Market Analysis and Feasibility Study (PDFDrive)

California Secure Choice
Market Analysis, Feasibility Study, and Program Design Consultant Services
(Non-IT Services)
RFP No. CSCRSIB03-14
Final Report
to the
California Secure Choice Retirement Savings Investment Board
Prepared By
Overture Financial LLC
March 17, 2016
A description of changes since the February 9, 2016 version is available on the last page of this report.
Contractor:
Sub-Contractors:
UC Berkeley Center for Labor Research and Education
BridgePoint LLC
Greenwald & Associates
Segal Consulting
Key Contributors:
UC Berkeley Center for Labor Research and Education
BridgePoint LLC
Greenwald & Associates
Segal Consulting
Rowland Davis, Lead Actuary Expert
Arun Muralidhar, Lead Pension Expert
K&L Gates, Legal Counsel to California Secure Choice
Contact Person:
Samir Kabbaj
Chief Operating Officer
1440 Broadway, 23rd Floor

New York, NY 10018
United States of America
Tel: +1 (212) 202-0947
Fax: +1 (212) 994-6561
Email: [email protected]
Page 2
Table of Contents
A. Background ................................................................................................ Page 5
B. Executive Summary ................................................................................... Page 6
C. Market Analysis ......................................................................................... Page 18
1) Overview ................................................................................................... Page 18
i. Scope and Methodology ............................................................. Page 18
ii. Timeline...................................................................................... Page 19
iii. Key Findings .............................................................................. Page 19
iv. Key Recommendations............................................................... Page 22
2) Market Profile ........................................................................................... Page 26
i. Methodology............................................................................... Page 26
ii. Key Findings .............................................................................. Page 27
3) Focus Groups ............................................................................................ Page 36
ii. Overview of Moderator’s Guide................................................. Page 37
4) Online Survey............................................................................................ Page 41
ii. Overview of Survey Questions................................................... Page 43
5) Rollovers and Cash-Outs........................................................................... Page 46
i. Overview .................................................................................... Page 46
ii. Key Findings .............................................................................. Page 47
6) Stakeholder Interviews (including Employer Interviews)......................... Page 47
Page 3
i. Overview .................................................................................... Page 47
ii. Summary of Feedback from Stakeholders.................................. Page 48
iii. Summary of Findings from Stakeholder Interviews................... Page 54
D. Program Design.......................................................................................... Page 55
1) Overview ................................................................................................... Page 55
ii. Timeline...................................................................................... Page 55
iii. Key Recommendations............................................................... Page 56
2) Investments ............................................................................................... Page 59
3) Operational Model..................................................................................... Page 91
4) Plan Rules and Procedures ........................................................................ Page 102
E. Financial Feasibility Study......................................................................... Page 109
1) Overview ................................................................................................... Page 109
ii. Timeline...................................................................................... Page 109
2) Projection Model ....................................................................................... Page 111
3) Core Assumptions ..................................................................................... Page 112
4) Baseline Scenario ...................................................................................... Page 113
5) Sensitivity Analysis................................................................................... Page 118
6) Scenario Analysis...................................................................................... Page 119
7) Conclusions ............................................................................................... Page 120
F. Addendum – Employer Costs .................................................................... Page 122
G. Scope of Services Deliverables Cross Reference Table ............................ Page 127
H. Appendix – Market Analysis Supporting Documents ............................... Page 129
Page 4
Overture Financial Final Report to the
A. Background
Legislation enacted in 2012 (SB 1234, Chapter 734, 2012) authorizes consideration of the
California Secure Choice Retirement Savings Program (“Program” or “Secure Choice
Program”). If implemented, the Program would provide a voluntary, automatic-enrollment
retirement savings plan for more than 6 million California workers who currently lack access
to retirement savings plans through their employers. The Program would require private
employers with five or more employees not currently offering a retirement savings plan to
provide their employees access to, and payroll deductions for, Secure Choice retirement
accounts. Implementation is contingent on enactment of subsequent legislation. The Program
would be administered by a nine-member board, chaired by the State Treasurer and
denominated as the California Secure Choice Retirement Savings Investment Board (the
“Board”).
Before the state legislature can consider further legislation to implement the Program, SB
1234 requires the Board to conduct a study to determine whether the legal and practical
conditions for implementation can be met. The Board approved an approach to the study
analysis that includes four distinct, but well-coordinated work streams:
a) Program Design – Program design narrowly tailored, as necessary or advisable, for the
purposes of the market analysis, including financial feasibility study and legal
feasibility study.
b) Market Analysis – A market analysis to determine likely levels of participation and
elements of the Program that could maximize participation, maximize the likelihood
of private sector financial providers offering products and services necessary to the
Program, and minimize inconvenience or disruptions to employers.
c) Financial Feasibility Study (also referred to as “feasibility study”) – A financial
analysis to determine whether likely demand and participation would make it possible
for the proposed Program to be self-sustaining as the statute requires.
d) Legal Feasibility Study – A legal analysis to determine whether the Program, as
designed in the Program Design phase, meets legal requirements specified in the
Secure Choice Retirement Savings Trust Act.
The Board contracted K&L Gates to conduct the legal feasibility study. The Board also issued
an RFP seeking a contractor for the program design, market analysis and financial feasibility
study work streams.
Overture Financial (”Overture”) was awarded in early 2015 the contract for the RFP (the
“Contract”) corresponding to the program design, market analysis, and financial feasibility
study work streams. The UC Berkeley Center for Labor Research and Education, BridgePoint
LLC, Greenwald & Associates and Segal Consulting are sub-contractors to Overture under
the Contract.
This Final Report is delivered to the Board in fulfillment of the Scope of Services under the
Contract.
Page 5
B. Executive Summary
This Final Report represents the culmination of many months of collaboration between
Overture Financial and its sub-contractors, the Board, California Secure Choice personnel and
contractors, stakeholders in the public and private sectors, service providers, employers and
employer associations, worker organizations, and community groups.
We are pleased to provide this report as an actionable document that can contribute to the
successful launch of the California Secure Choice Program, to the retirement security of
millions of Californians and to the spread of similar programs across the nation.
The scope of work under the Contract consists of three work streams: market analysis,
program design and financial feasibility study. The key findings and recommendations for
each of the work streams are summarized below.
Market Analysis
The Market Analysis work stream consists of four parts:
(1) A market profile outlining the economic and demographic characteristics of the
eligible workforce, both at the individual worker level and at the household level.
(2) Six focus groups with eligible workers—two conducted in Spanish and four conducted
in English—to provide a qualitative assessment of the target population’s attitudes and
preferences with regard to program features, auto-enrollment, auto-escalation, and
investment risk.
(3) An online survey of 1,000 eligible workers designed to yield reliable estimates of opt-
out and contribution rates and gauge attitudes toward retirement savings, investment
risk, liquidity and account access.
(4) Stakeholder interviews with employers and business groups, worker organizations,
and consumer organizations to identify key concerns and suggestions regarding the
design, rollout and implementation of the Program.
The key findings are the following:
(1) About 6.8 million workers are potentially eligible for the California Secure Choice
Retirement Savings Program.
(2) Likely participation rates (70-90%) are sufficiently high to enable the Program to
achieve broad coverage well above the minimum threshold for financial sustainability.
(3) Eligible participants in California are equally comfortable with a 3% or 5%
contribution rate. The vast majority of likely participants are also comfortable with
auto-escalation in 1% increments up to 10%.
(4) To start, the program should offer a default investment option consisting of a
diversified portfolio with long-term growth potential and the choice to opt into a low-
risk investment.
Page 6
(5) Given its inherent portability, the Program should have a lower incidence of rollovers
and cash-outs than employer-sponsored 401(k) plans, which often force workers with
low balances to close their accounts. At the same time, pre-retirement withdrawals are
likely to be higher for the Program given eligible workers’ income profile.
(6) The Program launch should include a concerted public education campaign focused on
workers and small businesses.
The table below summarizes the key recommendations.
Topic Recommendation
Default Contribution Rate 5%
Auto-Escalation Implement in 1% increments up to 10%, after the program
has sufficiently phased in, and only if the process can be
coordinated by the Recordkeeper in lieu of the employer.
Default Investment Vehicle Diversified portfolio that offers long-term growth
potential.
Access to Funds before Limit pre-retirement withdrawals to hardship.
Retirement
Account Information Access Electronic default with paper statement option.
Employer Outreach Develop and implement early outreach campaign to
employers and payroll processors to educate them about
program requirements.
Employee Outreach Develop and implement a worker outreach program in
partnership with worker organizations, unions,
community organizations and asset building groups. Focus
on educating employees about 1) their rights under the
Program and 2) how to make an informed decision on
whether to participate and how much to contribute.
Employee Protections Institute an easy way for employees to report non-
complying employers to the state. Incorporate non-
retaliation language into authorizing legislation.
Page 7
Program Design
The Program Design work stream consists of three parts:
(1) Investments: evaluation and recommendation of investment options for the Program
(2) Operational Model: development and recommendation of an operational model for the
Program
(3) Plan Rules and Procedures: development and recommendation of rules and procedures
for the operation of the Program
The tables below summarize the key recommendations for Program Design.
Investments
Default Investment Option Dynamic Asset Allocation Target Date Investment
At Launch Strategy implemented through Managed Accounts or
through Target Date Funds as fallback, pending legal
confirmation by K&L Gates that managed accounts are
permissible. An income-focused strategy should be
favored over an accumulation-focused strategy.
OR
Pooled IRA with Reserve Fund packaged as a Retirement

Savings Bond.
Additional Investment Consider a Variable Annuity with Guaranteed Minimum
Offering After launch Withdrawal Benefit (GMWB) as a complementary
offering in two to three years after launch once there are
sufficient account balances in participant accounts.
Default Payout Method Most DC plans default to the lump sum method, but the
best policy is to orient towards lifetime income. Initially
(first 3-5 years), account balances for retirees under the
California Secure Choice Plan will be too small to convert
into a meaningful income stream. The Board, therefore,
has time to consider options before selecting a default
payout method. Authorizing legislation should give the
Board flexibility to determine the default payout method.
Proprietary Funds Should the California Secure Choice Program implement
the Dynamic Asset Allocation Target Date Strategy as the
default investment option, we recommend creating
proprietary (i.e., custom) California Secure Choice funds
as investment vehicles for that option.
Page 8
Operational Model
Operational Model We recommend the Direct Service Operational Model
where a single recordkeeper services employers directly
without intermediation by the State of California
Employment Development Department (EDD) in order to
facilitate a faster launch and more flexibility in Program
features.
While the EDD-as-Intermediary Operational Model is less

costly over the long-term (approximately 10%), the
startup costs are significantly higher than the Direct
Service Operational Model, the launch date is likely to be
2 years later and some features, such as auto-escalation,
may not be feasible.
Plan Rules and Procedures
Primary Considerations The following factors are the primary drivers of
recommendations for plan rules and procedures
 Simplicity of administration, compliance and
enforcement
 Minimization of the administrative and
decision-making burden on employers
 Recordkeeping logistics
 Legal constraints
Rules and Procedures The Plan Rules and Procedures fall into seven distinct
Subjects areas:
1. Plan Basics
2. Definition of Employer (“ER”)
3. Definition of Eligible Employees (“EEs”) /
Participants
4. Voluntary Participation
5. Auto-Enrollment and Payroll Deduction
Mechanics
6. Social Security Number (“SSN”) / Identity
Issues
7. Money Out
Page 9
The seven sections below constitute our recommendations for the California Secure Choice
Plan Rules and Procedures.
1- Plan Basics
Plan Year January 1-December 31
ERs determine eligibility and begin notifying EEs during
4th quarter prior to each plan year.
NOTE: This is distinct from qualified plan year
IRA Type Default: Roth IRA

 Up to $5,500 after-tax annual contribution (or $6,500
if age 50+)
 Tax-free retirement withdrawals
 MAGI limit $184,000 married/$117,000 single
Individual has choice to switch to Traditional IRA with

Recordkeeper flag.
NOTE: Roth IRA does not require participant to file

income tax deduction, unlike Traditional IRA.
Default Contribution 5%
EE can elect percentage or fixed dollar amount per
paycheck with no minimum.
Auto-Escalation Implement at Board’s discretion beginning 2nd year of

program, in 1% increments up 10%.
EEs who elect contribution other than default rate

prompted to opt into future auto-escalation.
NOTE: This will only be Implemented if operational model

allows this process to be coordinated by Recordkeeper.
Page 10
2- Definition of Employer
Plan Sponsorship Exemption At least 1 California EE (i.e., EE who is subject to
Unemployment Insurance coverage in California and
whose pay is thus reportable to the EDD) must be
eligible for qualified employer-sponsored plan in order
for firm to be exempt from mandate.
NOTE: Statutory language should be included giving Board

discretion to adjust eligibility rules for ERs that do not
offer meaningful coverage to most of their EEs.
Firm vs. Establishment ER eligibility determined at firm level.
Firm Size (5+ EEs) Annual determination based on simple look-back rule.
We recommend the following criteria: average of
monthly employee headcounts reported on EDD Form DE-
9 for the 3rd quarter (ending 9/30) is 5.0 or higher. This
data is standardized across states, and using it as part of
the EE eligibility standard can help avoid duplicate payroll
deductions. The fall quarter is less subject to seasonal
hiring spikes than summer and winter.
Include only California EEs (as defined in Eligible

Employees in “Definition of Eligible Employees” below) in
calculation. Statute should give Board authority to
determine eligibility regulations.
Eligible Firms that Downsize Continue auto-enrollment/payroll deduction through

to Less than 5 EEs remainder of calendar year. The following year, ER may
choose to keep contributing for EEs already enrolled but
may not auto-enroll per draft DOL guidelines.
NOTE: Request from DOL ability to grandfather ERs once

they enter plan, in order to avoid creating two classes of
EEs.
Employment Intermediaries Party that controls payroll (e.g. temp agency) is

(PEOs, Temp Agencies, etc.) responsible for compliance.
Page 11
3- Definition of Eligible Employees / Participants
Employees Eligible for auto-enrollment: All EEs who are (i) EEs as
defined by IRS (receive W-2) and (ii) whose pay is subject
to California Unemployment Insurance taxes.
No exemption for part-time, short-term and seasonal

employees.
Recommended minimum age: 18

Alternatives: 19 or 20 (no higher, given
employment/earnings patterns)
Owners Owners eligible to participate if business falls under

mandate. This includes LLC/LP partners if they have
compensation eligible for IRA contributions under IRS
rules.
4- Voluntary Participation
Employers Not Covered by Allow these ERs to offer Secure Choice IRA. Under the
Mandate current draft of DOL guidelines for state auto-IRAs, ERs
not covered by mandate cannot auto-enroll EEs. Thus,
such employers could only offer voluntary enrollment to
EEs. Strong Recordkeeper control would be required to
prevent ER missteps in enrollment. However, if final DOL
regulations permit, employers should be allowed to auto-
enroll EEs.
Self-Employed/Independent Once the core program is running smoothly, Board should

Contractors consider allowing individuals to enroll through paperless
process and automatic ACH debits.
Voluntary Employer Not allowed for auto-IRA program under draft DOL
Contributions guidelines and current IRS rules. However, California
policymakers should consider whether the Board should
have discretion to establish a Multiple Employer Plan
(MEP) in the future to receive voluntary employer match
to EE contributions.
Page 12
5- Auto-Enrollment and Payroll Deduction Mechanisms
Active vs. Passive Passive auto-enrollment: ER or Recordkeeper—
depending on service model—notifies EE of auto-
enrollment; EE has 30 days to opt out before
Recordkeeper instructs ER to start payroll deduction. This
is only feasible in the Direct Service Model. In the EDD-
as-Intermediary model, ERs would either have to be
responsible for implementing the 30 day opt out process,
which can be onerous, or else start payroll deduction
immediately, in which case the Program would incur
increased costs for issuing refunds to EEs opting out.
Remove signature requirement for enrollment purposes;

keep EE signature as proof of receipt of program info.
Again, this is only advisable if the Recordkeeper directly
manages the opt-out process.
EEs Who Change their Mind Safe harbor period of 6 months after initial notification to
terminate payroll deduction and receive refund of
account balance with no transaction fee.
This policy may have to be adjusted based on further
determinations regarding Recordkeeper costs and
Program fee structure.
NOTE: IRA rules provide tax penalty free withdrawal of
contributions made each tax year (through April 15 of
following year)
Waiting Period None; immediate auto-enrollment. However, Auto-

enrollment/opt-out mechanics entail minimum 30-day
delay before payroll deduction.
IRA Contribution Limits Individual is responsible for tracking limit in relation to
income.
Recordkeeper flags when contributions approach

standard limits; issues refund of excess.
Income Limits on IRA Individual is responsible for tracking eligibility.
Eligibility
If ineligible based on income (small fraction of EEs):
-Elect Traditional IRA (may not be pre-tax if spouse
contributes to 401(k)-type plan, depending on income) or
-Request refund of contributions/terminate payroll
deduction.
Page 13
6- Social Security Number / Identity Issues
Employer Role in Social Normal employment eligibility verification process.
Security Number (SSN)
Validation NOTE: Include requirement for Recordkeeper to accept
this as part of the RFP to select Recordkeeper.
Recordkeeper & EE Roles Recordkeeper performs electronic validation of identity

of new enrollees; contacts EE (not ER) regarding invalid
SSN. Under the Direct Service model, no account is
created, and payroll deduction for that EE does not
commence until issue is resolved.
EE responsible for taking action to resolve issue -- correct

SSN/name, provide TIN, or opt out—within a 45 day
period.
If no resolution or EE opts out, Recordkeeper takes no

further action.
Under the EDD-as-Intermediary model, there may be a

need for refunds if payroll deduction commences before
the Recordkeeper has the opportunity to process SSN
issues.
Page 14
7- Money Out
Early Withdrawals Draft DOL guidelines prohibit restrictions or penalties; we
recommend requesting ability to impose requirement to
self-certify hardship.
NOTE: Awaiting legal feedback on permissibility of

product/fund-level restrictions.
Loans
Not permitted under IRA rules.
Rollovers Regular IRA rules per DOL guidelines – no restrictions.
Default Payout at Board should consider partial group annuity default

Retirement payout as program matures and account balances build
to levels sufficient for annuitization.
NOTE: Policy will be contingent on default investment

product (e.g., Target Date Fund vs. Pooled IRA/Reserve
Fund vs Target Date Fund with built-in income insurance).
Lost Accounts Escheat to State. Board to determine criteria for

considering an account lost (balance, number of years
inactive).
NOTE: Small, inactive accounts add to program cost.
Page 15
Financial Feasibility Study
The Financial Feasibility Study work stream calls for:
(1) An assessment of whether the Program will be self-sustaining.

(2) A recommendation for the amount of funds necessary to implement the Program and
the best means of financing.
(3) A recommendation of a cost and fee structure that ensures the Program is self-
sustaining, simple to administer and low-cost to participants.
Our key findings are that:
(1) The Secure Choice Program is financially viable and self-sustaining even under
adverse conditions with poor investment returns and high opt-outs rates.
(2) Total fees to participants need not exceed 1% of invested assets and such fees can
decline to significantly lower levels after the first 6 years of operation, making the
Program very attractive for savers.
(3) Under the conservative assumptions of the Baseline Scenario, with a default
contribution rate of 5% and an opt-out rate of 25%, the Program achieves significant
scale by the first year of operation with 1.6 million participants and over US $3 billion
in assets. It also achieves operational breakeven by the fourth year of operation. The
total funding gap—cumulative operating deficits financed at 5% interest—is moderate
at US $89 million, representing less than 2.7% of program assets at the end of the first
year of operation. The funding gap can be paid off by Year 6.
(4) Even under the adverse conditions of the Pessimistic Scenario, program expenses fall
below 1% of program assets by the sixth year of operation. The funding gap rises to
US $186 million representing 3.7% of program assets by Year 2, 2.3% by Year 3,
1.7% by Year 4 and 1.2% by Year 5.
(5) The sensitivity analysis we performed demonstrated that financing requirements and
program expense ratios are very sensitive to the default contribution rate, but the opt-
out rate has a moderate impact below 50% and even an extreme 70% opt-out rate still
affords a self-sustaining program with attractive long-term costs.
(6) Because most Program operating expenses consist of employee and employer per unit
costs, employer-level participation rates do not meaningfully impact Program financial
feasibility.
Our main recommendations are to:
(1) Structure the California Secure Choice Program along the lines of the Baseline
Scenario in terms of the default contribution rate (5%) and a recordkeeper direct
service model. In particular, program financing requirements and expense ratios are
highly sensitive to the default contribution rate. A lower default contribution rate
entails significantly higher startup financing.
Page 16
(2) Assuming a 5% default contribution rate, make provisions for obtaining US $134
million in startup financing, representing a 50% buffer over the Baseline Scenario
funding gap, even though a lesser amount is likely to obtain. Startup financing can be
secured through a line of credit or loan (best option), through vendor financing (less
attractive option), through higher fees to participants (undesirable option) or as a
combination of the above.
Recommended Legislative Changes
 SB1234 should be amended to allow the Board to set a default initial contribution rate
as high as 5%.
 SB1234 should be amended to allow the Board to implement auto-escalation of
participants’ contribution rates up to 10% with participant option to stop auto-
escalation and change the contribution rate at will.
 The statutory requirement for employers to collect signatures to enroll employees in
the Program should be removed.
 SB1234 should incorporate non-retaliation language authorizing employees to report
non-complying employers.
 SB1234 should be amended to remove the 50% cap on allocations to stocks and
entrust investment policy decisions to the Board subject to fiduciary constraints.
 SB1234 should give the Board flexibility to determine the default payout method (e.g.,
lump-sum or annuity).
 SB1234 should be amended to give the Board discretion to adjust Program eligibility
rules for employers that do not offer meaningful coverage to most of their employees.
Open Legal Items Being Addressed by K&L Gates
 Permissibility of product-level lockups or restrictions under proposed DOL

regulations.
 Permissibility of the managed account structure as a default investment option.
 No action letter from SEC for the Program as a whole and for specific Program
investment product offerings.
Page 17
C. Market Analysis
1. Overview
i. Scope and Methodology
The Scope of Services under the Contract calls for the Market Analysis to:
… determine likely levels of participation and elements of the Program that could
maximize participation, maximize the likelihood of private sector financial
providers offering products and services necessary to the Program, and minimize
inconvenience or disruptions to employers.
… and
determine whether the necessary conditions for implementation of the Program

can be met, including, but not limited to, likely participation rates, participants’
comfort with various investment vehicles and degree of risk, contribution levels,
and the rate of account closures and rollovers.
In order to address the above questions, the UC Berkeley Center for Labor Research and
Education (CLRE) conducted the Market Analysis in collaboration with Greenwald &
Associates (Greenwald), and in coordination with the Program Design and Feasibility
Study processes. The Market Analysis consists of four parts:
1) A market profile outlining the economic and demographic characteristics of the
eligible workforce, both at the individual worker level and at the household level.
Data were drawn from the Current Population Survey/Annual Social and
Economic Supplement (CPS ASEC). (CLRE also extracted data from CPS ASEC
for integration into the benefit projection model in the Program Design Study and
the revenue/expense model in the Financial Feasibility Study.)
2) Six (6) focus groups with eligible workers—two conducted in Spanish and
four conducted in English—to provide a qualitative assessment of the target
population’s attitudes and preferences with regard to program features, auto-
enrollment, auto-escalation, and investment risk.
3) Online survey of 1,000 eligible workers designed to yield reliable estimates of
opt-out and contribution rates and gauge attitudes toward retirement savings,
investment risk, liquidity, and account access.
4) Stakeholder interviews with employers and business groups, worker
organizations, and consumer organizations to identify key concerns and
suggestions regarding the design, rollout, and implementation of the Program.
Page 18
ii. Timeline
iii. Key Findings
Highlights
 About 6.8 million workers are potentially eligible for the California Secure Choice
Retirement Savings Program.1
 The median wage & salary income for this group is $23,000, and the mean is $35,000.
 83% are full-time workers and 17% are part-time.
 43% work in firms with fewer than 50 employees
 Two-thirds are people of color. 46% are Latino.
 3 out of 5 are under the age of 40
 57% are single; 43% are married and living with a spouse.
 42% have incomes that fall in the 0% federal marginal tax bracket after accounting for
all exemptions and deductions. Another 16% are in the 10% income bracket.
 Likely participation rates (70-90%) are sufficiently high to enable the Program to
achieve financial viability.
 Based on our internal survey of eligible workers in California and other research, we
estimate an opt-out rate range of 10-30%, depending on the auto-enrollment model.
The upper bound applies to an active-choice model in which each employee needs to
actively confirm their enrollment. The lower bound applies to a passive-choice model
in which each employee is given an opportunity to opt-out, and is then enrolled if they
take no action.
1
Eligible population statistics have been updated based on the latest available data from the Current Population
Survey (CPS). Income estimates have shifted upward due to economic growth and changes in CPS survey
methodology. The assumptions in the Feasibility Study are more conservative.
Page 19
 As we show in the Financial Feasibility Study, because of the large number of eligible
workers in California, participation rates as low as 50% do not have a significant
impact on the Program’s financial sustainability.
 Eligible participants in California are equally comfortable with a 3% and 5%

contribution rate. The vast majority of likely participants are also comfortable with
auto-escalation in 1% increments up to 10%.
 There is no statistically significant difference in opt-out rates between a 3% and 5%

default contribution rate in our survey results. This is corroborated by a national
survey conducted for Connecticut, which found no difference between 3% and 6%.2
 Likely contribution rates are highly sensitive to the default rate.
o A 5% default will lead to an average savings rate slightly higher than 5%
because a majority of those who elect a different contribution rate will choose
a higher rate. A 5% savings rate invested in a balanced portfolio or target date
fund yields a 20-23% average income replacement rate over a full career.
o A lower initial default (3%) will lead to lower average savings rates, and
ultimately lower retirement income.
 Auto-escalation will increase the savings rate among the majority of likely participants
(59%) but may increase the opt-out rate slightly.
 To start, the program should offer a default investment option consisting of a

diversified portfolio with long-term growth potential and the choice to opt into a low-
risk investment product.
 Most likely participants would choose a diversified portfolio with long-term growth
potential over a very safe investment such as a money market fund that is very likely
to yield low returns.
 At the same time, most eligible workers are risk-averse, especially if they are Latino
or low-income.
 While guarantees are expensive in the current interest rate environment, the Board
should continue to explore whether affordable guarantees—ones that do not unduly
compromise overall returns—can become feasible as the Program develops.
 Given its inherent portability, the Program should have a lower incidence of
rollovers and cash-outs than in employer-sponsored 401(k) plans, which often force
workers with low balances to close their accounts. At the same time, pre-retirement
withdrawals are likely to be higher in the Program given eligible workers’ income
profile.
 We estimate that about 25% of job leavers will roll over or cash out their balances.
 We also estimate that a total of 3.5% of plan assets will leak out each year through
rollovers, cash-outs, and pre-retirement withdrawals combined.
2
A. Belbase and G. Sanzenbacher, 2015 (Sep.), “Presentation to the Connecticut Retirement Security Board:
Employee Enrollment Experiment,” Center for Retirement Research at Boston College.
Page 20
 The Program launch should include a concerted public education campaign focused
on workers and small businesses.
 Both small employers and low-wage and immigrant workers require aggressive
outreach and education to understand their rights and responsibilities under the
Program.
 The outreach campaign should involve close collaboration with stakeholder groups
that have close ties to target employers and employees: chambers of commerce,
industry associations, worker centers, unions, and community based organizations, and
consumer organizations and asset-building groups.
 Outreach should also involve ethnic media to reach both ethnic employers and
immigrant workers.
Summary of Findings:
Topic Finding
Overall Demand for Program High
More than sufficient to render Program financially

feasible
Most uncovered workers in California, even those who

are low-income, want to save for retirement and feel that
they could save at least a small amount. They value
payroll deduction as an easy way to save.
Estimated Opt-Out Rate 10-30%, contingent on auto-enrollment mechanics
Default (passive) auto-enrollment should yield a 10% opt-

out rate. With an active choice process in which
employees must confirm participation, higher opt-out
rates should be expected.
Default Contribution Rate No difference in opt-out rates between 3% and 5%
A 5% default will lead to significantly higher retirement

incomes from the Program, compared to 3%.
Auto-Escalation High tolerance for auto-escalation
Overall, 8 out of 10 eligible workers surveyed said that

they would stay in the program with auto-enrollment.
Among likely participants (those who initially said they
would stay in the Program at the beginning of the
Page 21
Topic Finding
Greenwald online survey), 59% said they would stay with
the contributions, and 35% said they would stop the
increases. Only 6% said they would opt out entirely at
that time.
Risk Aversion/Risk Eligible workers are risk-averse, but most are willing to
Tolerance bear some risk in return for long-term growth in their
nest eggs. They value guarantees -- but not if they
preclude upside potential.
Specifically, 57% of likely participants in the Greenwald

online survey said they would rather invest in a diversified
portfolio (60% stocks/40% bonds) with long-term growth
potential and a small chance of loss of principal over the
long term. Only 27% said they would rather invest in a
money market fund that guards against loss but offers
little upside.
Access to Funds before A significant minority of eligible workers would not

Retirement participate if they cannot access funds in an emergency.
OTHER ISSUES
Financial Literacy The low-income segment of the eligible population has
less familiarity with basic financial concepts compared to
the general population.
iv. Key Recommendations
General Plan Design:
Default Contribution Rate 5%
NOTE: The statute should be amended to allow the Board

to set a default beginning contribution rate as high as 5%.
Auto-Escalation Implement in 1% increments up to 10%, after the

program has sufficiently phased in, and only if the
process can be coordinated by the Recordkeeper in lieu
of the employer.
Page 22
NOTE: The statute should be amended to allow the Board

to implement auto-escalation of participants’ contribution
rates up to 10%, with participant option to stop auto-
escalation and change their contribution rate at will.
Default Investment Vehicle Diversified portfolio that offers long-term growth

potential.
Insurance against loss may be purchased in the future as

participants approach retirement with substantial account
balances, or earlier depending on plan design. (see
Program Design study for more details)
Access to Funds before Limit pre-retirement withdrawals to hardship.

Retirement
While the program would ideally prohibit pre-retirement
withdrawals in order to maximize retirement income,
survey and focus group responses indicate that a
significant share of eligible workers would be disinclined
to participate if they cannot access their funds in
emergencies.
Account Information Access Electronic default with paper statement option.
While electronic statements help minimize Program costs,

some low-wage employees may not have access to a
computer or smartphone. Having a recordkeeper that has
a good program for SMS (text) based notifications in
addition to smartphone apps and web-based access may
help reduce the need for paper statements.
Program Features to Minimize Inconvenience or Disruptions to Employers:
Driving Principle Minimize decision-making for employers
Determination of Employee Simple look-back formula based on Fall quarter payroll

Eligibility headcounts.
(See Program Design section for details)
Auto-Enrollment Have the Recordkeeper play the primary role in

processing and tracking employee elections (including
Page 23
opt-outs and contribution rate changes), and SSN

validation for the purposes of establishing an account.
NOTE: This requires removing the statutory requirement

for employers to collect signatures to enroll employees in
the program.
Auto-Escalation Implement only if this can be coordinated by the

recordkeeper, without any need for employers to track
employee hire dates.
Outreach/Education & Employee Protections:
Employer Outreach Develop and implement early outreach campaign to
employers and payroll processors to educate them about
program requirements.
Work in partnership with state, local and ethnic

chambers of commerce and both ethnic and mainstream
media.
Employee Outreach Develop and implement a worker outreach program in

partnership with worker organizations, unions,
community organizations and asset building groups.
Focus on educating employees about 1) their rights under

the Program and 2) how to make an informed decision on
whether to participate and how much to contribute.
Make information about investments easily available to
workers who seek it out.
Employee Protections Institute an easy way for employees to report non-

complying employers to the State.
NOTE: Incorporate non-retaliation language into

authorizing legislation
Background on Opt-Out Rates under Auto-Enrollment:
The most important goal of the Market Analysis is to determine probable participation and
contribution rates. These two factors will drive the size of the Program’s asset pool and in
turn impact the ability of the Program to become financially self-sustaining and attract private
Page 24
financial service providers. While the Market Analysis includes original research to arrive at
such estimates for California, it is helpful to understand the broader dynamics of retirement
plan participation documented in existing research, particularly with regard to auto-enrollment
and participant retention.
To begin, there are three key models for enrollment into retirement savings plans, with
different consequences for rates of employee participation: opt-in, active choice, and passive
choice auto-enrollment. These are summarized in Table C-1.
Table C-1
Retirement Plan Enrollment Regimes
Enrollment Regime Description Participation Rates

(shortly after hire)
Opt-In Employees are not enrolled by Medium (45-55%)
default; must take action to opt (Low among low-wage
in. workers)
Active Choice Employees are forced to make a Higher (~70%)
decision about whether or not
to participate
Default Auto-Enrollment Employees enrolled by default; Highest (90%+)
(Passive Choice Auto- must take action to opt out. (Greatest difference for
Enrollment) low-wage workers)
Most studies of enrollment regimes compare passive choice auto-enrollment with the opt-in
system. For instance, 2015 Vanguard study found that “Among new hires, participation rates
more than double to 91% under automatic enrollment compared with 42% under voluntary
enrollment.”3 A survey of plan sponsors by the Defined Contribution Institutional Investment
Association found that two-thirds of the sample had opt-out rates of 9% or less.4
Comparing active choice to opt-in, Caroll, Choi, and Laibson et al. found that “the fraction of
employees who enroll in the 401(k) three months after hire is 28 percentage points higher
under an active decision regime than under a standard opt-in enrollment regime [emphasis
added].”5 While enrollments in an opt-in system do climb with tenure, for a given hire cohort,
it takes years for participation rates to catch up to an auto-enrollment system.6
3
J.W. Clark, S.P. Utkus, and J.A. Young, 2015 (Jan.), “Automatic Enrollment: The Power of the Default,”
Vanguard Research,
https://pressroom.vanguard.com/content/nonindexed/Automatic_enrollment_power_of_default_1.15.2015.pdf
4
L. Lucas, P. Hess, and C. Peterson, 2011 (Mar.), “Plan Sponsor Survey: Structuring DC Plan Automatic
Features to Pump Up Retirement Savings,” Defined Contribution Institutional Investment Association (DCIIA),
Washington, DC.
5
G.D. Carroll, J.J. Choi, D. Laibson, B.C. Madrian, and A. Metrick, 2009, “Optimal Defaults and Active
Decisions,” The Quarterly Journal of Economics v124n4, pp. 1639-1674.
6
Ibid.
Page 25
The National Employment Savings Trust (NEST) in the United Kingdom is a key example of
a government-sponsored defined-contribution retirement savings plans that uses auto-
enrollment but does not compel employee-level participation. Employers that do not already
sponsor a retirement plan that meets certain standards, are required to auto-enroll prime age
workers who earn at least £10,000 (about $14,200) a year. The minimum employee
contribution rate is 1%. In addition, employers are required to contribute 2% of pay on
employee earnings between £5,824 and £42,385 (about $8,200 to $61,000) a year. After the
smallest employers are phased into the program, minimum employer contributions will be
increased to 5% in October 2017, and finally to 8% in October 2018. From its launch in
October 2012 to August 2015, the program experienced an opt-out rate of 10% among
automatically enrolled workers.7
2. Market Profile
i. Methodology
CLRE analyzed CPS ASEC microdata8 to identify key characteristics of the eligible
population.
Universe. The universe for this analysis was defined as follows:

 California resident
 Private sector wage & salary employee during reference period
 Reported working for an employer that did not offer a retirement plan to any of its
employees at the longest job held in the calendar year
 Age 18-64. (Age bracket defined for analytical purposes only. Actual age
restrictions and eligibility rules are contingent on SCIB policy and federal laws.)
 Employed in a firm with 5 or more employees.9
Timeframe. In order to facilitate subpopulation analysis, we combined data for multiple
calendar years. Most of the following findings are based on the 2013, 2014, and 2015
CPS ASEC surveys, reflecting data for calendar years 2012-2014. Industry and
occupation data were analyzed before the recent release of 2015 survey microdata, and
reflect data for calendar years 2011-2013.
Note on Income Data. The CPS ASEC methodology was recently redesigned to better
7
United Kingdom Department for Works and Pensions (DWP), 2014 (Nov.), “Automatic Enrolment
Evaluation Report 2015,” DWP Research Report 909, DWP, London, UK,
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/477176/rr909-automatic-
enrolment-evaluation-2015.pdf.
8
Downloaded from the University of Minnesota IPUMS project.
9
Because the smallest firm size classification in our dataset was 1 to 9 employees, we multiplied the weights for
employees in this size class by 0.53, based on BLS data on employment distribution across firm sizes 1 to 4 and
5 to 9 nationally.
Page 26
capture income data from different sources. In 2013, the redesigned protocol set was
implemented for 3/8 of the sample, and the old protocol was implemented for 5/8 of the
sample. The redesigned protocol was fully implemented beginning in 2014, and research
confirms that the new methodology yields about 3% higher median income than the old
methodology.10 In addition, incomes have risen during the last few years due to stronger
employment.
Consequently, the family-level income statistics presented here are significantly higher
than those in earlier analyses, including CLRE’s presentation to SCIB in May 2015, which
used 2011, 2012, and 2013 data based on the older methodology. However, data on wage
and salary income is not affected by the redesign.
ii. Key Findings
Demographic Characteristics
 Size of eligible population: 6.8 million workers—55% of private sector workers age
18-64 who do not have access to a workplace retirement plan (Figure C-1).
 Gender: 55% are male, and 45% are female (Table C-2).
 Marital status: 57% are single and 43% are married and living with a spouse (Table
C-2).
 Age: The eligible population skews heavily toward younger workers (Figure C-2).
Three out of five (59%) are under the age of 40. One out of three (35%) are under the
age of 30 (i.e., 18-29 years old). Older workers make up a smaller share of the eligible
population because they are more likely to be offered a workplace retirement plan and
because labor force participation rates begin to drop off at older ages.
 Race/Ethnicity: two-thirds (66%) are workers of color. Latinos alone make up 46%
of the eligible population (Figure C-3).
 Language: Data about written English proficiency is not available for the eligible
population. One indicator, from the Census Bureau’s American Community Survey,
is that about 12% of private sector employees in California have limited spoken
English proficiency. CPS ASEC does not include questions about languages spoken.
The American Community Survey (ACS) from the U.S. Census Bureau does not ask
about retirement plans, but does have data on employment status and spoken language.
According to the 2014 ACS, about 12% of California private sector employees age 18-
64 have limited English proficiency; they either do not speak English or do not “speak
English well.”11 Among Spanish-speaking private sector employees age 18-64, 24%
10
J.L. Semega and E. Welniak, Jr., 2015, “The Effects of the Changes to the Current Population Survey Annual
Social and Economic Supplement on Estimates of Income,” Proceedings of the 2015 Allied Social Science
Association (ASSA) Research Conference, https://www.census.gov/content/dam/Census/library/working-
papers/2015/DEMO/ASSA-Income-CPSASEC-Red.pdf
11
Author’s analysis of 2014 ACS data from IPUMS.
Page 27
have limited English proficiency. Most communication between the Program and
participants will be in written form. However, it is unclear how spoken English
proficiency translates into English literacy. Some fluent speakers of English as a
second language may not necessarily be equally proficient in reading English. At the
same time, some who are not fluent in spoken English may have an easier time
reading English, depending on their educational background and literacy in their
native language.
Figure C-1
Share of Private Sector Employees Age 18-64 With Access to a Workplace
Retirement Plan
55.0%
51.7%
50.0%
45.0% 44.2%
40.0%
35.0%
30.0%
Table C-2
Gender & Marital Status of Eligible Workers, 2012-2014
Gender
Male 54.8%
Female 45.2%
Marital Status
Married, living with spouse 42.6%
Single 57.4%
Page 28
Figure C-2
Age Profile of Eligible Workers, 2012-2014
60-64 4.7%
55-59 7.3%
50-54 9.0%
45-49 9.8%
40-44 10.3%
35-39 10.8%
30-34 13.1%
25-29 14.6%
20-24 16.7%
18-19 3.7%
Figure C-3
Race/Ethnicity of Eligible Workers, 2012-2014
Other
2%
White
34%
Latino
46%
Asian
Black
14%
4%
Job-Related Characteristics
 Wage & salary income: the median wage income of eligible workers is $23,000, and
the mean is about $35,000. Four out of five earn wage income less than $50,000 a
year. (Figure C-4). These figures accurately represent actual earnings, but somewhat
under-represent annualized pay rates because about 20% of employees in the
Page 29
population worked less than a full year (see Figure C-6). Data adjusted for partial-
year earnings and
 Firm size: A majority (54%) of eligible employees work in firms with less than 100
employees; 43% work in firms with less than 50 employees, i.e, 5-49 employees
(Figure C-5).
 Full-time/part-time status: 83% of eligible workers are full-time, and 17% are part-
time (Figure C-6). This underscores the fact that the problem of lack of retirement
plan coverage is widespread.
 Industry: Retail, Accommodation & Food Services, Healthcare & Social Services,
and Manufacturing account for nearly half (48%) of the eligible workforce. In
particular, Accommodation & Food Services is over-represented (12% of eligible
workers vs. 9% of private sector employment) because three out of four employees in
this sector do not have access to a workplace retirement plan. Other, smaller sectors
are also over-represented because of lower-than-average access: Agriculture,
Construction, Management/Administrative Support/Waste Management Services, and
Other Services. (See Table C-3.)
 Industry & Race: Eligible workers of color are over-represented in Agriculture,
Manufacturing, Wholesale/Transportation/Warehousing, and Accommodation & Food
Services. In particular, Latinos are over-represented in Agriculture,
Management/Administrative Support/Waste Management Services, and
Accommodation & Food Services. (See Table C-4.)
Figure C-4
Wage Distribution of Eligible Employees, 2012-2014
median = $23,009 $74,278

mean = $35,146
$48,487
$36,013
$28,886
$23,009
$18,569
$14,224
$9,624
$4,642
10th 20th 30th 40th 50th 60th 70th 80th 90th

Percentile
Page 30
Figure C-5
Firm Size Profile of Eligible Workers, 2012-2014
5 to 9
1000+ 15.2%
28.3%
10 to 49
27.7%
500 to 999
4.2% 100 to 499
13.8% 50 to 99
10.8%
Figure C-6
Full-time/Part-time Status of Eligible Workers, 2012-2014
82.7%
16.6%
66.1%
17.3%
3.5%
13.8%
Full-time Part-time
Year-round Partial-year
Page 31
Table C-3
Distribution of Eligible Workers by Industry, 2011-2013
% of Private
% of Eligible Sector
Workers Employment
Agriculture 4.4% 2.7%
Mining & Utilities 0.5% 1.1%
Construction 7.2% 6.0%
Manufacturing 11.0% 13.1%
Retail 13.3% 13.6%
Wholesale, Transportation & Warehousing 7.3% 7.4%
Information, Finance & Insurance 5.6% 9.0%
Real Estate, Rental & Leasing 2.2% 2.0%
Professional, Scientific & Technical Svcs 6.1% 7.8%
Mgmt, Admin, Support Waste Mgmt Svcs 7.3% 5.5%
Educational Svcs 3.2% 3.7%
Health Care & Social Svcs 11.0% 12.6%
Arts, Entertainment & Recreation 2.6% 2.4%
Accommodation & Food Svcs 12.3% 8.6%
Other Svcs 6.1% 4.5%
Total 100.00% 100.0%
Table C-4
Race of Eligible Workers by Industry, 2011-2013
White Black Latino Asian Other Total

Agriculture 8% 0% 88% 3% 0% 100%
Mining & Utilities 44% 6% 48% 2% 0% 100%
Construction 32% 2% 61% 4% 2% 100%
Manufacturing 26% 2% 55% 15% 1% 100%
Retail 34% 4% 46% 14% 1% 100%
Wholesale, Transportation & Warehousing 29% 4% 50% 15% 1% 100%
Information, Finance & Insurance 48% 4% 30% 17% 1% 100%
Real Estate, Rental & Leasing 42% 5% 38% 13% 2% 100%
Professional, Scientific & Technical Svcs 51% 4% 17% 24% 3% 100%
Mgmt, Admin, Support Waste Mgmt Svcs 23% 6% 61% 8% 2% 100%
Educational Svcs 50% 6% 28% 13% 3% 100%
Health Care & Social Svcs 36% 8% 37% 17% 2% 100%
Arts, Entertainment & Recreation 52% 4% 27% 14% 3% 100%
Accommodation & Food Svcs 29% 3% 53% 13% 2% 100%
Other Svcs 31% 3% 50% 15% 1% 100%
Total 33% 4% 48% 13% 2% 100%
Page 32
Traditional or Roth IRA? Eligible Workers’ Family Income & Tax Status
We analyzed CPS ASEC data to understand the tax implications of a traditional IRA versus a
Roth IRA for eligible workers. The universe for this analysis is the same as above, except for
the timeframe. We used data for 2013 and 2014 to capture the income statistics using the CPS
ASEC’s redesigned income questionnaire.12
Considerations for Traditional IRA: Contributions are deducted from taxable income, and
retirement withdrawals are taxed as normal income. Participants must claim the deduction on
their tax return to receive the tax benefit—unlike 401(k) or pension contributions which are
directly reported to the IRS by employers and excluded from wages for paycheck calculation
purposes. Tax-deferred contributions are allowed for single filers of any income as long as
they do not participate in an employer sponsored retirement plan. For those who do not have
a workplace retirement plan, but whose spouses do, deductible contributions phase out
starting at $184,000 modified adjusted gross income (MAGI), and those with MAGI above
$194,000 can only make after-tax contributions.
Considerations for Roth IRA: Contributions are taxed as normal income, and retirement
withdrawals are tax-free up to IRS income limits. In 2016, allowable contributions phase out
starting at $117,000 modified adjusted gross income (MAGI) for single filers; those with
$132,000 MAGI and above are ineligible. For married filers, the phase-out starts at $184,000
MAGI, and those with $194,000 MAGI and above are ineligible.
MAGI is Adjusted Gross Income (AGI) with the following deductions added back in: 13
 Self-employed retirement and IRA contributions
 Half of self-employment taxes paid
 Alimony payments
 Health savings accounts or self-employed health insurance payments
 Student loan interest and qualified tuition costs
To begin, 95% of eligible workers file taxes—49% as Single, 7% as Head of Household, and
39% as Married/Filing Jointly (Figure C-6).
Table C-5 shows the percentile distribution of federal Adjusted Gross Income and taxable
income of eligible workers by filing status. It appears that the vast majority of Single and
Head of Household filers do not earn enough to trigger the Roth IRA income limit. Up to
20% of Married/Joint filers, representing 8% of the eligible population, may have high
enough incomes to trigger the Roth income limit for any contributions, and the traditional
IRA income limit if the worker’s spouse is covered by a retirement plan at work. It is likely
that there is heavy overlap between workers whose spouses have a retirement plan, and those
whose incomes are too high to qualify for Roth IRA contributions.
12
While the income question redesign affects total income, it does not affect wage and salary income data. Thus
the earnings data presented in the previous section are for 2012-2014.
13
IRS, “Adjusted Gross Income (AGI) vs. Modified Adjusted Gross Income (MAGI): What’s the Difference
Between Your AGI and MAGI?,” https://www.irs.com/articles/adjusted-gross-income-agi-vs-modified-adjusted-
gross-income-magi.
Page 33
In the case of a traditional IRA default, very high income workers would have to be advised
that if they are married and their spouse participates in a workplace retirement plan, their
contributions to the Program are not tax-deductible. In the case of a Roth IRA default, these
workers need to be instructed to re-characterize their contributions as a traditional IRA or to
stop contributing altogether. They should be notified of these options during auto-enrollment
in order to minimize recordkeeper costs. A mitigating factor is that households with such
high incomes tend to closely track their tax deductions and liabilities and are far better
positioned to make an opt-out decision based on tax issues than are low-income households.
A strong point in favor of a Roth IRA default is that a majority of eligible workers are
subject to very low marginal federal income tax rates: nearly 42% are in the 0% federal
income tax bracket, and 16% are in the 10% bracket (Table C-6). Thus they would not
reap meaningful tax benefits from a traditional IRA and stand to gain the most from a Roth
IRA that assures them tax-free retirement income in the future.
Unlike high-income tax filers, low-income workers require aggressive outreach to inform
them about tax issues. Ultimately low-income workers are less likely to take action to opt out
of an inappropriate default based on tax implications than high-income workers. Among
married filers, those with no taxable income outnumber those with incomes approaching
the limit for Roth IRAs by four to one (Table C-5).
Finally, 19% of married filers (representing 8% of the total eligible population) have a spouse
with a retirement plan, and need to be advised about potential limits on pre-tax contributions
in a traditional IRA (Table C-7).
Figure C-6
Eligible Workers’ Tax Filing Status, 2013-2014
Nonfiler
5%
Joint
39%
Single
49%
Head of
Household
7%
Page 34
Table C-5
Adjusted Gross Income & Taxable Income by Tax Filer Status, 2013-2014
Single/Head of Household (54% Married Filing Joint

of Total) (39% of Total)
Percentile AGI Taxable Income AGI Taxable Income
10th 5,000 0 0 0
20th 9,000 0 0 0
30th 13,000 1,850 0 0
40th 16,000 5,000 0 0
50th 20,000 9,850 29,004 3,300
60th 25,000 14,000 52,220 25,700
70th 30,000 19,720 85,000 53,729
80th 42,000 30,000 160,680 111,688
90th 62,000 44,994 233,812 187,842
Table C-6
Eligible Workers’ Federal Marginal Tax Rate, 2013-2014
Marginal Tax % of Eligible

Rate Workers
0% 41.6%
10% 16.1%
15% 28.3%
25% 10.8%
28% 2.2%
33% 0.7%
35% 0.0%
40% 0.3%
Total 100.0%
Table C.7
Spousal Retirement Plan Status of Eligible Workers, 2013-2014
% of Married % of All
Eligible Eligible
Workers Workers
No job in reference period 25.8% 10.8%
Spouses' employer does not offer retirement plan 51.7% 21.6%
Spouse's employer offers plan, but spouse not included 3.5% 1.5%
Spouse participates in employer retirement plan 18.9% 7.9%
Total married 100.0% 41.7%
Page 35
3. Focus Groups
i. Methodology
Greenwald conducted six focus groups in Summer 2015 with other members of the study
team advising on question content. The purpose of the focus groups was to yield rich,
qualitative insights into the values and views of those who do not have access to
retirement plans and to inform the design of the online survey instrument.
We conducted six focus groups of 6-10 workers in three regions of California – two each
in Los Angeles, San Francisco and Fresno (Table C-8).
Because low-income participants are harder to reach via the online panel surveys, we
chose to over-represent them in the focus groups. Four groups were low-income (less than
$50,000 annual household income) and two groups were “higher” income ($50,000 or
higher). Two of the four low income groups were held in Spanish with live translation to
English provided for observers.
Focus group participants were full-time workers age 21 and older who are household
decision makers and who do not have access to any type of pension or retirement plan at
work.
Overall Screening Requirements:

 Age 21 to 64
 Financial decision-maker for household
 Working full-time or part-time (at least 20 hours/week)
 Not self-employed
 Employer has 5+ employees
 Does not have pension or retirement plan through employer
 Mix by gender, education and marital status
 Mix by race/ethnicity in English speaking groups
Brian Perlman moderated the English speaking groups, and Chris Bain-Borrego
moderated the Spanish speaking groups.
Page 36
Table C-8
Focus Group Composition Summary
Fresno Los Angeles San Francisco

(June 23rd) (June 24th) (June 25th)
Low-income Low-income Higher Low-income Higher Low-income
(<$50K) (<$50K) income (<$50K) income (<$50K)
($50K+) ($50K+)
English Spanish English Spanish English English
9 10 8 9 6 6
participants participants participants participants participants participants
ii. Overview of Moderator’s Guide
The full Moderator’s Guide is attached in the Appendix. Because it took more time than
expected to help participants understand basic financial concepts related to the Program, not
all questions were covered in each focus group.
Groups began with a general discussion of participants' readiness for retirement and financial
realities, including:
 How they view their retirement prospects

 How well they have saved so far
 Obstacles to saving for retirement
 Familiarity/comfort with different investments and retirement savings vehicles
 Attitudes towards payroll deduction arrangements
We then introduced the proposed Program using a hand-out with a sample program
description (Exhibit C-1). Participants were given time to individually read the handout, and
then the Moderator reviewed each of the program’s seven key features. Participants were
asked about:
 Their overall reaction to the program
 Reaction to key features, including
 automatic enrollment and payroll deduction
 a 3% vs. 5% default contribution rate, and auto-escalation
 the IRA
 portability
 having professionals invest their retirement savings for them
 being able to convert savings into lifetime income
 online access to account information
Page 37
Exhibit C-1
Focus Group Handout 1 – Program Description
Page 38
We then gave out Handout 2, which illustrated the impact of steady monthly contributions on
long-term asset growth, and Handout 3, showing the expected retirement income from those
contributions in addition to Social Security, to gauge the effectiveness of different ways of
illustrating program benefits. (See Section H-Appendix for English and Spanish versions of
“Examples for Focus Groups”, as well as the Spanish version of Handout 1.)
Next we probed for preferences regarding the following:
 Levels of comfort with various investment portfolios with various risk levels
 Lifetime income – tradeoffs between income and certain period returns
 Importance of access to funds before retirement and deal-breaker conditions
 Tax treatment – paying taxes on retirement contributions now versus at
retirement (traditional vs. Roth IRA)
Finally, we tested various message statements regarding the plan emphasizing:
 The importance of promoting self-responsibility

 The impact of the plan on overcoming inertia in a positive way
 The important consequences of building net worth among those who have not
done so before
iii. Key Findings
The following are adapted from Greenwald’s final report on the focus groups, which can be
found in the Appendix. Readers should note that while they yield rich qualitative data, focus
group findings are suggestive rather than definitive because of their small sample size.
We used these findings to inform questions in the online survey, which offers a more reliable
gauge from which to infer likely behavior and preferences in the target population.
Current Environment
1. Many focus participants, especially low income ones, feel that they cannot afford to
save (as expected). Many are also held back by the inertia of never getting started and
fear/uncertainty about where to put their money.
2. However, most say they want to save and would do so if given the opportunity.
3. Many participants have a strong mistrust of financial institutions, fearing not only
market loss but also that they cannot trust institutions to hold their money.
4. Views on government are more mixed. Some trust government and some do not.
Most are at least mildly positive about California State government.
5. On balance, most are also risk averse—mostly due to fears and lack of knowledge
about the investment world. These consumers do not understand realities that would
Page 39
ease their mind – that money is protected from fraud, the risk-return trade-off, that risk
is reasonable for someone holding money for years, and that mutual fund money is
diversified. Notably, many participants believe that investment management consists
of betting on individual stocks.
Reaction to California Secure Choice
1. Respondents generally have a favorable reaction to the California Secure Choice

program and its features.
2. Most participants like the automatic enrollment feature. Most importantly, many
feel that automatic enrollment will get them to save more.
 They are mixed on whether 3% or 5% is an appropriate contribution, although
most are fine with a 5% default if they could choose a different rate.
 While some like automatic escalation, most are a little uncertain about
committing to it and whether or not they could really do it.
3. Portability is universally appealing. Participants like that they can take the plan
from job to job and that the account is in their name.
4. Most like the concept of converting their savings into a guaranteed income stream,
more so than we see in research with 401(k) participants.
5. Most like an illustration that shows a small amount of money coming out of their
paychecks leading to a significant savings later in life, and are willing to make that
tradeoff.
6. It is important for participants that they can pass the money to their heirs. This is
especially important to Hispanics who have a strong focus on their children.
7. The idea of having access to the account through a computer or smart phone is
appealing, although most were not that clear on what types of information they would
like to get.
Challenges
The focus groups revealed particular challenges that the Program should be prepared to
face in communicating with the target population. Most of these challenges relate to the
lack of comfort and familiarity with basic financial principles and investment options. In
addition, there are particular challenges related to the low-income Spanish speaking
population.
1. The biggest challenge will be positioning and explaining investment options to
potential users, given the lack of exposure to retirement savings vehicles in particular
and investment concepts in general.
Page 40
2. California will have to deal with the lack of trust that many have of financial
institutions. Most low-income participants have no idea of who holds and invests
retirement plan money and that protections are in place to keep it safe.
3. Many participants—especially those who are low-income—are overly risk-averse
as a result of their limited financial literacy, because they don’t understand the
relationship between risk, reward, and time, and the protection afforded by
diversification.
Challenges related to the Spanish-speaking population
1. Literacy relating to the U.S. financial system is extremely low among low-income
Spanish-speaking participants. Most barely know what IRAs are, and few have ever
thought about the future value of money.
2. Spanish-speaking participants are more risk averse than English speaking ones.
3. Most have strong suspicion of the government. Many trust government less than
financial institutions. Some of this is driven by anti-Hispanic political rhetoric from
politicians.
4. There is a strong culture of saving and wealth-building (e.g., buying a home and
saving for a business), but there is a much stronger focus on resources for one’s
family, especially children, than there is on retirement.
5. Some do not plan on using the U.S. retirement system.
6. The need for Social Security numbers may pose a barrier to participation. Even if the
workers themselves have them, there can often be designated beneficiaries who do
not.
4. Online Survey
Greenwald fielded an online survey of 1,000 California workers eligible for the Program
in order gauge potential participation/opt-out rates, contribution rates, and reactions to
potential program features. The survey was conducted from August 31 to September 16,
2015. The survey included a behavioral experiment designed to estimate opt-out rates
with a 3% default contribution rate and a 5% default contribution rate.
Page 41
i. Methodology
Sample Selection and Weighting
Respondents were selected from among members of Research Now’s online research
panel. Research Now has one of the largest online panels in the country. A primary reason
we used this panel is that, unlike most others, it is a “by-invitation-only” panel. This
means that rather than taking any individual that responds to an online promotion or
purchases a product, the panel is purposefully constructed. This allows it to have a more
representative nature than panels that accept volunteer participants.
To qualify, respondents were required to be:

 Age 21 to 64
 Working full-time or part-time
 Not self-employed or working for Federal, state or local government
 Working for employer with 5 or more employees
 Without a pension or retirement plan through employer
The data were weighted by gender, age, education, race/ethnicity and household income to
reflect the core population of workers eligible for the Program under SB1234, as defined
by CLRE’s analysis of CPS ASEC data. Consistent with the composition of online survey
panels in general, the unweighted sample for this survey contains greater shares of higher
income, college educated, and whites than the target population. However, we used
quotas to ensure sufficiently large samples of each race, gender, age, and income subgroup
to weight the data to reflect the subpopulations.
In a similarly-sized random sample survey, the margin of error would be plus or minus 3.1
percentage points at the 95% confidence level.
One limitation to the survey is that it was only conducted in English. Thus Spanish-
speaking participants are under-represented in the sample.
Behavioral Experiment with 3% and 5% Default Contribution Rates
Respondents were randomly split into two samples of 500 each to test the impact of two
different contribution rates—3% and 5%—on participant opt-out rates. At the beginning
of the survey, after the screening questions, respondents in each group were presented
with a brief description of the Program highlighting a few key features. The description
was identical for both groups, except for the contribution rate. Then they were asked what
they would do if their employer automatically enrolled them in the program: opt out, stay
in at the same contribution rate, or stay in but elect a different contribution rate. If they
chose to elect a different contribution rate, they were asked what they would change it to.
Page 42
This type of behavioral experiment reliably predicts participant behavior in an active

choice context in which respondents must make an affirmative choice in order to enroll in
a retirement plan. Such an approach yields significantly higher opt-out rates than a
passive choice approach in which respondents are enrolled in the plan unless they take
action to opt out.
ii. Overview of Survey Questions
The full questionnaire can be found in the Appendix. The survey topics were ordered as
follows:
1. Screening questions to filter for participants who meet the criteria listed above.
2. Reaction to Program consisting of a brief description of the program, leading into
a behavioral experiment to measure opt-out rates with a 3% versus 5% default.
This was followed by questions eliciting reactions to key program features
including auto-escalation, portability, and liquidity, and basic investment
risk/reward strategies.
3. Account access questions regarding participants’ preferred method of interacting
with the program in key situations ranging from enrollment to divorce to
retirement. (This section was informed by questions from Bridgepoint, the third
party administration specialist on the consultant team, to inform recordkeeping
cost estimates.)
4. General financial situation and attitudes toward retirement saving.
5. Additional financial and demographic questions regarding marital status, debt,
length of current employment, and whether or not they had a retirement plan at
their previous job. (The purpose of this section was to provide data to inform the
financial feasibility model, as well as for general analysis.)
iii. Key Findings
Greenwald’s final survey report, along with detailed tabulations of each question, can be
found in the Appendix. Below is a recap of the key findings from that report:
1. Strong support for auto-enrollment retirement savings via payroll deduction.
 Six in seven (84%) think this is a good idea, including 57% who say it is a very
good idea.
 Other key program features, such as portability and the ability to designate a
beneficiary, are appealing to a large majority of workers.
2. Most would participate in the program – only about a quarter (27%) would opt
out, regardless of whether the deferral (i.e., contribution) rate is 3% or 5%.
Page 43
 There is no statistically significant difference in opt-out rates between 3% and

5% default.
 Retention rates in the program are higher for women than for men (77% vs.
71%); likelihood of staying the program also increases as personal income
goes up. However, there are not statistically meaningful differences in
retention rates by Hispanic status or age.
 Some (18%) would stay in the program but would ask to have their deferral
rate changed. Of that group, only a minority would ask to lower their deferral
rate (32% of those with a 3% deferral rate and 43% of those with a 5% deferral
rate).
3. Automatic escalation is not a deal breaker for participation for most; liquidity is
a somewhat larger potential barrier.
 Automatically increasing contributions by 1% annually up to a maximum of
10% will not prevent most uncovered workers from participating – 81% would
stay in the program if it included automatic escalation. However, 33% would
ask their employer to stop the increases.
 About a third will not participate if they cannot access their money if they
become seriously ill (32%) or if their spouse dies (32%).
 About a quarter would require, as a condition of participation, being able to
access their money in the event of a job loss (28%) or a family member
becoming seriously ill (26%).
4. There is a clear preference for savings in the program to be invested for long-
term growth rather than for protecting against loss.
 By a two to one margin, uncovered workers prefer to have their money
invested in a Balanced Fund rather than a Money Market Fund.
5. Other key features of the program are appealing – large majorities say each of
seven program features tested are highly attractive.
 Being able to pass their savings on to a beneficiary in the event they die and
being able to take their account from job to job are most highly rated.
 Large shares also highly value having online access to their account, an
annuitization option at retirement, low cost investments in the program, and
having a personal account set up in their name.
 The least attractive feature – but still considered extremely to very attractive by
73% – is having multiple investment options available.
6. The vast majority of uncovered workers have the desire and the ability to put at
least some money aside for retirement, but most have not done much, if anything,
to build a retirement nest egg.
 They agree that saving for retirement is important (96% very or somewhat
important).
Page 44
 Retirement ranks second as an overall savings priority (45% rank it 1st or 2nd
out of 6 potential savings needs) after having an emergency fund.
 Nearly all could save at least some amount in a retirement savings plan
available at work. However, expected contributions are generally small –
two-thirds feel the most they could contribute is less than $100 per month.
 Over half are currently saving less than 5% for retirement, including 29% who
are not saving anything.
7. The leading barriers for not saving more for retirement include low earnings and
the debt burden they carry – these two issues are the primary reasons for over
half of uncovered workers.
 Four in ten say a major reason is that they are more focused on their family and
nearly as many (36%) report that dealing with unexpected expenses is a major
reason they do not save more.
8. Most prefer online interaction with the proposed plan through a website or
email, but there is a segment who requires talking by phone to customer service.
 When in need of assistance, 30-40% prefer to have phone contact for various
service needs.
 Among those who prefer phone-based service, two-thirds or more would only
feel comfortable using this method, especially when getting started in the
program.
1. 5% default contribution rate.

