Quality and Extent of Services Sample Clauses

Quality and Extent of Services. The Board considered the terms of the Agreements, including the scope of advisory services provided under the Agreements. The Board noted that, under the Agreements, DIMA and RREEF provide portfolio management services to the Fund and that, pursuant to a separate administrative services agreement, DIMA provides administrative services to the Fund. The Board considered the experience and skills of senior management and investment personnel and the resources made available to such personnel. The Board also considered the risks to ▇▇▇▇ in sponsoring or managing the Fund, including financial, operational and reputational risks, the potential economic impact to ▇▇▇▇ from such risks and ▇▇▇▇’s approach to addressing such risks. Throughout the course of the year, the Board also received information regarding ▇▇▇▇’s oversight of fund sub-advisors, including RREEF. The Board reviewed the Fund’s performance over

Quality and Extent of Services. The Board considered the terms of the Agreement, including the scope of advisory services provided under the Agreement. The Board noted that, under the Agreement, ▇▇▇▇ provides portfolio management services to the Fund and that, pursuant to a separate administrative services agreement, DIMA provides administrative services to the Fund. The Board considered the experience and skills of senior management and investment personnel and the resources made available to such personnel. The Board also considered the risks to ▇▇▇▇ in sponsoring or managing the Fund, including financial, operational and reputational risks, the potential economic impact to ▇▇▇▇ from such risks and ▇▇▇▇’s approach to addressing such risks. The Board reviewed the Fund’s performance over short-term and long-term periods and compared those returns to various agreed-upon performance measures, including a peer universe compiled using information supplied by iMoneyNet, an independent fund data service. The Board also noted that it has put into place a process of identifying “Funds in Review” (e.g., funds performing poorly relative to a peer universe), and receives additional reporting from ▇▇▇▇ regarding such funds and, where appropriate, ▇▇▇▇’s plans to address underperformance. The Board believes this process is an effective manner of identifying and addressing underperforming funds. Based on the information provided, the Board noted that, for the one- and three-year periods ended December 31, 2021, the Fund’s gross performance (Capital Shares) was in the 3rd quartile of the applicable iMoneyNet universe (the 1st quartile being the best performers and the 4th quartile being the worst performers).

Quality and Extent of Services. The Board considered the terms of the Agreements, including the scope of advisory services provided under the Agreements. The Board noted that, under the Agreements, DIMA and NTI provide portfolio management services to the Portfolio and the Fund and that, pursuant to separate administrative services agreements, DIMA provides administrative services to the Portfolio and the Fund. The Board considered the experience and skills of senior management and investment personnel and the resources made available to such personnel. The Board also considered the risks to ▇▇▇▇ in sponsoring or managing the Portfolio and the Fund, including financial, operational and reputational risks, the potential economic impact to ▇▇▇▇ from such risks and ▇▇▇▇’s approach to addressing such risks. Throughout the course of the year, the Board also received information regarding ▇▇▇▇’s oversight of fund sub-advisors, including NTI. The Board reviewed the Portfolio’s and the Fund’s performance over short-term and long-term periods and compared those returns to various agreed-upon performance measures, including market index(es) and a peer universe compiled using information supplied by Morningstar Direct (“Morningstar”), an independent fund data service. The Board also noted that it has put into place a process of identifying “Funds in Review” (e.g., funds performing

