concordia university, nebraska & concordia foundation,...

Concordia University, Nebraska & Concordia Foundation, Inc.December 31, 2011

Exceeding Your Expectations

500 West Madison Street, Suite 3855 | Chicago, IL 60661 | 312.853.1000

QUARTERLY CONSIDERATIONS

GENERAL Glad It’s Over? – 2011 challenged U.S. equity investors as the S&P 500 Index returned 2% and the Russell 2000 Index fell 4%. The average international equity fund dropped

14% as Eurozone debt issues took center stage. Treasuries and corporate bonds rallied as investors sought safety and yield.

A Wild Ride – The S&P 500 Index closed up or down 2% on 35 days in 2011, up from 22 days in 2010. In contrast, the Index didn’t post a single move of more than 2% in 2005 and just two in 2006.

New Research – Bond issuance denominated in local currency within emerging economies has expanded rapidly over the past decade. Please visit the Research section of our website for our most recent White Paper, Emerging Market Bonds, An Asset Class Primer.

For Your Reading Pleasure – We are proud to announce our fourth book, Nonprofit Asset Management: Effective Investment Strategies and Oversight. It will be available

on-line and in bookstores beginning February 1st, 2012. Profits from book sales will be donated to charity. PLAN SPONSORS Boost Retirement Readiness – Nearly twice as many 401(k) participants reached an overall contribution rate greater than 11% when the automatic default rate was increased

from 3% to 6%, according to a recent Principal study. Match Maker – Half of companies that suspended their matching contribution since early 2008 have fully restored it. Nearly 14% of 401(k) and profit sharing plans still

have suspended or reduced matching contributions, according to a recent PSCA survey. Risk Management – 80% of corporate pension plan sponsors with assets less than $5 billion employ a Liability Driven Investing (LDI) de-risking strategy, according to a recent

aiCIO survey. Only 15% have no plans to implement LDI.

NON-PROFIT ORGANIZATIONS Size Matters – In FY 2011, large endowments (over $1 billion) invested 58%, on average, in alternatives. On the other hand, the smallest endowments (less than $25 million)

invested just 9% in alternatives, according to a recent NACUBO survey. Join Us – Please join us on March 21st, 2012 for an informative Workshop, Alternative Investments for Nonprofits. Whether your endowment is large or small, we will present

five facts every investment committee must know regarding alternative investments. Look for your formal invite soon.

THE WEALTH OFFICE™ Tax Man Cometh – The IRS recently reported it audited 12.5% of wealthy taxpayers in fiscal 2011 (assets in excess of $1 million). This figure is up from 8% in 2010, and 6%

in 2009.

Change of Plans – 2012 is setting up to be a very confusing year from a tax and estate planning perspective. With many changes scheduled to take place at the end of the year and with a pending presidential election sure to further cloud the landscape, The Wealth OfficeTM can help keep you abreast of the latest implications with respect to your personal investment strategy.

Crystal Ball Default – Meredith Whitney’s year-end 2010 famous prediction of ‘hundreds of billions of dollars’ of municipal bond defaults in 2011 has turned out to be wildly inaccurate. Instead, total muni defaults for 2011 are estimated to be about $1 billion, or 25% of the $4.3 billion that defaulted in 2010. Ms. Whitney broke an important rule of forecasting – give a precise prediction and vague timeframe or give a vague prediction and precise timeframe, but never give a precise prediction and a precise timeframe. The Wealth OfficeTM points out municipal bonds were one of the best performing asset classes of 2011.

1


ECONOMY The Federal Reserve continues to keep interest rates on hold at the 0% to 0.25% range, and confirmed their intention to maintain low rates into 2013. In a coordinated action, the

Fed partnered with other major central banks during the quarter to ease tensions in the credit markets as European financial institutions were facing difficulty securing U.S. dollar-based funding. The next FOMC meeting is scheduled for January 24th-25th, 2012.

U.S. GDP advanced 1.8% in the prior quarter. The advance reflected positive contributions from personal consumption expenditures, nonresidential fixed investment, federal government spending and exports that were partly offset by negative contributions from state and local government spending and private inventory investment. Most analysts expect positive growth to continue in the first half of 2012. The fourth quarter GDP advance estimate is due out on January 27th, 2012.

The unemployment rate, which has been above 9% for most of the year, trended down each month of the quarter to end December at 8.5%. However, it will take 6 million more jobs to get the U.S. back to employment levels in December 2007, when the recession began. With millions of Americans still out of work, President Obama appears bound to face voters with the highest unemployment rate of any president running for re-election since World War II. Unemployment stood at 7.8% when President Obama took office.

Home prices continued to drift lower, although the pace of sales has started to slowly pick up. Despite the lowest mortgage rates in history, Americans have been reluctant to purchase a home as high unemployment and weak job growth have deterred many would-be buyers. Meanwhile, prices could potentially fall further once banks resume millions of foreclosures, which have been delayed because of a yearlong investigation into lending practices. Foreclosures and short sales are selling at an average discount of 20%.

On the political front, events in Washington will be closely watched. As the U.S. enters an election year, a growing fiscal deficit and expiring tax cuts are expected to fuel significant debate. Coloring these discussions will be several unpredictable factors: The state of the economy and who wins control of the House, the Senate and the White House.

8.3

-4.2

2.1

-0.8

-1.5

-11.7

12.7

15.5

11.8

8.2

12.3

3.4

DJIA

Russell 2000

S&P 500

NASDAQ

Russell Mid Cap

MSCI EAFE

Broad Equity Market Index Returns Ending 12/31/11

QTR

1 Year

U.S. EQUITY MARKETS U.S. equity markets moved higher during the final quarter of the year even as macroeconomic concerns, primarily surrounding Europe’s sovereign debt, continued to dominate the

minds of investors. Market volatility was heightened and correlations among stocks remained at historically high levels. Peaking stock correlations, which began in 2008, continued to spike throughout much of 2011 amid a flurry of macro/headline news.

The S&P 500 Index ended the quarter up 12% at 1,258. The S&P 500 finished the year with a gain of 2%, registering record price swings and correlations along the way. The Index tumbled as much as 19% from April to its low for the year of 1,099 on October 3rd as Congress and President Obama struggled over U.S. deficit cuts and concern grew that the Eurozone debt crisis was threatening the global economic recovery.

The NASDAQ Composite ended up 8% at 2,605 for the fourth quarter – but still managed to post its first annual loss in three years. The DJIA finished the quarter up 13% at 12,218. Investors’ preference for high-quality, dividend-paying stocks for much of 2011 led to the DJIA’s 8% annual gain.

Analysts have reined in their consensus estimates slightly for the quarter, mainly due to concerns about the impact of slower Eurozone growth on domestic corporate performance, though the negative revisions have slowed. As 2012 gets underway, many corporate executives have raised expectations for profit growth, but they are less than firm on commitments to invest in their business or pursue merger and acquisition activities.

Across market capitalizations, small- and mid-cap issues generally outperformed larger companies. Meanwhile, value stocks outperformed their growth counterparts. The financial characteristics of stocks that fared best were more economically sensitive. Defensively-oriented sectors lagged.

2


U.S. EQUITY SECTORS The materials sector soared on significant strength from chemicals and metals & mining stocks. Industrial-related stocks also rallied led by construction and transportation

stocks. Airlines underperformed as American Airlines and its parent AMR Corp. filed for bankruptcy amid rising labor costs, high fuel prices and dampened travel demand. Once the largest carrier, American is now third behind United Airlines and Delta Air Lines, both of which used Chapter 11 to cut costs and later found merger partners.

The financial services sector posted double-digit gains on strong performances from REITs and regional banks. However, larger institutions continued to be weighed down by investor worries about banks’ potential exposure to European sovereign debt. In corporate news, MF Global filed one of the nation’s largest bankruptcy cases after suffering big losses on European debt holdings, making it the first U.S. casualty of the Eurozone debt crisis. Meanwhile, millions of dollars of customer funds have reportedly gone missing.

The energy-related sector moved sharply higher during the quarter amid heightened tensions between Iran and the West. Iran is threatening to disrupt shipments through the Strait of Hormuz, which is among the world’s key shipping routes for oil tankers. The price of crude, which surged more than 20%, was also bolstered by positive U.S. economic data and declining inventories.

Results in the consumer discretionary sector were mixed. Amazon.com sold off sharply following a disappointing earnings report and forecast, which was caused by significant spending as the online retailer continues to invest heavily into its growing cloud business, as well as launching new electronics products such as its Kindle Fire tablet. Meanwhile, several luxury goods makers posted strong gains as consumers stepped up their purchases of high-end items, especially in Asia.

The traditionally defensive areas such as the utilities and telecommunications services sectors were among the weakest performers as investors gravitated towards riskier assets and away from safety and yield. In the telecom space, AT&T’s proposed purchase of Deutsche Telekom’s T-Mobile USA collapsed in the face of opposition from the U.S. Justice Department.

10.3 10.0 10.8 8.7 7.9 8.318.2 15.4 16.5 12.614.0 12.7

-17.1

2.4 6.319.9

4.7

-9.8-0.6

6.1

Consumer Staples

Health Care Financials Information Technology

Telecom Utilities Energy Materials Industrials Consumer Discretionary

Market Returns by Major Sectors of S&P 500 Index, Fourth Quarter 2011QTR 1 Year

REAL ESTATE Domestic REITs were one of the strongest performing asset classes for the fourth quarter and 2011.The NAREIT Equity REIT Index gained 15% during the quarter and 8%

for 2011. Strength was due to continued improvement in fundamentals, access to capital and attractive yields. Continuing to benefit from the housing market struggles, self storage outperformed during the quarter. Apartment REITs also advanced due to renewed pricing power and lower vacancy rates. Lodging/resorts was the worst performing sub-sector in 2011 due to its higher sensitivity to broader economic concerns. However, the sector bounced back during the fourth quarter amid rebounding occupancy rates.

During the fourth quarter, International REITs exhibited mixed results with Europe being the only declining region. Sovereign concerns caused Italy and Spain to significantly lag, but combined the countries represent less than 1% of the universe. Asia stabilized and was modestly positive after weakness throughout much of the year. Australia and China had strong quarterly returns that corresponded with monetary easing.

U.S. EQUITY MARKETS (continued) The HFRI Fund Weighted Composite Index increased 1%, while the HFRI Fund of Funds Composite Index declined marginally in the fourth quarter. Both indices fell

approximately 5% for the year. Tactical Trading managers were whipsawed by the markets and lagged during the fourth quarter. Event Driven and Equity Hedge led quarterly results thanks to strong performances in October. Eurekahedge noted that total asset flows for the year were $67 billion, taking the industry to over $1.7 trillion.

The Alerian MLP Index experienced a volatile year but ended up producing strong results while outperforming most asset classes. For the quarter MLPs advanced 16%, bringing the one-year results to a gain of 14%. The Index finished the year at an all-time high, following the second largest fourth quarter gain since the Index was created. Large cap and General Partner MLPs outperformed. Natural Gas Storage and thinly traded MLPs lagged.

3


COMMODITIES The Dow Jones-UBS Commodity Index ended up 0.3% after December’s weakness cut into strong results during October. Precious metals were the top performers for the year,

but strength in the U.S. dollar and liquidity needs amongst investors led to quarterly declines. Following weakness in the previous quarter, the energy sector outperformed thanks to double digit returns in October. Weakness in coffee and orange juice caused soft commodities to be the worst performer during the quarter. For the year, industrial metals was the worst performer, falling 24% on macroeconomic concerns.

0.4 2.2 3.9 1.5

-3.8

17.4

-4.4 -5.9-13.3 -16.0 -14.4

-24.2

-2.3

1.7 4.6

-14.0

DJ - UBS Commodity

Energy Grains Industrial Metals Livestock Petroleum Precious Metals Softs

DJ UBS Commodity Returns, Fourth Quarter 2011QTR 1 Year

FIXED INCOME MARKETS The yield curve ended the quarter relatively unchanged as rates continued to be supported by the Fed’s accommodative policy and implementation of “Operation Twist”.

The 2-year remained at 0.25% and the 30-year fell 1 basis point to 2.89%. The 5-year was the exception and outperformed the overall curve by declining 13 basis points to 0.83%. Overall, Treasuries returned 0.9% for the quarter. TIPS gained 2.7% during the quarter as real yields declined, increasing the 10-year breakeven to 2.0% from 1.7%.

Yield Curve Ending 12/31/11 Historical Yield Spreads vs 10-Year Notes Ending 12/31/11

0.02 0.250.83

1.89

2.89

0.020.25

0.96

1.92

2.90

3 Mo. 2 Year 5 Year 10 Year 30 Year

12/31/2011 9/30/2011

0123456789

10

Agency Corporate AA Corporate BB

Investment grade corporates outperformed duration matched Treasuries, returning 1.7%, as credit spreads tightened over the quarter. Overall, fundamentals remained strong as corporate profits and cash levels remained at historically high levels. Among investment grades, financial-backed issuers underperformed utility-backed and industrial-related corporates due to their disproportionate exposures to sovereign Europe debt. High yield issues also outperformed Treasuries, returning 6.4%, with lower quality, CCC-rated issues performing the best.

Mortgage-backed securities moved higher despite concerns that government programs aimed at stimulating the housing market will lead to increased refinancing activity and expectations for faster prepayments going forward. Commercial mortgage-backed securities (CMBS) were the best performing structured product, outperforming Treasuries by 2.2%, as spreads rallied late in the quarter. CMBS also saw an improvement in the new issuance market and stable delinquency rates. Asset-backed securities (ABS) produced positive returns, but trailed Treasuries, as the sector saw spreads widen. Within ABS, credit cards were the largest detractor followed by auto.

Municipal bonds posted solid results. December opened with significant amounts of muni supply coming to market, more new assets flowing into muni bond mutual funds, and reinvestment cash waiting to be deployed. This caused muni yields to grind lower, hitting new all-time lows at multiple points on the yield curve. Over the quarter, retail investors slowed muni investment due to “rate shock” given low absolute yields. However, crossover buyers and banks have been a strong source of demand taking advantage of the high muni to Treasury ratios. 2011 closed the year with a low default rate and many of the weaker states outperformed as investors saw many states pass balanced budgets.

4


FIXED INCOME MARKETS (continued) The European debt crisis remained at center stage as politicians continued to work on a credible solution. Overall, foreign bonds provided mixed results as investors recovered

from the third quarter. The dollar appreciated against most developed currencies and resulted in hedged portfolios, returning 0.6%, outperforming their unhedged counterparts, which returned -0.5%. Within Europe, Germany continued to benefit from their perceived “safe haven” status and returned 1.9% as yields declined. Portugal, Ireland, Italy, and Spain produced negative returns ranging from -1.0% and -4.0 %, while Greece was the largest detractor with a return of -37.4%. Emerging market debt (EMD) generated positive returns as investors continue to be drawn to the relatively high yield. Overall, EMD held up well in the volatile macro environment although concerns still loom surrounding the details of China’s slowdown. Similar to developed currencies, most emerging market currencies fell against the dollar causing hedged portfolios to outperform.

1.1 0.9 0.6 0.9 0.2 3.1 1.7 2.7 1.45.6 6.4 8.4

0.5

-0.5

0.6

7.8 9.84.8 6.3 5.1 6.5 8.4

13.6

6.9 6.8 5.41.2

-1.8

5.2 4.1

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 Fourth Quarter 2011QTR 1 Year

INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPED MARKETS International developed markets rose during the quarter, with the MSCI EAFE Index advancing 3%. Sectors such as healthcare, consumer staples and energy were among the

top performers, while financials, utilities and information technology underperformed. International growth stocks outperformed international value stocks with the MSCI EAFE Growth Index ending up 4% and the MSCI EAFE Value Index rising 3%. Across market

capitalizations, international large caps fared better than international small caps, with the MSCI EAFE Small Cap Index declining nearly 1%. The U.S. dollar appreciated sharply against the Euro, but declined against several commodity-related currencies such as the Canadian and Australian dollars. As the

debt crisis in Europe remains unresolved with no comprehensive solution forthcoming, the Euro has seen further weakness against the U.S. dollar and most major currencies. Lingering concerns about the possibility of further QE in the U.S. helped lift the Japanese yen to record highs against the U.S. dollar, before forcing government intervention. The safe-haven Swiss franc moved sharply lower against most currencies amid increased expectations that deflationary pressures would spur the central bank to intervene again.

-4.2-0.7 -0.6 -1.3

1.22.3

-4.1

4.5

-3.2

5.0

-0.2

-11.2

4.7

-2.4-0.4 0.0

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

Currency Returns versus U.S. Dollar, Fourth Quarter 2011QTR 1 YEAR

For the quarter, the MSCI Canada Index ended up 5% as the central bank left rates on hold at 1% amid the deepening sovereign debt crisis in Europe. The central bank has left rates unchanged since September 2010. In the summer of 2010, Canada became the first G-7 nation to raise rates since the financial crisis began. The Canadian dollar strengthened against the U.S. dollar as reports on U.S. employment and manufacturing indicated Canada’s biggest trading partner’s economy is recovering. An improving trend in U.S. data is positive for the Canadian dollar because it means better demand for the country’s exports.

The MSCI Europe Index gained 6%.The ECB cut rates to a record low of 1% and announced several steps to bolster the financial system amid the ongoing debt crisis. Spain ended down 2% as yields on the country’s debt touched record highs. Italy rose 1% as the debt crisis forced PM Silvio Berlusconi’s resignation. He was succeeded by Mario Monti, who quickly formed a new government to address the debt problems of the world’s eighth-largest economy. France advanced 3% despite ongoing concerns the country will lose its AAA rating. On the political front, President Nicolas Sarkozy will seek reelection as voters head to the polls in the April 2012 presidential election.