 There is no statistically significant difference in opt-out rates between a 3%
and 5% default contribution rate in our survey results. This is corroborated by
a national survey conducted for Connecticut, which found no difference
between 3% and 6%.14
 Likely contribution rates are highly sensitive to the default rate.
 A 5% default will lead to an average savings rate slightly higher than
5% because a majority of those who elect a different contribution rate
will choose a higher rate. A 5% savings rate invested in a balanced
portfolio or target date fund yields a 20-23% average income
replacement rate over a full career.
 A lower initial default (3%) will lead to lower average savings rates
and ultimately lower retirement income.
 Auto-escalation will increase the savings rate among the majority of likely
participants (59%) but may increase the opt-out rate slightly.
14
Belbase & Sanzenbacher 2015, op cit.
Page 45
2. To start, the program should offer a default investment option consisting of a

diversified portfolio with long-term growth potential and the choice to opt into a
low-risk investment product.
 Most likely participants would choose a diversified portfolio with long-term
growth potential over a completely safe investment such as a money market
fund that is guaranteed to yield low returns.
 At the same time, most eligible workers are risk-averse, especially if they are
Latino or low-income.
 While guarantees are expensive in the current interest rate environment, the
Board should continue to explore whether affordable guarantees—ones that do
not unduly compromise overall returns—can become feasible as the Program
develops.
5. Rollovers and Cash-Outs

i. Overview
Because of the difficulty of gauging employee behavior with regard to rollovers and cash-outs
through a survey method, we look to behavior in the 401(k) universe and adjust for
differences between employer-sponsored plans and the proposed program, both in terms of
overall design and participant characteristics.
Overall, about 3.5% of participants take withdrawals from 401(k) plans each year.15 In about
half of these cases, withdrawals are based on hardship. The rate of pre-retirement
withdrawals from the Program is likely to be higher than in the 401(k) world, given
demographics.
Impact of job turnover. Turnover averages 38% annually among 401(k) plans, primarily as
the result of job changes and retirement. Given that most 401(k) plans are single-employer,
turnover is likely to be lower for Program given its statewide coverage.
In addition, many 401(k) plans force participants with lower balances to withdraw their assets,
and this is a source of a significant share of savings leakage. Current law allows active 401(k)
plans to force out separating employees with less than $5,000 in their account16, and only 7%
of plan sponsors allow employees to keep their money in their 401(k) regardless of the
balance at separation.17 If the employee does not make an election on where to transfer their
assets, then the employer can decide for them. Those with less than $1,000 can simply be
15
Extrapolated from S. Holden and D. Schras, 2015 (Apr.), “Defined Contribution Plan Participants’

Activities, 2014.”, ICI Research Report, p. 5, Figure 3, www.ici.org/pdf/ppr_14_rec_survey.pdf.
16
U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO), 2014 (Nov.), “401(K) Plans: Greater Protections Needed for

Forced Transfers and Inactive Accounts,” GAO-15-73, GAO, Washington, DC,
http://www.gao.gov/assets/670/667151.pdf.
17
Plan Sponsor Council of America (PSCA), “55th Annual Survey of Profit Sharing and 401(k) Plans,” PSCA,
2012.
Page 46
cashed out.18 This is a particular problem for young and low-income workers because they
are more likely to have insufficient balances to stay with their employer plans.
Given that the Program is designed to be portable between jobs and that workers changing
jobs will not be prompted to take their funds elsewhere, we anticipate that turnover
resulting from job changes will be significantly lower in the Program than in 401(k)s.
Most IRA assets consist of rollovers from 401(k) plans. Among households that had rolled
over 401(k) assets into an IRA, 24% cited wanting to consolidate assets; 24% did not want to
leave money behind at the former employer; and 17% wanted more investment options.19
ii. Key Findings
 The rate of pre-retirement withdrawals from the Program is likely to be higher

than in the 401(k) world, given the demographics of the population eligible for
Secure Choice.
 However, we anticipate that turnover resulting from job changes will be
significantly lower in the Program than in 401(k)s due to the portability of the
Secure Choice IRA.
 Based on the above, we estimate that cash-outs and rollovers will occur with 10-25%
of job leavers and 5% of continuing workers, totaling 3.5% of plan assets each
year.
6. Stakeholder Interviews (Including Employers Interviews)

i. Overview
We conducted interviews/meetings in July and August of 2015 with over 22 representatives of

organizations on the implementation of the California Secure Choice Retirement Savings
Program. The purpose of the interviews was to ascertain the perspectives of multiple
stakeholders from three key constituencies: labor and community organizations, employers
and employer organizations, and consumer associations/asset building groups. We provided a
brief overview of SB 1234 and the proposed Program, then solicited questions, concerns and
suggestions regarding the design and implementation of the California Secure Choice
Retirement Savings Program. Interviews in the San Francisco Bay Area were conducted in
person, while interviews with people outside of the Bay Area were conducted by phone.
Interviews were semi-structured and typically ranged from thirty minutes to one hour in
length. Interviews were conducted by Nari Rhee, Manager of the Retirement Security
Program at UC Berkeley CLRE, and graduate student researcher Caitlin Fox-Hodess.
List of Interviewees
18
GAO, 2014 (Nov.), op cit.
19
“The Role of IRAs in U.S. Households’ Saving for Retirement, 2014,” ICI Research Perspective v21n1,
November 2015, https://www.ici.org/pdf/per21-01.pdf.
Page 47
Constituency Name Organization

Business Alice Perez California Hispanic Chamber of Commerce
Jim Lazarus San Francisco Chamber of Commerce
Nicole Rice California Manufacturers and Technology
Association
Marti Fisher California Chamber of Commerce
Gwyneth Borden Golden Gate Restaurant Association
Le Tim Ly Chinese Progressive Association (also interviewed as
community organization)
Jan Masaoka California Association of Non-Profits
Holly Culhane PAS Associates
Karen Bonnano Snelling Staffing
Scott Hauge Small Business California
Pete Isberg National Payroll Reporting Consortium and ADP
David Chase Small Business Majority
Labor & Juana Flores Mujeres Unidas y Activas
Worker Le Tim Ly Chinese Progressive Association (also interviewed as
Organizations employer)
Kathy Hoang Restaurant Opportunity Center
Dave Low Californians for Retirement Security and California
School Employees Association
Alexandra Suh Korean Immigrant Workers Association
Alexa Frankenberg SEIU California Child Care Campaign
& Valarie Bachelor
Consumer & Blanca Castro AARP
Asset Building Anne Price Insight Center for Community Economic
Organizations Development
Tom Rankin California Association of Retired Americans
Catherine Harvey National Council of La Raza
Singley (Interview + Housing/Assets Committee conference call
discussion with several NCLR affiliates in CA)
ii. Summary of Feedback from Stakeholders
The following is a summary of stakeholder views and recommendations discussed in the

interviews. The consultant team for this study considered stakeholder input alongside other
considerations, including legal constraints, operational logistics, and extensive research on
participant retirement savings behavior, in forming our final recommendations.
1) Employers & Business Organizations

Most of our interviews with the employer community were with business organizations
representing a wide range of California employers. (Despite multiple attempts to schedule
interviews with individual small employer contacts, most did not respond or did not commit
to an interview.)
Page 48
 The business representatives interviewed expressed a wide range of views on the

Program, varying in the level of favorability/unfavorability.
 Cost is a concern to some, but not the main worry given that employers will not be
required to contribute.
 Minimizing administrative burden is the highest priority, and interviewees offered
feedback on how to decrease this burden by minimizing complexity.
 Adequate outreach to small businesses and ethnic employers is necessary to help
them comply with legal requirements and avoid potential penalties.
Diversity of Views. Several employers and business associations welcomed the Program as a
way to even the playing field between small and large employers, giving the former a way to
easily provide retirement savings opportunities to their employees. These employers noted
the cost and complexity of setting up an employer-sponsored retirement plan as a barrier for
small employers.
Some were skeptical about the ability of the state government to implement the program,
though in different regards—ability to enforce the mandate, ability to administer a program
effectively, and exposure of investment decisions to political pressure. Two organizations
were concerned about potential liabilities to employers related to ERISA.
Cost Concerns. Surprisingly, few interviewees directly raised the cost of the program as an
issue, once they understood that employers would not be required to contribute. The main
cost concern that was raised involved the worry that employers would be required to use
payroll services in order to comply with the Program, or that employers who currently use
payroll services would see an increase in fees.
Administrative Burden. Interviewees were nearly unanimous in voicing concern that the
Program be structured to minimize administrative burden. Several noted that the cost of
compliance would be absorbed by employers as a normal cost of doing business but that the
main challenge is making sure that Program rules and procedures are simple and easy for
employers to follow.
Key suggestions to reduce administrative burden include:
 Uniform eligibility rules. Whenever possible, avoiding rules that require employers
to treat groups of employees differently—for instance, eligibility differences based on
age, tenure, or hours worked.
 No employer-level implementation of auto-escalation, which would require
employers to track hire dates and anniversaries.
 Limited frequency of employee elections regarding opting out/in or changing

contribution rates. However, interviewees were split on whether an open enrollment
period would increase or reduce the burden. [Note: Because of this concern, and the
concern about auto-escalation, the Program Design study recommends that
Page 49
recordkeepers, rather than employers, receive and process employee elections and
implement auto-escalation.]
 Limited employer responsibility for educating employees about the Program.
Responsibilities should be limited to distributing marketing materials as prescribed by
the State and interactions regarding payroll deductions.
 Centralized collection of enrollments and payroll deductions through EDD. Most
employers felt that that submitting enrollments and payroll deductions to EDD, with
which they already have a relationship, would be easier than dealing with a third party
administrator. However, one interviewee noted that this might create confusion for
employers and employees on whether or not contributions are mandatory rather than
voluntary.
Employer Outreach & Education. Several interviewees reflected on the successes and
failures in small business outreach in the launch of other state and local mandates, including
family leave, healthcare reform, and local minimum wage and sick leave laws. Noting that
employer education is critical to achieve compliance, they stressed the importance of early
outreach to employers and payroll processors.
Ideas on employer outreach include:
 Early outreach to help employers understand and comply with Program
requirements, and how the Program can benefit them.
 The state should work closely with employer organizations to conduct outreach,
including local and ethnic chambers of commerce, industry associations, and payroll
processors. Key methods of outreach through these organizations include information
sessions and webinars.
 One interviewee suggested the creation of a small business advisory committee to
work with the Board.
 Grassroots outreach campaign required for small businesses. Often, the smallest
businesses can only be effectively reached with “boots on the ground”—for instance,
door-to-door outreach in neighborhood business districts.
Other Issues. Interviewees also made other suggestions that the Board should consider.
 Voluntary employer contributions. Several advocated that the Program allow

voluntary employer contributions.
 The Program should be open to voluntary participation by employers with less
than five employees.
 Development and distribution of an employee education poster by EDD to post in
workplaces alongside required labor law notices.
 Protecting employers against potential liabilities under ERISA, even assuming
clearance from the U.S. Department of Labor.
Page 50
2) Worker Organizations
We focused these interviews on organizations representing low-wage workers who are most
likely to benefit from this program. Interviewees included Mujeres Unidas y Activas,
representing Latina immigrant women workers in San Francisco; the Chinese Progressive
Association, which organizes Asian immigrant restaurant workers in San Francisco; the
Restaurant Opportunity Centers United, a national organization of (mostly young) workers in
the food services industry; and Koreatown Immigrant Workers Alliance, representing Korean
and Latino service sector workers. We also interviewed representatives of the SEIU child
care division, and Californians for Retirement Security, a coalition of unions focused on
retirement and pension issues.
Interview respondents were unanimous in viewing the creation of the California Secure
Choice Retirement Savings Program as an important step forward for low-wage workers.
The following are key points are described in greater detail below.
 Strong support for the Program in terms of offering a low-cost, high-quality,
portable retirement savings option for low-wage workers.
 Need for adequate enforcement of employee rights under the Program.

 Outreach and education to help low-wage workers make informed decisions
about participating, in partnership with labor and community organizations
 Inclusion of workers who fall outside the legal mandate or as independent
contractors.
Support for the Program. Interviewees noted that the low-wage workers they represent very
often are unable to retire, or retire into poverty, because of inadequate retirement savings and
income.
 Low-cost, professionally managed savings program addresses current lack of

high quality retirement savings opportunities. Many of the members of the
grassroots worker organizations we interviewed rely primarily on Social Security
combined with low-yield accounts or life insurance, so a well-managed program with
low costs and higher payouts would be a welcome opportunity for many.
 Portability is an attractive feature for this workforce, which is concentrated in high-
turnover industries.
 Some concern about 3-5% default automatic contribution rate, noting that even
this modest contribution level may prove to be prohibitive for workers living paycheck
to paycheck.
 Concern about liquidity, that is, access to funds during emergencies. Several
interviewees noted that low-wage workers are asset poor and are also vulnerable to
financial shocks, and not having access might prompt workers to opt out.
Page 51
 A paper statement option in addition to online access is important for many low-
wage workers, and written communications should be available in many
languages.
Adequate Enforcement. Organizations representing low-wage workers and immigrant

workers note the widespread problem of wage-theft and benefits-theft in this labor market.
While many legal protections are in place at the state and municipal laws, these rights exist de
jure but not de facto because of a lack of effective enforcement mechanisms coupled with
insufficient education and outreach. Some ideas for enforcement included:
 Tax penalties for employer non-compliance.

 An easy way for workers to report employer non-compliance to the state
 Non-retaliation language in the authorizing legislation for the Program so that
workers will not be afraid to report employers who are not complying with the
mandate.
 Measures to prevent employers from encouraging workers to opt-out.
Outreach and Education to Low-Wage Workers. Low-wage workers have low financial
literacy, yet must navigate some complex questions to decide whether or not to participate in
the program. All interviewees noted this as a key issue.
 The state should plan a comprehensive worker outreach campaign during

Program roll-out that includes community-based organizations and both mainstream
and ethnic media.
 Education should focus on helping workers make an informed decision about
whether and how much to contribute to the Program, rather than the technical
details of how the Program investment management works. Workers need clear,
easy to understand information about the consequences of participating in the Program
for take-home pay, retirement income, and taxes. They also need information on basic
financial planning. Giving them more than the most basic information on Program
investments will be confusing and overwhelming to most low-wage workers.
 Workers also need education on the potential impact of Program participation on
means-tested public benefits, such as affordable housing, food stamps, child care
assistance, and Medicaid.
 Potential impact of immigration status on Program eligibility. One worry is that
workers without a valid Social Security Number (SSN) might contribute to the
Program but not be able to collect retirement benefits. Accepting Tax Identification
Numbers (TIN) to establish a Secure Choice IRA would help make the program
more accessible to immigrant workers.
Page 52
Other Issues
 Opportunity for independent contractors to participate. Many immigrant workers

in the low-wage service sector are employed either under the table or as independent
contractors.
 Some immigrant communities are less trusting of government than others.
California’s immigrant communities are very diverse, with different experiences with
government in their countries of origin and in the US.
3) Consumer organizations/Asset building groups
Like the worker organizations, the representatives of consumer organizations and asset
building groups that we interviewed were unanimous in viewing the creation of the California
Secure Choice Retirement Savings Program as an important step forward to addressing the
deficit of retirement income facing many workers.
The following is a summary of their opinions and suggestions:
 Ease of participation and simplicity of program design are the most important
features of the program for both employers and workers.
 3-5% is an appropriate default contribution level, though it might be better to start
at 3% and escalate up.
 The Program needs to balance the need to preserve retirement savings with
participants’ need to access funds for hardship reasons. Most agreed that not
allowing hardship withdrawals would be a barrier for participants, but that
withdrawals should otherwise be limited in order to preserve retirement funds. One
interviewee argued that no early withdrawal should be permitted, like Social Security.
 Paper statements must be an option as not everyone will have access to electronic
statements, and communications should address the linguistic and cultural
diversity of program participants.
 Properly designed outreach and education that addresses the diversity and
limited financial literacy of the Program market are important. This includes
working with organizations that understand how best to communicate with distinct
markets and communities and drawing lessons from the Affordable Care Act rollout to
understand how to promote trust in the Program, given that many low-wage workers
have had negative experiences with government and the financial system. However,
while investment details should be available to those who seek it out, it should not be a
part of the core outreach program because this can scare people away.
Page 53
iii. Summary of Findings from Stakeholders
Employers’ highest priority for the Program is the development of rules and procedures that
make it simple and easy for covered employers to comply with the mandate.
The worker, union, consumer, and asset building organizations we interviewed are strongly
supportive of the program. Their main concerns revolve around adequate outreach to
workers. Both worker and community organizations working with low-wage employees
stress that outreach should help workers make an informed decision about whether to
participate but should stay away from investment details that can overwhelm or scare off
participants with limited financial literacy. Such details should be available in a transparent
manner to those who actively seek them out.
Page 54
D. Program Design
1. Overview
The Scope of Services under the Contract calls for the Program Design element to:
 Evaluate and recommend the investment options for the Program
 Devise and recommend an operational model for the Program
 Recommend plan rules and procedures
In order to deliver on the requirements of the Program Design elements, the Program
Design team in coordination with the Market Analysis and Feasibility Study teams and in
collaboration with a broad range of stakeholders:
 Conducted a thorough analysis of investment options and made
recommendations for the investment options best suited for California Secure
Choice as described in the Investments section below.
 Evaluated in depth various potential operational models and made a
recommendation for the Operational Model most responsive to program
requirements as described in the Operational Model section below.
 Recommended plan rules and procedures after an extensive evaluation of
alternatives as described in the Plan Rules and Procedures section below.
ii. Timeline
Page 55
iii. Key Recommendations
Investments
Default Investment Option Dynamic Asset Allocation Target Date Investment
At Launch Strategy implemented through Managed Accounts or
through Target Date Funds as fallback, pending legal
confirmation by K&L Gates that managed accounts are
permissible. An income-focused strategy should be
favored over an accumulation-focused strategy if such
strategies becomes available in the US market prior to
launch. Based on participant demand, two to three
complementary target risk strategies can be offered as
non-default options to be proactively selected by
participants provided that adequate advisory tools are
offered for them to make an informed choice
OR
Pooled IRA with Reserve Fund, packaged as a Retirement

Savings Bond.
Additional Investment Consider a Variable Annuity with Guaranteed Minimum

Offering After launch Withdrawal Benefit (GMWB) as a complementary
offering in two to three years after launch once there are
sufficient account balances in participant accounts.
Default Payout Method Most DC plans default to the lump sum method, but the
best policy is to orient towards lifetime income. Initially
(first 3-5 years), account balances for retirees under the
California Secure Choice Plan will be too small to convert
into a meaningful income stream. The Board, therefore,
has time to consider options before selecting a default
payout method.
NOTE: Authorizing legislation should give the Board

flexibility to determine default payout.
Proprietary Funds Should California Secure Choice implement the Dynamic

Asset Allocation Target Date Strategy as the default
investment option, we recommend creating proprietary
(i.e., custom) California Secure Choice funds as
investment vehicles for that option.
Page 56
Even though commonplace among large DC plans,

creating a proprietary fund is somewhat involved and
would require that the Secure Choice organization to hire
a specialized consultant.
Operational Model
Operational Model We recommend the Direct Service Operational Model
where a single recordkeeper services employers directly
without intermediation by the State of California
Employment Development Department (EDD) in order to
facilitate a faster launch and more flexibility in Program
features.
While the EDD-as-Intermediary Model is less costly over

the long-term (approximately 10%), the startup costs are
significantly higher (see Financial Feasibility Study) than
the Direct Service Operational Model, the launch date is
likely to be 2 years later and some features, such as auto-
escalation, may not be feasible.
We also recommend that California Secure Choice hire a

consultant to develop the RFP requirements for the
selection of a recordkeeper, to run the RFP process and
to oversee the implementation of the operational
model.
Page 57
Plan Rules and Procedures
Primary Considerations The following factors are the primary drivers of
recommendations for plan rules and procedures:
 Simplicity of administration, compliance and

enforcement
 Minimization of the administrative and
decision-making burden on employers
 Recordkeeping logistics
 Legal constraints
Rules and Procedure Topics Extensive recommendations are made covering the
following areas:
 Plan Basics
 Definition of Employer (“ER”)
 Definition of Eligible Employees (“EEs”) /
Participants
 Voluntary Participation
 Auto-Enrollment and Payroll Deduction
Mechanics
 Social Security Number (“SSN”) / Identity
Issues
 Money Out
Page 58
2. Investments
i. Overview
The Overture team evaluated eight program investment vehicles that represent different
approaches to investment and risk. Each option was considered through a broad range of
features and characteristics in order to narrow down the options to two or three candidates for
the consideration of the Board.
In the next sections, the investment options under consideration, the evaluation approach and
the recommendations will be presented as follows:
o Retirement Plan Investment Basics

o Plan Design Considerations
o Investment Option Selection Process
o Investment Option Scores
o Investment Option Recommendations
o Comparison of Recommended Program Investment Options
ii. Retirement Plan Investment Basics
a. Retirement Plan Structure and Cash Flows
Retirement is one of the most important events in the life of an individual. Its collective
impact is equally important for the well-being of a nation especially as the population ages.
Planning for retirement through retirement plans that channel savings into investments is
therefore critical for the financial health of individuals and nations.
From a structural perspective, retirement plans fall into two categories: Defined Benefit
(“DB”) plans and Defined Contribution (“DC”) plans. The IRS defines them as follows:20
A Defined Benefit Plan, also known as a traditional pension plan, promises the
participant a specified monthly benefit at retirement. Often, the benefit is based on
factors such as the participant’s salary, age and the number of years he or she worked
for the employer. The plan may state this promised benefit as an exact dollar amount,
such as $100 per month at retirement. Or, more commonly, it may calculate a benefit
through a plan formula that considers such factors as salary and service.
A Defined Contribution Plan is a retirement plan in which the employee and/or the
employer contribute to the employee’s individual account under the plan. The
amount in the account at distribution includes the contributions and investment gains
or losses, minus any investment and administrative fees. Generally, the contributions
and earnings are not taxed until distribution. The value of the account will change
based on contributions and the value and performance of the investments. Examples
20
https://www.irs.gov/Retirement-Plans/Plan-Participant,-Employee/Definitions
Page 59
of defined contribution plans include 401(k) plans, 403(b) plans, employee stock
ownership plans and profit-sharing plans.
The California Secure Choice Plan (“SCP”) is designed to be a Defined Contribution plan that
holds investments in a Traditional IRA or Roth IRA account.
From a cash flow perspective, the “retirement event” is preceded by what is called the
Accumulation Phase during which a worker accumulates and invests assets to be withdrawn
during the non-working years and is followed by the Payout or Decumulation Phase during
which the accumulated assets are drawn upon to fund retirement or other income
requirements.
The image below illustrates the two phases for a US worker with a 40-year career.
Accumulation Phase Payout Phase
Investment Convert
Contributions Wealth to
(5% pay assumed)
Returns
(6.7% assumed) Income
22%
37% Social Security
Such a worker can expect to receive at retirement 37% (or more) of her final pay in US Social
Security benefits and, depending on her retirement plan, her contribution rate, investment
returns, the prevailing interest rates at retirement and various other factors, an additional
income from her retirement plan (shown in the illustration as 22% of final pay).
Page 60
Retirement income is the ultimate measure of the value of a retirement plan, whether Defined
Benefit or Defined Contribution.
DB plans are designed for retirement income. They begin with retirement income targets (i.e.,
payout phase cash flows) and work out the necessary elements to achieve those targets.
Projected Asset Contribution

Flow of Allocation Level
Benefit Policy (normal cost +
Payments designed to
adj. for actual
(Liabilities) meet promised
benefits market returns)
Range of
Sponsor’s
possible
risk
asset
tolerance
mixes
The challenge with DC Plans is that the focus is often on the accumulation phase.
Interest
rates
Lump sum at/during
at retirement retirement
based on
Contribution contributions
Level Asset and market

returns Longevity
Allocation Risk
based on age
and individual
risk tolerance
??
Retirement
Income
Page 61
The growing consensus is that DC plan design needs to shift from wealth accumulation (i.e.,
accumulation phase) to income focus (i.e., payout phase). Even though the California Secure
Choice Program is designed as a DC plan, retirement income is a principal consideration used
by the Overture team in evaluating the various investment vehicle options.
b. Accumulation Phase
The contributions or savings during the accumulation phase are typically invested in
accordance with an Investment Strategy.
Asset Allocation is the implementation of an investment strategy by allocating funds to

various asset classes. Asset classes are economic resources sharing similar risk and return
characteristics. Traditional asset classes include domestic and international stocks, bonds and
cash. For a diversified portfolio, asset allocation is the primary driver of investment risk and
returns.
Investment Risk or Uncertainty derives from the possibility of loss. It is often measured as
volatility, which is a measure of the variability in the value of an investment. From an
investor’s experience perspective, however, it is better represented as the actual loss (in
percentage terms).
Asset classes span the risk spectrum:

o Very Low Risk— near cash instruments such as money markets or US T-bills.
o Lower Risk—medium-term investment grade bonds denominated in US dollars such
as US Treasury notes.
o Higher Risk—US and international stocks
Investment return is correlated with investment risk. Historically, risky assets such as stocks
generate higher returns over time than less risky assets such as government bonds.
The risk-return profile of an investment also varies with the time horizon of the investment.
In the long-term (e.g., 20+ years), riskier investments, such as stocks, are expected to generate
higher average returns with a smaller chance of trailing behind inflation, and lower-risk
investments are expected to yield lower returns with a greater probability of falling behind
inflation. In the near term (e.g., 3-5 years), riskier investments may experience significant
drops in value; while lower risk investments tend to hold steady.
For retirement savings, long-term outcomes are the most critical, and small differences in
returns can be magnified over time. The chart below illustrates how an additional 1% in
returns (from 5% to 6%) sustained over a full career of 40 years translates into a nearly 50%
higher ending balance. Conversely, a 1% reduction in returns through fees (from 6% to 5%)
reduces the ending balance by nearly 30%.
Page 62
The 1% Difference
$110,000
$102,857
$100,000
$90,000
$80,000
$70,400
$70,000
$60,000
$50,000
$40,000
$30,000
$20,000
$10,000
Yea r 0
Yea r 1
Yea r 2
Yea r 3
Yea r 4
Yea r 5
Yea r 6
Yea r 7
Yea r 8
Yea r 9
Yea r 10
Yea r 11
Yea r 12
Yea r 13
Yea r 14
Yea r 15
Yea r 16
Yea r 17
Yea r 18
Yea r 19
Yea r 20
Yea r 21
Yea r 22
Yea r 23
Yea r 24
Yea r 25
Yea r 26
Yea r 27
Yea r 28
Yea r 29
Yea r 30
Yea r 31
Yea r 32
Yea r 33
Yea r 34
Yea r 35
Yea r 36
Yea r 37
Yea r 38
Yea r 39
Yea r 40
5% Investment 6% Investment
The chart below illustrates how a US $1 in 1926 would have fared throughout the years if it
were invested in in different asset classes.
Source: Morningstar Ibbotson
Page 63
The table below illustrates the long-term average returns and highest annual losses (labeled
“Lowest Annual Return”) of various asset classes from 1926 to 2014.
Annual Returns and Drawdowns of Traditional Asset Classes

1926-2014
50% Stocks
Inflation Near Cash (T-Bills) 100% Bonds 100% Stocks
50% Bonds
Compound Average Annual Return 2.9% 3.5% 5.7% 8.5% 10.1%
Premium Over Inflation 0.6% 2.8% 5.6% 7.2%
Lowest Annual Return -10.3% 0.0% -14.9% -24.3% -43.3%

% Negative Years 11.2% 2.2% 25.8% 21.3% 27.0%
Highest Annual Return 18.2% 14.7% 40.4% 34.6% 54.0%

% Positive Years 88.8% 97.8% 74.2% 78.7% 73.0%
Source: Morningstar Ibbotson
The charts and tables below compare the short-term and long-term outcomes based on various
asset allocations and illustrate why long-term outcomes are the most critical for retirement
savings. For example, the “Worst Case” scenario of the higher risk asset allocation (i.e., 70%
Stocks + 30% Bonds) is better than or even with the “Best Case” scenarios for the lower risk
asset allocations.
Account Value as % Pay
After 5 yrs. After 40 yrs.

Money
Expected Value (50th %-tile) 23.7% 187.7%
Market
"Best Case" Value (95th %-tile) 24.3% 201.6%
"Worst Case" Value (5th %-tile) 23.0% 175.2%
After 5 yrs. After 40 yrs.

100%
Bonds
"Best Case" Value (95th %-tile) 25.9% 254.5%
Percentiles:
95th
75th After 5 yrs. After 40 yrs.

70% Stocks + 50th
30% Bonds 25th
5th "Best Case" Value (95th %-tile) 32.8% 809.2%
SB1234 currently caps allocations to stocks at 50%. Based on the foregoing, we recommend
that the cap should be removed and that investment policy decisions be delegated to the
Board.
Page 64
c. Payout Phase
The payments in the payout phase can be structured as:
 A lump sum distribution

 An income stream
o Group annuity product with an insurance company
o Structured withdrawal program (SWP)
o In-plan collective payout option
 A combination of the above methods
An annuity is an insurance company contract that provides a series of payments to the

participant in exchange for a payment (premium) or series of payments. Life annuities provide
guaranteed retirement income for the remainder of one’s life in exchange for a lump sum
payment.
Annuities can also be used during the accumulation phase to guarantee returns on
contributions (considered as investment options below). Promised payments can be fixed or
variable.
“Annuity” is also a generic term that includes the income stream from a traditional pension.
Private annuities are more expensive than traditional pension annuities because the former
generally offer lower rates of return/interest and include profits and marketing costs.
The income stream/annuity product space is in rapid development. Initially (first 3-5 years),
account balances for retirees under the California Secure Choice Plan will be too small to
convert into a meaningful income stream.
The Board, therefore, has time to consider options before selecting a default payout method.
Authorizing legislation should give the Board flexibility to determine the default payout.
iii. Plan Design Considerations
Retirement Income in a defined contribution plan such as California Secure Choice is a

function of Contributions and Asset Allocation (e.g., mix of stocks/bonds).
The Key Sponsor Decisions in Any Auto-Enrollment Plan, including California Secure
Choice are:
(1) The Default Contribution Level and auto-escalation policy
(2) The Investment Policy: setting the asset allocation by risk profile(s). It is important to
recognize that sponsor responsibility for investment policy applies to both off-the-
shelf products and custom/proprietary funds.
Page 65
(3) The Default Payout Method at retirement (lump sum, systematic withdrawal, annuity,
or combo). Most DC plans default to the lump sum method, but the best policy is to
orient towards lifetime income. Initially (first 3-5 years), account balances for retirees
under the California Secure Choice Plan will be too small to convert into a meaningful
income stream. The Board, therefore, has time to consider options before selecting a
default payout method. Authorizing legislation should give the Board flexibility to
determine default payout.
iv. Investment Option Selection Process
a. Approach
The approach for the evaluation of the various program investment options (investment
product or investment vehicle are also used interchangeably) was to score each option along
two dimensions
(1) Product Score: this reflects the intrinsic relative value of the investment option
(2) Implementation Risk Score: this reflects the risks of implementing the investment
option within the context of the California Secure Choice Program.
An Evaluation Committee consisting of five members representing various partners of the

Overture consortium produced the scores for the various investment options using criteria that
were defined with feedback from the Board.
The Product Score is based on the following criteria
(1) Benefit and Cost Criteria

a. Income Replacement
b. Lifetime Income
c. Product Risks
d. Fund Accessibility
e. Embedded Costs
(2) Administrative Criteria

a. Ease and Efficiency of Administration
b. Financial Transparency
c. Ease of Communication
The Income Replacement concept refers to the level of income needed in retirement to
maintain the same standard of living before retirement. The Income Replacement Ratio —
retirement income expressed as a percentage of pre-retirement income—has become a
standard metric for assessing the adequacy of retirement income. There is no consensus on
how high the income replacement ratio must be to maintain the same standard of living during
retirement as before retirement. Various studies have suggested that middle class households
Page 66
should target income replacement ratios between 65% and 85%; while lower-income
households typically need higher replacement ratios than middle-income households because
they spend a larger proportion of their incomes on necessities.21 For an average person who
worked a full career and retired at 65 years of age in 2015, US Social Security benefits
replaced about 40 percent of past earnings.22 Therefore, in order to provide a meaningful
complement to Social Security for those who have no other retirement savings, California
Secure Choice should target income replacement ratios in excess of 20% over a full career.
Lifetime Income relates to longevity risk (i.e., the significant statistical probability that
individuals will live longer in retirement than they expect) and the lack of understanding
about the appropriate rate at which retirement income can be withdrawn. One of the shortfalls
of many retirement plan designs is that more focus is placed on the accumulation phase since
the distribution phase is many years away. The use of an income stream/annuity during the
payout phases addresses this risk. This criterion assesses the suitability and compatibility of
the investment option with an annuitization approach at retirement.
Product Risks refers to product-specific risks or features that can increase or mitigate risk to
retirement income. These include the exposure to interest rate risk at retirement in the case of
annuitization (low interest rates at retirement often translate into low annuity income),
embedded investment guarantees and potential conflicts of interest (e.g., principal-agent
issues and free rider problem).
Fund Accessibility relates to participants’ ability to access pre-retirement funds.

Limiting fund accessibility is important because early access can undermine the purpose of
saving for retirement. At the same time, placing strict restrictions on withdrawing pre-
retirement funds may impact the Program’s participation rates. Since the IRA structure allows
withdrawal subject to a penalty23, any additional limitations would have to be placed at the
product level. The ideal investment option should allow for the application of restrictions at
the discretion of the Board.24
Embedded Costs refers to costs, often hidden, that are charged by the investment product
provider within the product and therefore appear to the investor as diminished investment
returns. We have seen earlier how even a 1% fee sustained over a career can lower the
retirement benefits substantially. One of the problematic elements of the investment process is
21
Munnell, Alicia H., and Mauricio Soto. 2005a. "The House and Living Standards in Retirement." Issue Brief
No. 39. Chestnut Hill, MA: Center for Retirement Research at Boston College, and
Scholz, John Karl, and Ananth Seshadri. 2009. "What Replacement Rates Should Households Use?" MRRC
Research Paper No. 2009-214. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Retirement Research Center.
22
Michael Clingman, Kyle Burkhalter, and Chris Chaplain. July 2015. “Replacement Rates for Hypothetical
Retired Workers, Social Security Administration.” Actuarial Note No. 2015.9,
http://www.ssa.gov/OACT/NOTES/ran9/an2015-9.pdf.
23
The penalties and their application differ between Roth IRA and Traditional IRA. In some instances no
penalties apply. See http://www.irs.gov/Retirement-Plans/Plan-Participant,-Employee/Retirement-Topics---Tax-
on-Early-Distributions
24
K&L Gates, counsel to the Board, is inquiring with the Department of Labor whether product-level restrictions
are permissible.
Page 67
the lack of cost transparency of some investment products. The Overture team has striven in
its evaluation of the various investment options to deconstruct the underlying cost elements.
Ease and Efficiency of Administration- The ideal retirement program should be simple with
a low administrative burden and low management costs. The program should minimize the
administrative burden on both employers and the State. The impact of each investment option
on the California Secure Choice Program’s administrative efficiency is evaluated as part of
the scoring exercise.
Financial Transparency- The ideal investment option should be transparent with full
disclosure of all fees and embedded costs. In many DC plans, hidden fees can eat away an
appreciable portion of returns. Even with full fee disclosure, trading costs are often vague and
have been estimated, by one study, to cost an additional 0.66% for the median equity mutual
fund in 401(k) plans and 1.99% at the fifth quintile.25
Ease of Communication- Participants should clearly understand the nature of their

investment option, its benefits and its risks. The ideal investment option should be easy to
describe and communicate.
For every investment option, each Product Score criterion was independently scored by
Evaluation Committee members on a scale of 1 (Worst) to 5 (Best). The scores for each
criterion were averaged across members to produce an Average Criterion Score for every
investment option.
The Product Score for each investment option was calculated as the weighted average of the
Average Criterion Scores for that investment option using the weights in the table below.
Product Design Team Weightings
BENEFITS (70%)
Income Replacement (50%)
Lifetime Benefit (10%)
Risks (15%)
Interest Risk Rate at Retirement (25%)
Guarantee (25%)
Non-Fee Conflicts (50%)
Fund Inaccessibility (15%)
Plan Cost/ Sustainability (10%)
Administration Cost (33.33%)
Investment Management Cost (33.33%)
Cost of Guarantee (33.33%)
ADMINISTRATION (30%)
Ease & Efficiency of Administration (33.33%)
At Secure Choice Level(50%)
At Record Keeper Level(50%)
Financial Transparency (33.33%)
Ease of Communication (33.33%)
25
Richard W. Kopcke, Francis M. Vitagliano and Zhenya Karamcheva. 2009. “Fees and Trading Costs of Equity
Mutual Funds in 401(k) Plans and Potential Savings from ETFs and Commingled Trusts.” Center for Retirement
Research at Boston College Working Paper 2009-27.
.
Page 68
The Implementation Risk Score is based on the following criteria
(1) Potential for Errors

(2) Scalability
(3) Structural Complexity
Potential for Errors refers to the likelihood of errors that can affect participant investments
and/or benefits (e.g., a mis-entered birthdate can adversely affect the choice of target date
fund if such funds are the default investment option).
Scalability refers to benefits that can accrue from higher volumes. Some investment options
may become more attractive as assets grow in the Program.
Structural Complexity refers to the financial, legal and operational complexity of an

investment option. The higher the overall complexity of an investment option, the higher the
implementation risk which can manifest in execution delays, cost overruns and unforeseen
difficulties.
For every investment option, each Implementation Risk criterion was independently scored by
Evaluation Committee members on a scale of 1 (Low Risk) to 5 (High Risk). The scores for
each criterion were averaged across members to produce an Average Criterion Score for every
investment option.
The Implementation Score for each investment option was calculated as the equally-weighted
average of the Average Criterion Scores for that investment option.
b. Program Investment Options
The Overture team evaluated eight program investment options that represent different
approaches to investment and risk:
 Asset Allocation Strategies (individuals bear investment risk)

 Pooled IRA with Reserve Fund (pooled investment risk)
 Bank Deposit (FDIC insured)
 Annuities (private insurance contracts with guaranteed benefits)
The options are representative of a broad range of market options from “plain vanilla”
investments to products with stronger income focus and/or guarantee.
Each option was considered through a broad range of features and characteristics including
benefits, costs and several dimensions of risk, administrative and operational implications.
Page 69
The investment options considered were the following:
(1) Target Risk Funds: A target risk fund aims to expose its investors to a specified
level of investment risk. Target risk funds typically label themselves as
"conservative", "moderate risk" or "aggressive" in terms of their risk exposure.
The investment strategy is typically implemented as an asset allocation such that
higher exposures to stocks correspond to higher levels of risk.
(2) Dynamic Asset Allocation (DAA)/Target Date Funds (TDFs) with

Accumulation Focus: Target date funds are funds that implement a dynamic asset
allocation strategy where the level of risk assumed declines as the fund approaches
a particular retirement date. The vast majority of TDFs are accumulation-focused.
This means that the level of investment risk (“asset volatility”) is reduced over
time by shifting allocations to lower risk/volatility asset classes such as bonds.
(3) Dynamic Asset Allocation (DAA)/Target Date Funds with Retirement Income
Focus also known as Target Date Retirement Income Funds (TDIFs): TDIFs
are a new crop of target date fund that implements a dynamic asset allocation
strategy where the level of “risk to retirement income” is reduced as the fund
approaches a particular retirement date.
(4) Pooled IRA with Reserve Fund: This investment option will be described in
greater detail in the next section. It consists of a California public authority that
receives participant contributions and manages them in a single investment pool.
The authority issue shares to participant IRA accounts with values equal to their
contribution and declares periodic distributions (interest credits) based on the
performance of the investment pool. The purpose of the structure is to smooth
participant investment returns over time by creating a reserve that is used when the
pool investment returns are negative and that is built up when the pool investment
returns exceed certain thresholds. The structure creates no legal liability to the
State because participant shares are only redeemable against assets belonging to
the authority.
(5) Bank Deposit: This refers to an FDIC-insured Bank Deposit or Certificate of

Deposit (CD).
(6) Deferred Fixed Annuity: A deferred annuity is an annuity contract that delays
payment of an income stream until the investor elects to receive such income (e.g.,
at the time of retirement). A deferred fixed annuity is a deferred annuity that
guarantees an interest rate on contributions and accumulates up to the payout time
(e.g., retirement).
(7) Variable Annuity with Guaranteed Minimum Accumulation Benefit

(GMAB): A variable annuity (VA) is an insurance contract that allows the
participant to invest contributions in a selection of investments during the
accumulation phase and then pays the retiree an income stream that is determined
Page 70
by the performance of the investments chosen during the accumulation phase. A

VA with GMAB guarantees that the participant’s account value will be at least
equal to a certain minimum percentage (usually 100%) of the amount invested
after a specified number of years (typically 7-10 years) regardless of actual
investment performance. GMABs typically place constraints on the asset
allocations allowed.
(8) Variable Annuity with Guaranteed Minimum Withdrawal Benefit (GMWB):

A VA with GMWB guarantees that a certain minimum percentage (e.g., 5%) of
the amount invested can be withdrawn annually during retirement regardless of the
actual investment performance. If underlying investments perform well, a
participant may be able to withdraw higher levels than the minimum.
Page 71
The table below compares the eight investment options
Investment Option Investment Risk Pros Cons

Target Risk Funds No Guarantee. Widely available. Within an auto-
Participant bears risk. enrollment framework,
defaulting to a TRF may
be too risky for
participants approaching
retirement or conversely
not sufficiently aggressive
for young participants.
DAA TDFs with No Guarantee. Widely available. Traditional automated
Accumulation Focus Participant bears risk. glidepath may be rigid.
DAA TDFs with No Guarantee. Income orientation. Products currently under
Income Focus (TDIFs) Participant bears risk. Reduced interest rate risk development in US and
for annuitization at may be available prior to
retirement. More CA Secure Choice launch.
dynamic strategy in
changing markets.
Pooled IRA with Reserve No Guarantee. Superior outcomes in Administrative
Fund Participants bear risk long-run. All cohorts complexity. First
collectively. experience lower generation sacrifices
volatility. some returns to build
reserve.
Bank Deposit Federal Guarantee. Rock-solid principal Very poor return on
protection. contributions and low
income replacement.
Loss in real value of
contributions.
Deferred Fixed Annuity Insurance Guarantee. Predictable income. Poor return on
contributions and low
income replacement.
VA with GMAB Insurance Guarantee. Principal protection while High cost of guarantee
allowing participants to during accumulation.
invest in higher Does not protect
risk/higher return asset retirement income from
classes like equities. interest rate risk at time
Higher returns than bank of annuitization.
deposit.
VA with GMWB Insurance Guarantee. Allows participants to Not available for
invest in higher participants with more
risk/higher return asset than 10 years to
classes like equities while retirement. High cost of
maintaining a retirement guarantee. No
income floor. guaranteed COLA.
Page 72
c. Modeling the Investment Options
As part of the scoring process, each investment option was modeled to estimate its expected
income replacement ratio profile using a model developed specifically for that purpose. The
description of the model can be found in the next section entitled “Methodology and
Assumptions for the Calculation of Income Replacement Rates.”
The following assumptions were used across all investment options:
(1) Participant entry age at 25

(2) 5% contribution rate with no escalation on an initial salary of $30,000
(3) Participant retirement age at 67
(4) Group annuity purchased at retirement with a 2% COLA and 15-year period certain
In addition, the following product-specific assumptions were used:
(1) Target Risk Fund: assumed a fixed 70% equity and 30% bond asset allocation.
(2) Dynamic Asset Allocation/Target Date Fund with Accumulation Focus: assumed a
90/50 glidepath (explained in next section)
(3) Dynamic Asset Allocation/Target Date Retirement Income Fund (TDIFs): assumed a
98/48 glidepath.
(4) Pooled IRA with Reserve Fund: assumed a fixed 70% equity and 30% bond asset
allocation and used the crediting rules described in the next section.
(5) Variable Annuity with Guaranteed Minimum Accumulation Benefit (GMAB):
assumed a 60% equity and 40% bond asset allocation with a 100% minimum
accumulation benefit.
(6) Variable Annuity with Guaranteed Minimum Withdrawal Benefit (GMWB):

o This type of annuity is only available starting 10 years prior to retirement.
Before age 55 we assume contributions go to a typical TDF with accumulation
focus.
o At age 55, the balance is moved over to the variable annuity with GMWB and
subsequent contributions also go into the variable annuity.
o The basic guarantee is that for every $100 contributed into the variable
annuity, the insurance company guarantees a minimum lifetime retirement
income (with no COLA) of $5 (i.e., 5% income guarantee) – even if the
account value goes to zero.
o Contributions are invested following a 60% Stocks and 40% bonds asset
allocation.
o The insurance company charges an annual fee of 1% of assets (on top of
investment fees) for the guarantees.
o If net investment results are favorable, the guarantee can be “stepped up” –
both prior to and after retirement.
o If death occurs before the account value is zero, death benefits are payable.
Page 73
d. Methodology and Assumptions for the Calculation of Income Replacement Rates
Retirement account balances are influenced by a number of variables whose values cannot be
predicted with certainty. These variables include investment returns, inflation, wage growth,
and annuity purchase rates. Yet each of these factors affects the value of assets in an
individual’s account and the amount of lifetime income that can be provided at retirement.
In order to model this uncertainty we use a Monte Carlo simulation method. Monte Carlo
simulations require that each input variable, such as investment returns, be assigned a
probability distribution – defined primarily by a mean expected value assumption and a
standard deviation, or volatility, assumption to reflect the uncertainty of the outcome. For
each simulation, we randomly select input values from the distribution of possible values for
that variable and produce results based on those values. The simulation process creates a full
range of multi-year scenarios for all of the key variables that might affect the development of
an individual’s account balance. The statistical distribution of the results under all of these
scenarios provides important information on the probability of an individual meeting his or
her goals or falling short (“shortfall risk”).
We use the following assumptions in our Monte Carlo simulations:
Price Inflation
To simulate results for price inflation, we assume a median long-term inflation rate (CPI-U)
of 2.5%. Although our inflation simulations produce a distribution that is skewed (i.e. non-
normal), the observed standard deviation for annual results is 1.6%.
Wage Inflation
Wage inflation is simulated to reflect price inflation, plus an average real wage growth of
0.5% per year. The resulting distribution has a mean value of 3.0%, with a standard deviation
of 1.3%.
Ten-Year Treasury Note

Our simulated results for the yield on 10-year Treasury notes were generated using a mean
value of 4.25%, which is equal to the expected price inflation plus a real yield of 1.75%. The
observed standard deviation is 1.0%, which is consistent with historical experience.
Investment Returns
We use three types of inputs to model asset class returns: estimates of expected mean returns,
volatility (standard deviation), and correlation among asset classes. The most crucial inputs
are the estimates of expected return.
U.S. Fixed Income

We assume an expected return for US bonds in any single year of 4.8%. With an assumed
standard deviation of 5.0% (reflective of historical experience), the expected long-term
compound return for bonds becomes 4.5%. (The effects of year-to-year volatility will always
produce a lower long-term compound return expectation, as compared with the single-year
expectation.) The expected real return of 2.0% over inflation is in line with historical results.
Page 74
The full range of long-term compound bond returns that are used in the simulation model is
shown in the following table listing the distribution of returns by percentile:
Mean 4.5%
95% 5.2%
75% 4.8%
50% 4.5%
25% 4.2%
5% 3.9%
Equities (Mix of US and non-US)

We assume an expected return for stocks in any single year of 9.9%. With an assumed
standard deviation of 19.5% (reflective of historical experience), the expected long-term
compound return for equities becomes 7.9%. (The effects of year-to-year volatility will
always produce a lower long-term compound return expectation, as compared with the single-
year expectation.) The spread between the expected equity return and the expected bond
return is 3.4%, which is reflective of the long-term historical “equity risk premium.” Equity
returns are modeled so that they have an average correlation with bond returns of 4.5%. The
full range of long-term compound equity returns that are used in the simulation model is
shown in the following table listing the distribution of returns by percentile:
Mean 7.9%
Percentile
95% 13.8%
75% 10.2%
50% 7.8%
25% 5.5%
5% 2.3%
Annuitization
To convert the account balance at retirement into a lifetime income requires that the balance
be divided by an annuity factor (i.e. we assume that the retiree is electing an annuity payout
option). We model the annuity factors based on the interest yield simulated at the point of
retirement. The model is intended to approximate a market-priced annuity sold under a group
annuity contract. The assumed interest rate used for pricing is set at the simulated yield on
the 10-year Treasury bond, plus 50 basis points. We also include a 5% load in the price to
cover insurance company fees, profits and contingency reserves. The annuity that we use is a
single life annuity with a fixed 2% COLA and a 15-year certain period (which essentially
guarantees a return at death equal to the original annuity cost less benefits paid up to the date
of death). For mortality we assume a unisex blend of 50% male / 50% female experience and
use mortality rates that reflect expected improvements over the next 35 years (RP 2014
mortality table rates for blue collar workers with projection from table MP 2014).
Page 75
e. Investment Option Evaluation
The table below lists the Product Score and Implementation Risk Score for each investment
option.
Investment Option Product Score Implementation Risk Score

Target Risk Funds 4.11 1.13
DAA TDFs with Accumulation 3.86 1.67
DAA TDIFs 4.05 1.67
Pooled IRA with Reserve Fund 3.93 2.33
Bank Deposit 2.76 1.00
Deferred Fixed Annuity 2.52 2.87
VA with GMAB 2.58 3.13
VA with GMWB 2.98 3.13
The lowest possible score is 1 and the highest possible score is 5. A higher Product Score
means “better,” but a higher Implementation Risk Score means “riskier” or “worse.”
The chart below displays the Product Score for each investment option on the y-axis and the
Implementation Risk Score on the x-axis.
Option 1
Target Risk Fund
Option 2
Target Date Fund (Acc)
Option 3
Target Date Fund (Inc)
Option 4
Reserve Fund
Option 5
Bank Deposit
Option 6
Deferred Fixed Annuity
Option 7
Variable Annuity with GMAB
Option 8
Variable Annuity with GMWB
Note that the non-guaranteed asset allocation options are relatively close to each other at the
top left (i.e., Higher Product Score/Lower Implementation Risk) and the insurance-guaranteed
products are at the bottom right (i.e., Lower Product Score/Higher Implementation Risk). This
does not eliminate the insurance guaranteed options from consideration because from a
behavioral perspective such guarantee may encourage higher contributions rates and
potentially higher income replacements (more likely under Option 8-VA with GMWB).
Besides the behavioral aspect described above, other considerations for evaluating investment
options include:
Page 76
(1) Implementability at Launch

o Target Date Income Funds and Strategies are currently under development in
the US and may be available prior to the California Secure Choice launch. If
available before launch, target date income strategies are readily
implementable using the Managed Account approach recommended in the next
section.
o Variable Annuities with GMWB are available for participants with 10 years or
less to retirement. The eligible participant universe in the first 3 to 5 years after
the launch of California Secure Choice is unlikely to have sufficient balances
at retirement to afford meaningful income replacement from annuitization. Our
recommendation is to consider offering Variable Annuities with GMWB 3 to 5
years after launch.
(2) Suitability under Auto-Enrollment

o Target Risk Funds: Defaulting participants to a particular Target Risk Fund is
complicated due to suitability issues. If all participants are defaulted to a
Medium to Low Risk TRF, then younger participants are likely to experience
low lifetime returns and therefore low income replacement rates. On the other
hand, if all participants are defaulted to an Aggressive TRF, then participants
nearing retirement may be exposed to excessive risks. TRFs are best used as
non-default options available for participants with a sufficient level financial
literacy.
The table on the next page encapsulates the key considerations for selecting and
recommending the various investment options.
Page 77
Asset Allocation Income Replacement Rate Product Score Implemtation Risk Implementability Recommendation
Errors, Scalability,
Equity Path Median 5th %-tile Costs and Benefits At Launch To Be Considered
Structural Compelxity

Target Risk Fund 70% 24.7% 13.5% Hi Lo Ye s
Not as Default
2-3 complimentary TRFs.
Dyn AA/Target Date Fund

GUARANTEED
90% to 50% 24.2% 13.4% Hi Lo Ye s Yes as Default

(Accumulation)
NOT
Page 78
Dyn AA/Target Date Fund Possible as Market Yes

98% to 48% 24.4% 14.0% Hi Lo
(Income) Develops if available at launch
Reserve Fund (2058 Cohort) 70% 22.4% 12.3% Hi Me d Ye s

Yes as Default
Reserve Fund (2078 Cohort) 70% 29.7% 15.4% Hi Me d Ye s

Bank Deposit 10.0% 8.3% Med Lo Yes No
GUARANTEED
Deferred Fixed Annuity 13.4% 10.0% Lo Med Yes No
Variable Annuity with GMAB 19.0% 12.3% Lo Hi Yes No
Variable Annuity with GMWB No COLA Guar. 22.0% 12.7% Me d Hi N o. 3-5 Ye a rs Delayed
v. Investment Option Recommendations
a. Default Investment Option Recommendations
Based on the considerations described in the previous section (i.e., Product Score,
Implementation Risk Score, Implementability at Launch and Suitability under Auto-
Enrollment), the top two recommendations for the default investment option for
California Secure Choice at launch are:
 Dynamic Asset Allocation Target Date Investment Strategy implemented through

Managed Accounts or through Target Date Funds as fallback, pending legal
confirmation by K&L Gates that managed accounts are permissible. An income-
focused strategy should be favored over an accumulation-focused strategy if such
strategies becomes available in the US market prior to launch. Based on participant
demand, two to three complementary target risk strategies can be offered as non-
default options to be proactively selected by participants provided that adequate
advisory tools are offered for them to make an informed choice.
OR
 Pooled IRA with Reserve Fund packaged as a Retirement Savings Bond.
We also recommend considering a Variable Annuity with Guaranteed Minimum

Withdrawal Benefit (GMWB) as a complementary offering in two to three years after
launch once there are sufficient account balances in participant accounts.
The chart below summarizes our investment option recommendations.
FEASIBLE AT LAUNCH
Participant Bears
No Guarantee
 Dynamic Asset Allocation Target Date Investment Strategy

Risk
 Managed Accounts (with Target Date Funds as fallback)

Participants Bear
No Guarantee
Risk Collectively
 Pooled IRA with Reserve Fund

 Packaged as Retirement Savings Bond
RECOMMEND DEFERRING PRODUCT SELECTION

UNTIL ACCOUNT BALANCES ARE SUFFICIENT
Guarantee
Insurance
 Variable Annuity with Guaranteed Minimum Withdrawal Benefit

(GMWB)
 Private insurance product that offers income protection beginning 10 years
prior to retirement
Page 79
b. Dynamic Asset Allocation Target Date Strategy
The target date investment strategy is based on the theory that young workers have time on
their side and can invest heavily in riskier, higher-return assets while near-retirees do not have
that luxury.
Target Date investment strategy is designed to maximize returns and manage volatility near
retirement by dynamically adjusting the asset allocation along a declining risk trajectory as
the target retirement date approaches.
The key design issue for this strategy is the implementation of the risk trajectory as an asset
allocation glidepath and whether the trajectory continues “to or through” retirement. The two
charts below illustrate a “Typical” glidepath that starts with a 90% allocation to stocks and
progressively declines to 50% as the fund approached the retirement date and a “Lower Risk”
glidepath that starts at 75% and ends at 35%.
Typical (90 / 50) Lower Risk (75 / 35)
Bonds Bonds
% Allocation
Stocks Stocks
Age Age
A target date strategy can be implemented either as a series of Target Date Funds (TDFs) or
as Managed Accounts.
Target Date Funds (TDFs)
A TDF is a mutual fund that automatically implements the target date investment strategy.
The Investment Manager of each TDF makes the investment decisions for the fund according
to the investment policy for that fund.
TDFs are widely used default investment options in 401k plans and are typically offered as
series of 5-year retirement date intervals (e.g., “Target 2040” or “Target 2045”). Participants
are defaulted to the TDF that corresponds to their expected retirement age based on their date
of birth (validated by Recordkeeper).
Page 80
TDF 2015 Today TDF 2030 Today TDF 2045 Today
Bonds
10%
Bonds
25%
Bonds Stocks
50% 50%
Stocks Stocks
75% 90%
A TDF offering could include a large number of TDFs to cover all age groups and various
risk profiles (e.g., conservative, moderate and aggressive versions of TDF 2030), but this is
more costly and is better addressed using the Managed Account approach described below.
Mutual Funds vs Managed Accounts
A Mutual Fund is a Pooled Investment Vehicle (PIV). A PIV is an investment vehicle

made up of a pool of funds collected from many investors for the purpose of investing in
stocks, bonds, money market instruments and other securities. The mutual fund is managed
by an investment manager/firm.
A Managed Account (aka Individually Managed Account or Separately Managed Account)

is an investment account (e.g., IRA) owned by the participant but managed by a professional
investment management firm. Managed accounts differ from pooled investment vehicles like
mutual funds in that each portfolio is specific to each participant.
PIV (Mutual Fund) Structure Managed Account Structure
Investment Investment Manager Investment Manager

Managers
Account 1 Account 2 Account 3
Investment
Mutual Fund
Vehicles
Participants/Owners
Page 81
Recommended Managed Account Structure
Managed accounts can be used to build customized asset allocation strategies using a few
investment building blocks (e.g., stock fund, bond fund, money market fund).
Stock Fund
Bond Fund
Near Cash
This allows for greater economies of scale, as well as flexibility, at the program level and
participant level.
For each account, the Investment Manager, aided by software, allocates contributions across
building blocks and re-balances the portfolio according to the strategy selected for that
account.
The Board sets the default strategy and the range of choices for participants.
We recommend an initial low risk strategy for the first three years after enrollment followed
by a target date investment strategy based on the participant’s date of birth (validated by
recordkeeper), with participant choice to dial risk up or down or switch to a static low-
risk/moderate/aggressive strategy. We further favor the income approach over the
accumulation approach should it become available prior to launch.
Page 82
The illustration below shows how participants can intuitively dial risk up or down in a
managed account.
45 Year Old - Default
Bonds
25%
Stocks
75%
45 Year Old - Conservative 45 Year Old - Aggressive
Bonds
15%
Bonds
40%
Stocks
60%
Stocks
85%
Participants would not be allowed to pursue a “do it yourself” strategy under managed
accounts by picking and choosing their own investment mix.
Proprietary Funds
In the managed account/TDF option, the Board can choose off-the-shelf products from the
market or create proprietary funds.
“Proprietary” here means that the funds are created for California Secure Choice by the
California Secure Choice organization with support from the investment advisor,
administrator, custodian, etc.
Given the likely scale of the Program, there are significant cost and fee-related advantages to
creating proprietary funds. Proprietary funds will afford the Program
 An enhanced ability to drive down investment management costs.
 A greater flexibility on plan revenue structure (asset-based fees vs. fixed dollar
account maintenance fees). This allows the Program to keep expense ratios reasonable
for all participants and not unduly burden startup savers.
 The ability to place liquidity restrictions or lockups at the product level.
Should California Secure Choice implement the Dynamic Asset Allocation Target Date
Strategy as the default investment option, we recommend creating proprietary California
Secure Choice funds as investment vehicles for that option. Even though commonplace
Page 83
among large DC plans, creating a proprietary fund is somewhat involved and would require
that the California Secure Choice organization hire a specialized consultant.
c. Pooled IRA with Reserve Fund
SB1234 Plan Design Intent
SB 1234 attempts to replicate the collective risk-sharing aspect of cash balance plans in the
DC context with no employer or state-backed guarantee. Private insurance products that are
similar to cash balance plans exist but offer low returns.
We designed and modeled the Pooled IRA with Reserve Fund investment option as one way
to implement collective risk pooling and return smoothing based on the Collective 401(k)
concept from the Center for American Progress, developed by study team actuary Rowland
Davis.
Federal Regulatory Constraints
Structuring the Reserve Fund as envisaged in SB 1234 has two challenges:
(1) IRAs are typically invested in Pooled Investment Vehicles (PIVs) in the form of a
mutual fund, which may require federal registration under the Investment Company
Act of 1940.
(2) A mutual fund cannot maintain a reserve because net assets on the balance sheet of the
PIV are owned by the shareholders/participants.
The Workaround
A special purpose legal entity such as a statewide public authority (“California Secure Choice
Authority” or “CASCA”) is established to receive on its balance sheet all the contributions of
participants, or an existing public authority is designated for this purpose.
CASCA issues securities to each participant with a par value equal to their contribution at the
time of contribution:
o These securities behave like shares in a money market mutual fund but are structured
as variable interest bonds to benefit from federal registration exemptions.
o The bonds are redeemable at par value (i.e., face value).
o The bonds would constitute the only investment in participant Secure Choice IRA
accounts.
o The Reserve Fund consists of assets in excess of the value of bonds held by
participants.
Page 84
CASCA invests the assets on its balance sheet with oversight and direction by the Board,
advice from investment consultants and implementation by one or more investment managers.
California Secure Choice California Secure Choice

Authority IRA Accounts
Balance Sheet
Secure Secure Secure
Assets Liabilities Choice IRA
Account 1
Choice IRA
Account 2
Choice IRA
Account 3
Total
Value of CASCA CASCA CASCA
CASCA
Outstand- Bonds
ing Bonds Bonds Bonds Bonds
Investment =
Portfolio
+
Reserves or
Net Assets Participant 1 Participant 2 Participant 3
Participant
Contributions
The Plan policy, described below, is designed so that liabilities never exceed assets. The
structure creates no legal liability to the State because participant shares are only redeemable
against assets belonging to the authority.
Plan Policy
The Plan Investment Policy would be to manage assets on the CASCA balance sheet as a
single pooled investment in accordance with an investment policy and investment guidelines
approved by the Board. We used a 70% equities and 30% bonds asset allocation for modeling
purposes. Assuming no seed capital, we recommend a more conservative investment policy
(e.g., 20% Equities and 80% Bonds) for the first 3 years of the program.
The Plan Crediting Policy is the policy for declaring periodic interest distributions on the
CASCA bonds (which should by default be automatically reinvested) based on CASCA
investment returns and reserve policy. The crediting rules that were used for modeling are
based on the 3-year Smoothed Return, the size of Reserves and a collar with 0% Floor and
10% Cap and are applied as follows:
Page 85
Reserves Between 0% Reserves Exceed

No Reserves
and 40% of Liabilities 40% of Liabilities
Smoothed Return is
Pass on full smoothed return
0-10%
Pass on 10% to Pass on 10% to
Smoothed Return is Pass on 10% plus extra
participants. Excess participants. Excess
Above 10% credit per plan policy
goes to Reserve. goes to Reserve.
Use reserve to hold floor at zero if possible.
Smoothed Return is
Reduce account balances if reserve is insufficient.
Negative
Ability to “top off” accounts depends on size of reserve in relation to investment loss.
Crediting Policy Illustration
The chart below shows the 1990-2004 hypothetical CASCA fund returns and participant
returns based on the investment and crediting policies described above under two scenarios:
(i) Startup Plan where there are no reserves at the beginning of the period and a conservative
investment policy is applied over the first 3 years and (ii) Mature Plan where reserves stand at
40% of liabilities at the beginning of the period.
Because the late 1990s bull market would have allowed the Pooled IRA program to build up
healthy reserves, participants would have been buffered against loss in the 2001/2002 market
collapse, whether as a startup plan or as a mature plan. The Mature Plan would have offered
excess returns above the collar during most years.
The chart below shows the 2000-2014 hypothetical CASCA fund returns and participant
returns based on the investment and crediting policies described above under two scenarios:
(i) Startup Plan where there are no reserves at the beginning of the period and a conservative
investment policy is applied over the first 3 years and (ii) Mature Plan where reserves stand at
40% of liabilities at the beginning of the period.
Page 86
The Startup Plan would have had smoothed returns during most of the 2000s, but reduced
account balances during the 2008 financial crisis. The Mature Plan with a healthy starting
reserve of 40% of liabilities would have protected participants from any loss in 2008 and
offered surplus interest during recovery. The Startup Plan shows higher participant returns
during the early 2000s because of unusually high bond returns and the conservative initial
asset allocation.
Basic Trade Offs of Pooled of Pooled IRA with Reserve Fund
Pros:
 A properly designed Reserve Fund can facilitate inter-generational risk smoothing and
can produce a tighter range of results with less downside risk in the long-term.
 The investment process is less complex, compared to the Dynamic Asset Allocation
Target Date Strategy, as it involves the management of one portfolio (albeit with
additional analysis needed for an appropriate investment strategy).
 Recordkeeping is also simpler because there is only one security owned by
participants: the Secure Choice Bond.
Cons:
 In the early years some of the available returns will be diverted towards establishing
the desired reserve level and will not flow into credits to participants.
 Legal complexity (related to the special purpose entity and the issuance of bonds) and
operational complexity (related to managing the entity with its staff).
vi. Comparison of Recommended Program Investment Options
Page 87
Comparison of Recommended Program Investment Vehicles
Overall Features
Traditional Pension
Option 1: Dynamic Asset Option 2: Pooled IRA
(DB)
Allocation Auto IRA (DC) (Reserve Fund)
for comparison purposes only
Income Replacement Range 2058 Cohort: 12% - 22%
5th Percentile to Median1 13% - 23% Function of Career Income
2078 Cohort: 15% - 30%
(5% contribution rate; 42-year career)

Who Bears Investment Risk Participant Participants Collectively Sponsor
Sponsor Liability No Guarantees by Sponsor No Guarantees by Sponsor Explicit Obligation to Fund Shortfalls
Elevated Fiduciary Responsibility

Page 88
Normal Especially on Product & Default

Fiduciary Responsibility2 Selection3
Especially on Crediting Policy Unless Normal
Board Has No Discretion4
High (no proprietary product) Moderate

Ease of Implementation Moderate (proprietary product)
Additional legal and actuarial services required, N/A
but recordkeeping will be simple
Limited

Can add available investment & insurance Leaves Door Open to Private Investment
Flexibility in Benefit Design products; less flexibility on customization of Guarantee & In-Plan Annuity
N/A
private insurance guarantees
Notes
1- Nth Percentile means N% probability that result would be X% or lower. For example, there is a 5% probability that the income replacement rate for the Auto-IRA option would be
13% or less. Conversely, this also means that there is a 95% probability of the income replacement rate exceeding 13%. Median means 50th percentile.
2- A fiduciary duty is a legal duty to act solely in another party's interests. Parties owing this duty are called fiduciaries. The individuals to whom they owe a duty are called principals.
3- The selection of investment products and, in particular, the default investments place a duty of care on the individual members of the board and program officials entrusted with
making the selection.
4- Members of the Reserve Fund board are likely to be deemed fiduciaries. As such they may not profit from their relationship with their principals (i.e., Secure Choice Participants)
unless they have the principals' express informed consent. They also have a duty to avoid any conflicts of interest between themselves and their principals. A fiduciary duty is the
strictest duty of care recognized by the US legal system. If the Board has discretion in setting the crediting rate of the Reserve Fund, then the utmost care has to be taken in avoiding
conflicts of interest or favoring one group of participants over another. This burden can be mitigated if the crediting policy is strictly enshrined in legislation with little discretion left
for the board.
Comparison of Recommended Program Investment Vehicles
Participant Experience
Option 2
Option 1 Option 1
Pooled IRA with
Managed Accounts Target Date Funds
Reserve Fund
Income Replacement
2058 Cohort: 12% - 22%
13% - 23% 13% - 23%

5th Percentile to Median Range 2078 Cohort: 15% - 30%
(5% contribution rate; 42-year career)
Moderate Easy-Moderate
Easy
Ease of Understanding Participant sees allocation Savings bond concept is intuitive,
TDFs are intuitive
across several funds but crediting policy may not be
Page 89
Easy-Moderate
Easy
Ability to Adjust Risk
Account interface can be
Participants choose from N/A
Profile designed to make this intuitive
among several different target No participant choice
dates

RISK/REWARD
Volatility in Account High Low-Moderate

High
Balance (Low first 3 years) (Low first 3 years of operation)
Chance of Windfall 2058 Cohort: ~20%

(benefit 33% higher than expected ~20% ~20%
after full career)
Mature Program: ~25%
Chance of Large Loss Significant Significant Low

Near Retirement (Insurance can mitigate, but (Insurance can mitigate, but in mature program
(>20% drop in balance) will reduce benefits) will reduce benefits) (Low-Moderate in early years)
Comparison of Recommended Program Investment Options
Investment-Related Responsibilities of Board & Consultants
Option 1 Option 1
Option 2
Managed Target Date
Pooled IRA with Reserve Fund
Accounts Funds
Determine appropriate asset allocation for single

Determine asset allocation for
portfolio; adjust when prudent
Board: investment lineup; adjust when
Overall Investment Policy prudent
Determine prudent policies for reserve fund
accumulation and interest crediting
Page 90
Board: -- Credit accounts in strict accordance with

Account Crediting -- established policies
Advise on investment/asset allocation policy, product creation/selection & vendor

Investment Consultants
selection; supervise investment managers in tandem with staff

Minimal - project average balances, Moderate – help determine asset allocation
Actuaries plan demographics, retirement policy, project system assets, help determine
income appropriate crediting policy
Draft authorizing legislation and provide

legal advice to set up special purpose bond
Legal Oversee product creation
vehicle through which reserve fund can be
implemented
Day-to-day management of portfolio(s) in accordance with investment policy established

Investment Managers
and approved by Board
3. Operational Model
i. Overview
Administering the California Secure Choice Program represents the single largest cost item
and can be the primary determinant of its financial feasibility.
Recordkeeping is the central operational function of a retirement plan and as such represents
the largest administrative cost component. The recordkeeper is responsible for managing the
day-to-day operations of the plan including the maintenance of individual accounts and
keeping track of transactions and assets at the individual participant account level. A
recordkeeper is also responsible for enrolling participants, tracking participant contribution
rates and investment selections, providing account statements, maintaining the plan website
and providing general support to participants and plan sponsors/employers.
With a low average wage, a 5% contribution rate and a roll-out phased over 4 years, the
recordkeeper will be challenged to manage start-up costs and transaction volumes with very
low account balances in the early years.
Our core task is to solve for a fully loaded program cost that does not exceed 100 bps (at
steady state) while minimizing the employer burden and maintaining a reasonable participant
experience.
In devising the operational model, we have strived to:
(1) Balance the employer burden against operational costs against the participant
experience.
(2) Incorporate the key drivers of scale to the extent possible.
Page 91
The table below illustrates some of those drivers of scale we have considered.
Minimize Variation Data

The Fewer the Data Sources, the Better
• The fewer choices or “if/then” statements • Priority 1: limit employer interaction with
we build into the plan, the less complexity, recordkeeper by channeling data
the lower the cost–simplicity is our friend. transmission through the State of California
or optimize recordkeeper interaction with
• Processing volumes should be spread employers through payroll providers, a
evenly over the period (e.g. no month-end, standard electronic interface or a
quarter-end spikes). streamlined web portal.
• Priority 2: minimize data from employee to

the recordkeeper via paper or phone.
• Investment data, trading data, etc. would

follow industry protocols and interfaces.
Customer Experience Technology
• The fewer the person-to-person interactions, • Strong integration and straight-through

the less costly the model as 70% of a processing.
recordkeeper’s cost is personnel.
• Strong front-end customer interaction
• Operational Model should be designed to capabilities via web, mobile apps, SMS,
drive customers to electronic channels first, etc.
with personal interaction prioritized for life
events. • Consider traditional recordkeeping solutions
as well as some of the new technology
• Key Attributes: solutions coming to market.
o Clear, easy to understand web experience
o Minimize paper--everything delivered
electronically to the extent permissible.
ii. Potential Operational Models
We have designed two potential operational models:
(1) California Employment Department (EDD) as Intermediary between Employers and

the Recordkeeper, and
Page 92
(2) Direct Servicing of Employers by the Recordkeeper
In both models:
 The relationship is direct between the recordkeeper and employees (participants) for
most account-level issues.
 EDD runs employer education outreach/campaign and possibly performs compliance
and audit functions.
The chart below illustrates the main functions and flows of the EDD-as-Intermediary Model.
EDD Record-
Employers keeper
• Track opt-outs and EE • Bundle and transmit • Verify accountholder identity

contribution elections enrollments & deposits to • Direct relationship with
• Submit enrollment data Recordkeeper employees: ID/SSN issues,
• Remit payroll deductions refunds (within grace period)
Pros of the EDD-as-Intermediary Model

 Employers are already comfortable with EDD. There is no need to establish a
relationship with a third party.
 Continuity for employers and retention of historical program data between vendor
changes.
Cons of the EDD-as-Intermediary Model

 Time lag on enrollments and deposits.
 Employers responsible for tracking employee opt-outs and contribution elections with
no centralized audit trail and record of employee elections.
 Inability to implement features that require employee data across employers (e.g.,
auto-escalation).
 Substantial fixed start-up costs (new software) and development timeline (4-5 years,
minimum 3 years).
Page 93
The chart below illustrates the main functions and flows of the Direct Service Model.
Employers Record-
keeper
• Verify accountholder identity

• Register with Recordkeeper • Notify EEs/process opt-outs
• Upload auto-enrollment • Debit payroll deduction amounts
data for entire workforce from ER accounts (accept bundled
• Transmit payroll deduction data/$ from payroll servicers)
info • Direct relationship with employees:
contribution elections, ID/SSN
issues, refunds
Feedback
(EE opt-outs
and
contribution
elections)
Pros of the Direct Service Model

 Smoother auto-enrollment & payment remission process with less time lag (direct
feedback loop between employers and the recordkeeper)
 Greater transparency for opt-out tracking and other employee elections
 Faster time to market (at least 2 years but possibly 4 years difference) compared to the
EDD-as-Intermediary implementation
Cons of the Direct Service Model

 Nearly 300,000 employers would need to set up a direct relationship with the
recordkeeper.
 Discontinuity of employer experience and risk of historical data loss in case of vendor
change.
Page 94
iii. Optimized Operational Model Workflows
The next two pages contain detailed diagrams that encapsulate the functions and workflows
between the different parties for each of the two potential operational models.
Page 95
EDD-as-Intermediary: Detailed Model
In this model, EDD takes on key operational functions
• ER Eligibility &
Enrollment
• Feeds- participant
data & dollars
• Problem resolution • Investment Manager
SCRIB

Employer • Periodic excess
contribution
EDD selection & contract
negotiation
refunds/rejects • Performance reporting /
• ER Opt-Out evaluation
Audit/Control
• Marketing and
Communication
Strategy
• Participant data feeds
Page 96
• Aggregated participant
• EE Enrollment contribution files
• Individual Opt-Out • Inquiries and problem
• Deferral maintenance/ resolution (Case Investment
Management Management)
• Payroll deductions • Administrative Management
performance reporting /

evaluation
• Life event processing

requests (distribution
processing) • Data required for EE
• Beneficiary Elections statements
• General queries (balances, • Investment pricing
Employee prices) Recordkeeper • Trading
• Distributions/payouts • Problem resolution
proceeds
• Contribution limit
management.
• Excess contribution returns
• Account statements Width of line denotes
volume and complexity
of interaction
© 2015 Overture Financial LLC. All rights reserved.

