Clients
Law firms
A&I assists law firms with pretrial discovery, preparation of testimony, critique of opposing experts' analyses, and other aspects of litigation and arbitration. Our statisticians have provided expert testimony and in-court analysis in numerous trials and hearings. A&I is experienced in presenting complicated statistical concepts in a manner that is easily understood by judges and juries.
- Ballard Spahr Andrews & Ingersoll
- Bangser Klein Rocca & Blum
- Covington & Burling
- Foley Hoag
- Friedman Kaplan Seiler & Adelman
- K&L Gates
- Kaye Scholer
- Kittredge Donley Elson Fullem & Embick
- Kramer Levin Naftalis & Frankel
- Menaker & Herrmann
- Prince Lobel Glovsky & Tye
- Shapiro Haber & Urmy
- Shiff & Tisman
- Thompson Coburn
- Vedder Price Kaufman & Kammholz
Corporations
A&I advises corporate clients on a range of business issues, including performance metrics, marketing strategy, forecast modeling, and data quality. Our statistical modeling frequently results in substantial cost savings or revenue gains for our clients.
- Blue Cross Blue Shield
- Digital Equipment Corporation
- Kellogg Brown & Root
- New York City Health and Hospitals Corporation
- Packer Engineering
- Pfizer
- Public Broadcasting Corporation
- State Farm
- Time Warner
Government and non-profit
A&I works with local, state and federal government, as well as non-profit entities, by performing statistical sampling and analyses in regulatory, litigation and arbitration matters. Our government work is frequently done in a politically charged environment. We take pride in providing top quality, unbiased advice in the face such intense scrutiny.
- Colorado State Public Service Commission
- Florida Public Service Commission
- Maryland Attorney General
- Massachusetts Attorney General
- New York Attorney General
- New York City Corporation Counsel
- New York City Health and Hospitals Corporation
- New York City Police Department
- New York City Transit Authority
- New York State Public Service Commission
- Pennsylvania Attorney General
- Public Broadcasting Corporation
- U.S. Department of Labor
- U.S. Department of Transportation
- U.S. Geological Survey
- U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
- U.S. Postal Service
- U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee
Case: Class action against major auto insurer over claim handling
A potential class action against a major auto insurance carrier claimed improper denials of certain types of claims. To address the facts, the insurer's in-house statistician proposed sampling all claims of the type in a recent period, and conducting in-depth case reviews by senior claims managers.
The carrier retained Analysis & Inference to assist with the sampling, and with a protocol for the claim reviews to ensure their reliability and validity. The sampling was designed to help address the question arising in class certification of how similar were the circumstances of the accidents in which denials were made. Further, the design determined the number of cases that ensured a sufficient sample size to reach target levels of precision for the estimate of proportion of cases improperly denied.
Counsel for the carrier used our Report on the sample results to help prepare for the hearing on class action certification. In the end the Court denied the motion for class action certification.
Case: Sampling medical insurance claims files for Blue Cross Blue Shield for an audit challenge
A federal agency stated that a state Blue Cross Blue Shield organization had benefited improperly from their dual role as administrator of federal Medicaid insurance and as a provider of private health insurance.
Retained by the state government, Analysis & Inference designed exhaustive sampling and auditing of pertinent files in the insurer's very large databases of claims and insureds to determine the facts.
A senior statistician of Analysis & Inference assisted the insurer's counsel in explaining the sampling methodology at the negotiations. Using these facts, the provider established, to the satisfaction of the federal investigators, that breaches of their duties as administrator did not occur, or occurred in negligible degree and amount.
Case: Timeliness of delivery of special education services
The New York City Public Schools were sued in a class action on behalf of pre-school children who were eligible for special education services subsidized by the State and the Federal government, over the timely delivery of services. The city asked Analysis & Inference to examine the timeliness of provision of services.
Substantial sample surveys of private providers of substantial sample surveys of private providers of special education services, and of city social services staffs that administer the program were created and executed. The project called for sorting out a complex intersection of causal influences on the timeliness of service provision. It also called on the use of concepts and methods from the field of quality control and improvement.
Counsel for the city credited the final Report written at Analysis & Inference as being very instrumental in achieving a settlement.