March 5, 2024 • 14 mins
As climate risks grow, some private home insurance providers are retreating from US regions most vulnerable to catastrophe. And homeowners who can’t get coverage through the private market are increasingly turning to insurance “plans of last resort,” created by states.
The amount of liability taken on by these types of insurance plans is staggering, and growing: by some estimates, they’re holding more than $1 trillion of risk.
On today’s Big Take podcast, climate reporter Leslie Kaufman and California reporter Nadia Lopez share an investigation into how skyrocketing enrollment in state-created plans could create the conditions for a financial crisis.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:03):
Bloomberg Audio Studios, podcasts, radio news.
Speaker 2 (00:09):
In January, an insurance company called the Hartford announced that
it would no longer issue any new homeowners insurance policies
in California. Three other insurance companies, USAA, All State, and
State Farm have stopped writing or severely limited new homeowners
policies across the state. According to Bloomberg reporter Nadia Lopez,
(00:31):
the breaking point for a lot of these insurance companies
was the campfire back in twenty eighteen, and the video
that we're looking at is unbelievable, I mean really staggering
the veracity of the fire that we're seeing.
Speaker 3 (00:43):
It burnt down eighteen thousand buildings, cost sixteen point five
billion in damage, killed eighty five people, left.
Speaker 1 (00:51):
A lot more missing.
Speaker 3 (00:52):
It made it the most expensive, catastrophic and lethal fire
in the state's history.
Speaker 2 (00:57):
And insurance companies were on the hook for a lot
of that damage.
Speaker 4 (01:01):
Was really a big financial blow and made everyone say, oh,
my goodness, our model might not be working.
Speaker 2 (01:07):
This is Leslie Kaufman, a climate reporter for Bloomberg. Leslie
and our colleague Nadia say that as private companies have
pulled back, the state has stepped in to help people
get the coverage they need through residual insurance plans sometimes
called fare plans.
Speaker 3 (01:22):
It's a bare bones option that's usually far more expensive
than a traditional policy, but it covers what a private
insurer won't, like a wildfire.
Speaker 2 (01:32):
It's supposed to be a plan of last resort, but
the number of people in these types of plans is growing.
Speaker 4 (01:38):
These were never meant to be big plans. These were
meant to be teeny plans that served a tiny part
of the marketplace. The problem is climate change is really
changing that dynamic. It's made the much more common, much
more mainstream, which means the risks are much greater.
Speaker 2 (01:54):
And with more people relying on this kind of insurance,
questions are starting to emerge about whether these plans are
prepared financially to handle a major catastrophe.
Speaker 4 (02:04):
The number of policies have absolutely grown by staggering amounts.
The current liability in California is two hundred and ninety billion.
That's about six times what it was only five years ago.
Speaker 2 (02:18):
Today. On the big take, why insurance has become so
hard to get for some homeowners, and how skyrocketing enrollment
and state created plans could create the conditions for a
sweeping financial crisis. I'm Sarah Holder, and this is the
big take from Bloomberg News. The campfire that tore through Paradise, California,
(02:42):
in twenty eighteen was said to have been the costliest
natural catastrophe of the year, with an estimated twelve point
five billion dollars in insured losses. Now, typically when insurance
companies have to pay out a bunch of money like this,
they respond by raising rates. But this time in California,
my call leagues Leslie Kaufman and Nadia Lopez say the
(03:02):
insurance companies couldn't just do that.
Speaker 4 (03:05):
The campfire wiped out double the profits of twenty five years,
so not just twenty five years of profits, twice that amount.
So they went to California and said, we have all
this risk and you have people in risky places. We
want to raise rates now, and California said, no, can do.
California has a proposition on the books that limits the
(03:27):
amount of money you can raise.
Speaker 3 (03:29):
California right now has some of the most consumer friendly
of regulations that keep rates low, and when an insurance
company does want to raise their rates, they're subjected to
approval from the Department.
Speaker 2 (03:44):
Of Insurance NADIA says that while the regulations have saved
consumers one hundred and fifty billion dollars on premiums over
the last twenty five years, the insurance industry argues that
the caps have hurt them. They say they've made it
harder to adapt to the growing risk of catastrophes brought
on by climate change.
