2014 Agency Universe Study - Independent Agent
sionciatFoPl r Uea sse e bdo y Ino IABtr Aed Sis tattri ebu Aste so2014 Agency Universe StudyPrepared by:Future One is a collaborative program of theIndependent Insurance Agents & Brokers ofAmerica, Inc., and member companies.Maynard Robison,Consultant
Table of Contents3sAbout Future One and the 2014 Agency Universe StudyAcknowledgementsThe Agency SystemAgency RevenueMarketingMarket Access ProvidersAgency-Carrier RelationshipsAgency StaffTechnologyAttitudes and PerceptionsFoPl r Uea sse e bdo y Ino IABtr Aed Sis tattri ebu Aste soIndependent Agencies in a Time of Economic RecoveryAgency Perpetuation PlanningTies to the IndustryciationReader’s GuideAppendix A: Supplementary Data91416213140515672819397103111Supplementary Tables112Respondent Profile114Appendix B: Additional Details on Methods1172
About Future One and the 2014 Agency Universe StudyionsFuture One is a cooperative effort of the Independent Insurance Agents & Brokers of America (IIABA) and independent agency companies.It sponsors a variety of programs to enhance the independent agency system and agency-carrier relationships, both legislatively and in thebusiness environment.FoPl r Uea sse e bdo y Ino IABtr Aed Sis tattri ebu Aste sociatOne of Future One's major efforts has been the Agency Universe Study (AUS), first conducted in 1983. The study was repeated at 4-5 yearintervals over the next 13 years (1987, 1992, 1996, 2000) and, starting in 2002, has been conducted biennially to track the fast-pacedchanges in the industry.The AUS continues to provide information – much of it unavailable anywhere else – that is useful to independent agency principals,independent agency carriers, and the IIABA in its public information and education efforts. The study provides independent agency principals and managers with insights into how their peers operate, as well as businessstrategies that may be helpful to them. Carriers obtain information, ranging from agency principals’ and managers’ opinions about the future of the independent agencysystem to how they use technology. This information helps carriers make better decisions as they work with independentagency principals. IIABA cites the AUS several hundred times each year in its work with independent agency principals, the trade press and publicofficials.3
About Future One and the 2014 Agency Universe StudyThe StudyionsThe Agency Universe Study is a survey of independent insurance agencies. The 2014 survey continues to focus on both agencies as wholebusiness enterprises and, for multi-office agencies, on specific locations or satellite offices.ciatIndividual locations of multi-office agencies were included starting in 2006 for several reasons.FoPl r Uea sse e bdo y Ino IABtr Aed Sis tattri ebu Aste so Carriers often deal as much with specific offices as with multi-office agencies as a whole. Some decisions are made at the office level. Within large agencies, different offices often focus on different market segments.The first chapter in this report, The Agency System, provides data on agencies’ overall structures and revenues at the agency level,regardless of the number of offices the agency has. Subsequent chapters focus on operations at the individual office location level. (In thefew cases where both branch and headquarters locations responded to the survey, headquarters location responses were included in TheAgency System chapter, and all responses were included in subsequent chapters). However, throughout this report, agencies are classifiedby size in terms of their size as whole enterprises, across all offices. For the 80% of agencies that have just one location, operations at theenterprise level and at the individual office level are identical.The 2014 survey included many questions that were asked in previous versions of this research, both because they continue to be areas ofinterest and so that trends can be tracked. In most cases where 2014 and 2012 questions were identical, responses for both 2012 and2014 are included in this report. For more comparisons of 2014 to 2012, readers can refer to the cross-tabulations.MethodologyThere is no single comprehensive listing of independent agencies and brokers that could be used as sample for this study. Therefore, toobtain as broad a representation as possible, Future One used the IIABA’s listing of independent agencies, which is compiled from stateassociation membership lists, and also listings of their agencies that a number of participating carriers were willing to provide. The BusinessInsurance Top 100 Brokers list was added.Undoubtedly, the willingness of some carriers (but not others) to include their agency listings in the sample biases the data to some extent,by leading to overrepresentation of those carriers’ agencies. However, the extent of this bias is limited by the fact that agencies representmultiple carriers, and undoubtedly in many cases represent both a carrier that provided listings and carriers that did not. Of course, a very4large number of agencies also appear on the IIABA’s membership list.
