RFP #06-8052-11CS
RFP #15-1045-9CS
Questions and Answers
403(b) / 457 Deferred Compensation Plan:
Plan Administrative, Recordkeeping, Investment Management,
and Employee Education Services
COUNTY OF HENRICO, VIRGINIA
December 21, 2015
Q1. Could you please clarify if the teleconference number is only available to those people who are unable to physically attend the pre-proposal conference or if the conference can be simultaneously attended on-site by two firm representatives as well as remotely by another firm representative?
NA. Pre-proposal conference has already been held.
Q2. The Henrico 457 with VOYA Financial has a fixed account with roughly 12 million in deposits. It has a minimum guarantee of 4%. This rate is not available in the marketplace and current rates are much lower. If a new contract is established for the county, what does the county plan on doing with these accounts? Would the participant be made whole in any way?
The County will be reviewing a series of alternatives as part of this discussion point.
Q3. Will the fee paid by the county and/or plan participants to Sageview Advisory be clearly disclosed to participants along with the selected provider fees?
This question is not relevant to the scope of this RFP.
Q4. Administratively, what type of coordination is required between the Henrico 403b/457plans and VRS regarding annual max contributions?
The County’s payroll system is programmed to account for this operationally. Any future need for coordination of contributions would be established with the selected vendor.
Q5. The RFP document mentions that in the Henrico County Government plan, over 1,400 employees actively contribute and over 2,100 employees and former employees have deferred compensation accounts. The provided statistical data shows 1,074 total accounts (648 active/426 term) at Voya and 1,122 total accounts (698 active/424 term) at ICMA-RC. Is there any overlap between participants at the two providers? If so, can you provide the total unique participants?
Please refer to Attachment G for the most accurate data on the total number of active and terminated accounts as of 6/30/2015. There is one person who has a balance with both VOYA and ICMA-RC.
Q6. Is the contribution data for the Government and 457b plans, respectively, dated 6/30/15 only for 6 months or is it 12 months through 6/30/15?
Yes, the 6/30/2015 data for the Henrico County Government 457 plan is only for the prior 6 months. As stated in Attachment G, the 6/30/2015 data for Henrico County Public Schools 403(b) Plan includes the prior 12 months of contributions and distributions.
Q7. Is there a specific # of mtgs/days currently allocated to onsite employee meetings that we should replicate? Is there just 1 location for the Government Employees or multiple? Any Foreign language needs?
The County is interested in hearing from vendors a proposed solution for employee education and communication. There are multiple locations that could be used for employee meetings. The vendors should not read into the current solution and approach as being more optimal or less optimal; this is an area of significant consideration for the committee.
The need for interpretive pieces and communications is small. Please provide as part of your proposal submittal any specific capabilities you have in this area.
Q8. How many payrolls and what is the frequency?
Henrico County General Government employees are paid 26 times per year. Currently, Henrico County General Government allows employees to choose if they want their 457 deduction taken 24 or 26 times annually.
The majority of Henrico County Public Schools employees are paid 26 times annually. Most of HCPS employees are paid monthly (all teachers).
Q9. For the Schools plan, how many loans are currently outstanding?
As of 9/30/2015, there were 175 total loans outstanding totaling $881,027.87 in assets.
Q10. For the Schools plan, how many SDBAs are currently outstanding?
As of 9/30/2015, there were 28 total SDBAs totaling $164,716.11 in assets.
Q11. Please confirm that all assets listed can be moved on a plan level. Are there any holds/MVAs on current fixed products? Any of the other investments?
The Voya Fixed Account is fully liquid. The Voya Fixed Plus Account may be subject to a 5 year spread payout using the following schedule:
• One fifth of the value on the day requested
• One fourth of current value 12 months later
• One third of the current value 12 months later
• One half of the current value 12 months later
• Balance 12 months later
The VALIC Fixed Account may impose a limitation on sponsor initiated withdrawals from the Fixed Account equal to 20% per year without incurring a withdrawal charge.
In the event of an Employer initiates withdrawal of all or part of its Plan’s assets from the VT PLUS Fund, ICMA-RC has full discretion to defer the payout of such assets for a period of up to twelve months. In the case of a total withdrawal, participant transfers of PLUS Fund assets to other investment options may be restricted and participants may not be able to make additional investments in the PLUS Fund during this twelve-month period.
