All case studies

Case study 01  Deep dive

Claims Adjuster Copilot

B2B2C client app  Single sign-on for client companies and their employees

An AI workflow for insurance claims triage. Every claim runs the same seven steps in the same order: the AI checks coverage, matches evidence, applies fixed fraud rules and does the payout math, and a licensed adjuster approves every payout.

Role
Solo UX design (concept)
Scope
6 screens, 1 persona
Domain
Insurance / regulated AI
Status
Concept  clickable prototype, not user-tested

At a glance

The case in seven answers

Client
Northstar (anonymized)
What was the problem?
Carriers want AI to triage claims, but a wrong payout or a missed fraud signal creates real liability. Adjusters needed the AI to do the routine work without losing control of the money.
Why did it matter?
Routine claims take most of an adjuster’s day, and every payout carries financial and regulatory weight. Speed without control is not an option in a regulated business.
What research was done?
Secondary research across 8 sources on human-in-the-loop AI and claims, an audit of approval and escalation patterns, stakeholder mapping, and assumption-based personas that are not yet validated in interviews.
What constraints existed?
A licensed adjuster must approve every payout. The AI’s reasoning has to be inspectable, and every step needs a permanent record for compliance and disputes.
What decisions did I make?
I chose an AI workflow, not an agent: the same seven steps for every claim, with fixed routing rules (below 70% confidence goes to a specialist). The queue puts the lowest confidence first, and edits happen in place with a required reason.
How did engineering shape it?
I designed for how claims systems are built. The AI only stages a proposal, and a human approval is the only thing that can release a payment. Every number traces back to a policy clause or a document, and every step writes to the audit log.
What changed after launch?
It has not launched. It is a concept with a clickable prototype. Next, I would test the review card with adjusters and measure time to decision, edit and override rates, escalations and audit-ready claims.

01  Problem

Insurance carriers are moving claims triage toward AI-assisted decisioning

Starting with first-notice-of-loss (FNOL) — the initial claim filing — because it's a well-bounded, document-heavy task with clear inputs and precedent. Why FNOL is the entry point for AI agents in insurance and how a claims verification agent pipeline is typically structured both point to the same conclusion: the volume is real, but so is the risk.

But claims decisions carry real financial and regulatory weight — a wrong payout, a missed fraud signal, or an unexplained denial creates liability and erodes policyholder trust. That makes claims triage a genuine test case for a question the industry hasn't solved cleanly:

How do you let an AI system move fast on the routine 80% of cases while keeping a human demonstrably, auditably in control of every dollar that moves?

The design problem, stated plainly

  • AI should handle the volume — pattern-matching photos, estimates, and policy language across hundreds of claims a day.
  • A licensed adjuster must approve every payout — a regulatory requirement in most jurisdictions, not just a trust preference.
  • The interface has to make the AI's reasoning inspectable, not just its output — an adjuster who can't see why a number was recommended can't responsibly approve it.
  • Every decision, human or AI, needs a permanent record — for compliance, disputes, and model improvement.

02  Impact

Outcomes, business impact and learnings

This is a scoped concept project, so the business impact is designed and estimated, not measured. I have marked which is which.

Outcomes

What I delivered

  • A six-screen flow and a clickable prototype for confidence-gated claim review, from the AI proposal to the audit trail.
  • A reusable pattern set for regulated AI: propose, review, commit; scrutiny that scales with confidence; edit in place; escalation with context.
  • Every pattern traced to a source, so each decision can be defended, not just admired.

Business impact

Designed, not measured

  • Faster routine claims. The adjuster reviews a complete proposal instead of assembling one.
  • Judgment stays where it matters. High-risk and low-confidence claims reach a specialist with the full context attached.
  • Lower compliance exposure. A permanent record of who approved what, and on what evidence, for regulators and disputes.
  • How I would measure it: time to decision, edit and override rate, escalations, and audit-ready claims.

Learnings

What I took from it

  • In regulated work, “a human approves” is a requirement. The design job is making that approval fast and informed, not a rubber stamp.
  • Show the reasoning, not only the answer. An adjuster cannot responsibly approve a number they cannot inspect.
  • Confidence should set how closely to look, never whether to look.
  • Next: test the review card with adjusters to find where it slows them down.

Designed outcomes, not measured results

This concept has not been tested with adjusters, and the claims, amounts and confidence thresholds shown are illustrative. It shows hands-on depth in AI workflow UX: a confidence-gated approval flow, an escalation path and an audit-trail concept, each traced to a documented pattern.

03  Product

One claim, five steps, six screens

An adjuster works a single claim end to end. A senior adjuster or SIU investigator receives escalations, and a compliance reviewer audits the trail afterwards. Select a screen to jump to it.

  1. Propose

    The AI stages a recommendation for every claim. Nothing executes.

    01 Approval queue
  2. Review

    The adjuster sees the payout, confidence, fraud risk and the reasoning behind them.

    02 Review card04 Reasoning
  3. Decide

    Approve, edit the amount, or escalate to a specialist with full context.

    03 Edit05 Escalation
  4. Commit

    Only an explicit human approval releases a payout.

    02 Approve
  5. Record

    Every step is logged as it happens, for compliance and disputes.

    06 Audit trail

The screens

Walking through the full loop

Select any screen to view it full size.

01

Approval queue

The adjuster's entry point. Claims are sorted by confidence, lowest first, so cases that most need human judgment surface immediately. Color and status pills communicate risk without relying on color alone — each row also carries an explicit text label. The sidebar shows the AI workflow: the same seven steps for every claim, with the adjuster’s approval as the one human step.

Confidence-based prioritization
02

Claim review card

The centerpiece screen. Before any action executes, the adjuster sees the full AI-proposed decision: payout, confidence, fraud risk, and the specific reasoning behind the number. Nothing is approved automatically, and nothing is approved blind.

Propose → review → commit
03

Edit-in-place

Real claims rarely resolve to a clean accept or reject. This screen lets the adjuster adjust the AI's proposed payout directly, with a required reason field that becomes part of the permanent record.

Partial acceptance
04

Reasoning transparency panel

An expanded, numbered trace of exactly how the AI reached its recommendation — coverage match, evidence cross-reference, fraud screening, and payout math — each step citing its source.

Reasoning transparency
05

Escalation flow

When a claim falls below the confidence floor or trips a fraud signal, it routes to a specialist — arriving with a full context package already attached: the reasoning trace, claim history, and submitted evidence.

Escalation with context handoff
06

Audit trail

A timestamped record of every step in a claim's lifecycle — the AI's initial proposal, when a human opened it, what was changed and why, and who ultimately approved it.

Accountability record

04  Experience

Try the loop yourself

Open a claim, approve it, edit the payout, inspect the reasoning, or escalate. Every action is written to the audit trail. Use “Reset demo” inside the prototype to start over.

Adjuster Copilot  prototype Open full screen ↗

The prototype is a desktop-sized app, so it opens best in its own tab.

Open the prototype ↗

How I got here

The design process, in one document

This page shows the problem, the impact, the product and the experience. The thinking behind them is in a 18-slide presentation: discovery, research materials, personas, journey maps, ideas, user flows and a validation plan.

  • Discover
  • Research materials
  • Personas
  • Journey maps
  • Ideas
  • User flows
  • Screens, annotated
  • Validation plan
View the design process 18 slides  view only

Want to talk through the work?

I'm happy to walk through the thinking behind this, or my enterprise projects, in more detail.