About Future One and the 2014 Agency Universe StudyFoPl r Uea sse e bdo y Ino IABtr Aed Sis tattri ebu Aste sociationsData was collected via web-based interviewing. E-mail invitations (and reminders) were sent to agency principals and/or other agencycontacts, requesting their participation in the research. Each invitation included a unique PIN to enable respondents to complete thesurvey in more than one sitting if necessary, and to make it possible to analyze the survey results using information from the sample, suchas classifying agencies by community types using their zip codes. In total, 3628 respondents were included in the study—2648 whocompleted the entire questionnaire and 980 who completed only the first two key sections (Your Agency and Your Agency’s Revenues andMarkets). On a weighted basis, we received data from 3010 respondents (see page 7).Because Future One needed to collect a very broad range of information, two versions of the questionnaire were used to reduce thenumber of questions asked of each respondent. Each version contained a set of core questions common to both versions, plus somesections exclusive to each version. For example, version 1 asked about marketing while version 2 asked about agency technology usage.Another method used to shorten the interview length was limiting each respondent to answering no more than two sections about specificlines of business and account sizes: personal, small commercial ( 15K total annual P&C premium), medium commercial ( 15K- 99K totalannual P&C premium), and large/very large commercial ( 100K total annual P&C premium). Among respondents eligible to answer morethan two sections, the following priority was used to maximize the number of evaluations for types encountered less often: large/verylarge commercial, medium commercial, small commercial, personal. The eligibility criteria for answering each section, based on thenumber of accounts by line/account size, are shown below. Personal: 50 accounts Small commercial – accounts with 15,000 in annual premiums - 50 accounts Medium commercial – accounts providing 15,000 to 100,000 in annual premiums - 10 accounts Large/very large commercial - accounts paying 100,000 or more in annual premiums - 2 accountsAs in previous AUS reports, the terms “personal lines carrier,” “small commercial lines carrier,” etc., are used throughout. Of course, manycarriers provide coverage for both personal lines accounts and commercial lines accounts of various sizes. In this report, these designationsrefer to the type or size of accounts that agencies write with a carrier, not the lines or products offered by the carrier.5
About Future One and the 2014 Agency Universe StudyAnalysisFoPl r Uea sse e bdo y Ino IABtr Aed Sis tattri ebu Aste sociationsThe data cross-tabulation tables (or “banners”) used to analyze the data classify the participating agencies on a variety of dimensions. Inthe cross-tabs, statistically discernible differences between sub-groups (different agency sizes, different regions, etc.) are identified. Fromthe viewpoint of tracking development of the independent agency system, the most important differences are those between 2012 and2014. In this report’s charts, statistically discernible differences between 2012 and 2014 are identified by marking the 2012 percentagewith . To reduce clutter in already crowded charts , the statistical significance of other comparisons (e.g. among agency sizes) is notnoted systematically in this report. Those who want to check the statistical significance of a particular difference can use the data tables.Within the entire study population of 3628, the margin of error at a 95% confidence level is 1.6 percentage points. However, it isimportant to remember that the margin of error within a group, and between groups, is determined by the number of responses fromagencies in that group. Some of the sub-groups used in the analysis are relatively small, so caution must be exercised when interpretingthose results. Footnotes are included wherever particular caution is warranted due to very small sample sizes.The main categories used in the analysis and reporting, along with the total number of respondents in each, are detailed on the followingpages.Agency RevenueAgencies range from one-person operations with less than 100,000 in insurance revenue to nationwide operations with more than 25million in insurance revenue. These differences in size are closely related to many other differences among agencies, such as number ofcarriers, use of intermediaries, and mix of business.For purposes of the analysis, size is defined in terms of self-reported insurance revenue. Six categories that have proven in prior years todifferentiate agencies are used again in 2014.Respondents were asked to estimate the agency’s 2013 revenue as a whole, including all locations. A total of 3010 respondents providedan estimate.6
