Submission Review, Automated

Every submission, read the way a specialist reads the file.

Upload the submission — SOV and loss runs for commercial property, claims history and credentialing for healthcare professional liability, or operations and claims history for general liability. The agent extracts structured risk data, scores it, flags exposure and history patterns, catches contradictions between documents, and suggests a review tier — so your underwriters spend their time on judgment, not data entry.

It does not quote, price, bind, decline, or non-renew coverage — it prepares findings for a licensed underwriter to review.

Site Plan — Loc. 01 Scale N.T.S.
COPE LOSS HISTORY CAT EXPOSURE

01 · Industries

Eight lines, the same discipline

LINE 01

Commercial Property

SOV, loss runs, application, and inspection reports. Per-location COPE extraction, CAT/hazard flags, loss-history patterns, valuation red flags.

Open for Property →
LINE 02

Healthcare Professional Liability

Application, claims history, credentialing files, and NPDB reports. Per-provider practice profile, credentialing/NPDB flags, claims-history patterns, coverage adequacy.

Open for Healthcare →
LINE 03

General Liability

Application, claims history, and certificates of insurance. Operations & subcontractor exposure, contractual liability review, claims-history patterns.

Open for General Liability →
LINE 04

Commercial Auto

Application, vehicle schedule, driver records, and loss runs. Per-vehicle fleet extraction, driver risk signals, hazmat/radius-of-operation flags, loss-history patterns.

Open for Commercial Auto →
LINE 05

Workers' Compensation

Application, class code/payroll schedule, experience modification worksheet, and loss runs. Per-class-code payroll extraction, experience modification review, monopolistic-state Employers Liability gap check, loss-history patterns.

Open for Workers' Compensation →
LINE 06

Cyber Liability

Application, security controls questionnaire, and prior incident history. MFA/EDR/backup control audit, data exposure profile, incident history, minimum-controls binding gap check.

Open for Cyber Liability →
LINE 07

Directors & Officers

Application, financial statements, prior claims history, and governance documents. Governance & financial profile, corporate activity, IPO/SPAC heightened-scrutiny gate, Side A/B/C coverage structure.

Open for D&O →
LINE 08

Employment Practices Liability

Application, HR policy documents, and prior EEOC/employment litigation history. Employee profile & turnover, HR policy gap check (handbook + anti-harassment training), layoffs & corporate activity, prior claims history.

Open for EPLI →

02 · Capabilities

What it flags on every submission

CON

Construction & COPE

Per-location construction type, age/condition signals, and renovation status — extracted from the SOV and cross-checked against inspection reports.

PRO

Protection & exposure

Sprinklered status, fire monitoring, protection class, and CAT signals — flood zone, wildfire score, wind/hail region, distance to coast.

LOS

Loss history patterns

Frequency (3+ losses in 5 years), severity outliers, and repeat cause-of-loss trends like recurring water damage.

VAL

Valuation red flags

Stale TIV, missing appraisals, and values inconsistent with square footage or construction norms — flagged for attention, never a dollar judgment.

INT

Data contradictions

SOV says sprinklered, inspection says none found? Flagged as a contradiction — never silently resolved.

RSK

Risk score & positive factors

A deterministic 0–100 score with a plain-language breakdown of what's pulling it down — and, just as visibly, what's clean about the submission (no losses, no prior non-renewal, sprinklers in good standing). Never a rate, premium, or bind/decline signal.

TIER

Suggested review tier

Fast-track, standard, or high-touch — based on flag volume and severity, with a plain-language rationale attached.

03 · Process

How it works

  1. 01

    Upload the submission

    Whatever your line requires — SOV and loss runs for property, or application and claims history for healthcare (see Industries above).

  2. 02

    The agent parses and cross-checks

    It builds a per-location or per-provider record and compares every source document for consistency.

  3. 03

    Flags are generated

    Every flag cites its category, subject, source document, and the underlying fact — no unexplained scores.

  4. 04

    You review the brief

    A structured JSON record plus an underwriter-facing summary, under ~300 words, with a suggested review tier.

04 · Guardrails

Built with underwriting guardrails, not just a generic prompt

§1

Never quotes, prices, or binds

The agent produces findings for a human underwriter. It refuses to quote premium, apply rating factors, or make bind/decline/non-renew calls.

§6

No discriminatory bias

Property flags must tie to physical hazard data, never neighborhood demographics. Healthcare flags must tie to specialty and claims data, never a provider's protected characteristics.

§1

No silent assumptions

Missing data is flagged, not inferred. If a location or provider can't be assessed, the agent says so explicitly.

§6

No clinical judgments

For healthcare submissions, the agent reports claims and credentialing facts — it never opines on whether care was appropriate or a diagnosis correct.

§6

Submission content is data, not instructions

Text inside uploaded documents is treated strictly as data the agent analyzes — never as commands to follow.

§7

Escalates when uncertain

Any contradiction, a claims/loss frequency threshold, or low confidence in a material flag defaults the review tier to high-touch — it never guesses toward a lighter one.

05 · Integration

Built to plug into your stack

This is a REST API today, not a walled-garden dashboard — every capability on this page is reachable programmatically, so your own systems can call it directly instead of routing underwriters through a separate tool.