The decision to enforce these restrictions is a decision that each of these three firms will make independently. We are not at liberty to anticipate their business policy around these prospectus requirements.
There are no additional liquidity restrictions on the other investment options in either of the plans.
Q12. Please provide a copy of the plan documents/design.
While we understand why this would be helpful to know, the County is interested in conducting a thorough review of their plan design to maximize the opportunity to take advantage of some design features they have been contemplating over the last year. The County looks forward to revisiting the plan design with our advisor and recordkeeping partners as part of the initiation of the new contract.
Q13. Expand further on the coordination needed with VRS.
It is the expectation that our recordkeeping partner will not only be familiar with VRS plan design, but also be able to for example help administer the plan in tandem with contribution limits, educating participants appropriately on both ours and the VRS plan as well as consulting on payroll files that will take into consideration the programming necessary to ensure compliance with plan limits.
Q14. Please confirm that on page 37, there is an error with regard to duplication of questions.
Confirmed.
Q15. Please provide the approximate number of employees at your 73 locations.
Please see the below table for a detailed listing of the total number of employees by site for Henrico County Public Schools. It’s the expectation that the school locations be served and supported as done so today. It has not yet been determined the employee education strategy for the General Government employees but the committee looks to hearing a proposed strategy.
|Count of EMPLOYEE_HRMS_NUMBER |
|LOCATION |Total |
|Adams |63 |
|Ashe |61 |
|Baker |54 |
|Brookland |133 |
|Byrd |110 |
|Carver |47 |
|Chamberlayne |55 |
|Colonial Trail |57 |
|Davis |57 |
|Deep Run |172 |
|Donahoe |58 |
|Dumbarton |67 |
|Echo Lake |63 |
|Elko |105 |
|Fair Oaks |54 |
|Fairfield |120 |
|Freeman |179 |
|Gayton |49 |
|Glen Allen |4 |
|Glen Allen Elementary |59 |
|Glen Allen High |171 |
|Glen Lea |57 |
|Godwin |184 |
|Greenwood |60 |
|Harvie |66 |
|Henrico |197 |
|Hermitage |187 |
|Hermitage Technical Center |31 |
|Highland Springs Elem |3 |
|Highland Springs Elementary |65 |
|Highland Springs High |196 |
|Highland Springs Tech Ctr |33 |
|Holladay |73 |
|Holman |98 |
|Hungary Creek |107 |
|Johnson |64 |
|Kaechele Elementary |43 |
|Laburnum |71 |
|Lakeside |63 |
|Longan |54 |
|Longdale |70 |
|Maybeury |60 |
|Mehfoud |42 |
|Montrose |48 |
|Moody |106 |
|Nuckols Farm |52 |
|Pemberton |40 |
|Pinchbeck |56 |
|Pocahontas |97 |
|Randolph Education Center |46 |
|Ratcliffe |60 |
|Ridge |58 |
|Rivers Edge |61 |
|Rolfe |126 |
|Sandston |35 |
|Seven Pines |48 |
|Shady Grove |62 |
|Short Pump Elementary |49 |
|Short Pump Middle |91 |
|Skipwith |58 |
|Springfield Park |58 |
|The Academy at Virginia Randolph |74 |
|Three Chopt |42 |
|Trevvett |54 |
|Tuckahoe Elementary |57 |
|Tuckahoe Middle |108 |
|Tucker |191 |
|Twin Hickory |59 |
|Varina Elementary |42 |
|Varina High |187 |
|Ward |64 |
|Wilder |114 |
|Grand Total |5705 |
Q16. Do you prefer the recordkeeper submit a suggested investment menu offering?
At this time Henrico County will be working through their advisor to offer a proposed line-up. It is the expectation that the Successful Offeror have a complete open architecture platform. There are questions within the RFP that speak to the submission of any proprietary fund requirements. The committee under the current arrangement has ultimate decision making authority for investment fund selection.
Q17. Does the Henrico County population have a need for interpretive services or employees where English is not their primary language?
The need for interpretive pieces and communications is small. Please provide as part of your proposal submission any specific capabilities you have in this area.
Q18. Is it anticipated that VOYA, ICMA-RC or VALIC will impose a put on their stable value products?
At this time, the response to this is ultimately up to these three firms and their internal requirements regarding stable value funds. The County is not at liberty to anticipate their business policy or ability to waive such options.
