STATE STREET INSTITUTIONAL FUNDS

In developing our climate transition plan disclosure expectations, our asset stewardship team conducted an in-depth assessment of existing disclosure frameworks and standards for relevant disclosures. We considered several factors (e.g., market adoption, usefulness for decision-making, applicability across sectors) and selected a core set of disclosure expectations for companies that have adopted climate transition plans.

We recognize that there is no one-size-fits-all approach to reaching net-zero and that climate-related risks and opportunities can be highly nuanced across and within industries. The expectations set out below serve to provide transparency on the core criteria we expect companies that have adopted a climate transition plan to address in their related disclosures.

STATE STREET INSTITUTIONAL FUNDS
(the “Trust”)
One Iron Street
Boston, Massachusetts 02210

STATEMENT OF ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

January 31, 2024

Fund	TICKER
STATE STREET INSTITUTIONAL SMALL-CAP EQUITY FUND
Investment Class	(SIVIX)
Service Class	(SSQSX)
STATE STREET INSTITUTIONAL U.S. EQUITY FUND
Investment Class	(SUSIX)
Service Class	(SUSSX)

This Statement of Additional Information (“SAI”) relates to the statutory prospectus of State Street Institutional Funds (the “Trust”) dated January 31, 2024, as may be revised and/or supplemented from time to time thereafter for each of the Funds listed above (the “Prospectus”). This SAI, although not a prospectus, is incorporated in its entirety by reference into the Prospectus. Copies of the Prospectus describing each series of the Trust listed above (each, a “Fund” and collectively, the “Funds”) may be obtained without charge by calling the Trust (toll-free) at 1-800-242-0134.

The Trust's financial statements for the fiscal year ended September 30, 2023, and the Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm's Report thereon, are incorporated herein by reference to the Trust's Annual Report dated September 30, 2023. The Annual Report may be obtained without charge by calling the Trust at the toll free telephone number listed above.

Information regarding the status of shareholder accounts may be obtained by calling the Trust at the toll-free telephone number listed above or by writing to the Trust at c/o U.S. Bank Global Fund Services, P.O. Box 701, Milwaukee, WI 53201-0701. If you have invested through an Authorized Firm, you should call that firm for information on the status of your account. Terms that are defined in the Prospectus shall have the same meanings in this SAI.

SSF-INSTSAI-1

TABLE OF CONTENTS

General	3
Description of the Funds and Their Investments and Risks	3
Additional Investments and Risks	5
Investment Restrictions	30
Management of the Trust	33
Proxy Voting Procedures	40
Control Persons and Principal Holders of Securities	40
Investment Advisory and Other Services	42
Portfolio Managers	48
Brokerage Allocation and Other Practices	55
Declaration of Trust, Capital Stock and Other Information	58
Pricing of Shares	59
Dividends, Distributions	60
Taxation of the Funds	60
Underwriter	72
Financial Statements	72
Appendices	A-1

General

The Trust was organized as an unincorporated business trust under the laws of Delaware on May 23, 1997. The Trust is an open-end management investment company. The Trust includes the following diversified series:

•State Street Institutional Small-Cap Equity Fund (the “Small-Cap Equity Fund”); and

•State Street Institutional U.S. Equity Fund (the “U.S. Equity Fund”).

The Small-Cap Equity Fund and the U.S. Equity Fund are referred to in this SAI as the “Funds,” and each Fund may be referred to in context as the “Fund.”

On November 30, 2016, the name of the Trust was changed from “GE Institutional Funds” to “State Street Institutional Funds” in connection with the appointment of SSGA Funds Management, Inc. (“SSGA FM” or the “Adviser”) as investment adviser to the Funds. Additionally, on November 30, 2016, each Fund changed its respective name as follows:

Old Name	New Name
GE Institutional Small-Cap Equity Fund GE Institutional U.S. Equity Fund	State Street Institutional Small-Cap Equity Fund State Street Institutional U.S. Equity Fund

Description of the Funds and Their Investments and Risks

Each Fund's Prospectus contains information about the investment objective and policies of that Fund. This SAI should only be read in conjunction with the Prospectus of the Fund or Funds in which you intend to invest.

The investment objective or objectives of a Fund are fundamental and cannot be changed without the approval of a majority of the outstanding voting securities (as defined in the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended (the “1940 Act”)) of that Fund. Certain investment restrictions also are fundamental and cannot be changed without shareholder approval. In contrast, certain other investment restrictions, as well as the investment policies, of each Fund are not fundamental and may be changed by the Trust's Board of Trustees (the “Board”) without shareholder approval.

There can be no assurance that any Fund will achieve its investment objective or objectives. Investors should not consider any one Fund alone to be a complete investment program. All of the Funds are subject to the risk of changing economic conditions, as well as the risk inherent in the ability of the portfolio managers to make changes in the composition of a Fund in anticipation of changes in economic, business, and financial conditions. As with any security, a risk of loss is inherent in an investment in the shares of any of the Funds. The different types of securities, investments, and investment practices used by each Fund all have attendant risks of varying degrees. For example, with respect to equity securities, there can be no assurance of capital appreciation and there is a substantial risk of decline in the value of the securities. With respect to debt securities, there exists the risk that the issuer of a security may not be able to meet its obligations on interest or principal payments at the time required by the instrument. In addition, the value of debt instruments generally rises and falls inversely with prevailing current interest rates. As described below, an investment in certain of the Funds entails special additional risks as a result of their ability to invest a substantial portion of their assets in foreign securities.

Small-Cap Equity Fund

The investment objective of the Small-Cap Equity Fund is long-term growth of capital. The Fund seeks to achieve its objective by investing at least 80% (measured at the time of initial investment) of its net assets (plus any borrowings for investment purposes) under normal circumstances in equity securities of small-cap companies, such as common and preferred stocks. The Fund defines a small-cap company as one with a market capitalization that, at the time of initial investment, falls between (a) the market capitalization of the smallest company in the Russell 2000® Index and (b) either the larger of the market capitalization of the largest company in the Russell 2000® Index or $3.0 billion. The Fund uses a multi sub-adviser investment strategy that combines growth, value and core investment management styles. The portfolio management team of the Fund's investment adviser, SSGA FM, will allocate the Fund's assets among the sub-advisers to maintain exposure to a combination of investment styles, but may have larger allocations to certain sub-advisers based on its assessment of the potential for better performance or to address capacity constraints of a particular sub-adviser, among other reasons. As a result, this orientation will typically produce a portfolio that does not materially favor value or growth style investing, and allows the Fund the potential to benefit from both value and growth cycles in the marketplace.

U.S. Equity Fund

The investment objective of the U.S. Equity Fund is long-term growth of capital. The Fund seeks to achieve its objective by investing at least 80% (measured at the time of investment) of its net assets (plus any borrowings for investment purposes) under normal circumstances in equity securities of U.S. companies, such as common and preferred stocks. The Fund considers a U.S. company to be a company that generates at least 50% of its revenues or profits from business activities in the U.S., has at least 50% of its assets situated in the U.S., or has the principal trading market for its securities in the U.S.

* * *

Supplemental information concerning certain of the securities and other instruments in which the Funds may invest, the investment policies and strategies that the Funds may utilize and certain risks associated with those investments, policies and strategies is provided below. Unless otherwise indicated, all Funds are permitted to engage in the following investment strategies or techniques. The Funds are not obligated to pursue the following strategies or techniques and do not represent that these strategies or techniques are available now or will be available at any time in the future. A Fund will not purchase all of the following types of securities or employ all of the following strategies unless doing so is consistent with its investment objective.

The following tables summarize the investment techniques that may be employed by the Funds. Certain techniques and limitations may be changed at the discretion of SSGA FM and in some cases subject to the approval by the Board. Unless otherwise noted, percentage figures refer to the percentage of a Fund's total assets (including any borrowings) that may be invested in accordance with the indicated techniques.

	Borrowing Limit	When- Issued and Delayed Delivery Securities	Repurchase Agreements	Reverse Repurchase Agreements	Restricted Securities and Illiquid Investments	Structured and Indexed Securities	Options	Securities Index Options
Small-Cap Equity Fund	33 1∕3%	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	Yes	Yes
U.S. Equity Fund	33 1∕3%	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	Yes	Yes

	Futures Contracts and Options on Futures Contracts	Forward Contracts	Interest- Only Swaps, Interest Rate Swaps, Index Swaps and Credit Default Swaps	Options on Foreign Currencies	Maximum Investment in Debt Securities		Maximum Investment in Below- Investment Grade Debt Securities (High Yield Securities)	Maximum Investment in Foreign Securities
Small-Cap Equity Fund	Yes	Yes	No	No		20 %1	10 %	10 %2
U.S. Equity Fund	Yes	Yes	No	Yes		20 %1	5 %	15 %2

This percentage figure refers to the percentage of the applicable Fund's net assets (plus any borrowings for investment purposes).

This limitation excludes: American Depositary Receipts (“ADRs”); securities of a foreign issuer with a class of securities registered with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) and listed on a U.S. national securities exchange; and dollar-denominated securities publicly offered in the U.S. by a foreign issuer. For the U.S. Equity Fund only, the percentage figure refers to the percentage of the Fund's net assets (plus any borrowings for investment purposes).

	Lending of Fund Securities	Rule 144A Securities	Debt Obligations of Supranational Agencies	Depositary Receipts	Securities of Other Investment Funds	Floating and Variable Rate Instruments	Zero Coupon Obligations	Municipal Lease
Small-Cap Equity Fund	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	No 3	No	No
U.S. Equity Fund	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	No 3	No	No

This limitation excludes commercial paper and notes with variable and floating rates of interest.

	Participation Interests in Municipal Obligations	Municipal Obligation Components	Custodial Receipts on Municipal Obligations	Mortgage Related Securities, including Collateralized Mortgage Obligations (“CMOs”)	Government Stripped Mortgage Related Securities	Asset- Backed Securities and Receivable- Backed Securities	Mortgage Dollar Rolls	Short Sales Against the Box	Warrants
Small-Cap Equity Fund	No	No	No	No	No	No	No	Yes	Yes
U.S. Equity Fund	No	No	No	No	No	No	No	Yes	Yes

Additional Investments and Risks

To the extent consistent with its investment objective and restrictions (as indicated in the charts above), each Fund may invest in the following instruments and use the following techniques, and is subject to the following additional risks.

Bonds

Each Fund may invest a portion of their assets in bonds. A bond is an interest-bearing security issued by a company, governmental unit or, in some cases, a non-U.S. entity. The issuer of a bond has a contractual obligation to pay interest at a stated rate on specific dates and to repay principal (the bond's face value) periodically or on a specified maturity date; provided, however, a zero coupon bond pays no interest to its holder during its life. The value of a zero coupon bond to a Fund consists of the difference between such bond's face value at the time of maturity and the price for which it was acquired, which may be an amount significantly less than its face value (sometimes referred to as a “deep discount” price).

An issuer may have the right to redeem or “call” a bond before maturity, in which case the investor may have to reinvest the proceeds at lower market rates. Most bonds bear interest income at a “coupon” rate that is fixed for the life of the bond. The value of a fixed rate bond usually rises when market interest rates fall, and falls when market interest rates rise. Accordingly, a fixed rate bond's yield (income as a percent of the bond's current value) may differ from its coupon rate as its value rises or falls. Fixed rate bonds generally are also subject to inflation risk, which is the risk that the value of the bond or income from the bond will be worth less in the future as inflation decreases the value of money. This could mean that, as inflation increases, the “real” value of the assets of a Fund holding fixed rate bonds can decline, as can the value of the Fund's distributions. Other types of bonds bear income at an interest rate that is adjusted periodically. Because of their adjustable interest rates, the value of “floating-rate” or “variable-rate” bonds fluctuates much less in response to market interest rate movements than the value of fixed rate bonds. A Fund may treat some of these bonds as having a shorter maturity for purposes of calculating the weighted average maturity of its investment portfolio. Bonds may be senior or subordinated obligations. Senior obligations generally have the first claim on a corporation's earnings and assets and, in the event of liquidation, are paid before subordinated obligations. Bonds may be unsecured (backed only by the issuer's general creditworthiness) or secured (also backed by specified collateral). The investment return of corporate bonds reflects interest on the bond and changes in the market value of the bond. The market value of a corporate bond may be affected by the credit rating of the corporation, the corporation's performance and perceptions of the corporation in the market place. There is a risk that the issuers of the securities may not be able to meet their obligations on interest or principal payments at the time called for by such a security.

Bank Obligations

Domestic commercial banks organized under federal law are supervised and examined by the U.S. Comptroller of the Currency and are required to be members of the Federal Reserve System and to be insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (“FDIC”). Foreign branches of U.S. banks and foreign banks are not regulated by U.S. banking authorities and generally are not bound by mandatory reserve requirements, loan limitations, accounting, auditing and financial reporting standards comparable to U.S. banks. Obligations of foreign branches of U.S. banks and foreign banks are subject to the risks associated with investing in foreign securities generally. These obligations entail risks that are different from those of investments in obligations in domestic banks, including foreign economic and political developments outside the United States, foreign governmental restrictions that may adversely affect payment of principal and interest on the obligations, foreign exchange controls and foreign withholding or other taxes on income.

A U.S. branch of a foreign bank may or may not be subject to reserve requirements imposed by the Federal Reserve System or by the state in which the branch is located if the branch is licensed in that state. In addition, branches licensed by the Comptroller of the Currency and branches licensed by certain states (“State Branches”) may or may not be

required to: (i) pledge to the regulator by depositing assets with a designated bank within the state, an amount of its assets equal to 5% of its total liabilities and (ii) maintain assets within the state in an amount equal to a specified percentage of the aggregate amount of liabilities of the foreign bank payable at or through all of its agencies or branches within the state. The deposits of State Branches may not necessarily be insured by the FDIC. In addition, less information may be available to the public about a U.S. branch of a foreign bank than about a U.S. bank.

Cash Reserves

Each Fund may hold portions of its assets in cash or short-term debt instruments with remaining maturities of 397 days or less pending investment or to meet anticipated redemptions and day-to-day operating expenses. Short-term debt instruments consist of: (i) short-term obligations of the U.S. Government, its agencies, instrumentalities, authorities or political subdivisions; (ii) other short-term debt securities rated at the time of purchase Aa or higher by Moody's Investor Services, Inc. (“Moody's”) or AA or higher by S&P Global Ratings (“S&P”) or, if unrated, of comparable quality in the opinion of the Adviser; (iii) commercial paper; (iv) bank obligations, including negotiable certificates of deposit, time deposits and bankers' acceptances; and (v) repurchase agreements.

Cleared Derivatives Transactions

Transactions in some types of swaps are required to be centrally cleared by applicable rules and regulations and a Fund may also voluntarily centrally clear other transactions that are available for clearing. In a cleared derivatives transaction, a Fund's counterparty to the transaction is a central derivatives clearing organization, or clearing house, rather than a bank or broker. Because the Funds are not members of a clearing house, and only members of a clearing house can participate directly in the clearing house, the Funds hold cleared derivatives through accounts at clearing members. In cleared derivatives transactions, a Fund will make payments (including margin payments) to and receive payments from a clearing house through its accounts at clearing members. Clearing members guarantee performance of their clients' obligations to the clearing house. Centrally cleared derivative arrangements may be less favorable to a Fund than bilateral (non-cleared) arrangements. For example, a Fund may be required to provide greater amounts of margin for cleared derivatives transactions than for bilateral derivatives transactions. Also, in contrast to bilateral derivatives transactions, in some cases following a period of notice to a Fund, a clearing member generally can require termination of existing cleared derivatives transactions at any time or an increase in margin requirements above the margin that the clearing member required at the beginning of a transaction. Clearing houses also have broad rights to increase margin requirements for existing transactions or to terminate transactions at any time. A Fund is subject to risk if it enters into a derivatives transaction that is required to be cleared (or which the Adviser expects to be cleared), and no clearing member is willing or able to clear the transaction on a Fund's behalf. In that case, the transaction might have to be terminated, and a Fund could lose some or all of the benefit of the transaction, including loss of an increase in the value of the transaction and loss of hedging protection. In addition, the documentation governing the relationship between a Fund and clearing members is drafted by the clearing members and generally is less favorable to a Fund than typical bilateral derivatives documentation. For example, documentation relating to cleared derivatives generally includes a one-way indemnity by the Fund in favor of the clearing member for losses the clearing member incurs as the Fund's clearing member. Also, such documentation typically does not provide the Fund any remedies if the clearing member defaults or becomes insolvent.

Counterparty risk with respect to derivatives has been and will continue to be affected by rules and regulations relating to the derivatives market. With respect to a centrally cleared transaction, a party is subject to the credit risk of the clearing house and the clearing member through which it holds its cleared position. Credit risk of market participants with respect to centrally cleared derivatives is concentrated in a few clearing houses, and it is not clear how an insolvency proceeding of a clearing house would be conducted and what impact an insolvency of a clearing house would have on the financial system. A clearing member is obligated by contract and regulation to segregate all funds received from customers with respect to cleared derivatives positions from the clearing member's proprietary assets. However, all funds and other property received by a clearing member from its customers with respect to cleared derivatives are generally held by the clearing member on a commingled basis in an omnibus account (which can be invested in instruments permitted under the regulations). Therefore, a Fund might not be fully protected in the event of the bankruptcy of the Fund's clearing member because the Fund would be limited to recovering only a pro rata share of the funds held by the clearing member on behalf of customers, with a claim against the clearing member for any deficiency. Also, the clearing member is required to transfer to the clearing house the amount of margin required by the clearing house for cleared derivatives, which amount is generally held in an omnibus account at the clearing house for all customers of the clearing member. Regulations promulgated by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (the “CFTC”) require that the clearing member notify the clearing house of the initial margin provided by the clearing member to the clearing house that is attributable to each customer. However, if the clearing member does not accurately report the Fund's initial margin, the Fund is subject to

the risk that a clearing house will use the assets attributable to it in the clearing house's omnibus account to satisfy payment obligations a defaulting customer of the clearing member has to the clearing house. In addition, clearing members generally provide the clearing house the net amount of variation margin required for cleared swaps for all of its customers, rather than individually for each customer. A Fund is therefore subject to the risk that a clearing house will not make variation margin payments owed to the Fund if another customer of the clearing member has suffered a loss and is in default, and the risk that the Fund will be required to provide additional variation margin to the clearing house before the clearing house will move the Fund's cleared derivatives positions to another clearing member. In addition, if a clearing member does not comply with the applicable regulations or its agreement with the Fund, or in the event of fraud or misappropriation of customer assets by a clearing member, the Fund could have only an unsecured creditor claim in an insolvency of the clearing member with respect to the margin held by the clearing member.

Swap Execution Facilities

Certain derivatives contracts are required to be executed through swap execution facilities (“SEFs”). A SEF is a trading platform where multiple market participants can execute derivatives by accepting bids and offers made by multiple other participants in the platform. Such requirements may make it more difficult and costly for investment funds, such as a Fund, to enter into highly tailored or customized transactions. Trading swaps on a SEF may offer certain advantages over traditional bilateral over-the-counter trading, such as ease of execution, price transparency, increased liquidity and/or favorable pricing. Execution through a SEF is not, however, without additional costs and risks, as parties are required to comply with SEF and CFTC rules and regulations, including disclosure and recordkeeping obligations, and SEF rights of inspection, among others. SEFs typically charge fees, and if a Fund executes derivatives on a SEF through a broker intermediary, the intermediary may impose fees as well. A Fund also may be required to indemnify a SEF, or a broker intermediary who executes swaps on a SEF on the Fund's behalf, against any losses or costs that may be incurred as a result of the Fund's transactions on the SEF. In addition, a Fund may be subject to execution risk if it enters into a derivatives transaction that is required to be cleared, and no clearing member is willing to clear the transaction on the Fund's behalf. In that case, the transaction might have to be terminated, and the Fund could lose some or all of the benefit of any increase in the value of the transaction after the time of the trade.

Risks Associated with Derivatives Regulation

The U.S. government has enacted and is continuing to implement legislation that provides for regulation of the derivatives market, including clearing, margin, reporting, and registration requirements. The European Union (the “EU”), the United Kingdom (the “U.K.”) and some other countries have also adopted and are continuing to implement similar requirements, which will affect a Fund when it enters into a derivatives transaction with a counterparty organized in that country or otherwise subject to that country's derivatives regulations. Such rules and other new rules and regulations could, among other things, restrict a Fund's ability to engage in, or increase the cost to the Fund of, derivatives transactions, for example, by making some types of derivatives no longer available to the Fund, increasing margin or capital requirements, or otherwise limiting liquidity or increasing transaction costs. While the rules and regulations and central clearing of some derivatives transactions are designed to reduce systemic risk (i.e., the risk that the interdependence of large derivatives dealers could cause them to suffer liquidity, solvency or other challenges simultaneously), there is no assurance that they will achieve that result, and in the meantime, as noted above, central clearing and related requirements expose the Funds to new kinds of costs and risks.

For example, in the event of a counterparty's (or its affiliate's) insolvency, a Fund's ability to exercise remedies, such as the termination of transactions, netting of obligations and realization on collateral, could be stayed or eliminated under special resolution regimes adopted in the United States, the EU, the U.K. and various other jurisdictions. Such regimes provide government authorities with broad authority to intervene when a financial institution is experiencing financial difficulty. In particular, with respect to counterparties who are subject to such proceedings in the EU and the U.K., the liabilities of such counterparties to the Funds could be reduced, eliminated, or converted to equity in such counterparties (sometimes referred to as a “bail in”).

The SEC adopted Rule 18f-4 under the 1940 Act providing for the regulation of registered investment companies' use of derivatives and certain related instruments. The rule, among other things, limits derivatives exposure through one of two value-at-risk tests and eliminates the asset segregation framework for covering derivatives and certain financial instruments arising from the SEC's Release 10666 and ensuing staff guidance. The rule also requires funds to adopt and implement a derivatives risk management program (including the appointment of a derivatives risk manager and the implementation of certain testing requirements) and subjects funds to certain reporting requirements in respect of derivatives. Limited derivatives users (as determined by Rule 18f-4) are not, however, subject to the full requirements under the rule.

Additionally, U.S. regulators, the EU, the U.K. and certain other jurisdictions have adopted minimum margin and capital requirements for uncleared derivatives transactions. These rules impose minimum margin requirements on derivatives transactions between a Fund and its counterparties and may increase the amount of margin a Fund is required to provide. They impose regulatory requirements on the timing of transferring margin and the types of collateral that parties are permitted to exchange.

Since 2021, the SEC has proposed and, in some cases, finalized several new rules regarding a wide range of topics related to the Fund. For example, the SEC has proposed new rules requiring the reporting and public disclosure of a manager's positions in security-based swaps, including CDS, equity total return swaps and related positions. The SEC has also finalized new rules restricting activities that could be considered to be manipulative in connection with security-based swaps, new rules requiring managers to file monthly confidential reports with the SEC regarding equity short sales and related activity, new rules regarding regulatory and public reporting of certain securities lending transactions, and new rules requiring the central clearing of certain cash and repurchase transactions involving U.S. Treasuries. These and other proposed new rules, whether assessed on an individual or collective basis, could fundamentally change the current regulatory framework for relevant markets and market participants, including having a material impact on activities of investment managers and their funds. While it is currently difficult to predict the full impact of these new rules, these rules could make it more difficult for the Fund to execute certain investment strategies and may have an adverse effect on the Fund's ability to generate returns.

These and other regulations are relatively new and evolving, so their full impact on the Funds and the financial system are not yet known.

Collateralized Bond Obligations (“CBOs”), Collateralized Loan Obligations (“CLOs”) and Other Collateralized Debt Obligations (“CDOs”)

Certain Funds may invest in CBOs, CLOs and other CDOs, which are debt instruments backed solely by a pool of other debt securities. The risks of an investment in a CBO, CLO or other CDO depend largely on the type of the collateral securities (which would have the risks described elsewhere in this document for that type of security) and the class of the CBO, CLO or other CDO in which a Fund invests. Some CBOs, CLOs and other CDOs have credit ratings, but are typically issued in various classes with various priorities. Normally, CBOs, CLOs and other CDOs are privately offered and sold (that is, not registered under the securities laws) and may be characterized by the Funds as illiquid securities, but an active dealer market may exist for CBOs, CLOs and other CDOs that qualify for Rule 144A transactions. In addition to the normal interest rate, default and other risks of fixed income securities discussed elsewhere in this document, CBOs, CLOs and other CDOs carry additional risks, including the possibility that distributions from collateral securities will not be adequate to make interest or other payments, the quality of the collateral may decline in value or default, the Funds may invest in CBOs, CLOs or other CDOs that are subordinate to other classes, volatility in values, and the complex structure of the security may not be fully understood at the time of investment and produce disputes with the issuer or unexpected investment results.

Commodities

General. Certain Funds may invest in commodities. There are several additional risks associated with transactions in commodity futures contracts, swaps on commodity futures contracts, commodity forward contracts and other commodities instruments. In the commodity instruments markets, producers of the underlying commodity may decide to hedge the price risk of selling the commodity by selling commodity instruments today to lock in the price of the commodity at delivery tomorrow. In order to induce speculators to purchase the other side of the same commodity instrument, the commodity producer generally must sell the commodity instrument at a lower price than the expected future spot price. Conversely, if most hedgers in the commodity instruments market are purchasing commodity instruments to hedge against a rise in prices, then speculators will only sell the other side of the commodity instrument at a higher future price than the expected future spot price of the commodity. The changing nature of the hedgers and speculators in the commodity markets will influence whether futures prices are above or below the expected future spot price, which can have significant implications for the Funds. If the nature of hedgers and speculators in commodity instruments markets has shifted when it is time for a Fund to reinvest the proceeds of a maturing contract in a new commodity instrument, the Fund might reinvest at a higher or lower future price, or choose to pursue other investments. The commodities which underlie commodity instruments may be subject to additional economic and non-economic variables, such as drought, floods, weather, livestock disease, embargoes, tariffs, and international economic, political and regulatory developments. These factors may have a larger impact on commodity prices and commodity-linked instruments than on traditional securities. Certain commodities are also subject to limited pricing flexibility because of supply and demand factors. Others are subject to broad price fluctuations as a result of the volatility of the prices for certain raw materials and the instability of supplies of other materials. These

additional variables may create additional investment risks which subject a Fund's investments to greater volatility than other investments. Also, unlike the financial instruments markets, in the commodity instruments markets there are costs of physical storage associated with purchasing the underlying commodity. The price of the commodity instruments contract will reflect the storage costs of purchasing the physical commodity, including the time value of money invested in the physical commodity. To the extent that the storage costs for an underlying commodity change while a Fund is invested in instruments on that commodity, the value of the commodity instrument may change proportionately.

A Fund's ability to invest in commodity-linked investments may be limited by the Fund's intention to qualify as a regulated investment company (“RIC”) under the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “Code”) and could bear on the ability of a Fund to so qualify. See “Taxation of the Funds” below.

Commodity-Linked Investments

Certain Funds may invest in commodity-linked investments. The Funds may seek to provide exposure to the investment returns of real assets that trade in the commodity markets through commodity-linked derivative securities, such as structured notes, discussed below, which are designed to provide this exposure without direct investment in physical commodities or commodities futures contracts. Real assets are assets such as oil, gas, industrial and precious metals, livestock, and agricultural or meat products, or other items that have tangible properties, as compared to stocks or bonds, which are financial instruments. In choosing investments, the Adviser seeks to provide exposure to various commodities and commodity sectors. The value of commodity-linked derivative securities held by a Fund may be affected by a variety of factors, including, but not limited to, overall market movements and other factors affecting the value of particular industries or commodities, such as weather, disease, embargoes, acts of war or terrorism, or political and regulatory developments.

The prices of commodity-linked derivative securities may move in different directions than investments in traditional equity and debt securities when the value of those traditional securities is declining due to adverse economic conditions. As an example, during periods of rising inflation, debt securities have historically tended to decline in value due to the general increase in prevailing interest rates. Conversely, during those same periods of rising inflation, the prices of certain commodities, such as oil and metals, have historically tended to increase. Of course, there cannot be any guarantee that these investments will perform in that manner in the future, and at certain times the price movements of commodity-linked instruments have been parallel to those of debt and equity securities. Commodities have historically tended to increase and decrease in value during different parts of the business cycle than financial assets. Nevertheless, at various times, commodities prices may move in tandem with the prices of financial assets and thus may not provide overall portfolio diversification benefits. Under favorable economic conditions, a Fund's investments may be expected to underperform an investment in traditional securities. Over the long term, the returns on the Fund's investments are expected to exhibit low or negative correlation with stocks and bonds.

Because commodity-linked investments are available from a relatively small number of issuers, a Fund's investments will be particularly subject to counterparty risk, which is the risk that the issuer of the commodity-linked derivative (which issuer may also serve as counterparty to a substantial number of the Fund's commodity-linked and other derivative investments) will not fulfill its contractual obligations.

A Fund's ability to invest in commodity-linked investments may be limited by the Fund's intention to qualify as a RIC and could bear on the ability of a Fund to so qualify. See “Taxation of the Funds” below.

Credit Default Swaps and Total Return Swaps

Certain Funds may enter into credit default swaps or total return swaps to gain market exposure, manage liquidity, increase total returns or for hedging purposes. Credit default swaps and total return swaps are typically governed by the standard terms and conditions of an ISDA Master Agreement.

A credit default swap involves a protection buyer and a protection seller. The Funds may be either a protection buyer or seller. The protection buyer in a credit default swap makes periodic premium payments to the protection seller during the swap term in exchange for the protection seller agreeing to make certain defined payments to the protection buyer in the event certain defined credit events occur with respect to a particular security, issuer or basket of securities. A total return swap involves a total return receiver and a total return payor. The Funds may either be a total return receiver or payor. Generally, the total return payor sells to the total return receiver an amount equal to all cash flows and price appreciation on a defined security or asset payable at periodic times during the swap term (i.e., credit risk) in return for a periodic payment from the total return receiver based on a designated interest rate (e.g., the Secured Overnight Financing Rate (“SOFR”)) and spread plus the amount of any price depreciation on the reference security or asset. The total return payor

does not need to own the underlying security or asset to enter into a total return swap. The final payment at the end of the swap term includes final settlement of the current market price of the underlying reference security or asset, and payment by the applicable party for any appreciation or depreciation in value. Usually, collateral must be posted by the total return receiver to secure the periodic interest-based and market price depreciation payments depending on the credit quality of the underlying reference security and creditworthiness of the total return receiver, and the collateral amount is marked-to-market daily equal to the market price of the underlying reference security or asset between periodic payment dates.

In both credit default swaps and total return swaps, the same general risks inherent to derivative transactions are present; however, the use of credit default swaps and total return swaps can involve greater risks than if the Funds had invested in the reference obligation directly since, in addition to general market risks, credit default swaps and total return swaps are subject to counterparty credit risk, leverage risk, hedging risk, correlation risk and liquidity risk. The Funds will enter into credit default swap or a total return swap only with counterparties that the Adviser determines to meet certain standards of creditworthiness. In a credit default swap, a buyer generally also will lose its premium and recover nothing should no credit event occur and the swap is held to its termination date. If a credit event were to occur, the value of any deliverable obligation received by the seller, coupled with the upfront or periodic payments previously received, may be less than the full notional value it pays to the buyer, resulting in a loss of value to the seller. A Fund's obligations under a credit default swap agreement will be accrued daily (offset against any amounts owing to the Fund).

Swaps are highly specialized instruments that require investment techniques, risk analyses, and tax planning different from those associated with the ownership of stocks, bonds, and other traditional investments. The use of a swap agreement requires an understanding not only of the referenced obligation, reference rate, or index, but also of the swap agreement itself. Because some swap agreements have a leverage component, adverse changes in the value or level of the underlying asset, reference rate, or index can result in a loss substantially greater than the amount invested in the swap itself. Certain swaps have the potential for unlimited loss, regardless of the size of the initial investment.

Custodial Risk

There are risks involved in dealing with the custodians or brokers who hold a Fund's investments or settle a Fund's trades. It is possible that, in the event of the insolvency or bankruptcy of a custodian or broker, a Fund would be delayed or prevented from recovering its assets from the custodian or broker, or its estate, and may have only a general unsecured claim against the custodian or broker for those assets. In recent insolvencies of brokers or other financial institutions, the ability of certain customers to recover their assets from the insolvent's estate has been delayed, limited, or prevented, often unpredictably, and there is no assurance that any assets held by a Fund with a custodian or broker will be readily recoverable by the Fund. In addition, there may be limited recourse against non-U.S. sub-custodians in those situations in which a Fund invests in markets where custodial and/or settlement systems and regulations are not fully developed, including emerging markets, and the assets of the Fund have been entrusted to such sub-custodians. SSGA FM or an affiliate may serve as the custodian of the Funds.

Eurodollar Certificates of Deposit (“ECDs”), Eurodollar Time Deposits (“ETDs”) and Yankee Certificates of Deposit (“YCDs”)

Certain Funds may invest in ECDs, ETDs and YCDs. ECDs and ETDs are U.S. dollar denominated certificates of deposit and time deposits, respectively, issued by non-U.S. branches of domestic banks and non-U.S. banks. YCDs are U.S. dollar denominated certificates of deposit issued by U.S. branches of non-U.S. banks.

Different risks than those associated with the obligations of domestic banks may exist for ECDs, ETDs and YCDs because the banks issuing these instruments, or their domestic or non-U.S. branches, are not necessarily subject to the same regulatory requirements that apply to domestic banks, such as loan limitations, examinations and reserve, accounting, auditing, recordkeeping and public reporting requirements. Obligations of non-U.S. issuers also involve risks such as future unfavorable political and economic developments, withholding or other taxes, seizures of non-U.S. deposits, currency controls, interest limitations, and other governmental restrictions that might affect repayment of principal or payment of interest, or the ability to honor a credit commitment.

Foreign Currency Transactions and Foreign Currency Derivatives

Certain Funds may enter into a variety of different foreign currency transactions, including, by way of example, currency forward transactions, spot transactions, futures and forward contracts, swaps, or options. Most of these transactions are entered into “over the counter,” and a Fund assumes the risk that the counterparty may be unable or unwilling to perform its obligations, in addition to the risk of unfavorable or unanticipated changes in the values of the currencies underlying the transactions. Certain types of over-the-counter currency transactions may be uncollateralized, and a Fund may not be

able to recover all or any of the assets owed to it under such transactions if its counterparty should default. In some markets or in respect of certain currencies, a Fund may be required, or agree, in SSGA FM's discretion, to enter into foreign currency transactions via the custodian's relevant sub-custodian. SSGA FM may be subject to a conflict of interest in agreeing to any such arrangements on behalf of a Fund. Such transactions executed directly with the sub-custodian are executed at a rate determined solely by such sub-custodian. Accordingly, a Fund may not receive the best pricing of such currency transactions. Regulatory changes in a number of jurisdictions may require that certain currency transactions be subject to central clearing, or be subject to new or increased collateral requirements. These changes could increase the costs of currency transactions to a Fund and may make certain transactions unavailable; they may also increase the credit risk of such transactions to a Fund.

Foreign Securities

Certain Funds are permitted to invest in foreign securities. Foreign securities include securities of foreign companies and foreign governments (or agencies or subdivisions thereof). If a Fund's securities are held abroad, the countries in which such securities may be held and the sub-custodian holding them must be approved by the Board or its delegate under applicable rules adopted by the SEC. In buying foreign securities, the Fund may convert U.S. dollars into foreign currency, but only to effect securities transactions on foreign securities exchanges and not to hold such currency as an investment.

The globalization and integration of the world economic system and related financial markets have made it increasingly difficult to define issuers geographically. Accordingly, each Fund intends to construe geographic terms such as “foreign,”“non-U.S.”“European,” “Latin American,” and “Asian,” in the manner that affords to the Fund the greatest flexibility in seeking to achieve its investment objective(s). Specifically, in circumstances where the investment objective and/or strategy is to invest at least some percentage of the Fund's assets in foreign securities, etc., the Funds will take the view that a security meets this description so long as the issuer of a security is tied economically to the particular country or geographic region indicated by words of the relevant investment objective and/or strategy (the “Relevant Language”). For these purposes the issuer of a security is deemed to have that tie if:

(i)

The issuer is organized under the laws of the country or a country within the geographic region suggested by the Relevant Language or maintains its principal place of business in that country or region; or

(ii)

The securities are traded principally in the country or region suggested by the Relevant Language; or

(iii)

The issuer, during its most recent fiscal year, derived at least 50% of its revenues or profits from goods produced or sold, investments made, or services performed in the country or region suggested by the Relevant Language or has at least 50% of its assets in that country or region.

Certain Funds may intend to treat derivative securities (e.g., call options) by reference to the underlying security. Conversely, if the investment objective and/or strategy of the Fund limits the percentage of assets that may be invested in “foreign securities,” etc. or prohibits such investments altogether, the Funds intend to categorize securities as “foreign,” etc. only if the security possesses all of the attributes described above in clauses (i), (ii) and (iii).

Investments in foreign securities involve special risks and considerations. Foreign companies are not generally subject to uniform accounting, auditing and financial reporting standards, practices and requirements comparable to those applicable to domestic companies, and such practices and standards may vary significantly from country to country. There may be less publicly available information about a foreign company than about a domestic company. The Public Company Accounting Oversight Board, which regulates auditors of U.S. public companies, is unable to inspect audit work papers in certain foreign countries. Investors in foreign countries often have limited rights and few practical remedies to pursue shareholder claims, including class actions or fraud claims, and the ability of the SEC, the U.S. Department of Justice and other authorities to bring and enforce actions against foreign issuers or foreign persons is limited. Foreign markets have different clearance and settlement procedures. Delays in settlement could result in temporary periods when assets of a Fund are uninvested. The inability of a Fund to make intended security purchases due to settlement problems could cause it to miss certain investment opportunities. They may also entail certain other risks, such as the possibility of one or more of the following: imposition of dividend or interest withholding or other taxes (in each case, which taxes could potentially be confiscatory), higher brokerage costs, thinner trading markets, currency blockages or transfer restrictions, expropriation, nationalization, military coups or other adverse political or economic developments; less government supervision and regulation of securities exchanges, brokers and listed companies; and the difficulty of enforcing obligations in other countries. Purchases of foreign securities are usually made in foreign currencies and, as a result, a Fund may incur currency conversion costs and may be affected favorably or unfavorably by changes in the value of foreign currencies against the U.S. dollar. Further, it may be more difficult for a Fund's agents to keep currently informed about corporate actions which may affect the prices of portfolio securities. Communications between the United States

and foreign countries may be less reliable than within the United States, thus increasing the risk of delayed settlements of portfolio transactions or loss of certificates for portfolio securities. Certain markets may require payment for securities before delivery. A Fund's ability and decisions to purchase and sell portfolio securities may be affected by laws or regulations relating to the convertibility of currencies and repatriation of assets.

A number of current significant political, demographic and economic developments may affect investments in foreign securities and in securities of companies with operations overseas. Such developments include dramatic political changes in government and economic policies in several Eastern European countries and the republics composing the former Soviet Union, as well as the unification of the European Economic Community. The course of any one or more of these events and the effect on trade barriers, competition and markets for consumer goods and services are uncertain. Similar considerations are of concern with respect to developing countries. For example, the possibility of revolution and the dependence on foreign economic assistance may be greater in these countries than in developed countries. Management seeks to mitigate the risks associated with these considerations through diversification and active professional management.

Forward Commitments

Certain Funds may invest in forward commitments. A Fund may contract to purchase securities for a fixed price at a future date beyond customary settlement time consistent with the Fund's ability to manage its investment portfolio and meet redemption requests. A Fund may dispose of a commitment prior to settlement if it is appropriate to do so and realize short-term profits or losses upon such sale. Forward commitments involve a risk of loss if the value of the security to be purchased declines prior to the settlement date, or if the other party fails to complete the transaction.

Futures Contracts and Options on Futures

Certain Funds may enter into futures contracts on securities in which it may invest or on indices comprised of such securities and may purchase and write call and put options on such contracts.

Futures Contracts. A financial futures contract is a contract to buy or sell a specified quantity of financial instruments such as U.S. Treasury bills, notes and bonds at a specified future date at a price agreed upon when the contract is made. An index futures contract is a contract to buy or sell specified units of an index at a specified future date at a price agreed upon when the contract is made. The value of a unit is based on the current value of the index. Under such contracts no delivery of the actual securities making up the index takes place. Rather, upon expiration of the contract, settlement is made by exchanging cash in an amount equal to the difference between the contract price and the closing price of the index at expiration, net of variation margin previously paid. Futures contracts are traded in the United States only on commodity exchanges or boards of trade — known as “contract markets” — approved for such trading by the CFTC, and must be executed through a futures commission merchant or brokerage firm which is a member of the relevant contract market.

Although many futures contracts by their terms call for actual delivery or acceptance of commodities or securities, in most cases the contracts are closed out before the settlement date without the making or taking of delivery, but rather by entering into an offsetting contract (a “closing transaction”). Upon entering into a futures contract, a Fund is required to deposit initial margin with the futures broker. The initial margin serves as a “good faith” deposit that a Fund will honor its potential future commitments. Subsequent payments (called “variation margin” or “maintenance margin”) to and from the broker are made on a daily basis as the price of the underlying security or commodity fluctuates, making the long and short positions in the futures contract more or less valuable, a process known as “marking to the market.” If a Fund is unable to enter into a closing transaction, the amount of the Fund's potential loss may be unlimited. Futures contracts also involve brokerage costs.

Registration under the Commodity Exchange Act. The Adviser has claimed an exclusion from the definition of the term “commodity pool operator” with respect to the Funds, under the Commodity Exchange Act (the “CEA”), and therefore, is not subject to registration or regulation as a commodity pool operator under the CEA. As a result, the Funds, are limited in their ability to trade instruments subject to the CFTC's jurisdiction, including commodity futures (which include futures on broad-based securities indexes, interest rate futures and currency futures), options on commodity futures, certain swaps or other investments (whether directly or indirectly through investments in other investment vehicles).

Under this exclusion, a Fund must satisfy one of the following two trading limitations whenever it enters into a new commodity trading position: (1) the aggregate initial margin and premiums required to establish the Fund's positions in CFTC-regulated instruments may not exceed 5% of the liquidation value of the Fund's portfolio (after accounting for unrealized profits and unrealized losses on any such investments); or (2) the aggregate net notional value of such

instruments, determined at the time the most recent position was established, may not exceed 100% of the liquidation value of the Fund's portfolio (after accounting for unrealized profits and unrealized losses on any such positions). A Fund would not be required to consider its exposure to such instruments if they were held for “bona fide hedging” purposes, as such term is defined in the rules of the CFTC. In addition to meeting one of the foregoing trading limitations, the Fund may not market itself as a commodity pool or otherwise as a vehicle for trading in the markets for CFTC-regulated instruments.

Options on futures contracts. In return for the premium paid, options on futures contracts give the purchaser the right to assume a position in a futures contract at the specified option exercise price at any time during the period of the option. Options on futures are similar to options on securities except that options on futures give the purchaser the right, in return for the premium paid, to assume a position in a futures contract (a long position if the option is a call and a short position if the option is a put) at a specified exercise price at any time during the period of the option. Upon exercise of the option, the delivery of the futures position by the writer of the option to the holder of the option will be accompanied by delivery of the accumulated balance in the writer's futures margin account which represents the amount by which the market price of the futures contract, at exercise, exceeds (in the case of a call) or is less than (in the case of a put) the exercise price of the option on the futures. If an option is exercised on the last trading day prior to its expiration date, the settlement will be made entirely in cash. Purchasers of options who fail to exercise their options prior to the exercise date suffer a loss of the premium paid.

As with options on securities, the holder or writer of an option may terminate his position by selling or purchasing an offsetting option. There is no guarantee that such closing transactions can be effected.

A Fund will be required to deposit initial margin and maintenance margin with respect to put and call options on futures contracts written by it pursuant to brokers' requirements similar to those described above in connection with the discussion of futures contracts.

Risks of transactions in futures contracts and related options. Successful use of futures contracts by a Fund is subject to the Adviser's ability to predict movements in various factors affecting financial markets. Compared to the purchase or sale of futures contracts, the purchase of call or put options on futures contracts involves less potential risk to a Fund because the maximum amount at risk is the premium paid for the options (plus transaction costs). However, there may be circumstances when the purchase of a call or put option on a futures contract would result in a loss to a Fund when the purchase or sale of a futures contract would not, such as when there is no movement in the prices of the hedged investments. The writing of an option on a futures contract involves risks similar to those risks relating to the sale of futures contracts.

The use of options and futures strategies involves the risk of imperfect correlation among movements in the prices of the securities underlying the futures and options purchased and sold by the Fund, of the options and futures contracts themselves, and, in the case of hedging transactions, of the securities which are the subject of a hedge. The successful use of these strategies further depends on the ability of the Adviser to forecast interest rates and market movements correctly.

There is no assurance that higher than anticipated trading activity or other unforeseen events might not, at times, render certain market clearing facilities inadequate, and thereby result in the institution by exchanges of special procedures which may interfere with the timely execution of customer orders.

To reduce or eliminate a position held by a Fund, the Fund may seek to close out such a position. The ability to establish and close out positions will be subject to the development and maintenance of a liquid secondary market. It is not certain that this market will develop or continue to exist for a particular futures contract or option. Reasons for the absence of a liquid secondary market on an exchange include the following: (i) there may be insufficient trading interest in certain contracts or options; (ii) restrictions may be imposed by an exchange on opening transactions or closing transactions or both; (iii) trading halts, suspensions or other restrictions may be imposed with respect to particular classes or series of contracts or options, or underlying securities; (iv) unusual or unforeseen circumstances may interrupt normal operations on an exchange; (v) the facilities of an exchange or a clearing corporation may not at all times be adequate to handle current trading volume; or (vi) one or more exchanges could, for economic or other reasons, decide or be compelled at some future date to discontinue the trading of contracts or options (or a particular class or series of contracts or options), in which event the secondary market on that exchange for such contracts or options (or in the class or series of contracts or options) would cease to exist, although outstanding contracts or options on the exchange that had been issued by a clearing corporation as a result of trades on that exchange would likely continue to be exercisable in accordance with their terms.

U.S. Treasury security futures contracts and options. Some U.S. Treasury security futures contracts require the seller to deliver, or the purchaser to take delivery of, the type of U.S. Treasury security called for in the contract at a specified date and price; others may be settled in cash. Options on U.S. Treasury security futures contracts give the purchaser the right in return for the premium paid to assume a position in a U.S. Treasury security futures contract at the specified option exercise price at any time during the period of the option.

Successful use of U.S. Treasury security futures contracts by a Fund is subject to the Adviser's ability to predict movements in the direction of interest rates and other factors affecting markets for debt securities. For example, if a Fund has sold U.S. Treasury security futures contracts in order to hedge against the possibility of an increase in interest rates which would adversely affect the values of securities held in its portfolio, and the prices of the Fund's securities increase instead as a result of a decline in interest rates, the Fund will lose part or all of the benefit of the increased value of its securities which it has hedged because it will have offsetting losses in its futures positions. In addition, in such situations, if the Fund has insufficient cash, it may have to sell securities to meet daily maintenance margin requirements at a time when it may be disadvantageous to do so.

There is also a risk that price movements in U.S. Treasury security futures contracts and related options will not correlate closely with price movements in markets for particular securities. For example, if a Fund has hedged against a decline in the values of tax-exempt securities held by it by selling Treasury security futures and the values of Treasury securities subsequently increase while the values of the Fund's tax-exempt securities decrease, the Fund would incur losses on both the Treasury security futures contracts written by it and the tax-exempt securities held in its portfolio.

Government Mortgage-Related Securities

The Government National Mortgage Association (“GNMA” or “Ginnie Mae”) is the principal federal government guarantor of mortgage-related securities. GNMA is a wholly owned U.S. Government corporation within the Department of Housing and Urban Development. It guarantees, with the full faith and credit of the United States, full and timely payment of all monthly principal and interest on its mortgage-related securities. GNMA pass-through securities are considered to have a relatively low risk of default in that (1) the underlying mortgage loan portfolio is comprised entirely of government-backed loans and (2) the timely payment of both principal and interest on the securities is guaranteed by the full faith and credit of the U.S. Government, regardless of whether they have been collected. GNMA pass-through securities are, however, subject to the same interest rate risk as comparable privately issued mortgage-related securities. Therefore, the effective maturity and market value of a Fund's GNMA securities can be expected to fluctuate in response to changes in interest rate levels.

Residential mortgage loans are also pooled by the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (“FHLMC” or “Freddie Mac”), a corporate instrumentality of the U.S. Government. The mortgage loans in FHLMC's portfolio are not government backed; FHLMC, not the U.S. Government, guarantees the timely payment of interest and ultimate collection of principal on FHLMC securities. FHLMC also issues guaranteed mortgage certificates, on which it guarantees semiannual interest payments and a specified minimum annual payment of principal.

The Federal National Mortgage Association (“FNMA” or “Fannie Mae”) is a government-sponsored corporation owned entirely by private stockholders. It is subject to general regulation by the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development. FNMA purchases residential mortgages from a list of approved seller/servicers, which include savings and loan associations, savings banks, commercial banks, credit unions and mortgage bankers. Pass-through securities issued by FNMA are guaranteed as to timely payment of principal and interest only by FNMA, not the U.S. Government.

High Yield Securities

Certain Funds may invest a portion of their assets in high yield debt securities (commonly known as “junk” bonds). Investment in high yield securities generally provides greater income and increased opportunity for capital appreciation than investments in higher quality securities, but they also typically entail greater price volatility and credit risk. These high yield securities are regarded as predominantly speculative with respect to the issuer's continuing ability to meet principal and interest payments. Analysis of the creditworthiness of issuers of debt securities that are high yield may be more complex than for issuers of higher quality debt securities. In addition, high yield securities are often issued by smaller, less creditworthy companies or by highly leveraged (indebted) firms, but can also be issued by governments. Such issuers are generally less able than more financially stable issuers to make scheduled payments of interest and principal. The risks posed by securities issued under such circumstances are substantial.

