North Risk Partners

Employee Benefits Legislative Update

Ali Souza — Tue, 19 May 2026 16:00:45 +0000

May 2026

Stay ahead with the latest federal legislative and regulatory changes affecting employee benefits. Explore what HR leaders need to know about new health plan regulations, retirement program updates, and compliance expectations to keep your organization aligned and well-prepared.

What you'll learn:

Legislative and regulatory changes impacting employer plans

How these updates affect plan design and administration

What employers must do to stay compliant

Webinar presented by:

Bob Radecki
Senior VP Business Development & Compliance Consulting
Lumelight

Looking for the webinar recording and slides?

Contact your North Risk Partners advisor. Don't have an advisor? We'll help you find one.

Find an Advisor

Subcontractor Agreements That Protect Your Business

Ali Souza — Thu, 30 Apr 2026 16:20:36 +0000

April 2026

Strong subcontractor agreements are critical for managing risk and protecting your bottom line. This session will cover what makes an agreement effective, common pitfalls to avoid, and how to handle sole proprietors without employees. Learn how to safeguard your business before work begins.

What you'll learn:

Why subcontractor agreements matter for risk management

How to address sole proprietors with no employees

Pitfalls of not having proper agreements in place

Webinar presented by:

Blake Nelson
Attorney
Hellmuth & Johnson

Daschle Larsen
V.P. Commercial Lines, Risk Advisor, Partner
North Risk Partners

Looking for the webinar recording and slides?

Contact your North Risk Partners advisor. Don't have an advisor? We'll help you find one.

Find an Advisor

Stay Compliant With Minnesota Paid Leave Updates

Ali Souza — Wed, 22 Apr 2026 13:00:35 +0000

April 2026

Get the latest on Minnesota's Paid Leave law and recent changes. Learn how to integrate Paid Leave with other leave programs, including Earned Sick and Safe Time (ESST), Paid Time Off (PTO), Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA), Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), and Minnesota Pregnancy and Parental Leave.

What you'll learn:

The latest updates to Minnesota's Paid Leave law

Best practices for aligning Paid Leave with current leave policies

Webinar presented by:

Jordan Cardenas
Attorney
Wagner, Falconer & Judd

Looking for the webinar recording and slides?

Contact your North Risk Partners advisor. Don't have an advisor? We'll help you find one.

Find an Advisor

Do Interns & Temporary Employees Have to Be Offered Benefits?

Jarrica Walston — Mon, 20 Apr 2026 19:03:23 +0000

Employers often assume that an offer of coverage is not required for short-term or temporary positions, but that is not always the case. Whether an employer is hiring summer interns, hiring seasonal employees to keep up with increased demand at a certain time of year, or hiring to temporarily fill a position while another employee takes a leave of absence, these employees are often expected to work full-time hours, and therefore, the question arises: Does the position require an offer of coverage?

To answer this question, three factors must be considered:

Is the employer an applicable large employer (ALE)?

If the employer is an ALE, are they utilizing the look-back measurement method or the monthly measurement method?

If the employer is an ALE utilizing the look-back measurement method, are the temporary employees considered seasonal under §4980H?

Small Employers

For a small employer (i.e., has fewer than 50 full-time equivalents and thus is not an ALE), there is no obligation to make an offer of coverage to temporary employees. Small employers have broad flexibility to design benefit eligibility rules as desired, subject to any applicable state law. That being the case, small employers who utilize temporary employees and would prefer not to offer coverage to them should ensure that their plan eligibility rules specifically exclude that category of employees. Otherwise, a temporary employee meeting the plan eligibility requirements (e.g., working 30 or more hours per week) could argue that they are entitled to an offer of coverage.

Applicable Large Employers (ALEs)

ALEs (50 or more full-time equivalents) have to be a little more careful, at least in regard to their group medical plan. For benefits other than major medical, the employer could choose to handle eligibility rules as suggested above for small employers; however, the employer risks §4980H penalties if temporary employees are full-time and are not offered medical coverage. Whether temporary employees are considered full-time for §4980H purposes may depend on whether the employer is using the monthly measurement method or the look-back measurement method. Keep in mind that the method chosen must generally be used for all employees, or at least all hourly employees (it is possible to differentiate methods between hourly and salaried employees).

If an ALE is using the lookback measurement method…

Temporary employees that meet the §4980H definition of "seasonal" (see below) may be subject to an initial measurement period of up to 12 months, which prevents them from ever being considered full-time. Either they will not average enough hours to be considered full-time over the entire initial measurement period, or they will terminate employment prior to the beginning of the associated stability period. But temporary employees who do not meet the definition of seasonal and are expected to average full-time hours require an offer of medical coverage after the plan waiting period to avoid incurring potential penalties under §4980H.

