Log in / My SOA

The Impact of Artificial Intelligence/Large Language Models on Retirement Professionals and Retirees – Request for Proposals – Fourth Round

Background and Purpose

Hardly a day goes by without a feature story about the latest reverberation from the expanding use of Artificial Intelligence/Large Language Models (tools) in a variety of settings. The pace of use (and misuse) of these tools has been explosive and shows no sign of abating. Many experts would argue we are on the cusp of a permanent paradigm shift in teaching/academics and overall application of technology.

There is reason to think that it will strongly impact in significant ways the nature and extent of work currently done by actuaries, financial planners, advisors, attorneys, and other retirement professionals. Recent technological developments such as advances in quantum computing and others reinforce this impression.

Outside of professional settings, retirees and those nearing retirement themselves could significantly feel the reach of these tools. For example, they may change the method of delivery of investment advice, asset allocation, and general planning. At the same time, though, these tools may create new risks that expose retirees in ways that they have not and could not have been prepared.

With these issues in mind, the Society of Actuaries (SOA) Research Institute’s Aging and Retirement program is interested in an exploration of this topic from a variety of perspectives. The result of this effort is intended to provide a useful resource for readers to become well-grounded on the issues surrounding the impact of these tools in a retirement context and set the stage for future research.

This topic is of both immediate and long term importance. As a result, the Aging and Retirement program is issuing again for 2026 a request for proposals to explore this topic. A primary goal of this effort is to publish material that would either further actuarial practice or address an aspect of public financial security, ultimately benefiting consumers. Proposals should describe how this goal would be met.

Research Objective

The sponsors are seeking researchers to explore the multifaceted impacts of AI/Large Language Model tools on retirement professionals, retirees, and those planning for retirement. The desired end product of this effort is a resource that will aid in the understanding of relevant issues while providing current considerations and potential future dynamics of AI/Large Language Models in this area.

The intended audiences for this effort are actuaries and other retirement professionals such as financial planners as well as stakeholders involved in furthering public financial security and in turn, benefiting consumers.

The following are illustrative of the topics and questions that might be addressed. Respondents to this RFP are not required or expected to address all or even any of these topics/questions. Rather they are encouraged to also consider other question(s) or topic(s) they deem critical to the work done by the Society of Actuaries and its members. To maintain a reasonable scope, researchers should be selective in the number of topics/questions they cover.

Responses to this RFP should clarify the time horizon under consideration. The SOA Research Institute prefers that researchers address both current and future professional and retiree considerations of the AI/Large Language Model questions or topics they plan to focus on. Respondents are, however, free to cover only one aspect, but in either case, the responses should clarify what will be covered.

Retirees and Those Planning for Retirement

  • What are the risks and challenges that these tools may present specifically for the aging community? For example, what are risks to individual investments they may hold?
  • What is the best way to educate retirees and those planning for retirement on the uses of these tools?
  • What are ways to address fears that these individuals may feel about the adoption and use of such tools? What are concerns that are warranted for these individuals and which may be dispelled with better information?
  • What are the ways that these tools can best be used to educate and otherwise support individuals in managing their personal finances during their retirement years?
  • How do you make these tools useful for people in retirement if they may end up being the last to use them and the most exposed to abuse by them? How can tool interfaces be improved in this regard? How can their underlying algorithms be improved?
  • What may be risks introduced by using tools with algorithms that may be potentially biased or discriminatory? How might such biases, that may be racial, gender, or age-based specifically impact an aging population?
  • What are ways to prevent fraud and scams directed at retirees that make use of these tools? What are risks posed by such fraud and how can AI itself be used to help educate individuals on it?
  • How might these tools be used to promote better living in retirement? Can they help with more easily living independently, managing bills/payments, monitoring cognitive decline, etc.? Are there ways these tools can provide support to and lessen the adverse consequences associated with memory loss?
  • Can these tools help retirees and those planning for retirement better navigate getting help, such as more efficiently reaching customer service centers?
  • Can these tools help retirees who wish to work part time in retirement or otherwise return to the workforce?

