TRS Board of Trustees Meeting - April 2021
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
April 2021
TRS Board of Trustees Meeting
The image part with relationship ID rId8 was not found in the file.
Teacher Retirement System of
Tex as
1 0 0 0 R e d R iv e r S tr e e t
A u s tin , T e x a s
7 8 7 0 1 -2 6 9 8
TEACHER RETIREMENT SYSTEM OF TEXAS MEETING
BOARD OF TRUSTEES
AGENDA
April 14, 2021 – 8:00 a.m.
April 15, 2021 – 8:00 a.m.
April 16, 2021 – 8:00 a.m.
By Videoconference
All or part of the April 14-16, 2021 meeting of the TRS Board of Trustees may be held by
telephone or video conference call as authorized under Sections 551.130 and 551.127 of
the Texas Government Code. THIS MEETING WILL BE CONDUCTED BY
VIDEOCONFERENCE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE GOVERNOR’S
AUTHORIZATION CONCERNING SUSPENSION OF CERTAIN OPEN MEETING
LAW REQUIREMENTS IN RESPONSE TO THE COVID-19 (CORONAVIRUS)
DISASTER. A quorum of members of the Board will participate in the meeting and will
be audible to the public. Members of the public may access the meeting by clicking
https://zoom.us/j/984-348-8378 – Meeting ID: 984-348-8378, please email the Board
Secretary to obtain the meeting password at Katherine.Farrell@trs.texas.gov. Members of
the public may provide public comment by registering first with the Board Secretary by
submitting an email to Katherine.Farrell@trs.texas.gov identifying the name of the speaker
and topic, no later than 5:00 pm on April 15, 2021.
The open portions of the Board meeting are being broadcast over the Internet. Access to
the Internet broadcast and agenda materials of the Board meeting is provided at
www.trs.texas.gov. A recording of the meeting will be available at www.trs.texas.gov.
NOTE: The Board may take up any item posted on the agenda during its meeting on April
14-16, 2021 beginning at the time and place specified on this agenda.
1. Call roll of Board members.
2. Consider the following administrative matters – Jarvis V. Hollingsworth:
A. Approval of the February 2021 proposed meeting minutes; and
B. Setting, rescheduling or canceling future Board meetings.
NOTE: The Board meeting likely will recess after the last item above and will resume April
15, 2020, Thursday morning, to take up items listed below.
3. Receive an update on the TEAM Program Andrew Roth, Billy Lowe, Jennifer
Whitman and Adam Fambrough.
4. Receive an update from the TEAM Program Independent Program Assessment (IPA)
Vendor – Jonathan Scofield and Richard Holt, EY.
5. Receive a General Cybersecurity Overview – Frank Williams.
6. Receive annual ethics training – Chris Griesel.
NOTE: The Board meeting likely will recess after the last item above and will resume April
16, 2021, Friday morning, to take up items listed below.
7. Provide an opportunity for public comment – Jarvis V. Hollingsworth.
8. Receive the report of the Strategic Planning Committee on its April 14, 2021
meeting and consider the adoption of the proposed amendments to the 2021-25
Strategic Plan Goals, Objectives and Strategies – Committee Chair.
9. Receive the report of the Benefits Committee on its April 14, 2020 meeting and
consider adoption or acceptance of the following – Committee Chair:
a. Medical Board Meeting Minutes for January 2020, September 2020 and
January 2021;
b. Benefit Payments for December 2020 – February 2021;
10. Receive the report of the Budget Committee on its April 14, 2021 meeting –
Committee Chair.
11. Receive the report of the Policy Committee on its April 14, 2021 meeting and
consider the following – Committee Chair:
a. Amendments to the Litigation Policy; and
b. Adoption of a resolution amending on an emergency basis TRS Rule 31.1,
relating to Employment After Retirement Definitions, in Title 34, Part 3 of
the Texas Administrative Code
12. Receive the report of the Investment Management Committee on its April 14,
2021 meeting – Committee Chair.
13. Receive the report of the Audit Compliance and Ethics Committee on its April 15,
2021 meeting – Committee Chair
14. Review and discuss the Executive Director's report on the following matters –
Brian Guthrie:
A. Administrative operational matters, including updates on financial, audit,
legal, staff services, special projects, strategic planning, security assessment
related to information resources technology, legislative, mid-year actuarial
valuation and personnel matters.
B. Board operational matters, including a review of draft agendas for
upcoming meetings.
2
C. Event notices or reminders; holiday and other schedules of interest; board
member, employee or other individual recognitions; and expressions of
thanks, congratulations, or condolences.
15. Discuss TRS Active-Care FY2022 PPO and HMO Rates and Benefits - Katrina
Daniel.
16. Receive an update and consider long term facilities planning on potential new
building, potential renovations or sale of the Red River campus, and leases at 816
Congress and Indeed Tower, including considering a finding that to deliberate or
confer in open meeting would have a detrimental effect on the position of the
retirement system in negotiations with a third person – Brian Guthrie, Andrew
Roth, and Eric Lang.
17. Review the report of the General Counsel on pending and contemplated litigation,
including updates on litigation involving benefit-program contributions,
retirement benefits, health-benefit programs, investment matters and open records
– Heather Traeger.
18. Chief Operations and Administration Officer (COAO) update – Andrew Roth.
The Board may convene in Executive Session under the following, but not limited to:
a. Texas Government Code, Section 551.071: Consultation with Attorney;
b. Texas Government Code, Section 551.072: Deliberation Regarding Real
Property;
c. Texas Government Code, Section 551.074: Personnel Matters Relating to
Appointment, Employment, Evaluation, Assignment, Duties, Discipline, or
Dismissal of Officers or Employees including but not limited to the
Executive Director, Chief Audit Executive, Chief Investment Officer.
d. Texas Government Code, Section 551.076: Deliberation Regarding
Security Devices or Security Audits;
e. Texas Government Code, Section 551.089: Deliberation Regarding
Security Devices or Security Audits; or
f. Texas Government Code, Section 825.115: Applicability of Certain Laws;
g. Texas Government Code, Section 825.3011: Certain Consultations
Concerning Investments.
3
TAB 2
Minutes of the Board of Trustees
February 26, 2021
The Board of Trustees of the Teacher Retirement System of Texas met on February 26, 2021 via
videoconference in accordance with the Governor’s authorization concerning suspension of certain
Open Meeting law requirements in response to the COVID-19 (Coronavirus) disaster.