Seasonal Employee

§4980H defines a "seasonal employee" as an employee in a position for which the customary annual employment is 6 months or less. The reference to customary means that by the nature of the position, an employee in this position typically works for a period of 6 months or less, and that period should begin each calendar year in approximately the same part of the year (such as summer or winter). In other words, if an employer hires temporary employees throughout the year to help with projects as needed, or hires temporary employees who typically work beyond 6 months, then those employees cannot be classified as seasonal.

If an ALE is using the monthly measurement method…

For employers utilizing the monthly measurement method, any employee (including temporary employees) is considered full-time if they achieve 130 or more hours of service per month. If a temporary employee is expected to average full-time hours, even on a short-term basis, an offer of medical coverage is required after the plan waiting period to avoid potential penalties under §4980H.

Penalty Risk for ALEs

An ALE can avoid the bigger §4980H(a) penalty if coverage is offered to 95% or more of full-time employees each month. So, if temporary employees are full-time (and not considered seasonal for employers using the lookback measurement method) and not offered medical coverage, the employer could face a penalty under §4980H(a) if temporary employees make up 5% or more of the total full-time employee count during any particular month. A penalty under §4980H(a) is calculated monthly as follows for 2026: (full-time employee count - 30) x $278.33.

Even if the temporary employees make up less than 5%, the employer is still at risk for the §4980H(b) penalty at a cost of $417.50/month (in 2026) for each full-time temporary employee who is not offered medical coverage and enrolls in subsidized coverage through a public Marketplace.

If you have questions, please contact your North Risk Partners Risk Advisor. Don't have an advisor? No problem. We'll help you find one.

Find an Advisor

While every effort has been taken in compiling this information to ensure that its contents are totally accurate, neither the publisher nor the author can accept liability for any inaccuracies or changed circumstances of any information herein or for the consequences of any reliance placed upon it. This publication is distributed on the understanding that the publisher is not engaged in rendering legal, accounting, or other professional advice or services. Readers should always seek professional advice before entering into any commitments.

ERISA Fiduciary Duties

Jarrica Walston — Mon, 20 Apr 2026 18:55:43 +0000

Recent class action lawsuits have put a renewed spotlight on employers' ERISA fiduciary responsibilities when sponsoring health and welfare plans. Employers that offer ERISA-covered benefits are expected to maintain sound governance practices, make informed decisions, and actively oversee vendors and fees, while also ensuring plan terms are followed and communications are clear and accurate. As fiduciary litigation continues to evolve, these cases serve as a timely reminder that employers must play an active role in managing their benefit plans prudently and in the best interests of plan participants.

ERISA Fiduciary Duty Basics

ERISA §404 outlines the duties of a plan fiduciary and requires fiduciaries to perform their duties:

solely in the interests of participants and beneficiaries;

for the exclusive purpose of providing plan benefits, or for defraying reasonable expenses of plan administration;

with the care, skill, prudence and diligence that a prudent person acting in a like capacity and familiar with such matters would use; and

in accordance with the documents and the instruments governing the plan insofar as those documents and instruments are consistent with ERISA.

ERISA fiduciary duties include, among other things, administering the plan in accordance with plan documentation, including eligibility rules and claims procedures; providing participant disclosures; choosing and monitoring vendors to help administer the plan; and properly handling plan assets.

See further guidance from the Department of Labor's publication here.

It is not always clear whether a particular action or decision will rise to the level of a fiduciary breach. Rather than focusing on any single choice in isolation, the full set of facts and circumstances and how the plan is managed overall should be considered. For example, selecting a vendor that is not the lowest-cost option is not, by itself, a breach of fiduciary duty if the vendor provides additional value or services that benefit the plan. Similarly, conducting appropriate due diligence and documenting the decision-making process can help demonstrate that a decision was reasonable and prudent, even if the outcome ultimately differs from what was expected.

Who is a Plan Fiduciary?

Employer-sponsored plans subject to ERISA should have a named fiduciary. Typically, this is an individual, or sometimes a committee of people, working for the plan sponsor with decision-making authority. However, fiduciary status can also flow from the plan functions performed by a person who is not otherwise named as a fiduciary. It is not a person's title, office, or other formal designation that determines fiduciary status. Specifically, under ERISA §3(21), a person is a "fiduciary" with respect to an employee benefit plan to the extent that the person:

exercises any discretionary authority or discretionary control respecting management of the plan or exercises any authority or control respecting management or disposition of plan assets;

renders investment advice for a fee or for any other compensation, direct or indirect, or has any authority or any responsibility to do so; or

has discretionary authority or discretionary responsibility in the administration of the plan.