Quality and Extent of Services. The Board considered the terms of the Agreements, including the scope of advisory services provided under the Agreements. The Board noted that, under the Agreements, DIMA and Itaú provide portfolio management services to the Fund and that, pursuant to a separate administrative services agreement, DIMA provides administrative services to the Fund. The Board considered the experience and skills of senior management and investment personnel and the resources made available to such personnel. The Board also considered the risks to ▇▇▇▇ in sponsoring or managing the Fund, including financial, operational and reputational risks, the potential economic impact to ▇▇▇▇ from such risks and ▇▇▇▇’s approach to addressing such risks. Throughout the course of the year, the Board also received information regarding ▇▇▇▇’s oversight of fund sub-advisors, including Itaú. The Board reviewed the Fund’s performance over Fees and Expenses. The Board considered the Fund’s investment management fee schedule, sub-advisory fee schedule, operating expenses and total expense ratios, and comparative information provided by Broadridge Financial Solutions, Inc. (“Broadridge”) and the Fee Consultant regarding investment management fee rates paid to other investment advisors by similar funds (1st quartile being the most favorable and 4th quartile being the least favorable). With respect to management fees paid to other investment advisors by similar funds, the Board noted that the contractual fee rates paid by the Fund, which include a 0.097% fee paid to ▇▇▇▇ under the Fund’s administrative services agreement, were higher than the median (3rd quartile) of the applicable Broadridge peer group (based on Broadridge data provided as of December 31, 2021). With respect to the sub-advisory fee paid to Itaú, the Board noted that the fee is paid by ▇▇▇▇ out of its fee and not directly by the Fund. The Board noted that the Fund’s Class A shares total (net) operating expenses (excluding 12b-1 fees) were expected to be higher than the median (3rd quartile) of the applicable Broadridge expense universe (based on Broadridge data provided as of December 31, 2021, and analyzing Broadridge expense universe Class A (net) expenses less any applicable 12b-1 fees) (“Broadridge Universe Expenses”). The Board also reviewed data comparing each other operational share class’s total (net) operating expenses to the applicable Broadridge Universe Expenses. The Board noted that the expense limitations agreed to by ...

Quality and Extent of Services. The Board considered the terms of the Agreements, including the scope of advisory services provided under the Agreements. The Board noted that, under the Agreements, DIMA and NTI provide portfolio management services to the Fund and that, pursuant to a separate administrative services agreement, DIMA provides administrative services to the Fund. The Board considered the experience and skills of senior management and investment personnel and the resources made available to such personnel. The Board also considered the risks to DIMA in sponsoring or managing the Fund, including financial, operational and reputational risks, the potential economic impact to ▇▇▇▇ from such risks and ▇▇▇▇’s approach to addressing such risks. Throughout the course of the year, the Board also received information regarding ▇▇▇▇’s oversight of fund sub-advisors, including NTI. The Board reviewed the Fund’s performance over short-term and long-term periods and compared those returns to various agreed- upon performance measures, including market index(es) and a peer universe compiled using information supplied by Morningstar Direct (“Morningstar”), an independent fund data service. The Board also noted that it has put into place a process of identifying “Funds in Review” (e.g., funds performing poorly relative to a peer universe), and receives additional reporting from DIMA regarding such funds and, where appropriate, ▇▇▇▇’s plans to address underperformance. The Board believes this process is an effective manner of identifying and addressing underperforming funds. Based on the information provided, the Board noted that,

Quality and Extent of Services. The Board considered the terms of the Agreements, including the scope of advisory services provided under the Agreements. The Board noted that, under the Agreements, DIMA and RREEF provide portfolio management services to the Fund and that, pursuant to a separate administrative services agreement, DIMA provides administrative services to the Fund. The Board considered the experience and skills of senior management and investment personnel and the resources made available to such personnel. The Board also considered the risks to ▇▇▇▇ in sponsoring or managing the Fund, including financial, operational and reputational risks, the potential economic impact to ▇▇▇▇ from such risks and ▇▇▇▇’s approach to addressing such risks. Throughout the course of the year, the Board also received information regarding ▇▇▇▇’s oversight of fund sub-advisors, including RREEF. The Board reviewed the Fund’s performance over short- term and long-term periods and compared those returns to various agreed-upon performance measures, including market index(es) and a peer universe compiled using information supplied by Morningstar Direct (“Morningstar”), an independent fund data service. The Board also noted that it has put into place a process of identifying “Funds in Review” (e.g., funds performing poorly relative to a peer universe), and receives additional reporting from ▇▇▇▇ regarding such funds and, where appropriate, ▇▇▇▇’s plans to address underperformance. The Board believes this process is an effective manner of identifying and addressing underperforming funds. Based on the information provided, the Board noted that, for the one-, three- and five-year periods ended December 31, 2019, the Fund’s performance (Class A shares) was in the 2nd quartile, 2nd quartile and 1st quartile, respectively, of the applicable Morningstar universe (the 1st quartile being the best performers and the 4th quartile being the worst performers). The Board also observed that the Fund has outperformed its benchmark in the one-, three- and five-year periods ended December 31, 2019.

