Concordia University, Nebraska & Concordia Foundation,...

Concordia University, Nebraska & Concordia Foundation, Inc.September 30, 2012

Exceeding Your Expectations

500 West Madison Street, Suite 1700 | Chicago, IL 60661 | 312.853.1000

QUARTERLY CONSIDERATIONS

GENERAL Summer Rally – The S&P 500 advanced an impressive 2.6% in September, ironically in what has historically been the worst month for stocks. For the 3rd quarter, the S&P 500

and Russell 2000 returned 6.4% and 5.3%, respectively. Meanwhile, the EAFE Index rose 7.0%.

Tensions Rise – A gloom presides over Wall Street as investors ponder lowered earnings expectations, a January “fiscal cliff” and election uncertainty. The contrarian view is that attractive P/E ratios, large amounts of corporate cash and improving unemployment figures will further drive equity markets.

Things to Come? – California legislature recently passed a bill that creates a savings plan to cover over 6 million private sector employees with no workplace retirement benefit. The plan could serve as a national model and mean a bigger government role in retirement plans.

DSA News – More office space, enhanced research and talented new hires support our continued growth. With a focus on exceeding your expectations, we sincerely appreciate

your ongoing support, referrals and feedback.

PLAN SPONSORS A Non-Event – For all the time, effort and dollars spent on fee disclosure, participant notifications were met with little to no response. A case in point: Fidelity delivered 16.2 million

notices and received only 1,300 participant calls. Fee Link – The DOL announced the availability of a new 401(k) fee disclosure website as a resource for consumers. The “Understanding Your Retirement Plan Fees” website is

available at http://www.dol.gov/ebsa/publications/understandingretirementfees.html. Less Benefit – The percentage of large U.S. employers that offer a defined benefit pension plan to new salaried employees continues to fall, according to Towers

Watson. As of June 30th, 30% of Fortune 100 companies offered new employees a defined benefit plan compared to 90% of Fortune 100 companies in 1998.

NON-PROFIT ORGANIZATIONS Great Strides – 403(b) plan sponsors continue to migrate closer to their 401(k) counterparts. More 403(b) plans are implementing a Roth feature, using target date funds as

their default option and conducting periodic investment reviews. Please contact us to benchmark your Plan. Direct Funding – Endowments and foundations have become predominately direct investors in hedge funds, private equity and real assets. In a recent survey of $1 billion plus

institutions, only 27% cite active use of hedge fund of funds and 20% employ private equity fund of funds. THE WEALTH OFFICE™ Over the Edge – The looming “fiscal cliff” has many investors worried. The “fiscal cliff” refers to the set of tax increases and spending reductions set to take place if

Congress fails to act on these issues before the end of the year. Contact The Wealth OfficeTM for more information about how the “fiscal cliff” may affect your investment portfolio.

Year-End Dash – It’s that time of year again…Whether it’s annual gifting or a required minimum distribution from an IRA account, The Wealth OfficeTM can help you ensure all your 2012 initiatives are completed prior to the end of the year.

Up, Up, and Away – No doubt about it, taxes are set to rise. Beginning next year, an additional 3.8% tax on investment income is set to be implemented to help cover the cost of the Affordable Care Act. Also, if Congress elects to allow the Bush-era tax cuts to expire, the long-term capital gains tax rate will increase from the current 15% to 20%. Contact The Wealth OfficeTM to determine how rising taxes may impact your investment strategy going forward.

2


ECONOMY The Federal Reserve continues to keep rates on hold in the 0% to 0.25% range. Following the September FOMC meeting, the Fed extended the time period for which it

anticipates exceptionally low rates to at least mid-2015 and announced a third round of quantitative easing, citing the decline in U.S. labor market participation as a catalyst. The next FOMC meeting is scheduled for October 23rd-24th, 2012.

U.S. GDP advanced 1.3% in the prior quarter according to the Bureau of Economic Analysis. Positive contributions came from exports, personal consumption expenditures (PCE), and residential and nonresidential fixed investment. These were partly offset by negative contributions from private inventory investment, and state and local government spending. The third quarter GDP advance estimate is due out on October 26th, 2012.

According to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, the unemployment rate unexpectedly fell from 8.1% in August to 7.8% in September, its lowest level since January 2009. As Election Day edges closer, October’s unemployment figures scheduled to be released on November 2nd could provide a clue as to which candidate has a better chance to win the presidential race.

The housing market showed signs of improvement. Data through July for the S&P/Case-Shiller Index indicated home prices increased. Meanwhile, the pace of home re-sales rose in August to the fastest pace in more than two years. Mortgage rates continued to decline with rates for a 30-year fixed rate ending September at 3.43%, near a record low.

On the political front, the November 6th U.S. presidential elections will take center stage. Interestingly, which party gains control of Congress may have an even bigger impact on the economy than the actual race for the White House itself, since policymakers in the House and Senate will determine how to resolve the “fiscal cliff”.

26.5

31.9

30.2

30.6

28.0

14.3

5.0

5.3

6.4

6.5

5.6

7.0

DJIA

Russell 2000

S&P 500

NASDAQ

Russell Mid Cap

MSCI EAFE

Broad Equity Market Index Returns Ending 9/30/12

QTR

1 Year

U.S. EQUITY MARKETS The expectation of and delivering on the Federal Reserve’s quantitative easing, in conjunction with continued support from the European Central Bank of its member countries,

helped move the U.S. equity market up after a difficult second quarter.

The S&P 500 Index increased 6.4% during the quarter leaving its forward price-to-earnings (P/E) at 12.9x.The ratio rose from 12.3x in the second quarter, but remains below the 10-year average of 14.3x.

The technology-heavy NASDAQ Composite and the blue-chip oriented Dow Jones Industrial Average also followed suit during the quarter with positive returns of 6.5% and 5.0%, respectively.

Value stocks across large-, mid- and small-capitalizations broke the trend and outperformed growth stocks. Year-to-date that pushes small- and mid-cap value stocks ahead of growth while large-cap value still trails large-cap growth.

There were 29 U.S. IPOs in the third quarter of 2012, compared to 31 IPOs in the second quarter of 2012, and 21 IPOs in the third quarter of 2011.Total proceeds raised in the third quarter were $6.6 billion, compared to $21.8 billion in the second quarter of 2012 (which included the $16 billion Facebook IPO), and $3.2 billion in the third quarter of 2011.

3


U.S. EQUITY SECTORS Cyclical sectors led the way in performance during the third quarter, a possible reflection of rising consumer confidence. The University of Michigan Survey of Consumer

Confidence Sentiment index rose from 73.2 in June to 78.3 in September.

Energy was the top performing sector with a 10.1% return. During the quarter Hurricane Isaac made landfall on the Gulf Coast, Iran maintained its threat of closing the Straits of Hormuz and geopolitical tensions rose with continued unrest in the Middle East culminating in the murder of J. Christopher Stevens, the U.S. Ambassador to Libya. These factors pushed crude oil higher to $92.19/barrel, which provided a tailwind for energy companies. Phillips 66, a spinoff of ConocoPhillips performed particularly well rising 40%.

Consumer discretionary stocks rallied 7.5% bringing their one-year advancement to 36.6%. Early back-to-school programs, in addition to the aforementioned increased consumer confidence, have helped increase these 2012 gains.

Telecommunications services stocks had a strong quarter with an 8.1% increase. Driving this sector was the consumer services industry group. Sprint and MetroPCS led the way rising 69% and 94%, respectively. Each stock rallied on stronger-than-expected earnings and a rumor that the two firms would merge.

After performing the best in the downturn during the second quarter, defensive sectors lagged the broader index in the third quarter. Utilities was the only sector to post a negative return for the quarter of -0.5%. Healthcare helped defensive stock returns by posting a 6.2% gain. These gains were driven largely by biotechnology stocks. In particular, Gilead Sciences and Celgene were up 29% and 19%, respectively.

3.8 6.2 7.0 7.5 8.1

-0.5

10.1 5.1 3.6 7.5

24.3 29.5 34.8 32.4 35.8

12.927.1 29.2 29.6

36.6

Consumer Staples

Health Care Financials Information Technology

Telecom Utilities Energy Materials Industrials Consumer Discretionary

Market Returns by Major Sectors of S&P 500 Index, Third Quarter 2012QTR 1 Year

REAL ESTATE Global REITs gained 5.7%. Movements in the U.S. REIT market were influenced by the risk-on/risk-off gyrations in the equity market coupled with concerns related to political

uncertainty and the looming “fiscal cliff”. U.S. REITs rose 2.0% in July, were flat in August and fell 1.8% in September. From a sector perspective, industrial and retail were the top performers in the U.S. REIT market, driven primarily by improving fundamentals and increased leasing momentum. Apartments trailed due to rising supply and weakening tenant demand. Asian REITs outperformed for the quarter, largely due to the coordinated stimulative monetary measures implemented by major central banks. Among the top performers were Hong Kong Real Estate Operating Companies (REOCs) and Singapore REITs. European REITs also posted moderate advances for the quarter, led by Italy, Sweden, Norway, and the UK. European property markets rebounded as a result of increased investor optimism regarding a resolution to the European debt crisis.

U.S. EQUITY MARKETS (continued) The HFRI Fund Weighted Composite Index advanced 2.9% and the HFRI Fund of Funds Composite Index rose 2.3% during the quarter, according to Hedge Fund

Research (HFR). HFR noted hedge funds were positive each month of the quarter despite continued conservative positioning. Relative Value was the best performing strategy for the quarter and continues to lead all strategies year-to-date. Equity Hedge and Event Driven managers also produced solid gains as the equity markets steadily rallied and select distressed liquidations distributed meaningful cash flows. Tactical Trading ended the quarter positive despite giving up ground in August and September due to Systematic strategies continuing to struggle with intra-month reversals.

The Alerian MLP Index advanced 8.9% during the third quarter with a dividend yield of 6.2%. Key drivers of performance were the more commodity sensitive sectors. “Other”, which includes refining and fertilizer companies, advanced 31%. Gathering & Processing (+14.6%), Oil & Gas Production (+13.5%) and Propane (12.6%) also outperformed the broad market.

4

QUARTERLY CONSIDERATIONS COMMODITIES

After declining nearly 5% in the second quarter, commodities as a group snapped back during the third quarter, as the Dow Jones-UBS Commodity Index returned 9.7%. Central bank monetary policy initiatives and general uncertainty with respect to financial assets contributed to commodity price gains. Within agricultural commodities, grains were a strong performing sub-sector as prices rose sharply resulting from the severe drought in the nation’s heartland. Soybean, wheat and corn prices advanced 12%, 17% and 19%, respectively. Tight supply/demand fundamentals, coupled with increasing geopolitical tensions propelled the gains in energy commodities. Gasoline prices rose nearly 25%.

9.7 11.9 15.8 8.6

-5.8

13.4 13.4

-3.3

6.0

-2.3

38.9

6.1

-11.4

19.79.7

-21.5DJ - UBS

CommodityEnergy Grains Industrial Metals Livestock Petroleum Precious Metals Softs

DJ UBS Commodity Returns, Third Quarter 2012QTR 1 Year

FIXED INCOME MARKETS The yield curve shifted lower for all maturities with the exception of the 30-year following the Federal Reserve’s announcement of a new round of quantitative easing that will

obligate the Fed to purchase $40 billion of mortgage-backed securities each month. Additionally, the Fed extended “Operation Twist” through the end of 2012 and stated its expectations that interest rates will remain low through 2015. However, ongoing debt issues in Europe remain at the forefront of investors’ minds, and contributed to yield volatility during the quarter despite little change in yields. TIPS returned 2.1% for the quarter, outperforming U.S. Treasuries. The 10-year breakeven inflation rate is currently 1.9%, and the 10-year TIPS yield remains below zero at -0.3%.

Yield Curve Ending 09/30/12 Historical Yield Spreads vs 10-Year Notes Ending 09/30/12

0.1 0.23

0.621.65

2.82

0.09 0.330.72

1.67

2.76

3 Mo. 2 Year 5 Year 10 Year 30 Year

9/30/2012 6/30/2012

-

2

4

6

8

10

12

Agency Corporate AA Corporate BB

Investment grade corporates returned 3.5% during the third quarter. Credit spreads narrowed somewhat as corporate yields ticked down modestly and Treasury yields were mostly unchanged. Financials drove the performance in the corporate sector, posting a 5.1% return versus 3.3% in industrials and 3.2% in utilities. According to JPMorgan, new issuance of $200 billion in investment grade corporates was strong during the quarter, representing a growth rate of 45% year-over-year compared to 3Q 2011. High yield spreads also narrowed, which resulted in the sector outperforming Treasuries.

Mortgage-backed securities (MBS) rose modestly as the result of historically low interest rates and the Fed’s recent announcement of quantitative easing. However, MBS returns were low compared to the other spread sectors such as corporates, which have continued to improve in credit quality. Commercial mortgage-backed securities (CMBS) returned 3.9% during the quarter as commercial real estate values continue to stabilize. Asset-backed securities (ABS) returned 1.2% but lagged corporates which remain more attractive on a spread basis for investors looking for yield.

Municipal bonds returned 2.3%, outperforming Treasuries but lagging corporates. From a sector perspective, returns on revenue bonds were mostly in-line with general obligation bonds (GOs), with housing-related revenue bonds returning under 2% for the quarter. According to JPMorgan, muni yields remain at 122% of comparable Treasury yields, which ranks above the 10-year average of approximately 100%, but far below the peak position of 220% reached during the financial crisis of 2008-09.

5


FIXED INCOME MARKETS (continued) International bonds generated a 4% return on an unhedged basis and a 1.8% return on a hedged basis. In Europe, debt concerns related to Spain and Italy subsided somewhat

as “Super” Mario Draghi announced an unlimited purchasing program to support the sovereign debt of EU countries. Emerging markets debt returned 4.8% as demand for yield remained in focus. Economic growth in China is expected to be strong relative to the rest of the world, although subdued relative to recent year results. The Indian government has taken measures to revive economic growth and reduce the budget deficit, while Brazil’s central bank cut rates to spur growth.

1.6 0.6 0.8 1.1 1.2 3.9 3.5 2.1 1.4 4.4 4.4 4.8 4.8 4.0 1.85.2 3.0 2.6 3.7 3.7

12.0 10.1 9.1 4.6

17.7 18.724.2

12.7

3.5 4.9

Barclays Aggregate

Treasuries Agencies Mortgage-Backed

Securities

Asset-Backed

Securities

CMBS Investment-Grade

Corporates

TIPS ML Muni 3-7 Yr

High Yield BB

High Yield B

High Yield CCC

Emerging Mkt Debt

Non-US$ Bonds

(unhedged)

Non-US$ Bonds

(hedged)

Fixed Income Returns by Major Sectors Third Quarter 2012QTR 1 Year

INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPED MARKETS International developed markets advanced during the quarter, with the MSCI EAFE Index rising 7%. Sectors such as financial services, healthcare and consumer staples were

among the top performers, while utilities, consumer discretionary and information technology underperformed. International value stocks outperformed international growth stocks with the MSCI EAFE Value Index ending up 7.6% and the MSCI EAFE Growth Index rising 6.4%. Across

market capitalizations, international small caps fared better than international large caps, with the MSCI EAFE Small Cap Index advancing 7.9%. The U.S. dollar weakened against most major currencies during the third quarter as the fast-approaching “fiscal cliff” and the Federal Reserve’s open-ended quantitative

easing put the U.S. dollar under pressure. Meanwhile, the European Central Bank’s announcement of the Outright Monetary Transactions (OMT) reduced break-up risk and supported the Euro.

2.1 2.03.6 4.2

1.1

4.01.7 1.7

-4.4-1.2

3.57.0

1.5

5.7

-3.6

6.5

Euro Japanese yen British pound Mexican peso Chinese yuan Canadian dollar Swiss franc Australian dollar

Currency Returns versus U.S. Dollar, Third Quarter 2012QTR 1 YEAR

For the quarter, the MSCI Canada Index gained 11%. The Bank of Canada left interest rates on hold amid lingering downside pressures from slowing U.S. and global growth. The major strength of the Canadian economy is trade, and weak global economic health is dampening export growth. In corporate news, Calgary-based oil and natural gas producer Nexen agreed to be acquired by China National Offshore Oil Corp. (CNOOC) for $15 billion in cash. The deal, which is pending Canadian government approval, would be the largest overseas takeover by a Chinese company in history.

The MSCI Europe Index advanced 9%. In early July, the European Central Bank cut rates to a record low of 0.75% as financial and political tensions in the Eurozone persisted. Unemployment in the Eurozone remains at a record 11.4%, with northern countries exhibiting lower levels than southern countries. Eurozone unemployment among the youth is particularly troubling, with the rate among those under 25 hitting 23%. The jobless rate among the young workforce in Spain and Greece stands at a staggering 53% and 55%, respectively. Among the largest European markets, France and Italy gained 7% and 8%, respectively. Meanwhile, Germany rallied 14%, while Spain advanced 12%.

6


INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPED MARKETS (continued) The MSCI United Kingdom Index ended up 7% during the third quarter as the Bank of England voted to keep rates on hold at 0.5% but increased the size of its asset purchase

program in early July, citing lingering inflation concerns and a weak economic outlook. While indicators point to a very slow recovery, most economists expect Britain to emerge from recession in the most recent quarter as sales from the London Olympics and Paralympics likely boosted growth.

The MSCI Japan Index fell 1% as the Bank of Japan moved aggressively and eased monetary policy by boosting its asset-buying program as growth waned due to weakening

exports and a prolonged slowdown in China. Meanwhile, relations with China, which is Japan’s largest trading partner, are at their lowest in years over a territorial dispute of a set of uninhabited islands in the East China Sea. On the political front, Prime Minister Yoshihiko Noda fended off a challenge as leader of the ruling Democratic Party of Japan. However, with plunging poll ratings most analysts expect Noda will be forced to call for elections by early next year amid lack of progress on the issues facing the country.

The MSCI Pacific ex-Japan Index rallied 11%. Hong Kong rose 13% despite reduced demand for goods and services from mainland China. Australia gained 11% amid

improving consumer sentiment and low unemployment. In October, the Reserve Bank of Australia surprised economists by cutting rates by 25 basis points to 3.25%, reacting to evidence the mining investment boom that has underpinned the country's economic growth is fading. New Zealand soared 16% and was the top performing developed market.

