A commercial insurance coverage snapshot, prepared ahead of our conversation. What we found in the program, how we would approach it, and the next steps if you choose us.
Prepared for Harvey & Price Co., Eugene, Oregon. October 2026.
Provisional broker review
Review status Provisional. Substantial program information received, but complete 2026 to 2027 issued policies have not been supplied.
Harvey & Price's renewal presentation describes a substantial, multi-carrier insurance program covering fire sprinkler, HVAC, plumbing, electrical, and related contracting operations. It includes separate primary general liability programs, multiple excess liability layers, commercial auto, property, equipment, workers' compensation, professional and pollution liability, employment practices, fiduciary liability, crime, and cyber.
The first major distinction: the renewal presentations describe the 2026 to 2027 program, while the detailed liability endorsements and certificate materials primarily relate to 2025 to 2026. Those earlier endorsements reveal important restrictions and contract provisions worth investigating, but they cannot establish the exact wording of the renewed policies.
The priority is to determine whether the protection described in the renewal proposal is actually delivered by the issued contracts, particularly for large construction losses, completed operations, fire sprinkler work, subcontractors, and insurance requirements imposed by project owners.
Coverage snapshot prepared: 7-page PDF.
A two-page consolidated dashboard, 10 numbered findings, illustrative loss scenarios, supporting evidence, and meeting decisions.
| Finding | Status | Priority | Recommended next step |
|---|---|---|---|
| HP01. Issued policy verification | Awaiting documents | High | Obtain all 2026 to 2027 issued policies and endorsement schedules. |
| HP02. Excess liability layers | Open questions to verify | High | Verify attachment and exhaustion for the separate sprinkler, HVAC, auto, and completed-operations paths. |
| HP03. Contractor exclusions | Open questions to verify | High | Review sprinkler design, residential work, wrap-up, subcontracting, and additional-insured endorsements. |
| HP04. Property protection | Open questions to verify | High | Confirm why five storage structures show no building coverage and verify sprinkler impairment requirements. |
| HP05. Property valuations | Open questions to verify | Medium | Validate coinsurance, blanket values, and business-income assumptions. |
| HP06. Professional and pollution | Open questions to verify | High | Verify coverage triggers, retroactive dates, reporting deadlines, and defense-cost treatment. |
| HP07 to HP10. Supporting program | Awaiting documents and open questions to verify | Medium | Confirm workers' compensation elections, installation limits, cyber and crime interactions, and insured entities. |
HighMedium Priority is how we would rank the item for the meeting and the action list, High or Medium.
The renewal presentation describes two separate primary GL programs and their excess structures. For an otherwise qualifying sprinkler liability loss, the stated $1 million primary, $5 million first excess, $5 million second excess, and $2 million third excess total a nominal $13 million. That is arithmetic, not a verified available limit, until attachment, exclusions, and exhaustion conditions are reconciled.
The statement of values identifies five storage structures with "No Coverage" for the buildings. The renewal also includes 90% building and content coinsurance and a protective-safeguard requirement. These are precise items for a facilities and valuation conversation, rather than grounds to assume an uninsured loss.
Source cited: Property & Casualty Renewal Presentation Harvey & Price.
The presentation reports $2 million professional liability and $5 million pollution aggregate limits. The supplied prior-term contract distinguishes claims-made professional coverage from occurrence-based job-site pollution coverage. That distinction warrants specific review of the new issued policy.
Source cited: COIs Acords Harvey & Price.
I would position this as a coverage validation and insurance cost-efficiency exercise, not a criticism of their current brokerage program. The documents indicate substantial existing protection and several worthwhile opportunities to verify wording and operational fit.
The first meeting should establish permission to complete the policy audit, confirm property and operational facts, review how the excess program responds, and agree on an action sequence. The report also identifies the exact documents needed to turn these provisional questions into verified conclusions.
Team Lead
Logan Haugen
SVP, Commercial Lines / Team Haugen Lead. Property, casualty, and workers compensation.
Employee Benefits Lead
Michael Barclay, CIC
Vice President, Employee Benefits
