TL;DR
Line of coverage
Directors and officers liability is the line most often assumed to be in place and least often read. The assumption is easy to make: the organization carries insurance, the director is part of the organization, and the resident claims are covered. All true, and none of it reaches the exposure that actually threatens a director personally.
Resident harm is covered by the liability program. What reaches an individual is a decision: a staffing budget, an acquisition, a benefit plan, a disclosure to residents about refundable entrance fees, or an allegation that the board knew about a problem and did not act. Those are outside the liability grant entirely.
Last updated
Who this applies to
Any senior care organization with a board or managing members. It matters most to nonprofit providers, where volunteer directors have personal exposure and the organization may be least able to indemnify precisely when a claim arrives, and to continuing care campuses carrying refundable entrance fee obligations.
01
A directors and officers policy responds to claims alleging a wrongful act in the exercise of management or governance: breach of duty, misstatement, misleading statement, neglect or error in a managerial capacity.
It is conventionally described in three parts. Side A responds directly to individual insureds where the organization does not indemnify them. Side B reimburses the organization when it does indemnify. Side C covers the entity itself for claims made against it.
Side A is the part that protects a person rather than a balance sheet. It matters in exactly the scenario where indemnification fails, which is insolvency, a derivative claim, or a situation where indemnification is legally barred. A dedicated Side A limit that cannot be eroded by entity claims is stronger still.
Coverage is claims-made. The policy responds to claims first made during its period, subject to the retroactive date, which is why continuity and run-off matter more here than on an occurrence form.
Defense is typically inside the limit, so a long-running governance dispute consumes the money that would otherwise settle it.
02
Corporate negligence reaches upward. In states recognizing the doctrine, a plaintiff can plead that a resident injury was institutional rather than individual: inadequate staffing policy, inadequate oversight, inadequate response to known problems. Those are board-level allegations arising from a resident claim, which means the two programs have to coordinate rather than argue about which responds.
Refundable entrance fee obligations on a continuing care campus are long-dated promises backed by reserves and described in disclosure statements. A dispute over those is a financial claim against governance, and it is a category the liability program does not touch at all.
Nonprofit governance carries charitable-asset oversight that commercial governance does not, including attorney general interest, and volunteer immunity statutes that are consistently narrower than their names suggest.
Regulatory enforcement can name individuals. A serious survey finding is an organizational matter, and the enforcement environment in this industry occasionally reaches administrators and officers personally.
Transactions. Senior care changes hands frequently, and change-of-ownership disputes, earnout disagreements and successor liability arguments land on this policy rather than on the liability program.
03
No Side A component, or Side A sharing a limit with entity coverage. If entity claims exhaust the limit, the directors have nothing left, which is the failure mode Side A exists to prevent.
Bodily injury exclusions drafted broadly enough to swallow the corporate negligence claim. If a governance allegation arises from a resident injury, an exclusion for claims arising out of bodily injury can be read to exclude it. Ask specifically how the form treats a governance claim that originates in a resident event, because in this industry that is the likeliest claim there is.
Insured versus insured exclusions that block the claims most likely to arise in a closely held or family-run operation, where one owner sues another.
No fiduciary liability alongside it. Benefit plan fiduciary duty attaches to the people exercising discretion, and it is a separate policy. The coverage is inexpensive relative to what it addresses.
Run-off not addressed. A departing director is exposed to claims asserted after they leave arising from decisions made while serving. On a claims-made policy, the answer is a run-off provision, and the time to ask is before resigning.
Bylaws providing reimbursement rather than advancement of defense costs. Defense money arrives long before any outcome, and a director funding their own defense pending reimbursement is in a materially worse position.
04
Ask for the policy rather than the summary, and confirm three things: is there a Side A component, does it have a dedicated limit, and does the retroactive date reach back to when your continuous coverage began.
Put the corporate negligence question to the broker in writing. How does this form respond to a governance claim arising from a resident injury, given the bodily injury exclusion. Keep the answer.
Add fiduciary liability for the benefit plans if it is not there, and confirm who is named on it.
Read the bylaws for indemnification and confirm they provide advancement rather than reimbursement. If not, that is a bylaw amendment worth making while it is theoretical.
On a continuing care campus, size the limit against the refundable entrance fee obligations and outstanding debt rather than against operating revenue. Revenue understates this exposure badly.
Make the annual insurance review a board agenda item rather than a management report. A board that has never seen the structure cannot be said to have overseen it, which is itself a governance allegation.
Follow-up questions
The exposure does not scale down with the organization, because it attaches to individuals. A volunteer director at a small provider has the same personal assets at risk and the organization is less likely to be able to indemnify. If budget forces a choice, directors and officers with a Side A component plus fiduciary liability for the benefit plans are the two that reach individuals.
Side A responds directly to an individual where the organization does not indemnify them, which is most likely in insolvency or where indemnification is legally barred. Those are precisely the circumstances in which a director personal assets are genuinely reachable, so Side A is the part of the policy written for the person rather than for the entity.
For resident harm arising from operations, yes, as the organization. For a claim that a director breached a duty in a governance decision, no. That is a different grant and a different policy, and the distinction only becomes visible when a claim arrives.
Yes. These policies are claims-made, so a claim asserted after you leave, arising from decisions made while you served, is covered only if a policy remains in force reaching back to your period or run-off coverage was purchased. Ask about the run-off provision before you resign, while you still have standing to ask.
Go deeper
Other lines of coverage
The line that usually costs a senior care operator the most, where the experience modifier compounds year over year and resident handling drives the claim profile.
The packaged small-business policy many small senior care operators are sold, and the professional services exclusion that removes the only coverage that matters.
Coverage for claims by employees rather than residents, where wage and hour exposure across a large hourly workforce usually dominates everything else.
Coverage for a breach of resident health information and for the operational shutdown a ransomware event causes in a building where care cannot pause.
Property coverage for a licensed care building, where valuation, code upgrade cost and the displacement of residents matter more than the fire itself.
Commercial auto for community vehicles, plus the non-owned and hired exposure created every time an employee drives their own car on your behalf.
Employee dishonesty and the specific exposure created by holding money that belongs to residents, where a modest theft becomes a regulatory and reputational event.
Course of construction coverage for new senior housing and, more commonly, for renovation and expansion of an occupied licensed building.
Coverage for mechanical and electrical failure that the standard property form excludes, on equipment that in a care setting keeps residents alive rather than comfortable.
Free coverage review
Send the declarations page and five years of loss runs. A specialist reads this line against the rest of the structure and tells you where the gaps actually are, within one business day.