This section presents an industry solution for item 1 (Surety Account Application) described in SuretyScience's Surety blueprint. Although Surety account applications request largely the same information across all insurers, the industry still relies on many different data‑collection formats. These fragmented approaches create inconsistencies, increase error rates, and slow down processing. As a result, most information is still exchanged through email and rekeyed manually into internal systems—a process that undermines automation and scalability.
Ongoing Efforts
Methodologies
Across the Surety industry, a variety of methods are used to collect and review Account applications.
Challenges
These documents are typically received via unsecured email, most often as form filled documents in a wide range of formats that must be manually interpreted. The volume of data entry required is substantial, increasing the likelihood of errors during manual entry.
Challenges
Website application form data is rarely compatible with Surety system integration. As a result, information submitted securely must be exported, sent over unsecured email, and entered manually—counteracting both the security and efficiency benefits of the original submission method.
Challenges
Industry adoption remains limited. The form taxonomy is incomplete for some use cases and overly complex for others. Its focus on contract bond requests also creates confusion when underwriting occurs prior to the submission of bonds.
Challenges
Although ACORD forms are backed by an established data taxonomy, more flexible and extensible data structures are needed to capture all information required in today’s underwriting processes including unique account situations, emerging data types, or the varied workflows. Everyone should petition ACORD, insurers, and software vendors to adopt and implement this capability.