Retirement Professionals and Retirement Plans

  • What are ways that these tools can be used for preparation of actuarial analyses for retirement plans (defined benefit, defined contribution, etc.)? What are the most beneficial uses for such analyses? Which types of analyses may need to be approached with greater caution? For instance, how do you assess whether outputted information is reliable vs inaccurate/fabricated in this context? Can these tools themselves be used to help make such assessments? Which types of analyses are completely inapplicable or in other ways limited? How do the preceding considerations differ between now and in the future?
  • How would the issues in the previous bullet apply to retirement professionals who advise on retirement planning and prepare individual projections and other analyses?
  • What are uses of these tools for preparing reports that retirement professionals may need to create for any purposes outside of actuarial analyses? How might this impact the current roles and responsibilities of retirement professionals at different career stages? Are there positions that may become obsolete?
  • To what extent can these tools be used to professionally manage retirement investments and portfolios? How can these tools be used to help market such services?
  • How can prompts be written? What needs to be watched out for?
  • How might these tools support plan administration and reduce the need for personalized communication in writing and by phone? How does one avoid a participant getting stuck without an answer?
  • How do employers of retirement professionals feel about these tools? Are they embracing the tools for their employees’ use or are they steering employees away from them? What discomfort may they have?
  • With the widespread and increased knowledge of and use of AI tools, what are approaches on ethical standards, policies, or constraints that professionals or organizations may be or should be adopting for retirement planning uses of the tools?
  • How would the differing objectives of pure research vs profit-making impact the use of tools for retirement planning purposes?
  • What impact would the availability of less expensive and rapidly developed tools (DeepSeek, etc.) have on those interested in using AI for retirement planning purposes?
  • What potential does AI have to enhance personalization, efficiency, and accuracy across pension stakeholders in ways that address key challenges faced by pensions and retirement income systems?
  • For retirement plans, how could implementing AI with member communications, reporting, and retirement planning enhance overall engagement and support at each point in a member’s retirement life cycle?
  • What potential impact could AI have on pension plan governance? How would it be felt among different stakeholders?

Again, the list above is not meant to be exhaustive but merely examples of topics that may be examined in a research project.

Rules for Submission of Research Proposals

Proposal Requirements

To facilitate the evaluation of proposals, the following information should be submitted:

Resumes of the researcher(s), including any graduate student(s) expected to participate, indicating how their background, education and experience bear on their qualifications to undertake the research. If more than one researcher is involved, a single individual should be designated as the lead researcher and primary contact. The person submitting the proposal must be authorized to speak on behalf of all the researchers as well as for the firm or institution on whose behalf the proposal is submitted.

B. An outline of the approach to be used (e.g. literature search, model, etc.), emphasizing issues that require special consideration. Details should be given regarding the techniques to be used, collateral material to be consulted, and possible limitations of the analysis.

C. A description of the expected deliverables and any supporting data, tools or other resources.

D. Cost estimates for the research, including computer time, salaries, report preparation, material costs, etc. Such estimates can be in the form of hourly rates, but in such cases, time estimates should also be included. Any guarantees as to total cost should be given and will be considered in the evaluation of the proposal. While cost will be a factor in the evaluation of the proposal, it will not necessarily be the decisive factor.

E. A schedule for completion of the research, identifying key dates or time frames for research completion and report submissions. The sponsors are interested in completing this project in a timely manner. Suggestions in the proposal for ensuring timely delivery, such as fee adjustments, are encouraged.

F. Other related factors that give evidence of a proposer's capabilities to perform in a superior fashion should be detailed.

Selection Process

The SOA Research Institute will appoint a Project Oversight Group (POG) to oversee the project. The Institute is responsible for recommending the proposal to be funded. Input from other knowledgeable individuals also may be sought, but the Institute will make the final recommendation, subject to Society of Actuaries Research Institute (SOA) leadership approval. A staff research actuary will provide staff actuarial support.

Questions

Any questions regarding this RFP should be directed to Research-AR@soa.org.

Notification of Intent to Submit Proposal

If you intend to submit a proposal, please email written notification by June 15, 2026 to Research-AR@soa.org.

Submission of Proposal

Please email your proposal to Research-AR@soa.org; proposals must be received no later than July 1, 2026.

Conflict of Interest

You agree to disclose any of your material business, financial, and organizational interests and affiliations which are or may be construed to be reasonably related to the interest, activities, and programs of the Society of Actuaries Research Institute.

Appendix

The cost ranges below are intended as a guide for budgeting project costs for proposals in response to SOA Research Institute Request for Proposals (RFP). Please note these figures span the 33rd to 66th percentiles for all projects as well as projects that involve a specific approach (lit review, survey, etc.). They are based on historical costs over several recent years. Expected costs for some RFPs may fall outside these ranges depending on the nature of the work and resources required for completion.

All Contracted Projects

This category includes all contracted projects that the Institute has undertaken within the last several years.

The 33rd-66th percentile project costs range is $25,000 - $50,000.

Literature Reviews

This category includes projects that involved only a literature review or the cost for the portion of a larger project that included a literature review.

The 33rd-66th percentile project costs range is $15,000 - $20,000.

Surveys

This category includes all projects that had a survey as their primary component.

The 33rd-66th percentile project costs range is $28,000 - $55,000.