Employer Responsibilities

Employer plan sponsors have an obligation to operate their ERISA-covered health and welfare plans in compliance with applicable legal requirements and to oversee plan administration prudently. This includes clearly documenting plan terms and administrative procedures, communicating those terms to participants, and following established procedures in practice. While insurance carriers and vendors play a significant role-particularly for fully-insured plans-the employer retains fiduciary responsibility for oversight of the plan.

One of an employer's most important responsibilities is to conduct due diligence when selecting plan vendors and then to monitor those vendors' actions. Employers must also ensure that vendors are paid only reasonable and necessary fees. Recent laws and regulations-such as the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021 (CAA) and the Transparency in Coverage (TiC) rules-have increased the importance of effective vendor oversight. Many of these requirements cannot be satisfied without vendor cooperation. For example, prescription drug data collection (RxDC reporting) and non-quantitative treatment limitation (NQTL) comparative analyses often rely on information held by carriers, TPAs, or PBMs. Although employers may delegate administrative functions to third-party vendors, fiduciary responsibility for selecting and monitoring those vendors remains with the employer as plan sponsor.

As greater pricing, fee, and performance information becomes available to employers and the public, employers may be expected to consider and appropriately respond to that information when making plan decisions. While increased transparency can benefit both employers and participants, it may also heighten fiduciary expectations around monitoring costs, vendor performance, and plan design decisions.

Minimizing Risk of Fiduciary Liability

The following are some steps employers can take to minimize the risk of fiduciary liability:

Governance & Oversight

Create a benefits committee charged with meeting regularly (e.g., quarterly)

Implement written committee procedures and document plan-related decisions

Vendor Selection & Monitoring

Improve the process of selecting and monitoring vendors/service providers

Consider and compare multiple vendors

Include a compliance responsibility analysis as part of the vendor selection process

Review vendor contracts and consider indemnification provisions

Fees & Plan Assets

Ensure that only reasonable and necessary fees are paid for vendor services, taking into account the scope, quality, and value of the services provided

Ensure participant contributions are appropriately collected, timely handled, and used solely for the benefit of plan participants

Compliance & Risk Management

Perform regular compliance assessments (e.g., ERISA, COBRA, HIPAA, ACA, etc.)

Consider purchasing fiduciary liability insurance

Documentation

Maintain written records of committee meetings, vendor evaluations, compliance reviews, and key fiduciary decisions

If you have questions, please contact your North Risk Partners Risk Advisor. Don't have an advisor? No problem. We'll help you find one.

Find an Advisor

Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2026 (CAA 26)

Jarrica Walston — Mon, 20 Apr 2026 18:48:31 +0000

The Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2026 (CAA 26), which was signed by the President on February 3, 2026, reshapes how pharmacy benefit managers (PBMs) will operate in the employer group health plan market. The statute creates new federal transparency, reporting, rebate remittance, and fiduciary compliance requirements across the Public Health Service Act (PHSA), ERISA, and Internal Revenue Code, thereby broadly affecting all group health plans.

The legislation aims to:

Increase transparency into drug pricing, spreads, and rebate flows

Ensure that 100% of drug rebates and remuneration are passed back to plans

Expand fiduciary oversight and enforcement mechanisms

Most provisions take effect for plan years beginning 30 months after enactment (e.g., January 2029 for calendar year plans) and will apply to contracts entered into or renewed after that time. For employers and brokers, these changes may affect PBM contracting, fiduciary oversight, and compliance responsibilities well before the effective date as contracts are reviewed and renegotiated.

Overview of PBM Reporting Requirements

Contract Restrictions - Applicable to All Group Health Plans

A group health plan or carrier (or PBM acting on its behalf) may not enter into or renew a contract with an "applicable entity" (e.g., drug manufacturer, wholesaler, rebate aggregator, affiliated entity) unless that entity agrees to provide necessary information for required PBM reporting without limits or delay.

PBM Reporting - Requirements Vary by Group Size and Funding

The statute establishes PBM reporting obligations applicable to all group health plans, with additional, more detailed requirements for larger plans. PBMs must provide reports to plans semi-annually, or as often as quarterly upon plan request. The reports must be in plain language and machine-readable. All reports must comply with HIPAA privacy requirements and include only summary health information (aggregate and non-identifiable).

Failure to comply with the reporting and disclosure requirements risks potential penalties up to $10,000 per day. Knowingly providing false information risks penalties up to $100,000.

