2013 Thrift Savings Plan

Survey Results
1

Table of Contents

Executive Summary 2

Survey Methodology and Context 6

Survey Methodology 7

Survey Context 8

Report Information 9

Overview 10

Contributions 11

Investment Approaches 16

Asset Allocations 21

TSP Participant Experience 23

Overall Perspective 24

Communication and Education—Overall Use and Preferences 26

Communication and Education—TSP Website 27

Communication and Education—TSP ThriftLine 28

Communication and Education—TSP Annual Statement 29

TSP Administrative Services 30

TSP Account Actions and Approaches 33

Retirement Preparation and Planning 38

Closing 44

Appendix A: Detailed Profile of Respondents 45

Appendix B: Active Participant Survey 49

Appendix C: Separated Participant Survey 59
2

Executive Summary

The Federal Retirement Thrift Investment Board (FRTIB) contracted with Aon Hewitt, an independent 

consultancy, in a survey of Federal employees and uniformed services members with regard to their 

perspectives, attitudes, understanding, satisfaction, and behaviors related to the Thrift Savings Plan (TSP). 

The survey was designed as a follow up to prior studies conducted in 2006/2007, 2008, and 2011. The 

2013 survey was redesigned to significantly reduce the length while maintaining an emphasis on the key 

topics. The survey was conducted from September to November, 2013 through a paper-based mailing to 

the homes of a random sample of 46,733 active participants and separated Federal employees and 

uniformed service members who participate in the TSP. Those invited have the option of completing the 

survey on paper or on-line. Of those sampled, 5,524 responded, achieving a 12% response rate (slightly 

below the 2011 rate of 15%) and representing a good cross-section of the sample. The response rate may 

have been negatively impacted by the three-week government shutdown occurring within the administration 

period.

Key findings of the survey include:

Subgroup Differences of Note

Though there are many subgroup differences in specific areas, detailed throughout the report, overall 

results show somewhat less positive responses from those in uniformed services, those under 40 years of 

age, those with household incomes under $40,000, and those with lower balances or contribution rates 

compared to other related subgroups. Results for those who were automatically enrolled were very positive, 

and this group also had slightly higher average savings rates, indicating this feature is contributing towards 

helping this group prepare for retirement.

TSP Participant Behaviors

The average savings rate across all three retirement systems reported by respondents is 11.6% of basic 

pay, relatively unchanged from 2011 (11.5%) and higher than typical private sector savings plan average 

contributions of 7.3%1

, indicating a continued strong level of engagement with the TSP; however, the FERS 

average contribution rate declined 1.1% from 2011. Self-described investment approaches are similar to 

2011, with about one-third split between aggressive, balanced, and cautious categories. Similar to past 

results, uniformed services respondents tend to 

be the most aggressive investors. Nearly threequarters (73%) of respondents are comfortable 

choosing investment funds to meet their goals. 

This result is consistent across retirement 

systems and significantly higher than 2011 

results, indicating a very positive change. Only 

about half of respondents express confidence in 

their understanding of the Roth TSP option and 

L Fund investments, so these topics may be 

areas for further education efforts.

Tax benefits, payroll deduction convenience, and matching contributions continue to be the primary reasons 

for contributing to the TSP. However, the percentage of participants citing lower administrative costs as a 

reason rose significantly to 24% of active participant contributors (from 18% in 2011). For those not 

contributing to the 5% match level, about one-third cite the perceived inability to afford that level of 

1 Source: Aon Hewitt 2013 Universe Benchmarks: Measuring Employee Savings and Investing Behavior in Defined Contribution Plans, 

data as of December 31, 2012.

73%are comfortable choosing investment 

funds – up 14 points from 2011

 
3

savings—similar to benchmarks from private employer plan surveys.

2 Given this perceived affordability 

issue, finding ways to promote savings opportunities that do not take away from current earnings is 

important, such as during times of pay increases. Private sector plans have addressed this affordability 

perception by emphasizing how better budgeting can provide opportunities to save. 

TSP Participant Experience

Overall, Federal employees and uniformed 

services participants are quite satisfied with the 

TSP and its competitiveness compared to similar 

private sector plans. Over four-fifths (87%) of 

respondents are satisfied, an increase of 1

percentage point over 2011 levels. Ninety-five 

percent rate the TSP as competitive or better 

compared to other employers’ savings plans;

further, well over half (58%) say the TSP is above 

or well above others, significantly higher than 

private sector ratings in this regard (28%)

3

.

Similar to 2011 results, satisfaction is also strong 

for the TSP website, annual statements, and the 

ThriftLine, with over 80% indicating being satisfied 

or very satisfied with important characteristics of 

these channels. Respondents vary in terms of their 

most preferred sources of communication, though 

the TSP website and mailed statements dominate 

as both current channels and most preferred relative 

to others. Though currently not available, email is 

considered a top preference by nearly one-quarter 

of respondents (23%) overall, and therefore should 

be considered in the future as it is often effective in 

private sector efforts to drive participation and saving 

behaviors. Communication preferences are fairly 

consistent across subgroups.

The addition of a monthly income estimate to the 

statements appears to have been well-received 

with 61% saying they reviewed the estimate. Of 

those who reviewed the estimate, the two actions

taken most often were increasing the contribution 

amount (12%) and changing how the account is 

invested (10%).

2 Source: 2013 Aon Hewitt Benefits Perception Database of 314,326 respondents from 97 organizations. 3 Source: 2013 Aon Hewitt Benefits Perception Database of 314,326 respondents from 97 organizations.

87%are satisfied with TSP and 58%say 

TSP is better than other employer savings plans

Uniformed services members are more likely to 

rank electronic sources as 

preferred, relative to those in other 

retirement systems.

