather than trying to compete directly with the SOA for candidates, the actions below are meant to make us more attractive to candidates with general data science skills and attract candidates from schools without an actuarial program.

I would alter our preliminary exams to cover material that is both useful to employers and likely to be covered in commonly available undergraduate college level courses at a wide range of colleges – not just colleges with an actuarial science program. The specific set of actions I recommend are:

• Split our current MAS I exam into two parts and make those two parts Exams 2 & 3.
• Drop the material on the current Exam 2 from the exam track and replace it on a VEE basis with additional general Finance courses.
• Drop the three online courses from The Institute from the preliminary track and create a new VEE requirement for a general insurance course at the college level.
• Drop the newly proposed predictive analytics project course from the exam track and replace it with a VEE type option of either college courses that require hands-on modeling or courses through an organization like COURSERA that offer hands on modeling courses leading to certificates from schools like The University of Michigan.

If we avoid focusing on topics for exams that are only of value to those going the actuarial science route, we reduce the perceived risk for a college student in devoting time to taking our preliminary exams. Taking a course on Generalized Linear Modeling would look good on a resume for a wide range of jobs and then reviewing it to take Exam 3 is a reasonable investment in time for a college student. If the topics we cover in the preliminary exams can be found in a wider range of schools, we will broaden our potential pool of candidates.

Sandy Lowe

I would advocate that the CAS create a value proposition that is appealing to everyone from high schoolers, to college students, to career changers. We need to strengthen and more effectively market the CAS ‘brand’ by emphasizing:

1. Technical skill-building through our credentialing pathway and work;
2. Support and focus of the CAS to help members build powerful skills to enhance business acumen, decision-making skills, etc;
3. The breadth of opportunities available to CAS-credentialed actuaries that span from traditional actuarial services within personal or commercial lines to newer cyber risks, catastrophe management and modeling, enterprise risk management, predictive modeling, insurtech, banking, and areas outside of insurance;
4. How our skillset is valued in the industry as demonstrated by the growing demand for P&C actuaries with both traditional and non-traditional actuarial employers. 

Additionally, we need to utilize and mobilize CAS University Liaisons and strengthen ties with academics more than ever to maintain our presence on campuses and to share this message. Where coursework/exams may not align, we can market and share concrete examples of how our industry is working to evolve and keep up with exciting and dynamic changes of the industry.

That being said, it is not lost on me how important course alignment is for students and how much of a sway that can have on one’s decision to pursue CAS or SOA. As a Board Member, I would continue to push for a strategy on how to address this issue going forward.

Joe Milicia

I personally believe that competition between the CAS and SOA for early career exams is to the detriment of students who feel pressure to pick a path much earlier in their careers than many of us did as we were beginning our journey to become actuaries.

First, the CAS must continue outreach to universities. We need to continue to have active membership presence on college campuses. As a university liaison, I would often visit and speak to the actuarial students at my alma mater. We need volunteers to ensure that the CAS is the premier body of property casualty actuaries and that students interested in that career path aspire towards CAS membership.

Second, beyond wanting to give back to my university as an alum, I joined the advisory board of Temple University in part to advocate that property casualty content stays in the curriculum, that the skills we need in entry level candidates are taught and that the CAS is promoted as the premier organization for property casualty actuaries. We must continue to seek out feedback from the universities and ensure that we provide support like we do today – speakers, case studies, syllabi, etc.

Third, I don’t believe that having competing early level exams serves either the mission of the CAS or SOA and I believe that both organizations should reengage on this topic. I do not know if there is any willingness on the SOA’s part to be collaborative on this item, but that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t try. I’ve personally worked with current and past SOA leadership, and I would be happy to revisit this with friends and colleagues that I respect. My personal believe if that cooperation on this subject is the right path for both organizations. As leadership in both organizations changes annually, it is worth having a recurring dialogue to see if there are opportunities to improve.

Kathleen Ores Walsh

What is most important to me is promoting the CAS and promoting actuaries. Talking about the differences in the exams and careers between the CAS and SOA is also important, but I do not believe that it is a “zero-sum game” as one could interpret this question to mean. The CAS’s goal of growing our profession and continuing to ensure our credential is the gold standard in our industry should always be one of our key goals and we should leverage diverse avenues to drive awareness of all actuarial careers. To do this well, we need to continue to gather data to in order to measure the effectiveness of all of our growth channels and pipelines and engage with college programs.

Thomas Struppeck

Universities with actuarial programs (UT has one, but I am not involved with it) tend to focus on the life side. Historically, this makes sense because the SOA was bigger and had more entry-level jobs. There is a tremendous pool of potential future CAS actuaries coming from programs other than actuarial programs, such as statistics and machine-learning to just mention two. This is where I would like to see us focus our efforts. Currently our two MAS exams are each four hours long. Few students graduate ready to take one of them, but many students graduate ready to take half of one. I would like to see us offer the MAS exams in smaller (but more) pieces. There is a fear that this will lengthen average travel time, but average travel time is a misleading metric. Were the MAS exams each broken into two two-hour exams, many (most?) candidates would take them two at a time in order to get on with their careers more quickly. If some candidates chose to take them one at a time, perhaps because they have family or other responsibilities, why should we prevent that? I believe that these potential future members currently are dropping out of our program (and hence, don’t appear in the average travel time metric as they never finish.)

David Cummings

As noted in my response to Question 3, the CAS moved rapidly in 2020 to enable exams to resume during the pandemic while also setting the platform for future enhancements. There were some challenges that candidates faced during subsequent sittings that have been voiced and addressed. Many of the learnings have been incorporated into the Admissions Transformation Plan (ATP), mentioned in Question 7. The ATP includes many enhancements to the exam process while maintaining high standards for admission.

John Aquino

I have not noticed any new issues with the exam/admission process since 2020 other than the challenges of operating during the pandemic lockdown.

Emma Casehart

In 2020, the CAS transitioned all exams from pen and paper to computer-based testing. I sat for all of my fellowship exams, and some of my associateship exams, since 2020. I was nervous to test in the new environment after becoming familiar with studying for and taking pen-and-paper exams. While studying, I reminded myself that in the secure computer environment, the exams can better replicate the problems I would encounter during the workdays, and I would have some of the same tools I use everyday to solve them quickly. While the transition to the computer-based exams was done quickly due to COVID, I believe this model best allows candidates to showcase their skills.

As the CAS transitions to a computer-based testing based environment, we are also learning from other professional credentialing organizations. Most other professional societies with an examination process do not release pass marks or exam questions, and many offer extended or on-demand exam windows in a professionally proctored environment. Keeping test questions that best differentiate between qualified and unqualified candidates across multiple exam windows ensures the exams are well-designed with less pressure on CAS volunteers to produce entirely novel questions each sitting.

In the future, the CAS will be able to update exam content more frequently based on skills used in actuarial practice. One example is the new predictive analytics requirement, which ensures that all new actuaries have demonstrated familiarity with building a predictive model. New competencies like predictive analytics are being asked of actuaries, and competing organizations are delivering a modernized testing experience. For the future of the CAS, it is imperative that we identify and test new skills actuaries need to be successful, which requires a new way of credentialing our candidates.

The CAS has an opportunity to expand from a pure credentialing model to a model that also provides education to candidates. Both the form and content of exams are changing, and the CAS should ensure candidates can be successful in a rapidly changing exam environment. I believe the CAS can provide additional support through study and exam preparation materials, either produced by the CAS or in partnership with third-party organizations. We already provide sample exam environments for candidates to learn the PearsonVue software, offer study kits, and a practice exam for MAS exams, and we should consider expanding these offerings. Exams should not be made easier, but candidates should be given the best tools to prepare for them. As a member of the Board, I will advocate for additional review and exploration of these ideas to ensure all candidates have an opportunity to succeed.

Wanchin Chou

Collaboration is important to optimize the effectiveness of the CAS operations. It is no different from running a successful company which requires many people from different functional areas to team up effectively. There were some subjects which we probably relied on the staff too heavily. For example, not releasing exam questions and answers and handing over control of admissions in 2020 to CAS staff to run their Job Task Analysis project. The Job Task Analysis is a survey technique to establish the body of knowledge required for a person to be licensed to practice in each profession. It can be a good choice in some cases if properly set up.

To stay relevant and maintain our high-quality designation, we need to continue to evolve with the field. We also need to monitor the most important subjects discussed by the industry and at the NAIC meetings and reflect accordingly in our syllabus or exams. Ensuring our members have the skillset to be industry-leading problem solvers will be key to remaining relevant in our expanding field.

The Admissions Transformation Plan is very effective in actively engaging with the community to vet changes. Implementing a change on this scale is an on-going effort, and I trust that the CAS will continue to seek input from membership and proactively communicate changes.

Mike Larsen

There are three issues:

• We stopped releasing exam questions and answers starting in 2020 which both stopped the addition of valuable study material to candidates and made it much more difficult for them to write effective challenges.
• There were changes in the MAS syllabus that merit an open discussion before implementation.
• The initiatives that our syllabus and exam committee leadership group had started in 2019 to update our FCAS exams were deferred starting in 2020 until the Job Task Analysis project was completed, but the JTA project was unsuccessful, and we will be waiting until sometime in 2024 or maybe 2025 before the advanced ratemaking and reserving exams are in place.