Investing in high yield debt securities involves risks that are greater than the risks of investing in higher quality debt securities. These risks include: (i) changes in credit status, including weaker overall credit conditions of issuers and risks of default; (ii) industry, market and economic risk; and (iii) greater price variability and credit risks of certain high yield securities such as zero coupon and payment-in-kind securities. While these risks provide the opportunity for maximizing return over time, they may result in greater volatility of the value of the Fund than a fund that invests in higher-rated securities.

Furthermore, the value of high yield securities may be more susceptible to real or perceived adverse economic, company or industry conditions than is the case for higher quality securities. The market values of certain of these lower-rated and unrated debt securities tend to reflect individual issuer developments to a greater extent than do higher-rated securities which react primarily to fluctuations in the general level of interest rates, and tend to be more sensitive to economic conditions than are higher-rated securities. Adverse market, credit or economic conditions could make it difficult at certain times to sell certain high yield securities held by a Fund.

The secondary market on which high yield securities are traded may be less liquid than the market for higher grade securities. Less liquidity in the secondary trading market could adversely affect the price at which a Fund could sell a high yield security, and could adversely affect the daily net asset value (“NAV”) per share of a Fund. When secondary markets for high yield securities are less liquid than the market for higher grade securities, it may be more difficult to value the securities because there is less reliable, objective data available. However, an Index seeks to include primarily high yield securities that the Index provider believes have greater liquidity than the broader high yield securities market as a whole.

The use of credit ratings as a principal method of selecting high yield securities can involve certain risks. For example, credit ratings evaluate the safety of principal and interest payments, not the market value risk of high yield securities. Also, credit rating agencies may fail to change credit ratings in a timely fashion to reflect events since the security was last rated.

Illiquid Securities

Certain Funds may invest in illiquid investments. Each Fund will invest no more than 15% of its net assets in illiquid investments, including repurchase agreements and time deposits of more than seven days' duration. The absence of a regular trading market for illiquid investments imposes additional risks on investments in these securities. Illiquid investments may be difficult to value and may often be disposed of only after considerable expense and delay.

The SEC has adopted a liquidity risk management rule (the “Liquidity Rule”) that requires the Funds to establish a liquidity risk management program (the “LRMP”). The Trustees, including a majority of the Independent Trustees (as defined below), have designated the Adviser to administer the Funds' LRMP. Under the LRMP, the Adviser assesses, manages, and periodically reviews the Funds' liquidity risk. The Liquidity Rule defines “liquidity risk” as the risk that the Funds could not meet requests to redeem shares issued by the Funds without significant dilution of remaining investors' interests in the Funds. The liquidity of the Funds' portfolio investments is determined based on relevant market, trading and investment-specific considerations under the LRMP. To the extent that an investment is deemed to be an illiquid investment or a less liquid investment, the Funds can expect to be exposed to greater liquidity risk. While the LRMP attempts to assess and manage liquidity risk, there is no guarantee it will be effective in its operations and may not reduce the liquidity risk inherent in a Fund's investments. The SEC has recently proposed amendments to Rule 22e-4 under the 1940 Act and Rule 22c-1 under the 1940 Act that, if adopted, would, among other things, cause more investments to be treated as illiquid, and could prevent a Fund from investing in securities that the Adviser believes are appropriate or desirable.

Infrastructure-Related Companies Risk

Infrastructure-related companies include companies that primarily own, manage, develop and/or operate infrastructure assets, including transportation, utility, energy and/or telecommunications assets. Infrastructure-related businesses are subject to a variety of factors that may adversely affect their business or operations, including high interest costs in connection with capital construction programs, insurance costs, costs associated with environmental and other regulations, the effects of an economic slowdown, surplus capacity or technological obsolescence, industry competition, labor relations, rate caps or rate changes, uncertainties concerning availability of fuel at reasonable prices, the effects of energy conservation policies, natural disasters, terrorist attacks and other factors. Certain infrastructure-related entities, particularly telecommunications and utilities companies, are subject to extensive regulation by various governmental authorities. The costs of complying with governmental regulations, delays or failures to receive required regulatory approvals or the enactment of new adverse regulatory requirements may adversely affect infrastructure-related companies. Infrastructure-related companies may also be affected by service interruption and/or legal challenges due to environmental, operational or other conditions or events, and the imposition of special tariffs and changes in tax laws,

regulatory policies and accounting standards. There is also the risk that corruption may negatively affect publicly-funded infrastructure projects, especially in non-U.S. markets, resulting in work stoppage, delays and cost overruns. Other risks associated with infrastructure-related companies include uncertainties resulting from such companies' diversification into new domestic and international businesses, as well as agreements by any such companies linking future rate increases to inflation or other factors not directly related to the actual operating profits of the enterprise.

Investment Grade Bonds

Each Fund may invest in corporate notes and bonds that are rated investment-grade by a nationally recognized statistical rating organization (“NRSRO”) or, if unrated, are of comparable quality to the rated securities described above, as determined by the Adviser, in accordance with procedures established by the Board. Investment-grade securities include securities rated Baa or higher by Moody's or BBB- or higher by S&P (and securities of comparable quality); securities rated Baa by Moody's or BBB by S&P may have speculative characteristics.

Although obligations rated BBB by S&P or Baa by Moody's are considered investment grade, they may be viewed as being subject to greater risks than other investment grade obligations. Obligations rated BBB by S&P are regarded as having only an adequate capacity to pay principal and interest and those rated Baa by Moody's are considered medium-grade obligations that lack outstanding investment characteristics and have speculative characteristics as well.

Ratings as Investment Criteria

The ratings of NSROs, such as S&P or Moody's, represent the opinions of those organizations as to the quality of securities that they rate. Although these ratings, which are relative and subjective and are not absolute standards of quality, are used by the portfolio managers as initial criteria for the selection of portfolio securities on behalf of the Funds, the portfolio managers also rely upon their own analysis to evaluate potential investments.

Subsequent to its purchase by a Fund, an issue of securities may cease to be rated or its rating may be reduced below the minimum required for purchase by the Fund. Although neither event will require the sale of the securities by a Fund, the portfolio managers will consider the event in their determination of whether the Fund should continue to hold the securities. To the extent that an NRSRO's ratings change as a result of a change in the NRSRO or its rating system, the Funds will attempt to use comparable ratings as standards for their investments in accordance with their investment objectives and policies.

Lending of Fund Securities

Each Fund may lend portfolio securities to certain creditworthy borrowers in U.S. and non-U.S. markets in an amount not to exceed 40% of the value of its net assets. The borrowers provide collateral that is marked to market daily in an amount at least equal to the current market value of the securities loaned. A Fund may terminate a loan at any time and obtain the securities loaned. A Fund receives the value of any interest or cash or non-cash distributions paid on the loaned securities. A Fund cannot vote proxies for securities on loan, but may recall loans to vote proxies if a material issue affecting the Fund's economic interest in the investment is to be voted upon. Efforts to recall such securities promptly may be unsuccessful, especially for foreign securities or thinly traded securities. Distributions received on loaned securities in lieu of dividend payments (i.e., substitute payments) would not be considered qualified dividend income.

With respect to loans that are collateralized by cash, the borrower typically will be entitled to receive a fee based on the amount of cash collateral. A Fund is compensated by the difference between the amount earned on the reinvestment of cash collateral and the fee paid to the borrower. In the case of collateral other than cash, a Fund is compensated by a fee paid by the borrower equal to a percentage of the market value of the loaned securities. Any cash collateral may be reinvested in certain high quality short-term instruments either directly on behalf of the lending Fund or through one or more joint accounts or funds, which may include those managed by the Adviser. A Fund could lose money due to a decline in the value of collateral provided for loaned securities or any investments made with cash collateral. Certain non-cash collateral or investments made with cash collateral may have a greater risk of loss than other non-cash collateral or investments.

A Fund may pay a portion of the interest or fees earned from securities lending to a borrower as described above, and to one or more securities lending agents to be approved by the Board who would administer the lending program for the Funds in accordance with guidelines to be approved by the Board. In such capacity, the lending agent would provide the following services to the Funds in connection with the Funds' securities lending activities: (i) locating borrowers among an approved list of prospective borrowers; (ii) causing the delivery of loaned securities from a Fund to borrowers; (iii) monitoring the value of loaned securities, the value of collateral received, and other lending parameters; (iv) seeking additional collateral, as necessary, from borrowers; (v) receiving and holding collateral from borrowers, and facilitating the

investment and reinvestment of all or substantially all cash collateral in an investment vehicle designated by the Funds; (vi) returning collateral to borrowers; (vii) facilitating substitute dividend, interest, and other distribution payments to the Funds from borrowers; (viii) negotiating the terms of each loan of securities, including but not limited to the amount of any loan premium, and monitoring the terms of securities loan agreements with prospective borrowers for consistency with the requirements of a Securities Lending Authorization Agreement; (ix) selecting securities, including amounts (percentages), to be loaned; (x) recordkeeping and accounting servicing; and (xi) arranging for return of loaned securities to the Fund in accordance with the terms of the Securities Lending Authorization Agreement.

Securities lending involves exposure to certain risks, including operational risk (i.e., the risk of losses resulting from problems in the settlement and accounting process especially so in certain international markets such as Taiwan), “gap” risk (i.e., the risk of a mismatch between the return on cash collateral reinvestments and the fees a Fund has agreed to pay a borrower), risk of loss of collateral, credit, legal, counterparty and market risk. If a securities lending counterparty were to default, a Fund would be subject to the risk of a possible delay in receiving collateral (or the proceeds of its liquidation) or in recovering the loaned securities. In the event a borrower does not return a Fund's securities as agreed, the Fund may experience losses if the proceeds received from liquidating the collateral do not at least equal the value of the loaned security at the time the collateral is liquidated, plus the transaction costs incurred in purchasing replacement securities. Although a securities lending agent may agree to provide a Fund with indemnification in the event of a borrower default, a Fund is still exposed to the risk of losses in the event a borrower does not return a Fund's securities as agreed. For example, delays in recovery of lent securities may cause a Fund to lose the opportunity to sell the securities at a desirable price with guaranteed delivery provisions.

In response to market events, the SEC has adopted new reporting requirements for securities loans which include the public dissemination of certain information about such loans. These new reporting requirements may negatively impact a Fund's ability to execute certain of its investment strategies.

The Funds do not currently lend their portfolio securities.

Market Disruption and Geopolitical Risk

The Funds are subject to the risk that geopolitical events will disrupt securities markets and adversely affect global economies and markets. War, terrorism, and related geopolitical events have led, and in the future may lead, to increased short-term market volatility and may have adverse long-term effects on U.S. and world economies and markets generally. Likewise, natural and environmental disasters, epidemics or pandemics, such as that caused by COVID-19, and systemic market dislocations may be highly disruptive to economies and markets. Those events as well as other changes in non-U.S. and domestic economic and political conditions also could adversely affect individual issuers or related groups of issuers, securities markets, interest rates, credit ratings, inflation, investor sentiment, and other factors affecting the value of a Fund's investments. Given the increasing interdependence between global economies and markets, conditions in one country, market, or region might adversely impact markets, issuers and/or foreign exchange rates in other countries, including the U.S. Continuing uncertainty as to the status of the euro and the Economic and Monetary Union of the EU (the “EMU”) has created significant volatility in currency and financial markets generally. Any partial or complete dissolution of the EMU, or any continued uncertainty as to its status, could have significant adverse effects on currency and financial markets, and on the values of a Fund's investments. The EU faces challenges related to member states seeking to change their relationship with the European Union, exemplified by the United Kingdom's (“UK”) withdrawal from the EU in 2020 (an event commonly known as “Brexit”). Brexit has resulted in volatility in European and global markets and could have negative long-term impacts on financial markets in the UK and throughout Europe. There is still considerable uncertainty relating to the potential consequences associated with the exit, including how negotiations for new trade agreements will be conducted and whether the U.K.'s exit will increase the likelihood of other countries also departing the EU.

Securities markets may be susceptible to market manipulation or other fraudulent trade practices, which could disrupt the orderly functioning of these markets or adversely affect the value of investments traded in these markets, including investments of a Fund.

For example, London Interbank Offered Rate (“LIBOR”) was the offered rate at which major international banks could obtain wholesale, unsecured funding. Certain of the Funds' investments, payment obligations, financing terms and other transactions (including certain derivatives transactions) have historically been tied to LIBOR. In connection with the global transition away from LIBOR led by regulators and market participants, LIBOR was last published on a representative basis at the end of June 2023. Alternative reference rates to LIBOR have been established in most major currencies (e.g., the Secured Overnight Financing Rate for U.S. dollar LIBOR and the Sterling Overnight Index Average for GBP LIBOR) and

the transition to new reference rates continues. The transition away from LIBOR to the use of replacement rates has gone relatively smoothly but the full impact of the transition on the Funds or the financial instruments in which the Funds invest cannot yet be fully determined. In addition, the Funds' investments, payment obligations, financing terms and other transactions (including certain derivatives transactions) may be tied to other floating rates such as Euro Interbank Offered Rate (“EURIBOR”) and other similar types of reference rates including as a result of the transition away from LIBOR to new alternative reference rates (each, a “Reference Rate”). Such Reference Rates as well as other types of rates and indices are classed as “benchmarks” and have been the subject of ongoing national and international regulatory reform, including under the European Union regulation on indices used as benchmarks in financial instruments and financial contracts (known as the “Benchmarks Regulation”). The Benchmarks Regulation has been enacted into United Kingdom law by virtue of the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 (as amended), subject to amendments made by the Benchmarks (Amendment and Transitional Provision) (EU Exit) Regulations 2019 (SI 2019/657) and other statutory instruments. Following the implementation of these reforms, the manner of administration of benchmarks has changed and may further change in the future, with the result that relevant benchmarks may perform differently than in the past, the use of benchmarks that are not compliant with the new standards by certain supervised entities may be restricted, and certain benchmarks may be eliminated entirely. Such changes could cause increased market volatility and disruptions in liquidity for instruments that rely on or are impacted by such benchmarks. Additionally, there could be other consequences which cannot be predicted.

Recent political activity in the U.S. has increased the risk that the U.S. could default on some or any of its obligations. While it is impossible to predict the consequences of such an unprecedented event, it is likely that a default by the U.S. would be highly disruptive to the U.S. and global securities markets and could significantly impair the value of the Funds' investments. Similarly, political events within the U.S. at times have resulted, and may in the future result, in a shutdown of government services, which could negatively affect the U.S. economy, decrease the value of many Fund investments, and increase uncertainty in or impair the operation of the U.S. or other securities markets. To the extent a Fund has focused its investments in the stock market index of a particular region, adverse geopolitical and other events could have a disproportionate impact on the Fund.

Market Turbulence Resulting from Infectious Illness

A widespread outbreak of an infectious illness, such as COVID-19, may lead to governments and businesses world-wide taking aggressive measures, including closing borders, restricting international and domestic travel, and the imposition of prolonged quarantines of large populations. As occurred in the wake of COVID-19, the spread of such an illness may result in the disruption of and delays in the delivery of healthcare services and processes, the cancellation of organized events and educational institutions, the disruption of production and supply chains, a decline in consumer demand for certain goods and services, and general concern and uncertainty, all of which may contribute to increased volatility in global markets. COVID-19, and other epidemics and pandemics that may arise in the future, could adversely affect the economies of many nations, the global economy, individual companies, economic sectors and industries, and capital markets in ways that cannot be foreseen at the present time. In addition, the impact of infectious diseases in developing or emerging market countries may be greater due to limited health care resources. Political, economic and social stresses caused by an infectious illness also may exacerbate other pre-existing political, social and economic risks in certain countries. The duration of such an illness and its effects cannot be determined at this time, but the effects could be present for an extended period of time.

Mortgage-Backed Security Rolls

Certain Funds may enter into “forward roll” transactions with respect to mortgage-related securities issued by GNMA, FNMA or FHLMC. In a forward roll transaction, a Fund will sell a mortgage-related security to a bank or other permitted entity and simultaneously agree to repurchase a similar security from the institution at a later date at an agreed upon price. The mortgage securities that are repurchased will typically bear the same interest rate as those sold, but generally will be collateralized by different pools of mortgages with different prepayment histories than those sold. A Fund that engages in a forward roll transaction forgoes principal and interest paid on the securities sold during the roll period, but is compensated by the difference between the current sales price and the lower forward price for the future purchase. In addition, a Fund earns interest by investing the transaction proceeds during the roll period. A forward roll transaction may create investment leverage. A Fund is subject to the risk that the value of securities to be purchased pursuant to a forward roll transaction will decline over the roll period, and that the Fund's counterparty may be unwilling or unable to perform its obligations to the Fund.

Mortgage-Related Securities

Certain Funds may invest in mortgage-related securities. Mortgage-related securities represent an interest in a pool of, or are secured by, mortgage loans. Mortgage-related securities may be issued or guaranteed by (i) U.S. Government agencies or instrumentalities such as GNMA, FNMA and FHLMC or (ii) other issuers, including private companies.

Many mortgage-related securities provide regular payments which consist of interest and, in most cases, principal. In contrast, other forms of debt securities normally provide for periodic payment of interest in fixed amounts with principal payments at maturity or specified call dates. In effect, payments on many mortgage-related securities are a “pass-through” of the payments made by the individual borrowers on their mortgage loans, net of any fees paid to the issuer or guarantor of such securities.

Besides the scheduled repayment of principal, repayments of principal may result from the voluntary prepayment, refinancing or foreclosure of the underlying mortgage loans. If property owners make unscheduled prepayments of their mortgage loans, these prepayments will typically result in early payment of the applicable mortgage-related securities. The occurrence of mortgage prepayments is affected by a variety of factors including the level of interest rates, general economic conditions, the location and age of the mortgage, and other social and demographic conditions. During periods of falling interest rates, the rate of mortgage prepayments tends to increase, thereby tending to decrease the life of mortgage-related securities. During periods of rising interest rates, the rate of mortgage prepayments usually decreases, thereby tending to increase the life of mortgage-related securities.

Because of the possibility of prepayments (and due to scheduled repayments of principal), mortgage-related securities are less effective than other types of securities as a means of “locking in” attractive long-term interest rates. Prepayments would have to be reinvested at lower rates. As a result, these securities may have less potential for capital appreciation during periods of declining interest rates than other securities of comparable maturities, although they may have a similar risk of decline in market value during periods of rising interest rates. Prepayments may also significantly shorten the effective maturities of these securities, especially during periods of declining interest rates. Conversely, during periods of rising interest rates, a reduction in prepayments may increase the effective maturities of these securities, subjecting them to a greater risk of decline in market value in response to rising interest rates than traditional debt securities, and, therefore, potentially increasing the volatility of the Funds.

CMOs may be issued by a U.S. Government agency or instrumentality or by a private issuer. CMOs are typically structured with classes or series that have different maturities and are generally retired in sequence. Each class of obligations receives periodic interest payments according to its terms. However, monthly principal payments and any prepayments from the collateral pool are generally paid first to the holders of the most senior class. Thereafter, payments of principal are generally allocated to the next most senior class of obligations until that class of obligations has been fully repaid. Any or all classes of obligations of a CMO may be paid off sooner than expected because of an increase in the payoff speed of the pool. Changes in prepayment rates may have significant effects on the values and the volatility of the various classes and series of a CMO. Payment of interest or principal on some classes or series of a CMO may be subject to contingencies or some classes or series may bear some or all of the risk of default on the underlying mortgages.

Stripped mortgage-related securities are usually structured with two classes that receive different portions of the interest and principal distributions on a pool of mortgage loans. The yield to maturity on an interest only or “IO” class of stripped mortgage-related securities is extremely sensitive not only to changes in prevailing interest rates but also to the rate of principal payments (including prepayments) on the underlying assets. A rapid rate of principal prepayments may have a measurable adverse effect on a Fund's yield to maturity to the extent it invests in IOs. If the assets underlying the IO experience greater than anticipated prepayments of principal, the Fund may fail to recoup fully, or at all, its initial investment in these securities. Conversely, principal only securities or “POs” tend to increase in value if prepayments are greater than anticipated and decline if prepayments are slower than anticipated. The secondary market for stripped mortgage-related securities may be more volatile and less liquid than that for other mortgage-related securities, potentially limiting a Fund's ability to buy or sell those securities at any particular time.

Municipal and Municipal-Related Securities

Municipal securities may bear fixed, floating or variable rates of interest or may be zero coupon securities. Municipal securities are generally of two types: general obligations and revenue obligations. General obligations are backed by the full faith and credit of the issuer. These securities include tax anticipation notes, bond anticipation notes, general obligation bonds and commercial paper. Revenue obligations are backed by the revenues generated from a specific project or facility

and include industrial development bonds and private activity bonds. Tax anticipation notes are issued to finance working capital needs of municipalities and are generally issued in anticipation of future tax revenues. Bond anticipation notes are issued in expectation of the issuer obtaining longer-term financing.

A Fund may be more adversely impacted by changes in tax rates and policies than other funds. Because interest income from municipal securities is normally not subject to regular federal income taxation, the attractiveness of municipal securities in relation to other investment alternatives is affected by changes in federal income tax rates applicable to, or the continuing federal income tax-exempt status of, such interest income. Any proposed or actual changes in such rates or exempt status, therefore, can significantly affect the demand for and supply, liquidity and marketability of municipal securities. This could in turn affect a Fund's ability to acquire and dispose of municipal securities at desirable yield and price levels.

Custodial Receipts. Certain Funds may acquire custodial receipts or certificates underwritten by securities dealers or banks that evidence ownership of future interest payments, principal payments, or both, on certain Municipal Obligations. The underwriter of these certificates or receipts typically purchases Municipal Obligations and deposits the obligations in an irrevocable trust or custodial account with a custodian bank, which then issues receipts or certificates that evidence ownership of the periodic unmatured coupon payments and the final principal payment on the obligations. Custodial receipts evidencing specific coupon or principal payments have the same general attributes as zero coupon obligations described above. Although under the terms of a custodial receipt a Fund would be typically authorized to assert its rights directly against the issuer of the underlying obligation, the Fund could be required to assert through the custodian bank those rights as may exist against the underlying issuers. Thus, in the event the underlying issuer fails to pay principal and/or interest when due, a Fund may be subject to delays, expenses and risks that are greater than those that would have been involved if the Fund had purchased a direct obligation of the issuer. In addition, in the event that the trust or custodial account in which the underlying security has been deposited is determined to be an association taxable as a corporation, instead of a non-taxable entity, the yield on the underlying security would be reduced as a result of any additional taxes paid as a result of such treatment.

Participation Interests. Certain Funds may purchase from financial institutions participation interests in certain Municipal Obligations. A participation interest gives the Fund an undivided interest in the Municipal Obligation in the proportion that the Fund's participation interest bears to the total principal amount of the Municipal Obligation. These instruments may have fixed, floating or variable rates of interest. If the participation interest is unrated, or has been given a rating below one that is otherwise permissible for purchase by a Fund, the participation interest will be backed by an irrevocable letter of credit or guarantee of a bank that the Board has determined meets certain quality standards, or the payment obligation otherwise will be collateralized by U.S. Government securities. A Fund will have the right, with respect to certain participation interests, to demand payment, on a specified number of days' notice, for all or any part of the Fund's participation interest in the Municipal Obligation, plus accrued interest. The Trust intends that a Fund exercise its right to demand payment only upon a default under the terms of the Municipal Obligation, or to maintain or improve the quality of its investment portfolio.

Options

Certain Funds may purchase and sell put and call options to enhance investment performance and to protect against changes in market prices. There is no assurance that a Fund's use of put and call options will achieve its desired objective, and a Fund's use of options may result in losses to the Fund.

Covered call options. Certain Funds may write (i.e., sell) covered call options to realize a greater current return through the receipt of premiums than it would realize on its securities alone. Such option transactions may also be used as a limited form of hedging against a decline in the price of securities owned by a Fund.

A call option gives the holder the right to purchase, and obligates the writer to sell, a security at the exercise price at any time before the expiration date. A call option is “covered” if the writer, at all times while obligated as a writer, either owns the underlying securities (or comparable securities satisfying the cover requirements of the securities exchanges) or has the right to acquire such securities through immediate conversion of securities. A Fund may write covered call options or uncovered call options.

A Fund will receive a premium from writing a call option, which increases the Fund's return on the underlying security in the event the option expires unexercised or is closed out at a profit. The amount of the premium reflects, among other things, the relationship between the exercise price and the current market value of the underlying security, the volatility of the underlying security, the amount of time remaining until expiration, current interest rates, and the effect of supply and demand in the options market and in the market for the underlying security.

In return for the premium received when it writes a covered call option, a Fund gives up some or all of the opportunity to profit from an increase in the market price of the securities covering the call option during the life of the option. A Fund retains the risk of loss should the price of such securities decline. If the option expires unexercised, a Fund realizes a gain equal to the premium, which may be offset by a decline in price of the underlying security. If the option is exercised, a Fund realizes a gain or loss equal to the difference between the Fund's cost for the underlying security and the proceeds of sale (exercise price minus commissions) plus the amount of the premium.

A Fund may terminate a call option that it has written before it expires by entering into a closing purchase transaction. A Fund may enter into closing purchase transactions in order to free itself to sell the underlying security or to write another call on the security, realize a profit on a previously written call option, or protect a security from being called in an unexpected market rise. Any profits from a closing purchase transaction may be offset by a decline in the value of the underlying security. Conversely, because increases in the market price of a call option will generally reflect increases in the market price of the underlying security, any loss resulting from a closing purchase transaction is likely to be offset in whole or in part by unrealized appreciation of the underlying security owned by a Fund.

Uncovered call options. Writing uncovered call options may enable a Fund to realize income without committing capital to the ownership of the underlying securities or instruments, however writing uncovered calls are riskier than writing covered calls because there is no underlying security held by a Fund that can act as a partial hedge. When a Fund has written an uncovered call option, the Fund will not necessarily hold securities offsetting the risk to the Fund. As a result of writing a call option without holding the underlying the securities, if the call option were exercised, a Fund might be required to purchase the security that is the subject of the call at the market price at the time of exercise. The Fund's exposure on such an option is theoretically unlimited. There is also a risk, especially with less liquid preferred and debt securities, that the security may not be available for purchase. Uncovered calls have speculative characteristics.

Covered put options. A Fund may write covered put options in order to enhance its current return. Such options transactions may also be used as a limited form of hedging against an increase in the price of securities that the Fund plans to purchase. A put option gives the holder the right to sell, and obligates the writer to buy, a security at the exercise price at any time before the expiration date. A put option may be “covered” if the writer earmarks or otherwise segregates liquid assets equal to the price to be paid if the option is exercised minus margin on deposit.

By writing a put option, a Fund assumes the risk that it may be required to purchase the underlying security for an exercise price higher than its then current market value, resulting in a potential capital loss unless the security later appreciates in value.

A Fund may terminate a put option that it has written before it expires by entering into a closing purchase transaction. Any loss from this transaction may be partially or entirely offset by the premium received on the terminated option.

Purchasing put and call options. A Fund may also purchase put options to protect portfolio holdings against a decline in market value. This protection lasts for the life of the put option because a Fund, as a holder of the option, may sell the underlying security at the exercise price regardless of any decline in its market price. In order for a put option to be profitable, the market price of the underlying security must decline sufficiently below the exercise price to cover the premium and transaction costs that a Fund must pay. These costs will reduce any profit the Fund might have realized had it sold the underlying security instead of buying the put option.

A Fund may purchase call options to hedge against an increase in the price of securities that the Fund wants ultimately to buy. Such hedge protection is provided during the life of the call option since a Fund, as holder of the call option, is able to buy the underlying security at the exercise price regardless of any increase in the underlying security's market price. In order for a call option to be profitable, the market price of the underlying security must rise sufficiently above the exercise price to cover the premium and transaction costs. These costs will reduce any profit a Fund might have realized had it bought the underlying security at the time it purchased the call option.

A Fund may also purchase put and call options to attempt to enhance its current return.

Options on foreign securities. A Fund may purchase and sell options on foreign securities if the Adviser believes that the investment characteristics of such options, including the risks of investing in such options, are consistent with the Fund's investment objective. It is expected that risks related to such options will not differ materially from risks related to options on U.S. securities. However, position limits and other rules of foreign exchanges may differ from those in the United States. In addition, options markets in some countries, many of which are relatively new, may be less liquid than comparable markets in the United States.

Options on securities indices. A Fund may write or purchase options on securities indices. Index options are similar to options on individual securities in that the purchaser of an index option acquires the right to buy (in the case of a call) or sell (in the case of a put), and the writer undertakes the obligation to sell or buy (as the case may be), units of an index at a stated exercise price during the term of the option. Instead of the right to take or make actual delivery of securities, the holder of an index option has the right to receive a cash “exercise settlement amount.” This amount is equal to the amount by which the fixed exercise price of the option exceeds (in the case of a put) or is less than (in the case of a call) the closing value of the underlying index on the date of the exercise, multiplied by a fixed “index multiplier.”

Price movements in securities which a Fund owns or intends to purchase probably will not correlate perfectly with movements in the level of a securities index and, therefore, if the Fund uses an option for hedging purposes, it bears the risk of a loss on a securities index option which is not completely offset by movements in the price of such securities. Because securities index options are settled in cash, a call writer cannot determine the amount of its settlement obligations in advance and, unlike call writing on a specific security, cannot provide in advance for, or cover, its potential settlement obligations by acquiring and holding underlying securities. A Fund may, however, cover call options written on a securities index by holding a mix of securities which substantially replicate the movement of the index or by holding a call option on the securities index with an exercise price no higher than the call option sold.

Compared to the purchase or sale of futures contracts, the purchase of call or put options on an index involves less potential risk to a Fund because the maximum amount at risk is the premium paid for the options plus transactions costs. The writing of a put or call option on an index involves risks similar to those risks relating to the purchase or sale of index futures contracts.

Risks involved in the use of options. The successful use of a Fund's options strategies depends on the ability of the Adviser to forecast correctly interest rate and market movements. For example, if a Fund were to write a call option based on the Adviser's expectation that the price of the underlying security would fall, but the price was to rise instead, the Fund could be required to sell the security upon exercise at a price below the current market price. Similarly, if a Fund were to write a put option based on the Adviser's expectation that the price of the underlying security would rise, but the price was to fall instead, the Fund could be required to purchase the security upon exercise at a price higher than the current market price. When a Fund purchases an option, it runs the risk that it will lose its entire investment in the option in a relatively short period of time, unless the Fund exercises the option or enters into a closing sale transaction before the option's expiration. If the price of the underlying security does not rise (in the case of a call) or fall (in the case of a put) to an extent sufficient to cover the option premium and transaction costs, a Fund will lose part or all of its investment in the option. This contrasts with an investment by a Fund in the underlying security, since the Fund will not realize a loss if the security's price does not change.

The effective use of options also depends on a Fund's ability to terminate option positions at times when the Adviser deems it desirable to do so. There is no assurance that a Fund will be able to effect closing transactions at any particular time or at an acceptable price.

If a secondary market in options were to become unavailable, a Fund could no longer engage in closing transactions. Lack of investor interest might adversely affect the liquidity of the market for particular options or series of options. A market may discontinue trading of a particular option or options generally. In addition, a market could become temporarily unavailable if unusual events — such as volume in excess of trading or clearing capability — were to interrupt its normal operations.

A market may at times find it necessary to impose restrictions on particular types of options transactions, such as opening transactions. For example, if an underlying security ceases to meet qualifications imposed by the market or the Options Clearing Corporation, new series of options on that security will no longer be opened to replace expiring series, and opening transactions in existing series may be prohibited. If an options market were to become unavailable, a Fund as a holder of an option would be able to realize profits or limit losses only by exercising the option, and the Fund, as option writer, would remain obligated under the option until expiration or exercise.

Disruptions in the markets for the securities underlying options purchased or sold by a Fund could result in losses on the options. If trading is interrupted in an underlying security, the trading of options on that security is normally halted as well. As a result, a Fund as purchaser or writer of an option will be unable to close out its positions until options trading resumes, and it may be faced with considerable losses if trading in the security reopens at a substantially different price. In addition, the Options Clearing Corporation or options markets may impose exercise restrictions. If a prohibition on exercise is imposed at the time when trading in the option has also been halted, a Fund as purchaser or writer of an option will be locked into its position until one of the two restrictions has been lifted. If the Options Clearing Corporation

were to determine that the available supply of an underlying security appears insufficient to permit delivery by the writers of all outstanding calls in the event of exercise, it may prohibit indefinitely the exercise of put options. A Fund, as holder of such a put option, could lose its entire investment if the prohibition remained in effect until the put option's expiration.

Foreign-traded options are subject to many of the same risks presented by internationally-traded securities. In addition, because of time differences between the United States and various foreign countries, and because different holidays are observed in different countries, foreign options markets may be open for trading during hours or on days when U.S. markets are closed. As a result, option premiums may not reflect the current prices of the underlying interest in the United States.

Over-the-counter (“OTC”) options purchased by a Fund and assets held to cover OTC options written by the Fund may, under certain circumstances, be considered illiquid securities for purposes of any limitation on the Fund's ability to invest in illiquid securities.

Other Asset-Backed Securities

In addition to the mortgage related securities discussed above, certain Funds may invest in asset-backed securities that are not mortgage-related. Asset-backed securities other than mortgage-related securities represent undivided fractional interests in pools of instruments, such as consumer loans, and are typically similar in structure to mortgage-related pass-through securities. Payments of principal and interest are passed through to holders of the securities and are typically supported by some form of credit enhancement, such as a letter of credit, surety bond, limited guarantee by another entity, or by priority to certain of the borrower's other securities. The degree of credit-enhancement, if any, varies, applying only until exhausted and generally covering only a fraction of the security's par value.

The value of such asset-backed securities is affected by changes in the market's perception of the asset backing the security, changes in the creditworthiness of the servicing agent for the instrument pool, the originator of the instruments, or the financial institution providing any credit enhancement and the expenditure of any portion of any credit enhancement. The risks of investing in asset-backed securities are ultimately dependent upon payment of the underlying instruments by the obligors, and a Fund would generally have no recourse against the obligee of the instruments in the event of default by an obligor. The underlying instruments are subject to prepayments which shorten the duration of asset-backed securities and may lower their return, in generally the same manner as described above for prepayments of pools of mortgage loans underlying mortgage-related securities.

Private Placements and Restricted Securities

The Funds may invest in securities that are purchased in private placements and, accordingly, are subject to restrictions on resale as a matter of contract or under federal securities laws. While such private placements may offer attractive opportunities for investment not otherwise available on the open market, the securities so purchased are often “restricted securities,” i.e., securities which cannot be sold to the public without registration under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the “1933 Act”) or the availability of an exemption from registration (such as Rules 144 or 144A), or which are not readily marketable because they are subject to other legal or contractual delays in or restrictions on resale. Generally speaking, restricted securities may be sold only to qualified institutional buyers, or in a privately negotiated transaction to a limited number of purchasers, or in limited quantities after they have been held for a specified period of time and other conditions are met pursuant to an exemption from registration, or in a public offering for which a registration statement is in effect under the 1933 Act.

Because there may be relatively few potential purchasers for such investments, especially under adverse market or economic conditions or in the event of adverse changes in the financial condition of the issuer, the Fund could find it more difficult to sell such securities when the Adviser believes it advisable to do so or may be able to sell such securities only at prices lower than if such securities were more widely held. Market quotations for such securities are generally less readily available than for publicly traded securities. The absence of a trading market can make it difficult to ascertain a market value for such securities for purposes of computing the Fund's NAV, and the judgment of the Adviser may at times play a greater role in valuing these securities than in the case of publicly traded securities. Disposing of such securities, which may be illiquid investments, can involve time-consuming negotiation and legal expenses, and it may be difficult or impossible for the Fund to sell them promptly at an acceptable price. The Fund may have to bear the extra expense of registering such securities for resale and the risk of substantial delay in effecting such registration.

A Fund may be deemed to be an “underwriter” for purposes of the 1933 Act when selling restricted securities to the public, and in such event the Fund may be liable to purchasers of such securities if the registration statement prepared by the issuer, or the prospectus forming a part of it, is materially inaccurate or misleading.

Pre-Refunded Municipal Securities

The interest and principal payments on pre-refunded municipal securities are typically paid from the cash flow generated from an escrow fund consisting of U.S. Government securities. These payments have been “pre-refunded” using the escrow fund.

Purchase of Other Investment Company Shares

Certain Funds may, to the extent permitted under the 1940 Act and the rules thereunder, invest in shares of other investment companies, which include funds managed by SSGA FM, which invest exclusively in money market instruments or in investment companies with investment policies and objectives which are substantially similar to those of the Funds. These investments may be made temporarily, for example, to invest uncommitted cash balances or, in limited circumstances, to assist in meeting shareholder redemptions, or as long-term investments.

Exchange Traded Funds and Other Index-Related Securities. Certain Funds may invest in exchange-traded funds (“ETFs”), which are generally baskets of securities generally designed to track an index or a foreign market, such as Standard & Poor's Depositary Receipts. These securities are generally considered to be investment companies for purposes of each Fund's investment limitations. Investments in an ETF are subject to, among other risks, the risk that the ETF's shares may trade at a discount or premium relative to the NAV of the shares, an active trading market may not develop for the ETF's shares and the listing exchange may halt trading of the ETF's shares. In addition, an ETF may not replicate exactly the performance of the index it seeks to track for a number of reasons, including transaction costs incurred by the ETF, the temporary unavailability of certain index securities in the secondary market or discrepancies between the ETF and the index with respect to the weighting of securities or the number of securities held. The Funds may invest in ETFs advised by SSGA FM, the investment adviser to the Funds.

Real Estate Investment Trusts (“REITs”)

Each Fund may invest in REITs. REITs pool investors' funds for investment primarily in income producing real estate or real estate loans or interests. A REIT is not taxed on income distributed to shareholders if it complies with several requirements relating to its organization, ownership, assets, and income and a requirement that it distribute to its shareholders at least 90% of its taxable income (other than net capital gains) for each taxable year. REITs can generally be classified as Equity REITs, Mortgage REITs and Hybrid REITs. Equity REITs, which invest the majority of their assets directly in real property, derive their income primarily from rents. Equity REITs can also realize capital gains by selling properties that have appreciated in value. Mortgage REITs, which invest the majority of their assets in real estate mortgages, derive their income primarily from interest payments. Hybrid REITs combine the characteristics of both Equity REITs and Mortgage REITs. A Fund will not invest in real estate directly, but only in securities issued by real estate companies. However, a Fund may be subject to risks similar to those associated with the direct ownership of real estate (in addition to securities markets risks) because of its policy of concentration in the securities of companies in the real estate industry. These include declines in the value of real estate, risks related to general and local economic conditions, dependency on management skill, heavy cash flow dependency, possible lack of availability of mortgage funds, overbuilding, extended vacancies of properties, increased competition, increases in property taxes and operating expenses, changes in zoning laws, losses due to costs resulting from the clean-up of environmental problems, liability to third parties for damages resulting from environmental problems, casualty or condemnation losses, limitations on rents, changes in neighborhood values, the appeal of properties to tenants and changes in interest rates. Investments in REITs may subject Fund shareholders to duplicate management and administrative fees.

In addition to these risks, Equity REITs may be affected by changes in the value of the underlying property owned by the trusts, while Mortgage REITs may be affected by the quality of any credit extended. Further, Equity and Mortgage REITs are dependent upon management skills and generally may not be diversified. Equity and Mortgage REITs are also subject to heavy cash flow dependency, defaults by borrowers and self-liquidation. In addition, if applicable, Equity and Mortgage REITs could possibly fail to qualify for the favorable tax treatment available to REITs under the Code, or to maintain their exemptions from registration under the 1940 Act. The above factors may also adversely affect a borrower's or a lessee's ability to meet its obligations to the REIT. In the event of a default by a borrower or lessee, the REIT may experience delays in enforcing its rights as a mortgagee or lessor and may incur substantial costs associated with protecting investments.

Repurchase Agreements

The Funds may enter into repurchase agreements with banks, other financial institutions, such as broker-dealers, and other institutional counterparties. Under a repurchase agreement, a Fund purchases securities from a financial institution that agrees to repurchase the securities at the Fund's original purchase price plus interest within a specified time. A Fund will limit repurchase transactions to those member banks of the Federal Reserve System, broker-dealers and other financial institutions whose creditworthiness the Adviser considers satisfactory. Should the counterparty to a transaction fail financially, the Fund may encounter delay and incur costs before being able to sell the securities, or may be prevented from realizing on the securities. Further, the amount realized upon the sale of the securities may be less than that necessary to fully compensate the Fund.

Reverse Repurchase Agreements

The Funds may enter into reverse repurchase agreements, which are a form of borrowing. Under reverse repurchase agreements, a Fund transfers possession of portfolio securities to financial institutions in return for cash in an amount equal to a percentage of the portfolio securities' market value and agrees to repurchase the securities at a future date by repaying the cash with interest. Each Fund retains the right to receive interest and principal payments from the securities. Reverse repurchase agreements involve the risk that the market value of securities sold by a Fund may decline below the price at which it is obligated to repurchase the securities. Reverse repurchase agreements involve the risk that the buyer of the securities sold might be unable to deliver them when a Fund seeks to repurchase the securities. If the buyer files for bankruptcy or becomes insolvent, a Fund may be delayed or prevented from recovering the security that it sold.

Russia Sanctions Risk

Following Russia's invasion of Ukraine in late February 2022, various countries, including the U.S. and the U.K., as well as the E.U., issued broad-ranging economic sanctions against Russia. The U.S. and other countries have also imposed economic sanctions on Belarus and may impose sanctions on other countries that support Russia's invasion. A large number of corporations and U.S. states have also announced plans to divest interests or otherwise curtail business dealings with certain Russian businesses. These sanctions and any additional sanctions or other intergovernmental actions that have been or may be undertaken in the future, against Russia, Russian entities or Russian individuals, or other countries that support Russia's military invasion, may result in the devaluation of Russian currency, a downgrade in the country's credit rating, an immediate freeze of Russian assets, a decline in the value and liquidity of Russian securities, property or interests, and/or other adverse consequences to the Russian economy or a Fund. The scope and scale of sanctions in place at a particular time may be expanded or otherwise modified in a way that have negative effects on a Fund. Sanctions, or the threat of new or modified sanctions, could impair the ability of a Fund to buy, sell, hold, receive, deliver or otherwise transact in certain affected securities or other investment instruments. Sanctions could also result in Russia taking counter measures or other actions in response (including cyberattacks and espionage), which may further impair the value and liquidity of Russian securities. These sanctions, and the resulting disruption of the Russian economy, may cause volatility in other regional and global markets and may negatively impact the performance of various sectors and industries, as well as companies in other countries, which could have a negative effect on the performance of a Fund, even if a Fund does not have direct exposure to securities of Russian issuers. As a collective result of the imposition of sanctions, Russian government countermeasures and the impact that they have had on the trading markets for Russian securities, certain Funds have used, and may in the future use, fair valuation procedures approved by the Fund's Board to value certain Russian securities, which could result in such securities being deemed to have a zero value.

Short Sales Against the Box

Each Fund may sell securities “short against the box.” Whereas a short sale is the sale of a security a Fund does not own, a short sale is “against the box” if at all times during which the short position is open, the Fund owns at least an equal amount of the securities or securities convertible into, or exchangeable without further consideration for, securities of the same issue as the securities sold short. Swap transactions, futures contracts and other derivative-type instruments that reflect the equivalent of a short sale or a short position are not considered to be a short sale or short position for this purpose or for purposes of determining whether a short sale or position is considered to be “against the box.”

Special Risk Considerations of Investing in China

Certain Funds may invest in securities of Chinese issuers. Investing in securities of Chinese issuers, including by investing in A Shares, involves certain risks and considerations not typically associated with investing in securities of U.S. issuers, including, among others, (i) more frequent (and potentially widespread) trading suspensions and U.S. or foreign government interventions or restrictions with respect to Chinese issuers, which could preclude the Fund from making

certain investments or result in the Fund selling investments at disadvantageous times and which may also cause reduced liquidity and increased price volatility in such investments, (ii) currency revaluations and other currency exchange rate fluctuations or blockage, (iii) the nature and extent of intervention by the Chinese government in the Chinese securities markets, whether such intervention will continue and the impact of such intervention or its discontinuation, (iv) the risk of nationalization or expropriation of assets, (v) the risk that the Chinese government may decide not to continue to support economic reform programs, (vi) limitations on the use of brokers, (vii) potentially higher rates of inflation, (viii) the unavailability of consistently-reliable economic data, (ix) the relatively small size and absence of operating history of many Chinese companies, (x) accounting, auditing and financial reporting standards in China are different from U.S. standards and, therefore, disclosure of certain material information may not be available, (xi) greater political, economic, social, legal and tax-related uncertainty, (xii) higher market volatility caused by any potential regional territorial conflicts or natural disasters, (xiii) higher dependence on exports and international trade, (xiv) the risk of increased trade tariffs, sanctions, embargoes and other trade limitations, (xv) restrictions on foreign ownership, (xvi) risks associated with variable interest entity (“VIE”) structures, and (xvii) custody risks associated with investing through programs to access Chinese securities. Significant portions of the Chinese securities markets may become rapidly illiquid, as Chinese issuers have the ability to suspend the trading of their equity securities, and have shown a willingness to exercise that option in response to market volatility and other events. The liquidity of Chinese securities may shrink or disappear suddenly and without warning as a result of adverse economic, market or political events, or adverse investor perceptions, whether or not accurate.

In addition, unexpected political, regulatory and diplomatic events, such as the U.S.-China “trade war” that intensified in 2018, may affect investor and consumer confidence and may adversely impact financial markets and the broader economy, perhaps suddenly and to a significant degree. The current political climate and the renewal or escalation of a trade war between China and the United States may have an adverse effect on both the U.S. and Chinese economies, including as the result of one country's imposition of tariffs on the other country's products. In addition, sanctions or other investment restrictions could preclude a Fund from investing in certain Chinese issuers or cause a Fund to sell investments at disadvantageous times. Events such as these and their impact on the Funds are difficult to predict and it is unclear whether further tariffs may be imposed or other escalating actions may be taken in the future.

Moreover, the Chinese government is involved in a longstanding dispute with Taiwan that has included threats of invasion. If the political climate between the U.S. and China does not improve or continues to deteriorate, if China were to attempt unification of Taiwan by force, or if other geopolitical conflicts develop or get worse, economies, markets, and individual securities may be severely affected both regionally and globally, and the value of the Fund's assets may go down.

Special Risk Considerations of Investing in Japan

The growth of Japan's economy has historically lagged that of its Asian neighbors and other major developed economies. The Japanese economy is heavily dependent on international trade and has been adversely affected by trade tariffs, other protectionist measures, competition from emerging economies and the economic conditions of its trading partners. Japan also remains heavily dependent on oil imports, and higher commodity prices could therefore have a negative impact on the economy. The Japanese economy faces several other concerns, including a financial system with large levels of nonperforming loans, over-leveraged corporate balance sheets, extensive cross-ownership by major corporations, a changing corporate governance structure, and large government deficits. These issues may cause a slowdown of the Japanese economy. The Japanese yen has fluctuated widely at times and any increase in its value may cause a decline in exports that could weaken the Japanese economy. Japan has, in the past, intervened in the currency markets to attempt to maintain or reduce the value of the yen. Japanese intervention in the currency markets could cause the value of the yen to fluctuate sharply and unpredictably and could cause losses to investors. Japan has an aging workforce and has experienced a significant population decline in recent years. Japan's labor market appears to be undergoing fundamental structural changes, as a labor market traditionally accustomed to lifetime employment adjusts to meet the need for increased labor mobility, which may adversely affect Japan's economic competitiveness. Natural disasters, such as earthquakes, volcanoes, typhoons or tsunamis, could occur in Japan or surrounding areas and could negatively affect the Japanese economy.

Supranational Agencies

Each Fund may invest in debt obligations of supranational agencies such as the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (commonly known as the World Bank), which was chartered to finance development projects in developing member countries; the EU, which is a twenty-eight-nation organization engaged in cooperative economic activities; and the

Asian Development Bank, which is an international development bank established to lend funds, promote investment and provide technical assistance to member nations in the Asian and Pacific regions. Debt obligations of supranational agencies are not supported, directly or indirectly, by the U.S. Government.

Total Return Swaps, Equity Swaps and Interest Rate Swaps

Certain Funds may contract with a counterparty to pay a stream of cash flows and receive the total return of an index or a security for purposes of attempting to obtain a particular desired return at a lower cost to a Fund than if the Fund had invested directly in an instrument that yielded that desired return. A Fund's return on a swap will depend on the ability of its counterparty to perform its obligations under the swap. The Adviser will cause a Fund to enter into swap agreements only with counterparties that would be eligible for consideration as repurchase agreement counterparties under the Fund's repurchase agreement guidelines.

The Funds may enter into interest rate swap transactions with respect to any security they are entitled to hold. Interest rate swaps involve the exchange by a Fund with another party of their respective rights to receive interest, e.g., an exchange of floating rate payments for fixed rate payments. The Funds expect to enter into these transactions primarily to preserve a return or spread on a particular investment or portion of its portfolio or to protect against any increase in the price of securities it anticipates purchasing at a later date. The Funds generally intend to use these transactions as a hedge and not as a speculative investment. For example, a Fund may enter into an interest rate swap in order to protect against declines in the value of fixed income securities held by the Funds. In such an instance, the Fund may agree with a counterparty to pay a fixed rate (multiplied by a notional amount) and the counterparty to pay a floating rate multiplied by the same notional amount. If interest rates rise, resulting in a diminution in the value of a Fund, the Fund would receive payments under the swap that would offset, in whole or in part, such diminution in value; if interest rates fall, the Fund would likely lose money on the swap transaction.