7.1

2.5

8.96.6 6.9 5.8 5.2

2.51.4

11.4

7.0

-0.4

11.1 10.9

5.5 4.67.9

10.6 11.17.3

Consumer Staples Utilities Healthcare Energy Materials Industrials Telecom Consumer Discretionary

Info Technology Financials

International Equity Market Returns by Major Sectors, Third Quarter 2012

MSCI EAFE MSCI EM (emerging markets)

INTERNATIONAL EMERGING MARKETS The MSCI EM Index advanced 8% during the third quarter. Healthcare, energy and information technology were among the top performing sectors, while utilities, materials and

industrials underperformed. The MSCI EM Latin America Index advanced 5%. Brazil gained 5% as the central bank cut interest rates twice by a total of 100 basis points to 7.5%, a historic low, in an effort

to promote economic growth. To help solve infrastructure challenges ahead of the 2014 World Cup and the 2016 Olympics, Brazil’s government announced a $66 billion stimulus package. Mexico rose 7% as newly elected President Enrique Pena Nieto pushed through pro-business labor reforms. A dual U.S./Mexico listing of Banco Santander's Mexican unit became the second largest IPO in the U.S. this year behind Facebook and the largest ever for a Mexican company.

The MSCI EM Asia Index gained 9%. South Korea rallied 10% as the central bank trimmed rates in July and early October by a total of 50 basis points to 2.75%. To further

stimulate the South Korean economy, officials unveiled a $5.3 billion stimulus package in the form of temporary tax relief for big ticket household consumption items. India rallied 15% as officials announced a series of reforms, including a reduction of gasoline subsidies. Prime Minister Singh has been under intense pressure to reduce India’s fiscal deficit by cutting spending for subsidies, particularly on fuel. China advanced 5% as the central bank continued to lower rates to jumpstart the world’s second largest economy.

The EMEA (Eastern Europe, Middle East and Africa) Index rose 9%. Within Eastern Europe, Russia ended up 9% as higher oil prices bolstered energy-related stocks. In the

Middle East, Turkey gained 8% and is now among the best performing emerging markets year-to-date, up nearly 40%. South Africa advanced 7% as global stimulus measures sparked a rally in commodities, particularly mining and precious metals stocks.

-0.8

3.8 4.7 4.7 4.8 6.6 6.8 7.1 7.4 8.8 8.9 9.4 10.6 11.013.9

15.4

Japan Pacific EM Latin America

China Brazil South Africa

Mexico United Kingdom

France Europe EM Asia Russia Canada Pacific (Ex-Japan)

Germany India

Non-U.S. Equity Market Returns by Country (U.S.$), Third Quarter 2012

7

QUARTERLY CONSIDERATIONS Financial Markets Performance Ending September 30, 2012

Returns for Periods Exceeding One-Year are Annualized.

U.S. Equity QTR YTD 1YR 2YR 3YR 4YR 5YR 10YR S&P 500 Composite Index 6.4 16.4 30.2 14.8 13.2 7.8 1.1 8.0 Dow Jones Industrial Average 5.0 12.2 26.5 14.6 14.4 8.6 2.2 8.6 Russell 1000 Growth 6.1 16.8 29.2 15.8 14.7 10.3 3.2 8.4 Russell 1000 Value 6.5 15.7 30.9 13.3 11.8 5.7 -0.9 8.2 Russell Mid Cap 5.6 14.0 28.0 12.7 14.3 9.5 2.2 11.2 Russell Mid Cap Growth 5.3 13.9 26.7 13.0 14.7 10.7 2.5 11.1 Russell Mid Cap Value 5.8 14.0 29.3 12.3 13.9 8.2 1.7 11.0 Russell 2000 5.3 14.2 31.9 12.8 13.0 6.9 2.2 10.2 Russell 2000 Growth 4.8 14.1 31.2 13.9 14.2 8.7 3.0 10.5 Russell 2000 Value 5.7 14.4 32.6 11.7 11.7 5.1 1.3 9.7 NASDAQ 6.5 20.7 30.6 16.0 14.9 11.7 4.0 11.2 Russell 3000 6.2 16.1 30.2 14.4 13.3 8.0 1.3 8.5 NAREIT Equity REIT 0.2 15.1 32.6 15.7 20.4 5.7 2.1 11.4

Fixed Income & Cash Equivalents QTR YTD 1YR 2YR 3YR 4YR 5YR 10YR Barclays Cap US Aggregate 1.6 4.0 5.2 5.2 6.2 7.3 6.5 5.3 Citigroup High Yield Market 4.3 11.7 18.9 10.3 12.7 14.7 8.9 11.0 Barclays Capital US TIPS 2.1 6.2 9.1 9.5 9.3 8.4 7.9 6.6 BofA Merrill Lynch Muni 3-7 Years 1.4 3.1 4.6 4.2 4.6 6.2 5.7 4.5 Citigroup Hedged Non-U.S. Dollar Bond 1.8 4.3 4.9 3.1 3.6 4.7 4.6 4.3 Citigroup Unhedged Non-U.S. Dollar Bond 4.0 3.9 3.5 3.8 4.0 6.9 6.5 7.3 JPMorgan GBI-Em Mkts Global Diversified 4.8 12.1 12.7 4.7 9.4 10.2 8.7 N/A Citigroup Treasury Bill-3 Month 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.6 1.7 Ryan Labs 3 Yr GIC 0.3 1.2 1.7 2.2 2.7 3.2 3.5 3.7

International Equity QTR YTD 1YR 2YR 3YR 4YR 5YR 10YR MSCI EAFE 7.0 10.6 14.3 2.0 2.6 2.9 -4.8 8.7 MSCI EAFE Value 7.6 10.2 13.3 1.3 0.5 2.3 -5.7 9.1 MSCI EAFE Growth 6.4 10.9 15.2 2.7 4.7 3.4 -3.9 8.2 MSCI EAFE Small Cap 7.9 13.6 13.0 3.5 5.1 7.7 -2.6 11.6 MSCI Emerging Markets 7.9 12.3 17.3 -0.7 6.0 9.2 -1.0 17.4 S&P Developed World Property x U.S. 10.7 27.3 27.4 7.6 9.1 8.2 -4.2 12.2 S&P Developed World Property 5.7 21.6 29.7 10.8 13.2 7.2 -2.0 11.5

Miscellaneous QTR YTD 1YR 2YR 3YR 4YR 5YR 10YR Consumer Price Index 0.8 2.5 2.0 2.9 2.3 1.4 2.1 2.5 DJ UBS Commodity Index 9.7 5.6 6.0 3.0 5.3 -2.9 -3.0 5.2 HFRI Fund Weighted Composite Index 2.9 4.7 5.5 2.2 3.9 4.5 1.4 6.8 HFRI Fund of Funds Composite Index 2.3 3.3 2.8 0.5 1.5 0.8 -1.6 3.6 Alerian MLP 8.9 8.5 26.2 16.2 25.1 23.7 14.2 17.2

*All indices are unmanaged and investors can not invest directly into an index. Past performance is not indicative of future results.

8


The S&P 500 is based on the average performance of the 500 industrial stocks monitored by Standard & Poor’s. The Dow Jones Industrial Index is based on the average performance of the 30 blue-chip stocks monitored. Russell 1000 Growth measures the performance of those Russell 1000 companies with higher P/B ratios and higher forecasted growth values. Russell 1000 Value measures the performance of those Russell 1000 companies with lower P/B ratios and lower forecasted growth values. Russell Mid Cap measures the performance of the 800 smallest companies in the Russell 1000 Index. Russell Mid Cap Growth measures the performance of those Russell Mid Cap companies with higher P/B ratios and higher forecasted growth values. Russell Mid Cap Value measures the performance of those Russell Mid Cap companies with lower P/B ratios and lower forecasted growth values. Russell 2000 measures the performance of the small-cap stocks. Russell 2000 Growth measures the performance of the Russell 2000 companies with higher P/B ratios and higher forecasted growth values. Russell 2000 Value measures the performance of those Russell 2000 companies with lower P/B ratios and lower forecasted growth values. The NASDAQ measures all domestic and non-U.S. based common stocks listed on The NASDAQ Stock Market. Russell 3000 is a market-cap-weighted index which consists of roughly 3,000 of the largest companies in the U.S. As such, it represents nearly 98% of the investable U.S. equity market. NAREIT Equity REITs measures equity REITs. The index contains health care REITs, but no mortgage and hybrid REITs. The Barclays Aggregate Index is an unmanaged market value-weighted performance benchmark for investment-grade fixed-rate debt issues, including government, corporate, asset-backed and mortgage-backed securities, with maturities of at least one year. Citigroup High Yield Market is a market-cap weighted index, which measures the performance of below investment grade, Cash-Pay, Zero-to-Full, Pay-in-Kind, step-coupon bonds, and Rule 144A bonds issued by corporations domiciled in the United States or Canada, with remaining maturities of at least one year. All bonds must have a maximum quality rating of BB+/Ba1 by either S&P or Moody’s and the minimum amount outstanding at entry/exit must be $100 million. Barclays Capital US Treasury Inflation Protected Securities Index measures bonds with fixed rate coupon payments that adjust for inflation as measured by the Consumer Price Index. All bonds must be publicly traded, investment grade and have a minimum maturity of one year and a minimum amount outstanding of $250 million of face value. It currently is comprised of only US Treasury issued securities. Merrill Lynch Muni 3-7 Years measures municipal bonds with maturities between 3 and 6.99 year. Citigroup Non-$US Government Bond is a market-cap weighted index, that measures the performance in U.S. dollar terms of major non-U.S. bond markets. The index includes all investment grade fixed-rate bonds with a remaining maturity of one-year or longer. JP Morgan Government Bond Index-Emerging Market (GBI-EM) Index is a comprehensive emerging market debt index that tracks local currency bonds issued by emerging market governments; The Index is comprised of 14 countries whose weights are capped at 10% to avoid bias to more debt-laden countries. Citigroup Treasury Bill-3 Month represents the monthly return equivalents of yield averages which are not marked to market; this index is an average of the last three three-month Treasury bill issues. Ryan Labs 3 Yr GIC is an arithmetic mean of the market rates of 3 year GIC contracts. All rates are held for the full term of the contract. MSCI EAFE is a market-cap weighted index representing 22 of the developed markets outside North America. These 22 countries include 16 European countries and 6 Pacific countries. MSCI EAFE Value and MSCI EAFE Growth are free float-adjusted market cap indexes designed to measure the equity market performance of developed markets, excluding US & Canada. Five growth and three value variables are used to assign stocks to a specific style index. These include, book value to price, 12-months forward earnings to price, dividend yield, long-term forward earnings per share (EPS) growth rate, short-term forward EPS growth rate, current internal growth rate, long-term historical EPS growth trend, and long-term historical sales per share growth trend. MSCI EAFE Small Cap Index represents the small cap size segment of the MSCI EAFE Index. The small cap universe consists of the securities of those companies whose securities are not included in the large cap or mid cap segments of a particular market, which together comprise approximately 85% of each market’s free float-adjusted market cap. The small cap segment covers the 85-99% range of each market’s free float-adjusted market cap. MSCI Emerging Markets is a market-cap weighted index representing the major emerging countries in the world. S&P Developed World Property x U.S. measures the investable universe of publicly traded property companies in developed countries outside of the U.S. S&P Developed World Property measures the investable universe of publicly traded property companies in developed countries. Consumer Price Index is the United States Headline Consumer Price Index. Dow Jones UBS Commodity Index is composed of futures contracts on 19 physical commodities. No related group of commodities (e.g., energy, precious metals, livestock, grains, etc.) may constitute more than 33% of the index. Livestock = live cattle and lean hogs. Softs = sugar, cotton and coffee. Industrial Metals = aluminum, copper, zinc and nickel. Precious Metals = gold and silver. Grains = wheat, corn, soybeans. Energy = natural gas, crude oil, unleaded gas and heating oil. Petroleum = crude oil, unleaded gas and heating oil. HFRI Fund Weighted Composite Index - Fund of Funds invest with multiple managers through funds or managed accounts. The strategy designs a diversified portfolio of managers with the objective of significantly lowering the risk (volatility) of investing with an individual manager. The Fund of Funds manager has discretion in choosing which strategies to invest in for the portfolio. A manager may allocate funds to numerous managers within a single strategy, or with numerous managers in multiple strategies. The minimum investment in a Fund of Funds may be lower than an investment in an individual hedge fund or managed account. The investor has the advantage of diversification among managers and styles with significantly less capital than investing with separate managers. PLEASE NOTE: The HFRI Fund of Funds Index is not included in the HFRI Fund Weighted Composite Index. The Alerian MLP Index is a composite of the 50 most prominent energy master limited partnerships and will be calculated by Standard & Poor’s using a float-adjusted, market capitalization-weighted methodology.

9

Asset Class Summaries

Third Quarter 2012 Fixed Income The yield curve shifted lower for all maturities with the exception of the 30-year following the Fed’s announcement of a new round of quantitative easing that will obligate the Fed to purchase $40 billion of mortgage-backed securities each month. Additionally, the Fed extended “Operation Twist” through the end of 2012 and stated its expectations that rates will remain low through 2015. However, ongoing debt issues in Europe remain at the forefront of investors’ minds, and contributed to yield volatility during the quarter despite little change in yields. TIPS returned 2.1% for the quarter, outperforming U.S. Treasuries. The 10-year breakeven inflation rate is currently 1.9%, and 10-year TIPS yield remains below zero at -0.3%. Investment grade corporates returned 3.5% as credit spreads narrowed somewhat as corporate yields ticked down modestly and Treasury yields were mostly unchanged. Financials drove the performance in the corporate sector, posting a 5.1% return versus 3.3% in industrials and 3.2% in utilities. According to JPMorgan, new issuance of $200 billion in investment grade corporates was strong during the quarter and represented a growth rate of 45% year-over-year compared to 3Q 2011. High yield spreads also narrowed, which resulted in the sector outperforming Treasuries. Mortgage-backed securities (MBS) outperformed Treasuries modestly as the result of historically low interest rates and the Fed’s recent quantitative easing announcement. However, MBS returns were low compared to the other spread sectors such as corporates, which have continued to improve in credit quality. Commercial mortgage-backed securities (CMBS) returned 3.9% during the quarter as commercial real estate values continue to stabilize. Asset-backed securities (ABS) returned 1.2% but lagged corporates, which remain more attractive on a spread basis for investors looking for yield. TIPS TIPS returned 2.1% for the quarter, which outperformed U.S. Treasuries. The 10-year breakeven inflation rate is currently 1.9%, and the 10-year TIPS yield remains below zero at -0.3%. With the exception of the 30-year maturity, the entire TIPS yield curve remains below zero as investors remain willing to accept a reduction in future purchasing power in exchange for the safety of inflation-linked Treasuries. Munis Municipal bonds returned 2.3%, which outperformed Treasuries but lagged corporate bond returns. Returns on revenue bonds were mostly in line with general obligation bonds (GOs), with only housing related revenue bonds returning under 2% for the quarter. According to JPMorgan, muni yields remain at 122% of comparable Treasury yields, which ranks above the ten-year average of approximately 100%, but far below the peak position of 220% reached during the financial crisis of 2008-09. Foreign Bonds International bonds generated a 4% return on an unhedged basis and 1.8% on a hedged basis during the third quarter, and outperformed the broader U.S. fixed income market. In Europe, debt concerns related to Spain and Italy subsided somewhat as “Super” Mario Draghi announced an unlimited purchasing program to support the sovereign debt of EU countries. Emerging markets debt returned 4.8% for the quarter as demand for yield remains in focus. Economic growth in China is expected to be strong relative to the rest of the world, although subdued relative to recent year results. The Indian government has taken measures to revive economic growth and reduce the budget deficit, which include reducing the country’s withholding tax from 20% to 5%, exempting capital gains taxes on real estate purchased during the next five years and reducing subsidies for diesel fuel and cooking gas. The Brazilian central bank cut interest rates by 100 basis points during the quarter to 7.5%, a historic low, in an effort to promote economic growth given recent lackluster results. High Yield As a result of the “risk-on” environment during the quarter, high yield spreads narrowed by 64 basis points to 551 basis points over Treasuries on an option-adjusted basis, and resulted in the sector outperforming Treasuries. Despite persistent high U.S. unemployment and macroeconomic uncertainty, new issuance in the high yield space has been strong with $101.6 billion of bonds issued during the quarter and the $263.4 billion issued year-to-date already surpassing 2011’s full year amount. Retail investors continue to be interested in the sector, with high yield bond flows reaching a new annual record of $33.8 billion.

10


Third Quarter 2012 Balanced U.S. equity markets rallied as investors cheered actions by policymakers in the Eurozone and following the Federal Reserve’s commitment to maintain a highly accommodative monetary policy. The S&P 500 Index and the Russell 2000 Index of smaller companies gained 6% and 5%, respectively. Consumer discretionary, information technology and energy were among the top performing sectors, while utilities, industrials and consumer staples lagged. Across market capitalizations, large- and mid-cap issues marginally outperformed small-cap companies. Meanwhile, value stocks outperformed their growth counterparts. U.S. fixed income markets posted positive results. Lower quality, higher yielding corporate securities performed strongly. Investment grade corporates also moved higher. Treasuries were among the worst performing sectors as inflation expectations increased following the Fed’s QE3 announcement. Meanwhile, mortgage-backed securities outperformed duration-matched Treasuries amid further central bank activity in these markets. Broad Equity The expectation of and delivering on Quantitative Easing (QE) III in conjunction with continued support from the European Central Bank (ECB) of its member countries helped move the U.S. equity market up after a difficult second quarter. The S&P 500 Index increased 6.4% during the quarter while the NASDAQ Composite and Dow Jones Industrial Average also rose, with positive returns of 6.1% and 4.9%, respectively. Cyclical sectors led performance during the third quarter as energy was the top performing sector with a 10.5% return. Consumer discretionary stocks rallied 7.5% bringing year-to-date returns for the sector to 21.4%. Value stocks across large, mid and small capitalizations outperformed growth stocks. Year-to-date, small and mid value stocks are ahead of growth while large value still trails large growth. Large Cap Value Large Cap Value stocks advanced during the third quarter as a series of actions by the Federal Reserve and other central banks around the world boosted investor confidence and supported favorable performances across the financial markets. For the quarter, the Russell 1000 Value Index, the Russell 1000 Growth Index and the Russell 1000 Index advanced 6.5%, 6.1% and 6.3%, respectively. Across market capitalizations, large- and mid-cap stocks marginally outperformed small-cap issues. Within the Russell 1000 Value Index, the consumer discretionary, telecommunications services and energy sectors were all up over 9% and were among the top performers during the quarter. Financial services stocks also staged a rally returning nearly 7% amid global stimulus actions. Meanwhile, gains were somewhat limited in the utilities and information technology sectors. Large Cap Core Equity markets advanced during the third quarter of 2012 as concerns about the sovereign debt crisis moderated following a pledge by European Central Bank (ECB) president Mario Draghi to keep the Eurozone solvent. Investors welcomed announcements by the Federal Reserve and the ECB of further stimulus measures. Japan and China also took supportive actions. The S&P 500 Index rose 6% during the quarter, just shy of its five-year high. Gains occurred in nine of the 10 major sectors. The energy, telecommunications services, consumer discretionary, information technology, and financial services sectors outperformed the broader market. Meanwhile, several of the more defensive areas, such as consumer staples, lagged and utilities was the lone sector to finish in negative territory. Value stocks outperformed growth stocks, while large cap stocks outperformed small caps. Large Cap Growth The Russell 1000 Growth Index advanced 6% during the third quarter of 2012. For the quarter, large cap growth stocks modestly underperformed their large cap value counterparts. Within the large cap growth benchmark, sectors such as energy, consumer discretionary, information technology and healthcare posted solid returns. Among IT names, Apple benefited from investor anticipation surrounding the new iPhone 5. Google benefited from accelerated growth of paid clicks and volume growth due to an increase in the mobile market. Within the consumer discretionary space, homebuilders and home improvement stores generally fared well as the housing market appeared to stabilize somewhat. Home Depot was among the top performing stocks in the benchmark, rallying nearly 15%. In the energy sector, several industry heavyweights posted solid gains as crude oil prices rebounded from their prior quarter lows.

