Anexo

CIVILIAN PENSION BOARD AGENDA August 19, 2011 - 3:00 P.M. - Council Chambers - City Hall - City of Dover AGENDA ADDITIONS/DELETIONS 1. Adoption of Minutes - Civilian Pension Board Meeting of July 20, 2011 2. Adjournment POLICE PENSION BOARD AGENDA This Meeting Was Canceled. AGENDA ADDITIONS/DELETIONS 1. Organizational Issues - Election of Chair 2. Adjournment CIVILIAN AND POLICE PENSION BOARDS AGENDA Immediately Following the Adjournment of the Police Pension Board Meeting AGENDA ADDITIONS/DELETIONS 1. Adoption of Minutes - Civilian and Police Pension Boards Meeting of July 20, 2011 and Joint Civilian and Police Pension and Other Post Employment Benefits (OPEB) Boards Meeting of July 20, 2011 2. Investment Performance Analysis Report - Presented by Peirce Park Group 3. Global Equity Manager Search 4. Asset Allocation Mix - Potential Future Changes 5. Setting of Future Meeting Dates 6. Adjournment TO ASSURE THAT THERE WILL BE A QUORUM, PLEASE RSVP BY CONTACTING THE CITY CLERK’S OFFICE BY EMAIL AT CITYCLERK@DOVER.DE.US OR BY CALLING 736-7008 AS SOON AS POSSIBLE. /js S:\AGENDAS & MINUTES\Misc-Agendas\PENSION BOARDS\2011\08-19-2011 POLICE PENSION BOARD.wpd THE AGENDA ITEMS AS LISTED MAY NOT BE CONSIDERED IN SEQUENCE. THIS AGENDA IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE TO INCLUDE THE ADDITION OR THE DELETION OF ITEMS, INCLUDING EXECUTIVE SESSIONS.

JOINT CIVILIAN AND POLICE PENSION AND OTHER POST-EMPLOYMENT BENEFITS (OPEB) BOARDS A Joint Meeting of the Civilian Pension and Police Pension and Other Post-Employment Benefits (OPEB) Boards was held on July 20, 2011 at 3:05 p.m. with Dr. McGlumphy, Chairman of the Civilian Pension Board, presiding. Members present were Mr. Bonar, Mr. Hare, Mrs. Williams, Mr. Blakeman, Mr. Clendaniel, Mrs. Hettinger, Ret. Lt. Knotts, Ret. Cpl. Stallings, Mr. Koenig (Interim City Manager), and Mrs. Mitchell. Ret. Lt. Mullaney and Chief Hosfelt were absent. AGENDA ADDITIONS/DELETIONS Mrs. Williams moved for approval of the agenda as presented, seconded by Ret. Cpl. Stallings and unanimously carried. Investment Management Proposal Mrs. Donna Mitchell, Controller/Treasurer, stated that she had received a proposal from Peirce Park Group to expand their investment management services. She advised members that, currently, Peirce Park reviews city investments, selects mutual funds, advises the City when funds should be rebalanced, ensures that the City’s investments remain in compliance with its investment policy, and provides quarterly performance reports. Under the expanded proposal, Peirce Park would be authorized to manage the City’s accounts more actively. Since the Civilian and Police Pension Boards now schedule regular meetings every six (6) months, this would allow Peirce Park to transfer City funds from one investment account to another in the interim if they determine that adjustments are needed. Referring to Page 4 of the information provided by Peirce Park Group entitled City of Dover - June 9, 2011, under the heading PPG Consulting Plus, Mrs. Mitchell explained that the expanded services would include selecting managers, making manager changes, determining allocation among managers, and rebalancing. She stated that Peirce Park indicated that several of their clients have adopted this service. Mrs. Mitchell explained that during regular meetings of the Civilian and Police Pension Boards, representatives from Peirce Park indicated that the City’s fund returns have been in the top tier of all their clients. However, when this expanded opportunity was provided to her, she was told by the firm that the City is now in the middle range and is achieving mediocre results. Mrs. Mitchell advised members that the cost for the augmented services would be 25 basis points for management and advisory services (which equates to one-quarter of a percentage on the dollar), noting that the City would also continue to pay percentage fees for mutual funds. She stated that the City currently has fixed-rate agreements with Peirce Park, with rates determined by the amount of assets in the funds and, based on the assets held on June 7, 2011, the annual fee is $13,940 for the Police Pension Fund and $27,060 for the Civilian Pension Fund, totaling $41,000. Mrs. Mitchell stated that changing to the new service and fee structure would increase these fees to $27,720 for the Police Pension fund and $54,162 for the Civilian Pension Fund, for a total of $81,882. She indicated that the City pays Peirce Park $20,000 annually to manage the OPEB trust, noting that this trust has a lower asset value than the pension funds and, under the proposed agreement, the annual management fee for the OPEB fund (25 basis points) would equate to $17,000.

JOINT CIVILIAN AND POLICE PENSION AND OPEB BOARDS MEETING OF JULY 20, 2011 PAGE 2 Mrs. Mitchell explained that when the OPEB Trust was established, the OPEB Board decided to utilize Peirce Park Group as their investment manager, realizing that the agreement would expire on June 30, 2012 and would be re-bid at that time. She suggested that an investment service provider for all pension and OPEB funds be solicited through the City’s Request for Proposals (RFP) process. Mrs. Williams felt that the results achieved by Peirce Park Group were inferior to those that could have been achieved by the City’s previous manager, Merrill Lynch. Mrs. Mitchell advised members that an RFP was recently issued for the City’s investment account and approximately 26 proposals were received and reviewed. She explained that the City’s investments are now being managed for a fee of less than ten (10) basis points; however, she acknowledged that this is a fixed income account which typically involves lower management fees. Mrs. Mitchell noted that the City pays approximately $37,000 annually for management of this account, which has approximately $40M in assets. She indicated that the amount of assets in an account is also a factor in determing fees. Mrs. Williams noted the importance of determining a “track record” before engaging a broker, noting that basis points and fees are secondary to achieving the maximum return on investments. In response to Mrs. Hettinger, Mrs. Mitchell stated that the RFP would include benchmarks that an investment manager would be expected to meet. She indicated that this information is included on Peirce Park’s performance summaries as the Policy Index and that Peirce Park is meeting these benchmarks. For example, Mrs. Mitchell stated that the Policy Index listed on the Employee Pension Plan Provisional Performance Summary dated June 7, 2011 is 3.4%, and the year-to-date return is 3.5%; therefore, Peirce Park has met the established target. Responding to Mrs. Hettinger, Mrs. Mitchell stated that the decision to place all of the City’s investments in mutual funds was made when Peirce Park became the City’s investment manager. She explained that the City’s portfolio is blended between value, growth, and bond mutual funds with varying levels of risk. Mrs. Mitchell stated that the City does not pay transaction fees to Peirce Park; however, the individual mutual funds charge basis points (e.g., 26 basis points paid to the Vanguard Value Index Fund). Under the proposal received from Peirce Park, the City would pay 25 basis points to the Group for management and advisory services above and beyond these mutual fund fees. In response to Mrs. Hawkins, Mrs. Mitchell stated that she would prefer to use one (1) investment manager for all three (3) funds (Civilian Pension Fund, Police Pension Fund, and OPEB Fund). She noted that the City could terminate its existing agreements with Peirce Park after providing 30 days written notice without penalty. She reiterated that both contracts (OPEB and Pension) will expire on June 30, 2012. In response to Mrs. Williams, Mrs. Mitchell indicated that she was unsure if Peirce Park offered other investment products in addition to mutual funds. She stated she would perform further research to determine if investing in guaranteed annuities is an option for the City.

JOINT CIVILIAN AND POLICE PENSION AND OPEB BOARDS MEETING OF JULY 20, 2011 PAGE 3 Mr. Hare stated his understanding that annuities can guarantee a fixed rate of return, provided that no more than 5% of assets are withdrawn annually. Mr. Blakeman stated that Peirce Park should have informed the City previously if fund performance had dropped significantly since the Joint Pension Boards’ last meeting. Responding to Mrs. Williams, Mrs. Mitchell explained that the stock market declined rapidly when the City’s investments were held by Merrill Lynch and, as a result, the value of City’s invested assets decreased. This resulted in higher management fees under Merrill Lynch’s tiered fee structure. In addition, it was determined at that time that Merrill Lynch had placed the City’s investments in a retail account rather than an institutional account, which would have incurred lower fees. Consequently, the City’s transaction costs and fees escalated. Mrs. Mitchell stated that these fees were substantially reduced after engaging Peirce Park Group’s services; however, the fees have increased in the interim. In response to Mrs. Williams, Mrs. Mitchell stated that the RFP would compare advisory firms but would not compare each firm’s individual investments. Responding to Mrs. Hettinger, Mrs. Mitchell stated that the City’s investment management agreements typically extend three (3) to five (5) years and that agreements are sometimes signed for three (3) years with an option to extend if performance is satisfactory. Mr. Bonar moved to request staff to issue a Request for Proposals (RFP) for investment management services for the City’s Civilian Pension, Police Pension, and Other Post- Employment Benefits (OPEB) funds and to return to the Joint Boards with a recommendation regarding the early termination of the City’s existing agreements with the Peirce Park Group and the procurement of an investment management firm. The motion was seconded by Mrs. Hettinger and unanimously carried. Mr. Hare moved for adjournment, seconded by Ret. Cpl. Stallings and unanimously carried. Meeting adjourned at 3:39 P.M. Respectfully submitted, William P. McGlumphy Chairman of the Civilian Pension Board WPM/JS/ac/dd/tm S:\AGENDAS & MINUTES\Misc-Minutes\PENSION\2011\07-20-2011 Joint Civilian-Police Pension and OPEB Boards.wpd

City of Dover Investment Performance Report June 30, 2011 Data Knowledge Wisdom RESULTS Ph: (610) 719-0300 300 South High Street Fax: (610) 719-8345 West Chester, PA 19382 www.Peircepark.com 45

PEIRCE PARK GROUP PERFORMANCE EVALUATION AND REPORTING SERVICES INFORMATION DISCLAIMER Peirce Park Group has exercised reasonable professional care in the preparation of this performance report. Peirce Park Group relies on the client’s custodian for security holdings, market values, and transaction dates - these may differ from money manager statements. Returns are calculated using the custodian statements. There may be discrepancies in asset values and returns with managers, due to different values or methodologies used by the managers and custodians. When the manager(s) and the custodian are one and the same, we have no ability to determine the accuracy of the asset values put forth. Information in this report on market indices, security characteristics, and universe comparisons is received from Wilshire Associates. Therefore, we can make no guarantee as to the completeness or accuracy of the report. Total fund universes are generally comprised of separate accounts which are calculated gross of management fees. When clients have mutual funds in their portfolio, which have management fees included in returns (net), we increase (gross) the total fund return by an amount that reflects the internal costs of the fund (internal costs include, but are not limited to, management fees, advisory/subadvisory fees, administrative fees, interest expenses and fee reimbursements). We believe this allows for a better “apples to apples” universe comparison. Total Plan returns are derived from Wilshire Associates. 46

Market Environment – 2nd Quarter 2011 The fragile recovery in the global economy hit several rough patches in the second quarter of 2011 and global securities’ markets took investors for a rather tumultuous ride. Despite the unfolding debt crisis in Europe, p p opular rebellions in the Middle East and continued volatility in commodity prices, April was a fairly strong month for global stocks and bonds. However, global markets spent much of the rest of the quarter erasing April’s gains. June ended with essentially flat returns for the quarter. Economic data has disappointed over the past two months with headwinds such as energy prices and the conclusion of the Federal Reserve’s bond buying program stymieing the recovery. After a 3.1% annual increase in the fourth quarter of 2010, U.S. real Gross Domestic Product growth l slowed considerably to a 1.9% id annual rate as of the first quarter of 2011. The current economic slowdown occurred despite last December’s tax deal, which provided additional fiscal stimulus by extending the Bush-era tax cuts through 2012. Contributing to the slowdown is the surge in oil, gasoline and Natural Gas and Crude Oil Prices food prices. Every $0.01 rise in the gallon of gasoline costs U.S. consumers an additional $1.25 billion a year. In May, retail sales declined, breaking a streak of 10 consecutive months of positive growth. Disappointing auto sales contributed heavily to this decline. The fallout from the Japanese earthquake and the disruption in global automotive supply chains was a primary factor. These incidents alone subtracted a full percentage point from U.S. GDP growth this past quarter. Copyright © 2011 Peirce Park Group. All Rights Reserved. This Report is not to be construed as an offer or solicitation to buy or sell securities, or to engage in any trading or investment strategy. The views contained in this Report are those of Peirce Park Group as of June 30th 2011, may change as subsequent conditions vary, and are based on information obtained by Peirce Park Group from sources that are believed to be reliable. Such information is not necessarily all inclusive and is not guaranteed as to accuracy. Peirce Park Group is not responsible for typographical or clerical errors in this Report or in the dissemination of its contents. Reliance upon information in 1 this Report is at the sole discretion of the reader.