About Future One and the 2014 Agency Universe StudysEstimating the Size of the Agency Universe and the Distribution of Agencies by SizeFoPl r Uea sse e bdo y Ino IABtr Aed Sis tattri ebu Aste sociationOn its own, the Agency Universe survey cannot provide information with which to estimate the total number of independent agencies inthe U.S. In past years, an estimate of the total number of agencies and brokerages was obtained from the D&B database listings. However,due to changes to that database, the 2014 estimate of the total number of agencies and brokerages was derived from data cited by theCensus of Business data, as well as data from the US Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics. However, we used the D&B databasecounts to approximate the proportion of agencies that fall into each revenue category, by drawing a stratified random sample of agencies,including subsamples for each of ten revenue categories. Using methods described in Appendix B, the proportion of independent agenciesin each subsample was determined. This proportion was applied to the population of organizations in each size category to determine thetotal number of independent property/casualty agencies in that size category. The total number of independent insurance agencies wasestimated by adding these category totals across all of the categories, and the weights to be applied to responses in each categories weredetermined by dividing the category’s weight (i.e. the percentage of total responses the category included) by the number of responses inthe category.Additional details on these methods can be found in Appendix B.Weighting the Survey DataTo represent the agency universe accurately, the survey responses needed to be weighted by agency revenue size. For example, in relationto their numbers in the agency universe, many more Large and Jumbo agencies responded than Small and Medium-Small agencies.Therefore, it was necessary to give the responses from Small and Medium-Small agencies higher weights than responses from the Largeand Jumbo agencies. In arithmetical terms, in preparing the weighted data each response is multiplied by the weight applicable to itsrevenue category. Appendix B provides more information on the weighting.7
About Future One and the 2014 Agency Universe StudysAccessing Report InformationFoPl r Uea sse e bdo y Ino IABtr Aed Sis tattri ebu Aste soAccessing Additional InformationciationThe report includes a Reader's Guide, which provides definitions and details about analysis that are essential to understanding the studyresults. Reading it before proceeding to the body of the report is strongly recommended.The Agency Management Summary will focus on implications of the study findings.8
Reader’s GuidesQuestionnaire SectionsYour AgencyYour Agency's Revenues and MarketsMarket Access ProvidersThe Carriers You RepresentCustomer Service CentersYour Agency's StaffThe Insurance Business EnvironmentYour Agency's FutureMarketingInformation SourcesAbout YouYour Agency’s TechnologyFoPl r Uea sse e bdo y Ino IABtr Aed Sis tattri ebu Aste soA.B.C.D.E.F.G.H.I.J.K.L.ciationThe questionnaire is divided into 12 sections. The section numbers shown below will assist the reader in identifying the correct section foreach question noted as the source for a graph in the report. For example, QA1 refers to question #1 in the “Your Agency" section.9
Reader’s GuideThe Unit of AnalysisciationsIn the Agency Universe Study, the unit of analysis is the agency. Most findings are presented as percentages of agencies or averages acrossagencies. The reader should keep in mind that these are findings about agencies, not revenue. They do not take into account the fact thatrevenues are quite concentrated in larger agencies.FoPl r Uea sse e bdo y Ino IABtr Aed Sis tattri ebu Aste soMix of BusinessUsing information on sources of insurance revenue, responding agency locations were classified into three groups based on their primaryconcentration.Personal Lines Dominant (Weighted n 1238, 48% of agencies providing information)70% insurance revenue from:P&C personal lines commissionsP&C personal lines profit sharing, contingent commissions, and supplemental commissionsIndividual medical insurance commissions, bonuses, and feesIndividual life, annuities, mutual funds and other investment productsCommercial