Q19. How many unique employees are participating in the 457 plan? Are there any duplicate records where an employee has participated with more than one recordkeeper?
Please see Attachment G of the RFP. There is only one employee with a VOYA and ICMA-RC account.
Q20. Are the investment map able?
Please see Q11 above for more information on liquidity restrictions associated with the investments.
Q21. What are the mailing requirements?
There are only routine notices that are currently being mailed to employee’s homes. The County looks forward to hearing from Offerors their capabilities and best practices for combining required notices, making use of electronic means and communicating efficiently with participants.
Q22. Can you provide confirmation that the 403b assets are part of a group contract?
Confirmed
Q23. Please provide plan details on the total number of unique participants with an account balance between all the plans.
Please see Attachment G and Q19 above.
Q24. Please detail the employee education services today for both the Public Schools and the Governmental employees?
The County is interested in hearing from Offerors a proposed solution for employee education and communication. Offerors should not read into the current solution and approach as being more optimal or less optimal; this is an area of significant consideration for the committee.
Q25. Please confirm the intended transition dates for both the 457 and 403b?
The County is not committed to any one particular effective date for the 457 plan but has tentatively targeted 2nd or 3rd quarter 2016. The 403(b) plan is under contract through 2016. The County anticipates staggered conversion dates.
Q26. What was the total number of unforeseeable emergencies, QDROs, and distribution checks processed in 2014 for each plan?
For the Henrico County Public Schools 403(b) Plan: 2014 – 19 hardships, 0 QDRO’s, 73 in service distributions, 47 Retirement distributions, 100 Rollovers and 22 termination distributions.
For Henrico County General Government 457 Plan (Voya only): 2014 – 19 unforeseeable emergencies, 1 QDRO, 139 total distributions
For Henrico County General Government 457 Plan (ICMA only): 2014 – 11 Emergency withdrawals, 1 QDRO, 118 total distributions
Q27. Please provide the dollars in the SDBA account and the all associated fees?
As of 9/30/2015, there were 28 total SDBAs totaling $164,716.11 in assets in the Schwab Personal Choice Retirement Accounts.
Participants who utilize the Schwab Personal Choice Retirement Account may be subject to a $50 annual fee. Additionally, participants who utilize the account are subject to applicable trading costs associated with their transactions
Q28. Are there liquidation restrictions with the fixed/stable value product for all three vendors – ICMA, VOYA and VALIC if the County were to terminate their current contracts? Is there any contingent deferred sales charge (CDSC)? If so what percentage and dollar amount (or schedule)? Are there any restrictions on the transition of the Stable Value/Fixed Account assets?
Please see Q11 above.
Q29. Please confirm the amount of assets that will transfer within 90 days of transition.
Please see Attachment G of the RFP for a list of total assets by plan and vendor. Please see Q11 above for a description of the liquidity restrictions the investments may be subject to. We are unable to predict the amount of assets that will transfer within 90 days of the transition.
Q30. Can you please confirm the percentage of overlap of participants between plans?
Please see Q19 above.
Q31. Please confirm if you would like a proposed menu included in the RFP response.
At this time Henrico County will be working through their advisor to offer a proposed line-up. It is the expectation that the Successful Offeror have a complete open architecture platform. There are questions within the RFP that speak to the submission of any proprietary fund requirements. The committee under the current arrangement has ultimate decision making authority for investment fund selection.
Q32. How many days of onsite education does the General Government currently receive? How many days for the Public Schools? Does the current level of education onsite days meet the expectations of the County?
Please see Q24 above.
Q33. What additional retirement education would the County see as beneficial to its employees?
Please see Q24 above.
Q34. Is there a need for communications in languages other than English? If yes, please specify languages.
The need for interpretive pieces and communications is small. Please share as part of your proposal submission any specific capabilities you have in this area.
Q35. What have the typical growth rates in participation been over the last 2 years?
For the Henrico County Public Schools 403(b) Plan the participation rate has fluctuated between 20 – 25% for the past two calendar years.
The participation rate is not currently tracked by either vendor for the Henrico County General Government 457 Plan, however the participation rate has averaged roughly 30% for the past two years.
Q36. Do you currently allow beneficiaries to remain in the plan upon the transfer of assets from a deceased participant?
Yes
Q37. Please confirm if there is a limit on the number of unforeseeable emergency withdrawals that are permitted per participant under the current 457 plan? Approximately how many unforeseeable emergency withdrawals are requested annually?