Speaker 3 (04:02):
They can only use historical data to set rates. They
can't use forward looking climate data currently, which is something
they've been advocating.
Speaker 1 (04:11):
For for a long time.
Speaker 3 (04:12):
So ultimately, they argue that the state's current rules don't
allow them to increase premiums enough to reflect the risk
that they keep taking on.
Speaker 2 (04:20):
And so a bunch of private companies have just decided
to stop writing new policies entirely for Californians and certain
high risk wildfire zones.
Speaker 3 (04:30):
There's currently about eleven million people who live in California's
wildfire risk zones. These are areas that include Lla County,
San Diego, the vineyards of Napa and Sonoma, this Sierra
Nevada foothills. It's unclear exactly the total number of homes,
but there are significant populations across the state.
Speaker 2 (04:53):
All of this has made the state created insurance plan
increasingly popular.
Speaker 4 (04:57):
So people are pouring into these plans as private insurers
pull out, they have nowhere else to go.
Speaker 2 (05:04):
So now this plan of last resort is bearing the
risk that private insurers refuse to cover, which has raised
a question is there enough money to cover all these
new policies if another campfire were to happen. The plan
doesn't make its finances public, but a state report estimates
it's holding roughly one hundred million dollars in reserves as
of twenty twenty one.
Speaker 3 (05:25):
That's less than one percent of the insured losses from
the campfire.
Speaker 2 (05:30):
And this problem is bigger than just California because state
created insurance plans exist in lots of other states. In total,
thirty six states have these kinds of residual plans that
offer natural disaster coverage. They all need to reckon with
the same existential challenge.
Speaker 3 (05:47):
As states have assumed more and more risk, they're dodging
a fundamental question, how can they cover claims in the
wake of a huge and major catastrophe.
Speaker 4 (06:00):
So this is the really tricky part. They do get premiums,
but they are not forced like a private and sure
to do the kind of stress testing to make sure
that they have enough reserves and reinsurance to pay their
all their claims. I think how they're going to pay
(06:20):
should there really be a decimating event, a really big
catastrophic event is too unclear in too many of the cases.
Speaker 2 (06:30):
After the break, what homeowners and state policymakers are doing
to prepare for the worst. Welcome back to the Big
Take from Bloomberg News. I'm Sarah Holder. Before the break,
we were talking about state created insurance plans and the
(06:51):
question of whether they'll be able to cover a bunch
of claims in the event of a major catastrophe. We
asked Nadia to walk us through a scenario. There's a
huge wildfire in an area of California where a lot
of Fair Plan policyholders live. How would the plan pay
their claims?
Speaker 3 (07:08):
The Fair Plan has a certain number of reserves, and
if they don't have enough money to cover all of
the claims from that event in that area, then legally
they would place an assessment on all of its members.
Speaker 1 (07:25):
And all of its members are those private insures.
Speaker 2 (07:27):
Yes, private insurers are the members of the state created plan,
and some of these members are the very same companies
that have said they no longer want to write new homeowners'
policies in the state.
Speaker 3 (07:38):
So those private insurers would still be on the hook
for paying out those claims in areas that they'd said
they didn't want to cover anymore. That's why they're pulling
out right. If they have to participate in the fair
Plan proportional to their market share, they're going to reduce
their market share in that state. That's what makes sense
(08:00):
to them, so that the risk they take on through
the fair Plan becomes lower. But then it's like a
it's like a horrendous cycle.
Speaker 1 (08:11):
It's only creating more problems.
Speaker 3 (08:13):
Wait, this is crazy, Yes, it is. This is why
we wrote this story because it is.
Speaker 2 (08:19):
It is a very a vicious cycle.
Speaker 1 (08:22):
Vicious cycle.
Speaker 3 (08:24):
Yes, the more that private insures retreat, the bigger the
fair plan grows.
Speaker 1 (08:31):
So that presents more risk to the.
Speaker 3 (08:33):
Private insures that are attempting to.
Speaker 1 (08:38):
Reduce their risk by retreating. But then more people are
left without options.