Quality and Extent of Services. The Board considered the terms of the Agreements, including the scope of advisory services provided under the Agreements. The Board noted that, under the Agreements, ▇▇▇▇ provides portfolio management services to the Portfolio and the Fund and that, pursuant to separate administrative services agreements, DIMA provides administrative services to the Portfolio and the Fund. The Board considered the experience and skills of senior management and investment personnel and the resources made available to such personnel. The Board also considered the risks to ▇▇▇▇ in sponsoring or managing the Portfolio and the Fund, including financial, operational and reputational risks, the potential economic impact to ▇▇▇▇ from such risks and ▇▇▇▇’s approach to addressing such risks. The Board reviewed the Portfolio’s and the Fund’s performance over short-term and long-term periods and compared those returns to various agreed-upon performance measures, including a peer universe compiled using information supplied by iMoneyNet, an independent fund data service. The Board also noted that it has put into place a process of identifying “Funds in Review” (e.g., funds performing poorly relative to a peer universe), and receives additional reporting from ▇▇▇▇ regarding such funds and, where appropriate, ▇▇▇▇’s plans to address underperformance. The Board believes this process is an effective manner of identifying and addressing underperforming funds. Based on the information provided, the Board

Quality and Extent of Services. The Board considered the terms of the Agreement, including the scope of advisory services provided under the Agreement. The Board noted that, under the Agreement, DIMA provides portfolio management services and administrative services to the Fund. The Board considered the experience and skills of senior management and investment personnel and the resources made available to such personnel. The Board also considered the risks to ▇▇▇▇ in sponsoring or managing the Fund, including financial, operational and reputational risks, the potential economic impact to ▇▇▇▇ from such risks and ▇▇▇▇’s approach to addressing such risks. The Board reviewed the Fund’s performance over short-term and long-term periods and compared those returns to various agreed-upon performance measures, including market index(es) and a peer universe compiled using information supplied by Morningstar Direct (“Morningstar”), an independent fund data service. The Board also noted that it has put into place a process of identifying “Funds in Review” (e.g., funds performing poorly relative to a peer universe), and receives additional reporting from ▇▇▇▇ regarding such funds and, where appropriate, ▇▇▇▇’s plans to address underperformance. The Board believes this process is an effective manner of identifying and addressing underperforming funds. Based on the information provided, the Board noted that, for the one-, three- and

Quality and Extent of Services. The Board considered the terms of the Agreement, including the scope of advisory services provided under the Agreement. The Board noted that, under the Agreement, ▇▇▇▇ provides portfolio management services to the Fund and that, pursuant to a separate administrative services agreement, DIMA provides administrative services to the Fund. The Board considered the experience and skills of senior management and investment personnel and the resources made available to such personnel. The Board reviewed the Fund’s performance over short-term and long-term periods and compared those returns to various agreed-upon performance measures, including a peer universe compiled using information supplied by iMoneyNet, an independent fund data service. The Board also noted that it has put into place a process of identifying “Funds in Review” (e.g., funds performing poorly relative to a peer universe), and receives additional reporting from ▇▇▇▇ regarding such funds and, where appropriate, ▇▇▇▇’s plans to address underperformance. The Board believes this process is an effective manner of identifying and addressing underperforming funds.