Market Environment – 2nd Quarter 2011 The federal budget deficit is on track to come in near $1.35 trillion in the U.S. Unemployment Rate current fiscal year. This represents approximately 9% of GDP. In 2010, the deficit was also around 9% of GDP. In 2009, the deficit was a record 12 $1.4 trillion. A better economy should result in a shrinking deficit. By 10 2014, if growth forecasts prove accurate, the deficit is expected to settle 8 in near 5% of GDP. However, this is still well above the long-term average budget deficit. % 6 4 June’s dismal employment p p report g highlights the severity of the current economic slowdown. Job growth has all but stalled, and the 2 unemployment rate inched higher ending the quarter at 9.2% up from 0 8.8% at the end of March. Behind the weak job numbers is an Jan‐ Ju 10 l‐0 Ja 1 n‐ Ju 20 l‐0 Ja 2 n‐ Ju 30 l‐0 Ja 3 n‐ Ju 40 l‐0 extraordinary level of skittishness among businesses. While companies Ja 4 n‐ Ju 50 l‐0 Ja 5 n‐ Ju 60 l‐0 Ja 6 n‐ Ju 70 l‐0 Ja 7 n‐ Ju 80 l‐0 Ja 8 n‐ Ju 90 l‐0 Ja 9 n‐ Ju 01 l‐1 Ja 0 n‐ 11 Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics are not laying off workers, they remain reluctant to step up hiring, as they are unnerved by Washington’s apparent deadlock over how to address the nation’s daunting fiscal challenges. U.S. Hiring/Layoff Rate Although consumer-level inflation moderated somewhat as crude oil prices fell over the quarter (from $106.72 per barrel to $95.42 per barrel), higher commodity prices and inflationary pressures are being transmitted to the consumer and are being felt in the economy. The impact of higher commodities compresses economic conditions for both corporations and consumers in different ways. Overall, it reduces p disposable income and therefore potential consumption, while at the same time constricting corporate margins, dulling corporate confidence and hampering the potential for wage growth. In addition, the energy price headwind to growth becomes even more apparent when looked at against wage inflation expectations, which have flat-lined at effectively zero. 2

Market Environment – 2nd Quarter 2011 Over the past month, the market has begun to price in the longer Commodity Price Index term economic impact created by energy and commodity price inflation particularly in relation to the risks associated with growth. 250 Diversified commodities, as measured by the S&P GSCI Index, fell 200 5.3% during the month. In addition, real assets declined along with other risk assets as the markets weighed up the real effects of rising Index Level 150 energy and commodity prices on global growth. 100 Due to the pullback in commodity prices during the quarter, the U.S. Consumer Price Index (All Urban Consumers) rose only 1.0% in the 50 second quarter following a steeper 2.0% rise in Q1. Rising 3% Y.T.D., CPI is still on an upward tick compared to the low 0 inflationary environments of recent years. Jan-92 Jan-93 Jan-94 Jan-95 Jan-96 Jan-97 Jan-98 Jan-99 Jan-00 Jan-01 Jan-02 Jan-03 Jan-04 Jan-05 Jan-06 Jan-07 Jan-08 Jan-09 Jan-10 Jan-11 Skittishness is evident in businesses’ desire to hoard cash. Profit margins are about as wide as they have ever been, particularly among Quick Ratio for Non-Financial Corporations large and midsized firms. Companies are investing more, raising dividend p yayouts and stock prepurchases and boosting mergers and acquisitions. They are still making money though and sitting on significant cash reserves. The quick ratio for nonfinancial corporate businesses - liquid assets as a share of short term liabilities - is at a post-World War II high. Yet firms cannot seem to shake the fear that they will be caught short if they take a chance and deploy their cash reserves more aggressively. 3

Market Environment – 2nd Quarter 2011 In the minds of business owners, the two keys to a revival in growth Debt Ceiling Debate Unnerves Investors later this year will be a pull back in energy prices and a timely resolution of Washington’s debt ceiling debate. Some suggest that oil prices have peaked. Apart from Libya, the Middle East region’s other oil fields and pipelines are operating and Saudi Arabia has promised to make up any shortfall. Growth in oil demand is also moderating as higher prices curb consumption in the developed world and policymakers in emerging markets are moving to slow inflationary pressures in their economies. President Obama and Congress have until early August to raise the U.S. statutory debt ceiling or the Treasury will be unable to pay all its bills. If that were to happen, the Treasury would almost surely prioritize the government’s obligations so that p y g ayments on the federal debt would be made on time. There would likely also be enough to pay the military’s expenses. Beyond that, there would not be enough cash to go around. Government employees could be put on temporary leave, unemployed workers might not receive full benefits and Social Security recipients could come up short. Eventually the ceiling would be increased and everyone would receive what they were owed, but precisely when is unclear. Although there would be no technical U.S. debt default, stock and bond markets would face turmoil. Cracks are already developing in the market for credit d f efault swaps on Treasury bonds. The rating agencies have already put Treasury debt on negative watch for a possible downgrade. Once the spending cuts start in early August, global investors will begin to question the security of their own bonds. Interest rates should p spike as investors demand compensation p for the risk of holding U.S. debt. It is expected that the government will raise the debt ceiling, at least for a few months. The hope is that Interest Rate Trends: Economic data that suggested a still-struggling recovery, as an agreement will be put in to place that will significantly reduce well as the growing uncertainty stemming from the European debt crisis, future deficits. contributed to a decline in US Treasury rates across the yield curve. 4

Market Environment – 2nd Quarter 2011 DOMESTIC EQUITY QTR YTD 1 Year 3 Year 5 Year 10 Year DOMESTIC FIXED INCOME QTR YTD 1 Year 3 Year 5 Year 10 Year Russell 3000 Index (0.0) 6.4 32.4 4.0 3.4 3.4 Cash/Merrill Lynch 3-month T-Bill 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.4 2.0 2.1 Russell 3000 Growth Index 0.6 7.0 35.7 5.3 5.4 2.4 Barclays Govt/Credit 1-3 Yr 0.9 1.1 1.9 3.5 4.5 4.0 Russell 3000 Value Index (0.7) 5.7 29.1 2.7 1.2 4.3 Barclays Intermediate Government/Credit 2.1 2.5 3.8 5.8 6.1 5.4 S&P 500 Index 0.1 6.0 30.7 3.3 2.9 2.7 Barclays Long Government/Credit 3.3 3.3 3.2 8.2 7.7 7.2 Russell 1000 Index 0.1 6.4 31.9 3.7 3.3 3.2 Barclays Government 2.2 2.1 2.3 5.1 6.1 5.4 Russell 1000 Growth Index 0.8 6.8 35.0 5.0 5.3 2.2 Barclays Credit Bond 2.5 3.4 6.2 8.2 7.0 6.3 Russell 1000 Value Index (0.5) 5.9 28.9 2.3 1.2 4.0 Barclays Aggregate Bond 2.3 2.7 3.9 6.5 6.5 5.7 Russell TOP 200 Index (0.0) 5.6 29.2 2.6 2.5 1.7 Barclays Mortgage Backed Securities 2.3 2.9 3.8 6.9 7.0 5.8 Russell TOP 200 Growth Index 0.4 5.8 31.9 4.5 5.0 1.2 Barclays High Yield Corporate Bond 1.1 5.0 15.6 12.7 9.3 9.0 Russell TOP 200 Value Index (0.4) 5.5 26.5 0.6 0.0 2.1 Barclays Treasury Inflation-Protected Securities 3.7 5.8 7.7 5.3 6.9 7.0 Russell Mid-Cap Index 0.4 8.1 38.5 6.5 5.3 7.6 Consumer Price Index 1.0 3.0 3.6 1.0 2.2 2.4 Russell Mid-Cap Growth Index 1.6 9.6 43.3 6.6 6.3 5.5 INTERNATIONAL/GLOBAL EQUITY Russell Mid-Cap Value I d ndex (0.7) 6.7 34.3 6.4 4.0 8.4 MSCI EAFE (Net) 1.6 5.0 30.4 (1.8) 1.5 5.7 Russell 2000 Index (1.6) 6.2 37.4 7.8 4.1 6.3 MSCI EAFE Growth (Net) 2.1 4.4 31.3 (1.9) 2.5 5.3 Russell 2000 Growth Index (0.6) 8.6 43.5 8.4 5.8 4.6 MSCI EAFE Value (Net) 1.0 5.6 29.4 (1.7) 0.4 6.0 Russell 2000 Value Index (2.7) 3.8 31.4 7.1 2.2 7.5 MSCI EAFE Small Cap (Net) 0.9 3.8 36.4 3.3 2.3 10.1 DOMESTIC EQUITY BY SECTOR MSCI AC World Index (Net) 0.3 4.7 30.1 0.9 3.2 4.8 MSCI US Consumer Discretionary 3.5 8.2 42.2 15.0 5.6 4.1 MSCI AC World Index Growth (Net) 0.9 4.3 32.0 0.8 4.2 4.6 MSCI US Consumer Staples 5.7 8.9 28.2 9.3 8.6 7.7 MSCI AC World Index Value (Net) (0.4) 5.1 28.2 1.1 2.1 4.9 MSCI US Energy (5.1) 11.0 53.8 (3.6) 7.7 12.2 MSCI Europe ex U.K. (Net) 2.8 10.8 36.9 (2.3) 2.5 6.5 MSCI US Financials (4.8) (1.7) 15.8 (3.6) (9.0) (1.2) MSCI U.K. (Net) 1.7 5.6 34.1 (1.4) 1.2 5.5 MSCI US Health Care 6.9 14.0 30.3 8.9 6.2 3.6 MSCI Pacific ex Japan (Net) (0.2) 2.5 35.6 5.1 10.2 13.2 MSCI US Industrials (1.4) 7.4 38.6 4.5 3.8 4.8 MSCI Japan (Net) 0.2 (4.8) 13.0 (4.3) (3.8) 1.4 MSCI US Information Technology (1.3) 3.0 28.9 7.2 7.3 1.5 MSCI Emerging Markets (Net) (1.2) 0.9 27.8 4.2 11.4 16.2 MSCI US Materials (1.5) 4.4 46.8 1.0 8.2 9.2 FTSE EPRA/NAREIT Global Real Estate 2.5 4.6 31.5 2.3 1.8 - MSCI US REITs 3.6 10.3 34.1 5.4 2.4 10.6 SPECIALTY MSCI US Telecommunication Svcs. 2.4 7.1 37.5 4.5 4.7 0.3 S&P GSCI (7.9) 2.7 26.1 (21.7) (6.2) 3.7 MSCI US Utilities 5.2 9.5 25.2 (1.0) 5.1 3.9 S&P GSCI Gold 4.3 5.4 19.8 16.4 18.3 17.8 Source: Morningstar, MSCI Barra, Barclays Capital 5

Market Environment – 2nd Quarter 2011 U.S. stocks carried first-quarter momentum into April, with a 3.0% return for the Russell 3000; however, following April’s return, six 2Q 2011 Returns weeks of fear/volatility gripped the markets and a general sell off 1 0.8 occurred so that by June 30th the Russell 3000 returned 0% for the 0.4 quarter. 0.1 0 0.0 The Large Cap S&P 500 outperformed the All Cap Russell 3000 by -0.5 Total Return, % 0.1%, as larger capitalized companies out performed smaller issues -0.6 -1 during the quarter. Mid sized companies were the real winners in the quarter as the Russell Mid Cap index was up 0.4%. The big story for the quarter was the negative return in the small cap space (Russell -1.6 -2 2000 was down -1.6%). Among larger company stocks, defensive value-oriented equities -2.6 -3 outperformed growth-oriented names, with the Wilshire U.S. Large Value Index returning 0.6%, compared to the (-0.5%) slide for the S&P 500 Index Russell 1000 Growth Index Russell 3000 Index Russell 1000 Value Index Russell Mid-Cap Index Russell 2000 Growth Index Russell 2000 Index Russell 2000 Value Index Wilshire U.S. Large Growth Index. However, Russell characterizes value and growth differently and the Russell 1000 Growth 2Q 2011 Returns outperformed the Russell 1000 Value (+0.8% and -0.5%, 8 respectively). Within smaller-company stocks, h ll the Russell 2000 6.9 Growth Index outperformed the Russell 2000 Value Index (-0.6% 6 5.6 5.2 and -2.7%, respectively). 4 3.6 As investors sought out safe haven positions, the strongest Total Return, % 2 performers for the quarter were the defensive Health Care, Consumer Staples and Utility sectors (+6.9%, +5.7% and +5.2% 0 respectively). Financials, hampered by continued balance sheet worries, were one of the worst performing sectors for the quarter -2 (-4.8%). Energy stocks, reflecting the drop in oil prices and concerns -4 about global growth also ended down sharply for the quarter -5.1 -4.8 (-5.1%). Despite the ongoing slump in residential real estate sales, -6 the MSCI REIT Index returned +3.6% for the second quarter, easily Consumer Staples Energy Financials Health Care Utilities Real Estate 6 outpacing all broad U.S. stock sectors.