Lines Dominant (Weighted n 385, 15% of agencies providing information)70% insurance revenue from:P&C commercial lines commissionsP&C commercial lines profit sharing, contingent commissions, and supplemental commissionsValue-added services (e.g. risk management, claim administration, loss prevention)Retirement plan (401k, 403b, 457) commissions, bonuses and feesGroup medical insurance commissions, bonuses and feesOther employee benefits (e.g., dental, disability, life) commissions, bonuses, and feesBalanced (Weighted n 980, 38% of agencies providing information)Agencies not falling into either of the two "dominant" groups (but providing sufficient information to categorize revenue sources).Note: 407 agencies were not assigned to a mix of business group because they did not provide the necessary information.10
Reader’s GuidesCommercial ConcentrationFoPl r Uea sse e bdo y Ino IABtr Aed Sis tattri ebu Aste soSmall Commercial (Weighted n 1112, 90% of agencies providing information)ciationAgencies/offices writing commercial insurance were divided into three groups, based on their concentration of business within commerciallines. This was done in the cross-tabs so that responses from members of each group represent the opinions of agencies with sufficientexperience in the market in question. Only agencies/offices answering the relevant question are included in these groups.50% commercial revenue from small commercial accounts (total annual P&C premiums under 15,000) ANDAgency/office has at least 25 small commercial accountsMedium Commercial (Weighted n 91, 7% of agencies providing information)50% commercial revenue from medium commercial accounts (total annual P&C premiums 15,000- 99,999) ANDAgency/office has at least 15 medium commercial accountsLarge/Very Large Commercial (Weighted n 39, 3% of agencies providing information)50% commercial revenue from large/very large commercial accounts (total annual P&C premiums 100,000 ) ANDAgency/office has at least 3 large/very large accountsAgeAgencies were classified into one of two groups, based on self-reported year when their agency was established.New (Weighted n 267, 9% of agencies providing information)Agencies established within past five years (2010 or later)Established (Weighted n 2689, 91% of agencies providing information)Agencies established before 201011
Reader’s GuidesGeographyWest (Weighted n 425, 14% of agencies)Mountain (Weighted n 198, 7% of agencies)AZ, CO, ID, MT, NM, NV, UT, WYPacific (Weighted n 227, 7% of agencies)AK, CA, HI, OR, WAFoPl r Uea sse e bdo y Ino IABtr Aed Sis tattri ebu Aste soNortheast (Weighted n 550, 18% of agencies)New England (Weighted n 177, 6% of agencies)CT, MA, ME, NH, RI, VTMiddle Atlantic (Weighted n 372, 12% of agencies)NJ, NY, PAciationThe study utilized the four U.S. Census regions and the nine Census Divisions, as shown below.South (Weighted n 1038, 35% of agencies)South Atlantic (Weighted n 491, 17% of agencies)DC, DE, FL, GA, MD, NC, SC, VA, WVEast South Central (Weighted n 175, 6% of agencies)AL, KY, MS, TNWest South Central (Weighted n 372, 12% of agencies)AR, LA, OK, TXMidwest (Weighted n 968, 33% of agencies)East North Central (Weighted n 551, 19% of agencies)IL, IN, MI, OH, WIWest North Central (Weighted n 417, 14% of agencies)IA, KS, MN, MO, ND, NE, SD12
Reader’s GuidesCommunity TypesFoPl r Uea sse e bdo y Ino IABtr Aed Sis tattri ebu Aste sociationUsing U.S. Census data, agencies were classified into one of four groups based on the ZIP Code information contained in the sample.Where an MSA (Metropolitan Statistical Area) is part of a CMSA (Consolidated Metropolitan Statistical Area), we used the MSA todetermine community population. For example, an agency in Stamford, CT would be counted as being in a medium metro area(Bridgeport-Stamford), rather than in the larger CSA including New York City.Rural Areas/Small Towns (Weighted n 562, 19% of agencies)Population less than 50,000Small Metropolitan Areas (Weighted n 455, 15% of agencies)Population 50,000 - 249,999Medium Metropolitan Areas (Weighted n 570, 19% of agencies)Population 250,000 - 999,999Large Metropolitan Areas (Weighted n 1395, 47% of agencies)Population 1,000,000 or moreNote that a few urbanized areas with populations somewhat greater than 50,000 have not been classified as MSAs by the Federal Office ofManagement and Budget. Nonetheless, we included agencies in these areas in the Small Metropolitan Area category.13