The following Board members were present:
Jarvis V. Hollingsworth, Chair
Nanette Sissney, Vice Chair
Michael Ball
David Corpus
John Elliott
Christopher Moss
James Dick Nance
Robert H. Walls, Jr.
Others present:
Brian Guthrie, TRS Mr. Craig Campbell, Retiree
Andrew Roth, TRS Ms. Eileen O’Grady, Private Equity Stakeholder Project
Don Green, TRS Mr. Keith Robinson, Focus Consulting
Heather Traeger, TRS Ms. Kirsten S, Segal
Jase Auby, TRS Mr. Ken Vieira, Segal
Barbie Pearson, TRS Mr. Steve Voss, Aon
Katrina Daniel, TRS Mr. Mike McCormick
Amanda Jenami, TRS Ms. Meredith Jones, Aon
Chris Cutler, TRS Ms. Grace Meuller, RAC Chair
Caasi Lamb, TRS Dr. Keith Brown, Board Investment Advisor
Kevin Wakley, TRS
Lauren Gellhaus, TRS
Kellie Sauls, TRS
Katherine Farrell, TRS
Suzanne Dugan, Cohen Milstein
Mr. Hollingsworth called the meeting to order at 8:00 a.m.
1. Call roll of Board members.
Ms. Farrell called the roll. A quorum was present.
Mr. Hollingsworth provided welcoming remarks noting the Board was convening by
videoconference under the Governor’s Office’s authorization concerning suspension of certain
Open Meetings law requirements in response to COVID-19. Mr. Hollingsworth stated he hoped
all fared well during last week’s winter storm. He noted originally the board meeting was to cover
1
three half-days of meetings. However, due to the winter storms of last week that affected everyone
in the state, the Board decided it was important for us to take up the business of the Board, but
tailor it to one day of meetings. He announced items would be taken out of order and that the
following items would not be taken up that were posted for today’s meeting: Items 5, 6, 12, 13,
15, 16, 20, 21 and 22.
Mr. Hollingsworth announced agenda item 17 would be taken up first.
17. Provide an opportunity for public comment – Jarvis V. Hollingsworth.
Mr. Craig Campbell, a TRS retiree, expressed a need for a cost of living adjustment and not a 13th
check. He said he did not understand how bonuses were awarded but there should not be anymore
bonuses until every retired school district employee gets a compounding cost of living raise. He
said the Sunset Commission made some good recommendations and hope the Board will support.
Ms. Eileen O’Grady, representing the Private Equity Stakeholder Project, expressed concern
regarding a TRS investment with private equity and real estate firm, Oaktree Capital,. who despite
the CDC eviction moratorium, affiliates of Oaktree Capital have continued to file and advance
residential eviction cases.
Mr. Hollingsworth announced agenda item two would be taken up next.
2. Consider the following administrative matters – Jarvis V. Hollingsworth:
A. Approval of the December 2020 proposed meeting minutes; and
On a motion by Mr. Corpus, seconded by Mr. Moss, the Board unanimously approved the minutes
from the December 2020 meeting, as presented.
B. Setting, rescheduling or canceling future Board meetings.
On a motion by Mr. Nance, seconded by Mr. Corpus, the Board unanimously voted to amend the
schedule adding a third day, Wednesday, April 14, to the schedule if the April meeting is held
virtually.
Mr. Hollingsworth announced agenda item nine would be taken up next.
9. Review and Discuss the Executive Director’s report on the following matters – Brian
Guthrie:
A. Administrative operational matters, including updates on financial, audit, legal,
staff services, special projects, strategic planning, legislative, Sunset Update,
Trustee Elections and personnel matters.
B. Update on COVID-19 and TRS operations.
C. Board operational matters, including a review of draft agendas for upcoming
meetings.
D. Event notices or reminders; holiday and other schedules of interest; board
member, employee or other individual recognitions; and expressions of thanks,
congratulations, or condolences.
2
Mr. Guthrie shared images of TRS facilities covered in snow and specifically thanked the security
team who were on site during the recent crisis. He provided an overview of past and upcoming
conferences. He gave a legislative update and how COVID is affecting session. He then gave an
update on Return to Office for TRS staff. He reported Austin moved to Stage 5 before the
Christmas holiday, the highest stage with more restrictions in place. Since then Austin ratcheted
back in early February back to Stage 4. During this time, he said, in-person office visits were
suspended but are planning and ramping up to restart the office visits in person beginning March
1, 2021. He said the office continues to operate at Phase 2, 25 percent capacity and will look at
increasing it to 50 percent in the spring.
Mr. Guthrie reviewed employee demographics. He noted the average age is 44.2 years and average
tenure is six, almost seven years. He reported nearly 10 percent of employees are eligible to retire.
He then provided an update regarding the Trustee Election. He said the nominations period closed
in January with six candidates. He said the ballots will be mailed mid-March with the deadline to
get all the ballots back in is May 5th.
Mr. Guthrie announced TRS received top workplace in the country designation for the first time.
He concluded by reviewing the proposed items for the April and July Board meetings.
Mr. Hollingsworth announced agenda item three would be taken up next.
3. Chief Operations and Administration Officer (COAO) update – Andrew Roth.
Mr. Andrew Roth stated his goal for the year is to highlight opportunities in the agency from an
operational standpoint in terms of staff investment or adequate resourcing. He noted there was no
immediate ask but that it was to provide background. He reviewed cybersecurity first for it is one
of the most critical things, as an agency, we are responsible for, protecting our data and
information. He stated TRS delivers health care and are a $175 billion financial institution with
an investment portfolio that is global in reach and has instantaneous need for data and security. He
discussed the key activities of the cybersecurity group and the ever demanding and changing
workload. In response to Mr. Hollingsworth’s inquiry, Mr. Roth stated he did not feel the security
of our data or our members’ data was at immediate risk. However, he said in order to stay in front
of that risk, additional resources will need to be added in the near future. Mr. Roth concluded by
comparing TRS staff of nine with peers who have cybersecurity teams of 20 to 36 FTEs.
Mr. Hollingsworth announced agenda item fourteen would be taken up next.
14. Receive an update regarding Benefit Services – Brian Guthrie, Andrew Roth, Don
Green and Barbie Pearson.