We could start releasing the MAS exam questions and answer key at the end of the exam window to candidates along with a file showing what they answered during the exam. It may not be practical to release the constructed response exam answers given the time required to assemble the examiner’s reports, but we could release the questions. This could be an incentive to start moving the constructed response exams to multiple-choice to make it practical to release answers.

The suggestion on what to do with the changes to the MAS syllabus is to have an open discussion forum with the decision subject to peer review by the CAS membership before a material change is made to our syllabus.

The issue with the delay in updating the Fellowship exams was dealt with in question #3 above.

Sandy Lowe

Syllabus and exam changes always come with challenges, but I believe that changes are necessary to keep our credentials relevant with the evolving industry. That being said, it is important we are giving candidates enough time to plan ahead, and that candidates understand how they will be impacted and are confident in our ability to facilitate a smooth transition.

We also need to do a better job of figuring out the right balance of difficulty with the introduction of new exams/requirements and not teeter from sitting to sitting. This all will be especially important as we roll out the new Property and Casualty Predictive Analytics (PCPA) requirement, which will introduce a new project component to our credentialing process.

Another item that needs to be addressed relates to the shift toward Computer-Based Testing (CBT), which has not come without concerns. Three years later, technological hurdles continue to persist, and more needs to be done to prevent or remedy issues, as I discussed in Question 3. Additionally, with the introduction of CBT, Examiners’ Reports were discontinued, despite their value to exam preparation. While this was disappointing, even more disappointing is what has yet to follow that decision – for example, offering Exams 7-9 more than once a year, and shortening a candidate’s travel time from start to fellowship. I think this is another key place where the CAS can do better.

Joe Milicia

Obviously, COVID created a number of challenges for the CAS. I heard a number of complaints from my staff about challenges both with the vendor and with the policies in place for the exams. I also know that the release of results can be incredibly stressful for candidates. We should try to minimize candidate stress where we can in the lead up to exams, in the exam process itself and in the release of results.

More recently, my impression is that we’ve all adapted and are now more used to the new CBT format. We must always seek to improve but I believe we’ve reached a reasonable steady state.

Kathleen Ores Walsh

I have not been as close enough to the exam process to form a fact-based opinion on this topic. That being said, with the upcoming changes in the ATP, being transparent on outcomes and facts/data to support how these changes are helping or aren’t, will be important. I am excited about the opportunity to be a part of the board during this period of change and ensure we work together to assure success.

Thomas Struppeck

Again, I don’t believe that it is appropriate for me to opine on prior decisions. Going forward, breaking the MAS exams, as described in Question 5 above, should be considered.

David Cummings

The Admissions Transformation Plan (ATP) is a major strategic initiative for the CAS with many changes underway and more to come over the next few years. With any major change initiative, there is a need for frequent and comprehensive communications. This is particularly true for an initiative that touches this crucial aspect of the CAS mission. It will require communications geared to exam candidates as well as the general membership. As I assume the President-Elect and subsequent roles, I will ensure that the CAS continues to proactively communicate and listen to member and candidate feedback throughout the ATP program.

In preparing to respond to this question, I spent time reading through the ATP material on the Exams & Admissions section of CAS website. I found the information there to be well-structured and informative. It provided information about changes that have already been implemented, as well as a roadmap of what future changes will come. Importantly, it includes a commitment to exam candidates to provide at least 6 months advance notice for any changes to exams. It appears to me that communications have been well considered and well provided. I encourage all members to familiarize themselves with this program, since we all have an interest in the future of our admissions process.

John Aquino

The Admissions Transformation Plan is adequately explained in the presentation at the CAS web site. I am not prepared to opine on the level of membership input or its consideration in the Plan.

Emma Casehart

I was part of the team that worked on the Admissions Transformation Plan (ATP). With a small group of actuaries and staff, I brainstormed broad plans for the future, refined the plan based on member feedback from the Job Task Analysis, and wrote an article for the candidate audience about the evolution of the credential.

The ATP is the next step in credentialing as a professional organization. For many years, we had an education-based model, like a college class with a syllabus, required reading, and a final exam. As part of the ATP, we are moving towards a credentialing-based model that focuses our energy as an organization even more on identifying and testing the skills needed to be a successful actuary. If you are interested about the changes to the ATP, I encourage you to start by reading the existing resources in press releases and the ATP section of the CAS website.

Member input has been a critical part of the process. We heard from exam writers that their best questions each year were released and no longer able to be used. We heard from members and candidates that pen-and-paper exams didn’t reflect the types of problems they were being asked to solve. We heard from members that predictive analytics is a critical skillset for actuaries that was being tested in theory, but not in practice. We heard from members, via the Job Task Analysis, that some exam content wasn’t used in their work, and other emerging areas of practice weren’t captured in admissions. The ATP is meant to address these concerns and provide a way forward for exam content and delivery.

The communication of the ATP was not as robust as it should have been. While the ATP was and is driven by member feedback, volunteer needs, and a need to modernize the credentialing process, sharing that information with membership at large was not handled with transparency. CAS asked for and got feedback from volunteers on the initiative, but did not communicate this effectively back to membership or provide early updates on changes. Without those early communications, the ATP might have felt confusing, large, and unnecessary.

While feedback on the ATP has been provided and guided by members at every step of the process, the communication of that feedback could have been improved. I would have hosted additional town hall discussions early in the creation of the ATP on why a change to our admissions process is necessary and how the proposed changes advance the strategic vision of the CAS. I would have also asked for additional member feedback on exposure drafts of the strategic changes, and provided context on how that feedback was considered in the final strategy.

If you are interested in providing ongoing feedback, there are volunteer opportunities in admissions. For one-time feedback, you can email casatp@casact.org with feedback, comments, or concerns.

Wanchin Chou

Yes, it has been adequately explained. I was not up-to-speed but was able to quickly read about it from publicly available information.  The link on the CAS web https://www.casact.org/atp has a short deck with plenty of general and specific information. There are multiple announcements and links on that page. The information seems to have been provided years ahead of any changes to allow for comment. For example, there were detailed changes announced in December 2021 in quite a lot of detail here for 2023, which is over a year ahead of the planned changes. There’s a link for comments both in the deck and elsewhere on the website for those interested in providing input.

Per my reading from the reference link, I believe the CAS has made a good effort to communicate the Admissions Transformation Plan and is actively engaging with the community to vet changes. Implementing a change on this scale is an on-going effort, and I trust that the CAS will continue to seek input from membership and proactively communicate changes. A change of this magnitude is difficult, particularly for students in the exam process, and it is important for the CAS to deeply consider their experience and roll out changes cautiously.

Mike Larsen

No, I do not believe that the Admission Transformation Plan has been adequately explained, nor has there been sufficient input from membership.

For example, we lack an explanation on:

• How the exams fit together and what the overall goal of our exam process should be.
• We lack an open forum to review proposed changes in the syllabus and exam process.
• Why develop our own material rather than use commonly available course material from vendors or sources used to train data science people?
• Why is it worth waiting a year and incurring volunteer time to create and then grade hands-on modeling work with the modeling case created using insurance specific terms when we could go out today and find a wide range of online courses leading to certificates developed by schools like The University of Michigan.

Sandy Lowe

The Admissions Transformation Plan can be easily found on the CAS website and outlines what changes are within scope and expected timing, but lacks detail on certain pieces. That being said, it’s important to keep in mind that the Admissions Transformation Plan is exactly that – a plan or blueprint for transformation - and is currently still in progress. It seems that new announcements are being shared as they are ready with sufficient information on changes or next steps, with the latest announcement having been released in May. Membership feedback has been solicited since the announcement of the ATP and throughout the process, although it is difficult to assess to what extent that feedback has been reflected.

Joe Milicia

Yes, but this question implies that there are others that do not agree. I am unaware of controversy on this subject but would appreciate the opportunity to educate myself on any issues with the ATP so that I can appropriately react.

The CAS must balance a number of goals: maintaining the incredibly high standards expected from a CAS credential, evolving educational needs and evolving science around effective testing. I believe we can continue to modernize the exam process while maintaining the high standards of the CAS.

Kathleen Ores Walsh

I am aligned to the vision and understand the changes on the roadmap. As stated in my answer to Question 6, we should continue to be clear about what outcomes each of the changes are driving and how they are tied to the CAS strategic plan. For example, will they allow for more clarity on how to prepare for exams, improve pass rates, reduce costs, and continue to ensure that the FCAS is a gold standard in our industry? If elected, I will drive for that data and outcome base measurement with the ATP as we continue to evolve our education and admission programs.

Thomas Struppeck

It is inappropriate for me to opine on prior decisions.

David Cummings

I believe that it is core to the CAS mission to advance diversity, equity, and inclusion in our profession. Promoting a diverse membership helps us “increase the awareness of actuarial science” and ensures that we attract more and more talented analytical professionals who demonstrate “high standards of conduct and competence”. Including professionals with diverse life experiences, education and other backgrounds helps us to “advance the body of knowledge of actuarial science”. As we work to address the challenges that many people face in finding, choosing, and succeeding in an actuarial career, we clearly “contribute to the well being of society as a whole”.

I support the CAS Strategic Approach to DE&I that was recently approved by the Board in 2022, and the 8 tactics outlined in this document. I believe that progress in these areas of focus will have a meaningful impact in strengthening our profession and readying it for the future challenges ahead. It is important that CAS leadership looks for ways to improve and magnify our impact with the limited resources the CAS has. I look forward to working with these leaders to monitor progress in these focus areas and to adjust as needed.

