If your organization sponsors a 403(b) retirement plan, you almost certainly have some form of committee or group responsible for overseeing it, whether that is a formal investment committee, a subcommittee of the board, or simply the executive director and chief financial officer reviewing plan matters together a few times a year. Whatever its name or structure, this group carries real fiduciary responsibility. If you do not have a committee and a single individual is making retirement plan decisions, that person is generally assuming the full fiduciary responsibility and potential liability for those decisions.
The challenge many non-profit organizations face is not a lack of commitment to that responsibility. It is a lack of structure. Retirement committee meetings that are held irregularly, without a clear agenda, or that focus only on investment performance tend to leave important matters unaddressed, and leave the organization without the documentation it would need to demonstrate prudent oversight if questions were ever raised.
This post outlines what a well-run retirement committee meeting should typically cover. It is not intended as legal guidance, and every organization’s specific situation is different. But for plan sponsors looking to strengthen their committee process, having a consistent framework to work from is a useful starting point.
Investment Review
Investment review is usually the part of the meeting that gets the most attention. The committee examines how the plan’s investment options have performed over relevant time periods, compares that performance against appropriate benchmarks, and considers whether any changes to the lineup are warranted.
A few things worth noting: performance review should cover multiple time horizons, not just the most recent quarter. A fund that underperformed in the past three months may still be appropriate for the lineup; a fund that has underperformed consistently over three or five years warrants closer examination. The committee should also review the lineup for adequate diversification across asset classes and risk profiles, and confirm that target-date funds, if offered, remain appropriate for the participant population.
Critically, whatever the committee decides, to retain an option, place one on a watch list, or remove one, should be documented in the meeting minutes. The documentation of a thoughtful process matters as much as the outcome of that process.
Fee Review
Plan fees are an ongoing fiduciary concern, not a one-time question. The committee should periodically review the fees participants are paying, both investment-related fees and plan administration costs, and compare them against reasonable benchmarks for plans of similar size and complexity.
This does not mean fees must be the lowest available. It means they must be reasonable in light of the services being received. If the committee can document that it reviewed fees, considered the services provided, and concluded that the arrangement represents fair value, that is a defensible position. If fees have never been reviewed, that is a meaningful gap.
Participant Outcomes
Investment performance and fee management matter, but ultimately, the purpose of the retirement plan is to help employees accumulate meaningful retirement savings. Participant outcome metrics deserve a place on the committee agenda.
What percentage of eligible employees are enrolled? What is the average deferral rate? Are participants taking advantage of any employer match that is available? Are there populations, newer employees, part-time workers, employees in certain roles, who are consistently under-participating?
These data points are available from most recordkeepers, and reviewing them regularly helps the committee identify whether the plan is working as intended. Low participation or persistently low deferral rates may indicate that communication and education efforts need to be refreshed.
Plan Document and Compliance Status
Retirement plan regulations evolve, and plan documents need to stay current. The committee should periodically confirm with its plan administrator or advisor that the plan document reflects current law, that required amendments have been adopted on time, and that any required nondiscrimination testing has been completed and the results reviewed.
This is also the appropriate time to discuss any compliance issues that have arisen since the last meeting, late deposits, eligibility errors, or participant complaints, and confirm that corrective action has been or is being taken.
Documenting the Meeting
Meeting minutes are not just a formality. They are the primary evidence that the committee is taking its responsibilities seriously. Minutes should note who attended, what was reviewed, what decisions were made, and what action items are expected before the next meeting. They do not need to be lengthy, but they do need to be accurate and complete.
Retaining meeting materials, reports, presentations, benchmarking studies, alongside the minutes creates a record that demonstrates ongoing, substantive oversight. Organizations that can point to years of consistent meeting documentation are in a meaningfully stronger position than those that cannot.
A Note on Frequency
There is no single right answer for how often the retirement committee should meet. Many plans operate with quarterly or semi-annual meetings, while others meet annually. The appropriate frequency depends on the size and complexity of the plan, any ongoing issues that require monitoring, and the practical constraints of the committee members’ schedules.
What matters most is consistency. A committee that meets on a regular schedule, follows a structured agenda, and documents its work is fulfilling its responsibilities. One that meets only when a problem arises is managing reactively, which is a more difficult position to be in.
If you are not sure whether your current committee process is where it should be, a conversation with your plan advisor is a reasonable first step. Most advisors working in this space are well-positioned to help you evaluate your current approach and identify areas worth strengthening.
Leave a Reply