Mr. Guthrie provided an overview noting the critical need in Benefit Services. Mr. Roth noted that
when compared with TRS peers, the Benefit’s front office staff has one of the lowest ratios of staff
to member but is in the middle in terms of service levels provided. He said if you doubled the staff
by adding 200 or 400 more FTEs, TRS would still be in the middle of its peers. Ms. Barbie Pearson
focused on Benefit Services’ immediate staffing needs emphasizing how the workload has
3
increased year over year. She said at the July board meeting there will be a more comprehensive
long term plan for Benefit Services.
Ms. Pearson described how it takes all of Benefit Services to deliver exceptional customer service
to our members. She noted when Processing struggles, there is a huge impact on the Contact Center
by increased call volume. She then described the key activities in the various divisions of Benefit
Services that are struggling. She broke down the actual retirement process from a member making
the initial request of benefits estimate, to receiving their first payment, to death claims and benefits.
Ms. Pearson concluded by stating the proposal to address the immediate need is not enough, but it
will help specifically the Benefit Processing area. She said there are currently 248 FTEs in Benefit
Services; this proposal would raise staffing to 258, a four percent increase. She said the goal is to
focus on the members, on member service and provide the service members deserve. She said with
the appropriate resources, service levels can improve and staff within Benefit Services can be
cross-trained to be moved around to critical areas.
Mr. Don Green reviewed the fiscal impact of the additional FTEs for Benefits Services. He noted
the FY 21 budget contained a nine percent reduction from the appropriated level of funding,
resulting in an expected savings of $20 million plus. He said a large portion of those savings
resulted from a hiring freeze that was in place from July 2020 through December 31, 2020. He
said the 10 positions could be filled for Benefits Services from available revenue without dipping
into the $20 million plus savings that was placed in a contingency fund. He said the plan is to bring
back a proposal further on this issue in July as part of the regular budget development process.
Mr. Hollingsworth announced agenda item seven would be taken up next.
7. Receive an update on the enhanced TRS Complaint Process – Andrew Roth and
Heather Traeger.
Mr. Roth stated TRS has had a complaints process in place for many years, and in recent years
have begun the effort to enhance this existing process. He said the recent Sunset review highlighted
further opportunities with regards to communication, both in terms of plain language and in terms
of responding to complaints. He reviewed the various channels available to members who wish to
communicate to TRS regarding an issue and the volume received through those channels.
Ms. Traeger reviewed the types of communications TRS receives and the new process. She
reported a complaints log has been developed as an overlay to the various communication
pathways referenced by Mr. Roth. She said the log, managed by TRS Compliance, is designed to
target areas of concern, complaints, for membership and retirees that are a subset of the thousands
of communications TRS receives each month. She said reports will be provided on a monthly basis
to the TRS executives as well as on a quarterly basis to the Board. She noted the term complaint
for these purposes is aligned with the definition found in the State’s mandated Compact with
Texans program. She concluded by stating this new process is to identify and analyze any trends
in our complaint categories and TRS member interactions, as well as if there are areas were TRS
needs to take action.
Mr. Hollingsworth announced agenda item four would be taken up next.
4
4. Receive an update on TRS Core Values – Caasi Lamb and Keith Robinson, Focus
Consulting.
Ms. Caasi Lamb provided an update on TRS Core Values. She stated TRS’ core values identify
expected behaviors of TRS staff and are designed to create a culture that supports the agency’s
mission. The values represent TRS’ guiding principles, deeply-held beliefs, and highest priorities.
She stated core values are communicated regularly to TRS employees when they are hired, during
annual performance evaluations, and through employee recognition programs. She noted the
current set of values were established in 2013. Since that time TRS has grown and evolved as an
organization. She said a cross-functional project team consisting of representatives from
Organizational Excellence, DE&I, Legal and Compliance and Strategy Office worked together
with Focus Consulting on this initiative.
Mr. Keith Robinson provided background on the culture survey Focus performed to help inform
TRS about the organization and the strength of culture that was established in 2013. He noted the
survey was confidential and anonymity was important to get at the truth. He reported robust
participation in the survey, 73 percent of the agency. He reviewed the results of the survey and
focus groups. He said TRS has been extraordinarily deliberate in designing, executing, and
reinforcing its culture, and it shows up in the strong results that came out of the culture survey.
Ms. Lamb reviewed the new core values noting there was overlap between the 2013 values and
the new ones. She reported the new values are the following: member-focused; diversity; and
efficiency. She said member-focused replaced customer satisfaction for it not only encompasses
customer satisfaction but is directly related to TRS mission of making decisions with members’
best interests in mind. Ms. Lamb concluded by reviewing the plan to roll out the new core values
to the agency. She said going forward the review of core values will occur every four years, in
conjunction with the review of the mission statement.
Mr. Hollingsworth announced agenda item eight would be taken up next.
8. Receive governance training on Teachable Moments of the Last Decade and Thoughts
on the Risks of 2021 and Beyond – Amanda Jenami.
Ms. Amanda Jenami noted that the Internal Audit charter requires management, the Trustees, to
be kept informed of emerging trends in risk management and governance. She reviewed the
Institute of Internal Auditors’ three lines of defense model, which was updated in July 2020, as a
model to help explain how key organizational roles work together to facilitate strong governance
and risk management. She discussed lessons learned from the biggest corporate scandals of the
last decade. She provided the top four risks that pose the greatest challenges to organizations in
2021: crisis management, cybersecurity, talent management and culture. She noted that business
continuity and crisis response were driven to the top of the list by the unprecedented challenges
brought on by the COVID-19 pandemic and the increased reliance on technology and data. She
concluded by reviewing how these risks apply to TRS and efforts being made by management to
mitigate these risks.
5At 11:45 am, Mr. Hollingsworth announced a break for lunch.
At 12:29 pm, Mr. Hollingsworth reconvened the meeting and announced agenda item eleven
would be taken up next.
11. Receive an annual review of TRS health plans performance, including benchmark
comparisons, COVID and new plan year, new carrier installation and Retiree
Advisory Council (RAC) update – Katrina Daniel, Grace Meuller, RAC Chair;
Kirsten Schatten and Kenneth Vieira, Segal.
Ms. Grace Mueller presented the quarterly update from the Retirees Advisory Committee. She
reported the RAC’s last meeting was on January 26, 2021, via Zoom. The RAC received updates
regarding the legislative session, Sunset Advisory Commission’s recommendations, the trust fund
balance, long term facilities plan for TRS, a COVID report and a TRS-Care vendor transition
update. She said the next meeting is scheduled for June 17, 2021, via Zoom.