Treasury Inflation-Protected Securities

Certain Funds may invest in Treasury Inflation-Protection Securities (“TIPS”), a type of inflation-indexed Treasury security. TIPS typically provide for semiannual payments of interest and a payment of principal at maturity. In general, each payment will be adjusted to take into account any inflation or deflation that occurs between the issue date of the security and the payment date based on the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers (“CPI-U”).

Each semiannual payment of interest will be determined by multiplying a single fixed rate of interest by the inflation-adjusted principal amount of the security for the date of the interest payment. Thus, although the interest rate will be fixed, the amount of each interest payment will vary with changes in the principal of the security as adjusted for inflation and deflation.

TIPS also provide for an additional payment (a “minimum guarantee payment”) at maturity if the security's inflation-adjusted principal amount for the maturity date is less than the security's principal amount at issuance. The amount of the additional payment will equal the excess of the security's principal amount at issuance over the security's inflation-adjusted principal amount for the maturity date.

U.S. Government Securities

Certain Funds may purchase U.S. Government securities. The types of U.S. Government obligations in which the Funds may at times invest include: (1) U.S. Treasury obligations and (2) obligations issued or guaranteed by U.S. Government agencies and instrumentalities which are supported by any of the following: (a) the full faith and credit of the U.S. Treasury, (b) the right of the issuer to borrow an amount limited to a specific line of credit from the U.S. Treasury, (c) discretionary authority of the U.S. Government agency or instrumentality, or (d) the credit of the instrumentality (examples of agencies and instrumentalities are: Federal Land Banks, Federal Housing Administration, Federal Farm Credit Bank, Farmers Home Administration, Export-Import Bank of the United States, Central Bank for Cooperatives, Federal Intermediate Credit Banks, Federal Home Loan Banks, General Services Administration, Maritime Administration, Tennessee Development Bank, Asian-American Development Bank, International Bank for Reconstruction and Development and Federal National Mortgage Association). No assurance can be given that in the future the U.S. Government will provide financial support to U.S. Government securities it is not obligated to support.

U.S. Registered Securities of Non-U.S. Issuers

Certain Funds may purchase publicly traded common stocks of non-U.S. corporations.

Investing in U.S. registered, dollar-denominated, securities issued by non-U.S. issuers involves some risks and considerations not typically associated with investing in U.S. companies. These include differences in accounting, auditing and financial reporting standards, the possibility of expropriation or taxation (which could potentially be confiscatory), adverse changes in investment or exchange control regulations, political instability which could affect U.S. investments in non-U.S. countries, and potential restrictions of the flow of international capital. Non-U.S. companies may be subject to less governmental regulation than U.S. issuers. Moreover, individual non-U.S. economies may differ favorably or unfavorably from the U.S. economy in such respects as growth of gross domestic product, rate of inflation, capital reinvestment, resource self-sufficiency and balance of payment positions.

A Fund's investment in common stock of non-U.S. corporations may also be in the form of ADRs, Global Depositary Receipts (“GDRs”) and European Depositary Receipts (“EDRs”) (collectively “Depositary Receipts”). Depositary Receipts are receipts, typically issued by a bank or trust company, which evidence ownership of underlying securities issued by a non-U.S. corporation. For ADRs, the depository is typically a U.S. financial institution and the underlying securities are issued by a non-U.S. issuer. For other Depositary Receipts, the depository may be a non-U.S. or a U.S. entity, and the underlying securities may have a non-U.S. or a U.S. issuer. Depositary Receipts will not necessarily be denominated in the same currency as their underlying securities. Generally, ADRs, in registered form, are designed for use in the U.S. securities markets, and EDRs, in bearer form, are designated for use in European securities markets. GDRs are tradable both in the United States and in Europe and are designed for use throughout the world. A Fund may invest in unsponsored Depositary Receipts. The issuers of unsponsored Depositary Receipts are not obligated to disclose material information in the United States, and, therefore, there may be less information available regarding such issuers and there may not be a correlation between such information and the market value of the Depositary Receipts.

Variable Amount Master Demand Notes

Certain Funds may invest in variable amount master demand notes which are unsecured obligations that are redeemable upon demand and are typically unrated. These instruments are issued pursuant to written agreements between their issuers and holders. The agreements permit the holders to increase (subject to an agreed maximum) and the holders and issuers to decrease the principal amount of the notes, and specify that the rate of interest payable on the principal fluctuates according to an agreed formula. Generally, changes in interest rates will have a smaller effect on the market value of these securities than on the market value of comparable fixed income obligations. Thus, investing in these securities generally allows less opportunity for capital appreciation and depreciation than investing in comparable fixed income securities. There may be no active secondary market with respect to a particular variable rate instrument.

Variable and Floating Rate Securities

Certain Funds may invest in variable and floating rate securities. In general, variable rate securities are instruments issued or guaranteed by entities such as (1) U.S. Government, or an agency or instrumentality thereof, (2) corporations, (3) financial institutions, (4) insurance companies or (5) trusts that have a rate of interest subject to adjustment at regular intervals but less frequently than annually. A variable rate security provides for the automatic establishment of a new interest rate on set dates. Interest rates on these securities are ordinarily tied to, widely recognized market rates, which are typically set once a day. These rates may change as often as twice daily. Generally, changes in interest rates will have a smaller effect on the market value of variable and floating rate securities than on the market value of comparable fixed income obligations. Thus, investing in variable and floating rate securities generally allows less opportunity for capital appreciation and depreciation than investing in comparable fixed income securities. Variable rate obligations will be deemed to have a maturity equal to the period remaining until the next readjustment of the interest rate.

Warrants

A warrant is a security giving its holder the right to purchase shares of the issuer of the warrant at a specified price and future date. Because a warrant, which is a security permitting, but not obligating, its holder to subscribe for another security, does not carry with it the right to dividends or voting rights with respect to the securities that the warrant holder is entitled to purchase, and because a warrant does not represent any rights to the assets of the issuer, a warrant may be considered more speculative than certain other types of investments. In addition, the value of a warrant does not necessarily change with the value of the underlying security and a warrant ceases to have value if it is not exercised prior to its expiration date. An investment by a Fund in warrants valued at the lower of cost or market may not exceed 5% of the value of that Fund's net assets. Warrants acquired by a Fund in units or attached to securities may be deemed to be without value.

When-Issued, Delayed Delivery and Forward Commitment Transactions

To secure an advantageous price or yield, certain Funds may purchase securities on a when-issued, delayed delivery, to-be-announced (“TBA”) or forward commitment basis and may sell securities on a forward commitment or delayed delivery basis. A Fund will enter into when-issued, delayed delivery, TBA or forward commitment transactions for the purpose of acquiring securities and not for the purpose of leverage.

When purchasing a security on a when-issued, delayed delivery, TBA or forward commitment basis, a Fund assumes the rights and risks of ownership of the security, including the risk of price and yield fluctuations, and takes such fluctuations into account when determining its NAV. When such transactions are negotiated, certain terms may be fixed at the time the commitment is made, but delivery and payment for the securities takes place at a later date. In general, a Fund does not pay for the securities until received and does not start earning interest or other income until the contractual settlement date. A Fund may take delivery of the securities or it may sell the securities before the settlement date.

At the time of delivery of the securities, the value may be more or less than the purchase or sale price. If a Fund remains substantially fully invested at a time when when-issued, delayed delivery, TBA or forward commitment purchases are outstanding, the purchases may result in a form of leverage and give rise to increased volatility of the Fund's NAV. Default by, or bankruptcy of, a counterparty to a when-issued, delayed delivery, TBA or forward commitment transaction would expose the Fund to possible losses because of an adverse market action, expenses or delays in connection with the purchase or sale of the pools specified in such transaction. Purchases of when-issued, delayed delivery, TBA or forward commitment securities also involve a risk of loss if the seller fails to deliver after the value of the securities has risen.

A TBA transaction involves a commitment to purchase securities sold for a fixed price where the underlying securities are announced at a future date. The seller does not specify the particular securities to be delivered. Instead, a Fund agrees to accept any security that meets specified terms. For example, in a TBA mortgage-backed security transaction, a Fund and the seller would agree upon the issuer, interest rate and terms of the underlying mortgages. The seller would not identify the specific underlying mortgages until it issues the security. For this reason, in a TBA transaction, a Fund commits to purchase securities for which all specific information is not yet known at the time of the trade, particularly the exact face amount in forward commitment mortgage-backed securities transactions. The purchaser in a TBA transaction generally is subject to increased market risk and interest rate risk because the delivered securities may be less favorable than anticipated by the purchaser.

Certain Funds may also enter into a forward commitment to sell securities it owns. The use of forward commitments enables a Fund to hedge against anticipated changes in interest rates and prices. In a forward sale, a Fund does not participate in gains or losses on the security occurring after the commitment date. Forward commitments to sell securities also involve a risk of loss if the seller fails to take delivery after the value of the securities has declined. Forward commitment transactions involve additional risks similar to those associated with investments in options and futures contracts.

Rule amendments recently finalized by the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc. (“FINRA”) but not yet effective are expected to impose mandatory margin requirements for “Covered Agency Transactions,” which include TBA Transactions, certain transactions in pass-through mortgage-backed securities or small-business administration-backed asset-backed securities and transactions in collateralized mortgage obligations, in each case where such transactions have delayed contractual settlement dates of a specified period. There are limited exceptions to these margin requirements. Covered Agency Transactions historically have not been required to be collateralized. The collateralization of Covered Agency Transactions is intended to mitigate counterparty credit risk between trade and settlement, but could increase the cost of such transactions and impose added operational complexity.

Zero Coupon Securities

Certain Funds may invest in zero coupon securities. Zero coupon securities are notes, bonds and debentures that: (1) do not pay current interest and are issued at a substantial discount from par value; (2) have been stripped of their unmatured interest coupons and receipts; or (3) pay no interest until a stated date one or more years into the future. These securities also include certificates representing interests in such stripped coupons and receipts. Generally, changes in interest rates will have a greater impact on the market value of a zero coupon security than on the market value of the comparable securities that pay interest periodically during the life of the instrument. In the case of any zero-coupon debt obligations with a fixed maturity date of more than one year from the date of issuance that are treated as issued originally at a discount, a Fund will be required to accrue original issue discount (“OID”) for U.S. federal income tax purposes and the

Fund may as a result be required to pay out as an income distribution an amount which is greater than the total amount of cash interest the Fund actually received. To generate sufficient cash to make the requisite distributions to maintain its qualification for treatment as a RIC under the Code, a Fund may be required to sell investments, including at a time when it may not be advantageous to do so.

Privately-issued stripped securities are not themselves guaranteed by the U.S. Government, but the future payment of principal or interest on U.S. Treasury obligations which they represent is so guaranteed.

Investment Restrictions

Each Fund is subject to fundamental investment policies and limitations. Under the 1940 Act, fundamental investment policies and limitations may not be changed without the vote of a majority of the outstanding voting securities (as defined in the 1940 Act) of the Fund affected by the change.

Investment Restrictions for All Funds (Except as Otherwise Noted):

The following policies and limitations supplement those described in the Prospectus and this SAI. Investment restrictions numbered 1 through 8 below have been adopted as fundamental policies.

No Fund may borrow money, except that a Fund may (a) borrow from banks (as defined in the 1940 Act) and through reverse repurchase agreements in amounts up to 33-1/3% of its total assets (including the amount borrowed), (b) borrow amounts equal to an additional 5% of its total assets for temporary purposes, (c) invest in permitted leveraged investments, (d) engage in transactions in mortgage dollar rolls and other similar transactions, and (e) engage in other transactions that may entail borrowing or otherwise borrow money to the extent permitted by applicable law.

No Fund may lend its assets or money to other persons, except (a) by purchasing debt obligations (including privately placed debt obligations), (b) by lending cash or securities as permitted by applicable law, (c) by entering into repurchase agreements, (d) by investing in permitted leveraged investments, or (e) as otherwise permitted by applicable law.

Each Fund shall invest at least 75% of its total assets in some combination of the following: (a) cash and cash items, (b) U.S. Government securities (as defined in the 1940 Act), (c) securities of other investment companies, and (d) other securities. With regard to (d), other securities (acquired pursuant to this policy) are limited as to any single issuer to an amount not greater than 5% of a Fund's total assets and not more than 10% of the outstanding voting securities of any such issuer, or as otherwise permitted by applicable law.

No Fund will make investments that will result in the concentration (as that term is used in the 1940 Act) of its assets in securities of issuers in any one industry. For purposes of this restriction, supranational organizations are collectively considered to be members of a single “industry.”

No Fund may underwrite any issue of securities, except to the extent that the sale of portfolio securities in accordance with the Fund's investment objective, policies and limitations may be deemed to be an underwriting, and except that the Fund may acquire securities under circumstances in which, if the securities were sold, the Fund might be deemed to be an underwriter for purposes of the 1933 Act.

Each Fund may purchase or sell real estate, or direct or indirect interests in real estate, subject to other investment policies and applicable law.

A Fund may purchase or sell commodities or commodity contracts, subject to other investment policies and applicable law.

No Fund may issue senior securities except as otherwise permitted by its fundamental policy on borrowing or by applicable law.

Notes to Investment Restrictions

Unless otherwise indicated, all percentage limitations applicable to Fund investments (as stated in the investment restrictions listed above and elsewhere in this SAI or in the Prospectus) apply only at the time of purchases of securities, and any subsequent increase or decrease in percentage resulting from a change in value of portfolio securities or from a change in a Fund's net assets, or in any ratings, will not be deemed to result in a violation of the Fund's policies or restrictions.

For purposes of investment restriction 4, the Trust may use the industry classifications reflected by the S&P 500® Index, if applicable at the time of determination. For all other portfolio holdings, the Trust may use the Directory of Companies Required to File Annual Reports with the SEC and Bloomberg Inc. In addition, the Trust may select its own industry classifications, provided such classifications are reasonable. For purposes of investment restriction 4 above, “government securities” (as defined in the 1940 Act), which include but are not limited to, mortgage-backed securities and asset-backed securities that are issued or guaranteed by the U.S. Government, its agencies or instrumentalities, are not securities of an issuer in an industry, meaning that the Funds' industry concentration restrictions do not apply to such securities.

Additional Fundamental Investment Restrictions for All Funds except the Small-Cap Equity Fund

No Fund may invest in companies for the purpose of exercising control or management.

Names Rule Policy

To the extent a Fund is subject to Rule 35d-1 under the 1940 Act, the Fund has an investment policy, described in the Fund's prospectus, to, under normal circumstances, invest at least 80% of its assets in the particular types of investments suggested by the Fund's name (a “Name Policy”). “Assets” for the purposes of a Name Policy are net assets plus the amount of any borrowings for investment purposes. The percentage limitation applies at the time of purchase of an investment. A Fund's Name Policy may be changed by the Board without shareholder approval.

However, to the extent required by SEC regulations, shareholders will be provided with at least sixty (60) days' notice prior to any change in a Fund's Name Policy.

Additional Information

Certain of the Fundamental Investment Restrictions above limit a Fund's ability to engage in certain investment practices and purchase securities or other instruments to the extent consistent with applicable law. Applicable law includes the 1940 Act, the rules or regulations thereunder and applicable orders of the SEC as are currently in place. In addition, interpretations and guidance provided by the SEC staff may be taken into account, where deemed appropriate by a Fund, to determine if an investment practice or the purchase of securities or other instruments is permitted by applicable law. As such, the effects of these limitations will change as the statute, rules, regulations or orders (or, if applicable, interpretations) change, and no shareholder vote will be required or sought when such changes permit or require a resulting change in practice.

Disclosure of Portfolio Holdings

Introduction

The policies set forth below to be followed by State Street Bank and Trust Company (“State Street”) and SSGA FM (collectively, the “Service Providers”) for the disclosure of information about the portfolio holdings of the Trust. These disclosure policies are intended to ensure compliance by the Service Providers and the Trust with applicable regulations of the federal securities laws, including the 1940 Act and the Investment Advisers Act of 1940, as amended (the “Advisers Act”). The Board must approve all material amendments to the policy.

General Policy

It is the policy of the Service Providers to protect the confidentiality of client holdings and prevent the selective disclosure of non-public information concerning the Trust.

No information concerning the portfolio holdings of the Trust may be disclosed to any party (including shareholders) except as provided below. The Service Providers are not permitted to receive compensation or other consideration in connection with disclosing information about a Fund's portfolio to third parties. In order to address potential conflicts

between the interest of Fund shareholders, on the one hand, and those of the Service Providers or any affiliated person of those entities or of the Fund, on the other hand, the Fund's policies require that non-public disclosures of information regarding the Fund's portfolio may be made only if there is a legitimate business purpose consistent with fiduciary duties to all shareholders of the Fund.

The Board exercises continuing oversight over the disclosure of each Fund's holdings by (i) overseeing the implementation and enforcement of the portfolio holding disclosure policy, Codes of Ethics and other relevant policies of each Fund and its Service Providers by the Trust's Chief Compliance Officer (“CCO”), and (ii) considering reports and recommendations by the Trust's CCO concerning any material compliance matters (as defined in Rule 38a-1 under the 1940 Act). The Board reserves the right to amend the policy at any time without prior notice in its sole discretion.

Publicly Available Information. Any party may disclose portfolio holdings information after the holdings are publicly available. Disclosure of the complete holdings of each Fund is required to be made quarterly within 60 days of the end of the Fund's fiscal quarter in the Annual Report and Semi-Annual Report to Fund shareholders and in the monthly holdings report on Form N-PORT, with every third month made available to the public by the SEC 60 days after the end of the Funds' fiscal quarter. You can find SEC filings on the SEC's website, www.sec.gov. Information about a Fund's 10 largest holdings generally is posted on the Fund's website at ssga.com within 30 days following the end of each month. Each Fund will also make complete portfolio holdings available generally no later than 60 calendar days after the end of the Funds' fiscal quarter or subsequent to periodic portfolio holdings disclosure in the Fund's filings with the SEC or on their website.

Press Interviews Brokers and Other Discussions

Portfolio managers and other senior officers or spokespersons of the Service Providers or the Trust may disclose or confirm the ownership of any individual portfolio holding position to reporters, brokers, shareholders, consultants or other interested persons only if such information has been previously publicly disclosed in accordance with these disclosure policies.

Trading Desk Reports

State Street Global Advisors' (“SSGA”) trading desk may periodically distribute lists of investments held by its clients (including the Trust) for general analytical research purposes. In no case may such lists identify individual clients or individual client position sizes. Furthermore, in the case of equity securities, such lists shall not show aggregate client position sizes.

Miscellaneous

Confidentiality Agreement. No non-public disclosure of the Fund's portfolio holdings will be made to any party unless such party has signed a written Confidentiality Agreement. For purposes of the disclosure policies, any Confidentiality Agreement must be in a form and substance acceptable to, and approved by, the Trust's officers.

Evaluation Service Providers. There are numerous mutual fund evaluation services (such as Morningstar, Inc. and Broadridge Financial Solutions, Inc., formerly Lipper, Inc.) and due diligence departments of broker-dealers and wirehouses that regularly analyze the portfolio holdings of mutual funds in order to monitor and report on various attributes. These services and departments then distribute the results of their analysis to the public, paid subscribers and/or in-house brokers. In order to facilitate the review of the Trust by these services and departments, the Trust may distribute (or authorize the Service Providers and the Trust's custodian or fund accountants to distribute) month-end portfolio holdings to such services and departments only if such entity has executed a confidentiality agreement.

Additional Restrictions. Notwithstanding anything herein to the contrary, the Board, State Street and SSGA FM may, on a case-by-case basis, impose additional restrictions on the dissemination of portfolio information beyond those found in these disclosure policies.

Waivers of Restrictions. These disclosure policies may not be waived, or exceptions made, without the consent of the Trust's officers. All waivers and exceptions involving the Trust will be disclosed to the Board no later than its next regularly scheduled quarterly meeting.

Disclosures Required by Law. Nothing contained herein is intended to prevent the disclosure of portfolio holdings information as may be required by applicable law. For example, SSGA FM, State Street, the Trust or any of its affiliates or service providers may file any report required by applicable law (such as Schedules 13D, 13G and 13F or Form N-MFP), respond to requests from regulators and comply with valid subpoenas.

Management of the Trust

The Board is responsible for overseeing generally the management, activities and affairs of the Funds and has approved contracts with various organizations to provide, among other services, day-to-day management required by the Trust (see the section called “Investment Advisory and Other Services”). The Board has engaged the Adviser to manage the Funds on a day-to day basis. The Board is responsible for overseeing the Adviser and other service providers in the operation of the Trust in accordance with the provisions of the 1940 Act, applicable Delaware law and regulation, other applicable laws and regulations, and the Amended and Restated Declaration of Trust. The Trustees listed below are also Trustees of the SSGA Funds, the State Street Institutional Investment Trust, the State Street Master Funds and the State Street Navigator Securities Lending Trust (the “Navigator Trust”) and their respective series and Elfun Diversified Fund, Elfun Government Money Market Fund, Elfun Tax-Exempt Income Fund, Elfun Income Fund, Elfun International Equity Fund and Elfun Trusts (collectively, the “Elfun Funds”) and are Directors of State Street Variable Insurance Series Funds, Inc. The following table provides information with respect to each Trustee, including those Trustees who are not considered to be “interested” as that term is defined in the 1940 Act (the “Independent Trustees”), and each officer of the Trust.

TRUSTEES

Name, Address, and Year of Birth	Position(s) Held With Fund	Term of Office and Length of Time Served	Principal Occupation During Past Five Years and Relevant Experience	Number of Funds in Fund Complex Overseen by Trustee†	Other Directorships Held by Trustee During Past Five Years
INDEPENDENT TRUSTEES
PATRICK J. RILEY c/o SSGA Funds Management, Inc. One Iron Street Boston, MA 02210 YOB:1948	Trustee and Chairperson of the Board	Term: Until successor is elected and qualified Elected: 1/19	Associate Justice of the Superior Court, Commonwealth of Massachusetts (2002 – May 2010); Partner, Riley, Burke & Donahue, L.L.P. (law firm) (1985 – 2002); Independent Director, State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited (investment company) (1998 – 2023); Independent Director, SSGA Liquidity plc (formerly, SSGA Cash Management Fund plc) (1998 – 2023); Independent Director, SSGA Fixed Income plc (January 2009 – 2023); and Independent Director, SSGA Qualified Funds PLC (January 2009 – 2019).	54	Board Director and Chairman, SSGA SPDR ETFs Europe I plc Board (2011 – March 2023); Board Director and Chairman, SSGA SPDR ETFs Europe I plc (2013 – March 2023); Board Director, State Street Liquidity plc (1998 – March 2023).
JOHN R. COSTANTINO c/o SSGA Funds Management, Inc. One Iron Street Boston, MA 02210 YOB: 1946	Trustee and Chairperson of the Qualified Legal Compliance Committee	Term: Until successor is elected and qualified Elected: 1997	Senior Advisor to NGN Capital LLC (January 2020 – present); Managing General Partner, NGN Capital LLC (2006 – December 2019).	54	Director of Kleinfeld Bridal Corp. (January 2016 – present); Trustee of Neuroscience Research Institute (1986 – 2017); Trustee of Fordham University (1989 – 1995 and 2001 – 2007) and Trustee Emeritus (2007 – present); Trustee and Independent Chairperson of GE Funds (1993 – February 2011); Director, Muscular Dystrophy Association (2019 – present); Trustee of

Name, Address, and Year of Birth	Position(s) Held With Fund	Term of Office and Length of Time Served	Principal Occupation During Past Five Years and Relevant Experience	Number of Funds in Fund Complex Overseen by Trustee†	Other Directorships Held by Trustee During Past Five Years
					Gregorian University Foundation (1992 – 2007); Chairman of the Board of Directors, Vivaldi Biosciences Inc. (May 2017 – present); Chairman of the Supervisory Board, Vivaldi Biosciences AG. (May 2017 – present); Trustee, Gallim Dance (December 2021 – present).
MICHAEL A. JESSEE c/o SSGA Funds Management, Inc. One Iron Street Boston, MA 02210 YOB: 1946	Trustee and Chairperson of the Valuation Committee	Term: Until successor is elected and qualified Elected: 1/19	Retired; formerly, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Federal Home Loan Bank of Boston (1989 – 2009); Trustee, Randolph-Macon College (2004 – 2016).	54	None
MARGARET K. MCLAUGHLIN c/o SSGA Funds Management, Inc. One Iron Street Boston, MA 02210 YOB: 1967	Trustee, Vice-Chairperson of the Audit Committee and Vice-Chairperson of the Qualified Legal Compliance Committee	Term: Indefinite Appointed: 9/22	Consultant, Bates Group (consultants) (2021 – 2023); Consultant, Madison Dearborn Partners (private equity) (2019 – 2020); General Counsel/CCO, Kramer Van Kirk Credit Strategies L.P./Mariana Systems LLC (Investment Adviser/SaaS Technology) (2011 – 2019).	54	Director, Manning & Napier Fund Inc (2021 – 2022).
GEORGE M. PEREIRA c/o SSGA Funds Management, Inc. One Iron Street Boston, MA 02210 YOB: 1964	Trustee, Chairperson of the Nominating Committee and Chairperson of the Governance Committee	Term: Indefinite Appointed: 9/22	Chief Operating Officer (January 2011 – September 2020) and Chief Financial Officer (November 2004 – September 2020), Charles Schwab Investment Management.	54	Director, Pacific Premier Bancorp, Pacific Premier Bank (2021 – present); Director, Charles Schwab Asset Management (Ireland) Ltd., & Charles Schwab Worldwide Funds plc. (2005 – 2020); Director, Rotaplast International, Inc. (non-profit providing free medical services to children worldwide) (2012 – 2018).
DONNA M. RAPACCIOLI c/o SSGA Funds Management, Inc. One Iron Street Boston, MA 02210 YOB: 1962	Trustee, Chairperson of the Audit Committee, Vice-Chairperson of the Nominating Committee and Vice-Chairperson of the Governance Committee	Term: Until successor is elected and qualified Appointed: 1/12 Elected: 6/16	Dean of the Gabelli School of Business (2007 – June 2022) and Accounting Professor (1987 – present) at Fordham University.	54	Director- Graduate Management Admissions Council (2015 – present); Trustee of Emmanuel College (2010 – 2019).
MARK E. SWANSON	Trustee and	Term:	Treasurer, Chief	54	Director and President,

Name, Address, and Year of Birth	Position(s) Held With Fund	Term of Office and Length of Time Served	Principal Occupation During Past Five Years and Relevant Experience	Number of Funds in Fund Complex Overseen by Trustee†	Other Directorships Held by Trustee During Past Five Years
c/o SSGA Funds Management, Inc. One Iron Street Boston, MA 02210 YOB: 1963	Vice-Chairperson of the Valuation Committee	Indefinite Appointed: 3/23	Accounting Officer and Chief Financial Officer, Russell Investment Funds (“RIF”) (1998 – 2022); Global Head of Fund Services, Russell Investments (2013 – 2022); Treasurer, Chief Accounting Officer and Chief Financial Officer, Russell Investment Company (“RIC”) (1998 – 2022); President and Chief Executive Officer, RIF (2016 – 2017 and 2020 – 2022); President and Chief Executive Officer, RIC (2016 – 2017 and 2020 – 2022)		Russell Investments Fund Services, LLC (2010 – 2023); Director, Russell Investment Management, LLC, Russell Investments Trust Company and Russell Investments Financial Services, LLC (2010 – 2023).

†

For the purpose of determining the number of portfolios overseen by the Trustees, “Fund Complex” comprises registered investment companies for which SSGA FM serves as investment adviser.

The following lists the principal officers for the Trust, as well as their mailing addresses and ages, positions with the Trust and length of time served, and present and principal occupations:

Name, Address, and Year of Birth	Position(s) Held With Trust	Term of Office and Length of Time Served	Principal Occupation During Past Five Years
OFFICERS:
ANN M. CARPENTER SSGA Funds Management, Inc. One Iron Street Boston, MA 02210 YOB: 1966	President and Principal Executive Officer; Deputy Treasurer	Term: Indefinite Served: since 4/19 Term: Indefinite Served: since 5/23	Chief Operating Officer, SSGA Funds Management, Inc. (April 2005 - present); Managing Director, State Street Global Advisors (April 2005 - present).
BRUCE S. ROSENBERG SSGA Funds Management, Inc. One Iron Street Boston, MA 02210 YOB: 1961	Treasurer and Principal Financial Officer	Term: Indefinite Served: since 4/19	Managing Director, State Street Global Advisors and SSGA Funds Management, Inc. (July 2015 – present); Director, Credit Suisse (April 2008 – July 2015).
CHAD C. HALLETT SSGA Funds Management, Inc. One Iron Street Boston, MA 02210 YOB: 1969	Deputy Treasurer	Term: Indefinite Served: since 4/19	Vice President, State Street Global Advisors and SSGA Funds Management, Inc. (November 2014 – present).
DARLENE ANDERSON-VASQUEZ SSGA Funds Management, Inc. One Iron Street Boston, MA 02210 YOB: 1968	Deputy Treasurer	Term: Indefinite Served: since 4/19	Managing Director, State Street Global Advisors and SSGA Funds Management, Inc. (May 2016 – present); Senior Vice President, John Hancock Investments (September 2007 – May 2016).
ARTHUR A. JENSEN SSGA Funds Management, Inc. 1600 Summer Street Stamford, CT 06905 YOB: 1966	Deputy Treasurer	Term: Indefinite Served: since 4/19	Vice President State Street Global Advisors and SSGA Funds Management, Inc. (July 2016 – present); Mutual Funds Controller, GE Asset Management Incorporated (April 2011 – July 2016).

Name, Address, and Year of Birth	Position(s) Held With Trust	Term of Office and Length of Time Served	Principal Occupation During Past Five Years
DAVID LANCASTER SSGA Funds Management, Inc. One Iron Street Boston, MA 02210 YOB: 1971	Assistant Treasurer	Term: Indefinite Served: since 11/20	Vice President, State Street Global Advisors and SSGA Funds Management, Inc. (July 2017 – present); Assistant Vice President, State Street Bank and Trust Company (November 2011 – July 2017).*
JOHN BETTENCOURT SSGA Funds Management, Inc. One Iron Street Boston, MA 02210 YOB: 1976	Assistant Treasurer	Term: Indefinite Served: since 5/22	Vice President, State Street Global Advisors and SSGA Funds Management, Inc. (March 2020 – present); Assistant Vice President, State Street Global Advisors (June 2007 –March 2020).
BRIAN HARRIS SSGA Funds Management, Inc. One Iron Street Boston, MA 02210 YOB: 1973	Chief Compliance Officer; Anti-Money Laundering Officer; Code of Ethics Compliance Officer	Term: Indefinite Served: since 6/16 Term: Indefinite Served: since 4/19	Managing Director, State Street Global Advisors and SSGA Funds Management, Inc. (June 2013 – present).*
SEAN O'MALLEY SSGA Funds Management, Inc. One Iron Street Boston, MA 02210 YOB: 1969	Chief Legal Officer	Term: Indefinite Served: since 8/19	Senior Vice President and General Counsel, State Street Global Advisors (May 2022 - present); Senior Vice President and Deputy General Counsel, State Street Global Advisors (November 2013 – May 2022).
DAVID BARR SSGA Funds Management, Inc. One Iron Street Boston, MA 02210 YOB: 1974	Secretary	Term: Indefinite Served: since 9/20	Vice President and Senior Counsel, State Street Global Advisors (October 2019 – present); Vice President and Counsel, Eaton Vance Corp. (October 2010 – October 2019).
E. GERARD MAIORANA, JR. SSGA Funds Management, Inc. One Iron Street Boston, MA 02210 YOB: 1971	Assistant Secretary	Term: Indefinite Served: since 5/23	Assistant Vice President, State Street Global Advisors (July 2014 - present).
DAVID URMAN SSGA Funds Management, Inc. One Iron Street Boston, MA 02210 YOB: 1985	Assistant Secretary	Term: Indefinite Served: since 8/19	Vice President and Senior Counsel, State Street Global Advisors (April 2019 – present); Vice President and Counsel, State Street Global Advisors (August 2015 – April 2019); Associate, Ropes & Gray LLP (November 2012 – August 2015).

Served in various capacities and/or with various affiliated entities during noted time period.

The Declaration further provides that the Trust shall indemnify each of its Trustees and officers against liabilities and expenses reasonably incurred by them, in connection with, or arising out of, any action, suit or proceeding, threatened against or otherwise involving such Trustee or officer, directly or indirectly, by reason of being or having been a Trustee or officer of the Trust. The Declaration does not authorize the Trust to indemnify any Trustee or officer against any liability to which he or she would otherwise be subject by reason of or for willful misfeasance, bad faith, gross negligence or reckless disregard of such person's duties.

Summary of Trustees' Qualifications

Following is a summary of the experience, attributes and skills which qualify each Trustee to serve on the Board.

Patrick J. Riley: Mr. Riley is an experienced business executive with over 46 years of experience in the legal and financial services industries; his experience includes service as a trustee or director of various investment companies and Associate Justice of the Superior Court of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. He has served on the Board of Trustees and related Committees of SSGA Funds for 34 years and possesses significant experience regarding the operations and history of the Trust. Mr. Riley also serves as a Trustee of the Navigator Trust, State Street Institutional Investment Trust, State Street Master Funds, SSGA Funds, and Elfun Funds and a Director of State Street Variable Insurance Series Funds, Inc.

John R. Costantino: In addition to his tenure as a board member of various other funds advised by SSGA FM, Mr. Costantino has over 34 years of private equity investing experience. He has also served as an officer or a board member of charitable organizations and public and private companies for over 33 years. Mr. Costantino is an attorney and a certified public accountant. He also serves as a Trustee of the Navigator Trust, State Street Institutional Investment Trust, State Street Master Funds, SSGA Funds, and Elfun Funds and a Director of State Street Variable Insurance Series Funds, Inc. (independent chairperson through 2016).

Michael A. Jessee: Mr. Jessee is an experienced business executive with approximately 46 years of experience in the banking industry. He previously served as President and Chief Executive Officer of the Federal Home Loan Bank of Boston as well as various senior executive positions of major banks. Mr. Jessee has served on the Navigator Trust's Board of Trustees and related committees for 27 years and possesses significant experience regarding the Trust's operations and history. Mr. Jessee also serves as a Trustee of the Navigator Trust, State Street Institutional Investment Trust, State Street Master Funds, SSGA Funds, and Elfun Funds and a Director of State Street Variable Insurance Series Funds, Inc.

Margaret K. McLaughlin: Ms. McLaughlin has over 26 years of experience she has gained in a variety of roles encompassing regulatory, operating, legal, and compliance functions, serving both firms and their boards. Ms. McLaughlin formerly served as a founding member of the executive management team for Kramer Van Kirk Credit Strategies L.P. and its technology affiliate, Mariana Systems LLC, where she was integrally involved in corporate strategy, operational oversight, risk management and board governance. Prior to Kramer Van Kirk, Ms. McLaughlin was Assistant General Counsel to Harris Associates L.P., where she was responsible for legal, regulatory and compliance activities related to the Oakmark Mutual Funds. Ms. McLaughlin has an extensive understanding and perspective on governance, oversight, regulation, policies and procedures from these positions as well as her prior experience with both the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Department of Justice. Most recently, Ms. McLaughlin has held consulting positions at major private equity and management consulting firms. Ms. McLaughlin serves as a Trustee of State Street Institutional Investment Trust, State Street Master Funds, State Street Navigator Securities Lending Trust, SSGA Funds, Elfun Funds, and State Street Institutional Funds and a Director of State Street Variable Insurance Series Funds, Inc.

George M. Pereira: Mr. Pereira has over 31 years of experience in executive management with financial institutions, including extensive experience relating to financial reporting, operations, cybersecurity oversight, and enterprise risk management. Mr. Pereira recently retired from Charles Schwab Investment Management Inc., having served as Chief Operating Officer and Chief Financial Officer during his tenure. Previously, Mr. Pereira also served as Head of Financial Reporting for Charles Schwab & Co., Inc. Earlier in his career, Mr. Pereira gained valuable regulatory experience and perspective while serving as managing director at the New York Stock Exchange. With this professional experience, Mr. Pereira has developed wide-ranging expertise in building and managing financial, operational, technology and risk control platforms for growth and scale within the financial services industry. Additionally, Mr. Pereira is a member of the Latino Corporate Directors Association. Mr. Pereira serves as a Trustee of State Street Institutional Investment Trust, State Street Master Funds, State Street Navigator Securities Lending Trust, SSGA Funds, Elfun Funds, and State Street Institutional Funds and a Director of State Street Variable Insurance Series Funds, Inc.

Donna M. Rapaccioli: Ms. Rapaccioli has over 34 years of service as a full-time member of the business faculty at Fordham University, where she developed and taught undergraduate and graduate courses, including International Accounting and Financial Statement Analysis, has taught at the executive MBA level and served as Dean of the Gabelli School of Business for 15 years. She has served on Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business accreditation team visits, lectured on accounting and finance topics and consulted for numerous investment banks. Ms. Rapaccioli also serves as a Trustee of the Navigator Trust, State Street Institutional Investment Trust, State Street Master Funds, SSGA Funds, and Elfun Funds and a Director of State Street Variable Insurance Series Funds, Inc.

Mark E. Swanson: Mr. Swanson has over 26 years of experience in executive management with financial services institutions, including extensive experience relating to, fund operations, financial reporting, fund accounting, and fund services. Mr. Swanson recently retired from Russell Investments, having served most recently as the Global Head of Fund Services. Additionally, Mr. Swanson served as Treasurer, Chief Accounting Officer and Chief Financial Officer Russell Investment Company (“RIC”) and Russell Investment Funds (“RIF”). Previously, Mr. Swanson served as Global Head of Fund Operations for Russell, as well as serving in different directorships with RIC, RIF and other Russell entities. Mr. Swanson serves as a Trustee of State Street Institutional Investment Trust, State Street Master Funds, State Street Navigator Securities Lending Trust, SSGA Funds, Elfun Diversified Fund, Elfun Government Money Market Fund, Elfun Income Fund, Elfun International Equity Fund, Elfun Tax Exempt Income Fund, Elfun Trusts, and State Street Institutional Funds and a Director of State Street Variable Insurance Funds, Inc.

References to the experience, attributes and skills of Trustees above are pursuant to requirements of the SEC, do not constitute holding out of the Board or any Trustee as having any special expertise or experience, and shall not impose any greater responsibility or liability on any such person or on the Board by reason thereof.

Standing Committees

The Board of Trustees has established various committees to facilitate the timely and efficient consideration of various matters of importance to Independent Trustees, the Trust, and the Trust's shareholders and to facilitate compliance with legal and regulatory requirements. Currently, the Board has created an Audit Committee, Governance Committee, Nominating Committee, Valuation Committee and Qualified Legal Compliance Committee (the “QLCC”). The Nominating Committee, Valuation Committee and QLCC were created in January 2019.

The Audit Committee is composed of all of the Independent Trustees. The Audit Committee meets twice a year, or more often as required, in conjunction with meetings of the Board of Trustees. The Audit Committee oversees and monitors the Trust's internal accounting and control structure, its auditing function and its financial reporting process. The Audit Committee is responsible for selecting and retaining the independent accountants for the Trust. The Audit Committee is responsible for approving the audit plans, fees and other material arrangements in respect of the engagement of the independent accountants, including non-audit services performed. The Audit Committee reviews the qualifications of the independent accountant's key personnel involved in the foregoing activities and monitors the independent accountant's independence. During the fiscal year ended September 30, 2023, the Audit Committee held four meetings.

The Governance Committee is composed of all the Independent Trustees. The primary functions of the Governance Committee, including the Nominating Committee, is to review and evaluate the composition and performance of the Board; make nominations for membership on the Board and committees; review the responsibilities of each committee; and review governance procedures, compensation of Independent Trustees, and independence of outside counsel to the Trustees. The Nominating Committee will consider nominees to the Board recommended by shareholders. Recommendations should be submitted in accordance with the procedures set forth in the Nominating Committee Charter and should be submitted in writing to the Trust, to the attention of the Trust's Secretary, at the address of the principal executive offices of the Trust. Shareholder recommendations must be delivered to, or mailed and received at, the principal executive offices of the Trust not less than sixty (60) calendar days nor more than ninety (90) calendar days prior to the date of the Board or shareholder meeting at which the nominee candidate would be considered for election. During the fiscal year ended September 30, 2023, the Governance Committee and the Nominating Committee held three combined meetings.

The Valuation Committee is composed of all the Independent Trustees. The Valuation Committee's primary purpose is to review the actions and recommendations of the Adviser's Oversight Committee no less often than quarterly. The Trust has established procedures and guidelines for valuing portfolio securities and makes fair value determinations from time to time through the Valuation Committee, with the assistance of the Oversight Committee, State Street and SSGA FM. The Valuation Committee reviews the actions and recommendations of the Oversight Committee in connection with quarterly Board meetings. During the fiscal year ended September 30, 2023, the Valuation Committee held four meetings.

The QLCC is composed of all the Independent Trustees. The primary functions of the QLCC are to receive quarterly reports from the Trust's CCO; to oversee generally the Trust's responses to regulatory inquiries; and to investigate matters referred to it by the officers of the Trust and make recommendations to the Board regarding the implementation of an appropriate response to evidence of a material violation of the securities laws or breach of fiduciary duty or similar violation by the Trust, its officers or the Trustees. During the fiscal year ended September 30, 2023, the QLCC held four meetings.

Leadership Structure and Risk Management Oversight

The Board has chosen to select different individuals as Chairperson of the Board of the Trust, as Chairperson and Vice-Chairperson of the Committees of the Board, and as President of the Trust. Currently, Mr. Riley, an Independent Trustee, serves as Chairperson of the Board, Ms. Rapaccioli serves as Chairperson of the Audit Committee, Mr. Costantino serves as Chairperson of the QLCC, Mr. Jessee serves as Chairperson of the Valuation Committee, and Mr. Pereira serves as Chairperson of each of the Governance Committee and Nominating Committee. Ms. McLaughlin serves as Vice-Chairperson of the Audit Committee and Vice-Chairperson of the QLCC, Mr. Swanson serves as Vice-Chairperson of the Valuation Committee, and Ms. Rapaccioli serves as Vice-Chairperson of each of the Governance Committee and Nominating Committee. Ms. Carpenter, who is an employee of the Adviser, serves as President of the Trust. The Board

believes that this leadership structure is appropriate. Ms. Carpenter is available to provide the Board with insight regarding the Trust's day-to-day management when requested, while Mr. Riley provides an independent perspective on the Trust's overall operation and Ms. Rapaccioli provides a specialized perspective on audit matters.

The Board has delegated management of the Trust to service providers who are responsible for the day-to-day management of risks applicable to the Trust. The Board oversees risk management for the Trust in several ways. The Board receives regular reports from both the CCO and administrator for the Trust, detailing the results of the Trust's compliance with its Board-adopted policies and procedures, the investment policies and limitations of the Funds, and applicable provisions of the federal securities laws and the Code. As needed, the Adviser discusses management issues regarding the Trust with the Board, soliciting the Board's input on many aspects of management, including potential risks to the Funds. The Board's Audit Committee also receives reports on various aspects of risk that might affect the Trust and offers advice to management, as appropriate. The Trustees also meet in executive session with the independent counsel to the Independent Trustees, the independent registered public accounting firm, counsel to the Trust, the CCO and representatives of management, as needed. Through these regular reports and interactions, the Board oversees the risk management parameters for the Trust, which are effected on a day-to-day basis by service providers to the Trust.

Trustee Ownership of Securities of the Trust, Adviser and Distributor

As of December 31, 2023, none of the Independent Trustees or their immediate family members had any ownership of securities of the Adviser, State Street Global Advisors Funds Distributors, LLC (“SSGA FD” or the “Distributor”), the Trust's distributor, or any person directly or indirectly controlling, controlled by or under common control with the Adviser or SSGA FD.

The following table sets forth information describing the dollar range of the Trust's equity securities beneficially owned by each Trustee as of December 31, 2023.

Independent Trustees	Dollar Range Of Equity Securities In The Funds	Aggregate Dollar Range Of Equity Securities In All Registered Investment Companies Overseen By Trustees In Family of Investment Companies
Patrick J. Riley	None	Over $ 100,000
John R. Costantino	None	None
Michael A. Jessee	None	None
Donna M. Rapaccioli	None	None
Margaret K. McLaughlin	None	None
George M. Pereira	None	None
Richard D. Shirk(1)	None	Over $ 100,000
Mark E. Swanson(2)	None	None

(1) Mr. Shirk retired from the Board of Directors of the Trust effective as of December 31, 2023.

(2) Mr. Swanson was appointed as Independent Trustee effective March 2, 2023.

Trustee Compensation

As of January 1, 2024, except as noted below, each Independent Trustee receives for his or her services to the State Street Master Funds, the State Street Institutional Investment Trust, the SSGA Funds, the Elfun Funds, the Navigator Trust, State Street Institutional Funds and the Trust (together, the “Fund Entities”) an annual retainer of $390,000. The Chairperson receives an additional $100,000 annual retainer. The Independent Trustees receive a fee of $25,000 for each additional special in-person Board meeting and $5,000 for each additional special telephonic Board meeting. As of January 1, 2022, the total annual compensation paid to the Independent Trustees (other than telephonic and special meeting fees) is allocated to each Fund Entity as follows: a fixed amount of $21,000 will be allocated to each Fund Entity or, if applicable, each series thereof; and the remainder will be allocated among the Fund Entities or, if applicable, each series thereof that is not a feeder fund in a master-feeder structure, based on relative net assets. The Independent Trustees are reimbursed for travel and other out-of pocket expenses in connection with meeting attendance. As of the date of this SAI, the Trustees are not paid pension or retirement benefits as part of the Trust's expenses.

The Trust's officers are compensated by the Adviser and its affiliates.

The following table sets forth the total remuneration of Trustees and officers of the Trust for the fiscal year ended September 30, 2023:

Name of Trustee	Aggregate Compensation from the Trust	Pension or Retirement Benefits Accrued as Part of Trust Expenses	Estimated Annual Benefits Upon Retirement	Total Compensation from the Trust and Fund Complex Paid to Trustees
Patrick J. Riley	$10,414	$0	$0	$432,500
John R. Costantino	$8,337	$0	$0	$350,000
Michael A. Jessee	$8,337	$0	$0	$350,000
Donna M. Rapaccioli	$8,337	$0	$0	$350,000
Margaret McLaughlin	$8,337	$0	$0	$350,000
George M. Pereira	$8,337	$0	$0	$350,000
Richard D. Shirk(1)	$8,337	$0	$0	$350,000
Mark E. Swanson(2)	$3,984	$0	$0	$210,000

(1)

Mr. Shirk retired from the Board of Directors of the Trust effective as of December 31, 2023.

(2)

Mr. Swanson was appointed Trustee effective March 2, 2023.

Proxy Voting Procedures

The Board has delegated to the Adviser or Sub-Adviser, as applicable, the responsibility to vote proxies on securities held by the Funds, subject to certain exceptions. The Board has retained authority to vote proxies for certain bank and bank holding company securities (“Bank Securities”) that may be held by one or more Funds, other than the Small-Cap Equity Fund, from time to time. The Board has adopted the Institutional Shareholder Services, Inc.'s (“ISS”) benchmark proxy voting policy with respect to voting such Bank Securities' proxies. The Board has retained this authority in order to permit the Adviser to utilize exemptions from limitations arising under the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956, as amended, that might otherwise prevent the Adviser from investing a Fund's assets in Bank Securities. Each of the Trust's, the Adviser's and Sub-Advisers' proxy voting policies, as well as ISS' benchmark proxy voting policy, are attached as an appendix to this SAI. Information regarding how a Fund voted proxies relating to its portfolio securities during the most recent twelve-month period ended June 30 is available: (1) without charge by calling 1-866-787-2257; (2) on the Funds' website at https://www.ssga.com/us/en/intermediary/ic; and (3) on the SEC's website at https://www.sec.gov.

Reporting a Material Conflict of Interest

A material conflict of interest may arise in a situation where the proxy analyst, Portfolio Manager or Securities Analyst, when voting the proxy, has knowledge of a situation where either SSGA FM or one of its affiliates would enjoy a substantial or significant benefit from casting a vote in a particular way (“Material Conflict of Interest”). If a Material Conflict of Interest does arise, such conflict will be documented by SSGA FM or each Sub-Adviser, as applicable, on a Material Conflict of Interest form and the Board will be notified of such Material Conflict of Interest at the next regular board meeting after the Material Conflict of Interest occurs.

Control Persons and Principal Holders of Securities

As of December 31, 2023, the Trustees and officers of the Trust owned in the aggregate less than 1% of the shares of each class (if applicable) of each Fund.

Persons or organizations owning 25% or more of the outstanding shares of a Fund may be presumed to “control” (as that term is defined in the 1940 Act) a Fund. As a result, these persons or organizations could have the ability to approve or reject those matters submitted to the shareholders of such Fund for their approval.

As of December 31, 2023, to the knowledge of the Trust, the following persons held of record or beneficially through one or more accounts 25% or more of the outstanding shares of a Fund.

Name and Address	Percentage
Small-Cap Equity Fund

Name and Address	Percentage
NATIONAL FINANCIAL SERVICES LLC FOR THE EXCLUSIVE BENEFIT OF OUR CUSTOMERS ATTN MUTUAL FUNDS DEPT 4TH FL 499 WASHINGTON BLVD JERSEY CITY NJ 07310-1995 NJ	96.93%
U.S. Equity Fund
THE MANUFACTURERS LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY 200 BLOOR STREET EAST TORONTO ONTARIO M4W 1E5 CANADA	89.21%

As of December 31, 2023, to the knowledge of the Trust, the following persons held of record or beneficially through one or more accounts 5% or more of the outstanding shares of a class of a Fund.

