DEPARTMENT PERFORMANCE
Iowa Public Employees' Retirement System
Donna Mueller,
Chief Executive Officer
Mission Statement:
Administer a cost-efficient retirement plan that provides lifetime pension payments to public employees and serves to attract and retain a quality workforce.
Measures:
IPERS investment return
IPERS investments meet actuarial assumed
returns
IPERS service scores compared to other
public pension systems
IPERS benefits are administered
cost effectively
IPERS Trust Fund is invested cost
effectively
|
 |
-
Performance Plan - How we measure our progress
-
Strategic
Plan - How we plan for progress
-
Performance
Report - How we report our progress
-
Department Home Page - Learn more about this department
|
|
Highlighted Measure:
Percent by which IPERS meets
its total fund portfolio investment
return objective (a passively
managed benchmark comprised of
indexes for each asset class
within the Investment Board's
target allocations). Measurement
is taken twice a year on a rolling
10-year basis.
Data Source: IPERS
Updated 12/21/2016 |
 |
|
Why
this is important:
Provide effective investment of the IPERS Trust
Fund to meet payments of current and future pension
payments.
What we're doing about this:
IPERS seeks to add value over market returns in order to help reduce the unfunded liability of the System. IPERS Board and Staff continue to evaluate different approaches in terms of management and types of investments. Staff is implementing a risk management program that will keep the focus on funding the pension liabilities and seek to add value by preserving value in bad markets - when added value matters the most. |
|
|
Highlighted Measure:
Percent by which IPERS investment
return, on a rolling 10 year
basis, meets the 7.5% assumed
actuarial annual rate of interest.
Data Source: IPERS
Updated 12/21/2016 |
 |
|
Why
this is important:
The actuarial soundness of IPERS fund is very
important as it ultimately describes whether
IPERS has sufficient funds to pay all of the
promised benefits.
What we're doing about this:
While the impact of the Great Recession is still evident in the investment returns, IPERS longer-term investment performance has usually exceeded actuarial assumptions. IPERS' annualized investment return of 7.06% for the five-year period ended June 30, 2016 is just under the actuarial investment return assumption of 7.5%. While forecasts of market returns for the next ten years are expected to be low by comparison to recent history, IPERS will continue to invest in a conservative and practical manner - attempting to maximize returns on risk within a disciplined risk budgeting framework.
|
|
|
| Highlighted Measure:
IPERS' quality of service score
as ranked against peer public pension
systems within the benchmarking
services compiled by Cost Effectiveness
Measurement, Inc.
Data Source: Cost Effectiveness Measurement, Inc.
2017 data available March 2018
Updated 03/24/2017 |
 |
|
Why
this is important:
Since IPERS has no peers in state government, it is important
to benchmark services against those provided by other public
employee retirement systems. The CEM benchmarking effort
involves approximately 67 leading pension systems in the
U.S., Canada, Europe and Australia. CEM measures quality
of service delivery in fourteen service categories ranging
from communication, counseling, payments, and service to
employers. In eight of the fourteen service categories, IPERS'
service measures were greater than the peer median. IPERS
uses the benchmarking analysis in each of the measurable
service areas to improve services to employees and employers.
The overall "quality of service" score of 81
was close to the peer median score of 85. Over the past ten
years, IPERS' quality of service scores have been consistently at the score of 80-83.
What we're doing about this:
Results from the benchmarking study is being used to improve the quality of services and the efficiency of services by applying innovative approaches and best practices.
|
|
|
Highlighted Measure:
Percent by which IPERS benefit
administrative costs are less
than peer average administrative
costs as measured by CEM per
active member and annuitant.
Data Source: IPERS
NOTE: The larger the percentage is that IPERS is away from
the median cost of other
peer public pension funds
the better.
2017 data available March 2018
Updated 03/24/2017 |
 |
|
Why
this is important:
It is important to strive to control costs but still deliver
the highest level of service possible. For the fifteenth year
in a row, IPERS succeeded in keeping costs low. IPERS' cost
in 2016 was $53 per active and retired member.
This compares to the peer median cost of $85 per active
and retired member in 2016, which is down from $95 in 2015.
What we're doing about this:
The data clearly show that IPERS has been successful
in this area as we are the lowest cost system
in our CEM peer group of public retirement systems.
|
|
|
Highlighted Measure:
Percent of total fund market
value spent on investment administrative
costs.
Data Source: IPERS
Updated 12/21/2016
|
 |
|
Why
this is important:
It is important
to continuously strive to control investment
management costs but still seek the highest
possible return on our investments.
What we're doing about this:
IPERS investment costs have remained fairly steady over time, and IPERS is considered to be a "low cost" fund by CEM Benchmarking, Inc. given the complexity of the IPERS investment program. While low costs are an objective, IPERS will utilize higher cost, less liquid investment strategies, such as private equity, real estate, and timberland investments, when it is believed that such strategies will improve the long-term risk-adjusted return on the investment portfolio. IPERS continues to evaluate the effectiveness of its investment program and improve it through a more robust risk management program.
|
|
|
