Pension Plans Survey (PPS) 2017-18
Executive summary

POR Registration Number: 013-17
PSPC Contract Number: 59017-170005-001-CY
Contract Award Date: 2017-07-20
Delivery Date: 2018-04-26

Ce sommaire est aussi disponible en français

Prepared by:
Phoenix Strategic Perspectives Inc.
1678 Bank Street, Suite 2
Ottawa, ON, K1V 7Y6   
T: 613-260-1700   
info@phoenixspi.ca

Prepared for:
Office of the Superintendent of Financial Institutions (OSFI)
www.osfi-bsif.gc.ca

For more information on this summary, please email: information@osfi-bsif.gc.ca.

Summary

The Office of the Superintendent of Financial Institutions (OSFI) is the primary regulator and supervisor of federally regulated financial institutions and pension plans. In this role, OSFI supervises and regulates 1,233 private pension plans covering employees in federally regulated areas of employment.

To help assess how well it is achieving its mandate, OSFI commissioned Phoenix Strategic Perspectives Inc. (Phoenix SPI) to conduct a survey with pension plan administrators and professionals for their perceptions of OSFI’s performance. Generally conducted every three years, the Pension Plans Survey (PPS) collects data needed to assess OSFI’s perceived effectiveness in monitoring and supervising pension plans and supports OSFI’s commitment to be responsive to stakeholder input and to seek suggestions for improvement. Previous waves of the PPS were conducted in 2008-2009, 2011-2012, and 2014-2015.

The main objectives of this year’s survey were to: 1) obtain perspectives of OSFI’s performance as a regulator of federally regulated private pension plans; and 2) assess OSFI’s performance on a series of core measures. The survey was designed to collect opinions on the following:

• overall satisfaction with OSFI;
• clarity and usefulness of OSFI’s guidance;
• OSFI’s effectiveness at identifying problems with pension plans;
• the clarity of OSFI’s supervisory correspondence;
• the timeliness of OSFI’s approvals process; and
• OSFI’s effectiveness at communicating with pension plan administrators.

The results of the research provide the data needed to meet OSFI’s performance reporting commitments and enable OSFI’s Private Pension Plans Division (PPPD) to identify areas for improvement.

Methodology

To meet the objectives, an online survey was conducted with pension plan administrators and professionals who regularly deal with OSFI on behalf of pension plans. All plans with an asset size of $500,000 or more and at least 10 members were included in the survey. Available in both official languages, the survey was online from November 15 to December 22, 2017. Of the 1,045 plan administrators and professionals invited to complete the survey, 314 did so, which represents a solid response rate of 30%. Of the 314 respondents, 200 were plan administrators and 114 were professionals. Of the 200 plan administrators, 86 were defined benefits plan administrators, 82 defined contribution plan or pooled registered pension plan administrators, and 32 combination plan administrators. Since the entire population was invited to participate in this study, there is no margin of sampling error to be estimated or reported.

Key Findings

The following are key findings from the survey:

• Overall satisfaction with OSFI as a regulator is strong and among plan administrators it has increased since 2014. Seven in 10 (71%) plan administrators (up from 66% in 2014) and 68% of professionals are either very or somewhat satisfied with OSFI as a regulator.
• Not only were plan administrators and professionals satisfied with OSFI overall, the majority offered positive assessments of OSFI’s guidance material, effectiveness in supervising plans, response time to enquiries, and capacity to interact in both official languages. Specifically:
  • 73% of plan administrators and 82% of professionals believe OSFI’s guidance is effective at providing a clear indication of OSFI’s expectations.
  • 81% of plan administrators and 84% of professionals view OSFI as effective at supervising their plans.
  • 81% of plan administrators and 78% of professionals expressed satisfaction with the timeliness of OSFI’s response to enquiries.
  • Nine in 10 plan administrators (90%) and professionals (92%) are satisfied with OSFI’s capacity for interaction in the official languages.
• Across all but one of the areas explored, few respondents provided a negative rating of OSFI. The exception was OSFI’s approvals process. Levels of dissatisfaction, in particular among professionals, were higher in this area.
• Perceptions of the usefulness of InfoPensions’ content, as well as the information found in the Private Pension Plans area of OSFI’s website were positive.
  • 86% of plan administrators and 88% of professionals who read or reviewed an edition of InfoPensions rated the content as useful.
  • 86% of plan administrators and 85% of professionals who visited the OSFI website rated the information in the pensions area as useful.
• Use of the Regulatory Reporting System (RRS) varies by audience: 79% of plan administrators and 48% of professionals said they use RRS. Fewer than half of the RRS users said they used the training and support materials. Difficulties using RRS continue to exist. Consistent with 2014, many of those who provided final comments reported difficulties using RRS and those not satisfied with OSFI as a regulator pointed to issues using RRS.

The contract value was $41,034.82 (including HST).