Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Retirement Surveys topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board previews updated employer survey to gauge Social Security, deferred-comp and annuity use
Summary
Staff proposed updating a 2005 employer survey to collect current data on Social Security participation, deferred-comp participation and fees, annuity/purchased-service usage and new plan features such as auto-enroll/auto-escalate; board members suggested adding questions about retiree medical, providers' fees and PEP participation.
Tim Valencia, staff to the board, presented a preview of a proposed 2026 employer survey designed to update a 2005 benchmark study. Valencia said the survey would focus on Social Security participation, deferred-compensation offering and participation rates, annuity/purchased-service usage, and whether employers are using auto-enrollment or auto‑escalation features.
Valencia said the 2005 survey had strong response rates and produced useful benchmarks; he told the board the 2026 instrument should be short to preserve response rates but include new questions about participation rates, employer matches or flat contributions, and provider identities. "We will specifically seek to, you know, find out if they're contributing and is it a match, you know, or just a flat contribution rate and and at what rate," Valencia said.
Board members recommended additional focal points: (1) deferred-compensation provider fees and comparison with the state plan, (2) participation and uptake rates, (3) retiree medical access and contribution practices, and (4) whether employers have joined the Public Employee Benefits (PEP) model and, if so, why. Staff agreed to add questions on retiree medical coverage and to consider coordination with Health Care Authority or PEBB for relevant data.
Valencia said staff will attempt to use the Department of Retirement Systems’ employer database to pre-fill employer types (police, fire or both) and to keep the survey short to improve response rates. The board asked staff to consider outside survey expertise (for example, university social-research centers) to design question wording and maximize response rates and data quality.
No formal action was taken; staff will revise the instrument and return with a proposed survey.
