Every public-data field traces back to a filing.

Anybody can put a search box over public data. The derivations are what take the time, and they have to be right, because you are the one standing behind the number in front of a client.

Where the data comes from

The plan universe is built from Form 5500 filings disclosed by the U.S. Department of Labor’s Employee Benefits Security Administration (EBSA) through the public EFAST2 datasets: the federal public source of record for Form 5500 disclosure data. We ingest the annual Form 5500 and 5500-SF returns together with Schedules A, C, D, G, H, I and R. 5500RADAR is built from public DOL/EBSA disclosure data and filed attachments, not sponsor payroll, census, beneficiary or participant-account feeds.

Every item in the third column is a consequence of the second, and every item in the second traces to a document in the first. Nothing here is inferred from a purchased list or a vendor master file.

Freshness, and the lag

Form 5500 filings are due roughly seven months after plan year-end, and they are commonly amended afterwards. The public record therefore lags real events by several months no matter who is publishing it. That is a property of the source and not of any particular product, ours included.

Two lags stack. The source lags by design, as above. Our own snapshot lags too. The current coverage snapshot was measured from the indexed public filing roster on 21 August 2026. We publish that date instead of implying a continuous feed, and every plan carries the year it was last seen.

Why the universe is scoped

We do not chase the largest possible plan count. The universe is scoped on purpose to plans that matter for audit and advisory work: all full-form Form 5500 filers, plus selected short-form (5500-SF) filers whose latest filing reports at least 10 participants with account balances. Plans below that threshold are outside the current scoped universe.

A smaller set of correct, relevant plans beats a larger set padded with noise. Coverage counts are easy to inflate and we would rather not compete on that number.

Filing category and audit screen

Whether a plan needs an independent audit is not a simple headcount. For plan years beginning in 2023 or later, we first determine the filing category year by year under the current participant-with-account-balances method, then consider the small-plan waiver and other exemptions:

• Continuing defined-contribution plans use participants with account balances at the beginning of the plan year, not raw eligible or active headcount. For forecasting, a filed year-end balance count generally becomes the next plan year’s beginning count. Earlier plan years used a different participant-counting method and are outside the public screening tool.
• From 80 through 120 inclusive, the administrator may elect the same filing category used for the preceding year. Above 120 requires large-plan filing; below 80 requires small-plan filing. First-year plans use the end-of-year balance count and the 100-participant threshold because no prior filing category exists.
• Defined-benefit and welfare plans get their own tests, welfare only when funded through a trust, so unfunded welfare plans are not wrongly flagged.
• Small-plan filing status does not by itself waive the independent qualified public accountant (IQPA) report. The waiver in 29 CFR 2520.104-46 also has qualifying-asset or full-value-bonding, Summary Annual Report disclosure and document-availability conditions. A continuing plan measures qualifying assets at the preceding year end. An initial plan year uses a reasonable estimate under the DOL method described in 29 CFR 2580.412-15, not a nonexistent prior balance.

Official sources: DOL small-plan audit-waiver FAQ, 2025 Form 5500-SF instructions, 29 CFR 2520.103-1(d), and 29 CFR 2580.412-15.

The carry-forward, on one plan:

Filing category and audit waiver are separate determinations. At 108, this plan may retain its prior large-plan category; at 79 it must file as a small plan. A small pension plan still needs to satisfy the waiver conditions before omitting the IQPA report.

The screening tool on the home page applies these filing-category boundaries and keeps the waiver review visible instead of turning one participant count into a definitive legal conclusion.

Who audits and advises each plan

Auditor, adviser and recordkeeper relationships are assembled from applicable public schedules and attachments by filing year, rather than from a single current snapshot. This supports a year-by-year view of publicly reported relationships and reported provider changes; it is not a complete roster of every engagement or client relationship.

Firm names then run through a normalization step that collapses spelling variants and known brand rollups onto one canonical firm. This makes it easier to compare publicly reported relationships when the raw filings scatter the same firm across multiple spellings.

Reading the audited financial statements

Where an auditor’s report is attached, we go a step past the return itself: we read the attached audited financial statements and extract the opinion type, any additional paragraphs, the audit scope, and disclosed items such as delinquent participant contributions.

Professional context is applied when it matters. An ERISA §103(a)(3)(C) audit is a management-elected scope for certified investment information. The auditor performs the required procedures on that certification and audits the rest of the plan. The election is not a disclaimer or an audit red flag. Extracted facts carry a confidence indicator, and low-confidence extractions are marked for human review.

What we do not do

• We don’t inflate coverage or invent plans to win a head-to-head count.
• We don’t fabricate an auditor for a plan that doesn’t name one. “No auditor on file” means no auditor was found in the indexed public filing; it does not prove that no audit occurred.
• We don’t present derived signals as professional advice. Filing-category screens, opinion classifications and prospect signals are informational aids for prioritizing review. They are not legal, accounting, audit, tax or investment advice, and using them creates no professional engagement.