11


Third Quarter 2012 Mid Cap Mid-capitalization stocks posted positive performance in the third quarter as the Federal Reserve announced Quantitative Easing (QE) III and the European Central Bank (ECB) showed continued support for its member countries. The Russell Midcap Index returned 5.6% in the third quarter. Value stocks outperformed growth with the Russell Midcap Value Index returning 5.8% versus a 5.3% return for the Russell Midcap Growth Index. Across capitalization, mid-cap stocks underperformed large caps, but outperformed small caps for all style segments. Telecommunication services returned 22.1%. These gains were on the back of a rumor that Sprint and MetroPCS would merge. Though Sprint and MetroPCS returned 69% and 94%, respectively, the Telecommunication Services sector only contributed 0.3% to the Russell Midcap Index due to its small weight. Small Cap Value The Russell 2000 Value Index returned 5.6% for the quarter as investor confidence rose with the announcement of Quantitative Easing (QE) III by the Federal Reserve and the European Central Bank (ECB) showed continued support for its member countries. On July 26th, Mario Draghi announced that the ECB was ready to do whatever it takes to support the euro. This open-ended commitment helped spark optimism that there would be a resolution to the European sovereign debt crisis. Risk assets across the Atlantic responded positively to the announcement. Cyclical sectors led the way with materials, telecommunications services and consumer discretionary stocks returning 15.0%, 11.2% and 8.4%, respectively. Information technology was the only sector in the Russell 2000 Value Index with negative performance returning -0.3%. Small Cap Core The announcement of Quantitative Easing (QE) III in conjunction with Mario Draghi’s statement for unlimited support from the European Central Bank (ECB) for member countries sparked equity rallies across capitalizations and styles. The Russell 2000 Index returned 5.2% in the third quarter. Value outperformed growth with the Russell 2000 Value Index returning 5.6% compared to a 4.8% return for its growth counterpart. With positive relative returns in the second quarter and outperformance in the third, value now leads growth year-to-date in performance for Russell 2000 Index stocks. Cyclical sectors outperformed as the market rose. Telecommunication services, materials and energy returned 14.2%, 12.9% and 7.5%, respectively as every sector posted positive performance during the quarter. Small Cap Growth The Russell 2000 Growth Index returned 4.8% for the quarter as the Federal Reserve announced Quantitative Easing (QE) III and Mario Draghi, President of the European Central Bank (ECB), announced unlimited support for its member countries. Risk assets across the Atlantic responded positively to the announcement. Cyclical sectors led the way with telecommunications services, materials and energy stocks returning 16.5%, 10.4% and 8.6%, respectively. All sectors in the Russell 2000 Growth Index posted positive performance for the quarter. International Equity International markets posted positive results during the third quarter, with the MSCI EAFE rising 7% as major central banks around the world pumped liquidity into the financial system. The Bank of England left rates unchanged at 0.5%, but increased the size of its asset purchase program, citing lingering inflation concerns and a weak economic outlook. Meanwhile, the European Central Bank cut rates to a record low of 0.75%. Japan’s central bank also moved aggressively and eased monetary policy by boosting its asset-buying program. Among the most notable advancers during the quarter were Germany, Spain, Hong Kong and New Zealand, all with double-digit gains. Notable laggards included Japan, Ireland and Greece. All sectors rose, led by a powerful rally in financial services stocks. The healthcare and consumer staples sectors also posted solid results. Meanwhile, utilities, telecommunications services, consumer discretionary and information technology stocks lagged.

12


Third Quarter 2012 Emerging Markets The MSCI EM Index rose 8%, aided by a weak U.S. dollar against most emerging markets currencies. In particular, the Indian rupee and Mexican peso rallied sharply. Among the larger index constituents, India, Russia, South Korea and Taiwan were notable advancers. Meanwhile, returns in the Brazilian and Chinese stock markets were positive, but underperformed the overall Index. India rallied 15% as officials announced a series of reforms, including a reduction of gasoline subsidies. Prime Minister Singh has been under intense pressure to reduce India’s fiscal deficit by cutting spending for subsidies, particularly on fuel. China gained 5% as the central bank continued to lower rates to jumpstart the world’s second largest economy. Elsewhere in Asia, technology heavyweights helped support the South Korean and Taiwanese equity markets. In Latin America, Brazil rose 5% as officials cut rates to 7.5% and announced a $66 billion stimulus package to help solve infrastructure challenges ahead of the 2014 World Cup and the 2016 Olympics. Among EMEA (Eastern Europe, Middle East and Africa) countries, Russia gained 9% on strength from commodity producers. International Small Cap Equity International small cap equities ended the third quarter of 2012 higher amid assurances by major central banks around the world that they would continue to provide market liquidity in the event of another financial crisis or a sharp economic slowdown. The U.S. dollar weakened against most major currencies. In general, the more cyclical areas of the market outperformed, while sectors perceived to be more defensive typically lagged. For the quarter, European stocks outperformed those in the Pacific region, largely due to weakness in Japan. Within the emerging markets, select Emerging Asian, Latin American and EMEA (Eastern Europe, Middle East and Africa) countries performed strongly. Across market capitalizations, smaller-cap international stocks outperformed larger-cap international stocks. Global Equity For the quarter, the Dow Jones Industrial Average and the Russell 2000 Index of smaller companies each gained 5%, while the S&P 500 Index rose 6%. Meanwhile, the technology-heavy NASDAQ Composite advanced 7%. International markets gained, with the MSCI EAFE rising 7% as investors reacted favorably to global stimulus measures from the Federal Reserve, the European Central Bank and the Bank of Japan. Among the largest European markets, France and Italy gained 7% and 8%, respectively. Meanwhile, Germany rallied 14%, while Spain advanced 12%. Within the Pacific region, Japan declined 1%, while Australia and Singapore each rose 11%. Meanwhile, New Zealand rallied 16%. In the emerging markets, the MSCI EM posted an 8% gain on strength from select Emerging Asian, Latin American and EMEA (Eastern Europe, Middle East and Africa) countries. Commodities After declining nearly 5% in the second quarter, commodities as a group snapped back during the third quarter, as the Dow Jones-UBS Commodity Index returned 9.7%. Central bank monetary policy initiatives and general uncertainty with respect to financial assets contributed to commodity price gains. Within agricultural commodities, grains were a strong performing sub-sector as prices rose sharply resulting from the severe drought in the nation’s heartland. Soybean, wheat and corn prices advanced 12%, 17% and 19%, respectively. Tight supply/demand fundamentals, coupled with increasing geopolitical tensions, propelled the gains in energy commodities. Gasoline prices rose nearly 25% during the quarter. Looking ahead, forecasts for a relatively benign start to winter could prompt weakness in energy-related commodities such as natural gas and heating oil. A warmer winter with moderate to below average precipitation could further impact agricultural commodity prices. Finally, the Fed’s open-ended commitment to further quantitative easing and the ECB’s promise to purchase bonds in unlimited amounts if necessary could buoy commodities prices through the end of the year. Global Real Estate Movements in the U.S. REIT market were influenced by the risk-on/risk-off gyrations in the equity market coupled with concerns related to political uncertainty and the looming “fiscal cliff”. U.S. REITs rose 2.0% in July, were flat in August and fell 1.8% in September. From a sector perspective, industrial and retail were the top performers in the U.S. REIT market, driven primarily by improving fundamentals and increased leasing momentum. Apartments trailed due to rising supply and weakening tenant demand. Asian REITs outperformed for the quarter, largely due to the coordinated stimulative monetary measures implemented by major central banks. Among the top performers were Hong Kong Real Estate Operating Companies (REOCs) and Singapore REITs, which benefitted from stronger than expected rent growth on commercial assets and rising residential sales volumes within the mass housing segment. European REITs also posted moderate advances for the quarter, led by Italy, Sweden, Norway, and the UK. European property markets rebounded as a result of increased investor optimism regarding the European debt crisis following the announcement of new ECB bond buying measures and the ESM rescue fund ratification in Germany.

13


Third Quarter 2012 Hedge Funds (based on preliminary reports according to Hedge Fund Research, Inc.) Hedge fund returns during the quarter were positive and fairly consistent month to month. In September, hedge funds posted their strongest monthly performance since February 2012, led by Equity Hedge. Following the previous quarter’s weakness, growth equity-oriented managers benefitted nicely from healthcare, technology/telecom and emerging markets tailwinds, and gradually increased both gross and net exposures. Relative Value managers continued their solid performance with strong gains in RMBS and ABS. Short-Biased managers struggled during the quarter while funds with utilities and energy exposure continued to underperform. Tactical Trading managers delivered positive results in July, but gave up ground in August and September to finish the quarter with a slight gain. Trend following and other systematic strategies continue to weigh on results. Fund of hedge funds produced stable returns throughout the quarter but modestly underperformed direct hedge funds. While investors remain somewhat cautious, those who are putting capital work continue to gravitate toward macro/CTA and structured credit funds. MLPs The Alerian MLP Index advanced 8.9% for the quarter with a dividend yield of 6.2%. On the legislation front, H.R. 6437 was introduced to the House as a companion bill to Senator Coons’ “MLP Parity Act.” The main portion of the bill would amend the federal tax code to allow renewable energy sources to qualify as an MLP. This would make it easier and more attractive for private capital to invest in renewable energy. Even if the bill passes it may not generate above average investment alternatives but should ease concerns over legislations commitment to preserving the favorable tax status of MLPs. For the quarter, MLPs outpaced the S&P 500 by 2.5%. Key drivers of performance were the more commodity sensitive sectors. “Other”, which includes refining and fertilizer companies, advanced 31%. Gathering & Processing (+14.6%), Oil & Gas Production (+13.5%) and Propane (12.6%) also outperformed the broad market.

14

Third Quarter 2012 Knowledge College

The Next Chapter in the Active versus Passive Debate

In 2007, we authored “The Next Chapter in the Active versus Passive Management Debate,” where we evaluated the persistency of top quartile mutual funds in 17 different categories during the ten-year period ending December 2006. Given the persistence of abnormal market environments since that time, we recognized the impetus to update the study in 2010 and now again for the ten-year period ending December 31, 2011. The key observations from our 2007 and 2010 studies remain largely intact in this 2012 update. Evidence continues to indicate that the typical long-term top-quartile manager has significant stretches where three-year performance falls and remains below the peer group median. The evidence suggests such is the case for passive index providers as well. Exhibit 1:10-year top quartile funds1, 2 (ending December 31, 2011) that fell below median during one or more 3- and 5-year periods

Category

Number of funds with

10-year records1,2

Number of 10 year top

quartile funds

Number of 10 year top

quartile funds below median for a

3-year period

Percent of 10 year top quartile

funds below median for a

3-year period

Median consecutive

years spent in bottom half

Percent of 10 year top quartile

funds below median for a

5-year period

Intermediate Bond 238 60 51 85% 1.00 60% High Yield Bond 94 24 21 88% 1.00 67% International Bond 186 47 41 87% 1.25 45% Large Cap Value 204 51 48 94% 1.50 65% Large Cap Core 334 83 78 94% 1.00 61% Large Cap Growth 716 179 159 89% 1.25 74% Mid Cap Value 52 13 12 92% 1.00 69% Mid Cap Core 95 24 21 88% 1.25 63% Mid Cap Growth 158 40 38 95% 0.75 63% Small Cap Value 63 16 16 100% 1.13 63% Small Cap Core 133 33 29 88% 1.00 61% Small Cap Growth 154 39 36 92% 1.25 59% Real Estate 51 13 10 77% 0.50 31% International Value 67 17 17 100% 1.00 76% International Core 203 51 45 88% 0.75 49% International Growth 42 11 11 100% 0.75 55% Emerging Markets 64 16 13 81% 1.25 50%

Total 2854 717 646

Weighted Average 90% 1.00 63% 1Distinct Portfolio Only: Many fund families offer multiple versions of the same fund, but with variations on the fees that are charged and investor qualifications. The "distinct portfolio only" feature removes all duplicate options. Morningstar normally designates the oldest share class as the distinct portfolio. 2Morningstar mutual fund data was used as it is less prone to biases compared to other databases. While the Morningstar data is not immune to survivorship bias, each mutual fund that survived the ten-year stretch was captured regardless of performance. In addition, the Morningstar data generates returns net of expenses.

Key Observations:

90 percent of ten-year top quartile mutual funds were unable to avoid at least one three-year stretch in the bottom half of their peer groups.

63 percent of ten-year top quartile mutual funds were unable to avoid the bottom half during a five-year period.

Top quartile mutual funds whose three-year performance was in the bottom half spent an average of four consecutive quarters below median. On average, top quartile mutual funds spent 23% of all rolling three-year periods in the bottom half of their respective peer groups.

Passive investing also requires patience.

Indices and index funds give little assurance of median performance especially in the short term. Like active managers, indices can underperform the median manager within an asset class and can do so for long stretches of time.

15

What to expect from index investing

Given endemic periods of underperformance for active management, the logical question is whether there are certain asset classes where index funds make more sense. Exhibit 2 shows how each index3 performed compared to the active funds in its asset class over rolling three-year periods (during the 10-year period ending December 31, 2011). The vertical lines represent the range of three-year rankings for each asset class’ index while the hashes mark the average three-year rank for each index.

Exhibit 2: Range and average 3-year index3 peer group ranking for each asset class (Rolling three-year periods between January 1, 2002 and December 31, 2011)

Some indices have done well versus the active funds in their asset classes. However, all of the seventeen asset classes have had at least one rolling three-year period where the index ranked below the median fund in the asset class. This emphasizes the point that while there certainly are viable passive investment options, they are by no means a haven from periods of underperformance. Conclusion

For even the best performing active managers over the long-term, underperforming during a three- or five-year period is an eventual near certainty. Moving to an index fund also requires an investor to endure similar periods of subpar performance versus peer groups. As our study shows, indices often fall and remain below the median active manager for long stretches. Recognizing a good manager will add value over a full market cycle, investors must stay invested through the lulls where fund performance inevitably dips below the peer group median. Terminating a manager explicitly for underperformance and starting fresh with a new top performer (who will undoubtedly disappoint one day) leads to a self-defeating “hire at peak and fire at trough” cycle. As we said in our original 2007 paper, “Be patient or be passive.” In light of our most recent study, perhaps we should modify that maxim to “invest actively and be patient or invest passively and be patient.” If you would like more information about the topic, ask your DiMeo Schneider & Associates, L.L.C. investment consultant or visit our Research & Resource Center at www.dimeoschneider.com for a copy of our comprehensive paper, The Next Chapter in the Active versus Passive Debate (2012 Update). 3Indices: Barclays Aggregate Bond, Citigroup High Yield, Citigroup Non U.S. WGBI, Russell 1000 Value, S&P 500, Russell 1000 Growth, Russell Mid Cap Value, Russell Mid Cap, Russell Mid Cap Growth, Russell 2000 Value, Russell 2000, Russell 2000 Growth, Dow Jones Wilshire RESI, Citigroup PMI Value World ex U.S. , MSCI EAFE, Citigroup PMI Growth World ex U.S. , MSCI Emerging Markets.

16

ACCOUNT RECONCILIATION

BENCHMARK COMPOSITION

TRAILING PERFORMANCE SUMMARY

CALENDAR YEAR PERFORMANCE SUMMARY

CurrentQuarter

YTD1

Year3

Years5

YearsSince

InceptionInception

Date

Historical Account Composite 12/31/2003

Beginning Market Value 34,668,636 32,379,401 30,611,020 25,983,527 28,366,995 16,533,579

Net Contributions - 144,060 144,060 1,198,663 759,775 3,422,512

Gain/Loss 1,656,803 3,801,977 5,570,358 9,143,249 7,198,669 16,369,348

Ending Market Value 36,325,438 36,325,438 36,325,438 36,325,438 36,325,438 36,325,438

CurrentQuarter

YTD1

Year3

Years5

Years10

YearsSince

InceptionInception

Date

Historical Account Composite 4.78 11.72 18.18 10.31 4.47 N/A 7.42 12/31/2003

Target Asset Allocation 4.25 10.97 18.24 9.38 1.97 N/A 6.34 12/31/2003

2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002

Historical Account Composite -1.56 18.01 31.50 -26.08 8.07 12.52 9.11 8.88 19.07 N/A

Target Asset Allocation 0.70 12.62 24.89 -29.09 7.98 14.67 7.25 11.64 25.23 N/A

Allocation Mandate Weight (%)

May-2012

Russell 3000 Index 32.00

Barclays Aggregate 35.00

MSCI AC World ex USA 13.00

DSA Hedge Fund Index 20.00

Concordia University-Nebraska

Endowment

September 30, 2012

17

6

Concordia University, Nebraska & Concordia Foundation, Inc.Portfolio Engineer™

5.0%

5.5%

6.0%

6.5%

7.0%

7.5%

8.0%

Expe

cted

Ret

urn

Target Allocation

9/30/2012

6/30/2012

Past Allocations

Constraint Radius = 0.45%

Cash TIPS Muni Bond

US Bond

For. Dev. Bond

HY Bond

EM Bond

LC US Equity

MC US Equity

SC US Equity

Real Estate

Int'l Equity

EM Equity

Commod. Fut.

