Minutes:
Considered –
The report of the Treasurer providing Members
with information relating to the
administration of the Fund in the quarter and
updates on key issues and initiatives which impact the administration team,
including the following:-
Admission Agreements and New Academies
Administration
Membership
Statistics
Throughput
Statistics
Performance
Statistics
Commendations and Complaints
Annual Benefit Statements 2024
Breaches Policy & Log
Issues and Initiatives
Ongoing projects
McCloud
Pensions dashboard
New The Pensions
Regulator’s (TPR) General Code of Practice
Business Continuity
Plan
Risk Register
Member Training
Meeting Timetable
The Head of Pensions Administration introduced the report and the following issues were highlighted:-
·
There appeared to be a false spike in active members
as a result of the splitting of records for a leisure services employer that
had come into the NYC administrative function.
·
The Administration service continued to be
busy, however a two week work in progress position had been maintained.
·
There had been 13 commendations and 3
complaints during the quarter.
·
A complaint received in June related to
incorrect service history data being recorded on a member’s record. The team
had since carried out a data audit on the record to avoid this in the future.
In response to a question raised by a PFC Member, officers were unable to
confirm whether the data was incorrectly recorded by an NYPF employer or
officer due to the age of the error.
·
As of 8 August, only 49 Annual Benefit
Statements remained out of 28,564. As of 11 September, only 6 remained.
·
There had been no new breaches of the
Regulations during the quarter.
·
i-Connect continued to be rolled out with 198
employers now onboard with 45 remaining to be included, although a few were
currently in progress.
·
Good progress had been made with McCloud, and
work continued to resolve the list of errors. On 28 August, the Ministry of
Housing, Communities & Local Government confirmed that McCloud data did not
need to be included in the 2024 Annual Benefit Statements, and instead would be
included in the 2025 Statements.
·
In response, one Member raised concerns that
had the McCloud data needed to be included in the 2024 Annual Benefit
Statements, a breach would have likely occurred. In response, it was explained
that the majority of LGPS funds would have been in the same position. It was
also noted that there was a typographical error in paragraph 4.2 of the report,
where the year 2024 should be replaced with 2025.
·
A contract variation had been signed to
appoint Heywood as the Fund’s ISP provider for the Pensions Dashboard.
·
The TPR General Code of Practice came into
effect on 28 March 2024. A remote workshop was held on 20 August with Aon to
discuss the Fund’s progress using Aon’s compliance checker tool. Appendix 3 to
the report includes an output report. A meeting on 25 October will be held to
look at areas of development and to form an action plan.
·
The first draft of the business continuity
plan had been created and a workshop had been arranged for 8 October.
·
It was noted that work in relation to the
Pensions Dashboard Programme was behind schedule, and it was unlikely it would
be completed in the specified time frame.
·
In response, one Member asked whether anything
could be done by NYPF to bring attention to this situation. It was explained
that there was a statutory requirement to complete the work and that the issue
had already been raised to the Scheme Advisory Board.
·
The new General Code of Practice highlighted
areas that PFC Members should be familiar with. Members would be requested to
complete an LGPS National Knowledge Assessment run by Hymans Robertson in
October.
·
One Member raised concerns that the PFC had
not been informed of the assessment prior to the meeting. Officers noted
Members’ frustrations but reminded the Committee that the assessment was
voluntary and that the purpose was for officers to gain a better idea of the
collective knowledge of PFC Members. It was also noted that the technical
nature of the PFC and Pension Board meant that a higher level of knowledge was
required of Members compared to other committees. The benefit of attending
in-person conferences was also discussed.
·
One Member suggested that the Border to Coast
Pensions Partnership (BCPP) conference held in July be added to the table
recording Member attendance at training on page 75 of the reports pack.
·
The Risk Register was normally brought to the
July meeting of the PFC however as the deadline had been missed, it had been
brought to the subsequent meeting for review. A detailed report was included at
Appendix 4, and a summary report was detailed at Appendix 5.
·
The Key Personnel risk had worsened due to
work pressures across the Council to deal with Local Government Reorganisation
(LGR) issues and delays in the auditing of the NYPF accounts. 3 risks had
lessened, whilst 7 risks had remained the same since the last report.
·
The Head of Pensions Administration explained
that the date completed was left blank as the risks were ongoing and therefore
did not have an end date, but confirmed the risks would be reviewed.
Resolved –
That the contents of the report are noted.
Supporting documents: