Underwriting teams track the average handling time for each task and the number of submissions they process each month, but very few MGAs track the rework they must complete. The numbers look great on dashboards, but margins still shrink. Teams still feel overloaded, even though they are meeting their targets and doing their best. 

Leadership starts to notice and wonder why growth doesn’t turn into profit. Underwriting rework is the core of the problem. Minor errors at intake, missing data, unclear documentation, and inconsistent decisions create extra work later. 

The extra rework rarely shows up in reports, but it does consume underwriting time, delay decisions, and eat margins.

Underwriting rework doesn’t appear to be a major issue and seems like a small fix here and there. Over time, rework scales faster than new business, and for MGAs, underwriting rework becomes one of the biggest hidden margin killers.

TL;DR (Too Long; Didn’t Read)

• Most MGAs track speed and volume but fail to track underwriting rework, which quietly erodes margins.
• Underwriting rework comes from intake errors, missing data, unclear documentation, and inconsistent decisions.
• The largest sources of rework include intake issues, pricing revisions, endorsement corrections, and audit findings.
• Rework consumes underwriter capacity, delays decisions, increases servicing costs, and raises error risk.
• Operational discipline reduces rework by improving intake standards, underwriting guidelines, and workflow structure.
• OIP Insurtech helps MGAs reduce underwriting rework at the source through process discipline, standardization, and workflow optimization.

What Is Underwriting Rework

Underwriting rework happens when an underwriter must work on a specific task multiple times because something went wrong earlier in the process. Teams rework underwriting tasks when information arrives late, is incorrect, or is missing.

Rework includes correcting intake errors, fixing pricing mistakes, updating files after missing documents arrive, issuing multiple endorsements within a short period, and responding to audit findings that trace back to avoidable gaps. 

Underwriters spend hours fixing work they already completed instead of moving new business forward. Although you shouldn’t forget your existing clients, underwriting rework isn’t a single task and can be avoided. 

The rework hides inside emails, follow-ups, file edits, approvals, and clarifications. Most MGAs do not label it as rework; instead, they classify it as routine underwriting work. Margins disappear inside that normal work.

Why MGAs Don’t Track Underwriting Rework

Even though some MGAs do, most MGAs still don’t invest enough time into tracking and resolving underwriting rework. MGAs focus on speed and throughput because those metrics feel easy to measure. 

Standard metrics include the number of quotes/binders/policies/inspections per underwriter, the quote-to-bind ratio, and turnaround time. Leadership sees movement and assumes efficiency.

Rework doesn’t fit neatly into those metrics. Teams rarely track how often files are returned for fixes. Systems seldom capture how many times pricing changes after the initial quote. Endorsement volume grows without anyone linking it to earlier intake errors. 

Rework also feels uncomfortable to measure. Tracking rework exposes process weakness, and it highlights where discipline breaks down. Many organizations prefer to add headcount rather than surface those issues.

Without tracking rework, MGAs underestimate the actual workload. Teams are very busy, and productivity appears high, yet profit margins quietly erode.

Where Underwriting Rework Actually Happens

Underwriting rework does not start where teams expect. It rarely begins later at pricing or approval, and more often begins at intake. Starting with intake, the rework spreads across the underwriting lifecycle and hides inside everyday tasks. 

Intake Rework

Intake creates the largest volume of rework across MGA operations. Submissions arrive incomplete, unclear, or inconsistent. Required fields are empty, and coverage details conflict across documents. 

Exposure data lacks validation, and the underwriter must decide whether to pause the process or proceed with an assumption.

Sooner or later, brokers begin sending corrections, and underwriters reopen files that should have been completed long ago. Every correction triggers new work, price adjustments, and a data database update.

Data and Pricing Rework

Pricing rework follows closely behind intake issues. Incomplete data leads to assumptions, and assumptions lead to revisions. Revisions require approvals, explanations, and system updates.

Pricing rework also happens when guidelines lack clarity. Underwriters interpret rules differently when procedures aren’t clarified. Each pricing fix pulls underwriters away from new submissions.

Endorsement Rework

Endorsements often reflect earlier underwriting gaps. Policy changes occur because original terms lacked clarity or accuracy. Coverage details shift after bind because exposure details arrived late.

