Part one of two on emergency savings and low-to-moderate (LMI) income workersBackground: Last week, the RRC and Commonwealth published a joint study, available here. Qualitative focus groups were followed by a quantitative study of nearly 1,000 DC plan participants to further understand what features people are looking for, how emergency savings impacts retirement participation, and communication engagement strategies. The study exclusively surveyed LMI workers, oversampling Black and Latinx populations.1Previous joint RRC/Commonwealth studies highlighted that LMI workers face unique needs and challenges that were exacerbated by the pandemic. They are most likely to need, use, and benefit from an emergency savings solution. Several key takeaways emerged from our recent study, and we will focus on a subset of findings in this and subsequent Research Minutes.Findings: The study gauged LMI workers’ preferences in an emergency savings solution to identify which features are most important. Notably:“Zero fees” was noted as the top feature preference.The second tier, which was half as important as the zero fees, consisted of a preference for no minimum balances and immediate access of funds forwithdrawal.Workers gave the lowest weight to the ability to move savings to other financial institutions, automatically saving part of their paycheck, and linking the account to the workplace. These results do not indicate they are unimportant, just that they are relatively less important.Bottom Line: Since our work began in 2020, emergency savings solutions have emerged as a foundational tool to improve financial security. As plan sponsors and industry service providers develop solutions, being mindful of the priorities and needs of LMI workers could encourage them to engage with these offerings and help them grow their emergency savings.