Skip to main content
PensionRisk

Updated May 2026 · DOL Form 5500 + Public Plans Database

Critically Underfunded (<60%) Pension Plans

28 plans covering 4,152,445 participants.

28 plans report below 60% funding, covering 4,152,445 active and retired participants. This is the most stressed funding band tracked here. Participants in any plan in this band should review the most recent Annual Funding Notice and, for corporate single-employer plans, review the PBGC guarantee tables that backstop benefits.

Funding-ratio buckets organize pension plans by how much of their projected benefit liabilities are currently covered by plan assets. The Critically Underfunded (<60%) bucket holds 28 plans in our dataset. Reading funding ratios requires context: a 100% funded ratio is the actuarial target but does not guarantee future solvency — it depends on whether the underlying actuarial assumptions (mortality, return rate, salary growth) match reality over the decades-long horizon a pension obligation spans.

On the LakeQuality pension-health rubric, funding ratio is the largest single factor (50% weight), alongside multi-year funding trend (30%) and PBGC risk level (20%). The composite grade combines all three.

What This Funding Band Means

Critically underfunded plans report below 60% funding — the band most pension professionals associate with serious solvency stress. Some are corporate plans subject to PBGC at-risk rules under ERISA Section 430(i); others are multiemployer plans with formal Critical or Critical-and-Declining status under PPA; others are public plans where contribution shortfalls accumulated over decades.

Plans in this critically underfunded (<60%) band collectively report $518.4B in unfunded liability, distributed across the 28 plans listed below. Funding ratios on this page are taken directly from each plan's most recent valuation: DOL Form 5500 Schedule SB or MB for ERISA-covered plans, the Public Plans Database compilation for state and municipal systems.

For corporate single-employer plans in the at-risk range, the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation backstops benefits up to the statutory annual maximum, which varies by retirement age. Multiemployer plans have a separate PBGC insurance program with a much lower per-participant guarantee. Public plans have no federal insurance — accrued benefits are typically protected by state constitutional or statutory clauses and the sponsor's taxing authority.

Plans in This Range

#Plan NameTypeStateParticipantsFunding RatioAssetsGrade
1Hawaii Employees Retirement System (ERS)
State of Hawaii
publicHI132,00059.8%$20.0BC
2Houston Municipal Employees Pension System
City of Houston
publicTX28,00058.2%$4.5BC
3New Jersey Police & Firemen's Retirement System (PFRS)
State of New Jersey
publicNJ88,00058.1%$30.0BC
4Rhode Island Employees Retirement System (ERSRI)
State of Rhode Island
publicRI55,00058.1%$9.5BC
5Pennsylvania Public School Employees Retirement System (PSERS)
State of Pennsylvania
publicPA518,00057.8%$72.0BC
6Kentucky Teachers Retirement System (KTRS)
State of Kentucky
publicKY152,00055.3%$21.0BC
7Massachusetts Teachers Retirement System
State of Massachusetts
publicMA102,00055.2%$23.0BC
8South Carolina Retirement System
State of South Carolina
publicSC575,00055.1%$35.5BC
9Vermont State Teachers Retirement System
State of Vermont
publicVT27,00054.8%$2.2BC
10New Jersey Public Employees Retirement System (PERS)
State of New Jersey
publicNJ425,00052.3%$34.0BC
11Connecticut Teachers Retirement Board
State of Connecticut
publicCT92,00052.3%$20.5BC
12United Mine Workers of America 1974 Pension Plan
UMWA
multiemployerDC73,91351.5%$3.3BD
13New York State Teamsters Conference Pension & Retirement Fund
NY Teamsters Conference
multiemployerNY33,33050.3%$1.8BC
14Kentucky County Employees Retirement System (CERS)
State of Kentucky
publicKY185,00048.4%$8.5BC
15Philadelphia Municipal Retirement System
City of Philadelphia
publicPA63,00048.2%$5.8BC
16New Jersey Teachers Pension & Annuity Fund (TPAF)
State of New Jersey
publicNJ268,00048.1%$28.5BC
17Dallas Police & Fire Pension System
City of Dallas
publicTX11,20045.1%$2.4BD
18Illinois Teachers Retirement System (TRS)
State of Illinois
publicIL424,00044.7%$62.8BD
19State Universities Retirement System of Illinois (SURS)
State of Illinois
publicIL218,00044.1%$22.5BD
20Chicago Teachers Pension Fund
City of Chicago
publicIL69,00042.8%$12.4BD
21Bakery & Confectionery Union Industry International Pension Fund
BCTGM International Union
multiemployerMD100,40241.8%$3.0BD
22State Employees Retirement System of Illinois (SERS)
State of Illinois
publicIL152,00040.4%$19.8BD
23Connecticut State Employees Retirement System (SERS)
State of Connecticut
publicCT112,00038.2%$14.2BD
24Judges Retirement System of Illinois
State of Illinois
publicIL3,10035.2%$980.0MD
25Chicago Municipal Employees Annuity & Benefit Fund
City of Chicago
publicIL59,00025.3%$6.1BF
26Chicago Policemen's Annuity & Benefit Fund
City of Chicago
publicIL31,00023.3%$4.8BF
27Kentucky Employees Retirement System (KERS)
State of Kentucky
publicKY142,00020.4%$7.2BF
28Chicago Firefighters Annuity & Benefit Fund
City of Chicago
publicIL13,50019.5%$1.9BF