HFs Portfolio MLPs Expected

ReturnExpected

Risk

Distance From

Target

Rebalance Required

Target 0.0% 6.0% 0.0% 7.0% 7.0% 7.0% 5.0% 12.0% 3.0% 1.0% 6.0% 9.0% 4.0% 8.0% 20.0% 5.0% 7.20% 10.98% N.A. N.A.9/30/2012 0.0% 6.0% 0.0% 7.1% 7.1% 7.1% 4.9% 12.0% 2.9% 1.0% 6.1% 8.8% 4.0% 8.5% 19.6% 4.9% 7.18% 10.96% 0.03% No6/30/2012 0.1% 6.2% 0.0% 7.1% 7.1% 7.1% 4.9% 11.8% 2.9% 1.0% 6.3% 8.6% 3.9% 8.0% 20.0% 4.9% 7.15% 10.88% 0.11% No3/31/2012 0.1% 10.6% 0.0% 7.9% 5.9% 5.0% 4.9% 14.5% 3.0% 2.1% 6.0% 12.1% 5.0% 7.7% 10.2% 4.9% 7.08% 11.63% 0.66% Yes

12/31/2011 0.1% 11.6% 0.0% 7.8% 4.8% 4.0% 0.0% 13.5% 2.1% 5.4% 6.3% 11.8% 8.0% 9.6% 9.6% 5.5% 7.35% 12.12% 1.15% Yes9/30/2011 2.1% 13.3% 0.0% 8.2% 5.2% 4.0% 0.0% 12.5% 1.9% 4.6% 5.5% 10.3% 7.0% 9.9% 10.2% 5.3% 6.98% 11.27% 0.36% No6/30/2011 0.0% 11.5% 0.0% 7.9% 4.7% 3.9% 0.0% 13.5% 2.2% 5.3% 6.1% 12.0% 7.8% 10.2% 9.8% 5.2% 7.33% 12.10% 1.13% Yes3/31/2011 0.1% 11.2% 0.0% 7.6% 4.6% 3.9% 0.0% 13.4% 2.2% 5.5% 5.9% 11.9% 7.6% 10.8% 9.9% 5.5% 7.35% 12.10% 1.14% Yes

12/31/2010 0.1% 11.4% 0.0% 7.7% 4.8% 3.9% 0.0% 13.1% 2.1% 5.3% 5.9% 11.9% 7.9% 10.6% 10.0% 5.4% 7.34% 12.07% 1.10% Yes9/30/2010 0.1% 10.4% 0.0% 10.3% 2.1% 7.1% 0.0% 14.8% 2.5% 4.9% 10.7% 13.5% 8.4% 10.5% 0.0% 4.9% 7.31% 13.22% 2.24% Yes6/30/2010 0.1% 11.5% 0.0% 10.9% 2.3% 7.5% 0.0% 14.6% 2.4% 4.9% 9.9% 12.7% 7.8% 10.2% 0.0% 5.2% 7.19% 12.87% 1.89% Yes3/31/2010 0.1% 7.4% 0.0% 16.9% 1.1% 4.9% 0.0% 18.0% 2.6% 5.6% 7.4% 15.5% 5.3% 9.8% 0.0% 5.1% 7.15% 12.66% 1.68% Yes

12/31/2009 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 25.7% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 30.2% 4.7% 10.6% 2.7% 26.1% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 7.25% 14.16% 3.18% Yes

4.5%8.0% 9.0% 10.0% 11.0% 12.0% 13.0% 14.0% 15.0%

Expected Risk (Standard Deviation)

18

September 30, 2012 June 30, 2012

June 30, 2012September 30, 2012

Market Value($)

Allocation(%)

Target(%)

TIPS 2,150,564 6.2 6.0

Broad Domestic Fixed 2,459,301 7.1 7.0

High Yield Fixed 2,476,513 7.1 7.0

International Fixed Hedged 2,468,932 7.1 7.0

Emerging Markets Debt 1,689,852 4.9 5.0

Large Cap 4,089,133 11.8 12.0

Mid Cap 1,020,162 2.9 3.0

Small Cap 345,294 1.0 1.0

International Equity 2,981,845 8.6 9.0

Emerging Markets 1,351,785 3.9 4.0

Real Estate Domestic 2,193,662 6.3 6.0

S&P Developed Ex-U.S. Property - - 0.0

Commodities 2,770,556 8.0 8.0

MLP 1,712,656 4.9 5.0

Hedge Funds 6,940,857 20.0 20.0

Cash/Equivalents 17,525 0.1 0.0

Total Fund 34,668,636 100.0 100.0

Market Value($)

Allocation(%)

Target(%)

TIPS 2,196,441 6.0 6.0

Broad Domestic Fixed 2,564,923 7.1 7.0

High Yield Fixed 2,584,675 7.1 7.0

International Fixed Hedged 2,593,510 7.1 7.0

Emerging Markets Debt 1,764,397 4.9 5.0

Large Cap 4,355,101 12.0 12.0

Mid Cap 1,069,019 2.9 3.0

Small Cap 358,794 1.0 1.0

International Equity 3,198,014 8.8 9.0

Emerging Markets 1,444,545 4.0 4.0

Real Estate Domestic 2,199,819 6.1 6.0

S&P Developed Ex-U.S. Property - - 0.0

Commodities 3,105,820 8.5 8.0

MLP 1,764,803 4.9 5.0

Hedge Funds 7,117,781 19.6 20.0

Cash/Equivalents 7,797 0.0 0.0

Total Fund 36,325,438 100.0 100.0


Endowment

September 30, 2012

19

CurrentQuarter

YTD1

Year3

Years5

Years10

YearsSince

InceptionInception

Date

Historical Account Composite 4.78 11.72 18.18 10.31 4.47 N/A 7.42 12/31/2003

Target Asset Allocation 4.25 10.97 18.24 9.38 1.97 N/A 6.34 12/31/2003


Endowment

September 30, 2012

20

Up Market Capture

Down Market Capture

Concordia University-NebraskaVersus Target Asset Allocation

As of September 30, 2012

21

1Year

3Years

5Years

7Years

10Years

Return 18.18 10.31 4.47 6.68 N/A

Standard Deviation 9.87 11.70 14.79 12.95 N/A

Downside Risk 4.48 7.02 10.23 8.81 N/A

vs. Target Asset Allocation

Alpha -1.68 0.41 2.49 1.62 N/A

Beta 1.10 1.06 0.99 0.99 N/A

Consistency 50.00 55.56 63.33 58.33 N/A

Information Ratio 0.03 0.41 1.02 0.72 N/A

M-Squared -1.90 0.20 2.48 1.61 N/A

R-Squared 0.98 0.96 0.97 0.97 N/A

Tracking Error 1.75 2.35 2.39 2.19 N/A

Treynor Ratio 0.16 0.10 0.05 0.06 N/A

vs. Target vs. AA

Alpha 2.00 N/A N/A N/A N/A

Beta 1.03 N/A N/A N/A N/A

Consistency 83.33 N/A N/A N/A N/A

Information Ratio 2.56 N/A N/A N/A N/A

M-Squared 2.17 N/A N/A N/A N/A

R-Squared 0.99 N/A N/A N/A N/A

Tracking Error 0.93 N/A N/A N/A N/A

Treynor Ratio 0.17 N/A N/A N/A N/A

vs. Citigroup 3 Month T-Bill

Sharpe Ratio 1.75 0.89 0.33 0.43 N/A

Concordia University-NebraskaHistorical Account Composite


Calculation based on monthly periodicity.

22

5 YEARS3 YEARS

10 YEARS7 YEARS

No data found.


Endowment

September 30, 2012

23

vs Benchmark3

Years

vs Benchmark5

Years

vs Peer Group3

Years

vs Peer Group5

Years

Alpha3

Years

Alpha5

Years

Consistency5

Years

ExpenseRatio

Firm/StrategyEvaluation

Status

Vanguard Inflation-Protected Secs Adm Discuss

Loomis Sayles Bond Instl Pass

PIMCO Total Return Instl Pass

JPMorgan High Yield Select Discuss

PIMCO Foreign Bond (USD-Hedged) I Pass

PIMCO Emerging Local Bd Fd Inst Discuss

Dodge & Cox Stock Discuss

iShares S&P 500 Index Pass

iShares Russell 1000 Growth Index Pass

iShares S&P MidCap 400 Index Pass

DFA US Small Cap Value I Pass

Conestoga Small Cap Pass

American Funds EuroPacific Gr F-1 Discuss

Aberdeen Emerging Markets Instl Fd Instl Pass

Nuveen Real Estate Secs I Pass

PIMCO Commodity Real Ret Strat Instl N/A N/A N/A N/A

Kayne Anderson MLP Invst Co N/A N/A N/A N/A

Tortoise Energy Infrastructure Corp. N/A N/A N/A N/A

Grosvenor Inst'l Partners, L.P. N/A N/A N/A N/A

Magnitude International N/A N/A N/A N/A

Concordia University-NebraskaManager Evaluation Summary


24

Concordia University-NebraskaManager Evaluation Summary


Outperform Benchmark

Underperform Benchmark

vs Benchmark

Legend For Overall Criteria

1-50 Percentile

51-100 Percentile

vs Peer Group

50% or greater

Lower than 50%

Consistency

Lower than category average

Higher than category average

Expense Ratio

Subjective*

Subjective*

Firm/Strategy Evaluation

Discuss: Trailed 4 or more categories or recognized within Firm/Strategy Evaluation category

Status

Positive Alpha

Negative Alpha

Alpha

* Recognition within Firm/Strategy Evaluation category the result of a FLASH memo issued by DiMeo Schneider Investment Committee based on qualitative factors.

25

Fund &Cat Avg

Exp Ratio

Allocation

MarketValue

($)%

Performance(%)

CurrentQuarter

YTD1

Year3

Years5

Years10

Years2011 2010 2009

Total Plan

Historical Account Composite 36,325,438 100.0 4.8 11.7 18.2 10.3 4.5 N/A -1.6 18.0 31.5

Target Asset Allocation 4.2 11.0 18.2 9.4 2.0 N/A 0.7 12.6 24.9

CPI + 5.0% 2.1 6.4 7.1 7.4 7.2 7.6 8.1 6.6 7.9

TIPS

Vanguard Inflation-Protected Secs Adm 2,196,441 6.0 2.1 6.2 9.0 9.3 7.7 N/A 13.3 6.3 11.0 0.11

Barclays U.S. Treasury: U.S. TIPS 2.1 6.2 9.1 9.3 7.9 6.6 13.6 6.3 11.4

IM U.S. TIPS (MF) Median 2.0 5.8 8.3 8.6 7.1 6.3 11.9 5.9 10.2 0.83

Vanguard Inflation-Protected Secs Adm Rank 37 24 24 16 27 N/A 12 29 32

Broad Domestic Fixed

Loomis Sayles Bond Instl 1,833,545 5.0 4.8 11.7 14.5 11.1 7.4 10.7 3.8 13.6 37.2 0.64

Barclays Aggregate 1.6 4.0 5.2 6.2 6.5 5.3 7.8 6.5 5.9

IM U.S. Broad Market Core Fixed Income (MF) Median 2.4 6.0 7.4 7.1 6.4 5.1 6.5 7.5 13.3 0.92

Loomis Sayles Bond Instl Rank 1 1 1 1 21 1 93 1 1

PIMCO Total Return Instl 731,378 2.0 3.2 9.1 11.5 7.7 8.9 7.0 4.2 8.9 13.9 0.46

Barclays Aggregate 1.6 4.0 5.2 6.2 6.5 5.3 7.8 6.5 5.9

IM U.S. Broad Market Core Fixed Income (MF) Median 2.4 6.0 7.4 7.1 6.4 5.1 6.5 7.5 13.3 0.92

PIMCO Total Return Instl Rank 16 4 4 28 3 4 90 25 47

High Yield Fixed

JPMorgan High Yield Select 2,584,675 7.1 4.4 11.3 17.7 11.6 8.2 10.3 2.6 14.7 48.5 0.86

Citigroup High-Yield Market 4.3 11.7 18.9 12.7 8.9 11.0 5.5 14.3 55.2

IM U.S. High Yield Bonds (MF) Median 4.2 10.8 17.2 11.2 6.9 9.0 2.8 13.6 46.5 1.21

JPMorgan High Yield Select Rank 35 38 42 35 17 13 53 30 39

International Fixed Hedged

PIMCO Foreign Bond (USD-Hedged) I 2,593,510 7.1 5.1 9.1 11.7 9.0 8.6 6.6 6.8 9.2 19.0 0.50

Citigroup Non-U.S. World Government Bond Hedged 1.8 4.3 4.9 3.6 4.6 4.3 4.1 2.5 2.4

IM International Fixed Income (MF) Median 4.6 6.9 6.6 4.7 5.8 6.3 3.0 6.4 9.2 1.08

PIMCO Foreign Bond (USD-Hedged) I Rank 24 16 7 8 19 36 7 23 11

Concordia University-NebraskaEndowment


26



Fund &Cat Avg

Exp Ratio

Allocation

MarketValue

($)%

Performance(%)

CurrentQuarter

YTD1

Year3

Years5

Years10

Years2011 2010 2009

Emerging Market Debt

PIMCO Emerging Local Bd Fd Inst 1,764,397 4.9 4.4 11.7 13.6 9.8 8.4 N/A -0.8 15.6 29.3 0.90

JPM GBI-EM Global Diversified 4.8 12.1 12.7 9.4 8.7 N/A -1.8 15.7 22.0

IM Emerging Markets Debt (MF) Median 6.8 14.5 19.9 11.4 9.3 12.6 5.1 12.6 33.8 1.26

PIMCO Emerging Local Bd Fd Inst Rank 91 89 92 81 72 N/A 79 12 78

Large Cap

Dodge & Cox Stock 1,496,211 4.1 8.0 18.6 31.9 10.5 -1.8 7.8 -4.1 13.5 31.3 0.52

Russell 1000 Value Index 6.5 15.7 30.9 11.8 -0.9 8.2 0.4 15.5 19.7

IM U.S. Large Cap Value Equity (MF) Median 6.4 14.0 28.3 9.7 -1.2 7.0 -2.0 12.8 24.1 1.25

Dodge & Cox Stock Rank 2 2 5 36 61 26 74 40 14

iShares S&P 500 Index 1,439,158 4.0 6.3 16.4 30.1 13.1 1.0 7.9 2.0 15.0 26.4 0.09

S&P 500 6.4 16.4 30.2 13.2 1.1 8.0 2.1 15.1 26.5

IM S&P 500 Index (MF) Median 6.2 16.0 29.6 12.7 0.6 7.6 1.6 14.6 26.1 0.63

iShares S&P 500 Index Rank 12 10 9 7 7 6 10 9 17

iShares Russell 1000 Growth Index 1,419,731 3.9 6.0 16.6 28.9 14.5 3.1 8.2 2.5 16.5 36.9 0.20

Russell 1000 Growth Index 6.1 16.8 29.2 14.7 3.2 8.4 2.6 16.7 37.2

IM U.S. Large Cap Growth Equity (MF) Median 6.3 16.4 27.0 12.0 1.6 7.2 -1.8 15.0 34.7 1.33

iShares Russell 1000 Growth Index Rank 58 46 36 13 20 23 12 33 40

Mid Cap

iShares S&P MidCap 400 Index 1,069,019 2.9 5.4 13.7 28.3 14.1 3.7 10.6 -1.9 26.4 37.2 0.21

S&P MidCap 400 5.4 13.8 28.5 14.3 3.8 10.8 -1.7 26.6 37.4

IM U.S. Mid Cap Core Equity (MF) Median 4.9 12.8 25.9 11.5 0.6 8.7 -4.9 23.0 33.3 1.32

iShares S&P MidCap 400 Index Rank 36 32 27 10 9 17 25 11 34

Small Cap

DFA US Small Cap Value I 181,229 0.5 7.4 16.2 35.0 13.1 1.6 11.4 -7.5 30.9 33.6 0.52

Russell 2000 Value Index 5.7 14.4 32.6 11.7 1.3 9.7 -5.5 24.5 20.6

IM U.S. Small Cap Value Equity (MF) Median 5.0 12.4 30.6 11.5 2.0 10.0 -4.7 25.7 30.2 1.53

DFA US Small Cap Value I Rank 10 9 18 17 61 14 80 10 38

Conestoga Small Cap 177,565 0.5 0.6 10.1 24.6 14.6 5.2 N/A 4.6 24.0 29.1 1.10

Russell 2000 Growth Index 4.8 14.1 31.2 14.2 3.0 10.5 -2.9 29.1 34.5

IM U.S. Small Cap Growth Equity (MF) Median 5.2 13.3 30.9 14.2 1.8 9.7 -3.2 28.2 33.5 1.55

Conestoga Small Cap Rank 100 86 86 45 6 N/A 5 79 74

27



Fund &Cat Avg

Exp Ratio

Allocation

MarketValue

($)%

Performance(%)

CurrentQuarter

YTD1

Year3

Years5

Years10

Years2011 2010 2009

International Equity

American Funds EuroPacific Gr F-1 3,198,014 8.8 7.2 12.9 18.0 3.3 -2.2 10.3 -13.6 9.4 39.1 0.86

MSCI EAFE Index 7.0 10.6 14.3 2.6 -4.8 8.7 -11.7 8.2 32.5

IM International Large Cap Core Equity (MF) Median 6.3 10.2 14.7 2.1 -5.1 7.8 -12.4 7.3 29.7 1.36

American Funds EuroPacific Gr F-1 Rank 16 13 18 20 4 6 75 26 13

Emerging Markets

Aberdeen Emerging Markets Instl Fd Instl 1,444,545 4.0 6.9 17.6 24.0 12.6 7.6 N/A -11.0 27.6 76.6 1.03

MSCI Emerging Markets Index 7.9 12.3 17.3 6.0 -1.0 17.4 -18.2 19.2 79.0

IM Emerging Markets Equity (MF) Median 6.8 11.4 16.6 5.0 -2.7 15.4 -19.5 18.3 73.6 1.63

Aberdeen Emerging Markets Instl Fd Instl Rank 46 10 4 2 1 N/A 4 7 36

Real Estate Domestic

Nuveen Real Estate Secs I 2,199,819 6.1 0.3 15.4 32.5 21.1 4.0 13.3 7.9 30.6 30.5 1.04

FTSE NAREIT Equity REIT Index 0.2 15.1 32.6 20.4 2.1 11.4 8.3 27.9 28.0

IM Real Estate Sector (MF) Median 0.0 14.2 31.5 19.6 1.7 11.0 7.9 27.5 29.0 1.41

Nuveen Real Estate Secs I Rank 41 26 27 13 9 3 50 13 28

Commodities

PIMCO Commodity Real Ret Strat Instl 3,105,820 8.5 12.1 11.8 14.3 12.7 2.1 8.9 -7.6 24.1 39.9 0.74

Dow Jones-UBS Commodity Index 9.7 5.6 6.0 5.3 -3.0 5.2 -13.3 16.8 18.9

MLP

Kayne Anderson MLP Invst Co 876,266 2.4 3.3 8.2 20.3 22.3 8.5 N/A 3.0 35.4 69.9 2.40

Alerian MLP Index 8.9 8.5 26.2 25.1 14.2 17.2 13.9 35.9 76.4

ALPS Alerian MLP ETF 5.4 4.5 15.4 N/A N/A N/A 10.1 N/A N/A

Tortoise Energy Infrastructure Corp. 888,537 2.4 2.9 5.6 26.2 22.0 11.2 N/A 10.7 31.5 99.3 1.54

Alerian MLP Index 8.9 8.5 26.2 25.1 14.2 17.2 13.9 35.9 76.4

ALPS Alerian MLP ETF 5.4 4.5 15.4 N/A N/A N/A 10.1 N/A N/A

28



Fund &Cat Avg

Exp Ratio

Allocation

MarketValue

($)%

Performance(%)

CurrentQuarter

YTD1

Year3

Years5

Years10

Years2011 2010 2009

Hedge Funds

Grosvenor Inst'l Partners, L.P. 3,626,152 10.0 2.6 5.7 6.2 3.7 0.0 4.4 -3.8 6.7 13.9 1.25

HFRI Fund of Funds Composite Index 2.4 3.4 2.9 1.5 -1.6 3.6 -5.7 5.7 11.5

Magnitude International 3,491,629 9.6 2.4 5.5 6.1 7.0 3.9 7.2 4.7 6.7 25.7 1.00

HFRI Fund of Funds Composite Index 2.4 3.4 2.9 1.5 -1.6 3.6 -5.7 5.7 11.5

Cash/Equivalents

Cash & Equivalents 7,797 0.0

29

FUND INFO

HISTORICAL PERFORMANCE

FUND OBJECTIVE

QUARTERLY COMMENTS - FUND

The fund seeks to provide inflation protection and income consistent with investment in inflation-indexed securities. It primarily invests in inflation-indexed bonds issued by the U.S. government. It may invest in bonds of any maturity, though the fund typically maintains a dollar-weightedmaturity of seven to 10 years. Up to 20% of the assets may be invested in non-inflation-indexed securities, including investment grade corporatedebt and U.S. government and agency bonds. At a minimum, all bonds purchased will be rated “investment grade.”