Ms. Daniel introduced Ms. Kirsten Schatten and Mr. Ken Vieira with Segal. Ms. Schatten stated
Segal provides health consulting services with clients that include 21 state health plans and have
worked with TRS since 2019. She said the peers used in benchmarking TRS’ plans were Alabama,
Georgia, Illinois, North Carolina, Tennessee and Wisconsin. She noted the plans were majority
teachers but some of the state health plans included other state employees. She said for plan
efficiency they reviewed the total costs of the plan made up of what members pay when the see
providers; what’s the premium the member pays; and what’s the portion of the premium the
employer or state contributes. She stated they found TRS plans are efficient compared to peers in
the benchmarking study, which means that every dollar of premium comes into TRS buys more
health care than their peers. She reported this is especially pronounced for TRS-ActiveCare where
total costs are 15 to 25 percent less than peers. She noted TRS health plans receive considerably
less funding than peers, especially with TRS-ActiveCare. She stated that the benefits that TRS is
covering are similar to the benefits that other states in this benchmarking cover.
Ms. Schatten reviewed the actuarial value. She said because TRS members pick up more cost-
sharing compared to the benchmark states, it lowers TRS actuarial value. TRS members are
picking up about 25 percent. She noted the average actuarial value is more in the 85 percent range
in which members are only picking up 15 percent. She stated when everything is on the same dollar
basis, the TRS plans in in ActiveCare are the lowest costs of all plans. She said this shows how
the plan is being managed very efficiently.
Ms. Schatten noted it was more difficult to benchmark the TRS Care because it is an under-65
group that is smaller and likely some risk differentials. She reported 62 percent of those that are
eligible are currently participating, meaning some folks out there are picking up a plan somewhere
else. For the employer subsidy percent, she said it falls in the middle of the pack. She said the
reason for the lower TRS costs starts with the successful procurement, with best in class RFPs with
a deep dive into how vendors did their medical management. She reported the two change in
vendors saves over $700 million over the next few years. She also noted the administrative fees
for TRS are less than four percent of total costs. Mr. Vieira stated a large state’s administrative
6costs are probably seven to nine percent. Ms. Schatten said once the best contracts in the country
are in place, the next reason for lower costs is successful contract management.
Ms. Daniel concluded the presentation with a discussion of the Districts of Innovation’s offering
competing coverage. She noted about 145 districts are now offering competing coverage, it is split
evenly between metropolitan areas and rural areas. She noted the potential impact on the costs to
ActiveCare, is about $41 million with just the current population. She said this is a challenge and
despite best efforts it will probably drive up costs in ActiveCare.
Mr. Hollingsworth announced agenda item 19 would be taken up next.
19. Receive the CIO Update including Fleet Strategy; Talent Management;
Accomplishments; Notices; Awards; Key Dates and Upcoming Events; and Market
Update – Jase Auby.
Mr. Jase Auby announced that the Trust ended the year 2020 at an all-time high of $176.9 billion.
He noted during the midst of the COVID crisis at the April Board meeting last year, that number
was 149 billion, so the Trust gained $28 billion since last April. He reported the return on the Trust
for the year to date through April was minus eight percent but ended the year at a positive 11.6
percent. He said COVID affected the emerging managers program this year, the conference in
February was 100 percent virtual. He said there significantly greater participation, 2,600 attendees.
Mr. Auby provided the market update. He noted the U.S. equity market was one of the top
performers with a 21.1 percent return last year. He said Korea, Taiwan and China all outperformed
the U.S. for they emerged early from the COVID crisis. He said one area hit hard by COVID and
did not recover was the oil price, oil was off by 27.5 percent during the year.
Mr. Auby concluded by discussing the concept of valuation and long-term investing.
Mr. Hollingsworth announced agenda item 18 would be taken up next.
18. Receive an Investment Education Presentation including information on Interest
Rates and PE Ratio – Steve Voss and Mike McCormick, Aon.
Mr. Steve Voss stated they would provide a high level overview of some of the elements of stock
and bond investing and some of the elements of diversification. Mr. Mike McCormick discussed
the two decisions an investor must make: to own assets or to take the dollars and loan them to
others. He reviewed the ownership of assets, how asset owners make or lose money and the general
forces that drive these outcomes. He said the two things that drives asset values to go up are
inflation and economic growth. He stated two causes for fluctuation in the stock market in short
term is price to earnings (P/E) ratios and the Federal controlled interest rate levels. He further
reviewed what drove interest rates and their impact on bonds. He discussed importance of
diversification and need to re-balance a portfolio.
Mr. Hollingsworth announced agenda item 23 would be taken up next.
723. Receive an update on ESG Investing - Lauren Gellhaus, Steve Voss, Mike McCormick
and Meredith Jones, Aon.
Mr. Auby introduced the topic noting the Board received a presentation on environmental, social
and governance (ESG) back in February 2020. Ms. Meredith Jones provided an update on the
current status of ESG development since last February. She said there has been a dramatic increase
in attention on ESG risks and investments. She reported numerous studies have shown a positive
correlation between ESG and corporate financial performance, meaning companies that do ESG
well tend to perform better. She stated recent events have exposed almost every company to being
impacted by ESG such as COVID-19, George Floyd and Breonna Taylor murders, climate change
and the new Biden administration.
Ms. Lauren Gellhaus stated the ESG landscape continues to evolve, with no standard approach
when it comes to ESG investing. She noted that ESG education has been a focus for many U.S.
pensions in the past, with a shift to go beyond education and start integrating ESG into processes.
She said just as there is no standard for ESG investment approaches, how organizations address
ESG policies also differs widely. She reported some approaches include incorporating ESG
specific language into investment policy statements (IPS) or creating stand-alone ESG polices.
She reviewed how TRS peers are addressing the issue of policies. She stated TRS aims to build
off of the work done in 2020 and continue to take prudent steps forward. She said there were four
key goals for 2021 which included IMD recommending to the Board adding a statement on ESG
within the IPS. She concluded by stating the fiduciary duty and the Trust objectives are top of
mind. She said IMD’s objectives are to manage risk and produce a long-term rate of return and the
ESG efforts are not done despite these objectives rather they are done as a direct response to them.
Mr. Hollingsworth announced agenda item 10 would be taken up next.