Please see Q26 above.
Q38. Please confirm the targeted conversion date if the incumbent is not selected provider. Is there flexibility in the transition date?
Please note Q25 above.
Q39. Are there grandfathered life insurance policies in the plan?
No
Q40. Are deemed IRAs a part of the 457 plan? If so, please confirm the number of participants with deemed IRAs.
No
Q41. Please confirm if there are any services currently being administered in- house that the County would like to outsource to the provider (i.e. salary deferrals)
As indicated in the RFP, the County is increasingly interested in ways to outsource administrative serves that can be performed by the recordkeeper while at the same time streamlining processes and achieving more efficient outcomes. This is an area of significant importance to the committee.
Q42. Please confirm that all investment options do not have any participant liquidity restrictions or surrender charges. If there are liquidity restrictions or surrender charges, please disclose the provisions.
Please see Q11 above.
Q43. Are there any plan participants in the 457 government plan using more than one carrier? If so, how many? We want to confirm the actual number of plan participants in the 457 plan today.
Please note Q19 above.
Q44. Does the 457 or 403(b) plan require a QDIA? If so, what is it?
The VALIC Fixed Interest Account currently serves as the Designated Investment Alternative for the Henrico County Public Schools 403(b) Plan.
The Vantagepoint Milestone Target Date Series currently serves as the Designated Investment Alternative for the Henrico County General Government Plan.
Q45. Can the assets in money market accounts be mapped to a proprietary stable value product?
Yes, the assets in the money market accounts are map able. A mapping strategy has not been determined for the plans at this time.
Q46. Do either of the 457(b) providers offer a Managed Account program? If so, please provide the total assets in such programs with each provider.
No, Henrico County General Government 457 Plan does not currently utilize a managed account service. The County is interested in hearing from Offerors their proposed managed account service as part of the response to the RFP.
Q47. Please provide the current cost structure in either basis points or hard dollar fees being charged to the plan and plan participants today?
Please contact the procurement office directly at Henrico County and request this information.
Q48. Do any of the plans/vendors include individual life insurance policies? If so, please confirm the number of participants who have the policies, and if there are contributions being made to the policies. Please also advise which insurance company currently maintains life insurance policies.
No.
Q49. Questions 70C-I in the Stable Value section are identical to Questions 70J- P. Are they duplicates? If not, how should each set be answered?
Yes the questions are duplicates. Please only answer the questions once.
Q50. Regarding SageView Advisory Group, from an ongoing investment consulting and/or RIA service capacity what will they be responsible for and how will they be compensated?
This question is not relevant to the scope of this RFP.
Q51. What will SageView Advisory Group's involvement be in fund selection, portfolio selection with the open architecture's mutual fund platforms being proposed?
This question is not relevant to the scope of this RFP.
Q52. What is SageView Advisory Group's viewpoint of acting in a 3(21) investment fiduciary capacity for non ERISA plans?
This question is not relevant to the scope of this RFP.
Q53. Since you have two different TPAs will you be reducing to one TPA? Are you interested in the inclusion of a TPA offer with this bid?
As mentioned in the RFP, the County is interested in achieving efficiencies on all levels. It is anticipated that one vendor/recordkeeper will be chosen to administer the 457 plan. It is solely at the discretion of the committee if that one Offeror will in fact serve the schools population as well. The County is not interested in nor does the RFP encompass the services of a third party administrator.
Q54. Do you require return & responses for Section III, A & B? This was eluded to in the pre-proposal conference, but it is not listed as part of the Proposal Submission Requirements in Section VII or as part of the Proposal Response Format in Section VIII.
The County does expect a response to each of the requirements contained in Section III A&B. Addenda will include requirement for Executive Summary - Response to Scope of Work –The Offeror should address each section of the Scope of Work section of this document indicating compliance with or acceptance of the requirement and any additional explanation of their response. The Offeror shall identify any exceptions, referenced to the paragraph number, in a sub section titled “Exceptions”.
Q55. Do you require return & responses for Section VI? This was eluded to in the pre-proposal conference, but it is not listed as part of the Proposal Submission Requirements in Section VII or as part of the Proposal Response Format in Section VIII.
Offerors should respond to their understanding and concurrence with the General Contract Terms and Conditions. If Offerors would like to propose modifications to terms and conditions they may do so by including in a sub section titled “Exceptions”.