Notwithstanding my commitment and support for the Strategic Approach to DE&I, I think it is important to state that there are many other topics that need Board attention if we are to strengthen our profession for the challenges we face in the years ahead. I hope that next year, our members will pose questions to candidates that better reflect the breadth of these topics than we see in this year’s question set.

John Aquino

The current effort appears to focus on attracting more candidates to consider the CAS. That is appropriate. We should consider innovation in our pipeline diversification efforts as opposed to following the same steps as other organizations seeking to diversify membership.

Emma Casehart

We can do more to support our actuaries. Our current DEI initiatives are a start, but there are multiple changes I support to our initiatives. For more details on specific DEI initiatives I plan to support, please see my response to the question on CAS DEI strategy. At a high level, I plan to begin a mentorship program at the CAS to connect members with mentors and role models, assess the effectiveness of our scholarship and grant programs, explore the creation of a research prize for bias-related research papers, and gather feedback from members and outside organizations about member support missing from the CAS.

Wanchin Chou

I believe CAS does have a DEI strategy, a strong team both leading and monitoring our progress, and a series of specific initiatives that we are pursuing. Those laid out by the CAS are reasonable. They align with our Constitution and while wording has changed around the initiatives, the goals have not changed materially since laid out in the CAS Proceedings in 1976 (see FAQ link below).

Diverse and inclusive communities are more creative, engaged, and produce stronger business results. Diversity in our pool of candidates will only enhance our profession in the long-run and support continued growth in our profession. The CAS having a strong point person or team for diversity initiatives is appropriate to assure that we accomplish what we set out to do: that we stay focused and that the impacts of our efforts are maximized.

Regarding the initiatives for continue improvement, I would monitor the effectiveness of the progress, adapt to the needed changes, and set up the forum for open and regular discussions. 

Mike Larsen

It’s not clear that our DEI efforts speak to the issue of recruiting candidates from a wide range of analytical backgrounds. What I observed in the past was that many individuals with advanced analytical degrees looked at the actuarial science route as offering a better life financially and realized they could gain entry by passing the first two exams which covered material most of them had had while in college.

There are four parts to what I suggest we do to recruit from a broader pipeline:

• Alter the preliminary exams to have the first three exams cover material commonly available at the undergraduate level at a wide range of colleges which will broaden the pool of potential candidates.
• Set exam fees low enough to avoid the cost of sitting for an exam being a barrier to entry.
• Point out to candidates that our exams are open to all comers for a fee unlike trying to get into an elite university and competing for admission with legacy candidates.
• Point out to data scientists that to advance one’s career, one has to acquire some subject matter knowledge in the industry one is working in, and we provide that subject matter knowledge as part of our syllabus and exam process.

Sandy Lowe

Progress takes time, but I think we're on the right path. For example, looking back at year over year changes in the distribution of volunteers and conference presenters (using 2020, 2021 and 2022 CAS Diversity Data), we have seen increased representation of women, and Black and Latino communities. My hope is that as our volunteer pipeline widens, that impact will continue to increase representation at higher leadership levels throughout our organization too. And as we increase diversity throughout our organization and within our members, we will learn from and have access to a wider range of ideas.

As for changes to current efforts, my suggestion is to start with listening. We have lots of efforts currently to increase representation within our candidate pool. What efforts do we have to increase diversity when it comes to membership/volunteer engagement? I think there is value in setting up time to listen to current volunteers, presenters, chairs, etc from any underrepresented groups to better understand their experiences and potential barriers that might inhibit more engagement. From there we can focus on the right action plan.

Joe Milicia

In the spirit of improvement, I don’t believe that we can just ignore the complaints of those that have issues with the DE&I policy. I believe we have to do more to engage and move the discourse beyond the buzzwords that are in the news. I don’t believe that many members have issues with the actions that the CAS is taking, but as politics have polarized the country the CAS membership has also been polarized. Just like in politics this polarization does not further the discourse and does not help the CAS make meaningful progress. We need to continue to have the right dialogue to help move past the buzzwords and talk about what the CAS wants to achieve and how we are going about accomplishing those goals.

The CAS’ DE&I FAQ is a good document and a good step towards engagement, but I do think we need more outreach to those that feel the DE&I strategy does not reflect their views. I would push to continue to make that outreach to help bring along those that feel unheard. I also encourage those that feel unheard to continue to submit comments on the strategy but to do so in a professional and constructive manner.

Kathleen Ores Walsh

Diversity, equity, and inclusion programs are now table-stakes to any healthy functioning organization. I believe the CAS has a solid plan and am aligned to the content contained in our programs. In preparing to answer this question, I spent quite a bit of time reviewing the statements in the CAS DE&I  FAQs and they all resonated with me.

https://www.casact.org/sites/default/files/2022-06/CAS_Diversity_Equity_Inclusion-FAQs.pdf

One refinement I recommend, is identifying more aspirational outcomes and measurements of what we think we can accomplish together. I am interested in better understanding how we can improve the way our programs operate.

In addition to DE&I, I also believe the board needs to focus much of it’s time and energy on what we learned through post-pandemic inflationary and economic changes; and unprecedented climate volatility that continues to change year after year. Our board should be focused not only on DE&I, but also how continue to advance the body of knowledge of actuarial science from what we have learned.

Given these changes, what else should we accelerate in our competencies that relates to advancing knowledge? What did we learn as a profession in the last few years and the value we deliver to the industry?  If elected to the board, I will ensure we continue to support our DE&I programs and leverage our diverse learnings gathered these past few years to advance our profession, together.

Thomas Struppeck

A basic question in demographics is: Given a population at time t, what is the make-up of that population at time t+1? Often (and this is certainly the case for the CAS) the majority of the time t+1 population was present at time t. A consequence of this is that change can only occur slowly. We can facilitate broadening diversity of our membership by removing unnecessary barriers to entry such as excessively long preliminary exam times. (See Question 5 above,)

David Cummings

See my response to Question 8 above.

John Aquino

“DEI” is, sadly, a polarizing acronym. “DEI” precepts, in my opinion, are in many instances inconsistent with the worthy plan to enhance diversity, equity and inclusion. The CAS membership, myself included, have broadly expressed support for diversity, equity and inclusion. It is not proven that the CAS needs dedicated staff to promote diversity, equity and inclusion. With or without dedicated staff, the CAS should identify an action plan which will unify the membership in support of diversity, equity and inclusion.

Emma Casehart

A DEI strategy is necessary for the CAS. At a business case level, diversity improves business results, and we want the best results for the CAS. At a research question level, bias and discrimination topics are live questions being reviewed by regulators in ratemaking, reserving, and emerging insurance markets. As a highly respected professional group, the CAS has an opportunity to provide actuarial expertise on concerns relevant to the general public, who look to our profession as a model of a self-governed, thoughtful society. DEI questions and regulations affect actuarial work products, so the CAS has a responsibility to provide scholarship, guidance, and discussion around these topics of professional interest.

To support a DEI strategy, the CAS must have specific initiatives. The CAS has conducted the research to identify specific barriers to the profession, and our DEI initiatives should focus on ways to reduce these barriers to the profession and support current members in contributing to our society.. I support initiatives related to increasing the accessibility of profession through scholarships, reimbursement grants, and mentorship programs provided through the CAS and outside organizations. Please see my responses to questions on the definition of “equity” for more discussion of why members may require different levels of support to participate in our society, and questions on scholarships and grants for the importance of these supports to our society. The CAS should continue to request and respond to member feedback on specific DEI initiatives and how well they uphold the strategic direction of the CAS.

With regards to a CAS staff member dedicated to DEI, that is not for the Board to decide. The Board sets the strategy, and the CEO and staff decide how to best achieve the strategy. Operational considerations are outside our decision-making, to allow members and volunteers to focus on long-term strategic considerations. A dedicated staff member can directly support the Board strategic vision for DEI, execute specific initiatives related to the strategy, and assess the effectiveness of initiatives on operational metrics related to DEI.

Wanchin Chou

Yes, the CAS should have a DEI strategy if there’s a DEI problem and it is effective for how much the CAS is spending its time and resources on DEI initiatives. Initiatives should seek to improve the demographic imbalance in the membership. Having a DEI staff person is useful for promoting dialogue, gathering data, and addressing issues.

The “Equity” in DE&I is not equity in outcome (i.e., exam results), but rather it is equity in opportunity (i.e., addressing barriers within our outreach such as awareness and affordability). Financial and geographic accessibility has created barriers for some. Not all schools are alike. Students may find themselves not only unprepared when it comes to CV/resume/interview preparation, but also exam preparation. This doesn’t mean potential is lacking. Mentoring as well as Resume/Interview Prep sessions run by volunteers and the Diversity Networks are seeking to improve this. We need to continue to expand on this work.

It is good that Equity is a focus for the CAS initiatives.

Mike Larsen

There is some value in reaching out to schools with a high minority population that lack an actuarial program to point out the good characteristics of the actuarial career route.

Beyond spreading the word that actuarial science can be a good career option in part due to our independent, anonymous exam process, it’s unclear what is the benefit to the CAS in having a DEI program and having CAS staff spend time on DEI issues.

I would suggest that having CAS volunteers visit colleges can be at least as effective as having a CAS staff member call on colleges.

