Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Risk Management topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Napa County presents risk-management overview; workers’ comp and sheriff’s liabilities drive program costs
Summary
Assistant CEO Becky Craig and staff reviewed the county’s risk-management structure, PRISM participation, claims history and high-exposure areas; workers’ compensation and general liability (notably sheriff-related costs) were the largest cost drivers.
Napa County staff presented an overview of the county’s risk-management program during the Oct. 7 Board of Supervisors meeting, describing insurance purchasing through the PRISM joint-powers authority, claims administration, and department-level exposure.
Why it matters: the presentation identified workers’ compensation and general liability as primary cost drivers and outlined departmental allocations showing the Sheriff’s Office and Health & Human Services as the largest program cost centers.
Key points: Assistant CEO Becky Craig said Napa County is a PRISM (Public Risk Innovation Solutions and Management) member and noted the county’s premiums to the JPA are roughly $12 million annually. The county is self-insured up to a per-claim retention ($500,000 for general liability per current board policy and $350,000 for workers’ compensation) and purchases excess coverage through the pool. Craig described a 10-year claims summary showing around $16M in workers’ compensation paid with about $5.8M in reserves, and about $24M in general liability paid with major recoveries offsetting much of the exposure. The presentation showed the Sheriff’s Office accounted for approximately $5.8M of program costs (about one-third of the overall program allocation) while HHS, public works and others contributed smaller shares.
Risk drivers and trends: Craig said top exposures include workplace injuries, law-enforcement liability, medical-malpractice risk tied to inmate care and juvenile services, cyber incidents, and road-maintenance incidents. She noted PRISM’s large purchasing pool and rising reinsurance costs due to high-value claim trends nationwide.
Operational details: Craig described the county’s use of third-party administrators (Sedgwick for workers’ compensation and George Hills for liability), the role of the risk and safety officer (Alfredo Laranaga), and the county’s contract-insurance verification process (via Ebix). She said annual policy renewals and periodic actuarial studies set reserves and projections.
Board discussion: supervisors requested comparative data with other counties, departmental trends over time, and consideration of whether a dedicated county-level risk manager position is warranted to centralize oversight. Supervisor Ramos asked for department-level trend analysis and comparisons to other JPAs; supervisors discussed settlement authority (currently $50,000 for CEO/county counsel) and heard that many jurisdictions now set higher executive-level settlement authority. Human Resources highlighted return-to-work efforts and steps taken to improve employee experience with workers’ compensation claims.
Next steps: staff will provide follow-up information including comparative county data, department-level trend histories, and suggestions for administrative adjustments such as possible changes to settlement-authority levels and contract-management modernization.