Q56. Do you require return of Attachment G & H? These are listed as items to be included in Proposal Response Format, Section VIII, however, do not require a response from the vendor.
No. Attachment G & H are providing information purposes only.
Q57. In the pre-proposal conference, we were advised that no insurance certificate is required for submission; rather this is only needed upon award to a vendor. Based on this, do you require return of Attachment A?
No. Attachment A is provided for information purposes only.
Q58. What is the number of unique SSNs within the 457 deferred compensation program by Voya and ICMA-RC? Can participants have assets at both vendors or only with one? If at both vendors, what is the unique number of participants in the plan (both active and inactive) regardless of the vendor?
Please see Attachment G. Yes, only one participant currently defers to both VOYA and ICMA-RC platforms.
Q59. Will the existing 457 plan assets with the current providers transfer to VALIC in a lump sum at the direction of the employer, or will the current providers require that the participant request an individual transfer of their balance?
Neither, it is not anticipated that 457 plan assets will be consolidated under a plan with 403(b) participants. The plans will remain separate for administrative purposes despite the possibility that the same firm may be selected to administer both plans.
Q60. Will the County maintain a separate 457 plan for the school district, even after the RFP process?
The County does maintain an executive type 457 plan for the school district and will evaluate whether the plan should stay separate as part of the RFP process.
Q61. What is the County of Henrico looking to improve through this search? What are the goals for the RFP? Any pain points about current arrangement?
Please refer to the scope and services required in the RFP.
Q62. Based upon a single vendor scenario can you, in consultation with SageView Advisory Group, prepare a sample fund line-up (including ticker symbols and prospective fund asset balances) to assist with the delivery of a transparent cost proposal for comparison?
It’s the expectation that the County will be able to utilize or have access to any registered mutual fund. The committee is considering utilizing the least expensive eligible share class in hopes of deriving the most transparent and efficient investment cost structure. For that reason the RFP has been constructed to solicit only the recordkeepers cost of administering the plan and staying neutral with regard to investment cost.
Q63. Based upon the possibility of having two separate providers (i.e.: one for the School District and one for the County Government), can you in consultation with SageView Advisory Group provide ticker symbols and prospective fund asset balances for each scenario so we can price each plan individually?
As referred to in Q62 above, the County is interested in receiving from Offerors who are able to record keep both 457 and 403(b) plans, pricing for both plans as well as pricing for each standalone plan. Please refer to Attachment G for plan balances. Please see the updated copy of Attachment H provided for a list assets by fund including ticker symbols.
Q64. Does the School District and the County Government employee population have any special or secondary language needs (i.e.: Spanish) that a selected vendor can accommodate with bi-lingual education brochures, group and individual meetings in another language)? If yes, could you please specify which language or languages may be prominent?
The need for interpretive pieces and communications is small. Please share as part of your proposal submission any specific capabilities you have in this area.
Q65. How long have the current providers, VALIC, Voya and ICMA, been in place and are they eligible to bid again?
VALIC has been the sole provider for Henrico County Public School’s since 2011. VOYA and ICMA-RC have been place for more than thirty years.
Q66. How long has VALIC been a sole provider for the Henrico County School District?
VALIC has been the sole provider for Henrico County Public School’s since 2011.
Q67. Were there any legacy companies at the School District prior to VALIC becoming the sole vendor? If yes, could you please provide a list of them by name and dollar amount of assets held at each company?
Yes, there were legacy companies prior to VALIC becoming the sole vendor in 2011, however the name and dollar amount of the assets at each company are not relevant to the scope of this RFP.
Q68. Could you please provide the ticker symbols for all of the funds in Attachment H?
Please see the updated copy of Attachment H provided for a list assets by fund including ticker symbols.
Q69. Would Henrico County accept our fund line up and/or replacement recommendations in our proposal, excluding any proprietary investment options?
The County is reviewing recordkeeping proposals, investment recommendations will be considered in tandem with the County’s Advisor after the recordkeeping services are selected. Please see Q16 above.
Q70. Could we propose additional or specialty/sector funds exclusively for use in our managed account portfolio services that may not be available to participants to select on their own?
Please see Q69 above.
Q71. What is the current net yield on VALIC’s, Voya’s and ICMA’s Fixed Interest options? What is the minimum guaranteed rate? What is the current status of the 12-month put regarding liquidation? Is it negative or positive, and by how much? If it is negative, would Henrico County permit selected vendor to credit the account to make participants whole?
