Nurse Practitioner Malpractice Insurance Cost: What NPs Pay

Nurse Practitioners on Single Aim often ask what medical malpractice insurance will cost and which company to choose. To answer those questions, we analyzed deidentified policy documents uploaded through Single Aim. We used 82 individual NP policies with stated annual premiums for the cost analysis and 520 policies with an identified insurance company for the market share analysis.

‍

How much does malpractice insurance cost for a nurse practitioner?

To understand what NPs pay, we reviewed the annual premiums from 82 malpractice insurance policies uploaded through Single Aim.

The median annual premium was $1,332. The middle half of policies cost between $889 and $1,850, and more than 80% cost less than $2,000 per year.

‍

What determines the cost of NP malpractice insurance?

CM&F's published rate data shows how one carrier modifies its pricing. The variables in its rate tables include:

• Rating class
• Full-time or part-time status
• Employed or self-employed status
• Occurrence or claims-made coverage
• Coverage limits
• State

Pricing across states

If you hold everything else consistent and compare the same policy across states with available data, the annual rate varies from $1,269 in Arkansas to $5,891 in Florida.

‍

The NAIC notes that claim payments and defense costs affect medical liability pricing, while insurance regulation occurs at the state level.

Variation by specialty

Insurers group specialties into rating classes. CM&F's published tables use four classes, with higher classes carrying higher rates.

Variation: full-time versus part-time

CM&F's historical tables define part-time as 10 hours per week or less.

In the NSO policies in our sample, the median annual premium was $1,554.50 for full-time policies (n=32) and $957 for part-time policies (n=7)—38.4% lower for part-time policies.

In CM&F's tables, every part-time occurrence rate was 50% lower than the matching full-time rate.

Variation: employed versus self-employed

For the otherwise same policy, self-employed CM&F rates were 23% to 59% higher than employed rates across the six states, with a median increase of 38%.

Variation by coverage limits

The $1 million/$6 million limit was the most common in our sample, followed closely by $1 million/$3 million.

‍

More coverage costs more: in CM&F's historical rate tables, raising limits from $100,000 per claim/$300,000 aggregate to $1 million/$6 million increased the annual rate by about 56% in each of the six states. Because $1 million/$6 million was the highest limit listed in the rate tables, the other options are shown as decreases from that baseline.

‍

New-graduate and other discounts

Among the 39 NSO policies in our sample, the median annual premium was $1,210 for policies with a stated new-graduate discount (n=23) and $2,095 for policies without one (n=16)—42.2% lower in the discounted group. These are unadjusted medians, so state, rating class, and other policy differences may also affect the gap. Other discounts vary by carrier and are not included in this comparison.

What malpractice insurance companies did NPs choose?

Berxi and CM&F were the two most frequently observed choices in our sample. Together, they accounted for 64.2% of the 520 eligible Single Aim cases with an identified insurance company or program.

‍

Methodology

To understand what Nurse Practitioners pay for malpractice insurance and which companies they choose, we analyzed 756 deidentified insurance documents uploaded through Single Aim from 2024 through 2026. For the cost analysis, we focused on 82 individual policies that listed an annual base premium. For the company analysis, we used 520 eligible cases with an identified primary insurance company or program. For the coverage-limit analysis, we used 479 eligible cases with clearly stated per-claim and aggregate limits.

We also reviewed six published CM&F rate tables to see how one carrier adjusted pricing across states, rating classes, work status, employment status, policy form, and coverage limits.

Because the data comes from NPs using Single Aim, it should not be treated as a national survey or national market-share estimate. The CM&F tables appear to be historical, so we use them to explain pricing patterns rather than current rates.

Sources: Single Aim deidentified insurance records, 2024–2026; CM&F historical Nurse Practitioner rate tables for Arkansas, Florida, New Hampshire, New York, Pennsylvania, and Washington.

Fair Use: Feel free to use this data and research with proper attribution linking to this study.

Media Inquiries: For media inquiries, contact team@singleaimhealth.com.