WEBVTT

00:00:02.840 --> 00:00:04.680
Hi, I'm Laura McMinigal,

00:00:04.680 --> 00:00:07.560
Trustee Manager
at Independent Governance Group.

00:00:07.560 --> 00:00:10.640
This case study involves
delivering a scheme's first own

00:00:10.640 --> 00:00:13.680
risk assessment
during a significant period of transition.

00:00:13.840 --> 00:00:18.240
IGG provided professional corporate,
sole trustee, secretariat

00:00:18.360 --> 00:00:22.320
and governance support services
to a UK pension scheme with approximately

00:00:22.320 --> 00:00:26.280
260 members
and assets of around 36 million.

00:00:26.720 --> 00:00:31.000
A full review of the scheme's
effective System of governance, or ESOG,

00:00:31.240 --> 00:00:34.680
had previously been undertaken,
with subsequent annual reviews

00:00:34.680 --> 00:00:37.680
helping to establish
a strong governance foundation.

00:00:37.760 --> 00:00:41.760
This identified areas where policies
and processes required enhancement,

00:00:41.960 --> 00:00:43.080
while also confirming

00:00:43.080 --> 00:00:46.320
where existing arrangements
were already robust and effective.

00:00:46.400 --> 00:00:49.920
The trustee was required
to complete its first Own Risk Assessment,

00:00:50.360 --> 00:00:53.360
demonstrating the effectiveness
of the scheme's controls,

00:00:53.400 --> 00:00:56.480
mitigations and wider risk management
framework.

00:00:56.680 --> 00:01:00.960
However, this coincided with a significant
milestone in the scheme's journey.

00:01:01.480 --> 00:01:05.360
In March 2025,
the scheme completed a buy-in and began

00:01:05.360 --> 00:01:08.960
moving into the next phase
towards buy-out and eventual wind up.

00:01:09.280 --> 00:01:11.080
While overall risk had reduced.

00:01:11.080 --> 00:01:14.520
Governance requirements remained critical
during this transition phase.

00:01:14.840 --> 00:01:16.200
The challenge was to ensure

00:01:16.200 --> 00:01:19.560
that the ORA adopted a tailored
and proportionate approach,

00:01:19.920 --> 00:01:24.360
clearly evidenced how proportionality
had been applied, and also provided

00:01:24.360 --> 00:01:28.640
a clear and defensible justification
for the trustees governance approach.

00:01:28.920 --> 00:01:32.640
IGG approached the ORA
by building on the scheme's existing ESOG

00:01:32.640 --> 00:01:37.000
framework and using previous governance
reviews as the foundation for delivery.

00:01:37.040 --> 00:01:40.880
The assessment focused on reviewing
the effectiveness of existing controls

00:01:40.880 --> 00:01:41.640
and risk management

00:01:41.640 --> 00:01:45.560
processes, clearly documenting
how proportionality had been applied.

00:01:45.720 --> 00:01:49.480
Aligning the ORA with the schemes
posed by risk profile

00:01:49.800 --> 00:01:52.240
and ensuring outputs were evidence based,

00:01:52.240 --> 00:01:56.120
practical and straightforward
for the trustee to review and approve.

00:01:56.160 --> 00:02:00.160
A key focus throughout was distinguishing
between what was necessary

00:02:00.160 --> 00:02:04.280
to meet regulatory expectations
and support effective risk management,

00:02:04.920 --> 00:02:07.920
and what would simply add
unnecessary complexity.

00:02:08.400 --> 00:02:11.640
Working closely with the trustee, IGG
prioritised

00:02:11.640 --> 00:02:13.640
the areas that genuinely mattered.

00:02:13.640 --> 00:02:16.560
Avoiding duplication of existing processes

00:02:16.560 --> 00:02:20.400
and ensuring the ORA
became an extension of an already embedded

00:02:20.520 --> 00:02:24.080
governance framework
rather than a standalone exercise.

00:02:24.200 --> 00:02:27.920
The ORA was completed and signed off
ahead of the regulatory deadline,

00:02:27.920 --> 00:02:31.000
with the assessment confirming
a positive effectiveness rating.

00:02:31.440 --> 00:02:34.240
The trustee gained confidence
that the scheme's governance

00:02:34.240 --> 00:02:37.600
of risk management
framework was robust and comprehensive.

00:02:37.920 --> 00:02:40.760
The existing practices
remained appropriate to the scale

00:02:40.760 --> 00:02:44.320
and complexity of the scheme,
and that governance continued

00:02:44.320 --> 00:02:47.960
to support the trustees objectives
of safeguarding member benefits.

00:02:48.440 --> 00:02:52.120
The ORA also delivered a clear
and focused action Plan to support

00:02:52.120 --> 00:02:55.880
continued governance development
as the scheme progresses towards buy-out.

00:02:56.360 --> 00:03:00.560
This included re-evaluating risks
following the buy-in progressing data

00:03:00.560 --> 00:03:04.760
cleanse activity with administrators,
maintaining oversight of cyber

00:03:04.760 --> 00:03:09.600
and IT controls, and continuing structured
engagement with advisers and members.

00:03:09.840 --> 00:03:15.000
Importantly, the approach ensured robust
oversight and focus on areas of genuine

00:03:15.000 --> 00:03:19.000
value, avoiding unnecessary documentation
or process change.

00:03:19.400 --> 00:03:23.320
The trustee was able to demonstrate
compliance and effectiveness without over

00:03:23.320 --> 00:03:25.120
engineering the governance framework.

00:03:25.120 --> 00:03:29.240
This case study demonstrates the value
of a structured and proportionate approach

00:03:29.240 --> 00:03:32.640
to ORA delivery by building on existing
governance arrangements

00:03:32.640 --> 00:03:36.800
and aligning the assessment to the schemes
post buy-in risk profile.

00:03:37.120 --> 00:03:40.560
The trustee was able to demonstrate
compliance, gain confidence

00:03:40.560 --> 00:03:41.560
in the effectiveness

00:03:41.560 --> 00:03:45.600
of its governance framework and maintain
focus on the activities

00:03:45.600 --> 00:03:49.520
that were most relevant to supporting
its journey towards buy-out and wind up.

00:03:49.800 --> 00:03:51.880
Thanks for watching.
I hope it's been useful.