Nearly one-thirdof those who reviewed

the monthly income estimate on the statement 

took action based on that estimate.

 
4

While overall plan satisfaction is strong, participant satisfaction with TSP administrative services and 

communication efforts is lower. Most respondents are satisfied with their ability to take a loan (69%), ways 

to withdraw money after separation (61%), and their ability to transfer money into the TSP from other 

retirement vehicles (57%). 

In considering ways to enhance the value of the plan and the participant experience, most responded 

favorably to services related to guidance—specifically, they have high interest in how to optimize

withdrawals from the TSP (84% valuable or very valuable), how much money will be needed in retirement 

(77%), and retirement income planning (75%). Investment options offered, mobile access to account 

information and transactions, and financial advice or counseling are cited by most as favorite services 

provided by other financial institutions.

TSP Account Actions and Approaches

Many respondents like the idea of consolidating 

another retirement account into their TSP account. 

Of those with another account, 46% say they 

would consider rolling it into their TSP (up from 

35% in 2011), while 42% say they would not 

consider this.

For those who expect to transfer money from 

the TSP upon separation (or upon retirement 

for separated, but not-yet-retired participants), 

consolidation of accounts, better investment 

options, or better withdrawal options are the 

most often cited reasons. Focusing further on 

new alternatives or options in these areas or 

further education on what is available in TSP 

should be considered.

The Federal budget concerns getting significant media attention during and just prior to the survey 

administration did not trigger action by most TSP respondents (75%). For those who took action, reductions 

in contribution or withdrawals/loans were the most often cited actions.

Retirement Preparation and Planning

Respondents generally rank the TSP, available 

system pensions/annuities, and Social Security in

the top three sources of income. Not surprisingly, 

given the retirement system design differences, 

respondents view sources differently depending on 

the retirement system in which they participate. 

Across all three systems, though, the TSP is cited by 

about two-thirds (67%, up significantly from 56% in 

2011) as a top three source, making it a critical 

income source overall.

Over two-thirds (70%) of respondents say they do not have a specific financial goal for retirement. For the 

minority that report having a goal, the vast majority (83%) have a specific dollar amount in mind versus a 

multiple of pre-retirement pay. Though confidence that retirement income sources will be sufficient for a 

comfortable retirement has risen since 2011 (up 4 percentage points), fewer than two-thirds agree or 

strongly agree they are confident.

Consolidation of accounts, better investment options, 

or better withdrawal options are the most 

often cited reasons for 

transferring money from the TSP 

after separation. 

Over two-thirds (70%) of 

respondents say they do not have a specific

financial goal for retirement. 
5

Future Considerations

The results of this survey reaffirm the importance participants place on the TSP in their retirement planning 

and goals, and their high regard for the plan overall and the services provided. Continuing to provide the 

highly-satisfying services, information, and guidance tools will be important to maintaining the high level of 

overall satisfaction with the TSP.

Given the lower relative perceptions of the plan and key components from those in lower income ranges, 

lower balances, and lower age ranges, consider more targeted communication and education to these 

groups about the value of saving, actions that can help identify more money to save (e.g., budgeting tools), 

and the services and tools available through the plan to help. Consider further leverage of text, mobile and 

social media channels to better reach these audiences as their use of these tools tends to be higher than 

other groups. Mobile access is one of the well-liked elements from other financial institutions. Combining 

high-tech and high-touch methods have proven to be most effective in driving better behaviors in savings 

plans in the private sector.

Participants placed high value on the personal statements, so continue to reinforce that channel for 

communication—to the extent possible, leveraging personal emails could be a way to further extend this 

personalized information to engage participants while potentially producing cost savings as well. Email is a 

significant part of most communication strategies in the private sector and continues to be a preferred 

approach to obtaining personal information or reminders to employees from employers.

Further extension of guidance efforts should also be considered as participants responded very favorably to

services related to guidance tools and information, including how to optimize withdrawals, how to determine 

how much money is needed in retirement, and retirement income planning in general.

With a reasonably-sized portion of participants being unwilling to roll over other accounts into the TSP, 

this is an area where further investigation and research may be valuable to uncover the underlying reasons 

why this option is not viewed more positively. Integrating quantitative efforts, such as this survey, with 

supplemental qualitative research—interviews, focus groups, or website feedback—may be a good way to 

listen to participants and determine ways to add further value and improve quality and performance.
6

Survey 

Methodology 

and Context
7

Survey Methodology

The Federal Retirement Thrift Investment Board (FRTIB) partnered with Aon Hewitt to conduct a survey 

of participants in the Thrift Savings Plan (TSP). The survey was initially conducted with a sample of 

participants from September 11 to October 9, 2013. The administration was extended to November 17, 

2013 to allow for more response, especially given the government shut down that occurred October 1 

through October 16, 2013. The survey design builds from previous survey designs and current strategic 

objectives. 

Aon Hewitt and FRTIB collaborated to design the survey content by building from prior survey items and 

designing new survey items through an iterative process. It was determined that to better serve the 

different audiences, two versions of the survey would be used—one for active participants and another for 

separated participants (see Appendix). The surveys contained 45 closed-end response questions on the 

active participants version and 27 closed-end response questions on the separated participants version—

a core of 21 close-ended questions are the same across both versions. Both versions include one openended comment section in which participants were asked to provide additional comments or suggestions. 

Finally, the survey included eight demographic questions to allow analyses by key population subgroups. 

The original stratified, random sample was 48,146 Federal employees and uniformed services members. 

Aon Hewitt mailed an announcement postcard to the sample on August 30, 2013 alerting them that the 

survey would be coming. In addition to the postcard announcement, TSP website banners and a related 

video posted to the TSP channel on YouTube were used to further promote the survey effort. 