Market Environment – 2nd Quarter 2011 R fl eflecting a broad flight to fsafety over much of h the second quarter, treasury yields fell, with the bellwether 10-year yield falling 27 basis Major Currency Movements vs. US Dollar (2nd QTR) points (bps) to 3.26% at quarter-end. Still, Treasury yields fell across 9 8.7% Australian Dollar all maturities over the second quarter; two-year rates slid 31 bps to 8 Brazilian Real Canadian Dollar 0.47%, while thirty-year yields moved 14 bps lower to 4.39%. y 7 Chinese Yuan Renminbi Euro 6 Japanese Yen South Korean Won The Barclays 1-3 Year Gov’t/Credit Index returned 0.9%, while the 5 Swiss Franc Total Return, % 4.1% UK Pound Sterling Barclays Gov’t/Credit Long Term Index returned 3.3% for the 4 3.5% quarter. Given the defensive nature of the markets during the 3 2.6% 2.7% 2.2% quarter, Federal agency and corporate credit spreads widened slightly, 2 1.3% but credit still managed to outperform Government and Mortgage- 1 0.8% 0.2% Backed debt for the quarter. (+2.5%, +2.2% and +2.3%, 0 respectively). International stock markets were not immune to the headwinds afflicting the U.S. market. Volatile commodity prices, fluctuating U.S. high i yield corporate bond spreads id widened more h than demand, Middle East uncertainty and h the ongoing debt i crisis in investment-grade bonds, leading this market sector to underperform Greece all contributed to weak international markets. However, a all other U.S. broad bond market segments (+1.1%). This weak dollar and strength in the German and the U.K. markets underperformance is not surprising as high yield debt tends to afforded some good news to investors with offshore assets. In correlate more highly with equities. general, developed-markets p outperformed emerging markets. p The Pacific region (excluding Japan) underperformed the broad international market as concerns of slowing growth in China’s economy eclipsed guarded optimism of Japan’s ability to rebuild after the devastating March earthquake. Emerging market stocks, with their heightened sensitivity to commodities i pricing and the economic health of their trading partners, were notable Yield Curve Slope: The yield curve steepened. The slope between two- Sector Spreads: Investors were hesitant to take risks, which led to year yields and 10-year yields steepened by 6 bps, and the slope between mixed results versus US Treasuries. Spreads on investment-grade, underperformers in the second 7 five-year yields and 30-year yields steepened by 35 bps. high-yield and mortgages all increased. quarter.

Highlights • Employees Fund returned 0.6% for the quarter and gained over $100,000. • Among all public defined benefit plans in the WilCo-op plan sponsor universe, the Employees Fund return ranks in the top quartile over 3, 5 and 7 years. • Police Fund returned 0.4% for the quarter and gained over $40,000. • Among all public defined benefit plans in the WilCo-op plan sponsor universe, the Police Fund return ranks in the top quartile over 3, 5 and 7 years. • Value tilt and overweight to domestic small cap equities detracted from performance for the quarter. • DFA U.S. Targeted Value: Deep value small cap stocks were the biggest underperformers relative to the broad market. • Royce Value Plus and American Funds Growth Fund of America both underperformed (consider termination). 8

Employee Pension Asset Summary Employees BMV Contribution Withdrawls Fees Gain EMV Return (month) April p 21,250,058.18 550,000.00 256,382.68 0.00 555,404.81 22,099,080.31 2.58% May 22,099,080.31 810,000.00 256,382.68 2,291.94 (169,273.75) 22,481,131.94 -0.77% June 22,481,131.94 0.00 256,382.68 1,158.11 (281,028.51) 21,942,562.64 -1.26% TOTAL (net) 21 250 ,250,058.18 1 360 ,360,000.00 769,148.04 3 450 ,450.05 105,102.55 21 942 ,942,562.64 TOTAL (gross) = 0.57% 9

Police Pension Asset Summary Police BMV Contribution Withdrawls Fees Gain EMV Return (month) April p 11,556,740.09 0.00 122,552.39 0.00 295,648.14 11,729,835.84 2.59% May 11,729,835.84 0.00 122,635.79 961.59 (94,734.12) 11,511,504.34 -0.82% June 11,511,504.34 0.00 122,635.79 475.24 (156,638.59) 11,231,754.72 -1.38% TOTAL (net) 11 556 ,556,740.09 0.00 367,823.97 1 436 ,436.83 44 275 ,275.43 11 231 ,231,754.72 TOTAL (gross) = 0.41% 10

Performance Summary – total fund cumulative QUARTER YEAR TO DATE 1 YEAR 3 YEARS 5 YEARS 7 YEARS TOTAL FUND RETURN RANK RETURN RANK RETURN RANK RETURN RANK RETURN RANK RETURN RANK EMPLOYEE TOTAL FUND (Gross) 0.6 90 4.8 44 22.0 28 61.0 12 5.7 17 6.6 18 Policy Index* 1.0 59 4.8 44 21.7 35 4.7 51 4.6 63 5.4 66 Base Policy Index** 1.1 48 4.6 57 19.5 60 4.8 47 4.7 57 5.3 73 QUARTER YEAR TO DATE 1 YEAR 3 YEARS 5 YEARS 7 YEARS TOTAL FUND RETURN RANK RETURN RANK RETURN RANK RETURN RANK RETURN RANK RETURN RANK POLICE TOTAL FUND (Gross) 0.4 93 4.5 63 21.2 43 6.1 13 5.7 16 6.6 18 Policy Index* 1.0 59 4.8 44 21.7 35 4.7 51 4.6 63 5.4 66 Base Policy Index** 1.1 48 4.6 57 19.5 60 4.8 47 4.7 57 5.3 73 *51% Russell 3000 / 35% Barclays Capital Intermediate Gov't/Credit / 14% MSCI EAFE (Net) **50% S&P 500 / 38% Barclays Aggregate Bond/ 10% MSCI EAFE (Net) / 2% ML 3 Month TBILL 11

Performance Summary – total fund consecutive 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 TOTAL FUND RETURN RANK RETURN RANK RETURN RANK RETURN RANK RETURN RANK RETURN RANK EMPLOYEE TOTAL FUND 12.6 52 23.8 14 (23.1) 43 6.5 70 14.9 16 8.3 23 Policy d Index* 12.3 55 21.0 1 29 ( 4 24.9) 56 7.0 61 13.1 38 5.6 67 Base Policy Index** 11.3 74 18.9 50 (22.4) 39 6.7 66 12.2 49 4.8 85 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 TOTAL FUND RETURN RANK RETURN RANK RETURN RANK RETURN RANK RETURN RANK RETURN RANK POLICE TOTAL FUND 12.4 54 23.3 16 (22.3) 38 6.6 70 14.9 16 8.3 23 Policy Index* 12.3 55 21.0 29 (24.9) 56 7.0 61 13.1 38 5.6 67 Base Policy Index** 11.3 74 18.9 50 (22.4) 39 6.7 66 12.2 49 4.8 85 *51% Russell 3000 / 35% Barclays Capital Intermediate Gov't/Credit / 14% MSCI EAFE (Net) **50% S&P 500 / 38% Barclays Aggregate Bond/ 10% MSCI EAFE (Net) / 2% ML 3 Month TBILL 12

Performance Summary – cumulative QUARTER YEAR TO DATE 1 YEAR 3 YEARS 5 YEARS 7 YEARS DOMESTIC EQUITIES RETURN RANK RETURN RANK RETURN RANK RETURN RANK RETURN RANK RETURN RANK VANGUARD VALUE INDEX (0.6) 60 6.4 36 28.7 50 3.0 47 1.5 57 4.5 46 MSCI US Prime Market Value (0.6) 60 6.5 36 28.8 49 3.0 47 1.5 57 4.5 45 VANGUARD PRIMECAP CORE 1.0 18 6.2 34 32.1 22 6.5 5 6.0 5 - - MSCI US Prime Market 750 0.2 36 6.2 33 31.8 25 3.7 32 3.5 27 - - VANGUARD MORGAN GROWTH ADM. 0.7 37 6.7 31 35.7 28 3.6 45 4.4 45 5.6 33 Russell 3000 Growth 0.6 38 7.0 29 35.7 28 5.3 25 5.4 29 5.1 41 AMERICAN FUNDS GROWTH FUND (R6) (0.6) 70 4.8 68 28.1 83 1.3 72 3.0 71 5.5 33 Russell 1000 Growth 0.8 33 6.8 29 35.0 35 5.0 28 5.3 29 4.9 46 DFA U.S. TARGETED VALUE (3.1) 74 5.1 41 37.4 17 9.2 46 3.5 57 6.9 47 Russell 2500 Value (1.5) 30 6.1 22 34.5 38 7.9 67 3.5 54 6.7 53 ROYCE VALUE PLUS (2.6) 87 4.1 92 29.1 96 4.4 83 3.6 74 7.5 36 Russell 2000 Growth (0.6) 62 8.6 58 43.5 42 8.4 47 5.8 41 6.8 78 INTERNATIONAL AMERICAN FUNDS EUROPACIFIC GROWTH (R6) 1.1 60 4.7 49 29.4 74 1.9 10 5.3 7 9.7 8 MSCI ACWI ex US (Net) 0.4 79 3.8 68 29.7 71 (0.4) 33 3.7 19 8.6 15 DFA INTERNATIONAL VALUE 0.1 81 4.8 62 33.3 27 0.1 29 2.7 27 8.2 19 MSCI EAFE Value (Net) 1.0 58 5.6 45 29.4 66 (1.7) 61 0.4 75 6.0 63 FIXED INCOME VANGUARD INTERMEDIATE BOND INDEX 3.4 1 3.6 14 5.4 42 8.1 28 7.8 13 6.3 16 Barclays 5-10 YR US Govt/Credit 3.3 1 3.7 12 5.5 40 8.0 28 7.6 15 6.2 17 VANGUARD SHORT TERM BOND INDEX 1.6 7 1.7 35 2.7 60 4.5 38 5.3 19 4.3 23 Barclays 1-5 YR US Govt/Credit 1.5 9 1.8 31 2.8 56 4.6 34 5.3 19 4.3 22 13