Name and Address	Percentage of Class
Small-Cap Equity Fund – Investment Class
NATIONAL FINANCIAL SERVICES LLC FOR THE EXCLUSIVE BENEFIT OF OUR CUSTOMERS ATTN MUTUAL FUNDS DEPT 4TH FL 499 WASHINGTON BLVD JERSEY CITY NJ 07310-1995 NJ	96.93%
Small-Cap Equity Fund – Service Class
EMPOWER TRUST FBO FBO CERTAIN RETIREMENT PLANS 8515 E ORCHARD ROAD 2T2 GREENWOOD VLG, CO 80111-5002	51.48%
JOHN HANCOCK TRUST COMPANY LLC 200 BERKELEY ST STE 7 BOSTON MA 02116-5038	27.32%
CHARLES SCHWAB & CO INC SPECIAL CUSTODY A/C FBO CUSTOMERS ATTN MUTUAL FUNDS 211 MAIN ST SAN FRANCISCO CA 94105-1901	15.89%
U.S. Equity Fund – Investment Class
THE MANUFACTURERS LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY 200 BLOOR STREET EAST TORONTO ONTARIO M4W 1E5 CANADA	89.21%
C/O TIAA SEI PRIVATE TRUST COMPANY 1 FREEDOM VALLEY DRIVE OAKS PA 19456-9989	5.59%
U.S. Equity Fund – Service Class
CHARLES SCHWAB & CO INC SPECIAL CUSTODY A/C FBO CUSTOMERS ATTN MUTUAL FUNDS 211 MAIN ST SAN FRANCISCO CA 94105-1901	75.54%

Name and Address	Percentage of Class
NATIONAL FINANCIAL SERVICES LLC FOR THE EXCLUSIVE BENEFIT OF OUR CUSTOMERS ATTN MUTUAL FUNDS DEPT 4TH FL 499 WASHINGTON BLVD JERSEY CITY NJ 07310-1995 NJ	23.15%

Investment Advisory and Other Services

Investment Advisory Agreement

SSGA FM serves as the Funds' investment adviser and administrator pursuant to an investment advisory and administration agreement between SSGA FM and the Trust on behalf of each Fund, dated July 1, 2016 (the “Advisory Agreement”). The Adviser is a wholly-owned subsidiary of State Street Global Advisors, Inc., which itself is a wholly-owned subsidiary of State Street Corporation, a publicly held financial holding company. The Adviser and other advisory affiliates of State Street Corporation make up SSGA, the investment management arm of State Street Corporation. State Street, the Trust's custodian, and SSGA FD are affiliated persons of the Adviser. The address of the Adviser is One Iron Street, Boston, Massachusetts 02210. The address of State Street is One Congress Street, Boston, Massachusetts 02114.

The duties and responsibilities of SSGA FM are specified in the Advisory Agreement. Shareholders are not parties to, or intended (or “third party”) beneficiaries of, the Advisory Agreement. Rather, the Trust and its respective investment series are the sole intended beneficiaries of the Advisory Agreement. Neither this SAI nor the Prospectus is intended to give rise to any contract rights or other rights in any shareholder, other than any rights conferred by federal or state securities laws that may not be waived.

Under the Advisory Agreement, SSGA FM, subject to the supervision of the Board, provides a continuous investment program for each Fund's assets, including investment research and management. SSGA FM determines from time to time what investments are purchased, retained or sold by the Funds and places purchase and sale orders for the Funds' investments. SSGA FM provides the Trust with all executive, administrative, clerical and other personnel necessary to operate each Fund, and pays salaries and other employment-related costs of employing these persons. SSGA FM furnishes the Trust and each Fund with office space, facilities, and equipment and pays the day-to-day expenses related to the operation of such space, facilities and equipment. Subject to the supervision of the Board, SSGA FM, as administrator, also: (a) maintains the books and records of each Fund, (b) prepares reports to shareholders of each Fund, (c) prepares and files tax returns for each Fund, (d) assists with the preparation and filing of reports and the Trust's registration statement with the SEC, (e) provides appropriate officers for the Trust, (f) provides administrative support necessary for the Board to conduct meetings, and (g) supervises and coordinates the activities of other service providers, including independent auditors, legal counsel, custodians, accounting service agents and transfer agents. Under a separate sub-administration agreement, SSGA FM has delegated certain administrative functions to State Street. Under the sub-administration agreement, State Street performs certain back office services to support SSGA FM, including among other things, furnishing financial and performance information about the Funds for inclusion in regulatory filings and Board and shareholder reports; preparing regulatory filings, Board materials, and tax returns; performing expense and budgeting functions; performing tax compliance testing; and maintaining books and records.

SSGA FM is generally responsible for employing sufficient staff and consulting with other persons that it determines to be necessary or useful in the performance of its obligations under the Advisory Agreement. The Advisory Agreement obligates SSGA FM to provide services in accordance with each Fund's investment objective(s), policies and restrictions as stated in the Trust's current registration statement, as amended from time to time, and to keep the Trust informed of developments materially affecting the Funds, including furnishing the Trust with whatever information and reports the Board reasonably requests. SSGA FM will also carry out certain supervisory services with respect to any sub-advisers appointed to a Fund.

The Advisory Agreement provides that SSGA FM may render similar advisory and administrative services to other clients so long as when a Fund or any other client served by SSGA FM are prepared to invest in or desire to dispose of the same security, available investments or opportunities for sales will be allocated in a manner believed by SSGA FM to be equitable to the Fund. The Advisory Agreement also provides that SSGA FM shall not be liable for any error of judgment

or mistake of law or for any loss incurred by a Fund in connection with SSGA FM's services pursuant to the Advisory Agreement, except for a loss resulting from willful misfeasance, bad faith or gross negligence in the performance of its duties or from reckless disregard of its obligations and duties under the Advisory Agreement.

Each Fund is responsible for paying all of its expenses that are not assumed by SSGA FM pursuant to the Advisory Agreement. Such expenses include fees payable to the Trust's Independent Trustees, brokerage fees and expenses that are not normal operating expenses of the Funds (such as extraordinary expenses, interest and taxes). Additionally, the Funds reimburse SSGA FM for certain out-of pocket travel expenses of the CCO and compliance team incurred on the Funds' behalf.

The Advisory Agreement is effective from its date of execution, and continues in effect for an initial two-year term and will continue from year to year thereafter so long as its continuance is approved annually by (i) the Board or (ii) a vote of a majority of a Fund's outstanding voting securities, provided that in either event the continuance also is approved by the vote of a majority of the Trustees who are not parties to the Advisory Agreement or interested persons, as such term is defined in the 1940 Act, of any party to the Advisory Agreement by a vote cast in person at meeting called for the purpose of voting on such approval.

The Advisory Agreement will terminate automatically in the event of its “assignment” (as defined in the 1940 Act) and may be terminated without penalty by either the Trust or SSGA FM upon no more than 60 days' nor less than 30 days' written notice to the other or by vote of holders of a majority of a Fund's outstanding voting securities.

Each Fund pays SSGA FM a fee for advisory and administrative services (“Management Fee”). The Management Fee is deducted daily from the assets of each of the Funds and paid to SSGA FM monthly. The Management Fee for each Fund declines incrementally as Fund assets increase. This means that investors pay a reduced fee with respect to Fund assets over a certain level or “breakpoint.” The Management Fees payable to SSGA FM are based on the average daily net assets of each Fund at the following annual rates:

Name of Fund	Average Daily Net Assets of Fund	Annual Rate Percentage (%)*
Small-Cap Equity Fund**	First $250 million Next $250 million Over $500 million	0.95% 0.90% 0.85%
U.S. Equity Fund	First $25 million Next $25 million Over $50 million	0.55% 0.45% 0.35%

From time to time, SSGA FM may waive or reimburse the Management Fee paid by a Fund.

SSGA FM is contractually obligated until January 31, 2025 (i) to waive up to the full amount of the advisory fee payable by the Small-Cap Equity Fund, and/or (ii) to reimburse the Small-Cap Equity Fund for expenses to the extent that Total Annual Fund Operating Expenses (exclusive of non-recurring account fees, extraordinary expenses, and certain class specific expenses, such as distribution and shareholder servicing) exceed 0.75% of average daily net assets on an annual basis. This fee waiver and/or expense reimbursement arrangement may not be terminated prior to January 31, 2025 except with approval of the Board. For the year ended September 30, 2023, fees waived and expenses reimbursed by the Adviser, pursuant to this agreement, were $1,456,245.

The Advisory Agreement does not contain any provisions prescribing limits on the operating expenses of the Trust or any Fund. However, each Fund's management fee is a “unitary” fee that includes all operating expenses payable by the Fund, except for fees and expenses associated with the Trust's Independent Trustees, shareholder servicing and distribution (12b-1) fees, brokerage fees and commissions, and expenses that are not normal operating expenses of the Fund (such as extraordinary expenses, interest and taxes). The Management Fee for each Fund fluctuates based upon the average daily net assets of the Fund.

The following table provides total Management Fees paid by each Fund to SSGA FM for the fiscal years ended September 30, 2023, September 30, 2022 and September 30, 2021:

Fund	2023	2022	2021
Small-Cap Equity Fund	$9,318,429	$10,342,070	$11,084,633
U.S. Equity Fund	$797,217	$1,259,268	$2,000,025

Manager of Managers Structure

In order for SSGA FM to delegate portfolio management duties to a sub-adviser with respect to a Fund as permitted by the Advisory Agreement, the 1940 Act requires that the sub-advisory agreement be approved by the shareholders of that Fund. Specifically, Section 15(a) of the 1940 Act makes it unlawful for any person to act as an investment adviser (including as a sub-adviser) to a mutual fund, such as the Funds, except pursuant to a written contract that has been approved by shareholders of the Fund.

SSGA FM has received an exemptive order (the “Order”) from the SEC granting certain exemptions from Section 15(a) of the 1940 Act and certain rules thereunder and from certain disclosure obligations under various rules and forms. The exemptive relief granted by the Order, upon shareholder approval of the “manager of managers” structure, enables SSGA FM and the Board to operate with greater efficiency by allowing SSGA FM, subject to Board approval, including a majority of Independent Trustees, to retain and replace unaffiliated sub-advisers, and enter into and amend sub-advisory agreements with unaffiliated sub-advisers, without incurring the expense and delays of obtaining shareholder approval. Under the Order, SSGA FM has responsibility, subject to oversight of the Board, for overseeing the Funds' sub-advisers and recommending to the Board their hiring, termination, or replacement. The Order also permits a Fund to disclose only the aggregate fees paid to the sub-advisers, in lieu of disclosing the fees paid to each such sub-adviser.

Shareholders of each Fund approved such “manager of managers” structure at a shareholder meeting held on June 22, 2016.

Current Sub-Advisers

Small-Cap Equity Fund

SSGA FM has engaged the following investment sub-advisers to each manage a portion of the Small-Cap Equity Fund (“Allocated Assets”): Champlain Investment Partners, LLC (“Champlain”), Kennedy Capital Management LLC (“Kennedy”), Palisade Capital Management, LP (“Palisade”) and SouthernSun Asset Management, LLC (“SouthernSun”) (each, a “Sub-Adviser” and collectively, the “Sub-Advisers”). Prior to July 1, 2021, GlobeFlex Capital, L.P. served as a sub-adviser to the Small-Cap Equity Fund and prior to July 15, 2022, Riverbridge Partners, LLC (“Riverbridge”) served as a sub-adviser to the Small-Cap Equity Fund. For the fiscal years ended September 30, 2023, September 30, 2022, and September 30, 2021, SSGA FM paid in the aggregate sub-advisory fees of $6,349,510, $7,055,978, and $7,764,492, respectively, to the foregoing sub-advisers for their investment sub-advisory services to the Small-Cap Equity Fund.

Champlain — Champlain, having its principal office located at 180 Battery Street, Burlington, Vermont 05401, provides a continuous investment program with respect to Champlain's Allocated Assets, which may be changed from time to time at the sole discretion of SSGA FM. Champlain is registered as an investment adviser under the Advisers Act, and was formed in 2004. Champlain offers small and mid-cap investment strategies. As of September 30, 2023, Champlain had approximately $16 billion in assets under management. Champlain has served as one of the sub-advisers to the Fund since October 1, 2008.

Kennedy — Kennedy, having its principal office located at 10829 Olive Boulevard, St. Louis, Missouri 63141, provides a continuous investment program with respect to Kennedy's Allocated Assets, which may be changed from time to time at the sole discretion of SSGA FM. Kennedy is registered as an investment adviser under the Advisers Act, and was formed and founded in 1980 to provide customized investment management services to corporate and public pension funds, endowments, foundations and multi-employer plans as well as high-net-worth individuals. Kennedy specializes in the small and mid-cap asset classes. As of September 30, 2023, Kennedy had approximately $4.29 billion both in discretionary and non-discretionary assets under management. Kennedy has served as one of the sub-advisers to the Fund since September 10, 2010.

Palisade — Palisade, having its principal office located at One Bridge Plaza, Suite 1095, Fort Lee, New Jersey 07024, provides a continuous investment program with respect to Palisade's Allocated Assets, which may be changed from time to time at the sole discretion of SSGA FM. Palisade is registered as an investment adviser under the Advisers Act, and was formed in 1995. Palisade offers a variety of equity and convertible securities strategies. As of September 30, 2023, Palisade had approximately $4 billion of assets under management. Prior to October 1, 2008, Palisade had served as the sole sub-adviser to the Small-Cap Equity Fund since the Fund's inception.

SouthernSun — SouthernSun, having its principal office located at 240 Madison Avenue, Suite 800, Memphis, Tennessee 38103, provides a continuous investment program with respect to SouthernSun's Allocated Assets, which may be changed from time to time at the sole discretion of SSGA FM. SouthernSun is registered as an investment adviser

under the Advisers Act, and was formed in 1989. SouthernSun is a research-driven investment management firm implementing long-only U.S. Small Cap and SMID Cap equity strategies for institutions and individuals. SouthernSun is absolute return oriented, investing with a value approach and long-term perspective through disciplined, bottom-up, fundamental analysis and on-site research (e.g., management interviews, facility visits, inquiries with customers and suppliers). As of September 30, 2023, SouthernSun's estimated assets under management were approximately $887.3 million. SouthernSun has served as one of the sub-advisers to the Fund since October 1, 2008. Between March 31, 2014 and August 12, 2020, Affiliated Managers Group, Inc. (“AMG”), a publicly traded asset management company (NYSE: AMG), indirectly held a majority equity interest in SouthernSun and SouthernSun's principals held the remaining equity interests in the firm. As of August 13, 2020, SouthernSun acquired AMG's ownership interest in SouthernSun. SouthernSun is now wholly-owned by its employees, either directly or indirectly.

Sub-Advisory Agreements

At a shareholder meeting held on August 6, 2008, the shareholders of the Small-Cap Equity Fund approved separate sub-advisory agreements between GEAM (the Fund's then investment adviser) and each of Champlain and SouthernSun, and an amended and restated sub-advisory agreement with Palisade, each of which became effective on October 1, 2008. At a special meeting held on July 30, 2010, the Board approved a new sub-advisory agreement between GEAM and SouthernSun and at a regular meeting held on September 10, 2010, the Board approved a new sub-advisory agreement between GEAM and Kennedy. At a regular meeting held on March 6, 2014, the Board approved a new sub-advisory agreement between GEAM and SouthernSun. At a shareholder meeting held on June 22, 2016, the shareholders of the Small-Cap Equity Fund approved separate sub-advisory agreements between SSGA FM and each of Champlain, Kennedy, Palisade and SouthernSun, each of which became effective on July 1, 2016. At a meeting held on August 7, 2020, the Board approved a new sub-advisory agreement between SSGA FM and SouthernSun. As described above, SSGA FM has received an exemptive order from the SEC to operate under a manager of managers structure that permits SSGA FM, with the approval of the Board, to appoint and replace sub-advisers, enter into sub-advisory agreements, and materially amend and terminate sub-advisory agreements on behalf of the Funds without shareholder approval

Each respective sub-advisory agreement with each of Champlain, Kennedy, Palisade and SouthernSun is not assignable and may be terminated without penalty by either the sub-adviser or SSGA FM upon 60 days' written notice to the other or by the Board, or by the vote of a majority of the outstanding voting securities of the Fund, on 60 days' written notice to the sub-adviser. Each sub-advisory agreement provides that respective sub-adviser may render similar sub-advisory services to other clients so long as the services that it provides under the Agreement are not impaired thereby. Each sub-advisory agreement also provides that a sub-adviser shall not be liable for any loss incurred by the Fund except for a loss resulting from willful misfeasance, bad faith or gross negligence in the performance of its duties or from reckless disregard of its obligations and duties under the respective sub-advisory agreement.

Securities Activities of SSGA FM and the Sub-Advisers

Securities held by the Funds also may be held by other funds or separate accounts for which the investment adviser, SSGA FM and/or each of the Sub-Advisers act as an adviser. Because of different investment objectives or other factors, a particular security may be bought by SSGA FM, and/or the Sub-Advisers for one or more of its clients, when one or more other clients are selling the same security. If purchases or sales of securities for a Fund or other client of SSGA FM and/or a Sub-Adviser arise for consideration at or about the same time, transactions in such securities will be made, insofar as feasible, for the Fund and other clients in a manner deemed equitable to all. To the extent that transactions on behalf of more than one client of SSGA FM and/or any Sub-Adviser during the same period may increase the demand for securities being purchased or the supply of securities being sold, there may be an adverse effect on price.

On occasions when SSGA FM and/or a Sub-Adviser (under the supervision of the Board) deems the purchase or sale of a security to be in the best interests of the Trust as well as other funds or accounts for which SSGA FM and/or the Sub-Adviser acts as an adviser, it may, to the extent permitted by applicable laws and regulations, but will not be obligated to, aggregate the securities to be sold or purchased for the Trust with those to be sold or purchased for other funds or accounts in order to obtain favorable execution and low brokerage commissions. In that event, allocation of the securities purchased or sold, as well as the expenses incurred in the transaction, will be made by SSGA FM and/or a Sub-Adviser in the manner it considers to be most equitable and consistent with its fiduciary obligations to the Trust and to such other funds or accounts. In some cases this procedure may adversely affect the size the position obtainable for a Fund.

Code of Ethics

The Adviser, the Sub-Advisers, SSGA FD and the Trust have each adopted a code of ethics (the Trust's code being referred to herein as the “Code of Ethics”) under Rule 17j-1 of the 1940 Act. The Code of Ethics, by relying on the codes of the underlying service providers, permits personnel of the Funds' Adviser, Distributor and officers, subject to the provisions of the relevant code of ethics, to invest in securities, including securities that may be purchased or held by the Adviser or the Trust. Under the relevant code of ethics, all employees or officers who are deemed to be access persons (persons who have interaction with funds or accounts managed by the Adviser or SSGA FD as part of their job function) must pre-clear personal securities transactions. Each code of ethics is designed to ensure that employees conduct their personal securities transactions in a manner that does not create an actual or potential conflict of interest to the business or fiduciary responsibilities of the Trust's service providers or officers. In addition, the Code of Ethics establishes standards prohibiting the trading in or recommending of securities based on material, nonpublic information or the divulgence of such information to others.

Distributor

State Street Global Advisors Funds Distributors, LLC, located at One Iron Street, Boston, Massachusetts 02210, serves as the distributor of the Funds pursuant to the Distribution Agreement by and between the Distributor and the Funds.

Distribution Plan

The Board adopted a Shareholder Servicing and Distribution Plan with respect to the Trust's Service Class shares pursuant to Rule 12b-1 under the 1940 Act (the “Plan”). Under the Plan, the Trust pays SSGA FD, the Funds' principal underwriter, with respect to the Service Class shares of each Fund, an annual fee of 0.25% of the value of the average daily net assets attributed to such Service Class shares. The shareholder servicing and distribution fee is intended to (a) compensate SSGA FD, or enable SSGA FD to compensate other persons (“Service Providers”), for providing ongoing servicing and/or maintenance of the accounts of Service Class shareholders of a Fund and (b) compensate SSGA FD, or enable SSGA FD to compensate Service Providers (including any distributor of Service Class shares of the Fund), for providing services primarily intended to result in, or are primarily attributable to, the sale of Service Class shares.

The Plan was approved by the sole initial shareholder of the Trust. Under its terms, the Plan continues from year to year, provided its continuance is approved annually by vote of the Trust's full Board, as well as by a majority of the Independent Trustees of the Trust and who have no direct or indirect financial interest in the operation of the Plan or in any agreements related to the Plan (“Independent Trustees”). The Plan may not be amended to increase materially the amount of the fees paid under the Plan with respect to a Fund without approval of Service Class shareholders of the Fund. In addition, all material amendments of the Plan must be approved by the Trustees and Independent Trustees in the manner described above. The Plan may be terminated with respect to a Fund at any time, without penalty, by vote of a majority of the Independent Trustees or by a vote of a majority of the outstanding voting securities of the Service Class shares of that Fund (as defined in the 1940 Act).

In addition, SSGA FM and its affiliates, at their own expense and out of their own legitimate profits or other resources, pay additional compensation to certain authorized broker-dealers, investment advisers, financial advisers, retirement plan administrators, insurance companies, or other financial intermediaries that have entered into a distribution agreement, service agreement or other type of arrangement with SSGA FM, SSGA FD or the Funds (“Authorized Firms”) for selling or servicing Fund shares. Authorized Firms that receive these payments may be affiliated with SSGA FM. Payments may relate to selling and/or servicing activities, such as: access to an Authorized Firm's customers or network; recordkeeping services; aggregating, netting and transmission of orders; generation of sales and other informational materials; individual or broad-based marketing and sales activities; wholesale activities; conferences; retention of assets; new sales of Fund shares, and a wide range of other activities. Compensation amounts generally vary, and can include various initial and on-going payments. Additional compensation may also be paid to broker-dealers who offer certain Funds as part of a special preferred-list or other preferred treatment program.

SSGA FM does not direct the Funds' portfolio securities transactions or provide any brokerage-related remuneration to broker-dealers for promoting or selling Fund shares.

SSGA FM and its affiliates also may pay financial consultants for products and/or services such as: (i) performance analytical software, (ii) attendance at, or sponsorship of, professional conferences, (iii) product evaluations and other types of investment consulting, and (iv) asset/liability studies and other types of retirement plan consulting. SSGA FM and its affiliates may also provide non-cash compensation to financial consultants, including occasional gifts, meals, or other entertainment. These activities may create, or could be viewed as creating, an incentive for such consultants or their

employees or associated persons to recommend or sell shares of the Funds to their client investors. Firms and consultants that receive these various types of payments (including those affiliated with SSGA FM) may have a conflict of interest in selling the Funds rather than other mutual funds to their client investors, particularly if these payments exceed the amounts paid by other mutual funds.

For the fiscal year ended September 30, 2023, the Funds paid $4,525to SSGA FD for distribution and shareholder servicing. For the fiscal year ended September 30, 2023, the following Funds paid SSGA FD under their 12b-1 Plans:

Fund	Amount Paid Under Service Class 12b-1 Plan
Small-Cap Equity Fund	$4,232
U.S. Equity Fund	$293

For the fiscal year ended September 30, 2023, the fees paid by the Funds under each Fund's Service Class 12b-1 Plan were spent as follows:

Fund	Printing & Mailing of Prospectuses to Other than Current Shareholders	Compensation to Dealers	Compensation to Sales Personnel	Other*	Total
Small-Cap Equity Fund	$0	$4,205	$0	$27	$4,232
U.S. Equity Fund	$0	$291	$0	$2	$293

Includes such items as compensation for travel, conferences and seminars for staff, professional fees, technology, services, and overhead (including space/facilities and management).

Sub-Administrator and Custodian

State Street serves as the sub-administrator for the Funds, pursuant to a sub-administration agreement (the “Sub-Administration Agreement”). State Street serves as the custodian for the Funds, pursuant to a custody agreement (the “Custody Agreement”). Under the Sub-Administration Agreement, State Street is obligated to provide certain sub-administrative services to the Funds. Under the Custody Agreement, State Street is obligated to provide certain custody services to the Funds, as well as basic portfolio recordkeeping required by the Funds for regulatory and financial reporting purposes. State Street is a wholly owned subsidiary of State Street Corporation, a publicly held financial holding company, and is affiliated with the Adviser. State Street's mailing address is One Congress Street, Boston, Massachusetts 02114.

As consideration for services provided under the Sub-Administration Agreement and the Custody Agreement, the Adviser, from its Management Fee, pays State Street a fee for the services, which is accrued daily and paid monthly based on the average monthly net assets of each Fund. The Adviser, from its Management Fee, also pays State Street transaction and service fees for these services and reimburses State Street for out-of-pocket expenses.

Transfer Agent

U.S. Bancorp Fund Services, LLC, located at 615 East Michigan Street, Milwaukee, Wisconsin 53202-5207, serves as the transfer agent. As transfer agent, U.S. Bancorp Fund Services, LLC is responsible for processing purchase and redemption requests and crediting dividends to the accounts of shareholders of the Funds. For its services, U.S. Bancorp Fund Services, LLC receives monthly fees charged to the Funds, plus certain charges for securities transactions.

Securities Lending

None of the Funds engaged in securities lending activities during the fiscal year ended September 30, 2023.

Counsel and Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

Ropes & Gray LLP serves as counsel to the Trust. The principal business address of Ropes & Gray LLP is 800 Boylston Street, Boston, Massachusetts 02199. Sullivan & Worcester LLP, located at One Post Office Square, Boston, Massachusetts, 02109, serves as independent counsel to the Independent Trustees.

Ernst & Young LLP serves as the independent registered public accounting firm for the Trust and provides (i) audit services and (ii) tax services. In connection with the audit of the 2023 financial statements, the Trust entered into an engagement agreement with Ernst & Young LLP that sets forth the terms of Ernst & Young LLP's audit engagement. The principal business address of Ernst & Young LLP is 200 Clarendon Street, Boston, Massachusetts 02116.

Portfolio Managers

The Adviser manages the Funds using a team of investment professionals. The following table lists the number and types of accounts managed by each of the key professionals involved in the day-to-day portfolio management for each Fund and assets under management in those accounts. The total number of accounts and assets have been allocated to each respective manager. Therefore, some accounts and assets have been counted twice.

Other Accounts Managed as of September 30, 2023

Portfolio Manager	Registered Investment Company Accounts	Assets Managed (billions)	Other Pooled Investment Vehicle Accounts	Assets Managed (billions)	Other Accounts	Assets Managed (billions)	Total Assets Managed (billions)
Paul Nestro	5	$9.36	16	$1.07	11 (1)	$2.39 (1)	$12.82
Chris Sierakowski	5	$9.36	16	$1.07	11 (1)	$2.39 (1)	$12.82
Michael Solecki	5	$9.36	16	$1.07	11 (1)	$2.39 (1)	$12.82
Fares Altaher(2)	28	$20.82	155	$223.49	170 (3)	$90.58 (3)	$334.89
Shawn McKay(2)	28	$20.82	155	$223.49	170 (3)	$90.58 (3)	$334.89
Carrie Peluso(2)	28	$20.82	155	$223.49	170 (3)	$90.58 (3)	$334.89
Marc Shapiro	1	$0.01	2	$0.01	1,533	$2.09	$2.11
Dennison Veru	1	$0.01	0	$0	220	$0.18	$0.19
Scott Brayman	7	$10.20	4	$1.01	107 (4)	$3.55 (4)	$14.76
Frank Latuda, Jr.	5	$0.36	0	$0	53	$0.83	$1.19
McAfee Burke	4	$0.23	0	$0	20	$0.55	$0.78
Phillip Cook	2	$0.37	3	$0.03	90	$0.27	$0.67

(1)

Includes 2 accounts (totaling $345.84 million in assets under management) with performance-based fees.

(2)

The noted portfolio manager of the Small-Cap Equity Fund is responsible for allocating the Fund's assets to separate teams of portfolio managers and analysts for day-to-day management.

(3)

Includes 4 accounts (totaling $215.76 million in assets under management) with performance-based fees.

(4)

Includes 12 accounts (totaling $594.80 million in assets under management) with performance-based fees.

None of the portfolio managers listed above beneficially owned shares of any of the Funds as of September 30, 2023.

Portfolio Managers – Potential Conflicts of Interest

Portfolio managers at SSGA FM and at each Sub-Adviser may manage multiple registered investment companies, unregistered investment pools and/or investment accounts, which could raise potential conflicts of interest in the areas described below. Each of SSGA FM and the Sub-Advisers has policies and procedures in place that are reasonably designed to mitigate these conflicts of interest, which are also described below.

SSGA FM

A portfolio manager that has responsibility for managing more than one account may be subject to potential conflicts of interest because he or she is responsible for other accounts in addition to the Funds. Those conflicts could include preferential treatment of one account over others in terms of: (a) the portfolio manager's execution of different investment strategies for various accounts; or (b) the allocation of resources or of investment opportunities.

Portfolio managers may manage numerous accounts for multiple clients. These accounts may include registered investment companies, other types of pooled accounts (e.g., collective investment funds), and separate accounts (i.e., accounts managed on behalf of individuals or public or private institutions). Portfolio managers make investment decisions for each account based on the investment objectives and policies and other relevant investment considerations applicable to that portfolio. A potential conflict of interest may arise as a result of a portfolio manager's responsibility for multiple accounts with similar investment guidelines. Under these circumstances, a potential investment may be suitable for more than one of the portfolio manager's accounts, but the quantity of the investment available for purchase is less than the aggregate amount the accounts would ideally allocate to the opportunity. Similar conflicts may arise when multiple accounts seek to dispose of the same investment. The portfolio managers may also manage accounts whose objectives and policies differ from that of the Funds. These differences may be such that under certain circumstances, trading activity appropriate for one account managed by the portfolio manager may have adverse consequences for another account managed by the portfolio manager. For example, an account may sell a significant position in a security, which could cause the market price of that security to decrease, while a Fund maintained its position in that security.

A potential conflict may arise when the portfolio managers are responsible for accounts that have different advisory fees—the difference in fees could create an incentive for the portfolio manager to favor one account over another, for example, in terms of access to investment opportunities. This conflict may be heightened if an account is subject to a performance-based fee, as applicable. Another potential conflict may arise when the portfolio manager has a personal investment in one or more accounts that participate in transactions with other accounts. His or her personal investment(s) may create an incentive for the portfolio manager to favor one account over another. The Adviser has adopted policies and procedures reasonably designed to address these potential material conflicts. For instance, portfolio managers are normally responsible for all accounts within a certain investment discipline and do not, absent special circumstances, differentiate among the various accounts when allocating resources. Additionally, the Adviser and its advisory affiliates have processes and procedures for allocating investment opportunities among portfolios that are designed to provide a fair and equitable allocation. With respect to conflicts arising from personal investments, all employees, including portfolio managers, must comply with personal trading controls established by each of the Adviser's and Trust's Code of Ethics.

SSGA FM has a conflict of interest in its allocation of assets of the Small-Cap Equity Fund among the various Sub-Advisers. SSGA FM pays the management fees of the Sub-Advisers from its management fees and, therefore, may have an incentive to allocate more assets to Sub-Advisers with lower fees in order for SSGA FM to retain more of its management fee.

Champlain

The portfolio managers' management of “other accounts” may give rise to potential conflicts of interest in connection with their management of the Fund's investments, on the one hand, and the investments of the other accounts, on the other. The other accounts may have the same investment objective as a fund. Therefore, a potential conflict of interest may arise as a result of the identical investment objectives, whereby a portfolio manager could favor one account over another. Another potential conflict could include the portfolio managers' knowledge about the size, timing and possible market impact of fund trades, whereby a portfolio manager could use this information to the advantage of other accounts and to the disadvantage of the Fund. However, Champlain has established policies and procedures to ensure that the purchase and sale of securities among all accounts it manages are fairly and equitably allocated.

Compensation. Champlain compensates funds' portfolio managers for their management of the funds. Each fund's portfolio managers' compensation consists of a cash base salary and a discretionary performance bonus paid in cash that is based on overall profitability, and therefore in part based on the value of the fund's net assets and other client accounts they are managing. Each fund's portfolio managers also receive benefits standard for all of Champlain's employees, including health care and other insurance benefits. In addition, portfolio managers may also have an ownership stake in Champlain which would entitle them to a portion of the pre-tax profitability of the firm. Further, some portfolio managers may participate in a long-term incentive plan.

Brokerage Practices. Generally, equity securities, both listed and over-the-counter, are bought and sold through brokerage transactions for which commissions are payable. Purchases from underwriters will include the underwriting commission or concession, and purchases from dealers serving as market makers will include a dealer's mark-up or reflect a dealer's mark-down. Money market securities and other debt securities are usually bought and sold directly from the issuer or an underwriter or market maker for the securities. Generally, the funds will not pay brokerage commissions for such purchases. When a debt security is bought from an underwriter, the purchase price will usually include an underwriting commission or concession.

In addition, Champlain may place a combined order for two or more accounts it manages, including a fund, engaged in the purchase or sale of the same security if, in its judgment, joint execution is in the best interest of each participant and will result in best price and execution. Transactions involving commingled orders are allocated in a manner deemed equitable to each account or fund. Although it is recognized that, in some cases, the joint execution of orders could adversely affect the price or volume of the security that a particular account or a fund may obtain, it is the opinion of Champlain that the advantages of combined orders outweigh the possible disadvantages of combined orders.

Champlain does not expect to use one particular broker or dealer, and when one or more brokers is believed capable of providing the best combination of price and execution, Champlain may select a broker based upon brokerage or research services provided to Champlain. Champlain may pay a higher commission than otherwise obtainable from other brokers in return for such services only if a good faith determination is made that the commission is reasonable in relation to the services provided.

Section 28(e) of the Exchange Act permits Champlain, under certain circumstances, to cause the Fund to pay a broker or dealer a commission for effecting a transaction in excess of the amount of commission another broker or dealer would have charged for effecting the transaction in recognition of the value of brokerage and research services provided by the broker or dealer. In addition to agency transactions, Champlain may receive brokerage and research services in connection with certain riskless principal transactions, in accordance with applicable SEC guidance. Brokerage and research services include: (1) furnishing advice as to the value of securities, the advisability of investing in, purchasing or selling securities, and the availability of securities or purchasers or sellers of securities; (2) furnishing analyses and reports concerning issuers, industries, securities, economic factors and trends, portfolio strategy, and the performance of accounts; and (3) effecting securities transactions and performing functions incidental thereto (such as clearance, settlement, and custody). In the case of research services, Champlain believes that access to independent investment research is beneficial to its investment decision-making processes and, therefore, to the Fund.

To the extent that research services may be a factor in selecting brokers, such services may be in written form or through direct contact with individuals and may include information as to particular companies and securities as well as market, economic, or institutional areas and information which assists in the valuation and pricing of investments. Examples of research-oriented services for which Champlain might utilize fund commissions include research reports and other information on the economy, industries, sectors, groups of securities, individual companies, statistical information, political developments, technical market action, pricing and appraisal services, credit analysis, risk measurement analysis, performance and other analysis. Champlain may use research services furnished by brokers in servicing all client accounts and not all services may necessarily be used in connection with the account that paid commissions to the broker providing such services. Information so received by Champlain will be in addition to and not in lieu of the services required to be performed by Champlain under an Advisory Agreement. Any advisory or other fees paid to Champlain are not reduced as a result of the receipt of research services.

In some cases the Champlain may receive a service from a broker that has both a “research” and a “non-research” use. When this occurs, Champlain makes a good faith allocation, under all the circumstances, between the research and non-research uses of the service. The percentage of the service that is used for research purposes may be paid for with client commissions, while Champlain will use its own funds to pay for the percentage of the service that is used for non-research purposes. In making this good faith allocation, Champlain faces a potential conflict of interest, but Champlain believes that its allocation procedures are reasonably designed to ensure that it appropriately allocates the anticipated use of such services to their research and non-research uses.

From time to time, Champlain may purchase new issues of securities for clients, including the Fund, in a fixed price offering. In these situations, the seller may be a member of the selling group that will, in addition to selling securities, provide Champlain with research services. FINRA has adopted rules expressly permitting these types of arrangements under certain circumstances. Generally, the seller will provide research “credits” in these situations at a rate that is higher than that which is available for typical secondary market transactions. These arrangements may not fall within the safe harbor of Section 28(e).

Trade Allocation. Champlain will seek to manage potential conflicts of interest in the following specific respects:

(i) When a potential transaction would benefit more than one client, trades will be bunched where advantageous and allocated pro rata until all participating accounts have been satisfied, or by some other means deemed fair under the circumstances; the firm's trading system facilitates the automated accomplishment of this fair allocation. Allocations may not be pro rata due to individual account restrictions or guidelines. This will result in a slightly larger allocation in permitted securities to those accounts than would otherwise be warranted by the account's assets, or no allocation at all if the security violates account guidelines. Also, cash flows in particular accounts are often considered when allocating investment opportunities; (ii) the firm ensures its Code of Ethics provisions on personal securities trading are followed so that personal trading by employees does not interfere with trading on behalf of clients.

Kennedy

Compensation. Kennedy's compensation structure is designed to directly tie investment professionals to the performance of client portfolios and thus to align Kennedy's employees' interests with those of clients. Kennedy believes that its measures are highly objective and significantly driven by the performance contribution attributable to each investment professional.

Brokerage Practices. Kennedy has partnered with the Integrated Trading Solutions team at Northern Trust (“NT ITS”) as an outsourced trading partner leveraging NT ITS to provide trade order execution with the objective of obtaining the best possible execution for each order. In conjunction with the migration to an outsourced trading solution, Kennedy has

generally “unbundled” the investment research, brokerage products or other services (collectively “Products and Services”) received from the order execution process. The Products and Services may be useful for all client accounts, and not all research may be useful for the account for which the particular transaction was effected. Kennedy seeks to limit its soft commission use to those Products and Services that it believes facilitate the investment decision making process and otherwise comply with the SEC's interpretations of Section 28(e). Kennedy has set a commission rate that exceeds the amounts other broker-dealers might have charged for effecting these transactions, which has been determined in good faith that such amount is reasonable in relation to the value of the Products and Services provided, viewed either in terms of a particular transaction or in the overall duty to their clients. Kennedy believes that research obtained with soft dollars benefits all of its clients regardless of strategy.

Trade Allocation. To address potential conflicts Kennedy has developed a trade allocation policy which provides that all accounts are treated similarly to any other client account and in a manner that it believes does not conflict with the interests of any client. It is Kennedy's policy that accounts are traded according to its stated policies and allocated fairly so that no one account or strategy is favored over another. Kennedy generally aggregates orders of all portfolios where it is buying or selling the same security at the same time with the participating accounts generally receiving the same average price and proportional share of execution expenses. Trades are allocated to participating accounts on a pro-rata basis.

Palisade

Compensation. The compensation paid to Palisade for managing the Fund assets allocated to it is based only on a percentage of assets under management.

IPO Allocation. If a portfolio manager identifies an IPO that may be suitable for more than one Fund or other client account, the Fund may not be able to take full advantage of that opportunity. To mitigate this conflict of interest, Palisade has adopted procedures to ensure the fair and equitable allocation of IPO shares to the Fund it advises and other client accounts consistent with its fiduciary obligations to each of its clients. Palisade generally invests in and allocates IPOs to eligible accounts based on the target amount submitted in advance by the portfolio managers for each strategy for accounts which are eligible to participate in IPOs.

Brokerage Practices. Palisade generally determines the broker or dealer through which client transactions will be effected on a transaction-by-transaction basis (although some clients direct Palisade to use a particular broker or dealer for a portion of the transactions in their accounts). Palisade receives benefits other than execution from various broker-dealers in connection with client securities transactions. Consistent with its duty to seek best execution, Palisade typically directs client orders to broker-dealers in recognition of research and/or order execution services furnished by them, as permitted by Section 28(e) of the Exchange Act. In some cases, research services that are generated by third parties are provided by or through broker-dealers. Clients may pay commissions higher than those charged by other broker-dealers in return for soft dollar benefits. Palisade does not attempt to allocate the relative costs or benefits of soft dollar benefits such as research to client accounts proportionately to the soft dollar benefits generated by the account. Palisade believes that the soft dollar benefits (including research) are, in the aggregate, of assistance in fulfilling its overall responsibilities to clients.

Trade Allocation. Consistent with its duty to seek best execution, Palisade typically buys and sells securities on a “bunched” or aggregated basis for eligible accounts, so long as transaction costs are shared equitably and on a prorated basis between all accounts included in any such trade. While Palisade will always try to allocate investment opportunities and the results of transactions pro rata in the first instance, Palisade may allocate on a basis other than pro rata, if, under the circumstances, Palisade believes that such other method of allocation is reasonable, does not result in improper or undisclosed advantage or disadvantage to participating accounts, and results in fair access, over time, to investment and trading opportunities for all eligible accounts. Palisade will consider factors such as: investment objectives and style; risk/return parameters; legal, regulatory, and client requirements or restrictions; tax considerations; account size; sensitivity to turnover; and available cash and cash flows.

SouthernSun

Compensation. The compensation paid to SouthernSun for managing the Fund is based only on a percentage of assets under management. In limited instances, SouthernSun may enter into performance-based fee arrangements with certain clients. SouthernSun has implemented and designed policies and procedures in an effort to ensure that all clients are treated fairly and to prevent this type of conflict from influencing the allocation of investment opportunities among clients.

IPO Allocation. SouthernSun does not participate in IPOs as a routine practice. In the rare event that it does so in the future, allocation among client accounts would follow similar policies as those relating to aggregate trades.

Brokerage Practices. As an investment advisory firm, SouthernSun has a fiduciary and fundamental duty to seek best execution for all client transactions and, as a matter of policy and practice, does seek to obtain best execution for client transactions. Although SouthernSun may, at times, elect to support its clients' request for participation in established commission recapture or discount programs, SouthernSun's duty to seek best execution, pursuant to established best execution policies, will dictate broker selection for all client transactions. In the event that a client requests SouthernSun to participate in a commission recapture or discount program and SouthernSun agrees, the firm will discuss the request with the client to confirm the firm's understanding of the program and to implement.

Notwithstanding the foregoing, participation in a commission recapture or discount program may compromise SouthernSun's ability to seek best execution.

SouthernSun has a best execution process where brokers are evaluated on the following criteria: qualitative information and quantitative performance which is currently based on transaction cost analysis data. The commissions charged must be, in SouthernSun's judgment, reasonable under the circumstances in light of the value of all services provided.

During the routine course of business, SouthernSun's trading desk selects a broker for each discretionary trade, unless restricted by contract or explicit client instructions, and takes into consideration certain qualitative factors (e.g., execution, responsiveness, anonymity, access to liquidity, geographic location, size and specialty of the firm, flexibility, etc.) for the given security at that period in time in an attempt to facilitate best execution. For example, depending on the size of the trade, the same broker is not always the best source of liquidity every time SouthernSun elects to trade that position. SouthernSun may have advisory relationships with affiliates of brokers selected for each trade; however, such relationships are not the determinant in the firm's broker selection process. SouthernSun may or may not elect to solicit competitive bids or offers for a particular transaction based on the trading desk's judgment of the potential benefit or harm to the execution of that transaction. Prior to adding a new broker to the approved broker list, the Chairman of the Best Execution Committee will notify the Committee of the new potential broker, including the rationale for presenting the broker. The Compliance and Legal Team must also screen the broker to determine if there are any significant deficiencies from a due diligence perspective. If a screened broker has significant deficiencies identified by the Compliance and Legal Team, or warrants further review for other reasons, the Best Execution Committee must review the results and opine on the addition of any new broker. For purposes of ongoing due diligence, the Compliance and Legal Team will periodically send current brokers a due diligence questionnaire and will review responses for any notable business, regulatory, or legal updates. As part of the semi-annual Best Execution meeting, the Committee will review each broker's performance, determine any underperformance based on various factors, and remove any brokers from the Approved Broker List as needed.

SouthernSun receives research and other services including, but not limited to, access to conferences, management meetings, and plant and facility tours from brokers with whom SouthernSun trades as well as brokers who are trying to solicit business but with whom SouthernSun does not currently have a trading relationship. For those situations in which we receive research and other services from brokers with whom we trade, these are considered “soft dollar” benefits that fall within the safe harbor provision of Section 28(e) of the Exchange Act. However, SouthernSun is under no obligation to trade with any broker and does not adjust commission rates for research and other services. These services are used for the benefit of all applicable clients irrespective of the nature of the relationship.

SouthernSun does not attempt to allocate such services proportionately to clients based on the soft dollar benefits generated by their respective accounts. SouthernSun pays a negotiated rate in cents per share or per transaction or in basis points depending on the broker, but SouthernSun does not currently have any formal soft dollar arrangements with any broker.

Trade Allocation. SouthernSun generally adheres to a trade sequence when investing for accounts under similar investment policies and objectives. SouthernSun's trade sequence typically includes two steps:

Fully discretionary trading relationships and

Captive or directed trading relationships

Unified Managed Accounts (“UMA”) or model relationships are typically provided investment model updates only if there is a change in the target weightings and the trade sequence has completed the first two steps. In limited instances, SouthernSun provides additional trading information to certain UMA managers based on contractual obligations and/or the sophistication and capabilities of UMA manager's methodology for receiving such information. Fully discretionary separately managed accounts (“SMAs”) generally utilize the same investment strategies offered to wrap programs, but wrap accounts may experience performance dispersion relative to SMAs, and one another, as a result of investment

discretion and brokerage selection differences, among other reasons. Each account and/or trading relationship in step 2 is placed in a randomizer giving each relationship an equal opportunity in the sequence of trading. The trade sequence may be altered or not completed at the discretion of the Investment Team or the trading desk, depending on the time of trade, liquidity conditions, and the broker's ability to complete the trade, in order to facilitate best execution. In addition, any employee-related pooled vehicles will be traded in the same manner and subject to all of the trading procedures in this section (i.e. cycle, aggregation, and allocation), as well as the overall principles of Brokerage Practices discussed in Item-12 of the firm's Form ADV Part 2.

SouthernSun may aggregate client purchase and sale orders of securities with those of other clients if, in SouthernSun's judgment, such aggregation is reasonably likely to result in an overall economic benefit to its clients, better execution price, lower commission expenses, beneficial timing of transactions, or a combination of these and other factors. SouthernSun may also consider a cross trade if it is permissible, determined to be a mutually beneficial opportunity for both sides of the trade, and executed at arm's length. Any cross trades that occur must be approved by a member of SouthernSun's Compliance team.

Partially filled orders are generally allocated on a prorated basis in order to achieve comparable gross exposure levels per each security position held or traded. Orders filled with less than 25% of the total order size are typically allocated on a random basis across similar accounts. Similar accounts are defined as a common investment strategy, trading venue, or both.

These allocation guidelines could be altered for accounts that pay commissions on a per trade basis rather than a per share basis, or other client-directed requests. Orders that are not completed retain priority in subsequent trading, subject to the conditions previously mentioned.

Portfolio Managers – Compensation

Set forth below are descriptions of the structure of, and methods used to determine, portfolio manager compensation at SSGA FM and each of the Sub-Advisers.

SSGA FM

SSGA's culture is complemented and reinforced by a total rewards strategy that is based on a pay for performance philosophy which seeks to offer a competitive pay mix of base salary, benefits, cash incentives and deferred compensation.

Salary is based on a number of factors, including external benchmarking data and market trends, and performance both at the business and individual level. SSGA's Global Human Resources department regularly participates in compensation surveys in order to provide SSGA with market-based compensation information that helps support individual pay decisions.

Additionally, subject to State Street and SSGA business results, an incentive pool is allocated to SSGA to reward its employees. The size of the incentive pool for most business units is based on the firm's overall profitability and other factors, including performance against risk-related goals. For most SSGA investment teams, SSGA recognizes and rewards performance by linking annual incentive decisions for investment teams to the firm's or business unit's profitability and business unit investment performance over a multi-year period.

Incentive pool funding for most active investment teams is driven in part by the post-tax investment performance of fund(s) managed by the team versus the return levels of the benchmark index(es) of the fund(s) on a one-, three- and, in some cases, five-year basis. For most active investment teams, a material portion of incentive compensation for senior staff is deferred over a four-year period into the SSGA Long-Term Incentive (“SSGA LTI”) program. For these teams, The SSGA LTI program indexes the performance of these deferred awards against the post-tax investment performance of fund(s) managed by the team. This is intended to align our investment team's compensation with client interests, both through annual incentive compensation awards and through the long-term value of deferred awards in the SSGA LTI program.

For the index equity investment team, incentive pool funding is driven in part by the post-tax 1 and 3-year tracking error of the funds managed by the team against the benchmark indexes of the funds.

The discretionary allocation of the incentive pool to the business units within SSGA is influenced by market-based compensation data, as well as the overall performance of each business unit. Individual compensation decisions are made by the employee's manager, in conjunction with the senior management of the employee's business unit. These decisions are based on the overall performance of the employee and, as mentioned above, on the performance of the firm

and business unit. Depending on the job level, a portion of the annual incentive may be awarded in deferred compensation, which may include cash and/or Deferred Stock Awards (State Street stock), which typically vest over a four-year period. This helps to retain staff and further aligns SSGA employees' interests with SSGA clients' and shareholders' long-term interests.

SSGA recognizes and rewards outstanding performance by:

•Promoting employee ownership to connect employees directly to the company's success.

•Using rewards to reinforce mission, vision, values and business strategy.

•Seeking to recognize and preserve the firm's unique culture and team orientation.

•Providing all employees the opportunity to share in the success of SSGA.

Champlain

All employees and partners have a base salary, along with participation in a discretionary bonus plan. In addition, partners participate in pre-tax profit distributions.