Sandy Lowe

Yes, I believe the CAS should have a DEI strategy, with specific initiatives and dedicated staff to move our strategy forward. As I mentioned in my Candidate Issue Identification and Discussion, diversity in our membership and profession drives increased diversity of thought, which benefits our profession, industry, and companies. The CAS still has a way to go, and it is important we have strong leaders to ensure our efforts are on the right trajectory and aligned with the CAS DEI strategy.

DEI initiatives should include increasing awareness of the profession through avenues such as Be an Actuary or other organizations that can help promote the field. I am passionate on this topic, as it inspired me to co-found the Network of Actuarial Women and Allies (NAWA), and was the focus of the NAWA Candidate Outreach committee of which I co-chaired. I am supportive and agree with the CAS spending its time and resources on DEI initiatives.

Joe Milicia

I believe that DE&I is essential to all professions. The CAS must compete with all other professions to attract the best and brightest in order to ensure the future of the profession. Underrepresentation from various demographics likely means that there is untapped talent and potential that could be furthering the actuarial profession.

The amount of questions in this forum related to DE&I demonstrates that the CAS must be very active in both defining our DE&I strategy, marking progress on DE&I initiatives and engaging with the membership on DE&I topics. To those ends, it is necessary to have full time staff that can support all the effort that is required on this front. Whether or not you agree with the current strategy, the attention and feedback on DE&I necessitates devoted staff that can focus on best positioning the CAS for the future.

I agree with the investment in DE&I and I agree with the direction of the CAS on DE&I. Where I want to see improvement is to help make sure we bring together the CAS community.

Kathleen Ores Walsh

See answer to Question 8.

Thomas Struppeck

Expanding the breadth of experiences in the CAS membership can only strengthen us. If heading towards that laudable goal is what is meant by “DEI strategy”, then of course, yes. Continuing the expansion of our university outreach to programs other than actuarial science programs (for example statistics) should provide a stream of new entrants with more diverse experiences and backgrounds.

David Cummings

See my response to Question 8 above.

John Aquino

Charges of systemic racism are divisive, presumptive of guilt, and in my opinion likely to result in future racism. The CAS system of admission by examination renders racism impossible in the formal admissions process. The race of the candidate is unknown to the graders, and admissions are completely a function of demonstration of the required knowledge. The failed Constitutional amendment to remove examinations as a requirement for admission is possibly a threat to our proud history of equity which has given us the diverse CAS membership we enjoy today.

Emma Casehart

The CAS is not and has not been systemically racist. To become a member of the CAS, one must objectively prove they possess the skills relevant to actuarial work. Our unbiased credentialing process continues to be an objective strength of the CAS.

However, the CAS is affected by forces outside of our control that limit the number of potentially qualified candidates who choose to join our society. As identified in a 2018 study on diversity in the actuarial profession, there are barriers to becoming an actuary in areas such as awareness of the career, lack of role models, and economic need. These barriers aren’t relevant to the skills of a potential actuary, but they limit who considers our profession.

A university student who only learns of the profession late in their university coursework may struggle more taking exams than students who were aware of the profession and built the necessary skills to pass earlier in college. A working parent may struggle to find the necessary time to study while balancing childcare needs and require additional attempts at an exam. A promising candidate who lacks the funds to sit for more than one exam attempt may struggle to pass the exams required to be considered for a prestigious internship.

These struggles aren’t relevant to ultimate actuarial knowledge, but they can shut out new actuaries who could develop novel methodologies or produce profession-changing research. The admissions process is not an unfair barrier to membership, but other, external factors may unfairly influence who has the opportunity to show they have the skills to be a member.

As a member of the Board, I plan to provide additional support to potential candidates earlier in their process of considering a career, like mentorship with current CAS actuaries. For more specific discussion on equity, please see my response defining equity at the CAS.

Wanchin Chou

There is nothing racist in our admittance process nor in the way that we govern ourselves to my knowledge. However, in my opinion, many minorities are underrepresented in the membership of the CAS. I believe we are stronger when we can hear from and be joined by a more diverse and representative cross section of our society.

Our exam/credentialing process is and should remain free of systematic racism. Our merit-based credentialing process, in which exam grading is blind to a candidate’s personal information, is an essential component of our structure, and one we must always uphold. The process that feeds the awareness, accessibility, and preparedness of students into our Society has issues. It isn’t directly the CAS that causes all of this, but rather we are impacted by it and our lack of diversity is what we must show for it.

Mike Larsen

The term “racist” has too strong a connotation, but I think the original CAS Diversity and Inclusion initiative went against our general viewpoint that our members attain membership based on individual merit and hard work and that we don’t give preferential treatment (affirmative action) to any class.

Using the term “Equity” implied to me that we could consider altering our process to affect the outcome of exam accreditation to meet diversity goals.

I would not stress “Equity” going forward and simply note that we view anyone who has passed the exams and agrees to live by our code of conduct as a full-fledged member of our guild.

Sandy Lowe

The original CAS Diversity and Inclusion initiatives were not systemically racist and were in place to address the impact of broader issues on our Society. Barriers to entry (e.g. lack of awareness or cost) still exist and make our profession and actuarial exams less accessible for some more than others. Given this, Equity, with emphasis on equity of opportunity, should continue to be a part of the CAS DEI strategy and initiatives going forward.

Joe Milicia

I think this is another example of buzzwords creating more issues than CAS actions creating issues. The CAS has underrepresentation of certain populations. To address that, the CAS has tried to remove barriers of entry for these groups. Actions include outreach to promote more awareness in these underrepresented populations and exam fee reimbursement via needs-based assistance administered jointly with the SOA. I believe both of these initiatives are worthy and are aligned with the CAS’s strategic direction and constitution. Similar programs should be considered for adoption in the future.

Likewise, initiatives that could be lumped into the equity bucket like membership quotas or exam pass quotas should not be pursued and I would not support those types of initiatives.

Individual proposals that encourage membership from underrepresented populations should be weighed on their merits, considered and rejected or implemented.

Kathleen Ores Walsh

See answer to Question 8.

Thomas Struppeck

I was unable to find an exact definition of “Equity” on the CAS website, but I did find this in FAQ #2:

“Equity is part of the strategy to acknowledge that different people face different challenges and may need different tools to succeed.”

That certainly is true, and the CAS should continue to facilitate providing its members and potential future members with the tools that they need to succeed.

David Cummings

No, and to my knowledge, the CAS has no such policies. We do have some programs that aim to increase the awareness of our profession among underrepresented groups and encourage their participation in our admission process. In my opinion, these programs do not discriminate for or against anyone else.

John Aquino

The CAS have should not have policies that discriminate for or against individuals, solely or in part, on the basis of their race, religion, national origin, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, or political affiliation or opinions.

Emma Casehart

The CAS should not discriminate against any protected class.

Wanchin Chou

No, it could create unintentional bias. The Supreme Court has recently banned colleges from using race as admission criteria, essentially ending affirmative action. The quote was complicated ‘We have permitted race-based admissions only within the confines of narrow restrictions. University programs must comply with strict scrutiny, they may never use race as a stereotype or negative, and – as some point – they must end. … They must therefore be invalidated under the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.’

Our exam/credentialing process is and should remain free of systematic racism. Our merit-based credentialing process, in which exam grading is blind to a candidate’s personal information, is an essential component of our structure, and one we must always uphold.

The process that feeds the awareness, accessibility, and preparedness of students into our Society has issues. It isn’t directly the CAS that causes all of this, but rather we are impacted by it and our lack of diversity is what we must show for it.

Mike Larsen

No, we should not have policies that discriminate for or against individuals on the basis of their race, religion, national origin, ethnicity, sexual orientation, or political opinions.

I believe that we are an organization that believes in merit-based recognition and that is a key part of our brand and core values.

Sandy Lowe

The CAS should not have policies that discriminate against any protected class. However, I’m in favor of policies that attempt to level the playing field specifically for marginalized communities, such as exam scholarships for Black, Latino or Indigenous candidates.

Joe Milicia

No, the CAS should not discriminate. I do not believe that any current DE&I initiatives of the CAS constitute discrimination and would not support discriminatory initiatives in the future. However, the CAS has identified issues and is taking action to address those issues. Alternative suggestions to address those issues and feedback on current strategy are welcome.

Kathleen Ores Walsh

No and I do not believe that the CAS currently does.

Thomas Struppeck

In general, policies that differentiate among various groups solely on those criteria should be avoided (I would include “age” and “disability” in your list.) As a practical matter, some accommodation is often provided, such as avoiding scheduling CAS meetings during major religious holidays.

David Cummings

See my response to Question 8. The 8 tactics in the current CAS Strategic Approach to DE&I (adopted Feb 14, 2022) outline a focus on equal opportunity, increased awareness, and accessibility for underrepresented groups that is consistent with how I would define “equity”.

John Aquino

As a member of the Board, I would ask the CAS to define “equity” in its CAS DEI strategy.

Emma Casehart

As shared in the CAS DEI strategy FAQs, equity can be described as “equality of opportunity”. Based on our multi-national, diverse organization, not all members have the same opportunities and may need different tools to succeed. Based on this definition, members need different levels of involvement from the CAS community to participate equally in our society. Within our professional society, we can create an environment where there are fewer barriers to learn from each other's experiences.

As emphasized in the DEI strategy, there are multiple potential definitions of “equity” that are not explored here. I want to focus the discussion of equity as part of DEI on equality of opportunity for our actuaries.