Performance Summary – consecutive 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 DOMESTIC EQUITY RETURN RANK RETURN RANK RETURN RANK RETURN RANK RETURN RANK RETURN RANK VANGUARD VALUE INDEX 14.5 35 19.7 68 (35.9) 43 0.1 61 22.2 7 7.1 37 MSCI US Prime Market Value 14.5 35 19.5 70 (36.0) 44 0.2 61 22.4 6 7.3 36 VANGUARD PRIMECAP CORE 14.9 37 37.0 12 (31.3) 11 7.0 31 12.3 78 12.1 4 MSCI US Prime Market 750 15.9 23 27.8 44 (37.1) 45 6.4 35 15.7 29 6.3 37 VANGUARD MORGAN GROWTH ADM. 18.9 24 36.3 41 (41.3) 58 11.4 64 11.3 20 9.3 28 Russell 3000 Growth 17.6 32 37.0 38 (38.4) 36 11.4 64 9.5 34 5.2 59 AMERICAN FUNDS GROWTH FUND (R6) 12.7 76 34.8 49 (39.1) 39 11.0 66 10.9 22 14.2 10 Russell 1000 Growth 16.7 40 37.2 37 (38.4) 36 11.8 60 9.1 38 5.3 58 DFA U.S. TARGETED VALUE 29.0 29 31.9 48 (33.8) 60 (8.2) 65 19.7 29 9.3 16 Russell 2500 Value 24.8 65 27.7 68 (32.0) 48 (7.3) 58 20.2 25 7.7 38 ROYCE VALUE PLUS 20.3 91 41.9 28 (40.9) 50 3.4 69 19.4 7 13.2 8 Russell 2000 Growth 29.1 34 34.5 52 (38.5) 27 7.1 54 13.4 30 4.2 66 INTERNATIONAL AMERICAN FUNDS EUROPACIFIC GROWTH (R6) 9.8 54 39.4 17 (40.5) 15 19.0 11 21.9 80 21.1 6 MSCI ACWI ex US (Net) 11.2 40 41.5 12 (45.5) 73 16.7 19 26.7 23 16.6 27 DFA INTERNATIONAL VALUE 10.6 23 39.5 20 (46.3) 69 10.2 40 34.2 6 15.3 38 MSCI EAFE Value (Net) 3.3 87 34.2 36 (44.1) 53 6.0 81 30.4 19 13.8 53 FIXED INCOME VANGUARD INTERMEDIATE BOND INDEX 9.5 16 6.9 82 5.0 14 7.7 6 3.9 65 1.8 71 Barclays 5-10 YR US Govt/Credit 9.4 16 6.5 84 5.1 14 7.6 7 3.8 73 1.8 64 VANGUARD SHORT TERM BOND INDEX 4.0 45 4.4 84 5.5 2 7.3 2 4.1 59 1.3 77 Barclays 1-5 YR US Govt/Credit 4.1 44 4.6 83 5.1 3 7.3 2 4.2 50 1.4 64 14

Security Characteristics Valuation Multiples Equities by Style as a % of Total Equity Style Portfolio Value Core Growth Maturity 4.30 Duration (Total) 3.89 28 23 20 Large Avg. Credit Quality AA Valuation Multiples Portfolio Benchmark Credit Quality 7 7 5 Medium P/E Ratio* 15.9 15.0 AAA 69.5% P/B Ratio* 2.0 2.0 AA 6.4% *Trailing 12 Months A 13.1% 4 4 2 Small BBB 11.0% Below BB 0.0% Not Rated/NA 0.0% Portfolio Allocation B h enchmark Allocation 5.5% 35.0% 32.7% Cash US Stocks Non-US Stocks Bonds 15.2% 46.6% 14.0% 51.0% 15

Sector Allocations – as a % of total equities 18% City of Dover 16% Benchmark* 14% 12% 10% 8% 6% 4% 2% 0% Basic Consumer Financial Real Estate Telecom Energy Industrials Technology Consumer Healthcare Utilities Materials Cyclical Services Defensive R i egional Allocations – as a % of total equities 90% City of Dover 80% B n enchmark* 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% *51% Russell 3000 / 35% Barclay’s Intermediate Gov’t/Credit / 14% MSCI EAFE (Net) 16

City of Dover - Employees Cumulative Performance Comparison Total Returns of Total Fund Public Sponsors Periods Ending 6/11 26% 24% 22% E 1 20% 2 18% 16% 14% 12% 10% 8% 6% E E E 1 2 4% E 1 2 1 2 1 2 2% 0% E 1 2 -2% Last 6/11 Last Last 3 Last 5 Last 7 Qtr YTD Year Years Years Years 5th Percentile 1.9 6.1 24.8 6.8 6.5 7.2 25th Percentile 1.4 5.4 22.5 5.7 5.4 6.3 Median 1.1 4.7 20.6 4.8 4.9 5.8 75th Percentile 0.9 4.2 15.8 3.7 4.2 5.3 95th Percentile 0.3 3.0 13.0 1.8 3.2 4.6 E Employees Total Fund 0.6 (90) 4.8 (44) 22.0 (28) 6.1 (12) 5.7 (17) 6.6 (18) 1 Policy Index 0.9 (59) 4.8 (44) 21.7 (35) 4.7 (51) 4.6 (63) 5.4 (66) 2 Base Policy Index 1.1 (48) 4.6 (57) 19.5 (60) 4.8 (47) 4.7 (57) 5.3 (73) 17 Returns for periods greater than one year are annualized.

City of Dover - Employees Calendar Year Performance Comparison Total Returns of Total Fund Public Sponsors Years Ending December 30% 25% E 20% 1 12 2 15% E E12 12 E 10% E 2 5% E12 12 E1 E12 0% -5% 12 -10% 2 E 1 -15% E -20% -25% E 2 1 -30% -35% 6/30/11 YTD 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001 5th Percentile 6.1 17.2 27.4 -9.7 10.8 16.3 10.3 13.9 26.0 1.6 4.4 25th Percentile 5.4 14.0 21.6 -20.2 8.7 14.1 8.1 11.8 22.6 -5.9 -0.7 Median 4.7 12.7 19.1 -24.0 7.5 12.1 6.5 9.9 19.7 -8.3 -2.7 75th Percentile 4.2 11.2 15.6 -27.2 6.4 10.3 5.3 8.4 17.0 -9.8 -4.8 95th Percentile 3.0 9.3 9.6 -30.4 4.4 6.6 3.9 5.7 11.3 -12.8 -9.0 E Employees Total Fund 4.8 (44) 12.6 (52) 23.8 (14) -23.1 (43) 6.5 (70) 14.9 (16) 8.3 (23) 7.0 (89) 13.9 (89) -15.3 (97) -9.0 (95) 1 Policy Index 4.8 (44) 12.3 (55) 21.0 (29) -24.9 (56) 7.0 (61) 13.1 (38) 5.6 (67) 8.2 (76) 20.0 (47) -11.2 (85) -4.2 (67) 2 Base Policy Index 4.6 (57) 11.3 (74) 18.9 (50) -22.4 (39) 6.7 (66) 12.2 (49) 4.8 (85) 9.2 (64) 19.6 (51) -9.0 (66) -4.5 (71) 18 Returns for periods greater than one year are annualized.

City of Dover - Employees Return vs Risk Total Returns of Total Fund Public Sponsors 3 Years Ending 6/30/11 9.0 Median 8.0 Risk 7.0 Annualized Rate of Return 6.0 E 5.0 Median 2 1 Return 4.0 3.0 2.0 1.0 2.0 4.6 7.2 9.8 12.4 15.0 17.6 20.2 22.8 25.4 28.0 Historical Standard Deviation of Return Annualized Return Standard Deviation Value Rank Value Rank E Employees Total Fund 6.1 12 16.4 72 1 Policy Index 4.7 51 16.7 77 2 Base Policy Index 4.8 47 14.9 47 Median 4.8 15.2 19

City of Dover - Employees Return vs Risk Total Returns of Total Fund Public Sponsors 5 Years Ending 6/30/11 7.5 Median 7.0 Risk 6.5 Annualized Rate of Return 6.0 5.5 E 5.0 Median 2 1 Return 4.5 4.0 3.5 3.0 2.5 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 12.0 14.0 16.0 18.0 20.0 22.0 Historical Standard Deviation of Return Annualized Return Standard Deviation Value Rank Value Rank E Employees Total Fund 5.7 17 13.2 71 1 Policy Index 4.6 63 13.4 75 2 Base Policy Index 4.7 57 12.1 46 Median 4.9 12.3 20

City of Dover - Police Pension Fund Cumulative Performance Comparison Total Returns of Total Fund Public Sponsors Periods Ending 6/11 26% 24% 22% P 1 20% 2 18% 16% 14% 12% 10% 8% 6% P P P 1 2 4% P 1 2 1 2 1 2 2% 0% P 1 2 -2% Last 6/11 Last Last 3 Last 5 Last 7 Qtr YTD Year Years Years Years 5th Percentile 1.9 6.1 24.8 6.8 6.5 7.2 25th Percentile 1.4 5.4 22.5 5.7 5.4 6.3 Median 1.1 4.7 20.6 4.8 4.9 5.8 75th Percentile 0.9 4.2 15.8 3.7 4.2 5.3 95th Percentile 0.3 3.0 13.0 1.8 3.2 4.6 P Police Total Fund 0.4 (93) 4.5 (63) 21.2 (43) 6.1 (13) 5.7 (16) 6.6 (18) 1 Policy Index 0.9 (59) 4.8 (44) 21.7 (35) 4.7 (51) 4.6 (63) 5.4 (66) 2 Base Policy Index 1.1 (48) 4.6 (57) 19.5 (60) 4.8 (47) 4.7 (57) 5.3 (73) 21 Returns for periods greater than one year are annualized.

City of Dover - Police Pension Fund Calendar Year Performance Comparison Total Returns of Total Fund Public Sponsors Years Ending December 30% 25% P 20% 1 12 2 15% P P12 12 P 10% P 2 5% P12 12 P1 P12 0% -5% 12 -10% 2 P 1 -15% P -20% P 2 -25% 1 -30% -35% 6/30/11 YTD 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001 5th Percentile 6.1 17.2 27.4 -9.7 10.8 16.3 10.3 13.9 26.0 1.6 4.4 25th Percentile 5.4 14.0 21.6 -20.2 8.7 14.1 8.1 11.8 22.6 -5.9 -0.7 Median 4.7 12.7 19.1 -24.0 7.5 12.1 6.5 9.9 19.7 -8.3 -2.7 75th Percentile 4.2 11.2 15.6 -27.2 6.4 10.3 5.3 8.4 17.0 -9.8 -4.8 95th Percentile 3.0 9.3 9.6 -30.4 4.4 6.6 3.9 5.7 11.3 -12.8 -9.0 P Police Total Fund 4.5 (63) 12.4 (54) 23.3 (16) -22.3 (38) 6.6 (70) 14.9 (17) 8.3 (23) 6.6 (92) 13.8 (89) -15.2 (97) -10.5 (97) 1 Policy Index 4.8 (44) 12.3 (55) 21.0 (29) -24.9 (56) 7.0 (61) 13.1 (38) 5.6 (67) 8.2 (76) 20.0 (47) -11.2 (85) -4.2 (67) 2 Base Policy Index 4.6 (57) 11.3 (74) 18.9 (50) -22.4 (39) 6.7 (66) 12.2 (49) 4.8 (85) 9.2 (64) 19.6 (51) -9.0 (66) -4.5 (71) 22 Returns for periods greater than one year are annualized.

City of Dover - Police Pension Fund Return vs Risk Total Returns of Total Fund Public Sponsors 3 Years Ending 6/30/11 9.0 Median 8.0 Risk 7.0 Annualized Rate of Return 6.0 P 5.0 Median 2 1 Return 4.0 3.0 2.0 1.0 2.0 4.6 7.2 9.8 12.4 15.0 17.6 20.2 22.8 25.4 28.0 Historical Standard Deviation of Return Annualized Return Standard Deviation Value Rank Value Rank P Police Total Fund 6.1 13 16.1 68 1 Policy Index 4.7 51 16.7 77 2 Base Policy Index 4.8 47 14.9 47 Median 4.8 15.2 23

City of Dover - Police Pension Fund Return vs Risk Total Returns of Total Fund Public Sponsors 5 Years Ending 6/30/11 7.5 Median 7.0 Risk 6.5 Annualized Rate of Return 6.0 P 5.5 5.0 Median 2 1 Return 4.5 4.0 3.5 3.0 2.5 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 12.0 14.0 16.0 18.0 20.0 22.0 Historical Standard Deviation of Return Annualized Return Standard Deviation Value Rank Value Rank P Police Total Fund 5.7 16 13.0 67 1 Policy Index 4.6 63 13.4 75 2 Base Policy Index 4.7 57 12.1 46 Median 4.9 12.3 24