Product Name Vanguard Infl-Prot;Adm (VAIPX)

Fund Family Vanguard Group Inc

Ticker VAIPX

Peer Group IM U.S. TIPS (MF)

Benchmark Barclays Cap US Treasury: US TIPS

Fund Inception 06/10/2005

Portfolio Manager Gemma Wright-Casparius

Total Assets $15,822 Million

Total Assets Date 09/30/2012

Gross Expense 0.11%

Net Expense 0.11%

Turnover 28%

The Barclays U.S. Treasury Inflation Protected Index returned 2.1% for the period. The Inflation-Protected Securities Fund closely tracked theTIPS index and outperformed its peer group during the quarter. The fund invests almost exclusively in TIPS, and its performance can vary fromthat of competing funds that may hold other types of securities.During the quarter, 10-year break-even rates widened from 2.13% to 2.42% as inflationary concerns increased following the Federal Reserve'sannouncement of a third round of QE.

J. Rondini, Senior Investment Analyst, DiMeo Schneider & Associates, L.L.C. 3Q12

CurrentQuarter

YTD1

Year3

Years5

Years10

Years2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002

Vanguard Infl-Protected Secs Adm 2.13 6.24 8.99 9.26 7.71 N/A 13.29 6.31 10.96 -2.78 11.69 0.52 N/A N/A N/A N/A

Barclays Cap US Treasury: US TIPS 2.12 6.25 9.10 9.29 7.93 6.64 13.56 6.31 11.41 -2.35 11.63 0.49 2.84 8.46 8.39 16.56

IM U.S. TIPS (MF) Median 2.04 5.79 8.29 8.64 7.09 6.32 11.94 5.86 10.24 -2.56 10.62 -0.05 2.06 7.58 7.61 16.07

Vanguard Infl-Protected Secs Adm Rank 37 24 24 16 27 N/A 12 29 32 56 7 17 N/A N/A N/A N/A

Vanguard Infl-Protected Secs Adm

September 30, 2012

30

PEER GROUP ANALYSIS 3 YEAR ROLLING PEER GROUP PERCENTILE RANKING

RELATIVE PERFORMANCE TO INDEXRISK AND RETURN (10/01/07-09/30/12)

CurrentQuarter

1Year

3Years

5Years

Vanguard Infl-Protected Secs Adm 2.1 (37) 9.0 (24) 9.3 (16) 7.7 (27)

Barclays Cap US Treasury: US TIPS 2.1 (39) 9.1 (20) 9.3 (14) 7.9 (17)

5th Percentile 3.1 10.8 9.8 8.4

1st Quartile 2.3 8.9 9.1 7.7

Median 2.0 8.3 8.6 7.1

3rd Quartile 1.9 7.3 8.0 6.3

95th Percentile 1.2 3.9 4.9 2.3


September 30, 2012

31

PORTFOLIO CHARACTERISTICSRISK CHARACTERISTICS

SECTOR EXPOSURE (%)CREDIT QUALITY DISTRIBUTION (%)

1Year

3Years

5Years

10Years

Return 8.99 9.26 7.71 N/A

Standard Deviation 3.91 4.77 7.43 N/A

vs. Barclays Cap US Treasury: US TIPS

Tracking Error 0.43 0.42 0.65 N/A

Alpha -0.06 -0.02 -0.21 N/A

Beta 1.00 1.00 1.00 N/A

R-Squared 0.99 0.99 0.99 N/A

Consistency 33.33 44.44 46.67 N/A

vs. 90 Day U.S. Treasury Bill

Sharpe Ratio 2.22 1.87 0.95 N/A

Portfolio Benchmark

Effective Duration 8.6 8.8

Avg. Maturity 9.6 9.2

Current Yield 2.5 1.3


September 30, 2012

32

FUND INFO


FUND OBJECTIVE


This fund is managed to take full advantage of the 35% limit on below investment-grade bonds, which tends to generate a higher risk/rewardprofile. In addition, management is willing to take on added interest rate risk through obtaining longer-duration bonds in order to gain higher yields.To ease some of this interest rate risk, the fund is structured with counter cyclical elements. In doing so, it will utilize convertible bonds, municipalbonds, preferred stocks and foreign corporate and government bonds, in addition to the domestic corporate bonds which make up the majority of

the fund.

Product Name Loomis Sayles:Bd;Inst (LSBDX)

Fund Family Loomis Sayles & Company LP

Ticker LSBDX

Peer Group IM U.S. Broad Market Core Fixed Income (MF)

Benchmark Barclays Aggregate


Portfolio Manager Team Managed



Gross Expense 0.64%

Net Expense 0.64%

Turnover 22%

A large underweight to government bonds detracted from results as treasuries rallied. An overweight to corporate bonds detracted slightly from relative results as they lagged treasuries.The portfolio’s slightly longer than benchmark duration added to results for the quarter as longer term bonds outperformed.An overweight to lower quality issues in the shorter portion of the curve helped returns; however an overweight to below investment grades in the long part of the curve detracted from results.A modest equity exposure also detracted from returns as they trailed the bond market for the quarter.

M. O'Neill, Analyst, DiMeo Schneider & Associates, L.L.C. 2Q12

CurrentQuarter

YTD1

Year3

Years5

Years10

Years2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002

Loomis Sayles Bond Instl 4.76 11.71 14.52 11.14 7.40 10.72 3.76 13.58 37.19 -21.82 8.53 11.29 4.28 11.30 29.18 13.34

Barclays Aggregate 1.58 3.99 5.16 6.19 6.53 5.33 7.84 6.54 5.93 5.24 6.97 4.34 2.43 4.34 4.11 10.27

IM U.S. Broad Market Core Fixed Income (MF) Median 2.43 5.97 7.41 7.11 6.39 5.12 6.54 7.50 13.31 -3.68 5.25 3.94 1.82 4.02 4.36 8.58

Loomis Sayles Bond Instl Rank 1 1 1 1 21 1 93 1 1 97 2 1 2 1 1 1

Loomis Sayles Bond Instl

September 30, 2012

33



CurrentQuarter

1Year

3Years

5Years

Loomis Sayles Bond Instl 4.8 (1) 14.5 (1) 11.1 (1) 7.4 (21)

Barclays Aggregate 1.6 (90) 5.2 (87) 6.2 (79) 6.5 (45)

5th Percentile 3.8 11.1 9.5 8.6

1st Quartile 2.9 8.6 7.8 7.2

Median 2.4 7.4 7.1 6.4

3rd Quartile 2.0 6.2 6.3 5.5

95th Percentile 1.4 4.3 4.8 3.1


September 30, 2012

34



1Year

3Years

5Years

10Years

Return 14.52 11.14 7.40 10.72

Standard Deviation 7.30 7.00 12.27 9.65

vs. Barclays Aggregate

Tracking Error 7.54 7.57 11.16 8.52

Alpha 14.45 11.93 -1.93 3.95

Beta 0.06 -0.08 1.54 1.30

R-Squared 0.00 0.00 0.20 0.23

Consistency 58.33 58.33 55.00 65.83


Sharpe Ratio 1.90 1.54 0.58 0.92

Portfolio Benchmark





September 30, 2012

35

FUND INFO


FUND OBJECTIVE


PIMCO seeks current income consistent with preservation of capital. The process begins with a top-down review of the global economy andinterest rates. Management looks at the most likely near term scenario with regard to interest rate volatility, yield curve shape, and credit trends.

Once the larger trends are established, they focus on selecting high-quality fixed income securities through the use of proprietary research.

Product Name PIMCO:Tot Rtn;Inst (PTTRX)

Fund Family PIMCO

Ticker PTTRX

Peer Group IM U.S. Broad Market Core Fixed Income (MF)

Benchmark Barclays Aggregate


Portfolio Manager William H. Gross



Gross Expense 0.46%

Net Expense 0.46%

Turnover 584%

The fund outperformed in the third quarter’s “risk on” environment that resulted from further quantitative easing programs announced by theFederal Reserve and the European Central Bank.The fund remains underweight to government-related securities, and is positioned with an overweight to TIPS, an underweight to nominaltreasuries, and an overweight to the “belly of the curve” (6-10 year maturities) while being underweight short and long term maturities.The fund is positioned with an underweight position to investment grade credit, but remains overweight to financials due to 15 of the largest 19U.S. banks passing PIMCO’s most stringent (and unlikely) stress testing scenario, which includes a 13% unemployment rate, a 50% drop inequity markets, and a 21% reduction in home prices.Although the fund is underweight credit, PIMCO views the fund’s tactical positions in municipal bonds and “Build America Bonds” as substitutes to credit that are trading at more attractive yield spreads above treasuries than other traditional investment grade credits.The fund’s foreign holdings remain in Canadian, Mexican and Brazilian issues, but the fund also started purchasing Italian sovereign bondsduring the quarter due to the ECB’s support for euro-denominated sovereign bonds.

A.Novara, Research Analyst, DiMeo Schneider & Associates, L.L.C. 3Q12

CurrentQuarter

YTD1

Year3

Years5

Years10

Years2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002

PIMCO Total Return Instl 3.16 9.08 11.51 7.69 8.94 6.96 4.16 8.86 13.87 4.82 9.08 3.99 2.88 5.14 5.57 10.21

Barclays Aggregate 1.58 3.99 5.16 6.19 6.53 5.33 7.84 6.54 5.93 5.24 6.97 4.34 2.43 4.34 4.11 10.27

IM U.S. Broad Market Core Fixed Income (MF) Median 2.43 5.97 7.41 7.11 6.39 5.12 6.54 7.50 13.31 -3.68 5.25 3.94 1.82 4.02 4.36 8.58

PIMCO Total Return Instl Rank 16 4 4 28 3 4 90 25 47 13 1 47 4 12 28 10

PIMCO Total Return Instl

September 30, 2012

36



CurrentQuarter

1Year

3Years

5Years

PIMCO Total Return Instl 3.2 (16) 11.5 (4) 7.7 (28) 8.9 (3)

Barclays Aggregate 1.6 (90) 5.2 (87) 6.2 (79) 6.5 (45)

5th Percentile 3.8 11.1 9.5 8.6

1st Quartile 2.9 8.6 7.8 7.2

Median 2.4 7.4 7.1 6.4

3rd Quartile 2.0 6.2 6.3 5.5

95th Percentile 1.4 4.3 4.8 3.1


September 30, 2012

37



1Year

3Years

5Years

10Years

Return 11.51 7.69 8.94 6.96


vs. Barclays Aggregate

Tracking Error 2.07 2.71 2.84 2.12

Alpha 5.36 2.90 2.90 1.74

Beta 1.14 0.76 0.91 0.97

R-Squared 0.56 0.37 0.56 0.73

Consistency 83.33 72.22 73.33 68.33


Sharpe Ratio 3.54 2.22 1.86 1.23

Portfolio Benchmark





September 30, 2012

38

FUND INFO


FUND OBJECTIVE


The fund utilizes a bottom-up, fundamental, value-oriented approach to analyze the issuer's business prospectus, management, capitalrequirements, capital structure, enterprise value, and security structure and covenants. Credit analysts focusing solely on high yield havesignificant influence on buy/sell decisions, industry weighting, and risk profile within an industry. The analysts keep a performance rating on eachindustry they follow, which determines relative weightings in the portfolio. Relative positions within each industry in terms of credit quality alsoresult from analyst ratings. Management may shift from weaker to stronger credits and from cyclical to non-cyclical sectors if they believe the

economic environment will weaken and vice versa if they believe the economy will strengthen.

Product Name JPMorgan:High Yield;Sel (OHYFX)

Fund Family JPMorgan Funds

Ticker OHYFX

Peer Group IM U.S. High Yield Bonds (MF)

Benchmark Citigroup High-Yield Market


Portfolio Manager Morgan/Shanahan/Gibson



Gross Expense 1.10%

Net Expense 0.86%

Turnover 41%

Underperformance during the second quarter was primarily due to security selection in the basic materials, consumer cyclicals, industrial-other,technology and utilities sectors. At the industry level, underweight positions in consumer non-cyclicals and utilities negatively impacted returns.On the positive side, security selection in the communications, energy and finance sectors contributed to returns. At the industry level, anoverweight position in consumer cyclicals and underweights in the basic materials and energy sectors added to returns.


CurrentQuarter

YTD1

Year3

Years5

Years10

Years2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002

JPMorgan High Yield Select 4.37 11.31 17.73 11.63 8.22 10.26 2.65 14.67 48.45 -22.54 2.18 12.80 3.04 11.31 26.10 -1.09

Citigroup High-Yield Market 4.32 11.73 18.90 12.67 8.88 10.97 5.51 14.33 55.23 -25.91 1.83 11.85 2.07 10.80 30.62 -1.52

IM U.S. High Yield Bonds (MF) Median 4.16 10.79 17.18 11.20 6.94 9.00 2.79 13.60 46.46 -25.30 1.73 9.76 2.71 9.70 24.01 -0.54

JPMorgan High Yield Select Rank 35 38 42 35 17 13 53 30 39 29 37 6 41 18 35 57

JPMorgan High Yield Select

September 30, 2012

39



CurrentQuarter

1Year

3Years

5Years

JPMorgan High Yield Select 4.4 (35) 17.7 (42) 11.6 (35) 8.2 (17)

Citigroup High-Yield Market 4.3 (39) 18.9 (23) 12.7 (11) 8.9 (6)

5th Percentile 5.6 20.6 13.1 8.9

1st Quartile 4.6 18.6 11.9 7.8

Median 4.2 17.2 11.2 6.9

3rd Quartile 3.3 12.6 10.0 5.6

95th Percentile 2.3 8.8 6.4 3.1


September 30, 2012

40



1Year

3Years

5Years

10Years

Return 17.73 11.63 8.22 10.26


vs. Citigroup High-Yield Market

Tracking Error 0.75 0.95 3.85 3.03

Alpha 0.16 -1.36 1.00 1.42

Beta 0.93 1.04 0.80 0.80

R-Squared 0.99 0.98 0.95 0.94

Consistency 33.33 47.22 48.33 49.17


Sharpe Ratio 2.58 1.55 0.68 0.95

Portfolio Benchmark

Effective Duration 4.5

Avg. Maturity 7.0

Current Yield 8.4


September 30, 2012

41

FUND INFO


FUND OBJECTIVE


The fund takes an all-encompassing approach toward international fixed-income investing. Top-down work begins with a 3-5 year outlook for theglobal economy and interest rates followed by using a country-bond allocation model to help determine which countries have the best risk adjusted

yield. The bottom-up strategy focuses on credit research, stressing fundamental and in depth analysis of all potential holdings.

Product Name PIMCO:For Bd (DH);Inst (PFORX)

Fund Family PIMCO

Ticker PFORX

Peer Group IM International Fixed Income (MF)

Benchmark Citigroup Non-U.S. WGB Hedged


Portfolio Manager Scott A. Mather



Gross Expense 0.50%

Net Expense 0.50%

Turnover 355%

Both interest rate strategies and sector strategies drove the fund’s strong relative performance during the third quarter, with the portfolio’sunderweight duration exposure to Japan contributing to performance, as well as overweight duration exposures to Europe, the United Kingdom,and the U.S. also contributing meaningfully.Positions in both non-agency and agency mortgaged backed securities, as well as asset backed securities, drove the fund’s strong performancefrom its sector strategies.The fund remains duration underweight to government bonds, which is the benchmark’s sole focus.