Direct Servicing by Recordkeeper:
Detailed Model
In this model, Recordkeeper takes on all operational functions directly with employers
• Audit/Control/Governance • Investment Manager

• Marketing and EDD SCRIB selection & contract
Employer Communication Strategy negotiation

• Performance reporting /
evaluation
• ER Eligibility & Enrollment

• Feeds or web loaded files – • CA
individual demographic and Employer
financial data Database
• Contribution funding
Page 97
• Communicates to • Employer inquiries and

EE about problem resolution • Inquiries &
Enrollment • Feedback report (i.e. report of Problem
resolution
Investment
• Payroll deductions deferral changes made with
•
• On-boarding of
•
provider)
ER Opt Out
Administrative
performance
Management
individuals
• Problem resolution • Communicates Individual Opt- reporting /

Out and Deferral evaluation
Management Decisions to ER • List of ERs and EEs
participating
• EE Enrollment
• Deferral maintenance/
Management • Data required for EE
• Individual Opt-Out statements
Employee • Life event requests Recordkeeper • Investment pricing
• Beneficiary mgmt. • Trading
• General queries (balances, • Problem resolution
prices)
• Distributions/payouts
• Contribution limit
management
• Excess contribution returns Width of line denotes
• Account statements volume and complexity
of interaction

iv. Optimized Operational Model Features
The next two pages contain tables with detailed features for each of the two potential
operational models.
Page 98
Operational Model Features
Feature Model with EDD-as- Model with Direct Preferred Option
Intermediary Servicing from
Recordkeeper
ER Eligibility Determination ER Determined w/EDD auditing ER Determined w/State Agency ER Determined w/EDD auditing
auditing
ER Enrollment EDD Managed Recordkeeper Managed Recordkeeper Managed

EE Enrollment ER Managed ER Managed/Set up on RK ER Managed/Set up on RK system &
system & communicates to EE communicates to EE
Opt Out EDD Managed Recordkeeper Managed Recordkeeper Managed
(Employer)
Opt Out ER Managed Recordkeeper Managed Recordkeeper Managed
Page 99
(Individual) w/EDD auditing (feedback to ERs) (feedback to ERs)

Minimum Contribution Rate None subject to Recordkeeper/ None subject to Recordkeeper/ None subject to Recordkeeper/
Custodian limitations Custodian limitations Custodian limitations
Deferral Maintenance/ Management ER Managed Recordkeeper Managed Recordkeeper Managed
(Contribution Rate Management) (feedback to ERs) (feedback to ERs)

Contribution File Management EDD aggregation of all ER files Individual ER Files/Feeds Individual ER Files/Feeds and/or
– 1 Recordkeeper feed and/or Payroll Providers Feeds Payroll Providers Feeds to
to Recordkeeper Recordkeeper
Contribution File Processing EDD Feed w/Web reporting and Recordkeeper works with Recordkeeper works with Payroll
Issue/Reject Management funding Payroll Providers and ERs Providers and ERs
Contribution Limit Monitoring and Recordkeeper Managed Recordkeeper Managed Recordkeeper Managed
Management (In Plan)
Contribution Limit Monitoring and Individual Managed Individual Managed Individual Managed
Management (Across Plans)
Contribution Limit Management Recordkeeper rejects excess Recordkeeper rejects excess Recordkeeper rejects excess back to
(Return of excess) back to Individual via Check back to Individual via Check Individual via Check

Operational Model Features (Continued)
Feature Model with EDD-as- Model with Direct Servicing Preferred Option
Intermediary from Recordkeeper
General Account Inquiry Individual self-service via Individual self-service via Individual self-service via
(i.e. Balances) Recordkeeper Web Recordkeeper Web Recordkeeper Web
General Account Individual self-service via Individual self-service via Individual self-service via
Maintenance Recordkeeper Web Recordkeeper Web Recordkeeper Web
(limited – Beneficiaries…)

Case Management Direct workflow access - submission Recordkeeper fields issue/problem Recordkeeper fields issue/problem
to/exchange with - recordkeeper via queries from all individuals and/or queries from all individuals and/or
single source (i.e. state only) employers employers
Education and Secure Choice works with EDD and Secure Choice works with EDD and Secure Choice works with EDD and
Communication Materials Recordkeeper to provide Marketing Recordkeeper to provide Marketing Recordkeeper to provide Marketing
and Communication Content and Communication Content and Communication Content
Displayed in Recordkeeper Website. Displayed in Recordkeeper Website. Displayed in Recordkeeper Website.
Page 100
Secure Choice and EDD Secure Choice and EDD Secure Choice and EDD
Collaborates on Employer Outreach Collaborates on Employer Outreach Collaborates on Employer Outreach
and Training and Training and Training
Account Statements Default Mail One Year-End Default Mail One Year-End Default Mail One Year-End
Statement, monthly statements Statement, monthly statements Statement, monthly statements
available on Recordkeeper website. available on Recordkeeper website. available on Recordkeeper website.

Employee can opt out of receiving Employee can opt out of receiving Employee can opt out of receiving
Year-End Year-End Statement by mail Year-End
Statement by mail Statement by mail
Retirement Calculators – Web-based – Self-Serve Tool – Web-based – Self-Serve Tool – Web-based – Self-Serve Tool –
Contribution and Distribution Recordkeeper supported Recordkeeper supported Recordkeeper supported
options/impacts
Distribution Services Recordkeeper web-based self- Recordkeeper web-based self- Recordkeeper web-based self-
(Retirement eligible service capability service capability service capability
population)
Missing Participants State manages through own Recordkeeper manages through third Recordkeeper manages through
databases Party Vendors third Party Vendors
Tax Reporting – i.e. Annual Mail to AOR unless Employee Opts Mail to AOR unless Employee Opts Mail to AOR unless Employee Opts
Contributions form 5498, into Secure Web-based into Secure Web-based into Secure Web-based
Distributions form 1099R etc. Recordkeeper “Drop Box” –Login Recordkeeper “Drop Box” –Login Recordkeeper “Drop Box” –Login
required required required

v. Operational Model Recommendation
While the EDD-as-Intermediary Operational Model is less costly over the long-term
(approximately 10%), the startup costs are significantly higher (see Financial Feasibility
Study) than the Direct Service Operational Model, the launch date is likely to be 2 years later
and some features such auto-escalation may not be feasible.
We, therefore, recommend the Direct Service Operational Model. Furthermore, we

recommend that California Secure Choice hire a consultant to develop the RFP requirements
for the selection of a recordkeeper, to run the RFP process and to oversee the implementation
of the operational model.
Page 101
4. Plan Rules and Procedures

i. Overview
Plan rules and procedures are the fundamental guidelines for the operation of a retirement
plan and are a critical component for the success of the California Secure Choice Program.
The development of the plan rules and procedures was performed by a dedicated committee
with participation from the various members of the Overture consortium. The committee
collaborated closely with California Secure Choice legal counsel, K&L Gates, and sought
input from stakeholders, payroll providers, recordkeepers and other related parties.
There were four driving factors in making our recommendations:
(1) Simplicity of administration, compliance and enforcement

(2) Minimization of the administrative and decision-making burden on employers
(3) Recordkeeping logistics
(4) Legal constraints
ii. Recommendations
The Plan Rules and Procedures fall into seven distinct areas:
 Plan Basics
 Definition of Employer (“ER”)
 Definition of Eligible Employees (“EEs”) / Participants
 Voluntary Participation
 Auto-Enrollment and Payroll Deduction Mechanics
 Social Security Number (“SSN”) / Identity Issues
 Money Out
The seven sections below constitute our recommendations for the California Secure Choice
Plan Rules and Procedures.
Page 102
Plan Basics
Plan Year January 1-December 31
ERs determine eligibility and begin notifying EEs during
4th quarter prior to each plan year.
NOTE: This is distinct from qualified plan year
IRA Type Default: Roth IRA

 Up to $5,500 after-tax annual contribution (or $6,500
if age 50+)
 Tax-free retirement withdrawals
 MAGI limit $184,000 married/$117,000 single
Individual has choice to switch to Traditional IRA with

Recordkeeper flag.
NOTE: Roth IRA does not require participant to file

income tax deduction, unlike Traditional IRA.
Default Contribution 5%
EE can elect percentage or fixed dollar amount per
paycheck with no minimum.
Auto-Escalation Implement at Board’s discretion beginning 2nd year of

program, in 1% increments up 10%.
EEs who elect contribution other than default rate

prompted to opt into future auto-escalation.
NOTE: This will only be Implemented if operational model

allows this process to be coordinated by Recordkeeper.
Page 103
Definition of Employer
Plan Sponsorship Exemption At least 1 California EE (i.e., EE who is subject to
Unemployment Insurance coverage in California and
whose pay is thus reportable to the EDD) must be
eligible for qualified employer-sponsored plan in order
for firm to be exempt from mandate.
NOTE: Statutory language should be included giving Board

discretion to adjust eligibility rules for ERs that do not
offer meaningful coverage to most of their EEs.
Firm vs. Establishment ER eligibility determined at firm level.
Firm Size (5+ EEs) Annual determination based on simple look-back rule.
We recommend the following criteria: average of
monthly employee headcounts reported on EDD Form DE-
9 for the 3rd quarter (ending 9/30) is 5.0 or higher. This
data is standardized across states, and using it as part of
the EE eligibility standard can help avoid duplicate payroll
deductions. The fall quarter is less subject to seasonal
hiring spikes than summer and winter.
Include only California EEs (as defined in Eligible

Employees in “Definition of Eligible Employees” below)
count in calculation. Statute should give Board authority
to determine eligibility regulations.
Eligible Firms that Downsize Continue auto-enrollment/payroll deduction through

to Less than 5 EEs remainder of calendar year. The following year, ER may
choose to keep contributing for EEs already enrolled but
may not auto-enroll per draft DOL guidelines.
NOTE: Request from DOL ability to grandfather ERs once

they enter plan, in order to avoid creating two classes of
EEs.
Employment Intermediaries Party that controls payroll (e.g. temp agency) is

(PEOs, Temp Agencies, etc.) responsible for compliance.
Page 104
Definition of Eligible Employees / Participants
Employees Eligible for auto-enrollment: All EEs who are (i) EEs as
defined by IRS (receive W-2) and (ii) whose pay is subject
to California Unemployment Insurance taxes.
No exemption for part-time, short-term and seasonal

employees
Recommended minimum age: 18

Alternatives: 19 or 20 (no higher, given
employment/earnings patterns)
Owners Owners eligible to participate if business falls under

mandate. This includes LLC/LP partners if they have
compensation eligible for IRA contributions under IRS
rules.
Voluntary Participation
Employers Not Covered by Allow these ERs to offer Secure Choice IRA. Under the
Mandate current draft of DOL guidelines for state auto-IRAs, ERs
not covered by mandate cannot auto-enroll EEs. Thus
such employers could only offer voluntary enrollment to
EEs. Strong Recordkeeper control would be required to
prevent ER missteps in enrollment. However, if final DOL
regulations permit, employers should be allowed to auto-
enroll EEs.
Self-Employed/Independent Once the core program is running smoothly, Board should

Contractors consider allowing individuals to enroll through paperless
process and automatic ACH debits.
Voluntary Employer Not allowed for auto-IRA program under draft DOL
Contributions guidelines and current IRS rules. However, California
policymakers should consider whether the Board should
have discretion to establish a Multiple Employer Plan
(MEP) in the future to receive voluntary employer match
to EE contributions.
Page 105
Auto-Enrollment and Payroll Deduction Mechanisms
Active vs. Passive Passive auto-enrollment: ER or Recordkeeper—
depending on service model—notifies EE of auto-
enrollment; EE has 30 days to opt out before
Recordkeeper instructs ER to start payroll deduction. This
is only feasible in the Direct Service Model. In the EDD-
as-Intermediary model, ERs would either have to be
responsible for implementing the 30 day opt out process,
which can be onerous, or else start payroll deduction
immediately, in which case the Program would incur
increased costs for issuing refunds to EEs opting out.
Remove signature requirement for enrollment purposes;

keep EE signature as proof of receipt of program info.
Again, this is only advisable if the Recordkeeper directly
manages the opt-out process.
EEs Who Change their Mind Safe harbor period of 6 months after initial notification to
terminate payroll deduction and receive refund of
account balance with no transaction fee.
This policy may have to be adjusted based on further
determinations regarding Recordkeeper costs and
Program fee structure.
NOTE: IRA rules provide tax penalty free withdrawal of
contributions made each tax year (through April 15 of
following year)
Waiting Period None; immediate auto-enrollment. However, Auto-

enrollment/opt-out mechanics entail minimum 30-day
delay before payroll deduction.
IRA Contribution Limits Individual is responsible for tracking limit in relation to
income.
Recordkeeper flags when contributions approach

standard limits; issues refund of excess.
Income Limits on IRA Individual is responsible for tracking eligibility.
Eligibility
If ineligible based on income (small fraction of EEs):
-Elect Traditional IRA (may not be pre-tax if spouse
contributes to 401(k)-type plan, depending on income) or
-Request refund of contributions/terminate payroll
deduction.
Page 106
Social Security Number / Identity Issues
Employer Role in Social Normal employment eligibility verification process.
Security Number (SSN)
Validation NOTE: Include requirement for Recordkeeper to accept
this as part of the RFP to select Recordkeeper.
Recordkeeper & EE Roles Recordkeeper performs electronic validation of identity

of new enrollees; contacts EE (not ER) regarding invalid
Social Security Number (SSN). Under the Direct Service
model, no account is created, and payroll deduction for
that EE does not commence until issue is resolved.
EE responsible for taking action to resolve issue -- correct

SSN/name, provide TIN, or opt out--within 45 day period.
If no resolution or EE opts out, Recordkeeper takes no

further action.
Under the EDD-as-Intermediary model, there may be a

need for refunds if payroll deduction commences before
the Recordkeeper has an opportunity to process SSN
issues.
Page 107
Money Out
Early Withdrawals Draft DOL guidelines prohibit restrictions or penalties; we
recommend requesting ability to impose requirement to
self-certify hardship.
NOTE: Awaiting legal feedback on permissibility of

product/fund-level restrictions.
Loans
Not permitted under IRA rules.
Rollovers Regular IRA rules per DOL guidelines – no restrictions.
Default Payout at Board should consider partial group annuity default

Retirement payout as program matures and account balances build
to levels sufficient for annuitization.
NOTE: Policy will be contingent on default investment

product (e.g., Target Date Fund vs Pooled IRA/Reserve
Fund vs Target Date Fund with built-in income insurance).
Lost Accounts Escheat to State. Board to determine criteria for

considering an account lost (balance, number of years
inactive).
NOTE: Small, inactive accounts add to program cost.
Page 108
E. Financial Feasibility Study

1. Overview
The Scope of Services under the Contract calls for the Financial Feasibility Study to:
 Assess whether the Program will be self-sustaining.
 Recommend the amount of funds necessary to implement the Program and the best
means of financing.
 Recommend a cost and fee structure that ensures the Program is self-sustaining,
simple to administer, and low-cost to participants.
The Financial Feasibility Study team in coordination with the Program Design and Market
Analysis teams has delivered on the requirements for the Financial Feasbility Study
element as described below.
ii. Timeline
Page 109
iii. Key Findings
Our key findings are that
(1) The Secure Choice Program is financially viable and self-sustaining even under
adverse conditions with poor investment returns and high opt-outs rates.
(2) Total fees to participants need not exceed 1% of invested assets and such fees can
decline to significantly lower levels after the first 6 years of operation, making the
Program very attractive for savers.
(3) Under the conservative assumptions of the Baseline Scenario, with a default
contribution rate of 5% and an opt-out rate of 25%, the Program achieves significant
scale by the first year of operation with 1.6 million participants and over US $3 billion
in assets. It also achieves operational breakeven by the fourth year of operation. The
total funding gap—cumulative operating deficits financed at 5% interest—is moderate
at US $89 million, representing 2.7% of program assets at the end of the first year of
operation. The funding gap can be paid off by Year 6.
(4) Even under the adverse conditions of the Pessimistic Scenario, program expenses fall
below 1% of program assets by the sixth year of operation. The funding gap rises to
US $186 million representing 3.7% of program assets by Year 2, 2.3% by Year 3,
1.7% by Year 4 and 1.2% by Year 5.
(5) The sensitivity analysis we performed demonstrated that financing requirements and
program expense ratios are very sensitive to the default contribution rate, but the opt-
out rate has a moderate impact below 50% and even an extreme 70% opt-out rate still
affords a self-sustaining program with attractive long-term costs.
feasibility.
Page 110
2. Projection Model
Overview: A projection model was developed to determine whether the costs associated with
implementing and running the California Secure Choice Program were within acceptable
limits over a period of many years. The model projects outcomes for 15-year scenarios based
on a flexible set of input parameters and assumptions. The specific results developed within
the model are:
 The number of program participants at the start of each year, split between those who
are actively contributing and those who are not contributing but still maintain an
account within the program.
 The number of participants entering and leaving the program for each year.
 All cash flows into and out of the program for each year:
o Contributions
o Distributions of assets to exiting participants
o Investment returns
o Expenses, split into a number of sub-categories, for the program operation,
recordkeeping, and investment of assets
 The total assets under investment within the program.
 Program expenses as percentage of assets under investment within the program.
 Funding requirements.
Methodology: The model uses data from the Current Population Survey (CPS) to determine
the initial number of workers expected to meet the program’s eligibility requirements, as well
as their demographic make-up:
 Ages
 Part-time / full-time status
 Earnings
From this data, the model estimates the number of eligible workers who will actually enter the
program each year, what their contributions will be, and how many might leave the program
each year as the result of worker turnover. Full-time and part-time workers are modeled
separately due to the significant differences in their demographics. Essentially, the model
creates the expected payroll for participating workers, which then allows for a calculation of
the expected contribution inflows. Additional assumptions are then used to develop all other
cash flows expected for a particular scenario. The assumptions are discussed in more detail in
the following sections. They can be divided into two major categories:
 Core assumptions, which are those related to participant behaviors (e.g. turnover, opt-
out rates, cash out rates, etc.) as well as the primary economic assumptions (e.g. rate
of wage growth, investment returns), and
 Scenario-specific assumptions, which cover the various expenses expected under any
specific combination of an operational structure and an investment structure.
Input Parameters and Core Assumptions: To permit flexibility in running the model, many
input parameters are used to specify the key assumptions. For core assumptions, there are
Page 111
over 25 different input parameters. For the scenario-specific assumptions related to program
expenses, there are, for any given year, 33 different potential input parameters. These cover
11 different expense categories, and then allow the estimated expense to be input as some
combination of a fixed dollar amount, a per participant charge, and/or a percentage of assets
charge.
3. Core Assumptions
The following list highlights the values used for some of the key core assumption inputs.
Sensitivity testing was performed for many of these input variables to test the sensitivity of
output results to changes in the assumptions. As a general rule, we opted to make
assumptions which we felt were “conservative” in nature – meaning that we purposely made
an attempt to push program expenses (measured as a percentage of assets) more toward the
upper end of the expected range, as opposed to the middle or lower end of the expected range.
 Eligible Worker Pool: The CPS data showed that 6.3 million were workers potentially
available as eligible participants, 25% of them part-time and 75% of them full-time.
We estimated that 10% of this number would not have a valid Social Security number
and so would not participate. We also estimated (based on an analysis of hours
worked per year) that at any single point in time, about 10% of full-time workers and
25% of part-time workers would be in between jobs and not represented on any
employer payroll.
 Average Pay: Based on the CPS data on annual earnings, part-time/full-time status,
and number of weeks worked during the calendar year, we assumed an average annual
pay rate of $45,000 for full-time workers and $20,000 for part-time workers.
 Worker Turnover: The assumed turnover rates were developed by analyzing the job
tenure data from responses to the marketing survey. We assumed a gross annual
turnover rate of 18% for full-time workers and 30% for part-time workers. Of those
assumed to change jobs in a year, we assumed that 50% of full-time and 60% of part-
time workers would remain covered under the California Secure Choice Program with
their new employer. Of the remaining workers who would exit from active
participation, we assumed that 50% would elect a lump sum cash-out. Within the
model, turnover rates are modeled in a way that reflects both the age and service
characteristics of the workers.
 Employer Phase-in Schedule: There are approximately 285,000 employers of which

90% have fewer than 50 employees. Employers with less than 50 employees account
for approximately 43% of the total eligible employee population. Starting with
employers with more than 50 employees in the first year and following advice from
Bridgepoint not to exceed roll-out to more than 100,000 employers per year, a four-
Page 112
year phase-in schedule would be required. In terms of the percentage of eligible

workers, the phase-in assumption results in 46% entering in year one, 27% in year
two, 17% in year three and 10% in year four.
 Base Economic Variables: We assumed that price inflation would scale from 1% in
the first year, up to 2% in year three and later. We assumed general wage growth
would scale from 0% in the first year, up to 2.5% in year four and later.
4. Baseline Scenario
The baseline scenario was constructed as a conservative scenario based on the results of the
Market Analysis, the work of the Program Design team with regard to the Operational Model,
Plan Rules and Procedures and Investment Options, our research into the various cost drivers,
conservative market assumptions and a 1% cap of total fees charged to participants as a
percentage of assets.
i. Baseline Scenario Assumptions
 Participation
 Default contribution rate: 5% based on Market Analysis Recommendations
 Opt-out rate: 25% based on conservative Market Analysis Findings
 Leakage
 In-service leakage rate (% of assets a year): 1%
 Percent of job leavers taking lump sum: 50%
 Total effective annual leakage from plan: 3.5%
 Total Fees Charged to Participants: 1% of Assets
 Program Expenses
 Direct recordkeeper servicing model with EDD role limited to employer outreach,
training and support
 Description of expense items and assumptions included in Section (v) below.
 Do not include enforcement costs
 Conservative Nominal Investment Returns: 0% Years 1-3, 3% Thereafter
Page 113
ii. Baseline Scenario Assets and Participants
The chart below shows that significant scale is achieved by the first year of operation with 1.6
million participants and over $3 billion in assets.
Baseline Scenario Assets and Participants

4,500,000 35,000
4,000,000
$28,429 30,000
3,500,000
25,000
3,000,000 $21,327
USD Millions
Participants
2,500,000 20,000
2,000,000 $14,311
15,000
1,500,000
$8,243 10,000
1,000,000
$3,228 5,000
500,000
$0
- -
1 2 3 4 5 6
Year of Operation
Assets BOY Active & Inactive Participants
First year enrollment is only for employers with more than 100 California employees.
Page 114
iii. Baseline Scenario Expenses
The chart shows all program expenses as a percent of asset over the years. The 1% Fee Cap
line represents the highest level of fees that can be charged to participants in the Baseline
Scenario.
Baseline Scenario Expense Ratio and Payoff Year

3.50%
3.17%
3.00% Payoff Year 6

Program Expenses as % of Assets
2.50%
2.00%
1.75%
1.50%
1.26%
1.00%
1.00%
0.76% 1% Fee Cap
0.65% 0.58%
0.52% 0.48% 0.45%
0.50% 0.42% 0.40% 0.39% 0.37% 0.36%
0.00%
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
Year of Operation
The operating deficit during the first 3 years (blue bars above the 1% Fee Cap line) has to be
financed from future surpluses (blue bars below the 1% Fee Cap line).
Assuming a funding cost of 5% per year, the funding gap can be paid off by Year 6.
iv. Baseline Scenario Funding Requirements
The startup financing requirement for the Baseline Scenario is US $89 million. This is
equivalent to the amount that the Program would have to borrow in order to cover the revenue
shortfalls of the first 3 years, assuming 5% interest. The loan would be paid off during Year 6.
Page 115
There are at least four ways to finance the funding gap

(1) The Program secures a startup loan or
(2) Participants are initially charged fees in excess of the 1% cap or
(3) Key vendors fund the gap by absorbing the operating deficit until the shortfall is paid
off. This would require 6+ year contracts and vendors with significant capital
wherewithal or
(4) Combination of the above
The table below shows how higher participant fees reduce the need for financing, but shifting
the startup fee structure toward account-based fees can be regressive.
Fee on Assets Monthly Account Fee Required Financing
1% $0.5 $48 million
0.8% $1 $40 million
1% $1 $21 million
3% $0 $1 million
Page 116
v. Baseline Scenario Expense Drivers
The table below breaks down the expense drivers under the Baseline Scenario.
Real Year 1
Year 1
Expense Items Growth Percent of Comment
USD Millions
Rate Assets
Internal Staff 10% $3 Based on CA Savings Plus + 20%
Board Expenses 10% $0.20 Includes fiduciary insurance
External Legal Services $0.50 Goes down to $250,000 after Year 1
OE&E 10% $3 Based on CA Savings Plus + 20%
Investment Consultants $0.35 Goes down to $250,000 after Year 1
Investment Management 0.18%
Custodian/Trustee Services 0.01%
For two years. Yr 1: System Architecture

Non-Recordkeeping Startup Costs $0.75
and RFP. Yr 2: Project Management
Recordkeeping and EDD See next set of tables
 The Real Growth Rate column indicates the rate at which the line item will be increased
every year (in addition to the inflationary adjustment described below).
 After Year 5, flat (i.e., non-percent) expense items are increased by 1.5% (i.e., 0.5% less
than inflation assumption) every year.
 Enforcement costs are not included.
The tables below break down recordkeeping cost drivers and EDD Cost Estimates.
Recodkeeping Cost Drivers
Annual Cost Drivers EDD Servicing Model Direct Servicing Model

Flat Amount (Current USD) $600,000 $800,000
Per New Employer $120 $240
Per Existing (Non-New) Employer $120 $150
Per Participant $17 $20
EDD Cost Estimates
EDD Servicing Model Direct Serving Model

Cost Item EDD acts as Intermediary betw een Recordleeper and Employers and EDD Only Performs Employer Outreach, Support
Performs Employer Outreach, Support and Training Functions and Training Functions
Startup Ongoing Startup Ongoing

Systems* $42,000,000 $5,000,000
Legal $150,000
Marketing $800,000 $400,000 $800,000 $400,000
Contribution Processing $700,000 $1,800,000
Call Center $1,200,000 $700,000 $1,200,000 $700,000
Reserve $300,000 $1,950,000 $100,000 $300,000
Total $45,000,000 $10,000,000 $2,100,000 $1,400,000
*Assumes leveraging and upgrading of existing EDD ACES system. A new dedicated stand-alone system is estimated to cost $28 million more.
Page 117
 The recordkeeping cost drivers are based on the operational workflows presented in
the Operational Model section under Program Design and are derived from a model
proprietary to Bridgepoint.
 EDD data are derived from functional cost estimates provided by EDD with the
following adjustments: exclusion of compliance auditing costs, reduction of legal
costs to be consistent with our research and an additional 20% buffer in the Reserve
line item.
5. Sensitivity Analysis
The table below shows the results of performing sensitivity analyses by adjusting one key
assumption of the Baseline Scenario at a time.
Required Year 1 Year 5 Year 10

Payoff
Financing Program Expenses Program Expenses Program Expenses
Year
(USD Millions) as % of Assets as % of Assets as % of Assets
Baseline (5% Contribution; 25% opt-out) $89 6 3.17% 0.76% 0.45%
3% Contribution Rate $170 9 4.78% 1.07% 0.59%
10% Opt-out Rate $89 6 3.02% 0.72% 0.43%
EDD Servicing Model $103 6 6.03% 0.71% 0.43%
Adverse Investment Returns* $88 7 3.17% 0.83% 0.46%
Reserve Fund Structure** $90 6 3.23% 0.76% 0.45%
50% Opt-out Rate $100 7 3.61% 0.88% 0.50%
Extreme 70% Opt-out Rate $116 10 4.47% 1.10% 0.60%

*Sequence of Annual Investment Returns as follows: 0%,0%,-10%,-10%,5%,5%,10%,10%,0%,-15%,5%,5%,5%,5%,5%.
**Incremental $1 million in external legal startup expense.
The sensitivity analysis shows that:
(1) Financing requirements and program expense ratios are very sensitive to the
default contribution rate.
(2) Initial program expenses are higher under the EDD Servicing Model because of the
higher startup cost estimate of $45 million.
(3) The opt-out rate has a moderate impact below 50% because key variable costs are tied
to the number of participants and the program is large in scale. Even an extreme 70%
opt-out rate still affords a self-sustaining program with attractive long-term costs albeit
with a financing requirement that is 30% higher and a payoff 4 years later.
(4) Because the Baseline Scenario assumes that participants are defaulted to very low risk
investments during first three years, the impact of adverse investment returns is only
seen in later year program expense ratios.
Page 118
6. Scenario Analysis
Three scenarios—Baseline Scenario, Optimistic Scenario and Pessimistic Scenario—were
constructed to gauge the range of variability of results and as means for contingency
planning.
i. Scenario Assumptions
The table below shows the assumptions for the various scenarios.
Expenses Borne Employer

Contribution Rate Opt-out Rate Investment Returns
by Participants Servicing Model
Direct Conservative
Baseline 1% of Assets 5% 25%
Recordkeeper 1st 3 Yrs: 0%; 3% Thereafter
Direct Adverse:
Pessimistic 1% of Assets 3% 30% 0%,0%,-10%,-10%,5%,5%,10%,10%,0%,-
Recordkeeper 15%,5%,5%,5%,5%,5%
Direct Average
Optimistic 1% of Assets 5% 10%
Recordkeeper 1st 3 Yrs: 0%; 6% Thereafter
ii. Scenario Results
The table below breaks down the results under the various scenarios.
Required Year 1 Year 5 Year 10

Payoff
Financing Program Expenses Program Expenses Program Expenses
Year
(USD Millions) as % of Assets as % of Assets as % of Assets
Baseline $89 6 3.17% 0.76% 0.45%
Pessimistic $186 10 4.88% 1.21% 0.61%
Optimistic $89 6 3.02% 0.71% 0.41%
Page 119
The Scenario Analysis shows that:
(1) The default contribution rate is the primary driver as shown in the Sensitivity Analysis
section and explains most of the difference in results between the Baseline and
Pessimistic Scenarios.
(2) The Optimistic Scenario is close to the Baseline Scenario because it has the same
contribution rate.
(3) Even under the Pessimistic Scenario, program expenses fall below the 1% Fee Cap by
Year 6 while the funding gap rises to US $186 million representing 3.7% of program
assets by Year 2, 2.3% by Year 3, 1.7% by Year 4 and 1.2% by Year 5.
7. Conclusions
The conservative assumptions encapsulated in the Baseline Scenario are based on the results
of the Market Analysis, the work of the Program Design team with regard to the Operational
Model and Investment Options, our research into the various cost drivers, conservative market
assumptions and a 1% cap on total fees charged to participants as a percentage of assets.
Based on the results of the Baseline Scenario,
(1) The Program achieves significant scale by the first year of operation with 1.6 million
participants and over US $3 billion in assets.
(2) The Program achieves operational breakeven by Year 4 with a moderate funding gap
of US $89 million (assuming a 5% funding rate) that represents 2.7% of end of Year 1
program assets.
(3) The funding gap can be paid off in 6 years assuming a 5% interest rate and can be
financed as a loan, through higher fees to participants, through vendor financing or as
a combination of the above.
(4) The fees to participants can decline to very attractive levels after the first 6 years of
operation.
The Sensitivity Analysis demonstrated that:
(1) Financing requirements and program expense ratios are very sensitive to the default
contribution rate, but
(2) The opt-out rate has a moderate impact below 50% and even an extreme 70% opt-out
rate still affords a self-sustaining program with attractive long-term costs albeit with a
financing requirement that is 30% higher and a payoff 4 years later.
feasibility.
Page 120
The Scenario Analysis showed that even under the adverse conditions of the Pessimistic
Scenario, program expenses fall below the 1% Fee Cap by Year 6 while the funding gap rises
to US $186 million representing 3.7% of program assets by Year 2, 2.3% by Year 3, 1.7% by
Year 4 and 1.2% by Year 5.
Our main conclusions are that:
(1) The Secure Choice Program is financially viable and self-sustaining even under the
adverse conditions of the Pessimistic Scenario.
(2) That total fees to participants need not exceed 1% on invested assets and that such fees
can decline to very attractive levels after the first 6 years of operation.
(3) The startup costs (funding gap) are in the order of US $89 million under the Baseline
Scenario and US $186 million under the Pessimistic Scenario.
Page 121
F. Addendum – Employer Costs

1. Introduction
There are two main components of potential employer cost related to implementing and
supporting the California Secure Choice Program (“Program”) under the recommended Direct
Servicing of Employers by the Recordkeeper operational model and the proposed Plan Rules
and Procedures: startup costs and ongoing costs. Furthermore, we distinguish out-of-pocket
costs in the form of increased expenditures from administrative burden, which reflects time
spent by existing full-time staff or by the business owner implementing and supporting the
Program.
In this analysis, we estimate the impact of the Program on employers, differentiated by size.
Estimates for small employers with fewer than 50 employees are based on the assumption that
they do not use a full service payroll provider. However, a significant minority of employers
in this group do use full service payroll providers. These employers will see their
administrative burden reduced in a manner similar to larger firms.
2. Out-of-Pocket Costs
Out-of-pocket outlays consist of increases in spending on wages or vendor services to cover
the extra work of implementing the Program. Given the recommended rules, procedures and
operational model of the Program—and what we learned from recordkeeper portal
demonstrations, feedback from payroll service providers and interviews with the business
community—out-of-pocket outlays are not likely to be very significant.
 For larger firms using full service payroll providers, there may be an incremental
fee increase associated with having these providers handle auto-enrollment
mechanics, tracking of contribution rates and remission of contributions to the
recordkeeper. This service is not typically available except where the payroll processor
itself serves as a plan administrator, but the payroll industry is currently working with
several states to create data transmission standards to enable such a process with third
party administrators/recordkeepers. With such services in place, the incremental
expense to employers is likely to be modest or negligible.
 For small firms that are not large enough to have full-time HR or accounting
staff and that use either limited-service payroll providers or QuickBooks (or similar
software) in tandem with a bookkeeper, there may be extra outlays in the range of
2-4 hours of bookkeeper pay per month depending on workforce size and turnover.
 For micro-businesses, we anticipate little or no out-of-pocket costs. In these firms,
business owners typically handle payroll using bookkeeping software or a spreadsheet.
Ongoing implementation of auto-enrollment will be minimal given the small size of
the workforce, though small business owners are likely to require extra help
understanding program requirements and getting set up with the recordkeeper.
Page 122
3. Administrative Burden
The biggest material concern about the Program is not increased expenditures but the
increase in the administrative burden—especially on small employers. The administrative
burden is represented by the amount of time that employers have to spend implementing the
Program and navigating its requirements, which in turn is linked to complexity at the level of
employer decision-making. We estimate the administrative burden in terms of labor time.
We strived to be conservative in our estimates although it is likely that employers will
experience a lower administrative burden after a few a payroll cycles.
The two tables at the end of this section detail the startup and ongoing tasks, estimate labor
hours for each, and identify the functions that can be automated through a full service payroll
provider though at some cost. These estimates are drawn from our detailed knowledge of the
recommended Program rules, procedures and operational model and our discussions with
business groups, payroll processors and recordkeepers. The following is a summary of the in-
house labor time burden (which may require extra employee or contract service provider
hours or may be absorbed by existing staff or the business owner).
Micro-Businesses (5-9 employees):
 We expect 6-8 hours to perform startup tasks, including eligibility determination,

registration with the recordkeeper, collection and submission of employee data, and
the first round of payroll deductions and funds transfer. The administrative load for
smaller employers is likely to be heaviest during the startup phase, given that they
often lack professional HR support. However, recordkeepers specializing in small
businesses have online portals that are relatively easy to navigate and that allow
business owners to upload data easily using QuickBooks, an Excel spreadsheet
template that they provide, or manual data entry directly into the website.
 Thereafter, we estimate about 2 hours per month for ongoing administration:
updating contribution rates in their own payroll system, uploading new employee data
and contribution data, and approving ACH debits to transfer employee contributions to
the recordkeeper.
Small Businesses (10-49 employees) assuming the use of either basic payroll services or
bookkeeping software, plus a staff or contract bookkeeper:
 We expect 7-10 hours to perform startup tasks. Extra time may be spent exploring
alternatives to the California Secure Choice Program, but since this would be
voluntary on the part of the employer, we do not include this work in our estimates.
 Thereafter, we estimate about 2-4 hours per month for ongoing administration,
depending on workforce size, turnover and payroll frequency.
Page 123
 How much of this administrative load will be absorbed internally or entail extra labor
expenses (for instance, extra hours for a contract bookkeeper) depends on whether the
firm is large enough to have in-house HR or accounting staff. Many firms find that as
they approach 30 employees, they need full-time staff to handle some combination of
accounting/bookkeeping and HR/payroll.
Large Businesses (50+ employees) assuming the use of a full service payroll provider:
 We expect approximately 12 hours total staff time to determine employer

eligibility, read program requirements, register with the recordkeeper and make
arrangements with the payroll service provider (see below). Extra time may be
spent exploring alternatives to the California Secure Choice Program.
 The level of employer administrative load related to startup and ongoing
enrollment and payroll deduction will be dependent on the capacity of the payroll
service provider.
o Ideally, full service payroll firms would assume auto-enrollment, contribution
rate updates, fund remittance and reporting functions directly with the
recordkeeper (contingent on employer approval). The National Payroll
Reporting Consortium is facilitating coordination between payroll firms and
several states to create such a service, which is typically not available unless
the payroll firm itself serves as the retirement plan administrator. Assuming
that such services are in place by Program launch, the additional administrative
load on employers will be minimal.
o On the other hand, if the employer manages interactions with the recordkeeper
internally rather than through the payroll service provider, the startup
administrative work would be roughly consistent with the load for small
businesses in proportion to workforce size adjusted for economies of scale.
 Ultimately, we do not expect a significant ongoing in-house administrative load,
in relation to firm size, given the higher level of data management and automation in
larger firms and the likely availability of payroll provider automation by the time the
Program launches.
Caution: Administrative work that is absorbed by the employer and that does not entail
increased cash outlays incurs opportunity cost, but this should not be confused with actual
expenses. Without a detailed study, it would be arbitrary to assign a dollar cost per hour,
given differentials in compensation and the fact that many firms will simply absorb the extra
time demand.
Page 124
Startup
Employer Functions, Estimated Labor Time Requirements and
Payroll Service Provider Roles
Using Full Service Payroll Not Using Payroll Service

Provider
For Labor Time Estimate,
For Labor Time Estimate, Assume 5-49 Employees, with
Assume >=50 Employees Firms >=10 Employees Using
Bookkeeping Software
Determine Employer
Eligibility
 >=5 employee average monthly <1 hour <1 hour
count on Fall quarter DE-9
Read Program Participation

Requirements 2 hours 2 hours
Determine Employee
Eligibility
 All employees reportable to Payroll service provider 1-2 hours
EDD except for those under age
cutoff
Registration with
Recordkeeper via Online
1 hour or through payroll service
Portal– Startup 1 hour
 Provide employer info
provider
 Set up ACH debit
Auto-Enrollment – Startup Ideal: Employer makes
 Gather relevant information for arrangements with Payroll
all eligible employees Service Provider to transmit
 Transmit employee data to 1-4 hours
initial enrollment data (8 hours)
recordkeeper, directly or via depending on number of
payroll service provider employees
Alternative: Employer uploads
data directly to recordkeeper
Page 125
Ongoing
Employer Functions, Estimated Labor Time Requirements and
Payroll Service Provider Roles
Using Full Service Payroll Not Using Payroll Service

Provider
For Labor Time Estimate,
For Labor Time Estimate, Assume 5-49 Employees, with
Assume >=50 Employees Firms >=10 Employees Using
Bookkeeping Software
Auto-Enrollment – Ongoing Ideal: Payroll service provider
transmits new employee data to
recordkeeper
0.5-1 hour/month
Alternative: Employer transmits depending on number of
data on new/terminated employees
employees directly to
recordkeeper
Payroll Deduction Ideal: Full service payroll

 Receive data file from providers receive contribution
recordkeeper with contribution rate instructions directly from
rates recordkeeper and execute with
 Input into payroll system (incl. employer approval
software or spreadsheet) 0.5-1 hour/month
Alternative: Employer receives
depending on number of
contribution rate instructions
employees
from recordkeeper, updates
deduction instructions to payroll
provider – # hours contingent on
workforce size
Submit Payroll Deduction Ideal: Payroll service

Report to Recordkeeper providers directly provide
and Approve Remittance multi-employer batch reports
via ACH to recordkeeper, like they do
with EDD payroll tax
reports.
1-2 hours/month
Alternative: Employer
approves ACH deduction;
payroll service provider
provides batch report for
employer to submit to
recordkeeper
Page 126
G. Scope of Services Deliverables Cross Reference Table
Cross
Market Analysis Reference
Pages
Focus Groups 36-41
Online Survey 41-46
Employer Interviews 47-54
Cross
Program Design Reference
Pages
Develop Key Goals and Expected Outcomes of the SCP
Define the Payroll Deduction-IRA Structure
Identify the Elements that Best Attract Employees and Employers
Impact of Law Firm Findings on Plan Design, Coverage & Funding
Design a Benefits Approach (Auto Enrollment/Auto Escalation)
Determine Process for Selecting Investment Manager(s)
Determine Process for Selecting Administration Manager(s)
Determine Process for Selecting Recordkeeping Manager{s)
Mechanics of Program During the Accumulation Phase:
Set the Level of Contributions and Escalations
Set the Investment Policy
Determine Investment Strategies to be implemented
Determine Investment Options 55-108
How will Investments Returns be Credited
How will Account Balances Reflect Gains/Losses
Determine Income Replacement Adequacy
Mechanics of the Program During the Payout Phase
Determine Process of Conversion into an Annuity
Determine whether Annuitization is Compulsory
Actual Benefit Adjusted to Reflect Post-Retirement Invest Experience
Who is at Risk for (non-) Investment Adverse Experience Post-
Retirement
Determine Any Other Benefits (Death, Survivor,…..)
Implementation Phase
Determine Process by Which Target Employers are Identified
Determine Process How Identified Employers Join Program
Determine Process How Identified Employers Withdraw from Program
Determine Process How Employees Enroll in Program
Determine How Employees Can Opt out or Withdraw from Program 55-108
Determine How Contributions Can Be Collected
Determine How Contributions Can Be Submitted to Recordkeeper
Determine Process for Rollovers
Page 127
Determine Process for Transfers

Determine Process for Withdrawals
Set Process for Enrollment of Employees of non-Participating Employers
Outcome Phase
Sensitivity Testing Using Different Participation Rates
55-108
Suggest Marketing and Communication Tools (Behavioral Economics)
Cross
Financial Feasibility Study Reference
Page
Financial Feasibility and Program Sustainability
Funds Necessary to Implement Program & Options for Financing 109-121
Cost & Fee Structure to Run the Program
Page 128
H. Appendix – Market Analysis Supporting Documents

1. Focus Group Moderator Guide
2. Focus Group Handout 1 - Spanish
3. Examples for Focus Groups – Final – English
4. Examples for Focus Groups – Final – Spanish
5. Greenwald Final Report – Focus Groups
6. Online Survey – Final Questionnaire
7. Online Survey – Weighted Tabulations
8. Online Survey – Weighted Crosstabs
9. Greenwald Final Report – Online Survey
Page 129
Moderator’s Guide
Reactions to California Secure Choice Retirement Savings Plan
Consumer Focus Groups
Final Draft (6-17-15)
I. Introduction (5-10 minutes)

A. Purpose of the group: learn how consumers think about preparing for retirement
B. Rules of focus groups
1. Observers, taping
2. No wrong answers
3. No follow up, research only
4. Participate and give others a chance to participate
Appendix - 1. Focus Group Moderator Guide

C. Introductions
1. What you do for a living
2. What you are most looking forward to doing in retirement
II. Planning for Retirement (20 minutes)

A. How much thought, if any, have you given to retirement?
1. When plan to retire – why at that age?
2. What do you think retirement will be like for you?
3. What are your biggest concerns or fears about retirement?
Probe on:
 Never being able to retire – always having to work
 Running out of money
 Being a burden on children
 Not being able to maintain current lifestyle
 Health problems and cost of medical care
 Affordable housing
B. What steps, if any, have you taken to prepare for retirement?
1. Have you started saving for retirement?
2. (IF YES) What savings methods or products are you using?
3. (IF YES) How well are you doing in saving for retirement?
4. (IF YES) How confident are you that you will have saved enough for a
comfortable retirement – why or why not?
C. How knowledgeable do you feel about how to get financially ready for
retirement?
1. What have your sources of information been about this issue?
1
2. Would you be interested in becoming more informed about saving and
investing for retirement?
D. Why haven’t you started saving for retirement or saved more?

1. What obstacles hold you back?
Probe on:
 Can’t afford to save more
 Don’t know enough about how to save and invest
 Don’t trust financial institutions
 Too far in future to think about
 Have other priorities
 Won’t make a difference

2. To what extent would you like to be able to save more for your retirement?
a. How would it make you feel if you were saving/saving more?
3. What might motivate you to get more interested in saving for retirement?
What kind of things (short of me handing out $100 bills) might help you put
aside money for retirement?
a. Would help with budgeting be useful?
b. What would you be willing to give up to save more for retirement?
c. What do you think about getting information at work about saving
for retirement?
d. Suppose your employer provided a way to save through work –
would that be of interest?
e. Would you be open to government-sponsored programs that
helped people save for retirement by making it easy and
automatic?
f. Is there any way community organizations could be helpful?
g. Other ideas?
III. Financial Comfort Level and Preferences (15 minutes)

A. How would you describe yourself in terms of making financial decisions? What is
your comfort level when it comes to saving and investing?
1. Just to get a general sense of your financial situation, can I get a show of
hands for how many have:
 Bank accounts
 Credit cards
 Life insurance
 Investments like stocks, bonds or mutual funds
2
 Annuities
 Ever had a 401(k) type plan at work?
 Ever had a traditional pension at work?
2. How familiar are you with retirement savings products like IRAs? Do you
know how they work? How about Roth IRAs?
3. Do you get any advice about saving or how to invest? Who gives it to you?
4. Who do you trust to provide good advice and help with financial matters?
Probe on:
 HR department at work
 Family members
 Financial programs on radio or TV
 Financial advisor or broker

 The internet, Google, etc.
5. What do you think about the idea of having money automatically deducted
from your paycheck to pay for things like medical insurance? That type of
arrangement is often referred to as “payroll deduction.”
a. Are you currently using payroll deduction?
b. [IF YES] What for? What is that like for you? Do you notice that the
money is being taken out of your paycheck? How easy or difficult
was it to adjust to?
c. Does the concept of payroll deduction make sense as a way to help
you set aside money you want to save? Why or why not?
6. (For those saving for retirement, if not already covered) – How are you
investing your money now? What is it invested in? Do you get advice or
support on how to do it? From whom? (For those not saving, ask
prospectively.)
(Probe:) Some people like to get very involved in picking out the specific
investments for their money. Other folks just want the peace of mind that 1)
their money is being invested wisely for the long term by an expert they
trust and 2) that it is growing in value. Are you more like that or do you
prefer to be making specific investment decisions yourself?
IV. Reaction to Retirement Plan Offered Through Employer (55 minutes)

Hand out written description of retirement plan (Handout 1 -- see separate document);
moderator reads description aloud to make sure “everyone is on the same page.”
A. How appealing is the basic idea of this type of retirement plan?

1. What are your reasons for feeling that way? What do you like/dislike?
3
2. Is anything confusing or unclear?
3. What are the biggest advantages?
4. What concerns you most about it?
B. Next, I’d like to get your reactions to some of the specific features of this
retirement plan. For each feature, ask:
 Whether understandable
 How it affects evaluation of retirement plan
 Improvements to make feature more appealing
1. The idea that unless you tell your employer not to do it, money will be
automatically deducted from your paycheck and contributed to a retirement
plan account that is in your name. (auto enrollment)

2. The amount you contribute each pay period would be at 3% if you are in the
retirement plan, unless you chose to contribute a different amount. (default
contribution)
 What if the amount automatically contributed to your Secure Choice plan
was 5%?
 What if the amount you contribute automatically increased by 1% of your
paycheck every year, up to 10% after seven years? [IF TOO HIGH] What
should the upper limit be for automatic yearly increases?
3. The account will be set up in your name in an IRA (Individual Retirement
Account). You would fully own the money in your IRA. If you die before you
use the money in your account, it would go to your spouse or whomever
you designate.
4. The retirement plan will stay with you if you change jobs or stop working.
(portability)
5. Not having to worry about how to invest your retirement savings. The
money you contribute would be automatically invested in a low cost
investment designed for plan participants and managed by professionals,
unless you choose the plan’s other available investment options. (default
investment account)
[If financially sophisticated participants demand specifics, you can say a
Balanced Fund or Target Date Fund would probably be the default]
6. Being able to convert your savings into monthly income to last the rest of
your life.
7. Having access to your account information at any time through a computer
or smart phone. Also, being able to get a yearly account statement that
shows current balance, contributions, investment returns and fees, as well
as a projection of how much you can expect in retirement income.
(transparency)
4
C. Now I’m going to show you two handouts on key aspects of the plan. I’m
interested in how well or not well these handouts communicate these features of
the plan.
1. Distribute Handout 2 (see PowerPoint slides): Impact of Contribution on

Retirement Savings
Moderator walks participants through handout.
a. What is your reaction to this exhibit? Likes/dislikes?
b. Is anything confusing or unclear?
c. What would you change about this exhibit to make it better?
Probe on:

 Alternative assumptions about investment returns
(low/average/high) – which one is most believable for you?
 Contribution levels
 Use of graphics
2. Distribute Handout 3 (see PowerPoint slides): Expected Retirement

Income
Moderator walks participants through handout.
a. What is your reaction to this exhibit? Likes/dislikes?
b. Is anything confusing or unclear?
c. What would you change about this exhibit to make it better?
Probe on:
 Contribution levels
 Social Security assumptions
 Use of graphics
D. I’d like to get a sense of your preferences about saving and investing for
retirement.
1. Risk vs reward
 Where do you put yourself between these two types of people:
o Prefer to take a lot of risk with investing my money with the hope of
making a lot of money
o Prefer to take almost no risk with money I’ve earned because I don’t
want to lose any of it, even if this means a low return
5
Moderator draws continuum on flip chart and labels end points; marks where
participants put themselves; points out that “putting under mattress” actually
loses money due to inflation and reduced buying power.
 Now suppose you could choose to put your retirement savings in an
account with an expected return of 6% like you saw in Handout 2, but each
year your investment returns will fluctuate and you might end up with a
much lower average return. How attractive would that be?
 Would you prefer more predictable returns, averaging more like what you
might get in a bank savings account, even it might not keep up with
inflation?
2. Lifetime income

 What if the program automatically converted a large portion of your
account balance into lifetime income (like an annuity) unless you chose
otherwise?
[If asked, moderator will explain how different types of annuities work –
specifically, that you can purchase annuities that pay for exactly as long as
you live—so you might lose out if you die much sooner than you expect--or
lower payments that go to a spouse if you die.
3. Access to funds before retirement: What if…

 You could not withdraw the funds at all before you retire.
 You could only withdraw a portion of your balance in an emergency –
understanding that the federal government charges a 10% penalty before
age 59 1/2
 You could only withdraw funds for economic hardship reasons (such as
unemployment or illness), but with no limit on how much – with a tax
penalty
 You could withdraw your money at any time – with a tax penalty.
4. Tax treatment preference

 Assuming you were in a 20% tax bracket, if you contribute $50 per pay
period to the retirement plan, only $40 would actually be taken out of your
paycheck. (pre-tax contributions)
 What if you paid taxes up front, but you could withdraw the money plus
investment gains tax-free when you retire? (post-tax contributions)
5. Having one default investment option vs. choice

 How would you feel about having just one investment fund that your
contributions automatically go into?
 How much of a difference does it make to you if the plan offers a limited
number of other investments that you can choose?
6
V. Messaging and Communications (20 minutes)
A. Best way of describing retirement plan
1. What program aspect or goal of the retirement plan would be most likely to
grab your attention?
B. Reactions to messaging statements -- show on cards one at a time.
 Invest to make sure you have a secure stream of income when you retire
 Be able to supplement what you get from Social Security
 Growth of your retirement nest egg

 A straightforward and simple way to save for retirement
 Payroll deduction makes saving for retirement easy and convenient
 A savings plan designed to help all workers achieve financial security in
retirement
 This program will reduce future elder poverty and need for social assistance.
 It’s your money, your account, and you can take it from job to job
 Get on the path to being self-sufficient in retirement
 You won’t need to think about doing the right thing for your future – you will
automatically be saving for retirement with every paycheck you get
1. How motivating is this message?

2. Is there a better way to communicate this idea? What are your suggestions
for improvement?
3. After all messages have been discussed, take vote on best message and
worst message. What are the reasons for liking it best/worst?
C. Best way to communicate about the new retirement plan
1. How would you most like to learn about how the new retirement plan
works?
Probe on:
 Group meeting at work
 Brochures and other written materials
 Emails
 Website
2. If you were in this new plan, how would you most like to get information
about your retirement account?
7
Probe on:
 Emails – prefer to receive on phone or computer?
 Website -- prefer to access on phone or computer?
 Mailings of account statements or other information
 800 number
VI. Wrap Up (5 minutes)

Any other ideas for ways in which a state-sponsored retirement savings plan
could be improved or made more appealing to you?
8
Volante 1
 Elección Segura de California (Secure Choice):

Propuesta del Programa
El Estado de California está desarrollando un nuevo plan, basado en el lugar de trabajo, de

ahorros para la jubilación para los seis millones de trabajadores en el estado que actualmente
no tienen ningún plan de jubilación en su trabajo. El Plan de Ahorros de Jubilación de
Elección Segura de California (Secure Choice) ofrecerá una manera fácil de ahorrar
para la jubilación directamente de su sueldo. Las características principales incluyen:
 Inscripción automática, con la opción de no participar.

Ud. sería automáticamente inscrito/a por su empleador al plan de jubilación Secure Choice, a menos
que Ud. elija no participar.
Appendix – 2. Focus Group Handout 1 - Spanish

 Tarifa de contribución automática y flexible.
Si Ud. esta inscrito/a, el 3% de su sueldo sería contribuído automáticamente al plan de cada cheque.
Ud. podría elegir contribuír un monto diferente, o mas alto o mas bajo.
Ejemplos Salario Anual Contribución al Mes @ 3% Contribución Anual

$20,000 $50 $600
$40,000 $100 $1,200
$60,000 $150 $1,800
 El dinero sería depositado en una cuenta individual de la jubilación (IRA) en su nombre.

Sus contribuciónes, más cualquier ganancia de inversión, serían mantenidos en la cuenta hasta que los
necesite cuando Ud. se jubile. Ud. plenamente poseería el dinero en su IRA. Sí Ud. falleciera antes
de usar el dinero, el dinero sería distribuído a su esposo/a (si Ud. esta casado/a) o a cualquier persona
que Ud. quiera que lo herede.
 Su cuenta de Secure Choice permanecería con Ud. de empleo a empleo.

Sí Ud. se muda fuera del estado, o a un trabajo que ya ofrece un plan de 401k o pensión, sus contribu-
ciones a Secure Choice terminarían -- pero su cuenta seguiría ganando rendimientos de la inversión.
 Su dinero sería invertido automáticamente en un fondo de alta calidad y bajo costo manejado
por profesionales de inversión.
Este fondo será diseñado para crecer sus ahorros de la jubilación con el tiempo y incluyerá una mez-
cla de bonos y acciones. Ud. También podría elegir entre algunas otras opciones de inversión de bajo
costo.
 Cuando Ud. se jubile, Secure Choice le permitiría convertir su saldo a un ingreso mensual de
toda la vida.
 Ud. podría acceder a la información de su cuenta en cualquier momento a través de una

computadora o un Smartphone.
Su estado de cuenta anual le mostraría claramente el saldo de la cuenta, las contribuciones, las ga-
nancias de inversión y las tarifas. También le mostraría la cantidad del ingreso que Ud. podría recibir
cuando Ud. se jubile basado en su forma de ahorros actual.
Examples for Focus Groups
English
Appendix - 3. Examples for Focus Groups - Final - English

The Basics
• Your employer will automatically put a portion of
your pay into your savings account in the Plan.
• The Plan invests the money for you so it will grow
over time:
– The investment returns are not guaranteed.
– There could even be a loss in any single year.
– But over a longer period of savings the returns are
expected to provide a meaningful addition to your
own contribution amounts.

Impact of Contribution on Paycheck
-
Take home pay Contribution to Estimated tax Adjusted take
twice a month
$1,000
the savings Plan
$50
+ benefit
$10
= home pay
$960
$50 twice a month = $1,200/year
How Savings Grow in Retirement Plan

$70,000 With a 6% average
Low return (4%) Average return (6%) High return (8%) return, you have
$60,000 contributed
$29,000 over 20
$50,000 years but your
account has grown
$40,000 to $52,000.
You
$30,000 contribute
$1,200 the
$20,000 first year.
$10,000
$0
1 year 5 years 10 years 15 years 20 years
Assumes 2% inflation and an investment portfolio of stocks and bonds.

Handout 2 v1

Impact of Contribution on Paycheck
-
Take home pay Contribution to Estimated tax Adjusted take
twice a month
$2,000
the savings Plan
$100
+ benefit
$20
= home pay
$1,920
$100 twice a month = $2,400/year
How Savings Grow in Retirement Plan

$140,000 With a 6% average
Low return (4%) Average return (6%) High return (8%) return, you have
$120,000 contributed
$58,000 over 20
$100,000 years but your
account has grown
$80,000 to $103,000.
You
$60,000 contribute
$2,400 the
$40,000 first year.
$20,000
$0
Assumes 2% inflation and an investment portfolio of stocks and bonds.

Handout 2 v2

Expected Retirement Income
With Average Investment Returns
Assume you work until age 67, retire after at least 20 years of contributing to
the plan, and are eligible to collect Social Security at retirement. Here are
some estimates of what you would be getting in retirement income from
work savings and Social Security, assuming your retirement plan savings
earned an average investment return of 6% and $24,000 current annual pay.
Retirement Yearly income Total Expected

Number of Plan from Retirement Expected Retirement
years you Contribution Plan if you take Social Security
contribute (2x a month) annuity option benefit Income
first year
20 years
(currently age 46)
$50 $1,910 + $13,000 = $14,910
30 years
(currently age 36)
$50 $3,575 + $13,000
= $16,575
40 years
(currently age 26)
$50 $6,020 + $13,000 = $19,020
Note: Amounts are in today’s dollars (same purchasing power as today).
Handout 3

Examples for Focus Groups
Spanish
Appendix - 4. Examples for Focus Groups - Final - Spanish

Los Conceptos Básicos
• En el Plan, su empleador automáticamente
pondrá una parte de su sueldo en su cuenta de
ahorros.
• El Plan invierte el dinero para usted para que
pueda aumentar con el tiempo:
– Los rendimientos de las inversiones no están
garantizados.
– Incluso podría haber una pérdida en cualquier año.
– Pero de un período de ahorro a largo plazo se espera
que los rendimientos proporcionen una adición
significativa a sus propios contribuciones.