10. Receive the annual update on TRS Diversity, Equity and Inclusion – Kellie Sauls.
Ms. Kellie Sauls stated the business case is strong for diversity, equity and inclusion (DE&I), there
are large demographic shifts happening in the workforce. She noted the underlying data that is
being tracked is member demographics as well as State of Texas demographics and student
demographic data. She provided the broad overview of the DE&I vision. She discussed the
accomplishments over the past year and the current state of DE&I work. She also discussed DE&I
strategy, performance metrics and measurements and discussed areas of focus going forward in
2021. She said industry best practices involve using a third-party measurement to ensure a
consistent approach to standardization and realistic benchmarking. She reported TRS is in the
process of issuing a related RFP in mid-March.
Ms. Sauls concluded by reviewing the outreach activities TRS made partnering with various
professional affinity networks and universities.
Mr. Hollingsworth announced agenda item 24 would be taken up next.
824. Receive an update and consider long-term facilities planning on potential new
building, potential renovations or sale of he Red River campus, and leases at 816
Congress and Indeed Tower, including considering a finding that to deliberate or
confer in open meeting would have a detrimental effect on the position of the
retirement system in negotiations with a third person – Brian Guthrie, Andrew Roth
and Eric Lang.
Mr. Guthrie stated TRs is in a holding pattern to assess options and wait for the pandemic to end
and the real estate market in Austin to come ack to some semblance of order. He stated a new
factor in the long-term space need consideration is an analysis of work from home. He noted
currently they have anecdotal evidence and need to review the proper ratio of work from home
and work in the office. He said they continue to evaluate all options that exist in the market as it
currently stands and continues to review options of not doing anything and what it would take to
renovate existing facilities.
Mr. Roth discussed progress made on related activities since December. He reviewed current work
streams such as moving forward with critical maintenance projects at Red River and developing
three, five and seven year facilities plans.
Mr. Hollingsworth announced the Board would recess and go into executive session on item
number 24, matters relating to real property and the long-term facilities discussion.
On a motion by Mr. Corpus, seconded by Mr. Elliott, the Board unanimously found that
deliberating or conferring on long-term space planning activities in open meeting would have a
detrimental effect on the position of the retirement system in negotiations with a third person.
At 3:49 p.m., Mr. Hollingsworth announced the Board would go into executive session under the
following agenda item and sections of the Government Code: item 24 under Sections 825.115(e),
551.071 and 551.072, to discuss Board procurement matters, real property and consult with legal
counsel as needed.
At 4:29 p.m., Mr. Hollingsworth reconvened the Board Meeting.
5. Receive an update on the 2021-25 Strategic Plan – Caasi Lamb.
This item was not taken up for discussion.
6. Receive an update on the Member Satisfaction Survey and Reporting Employer
Satisfaction Survey results – Caasi Lamb; Dr. Rene Paulson Elite Research and Dr.
Kirby Goidel, Texas A&M University.
This item was not taken up for discussion.
12. Receive an update on the TEAM Program – Andrew Roth, Billy Lowe, Jennifer
Whitman and Adam Fambrough.
9This item was not taken up for discussion.
13. Receive an update from the TEAM Program Independent Program Assessment (IPA)
Vendor – Doug Holt and Jonathan Scofield, EY.
This item was not taken up for discussion.
15. Receive annual update on Cybersecurity – Frank Williams.
This item was not taken up for discussion.
16. Review the report of the General Counsel on pending and contemplated litigation,
including updates on litigation involving benefit-program contributions, retirement
benefits, health benefit programs, investment matters, open records – Heather
Traeger.
This item was not taken up for discussion.
20. Receive the Emerging Manager Annual Update - Kirk Sims.
This item was not taken up for discussion.
21. Receive the Annual Update on IMD Operations & Talent Management Group -
Sylvia Bell.
This item was not taken up for discussion.
22. Review of IMD Legal & Compliance - Heather Traeger.
This item was not taken up for discussion.
At 4:30 pm, Mr. Hollingsworth adjourned the meeting.
APPROVED BY THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE TEACHER RETIREMENT SYSTEM
OF TEXAS ON THE ___ DAY OF APRIL 2021.
ATTESTED BY:
__________________________ _________________________
Katherine H. Farrell Date
Secretary to the TRS Board of Trustees
10Setting and Re-scheduling Future Board Meeting Dates
Future Meetings for Calendar Year 2021
July 15 – 16, 2021
July 14 – 16, 2021 (if virtual meeting)
September 16 – 17, 2021
December 7 – 8, 2021
1TAB 3
TEAM Program Presentation Brian Guthrie Andrew Roth Adam Fambrough Billy Lowe Jennifer Whitman
TEAM – WHERE WE ARE NOW
*FY21 direct obligations are as of month close February 2021
INCREMENTAL RELEASE PROGRESS KEY STATUS UPDATES
Achievements
• 03/10/2021 - First round of regression testing for Pension Line Of Business
Payment Address and Web Self Service Releases began
• 03/19/2021 – Completed third round of HILOB User Acceptance Testing
• 03/26/2021 – Second HILOB Dry Run for Cutover Planning completed
• 04/09/2021 – Completed final round of HILOB User Acceptance Testing
• 04/12/2021 – HILOB User Acceptance Testing Exit Quality Gate
Key Goals Upcoming
• 04/19/2021 – Projected HILOB Go-Live
• 05/11/2021 – Payment Address Release Development Complete
Issues/Risks
• Resource constraints on key technical teams 2TEAM EXECUTION
31 32
29 34
33 35
30
02/01/21 04/01/21 06/01/21
TASK DUE DATE ACTUAL STATUS
29 Planned Production Release (Pension) (To be rescheduled 2/21/21 2/28/21 Completed
after business closures due to extreme weather)
30 Payment Address & Web Self Service Releases End to End 3/01/21 3/10/21 Completed
Business Process Regression Testing Round #1
31 HILOB Dry Run #2 (Go-Live test) begins 3/20/21 3/20/21 Completed
32 HILOB User Acceptance Testing (UAT) ends 4/09/21 4/09/21 Completed
33 HILOB UAT Exit Quality Gate 4/12/21 4/12/21 Completed
34 HILOB Go-Live (tentative) 4/19/21 Pending
35 Payment Address Development Complete 05/11/21 Pending
3HILOB – Health Insurance Line of Business System
Improvements with HILOB
• Modern interface and navigation
• Modern architecture
• Process automation
• Built in logic to avoid errors and discrepancies that
happen in current legacy system
• Integrated with Pension Line of Business system
• Reduced data entry errors
• Single member profile
4HILOB Cutover Plan
What is Cutover?