Speaker 3 (08:42):
So this is all happening at a really fast rate,
and inevitably there will be another wildfire or natural disaster,
and so if a catastrophic event triggers its massive assessment,
it could force a lot of private insurers and bankruptcy.
What would happen otherwise? Would the state step in and
(09:04):
say no, in order for them to recoup some of
those losses, We'll allow them to put a surcharge on
all their policyholders. It's unclear. That's what we don't have
the answer to yet. But inevitably there will be a
wildfire at some point because climate change is not slowing down.
So how is the state going to account for this possibility?
Speaker 2 (09:26):
Yeah, I mean, how is the state going to account
for this possibility?
Speaker 1 (09:29):
Right now?
Speaker 3 (09:31):
As the private insurance are retreating. Ricardo Lara, the California
Insurance Commissioner, has put forth a plan that he's calling
the largest insurance reform in the state since proposition. Want
to throw his pass back in the eighties, which set
those friendly consumer regulations right, So his plan would drastically
(09:53):
change the way the rules currently work. It would allow
insurance to raise rates more quickly and to allow for
increases based on future climate risk data and reinsurance costs.
And these are big changes that the prevad insurers have
been saying they really wanted for a long time, and
that he says will now contribute to stabilizing the market
(10:16):
and bringing them back to do business in California. The
concern is that this change could lead to rate hikes
of as much as fifty percent. That's what some sources
had told me, and that could create a real burden
on Californians who live in areas that are already really
(10:36):
difficult for them to be living in due to the
cost of living, expenses and other things.
Speaker 2 (10:43):
As for the state's fair plan, the California Department of
Insurance set in a statement that it performs a triennial
examination to quote evaluate the financial condition, assess corporate governance,
identify current and prospective risks, and evaluate system controls and
procedures used to mitigate those risks end quote. Of course,
California's is not the only state mandated plan facing this risk.
(11:07):
Of the thirty six states with these residual insurance plans,
twenty one declined to explain how exactly they pay deficits
that exceed their assets. That's according to new research from Milliman,
an insurance consulting group. Leslie and Nadia say that when
insurers talk about how to address the concern presented by
climate change, there's one thing that comes up again and again.
(11:29):
It's known as hardening.
Speaker 4 (11:32):
This is becoming a theme with insurance companies, how they
could become your partner in hardening and what does that
look like. That means that if you're in a flood zone,
you need to go up on stilts or make sure
that your sumpump is powered so that it wouldn't go
out during a flood. If you're in a fire zone,
you have to have a five foot protection around your
house with nothing combustible, and that includes plants and shrubs.
(11:55):
So their answer is, if we're going to do all
of this and make affordable and you're going to continue
to live in California forests and Florida coastal areas, we
have to come up with a plan B to make
this a little bit better.
Speaker 2 (12:10):
But strategies like hardening only go so far as the
risks of major storms and fires increase, which raises a
question is moving away from these disaster prone areas something
people should be considering.
Speaker 3 (12:23):
I think that a lot of people are not left
with many options. Tons of people. Most people live in
parts of the state that aren't necessarily exposed to wildfires,
in the San Francisco Bay area or other parts of
the coast, but Increasingly more people are being exposed to
(12:47):
wildfire risk all over.
Speaker 1 (12:50):
These are their communities.
Speaker 3 (12:52):
Some people chose to live in these places because they
can't afford the high cost of living in a city
like Sanforce, Cisco or La, and some people have deep
communal ties.
Speaker 1 (13:04):
To these areas.
Speaker 3 (13:06):
It's a really tricky problem because even though there are
some places of California that some people say we shouldn't
be building in anymore, you can't really tell people that
they should leave the communities that they loved and have
lived in for generations.
Speaker 2 (13:26):
This is the Big Take from Bloomberg News. I'm Sarah Holder.
This episode was produced by Adrianna Tapia. It was edited
by Caitlin Kenny and Emily Buzo. It was mixed by
Ben O'Brien. It was fact checked by Alex Sugiura. Our
senior producers are Naomi Shaven and Jilda Di Carly. We
get editorial direction from Elizabeth Ponso. Nicole Beemsterbor is our
(13:49):
executive producer. Sage Bauman is our head of podcasts. Thanks
for listening. Please follow and review The Big Take wherever
you listen to podcasts. It helps new listeners find the show.