CurrentQuarter

YTD1

Year3

Years5

Years10

Years2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002

PIMCO Foreign Bond (USD-Hedged) I 5.05 9.14 11.75 9.02 8.62 6.63 6.77 9.19 19.04 -2.36 3.98 2.94 5.72 6.65 3.57 7.66

Citigroup Non-U.S. WGB Hedged 1.81 4.28 4.91 3.64 4.62 4.34 4.06 2.47 2.38 8.01 4.87 3.11 5.69 5.18 1.88 6.85

IM International Fixed Income (MF) Median 4.57 6.85 6.60 4.68 5.77 6.30 2.98 6.44 9.16 2.24 9.29 5.47 -8.08 10.81 17.63 19.93

PIMCO Foreign Bond (USD-Hedged) I Rank 24 16 7 8 19 36 7 23 11 81 83 82 4 80 85 77

PIMCO Foreign Bond (USD-Hedged) I

September 30, 2012

42



CurrentQuarter

1Year

3Years

5Years

PIMCO Foreign Bond (USD-Hedged) I 5.1 (24) 11.7 (7) 9.0 (8) 8.6 (19)

Citigroup Non-U.S. WGB Hedged 1.8 (99) 4.9 (68) 3.6 (77) 4.6 (84)

5th Percentile 7.2 12.3 9.3 9.8

1st Quartile 5.0 9.8 7.6 7.9

Median 4.6 6.6 4.7 5.8

3rd Quartile 3.9 4.1 3.7 5.0

95th Percentile 2.3 2.1 1.7 3.8


September 30, 2012

43



1Year

3Years

5Years

10Years

Return 11.75 9.02 8.62 6.63


vs. Citigroup Non-U.S. WGB Hedged

Tracking Error 2.21 2.49 4.63 3.40

Alpha 6.72 5.77 5.80 3.49

Beta 0.97 0.86 0.61 0.72

R-Squared 0.58 0.46 0.13 0.25

Consistency 75.00 72.22 66.67 60.00


Sharpe Ratio 3.28 2.58 1.57 1.20

Portfolio Benchmark


Avg. Maturity 11.4

Current Yield 4.6


September 30, 2012

44

FUND INFO


FUND OBJECTIVE


The fund takes a conservative approach toward emerging market fixed-income investing. Top-down work begins with a 3-5 year outlook for theglobal economy and interest rates followed by using a country-bond allocation model to help determine which countries have the best risk adjustedyield. Country selection also takes into account fiscal and reserve positions, relationship to external trends, and the potential for adverse technical

conditions. The bottom-up strategy focuses on credit research, stressing fundamental and in depth relative value analysis of all potential holdings.

Product Name PIMCO:Em Local Bd;Inst (PELBX)

Fund Family PIMCO

Ticker PELBX

Peer Group IM Emerging Markets Debt (MF)

Benchmark JPM GBI-EM Global Diversified


Portfolio Manager Michael Gomez



Gross Expense 0.90%

Net Expense 0.90%

Turnover 22%

The fund underperformed modestly during the quarter as overweights to Brazil and Mexico underperformed modestly, and underweights tostrong performers Turkey and Hungary detracted from performance.Chinese exposure was scaled back slightly to reflect lower growth expectations.The fund remains overweight to local duration as yields are expected to decline as EM inflation concerns abate.An overweight to EM currencies is the result of PIMCO’s perception of weakness in the U.S. dollar and Euro given recent announcements of further quantitative easing.EM corporates continue to remain attractive in some areas when compared to their sovereign counterparts, specifically in areas like Russiawhere barriers to local market access exist.


CurrentQuarter

YTD1

Year3

Years5

Years10

Years2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002

PIMCO Emerging Local Bd Fd Inst 4.43 11.70 13.63 9.76 8.43 N/A -0.78 15.55 29.27 -10.66 12.29 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

JPM GBI-EM Global Diversified 4.80 12.12 12.66 9.43 8.74 N/A -1.75 15.68 21.98 -5.22 18.11 15.22 6.27 22.97 16.92 N/A

IM Emerging Markets Debt (MF) Median 6.79 14.50 19.86 11.35 9.26 12.61 5.13 12.60 33.83 -18.03 4.91 11.09 11.40 12.61 30.39 12.02

PIMCO Emerging Local Bd Fd Inst Rank 91 89 92 81 72 N/A 79 12 78 6 6 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

PIMCO Emerging Local Bd Fd Inst

September 30, 2012

45



CurrentQuarter

1Year

3Years

5Years

PIMCO Emerging Local Bd Fd Inst 4.4 (91) 13.6 (92) 9.8 (81) 8.4 (72)

JPM GBI-EM Global Diversified 4.8 (90) 12.7 (92) 9.4 (82) 8.7 (71)

5th Percentile 8.7 24.0 13.7 10.9

1st Quartile 7.3 21.2 12.2 10.1

Median 6.8 19.9 11.4 9.3

3rd Quartile 5.7 17.5 10.4 8.0

95th Percentile 3.2 6.7 3.6 3.0


September 30, 2012

46



1Year

3Years

5Years

10Years

Return 13.63 9.76 8.43 N/A


vs. JPM GBI-EM Global Diversified


Alpha 1.76 0.68 -0.56 N/A

Beta 0.92 0.96 1.04 N/A

R-Squared 0.99 0.99 0.98 N/A

Consistency 50.00 41.67 41.67 N/A



Portfolio Benchmark


Avg. Maturity 6.0

Current Yield 4.1


September 30, 2012

47

FUND INFO


FUND OBJECTIVE


The portfolio is built based on Dodge & Cox's fundamental research effort, a three-to-five year time horizon, and a strong price discipline. It investsin companies that appear to be temporarily undervalued by the stock market but have a favorable outlook for long-term growth, while focusing onthe underlying financial condition and prospects of individual companies, including future earnings, cash flow, and dividends. Other factors,including financial strength, economic condition, competitive advantage, and quality of the business franchise are weighed against valuation in

selecting individual securities. By prospectus, the fund can invest up to 20% of its assets in U.S. dollar-denominated foreign securities.

Product Name Dodge & Cox Stock (DODGX)

Fund Family Dodge & Cox

Ticker DODGX

Peer Group IM U.S. Large Cap Value Equity (MF)

Benchmark Russell 1000 Value Index





Gross Expense 0.52%

Net Expense 0.52%

Turnover 16%

The fund’s telecommunications services stocks were strong contributors during the third quarter. Investors concerned about troubles around theglobe rewarded telecom companies given their strong dividends and exposure to the U.S. economy. Sprint performed particularly well, rising69%.Positioning in the financials sector also aided results. Goldman Sachs, which lagged last quarter, delivered a strong performance. Theinvestment banking, securities and investment management firm announced better than expected revenues and solid expense reductions.Within the consumer discretionary space, media holdings posted gains. Time Warner benefited from strong revenue growth in the company'spay TV business and from a reaffirmed full-year outlook for earnings. Other notable contributors included Comcast and Time Warner Cable.Lastly, performance benefited from strong stock selection within the healthcare sector. Notable contributors included pharmaceutical giantsMerck and Sanofi as well as biotechnology firm Amgen.


CurrentQuarter

YTD1

Year3

Years5

Years10

Years2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002

Dodge & Cox Stock 8.03 18.63 31.89 10.50 -1.76 7.84 -4.08 13.49 31.27 -43.31 0.14 18.53 9.37 19.17 32.34 -10.54

Russell 1000 Value Index 6.51 15.75 30.92 11.84 -0.90 8.17 0.39 15.51 19.69 -36.85 -0.17 22.25 7.05 16.49 30.03 -15.52

IM U.S. Large Cap Value Equity (MF) Median 6.35 14.03 28.28 9.75 -1.20 7.04 -2.05 12.78 24.10 -36.92 1.32 17.97 5.03 12.83 28.45 -18.97

Dodge & Cox Stock Rank 2 2 5 36 61 26 74 40 14 92 60 43 11 2 20 4

Dodge & Cox Stock

September 30, 2012

48



CurrentQuarter

1Year

3Years

5Years

Dodge & Cox Stock 8.0 (2) 31.9 (5) 10.5 (36) -1.8 (61)

Russell 1000 Value Index 6.5 (43) 30.9 (11) 11.8 (11) -0.9 (40)

5th Percentile 7.7 31.7 12.4 1.1

1st Quartile 6.9 30.0 11.0 0.0

Median 6.4 28.3 9.7 -1.2

3rd Quartile 5.6 26.4 8.4 -2.5

95th Percentile 4.1 21.4 7.0 -4.3

Dodge & Cox Stock

September 30, 2012

49

RISK CHARACTERISTICS PORTFOLIO CHARACTERISTICS

SECTOR EXPOSURE (%) TOP 10 HOLDINGS

Portfolio Benchmark

Total Securities 80 690

Price/Earnings (P/E) 16.0 12.6

Price/Book (P/B) 2.2 1.8

Dividend Yield 2.7 2.6

1Year

3Years

5Years

10Years

Return 31.89 10.50 -1.76 7.84


vs. Russell 1000 Value Index

Tracking Error 2.91 3.23 4.95 4.32

Alpha -1.40 -2.13 -0.44 -0.65

Beta 1.08 1.10 1.10 1.07

R-Squared 0.97 0.97 0.96 0.94

Consistency 41.67 41.67 50.00 47.50


Sharpe Ratio 1.94 0.65 0.01 0.42

As of 06/30/2012

Wells Fargo & Co ORD 4.4%

Capital One Financial Corp ORD 4.3%

Comcast Corp ORD 4.3%

Merck & Co Inc ORD 3.6%

Hewlett-Packard Co ORD 3.4%

General Electric Co ORD 3.3%

Time Warner Inc ORD 3.0%

Sanofi SA DR 2.8%

Microsoft Corp ORD 2.8%

GlaxoSmithKline PLC DR 2.7%

Dodge & Cox Stock

September 30, 2012

50

FUND INFO


FUND OBJECTIVE


This exchange traded fund (ETF) seeks performance corresponding to the price and yield performance, before fees and expenses, of the large capportion of the U.S. equity market, as represented by the S&P 500 Index. Each stock in the Index is held on a market capitalization weighted basiswhere the size of the position in the stock is based on the size of the stock as measured by the stock price times the number of shares outstanding.

The fund attempts to replicate this index by holding all or substantially all of the stocks in the S&P 500.

Product Name iShares:S&P 500 Index (IVV)

Fund Family BlackRock Fund Advisors

Ticker

Peer Group IM U.S. Large Cap Core Equity (MF)

Benchmark S&P 500





Gross Expense 0.09%

Net Expense 0.09%

Turnover 5%

Due to the passive nature of this product, commentary not provided.

CurrentQuarter

YTD1

Year3

Years5

Years10

Years2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002

iShares S&P 500 Index 6.33 16.36 30.06 13.10 1.01 7.94 2.03 14.96 26.43 -36.95 5.44 15.69 4.83 10.77 28.53 -22.15

S&P 500 6.35 16.44 30.20 13.20 1.05 8.01 2.11 15.06 26.46 -37.00 5.49 15.79 4.91 10.88 28.68 -22.10

IM U.S. Large Cap Core Equity (MF) Median 6.30 14.76 27.77 10.82 0.20 7.19 -0.66 12.98 26.36 -36.92 5.90 14.37 5.23 9.71 26.03 -21.73

iShares S&P 500 Index Rank 49 29 24 15 29 26 22 19 50 51 56 33 56 39 30 56

iShares S&P 500 Index

September 30, 2012

51



CurrentQuarter

1Year

3Years

5Years

iShares S&P 500 Index 6.3 (49) 30.1 (24) 13.1 (15) 1.0 (29)

5th Percentile 8.3 32.8 14.1 2.8

1st Quartile 6.9 29.9 12.5 1.2

Median 6.3 27.8 10.8 0.2

3rd Quartile 5.5 25.2 9.3 -1.0

95th Percentile 4.0 20.9 6.9 -3.6


September 30, 2012

52


SECTOR EXPOSURE (%)

Portfolio

TOP 10 HOLDINGS

1Year

3Years

5Years

10Years

Return 30.06 13.10 1.01 7.94


vs. S&P 500

Tracking Error 0.03 0.04 0.04 0.04

Alpha -0.06 -0.07 -0.04 -0.05

Beta 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00

R-Squared 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00

Consistency 0.00 16.67 28.33 20.00


Sharpe Ratio 2.08 0.88 0.11 0.47

Total Securities 503

Avg. Market Cap 117.15 Billion

P/E 19.1

P/B 3.9

Div. Yield 2.54%

Annual EPS 20.2

5Yr EPS 10.1

3Yr EPS Growth 15.2

As of 08/31/2012

Apple Inc ORD 4.9%

Exxon Mobil Corp ORD 3.2%


International Business Machines Corp ORD 1.8%

Chevron Corp ORD 1.7%

General Electric Co ORD 1.7%

AT&T Inc ORD 1.7%

Johnson & Johnson ORD 1.5%

Procter & Gamble Co ORD 1.4%

Wells Fargo & Co ORD 1.4%


September 30, 2012

53

FUND INFO


FUND OBJECTIVE


This exchange traded fund (ETF) seeks performance corresponding to the price and yield performance, before fees and expenses, of the large capgrowth portion of the U.S. equity market, as represented by the Russell 1000 Growth Index. The Russell 1000 Growth Index is comprised of thestocks within the Russell 1000 Index with higher price-to-book values and higher forecasted growth values. The Russell 1000 Index measures the

performance of the 1,000 largest companies in the Russell 3000 Index.

Product Name iShares:Russ 1000 Gr Idx (IWF)


Ticker

Peer Group IM U.S. Large Cap Growth Equity (MF)

Benchmark Russell 1000 Growth Index





Gross Expense 0.20%

Net Expense 0.20%

Turnover 19%


CurrentQuarter

YTD1

Year3

Years5

Years10

Years2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002

iShares Russell 1000 Growth Index 6.05 16.62 28.92 14.52 3.07 8.22 2.47 16.47 36.94 -38.48 11.63 8.86 5.08 6.09 29.46 -27.99

Russell 1000 Growth Index 6.11 16.80 29.19 14.73 3.24 8.41 2.64 16.71 37.21 -38.44 11.81 9.07 5.26 6.30 29.75 -27.88

IM U.S. Large Cap Growth Equity (MF) Median 6.26 16.36 26.97 12.00 1.57 7.22 -1.77 15.04 34.73 -39.73 13.58 6.57 5.66 7.33 27.01 -27.17

iShares Russell 1000 Growth Index Rank 58 46 36 13 20 23 12 33 40 40 68 25 57 67 33 56

iShares Russell 1000 Growth Index

September 30, 2012

54



CurrentQuarter

1Year

3Years

5Years

iShares Russell 1000 Growth Index 6.0 (58) 28.9 (36) 14.5 (13) 3.1 (20)

5th Percentile 8.6 32.8 16.4 4.6

1st Quartile 7.2 30.1 13.3 2.7

Median 6.3 27.0 12.0 1.6

3rd Quartile 5.5 24.6 10.4 0.0

95th Percentile 3.7 21.3 8.2 -1.8


September 30, 2012

55


SECTOR EXPOSURE (%)

Portfolio

TOP 10 HOLDINGS

1Year

3Years

5Years

10Years

Return 28.92 14.52 3.07 8.22


vs. Russell 1000 Growth Index

Tracking Error 0.03 0.04 0.04 0.04

Alpha -0.17 -0.17 -0.16 -0.17

Beta 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00

R-Squared 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00

Consistency 8.33 8.33 13.33 6.67


Sharpe Ratio 1.92 0.93 0.22 0.48



P/E 22.0

P/B 5.9

Div. Yield 2.21%

Annual EPS 24.0

5Yr EPS 19.0

3Yr EPS Growth 20.4

As of 08/31/2012

Apple Inc ORD 8.8%


International Business Machines Corp ORD 3.0%

Google Inc ORD 2.5%

The Coca-Cola Co ORD 2.1%

Philip Morris International Inc ORD 2.0%

Verizon Communications Inc ORD 1.7%

Oracle Corp ORD 1.7%

PepsiCo Inc ORD 1.6%

Qualcomm Inc ORD 1.5%


September 30, 2012

56

FUND INFO


FUND OBJECTIVE


The iShares S&P Midcap 400 Fund seeks investment results that correspond generally to the price and yield performance of the S&P Midcap 400index. The fund invests at least 90% of assets in the securities of the underlying index. It uses a replication strategy in order to track the S&P

Midcap 400 index, which measures the performance of the mid-capitalization sector of the US equity market.

Product Name iShares:S&P MC 400 Idx (IJH)


Ticker

Peer Group IM U.S. Mid Cap Core Equity (MF)

Benchmark S&P MidCap 400


Portfolio Manager Team Mnanaged



Gross Expense 0.21%

Net Expense 0.21%

Turnover 14%


CurrentQuarter

YTD1

Year3

Years5

Years10

Years2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002

iShares S&P MidCap 400 Index 5.41 13.67 28.35 14.14 3.73 10.62 -1.89 26.38 37.21 -36.19 7.80 10.13 12.48 16.29 35.36 -14.70

S&P MidCap 400 5.44 13.77 28.54 14.33 3.83 10.77 -1.73 26.64 37.38 -36.23 7.98 10.32 12.55 16.50 35.64 -14.51

IM U.S. Mid Cap Core Equity (MF) Median 4.87 12.80 25.92 11.50 0.64 8.71 -4.94 23.03 33.34 -39.44 5.59 12.73 9.91 15.89 33.02 -15.46

iShares S&P MidCap 400 Index Rank 36 32 27 10 9 17 25 11 34 21 39 73 32 45 39 43

iShares S&P MidCap 400 Index

September 30, 2012

57



CurrentQuarter

1Year

3Years

5Years

iShares S&P MidCap 400 Index 5.4 (36) 28.3 (27) 14.1 (10) 3.7 (9)

5th Percentile 7.1 31.6 16.5 4.9

1st Quartile 5.7 28.6 12.4 1.9

Median 4.9 25.9 11.5 0.6

3rd Quartile 3.9 23.9 9.4 -1.1

95th Percentile 2.7 17.7 5.8 -3.7


September 30, 2012

58


SECTOR EXPOSURE (%)

Portfolio

TOP 10 HOLDINGS

1Year

3Years

5Years

10Years

Return 28.35 14.14 3.73 10.62


vs. S&P MidCap 400

Tracking Error 0.03 0.03 0.07 0.07

Alpha -0.12 -0.15 -0.09 -0.12

Beta 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00

R-Squared 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00

Consistency 0.00 2.78 15.00 10.00


Sharpe Ratio 1.64 0.81 0.25 0.56



P/E 24.4

P/B 3.3

Div. Yield 2.34%

Annual EPS 21.8

5Yr EPS 7.4

3Yr EPS Growth 12.1

As of 08/31/2012

Regeneron Pharmaceuticals Inc ORD 1.0%

Vertex Pharmaceuticals Inc ORD 1.0%

Equinix Inc ORD 0.8%

Kansas City Southern ORD 0.7%

HollyFrontier Corp ORD 0.7%

Ametek Inc ORD 0.7%

Macerich Co 0.7%

PetSmart Inc ORD 0.7%

Church & Dwight Co Inc ORD 0.7%

SL Green Realty Corp 0.6%


September 30, 2012

59

FUND INFO


FUND OBJECTIVE


The process selects stocks from the bottom deciles of NYSE issues, but include only the “value” subset. Stocks are ranked by book-to-marketratio, and stocks falling in the top three deciles (30%) are purchased for the fund. Book value is reconstructed for each eligible issue based onmanagement’s interpretation of how accounting charges affect “real” book value. This product will not own REITs, ADRs or foreign stocks, recently

issued IPOs, companies with less than 3 years of history, or OTC companies with fewer than 4 market makers.