AcknowledgementsAdam AnspachMarketing ManagerCentral InsuranceDan MaloneyVice President of Sales and MarketingEncompass InsuranceMadelyn H. FlannaganVP, Agent Development, Education and ResearchIndependent Insurance Agents & Brokers ofAmerica, Inc.madelyn.flannagan@iiaba.netRalph MelhornField Management Regional DirectorTravelersciatAllison DrummondManager, Marketing Insights and AnalyticsLiberty Mutual InsuranceFoPl r Uea sse e bdo y Ino IABtr Aed Sis tattri ebu Aste soSean AndersonDirector, Customer ResearchThe HartfordionsThe 2014 Agency Universe Study has been carried out, analyzed, and reported under the direction of the IIABA Future One Research TaskForce. Zeldis Research and Maynard Robison wish to acknowledge the invaluable guidance and help provided by the members of theresearch committee.Jeff Bair, CICHead of Merchandising and Business DevelopmentMichael FrankeForemost Insurance GroupMarket Research AnalystKaren BartosikProgressive InsuranceAVP Commercial Strategic MarketingGreg GrzywaczChubb & SonCustomer ResearchRebecca BrattenThe HartfordMarket Research AnalystMel HirstProgressive InsuranceVP, Sales Promotions and Agency RelationsJoAnna CareyErie InsuranceMarketing Development ManagerForemostKevin Jenne'Director, Agent & Consumer InsightsGerald ChiddickSafeco InsuranceVice President - MarketingLisa M. KozlowskiAmerisure InsuranceCustomer and Market Insight LeaderWestfield InsurancePatrice NolanMarket Research Analyst, Producer &Product DevelopmentCNARose SheldonAIA Sales Education ConsultantAllstateMatt SternatVP, Enterprise Market ResearchTravelersLynn SwansonSenior Consultant, Sales DeliveryAllied InsuranceJeff TaylorAVP, Sales DevelopmentAllied Insurance14
AcknowledgementsciationsMaynard Robison, an independent consultant who has worked on the Agency Universe Study since 2000, directed the study. In thisproject, he worked very closely with the main research vendor, Zeldis Research Associates. Maynard can be reached at (215) 760-2351 orby e-mail at maynard.robison@verizon.net.FoPl r Uea sse e bdo y Ino IABtr Aed Sis tattri ebu Aste soSince 1991, Zeldis Research has been designing customized market research to help clients understand their customers. Zeldis Researchhas extensive experience in the insurance industry, as well as consumer products, education, financial services, healthcare, and publishing,and offers the full spectrum of quantitative and qualitative techniques, including advanced analytic approaches.With deep and broad sector experience and an understanding of the products relevant to the insurance industry, Zeldis Research helpsclients understand consumer and business trends and the complex influences that could impact marketing efforts.At Zeldis Research, this project was directed by Courtney Robertson, Senior Research Director, and Ken Zeldis, Partner. Courtney Robertsoncan be reached by telephone at (609) 737-7223, ext. 213 or by e-mail at courtney@zeldisresearch.com.For more information about Future One and to obtain a complete copy of this report please contact:Madelyn H. FlannaganVice President, Agent Development, Education and ResearchIndependent Insurance Agents & Brokers of America, Inc.madelyn.flannagan@iiaba.net(800) 221-791715
ciatFoPl r Uea sse e bdo y Ino IABtr Aed Sis tattri ebu Aste soIndependent Agencies in aTime of Economic Recovery16ions
Independent Agencies in a Time of Economic RecoveryImpacts of recession and recoveryThe Great Recession that began in 2008 depressed insurance premiums, particularly commercial insurancepremiums, which contracted in each year 2008 - 2010. This contraction in commercial insurance premiums reflected both reduced business activity generally and excesscapacity for commercial insurance, placing downward pressure on pricing. This trend reversed in 2011 when commercial insurance premiums rose by 5% or 11.4 billion, to a grand total of 239.9 billion. Commercial insurance premium levels have a disproportionate impact on independent agencies and brokers,because they dominate the commercial insurance market (78.4% market share in 2011). Overall, they areparticularly important to the largest agencies and brokers that write a disproportionate share of the channel'scommercial insurance.FoPl r Uea sse e bdo y Ino IABtr Aed Sis tattri ebu Aste sociations NOTE: Information reported on this slide comes from the IIABA's report "2011 Property-Casualty InsuranceMarket: Opportunities and Competitive Challenges for Independent Agents and Brokers." 2011 is the latest year forwhich data is available.17
