Insurance Providers

It depends on which problem you're solving first. If you're standing up an entity—an LLC offering Botox, fillers, IV therapy, or lasers that needs professional liability, GL, property, cyber, and HIPAA defense placed together—PPIB's purpose-built MediSpa program is designed for exactly that, with limits to $2M/$3M and quotes typically back in 5-8 business days. If you're a provider-owner who first needs personal malpractice and wants entity coverage from the same relationship, CM&F's provider-first model with online individual quoting is the faster start, and AmSpa members should ask about partner terms. Many practices reasonably quote both.

No—and that's normal for this category. PPIB is a specialty program brokerage (an MGA-style intermediary, now a division of Specialty Program Group under HUB), and CM&F Group is a program administrator; both place risk across multiple underlying carriers that actually pay claims. Neither discloses those carriers on public pages because placement varies by risk. The practical diligence step is the same with both: at quote time, ask which carrier issues your policy and confirm its AM Best rating before you bind.

Neither publishes pricing, so this is directional. PPIB's MediSpa program is custom-quoted with a 5-8 business-day turnaround, and entity med-spa malpractice across the market typically runs roughly $3,500-$12,000 per year depending on procedure mix, providers, limits, and state. CM&F quotes individuals online—usually the quicker and cheaper purchase since it covers one licensee rather than a facility—while its entity programs are quoted to scope. For any real comparison, have both quote the same disclosed service menu and limits, and compare the issuing carriers, not just the premiums.

It matters as distribution and as signal. As AmSpa's official insurance partner, CM&F is the default introduction for a large share of the industry, which keeps its cosmetic RN/NP/PA/MD and med-spa programs current with how the industry actually practices—and members should ask about partner terms when quoting. It is not, however, a substitute for diligence: partnership status doesn't change your exclusions, your limits, or the underlying carrier on your specific policy. Verify those the same way you would with any program, including PPIB.

Yes, and stacking by layer is common. A typical structure: the entity carries a facility program (PPIB's MediSpa program is a natural fit for complex multi-exposure practices), while each injector carries an individual portable policy (CM&F's core strength, alongside options like NSO, HPSO, or Berxi). The entity policy defends the business and owner; the individual policies protect each provider's license and give them their own limits and defense. Just make sure the two layers are disclosed to each other's underwriters so coverage coordinates rather than conflicts.