The social security institution maximizes the potential of partnerships in developing and implementing workplace health promotion initiatives.

This can be called the “synergistic effect”.

The institution promotes workplace health promotion as a key element of good corporate citizenship.

Valuations of a social security scheme are aimed at assessing their actuarial soundness. Soundness may be defined in a variety of ways and social security institutions should define measures of soundness appropriate to their situation and their scheme. As stated in the ISSA Guidelines on Good Governance (Guideline 59), a social security scheme should carry out regular actuarial valuations to monitor sustainability and other key elements.

In determining the rate of return to be credited to provident fund accounts of beneficiaries the actuary considers relevant factors, the impact of decisions on the sustainability of the scheme and the adequacy of benefits. The actuary uses his or her judgement in developing appropriate assumptions and methodology and in making recommendations.

Although the role of social security is to respond effectively to life-cycle risks of the population covered, the management, financing, administration and delivery of benefits and services supporting this role are also subject to risk. The risks inherent in what social security institutions do are multifaceted, changing and often complex. The nature of risk depends on outside trends and factors as well as how the institution carries out and monitors tasks internally.

In respect of the financing of a social security scheme, the social security institution establishes a formal written funding policy which takes into account factors relevant to the scheme as well as the socio-economic context of the country. An actuary takes into account the funding policy while preparing any actuarial valuation of the social security scheme.

The institution is aware of the strategic importance of the enabling environment required to support the extension of social security coverage to difficult-to-cover groups. It identifies the elements that it could leverage and the gaps/weaknesses in coverage that should be mitigated.

The institution establishes calculation bases and contribution rates that are transparent and adapted to the needs of difficult-to-cover people.

All information communicated is accurate, clear, verifiable, relevant, timely and up-to-date. Personal information is protected and only used for the purpose for which it was collected.

Social security institutions are custodians of large quantities of personal information that must be strictly protected.

The institution commits itself to open and inclusive use of language in communication.

Contribution collection and compliance systems comprise different activities. Some concern matters of institutional organization, policy and strategy, while others focus on contribution collection operations and compliance enforcement. In turn, the involved actors consist mainly of the institutions responsible for collecting social security contributions and of different categories of contributors.

The institution implements the key processes of identifying its debtors and carrying out the procedures to obtain the corresponding payment.

These processes play a fundamental role in promoting compliance by contributors and obtaining the payments necessary to the system’s sustainability. Efficient identification and settlement of debts also adds to the credibility of the collecting agent and helps to build the culture of social security.

The ISSA Guidelines for Social Security Administration were prepared by the ISSA General Secretariat with the ISSA technical commissions.

The ISSA Guidelines on Contribution Collection and Compliance were produced under the auspices of the ISSA Working Group on Contribution Collection and Compliance. The Guidelines were prepared by a team at the ISSA General Secretariat led by Raúl Ruggia Frick with the involvement of Octavio Jiménez Durán. Expert support and contributions were provided by Louis Enoff and Ian McDonald.

The board ensures that the risks faced by the social security institution are properly identified and managed or averted. These risks may arise in various forms, including but not limited to strategic, operational, political, economic, regulatory, geographic and demographic risks.

There is enough flexibility within the legal framework to allow the institution to introduce innovations and improvements in the administration and implementation of the social security programme, without having to amend the legislation, policy or decree establishing it.

Open dissemination of key information about the social security institution does not necessarily imply transparency. To be transparent, such information, which is a basic right for stakeholders, members and beneficiaries of the social security scheme, should be timely, reliable, relevant, accurate and objectively verifiable.

The board and management articulate a strategic plan which spells out the key strategies and plans of action that will be implemented in order to perform the legislated mandate of the institution. A strategic plan usually spans a period of from three to five years, is periodically reviewed and fine-tuned, and is further detailed and rendered precise by annual plans.

Depending upon the legislation, policy or decree that establishes the social security programme, the board and management of a social security institution may be duty bound to maintain an adequate level of funding to deliver the promised benefits to members and beneficiaries of the scheme, and to ensure the cost effectiveness of the administration of the social security programme.

There are many areas to be addressed in enforcing the prudent person principle in the investment of social security funds. These guidelines are addressed specifically to institutions that have representation on the boards of companies where they have significant asset holdings.

The management ensures that the officers and staff are loyal to the institution and its mandate.

The institution operationalizes its mission and general objectives into specific ICT-related plans and actions implementing social security functions.

The institution develops a unique master data model, which standardizes the definition of the core objects and relationships (e.g. persons, employers, enrolment periods, benefits). A corresponding ICT-based master data system fosters the consistency of such information.

The institution implements a comprehensive system to control access to technological equipment and devices and software systems.

This includes mechanisms for data access control, endpoint access control, authentication and identification, user privilege management, network access control, password management and logs.

The institution determines the value of the master data and performs master data governance and master data management practices to optimize the results expected from ICT investments (services and authorized assets of ICT) throughout the master data life cycle.

The institution establishes a strategy and an action plan to implement the international social security agreements.