On September 11, 2013, Aon Hewitt mailed survey packets containing a cover letter, questionnaire, and 

postage-paid return envelope to the sample to achieve a reliable and representative sample. In the cover 

letter, potential respondents were given the option and related instructions to complete the survey online 

as well. There were 1,413 survey packets returned as undeliverable, leaving 46,733 eligible for completion. 

The sample was sent a reminder postcard on September 24, 2013. An additional reminder postcard 

announcing the survey deadline extension was mailed to the sample on October 22, 2013. In addition, 

reminder messages and deadline extension announcements were posted on the TSP website banner and 

plan news/announcement pages as well as on the account access page of the sampled participants.

A total of 5,524 participants

completed the online or paper survey

(useable surveys) for a total 

response rate of 11.8%. This 

response rate lags the typical range 

Aon Hewitt generally obtains from 

similar surveys in the private sector 

(typically 25%–35%). It should be 

noted that this benchmark is for online survey administration via email 

invitation, which may account for 

much of the difference. 

In analyzing the survey items, the 

margin of error will vary based on the 

number of respondents answering that item and the related variance of those responses. Using a 95% 

confidence interval, the approximate margin of error for the overall population would be 1.2%.

Mailed* Responding

Adjusted 

Response 

Rate

Online 

%

Paper 

%

Nov 

2006/ 

March 

2007

26,852 5,053 18.8% N/A N/A

Nov 2008 34,250 4,891 14.3% 32% 68%

Oct 2011 55,055 8,246 15.0% 22% 78%

Oct 2013 46,733 5,524 11.8% 31% 69%

*Not including undeliverable
8

Survey Context

Given the survey administration timing, we would reasonably expect some impact on responses to 

retirement expectations and the TSP from the continued uncertainty and concern about the economy, job 

security, and general financial markets. The table below outlines general economic data for the survey 

administration periods, illustrating a somewhat improved picture since the prior survey in 2011. 

It is not possible to determine the 

magnitude of the impact in the responses

overall or as a comparison between time 

periods. Comparisons to prior results have 

been provided where available throughout 

this report to provide some insight into how 

perceptions have changed between the 

periods.

In addition to the above, the Federal 

workforce experienced pay freezes from 

2011 to 2013 and the impact of 

sequestration in 2013. The only meaningful 

change to the plan during this period was 

the introduction of Roth TSP in May 2012.

Nov 

2006

Nov

2008

Oct 

2011

Nov 

2013

Consumer Price 

Index (endperiod)

203.1 211.3 227.3 233.1

Prior Quarter GDP 

Growth (% real 

change)

2.7% – 0.3% 1.7% 2.5%

U.S. Recorded 

Unemployment 

Rate

4.6% 5.8% 9.0% 7.0%

Dow Jones 

Industrial 

Average

12,280 8,829 12,232 15,962
9

Report Information

Throughout the report, the results for 2013 are shown based to those answering the related question. 

In some cases the populations upon which a percentage is based (either for 2013 or prior years’ results) 

are changed or re-based to allow for appropriate comparisons between years. In many cases, those who 

indicated “Don’t Know” or “Not Applicable” are also removed from the base for calculating proportional 

results where noted.

Throughout the report, results are shown by subgroups, including by retirement systems (e.g., FERS, 

CSRS, and uniformed services). A brief overview of the systems is provided below to provide important 

context for the survey results:

FERS is the Federal Employees’ Retirement System established by Public Law 99-335; TSP 

benefits are codified in chapter 84 of title 5 U.S. Code. FERSA became effective January 1, 1987. 

Individuals covered under FERS pay Social Security taxes and FERS basic benefit deductions. They 

also receive an automatic agency/employer contribution to a TSP account in their name equivalent to 

one-percent of their basic pay and receive dollar/dollar matching on the first three-percent of 

contributions and 50-cents/dollar matching on additional contributions up to five-percent of basic pay. 

Contributions in excess of five-percent of basic pay are not matched. 

It should be noted that effective 2006, participants were able to make contributions from basic pay to 

their TSP accounts up to the Internal Revenue Code (I.R.C.) section 402(g) excess deferral limit. 

Effective June 2009, newly hired FERS employees immediately became eligible (no waiting period) for 

agency automatic and matching contributions. Effective August 2010, all newly hired Federal 

employees who were eligible to participate in the Thrift Savings Plan automatically had 3 percent of 

their basic pay contributed to the TSP (default employee contribution) unless they elected to not 

contribute or elected to contribute at some other level prior to the end of the employee’s first pay 

period. The TSP is a core component of the three-tiered retirement benefits of FERS employees; the 

other two components are Social Security and the FERS basic annuity program. 

CSRS is the Civil Service Retirement System (the TSP benefits are codified in subchapter III of 

chapter 83 of title 5 U.S. Code). The law that created CSRS was enacted in 1920. Individuals covered 

under CSRS pay CSRS employee deductions and are excluded from OASDI taxes of Social Security. 

Effective 2006, they were able to make contributions from basic pay to their TSP accounts up to the 

402(g) limits, however, they do not receive any agency/employer contributions. The TSP is a 

supplemental retirement benefit for CSRS employees. 

Uniformed services personnel became eligible to participate in the TSP in 2002 following the 

enactment of the Floyd D. Spence National Defense Authorization Act for 2001 (Public Law 106-398).

For TSP purposes, the uniformed services include members of the Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine 

Corps, Coast Guard, Public Health Service, and Commissioned Officers of the National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration, as well as members of the Ready Reserve and the National Guard. 