Large Employers/Plans

Large self-funded plans must receive detailed, drug-level (or claims-level) reporting. Large fully-insured plans do not automatically receive detailed reporting, but can opt in annually to receive the same reporting required to be provided to large self-funded plans. For this purpose, a large plan is one that is offered by an employer with 100 or more employees or a plan that has 100 or more participants.

The detailed reporting includes, among other items:

Drug-by-drug compensation paid by the plan to the PBM, PBM compensation paid to pharmacies, and the spread between those amounts

Net drug prices after rebates

Total rebates received (by the plan and PBM)

Participant cost-sharing

Formulary determinations

High-spend drug disclosures

Affiliated pharmacy pricing comparisons

All Plans

In contrast to the detailed reporting required for large plans, all group health plans must receive:

A plan-level summary designed to assist fiduciaries in evaluating PBM compensation and pricing structures.

A separate participant-facing summary containing only aggregate information that must be made available to plan participants upon request.

In addition to the participant-facing summary, plan participants may request their own claim-specific information. Employers will likely rely on their PBM or TPA to supply the necessary data for such requests and should ensure service agreements clearly address responsibility and response timelines.

Group health plans must provide an annual notice to participants regarding PBM reporting obligations and plan participants' right to request the summary reports and claim-specific information.

Rebate Pass-Through Requirements - ERISA Plans

A contract is not reasonable for purposes of compliance with ERISA §408(b)(2) unless 100% of rebates, fees, alternative discounts, and other remuneration tied to drug utilization are remitted to the group health plan (or carrier on behalf of the plan) on a quarterly basis, no later than 90 days after the end of each quarter. Whether the plan may retain the rebate or must share the rebates with plan participants may depend upon plan documentation, level of participant contributions, etc.

The statute also provides the plan with audit rights regarding rebates at least once per plan year, with the auditor selected by the plan fiduciary and not paid, directly or indirectly, by the PBM.

Expanded Compensation Disclosures - ERISA Plans

The Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2021 (CAA) included a requirement that brokers and consultants supplying services to ERISA-covered group health plans provide disclosures to plan fiduciaries where the broker or consultant reasonably expects to receive at least $1,000 in direct or indirect compensation. The disclosure is required to be made "reasonably in advance" of entering into a contract for services and must describe the services to be provided, indicate whether the service provider expects to be a plan fiduciary, and describe all forms of direct and indirect compensation the service provider expects to receive in connection with the arrangement, including the manner in which compensation will be received.

These disclosure requirements have now been clarified/expanded to include PBMs, TPAs, stop-loss insurers, and most other group health plan service providers. The statute does not provide a separate delayed effective date for this provision, so it could be interpreted to apply upon enactment to new or renewed service arrangements entered on a go-forward basis.

Plan fiduciaries must obtain these disclosures, evaluate whether compensation is reasonable, document their assessment, and monitor compliance on an ongoing basis. Failure to request or review required disclosures may create fiduciary risk.

Summary

CAA 26 does not simply increase transparency, it meaningfully shifts leverage to plan sponsors while simultaneously increasing fiduciary accountability. Employers and brokers will need to balance new access to data with heightened expectations around oversight, documentation, and vendor management.

The statute directs the Secretary to issue regulations specifying a standard reporting format and other implementing guidance within 18 months of enactment. Employers should expect further clarification on reporting templates, coordination with existing transparency rules, and operational mechanics.

Note on Recent Proposed Regulations

On January 30, the Department of Labor (DOL) issued proposed PBM compensation disclosure rules. The rules are modeled on the ERISA broker compensation disclosure requirements but are much more detailed and would require extensive compensation reporting and new audit rights for covered plans. These rules would apply only to self-funded ERISA plans and were slated to take effect for plan years beginning after July 2026. There are some significant differences in the proposed rules and the CAA 26 legislation, and it's unclear what the DOL will do with its proposed rules following the passage of CAA 26. The DOL could withdraw or pause its proposed rules, proceed with the ERISA-based requirements on a faster timeline, or reissue revised regulations that more closely align with the statute. Until the DOL clarifies its approach, employers, brokers, and PBMs face uncertainty regarding the scope and timing of future compliance obligations.

If you have questions, please contact your North Risk Partners Risk Advisor. Don't have an advisor? No problem. We'll help you find one.

Find an Advisor

First Quarter Benefit News Highlights

Jarrica Walston — Mon, 20 Apr 2026 18:34:22 +0000

This quarter's benefits news highlights key compliance and administration issues that employers should keep on their radar, from updated HIPAA requirements and new privacy notice guidance to rising ACA cost limits and increased enforcement activity. We're also tracking important litigation trends and reporting reminders that could affect plan administration in the months ahead. Read on for timely updates to help you stay informed and prepared.