We'll be back tomorrow. H
Bloomberg Audio Studios, podcasts, radio news.
Speaker 2 (00:09):
In January, an insurance company called the Hartford announced that
it would no longer issue any new homeowners insurance policies
in California. Three other insurance companies, USAA, All State, and
State Farm have stopped writing or severely limited new homeowners
policies across the state. According to Bloomberg reporter Nadia Lopez,
(00:31):
the breaking point for a lot of these insurance companies
was the campfire back in twenty eighteen, and the video
that we're looking at is unbelievable, I mean really staggering
the veracity of the fire that we're seeing.
Speaker 3 (00:43):
It burnt down eighteen thousand buildings, cost sixteen point five
billion in damage, killed eighty five people, left.
Speaker 1 (00:51):
A lot more missing.
Speaker 3 (00:52):
It made it the most expensive, catastrophic and lethal fire
in the state's history.
Speaker 2 (00:57):
And insurance companies were on the hook for a lot
of that damage.
Speaker 4 (01:01):
Was really a big financial blow and made everyone say, oh,
my goodness, our model might not be working.
Speaker 2 (01:07):
This is Leslie Kaufman, a climate reporter for Bloomberg. Leslie
and our colleague Nadia say that as private companies have
pulled back, the state has stepped in to help people
get the coverage they need through residual insurance plans sometimes
called fare plans.
Speaker 3 (01:22):
It's a bare bones option that's usually far more expensive
than a traditional policy, but it covers what a private
insurer won't, like a wildfire.
Speaker 2 (01:32):
It's supposed to be a plan of last resort, but
the number of people in these types of plans is growing.
Speaker 4 (01:38):
These were never meant to be big plans. These were
meant to be teeny plans that served a tiny part
of the marketplace. The problem is climate change is really
changing that dynamic. It's made the much more common, much
more mainstream, which means the risks are much greater.
Speaker 2 (01:54):
And with more people relying on this kind of insurance,
questions are starting to emerge about whether these plans are
prepared financially to handle a major catastrophe.
Speaker 4 (02:04):
The number of policies have absolutely grown by staggering amounts.
The current liability in California is two hundred and ninety billion.
That's about six times what it was only five years ago.
Speaker 2 (02:18):
Today. On the big take, why insurance has become so
hard to get for some homeowners, and how skyrocketing enrollment
and state created plans could create the conditions for a
sweeping financial crisis. I'm Sarah Holder, and this is the
big take from Bloomberg News. The campfire that tore through Paradise, California,
(02:42):
in twenty eighteen was said to have been the costliest
natural catastrophe of the year, with an estimated twelve point
five billion dollars in insured losses. Now, typically when insurance
companies have to pay out a bunch of money like this,
they respond by raising rates. But this time in California,
my call leagues Leslie Kaufman and Nadia Lopez say the
(03:02):
insurance companies couldn't just do that.
Speaker 4 (03:05):
The campfire wiped out double the profits of twenty five years,
so not just twenty five years of profits, twice that amount.
So they went to California and said, we have all
this risk and you have people in risky places. We
want to raise rates now, and California said, no, can do.
California has a proposition on the books that limits the
(03:27):
amount of money you can raise.
Speaker 3 (03:29):
California right now has some of the most consumer friendly
of regulations that keep rates low, and when an insurance
company does want to raise their rates, they're subjected to
approval from the Department.
Speaker 2 (03:44):
Of Insurance NADIA says that while the regulations have saved
consumers one hundred and fifty billion dollars on premiums over
the last twenty five years, the insurance industry argues that
the caps have hurt them. They say they've made it
harder to adapt to the growing risk of catastrophes brought
on by climate change.
Speaker 3 (04:02):
They can only use historical data to set rates. They
can't use forward looking climate data currently, which is something
they've been advocating.
Speaker 1 (04:11):
For for a long time.