5


INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPED MARKETS (continued) The MSCI United Kingdom Index rose 9% as the Bank of England kept rates on hold at 0.5%, where it has remained since March 2009. In October, the central bank voted to

expand its bond-buying program for the first time in almost two years as government budget cuts, combined with Europe’s debt crisis, pose an increasing threat to Britain’s economic recovery. GDP rose a tepid 0.5% due to stagnant household expenditures as consumers hit hard by rising prices and anemic wage growth tightened their belts.

The MSCI Japan Index lost 4% as the Bank of Japan downgraded its assessment of the Japanese economy as sliding exports and expensive energy imports led to the largest

trade deficit on record. Imports increased largely due to the higher demand for fossil fuels as much of the nation’s nuclear power plants have been idling since the tsunami and earthquake on March 11th. Exports declined due to slowing overseas economies and the strong currency. The Japanese yen, which had risen to a post-World War II high against the U.S. dollar during the quarter, moved lower after government officials intervened in currency markets for the third time this year.

The MSCI Pacific ex-Japan Index gained 6%. Hong Kong advanced 6% as the economy remains relatively strong, with a low unemployment rate, robust retail sales and

strong GDP growth. Australia rose 8% as the Reserve Bank of Australia cut interest rates to 4.25% in two 25 basis point moves amid worries about slowing Asian growth and turbulence in Europe. Singapore declined 1% as reduced demand and supply chain disruptions hurt manufacturing, one of the key drivers of growth of Singapore's economy.

5.7

-5.4

5.514.1

4.3 4.1 0.1 0.8

-0.8 -0.9

9.7 8.9

-3.2

6.61.0 1.9 2.0 2.1

7.1 4.2

Consumer Staples Utilities Healthcare Energy Materials Industrials Telecom Consumer Discretionary

Info Technology Financials

International Equity Market Returns by Major Sectors, Fourth Quarter 2011

MSCI EAFE MSCI EM (emerging markets)

INTERNATIONAL EMERGING MARKETS The MSCI EM Index advanced 4% during the fourth quarter. Consumer staples, information technology and utilities were among the top performing sectors, while healthcare,

industrials and materials underperformed. The MSCI EM Latin America Index rose 9%. Brazil advanced 9% as the central bank cut rates by a total of 100 basis points to 11%. Brazilian policymakers have been walking

a fine line since August, when the central bank surprised markets by lowering rates despite high inflation. Brazil’s inflation rate is hovering slightly above the 6.5% upper limit. Mexico gained 9% as GDP grew a better-than-expected 4.5%. On the political front, Mexico’s upcoming July 2012 presidential elections will be closely watched. Of particular importance in the U.S., is how the trade and security policies of President Felipe Calderon’s successor will affect illegal immigration and the robust trade relationship with Mexico.

The MSCI EM Asia Index gained 3%. India plunged 14% as GDP grew 6.9% in the most recent quarter, the lowest level of growth since the second quarter of 2009.

Government officials stated inflation and exposure to Europe's economic woes are leading causes for India’s lower expansion rate. South Korea rose 6% amid a strong showing from IT giant Samsung Electronics after the company overtook Apple as the world’s largest smartphone vendor. China advanced 8% as the People’s Bank of China lowered the reserve ratio requirement by 50 basis points. It was the first cut in the ratio since 2008, and a change in course after the ratio was raised steadily throughout much of 2011.

The EMEA (Eastern Europe, Middle East and Africa) Index advanced 3%. Within Eastern Europe, Russia rose 6% despite heightened political tensions. Widespread protests

erupted ahead of the March 2012 presidential elections in opposition to Prime Minister Vladimir Putin's likely return to the presidency. The former two-term president (2000-2008) became prime minister in 2008 under his protégé President Medvedev because the Russian constitution does not allow three consecutive terms. In the Middle East, Turkey fell 16% amid high inflation and uncertainty regarding future monetary policy. South Africa gained 7% on higher commodity prices.

-14.3-3.9

-0.3

2.8 3.3 3.9 5.2 5.5 6.0 6.2 7.0 8.1 8.8 8.9 9.1 9.4

India Japan Pacific France EM Asia Germany Canada Europe Pacific (Ex-

Japan)

Russia South Africa

China EM Latin America

Brazil United Kingdom

Mexico

Non-U.S. Equity Market Returns by Country (U.S.$), Fourth Quarter 2011

6

QUARTERLY CONSIDERATIONS Financial Markets Performance Ending December 31, 2011

Returns for Periods Exceeding One-Year are Annualized.

U.S. Equity QTR YTD 1YR 2YR 3YR 4YR 5YR 10YR S&P 500 Composite Index 11.8 2.1 2.1 8.4 14.1 -1.6 -0.3 2.9 Dow Jones Industrial Average 12.7 8.3 8.3 11.2 14.9 0.8 2.4 4.6 Russell 1000 Growth 10.6 2.6 2.6 9.5 18.0 0.3 2.5 2.6 Russell 1000 Value 13.1 0.4 0.4 7.7 11.5 -3.2 -2.6 3.9 Russell Mid Cap 12.3 -1.5 -1.5 11.1 20.2 0.4 1.4 7.0 Russell 2000 15.5 -4.2 -4.2 10.3 15.6 0.6 0.2 5.6 Russell 2000 Growth 15.0 -2.9 -2.9 12.0 19.0 0.9 2.1 4.5 Russell 2000 Value 16.0 -5.5 -5.5 8.5 12.4 0.2 -1.9 6.4 NASDAQ 8.2 -0.8 -0.8 8.3 19.4 0.6 2.5 3.7 Russell 3000 12.1 1.0 1.0 8.7 14.9 -1.3 -0.0 3.5 NAREIT Equity REIT 15.2 8.3 8.3 17.7 21.0 2.5 -1.4 10.2

Fixed Income & Cash Equivalents QTR YTD 1YR 2YR 3YR 4YR 5YR 10YR Barclays Cap US Aggregate 1.1 7.8 7.8 7.2 6.8 6.4 6.5 5.8 Citigroup High Yield Market 6.4 5.5 5.5 9.8 23.3 8.5 7.2 8.7 Barclays Capital US TIPS 2.7 13.6 13.6 9.9 10.4 7.1 8.0 7.6 Merrill Lynch Muni 3-7 Years 1.4 6.9 6.9 5.1 5.8 5.8 5.7 5.0 Citigroup Hedged Non-U.S. Dollar Bond 0.6 4.1 4.1 3.3 3.0 4.2 4.3 4.4 Citigroup Unhedged Non-U.S. Dollar Bond -0.5 5.2 5.2 5.2 4.9 6.2 7.2 8.4 Citigroup Treasury Bill-3 Month 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.5 1.4 1.9 Ryan Labs 3 Yr GIC 0.5 2.4 2.4 3.0 3.5 3.8 4.0 4.1

International Equity QTR YTD 1YR 2YR 3YR 4YR 5YR 10YR MSCI EAFE 3.4 -11.7 -11.7 -2.3 8.2 -7.9 -4.3 5.1 MSCI EAFE Value 2.8 -11.6 -11.6 -4.2 7.4 -8.6 -5.8 5.5 MSCI EAFE Growth 3.9 -11.8 -11.8 -0.4 8.9 -7.2 -2.8 4.6 MSCI EAFE Small Cap -0.5 -15.7 -15.7 1.6 15.0 -5.2 -3.8 9.4 MSCI Emerging Markets 4.4 -18.2 -18.2 -1.2 20.4 -4.9 2.7 14.2 S&P Developed World Property x U.S. 0.1 -14.7 -14.7 0.4 12.9 -8.8 -7.4 9.2

Miscellaneous QTR YTD 1YR 2YR 3YR 4YR 5YR 10YR Consumer Price Index -0.1 3.0 3.0 2.2 2.4 1.8 2.2 2.5 DJ UBS Commodity Index 0.3 -13.3 -13.3 0.6 6.4 -6.2 -2.1 6.6 HFRI Fund Weighted Composite Index 1.3 -4.8 -4.8 2.4 8.0 0.5 2.3 5.9 HFRI Fund of Funds Composite Index -0.3 -5.5 -5.5 -0.1 3.6 -3.3 -0.7 3.3 Alerian MLP 16.3 13.9 13.9 24.4 39.7 14.6 14.2 15.7

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

7


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 the 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 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. 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 21 of the developed markets outside North America. These 20 countries include 14 European countries and 6 Pacific countries. S&P/Large/Mid Value World x U.S. and S&P Large/Mid Growth World x US Indices measure the performance of the largest 80% of developed county’s available market capitalization, adjusted for float. Three growth and four value variables are used to assign stocks to a specific style index. These include, 5-year historical EPS growth rate, 5-year historical sales per growth rate, 5-year average annual internal growth rate, book to value per share, sales per share price, cash flow per share price and dividend yield. Each style index constitutes 50% of the total float of the S&P Large/Mid World x U.S. Index. S&P Small Cap World x U.S. represents small cap companies across developed markets. Eligible companies' full market capitalization range from USD 200 ~1,500 million and free float adjusted the market capitalization of the index constituents. 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 foreign countries. Consumer Price Index is the United States Headline Consumer Price Index, which excludes energy and food. 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. 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.

8

Fourth Quarter 2011 Knowledge College

Emerging Market Bonds

Emerging Market Bonds are a growing sub-sector of the foreign debt market. Though currently accounting for less than 5 percent of the world’s bond issuance, emerging market countries are growing faster than the developed world. Their capital markets are also increasing in size. While Emerging Market Bonds may have greater political risks, the countries’ lower debt levels, lower trade deficits (often surpluses), higher savings rates, and younger population arguably put them in better fiscal positions than many of their developed market counterparts, especially following the 2008 financial crisis. In the 1980s and early 1990s, the tradable market for emerging market fixed income was largely external and denominated in USD. Bonds denominated in local currency began to take hold in the late 1990s. Rapid expansion over the last decade has brought the market’s size from $600 billion in the mid 2000s to approximately $2.1 trillion at the end of 2010.i As governments and businesses of Latin America, Eastern Europe, and Asia (ex-Japan) borrow money to finance fiscal deficits, infrastructure projects and business growth, they issue bonds. These bonds encompass three categories—external, local currency and corporate debt. External debt is issued in currencies such as the USD or euro; the yield of these bonds includes a risk premium based on the issuing government’s creditworthiness. The largest risk to external emerging market debt is a default or stress caused by currency fluctuations. For example, if the USD appreciates against the Brazilian reál, Brazil’s USD-denominated interest expense rises imposing a greater financial burden on the Brazilian government. In contrast, local currency debt is issued in the country’s home currency. This adds currency and interest rate risk for U.S. based investors, but also indicates a more responsible and stable local government policy. Since the late 1990s, emerging market countries have continued to stabilize and mature. This new regime has seen most emerging market countries reduce the risk of a currency crisis by transitioning to more flexible or even floating exchange rate approaches, which are less prone to sudden devaluations. The charts below show relative Debt-to-GDP, Inflation (CPI) and Foreign Exchange Reserves for relevant emerging market countries. While relative debt for emerging market countries is clearly less of an issue compared to their developed counterparts, inflation and foreign exchange reserves management has also markedly improved. Debt % of GDP (Local Public)ii CPI (% YOY)iii Foreign Exchange Reserves (U.S. $B)iv

Volatility in local economies as well as political instability are significant risks to the asset class. However, the risks are accompanied by higher yields, and the asset class has proven to be quite resilient during stress periods experienced by other asset classes. While approximately 70% of local currency emerging market debt is held by local participants, this composition is slowly migrating abroad as the asset class matures and continues to generate interest from various foreign institutional investors.

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%Debt as % of GDP (Local: public only)

05

1015202530

-$10

$40

$90

$140

$190

9

As of 12/31/2011, the JPMorgan GBI-EM Global Diversified Index had a YTM of 6.57%, duration of 4.44, and remaining life of 6.52 years.

The Emerging Market Bond asset class has over 40 countries in its universe; however, not all are easily investable or issue debt in local currency terms. The JPMorgan GBI-EM Global Diversified Index is comprised of 14 countries whose weights are capped at 10% to avoid bias to more debt-laden countries. The exhibits below illustrate the impact of this constraint relative to the float-weighted “Global” version of the JPMorgan GBI-EM Index (left side).

Emerging Market Bonds in the Frontier Engineer™ Framework Emerging Market Bonds returned an annualized 11.1% from 1994 - 2011, second best of all asset classes (MLPs). Over the same

time, they exhibited a standard deviation of 14.1%. Since 1997, which includes the extreme emerging markets volatility in 1998, skewness and excess kurtosis for Emerging Market Bonds

was -2.33 and 13.67, respectively. When adjusting the short-term return stream to a longer comparable return stream (i.e., relative to High Yield Bonds 1984 - 1994 and

U.S. Bonds 1979 - 1984), standard deviation goes from 14.1% to 16.9%. From 1997 - 2011, Emerging Market Bonds outperformed all other fixed income asset classes (TIPS, U.S. Bonds, Foreign Developed

Bonds) 54% of the time on a calendar year basis.

Brazil, 26.1%

Chile, 0.1%

Colombia, 2.2%

Hungary , 3.5%

Indonesia , 6.8%Malaysia , 7.6%Mexico , 14.2%

Peru , 1.2%

Philippines, 0.3%

Poland , 11.2%

Russia , 4.9%

South Africa , 8.8%

Thailand , 5.2%Turkey , 8.0%

JPMorgan GBI-EM Global Unhedged Country Weights (10/31/11)

Brazil10.0%

Chile0.2%

Columbia4.1%

Hungary 6.0%

Indonesia 10.0%

Malaysia 10.0%

Mexico 10.0%Peru

2.0%Philippines

0.5%

Poland 10.0%

Russia 8.4%

South Africa 10.0%

Thailand 8.8%

Turkey 10.0%

JPMorgan GBI-EM Global Diversified Unhedged Country Weights (10/31/11)

10

Volatility, Return, Fat Tails and Diversification Benefits Since 2003, Emerging Market Bonds have exhibited a standard deviation of 11.9%. Currency movements accounted for roughly two-

thirds of this total realized volatility. Over this same period, currency accounted for just over half of the Emerging Market Bond total return. Emerging Market Bonds have nearly double the negative skew and 1.5x the excess kurtosis of High Yield Bonds (1997 - 2011). Since 2003, skewness and excess kurtosis of local currency bonds have been more muted at -0.95 and 3.38. This compares to High

Yield Bonds which exhibited skewness and excess kurtosis of -1.44 and 9.10 over the same period. The fat tails can be directly related to the asset class exhibiting two historical drawdowns of over 25% (1994 and 1998). Double-digit

(positive and negative) monthly returns are not rare either. However, it is important to note that Emerging Market Bond fat tails are diversifying to those of other asset classes (i.e., 2000 - 2002 and 2007 - 2009).

Skewness & Kurtosis

Historical Correlations

Cash TIPS US Bonds

Int'l Bond

HY Bond

EM Bonds

Large Cap US

Mid Cap US

Small Cap US

REITs Int'l Equity

Em. Mkts. Equity

Commod- ity Futures

Hedge Fund Portfolio

Private Equity

MLPs Muni (3-7)

Skew - -0.86 -0.39 0.07 -1.23 -2.33 -0.56 -0.70 -0.43 -0.69 -0.63 -0.77 -0.95 -0.66 -0.43 -0.46 -0.36Kurt - 5.54 1.29 0.40 8.72 13.67 0.64 1.70 0.67 7.05 1.14 1.58 4.14 3.71 0.67 2.11 1.00

Cash TIPS Muni Bond

US Bond For. Dev. Bond

HY Bond EM Bond

LC US Equity

MC US Equity

SC US Equity

REITs Int'l Equity

EM Equity

Commod. Fut.

HFs Portfolio

MLPs Private Equity

Cash 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00TIPS 0.00 1.00 0.54 0.74 0.55 0.28 0.30 0.03 0.07 0.00 0.19 0.09 0.11 0.56 0.10 0.10 0.00Muni Bond 0.00 0.54 1.00 0.72 0.45 0.20 0.20 0.09 0.09 0.03 0.10 0.08 0.00 0.05 0.09 0.19 0.03US Bond 0.00 0.74 0.72 1.00 0.51 0.27 0.29 0.22 0.21 0.12 0.19 0.16 0.00 0.32 0.07 0.12 0.12For. Dev. Bond 0.00 0.55 0.45 0.51 1.00 0.09 0.24 0.04 0.00 -0.04 0.06 0.40 0.07 0.25 -0.01 0.04 -0.04HY Bond 0.00 0.28 0.20 0.27 0.09 1.00 0.53 0.58 0.65 0.61 0.62 0.52 0.56 0.28 0.48 0.54 0.61EM Bond 0.00 0.30 0.20 0.29 0.24 0.53 1.00 0.59 0.60 0.57 0.47 0.59 0.73 0.40 0.59 0.33 0.57LC US Equity 0.00 0.03 0.09 0.22 0.04 0.58 0.59 1.00 0.94 0.83 0.62 0.66 0.67 0.26 0.53 0.36 0.83MC US Equity 0.00 0.07 0.09 0.21 0.00 0.65 0.60 0.94 1.00 0.94 0.71 0.64 0.70 0.28 0.59 0.42 0.94SC US Equity 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.12 -0.04 0.61 0.57 0.83 0.94 1.00 0.72 0.59 0.68 0.23 0.57 0.39 1.00REITs 0.00 0.19 0.10 0.19 0.06 0.62 0.47 0.62 0.71 0.72 1.00 0.50 0.47 0.26 0.30 0.34 0.72Int'l Equity 0.00 0.09 0.08 0.16 0.40 0.52 0.59 0.66 0.64 0.59 0.50 1.00 0.69 0.31 0.53 0.36 0.59EM Equity 0.00 0.11 0.00 0.00 0.07 0.56 0.73 0.67 0.70 0.68 0.47 0.69 1.00 0.31 0.66 0.38 0.68Commod. Fut. 0.00 0.56 0.05 0.32 0.25 0.28 0.40 0.26 0.28 0.23 0.26 0.31 0.31 1.00 0.41 0.30 0.23HFs Portfolio 0.00 0.10 0.09 0.07 -0.01 0.48 0.59 0.53 0.59 0.57 0.30 0.53 0.66 0.41 1.00 0.32 0.57MLPs 0.00 0.10 0.19 0.12 0.04 0.54 0.33 0.36 0.42 0.39 0.34 0.36 0.38 0.30 0.32 1.00 0.39Private Equity 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.12 -0.04 0.61 0.57 0.83 0.94 1.00 0.72 0.59 0.68 0.23 0.57 0.39 1.00

11

Ways to Invest Foreign Developed, Core Plus and/or Hedge Fund managers allocate to Emerging Market Bonds opportunistically. Strategically allocate to Emerging Market Bonds with a strict bias to local currency. Summary Benefits: Higher return potential through yield premium to most developed markets. Diversifying return stream, especially during other asset classes’ extreme events. Direct exposure to growth, social development, and currency appreciation of emerging market economies, which are in a better

long-term position compared to most developed countries. Concerns: Volatile asset class (on par with U.S. Equities) driven in large part by currency oscillation and exacerbated by extraordinary fat tails. Elevated currency, fiscal and geopolitical policy risks, including emerging market contagion.

