To note the contents of the report.

Damien Pantling introduced the report by summarising the 3 appendices.

The Communications Strategy was last reviewed in September 2018 and had been updated to include several changes in the way the Pension Fund communicates with its stakeholders. These included changing from in-person to hybrid and online meetings, streamlining of member and employer newsletter communication, a focus on e-communication and moving away from the use of paper, and presentational changes such as updating hyperlinks on websites.

Regarding communication with people’s representatives, the Chairman asked if it meant their individual or collective representatives. Kevin Taylor replied that this related to requirements in the regulations where scheme members who are unable to look after their own affairs can nominate named representatives (so individual).

The Chairman then asked if it was entirely an online process when a MyPension Online activation key was sent to scheme members or did something else go out by post. Philip Boyton answered that initial an activation key was posted to the new member’s home address.

The Chairman then asked if stats were kept of the downloads of employer actions. Philip Boyton answered that prior to a change in website functionality that RBWM made several months ago, the Fund was able to draw website statistics on what webpages were visited. Following the change, driven by the need for an individual to accept internet cookies, the Fund were unable to acquire this information. However, the Fund was liaising with the RBWM website team and in an effort to re-start the process again.

Damien Pantling then moved onto the second appendix, the Pension Administration Strategy, which was last approved in January 2019. While the regulations did not make the document compulsory, it was highly recommended and good practice to have such a statement. The Strategy had been updated with all valid links and references to various documents. The aims and objectives have been updated to bring it in line with the business plan which was approved earlier in 2022. The section on the Service Level Agreement (SLA) had been expanded to ensure the purpose of the SLA was made clear and to prevent confusion between the Fund’s SLA with the administering authority (RBWM) and the employer SLA with the administration team. The Administration Strategy also referenced the changes to the Communications Strategy that was being approved alongside the Administration Strategy.

Damien Pantling then discussed the Service Level Agreement. He explained that this was the SLA in place between the Fund and every single employer, establishing what was required from each employer as well as the Fund’s Administration Team. This would enable KPIs (key performance indicators), that were set out in the Pension Administration Strategy to be monitored effectively. Damien Pantling added that this SLA was separate to the SLA brought to the Pension Fund Committee for approval a short while ago which was about how the Administration Team would exercise the Administering Authority's duties.

Regarding an employer needing to know whether the employee was full-time or variable time, the Chairman asked why this was still needed as the scheme was now a CARE scheme. Kevin Taylor replied that they did not necessarily need to have this information for pension calculation purposes but that it was automatically provided through iConnect and was good practice bearing in mind such issues as McCloud where employers are required to provide historical information.

Referring to a comment in the report stating that the administering authority would provide presentations to the scheme employer on an ad hoc basis, the Chairman asked if this was done individually, collectively or both. Damien Pantling replied that it was both.

The Board noted the report.