FY2020 source-reconciled actuarial data · Public Plans Database

Pittsburgh Fire

Funded ratio, unfunded liability, member counts, and 23-year financial history for Pittsburgh Fire, sourced from the Public Plans Database (Boston College CRR) and cross-checked against actuarial valuations.

Browse all states → How we grade plans

By · · Pennsylvania · Police & Fire Plan · Data through FY2020

Funded Ratio: 57.9% (Critical) Pittsburgh Fire funded ratio compared to national public pension benchmark. FUNDED RATIO 57.9% Critical Nat'l avg 75.49869791666667% 0% 60 70 80 100% Healthy > 80% · At-risk 70-80% · Critical < 60%
Pittsburgh Fire funded ratio is 57.9 percent, classified as Critical. National public-pension benchmark is 75.49869791666667 percent.
Actuarial funded ratio
57.9%
Health grade
BReported funded ratio above the portfolio average range
Actuarial assets
$311M
Members
N/A

According to the Public Plans Database, compiled by the Boston College Center for Retirement Research, Pittsburgh Fire is one of 197 public pension plans tracked nationwide. The plan card reports source-reconciled actuarial figures through FY2020; the multi-year table includes only years whose reported ratio ties to its actuarial dollars. This site’s database copy was last loaded in July 2026. See our methodology for the full source and update cadence.

Higher funded-ratio band

Pittsburgh Fire ranks #32 of 192 by source-reconciled actuarial funded ratio (57.9%), top-third among tracked public plans.

Pittsburgh Fire in the higher-funded third

According to the Public Plans Database, Pittsburgh Fire sits in the higher-funded third at 57.9% (grade B, #32 of 192) for FY2020, 17.6 points below the national public-pension average.

57.9%
Funded · #32 of 192
B
Health grade
$227M
Actuarial unfunded liability
+0.8pp
FY2004→FY2020
Subscribe to funded-ratio changes (RSS)

Actuarial Unfunded Liability

$227M

Below-median unfunded liability · source-reported UAAL

Total Members

N/A

active + retired + vested

1-Year Return

9.1%

Above assumed rate · net investment return

1.2pp vs 5-yr avg

5-Year Avg Return

8.0%

Above assumed rate · annualized, net of fees

F
Composite Health Score
18/100
Pittsburgh Fire

Transparent derived index from public pension-plan filings, not an official rating. A 4-dimension composite (funded ratio, contribution discipline, 5-year investment return, unfunded burden), each scored against this dataset's own percentile distribution across 197 reporting plans. Not the same as the plan's headline funded-ratio grade above. See the exact dimensions, weights, and formula.

Funded Ratio F
57.9%
Actuarial assets as a share of liabilities
Contribution Discipline N/A
N/A
Share of the actuarially required contribution actually paid
Investment Returns F
8.0%
5-year annualized investment return
Unfunded Burden F
42.1%
Unfunded liability as a share of total obligations
How this score is calculated (benchmark table)
Dimension P10 P25 P50 P75 P90 Weight
Funded ratio (higher = better) 57.6% 67.2% 75.0% 87.0% 97.6% 0.35
Contribution discipline (ARC) (higher = better) 88.4% 100.0% 100.0% 104.1% 122.1% 0.25
5yr investment return (higher = better) 6.4% 7.5% 8.3% 9.1% 9.9% 0.20
Unfunded burden (lower = better) 2.0% 12.7% 25.0% 33.1% 42.4% 0.20

Percentiles computed across all 197 plans in this database with a reported value for that metric (2026-09-09). A dimension a plan does not report drops out of its composite, and that weight redistributes across the dimensions it does report, so thin reporting never silently lowers a score relative to a fully-reported peer.

Investment Policy Mix

Asset Allocation: 55% equity, 25% fixed income, 17% alternatives Pittsburgh Fire investment policy mix as reported in its CAFR and actuarial valuation. ASSET ALLOCATION $311M market assets · CAFR / actuarial valuation 55% 25% 17% Equity 55.0% Fixed Inc. 25.0% Alternatives 17.0% Cash 3.0% Investment Stance: Growth-Tilted · Equity + Alts 72%
Pittsburgh Fire asset allocation: 55% equity, 25% fixed income, 17% alternatives, 3% cash. Investment stance: Growth-Tilted.

Funded ratio, 2004 to 2020

Assets as a share of the benefits already promised, one point per reported year. Up 0.8 points across the series. This is the multi-year table's series, so its last point can be a later year than the plan card above, which reports the plan's own latest valuation.

30%35%40%45%50%55%60% 200420062008201020122014201620182020 57.9%

What changed, FY2018 to FY2020

1.7 pts funded ratio

Pittsburgh Fire's funded ratio rose 1.7 points from FY2018 to FY2020, with assets contributing +12.4 points and the accrued liability contributing -10.7.

Funded ratio
56.2% → 57.9%
Actuarial assets
$255M → $311M (+22.0%)
Accrued liability
$454M → $538M (+18.5%)
Where the 1.7-point move came from
Assets
+12.4 pts
Accrued liability
-10.7 pts

Accrued liability is the source-reported value for benefits already promised. The two contributions are the move the ratio would have made on the prior year’s liability (assets) and the remainder (liability); they sum to the total by construction. Both years shown provide source-reconciled actuarial assets and liability, so neither figure rests on a ratio published on its own. Source: Public Plans Database (Boston College CRR / NASRA), loaded July 2026. See our funding-change board for how this plan’s move compares with the rest of the dataset.

Historical Actuarial Funding

Year Actuarial Ratio
2020 57.9%
2018 56.2%
2016 54.2%
2014 55.5%
2012 56.7%
2010 39.5%
2008 35.4%
2006 46.3%
2004 57.1%

What the Data Says About Pittsburgh Fire

Pittsburgh Fire's funded ratio lands close to the middle of the national distribution, 18 points below the 75.5% national average across tracked plans. A 5-year average investment return of 8.0% factors into the plan's overall trajectory.

For Pennsylvania taxpayers and plan members, the $227M source-reported actuarial unfunded liability is the shortfall this plan must close over time.

Where this data comes from + how funding gaps get resolved

These figures come from the Public Plans Database, a collaboration between the Boston College Center for Retirement Research and NASRA that compiles them from each plan's Comprehensive Annual Financial Reports (CAFRs) and actuarial valuations. The relationship between contribution adequacy and investment performance determines whether an unfunded liability narrows or expands year over year, and the gap itself is typically closed through some combination of higher contributions, investment returns, or benefit modifications. See our methodology for how public-pension funding differs from ERISA-backed private plans, and our disclaimer below before acting on this data.

Plan Details

Plan Type
Police & Fire
State
Pennsylvania
Market Assets
$311M
Source: Public Plans Database (PPD)
Boston College CRR / NASRA

Plans With a Similar Funded Ratio

The closest plans nationwide to Pittsburgh Fire's 94.9% funded ratio.

Showing 5 of 191 plans nationwide with a reported funded ratio.

Other Pennsylvania Plans

All Pennsylvania plans →

Read with this plan

Every figure on PlainPension is rendered directly from the Public Plans Database (Boston College Center for Retirement Research), no number is typed in by an editor. Pittsburgh Fire ranks #32 of 192 by funded ratio. This information is for informational purposes only and does not constitute professional advice, consult a qualified professional before acting on it. See our editorial standards & corrections policy, the typed corrections pathway, the methodology behind these numbers, or report a data error. Data current as of July 2026.