Conclusion Emerging Market bonds can serve a key purpose within a diversified portfolio. Many institutional and individual investors have ambitious spending requirements. While emerging market bonds have unique risks, they can improve overall risk-adjusted performance. If you would like more information about investing in emerging market bonds, ask your DiMeo Schneider & Associates, L.L.C.’s investment consultant or visit our Research & Resource Center at www.dimeoschneider.com for a copy of our comprehensive paper: Emerging Market Bonds: An Asset Class Primer. i JP Morgan, EM Debt as an Asset Class, January 2004; JP Morgan DataQuery. PineBridge Investments, The Rise and Rise of Emerging Market Debt, January 2011. ii The World Factbook. iii Standish and JPMorgan. Market Cap weighted averages for countries in the JPMorgan GBI-EM Global Diversified Index. iv Standish and JPMorgan. Market Cap weighted averages for countries in the JPMorgan GBI-EM Global Diversified Index.

12

ACCOUNT RECONCILIATION

BENCHMARK COMPOSITION

TRAILING PERFORMANCE SUMMARY

CALENDAR YEAR PERFORMANCE SUMMARY

CurrentQuarter

YTD1

Year3

Years5

YearsSince

InceptionInception

Date

Historical Account Composite 01/01/2004

Begining Market Value 30,611,020 32,351,109 32,351,109 20,313,628 26,284,962 17,848,787

Net Contributions - 494,623 494,623 1,122,080 178,096 2,475,871

Gain/Loss 1,772,351 -462,361 -462,361 10,947,664 5,920,314 12,058,714

Ending Market Value 32,383,371 32,383,371 32,383,371 32,383,371 32,383,371 32,383,371

CurrentQuarter

YTD1

Year3

Years5

Years10

YearsSince

InceptionInception

Date

Historical Account Composite 5.80 -1.55 -1.55 15.17 4.07 N/A 6.31 01/01/2004

Target Asset Allocation 6.55 0.70 0.70 12.30 1.63 N/A 5.10 01/01/2004

2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001

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

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

Allocation Mandate Weight (%)

Dec-2010

Russell 3000 Index 40.00

Barclays Capital Aggregate 30.00

MSCI AC World ex USA 20.00

DSA Hedge Fund Index 10.00

Concordia University-Nebraska

Endowment

December 31, 2011

13

Fund &Cat Avg

Exp Ratio

Allocation

MarketValue

($)%

Performance(%)

CurrentQuarter

YTD1

Year3

Years5

Years10

Years2010 2009 2008

Total Plan

Historical Account Composite 32,383,371 100.0 5.8 -1.5 -1.5 15.2 4.1 N/A 18.0 31.5 -26.1

Target Asset Allocation 6.5 0.7 0.7 12.3 1.6 N/A 12.6 24.9 -29.1

TIPS

Vanguard Inflation-Protected Secs Adm 3,767,469 11.6 2.6 13.3 13.3 10.1 7.7 N/A 6.3 11.0 -2.8 0.11

Barclays Capital U.S. Treasury: U.S. TIPS 2.7 13.6 13.6 10.4 8.0 7.6 6.3 11.4 -2.4

IM U.S. TIPS (MF) Median 2.4 11.9 11.9 9.3 7.1 7.3 5.8 10.3 -2.4 0.83

Vanguard Inflation-Protected Secs Adm Rank 19 12 12 23 23 N/A 26 33 58

Broad Domestic Fixed

Loomis Sayles Bond Instl 1,881,062 5.8 2.5 3.8 3.8 17.4 6.5 10.0 13.6 37.2 -21.8 0.64

Barclays Capital Aggregate 1.1 7.8 7.8 6.8 6.5 5.8 6.5 5.9 5.2

IM U.S. Broad Market Core Fixed Income (MF) Median 1.3 6.5 6.5 8.9 5.9 5.3 7.5 13.2 -3.6 0.92

Loomis Sayles Bond Instl Rank 3 91 91 1 31 1 1 1 97

PIMCO Total Return Instl 633,398 2.0 2.2 4.2 4.2 8.9 8.1 6.8 8.8 13.9 4.8 0.46

Barclays Capital Aggregate 1.1 7.8 7.8 6.8 6.5 5.8 6.5 5.9 5.2

IM U.S. Broad Market Core Fixed Income (MF) Median 1.3 6.5 6.5 8.9 5.9 5.3 7.5 13.2 -3.6 0.92

PIMCO Total Return Instl Rank 6 89 89 52 4 4 25 46 13

High Yield Fixed

JPMorgan High Yield Select 1,281,384 4.0 5.8 2.6 2.6 20.4 6.7 8.4 14.7 48.5 -22.5 0.91

Citigroup High-Yield Market 6.4 5.5 5.5 23.3 7.2 8.7 14.3 55.2 -25.9

IM U.S. High Yield Bonds (MF) Median 5.3 2.7 2.7 19.6 5.3 7.0 13.6 46.3 -25.2 1.21

JPMorgan High Yield Select Rank 38 52 52 39 14 12 30 39 29

International Fixed Hedged

PIMCO Foreign Bond (USD-Hedged) I 1,563,964 4.8 2.4 6.8 6.8 11.5 7.1 6.2 9.2 19.0 -2.4 0.52

Citigroup Non-U.S. World Government Bond Hedged 0.6 4.1 4.1 3.0 4.3 4.4 2.5 2.4 8.0

IM International Fixed Income (MF) Median 0.2 3.1 3.1 5.9 5.8 6.7 6.1 8.9 1.9 1.08

PIMCO Foreign Bond (USD-Hedged) I Rank 2 8 8 11 20 55 20 10 81

Large Cap

Dodge & Cox Stock 1,348,606 4.2 11.2 -4.1 -4.1 12.6 -4.1 4.0 13.5 31.3 -43.3 0.52

Russell 1000 Value Index 13.1 0.4 0.4 11.5 -2.6 3.9 15.5 19.7 -36.8

IM U.S. Large Cap Value Equity (MF) Median 12.2 -2.2 -2.2 10.8 -2.6 2.9 12.9 23.4 -37.0 1.25

Dodge & Cox Stock Rank 77 71 71 21 79 14 41 13 92

Concordia University-NebraskaEndowment

As of December 31, 2011

14



Fund &Cat Avg

Exp Ratio

Allocation

MarketValue

($)%

Performance(%)

CurrentQuarter

YTD1

Year3

Years5

Years10

Years2010 2009 2008

iShares S&P 500 Index 1,698,881 5.2 11.8 2.0 2.0 14.0 -0.3 2.9 15.0 26.4 -37.0 0.09

S&P 500 11.8 2.1 2.1 14.1 -0.3 2.9 15.1 26.5 -37.0

IM S&P 500 Index (MF) Median 11.7 1.6 1.6 13.6 -0.7 2.5 14.6 26.1 -37.3 0.63

iShares S&P 500 Index Rank 21 10 10 9 8 7 9 17 13

iShares Russell 1000 Growth Index 1,336,034 4.1 10.5 2.5 2.5 17.8 2.3 2.4 16.5 36.9 -38.5 0.20

Russell 1000 Growth Index 10.6 2.6 2.6 18.0 2.5 2.6 16.7 37.2 -38.4

IM U.S. Large Cap Growth Equity (MF) Median 9.3 -1.7 -1.7 15.3 0.9 1.9 15.3 34.8 -40.2 1.33

iShares Russell 1000 Growth Index Rank 19 12 12 16 28 37 36 42 36

Mid Cap

iShares S&P MidCap 400 Index 684,848 2.1 12.9 -1.9 -1.9 19.4 3.2 6.9 26.4 37.2 -36.2 0.21

S&P MidCap 400 13.0 -1.7 -1.7 19.6 3.3 7.0 26.6 37.4 -36.2

IM U.S. Mid Cap Core Equity (MF) Median 12.7 -3.2 -3.2 17.5 1.2 5.5 23.7 34.6 -38.7 1.32

iShares S&P MidCap 400 Index Rank 44 30 30 26 14 10 17 31 23

Small Cap

DFA US Small Cap Value I 887,559 2.7 16.2 -7.5 -7.5 17.4 -1.8 8.0 30.9 33.6 -36.8 0.52

Russell 2000 Value Index 16.0 -5.5 -5.5 12.4 -1.9 6.4 24.5 20.6 -28.9

IM U.S. Small Cap Value Equity (MF) Median 16.3 -4.8 -4.8 16.1 -0.1 7.1 25.4 30.2 -32.4 1.53

DFA US Small Cap Value I Rank 52 71 71 34 79 29 9 36 71

Conestoga Small Cap 859,519 2.7 13.2 4.6 4.6 18.7 5.2 N/A 24.0 29.1 -27.7 1.10

Russell 2000 Growth Index 15.0 -2.9 -2.9 19.0 2.1 4.5 29.1 34.5 -38.5

IM U.S. Small Cap Growth Equity (MF) Median 13.3 -3.4 -3.4 19.2 1.6 4.4 27.7 35.7 -41.9 1.55

Conestoga Small Cap Rank 52 4 4 55 6 N/A 77 80 1

International Equity

American Funds EuroPacific Gr F-1 3,038,568 9.4 4.5 -13.6 -13.6 9.5 -1.5 6.5 9.4 39.1 -40.5 0.85

MSCI EAFE Index 3.4 -11.7 -11.7 8.2 -4.3 5.1 8.2 32.5 -43.1

IM International Large Cap Core Equity (MF) Median 4.6 -12.7 -12.7 6.8 -4.9 4.1 8.0 28.8 -43.4 1.36

American Funds EuroPacific Gr F-1 Rank 52 66 66 18 6 6 31 11 16

DFA Intl Small Cap Value I 779,824 2.4 1.4 -17.5 -17.5 10.8 -4.0 11.9 18.1 39.5 -41.7 0.70

MSCI EAFE Small Cap Value -1.5 -17.3 -17.3 14.0 -4.0 10.8 19.3 50.0 -45.5

IM International SMID Cap Value Equity (MF) Median 0.3 -18.3 -18.3 18.6 -3.3 N/A 21.1 60.7 -46.2 1.38

DFA Intl Small Cap Value I Rank 27 36 36 87 90 N/A 80 64 16

15



Fund &Cat Avg

Exp Ratio

Allocation

MarketValue

($)%

Performance(%)

CurrentQuarter

YTD1

Year3

Years5

Years10

Years2010 2009 2008

Emerging Markets

Aberdeen Emerging Markets Instl Fd Instl 2,583,587 8.0 5.5 -11.0 -11.0 26.1 N/A N/A 27.6 76.6 -40.4 0.95

MSCI Emerging Markets Index 4.4 -18.2 -18.2 20.4 2.7 14.2 19.2 79.0 -53.2

IM Emerging Markets Equity (MF) Median 4.5 -19.5 -19.5 18.0 0.6 13.0 18.3 73.6 -54.9 1.63

Aberdeen Emerging Markets Instl Fd Instl Rank 23 4 4 4 N/A N/A 7 36 2

Real Estate Domestic

Nuveen Real Estate Secs I 1,048,223 3.2 14.8 7.9 7.9 22.5 0.3 12.3 30.6 30.5 -34.8 1.04

FTSE NAREIT Equity REIT Index 15.2 8.3 8.3 21.0 -1.4 10.2 27.9 28.0 -37.7

IM Real Estate Sector (MF) Median 15.2 7.9 7.9 20.9 -1.8 9.8 27.4 28.9 -38.9 1.41

Nuveen Real Estate Secs I Rank 69 51 51 17 9 2 11 26 10

Real Estate International

Cohen & Steers International Realty I 952,876 2.9 3.4 -16.8 -16.8 8.8 -8.2 N/A 14.0 36.0 -47.3 1.26

S&P Developed Ex-U.S. Property 0.1 -14.7 -14.7 12.9 -7.4 9.2 18.1 42.8 -51.8

Commodities

PIMCO Commodity Real Ret Strat Instl 3,111,887 9.6 2.2 -7.6 -7.6 17.1 2.4 N/A 24.1 39.9 -43.3 0.79

Dow Jones-UBS Commodity Index 0.3 -13.3 -13.3 6.4 -2.1 6.6 16.8 18.9 -35.6

MLP

Kayne Anderson MLP Invst Co 873,967 2.7 11.2 3.0 3.0 33.3 6.7 N/A 35.4 69.9 -38.1

Alerian MLP Index 16.3 13.9 13.9 39.7 14.2 15.7 35.9 76.4 -36.8

Tortoise Energy Infrastructure Corp. 911,783 2.8 19.5 10.7 10.7 42.6 10.4 N/A 31.5 99.3 -44.5

Alerian MLP Index 16.3 13.9 13.9 39.7 14.2 15.7 35.9 76.4 -36.8

Hedge Funds

Grosvenor Inst'l Partners, L.P. 3,122,690 9.6 0.6 -3.8 -3.8 5.3 0.4 3.8 6.5 13.9 -20.9

HFRI Fund of Funds Composite Index -0.3 -5.5 -5.5 3.6 -0.7 3.3 5.7 11.5 -21.4

Cash/Equivalents

Cash & Equivalents 17,242 0.1

16

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 Pass

PIMCO Foreign Bond (USD-Hedged) I Pass

Dodge & Cox Stock Pass

iShares S&P 500 Index Discuss

iShares Russell 1000 Growth Index Discuss

iShares S&P MidCap 400 Index Discuss

DFA US Small Cap Value I Pass

Conestoga Small Cap Pass

American Funds EuroPacific Gr F-1 Pass

DFA Intl Small Cap Value I Discuss

Aberdeen Emerging Markets Instl Fd Instl

Nuveen Real Estate Secs I Pass

Cohen & Steers International Realty I

PIMCO Commodity Real Ret Strat Instl

Kayne Anderson MLP Invst Co

Tortoise Energy Infrastructure Corp.

Grosvenor Inst'l Partners, L.P.

Concordia University-NebraskaManager Evaluation Summary


17

Concordia University-NebraskaManager Evaluation Summary


Outperform Benchmark

Underperform Benchmark

vs Benchmark

Legend For Overall Criteria

1-50 Percentile

51-100 Percentile

vs Peer Group

46% or greater

45% or lower

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.

18

Concordia University, Nebraska & Concordia Foundation, Inc.Portfolio Engineer Radius Calculator

7.25%

7.75%

8.25%

8.75%E

xpec

ted

Ret

urn

All Historical Portfolios

Target Allocation

Current Portfolio

Prior Quarter

Constraint Radius0.45%

CashInflation Indexed Bonds

Investment Grade US

Bonds

Foreign Bonds

High Yield Bonds

Large Cap US

Mid Cap US

Small Cap US

REITs Foreign Stocks

Emerging Markets Stocks

MLPs HFOF Commodity Futures E (Return) E(Risk) Distance From

Target Rebalance

Target 0% 12% 8% 5% 4% 13% 2% 5% 6% 12% 8% 5% 10% 10% 7.69% 12.01% N.A. N.A.

Date CashInflation Indexed Bonds

Investment Grade US

Bonds

Foreign Bonds

High Yield Bonds

Large Cap US

Mid Cap US

Small Cap US

REITs Foreign Stocks

Emerging Markets Stocks

MLPs HFOF Commodity Futures E (Return) E(Risk) Distance From

Target Rebalance

12/31/2011 0% 12% 8% 5% 4% 14% 2% 5% 6% 12% 8% 6% 10% 10% 7.75% 12.14% 0.14% No

9/30/2011 2% 13% 8% 5% 4% 13% 2% 5% 6% 10% 7% 5% 10% 10% 7.39% 11.29% 0.78% Yes

6.75%9.50% 10.00% 10.50% 11.00% 11.50% 12.00% 12.50% 13.00% 13.50%

Expected Risk (Standard Deviation)

19

December 31, 2011 September 30, 2011

September 30, 2011December 31, 2011

Market Value($)

Allocation(%)

Target(%)

TIPS 4,058,743 13.3 12.0

Broad Domestic Fixed 2,520,380 8.2 8.0

High Yield Fixed 1,211,454 4.0 4.0

International Fixed Hedged 1,607,188 5.3 5.0

Large Cap 3,841,994 12.6 13.0

Mid Cap 576,670 1.9 2.0

Small Cap 1,418,692 4.6 5.0

International Equity 3,142,141 10.3 12.0

Emerging Markets 2,158,274 7.1 8.0

Real Estate Domestic 912,882 3.0 3.0

Real Estate International 757,854 2.5 3.0

Commodities 3,043,612 9.9 10.0

MLP 1,625,397 5.3 5.0

Hedge Funds 3,104,830 10.1 10.0

Cash/Equivalents 630,909 2.1 0.0

Total Fund 30,611,020 100.0 100.0

Market Value($)

Allocation(%)

Target(%)

TIPS 3,767,469 11.6 12.0

Broad Domestic Fixed 2,514,460 7.8 8.0

High Yield Fixed 1,281,384 4.0 4.0

International Fixed Hedged 1,563,964 4.8 5.0

Large Cap 4,383,521 13.5 13.0

Mid Cap 684,848 2.1 2.0

Small Cap 1,747,078 5.4 5.0

International Equity 3,818,392 11.8 12.0

Emerging Markets 2,583,587 8.0 8.0

Real Estate Domestic 1,048,223 3.2 3.0

Real Estate International 952,876 2.9 3.0

Commodities 3,111,887 9.6 10.0

MLP 1,785,750 5.5 5.0

Hedge Funds 3,122,690 9.6 10.0

Cash/Equivalents 17,242 0.1 0.0

Total Fund 32,383,371 100.0 100.0


Endowment

December 31, 2011

20

Retu

rn (

%)

CurrentQuarter

YTD1

Year3

Years5

Years10

YearsSince

InceptionInception

Date

Historical Account Composite 5.80 -1.55 -1.55 15.17 4.07 N/A 6.67 12/31/2003

Target Asset Allocation 6.55 0.70 0.70 12.30 1.63 N/A 5.58 12/31/2003


Endowment

December 31, 2011

21

5 YEARS3 YEARS

10 YEARS7 YEARS

No data found.


