Why Your Internal RFP May Not Hold up in Court

The Hidden Weakness of Internal RFPs

Internal RFPs often rely on:

These practices feel normal, even efficient. But from a fiduciary perspective, they can look biased, incomplete, or worse: negligent.

• Relationships with long-time advisors or brokers
• Vague or outdated benchmarks
• Undocumented decision-making

What Courts and Regulators Actually Want

Fiduciary compliance isn’t about doing what you think is best. It’s about proving that you followed a neutral, thorough, and well-documented process. That includes:

Impartial vendor evaluations Fee benchmarking across the relevant market Written rationale for decisions Records of due diligence and comparisons

Without these, your internal process may not be enough, even if your vendor is performing well.

The Real Cost of “We’ve Always Done It This Way”

The most common mistake we see? Renewing a vendor without documenting why.

Even if you’ve used the same advisor or broker for years, ERISA still requires that you regularly:

Review fees Evaluate performance Compare options Failing to do so could result in fines, lawsuits, and public reputational damage, especially as class-action lawsuits around benefit plans continue to rise.

Independent Evaluation = Fiduciary Protection

This is where we come in.

At Culpepper RFP, we conduct independent, conflict-free evaluations of retirement and health benefit service providers. We’re not affiliated with any broker, advisor, or vendor, and we don’t sell services ourselves.

That’s why ERISA attorneys refer us to their clients: Because we help build a legally defensible process, one that removes doubt and protects your organization before problems arise.

If You Haven’t Reviewed Your Process in 3+ Years, Now Is the Time

The law is evolving. Litigation is increasing. And “good enough” processes aren’t cutting it anymore.

Let’s make sure your internal RFP process isn’t just thorough, it’s legally sound