Independent Agencies in a Time of Economic RecoveryIndependent agency resilienceAfter a 3% increase between 2010 and 2012, the estimated total number of independent agencies has leveled offat 38,500, following a low of 37,500 during the recession (between 2006 and 2010).As the size of the independent agency universe steadies, a notable trend is the growing proportion of agencieswith principals over age 65. (In 2014, 18% of agencies have principals over the age of 65 with at least 20%ownership – versus 10% in 2012). FoPl r Uea sse e bdo y Ino IABtr Aed Sis tattri ebu Aste so Part of this stabilization may be due the lower founding rate of new agencies compared to 2012.ciat ions While the vast majority of agencies still do not anticipate a major ownership change in the imminent future,the number of aging principals is likely to herald a higher rate of agency ownership turnover in the next fiveto ten years or so.In addition, in 2014, there are fewer Small agencies and an increase in Medium-Small agencies. This seems to continue a trend evident in 2012, and is presumably due to the growth of agencies that wereSmall in 2012 to Medium-Small by 2014, as well as mergers and acquisitions activity. It may also reflect theincreasing challenge of maintaining business viability/profitability as a Small agency. While the trend was notable prior to 2014, changes in the sources and approach used to estimate the agencyuniverse this year may have also had some influence on the size distribution estimate as well. At the same time, business conditions seem to be increasingly favorable. Over two-thirds of agencies reportedrevenue increases between 2012 and 2013, while only 15% saw decreases in revenue between 2012 and 2013. Themajority of agencies reported gains in both personal lines and commercial lines revenue.18
Independent Agencies in a Time of Economic RecoveryIndustry specializationMarket access providers (particularly managing general agents and wholesale brokers) continue to play a large rolein placing independent agency business, with usage rates comparable to 2012. Use of market access providers spans revenue size categories. The 77% of Jumbo agencies who use them place asizable proportion of business through market access providers (21% of personal lines revenue and 30% ofcommercial lines revenue), suggesting that some of these agencies specialize in placing certain types of risk whilemarketing others through third parties. Such specialization is supported by survey feedback, in which seven in ten agencies with medium commercial linesaccounts say they have particular expertise in specific industries (from which they derive the majority of theirmedium commercial lines revenue). In addition, for large commercial lines accounts, availability of industry-specific products is second only toprice in terms of importance in carrier selection. Generally, then, there seems to be a growing need for coverages, products, and services geared towardsspecific industries. A high rate of industry specialization may also help account for the fact that newer agencies are more likely thanestablished agencies to be commercial lines dominant (23% vs. 14% of agencies). They also derive more of theircommercial lines revenue from E&S and Specialty Lines P&C. Presumably, this is because new agencies try to find a suitable business niche (directionally higher proportionsof newer agencies also say they specialize in specific industries compared to established agencies). New agencies also continue to be more diverse-minded in their employment and marketing efforts.FoPl r Uea sse e bdo y Ino IABtr Aed Sis tattri ebu Aste sociations 19
Independent Agencies in a Time of Economic RecoverySocial media and digital marketingPredictably, social media use seems to be on the rise. One-fifth of agencies use the assistance of a third-party to help build their social media presence, and 43%include social media presence as part of their 2013 marketing program (versus 26% who included socialmedia marketing strategies in their marketing program in 2011). Key reasons for use of social media include building the agency’s brand and attracting new customers.,typically via Facebook and/or LinkedIn. Use of social media for marketing efforts may help account for the drop in use of personal visits andtelephone calls for both prospecting and keeping in touch with customers (and for both personal lines andcommercial lines). At the same time, social media use is still in its fledging state among independent agencies. Marketing the agency effectively on the internet is cited as a top technological challenge. Only one-third (37%) agree that digital marketing has become a core part of their overall marketing effort. Only one-third (33%) have formal social media content policies. Fewer than one in ten are currently following insurance-related topics on Twitter. In addition, few (11%) have expanded into more sophisticated digital marketing strategies (YouTube, blogs,webinars, etc.).FoPl r Uea sse e bdo y Ino IABtr Aed Sis tattri ebu Aste sociations 20