Endowment

December 31, 2011

22

FUND INFO QUARTERLY COMMENTS - ASSET CLASS

HISTORICAL PERFORMANCE

FUND OBJECTIVE

QUARTERLY COMMENTS - FUND

TIPS returned 4.5%, trailing Treasuries by 200 basis points. Realized inflation crept higher during the quarter but did not translate into an increase

in the 10-year breakeven. In fact, the opposite occurred as the 10-year breakeven narrow ed from 2.4% to 1.7%. As a result, the reduction w as

caused by real yields not being able to keep up in the nominal yield rally. Overall, real yields declined w ith the 10-year coming in 0.6% to end the

quarter at 0.2% and the 30-year narrow ing 0.7% to 1.0%.

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 Hollyer/Volpert

Total Assets $13,533 Million

Total Assets Date 12/31/2011

Gross Expense 0.11%

Net Expense 0.11%

Turnover 29%

• The Barclays Capital U.S. Treasury Inflation Protected Securities Index posted a strong return of 4.5% during the third quarter of 2011.

• In this environment, the Vanguard Inflation-Protected Securities Fund outperformed both the Index and its peer group. The fund benefited from a

slight increase in its relative duration during the quarter.

J. Rondini, Senior Investment Analyst, DiMeo Schneider & Associates, L.L.C. 3Q11

CurrentQuarter

YTD1

Year3

Years5

Years10

Years2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001

Vanguard Infl-Protected Secs Adm 2.59 13.29 13.29 10.15 7.73 N/A 6.31 10.96 -2.78 11.69 0.52 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

Barclays Cap US Treasury: US TIPS 2.69 13.56 13.56 10.38 7.95 7.58 6.31 11.41 -2.35 11.63 0.49 2.84 8.46 8.39 16.56 7.89

IM U.S. TIPS (MF) Median 2.37 11.93 11.93 9.34 7.10 7.33 5.83 10.29 -2.41 10.58 -0.06 2.06 7.58 7.61 16.07 7.62

Vanguard Infl-Protected Secs Adm Rank 19 12 12 23 23 N/A 26 33 58 7 15 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

The fund seeks to provide inflation protection and income consistent w ith 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-w eighted maturity of seven to 10 years. Up to 20% of the assets may be invested in non-inflation-indexed securities, including

investment grade corporate debt and U.S. government and agency bonds. At a minimum, all bonds purchased w ill be rated “investment grade.”

Vanguard Infl-Protected Secs Adm

December 31, 2011

23

PEER GROUP ANALYSIS 3 YEAR ROLLING PEER GROUP PERCENTILE RANKING

RELATIVE PERFORMANCE TO INDEXRISK AND RETURN (01/01/07-12/31/11)


Barclays Cap US Treasury: US TIPS

0.0

25.0

50.0

75.0

100.0

3/07 9/07 3/08 9/08 3/09 9/09 3/10 9/10 3/11 12/11

CurrentQuarter

1Year

3Years

5Years

Vanguard Infl-Protected Secs Adm 2.6 (19) 13.3 (12) 10.1 (23) 7.7 (23)

Barclays Cap US Treasury: US TIPS 2.7 (9) 13.6 (7) 10.4 (19) 8.0 (13)

5th Percentile 3.0 13.8 12.3 8.2

1st Quartile 2.6 12.9 10.0 7.7

Median 2.4 11.9 9.3 7.1

3rd Quartile 2.0 9.2 8.4 6.2

95th Percentile 0.8 4.5 6.8 1.9

Cumulative Annualized Over/Under Relative Performance

Over/Under Performance

0.0

0.2

0.4

-0.2

-0.4

3/07 9/07 3/08 9/08 3/09 9/09 3/10 9/10 3/11 12/11


Barclays Cap US Treasury: US TIPS

7.7

7.8

7.9

8.0

Risk (Standard Deviation %)


December 31, 2011

24

PORTFOLIO CHARACTERISTICSRISK CHARACTERISTICS

SECTOR EXPOSURE (%)CREDIT QUALITY DISTRIBUTION (%)

1Year

3Years

5Years

10Years

Return 13.29 10.15 7.73 N/A

Standard Deviation 3.96 5.69 7.38 N/A

vs. Barclays Cap US Treasury: US TIPS

Tracking Error 0.55 0.68 0.65 N/A

Alpha -0.31 -0.04 -0.21 N/A

Beta 1.01 0.98 1.00 N/A

R-Squared 0.98 0.99 0.99 N/A

Consistency 58.33 52.78 48.33 N/A

vs. 90 Day U.S. Treasury Bill

Sharpe Ratio 3.16 1.71 0.85 N/A

Portfolio

Portfolio Duration 8.1

Avg. Maturity 9.0

Current Yield 2.6

Gov

't

Cas

h/Oth

er

AAA


December 31, 2011

25



FUND OBJECTIVE


Domestic f ixed income saw positive returns across all major sectors. The yield curve ended relatively unchanged as rates continued to be

supported by the Fed’s accommodative policy and implementation of “Operation Tw ist”. The 2-year remained at 0.25% and the 30-year fell 1 basis

point to 2.89%. The 5-year w as the exception and outperformed the overall curve by declining 13 basis points to 0.83%. Overall, Treasuries

returned 0.9% for the quarter. Investment grade corporates outperformed duration matched Treasuries, returning 1.7%, as credit spreads

tightened over the quarter. Overall, fundamentals remained strong as corporate profits and cash levels remained at historically high levels. Among

investment grades, f inancial-backed issuers underperformed utility-backed and industrial-related corporates due to their disproportionate

exposures to sovereign Europe debt. Mortgage-backed securities moved higher despite concerns that government programs aimed at stimulating

the housing market w ill lead to increased refinancing activity and expectations for faster prepayments going forw ard. Commercial mortgage-

backed securities (CMBS) w ere the best performing structured product, outperforming Treasuries by 2.2%, as spreads rallied late in the quarter.

CMBS also saw an improvement in the new issuance market and stable delinquency rates. Asset-backed securities (ABS) produced positive

returns, but trailed Treasuries, as the sector saw spreads w iden. Within ABS, credit cards w ere the largest detractor follow ed by auto.

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 Capital Aggregate


Portfolio Manager Team Managed



Gross Expense 0.64%

Net Expense 0.64%

Turnover 22%

Manager performance commentary not available at time of publishing.

CurrentQuarter

YTD1

Year3

Years5

Years10

Years2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001

Loomis Sayles Bond Instl 2.51 3.76 3.76 17.37 6.53 10.00 13.58 37.19 -21.82 8.53 11.29 4.28 11.30 29.18 13.34 2.66

Barclays Capital Aggregate 1.12 7.84 7.84 6.77 6.50 5.78 6.54 5.93 5.24 6.97 4.34 2.43 4.34 4.11 10.27 8.43

IM U.S. Broad Market Core Fixed Income (MF) Median 1.32 6.54 6.54 8.92 5.95 5.30 7.50 13.16 -3.60 5.28 3.95 1.83 4.04 4.37 8.56 7.58

Loomis Sayles Bond Instl Rank 3 91 91 1 31 1 1 1 97 2 1 2 1 1 1 100

This fund is managed to take full advantage of the 35% limit on below investment-grade bonds, w hich tends to generate a higher risk/rew ard profile. In addition, management is w illing 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 w ith counter cyclical elements. In doing so, it w ill

utilize convertible bonds, municipal bonds, preferred stocks and foreign corporate and government bonds, in addition to the domestic corporate bonds w hich make up the majority of the fund.

Loomis Sayles Bond Instl

December 31, 2011

26



Loomis Sayles Bond Instl Barclays Capital Aggregate

0.0

25.0

50.0

75.0

100.0

3/07 9/07 3/08 9/08 3/09 9/09 3/10 9/10 3/11 12/11

CurrentQuarter

1Year

3Years

5Years

Loomis Sayles Bond Instl 2.5 (3) 3.8 (91) 17.4 (1) 6.5 (31)

Barclays Capital Aggregate 1.1 (66) 7.8 (10) 6.8 (85) 6.5 (31)

5th Percentile 2.2 8.1 12.3 7.8

1st Quartile 1.6 7.3 10.6 6.7

Median 1.3 6.5 8.9 5.9

3rd Quartile 1.0 5.5 7.6 4.8

95th Percentile 0.7 3.1 5.3 2.2



0.0

6.0

12.0

18.0

-6.0

-12.0

-18.0

3/07 9/07 3/08 9/08 3/09 9/09 3/10 9/10 3/11 12/11

Loomis Sayles Bond Instl Barclays Capital Aggregate

6.50

6.51

6.52

6.53

2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 12.0 14.0



December 31, 2011

27



1Year

3Years

5Years

10Years

Return 3.76 17.37 6.53 10.00

Standard Deviation 8.19 8.83 12.14 9.68

vs. Barclays Capital Aggregate

Tracking Error 8.37 8.85 10.93 8.57

Alpha 2.54 14.19 -3.01 2.96

Beta 0.20 0.48 1.59 1.25

R-Squared 0.00 0.02 0.22 0.23

Consistency 41.67 63.89 53.33 64.17


Sharpe Ratio 0.48 1.86 0.46 0.84

Portfolio Benchmark

Portfolio Duration 5.8 4.6

Avg. Maturity 10.4 6.4

Current Yield 5.2 3.2

Gov

't

Cor

pora

te

Mor

tgag

e

Prefe

rred

Mun

icipal

Equity

Cas

h/Oth

er

AAA AA ABBB BB B

CCC

NR


December 31, 2011

28



FUND OBJECTIVE


Domestic f ixed income saw positive returns across all major sectors. The yield curve ended relatively unchanged as rates continued to be

supported by the Fed’s accommodative policy and implementation of “Operation Tw ist”. The 2-year remained at 0.25% and the 30-year fell 1 basis

point to 2.89%. The 5-year w as the exception and outperformed the overall curve by declining 13 basis points to 0.83%. Overall, Treasuries

returned 0.9% for the quarter. Investment grade corporates outperformed duration matched Treasuries, returning 1.7%, as credit spreads

tightened over the quarter. Overall, fundamentals remained strong as corporate profits and cash levels remained at historically high levels. Among

investment grades, f inancial-backed issuers underperformed utility-backed and industrial-related corporates due to their disproportionate

exposures to sovereign Europe debt. Mortgage-backed securities moved higher despite concerns that government programs aimed at stimulating

the housing market w ill lead to increased refinancing activity and expectations for faster prepayments going forw ard. Commercial mortgage-

backed securities (CMBS) w ere the best performing structured product, outperforming Treasuries by 2.2%, as spreads rallied late in the quarter.

CMBS also saw an improvement in the new issuance market and stable delinquency rates. Asset-backed securities (ABS) produced positive

returns, but trailed Treasuries, as the sector saw spreads w iden. Within ABS, credit cards w ere the largest detractor follow ed by auto.

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 Capital Aggregate


Portfolio Manager William H. Gross



Gross Expense 0.46%

Net Expense 0.46%

Turnover 430%

• During the fourth quarter of 2011, an overw eight to U.S. duration coupled w ith interest rate exposure in the U.K., Canada and core Europe

added to returns as investors searched for bonds of nations w ith stronger balance sheets and top credit ratings.

• Within the corporate sector, holdings of w ell-capitalized f inancial institutions added to performance as investors differentiated among more

challenged financial institutions and those w ith healthier balance sheets.

• The fund’s emerging markets overw eight, specif ically external debt, also added to results as spreads tightened modestly. Additionally, local rate

exposure in Brazil w as positive for performance as rates fell amid low er global grow th expectations.

• On the dow nside, a curve steepening bias, implemented via Eurodollar futures, detracted from performance as most Eurodollar contracts

decreased in price.

• Holdings of Build America Bonds (BABs) also detracted.


CurrentQuarter

YTD1

Year3

Years5

Years10

Years2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001

PIMCO Total Return Instl 2.22 4.17 4.17 8.89 8.10 6.81 8.84 13.87 4.82 9.08 3.99 2.88 5.14 5.57 10.21 9.49

Barclays Capital Aggregate 1.12 7.84 7.84 6.77 6.50 5.78 6.54 5.93 5.24 6.97 4.34 2.43 4.34 4.11 10.27 8.43

IM U.S. Broad Market Core Fixed Income (MF) Median 1.32 6.54 6.54 8.92 5.95 5.30 7.50 13.16 -3.60 5.28 3.95 1.83 4.04 4.37 8.56 7.58

PIMCO Total Return Instl Rank 6 89 89 52 4 4 25 46 13 1 47 4 13 28 10 7

PIMCO seeks current income consistent w ith preservation of capital. The process begins w ith a top-dow n review of the global economy and interest rates. Management looks at the most likely near term

scenario w ith regard to interest rate volatility, yield curve shape, and credit trends. Once the larger trends are established, they focus on selecting high-quality f ixed income securities through the use of

proprietary research.

PIMCO Total Return Instl

December 31, 2011

29



PIMCO Total Return Instl Barclays Capital Aggregate

0.0

25.0

50.0

75.0

100.0

3/07 9/07 3/08 9/08 3/09 9/09 3/10 9/10 3/11 12/11

CurrentQuarter

1Year

3Years

5Years

PIMCO Total Return Instl 2.2 (6) 4.2 (89) 8.9 (52) 8.1 (4)

Barclays Capital Aggregate 1.1 (66) 7.8 (10) 6.8 (85) 6.5 (31)

5th Percentile 2.2 8.1 12.3 7.8

1st Quartile 1.6 7.3 10.6 6.7

Median 1.3 6.5 8.9 5.9

3rd Quartile 1.0 5.5 7.6 4.8

95th Percentile 0.7 3.1 5.3 2.2



0.0

2.0

4.0

-2.0

-4.0

-6.0

3/07 9/07 3/08 9/08 3/09 9/09 3/10 9/10 3/11 12/11

PIMCO Total Return Instl Barclays Capital Aggregate

6.0

6.4

6.8

7.2

7.6

8.0

8.4

3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.8 3.9 4.0 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4 4.5 4.6



December 31, 2011

30



1Year

3Years

5Years

10Years

Return 4.17 8.89 8.10 6.81


vs. Barclays Capital Aggregate

Tracking Error 3.60 2.93 2.81 2.08

Alpha 0.36 3.30 1.96 1.18

Beta 0.50 0.81 0.94 0.97

R-Squared 0.10 0.38 0.59 0.75

Consistency 50.00 72.22 70.00 64.17


Sharpe Ratio 1.13 2.32 1.47 1.15

Portfolio Benchmark

Portfolio Duration 7.1 4.6

Avg. Maturity 9.0 6.4

Current Yield 3.5 3.2

Gov

't

Cor

pora

te

Mor

tgag

e

Prefe

rred

Mun

icipal

Cas

h/Oth

er

AAA AA ABBB BB B

CCC

NR


December 31, 2011

31



FUND OBJECTIVE


High yield bonds w ere the w orst performers in f ixed income and ended the quarter in negative territory w ith low er quality issues, CCC-rated,

leading the move to the dow nside. Credit spreads continued to w iden despite generally healthy balance sheets and default rates treading at

historical low s. Defensive sectors, such as lodging, energy and cable, outperformed w hile homebuilders, banks and insurance companies lagged.

New supply continues to slow and remains mostly refinancing activity.

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/Gibson/Shanahan



Gross Expense 1.08%

Net Expense 0.91%

Turnover 45%

• The fund underperformed its benchmark in the period, due primarily to security selection in the consumer non-cyclical, f inance, transportation

and utility sectors.

• At the industry level, overw eight positions in communication, consumer cyclical and transportation, and underw eights in the capital goods,

consumer non-cyclical and utility sectors w eighed on returns.

• On the positive side, security selection in the energy and industrial sectors contributed to performance. At the industry level, a modestly

underw eight position in the technology sector added to returns.


CurrentQuarter

YTD1

Year3

Years5

Years10

Years2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001

JPMorgan High Yield Select 5.77 2.65 2.65 20.45 6.70 8.36 14.67 48.45 -22.54 2.18 12.80 3.04 11.31 26.10 -1.09 5.35

Citigroup High-Yield Market 6.42 5.51 5.51 23.26 7.15 8.68 14.33 55.23 -25.91 1.83 11.85 2.07 10.80 30.62 -1.52 5.42

IM U.S. High Yield Bonds (MF) Median 5.31 2.73 2.73 19.56 5.27 7.02 13.59 46.26 -25.20 1.72 9.75 2.72 9.70 24.01 -0.54 3.23

JPMorgan High Yield Select Rank 38 52 52 39 14 12 30 39 29 36 6 41 18 35 57 27

The fund utilizes a bottom-up, fundamental, value-oriented approach to analyze the issuer's business prospectus, management, capital requirements, capital structure, enterprise value, and security

structure and covenants. Credit analysts focusing solely on high yield have signif icant influence on buy/sell decisions, industry w eighting, and risk profile w ithin an industry. The analysts keep a

performance rating on each industry they follow , w hich determines relative w eightings in the portfolio. Relative positions w ithin each industry in terms of credit quality also result from analyst ratings.