1. New HIPAA Rule Modernizes Claims Processing

This final rule establishes the first nationwide HIPAA standards for electronically exchanging health care claims attachments such as medical records and clinical data and requires the use of secure electronic signatures for those transactions. It replaces outdated manual processes like faxing and mailing with standardized electronic systems, improving efficiency, speeding claims processing, and enhancing data security across providers and insurers. Overall, the rule modernizes administrative workflows in healthcare and is projected to save the industry roughly $780 million annually while reducing burden and improving care delivery. Compliance, which will be handled primarily by carriers and TPAs on behalf of group health plans, is required by May 26, 2028. Read more here.

2. Changes to USPS Postmark Rules May Impact Benefit Administration

It's not often that postal rules affect employee benefits, but a recent change by the U.S. Postal Service (USPS) could impact certain benefit functions, particularly COBRA. Under the new USPS rules, the postmark reflects the date mail first undergoes automated processing, not necessarily the date it was dropped in the mail. Depending on location and processing timelines, this could occur one or more days after USPS receives the letter.

Many benefit deadlines rely on the "mailbox rule," which treats a document as delivered on the postmark date. That date determines whether submissions such as COBRA elections or premium payments are timely. For example, if a COBRA premium grace period ends March 30 and a participant mails payment that day, they may believe the payment is timely. But if USPS does not process the mail until April 1 or 2, the postmark will reflect that later date. Under the mailbox rule, the payment could be considered late, allowing the employer to terminate coverage for nonpayment. Because many participants mail COBRA forms or payments close to the deadline, this change could increase disputes where participants claim they mailed items on time, but the postmark shows otherwise. It remains to be seen whether courts will adjust the mailbox rule in response. In the meantime, employers may need to decide whether to continue relying strictly on the postmark or to adopt a more flexible approach.

3. ERISA Fiduciary Litigation Update

Recent ERISA litigation developments continue to highlight the growing scrutiny on employer health plan fiduciary practices, particularly related to prescription drug pricing and pharmacy benefit manager (PBM) oversight.

In Navarro v. Wells Fargo, a federal court dismissed claims alleging the company breached fiduciary duties by allowing excessive prescription drug pricing in its health plan. The court found plaintiffs lacked Article III standing because they failed to demonstrate a concrete financial injury. Conversely, Stern v. JPMorgan Chase will move forward after a court allowed claims alleging fiduciaries failed to prudently monitor PBM arrangements and allowed participants to pay inflated prices for generic drugs. Separately, new claims have been filed, reflecting an emerging trend in litigation that is expanding beyond plan sponsors to include benefits consultants and advisors. These cases reinforce the importance for plan fiduciaries to maintain strong governance, actively monitor vendors, and document efforts to meet ERISA's duties of prudence and loyalty.

4. Updated RxDC Instructions

CMS released updated instructions for prescription drug reporting (RxDC reporting) in late February. The instructions don't include any substantive changes. The latest instructions and templates can be found here.

Annual RxDC reporting is required by June 1 of each year. Reporting for 2025 data is due June 1, 2026. The reporting consists of a plan file (P2), eight data files (D1 - D8) and accompanying narratives. Most employer-sponsored health plans rely heavily on their carriers, TPAs, and PBMs to provide the data necessary, and in many cases, to submit the reporting to CMS on behalf of employer group health plans. To complete the reporting, carriers or TPAs may have reached out to employers asking for information about premium splits (employer and employee contributions) as well as other data required for the D1 file. Once this information is provided, the carrier, TPA, and/or PBM may handle the entirety of a group health plan's RxDC reporting. However, for employers who fail to timely respond with the requested data, or if the carrier/TPA is unwilling to help with the D1 file, the employer may have to submit a P2 and D1 file on their own. If assistance is needed with the P2 and D1 files, see Lumelight's solution here.

5. Updated Model Notice of Privacy Practices

The HIPAA Privacy Rule requires health plans and covered health care providers to develop and distribute a notice that provides a clear, user friendly explanation of individuals' rights with respect to their personal health information and the privacy practices of health plans and health care providers. As of February 16, 2026, these HIPAA covered entities are required to include information about specific restrictions on the use and disclosure of substance use disorder (SUD) patient records in their notice of privacy practices (NPP). The new model notice incorporating these changes was released by Health and Human Services (HHS) on February 13, 2026. Plan sponsors of self-funded group health plans should use an updated NPP for all future distributions. Insurance carriers will typically handle distribution of the NPP for fully-insured plans. Read more here.