• Cutover occurs when a project is deployed to production.
• Series of steps/tasks that must be precisely orchestrated to ensure
the successful deployment of a new application.
• HILOB Cutover Plan includes:
oapproximately 290 steps/tasks
otask execution owners and back-ups
otask sequence and timing down to the minute
oa back-out/rollback mitigation plan
• TRS has executed two different dry runs of the HILOB Cutover Plan
5HILOB Support Plan
CONTINUOUS CLEAR COMMUNICATION
Leverage TRUST Alerts Intranet page
Department specific communications
Leverage existing IT Service Desk ticketing process
FIRST WEEK ONGOING
• Mission Control: Daily meetings to review • Member & Business value driven
and triage issues with IT & Business prioritization process
• Major issue trend tracking • Scheduled Maintenance & Enhancement
• Virtual desk-side support for business Releases (M&E)
areas
• Frequent defect fix production releases
6APPENDIX
Additional Detailed Information
7TEAM PRODUCT LINE ROADMAP
STATUS
On timeTEAM PRODUCT LINE ROADMAP – 12 MONTH VIEW
BUDGET FY21 direct obligations are as of month close February 2021
TEAM EXECUTION
Previous
28 30 31
29
02/01/21 03/01/20 04/01/21
TASK DUE DATE ACTUAL STATUS
28 HILOB Security Testing begins 2/08/21 2/08/21 Completed
29 Planned Production Release - (To be rescheduled after 2/21/21 2/28/21 Completed
business closures due to extreme weather)
30 Payment Address & Web Self Service Releases End to 3/01/21 3/10/21 Completed
End Business Process Testing Round #1 begins
31 HILOB Dry Run #2 (Go-Live test) begins 3/20/21 3/20/21 Completed
11TEAM EXECUTION
Current
35
32 34
33
04/01/21 05/01/20 06/01/21
TASK DUE DATE ACTUAL STATUS
32 HILOB User Acceptance Testing (UAT) ends 4/09/21 4/09/21 Completed
33 HILOB UAT Exit Quality Gate 4/12/21 4/12/21 Completed
34 HILOB Go-Live (tentative) 4/19/21 Pending
35 Payment Address Release Code Complete 5/11/21 Pending
12TEAM EXECUTION
Next
38
36
37 39
06/01/21 07/01/21 08/01/21
TASK DUE DATE ACTUAL STATUS
36 Planned Production Release - (Fiscal Year End) 6/21/21 Pending
37 Payment Address Release Final Regression Testing begins 6/23/21 Pending
38 Retirement Application Processing & Death Application 6/23/21 Pending
Processing (RAP/DTH) Release Development begins
39 Payment Address Release Pre-User Acceptance Testing 7/14/21 Pending
(UAT) begins
13TAB 4
Board of Trustees IPA Update April 2021
Agenda
01 Overview of Methodology
02 Grading Scale
03 Setting the Stage
04 Summary of Findings
05 Trends & KPIs
06 Q/A
Page 2Program Assessment – Cube Methodology Overview
Future Review
Portfolio Governance
Program Governance
A One-Team culture Capability
Communicate and collaborate with consistency, transparency
and Technical Solution
maturity
and bridging the gap from dev team to leadership Program Management
Complexity Performance
profile management
Embedding within the Team Business case
Organizational Benefits
Provide solutions and expert guidance to key TRS and partner
change design and
integrity
management realization
stakeholders Decision Compliance and
framework regulatory
Quality Cutover
Being Independent
management and
Governance support
Speak the truth with open dialogue with senior leaders Risk
effectiveness Testing
and
management
validation
Human Methodology
Communications
resource and Controls
Forward Looking
management
management development
Identify issues and risk before they become critical Procurement Security,
management BC and DR
Scope Integration Sustainability Data
Solution Focused management management model management
Assesses the program with effective program governance Time
Technical
infrastructure
model, technical solution and program management
management
Requirements
Cost engineering
management
Success Driven and design
Everything we do is anchored to what will make the TRS TEAM Product Management Technical Solution
program successful
Page 3Grading Scale
Our assessment grading scale is targeted for optimal program growth for TEAM and establishing a baseline to
improve upon. The goal is not to be a perfect 10 but to improve components of the program to increase
productivity and effectiveness of the product implementation.
Not Agile Transition Agile Optimal Range Pure Agile
TEAM program needs improvement TEAM conducting fundamental agile Where TEAM Program wants to be Not what TEAM program is striving for
y
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Activities/functions are not defined and All functions and teams are high performing,
Activities/functions are defined, fairly stable and
performed in an ad-hoc manner or process aligned, continually optimizing and leading practices
consistent across functions and teams. And are
aren’t stable and consistent across functions are engrained in the daily activities. High level of
being performed at a proficient level
and teams automation.
Page 4Setting the stage
Background
This initial report is based of the first 6 weeks of TEAM program review.
Shadowed key meetings and conducted initial review of program documents
15+ 4.11 Out of 10
9
Participated in all 9
Compiled this baseline report and each month our assessment scores will be updated Daily stand ups Overall Program scrum team planning
based on further review of the program. attended Health sessions and backlog
grooming
Pending defining targets with the TEAM Program Leadership for each of the program
2 Agile 101
components.
Based on our previous IPA experience and TRS’s current level of agility, the
baseline score is on par with previous experience Retrospectives participated in Reviewed and provided
feedback for initial Agile101
document
Grading scale Scope Schedule Budget
Initially defined
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 HILOB release on
program backlog TBD based on next
track. Future
Not defined and performed in an Are defined, fairly stable and High performing, aligned, needs further iteration’s
ad-hoc manner consistent across functions and continually optimizing and leading releases need to be
refinement and assessments
teams practices continually refined
Process aren’t stable and
restructuring
consistent Performed at a proficient level High level of automation.
EY IPA team is working daily with the TRS TEAM program to cultivate relationships and a robust understanding
across the entire program
Page 5TEAM Program summary Overall Rating:
4.11
Trends and KPI’s Wall of Fame
4.0 4.3 4.0
Agile101 TEAM Willingness to
Program Governance Product Management Technical Solution documentation participation grow
Quick Wins Risks
Value metrics Standard tool Reporting errors Disparate
set systems
Areas of Opportunity
Alignment between enterprise program Single source of truth for program tracking
planning and day to day ways of working and implementation and automation in key
aspects
Page 6Trends and KPIs
Facet Area of Review March ‘21 April ‘21 May ‘21 Q2+ Trend
TEAM Program Overall Program Health 4.11
Decision framework 4
Organizational change management N/A
Program
Governance Performance management 4
Overall: 4.0 Governance effectiveness 5
Benefits design and realization 3
Product Quality management 2
Management
Risk management 5
Overall: 4.3 Communications management 6
Methodology and development 3
Technical Solution Testing and validation 4
Overall: 4.0 Cutover and support 5
Sustainability model 4
*As the program advances we will bring in additional areas of review and rank them.