Management may shift from w eaker to stronger credits and from cyclical to non-cyclical sectors if they believe the economic environment w ill w eaken and vice versa if they believe the economy w ill

strengthen.

JPMorgan High Yield Select

December 31, 2011

32



JPMorgan High Yield Select Citigroup High-Yield Market

0.0

25.0

50.0

75.0

100.0

3/07 9/07 3/08 9/08 3/09 9/09 3/10 9/10 3/11 12/11

CurrentQuarter

1Year

3Years

5Years

JPMorgan High Yield Select 5.8 (38) 2.6 (52) 20.4 (39) 6.7 (14)

Citigroup High-Yield Market 6.4 (15) 5.5 (7) 23.3 (9) 7.2 (7)

5th Percentile 6.9 5.8 23.8 7.3

1st Quartile 6.1 4.1 21.4 6.2

Median 5.3 2.7 19.6 5.3

3rd Quartile 3.6 1.4 17.2 4.2

95th Percentile 2.7 -2.3 11.5 1.3



0.0

2.0

4.0

-2.0

-4.0

3/07 9/07 3/08 9/08 3/09 9/09 3/10 9/10 3/11 12/11

JPMorgan High Yield Select Citigroup High-Yield Market

6.6

6.7

6.8

6.9

7.0

7.1

7.2

7.3

11.0 11.5 12.0 12.5 13.0 13.5 14.0 14.5



December 31, 2011

33



1Year

3Years

5Years

10Years

Return 2.65 20.45 6.70 8.36


vs. Citigroup High-Yield Market

Tracking Error 1.06 2.75 3.87 3.44

Alpha -2.73 0.83 0.85 1.52

Beta 1.00 0.85 0.80 0.77

R-Squared 0.99 0.95 0.95 0.94

Consistency 25.00 47.22 50.00 50.83


Sharpe Ratio 0.33 2.00 0.49 0.72

Portfolio


Avg. Maturity 7.8

Current Yield 7.6

Gov

't

Cor

pora

te

Mor

tgag

e

Prefe

rred

Equity

Cas

h/Oth

er

BBB BB BCCC

NR


December 31, 2011

34



FUND OBJECTIVE


The European debt crisis remained at center stage as politicians continued to w ork on a credible solution. Overall, foreign bonds provided mixed

results as investors recovered from the third quarter. The dollar appreciated against most developed currencies w hich resulted in hedged

portfolios returning 0.6% and outperforming their unhedged counterparts w hich lost 0.5%. Within Europe, Germany continued to benefit from its

perceived “safe haven” status and returned 1.9% as yields declined. Portugal, Ireland, Italy, and Spain produced negative returns ranging from -

1.0% to -4.0 % w hile Greece w as the largest detractor w ith a return of -37.4%. Emerging market debt (EMD) generated positive returns as

investors continue to be draw n to the relatively high yield. Overall, EMD held up w ell in the volatile macro environment although concerns still loom

surrounding the details of China’s slow dow n. External debt, bonds issued in USD, outperformed during the quarter w ith Latin America leading the

w ay. Within the local currency segment, hedged portfolios outperformed as most emerging market currencies depreciated during the quarter.

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 0.52%

Net Expense 0.52%

Turnover 236%

• Contributors to outperformance for the fourth quarter include an underw eight to German bunds, an underw eight to the Euro, and an overw eight

to the United Kingdom.

• Detractors to performance include an underw eight to European peripherals and an underw eight to duration in Japan.

• The Fund’s investment grade credit holdings remain in senior corporate bonds of systematically important f inancial institutions in the U.S. and

Europe.

• The fund’s strategy going forw ard includes focusing on high quality asset-backed and mortgage-backed securities that are expected to garner

government support in order to restart the securitization market.

A. Novara, Research Analyst, DiMeo Schneider & Associates, L.L.C. 4Q11

CurrentQuarter

YTD1

Year3

Years5

Years10

Years2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001

PIMCO Foreign Bond (USD-Hedged) I 2.39 6.77 6.77 11.55 7.10 6.19 9.19 19.04 -2.36 3.98 2.94 5.72 6.65 3.57 7.66 8.97

Citigroup Non-U.S. WGB Hedged 0.61 4.06 4.06 2.96 4.34 4.43 2.47 2.38 8.01 4.87 3.11 5.69 5.18 1.88 6.85 6.10

IM International Fixed Income (MF) Median 0.16 3.13 3.13 5.86 5.83 6.69 6.10 8.92 1.85 9.24 5.30 -8.23 10.81 16.30 19.74 -1.34

PIMCO Foreign Bond (USD-Hedged) I Rank 2 8 8 11 20 55 20 10 81 82 81 4 79 84 75 1

The fund takes an all-encompassing approach tow ard international fixed-income investing. Top-dow n w ork begins w ith a 3-5 year outlook for the global economy and interest rates follow ed by using a

country-bond allocation model to help determine w hich 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.

PIMCO Foreign Bond (USD-Hedged) I

December 31, 2011

35




Citigroup Non-U.S. WGB Hedged

0.0

25.0

50.0

75.0

100.0

3/07 9/07 3/08 9/08 3/09 9/09 3/10 9/10 3/11 12/11

CurrentQuarter

1Year

3Years

5Years

PIMCO Foreign Bond (USD-Hedged) I 2.4 (2) 6.8 (8) 11.5 (11) 7.1 (20)

Citigroup Non-U.S. WGB Hedged 0.6 (39) 4.1 (36) 3.0 (100) 4.3 (90)

5th Percentile 2.3 7.9 13.4 9.2

1st Quartile 1.1 4.7 9.3 6.9

Median 0.2 3.1 5.9 5.8

3rd Quartile -0.8 1.6 4.6 5.1

95th Percentile -1.5 -1.3 3.5 4.0



0.0

3.0

6.0

9.0

-3.0

-6.0

3/07 9/07 3/08 9/08 3/09 9/09 3/10 9/10 3/11 12/11


Citigroup Non-U.S. WGB Hedged

4.0

5.0

6.0

7.0

8.0

2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.5



December 31, 2011

36



1Year

3Years

5Years

10Years

Return 6.77 11.55 7.10 6.19


vs. Citigroup Non-U.S. WGB Hedged

Tracking Error 2.74 3.94 4.64 3.36

Alpha 3.54 9.54 4.39 3.02

Beta 0.78 0.65 0.63 0.71

R-Squared 0.43 0.18 0.15 0.25

Consistency 58.33 72.22 60.00 57.50


Sharpe Ratio 1.85 2.59 1.10 1.08

Portfolio


Avg. Maturity 9.4

Current Yield 2.8

Gov

't

Cor

pora

te

Mor

tgag

e

Prefe

rred

Mun

icipal

Cas

h/Oth

er

AAA AA ABBB BB B

CCC


December 31, 2011

37



FUND OBJECTIVE


The Russell 1000 Value Index advanced 13% during the fourth quarter of 2011, ending a highly volatile year in slightly positive territory. For the

quarter, large cap value stocks outperformed their large cap grow th counterparts. The quarter’s strong return w as fueled by encouraging U.S.

economic signs. Unemployment fell to 8.5%, its low est level since March 2009, and corporate earnings continued to be strong. Despite the short-

term positive new s, how ever, some concerns faced earlier in the year persisted, such as the slow economic recovery, a w eak U.S. housing

market, and the sovereign debt crisis and recession fears in Europe. Within the Index, the more economically sensitive names w ere among the

best performers. Chevron, the largest constituent in the Index, rallied 16% as the price of crude oil surged more than 20%, bolstered by improving

U.S. economic data and declining inventories.

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 12%

• Stock selection w ithin information technology detracted the most from performance.

• Security selection w ithin f inancials also hurt returns; how ever an underw eight to the sector added to results.

• An underw eight to energy w eighed on performance.

• An overw eight to consumer discretionary and an underw eight to telecommunications helped returns; how ever, security selection in both

sectors detracted from results.

• An underw eight as w ell as security selection w ithin consumer staples contributed to performance.

M. O'Neill, Analyst, DiMeo Schneider & Associates, L.L.C. 4Q11

CurrentQuarter

YTD1

Year3

Years5

Years10

Years2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001

Dodge & Cox Stock 11.17 -4.08 -4.08 12.63 -4.10 4.03 13.49 31.27 -43.31 0.14 18.53 9.37 19.17 32.34 -10.54 9.33

Russell 1000 Value Index 13.11 0.39 0.39 11.55 -2.64 3.89 15.51 19.69 -36.85 -0.17 22.25 7.05 16.49 30.03 -15.52 -5.59

IM U.S. Large Cap Value Equity (MF) Median 12.20 -2.20 -2.20 10.81 -2.61 2.91 12.85 23.41 -37.02 1.62 18.14 5.55 13.06 28.59 -19.16 -4.22

Dodge & Cox Stock Rank 77 71 71 21 79 14 41 13 92 62 45 15 2 18 4 8

The portfolio is built based on Dodge & Cox's fundamental research effort, a three-to-f ive year time horizon, and a strong price discipline. It invests in companies that appear to be temporarily undervalued

by the stock market but have a favorable outlook for long-term grow th, w hile focusing on the 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 w eighed 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.

Dodge & Cox Stock

December 31, 2011

38



Dodge & Cox Stock Russell 1000 Value Index

0.0

25.0

50.0

75.0

100.0

3/07 9/07 3/08 9/08 3/09 9/09 3/10 9/10 3/11 12/11

CurrentQuarter

1Year

3Years

5Years

Dodge & Cox Stock 11.2 (77) -4.1 (71) 12.6 (21) -4.1 (79)

Russell 1000 Value Index 13.1 (24) 0.4 (22) 11.5 (35) -2.6 (51)

5th Percentile 14.6 4.8 14.3 0.2

1st Quartile 13.1 0.1 12.2 -1.4

Median 12.2 -2.2 10.8 -2.6

3rd Quartile 11.3 -4.7 9.3 -4.0

95th Percentile 9.8 -8.3 7.2 -6.1



0.0

3.0

6.0

-3.0

-6.0

3/07 9/07 3/08 9/08 3/09 9/09 3/10 9/10 3/11 12/11

Dodge & Cox Stock Russell 1000 Value Index

-4.5

-4.2

-3.9

-3.6

-3.3

-3.0

-2.7

-2.4

19.5 20.0 20.5 21.0 21.5 22.0 22.5


Dodge & Cox Stock

December 31, 2011

39

RISK CHARACTERISTICS PORTFOLIO CHARACTERISTICS

SECTOR EXPOSURE (%)

Portfolio Benchmark

Total Securities 80 653

Price/Earnings (P/E) 13.6 11.0

Price/Book (P/B) 2.1 1.6

Dividend Yield 3.0 3.2

1Year

3Years

5Years

10Years

Return -4.08 12.63 -4.10 4.03


vs. Russell 1000 Value Index

Tracking Error 2.63 3.98 4.93 4.33

Alpha -4.34 0.43 -0.98 0.12

Beta 1.08 1.07 1.09 1.04

R-Squared 0.98 0.97 0.96 0.94

Consistency 25.00 50.00 46.67 50.00


Sharpe Ratio -0.15 0.64 -0.14 0.21

Dodge & Cox Stock

December 31, 2011

40



FUND OBJECTIVE


Equity markets rose through much of the quarter, but ups and dow ns in the sovereign debt crisis in Europe and concerns about budget diff iculties

in the U.S. federal government created volatile conditions. The S&P 500 Index finished up 12%. The U.S. economy appeared to strengthen, as

industrial production increased, retail sales rose, and activity in the manufacturing sector improved. Personal income gained and consumer

sentiment improved, albeit from relatively low levels. The economy continued to add jobs, and the unemployment rate fell, although this resulted in

part from a decline in the labor force. Housing prices remained soft, attracting buyers as mortgage rates remained near historical low s. All 10

major sectors posted gains during the quarter. Leading the w ay w ere energy, industrials, materials and consumer discretionary. For the quarter,

value stocks outperformed grow th stocks, w hile small cap stocks outperformed large caps.

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


Portfolio Manager O'Connor/Leung



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

Years2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001

iShares S&P 500 Index 11.77 2.03 2.03 14.04 -0.29 2.86 14.96 26.43 -36.95 5.44 15.69 4.83 10.77 28.53 -22.15 -11.96

S&P 500 11.82 2.11 2.11 14.11 -0.25 2.92 15.06 26.46 -37.00 5.49 15.79 4.91 10.88 28.68 -22.10 -11.89

IM U.S. Large Cap Core Equity (MF) Median 11.25 -0.50 -0.50 12.81 -0.71 2.45 13.00 26.77 -37.04 5.77 14.01 5.30 9.68 26.18 -21.88 -11.63

iShares S&P 500 Index Rank 31 24 24 27 40 38 20 52 49 54 30 57 37 31 54 54

This exchange traded fund (ETF) seeks performance corresponding to the price and yield performance, before fees and expenses, of the large cap portion of the U.S. equity market, as represented by

the S&P500 Index. Each stock in the Index is held on a market capitalization w eighted basis w here 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.

iShares S&P 500 Index

December 31, 2011

41




0.0

25.0

50.0

75.0

100.0

3/07 9/07 3/08 9/08 3/09 9/09 3/10 9/10 3/11 12/11

CurrentQuarter

1Year

3Years

5Years

iShares S&P 500 Index 11.8 (31) 2.0 (24) 14.0 (27) -0.3 (40)

5th Percentile 13.3 6.2 17.1 2.2

1st Quartile 12.0 1.7 14.1 0.5

Median 11.2 -0.5 12.8 -0.7

3rd Quartile 10.2 -2.9 11.2 -2.0

95th Percentile 8.3 -8.5 8.2 -4.3



0.0

3/07 9/07 3/08 9/08 3/09 9/09 3/10 9/10 3/11 12/11


-1.5

-1.0

-0.5

0.0

0.5

1.0

17.0 17.5 18.0 18.5 19.0 19.5 20.0



December 31, 2011

42


SECTOR EXPOSURE (%)

Portfolio1Year

3Years

5Years

10Years

Return 2.03 14.04 -0.29 2.86


vs. S&P 500

Tracking Error 0.03 0.05 0.05 0.04

Alpha -0.08 -0.04 -0.04 -0.06

Beta 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00

R-Squared 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00

Consistency 8.33 25.00 31.67 22.50


Sharpe Ratio 0.20 0.79 0.00 0.14

Total Securities 501

Avg. Market Cap 89.81 Billion

P/E 16.5

P/B 3.6

Div. Yield 2.60%

Annual EPS 33.5

5Yr EPS 10.3

3Yr EPS Growth 7.7


December 31, 2011

43



FUND OBJECTIVE


The Russell 1000 Grow th Index rose 11% during the fourth quarter, despite great uncertainty surrounding the resolution of the European debt

crisis as investors focused on improving U.S. economic data. With macro issues clouding outlooks around the w orld, daily changes in equities

w ere at heightened levels. These moves w ere propelled by sw ift reversals in headline-driven sentiment manifested in w hat has been dubbed a

risk-on/risk-off trading environment. In general, traditionally defensive sectors underperformed as investors gravitated tow ards riskier assets and

aw ay from safety and yield. Meanw hile, stocks of a more economically sensitive nature posted strong results as companies in industries

perceived to do w ell in times of economic grow th tended to move in lock-step w ith positive new s, rising w hen headlines suggested a

strengthening U.S. economic outlook. For the quarter, large cap grow th stocks underperformed their large cap value counterparts.

Product Name iShares:Russ 1000 Gr Idx (IWF)


Ticker

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

Benchmark Russell 1000 Growth Index


Portfolio Manager Leung/O'Connor



Gross Expense 0.20%

Net Expense 0.20%

Turnover 24%


CurrentQuarter

YTD1

Year3

Years5

Years10

Years2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001

iShares Russell 1000 Growth Index 10.55 2.47 2.47 17.79 2.34 2.42 16.47 36.94 -38.48 11.63 8.86 5.08 6.09 29.46 -27.99 -20.64

Russell 1000 Growth Index 10.61 2.64 2.64 18.02 2.50 2.60 16.71 37.21 -38.44 11.81 9.07 5.26 6.30 29.75 -27.88 -20.42

IM U.S. Large Cap Growth Equity (MF) Median 9.35 -1.72 -1.72 15.25 0.88 1.89 15.29 34.81 -40.21 13.90 6.38 5.59 7.29 26.58 -27.41 -20.85

iShares Russell 1000 Growth Index Rank 19 12 12 16 28 37 36 42 36 70 23 56 66 31 55 49

This exchange traded fund (ETF) seeks performance corresponding to the price and yield performance, before fees and expenses, of the large cap grow th portion of the U.S. equity market, as

represented by the Russell 1000 Grow th Index. The Russell 1000 Grow th Index is comprised of the stocks w ithin the Russell 1000 Index w ith higher price-to-book values and higher forecasted grow th

values. The Russell 1000 Index measures the performance of the 1,000 largest companies in the Russell 3000 Index.

iShares Russell 1000 Growth Index

December 31, 2011

44




0.0

25.0

50.0

75.0

100.0

3/07 9/07 3/08 9/08 3/09 9/09 3/10 9/10 3/11 12/11

CurrentQuarter

1Year

3Years

5Years

iShares Russell 1000 Growth Index 10.5 (19) 2.5 (12) 17.8 (16) 2.3 (28)

5th Percentile 11.8 3.9 22.0 3.9

1st Quartile 10.2 0.6 16.9 2.5

Median 9.3 -1.7 15.3 0.9

3rd Quartile 8.1 -4.3 13.2 -0.3

95th Percentile 6.1 -8.2 10.9 -2.1



0.0

-0.1

-0.2

3/07 9/07 3/08 9/08 3/09 9/09 3/10 9/10 3/11 12/11


2.2

2.3

2.4

2.5

17.5 18.0 18.5 19.0 19.5 20.0 20.5



December 31, 2011

45


SECTOR EXPOSURE (%)

Portfolio1Year

3Years

5Years

10Years

Return 2.47 17.79 2.34 2.42


vs. Russell 1000 Growth Index

Tracking Error 0.02 0.04 0.04 0.04

Alpha -0.17 -0.16 -0.16 -0.17

Beta 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00

R-Squared 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00

Consistency 0.00 8.33 11.67 7.50


Sharpe Ratio 0.23 1.01 0.14 0.11



P/E 19.4

P/B 5.3

Div. Yield 2.23%

Annual EPS 36.4

5Yr EPS 16.5

3Yr EPS Growth 14.5


December 31, 2011

46



FUND OBJECTIVE


After a tumultuous third quarter, U.S. equity markets rebounded in the fourth quarter of 2011 amid stronger U.S. economic data and the belief that

Eurozone leaders could devise a plan to stabilize their debt crisis. Although unemployment levels remain stubbornly high, consumer balance sheets

continue to show signs of improvement. Consumer confidence jumped sharply in December, w ith noted improvements in the outlook for current

conditions, employment opportunities and f inancial situations. On the corporate side, earnings w ere once again robust w ith approximately 70%

exceeding forecasts. For the fourth quarter, the Russell MidCap Value Index, the Russell MidCap Grow th Index and the Russell MidCap Index

advanced 13.4%, 11.2% and 12.3%, respectively. Across market capitalizations, small- and mid-cap issues generally outperformed larger

companies.

