Insurance regulators operate in one of the most risk-sensitive licensure environments. Every exam result must stand up to audit, appeal, and enforcement scrutiny. Not just on exam day, but long after licensure decisions are made.
As testing models evolve, regulators face a critical challenge: how to introduce flexibility and convenience in exam delivery, without introducing new risk. Multi-modal testing, which combines secure test center delivery with a remote testing option, is increasingly part of that discussion.
But for insurance programs, adoption hinges on a higher bar than convenience alone. The real question is whether remote insurance license exams can meet the same standards of security, oversight, and defensibility as traditional test centers.
Why defensibility matters in insurance licensure
Insurance licensing exams play a central role in protecting consumers and financial markets. Regulators must be confident that every exam result reflects verified candidate identity, secure content, and fair administration.
At the same time, the insurance workforce is evolving. More than one in five U.S. workers now holds an occupational license, and mobility across states and roles continues to increase. Candidates may live far from test centers, test while working full time, or require greater scheduling flexibility. The pressure to modernize delivery is real, but the tolerance for security gaps is not.
This tension is where concerns about remote insurance exams often arise. Questions around impersonation, compromised content, and inconsistent oversight can slow adoption. For insurance regulators, the goal is not flexibility at any cost. It is controlled, evidence-based flexibility that strengthens confidence in licensure decisions.
Multi-modal testing as a controlled extension of security
Multi-modal testing is not about replacing secure test centers. For insurance programs, it is about extending proven controls across delivery models without creating uneven risk.
When designed correctly, multi-modal insurance testing allows regulators to:
- Maintain defensible outcomes by applying consistent security and psychometric standards across all exams.
- Manage demand without strain, supporting peak testing periods without overburdening test center capacity.
- Support candidate access without lowering oversight expectations.
- Preserve audit readiness through documented, repeatable security processes.
The distinction is critical. Remote delivery must operate under the same governance framework as in-person testing, with equivalent controls, documentation, and accountability.
What security-first insurance testing looks like in practice
For insurance regulators, exam security extends well beyond proctoring. A defensible model protects the entire exam lifecycle: before, during, and after the test session.
A security-first, multi-modal insurance licensing exam typically includes:
- Robust identity verification, using biometric and multi-factor checks to confirm candidate identity across both test center and remote sessions.
- Secure check-in procedures, carried out by trained test center staff or remote specialists who perform physical checks and environment scans for unauthorized items. For remote exams, this may include a guided room scan using the candidate’s mobile phone, providing additional visibility before the exam begins.
- Live human proctoring supported by technology, including AI-assisted flagging that highlights anomalies while keeping final decisions in expert hands. For online proctoring, a second camera (often the candidate’s mobile device) can be used throughout the session to strengthen monitoring and oversight.
- Controlled testing environments, using lockdown browsers and secure infrastructure to protect exam content and candidate data.
- Post-exam data forensics, analyzing response patterns, timing irregularities, and score shifts to identify potential misconduct and support investigations.
This post-exam layer is especially important in insurance licensure. It provides regulators with evidence that supports enforcement decisions and enables rapid response when risks emerge.
When these controls work together, exam outcomes remain consistent across delivery models – supporting valid outcomes, fair results, and defensible regulatory decisions.
A real-world example: Washington State Office of the Insurance Commissioner
The Washington State Office of the Insurance Commissioner (WA OIC) offers a clear example of how security-led multi-modal delivery can work for insurance programs.
From the outset, WA OIC approached multi-modal testing with caution and rigor. Geographic and scheduling constraints made test center–only delivery challenging across the state, but flexibility could not come at the expense of oversight or public protection.
In partnership with PSI, the program launched a hybrid delivery model that combined secure test centers with online proctoring, designed and validated before launch to meet insurance-specific security requirements. Controls were aligned across modalities, and oversight processes were established to ensure consistency in identity verification, monitoring, and post-exam review.
The result was broader access for candidates, strong administrator confidence, and sustained trust in exam integrity. The program demonstrated that insurance exams can be fully suited for secure multi-modal delivery when governance and security are built in from day one.
Why some programs pull back and others move forward
In recent years, some insurance programs have removed remote testing options due to security concerns. The majority of PSI’s insurance licensure clients have continued to offer remote testing as part of a multi-modal model. Their confidence is grounded in multi-layered security, continuous monitoring, and the ability to produce evidence that supports regulatory decisions over time.
This difference matters. Multi-modal testing is not inherently risky, but it does demand a security framework designed for high-stakes insurance environments.
A collaborative partner for insurance regulators
Security is not static. Threats evolve, candidate behaviors change, and delivery models adapt. That’s why insurance regulators need more than a vendor – they need a partner.
PSI works closely with state insurance programs to monitor emerging risks, review data trends, and refine controls as threats evolve. This collaborative approach supports long-term confidence in both in-person and remote insurance licensing exams, without increasing administrative burden.
As part of ETS, PSI also brings the benefits of scale, shared research, and ongoing innovation in exam security. Helping insurance programs remain future-ready without sacrificing defensibility.
Confidence in every insurance license
Insurance licensure depends on trust from regulators, candidates, and the public. Secure, defensible testing is foundational to that trust.
Multi-modal delivery, when built on strong assessment science, layered security, and advanced forensics, allows regulators to modernize responsibly. Not by lowering standards, but by extending them.