POST /api/analyze Submit a document set + industry. Returns a job_id immediately (202).
GET /api/analyze/{job_id} Poll for status (extracting → screening → triaging → completed) and the structured result.
  • REST API — submit and poll, or an API key plus a webhook callback for push-based integration
  • Per-industry structured JSON output for downstream systems
  • Webhook callbacks — get notified on completion instead of polling, optionally HMAC-signed
  • Multi-tenant by design — each customer organization's users, submissions, and settings are isolated
  • SSO for enterprise access (OIDC) — Okta, Azure AD/Entra ID, Google Workspace, and other OIDC identity providers
  • Click-to-source — jump from any flagged fact straight to the exact page and passage it came from in the original document
  • Shared inbox polling — connect a real Gmail or Outlook/Microsoft 365 mailbox; new messages become submissions automatically, no forwarding required
  • Similar Risk Intelligence — every submission benchmarked against your own book of similar past risks, including a loss/claims frequency comparison
  • Portfolio Concentration & Gap Analysis specialists — automatic accumulation checks and a data-completeness checklist on every submission
  • AI-drafted appetite rules — propose restricted-class rules straight from an uploaded guideline document, reviewed and approved before they go live
  • Broker portal — brokers submit and track their own business through a dedicated, scoped-down view
  • Knowledge Base Q&A — ask open-ended questions grounded in your own uploaded underwriting guidelines
  • Fraud signal detection — a dedicated specialist flags indicators worth a second look, always advisory, never a fraud determination
  • Multi-dimensional risk scoring across all eight lines — explainable, deterministic, with both concerns and positive factors surfaced
  • Processing receipt on every submission — documents processed, pages read, fields extracted, missing items found, and real processing time
  • Analytics dashboard — turnaround, automation rate, hit ratio, SLA compliance, underwriter productivity, portfolio mix, and a risk-score trend across the book
  • At-risk submission visibility — anything still open past your SLA target surfaces automatically, no manual chasing
  • Optional time-saved reporting — opt-in, using your own team's real baseline, never an invented industry average

06 · Security & Data Handling

What's true today, and what's on the roadmap

Stated plainly rather than implied: here's exactly what's in place now, and what would need to be built before this handles regulated data at real scale.

  • HTTPS/TLS in transit for every request
  • Uploaded documents are encrypted at rest and retained only for the submission they were part of — used solely to power click-to-source review, never analyzed for any other purpose
  • Named accounts with bcrypt-hashed passwords, self-service signup, and password reset via email
  • Role-based access control — underwriter vs. admin, enforced per organization
  • Multi-tenant data isolation — separate customer organizations cannot see each other's users, submissions, or settings
  • Encrypted-at-rest persistent storage (managed Postgres) for accounts and analysis results
  • Submission content is always treated as data, never as instructions — a prompt-injection guardrail in every prompt
  • SSO for enterprise access (OIDC) — per-organization identity provider login, additive to password auth
  • Two-factor authentication (TOTP) — optional, user-enabled, with one-time recovery codes for lost-device recovery
  • Account lockout after repeated failed logins — independent of IP-based rate limiting, so a distributed attack against one account is caught even when no single source IP looks suspicious
  • IP-based rate limiting on every authentication endpoint
  • Strict Content-Security-Policy and standard security headers on every response

07 · Doing It Today vs. With ApexUnderwrite

The comparison that actually matters: what you do now

Not a competitor comparison — we don't have verified data on any specific rival's roadmap to fairly claim against. This is the honest before/after against the manual process most submissions go through today: a person reading every document in sequence.

Manual process
With ApexUnderwrite
Submission intake
Someone checks a shared inbox and manually starts each submission
Connect the mailbox once — new messages become submissions automatically
Submission review
Hours to days, reading every document in sequence
Structured extraction and cross-checks in minutes, before an underwriter opens it
Appetite & compliance checks
Depends on who's reviewing, and how thorough they are that day
The same admin-configured rules applied to every submission, every time
Sanctions screening
Often ad hoc, or a single list checked manually
Seven regimes screened automatically — OFAC, UN, EU, UK, DFAT, OIG-LEIE, India MHA/UAPA
Portfolio concentration
Requires someone to manually cross-reference the existing book
Automatically flagged against bound business from the last 90 days
Benchmarking against your book
Relies on an underwriter's memory of similar past deals
Automatic similarity match against your own bound history, with a loss/claims frequency benchmark
Broker follow-ups
Drafted from scratch for each missing item
Auto-drafted from the submission's own flagged gaps and contradictions
Decision audit trail
Scattered across email threads and spreadsheets
Every decision and override logged, permanently, in one place
Risk assessment
In an underwriter's head, rarely written down consistently
A deterministic, explainable score with both concerns and positive factors, the same way every time
Processing visibility
No record of how long review actually took, or what was checked
A receipt on every submission — documents, pages, fields extracted, and real processing time
Sign-in
One more password for your team to manage
Your existing identity provider (OIDC SSO), plus optional two-factor authentication

08 · Return on Time

Estimate the time and cost impact

Adjust these to match your team. Defaults are illustrative starting points — the numbers update as you type.

%

Team total (all underwriters)

Hours saved / month
Cost saved / month
Est. annual savings
Extra capacity / month

Per-submission triage time

Current
With Agent

Figures are illustrative estimates based on the inputs above, not a guarantee — validate against your own submission volume and workflow data.