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 O'Connor/Leung



Gross Expense 0.21%

Net Expense 0.21%

Turnover 14%


CurrentQuarter

YTD1

Year3

Years5

Years10

Years2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001

iShares S&P MidCap 400 Index 12.91 -1.89 -1.89 19.38 3.19 6.88 26.38 37.21 -36.19 7.80 10.13 12.48 16.29 35.36 -14.70 -0.68

S&P MidCap 400 12.98 -1.73 -1.73 19.57 3.32 7.04 26.64 37.38 -36.23 7.98 10.32 12.55 16.50 35.64 -14.51 -0.61

IM U.S. Mid Cap Core Equity (MF) Median 12.75 -3.19 -3.19 17.48 1.21 5.54 23.69 34.60 -38.73 6.63 12.27 10.29 15.78 34.55 -15.73 -2.30

iShares S&P MidCap 400 Index Rank 44 30 30 26 14 10 17 31 23 37 67 25 41 41 35 36

The iShares S&P Midcap 400 Fund seeks investment results that correspond generally to the price and yield performance of the S&P Midcap 400 index. 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, w hich measures the performance of the mid-capitalization sector of the US equity market.

iShares S&P MidCap 400 Index

December 31, 2011

47




0.0

25.0

50.0

75.0

100.0

3/07 9/07 3/08 9/08 3/09 9/09 3/10 9/10 3/11 12/11

CurrentQuarter

1Year

3Years

5Years

iShares S&P MidCap 400 Index 12.9 (44) -1.9 (30) 19.4 (26) 3.2 (14)

5th Percentile 16.5 3.6 22.5 4.4

1st Quartile 14.0 -1.6 19.6 2.6

Median 12.7 -3.2 17.5 1.2

3rd Quartile 11.5 -5.9 15.5 -0.2

95th Percentile 9.0 -10.3 11.9 -2.8



0.0

0.1

-0.1

-0.2

3/07 9/07 3/08 9/08 3/09 9/09 3/10 9/10 3/11 12/11


3.1

3.2

3.3

21.0 21.5 22.0 22.5 23.0 23.5 24.0



December 31, 2011

48


SECTOR EXPOSURE (%)

Portfolio1Year

3Years

5Years

10Years

Return -1.89 19.38 3.19 6.88


vs. S&P MidCap 400

Tracking Error 0.03 0.04 0.08 0.07

Alpha -0.17 -0.14 -0.12 -0.14

Beta 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00

R-Squared 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00

Consistency 8.33 8.33 15.00 10.00


Sharpe Ratio 0.00 0.92 0.19 0.35



P/E 22.8

P/B 3.1

Div. Yield 2.39%

Annual EPS 33.4

5Yr EPS 10.3

3Yr EPS Growth 6.1


December 31, 2011

49



FUND OBJECTIVE


The Russell 2000 Value Index advanced 16% during the fourth quarter of 2011 as continued strength in corporate profits and improving U.S.

economic data outw eighed grow ing concerns about the European debt crisis and slow ing grow th rates in emerging markets. Small cap stocks

outperformed large cap stocks for the quarter, but large caps outperformed for the year. The more defensively-oriented sectors w ere among the

w orst performing areas during the quarter, w hile cyclical sectors outperformed. Macroeconomic events continued to affect stock prices greatly

throughout the quarter, keeping stock correlations at record highs.

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


Portfolio Manager Stephen A. Clark



Gross Expense 0.52%

Net Expense 0.52%

Turnover 19%

• An underw eighting to utilities added the most to performance during the fourth quarter.

• Stock selection w ithin energy, f inancials and materials also lif ted returns.

• Security selection to consumer discretionary and information technology detracted from performance.

R. Vervoort, Analyst, DiMeo Schneider & Associates, LLC. 4Q11

CurrentQuarter

YTD1

Year3

Years5

Years10

Years2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001

DFA US Small Cap Value I 16.19 -7.55 -7.55 17.38 -1.82 8.05 30.90 33.62 -36.79 -10.75 21.55 7.79 25.39 59.40 -9.27 22.65

Russell 2000 Value Index 15.97 -5.50 -5.50 12.36 -1.87 6.40 24.50 20.58 -28.92 -9.78 23.48 4.71 22.25 46.03 -11.43 14.03

IM U.S. Small Cap Value Equity (MF) Median 16.32 -4.77 -4.77 16.07 -0.08 7.06 25.40 30.18 -32.42 -5.92 16.55 6.28 20.42 42.04 -11.81 15.43

DFA US Small Cap Value I Rank 52 71 71 34 79 29 9 36 71 80 10 34 12 10 37 16

The process selects stocks from the bottom deciles of NYSE issues, but include only the “value” subset. Stocks are ranked by book-to-market ratio, and stocks falling in the top three deciles (30%) are

purchased for the fund. Book value is reconstructed for each eligible issue based on management’s interpretation of how accounting charges affect “real” book value. This product w ill not ow n REITs,

ADRs or foreign stocks, recently issued IPOs, companies w ith less than 3 years of history, or OTC companies w ith few er than 4 market makers.

DFA US Small Cap Value I

December 31, 2011

50



DFA US Small Cap Value I Russell 2000 Value Index

0.0

25.0

50.0

75.0

100.0

3/07 9/07 3/08 9/08 3/09 9/09 3/10 9/10 3/11 12/11

CurrentQuarter

1Year

3Years

5Years

DFA US Small Cap Value I 16.2 (52) -7.5 (71) 17.4 (34) -1.8 (79)

Russell 2000 Value Index 16.0 (56) -5.5 (57) 12.4 (89) -1.9 (80)

5th Percentile 19.9 1.3 23.6 4.1

1st Quartile 17.5 -2.0 18.5 1.2

Median 16.3 -4.8 16.1 -0.1

3rd Quartile 14.6 -8.1 14.4 -1.6

95th Percentile 10.4 -13.1 11.7 -3.8



0.0

3.0

6.0

-3.0

-6.0

3/07 9/07 3/08 9/08 3/09 9/09 3/10 9/10 3/11 12/11

DFA US Small Cap Value I Russell 2000 Value Index

-1.8

24.0 24.5 25.0 25.5 26.0 26.5 27.0 27.5 28.0



December 31, 2011

51


SECTOR EXPOSURE (%)

Portfolio Benchmark

Total Securities 1,468 1,354




1Year

3Years

5Years

10Years

Return -7.55 17.38 -1.82 8.05


vs. Russell 2000 Value Index

Tracking Error 3.55 4.18 4.45 4.12

Alpha -1.08 3.56 0.62 1.22

Beta 1.13 1.12 1.10 1.10

R-Squared 0.99 0.99 0.98 0.98

Consistency 50.00 66.67 55.00 60.00


Sharpe Ratio -0.21 0.69 0.02 0.37


December 31, 2011

52



FUND OBJECTIVE


Evidence of a deceleration in global economic grow th and mounting fiscal diff iculties of several major developed economies sent stocks low er

during the third quarter of 2011. Meanw hile, volatility soared amid w ild sw ings in investor sentiment based on new s headlines. In this environment,

the Russell 2000 Grow th Index declined 22%. Defensive sectors such as healthcare, utilities and consumer staples w ere the best performing

sectors in the Index, w hile sectors such as industrials, energy and materials underperformed. During the quarter, small cap stocks

underperformed large cap stocks. Considering w aning global grow th and smaller companies generally being more economically sensitive, this

underperformance relative to large caps is not surprising.

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, Jr

Total Assets $185 Million


Gross Expense 1.24%

Net Expense 1.10%

Turnover 18%

• Third quarter 2011 performance results benefited from strong stock selection in the producer durables and information technology sectors

largely due to the portfolio’s emphasis on companies w ith more consistent earnings and revenue streams. These higher-quality companies

outperformed the broader index holdings in the dow n market.

• Within producer durables, Rollins, the parent company of Orkin Pest Control, w as a top performer. Rollins has continued to deliver steady grow th

in its commercial and residential pest services businesses. Among the fund’s IT holdings, Tyler Technologies has delivered consistent earnings

grow th due to its recurring softw are license revenues. Tyler provides softw are technologies to local and state governments to assist in the

f inancial and budgeting management functions.


CurrentQuarter

YTD1

Year3

Years5

Years10

Years2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001

Conestoga Small Cap 13.20 4.55 4.55 18.72 5.19 N/A 23.99 29.09 -27.68 6.43 9.18 4.39 18.81 33.68 N/A N/A

Russell 2000 Growth Index 14.99 -2.91 -2.91 19.00 2.09 4.48 29.09 34.47 -38.54 7.05 13.35 4.15 14.31 48.54 -30.26 -9.23

IM U.S. Small Cap Growth Equity (MF) Median 13.31 -3.37 -3.37 19.17 1.63 4.38 27.72 35.72 -41.87 8.66 10.37 5.48 11.85 43.83 -27.66 -11.86

Conestoga Small Cap Rank 52 4 4 55 6 N/A 77 80 1 60 59 65 11 88 N/A N/A

The investment style focuses on high quality small cap companies w ith long term sustainable grow th in the 15 - 20% range. Ideas are generated approximately equally across three sources - quantitative

screening; regional, boutique brokers; and company contacts through industry conferences, trade show s or other research. Fundamental research is focused on strong earnings and ROE grow th, a low

debt to capitalization rate, strong balance sheet, and a solid management team. The portfolio is fairly concentrated at 45 - 50 stocks w ith turnover around 30%.

Conestoga Small Cap

December 31, 2011

53



Conestoga Small Cap Russell 2000 Growth Index

0.0

25.0

50.0

75.0

100.0

3/07 9/07 3/08 9/08 3/09 9/09 3/10 9/10 3/11 12/11

CurrentQuarter

1Year

3Years

5Years

Conestoga Small Cap 13.2 (52) 4.6 (4) 18.7 (55) 5.2 (6)

Russell 2000 Growth Index 15.0 (30) -2.9 (46) 19.0 (52) 2.1 (41)

5th Percentile 17.7 4.2 25.4 5.3

1st Quartile 15.3 -0.5 21.8 3.0

Median 13.3 -3.4 19.2 1.6

3rd Quartile 11.6 -5.7 16.7 -0.1

95th Percentile 8.6 -11.6 12.0 -2.6



0.0

3.0

6.0

9.0

-3.0

-6.0

3/07 9/07 3/08 9/08 3/09 9/09 3/10 9/10 3/11 12/11

Conestoga Small Cap Russell 2000 Growth Index

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

20.0 21.0 22.0 23.0 24.0 25.0


Conestoga Small Cap

December 31, 2011

54


SECTOR EXPOSURE (%)

Portfolio Benchmark

Total Securities 49 1,155




1Year

3Years

5Years

10Years

Return 4.55 18.72 5.19 N/A


vs. Russell 2000 Growth Index


Alpha 6.85 2.21 3.06 N/A

Beta 0.83 0.84 0.83 N/A

R-Squared 0.94 0.95 0.94 N/A

Consistency 58.33 41.67 51.67 N/A



Conestoga Small Cap

December 31, 2011

55



FUND OBJECTIVE


International markets posted mostly positive results during the fourth quarter, w ith the MSCI EAFE rising 3%. Stocks rose as data pointed to

economic improvements and European leaders appeared to be moving tow ard a comprehensive plan to deal w ith the region’s sovereign debt

crisis. The United Kingdom advanced 9% as the Bank of England kept interest rates on hold at 0.5%. Meanw hile, the European Central Bank cut

interest rates by 50 basis points to a record low of 1% and announced several steps to bolster the continent's f inancial system. Among the largest

European markets, Italy, France and Germany advanced 1%, 3% and 4%, respectively. Spain declined 2%. Within the Pacif ic region, Japan ended

dow n 4%, w hile New Zealand declined 2%. Meanw hile, Hong Kong and Australia gained 6% and 8%, respectively. Canada rose 5% as the

central bank left interest rates on hold at 1%.

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 0.85%

Net Expense 0.85%

Turnover 31%• 4Q’11 contributors include less exposure to Japan and positive stock selection w ithin construction materials, beverages, pharmaceuticals and

semiconductors.

• 4Q’11 detractors include the fund’s cash position, stock selection in w ireless telecom services, and exposure to India, U.K., and Energy.

• Portfolio remains meaningfully exposed to European companies and signif icantly underw eight Japanese companies.

• Largest sectors for the fund remain Financials and Health Care; how ever pharmaceuticals w ere trimmed during the period and holdings in banks

and insurance companies w ere also reduced.

A. Novara, Research Analyst, DiMeo Schneider & Associates, L.L.C. 4Q11

CurrentQuarter

YTD1

Year3

Years5

Years10

Years2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001

American Funds EuroPacific Gr F-1 4.54 -13.60 -13.60 9.55 -1.45 6.52 9.38 39.10 -40.55 18.94 21.84 21.05 19.63 32.84 -13.65 N/A

MSCI EAFE Index 3.38 -11.73 -11.73 8.16 -4.26 5.12 8.21 32.46 -43.06 11.63 26.86 14.02 20.70 39.17 -15.66 -21.21

IM International Large Cap Core Equity (MF) Median 4.60 -12.67 -12.67 6.75 -4.85 4.12 8.04 28.85 -43.38 11.51 25.00 13.52 17.18 32.35 -16.48 -21.83

American Funds EuroPacific Gr F-1 Rank 52 66 66 18 6 6 31 11 16 6 88 5 22 47 26 N/A

The fund is sub-advised by Capital Research and Management Company. Using a common pool of industry analysts for research, eight portfolio counselors construct independent portfolios using their

individual styles from grow th to value. The fund tends to focus on blue chip multinational companies w hile allow ing each portfolio sleeve to invest up to 25% in emerging markets. The resulting portfolio

holds over 400 securities w ith relatively low turnover.

American Funds EuroPacific Gr F-1

December 31, 2011

56




MSCI EAFE Index

0.0

25.0

50.0

75.0

100.0

3/07 9/07 3/08 9/08 3/09 9/09 3/10 9/10 3/11 12/11

CurrentQuarter

1Year

3Years

5Years

American Funds EuroPacific Gr F-1 4.5 (52) -13.6 (66) 9.5 (18) -1.5 (6)

MSCI EAFE Index 3.4 (86) -11.7 (36) 8.2 (28) -4.3 (40)

5th Percentile 7.0 -7.4 12.1 -1.3

1st Quartile 5.2 -10.9 8.4 -3.7

Median 4.6 -12.7 6.8 -4.9

3rd Quartile 3.8 -14.2 5.4 -6.0

95th Percentile 2.2 -17.6 2.3 -8.8



0.0

2.0

4.0

6.0

8.0

10.0

-2.0

-4.0

3/07 9/07 3/08 9/08 3/09 9/09 3/10 9/10 3/11 12/11


MSCI EAFE Index

-5.0

-4.0

-3.0

-2.0

-1.0

21.4 21.6 21.8 22.0 22.2 22.4 22.6



December 31, 2011

57


SECTOR EXPOSURE (%)REGION WEIGHTS (%)

Portfolio Benchmark





1Year

3Years

5Years

10Years

Return -13.60 9.55 -1.45 6.52


vs. MSCI EAFE Index

Tracking Error 4.79 5.03 4.61 3.98

Alpha -2.38 1.78 2.62 1.61

Beta 0.97 0.93 0.94 0.94

R-Squared 0.94 0.95 0.96 0.95

Consistency 33.33 52.78 58.33 54.17


Sharpe Ratio -0.68 0.53 -0.02 0.34


December 31, 2011

58



FUND OBJECTIVE


International small cap equities ended the third quarter of 2011 sharply low er. The quarter w as one of the most volatile periods for stocks in

history and stock markets around the globe posted steep losses. Investors remain concerned that global economic grow th is slow ing, and several

countries could slip into recession. Additionally, investor sentiment turned decidedly defensive because there appears to be no imminent resolution

to the ongoing sovereign debt crisis in Europe. For the quarter, European stocks declined more than those in the Pacif ic ex-Japan region, and

every emerging market region fell more than 20%. While both large- and small-capitalization stocks posted negative results, smaller-cap

international stocks marginally outperformed larger-cap international stocks.

Product Name DFA Intl Sm Cap Val;I (DISVX)

Fund Family Dimensional Fund Advisors LP

Ticker DISVX

Peer Group IM International SMID Cap Value Equity (MF)

Benchmark MSCI EAFE Small Cap Value





Gross Expense 0.70%

Net Expense 0.70%

Turnover 18%

• Stock selection w ithin energy and consumer staples detracted from performance.

