Issue - meetings

1.       

2.       

3.       

4.       

5.       

6.       

7.       

8.       

9.       

10.       

11.       

12.       

13.       

14.       

15.       

16.       

17.       

18.       

19.       

20.       

21.       

22.       

23.       

24.       

25.       

26.       

27.       

28.       

29.       

30.       

31.       

32.       

33.       

34.       

35.       

36.       

37.       

38.       

39.       

40.       

41.       

42.       

43.       

44.       

45.       

46.       

47.       

48.       

49.       

50.       

51.       

52.       

53.       

54.       

55.       

56.       

57.       

58.       

59.       

60.       

61.       

62.       

63.       

64.       

65.       

66.       

67.       

68.       

69.       

69.1.      The Board considered a report providing an update on the performance and activities of Orbis Business Operations in relation to the ESPF.

69.2.      The Chair asked for clarification as to why the draft Pension Fund Annual Report recorded that three complaints were received but that the Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) here recorded that there were none. OO said that he would seek clarification.

69.3.      BR expressed concern that there was no indication of the potential liabilities to the ESPF of GMP reconciliation even though the number of cases where the tolerance was greater than £2 was known, following ITM’s previous work. He also questioned why the tender requested bids based on tolerance levels of £1-3 when ITM had already identified the number of cases with a tolerance level of £2.  He noted that £500,000 had originally been earmarked for GMP reconciliation but £29,000 had been spent to date. He, along with the Chair, requested assurance that there would not be further expenditure beyond the next stage.  The Chair also noted that there would have been considerable internal cost for the project.

69.4.      OO said that Business Operations had received assurance from the Procurement team that the contract with JTL would cover the remainder of the GMP process.  The contract is on behalf of five pension funds so there is a significant incentive for JTL to deliver the desired results within the deadline.  He confirmed that ITM would transfer the data they had produced to date to JTL.

69.5.      The Chair asked whether it would have been more economically viable to have procured the GMP Reconciliation process as a single contract rather than breaking it into three stages. OO said that it had not been clear at the start what amount of work would have been required to complete the process, so a single procurement may not have been cost effective.

69.6.      The Board RESOLVED:

1) note the report;

2) request a report on GMP reconciliation at the end of the process including the full costs, evaluation of the success of the process, and lessons learned.