Please see Q11 above for more information about the liquidity restrictions associated with the fixed interest assets. Please see Attachment G for more information about the current crediting rate for all fixed interest assets.
Q72. Will selected vendor be expected to accommodate Roth 403(b)/457 contributions?
The County is interested in considering this further as part of plan design changes within a new contract.
Q73. What types of assets and general description of investment types would you like to be available in the self-directed brokerage window for the participants (i.e.: mutual funds, individual stocks/bonds, alternative investments, etc.)?
The County is interested in hearing more about recordkeepers’ self-directed brokerage options. Preliminarily they have reviewed the current vendors’ capabilities and will likely limit participants to mutual fund options only for efficiency but have not ultimately reached a final decision at this point.
Q74. Regarding self-directed brokerage, will there be any investment restrictions or limitations on permissible investment types? If yes, please describe.
Please see Q73 above.
Q75. Is there, or would there be a requirement to complete a specified financial education program prior to granting participant access to the self-directed brokerage window?
This is unknown at this time.
Q76. Can you please provide us a copy of the pre-proposal meeting sign-in sheet to help facilitate professional financial service of SWAM/MBE firms?
The list of Attendees is posted on the County of Henrico website.
Q77. Can you please provide the approximate dates, number of locations and estimated number of employees at each location of your annual open enrollment meetings?
Enrollment dates have not yet been determined, please see Q15 above.
Q78. How many work sites does Henrico County and School District have? What are the addresses of these worksites? Can you provide us with an estimated number of employees at each of the geographic locations?
Please see Q15 above.
Q79. Will employees at these sites be permitted to attend group and/or individual meetings? Will there be rooms available to be reserved to conduct these meetings?
Yes.
Q80. How many group and one-on-one meetings regarding employees and plan participants have the current vendors provided in the last 12 months?
Please see Q24 above.
Q81. What are the minimum experience requirements for onsite communication and enrollment representatives?
That has not been determined. The County will evaluate experience and credentials as part of the RFP process.
Q82. Do any of the current vendors offer managed accounts or advisory services to the participants? If yes, could you please indicate name, brief description of service and cost to the plan or participant?
Yes, VALIC does currently offer a managed account solution for the Henrico County Public Schools 403(b) Plan. VALIC offers Guided Portfolio Services (GPS) which offers participants with wealth forecasting, allocation, investment selection and ongoing asset management services. VALIC offers GPS through Ibbotson Associates, Inc. The participant fee can range from 0.45% - 0.60% based on the participants assets managed in the program.
Henrico County General Government 457 Plan does not currently utilize a managed account service.
Q83. Although it was noted during the pre-proposal conference that Henrico County may have already achieved 58% SWAM/MBE participation, does that preclude us from including meaningful professional MBE/SWAM service participation on this opportunity?
No. The County encourages Offerors to utilize small, woman-owned, and minority-owned business enterprises. Please see Page 20, See Section S. for additional information.
Q84. Although there is not a separate evaluation metric for MBE/SWAM participation, will the MBE/SWAM subcontractor be included into the experience and any other applicable evaluation sections (i.e.: education, communication, managed accounts)?
Offerors should submit any information for consideration relating to any sub- contractors that will be utilized under the contract. Please reference page 11, Section S – Subcontracts.
Q85. Does the county currently provide one-on-one and group meetings for participants? If yes, can you please provide the # of each held this year?
Yes, please see Q24 above.
Q86. Can you please provide the locations along with the number of employees at each?
Please refer to the answer and chart provided for Q15.
Q87. How would the advisor/county assess the overall effectiveness of the participant engagement experience with three separate vendors?
Please see Q24 above.
Q88. What are the most successful campaigns the county has run in the last couple of years?
Please see Q24 above.
Q89. What are the preferred methods (electronic, paper, meetings) to reach employees?
The County currently uses paper but is increasingly interested in the integration of electronic communication to its employees.
Q90. What are the top three or four goals the county and advisor would like to see accomplished as they relate to participant engagement and selecting a new provider?
Please refer to the scope and services required in the RFP.
Q91. Can you provide copies of your plan documents for both the 457 and 403(b) Plans which clearly outline the plan design and rules of your plans?