How Funding Ratios Are Calculated

A pension plan's funding ratio is the value of plan assets divided by the present value of accrued benefit obligations, computed at the plan's assumed discount rate. Corporate plans typically use lower discount rates required under ASC 715; public plans typically use 6.5%–7.5% under GASB. Most plans smooth investment gains and losses over five years, which means a single bad market year takes years to fully phase into the reported ratio. The Pension Health Score on this page combines funding ratio (50%), 3-year funding trend (30%), and PBGC risk level (20%) into a 0–100 composite. Read the full methodology.

Browse by State

Frequently Asked Questions

What does "Critically Underfunded (<60%)" mean?

A critically underfunded (<60%) pension plan has a funding ratio below 60%. The funding ratio compares plan assets to the present value of accrued benefit obligations at the plan's assumed discount rate. Critically underfunded plans report below 60% funding — the band most pension professionals associate with serious solvency stress. Some are corporate plans subject to PBGC at-risk rules under ERISA Section 430(i); others are multiemployer plans with formal Critical or Critical-and-Declining status under PPA; others are public plans where contribution shortfalls accumulated over decades.

What is a healthy funding ratio?

Actuaries broadly treat plans above 80% funded as in acceptable condition for an ongoing operation, and plans above 100% as fully funded on a smoothed-asset basis. Plans below 60% are widely considered critically underfunded. The thresholds are not regulatory bright lines for public plans; for corporate single-employer plans, ERISA Section 430(i) imposes additional restrictions on plans below 80% (and stricter still below 70%) under the at-risk designation.

Where do these funding ratios come from?

For ERISA-covered private and multiemployer plans, funding ratios come from DOL EBSA Form 5500 Schedule SB and Schedule MB filings — the actuarial valuation each plan files annually with the Department of Labor. For state and municipal public plans, ratios come from the Boston College Center for Retirement Research Public Plans Database, which compiles each system's annual valuation from its ACFR. None of the figures here are estimates or projections.

Does a low funding ratio mean my benefits are at risk?

It depends on the plan type and your specific plan's status. Corporate single-employer plan benefits are insured by PBGC up to the statutory annual maximum; if a plan terminates underfunded, PBGC pays guaranteed amounts up to that cap. Multiemployer plans have a separate PBGC program with a much lower per-participant guarantee. Public plans rely on state constitutional or statutory clauses and the sponsor's taxing authority. None of this is investment advice — for plan-specific concerns, review your most recent Annual Funding Notice and consult a fiduciary advisor.

How current is this data?

Funding ratios refresh each time DOL EBSA publishes new Form 5500 filings (about a 9–12 month lag after plan year-end) and as the Public Plans Database releases its annual update. The current dataset reflects valuations available as of May 2026.

28 plans report below 60% funding, covering 4,152,445 active and retired participants. This is the most stressed funding band tracked here. Participants in any plan in this band should review the most recent Annual Funding Notice and, for corporate single-employer plans, review the PBGC guarantee tables that backstop benefits.