ciatFoPl r Uea sse e bdo y Ino IABtr Aed Sis tattri ebu Aste soThe Agency System21ions
The Agency SystemFoPl r Uea sse e bdo y Ino IABtr Aed Sis tattri ebu Aste sociationsThe total estimated number of independent agencies stands at 38,500, similar to the 2012 estimate.Total Number of Independent Agencies, 1996-201422
The Agency System15% of all independent agencies and brokerages are Small, and 57% are Medium-Small.FoPl r Uea sse e bdo y Ino IABtr Aed Sis tattri ebu Aste sociations The primary change from 2012 reflects a lower proportion of Small agencies, and an increase in Medium-Small agencies. This seems tocontinue a trend evident in 2012, and is presumably due to the growth of agencies that were Small in 2012 to Medium-Small by 2014 aswell as mergers and acquisitions activity. Between 2011 and 2012, industry premiums increased substantially. Very likely, because of this increase many small agencies passedfrom the Small to the Medium Small category. While the trend was notable prior to 2014, changes in the sources and approach used to estimate the agency universe this year mayhave also had some influence on the size distribution estimate as well. An additional analysis was carried out to determine thepotential impact of changes to one of the sources (see text box below).Agency Distribution by Revenue Size: 2012 vs. 2014 indicates significant difference 2012 - 2014QA9, Weighted n 3010Early in 2014, D&B (which plays a role in estima
The Agency Universe Study is a survey of independent insurance agencies. The 2014 survey continues to focus on both agencies as whole business enterprises and, for multi-office agencies, on specific locations or satellite offices. Individual locations of multi-office agencies were included starting in 2006 for several reasons.
Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency. Defense Commissary Agency. Defense Contract Audit Agency. Defense Contract Management Agency * Defense Finance and Accounting Service. Defense Health Agency * Defense Information Systems Agency * Defense Intelligence Agency * Defense Legal Services Agency. Defense Logistics Agency * Defense POW/MIA .
Mar 17, 2014 · External Database Access External Database Access (EDA) enables you to convert data stored in the UniVerse database to a 1NF database, such as Microsoft SQLServer, then access that data using existing UniVerse BASIC programs, RetrieVe, or UniVerse SQL. Note: EDA was not designed to access data that already resides in a 1NF
Western Washington University e-mail: alles@biol.wwu.edu . Cosmology is the study of the evolution of the universe from its first moments to the present. In cosmology the most fundamental question we can ask is: Does our universe have . Big Bang: The Origin of the Universe by Simon Singh (2004).
September: 2013 33,391.18 9/24/2013 October: 2013 33,391.18 10/24/2013 December: 2013 65,031.50 12/20/2013 January: 2014 33,099.37 1/23/2014 February: 2014 33,099.37 2/24/2014 March: 2014 33,099.37 3/24/2014 April: 2014 31,662.23 4/25/2014 May: 2014 31,662.23 5/22/2014 June: 2014 31,662.24 6/26/2014 392,881.03
The Fate of the Universe If ρ 0, the density of matter and energy in the Universe, is greater than some critical density, ρ c, the expansion of the Universe will eventually cease and reverse, so that it ultimately contracts (THE BIG CRUNCH) If ρ 0, the density of matter and energy in the Universe, is LESS than then critical density,
To discover what the universe is made of and how it works is the challenge of particle physics. “Quantum Universe” defines the quest to explain the universe in terms of quantum physics, which governs the behavior of the microscopic, subatomic world. It describes a revolution in partic
ning universe of BattleTech. A Time of War is a brief encapsula-tion of the BattleTech universe. With that, you’ll have a frame of reference to jump right into the short story Perpetual War that provides a taste for what BattleMech combat is like for the men and women who populate this exciting universe. Next,
API 6A Flanges Catalogue. API 6A - TYPE - 6B 13.8 MPA (2000 PSI) Size B OD C (MAX.) K P E T Q X BC N H LN HL JL Ring Number R or RX 2 1/16 53.2 165 3 108 82.55 7.9 33.4 25.4 84 127 8 20 81 60.3 53.3 23 2 9/16 65.9 190 3 127 101.60 7.9 36.6 28.6 100 149.2 8 23 88 73.0 63.5 26 3 1/8 81.8 210 3 146 123.83 7.9 39.7 31.8 117 168.3 8 23 91 88.9 78.7 31 4 1/16 108.7 275 3 175 149.23 7.9 46.1 .
