Reviewing Sustainability of the Social Welfare Facility Retirement Benefit Plan

At the third review meeting on June 26, 2026, relevant organizations were interviewed, and the mechanisms of pay-as-you-go financing, reserve funds, and financial reviews in the public pension system were explained. The plan is a retirement benefit system for social welfare facility employees and currently uses a pay-as-you-go financing method.

In a survey by the Japan Intellectual Disability Welfare Association, 76.3% of corporations responding among 378 corporations said that enrollment in the plan contributed to recruiting and retaining employees. Surveys by the National Council of Children's Homes and other organizations also found that explaining the enrollment plan and promoting it during recruitment were used to secure and retain personnel.

Meanwhile, among disability welfare facilities, facilities outside the plan that had not enrolled employees who joined after April 1, 2016, following the abolition of public subsidies, accounted for one-fourth of enrolled corporations. The decline in new enrollees was identified as a factor that could destabilize the pay-as-you-go system.

Enrollment in the plan enhances the appeal of employment and employees' sense of security about the future, supporting recruitment and retention at social welfare facilities. In child care homes, long-term employee service is also related to stable relationship-building with children and the quality of support.

If contributions rise further, approximately 90% of corporations expect an impact on management, raising concerns about pressure on management and operations, higher turnover, and the outflow of personnel to other industries. Facilities operated through government expense subsidies may find it difficult to secure the additional amount independently.

Although most opinions favored maintaining the plan without reducing benefit levels, any review of payment requirements or public funding must assess the effects on employee treatment and corporate management at the same time.

Provider associations proposed allowing contributions to be paid in installments several times a year without presuming a major increase, maintaining benefit levels as much as possible, communicating the plan's appeal, and making concentrated public investments for a defined period. Regarding the requirement of at least one year of service for payment, they also proposed examining the effects of extending the requirement from approximately three to five years.

Child care homes requested that eligibility be expanded to businesses within Type II social welfare businesses that are not eligible for public subsidies. When veteran employees are assigned to ineligible businesses, facilities may have to cover the full contributions that are not eligible for subsidies, which could hinder the development of higher-function and multifunction services.

As an example from the public pension system, a method was introduced in which population, economic, and employment conditions are projected under multiple scenarios during financial reviews conducted every five years, and system changes are considered. For the mutual aid plan, proposals included institutionalizing regular reviews, indicating contribution increase timing at an early stage, and considering automatic long-term adjustments linking wages and contributions.

If reserve funds are established, the balance between revenues and expenditures must be made positive over a defined period, making their scale, investment methods, and consensus-building key issues. Under the current system, all employees can re-enroll if a notice of non-enrollment is withdrawn, but the gap period is not counted toward the enrollment period. Employers bear the full contribution, and the benefit accrual rate increases with the length of enrollment.