There are a few examples of equity needs within our society the CAS can address. Some members will want additional mentorship before feeling comfortable chairing a volunteer committee or volunteering to grade exams; the CAS community can provide additional mentorship for members through the creation of a formal mentorship program to help those members share their skills. Many members want to find a small group within the CAS community as a source of camaraderie, professional support, and spirited discussion; while the CAS may not offer this directly, we can support organizations and places that lead to new professional breakthroughs.

The goals of the DEI strategy are to promote inclusion and foster equal opportunities for all actuaries. Promoting opportunity for all is a key way the CAS can advance the body of knowledge of actuarial science as outlined in our Statement of Purpose. As a board member, I will support initiatives that increase the equality of opportunities for all actuaries, including the creation of formal mentorship programs and supporting outside organizations that offer professional support to CAS members.

Wanchin Chou

The “Equity” in DEI is not equity in outcome (i.e., exam results), but rather it is equity in opportunity.

Financial and geographic accessibility has created barriers for some student populations. Not all schools are alike. Students may find themselves not only unprepared when it comes to resume/interview preparation, but also exam preparation. This doesn’t mean potential is lacking.

Mentoring as well as Resume/Interview Prep sessions run by volunteers and the Diversity Networks can improve this. We need to continue to expand on this work.

Mike Larsen

I read it and found it to be confusing. There was a statement that we need to recognize different groups have barriers to entry that don’t exist for all groups, yet we have to keep the same exam passing standards.

The implication is that the members find the term “equity” as used in the DEI strategy to be confusing and don’t understand where the board is at on this issue.

Sandy Lowe

As stated in CAS DEI FAQ #2, the CAS defines equity as “part of the strategy to acknowledge that different people face different challenges and may need different tools to succeed.” To me, that means focusing on ensuring equal opportunities, which includes understanding the barriers to entry and addressing them where appropriate. If the focus was on equity of outcome, there could be ramifications and concerns of weakening the credibility of our credentials, but this is not the case, as our credentialling process will not vary based on a candidate’s identity. Instead, we are focused on increasing awareness of our profession and improving access to our testing.

Joe Milicia

Equity means that different people have different barriers to entry and a one-size-fits-all approach will not solve all of our challenges. This means recognizing that the historical practices and policies of the CAS as well as the broader world have resulted in our current distribution of membership that looks different from the distribution of people in the communities in which we reside. Equity policies seek to correct for those historical mistakes be they due to CAS or non-CAS policies and correct for bias just as a CAS member would seek to correct for bias in a model that they are building.

Kathleen Ores Walsh

I am aligned to how the CAS DE&I FAQ answers this question (see #2 in the link)
https://www.casact.org/sites/default/files/2022-06/CAS_Diversity_Equity_Inclusion-FAQs.pdf

Thomas Struppeck

See Question 10. We already (appropriately) offer exam accommodations to candidates that require them. The CAS should make sure that its website and the papers in its online library are properly accessible. There are widely available tools that facilitate this.

David Cummings

Candidates are not required to disclose their race or ethnicity at exam registration, but they may choose to do so. Regardless of their choice, exam grading is blind to their personal information. I see no reason for this practice to change.

John Aquino

CAS candidates should not be required to fill out an ethnicity form, or any form that forces disclosure of irrelevant personal information, at exam registration.

Emma Casehart

Providing information on ethnicity is never a requirement and is always optional. Gathering information on who our actuaries are is an important, yet optional, part of our profession. As actuaries, we are dedicated to researching and collecting data on many topics to understand the story behind the data. Without information on the candidates and associates of our society, we are missing key data on the effectiveness of programs we offer to support strategic DEI initiatives and on the makeup of our membership. If a member or candidate is uncomfortable providing this information, they can elect not to answer the question.

Wanchin Chou

No, it could create unintentional bias. The CAS also should not allow policies that discriminate for or against individuals because that creates an unfair process.

While the CAS may find value in learning the ethnic makeup of the pool of candidates and how it changes over time, a requirement at registration is a poor idea. It would send the wrong message to candidates, leading some to suspect that there are quotas driving admissions. The CAS can use voluntary survey methods outside of the registration and examination process to better understand the diversity within our candidate pool.

Mike Larsen

No, candidates should not be asked to fill out an ethnicity form at registration.

Filling out that form runs counter to our long-standing practice that candidates are anonymous and one’s race, gender etc. will not influence that candidate’s outcome for an exam.

If we ask candidates to fill out a questionnaire, it can lead to questions on how that information is actually used both by candidates and by their employers.

Sandy Lowe

While I don’t think it is necessary for exam candidates to fill out an ethnicity form, I do believe there are benefits to collecting this data to better help us understand progress (or lack thereof) we are making towards addressing barriers to entry at all stages of a candidates’ journey. Additionally, if collected, we need to be explicit and clear with candidates on how this data is being used.

Joe Milicia

As an actuary, I’m always in favor of having more data that I can use to support my decisions. Having additional information about where the choke points are – at membership, at the exam stage or earlier will all serve to help inform what actions may be effective and what actions may not be effective in ensuring that we have a fair admissions process.

Kathleen Ores Walsh

Candidates can be asked but are not required. If those details are provided, then the responses can be used to help with transparency on the effectiveness of our DE&I program, so I do support gathering but not requiring this information.

Thomas Struppeck

There certainly is value in the CAS knowing the demographic make-up of its candidate pool. By far the easiest way to obtain this information is to ask the candidates. I would suggest making the question voluntary, as the quality of data from mandatory questions is suspect.

David Cummings

I support the continuation of both the Diversity Exam Reimbursement Program and the Needs-Based Exam Reimbursement Program. I believe that both programs are needed to address the economic barriers that our admissions process presents to some aspiring actuaries and to encourage the participation of underrepresented groups.

John Aquino

For the members considering this question, here is the key feature of the CAS Diversity Exam Fee Scholarship program:

“Reimbursement Criteria:

This program is specifically intended for individuals who identify as American/Black, Hispanic/Latinx, Native American and/or Indigenous People currently living in the U.S or Canada. If you do not belong to any of these groups, we request that you refrain from submitting this form, as you do not meet the eligibility criteria.”

This appears to be a race based preference system. If the question were put to me, I would support a change to a system for awarding scholarship funds based on need. It should be noted that scholarships awarded based on ethnicity are common; the question is not one which I would actively pursue as a Board member.

Emma Casehart

The CAS supports a wide variety of scholarship and fee programs. Some programs are designed to assist candidates in specific countries with the financial costs of CAS exams. Other programs are based in the U.S. and Canada, and focus on candidates from specific racial or ethnic backgrounds, with interest in the actuarial profession as a college student, or with significant financial needs. Financial need, as defined for the purposes of a needs-based scholarship, often does not cover the many ways a candidate may lack resources or support in their exam journey. The CAS should continue to support the multiple avenues that exist for candidates to enter the profession.

I want the CAS to have the best talent available to support the future of property and casualty insurance. Many candidates with the skills and drive to succeed may lack the ability to pay for exam registrations on their own. The exams are a test of actuarial skill and acumen, not of financial standing. Any program, however, should be monitored for effectiveness and success, and the CAS should not support a scholarship or reimbursement program that does not demonstrate a track record of benefitting our profession. I will continue to support all current reimbursement and scholarship programs, and I will request a review of the success of our reimbursement and scholarship programs as director, and share these results with membership.

Wanchin Chou

It depends on the effectiveness and the needs for the program. A costs and benefits study needs to be conducted annually to justify that the program meets the needs and supports those students properly and enhances the CAS DEI initiatives.

There is a financial barrier to taking our exams. Some of this is being addressed, mainly with the new CAS/SOA Needs-Based Exam Reimbursement Pilot Program, but there are other barriers that will remain, such as the cost of study material. Exam center location as well can be an issue for some.

Not all schools are alike. Students may find themselves not only unprepared when it comes to CV/resume/interview preparation, but also exam preparation. This doesn’t mean potential is lacking. Mentoring as well as Resume/Interview Prep sessions run by volunteers and the Diversity Networks are seeking to improve this. We need to continue to expand on this work.

Mike Larsen

Yes, we should drop the CAS Diversity Exam Fee Scholarship. Discriminating on the basis of race is not a good practice.

We may need to be more generous on our needs-based program assistance and may find it to our advantage to subsidize the preliminary exams to expand the potential candidate pool.

Sandy Lowe

The Diversity Exam Reimbursement Program is intended to remove just one of the many additional barriers that Black, Latino, and Native American or Indigenous candidates face in their paths to becoming actuaries that candidates from other groups don’t face. As Black and Latino actuaries make up less than 3.5% of current CAS membership and data on the number of Native American or Indigenous actuaries is not readily available in the CAS Diversity Data, there is continued progress to be made to increase the diversity of our profession, which is the scholarship’s original purpose. While all programs supported by the CAS should be continuously evaluated, I believe this program, which is jointly offered by the CAS and SOA, is serving its purpose.

As the impact of the high cost of exams on low-income candidates should also be addressed, the Needs-Based Exam Reimbursement Program should continue to be offered to eligible candidates.

Joe Milicia

Based on the knowledge that I have today, I know we have an issue where specific races are underrepresented in our membership. The current program is seeking to correct that issue and thus I believe it is appropriate. It would be good to question if we are underrepresented by different economic backgrounds as well and to consider what actions we might take to also fix issues at that level. I’m also aware that there is overlap in those populations and believe that pursuing one does not prevent or preclude the other – we can do both.