Speaker 3 (04:12):
So ultimately, they argue that the state's current rules don't
allow them to increase premiums enough to reflect the risk
that they keep taking on.
Speaker 2 (04:20):
And so a bunch of private companies have just decided
to stop writing new policies entirely for Californians and certain
high risk wildfire zones.
Speaker 3 (04:30):
There's currently about eleven million people who live in California's
wildfire risk zones. These are areas that include Lla County,
San Diego, the vineyards of Napa and Sonoma, this Sierra
Nevada foothills. It's unclear exactly the total number of homes,
but there are significant populations across the state.
Speaker 2 (04:53):
All of this has made the state created insurance plan
increasingly popular.
Speaker 4 (04:57):
So people are pouring into these plans as private insurers
pull out, they have nowhere else to go.
Speaker 2 (05:04):
So now this plan of last resort is bearing the
risk that private insurers refuse to cover, which has raised
a question is there enough money to cover all these
new policies if another campfire were to happen. The plan
doesn't make its finances public, but a state report estimates
it's holding roughly one hundred million dollars in reserves as
of twenty twenty one.
Speaker 3 (05:25):
That's less than one percent of the insured losses from
the campfire.
Speaker 2 (05:30):
And this problem is bigger than just California because state
created insurance plans exist in lots of other states. In total,
thirty six states have these kinds of residual plans that
offer natural disaster coverage. They all need to reckon with
the same existential challenge.
Speaker 3 (05:47):
As states have assumed more and more risk, they're dodging
a fundamental question, how can they cover claims in the
wake of a huge and major catastrophe.
Speaker 4 (06:00):
So this is the really tricky part. They do get premiums,
but they are not forced like a private and sure
to do the kind of stress testing to make sure
that they have enough reserves and reinsurance to pay their
all their claims. I think how they're going to pay
(06:20):
should there really be a decimating event, a really big
catastrophic event is too unclear in too many of the cases.
Speaker 2 (06:30):
After the break, what homeowners and state policymakers are doing
to prepare for the worst. Welcome back to the Big
Take from Bloomberg News. I'm Sarah Holder. Before the break,
we were talking about state created insurance plans and the
(06:51):
question of whether they'll be able to cover a bunch
of claims in the event of a major catastrophe. We
asked Nadia to walk us through a scenario. There's a
huge wildfire in an area of California where a lot
of Fair Plan policyholders live. How would the plan pay
their claims?
Speaker 3 (07:08):
The Fair Plan has a certain number of reserves, and
if they don't have enough money to cover all of
the claims from that event in that area, then legally
they would place an assessment on all of its members.
Speaker 1 (07:25):
And all of its members are those private insures.
Speaker 2 (07:27):
Yes, private insurers are the members of the state created plan,
and some of these members are the very same companies
that have said they no longer want to write new homeowners'
policies in the state.
Speaker 3 (07:38):
So those private insurers would still be on the hook
for paying out those claims in areas that they'd said
they didn't want to cover anymore. That's why they're pulling
out right. If they have to participate in the fair
Plan proportional to their market share, they're going to reduce
their market share in that state. That's what makes sense
(08:00):
to them, so that the risk they take on through
the fair Plan becomes lower. But then it's like a
it's like a horrendous cycle.
Speaker 1 (08:11):
It's only creating more problems.
Speaker 3 (08:13):
Wait, this is crazy, Yes, it is. This is why
we wrote this story because it is.
Speaker 2 (08:19):
It is a very a vicious cycle.
Speaker 1 (08:22):
Vicious cycle.
Speaker 3 (08:24):
Yes, the more that private insures retreat, the bigger the
fair plan grows.
Speaker 1 (08:31):
So that presents more risk to the.
Speaker 3 (08:33):
Private insures that are attempting to.
Speaker 1 (08:38):
Reduce their risk by retreating. But then more people are
left without options.
Speaker 3 (08:42):
So this is all happening at a really fast rate,
and inevitably there will be another wildfire or natural disaster,
and so if a catastrophic event triggers its massive assessment,
it could force a lot of private insurers and bankruptcy.