Product Name DFA US Small Cap Val;I (DFSVX)

Fund Family Dimensional Fund Advisors LP

Ticker DFSVX

Peer Group IM U.S. Small Cap Value Equity (MF)

Benchmark Russell 2000 Value Index





Gross Expense 0.52%

Net Expense 0.52%

Turnover 14%

The DFA Small Cap Value fund outperformed its benchmark for the quarter in part due to relative outperformance from market-cap weighting.Both a relatively higher allocation to large and micro cap stocks, respectively, contributed to relative performance.The strongest-performing sectors in the quarter were energy, materials, consumer staples, and consumer discretionary. The portfolio generatednearly all of its relative outperformance over the quarter on the back of strong stock selection within each of these sectors.Not having exposure within telecommunication services detracted from relative results, as the sector was a market leader over the quarter.

B. McNaul, Investment Research Associate, DiMeo Schneider & Associates, L.L.C. 3Q12

CurrentQuarter

YTD1

Year3

Years5

Years10

Years2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002

DFA US Small Cap Value I 7.41 16.18 35.00 13.10 1.61 11.43 -7.55 30.90 33.62 -36.79 -10.75 21.55 7.79 25.39 59.40 -9.27

Russell 2000 Value Index 5.67 14.37 32.63 11.72 1.35 9.68 -5.50 24.50 20.58 -28.92 -9.78 23.48 4.71 22.25 46.03 -11.43

IM U.S. Small Cap Value Equity (MF) Median 4.95 12.45 30.57 11.47 2.04 9.97 -4.73 25.72 30.19 -32.12 -6.80 16.54 6.12 20.14 42.80 -11.84

DFA US Small Cap Value I Rank 10 9 18 17 61 14 80 10 38 71 76 8 33 8 14 32

DFA US Small Cap Value I

September 30, 2012

60



CurrentQuarter

1Year

3Years

5Years

DFA US Small Cap Value I 7.4 (10) 35.0 (18) 13.1 (17) 1.6 (61)

Russell 2000 Value Index 5.7 (38) 32.6 (30) 11.7 (45) 1.3 (67)

5th Percentile 7.9 37.2 14.5 4.7

1st Quartile 6.1 33.3 12.6 3.1

Median 5.0 30.6 11.5 2.0

3rd Quartile 3.7 27.2 10.4 0.8

95th Percentile 2.6 19.1 7.8 -1.2


September 30, 2012

61



Portfolio Benchmark

Total Securities 1,328 1,358




1Year

3Years

5Years

10Years

Return 35.00 13.10 1.61 11.43


vs. Russell 2000 Value Index

Tracking Error 3.07 3.68 4.35 4.10

Alpha -0.66 0.11 0.53 0.95

Beta 1.09 1.13 1.10 1.10

R-Squared 0.98 0.99 0.98 0.97

Consistency 41.67 52.78 53.33 59.17


Sharpe Ratio 1.74 0.64 0.17 0.52

As of 04/30/2012

Dillard's Inc ORD 1.1%

Westlake Chemical Corp ORD 1.1%

Esterline Technologies Corp ORD 1.1%

LifePoint Hospitals Inc ORD 1.0%

Helix Energy Solutions Group Inc ORD 1.0%

GATX Corp ORD 1.0%

Matson Inc ORD 0.9%

CNO Financial Group Inc ORD 0.9%

Delphi Financial Group Inc ORD 0.9%

Bristow Group Inc ORD 0.8%


September 30, 2012

62

FUND INFO


FUND OBJECTIVE


The investment style focuses on high quality small cap companies with long term sustainable growth in the 15 – 20% range. Ideas are generatedapproximately equally across three sources – quantitative screening; regional, boutique brokers; and company contacts through industryconferences, trade shows or other research. Fundamental research is focused on strong earnings and ROE growth, a low debt to capitalization

rate, strong balance sheet, and a solid management team. The portfolio is fairly concentrated at 45 – 50 stocks with turnover around 30%.

Product Name Conestoga Small Cap (CCASX)

Fund Family Conestoga Capital Advisors LLC

Ticker CCASX

Peer Group IM U.S. Small Cap Growth Equity (MF)

Benchmark Russell 2000 Growth Index


Portfolio Manager Mitchell/Martindale

Total Assets $296 Million


Gross Expense 1.27%

Net Expense 1.10%

Turnover 18%

Negative stock selection effects in every sector other than technology detracted from relative performance over the quarter.The largest contributing stock for the quarter was Bottomline Technologies, a developer of banking and payment software services for financialinstitutions. The company has been transitioning to a cloud-based delivery of its software, which has significantly boosted revenue growth.Positive stock selection within technology, however, was largely mitigated by an unfavorable significant overweight to the sector.Energy and healthcare were the largest sector laggards over the quarter.Within healthcare, several positions lagged the benchmark, including Quality Systems Inc. (QSII); Neogen Corp. (NEOG) and MeridianBioscience Inc. (VIVO). Conestoga sold QSII in early October after reviewing the results of a proxy battle over board positions.The strategy’s three positions in the energy sector all suffered modestly from declines in natural gas prices.The weakest stock in the portfolio from a contribution to return standpoint was Raven Industries Inc., a Sioux Falls, SD-based mini-conglomerate.

B. McNaul, Investment Research Associate, DiMeo Schneider & Associates, L.L.C. 3Q12

CurrentQuarter

YTD1

Year3

Years5

Years10

Years2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002

Conestoga Small Cap 0.57 10.08 24.61 14.59 5.22 N/A 4.55 23.99 29.09 -27.68 6.43 9.18 4.39 18.81 33.68 N/A

Russell 2000 Growth Index 4.84 14.08 31.18 14.19 2.96 10.55 -2.91 29.09 34.47 -38.54 7.05 13.35 4.15 14.31 48.54 -30.26

IM U.S. Small Cap Growth Equity (MF) Median 5.22 13.28 30.86 14.24 1.80 9.70 -3.23 28.20 33.47 -42.22 7.82 9.98 5.31 11.21 44.33 -27.91

Conestoga Small Cap Rank 100 86 86 45 6 N/A 5 79 74 1 55 57 61 11 86 N/A

Conestoga Small Cap

September 30, 2012

63



CurrentQuarter

1Year

3Years

5Years

Conestoga Small Cap 0.6 (100) 24.6 (86) 14.6 (45) 5.2 (6)

Russell 2000 Growth Index 4.8 (61) 31.2 (45) 14.2 (52) 3.0 (31)

5th Percentile 8.3 36.8 18.3 5.3

1st Quartile 6.5 33.4 16.1 3.3

Median 5.2 30.9 14.2 1.8

3rd Quartile 4.2 26.8 12.8 -0.3

95th Percentile 2.4 20.7 5.8 -2.8

Conestoga Small Cap

September 30, 2012

64



Portfolio Benchmark

Total Securities 49 1,117




1Year

3Years

5Years

10Years

Return 24.61 14.59 5.22 N/A


vs. Russell 2000 Growth Index


Alpha -1.34 2.48 2.36 N/A

Beta 0.86 0.83 0.82 N/A

R-Squared 0.90 0.93 0.94 N/A

Consistency 50.00 50.00 50.00 N/A



As of 08/31/2012

CoStar Group Inc ORD 3.7%

Raven Industries Inc ORD 3.5%

Bottomline Technologies (de), Inc ORD 3.1%

ACI Worldwide Inc ORD 3.1%

Sun Hydraulics Corp ORD 3.1%

Sourcefire Inc ORD 2.9%

Align Technology Inc ORD 2.9%

Tyler Technologies Inc ORD 2.8%

Abaxis Inc ORD 2.7%

Carbo Ceramics Inc ORD 2.7%

Conestoga Small Cap

September 30, 2012

65

FUND INFO


FUND OBJECTIVE


The fund is sub-advised by Capital Research and Management Company. Using a common pool of industry analysts for research, eight portfoliocounselors construct independent portfolios using their individual styles from growth to value. The fund tends to focus on blue chip multinationalcompanies while allowing each portfolio sleeve to invest up to 25% in emerging markets. The resulting portfolio holds over 400 securities with

relatively low turnover.

Product Name American Funds EuPc;F-1 (AEGFX)

Fund Family American Funds

Ticker AEGFX

Peer Group IM International Large Cap Core Equity (MF)

Benchmark MSCI EAFE Index





Gross Expense 0.86%

Net Expense 0.86%

Turnover 24%Regionally, limited exposure to Japan, especially in the areas of banks and utilities, was beneficial. The fund’s holdings of firms domiciled in theemerging markets was also positive, particularly India and South Korea. However, the fund was held back by a relatively low concentration of companies located in Australia and Singapore.From a sector perspective, limited exposure to utility companies was beneficial since firms in this sector lagged the broader market, but a

cautious stance in the financial services sector detracted from overall results.Among individual contributors, Canadian oil producer Nexen rallied after it received a takeover bid. Among financials, U.K. bank Barclays and India’s Housing Development Finance were positive contributors. However, in the telecom sector, Mexican provider America Movil detractedafter reporting disappointing results. Hong Kong-based trading and logistics group Li & Fung struggled following the release of weak results,which indicated that it was being affected by the slowdown in global demand.


CurrentQuarter

YTD1

Year3

Years5

Years10

Years2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002

American Funds EuroPacific Gr F-1 7.25 12.92 18.04 3.33 -2.21 10.25 -13.60 9.38 39.10 -40.55 18.94 21.84 21.05 19.63 32.84 -13.65

MSCI EAFE Index 6.98 10.59 14.33 2.59 -4.77 8.69 -11.73 8.21 32.46 -43.06 11.63 26.86 14.02 20.70 39.17 -15.66

IM International Large Cap Core Equity (MF) Median 6.32 10.19 14.71 2.11 -5.08 7.79 -12.40 7.35 29.67 -42.71 11.16 25.37 13.39 17.54 33.13 -16.74

American Funds EuroPacific Gr F-1 Rank 16 13 18 20 4 6 75 26 13 14 6 89 6 29 52 19

American Funds EuroPacific Gr F-1

September 30, 2012

66



CurrentQuarter

1Year

3Years

5Years

American Funds EuroPacific Gr F-1 7.2 (16) 18.0 (18) 3.3 (20) -2.2 (4)

MSCI EAFE Index 7.0 (19) 14.3 (60) 2.6 (33) -4.8 (41)

5th Percentile 8.3 19.8 5.7 -2.3

1st Quartile 6.7 17.4 2.9 -4.0

Median 6.3 14.7 2.1 -5.1

3rd Quartile 6.0 13.5 1.1 -6.0

95th Percentile 5.1 11.7 -0.6 -7.8


September 30, 2012

67


SECTOR EXPOSURE (%)REGION WEIGHTS (%)

Portfolio Benchmark





1Year

3Years

5Years

10Years

Return 18.04 3.33 -2.21 10.25


vs. MSCI EAFE Index

Tracking Error 4.19 3.92 4.69 3.96

Alpha 4.61 0.84 2.29 1.92

Beta 0.90 0.95 0.94 0.94

R-Squared 0.95 0.96 0.96 0.95

Consistency 75.00 55.56 58.33 57.50


Sharpe Ratio 1.04 0.26 -0.02 0.54


September 30, 2012

68

FUND INFO


FUND OBJECTIVE


The fund seeks to invest in high quality companies when they are trading at a discounted price. High quality companies are defined as those withrecurring revenue growth, a quality management team, a “core” business, and strong balance sheet. Fundamental research is conducted byAberdeen's global team to understand the growth prospects of the firm and the quality of the financials. The valuation metrics used are determined by the type of company and its economic sector. Within risk controls, portfolios are constructed on a bottom-up basis using a very long-termoutlook that has led to a low turnover rate, but can also produce higher tracking error. The portfolio will typically hold 50 - 70 securities. Expensecap of 0.95% expires on 11/23/11. Expenses after 11/23 will reflect actual fees capped at 1.10% through 2/27/13 (reviewed annually thereafter).Actual fees were 1.05% for the year ending 10/31/10.

Product Name Aberdeen:Em Mkt;I (ABEMX)

Fund Family Aberdeen Asset Management Inc

Ticker ABEMX

Peer Group IM Emerging Markets Equity (MF)

Benchmark MSCI Emerging Markets Index





Gross Expense 1.03%

Net Expense 1.03%

Turnover 2%

From a sector perspective, positioning in South Korea, Chile and Turkey detracted in the third quarter. In South Korea, an underweight position,coupled with negative stock selection, detracted from results. Notable decliners included BS Financial Group, E Mart and Shinsegae. In Chile,Banco Santander disappointed on the back of weak loan growth and reduced net margins.Meanwhile, the fund’s positioning in India (overweight), China (underweight) and Thailand proved positive to overall results. Among the fund’sThai holdings, Siam Cement and Siam Commercial Bank posted solid returns. Exposure to non-Index Argentina also aided results as Tenarisrallied on the back of strong revenues and a continued recovery in margins.


CurrentQuarter

YTD1

Year3

Years5

Years10

Years2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002

Aberdeen Emerging Markets Instl 6.86 17.62 24.04 12.56 7.63 N/A -11.05 27.58 76.55 -40.36 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

MSCI Emerging Markets Index 7.89 12.34 17.34 5.96 -0.98 17.37 -18.17 19.20 79.02 -53.18 39.78 32.59 34.54 25.95 56.28 -6.00

IM Emerging Markets Equity (MF) Median 6.79 11.40 16.64 5.04 -2.66 15.45 -19.54 18.33 73.65 -54.86 36.44 32.20 32.14 24.11 54.51 -5.63

Aberdeen Emerging Markets Instl Rank 46 10 4 2 1 N/A 4 7 36 2 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

Aberdeen Emerging Markets Instl

September 30, 2012

69



CurrentQuarter

1Year

3Years

5Years

Aberdeen Emerging Markets Instl 6.9 (46) 24.0 (4) 12.6 (2) 7.6 (1)

MSCI Emerging Markets Index 7.9 (21) 17.3 (44) 6.0 (29) -1.0 (25)

5th Percentile 10.1 23.0 9.2 2.6

1st Quartile 7.4 18.8 6.3 -1.0

Median 6.8 16.6 5.0 -2.7

3rd Quartile 6.0 13.1 2.8 -4.4

95th Percentile 4.2 6.2 -1.0 -8.0


September 30, 2012

70


SECTOR EXPOSURE (%)REGION WEIGHTS (%)

Portfolio Benchmark





1Year

3Years

5Years

10Years

Return 24.04 12.56 7.63 N/A


vs. MSCI Emerging Markets Index


Alpha 8.45 6.84 8.08 N/A

Beta 0.83 0.88 0.86 N/A

R-Squared 0.93 0.94 0.95 N/A

Consistency 41.67 58.33 58.33 N/A




September 30, 2012

71

FUND INFO



FUND OBJECTIVE

The fund is managed on a relative basis with a focus on individual stock selection rather than economic or market cycles. The ultimate goal is toselect securities that have positive growth aspects at a reasonable price. A research-driven team approach utilizes front end quantitative screenswith qualitative assessments, sub-sector analysis, and economic research. The outcome is a diversified portfolio from both a sector and geographic basis, which holds securities with the best risk/reward for their given industry. Effective December 31, 2010 the First American Real

Estate Securities fund was renamed to Nuveen Real Estate Securities. Also effective December 31, 2010, the fund is closed to new investment.

Product Name Nuveen Real Est;I (FARCX)

Fund Family Nuveen Fund Advisors Inc

Ticker FARCX

Peer Group IM Real Estate Sector (MF)

Benchmark FTSE NAREIT Equity REIT Index


Portfolio Manager Rosenberg/Wenker/Sedlak



Gross Expense 1.04%

Net Expense 1.04%

Turnover 103%

The Fund benefited from individual stock selection and diversification across all property sectors.The best performing sectors were industrial, apartments and office. Within industrials, an underweight to a large-cap stock with significantexposure to Europe was accretive to results.Out of index exposure to the infrastructure sector contributed positively.Healthcare REITs and cash holdings were the largest detractors from results. Poor stock selection and an underweight within healthcareweighed on results.

T. Leedy Senior Alternative Investment Research Analyst, DiMeo Schneider & Associates, L.L.C 2Q12

CurrentQuarter

YTD1

Year3

Years5

Years10

Years2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002

Nuveen Real Estate Secs I 0.28 15.41 32.52 21.09 4.04 13.31 7.89 30.57 30.53 -34.80 -15.19 39.47 15.29 32.49 37.58 7.36

FTSE NAREIT Equity REIT Index 0.16 15.09 32.61 20.38 2.10 11.38 8.29 27.94 28.01 -37.74 -15.70 35.03 12.17 31.56 37.08 3.81

IM Real Estate Sector (MF) Median 0.02 14.24 31.54 19.58 1.67 11.00 7.89 27.46 29.04 -38.99 -17.22 34.60 12.48 32.31 35.96 4.18

Nuveen Real Estate Secs I Rank 41 26 27 13 9 3 50 13 28 10 16 1 17 45 29 13

Nuveen Real Estate Secs I

September 30, 2012

72



CurrentQuarter

1Year

3Years

5Years

Nuveen Real Estate Secs I 0.3 (41) 32.5 (27) 21.1 (13) 4.0 (9)

FTSE NAREIT Equity REIT Index 0.2 (45) 32.6 (25) 20.4 (28) 2.1 (38)

5th Percentile 5.0 43.7 22.2 5.5

1st Quartile 0.8 32.6 20.5 2.7

Median 0.0 31.5 19.6 1.7

3rd Quartile -0.4 30.5 18.6 0.7

95th Percentile -0.7 22.4 16.9 -2.1


September 30, 2012

73

RISK CHARACTERISTICS REGION DISTRIBUTION

SECTOR EXPOSURE (%)

1Year

3Years

5Years

10Years

Return 32.52 21.09 4.04 13.31


vs. FTSE NAREIT Equity REIT Index

Tracking Error 0.67 0.87 2.43 2.26

Alpha 0.79 0.77 1.70 2.14

Beta 0.97 0.99 0.94 0.95

R-Squared 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99

Consistency 50.00 58.33 58.33 61.67


Sharpe Ratio 1.76 1.12 0.27 0.57


September 30, 2012

74

FUND INFO


FUND OBJECTIVE


The fund combines a position in commodity-linked derivative instruments, primarily swaps through an offshore subsidiary, with an actively

managed portfolio principally consisting of Treasury Inflation Protected Securities (TIPS). The derivatives only require the fund to hold around 15%

of its assets as collateral. The commodity-linked derivatives capture the return potential and diversification benefits of the commodity futures

market, while PIMCO's active fixed income management seeks to outperform T-Bills, net of fees. The strategy has the added advantage of

benefiting concurrently from the inflation hedging properties of both commodity futures and TIPS (Double Real).