Page 7Questions? Page 8 3 April 2021 Presentation title
EY | Building a better working world EY refers to the global organization, and may refer to one or more, of
the member firms of Ernst & Young Global Limited, each of which is a
separate legal entity. Ernst & Young Global Limited, a UK company
limited by guarantee, does not provide services to clients. Information
EY exists to build a better working world, helping about how EY collects and uses personal data and a description of the
to create long-term value for clients, people and rights individuals have under data protection legislation are available
via ey.com/privacy. EY member firms do not practice law where
society and build trust in the capital markets. prohibited by local laws. For more information about our organization,
please visit ey.com.
Enabled by data and technology, diverse EY
In Consulting, we are building a better working world by transforming
teams in over 150 countries provide trust businesses through the power of people, technology and innovation.
through assurance and help clients grow, It's our ambition to become the world's leading transformation
consultants.
transform and operate. The diversity and skills of 70,000+ people will help clients realize
transformation by putting humans at the center, delivering technology
Working across assurance, consulting, law, at speed and leveraging innovation at scale.
These core drivers of “Transformation Realized” will create long-term
strategy, tax and transactions, EY teams ask value for people, clients and society.
better questions to find new answers for the For more information about our Consulting organization, please visit
complex issues facing our world today. ey.com/consulting.
© 2021 EYGM Limited.
All Rights Reserved.
ey.comTAB 5
Information Security Report Frank Williams April 15, 2021
OVERVIEW
Agenda
• Holistic Look at 2020
• Building Blocks to Protect TRS:
• Business Fundamentals
• IT Fundamentals
• Security Program Fundamentals
• Advanced Security Programs
• Emerging Technology
2HOLISTIC LOOK: 2020 – A TRANSFORMATIONAL YEAR IN CYBERSECURITY
3BUILDING BLOCKS: BUSINESS FUNDAMENTALS
Digital Transformation initiatives frequently outpace the
ability to provide effective security. These digital
ambitions dramatically expand our cyber attack surface.
Regulations and oversight are also constantly evolving.
The top 2 factors that help determine the priority of
TRS’s cybersecurity spending are:
1) Implementing security best practices
2) Compliance mandates
4LEGISLATIVE AND REGULATORY BURDENS
5BUILDING BLOCKS: IT FUNDAMENTALS
Formalized management programs of these IT
fundamentals can slow progress, but they must be
engrained in the evolving TRS culture to create a
strong defense against various threats.
6INTERNAL PROJECTS: IMPROVEMENTS TO INFRASTRUCTURE
7BUILDING BLOCKS: SECURITY PROGRAM FUNDAMENTALS
Effective threat management is about
understanding your attack surface and
gaps. TRS Information Security operations
continue to evolve beyond traditional
security mechanisms, and our program
fundamentals are constantly adapting to
the changes coming out of digital
transformation.
8TRS-WIDE TRAINING
9BUILDING BLOCKS: ADVANCED SECURITY PROGRAMS
Beyond the fundamentals,
TRS cybersecurity staff provide
highly adaptive services to support
the speed of enterprise expansion
amongst a full stack of new growth
opportunities.
10ENTERPRISE GROWTH
11BUILDING BLOCKS: EMERGING TECHNOLOGY
These emerging
technologies can be used for
cyber defense to fully
harness the power of
installed security technology
that is often siloed in nature.
These technologies are also
empowering the future of
cyber crime.
12OPERATIONAL MODEL: BUILDING BLOCKS TO PROTECT TRS
13TAB 15
TRS-ActiveCare FY 2022 PPO and HMO Rates and Benefits Discussion Katrina Daniel April 2021
TRS-ActiveCare: Competing Coverage Shifts Costs to Employees who Need Care the Most
Features of Competing Plans Increase Costs for
Members who Need Health Care the Most
• Transfers financial risk • Potentially narrow
to employees network of physicians
• No contracts with • Excludes most
hospitals to define specialty drug coverage
network or protect • High cost of specialty
members from drugs may impair
balancing billing access to potentially
• Burdensome life-saving treatment
authorization process
2TRS-ActiveCare: The Financial Impact of Adverse Selection
Competing Plans Attract Lower-Cost Employees,
Increasing Costs in TRS-ActiveCare
$240 40% $41M
Employees leaving Employees leaving Increase in
TRS had 38% lower TRS had 40% premiums to
monthly medical & lower specialty remaining
pharmacy costs drug costs employees
Note: Comparisons are between employees leaving and staying within
districts offering competing coverage. 3TRS-ActiveCare: Legislative History
The Committee recommends that the
plan be structured in such a way to avoid
adverse selection by the school districts.
[T]he greater resulting issue of
districts backing out of ActiveCare is
the resulting ‘adverse selection’ that
occurs.