Impacto de su contribución a su sueldo
Beneficio
-
Contribuciones al Salario total
Quincena
$1,000
plan de ahorro
$50
+ impositivo
aproximado
= ajustado
$960
$10
$50 cada quincena = $1,200/año
La forma en que ahorros crecen en el Plan de Jubilación

$70,000 Con un promedio
Low return (4%) Average return (6%) High return (8%) de devolución de
$60,000 6%, usted ha
contribuido
$50,000 $29,000 a lo largo
de 20 años pero
$40,000 su cuenta ha
crecido a $52,000.
Usted
$30,000 contribuye
$1,200 el
$20,000 primer
año.
$10,000
$0
Asume 2% de inflación y un cartera de inversión de acciones y bonos.

Handout 2 v1

Impacto de su contribución a su sueldo
Beneficio
-
Contribuciones al Salario total
Quincena
$2,000
plan de ahorro
$100
+ impositivo
aproximado
= ajustado
$1,920
$20
$100 cada quincena= $2,400/año
La forma en que ahorros crecen en el Plan de Jubilación

$140,000 Con un promedio
Low return (4%) Average return (6%) High return (8%) de devolución de
$120,000 6%, usted ha
contribuido
$100,000 $58,000 a lo largo
de 20 años pero su
$80,000 cuenta ha crecido
a $103,000.
Usted
$60,000 contribuye
$2,400 el
$40,000 primer
año.
$20,000
$0
Asume el 2% de inflación y una cartera de inversiones de acciones y bonos.

Handout 2 v2

Ingresos de Jubilación Esperados con devoluciones
de promedio de inversiones
Supongamos que Ud. trabaja hasta los 67 años, que se jubila después de por lo
menos 20 años de contribuciones al plan, y que Ud. es elegible para recibir Seguro
Social cuando se jubila. Estas son algunas estimaciones de lo que Ud. recibiría como
ingreso de la jubilación de su ahorros del trabajo y del Seguro Social, suponiendo
que sus ahorros del plan de la jubilación devuelven un promedio de rendimientos de
inversión de 6% con $24,000 de su actual sueldo anual.
Contribución Ingreso anual del Total de ingresos

Cantidad de al plan de plan de jubilación Beneficios de jubilación
años que Ud. jubilación si toma la opción esperados del
contribuyó (2x por mes) de anualidad Seguro Social esperados
primer año
20 years
(actualmente 46
$50 $1,910 + $13,000 = $14,910
años de edad)
30 years
(actualmente 36
$50 $3,575 + $13,000 = $16,575
=
años de edad)
+ $19,020
40 years $50 $6,020 $13,000
(actualmente 26
años de edad)
Nota: Las cantidades notadas son en dólares actuales (mismo poder

adquisitivo que hoy).
Handout 3

Online Survey of Employees Without
Workplace Retirement Plans
Report of Findings
Conducted for:
State of California
October 2015
Prepared by Greenwald & Associates 2015 1
Appendix - 5. Greenwald Final Report - Focus Groups

Table of Contents
Methodology 3
Key Findings 4
Reaction to Proposed Program 8
Interacting with the Proposed Program 20
Overall Planning, Financial Awareness and Attitudes 23
Respondent Profile 32

Methodology
• Online survey was conducted by independent research firm Greenwald & Associates.
• A total of 1,000 consumers were surveyed from August 31th to September 16st, 2015.
• Respondents were selected from among members of Research Now’s online research panel.
• To qualify, respondents were required to be:
– Age 21 to 64
– Working full-time or part-time
– Not self-employed or working for Federal, state or local government
– Working for employer with 5+ employees
– Without a pension or retirement plan through employer
• The data were weighted by gender, age, education, race/ethnicity and household income to
reflect the population of uncovered workers in California matching the survey’s qualification
requirements. In a similarly-sized random sample survey, the margin of error would be plus
or minus 3.1 percentage points at the 95% confidence level.
• Due to rounding and missing categories, numbers presented may not always total to 100%.

Key Findings
1. California uncovered workers are interested in a retirement savings program

that automatically enrolls them but gives them the option not to participate.
• Six in seven think it is a good idea, including 57% who say it is a very good
idea.
• When shown an example of how savings in such a program could grow over
time, 55% say it would excellent or very good for them and another 26% say
it would be good.
2. Most would participate in the program – only about a quarter would opt out,
regardless of whether the deferral rate is 3% or 5%.
• Retention rates in the program are higher for women than for men (77% vs.
• Some (18%) would stay in the program but would ask to have their deferral
rate changed. Of that group, only a minority would ask to lower their
deferral rate (32% of those with a 3% deferral rate and 43% of those with a
5% deferral rate).

Key Findings (continued)
• Automatically increasing contributions by 1% annually up to a maximum of
10% will not prevent most uncovered workers from participating – 81%
would stay in the program if it included automatic escalation. However, 33%
would ask their employer to stop the increases.
• About a third will not participate if they cannot access their money if they
• About a quarter would require, as a condition of participation, being able to
• By a two to one margin, uncovered workers prefer to have their money

• Being able to pass their savings on to a beneficiary in the event they die and
• Large shares also highly value having online access to their account, an
• The least attractive feature – but still considered extremely to very attractive
by 73% – is having multiple investment options available.
least some money aside for retirement, but most have not done much, if
anything, to build a retirement nest egg.
• They agree that saving for retirement is important (96% very or somewhat
important).
• Retirement ranks second as an overall savings priority (45% rank it 1st or 2nd

• Nearly all could save at least some amount in a retirement savings plan
• Over half are currently saving less than 5% for retirement, including 29% who
• Four in ten say a major reason is that they are more focused on their family
and nearly as many (36%) report that dealing with unexpected expenses is a
major reason they don’t save more.
• When in need of assistance, 30-40% prefer to have phone contact for various
service needs.
• Among those who prefer phone-based service, two-thirds or more would only
program.

Reaction To Proposed Program

Respondents were asked to read a description of
the proposed retirement savings program.
• The sample was split: half saw a description with a 3% deferral rate and half saw a 5% deferral rate.

Three-quarters of uncovered workers would stay in
the program, whether the deferral rate is 3% or 5%.
• Within the opt-in segment, 16% to 20% would ask for a change in their deferral rate.
• Just over a quarter (27%) would opt out.
 Opt-out rates are higher for those with no college than for those who attended college but did not get a 4-year
degree (30% vs. 17%).
Stay in program Stay in program, but ask your employer to change the contribution rate Opt out of program
NET: Stay in program – 73%
Total 56% 18% 27%

(n=1,000)
3% Contribution 57% 16% 27%

(n=500)

(n=500)
Q1. If you were automatically enrolled in the California Secure Choice program above at (3%/5%) of your paycheck, would you…?

Retention rates are higher for women than for men;
they also increase as personal income goes up.
There are not statistically meaningful differences in the percentage who would stay in the
program by age or by Hispanic status.
Percent who would stay in program
77% 79%
75% 75% 74%
71% 72% 72% 71%
Male Female < Age 35 Age 35+ Hispanic Non- <$30K $30K- $60K+
Hispanic $59K
---- Personal Income ---
Base: Total, n=1,000

Among those who would stay in the program but
ask to change their deferral rate, over half would
request a higher contribution rate.
3% Contribution 5% Contribution
(n=103) (n=103)
Less than 1% 0% Less than 1% 3%

32% would 1% 10% 1% 2%
lower their
contribution 2% 23% 2% 15%
rate 43% would
3% 3% 21% lower their
62% would 4% 1% 4% 3% contribution
raise their rate
contribution 5% 25% 5%
rate 55% would
6% 7% 6% <0.5%
raise their
7% 1% 7% 8% contribution
rate
8% 3% 8% 8%
9% 0% 9% 8%
10% 20% 10% 24%
More than 10% 6% More than 10% 6%
Don't know 6%
Don't know 1%
Q1A. What percentage would you ask your employer to change the contribution rate to?

Six in seven (85%) support the idea of automatically
enrolling uncovered workers into a retirement
savings program that has an opt-out option.
• Only a very small proportion (4%) think it is a very poor idea.
Very poor
Somewhat idea
poor idea 4%
10%
Very good
Somewhat idea
good idea 57%
29%
Q2. In general, do you think automatically enrolling workers into a retirement savings program while giving them the option to choose not to
participate is a:

When given a concrete example of potential
savings growth in the program, over half think it
would be excellent to very good for them.
55%
Excellent:
26%
26%
12%
6%
2%
Excellent/Very good Good Fair Poor Don't know

Q3. Given these numbers, do you feel that taking part in this program would be for you:

If the program had automatic escalation of 1%
annually up to a maximum of 10%, a fifth would opt
out and another third would just stop the increases.
• Opt-out rates if the program included an automatic escalation feature are higher for
non-Hispanic than for Hispanic respondents (23% vs. 15%).
Stay in the program with the increases in contribution

Stay in the program but ask your employer to stop the increases
Opt out of the program entirely
Total 48% 33% 19%

(n=1,000)
Q4. Suppose that the program automatically increased your contributions by 1% of your paycheck every year up to a maximum of 10%.
Would you…

Respondents were shown two investment fund
options for the program.
The retirement savings program could be set up with different fund options. Two examples are described
below. Please read both the description and the chart:
A. A “Balanced Fund" that has a mix of 60% stocks and 40% bonds. This is expected to provide significant
investment growth over the long term. However, performance will vary a lot from year to year, and there
is a 1-in-50 (2%) chance of losing some of the principal (your contributions) after 20 years.
B. A “Money Market Fund,” an interest-bearing account that protects the principal. You will never lose your
deposit, but interest rates may fail to keep pace with inflation.

About twice as many prefer a Balanced Fund over a
Money Market Fund.
• Half (51%) prefer a Balanced Fund compared to 23% who prefer a Money Market Fund. Another
10% do not have a preference and 16% don’t know.
 Preference for the Balanced Fund increases with education and income.
Don't know
Makes no 16%
difference
10%
Option A:
Balanced
fund
51%
Option B:
Money
Market fund
23%
Q5. Do you prefer to have the money automatically invested in a low-cost fund that is:

Large majorities feel each of the 7 program features
tested are very attractive, with beneficiary benefits
and portability rated most highly.
• The least attractive feature is having multiple investment options to choose from in addition to the
default investment fund.
Extremely attractive Very attractive Somewhat attractive Not attractive
If you die before you use the money in your account, having it go
62% 22% 14%
to your spouse or whomever you designate
Being able to take your account from job to job 60% 24% 12%
Having access to your account information at any time through a

53% 29% 16%
computer or smart phone
At retirement, being able to convert all or part of your balance

51% 30% 17%
into monthly income for life
All the investment options will be low cost 50% 33% 15%
Having a personal account set up in your name 49% 32% 17%
Having a few investment options to choose from in addition to 4%

36% 37% 23%
the investment fund that your contributions automatically go into
Q6. The following are features of the California Secure Choice program. How attractive is each feature?

Nearly nine in ten think the proposed retirement
savings program is a good idea for the State of
California.
• Just 12% describe it as a somewhat or very poor idea.
88%
Good idea
49%
38%
9%
3%
Very good idea Somewhat good idea Somewhat poor idea Very poor idea
Q7. How good or poor an idea do you think this program is for the State of California?

About a third won’t participate in the program if
they are unable to access their money if they
become seriously ill or their spouse dies.
• About a quarter would require, as a condition of participation, being able to access their savings in the
event of job loss (28%) or a family member becoming seriously ill (26%).
• There is less demand for liquidity in these situations: home purchase (18%), birth of a child (16%), tuition
(13%) and other large types of purchases (12%).
Must have or won't participate Would be nice to have access Don't care either way Do not need access Not applicable
Serious illness on your part 32% 51% 9% 5%
Death of a spouse 32% 44% 10% 6% 9%
Loss of a job 28% 50% 11% 6% 5%
Spouse or other family member becomes seriously ill 26% 54% 10% 4% 6%
Home purchase 18% 47% 16% 13% 6%
Birth of a child 16% 36% 18% 16% 15%
Tuition for schooling 13% 36% 23% 17% 11%
Other type purchase or expense 12% 31% 24% 25% 7%

Q8. How important is it that you have access, before retirement, to your money in your California Secure Choice program account for
each of the following situations?

Interacting with the Proposed Program

For various needs, Internet-based service is
preferred to phone, and by a wide margin, to mail.
• Very few want to use online chat or mail to address their service needs.
• About four in ten prefer phone for each of the following: when first starting in the plan (40%), for
early withdrawals (39%), if a family member dies (39%) or for pre-retirement planning (38%).
Phone Website/ email Online chat Mail
When you first start contributing to the plan 40% 48% 5% 7%
If you needed to withdraw funds early (before

retirement) 39% 51% 5% 5%
If a spouse or other family member died 39% 47% 5% 9%
When you start getting close to retirement and thinking

about how you will use the savings in your account 38% 49% 6% 7%
When you are in retirement and drawing down on the 35% 55% 4% 6%
savings in your account
If you divorced 32% 50% 7% 11%
To add or subtract a beneficiary, for example, after the

29% 57% 8% 7%
birth of a child or getting married

Q9. Assuming you have questions or need assistance, by which of these four ways would you prefer to work with customer service in
each of these situations:

Among those who prefer phone-based service,
majorities would only feel comfortable using this
method, especially when getting started in program.
• Almost three-fourths (73%) of those who prefer phone say this is the only way they want to initially
get service.
Percent answering “yes”
When you first start contributing to the plan 73%

(n=336)
If a spouse or other family member died 70%

(n=343)
If you needed to withdraw funds early (before retirement) 70%

(n=361)
To add or substract a beneficiary, for example, after the birth of

69%
a child or getting married
(n=226)
When you are in retirement and drawing down on the savings in
68%
your account
(n=323)
If you divorced 67%

(n=275)
When you start getting close to retirement and thinking about

64%
how you will use the savings in your account
(n=375)
Base: Percentages based on those who prefer service by phone for each given situation.
Q10. Is talking by phone with a customer service representative the only way in which you would feel comfortable getting the help you
needed in each of these situations?

Overall Planning, Financial Awareness &
Attitudes

Uncovered workers agree that saving for retirement
is important.
• Nearly all (96%) affirm the importance of saving for retirement, including 69% who say this goal is
very important.
 Placing high importance on saving for retirement increases with age and with income.
96%
Important
69%
28%
3% 1%
Very important Somewhat important Not too important Not at all important
Q11. The next few questions are about your attitudes about saving for retirement in general. How important to you is it to save for retirement?

Most believe they could set aside money to
contribute to a retirement savings plan, but two-
thirds could contribute less than $100 per month.
• Just 4% report they could not set aside any amount for retirement.
Maximum Expected Monthly Contribution

Through Payroll Deduction
Less than $25 11%
Not
surprisingly, $25 to $49 33%
confidence and
45% ability to save
40% increases with $50 to $99 20%
income.
$100 to $199 17%
$200 to $299 6%
$300 to $399 3%
11%
3% $400 or more 6%
I don't think I could

Very confident Somewhat Not too Not at all 4%
save anything
confident confident confident

Q12. If you had access to a similar type of retirement plan, how confident are you that you would be able to set aside some money to contribute?
Q13. About how much per month would be the maximum you could likely contribute to this type of retirement savings plan?

On average, uncovered workers are saving 4.5% of
their household income for retirement. However,
three in ten are not saving anything for retirement.
• Women are more likely than men to report they (and their spouse, if married) are not saving at all
for retirement (37% vs. 23%).
Percentage of Total Household Income

Being Saved for Retirement
Saving 10%
or more
19% Saving 0%,
29%
Saving 5%
to 9%
26% Saving 1%
to 4%
26%
Q14. Currently, about what percentage of your total household income, are you (and your spouse/partner) saving for retirement?

The leading reasons for not saving more for
retirement are not making enough money or
needing to pay off debts.
• These are primary reasons for 8 in 10 uncovered workers, including half who say they are the
primary reason.
• 4 in 10 report a major obstacle to retirement saving is their focus on helping their family.
Primary
Major reason Minor reason reason
You do not earn enough at your job 51% 30% 30%
You have to pay off debts 52% 26% 24%
You have had unexpected expenses 36% 33% 6%
You are more focused on helping your family 40% 26% 14%
You are unsure about how to invest the
money
28% 38% 7%
You have simply put it off 27% 38% 6%

You are more focused on enjoying today than
20% 39% 6%
on saving for the future
You are not sure about how much to save 19% 36% 2%
Other 6% 6% 3%
Q15. Please indicate if the following are reasons for you (and your spouse/partner) not saving (more) money:
Q16. Which ONE of those is your PRIMARY reason for not saving more money now?
Prepared by Greenwald & Associates 2015 Base: Q15, n=1,000
28
Q16, n=943

Retirement ranks second as an overall savings
priority after having an emergency fund.
• When asked to rank six potential savings needs, over half (55%) ranked having an emergency fund
either their first or second priority. Just under half (45%) ranked retirement as one of their top two
overall savings priorities.
Ranked 1st Ranked 2nd
To have an emergency fund equal to about 3 to 6

months of living expenses in case you lose your 30% 25%
job or are unable to work
Retirement 26% 19%
For unexpected expenses, such as medical costs

9% 25%
or car repairs
To buy a house or business 21% 11%
To pay tuition for yourself, children or 10% 12%

grandchildren
To make large purchases, such as a car 5% 8%

Q17. Thinking about your overall savings priorities, please rank the following financial goals from 1 to 6, with “1” Most important and “6”
Least important:

Another indication of the strong interest uncovered
workers have in saving for retirement are large
shares who think they could and should do it.
• Only about one in seven (14%) thinks it is hopeless for them to save anything for
retirement.
Strongly agree Somewhat agree
I would feel a lot better about my life 20 years from

now if I had some money saved for retirement 64% 29% 93%
I should have started saving earlier for retirement,

even if it was hard to do it 47% 39% 86%
I really could save for retirement if I forced myself

to do it 38% 48% 86%
It is hopeless for me to save anything 14% 28% 42%

Q18. To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statements:

While a majority are confident they know how much
to save for retirement, only 1 in 5 are very
confident.
• Four in ten (39%) are not comfortable they know how much money they need to save for retirement.
61%
Confident
40%
28%
21%
12%
Very confident Somewhat confident Not too confident Not at all confident

Q19. How confident are you that you know how much money you need to save for retirement?

For managing and investing retirement money,
there is greater trust in professional financial
advisors than in government and other entities.
• Small shares strongly indicate any would be untrustworthy stewards, including federal government
(14%) and state government (13%).
Strongly agree Somewhat agree Neutral Somewhat disagree Strongly disagree
Professional financial advisors 17% 39% 34% 8% 4%
Federal government 15% 22% 33% 15% 14%
Financial companies 14% 31% 40% 9% 5%
Your employer 14% 31% 39% 8% 8%
State government 13% 24% 36% 15% 13%
Insurance companies 12% 28% 40% 12% 8%
Q20. For each of the following, to what extent do you agree or disagree that each is trustworthy when it comes to managing a nd investing
workers’ retirement savings:

Respondent Profile

Respondent Profile
Gender Total Age Total

(n=1,000) (n=1,000)
Male 55% 21 to 24 7%
Female 45 25 to 29 12
30 to 34 24
Employment Status 35 to 39 13
Employed full-time 77% 40 to 44 10
Employed part-time at least 20 hours per 19 45 to 49 13

week 50 to 54 9
Employed part-time less than 20 hours per 4 55 to 59 8
week
60 to 64 5
Personal Income
Less than $10,000 7% Household Income
$10,000 to $19,999 14 Under $35,000 34%

$20,000 to $29,999 20 $35,000 to $49,999 15
$30,000 to $39,999 15 $50,000 to $74,999 18
$40,000 to $49,999 9 $75,000 to $99,999 11
$50,000 to $59,999 11 $100,000 to $149,999 12
$60,000 or more 23 $150,000 or more 9
Prefer not to say 2

Respondent Profile (continued)
Race or Ethnicity Total Education Total

(n=1,000) (n=1,000)
Hispanic or Latino 49% Some high school or less 4%

White/Caucasian 34 High school graduate 42
Asian-American 11 Trade or 2-year associate degree 8
African-American 6 Some college (4-year degree college) 19
Other 1 College graduate (4-year degree college) 17
Post graduate work 2
Graduate degree 8
Savings and Investments
Less than $2,000 32% Marital status

$2,000 to less than $10,000 17 Married 45%
$10,000 to less than $25,000 10 Single, never married 32
$25,000 to less than $50,000 7 Not married, but living with a partner 13
$50,000 to less than $100,000 8 Divorced, separated or widowed 9
$100,000 or more 15 Prefer not to say 1
Not sure 7
Prefer not to say 4

No. of Years with Current Employer Total No. of Employers Worked for in Last Total
(n=1,000) Five Years (n=1,000)
Less than 1 year 16% 1 employer 44%

1 year but less than 3 years 26 2 employers 34
3 years but less than 5 years 16 3 employers 13
5 years but less than 10 years 23 4 or more employers 9
10 years or more 19
Pension or Retirement Savings Plan Types of Debt

in Previous Job (n=554)
Yes 29% Credit card debt that will take more than 3 56%
months to pay off
No 65
Car loan 43%
Not sure 6
Home mortgage 29%
Student loans 23%
Spouse Has a Pension or Retirement
Savings Plan at Current Job (n=451) Other types of personal loans 14%
Yes 36% Other types of loans through a financial
9%
institution
No 57
None of the above 15%
Not sure 8

Respondent’s Employer
No. of Employees Total Current Employer Total

(n=1,000) (n=1,000)
5 to 9 employees 14% A for-profit business 65%

10 to 49 employees 36 A non-profit organization 17
50 to 99 employees 14 A private educational or academic institution 4
100 to 499 employees 18 Other 13
500 or more employees 19

CALIFORNIA SECURE CHOICE
Employees without Workplace Retirement Plan
Thank you for agreeing to participate in this survey. The goal of this study is to learn more
about how people your age think about preparing for retirement.
SCREENING
S1. In what State do you live?

Total
(n=1,000)
California .......................................................................... 100%
Prefer not to say ..................................................................--
Appendix - 6. Online Survey - Final Questionnaire

S2. Are you…?
Total
(n=1,000)
Male.................................................................................... 55%
Female ............................................................................... 45
S3. In what year were you born?

Total
(n=1,000)
21 to 34 .............................................................................. 43%
35 to 49 .............................................................................. 36
50 to 64 .............................................................................. 21
Prefer not to say ..................................................................--
S4. Which of the following best describes your current employment status?
Total
(n=1,000)
Employed full-time .............................................................. 77%
Employed part-time at least 20 hours per week.................. 19
Employed part-time less than 20 hours per week................. 4
Not currently working ........................................................... --
Other ...................................................................................--
Prefer not to say ..................................................................--
California Secure Choice Survey 1

S5. About how many employees work for your company or organization?
Total
(n=1,000)
Less than 5 ...........................................................................--
5 to 9 .................................................................................. 14%
10 to 49 .............................................................................. 36
50 to 99 .............................................................................. 14
100 to 499 .......................................................................... 18
500+ ................................................................................... 19
Prefer not to say ...................................................................--
S6. Do you have access to any type of pension or retirement savings plan (such as a
401(k) or 457 plan) at your primary job?

Pop up definitions:
Pension: Pension plans are funded by an employer and typically pay a monthly benefit for
life at retirement. The payment is usually based on the length of time people worked in a
company.
Retirement savings plan: Employer-provided retirement plans – such as 401(k), 457, and
403(b) plans – enable employees to make contributions on a tax-deferred basis. Employers
typically allow employees to contribute through payroll deduction and they hire financial
companies or investment professionals to manage the investments.
Total
(n=1,000)
Yes .......................................................................................--
No..................................................................................... 100%
Not sure ................................................................................--
S7. Which of the following best describes your current employer?

Total
(n=1,000)
A for-profit business............................................................ 65%
A non-profit organization .................................................... 17
A private educational or academic institution........................ 4
Federal, state or local government, including public
school or public college ..................................................--
Self-employed......................................................................--
Other .................................................................................. 13

S8. How would you describe your race or ethnicity?
Total
(n=1,000)
Hispanic or Latino............................................................... 49%
White/Caucasian ................................................................ 34
Asian-American .................................................................. 11
African-American .................................................................. 6
Other .................................................................................... 1
S9. What was the highest level of education you completed?

Total
(n=1,000)
Some high school or less ..................................................... 4%

High school graduate.......................................................... 42
Trade or 2-year associate degree......................................... 8
Some college (4-year degree college)................................ 19
College graduate (4 year degree college) .......................... 17
Post graduate work............................................................... 2
Graduate degree .................................................................. 8
S10. In 2014, what was your total household income, before taxes? Your best estimate
is fine.
Total
(n=1,000)
Under $35,000.................................................................... 34%
$35,000 to $49,999............................................................. 15
$50,000 to $74,999............................................................. 18
$75,000 to $99,999............................................................. 11
$100,000 to $149,999......................................................... 12
$150,000 or more ................................................................. 9
Prefer not to say ...................................................................--
S11. What is your marital status?

Total
(n=1,000)
Married ............................................................................... 45%
Single, never married ......................................................... 32
Not married, but living with a partner .................................. 13
Divorced, separated or widowed .......................................... 9
Prefer not to say ................................................................... 1

REACTION TO PROPOSED PROGRAM
Imagine that a new retirement savings program is being offered at your job. Please read
the description of the program below and select the choice you’d likely make if this
program were actually available.
California Secure Choice Retirement Savings Plan
Your employer will automatically deduct a contribution from each paycheck, and deposit
the money into a retirement account in your name. Your savings will be invested in the
market in order to provide you with income in retirement. The account will follow you from
job to job.
Some important features of the California Secure Choice plan:

 [Version A: 3;Version B: 5] percent of your pay, or [Version A:$30; Version B: $50]
per every $1,000 you earn, will be deducted and deposited into your account. You
can change how much you contribute to your account a few times a year and can
stop contributing at any time by opting out of the program.
 The money will be invested in a fund appropriate for someone your age, managed
by a private company selected and monitored by the State of California.
 The funds in your account will be legally your money, and not your employer’s or
the state’s.
 At retirement, you can choose to convert your account balance to a stream of
monthly income payments to last the rest of your life.
Detailed information on the program can be found here.
1. If you were automatically enrolled in the California Secure Choice program above at
[Version A: 3%; Version B: 5%] of your paycheck, would you…
Total
(n=1,000)
Stay in program .................................................................. 56%
Stay in program, but ask your employer to change the
contribution rate to: __%................................................ 18
Opt out of program ............................................................. 27
2. In general, do you think automatically enrolling workers into a retirement

savings program while giving them the option to choose not to participate is a:
Total
(n=1,000)
Very good idea.......................................................................57%
Somewhat good idea .............................................................29
Somewhat poor idea ..............................................................10
Very poor idea..........................................................................4

3. While investment performance is not guaranteed, if someone contributed $50 per
month over 20 years, assuming a 6% average rate of investment return, their
account in the California Secure Choice program would grow to $52,000.
Given these numbers, do you feel that taking part in this program would be for you:
Total
(n=1,000)
Excellent ............................................................................. 26%
Very good ........................................................................... 29
Good................................................................................... 26
Fair ..................................................................................... 12
Poor...................................................................................... 6
Don’t know............................................................................ 2

4. Suppose that the program automatically increased your contributions by 1% of your
paycheck every year up to a maximum of 10%. Would you …
Total
(n=1,000)
Stay in the program with the increases in contribution ....... 48%
Stay in the program but ask your employer to stop
the increases ........................................................... 33
Opt out of the program entirely ........................................... 19
5. The retirement savings program could be set up with different fund options. Two
examples are described below. Please read both the description and the chart:
A. A “Balanced Fund" that has a mix of 60% stocks and 40% bonds. This is
expected to provide significant investment growth over the long term. However,
performance will vary a lot from year to year, and there is a 1-in-50 (2%) chance
of losing some of the principal (your contributions) after 20 years.
B. A “Money Market Fund,” an interest-bearing account that protects the principal.
You will never lose your deposit, but interest rates may fail to keep pace with
inflation.

Do you prefer to have the money automatically invested in a low-cost fund that is:
Total
(n=1,000)
Option A: Balanced fund ................................................... 51%
Option B: Money Market fund............................................ 23
Makes no difference ........................................................... 10
Don’t know.......................................................................... 16

6. The following are features of the California Secure Choice program. How attractive
is each feature?
Extremely Very Somewhat Not

Total (n=1,000) attractive attractive attractive attractive
a. Having a personal account set up in your
name 49% 32 17 2
b. Being able to take your account from job

60% 24 12 3
to job
c. Having a few investment options to
choose from in addition to the investment
36% 37 23 4
fund that your contributions automatically
go into

d. All the investment options will be low cost 50% 33 15 2
e. If you die before you use the money in
your account, having it go to your spouse 62% 22 14 2
or whomever you designate
f. Having access to your account information
at any time through a computer or smart 53% 29 16 3
phone
g. At retirement, being able to convert all or
part of your balance into monthly income 51% 30 17 2
for life
7. How good or poor an idea do you think this program is for the State of
California?
Total
(n=1,000)
Very good idea.......................................................................49%
Somewhat good idea .............................................................38
Somewhat poor idea ................................................................9
Very poor idea..........................................................................3

8. How important is it that you have access, before retirement, to your money in your
California Secure Choice program account for each of the following situations?
Keep in mind that taking money out early means that less will be available for your
retirement.
Would be
Must have nice to Do not
or won’t have Don’t care need
Total (n=1,000) participate access either way access NA
a. Loss of a job 28% 50 11 6 5
b. Serious illness on your part 32% 51 9 3 5
c. Spouse or other family member
26% 54 10 4 6
becomes seriously ill
d. Death of a spouse 32% 44 10 6 9

e. Birth of a child 16% 36 18 16 15
f. Home purchase 18% 47 16 13 6
g. Other large purchase or expense, such
12% 31 24 25 7
as buying a car or taking a vacation
h. Tuition for schooling 13% 36 23 17 11
INTERACTING WITH PLAN
9. There are various ways that customer service for your retirement plan account
could be provided. Assuming you have questions or need assistance, by which of
these four ways would you prefer to work with customer service in each of these
situations:
Mail
Website/ Online (e.g., sending
Total (n=1,000) Phone email chat letters, forms)
a. When you first start contributing to the plan 40% 48 5 7

b. If you needed to withdraw funds early (before
39% 51 5 5
retirement)
c. To add or subtract a beneficiary, for example,
29% 57 8 7
after the birth of a child or getting married
d. If you divorced 32% 50 7 11
e. If a spouse or other family member died 39% 47 5 9
f. When you start getting close to retirement and
thinking about how you will use the savings in 38% 49 6 7
your account
g. When you are in retirement and drawing down
35% 55 4 6
on the savings in your account

10. Is talking by phone with a customer service representative the only way in which
you would feel comfortable getting the help you needed in each of these situations:
Yes No
a. When you first start contributing to the plan (n=397) 73% 27
b. If you needed to withdraw funds early (before retirement) 70% 30
(n=361)
c. To add or subtract a beneficiary, for example, after the birth
69% 31
of a child or getting married (n=226)
d. If you divorced (n=275) 67% 33
e. If a spouse or other family member died (n=343) 70% 30
f. When you start getting close to retirement and thinking about

64% 36
how you will use the savings in your account (n=375)
g. When you are in retirement and drawing down on the savings
68% 32
in your account (n=323)
OVERALL PLANNING, FINANCIAL AWARENESS & ATTITUDES
The next few questions are about your attitudes about saving for retirement in general.
11. How important to you is it to save for retirement?
Total
(n=1,000)
Very important .................................................................... 69%
Somewhat important........................................................... 28
Not too important .................................................................. 3
Not at all important ............................................................... 1
12. Many employers offer a retirement plan such as a 401(k) that their employees can
make contributions to, typically through payroll deduction. If you had access to a
similar type of retirement plan, how confident are you that you would be able to set
aside some money to contribute?
Total
(n=1,000)
Very confident..................................................................... 45%
Somewhat confident ........................................................... 40
Not too confident ................................................................ 11
Not at all confident................................................................ 3

13. About how much per month would be the maximum you could likely contribute to
this type of retirement savings plan?
Total
(n=1,000)
Less than $25 ..................................................................... 11%
$25 to $49 .......................................................................... 33
$50 to $99 .......................................................................... 20
$100 to $199....................................................................... 17
$200 to $299......................................................................... 6
$300 to $399......................................................................... 3
$400 or more ........................................................................ 6
I don’t think I could save anything ........................................ 4

14. Currently, about what percentage of your total household income, are you and your
spouse/partner saving for retirement?
Total
(n=1,000)
0% ...................................................................................... 29%
1% to 4% ............................................................................ 26
5% to 9% ............................................................................ 26
10% or more ....................................................................... 19
15. There are various issues that can prevent people from saving; saving more money
for retirement. Please indicate if the following are reasons for you (or you and your
spouse/partner) not saving; saving more money now.
16. Which ONE of those is your PRIMARY reason for not saving more money now?
Total (n=1,000) Q15 Q16

Major Minor Not a Primary
Reason Reason Reason Reason
a. You do not earn enough at your job 51% 30 19 30%
b. You have to pay off debts 52% 26 22 24
c. You have had unexpected expenses 36% 33 31 6
d. You have simply put it off 27% 38 35 6
e. You are unsure about how to invest the
28% 38 34 7
money
f. You are not sure about how much to save 19% 36 45 2
g. You are more focused on enjoying today
20% 39 41 6
than on saving for the future
h. You are more focused on helping your family 40% 26 34 14
i. Other 6% 6% 89% 3

17. Thinking about your overall savings priorities, please rank the following financial
goals from 1 to 6, with “1” Most important and “6” Least important.
Ranked Ranked Ranked Ranked Ranked Ranked
Total (n=1,000) 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th 6th
a. Retirement 26% 19 17 14 14 9
b. To buy a house or business 21% 11 12 20 20 16
c. To pay tuition for yourself,
10% 12 11 15 18 35
children or grandchildren
d. To have an emergency fund
equal to about 3 to 6 months of
30% 25 18 11 12 4
living expenses in case you lose
your job or are unable to work

e. To make large purchases, such
5% 8 12 22 23 30
as a car
f. For unexpected expenses, such
9% 25 28 18 14 6
as medical costs or car repairs
18. To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statements:
Strongly Somewhat Somewhat Strongly
Total (n=1,000) agree agree disagree disagree
a. I really could save for retirement if I
forced myself to do it 38% 48 11 3
b. It is hopeless for me to save anything 14% 28 24 34

c. I would feel a lot better about my life 20
years from now if I had some money 64% 29 5 1
saved for retirement
d. I should have started saving earlier for
47% 39 11 3
retirement, even if it was hard to do it
19. How confident are you that you know how much money you need to save for
retirement?
Total
(n=1,000)
Very confident..................................................................... 21%
Somewhat confident .......................................................... 40
Not too confident ................................................................ 28
Not at all confident.............................................................. 12

20. For each of the following, to what extent do you agree or disagree that each is
trustworthy when it comes to managing and investing workers’ retirement savings:
Strongly Somewhat Somewhat Strongly

Total (n=1,000) Agree Agree Neutral Disagree Disagree
a. Federal government 15% 22 33 15 14
b. State government 13% 24 36 15 13
c. Your employer 14% 31 39 8 8
d. Professional financial advisors 17% 39 34 8 4
e. Financial companies 14% 31 40 9 5
f. Insurance companies 12% 28 40 12 8

DEMOGRAPHICS
The last few questions are for statistical purposes only.
D1. How long have you been working for your current employer?
Total
(n=1,000)
Less than 1 year ................................................................. 16%
1 year but less than 3 years ............................................... 26
3 years but less than 5 years.............................................. 16
5 years but less than 10 years............................................ 23
10 years or more ................................................................ 19
D2. In the last 5 years, how many different employers have you worked for (including
your current employer)?
Total
(n=1,000)
1 ......................................................................................... 44%
2 ......................................................................................... 34
3 ......................................................................................... 13
4 or more .............................................................................. 9
D3. In your previous job, did you have the ability to be in a pension or retirement
savings plan, such as a 401(k) plan?
Total
(n=554)
Yes ..................................................................................... 29%
No....................................................................................... 65
Not sure ................................................................................ 6

D4. Does your spouse currently have a pension or a retirement savings plan, such as a
401(k) plan, at his or her current job?
Total
(n=451)
Yes ..................................................................................... 36%
No....................................................................................... 57
Not sure ................................................................................ 8
D5. Which of the following types of debt do you and your spouse/partner have?
Total
(n=1,000)
Credit card debt that will take more than 3 months to

pay off............................................................................ 56%
Car loan.............................................................................. 43%
Home mortgage.................................................................. 29%
Student loans...................................................................... 23%
Other types of personal loans............................................. 14%
Other types of loans through a financial institution ............... 9%
None of the above .............................................................. 15%
D6. What is your annual income that you personally earn from the job(s) that you have
(your wage income)?
Total
(n=1,000)
Less than $10,000 ................................................................ 7%
$10,000 to $19,999............................................................. 14
$20,000 to $29,999............................................................. 20
$30,000 to $39,999............................................................. 15
$40,000 to $49,999............................................................... 9
$50,000 to $59,999............................................................. 11
$60,000 to $69,999............................................................... 5
$70,000 to $79,999............................................................... 3
$80,000 to $89,999............................................................... 2
$90,000 to $99,999............................................................... 2
$100,000 to $124,999........................................................... 4
$125,000 to $149,999........................................................... 2
$150,000 or more ................................................................. 4
Prefer not to say ................................................................... 2

D7. About how much money would you say you and your spouse/partner currently have,
in total, in savings and investments, not including the value of your primary
residence? Please include savings, certificates of deposits, stocks, bonds, mutual
funds, employer-sponsored retirement savings plans, and other investments, but do
not include the value of traditional pension plans.
Total
(n=1,000)
Less than $2,000 ................................................................ 32%
$2,000 to less than $10,000 ............................................... 17
$10,000 to less than $25,000 ............................................. 10
$25,000 to less than $50,000 ............................................... 7
$50,000 to less than $100,000 ............................................. 8
$100,000 to less than $150,000 ........................................... 4
$150,000 to less than $250,000 ........................................... 2

$250,000 to less than $500,000 ........................................... 3
$500,000 to less than $1 million, or ...................................... 4
$1 million or more ................................................................. 1
Not sure ................................................................................ 7
Prefer not to say ................................................................... 4

CALIFORNIA SECURE CHOICE -- EMPLOYEES WITHOUT WORKPLACE RETIREMENT PLANS -- WEIGHTED MARGINALS
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Weighted Marginals
Page 1.......S1 -- In what State do you live?
Page 2.......S2 -- Are you...? [GENDER]
Page 3.......S3 -- In what year were you born? [RECODED TO DISPLAY AGE]
Page 5.......S4 -- Which of the following best describes your current employment status?
Page 6.......S5 -- About how many employees work for your company or organization?
Page 7.......S6 -- Do you have access to any type of pension or retirement savings plan (such as a 401(k) or 457 plan)
at your primary job?
Page 8.......S7 -- Which of the following best describes your current employer?
Page 9.......S8 -- How would you describe your race or ethnicity?
Page 10......S9 -- What was the highest level of education you completed?
Page 11......S10 -- In 2014, what was your total household income, before taxes? Your best estimate is fine.
Page 12......S11 -- What is your marital status?
Page 13......Q1 -- Imagine that a new retirement savings program is being offered at your job. Please read the description
of the program below and select the choice you'd likely make if this program were actually available...
If you were automatically enrolled in the California Secure Choice program above at (3%/5%) of your paycheck,
would you...
Page 14......Q1A -- What percentage would you ask your employer to change the contribution rate to?
FILTER: Would stay in the California Secure Choice program but would ask employer to change the contribution rate
Page 16......Q2 -- In general, do you think automatically enrolling workers into a retirement savings program while giving them
the option to choose not to participate is a:
Page 17......Q3 -- While investment performance is not guaranteed, if someone contributed $50 per month over 20 years, assuming
a 6% average rate of investment return, their account in the California Secure Choice program would grow to $52,000.
Page 19......Q4 -- Suppose that the program automatically increased your contributions by 1% of your paycheck every year up to
a maximum of 10%. Would you...
Page 20......Q5 -- The retirement savings program could be set up with different fund options. Two examples are described below.
Please read both the description and the chart: (A - BALANCED FUND; B - MONEY MARKET FUND)
Appendix - 7. Online Survey - Weighted Tabulations

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page 21......Q6 -- The following are features of the California Secure Choice program. How attractive is each feature?
*** SUMMARY TABLE -- TOP 2 (EXTREMELY/VERY ATTRACTIVE) ***
(A) Having a personal account set up in your name
(B) Being able to take your account from job to job
(C) Having a few investment options to choose from in addition to the investment fund that your contributions
automatically go into
(D) All the investment options will be low cost
(E) If you die before you use the money in your account, having it go to your spouse or whomever you designate
(F) Having access to your account information at any time through a computer or smart phone
(G) At retirement, being able to convert all or part of your balance into monthly income for life
Page 30......Q7 -- How good or poor an idea do you think this program is for the State of California?
Page 31......Q8 -- How important is it that you have access, before retirement, to your money in your California Secure Choice program
account for each of the following situations? Keep in mind that taking money out early means that less will be
available for your retirement:
*** SUMMARY TABLE -- MUST HAVE OR WON'T PARTICIPATE ***
(A) Loss of a job
(B) Serious illness on your part
(C) Spouse or other family member becomes seriously ill

TABLE OF CONTENTS
(D) Death of a spouse
(E) Birth of a child
(F) Home purchase
(G) Other large purchase or expense, such as buying a car or taking a vacation
(H) Tuition for schooling
Page 41......Q9 -- There are various ways that customer service for your retirement plan account could be provided. Assuming you have
questions or need assistance, by which of these four ways would you prefer to work with customer service in each
of these situations:
*** SUMMARY TABLE -- PHONE ***
(A) When you first start contributing to the plan
(B) If you needed to withdraw funds early (before retirement)
(C) To add or subtract a beneficiary, for example, after the birth of a child or getting married
(D) If you divorced

TABLE OF CONTENTS
(E) If a spouse or other family member died
(F) When you start getting close to retirement and thinking about how you will use the savings in your account
(G) When you are in retirement and drawing down on the savings in your account
Page 50......Q10 -- Is talking by phone with a customer service representative the only way in which you would feel comfortable
getting the help you needed in each of these situations:
*** SUMMARY TABLE -- YES ***
NOTE: Percentages for each item are based on those who prefer to work with customer service by phone for the given situation
FILTER: Prefers to work with customer service by phone when first starting to contribute to the plan
FILTER: Prefers to work with customer service by phone if needing to withdraw funds early
FILTER: Prefers to work with customer service by phone if adding or subtracting a beneficiary
(D) If you divorced
FILTER: Prefers to work with customer service by phone if getting divorced
FILTER: Prefers to work with customer service by phone if a spouse or other family member died
FILTER: Prefers to work with customer service by phone when starting to get close to retirement and thinking about how
to use the savings in the account

TABLE OF CONTENTS
FILTER: Prefers to work with customer service by phone when in retirement and drawing down on savings in the account
Page 59......Q11 -- The next few questions are about your attitudes about saving for retirement in general. How important to you
is it to save for retirement?
Page 60......Q12 -- Many employers offer a retirement plan such as a 401(k) that their employees can make contributions to, typically
through payroll deduction. If you had access to a similar type of retirement plan, how confident are you that you
would be able to set aside some money to contribute?
Page 61......Q13 -- About how much per month would be the maximum you could likely contribute to this type of retirement savings plan?
Page 63......Q14 -- Currently, about what percentage of your total household income, are you (and your spouse/partner) saving
for retirement?
Page 66......Q15 -- There are various issues that can prevent people from saving (more) money for retirement. Please indicate if
the following are reasons for you (and your spouse/partner) not saving (more) money now:
*** SUMMARY TABLE -- TOP 2 (MAJOR/MINOR REASON) ***
(A) You do not earn enough at your job
(B) You have to pay off debts
(C) You have had unexpected expenses
(D) You have simply put it off
(E) You are unsure about how to invest the money
(F) You are not sure about how much to save
(G) You are more focused on enjoying today than on saving for the future

TABLE OF CONTENTS
(H) You are more focused on helping your family
(I) Other
(I) Other
*** OTHER REASONS CONSIDERED MAJOR/MINOR ***
FILTER: Rated the other reason provided as major or minor
Page 79......Q16 -- Which ONE of those is your PRIMARY reason for not saving more money now?
FILTER: Rated at least one reason as major or minor
Page 81......Q17 -- Thinking about your overall savings priorities, please rank the following financial goals from 1 to 6,
with '1' Most important and '6' Least important:
*** SUMMARY TABLE -- TOP 1 (RANKED 1ST) ***
*** SUMMARY TABLE -- TOP 2 (RANKED 1ST OR 2ND) ***
(A) Retirement
(B) To buy a house or business
(C) To pay tuition for yourself, children or grandchildren
(D) To have an emergency fund equal to about 3 to 6 months of living expenses in case you lose your job
or are unable to work
(E) To make large purchases, such as a car
(F) For unexpected expenses, such as medical costs or car repairs

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page 95......Q18 -- To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statements:
*** SUMMARY TABLE -- TOP 2 (STRONGLY/SOMEWHAT AGREE) ***
(A) I really could save for retirement if I forced myself to do it
(B) It is hopeless for me to save anything
(C) I would feel a lot better about my life 20 years from now if I had some money saved for retirement
(D) I should have started saving earlier for retirement, even if it was hard to do it
Page 100.....Q19 -- How confident are you that you know how much money you need to save for retirement?
Page 101.....Q20 -- For each of the following, to what extent do you agree or disagree that each is trustworthy when it comes to
managing and investing workers' retirement savings:
(A) Federal government
(B) State government
(C) Your employer
(D) Professional financial advisors
(E) Financial companies
(F) Insurance companies
Page 109.....D1 -- How long have you been working for your current employer?

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page 110.....D2 -- In the last 5 years, how many different employers have you worked for (including your current employer)?
Page 111.....D3 -- In your previous job, did you have the ability to be in a pension or retirement savings plan, such as a 401(k) plan?
FILTER: Has worked for 2 or more different employers in the last 5 years
Page 112.....D4 -- Does your spouse currently have a pension or a retirement savings plan, such as a 401(k) plan, at his or her
current job?
FILTER: Married
Page 113.....D5 -- Which of the following types of debt do you (and your spouse/partner) have?
[MULTIPLE RESPONSES ACCEPTED]
Page 114.....D6 -- What is your annual income that you personally earn from the job(s) that you have (your wage income)?
Page 116.....D7 -- About how much money would you say you (and your spouse/partner) currently have, in total, in savings and investments,
not including the value of your primary residence? Please include savings, certificates of deposits, stocks, bonds,
mutual funds, employer-sponsored retirement savings plans, and other investments, but do not include the value of
traditional pension plans.

Page 1
S1 -- In what State do you live?
[CONTRIB AMT VERSN]

TOTAL 3% 5%
--------- --------- ---------
(A) (B) (C)
TOTAL 1000 519 481

100% 52% 48%
UNWEIGHTED TOTAL 1000 500 500
California 1000 519 481

100% 100% 100%
Comparison Groups: BC
Independent T-Test for Means, Independent Z-Test for Percentages (unpooled proportions)
Uppercase letters indicate significance at the 99% level.
Lowercase letters indicate significance at the 95% level.
PREPARED BY GREENWALD & ASSOCIATES, INC. (09/18/2015)

Page 2
S2 -- Are you...? [GENDER]
[CONTRIB AMT VERSN]

TOTAL 3% 5%
--------- --------- ---------
(A) (B) (C)
TOTAL 1000 519 481

100% 52% 48%
Male 552 268 284

55% 52% 59%
Female 448 251 197

45% 48% 41%

Page 3
S3 -- In what year were you born? [RECODED TO DISPLAY AGE]
[CONTRIB AMT VERSN]

TOTAL 3% 5%
--------- --------- ---------
(A) (B) (C)
TOTAL 1000 519 481

100% 52% 48%
NET: 21 TO 34 426 240 186

_____________ 43% 46% 39%
21 to 24 71 46 26
7% 9% 5%
25 to 29 119 57 62
12% 11% 13%
30 to 34 235 137 99
24% 26% 21%
NET: 35 TO 49 360 163 196

_____________ 36% 31% 41%
35 to 39 127 56 70
13% 11% 15%
40 to 44 101 43 59
10% 8% 12%
45 to 49 131 64 67
13% 12% 14%
NET: 50 TO 64 214 116 98

_____________ 21% 22% 20%

Page 4
(Continued)
[CONTRIB AMT VERSN]

TOTAL 3% 5%
--------- --------- ---------
(A) (B) (C)
50 to 54 90 54 36
9% 10% 7%
55 to 59 78 38 39
8% 7% 8%
60 to 64 47 23 23
5% 4% 5%
MEAN 39.6 39.2 40.0
MEDIAN 37.0 36.0 38.0

Page 5
S4 -- Which of the following best describes your current employment status?
[CONTRIB AMT VERSN]

TOTAL 3% 5%
--------- --------- ---------
(A) (B) (C)
TOTAL 1000 519 481

100% 52% 48%
Employed full-time 774 394 380

77% 76% 79%
NET: EMPLOYED PART-TIME 226 125 101

_______________________ 23% 24% 21%
Employed part-time at 185 107 79

least 20 hours per 19% 21% 16%
week
Employed part-time 41 18 23
less than 20 hours per 4% 3% 5%
week

Page 6
S5 -- About how many employees work for your company or organization?
[CONTRIB AMT VERSN]

TOTAL 3% 5%
--------- --------- ---------
(A) (B) (C)
TOTAL 1000 519 481

100% 52% 48%
5 to 9 136 76 61
14% 15% 13%
10 to 49 360 193 167

36% 37% 35%
50 to 99 136 64 72
14% 12% 15%
100 to 499 176 100 76

18% 19% 16%
500+ 191 86 106

19% 17% 22%

Page 7
S6 -- Do you have access to any type of pension or retirement savings plan (such as a 401(k) or 457 plan)
[CONTRIB AMT VERSN]

TOTAL 3% 5%
--------- --------- ---------
(A) (B) (C)
TOTAL 1000 519 481

100% 52% 48%
No 1000 519 481

100% 100% 100%

Page 8
S7 -- Which of the following best describes your current employer?
[CONTRIB AMT VERSN]

TOTAL 3% 5%
--------- --------- ---------
(A) (B) (C)
TOTAL 1000 519 481

100% 52% 48%
A for-profit business 651 353 298

65% 68% 62%
A non-profit 175 76 99
organization 17% 15% 21%
A private educational or 39 10 29
academic institution 4% 2% 6%
Other 135 80 55
13% 15% 11%

Page 9
S8 -- How would you describe your race or ethnicity?
[CONTRIB AMT VERSN]

TOTAL 3% 5%
--------- --------- ---------
(A) (B) (C)
TOTAL 1000 519 481

100% 52% 48%
Hispanic or Latino 489 253 236

49% 49% 49%
White/Caucasian 336 166 171

34% 32% 35%
Asian-American 109 58 52
11% 11% 11%
African-American 55 37 18
6% 7% 4%
Other 10 6 4
1% 1% 1%

Page 10
S9 -- What was the highest level of education you completed?
[CONTRIB AMT VERSN]

TOTAL 3% 5%
--------- --------- ---------
(A) (B) (C)
TOTAL 1000 519 481

100% 52% 48%
Some high school or less 39 20 19

4% 4% 4%
High school graduate 419 207 212

42% 40% 44%
Trade or 2-year 81 34 47
associate degree 8% 7% 10%
Some college (4-year 189 115 74

degree college) 19% 22% 15%
College graduate (4-year 174 88 86

degree college) 17% 17% 18%
Post graduate work 22 13 8

2% 3% 2%
Graduate degree 77 43 34
8% 8% 7%

Page 11
S10 -- In 2014, what was your total household income, before taxes? Your best estimate is fine.
[CONTRIB AMT VERSN]

TOTAL 3% 5%
--------- --------- ---------
(A) (B) (C)
TOTAL 1000 519 481

100% 52% 48%
NET: UNDER $50,000 490 257 233

__________________ 49% 49% 49%
Under $35,000 341 179 162

34% 34% 34%
$35,000 to $49,999 149 78 72

15% 15% 15%
NET: $50,000 TO $99,999 294 147 147

_______________________ 29% 28% 31%
$50,000 to $74,999 183 91 92

18% 18% 19%
$75,000 to $99,999 111 56 55

11% 11% 11%
NET: $100,000 OR MORE 216 116 100

_____________________ 22% 22% 21%
$100,000 to $149,999 125 70 55

12% 13% 11%
$150,000 or more 91 46 45
9% 9% 9%

Page 12
S11 -- What is your marital status?
[CONTRIB AMT VERSN]

TOTAL 3% 5%
--------- --------- ---------
(A) (B) (C)
TOTAL 1000 519 481

100% 52% 48%
Married 452 237 215

45% 46% 45%
Not married, but living 135 70 65

with a partner 13% 13% 14%
Divorced, separated or 92 40 53
widowed 9% 8% 11%
Single, never married 315 168 147

32% 32% 31%
Prefer not to say 6 5 1

1% 1% *%

Page 13
Q1 -- Imagine that a new retirement savings program is being offered at your job. Please read the description
would you...
[CONTRIB AMT VERSN]

TOTAL 3% 5%
--------- --------- ---------
(A) (B) (C)
TOTAL 1000 519 481

100% 52% 48%
Stay in program 559 297 262

56% 57% 55%
Stay in program, but ask 176 81 95

your employer to change 18% 16% 20%
the contribution rate
Opt out of program 265 141 124

27% 27% 26%

Page 14
Q1A -- What percentage would you ask your employer to change the contribution rate to?
[CONTRIB AMT VERSN]

TOTAL 3% 5%
--------- --------- ---------
(A) (B) (C)
TOTAL 176 81 95
100% 46% 54%
NET: LESS THAN 3% 45 26 18

_________________ 25% 32% 19%
Less than 1% 3 - 3
2% 3%
1% 9 8 2
5% 10% 2%
2% 32 18 14
18% 23% 15%
NET: 3% TO 5% 44 21 23
_____________ 25% 26% 24%
3% 20 - 20
12% 21%
B
4% 3 1 3
2% 1% 3%
5% 20 20 -
11% 25%
C

Page 15
(Continued)
[CONTRIB AMT VERSN]

TOTAL 3% 5%
--------- --------- ---------
(A) (B) (C)
NET: MORE THAN 5% 82 29 52

_________________ 47% 36% 55%
6% 6 6 0
3% 7% *%
7% 8 1 8
5% 1% 8%
8% 9 2 7
5% 3% 8%
9% 8 - 8
5% 8%
B
10% 39 16 23
22% 20% 24%
More than 10% 11 5 6

6% 6% 6%
Don't know 6 5 1
3% 6% 1%

Page 16
Q2 -- In general, do you think automatically enrolling workers into a retirement savings program while giving them
[CONTRIB AMT VERSN]

TOTAL 3% 5%
--------- --------- ---------
(A) (B) (C)
TOTAL 1000 519 481

100% 52% 48%
NET: GOOD IDEA 854 459 395

______________ 85% 88% 82%
Very good idea (4) 566 278 288

57% 54% 60%
Somewhat good idea (3) 288 181 107

29% 35% 22%
c
NET: POOR IDEA 146 60 86

______________ 15% 12% 18%
Somewhat poor idea (2) 103 42 61

10% 8% 13%
Very poor idea (1) 43 18 25

4% 3% 5%
MEAN 3.4 3.4 3.4
MEDIAN 4.0 4.0 4.0

Page 17
Q3 -- While investment performance is not guaranteed, if someone contributed $50 per month over 20 years, assuming
[CONTRIB AMT VERSN]

TOTAL 3% 5%
--------- --------- ---------
(A) (B) (C)
TOTAL 1000 519 481

100% 52% 48%
NET: EXCELLENT/VERY GOOD 548 279 268

________________________ 55% 54% 56%
Excellent (5) 259 125 134

26% 24% 28%
Very good (4) 289 155 134

29% 30% 28%
Good (3) 256 123 133

26% 24% 28%
NET: FAIR/POOR 176 109 67

______________ 18% 21% 14%
Fair (2) 117 79 37

12% 15% 8%
Poor (1) 59 30 30
6% 6% 6%
Don't know 20 8 13
2% 1% 3%

Page 18
(Continued)
[CONTRIB AMT VERSN]

TOTAL 3% 5%
--------- --------- ---------
(A) (B) (C)
MEAN 3.6 3.5 3.7
MEDIAN 4.0 4.0 4.0

Page 19
Q4 -- Suppose that the program automatically increased your contributions by 1% of your paycheck every year up to
[CONTRIB AMT VERSN]

TOTAL 3% 5%
--------- --------- ---------
(A) (B) (C)
TOTAL 1000 519 481

100% 52% 48%
Stay in the program with 480 236 245

the increases in 48% 45% 51%
contribution
Stay in the program but 330 167 163

ask your employer to 33% 32% 34%
stop the increases
Opt out of the program 190 116 74

entirely 19% 22% 15%

Page 20
Q5 -- The retirement savings program could be set up with different fund options. Two examples are described below.
[CONTRIB AMT VERSN]

TOTAL 3% 5%
--------- --------- ---------
(A) (B) (C)
TOTAL 1000 519 481

100% 52% 48%
Option A: Balanced fund 510 261 249

51% 50% 52%
Option B: Money Market 231 110 121

fund 23% 21% 25%
Makes no difference 101 50 51

10% 10% 11%
Don't know 157 98 59

16% 19% 12%

Page 21
Q6 -- The following are features of the California Secure Choice program. How attractive is each feature?
[CONTRIB AMT VERSN]

TOTAL 3% 5%
--------- --------- ---------
(A) (B) (C)
TOTAL 1000 519 481

100% 52% 48%
(E) If you die before 841 424 417

you use the money in 84% 82% 87%
your account, having it
go to your spouse or
whomever you designate
(B) Being able to take 841 431 410

your account from job to 84% 83% 85%
job
(D) All the investment 826 431 394

options will be low cost 83% 83% 82%
(F) Having access to 816 416 400

your account information 82% 80% 83%
at any time through a
(G) At retirement, being 811 405 406

able to convert all or 81% 78% 84%
part of your balance
into monthly income for
life
(A) Having a personal 804 406 398

account set up in your 80% 78% 83%
name

Page 22
(Continued)
[CONTRIB AMT VERSN]

TOTAL 3% 5%
--------- --------- ---------
(A) (B) (C)
(C) Having a few 732 378 353

investment options to 73% 73% 74%
choose from in addition
to the investment fund
that your contributions

Page 23
[CONTRIB AMT VERSN]

TOTAL 3% 5%
--------- --------- ---------
(A) (B) (C)
TOTAL 1000 519 481

100% 52% 48%
NET: EXTREMELY/VERY 804 406 398

ATTRACTIVE 80% 78% 83%
___________________
Extremely 488 245 243

attractive (4) 49% 47% 51%
Very attractive (3) 316 161 155

32% 31% 32%
NET: SOMEWHAT/NOT 196 113 83

_________________
Somewhat 174 101 74

attractive (2) 17% 19% 15%
Not attractive (1) 22 13 9

2% 2% 2%
MEAN 3.3 3.2 3.3
MEDIAN 3.0 3.0 4.0

Page 24
[CONTRIB AMT VERSN]

TOTAL 3% 5%
--------- --------- ---------
(A) (B) (C)
TOTAL 1000 519 481

100% 52% 48%

___________________

attractive (4) 60% 59% 62%

24% 24% 23%

_________________
Somewhat 125 59 65
attractive (2) 12% 11% 14%

3% 6% 1%
c
MEAN 3.4 3.4 3.5
MEDIAN 4.0 4.0 4.0

Page 25
[CONTRIB AMT VERSN]

TOTAL 3% 5%
--------- --------- ---------
(A) (B) (C)
TOTAL 1000 519 481

100% 52% 48%

___________________

attractive (4) 36% 34% 38%

37% 39% 36%

_________________
Somewhat 230 119 111

attractive (2) 23% 23% 23%

4% 4% 3%
MEAN 3.1 3.0 3.1
MEDIAN 3.0 3.0 3.0

Page 26
[CONTRIB AMT VERSN]

TOTAL 3% 5%
--------- --------- ---------
(A) (B) (C)
TOTAL 1000 519 481

100% 52% 48%

___________________

attractive (4) 50% 45% 54%

33% 38% 28%

_________________
Somewhat 153 77 77
attractive (2) 15% 15% 16%

2% 2% 2%
MEAN 3.3 3.3 3.3
MEDIAN 3.0 3.0 4.0

Page 27
[CONTRIB AMT VERSN]

TOTAL 3% 5%
--------- --------- ---------
(A) (B) (C)
TOTAL 1000 519 481

100% 52% 48%

___________________

attractive (4) 62% 61% 63%

22% 21% 24%

_________________
Somewhat 138 83 55
attractive (2) 14% 16% 11%

2% 2% 2%
MEAN 3.4 3.4 3.5
MEDIAN 4.0 4.0 4.0

Page 28
[CONTRIB AMT VERSN]

TOTAL 3% 5%
--------- --------- ---------
(A) (B) (C)
TOTAL 1000 519 481

100% 52% 48%

___________________

attractive (4) 53% 54% 52%

29% 26% 31%

_________________
Somewhat 156 89 67
attractive (2) 16% 17% 14%

3% 3% 3%
MEAN 3.3 3.3 3.3
MEDIAN 4.0 4.0 4.0

Page 29
[CONTRIB AMT VERSN]

TOTAL 3% 5%
--------- --------- ---------
(A) (B) (C)
TOTAL 1000 519 481

100% 52% 48%

___________________

attractive (4) 51% 48% 54%

30% 30% 31%

_________________
Somewhat 165 99 66
attractive (2) 17% 19% 14%

2% 3% 2%
MEAN 3.3 3.2 3.4
MEDIAN 4.0 3.0 4.0

Page 30
Q7 -- How good or poor an idea do you think this program is for the State of California?
[CONTRIB AMT VERSN]

TOTAL 3% 5%
--------- --------- ---------
(A) (B) (C)
TOTAL 1000 519 481

100% 52% 48%
NET: GOOD IDEA 877 448 429

______________ 88% 86% 89%
Very good idea (4) 495 264 231

49% 51% 48%
Somewhat good idea (3) 382 184 198

38% 35% 41%
NET: POOR IDEA 123 71 52

______________ 12% 14% 11%
Somewhat poor idea (2) 89 49 39

9% 10% 8%
Very poor idea (1) 35 22 13

3% 4% 3%
MEAN 3.3 3.3 3.3
MEDIAN 3.0 4.0 3.0

Page 31
Q8 -- How important is it that you have access, before retirement, to your money in your California Secure Choice program
[CONTRIB AMT VERSN]

TOTAL 3% 5%
--------- --------- ---------
(A) (B) (C)
TOTAL 1000 519 481

100% 52% 48%
(B) Serious illness on 324 195 129

your part 32% 38% 27%
(D) Death of a spouse 316 156 160

32% 30% 33%
(A) Loss of a job 284 145 139

28% 28% 29%
(C) Spouse or other 264 155 110

family member becomes 26% 30% 23%
seriously ill
(F) Home purchase 177 81 96

18% 16% 20%
(E) Birth of a child 156 86 70

16% 17% 15%
(H) Tuition for 129 39 90

schooling 13% 7% 19%
B

Page 32
(Continued)
[CONTRIB AMT VERSN]

TOTAL 3% 5%
--------- --------- ---------
(A) (B) (C)
(G) Other large purchase 124 50 73

or expense, such as 12% 10% 15%
buying a car or taking a
vacation

Page 33
(A) Loss of a job
[CONTRIB AMT VERSN]

TOTAL 3% 5%
--------- --------- ---------
(A) (B) (C)
TOTAL 1000 519 481

100% 52% 48%
NET: MUST HAVE/WOULD BE 782 406 376

NICE TO HAVE 78% 78% 78%
_______________________
Must have or won't 284 145 139

participate 28% 28% 29%
Would be nice to have 498 261 238

access 50% 50% 49%
NET: DON'T CARE/DO NOT 167 87 80

NEED 17% 17% 17%
______________________
Don't care either way 107 51 56

11% 10% 12%
Do not need access 60 36 24

6% 7% 5%
Not applicable 51 26 25
5% 5% 5%

Page 34
[CONTRIB AMT VERSN]

TOTAL 3% 5%
--------- --------- ---------
(A) (B) (C)
TOTAL 1000 519 481

100% 52% 48%

_______________________


access 51% 46% 56%

NEED 12% 11% 12%
______________________

9% 8% 10%

3% 3% 2%
5% 5% 5%

Page 35
[CONTRIB AMT VERSN]

TOTAL 3% 5%
--------- --------- ---------
(A) (B) (C)
TOTAL 1000 519 481

100% 52% 48%

_______________________ b


access 54% 45% 62%
B

NEED 14% 16% 11%
______________________

10% 11% 8%

4% 5% 3%
6% 9% 4%

Page 36
[CONTRIB AMT VERSN]

TOTAL 3% 5%
--------- --------- ---------
(A) (B) (C)
TOTAL 1000 519 481

100% 52% 48%

_______________________


access 44% 44% 44%

NEED 15% 15% 16%
______________________

10% 9% 11%

6% 7% 5%
9% 10% 7%

Page 37
[CONTRIB AMT VERSN]

TOTAL 3% 5%
--------- --------- ---------
(A) (B) (C)
TOTAL 1000 519 481

100% 52% 48%

_______________________


access 36% 34% 37%

NEED 34% 35% 32%
______________________

18% 17% 19%

16% 19% 13%

15% 14% 16%

Page 38
(F) Home purchase
[CONTRIB AMT VERSN]

TOTAL 3% 5%
--------- --------- ---------
(A) (B) (C)
TOTAL 1000 519 481

100% 52% 48%

_______________________


access 47% 48% 47%

NEED 29% 30% 27%
______________________

16% 15% 17%

13% 15% 10%
6% 7% 6%

Page 39
[CONTRIB AMT VERSN]

TOTAL 3% 5%
--------- --------- ---------
(A) (B) (C)
TOTAL 1000 519 481

100% 52% 48%

_______________________


access 31% 32% 30%

NEED 49% 50% 49%
______________________

24% 24% 25%

25% 26% 24%
7% 8% 6%

Page 40
[CONTRIB AMT VERSN]