6. 2027 ACA OOP Maximums

The 2027 maximum out-of-pocket (OOP) limits that may be used for non-grandfathered group health plans under ACA rules. For 2027, the maximum OOP for self-only coverage is $12,000 (currently $10,150 for 2026) and the maximum OOP for family coverage is $24,000 (currently $20,300 for 2026). The guidance can be found here.

7. Updated HIPAA, MSP and SBC Penalties for Non-Compliance

The Department of Health & Human Services (HHS) announced updated penalty amounts for HIPAA, MSP, and SBC violations. The updated penalties can be found here.

For HIPAA privacy and security non-compliance, the updated penalties range from $145 for lack of knowledge to $2,190,294 for willful neglect.

For non-compliance with Medicare Secondary Payer (MSP) rules, including taking into account Medicare eligibility or incenting individuals to waive the employer's plan in favor of Medicare, the updated penalty is $11,823.

For failure to timely distribute a current summary of benefits & coverage (SBC), the updated penalty is $1,443.

8. EBSA 2026 Enforcement Priorities

The U.S. Department of Labor's Employee Benefits Security Administration (EBSA) announced its national enforcement priorities for fiscal year 2026, focusing on issues that pose the greatest risk to plan participants and beneficiaries. Specific to health and welfare benefit plans, investigations will prioritize cybersecurity, access to mental health and substance use disorder benefits, surprise medical billing, and handling of employee contributions. EBSA also signaled a continued commitment to addressing abusive Multiple Employer Welfare Arrangements (MEWAs). Read more here.

9. Increased State-Level Mental Health Parity Enforcement

States are increasingly enforcing mental health parity laws and issuing record fines against health insurers for failing to provide mental health and substance use disorder coverage on par with medical/surgical benefits. Regulators have penalized plans like Kaiser Foundation Health Plan of Washington for not supplying adequate documentation or compliance evidence such as a non-quantitative treatment limitation (NQTL) comparative analysis, signaling tougher scrutiny of insurer practices under parity requirements. These actions reflect a broader state-level crackdown to hold insurers accountable for adhering to both state and federal mental health parity standards, aiming to improve access and equity in mental and behavioral health care. For employers offering self-funded health plans, this serves as a reminder that compliance with the Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act (MHPAEA) requires a completed NQTL comparative analysis that must be maintained and made available upon request. See Lumelight's solutions here.

10. Updated HRSA Preventive Coverage Guidelines

Non-grandfathered group health plans must cover preventive services included in the updated HRSA-supported Women's Preventive Services Guidelines without cost-sharing under the ACA. The cervical cancer screening guideline has been revised for plan years beginning in 2027 to reflect current evidence-based recommendations for average-risk women aged 30-65. The guideline retains existing options (Pap tests, co-testing, and primary high-risk HPV testing every five years) and adds a recommendation that patient-collected (self-collected) hrHPV testing should also be covered. It also explicitly states that when additional testing (e.g., cytology, biopsy, extended genotyping) is clinically indicated to complete the screening process, those services are part of the cervical cancer screening guideline and must be covered accordingly. Read more here.

11. OCR Cybersecurity Newsletter

OCR (The Office for Civil Rights), a division HHS (Health & Human Services), released a newsletter further clarifying its focus on cybersecurity of PHI (protected health information). The newsletter underscores that system hardening is a core HIPAA compliance obligation, not merely a best practice. "System hardening" is the process of customizing electronic information systems to reduce the number of weaknesses and vulnerabilities that an attacker can exploit. OCR identifies three methods covered entities and business associates are expected to undertake in the process of system hardening:

Regularly patching known vulnerabilities

Removing or disabling unnecessary software and services

Properly enabling and configuring security controls.

OCR's expectation is that covered entities and business associates engage in regular review, documentation, monitoring and remediation. Read the newsletter here.

12. Marketplace Premium Tax Credits

Since Congress did not pass legislation before the end of 2025 to extend the enhanced premium tax credits, many individuals will face higher Marketplace premiums in 2026. Importantly, a change in the cost of individual health coverage does not trigger a HIPAA special enrollment event. As a result, group health plans are not required to allow mid-year enrollment, meaning affected individuals generally cannot move to an employer's plan until the next open enrollment period, unless the employer and carrier (or stop-loss vendor) choose to permit a more generous special enrollment opportunity.

In addition, federal agencies issued updated FAQs addressing premium tax credits. The guidance clarifies that repayment caps have been removed, which may significantly increase tax liability for individuals who receive excess premium tax credits. This can occur, for example, if an individual is ineligible due to the availability of employer-sponsored coverage or fails to provide accurate or updated household income information when enrolling in Marketplace coverage. The updated FAQs can be found here.