Domestic Equities 25

Vanguard Value Index Signal as of June 30, 2011 Prospectus Investment Objective Returns-Based Equity Style Map The investment seeks to replicate, net of expenses, the MSCI US Prime Market Value Index. The fund generally invests all, or substantially all, of its assets in the stocks that make up the index, holding each stock in approximately the same proportion as its weighting in the index. The index Sep-06 - Jun-11 measures the investment return of large-capitalization value stocks. Lg Value Lg Growth 1 Portfolio Information Portfolio Characteristics Small - Large Ticker VVISX Vanguard Value MSCI US Prime Equity Style Box Large-Value Index Signal Market Value 0 Total Fund Net Assets $15.6B Turnover Ratio 27% - % Assets in Top 10 Holdings 30.2% Total Number of Holdings 416 413 Manager Name Gerard C. O'Reilly P/E Ratio 14.3 13.1 -1 Manager Tenure 16.5 years Sm Value Sm Growth P/B Ratio 1.7 1.6 Fund Incept Date 11/02/1992 -1 0 1 Avg Mkt Cap $MM $46.6B - Value - Growth Expense Ratio 0.12% Vanguard Value Index Signal MSCI US Prime Market Value Capture Ratios Sep-06 - Jun-11 140 Top Ten Holdings Market Capitalizations 130 ExxonMobil Corporation 6.4% % Giant Cap Up Mkt Capture Ratio, % 120 Chevron Corporation 3.3% % Large Cap % Medium Cap 110 General Electric Company 3.2% % Small Cap AT&T, Inc. 2.7% 18.3% 100 53.2% % Micro Cap JP Morgan Chase & Co 2.7% 90 Procter & Gamble Company 2.6% 80 Johnson & Johnson 2.5% 70 Pfizer Inc. 2.5% 60 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 Wells Fargo Company 2.4% Down Mkt Capture Ratio, % Bank of America Corp 2.0% 28.3% Vanguard Value Index Signal MSCI US Prime Market Value Sector Allocations Batting Averages % Basic % Communication % Consumer % Consumer % % % Real % % % Financial % Materials Services Cyclical Defensive Healthcare Industrials Estate Technology Energy Services Utilities Sep-06 - Jun-11 25 1.0 21.1 0.9 20 0.8 Up Mkt Batting Average 17.3 0.7 15 13.0 0.6 11.4 0.5 10 8.2 0.4 6.2 5.6 6.1 5.3 0.3 5 2.8 3.1 0.2 0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 Vanguard Value Index Signal Down Mkt Batting Average % Basic Materials % Communication Services % Consumer Cyclical % Consumer Defensive % Healthcare % Industrials % Real Estate % Technology % Energy % Financial Services % Utilities Vanguard Value Index Signal Please note: Fund returns are net of fees. Benchmark returns are gross of fees. 26

Vanguard PRIMECAP Core Inv as of June 30, 2011 Prospectus Investment Objective Returns-Based Equity Style Map The investment seeks to provide long-term capital appreciation. The fund invests in stocks of companies whose future earnings potential, in the view of the fund?s advisor, is not reflected in their current market prices. It can invest in stocks across all industry sectors and market capitalizations. Sep-06 - Jun-11 Lg Value Lg Growth 1 Portfolio Information Portfolio Characteristics Small - Large Ticker VPCCX Vanguard PRIMECAP MSCI US Prime Equity Style Box Large-Growth Core Inv Market 750 0 Total Fund Net Assets $5.3B Turnover Ratio 8% - % Assets in Top 10 Holdings 25.4% Total Number of Holdings 138 753 Manager Name Joel P. Fried P/E Ratio 17.2 15.3 -1 Manager Tenure 6.6 years P/B Ratio 2.9 2.2 Sm Value Sm Growth Fund Incept Date 12/09/2004 Avg Mkt Cap $MM $30.0B - -1 0 1 Value - Growth Expense Ratio 0.51% Vanguard PRIMECAP Core Inv MSCI US Prime Market 750 Capture Ratios Sep-06 - Jun-11 140 Top Ten Holdings Market Capitalizations 130 Amgen, Inc. 3.6% % Giant Cap Up Mkt Capture Ratio, % 120 Marsh & McLennan Companies, Inc. 2.6% 37.1% % Large Cap % Medium Cap 110 CMT Market Liquidity Rate 2.6% % Small Cap 16.1% 100 Intuit, Inc. 2.6% % Micro Cap Roche Holding AG 2.5% 90 Novartis AG ADR 2.4% 80 Potash Corporation of Saskatchewan, Inc. 2.4% 70 Oracle Corporation 2.3% 60 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 Eli Lilly and Company 2.3% Down Mkt Capture Ratio, % Boeing Company 2.1% Vanguard PRIMECAP Core Inv 46.3% MSCI US Prime Market 750 Sector Allocations Batting Averages % Basic % Communication % Consumer % Consumer % % % Real % % % Financial % Materials Services Cyclical Defensive Healthcare Industrials Estate Technology Energy Services Utilities Sep-06 - Jun-11 30 1.0 26.4 0.9 25 0.8 Up Mkt Batting Average 20 19.7 0.7 18.3 0.6 15 0.5 10.8 10 0.4 7.6 7.2 5.5 0.3 5 1.5 2.1 0.2 0.1 0.9 0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 Vanguard PRIMECAP Core Inv Down Mkt Batting Average % Basic Materials % Communication Services % Consumer Cyclical % Consumer Defensive % Healthcare % Industrials % Real Estate % Technology % Energy % Financial Services % Utilities Vanguard PRIMECAP Core Inv Please note: Fund returns are net of fees. Benchmark returns are gross of fees. 27

Vanguard Morgan Growth Adm as of June 30, 2011 Prospectus Investment Objective Returns-Based Equity Style Map The investment seeks long-term growth of capital. The fund invests mainly in the stocks of mid- and large-capitalization U.S. companies whose revenues and/or earnings are expected to grow faster than those of the average company in the market. It uses multiple investment advisors. Jul-06 - Jun-11 Lg Value Lg Growth 1 Portfolio Information Portfolio Characteristics Small - Large Ticker VMRAX Vanguard Morgan Russell 3000 Equity Style Box Large-Growth Growth Adm Growth 0 Total Fund Net Assets $9.4B Turnover Ratio 60% - % Assets in Top 10 Holdings 21.2% Total Number of Holdings 342 1,752 Manager Name James P. Stetler P/E Ratio 19.9 18.4 -1 Manager Tenure 7.5 years P/B Ratio 3.5 4.0 Sm Value Sm Growth Fund Incept Date 12/31/1968 Avg Mkt Cap $MM $24.0B - -1 0 1 Value - Growth Expense Ratio 0.29% Vanguard Morgan Growth Adm Russell 3000 Growth Capture Ratios Jul-06 - Jun-11 140 Top Ten Holdings Market Capitalizations 130 Apple, Inc. 3.4% % Giant Cap Up Mkt Capture Ratio, % 120 International Business Machines Corp 3.2% 34.1% 3.2% % Large Cap % Medium Cap 110 CMT Market Liquidity Rate 2.6% % Small Cap Oracle Corporation 2.2% 100 % Micro Cap EMC Corporation 1.8% 90 Altera Corp. 1.7% 80 28.4% Microsoft Corporation 1.7% 70 Cisco Systems, Inc. 1.7% 60 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 Google, Inc. 1.6% Down Mkt Capture Ratio, % Caterpillar Inc. 1.4% 34.4% Vanguard Morgan Growth Adm Russell 3000 Growth Sector Allocations Batting Averages % Basic % Communication % Consumer % Consumer % % % Real % % % Financial % Materials Services Cyclical Defensive Healthcare Industrials Estate Technology Energy Services Utilities Jul-06 - Jun-11 40 1.0 36.9 0.9 35 0.8 Up Mkt Batting Average 30 0.7 25 24.6 0.6 0.5 20 16.2 0.4 15 13.2 12.7 11.8 11.8 0.3 10.9 10.9 10.7 10 8.9 0.2 4.6 4.9 0.1 5 3.1 3.8 3.0 2.8 1.9 1.8 0.5 0.1 0.1 0.0 0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 Down Mkt Batting Average Vanguard Morgan Growth Adm Russell 3000 Growth Vanguard Morgan Growth Adm Please note: Fund returns are net of fees. Benchmark returns are gross of fees. 28

American Funds Growth Fund of Amer R6 as of June 30, 2011 Prospectus Investment Objective Returns-Based Equity Style Map The investment seeks capital growth by investing in common stocks. The fund invests primarily in common stocks and seeks to invest in companies that appear to offer superior opportunities for growth of capital. It may invest a portion of its assets in securities of issuers domiciled outside the U.S. Jul-06 - Jun-11 The fund may also hold cash or money market instruments. Lg Value Lg Growth 1 Portfolio Information Portfolio Characteristics Small - Large Ticker RGAGX American Funds Growth Russell 1000 Equity Style Box Large-Growth Fund of Amer R6 Growth 0 Turnover Ratio 33% - Total Fund Net Assets $162.4B Total Number of Holdings 439 591 % Assets in Top 10 Holdings 17.3% Manager Name James E. Drasdo P/E Ratio 18.2 18.2 -1 Manager Tenure 25.7 years P/B Ratio 2.6 4.1 Sm Value Sm Growth Fund Incept Date 11/30/1973 Avg Mkt Cap $MM $41.1B - -1 0 1 Value - Growth Expense Ratio 0.34% American Funds Growth Fund of Amer R6 Russell 1000 Growth Capture Ratios Jul-06 - Jun-11 140 Top Ten Holdings Market Capitalizations 130 Oracle Corporation 2.7% % Giant Cap Up Mkt Capture Ratio, % 120 Apple, Inc. 2.4% % Large Cap % Medium Cap 110 Google, Inc. 1.9% 10.5% % Small Cap 50.2% 100 Apache Corporation 1.6% % Micro Cap Schlumberger, Ltd. 1.6% 90 Microsoft Corporation 1.5% 80 Home Depot, Inc. 1.5% 70 Philip Morris International, Inc. 1.5% 60 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 Union Pacific Corporation 1.4% Down Mkt Capture Ratio, % EMC Corporation 1.2% 39.0% American Funds Growth Fund of Amer R6 Russell 1000 Growth Sector Allocations Batting Averages % Basic % Communication % Consumer % Consumer % % % Real % % % Financial % Materials Services Cyclical Defensive Healthcare Industrials Estate Technology Energy Services Utilities Jul-06 - Jun-11 25 24.7 1.0 0.9 21.5 20 0.8 Up Mkt Batting Average 0.7 0.6 15 13.0 0.5 12.0 12.4 12.4 12.4 10.7 10.3 11.1 11.0 10.8 0.4 10 7.7 0.3 6.3 6.5 0.2 5 4.5 3.2 3.0 0.1 1.6 0.1 0.3 0.1 0.0 0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 Down Mkt Batting Average American Funds Growth Fund of Amer R6 Russell 1000 Growth American Funds Growth Fund of Amer R6 Please note: Fund returns are net of fees. Benchmark returns are gross of fees. 29

DFA US Targeted Value I as of June 30, 2011 Prospectus Investment Objective Returns-Based Equity Style Map The investment seeks long-term capital appreciation. The fund normally invests in a broad and diverse group of common stocks of small and mid cap companies that the advisor believes are undervalued. It invests at least 80% of net assets in securities of U.S. companies whose market Jul-06 - Jun-11 capitalizations are generally smaller than the 500th largest U.S. company. The fund may use derivatives, such as futures contracts and options on futures contracts for U.S. equity securities and indices. It may also lend its portfolio securities to generate additional income. Lg Value Lg Growth 1 Portfolio Information Portfolio Characteristics Small - Large Ticker DFFVX DFA US Targeted Russell 2500 Equity Style Box Small-Value Value I Value 0 Total Fund Net Assets $2.9B Turnover Ratio 20% - % Assets in Top 10 Holdings 4.9% Total Number of Holdings 1,566 1,709 Manager Name Stephen A. Clark P/E Ratio 15.7 14.6 -1 Manager Tenure 3.3 years P/B Ratio 1.3 1.4 Sm Value Sm Growth Fund Incept Date 02/23/2000 Avg Mkt Cap $MM $1.3B - -1 0 1 Value - Growth Expense Ratio 0.38% DFA US Targeted Value I Russell 2500 Value Capture Ratios Jul-06 - Jun-11 140 Top Ten Holdings Market Capitalizations 130 Rowan Companies, Inc. 0.6% % Giant Cap Up Mkt Capture Ratio, % 29.3% 120 Arrow Electronics, Inc. 0.5% % Large Cap % Medium Cap 110 Coventry Health Care, Inc. 0.5% % Small Cap Reinsurance Group of America 0.5% 100 % Micro Cap NASDAQ OMX Group, Inc. 0.5% 90 27.5% Axis Capital Holdings Ltd. 0.5% 80 Plains Exploration & Production Company 0.5% 70 Tech Data Corporation 0.5% 60 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 Sunoco, Inc. 0.5% Down Mkt Capture Ratio, % MeadWestvaco Corporation 0.5% 42.8% DFA US Targeted Value I Russell 2500 Value Sector Allocations Batting Averages % Basic % Communication % Consumer % Consumer % % % Real % % % Financial % Materials Services Cyclical Defensive Healthcare Industrials Estate Technology Energy Services Utilities Jul-06 - Jun-11 25 1.0 22.0 0.9 21.0 20 0.8 Up Mkt Batting Average 0.7 16.0 16.3 0.6 15 13.6 13.0 0.5 10.8 10.2 0.4 10 9.8 8.8 8.9 0.3 6.4 6.6 5.7 0.2 5 4.7 4.4 3.8 3.8 0.1 1.8 1.1 0.1 0.5 0.0 0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 Down Mkt Batting Average DFA US Targeted Value I Russell 2500 Value DFA US Targeted Value I Please note: Fund returns are net of fees. Benchmark returns are gross of fees. 30