Kennedy

Kennedy's compensation structure is designed to directly tie investment professionals to the performance of client portfolios and thus to align Kennedy's employees' interests with those of clients. Kennedy believes that its measures are highly objective and significantly driven by the performance contribution attributable to each investment professional.

Portfolio Manager Compensation

Portfolio Manager compensation begins with base salary and is augmented by semi-annual bonuses. Investment performance bonuses are based upon the returns generated for client accounts relative to one or more identified benchmarks on a trailing one-year basis and also relative to industry peers on a rolling three-year basis. Other forms of variable compensation are typically based on the achievement of certain goals (such as assets under management and investment performance) as well as subjective scoring.

Palisade

Palisade seeks to maintain a compensation program that is competitive within its industry. Employee portfolio managers receive a fixed base salary based on their experience and responsibilities and are eligible for a variable annual performance-based incentive bonus. The incentive bonus is based on a combination of the firm's overall results and the general overall before-tax performance of all accounts managed by the portfolio manager, including the Small-Cap Equity Fund, based in part on the Fund's objective performance over the past one-, three- and five-year periods against the Russell 2000® Index benchmark and the Small-Cap Equity Fund's ranking within an appropriate peer group and other subjective factors. Palisade's investment professionals may also receive discretionary bonuses tied to the performance of Palisade, the Small-Cap Core Equity team, and the individual. Portfolio managers who are partners of the firm receive distributions based on their pro rata share of the firm's profits.

Palisade maintains a Unit Appreciation Rights (“UAR”) Plan, whereby key Palisade employees who are not firm partners participate in the UAR Plan. This plan provides an opportunity for each participating employee to share in the appreciation of Palisade's equity value over time, similar to a stock option plan in a publicly traded company.

All employees are eligible for Palisade's 401(k) plan, group life, health and disability insurance programs.

SouthernSun

The compensation and interests of SouthernSun's portfolio manager are aligned with their clients. The portfolio manager is compensated by a fixed salary, bonus compensation, retirement and 401(k) Plan contributions, potentially profit sharing, and ownership distributions.

Brokerage Allocation and Other Practices

Portfolio transactions are placed on behalf of a Fund by the Adviser or a Sub-Adviser, as applicable. The section below describes how portfolio transactions are affected by the Adviser. A discussion of how portfolio transactions are affected by each Sub-Adviser is included within the “PORTFOLIO MANAGERS” section above.

Purchases and sales of securities on a securities exchange are affected through brokers who charge a commission for their services. Ordinarily commissions are not charged on over-the-counter orders (e.g., fixed income securities) because the Funds pay a spread which is included in the cost of the security and represents the difference between the dealer's quoted price at which it is willing to sell the security and the dealer's quoted price at which it is willing to buy the security. When a Fund executes an over-the-counter order with an electronic communications network or an alternative trading system, a commission is charged by such electronic communications networks and alternative trading systems as they execute such orders on an agency basis. Securities may be purchased from underwriters at prices that include underwriting fees.

In placing a portfolio transaction, the Adviser seeks to achieve best execution. The Adviser's duty to seek best execution requires the Adviser to take reasonable steps to obtain for the client as favorable an overall result as possible for Fund portfolio transactions under the circumstances, taking into account various factors that are relevant to the particular transaction.

The Adviser refers to and selects from the list of approved trading counterparties maintained by the Adviser's Credit Risk Management team. In selecting a trading counterparty for a particular trade, the Adviser seeks to weigh relevant factors including, but not limited to the following:

•Prompt and reliable execution;

•The competitiveness of commission rates and spreads, if applicable;

•The financial strength, stability and/or reputation of the trading counterparty;

•The willingness and ability of the executing trading counterparty to execute transactions (and commit capital) of size in liquid and illiquid markets without disrupting the market for the security;

•Local laws, regulations or restrictions;

•The ability of the trading counterparty to maintain confidentiality;

•The availability and capability of execution venues, including electronic communications networks for trading and execution management systems made available to Adviser;

•Market share;

•Liquidity;

•Price;

•Execution related costs;

•History of execution of orders;

•Likelihood of execution and settlement;

•Order size and nature;

•Clearance and settlement capabilities, especially in high volatility market environments;

•Availability of lendable securities;

•Sophistication of the trading counterparty's trading capabilities and infrastructure/facilities;

•The operational efficiency with which transactions are processed and cleared, taking into account the order size and complexity;

•Speed and responsiveness to the Adviser;

•Access to secondary markets;

•Counterparty exposure; and

•Depending upon the circumstances, the Adviser may take other relevant factors into account if the Adviser believes that these are important in taking all sufficient steps to obtain the best possible result for execution of the order.

In selecting a trading counterparty, the price of the transaction and costs related to the execution of the transaction typically merit a high relative importance, depending on the circumstances. The Adviser does not necessarily select a trading counterparty based upon price and costs but may take other relevant factors into account if it believes that these are important in taking reasonable steps to obtain the best possible result for a Fund under the circumstances. Consequently, the Adviser may cause a client to pay a trading counterparty more than another trading counterparty might have charged for the same transaction in recognition of the value and quality of the brokerage services provided. The following matters may influence the relative importance that the Adviser places upon the relevant factors:

(i)

The nature and characteristics of the order or transaction. For example, size of order, market impact of order, limits, or other instructions relating to the order;

(ii)

The characteristics of the financial instrument(s) or other assets which are the subject of that order. For example, whether the order pertains to an equity, fixed income, derivative or convertible instrument;

(iii)

The characteristics of the execution venues to which that order can be directed, if relevant. For example, availability and capabilities of electronic trading systems;

(iv)

Whether the transaction is a ‘delivery versus payment' or ‘over-the-counter' transaction. The creditworthiness of the trading counterparty, the amount of existing exposure to a trading counterparty and trading counterparty settlement capabilities may be given a higher relative importance in the case of ‘over-the-counter' transactions; and/or

(v)

Any other circumstances that the Adviser believes are relevant at the time.

The process by which trading counterparties are selected to effect transactions is designed to exclude consideration of the sales efforts conducted by broker-dealers in relation to the Funds.

The brokerage commissions paid by the Funds for the last three fiscal years are shown below:

Fund	2023	2022	2021
Small-Cap Equity Fund	$398,529	$598,916	$729,198
U.S. Equity Fund	$32,914	$93,977	$75,695

State Street Institutional U.S. Equity Fund: With respect only to the U.S. Equity Fund, which is managed through the Adviser's Stamford, Connecticut-based Active Fundamental Equity business, the Adviser uses “soft” or equity commission dollars for the purchase of third-party research permissible under Section 28(e) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”). Research services received by the Adviser on behalf of the U.S. Equity Fund includes, among other things, research reports and analysis, stock specific and sector research, market color, market data and regulatory analysis.

State Street Small-Cap Equity Fund: The Adviser does not currently use the Small-Cap Equity Fund's assets in connection with third-party soft dollar arrangements. While the Adviser does not currently use “soft” or commission dollars paid by the Small-Cap Equity Fund for the purchase of third-party research, the Adviser reserves the right to do so in the future.

The following table shows the dollar amount of brokerage commissions paid to firms that provided research and brokerage services and the approximate dollar amount of transactions involved during the fiscal year ended September 30, 2023. Funds that are not listed paid no brokerage commissions to firms for such services.

Fund	Commissions Paid to Firms for Brokerage and Research Services	Total Amount of Transactions to Firms for Brokerage and Research Services
U.S. Equity Fund	$20,610	$162,175,016
Small-Cap Equity Fund	$210,910	$485,441,733

The following table shows the dollar amount of brokerage commissions paid to each firm that provided research and brokerage services obtained in compliance with Section 28(e) of the Exchange Act, and the approximate dollar amount of transactions involved during the fiscal year ended September 30, 2023. Certain firms, commissions paid, and total amounts paid for transaction services listed may reflect research and brokerage services obtained by the Sub-Advisers.

Firm	Commissions Paid to Firm for Brokerage and Research Services	Total Amount of Transactions for Brokerage and Research Services
Westminster Research Asssociates	$27,074	$235,193,205
Northern Trust	$59,123	$130,981,739
Fidelity	$5,661	$37,618,913
Jones Trading	$37,963	$35,331,190
Robert W. Baird & Co Inc.	$17,807	$20,223,648
Goldman Sachs	$2,424	$19,308,329
Virtu Americas, LLC	$2,259	$15,208,117
BofA Merrill Lynch	$2,521	$13,410,514
Stifel,Nicolaus & Co Inc.	$9,190	$11,633,381
Instinet	$1,450	$11,014,239
UBS	$1,320	$9,439,245
RBC Capital Markets	$8,541	$7,750,038
Citigroup	$901	$7,075,771
Cantor, Fitzgerald	$1,312	$6,711,739
JP Morgan	$1,249	$6,584,201
Jefferies, LLC.	$7,158	$6,436,168
CJS Securities	$4,919	$6,083,430
KeyBanc Capital Markets, Inc.	$5,206	$5,823,215
Morgan Stanley	$1,094	$5,527,415
Stephens Inc.	$4,474	$4,886,953
B. Riley Securities	$3,534	$3,547,300
Piper Sandler	$3,619	$3,519,290
Strategas Securities, LLC.	$4,112	$3,084,694
Northcoast Research Partners, LLC.	$4,744	$3,040,666
D.A. Davidson	$4,337	$2,700,236
JMP Securities	$1,326	$1,882,528
Evercore ISI	$2,609	$1,580,871
Raymond James & Associates	$3,270	$1,532,952
Truist Securities, Inc.	$1,872	$1,349,152
CreditSuisse	$15	$477,007
Wells Fargo NA	$281	$465,003
Barclays	$92	$447,002
Liquidnet & Company	$65	$171,747

Securities of “Regular Broker-Dealer.” The Trust is required to identify any securities of its “regular brokers and dealers” (as such term is defined in the 1940 Act) which it may hold at the close of its most recent fiscal year. “Regular brokers or dealers” of the Trust are the ten brokers or dealers that, during the most recent fiscal year: (i) received the greatest dollar amounts of brokerage commissions from the Trust's portfolio transactions; (ii) engaged as principal in the largest dollar amounts of portfolio transactions of the Trust; or (iii) sold the largest dollar amounts of the Trust's shares.

The Trust's holdings in Securities of Regular Broker-Dealers as of September 30, 2023 are as follows:

Raymond James Financial, Inc.	$6,578,266
Stifel Financial Corp.	$2,767,626
JPMorgan Chase & Co.	$2,433,871
Piper Sandler Cos.	$1,732,241
Bank of America Corp.	$984,831

Portfolio turnover may vary from year to year, as well as within a year. High turnover rates are likely to result in comparatively greater brokerage expenses or transaction costs. The overall reasonableness of brokerage commissions and transaction costs is evaluated by the Adviser based upon its knowledge of available information as to the general level of commissions and transaction costs paid by other institutional investors for comparable services.

The following table provides the portfolio turnover rates for each Fund over the past two fiscal years.

Fund	Portfolio Turnover for Fiscal Year Ended September 30, 2023	Portfolio Turnover for Fiscal Year Ended September 30, 2022
Small-Cap Equity Fund	29 %	30 %
U.S. Equity Fund	39 %	29 %

Declaration of Trust, Capital Stock and Other Information

The Trust is an open-end management investment company organized as an unincorporated business trust under the laws of Delaware pursuant to a Certificate of Trust dated May 23, 1997, as amended from time to time. The Trust's Amended and Restated Declaration of Trust, dated July 24, 1998, as amended from time to time (the “Declaration”) permits the Trustees to issue an unlimited number of full and fractional shares of beneficial interest of the Trust par value $0.001 per share. Under the Declaration, the Trustees have the authority to create and classify shares of beneficial interest in separate series, without further action by shareholders.

The Declaration also authorizes the Trustees to classify and reclassify the shares of the Trust, or new series of the Trust, into one or more classes. As of the date of this SAI, the Trustees have authorized the issuance of two classes of shares of the Funds, designated as the Investment Class shares and the Service Class shares. The shares of each class of each Fund represent an equal proportionate interest in the aggregate net assets attributable to that class of that Fund. Holders of Service Class shares have certain exclusive voting rights on matters relating to the Plan. The different classes of the Fund may bear different expenses relating to the cost of holding shareholder meetings necessitated by the exclusive voting rights of any class of shares.

In the interest of economy and convenience, certificates representing shares of a Fund are not physically issued. U.S. Bancorp Fund Services, LLC maintains a record of each shareholder's ownership of shares of a Fund.

Dividends paid by each Fund, if any, with respect to each class of shares will be calculated in the same manner, at the same time and on the same day and will be in the same amount, except for differences resulting from the facts that: (a) the distribution and service fees relating to Service Class shares will be borne exclusively by that class, and (b) each of the Service Class shares and the Investment Class shares will bear any other class expenses properly allocable to such class of shares, subject to the requirements imposed by IRS on funds having a multiple-class structure. Similarly, the NAV per share may vary depending on whether Service Class shares or Investment Class shares are purchased. In the event of liquidation, shareholders of each class of each Fund are entitled to share pro rata in the net assets of the class of the Fund available for distribution to these shareholders. Shares entitle their holders to one vote per share, are freely transferable and have no preemptive, subscription or conversion rights. When issued, shares are fully paid and non-assessable.

Unless otherwise required by the 1940 Act or the Declaration, the Trust has no intention of holding annual meetings of shareholders. Fund shareholders may remove a Trustee by the affirmative vote of at least two-thirds of the Trust's outstanding shares and the Trustees shall promptly call a meeting for such purpose when requested to do so in writing by the record holders of not less than 10% of the outstanding shares of the Trust.

Shareholder Liability. Generally, Delaware business trust shareholders are not personally liable for obligations of the Delaware business trust under Delaware law. The Delaware Business Trust Act (“DBTA”) provides that a shareholder of a Delaware business trust shall be entitled to the same limitation of liability extended to shareholders of private for-profit corporations. The Declaration expressly provides that the Trust has been organized under the DBTA and that the Declaration is to be governed by and interpreted in accordance with Delaware law. It is nevertheless possible that a Delaware business trust, such as the Trust, might become a party to an action in another state whose courts refuse to apply Delaware law, in which case the Trust's shareholders could possibly be subject to personal liability.

To guard against this risk, the Declaration: (a) contains an express disclaimer of shareholder liability for acts or obligations of the Trust and provides that notice of such disclaimer may be given in each agreement, obligation and instrument entered into or executed by the Trust or its Trustees, (b) provides for the indemnification out of Trust property of any

shareholders held personally liable for any obligations of the Trust or any Fund, and (b) provides that the Trust shall, upon request, assume the defense of any claim made against any shareholder for any act or obligation of the Trust and satisfy any judgment thereon. Thus, the risk of a shareholder incurring financial loss beyond his or her investment because of shareholder liability is limited to circumstances in which all of the following factors are present: (a) a court refuses to apply Delaware law; (b) the liability arose under tort law or, if not, no contractual limitation of liability was in effect; and (c) the Trust itself would be unable to meet its obligations. In the light of DBTA, the nature of the Trust's business, and the nature of its assets, the risk of personal liability to a shareholder is remote.

Limitation of Trustee and Officer Liability. The Declaration further provides that the Trust shall indemnify each of its Trustees and officers against liabilities and expenses reasonably incurred by them, in connection with, or arising out of, any action, suit or proceeding, threatened against or otherwise involving such Trustee or officer, directly or indirectly, by reason of being or having been a Trustee or officer of the Trust. The Declaration does not authorize the Trust to indemnify any Trustee or officer against any liability to which he or she would otherwise be subject by reason of or for willful misfeasance, bad faith, gross negligence or reckless disregard of such person's duties.

Limitation of Interseries Liability. All persons dealing with a Fund must look solely to the property of that particular Fund for the enforcement of any claims against that Fund, as neither the Trustees, officers, agents or shareholders assume any personal liability for obligations entered into on behalf of a Fund or the Trust. No Fund is liable for the obligations of any other Fund.

Voting. When issued, shares of a Fund will be fully paid and non-assessable. Shares are freely transferable and have no preemptive, subscription or conversion rights. Each of the Service Class and the Investment Class represents an identical interest in a Fund's investment portfolio. As a result, each Class has the same rights, privileges and preferences, except with respect to: (i) the designation of each Class; (ii) the sales arrangement; (iii) certain expenses allocable exclusively to each Class; and (iv) voting rights on matters exclusively affecting a single Class. The Board does not anticipate that there will be any conflicts among the interests of the holders of the two Classes. The Trustees, on an ongoing basis, will consider whether any conflict exists and, if so, will take appropriate action. Certain aspects of the shares may be changed, upon notice to Fund shareholders, to satisfy certain tax regulatory requirements, if the Trust's Board deems the change necessary.

When matters are submitted for shareholder vote, each shareholder of each Fund will have one vote for each full share held and proportionate, fractional votes for fractional shares held. In general, shares of all Funds vote as a single class on all matters except (1) matters affecting the interests of one or more of the Funds or Classes of a Fund, in which case only shares of the affected Funds or Classes would be entitled to vote, or (2) when the 1940 Act requires the vote of an individual Fund. Normally, no meetings of shareholders of the Funds will be held for the purpose of electing Trustees of the Trust unless and until such time as less than a majority of the Trustees holding office have been elected by shareholders of the Trust, at which time the Trustees then in office will call a shareholders' meeting for the election of Trustees. Shareholders of record of no less than two-thirds of the outstanding shares of the Trust may remove a Trustee through a declaration in writing or by vote cast in person or by proxy at a meeting called for that purpose. A meeting will be called for the purpose of voting on the removal of a Trustee at the written request of holders of 10% of the Trust's outstanding shares.

Pricing of Shares

Multiple-class funds do not have a single share price. Rather, each class has a share price, called its NAV. The price per share for each class of each Fund is determined each business day (unless otherwise noted) at the scheduled close of the NYSE (ordinarily 4:00 p.m. Eastern time). A business day is one in which the NYSE is open for regular trading. A Fund does not calculate its price on days in which the NYSE is closed for trading. Currently, the NYSE is open for regular trading every weekday except New Year's Day, Martin Luther King, Jr. Day, President's Day, Good Friday, Memorial Day, Juneteenth National Independence Day, Independence Day, Labor Day, Thanksgiving Day, and Christmas Day. The NYSE may close early on certain days, such as Christmas Eve and New Year's Eve and before certain other holidays. Please contact your Funds account representative if you have questions on early NYSE closing times. In unusual circumstances, such as an emergency or an unscheduled close or halt of trading on the NYSE, the time at which share prices are determined may be changed.

The Funds' securities will be valued pursuant to guidelines established by the Board.

Dividends, Distributions

Net investment income (that is, income other than long- and short-term capital gains) and net realized long- and short-term capital gains are determined separately for each Fund. Dividends of a Fund which are derived from net investment income and distributions of net realized long- and short-term capital gains paid by a Fund to a shareholder will be automatically reinvested in additional shares of the same Class of the Fund, respectively, and deposited in the shareholder's account, unless the shareholder instructs the Trust, in writing or by telephone, to pay all dividends and distributions in cash. Shareholders may contact the Trust for details concerning this election. However, if it is determined that the U.S. Postal Service cannot properly deliver mailings by a Fund to a shareholder, the Fund may terminate the shareholder's election to receive dividends and other distributions in cash. Thereafter, the shareholder's subsequent dividends and other distributions will be automatically reinvested in additional shares of the Fund until the shareholder notifies the Fund in writing of his or her correct address and requests in writing that the election to receive dividends and other distributions in cash be reinstated. No interest will accrue on amounts represented by uncashed dividend, distribution or redemption checks.

Dividends attributable to the net investment income, if any, are declared and paid annually. Dividends attributed to realized capital gains, if any, of each Fund are declared and paid annually. Distributions of any net realized long-term and short-term capital gains earned by a Fund will be made annually. These dividends and distributions are intended to comply with the requirements of the Code and are determined in accordance with federal income tax regulations, which may differ from generally accepted accounting principles. As a result of the different service and distribution fees applicable to the Classes, the per share dividends and distribution on Investment Class shares will be higher than those on the Service Class shares.

Each Fund is subject to a 4% non-deductible excise tax measured with respect to certain undistributed amounts of net investment income and capital gains. If necessary to avoid the imposition of this tax, and if in the best interests of a Fund's shareholders, the Trust may declare and pay dividends of the Fund's net investment income and distributions of the Fund's net capital gains more frequently than stated above.

Taxation of the Funds

The following discussion of U.S. federal income tax consequences of an investment in the Funds is based on the Code, U.S. Treasury regulations, and other applicable authority, as of the date of this SAI. These authorities are subject to change by legislative or administrative action, possibly with retroactive effect. The following discussion is only a summary of some of the important U.S. federal income tax considerations generally applicable to investments in the Funds. There may be other tax considerations applicable to particular shareholders. Shareholders should consult their own tax advisors regarding their particular situation and the possible application of foreign, state and local tax laws.

Special tax rules apply to investments through defined contribution plans and other tax-qualified plans or tax-advantaged arrangements. Shareholders should consult their tax advisers to determine the suitability of shares of a Fund as an investment through such plans and arrangements and the precise effect of an investment on their particular tax situations.

Qualification as a Regulated Investment Company

Each Fund has elected to be treated as a RIC under Subchapter M of the Code and intends each year to qualify and be eligible to be treated as such. In order to qualify for the special tax treatment accorded RICs and their shareholders, each Fund must, among other things, (a) derive at least 90% of its gross income for each taxable year from (i) dividends, interest, payments with respect to certain securities loans, gains from the sale of securities or foreign currencies, or other income (including but not limited to gains from options, futures or forward contracts) derived with respect to its business of investing in such stock, securities or currencies and (ii) net income derived from interests in “qualified publicly traded partnerships” (as defined below); (b) diversify its holdings so that, at the end of each quarter of the Fund's taxable year, (i) at least 50% of the value of the Fund's total assets consists of cash and cash items, U.S. Government securities, securities of other RICs, and other securities limited in respect of any one issuer to a value not greater than 5% of the value of the Fund's total assets and no more than 10% of the outstanding voting securities of such issuer, and (ii) no more than 25% of its assets are invested, including through corporations in which the Fund owns a 20% or more voting stock interest, (x) in the securities (other than those of the U.S. Government or other RICs) of any one issuer or of two or more issuers which the Fund controls and which are engaged in the same, similar or related trades and businesses, or (y) in the securities of one or more qualified publicly traded partnerships (as defined below); and (c) distribute with respect to each

taxable year at least 90% of the sum of its investment company taxable income (as that term is defined in the Code without regard to the deduction for dividends paid — generally taxable ordinary income and the excess, if any, of net short-term capital gains over net long-term capital losses) and net tax-exempt income, for such year.

In general, for purposes of the 90% gross income requirement described in (a) above, income derived from a partnership will be treated as qualifying income only to the extent such income is attributable to items of income of the partnership which would be qualifying income if realized directly by the RIC. However, 100% of the net income derived from an interest in a “qualified publicly traded partnership” (a partnership (x) the interests in which are traded on an established securities market or are readily tradable on a secondary market or the substantial equivalent thereof, and (y) that derives less than 90% of its income from the qualifying income described in section (a)(i) of the preceding paragraph), will be treated as qualifying income. In general, such entities will be treated as partnerships for federal income tax purposes, because they meet the passive income requirement under Code Section 7704(c)(2). Further, although in general the passive loss rules of the Code do not apply to RICs, such rules do apply to a RIC with respect to items attributable to an interest in a qualified publicly traded partnership.

For purposes of the diversification test in (b) above, the term “outstanding voting securities of such issuer” will include the equity securities of a qualified publicly traded partnership. Also, for purposes of the diversification test in (b) above, the identification of the issuer (or, in some cases, issuers) of a particular investment can depend on the terms and conditions of that investment. In some cases, identification of the issuer (or issuers) is uncertain under current law, and an adverse determination or future guidance by the Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) with respect to issuer identification for a particular type of investment may adversely affect a Fund's ability to meet the diversification test in (b) above.

If a Fund qualifies as a RIC that is accorded special tax treatment, the Fund will not be subject to federal income tax on income or gains distributed in a timely manner to its shareholders in the form of dividends (including Capital Gain Dividends, as defined below). If a Fund were to fail to meet the income, diversification or distribution test described above, the Fund could in some cases cure such failure, including by paying a Fund-level tax, paying interest or disposing of certain assets. If such Fund were ineligible to or otherwise did not cure such failure for any year, or if such Fund were otherwise to fail to qualify as a RIC accorded special tax treatment in any taxable year, the Fund would be subject to tax at the Fund level on its taxable income at corporate rates, and all distributions from earnings and profits, including any distributions of net tax-exempt income (if any) and net capital gains (as defined below), would be taxable to shareholders as ordinary income. Some portions of such distributions may be eligible for the dividends-received deduction in the case of corporate shareholders and may be eligible to be treated as “qualified dividend income” in the case of shareholders taxed as individuals, provided, in both cases, the shareholder meets certain holding period and other requirements in respect of a Fund's shares (as described below). In addition, a Fund could be required to recognize unrealized gains, pay substantial taxes and interest and make substantial distributions before re-qualifying as a RIC that is accorded special tax treatment.

Each Fund intends to distribute at least annually to its shareholders all or substantially all of its investment company taxable income (computed without regard to the dividends-paid deduction) and its net tax-exempt income (if any), and may distribute its net capital gain (that is, the excess of net long-term capital gain over net short-term capital loss, in each case determined with reference to any loss carryforwards). Any taxable income retained by a Fund will be subject to tax at the Fund level at regular corporate rates. If a Fund retains any net capital gain, it will be subject to tax at regular corporate rates on the amount retained, but it is permitted to designate the retained amount as undistributed capital gain in a timely notice to its shareholders who (a) will be required to include in income for federal income tax purposes, as long-term capital gain, their shares of such undistributed amount, and (b) will be entitled to credit their proportionate shares of the tax paid by the Fund on such undistributed amount against their federal income tax liabilities, if any, and to claim refunds on a properly-filed U.S. tax return to the extent the credit exceeds such liabilities. If a Fund makes this designation, for U.S. federal income tax purposes, the tax basis of shares owned by a shareholder of the Fund will be increased by an amount equal to the difference between the amount of undistributed capital gains included in the shareholder's gross income under clause (a) of the preceding sentence and the tax deemed paid by the shareholder under clause (b) of the preceding sentence. The Funds are not required to, and there can be no assurance a Fund will, make this designation if it retains all or a portion of its net capital gain in a taxable year.

In determining its net capital gain, including in connection with determining the amount available to support a Capital Gain Dividend (as defined below), its taxable income, and its earnings and profits, a RIC generally may elect to treat part or all of any post-October capital loss (defined as any net capital loss attributable to the portion, if any, of the taxable year after October 31 or, if there is no such loss, the net long-term capital loss or net short-term capital loss attributable to any such

portion of the taxable year) or late-year ordinary loss (generally, the sum of its (i) net ordinary loss, if any, from the sale, exchange or other taxable disposition of property, attributable to the portion, if any, of the taxable year after October 31, and its (ii) other net ordinary loss, if any, attributable to the portion, if any, of the taxable year after December 31) as if incurred in the succeeding taxable year.

If a Fund were to fail to distribute in a calendar year at least an amount equal, in general, to the sum of 98% of its ordinary income for such year and 98.2% of its capital gain net income for the one-year period ending October 31 of such year (or November 30 or December 31, if the Fund is eligible to elect and so elects), plus any such amounts retained from the prior year, the Fund would be subject to a nondeductible 4% excise tax on the undistributed amounts. For purposes of the required excise tax distribution, a RIC's ordinary gains and losses from the sale, exchange or other taxable disposition of property that would otherwise be taken into account after October 31 of a calendar year (or November 30, if the Fund makes the election referred to above) generally are treated as arising on January 1 of the following calendar year; in the case of a Fund with a December 31 year end that makes the election described above, no such gains or losses will be so treated. Also, for these purposes, a Fund will be treated as having distributed any amount on which it is subject to corporate income tax for the taxable year ending within the calendar year. Each Fund intends generally to make distributions sufficient to avoid imposition of the excise tax, although there can be no assurance that it will be able to do so. Distributions declared by a Fund during October, November and December to shareholders of record on a date in any such month and paid by the Fund during the following January will be treated for federal tax purposes as paid by the Fund and received by shareholders on December 31 of the year in which declared.

Capital losses in excess of capital gains (“net capital losses”) are not permitted to be deducted against a Fund's net investment income. Instead, potentially subject to certain limitations, a Fund may carry net capital losses from any taxable year forward to subsequent taxable years to offset capital gains, if any, realized during such subsequent taxable years. Distributions from capital gains are generally made after applying any available capital loss carryforwards. Capital loss carryforwards are reduced to the extent they offset current-year net realized capital gains, whether the Fund retains or distributes such gains. A Fund may carry net capital losses forward to one or more subsequent taxable years without expiration; any such carryforward losses will retain their character as short-term or long-term. The Fund must apply such carryforwards first against gains of the same character. See a Fund's most recent annual shareholder report for the Fund's available capital loss carryovers as of the end of its most recently ended fiscal year.

Taxation of Distributions Received by Shareholders

For U.S. federal income tax purposes, distributions of investment income are generally taxable to shareholders as ordinary income. Taxes on distributions of capital gains are determined by how long a Fund owned (or is deemed to have owned) the investments that generated them, rather than how long a shareholder has owned his or her Fund shares. In general, a Fund will recognize long-term capital gain or loss on the disposition of assets the Fund has owned (or is deemed to have owned) for more than one year, and short-term capital gain or loss on the disposition of investments the Fund has owned (or is deemed to have owned) for one year or less. Distributions of net-capital gain (that is, the excess of net long-term capital gain over net short-term capital loss) that are properly reported by a Fund as capital gain dividends (“Capital Gain Dividends”) generally will be taxable to a shareholder receiving such distributions as long-term capital gains includible in net capital gain and taxed to individuals at reduced rates relative to ordinary income. Distributions from capital gains are generally made after applying any available capital loss carryovers. The IRS and the Department of the Treasury have issued regulations that impose special rules in respect of Capital Gain Dividends received through partnership interests constituting “applicable partnership interests” under Section 1061 of the Code. Distributions of net short-term capital gain (as reduced by any net long-term capital loss for the taxable year) will be taxable to shareholders as ordinary income. Distributions of investment income properly reported by a Fund as derived from “qualified dividend income” will be taxed in the hands of individuals at the rates applicable to net capital gain, provided holding period and other requirements are met at each of the shareholder and the Fund level.

The Code generally imposes a 3.8% Medicare contribution tax on the net investment income of certain individuals, trusts and estates to the extent their income exceeds certain threshold amounts. For these purposes, “net investment income” generally includes, among other things, (i) distributions paid by a Fund of net investment income and capital gains, and (ii) any net gain from the sale, redemption, exchange or other taxable disposition of Fund shares. Shareholders are advised to consult their tax advisors regarding the possible implications of this additional tax on their investment in a Fund.

If a Fund makes a distribution to a shareholder in excess of the Fund's current and accumulated earnings and profits in any taxable year, the excess distribution will be treated as a return of capital to the extent of such shareholder's tax basis in its shares, and thereafter as capital gain. A return of capital is not taxable, but it reduces a shareholder's tax basis in its shares, thus reducing any loss or increasing any gain on a subsequent taxable disposition by the shareholder of its shares.

Shareholders of a Fund will be subject to federal income taxes as described herein on distributions made by the Fund whether received in cash or reinvested in additional shares of the Fund.

Distributions with respect to a Fund's shares are generally subject to U.S. federal income tax as described herein to the extent they do not exceed the Fund's realized income and gains, even though such distributions may economically represent a return of a particular shareholder's investment. Such distributions are likely to occur in respect of shares purchased at a time when a Fund's NAV includes either unrealized gains, or realized but undistributed income or gains, that were therefore included in the price the shareholder paid. Such distributions may reduce the fair market value of the Fund's shares below the shareholder's cost basis in those shares. As described above, a Fund is required to distribute realized income and gains regardless of whether the Fund's NAV also reflects unrealized losses.

In order for some portion of the dividends received by a Fund shareholder to be “qualified dividend income,” the Fund must meet holding period and other requirements with respect to the dividend-paying stocks held by the Fund and the shareholder must meet holding period and other requirements with respect to the Fund's shares. In general, a dividend will not be treated as qualified dividend income (a) if the dividend is received with respect to any share of stock held for fewer than 61 days during the 121-day period beginning on the date which is 60 days before the date on which such share becomes ex-dividend with respect to such dividend (or, in the case of certain preferred stock, 91 days during the 181-day period beginning 90 days before such date), (b) to the extent that the recipient is under an obligation (whether pursuant to a short sale or otherwise) to make related payments with respect to positions in substantially similar or related property, (c) if the recipient elects to have the dividend income treated as investment income for purposes of the limitation on deductibility of investment interest, or (d) if the dividend is received from a foreign corporation that is (i) not eligible for the benefits of a comprehensive income tax treaty with the United States (with the exception of dividends paid on stock of such a foreign corporation readily tradable on an established securities market in the United States) or (ii) treated as a passive foreign investment company (“PFIC”).

In general, distributions of investment income properly reported by a Fund as derived from qualified dividend income will be treated as qualified dividend income in the hands of a shareholder taxed as an individual, provided the shareholder meets the holding period and other requirements described above with respect to the Fund's shares. If the aggregate qualified dividends received by a Fund during any taxable year are 95% or more of the Fund's gross income (excluding net long-term capital gain over net short-term capital loss), then 100% of the Fund's dividends (other than dividends properly reported as Capital Gain Dividends) will be eligible to be treated as qualified dividend income.

In general, dividends of net investment income received by corporate shareholders of a Fund will qualify for the dividends-received deduction generally available to corporations to the extent of the amount of eligible dividends received by a Fund from domestic corporations for the taxable year. A dividend received by a Fund will not be treated as a dividend eligible for the dividends-received deduction (a) if it has been received with respect to any share of stock that the Fund has held for less than 46 days (91 days in the case of certain preferred stock) during the 91-day period beginning on the date which is 45 days before the date on which such share becomes ex-dividend with respect to such dividend (during the 181-day period beginning 90 days before such date in the case of certain preferred stock) or (b) to the extent that the Fund is under an obligation (pursuant to a short sale or otherwise) to make related payments with respect to positions in substantially similar or related property. Finally, the dividends-received deduction may otherwise be disallowed or reduced (x) if the corporate shareholder fails to satisfy the foregoing requirements with respect to its shares of the Fund or (y) by application of various provisions of the Code (for instance, the dividends-received deduction is reduced in the case of a dividend received on debt-financed portfolio stock (generally, stock acquired with borrowed funds)).

Any distribution of income that is attributable to (a) income received by a Fund in lieu of dividends with respect to securities on loan pursuant to a securities lending transaction or (b) dividend income received by a Fund on securities it temporarily purchased from a counterparty pursuant to a repurchase agreement that is treated for U.S. federal income tax purposes as a loan by the Fund, will not constitute qualified dividend income to individual shareholders and will not be eligible for the dividends-received deduction for corporate shareholders.

Distributions by a Fund to its shareholders that the Fund properly reports as “section 199A dividends,” as defined and subject to certain conditions described below, are treated as qualified REIT dividends in the hands of non-corporate shareholders. Non-corporate shareholders are permitted a federal income tax deduction equal to 20% of qualified REIT dividends received by them, subject to certain limitations. Very generally, a “section 199A dividend” is any dividend or portion thereof that is attributable to certain dividends received by a RIC from REITs, to the extent such dividends are properly reported as such by the RIC in a written notice to its shareholders. A section 199A dividend is treated as a qualified REIT dividend only if the shareholder receiving such dividend holds the dividend-paying RIC shares for at least 46 days of the 91-day period beginning 45 days before the shares become ex-dividend, and is not under an obligation to make related payments with respect to a position in substantially similar or related property. A Fund is permitted to report such part of its dividends as section 199A dividends as are eligible, but is not required to do so.

If a Fund holds, directly or indirectly, one or more “tax credit bonds” issued on or before December 31, 2017 on one or more applicable dates during a taxable year, the Fund may elect to permit its shareholders to claim a tax credit on their income tax returns equal to each shareholder's proportionate share of tax credits from the bond otherwise allowed to the Fund. In such a case, a shareholder will be deemed to receive a distribution of money with respect to its Fund shares equal to its proportionate share of the amount of such credits and be allowed a credit against the shareholder's U.S. federal income tax liability equal to the amount of such deemed distribution. A shareholder's ability to claim a tax credit associated with one or more tax credit bonds may be subject to certain limitations imposed by the Code, and the amount of the tax credits may not exceed the amount reported by the Fund in a written notice to shareholders. Even if a Fund is eligible to pass through tax credits to shareholders, the Fund may choose not to do so.

As required by federal law, detailed federal tax information with respect to each calendar year will be furnished to each shareholder early in the succeeding year.

Tax Implications of Certain Fund Investments

Investments in Other RICs. If a Fund receives dividends from an underlying RIC (each, an “underlying RIC”) and the underlying RIC reports such dividends as qualified dividend income, then the Fund is permitted, in turn, to report a portion of such dividends as “qualified dividend income” when it distributes such portion to its shareholders, provided holding period and other requirements are met.

If a Fund receives dividends from an underlying RIC, and the underlying RIC reports such dividends as eligible for the dividends-received deduction, then the Fund is permitted, in turn, to report a portion of such dividends as eligible for the dividends-received deduction as well when it distributes such portion to its shareholders, provided holding period and other requirements are met.

If an underlying RIC in which a Fund invests elects to pass through tax credit bond credits to its shareholders, then the Fund is permitted in turn to elect to pass through its proportionate share of those tax credits to its shareholders, provided that the Fund meets shareholder notice and other requirements.

The foregoing rules may cause the tax treatments of a Fund's gains, losses and distributions to differ at times from the tax treatment that would apply if the Fund invested directly in the types of securities held by the underlying RIC. As a result, investors may receive taxable distributions earlier and recognize higher amounts of capital gain or ordinary income than they otherwise would.

Special Rules for Debt Obligations. Some debt obligations with a fixed maturity date of more than one year from the date of issuance (and zero-coupon debt obligations with a fixed maturity date of more than one year from the date of issuance) will be treated as debt obligations that are issued originally at a discount. Generally, OID is treated as interest income and is included in a Fund's income and required to be distributed by the Fund over the term of the debt obligation, even though payment of that amount is not received until a later time, upon partial or full repayment or disposition of the debt obligation. In addition, payment-in-kind obligations will give rise to income which is required to be distributed and is taxable even though the Fund holding the obligation receives no interest payment in cash on the obligation during the year.

Some debt obligations with a fixed maturity date of more than one year from the date of issuance that are acquired in the secondary market by a Fund may be treated as having “market discount.” Very generally, market discount is the excess of the stated redemption price of a debt obligation (or in the case of an obligation issued with OID, its “revised issue price”) over the purchase price of such obligation. Subject to the discussion below regarding Section 451 of the Code, (i) generally, any gain recognized on the disposition of, and any partial payment of principal on, a debt obligation having market discount is treated as ordinary income to the extent the gain, or principal payment, does not exceed the “accrued market discount” on such debt obligation, (ii) alternatively, a Fund may elect to accrue market discount currently, in which

case the Fund will be required to include the accrued market discount in income (as ordinary income) and thus distribute it over the term of the debt obligation, even though payment of that amount is not received until a later time, upon partial or full repayment or disposition of the debt obligation, and (iii) the rate at which the market discount accrues, and thus is included in a Fund's income, will depend upon which of the permitted accrual methods the Fund elects. Notwithstanding the foregoing, effective for taxable years beginning after 2017, Section 451 of the Code generally requires any accrual method taxpayer to take into account items of gross income no later than the time at which such items are taken into account as revenue in the taxpayer's financial statements. The IRS and the Department of Treasury have issued final regulations providing that this rule does not apply to accrued market discount. If this rule were to apply to the accrual of market discount, each Fund would be required to include in income any market discount as it takes the same into account on its financial statements, even if the Fund does not otherwise elect to accrue market discount currently for federal income tax purposes.

If a Fund holds the foregoing kinds of obligations, or other obligations subject to special rules under the Code, the Fund may be required to pay out as an income distribution each year an amount which is greater than the total amount of cash interest the Fund actually received. Such distributions may be made from the cash assets of the Fund or, if necessary, by disposition of portfolio securities including at a time when it may not be advantageous to do so. These dispositions may cause a Fund to realize higher amounts of short-term capital gains (generally taxed to shareholders at ordinary income tax rates) and, in the event the Fund realizes net capital gains from such transactions, its shareholders may receive a larger Capital Gain Dividend than they would have if the Fund had not held such obligations.

A portion of the OID accrued on certain high yield discount obligations may not be deductible to the issuer and will instead be treated as a dividend paid by the issuer for purposes of the dividends-received deduction. In such cases, if the issuer of the high yield discount obligations is a domestic corporation, dividend payments by a Fund may be eligible for the dividends-received deduction to the extent attributable to the deemed dividend portion of such OID.

Securities Purchased at a Premium. Very generally, where a Fund purchases a bond at a price that exceeds the redemption price at maturity – that is, at a premium — the premium is amortizable over the remaining term of the bond. In the case of a taxable bond, if a Fund makes an election applicable to all such bonds it purchases, which election is irrevocable without consent of the IRS, the Fund reduces the current taxable income from the bond by the amortized premium and reduces its tax basis in the bond by the amount of such offset; upon the disposition or maturity of such bonds acquired on or after January 4, 2013, the Fund is permitted to deduct any remaining premium allocable to a prior period.

At-risk or Defaulted Securities. Investments in debt obligations that are at risk of or in default present special tax issues for the Funds. Tax rules are not entirely clear about issues such as when a Fund may cease to accrue interest, OID or market discount; whether, when or to what extent the Fund should recognize market discount on such a debt obligation; when and to what extent a Fund may take deductions for bad debts or worthless securities; and how a Fund should allocate payments received on obligations in default between principal and income. These and other related issues will be addressed by a Fund when, as and if it invests in such securities, in order to seek to ensure that it distributes sufficient income to preserve its status as a RIC and does not become subject to U.S. federal income or excise tax.

Certain Investments in REITs. Any investment by a Fund in equity securities of REITs qualifying as such under Subchapter M of the Code may result in the Fund's receipt of cash in excess of the REIT's earnings; if the Fund distributes these amounts, these distributions could constitute a return of capital to Fund shareholders for U.S. federal income tax purposes. Dividends received by a Fund from a REIT will not qualify for the corporate dividends-received deduction and generally will not constitute qualified dividend income.

Certain Investments in Mortgage Pooling Vehicles. Certain Funds may invest directly or indirectly in residual interests in real estate mortgage investment conduits (“REMICs”) (including by investing in residual interests in CMOs with respect to which an election to be treated as a REMIC is in effect) or equity interests in taxable mortgage pools (“TMPs”). Under a notice issued by the IRS in October 2006 and Treasury regulations that have yet to be issued but may apply retroactively, a portion of a Fund's income (including income allocated to the Fund from certain pass-through entities) that is attributable to a residual interest in a REMIC or an equity interest in a TMP (referred to in the Code as an “excess inclusion”) will be subject to U.S. federal income tax in all events. This notice also provides, and the regulations are expected to provide, that excess inclusion income of a RIC, such as a Fund, will be allocated to shareholders of the RIC in proportion to the dividends received by such shareholders, with the same consequences as if the shareholders held the related interest directly. As a result, a RIC investing in such securities may not be a suitable investment for charitable remainder trusts (“CRTs”), as noted below.

In general, excess inclusion income allocated to shareholders (i) cannot be offset by net operating losses (subject to a limited exception for certain thrift institutions), (ii) will constitute unrelated business taxable income (“UBTI”) to entities (including a qualified pension plan, an individual retirement account, a 401(k) plan, a Keogh plan or other tax-exempt entity) subject to tax on UBTI, thereby potentially requiring such an entity that is allocated excess inclusion income, and that otherwise might not be required to file a tax return, to file a tax return and pay tax on such income, and (iii) in the case of a foreign shareholder will not qualify for any reduction in U.S. federal withholding tax. A shareholder will be subject to U.S. federal income tax on such inclusions notwithstanding any exemption from such income tax otherwise available under the Code.

Foreign Currency Transactions. Any transaction by a Fund in foreign currencies, foreign currency-denominated debt obligations or certain foreign currency options, futures contracts or forward contracts (or similar instruments) may give rise to ordinary income or loss to the extent such income or loss results from fluctuations in the value of the foreign currency concerned. Any such net gains could require a larger dividend toward the end of the calendar year. Any such net losses will generally reduce and potentially require the recharacterization of prior ordinary income distributions. Such ordinary income treatment may accelerate a Fund's distributions to shareholders and increase the distributions taxed to shareholders as ordinary income. Any net ordinary losses so created cannot be carried forward by the Fund to offset income or gains earned in subsequent taxable years.

Passive Foreign Investment Companies. Equity investments by a Fund in certain PFICs could potentially subject the Fund to a U.S. federal income tax (including interest charges) on distributions received from the company or on proceeds received from the disposition of shares in the company. This tax cannot be eliminated by making distributions to Fund shareholders. However, a Fund may elect to avoid the imposition of that tax. For example, a Fund may elect to treat a PFIC as a “qualified electing fund” (i.e., make a “QEF election”), in which case the Fund will be required to include its share of the PFIC's income and net capital gains annually, regardless of whether it receives any distribution from the PFIC. A Fund also may make an election to mark the gains (and to a limited extent losses) in such holdings “to the market” as though it had sold (and, solely for purposes of this mark-to-market election, repurchased) its holdings in those PFICs on the last day of the Fund's taxable year. Such gains and losses are treated as ordinary income and loss. The QEF and mark-to-market elections may accelerate the recognition of income (without the receipt of cash) and increase the amount required to be distributed by the Fund to avoid taxation. Either of these elections therefore may require a Fund to liquidate other investments (including when it is not advantageous to do so) to meet its distribution requirement, which also may accelerate the recognition of gain and affect the Fund's total return. Dividends paid by PFICs will not be eligible to be treated as “qualified dividend income.”

Because it is not always possible to identify a foreign corporation as a PFIC, a Fund may incur the tax and interest charges described above in some instances.

Options and Futures. In general, option premiums received by a Fund are not immediately included in the income of the Fund. Instead, the premiums are recognized when the option contract expires, the option is exercised by the holder, or the Fund transfers or otherwise terminates the option (e.g., through a closing transaction). If a call option written by a Fund is exercised and the Fund sells or delivers the underlying stock, the Fund generally will recognize capital gain or loss equal to (a) the sum of the strike price and the option premium received by the Fund minus (b) the Fund's basis in the stock. Such gain or loss generally will be short-term or long-term depending upon the holding period of the underlying stock. If securities are purchased by a Fund pursuant to the exercise of a put option written by it, the Fund generally will subtract the premium received for purposes of computing its cost basis in the securities purchased. Gain or loss arising in respect of a termination of a Fund's obligation under an option other than through the exercise of the option will be short-term gain or loss depending on whether the premium income received by the Fund is greater or less than the amount paid by the Fund (if any) in terminating the transaction. Thus, for example, if an option written by a Fund expires unexercised, the Fund generally will recognize short-term gain equal to the premium received.

A Fund's options activities may include transactions constituting straddles for U.S. federal income tax purposes, that is, that trigger the U.S. federal income tax straddle rules contained primarily in Section 1092 of the Code. Such straddles include, for example, positions in a particular security, or an index of securities, and one or more options that offset the former position, including options that are “covered” by a Fund's long position in the subject security. Very generally, where applicable, Section 1092 requires (i) that losses be deferred on positions deemed to be offsetting positions with respect to “substantially similar or related property,” to the extent of unrealized gain in the latter, and (ii) that the holding period of such a straddle position that has not already been held for the long-term holding period be terminated and begin anew once the position is no longer part of a straddle. Options on single stocks that are not “deep in the money” may constitute qualified covered calls, which generally are not subject to the straddle rules; the holding period on stock underlying

qualified covered calls that are “in the money” although not “deep in the money” will be suspended during the period that such calls are outstanding. Thus, the straddle rules and the rules governing qualified covered calls could cause gains that would otherwise constitute long-term capital gains to be treated as short-term capital gains, and distributions that would otherwise constitute “qualified dividend income” or qualify for the dividends-received deduction to fail to satisfy the holding period requirements and therefore to be taxed as ordinary income or fail to qualify for the dividends-received deduction, as the case may be.

The tax treatment of certain positions entered into by a Fund, including regulated futures contracts, certain foreign currency positions and certain listed non-equity options, will be governed by section 1256 of the Code (“section 1256 contracts”). Gains or losses on section 1256 contracts generally are considered 60% long-term and 40% short-term capital gains or losses (“60/40”), although certain foreign currency gains and losses from such contracts may be treated as ordinary in character. Also, section 1256 contracts held by a Fund at the end of each taxable year (and, for purposes of the 4% excise tax, on certain other dates as prescribed under the Code) are “marked to market” with the result that unrealized gains or losses are treated as though they were realized and the resulting gain or loss is treated as ordinary or 60/40 gain or loss, as applicable.

Derivatives, Hedging, and Related Transactions. In addition to the special rules described above in respect of futures and options transactions, a Fund's transactions in other derivative instruments (e.g., forward contracts and swap agreements), as well as any of its hedging, short sale, securities loan or similar transactions, may be subject to one or more special tax rules (e.g., notional principal contract, straddle, constructive sale, wash sale and short sale rules). These rules may affect whether gains and losses recognized by a Fund are treated as ordinary or capital, accelerate the recognition of income or gains to the Fund, defer losses to the Fund, and cause adjustments in the holding periods of the Fund's securities, thereby affecting whether capital gains and losses are treated as short-term or long-term. These rules could therefore affect the amount, timing and/or character of distributions to shareholders.