TOTAL 3% 5%
--------- --------- ---------
(A) (B) (C)
TOTAL 1000 519 481

100% 52% 48%

_______________________

B

access 36% 42% 31%

NEED 40% 39% 41%
______________________

23% 22% 24%

17% 17% 17%

11% 12% 10%

Page 41
Q9 -- There are various ways that customer service for your retirement plan account could be provided. Assuming you have
[CONTRIB AMT VERSN]

TOTAL 3% 5%
--------- --------- ---------
(A) (B) (C)
TOTAL 1000 519 481

100% 52% 48%
(A) When you first start 397 204 193

contributing to the plan 40% 39% 40%
(B) If you needed to 392 208 184

withdraw funds early 39% 40% 38%
(before retirement)
(E) If a spouse or other 387 182 204

family member died 39% 35% 43%
(F) When you start 376 198 178

getting close to 38% 38% 37%
retirement and thinking
about how you will use
the savings in your
account
(G) When you are in 346 179 167

retirement and drawing 35% 34% 35%
down on the savings in
your account
(D) If you divorced 321 153 168

32% 29% 35%

Page 42
(Continued)
[CONTRIB AMT VERSN]

TOTAL 3% 5%
--------- --------- ---------
(A) (B) (C)
(C) To add or subtract a 286 143 142

beneficiary, for 29% 28% 30%
example, after the birth
of a child or getting
married

Page 43
[CONTRIB AMT VERSN]

TOTAL 3% 5%
--------- --------- ---------
(A) (B) (C)
TOTAL 1000 519 481

100% 52% 48%
Phone 397 204 193

40% 39% 40%
Website/ email 478 239 239

48% 46% 50%
Online chat 51 26 25
5% 5% 5%
Mail (e.g., sending 74 49 24

letters, forms) 7% 10% 5%

Page 44
[CONTRIB AMT VERSN]

TOTAL 3% 5%
--------- --------- ---------
(A) (B) (C)
TOTAL 1000 519 481

100% 52% 48%
Phone 392 208 184

39% 40% 38%

51% 50% 53%
5% 4% 5%


Page 45
[CONTRIB AMT VERSN]

TOTAL 3% 5%
--------- --------- ---------
(A) (B) (C)
TOTAL 1000 519 481

100% 52% 48%
Phone 286 143 142

29% 28% 30%

57% 56% 57%
8% 9% 6%


Page 46
(D) If you divorced
[CONTRIB AMT VERSN]

TOTAL 3% 5%
--------- --------- ---------
(A) (B) (C)
TOTAL 1000 519 481

100% 52% 48%
Phone 321 153 168

32% 29% 35%

50% 50% 50%
7% 9% 4%


Page 47
[CONTRIB AMT VERSN]

TOTAL 3% 5%
--------- --------- ---------
(A) (B) (C)
TOTAL 1000 519 481

100% 52% 48%
Phone 387 182 204

39% 35% 43%

47% 47% 46%
5% 7% 4%


Page 48
[CONTRIB AMT VERSN]

TOTAL 3% 5%
--------- --------- ---------
(A) (B) (C)
TOTAL 1000 519 481

100% 52% 48%
Phone 376 198 178

38% 38% 37%

49% 45% 52%
6% 8% 5%


Page 49
[CONTRIB AMT VERSN]

TOTAL 3% 5%
--------- --------- ---------
(A) (B) (C)
TOTAL 1000 519 481

100% 52% 48%
Phone 346 179 167

35% 34% 35%

55% 54% 57%
4% 3% 5%


Page 50
Q10 -- Is talking by phone with a customer service representative the only way in which you would feel comfortable
[CONTRIB AMT VERSN]

TOTAL 3% 5%
--------- --------- ---------
(A) (B) (C)
TOTAL 1000 519 481

100% 52% 48%
(A) When you first start 291 146 145

contributing to the plan 73% 71% 75%
(E) If a spouse or other 272 124 148

family member died 70% 68% 72%
(B) If you needed to 275 146 129

withdraw funds early 70% 70% 70%
(before retirement)
(C) To add or subtract a 196 91 106

beneficiary, for 69% 63% 74%
married
(G) When you are in 235 134 101

retirement and drawing 68% 75% 61%
your account
(D) If you divorced 214 102 112

67% 67% 67%

Page 51
(Continued)
[CONTRIB AMT VERSN]

TOTAL 3% 5%
--------- --------- ---------
(A) (B) (C)
(F) When you start 241 143 98

getting close to 64% 72% 55%
the savings in your
account

Page 52
[CONTRIB AMT VERSN]

TOTAL 3% 5%
--------- --------- ---------
(A) (B) (C)
TOTAL 397 204 193

100% 51% 49%
Yes 291 146 145

73% 71% 75%
No 107 58 49
27% 29% 25%

Page 53
[CONTRIB AMT VERSN]

TOTAL 3% 5%
--------- --------- ---------
(A) (B) (C)
TOTAL 392 208 184

100% 53% 47%
Yes 275 146 129

70% 70% 70%
No 117 62 55
30% 30% 30%

Page 54
[CONTRIB AMT VERSN]

TOTAL 3% 5%
--------- --------- ---------
(A) (B) (C)
TOTAL 286 143 142

100% 50% 50%
Yes 196 91 106

69% 63% 74%
No 90 53 37
31% 37% 26%

Page 55
(D) If you divorced
[CONTRIB AMT VERSN]

TOTAL 3% 5%
--------- --------- ---------
(A) (B) (C)
TOTAL 321 153 168

100% 48% 52%
Yes 214 102 112

67% 67% 67%
No 107 51 56
33% 33% 33%

Page 56
[CONTRIB AMT VERSN]

TOTAL 3% 5%
--------- --------- ---------
(A) (B) (C)
TOTAL 387 182 204

100% 47% 53%
Yes 272 124 148

70% 68% 72%
No 114 58 57
30% 32% 28%

Page 57
[CONTRIB AMT VERSN]

TOTAL 3% 5%
--------- --------- ---------
(A) (B) (C)
TOTAL 376 198 178

100% 53% 47%
Yes 241 143 98

64% 72% 55%
No 135 55 80
36% 28% 45%

Page 58
[CONTRIB AMT VERSN]

TOTAL 3% 5%
--------- --------- ---------
(A) (B) (C)
TOTAL 346 179 167

100% 52% 48%
Yes 235 134 101

68% 75% 61%
No 111 45 66
32% 25% 39%

Page 59
Q11 -- The next few questions are about your attitudes about saving for retirement in general. How important to you
[CONTRIB AMT VERSN]

TOTAL 3% 5%
--------- --------- ---------
(A) (B) (C)
TOTAL 1000 519 481

100% 52% 48%
NET: IMPORTANT 965 499 466

______________ 96% 96% 97%
Very important (4) 687 353 334

69% 68% 69%
Somewhat important (3) 278 146 132

28% 28% 27%
NET: NOT IMPORTANT 35 20 15

__________________ 4% 4% 3%
Not too important (2) 27 18 8

3% 4% 2%
Not at all 8 2 7
important (1) 1% *% 1%
MEAN 3.6 3.6 3.6
MEDIAN 4.0 4.0 4.0

Page 60
Q12 -- Many employers offer a retirement plan such as a 401(k) that their employees can make contributions to, typically
[CONTRIB AMT VERSN]

TOTAL 3% 5%
--------- --------- ---------
(A) (B) (C)
TOTAL 1000 519 481

100% 52% 48%
NET: CONFIDENT 856 448 408

______________ 86% 86% 85%
Very confident (4) 454 235 219

45% 45% 46%
Somewhat confident (3) 403 213 190

40% 41% 39%
NET: NOT CONFIDENT 144 71 72

__________________ 14% 14% 15%
Not too confident (2) 110 57 53

11% 11% 11%
Not at all 34 14 20
confident (1) 3% 3% 4%
MEAN 3.3 3.3 3.3
MEDIAN 3.0 3.0 3.0

Page 61
Q13 -- About how much per month would be the maximum you could likely contribute to this type of retirement savings plan?
[CONTRIB AMT VERSN]

TOTAL 3% 5%
--------- --------- ---------
(A) (B) (C)
TOTAL 1000 519 481

100% 52% 48%
NET: LESS THAN $100 643 308 335

___________________ 64% 59% 70%
Less than $25 106 44 62

11% 9% 13%
$25 to $49 333 154 180

33% 30% 37%
$50 to $99 204 110 94

20% 21% 20%
NET: $100 OR MORE 320 183 137

_________________ 32% 35% 29%
$100 to $199 168 104 64

17% 20% 13%
$200 to $299 62 35 28
6% 7% 6%
$300 to $399 29 15 13
3% 3% 3%
$400 or more 61 29 32
6% 6% 7%

Page 62
(Continued)
[CONTRIB AMT VERSN]

TOTAL 3% 5%
--------- --------- ---------
(A) (B) (C)
I don't think I could 37 29 8

save anything 4% 6% 2%

Page 63
Q14 -- Currently, about what percentage of your total household income, are you (and your spouse/partner) saving
for retirement?
[CONTRIB AMT VERSN]

TOTAL 3% 5%
--------- --------- ---------
(A) (B) (C)
TOTAL 1000 519 481

100% 52% 48%
0% 291 161 130

29% 31% 27%
NET: 1% TO 4% 256 118 138

_____________ 26% 23% 29%
1% 85 38 47
8% 7% 10%
2% 73 41 32
7% 8% 7%
3% 58 29 29
6% 6% 6%
4% 40 10 30
4% 2% 6%
b
NET: 5% to 9% 258 128 130

_____________ 26% 25% 27%
5% 186 102 85
19% 20% 18%

Page 64
(Continued)
for retirement?
[CONTRIB AMT VERSN]

TOTAL 3% 5%
--------- --------- ---------
(A) (B) (C)
6% 33 7 26
3% 1% 5%
b
7% 21 9 12
2% 2% 2%
8% 16 10 6
2% 2% 1%
9% 2 1 1
*% *% *%
NET: 10% OR MORE 195 112 83

________________ 19% 22% 17%
10% 121 72 48
12% 14% 10%
11% 5 5 0
1% 1% *%
12% 4 1 2
*% *% *%
13% 1 0 1
*% *% *%
14% 0 - 0
*% *%

Page 65
(Continued)
for retirement?
[CONTRIB AMT VERSN]

TOTAL 3% 5%
--------- --------- ---------
(A) (B) (C)
15% 14 6 8
1% 1% 2%
16% 0 0 -
*% *%
17% 5 1 4
1% *% 1%
18% 4 3 0
*% 1% *%
20% 20 13 7
2% 3% 1%
More than 20% 20 9 11

2% 2% 2%

Page 66
Q15 -- There are various issues that can prevent people from saving (more) money for retirement. Please indicate if
[CONTRIB AMT VERSN]

TOTAL 3% 5%
--------- --------- ---------
(A) (B) (C)
TOTAL 1000 519 481

100% 52% 48%
(A) You do not earn 809 410 399

enough at your job 81% 79% 83%
(B) You have to pay off 778 392 386

debts 78% 76% 80%
(C) You have had 693 357 336

unexpected expenses 69% 69% 70%
(H) You are more focused 662 337 325

on helping your family 66% 65% 68%
(E) You are unsure about 661 346 315

how to invest the money 66% 67% 66%
(D) You have simply put 652 337 315

it off 65% 65% 66%
(G) You are more focused 593 316 278

on enjoying today than 59% 61% 58%
(F) You are not sure 545 276 269

about how much to save 55% 53% 56%

Page 67
(Continued)
[CONTRIB AMT VERSN]

TOTAL 3% 5%
--------- --------- ---------
(A) (B) (C)
(I) Other 113 80 33

11% 15% 7%
c

Page 68
[CONTRIB AMT VERSN]

TOTAL 3% 5%
--------- --------- ---------
(A) (B) (C)
TOTAL 1000 519 481

100% 52% 48%
NET: REASON 809 410 399

___________ 81% 79% 83%
Major Reason (3) 507 249 258

51% 48% 54%
Minor Reason (2) 302 161 141

30% 31% 29%
Not a Reason (1) 191 109 82

19% 21% 17%
MEAN 2.3 2.3 2.4
MEDIAN 3.0 2.0 3.0

Page 69
[CONTRIB AMT VERSN]

TOTAL 3% 5%
--------- --------- ---------
(A) (B) (C)
TOTAL 1000 519 481

100% 52% 48%
NET: REASON 778 392 386

___________ 78% 76% 80%
Major Reason (3) 519 281 238

52% 54% 50%
Minor Reason (2) 258 111 147

26% 21% 31%
Not a Reason (1) 222 127 95

22% 24% 20%
MEAN 2.3 2.3 2.3
MEDIAN 3.0 3.0 2.0

Page 70
[CONTRIB AMT VERSN]

TOTAL 3% 5%
--------- --------- ---------
(A) (B) (C)
TOTAL 1000 519 481

100% 52% 48%
NET: REASON 693 357 336

___________ 69% 69% 70%
Major Reason (3) 360 185 175

36% 36% 36%
Minor Reason (2) 333 173 161

33% 33% 33%
Not a Reason (1) 307 162 145

31% 31% 30%
MEAN 2.1 2.0 2.1
MEDIAN 2.0 2.0 2.0

Page 71
[CONTRIB AMT VERSN]

TOTAL 3% 5%
--------- --------- ---------
(A) (B) (C)
TOTAL 1000 519 481

100% 52% 48%
NET: REASON 652 337 315

___________ 65% 65% 66%
Major Reason (3) 270 113 156

27% 22% 32%
b
Minor Reason (2) 383 223 159

38% 43% 33%
Not a Reason (1) 348 182 166

35% 35% 34%
MEAN 1.9 1.9 2.0
MEDIAN 2.0 2.0 2.0

Page 72
[CONTRIB AMT VERSN]

TOTAL 3% 5%
--------- --------- ---------
(A) (B) (C)
TOTAL 1000 519 481

100% 52% 48%
NET: REASON 661 346 315

___________ 66% 67% 66%
Major Reason (3) 279 157 122

28% 30% 25%
Minor Reason (2) 382 189 193

38% 36% 40%
Not a Reason (1) 339 173 165

34% 33% 34%
MEAN 1.9 2.0 1.9
MEDIAN 2.0 2.0 2.0

Page 73
[CONTRIB AMT VERSN]

TOTAL 3% 5%
--------- --------- ---------
(A) (B) (C)
TOTAL 1000 519 481

100% 52% 48%
NET: REASON 545 276 269

___________ 55% 53% 56%
Major Reason (3) 189 82 107

19% 16% 22%
Minor Reason (2) 356 194 162

36% 37% 34%
Not a Reason (1) 455 243 212

45% 47% 44%
MEAN 1.7 1.7 1.8
MEDIAN 2.0 2.0 2.0

Page 74
[CONTRIB AMT VERSN]

TOTAL 3% 5%
--------- --------- ---------
(A) (B) (C)
TOTAL 1000 519 481

100% 52% 48%
NET: REASON 593 316 278

___________ 59% 61% 58%

20% 22% 18%
Minor Reason (2) 392 199 193

39% 38% 40%
Not a Reason (1) 407 204 203

41% 39% 42%
MEAN 1.8 1.8 1.8
MEDIAN 2.0 2.0 2.0

Page 75
[CONTRIB AMT VERSN]

TOTAL 3% 5%
--------- --------- ---------
(A) (B) (C)
TOTAL 1000 519 481

100% 52% 48%
NET: REASON 662 337 325

___________ 66% 65% 68%
Major Reason (3) 398 192 205

40% 37% 43%
Minor Reason (2) 265 145 120

26% 28% 25%
Not a Reason (1) 338 182 156

34% 35% 32%
MEAN 2.1 2.0 2.1
MEDIAN 2.0 2.0 2.0

Page 76
(I) Other
[CONTRIB AMT VERSN]

TOTAL 3% 5%
--------- --------- ---------
(A) (B) (C)
TOTAL 1000 519 481

100% 52% 48%
NET: REASON 113 80 33

___________ 11% 15% 7%
c

6% 8% 3%
c
Minor Reason (2) 57 37 20

6% 7% 4%
Not a Reason (1) 887 439 448

89% 85% 93%
b
MEAN 1.2 1.2 1.1

c
MEDIAN 1.0 1.0 1.0

Page 77
(I) Other
[CONTRIB AMT VERSN]

TOTAL 3% 5%
--------- --------- ---------
(A) (B) (C)
TOTAL 113 80 33
100% 71% 29%
Educational expenses: 24 13 11
saving for college, 21% 16% 32%
tuition, student loans
Not enough money/income 20 18 1

17% 23% 5%
Lack of information on 11 7 4
how to save/invest 10% 9% 12%
Saving for house/car; 9 8 1

expense of house/car 8% 10% 2%
Family situation: 9 6 3
children, child support 8% 7% 10%
new baby, divorce
Job loss/insecurity 8 5 4
7% 6% 11%
No retirement plan at 3 0 3
work 3% *% 8%

Page 78
(Continued)
(I) Other
[CONTRIB AMT VERSN]

TOTAL 3% 5%
--------- --------- ---------
(A) (B) (C)
No need to save 3 2 1
3% 3% 3%
Health issues; medical 2 2 1

costs 2% 2% 2%
Poor economic climate: 1 1 1

volatile stock market, 1% 1% 2%
low interest rates
Other 23 18 5
20% 23% 14%

Page 79
Q16 -- Which ONE of those is your PRIMARY reason for not saving more money now?
[CONTRIB AMT VERSN]

TOTAL 3% 5%
--------- --------- ---------
(A) (B) (C)
TOTAL 937 482 455

100% 51% 49%
You do not earn enough 281 129 152

at your job 30% 27% 33%
You have to pay off 228 124 104

debts 24% 26% 23%
You are more focused on 136 60 75

helping your family 14% 13% 17%
You are unsure about how 67 38 28

to invest the money 7% 8% 6%
You have had unexpected 60 33 28

expenses 6% 7% 6%
You have simply put it 60 39 21

off 6% 8% 5%
You are more focused on 58 35 23

enjoying today than on 6% 7% 5%
saving for the future
You are not sure about 23 9 14

how much to save 2% 2% 3%

Page 80
(Continued)
[CONTRIB AMT VERSN]

TOTAL 3% 5%
--------- --------- ---------
(A) (B) (C)
Other 25 15 10
3% 3% 2%

Page 81
Q17 -- Thinking about your overall savings priorities, please rank the following financial goals from 1 to 6,
[CONTRIB AMT VERSN]

TOTAL 3% 5%
--------- --------- ---------
(A) (B) (C)
TOTAL 1000 519 481

100% 52% 48%
(D) To have an emergency 298 147 151

fund equal to about 3 to 30% 28% 31%
6 months of living
expenses in case you
lose your job or are
unable to work
(A) Retirement 261 142 119

26% 27% 25%
(B) To buy a house or 208 81 127

business 21% 16% 26%
b
(C) To pay tuition for 97 65 32

yourself, children or 10% 13% 7%
grandchildren
(F) For unexpected 88 48 39

expenses, such as 9% 9% 8%
medical costs or car
repairs
(E) To make large 48 35 13

purchases, such as a car 5% 7% 3%

Page 82
[CONTRIB AMT VERSN]

TOTAL 3% 5%
--------- --------- ---------
(A) (B) (C)
TOTAL 1000 519 481

100% 52% 48%
(D) To have an emergency 547 273 275

fund equal to about 3 to 55% 53% 57%
6 months of living
unable to work
(A) Retirement 451 237 214

45% 46% 44%
(F) For unexpected 338 193 145

expenses, such as 34% 37% 30%
repairs
(B) To buy a house or 320 132 188

business 32% 25% 39%
b
(C) To pay tuition for 214 123 91

yourself, children or 21% 24% 19%
grandchildren
(E) To make large 130 81 49

purchases, such as a car 13% 16% 10%

Page 83
(A) Retirement
[CONTRIB AMT VERSN]

TOTAL 3% 5%
--------- --------- ---------
(A) (B) (C)
TOTAL 1000 519 481

100% 52% 48%
NET: TOP 2 451 237 214

__________ 45% 46% 44%
Ranked 1st 261 142 119

(Most Important) 26% 27% 25%
Ranked 2nd 190 95 95

19% 18% 20%
Ranked 3rd 175 101 74

17% 19% 15%
Ranked 4th 145 73 72

14% 14% 15%
NET: BOTTOM 2 230 108 122

_____________ 23% 21% 25%

14% 13% 14%
Ranked 6th 92 40 53
(Least Important) 9% 8% 11%

Page 84
(Continued)
(A) Retirement
[CONTRIB AMT VERSN]

TOTAL 3% 5%
--------- --------- ---------
(A) (B) (C)
MEAN RANKING 3.0 2.9 3.1
MEDIAN RANKING 3.0 3.0 3.0

Page 85
[CONTRIB AMT VERSN]

TOTAL 3% 5%
--------- --------- ---------
(A) (B) (C)
TOTAL 1000 519 481

100% 52% 48%
NET: TOP 2 320 132 188

__________ 32% 25% 39%
b
Ranked 1st 208 81 127

b

11% 10% 13%
Ranked 3rd 124 65 59

12% 13% 12%
Ranked 4th 200 124 76

20% 24% 16%
NET: BOTTOM 2 356 198 158

_____________ 36% 38% 33%
Ranked 5th 201 113 88

20% 22% 18%


Page 86
(Continued)
[CONTRIB AMT VERSN]

TOTAL 3% 5%
--------- --------- ---------
(A) (B) (C)

c

Page 87
[CONTRIB AMT VERSN]

TOTAL 3% 5%
--------- --------- ---------
(A) (B) (C)
TOTAL 1000 519 481

100% 52% 48%
NET: TOP 2 214 123 91

__________ 21% 24% 19%
Ranked 1st 97 65 32

12% 11% 12%

11% 14% 9%

15% 15% 14%
NET: BOTTOM 2 525 246 278

_____________ 52% 47% 58%
Ranked 5th 176 73 103

18% 14% 22%
Ranked 6th 349 174 175


Page 88
(Continued)
[CONTRIB AMT VERSN]

TOTAL 3% 5%
--------- --------- ---------
(A) (B) (C)

Page 89
[CONTRIB AMT VERSN]

TOTAL 3% 5%
--------- --------- ---------
(A) (B) (C)
TOTAL 1000 519 481

100% 52% 48%
NET: TOP 2 547 273 275

__________ 55% 53% 57%
Ranked 1st 298 147 151

Ranked 2nd 249 125 124

25% 24% 26%

18% 16% 21%

11% 11% 11%
NET: BOTTOM 2 163 108 55

_____________ 16% 21% 11%
c

12% 15% 8%
c

Page 90
(Continued)
[CONTRIB AMT VERSN]

TOTAL 3% 5%
--------- --------- ---------
(A) (B) (C)
Ranked 6th 45 29 16

Page 91
[CONTRIB AMT VERSN]

TOTAL 3% 5%
--------- --------- ---------
(A) (B) (C)
TOTAL 1000 519 481

100% 52% 48%
NET: TOP 2 130 81 49

__________ 13% 16% 10%
Ranked 1st 48 35 13
Ranked 2nd 82 46 36
8% 9% 8%

12% 9% 15%
Ranked 4th 219 102 116

22% 20% 24%
NET: BOTTOM 2 531 288 243

_____________ 53% 55% 51%
Ranked 5th 233 122 111

23% 23% 23%
Ranked 6th 298 166 132


Page 92
(Continued)
[CONTRIB AMT VERSN]

TOTAL 3% 5%
--------- --------- ---------
(A) (B) (C)

Page 93
[CONTRIB AMT VERSN]

TOTAL 3% 5%
--------- --------- ---------
(A) (B) (C)
TOTAL 1000 519 481

100% 52% 48%
NET: TOP 2 338 193 145

__________ 34% 37% 30%
Ranked 1st 88 48 39
Ranked 2nd 250 145 106

25% 28% 22%
Ranked 3rd 284 149 135

28% 29% 28%

18% 17% 20%
NET: BOTTOM 2 196 90 105

_____________ 20% 17% 22%

14% 12% 15%
Ranked 6th 61 26 35

Page 94
(Continued)
[CONTRIB AMT VERSN]

TOTAL 3% 5%
--------- --------- ---------
(A) (B) (C)

Page 95
Q18 -- To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statements:
[CONTRIB AMT VERSN]

TOTAL 3% 5%
--------- --------- ---------
(A) (B) (C)
TOTAL 1000 519 481

100% 52% 48%
(C) I would feel a lot 933 491 441

better about my life 20 93% 95% 92%
years from now if I had
some money saved for
retirement
(A) I really could save 862 448 414

for retirement if I 86% 86% 86%
forced myself to do it
(D) I should have 860 446 413

started saving earlier 86% 86% 86%
for retirement, even if
it was hard to do it
(B) It is hopeless for 417 207 210

me to save anything 42% 40% 44%

Page 96
[CONTRIB AMT VERSN]

TOTAL 3% 5%
--------- --------- ---------
(A) (B) (C)
TOTAL 1000 519 481

100% 52% 48%
NET: AGREE 862 448 414

__________ 86% 86% 86%
Strongly agree (4) 381 209 172

38% 40% 36%
Somewhat agree (3) 481 239 242

48% 46% 50%
NET: DISAGREE 138 71 67

_____________ 14% 14% 14%
Somewhat disagree (2) 106 50 56

11% 10% 12%
Strongly disagree (1) 32 21 11

3% 4% 2%
MEAN 3.2 3.2 3.2
MEDIAN 3.0 3.0 3.0

Page 97
[CONTRIB AMT VERSN]

TOTAL 3% 5%
--------- --------- ---------
(A) (B) (C)
TOTAL 1000 519 481

100% 52% 48%
NET: AGREE 417 207 210

__________ 42% 40% 44%

14% 11% 17%

28% 29% 27%

_____________ 58% 60% 56%

24% 25% 23%

34% 35% 34%
MEAN 2.2 2.2 2.3
MEDIAN 2.0 2.0 2.0

Page 98
[CONTRIB AMT VERSN]

TOTAL 3% 5%
--------- --------- ---------
(A) (B) (C)
TOTAL 1000 519 481

100% 52% 48%
NET: AGREE 933 491 441

__________ 93% 95% 92%

64% 66% 63%

29% 28% 29%
_____________ 7% 5% 8%

5% 4% 6%

1% 1% 2%
MEAN 3.6 3.6 3.5
MEDIAN 4.0 4.0 4.0

Page 99
[CONTRIB AMT VERSN]

TOTAL 3% 5%
--------- --------- ---------
(A) (B) (C)
TOTAL 1000 519 481

100% 52% 48%
NET: AGREE 860 446 413

__________ 86% 86% 86%

47% 43% 50%

39% 43% 36%

_____________ 14% 14% 14%

11% 10% 11%

3% 4% 3%
MEAN 3.3 3.2 3.3
MEDIAN 3.0 3.0 4.0

Page 100
Q19 -- How confident are you that you know how much money you need to save for retirement?
[CONTRIB AMT VERSN]

TOTAL 3% 5%
--------- --------- ---------
(A) (B) (C)
TOTAL 1000 519 481

100% 52% 48%
NET: CONFIDENT 605 307 298

______________ 61% 59% 62%
Very confident (4) 209 88 121

21% 17% 25%
Somewhat confident (3) 397 219 177

40% 42% 37%
NET: NOT CONFIDENT 395 212 183

__________________ 39% 41% 38%
Not too confident (2) 279 146 133

28% 28% 28%
Not at all 115 65 50

confident (1) 12% 13% 10%
MEAN 2.7 2.6 2.8
MEDIAN 3.0 3.0 3.0

Page 101
Q20 -- For each of the following, to what extent do you agree or disagree that each is trustworthy when it comes to
[CONTRIB AMT VERSN]

TOTAL 3% 5%
--------- --------- ---------
(A) (B) (C)
TOTAL 1000 519 481

100% 52% 48%
(D) Professional 551 292 259

financial advisors 55% 56% 54%
(E) Financial companies 457 227 229

46% 44% 48%
(C) Your employer 451 218 233

45% 42% 48%
(F) Insurance companies 401 222 179

40% 43% 37%
(A) Federal government 374 185 189

37% 36% 39%
(B) State government 373 186 187

37% 36% 39%

Page 102
[CONTRIB AMT VERSN]

TOTAL 3% 5%
--------- --------- ---------
(A) (B) (C)
TOTAL 1000 519 481

100% 52% 48%
NET: AGREE 374 185 189

__________ 37% 36% 39%
Strongly Agree (5) 152 66 86

15% 13% 18%
Somewhat Agree (4) 221 119 103

22% 23% 21%
Neutral (3) 332 168 165

33% 32% 34%

_____________ 29% 32% 27%
Somewhat Disagree (2) 152 74 78

15% 14% 16%
Strongly Disagree (1) 143 92 50

14% 18% 10%
MEAN 3.1 3.0 3.2
MEDIAN 3.0 3.0 3.0

Page 103
[CONTRIB AMT VERSN]

TOTAL 3% 5%
--------- --------- ---------
(A) (B) (C)
TOTAL 1000 519 481

100% 52% 48%
NET: AGREE 373 186 187

__________ 37% 36% 39%

13% 11% 15%

24% 25% 24%
Neutral (3) 355 178 178

36% 34% 37%

_____________ 27% 30% 24%

15% 15% 14%

13% 15% 10%
MEAN 3.1 3.0 3.2
MEDIAN 3.0 3.0 3.0

Page 104
(C) Your employer
[CONTRIB AMT VERSN]

TOTAL 3% 5%
--------- --------- ---------
(A) (B) (C)
TOTAL 1000 519 481

100% 52% 48%
NET: AGREE 451 218 233

__________ 45% 42% 48%

14% 11% 18%

31% 31% 31%
Neutral (3) 388 193 195

39% 37% 40%

_____________ 16% 21% 11%
c

8% 8% 7%

8% 12% 4%
C
MEAN 3.4 3.2 3.5

b

Page 105
(Continued)
(C) Your employer
[CONTRIB AMT VERSN]

TOTAL 3% 5%
--------- --------- ---------
(A) (B) (C)
MEDIAN 3.0 3.0 3.0

Page 106
[CONTRIB AMT VERSN]

TOTAL 3% 5%
--------- --------- ---------
(A) (B) (C)
TOTAL 1000 519 481

100% 52% 48%
NET: AGREE 551 292 259

__________ 55% 56% 54%

17% 16% 17%

39% 40% 37%
Neutral (3) 337 160 178

34% 31% 37%

_____________ 11% 13% 9%

8% 10% 5%

4% 3% 4%
MEAN 3.6 3.6 3.6
MEDIAN 4.0 4.0 4.0

Page 107
[CONTRIB AMT VERSN]

TOTAL 3% 5%
--------- --------- ---------
(A) (B) (C)
TOTAL 1000 519 481

100% 52% 48%
NET: AGREE 457 227 229

__________ 46% 44% 48%

14% 13% 16%

31% 31% 32%
Neutral (3) 399 202 197

40% 39% 41%

_____________ 14% 17% 11%

9% 11% 7%

5% 6% 5%
MEAN 3.4 3.3 3.5
MEDIAN 3.0 3.0 3.0

Page 108
[CONTRIB AMT VERSN]

TOTAL 3% 5%
--------- --------- ---------
(A) (B) (C)
TOTAL 1000 519 481

100% 52% 48%
NET: AGREE 401 222 179

__________ 40% 43% 37%

12% 10% 14%

28% 33% 23%
Neutral (3) 401 186 215

40% 36% 45%

_____________ 20% 22% 18%

12% 12% 12%

8% 10% 6%
MEAN 3.2 3.2 3.3
MEDIAN 3.0 3.0 3.0

Page 109
D1 -- How long have you been working for your current employer?
[CONTRIB AMT VERSN]

TOTAL 3% 5%
--------- --------- ---------
(A) (B) (C)
TOTAL 1000 519 481

100% 52% 48%
NET: LESS THAN 5 YEARS 580 310 270

______________________ 58% 60% 56%
Less than 1 year 157 75 82

16% 14% 17%
1 year but less than 263 152 111

3 years 26% 29% 23%
3 years but less than 160 83 77

5 years 16% 16% 16%
NET: 5 YEARS OR MORE 420 209 211

____________________ 42% 40% 44%
5 years but less than 230 111 119

10 years 23% 21% 25%
10 years or more 190 98 92

19% 19% 19%

Page 110
D2 -- In the last 5 years, how many different employers have you worked for (including your current employer)?
[CONTRIB AMT VERSN]

TOTAL 3% 5%
--------- --------- ---------
(A) (B) (C)
TOTAL 1000 519 481

100% 52% 48%
1 437 219 218

44% 42% 45%
NET: 2 OR MORE 563 300 263

______________ 56% 58% 55%
2 341 168 173

34% 32% 36%
3 131 85 46
13% 16% 10%
4 or more 91 47 43
9% 9% 9%

Page 111
D3 -- In your previous job, did you have the ability to be in a pension or retirement savings plan, such as a 401(k) plan?
[CONTRIB AMT VERSN]

TOTAL 3% 5%
--------- --------- ---------
(A) (B) (C)
TOTAL 563 300 263

100% 53% 47%
Yes 164 91 72
29% 31% 27%
No 364 188 177

65% 63% 67%
Not sure 35 20 14
6% 7% 5%

Page 112
D4 -- Does your spouse currently have a pension or a retirement savings plan, such as a 401(k) plan, at his or her
current job?
FILTER: Married
[CONTRIB AMT VERSN]

TOTAL 3% 5%
--------- --------- ---------
(A) (B) (C)
TOTAL 452 237 215

100% 52% 48%
Yes 161 98 64
36% 41% 30%
No 255 132 124

57% 56% 57%
Not sure 35 7 28
8% 3% 13%
b

Page 113
D5 -- Which of the following types of debt do you (and your spouse/partner) have?
[CONTRIB AMT VERSN]

TOTAL 3% 5%
--------- --------- ---------
(A) (B) (C)
TOTAL 1000 519 481

100% 52% 48%
Credit card debt that 555 311 244

will take more than 3 56% 60% 51%
months to pay off
Car loan 427 220 207

43% 42% 43%
Home mortgage 287 150 137

29% 29% 29%
Student loans 235 121 114

23% 23% 24%
Other types of personal 142 61 82

loans 14% 12% 17%
Other types of loans 92 61 32

through a financial 9% 12% 7%
institution
None of the above 146 64 82

15% 12% 17%

Page 114
D6 -- What is your annual income that you personally earn from the job(s) that you have (your wage income)?
[CONTRIB AMT VERSN]

TOTAL 3% 5%
--------- --------- ---------
(A) (B) (C)
TOTAL 1000 519 481

100% 52% 48%
NET: LESS THAN $30,000 408 214 194

______________________ 41% 41% 40%
Less than $10,000 71 39 32

7% 8% 7%
$10,000 to $19,999 141 81 60

14% 16% 12%
$20,000 to $29,999 196 94 102

20% 18% 21%
NET: $30,000 TO $59,999 343 159 184

_______________________ 34% 31% 38%
$30,000 to $39,999 147 71 76

15% 14% 16%
$40,000 to $49,999 86 42 44
9% 8% 9%
$50,000 to $59,999 110 46 64

11% 9% 13%
NET: $60,000 OR MORE 232 135 97

____________________ 23% 26% 20%

Page 115
(Continued)
[CONTRIB AMT VERSN]

TOTAL 3% 5%
--------- --------- ---------
(A) (B) (C)
$60,000 to $69,999 53 30 23
5% 6% 5%
$70,000 to $79,999 35 22 13
3% 4% 3%
$80,000 to $89,999 16 7 10
2% 1% 2%
$90,000 to $99,999 20 12 8
2% 2% 2%
$100,000 to $124,999 45 25 20
4% 5% 4%
$125,000 to $149,999 23 19 4
2% 4% 1%
$150,000 or more 41 21 20
4% 4% 4%

2% 2% 1%

Page 116
D7 -- About how much money would you say you (and your spouse/partner) currently have, in total, in savings and investments,
[CONTRIB AMT VERSN]

TOTAL 3% 5%
--------- --------- ---------
(A) (B) (C)
TOTAL 1000 519 481

100% 52% 48%
NET: LESS THAN $25,000 594 296 298

______________________ 59% 57% 62%
Less than $2,000 323 159 164

32% 31% 34%
$2,000 to less than 171 86 85

$10,000 17% 17% 18%
$10,000 to less than 100 51 50

$25,000 10% 10% 10%
NET: $25,000 TO $99,999 141 67 74

_______________________ 14% 13% 15%
$25,000 to less than 66 22 44

$50,000 7% 4% 9%
$50,000 to less than 76 45 31

$100,000 8% 9% 6%
NET: $100,000 OR MORE 149 89 60

_____________________ 15% 17% 12%

Page 117
(Continued)
[CONTRIB AMT VERSN]

TOTAL 3% 5%
--------- --------- ---------
(A) (B) (C)
$100,000 to less than 45 34 11

$150,000 4% 6% 2%
$150,000 to less than 21 11 10

$250,000 2% 2% 2%
$250,000 to less than 30 17 13

$500,000 3% 3% 3%
$500,000 to less than 38 23 15

$1 million, or 4% 4% 3%
$1 million or more 15 4 11
1% 1% 2%
Not sure 75 46 29
7% 9% 6%

4% 4% 4%

CALIFORNIA SECURE CHOICE -- EMPLOYEES WITHOUT WORKPLACE RETIREMENT PLANS -- WEIGHTED BANNER 1
TABLE OF CONTENTS
BANNER 1
Page 1.......S1 -- In what State do you live?
Page 2.......S2 -- Are you...? [GENDER]
Page 3.......S3 -- In what year were you born? [RECODED TO DISPLAY AGE]
Page 5.......S4 -- Which of the following best describes your current employment status?
Page 6.......S5 -- About how many employees work for your company or organization?
Page 7.......S6 -- Do you have access to any type of pension or retirement savings plan (such as a 401(k) or 457 plan)
Page 8.......S7 -- Which of the following best describes your current employer?
Page 9.......S8 -- How would you describe your race or ethnicity?
Page 10......S9 -- What was the highest level of education you completed?
Page 12......S10 -- In 2014, what was your total household income, before taxes? Your best estimate is fine.
Page 14......S11 -- What is your marital status?
Page 15......Q1 -- Imagine that a new retirement savings program is being offered at your job. Please read the description
would you...
Page 16......Q1A -- What percentage would you ask your employer to change the contribution rate to?
Page 19......Q2 -- In general, do you think automatically enrolling workers into a retirement savings program while giving them
Page 21......Q3 -- While investment performance is not guaranteed, if someone contributed $50 per month over 20 years, assuming
Page 23......Q4 -- Suppose that the program automatically increased your contributions by 1% of your paycheck every year up to
Page 24......Q5 -- The retirement savings program could be set up with different fund options. Two examples are described below.
Appendix - 8. Online Survey - Weighted Crosstabs

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page 41......Q7 -- How good or poor an idea do you think this program is for the State of California?
(A) Loss of a job

TABLE OF CONTENTS
(F) Home purchase
(D) If you divorced

TABLE OF CONTENTS
(D) If you divorced

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page 79......Q11 -- The next few questions are about your attitudes about saving for retirement in general. How important to you
Page 81......Q12 -- Many employers offer a retirement plan such as a 401(k) that their employees can make contributions to, typically
Page 83......Q13 -- About how much per month would be the maximum you could likely contribute to this type of retirement savings plan?
Page 85......Q14 -- Currently, about what percentage of your total household income, are you (and your spouse/partner) saving
for retirement?

TABLE OF CONTENTS
(I) Other
(I) Other
Page 101.....Q16 -- Which ONE of those is your PRIMARY reason for not saving more money now?
Page 103.....Q17 -- Thinking about your overall savings priorities, please rank the following financial goals from 1 to 6,
(A) Retirement

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page 119.....Q18 -- To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statements:
Page 128.....Q19 -- How confident are you that you know how much money you need to save for retirement?
(C) Your employer
Page 143.....D1 -- How long have you been working for your current employer?

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page 144.....D2 -- In the last 5 years, how many different employers have you worked for (including your current employer)?
Page 145.....D3 -- In your previous job, did you have the ability to be in a pension or retirement savings plan, such as a 401(k) plan?
Page 146.....D4 -- Does your spouse currently have a pension or a retirement savings plan, such as a 401(k) plan, at his or her
current job?
FILTER: Married
Page 147.....D5 -- Which of the following types of debt do you (and your spouse/partner) have?
Page 149.....D6 -- What is your annual income that you personally earn from the job(s) that you have (your wage income)?
Page 152.....D7 -- About how much money would you say you (and your spouse/partner) currently have, in total, in savings and investments,

Page 1
S1 -- In what State do you live?
[--GENDER-] [------AGE------] [HISPANIC/] [RETENTION] [---EDUCATION---] [EMPLOYMNT] [HOUSEHOLD INCOM] [PERSONAL INCOME]
WGTD Fe- [--LATINO-] Stay Opt No Some Coll Full Part $50K- $100K $30K- $60K
TOTAL Male male 21-34 35-49 50-64 Yes No in Out Coll Coll Grad+ Time Time <$50K $99K Plus <$30K $59K Plus
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
(A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F) (G) (H) (I) (J) (K) (L) (M) (N) (O) (P) (Q) (R) (S) (T) (U)
TOTAL 1000 552 448 426 360 214 489 511 735 265 538 189 273 774 226 490 294 216 408 343 232
100% 55% 45% 43% 36% 21% 49% 51% 73% 27% 54% 19% 27% 77% 23% 49% 29% 22% 41% 34% 23%
UNWEIGHTED TOTAL 1000 372 628 368 318 314 223 777 754 246 304 175 521 761 239 383 379 238 287 394 303
California 1000 552 448 426 360 214 489 511 735 265 538 189 273 774 226 490 294 216 408 343 232
100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
Comparison Groups: BC/DEF/GH/IJ/KLM/NO/PQR/STU


Page 2
S2 -- Are you...? [GENDER]
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
TOTAL 1000 552 448 426 360 214 489 511 735 265 538 189 273 774 226 490 294 216 408 343 232
100% 55% 45% 43% 36% 21% 49% 51% 73% 27% 54% 19% 27% 77% 23% 49% 29% 22% 41% 34% 23%
Male 552 552 - 236 208 108 265 287 391 160 316 94 142 449 103 272 162 118 227 169 148
55% 100% 55% 58% 50% 54% 56% 53% 61% 59% 50% 52% 58% 45% 55% 55% 55% 56% 49% 64%
o t
Female 448 - 448 190 152 107 224 224 344 105 223 95 131 325 124 219 132 98 181 174 84
45% 100% 45% 42% 50% 46% 44% 47% 39% 41% 50% 48% 42% 55% 45% 45% 45% 44% 51% 36%
n u


Page 3
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
TOTAL 1000 552 448 426 360 214 489 511 735 265 538 189 273 774 226 490 294 216 408 343 232
100% 55% 45% 43% 36% 21% 49% 51% 73% 27% 54% 19% 27% 77% 23% 49% 29% 22% 41% 34% 23%
NET: 21 TO 34 426 236 190 426 - - 246 180 306 120 220 103 102 323 103 282 101 43 230 132 57
_____________ 43% 43% 42% 100% 50% 35% 42% 45% 41% 55% 38% 42% 46% 57% 34% 20% 56% 39% 25%
h kM QR r tU u
21 to 24 71 35 36 71 - - 57 14 64 7 39 28 4 37 34 64 6 1 60 9 1
7% 6% 8% 17% 12% 3% 9% 3% 7% 15% 1% 5% 15% 13% 2% *% 15% 3% *%
EF H j m kM N QR TU
25 to 29 119 61 58 119 - - 70 50 86 33 40 29 50 98 21 78 29 12 52 52 14
12% 11% 13% 28% 14% 10% 12% 13% 7% 16% 18% 13% 9% 16% 10% 6% 13% 15% 6%
EF k K r u
30 to 34 235 139 96 235 - - 119 116 156 80 141 46 49 187 48 139 66 30 117 70 42
24% 25% 22% 55% 24% 23% 21% 30% 26% 24% 18% 24% 21% 28% 22% 14% 29% 21% 18%
EF R
NET: 35 TO 49 360 208 152 - 360 - 176 184 258 102 217 48 94 293 67 158 103 98 120 139 94
_____________ 36% 38% 34% 100% 36% 36% 35% 38% 40% 26% 35% 38% 29% 32% 35% 46% 29% 40% 41%
l p
35 to 39 127 77 50 - 127 - 62 65 101 26 69 23 35 108 19 56 35 36 30 63 34

13% 14% 11% 35% 13% 13% 14% 10% 13% 12% 13% 14% 8% 11% 12% 17% 7% 18% 15%
DF s
40 to 44 101 54 47 - 101 - 52 50 80 22 57 12 33 68 33 38 38 25 31 37 29
10% 10% 10% 28% 11% 10% 11% 8% 11% 6% 12% 9% 15% 8% 13% 12% 8% 11% 13%
DF


Page 4
(Continued)
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
45 to 49 131 76 55 - 131 - 62 69 77 54 91 14 26 117 14 64 30 37 59 39 31

13% 14% 12% 37% 13% 13% 11% 20% 17% 8% 9% 15% 6% 13% 10% 17% 15% 11% 13%
DF i lm O
NET: 50 TO 64 214 108 107 - - 214 67 148 171 43 102 37 76 158 56 50 90 74 59 72 81

_____________ 21% 20% 24% 100% 14% 29% 23% 16% 19% 20% 28% 20% 25% 10% 31% 34% 14% 21% 35%
G P P St
50 to 54 90 40 50 - - 90 27 64 76 14 36 19 35 67 23 22 37 32 22 36 32
9% 7% 11% 42% 5% 12% 10% 5% 7% 10% 13% 9% 10% 4% 13% 15% 5% 11% 14%
DE g k p s
55 to 59 78 47 31 - - 78 23 55 63 14 45 11 22 64 14 14 35 29 18 23 37
8% 8% 7% 36% 5% 11% 9% 5% 8% 6% 8% 8% 6% 3% 12% 13% 4% 7% 16%
DE p p st
60 to 64 47 21 25 - - 47 17 29 32 15 21 7 18 27 19 15 18 14 19 13 12
5% 4% 6% 22% 4% 6% 4% 6% 4% 4% 7% 4% 9% 3% 6% 7% 5% 4% 5%
DE
MEAN 39.6 39.5 39.7 29.3 42.0 55.9 37.3 41.8 39.4 40.1 40.0 36.9 40.6 39.8 38.9 35.9 42.2 44.3 36.8 40.0 43.7
D DE G L P P St
MEDIAN 37.0 37.0 37.0 30.0 42.0 55.0 34.0 40.0 37.0 37.0 39.0 34.0 39.0 38.0 36.0 33.0 41.0 45.0 33.0 39.0 43.0


Page 5
S4 -- Which of the following best describes your current employment status?
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
TOTAL 1000 552 448 426 360 214 489 511 735 265 538 189 273 774 226 490 294 216 408 343 232
100% 55% 45% 43% 36% 21% 49% 51% 73% 27% 54% 19% 27% 77% 23% 49% 29% 22% 41% 34% 23%
Employed full-time 774 449 325 323 293 158 372 402 563 211 435 139 199 774 - 350 243 181 243 304 213
77% 81% 72% 76% 82% 74% 76% 79% 77% 80% 81% 74% 73% 100% 71% 83% 84% 60% 89% 92%
p S S
NET: EMPLOYED PART-TIME 226 103 124 103 67 56 117 109 172 54 103 50 74 - 226 140 51 35 165 39 19
_______________________ 23% 19% 28% 24% 18% 26% 24% 21% 23% 20% 19% 26% 27% 100% 29% 17% 16% 40% 11% 8%
r TU
Employed part-time at 185 80 106 89 53 43 98 87 140 45 86 39 60 - 185 110 46 30 131 35 17

least 20 hours per 19% 14% 24% 21% 15% 20% 20% 17% 19% 17% 16% 21% 22% 82% 22% 16% 14% 32% 10% 7%
week b N TU
Employed part-time 41 23 18 14 14 13 18 22 32 9 17 11 13 - 41 30 5 5 34 4 2
less than 20 hours per 4% 4% 4% 3% 4% 6% 4% 4% 4% 3% 3% 6% 5% 18% 6% 2% 2% 8% 1% 1%
week N


Page 6
S5 -- About how many employees work for your company or organization?
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
TOTAL 1000 552 448 426 360 214 489 511 735 265 538 189 273 774 226 490 294 216 408 343 232
100% 55% 45% 43% 36% 21% 49% 51% 73% 27% 54% 19% 27% 77% 23% 49% 29% 22% 41% 34% 23%
5 to 9 136 53 84 41 53 43 46 91 97 39 75 21 41 105 32 39 59 38 41 54 33
14% 10% 19% 10% 15% 20% 9% 18% 13% 15% 14% 11% 15% 14% 14% 8% 20% 18% 10% 16% 14%
b p
10 to 49 360 194 166 153 113 93 184 176 256 104 185 74 101 272 88 166 108 86 135 115 106
36% 35% 37% 36% 32% 43% 38% 34% 35% 39% 34% 39% 37% 35% 39% 34% 37% 40% 33% 34% 46%
50 to 99 136 89 47 62 48 26 81 56 108 28 83 23 31 118 18 82 36 18 52 54 30

14% 16% 11% 15% 13% 12% 16% 11% 15% 11% 15% 12% 11% 15% 8% 17% 12% 9% 13% 16% 13%
100 to 499 176 105 71 87 64 25 100 76 136 40 107 26 43 127 49 118 35 23 102 53 19
18% 19% 16% 20% 18% 12% 21% 15% 19% 15% 20% 14% 16% 16% 22% 24% 12% 11% 25% 16% 8%
qR U
500+ 191 111 80 83 81 27 79 113 138 54 88 46 57 153 39 86 56 50 79 67 45

19% 20% 18% 20% 22% 13% 16% 22% 19% 20% 16% 25% 21% 20% 17% 18% 19% 23% 19% 19% 19%


Page 7
S6 -- Do you have access to any type of pension or retirement savings plan (such as a 401(k) or 457 plan)
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
TOTAL 1000 552 448 426 360 214 489 511 735 265 538 189 273 774 226 490 294 216 408 343 232
100% 55% 45% 43% 36% 21% 49% 51% 73% 27% 54% 19% 27% 77% 23% 49% 29% 22% 41% 34% 23%
No 1000 552 448 426 360 214 489 511 735 265 538 189 273 774 226 490 294 216 408 343 232
100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%


Page 8
S7 -- Which of the following best describes your current employer?
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
TOTAL 1000 552 448 426 360 214 489 511 735 265 538 189 273 774 226 490 294 216 408 343 232
100% 55% 45% 43% 36% 21% 49% 51% 73% 27% 54% 19% 27% 77% 23% 49% 29% 22% 41% 34% 23%
A for-profit business 651 378 274 251 236 164 259 392 489 162 322 128 202 521 130 268 209 174 229 226 183
65% 68% 61% 59% 66% 76% 53% 77% 67% 61% 60% 68% 74% 67% 57% 55% 71% 80% 56% 66% 79%
D G K p P St
A non-profit 175 93 81 97 54 23 117 58 118 57 115 28 32 121 54 118 38 18 91 64 20

organization 17% 17% 18% 23% 15% 11% 24% 11% 16% 21% 21% 15% 12% 16% 24% 24% 13% 8% 22% 19% 8%
f H m qR U u
A private educational or 39 24 15 26 7 7 25 14 31 8 15 7 18 34 5 26 11 3 16 18 5
academic institution 4% 4% 3% 6% 2% 3% 5% 3% 4% 3% 3% 4% 6% 4% 2% 5% 4% 1% 4% 5% 2%
Other 135 56 78 51 63 21 87 47 96 38 87 26 22 97 38 78 36 21 72 35 24
13% 10% 17% 12% 17% 10% 18% 9% 13% 14% 16% 14% 8% 13% 17% 16% 12% 10% 18% 10% 10%
b h m


Page 9
S8 -- How would you describe your race or ethnicity?
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
TOTAL 1000 552 448 426 360 214 489 511 735 265 538 189 273 774 226 490 294 216 408 343 232
100% 55% 45% 43% 36% 21% 49% 51% 73% 27% 54% 19% 27% 77% 23% 49% 29% 22% 41% 34% 23%
Hispanic or Latino 489 265 224 246 176 67 489 - 366 123 304 108 77 372 117 296 147 46 228 184 71
49% 48% 50% 58% 49% 31% 100% 50% 46% 57% 57% 28% 48% 52% 60% 50% 21% 56% 54% 30%
F F M M R R U U
White/Caucasian 336 177 159 112 112 113 - 336 244 93 163 51 122 268 68 110 104 123 102 110 116
34% 32% 36% 26% 31% 53% 66% 33% 35% 30% 27% 45% 35% 30% 22% 35% 57% 25% 32% 50%
DE G kL PQ ST
Asian-American 109 64 46 34 52 24 - 109 77 32 26 22 61 85 25 33 38 38 29 38 41

11% 12% 10% 8% 14% 11% 21% 11% 12% 5% 12% 23% 11% 11% 7% 13% 18% 7% 11% 18%
G Kl p
African-American 55 39 17 29 20 6 - 55 41 15 41 7 7 44 12 49 3 4 42 10 3
6% 7% 4% 7% 5% 3% 11% 6% 6% 8% 4% 3% 6% 5% 10% 1% 2% 10% 3% 1%
G m QR TU
Other 10 7 3 5 0 5 - 10 8 3 4 1 6 6 5 2 3 6 7 1 2
1% 1% 1% 1% *% 2% 2% 1% 1% 1% *% 2% 1% 2% *% 1% 3% 2% *% 1%
g


Page 10
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
TOTAL 1000 552 448 426 360 214 489 511 735 265 538 189 273 774 226 490 294 216 408 343 232
100% 55% 45% 43% 36% 21% 49% 51% 73% 27% 54% 19% 27% 77% 23% 49% 29% 22% 41% 34% 23%
NET: NO COLLEGE 538 316 223 220 217 102 304 234 375 163 538 - - 435 103 332 149 57 267 199 66
_______________ 54% 57% 50% 52% 60% 47% 62% 46% 51% 62% 100% 56% 46% 68% 51% 26% 65% 58% 28%
H QR R U U
Some high school or 39 27 12 9 15 14 25 14 35 4 39 - - 23 16 19 16 4 23 2 14

less 4% 5% 3% 2% 4% 6% 5% 3% 5% 2% 7% 3% 7% 4% 6% 2% 6% *% 6%
D J LM N R T T
High school graduate 419 255 164 177 170 72 234 184 274 145 419 - - 352 66 275 103 42 216 160 36
42% 46% 37% 42% 47% 33% 48% 36% 37% 55% 78% 46% 29% 56% 35% 19% 53% 47% 16%
c F h I LM O QR R U U
Trade or 2-year 81 34 47 34 31 16 46 36 67 14 81 - - 61 20 39 30 11 28 37 15
associate degree 8% 6% 10% 8% 9% 7% 9% 7% 9% 5% 15% 8% 9% 8% 10% 5% 7% 11% 7%
LM
Some college (4-year 189 94 95 103 48 37 108 81 156 33 - 189 - 139 50 87 69 33 72 69 44

degree college) 19% 17% 21% 24% 13% 17% 22% 16% 21% 12% 100% 18% 22% 18% 24% 15% 18% 20% 19%
e
NET: COLLEGE DEGREE OR 273 142 131 102 94 76 77 196 204 69 - - 273 199 74 71 75 127 70 75 123
HIGHER 27% 26% 29% 24% 26% 35% 16% 38% 28% 26% 100% 26% 33% 14% 26% 59% 17% 22% 53%
______________________ G PQ ST
College graduate (4- 174 86 88 76 54 44 53 121 125 49 - - 174 129 45 60 54 60 53 58 61

year degree college) 17% 16% 20% 18% 15% 21% 11% 24% 17% 18% 64% 17% 20% 12% 18% 28% 13% 17% 26%
g KL p s


Page 11
(Continued)
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
Post graduate work 22 11 11 7 7 7 9 13 17 4 - - 22 12 9 4 3 14 2 5 13

2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 3% 2% 3% 2% 2% 8% 2% 4% 1% 1% 6% 1% 1% 5%
KL p
Graduate degree 77 45 32 19 33 25 15 62 61 16 - - 77 57 20 7 18 52 15 13 49
8% 8% 7% 4% 9% 11% 3% 12% 8% 6% 28% 7% 9% 1% 6% 24% 4% 4% 21%
G KL PQ ST


Page 12
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
TOTAL 1000 552 448 426 360 214 489 511 735 265 538 189 273 774 226 490 294 216 408 343 232
100% 55% 45% 43% 36% 21% 49% 51% 73% 27% 54% 19% 27% 77% 23% 49% 29% 22% 41% 34% 23%
NET: UNDER $50,000 490 272 219 282 158 50 296 194 338 152 332 87 71 350 140 490 - - 338 148 1
__________________ 49% 49% 49% 66% 44% 23% 61% 38% 46% 57% 62% 46% 26% 45% 62% 100% 83% 43% 1%
EF F H lM M n TU U
Under $35,000 341 191 150 196 110 35 203 137 228 113 241 53 46 228 113 341 - - 297 42 -
34% 35% 33% 46% 31% 16% 42% 27% 31% 43% 45% 28% 17% 29% 50% 70% 73% 12%
EF F H LM m N QR TU U
$35,000 to $49,999 149 81 69 86 48 15 93 56 110 39 91 34 25 122 27 149 - - 41 106 1

15% 15% 15% 20% 13% 7% 19% 11% 15% 15% 17% 18% 9% 16% 12% 30% 10% 31% 1%
f QR U SU
NET: $50,000 TO $99,999 294 162 132 101 103 90 147 147 230 63 149 69 75 243 51 - 294 - 49 143 95
_______________________ 29% 29% 29% 24% 29% 42% 30% 29% 31% 24% 28% 37% 28% 31% 22% 100% 12% 42% 41%
D S S
$50,000 to $74,999 183 105 77 66 66 51 95 87 143 39 93 46 43 147 36 - 183 - 37 93 45

18% 19% 17% 15% 18% 24% 20% 17% 20% 15% 17% 24% 16% 19% 16% 62% 9% 27% 19%
PR S
$75,000 to $99,999 111 57 55 35 37 39 51 60 87 24 56 23 32 96 15 - 111 - 12 50 50

11% 10% 12% 8% 10% 18% 10% 12% 12% 9% 10% 12% 12% 12% 7% 38% 3% 14% 21%
PR S S
NET: $100,000 OR MORE 216 118 98 43 98 74 46 170 167 50 57 33 127 181 35 - - 216 21 52 137
_____________________ 22% 21% 22% 10% 27% 35% 9% 33% 23% 19% 11% 17% 46% 23% 16% 100% 5% 15% 59%
D D G KL s ST


Page 13
(Continued)
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
$100,000 to $149,999 125 79 46 28 49 48 35 89 101 24 37 23 65 110 15 - - 125 14 35 72

12% 14% 10% 7% 14% 22% 7% 18% 14% 9% 7% 12% 24% 14% 7% 58% 3% 10% 31%
D G KL PQ ST
$150,000 or more 91 39 52 16 49 26 11 81 66 25 20 10 62 71 20 - - 91 8 17 65
9% 7% 12% 4% 14% 12% 2% 16% 9% 10% 4% 5% 23% 9% 9% 42% 2% 5% 28%
d d G KL PQ ST


Page 14
S11 -- What is your marital status?
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
TOTAL 1000 552 448 426 360 214 489 511 735 265 538 189 273 774 226 490 294 216 408 343 232
100% 55% 45% 43% 36% 21% 49% 51% 73% 27% 54% 19% 27% 77% 23% 49% 29% 22% 41% 34% 23%
Married 452 222 230 116 200 136 246 206 329 123 239 76 136 371 81 148 167 138 134 159 146
45% 40% 51% 27% 56% 63% 50% 40% 45% 46% 44% 40% 50% 48% 36% 30% 57% 64% 33% 46% 63%
D D P P St
Not married, but living 135 77 57 94 32 9 66 68 122 13 80 23 32 95 40 80 25 30 66 42 27

with a partner 13% 14% 13% 22% 9% 4% 14% 13% 17% 5% 15% 12% 12% 12% 17% 16% 9% 14% 16% 12% 12%
EF J
Divorced, separated or 92 41 52 14 39 40 31 61 78 14 60 14 18 81 11 48 32 13 36 42 14
widowed 9% 7% 11% 3% 11% 19% 6% 12% 11% 5% 11% 8% 7% 10% 5% 10% 11% 6% 9% 12% 6%
d D
Single, never married 315 209 106 201 86 28 141 174 202 113 158 74 83 222 93 212 69 34 172 99 44
32% 38% 24% 47% 24% 13% 29% 34% 27% 43% 29% 39% 31% 29% 41% 43% 24% 16% 42% 29% 19%
C EF i n QR U
Prefer not to say 6 3 3 2 3 1 4 2 4 2 2 2 2 5 1 3 1 2 1 2 2

1% *% 1% *% 1% 1% 1% *% *% 1% *% 1% 1% 1% *% 1% *% 1% *% 1% 1%


Page 15
Q1 -- Imagine that a new retirement savings program is being offered at your job. Please read the description
would you...
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
TOTAL 1000 552 448 426 360 214 489 511 735 265 538 189 273 774 226 490 294 216 408 343 232
100% 55% 45% 43% 36% 21% 49% 51% 73% 27% 54% 19% 27% 77% 23% 49% 29% 22% 41% 34% 23%
NET: STAY IN 735 391 344 306 258 171 366 369 735 - 375 156 204 563 172 338 230 167 292 254 183
____________ 73% 71% 77% 72% 72% 80% 75% 72% 100% 70% 83% 75% 73% 76% 69% 78% 77% 71% 74% 79%
k
Stay in program 559 289 270 220 203 136 290 270 559 - 291 121 147 413 146 267 169 123 236 197 123
56% 52% 60% 52% 56% 64% 59% 53% 76% 54% 64% 54% 53% 65% 54% 58% 57% 58% 57% 53%
J
Stay in program, but 176 102 74 86 55 35 76 100 176 - 84 35 57 150 25 71 61 44 56 57 60

ask your employer to 18% 18% 16% 20% 15% 16% 16% 19% 24% 16% 18% 21% 19% 11% 14% 21% 20% 14% 16% 26%
change the J s
contribution rate
Opt out of program 265 160 105 120 102 43 123 142 - 265 163 33 69 211 54 152 63 50 116 89 49
27% 29% 23% 28% 28% 20% 25% 28% 100% 30% 17% 25% 27% 24% 31% 22% 23% 29% 26% 21%
l


Page 16
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
TOTAL 176 102 74 86 55 35 76 100 176 - 84 35 57 150 25 71 61 44 56 57 60

100% 58% 42% 49% 31% 20% 43% 57% 100% 48% 20% 32% 85% 15% 40% 35% 25% 32% 32% 34%
UNWEIGHTED TOTAL 206 85 121 70 66 70 40 166 206 - 67 31 108 167 39 74 81 51 55 74 73
NET: LESS THAN 3% 45 18 26 27 13 5 22 22 45 - 24 11 9 37 7 30 13 1 26 11 5

_________________ 25% 18% 36% 31% 23% 15% 29% 23% 25% 29% 31% 16% 25% 28% 43% 21% 3% 47% 20% 9%
b R r U
Less than 1% 3 3 0 1 2 - - 3 3 - 2 - 1 3 - 0 3 - - 3 0
2% 3% *% 1% 4% 3% 2% 3% 1% 2% *% 4% 5% 1%
f g
1% 9 2 8 4 2 3 4 5 9 - 4 2 4 5 5 6 3 0 5 2 1
5% 2% 10% 5% 4% 8% 6% 5% 5% 5% 5% 6% 3% 19% 8% 5% 1% 8% 3% 2%
2% 32 14 18 22 8 2 18 14 32 - 18 9 5 30 2 24 7 1 21 7 4
18% 14% 25% 25% 15% 7% 24% 14% 18% 21% 26% 9% 20% 9% 34% 11% 2% 38% 12% 6%
qR tU
NET: 3% TO 5% 44 21 23 21 16 6 25 18 44 - 21 11 11 39 4 13 21 9 5 17 21
_____________ 25% 20% 31% 25% 29% 18% 33% 18% 25% 26% 32% 19% 26% 16% 19% 34% 21% 10% 30% 35%
s
3% 20 10 11 10 10 1 15 5 20 - 17 2 1 18 2 10 5 5 4 11 6
12% 9% 15% 12% 18% 2% 20% 5% 12% 20% 6% 2% 12% 9% 14% 9% 12% 6% 19% 10%
f f m


Page 17
(Continued)
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
4% 3 1 2 2 1 0 1 2 3 - 1 1 2 3 1 1 2 1 1 1 2
2% 1% 3% 2% 2% *% 2% 2% 2% 1% 2% 3% 2% 3% 1% 3% 1% 1% 2% 3%
5% 20 10 10 9 5 6 9 11 20 - 4 9 8 19 1 3 14 4 1 5 14
11% 10% 14% 11% 9% 16% 12% 11% 11% 4% 25% 14% 13% 4% 4% 23% 8% 2% 9% 23%
p S
NET: MORE THAN 5% 82 60 22 37 25 20 28 53 82 - 35 12 35 68 14 26 24 31 24 26 31

_________________ 47% 59% 30% 43% 46% 58% 37% 54% 47% 42% 33% 62% 45% 55% 37% 39% 72% 42% 47% 52%
C l pQ
6% 6 5 1 1 0 5 0 6 6 - 5 - 2 6 0 1 0 5 0 1 5
3% 5% 1% 1% *% 14% 1% 6% 3% 5% 3% 4% 1% 1% 1% 11% *% 1% 9%
de
7% 8 4 4 7 - 1 5 3 8 - 3 5 1 3 6 2 5 2 6 1 2
5% 4% 6% 8% 4% 7% 3% 5% 4% 13% 2% 2% 23% 2% 8% 4% 10% 1% 3%
N
8% 9 8 2 5 5 0 3 7 9 - 1 - 8 8 1 4 1 5 4 2 4
5% 7% 3% 5% 8% 1% 4% 7% 5% 1% 15% 5% 5% 6% 1% 11% 8% 3% 6%
KL
9% 8 8 0 8 - 0 8 0 8 - 8 0 - 8 - 8 0 - - 8 0
5% 7% 1% 9% 1% 10% *% 5% 9% 1% 5% 11% 1% 13% 1%
C Ef H M O QR SU
10% 39 29 10 14 14 11 10 29 39 - 17 6 17 35 4 11 13 15 11 13 15
22% 28% 14% 16% 26% 32% 13% 29% 22% 20% 16% 30% 24% 15% 16% 21% 34% 19% 23% 24%