Product Name PIMCO:Comm RR Str;Inst (PCRIX)

Fund Family PIMCO

Ticker PCRIX

Peer Group IM Commodities General (MF)

Benchmark Dow Jones-UBS Commodity Index


Portfolio Manager Mihir Worah



Gross Expense 0.87%

Net Expense 0.74%

Turnover 177%

Even though most commodity sectors declined during the second quarter, alpha strategies and TIPS collateral led to quarterly outperformance.Curve positioning within domestic TIPs was accretive to results.Substitution strategies were mixed for the quarter. Positive contributions came from soybeans versus corn while platinum versus gold detractedfrom results.Short Australian dollar holdings earlier in the quarter weighed on results.


CurrentQuarter

YTD1

Year3

Years5

Years10

Years2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002

PIMCO Commodity Real Ret Strat Instl 12.10 11.77 14.28 12.71 2.14 8.88 -7.56 24.13 39.91 -43.33 23.80 -3.04 20.50 16.36 29.82 N/A

Dow Jones-UBS Commodity Index 9.69 5.63 6.00 5.26 -3.03 5.20 -13.32 16.83 18.91 -35.65 16.23 2.07 21.36 9.15 23.93 25.91

PIMCO Commodity Real Ret Strat Instl

September 30, 2012

75


RISK CHARACTERISTICS STRATEGY ALLOCATION (index)

1Year

3Years

5Years

10Years

Return 14.28 12.71 2.14 8.88


vs. Dow Jones-UBS Commodity Index

Tracking Error 2.88 3.54 7.27 6.71

Alpha 7.69 6.97 6.69 3.30

Beta 1.04 1.06 1.16 1.15

R-Squared 0.97 0.97 0.94 0.92

Consistency 75.00 69.44 65.00 55.83


Sharpe Ratio 0.89 0.73 0.19 0.42

PIMCO Commodity Real Ret Strat Instl

September 30, 2012

76

FUND INFO


FUND OBJECTIVE


Kayne Anderson MLP Investment Co. is a non-diversified, closed-end management investment company whose investment objective is to obtain ahigh after-tax total return by investing the vast majority of it's total assets in energy related MLPs and other Midstream Energy Companies. MLPsare publicly traded limited partnerships. Energy-related MLPs own domestic infrastructure assets that are used in the gathering, processing,transportation, storage, refining and distribution of energy-related commodities. Kayne Anderson differentiates itself through an extensive network of relationships with major energy companies and an investment team with over 134 years of combined energy experience. The fund may also investin private or restricted investment opportunities not available to retail investors along with debt securities of MLPs and other Midstream Energy

Companies.

Assets under Management (12/31/11)$3,810 Million

Inception Date9/28/04

Management Fee2.4%

Management Fee is obtained from the most recentannual report. It represents the management fee asa percentage of average net assets which reflects

the fund's deferred tax liability.

The fund’s price return of 0.6% outperformed its NAV return of -5.6% and the benchmark return of -2.3%.The fund’s premium to NAV increased during the quarter to 12.9% from 8.2%.Exposure to upstream MLPs and an overweight to coal detracted from results.Growth oriented and smaller cap securities lagged during the second quarter.An overweight to midstream and more liquid MLPs contributed to returns.

T. Leedy, Senior Alternative Research Analyst, DiMeo Schneider & Associates, L.L.C. 2Q12

CurrentQuarter

YTD1

Year3

Years5

Years10

Years2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002

Kayne Anderson MLP Invst Co 3.29 8.24 20.33 22.28 8.48 N/A 3.01 35.36 69.94 -38.08 -5.67 45.00 3.00 N/A N/A N/A

Alerian MLP Index 8.89 8.50 26.22 25.10 14.21 17.15 13.88 35.85 76.41 -36.80 12.42 27.62 5.22 15.92 41.60 0.24

ALPS Alerian MLP ETF 5.43 4.48 15.43 N/A N/A N/A 10.09 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

Kayne Anderson MLP Invst Co

September 30, 2012

77


RISK CHARACTERISTICS STRATEGY ALLOCATION

1Year

3Years

5Years

10Years

Return 20.33 22.28 8.48 N/A


vs. Alerian MLP Index


Alpha 6.65 5.84 0.84 N/A

Beta 0.53 0.68 0.78 N/A

R-Squared 0.40 0.31 0.29 N/A

Consistency 50.00 50.00 50.00 N/A



Kayne Anderson MLP Invst Co

September 30, 2012

78

FUND INFO


FUND OBJECTIVE


Tortoise Energy Infrastructure Corp. is a non-diversified, closed-end management investment company. The fund seeks to provide investors withan efficient vehicle to invest in publicly traded energy infrastructure MLPs while providing a high level of total return with an emphasis on currentdistributions. The fund may additionally invest in private or restricted investment opportunities not available to retail investors along with debt

securities of MLPs and other Midstream Energy Companies.

Assets under Management (1/31/12)$1,690 Million

Inception Date3/2/04

Management Fee

1.54%

Management Fee is obtained from the most recentannual report. It represents the management fee asa percentage of average net assets which reflects

the fund's deferred tax liability.

The fund’s price return of -1.8% outperformed its NAV return of -3.5% and the benchmark return of -2.3%.The fund’s premium to NAV increased during the quarter to 18.4% from 16.1%.The fund’s focus on Midstream securities was accretive to results during a volatile quarter that was driven by commodity sensitivity.An underweight to the bechmark’s top holding (Enterprise Products Partners L.P., 15.9% index weight) and propane weighed on performance.An underweight to smaller cap MLPs contributed to results.

T. Leedy, Senior Alternative Research Analyst, DiMeo Schneider & Associates, L.L.C. 2Q12

CurrentQuarter

YTD1

Year3

Years5

Years10

Years2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002

Tortoise Energy Infrastructure Corp. 2.90 5.58 26.19 22.02 11.17 N/A 10.75 31.49 99.32 -44.47 1.66 37.57 4.47 N/A N/A N/A

Alerian MLP Index 8.89 8.50 26.22 25.10 14.21 17.15 13.88 35.85 76.41 -36.80 12.42 27.62 5.22 15.92 41.60 0.24

ALPS Alerian MLP ETF 5.43 4.48 15.43 N/A N/A N/A 10.09 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

Tortoise Energy Infrastructure Corp.

September 30, 2012

79



1Year

3Years

5Years

10Years

Return 26.19 22.02 11.17 N/A


vs. Alerian MLP Index


Alpha -1.05 -1.76 -2.22 N/A

Beta 1.07 0.99 1.05 N/A

R-Squared 0.71 0.63 0.70 N/A

Consistency 41.67 47.22 51.67 N/A



Tortoise Energy Infrastructure Corp.

September 30, 2012

80

FUND INFO


FUND OBJECTIVE


Assets under Management$5.7 Billion

Inception Date01/00

Minimum Investment$5,000,000 (Negotiable at Manager Discretion)

Management FeeAnnual fees: First $25 m = 1.25%, Next $25 m = 1.00%,Next $50 m = 0.80%, Over $100 m = 0.60%;Fee is subject to a 0.75% min

Performance FeeN/A

ContributionsQuarterly

Withdrawals

Quarterly with 70 days notice

Grosvenor Institutional Partners (“GIP”) is a globally diversified, multi-strategy, multi-manager portfolio that allocates its assets to hedge fundmanagers that specialize in a wide range of alternative investment strategies. GIP has two primary investment objectives: to provide its investorswith a superior long-term, risk-adjusted rate of return and to preserve capital. The Fund will allocate to approximately 40 managers.

The largest quarterly detractor from results was equities while credit was the top contributor. The majority of funds and strategies were flat toslightly negative during the quarter.Macro and commodity allocations increased marginally during the quarter. The team continues to focus on adding lower correlated strategies andopportunities.Portfolio hedge outperformed and profited from increased volatility and declines in equities.Credit strategies benefited from favorable sector selections and a broad credit market rally. RMBS exposure added to returns due to strongtechnical factors and stabilizing housing data.Event driven and Commodity focused strategies were the weakest quarterly performers. Special situation equities weighed on event driven fundsand directional commodity funds suffered amidst sharp declines in the majority of commodity sectors.


CurrentQuarter

YTD1

Year3

Years5

Years10

Years2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002

Grosvenor Inst'l Partners, L.P. 2.59 5.69 6.18 3.67 0.04 4.36 -3.80 6.66 13.95 -20.89 10.69 9.40 6.80 6.92 11.16 2.27

HFRI Fund of Funds Composite Index 2.37 3.38 2.89 1.49 -1.64 3.62 -5.72 5.70 11.47 -21.37 10.25 10.39 7.49 6.86 11.61 1.02

Grosvenor Inst'l Partners, L.P.

September 30, 2012

81



1Year

3Years

5Years

10Years

Return 6.18 3.67 0.04 4.36


vs. HFRI Fund of Funds Composite Index

Tracking Error 1.11 1.52 1.77 1.61

Alpha 3.39 2.36 1.56 1.19

Beta 0.94 0.86 0.92 0.87

R-Squared 0.90 0.88 0.93 0.92

Consistency 66.67 61.11 60.00 55.83


Sharpe Ratio 1.74 0.89 -0.07 0.53

Grosvenor Inst'l Partners, L.P.

September 30, 2012

82

FUND INFO


FUND OBJECTIVE


Assets under Management$2.5 Billion

Inception Date10/02

Minimum Investment$5,000,000

Management Fee1%

Performance Fee10%

ContributionsMonthly

WithdrawalsQuarterly

Magnitude International is a globally diversified multi-strategy FOHF which targets attractive risk-adjusted returns with limited exposure to passive

risk factors. Management displays a quantitative, arbitrage and relative value bias and will evaluate “corners of the market” for small positions.

The credit relative value strategy was the primary contributor to the portfolio’s performance, with all but one fund contributing positively.Structured credit outperformed due to a non agency rally and another round of maiden lane transactions.Energy exposure within equity hedge and idiosyncratic events within event driven strategies detracted from results.The worst performing manager declined following the sudden departure of the portfolio manager. Magnitude has taken control of the separatelymanaged account and will liquidate it in a timely manner.Fixed income arbitrage, specifically RMBS exposure, contributed positively to results.


CurrentQuarter

YTD1

Year3

Years5

Years10

Years2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002

Magnitude International 2.50 5.64 6.27 7.02 3.96 7.25 4.67 6.75 25.71 -21.64 13.54 14.30 8.67 8.42 11.60 N/A

HFRI Fund of Funds Composite Index 2.37 3.38 2.89 1.49 -1.64 3.62 -5.72 5.70 11.47 -21.37 10.25 10.39 7.49 6.86 11.61 1.02

Magnitude International

September 30, 2012

83



1Year

3Years

5Years

10Years

Return 6.27 7.02 3.96 7.25


vs. HFRI Fund of Funds Composite Index

Tracking Error 2.02 2.77 3.19 2.83

Alpha 4.90 6.29 5.58 4.17

Beta 0.45 0.45 0.92 0.83

R-Squared 0.84 0.67 0.78 0.74

Consistency 66.67 72.22 71.67 62.50


Sharpe Ratio 3.52 2.77 0.50 1.02

Magnitude International

September 30, 2012

84

DEFINITION OF KEY STATISTICS

Returns Time-weighted average annual returns for the time periods indicated. Time weighted returns seek to eliminate the impact of external cash flows on the rate of return calculations. All returns are annualized if the period for which they are calculated exceeds one year.

Universe Comparison The universe compares the fund's returns to a group of other investment portfolios with similar investment strategies. The returns for the fund, the index and the universe percentiles are displayed. A percentile ranking of 1 is the best, while a percentile ranking of 100 is the worst. For example, a ranking of 50 indicates the fund outperformed half of the universe. A ranking of 25 indicates the fund was in the top 25% of the universe, outperforming 75%.

Returns In Up/Down Markets This measures how the fund performed in both up and down markets. The methodology is to segregate the performance for each time period into the quarters in which the market, as defined by the index, was positive and negative. Quarters with negative index returns are treated as down markets, and quarters with positive index returns are treated as up markets. Thus, in a 3 year or 12 quarter period, there might be 4 down quarters and 8 up quarters. A simple arithmetic average of returns is calculated for the fund and the index based on the up quarters. A simple arithmetic average of returns is calculated for the fund and the index based on the down quarters. The up market capture ratio is the ratio of the fund's return in up markets to the index. The down market capture ratio is the ratio of the fund's return in down markets to the index. Ideally, the fund would have a greater up market capture ratio than down market capture ratio.

Standard Deviation Standard deviation is a statistical measure of the range of performance within which the total returns of a fund fall. When a fund has a high standard deviation, the range of performance is very wide, meaning there is a greater volatility. Approximately 68% of the time, the total return of any given fund will differ from the average total return by no more than plus or minus the standard deviation figure. Ninety-five percent of the time, a fund’s total return will be within a range of plus or minus two times the standard deviation from the average total return. If the quarterly or monthly returns are all the same the standard deviation will be zero. The more they vary from one another, the higher the standard deviation. Standard deviation can be misleading as a risk indicator for funds with high total returns because large positive deviations will increase the standard deviation without a corresponding increase in the risk of the fund. While positive volatility is welcome, negative is not.

R-Squared This reflects the percentage of a fund’s movements that are explained by movements in its benchmark index. An R-squared of 100 means that all movements of a fund are completely explained by movements in the index. Conversely, a

low R-squared indicates very few of the fund’s movements are explained by movements in the benchmark index. R-squared can also be used to ascertain the significance of a particular beta. Generally, a higher R-squared will indicate a more reliable beta figure. If the R-squared is lower, then the beta is less relevant to the fund’s performance. A measure of diversification, R-squared indicates the extent to which fluctuations in portfolio returns are explained by market. An R-squared = 0.70 implies that 70% of the fluctuation in a portfolio's return is explained by the fluctuation in the market. In this instance, overweighting or underweighting of industry groups or individual securities is responsible for 30% of the fund's movement.

Beta This is a measure of a fund’s market risk. The beta of the market is 1.00. Accordingly, a fund with a 1.10 beta is expected to perform 10% better than the market in up markets and 10% worse that the market in down markets. It is

important to note, however, a low fund beta does not imply the fund has a low level of volatility; rather, a low beta means only that the fund’s market-related risk is low. Because beta analyzes the market risk of a fund by showing how responsive the fund is to the market, its usefulness depends on the degree to which the markets determine the fund's total risk (indicated by R-squared ).

Alpha The Alpha is the nonsystematic return, or the return that can’t be attributed to the market. It can be thought of as how the manager performed if the market’s return was zero. A positive alpha implies the manager added value to the return of the portfolio over that of the market. A negative alpha implies the manager did not contribute any value over the performance of the market.

Sharpe Ratio The Sharpe ratio is the excess return per unit of total risk as measured by standard deviation. Higher numbers are better, indicating more return for the level of risk experienced. The ratio is a fund's return minus the risk-free rate of return

(30-day T-Bill rate) divided by the fund’s standard deviation. The higher the Sharpe ratio, the more reward you are receiving per unit of total risk. This measure can be used to rank the performance of mutual funds or other portfolios.

Treynor Ratio The Treynor ratio measures returns earned in excess of that which could have been earned on a riskless investment per each unit of market risk. The ratio relates excess return over the risk-free rate to the additional risk taken; however, systematic risk is used instead of total risk. The Treynor ratio is similar to the Sharpe ratio, except in the fact that it uses the beta to evaluate the returns rather than the standard deviation of portfolio returns. High values mean better return for risk taken.

Tracking Error Tracking error measures the volatility of the difference in annual returns between the manager and the index. This value is calculated by measuring the standard deviation of the difference between the manager and index returns. For example, a tracking error of +/- 5 would mean there is about a 68% chance (1 standard deviation event) that the manager's returns will fall within +/- 5% of the benchmark's annual return.

Information Ratio The information ratio is a measure of the consistency of excess return. This value is determined by taking the annualized excess return over a benchmark (style benchmark by default) and dividing it by the standard deviation of excess return.

Consistency Consistency shows the percent of the periods the fund has beaten the index and the percent of the periods the index has beat the fund. A high average for the fund (e.g. over 50) is desirable, indicating the fund has beaten the index frequently.

Downside Risk Downside risk is an estimation of a security’s potential to suffer a decline in value if the market conditions change, or the amount of loss that could be sustained as a result of the decline. It explains a “worst case” scenario for an investment, or how much the investor stands to lose.

M-Squared M-squared, or the Modigliani risk-adjusted performance measure is used to characterize how well a portfolio’s return rewards an investor for the amount of risk taken, relative to that of some benchmark portfolio and to the risk-free rate.

85

VALUATION POLICY

DiMeo Schneider does not engage an independent third party pricing service to value securities. Our reports are generated using the security prices provided by custodians used by our clients. Our pricing hierarchy is to first use valuations provided by the custodian that holds assets for the greatest number of clients. If a client holds a security not reported by this custodian, the valuation is generated from the next most prominent custodian, and so forth. Each custodian uses pricing services from outside vendors, where the vendors may generate nominally different prices. Therefore, this report can reflect minor valuation differences from those contained in a custodian’s report. REPORTING POLICY This report is intended for the exclusive use of clients of DiMeo Schneider & Associates, L.L.C. Content and format is privileged and confidential. Any dissemination or distribution of this report is strictly prohibited. The information contained in this report has been obtained from trade and statistical services and other sources which are deemed but not guaranteed to be accurate. Any opinions expressed herein reflect our judgment at this date and are subject to change. OTHER Rule 204-3 under the Investment Advisors Act of 1940 requires that we make an annual offer to clients to send them, without charge, a written disclosure statement meeting the requirements of such rule. We will be glad to send a copy of such a statement to you upon your written request. Please advise us of any changes in your objectives or circumstances.

86

Concordia University, Nebraska & Concordia Foundation,...

Documents

Transcript of Concordia University, Nebraska & Concordia Foundation,...