Because these and other tax rules applicable to these types of transactions are in some cases uncertain under current law, an adverse determination or future guidance by the IRS with respect to these rules (which determination or guidance could be retroactive) may affect whether a Fund has made sufficient distributions, and otherwise satisfied the relevant requirements, to maintain its qualification as a RIC and avoid a Fund-level tax.

Commodity-Linked Instruments. A Fund's direct or indirect investments in commodities and commodity-linked instruments can be limited by the Fund's intention to qualify as a RIC, and can bear on the Fund's ability to so qualify. Income and gains from commodities and certain commodity-linked instruments does not constitute qualifying income to a RIC for purposes of the 90% gross income test described above. The tax treatment of some other commodity-linked instruments in which a Fund might invest is not certain, in particular with respect to whether income or gains from such instruments constitute qualifying income to a RIC. If a Fund were to treat income or gain from a particular instrument as qualifying income and the income or gain were later determined not to constitute qualifying income and, together with any other nonqualifying income, caused the Fund's nonqualifying income to exceed 10% of its gross income in any taxable year, the Fund would fail to qualify as a RIC unless it is eligible to and does pay a tax at the Fund level.

Book-Tax Differences. Certain of a Fund's investments in derivative instruments and foreign currency-denominated instruments, and any of the Fund's transactions in foreign currencies and hedging activities, are likely to produce a difference between its book income and the sum of its taxable income and net tax-exempt income (if any). If such a difference arises, and a Fund's book income is less than the sum of its taxable income and net tax-exempt income, the Fund could be required to make distributions exceeding book income to qualify as a RIC that is accorded special tax treatment and to avoid an entity-level tax. In the alternative, if a Fund's book income exceeds the sum of its taxable income (including realized capital gains) and net tax-exempt income, the distribution (if any) of such excess generally will be treated as (i) a dividend to the extent of the Fund's remaining earnings and profits (including earnings and profits arising from tax-exempt income), (ii) thereafter, as a return of capital to the extent of the recipient's basis in its shares, and (iii) thereafter as gain from the sale or exchange of a capital asset.

Personal Holding Company

A Fund will be a personal holding company for federal income tax purposes if 50% or more of the Fund's shares are owned, at any time during the last half of the Fund's taxable year, directly or indirectly by five or fewer individuals. For this purpose, the term “individual” includes pension trusts, private foundations and certain other tax-exempt trusts. If a Fund becomes a personal holding company, it may be subject to a tax of 20% on all its investment income and on any net short-term gains not distributed to shareholders on or before the fifteenth day of the third month following the close of the Fund's taxable year. In addition, a Fund's status as a personal holding company may also limit the ability of the Fund to

distribute dividends with respect to a taxable year in a manner qualifying for the dividends-paid deduction subsequent to the end of the taxable year and will prevent the Fund from using tax equalization (as described below). Each Fund intends to distribute all of its income and gain in timely manner such that it will not be subject to an income tax or an otherwise applicable personal holding company tax, but there can be no assurance that the Fund will be successful in doing so each year. Each Fund is currently treated as a personal holding company.

Tax Equalization

Under current law, if a Fund is not treated as a personal holding company for U.S. federal income tax purposes, the Fund is permitted to treat on its tax return as dividends paid the portion of redemption proceeds paid to redeeming shareholders that represents the redeeming shareholders' portion of the Fund's accumulated earnings and profits. This practice, called tax “equalization,” reduces the amount of income and/or gains that the Fund is required to distribute as dividends to non-redeeming shareholders. Tax equalization is not available to the Funds because of their current status as personal holding companies, which may result in a Fund being required to distribute a greater amount to non-redeeming shareholders in the form of dividends to avoid a fund-level federal income or excise tax or to qualify as a RIC than the Fund would have distributed were it not a personal holding company, including in particular, in the event of a redemption by a large shareholder.

Foreign Taxation

A Fund's income, proceeds and gains from sources within foreign countries may be subject to non-U.S. withholding or other taxes, which will reduce the yield on those investments. Tax conventions between certain countries and the United States may reduce or eliminate such taxes. If, at the close of a Fund's taxable year, more than 50% of the assets of the Fund consists of the securities of foreign corporations, the Fund may elect to permit shareholders to claim a credit or deduction (but not both) on their income tax returns for their pro rata portions of qualified taxes paid by a Fund to foreign countries in respect of foreign securities that the Fund has held for at least the minimum period specified in the Code. In such a case, shareholders will include in gross income from foreign sources their pro rata shares of such taxes paid by such Fund. A shareholder's ability to claim an offsetting foreign tax credit or deduction in respect of foreign taxes paid by a Fund is subject to certain limitations imposed by the Code, which may result in the shareholder's not receiving a full credit or deduction (if any) for the amount of such taxes. Shareholders who do not itemize on their U.S. federal income tax returns may claim a credit (but not a deduction) for such foreign taxes. Even if a Fund were eligible to make such an election for a given year, it may determine not to do so. If a Fund does not qualify for or does not make such election, shareholders will not be entitled to claim a credit or deduction with respect to foreign taxes paid by the Fund; in that case the foreign tax will nonetheless reduce the Fund's taxable income.

If at the close of each quarter of its taxable year, at least 50% of the total assets of a Fund consists of interests in other RICs such Fund will be a “qualified fund of funds.” In that case, the Fund is permitted to elect to pass through to its shareholders foreign income and other similar taxes paid by the Fund in respect of foreign securities held directly by the Fund or by the underlying RIC in which it invests that itself elected to pass such taxes through to shareholders, so that shareholders of the Fund will be eligible to claim a tax credit or deduction for such taxes. However, even if a Fund qualifies to make such election for any year, it may determine not to do so. Shareholders that are not subject to U.S. federal income tax, and those who invest in a Fund through tax-advantaged accounts (including those who invest through individual retirement accounts or other tax-advantaged retirement plans), generally will receive no benefit from any tax credit or deduction passed through by the Fund. Under certain circumstances, if a Fund receives a refund of foreign taxes paid in respect of a prior year, the value of Fund Shares could be affected or any foreign tax credits or deductions passed through to shareholders in respect of the Fund's foreign taxes for the current year could be reduced.

Backup Withholding

A Fund generally is required to withhold and remit to the U.S. Treasury a percentage of the taxable distributions and redemption proceeds paid to any individual shareholder who fails to properly furnish the Fund with a correct taxpayer identification number (“TIN”), who has under-reported dividend or interest income, or who fails to certify to the Fund that he or she is not subject to such withholding.

Backup withholding is not an additional tax. Any amounts withheld may be credited against the shareholder's U.S. federal income tax liability, provided the appropriate information is furnished to the IRS.

Tax-Exempt Shareholders

Income of a RIC that would be UBTI if earned directly by a tax-exempt entity will not generally constitute UBTI when distributed to a tax-exempt shareholder of the RIC. Notwithstanding this “blocking” effect, a tax-exempt shareholder could realize UBTI by virtue of its investment in a Fund if shares in the Fund constitute debt-financed property in the hands of the tax-exempt shareholder within the meaning of Code Section 514(b).

A tax-exempt shareholder may also recognize UBTI if a Fund recognizes “excess inclusion income” derived from direct or indirect investments in residual interests in REMICs or equity interests in TMPs if the amount of such income recognized by the Fund exceeds the Fund's investment company taxable income (after taking into account deductions for dividends paid by the Fund).

In addition, special tax consequences apply to CRTs that invest in RICs that invest directly or indirectly in residual interests in REMICs or equity interests in TMPs. Under legislation enacted in December 2006, a CRT (as defined in Section 664 of the Code) that realizes any UBTI for a taxable year must pay an excise tax annually of an amount equal to such UBTI. Under IRS guidance issued in October 2006, a CRT will not recognize UBTI as a result of investing in a RIC that recognizes “excess inclusion income.” Rather, if at any time during any taxable year a CRT (or one of certain other tax-exempt shareholders, such as the United States, a state or political subdivision, or an agency or instrumentality thereof, and certain energy cooperatives) is a record holder of a share in a RIC that recognizes “excess inclusion income,” then the RIC will be subject to a tax on that portion of its “excess inclusion income” for the taxable year that is allocable to such shareholders at the highest federal corporate income tax rate. The extent to which this IRS guidance remains applicable in light of the December 2006 legislation is unclear. To the extent permitted under the 1940 Act, each Fund may elect to specially allocate any such tax to the applicable CRT, or other shareholder, and thus reduce such shareholder's distributions for the year by the amount of the tax that relates to such shareholder's interest in a Fund. CRTs are urged to consult their tax advisors concerning the consequences of investing in each Fund.

Redemptions and Exchanges

Redemptions and exchanges of each Fund's shares are taxable events and, accordingly, shareholders may realize gain or loss on these transactions. In general, any gain or loss realized upon a taxable disposition of shares will be treated as long-term capital gain or loss if the shares have been held for more than 12 months. Otherwise, the gain or loss on the taxable disposition of Fund shares will be treated as short-term capital gain or loss. However, any loss realized upon a taxable disposition of Fund shares held by a shareholder for six months or less will be treated as long-term, rather than short-term, to the extent of any Capital Gain Dividends received (or deemed received) by the shareholder with respect to the shares. Further, all or a portion of any loss realized upon a taxable disposition of Fund shares generally will be disallowed under the Code's “wash sale” rule if other substantially identical shares are purchased, including by means of dividend reinvestment, within 30 days before or after the disposition. In such a case, the basis of the newly purchased shares will be adjusted to reflect the disallowed loss.

Upon the redemption or exchange of shares of a Fund, the Fund or, in the case of shares purchased through a financial intermediary, the financial intermediary may be required to provide you and the IRS with cost basis and certain other related tax information about the Fund shares you redeemed or exchanged. See the Funds' prospectuses for more information.

Tax Shelter Reporting

Under Treasury regulations, if a shareholder recognizes a loss of $2 million or more for an individual shareholder or $10 million or more for a corporate shareholder (or a greater loss over a combination of years), the shareholder must file with the IRS a disclosure statement on IRS Form 8886. Direct shareholders of portfolio securities are in many cases excepted from this reporting requirement, but under current guidance, shareholders of a RIC are not excepted. Future guidance may extend the current exception from this reporting requirement to shareholders of most or all RICs. The fact that a loss is reportable under these regulations does not affect the legal determination of whether the taxpayer's treatment of the loss is proper. Shareholders should consult their tax advisers to determine the applicability of these regulations in light of their individual circumstances.

Non-U.S. Shareholders

Non-U.S. shareholders in a Fund should consult their tax advisors concerning the tax consequences of ownership of shares in the Fund. Distributions by a Fund to shareholders that are not “U.S. persons” within the meaning of the Code (“foreign shareholders”) properly reported by the Fund as (1) Capital Gain Dividends, (2) short-term capital gain dividends, and (3) interest-related dividends, each as defined and subject to certain conditions described below, generally are not subject to withholding of U.S. federal income tax.

In general, the Code defines (1) “short-term capital gain dividends” as distributions of net short-term capital gains in excess of net long-term capital losses and (2) “interest-related dividends” as distributions from U.S.-source interest income of types similar to those not subject to U.S. federal income tax if earned directly by an individual foreign shareholder, in each case to the extent such distributions are properly reported as such by a Fund in a written notice to shareholders.

The exceptions to withholding for Capital Gain Dividends and short-term capital gain dividends do not apply to (A) distributions to an individual foreign shareholder who is present in the United States for a period or periods aggregating 183 days or more during the year of the distribution and (B) distributions attributable to gain that is treated as effectively connected with the conduct by the foreign shareholder of a trade or business within the United States under special rules regarding the disposition of U.S. real property interests (“USRPIs”) as described below. The exception to withholding for interest-related dividends does not apply to distributions to a foreign shareholder (i) that has not provided a satisfactory statement that the beneficial owner is not a U.S. person, (ii) to the extent that the dividend is attributable to certain interest on an obligation if the foreign shareholder is the issuer or is a 10% shareholder of the issuer, (iii) that is within certain foreign countries that have inadequate information exchange with the United States, or (iv) to the extent the dividend is attributable to interest paid by a person that is a related person of the foreign shareholder and the foreign shareholder is a controlled foreign corporation.

If a Fund invests in a RIC that pays such distributions to the Fund, such distributions retain their character as not subject to withholding if properly reported when paid by the Fund to foreign shareholders. A RIC is permitted to report such parts of its dividends as are eligible to be treated as interest-related or short-term capital gain dividends, but is not required to do so. In the case of shares held through an intermediary, the intermediary may withhold even if a Fund reports all or a portion of a payment as an interest-related or short-term capital gain dividend to shareholders.

Foreign shareholders should contact their intermediaries regarding the application of withholding rules to their accounts.

Distributions by a Fund to foreign shareholders other than Capital Gain Dividends, short-term capital gain dividends and interest-related dividends (e.g., dividends attributable to dividend and foreign-source interest income or to short-term capital gains or U.S. source interest income to which the exception from withholding described above does not apply) are generally subject to withholding of U.S. federal income tax at a rate of 30% (or lower applicable treaty rate).

A foreign shareholder is not, in general, subject to U.S. federal income tax on gains (and is not allowed a deduction for losses) realized on the sale of shares of a Fund unless (a) such gain is effectively connected with the conduct of a trade or business carried on by such holder within the United States, (b) in the case of an individual holder, the holder is present in the United States for a period or periods aggregating 183 days or more during the year of the sale and certain other conditions are met, or (c) the special rules relating to gain attributable to the sale or exchange of USRPIs apply to the foreign shareholder's sale of shares of the Fund (as described below).

Foreign shareholders with respect to whom income from a Fund is effectively connected with a trade or business conducted by the foreign person within the United States will in general be subject to U.S. federal income tax on the income derived from the Fund at the graduated rates applicable to U.S. citizens, residents or domestic corporations, whether such income is received in cash or reinvested in shares of the Fund and, in the case of a foreign corporation, may also be subject to a branch profits tax. If a foreign shareholder is eligible for the benefits of a tax treaty, any effectively connected income or gain will generally be subject to U.S. federal income tax on a net basis only if it is also attributable to a permanent establishment maintained by the shareholder in the United States. More generally, foreign shareholders who are residents in a country with an income tax treaty with the United States may obtain different tax results than those described herein, and are urged to consult their tax advisors.

Special rules would apply if a Fund were a qualified investment entity (“QIE”) because it is either a “U.S. real property holding corporation” (“USRPHC”) or would be a USRPHC but for the operation of certain exceptions to the definition thereof. Very generally, a USRPHC is a domestic corporation that holds USRPIs the fair market value of which equals or exceeds 50% of the sum of the fair market values of the corporation's USRPIs, interests in real property located outside the United States, and other trade or business assets. USRPIs are generally defined as any interest in U.S. real property

and any interest (other than solely as a creditor) in a USRPHC or, very generally, an entity that has been a USRPHC in the last five years. A Fund that holds, directly or indirectly, significant interests in REITs may be a USRPHC. Interests in domestically controlled QIEs, including REITs and RICs that are QIEs, not-greater-than-10% interests in publicly traded classes of stock in REITs and not-greater-than-5% interests in publicly traded classes of stock in RICs generally are not USRPIs, but these exceptions do not apply for purposes of determining whether a Fund is a QIE. If an interest in a Fund were a USRPI, the Fund would be required to withhold U.S. tax on the proceeds of a share redemption by a greater-than-5% foreign shareholder, in which case such foreign shareholder generally would also be required to file U.S. tax returns and pay any additional taxes due in connection with the redemption.

If a Fund were a QIE under a special “look-through” rule, any distributions by the Fund to a foreign shareholder attributable directly or indirectly to (i) distributions received by the Fund from a lower-tier RIC or REIT that the Fund is required to treat as USRPI gain in its hands and (ii) gains realized on the disposition of USRPIs by the Fund, would retain their character as gains realized from USRPIs in the hands of the Fund's foreign shareholders and would be subject to U.S. tax withholding. In addition, such distributions could result in the foreign shareholder being required to file a U.S. tax return and pay tax on the distributions at regular U.S. federal income tax rates. The consequences to a foreign shareholder, including the rate of such withholding and character of such distributions (e.g., as ordinary income or USRPI gain), would vary depending upon the extent of the foreign shareholder's current and past ownership of the Fund. Each Fund generally does not expect that it will be a QIE.

Foreign shareholders of a Fund also may be subject to “wash sale” rules to prevent the avoidance of the tax-filing and –payment obligations discussed above through the sale and repurchase of Fund shares.

Foreign shareholders should consult their tax advisers and, if holding shares through intermediaries, their intermediaries, concerning the application of these rules to their investment in a Fund.

In order for a foreign shareholder to qualify for any exemptions from withholding described above or for lower withholding tax rates under income tax treaties, or to establish an exemption from back-up withholding, the foreign shareholder must comply with special certification and filing requirements relating to its non-U.S. status (including, in general, furnishing an IRS Form W-8BEN, IRS Form W-8BEN-E or substitute form). Non-U.S. investors in a Fund should consult their tax advisers in this regard.

Special rules (including withholding and reporting requirements) apply to foreign partnerships and those holding Fund shares through foreign partnerships. Additional considerations may apply to foreign trusts and estates. Investors holding Fund shares through foreign entities should consult their tax advisers about their particular situation.

A foreign shareholder may be subject to state and local tax and to the U.S. federal estate tax in addition to the U.S. federal income tax on income referred to above.

Shareholder Reporting Obligations With Respect To Foreign Bank and Financial Accounts

Shareholders that are U.S. persons and own, directly or indirectly, more than 50% of a Fund by vote or value could be required to report annually their “financial interest” in the Fund's “foreign financial accounts,” if any, on FinCEN Form 114, Report of Foreign Bank and Financial Accounts (“FBAR”). Shareholders should consult a tax advisor, and persons investing in a Fund through an intermediary should contact their intermediary, regarding the applicability to them of this reporting requirement.

Other Reporting and Withholding Requirements

Sections 1471-1474 of the Code and the U.S. Treasury and IRS guidance issued thereunder (collectively, “FATCA”) generally require a Fund to obtain information sufficient to identify the status of each of its shareholders under FATCA or under an applicable intergovernmental agreement (an “IGA”) between the United States and a foreign government. If a shareholder fails to provide the requested information or otherwise fails to comply with FATCA or an IGA, the Fund may be required to withhold under FATCA at a rate of 30% with respect to that shareholder on ordinary dividends it pays. The IRS and the Department of Treasury have issued proposed regulations providing that these withholding rules will not apply to the gross proceeds of share redemptions or Capital Gain Dividends a Fund pays. If a payment by a Fund is subject to FATCA withholding, the Fund is required to withhold even if such payment would otherwise be exempt from withholding under the rules applicable to foreign shareholders described above (e.g., short-term capital gain dividends and interest-related dividends).

Each prospective investor is urged to consult its tax adviser regarding the applicability of FATCA and any other reporting requirements with respect to the prospective investor's own situation, including investments through an intermediary.

Underwriter

SSGA FD serves as the Funds' distributor pursuant to the Distribution Agreement by and between SSGA FD and the Trust. Pursuant to the Distribution Agreement, the Funds pay SSGA FD fees under the Rule 12b-1 Plan in effect for the Funds. For a description of the fees paid to SSGA FD under the Rule 12b-1 Plan, see “Shareholder Servicing and Distribution Plans,” above. SSGA FD is not obligated to sell any specific number of shares and will sell shares of a Fund on a continuous basis only against orders to purchase shares. The principal business address of SSGA FD is One Iron Street, Boston, MA 02210.

Financial Statements

The Trust's Annual Report dated September 30, 2023, which either accompanies this SAI or has previously been provided to the person to whom this SAI is being sent, is incorporated herein by reference with respect to all information other than the information set forth in the Letter to Shareholders included in the Annual Report. The Trust will furnish, without charge, a copy of the Annual Report, upon request to the Trust at P.O. Box 701, Milwaukee, WI 53201-0701, or by calling 1-800-242-0134.

APPENDIX A

RATINGS OF DEBT INSTRUMENTS

MOODY'S INVESTORS SERVICE, INC. (“MOODY'S”)

GLOBAL LONG-TERM RATING SCALE

Ratings assigned on Moody's global long-term rating scale are forward-looking opinions of the relative credit risks of financial obligations issued by non-financial corporates, financial institutions, structured finance vehicles, project finance vehicles, and public sector entities. Long-term ratings are assigned to issuers or obligations with an original maturity of one year or more and reflect both on the likelihood of a default on contractually promised payments and the expected financial loss suffered in the event of default.

Aaa: Obligations rated Aaa are judged to be of the highest quality, subject to the lowest level of credit risk.

Aa: Obligations rated Aa are judged to be of high quality and are subject to very low credit risk.

A: Obligations rated A are judged to be upper-medium grade and are subject to low credit risk.

Baa: Obligations rated Baa are judged to be medium-grade and subject to moderate credit risk and as such may possess certain speculative characteristics.

Ba: Obligations rated Ba are judged to be speculative and are subject to substantial credit risk.

B: Obligations rated B are considered speculative and are subject to high credit risk.

Caa: Obligations rated Caa are judged to be speculative of poor standing and are subject to very high credit risk.

Ca: Obligations rated Ca are highly speculative and are likely in, or very near, default, with some prospect of recovery of principal and interest.

C: Obligations rated C are the lowest rated and are typically in default, with little prospect for recovery of principal or interest.

Note: Moody's appends numerical modifiers 1, 2, and 3 to each generic rating classification from Aa through Caa. The modifier 1 indicates that the obligation ranks in the higher end of its generic rating category; the modifier 2 indicates a mid-range ranking; and the modifier 3 indicates a ranking in the lower end of that generic rating category. Additionally, a “(hyb)” indicator is appended to all ratings of hybrid securities issued by banks, insurers, finance companies, and securities firms.*

By their terms, hybrid securities allow for the omission of scheduled dividends, interest, or principal payments, which can potentially result in impairment if such an omission occurs. Hybrid securities may also be subject to contractually allowable write-downs of principal that could result in impairment. Together with the hybrid indicator, the long-term obligation rating assigned to a hybrid security is an expression of the relative credit risk associated with that security.

GLOBAL SHORT-TERM RATING SCALE

Ratings assigned on Moody's global short-term rating scale are forward-looking opinions of the relative credit risks of financial obligations issued by non-financial corporates, financial institutions, structured finance vehicles, project finance vehicles, and public sector entities. Short-term ratings are assigned to obligations with an original maturity of thirteen months or less and reflect both on the likelihood of a default on contractually promised payments and the expected financial loss suffered in the event of default.

P-1: Ratings of Prime-1 reflect a superior ability to repay short-term obligations.

P-2: Ratings of Prime-2 reflect a strong ability to repay short-term obligations.

P-3: Ratings of Prime-3 reflect an acceptable ability to repay short-term obligations.

NP: Issuers (or supporting institutions) rated Not Prime do not fall within any of the Prime rating categories.

A-1

S&P GLOBAL RATINGS (“S&P”)

ISSUE CREDIT RATING DEFINITIONS

An S&P Global Ratings issue credit rating is a forward-looking opinion about the creditworthiness of an obligor with respect to a specific financial obligation, a specific class of financial obligations, or a specific financial program (including ratings on medium-term note programs and commercial paper programs). It takes into consideration the creditworthiness of guarantors, insurers, or other forms of credit enhancement on the obligation and takes into account the currency in which the obligation is denominated. The opinion reflects S&P Global Ratings' view of the obligor's capacity and willingness to meet its financial commitments as they come due, and this opinion may assess terms, such as collateral security and subordination, which could affect ultimate payment in the event of default.

Issue credit ratings can be either long-term or short-term. Short-term ratings are generally assigned to those obligations considered short-term in the relevant market. Short-term ratings are also used to indicate the creditworthiness of an obligor with respect to put features on long-term obligations. Medium-term notes are assigned long-term ratings.

LONG-TERM ISSUE CREDIT RATINGS*

AAA: An obligation rated ‘AAA' has the highest rating assigned by S&P Global Ratings. The obligor's capacity to meet its financial commitments on the obligation is extremely strong.

AA: An obligation rated ‘AA' differs from the highest-rated obligations only to a small degree. The obligor's capacity to meet its financial commitments on the obligation is very strong.

A: An obligation rated ‘A' is somewhat more susceptible to the adverse effects of changes in circumstances and economic conditions than obligations in higher-rated categories. However, the obligor's capacity to meet its financial commitments on the obligation is still strong.

BBB: An obligation rated ‘BBB' exhibits adequate protection parameters. However, adverse economic conditions or changing circumstances are more likely to weaken the obligor's capacity to meet its financial commitments on the obligation.

BB; B; CCC; CC; and C: Obligations rated ‘BB', ‘B', ‘CCC', ‘CC', and ‘C' are regarded as having significant speculative characteristics. ‘BB' indicates the least degree of speculation and ‘C' the highest. While such obligations will likely have some quality and protective characteristics, these may be outweighed by large uncertainties or major exposure to adverse conditions.

BB: An obligation rated ‘BB' is less vulnerable to nonpayment than other speculative issues. However, it faces major ongoing uncertainties or exposure to adverse business, financial, or economic conditions that could lead to the obligor's inadequate capacity to meet its financial commitments on the obligation.

B: An obligation rated ‘B' is more vulnerable to nonpayment than obligations rated ‘BB', but the obligor currently has the capacity to meet its financial commitments on the obligation. Adverse business, financial, or economic conditions will likely impair the obligor's capacity or willingness to meet its financial commitments on the obligation.

CCC: An obligation rated ‘CCC' is currently vulnerable to nonpayment, and is dependent upon favorable business, financial, and economic conditions for the obligor to meet its financial commitments on the obligation. In the event of adverse business, financial, or economic conditions, the obligor is not likely to have the capacity to meet its financial commitments on the obligation.

CC: An obligation rated ‘CC' is currently highly vulnerable to nonpayment. The ‘CC' rating is used when a default has not yet occurred, but S&P Global Ratings expects default to be a virtual certainty, regardless of the anticipated time to default.

C: An obligation rated ‘C' is currently highly vulnerable to nonpayment, and the obligation is expected to have lower relative seniority or lower ultimate recovery compared with obligations that are rated higher.

D: An obligation rated ‘D' is in default or in breach of an imputed promise. For non-hybrid capital instruments, the ‘D' rating category is used when payments on an obligation are not made on the date due, unless S&P Global Ratings believes that such payments will be made within five business days in the absence of a stated grace period or within the earlier of the stated grace period or 30 calendar days. The ‘D' rating also will be used upon the filing of a bankruptcy petition or the taking of similar action and where default on an obligation is a virtual certainty, for example due to automatic stay provisions. A rating on an obligation is lowered to 'D' if it is subject to a distressed debt restructuring.

NR: This indicates that a rating has not been assigned or is no longer assigned.

A-2

Ratings from 'AA' to 'CCC' may be modified by the addition of a plus (+) or minus (-) sign to show relative standing within the rating categories.

SHORT-TERM ISSUE CREDIT RATINGS

A-1: A short-term obligation rated ‘A-1' is rated in the highest category by S&P Global Ratings. The obligor's capacity to meet its financial commitments on the obligation is strong. Within this category, certain obligations are designated with a plus sign (+). This indicates that the obligor's capacity to meet its financial commitments on these obligations is extremely strong.

A-2: A short-term obligation rated ‘A-2' is somewhat more susceptible to the adverse effects of changes in circumstances and economic conditions than obligations in higher rating categories. However, the obligor's capacity to meet its financial commitments on the obligation is satisfactory.

A-3: A short-term obligation rated ‘A-3' exhibits adequate protection parameters. However, adverse economic conditions or changing circumstances are more likely to weaken an obligor's capacity to meet its financial commitments on the obligation.

B: A short-term obligation rated ‘B' is regarded as vulnerable and has significant speculative characteristics. The obligor currently has the capacity to meet its financial commitments; however, it faces major ongoing uncertainties that could lead to the obligor's inadequate capacity to meet its financial commitments.

C: A short-term obligation rated ‘C' is currently vulnerable to nonpayment and is dependent upon favorable business, financial, and economic conditions for the obligor to meet its financial commitments on the obligation.

D: A short-term obligation rated ‘D' is in default or in breach of an imputed promise. For non-hybrid capital instruments, the ‘D' rating category is used when payments on an obligation are not made on the date due, unless S&P Global Ratings believes that such payments will be made within any stated grace period. However, any stated grace period longer than five business days will be treated as five business days. The ‘D' rating also will be used upon the filing of a bankruptcy petition or the taking of a similar action and where default on an obligation is a virtual certainty, for example due to automatic stay provisions. An obligation's rating is lowered to ‘D' if it is subject to a distressed debt restructuring.

FITCH RATINGS. (“FITCH”)

ISSUER DEFAULT RATINGS

Rated entities in a number of sectors, including financial and non-financial corporations, sovereigns, insurance companies and certain sectors within public finance, are generally assigned Issuer Default Ratings (IDRs). IDRs are also assigned to certain entities in global infrastructure and project finance. IDRs opine on an entity's relative vulnerability to default on financial obligations. The threshold default risk addressed by the IDR is generally that of the financial obligations whose non-payment would best reflect the uncured failure of that entity. As such, IDRs also address relative vulnerability to bankruptcy, administrative receivership or similar concepts.

In aggregate, IDRs provide an ordinal ranking of issuers based on the agency's view of their relative vulnerability to default, rather than a prediction of a specific percentage likelihood of default.

AAA: Highest credit quality.

‘AAA' ratings denote the lowest expectation of default risk. They are assigned only in cases of exceptionally strong capacity for payment of financial commitments. This capacity is highly unlikely to be adversely affected by foreseeable events.

AA: Very high credit quality.

‘AA' ratings denote expectations of very low default risk. They indicate very strong capacity for payment of financial commitments. This capacity is not significantly vulnerable to foreseeable events.

A: High credit quality.

‘A' ratings denote expectations of low default risk. The capacity for payment of financial commitments is considered strong. This capacity may, nevertheless, be more vulnerable to adverse business or economic conditions than is the case for higher ratings.

A-3

BBB: Good credit quality.

‘BBB' ratings indicate that expectations of default risk are currently low. The capacity for payment of financial commitments is considered adequate, but adverse business or economic conditions are more likely to impair this capacity.

BB: Speculative.

‘BB' ratings indicate an elevated vulnerability to default risk, particularly in the event of adverse changes in business or economic conditions over time; however, business or financial flexibility exists that supports the servicing of financial commitments.

B: Highly speculative.

‘B' ratings indicate that material default risk is present, but a limited margin of safety remains. Financial commitments are currently being met; however, capacity for continued payment is vulnerable to deterioration in the business and economic environment.

CCC: Substantial credit risk.

Very low margin for safety. Default is a real possibility.

CC: Very high levels of credit risk.

Default of some kind appears probable.

C: Near default

A default or default-like process has begun, or the issuer is in standstill, or for a closed funding vehicle, payment capacity is irrevocably impaired. Conditions that are indicative of a ‘C' category rating for an issuer include:

the issuer has entered into a grace or cure period following non-payment of a material financial obligation;

the issuer has entered into a temporary negotiated waiver or standstill agreement following a payment default on a material financial obligation;

the formal announcement by the issuer or their agent of a distressed debt exchange;

a closed financing vehicle where payment capacity is irrevocably impaired such that it is not expected to pay interest and/or principal in full during the life of the transaction, but where no payment default is imminent.

RD: Restricted default.

‘RD' ratings indicate an issuer that in Fitch's opinion has experienced:

an uncured payment default or distressed debt exchange on a bond, loan or other material financial obligation, but

has not entered into bankruptcy filings, administration, receivership, liquidation, or other formal winding-up procedure, and

has not otherwise ceased operating.

This would include:

the selective payment default on a specific class or currency of debt;

ii.

the uncured expiry of any applicable grace period, cure period or default forbearance period following a payment default on a bank loan, capital markets security or other material financial obligation;

iii.

the extension of multiple waivers or forbearance periods upon a payment default on one or more material financial obligations, either in series or in parallel; ordinary execution of a distressed debt exchange on one or more material financial obligations.

D: Default.

‘D' ratings indicate an issuer that in Fitch's opinion has entered into bankruptcy filings, administration, receivership, liquidation or other formal winding-up procedure or that has otherwise ceased business.

A-4

Default ratings are not assigned prospectively to entities or their obligations; within this context, non-payment on an instrument that contains a deferral feature or grace period will generally not be considered a default until after the expiration of the deferral or grace period, unless a default is otherwise driven by bankruptcy or other similar circumstance, or by a distressed debt exchange.

In all cases, the assignment of a default rating reflects the agency's opinion as to the most appropriate rating category consistent with the rest of its universe of ratings and may differ from the definition of default under the terms of an issuer's financial obligations or local commercial practice.

SHORT-TERM RATINGS ASSIGNED TO ISSUERS AND OBLIGATIONS

A short-term issuer or obligation rating is based in all cases on the short-term vulnerability to default of the rated entity and relates to the capacity to meet financial obligations in accordance with the documentation governing the relevant obligation. Short-term deposit ratings may be adjusted for loss severity. Short-Term Ratings are assigned to obligations whose initial maturity is viewed as “short term” based on market convention. Typically, this means up to 13 months for corporate, sovereign, and structured obligations and up to 36 months for obligations in U.S. public finance markets.

F1: Highest Short-Term Credit Quality. Indicates the strongest intrinsic capacity for timely payment of financial commitments; may have an added “+” to denote any exceptionally strong credit feature.

F2: Good Short-Term Credit Quality. Good intrinsic capacity for timely payment of financial commitments.

F3: Fair Short-Term Credit Quality. The intrinsic capacity for timely payment of financial commitments is adequate.

B: Speculative Short-Term Credit Quality. Minimal capacity for timely payment of financial commitments, plus heightened vulnerability to near term adverse changes in financial and economic conditions.

C: High Short-Term Default risk. Default is a real possibility.

RD: Restricted Default. Indicates an entity that has defaulted on one or more of its financial commitments, although it continues to meet other financial obligations. Typically applicable to entity ratings only.

D: Default. Indicates a broad-based default event for an entity, or the default of a short-term obligation.

Note: The modifiers “+” or “-” may be appended to a rating to denote relative status within major rating categories. For example, the rating category ‘AA' has three notch-specific rating levels (‘AA+'; ‘AA'; ‘AA-'; each a rating level). Such suffixes are not added to ‘AAA' ratings and ratings below the 'CCC' category. For the short-term rating category of ‘F1', a ‘+' may be appended. For Viability Ratings, the modifiers “+” or “–” may be appended to a rating to denote relative status within categories from ‘AA' to ‘CCC'. For derivative counterparty ratings the modifiers “+” or “–” may be appended to the ratings within ‘AA(dcr)' to ‘CCC(dcr)' categories.

A-5

APPENDIX B – TRUST'S PROXY VOTING PROCEDURES

SSGA FUNDS
STATE STREET MASTER FUNDS
STATE STREET INSTITUTIONAL INVESTMENT TRUST
ELFUN GOVERNMENT MONEY MARKET FUND
ELFUN TAX-EXEMPT INCOME FUND
ELFUN INCOME FUND
ELFUN DIVERSIFIED FUND
ELFUN INTERNATIONAL EQUITY FUND
ELFUN TRUSTS
STATE STREET NAVIGATOR SECURITIES LENDING TRUST
STATE STREET INSTITUTIONAL FUNDS
STATE STREET VARIABLE INSURANCE SERIES FUNDS, INC. (THE “COMPANY”)1

PROXY VOTING POLICY AND PROCEDURES

As of September 20, 2017

The Board of Trustees/Directors of the Trust/Company (each series thereof, a “Fund”) have adopted the following policy and procedures with respect to voting proxies relating to portfolio securities held by the Trust/Company's investment portfolios.

1. Proxy Voting Policy

The policy of the Trust/Company is to delegate the responsibility for voting proxies relating to portfolio securities held by the Trust/Company to SSGA Funds Management, Inc., the Trust/Company's investment adviser (the “Adviser”), subject to the Trustees/Directors' continuing oversight.

2. Fiduciary Duty

The right to vote proxies with respect to a portfolio security held by the Trust/Company is an asset of the Trust/Company. The Adviser acts as a fiduciary of the Trust/Company and must vote proxies in a manner consistent with the best interest of the Trust/Company and its shareholders.

3. Proxy Voting Procedures

A. At least annually, the Adviser shall present to the Boards of Trustees/Directors its policies, procedures and other guidelines for voting proxies (“Policy”) and the policy of any Sub-adviser (as defined below) to which proxy voting authority has been delegated (see Section 9 below). In addition, the Adviser shall notify the Trustees/Directors of material changes to its Policy or the policy of any Sub-adviser promptly and not later than the next regular meeting of the Board of Trustees/Directors after such amendment is implemented.

B. At least annually, the Adviser shall present to the Boards of Trustees/Directors its policy for managing conflicts of interests that may arise through the Adviser's proxy voting activities. In addition, the Adviser shall report any Policy overrides involving portfolio securities held by a Fund to the Trustees/Directors at the next regular meeting of the Board of Trustees/Directors after such override(s) occur.

C. At least annually, the Adviser shall inform the Trustees/Director that a record is available with respect to each proxy voted with respect to portfolio securities of the Trust/Company during the year. Also see Section 5 below.

4. Revocation of Authority to Vote

The delegation by the Trustees/Directors of the authority to vote proxies relating to portfolio securities of the Trust/Company may be revoked by the Trustees/Directors, in whole or in part, at any time.

____________

Unless otherwise noted, the singular term “Trust/Company” used throughout this document means each of SSGA Funds, State Street Master Funds, State Street Institutional Investment Trust, State Street Navigator Securities Lending Trust, Elfun Government Money Market Fund, Elfun Tax-Exempt Income Fund, Elfun Income Fund, Elfun Diversified Fund, Elfun International Equity Fund, Elfun Trusts, State Street Institutional Funds, and State Street Variable Insurance Series Funds, Inc.

B-1

5. Annual Filing of Proxy Voting Record

The Adviser shall provide the required data for each proxy voted with respect to portfolio securities of the Trust/Company to the Trust/Company or its designated service provider in a timely manner and in a format acceptable to be filed in the Trust/Company's annual proxy voting report on Form N-PX for the twelve-month period ended June 30. Form N-PX is required to be filed not later than August 31 of each year.

6. Retention and Oversight of Proxy Advisory Firms

A. In considering whether to retain or continue retaining a particular proxy advisory firm, the Adviser will ascertain whether the proxy advisory firm has the capacity and competency to adequately analyze proxy issues, act as proxy voting agent as requested, and implement the Policy. In this regard, the Adviser will consider, at least annually, among other things, the adequacy and quality of the proxy advisory firm's staffing and personnel and the robustness of its policies and procedures regarding its ability to identify and address any conflicts of interest. The Adviser shall, at least annually, report to Boards of Trustees/Directors regarding the results of this review.

B. The Adviser will request quarterly and annual reporting from any proxy advisory firm retained by the Adviser, and hold ad hoc meetings with such proxy advisory firm, in order to determine whether there has been any business changes that might impact the proxy advisory firm's capacity or competency to provide proxy voting advice or services or changes to the proxy advisory firm's conflicts policies or procedures. The Adviser will also take reasonable steps to investigate any material factual error, notified to the Adviser by the proxy advisory firm or identified by the Adviser, made by the proxy advisory firm in providing proxy voting services.

7. Periodic Sampling

The Adviser will periodically sample proxy votes to review whether they complied with the Policy. The Adviser shall, at least annually, report to the Boards of Trustees/Directors regarding the frequency and results of the sampling performed.

8. Disclosures

The Trust/Company shall include in its registration statement:

1. A description of this policy and of the policies and procedures used by the Adviser to determine how to vote proxies relating to portfolio securities; and

1. A statement disclosing that information regarding how the Trust/Company voted proxies relating to portfolio securities during the most recent twelve-month period ended June 30 is available without charge, upon request, by calling the Trust/Company's toll-free telephone number; or through a specified Internet address; or both; and on the Securities and Exchange Commission's (the “SEC”) website.

The Trust/Company shall include in its annual and semi-annual reports to shareholders:

1. A statement disclosing that a description of the policies and procedures used by or on behalf of the Trust/Company to determine how to vote proxies relating to portfolio securities of the Funds is available without charge, upon request, by calling the Trust/Company's toll-free telephone number; through a specified Internet address, if applicable; and on the SEC's website; and

2. A statement disclosing that information regarding how the Trust/Company voted proxies relating to portfolio securities during the most recent twelve-month period ended June 30 is available without charge, upon request, by calling the Trust/Company's toll-free telephone number; or through a specified Internet address; or both; and on the SEC's website.

9. Sub-Advisers

For certain Funds, the Adviser may retain investment management firms (“Sub-advisers”) to provide day-to-day investment management services to the Funds pursuant to sub-advisory agreements. It is the policy of the Trust/Company that the Adviser may delegate proxy voting authority with respect to a Fund to a Sub-adviser. Pursuant to such delegation, a Sub-adviser is authorized to vote proxies on behalf of the applicable Fund or Funds for which it serves as sub-adviser, in accordance with the Sub-adviser's proxy voting policies and procedures.

10. Review of Policy

The Trustees/Directors shall review this policy to determine its continued sufficiency as necessary from time to time.

B-2

APPENDIX C – ADVISER’S PROXY VOTING PROCEDURES AND GUIDELINES

LOGO

March 2023

Global Proxy Voting and Engagement Principles

State Street Global Advisors, one of the industry’s largest institutional asset managers, is the investment management arm of State Street Corporation, a leading provider of financial services to institutional investors. As an investment manager, State Street Global Advisors has discretionary proxy voting authority over most of its client accounts, and State Street Global Advisors votes these proxies in the manner that we believe will most likely protect and promote the long-term economic value of client investments, as described in this document.ⁱ

These Global Proxy Voting and Engagement Principles (the “Principles”) are also applicable to SSGA Funds Management, Inc., State Street Global Advisors Trust Company, and other advisory affiliates of State Street Corporation. Additionally, State Street Global Advisors maintains Proxy Voting and Engagement Guidelines for select markets, including: Australia, continental Europe, Japan, New Zealand, North America (Canada and the US), the UK and Ireland, and emerging markets. International markets not covered by our market-specific guidelines are reviewed and voted in a manner that is consistent with the Principles; however, State Street Global Advisors also endeavors to show sensitivity to local market practices when voting in these various markets.

C-1

LOGO



State Street Global Advisors’ Authority and Duties to Vote Client and Fund Securities				Where State Street Global Advisors’ clients have asked it to vote their shares on their behalf or where a commingled fund fiduciary has delegated the responsibility to vote the fund’s securities to State Street Global Advisors, State Street Global Advisors votes those client and fund-owned securities in a unified manner, consistent with the Principles described in this document. Exceptions to this unified voting policy are: (1) where State Street Global Advisors has made proxy voting choices (i.e., the proxy voting program) available to investors within a commingled fund, in which case a pro rata portion of shares held by the fund attributable to investors who choose to participate in the proxy voting program would be voted consistent with the third-party proxy voting policies selected by the investors, and (2) in the limited circumstances where a pooled investment vehicle managed by State Street Global Advisors utilizes a third party proxy voting guideline as set forth in that fund’s organizational and/or offering documents. With respect to such funds utilizing third-party proxy voting guidelines, the terms of the applicable third-party proxy voting guidelines shall apply in place of the Principles described herein and the proxy votes implemented with respect to such a fund may differ from and be contrary to those votes implemented for other portfolios managed by State Street Global Advisors pursuant to its proprietary proxy voting guidelines.

The Principles-State Street Global Advisors’ Approach to Proxy Voting and Issuer Engagement				At State Street Global Advisors, we take our fiduciary duties as an asset manager very seriously. We have a dedicated team of corporate governance professionals who help us carry out our duties as a responsible investor. These duties include engaging with companies, developing and enhancing in-house corporate governance guidelines, analyzing corporate governance issues on a case-by-case basis at the company level, and exercising voting rights. The underlying goal is to maximize shareholder value.

				The Principles may take different perspectives on common governance issues that vary from one market to another. Similarly, engagement activity may take different forms in order to best achieve long-term engagement goals. Rather than divesting from portfolio companies, our approach is to engage with such companies. We believe that proxy voting and engagement with portfolio companies is often the most direct and productive way for shareholders to exercise their ownership rights. This comprehensive toolkit is an integral part of the overall investment process.

				We believe engagement and voting activity have a direct relationship. As a result, the integration of our engagement activities, while leveraging the exercise of voting rights, provides a meaningful shareholder tool that we believe protects and enhances the long-term economic value of the holdings in our clients’ accounts. We maximize voting power and engagement by maintaining a centralized proxy voting and active ownership process covering all holdings, regardless of strategy. Despite the vast array of investment strategies and objectives across State Street Global Advisors, the fiduciary responsibilities of share ownership and voting for which State Street Global Advisors has voting discretion are carried out with a single voice and objective.

C-2

LOGO



				The Principles support governance structures that we believe add to, or maximize, shareholder value for the companies held in our clients’ portfolios. We conduct issuer-specific engagements with companies to discuss our principles, including sustainability-related risks and opportunities. In addition, we encourage issuers to find ways to increase the amount of direct communication board members have with shareholders. Direct communication with executive board members and independent non-executive directors is critical to helping companies understand shareholder concerns.

				In conducting our engagements, we also evaluate the various factors that influence the corporate governance framework of a country, including the macroeconomic conditions and broader political system, the quality of regulatory oversight, the enforcement of property and shareholder rights, and the independence of the judiciary. We understand that regulatory requirements and investor expectations relating to governance practices and engagement activities differ from country to country. As a result, we engage with issuers, regulators, or a combination of the two depending upon the market. We are also a member of various investor associations that seek to address broader corporate governance-related policy at the country level.

				The State Street Global Advisors Asset Stewardship Team may consult with members of various investment teams to engage with companies on corporate governance issues and to address any specific concerns. This facilitates our comprehensive approach to information gathering as it relates to items that are to be voted upon at upcoming shareholder meetings. We also conduct issuer-specific engagements with companies, covering various corporate governance and sustainability-related topics outside of proxy season.

				The Asset Stewardship Team employs a blend of quantitative and qualitative research, analysis and data in order to support screens that identify issuers where active engagement may be necessary to protect and promote shareholder value. Issuer engagement may also be event-driven, focusing on issuer-specific corporate governance or sustainability concerns, or broader industry-related trends. We also consider the size of our total position in the issuer in question and/or the potential negative governance, performance profile, and circumstance at hand. As a result, we believe issuer engagement can take many forms and be triggered by numerous circumstances. The following approaches represent how we define engagement methods:

Active				We use screening tools designed to capture a mix of company-specific data, including governance and sustainability profiles, to inform our voting and engagement activity.

C-3

LOGO



				We will actively seek direct dialogue with the board and management of companies that we have identified through our screening processes. Such engagements may lead to further monitoring to ensure that the company improves its governance or sustainability practices. In these cases, the engagement process represents the most meaningful opportunity for us to protect long-term shareholder value from excessive risk due to poor governance and sustainability practices.

Reactive				Reactive engagement is initiated by issuers. We routinely discuss specific voting issues and items with the issuer community. Reactive engagement is an opportunity to address not only voting items, but also a wide range of governance and sustainability issues.

				We have established an engagement protocol that further describes our approach to issuer engagement.

Measurement				Our stewardship activities are designed to have an impact on company-specific and market-level disclosure and oversight practices that we believe protect and promote shareholder value.

				Company-specific successes Assessing the effectiveness of our company-specific engagement process can be challenging to measure. To limit subjectivity in measuring our success, we actively seek issuer feedback and monitor the actions taken by issuers post-engagement in order to identify tangible changes. This enables us to establish indicators to gauge how issuers respond to our concerns and to what degree these responses satisfy our requests. It is also important to note that successful engagement activity can be measured over multiple years depending on the facts and circumstances involved. These engagements not only inform our voting decisions but also allow us to monitor improvement over time and to contribute to our evolving perspectives on priority areas. We also track the impact of our proxy votes by reviewing changing trends in market practices on specific corporate-governance or sustainability-related issues that we address through voting action. We report engagement and voting actions to clients on an annual basis.

				Market-level successes We track the broader adoption of our stewardship priorities — Effective Board Oversight, Climate Risk Management, Human Capital Management, and Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion - which we consider core to creating long-term value, by assessing the number of market participants that have embraced positions consistent with our thought leadership and advocacy.

C-4

LOGO



Proxy Voting Procedure

Oversight				The Asset Stewardship Team is responsible for developing and implementing State Street Global Advisors’ Global Proxy Voting and Engagement Principles, Global Proxy Voting and Engagement Guidelines for Environmental and Social Factors, regional proxy voting and engagement guidelines, and guidance published thereunder by State Street Global Advisors from time to time, available at ssga.com/about-us/asset-stewardship.html (collectively, the “Voting Policy”), the implementation of third-party proxy voting guidelines where applicable, case-by-case voting items, issuer engagement activities, and research and analysis of governance-related issues. The Asset Stewardship Team’s activities are overseen by our internal governance body, State Street Global Advisors’ ESG Committee (the “ESG Committee”). The ESG Committee is responsible for reviewing State Street Global Advisors’ stewardship strategy, engagement priorities, and proxy voting guidelines, and for monitoring the delivery of voting objectives.

Proxy Voting Process				In order to facilitate our proxy voting process, we retain Institutional Shareholder Services Inc. (“ISS”), a firm with expertise in proxy voting and corporate governance. We utilize ISS to: (1) act as our proxy voting agent (providing State Street Global Advisors with vote execution and administration services), (2) assist in applying the Voting Policy, (3) provide research and analysis relating to general corporate governance issues and specific proxy items, and (4) provide proxy voting guidelines in limited circumstances.