• An underw eight to utilities also w eighed on returns during the quarter.

• Security selection in industrials and information technology added to relative performance.

• On a country allocation basis, an overw eight to as w ell as stock selection in Europe detracted the most from performance, w hile holdings in

Japan added to relative returns.

R. Vervoort, Analyst, DiMeo Schneider & Associates, LLC. 3Q11

CurrentQuarter

YTD1

Year3

Years5

Years10

Years2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001

DFA Intl Small Cap Value I 1.36 -17.46 -17.46 10.79 -3.97 11.86 18.10 39.51 -41.68 2.95 28.39 23.23 34.80 66.48 5.79 -4.59

MSCI EAFE Small Cap Value -1.54 -17.26 -17.26 13.99 -4.01 10.84 19.33 50.03 -45.55 1.01 28.22 20.99 35.31 60.14 2.14 -8.38

IM International SMID Cap Value Equity (MF) Median 0.25 -18.29 -18.29 18.63 -3.28 N/A 21.07 60.67 -46.25 6.52 27.43 21.06 28.95 52.24 -3.31 -7.09

DFA Intl Small Cap Value I Rank 27 36 36 87 90 N/A 80 64 16 67 17 1 1 1 1 12

DFA's quantitative approach begins w ith the countries in the MSCI World ex U.S. Index and focuses on securities possessing a high book value in relation to their market value. This sort excludes firms

w ith negative or zero book values and accounts for additional factors such as price-to-cash-flow or price-to-earnings ratios to assess value. They then take the bottom 10 - 15% of each of these

countries by f loat adjusted market cap w ith a f loor of $50 million and apply over 30 screens to narrow dow n the portfolio holdings. These exclusionary screens include trading issues such as liquidity,

f loat and trading history; pricing issues such as bankruptcy, merger target or foreign restrictions; or momentum. Some portfolio restrictions are applied such as a 25% limit on industries and 5% security

limits.

DFA Intl Small Cap Value I

December 31, 2011

59



DFA Intl Small Cap Value I MSCI EAFE Small Cap Value

0.0

25.0

50.0

75.0

100.0

3/07 9/07 3/08 9/08 3/09 9/09 3/10 9/10 3/11 12/11

CurrentQuarter

1Year

3Years

5Years

DFA Intl Small Cap Value I 1.4 (27) -17.5 (36) 10.8 (87) -4.0 (90)

MSCI EAFE Small Cap Value -1.5 (77) -17.3 (34) 14.0 (77) -4.0 (91)

5th Percentile 3.9 -11.9 21.0 -1.6

1st Quartile 1.4 -16.5 19.4 -2.2

Median 0.3 -18.3 18.6 -3.3

3rd Quartile -1.5 -20.4 14.5 -3.5

95th Percentile -2.5 -21.4 6.3 -5.2



0.0

2.0

4.0

6.0

-2.0

-4.0

-6.0

3/07 9/07 3/08 9/08 3/09 9/09 3/10 9/10 3/11 12/11

DFA Intl Small Cap Value I MSCI EAFE Small Cap Value

-4.0

24.6



December 31, 2011

60



Portfolio Benchmark

Total Securities 2,222

Price/Earnings (P/E) 18.2

Price/Book (P/B) 1.1

Dividend Yield 3.1

1Year

3Years

5Years

10Years

Return -17.46 10.79 -3.97 11.86


vs. MSCI EAFE Small Cap Value

Tracking Error 3.94 3.98 3.77 3.34

Alpha 1.08 -2.80 0.01 1.11

Beta 1.06 1.01 0.99 0.98

R-Squared 0.96 0.97 0.98 0.97

Consistency 41.67 38.89 51.67 53.33


Sharpe Ratio -0.96 0.53 -0.10 0.57


December 31, 2011

61



FUND OBJECTIVE


Emerging markets equities recovered from steep losses in the third quarter. Stocks rose sharply in October, before sliding in November and

December as market confidence w avered over Europe’s ability to address the debt crisis. This w as the f irst year since 2008 during w hich

emerging markets underperformed developed ones. Within Asia, India plunged 14% amid political gridlock, consensus market expectations for

w eaker corporate earnings grow th, and persistently high inf lation. Among the other large Asian markets, South Korea and China advanced 6%

and 8%, respectively. Taiw an ended marginally low er. Within Latin America, Brazil rallied 9%. Though higher oil prices benefited the market, the

biggest gains came from locally oriented businesses such as financial and consumer companies. Among EMEA countries, South Africa ended up

7%. In the Middle East, Turkey fell 16%, w hile Egypt declined 12%. Within Eastern Europe, Poland declined 6%, w hile the Czech Republic and

Hungary each fell 2%. Meanw hile, Russia advanced 6%.

Product Name Aberdeen:Em Mkt Inst;I (ABEMX)

Fund Family Aberdeen Asset Management Inc

Ticker ABEMX

Peer Group IM Emerging Markets Equity (MF)

Benchmark MSCI Emerging Markets Index





Gross Expense 1.10%

Net Expense 0.95%

Turnover 1%

• Stock selection w ithin energy added the most to relative performance, w hile security selection in f inancials detracted from results.

• An overw eight and stock selection w ithin consumer staples helped returns.

• Security selection as w ell as an underw eight to materials also added to results.

• On a country allocation basis, holdings in Brazil, Italy, and Hong Kong added the most to relative performance, w hile holdings in Turkey, India,

and South Korea detracted the most from results.

M. O'Neill, Analyst, DiMeo Schneider & Associates, L.L.C. 4Q11

CurrentQuarter

YTD1

Year3

Years5

Years10

Years2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001

Aberdeen Emerging Markets Instl 5.46 -11.05 -11.05 26.07 N/A N/A 27.58 76.55 -40.36 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

MSCI Emerging Markets Index 4.45 -18.17 -18.17 20.42 2.70 14.20 19.20 79.02 -53.18 39.78 32.59 34.54 25.95 56.28 -6.00 -2.37

IM Emerging Markets Equity (MF) Median 4.49 -19.54 -19.54 17.99 0.64 12.98 18.33 73.65 -54.86 36.44 32.20 32.14 24.11 54.51 -5.63 -3.23

Aberdeen Emerging Markets Instl Rank 23 4 4 4 N/A N/A 7 36 2 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

The fund seeks to invest in high quality companies w hen they are trading at a discounted price. High quality companies are defined as those w ith recurring revenue grow th, a quality management team, a

“core” business, and strong balance sheet. Fundamental research is conducted by Aberdeen's global team to understand the grow th prospects of the firm and the quality of the f inancials. 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-term outlook that has led to a low

turnover rate, but can also produce higher tracking error. The portfolio w ill typically hold 50 - 70 securities. Expense cap 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.

Aberdeen Emerging Markets Instl

December 31, 2011

62



Aberdeen Emerging Markets Instl MSCI Emerging Markets Index

0.0

25.0

50.0

75.0

100.0

3/07 9/07 3/08 9/08 3/09 9/09 3/10 9/10 3/11 12/11

CurrentQuarter

1Year

3Years

5Years

Aberdeen Emerging Markets Instl 5.5 (23) -11.0 (4) 26.1 (4) N/A

MSCI Emerging Markets Index 4.4 (51) -18.2 (32) 20.4 (25) 2.7 (18)

5th Percentile 7.2 -11.9 25.3 4.9

1st Quartile 5.4 -17.7 20.4 2.0

Median 4.5 -19.5 18.0 0.6

3rd Quartile 3.3 -23.5 16.2 -0.9

95th Percentile -0.6 -28.7 12.9 -5.1



0.0

4.0

8.0

12.0

16.0

-4.0

-8.0

9/07 3/08 9/08 3/09 9/09 3/10 9/10 3/11 12/11


MSCI Emerging Markets Index

2.6

2.7

2.8

27.5 28.0 28.5 29.0 29.5 30.0 30.5



December 31, 2011

63



Portfolio Benchmark





1Year

3Years

5Years

10Years

Return -11.05 26.07 N/A N/A

Standard Deviation 19.52 23.90 N/A N/A

vs. MSCI Emerging Markets Index

Tracking Error 6.32 5.61 N/A N/A

Alpha 4.21 6.43 N/A N/A

Beta 0.81 0.91 N/A N/A

R-Squared 0.95 0.96 N/A N/A

Consistency 66.67 58.33 N/A N/A


Sharpe Ratio -0.50 1.09 N/A N/A


December 31, 2011

64

FUND INFO



FUND OBJECTIVE

QUARTERLY COMMENTS - ASSET CLASS

Domestic REITs underperformed the broader market, losing 15%. Defensive sectors such as self storage and healthcare outperformed cyclical

areas of the market. In both cases, large caps outperformed small caps as the market bid up quality balance sheets and stable cash flow s. Hotels,

the highest levered sector, w as the w orst performer and w as hurt by credit concerns and slow ing GDP grow th. Industrial REITs put up in-line

results but w ere also punished for their cyclical exposure. Apartments fared w ell in the first tw o months of the quarter but fell back in-line in

September on new s that rentals rates may be slow ing. Retail and regional malls w ere able to slightly outperform as the higher quality names w ere

able to w ithstand the w eaker economic backdrop.

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 133%

• The fund slightly underperformed its benchmark during the third quarter and is performing in line year-to-date.

• Strong performance from core holdings in regional Malls w as accretive to results.

• Healthcare REITs w ere the largest relative detractor due to poor stock selection and a 4% underw eight.

• Strong stock selection (+11% vs. -9%) in Net Lease companies caused the sector to outperform.

• In the diversif ied sector, macroeconomic concerns dragged dow n stocks of companies w ith large development pipelines.

T. Leedy, Senior Alternative Investment Analyst, DiMeo Schneider & Associates, L.L.C. 3Q11

CurrentQuarter

YTD1

Year3

Years5

Years10

Years2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001

Nuveen Real Estate Secs I 14.83 7.89 7.89 22.51 0.33 12.33 30.57 30.53 -34.80 -15.19 39.47 15.29 32.49 37.58 7.36 9.82

FTSE NAREIT Equity REIT Index 15.22 8.29 8.29 21.04 -1.42 10.19 27.94 28.01 -37.74 -15.70 35.03 12.17 31.56 37.08 3.81 13.93

IM Real Estate Sector (MF) Median 15.21 7.92 7.92 20.89 -1.83 9.84 27.41 28.91 -38.91 -17.18 34.71 12.60 32.35 36.10 4.20 8.64

Nuveen Real Estate Secs I Rank 69 51 51 17 9 2 11 26 10 16 1 17 46 30 14 35

The fund is managed on a relative basis w ith a focus on individual stock selection rather than economic or market cycles. The ultimate goal is to select securities that have positive grow th aspects at a

reasonable price. A research-driven team approach utilizes front end quantitative screens w ith qualitative assessments, sub-sector analysis, and economic research. The outcome is a diversif ied

portfolio from both a sector and geographic basis, w hich holds securities w ith the best risk/rew ard 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.

Nuveen Real Estate Secs I

December 31, 2011

65



Nuveen Real Estate Secs I FTSE NAREIT Equity REIT Index

0.0

25.0

50.0

75.0

100.0

3/07 9/07 3/08 9/08 3/09 9/09 3/10 9/10 3/11 12/11

CurrentQuarter

1Year

3Years

5Years

Nuveen Real Estate Secs I 14.8 (69) 7.9 (51) 22.5 (17) 0.3 (9)

FTSE NAREIT Equity REIT Index 15.2 (50) 8.3 (47) 21.0 (47) -1.4 (39)

5th Percentile 17.1 11.3 31.0 1.6

1st Quartile 15.9 9.3 22.2 -1.0

Median 15.2 7.9 20.9 -1.8

3rd Quartile 14.5 6.0 19.8 -2.7

95th Percentile 7.2 0.9 17.3 -5.9



0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

-1.0

-2.0

3/07 9/07 3/08 9/08 3/09 9/09 3/10 9/10 3/11 12/11


FTSE NAREIT Equity REIT Index

-2.0

-1.6

-1.2

-0.8

-0.4

0.0

0.4

0.8

30.9 31.2 31.5 31.8 32.1 32.4 32.7 33.0 33.3 33.6



December 31, 2011

66

RISK CHARACTERISTICS REGION DISTRIBUTION

SECTOR EXPOSURE (%)


0.0

5.0

10.0

15.0

20.0

25.0

30.0

35.0

40.0

45.0

East

Wes

t

South

Mid

wes

t

Oth

er

19.2

23.9

40.3

16.6

0.0

31.8

20.9

25.2

12.5

9.6

1Year

3Years

5Years

10Years

Return 7.89 22.51 0.33 12.33


vs. FTSE NAREIT Equity REIT Index

Tracking Error 0.80 2.31 2.44 2.30

Alpha -0.26 2.08 1.40 2.31

Beta 0.98 0.94 0.95 0.95

R-Squared 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99

Consistency 58.33 58.33 56.67 63.33


Sharpe Ratio 0.46 0.83 0.13 0.53


0.0

4.0

8.0

12.0

16.0

20.0

24.0

28.0

Oth

er

Diver

sifie

d

Offi

ce

Reg

iona

l Mall

Apartm

ent

Indu

stria

l

Hea

lth C

are

Hot

el

Shopp

ing

Cen

ter

Self-S

tora

ge

8.2

5.5

12.3

16.017.5

4.8

14.8

6.68.2

6.05.0

1.5

23.1

15.116.2

7.3

10.3

7.08.3

6.2


December 31, 2011

67

FUND INFO



FUND OBJECTIVE

QUARTERLY COMMENTS - ASSET CLASS

International REITs w ere negative across all major regions as the index lost 16%. Asia continued to lag as Hong Kong and China w ere hindered by

slow ing sales, rising mortgage rates and tighter credit for developers. Japan outperformed during the quarter as JREITs continued to benefit from

Bank of Japan purchase programs. Canada held up w ell as investors f locked to the defensive country and Australia outperformed as company

fundamentals remained relatively stable. The UK, w hich has outperformed year to date, lagged as sentiment changed and banks brought real

estate portfolios to market. In Europe, increasing concerns around the sovereign debt crisis caused REITs to generally trade dow n w ith the

broader equity market and increased volatility in smaller cap names. Questions surrounding the banking system and the availability of future credit

have led companies to explore private placements and loans w ith insurance companies. It should be noted, how ever, that companies are w ell

capitalized and face smaller refinancing risks due to recent maturity extensions.

Product Name Cohen&Steers Itl Rlty;I (IRFIX)

Fund Family Cohen & Steers Capital Management Inc

Ticker IRFIX

Peer Group IM International Real Estate (MF)

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


Portfolio Manager Rovers/Sullivan

Total Assets $810 Million


Gross Expense 1.26%

Net Expense 1.26%

Turnover 84%• The fund marginally underperformed its benchmark for the third quarter and year-to-date. Stock selection and portfolio positioning both w eighed

on results.

• Poor stock selection in the United Kingdom detracted from results. Financial service companies w ithin the Office sector specif ically

underperformed.

• Avoiding the w orst performing regions in their benchmark, Italy, Greece and Spain, contributed to quarterly results.

• J-REITs outperformed but poor stock selection w eighed on the portfolio. The Bank of Japan’s continued purchase of J-REITs, as part of its

asset-support program, helped prices during the quarter.

• Going forw ard, the team is positive on select Off ice and Residential companies in Germany, Prime Retail in the West End of London w hile being

cautious tow ard Property Developers in Japan.


CurrentQuarter

YTD1

Year3

Years5

Years10

Years2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001

Cohen & Steers Int'l Realty I 3.36 -16.83 -16.83 8.82 -8.25 N/A 13.95 35.96 -47.26 -4.32 44.45 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

S&P Developed Ex-U.S. Property 0.10 -14.71 -14.71 12.87 -7.36 9.18 18.09 42.76 -51.79 -1.55 43.90 17.28 40.97 45.76 1.72 -9.50

The fund’s team consists of almost 30 globally based investment professionals coordinated by the CIO, Joseph Harvey. Portfolio construction is done primarily on a bottom up basis using the regional

analysts' fundamental research. Net asset value and cash f low estimates are created for each company and the firm’s proprietary international valuation model then uses these inputs (price to NAV first

and cash f low grow th second) to determine optimal security w eights. Sector and geographic w eightings are driven primarily by their outlook for each national economy and an assessment of w hich

property types w ill perform best in that environment, considering the supply/demand conditions.

Cohen & Steers Int'l Realty I

December 31, 2011

68

RELATIVE PERFORMANCE TO INDEXRISK AND RETURN (01/01/07-12/31/11)RISK CHARACTERISTICS

REGION DISTRIBUTION SECTOR EXPOSURE (%)

1Year

3Years

5Years

10Years

Return -16.83 8.82 -8.25 N/A


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


Alpha -1.05 -3.90 -1.09 N/A

Beta 1.07 1.05 0.97 N/A

R-Squared 0.94 0.96 0.94 N/A

Consistency 41.67 41.67 41.67 N/A


Sharpe Ratio -0.79 0.44 -0.26 N/A

Cohen & Steers Int'l Realty I S&P Developed Ex-U.S. Property

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

Offi

ce

Indu

stria

l

Apartm

ent

Ret

ail

Hot

el

Oth

er

Cas

h

34.7

6.7

16.3

36.5

1.4

4.4

0.0

28.4

3.4

18.9

43.7

1.8 1.8 2.1

Cohen & Steers Int'l Realty I S&P Developed Ex-U.S. Property

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

80.0

Nor

th A

mer

ica

South

Am

erica

Europ

eAsi

a

Oth

er

10.5

0.0

27.0

62.3

0.2

9.8

3.0

20.5

64.7

2.1

Cohen & Steers Int'l Realty I

December 31, 2011

69



FUND OBJECTIVE


Commodities w ere broadly w eaker for the third quarter as increased volatility and macro concerns plagued the sector. Industrial metals and

energy w ere the hardest hit due to their high correlation to global grow th. Agriculture continued to lose ground after putting up sizable returns

earlier in the year. Farmers responded to favorable prices by planting more acreage w hich has increased expected supply and put dow nw ard

pressure on future prices. Livestock and precious metals w ere the tw o positive sectors for the quarter. Livestock continued to benefit from

favorable supply dynamics. Gold returned nearly 8% for the quarter despite the massive sell-off in September after it almost retraced the all-time

high made previously in the quarter.