Effective 2006, uniformed service personnel may make contributions from basic pay to their TSP 

accounts up to the 402(g) limits, but they do not receive any agency/employer contributions. Members 

of the uniformed services can also contribute from 1 to 100 percent of any incentive pay, special pay, or 

bonus pay—as long as they also elect to contribute from their basic pay. Members can make 

contributions from tax-exempt pay (i.e., pay that is subject to the combat zone tax exclusion). Their

tax-exempt contributions are not subject to the 402(g) limits; however, they must not exceed the I.R.C. 

section 415(c) annual addition limits. 
10

Overview

The profile of respondents represents a good cross-section of the population. Given the stratification of the 

sample and different response rates by retirement system, we would expect differences between the profile 

of respondents and the total population or total sample in some areas, including by retirement system. 

In fact, CSRS responded at the highest rate (21%), while uniformed services’ rate was only 8% (see 

Appendix A for details). To understand the potential impact of this difference, the results were weighted by 

the population proportions in each retirement system, e.g., 10% CSRS, 63% FERS, and 27% uniformed 

services. The weighted results are not materially different from the unweighted results, so the 

remainder of this report uses the unweighted results. Unweighted results were also used in prior 

survey periods.

Though respondents represent a diverse group, the “typical” respondent tends to be currently 

employed (60%), male (62%), Caucasian/White (72%), 50 years of age or older (63%), married (70%), with 

a college degree (68%), with a median length of service of 24 years, and earning a median annual pay of 

$73,000. A detailed profile of respondents can be found in Appendix A.

Combined Retirement System Active/Separated
11

Contributions

All those eligible for the sample had to have a non-zero balance in their TSP account—through their own 

contributions, agency contributions, or both. Of the active participants who responded to the survey, 92% 

say they are currently contributing, though 15% of those active participants either did not know how much 

they contribute (8%) or did not answer the question (7%). Among private sector defined contribution plans, 

participation averages 78.0%.3

As in prior surveys, the deferral rate 

results reflected here are self-reported

and exclude eligible employees who are 

not currently contributing to the TSP.

Among active participants currently 

contributing and answering the question 

related to deferral rates, the average savings 

rate is 11.6% of basic pay, about the same 

as 2011 (11.5%). The median deferral rate 

among active participants remains 

unchanged at 10.0%. These rates are higher 

than average private sector savings plan pretax contributions of 7.3% of pay4 (relatively 

unchanged from 7.2% in 2011).

Deferral rates are highest among uniformed 

services and lowest among FERS 

respondents. As estimated from self-reported 

data, the FERS average rate is down 

markedly from 2011— private sector average 

rate was flat over the same time period. The 

median rate across uniformed services and 

CSRS is 10.0%, while the median for FERS 

is 8% (down from 10% in 2011). Most respondents self-report deferral rates above the “match” rate of 5%.

Interestingly, respondents with household incomes of $25,000 or less report a higher average deferral rate 

of 14.8% compared to other income ranges, except those with over $150,000, who defer at an average 

of 14.1%. Female respondents defer at lower average rates compared to their male counterparts 

(10.9% versus 12.0%).

4 Source: Aon Hewitt 2013 Universe Benchmarks: Measuring Employee Savings and Investing Behavior in Defined Contribution Plans,

 data as of December 31, 2012.

Average TSP Deferral Rates by Retirement Systems*

2006 2008 2011 2013

CSRS 9.1% 9.2% 10.2% 11.1%

FERS 9.0% 9.2% 11.6% 10.5%

Uniformed 

Services

11.9% 11.8% 12.1% 12.5%

TOTAL 10.2% 10.3% 11.5% 11.6%

*Includes active participants of the Federal Government who are currently 

contributing a portion of pay to the TSP and provided their contribution rate on the 

survey (N=2,581). Contribution amounts were derived using self-reported 

contribution rates at the time of the survey times the mid-point of their annual pay 

group. Amounts could be over- or under- estimated due to changes over the year 

and annual pay which is estimated based on participants’ survey response.

 
12
13

Top Reasons for Contributing

#1 Tax Benefits 

#2 Convenience 

#3 Matching 

The top reasons for contributing to the TSP 

among active participants continue to be the 

tax benefits (56%) and convenience of payroll 

deduction (51%), similar to prior results. 

Matching contributions are mentioned as a 

reason by 82% of FERS respondents as a 

reason for contributing (this is their top reason 

and consistent with the 85% in 2011). (Note: 

CSRS and uniformed services do not have a 

matching feature in their plan.) Those citing 

lower administration costs rose significantly

from 18% in 2011 to 24% of active

contributors in 2013. With the addition of the 

Roth option, 12% cite the tax-free earnings from this option as a reason they contribute—over 54% of 

those citing this as a reason are uniformed services participants (although uniformed services 

participants comprise only 40% of the survey respondents).

Not surprisingly, auto-enrollment is more likely to be cited by those who were auto-enrolled and often with 

less tenure since auto-enrollment was implemented in 2010. Respondents under 40 years of age are more 

likely to cite recommendations from others (colleagues, friends, financial advisors), reinforcing the notion 

that this group values social influences more significantly than older participants. This younger cohort is 

also more likely to cite the tax benefits associated with Roth TSP as an important reason to 

participate. Older respondents (60 years or older) are more likely to cite tax benefits, matching, and lower 

administration costs as important reasons they participate.
14
15

Top Reasons for 

Not Contributing 

at Least 5% of Pay

#1 Affordability 

#2 Use of Outside 

Investments 

Among active participants currently not 

contributing at least 5 percent of pay, the 

primary reason for not contributing at that 

level is the perception that they cannot afford 

to (34%), though over one-quarter (27%) cite 

use of outside investments. Over threequarters selected “Other”—most often, those 

selecting this mentioned the fact they are 

nearing retirement or need the money for loan 

repayment. In private sector surveys, 39% of 

respondents typically indicate affordability as a 

reason for not contributing to a defined 

contribution savings plan.

