Independent OCIO Manager Searches for Pensions, Endowments, and Foundation
A structured, documented process for selecting an OCIO — run by a team with direct experience inside a large OCIO platform, so you know which questions matter before the proposals arrive.
Why an OCIO Search Is Harder Than It Looks
OCIO searches get complicated quickly. There are dozens of firms, materially different service models, and wide variation in how fees and responsibilities are structured — which means proposals rarely arrive in comparable form.
The right shortlist depends on your portfolio type, your governance structure, and what the scope actually includes: discretionary management, implementation only, administrative support, or a combination. Services may span traditional and alternative asset classes, and the evaluation criteria have to reflect that complexity — otherwise you end up comparing firms that are answering different questions.
Our job is to define the scope first, then run an organized, documented evaluation against it — so every firm is compared consistently and your committee can articulate the rationale behind the decision.
The Fee Question Most OCIO Proposals Don't Answer Clearly
An OCIO's headline fee is rarely the full cost. Total cost typically layers the OCIO's advisory or management fee, the underlying managers' fees, and — at some firms — revenue from proprietary funds placed in your portfolio. Two proposals with similar headline fees can differ meaningfully in all-in cost and in how conflicted the underlying structure is.
Part of our evaluation is normalizing every proposal to an all-in cost and identifying where a firm earns revenue beyond its stated fee — including proprietary product usage — so your committee is comparing complete numbers, not marketing numbers
How the OCIO Search Process Works
Defining scope with your committee: discretion level, asset classes, administrative support, and reporting expectations
Identifying OCIO firms that fit your portfolio size, type, and governance structure
Writing the RFP and managing the evaluation from start to finish
Organizing evaluation criteria so every firm is compared consistently
Handling all firm communication during the evaluation period
Normalizing fee proposals to all-in cost, including underlying manager fees and proprietary product revenue
Summarizing results and presenting findings to your committee or board
Coordinating finalist presentations and agendas
Managing reference checks
Supporting final fee negotiation
The deliverable is a complete decision file — scope definition, criteria, comparisons, fee normalization, and rationale — that your organization retains.
We've Worked Inside the Firms You're Evaluating
Culpepper RFP brings direct experience from inside a large OCIO platform. We know how these firms are structured, how services are packaged and priced, and where the differences between proposals actually show up after the contract is signed. That's the difference between asking the standard RFP questions and asking the ones firms don't volunteer answers to.
A Documented Search Is a Fiduciary Asset
For pension plans, ERISA requires a prudent, documented process for selecting and monitoring providers — and delegating investment discretion to an OCIO is among the most consequential provider decisions a plan makes. For endowments and foundations, board members carry fiduciary duties of care and prudence under state law, and the selection of an OCIO is where those duties are most visible.
In both cases, the standard is the same in practice: could you show a reviewer — a regulator, a donor, a new board member — how this decision was made? A structured, independent search produces that answer in writing.
Our References Are Our Clients — All of Them
Our clients engage us for independent evaluations at sensitive moments — often at the direction of counsel — so we don't publish named testimonials or case studies. Discretion is part of the engagement.
What we offer instead is stronger: 100% of Culpepper RFP clients can act as a reference, a standard we've maintained since the firm began. When you're seriously evaluating whether to work with us, we'll connect you directly with organizations similar to yours in size, plan type, and situation — and you can ask them anything.
Looking for a different evaluation? We also run independent evaluations for retirement plan providers, DOL cybersecurity firms actuarial, and benefit brokers— each covered on its own page.
Frequently Asked Questions
-
CFOs, executive directors, finance and investment committees, and board members — often at organizations without in-house investment staff. Many are running their first OCIO search, or their first in a decade. You don't need investment expertise to run a defensible search; that's what you're engaging.
-
You can — but 'a board member knew them' is a difficult rationale to defend later, and it puts that board member in an awkward position if the relationship ever disappoints. A structured search can absolutely include firms your board knows and respects; the difference is that they compete on documented criteria alongside the rest of the market. If the known firm is genuinely the best fit, the search proves it — and the board member's judgment is validated rather than merely trusted.
-
By defining scope before anything goes out the door. Discretion level, asset class coverage, administrative support, and reporting expectations get settled with your committee first, and every firm responds to the same defined scope. Comparing an implementation-only proposal against a full-discretion proposal isn't a comparison — scope definition is what makes the evaluation apples-to-apples.
-
We handle firm research, RFP writing, distribution, all firm communication, fee normalization, scoring, summaries, finalist scheduling, and reference checks. Your committee's involvement concentrates at three points: the scope-definition session at the start, a findings review, and finalist presentations — where the decision is yours.
-
No — decoding them is part of the engagement. We normalize every proposal to an all-in cost: the OCIO's fee, underlying manager fees, and any revenue the firm earns from proprietary products in your portfolio. Most committees see a true side-by-side cost comparison for the first time during this process.
-
Most full evaluations are started and completed within 90 days, though OCIO searches with complex scopes — significant alternatives exposure, transition considerations, or multi-pool structures — can run longer. We confirm the timeline during scoping.
-
It depends on what you're solving. If you have an OCIO and want to confirm fees and services are competitive, benchmarking may be sufficient. If you're testing the market before committing to a search, an RFI gathers structured information. If you're selecting or replacing an OCIO, a full documented RFP is the defensible path. We tell you which level fits before any engagement begi
-
Yes — every client we've ever worked with. 100% of Culpepper RFP clients can act as a reference. Once you're seriously evaluating an engagement, we'll connect you with organizations similar to yours, and what you ask them is up to you.
“Your knowledge of this industry and best practices is impressive. Thanks for providing such good guidance. I certainly hope we can work together again.” — Director of Finance
— Director of Finance
Could Your Committee Document How Your OCIO Was Selected?
Whether you're selecting your first OCIO, replacing one, or confirming the current arrangement still fits — schedule a call with Jay.
You'll leave knowing whether a search makes sense, what level fits, and what the process would look like.