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 0.89%

Net Expense 0.79%

Turnover 198%• The follow ing strategies helped quarterly returns: Commodity structural alpha strategies, particularly modif ied roll and calendar strategies;

Holdings of Australian inflation-linked bonds (ILBs), w hich rallied on strong investor demand for high quality yield; Exposure to non-U.S.

developed nominal interest rates, particularly core Europe, w here rates fell; and, Exposure to EM local debt in Brazil and Mexico as rates fell

sharply in these countries.

• The follow ing strategies w ere negative or neutral for returns: An underw eight to U.S. duration, primarily via TIPS as real yields rallied (how ever,

an overw eight to long-dated TIPS helped mitigate losses); Positions in bonds of f inancial companies, w hich declined amid fears of a slow dow n

in global grow th and uncertainty surrounding European sovereign risk; Exposure to a select basket of EM currencies as the U.S. dollar

appreciated against most currencies; and, Exposure to non-Agency mortgages, as risk aversion put dow nw ard pressure on prices.


CurrentQuarter

YTD1

Year3

Years5

Years10

Years2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001

PIMCO Commodity Real Ret Strat Instl 2.24 -7.56 -7.56 17.09 2.41 N/A 24.13 39.91 -43.33 23.80 -3.04 20.50 16.36 29.82 N/A N/A

Dow Jones-UBS Commodity Index 0.35 -13.32 -13.32 6.39 -2.07 6.63 16.83 18.91 -35.65 16.23 2.07 21.36 9.15 23.93 25.91 -19.51

The fund combines a position in commodity-linked derivative instruments, primarily sw aps through an offshore subsidiary, w ith 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 diversif ication benefits of

the commodity futures market, w hile 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).


December 31, 2011

70


RISK CHARACTERISTICS STRATEGY ALLOCATION (index)



0.0

3.0

6.0

9.0

12.0

-3.0

-6.0

-9.0

3/07 9/07 3/08 9/08 3/09 9/09 3/10 9/10 3/11 12/11


Dow Jones-UBS Commodity Index

-3.0

-2.0

-1.0

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

20.0 21.0 22.0 23.0 24.0 25.0 26.0 27.0


0.0

5.0

10.0

15.0

20.0

25.0

30.0

35.0

Base

Met

als

Energ

y

Gra

ins

Live

stoc

k

Preciou

s M

etal

s

14.9

32.6

28.6

6.6

17.2

1Year

3Years

5Years

10Years

Return -7.56 17.09 2.41 N/A


vs. Dow Jones-UBS Commodity Index


Alpha 9.12 9.75 5.81 N/A

Beta 1.15 1.10 1.18 N/A

R-Squared 0.99 0.95 0.94 N/A

Consistency 66.67 69.44 61.67 N/A


Sharpe Ratio -0.26 0.88 0.17 N/A


December 31, 2011

71



FUND OBJECTIVE


Despite relatively stable business fundamentals; MLPs w ere not immune to the macro headw inds and traded w ith the energy sector at times during

the quarter. Overall, the Alerian MLP Index outperformed the S&P 500 Index by approximately 7.0% for the quarter. Core long-haul pipelines

generally outperformed commodity sensitive sectors. Propane and coal continued to struggle and w ere the w orst performing sectors. Equity

issuance slow ed to approximately $2 billion in the 3rd quarter and included 2 IPOs. Debt offering in the space remained stable betw een $5 and $6

billion and shifted predominantly to investment grade names due to w idening credit spreads. As of quarter end, MLPs remain fairly priced and are

in-line w ith their long-term averages compared to other yield oriented asset classes. Yields remain healthy as many underlying MLPs raised

distributions during the quarter.

Assets under Management$3,113 Million

Inception Date9/28/04

Management Fee (11/10)

2.1%

Management Fee is obtained from the most recent

annual report. It represents the management fee as a

percentage of average net assets w hich reflects the

fund's deferred tax liability.

• The fund’s price return of -6.5% outperformed its NAV return of -9.5% and its benchmark. The fund’s premium to NAV increased during the

quarter to 12.1% from 8.4%.

• Volatility during the quarter caused short term correlations to the broader energy sector to remain elevated above long term averages, creating a

headw ind for the fund. The fund and the overall MLP sector reversed this negative trend in October.

• An underw eight to propane w as accretive to performance w hile a small overw eight to shipping/marine MLPs detracted.

• Larger cap names generally held up better during the quarter. Underw eights to Enterprise Product Partners and Kinder Morgan Energy Partners

hurt performance.

• The team took advantage of the short term volatility by rotating into small cap names trading at attractive valuations.

• Quarterly fund distributions w ere increased during the quarter as underlying MLP distribution grow th continued to expand.

B. Bartelt, Research Analyst, DiMeo Schneider & Associates, L.L.C. 3Q11

CurrentQuarter

YTD1

Year3

Years5

Years10

Years2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001

Kayne Anderson MLP Invst Co 11.17 3.05 3.05 33.32 6.72 N/A 35.35 69.91 -38.07 -5.66 44.97 3.05 N/A N/A N/A N/A

Alerian MLP Index 16.33 13.88 13.88 39.75 14.16 15.66 35.85 76.41 -36.80 12.42 27.62 5.22 15.92 41.60 0.24 44.36

Kayne Anderson MLP Investment Co. is a non-diversif ied, closed-end management investment company w hose investment objective is to obtain a high after-tax total return by investing the vast majority of

it's total assets in energy related MLPs and other Midstream Energy Companies. MLPs are publicly traded limited partnerships. Energy-related MLPs ow n 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 netw ork of relationships w ith major

energy companies and an investment team w ith over 134 years of combined energy experience. The fund may also invest in private or restricted investment opportunities not available to retail investors

along w ith debt securities of MLPs and other Midstream Energy Companies.


December 31, 2011

72


RISK CHARACTERISTICS STRATEGY ALLOCATION



0.0

5.0

10.0

15.0

20.0

-5.0

-10.0

-15.0

-20.0

3/07 9/07 3/08 9/08 3/09 9/09 3/10 9/10 3/11 12/11

Kayne Anderson MLP Invst Co Alerian MLP Index

6.0

8.0

10.0

12.0

14.0

16.0

18.0 20.0 22.0 24.0 26.0 28.0 30.0



0.0% 20.0% 40.0% 60.0% 80.0%

Upstream MLPs

Shipping MLPs

Propane MLPs

MLP Affiliates

Midstream MLPs

General Partners

Coal MLPs & Other

2.0%

4.0%

3.0%

8.0%

70.0%

8.0%

5.0%

1Year

3Years

5Years

10Years

Return 3.05 33.32 6.72 N/A


vs. Alerian MLP Index


Alpha -3.25 16.93 -0.80 N/A

Beta 0.54 0.43 0.78 N/A

R-Squared 0.23 0.14 0.29 N/A

Consistency 58.33 50.00 46.67 N/A




December 31, 2011

73



FUND OBJECTIVE


Despite relatively stable business fundamentals; MLPs w ere not immune to the macro headw inds and traded w ith the energy sector at times during

the quarter. Overall, the Alerian MLP Index outperformed the S&P 500 Index by approximately 7.0% for the quarter. Core long-haul pipelines

generally outperformed commodity sensitive sectors. Propane and coal continued to struggle and w ere the w orst performing sectors. Equity

issuance slow ed to approximately $2 billion in the 3rd quarter and included 2 IPOs. Debt offering in the space remained stable betw een $5 and $6

billion and shifted predominantly to investment grade names due to w idening credit spreads. As of quarter end, MLPs remain fairly priced and are

in-line w ith their long-term averages compared to other yield oriented asset classes. Yields remain healthy as many underlying MLPs raised

distributions during the quarter.

Assets under Management$1,480 Million

Inception Date3/2/04

Management Fee (11/09)1.5%

Management Fee is obtained from the most recent

annual report. It represents the management fee as a

percentage of average net assets w hich reflects the

fund's deferred tax liability.

• The fund’s price return of -9.3% underperformed its NAV return of -6.8% and its benchmark. The fund’s premium to NAV decreased during the

quarter to 9.7% from 12.4%. Since quarter end, the premium has increased to over 12%.

• Volatility during the quarter caused short term correlations to the broader energy sector to remain elevated above long term averages, creating a

headw ind for the fund. The fund and the overall MLP sector reversed this negative trend in October.

• Underw eights to the lagging sectors of coal and propane w ere accretive during the quarter. An overw eight to natural gas pipelines also aided

performance.

• Poor stock selection in natural gas pipelines, specif ically Enterprise Product Partners and Energy Transfer Partners, detracted from performance.

Exposure to non-commodity sensitive names in gathering and processing also detracted from performance.

• Quarterly fund distributions w ere increased during the quarter as underlying MLP distribution grow th continued to expand.

B. Bartelt, Research Analyst, DiMeo Schneider & Associates, L.L.C. 3Q11

CurrentQuarter

YTD1

Year3

Years5

Years10

Years2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001

Tortoise Energy Infrastructure Corp. 19.52 10.74 10.74 42.63 10.39 N/A 31.49 99.28 -44.45 1.70 37.46 4.53 N/A N/A N/A N/A

Alerian MLP Index 16.33 13.88 13.88 39.75 14.16 15.66 35.85 76.41 -36.80 12.42 27.62 5.22 15.92 41.60 0.24 44.36

Tortoise Energy Infrastructure Corp. is a non-diversif ied, closed-end management investment company. The fund seeks to provide investors w ith an eff icient vehicle to invest in publicly traded energy

infrastructure MLPs w hile providing a high level of total return w ith an emphasis on current distributions. The fund may additionally invest in private or restricted investment opportunities not available to

retail investors along w ith debt securities of MLPs and other Midstream Energy Companies.


December 31, 2011

74





0.0

5.0

10.0

15.0

-5.0

-10.0

-15.0

3/07 9/07 3/08 9/08 3/09 9/09 3/10 9/10 3/11 12/11


Alerian MLP Index

10.0

11.0

12.0

13.0

14.0

15.0

18.0 19.0 20.0 21.0 22.0 23.0 24.0 25.0 26.0 27.0



0.0% 10.0% 20.0% 30.0% 40.0% 50.0%

Propane

Petroleum Transportation

Natural Gas Pipelines

Gathering & Processing

2.6%

38.7%

44.8%

13.9%

1Year

3Years

5Years

10Years

Return 10.74 42.63 10.39 N/A


vs. Alerian MLP Index


Alpha -4.09 5.20 -2.73 N/A

Beta 1.14 0.93 1.05 N/A

R-Squared 0.76 0.64 0.66 N/A

Consistency 58.33 55.56 51.67 N/A




December 31, 2011

75



FUND OBJECTIVE


Hedge funds declined during the third quarter but preserved capital rather w ell relative to the broad equity markets, despite dragging most strategies

negative for the year. Equity hedge (-9.5%) and event driven (-7.0%) managers underperformed for the quarter w hile short biased (+13.2%) and

macro (+1.0%) managers outperformed amid elevated market volatility. Short-term systematic strategies (+4.1%) also benefitted nicely from volatile

trends in commodity and currency markets. Market neutral strategies (-3.3%) also outperformed broad equity indices, benefiting from continued

low er correlations. Relative value managers w ere modestly negative (-3.2%) for the quarter mainly due to spreads w idening. Fund of hedge funds

outperformed direct hedge funds due to additional portfolio tail risk strategies and market hedges. Broadly speaking, hedge funds continued to see

modest inflow s, partially offsetting performance-based asset declines. After reaching their highest exposures earlier this summer since 2008,

hedge funds continued to pare back leverage and raise cash given the fragility of market sentiment and other macro factors. The U.S. Securities

and Exchange Commission (SEC) extended the registration deadline for unregistered investment advisors, including hedge funds, until March 2012.

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

• GIP experienced negative quarterly performance and underperformed its benchmark.

• Arbitrage/Credit and Equity oriented managers detracted from results w hile cash and Opportunistic managers outperformed.

• Domestic Hedge Equities, the fund’s third largest strategy allocation, w as the w orst performing strategy for the quarter. Short positions

contributed to results w hile long exposure to cyclical sectors and higher beta names lagged. A longer biased manager w ith nearly half of their

net long exposure in financials particularly w eighed on results.

• Other than short biased, all Arbitrage/Credit strategies w ere negative for the quarter. Event driven managers w ere the leading detractor from

performance. Losses primarily came from a manager w ith exposure to tier 1 European financials and Lehman Brothers combined w ith another

manger’s losses in HMOs and Asia.

• Geographic allocations remained relatively unchanged for the quarter.

• The team terminated a generalist equity hedge manager (underperformance relative to peers) and added a long biased, domestic equity hedge

manager focused on financials.


CurrentQuarter

YTD1

Year3

Years5

Years10

Years2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001

Grosvenor Inst'l Partners, L.P. 0.57 -3.81 -3.81 5.26 0.42 3.79 6.47 13.87 -20.89 10.69 9.40 6.80 6.92 11.16 2.27 8.24

HFRI Fund of Funds Composite Index -0.26 -5.51 -5.51 3.64 -0.71 3.27 5.70 11.47 -21.37 10.25 10.39 7.49 6.86 11.61 1.02 2.80

Grosvenor Institutional Partners (“GIP”) is a globally diversif ied, multi-strategy, multi-manager portfolio that allocates its assets to hedge fund managers that specialize in a w ide range of alternative

investment strategies. GIP has tw o primary investment objectives: to provide its investors w ith a superior long-term, risk-adjusted rate of return and to preserve capital. GIP is eligible to U.S. tax-exempt

investors, benefit plans and IRAs w ho are “qualif ied purchasers” under Section 3(C)7 of the Investment Company Act of 1940. An entity generally must have a “net investment” portfolio of at least $25

million to qualify; the beneficiary of an IRA generally must have a “net investment” portfolio of at least $5 million in order for the IRA to qualify. The Fund is structured to avoid generating UBTI for U.S. tax-

exempt investors and w ill allocate to approximately 60 managers.


December 31, 2011

76





0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

-0.5

-1.0

-1.5

3/07 9/07 3/08 9/08 3/09 9/09 3/10 9/10 3/11 12/11


HFRI Fund of Funds Composite Index

-0.9

-0.6

-0.3

0.0

0.3

0.6

6.3 6.4 6.5 6.6 6.7



0.0% 10.0% 20.0% 30.0% 40.0% 50.0%

Relative Value

Other

Event Driven

Equity Hedge

41.1%

13.3%

14.6%

31.0%

1Year

3Years

5Years

10Years

Return -3.81 5.26 0.42 3.79


vs. HFRI Fund of Funds Composite Index

Tracking Error 1.55 1.77 1.81 1.62

Alpha 1.74 2.06 1.07 0.92

Beta 0.99 0.86 0.91 0.87

R-Squared 0.89 0.85 0.93 0.91

Consistency 66.67 61.11 58.33 55.00


Sharpe Ratio -0.83 1.18 -0.13 0.40


December 31, 2011

77

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.

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.

78

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.

79

Privacy Policy and Practices of DiMeo Schneider & Associates, L.L.C.

DiMeo Schneider & Associates values the trust our clients place in us and we are committed to the responsible management, use and protection of our clients’ personal information. Federal law requires that we tell you how we collect, share, and protect your personal information. We ask that you take a moment to review our privacy policy. Why We Obtain Information DiMeo Schneider & Associates gathers information to help us serve your financial needs, provide customer service, and fulfill legal and regulatory requirements. Any collection of personal information is used to support our normal business operations and to service our relationship with you. What Information We Collect The type of nonpublic personal information we collect and share depends on the product or service you have with us. This information can include your:

Social Security Number; Income; Account balances; and Payment history.

How We Collect Information Some of the nonpublic personal and financial information DiMeo Schneider & Associates collects comes from you. Other sources may include:

Information on applications and related forms, such as name, address, Social Security Number, assets and income; Information regarding your transactions with us, such as purchases, sales and account balances; Information from your employer, association, or benefit plan sponsor, such as name, address, Social Security Number, assets, and income.

How We Share Your Information DiMeo Schneider & Associates does not disclose nonpublic personal information about you to anyone, except as permitted or required by law. In the course of servicing your account, DiMeo Schneider & Associates may share information collected about you with other service providers such as mutual fund companies, broker/dealers, insurance companies, banks and investment firms to provide account maintenance and to effect transactions. We may also disclose your information to other organizations such as government agencies and law enforcement officials (for example, for tax reporting or under court order), or to other organizations and individuals with your consent (for example, to your attorney or tax professional). DiMeo Schneider & Associates does not disclose your nonpublic personal information, except as provided above. How Often DiMeo Schneider & Associates Notifies Clients DiMeo Schneider & Associates must notify you about our sharing practices when you open an account and each year while you are a customer. Protecting Your Information DiMeo Schneider & Associates maintains physical, electronic, and procedural safeguards to protect your nonpublic personal information to ensure that we are complying with our own policy, industry practices, and federal or state regulations. If you ever become an inactive client, we will continue to adhere to the privacy policies and practices described in this notice. Contacting DiMeo Schneider & Associates We welcome your questions regarding our privacy policy. Please feel free to contact Scott Blim via telephone at (312) 853-1000, via email at [email protected], or via regular mail at 500 West Madison, Suite 3855, Chicago, Il 60661.

DiMeo Schneider & Associates, L.L.C. reserves the right to change this Privacy Policy at any time, without notice, and will notify clients of any modifications on an annual basis.

80

concordia university, nebraska & concordia foundation,...

Documents