5 As in prior years, 

those earning $25,000 or less annually are 

more likely to cite affordability as a reason for 

not contributing up to 5 percent—46% of this 

group cite this as a reason. Also more likely to 

cite affordability are females (40% versus 29% for males) and those with household incomes of $60,000–

$80,000 (44%).

5 Source: 2013 Aon Hewitt Benefits Perception Database of 314,326 respondents from 97 organizations.

 
16

Investment Approaches

Nearly three-quarters (73%) of respondents are 

comfortable choosing investment funds to meet their 

goals. This result is consistent across retirement 

systems and significantly higher than 2011 results. 

Male respondents are much more likely than 

females to say they are comfortable choosing 

investment funds (78% versus 65% for females). 

Those contributing at 15% or more of pay are also 

more likely to be comfortable choosing investments.

Participants’ understanding of Roth TSP and Lifecycle 

Funds lag a bit with about one-quarter (24%) indicating 

a lack of understanding. Those contributing at higher 

rates (15 percent or more) are more likely to 

understand the Roth TSP and Lifecycle Fund options. 

Those without loans, those under 40 years of age, and 

those with household incomes over $80,000 are more 

likely to say they understand the Roth and Lifecycle 

Fund options as well. African-American/Black 

respondents are less likely than others to say they 

understand Roth TSP (40%) and L Funds (37%). No 

significant differences among other subgroups were 

found.

73%are comfortable choosing investment 

funds—up 14 points from 2011.

Roth and Lifecycle Fund 

understanding lagsfor older, 

lower earning, and 

African-American/Black participants.
17

Self-described investment approaches are similar to 

2011, with about one-third split between aggressive, 

balanced, and cautious categories. Similar to past results, 

uniformed services respondents tend to be the most 

aggressive, followed by FERS, with CSRS respondents 

being the most cautious relative to others. 

Not surprisingly, self-reported investment approaches 

vary by demographics. Male, younger, and those with 

incomes over $80,000 tend to have a more aggressive 

approach to investing compared to their female, older, 

and lower income counterparts.
18

When choosing investment funds, most ranked economic factors, length of time until money is needed, 

fund risk level, and past fund performance as most influential. This is consistent across retirement systems.
19

The youngest group of respondents, those under 

age 30, is more likely than others to cite fellow

participants/friends/family (34% versus 14% ranked 

in top three), providing further evidence of the 

influence social connections may have on younger 

participants.

Other differences of note include (see tables on page 20):

Asian/Pacific Islander respondents are less likely to cite economic factors as an influence in economic 

decisions compared to the other race/ethnic identities, while economic factors are also less likely to be 

influential for women compared to men.

Financial investment publications have more influence for higher income participants than lower income 

participants.

Investment influencers differ by age, income, 

race/ethnicity, and household income
20
21

Asset Allocations

Survey results indicate a strong link between self-reported investment risk approaches and actual 

investment choices with lower risk approaches favoring G Funds and higher risk approaches favoring other 

asset class funds. The percentage in L Funds is consistent across risk levels, though those categorizing 

themselves as “balanced” are somewhat more likely to use L Funds in their mix, and those categorizing 

themselves as “no risk” are less likely to leverage L Funds, not surprisingly opting for G Funds primarily.

As respondents age, they are more likely to allocate a greater portion of assets to the G Fund in their 

portfolio. Respondents under age 30 have a relatively larger portion (29%) of their funds in the G Fund 

(though down from 35% in 2011), than might be considered appropriate. Respondents with 100% of their 

balance in the G fund are more likely to be older with lower household income (17% under $40,000 versus 

9% total), and more likely to have been auto-enrolled (43% of respondents who were auto-enrolled retain

their entire balance in the G Fund). There are no relevant differences across other demographics for this 

very conservatively invested group. Though we may expect greater use of L Funds at younger ages since 

they were more recently introduced, the low use at higher ages (where still appropriate) may signal a need 

for further education on this option. That said, for each age group over 50, the percentage allocated to the 

L Fund has gone up between two and five percentage points from 2011 results. 
22

When considering household income categories, we see much greater allocation to the low risk G Fund

among those at lower household income ranges, a greater allocation to other core asset classes among 

higher income ranges, and somewhat consistent allocation to an L Fund across ranges with the exception 

of those with incomes below $25,000 where L Fund allocation is only 6%—likely due to the significant 

weight allocated to the G Fund.
23

TSP Participant 

Experience
24

TSP Participant Experience

Overall Perspective

Overall satisfaction (those indicating being satisfied or very satisfied) with the TSP is up to 87% from the 

86% result in 2011. Satisfaction is highest among CSRS (90%) and FERS (88%), while uniformed services 

lags at 84%, though still quite positive.

Satisfaction is relatively consistent across all 

demographics (age, gender, race/ethnicity, and income 

or pay levels), with some minor exceptions: those 

earning under $25,000 in pay or with household 

incomes under $25,000 (79% and 73%, respectively),

and those under 30 years of age (80%—up from 76% 

in 2011) are less likely to be satisfied. Respondents 

with account balances over $50,000 are more likely to 

be satisfied (91%) relative to those with lower 

balances.

With the relatively lower satisfaction among lower incomes and younger participants, there are also similar 

results by tenure—those with less than three years of service are somewhat less likely to be satisfied. This 

may be the result of this group having less experience in the plan or with less experience, a less complete 

understanding of the value. The TSP has experienced changes and additions over the years including the 

addition of uniformed services in 2002, daily valuation in 2003, the addition of Lifecycle Funds in 2005, and 

auto-enrollment in 2010. In fact, those joining after 2005 are less likely to be satisfied than those with longer 

tenure (81% versus 88%), which also coincides with the elimination of the TSP open seasons and 

accompanying universal focus on the TSP. 

