Record keepers

[Guest benefitsanalyst]

Does anyone know who are the "big players" or "best players" in the non-qualified deferred compensation plan record keeping arena?

[david rigby]

Hmmm. BenefitsLink is a good place to start looking for many things:

http://benefitslink.com/yellowpages/

However, bigger is not always better. Got a big plan that needs help? RFP?

(P.S. My firm can do this, as can many other contributors to these Message Boards, but I'm not here to plug that.)

[Guest benefitsanalyst]

We have already identified 2 potential vendors...PenCal and TBG. We are looking for 1 or 2 more.

Thanks,.

[GBurns]

I am curious as to how you arrived at these 2 choices?

Having a large number of plan participants because of having a few clients who are large employers only makes one have a large number of participants. It does not denote competence and does not necessarily make one a "big player" (unless head count is the only criteria) and it definitely does not make one a "best player".

[Guest benefitsanalyst]

We had received referrals for these 2 possible TPAs. I don't care if they are the best or biggest, so maybe my wording was not the best. We are simply looking for other possible vendors to handle the recordkeeping responsibilites for our non-qualified deferred compensation plan.

We definitely do not want a TPA whose primary business is 401(k) recordkeeping if their systems are not specifically designed for NQDC plans.

[GBurns]

On the other hand, Do you want a recordkeeper whose "system" is set up for NQDC Plans, but who has not had sufficient variations in designs, participants, problems etc to have "learned the ropes" and who might, for other reasons, be lax in compliance and service etc ?

Having the alleged "bells and whistles" does not mean competence nor does it mean that the service will be valuable too you.

It could be that the "Value added services" are of more value than the actual "system".

[Guest benefitsanalyst]

Very true. So with that said, do you know of any recordkeepers that you would recommend?

[david rigby]

You mention 2 in CA (both Southern CA, I think). If that is a criteria, please advise. Criteria other than those already mentioned?

BTW, I work in the "South". Does that count?

[GBurns]

Without better criteria and some idea of what is required, it would be hard for anyone to do rationally.

In any case I would prefer that your recommendations come from those with more hands-on experience. My experiences are more from the sales side and not enough from the operational/problem resolution side, and so would not benefit you. But, I do know enough to say that 1 of your chosen firms would never be on any list that I make up unless my client was super large (200+ participating Executives). Aside from lack of cost effectiveness, complexity of user interface, some firms just do not have the mindset to handle small clients.

[Guest benefitsanalyst]

Pax - location of company does not matter. Specifically, we are looking for a recordkeeper who can provide us with a complete outsourcing solution in a cost-effective manner (so not the most expensive TPA), online account access that can accommodate specific plan provisions (and online enrollment), plan sponsor online access. In addition, their systems must be up-to-date to handle recent legislative changes.

GBurns - we would be closer to a larger client. We have 6,000 employees with 300 eligible to participate in the NQDC plan.

I am curious as to which vendor on my list you would not recommend and why?

Thanks again to both of you for your feedback.

[E as in ERISA]

My understanding is that if you want daily valuation of investments, then you generally want a 401(k) vendor even though you might have issues with some NQ plan distribution issues (the systems aren't set up to track lots of different distribution options).