If you have questions, please contact your North Risk Partners Risk Advisor. Don't have an advisor? No problem. We'll help you find one.

Find an Advisor

North Risk’s Hokan Almstrom Named One of Insurance Journal’s 2025 Agents of the Year

Kiley Westby — Wed, 15 Apr 2026 19:56:42 +0000

April 15, 2026 - North Risk Partners is proud to announce that Hokan Almstrom, V.P. - Employee Benefits, Risk Advisor, Partner, has been named one of Insurance Journal's 2025 Agents of the Year.

With a career spanning nearly four decades, Almstrom has built a reputation for prioritizing long-term relationships and delivering trusted risk advisory services. As a partner at North Risk Partners, he emphasizes personal service and consistent client engagement, believing that strong relationships create trust, loyalty, and meaningful referrals. He sets a strong example for his sales team, consistently leading new business efforts across both commercial lines and employee benefits. His accomplishments have been recognized with multiple internal awards, including New Business Leader across all lines of business in 2025.

Almstrom has built a strong track record serving tribal businesses, beginning with his first tribal account in 1991. Today, tribal business represents a significant portion of his book, reflecting years of relationship-building and a strong understanding of the market. He values the opportunity to work closely with tribal leaders and support their long-term success.

"Being recognized by Insurance Journal is an honor," Almstrom said. "Insurance is ultimately about relationships, trust, and hard work. I'm grateful for the clients who have placed their confidence in me over the years and for the colleagues who have supported me throughout my career."

Hokan accepting the 2024 All Lines New Business Leader award from North Risk President & CEO, Chris Meidt at the 2025 Sales Meeting.

"Hokan is a best-in-class Advisor. His client-first lens, rooted in a servant leader mindset, coupled with a deep sense of commitment to this profession, makes him a role model in our firm," said Chris Meidt, President & CEO and Partner of North Risk Partners. "This recognition is well deserved."

The annual Agents of the Year recognition highlights 26 standout agents from across the country who exemplify what it means to be a successful independent agent. Honorees are selected based on business performance, specialization, leadership, and their dedication to professionalism and service.

The 2025 honorees were featured in the February 23, 2026, issue of Insurance Journal magazine. Read the full article here.

North Risk Partners specializes in strategic insurance solutions for people and business. Our team helps clients Face Risk Head On with right-fit insurance coverage and loss prevention resources. For businesses, we offer commercial property and casualty insurance, surety bonds, employee benefits, as well as programming and compliance support in the areas of human resources, health and safety, and more. Our firm has over 450 employees and 29 locations across our five-state footprint.

Media Contact:
Kiley Westby, Communications Specialist, North Risk Partners
kiley.westby@northriskpartners.com | (763) 746-0950

Construction Industry Fatalities Decline in 2024

Jarrica Walston — Tue, 14 Apr 2026 15:13:02 +0000

In 2024, total workplace fatalities in the United States fell to 5,070, the lowest number since 2020. While this data is being discussed in 2026, it reflects the most recent of fully verified national fatality data, as each incident takes significant time to investigate and finalize. The construction industry, in particular, saw improved worker safety, with fewer total deaths. The U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) reported 41 fewer worker deaths in 2024 than in 2023, down to 1,034 from 1,075, representing a 4% decrease year over year.

On an occupational level, 1,032 deaths occurred among construction and extraction workers, while there were 788 fatalities among construction trades workers, a decline from 809 in 2023. Moreover, 2024 saw a slight decrease in the construction fatality rate, with a recorded 9.2 deaths per 100,000 full-time equivalent workers (down from 9.6 in the previous year). This is the lowest fatality rate in the industry since 2011.

Despite these improvements, construction still accounts for 20% of all occupational fatalities, making it one of the most hazardous industries. The fatality rate, which has hovered between nine and 10 deaths per 100,000 workers for more than a decade, indicates long-term stagnation in safety improvement.

Leading Causes of Fatalities

The BLS cited the following as the top causes of construction worker fatalities in 2024:

Slips, trips, and falls: 389 deaths

Transportation incidents, including collisions and vehicle-struck-by incidents: 244 deaths

Exposure to harmful substances or environments: 187 deaths

Contact incidents, including struck-by incidents: 161 deaths

Workplace violence: 46 deaths

Fires and explosions: 5 deaths

Falls remain the leading safety concern on construction sites. Although fall-related deaths decreased from 421 in 2023 to 389 in 2024, they still accounted for over a third of deaths. In 2024, 10.8% of fatal falls, slips, and trips involved a worker falling from a height of more than 30 feet.