Satisfaction lags for younger, less tenured, 

and lower income respondents, though 

satisfaction among these groups is still 

relatively high.
25

When considering the TSP relative to what respondents know or have heard about other employers’ 

retirement savings plans, again results are positive with 95% saying TSP is the same as or better than 

others’ plans—over half (58%) say TSP is above or well above others, up from 55% in 2011. 

This compares favorably to private sector perceptions of 401(k) programs where only 28% say their plan is 

above or well above others.6 This result differs significantly by retirement system, with uniformed services

being less likely than CSRS or FERS to say the plan is above others (50% of uniformed services say well 

above or above others), though perceptions have risen over 2011 across each system. Though Active 

participants’ view of competitiveness has risen (56% from 51% in 2011), it lags somewhat the views from 

Separated participants (62%, unchanged from 2011). Respondents over age 50 (63% above or well above), 

males (60%), and those with account balances over $50,000 (66%) are more likely to view the TSP as 

above or well above other plans. Though more likely to be satisfied, African-American/ Black and multi-race 

respondents are less likely to view the TSP as above others (54% and 45%, respectively) relative to other 

ethnic identities.

6 Source: 2013 Aon Hewitt Benefits Perception Database of 314,326 respondents from 97 organizations.

“TSP seems to be doing a good job adjusting to changing times and developing tools, investment 

options, and services beneficial to investors.”

—Uniformed services participant

“Considering investment options in the private sector, I think the TSP is excellent.”

—FERS participant

 
26

Communication and Education—Overall Use and Preferences

Respondents vary in terms of most preferred sources of communication, though the TSP website and 

mailed statements dominate as both current channels and most preferred relative to others. Though 

currently not available, email is considered a top preference by nearly one-quarter of respondents (23%) 

overall. Communication preferences are fairly consistent across subgroups, though uniformed services 

is more likely to rank electronic sources as preferred relative to those in other systems.

As expected, those under 40 years of age are more 

likely to prefer electronic methods, while older 

respondents and those with lower household incomes 

are less likely to prefer electronic. That said, the TSP 

website is most preferred across all groups except 

those over 70 years old or those with household 

incomes under $40,000, where it is second to mailed 

statements. Interestingly, those with household 

incomes under $25,000 are more likely to prefer 

mobile application or text (13% versus 8% for total) compared to others. According to Forrester Research in 

2013, use of mobile devices is similar across income levels, but three times more prevalent for those under 

40 years of age. African-American/ Black respondents are more likely to use the ThriftLine (45%) and more 

likely to prefer it (50% top three preference) compared to others.

Those with household incomes under $25,000 

are more likely to prefer mobile application or 

text.
27

Communication and Education—TSP Website

Consistent with 2011 results overall, 2013 respondents continue to be positive about the TSP website with 

at least 80% satisfied or very satisfied with the ability to access account information, support information 

and tools provided, and overall ease of use. The results differ across retirement systems with uniformed 

services less likely to be positive and CSRS more likely to be positive compared to respondents in the 

other systems.

Across the website items, respondents under age 40, those with household incomes under $40,000, and 

multi-race respondents are less likely to be as positive as others, though favorable responses still tend to 

be in the 70% or higher range in these groups. Though the cause for the less positive perceptions cannot 

be fully explained, we often find younger participants have higher expectations for web site design, 

functionality, and interactivity. Therefore these higher expectations may be driving lower overall 

perceptions—further research with this subgroup could provide more insight into the reasons for the lower 

perceptions and what action might help to enhance their experience. Longer-tenured respondents and 

those with loans are more likely to be satisfied across the website survey items.

“Keep the website as simple and uncomplicated as possible.”

—FERS participant

“Everything I need is in the website.”

—Uniformed services participant

“The website is easy to navigate and understandable. It would be nice to see the history of my funds, 

say over a year, in a chart or graph form.”

—FERS participant
28

Communication and Education—TSP ThriftLine

Up 3% from 2011, nearly nine out of ten respondents who have used the ThriftLine in the past 12 months 

(25% of total respondents) are satisfied or very satisfied with the quality of service received. This result is 

up dramatically from 54% in 2008. 

Results across retirement systems, Active/Separated status, and other demographics are reasonably 

consistent, though perceptions from uniformed services lag slightly. The current hours of operation work 

well for over four-fifths of respondents (82%), though some (7%) prefer to be able to call during weekends.

Those respondents who do prefer to be able to call on the weekend have similar overall communication 

preferences to others, though slightly more likely to prefer the phone channel. This group also tends to be 

more likely to be uniformed services, younger, and female compared to other respondents.
29

Communication and Education—TSP Annual Statement

The annual statement is used by 72% of respondents and ranks second only to the website as the most 

preferred communication source for TSP information. Nearly nine out of ten respondents (89%) express 

satisfaction with the information provided in the annual statement. Respondents under 30 years of age and 

those with household incomes of $25,000 or less are less likely be satisfied with the information provided in 

the annual statement, though at 80%, the vast majority of these two groups are still quite satisfied. 

Nearly three-quarters (73%) of separated participants agree 

that the estimate of monthly retirement income on the 

annual statement is helpful. Over one-quarter (29%) of 

active participants report that they took some action based 

on the monthly income estimate, most often either 

increasing the amount they contribute or revising the 

investment mix. FERS and uniformed services respondents 

were more likely to take action compared to CSRS 

respondents. Those who did take some action based on 

the monthly income estimate are more likely to be younger 

(48% under 50) and in uniformed services (47% versus 40% in total population).This compares favorably to 

a recent EBRI study which found 36% thought the illustration was useful.7

7 EBRI Benefit Research Institute, 2014 Retirement Confidence Study.

12%increased their contributions

as a result of the estimate of monthly

retirement income on the annual statement.