I was raised by a single-mother and attended public school from kindergarten through eighth grade in Philadelphia. I know that money and debt was a big influence on my choice for education and I also know that my children will have more opportunities and economic freedom than I enjoyed because I was able to become an actuary. I want to make sure that opportunity is available for all and that we increase awareness of the actuarial profession so that it might provide those opportunities to others that could thrive in the profession.

Kathleen Ores Walsh

Yes, I am supportive of these programs, and I believe they are needed, especially as evidenced by our historical studies and the above referenced definition of equity (See answer to Question 12)

Thomas Struppeck

The Diversity Exam Reimbursement Program is sponsored by Be An Actuary, which is jointly run by the SOA and the CAS.

In my experience, exam fees are often company paid. This disadvantages potential candidates that are not yet in the industry. Our outreach programs to increase diversity should be directed towards underrepresented majors and schools. This is something that the CAS can do on its own.

David Cummings

See my response to Question 8. Because diversity, equity, and inclusion are core to our mission, the CAS needs to speak and act on these issues, whether or not they become politically or socially charged – just as we do on topics of ratemaking that become politically or socially charged. Of course, the CAS does not directly involve itself in public policy debates or advocate for changes in laws or regulations. That is the role of the AAA, when needed. But we support research, publish discussion papers, and advance informed perspectives on these topics. In a similar way, the CAS rightly engages in topics of diversity, equity, and inclusion for the benefit of our profession and our community.

John Aquino

CAS members regularly opine upon issues of social justice. The CAS, however, is not the voice of its members. The CAS should avoid positions on political issues which divide the membership.

Emma Casehart

The CAS constitution is clear, in Article IX, that “No opinion with respect to questions of public interest shall be publicly expressed by, or on behalf of, the Casualty Actuarial Society, except on matters within the special professional competence of actuaries and then only with an affirmative vote of three-fourths of all members of the Board of Directors.” Public opinions of the CAS should be issued within the confines of our constitution.

However, internal communications to CAS members are not a matter of public statement. While I agree that an organization as diverse, multi-national, and large as the CAS should consider all of our members before communicating internally, the constitution does not limit the CAS to discuss only matters of professional actuarial competence with our actuaries. As risk-management professionals, actuaries are required to be aware of new and emerging risks, many of which have been politicized across the world.

One example is climate change. This will have a profound effect on insurance and reinsurance markets, and touch potentially every risk our actuaries research. Climate change, for some, is a political issue, but the effects on our industry will be profound regardless of political affiliation. The CAS should feel empowered by our constitution to share resources, create working groups, and organize conference topics around this important issue, even though it is not a tightly interpreted matter of “special professional competence of actuaries”.

Wanchin Chou

No, we are recognized as actuarial professionals, and we do our best when they are actuarial subjects. We are not qualified for subjects which the lawyers, economists, and regulators might be better participating effectively.

There are many organizations with expertise and appropriate qualifications. CAS could have an open discussion forum, but some logistic plans need to be explored and planned accordingly so the members participating can get benefits instead of unintentional frustrations.

Mike Larsen

No, the CAS as an organization should remain focused on basic education and advancing the practice of actuarial science.

Please note ARTICLE IX. - Public Expression of Professional Opinion in our constitution speaks to that issue and places fairly severe restrictions on speaking to issues outside of actuarial science which means to comply with our constitution we should avoid speaking on “social justice” issues.

Sandy Lowe

If an issue impacts our membership, I think there is opportunity to offer empathy within our community. It’s important to remember that people can be impacted in different ways and hold differing viewpoints. By offering empathy, we don’t need to agree, but we can start to build more understanding and inclusion.

Joe Milicia

No, I don’t believe that the CAS should be advocating on public policies and involved in political discourse. I also don’t believe that the CAS having DE&I policies violates that belief as I believe the DE&I policy is about attracting the best and brightest candidates to an actuarial career and making the CAS as strong as it can be. Promoting our own best interest is not political advocacy.

Kathleen Ores Walsh

See answer to Question 8. In addition, we should continue to focus on our core purpose as how we guide our actions and insight and advocacy.

Thomas Struppeck

In my answer to Question #2, I quote Article II – Statement of Purpose from the CAS Constitution.

The purposes of the Casualty Actuarial Society are to … and maintain high standards of conduct and competence for the members, and to increase the awareness of actuarial science.

To the extent that “social justice” issues are part of “high standards of conduct”, the answer would appear to be yes.

David Cummings

There is sufficient guidance in our Actuarial Standards of Practice, our Statement of Principles on Ratemaking, as well as applicable laws and regulations to dismiss this question.

John Aquino

All members are encouraged to read, or read again, the ratemaking principles:

Statement of Principles Regarding Property and Casualty Insurance Ratemaking

As a member of the Board, I would be open to discussion of changes to these Principles. Based on my experience in the observation of their development and experience with their application in practice, I am currently satisfied with the ratemaking principles.

Emma Casehart

Formally, the CAS has rescinded the Statement of Principles Regarding Property and Casualty Ratemaking since they are duplicative of multiple ASOPs and may be interpreted to provide practice guidance they were not intended to provide. As of April 2021, the American Academy of Actuaries is considering creating a practice note around the ratemaking principles contained across ASOPs.

However, the spirit of this question is best answered with a reference to Principle Four of the CAS Statement of Principles Regarding Property and Casualty Ratemaking: “A rate is reasonable and not excessive, inadequate, or unfairly discriminatory if it is an actuarially sound estimate of the expected value of all future costs associated with an individual risk transfer.”

The CAS should continue to uphold the principles of ratemaking to ensure rates are not unfairly discriminatory towards any group.

Wanchin Chou

No. The ratemaking principles uphold the role of CAS members in measuring, analyzing, and projecting risk-based costs. Subsidization can come from practical and/or legal requirements on the pricing system. Actuaries should recognize the requirements but not ignore the underlying analytical results.

Ratemaking principles should be kept for technical and reputation as a profession. However, it is up to the state regulations and companies to decide if subsidization of certain political identity groups is appropriate. CAS members may have a role in determining if a subsidization is occurring and the impact of that subsidization, but the CAS should not be in the role of unilaterally changing our ratemaking principles. The CAS Constitution states that “No opinion with respect to questions of public interest shall be publicly expressed by, or on behalf of, the Casualty Actuarial Society, except on matters within the special professional competence of actuaries and then only with an affirmative vote of three-fourths of all members of the Board of Directors.” Unilaterally making changes to our ratemaking principles in this way I believe would be a violation of this constitutional directive.

Given the wording in many states’ rating laws, such a change would have limited practical impact. CT has rating statutes that prohibit unfair discrimination. Other states have similar rating statutes. Therefore, even if the CAS were to change the ratemaking principles to allow certain groups to subsidize others, insurers could run afoul of rating laws if they incorporated such principles into their rates and attempted to disaggregate price from risk.

Mike Larsen

I do not believe the CAS should move away from cost based ratemaking principles, but we should acknowledge that a state insurance department may be directed by the state legislature through statute to subsidize certain political groups and doing business in that state means complying with their laws.

There are some practical steps that we should take to acknowledge the political realities that insurance regulators have to deal with:

• The CAS should outline methods to estimate the costs of subsidization and work with the states to help them understand the effects of legislation on the insurance market in their state.
• We need to recognize that there will be statutes that invoke subsidization for protected classes in some states and open up a dialogue with insurance regulators on how our members can work with insurance regulators to best protect our clients’ interests yet comply with the laws in a given state.

Sandy Lowe

No, I do not believe the CAS should change its ratemaking principles.

Joe Milicia

As an insurance professional, I want the output of my actuarial team to communicate to our underwriters and other stakeholders, the best approximation of the true cost of insurance that we can model. Subsidizing certain political identity groups would violate that. So, from a fundamental standpoint, I wouldn’t want to model that and don’t believe it is appropriate to do so. Now, as DOIs regulate insurers, they already tell us certain variables that we cannot use in pricing that create cross-subsidies and otherwise inaccuracies of costs for individual risks. Should a state DOI mandate subsidization of certain groups, then just as today laws and regulations must be adhered to, I would expect we would need to allow for that in our pricing assumptions.

Kathleen Ores Walsh

I don’t believe our core principals should change and they do provide appropriate guidance on this question. Based on that, this question should be disregarded.

Thomas Struppeck

It is not clear to me why any political identity group should be subsidized beyond what is already allowed by the ratemaking principles.

David Cummings

Members should always feel able to voice their concerns about CAS events, but should also recognize that there are many factors that our Continuing Education leaders need to consider in choosing meeting locations – including the need to serve members who live and work in states that others may have concerns with. We have a history of providing continuing education programs in many different locations, as well as virtual options. Hopefully this provides all members the opportunities they seek for education, networking, and collaboration over time.

John Aquino

I oppose boycotts of locations for CAS events.

Emma Casehart

I encourage members with concerns about meeting locations to share those concerns with CAS Meeting Services staff. There are many reasons members may have concerns about a meeting location, including accessibility, safety, visa requirements, or personal travel needs. If the CAS is failing to provide a necessary accommodation for a specific member, meeting services staff should be informed so they can make required changes.

If members are unable or unwilling to travel to certain locations, the CAS should be made aware of those member perspectives. Part of transparency is collecting feedback from members. Member participation is one of the core reasons to host an event, and if a significant number of members will not attend an event due to location, the CAS should consider this in their process for selecting event locations. However, the logistics of planning large events cannot accommodate all perspectives or needs; the CAS should select event locations that provide the greatest benefit to CAS members while ensuring the highest level of accessibility and safety for members.

