The Pensions Board of Hammersmith and Fulham Council met on Wednesday 04 March 2026 to review key performance indicators, pension administration updates, and the pension fund's quarterly performance. Key discussions included the performance of the Local Pension Partnership Administration (LPPA), updates on pension administration activities, and a detailed analysis of the pension fund's investments and associated risks.

Key Performance Indicators

Eleanor Dennis, Head of Pensions, presented the Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) for the period September to December 2025, highlighting the performance of the Local Pension Partnership Administration (LPPA). Overall performance for the period showed a consistent improvement, with 99.7% of cases completed on time by the end of quarter three. This represents a steady increase from 96.5% at the beginning of the scheme year. Retirements saw a performance rating of 98.6%, with deferred retirements at 99.2%. The improvements are partly attributed to increased automation through online forms. However, concerns were raised regarding the quality of processing from LPPA's bereavement team, with ongoing feedback provided to encourage improvement.

Councillor Nikos Souslous expressed satisfaction with the substantial improvements made since the early days of the new administration, thanking Eleanor Dennis and her team. He inquired about any specific areas of concern or potential future issues. Eleanor Dennis identified the quality of processing as an area for continued improvement, noting that while the bulk of cases were processed on time, there were still ad hoc issues with specific cases that required intervention from the council's team.

A scheme member representative shared personal feedback on the difficulty of obtaining information regarding death grants, noting that while pension amounts were clear, the death grant details were not readily accessible through the system. Eleanor Dennis suggested this could be a topic for inclusion in the pension fund's newsletter.

Regarding customer satisfaction scores, it was noted that the response rate to surveys remained low. Eleanor Dennis explained that LPPA had previously tried incentives such as Amazon vouchers to encourage responses, but with limited success. The low numbers meant that fluctuations in satisfaction or dissatisfaction could appear significant. It was suggested that the council might consider conducting its own member surveys in the future.

Pension Administration Update

Eleanor Dennis also provided an update on key activities in the pension operation and administration function. Employer engagement in submitting monthly files had increased to 90%, with the LBHF pension team collaborating with LPPA to support employers in submitting these accurately. Complaints had fallen to around 13 cases, primarily related to delays and communication issues concerning transfers.

Looking ahead, a busy period was anticipated due to significant changes in LGPS, including increased governance and enhanced member benefits, with tight implementation dates from April to Autumn. Assurances were received that administrators were well-resourced and confident in maintaining KPIs, though it was acknowledged that performance might see slight dips due to the volume of changes. Preparations for the pension dashboard and increasing membership numbers were also noted.

A councillor raised a question about additional work charged by LPPA, clarifying that the £620,000 figure was the annual service charge, not for additional work. An additional charge of around £2,000 was noted for audit purposes, as LPPA's assurance was not satisfactory to Grant Thornton, the auditors.

Regarding complaints, Eleanor Dennis confirmed that there had been no formal complaints passed to the Pensions Ombudsman in the last two years. The complaints received were primarily around delays in processing transfers, which could often be resolved with better communication from LPPA.

The upcoming pension bill was discussed, with a survey conducted by the Scheme Advisory Board to address diversity and inclusion within the pension fund committee and board. The results of this survey were awaited and would be shared. A brief overview of the new pension landscape was provided, highlighting significant changes in pooling, increased governance, and more generous survivor benefits and death grants.

Pension Fund Quarterly Update Q4 2025

Patrick Rowe, Strategic Finance Manager, presented the Pension Fund Quarterly Update for the quarter ended 31 December 2025. He noted that market reactions to recent geopolitical unrest would have impacted figures since the report's publication, with falls in equities and impacts on gilts and investment-grade bonds. The portfolio was described as well-diversified, with private market assets offering inflation protection.

A significant discussion point was the decision to divest from the LCIV Global Equity Quality fund, managed by Morgan Stanley, in favour of BlackRock's ESG-inclined passive equity fund. Officers were notified that LCIV planned to close the fund and a coordinated exit strategy with remaining investors (Westminster and City of London Pension Funds) was being developed. This approach was deemed equitable to ensure no party bore disproportionate costs. The extent of the investment was approximately £180 million, with an exit timeline hoped to be within weeks, though delays were anticipated due to LCIV's focus on pooling reforms.

Concerns were raised about the lack of clear protocols for situations where multiple local authorities were invested in a single fund, with two wishing to exit and one not. The rationale for cooperating with City of London was to avoid setting a precedent of solely serving immediate interests and to maintain good relationships, as cooperation was key for future pooling reforms.

The potential impact of the Middle East conflict on equity markets was discussed, with a view that both the LCIV Global Equity Quality Fund and BlackRock would broadly move together in response to macroeconomic concerns.

Further concerns were raised about the performance of Darwin Alternatives, which had been downgraded. Darwin was expected to present to the next meeting to explain its performance, particularly concerning its leisure park investments. The fund is a private market asset, meaning a simple sale on the day is not possible, and a decision would need to be made on whether to hold the asset or sell on the secondary market at a potential loss. The committee appeared to be leaning towards holding the asset and trusting the fund management.

Alpha Real Capital was also identified as a matter of concern due to underperformance. The benchmark used for this fund, which holds properties, was questioned as being linked to short-term money market funds.

Finally, the risk register was discussed, with clarification sought on the meaning of numerical references to funds and the adequacy of mitigation actions. It was explained that the numbers reflected the potential monetary value of a risk, and the mitigation actions were focused on monitoring and influencing the service providers. The risk of administrators lacking sufficient staff or skills was identified as an ongoing, high risk, particularly in the context of legislative changes and competition for skilled resources within LGPS funds. The potential for merging funds was mentioned as a directive within the Pensions Bill to address this issue.

The meeting concluded with thanks from Councillor Nikos Souslous to the Chair and officers for their work over the past four years.