Many MGAs treat endorsements as separate work. In reality, endorsement volume often signals underwriting rework. High endorsement volume increases servicing cost, while margins suffer quietly.

Audit and Compliance Rework

Audits expose rework long after the original decision. You’ve probably asked one of your underwriters, “What happened here?” and their answer was, “I have no idea, it was months ago”.

Missing documentation, unclear rationale, and inconsistent pricing trigger follow-ups months later. Underwriters revisit old files. Teams reconstruct decisions. Managers spend time responding instead of improving operations.

Why Underwriting Rework Scales Faster Than Volume

New submissions predictably increase workload, but rework doesn’t. Rework compounds, and nobody can predict them. 

Each new submission creates a risk of multiple downstream corrections. As volume grows, error volume grows faster. Teams feel overwhelmed even when submission growth stays modest.

Rework also spreads across teams. One intake issue touches underwriting, pricing, endorsements, compliance, and servicing. One mistake creates many tasks.

The Cost of Underwriting Rework for MGAs

Underwriting rework damages margins in several ways. First, rework consumes underwriter capacity. Skilled underwriters spend time fixing files and sending follow-up emails instead of evaluating risk. Revenue per underwriter declines.

Secondly, rework delays decisions, and brokers wait longer. Some deals walk away. Lost opportunities never appear in reports; they exist in both renewals and new business.

Rework increases error risk. Each file touch increases the chance of mistakes. Errors create claims exposure and audit findings, and, on top of that, rework increases servicing costs.

Why MGAs Don’t Fix Rework

Many MGAs respond to pressure by hiring. Hiring feels fast, but onboarding and the learning curve will take at least a few months before you see results. 

More underwriters reduce the visible backlog, but rework still exists. Errors still enter the intake. Operational discipline scales better than headcount. Clear rules, clean intake, and standardized workflows reduce rework before it starts.

How Operational Discipline Reduces Underwriting Rework

Operational discipline focuses on preventing errors instead of fixing them later. Strong intake standards prevent rework from the outset and ensure it doesn’t come back later. Required fields, validation rules, and clear submission guidelines reduce follow-ups.

Clear underwriting guidelines reduce pricing rework. Underwriters make consistent decisions when rules feel clear and accessible. Structured workflows reduce handoff confusion and ensure tasks progress smoothly.

How to Start Reducing Underwriting Rework

Start by acknowledging rework and informing your team about the change. Track each step in the policy lifecycle of a single insured. Measure how often files reopen. Count pricing revisions and the number of back-and-forth emails. Monitor endorsement volume separately with new business and renewals.

Review intake quality. Identify which missing fields cause the most downstream fixes. Tighten those requirements first. Standardize underwriting decisions and find your gray areas. 

The simplest example is a missing TRIA form. The agent informed you by email to reject TRIA. You will deny it, but you will also wait another 2 weeks and follow up multiple times to remind them to send you a signed TRIA form that shows rejection.

Retail agents also know you will ask for the form, and they are likely chasing their clients to sign it. A simple step, such as updating the email template and bolding the TRIA form requirement, is a good start. 

Your underwriting team will have answers to all your questions. They do this daily; they know what’s slowing them down the most. It’s time to call a meeting with your team and 

Underwriting Rework Solutions by OIP Insurtech

At OIP Insurtech, we help MGAs reduce underwriting rework at the source. Our teams analyze intake quality, underwriting workflows, documentation standards, and downstream correction patterns.

We focus on process discipline, role clarity, standardization, and operational structure. We help MGAs eliminate rework rather than staffing around it. Through process design, workflow optimization, and underwriting support, we reduce hidden cost that erodes margins.

MGAs that control underwriting rework protect profitability as volume scales; we’re right there to help you make that shift possible.

Click here to check out our specialized practice services, or contact us to review them together.

The Bottom Line

Underwriting rework rarely shows up on dashboards. Minor errors scale fast, and rework spreads across teams like a virus. Headcount alone cannot fix the problem, and you will never be able to accept taking on more workload and fulfilling your potential.

MGAs that track underwriting rework will gain clarity and better understand their operations. Fixing the root cause of the problem protects margins in the long term. Operational discipline creates leverage where speed and volume metrics fall short.

Underwriting rework costs more than most teams realize. Operational discipline and standardization are innovative ways to create leverage where speed and volume metrics fall short.