What would happen otherwise? Would the state step in and
(09:04):
say no, in order for them to recoup some of
those losses, We'll allow them to put a surcharge on
all their policyholders. It's unclear. That's what we don't have
the answer to yet. But inevitably there will be a
wildfire at some point because climate change is not slowing down.
So how is the state going to account for this possibility?
Speaker 2 (09:26):
Yeah, I mean, how is the state going to account
for this possibility?
Speaker 1 (09:29):
Right now?
Speaker 3 (09:31):
As the private insurance are retreating. Ricardo Lara, the California
Insurance Commissioner, has put forth a plan that he's calling
the largest insurance reform in the state since proposition. Want
to throw his pass back in the eighties, which set
those friendly consumer regulations right, So his plan would drastically
(09:53):
change the way the rules currently work. It would allow
insurance to raise rates more quickly and to allow for
increases based on future climate risk data and reinsurance costs.
And these are big changes that the prevad insurers have
been saying they really wanted for a long time, and
that he says will now contribute to stabilizing the market
(10:16):
and bringing them back to do business in California. The
concern is that this change could lead to rate hikes
of as much as fifty percent. That's what some sources
had told me, and that could create a real burden
on Californians who live in areas that are already really
(10:36):
difficult for them to be living in due to the
cost of living, expenses and other things.
Speaker 2 (10:43):
As for the state's fair plan, the California Department of
Insurance set in a statement that it performs a triennial
examination to quote evaluate the financial condition, assess corporate governance,
identify current and prospective risks, and evaluate system controls and
procedures used to mitigate those risks end quote. Of course,
California's is not the only state mandated plan facing this risk.
(11:07):
Of the thirty six states with these residual insurance plans,
twenty one declined to explain how exactly they pay deficits
that exceed their assets. That's according to new research from Milliman,
an insurance consulting group. Leslie and Nadia say that when
insurers talk about how to address the concern presented by
climate change, there's one thing that comes up again and again.
(11:29):
It's known as hardening.
Speaker 4 (11:32):
This is becoming a theme with insurance companies, how they
could become your partner in hardening and what does that
look like. That means that if you're in a flood zone,
you need to go up on stilts or make sure
that your sumpump is powered so that it wouldn't go
out during a flood. If you're in a fire zone,
you have to have a five foot protection around your
house with nothing combustible, and that includes plants and shrubs.
(11:55):
So their answer is, if we're going to do all
of this and make affordable and you're going to continue
to live in California forests and Florida coastal areas, we
have to come up with a plan B to make
this a little bit better.
Speaker 2 (12:10):
But strategies like hardening only go so far as the
risks of major storms and fires increase, which raises a
question is moving away from these disaster prone areas something
people should be considering.
Speaker 3 (12:23):
I think that a lot of people are not left
with many options. Tons of people. Most people live in
parts of the state that aren't necessarily exposed to wildfires,
in the San Francisco Bay area or other parts of
the coast, but Increasingly more people are being exposed to
(12:47):
wildfire risk all over.
Speaker 1 (12:50):
These are their communities.
Speaker 3 (12:52):
Some people chose to live in these places because they
can't afford the high cost of living in a city
like Sanforce, Cisco or La, and some people have deep
communal ties.
Speaker 1 (13:04):
To these areas.
Speaker 3 (13:06):
It's a really tricky problem because even though there are
some places of California that some people say we shouldn't
be building in anymore, you can't really tell people that
they should leave the communities that they loved and have
lived in for generations.
Speaker 2 (13:26):
This is the Big Take from Bloomberg News. I'm Sarah Holder.
This episode was produced by Adrianna Tapia. It was edited
by Caitlin Kenny and Emily Buzo. It was mixed by
Ben O'Brien. It was fact checked by Alex Sugiura. Our
senior producers are Naomi Shaven and Jilda Di Carly. We
get editorial direction from Elizabeth Ponso. Nicole Beemsterbor is our
(13:49):
executive producer. Sage Bauman is our head of podcasts. Thanks
for listening. Please follow and review The Big Take wherever
you listen to podcasts. It helps new listeners find the show.
We'll be back tomorrow. H
Hosts And Creators
Sarah Holder
Saleha Mohsin
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!