Royce Value Plus Invmt as of June 30, 2011 Prospectus Investment Objective Returns-Based Equity Style Map The investment seeks long-term growth of capital. The fund normally invests at least 80% of assets in equities securities of small-, mid-, and micro-cap companies. It may invest up to 25% of assets in the securities of foreign issuers that it believes are trading significantly below its estimate Jul-06 - Jun-11 of their current worth. The fund may give consideration to those companies that Royce believes have above-average growth prospects. Lg Value Lg Growth 1 Portfolio Information Portfolio Characteristics Small - Large Ticker RVPHX Royce Value Russell 2000 Equity Style Box Small-Growth Plus Invmt Growth 0 Total Fund Net Assets $2.9B Turnover Ratio 48% - % Assets in Top 10 Holdings 16.0% Total Number of Holdings 126 1,161 Manager Name W. Whitney George P/E Ratio 21.7 21.7 -1 Manager Tenure 10.1 years Sm Value Sm Growth P/B Ratio 2.4 3.5 Fund Incept Date 06/14/2001 -1 0 1 Avg Mkt Cap $MM $1.9B - Value - Growth Expense Ratio 1.08% Royce Value Plus Invmt Russell 2000 Growth Capture Ratios Jul-06 - Jun-11 140 Top Ten Holdings Market Capitalizations 130 Allied Nevada Gold Corp 2.0% % Giant Cap Up Mkt Capture Ratio, % 4.6% 120 Worthington Industries 1.8% % Large Cap % Medium Cap 110 Avid Technology, Inc. 1.7% 15.8% % Small Cap International Rectifier 1.7% 100 44.2% % Micro Cap Silver Standard Resources, Inc. 1.6% 90 Valmont Industries, Inc. 1.6% 80 Mercury Computer Systems, Inc. 1.5% 70 Littelfuse Inc. 1.4% 60 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 Myriad Genetics, Inc. 1.4% Down Mkt Capture Ratio, % 1.4% Varian Semiconductor Equipment Associates, Inc. 35.4% Royce Value Plus Invmt Russell 2000 Growth Sector Allocations Batting Averages % Basic % Communication % Consumer % Consumer % % % Real % % % Financial % Materials Services Cyclical Defensive Healthcare Industrials Estate Technology Energy Services Utilities Jul-06 - Jun-11 30 1.0 27.1 0.9 25 23.5 0.8 Up Mkt Batting Average 0.7 19.8 20 17.3 0.6 14.5 15.3 0.5 15 11.4 0.4 10.1 10 0.3 7.9 7.5 6.1 0.2 5.3 5.3 5.3 5 4.2 3.1 2.9 0.1 1.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 Down Mkt Batting Average Royce Value Plus Invmt Russell 2000 Growth Royce Value Plus Invmt Please note: Fund returns are net of fees. Benchmark returns are gross of fees. 31

[This Page Intentionally Left Blank] 32

International Equities 33

American Funds EuroPacific Gr R6 as of June 30, 2011 Prospectus Investment Objective Returns-Based Equity Style Map The investment seeks to provide long-term growth of capital. The fund invests primarily in common stocks of issuers in Europe and the Pacific Basin that the investment adviser believes have the potential for growth. Growth stocks are stocks that the investment adviser believes have the potential Jul-06 - Jun-11 for above-average capital appreciation. It normally invests at least 80% of net assets in securities of issuers in Europe and the Pacific Basin. The fund may invest a portion of its assets in common stocks and other securities of companies in countries with developing economies and/or markets. ACWIexUS LgVal ACWIexUS LgGro 1 Portfolio Information Portfolio Characteristics Ticker RERGX American Funds MSCI EAFE Equity Style Box Large-Blend EuroPacific Gr R6 (Net) 0 Total Fund Net Assets $116.2B Turnover Ratio 31% - % Assets in Top 10 Holdings 17.7% Total Number of Holdings 416 944 Manager Name Stephen E. Bepler P/E Ratio 16.0 12.4 Manager Tenure 27.2 years P/B Ratio 2.0 1.4 -1 ACWIexUS SmVal ACWIexUS SmGro Fund Incept Date 04/16/1984 Avg. Mkt. Capitalization $37.5B - -1 0 1 Expense Ratio 0.50% American Funds EuroPacific Gr R6 MSCI EAFE (Net) Capture Ratios Jul-06 - Jun-11 Top Ten Holdings Sector Allocations 140 20 Novo Nordisk A/S 2.7% 19.0 % Basic Materials 120 Up Mkt Capture Ratio, % 18 America Movil S.A.B. de C.V. ADR L 2.7% % Communication Services 100 Softbank Corporation 1.9% 16 % Consumer Cyclical % Consumer Defensive 80 Bayer AG 1.8% 14 % Healthcare 60 Novartis AG 1.7% 12 10.5 11.0 10.6 10.6 % Industrials Daimler AG 1.6% 10.2 40 10 9.3 % Real Estate Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. 1.4% 8 8.1 7.1 % Technology 20 Nestle SA 1.4% % Energy 0 6 % Financial Services 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 HTC Corporation 1.3% 4 % Utilities Down Mkt Capture Ratio, % Anheuser-Busch InBev SA 1.1% 2 2.2 1.2 American Funds EuroPacific Gr R6 0 MSCI EAFE (Net) Market Capitalizations Developed/Emerging Market Allocations Batting Averages % Giant Cap 19.1% % Emerging Market Jul-06 - Jun-11 % Large Cap % Developed Country 5.9% % Medium Cap % Small Cap 0.5 Up Mkt Batting Average % Micro Cap 0.4 62.2% 0.3 0.2 31.9% 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 Down Mkt Batting Average 80.9% American Funds EuroPacific Gr R6 34

DFA Intl Value I as of June 30, 2011 Prospectus Investment Objective Returns-Based Equity Style Map The investment seeks long-term capital appreciation. The fund normally invests substantially all of its assets in the DFA International Value Series. The DFA International Value Series, using a market capitalization weighted approach, purchases stocks of large non-U.S. companies in countries Jul-06 - Jun-11 with developed markets that the Advisor determines to be value stocks. ACWIexUS LgVal ACWIexUS LgGro 1 Portfolio Information Portfolio Characteristics Ticker DFIVX DFA Intl MSCI EAFE Equity Style Box Large-Value Value I Value (Net) 0 Total Fund Net Assets $5.9B Turnover Ratio 20% - % Assets in Top 10 Holdings 17.0% Total Number of Holdings 542 510 Manager Name Karen E. Umland P/E Ratio 12.9 10.1 Manager Tenure 12.5 years P/B Ratio 1.0 1.1 -1 ACWIexUS SmVal ACWIexUS SmGro Fund Incept Date 02/15/1994 Avg. Mkt. Capitalization $22.7B - -1 0 1 Expense Ratio 0.45% DFA Intl Value I MSCI EAFE Value (Net) Capture Ratios Jul-06 - Jun-11 Top Ten Holdings Sector Allocations 140 30 Vodafone Group PLC ADR 3.1% 28.5 % Basic Materials 120 Up Mkt Capture Ratio, % Royal Dutch Shell PLC ADR B 3.1% % Communication Services 25 100 Daimler AG 1.9% % Consumer Cyclical % Consumer Defensive 80 GDF Suez 1.4% 20 % Healthcare 60 Suncor Energy, Inc. 1.4% % Industrials Vodafone Group PLC 1.3% 40 15 13.8 % Real Estate 12.9 Vivendi 1.3% 11.4 % Technology 20 Xstrata PLC 1.2% 10 9.5 % Energy 0 8.2 % Financial Services 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 Zurich Financial Services AG 1.2% 5 5.1 4.8 % Utilities Down Mkt Capture Ratio, % ArcelorMittal SA 1.2% 3.1 1.5 1.2 DFA Intl Value I 0 MSCI EAFE Value (Net) Market Capitalizations Developed/Emerging Market Allocations Batting Averages % Giant Cap % Emerging Market Jul-06 - Jun-11 % Large Cap % Developed Country 0.8 % Medium Cap 0.7 42.8% % Small Cap Up Mkt Batting Average 16.7% % Micro Cap 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 99.5% Down Mkt Batting Average 40.2% DFA Intl Value I 35

[This Page Intentionally Left Blank] 36

Fixed Income 37

This material is for internal and/or client reporting purposes only and may not be used Advanced Analytics Page 1 of 1 as sales material or by broker/dealers in connection with the sale of any security. Release Date: 06-30-2011 Vanguard Interm-Term Bond Index Signal EQ Style FI Style Morningstar Category AA Data updated through 06-30-2011 - Ì Medium/Lo Intermediate-term Bond Portfolio: Bond Quality Credit Quality % Credit Quality % Average AAA AA A BBB BB B Below B NR/NA As of 03-31-11 A 58 6 17 19 0 0 0 0 2010 A 55 6 20 19 0 0 0 0 2009 A 54 6 21 19 0 0 0 0 2008 A 58 5 22 15 0 0 0 0 ......................................................................................................................................................... Maturity and Duration Stated Maturity Range % Avg Eff Avg Eff Maturity Yr 1-3 Yr 3-5 Yr 5-7 Yr 7-10 Yr 10-15 Yr 15-20 Yr 20-30 Yr Duration As of 03-31-11 7.3 0.0 0.1 42.7 56.2 0.5 0.0 0.0 *6.3 2010 7.3 0.0 0.1 43.8 55.2 0.2 0.0 0.0 *6.3 2009 7.5 0.0 0.2 36.8 62.3 0.1 0.0 0.1 *6.3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Coupon and Price Coupon Range % Avg Wtd Avg Wtd Coupon % 0,PIK 0-8 8-11 11-13 13-14.5 +14.5 NA Price As of 03-31-11 4.78 0.00 94.22 4.50 0.05 0.00 0.00 1.23 107.06 2010 4.78 0.00 93.70 5.02 0.05 0.00 0.00 1.23 108.39 2009 5.39 0.00 89.90 7.96 0.82 0.00 0.00 1.32 107.01 * Provided by fund © 1996-2011 Morningstar, Inc. All rights reserved. 22 W. Washington Street, Chicago, IL, 60602, 312-696-6000 Although data are gathered from reliable sources, Morningstar cannot guarantee completeness and accuracy. ß Principia™ 38

This material is for internal and/or client reporting purposes only and may not be used Advanced Analytics Page 1 of 1 as sales material or by broker/dealers in connection with the sale of any security. Release Date: 06-30-2011 Vanguard Interm-Term Bond Index Signal EQ Style FI Style Morningstar Category AA Data updated through 06-30-2011 - Ì Medium/Lo Intermediate-term Bond Portfolio: Composition % of bonds % 100 90 80 Historical Range 70 High 60 03-31-11 50 Low 40 30 20 10 0 US Govt Mortgage Credit Foreign As of 03-31-11 56.1 0.0 32.3 11.5 3 year Average 53.8 0.4 34.6 11.2 2010 57.5 0.0 31.6 10.9 2009 50.3 1.1 36.8 11.8 2008 53.5 0.1 35.5 11.0 2007 52.2 0.0 43.5 4.2 2006 49.6 0.1 45.2 5.2 2005 48.1 0.1 46.4 5.4 2004 44.7 0.1 52.7 2.5 2003 43.5 0.1 53.9 2.5 © 1996-2011 Morningstar, Inc. All rights reserved. 22 W. Washington Street, Chicago, IL, 60602, 312-696-6000 Although data are gathered from reliable sources, Morningstar cannot guarantee completeness and accuracy. ß Principia™ 39

