Pension Sustainability: Rhode Island

Retaining Effective Teachers Policy

Goal

The state should ensure that excessive resources are not committed to funding teachers' pension systems.

Meets a small part of goal
Suggested Citation:
National Council on Teacher Quality. (2011). Pension Sustainability: Rhode Island results. State Teacher Policy Database. [Data set].
Retrieved from: https://www.nctq.org/yearbook/state/RI-Pension-Sustainability-9

Analysis of Rhode Island's policies

As of June 30, 2010, the most recent date for which an actuarial valuation is available, Rhode Island's pension system for teachers is 48.4 percent funded and has a 19-year amortization period. This means that if the plan earns its assumed rate of return and maintains current contribution rates, it would take the state 19 years to pay off its unfunded liabilities. While its amortization period meets requirements, Rhode Island's funding level is too low. The state's system is not financially sustainable according to actuarial benchmarks.

In addition, Rhode Island commits excessive resources toward its teachers' retirement system. The current employer contribution rate of 22.32 percent is extremely high and is set to increase to 35.25 percent for fiscal year 2012, in light of the fact that most local districts are contributing an additional 6.2 percent to Social Security. The employer rate is determined according to statutory requirements, which mandate that the employer contribution rate must equal the cost to fund this year's expenses (the normal cost) plus any amount needed to amortize any unfunded liabilities over a closed period ending June 30, 2029. The state pays 40 percent of the employer contribution and the local districts pay 60 percent. While these rates allow the state to pay off liabilities within a relatively short period, it does so at great cost, precluding Rhode Island from spending those funds on other, more immediate means to retain talented teachers. The employee contribution rate of 9.5 percent (with an additional 1 percent if the municipality has a COLA provision) is reasonable for those teachers in districts not contributing to Social Security but is excessive for those teachers who must also contribute 6.2 percent to Social Security.

Citation

Recommendations for Rhode Island

Ensure that the pension system is financially sustainable.
The state would be better off if its system was over 95 percent funded to allow more protection during financial downturns. However, Rhode Island should consider ways to improve its funding level without raising the contributions of school districts and teachers. Committing excessive resources to pension benefits can negatively affect teacher recruitment and retention. Improving funding levels necessitates, in part, systemic changes in the state's pension system. Goals 4-G and 4-I provide suggestions for pension system structures that are both sustainable and fair.

State response to our analysis

The Employees' Retirement System of Rhode Island did not respond to repeated requests to review NCTQ's analyses related to teacher pensions.

Research rationale

NCTQ's analysis of the financial sustainability of state pension system is based on actuarial benchmarks promulgated by government and private accounting standards boards. For more information see U.S. Government Accountability Office, 2007, 30 and Government Accounting Standards Board Statement No. 25.

For an overview of the current state of teacher pensions, the various incentives they create, and suggested solutions, see Robert Costrell and Michael Podgursky. "Reforming K-12 Educator Pensions: A Labor Market Perspective." TIAA-CREF Institute (2011).

For evidence that retirement incentives do have a statistically significant effect on retirement decisions, see Joshua Furgeson, Robert P. Strauss, and William B. Vogt. "The Effects of Defined Benefit Pension Incentives and Working Conditions on Teacher Retirement Decisions", Education Finance and Policy (Summer, 2006).

For examples of how teacher pension systems inhibit teacher mobility, see Robert Costrell and Michael Podgursky, "Golden Handcuffs," Education Next, (Winter, 2010).

For additional information on state pension systems, see Susanna Loeb, and Luke Miller. "State Teacher Policies: What Are They, What Are Their Effects, and What Are Their Implications for School Finance?" Stanford University: Institute for Research on Education Policy and Practice (2006); and Janet Hansen, "Teacher Pensions: A Background Paper", published through the Committee for Economic Development (May, 2008).

For further evidence supporting NCTQ's teacher pension standards, see "Public Employees' Retirement System of the State of Nevada: Analysis and Comparison of Defined Benefit and Defined Contribution Retirement Plans." The Segal Group (2010).