4TRS-ActiveCare: Competing Coverage Increases Costs to Public Education Employees
School Districts Offering Competing Coverage
• D is tr ic ts o ffe r in g c o m p e tin g c o v e r a g e
r e p r e s e n t 1 4 % o f p a r tic ip a tin g d is tr ic ts
a n d e m p lo y 1 0 % o f e lig ib le e m p lo y e e s
• In c r e a s e in c o s ts r e p r e s e n ts 2 .3 % o f
T R S - A c tiv e C a r e a n n u a l c la im s p a id in
F Y 2 0 2 1
• A n a d d itio n a l im p a c t o f 0 .1 % - 1 .5 %
p o s s ib le in F Y 2 0 2 2
• F Y 2 0 2 2 im p a c t d e p e n d s o n h o w m a n y
a d d itio n a l d is tr ic ts o ffe r c o m p e tin g
c o v e r a g e a n d a n y le g is la tiv e c h a n g e s
Made with flourish. studio
5TRS-ActiveCare: Rates & Benefits in July
6TRS-ActiveCare: Self-Insured Benefits Summary
Benefit Primary HD Primary+
Ind. Med Deductible $2,500 $2,800 $1,200
Rx Deductible Integrated Integrated $200
Coins 30% 20% 20%
Ind. In-Network MOOP $8,150 $6,900 $6,900
PCP $30 Ded, Coins $30
Specialty $70 Ded, Coins $70
Therapy $30 Ded, Coins $30
Generic Rx $15 Ded, 20% $15
Pref Brand Rx Ded, 30% Ded, 25% Ded, 25%
Non-Pref Brand Rx Ded, 50% Ded, 50% Ded, 50%
Specialty Rx Ded, 30% Ded, 20% Ded, 20%
Additional details available in plan highlights document:
7
https://www.bcbstx.com/trsactivecare/pdf/trs-plan-highlights.pdfTRS-ActiveCare: Key Dates for FY2022 Plan Year
Rates & benefits set New Plan Year (1st)
July 15th-16th
2nd BA training
May June July August Sept
1st benefits
administrator (BA) Annual Enrollment
training August 2–23
8TRS-ActiveCare Communications Plan
Benefit Administrators
• 7 virtual regional trainings
• Administrative guide and training survey
• Annual enrollment toolkit
Participants
• Email updates through The Pulse
• Annual enrollment videoSept
• Enrollment guide
• District intranet toolkit
• Provider search tool
• PCP selection FAQ
9TAB 16
TRS Long-Term
Facilities Update
Brian Guthrie, Executive Director
Andrew Roth, COAO
April 16, 2021
1TRS Long-Term Facilities: Agenda
I. Vision: Generational Solution
II. Overview of December and February BOT meetings
III. Indeed Tower Sublease Update
IV. Current Workstreams
V. Status of Remote Work
VI. Return to Office
VII. Next Steps
2TRS Long-Term Facilities: Vision
Generational Solution
• Generates significant savings to the fund by decreasing use of leased space
• Consistent with Texas Facilities Commission’s mission on consolidating agency facilities and
minimizing use of leased offices
• Reduces need for costly improvements on outdated HQ buildings
• Eliminates a costly piecemeal approach
Why is this necessary?
• Space needs compounded over time
• TRS is out of space; relying on Work-From-Home (WFH), an unsustainable solution
• Status quo is the most expensive option
3TRS Long-Term Facilities: Vision
Other Considerations
• Current environment is uncertain and unprecedented
• Pandemic-driven changes require cautious, deliberate, and thoughtful approach
Non-negotiables
• Decision must be in the best interest of the members and the Fund
• A prudent fiduciary decision needs to be made
• Most economically advantageous long-term decision
4TRS Long-Term Facilities: 2020 Overview
December 2020 Board Meeting February 2020 Board Meeting
• Updated the board on Indeed Tower • Updated the board on Indeed Tower
subleasing activities subleasing activities
• Discussed the need for space: flexibility, • Shared the current workstreams regarding
timing, and cost the due diligence on Build-To-Suit
• Discussed cost and timing associated with (BTS) options and improvements to the
current options as of December 2020 Red River facility
• Approved a 2-year lease at 816 Congress
5TRS Long-Term Facilities: Indeed Tower Sublease Update
Sublease Activity
• Building expected to be completed in Summer of 2021
• Cushman & Wakefield aggressively marketing space
o Responding to multiple inquiries about the space
o Conducting tours for potential sublessees
• Toured the space to determine necessity of build-out work
o Ready to request permits at the appropriate time
6TRS Long-Term Facilities: Current Workstreams
Build-to-Suit Opportunities Red River Campus
• Follow through on design work for • Critical maintenance projects initiated
potential Build-to-Suit options (total financial outlay approx. $4-5 million)
• Explore potential legal issues with both • Extra seating
buildings • Sump pump replacement
• Fire suppression maintenance
• Explore potential legal issues with • Landscaping
proposed transaction structures
• Develop 3, 5, and 7-year facilities plans
7TRS Long-Term Facilities: Current Workstreams
816 Congress
• Lease extended
• Additional 2-year term will provide flexibility and stability while assessing solutions
• Space can be utilized for transition and continued growth
• Continue to develop long-term solution
8TRS Long-Term Facilities: Status of Remote Work
Strengths Challenges
• Flexibility • Technology issues
• Reduced employee stress associated with • Productivity loss in certain business areas,
traffic and commuting including key member-facing areas
• Productivity gains in certain areas • Compliance and data security associated
• Allows TRS to continue to deliver with remote work strategies
uninterrupted services to members during • Suboptimal onboarding and training
a global pandemic experience
• Culture erosion
9TRS Long-Term Facilities: Return to Office
Constraints with Red River Campus
Red River Campus Capacity
and 816 Congress
• With social distancing, can accommodate • Unable to flexibly configure space
approximately 60% of its current staff of • Evolving member service needs
approximately 650 employees • Technology
• On any given day, this will require 40% of • Social distancing
Red River staff to be working remotely • Hybrid meetings
• As the need for social distancing eases,
TRS membership and staff will grow,
continuing to put pressure on mitigations
such as remote work
10TRS Long-Term Facilities: Return to Office
816 Congress Red River
• Kicked off procurement effort for a broker • Initiating significant maintenance-related
to identify leased space for IMD after facilities efforts
current lease term expires • Ability to add additional seating
• Engaging in TI for space improvements constrained; few empty spaces remain
11TRS Long-Term Facilities: Next Steps
Next Steps
• Continue due diligence on existing options (e.g., design meetings)
• Continue to look for the best possible option for TRS and its members
• Evaluate potential issues with full Return To Office (RTO)
Members (Red River)
Partners (816 Congress)
• Initiate maintenance and space efficiency activities at Red River that can be done while staff
occupancy is low
• Updated timeline for the July TRS Board of Trustees meeting
12TAB 18
Chief Operations and Administrative Officer Presentation Andrew Roth April 16, 2021
AGENDA
I. Return to Office
II. Shared Service Investment Needs
2I. RETURN TO OFFICE : PEOPLE
• Currently in Phase 2, 25%-33% occupancy • Full occupancy means 75% occupancy on
• Will move into Phase 3, approx. 50% any given day in keeping with new remote
occupancy, in Summer 2021 work standard of 75/25
• Able to seat approx. 60% of staff while • Expecting to return to full occupancy in
accommodating social distancing Sept. 2021
• Phase 4, returning to full occupancy,
dependent on public health official
recommendations over the summer
3You can also read