Vanguard Interm-Term Bond Index Signal as of June 30, 2011 Cumulative Returns 11 Annual Return vs. Annual Std. Dev. 10 Jul-06 - Jun-11 9 8 Total Annualized Return, % 7 Total Annualized Return, % 8 6 7 5 6 4 5 3 4 2 3 1 2 0 0 5 10 1 Total Annualized StdDev, % 0 QTR 1 Year 3 Years 5 Years 10 Years Vanguard Interm-Term Bond Index Signal BarCap US Govt/Credit 5-10 Yr Vanguard Interm-Term Bond Index Signal BarCap US Govt/Credit 5-10 Yr Capture Ratios QTR YTD 1 Year 3 Years 5 Years 10 Years Jul-06 - Jun-11 Vanguard Interm-Term Bond Index Signal 3.3 3.6 5.4 8.0 7.7 6.5 120 BarCap US Govt/Credit 5-10 Yr 3.3 3.7 5.5 8.0 7.6 6.7 100 Up Mkt Capture Ratio, % Peer Group Rankings: 80 Vanguard Interm-Term Bond Index Signal 1 14 42 28 13 12 60 BarCap US Govt/Credit 5-10 Yr 1 12 40 28 15 9 40 Consecutive Returns 30 20 25 0 20 0 20 40 60 80 100 Down Mkt Capture Ratio, % 15 Total Return, % Vanguard Interm-Term Bond Index Signal 10 BarCap US Govt/Credit 5-10 Yr 5 Batting Averages 0 Jul-06 - Jun-11 -5 -10 0.5 Up Mkt Batting Average -15 0.4 -20 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 0.3 Vanguard Interm-Term Bond Index Signal BarCap US Govt/Credit 5-10 Yr 0.2 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 0.1 Vanguard Interm-Term Bond Index Signal 9.5 6.9 5.0 7.7 3.9 1.8 5.2 5.6 10.9 BarCap US Govt/Credit 5-10 Yr 9.4 6.5 5.1 7.6 3.8 1.8 5.3 6.0 13.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 Peer Group Rankings: Down Mkt Batting Average Vanguard Interm-Term Bond Index Signal 16 82 14 6 65 71 12 29 7 Vanguard Interm-Term Bond Index Signal BarCap US Govt/Credit 5-10 Yr 16 84 14 7 73 64 10 25 1 40

This material is for internal and/or client reporting purposes only and may not be used Advanced Analytics Page 1 of 1 as sales material or by broker/dealers in connection with the sale of any security. Release Date: 06-30-2011 Vanguard Short-Term Bond Index Signal EQ Style FI Style Morningstar Category AA Data updated through 06-30-2011 - Ç High/Short Short-term Bond Portfolio: Bond Quality Credit Quality % Credit Quality % Average AAA AA A BBB BB B Below B NR/NA As of 03-31-11 AA 76 7 11 7 0 0 0 0 2010 AA 76 6 11 7 0 0 0 0 2009 AA 76 6 11 8 0 0 0 0 2008 AA 75 5 12 7 0 0 0 0 ......................................................................................................................................................... Maturity and Duration Stated Maturity Range % Avg Eff Avg Eff Maturity Yr 1-3 Yr 3-5 Yr 5-7 Yr 7-10 Yr 10-15 Yr 15-20 Yr 20-30 Yr Duration As of 03-31-11 2.7 58.5 40.4 1.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 *2.6 2010 2.7 56.8 41.8 1.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 *2.6 2009 2.7 60.3 38.9 0.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 *2.6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Coupon and Price Coupon Range % Avg Wtd Avg Wtd Coupon % 0,PIK 0-8 8-11 11-13 13-14.5 +14.5 NA Price As of 03-31-11 2.78 9.78 89.13 0.51 0.33 0.00 0.00 0.25 103.01 2010 2.84 8.73 90.32 0.59 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.34 103.54 2009 3.60 5.81 93.14 0.67 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.36 103.50 * Provided by fund © 1996-2011 Morningstar, Inc. All rights reserved. 22 W. Washington Street, Chicago, IL, 60602, 312-696-6000 Although data are gathered from reliable sources, Morningstar cannot guarantee completeness and accuracy. ß Principia™ 41

This material is for internal and/or client reporting purposes only and may not be used Advanced Analytics Page 1 of 1 as sales material or by broker/dealers in connection with the sale of any security. Release Date: 06-30-2011 Vanguard Short-Term Bond Index Signal EQ Style FI Style Morningstar Category AA Data updated through 06-30-2011 - Ç High/Short Short-term Bond Portfolio: Composition % of bonds % 100 90 80 Historical Range 70 High 60 03-31-11 50 Low 40 30 20 10 0 US Govt Mortgage Credit Foreign As of 03-31-11 70.0 0.0 20.2 9.8 3 year Average 67.6 0.3 22.7 9.3 2010 69.9 0.0 20.9 9.2 2009 65.3 1.0 24.0 9.6 2008 67.5 0.0 23.3 9.2 2007 66.9 0.6 30.2 2.3 2006 68.7 0.2 28.4 2.7 2005 70.1 0.1 26.4 3.4 2004 67.0 0.2 30.2 2.6 2003 61.7 0.4 36.5 1.4 © 1996-2011 Morningstar, Inc. All rights reserved. 22 W. Washington Street, Chicago, IL, 60602, 312-696-6000 Although data are gathered from reliable sources, Morningstar cannot guarantee completeness and accuracy. ß Principia™ 42

Vanguard Short-Term Bond Index Signal as of June 30, 2011 Cumulative Returns 7 Annual Return vs. Annual Std. Dev. 6 Jul-06 - Jun-11 6 Total Annualized Return, % Total Annualized Return, % 5 5 4 4 3 3 2 2 1 0 1 0 5 Total Annualized StdDev, % 0 QTR 1 Year 3 Years 5 Years 10 Years Vanguard Short-Term Bond Index Signal BarCap Govt/Credit 1-5 Yr Vanguard Short-Term Bond Index Signal BarCap Govt/Credit 1-5 Yr Capture Ratios QTR YTD 1 Year 3 Years 5 Years 10 Years Jul-06 - Jun-11 Vanguard Short-Term Bond Index Signal 1.5 1.7 2.7 4.5 5.3 4.3 120 BarCap Govt/Credit 1-5 Yr 1.5 1.8 2.8 4.6 5.3 4.6 100 Up Mkt Capture Ratio, % Peer Group Rankings: 80 Vanguard Short-Term Bond Index Signal 7 35 60 38 19 19 60 BarCap Govt/Credit 1-5 Yr 9 31 56 34 19 17 40 Consecutive Returns 20 20 15 0 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 10 Down Mkt Capture Ratio, % Total Return, % 5 Vanguard Short-Term Bond Index Signal BarCap Govt/Credit 1-5 Yr 0 Batting Averages -5 Jul-06 - Jun-11 -10 0.5 -15 Up Mkt Batting Average 0.4 -20 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 0.3 Vanguard Short-Term Bond Index Signal BarCap Govt/Credit 1-5 Yr 0.2 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 0.1 Vanguard Short-Term Bond Index Signal 4.0 4.4 5.5 7.3 4.1 1.3 1.7 3.4 6.1 BarCap Govt/Credit 1-5 Yr 4.1 4.6 5.1 7.3 4.2 1.4 1.8 3.4 8.1 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 Peer Group Rankings: Down Mkt Batting Average Vanguard Short-Term Bond Index Signal 45 84 2 2 59 77 45 30 37 Vanguard Short-Term Bond Index Signal BarCap Govt/Credit 1-5 Yr 44 83 3 2 50 64 40 30 8 43

Glossary Batting Average: Defined as the number of periods that the product outperforms the benchmark divided by the total number of periods for the entire evaluation period. It is a percentage indicating the probability of “value-added” performance by the product compared to the benchmark in a given date range. Down Market Capture Return: A measure of the manager’s performance in down markets relative to the market itself. This is an annualized semi-variance rate of return that represents a gain or loss generated during the market down periods. The return for the market for each quarter is considered a down market quarter if it is less than zero. Using those down quarters, the returns for the manager for all down quarters are linked and annualized to get this number. Please note that just because the market performance is down does not mean that the performance of the manager is down as well. Growth Equity: Equities that exhibit higher capital appreciation and earnings growth characteristics than the broad market. The issuing companies tend to have high earnings reinvestment rates and therefore, pay out little dividend. Growth stocks yp typically have high price-to-book ratios, high price-to-earnings ratios, high earnings growth rates, and low dividend yield. Market Capitalization: The product of the stock’s price per share by its number of shares outstanding. Price-to-Book Ratio: The ratio of current market price to the company’s latest reported book price per share. Price-to-Earnings Ratio: This ratio is the market price divided by the trailing twelve months’ earnings per share (EPS). Rate of Return: It is a tool for indicating and measuring performance, including appreciation (or depreciation), realized capital gains (or losses), and income. Indices are computed and then forward-linked to calculate a rate of return for the period under study for any type of weighting, i.e. time weighted, dollar weighted, etc. Returns can be calculated for any time period with a quarterly multiple factor. Most recent quarter represents three fiscal months. Standard Deviation: A measure of dispersion about an average in applied statistics. It is a good measure of the historical variability of the return earned by an investment manager. The assumption is the greater variability in the rate of return connotes greater risk undertaken in achieving the return. For example, one would prefer a portfolio that earns 5% each period to one that alternates between a return of zero in one period and 10% the next. A general rule is that, for any given rate of return, the lower the standard deviation the better; similarly, for any given standard deviation, the manager who provides the highest rate of return is best. Up Market Capture Return: A measure of the manager’s performance in up markets relative to the market itself. This is an annualized semi-variance rate of return that represents a gain or loss generated during the market up periods. The return for the market for each quarter is considered an up market quarter if it is greater than zero. Using those up quarters, the returns for the manager for all up quarters are linked and annualized to get this number. Please note that just because the market performance is up does not mean that the performance of the manager is up as well. Value Equity: Equities that are perceived to be undervalued relative to the broad market, and therefore have potential for capital appreciation in the future. Value equities are usually purchased when their price-to-book and price-to-earnings ratios are low; they tend to pay out earnings in dividends, therefore their dividend yield is higher than the market. 44

1407 Foulk Road, Suite 100 City of Dover Wilmington, DE 19803 Global Equity Search 300 South High Street West Chester, PA 19382 August 2011 Ph: (610) 719-0300 Fax: (610) 719-8345 www.Peircepark.com

Table of Contents I. Introduction (Page 1) II. Manager Information (Page 2) III. Fund Returns and Statistics (Page 8) IV. Glossary (Page 15) V. Disclosure (Page 16)

Process It was determined that the best fit would be a Global “Core-Growth” fund that would replace the domestic growth funds currently on the watch-list: Royce Value Plus & American Funds Growth Fund of America. 1

Fund Comparison American Funds New Harding Loevner Global Thornburg Global Perspective R6 Equity Inst'l Opportunities R5 Ticker RNPGX HLMVX THOFX Equity Style Core/Growth Growth Core Expense Ratio 0.46% 1.00% 0.99% Number of Holdings 249 66 36 Turnover Ratio 24% 35% 66% % Assets in Top 10 Holdings 16.7% 27.7% 40.4% Avg Mkt Cap (in $billions) $42.6 $32.3 $12.4 Fund Inception Date 3/13/1973 11/29/1996 7/28/2006 Redemption Fee N/A 2.00% N/A Redemption Fee Terms N/A if redeemed within 90 days N/A 2

Fund Comparison American Funds New Harding Loevner Global Thornburg Global Perspective R6 Equity Inst'l Opportunities R5 % Mega Cap Stocks 59.1% 45.6% 32.1% % Large Cap Stocks 32.0% 38.2% 23.8% % Mid Cap Stocks 8.6% 14.3% 23.2% % Small Cap Stocks 0.3% 1.9% 16.8% % Micro Cap Stocks 0.0% 0.0% 4.2% % Developed Markets 92.3% 90.1% 89.8% % Emerging Markets 7.7% 9.9% 10.2% Typical Fund Characteristics: • Tilted more toward • Tilted more toward • Will invest in a range of large/mega cap stocks. large/mega cap stocks – will capitalizations. go into mid cap space. • Low tracking error relative to • Concentrated portfolio – its benchmark. • Relatively low tracking error small number of holdings – versus its benchmark. 30-35. • Low turnover (20%-40% per year). • Decent down market • Tends to have high tracking protection and high down error and high volatility. • Lower than average expense market batting average. ratio. • Investments diversified • Pure growth strategy. among three distinct strategies – basic value, consistent earners and emerging franchises. 3