Page 18
(Continued)
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
More than 10% 11 6 4 3 6 2 3 8 11 - 2 1 7 8 3 1 5 5 3 3 5

6% 6% 6% 3% 11% 6% 3% 8% 6% 2% 3% 13% 5% 10% 1% 7% 12% 5% 5% 9%
k
Don't know 6 3 2 1 1 3 - 6 6 - 3 1 2 5 0 1 3 2 1 2 2
3% 3% 3% 2% 2% 9% 6% 3% 3% 3% 3% 4% 1% 1% 5% 4% 1% 4% 4%
g


Page 19
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
TOTAL 1000 552 448 426 360 214 489 511 735 265 538 189 273 774 226 490 294 216 408 343 232
100% 55% 45% 43% 36% 21% 49% 51% 73% 27% 54% 19% 27% 77% 23% 49% 29% 22% 41% 34% 23%
NET: GOOD IDEA 854 445 409 352 313 189 424 430 681 173 463 160 232 654 200 415 256 183 333 297 209
______________ 85% 81% 91% 83% 87% 88% 87% 84% 93% 65% 86% 85% 85% 85% 88% 85% 87% 84% 82% 86% 90%
b J
Very good idea (4) 566 317 250 224 229 113 304 262 489 77 297 118 151 419 147 282 150 134 224 207 130
57% 57% 56% 53% 64% 53% 62% 51% 67% 29% 55% 62% 55% 54% 65% 58% 51% 62% 55% 60% 56%
J
Somewhat good idea (3) 288 129 159 128 84 76 120 168 192 95 166 42 81 235 53 133 107 48 109 90 79
29% 23% 36% 30% 23% 36% 25% 33% 26% 36% 31% 22% 30% 30% 23% 27% 36% 22% 27% 26% 34%
b r
NET: POOR IDEA 146 106 40 74 46 25 65 81 54 92 76 29 41 120 26 75 37 34 75 47 24

______________ 15% 19% 9% 17% 13% 12% 13% 16% 7% 35% 14% 15% 15% 15% 12% 15% 13% 16% 18% 14% 10%
c I
Somewhat poor idea (2) 103 79 24 52 35 16 55 48 45 58 57 16 30 88 15 50 29 24 55 32 16

10% 14% 5% 12% 10% 8% 11% 9% 6% 22% 11% 8% 11% 11% 7% 10% 10% 11% 13% 9% 7%
c I
Very poor idea (1) 43 27 16 22 12 9 10 33 9 34 19 14 11 32 11 24 9 10 20 14 8

4% 5% 4% 5% 3% 4% 2% 6% 1% 13% 3% 7% 4% 4% 5% 5% 3% 4% 5% 4% 3%
g i


Page 20
(Continued)
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
MEAN 3.4 3.3 3.4 3.3 3.5 3.4 3.5 3.3 3.6 2.8 3.4 3.4 3.4 3.3 3.5 3.4 3.4 3.4 3.3 3.4 3.4
J
MEDIAN 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0


Page 21
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
TOTAL 1000 552 448 426 360 214 489 511 735 265 538 189 273 774 226 490 294 216 408 343 232
100% 55% 45% 43% 36% 21% 49% 51% 73% 27% 54% 19% 27% 77% 23% 49% 29% 22% 41% 34% 23%
NET: EXCELLENT/VERY GOOD 548 306 242 246 203 99 309 239 476 72 305 109 134 406 142 290 152 106 234 188 119
________________________ 55% 55% 54% 58% 56% 46% 63% 47% 65% 27% 57% 58% 49% 52% 63% 59% 52% 49% 57% 55% 51%
H J
Excellent (5) 259 141 118 102 114 43 148 111 237 22 146 48 66 202 57 135 71 53 115 91 50
26% 25% 26% 24% 32% 20% 30% 22% 32% 8% 27% 25% 24% 26% 25% 28% 24% 25% 28% 26% 22%
J
Very good (4) 289 165 124 144 88 56 161 128 239 50 159 61 68 203 85 155 81 52 119 97 69
29% 30% 28% 34% 25% 26% 33% 25% 32% 19% 30% 32% 25% 26% 38% 32% 28% 24% 29% 28% 30%
j
Good (3) 256 130 125 103 93 60 130 125 166 89 140 48 67 205 51 106 104 45 93 97 57
26% 24% 28% 24% 26% 28% 27% 25% 23% 34% 26% 26% 25% 26% 22% 22% 35% 21% 23% 28% 24%
pr
NET: FAIR/POOR 176 108 68 72 55 49 44 132 89 87 86 27 63 147 29 84 33 59 74 52 50

______________ 18% 20% 15% 17% 15% 23% 9% 26% 12% 33% 16% 14% 23% 19% 13% 17% 11% 27% 18% 15% 21%
G I Q
Fair (2) 117 69 48 52 34 30 35 82 75 42 61 13 42 100 16 59 23 34 55 31 30

12% 13% 11% 12% 10% 14% 7% 16% 10% 16% 11% 7% 16% 13% 7% 12% 8% 16% 13% 9% 13%
g l


Page 22
(Continued)
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
Poor (1) 59 39 20 20 21 19 9 50 14 45 25 14 21 47 13 25 9 25 19 21 19
6% 7% 4% 5% 6% 9% 2% 10% 2% 17% 5% 7% 8% 6% 6% 5% 3% 12% 5% 6% 8%
G i q
Don't know 20 7 13 5 9 7 6 15 4 17 7 5 9 16 4 9 5 6 7 5 7
2% 1% 3% 1% 2% 3% 1% 3% 1% 6% 1% 2% 3% 2% 2% 2% 2% 3% 2% 2% 3%
MEAN 3.6 3.5 3.6 3.6 3.7 3.4 3.8 3.3 3.8 2.8 3.6 3.6 3.4 3.5 3.7 3.7 3.6 3.4 3.6 3.6 3.4
H J
MEDIAN 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0


Page 23
Q4 -- Suppose that the program automatically increased your contributions by 1% of your paycheck every year up to
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
TOTAL 1000 552 448 426 360 214 489 511 735 265 538 189 273 774 226 490 294 216 408 343 232
100% 55% 45% 43% 36% 21% 49% 51% 73% 27% 54% 19% 27% 77% 23% 49% 29% 22% 41% 34% 23%
Stay in the program with 480 270 210 167 187 126 227 254 434 47 251 97 132 368 113 214 146 120 186 154 134
the increases in 48% 49% 47% 39% 52% 59% 46% 50% 59% 18% 47% 51% 49% 48% 50% 44% 50% 56% 46% 45% 58%
contribution D J
Stay in the program but 330 159 171 172 95 64 190 140 257 73 171 65 94 245 85 178 90 62 133 132 63
ask your employer to 33% 29% 38% 40% 26% 30% 39% 27% 35% 27% 32% 34% 35% 32% 38% 36% 31% 29% 33% 39% 27%
stop the increases e h
Opt out of the program 190 123 67 87 78 24 72 118 44 146 117 27 46 161 28 98 58 33 89 57 36
entirely 19% 22% 15% 20% 22% 11% 15% 23% 6% 55% 22% 14% 17% 21% 13% 20% 20% 15% 22% 17% 15%
g I


Page 24
Q5 -- The retirement savings program could be set up with different fund options. Two examples are described below.
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
TOTAL 1000 552 448 426 360 214 489 511 735 265 538 189 273 774 226 490 294 216 408 343 232
100% 55% 45% 43% 36% 21% 49% 51% 73% 27% 54% 19% 27% 77% 23% 49% 29% 22% 41% 34% 23%
Option A: Balanced fund 510 302 208 210 188 111 226 284 419 91 241 99 170 404 106 213 147 150 176 173 157
51% 55% 46% 49% 52% 52% 46% 56% 57% 34% 45% 53% 62% 52% 47% 43% 50% 69% 43% 50% 67%
J K PQ ST
Option B: Money Market 231 118 113 88 97 47 132 99 197 35 132 46 53 178 53 107 86 38 93 100 37
fund 23% 21% 25% 21% 27% 22% 27% 19% 27% 13% 25% 24% 19% 23% 24% 22% 29% 18% 23% 29% 16%
j r u
Makes no difference 101 60 41 45 19 37 53 49 46 55 62 20 19 86 15 62 27 12 55 20 24

10% 11% 9% 11% 5% 17% 11% 10% 6% 21% 12% 11% 7% 11% 7% 13% 9% 6% 14% 6% 11%
E i
Don't know 157 71 86 82 56 19 78 79 72 85 103 24 31 105 52 108 34 15 84 51 14

16% 13% 19% 19% 16% 9% 16% 15% 10% 32% 19% 13% 11% 14% 23% 22% 12% 7% 20% 15% 6%
f I qR U u


Page 25
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
TOTAL 1000 552 448 426 360 214 489 511 735 265 538 189 273 774 226 490 294 216 408 343 232
100% 55% 45% 43% 36% 21% 49% 51% 73% 27% 54% 19% 27% 77% 23% 49% 29% 22% 41% 34% 23%
(E) If you die before 841 468 374 359 299 184 415 426 661 180 454 155 233 653 188 400 249 192 320 310 197
you use the money in 84% 85% 83% 84% 83% 86% 85% 83% 90% 68% 84% 82% 85% 84% 83% 82% 85% 89% 78% 90% 85%
your account, having it J s
go to your spouse or
whomever you designate
(B) Being able to take 841 446 395 353 303 185 408 433 665 176 440 162 239 643 198 406 242 193 328 301 198
your account from job to 84% 81% 88% 83% 84% 86% 83% 85% 90% 66% 82% 86% 88% 83% 88% 83% 82% 89% 80% 88% 85%
job J
(D) All the investment 826 459 367 360 291 175 403 423 641 185 447 147 232 634 191 392 252 181 338 284 192
options will be low cost 83% 83% 82% 85% 81% 81% 82% 83% 87% 70% 83% 78% 85% 82% 85% 80% 86% 84% 83% 83% 83%
j
(F) Having access to 816 442 374 345 300 171 418 398 634 181 439 156 221 622 194 389 247 179 322 291 194
your account information 82% 80% 83% 81% 84% 80% 85% 78% 86% 68% 81% 83% 81% 80% 86% 79% 84% 83% 79% 85% 83%
at any time through a j
(G) At retirement, being 811 437 374 343 293 176 410 401 645 166 448 151 212 623 188 389 245 177 330 286 186
able to convert all or 81% 79% 83% 80% 81% 82% 84% 78% 88% 63% 83% 80% 78% 81% 83% 79% 83% 82% 81% 83% 80%
part of your balance J
into monthly income for
life


Page 26
(Continued)
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
(A) Having a personal 804 446 358 345 288 171 418 386 644 160 437 152 215 614 190 397 238 169 324 287 185
account set up in your 80% 81% 80% 81% 80% 80% 86% 76% 88% 60% 81% 80% 79% 79% 84% 81% 81% 78% 79% 83% 80%
name h J
(C) Having a few 732 413 319 301 274 156 362 370 581 151 403 124 205 569 163 345 224 163 280 262 178
investment options to 73% 75% 71% 71% 76% 73% 74% 72% 79% 57% 75% 65% 75% 74% 72% 70% 76% 75% 69% 76% 77%
choose from in addition J
to the investment fund
that your contributions


Page 27
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
TOTAL 1000 552 448 426 360 214 489 511 735 265 538 189 273 774 226 490 294 216 408 343 232
100% 55% 45% 43% 36% 21% 49% 51% 73% 27% 54% 19% 27% 77% 23% 49% 29% 22% 41% 34% 23%
NET: EXTREMELY/VERY 804 446 358 345 288 171 418 386 644 160 437 152 215 614 190 397 238 169 324 287 185
ATTRACTIVE 80% 81% 80% 81% 80% 80% 86% 76% 88% 60% 81% 80% 79% 79% 84% 81% 81% 78% 79% 83% 80%
___________________ h J
Extremely 488 258 230 207 186 95 263 225 402 87 272 95 121 382 106 231 143 114 183 185 119
attractive (4) 49% 47% 51% 49% 52% 44% 54% 44% 55% 33% 51% 50% 44% 49% 47% 47% 49% 53% 45% 54% 51%
J
Very attractive (3) 316 188 128 138 102 76 155 161 243 73 165 57 94 232 84 166 95 55 141 102 67
32% 34% 29% 32% 28% 35% 32% 31% 33% 28% 31% 30% 34% 30% 37% 34% 32% 26% 35% 30% 29%
NET: SOMEWHAT/NOT 196 106 90 81 71 43 71 125 91 105 101 37 58 160 36 93 56 47 84 57 47

ATTRACTIVE 20% 19% 20% 19% 20% 20% 14% 24% 12% 40% 19% 20% 21% 21% 16% 19% 19% 22% 21% 17% 20%
_________________ g I
Somewhat 174 94 80 71 64 40 65 110 87 87 95 30 49 141 33 84 48 42 80 46 41

attractive (2) 17% 17% 18% 17% 18% 18% 13% 21% 12% 33% 18% 16% 18% 18% 15% 17% 16% 19% 20% 13% 18%
g I
Not attractive (1) 22 12 10 10 8 4 6 15 4 18 6 7 8 19 3 9 7 6 4 10 6

2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 1% 3% *% 7% 1% 4% 3% 2% 1% 2% 3% 3% 1% 3% 3%
MEAN 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.2 3.4 3.2 3.4 2.9 3.3 3.3 3.2 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.2 3.3 3.3
h J


Page 28
(Continued)
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
MEDIAN 3.0 3.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 4.0


Page 29
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
TOTAL 1000 552 448 426 360 214 489 511 735 265 538 189 273 774 226 490 294 216 408 343 232
100% 55% 45% 43% 36% 21% 49% 51% 73% 27% 54% 19% 27% 77% 23% 49% 29% 22% 41% 34% 23%
ATTRACTIVE 84% 81% 88% 83% 84% 86% 83% 85% 90% 66% 82% 86% 88% 83% 88% 83% 82% 89% 80% 88% 85%
___________________ J
Extremely 603 290 313 251 226 126 295 308 501 102 307 120 177 465 138 279 166 159 216 235 145
attractive (4) 60% 53% 70% 59% 63% 59% 60% 60% 68% 39% 57% 63% 65% 60% 61% 57% 56% 73% 53% 69% 63%
B J PQ s
Very attractive (3) 238 156 81 102 77 59 112 125 164 73 133 43 63 178 60 127 76 34 112 65 52
24% 28% 18% 24% 21% 28% 23% 25% 22% 28% 25% 23% 23% 23% 27% 26% 26% 16% 27% 19% 23%
c
NET: SOMEWHAT/NOT 159 106 54 73 57 29 81 78 70 89 99 27 34 131 28 84 52 23 80 43 35

ATTRACTIVE 16% 19% 12% 17% 16% 14% 17% 15% 10% 34% 18% 14% 12% 17% 12% 17% 18% 11% 20% 12% 15%
_________________ I
Somewhat 125 78 47 48 51 26 76 49 60 65 77 19 29 104 21 66 40 19 60 32 31

attractive (2) 12% 14% 11% 11% 14% 12% 15% 10% 8% 24% 14% 10% 10% 13% 9% 13% 14% 9% 15% 9% 14%
I
Not attractive (1) 34 28 6 25 6 4 6 29 10 24 22 8 5 27 7 19 12 4 20 10 3

3% 5% 1% 6% 2% 2% 1% 6% 1% 9% 4% 4% 2% 4% 3% 4% 4% 2% 5% 3% 1%
g


Page 30
(Continued)
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
MEAN 3.4 3.3 3.6 3.4 3.5 3.4 3.4 3.4 3.6 3.0 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.4 3.5 3.4 3.3 3.6 3.3 3.5 3.5
B J pq s
MEDIAN 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0


Page 31
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
TOTAL 1000 552 448 426 360 214 489 511 735 265 538 189 273 774 226 490 294 216 408 343 232
100% 55% 45% 43% 36% 21% 49% 51% 73% 27% 54% 19% 27% 77% 23% 49% 29% 22% 41% 34% 23%
ATTRACTIVE 73% 75% 71% 71% 76% 73% 74% 72% 79% 57% 75% 65% 75% 74% 72% 70% 76% 75% 69% 76% 77%
___________________ J
Extremely 357 201 157 162 125 71 184 173 275 83 198 59 100 273 84 179 92 87 152 121 84
attractive (4) 36% 36% 35% 38% 35% 33% 38% 34% 37% 31% 37% 31% 37% 35% 37% 36% 31% 40% 37% 35% 36%
Very attractive (3) 374 212 162 140 149 85 177 197 306 68 206 64 105 296 78 166 132 76 128 141 95
37% 38% 36% 33% 42% 40% 36% 39% 42% 26% 38% 34% 38% 38% 35% 34% 45% 35% 31% 41% 41%
j
NET: SOMEWHAT/NOT 268 139 129 125 85 58 127 141 154 114 135 65 68 205 63 145 70 53 128 81 54
ATTRACTIVE 27% 25% 29% 29% 24% 27% 26% 28% 21% 43% 25% 35% 25% 26% 28% 30% 24% 25% 31% 24% 23%
_________________ I
Somewhat 230 122 109 111 68 52 112 118 140 91 118 55 58 174 57 128 63 39 117 67 44
attractive (2) 23% 22% 24% 26% 19% 24% 23% 23% 19% 34% 22% 29% 21% 22% 25% 26% 21% 18% 29% 20% 19%
i
Not attractive (1) 38 17 21 14 17 7 15 23 14 24 18 10 10 31 7 17 7 14 10 14 10

4% 3% 5% 3% 5% 3% 3% 4% 2% 9% 3% 5% 4% 4% 3% 3% 2% 6% 3% 4% 4%
MEAN 3.1 3.1 3.0 3.1 3.1 3.0 3.1 3.0 3.1 2.8 3.1 2.9 3.1 3.0 3.1 3.0 3.1 3.1 3.0 3.1 3.1
j


Page 32
(Continued)
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
MEDIAN 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0


Page 33
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
TOTAL 1000 552 448 426 360 214 489 511 735 265 538 189 273 774 226 490 294 216 408 343 232
100% 55% 45% 43% 36% 21% 49% 51% 73% 27% 54% 19% 27% 77% 23% 49% 29% 22% 41% 34% 23%
ATTRACTIVE 83% 83% 82% 85% 81% 81% 82% 83% 87% 70% 83% 78% 85% 82% 85% 80% 86% 84% 83% 83% 83%
___________________ j
Extremely 497 246 251 197 188 113 258 240 404 93 267 85 145 384 114 224 147 127 183 199 112
attractive (4) 50% 45% 56% 46% 52% 53% 53% 47% 55% 35% 50% 45% 53% 50% 50% 46% 50% 59% 45% 58% 48%
J
Very attractive (3) 328 212 116 163 103 62 145 183 236 92 180 62 87 250 78 168 105 55 155 85 80
33% 38% 26% 38% 29% 29% 30% 36% 32% 35% 33% 33% 32% 32% 34% 34% 36% 25% 38% 25% 34%
c
NET: SOMEWHAT/NOT 174 93 81 66 69 40 86 89 94 80 91 42 41 139 35 98 42 35 70 59 40

ATTRACTIVE 17% 17% 18% 15% 19% 19% 18% 17% 13% 30% 17% 22% 15% 18% 15% 20% 14% 16% 17% 17% 17%
_________________ i
Somewhat 153 82 72 58 58 36 80 73 88 65 83 36 34 121 33 89 35 30 65 50 33

attractive (2) 15% 15% 16% 14% 16% 17% 16% 14% 12% 25% 15% 19% 13% 16% 14% 18% 12% 14% 16% 15% 14%
i
Not attractive (1) 21 12 9 8 10 3 6 15 6 15 8 7 6 19 2 9 7 5 5 9 7

2% 2% 2% 2% 3% 2% 1% 3% 1% 6% 2% 4% 2% 2% 1% 2% 2% 2% 1% 3% 3%
MEAN 3.3 3.3 3.4 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.4 3.0 3.3 3.2 3.4 3.3 3.3 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.3 3.4 3.3
J


Page 34
(Continued)
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
MEDIAN 3.0 3.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 3.0


Page 35
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
TOTAL 1000 552 448 426 360 214 489 511 735 265 538 189 273 774 226 490 294 216 408 343 232
100% 55% 45% 43% 36% 21% 49% 51% 73% 27% 54% 19% 27% 77% 23% 49% 29% 22% 41% 34% 23%
ATTRACTIVE 84% 85% 83% 84% 83% 86% 85% 83% 90% 68% 84% 82% 85% 84% 83% 82% 85% 89% 78% 90% 85%
___________________ J s
Extremely 620 320 300 273 223 124 313 307 507 114 327 123 171 472 148 286 181 153 228 239 145
attractive (4) 62% 58% 67% 64% 62% 58% 64% 60% 69% 43% 61% 65% 63% 61% 65% 58% 62% 71% 56% 70% 62%
J
Very attractive (3) 221 148 73 85 76 59 102 119 154 67 127 32 62 181 40 115 68 39 92 72 52
22% 27% 16% 20% 21% 28% 21% 23% 21% 25% 24% 17% 23% 23% 18% 23% 23% 18% 23% 21% 23%
c
NET: SOMEWHAT/NOT 159 84 75 67 61 31 74 85 74 85 85 34 40 121 38 90 45 24 88 33 35

ATTRACTIVE 16% 15% 17% 16% 17% 14% 15% 17% 10% 32% 16% 18% 15% 16% 17% 18% 15% 11% 22% 10% 15%
_________________ I t
Somewhat 138 74 64 61 52 26 68 70 68 70 79 28 31 106 32 78 41 19 80 26 33

attractive (2) 14% 13% 14% 14% 14% 12% 14% 14% 9% 26% 15% 15% 11% 14% 14% 16% 14% 9% 20% 7% 14%
I t
Not attractive (1) 20 10 11 7 9 5 6 14 6 15 5 6 9 14 6 11 4 6 8 7 3

2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 1% 3% 1% 6% 1% 3% 3% 2% 3% 2% 1% 3% 2% 2% 1%
MEAN 3.4 3.4 3.5 3.5 3.4 3.4 3.5 3.4 3.6 3.1 3.4 3.4 3.4 3.4 3.5 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.3 3.6 3.5
J s


Page 36
(Continued)
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
MEDIAN 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0


Page 37
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
TOTAL 1000 552 448 426 360 214 489 511 735 265 538 189 273 774 226 490 294 216 408 343 232
100% 55% 45% 43% 36% 21% 49% 51% 73% 27% 54% 19% 27% 77% 23% 49% 29% 22% 41% 34% 23%
ATTRACTIVE 82% 80% 83% 81% 84% 80% 85% 78% 86% 68% 81% 83% 81% 80% 86% 79% 84% 83% 79% 85% 83%
___________________ j
Extremely 530 268 262 224 203 104 283 247 432 98 281 105 144 395 135 251 158 121 199 206 121
attractive (4) 53% 49% 58% 52% 56% 48% 58% 48% 59% 37% 52% 56% 53% 51% 60% 51% 54% 56% 49% 60% 52%
J
Very attractive (3) 285 174 112 121 97 67 135 151 202 84 157 51 77 226 59 138 89 58 123 84 73
29% 32% 25% 28% 27% 31% 28% 30% 27% 32% 29% 27% 28% 29% 26% 28% 30% 27% 30% 25% 32%
NET: SOMEWHAT/NOT 184 110 75 81 59 44 71 113 101 84 100 33 52 152 32 101 46 37 86 52 39

ATTRACTIVE 18% 20% 17% 19% 16% 20% 15% 22% 14% 32% 19% 17% 19% 20% 14% 21% 16% 17% 21% 15% 17%
_________________ i
Somewhat 156 92 64 69 49 39 61 95 90 66 90 21 44 129 27 81 42 33 72 42 34

attractive (2) 16% 17% 14% 16% 13% 18% 13% 18% 12% 25% 17% 11% 16% 17% 12% 17% 14% 15% 18% 12% 15%
i
Not attractive (1) 28 18 11 13 11 5 10 19 11 17 9 11 8 23 5 19 4 5 13 10 4

3% 3% 2% 3% 3% 2% 2% 4% 1% 7% 2% 6% 3% 3% 2% 4% 2% 2% 3% 3% 2%
MEAN 3.3 3.3 3.4 3.3 3.4 3.3 3.4 3.2 3.4 3.0 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.4 3.3 3.4 3.4 3.2 3.4 3.3
h J


Page 38
(Continued)
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
MEDIAN 4.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 4.0


Page 39
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
TOTAL 1000 552 448 426 360 214 489 511 735 265 538 189 273 774 226 490 294 216 408 343 232
100% 55% 45% 43% 36% 21% 49% 51% 73% 27% 54% 19% 27% 77% 23% 49% 29% 22% 41% 34% 23%
ATTRACTIVE 81% 79% 83% 80% 81% 82% 84% 78% 88% 63% 83% 80% 78% 81% 83% 79% 83% 82% 81% 83% 80%
___________________ J
Extremely 508 264 244 220 191 97 271 236 430 77 275 97 136 395 113 234 150 123 198 195 112
attractive (4) 51% 48% 54% 52% 53% 45% 55% 46% 59% 29% 51% 51% 50% 51% 50% 48% 51% 57% 48% 57% 48%
J
Very attractive (3) 303 173 130 123 102 79 139 165 214 89 173 54 76 229 75 155 95 54 132 91 74
30% 31% 29% 29% 28% 37% 28% 32% 29% 34% 32% 28% 28% 30% 33% 32% 32% 25% 32% 26% 32%
NET: SOMEWHAT/NOT 189 114 74 83 67 39 79 110 90 99 90 38 60 150 38 101 49 39 78 57 47

ATTRACTIVE 19% 21% 17% 20% 19% 18% 16% 22% 12% 37% 17% 20% 22% 19% 17% 21% 17% 18% 19% 17% 20%
_________________ I
Somewhat 165 102 63 74 57 34 72 93 85 80 84 31 51 130 35 91 41 33 73 46 41

attractive (2) 17% 19% 14% 17% 16% 16% 15% 18% 12% 30% 16% 16% 19% 17% 15% 19% 14% 15% 18% 13% 17%
I
Not attractive (1) 24 12 12 9 10 5 7 17 5 19 7 7 10 20 4 9 7 7 6 11 6

2% 2% 3% 2% 3% 2% 1% 3% 1% 7% 1% 4% 4% 3% 2% 2% 3% 3% 1% 3% 3%
MEAN 3.3 3.2 3.4 3.3 3.3 3.2 3.4 3.2 3.5 2.9 3.3 3.3 3.2 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.4 3.3 3.4 3.3
J


Page 40
(Continued)
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
MEDIAN 4.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 3.0


Page 41
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
TOTAL 1000 552 448 426 360 214 489 511 735 265 538 189 273 774 226 490 294 216 408 343 232
100% 55% 45% 43% 36% 21% 49% 51% 73% 27% 54% 19% 27% 77% 23% 49% 29% 22% 41% 34% 23%
NET: GOOD IDEA 877 464 413 367 314 196 455 422 707 169 466 171 240 670 207 428 257 192 355 300 212
______________ 88% 84% 92% 86% 87% 91% 93% 82% 96% 64% 87% 90% 88% 87% 92% 87% 88% 89% 87% 87% 91%
b H J
Very good idea (4) 495 276 219 216 177 101 281 214 434 61 267 99 129 384 111 239 145 110 189 184 119
49% 50% 49% 51% 49% 47% 57% 42% 59% 23% 50% 52% 47% 50% 49% 49% 49% 51% 46% 54% 51%
H J
Somewhat good idea (3) 382 188 194 151 137 95 175 208 273 109 199 72 111 286 96 189 112 82 165 116 92
38% 34% 43% 35% 38% 44% 36% 41% 37% 41% 37% 38% 41% 37% 42% 38% 38% 38% 41% 34% 40%
NET: POOR IDEA 123 88 35 59 46 18 34 90 28 96 73 18 32 104 19 62 37 24 53 43 21

______________ 12% 16% 8% 14% 13% 9% 7% 18% 4% 36% 13% 10% 12% 13% 8% 13% 12% 11% 13% 13% 9%
c G I
Somewhat poor idea (2) 89 69 20 44 34 10 27 62 27 61 59 8 22 76 13 43 31 14 40 31 12

9% 13% 4% 10% 10% 5% 6% 12% 4% 23% 11% 4% 8% 10% 6% 9% 11% 6% 10% 9% 5%
c G I
Very poor idea (1) 35 19 16 15 12 8 7 28 0 34 14 11 10 28 7 19 5 10 13 12 9

3% 3% 3% 3% 3% 4% 1% 5% *% 13% 3% 6% 4% 4% 3% 4% 2% 5% 3% 3% 4%
g I
MEAN 3.3 3.3 3.4 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.5 3.2 3.6 2.7 3.3 3.4 3.3 3.3 3.4 3.3 3.4 3.4 3.3 3.4 3.4
H J


Page 42
(Continued)
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
MEDIAN 3.0 3.0 3.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 4.0


Page 43
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
TOTAL 1000 552 448 426 360 214 489 511 735 265 538 189 273 774 226 490 294 216 408 343 232
100% 55% 45% 43% 36% 21% 49% 51% 73% 27% 54% 19% 27% 77% 23% 49% 29% 22% 41% 34% 23%
(B) Serious illness on 324 183 141 161 106 57 173 151 223 101 170 69 85 247 77 158 92 73 138 109 72
your part 32% 33% 31% 38% 29% 27% 35% 30% 30% 38% 32% 36% 31% 32% 34% 32% 31% 34% 34% 32% 31%
(D) Death of a spouse 316 176 140 167 98 51 208 108 232 84 197 53 66 250 66 166 89 62 122 133 58
32% 32% 31% 39% 27% 24% 43% 21% 32% 32% 37% 28% 24% 32% 29% 34% 30% 29% 30% 39% 25%
f H m u
(A) Loss of a job 284 155 129 125 98 61 162 122 192 91 164 57 63 225 59 138 92 53 112 107 61
28% 28% 29% 29% 27% 28% 33% 24% 26% 34% 30% 30% 23% 29% 26% 28% 31% 25% 27% 31% 26%
(C) Spouse or other 264 136 128 128 87 50 158 106 195 69 140 50 73 207 57 115 85 64 100 102 59
family member becomes 26% 25% 29% 30% 24% 23% 32% 21% 27% 26% 26% 27% 27% 27% 25% 23% 29% 30% 25% 30% 26%
seriously ill h
(F) Home purchase 177 103 73 91 65 21 119 58 108 68 104 37 36 144 32 93 56 27 73 63 35

18% 19% 16% 21% 18% 10% 24% 11% 15% 26% 19% 19% 13% 19% 14% 19% 19% 13% 18% 18% 15%
f H
(E) Birth of a child 156 106 50 99 47 10 112 44 98 58 99 30 27 117 40 102 31 23 81 48 25

16% 19% 11% 23% 13% 4% 23% 9% 13% 22% 18% 16% 10% 15% 18% 21% 10% 11% 20% 14% 11%
c eF f H m qr u


Page 44
(Continued)
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
(H) Tuition for 129 85 44 65 51 13 98 30 91 37 80 30 18 99 30 77 37 15 58 53 16

schooling 13% 15% 10% 15% 14% 6% 20% 6% 12% 14% 15% 16% 7% 13% 13% 16% 12% 7% 14% 16% 7%
f f H M M r U
(G) Other large purchase 124 77 47 57 52 15 90 34 74 50 77 29 17 103 21 64 40 21 40 51 26

or expense, such as 12% 14% 11% 13% 14% 7% 18% 7% 10% 19% 14% 16% 6% 13% 9% 13% 13% 10% 10% 15% 11%
buying a car or taking a H i M M
vacation


Page 45
(A) Loss of a job
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
TOTAL 1000 552 448 426 360 214 489 511 735 265 538 189 273 774 226 490 294 216 408 343 232
100% 55% 45% 43% 36% 21% 49% 51% 73% 27% 54% 19% 27% 77% 23% 49% 29% 22% 41% 34% 23%
NET: MUST HAVE/WOULD BE 782 409 373 336 280 166 399 383 620 162 427 143 213 607 176 380 244 158 317 280 173
NICE TO HAVE 78% 74% 83% 79% 78% 77% 82% 75% 84% 61% 79% 76% 78% 78% 78% 78% 83% 73% 78% 82% 74%
_______________________ J
Must have or won't 284 155 129 125 98 61 162 122 192 91 164 57 63 225 59 138 92 53 112 107 61
participate 28% 28% 29% 29% 27% 28% 33% 24% 26% 34% 30% 30% 23% 29% 26% 28% 31% 25% 27% 31% 26%
Would be nice to have 498 254 244 211 182 105 237 261 428 71 263 86 149 381 117 242 152 105 205 173 112
access 50% 46% 55% 50% 50% 49% 48% 51% 58% 27% 49% 45% 55% 49% 52% 49% 52% 48% 50% 51% 48%
J
NET: DON'T CARE/DO NOT 167 117 50 75 48 45 53 115 94 73 79 34 54 129 38 70 45 52 57 54 54

NEED 17% 21% 11% 18% 13% 21% 11% 22% 13% 28% 15% 18% 20% 17% 17% 14% 15% 24% 14% 16% 23%
______________________ c G i
Don't care either way 107 74 33 52 31 24 37 70 51 56 56 21 31 84 23 56 30 21 48 33 24

11% 13% 7% 12% 9% 11% 8% 14% 7% 21% 10% 11% 11% 11% 10% 12% 10% 10% 12% 9% 11%
I
Do not need access 60 43 17 23 17 21 15 45 43 17 23 14 24 45 15 14 16 31 10 21 30

6% 8% 4% 5% 5% 10% 3% 9% 6% 6% 4% 7% 9% 6% 7% 3% 5% 14% 2% 6% 13%
g Pq S


Page 46
(Continued)
(A) Loss of a job
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
Not applicable 51 26 25 14 32 4 37 13 21 30 33 12 6 38 13 40 5 6 34 9 5
5% 5% 6% 3% 9% 2% 8% 3% 3% 11% 6% 6% 2% 5% 6% 8% 2% 3% 8% 3% 2%
dF h i m Qr tu


Page 47
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
TOTAL 1000 552 448 426 360 214 489 511 735 265 538 189 273 774 226 490 294 216 408 343 232
100% 55% 45% 43% 36% 21% 49% 51% 73% 27% 54% 19% 27% 77% 23% 49% 29% 22% 41% 34% 23%
NICE TO HAVE 83% 81% 86% 88% 80% 78% 83% 84% 87% 73% 84% 80% 85% 84% 82% 85% 80% 84% 83% 86% 80%
_______________________ j
Must have or won't 324 183 141 161 106 57 173 151 223 101 170 69 85 247 77 158 92 73 138 109 72
participate 32% 33% 31% 38% 29% 27% 35% 30% 30% 38% 32% 36% 31% 32% 34% 32% 31% 34% 34% 32% 31%
access 51% 48% 54% 51% 51% 52% 47% 54% 57% 35% 52% 43% 53% 52% 48% 53% 48% 50% 50% 54% 49%
J

NEED 12% 14% 9% 9% 11% 18% 9% 14% 10% 15% 9% 15% 13% 11% 13% 6% 19% 13% 7% 12% 18%
______________________ P s

9% 11% 6% 6% 8% 14% 8% 10% 8% 12% 8% 11% 9% 8% 12% 5% 16% 8% 6% 8% 12%
Pr

3% 3% 3% 3% 3% 4% 2% 4% 3% 3% 2% 4% 4% 3% 2% 1% 3% 6% 1% 3% 5%


Page 48
(Continued)
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
Not applicable 52 26 26 11 32 8 39 13 19 33 36 10 6 40 11 42 3 7 38 7 6
5% 5% 6% 3% 9% 4% 8% 3% 3% 12% 7% 5% 2% 5% 5% 9% 1% 3% 9% 2% 3%
D h i Qr TU


Page 49
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
TOTAL 1000 552 448 426 360 214 489 511 735 265 538 189 273 774 226 490 294 216 408 343 232
100% 55% 45% 43% 36% 21% 49% 51% 73% 27% 54% 19% 27% 77% 23% 49% 29% 22% 41% 34% 23%
NICE TO HAVE 80% 77% 83% 83% 77% 79% 86% 75% 87% 60% 79% 82% 80% 79% 82% 80% 80% 80% 80% 81% 81%
_______________________ h J
Must have or won't 264 136 128 128 87 50 158 106 195 69 140 50 73 207 57 115 85 64 100 102 59
participate 26% 25% 29% 30% 24% 23% 32% 21% 27% 26% 26% 27% 27% 27% 25% 23% 29% 30% 25% 30% 26%
h
access 54% 53% 55% 53% 53% 55% 53% 54% 61% 34% 53% 55% 53% 53% 56% 56% 51% 50% 55% 51% 55%
J

NEED 14% 16% 11% 12% 15% 15% 9% 18% 11% 23% 12% 14% 16% 13% 16% 10% 17% 16% 11% 15% 15%
______________________ g

10% 12% 7% 10% 10% 9% 7% 12% 6% 20% 9% 8% 12% 8% 14% 9% 11% 9% 10% 9% 9%
I

4% 4% 4% 2% 5% 6% 2% 6% 5% 2% 3% 6% 5% 5% 3% 2% 6% 8% 1% 7% 6%
p


Page 50
(Continued)
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
Not applicable 63 36 27 20 29 13 26 37 16 46 45 7 10 59 4 47 8 8 39 13 10
6% 6% 6% 5% 8% 6% 5% 7% 2% 17% 8% 4% 4% 8% 2% 10% 3% 3% 10% 4% 4%
I o q


Page 51
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
TOTAL 1000 552 448 426 360 214 489 511 735 265 538 189 273 774 226 490 294 216 408 343 232
100% 55% 45% 43% 36% 21% 49% 51% 73% 27% 54% 19% 27% 77% 23% 49% 29% 22% 41% 34% 23%
NICE TO HAVE 76% 72% 80% 84% 69% 71% 83% 69% 80% 63% 77% 79% 72% 75% 77% 74% 79% 75% 74% 79% 74%
_______________________ Ef H j
Must have or won't 316 176 140 167 98 51 208 108 232 84 197 53 66 250 66 166 89 62 122 133 58
participate 32% 32% 31% 39% 27% 24% 43% 21% 32% 32% 37% 28% 24% 32% 29% 34% 30% 29% 30% 39% 25%
f H m u
access 44% 40% 49% 45% 41% 47% 41% 48% 49% 31% 40% 50% 48% 43% 48% 40% 49% 47% 44% 40% 49%
j

NEED 15% 19% 11% 13% 17% 18% 9% 22% 13% 22% 12% 16% 22% 15% 15% 13% 17% 17% 14% 14% 19%
______________________ G k

10% 12% 7% 8% 13% 9% 7% 12% 8% 14% 7% 10% 15% 9% 11% 10% 11% 8% 10% 8% 11%
k

6% 7% 4% 5% 4% 9% 2% 9% 5% 8% 5% 6% 7% 6% 5% 4% 6% 9% 4% 6% 7%
G


Page 52
(Continued)
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
Not applicable 89 47 42 12 53 24 39 50 48 40 60 11 18 72 16 61 11 17 47 23 18
9% 9% 9% 3% 15% 11% 8% 10% 7% 15% 11% 6% 7% 9% 7% 12% 4% 8% 12% 7% 8%
D d q


Page 53
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
TOTAL 1000 552 448 426 360 214 489 511 735 265 538 189 273 774 226 490 294 216 408 343 232
100% 55% 45% 43% 36% 21% 49% 51% 73% 27% 54% 19% 27% 77% 23% 49% 29% 22% 41% 34% 23%
NICE TO HAVE 51% 56% 46% 66% 51% 23% 62% 40% 53% 45% 52% 50% 50% 50% 55% 61% 42% 40% 57% 55% 37%
_______________________ eF F H QR U U
Must have or won't 156 106 50 99 47 10 112 44 98 58 99 30 27 117 40 102 31 23 81 48 25

participate 16% 19% 11% 23% 13% 4% 23% 9% 13% 22% 18% 16% 10% 15% 18% 21% 10% 11% 20% 14% 11%
c eF f H m qr u
access 36% 36% 35% 42% 38% 18% 39% 32% 40% 23% 34% 34% 40% 35% 37% 41% 32% 29% 38% 41% 26%
F F J u
NEED 34% 33% 35% 31% 28% 49% 26% 41% 34% 34% 31% 38% 36% 35% 32% 23% 48% 39% 27% 32% 45%
______________________ dE g P p st

18% 19% 17% 15% 18% 23% 15% 20% 18% 18% 16% 20% 20% 18% 17% 14% 26% 17% 15% 15% 25%
p t

16% 15% 18% 16% 11% 26% 11% 21% 16% 15% 15% 18% 16% 16% 15% 10% 22% 22% 12% 17% 20%
E g p p


Page 54
(Continued)
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
Not applicable 149 62 87 13 75 61 54 94 92 57 88 22 39 118 31 75 28 46 61 45 42

15% 11% 19% 3% 21% 29% 11% 18% 13% 21% 16% 12% 14% 15% 14% 15% 10% 21% 15% 13% 18%
D D q


Page 55
(F) Home purchase
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
TOTAL 1000 552 448 426 360 214 489 511 735 265 538 189 273 774 226 490 294 216 408 343 232
100% 55% 45% 43% 36% 21% 49% 51% 73% 27% 54% 19% 27% 77% 23% 49% 29% 22% 41% 34% 23%
NICE TO HAVE 65% 66% 64% 74% 63% 50% 72% 58% 69% 55% 67% 63% 62% 66% 62% 69% 64% 57% 68% 66% 58%
_______________________ F h
Must have or won't 177 103 73 91 65 21 119 58 108 68 104 37 36 144 32 93 56 27 73 63 35

participate 18% 19% 16% 21% 18% 10% 24% 11% 15% 26% 19% 19% 13% 19% 14% 19% 19% 13% 18% 18% 15%
f H
access 47% 47% 47% 53% 45% 40% 48% 47% 54% 29% 48% 44% 48% 47% 47% 50% 45% 44% 50% 47% 43%
J
NEED 29% 29% 28% 23% 29% 39% 22% 35% 28% 31% 26% 31% 32% 27% 34% 23% 32% 37% 23% 30% 36%
______________________ d g p

16% 19% 12% 15% 19% 14% 12% 19% 14% 21% 14% 18% 18% 14% 24% 15% 18% 17% 16% 13% 20%
n

13% 10% 16% 9% 10% 25% 9% 16% 13% 10% 12% 13% 14% 13% 10% 8% 14% 20% 7% 17% 16%
DE p s


Page 56
(Continued)
(F) Home purchase
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
Not applicable 64 28 36 11 29 24 31 33 28 36 36 12 16 54 10 41 11 12 35 14 14
6% 5% 8% 3% 8% 11% 6% 6% 4% 14% 7% 6% 6% 7% 4% 8% 4% 6% 9% 4% 6%
d i


Page 57
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
TOTAL 1000 552 448 426 360 214 489 511 735 265 538 189 273 774 226 490 294 216 408 343 232
100% 55% 45% 43% 36% 21% 49% 51% 73% 27% 54% 19% 27% 77% 23% 49% 29% 22% 41% 34% 23%
NICE TO HAVE 44% 43% 44% 48% 45% 32% 53% 34% 46% 35% 47% 46% 36% 42% 48% 52% 42% 27% 51% 42% 32%
_______________________ f H R r U
Must have or won't 124 77 47 57 52 15 90 34 74 50 77 29 17 103 21 64 40 21 40 51 26

participate 12% 14% 11% 13% 14% 7% 18% 7% 10% 19% 14% 16% 6% 13% 9% 13% 13% 10% 10% 15% 11%
H i M M
access 31% 29% 34% 35% 31% 25% 35% 28% 36% 17% 32% 30% 30% 29% 38% 39% 29% 17% 41% 27% 21%
J R r tU
NEED 49% 51% 48% 47% 45% 62% 39% 60% 49% 50% 47% 48% 55% 51% 45% 39% 56% 66% 40% 53% 61%
______________________ de G p P S
24% 31% 17% 26% 22% 24% 21% 28% 21% 34% 29% 17% 22% 25% 23% 25% 25% 22% 26% 20% 28%
C l
25% 20% 31% 21% 23% 37% 18% 32% 28% 16% 19% 31% 34% 26% 22% 13% 31% 43% 14% 33% 33%
b de G K P P S S


Page 58
(Continued)
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
Not applicable 70 34 36 22 35 13 39 31 31 39 33 13 23 53 17 47 6 17 37 16 16
7% 6% 8% 5% 10% 6% 8% 6% 4% 15% 6% 7% 9% 7% 8% 10% 2% 8% 9% 5% 7%
i q


Page 59
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
TOTAL 1000 552 448 426 360 214 489 511 735 265 538 189 273 774 226 490 294 216 408 343 232
100% 55% 45% 43% 36% 21% 49% 51% 73% 27% 54% 19% 27% 77% 23% 49% 29% 22% 41% 34% 23%
NICE TO HAVE 49% 48% 50% 58% 50% 30% 62% 37% 53% 39% 52% 51% 42% 50% 47% 56% 48% 36% 54% 53% 36%
_______________________ F F H R U U
Must have or won't 129 85 44 65 51 13 98 30 91 37 80 30 18 99 30 77 37 15 58 53 16

participate 13% 15% 10% 15% 14% 6% 20% 6% 12% 14% 15% 16% 7% 13% 13% 16% 12% 7% 14% 16% 7%
f f H M M r U
access 36% 33% 41% 43% 36% 24% 41% 32% 40% 25% 38% 35% 35% 37% 34% 40% 36% 29% 40% 37% 29%
F j
NEED 40% 43% 36% 38% 38% 47% 30% 50% 39% 43% 37% 38% 48% 38% 45% 31% 45% 53% 34% 37% 54%
______________________ G P St
23% 26% 19% 20% 26% 23% 20% 26% 22% 25% 22% 22% 26% 21% 30% 20% 25% 26% 21% 20% 31%

17% 17% 17% 18% 12% 23% 10% 24% 17% 18% 15% 16% 22% 18% 15% 11% 19% 27% 13% 17% 23%
G P


Page 60
(Continued)
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
Not applicable 109 48 61 16 44 49 43 66 62 47 59 21 29 92 17 65 20 24 50 33 24

11% 9% 14% 4% 12% 23% 9% 13% 8% 18% 11% 11% 11% 12% 8% 13% 7% 11% 12% 10% 10%
d D


Page 61
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
TOTAL 1000 552 448 426 360 214 489 511 735 265 538 189 273 774 226 490 294 216 408 343 232
100% 55% 45% 43% 36% 21% 49% 51% 73% 27% 54% 19% 27% 77% 23% 49% 29% 22% 41% 34% 23%
(A) When you first start 397 227 171 201 120 76 221 177 284 113 242 65 91 293 104 221 102 75 187 125 74
contributing to the plan 40% 41% 38% 47% 33% 36% 45% 35% 39% 43% 45% 34% 33% 38% 46% 45% 35% 35% 46% 37% 32%
e m u
(B) If you needed to 392 215 177 156 150 85 194 198 292 100 233 66 92 289 103 196 114 82 172 138 73
withdraw funds early 39% 39% 40% 37% 42% 40% 40% 39% 40% 38% 43% 35% 34% 37% 46% 40% 39% 38% 42% 40% 32%
(before retirement)
(E) If a spouse or other 387 212 175 177 133 77 200 187 291 95 244 63 79 308 79 200 104 82 154 151 73
family member died 39% 38% 39% 42% 37% 36% 41% 37% 40% 36% 45% 34% 29% 40% 35% 41% 36% 38% 38% 44% 32%
M u
(F) When you start 376 195 181 188 120 68 184 192 278 98 210 64 102 291 85 203 88 85 175 109 82
getting close to 38% 35% 40% 44% 33% 32% 38% 38% 38% 37% 39% 34% 37% 38% 38% 41% 30% 39% 43% 32% 35%
the savings in your
account
(G) When you are in 346 182 163 185 107 54 171 175 253 93 204 71 71 267 79 191 89 66 174 94 68
retirement and drawing 35% 33% 36% 43% 30% 25% 35% 34% 34% 35% 38% 37% 26% 35% 35% 39% 30% 30% 43% 27% 29%
down on the savings in eF m m t
your account


Page 62
(Continued)
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
(D) If you divorced 321 187 134 160 115 46 169 152 229 92 208 52 61 243 78 184 82 55 151 103 64
32% 34% 30% 38% 32% 21% 35% 30% 31% 35% 39% 28% 22% 31% 34% 38% 28% 25% 37% 30% 28%
f M r
(C) To add or subtract a 286 177 108 148 106 31 164 122 207 79 197 40 49 204 82 180 71 35 144 96 44
beneficiary, for 29% 32% 24% 35% 30% 15% 34% 24% 28% 30% 37% 21% 18% 26% 36% 37% 24% 16% 35% 28% 19%
example, after the birth F f lM qR U
married


Page 63
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
TOTAL 1000 552 448 426 360 214 489 511 735 265 538 189 273 774 226 490 294 216 408 343 232
100% 55% 45% 43% 36% 21% 49% 51% 73% 27% 54% 19% 27% 77% 23% 49% 29% 22% 41% 34% 23%
Phone 397 227 171 201 120 76 221 177 284 113 242 65 91 293 104 221 102 75 187 125 74
40% 41% 38% 47% 33% 36% 45% 35% 39% 43% 45% 34% 33% 38% 46% 45% 35% 35% 46% 37% 32%
e m u
Website/ email 478 263 215 177 198 102 229 248 369 109 249 85 143 383 94 217 152 109 176 169 128
48% 48% 48% 42% 55% 48% 47% 49% 50% 41% 46% 45% 53% 50% 42% 44% 52% 50% 43% 49% 55%
Online chat 51 28 23 31 11 9 15 36 40 12 11 22 19 41 11 18 20 13 15 21 14
5% 5% 5% 7% 3% 4% 3% 7% 5% 4% 2% 12% 7% 5% 5% 4% 7% 6% 4% 6% 6%
K
Mail (e.g., sending 74 34 40 17 30 27 24 50 43 31 37 17 19 56 17 34 20 19 30 28 16

letters, forms) 7% 6% 9% 4% 8% 13% 5% 10% 6% 12% 7% 9% 7% 7% 8% 7% 7% 9% 7% 8% 7%
d


Page 64
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
TOTAL 1000 552 448 426 360 214 489 511 735 265 538 189 273 774 226 490 294 216 408 343 232
100% 55% 45% 43% 36% 21% 49% 51% 73% 27% 54% 19% 27% 77% 23% 49% 29% 22% 41% 34% 23%
Phone 392 215 177 156 150 85 194 198 292 100 233 66 92 289 103 196 114 82 172 138 73
39% 39% 40% 37% 42% 40% 40% 39% 40% 38% 43% 35% 34% 37% 46% 40% 39% 38% 42% 40% 32%
Website/ email 514 288 226 232 175 107 264 249 375 138 271 93 149 419 95 252 149 112 195 179 132
51% 52% 50% 54% 49% 50% 54% 49% 51% 52% 50% 49% 55% 54% 42% 51% 51% 52% 48% 52% 57%
Online chat 47 28 19 23 16 8 13 35 38 9 12 16 19 34 14 17 18 13 16 13 18
5% 5% 4% 5% 5% 4% 3% 7% 5% 3% 2% 9% 7% 4% 6% 3% 6% 6% 4% 4% 8%
Mail (e.g., sending 47 21 26 15 18 14 18 29 29 17 21 13 12 33 14 26 12 9 25 13 9

letters, forms) 5% 4% 6% 4% 5% 7% 4% 6% 4% 7% 4% 7% 4% 4% 6% 5% 4% 4% 6% 4% 4%


Page 65
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
TOTAL 1000 552 448 426 360 214 489 511 735 265 538 189 273 774 226 490 294 216 408 343 232
100% 55% 45% 43% 36% 21% 49% 51% 73% 27% 54% 19% 27% 77% 23% 49% 29% 22% 41% 34% 23%
Phone 286 177 108 148 106 31 164 122 207 79 197 40 49 204 82 180 71 35 144 96 44
29% 32% 24% 35% 30% 15% 34% 24% 28% 30% 37% 21% 18% 26% 36% 37% 24% 16% 35% 28% 19%
F f lM qR U
Website/ email 567 292 274 223 189 155 256 311 439 128 262 114 191 452 115 220 187 159 183 204 167
57% 53% 61% 52% 52% 72% 52% 61% 60% 48% 49% 60% 70% 58% 51% 45% 64% 74% 45% 60% 72%
DE K P P s St
Online chat 77 45 32 35 36 6 37 40 39 38 44 17 16 68 9 54 15 8 49 15 11
8% 8% 7% 8% 10% 3% 8% 8% 5% 15% 8% 9% 6% 9% 4% 11% 5% 4% 12% 4% 5%
f i r tu
Mail (e.g., sending 71 37 34 20 29 22 32 38 51 20 35 18 17 50 20 36 20 14 32 28 11

letters, forms) 7% 7% 8% 5% 8% 10% 7% 7% 7% 8% 7% 10% 6% 6% 9% 7% 7% 7% 8% 8% 5%


Page 66
(D) If you divorced
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
TOTAL 1000 552 448 426 360 214 489 511 735 265 538 189 273 774 226 490 294 216 408 343 232
100% 55% 45% 43% 36% 21% 49% 51% 73% 27% 54% 19% 27% 77% 23% 49% 29% 22% 41% 34% 23%
Phone 321 187 134 160 115 46 169 152 229 92 208 52 61 243 78 184 82 55 151 103 64
32% 34% 30% 38% 32% 21% 35% 30% 31% 35% 39% 28% 22% 31% 34% 38% 28% 25% 37% 30% 28%
f M r
Website/ email 500 264 236 187 170 143 214 285 398 102 226 95 179 404 96 181 173 145 142 196 147
50% 48% 53% 44% 47% 67% 44% 56% 54% 38% 42% 50% 66% 52% 42% 37% 59% 67% 35% 57% 63%
DE g j KL P P S S
Online chat 66 34 32 33 28 4 29 37 31 35 38 14 13 56 10 44 16 6 43 11 11
7% 6% 7% 8% 8% 2% 6% 7% 4% 13% 7% 8% 5% 7% 4% 9% 6% 3% 10% 3% 5%
i r t
Mail (e.g., sending 114 67 46 46 46 21 76 37 77 37 66 28 19 71 42 81 22 10 71 33 9

letters, forms) 11% 12% 10% 11% 13% 10% 16% 7% 10% 14% 12% 15% 7% 9% 19% 17% 8% 5% 18% 10% 4%
h m n qR U


Page 67
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
TOTAL 1000 552 448 426 360 214 489 511 735 265 538 189 273 774 226 490 294 216 408 343 232
100% 55% 45% 43% 36% 21% 49% 51% 73% 27% 54% 19% 27% 77% 23% 49% 29% 22% 41% 34% 23%
Phone 387 212 175 177 133 77 200 187 291 95 244 63 79 308 79 200 104 82 154 151 73
39% 38% 39% 42% 37% 36% 41% 37% 40% 36% 45% 34% 29% 40% 35% 41% 36% 38% 38% 44% 32%
M u
Website/ email 469 242 228 178 172 120 212 258 361 109 215 93 160 361 108 201 148 120 178 150 134
47% 44% 51% 42% 48% 56% 43% 50% 49% 41% 40% 49% 59% 47% 48% 41% 51% 55% 44% 44% 58%
d K p t
Online chat 53 32 21 37 9 7 14 39 31 23 22 16 15 43 11 26 19 8 25 12 16
5% 6% 5% 9% 2% 3% 3% 8% 4% 9% 4% 9% 6% 5% 5% 5% 6% 4% 6% 4% 7%
g
Mail (e.g., sending 91 66 25 34 46 11 64 27 53 38 57 16 18 63 28 62 22 6 51 30 9

letters, forms) 9% 12% 6% 8% 13% 5% 13% 5% 7% 14% 11% 8% 7% 8% 12% 13% 8% 3% 13% 9% 4%
c f h R u


Page 68
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
TOTAL 1000 552 448 426 360 214 489 511 735 265 538 189 273 774 226 490 294 216 408 343 232
100% 55% 45% 43% 36% 21% 49% 51% 73% 27% 54% 19% 27% 77% 23% 49% 29% 22% 41% 34% 23%
Phone 376 195 181 188 120 68 184 192 278 98 210 64 102 291 85 203 88 85 175 109 82
38% 35% 40% 44% 33% 32% 38% 38% 38% 37% 39% 34% 37% 38% 38% 41% 30% 39% 43% 32% 35%
Website/ email 487 282 205 186 191 109 251 236 365 121 256 92 139 387 100 209 172 105 166 188 128
49% 51% 46% 44% 53% 51% 51% 46% 50% 46% 48% 49% 51% 50% 44% 43% 59% 49% 41% 55% 55%
p s
Online chat 62 36 26 30 16 17 12 51 38 24 31 11 20 45 17 35 14 14 32 18 12
6% 7% 6% 7% 4% 8% 2% 10% 5% 9% 6% 6% 7% 6% 8% 7% 5% 6% 8% 5% 5%
G
Mail (e.g., sending 75 39 36 22 33 20 43 32 54 21 41 22 12 51 24 43 20 12 34 29 10

letters, forms) 7% 7% 8% 5% 9% 9% 9% 6% 7% 8% 8% 12% 4% 7% 11% 9% 7% 6% 8% 8% 4%
m


Page 69
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
TOTAL 1000 552 448 426 360 214 489 511 735 265 538 189 273 774 226 490 294 216 408 343 232
100% 55% 45% 43% 36% 21% 49% 51% 73% 27% 54% 19% 27% 77% 23% 49% 29% 22% 41% 34% 23%
Phone 346 182 163 185 107 54 171 175 253 93 204 71 71 267 79 191 89 66 174 94 68
35% 33% 36% 43% 30% 25% 35% 34% 34% 35% 38% 37% 26% 35% 35% 39% 30% 30% 43% 27% 29%
eF m m t
Website/ email 553 316 238 209 212 133 278 276 406 148 288 93 172 438 116 241 183 129 190 215 144
55% 57% 53% 49% 59% 62% 57% 54% 55% 56% 54% 49% 63% 57% 51% 49% 62% 60% 46% 63% 62%
l s s
Online chat 42 25 17 18 18 7 15 27 36 6 15 11 16 30 12 23 10 9 20 12 9
4% 5% 4% 4% 5% 3% 3% 5% 5% 2% 3% 6% 6% 4% 5% 5% 3% 4% 5% 4% 4%
Mail (e.g., sending 59 28 30 15 24 20 25 34 40 18 31 15 13 39 20 34 12 12 25 22 11

letters, forms) 6% 5% 7% 3% 7% 10% 5% 7% 5% 7% 6% 8% 5% 5% 9% 7% 4% 6% 6% 6% 5%
d


Page 70
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
TOTAL 1000 552 448 426 360 214 489 511 735 265 538 189 273 774 226 490 294 216 408 343 232
100% 55% 45% 43% 36% 21% 49% 51% 73% 27% 54% 19% 27% 77% 23% 49% 29% 22% 41% 34% 23%
(A) When you first start 291 177 113 154 93 43 165 125 203 87 188 44 58 211 80 175 72 44 147 84 49
contributing to the plan 73% 78% 66% 77% 78% 57% 75% 71% 71% 77% 78% 68% 64% 72% 77% 79% 70% 59% 78% 67% 67%
(E) If a spouse or other 272 145 127 110 106 56 144 128 206 67 171 43 58 221 51 135 72 65 98 115 54
family member died 70% 68% 73% 62% 80% 73% 72% 69% 71% 70% 70% 67% 74% 72% 64% 68% 69% 80% 64% 77% 74%
(B) If you needed to 275 165 111 110 118 48 140 136 194 82 175 43 57 199 77 148 72 55 131 84 52
withdraw funds early 70% 77% 62% 70% 78% 56% 72% 68% 66% 81% 75% 64% 62% 69% 74% 76% 63% 68% 76% 61% 72%
(before retirement)
(C) To add or subtract a 196 128 68 88 85 23 114 82 129 68 139 22 36 133 63 125 47 25 89 76 31
beneficiary, for 69% 72% 63% 59% 80% 73% 69% 68% 62% 86% 71% 54% 73% 65% 77% 69% 65% 72% 62% 80% 70%
married
(G) When you are in 235 132 103 123 80 32 114 121 174 61 148 41 46 180 55 134 57 44 119 62 45
retirement and drawing 68% 72% 63% 66% 75% 59% 66% 69% 69% 65% 73% 57% 64% 67% 70% 70% 64% 67% 69% 66% 65%
your account


Page 71
(Continued)
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
(D) If you divorced 214 142 73 92 89 33 114 100 149 66 152 26 37 164 50 129 48 38 100 72 40
67% 76% 54% 58% 78% 71% 68% 66% 65% 72% 73% 49% 60% 68% 64% 70% 58% 69% 66% 70% 61%
c
(F) When you start 241 126 114 115 86 40 119 122 178 63 142 41 58 179 62 138 49 54 117 67 54
getting close to 64% 65% 63% 61% 72% 58% 65% 63% 64% 64% 68% 63% 57% 62% 72% 68% 55% 63% 67% 61% 66%
the savings in your
account


Page 72
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
TOTAL 397 227 171 201 120 76 221 177 284 113 242 65 91 293 104 221 102 75 187 125 74
100% 57% 43% 51% 30% 19% 56% 44% 71% 29% 61% 16% 23% 74% 26% 55% 26% 19% 47% 32% 19%
Yes 291 177 113 154 93 43 165 125 203 87 188 44 58 211 80 175 72 44 147 84 49
73% 78% 66% 77% 78% 57% 75% 71% 71% 77% 78% 68% 64% 72% 77% 79% 70% 59% 78% 67% 67%
No 107 49 58 47 27 33 56 51 81 26 53 21 33 83 24 45 31 31 40 41 24
27% 22% 34% 23% 22% 43% 25% 29% 29% 23% 22% 32% 36% 28% 23% 21% 30% 41% 22% 33% 33%


Page 73
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
TOTAL 392 215 177 156 150 85 194 198 292 100 233 66 92 289 103 196 114 82 172 138 73
100% 55% 45% 40% 38% 22% 49% 51% 74% 26% 60% 17% 24% 74% 26% 50% 29% 21% 44% 35% 19%
Yes 275 165 111 110 118 48 140 136 194 82 175 43 57 199 77 148 72 55 131 84 52
70% 77% 62% 70% 78% 56% 72% 68% 66% 81% 75% 64% 62% 69% 74% 76% 63% 68% 76% 61% 72%
No 117 50 67 46 33 38 54 62 98 19 58 24 35 90 26 48 42 26 41 54 21
30% 23% 38% 30% 22% 44% 28% 32% 34% 19% 25% 36% 38% 31% 26% 24% 37% 32% 24% 39% 28%


Page 74
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
TOTAL 286 177 108 148 106 31 164 122 207 79 197 40 49 204 82 180 71 35 144 96 44
100% 62% 38% 52% 37% 11% 57% 43% 72% 28% 69% 14% 17% 71% 29% 63% 25% 12% 50% 33% 15%
Yes 196 128 68 88 85 23 114 82 129 68 139 22 36 133 63 125 47 25 89 76 31

69% 72% 63% 59% 80% 73% 69% 68% 62% 86% 71% 54% 73% 65% 77% 69% 65% 72% 62% 80% 70%
No 90 49 40 60 21 8 50 39 78 11 58 18 13 71 19 55 25 10 55 19 13
31% 28% 37% 41% 20% 27% 31% 32% 38% 14% 29% 46% 27% 35% 23% 31% 35% 28% 38% 20% 30%


Page 75
(D) If you divorced
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
TOTAL 321 187 134 160 115 46 169 152 229 92 208 52 61 243 78 184 82 55 151 103 64
100% 58% 42% 50% 36% 14% 53% 47% 71% 29% 65% 16% 19% 76% 24% 57% 26% 17% 47% 32% 20%
Yes 214 142 73 92 89 33 114 100 149 66 152 26 37 164 50 129 48 38 100 72 40
67% 76% 54% 58% 78% 71% 68% 66% 65% 72% 73% 49% 60% 68% 64% 70% 58% 69% 66% 70% 61%
c
No 107 45 61 68 26 13 55 52 81 26 56 27 24 79 28 55 34 17 51 31 25
33% 24% 46% 42% 22% 29% 32% 34% 35% 28% 27% 51% 40% 32% 36% 30% 42% 31% 34% 30% 39%
b


Page 76
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
TOTAL 387 212 175 177 133 77 200 187 291 95 244 63 79 308 79 200 104 82 154 151 73
100% 55% 45% 46% 34% 20% 52% 48% 75% 25% 63% 16% 21% 80% 20% 52% 27% 21% 40% 39% 19%
Yes 272 145 127 110 106 56 144 128 206 67 171 43 58 221 51 135 72 65 98 115 54
70% 68% 73% 62% 80% 73% 72% 69% 71% 70% 70% 67% 74% 72% 64% 68% 69% 80% 64% 77% 74%
No 114 67 47 68 26 20 56 59 86 29 73 21 21 86 28 65 33 17 55 35 19
30% 32% 27% 38% 20% 27% 28% 31% 29% 30% 30% 33% 26% 28% 36% 32% 31% 20% 36% 23% 26%


Page 77
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
TOTAL 376 195 181 188 120 68 184 192 278 98 210 64 102 291 85 203 88 85 175 109 82
100% 52% 48% 50% 32% 18% 49% 51% 74% 26% 56% 17% 27% 77% 23% 54% 23% 23% 47% 29% 22%
Yes 241 126 114 115 86 40 119 122 178 63 142 41 58 179 62 138 49 54 117 67 54
64% 65% 63% 61% 72% 58% 65% 63% 64% 64% 68% 63% 57% 62% 72% 68% 55% 63% 67% 61% 66%
No 135 69 66 73 34 29 65 70 100 35 68 24 43 112 24 65 39 31 59 42 28

