This report shows public data only. Is this your organisation? If so, login here to view your full report.

Bloomberg LP Retirement Plans

PRI reporting framework 2020

You are in Indirect – Manager Selection, Appointment and Monitoring » Selection

Selection

SAM 02. Selection processes (LE and FI)

02.1. Indicate what RI-related information your organisation typically covers in the majority of selection documentation for your external managers

Your organisation’s investment strategy and how ESG objectives relate to it

ESG incorporation requirements

ESG reporting requirements

Other

No RI information covered in the selection documentation

LE

FI - SSA
FI - Corporate (financial)
FI - Corporate (non-financial)
FI - Securitised
Your organisation’s investment strategy and how ESG objectives relate to it
ESG incorporation requirements
ESG reporting requirements
Other
No RI information covered in the selection documentation

You selected an `Other` option in table SAM 02.1 above, please specify

As a Retirement Plan Provider, Bloomberg Global Retirement Plans must be cognizant of local regulations and governing mandates regarding Responsible Investment integration.  For example, in the United States, ERISA guidance has stipulated that economic concerns are primary when providing participants with investment strategy choices.

Currently, through its investment consultant, Bloomberg monitors how the manager incorporates ESG considerations into its research and investment processes and whether these are sensible and align with other objectives.

02.2. Explain how your organisation evaluates the investment manager’s ability to align between your investment strategy and their investment approach

Strategy

Assess the time horizon of the investment manager’s offering vs. your/beneficiaries’ requirements

Assess the quality of investment policy and its references to ESG

Assess the investment approach and how ESG objectives are implemented in the investment process

Review the manager’s firm-level vs. product-level approach to RI

Assess the ESG definitions to be used

Other

None of the above

LE

FI - SSA
FI - Corporate (financial)
FI - Corporate (non-financial)
FI - Securitised
Assess the time horizon of the investment manager’s offering vs. your/beneficiaries’ requirements
Assess the quality of investment policy and its reference to ESG
Assess the investment approach and how ESG objectives are implemented in the investment process
Review the manager’s firm-level vs. product-level approach to RI
Assess the ESG definitions to be used
Other
None of the above

ESG people/oversight

Assess ESG expertise of investment teams

Review the oversight and responsibilities of ESG implementation

Review how ESG implementation is incentivised

Review the manager’s RI-promotion efforts and engagement with the industry

Other

None of the above

LE

FI - SSA
FI - Corporate (financial)
FI - Corporate (non-financial)
FI - Securitised
Assess ESG expertise of investment teams
Review the oversight and responsibilities of ESG implementation
Review how is ESG implementation enforced /ensured
Review the manager’s RI-promotion efforts and engagement with the industry
Other
None of the above

Process/portfolio construction/investment valuation

Review the process for ensuring the quality of the ESG data used

Review and agree the use of ESG data in the investment decision making process

Review and agree the impact of ESG analysis on investment decisions

Review and agree ESG objectives (e.g. risk reduction, return seeking, real-world impact)

Review and agree manager’s ESG risk framework

Review and agree ESG risk limits at athe portfolio level (portfolio construction) and other ESG objectives

Review how ESG materiality is evaluated by the manager

Review process for defining and communicating on ESG incidents

Review and agree ESG reporting frequency and detail

Other, specify

None of the above

LE

FI - SSA
FI - Corporate (financial)
FI - Corporate (non-financial)
FI - Securitised
Review the process for ensuring the quality of the ESG data used
Review and agree the use of ESG data in the investment decision making process
Review and agree the impact of ESG analysis on investment decisions
Review and agree ESG objectives (e.g. risk reduction, return seeking, real-world impact)
Review and agree manager’s ESG risk framework
Review and agree ESG risk limits at athe portfolio level (portfolio construction) and other ESG objectives
Review how ESG materiality is evaluated by the manager
Review process for defining and communicating on ESG incidents
Review and agree ESG reporting frequency and detail
Other, specify
None of the above

02.3. Indicate the selection process and its ESG/RI components

          Review strategy ESG ratings developed by third parties including Bloomberg’s retirement plan investment consultant.
        

02.4. When selecting external managers does your organisation set any of the following:

ESG performance development targets

ESG score

ESG weight

Real economy influence

Other RI considerations

None of the above

LE

FI - SSA
FI - Corporate (financial)
FI - Corporate (non-financial)
FI - Securitised
ESG performance development targets
ESG score
ESG weight
Real world economy targets
Other RI considerations
None of the above

02.5. Describe how the ESG information reviewed and discussed affects the selection decision making process.[OPTIONAL]

          Active strategies are given an ESG score or rating by our investment consultant Mercer that sits alongside traditional ratings and are considered alongside all relevant factors. The rating is a qualitative assessment of the depth of ESG integration throughout a strategy’s process: 
- Idea Generation (e.g. risks and opportunities identified) 
- Portfolio Construction (e.g. identifying whether ESG views are translated into portfolio positions) 
- Implementation (e.g. evidence of active ownership, turnover, time horizon) 
- Business Management (e.g. firm wide commitment to ESG issues) 
The process takes into account that there is no “one size fits all” model for ESG integration. Instead, it looks for indications that managers have made efforts to integrate ESG factors into their alpha generation process as well as beta enhancement by exercising ownership rights. For actively managed strategies, the highest rating indicates that it is a leader in the integration of ESG factors and employs active ownership into core processes. Passively managed strategies are rated slightly differently, with the highest rating indicating that it is a leader in voting & engagement across ESG topics, with active ownership activities and ESG initiatives undertaken consistently at a global level.
        

SAM 03. Evaluating engagement and voting practices in manager selection (listed equity/fixed income)

03.1. Indicate how your organisation typically evaluates the manager’s active ownership practices in the majority of the manager selection process.

(Proxy) voting

Review the manager’s voting policy

Review the manager’s ability to align voting activities with clients’ specific voting policies

Review the manager’s process for informing clients about voting decisions

Ensure whether voting outcomes feed back into the investment decision-making process

Review the number of votes cast as a percentage of ballots/AGMs or holdings and available rationale

Other voting issues in your selection process; specify

LE

Review the manager’s voting policy
Review the manager’s ability to align voting activities with clients’ specific voting policies
Review the manager’s process for informing clients about voting decisions
Ensure whether voting outcomes feed back into the investment decision-making process
Review the number of votes cast as a percentage of ballots/AGMs or holdings and available rationale
Other active ownership voting issues in your selection process; specify

03.3. Describe how you assess if the manager’s voting approach is effective/appropriate

03.4. Additional information [OPTIONAL]

          
        

Top