				All voting decisions and engagement activities are undertaken in accordance with our in-house Voting Policy, ensuring that the interests of our clients remain the sole consideration when discharging our stewardship responsibilities. Exceptions to this policy is the use of an independent third party to vote on State Street stock and other State Street Global Advisors affiliated entities, to mitigate a conflict of interest of voting on our parent company or affiliated entities, and other situations where we retain an independent fiduciary to make a voting decision where we believe we may be conflicted from voting (for example, due to an outside business interest). In such cases, delegated third parties exercise vote decisions based upon State Street Global Advisors’ Proxy Voting and Engagement Guidelines.

				We aim to vote at all shareholder meetings where our clients have given us the authority to vote their shares and where it is feasible to do so. However, when we deem appropriate, we could refrain from voting at meetings in cases where:

				• Power of attorney documentation is required.

C-5

LOGO



				• Voting will have a material impact on our ability to trade the security.

				• Voting is not permissible due to sanctions affecting a company or individual.

				• Issuer-specific special documentation is required or various market or issuer certifications are required.

				• Unless a client directs otherwise, State Street Global Advisors will not vote proxies in so-called “share blocking” markets (markets where proxy voters have their securities blocked from trading during the period of the annual meeting).

				Additionally, we are unable to vote proxies when certain custodians, used by our clients, do not offer proxy voting in a jurisdiction or when they charge a meeting-specific fee in excess of the typical custody service agreement.

				In rare circumstances where nuances within specific resolutions fall outside of the scope of existing voting guidelines, requiring case-by-case analysis, such resolutions are escalated to the head of Asset Stewardship and reported to the ESG Committee. Additionally, in certain cases, where a material conflict of interest is identified, the matter may be referred to the ESG Committee for review.

Conflict of Interest				See our standalone Conflicts Mitigation Guidelines.

Proxy Voting and Engagement Principles

Directors and Boards				The election of directors is one of the most important fiduciary duties we perform on behalf of our clients. We believe that well-governed companies can protect and pursue shareholder interests better and withstand the challenges of an uncertain economic environment. As such, we seek to vote director elections in a way that we believe will maximize long-term value.

				Principally, a board acts on behalf of shareholders by protecting their interests and preserving their rights. This concept establishes the standard by which board and director performance is measured. In order to achieve this fundamental principle, the role of the board is to carry out its responsibilities in the best long-term interest of the company and its shareholders. An independent and effective board sets the strategy and provides guidance on strategic matters, oversees management, selects the CEO and other senior executives, creates a succession plan for the board and management, provides risk oversight, and assesses the performance of the CEO and management. In contrast, management implements the business and capital allocation strategies and runs the company’s day-to-day operations. As part of our engagement process, we routinely discuss the importance of these responsibilities with the boards of issuers.

C-6

LOGO



				We believe the quality of a board is a measure of director independence, director succession planning, board diversity, evaluations and refreshment, and company governance practices. In voting to elect nominees, we consider many factors. We believe independent directors are crucial to good corporate governance; they help management establish sound corporate governance policies and practices. A sufficiently independent board will effectively monitor management, maintain appropriate governance practices, and perform oversight functions necessary to protect shareholder interests. We also believe the right mix of skills, independence, diversity, and qualifications among directors provides boards with the knowledge and direct experience to manage risks and operating structures that are often complex and industry-specific.

Accounting and Audit- Related Issues				We believe audit committees are critical and necessary as part of the board’s risk oversight role. The audit committee is responsible for setting out an internal audit function that provides robust audit and internal control systems designed to effectively manage potential and emerging risks to the company’s operations and strategy. We believe audit committees should have independent directors as members, and we will hold the members of the audit committee responsible for overseeing the management of the audit function.

				We believe the disclosure and availability of reliable financial statements in a timely manner is imperative for the investment process. As a result, board oversight of the internal controls and the independence of the audit process are essential if investors are to rely upon financial statements. It is important for the audit committee to appoint external auditors who are independent from management as we expect auditors to provide assurance of a company’s financial condition.

Capital Structure, Reorganization and Mergers				The ability to raise capital is critical for companies to carry out strategy, to grow, and to achieve returns above their cost of capital. The approval of capital raising activities is fundamental to a shareholder’s ability to monitor the amounts of proceeds and to ensure capital is deployed efficiently. Altering the capital structure of a company is a critical decision for boards. When making such a decision, we believe the company should disclose a comprehensive business rationale that is consistent with corporate strategy and not overly dilutive to its shareholders.

				Mergers or reorganization of the structure of a company often involve proposals relating to reincorporation, restructurings, liquidations, and other major changes to the corporation.

				Proposals that are in the best interests of shareholders, demonstrated by enhancing share value or improving the effectiveness of the company’s operations, will be supported. In evaluating mergers and acquisitions, we consider the impact of the corporate governance provisions to shareholders. In all cases, we use our discretion in order to maximize shareholder value.

C-7

LOGO



				Occasionally, companies add anti-takeover provisions that reduce the chances of a potential acquirer to make an offer, or to reduce the likelihood of a successful offer. We do not support proposals that reduce shareholders’ rights, entrench management, or reduce the likelihood of shareholders’ right to vote on reasonable offers.

Compensation				We consider it the board’s responsibility to identify the appropriate level of executive compensation. Despite the differences among the types of plans and the awards possible, there is a simple underlying philosophy that guides our analysis of executive compensation: we believe that there should be a direct relationship between executive compensation and company performance over the long term.

				Shareholders should have the opportunity to assess whether pay structures and levels are aligned with business performance. When assessing remuneration reports, we consider factors such as adequate disclosure of various remuneration elements, absolute and relative pay levels, peer selection and benchmarking, the mix of long-term and short-term incentives, alignment of pay structures with shareholder interests, as well as with corporate strategy and performance. We may oppose remuneration reports where pay seems misaligned with shareholders’ interests. We may also consider executive compensation practices when re-electing members of the remuneration committee.

				We recognize that compensation policies and practices are unique from market to market; often there are significant differences between the level of disclosures, the amount and forms of compensation paid, and the ability of shareholders to approve executive compensation practices. As a result, our ability to assess the appropriateness of executive compensation is often dependent on market practices and laws.

Environmental and Social Issues				As a fiduciary, State Street Global Advisors takes a comprehensive approach to engaging with our portfolio companies about material environmental and social issues. Our Asset Stewardship program prioritization process allows us to proactively identify companies for engagement and voting in order to mitigate sustainability risks in our portfolio. Through engagement, we aim to build long-term relationships with the issuers in which we invest on behalf of our clients and to address a broad range of topics relating to the promotion of long-term shareholder value creation. When voting, we fundamentally consider whether the adoption of a shareholder proposal addressing a material environmental or social topic would promote long-term shareholder value in the context of the company’s existing practices and disclosures as well as existing market practice.

				For more information on our approach to environmental and social topics, please see our Global Proxy Voting and Engagement Guidelines for Environmental and Social Factors, available at ssga.com/about-us/asset-stewardship.html.

C-8

LOGO



General/Routine				Although we do not seek involvement in the day-to-day operations of an organization, we recognize the need for conscientious oversight and input into management decisions that may affect a company’s value. We support proposals that encourage economically advantageous corporate practices and governance, while leaving decisions that are deemed to be routine or constitute ordinary business to management and the board of directors.

Fixed Income Stewardship				The two elements of our fixed income stewardship program are:

				Proxy Voting:

				While matters that arise for a vote at bondholder meetings vary by jurisdiction, examples of common proxy voting resolutions at bondholder meetings include:

				• Approving amendments to debt covenants and/or terms of issuance

				• Authorizing procedural matters, such as filing of required documents/other formalities

				• Approving debt restructuring plans

				• Abstaining from challenging the bankruptcy trustees

				• Authorizing repurchase of issued debt security

				• Approving the placement of unissued debt securities under the control of directors

				• Approving spin-off/absorption proposals

				Given the nature of the items that arise for vote at bondholder meetings, we take a case-by-case approach to voting bondholder resolutions. Where necessary, we will engage with issuers on voting matters prior to arriving at voting decisions. All voting decisions will be made in the best interest of our clients.

				Issuer Engagement:

				We recognize that debt holders have limited leverage with companies on a day-to-day basis. Our guidelines for engagement with fixed income issuers broadly follow the engagement guidelines for our equity holdings, as described above.

Securities on Loan				As a responsible investor and fiduciary, we recognize the importance of balancing the benefits of voting shares and the incremental lending revenue for the pooled funds that participate in State Street Global Advisors’ securities lending program (the “Funds”). Our objective is to recall securities on loan and restrict future lending until after the record date for the respective vote in instances where we believe that a particular vote could have a material impact on the Funds’ long-term financial performance and the benefit of voting shares will outweigh the forgone lending income.

C-9

LOGO



				Accordingly, we have set systematic recall and lending restriction criteria for shareholder meetings involving situations with the highest potential financial implications (such as proxy contests and strategic transactions including mergers and acquisitions, going dark transactions, change of corporate form, bankruptcy and liquidation).

				Generally, these criteria for recall and restriction for lending only apply to certain large cap indices in developed markets.

				State Street Global Advisors monitors the forgone lending revenue associated with each recall to determine if the impact on the Funds’ long-term financial performance and the benefit of voting shares will outweigh the forgone lending income.

				Although our objective is to systematically recall securities based on the aforementioned criteria, we must receive notice of the vote in sufficient time to recall the shares on or before the record date. In cases in which we do not receive timely notice, we may be unable to recall the shares on or before the record date.

Reporting				We provide transparency for our stewardship activities through our regular client reports and relevant information reported online. We publish an annual stewardship report that provides details of our stewardship approach, engagement and voting policies, and activities during the year. The annual report is complemented by quarterly stewardship activity reports as well as the regular publication of thought leadership on governance and sustainability on our website. Our voting record information is available on Vote View, an interactive platform that provides relevant company details, proposal types, resolution descriptions, and records of our votes cast.

About State Street Global Advisors				For four decades, State Street Global Advisors has served the world’s governments, institutions and financial advisors. With a rigorous, risk-aware approach built on research, analysis and market-tested experience, we build from a breadth of index and active strategies to create cost-effective solutions. And, as pioneers in index, ETF, and ESG investing, we are always inventing new ways to invest. As a result, we have become the world’s fourth-largest asset manager* with US $3.62 trillion^†under our care.

				* Pensions & Investments Research Center, as of December 31, 2021.
				^† This figure is presented as of March 31, 2023 and includes approximately $65.03 billion USD of assets with respect to SPDR products for which State Street Global Advisors Funds Distributors, LLC (SSGA FD) acts solely as the marketing agent. SSGA FD and State Street Global Advisors are affiliated. Please note all AUM is unaudited.

C-10

LOGO

ssga.com

Marketing communications

State Street Global Advisors Worldwide Entities

Abu Dhabi: State Street Global Advisors Limited, ADGM branch is regulated by the Financial Services Regulatory Authority (FSRA). This document is intended for Professional Clients or Market Counterparties only as defined by the FSRA and no other person should act upon it. State Street Global Advisors Limited, ADGM Branch, Al Khatem Tower, Suite 42801, Level 28, ADGM Square, Al Maryah Island, P.O Box 76404, Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates. Regulated by the ADGM Financial Services Regulatory Authority. T: +971 2 245 9000. Australia: State Street Global Advisors, Australia, Limited (ABN 42 003 914 225) is the holder of an Australian Financial Services License (AFSL Number 238276). Registered office: Level 14, 420 George Street, Sydney, NSW 2000, Australia. T: +612 9240-7600. F: +612 9240-7611. Belgium: State Street Global Advisors Belgium, Chaussée de La Hulpe 185, 1170 Brussels, Belgium. T: +32 2 663 2036. State Street Global Advisors Belgium is a branch office of State Street Global

Advisors Europe Limited, registered in Ireland with company number 49934, authorised and regulated by the Central Bank of Ireland, and whose registered office is at 78 Sir John Rogerson’s

Quay, Dublin 2. Canada: State Street Global Advisors, Ltd., 1981 McGill College

Avenue, Suite 500, Montreal, Qc, H3A 3A8, T: +514 282 2400 and 30 Adelaide Street East Suite 800, Toronto, Ontario M5C 3G6. T: +647 775 5900. France: State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, France Branch (“State Street Global Advisors France”) is a branch of State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, registered in Ireland with company number 49934, authorised and regulated by the Central Bank of Ireland, and whose registered office is at 78 Sir John Rogerson’s Quay, Dublin 2. State Street Global Advisors France is registered in France with company number RCS Nanterre 899 183 289, and its office is located at Coeur Défense — Tour A — La Défense 4, 33e étage, 100, Esplanade du Général de Gaulle, 92 931 Paris La Défense Cedex, France. T: +33 1 44 45 40 00. F: +33 1 44 45 41 92. Germany: State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, Branch in Germany, Brienner Strasse 59, D-80333 Munich, Germany (“State Street Global Advisors Germany”). T: +49 (0)89 55878 400. State Street Global Advisors Germany is a branch of State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, registered in Ireland with company number 49934, authorised and regulated by the Central Bank of Ireland, and whose registered office is at 78 Sir John Rogerson’s Quay,

Dublin 2. Hong Kong: State Street Global Advisors Asia Limited, 68/F, Two International Finance Centre, 8 Finance Street, Central, Hong Kong. T: +852 2103-0288. F: +852 2103-0200.

Ireland: State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited is regulated by the Central Bank of Ireland. Registered office address 78 Sir John Rogerson’s Quay, Dublin 2. Registered Number: 49934. T: +353 (0)1 776 3000. F: +353 (0)1 776 3300. Italy: State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, Italy Branch (“State Street Global Advisors Italy”) is a branch of State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, registered in Ireland with company number 49934, authorised and regulated by the Central Bank of Ireland, and whose registered office is at 78 Sir John Rogerson’s Quay, Dublin 2. State Street Global Advisors Italy is registered in Italy with company number 11871450968 — REA: 2628603 and VAT number 11871450968, and its office is located at Via Ferrante Aporti, 10 - 20125 Milan, Italy. T: +39 02 32066 100. F: +39

02 32066 155. Japan: State Street Global Advisors (Japan) Co., Ltd., Toranomon Hills Mori Tower 25F 1-23-1 Toranomon, Minato-ku, Tokyo 105-6325 Japan. T: +81-3-4530-7380. Financial Instruments Business Operator, Kanto Local Financial Bureau (Kinsho #345), Membership: Japan Investment Advisers Association, The Investment Trust Association, Japan,

Japan Securities Dealers’ Association. Netherlands: State Street Global Advisors Netherlands, Apollo Building 7th floor,

Herikerbergweg 29, 1101 CN Amsterdam, Netherlands. T: +31 20 7181 000. State Street Global Advisors Netherlands is a branch office of State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, registered in Ireland with company number 49934, authorised and regulated by the Central Bank of Ireland, and whose registered office is at 78 Sir John Rogerson’s Quay, Dublin 2. Singapore: State Street Global Advisors Singapore Limited, 168, Robinson Road, #33-01 Capital Tower, Singapore 068912 (Company Reg. No: 200002719D, regulated by the Monetary Authority of Singapore). T: +65 6826-7555. F: +65 6826-7501. Switzerland: State Street Global Advisors AG, Beethovenstr. 19, CH-8027 Zurich. Registered with the Register of Commerce Zurich CHE-105.078.458. T: +41 (0)44 245 70 00. F: +41 (0)44 245 70 16. United Kingdom: State Street Global Advisors Limited. Authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority. Registered in England. Registered No. 2509928. VAT No.

5776591 81. Registered office: 20 Churchill Place, Canary Wharf, London, E14 5HJ. T: 020 3395 6000. F: 020 3395

6350. United States: State Street Global Advisors, 1 Iron Street, Boston, MA 02210-1641. T: +1 617 786 3000.

C-11

LOGO

The views expressed in this material are the views of SSGA Asset Stewardship Team through the period ended March 23, 2023 and are subject to change based on market and other conditions. This document contains certain statements that may be deemed forward-looking statements. Please note that any such statements are not guarantees of any future performance and actual results or developments may differ materially from those projected.

Investing involves risk including the risk of loss of principal.

The whole or any part of this work may not be reproduced, copied or transmitted or any of its contents disclosed to third parties without SSGA’s express written consent.

All information is from SSGA unless otherwise noted and has been obtained from sources believed to be reliable, but its accuracy is not

guaranteed. There is no representation or warranty as to the current accuracy, reliability or completeness of, nor liability for, decisions based on such information and it should not be relied on as such.

The information provided does not constitute investment advice and it should not be relied on as such. It should not be considered a solicitation to buy or an offer to sell a security. It does not take into account any investor’s particular investment objectives, strategies, tax status or investment horizon. You should consult your tax and financial advisor.

A portfolio’s ESG criteria may result in the portfolio investing in industry sectors or securities which underperform the market as a whole.

This communication is directed at professional clients (this includes eligible counterparties as defined by the appropriate EU regulator who are deemed both knowledgeable and experienced in matters relating to investments. The products and services to which this communication relates are only available to such persons and persons of any other description (including retail clients) should not rely on this communication.

Responsible-Factor (R Factor) scoring is designed by State Street to reflect certain ESG characteristics and does not represent investment performance. Results generated out of the scoring

model is based on sustainability and corporate governance dimensions of a scored entity.

The information contained in this communication is not a research recommendation or ‘investment research’ and is classified as a ‘Marketing Communication’ in accordance with the Markets in Financial Instruments Directive (2014/65/EU) or applicable Swiss regulation. This means that this marketing communication (a) has not been prepared in accordance with legal requirements designed to promote the independence of investment research (b) is not subject to any prohibition on dealing ahead of the dissemination of investment research.

ID1551551-3479888.7.2.GBL.RTL 0423 Exp. Date: 03/31/2024

C-12

LOGO

April 2023

Global Proxy Voting and Engagement Guidelines for Environmental and Social Factors

Information Classification: Limited Access

C-13

LOGO



Overview				Our primary fiduciary obligation to our clients is to maximize the long-term returns of their investments. It is our view that material sustainability considerations, including material environmental and social (E&S) issues, can present material risks and/or opportunities that impact long-term value creation. This philosophy provides the foundation for our value-based approach to Asset Stewardship.

				We regularly identify stewardship priorities that we believe are important for our portfolio companies to consider.

Our Approach to Assessing E&S Factors				While we believe that E&S factors can expose companies to material risks as well as drive long-term value creation, the materiality of specific E&S factors varies across industries, markets, and specific companies. We leverage several inputs to inform our views on an E&S issue at a given company, including: • Established frameworks, including The Sustainability Accounting Standards Board’s (SASB) Standards, the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures (TCFD) Framework, etc. • Academic research and other expert insights • Disclosure expectations required by regulation • Market expectations for the sector and industry We expect companies to disclose information regarding their approach to identifying and managing E&S-related risks and opportunities they have deemed to be material, as well as the board’s oversight of these risks and opportunities.

Our Approach to E&S Factors Through Engagements				The Asset Stewardship team regularly identifies thematic stewardship priorities that will be addressed across different engagement meetings. We focus on priorities that we consider important to be considered by the portfolio companies in which we invest our clients’ assets. These engagements help us to establish disclosure expectations and to more fully understand the nuanced challenges that companies seek to address related to E&S factors. Establishing robust disclosure expectations allows us to monitor companies’ progress toward alignment with our relevant disclosure expectations, and contributes to our perspectives on our stewardship priority areas.

				Through engagement, we address a broad range of factors that align with our stewardship priorities and seek to foster constructive, long-term relationships with issuers. We view engagements as part of an ongoing dialogue, versus a series of one-off conversations. During conversations with issuers, we share expectations and perspectives on key dimensions of E&S factors, and seek to understand how companies and their boards manage and oversee related risks and opportunities.

Information Classification: Limited Access

C-14

LOGO



				The Use of R-Factor in Engagements

				R-Factor^™ is a scoring system created by State Street Global Advisors that measures the performance of a company’s business operations and governance as it relates to material ESG factors facing the company’s industry. SSGA uses R-Factor as a consideration when prioritizing engagements. State Street Global Advisors may also engage with a company regarding its R-Factor^™ score at the request of the company.

Analyzing E&S Proposals				When analyzing shareholder proposals related to E&S factors, we consider the following factors: • The materiality of the E&S factors in the proposal to the company’s business and sector (see “Our Approach to Assessing Materiality and Relevance of E&S Factors” above) • The content and intent of the proposal, including whether the adoption of such a proposal would provide information to allow investors to better understand risk and opportunities in the context of the company’s disclosure and practices • The strength of board oversight of the company’s relevant sustainability practices, as well as responsiveness to engagement • Binding nature or prescriptiveness of proposal For proposal topics for which we have developed guidance, we leverage the specific guidance, found in the Appendix, as a benchmark to analyze a company’s disclosures relative to our expectations for the relevant E&S factor. For proposal topics for which we have not published guidance, we evaluate the company’s determination of materiality of the proposal to the company’s business and operations and the company’s related disclosures and oversight.

Voting on E&S Proposals				Below is the approach we follow when voting on E&S proposals: • FOR We will consider voting for proposals that we believe will lead to increased alignment with our expectations, including those set out in the attached Appendix; • ABSTAIN We will consider voting abstain when we support some elements of a proposal’s request, or recognize a company’s commitment to implement related disclosure and/or oversight practices; • AGAINST We will consider voting against proposals that we believe are immaterial, overly prescriptive, or would not further our disclosure and oversight expectations, including those set out in the Appendix.

Information Classification: Limited Access

C-15

LOGO



Appendix				Guidance on Common Environmental and Social Proposal Topics The following provides an overview of State Street Global Advisors’ public guidance related to common environmental and social shareholder proposal topics. We leverage this to inform our analysis of relevant shareholder proposals as it applies to companies in our portfolios. Climate Change We expect all companies to provide public disclosures in accordance with the following four pillars of the Taskforce for Climate-related Financial Disclosures (TCFD) framework: 1. Governance; 2. Strategy; 3. Risk Management; and 4. Metrics and Targets.

				Additionally, we expect companies in carbon-intensive sectors to disclose:

				Interim greenhouse gas emissions reduction targets to accompany long-term climate ambitions

				Discussion of impacts of scenario-planning on strategy and financial planning Incorporation of climate considerations in capital allocation decisions

				Scope 1, 2, and material categories of Scope 3 greenhouse gas emissions

				For additional context on our expectations for relevant disclosures, please review our related guidance.

				Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion

				We expect all companies to provide public disclosure in the following key areas:

				1. Board Oversight — Describe how the board executes its oversight role in risks and opportunities related to diversity and inclusion; 2. Strategy — Articulate the role diversity (of race, ethnicity, and gender, at minimum) plays in the company’s broader human capital management practices and long-term strategy; 3. Goals — Describe what diversity, equity, and inclusion-related goals exist, how these goals contribute to the company’s overall strategy, and how they are managed and progressing;

Information Classification: Limited Access

C-16

LOGO



				4. Metrics — Provide measures of the diversity of the company’s global employee base and board, including:

				- Workforce — Employee diversity by race, ethnicity, and gender (at minimum). We expect to see this information to be broken down by industry-relevant employment categories or levels of seniority, for all full-time employees. In the US, companies are expected to at least use the disclosure framework set forth by the United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission’s EEO-1 Survey. Non-US companies are encouraged to disclose this information in alignment with SASB guidance and nationally appropriate frameworks; and,

				- Board — Diversity characteristics, including racial, ethnic, and gender makeup (at minimum) of the board of directors; and

				5. Board Diversity — Articulate goals and strategy related to diverse representation at the board (including race, ethnicity, and gender, at minimum), including how the board reflects the diversity of the company’s workforce, community, customers, and other key stakeholders.

				For additional context on our expectations for relevant disclosures, please review our related guidance.

				Civil Rights Risks

				We expect all companies in the US to provide public disclosure on:

				1. Risks related to civil rights, including risks associated with products, practices, and services ; 2. Plans to manage and mitigate these risks; and 3. Processes at the board for overseeing such risks (e.g., committee responsible, frequency of discussions, etc.).

				For additional context on our expectations for relevant disclosures, please review our related guidance.

				Pay Equity

				We expect all companies in the US and the UK to provide public disclosure on: 1. Adjusted pay gaps related to race and gender within the company (Disclosure of the unadjusted pay gap is also encouraged, but not expected outside of the UK market at this time); 2. Strategy to achieve and maintain pay equity; and 3. Role of the board in overseeing pay strategies as well as Diversity, Equity and Inclusion efforts.

				For additional context on our expectations for relevant disclosures, please review our related guidance.

Information Classification: Limited Access

C-17

LOGO



				Human Rights

				We expect companies to disclose whether they have established processes for identifying risks related to human rights. If any material human rights risks are identified, we expect further public disclosure describing: 1. Human rights-related risks the company considers most material; 2. Plans to manage and mitigate these risks; 3. Board oversight of these risks; and 4. Assessment of the effectiveness of the human rights risk management program.

				For additional context on our expectations for relevant disclosures, please review our related guidance.

				Human Capital Management

				We expect all companies to provide public disclosure on:

				1. Board oversight — Methods outlining how the board oversees human capital-related risks and opportunities; 2. Strategy — Approaches to human capital management and how these advance the long-term business strategy; 3. Compensation — Strategies throughout the organization that aim to attract and retain employees, and incentivize contribution to an effective human capital strategy; 4. Voice — Channels to ensure the concerns and ideas from workers are solicited and acted upon, and how the workforce is engaged and empowered in the organization; and 5. Diversity, equity, and inclusion — Efforts to advance diversity, equity, and inclusion (see our complementary Guidance on Diversity Disclosures & Practices for additional context).

				For additional context on our expectations for relevant disclosures, please review our related guidance.

				Environmental Impacts

				If material risks related to adverse environmental impacts from company operations have been identified, we expect companies to disclose information related to: 1. Adverse environmental impacts the company considers most material, including relevant demographic data where applicable; 2. Management of material risks from company operations, including the role of stakeholders; and 3. Board oversight of such risks.

Information Classification: Limited Access

C-18

LOGO



				Deforestation-Intensive Companies

				We expect companies that have determined deforestation is a material risk to their business and operations to disclose: 1. Strategy to assess and manage deforestation-related risks and opportunities for high-risk commodities in the company’s operations and/or business value chain (e.g., supply chain monitoring and engagement, greenhouse gas emissions linked to deforestation, product certifications, stakeholder engagement); 2. Quantitative and/or qualitative metrics and time-bound targets used to assess and manage risks and opportunities related to high deforestation-risk commodities in the company’s operations and/or business value chain; and 3. Board oversight and accountability for deforestation and/or land use-related risks.

				For additional context on our expectations for relevant disclosures and leading practices, please review our related insights gained from engaging with our portfolio companies in deforestation-intensive sectors.

About State Street Global Advisors				For four decades, State Street Global Advisors has served the world’s governments, institutions and financial advisors. With a rigorous, risk-aware approach built on research, analysis and market-tested experience, we build from a breadth of index and active strategies to create cost-effective solutions. And, as pioneers in index, ETF, and ESG investing, we are always inventing new ways to invest. As a result, we have become the world’s fourth-largest asset manager* with US $3.62 trillion^† under our care.

				* Pensions & Investments Research Center, as of December 31, 2021.
				^†This figure is presented as of March 31, 2023 and includes approximately $65.03 billion USD of assets with respect to SPDR products for which State Street Global Advisors Funds Distributors, LLC (SSGA FD) acts solely as the marketing agent. SSGA FD and State Street Global Advisors are affiliated. Please note all AUM is unaudited.

Information Classification: Limited Access

C-19

LOGO

ssga.com

State Street Global Advisors

Marketing Communication

Worldwide Entities

John Rogerson’s Quay, Dublin 2. Canada: State Street Global Advisors, Ltd., 1981 McGill College Avenue, Suite 500, Montreal, Qc, H3A 3A8, T: +514 282 2400 and 30 Adelaide Street East Suite 800, Toronto, Ontario M5C 3G6. T: +647 775 5900. France: State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, France Branch (“State Street Global Advisors France”) is a branch of State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, registered in Ireland with company number 49934, authorised and regulated by the Central Bank of Ireland, and whose registered office is at 78 Sir John Rogerson’s Quay, Dublin 2. State Street Global Advisors France is registered in France with company number RCS Nanterre 899 183 289, and its office is located at Coeur Défense — Tour A — La Défense 4, 33e étage, 100, Esplanade du Général de Gaulle, 92 931 Paris La Défense Cedex, France. T: +33 1 44 45 40 00. F: +33 1 44 45 41 92. Germany: State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, Branch in Germany, Brienner Strasse 59, D-80333 Munich, Germany (“State Street Global Advisors Germany”). T: +49 (0)89 55878 400. State Street Global Advisors Germany is a branch of State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, registered in Ireland with company number 49934, authorised and regulated by the Central Bank of Ireland, and whose registered office is at 78 Sir John Rogerson’s Quay, Dublin 2. Hong Kong: State Street

Global Advisors Asia Limited, 68/F, Two International Finance Centre, 8 Finance Street, Central, Hong Kong. T: +852 2103-0288. F: +852 2103-0200. Ireland: State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited is regulated by the Central Bank of Ireland. Registered office address 78 Sir John Rogerson’s Quay, Dublin 2. Registered Number: 49934. T: +353 (0)1 776 3000. F: +353 (0)1 776 3300. Italy: State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, Italy Branch (“State Street Global Advisors Italy”) is a branch of State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, registered in Ireland with company number 49934, authorised and regulated by the Central Bank of Ireland, and whose registered office is at 78 Sir John Rogerson’s Quay, Dublin 2. State Street Global Advisors Italy is registered in Italy with company number 11871450968 — REA: 2628603 and VAT number 11871450968, and its office is located at Via Ferrante Aporti, 10 -20125 Milan, Italy. T: +39 02 32066 100. F: +39 02 32066 155. Japan: State Street Global Advisors (Japan) Co., Ltd., Toranomon Hills Mori Tower 25F 1-23-1 Toranomon, Minato-ku, Tokyo 105-6325 Japan. T: +81-3-4530-7380. Financial Instruments Business Operator, Kanto Local Financial Bureau (Kinsho #345), Membership: Japan Investment Advisers Association, The Investment Trust Association, Japan, Japan Securities Dealers’ Association. Netherlands: State Street Global Advisors

Netherlands, Apollo Building 7th floor, Herikerbergweg 29, 1101 CN Amsterdam, Netherlands. T: +31 20 7181 000. State Street Global Advisors Netherlands is a branch office of State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, registered in Ireland with company number 49934, authorised and regulated by the Central Bank of Ireland, and whose registered office is at 78 Sir John Rogerson’s Quay, Dublin 2. Singapore: State Street Global Advisors Singapore Limited, 168, Robinson Road, #33-01 Capital Tower, Singapore 068912 (Company Reg. No: 200002719D, regulated by the Monetary Authority of Singapore). T: +65 6826-7555. F: +65 6826-7501. Switzerland: State Street Global Advisors AG, Beethovenstr. 19, CH-8027 Zurich. Registered with the Register of Commerce Zurich CHE-105.078.458. T: +41 (0)44 245 70 00. F: +41 (0)44 245 70 16. South Africa: State Street Global Advisors Limited is regulated by the Financial Sector Conduct Authority in South Africa under license number 42670. United Kingdom: State Street Global Advisors Limited. Authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority. Registered in England. Registered No. 2509928. VAT No. 5776591 81. Registered office: 20 Churchill Place, Canary Wharf, London, E14 5HJ. T: 020 3395 6000. F: 020 3395 6350. United States: State Street Global Advisors, 1 Iron Street, Boston, MA 02210-1641. T: +1 617 786 3000.

Information Classification: Limited Access

C-20

LOGO

Important Risk Information

The whole or any part of this work may not be reproduced, copied or transmitted or any of its contents disclosed to third parties without State Street Global Advisors’ express The views expressed in this material are the views of SSGA Asset Stewardship Team through the period ended May 26, 2023 and are subject to change based on market and other conditions. This document contains certain statements that may be deemed forward-looking statements. Please note that any such statements are not guarantees of any future performance and actual results or developments may differ materially from those projected.

Investing involves risk including the risk of loss of principal.

The whole or any part of this work may not be reproduced, copied or transmitted or any of its contents disclosed to third parties without SSGA’s express written consent.

The returns on a portfolio of securities which exclude companies that do not meet the portfolio’s specified ESG criteria may trail the returns on a portfolio of securities which include such companies. A portfolio’s ESG criteria may result in the portfolio investing

in industry sectors or securities which underperform the market as a whole.

Responsible-Factor (R Factor) scoring is designed by State Street to reflect certain ESG characteristics and does not

represent investment performance. Results generated out of the scoring model is based on sustainability and corporate governance dimensions of a scored entity.

ID1533400-3479887.5.1.GBL.RTL 0423

Exp. Date: 06/30/2024

Information Classification: Limited Access

C-21

LOGO

March 2023

Conflicts Mitigation Guidelines Managing Conflicts of Interest Arising from State Street Global Advisors’ Proxy Voting and Engagement Activity

State Street Corporation has a comprehensive standalone Conflicts of Interest Policy and other policies that address a range of identified conflicts of interests. In addition, State Street Global Advisors, the asset management business of State Street Corporation, maintains a conflicts register that identifies key conflicts and describes systems in place to mitigate the conflicts. This document* is designed to act in conjunction with related policies and practices employed by other groups within the organization. Further, it complements those policies and practices

C-22

LOGO

by providing information about managing the conflicts of interests that may arise through State Street Global Advisors’ proxy voting and engagement activities.

These Managing Conflicts of Interest Arising From State Street Global Advisors’ Proxy Voting and Engagement Activity Guidelines are also applicable to SSGA Funds Management, Inc. SSGA Funds Management, Inc. is an SEC-registered investment adviser. SSGA Funds Management, Inc., State Street Global Advisors Trust Company, and other advisory affiliates of State Street make up State Street Global Advisors, the investment management arm of State Street Corporation.

C-23

LOGO



Managing Conflicts of Interest Related to Proxy Voting and Engagement				State Street Global Advisors has implemented processes designed to prevent undue influence on State Street Global Advisors’ voting and engagement activities that may arise from relationships between proxy issuers or companies and State Street Corporation, State Street Global Advisors, State Street Global Advisors affiliates, State Street Global Advisors Funds, or State Street Global Advisors Fund affiliates. State Street Global Advisors assigns sole responsibility for the implementation of proxy voting guidelines to members of its Asset Stewardship Team, a team that is independent from other functions within the organization, such as sales and marketing, investment, or client facing teams. Proxy voting is undertaken in accordance with the Global Proxy Voting and Engagement Principles, Global Proxy Voting and Engagement Guidelines for Environmental and Social Factors, regional proxy voting and engagement guidelines and guidance published thereunder by State Street Global Advisors from time to time (the “Voting Policy”), which are reviewed and overseen by the State Street Global Advisors’ ESG Committee (the “ESG Committee”). Any changes to the Voting Policy are communicated to Asset Stewardship Team employees in a timely manner to ensure that they understand the potential impact to their proxy voting activities. In rare circumstances where nuances within specific proxy proposals fall outside of the scope of the Voting Policy, requiring case-by-case analysis, such proposals are escalated to the head of Asset Stewardship and reported to the ESG Committee. Voting consistently with the Voting Policy helps mitigate potential conflicts of interest, as the Voting Policy is determined without reference to any specific entities or relationship. Members of the Asset Stewardship Team may from time to time discuss views on proxy voting matters, company performance, strategy, etc. with other State Street Corporation or State Street Global Advisors employees, including portfolio managers, senior executives, and relationship managers. However, final voting decisions are made solely by the Asset Stewardship Team, in accordance with the Voting Policy and in a manner consistent with the best interest of its clients, taking into account various perspectives on risks and opportunities with the goal of maximizing the value of client assets. Except in certain jurisdictions where proxy voting decisions are regularly disclosed prior to voting pursuant to local custom, Asset Stewardship Team employees are generally prohibited from disclosing State Street Global Advisors’ voting decisions prior to the meetings. In addition, State Street Global Advisors generally exercises a single voting decision for each ballot item across the client accounts for which it is responsible for proxy voting regardless of investment strategy.¹ In certain cases, where a material conflict of interest is identified, the matter may be referred to the ESG Committee for review. Other protocols designed to help mitigate potential conflicts of interest include:
				1 Exceptions to this unified voting policy are where: (1) State Street Global Advisors has made proxy voting choices (i.e., the State Street Global Advisors proxy voting program) available to investors within a pooled investment vehicle, in which case a pro rata portion of shares held by the fund attributable to investors who choose to participate in the proxy voting program would be voted consistent with the third-party proxy voting policies selected by the investors, and (2) in limited circumstances, certain pooled investment vehicles for which State Street Global Advisors acts as investment manager may, pursuant to their governing documents, utilize proxy voting guidelines developed by third-party advisors.

C-24

LOGO



Types of Potential Conflict	Stewardship Conflict of Interest Description	Typical Conflict Mitigation Protocols That We Employ

Business relationships	A conflict of interest may arise where, for example, we hold investments in companies with which we, or our affiliates, have material business relationships.	Assigning sole responsibility for the implementation of proxy voting guidelines to members of Asset Stewardship Team and voting in accordance with the Voting Policy are our primary conflict mitigation protocols. Furthermore, the voting rationale is recorded to provide transparency. Additional mitigation steps may be implemented on a case-by-case basis. This may include, for example, blackout periods for communications with issuers/clients.

Equity investments	A conflict of interest may arise where client accounts and/ or State Street Global Advisors pooled funds, where State Street Global Advisors acts as trustee, may hold shares in State Street Corporation or other State Street Global Advisors affiliated entities, such as mutual funds affiliated with SSGA Funds Management, Inc.	Mitigants may include, for example, outsourcing voting decisions relating to a shareholder meeting of State Street Corporation or other State Street Global Advisors affiliated entities to independent outside third parties. In such cases, delegated third parties exercise voting decisions based upon State Street Global Advisors’ Voting Policy.

Outside business interest	A conflict of interest may arise where an Asset Stewardship Team employee or a key employee in the firm has an outside business interest (such as a director role in a company we invest in, or in the same industry as we invest).	State Street Global Advisors maintains an Outside Activities Policy and employees must submit a request requiring approval before undertaking any outside activities that are captured by the Outside Activities Policy. The request will be reviewed by the employee’s manager and the Conduct Risk Management Office to ensure compliance with applicable policies and procedures (such as the Global Anti-Corruption Policy and the Standard of Conduct) and ensure potential conflicts are mitigated. Additional mitigation steps may be implemented on a case-by-case basis. This may include, for example, retaining an independent fiduciary to make a voting decision where State Street Global Advisors believes it may be conflicted from voting due to an employee’s outside business interest.

Other personal conflicts	A conflict of interest may arise where a family member or other personal contact of an employee is employed by a company in which we invest.	Mitigation steps may be implemented for personal conflicts on a case-by-case basis. This may include, for example, filing a Personal Conflicts declaration with a mitigation strategy to document how the conflict will be avoided. Such strategies may include, for example, a member of the Asset Stewardship Team with a conflict recusing him/herself from voting and participating in engagement activities at the relevant company, and implementing blackout periods for communications with issuers/clients.

Securities lending	We may lend securities that we hold in one of our portfolios to another financial counterparty. This may create a conflict of interest regarding whether to recall those securities to enable us to vote on behalf of the portfolio in a shareholder resolution, which may impact the intended securities lending income.	Our approach to securities lending recall, and any potential conflicts that may be created through our securities lending recall activity, is governed by the Securities Lending Recall for Proxy Voting Procedure, which is co-owned by the Asset Stewardship Team, Securities Lending Team and Proxy Operations Group. The conflict mitigation protocols include predefining criteria to systematically recall shares, periodic review of the recall procedure by relevant stakeholders, and periodic reporting of recall activities and associated forgone lending income to the relevant internal governance bodies.

C-25

LOGO



About State Street Global Advisors				For four decades, State Street Global Advisors has served the world’s governments, institutions and financial advisors. With a rigorous, risk-aware approach built on research, analysis and market-tested experience, we build from a breadth of index and active strategies to create cost-effective solutions. And, as pioneers in index, ETF, and ESG investing, we are always inventing new ways to invest. As a result, we have become the world’s fourth-largest asset manager* with US $3.48 trillion† under our care.

				* Pensions & Investments Research Center, as of December 31, 2021.
				^† This figure is presented as of December 31, 2022 and includes approximately $58.60 billion USD of assets with respect to SPDR products for which State Street Global Advisors Funds Distributors, LLC (SSGA FD) acts solely as the marketing agent. SSGA FD and State Street Global Advisors are affiliated. Please note all AUM is unaudited.

C-26

LOGO

ssga.com

Marketing communication

State Street Global Advisors Worldwide Entities

49934, authorised and regulated by the Central Bank of Ireland, and whose registered office is at 78 Sir John Rogerson’s Quay, Dublin 2. Canada: State Street Global Advisors, Ltd., 1981 McGill College Avenue, Suite 500, Montreal, Qc, H3A 3A8, T: +514 282 2400 and 30 Adelaide Street East Suite 800, Toronto, Ontario M5C 3G6. T: +647 775 5900. France: State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, France Branch (“State Street Global Advisors France”) is a branch of State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, registered in Ireland with company number 49934, authorised and regulated by the Central Bank of Ireland, and whose registered office is at 78 Sir John Rogerson’s Quay, Dublin 2. State Street Global Advisors France is registered in France with company number RCS Nanterre 899 183 289, and its office is located at Coeur Défense — Tour A — La Défense 4, 33e étage, 100, Esplanade du Général de Gaulle, 92 931 Paris La Défense Cedex, France. T: +33 1 44 45 40 00. F: +33 1 44 45 41 92. Germany: State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, Branch in Germany, Brienner Strasse 59, D-80333 Munich, Germany (“State Street Global Advisors Germany”). T: +49 (0)89 55878 400. State Street Global Advisors Germany is a branch

of State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, registered in Ireland with company number 49934, authorised and regulated by the Central Bank of Ireland, and whose registered office is at 78 Sir John Rogerson’s Quay, Dublin 2. Hong Kong: State Street Global Advisors Asia Limited, 68/F, Two International Finance Centre, 8 Finance Street, Central, Hong Kong. T: +852 2103-0288. F: +852 2103-0200. Ireland: State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited is regulated by the Central Bank of Ireland. Registered office address 78 Sir John Rogerson’s Quay, Dublin 2. Registered Number: 49934. T: +353 (0)1 776 3000. F: +353 (0)1 776 3300. Italy: State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, Italy Branch (“State Street Global Advisors Italy”) is a branch of State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, registered in Ireland with company number 49934, authorised and regulated by the Central Bank of Ireland, and whose registered office is at 78 Sir John Rogerson’s Quay, Dublin 2. State Street Global Advisors Italy is registered in Italy with company number 11871450968 — REA: 2628603 and VAT number 11871450968, and its office is located at Via Ferrante Aporti, 10 -20125 Milan, Italy. T: +39 02 32066 100. F: +39 02 32066 155. Japan: State Street Global Advisors (Japan)

Co., Ltd., Toranomon Hills Mori Tower 25F 1-23-1 Toranomon, Minato-ku, Tokyo 105-6325 Japan. T: +81-3-4530-7380. Financial Instruments Business Operator, Kanto Local Financial Bureau (Kinsho #345), Membership: Japan Investment Advisers Association, The Investment Trust Association, Japan, Japan Securities Dealers’ Association. Netherlands: State Street Global Advisors Netherlands, Apollo Building 7th floor, Herikerbergweg 29, 1101 CN Amsterdam, Netherlands. T: +31 20 7181 000. State Street Global Advisors Netherlands is a branch office of State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, registered in Ireland with company number 49934, authorised and regulated by the Central Bank of Ireland, and whose registered office is at 78 Sir John Rogerson’s Quay, Dublin 2. Singapore: State Street Global Advisors Singapore Limited, 168, Robinson Road, #33-01 Capital Tower, Singapore 068912 (Company Reg. No: 200002719D, regulated by the Monetary Authority of Singapore). T: +65 6826-7555. F: +65 6826-7501. Switzerland: State Street Global Advisors AG, Beethovenstr. 19, CH-8027 Zurich. Registered with the Register of Commerce Zurich CHE-105.078.458. T: +41 (0)44 245 70 00. F: +41 (0)44 245 70 16. United Kingdom: State Street Global Advisors Limited. Authorised and

C-27

LOGO

regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority. Registered in England. Registered No. 2509928. VAT No. 5776591 81. Registered office: 20 Churchill Place, Canary Wharf, London, E14 5HJ. T: 020 3395 6000. F: 020 3395 6350. United States: State Street Global Advisors, 1 Iron Street, Boston, MA 02210-1641. T: +1 617 786 3000.

Investing involves risk including the risk of loss of principal.

The whole or any part of this work may not be reproduced, copied or transmitted or any of

its contents disclosed to third parties without SSGA’s express written consent.

A portfolio’s ESG criteria may result in the portfolio investing in industry sectors or securities which underperform the market as a whole.

Responsible-Factor (R Factor) scoring is designed by State Street to reflect certain ESG characteristics and does not

represent investment performance. Results generated out of the scoring model is based on sustainability and corporate governance dimensions of a scored entity.

The information contained in this communication is not a research recommendation or ‘investment research’ and is classified as a

‘Marketing Communication’ in accordance with the Markets in Financial Instruments Directive (2014/65/EU) or applicable Swiss regulation. This means that this marketing communication (a) has not been prepared in accordance with legal requirements designed to promote the independence of investment research (b) is not subject to any prohibition on dealing ahead of the dissemination of investment research.

ID1482714-3479898.4.1.GBL.RTL 0323 Exp. Date: 03/31/2024

C-28

LOGO

March 2023

State Street Global Advisors’ Global Issuer and Stakeholder Engagement Guidelines

State Street Global Advisors has developed engagement guidelines to increase transparency around our engagement philosophy, approach, and processes. These guidelines are designed to communicate with our investee companies regarding the objectives of our engagement activities and to facilitate a better understanding of our preferred terms of engagement. The guidelines also outline our approach to engaging with activist investors and shareholder proposal proponents.

C-29

LOGO



				State Street Global Advisors’ engagement activities are driven exclusively by our goal to maximize and protect the long-term value of our clients’ assets.

State Street Global Advisors’ Methodology for Developing its Annual Engagement Strategy				While we would like to maintain a dialogue with all of our portfolio companies, we recognize the need to focus our engagement efforts where we believe we will have maximum impact. Each year, as part of its strategic review process, the Asset Stewardship Team develops an annual engagement strategy, and it accordingly identifies a priority list of companies that we intend to engage with during the year. We focus on priorities that we consider important to be considered by the portfolio companies in which we invest our clients’ assets.

				The intensity and type of engagement with a company is determined by State Street Global Advisors’ relative and absolute holdings in that company. In addition, we factor in geographic diversity in our engagement efforts to reflect the level of economic exposure to various markets. Finally, we also consider the engagement culture in a market or geographic region when developing our engagement priority list and approach.

				State Street Global Advisors meets with companies through in-person and virtual meetings. We prefer virtual meetings as we believe this is cost effective for our clients and investee companies. This also helps us minimize our global carbon footprint.

Helpful Information to Include in Engagement Request Emails to State Street Global Advisors				To help expedite the review of engagement requests, please include the following information in engagement request emails to State Street Global Advisors: • Company name and identifier (i.e. ticker) • Topics the issuer is interested in discussing • Upcoming meeting date, if applicable • Issuer attendees and their titles All requests for engagement should be sent to the Asset Stewardship Team at [email protected].

Guidelines for Engaging with Investee Companies				• During the ‘proxy season’, we prioritize conversations related to companies’ shareholder meetings. In the ‘off-season’, we discuss our focus areas and stewardship priorities with companies for whom these topics are most material.

C-30

LOGO



				• We believe that as a long-term shareholder with substantial holdings, it is important to establish a relationship and have a direct communication channel with independent directors in our investee companies. Therefore, as part of our engagement process, we prefer to meet with the non-executive chairperson/lead independent director and/or representative of key board committees. Such meetings help us assess the quality and effectiveness of the board, the extent of the oversight of management, and the board’s perspectives on key issues, such as strategy, risk, capital allocation, and compensation. It also allows us to escalate matters to the board’s attention if management has been unresponsive to suggestions discussed during prior engagements.

				• After our initial meeting with members of the board, the frequency of desired follow-up meetings is determined by the nature of the issues discussed. We will outline expectations and timelines for subsequent meetings during the discussion. We follow similar guidelines for meeting requests with C-suite management representatives at companies.

				• Typically, we allow additional capacity for reactive engagement in Q2 for markets such as the US, UK, EU, and Japan (Q4 for Australian companies) where the majority of the companies have general meetings between the months of April and June.

				• We reserve the Q1, Q3, and Q4 time periods to conduct the majority of our active engagements with some room for reactive engagement with companies that have experienced a significant event or are seeking approval for a corporate transaction, board transition, or other material concern.

				• Instances in which we are likely to accept engagement requests include instances when:

				– We have concerns about a ballot item; and

				– We believe that engagement will better inform our voting decision; and/or

				– We want to discuss material risks with a company

				• Instances in which we are likely to decline engagement requests include instances when:

				– We do not have any immediate concerns about a ballot item

				– We believe we have adequate information to make an informed voting decision on a ballot item

				– Our position on a ballot item is addressed in our public policy statement

				– We have actively engaged with the company on matters pertaining to the ballot proposal outside the ‘proxy season’

				– We believe that the matter is best discussed outside the vote solicitation period

C-31

LOGO



				• If we have provided feedback during the vote solicitation period, we believe that any follow-up discussion with the company should focus on the board or company’s response to our feedback

				• We track all feedback provided to investee companies and routinely conduct follow-up engagements to assess the progress made by a company toward the incorporation of our feedback

				• We welcome written submission of changes made by the board to the company’s governance or remuneration policies and practices

Guidelines for Engaging with Other Investors Soliciting State Street Global Advisors’ Votes in Connection with Vote-No Campaigns or Shareholder Proposals				We believe it is good practice for us to speak to other investors that are running proxy contests, putting forth vote-no campaigns, or proposing shareholder proposals at investee companies. However, we generally limit such discussions with investors to one engagement unless we believe that it is necessary for us to have a follow-up call. We welcome the opportunity to review materials sent in advance of the proposed discussion. To the extent possible, we review all materials made publicly available by the investor or the company on a contested ballot item before making a voting decision. Our primary purpose of engaging with investors is:

				• To gain a better understanding of their position or concerns at investee companies.