 
30

TSP Administrative Services

Most respondents are satisfied with their ability to take a loan (69%), ways to withdraw money after 

separation (61%), and ability to transfer money into TSP from another retirement vehicle (57%). Though 

satisfaction with ways to withdraw money after separation has generally improved since 2008, a slight rise 

in dissatisfaction appears this year (up to 10% from 7% in 2011).

Respondents under 40 years of age are less likely 

to be satisfied with the ability to take loans, while 

female respondents are more likely to be satisfied 

with this ability. Those with account balances of 

$50,000 or more and those ages 70 or older are 

more likely to be satisfied with the ways to

withdraw money after separation, while those 

ages 30–39 are less likely to be satisfied with 

withdrawal methods.

Younger respondents are less likely to be 

satisfied with administrative services 

like loans and withdrawal methods.

“Wish there was more flexible withdrawal options in retirement.”

—FERS participant

“I’d like to be able to take my money out in “chunks” here and there over the years rather than having 

to take monthly withdrawals.”

—CSRS participant
31

When asked which services they value from other 

financial institutions, respondents cited investment 

options, mobile access for information and 

transactions, and available financial advice or 

counseling most often.

Those under 40 years of age are more likely to 

say they like mobile access (61%) and modeling/

calculator tools (29%) from their financial services 

institutions. Those with household incomes over 

$80,000 are also more likely to say they like 

modeling/calculator tools (23%). Female respondents are more likely to cite financial advice/counseling as 

a service they like relative to males (45% versus 40% for males), whereas males are more likely to favor 

investment options offered (49% versus 40% for females) and ability to download account information into 

other software (22% versus 16% for females).

Investment options, mobile access for information 

and transactions, and available financial advice or 

counseling are most liked services

from other financial institutions.

“I’d very much like to be able to download my current account information and transactions into Quicken 

so I don’t have to wait for the statement and then manually enter the information.”

—FERS participant

“I’d like to be able to download data into my financial software.”

—Uniformed services participant

“Consider a TSP app for mobile phones.”

—FERS participant
32

Most participants say each of the potential new 

services or additional information tested in the survey 

would provide at least some value. Those cited as 

valuable or very valuable by at least three-quarters of 

respondents focus primarily on guidance—on how to 

optimize withdrawals from the TSP (84%), on how 

much money will be needed in retirement (77%), and 

on retirement income planning (75%).

CSRS respondents are more likely to value retirement-related events/conferences (59%), while those under 

40 years of age are less likely to view this as valuable (42%). Female respondents are more likely than 

males to find value in all the options considered, though the relative rank of each is similar between groups, 

e.g., general guidance on withdrawals is highest value for both groups. African-American/Black 

respondents are more likely to find value in the general estimate of money needed (89%), retirementrelated events/conferences (73%), and investment advice (74%), compared to others.

Guidance tools and information are 

seen as most valuable new ideas.
33

TSP Account Actions and Approaches

Respondents were asked what actions they are or 

would consider related to retirement accounts outside 

TSP. Overall, most respondents (55%) like the idea of 

consolidating another retirement account into their 

TSP account—similar results across retirement 

systems. Of those that have another retirement 

account, 11% have already rolled it into their TSP and 

another 46% would consider doing so (up from 36% in 

2011), though 42% would not consider rolling over 

another retirement account into their TSP. 

Perspectives differ across retirement systems, with 

uniformed services participants more likely to consider 

rolling another account into their TSP, and CSRS and 

FERS less likely to consider it. Also respondents over 

50 years of age with another retirement account are 

less likely to consider rolling them over to the TSP 

account (47% would not consider it as compared to

42% of all respondents).
34

Though most active participants do not plan to transfer money out of the TSP into another account after 

separation (57%), those that do plan to transfer money are most likely to cite consolidation of accounts 

(42%), investment choices (36%), and more flexible withdrawal options (32%) as reasons. Respondents 

under age 50 are less likely to say they expect to transfer money out of the TSP after separation 

(62% versus 51% for those over age 50).

“Right now I have two TSP accounts, one from civilian service and the other from them the military 

reserve – please offer an option to combine them so I don’t have to.”

—Uniformed services participant

“I would like to see a little more flexibility in withdrawing funds instead of having to wait until the one time 

during the year.”

—FERS participant
35

Of separated respondents who have not yet retired (29% of separated respondents), one-quarter (26%) 

expect to withdraw money immediately upon retirement—this result is consistent across retirement 

systems. 

The withdrawals are most likely to be used to pay living expenses, though about one-quarter expect to 

pay down debt (25%) or invest the money elsewhere (21%). Separated, not-yet-retired respondents under 

age 30 are most likely to say they expect to withdraw money immediately upon retirement (43%).
36

Among separated, yet-to-retire participants that do plan to transfer money from their TSP to another 

retirement account after retirement (40% of separated, yet-to-retire respondents), the primary reason is to 

consolidate accounts (65%).

Separated respondents keeping money in the TSP (retired or not) cite lack of need to withdraw (57%), 

satisfaction with investment options and performance (54%), and leveraging low administrative fees (39%) 

as primary reasons for doing so. About one-quarter (26%) cite the fact they are receiving monthly payments 

from the TSP as a reason they keep money in the account—a significant part of these are FERS (39%) 

participants.
37

Just prior to and during survey administration, there was significant media and public attention on 

government budget issues and the related potential government shutdown. In light of this, respondents 

were asked if the recent budget conditions sparked any action related to their TSP account. For most 

(75%), no action related to the TSP was triggered. For those who did take some action based on the budget 

conditions, reducing the amount they were contributing or taking a loan or withdrawal were the actions most 

often cited. Respondents under 50 years of age who did take action were more likely than older 

respondents to decrease their contribution (40% cite as reason versus 19% for those 50 or older). There 

were no significant differences among other groups.
38

 

Retirement 

Preparation 

and Planning
39

Retirement Preparation and Planning

Of course, key factors to consider in retirement planning include current assets, income/assets required at 

time of retirement, estimated amount of time before retirement, and estimated amount of time to be spent in 

retirement.