While we understand why this would be helpful to know, the County is interested in revisiting a thorough review of their plan design to maximize the opportunity to take advantage of some design features they’ve been contemplating over the last year. We look forward to revisiting the plan design with our advisor and recordkeeping partners as part of the initiation of the new contract.
Q92. Can you please provide the plan documents or SPD for each plan?
Please see Q91 above.
Q93. Are you interested in maintaining custom plan documents or converting to the selected vendor’s model plan document?
The County currently uses a model plan document and expects to do so as well going forward.
Q94. Please provide the current service agreement.
The County is currently not prepared to share this with prospective Offerors at this time.
Q95. What is the number of unique participants are there between the two 457 vendors?
Please see Q58 above.
Q96. How many unique participants are there between the 403(b) and 457 Plans?
There is a small subset of employees with balances at both Henrico County Public Schools 403(b) Plan and in Henrico County General Government’s 457 Plan. Please see Attachment G for a list of total participants both active and terminated.
Q97. How many new employees were hired in 2012, 2013 & 2014?
Henrico County General Government new hires (numbers tracked by fiscal year) 2012 - 2013: 376 2013 - 2014: 383 2014 - 2015: 417
Henrico County Public Schools new hires: 2012: 1,602 2013: 1,788 2014: 1,548
Q98. Which enrollment method/s is currently used? Auto-enrollment, web, 800 call center, paper, etc.?
Please see Q89 above.
Q99. How many field representatives are dedicated per vendor to servicing each of the Plans?
VALIC: 4
Voya: 2
ICMA: 2
Q100. How many days of education are the plans currently receiving?
The County is interested in hearing from vendors a proposed solution for employee education and communication. Offerors should not read into the current solution and approach as being more optimal or less optimal; this is an area of significant consideration for the committee.
Q101. Can you confirm whether there is a managed account service offered in the 457 Plan? If so, please provide the total number of participants and assets in that service? If not, is the County interested in this type of service to be added to the 457 Plan?
Please see Q46 above.
Q102. Are you interested in mapping those participants who are currently using the Guided Portfolio Managed account service, to a comparable service with the selected vendor?
A mapping strategy has not yet been determined for the Henrico County Public Schools 403(b). The County will consider mapping the assets in the Guided Portfolio Services service to a comparable service with the selected vendor.
Q103. Do you currently offer a Self Directed Brokerage Account (SDBA)? If so, what company is this service administered by, how many participants use this service and what are the total assets in the SDBA?
As of 9/30/2015, there were 28 total SDBAs totaling $164,716.11 in assets in the Henrico County Public Schools 403(b) Plan. The SDBA is administered by Charles Schwab.
Henrico County General Government does not currently utilize a SDBA, however Henrico County Government is interested in considering the use of SDBA moving forward.
Q104. What are the current administrative and recordkeeping fees for each plan?
Please contact the procurement office directly at Henrico County and request this information.
Q105. What were the total contributions in 2012, 2013, and 2014 for each plan?
Please refer to an updated version of Attachment G which now includes 2012 data.
Q106. What were the total distributions in 2012, 2013, and 2014 for each plan?
Please refer to an updated version of Attachment G which now includes 2012 data.
Q107. How many new loans were issued in 2012, 2013 and 2014 for each plan?
For the Henrico County Public Schools 403(b) Plan: 2012: 28; 2013: 41; 2014: 53
The Henrico County General Government Plan currently does not allow for loans.
Q108. How many outstanding loans were there in 2012, 2013 and 2014 for each plan?
For the Henrico County Public Schools 403(b) Plan: 2012: 62; 2013: 103; 2014: 154
The Henrico County General Government Plan currently does not allow for loans.
Q109. Please provide a breakdown of the assets in each Plan and include the ticker symbols.
Please see the updated copy of Attachment H provided for a list assets by fund including ticker symbols.
Q110. Are there any transfer restrictions, penalties, market value adjustments or surrender charges on any of the current investments? If so, please describe the termination provisions.
Please see Q11 above.
Q111. Please provide the current payroll file layouts, as well as definitions for the files.
Offerors shall provide layout specifications for their solutions with their proposal submission.
-----------------------
COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA
COUNTY OF HENRICO
[pic]
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE
CECELIA H. STOWE, CPPO, C.P.M.
PURCHASING DIRECTOR
................
................
In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.
To fulfill the demand for quickly locating and searching documents.
It is intelligent file search solution for home and business.