36% 35% 37% 39% 28% 42% 35% 37% 36% 36% 32% 37% 43% 38% 28% 32% 45% 37% 33% 39% 34%


Page 78
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
TOTAL 346 182 163 185 107 54 171 175 253 93 204 71 71 267 79 191 89 66 174 94 68
100% 53% 47% 53% 31% 16% 49% 51% 73% 27% 59% 20% 21% 77% 23% 55% 26% 19% 50% 27% 20%
Yes 235 132 103 123 80 32 114 121 174 61 148 41 46 180 55 134 57 44 119 62 45
68% 72% 63% 66% 75% 59% 66% 69% 69% 65% 73% 57% 64% 67% 70% 70% 64% 67% 69% 66% 65%
No 111 51 61 62 27 22 57 54 79 32 56 30 26 88 24 57 32 22 54 32 24
32% 28% 37% 34% 25% 41% 34% 31% 31% 35% 27% 43% 36% 33% 30% 30% 36% 33% 31% 34% 35%


Page 79
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
TOTAL 1000 552 448 426 360 214 489 511 735 265 538 189 273 774 226 490 294 216 408 343 232
100% 55% 45% 43% 36% 21% 49% 51% 73% 27% 54% 19% 27% 77% 23% 49% 29% 22% 41% 34% 23%
NET: IMPORTANT 965 524 440 407 347 211 483 482 723 242 519 181 265 747 217 468 283 214 391 328 230
______________ 96% 95% 98% 96% 96% 98% 99% 94% 98% 91% 96% 96% 97% 97% 96% 95% 96% 99% 96% 96% 99%
h
Very important (4) 687 355 332 259 251 177 360 327 544 143 343 145 199 534 153 294 215 178 239 251 189
69% 64% 74% 61% 70% 82% 74% 64% 74% 54% 64% 76% 73% 69% 68% 60% 73% 82% 59% 73% 81%
De J k p P s S
Somewhat important (3) 278 169 109 148 96 34 123 155 180 98 175 36 66 213 65 174 68 36 152 77 41
28% 31% 24% 35% 27% 16% 25% 30% 24% 37% 33% 19% 24% 28% 29% 36% 23% 17% 37% 22% 17%
F l qR tU
NET: NOT IMPORTANT 35 27 8 19 13 3 6 29 12 23 20 8 7 26 9 22 11 2 17 15 3

__________________ 4% 5% 2% 4% 4% 2% 1% 6% 2% 9% 4% 4% 3% 3% 4% 5% 4% 1% 4% 4% 1%
g
Not too important (2) 27 20 7 15 9 2 6 20 12 15 14 7 6 22 5 16 10 0 10 15 2

3% 4% 2% 4% 2% 1% 1% 4% 2% 6% 3% 4% 2% 3% 2% 3% 3% *% 2% 4% 1%
Not at all 8 8 1 3 4 1 - 8 - 8 6 1 1 5 4 6 1 2 7 - 1
important (1) 1% 1% *% 1% 1% 1% 2% 3% 1% 1% 1% 1% 2% 1% *% 1% 2% 1%
g
MEAN 3.6 3.6 3.7 3.6 3.7 3.8 3.7 3.6 3.7 3.4 3.6 3.7 3.7 3.7 3.6 3.5 3.7 3.8 3.5 3.7 3.8
D h J P S


Page 80
(Continued)
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
MEDIAN 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0


Page 81
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
TOTAL 1000 552 448 426 360 214 489 511 735 265 538 189 273 774 226 490 294 216 408 343 232
100% 55% 45% 43% 36% 21% 49% 51% 73% 27% 54% 19% 27% 77% 23% 49% 29% 22% 41% 34% 23%
NET: CONFIDENT 856 460 396 349 319 189 447 409 665 191 456 165 235 660 196 399 258 198 331 303 214
______________ 86% 83% 88% 82% 89% 88% 91% 80% 90% 72% 85% 87% 86% 85% 87% 82% 88% 92% 81% 88% 92%
H J p s
Very confident (4) 454 233 221 171 174 109 234 219 372 82 231 84 138 362 91 180 141 132 133 175 141
45% 42% 49% 40% 48% 51% 48% 43% 51% 31% 43% 45% 51% 47% 40% 37% 48% 61% 33% 51% 61%
J Pq s S
Somewhat confident (3) 403 228 175 177 145 80 213 190 293 109 225 81 97 298 105 219 118 66 198 127 73
40% 41% 39% 42% 40% 37% 44% 37% 40% 41% 42% 43% 36% 39% 46% 45% 40% 31% 48% 37% 31%
r u
NET: NOT CONFIDENT 144 91 52 77 41 26 42 102 70 74 82 24 38 114 30 91 35 18 77 41 19

__________________ 14% 17% 12% 18% 11% 12% 9% 20% 10% 28% 15% 13% 14% 15% 13% 18% 12% 8% 19% 12% 8%
G I r u
Not too confident (2) 110 67 43 68 26 16 36 74 60 50 65 18 27 90 20 71 26 14 62 30 11

11% 12% 10% 16% 7% 8% 7% 14% 8% 19% 12% 10% 10% 12% 9% 14% 9% 6% 15% 9% 5%
g i r u
Not at all 34 24 10 10 15 9 5 28 10 23 17 6 11 24 10 20 10 4 15 10 8
confident (1) 3% 4% 2% 2% 4% 4% 1% 6% 1% 9% 3% 3% 4% 3% 5% 4% 3% 2% 4% 3% 3%
g


Page 82
(Continued)
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
MEAN 3.3 3.2 3.4 3.2 3.3 3.3 3.4 3.2 3.4 2.9 3.2 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.2 3.1 3.3 3.5 3.1 3.4 3.5
h J P s S
MEDIAN 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 4.0


Page 83
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
TOTAL 1000 552 448 426 360 214 489 511 735 265 538 189 273 774 226 490 294 216 408 343 232
100% 55% 45% 43% 36% 21% 49% 51% 73% 27% 54% 19% 27% 77% 23% 49% 29% 22% 41% 34% 23%
NET: LESS THAN $100 643 349 294 331 208 105 378 265 474 170 390 125 128 456 187 405 191 48 341 236 55
___________________ 64% 63% 66% 78% 58% 49% 77% 52% 64% 64% 72% 66% 47% 59% 83% 83% 65% 22% 84% 69% 24%
EF H M M N QR R tU U
Less than $25 106 54 52 70 25 10 62 44 62 43 67 18 21 74 32 88 12 6 88 12 5

11% 10% 11% 17% 7% 5% 13% 9% 9% 16% 12% 10% 8% 10% 14% 18% 4% 3% 22% 4% 2%
eF QR TU
$25 to $49 333 192 141 178 115 40 209 124 248 86 222 61 51 238 95 241 81 10 187 115 21
33% 35% 32% 42% 32% 19% 43% 24% 34% 32% 41% 32% 19% 31% 42% 49% 28% 5% 46% 34% 9%
F f H M M QR R U U
$50 to $99 204 102 102 82 67 55 106 97 163 41 101 46 56 143 61 76 97 32 65 108 30
20% 19% 23% 19% 19% 25% 22% 19% 22% 15% 19% 25% 21% 19% 27% 15% 33% 15% 16% 32% 13%
PR sU
NET: $100 OR MORE 320 189 131 88 127 105 89 231 258 63 126 60 134 285 35 58 98 164 45 99 172
_________________ 32% 34% 29% 21% 35% 49% 18% 45% 35% 24% 23% 32% 49% 37% 16% 12% 33% 76% 11% 29% 74%
d D G KL O P PQ S ST
$100 to $199 168 105 63 60 56 52 64 104 140 27 79 32 57 148 20 47 66 55 34 57 74

17% 19% 14% 14% 16% 24% 13% 20% 19% 10% 15% 17% 21% 19% 9% 10% 22% 25% 8% 17% 32%
o p P ST
$200 to $299 62 36 26 14 26 23 18 44 50 12 20 19 24 57 5 8 21 34 8 24 30
6% 7% 6% 3% 7% 11% 4% 9% 7% 5% 4% 10% 9% 7% 2% 2% 7% 16% 2% 7% 13%
Pq S


Page 84
(Continued)
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
$300 to $399 29 18 11 4 14 10 3 26 26 3 12 3 14 28 1 1 5 23 - 4 24
3% 3% 3% 1% 4% 5% 1% 5% 4% 1% 2% 2% 5% 4% *% *% 2% 11% 1% 11%
G o PQ ST
$400 or more 61 30 31 10 32 19 4 57 41 20 16 6 39 52 9 2 7 52 3 13 43
6% 5% 7% 2% 9% 9% 1% 11% 6% 8% 3% 3% 14% 7% 4% *% 2% 24% 1% 4% 19%
G KL PQ ST
I don't think I could 37 14 22 7 25 5 22 14 4 33 22 4 11 33 3 28 5 4 22 8 5

save anything 4% 3% 5% 2% 7% 2% 5% 3% 1% 12% 4% 2% 4% 4% 1% 6% 2% 2% 5% 2% 2%
d I


Page 85
for retirement?
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
TOTAL 1000 552 448 426 360 214 489 511 735 265 538 189 273 774 226 490 294 216 408 343 232
100% 55% 45% 43% 36% 21% 49% 51% 73% 27% 54% 19% 27% 77% 23% 49% 29% 22% 41% 34% 23%
0% 291 124 167 156 82 53 123 168 210 81 176 54 60 224 67 174 86 31 151 98 35
29% 23% 37% 37% 23% 25% 25% 33% 29% 31% 33% 29% 22% 29% 29% 35% 29% 14% 37% 28% 15%
B e R R U u
NET: 1% TO 4% 256 164 92 108 107 41 149 107 217 39 135 53 68 189 67 151 71 34 118 90 43
_____________ 26% 30% 20% 25% 30% 19% 30% 21% 30% 15% 25% 28% 25% 24% 30% 31% 24% 16% 29% 26% 18%
j R
1% 85 51 34 37 36 12 58 27 66 19 49 22 15 66 19 48 31 6 40 28 14
8% 9% 8% 9% 10% 5% 12% 5% 9% 7% 9% 11% 5% 9% 8% 10% 10% 3% 10% 8% 6%
r r
2% 73 52 21 37 22 14 44 29 65 8 36 16 21 41 32 46 13 15 39 16 16
7% 9% 5% 9% 6% 7% 9% 6% 9% 3% 7% 8% 8% 5% 14% 9% 4% 7% 10% 5% 7%
N
3% 58 26 31 19 26 13 33 25 48 9 28 9 21 45 13 30 21 7 21 30 7
6% 5% 7% 4% 7% 6% 7% 5% 7% 4% 5% 5% 8% 6% 6% 6% 7% 3% 5% 9% 3%
4% 40 35 5 15 22 3 14 26 38 3 22 6 12 37 3 28 7 6 19 15 6
4% 6% 1% 4% 6% 1% 3% 5% 5% 1% 4% 3% 4% 5% 1% 6% 2% 3% 5% 4% 3%
c f
NET: 5% to 9% 258 172 86 113 94 52 153 105 180 78 147 52 60 216 43 116 79 63 100 81 77
_____________ 26% 31% 19% 26% 26% 24% 31% 21% 24% 30% 27% 27% 22% 28% 19% 24% 27% 29% 24% 24% 33%
c h


Page 86
(Continued)
for retirement?
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
5% 186 119 67 69 76 41 111 76 124 62 116 30 40 162 24 92 57 38 69 62 55

19% 22% 15% 16% 21% 19% 23% 15% 17% 24% 22% 16% 15% 21% 11% 19% 19% 17% 17% 18% 24%
o
6% 33 28 5 27 6 1 26 8 19 14 22 6 5 31 2 21 7 5 14 8 10
3% 5% 1% 6% 2% *% 5% 1% 3% 5% 4% 3% 2% 4% 1% 4% 3% 2% 4% 2% 4%
c eF h
7% 21 17 4 13 4 4 13 8 20 1 4 12 5 11 10 3 13 5 10 4 6
2% 3% 1% 3% 1% 2% 3% 2% 3% *% 1% 6% 2% 1% 5% 1% 4% 2% 3% 1% 3%
Km p
8% 16 7 9 2 8 5 3 13 15 1 4 3 9 10 6 1 1 14 6 5 5
2% 1% 2% 1% 2% 3% 1% 2% 2% *% 1% 2% 3% 1% 3% *% *% 6% 1% 2% 2%
k PQ
9% 2 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 2 - 1 - 1 2 - 0 1 1 - 1 0
*% *% *% *% *% *% *% *% *% *% *% *% *% *% 1% *% *%
NET: 10% OR MORE 195 91 104 49 77 69 64 131 128 66 81 30 84 145 50 49 57 88 39 74 78

________________ 19% 16% 23% 12% 21% 32% 13% 26% 17% 25% 15% 16% 31% 19% 22% 10% 20% 41% 10% 22% 34%
D G KL PQ s St
10% 121 56 64 31 42 48 52 68 81 40 58 17 46 82 39 41 42 38 30 54 37
12% 10% 14% 7% 12% 22% 11% 13% 11% 15% 11% 9% 17% 11% 17% 8% 14% 18% 7% 16% 16%
D l p
11% 5 - 5 3 1 1 3 2 5 0 3 1 1 4 1 1 3 1 1 - 4
1% 1% 1% *% 1% 1% *% 1% *% 1% *% *% 1% *% *% 1% *% *% 2%


Page 87
(Continued)
for retirement?
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
12% 4 2 2 2 1 1 - 4 2 2 2 - 2 3 0 - 2 1 0 - 3
*% *% *% *% *% *% 1% *% 1% *% 1% *% *% 1% 1% *% 2%
13% 1 0 1 1 - 0 - 1 1 - 0 - 1 1 - 0 0 0 - 0 1
*% *% *% *% *% *% *% *% *% *% *% *% *% *% *%
14% 0 0 - - - 0 - 0 - 0 - - 0 0 - - 0 - - - 0
*% *% *% *% *% *% *% *% *%
15% 14 7 8 3 6 5 1 13 10 5 0 3 11 12 3 2 2 10 3 5 7
1% 1% 2% 1% 2% 3% *% 3% 1% 2% *% 2% 4% 1% 1% *% 1% 5% 1% 1% 3%
K
16% 0 0 - - - 0 - 0 0 - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - - 0
*% *% *% *% *% *% *% *% *%
17% 5 2 4 2 2 1 1 4 4 1 - - 5 4 1 1 - 4 2 - 4
1% *% 1% 1% 1% *% *% 1% 1% 1% 2% 1% *% *% 2% *% 2%
KL
18% 4 3 1 - 3 1 3 1 3 0 0 3 0 4 0 - 1 3 - 0 4
*% 1% *% 1% *% 1% *% *% *% *% 2% *% *% *% *% 1% *% 2%
20% 20 10 10 2 12 6 - 20 13 7 10 2 7 19 1 1 2 18 1 10 10
2% 2% 2% *% 3% 3% 4% 2% 3% 2% 1% 3% 2% 1% *% 1% 8% *% 3% 4%
G PQ s
More than 20% 20 10 10 5 10 5 4 16 11 10 7 3 10 15 5 4 5 11 3 6 10

2% 2% 2% 1% 3% 3% 1% 3% 1% 4% 1% 2% 4% 2% 2% 1% 2% 5% 1% 2% 4%


Page 88
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
TOTAL 1000 552 448 426 360 214 489 511 735 265 538 189 273 774 226 490 294 216 408 343 232
100% 55% 45% 43% 36% 21% 49% 51% 73% 27% 54% 19% 27% 77% 23% 49% 29% 22% 41% 34% 23%
(A) You do not earn 809 443 366 378 280 151 423 385 597 211 461 161 187 614 195 452 235 122 380 261 152
enough at your job 81% 80% 82% 89% 78% 70% 87% 75% 81% 80% 86% 85% 69% 79% 86% 92% 80% 56% 93% 76% 66%
F h M M QR R TU
(B) You have to pay off 778 438 340 347 292 138 409 369 588 189 424 158 196 610 168 400 231 147 326 261 176
debts 78% 79% 76% 82% 81% 64% 84% 72% 80% 71% 79% 84% 72% 79% 74% 82% 79% 68% 80% 76% 76%
F f h m r
(C) You have had 693 387 306 336 231 125 375 317 510 182 368 146 179 537 156 359 216 118 287 235 156
unexpected expenses 69% 70% 68% 79% 64% 58% 77% 62% 69% 69% 68% 77% 66% 69% 69% 73% 73% 54% 70% 68% 67%
eF H m R R
(H) You are more focused 662 378 284 294 251 117 378 284 484 178 372 133 157 507 155 359 187 117 299 203 145
on helping your family 66% 69% 63% 69% 70% 55% 77% 56% 66% 67% 69% 71% 58% 66% 69% 73% 64% 54% 73% 59% 62%
f f H m R t
(E) You are unsure about 661 386 275 327 217 117 359 302 514 148 348 145 168 509 152 348 193 120 282 230 142
how to invest the money 66% 70% 61% 77% 60% 55% 73% 59% 70% 56% 65% 77% 62% 66% 67% 71% 66% 56% 69% 67% 61%
eF h M r
(D) You have simply put 652 351 301 294 246 112 374 278 506 146 366 128 158 508 144 347 191 114 283 211 150
it off 65% 64% 67% 69% 68% 52% 76% 54% 69% 55% 68% 68% 58% 66% 64% 71% 65% 53% 69% 62% 65%
f f H R


Page 89
(Continued)
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
(G) You are more focused 593 340 253 271 223 99 327 266 439 154 332 112 150 457 136 321 165 107 261 188 137
on enjoying today than 59% 62% 57% 64% 62% 46% 67% 52% 60% 58% 62% 59% 55% 59% 60% 65% 56% 50% 64% 55% 59%
on saving for the future f f h r
(F) You are not sure 545 318 227 281 190 75 319 226 423 122 302 111 132 424 121 293 159 93 235 187 116
about how much to save 55% 58% 51% 66% 53% 35% 65% 44% 58% 46% 56% 59% 48% 55% 54% 60% 54% 43% 58% 55% 50%
F f H r
(I) Other 113 50 63 39 56 17 73 40 66 47 71 19 23 94 19 57 34 22 48 42 18

11% 9% 14% 9% 16% 8% 15% 8% 9% 18% 13% 10% 8% 12% 8% 12% 12% 10% 12% 12% 8%
i


Page 90
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
TOTAL 1000 552 448 426 360 214 489 511 735 265 538 189 273 774 226 490 294 216 408 343 232
100% 55% 45% 43% 36% 21% 49% 51% 73% 27% 54% 19% 27% 77% 23% 49% 29% 22% 41% 34% 23%
NET: REASON 809 443 366 378 280 151 423 385 597 211 461 161 187 614 195 452 235 122 380 261 152
___________ 81% 80% 82% 89% 78% 70% 87% 75% 81% 80% 86% 85% 69% 79% 86% 92% 80% 56% 93% 76% 66%
F h M M QR R TU
Major Reason (3) 507 272 235 239 181 87 268 239 373 134 289 92 126 390 118 312 124 71 278 141 80
51% 49% 52% 56% 50% 41% 55% 47% 51% 51% 54% 49% 46% 50% 52% 64% 42% 33% 68% 41% 34%
f QR TU
Minor Reason (2) 302 171 131 139 99 64 155 146 224 78 171 69 61 224 77 140 111 51 102 119 73
30% 31% 29% 33% 28% 30% 32% 29% 31% 29% 32% 36% 23% 29% 34% 29% 38% 24% 25% 35% 31%
M r
Not a Reason (1) 191 109 82 48 80 63 66 126 138 54 78 28 85 160 31 38 59 95 28 82 80

19% 20% 18% 11% 22% 30% 13% 25% 19% 20% 14% 15% 31% 21% 14% 8% 20% 44% 7% 24% 34%
D g KL P PQ S S
MEAN 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.4 2.3 2.1 2.4 2.2 2.3 2.3 2.4 2.3 2.1 2.3 2.4 2.6 2.2 1.9 2.6 2.2 2.0
F h M m QR R TU
MEDIAN 3.0 2.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 2.0 3.0 2.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 2.0 2.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 2.0 2.0 3.0 2.0 2.0


Page 91
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
TOTAL 1000 552 448 426 360 214 489 511 735 265 538 189 273 774 226 490 294 216 408 343 232
100% 55% 45% 43% 36% 21% 49% 51% 73% 27% 54% 19% 27% 77% 23% 49% 29% 22% 41% 34% 23%
NET: REASON 778 438 340 347 292 138 409 369 588 189 424 158 196 610 168 400 231 147 326 261 176
___________ 78% 79% 76% 82% 81% 64% 84% 72% 80% 71% 79% 84% 72% 79% 74% 82% 79% 68% 80% 76% 76%
F f h m r
Major Reason (3) 519 293 227 240 188 91 269 251 414 105 283 107 130 409 111 248 170 102 213 174 127
52% 53% 51% 56% 52% 42% 55% 49% 56% 40% 53% 57% 48% 53% 49% 51% 58% 47% 52% 51% 55%
j
Minor Reason (2) 258 145 113 107 104 47 141 118 174 84 141 51 67 201 57 151 61 46 113 87 48
26% 26% 25% 25% 29% 22% 29% 23% 24% 32% 26% 27% 24% 26% 25% 31% 21% 21% 28% 25% 21%
Not a Reason (1) 222 114 108 79 67 76 80 142 147 76 115 31 76 164 58 90 63 69 82 82 57
22% 21% 24% 18% 19% 36% 16% 28% 20% 29% 21% 16% 28% 21% 26% 18% 21% 32% 20% 24% 24%
De g l p
MEAN 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.4 2.3 2.1 2.4 2.2 2.4 2.1 2.3 2.4 2.2 2.3 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.2 2.3 2.3 2.3
f f j m
MEDIAN 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 2.0 3.0 2.0 3.0 2.0 3.0 3.0 2.0 3.0 2.0 3.0 3.0 2.0 3.0 3.0 3.0


Page 92
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
TOTAL 1000 552 448 426 360 214 489 511 735 265 538 189 273 774 226 490 294 216 408 343 232
100% 55% 45% 43% 36% 21% 49% 51% 73% 27% 54% 19% 27% 77% 23% 49% 29% 22% 41% 34% 23%
NET: REASON 693 387 306 336 231 125 375 317 510 182 368 146 179 537 156 359 216 118 287 235 156
___________ 69% 70% 68% 79% 64% 58% 77% 62% 69% 69% 68% 77% 66% 69% 69% 73% 73% 54% 70% 68% 67%
eF H m R R
Major Reason (3) 360 197 163 179 129 52 201 158 274 86 190 78 91 274 86 205 108 47 162 122 65
36% 36% 36% 42% 36% 24% 41% 31% 37% 32% 35% 41% 33% 35% 38% 42% 37% 22% 40% 36% 28%
F R r
Minor Reason (2) 333 190 143 157 102 74 174 159 237 97 178 67 88 263 70 155 108 71 125 113 91
33% 35% 32% 37% 28% 34% 36% 31% 32% 36% 33% 36% 32% 34% 31% 32% 37% 33% 31% 33% 39%
Not a Reason (1) 307 165 143 90 128 89 113 194 225 83 171 43 93 237 70 131 78 98 121 109 76
31% 30% 32% 21% 36% 42% 23% 38% 31% 31% 32% 23% 34% 31% 31% 27% 27% 46% 30% 32% 33%
d D G l PQ
MEAN 2.1 2.1 2.0 2.2 2.0 1.8 2.2 1.9 2.1 2.0 2.0 2.2 2.0 2.0 2.1 2.2 2.1 1.8 2.1 2.0 2.0
F H m R R
MEDIAN 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0


Page 93
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
TOTAL 1000 552 448 426 360 214 489 511 735 265 538 189 273 774 226 490 294 216 408 343 232
100% 55% 45% 43% 36% 21% 49% 51% 73% 27% 54% 19% 27% 77% 23% 49% 29% 22% 41% 34% 23%
NET: REASON 652 351 301 294 246 112 374 278 506 146 366 128 158 508 144 347 191 114 283 211 150
___________ 65% 64% 67% 69% 68% 52% 76% 54% 69% 55% 68% 68% 58% 66% 64% 71% 65% 53% 69% 62% 65%
f f H R
Major Reason (3) 270 148 122 117 95 58 164 105 215 55 165 54 50 210 59 144 83 43 116 82 68
27% 27% 27% 27% 26% 27% 34% 21% 29% 21% 31% 29% 18% 27% 26% 29% 28% 20% 29% 24% 29%
h m m
Minor Reason (2) 383 203 180 177 151 54 210 173 291 91 201 74 108 298 85 203 108 71 166 129 82
38% 37% 40% 42% 42% 25% 43% 34% 40% 34% 37% 39% 40% 38% 37% 41% 37% 33% 41% 38% 35%
f f
Not a Reason (1) 348 201 147 132 114 102 115 233 229 119 172 61 115 266 82 143 103 102 125 132 82
35% 36% 33% 31% 32% 48% 24% 46% 31% 45% 32% 32% 42% 34% 36% 29% 35% 47% 31% 38% 35%
de G P
MEAN 1.9 1.9 1.9 2.0 1.9 1.8 2.1 1.8 2.0 1.8 2.0 2.0 1.8 1.9 1.9 2.0 1.9 1.7 2.0 1.9 1.9
H m m R r
MEDIAN 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0


Page 94
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
TOTAL 1000 552 448 426 360 214 489 511 735 265 538 189 273 774 226 490 294 216 408 343 232
100% 55% 45% 43% 36% 21% 49% 51% 73% 27% 54% 19% 27% 77% 23% 49% 29% 22% 41% 34% 23%
NET: REASON 661 386 275 327 217 117 359 302 514 148 348 145 168 509 152 348 193 120 282 230 142
___________ 66% 70% 61% 77% 60% 55% 73% 59% 70% 56% 65% 77% 62% 66% 67% 71% 66% 56% 69% 67% 61%
eF h M r
Major Reason (3) 279 143 136 149 98 33 162 117 209 70 145 63 71 222 57 146 74 59 113 106 56
28% 26% 30% 35% 27% 15% 33% 23% 28% 27% 27% 34% 26% 29% 25% 30% 25% 27% 28% 31% 24%
F f
Minor Reason (2) 382 243 139 178 119 85 197 185 305 77 204 82 97 287 95 203 118 61 169 124 85
38% 44% 31% 42% 33% 40% 40% 36% 41% 29% 38% 43% 36% 37% 42% 41% 40% 28% 41% 36% 37%
c r
Not a Reason (1) 339 166 173 99 143 97 130 209 221 117 190 44 105 265 74 142 101 96 126 113 91
34% 30% 39% 23% 40% 45% 27% 41% 30% 44% 35% 23% 38% 34% 33% 29% 34% 44% 31% 33% 39%
d D g L p
MEAN 1.9 2.0 1.9 2.1 1.9 1.7 2.1 1.8 2.0 1.8 1.9 2.1 1.9 1.9 1.9 2.0 1.9 1.8 2.0 2.0 1.9
eF H m
MEDIAN 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0


Page 95
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
TOTAL 1000 552 448 426 360 214 489 511 735 265 538 189 273 774 226 490 294 216 408 343 232
100% 55% 45% 43% 36% 21% 49% 51% 73% 27% 54% 19% 27% 77% 23% 49% 29% 22% 41% 34% 23%
NET: REASON 545 318 227 281 190 75 319 226 423 122 302 111 132 424 121 293 159 93 235 187 116
___________ 55% 58% 51% 66% 53% 35% 65% 44% 58% 46% 56% 59% 48% 55% 54% 60% 54% 43% 58% 55% 50%
F f H r
Major Reason (3) 189 104 84 106 59 24 126 63 140 49 109 38 41 140 48 107 52 29 92 64 31
19% 19% 19% 25% 16% 11% 26% 12% 19% 18% 20% 20% 15% 18% 21% 22% 18% 14% 23% 19% 13%
F H
Minor Reason (2) 356 214 143 175 131 51 193 163 283 74 192 73 91 283 73 185 107 64 142 123 85
36% 39% 32% 41% 36% 24% 40% 32% 38% 28% 36% 39% 33% 37% 32% 38% 36% 30% 35% 36% 36%
F
Not a Reason (1) 455 234 221 145 170 140 170 285 312 143 237 78 141 350 105 198 135 123 173 156 117
45% 42% 49% 34% 47% 65% 35% 56% 42% 54% 44% 41% 52% 45% 46% 40% 46% 57% 42% 45% 50%
De G p
MEAN 1.7 1.8 1.7 1.9 1.7 1.5 1.9 1.6 1.8 1.6 1.8 1.8 1.6 1.7 1.8 1.8 1.7 1.6 1.8 1.7 1.6
eF f H r
MEDIAN 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 1.0 2.0 1.0 2.0 1.0 2.0 2.0 1.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 1.0 2.0 2.0 1.0


Page 96
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
TOTAL 1000 552 448 426 360 214 489 511 735 265 538 189 273 774 226 490 294 216 408 343 232
100% 55% 45% 43% 36% 21% 49% 51% 73% 27% 54% 19% 27% 77% 23% 49% 29% 22% 41% 34% 23%
NET: REASON 593 340 253 271 223 99 327 266 439 154 332 112 150 457 136 321 165 107 261 188 137
___________ 59% 62% 57% 64% 62% 46% 67% 52% 60% 58% 62% 59% 55% 59% 60% 65% 56% 50% 64% 55% 59%
f f h r
Major Reason (3) 201 120 81 102 66 33 131 70 153 49 109 45 47 145 56 122 58 21 90 57 52
20% 22% 18% 24% 18% 16% 27% 14% 21% 18% 20% 24% 17% 19% 25% 25% 20% 10% 22% 17% 22%
H R r
Minor Reason (2) 392 219 173 169 157 66 196 196 287 105 223 67 103 312 80 199 107 86 171 131 86
39% 40% 39% 40% 44% 31% 40% 38% 39% 40% 41% 35% 38% 40% 35% 41% 36% 40% 42% 38% 37%
Not a Reason (1) 407 212 195 155 136 116 162 245 296 111 206 77 123 316 90 170 128 109 147 155 95
41% 38% 43% 36% 38% 54% 33% 48% 40% 42% 38% 41% 45% 41% 40% 35% 44% 50% 36% 45% 41%
de g p
MEAN 1.8 1.8 1.7 1.9 1.8 1.6 1.9 1.7 1.8 1.8 1.8 1.8 1.7 1.8 1.8 1.9 1.8 1.6 1.9 1.7 1.8
f H R
MEDIAN 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 1.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 1.0 2.0 2.0 2.0


Page 97
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
TOTAL 1000 552 448 426 360 214 489 511 735 265 538 189 273 774 226 490 294 216 408 343 232
100% 55% 45% 43% 36% 21% 49% 51% 73% 27% 54% 19% 27% 77% 23% 49% 29% 22% 41% 34% 23%
NET: REASON 662 378 284 294 251 117 378 284 484 178 372 133 157 507 155 359 187 117 299 203 145
___________ 66% 69% 63% 69% 70% 55% 77% 56% 66% 67% 69% 71% 58% 66% 69% 73% 64% 54% 73% 59% 62%
f f H m R t
Major Reason (3) 398 257 141 201 140 57 257 140 294 103 237 80 80 298 100 245 94 59 201 123 67
40% 47% 31% 47% 39% 27% 53% 27% 40% 39% 44% 43% 30% 38% 44% 50% 32% 27% 49% 36% 29%
C F H M m QR tU
Minor Reason (2) 265 121 143 93 112 60 121 144 190 75 135 53 77 209 55 113 93 58 99 80 78
26% 22% 32% 22% 31% 28% 25% 28% 26% 28% 25% 28% 28% 27% 24% 23% 32% 27% 24% 23% 33%
Not a Reason (1) 338 173 164 132 108 97 111 227 251 87 167 56 115 267 71 132 107 99 108 140 88
34% 31% 37% 31% 30% 45% 23% 44% 34% 33% 31% 29% 42% 34% 31% 27% 36% 46% 27% 41% 38%
de G l P s
MEAN 2.1 2.2 1.9 2.2 2.1 1.8 2.3 1.8 2.1 2.1 2.1 2.1 1.9 2.0 2.1 2.2 2.0 1.8 2.2 1.9 1.9
c F f H M M qR tU
MEDIAN 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 3.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 3.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0


Page 98
(I) Other
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
TOTAL 1000 552 448 426 360 214 489 511 735 265 538 189 273 774 226 490 294 216 408 343 232
100% 55% 45% 43% 36% 21% 49% 51% 73% 27% 54% 19% 27% 77% 23% 49% 29% 22% 41% 34% 23%
NET: REASON 113 50 63 39 56 17 73 40 66 47 71 19 23 94 19 57 34 22 48 42 18

___________ 11% 9% 14% 9% 16% 8% 15% 8% 9% 18% 13% 10% 8% 12% 8% 12% 12% 10% 12% 12% 8%
i
Major Reason (3) 56 31 25 24 20 12 34 23 45 12 31 13 13 49 8 29 15 12 20 17 14

6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 5% 7% 4% 6% 4% 6% 7% 5% 6% 3% 6% 5% 6% 5% 5% 6%
Minor Reason (2) 57 18 38 15 36 6 39 18 21 35 41 6 10 46 11 28 19 10 28 25 4

6% 3% 9% 4% 10% 3% 8% 3% 3% 13% 8% 3% 4% 6% 5% 6% 6% 4% 7% 7% 2%
b dF I u U
Not a Reason (1) 887 502 385 387 303 197 416 471 669 218 467 170 250 679 208 433 260 195 360 302 215
89% 91% 86% 91% 84% 92% 85% 92% 91% 82% 87% 90% 92% 88% 92% 88% 88% 90% 88% 88% 92%
j
MEAN 1.2 1.1 1.2 1.1 1.2 1.1 1.2 1.1 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.1 1.2 1.1 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.1
MEDIAN 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0


Page 99
(I) Other
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
TOTAL 113 50 63 39 56 17 73 40 66 47 71 19 23 94 19 57 34 22 48 42 18
100% 44% 56% 35% 50% 15% 64% 36% 58% 42% 63% 17% 20% 84% 16% 51% 30% 19% 43% 37% 16%
Educational expenses: 24 21 2 9 14 1 19 4 12 11 18 - 5 23 0 9 11 4 9 11 3
saving for college, 21% 43% 3% 22% 25% 4% 27% 10% 18% 24% 26% 23% 25% 2% 15% 32% 18% 18% 26% 18%
tuition, student loans C L L o
Not enough money/income 20 1 19 1 18 1 19 1 4 16 18 0 1 17 2 16 4 - 16 3 1

17% 1% 30% 2% 33% 3% 26% 2% 6% 34% 26% 3% 4% 18% 13% 27% 12% 33% 8% 4%
B df h I R tU
Lack of information on 11 5 6 2 9 - 7 4 11 - 9 2 - 9 2 7 - 4 2 9 -
how to save/invest 10% 11% 9% 5% 16% 10% 10% 17% 13% 11% 10% 11% 13% 19% 4% 22%
J q U
Saving for house/car; 9 3 7 6 3 1 6 3 8 1 2 7 0 6 3 2 1 6 2 2 5

expense of house/car 8% 5% 10% 15% 5% 3% 9% 6% 13% 2% 3% 38% 1% 6% 17% 3% 4% 26% 5% 5% 26%
km
Family situation: 9 2 7 6 2 2 4 5 5 4 7 - 2 7 2 5 2 2 6 2 0
children, child support 8% 5% 10% 14% 3% 10% 5% 13% 7% 9% 9% 10% 8% 8% 9% 6% 8% 13% 4% 2%
new baby, divorce


Page 100
(Continued)
(I) Other
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
Job loss/insecurity 8 2 7 1 3 4 8 1 8 - 5 3 1 5 4 5 4 - 3 5 -
7% 3% 11% 3% 6% 23% 10% 2% 13% 7% 15% 3% 5% 20% 8% 11% 7% 12%
No retirement plan at 3 0 3 3 0 - 2 1 3 0 2 - 1 3 - 2 1 - 2 1 0
work 3% 1% 4% 7% *% 3% 2% 4% 1% 3% 4% 3% 4% 2% 5% 1% 2%
No need to save 3 0 3 - - 3 - 3 0 3 - - 3 0 3 2 0 0 3 - -
3% 1% 4% 17% 8% 1% 6% 13% *% 15% 4% 1% 1% 6%
kl
Health issues; medical 2 - 2 - 1 1 1 2 2 1 - - 2 2 - 0 1 1 - 0 2

costs 2% 3% 1% 8% 1% 4% 2% 1% 9% 2% 1% 2% 5% 1% 9%
Poor economic climate: 1 0 1 1 0 0 - 1 1 - - 1 1 1 - 0 1 0 - 0 1

volatile stock market, 1% 1% 1% 2% *% 2% 3% 2% 4% 2% 1% *% 2% 2% *% 6%
low interest rates
Other 23 15 8 12 6 5 7 16 11 11 10 6 7 20 3 9 9 5 4 8 6
20% 30% 12% 31% 10% 29% 9% 40% 17% 24% 14% 30% 31% 21% 14% 15% 28% 22% 8% 20% 34%


Page 101
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
TOTAL 937 515 422 418 334 186 465 472 700 238 501 181 255 723 214 480 262 196 395 309 217
100% 55% 45% 45% 36% 20% 50% 50% 75% 25% 53% 19% 27% 77% 23% 51% 28% 21% 42% 33% 23%
You do not earn enough 281 138 143 106 129 46 116 165 206 75 158 49 73 211 70 165 80 36 166 72 37
at your job 30% 27% 34% 25% 39% 25% 25% 35% 29% 31% 32% 27% 29% 29% 33% 34% 31% 18% 42% 23% 17%
f r r TU
You have to pay off 228 109 118 114 69 45 81 147 170 58 124 40 64 175 53 105 61 62 87 89 48
debts 24% 21% 28% 27% 21% 24% 17% 31% 24% 24% 25% 22% 25% 24% 25% 22% 23% 31% 22% 29% 22%
g
You are more focused on 136 100 35 78 31 27 104 32 83 53 89 21 26 106 30 82 30 23 59 53 23

helping your family 14% 19% 8% 19% 9% 15% 22% 7% 12% 22% 18% 12% 10% 15% 14% 17% 12% 12% 15% 17% 11%
C e H i m
You are unsure about how 67 37 30 20 37 9 33 34 55 12 25 16 26 55 12 24 18 24 10 29 26

to invest the money 7% 7% 7% 5% 11% 5% 7% 7% 8% 5% 5% 9% 10% 8% 6% 5% 7% 12% 3% 9% 12%
s s
You have had unexpected 60 31 29 27 24 9 38 22 51 9 19 20 21 39 21 29 20 11 21 21 18

expenses 6% 6% 7% 6% 7% 5% 8% 5% 7% 4% 4% 11% 8% 5% 10% 6% 8% 6% 5% 7% 8%
k
You have simply put it 60 24 35 18 16 25 34 26 53 7 34 14 12 53 7 18 23 19 12 15 33

off 6% 5% 8% 4% 5% 14% 7% 5% 8% 3% 7% 8% 5% 7% 3% 4% 9% 9% 3% 5% 15%
De ST


Page 102
(Continued)
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
You are more focused on 58 45 13 30 17 10 34 24 49 9 30 13 15 45 13 31 16 11 23 14 21

enjoying today than on 6% 9% 3% 7% 5% 6% 7% 5% 7% 4% 6% 7% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 4% 10%
saving for the future
You are not sure about 23 18 5 15 5 3 17 6 18 5 13 4 6 18 5 19 2 2 11 11 2

how much to save 2% 3% 1% 4% 2% 2% 4% 1% 3% 2% 3% 2% 3% 3% 2% 4% 1% 1% 3% 3% 1%
q
Other 25 13 12 9 5 11 8 17 15 10 10 3 12 22 3 6 12 8 6 5 8
3% 3% 3% 2% 2% 6% 2% 4% 2% 4% 2% 2% 5% 3% 1% 1% 4% 4% 2% 2% 4%


Page 103
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
TOTAL 1000 552 448 426 360 214 489 511 735 265 538 189 273 774 226 490 294 216 408 343 232
100% 55% 45% 43% 36% 21% 49% 51% 73% 27% 54% 19% 27% 77% 23% 49% 29% 22% 41% 34% 23%
(D) To have an emergency 298 154 145 128 104 66 123 175 224 74 167 53 78 223 75 149 85 64 127 98 70
fund equal to about 3 to 30% 28% 32% 30% 29% 31% 25% 34% 30% 28% 31% 28% 29% 29% 33% 30% 29% 30% 31% 28% 30%
6 months of living
unable to work
(A) Retirement 261 159 102 71 88 102 124 137 189 72 137 52 72 211 50 105 82 74 78 99 78
26% 29% 23% 17% 25% 47% 25% 27% 26% 27% 25% 28% 26% 27% 22% 21% 28% 34% 19% 29% 34%
DE p s
(B) To buy a house or 208 125 83 121 74 13 119 89 144 64 123 34 52 169 39 114 56 38 96 73 34
business 21% 23% 18% 28% 20% 6% 24% 17% 20% 24% 23% 18% 19% 22% 17% 23% 19% 18% 24% 21% 15%
F F
(C) To pay tuition for 97 42 55 29 52 16 59 39 64 33 47 22 28 69 28 49 29 19 41 35 20

yourself, children or 10% 8% 12% 7% 14% 8% 12% 8% 9% 13% 9% 12% 10% 9% 12% 10% 10% 9% 10% 10% 8%
grandchildren
(F) For unexpected 88 44 44 40 34 13 33 55 71 16 37 20 32 70 18 43 32 13 35 29 22

expenses, such as 9% 8% 10% 9% 9% 6% 7% 11% 10% 6% 7% 10% 12% 9% 8% 9% 11% 6% 9% 9% 10%
repairs


Page 104
(Continued)
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
(E) To make large 48 28 19 36 7 4 31 16 42 5 29 8 11 31 16 30 10 7 30 10 7

purchases, such as a car 5% 5% 4% 9% 2% 2% 6% 3% 6% 2% 5% 4% 4% 4% 7% 6% 4% 3% 7% 3% 3%
ef


Page 105
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
TOTAL 1000 552 448 426 360 214 489 511 735 265 538 189 273 774 226 490 294 216 408 343 232
100% 55% 45% 43% 36% 21% 49% 51% 73% 27% 54% 19% 27% 77% 23% 49% 29% 22% 41% 34% 23%
(D) To have an emergency 547 294 254 240 182 125 249 298 397 150 298 99 150 432 115 260 162 126 220 188 129
fund equal to about 3 to 55% 53% 57% 56% 51% 58% 51% 58% 54% 57% 55% 52% 55% 56% 51% 53% 55% 58% 54% 55% 56%
6 months of living
unable to work
(A) Retirement 451 255 196 137 167 147 213 238 338 112 243 82 126 357 94 209 129 113 159 157 127
45% 46% 44% 32% 46% 69% 44% 46% 46% 42% 45% 43% 46% 46% 41% 43% 44% 52% 39% 46% 55%
d DE s
(F) For unexpected 338 175 163 158 108 72 142 196 239 99 166 70 103 244 94 173 102 63 148 113 73
expenses, such as 34% 32% 36% 37% 30% 33% 29% 38% 33% 37% 31% 37% 38% 32% 42% 35% 35% 29% 36% 33% 31%
repairs
(B) To buy a house or 320 188 132 168 121 32 170 150 237 83 179 57 83 251 69 175 85 60 143 114 56
business 32% 34% 29% 39% 34% 15% 35% 29% 32% 31% 33% 30% 31% 32% 31% 36% 29% 28% 35% 33% 24%
F F
(C) To pay tuition for 214 113 101 77 108 29 133 82 149 65 115 48 51 166 49 108 60 46 93 71 46
yourself, children or 21% 20% 23% 18% 30% 13% 27% 16% 20% 24% 21% 25% 19% 21% 21% 22% 20% 21% 23% 21% 20%
grandchildren dF h


Page 106
(Continued)
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
(E) To make large 130 80 50 72 33 25 71 59 109 21 76 22 32 99 31 56 50 24 53 43 34

purchases, such as a car 13% 14% 11% 17% 9% 12% 15% 11% 15% 8% 14% 12% 12% 13% 14% 11% 17% 11% 13% 12% 15%


Page 107
(A) Retirement
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
TOTAL 1000 552 448 426 360 214 489 511 735 265 538 189 273 774 226 490 294 216 408 343 232
100% 55% 45% 43% 36% 21% 49% 51% 73% 27% 54% 19% 27% 77% 23% 49% 29% 22% 41% 34% 23%
NET: TOP 2 451 255 196 137 167 147 213 238 338 112 243 82 126 357 94 209 129 113 159 157 127
__________ 45% 46% 44% 32% 46% 69% 44% 46% 46% 42% 45% 43% 46% 46% 41% 43% 44% 52% 39% 46% 55%
d DE s
Ranked 1st 261 159 102 71 88 102 124 137 189 72 137 52 72 211 50 105 82 74 78 99 78
(Most Important) 26% 29% 23% 17% 25% 47% 25% 27% 26% 27% 25% 28% 26% 27% 22% 21% 28% 34% 19% 29% 34%
DE p s
Ranked 2nd 190 96 94 66 78 45 89 100 149 41 106 29 54 146 44 104 47 39 81 59 48

19% 17% 21% 15% 22% 21% 18% 20% 20% 15% 20% 15% 20% 19% 19% 21% 16% 18% 20% 17% 21%
Ranked 3rd 175 79 95 66 73 36 79 96 130 45 92 43 40 151 24 61 68 46 51 75 42

17% 14% 21% 16% 20% 17% 16% 19% 18% 17% 17% 23% 15% 20% 10% 12% 23% 21% 13% 22% 18%
p
Ranked 4th 145 83 62 97 34 14 83 62 113 31 76 26 43 102 43 83 39 22 76 38 31

14% 15% 14% 23% 9% 6% 17% 12% 15% 12% 14% 14% 16% 13% 19% 17% 13% 10% 19% 11% 13%
eF
NET: BOTTOM 2 230 134 96 126 86 18 114 116 154 76 128 38 64 163 66 137 58 35 122 72 32
_____________ 23% 24% 21% 29% 24% 8% 23% 23% 21% 29% 24% 20% 23% 21% 29% 28% 20% 16% 30% 21% 14%
F F r U


Page 108
(Continued)
(A) Retirement
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
Ranked 5th 138 74 63 72 54 12 80 58 101 37 84 18 36 100 38 70 45 23 69 44 22

14% 13% 14% 17% 15% 5% 16% 11% 14% 14% 16% 9% 13% 13% 17% 14% 15% 11% 17% 13% 9%
F f
Ranked 6th 92 60 32 54 32 6 34 58 53 40 44 20 28 64 28 67 13 12 53 28 11
(Least Important) 9% 11% 7% 13% 9% 3% 7% 11% 7% 15% 8% 11% 10% 8% 13% 14% 5% 5% 13% 8% 5%
f qr
MEAN RANKING 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.5 3.0 2.1 3.0 3.0 2.9 3.1 3.0 2.9 3.0 2.9 3.3 3.2 2.9 2.6 3.3 2.9 2.6
eF F R U
MEDIAN RANKING 3.0 3.0 3.0 4.0 3.0 2.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 2.0 3.0 3.0 2.0


Page 109
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
TOTAL 1000 552 448 426 360 214 489 511 735 265 538 189 273 774 226 490 294 216 408 343 232
100% 55% 45% 43% 36% 21% 49% 51% 73% 27% 54% 19% 27% 77% 23% 49% 29% 22% 41% 34% 23%
NET: TOP 2 320 188 132 168 121 32 170 150 237 83 179 57 83 251 69 175 85 60 143 114 56
__________ 32% 34% 29% 39% 34% 15% 35% 29% 32% 31% 33% 30% 31% 32% 31% 36% 29% 28% 35% 33% 24%
F F
Ranked 1st 208 125 83 121 74 13 119 89 144 64 123 34 52 169 39 114 56 38 96 73 34
(Most Important) 21% 23% 18% 28% 20% 6% 24% 17% 20% 24% 23% 18% 19% 22% 17% 23% 19% 18% 24% 21% 15%
F F
Ranked 2nd 112 63 49 47 47 18 50 61 92 19 56 24 32 82 30 61 29 22 47 41 22

11% 11% 11% 11% 13% 9% 10% 12% 13% 7% 10% 13% 12% 11% 13% 12% 10% 10% 11% 12% 9%
Ranked 3rd 124 65 59 66 43 15 56 68 79 45 61 22 41 95 29 52 49 23 42 48 33

12% 12% 13% 15% 12% 7% 11% 13% 11% 17% 11% 12% 15% 12% 13% 11% 17% 11% 10% 14% 14%
Ranked 4th 200 113 87 82 77 41 86 114 143 57 122 26 52 165 35 102 56 42 81 75 39

20% 21% 19% 19% 21% 19% 18% 22% 19% 22% 23% 14% 19% 21% 15% 21% 19% 19% 20% 22% 17%
NET: BOTTOM 2 356 186 170 111 119 126 177 179 276 80 176 84 96 263 93 161 104 91 142 106 104
_____________ 36% 34% 38% 26% 33% 59% 36% 35% 38% 30% 33% 44% 35% 34% 41% 33% 35% 42% 35% 31% 45%
DE t
Ranked 5th 201 111 90 67 74 60 82 119 151 50 95 51 55 151 50 104 45 52 101 44 54

20% 20% 20% 16% 21% 28% 17% 23% 20% 19% 18% 27% 20% 20% 22% 21% 15% 24% 25% 13% 23%
d


Page 110
(Continued)
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
Ranked 6th 155 75 80 44 45 66 96 60 125 30 82 32 41 112 44 57 59 39 41 62 50

(Least Important) 16% 14% 18% 10% 13% 31% 20% 12% 17% 11% 15% 17% 15% 14% 19% 12% 20% 18% 10% 18% 22%
DE s
MEAN RANKING 3.5 3.4 3.7 3.1 3.5 4.5 3.5 3.6 3.6 3.4 3.5 3.7 3.6 3.5 3.7 3.4 3.6 3.8 3.4 3.5 3.9
DE s
MEDIAN RANKING 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0


Page 111
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
TOTAL 1000 552 448 426 360 214 489 511 735 265 538 189 273 774 226 490 294 216 408 343 232
100% 55% 45% 43% 36% 21% 49% 51% 73% 27% 54% 19% 27% 77% 23% 49% 29% 22% 41% 34% 23%
NET: TOP 2 214 113 101 77 108 29 133 82 149 65 115 48 51 166 49 108 60 46 93 71 46
__________ 21% 20% 23% 18% 30% 13% 27% 16% 20% 24% 21% 25% 19% 21% 21% 22% 20% 21% 23% 21% 20%
dF h
Ranked 1st 97 42 55 29 52 16 59 39 64 33 47 22 28 69 28 49 29 19 41 35 20
(Most Important) 10% 8% 12% 7% 14% 8% 12% 8% 9% 13% 9% 12% 10% 9% 12% 10% 10% 9% 10% 10% 8%
Ranked 2nd 117 71 46 48 56 13 74 43 86 31 67 26 23 96 20 58 31 27 52 36 26

12% 13% 10% 11% 16% 6% 15% 8% 12% 12% 13% 14% 9% 12% 9% 12% 11% 13% 13% 10% 11%
F
Ranked 3rd 114 68 46 63 41 11 78 36 83 31 61 21 31 65 49 68 26 20 63 27 21

11% 12% 10% 15% 11% 5% 16% 7% 11% 12% 11% 11% 11% 8% 22% 14% 9% 9% 15% 8% 9%
f h N
Ranked 4th 147 79 68 49 46 52 71 77 112 36 78 39 30 122 26 65 50 32 49 62 36

15% 14% 15% 11% 13% 24% 14% 15% 15% 13% 15% 21% 11% 16% 11% 13% 17% 15% 12% 18% 16%
De m
NET: BOTTOM 2 525 292 233 237 165 123 208 317 391 134 284 80 160 422 103 249 158 118 203 183 129
_____________ 52% 53% 52% 56% 46% 57% 43% 62% 53% 51% 53% 43% 59% 54% 46% 51% 54% 55% 50% 53% 56%
G L


Page 112
(Continued)
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
Ranked 5th 176 111 65 98 48 30 84 92 131 45 93 31 51 139 37 107 42 27 70 60 45

18% 20% 14% 23% 13% 14% 17% 18% 18% 17% 17% 17% 19% 18% 16% 22% 14% 13% 17% 17% 19%
Ranked 6th 349 180 168 140 116 93 124 225 259 89 191 49 109 283 66 142 116 91 133 123 85
(Least Important) 35% 33% 38% 33% 32% 43% 25% 44% 35% 34% 35% 26% 40% 37% 29% 29% 40% 42% 33% 36% 36%
G l
MEAN RANKING 4.2 4.2 4.2 4.3 3.9 4.6 3.9 4.6 4.3 4.1 4.3 3.9 4.4 4.3 4.0 4.1 4.3 4.4 4.1 4.3 4.4
E G l
MEDIAN RANKING 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 5.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 5.0 5.0


Page 113
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
TOTAL 1000 552 448 426 360 214 489 511 735 265 538 189 273 774 226 490 294 216 408 343 232
100% 55% 45% 43% 36% 21% 49% 51% 73% 27% 54% 19% 27% 77% 23% 49% 29% 22% 41% 34% 23%
NET: TOP 2 547 294 254 240 182 125 249 298 397 150 298 99 150 432 115 260 162 126 220 188 129
__________ 55% 53% 57% 56% 51% 58% 51% 58% 54% 57% 55% 52% 55% 56% 51% 53% 55% 58% 54% 55% 56%
Ranked 1st 298 154 145 128 104 66 123 175 224 74 167 53 78 223 75 149 85 64 127 98 70
(Most Important) 30% 28% 32% 30% 29% 31% 25% 34% 30% 28% 31% 28% 29% 29% 33% 30% 29% 30% 31% 28% 30%
Ranked 2nd 249 140 109 112 78 59 126 123 173 76 132 46 71 209 40 111 76 62 93 90 59
25% 25% 24% 26% 22% 27% 26% 24% 24% 29% 24% 24% 26% 27% 18% 23% 26% 29% 23% 26% 25%
Ranked 3rd 183 109 74 65 73 45 93 90 148 35 92 40 51 142 41 88 53 41 68 71 43

18% 20% 17% 15% 20% 21% 19% 18% 20% 13% 17% 21% 19% 18% 18% 18% 18% 19% 17% 21% 18%
Ranked 4th 107 53 54 44 42 22 62 45 86 21 51 24 32 81 26 53 33 21 34 43 27

11% 10% 12% 10% 12% 10% 13% 9% 12% 8% 10% 13% 12% 10% 12% 11% 11% 10% 8% 13% 12%
NET: BOTTOM 2 163 96 66 77 63 23 85 78 104 58 97 26 40 119 43 89 46 28 86 41 33

_____________ 16% 17% 15% 18% 17% 11% 17% 15% 14% 22% 18% 14% 15% 15% 19% 18% 16% 13% 21% 12% 14%
Ranked 5th 118 61 57 46 51 22 74 44 78 40 71 16 31 89 29 61 33 24 52 35 29

12% 11% 13% 11% 14% 10% 15% 9% 11% 15% 13% 8% 11% 11% 13% 12% 11% 11% 13% 10% 12%
Ranked 6th 45 36 9 31 12 2 11 34 26 18 26 10 9 30 14 28 13 4 34 5 5
(Least Important) 4% 6% 2% 7% 3% 1% 2% 7% 4% 7% 5% 5% 3% 4% 6% 6% 4% 2% 8% 2% 2%
f tu


Page 114
(Continued)
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
MEAN RANKING 2.6 2.7 2.5 2.7 2.7 2.4 2.7 2.5 2.6 2.7 2.6 2.7 2.6 2.6 2.7 2.7 2.6 2.5 2.7 2.5 2.6
MEDIAN RANKING 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0


Page 115
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
TOTAL 1000 552 448 426 360 214 489 511 735 265 538 189 273 774 226 490 294 216 408 343 232
100% 55% 45% 43% 36% 21% 49% 51% 73% 27% 54% 19% 27% 77% 23% 49% 29% 22% 41% 34% 23%
NET: TOP 2 130 80 50 72 33 25 71 59 109 21 76 22 32 99 31 56 50 24 53 43 34

__________ 13% 14% 11% 17% 9% 12% 15% 11% 15% 8% 14% 12% 12% 13% 14% 11% 17% 11% 13% 12% 15%
Ranked 1st 48 28 19 36 7 4 31 16 42 5 29 8 11 31 16 30 10 7 30 10 7
(Most Important) 5% 5% 4% 9% 2% 2% 6% 3% 6% 2% 5% 4% 4% 4% 7% 6% 4% 3% 7% 3% 3%
ef
Ranked 2nd 82 51 31 35 26 21 40 42 67 15 48 14 21 67 15 26 39 17 22 33 26
8% 9% 7% 8% 7% 10% 8% 8% 9% 6% 9% 7% 8% 9% 7% 5% 13% 8% 6% 10% 11%
p
Ranked 3rd 120 67 53 50 48 22 53 67 78 42 54 23 43 86 34 58 36 26 47 46 24

12% 12% 12% 12% 13% 10% 11% 13% 11% 16% 10% 12% 16% 11% 15% 12% 12% 12% 12% 14% 10%
Ranked 4th 219 123 96 88 75 56 94 125 144 75 125 40 54 171 48 116 58 44 103 57 53
22% 22% 21% 21% 21% 26% 19% 24% 20% 28% 23% 21% 20% 22% 21% 24% 20% 20% 25% 17% 23%
NET: BOTTOM 2 531 282 249 216 204 111 270 261 404 128 284 104 144 419 112 259 150 122 204 197 123
_____________ 53% 51% 56% 51% 57% 52% 55% 51% 55% 48% 53% 55% 53% 54% 50% 53% 51% 56% 50% 57% 53%
Ranked 5th 233 119 114 94 70 69 90 143 174 58 126 38 69 177 55 103 71 59 78 98 54
23% 21% 25% 22% 19% 32% 18% 28% 24% 22% 23% 20% 25% 23% 24% 21% 24% 27% 19% 28% 23%


Page 116
(Continued)
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
Ranked 6th 298 163 135 122 134 42 180 118 229 69 157 66 75 241 57 156 79 63 127 99 69
(Least Important) 30% 30% 30% 29% 37% 20% 37% 23% 31% 26% 29% 35% 28% 31% 25% 32% 27% 29% 31% 29% 30%
F h
MEAN RANKING 4.4 4.3 4.5 4.3 4.6 4.4 4.5 4.3 4.4 4.4 4.4 4.5 4.4 4.4 4.2 4.4 4.3 4.5 4.4 4.4 4.4
MEDIAN RANKING 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0


Page 117
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
TOTAL 1000 552 448 426 360 214 489 511 735 265 538 189 273 774 226 490 294 216 408 343 232
100% 55% 45% 43% 36% 21% 49% 51% 73% 27% 54% 19% 27% 77% 23% 49% 29% 22% 41% 34% 23%
NET: TOP 2 338 175 163 158 108 72 142 196 239 99 166 70 103 244 94 173 102 63 148 113 73
__________ 34% 32% 36% 37% 30% 33% 29% 38% 33% 37% 31% 37% 38% 32% 42% 35% 35% 29% 36% 33% 31%
Ranked 1st 88 44 44 40 34 13 33 55 71 16 37 20 32 70 18 43 32 13 35 29 22
(Most Important) 9% 8% 10% 9% 9% 6% 7% 11% 10% 6% 7% 10% 12% 9% 8% 9% 11% 6% 9% 9% 10%
Ranked 2nd 250 131 119 118 74 58 109 141 168 82 129 50 71 174 77 129 71 50 113 84 51
25% 24% 27% 28% 21% 27% 22% 28% 23% 31% 24% 27% 26% 22% 34% 26% 24% 23% 28% 25% 22%
Ranked 3rd 284 163 121 115 83 85 131 153 217 67 179 39 66 234 50 163 61 60 137 74 69
28% 30% 27% 27% 23% 40% 27% 30% 30% 25% 33% 21% 24% 30% 22% 33% 21% 28% 34% 22% 30%
de l q
Ranked 4th 182 100 82 67 85 30 93 89 137 45 86 34 63 134 48 70 58 54 64 68 47

18% 18% 18% 16% 24% 14% 19% 17% 19% 17% 16% 18% 23% 17% 21% 14% 20% 25% 16% 20% 20%
p
NET: BOTTOM 2 196 114 82 86 82 28 123 72 142 54 108 46 41 162 34 85 72 38 59 88 43

_____________ 20% 21% 18% 20% 23% 13% 25% 14% 19% 20% 20% 25% 15% 21% 15% 17% 25% 18% 14% 26% 19%
h m s
Ranked 5th 135 76 59 50 63 23 79 56 99 36 69 35 31 118 17 45 59 31 38 62 30

14% 14% 13% 12% 18% 11% 16% 11% 14% 13% 13% 19% 11% 15% 7% 9% 20% 14% 9% 18% 13%
o p


Page 118
(Continued)
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
Ranked 6th 61 38 23 36 19 5 44 17 42 18 39 11 10 43 17 40 13 8 21 26 13
(Least Important) 6% 7% 5% 8% 5% 2% 9% 3% 6% 7% 7% 6% 4% 6% 8% 8% 5% 4% 5% 7% 6%
f h
MEAN RANKING 3.2 3.3 3.1 3.2 3.4 3.0 3.4 3.0 3.2 3.2 3.3 3.3 3.1 3.2 3.1 3.1 3.3 3.3 3.0 3.4 3.2
H
MEDIAN RANKING 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0


Page 119
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
TOTAL 1000 552 448 426 360 214 489 511 735 265 538 189 273 774 226 490 294 216 408 343 232
100% 55% 45% 43% 36% 21% 49% 51% 73% 27% 54% 19% 27% 77% 23% 49% 29% 22% 41% 34% 23%
(C) I would feel a lot 933 517 415 403 341 188 473 460 694 238 521 175 237 730 202 467 274 191 385 320 214
better about my life 20 93% 94% 93% 95% 95% 88% 97% 90% 94% 90% 97% 93% 87% 94% 89% 95% 93% 88% 94% 93% 92%
years from now if I had h M
some money saved for
retirement
(A) I really could save 862 481 381 375 310 177 450 412 651 211 478 160 223 668 194 427 248 187 352 293 203
for retirement if I 86% 87% 85% 88% 86% 83% 92% 81% 89% 79% 89% 85% 82% 86% 86% 87% 84% 86% 86% 85% 87%
forced myself to do it H
(D) I should have 860 470 390 358 314 187 441 418 644 216 478 168 213 664 195 423 268 169 357 290 198
started saving earlier 86% 85% 87% 84% 87% 87% 90% 82% 88% 81% 89% 89% 78% 86% 86% 86% 91% 78% 87% 85% 85%
for retirement, even if h M M R
it was hard to do it
(B) It is hopeless for 417 239 177 194 157 65 251 166 278 138 275 67 74 310 106 278 96 43 216 140 58
me to save anything 42% 43% 40% 46% 44% 30% 51% 32% 38% 52% 51% 36% 27% 40% 47% 57% 33% 20% 53% 41% 25%
f f H i lM QR r U U


Page 120
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
TOTAL 1000 552 448 426 360 214 489 511 735 265 538 189 273 774 226 490 294 216 408 343 232
100% 55% 45% 43% 36% 21% 49% 51% 73% 27% 54% 19% 27% 77% 23% 49% 29% 22% 41% 34% 23%
NET: AGREE 862 481 381 375 310 177 450 412 651 211 478 160 223 668 194 427 248 187 352 293 203
__________ 86% 87% 85% 88% 86% 83% 92% 81% 89% 79% 89% 85% 82% 86% 86% 87% 84% 86% 86% 85% 87%
H
Strongly agree (4) 381 216 166 187 120 75 201 180 313 68 193 76 112 264 117 178 84 119 144 119 114
38% 39% 37% 44% 33% 35% 41% 35% 43% 26% 36% 40% 41% 34% 52% 36% 29% 55% 35% 35% 49%
j N PQ st
Somewhat agree (3) 481 265 216 188 190 102 249 231 338 143 285 84 111 404 77 249 164 68 208 174 89
48% 48% 48% 44% 53% 48% 51% 45% 46% 54% 53% 44% 41% 52% 34% 51% 56% 31% 51% 51% 38%
m O R R
NET: DISAGREE 138 71 67 51 50 37 39 99 84 54 60 29 49 105 33 63 46 29 56 50 30

_____________ 14% 13% 15% 12% 14% 17% 8% 19% 11% 21% 11% 15% 18% 14% 14% 13% 16% 14% 14% 15% 13%
G
Somewhat disagree (2) 106 62 44 42 39 25 36 69 66 40 48 24 34 82 23 46 41 19 40 43 20

11% 11% 10% 10% 11% 12% 7% 14% 9% 15% 9% 13% 12% 11% 10% 9% 14% 9% 10% 13% 9%
Strongly disagree (1) 32 9 23 9 11 13 2 30 18 14 13 4 15 23 9 18 4 10 16 7 10

3% 2% 5% 2% 3% 6% *% 6% 2% 5% 2% 2% 6% 3% 4% 4% 1% 5% 4% 2% 4%
g
MEAN 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.3 3.2 3.1 3.3 3.1 3.3 3.0 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.3 3.2 3.1 3.4 3.2 3.2 3.3
h j q


Page 121
(Continued)
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
MEDIAN 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 3.0


Page 122
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
TOTAL 1000 552 448 426 360 214 489 511 735 265 538 189 273 774 226 490 294 216 408 343 232
100% 55% 45% 43% 36% 21% 49% 51% 73% 27% 54% 19% 27% 77% 23% 49% 29% 22% 41% 34% 23%
NET: AGREE 417 239 177 194 157 65 251 166 278 138 275 67 74 310 106 278 96 43 216 140 58
__________ 42% 43% 40% 46% 44% 30% 51% 32% 38% 52% 51% 36% 27% 40% 47% 57% 33% 20% 53% 41% 25%
f f H i lM QR r U U
Strongly agree (4) 135 81 55 54 62 19 100 35 82 53 99 18 19 106 29 100 28 7 78 40 17