Wanchin Chou

The CAS may want to avoid picking sides in these issues and to find event locations based on the cost, location, and amenities provided. In the case of members’ opposition to some states’ laws, such those with strict bans abortion or bans on limiting guns, the CAS should take a more logical and neutral. approach. Challenges may also arise in states that have passed legislation to prohibit the use of Environmental, Social, and Governance regulations (known as ESG) for corporations and public investment entities like pension funds. These are difficult political and policy issues to navigate. CAS could have an open discussion forum but ultimately make the decision that benefits its community most.

These are difficult political and policy issues. The CAS may want to avoid picking sides in these issues and to find event locations based on the cost, location, and amenities provided.

Per my discussion with friends, if the question is regarding members’ opposition to some states’ laws, such those with strict bans abortion or bans on limiting guns. It could also include states that have passed legislation to prohibit the use of Environmental, Social, and Governance regulations (known as ESG) for corporations and public investment entities like pension funds. These are difficult political and policy issues. CAS could have an open discussion forum, but some logistic plans need to be explored and planned accordingly so the members participating can get benefits instead of unintentional frustrations.

Mike Larsen

We should have a sound business case to hold a CAS event in a state that an appreciable number of our members objected to as the venue for a meeting and make that case available to members who present those objections.

Sandy Lowe

There are many considerations that must be made when deciding on where a CAS event should take place. It is the responsibility of the CAS to understand any concern and to take the time to assess the matter diligently, before jumping to a decision. The safety of our members and staff is important and should be taken into careful consideration with any decision.

Joe Milicia

I would need more information on the objections that members have. We should seek to create a welcoming society for all members. Having served on the planning committees for multiple conferences, I know that we consider many factors in our decisions of where to host CAS events from convenience to affordability to event quality. We also pick venues far in advance of the meetings themselves. We must always balance the competing factors to try to host the best events we can.

Kathleen Ores Walsh

Every member should be able to express their opinions however, member concerns are only one consideration for where an event is held. We serve members in every state and can provide CE offerings both in person and hybrid/online. If we focus on the outcome of being able to provide accessible and affordable CE to all members, I believe the CAS’s current approach is sufficient.

Thomas Struppeck

Unfortunately, from time-to-time certain jurisdictions may become inhospitable to various groups. The CAS should avoid using meeting locations where some of our members might feel uncomfortable or even unsafe. A challenge here is that meeting planning starts far in advance of the meeting – often years in advance for large meetings. It may simply not be feasible to relocate an imminent meeting.

David Cummings

In 2020, I voted in support of the CAS Approach to Race and Insurance Pricing. In the years that have followed, the CAS has produced important papers and educational opportunities to help our members be informed about these issues. We now have reference materials that can help actuaries understand tools and techniques to address questions of unintended bias. We have demonstrated how the CAS can advance informed perspectives without crossing the line into public policy or advocacy. As a result, our profession is far better equipped than we were just a few short years ago. This is important, because questions about these topics are not going away. In fact, as artificial intelligence and other machine learning methods become more widely applied, similar questions will be asked by our employers, our customers, and our regulators. These questions will not only be about race, and they will not only be about pricing. These questions will need to be answered with professionalism and expertise in order for these powerful analytical tools to be used with confidence in the businesses we support. We should build on the work we have done through the CAS Approach to Race and Insurance Pricing to be ready to address these questions when they come.

John Aquino

There have been a handful of papers since the issuance of the CAS Approach to Race and Insurance Pricing which can be found here:

CAS Papers On Race

For the entirety of my career race based pricing was illegal, and I believe it remains illegal. I oppose the use of race as a rating variable. This area of research adds race as a variable of interest in actuarial work. Given that the CAS has opened the door to papers on race based pricing, perhaps no further promotion of such research is needed.

Emma Casehart

The current CAS Approach to Race and Insurance Pricing is tightly focused on potential effects of societal racial discrimination on personal lines ratemaking data.

CAS should continue to support research that expands our knowledge of actuarial science. I would like to see additional research on this topic into other areas like adjusting or accounting for societal racial bias artifacts in predictive modeling data, a review of international regulatory schema around bias, additional classification ratemaking methodologies that respond to potential regulatory requirements around bias and insurance, and methodologies not necessarily related to race but used in general bias testing, like the creation of synthetic data. Regulators and the general public are keenly aware of conversations around race and insurance pricing, and the CAS should continue to support further research in this area. To incentivize research and materially support profession-advancing research on this topic, I would propose that the CAS consider funding the creation of a research prize specifically related to topics of both actuarial and public interest, like bias and insurance ratemaking.

In addition to producing research, the CAS can discuss race and insurance pricing with members. The CAS should expand coverage of bias topics in professional education opportunities to ensure all actuaries have the opportunity to learn from the new research produced as part of this series. The U.S. Qualification Standards require at least one hour of bias topic continuing education each year, and the CAS should provide new opportunities to learn about and discuss bias in insurance each year as part of the Race and Insurance Pricing approach.

The CAS has an opportunity to lead the development of novel methodologies that further public trust in the profession. My vision for the future is that the CAS is a leader in producing cutting-edge research that addresses bias and discrimination, which is a topic of importance to regulators, actuaries, and the general public.

Wanchin Chou

My vision is to build and maintain diversity in our community, starting with how we recruit and continuously listening to new perspectives.

The “Equity” in DE&I is not equity in outcome (i.e., exam results), but rather it is equity in opportunity (i.e., addressing barriers within our outreach such as awareness and affordability). Financial and geographic accessibility has created barriers for some students. If the Race and Insurance Pricing question asked included focus areas such as basic and continuing education, research, leadership and influence, and collaboration. Input across different ages and experience levels of our CAS members, across lines of business and across international boundaries will enhance our effectiveness and adaptability.

There is a discussion related to the unintentional bias in the P&C insurance. In addition to the DE&I initiatives, the CAS actuaries can also help in identifying actuarial practices to minimize any racial discrimination and disparity impacts.

Mike Larsen

The steps I proposed are:

• Commission research to compare how the existing set of papers fits into our general cost-based ratemaking principles.
• Clarify the intent of the research papers. Do we want to give members historical background on the forces that drive the current political debate on ratemaking for protected classes or offer options to deviate from cost-based pricing?
• Examine the expected profitability for companies that adopt class plan techniques that have as a goal mitigating the effects of class plan modeling on protected classes.
• Survey current ratemaking practices to verify that class plan or territorial ratemaking is focused on forecasting future loss costs given what can be observed today and not on establishing causality.
• Survey states to see how subsidies for protected class plans are funded today.

Sandy Lowe

The work accomplished thus far as a result of the CAS Approach to Race and Insurance Pricing has been informative, communicated widely, and has inspired productive discussions on the topic. I have participated in sessions, reviewed some of the research papers and found the content to be useful, interesting, and relevant to our work. I believe the conversation is not yet over. Moving forward, the CAS should continue to drive broad education on the topic—offering the Race and Insurance Complimentary Bundle is a great start. Additionally, I envision increased engagement and discussion with the NAIC and regulators on the topic. I have seen engagement led by the AAA and while I have less visibility into CAS involvement and collaboration on those efforts, I think the CAS should either increase or continue to support this work. Lastly, some form of monitoring could be valuable to the industry to understand how this work has been used and how it has influenced decisions or actions taken by companies or regulators.

Joe Milicia

I believe that adding bias topics to the CE requirements is a welcome update to the CE guidelines. Research and publications to support actuaries in understanding the history and impact of race within financial services is also a necessary step to understand how historical policies may have impacted the data we rely on for projections and must be understood before we can assess and quantify the impact. As actuaries we are well positioned to be able to measure the impact of race within insurance pricing and to provide actuarial advice to regulators seeking the best way to combat bias. There is also the potential that AI and machine learning algorithms may be being trained on data that includes implicit biases and I believe that actuaries are well positioned to help identify and correct for those biases. We must continue to study and assess the impact and devise ways to identify biases in models where correlated variables may not be explicit due to the model form. I believe the necessary next steps will be focused on how new technologies, AI, and advance analytics may create hidden biases and should focus on how to identify and correct for those biases.

Kathleen Ores Walsh

This is an important topic that we should continue to evolve in line with our regulatory bodies. If elected to the board, I will strive for our industry to drive these conversations versus react to them. Topics such as unfair discrimination, not just on race, but other protected classes will likely not abate. As such, given our education, Actuaries have the necessary skillset and acumen to help lead from the front on these issues. In line with our strategic priorities, I believe the CAS should continue to fund this stream of work so we can contribute research, methods, and solutions to ensure equitable outcomes that our industry can impact. I also believe this will include not only pricing but other operations of our companies (underwriting, marketing, etc.) and if elected, I look forward to continuing to ensure that the CAS contributes effective insight and solutions pertinent to the insurance industry.

Thomas Struppeck

The CAS has produced some nice research papers on this topic. It would be interesting to see some further research on how the recent court decision in “Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. President and Fellows of Harvard College” might change insurance regulation, in particular how “disparate treatment” and “disparate impact” will be viewed going forward. Until this is known it will be difficult to see what is best.