Overall, the BLS data highlights that even with notable progress, construction operations still face significant hazards that pose critical risks to employee safety.

Risk Mitigation Strategies

Economic and demographic shifts contribute to employee safety across the construction industry. With increased demand for infrastructure, domestic manufacturing, data centers, housing, and commercial development, construction operations are growing nationwide, creating more opportunities for job-site injuries and deaths. In addition, the retirement of older employees and the entry of new workers can increase safety risks, as less-experienced workers may be more vulnerable, and safety training and supervision may be insufficient.

Considering these trends, safety experts stress the importance of the following proactive strategies to improve safety among the construction workforce:

Strengthen fall protection systems and real-time compliance monitoring.

Enhance onboarding and skills training for new or inexperienced workers.

Implement clear stop-work authority policies that empower employees to stop unsafe tasks.

Foster a strong safety culture and leadership accountability at all levels.

Introduce programs that address common contributors to injuries and fatalities, including mental health, substance misuse, and heat stress.

Continue to focus on mitigating vehicle and struck-by hazards as well as fall risks, the top causes of death among construction workers.

Construction-related fatalities decreased in 2024, but the industry continues to face elevated safety risks. Progress in safety outcomes will require continuous investment in training, enforcement, and proactive jobsite hazard management.

If you have questions, please contact a North Risk Partners Advisor.

This blog is not intended to be an exhaustive source of information nor should any discussion or opinions be construed as legal advice. Readers should consult legal counsel or a licensed insurance professional for appropriate advice. © 2026 Zywave, Inc. All rights reserved.

Cumulative Trauma Injuries and Workers’ Compensation

Jarrica Walston — Tue, 14 Apr 2026 15:00:29 +0000

Although common in the construction industry, cumulative trauma injuries (CTIs) are some of the most complex workers' compensation claims. They often result in long, painful experiences for employees. Therefore, it's crucial that construction employers reduce the risk of CTIs and associated workers' compensation claims.

Common CTIs in Construction

CTIs, also known as repetitive movement or overuse injuries, result from repeated movements, improper or awkward positioning, vibration, or forceful exertion over an extended period. Construction workers face elevated exposure to these conditions, leading to the degeneration of their impacted body parts and necessitating medical treatment. The following are common types of CTIs in construction:

Low back injuries are caused by repetitive lifting, bending, and twisting. These types of injuries include strain, disc degeneration, and chronic pain.

Shoulder injuries, such as rotator cuff irritation and tendonitis, can result from repetitive overhead work, lifting, and holding materials away from the body.

Knee injuries can be caused by frequent kneeling, squatting, climbing, and load-bearing tasks.

Wrist, hand, and finger injuries can occur due to repetitive gripping, vibration from tools, and forceful use. These types of injuries include tendonitis, trigger finger, and carpal tunnel.

CTIs can present with a variety of symptoms, including pain, inflammation, numbness or tingling, swelling, and reduced range of motion.

Workers' Compensation Claims From CTIs

CTI claims can be complicated and costly. Since such injuries occur over an extended length of time, it's often challenging to determine the root cause of the injury. Many workers also delay reporting their injuries; they may assume their injuries are temporary, avoid medical care, and end up with more severe injuries and higher claim costs over time.

Since CTIs can affect multiple body parts and result in long-term damage, they often require extended treatment, such as physical therapy. Employers may have to modify the injured employee's duties, or the worker may even require vocational retraining if the injury prevents them from returning to their usual work tasks. In general, CTIs impact employers by increasing employees' time away from work, raising medical and indemnity costs, and complicating claims investigations. Preventing these injuries is more cost-effective for employers than managing their subsequent claims.

How to Mitigate CTI Claims

Construction employers can help prevent CTI injuries among workers with the following strategies:

Conduct ergonomic risk assessments to identify tasks with repetitive motion hazards.

Provide proper tools and equipment and redesign work tasks in ways that reduce strain and physical exertion. Where possible, incorporate mechanical lifts; ergonomic or anti-vibration tools and tools that require less grip force; and adjustable platforms that reduce bending and overhead reach.

Provide employee training on ergonomics and CTI prevention. Workers should be instructed on proper lifting techniques, posture, tool handling, and early symptom recognition.

Encourage early injury reporting to reduce medical severity and claim costs.

Create wellness programs that teach employees how to care for their bodies, reduce injury risk, and promote overall well-being.

CTIs are significant challenges in the construction industry, but they are also preventable. Implementing preventive measures can help employers protect their employees and minimize workers' compensation costs.

If you have questions, please contact a North Risk Partners Advisor.