14% 15% 12% 13% 17% 9% 21% 7% 11% 20% 18% 9% 7% 14% 13% 20% 10% 3% 19% 12% 7%
f H i lM qR r U
Somewhat agree (3) 281 158 123 140 96 46 150 131 196 85 177 49 55 204 77 178 67 36 138 100 41
28% 29% 27% 33% 27% 21% 31% 26% 27% 32% 33% 26% 20% 26% 34% 36% 23% 17% 34% 29% 17%
m qR U u
NET: DISAGREE 583 313 271 232 202 149 238 345 457 127 263 122 199 464 120 212 198 173 192 203 175
_____________ 58% 57% 60% 54% 56% 70% 49% 68% 62% 48% 49% 64% 73% 60% 53% 43% 67% 80% 47% 59% 75%
de G j k K P Pq ST
24% 24% 24% 26% 19% 29% 23% 25% 26% 19% 18% 38% 27% 24% 26% 18% 34% 24% 23% 20% 30%
Km p
34% 32% 37% 29% 37% 40% 26% 42% 36% 28% 31% 27% 46% 36% 27% 25% 34% 56% 24% 39% 46%
G KL PQ s S


Page 123
(Continued)
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
MEAN 2.2 2.3 2.2 2.3 2.2 2.0 2.5 2.0 2.1 2.4 2.4 2.2 1.9 2.2 2.3 2.5 2.1 1.7 2.5 2.1 1.9
f H i M M QR R tU u
MEDIAN 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 3.0 2.0 2.0 3.0 3.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 3.0 2.0 1.0 3.0 2.0 2.0


Page 124
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
TOTAL 1000 552 448 426 360 214 489 511 735 265 538 189 273 774 226 490 294 216 408 343 232
100% 55% 45% 43% 36% 21% 49% 51% 73% 27% 54% 19% 27% 77% 23% 49% 29% 22% 41% 34% 23%
NET: AGREE 933 517 415 403 341 188 473 460 694 238 521 175 237 730 202 467 274 191 385 320 214
__________ 93% 94% 93% 95% 95% 88% 97% 90% 94% 90% 97% 93% 87% 94% 89% 95% 93% 88% 94% 93% 92%
h M
Strongly agree (4) 644 340 304 298 225 121 342 303 508 136 377 108 159 508 136 346 163 135 292 197 149
64% 62% 68% 70% 63% 56% 70% 59% 69% 51% 70% 57% 58% 66% 60% 71% 55% 63% 72% 57% 64%
j m q t
Somewhat agree (3) 288 177 111 105 116 67 131 157 186 102 144 67 78 222 66 121 111 56 93 123 65
29% 32% 25% 25% 32% 31% 27% 31% 25% 39% 27% 35% 29% 29% 29% 25% 38% 26% 23% 36% 28%
pr s
NET: DISAGREE 67 34 33 23 18 26 16 51 41 27 17 14 36 43 24 23 20 25 23 23 19
_____________ 7% 6% 7% 5% 5% 12% 3% 10% 6% 10% 3% 7% 13% 6% 11% 5% 7% 12% 6% 7% 8%
g K

5% 5% 5% 5% 4% 7% 3% 8% 4% 9% 2% 7% 10% 4% 9% 4% 6% 7% 5% 4% 6%
K

1% 1% 2% *% 1% 5% *% 2% 1% 2% 1% *% 3% 1% 2% 1% 1% 5% 1% 2% 2%
MEAN 3.6 3.5 3.6 3.6 3.6 3.4 3.7 3.5 3.6 3.4 3.7 3.5 3.4 3.6 3.5 3.7 3.5 3.5 3.7 3.5 3.5
f h M


Page 125
(Continued)
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
MEDIAN 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0


Page 126
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
TOTAL 1000 552 448 426 360 214 489 511 735 265 538 189 273 774 226 490 294 216 408 343 232
100% 55% 45% 43% 36% 21% 49% 51% 73% 27% 54% 19% 27% 77% 23% 49% 29% 22% 41% 34% 23%
NET: AGREE 860 470 390 358 314 187 441 418 644 216 478 168 213 664 195 423 268 169 357 290 198
__________ 86% 85% 87% 84% 87% 87% 90% 82% 88% 81% 89% 89% 78% 86% 86% 86% 91% 78% 87% 85% 85%
h M M R
Strongly agree (4) 465 232 233 180 190 95 242 224 370 96 252 96 117 364 102 238 113 114 187 157 120
47% 42% 52% 42% 53% 44% 49% 44% 50% 36% 47% 51% 43% 47% 45% 49% 39% 53% 46% 46% 52%
q
Somewhat agree (3) 394 237 157 178 124 93 200 195 274 120 226 72 96 301 94 185 154 55 170 134 78
39% 43% 35% 42% 34% 43% 41% 38% 37% 45% 42% 38% 35% 39% 41% 38% 53% 25% 42% 39% 34%
pR
NET: DISAGREE 140 82 58 68 46 27 48 93 91 49 60 21 59 110 31 67 26 47 51 53 34

_____________ 14% 15% 13% 16% 13% 13% 10% 18% 12% 19% 11% 11% 22% 14% 14% 14% 9% 22% 13% 15% 15%
g KL Q

11% 12% 9% 12% 9% 10% 7% 14% 9% 15% 10% 8% 14% 11% 9% 12% 6% 14% 10% 12% 9%
g l q

3% 3% 4% 4% 4% 2% 3% 4% 3% 4% 1% 3% 8% 3% 4% 2% 3% 7% 2% 4% 6%
K


Page 127
(Continued)
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
MEAN 3.3 3.2 3.3 3.2 3.4 3.3 3.4 3.2 3.3 3.1 3.3 3.4 3.1 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.2 3.3 3.3 3.3
m m
MEDIAN 3.0 3.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 4.0


Page 128
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
TOTAL 1000 552 448 426 360 214 489 511 735 265 538 189 273 774 226 490 294 216 408 343 232
100% 55% 45% 43% 36% 21% 49% 51% 73% 27% 54% 19% 27% 77% 23% 49% 29% 22% 41% 34% 23%
NET: CONFIDENT 605 365 240 248 229 128 345 260 418 187 323 117 165 450 156 320 157 128 255 199 140
______________ 61% 66% 54% 58% 64% 60% 71% 51% 57% 71% 60% 62% 61% 58% 69% 65% 53% 59% 62% 58% 60%
c H
Very confident (4) 209 134 75 106 63 40 130 79 139 69 111 44 53 152 56 115 47 47 85 75 48
21% 24% 17% 25% 17% 19% 27% 15% 19% 26% 21% 23% 20% 20% 25% 23% 16% 22% 21% 22% 21%
h
Somewhat confident (3) 397 231 165 141 166 89 216 181 279 118 212 73 112 297 99 206 110 81 170 124 93
40% 42% 37% 33% 46% 41% 44% 35% 38% 44% 39% 39% 41% 38% 44% 42% 37% 38% 42% 36% 40%
NET: NOT CONFIDENT 395 186 208 178 130 86 144 251 317 78 215 72 108 324 71 170 137 88 153 144 92
__________________ 39% 34% 46% 42% 36% 40% 29% 49% 43% 29% 40% 38% 39% 42% 31% 35% 47% 41% 38% 42% 40%
b G
Not too confident (2) 279 137 142 119 100 60 102 177 227 52 144 55 80 232 47 104 117 58 98 110 70
28% 25% 32% 28% 28% 28% 21% 35% 31% 20% 27% 29% 29% 30% 21% 21% 40% 27% 24% 32% 30%
g Pr
Not at all 115 49 66 59 30 26 41 74 90 26 71 16 28 92 24 65 20 30 55 34 22

confident (1) 12% 9% 15% 14% 8% 12% 8% 15% 12% 10% 13% 9% 10% 12% 10% 13% 7% 14% 13% 10% 9%
MEAN 2.7 2.8 2.6 2.7 2.7 2.7 2.9 2.5 2.6 2.9 2.7 2.8 2.7 2.7 2.8 2.8 2.6 2.7 2.7 2.7 2.7
c H


Page 129
(Continued)
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
MEDIAN 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0


Page 130
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
TOTAL 1000 552 448 426 360 214 489 511 735 265 538 189 273 774 226 490 294 216 408 343 232
100% 55% 45% 43% 36% 21% 49% 51% 73% 27% 54% 19% 27% 77% 23% 49% 29% 22% 41% 34% 23%
(D) Professional 551 293 258 237 204 111 300 251 416 135 309 108 135 432 120 263 161 127 221 199 129
financial advisors 55% 53% 58% 56% 57% 52% 61% 49% 57% 51% 57% 57% 49% 56% 53% 54% 55% 59% 54% 58% 56%
h
(E) Financial companies 457 239 218 175 190 91 241 216 346 111 254 86 117 371 86 218 137 101 173 170 109
46% 43% 49% 41% 53% 43% 49% 42% 47% 42% 47% 46% 43% 48% 38% 45% 47% 47% 42% 50% 47%
(C) Your employer 451 252 199 234 156 61 299 152 347 104 254 102 96 358 93 274 111 66 210 161 77
45% 46% 44% 55% 43% 29% 61% 30% 47% 39% 47% 54% 35% 46% 41% 56% 38% 31% 51% 47% 33%
F f H m M QR U u
(F) Insurance companies 401 227 173 184 156 61 282 119 310 91 230 84 87 324 77 223 108 70 171 134 92
40% 41% 39% 43% 43% 28% 58% 23% 42% 34% 43% 44% 32% 42% 34% 46% 37% 32% 42% 39% 40%
f f H m r
(A) Federal government 374 233 140 187 139 48 251 123 282 92 214 74 86 314 59 241 76 57 164 128 78
37% 42% 31% 44% 39% 23% 51% 24% 38% 35% 40% 39% 31% 41% 26% 49% 26% 26% 40% 37% 33%
c F F H o QR
(B) State government 373 232 141 192 141 41 248 125 284 89 218 70 86 300 73 247 76 50 177 131 61
37% 42% 32% 45% 39% 19% 51% 24% 39% 34% 40% 37% 31% 39% 32% 50% 26% 23% 43% 38% 26%
c F F H QR U u


Page 131
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
TOTAL 1000 552 448 426 360 214 489 511 735 265 538 189 273 774 226 490 294 216 408 343 232
100% 55% 45% 43% 36% 21% 49% 51% 73% 27% 54% 19% 27% 77% 23% 49% 29% 22% 41% 34% 23%
NET: AGREE 374 233 140 187 139 48 251 123 282 92 214 74 86 314 59 241 76 57 164 128 78
__________ 37% 42% 31% 44% 39% 23% 51% 24% 38% 35% 40% 39% 31% 41% 26% 49% 26% 26% 40% 37% 33%
c F F H o QR
Strongly Agree (5) 152 112 40 88 51 13 127 26 120 32 111 23 18 132 20 111 31 10 74 57 21
15% 20% 9% 21% 14% 6% 26% 5% 16% 12% 21% 12% 7% 17% 9% 23% 11% 4% 18% 17% 9%
C F f H lM o QR u u
Somewhat Agree (4) 221 122 100 99 87 36 124 97 162 60 103 50 68 183 39 129 45 47 90 71 57
22% 22% 22% 23% 24% 17% 25% 19% 22% 23% 19% 27% 25% 24% 17% 26% 15% 22% 22% 21% 24%
q
Neutral (3) 332 174 159 139 128 66 119 213 271 62 176 60 96 242 90 142 111 79 139 111 71
33% 31% 35% 33% 35% 31% 24% 42% 37% 23% 33% 32% 35% 31% 40% 29% 38% 37% 34% 32% 31%
G
NET: DISAGREE 294 145 149 101 93 100 119 175 182 112 148 55 91 217 77 108 106 80 105 104 83
_____________ 29% 26% 33% 24% 26% 47% 24% 34% 25% 42% 27% 29% 33% 28% 34% 22% 36% 37% 26% 30% 36%
DE i p p
Somewhat Disagree (2) 152 67 85 53 47 51 70 82 115 36 70 29 53 106 46 47 67 38 59 65 27

15% 12% 19% 13% 13% 24% 14% 16% 16% 14% 13% 15% 19% 14% 20% 10% 23% 18% 14% 19% 12%
d p


Page 132
(Continued)
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
Strongly Disagree (1) 143 78 65 48 46 49 49 93 67 75 78 26 38 111 31 61 39 42 46 39 56

14% 14% 14% 11% 13% 23% 10% 18% 9% 28% 15% 14% 14% 14% 14% 12% 13% 19% 11% 11% 24%
d g I st
MEAN 3.1 3.2 2.9 3.3 3.1 2.6 3.4 2.8 3.2 2.8 3.2 3.1 2.9 3.2 2.9 3.4 2.9 2.7 3.2 3.1 2.8
c F F H j m QR u
MEDIAN 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0


Page 133
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
TOTAL 1000 552 448 426 360 214 489 511 735 265 538 189 273 774 226 490 294 216 408 343 232
100% 55% 45% 43% 36% 21% 49% 51% 73% 27% 54% 19% 27% 77% 23% 49% 29% 22% 41% 34% 23%
NET: AGREE 373 232 141 192 141 41 248 125 284 89 218 70 86 300 73 247 76 50 177 131 61
__________ 37% 42% 32% 45% 39% 19% 51% 24% 39% 34% 40% 37% 31% 39% 32% 50% 26% 23% 43% 38% 26%
c F F H QR U u
Strongly Agree (5) 129 95 34 65 53 11 98 31 113 16 88 22 19 102 27 87 33 9 64 48 17

13% 17% 8% 15% 15% 5% 20% 6% 15% 6% 16% 12% 7% 13% 12% 18% 11% 4% 16% 14% 7%
C F F H J M R r u u
Somewhat Agree (4) 244 137 108 127 88 29 150 94 171 73 130 48 67 198 46 160 44 41 113 83 45
24% 25% 24% 30% 24% 14% 31% 18% 23% 28% 24% 25% 25% 26% 21% 33% 15% 19% 28% 24% 19%
F h Qr
Neutral (3) 355 198 158 151 130 74 142 214 278 77 187 70 98 259 96 153 117 85 153 104 86
36% 36% 35% 36% 36% 34% 29% 42% 38% 29% 35% 37% 36% 34% 42% 31% 40% 39% 38% 30% 37%
g
NET: DISAGREE 271 122 149 83 89 100 99 173 172 99 134 49 89 214 57 90 100 81 78 108 85
_____________ 27% 22% 33% 19% 25% 47% 20% 34% 23% 37% 25% 26% 33% 28% 25% 18% 34% 38% 19% 31% 37%
b DE g p P s

15% 11% 19% 12% 12% 24% 13% 16% 15% 14% 13% 11% 19% 14% 16% 9% 21% 18% 11% 20% 14%
de l p


Page 134
(Continued)
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----

13% 11% 15% 8% 12% 23% 8% 17% 9% 23% 11% 15% 13% 14% 9% 9% 14% 19% 8% 11% 22%
D G i St
MEAN 3.1 3.3 2.9 3.3 3.2 2.6 3.4 2.8 3.2 2.8 3.2 3.1 2.9 3.1 3.1 3.4 2.9 2.7 3.3 3.1 2.7
C F F H j m QR U u
MEDIAN 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0


Page 135
(C) Your employer
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
TOTAL 1000 552 448 426 360 214 489 511 735 265 538 189 273 774 226 490 294 216 408 343 232
100% 55% 45% 43% 36% 21% 49% 51% 73% 27% 54% 19% 27% 77% 23% 49% 29% 22% 41% 34% 23%
NET: AGREE 451 252 199 234 156 61 299 152 347 104 254 102 96 358 93 274 111 66 210 161 77
__________ 45% 46% 44% 55% 43% 29% 61% 30% 47% 39% 47% 54% 35% 46% 41% 56% 38% 31% 51% 47% 33%
F f H m M QR U u
Strongly Agree (5) 144 88 56 81 50 12 111 33 106 38 82 37 25 114 30 96 26 23 55 65 22

14% 16% 12% 19% 14% 6% 23% 6% 14% 14% 15% 20% 9% 15% 13% 19% 9% 11% 14% 19% 9%
F f H M Qr u
Somewhat Agree (4) 307 164 144 153 105 49 188 119 241 66 172 65 71 245 63 179 85 43 155 96 56
31% 30% 32% 36% 29% 23% 39% 23% 33% 25% 32% 34% 26% 32% 28% 36% 29% 20% 38% 28% 24%
f H R u
Neutral (3) 388 207 180 140 149 98 141 246 281 106 207 63 118 282 105 165 118 104 146 117 113
39% 38% 40% 33% 42% 46% 29% 48% 38% 40% 38% 33% 43% 36% 47% 34% 40% 48% 36% 34% 48%
G p t
NET: DISAGREE 161 93 69 52 54 56 48 113 107 54 78 24 59 133 28 51 64 46 52 65 42

_____________ 16% 17% 15% 12% 15% 26% 10% 22% 15% 20% 14% 13% 22% 17% 12% 10% 22% 21% 13% 19% 18%
d G p p

8% 9% 7% 4% 10% 12% 5% 11% 7% 11% 5% 8% 14% 8% 9% 3% 14% 12% 5% 10% 11%
K P p


Page 136
(Continued)
(C) Your employer
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----

8% 8% 8% 8% 5% 14% 5% 11% 8% 9% 10% 5% 7% 9% 4% 8% 8% 9% 8% 9% 8%
e g
MEAN 3.4 3.4 3.3 3.5 3.4 2.9 3.7 3.0 3.4 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.6 3.2 3.1 3.4 3.4 3.2
F F H M QR
MEDIAN 3.0 3.0 3.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 4.0 3.0 3.0


Page 137
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
TOTAL 1000 552 448 426 360 214 489 511 735 265 538 189 273 774 226 490 294 216 408 343 232
100% 55% 45% 43% 36% 21% 49% 51% 73% 27% 54% 19% 27% 77% 23% 49% 29% 22% 41% 34% 23%
NET: AGREE 551 293 258 237 204 111 300 251 416 135 309 108 135 432 120 263 161 127 221 199 129
__________ 55% 53% 58% 56% 57% 52% 61% 49% 57% 51% 57% 57% 49% 56% 53% 54% 55% 59% 54% 58% 56%
h
Strongly Agree (5) 165 82 84 73 61 31 106 59 117 48 99 35 32 133 33 83 42 40 55 78 32

17% 15% 19% 17% 17% 15% 22% 12% 16% 18% 18% 18% 12% 17% 14% 17% 14% 18% 14% 23% 14%
h u
Somewhat Agree (4) 386 212 174 164 143 79 193 193 299 87 210 73 103 299 87 180 119 88 165 121 97
39% 38% 39% 38% 40% 37% 40% 38% 41% 33% 39% 38% 38% 39% 38% 37% 40% 40% 41% 35% 42%
Neutral (3) 337 189 148 140 125 72 135 202 249 88 175 61 101 264 74 181 95 61 149 107 68
34% 34% 33% 33% 35% 34% 28% 39% 34% 33% 33% 32% 37% 34% 33% 37% 32% 28% 37% 31% 29%
g
NET: DISAGREE 112 69 43 49 31 32 54 58 70 42 54 20 37 78 33 46 37 28 38 37 35

_____________ 11% 13% 9% 11% 9% 15% 11% 11% 9% 16% 10% 11% 14% 10% 15% 9% 13% 13% 9% 11% 15%

8% 8% 7% 9% 4% 11% 9% 7% 7% 10% 8% 4% 8% 6% 13% 7% 8% 7% 8% 6% 10%

4% 4% 3% 3% 4% 4% 2% 5% 3% 6% 2% 6% 5% 4% 2% 2% 4% 6% 2% 5% 5%


Page 138
(Continued)
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
MEAN 3.6 3.5 3.6 3.6 3.6 3.5 3.7 3.4 3.6 3.5 3.6 3.6 3.4 3.6 3.5 3.6 3.5 3.6 3.6 3.7 3.5
h
MEDIAN 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0


Page 139
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
TOTAL 1000 552 448 426 360 214 489 511 735 265 538 189 273 774 226 490 294 216 408 343 232
100% 55% 45% 43% 36% 21% 49% 51% 73% 27% 54% 19% 27% 77% 23% 49% 29% 22% 41% 34% 23%
NET: AGREE 457 239 218 175 190 91 241 216 346 111 254 86 117 371 86 218 137 101 173 170 109
__________ 46% 43% 49% 41% 53% 43% 49% 42% 47% 42% 47% 46% 43% 48% 38% 45% 47% 47% 42% 50% 47%
Strongly Agree (5) 145 90 54 59 56 29 112 33 103 41 86 36 23 120 25 88 40 17 60 59 23

14% 16% 12% 14% 16% 14% 23% 6% 14% 16% 16% 19% 9% 15% 11% 18% 14% 8% 15% 17% 10%
H m M r u
Somewhat Agree (4) 312 149 163 116 134 62 129 183 243 70 168 51 93 251 61 131 97 84 113 111 86
31% 27% 36% 27% 37% 29% 26% 36% 33% 26% 31% 27% 34% 32% 27% 27% 33% 39% 28% 32% 37%
Neutral (3) 399 227 172 197 123 79 178 222 292 107 216 79 105 297 102 205 117 77 178 130 80
40% 41% 38% 46% 34% 37% 36% 43% 40% 40% 40% 42% 38% 38% 45% 42% 40% 36% 44% 38% 34%
NET: DISAGREE 144 86 58 53 46 44 70 74 97 47 69 24 51 106 38 66 40 38 57 42 43

_____________ 14% 16% 13% 13% 13% 20% 14% 14% 13% 18% 13% 13% 19% 14% 17% 14% 13% 18% 14% 12% 19%

9% 9% 9% 6% 9% 16% 9% 9% 10% 7% 9% 6% 12% 9% 8% 7% 11% 11% 7% 9% 12%
d

5% 6% 4% 7% 4% 4% 5% 6% 3% 10% 4% 7% 7% 4% 8% 6% 2% 7% 7% 3% 6%


Page 140
(Continued)
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
MEAN 3.4 3.4 3.4 3.4 3.5 3.3 3.5 3.3 3.4 3.3 3.5 3.4 3.3 3.5 3.2 3.4 3.4 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.3
h
MEDIAN 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0


Page 141
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
TOTAL 1000 552 448 426 360 214 489 511 735 265 538 189 273 774 226 490 294 216 408 343 232
100% 55% 45% 43% 36% 21% 49% 51% 73% 27% 54% 19% 27% 77% 23% 49% 29% 22% 41% 34% 23%
NET: AGREE 401 227 173 184 156 61 282 119 310 91 230 84 87 324 77 223 108 70 171 134 92
__________ 40% 41% 39% 43% 43% 28% 58% 23% 42% 34% 43% 44% 32% 42% 34% 46% 37% 32% 42% 39% 40%
f f H m r
Strongly Agree (5) 117 86 31 71 39 7 97 21 80 37 68 30 19 93 24 76 27 14 53 43 22

12% 16% 7% 17% 11% 3% 20% 4% 11% 14% 13% 16% 7% 12% 11% 16% 9% 7% 13% 13% 9%
C F F H m M qR
Somewhat Agree (4) 283 141 142 113 117 53 185 98 230 54 162 54 68 230 53 147 81 55 119 91 70
28% 26% 32% 27% 32% 25% 38% 19% 31% 20% 30% 29% 25% 30% 23% 30% 28% 26% 29% 26% 30%
H
Neutral (3) 401 226 175 159 147 95 145 256 292 108 231 59 110 310 91 183 131 87 160 143 85
40% 41% 39% 37% 41% 44% 30% 50% 40% 41% 43% 31% 40% 40% 40% 37% 45% 40% 39% 42% 37%
G
NET: DISAGREE 199 99 100 83 57 59 62 136 133 66 77 46 76 140 58 84 55 59 77 66 55

_____________ 20% 18% 22% 19% 16% 27% 13% 27% 18% 25% 14% 24% 28% 18% 26% 17% 19% 27% 19% 19% 24%
G K

12% 10% 14% 9% 9% 21% 7% 16% 13% 7% 6% 17% 18% 11% 14% 9% 13% 17% 10% 13% 14%
de g k K


Page 142
(Continued)
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----

8% 8% 9% 10% 7% 6% 6% 10% 5% 17% 8% 7% 9% 7% 12% 9% 6% 10% 9% 6% 10%
i
MEAN 3.2 3.3 3.1 3.3 3.3 3.0 3.6 2.9 3.3 3.1 3.3 3.3 3.0 3.3 3.1 3.4 3.2 3.0 3.3 3.3 3.1
f f H M m r
MEDIAN 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0


Page 143
D1 -- How long have you been working for your current employer?
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
TOTAL 1000 552 448 426 360 214 489 511 735 265 538 189 273 774 226 490 294 216 408 343 232
100% 55% 45% 43% 36% 21% 49% 51% 73% 27% 54% 19% 27% 77% 23% 49% 29% 22% 41% 34% 23%
NET: LESS THAN 5 YEARS 580 326 254 324 177 79 284 296 432 148 301 122 157 415 165 323 157 99 293 173 104
______________________ 58% 59% 57% 76% 49% 37% 58% 58% 59% 56% 56% 64% 58% 54% 73% 66% 54% 46% 72% 51% 45%
EF N R TU
Less than 1 year 157 93 64 99 40 18 76 81 105 52 85 24 47 124 33 92 38 27 79 41 30

16% 17% 14% 23% 11% 8% 16% 16% 14% 20% 16% 13% 17% 16% 15% 19% 13% 12% 19% 12% 13%
eF
1 year but less than 263 148 115 166 66 31 120 143 207 56 131 68 64 170 93 152 69 42 147 72 43
3 years 26% 27% 26% 39% 18% 15% 25% 28% 28% 21% 24% 36% 23% 22% 41% 31% 24% 19% 36% 21% 19%
EF m N r tU
3 years but less than 160 84 76 60 71 29 89 72 121 39 85 29 46 121 39 79 50 31 66 61 30

5 years 16% 15% 17% 14% 20% 14% 18% 14% 16% 15% 16% 15% 17% 16% 17% 16% 17% 14% 16% 18% 13%
NET: 5 YEARS OR MORE 420 226 194 102 182 136 205 215 303 117 237 68 115 359 61 167 136 117 115 170 129
____________________ 42% 41% 43% 24% 51% 63% 42% 42% 41% 44% 44% 36% 42% 46% 27% 34% 46% 54% 28% 49% 55%
D D O P S S
5 years but less than 230 122 108 79 104 47 121 109 166 64 117 38 75 191 39 108 61 61 80 87 61
10 years 23% 22% 24% 19% 29% 22% 25% 21% 23% 24% 22% 20% 27% 25% 17% 22% 21% 28% 20% 25% 26%
10 years or more 190 104 86 23 79 88 84 106 137 53 120 30 40 168 21 59 75 56 35 82 68

19% 19% 19% 5% 22% 41% 17% 21% 19% 20% 22% 16% 15% 22% 9% 12% 26% 26% 9% 24% 29%
D DE o p p S S


Page 144
D2 -- In the last 5 years, how many different employers have you worked for (including your current employer)?
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
TOTAL 1000 552 448 426 360 214 489 511 735 265 538 189 273 774 226 490 294 216 408 343 232
100% 55% 45% 43% 36% 21% 49% 51% 73% 27% 54% 19% 27% 77% 23% 49% 29% 22% 41% 34% 23%
1 437 240 197 130 174 133 213 224 339 98 233 82 122 345 92 166 148 123 136 163 131
44% 43% 44% 30% 48% 62% 44% 44% 46% 37% 43% 43% 45% 45% 41% 34% 50% 57% 33% 48% 56%
D D p P s S
NET: 2 OR MORE 563 312 251 296 185 82 276 287 396 167 305 107 150 428 134 324 146 93 272 180 101
______________ 56% 57% 56% 70% 52% 38% 56% 56% 54% 63% 57% 57% 55% 55% 59% 66% 50% 43% 67% 52% 44%
EF qR tU
2 341 177 164 178 104 59 164 177 226 115 180 69 92 249 92 184 99 58 139 134 61
34% 32% 37% 42% 29% 28% 34% 35% 31% 44% 33% 36% 34% 32% 41% 38% 34% 27% 34% 39% 26%
f u
3 131 95 36 81 37 13 62 69 121 10 74 24 33 105 26 83 31 17 82 27 22

13% 17% 8% 19% 10% 6% 13% 14% 16% 4% 14% 13% 12% 14% 11% 17% 11% 8% 20% 8% 10%
c F J r tu
4 or more 91 39 51 37 44 10 50 41 49 41 51 15 25 74 16 57 15 19 51 20 18
9% 7% 11% 9% 12% 4% 10% 8% 7% 16% 9% 8% 9% 10% 7% 12% 5% 9% 12% 6% 8%
f i


Page 145
D3 -- In your previous job, did you have the ability to be in a pension or retirement savings plan, such as a 401(k) plan?
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
TOTAL 563 312 251 296 185 82 276 287 396 167 305 107 150 428 134 324 146 93 272 180 101
100% 55% 45% 53% 33% 14% 49% 51% 70% 30% 54% 19% 27% 76% 24% 58% 26% 17% 48% 32% 18%
Yes 164 75 89 70 73 21 76 88 110 54 75 37 51 133 31 67 52 44 45 64 52

29% 24% 35% 23% 40% 25% 28% 31% 28% 32% 25% 35% 34% 31% 23% 21% 36% 48% 16% 36% 51%
P s S
No 364 210 155 204 103 58 180 184 255 109 206 67 91 271 94 228 89 47 202 113 43
65% 67% 62% 69% 56% 71% 65% 64% 64% 65% 67% 63% 61% 63% 70% 71% 61% 50% 74% 63% 42%
r U u
Not sure 35 27 7 23 9 3 20 15 31 4 24 3 7 25 10 28 5 2 26 2 6
6% 9% 3% 8% 5% 4% 7% 5% 8% 2% 8% 3% 5% 6% 7% 9% 3% 2% 10% 1% 6%
t


Page 146
D4 -- Does your spouse currently have a pension or a retirement savings plan, such as a 401(k) plan, at his or her
current job?
FILTER: Married
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
TOTAL 452 222 230 116 200 136 246 206 329 123 239 76 136 371 81 148 167 138 134 159 146
100% 49% 51% 26% 44% 30% 54% 46% 73% 27% 53% 17% 30% 82% 18% 33% 37% 30% 30% 35% 32%
Yes 161 62 100 48 61 53 75 87 136 25 66 32 63 123 38 27 56 79 35 67 55

36% 28% 43% 41% 31% 39% 30% 42% 41% 21% 28% 41% 47% 33% 47% 18% 33% 57% 26% 42% 38%
k PQ
No 255 142 113 48 127 81 141 114 175 80 149 40 66 222 33 96 109 50 81 87 82
57% 64% 49% 41% 63% 59% 57% 56% 53% 65% 62% 53% 48% 60% 41% 65% 66% 36% 60% 55% 56%
o R R
Not sure 35 18 17 20 12 3 31 5 18 17 24 4 7 25 10 25 2 9 18 5 9
8% 8% 7% 17% 6% 2% 12% 2% 6% 14% 10% 6% 5% 7% 12% 17% 1% 7% 14% 3% 6%
eF h q t


Page 147
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
TOTAL 1000 552 448 426 360 214 489 511 735 265 538 189 273 774 226 490 294 216 408 343 232
100% 55% 45% 43% 36% 21% 49% 51% 73% 27% 54% 19% 27% 77% 23% 49% 29% 22% 41% 34% 23%
Credit card debt that 555 285 270 246 196 113 293 262 409 146 330 120 105 441 114 267 186 102 219 209 119
will take more than 3 56% 52% 60% 58% 55% 53% 60% 51% 56% 55% 61% 64% 38% 57% 51% 55% 63% 47% 54% 61% 51%
months to pay off M M r
Car loan 427 216 211 187 141 98 219 208 342 85 237 91 99 362 65 176 140 111 117 186 116
43% 39% 47% 44% 39% 46% 45% 41% 46% 32% 44% 48% 36% 47% 29% 36% 48% 51% 29% 54% 50%
j m O p S S
Home mortgage 287 156 131 50 126 111 124 164 215 72 134 61 93 239 48 54 113 121 53 115 113
29% 28% 29% 12% 35% 52% 25% 32% 29% 27% 25% 32% 34% 31% 21% 11% 38% 56% 13% 34% 49%
D De P PQ S St
Student loans 235 135 99 123 88 23 101 134 196 38 95 50 90 185 49 131 60 44 105 74 55
23% 25% 22% 29% 25% 11% 21% 26% 27% 14% 18% 26% 33% 24% 22% 27% 20% 20% 26% 22% 24%
F f j K
Other types of personal 142 78 65 68 46 29 89 54 104 38 95 23 25 114 29 72 48 22 58 58 26

loans 14% 14% 14% 16% 13% 13% 18% 11% 14% 14% 18% 12% 9% 15% 13% 15% 16% 10% 14% 17% 11%
m
Other types of loans 92 35 57 40 23 30 47 45 83 10 55 10 27 70 22 33 48 12 37 41 14

through a financial 9% 6% 13% 9% 6% 14% 10% 9% 11% 4% 10% 6% 10% 9% 10% 7% 16% 6% 9% 12% 6%
institution pR


Page 148
(Continued)
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
None of the above 146 91 55 73 42 31 67 79 100 46 70 27 50 102 44 89 34 24 78 40 26

15% 17% 12% 17% 12% 14% 14% 16% 14% 17% 13% 14% 18% 13% 19% 18% 12% 11% 19% 12% 11%


Page 149
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
TOTAL 1000 552 448 426 360 214 489 511 735 265 538 189 273 774 226 490 294 216 408 343 232
100% 55% 45% 43% 36% 21% 49% 51% 73% 27% 54% 19% 27% 77% 23% 49% 29% 22% 41% 34% 23%
NET: LESS THAN $30,000 408 227 181 230 120 59 228 180 292 116 267 72 70 243 165 338 49 21 408 - -
______________________ 41% 41% 40% 54% 33% 27% 47% 35% 40% 44% 50% 38% 26% 31% 73% 69% 17% 10% 100%
EF h M m N QR
Less than $10,000 71 55 17 57 8 6 39 32 37 34 46 15 10 28 43 66 3 2 71 - -

7% 10% 4% 13% 2% 3% 8% 6% 5% 13% 9% 8% 3% 4% 19% 13% 1% 1% 17%
c EF i m N QR TU
$10,000 to $19,999 141 81 60 82 42 16 89 51 105 35 85 30 26 68 73 116 18 7 141 - -

14% 15% 13% 19% 12% 8% 18% 10% 14% 13% 16% 16% 9% 9% 32% 24% 6% 3% 35%
F h N QR TU
$20,000 to $29,999 196 90 105 90 70 36 99 96 149 47 135 26 35 147 49 156 27 13 196 - -

20% 16% 23% 21% 19% 17% 20% 19% 20% 18% 25% 14% 13% 19% 22% 32% 9% 6% 48%
lM QR TU
NET: $30,000 TO $59,999 343 169 174 132 139 72 184 159 254 89 199 69 75 304 39 148 143 52 - 343 -
_______________________ 34% 31% 39% 31% 39% 34% 38% 31% 35% 34% 37% 37% 28% 39% 17% 30% 49% 24% 100%
O PR
$30,000 to $39,999 147 56 92 75 42 31 98 49 112 35 99 25 23 125 22 95 37 15 - 147 -

15% 10% 20% 18% 12% 14% 20% 10% 15% 13% 18% 13% 8% 16% 10% 19% 13% 7% 43%
B h m R SU
$40,000 to $49,999 86 44 42 37 33 16 33 53 63 23 41 18 26 80 5 49 23 14 - 86 -
9% 8% 9% 9% 9% 7% 7% 10% 9% 9% 8% 10% 10% 10% 2% 10% 8% 7% 25%
o SU


Page 150
(Continued)
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
$50,000 to $59,999 110 70 41 20 64 26 53 57 79 31 58 26 26 98 12 4 83 23 - 110 -

11% 13% 9% 5% 18% 12% 11% 11% 11% 12% 11% 14% 9% 13% 5% 1% 28% 11% 32%
D o PR P SU
NET: $60,000 OR MORE 232 148 84 57 94 81 71 162 183 49 66 44 123 213 19 1 95 137 - - 232
____________________ 23% 27% 19% 13% 26% 38% 14% 32% 25% 19% 12% 23% 45% 28% 8% *% 32% 63% 100%
d D G KL O P PQ
$60,000 to $69,999 53 35 18 16 12 24 31 21 46 6 24 13 15 48 4 1 42 9 - - 53
5% 6% 4% 4% 3% 11% 6% 4% 6% 2% 4% 7% 6% 6% 2% *% 14% 4% 23%
de Pr ST
$70,000 to $79,999 35 16 19 13 16 6 16 19 31 4 8 8 19 31 4 - 24 11 - - 35
3% 3% 4% 3% 4% 3% 3% 4% 4% 2% 2% 4% 7% 4% 2% 8% 5% 15%
k p P ST
$80,000 to $89,999 16 10 6 6 6 4 2 14 12 4 3 4 9 15 2 - 12 4 - - 16
2% 2% 1% 1% 2% 2% *% 3% 2% 1% 1% 2% 3% 2% 1% 4% 2% 7%
ST
$90,000 to $99,999 20 14 7 5 8 7 3 17 19 1 10 4 6 20 0 - 16 4 - - 20
2% 2% 1% 1% 2% 3% 1% 3% 3% 1% 2% 2% 2% 3% *% 6% 2% 9%
p ST
$100,000 to $124,999 45 33 12 6 14 24 9 35 33 11 9 10 26 43 2 - 0 44 - - 45
4% 6% 3% 1% 4% 11% 2% 7% 5% 4% 2% 5% 10% 6% 1% *% 20% 19%
De g K o PQ ST
$125,000 to $149,999 23 19 4 8 11 3 8 15 15 8 4 1 18 16 6 - - 23 - - 23
2% 3% 1% 2% 3% 2% 2% 3% 2% 3% 1% 1% 6% 2% 3% 10% 10%
KL PQ ST


Page 151
(Continued)
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
$150,000 or more 41 21 20 3 27 11 1 40 26 15 8 3 29 40 1 - - 41 - - 41
4% 4% 4% 1% 7% 5% *% 8% 4% 6% 2% 2% 11% 5% *% 19% 18%
d G KL O PQ ST
Prefer not to say 16 8 8 7 7 3 6 10 6 10 7 5 4 13 3 3 8 6 - - -

2% 1% 2% 2% 2% 1% 1% 2% 1% 4% 1% 3% 2% 2% 1% 1% 3% 3%


Page 152
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
TOTAL 1000 552 448 426 360 214 489 511 735 265 538 189 273 774 226 490 294 216 408 343 232
100% 55% 45% 43% 36% 21% 49% 51% 73% 27% 54% 19% 27% 77% 23% 49% 29% 22% 41% 34% 23%
NET: LESS THAN $25,000 594 332 262 309 214 71 340 254 456 138 353 123 119 439 155 382 168 43 328 199 66
______________________ 59% 60% 59% 73% 59% 33% 69% 50% 62% 52% 66% 65% 44% 57% 68% 78% 57% 20% 80% 58% 28%
F F H M M QR R TU U
Less than $2,000 323 183 140 183 101 38 194 129 241 82 214 59 50 230 93 245 67 10 225 76 22
32% 33% 31% 43% 28% 18% 40% 25% 33% 31% 40% 31% 18% 30% 41% 50% 23% 5% 55% 22% 9%
eF h M m QR R TU U
$2,000 to less than 171 98 72 82 70 19 91 80 128 42 96 35 40 131 40 98 57 16 80 68 22

$10,000 17% 18% 16% 19% 19% 9% 19% 16% 17% 16% 18% 19% 15% 17% 18% 20% 19% 7% 20% 20% 10%
f R R u
$10,000 to less than 100 50 50 44 43 14 55 45 86 14 43 29 28 79 22 39 44 17 23 55 22

$25,000 10% 9% 11% 10% 12% 6% 11% 9% 12% 5% 8% 15% 10% 10% 10% 8% 15% 8% 6% 16% 9%
s
NET: $25,000 TO $99,999 141 72 69 57 46 39 50 91 100 41 74 21 47 125 16 46 56 39 30 73 39

_______________________ 14% 13% 15% 13% 13% 18% 10% 18% 14% 16% 14% 11% 17% 16% 7% 9% 19% 18% 7% 21% 17%
o S
$25,000 to less than 66 36 29 35 18 13 30 36 46 20 32 9 25 58 8 29 20 17 12 37 17

$50,000 7% 7% 7% 8% 5% 6% 6% 7% 6% 8% 6% 5% 9% 7% 4% 6% 7% 8% 3% 11% 7%
s


Page 153
(Continued)
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
$50,000 to less than 76 36 40 22 27 26 20 55 54 21 42 12 21 68 8 17 36 22 18 36 22

$100,000 8% 7% 9% 5% 8% 12% 4% 11% 7% 8% 8% 6% 8% 9% 4% 3% 12% 10% 4% 10% 9%
G p p
NET: $100,000 OR MORE 149 91 58 19 52 78 27 122 115 34 37 26 86 118 31 7 29 113 17 33 99

_____________________ 15% 16% 13% 4% 14% 36% 6% 24% 16% 13% 7% 14% 32% 15% 14% 1% 10% 52% 4% 10% 43%
d DE G KL p PQ ST
$100,000 to less than 45 29 16 9 17 19 9 36 34 11 18 13 15 41 4 4 10 31 3 8 34

$150,000 4% 5% 4% 2% 5% 9% 2% 7% 5% 4% 3% 7% 5% 5% 2% 1% 3% 14% 1% 2% 15%
d G PQ ST
$150,000 to less than 21 14 7 2 9 10 2 19 15 7 2 3 16 19 3 1 6 15 0 5 16

$250,000 2% 3% 2% 1% 2% 5% *% 4% 2% 3% *% 2% 6% 2% 1% *% 2% 7% *% 2% 7%
g K p S
$250,000 to less than 30 17 13 1 11 19 7 23 26 4 4 7 19 21 9 1 10 19 6 6 18

$500,000 3% 3% 3% *% 3% 9% 1% 4% 4% 1% 1% 4% 7% 3% 4% *% 3% 9% 2% 2% 8%
d K P t
$500,000 to less than 38 28 10 6 12 20 9 29 29 9 8 3 26 26 12 1 3 34 5 9 24

$1 million, or 4% 5% 2% 1% 3% 9% 2% 6% 4% 4% 2% 2% 10% 3% 5% *% 1% 16% 1% 3% 10%
d KL PQ ST
$1 million or more 15 3 12 1 4 9 - 15 11 4 5 - 10 11 3 0 0 14 2 5 7
1% 1% 3% *% 1% 4% 3% 1% 1% 1% 4% 1% 1% *% *% 7% 1% 1% 3%
G L pq


Page 154
(Continued)
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
Not sure 75 35 40 25 33 17 56 18 48 26 55 6 13 61 14 37 24 14 25 25 20
7% 6% 9% 6% 9% 8% 12% 4% 7% 10% 10% 3% 5% 8% 6% 8% 8% 6% 6% 7% 9%
h lm
Prefer not to say 41 23 19 17 15 9 15 26 16 25 19 13 8 31 11 17 16 7 8 13 8

4% 4% 4% 4% 4% 4% 3% 5% 2% 9% 4% 7% 3% 4% 5% 4% 6% 3% 2% 4% 4%


Online Survey of Employees Without
Workplace Retirement Plans
Report of Findings
Conducted for:
State of California
October 2015
Appendix - 9. Greenwald Final Report - Online Survey

Table of Contents
Methodology 3
Key Findings 4
Reaction to Proposed Program 8
Interacting with the Proposed Program 20
Overall Planning, Financial Awareness and Attitudes 23
Respondent Profile 32

Methodology
• Online survey was conducted by independent research firm Greenwald & Associates.
• A total of 1,000 consumers were surveyed from August 31th to September 16st, 2015.
• Respondents were selected from among members of Research Now’s online research panel.
• To qualify, respondents were required to be:
– Age 21 to 64
– Working full-time or part-time
– Not self-employed or working for Federal, state or local government
– Working for employer with 5+ employees
– Without a pension or retirement plan through employer
• The data were weighted by gender, age, education, race/ethnicity and household income to
reflect the population of uncovered workers in California matching the survey’s qualification
requirements. In a similarly-sized random sample survey, the margin of error would be plus
or minus 3.1 percentage points at the 95% confidence level.
• Due to rounding and missing categories, numbers presented may not always total to 100%.

Key Findings
1. California uncovered workers are interested in a retirement savings program

that automatically enrolls them but gives them the option not to participate.
• Six in seven think it is a good idea, including 57% who say it is a very good
idea.
• When shown an example of how savings in such a program could grow over
time, 55% say it would excellent or very good for them and another 26% say
it would be good.
2. Most would participate in the program – only about a quarter would opt out,
regardless of whether the deferral rate is 3% or 5%.
• Retention rates in the program are higher for women than for men (77% vs.
• Some (18%) would stay in the program but would ask to have their deferral
rate changed. Of that group, only a minority would ask to lower their
deferral rate (32% of those with a 3% deferral rate and 43% of those with a
5% deferral rate).

• Automatically increasing contributions by 1% annually up to a maximum of
10% will not prevent most uncovered workers from participating – 81%
would stay in the program if it included automatic escalation. However, 33%
would ask their employer to stop the increases.
• About a third will not participate if they cannot access their money if they
• About a quarter would require, as a condition of participation, being able to
• By a two to one margin, uncovered workers prefer to have their money

• Being able to pass their savings on to a beneficiary in the event they die and
• Large shares also highly value having online access to their account, an
• The least attractive feature – but still considered extremely to very attractive
by 73% – is having multiple investment options available.
least some money aside for retirement, but most have not done much, if
anything, to build a retirement nest egg.
• They agree that saving for retirement is important (96% very or somewhat
important).
• Retirement ranks second as an overall savings priority (45% rank it 1st or 2nd

• Nearly all could save at least some amount in a retirement savings plan
• Over half are currently saving less than 5% for retirement, including 29% who
• Four in ten say a major reason is that they are more focused on their family
and nearly as many (36%) report that dealing with unexpected expenses is a
major reason they don’t save more.
• When in need of assistance, 30-40% prefer to have phone contact for various
service needs.
• Among those who prefer phone-based service, two-thirds or more would only
program.

Reaction To Proposed Program

Respondents were asked to read a description of
the proposed retirement savings program.
• The sample was split: half saw a description with a 3% deferral rate and half saw a 5% deferral rate.

Three-quarters of uncovered workers would stay in
the program, whether the deferral rate is 3% or 5%.
• Within the opt-in segment, 16% to 20% would ask for a change in their deferral rate.
• Just over a quarter (27%) would opt out.
 Opt-out rates are higher for those with no college than for those who attended college but did not get a 4-year
degree (30% vs. 17%).
Stay in program Stay in program, but ask your employer to change the contribution rate Opt out of program
Total 56% 18% 27%

(n=1,000)

(n=500)

(n=500)

Retention rates are higher for women than for men;
they also increase as personal income goes up.
There are not statistically meaningful differences in the percentage who would stay in the
program by age or by Hispanic status.
Percent who would stay in program
77% 79%
75% 75% 74%
71% 72% 72% 71%
Male Female < Age 35 Age 35+ Hispanic Non- <$30K $30K- $60K+
Hispanic $59K
---- Personal Income ---

Among those who would stay in the program but
ask to change their deferral rate, over half would
request a higher contribution rate.
3% Contribution 5% Contribution
(n=103) (n=103)
Less than 1% 0% Less than 1% 3%

32% would 1% 10% 1% 2%
lower their
contribution 2% 23% 2% 15%
rate 43% would
3% 3% 21% lower their
62% would 4% 1% 4% 3% contribution
raise their rate
contribution 5% 25% 5%
rate 55% would
6% 7% 6% <0.5%
raise their
7% 1% 7% 8% contribution
rate
8% 3% 8% 8%
9% 0% 9% 8%
10% 20% 10% 24%
More than 10% 6% More than 10% 6%
Don't know 6%
Don't know 1%
Q1A. What percentage would you ask your employer to change the contribution rate to?

Six in seven (85%) support the idea of automatically
enrolling uncovered workers into a retirement
savings program that has an opt-out option.
• Only a very small proportion (4%) think it is a very poor idea.
Very poor
Somewhat idea
poor idea 4%
10%
Very good
Somewhat idea
good idea 57%
29%
Q2. In general, do you think automatically enrolling workers into a retirement savings program while giving them the option to choose not to
participate is a:

When given a concrete example of potential
savings growth in the program, over half think it
would be excellent to very good for them.
55%
Excellent:
26%
26%
12%
6%
2%
Excellent/Very good Good Fair Poor Don't know

Q3. Given these numbers, do you feel that taking part in this program would be for you:

If the program had automatic escalation of 1%
annually up to a maximum of 10%, a fifth would opt
out and another third would just stop the increases.
• Opt-out rates if the program included an automatic escalation feature are higher for
non-Hispanic than for Hispanic respondents (23% vs. 15%).
Stay in the program with the increases in contribution

Stay in the program but ask your employer to stop the increases
Opt out of the program entirely
Total 48% 33% 19%

(n=1,000)
Q4. Suppose that the program automatically increased your contributions by 1% of your paycheck every year up to a maximum of 10%.
Would you…

Respondents were shown two investment fund
options for the program.
The retirement savings program could be set up with different fund options. Two examples are described
below. Please read both the description and the chart:
A. A “Balanced Fund" that has a mix of 60% stocks and 40% bonds. This is expected to provide significant
investment growth over the long term. However, performance will vary a lot from year to year, and there
is a 1-in-50 (2%) chance of losing some of the principal (your contributions) after 20 years.
B. A “Money Market Fund,” an interest-bearing account that protects the principal. You will never lose your
deposit, but interest rates may fail to keep pace with inflation.

About twice as many prefer a Balanced Fund over a
Money Market Fund.
• Half (51%) prefer a Balanced Fund compared to 23% who prefer a Money Market Fund. Another
10% do not have a preference and 16% don’t know.
 Preference for the Balanced Fund increases with education and income.
Don't know
Makes no 16%
difference
10%
Option A:
Balanced
fund
51%
Option B:
Money
Market fund
23%
Q5. Do you prefer to have the money automatically invested in a low-cost fund that is:

Large majorities feel each of the 7 program features
tested are very attractive, with beneficiary benefits
and portability rated most highly.
• The least attractive feature is having multiple investment options to choose from in addition to the
default investment fund.
Extremely attractive Very attractive Somewhat attractive Not attractive
If you die before you use the money in your account, having it go
62% 22% 14%
to your spouse or whomever you designate
Being able to take your account from job to job 60% 24% 12%
Having access to your account information at any time through a

53% 29% 16%
At retirement, being able to convert all or part of your balance

51% 30% 17%
into monthly income for life
All the investment options will be low cost 50% 33% 15%
Having a personal account set up in your name 49% 32% 17%
Having a few investment options to choose from in addition to 4%

36% 37% 23%
the investment fund that your contributions automatically go into
Q6. The following are features of the California Secure Choice program. How attractive is each feature?

Nearly nine in ten think the proposed retirement
savings program is a good idea for the State of
California.
• Just 12% describe it as a somewhat or very poor idea.
88%
Good idea
49%
38%
9%
3%
Very good idea Somewhat good idea Somewhat poor idea Very poor idea
Q7. How good or poor an idea do you think this program is for the State of California?

About a third won’t participate in the program if
they are unable to access their money if they
become seriously ill or their spouse dies.
• About a quarter would require, as a condition of participation, being able to access their savings in the
event of job loss (28%) or a family member becoming seriously ill (26%).
• There is less demand for liquidity in these situations: home purchase (18%), birth of a child (16%), tuition
(13%) and other large types of purchases (12%).
Must have or won't participate Would be nice to have access Don't care either way Do not need access Not applicable
Serious illness on your part 32% 51% 9% 5%
Death of a spouse 32% 44% 10% 6% 9%
Loss of a job 28% 50% 11% 6% 5%
Spouse or other family member becomes seriously ill 26% 54% 10% 4% 6%
Home purchase 18% 47% 16% 13% 6%
Birth of a child 16% 36% 18% 16% 15%
Tuition for schooling 13% 36% 23% 17% 11%
Other type purchase or expense 12% 31% 24% 25% 7%

Q8. How important is it that you have access, before retirement, to your money in your California Secure Choice program account for
each of the following situations?

Interacting with the Proposed Program

For various needs, Internet-based service is
preferred to phone, and by a wide margin, to mail.
• Very few want to use online chat or mail to address their service needs.
• About four in ten prefer phone for each of the following: when first starting in the plan (40%), for
early withdrawals (39%), if a family member dies (39%) or for pre-retirement planning (38%).
Phone Website/ email Online chat Mail
When you first start contributing to the plan 40% 48% 5% 7%
If you needed to withdraw funds early (before

retirement) 39% 51% 5% 5%
If a spouse or other family member died 39% 47% 5% 9%
When you start getting close to retirement and thinking

about how you will use the savings in your account 38% 49% 6% 7%
When you are in retirement and drawing down on the 35% 55% 4% 6%
savings in your account
If you divorced 32% 50% 7% 11%
To add or subtract a beneficiary, for example, after the

29% 57% 8% 7%
birth of a child or getting married

Q9. Assuming you have questions or need assistance, by which of these four ways would you prefer to work with customer service in
each of these situations:

Among those who prefer phone-based service,
majorities would only feel comfortable using this
method, especially when getting started in program.
• Almost three-fourths (73%) of those who prefer phone say this is the only way they want to initially
get service.
Percent answering “yes”
When you first start contributing to the plan 73%

(n=336)
If a spouse or other family member died 70%

(n=343)
If you needed to withdraw funds early (before retirement) 70%

(n=361)
To add or substract a beneficiary, for example, after the birth of

69%
a child or getting married
(n=226)
When you are in retirement and drawing down on the savings in
68%
your account
(n=323)
If you divorced 67%

(n=275)
When you start getting close to retirement and thinking about

64%
how you will use the savings in your account
(n=375)
Base: Percentages based on those who prefer service by phone for each given situation.
Q10. Is talking by phone with a customer service representative the only way in which you would feel comfortable getting the help you
needed in each of these situations?

Overall Planning, Financial Awareness &
Attitudes

Uncovered workers agree that saving for retirement
is important.
• Nearly all (96%) affirm the importance of saving for retirement, including 69% who say this goal is
very important.
 Placing high importance on saving for retirement increases with age and with income.
96%
Important
69%
28%
3% 1%
Very important Somewhat important Not too important Not at all important
Q11. The next few questions are about your attitudes about saving for retirement in general. How important to you is it to save for retirement?

Most believe they could set aside money to
contribute to a retirement savings plan, but two-
thirds could contribute less than $100 per month.
• Just 4% report they could not set aside any amount for retirement.
Maximum Expected Monthly Contribution

Through Payroll Deduction
Less than $25 11%
Not
surprisingly, $25 to $49 33%
confidence and
45% ability to save
40% increases with $50 to $99 20%
income.
$100 to $199 17%
$200 to $299 6%
$300 to $399 3%
11%
3% $400 or more 6%
I don't think I could

Very confident Somewhat Not too Not at all 4%
save anything
confident confident confident

Q12. If you had access to a similar type of retirement plan, how confident are you that you would be able to set aside some money to contribute?
Q13. About how much per month would be the maximum you could likely contribute to this type of retirement savings plan?

On average, uncovered workers are saving 4.5% of
their household income for retirement. However,
three in ten are not saving anything for retirement.
• Women are more likely than men to report they (and their spouse, if married) are not saving at all
for retirement (37% vs. 23%).
Percentage of Total Household Income

Being Saved for Retirement
Saving 10%
or more
19% Saving 0%,
29%
Saving 5%
to 9%
26% Saving 1%
to 4%
26%
Q14. Currently, about what percentage of your total household income, are you (and your spouse/partner) saving for retirement?

The leading reasons for not saving more for
retirement are not making enough money or
needing to pay off debts.
• These are primary reasons for 8 in 10 uncovered workers, including half who say they are the
primary reason.
• 4 in 10 report a major obstacle to retirement saving is their focus on helping their family.
Primary
Major reason Minor reason reason
You do not earn enough at your job 51% 30% 30%
You have to pay off debts 52% 26% 24%
You have had unexpected expenses 36% 33% 6%
You are more focused on helping your family 40% 26% 14%
You are unsure about how to invest the
money
28% 38% 7%
You have simply put it off 27% 38% 6%

You are more focused on enjoying today than
20% 39% 6%
You are not sure about how much to save 19% 36% 2%
Other 6% 6% 3%
Q15. Please indicate if the following are reasons for you (and your spouse/partner) not saving (more) money:
Q16. Which ONE of those is your PRIMARY reason for not saving more money now?
Prepared by Greenwald & Associates 2015 Base: Q15, n=1,000
28
Q16, n=943

Retirement ranks second as an overall savings
priority after having an emergency fund.
• When asked to rank six potential savings needs, over half (55%) ranked having an emergency fund
either their first or second priority. Just under half (45%) ranked retirement as one of their top two
overall savings priorities.
Ranked 1st Ranked 2nd
To have an emergency fund equal to about 3 to 6

months of living expenses in case you lose your 30% 25%
job or are unable to work
Retirement 26% 19%
For unexpected expenses, such as medical costs

9% 25%
or car repairs
To buy a house or business 21% 11%
To pay tuition for yourself, children or 10% 12%

grandchildren
To make large purchases, such as a car 5% 8%

Q17. Thinking about your overall savings priorities, please rank the following financial goals from 1 to 6, with “1” Most important and “6”
Least important:

Another indication of the strong interest uncovered
workers have in saving for retirement are large
shares who think they could and should do it.
• Only about one in seven (14%) thinks it is hopeless for them to save anything for
retirement.
Strongly agree Somewhat agree
I would feel a lot better about my life 20 years from

now if I had some money saved for retirement 64% 29% 93%
I should have started saving earlier for retirement,

even if it was hard to do it 47% 39% 86%
I really could save for retirement if I forced myself

to do it 38% 48% 86%
It is hopeless for me to save anything 14% 28% 42%

Q18. To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statements:

While a majority are confident they know how much
to save for retirement, only 1 in 5 are very
confident.
• Four in ten (39%) are not comfortable they know how much money they need to save for retirement.
61%
Confident
40%
28%
21%
12%
Very confident Somewhat confident Not too confident Not at all confident

Q19. How confident are you that you know how much money you need to save for retirement?

For managing and investing retirement money,
there is greater trust in professional financial
advisors than in government and other entities.
• Small shares strongly indicate any would be untrustworthy stewards, including federal government
(14%) and state government (13%).
Strongly agree Somewhat agree Neutral Somewhat disagree Strongly disagree
Professional financial advisors 17% 39% 34% 8% 4%
Federal government 15% 22% 33% 15% 14%
Financial companies 14% 31% 40% 9% 5%
Your employer 14% 31% 39% 8% 8%
State government 13% 24% 36% 15% 13%
Insurance companies 12% 28% 40% 12% 8%
Q20. For each of the following, to what extent do you agree or disagree that each is trustworthy when it comes to managing a nd investing
workers’ retirement savings:

Respondent Profile

Respondent Profile
Gender Total Age Total

(n=1,000) (n=1,000)
Male 55% 21 to 24 7%
Female 45 25 to 29 12
30 to 34 24
Employment Status 35 to 39 13
Employed full-time 77% 40 to 44 10
Employed part-time at least 20 hours per 19 45 to 49 13

week 50 to 54 9
Employed part-time less than 20 hours per 4 55 to 59 8
week
60 to 64 5
Personal Income
Less than $10,000 7% Household Income
$10,000 to $19,999 14 Under $35,000 34%

$20,000 to $29,999 20 $35,000 to $49,999 15
$30,000 to $39,999 15 $50,000 to $74,999 18
$40,000 to $49,999 9 $75,000 to $99,999 11
$50,000 to $59,999 11 $100,000 to $149,999 12
$60,000 or more 23 $150,000 or more 9
Prefer not to say 2

Race or Ethnicity Total Education Total

(n=1,000) (n=1,000)
Hispanic or Latino 49% Some high school or less 4%

White/Caucasian 34 High school graduate 42
Asian-American 11 Trade or 2-year associate degree 8
African-American 6 Some college (4-year degree college) 19
Other 1 College graduate (4-year degree college) 17
Post graduate work 2
Graduate degree 8
Savings and Investments
Less than $2,000 32% Marital status

$2,000 to less than $10,000 17 Married 45%
$10,000 to less than $25,000 10 Single, never married 32
$25,000 to less than $50,000 7 Not married, but living with a partner 13
$50,000 to less than $100,000 8 Divorced, separated or widowed 9
$100,000 or more 15 Prefer not to say 1
Not sure 7
Prefer not to say 4

No. of Years with Current Employer Total No. of Employers Worked for in Last Total
(n=1,000) Five Years (n=1,000)
Less than 1 year 16% 1 employer 44%

1 year but less than 3 years 26 2 employers 34
3 years but less than 5 years 16 3 employers 13
5 years but less than 10 years 23 4 or more employers 9
10 years or more 19
Pension or Retirement Savings Plan Types of Debt

in Previous Job (n=554)
Yes 29% Credit card debt that will take more than 3 56%
months to pay off
No 65
Car loan 43%
Not sure 6
Home mortgage 29%
Student loans 23%
Spouse Has a Pension or Retirement
Savings Plan at Current Job (n=451) Other types of personal loans 14%
Yes 36% Other types of loans through a financial
9%
institution
No 57
None of the above 15%
Not sure 8

Respondent’s Employer
No. of Employees Total Current Employer Total

(n=1,000) (n=1,000)
5 to 9 employees 14% A for-profit business 65%

10 to 49 employees 36 A non-profit organization 17
50 to 99 employees 14 A private educational or academic institution 4
100 to 499 employees 18 Other 13
500 or more employees 19

NOTE ON CHANGES SINCE FEBRUARY 9, 2016 VERSION
This version of the Final Report includes corrected cost estimates in the Financial Feasibility
Study section (Section E) and the corresponding section in the Executive Summary (pages 16
and 17). It reflects the correction of a calculation error that inadvertently omitted one of the
five components of recordkeeping costs used in our financial feasibility model and affects all
scenarios modeled.
While the corrected calculations result in a somewhat higher funding gap, a slightly longer
timeframe for program self-sufficiency, and slightly higher expense ratios over the long run for
the Baseline Scenario, they do not alter the key findings on the financial feasibility of the
California Secure Choice Program (the “Program”).
 The corrected results do not change the fundamental finding that the Program can be
self-sustaining based on conservative assumptions about participation and investment
earnings and a fee cap of 100 bps.
 The corrected results do not change any of our recommendations except for the
startup financing amount. We now recommend US $134 million for a startup loan (50%
buffer over the recalculated funding gap of US $89 million), assuming a 5% default
contribution rate, instead of US $129 million as recommended in the original report.
This assumes full state financing of the startup funding gap. However, as specified in
the Financial Feasibility Study section, this cost can be significantly reduced if the
Program charges modest account maintenance fees to participants and/or has service
providers absorb some of the startup costs in exchange for a longer-term contract.
The corrected results do not involve any change in methodology, assumptions, input parameters and
model structure.

Market Analysis and Feasibility Study (PDFDrive)

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Market Analysis and Feasibility Study (PDFDrive)

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Market Analysis and Feasibility Study (PDFDrive)

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

California Secure Choice

Market Analysis, Feasibility Study, and Program Design Consultant Services

RFP No. CSCRSIB03-14

California Secure Choice Retirement Savings Investment Board

Overture Financial LLC

March 17, 2016

Chief Operating Officer

Overture Financial LLC

1440 Broadway, 23rd Floor

A. Background ................................................................................................ Page 5

B. Executive Summary ................................................................................... Page 6

C. Market Analysis ......................................................................................... Page 18

1) Overview ................................................................................................... Page 18

i. Scope and Methodology ............................................................. Page 18

ii. Timeline...................................................................................... Page 19

iii. Key Findings .............................................................................. Page 19

iv. Key Recommendations............................................................... Page 22

2) Market Profile ........................................................................................... Page 26

ii. Key Findings .............................................................................. Page 27

3) Focus Groups ............................................................................................ Page 36

ii. Overview of Moderator’s Guide................................................. Page 37

iii. Key Findings .............................................................................. Page 39

4) Online Survey............................................................................................ Page 41

ii. Overview of Survey Questions................................................... Page 43

iii. Key Findings .............................................................................. Page 43

iv. Key Recommendations............................................................... Page 45

5) Rollovers and Cash-Outs........................................................................... Page 46

i. Overview .................................................................................... Page 46

ii. Key Findings .............................................................................. Page 47

6) Stakeholder Interviews (including Employer Interviews)......................... Page 47

ii. Summary of Feedback from Stakeholders.................................. Page 48

iii. Summary of Findings from Stakeholder Interviews................... Page 54

D. Program Design.......................................................................................... Page 55

1) Overview ................................................................................................... Page 55

i. Scope and Methodology ............................................................. Page 55

ii. Timeline...................................................................................... Page 55

iii. Key Recommendations............................................................... Page 56

2) Investments ............................................................................................... Page 59

3) Operational Model..................................................................................... Page 91

4) Plan Rules and Procedures ........................................................................ Page 102

E. Financial Feasibility Study......................................................................... Page 109

1) Overview ................................................................................................... Page 109

i. Scope and Methodology ............................................................. Page 109

ii. Timeline...................................................................................... Page 109

iii. Key Findings .............................................................................. Page 110

iv. Key Recommendations............................................................... Page 110

2) Projection Model ....................................................................................... Page 111

3) Core Assumptions ..................................................................................... Page 112

4) Baseline Scenario ...................................................................................... Page 113

5) Sensitivity Analysis................................................................................... Page 118

6) Scenario Analysis...................................................................................... Page 119

7) Conclusions ............................................................................................... Page 120

F. Addendum – Employer Costs .................................................................... Page 122

G. Scope of Services Deliverables Cross Reference Table ............................ Page 127

H. Appendix – Market Analysis Supporting Documents ............................... Page 129

The Market Analysis work stream consists of four parts:

The key findings are the following:

The table below summarizes the key recommendations.

The Program Design work stream consists of three parts: