Free template · Insurance
Performance review template for a claims adjuster
A ready-to-use, section-by-section template with the competencies that matter for a claims adjuster, role-specific example phrases, and a guard against the stock filler that makes most reviews read as generic. Copy the structure, fill in your evidence, or skip the writing entirely with Crestento.
The template
Four sections, in this order. Length should match the evidence you have — a thin section is honest; an invented paragraph is not.
Summary
One or two paragraphs setting the context: what was expected of claims adjuster this period, and your overall verdict. Lead with the headline.
Example phrasing
“Handled 312 claims across the year with average cycle time of 28 days against a target of 35, maintained reserve accuracy within 8% of final settlement on 94% of files, closed 11 litigated files without trial, and held a 4.6/5 claimant-experience signal across the year.”
Strengths
The behaviours and outcomes that made the work happen. Anchor in evidence: claims handled per period, average claim cycle time, reserve accuracy at close.
- Evidence for: claim investigation and documentation.
- Evidence for: coverage analysis and determination.
- Evidence for: reserving accuracy.
- Evidence for: settlement negotiation.
Areas for Growth
Forward-looking development edges. Frame as opportunities, not deficiencies. Specific behaviours to develop, not generic claims adjuster criticism.
- One pattern observed across the period.
- One specific behaviour to develop.
- One concrete next step.
Goals for the Next Period
Two or three concrete goals. Each should name a specific behaviour change, a measurable target, and a deadline. Avoid vague aspirations.
Competencies to evaluate
The 7 competencies a strong claims adjuster review structures around, in priority order. Use these as the spine of the Strengths and Areas for Growth sections.
- claim investigation and documentation
- coverage analysis and determination
- reserving accuracy
- settlement negotiation
- litigation management and defense partnership
- customer / claimant communication
- file management and compliance
Before you write
Claims adjusting is about getting the right outcome — coverage applied correctly, reserve set accurately, settlement reached fairly — while keeping the claimant feeling heard. Strong adjusters protect the company's loss costs while treating claimants with dignity. Weak adjusters either pay too much (loss costs) or fight legitimate claims into litigation (cost AND reputation).
Evidence to gather
Strong reviews for a claims adjuster cite evidence of these shapes. Only use a specific value (a percentage, a count, a dollar amount) if you actually have it — don’t invent a number to sound concrete.
- claims handled per period
- average claim cycle time
- reserve accuracy at close
- litigation rate (claims that went to suit)
- subrogation recovery rate
- claimant-experience signal
- compliance audit findings
Where to find the evidence
Work products a claims adjuster produces. Reference these by name in the review when they’re relevant — it signals you know the work.
- claim files with documented investigation
- coverage analysis memos
- reserve worksheets and updates
- settlement negotiation documentation
- litigation handover packets to defense counsel
- subrogation files
- audit-response documentation
Phrasing that lands vs phrasing that doesn’t
Strong — specific, evidenced, role-appropriate
“Handled 312 claims across the year with average cycle time of 28 days against a target of 35, maintained reserve accuracy within 8% of final settlement on 94% of files, closed 11 litigated files without trial, and held a 4.6/5 claimant-experience signal across the year.”
Weak — vague, unevidenced, generic
“Capable adjuster, handles a heavy caseload.”
Phrases to never use
Stock filler that AI-written claims adjuster reviews slip into. Managers spot it instantly. Rewrite to name a specific behaviour instead.
- “capable adjuster”
- “handles a heavy caseload”
- “great with claimants”
- “passionate about service”
- “consistent file management”
- “trusted by management”
- “raises the bar on claims”
Don’t invent these specifics
The details an AI tends to fabricate for claims adjusterreviews. If you don’t have the specific number, name, or date in your notes, leave it out — generic-but-honest beats specific-but- invented every time.
- specific claim-count or cycle-time numbers not in input
- named claims or claimants when not mentioned (privacy + bad faith risk)
- specific reserve-accuracy percentages not provided
- named litigation outcomes not in input
- specific subrogation recoveries not provided
Skip the template, generate the review
Drop your bullet points into Crestento and it produces the polished draft using this exact template structure, tuned for a claims adjuster. Two reviews free, no card.
Try Crestento free