As might be expected, respondents overall rank the TSP, available pensions/annuities, and Social Security

in the top three sources of income. Not surprisingly, given the retirement system design differences, 

respondents view sources differently depending on the retirement system in which they participate. Across 

all three systems, though, the TSP is cited by about two-thirds (up significantly from 56%) as a top three 

source, making it a critical source overall.
40

Respondents under 40 years of age are more likely to cite the TSP account as a top three source 

(75% rank it in top 3, up from 63% in 2011) and working during retirement (27%), while less likely to cite 

Social Security (23%). Among the under-40 group, the TSP account is the most often cited top-three 

source. FERS/CSRS annuity and Social Security are more likely to be in the top three for those age 50 or 

older (66% and 48%, respectively—similar to 2011), though TSP is the second most often cited source at 

62%, up from 47% in 2011, for this group. 

Those with household incomes of $25,000 or less are more likely to include income from working in 

retirement as a top-three source (41%) and other personal savings (32%). Those earning annual pay under 

$60,000 place somewhat more emphasis on previous employer plans and Social Security than higher 

earners. Hispanic/Latin American respondents are more likely to cite other personal savings as a top three 

source (24%), while African-American/Black are less likely to cite “mutual funds, stocks, bonds, or 

brokerage accounts” as a top source (10%).
41

Over two-thirds (70%) of respondents say they do not have a specific financial goal for retirement. For the 

minority that report having a goal, most (83%) have a specific dollar amount in mind versus a multiple of 

pre-retirement pay. CSRS respondents, who likely see the TSP as more of a supplemental savings plan, 

are more likely to say they have no specific goal and just save as much as they can. Respondents under 

age 30, female, those contributing less than 10% of pay, and those 70 years and older are less likely to say 

they have a specific goal.
42
43

Though confidence that 

retirement income sources 

will be sufficient for a 

comfortable retirement has 

risen slightly since 2011, 

fewer than two-thirds 

(61%) agree or strongly 

agree they are confident. FERS respondents are less likely to feel confident compared to other system 

respondents, perhaps partly due to the reduction in the available defined benefit component in their plan. 

Separated respondents, those without loans, those with higher account balances, males, Caucasian/White 

respondents, and those over 50 years of age are more likely to express confidence that they will have 

sufficient income in retirement, while those under age 50 are less likely to express this confidence.

Participants’ estimates of the income replacement level necessary to live comfortably in retirement declined 

from 2011. Two-thirds (66%) of respondents estimate that a replacement level less than 80% would be 

sufficient as compared to 58% of respondents 2011.

“Be cognizant of the large number of people who will retire within the next ten years and the services 

they would appreciate: total retirement planning/packaging that is web-based, user-friendly, and wellexplained.”

—FERS participant

“I feel privileged to be a Federal employee with access to the TSP program. But as I have approached 

retirement, my agency offers less useful information. This is an opportunity for TSP to fill in the gap with 

retirement seminars, etc.”

—CSRS participant
44

Closing

Overall, participants are quite satisfied with the TSP and its competitiveness compared to similar private 

sector plans. While overall satisfaction is high, satisfaction lags in administrative service areas such as the 

perceived ability to transfer other accounts into the TSP and ways to withdraw money from the account 

after separation from service. These lower satisfaction levels may come from either a lack of knowledge 

about how to execute these activities on the part of participants or from an assessment from participants 

that these services are not addressing their expectations fully.

A continued focus on providing information and education on TSP participant benefits, diversification of 

investments, and appropriate support for savings and investment decisions will likely provide the greatest 

impact on overall satisfaction.

Given the lower relative perceptions of the plan overall and key plan components from those in lower 

income ranges, lower balances, and lower age ranges, consider more targeted communication and 

education to these groups about the value of saving, actions that can help identify more money to save 

(e.g. budgeting tools), and the services and tools available through the plan. Consider further leverage of 

short videos, text, mobile and social media channels to better reach these audiences as their use of these 

tools tend to be higher than other groups. Mobile access is one of the well-liked elements from other 

financial institutions. Combining high-tech and high-touch methods have proven to be most effective in 

driving better behaviors in savings plans in the private sector.

Participants placed high value on the annual statements. To the extent possible, leveraging personal emails 

could be a way to further engage participants while potentially providing cost savings. Email is a significant 

part of most communication strategies in the private sector and continues to be a preferred approach to 

targeting information or reminders to participants.

Offering guidance should also be considered as participants responded favorably to these services and 

information when assisting with optimizing withdrawals, determining how much money is needed in 

retirement, and retirement income planning in general.

With a reasonably-sized portion of participants being unwilling to roll over other accounts into the TSP, this 

is an area where further investigation and research may be valuable to uncover the underlying reasons why

this option is not viewed more positively. Integrating quantitative efforts, such as this survey, with 

supplemental qualitative research—interviews, focus groups, or web-site feedback—may be a good way to 

listen to participants and determine ways to add further value and improve quality and performance.

“I am very pleased with TSP and wish I would have started contributing at my earliest possible point.”

—Uniformed Services participant

“I have been a TSP member from the start. It is one of the best programs every provided for Federal 

workers. Thank you for all your efforts. You are a very professional organization.”

—CSRS participant

“I think you have a great program and offer great services. Keep up the good work.”

—FERS participant
45

Appendix A: 

Detailed Profile 

of Respondents
46
47
48
49

Appendix B: 

Active 

Participant 

Survey
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59

Appendix C: 

Separated 

Participant 

Survey 
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68