Retirement & You
|
|
MOSERS Stays on Track
Earns #1 Service Rating for 3rd Straight Year |
|
Each year, MOSERS participates in a pension plan benchmarking service performed by Cost Effectiveness Measurement (CEM). We are proud to report that our service has once again been ranked #1 among our peers (other state pension plans around the country). The CEM report also does extensive cost comparisons and provides feedback on whether or not our costs are reasonable. Here again, we did very well on our operations costs compared to the benchmark for a plan of our size.
|
Service
MOSERS’ service score for this year was 89. This was the highest score of our peer group and well above the peer median of 77, as you can see from the chart below. Each year, we look for improvements to service that can be made in a cost-effective manner. Some of the reasons for our high service rating include:
- A staff focused on excellence in customer service and continual improvement.
- Up-to-date technology that provides counselors immediate access to member records.
- Our website, which provides members with secure access to personal information and the ability to perform important processes online at their convenience.
-
Internal processes that control risk and ensure the accuracy and security of information.
Cost
MOSERS’ cost per member for this year was $70. This was equal to the peer median and well below the expected benchmark cost of $83. This cost measure is particularly meaningful when you consider that with only 100,000 members, MOSERS does not enjoy the economies of scale available to larger systems in the CEM study. Our costs increased 1% this year over last, which is less than what would have been expected due to inflation.
CEM defines service as “anything a member would like, before considering costs,” so a high level of customer service tends to increase a system’s costs. Our goal is to maintain and increase our service ratings without significantly increasing our total cost. |
Setting the Pace
Deciding where to go and how to get there is often a challenge. CEM helps us stay right on track and to set the pace for improvements to service that can be made in a cost-effective manner.
|
 |
Going the Distance
Key service measures included in our score:
- Written benefit estimates 92 compared to a peer average of 64.
- Member contacts – Calls, emails, letters 85 compared to a peer average of 67.
- Website 96 compared to a peer average of 77.
- Electronic delivery of newsletters, annual benefit statements, etc. 75 compared to a peer average of 17.
|
Why We Participate
CEM gathers the data for their report through an extensive survey process. Last year’s survey contained 242 questions and examined every aspect of what we do in terms of operations. After participating for the past six years, we’ve gotten efficient at collecting and documenting the information needed to complete the survey, but it’s still quite a task. Why do we do it?
- To improve understanding of our business. Knowing how and why we are different from our peers helps us better understand our business.
- To establish service standards. The CEM measures have helped us develop new service standards to maintain and improve our service to members.
- To demonstrate our performance in the absence of competition. Good benchmarking allows us to compare our costs and performance to our peers.
- To help set priorities by demonstrating tradeoffs. Understanding tradeoffs helps us to make better decisions and determine whether we are getting good value for what we are paying.
- To communicate performance. The results of the CEM analysis are presented to our staff, board members, and pension boards throughout the world.
- What gets measured gets managed. Without measures it is difficult to assess where improvements or cost-effective strategies can be applied.
- To identify best practices. By observing how other systems conduct business, we are able to identify best practices or other alternatives to enhance the operation of our organization.
Our Peer Universe
This year 55 leading pension systems around the globe* participated in the CEM benchmarking service. In order to get the best comparisons of cost and performance, we are compared to pension systems of similar size and nationality. MOSERS’ peer group consists of 12 U.S. pension systems (see chart).
*From the United States, Canada, the Netherlands, and Australia. |
|
 |
 |
|
|