City of Dover: Global Search Sector Distributions American Funds New Thornburg Global Harding Loevner 40 Perspective R6 Opportunities R5 Global Equity Inst 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 % Basic Materials % Communication Services % Consumer Cyclical % Consumer Defensive % Healthcare % Industrials % Real Estate % Technology % Energy % Financial Services % Utilities Regional Allocations American Funds New Thornburg Global Harding Loevner 60 Perspective R6 Opportunities R5 Global Equity Inst 50 40 30 20 10 0 % United States % Canada % Latin America % United Kingdom % Eurozone % Europe - ex Euro % Europe - Emerging % Africa % Middle East % Japan % Australasia % Asia - Developed % Asia - Emerging All mutual fund returns are net of fees. 4

American Funds New Perspective • Capital Research and Management Company (CRM) is the investment manager. American Funds distributes and serves as the transfer agent for American Funds mutual funds. • CRM is one of the largest mutual fund managers in the world, managing over $1 trillion in global assets. • Over $350 billion in global/international assets. Portfolio Management • Seven portfolio counselors each manage a portion of the strategy’s assets. • Each counselor has been with CRM for over 14 years. Average firm tenure is 22 years. • Investment decisions are made independently by each counselor. • Compensation is heavily influenced by investment results. Performance is measured over rolling four- and eight-year periods. • Resources pooled from a global network of analysts and portfolio counselors. • Most portfolio counselors are generalists, whereas research analysts are specialists. Investment Process & Philosophy • Extensive research is performed to determine the difference between the fundamental value of a company and its price in the marketplace. • Diversifies among blue chip companies in the U.S. and abroad focusing on opportunities generated by changes in global trade patterns and economic and political relationships. • “Bottom-up”, fundamental stock-pickers. Analysts evaluate a number of factors, including company fundamentals, stock characteristics and long-term outlook. 5

Harding Loevner Global Equity • Founded in 1989. 60% of firm is owned by Affliated Managers Group, Inc. 40% is employee owned. • Manages more than $13 billion in assets. Almost exclusively in equities. • Strategies include: International, International Small Companies, Global, Emerging Markets and Frontier Markets. Portfolio Management • Strategy consists of two “lead” portfolio managers and one “auxiliary” portfolio manager. • Lead portfolio managers have been with the firm for over 14 years. • Approximately 25 investment professionals share in research. All portfolio managers are analysts. • Compensation includes a base salary, a bonus and a long-term incentive compensation plan tied to exceeding the performance of a benchmark tied to their respective sector of expertise. Investment Process & Philosophy • Believes that shares of high-quality, growing companies, purchased at reasonable prices, will provide superior risk-adjusted returns over the long-term. • Defines four quality growth criteria that a company must exhibit before it will be considered for investment: Capable Management:, Competitive Advantage, Durable Growth and Financial Strength. • Investment methodology is based upon two principles: 1) Insights gained through the careful study of individual companies (“bottom- up analysis”) are more valuable than market (“top-down”) forecasts; and 2) An understanding of the global competitive structure of industries is crucial for identifying the best companies worldwide. • Sector and country allocations in the portfolio are primarily the results of individual stock selection, and are not determined by a top- down country or sector allocation process. However, analysts take into account relevant country and industry macro factors for each company they research. 6

Thornburg Global Opportunities • Established in 1982. Privately held and based in Santa Fe, New Mexico. • Manages over $83 billion in assets. Over $500 million is managed in the global equity strategy. • Majority of assets under management reside in mutual funds. Firm also offers separate accounts and commingled trusts. Portfolio Management • Brian McMahon is a co-portfolio manager of the fund. • CEO and CIO of Thornburg Investment Management. Has been with Thornburg for over 27 years. • Vinson Walden is a co-portfolio manager of the fund. • Joined Thornburg in 2002. Has over 18 years of investment experience. • Portfolio managers are supported by a team of approximately 17 analysts. • All portfolio managers are equity owners of the firm. • Investment team members are considered global generalists, though a number of them have specialized knowledge in certain areas based on their backgrounds. Investment Process & Philosophy • Utilizes an active, bottom-up investment philosophy, seeking to buy promising companies with sound business fundamentals at a time when their intrinsic value is not fully recognized by the marketplace. • Defines value in three categories: Basic Value, Consistent Earners, and Emerging Franchises. • Key considerations include; 1) understanding the business model (financial strength, profitability, marginal costs, revenue stream characteristics); 2) market leadership (brand equity, market share, competitive landscape, pricing power); and 3) corporate culture (alignment with shareholders, management ability and ambition, management execution). 7

Fund Returns and Statistics 8

City of Dover: Global Search Cumulative Returns Aug-01 - Jul-11 25 20 Total Annualized Return, % 15 10 5 0 1 Year 3 Years 5 Years 10 Years American Funds New Perspective R6 Harding Loevner Global Equity Inst Thornburg Global Opportunities R5 MSCI World (Net) 1 Year 3 Years 5 Years 10 Years American Funds New Perspective R6 19.0 4.0 5.3 6.9 Harding Loevner Global Equity Inst 18.4 4.3 5.5 6.1 Thornburg Global Opportunities R5 23.2 3.7 9.9 NA MSCI World (Net) 18.5 0.7 1.8 3.9 All mutual fund returns are net of fees. 9

City of Dover: Global Search Consecutive Returns 50 40 30 20 Total Annualized Return, % 10 0 -10 -20 -30 -40 -50 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 American Funds New Perspective R6 Harding Loevner Global Equity Inst Thornburg Global Opportunities R5 MSCI World (Net) 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 American Funds New Perspective R6 13.1 37.7 -37.8 16.0 19.9 11.3 14.3 36.8 -16.1 Harding Loevner Global Equity Inst 15.6 40.2 -38.3 16.4 17.8 16.7 7.6 31.5 -19.0 Thornburg Global Opportunities R5 15.8 46.7 -47.8 31.9 NA NA NA NA NA MSCI World (Net) 11.8 30.0 -40.7 9.0 20.1 9.5 14.7 33.1 -19.9 All mutual fund returns are net of fees. 10

City of Dover: Global Search Quarterly Returns in Excess of MSCI World (Net) 12 10 8 6 Excess Return, % 4 2 0 -2 -4 -6 -8 Oct-06 Jan-07 Apr-07 Jul-07 Oct-07 Jan-08 Apr-08 Jul-08 Oct-08 Jan-09 Apr-09 Jul-09 Oct-09 Jan-10 Apr-10 Jul-10 Oct-10 Jan-11 Apr-11 Jul-11 American Funds New Perspective R6 Harding Loevner Global Equity Inst Thornburg Global Opportunities R5 Distribution of Monthly Returns in Excess of MSCI World (Net) Aug-06 - Jul-11 45 40 35 30 Frequency, % 25 20 15 10 5 0 -5.00 -4.00 -3.00 -2.00 -1.00 0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 -5.00 7.00 -4.00 -3.00 -2.00 -1.00 0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00 -5.00 -4.00 -3.00 -2.00 -1.00 0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00 Excess Return, % American Funds New Perspective R6 Harding Loevner Global Equity Inst Thornburg Global Opportunities R5 All mutual fund returns are net of fees. 11

City of Dover: Global Search Capture Ratios Batting Average Aug-06 - Jul-11 Aug-06 - Jul-11 140 1.0 135 0.9 130 0.8 125 Up Mkt Capture Ratio, % 0.7 Up Mkt Batting Average 120 115 0.6 110 0.5 105 0.4 100 0.3 95 0.2 90 85 0.1 80 0.0 80 85 90 95 100 105 110 115 120 125 130 135 140 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 Down Mkt Capture Ratio, % Down Mkt Batting Average Alpha vs. Tracking Error Performance vs. Volatility Aug-06 - Jul-11 Aug-06 - Jul-11 9 11 8 10 9 7 8 Total Annualized Return, % 6 7 5 6 Alpha, % 4 5 4 3 3 2 2 1 1 0 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Tracking Error, % Total Annualized StdDev, % American Funds New Perspective R6 Harding Loevner Global Equity Inst Thornburg Global Opportunities R5 MSCI World (Net) American Funds New Harding Loevner Thornburg Global MSCI World Perspective R6 Global Equity Inst Opportunities R5 (Net) Information Ratio 1.02 1.01 1.07 NA Beta 0.94 0.94 1.15 1.00 Sharpe Ratio 0.18 0.19 0.34 -0.01 Tracking Error, % 3.47 3.71 7.63 0.00 All mutual fund returns are net of fees. 12

City of Dover: Global Search Performance Extremes Best Monthly Return Worst Monthly Return Best 3 Month Return Worst 3 Month Return Max Drawdown Return Max Run Up Return 150 141.1 125 100 99.6 96.2 93.8 75 50 Return, % 41.4 33.0 30.4 29.1 25 15.9 9.8 10.7 11.2 0 -18.3 -18.7 -19.0 -25 -23.3 -31.4 -32.7 -33.2 -40.1 -50 -49.1 -48.7 -54.0 -60.9 -75 Aug-06 - Jul-11 Aug-06 - Jul-11 Aug-06 - Jul-11 Aug-06 - Jul-11 Aug-06 - Jul-11 Aug-06 - Jul-11 American Funds New Perspective R6 Harding Loevner Global Equity Inst Thornburg Global Opportunities R5 MSCI World (Net) All mutual fund returns are net of fees. 13

City of Dover: Global Search Returns-Based Style Analysis Aug-06 - Jul-11 MSCI The World Index Style American Funds New Perspective R6 Harding Loevner Global Equity Inst Thornburg Global Opportunities R5 MSCI World (Net) MSCI World Large Value MSCI World Large Growth 1 Small-Large 0 -1 MSCI World Small Value MSCI World Small Growth -1 0 1 Value-Growth All mutual fund returns are net of fees. 14

Glossary Batting Average: Defined as the number of periods that the product outperforms the benchmark divided by the total number of periods for the entire evaluation period. It is a percentage indicating the probability of “value-added” performance by the product compared to the benchmark in a given date range. Down Market Capture Return: A measure of the manager’s performance in down markets relative to the market itself. This is an annualized semi-variance rate of return that represents a gain or loss generated during the market down periods. The return for the market for each quarter is considered a down market quarter if it is less than zero. Using those down quarters, the returns for the manager for all down quarters are linked and annualized to get this number. Please note that just because the market performance is down does not mean that the performance of the manager is down as well. Growth Equity: Equities that exhibit higher capital appreciation and earnings growth characteristics than the broad market. The issuing companies tend to have high earnings reinvestment rates and therefore, pay out little dividend. Growth stocks yp typically have high price-to-book ratios, high price-to-earnings ratios, high earnings growth rates, and low dividend yield. Market Capitalization: The product of the stock’s price per share by its number of shares outstanding. Price-to-Book Ratio: The ratio of current market price to the company’s latest reported book price per share. Price-to-Earnings Ratio: This ratio is the market price divided by the trailing twelve months’ earnings per share (EPS). Rate of Return: It is a tool for indicating and measuring performance, including appreciation (or depreciation), realized capital gains (or losses), and income. Indices are computed and then forward-linked to calculate a rate of return for the period under study for any type of weighting, i.e. time weighted, dollar weighted, etc. Returns can be calculated for any time period with a quarterly multiple factor. Most recent quarter represents three fiscal months. Standard Deviation: A measure of dispersion about an average in applied statistics. It is a good measure of the historical variability of the return earned by an investment manager. The assumption is the greater variability in the rate of return connotes greater risk undertaken in achieving the return. For example, one would prefer a portfolio that earns 5% each period to one that alternates between a return of zero in one period and 10% the next. A general rule is that, for any given rate of return, the lower the standard deviation the better; similarly, for any given standard deviation, the manager who provides the highest rate of return is best. Up Market Capture Return: A measure of the manager’s performance in up markets relative to the market itself. This is an annualized semi-variance rate of return that represents a gain or loss generated during the market up periods. The return for the market for each quarter is considered an up market quarter if it is greater than zero. Using those up quarters, the returns for the manager for all up quarters are linked and annualized to get this number. Please note that just because the market performance is up does not mean that the performance of the manager is up as well. Value Equity: Equities that are perceived to be undervalued relative to the broad market, and therefore have potential for capital appreciation in the future. Value equities are usually purchased when their price-to-book and price-to-earnings ratios are low; they tend to pay out earnings in dividends, therefore their dividend yield is higher than the market. 15

General Disclosure Past performance is not indicative of future performance. Peirce Park Group made every reasonable effort to ensure the accuracy of the data provided in this r p eport. However, we cannot guarantee its accuracy. Sources of i f r r nformation i l nclude: M r i orningstar, MSCI Barra, V t eVestment Alliance, American Funds, Harding Loevner, Thornburg Investment Management. 16