David Cummings

I would support the creation of an open discussion forum on the CAS website, as long as it is not anonymous and enforces “rules of engagement” that promote professional and respectful dialog. If done well, this could be a great way to foster collaboration and research on new ideas, increase member engagement, and strengthen our community.

John Aquino

An open discussion forum seems a welcome step, although the operation of a forum is not without challenges. I would consider the thoughts of the members, board and staff before reaching a conclusion on the benefits of a forum. As we enjoy a diverse membership, diverse opinions are to be welcomed, and through fellowship in a community of discussion we can learn from our differences.

If such a forum is to be of value, then it must be open. Any member of the CAS is free to post their thoughts on actuarial science, and the operations of the CAS. It would not be the place of any staff member to post on the forum or to censor member opinions, but for a requirement for civility: 1) Personal attacks would be removed. 2) Vulgar or profane posts would be removed.

Emma Casehart

The CAS has a discussion forum with moderated communities for actuarial organizations, actuarial topics of special interest to the community, and exam study groups. These forums are locations for actuaries to connect on matters of professional importance. There is a group dedicated to “General Research” that is an excellent fit for research topics on a wide variety of actuarial issues, such as how environmental changes may affect property and casualty losses over time, or how methodologies may need to be adapted to a world with different weather patterns. The “Diversity Impact Group” forum may be a fit for discussions on DEI initiatives of the CAS.

I support the creation of communities to discuss topics of interest to membership. For those interested in connecting with other actuaries on these topics now, I encourage you to volunteer on the relevant CAS committee to connect with members on topics of interest to you.

Wanchin Chou

Yes, I support having an open discussion forum to make sure all perspectives are represented and heard. This would align with our ongoing efforts to be more aware of diverse perspectives and create transparency.

Per my reading from the reference link, I believe the CAS has made a good effort to communicate the Admissions Transformation Plan and is actively engaging with the community to vet changes. Implementing a change on this scale is an on-going effort, and I trust that the CAS will continue to seek input from membership and proactively communicate changes. A change of this magnitude is difficult, particularly for students in the exam process, and it is important for the CAS to deeply consider their experience and roll out changes cautiously.

However, there are many organizations with expertise and appropriate qualifications regarding DEI and ESG. CAS could have an open discussion forum, but some logistic plans need to be explored and planned accordingly so the members participating can get benefits instead of unintentional frustrations.

Mike Larsen

I support having open discussion forums. An open discussion would mean that all questions are published and there is a response by the CAS to the questions, although if there are a number of related questions one response from the CAS would be sufficient.

The reasons I support an open discussion forum include:

• This enables peer review of CAS decisions by CAS members, and peer review is a good thing.
• It is a means to improve member engagement. We have a low participation rate in surveys, which I take as a sign that members question the value of giving input without a sign that their input is heard.
• It is an effective means to put some sunlight on choices made by the CAS, which is healthy.

Sandy Lowe

In general, I support having a moderated open discussion forum on the CAS website. For certain topics, there are valuable benefits from having an informal forum to exchange ideas, gather feedback, and help the Board to stay connected to members. Such a forum, however, requires guidelines to ensure that discussions remain on topic, productive, respectful, and appropriate. The use of moderators could help to facilitate a healthy discussion and community.

Joe Milicia

I support membership engagement on all topics and particularly on controversial topics as I believe the CAS must serve the membership. That includes soliciting feedback via the web and having representatives available to discuss policy at CAS events and regional affiliate events. I do believe it is reasonable to attempt to control these discussions – they should not distract from the ability of the CAS to progress on strategic objectives, and they should be civil and professional. I don’t believe that the CAS should subject itself to endless debate or that universal consensus should be required to advance policies. I do believe that the CAS actively seeks out feedback and as a member of the Board of Directors I would strongly consider that feedback in my decision making.

Kathleen Ores Walsh

Yes, it helps with transparency and community connection as an additional channel of communication where our members can find additional engagement. With this in mind, some guardrails should be established, including non-anonymity.

Thomas Struppeck

Discussion boards can be either moderated or unmoderated. Unmoderated boards all too often become sewers. That would be inappropriate for a professional society such as the CAS. Moderated boards require a moderator, who has the unenviable task of either only allowing pablum, or allowing the discussion to devolve and once again we have a sewer. So, no, the CAS should not be in the open discussion forum business.

There are other ways to facilitate discussion on potentially contentious topics: panel presentations or Q&A sessions at meetings come to mind, but discussion boards are too likely to attract trolls.

David Cummings

Our longstanding commitment to professional ethics is a key element of what defines and makes us a “profession”. Our Code of Professional Conduct sets a high standard of honesty, integrity, and competence, with a “responsibility to the public” and “the reputation of the actuarial profession”. It is important that the ABCD continues to play its essential role in carefully evaluating when an actuary’s actions and conduct warrant counseling and/or discipline.

John Aquino

There should be a high bar in any action related to the discipline of CAS members. There should not be discipline when the accusations are leveled based upon current issues of political discourse, especially where partisan actors presume guilt on the part of those with whom they do not agree.

Emma Casehart

The ABCD is the disciplinary body for our profession. Anyone, regardless of membership in an actuarial organization, can submit a complaint to the ABCD. This is a benefit to our profession since it is a key indicator of the high ethical standards to which we hold ourselves. Our Code of Professional Conduct requires an actuary to “uphold the reputation of the actuarial profession”. While this is not a matter st “actuarial” matter, as a self-governing group of actuaries, we must uphold the high standards we set for ourselves.

From the ABCD Rules of Procedure, if a complaint that is submitted to the ABCD is found to not involve a violation of the Code of Professional Conduct, the complaint is dismissed. If the complaint is a dispute between two parties, the ABCD may offer to mediate the matter. If the complaint is found to be a violation of the Code of Professional Conduct, the ABCD will take appropriate action. It is the responsibility of the ABCD to investigate alleged violations appropriately and dismiss a complaint if warranted.

As part of our bylaws, complaints received by the CAS about the conduct of a member must be treated with “serious consideration” and are required to be referred to the ABCD. Substantiated violations of the Code of Professional Conduct should be treated seriously, as they tarnish the reputation of our profession.

Wanchin Chou

No, if the member hasn’t said or done something that denigrates the reputation of the actuarial profession. Exercising free speech as an individual should not be a disciplinary concern for the ABCD, the CAS, or the AAA.

Again, ABCD/CAS/AAA are recognized as actuarial professionals, and we do our best when they are actuarial subjects. We are not qualified for subjects which the lawyers, scientists, and regulators might be able to contribute more effectively.

Mike Larsen

Those committees should focus on actuarial work issues and act to protect our brand in the eyes of clients who want to rely on our credentials as a means of ensuring they will obtain reliable analysis to manage their business.

One should note that restricting the ABCD/CAS/AAA discipline activity to actuarial work is consistent with our constitution which can be interpreted as saying that the actuarial organizations should focus on actuarial work and avoid commenting on social policy issues.

Sandy Lowe

CAS members are free to hold and express their own opinions outside of their professional capacity. However, we have a responsibility to represent our profession well.

According to Precept 1 of the Code of Professional Conduct, “An Actuary shall act honestly, with integrity and competence, and in a manner to fulfill the profession’s responsibility to the public and to uphold the reputation of the actuarial profession.” Additionally, Annotation 1-4 states “An Actuary shall not engage in any professional conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation or commit any act that reflects adversely on the actuarial profession.”

An actuary should not be disciplined solely on the basis of their personal/political/social justice viewpoint. It could potentially be within the ABCD purview to consider disciplinary action if an individual acts upon that viewpoint in a way that harms the reputation of the profession.

Joe Milicia

While my first reaction to this question is to say no, someone’s personal opinion unrelated to actuarial work should not result in professional consequences, Precept 1 of the CAS Code of Professional Conduct states that “[a]n Actuary shall act honestly, with integrity and competence, and in a manner to fulfill the profession’s responsibility to the public and to uphold the reputation of the actuarial profession.” Under Precept 1, we are all tasked with upholding the profession’s reputation which I believe extends beyond just an actuary’s professional responsibilities. In fact, the Annotation 1-4 to Precept 1 discusses “professional conduct involving dishonest, fraud, deceit [and] misrepresentation or commit any act that reflects adversely on the actuarial profession” (emphasis added.)

We must be very careful to uphold the reputation of the profession and that responsibility applies to members in their public conduct and also applies to the ABCD/CAS/AAA to act in their best judgment when deciding if an act unrelated to a member’s professional conduct rises to the level that it reflects adversely on the actuarial profession. Disciplining a member for their personal conduct must be carefully considered but I do not believe it is appropriate to say there are never circumstances where acts outside of someone’s professional duties can be detrimental to the profession. This means that personal conduct can result in professional discipline when egregious.

Kathleen Ores Walsh

Our code of conduct is an important part of how we maintain standards of excellence in our profession. This code identifies professional and ethical standards in how we operate including integrity, and respect. Our governing bodies are there to help ensure we have appropriate accountability to each other and I continue to support these organizations to make sure we are all held to our professional standards and codes. To the extent members actions are not aligned to our codes of conduct, appropriate discipline should be considered.

Thomas Struppeck

From the Code of Professional Conduct:

ANNOTATION 1-4. An Actuary shall not engage in any professional conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation or commit any act that reflects adversely on the actuarial profession.

Members are of course free to hold whatever opinions they wish, but should they commit an act that reflects adversely on the actuarial profession, then they are subject to possible discipline.