Estimated Reading Time: 5 minutes
Many nonprofit organizations seek to increase the amount of their liability insurance protection for a variety of reasons, such as when —
When the concerned leaders of these organizations ask for increased liability coverage from their current liability carriers, those carriers that are willing to cooperate often offer these organizations either excess liability insurance or umbrella liability insurance above their existing primary liability insurance.
Traditionally, there have been clear, significant differences between excess liability and umbrella liability insurance — differences that managers responsible for managing a nonprofit’s insurance have had to understand to be sure that their organizations were protected by adequate liability insurance. Recently, however, these once sharp distinctions have become blurred. Insurers have introduced liability policy forms that combine the distinguishing features of excess liability and umbrella liability policies, sometimes renaming these new policies in the process. Consequently, it is no longer safe to judge a liability policy by its title, watching for the key words “excess” and “umbrella.” Now, the responsible nonprofit executive often must read several liability policies in their entirety to understand their liability protection.
To make reading these policies more manageable, this fact sheet first describes the traditional distinctions between excess and umbrella liability insurance and then touches upon the differences in some of the newer hybrid forms.
For the past several decades and until quite recently, it has been the case that:
To illustrate these traditional differences between excess insurance and umbrella insurance arrangements, let us consider first some excess liability insurance and then substitute umbrella insurance. (Only the largest nonprofit organizations carry both excess and umbrella liability policies; most nonprofits rely on one or the other.) Start by supposing that a nonprofit’s liability insurance program rests on four underlying primary policies:
Suppose, as one alternative, that this nonprofit’s program also includes, as a traditional excess liability policy, a CGL policy with a $3 million per occurrence limit. Under this excess-insurance alternative, its liability insurance program consists of:
Now as the second alternative, assume that this organization does not buy excess CGL coverage with a $3 million per occurrence limit but, instead, purchases a traditional umbrella liability policy with the same $3 million per occurrence limits. Each of the original primary insurance limits then increases by $3 million, so that this nonprofit’s liability insurance program, under the umbrella insurance alternative, consists of:
insurance of $4 ($1 + $3) million per occurrence
insurance of $6 ($3 + $3) million per occurrence
The traditional umbrella insurance clearly costs — and typically is worth — more than the excess coverage for three reasons. First, the traditional umbrella coverage increases the automobile, professional liability, and D&O coverage limits, but the excess coverage does not. Second, the broadly written umbrella coverage provides insurance for many of the “following-form” exclusions and limitations that the excess coverage imports from the underlying primary policies. Third, traditional umbrella liability insurance provides (subject to any self-insured retentions or other deductibles) first-dollar coverage of exposures the more specific liability policies never address. Umbrella liability policy costs more than excess liability insurance but, for virtually any organization with the range of exposures that characterize its particular rating class, the umbrella provides more protection than the excess insurance policy. At least, that’s generally true for the traditional excess and umbrella liability insurance arrangements.
But traditions are changing. Some insurance policies with “excess ” in their titles now increase policy limits for several underlying policies, not just the traditional single policy. Some policies that are still called “umbrellas” have no “drop down” feature like those that used to fill in many coverage gaps within and between primary policies. Furthermore, some newly named “umbrellas” are almost indistinguishable from traditional excess liability policies.
In short, one can no longer confidently judge many new liability policies by their titles. One has no choice but to read them, or read at least the insurer’s very detailed descriptions of these often long and complex documents. The traditional distinctions between excess and umbrella coverages still matter — which primary limits are being increased, what are the exclusions and other coverage limitations, what is happening with coverage gaps within and between the primary policies — but these distinctions are not as clear as they once were, and they may emerge in surprising places and ways. Change is in progress, and change usually brings progress that ultimately benefits consumers of all goods and services. In the meantime, nonprofit buyers of increased limits of liability insurance beware. Stay alert — read carefully!
“First let me congratulate you on a conference well done. I had a great time at the Nonprofit Employee Benefits Conference and walked away with some valuable tools and questions that we’ll need to be addressing in both the short and long term. Thanks to you and your staff for all you do to provide us with quality resources in support of our missions.”
“BBYO’s engagement of the Center to conduct a risk assessment was one of the most valuable processes undertaken over the past five years. Numerous programmatic and procedural changes were recommended and have since been implemented. Additionally, dozens (literally) of insurance coverage gaps were identified that would never have been without the work of the Center. This assessment led to a broker bidding process that resulted in BBYO’s selection of a new broker that we have been extremely satisfied with. I unconditionally recommend the Center for their consultative services.
“Melanie Herman has provided expert, insightful, timely and well resourced information to our Executive Team and Board of Directors. Our corporation recently experienced massive growth through merger and the Board has been working to better integrate their expanded set of roles and responsibilities. Melanie presented at our Annual Board of Director’s Retreat and captured the interest of our Board members. As a result of her excellent presentation the Board has engaged in focused review which is having immediate effects on governance.”
“The Nonprofit Risk Management Center has been an outstanding partner for us. They are attentive to our needs, and work hard to successfully meet our requests for information. Being an Affiliate member gave us access to so many time- and money-saving resources that it easily paid for itself! Nonprofit Risk Management Center is truly a valued partner of The Community Foundation of Elkhart County and we are continuously able to optimize staff time with the support given by their team.”
“The board and staff of the Prince George’s Child Resource Center are extremely pleased with the results of the risk assessment conducted by the Nonprofit Risk Management Center. A thorough scan revealed that while we are a well run organization, we had risks that we never imagined. We are grateful to know that we have now minimized our organizational risks and we recommend the Center to other nonprofits.”
Great American Insurance Group’s Specialty Human Services is committed to protecting those who improve your communities. The Center team has committed to delivering dynamic risk management solutions tailored to nonprofit organizations. These organizations have many and varied risk issues, hence the need for specialized coverage and expert knowledge for their protection. We’ve had Melanie speak on several occasions to employees and our agents. She is always on point and delivers such great value. Thank you for the terrific partnership and allowing our nonprofits to focus on their mission!