				• In proxy contest situations:

				– To assess possible director candidates where investors are seeking board representation in proxy contest situations

				– To understand the investor’s proposed strategy for the company and investment time horizon to assess their alignment with State Street Global Advisors’ views and interests as a long-term shareholder

				All requests for engagement should be sent to [email protected].

				Investor Engagement Protocol

				State Street Global Advisors encourages boards of directors to develop an investor engagement protocol or plan that establishes policies and mechanisms through which independent directors communicate with and receive feedback from institutional investors. The protocol would help foster strong relationships between a company’s directors and its investors, while promoting transparency, responsibility, and accountability of the board.

C-32

LOGO



				The protocol should identify key independent directors (such as a non-executive chairman, lead independent director, or a representative of a key board committee), who would be mandated to engage with shareholders on a range of topics that are of interest to State Street Global Advisors and/or other institutional investors. A robust engagement protocol would also develop a crisis communication plan for the board when institutional investors and the market-at- large need to communicate with independent directors, in a timely manner, about their oversight and response to a developing concern facing the company.

Requesting R-Factor^™ Scores				Companies interested in receiving their R-Factor^™ scores should submit an email request to [email protected] including the following information:

				• Company’s legal name

				• Ticker

				• ISIN

				• Company’s headquarter location

				• Contact name

				• Contact’s Title at Company

				• Contact email address (must be an official company email address)

				• Contact phone#

				Please note that R-Factor^™ scores will be provided only to employees affiliated with a company’s Investor Relations, Chief Financial Officer, ESG/Sustainability Leadership or General Secretary’s organizations. Please include attestation in your email stating that you are affiliated with one of these functions.

About State Street Global Advisors				For four decades, State Street Global Advisors has served the world’s governments, institutions and financial advisors. With a rigorous, risk-aware approach built on research, analysis and market-tested experience, we build from a breadth of index and active strategies to create cost-effective solutions. And, as pioneers in index, ETF, and ESG investing, we are always inventing new ways to invest. As a result, we have become the world’s fourth-largest asset manager* with US $3.48 trillion† under our care.

				* Pensions & Investments Research Center, as of December 31, 2021.
				^† This figure is presented as of December 31, 2022 and includes approximately $58.60 billion USD of assets with respect to SPDR products for which State Street Global Advisors Funds Distributors, LLC (SSGA FD) acts solely as the marketing agent. SSGA FD and State Street Global Advisors are affiliated. Please note all AUM is unaudited.

C-33

LOGO

ssga.com

Marketing communication

State Street Global Advisors Worldwide Entities

2. Hong Kong: State Street Global Advisors Asia Limited, 68/F, Two International Finance Centre, 8 Finance Street, Central, Hong Kong. T: +852 2103-0288. F: +852 2103-0200. Ireland: State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited is regulated by the Central Bank of Ireland. Registered office address 78 Sir John Rogerson’s Quay, Dublin 2. Registered Number: 49934. T: +353 (0)1 776 3000. F: +353 (0)1 776 3300. Italy: State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, Italy Branch (“State Street Global Advisors Italy”) is a branch of State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, registered in Ireland with company number 49934, authorised and regulated by the Central Bank of Ireland, and whose registered office is at 78 Sir John Rogerson’s Quay, Dublin 2. State Street Global Advisors Italy is registered in Italy with company number 11871450968 — REA: 2628603 and VAT number 11871450968, and its office is located at Via Ferrante Aporti, 10 -20125 Milan, Italy. T: +39 02 32066 100. F: +39 02 32066 155. Japan: State Street Global Advisors (Japan) Co., Ltd., Toranomon Hills Mori Tower 25F 1-23-1 Toranomon, Minato-ku, Tokyo 105-6325 Japan. T: +81-3-4530-7380. Financial Instruments Business Operator, Kanto Local Financial Bureau (Kinsho #345), Membership: Japan Investment Advisers Association, The Investment Trust Association, Japan,

Japan Securities Dealers’ Association. Netherlands: State Street Global Advisors Netherlands, Apollo Building 7th floor, Herikerbergweg 29, 1101 CN Amsterdam, Netherlands. T: +31 20 7181 000. State Street Global Advisors Netherlands is a branch office of State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, registered in Ireland with company number 49934, authorised and regulated by the Central Bank of Ireland, and whose registered office is at 78 Sir John Rogerson’s Quay, Dublin 2. Singapore: State Street Global Advisors Singapore Limited, 168, Robinson Road, #33-01 Capital Tower, Singapore 068912 (Company Reg. No: 200002719D, regulated by the Monetary Authority of Singapore). T: +65 6826-7555. F: +65 6826-7501. Switzerland: State Street Global Advisors AG, Beethovenstr. 19, CH-8027 Zurich. Registered with the Register of Commerce Zurich CHE-105.078.458. T: +41 (0)44 245 70 00. F: +41 (0)44 245 70 16. United Kingdom: State Street Global Advisors Limited. Authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority. Registered in England. Registered No. 2509928. VAT No. 5776591 81. Registered office: 20 Churchill Place, Canary Wharf, London, E14 5HJ. T: 020 3395 6000. F: 020 3395 6350. United States: State Street Global Advisors, 1 Iron Street, Boston, MA 02210-1641. T: +1 617 786 3000.

C-34

LOGO

Investing involves risk including the risk of loss of principal.

The whole or any part of this work may not be reproduced, copied or transmitted or any of its contents disclosed to third parties without SSGA’s express written consent.

All information is from SSGA unless otherwise noted and has been obtained from sources believed to be reliable, but its accuracy is not guaranteed.

There is no representation or warranty as to the current accuracy, reliability or completeness of, nor liability for, decisions based on such information and it should not be relied on as such.

Responsible-Factor (R Factor) scoring is designed by State Street to reflect certain ESG characteristics and does not represent investment

performance. Results generated out of the scoring model is based on sustainability and corporate governance dimensions of a scored entity.

ID1482720-3479897.3.1.GBL.RTL 0323 Exp. Date: 03/31/2024

C-35

LOGO

March 2023

Australia and New Zealand

Proxy Voting and Engagement Guidelines

State Street Global Advisors’ Proxy Voting and Engagement Guidelinesⁱ for Australia and New Zealand outline our approach to voting and engaging with companies listed on stock exchanges in Australia and New Zealand. These Guidelines complement and should be read in conjunction with State Street Global Advisors’ Global Proxy Voting and Engagement Principles, which outline our overall approach to voting and engaging with companies, and State Street Global Advisors’ Conflicts Mitigation Guidelines, which provide information about managing the conflicts of interests that may arise through State Street Global Advisors’ proxy voting and engagement activities.

These Proxy Voting and Engagement Guidelines (the “Guidelines”) are also applicable to SSGA Funds Management, Inc., State Street Global Advisors Trust Company, and other advisory affiliates of State Street Corporation. Additionally, State Street Global Advisors maintains Proxy Voting and Engagement Guidelines for select markets, including: Australia, continental Europe, Japan, New Zealand, North America (Canada and the US), the UK and Ireland, and emerging markets. International markets not covered by our market-specific guidelines are reviewed and voted in a manner that is consistent with the Global Proxy Voting and Engagement Principles; however, State Street Global Advisors also endeavors to show sensitivity to local market practices when voting in these various markets.

C-36

LOGO



				State Street Global Advisors’ Proxy Voting and Engagement Guidelines for Australia and New Zealand address our market-specific approaches to topics including directors and boards, accounting and audit-related issues, capital structure, reorganization and mergers, remuneration, and other governance-related issues.

				When voting and engaging with companies in global markets, we consider market-specific nuances in the manner that we believe will most likely protect and promote the long-term economic value of client investments. We expect companies to observe the relevant laws and regulations of their respective markets as well as country-specific best practice guidelines and corporate governance codes. We may hold companies in some markets to our global standards when we feel that a country’s regulatory requirements do not address some of the key philosophical principles that we believe are fundamental to our global voting principles.

				In our analysis and research into corporate governance issues in Australia and New Zealand, we expect all companies at a minimum to comply with the ASX Corporate Governance Principles or the NZX Corporate Governance Code, based on their locations. Consistent with the ‘comply or explain’ expectations established by the Principles and the Code, we encourage companies to proactively disclose their level of compliance with the Principles or the Code. In instances of non-compliance, and when companies cannot explain the nuances of their governance structure effectively, either publicly or through engagement, we may vote against the independent board leader.

State Street Global Advisors’ Proxy Voting and Engagement Philosophy				In our view, corporate governance and sustainability issues are an integral part of the investment process. The Asset Stewardship Team consists of investment professionals with expertise in corporate governance, remuneration, accounting, and environmental and social issues. We have established robust corporate governance principles and practices that are backed with extensive analytical expertise in order to understand the complexities of the corporate governance landscape. We engage with companies to provide insight on the principles and practices that drive our voting decisions. We also conduct proactive engagement to address significant shareholder concerns and issues in a manner consistent with maximizing shareholder value.

				The team works alongside members of State Street Global Advisors’ Active Fundamental and Asia-Pacific (“APAC”) investment teams, collaborating on issuer engagements and providing input on company-specific fundamentals.

C-37

LOGO



Directors and Boards				Principally, a board acts on behalf of shareholders by protecting their interests and preserving their rights. In order to carry out their primary responsibilities, directors have to undertake activities that range from setting strategy and providing guidance on strategic matters, overseeing executive management, to selecting the CEO and other senior executives, creating a succession plan for the board and management, and providing effective risk oversight, including of risks related to sustainability issues. Further, we believe good corporate governance necessitates the existence of effective internal controls and risk management systems, which should be governed by the board.

				State Street Global Advisors believes that a well-constituted board of directors with a good balance of skills, expertise, and independence provides the foundations for a well-governed company. We view board quality as a measure of director independence, director succession planning, board diversity, evaluations and refreshment, and company governance practices. We vote for the (re-)election of directors on a case-by-case basis after considering various factors including board quality, general market practice, and availability of information on director skills and expertise.

				In our analysis of boards, we consider whether board members have adequate skills to provide effective oversight of corporate strategy, operations, and risks, including environmental and social issues. Boards should also have a regular evaluation process in place to assess the effectiveness of the board and the skills of board members to address issues, such as emerging risks, changes to corporate strategy, and diversification of operations and geographic footprint.

				We may also consider board performance and directors who appear to be remiss in the performance of their oversight responsibilities when analyzing their suitability for reappointment (e.g. fraud, criminal wrongdoing and breach of fiduciary responsibilities).

Board Independence				In principle, we believe independent directors are crucial to robust corporate governance and help management establish sound corporate governance policies and practices. We believe a sufficiently independent board will most effectively monitor management and perform oversight functions necessary to protect shareholder interests.

				We expect boards of ASX 300 and New Zealand listed companies to be comprised of at least a majority of independent directors. At all other Australian listed companies, we expect boards to be comprised of at least one-third independent directors.

				Our broad criteria for director independence in Australia and New Zealand include factors such as:

				• Participation in related-party transactions and other business relations with the company

				• Employment history with company

C-38

LOGO



				• Relations with controlling shareholders

				• Family ties with any of the company’s advisers, directors, or senior employees

Separation Chair/CEO				While we are generally supportive of having the roles of chairman and CEO separated in the Australian and New Zealand markets, we assess the division of responsibilities between chairman and CEO on a case-by-case basis, giving consideration to factors such as company-specific circumstances, overall level of independence on the board and general corporate governance standards in the company. Similarly, we will monitor for circumstances in which a combined chairman/CEO is appointed or where a former CEO becomes chairman.

Director Time Commitments				When voting on the election or re-election of a director, we also consider the number of outside board directorships that a non-executive and an executive may undertake. Thus, State Street Global Advisors may take voting action against a director who exceeds the number of board mandates listed below:

				• Named Executive Officers (NEOs) of a public company who sit on more than two public company boards

				• Non-executive board chairs or lead independent directors who sit on more than three public company boards

				• Director nominees who sit on more than four public company boards

				For non-executive board chairs/lead independent directors and director nominees who hold excessive commitments, as defined above, we may consider waiving our policy and vote in support of a director if a company discloses its director commitment policy in a publicly available manner (e.g., corporate governance guidelines, proxy statement, company website). This policy or associated disclosure must include:

				• A numerical limit on public company board seats a director can serve on

				— This limit cannot exceed our policy by more than one seat

				• Consideration of public company board leadership positions (e.g., Committee Chair)

				• Affirmation that all directors are currently compliant with the company policy

				• Description of an annual policy review process undertaken by the Nominating Committee to evaluate outside director time commitments

				If a director is imminently leaving a board and this departure is disclosed in a written, time-bound and publicly-available manner, we may consider waiving our withhold vote when evaluating the director for excessive time commitments.

C-39

LOGO



				Service on a mutual fund board, the board of a UK investment trust or a Special Purpose Acquisition Company (SPAC) board is not considered when evaluating directors for excessive commitments. However, we do expect these roles to be considered by nominating committees when evaluating director time commitments.

Director Attendance at Board Meetings				We also consider attendance at board meetings and may withhold votes from directors who attend less than 75 percent of board meetings without appropriate explanation or providing reason for their failure to meet the attendance threshold. In addition, we monitor other factors that may influence the independence of a non-executive director, such as performance-related pay, cross-directorships, significant shareholdings, and tenure. We support the annual election of directors and encourage Australian and New Zealand companies to adopt this practice.

Board Committees				We believe companies should have committees for audit, remuneration, and nomination oversight. The audit committee is responsible for monitoring the integrity of the financial statements of the company, appointing external auditors, monitoring their qualifications and independence, and their effectiveness and resource levels. ASX Corporate Governance Principles requires listed companies to have an audit committee of at least three members all of whom are non-executive directors and a majority of whom are independent directors. It also requires that the committee be chaired by an independent director who is not the chair of the board. We hold Australian and New Zealand companies to our global standards for developed financial markets by requiring that all members of the audit committee be independent directors.

				The nomination committee is responsible for evaluating and reviewing the balance of skills, knowledge, and experience of the board. It also ensures that adequate succession plans are in place for directors and the CEO. We may vote against the re-election of members of the nomination committee if the board has failed to address concerns over board structure or succession.

Board Gender Diversity				We expect boards of all listed companies to have at least one female board member and the boards of ASX 300 companies to be composed of at least 30 percent women directors. If a company does not meet the applicable expectation, State Street Global Advisors may vote against the Chair of the board’s nominating committee or the board leader in the absence of a nominating committee. Additionally, if a company does not meet the applicable expectation for three consecutive years, State Street Global Advisors may vote against all incumbent members of the nominating committee or those persons deemed responsible for the nomination process.

				We may waive this voting guideline if a company engages with State Street Global Advisors and provides a specific, timebound plan for either reaching the 30-percent threshold (ASX 300) or for adding a woman director (non-ASX 300).

C-40

LOGO



Board Responsiveness to High Dissent Against Pay Proposals				Executive pay is another important aspect of corporate governance. We believe that executive pay should be determined by the board of directors. We expect companies to have in place remuneration committees to provide independent oversight over executive pay. ASX Corporate Governance Principles require listed companies to have a remuneration committee of at least three members all of whom are non-executive directors and a majority of whom are independent directors. Similarly, the NZX Corporate Governance Code recommends that at least a majority of remuneration committee members be independent.

				Since Australia has a non-binding vote on pay with a two-strike rule requiring a board spill vote in the event of a second strike, we believe that the vote provides investors a mechanism to address concerns they may have on the quality of oversight provided by the board on remuneration issues. Accordingly, our voting guidelines accommodate local market practice.

				We believe poorly structured executive compensation plans pose increasing reputational risk to companies. Ongoing high level of dissent against a company’s compensation proposals may indicate that the company is not receptive to investor concerns. If the level of dissent against a company’s remuneration report and/or remuneration policy is consistently high, and we have determined that a vote against a pay-related proposal is warranted in the third consecutive year, we may vote against the Chair of the remuneration committee.

Climate-related Disclosure				State Street Global Advisors finds that the recommendations of the Taskforce on Climate-related Financial Disclosures (TCFD) provide the most effective framework for disclosure of climate-related risks and opportunities. As such, we may take voting action against companies in the ASX 200 that fail to provide sufficient disclosure regarding climate-related risks and opportunities related to that company, or board oversight of climate related risks and opportunities, in accordance with the TCFD framework.

Indemnification and Limitations on Liability				Generally, State Street Global Advisors supports proposals to limit directors’ liability and/or expand indemnification and liability protection up to the limit provided by law, if he or she has not acted in bad faith, gross negligence, or reckless disregard of the duties involved in the conduct of his or her office.

C-41

LOGO



Shareholder Rights

Virtual/Hybrid Shareholder Meetings				As a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, companies are increasingly conducting their shareholder meetings in a virtual or hybrid format. While we are encouraged by the success of virtual and hybrid shareholder meetings, companies and shareholders must remain vigilant in continuing to improve their virtual shareholder meeting practices. Recognizing the success of virtual and hybrid shareholder meetings and a shifting regulatory environment, we will generally support proposals that grant boards the right to hold shareholder meetings in a virtual or hybrid format as long as companies uphold the following best practices:

				• Afford virtual attendee shareholders the same rights as would normally be granted to in-person attendee shareholders

				• Commit to time-bound renewal (five years or less) of meeting format authorization by shareholders

				• Provide a written record of all questions posed during the meeting, and

				• Comply with local market laws and regulations relating to virtual and hybrid shareholder meeting practices

				If a company breaches of any of the criteria above, we may vote against the Chair of the nominating committee.

Accounting and Audit- Related Issues				Companies should have robust internal audit and internal control systems designed for effective management of any potential and emerging risks to company operations and strategy. The responsibility of setting out an internal audit function lies with the audit committee, which should have independent non-executive directors designated as members.

Appointment of External Auditors				State Street Global Advisors believes that a company’s auditor is an essential feature of an effective and transparent system of external supervision. Shareholders should be given the opportunity to vote on their appointment or to re-appoint at the annual meeting. When appointing external auditors and approving audit fees, we will take into consideration the level of detail in company disclosures. We will generally not support resolutions if adequate breakdown is not provided and if non-audit fees are more than 50 percent of audit fees. In addition, we may vote against members of the audit committee if we have concerns with audit-related issues or if the level of non-audit fees to audit fees is significant. In certain circumstances, we may consider auditor tenure when evaluating the audit process.

C-42

LOGO



Approval of Financial Statements				We believe the disclosure and availability of reliable financial statements in a timely manner is imperative for the investment process. We expect external auditors to provide assurance of a company’s financial condition. Hence, we may vote against the approval of financial statements if i) they have not been disclosed or audited; ii) the auditor opinion is qualified/adverse, or the auditor has issued a disclaimer of opinion; or iii) the auditor opinion is not disclosed.

Capital Structure, Reorganization, and Mergers

Share Issuances				The ability to raise capital is critical for companies to carry out strategy, to grow, and to achieve returns above their cost of capital. The approval of capital raising activities is fundamental to shareholders’ ability to monitor the returns and to ensure capital is deployed efficiently. State Street Global Advisors supports capital increases that have sound business reasons and are not excessive relative to a company’s existing capital base.

				Pre-emption rights are a fundamental right for shareholders to protect their investment in a company. Where companies seek to issue new shares without pre-emption rights, we may vote against if such authorities are greater than 20 percent of the issued share capital. We may also vote against resolutions seeking authority to issue capital with pre-emption rights if the aggregate amount allowed seems excessive and is not justified by the board. Generally, we are against capital issuance proposals greater than 100 percent of the issued share capital when the proceeds are not intended for specific purpose.

Share Repurchase Programs				We generally support proposals to repurchase shares, unless the issuer does not clearly state the business purpose for the program, a definitive number of shares to be repurchased, and the timeframe for the repurchase. We may vote against share repurchase requests that allow share repurchases during a takeover period.

Dividends				We generally support dividend payouts that constitute 30 percent or more of net income. We may vote against a dividend payout if the dividend payout ratio has been consistently below 30 percent without adequate explanation. We may also vote against if the payout is excessive given the company’s financial position. Particular attention will be warranted when the payment may damage the company’s long-term financial health.

C-43

LOGO



Mergers and Acquisitions				Mergers or reorganization of the company structure often involve proposals relating to reincorporation, restructurings, liquidations, and other major changes to the corporation. Proposals that are in the best interests of shareholders, demonstrated by enhancing share value or improving the effectiveness of the company’s operations, will be supported. In general, provisions that are not viewed as financially sound or are thought to be destructive to shareholders’ rights are not supported. We will generally support transactions that maximize shareholder value. Some of the considerations include:

				• Offer premium

				• Strategic rationale

				• Board oversight of the process for the recommended transaction, including, director and/or management conflicts of interest

				• Offers made at a premium and where there are no other higher bidders

				• Offers in which the secondary market price is substantially lower than the net asset value

				We may vote against a transaction considering the following:

				• Offers with potentially damaging consequences for minority shareholders because of illiquid stock

				• Offers where we believe there is a reasonable prospect for an enhanced bid or other bidders

				• The current market price of the security exceeds the bid price at the time of voting

Anti-Takeover Measures				We oppose anti-takeover defenses, such as authorities for the board to issue warrants convertible into shares to existing shareholders during a hostile takeover.

C-44

LOGO



Remuneration

Executive Pay				There is a simple underlying philosophy that guides State Street Global Advisors’ analysis of executive pay; there should be a direct relationship between remuneration and company performance over the long term. Shareholders should have the opportunity to assess whether pay structures and levels are aligned with business performance. When assessing remuneration reports, we consider various factors, such as adequate disclosure of different remuneration elements, absolute and relative pay levels, peer selection and benchmarking, the mix of long-term and short-term incentives, alignment of pay structures with shareholder interests as well as with corporate strategy and performance. We may oppose remuneration reports in which there seems to be a misalignment between pay and shareholders’ interests and where incentive policies and schemes have a re-test option or feature. We may also vote against the re-election of members of the remuneration committee if we have serious concerns about remuneration practices and if the company has not been responsive to shareholder pressure to review its approach.

Equity Incentive Plans				We may not support proposals on equity-based incentive plans where insufficient information is provided on matters, such as grant limits, performance metrics, performance, and vesting periods and overall dilution. Generally, we do not support options under such plans being issued at a discount to market price nor plans that allow for re-testing of performance metrics.

Non-Executive Director Pay				Authorities that seek shareholder approval for non-executive directors’ fees generally are not controversial. We generally support resolutions regarding directors’ fees unless disclosure is poor and we are unable to determine whether the fees are excessive relative to fees paid by other comparable companies. We will evaluate any non-cash or performance-related pay to non-executive directors on a company-by-company basis.

Risk Management and Oversight				State Street Global Advisors believes that risk management is a key function of the board, which is responsible for setting the overall risk appetite of a company and for providing oversight on the risk management process established by senior executives at a company. We allow boards to have discretion over the ways in which they provide oversight in this area. However, we expect companies to disclose how the board provides oversight on its risk management system and risk identification. Boards should also review existing and emerging risks that evolve in tandem with the political and economic landscape or as companies diversify or expand their operations into new areas.

C-45

LOGO



				As responsible stewards, we believe in the importance of effective risk management and oversight of issues that are material to a company. To effectively assess the risk of our clients’ portfolios and the broader market, we expect our portfolio companies to manage risks and opportunities that are material and industry-specific and that have a demonstrated link to long-term value creation, and to provide high-quality disclosure of this process to shareholders.

				Consistent with this perspective, we may seek to engage with our portfolio companies to better understand how their boards are overseeing risks and opportunities the company has deemed to be material to its business or operations. If we believe a company has failed to implement and communicate effective oversight of these risks, we may consider voting against the directors responsible.

Environmental and Social Issues				As a fiduciary, State Street Global Advisors takes a comprehensive approach to engaging with our portfolio companies about material environmental and social factors. Our Asset Stewardship program prioritization process allows us to proactively identify companies for engagement and voting in order to mitigate sustainability risks in our portfolio. Through engagement, we aim to build long-term relationships with the issuers in which we invest on behalf of our clients and to address a broad range of topics relating to the promotion of long-term shareholder value creation. When voting, we fundamentally consider whether the adoption of a shareholder proposal addressing an environmental or social topic material to the company would promote long-term shareholder value in the context of the company’s existing practices and disclosures as well as existing market practice.

				For more information on our approach to environmental and social issues, please see our Global Proxy Voting and Engagement Guidelines for Environmental and Social Factors, available at ssga.com/about-us/asset-stewardship.html.

About State Street Global Advisors				For four decades, State Street Global Advisors has served the world’s governments, institutions and financial advisors. With a rigorous, risk-aware approach built on research, analysis and market-tested experience, we build from a breadth of index and active strategies to create cost-effective solutions. And, as pioneers in index, ETF, and ESG investing, we are always inventing new ways to invest. As a result, we have become the world’s fourth-largest asset manager* with US $3.48 trillion^†under our care. .

				* Pensions & Investments Research Center, as of December 31, 2021.
				† This figure is presented as of December 31, 2022 and includes approximately $58.60 billion USD of assets with respect to SPDR products for which State Street Global Advisors Funds Distributors, LLC (SSGA FD) acts solely as the marketing agent. SSGA FD and State Street Global Advisors are affiliated. Please note all AUM is unaudited.

C-46

LOGO

ssga.com

Marketing communication

State Street Global Advisors Worldwide Entities

regulated by the Central Bank of Ireland, and whose registered office is at 78 Sir John Rogerson’s Quay, Dublin 2. Canada: State Street Global Advisors, Ltd., 1981 McGill College Avenue, Suite 500, Montreal, Qc, H3A 3A8, T: +514 282 2400 and 30 Adelaide Street East Suite 800, Toronto, Ontario M5C 3G6. T: +647 775 5900. France: State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, France Branch (“State Street Global Advisors France”) is a branch of State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, registered in Ireland with company number 49934, authorised and regulated by the Central Bank of Ireland, and whose registered office is at 78 Sir John Rogerson’s Quay, Dublin 2. State Street Global Advisors France is registered in France with company number RCS Nanterre 899 183 289, and its office is located at Coeur Défense —Tour A —La Défense 4, 33e étage, 100, Esplanade du Général de Gaulle, 92 931 Paris La Défense Cedex, France. T: +33 1 44 45 40 00. F: +33 1 44 45 41 92. Germany: State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, Branch in Germany, Brienner Strasse 59, D-80333 Munich, Germany (“State Street Global Advisors Germany”). T: +49 (0)89 55878 400. State Street Global Advisors Germany is a branch of State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, registered in

Ireland with company number 49934, authorised and regulated by the Central Bank of Ireland, and whose registered office is at 78 Sir John Rogerson’s Quay, Dublin 2. Hong Kong: State Street Global Advisors Asia Limited, 68/F, Two International Finance Centre, 8 Finance Street, Central, Hong Kong. T: +852 2103-0288. F: +852 2103-0200. Ireland: State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited is regulated by the Central Bank of Ireland. Registered office address 78 Sir John Rogerson’s Quay, Dublin 2. Registered Number: 49934. T: +353 (0)1 776 3000. F: +353 (0)1 776 3300. Italy: State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, Italy Branch (“State Street Global Advisors Italy”) is a branch of State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, registered in Ireland with company number 49934, authorised and regulated by the Central Bank of Ireland, and whose registered office is at 78 Sir John Rogerson’s Quay, Dublin 2. State Street Global Advisors Italy is registered in Italy with company number 11871450968 —REA: 2628603 and VAT number 11871450968, and its office is located at Via Ferrante Aporti, 10 -20125 Milan, Italy. T: +39 02 32066 100. F: +39 02 32066 155. Japan: State Street Global Advisors (Japan) Co., Ltd., Toranomon Hills Mori Tower 25F 1-23-1 Toranomon, Minato-ku, Tokyo 105-6325

Japan. T: +81-3-4530-7380. Financial Instruments Business Operator, Kanto Local Financial Bureau (Kinsho #345), Membership: Japan Investment Advisers Association, The Investment Trust Association, Japan, Japan Securities Dealers’ Association. Netherlands: State Street Global Advisors Netherlands, Apollo Building 7th floor, Herikerbergweg 29, 1101 CN Amsterdam, Netherlands. T: +31 20 7181 000. State Street Global Advisors Netherlands is a branch office of State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, registered in Ireland with company number 49934, authorised and regulated by the Central Bank of Ireland, and whose registered office is at 78 Sir John Rogerson’s Quay, Dublin 2. Singapore: State Street Global Advisors Singapore Limited, 168, Robinson Road, #33-01 Capital Tower, Singapore 068912 (Company Reg. No: 200002719D, regulated by the Monetary Authority of Singapore). T: +65 6826-7555. F: +65 6826-7501. Switzerland: State Street Global Advisors AG, Beethovenstr. 19, CH-8027 Zurich. Registered with the Register of Commerce Zurich CHE-105.078.458. T: +41 (0)44 245 70 00. F: +41 (0)44 245 70 16. United Kingdom: State Street Global Advisors Limited. Authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority. Registered in England. Registered No.

C-47

LOGO

2509928. VAT No. 5776591 81. Registered office: 20 Churchill Place, Canary Wharf, London, E14 5HJ. T: 020 3395 6000. F: 020 3395 6350. United States: State Street Global Advisors, 1 Iron Street, Boston, MA 02210-1641. T: +1 617 786 3000.

Investing involves risk including the risk of loss of principal.

The whole or any part of this work may not be reproduced, copied or transmitted or any of its contents disclosed to third parties without SSGA’s express written consent.

All information is from SSGA

unless otherwise noted and has been obtained from sources believed to be reliable, but its accuracy is not guaranteed. There is no representation or warranty as to the current accuracy, reliability or completeness of, nor liability for, decisions based on such information and it should not be relied on as such.

which underperform the market as a whole.

Responsible-Factor (R Factor) scoring is designed by State Street to reflect certain ESG characteristics and does not

represent investment performance. Results generated out of the scoring model is based on sustainability and corporate governance dimensions of a scored entity.

ID1482395-3479907.3.1.GBL.RTL 0323

Exp. Date: 03/31/2024

C-48

LOGO

March 2023

Continental Europe

Proxy Voting and Engagement Guidelines

State Street Global Advisors’ Proxy Voting and Engagement Guidelinesⁱ for Continental Europe outline our approach to voting and engaging with companies listed on stock exchanges in European markets, excluding the United Kingdom and Ireland. These Guidelines complement and should be read in conjunction with State Street Global Advisors’ Global Proxy Voting and Engagement Principles, which outline our overall approach to voting and engaging with companies, and State Street Global Advisors’ Conflicts Mitigation Guidelines, which provide information about managing the conflicts of interests that may arise through State Street Global Advisors’ proxy voting and engagement activities.

C-49

LOGO



				State Street Global Advisors’ Proxy Voting and Engagement Guidelines for Continental Europe address our market-specific approaches to topics including directors and boards, accounting and audit-related issues, capital structure, reorganization and mergers, remuneration, and other governance-related issues.

				When voting and engaging with companies in European markets, we consider market-specific nuances in the manner that we believe will most likely protect and promote the long-term economic value of client investments. We expect companies to observe the relevant laws and regulations of their respective markets, as well as country-specific best practice guidelines and corporate governance codes. We may hold companies in some markets to our global standards when we feel that a country’s regulatory requirements do not address some of the key philosophical principles that we believe are fundamental to our global voting principles.

				In our analysis and research into corporate governance issues at European companies, we expect all companies at a minimum to comply with guidance issued by the European Commission and country-specific governance codes. Consistent with the “comply-or-explain” expectations commonly established by guidance and codes, we encourage companies to proactively disclose their level of compliance with applicable provisions and requirements. In cases of non-compliance, and when companies cannot explain the nuances of their governance structures effectively, either publicly or through engagement, we may vote against the independent board leader.

State Street Global Advisors’ Proxy Voting and Engagement Philosophy				In our view, corporate governance and sustainability issues are an integral part of the investment process. The Asset Stewardship Team consists of investment professionals with expertise in corporate governance, remuneration, accounting, and environmental and social issues. We have established robust corporate governance principles and practices that are backed with extensive analytical expertise in order to understand the complexities of the corporate governance landscape. We engage with companies to provide insight on the principles and practices that drive our voting decisions. We also conduct proactive engagements to address significant shareholder concerns and issues in a manner consistent with maximizing shareholder value. The team works alongside members of State Street Global Advisors’ Active Fundamental and Europe, Middle East and Africa (“EMEA”) investment teams, collaborating on issuer engagements and providing input on company-specific fundamentals.

Directors and Boards				Principally, a board acts on behalf of shareholders by protecting their interests and preserving their rights. In order to carry out their primary responsibilities, directors have to undertake activities that range from setting strategy and providing guidance on strategic matters, overseeing executive management, to selecting the CEO and other senior executives, creating a succession plan for the board and management, and providing effective risk oversight, including of risks related to sustainability issues. Further, we believe good corporate governance necessitates the existence of effective internal controls and risk management systems, which should be governed by the board.

C-50

LOGO



				We believe that a well-constituted board of directors with a balance of skills, expertise and independence, provides the foundations for a well-governed company. We view board quality as a measure of director independence, director succession planning, board diversity, evaluations and refreshment, and company governance practices. We vote for the (re-)election of directors on a case-by-case basis after considering various factors, including board quality, general market practice, and availability of information on director skills and expertise. In our analysis of boards, we consider whether board members have adequate skills to provide effective oversight of corporate strategy, operations, and risks, including environmental and social issues. Boards should also have a regular evaluation process in place to assess the effectiveness of the board and the skills of board members to address issues such as emerging risks, changes to corporate strategy, and diversification of operations and geographic footprint. We may also consider factors such as board performance and directors who appear to be remiss in the performance of their oversight responsibilities (e.g. fraud, criminal wrongdoing and/or breach of fiduciary responsibilities).

Board Independence				In principle, we believe independent directors are crucial to robust corporate governance and help management establish sound corporate governance policies and practices. We believe a sufficiently independent board will most effectively monitor management and perform oversight functions necessary to protect shareholder interests. Our broad criteria for director independence in European companies include factors such as:

				• Participation in related-party transactions and other business relations with the company

				• Employment history with the company

				• Relations with controlling shareholders

				• Family ties with any of the company’s advisers, directors or senior employees

				• Serving as an employee or government representative

				• Overall average board tenure and individual director tenure at issuers with classified and de-classified boards, respectively, and

				• Company classification of a director as non-independent

				While overall board independence requirements and board structures differ from market to market, we consider voting against directors we deem non-independent if overall board independence is below 33 percent or if overall independence level is below 50 percent after excluding employee representatives and/or directors elected in accordance with local laws who are not elected by shareholders. We may withhold support for a proposal to discharge the board if a company does not meet adequate governance standards or board level independence.

C-51

LOGO



Separation Chair/CEO				We also assess the division of responsibilities between chair and CEO on a case-by-case basis, giving consideration to factors such as overall level of independence on the board and general corporate governance standards in the company. However, we may take voting action against the chair or members of the nominating committee at the STOXX Europe 600 companies that have combined the roles of chair and CEO and have not appointed an independent deputy chair or a lead independent director.

Director Time Commitments				When voting on the election or re-election of a director, we also consider the number of outside board directorships a non-executive and an executive may undertake. Thus, State Street Global Advisors may take voting action against a director who exceeds the number of board mandates listed below:

				• Named Executive Officers (NEOs) of a public company who sit on more than two public company boards

				• Non-executive board chairs or lead independent directors who sit on more than three public company boards

				• Director nominees who sit on more than four public company boards

				For non-executive board chairs/lead independent directors and director nominees who hold excessive commitments, as defined above, we may consider waiving our policy and vote in support of a director if a company discloses its director commitment policy in a publicly available manner (e.g., corporate governance guidelines, proxy statement, company website). This policy or associated disclosure must include:

				• A numerical limit on public company board seats a director can serve on

				– This limit cannot exceed our policy by more than one seat

				• Consideration of public company board leadership positions (e.g., Committee Chair)

				• Affirmation that all directors are currently compliant with the company policy

				• Description of an annual policy review process undertaken by the Nominating Committee to evaluate outside director time commitments

				If a director is imminently leaving a board and this departure is disclosed in a written, time-bound and publicly-available manner, we may consider waiving our withhold vote when evaluating the director for excessive time commitments.

				Service on a mutual fund board, the board of a UK investment trust or a Special Purpose Acquisition Company (SPAC) board is not considered when evaluating directors for excessive commitments. However, we do expect these roles to be considered by nominating committees when evaluating director time commitments.

C-52

LOGO



Director Attendance at Board Meetings				We also consider attendance at board meetings and may withhold votes from directors who attend less than 75 percent of board meetings without appropriate explanation or providing reason for their failure to meet the attendance threshold. In addition, we monitor other factors that may influence the independence of a non-executive director, such as performance-related pay, cross-directorships and significant shareholdings. Moreover, we may vote against the election of a director whose biographical disclosures are insufficient to assess his or her role on the board and/or independence.

Board Gender Diversity				We expect boards of all listed companies to have at least one female board member and the boards of STOXX 600 companies to be composed of at least 30 percent women directors. If a company does not meet the applicable expectation, State Street Global Advisors may vote against the Chair of the board’s nominating committee or the board leader in the absence of a nominating committee. Additionally, if a company does not meet the applicable expectation for three consecutive years, State Street Global Advisors may vote against all incumbent members of the nominating committee or those persons deemed responsible for the nomination process. We may waive this voting guideline if a company engages with State Street Global Advisors and provides a specific, timebound plan for either reaching the 30-percent threshold (STOXX 600) or for adding a woman director (non-STOXX 600).

Length of Board Terms				Although we generally are in favour of the annual election of directors, we recognise that director terms vary considerably in different European markets. We may vote against article/bylaw changes that seek to extend director terms. In addition, we may vote against directors in certain markets if their terms extend beyond four years.

Board Committees				We believe companies should have relevant board level committees for audit, remuneration and nomination oversight. The audit committee is responsible for monitoring the integrity of the financial statements of the company, appointing external auditors, monitoring their qualifications and independence, and assessing effectiveness and resource levels. Similarly, executive pay is an important aspect of corporate governance, and it should be determined by the board of directors. We expect companies to have remuneration committees to provide independent oversight of executive pay. We may vote against nominees who are executive members of audit or remuneration committees. In certain European markets, it is not uncommon for the election of directors to be presented in a single slate. In these cases, where executives serve on the audit or the remuneration committees, we may vote against the entire slate.

Board Responsiveness to High Dissent Against Pay Proposals				Poorly-structured executive remuneration plans pose increasing reputational risk to companies. Ongoing high levels of dissent against a company’s remuneration proposals may indicate that the company is not receptive to investor concerns. If the level of dissent against a company’s remuneration report and/or remuneration policy is consistently high, and we have determined that a vote against a remuneration-related proposal is warranted in the third consecutive year, we may vote against the Chair of the remuneration committee.

C-53

LOGO



Climate-related Disclosure				State Street Global Advisors finds that the recommendations of the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures (TCFD) provide the most effective framework for disclosure of climate-related risks and opportunities. As such, we may take voting action against companies in the STOXX 600 that fail to provide sufficient disclosure regarding climate-related risks and opportunities related to that company, or board oversight of climate-related risks and opportunities, in accordance with the TCFD framework.

Indemnification and Limitations on Liability				Generally, we support proposals to limit directors’ liability and/or expand indemnification and liability protection up to the limit provided by law if a director has not acted in bad faith, with gross negligence, or with reckless disregard of the duties involved in the conduct of his or her office.

Shareholder Rights

Virtual/Hybrid Shareholder Meetings				As a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, companies are increasingly conducting their shareholder meetings in a virtual or hybrid format. While we are encouraged by the success of virtual and hybrid shareholder meetings, companies and shareholders must remain vigilant in continuing to improve their virtual shareholder meeting practices.
				Recognizing the success of virtual and hybrid shareholder meetings and a shifting regulatory environment, we will generally support proposals that grant boards the right to hold shareholder meetings in a virtual or hybrid format as long as companies uphold the following best practices:

				• Afford virtual attendee shareholders the same rights as would normally be granted to in-person attendee shareholders

				• Commit to time-bound renewal (five years or less) of meeting format authorization by shareholders

				• Provide a written record of all questions posed during the meeting, and

				• Comply with local market laws and regulations relating to virtual and hybrid shareholder meeting practices

				If a company breaches of any of the criteria above, we may vote against the Chair of the nominating committee.

Accounting and Audit-Related Issues				Companies should have robust internal audit and internal control systems designed for effective management of any potential and emerging risks to company operations and strategy. The responsibility of setting up an internal audit function lies with the audit committee, which should have as members independent non-executive directors.

C-54

LOGO



Appointment of External Auditors				We believe that a company’s auditor is an essential feature of an effective and transparent system of external supervision. Shareholders should be given the opportunity to vote on their appointment or re-appoint them at the annual meeting. When appointing external auditors and approving audit fees, we consider the level of detail in company disclosures; we will generally not support such resolutions if adequate breakdown is not provided and if non-audit fees are more than 50 percent of audit fees. In addition, we may vote against members of the audit committee if we have concerns with audit-related issues or if the level of non-audit fees to audit fees is significant. We may consider auditor tenure when evaluating the audit process in certain circumstances.

Limit Legal Liability of External Auditors				We generally oppose limiting the legal liability of audit firms as we believe this could create a negative impact on the quality of the audit function.

Approval of Financial Statements				We believe the disclosure and availability of reliable financial statements in a timely manner is imperative for the investment process. We expect external auditors to provide assurance of a company’s financial condition. Hence, we may vote against the approval of financial statements if i) they have not been disclosed or audited; ii) the auditor opinion is qualified/adverse, or the auditor has issued a disclaimer of opinion; or iii) the auditor opinion is not disclosed. Capital Structure, Reorganization, and Mergers In some European markets, differential voting rights continue to exist. State Street Global Advisors supports the one-share, one-vote policy and favors a share structure where all shares have equal voting rights. We believe pre-emption rights should be introduced for shareholders in order to provide adequate protection from excessive dilution from the issuance of new shares or convertible securities to third parties or a small number of select shareholders.

Unequal Voting Rights				We generally oppose proposals authorizing the creation of new classes of common stock with superior voting rights. We will generally oppose the creation of new classes of preferred stock with unspecified voting, conversion, dividend distribution and other rights. In addition, we will not support capitalization changes that add classes of stock with undefined voting rights or classes that may dilute the voting interests of existing shareholders. We support proposals to abolish voting caps and capitalization changes that eliminate other classes of stock and/or unequal voting rights.

Increase in Authorized Capital				The ability to raise capital is critical for companies to carry out strategy, to grow, and to achieve returns above their cost of capital. The approval of capital raising activities is fundamental to shareholders’ ability to monitor returns and to ensure capital is deployed efficiently. We support capital increases that have sound business reasons and are not excessive relative to a company’s existing capital base.

C-55

LOGO



				Pre-emption rights are a fundamental right for shareholders to protect their investment in a company. Where companies seek to issue new shares whilst disapplying pre-emption rights, we may vote against if such authorities are greater than 20 percent of the issued share capital. We may also vote against resolutions that seek authority to issue capital with pre-emption rights if the aggregate amount allowed seems excessive and is not justified by the board. Generally, we oppose capital issuance proposals greater than 100 percent of the issued share capital when the proceeds are not intended for a specific purpose.

Share Repurchase Programs				We typically support proposals to repurchase shares; however, there are exceptions in some cases. We do not support repurchases if the issuer does not clearly state the business purpose for the program, a definitive number of shares to be repurchased, the range of premium/discount to market price at which the company can repurchase shares, and the timeframe for the repurchase. We may vote against share repurchase requests that allow share repurchases during a takeover period.

Dividends				We generally support dividend payouts that constitute 30 percent or more of net income. We may vote against the dividend payouts if the dividend payout ratio has been consistently below 30 percent without adequate explanation or the payout is excessive given the company’s financial position. Particular attention will be paid to cases in which the payment may damage the company’s long-term financial health.

Related-Party Transactions				Some companies in European markets have a controlled ownership structure and complex cross-shareholdings between subsidiaries and parent companies (“related companies”). Such structures may result in the prevalence of related-party transactions between the company and its various stakeholders, such as directors and management, subsidiaries and shareholders. In markets where shareholders are required to approve such transactions, we expect companies to provide details of the transaction, such as the nature, the value and the purpose of such a transaction. We also encourage independent directors to ratify such transactions. Further, we encourage companies to describe the level of independent board oversight and the approval process, including details of any independent valuations provided by financial advisors on related-party transactions.

Mergers and Acquisitions				Mergers or restructurings often involve proposals relating to reincorporation, restructurings, mergers, liquidation and other major changes to the corporation. Proposals will be supported if they are in the best interest of the shareholders, which is demonstrated by enhancing share value or improving the effectiveness of the company’s operations. In general, provisions that are not viewed as financially sound or are thought to be destructive to shareholders’ rights are not supported.

C-56

LOGO



				We will generally support transactions that maximize shareholder value. Some of the considerations include:

				• Offer premium

				• Strategic rationale

				• Board oversight of the process for the recommended transaction, including director and/or management conflicts of interest

				• Offers made at a premium and where there are no other higher bidders

				• Offers in which the secondary market price is substantially lower than the net asset value

				We may vote against a transaction considering the following:

				• Offers with potentially damaging consequences for minority shareholders because of illiquid stock

				• Offers where we believe there is a reasonable prospect for an enhanced bid or other bidders

				• The current market price of the security exceeds the bid price at the time of voting.

Anti-Takeover Measures				European markets have diverse regulations concerning the use of share issuances as takeover defenses, with legal restrictions lacking in some markets. We support the one-share, one-vote policy. For example, dual-class capital structures entrench certain shareholders and management, insulating them from possible takeovers. We oppose unlimited share issuance authorizations because they can be used as anti-takeover devices. They have the potential for substantial voting and earnings dilution. We also monitor the duration of time for authorities to issue shares, as well as whether there are restrictions and caps on multiple issuance authorities during the specified time periods. We oppose antitakeover defenses, such as authorities for the board when subject to a hostile takeover to issue warrants convertible into shares to existing shareholders.
Remuneration

Executive Pay				Despite the differences among the various types of plans and awards, there is a simple underlying philosophy that guides our analysis of executive pay: there should be a direct relationship between remuneration and company performance over the long term.

C-57

LOGO



				Shareholders should have the opportunity to assess whether pay structures and levels are aligned with business performance. When assessing remuneration reports, we consider factors such as adequate disclosure of remuneration elements, absolute and relative pay levels, peer selection and benchmarking, the mix of long-term and short-term incentives, alignment of pay structures with shareholder interests, corporate strategy and performance. We may oppose remuneration reports where pay seems misaligned with shareholders’ interests. We may also vote against the re-election of members of the remuneration committee if we have serious concerns about remuneration practices and if the company has not been responsive to shareholder pressure to review its approach.

Equity Incentives Plans				We may not support proposals regarding equity-based incentive plans where insufficient information is provided on matters, including grant limits, performance metrics, performance and vesting periods, and overall dilution. Generally, we do not support options under such plans being issued at a discount to market price or plans that allow for retesting of performance metrics.

Non-Executive Director Pay				In European markets, proposals seeking shareholder approval for non-executive directors’ fees are generally not controversial. We typically support resolutions regarding directors’ fees unless disclosure is poor and we are unable to determine whether the fees are excessive relative to fees paid by comparable companies. We will evaluate any non-cash or performance-related pay to non-executive directors on a company-by-company basis.

Risk Management				We believe that risk management is a key function of the board, which is responsible for setting the overall risk appetite of a company and for providing oversight on the risk management process established by senior executives at a company. We allow boards to have discretion regarding the ways in which they provide oversight in this area. However, we expect companies to disclose how the board provides oversight on its risk management system and risk identification. Boards should also review existing and emerging risks that evolve in tandem with the political and economic landscape or as companies diversify or expand their operations into new areas. As responsible stewards, we believe in the importance of effective risk management and oversight of issues that are material to a company. To effectively assess the risk of our clients’ portfolios and the broader market, we expect our portfolio companies to manage risks and opportunities that are material and industry-specific and that have a demonstrated link to long-term value creation, and to provide high-quality disclosure of this process to shareholders.

C-58

LOGO



				Consistent with this perspective, we may seek to engage with our portfolio companies to better understand how their boards are overseeing risks and opportunities the company has deemed to be material to its business or operations. If we believe a company has failed to implement and communicate effective oversight of these risks, we may consider voting against the directors responsible.

Environmental and Social Issues				As a fiduciary, State Street Global Advisors takes a comprehensive approach to engaging with our portfolio companies about material environmental and social factors. Our Asset Stewardship program prioritization process allows us to proactively identify companies for engagement and voting in order to mitigate sustainability risks in our portfolio. Through engagement, we aim to build long-term relationships with the issuers in which we invest on behalf of our clients and to address a broad range of topics relating to the promotion of long-term shareholder value creation. When voting, we fundamentally consider whether the adoption of a shareholder proposal addressing an environmental or social topic material to the company would promote long-term shareholder value in the context of the company’s existing practices and disclosures as well as existing market practice. For more information on our approach to environmental and social issues, please see our Global Proxy Voting and Engagement Guidelines for Environmental and Social Factors, available at ssga.com/about-us/asset-stewardship.html.

About State Street Global Advisors				For four decades, State Street Global Advisors has served the world’s governments, institutions and financial advisors. With a rigorous, risk-aware approach built on research, analysis and market-tested experience, we build from a breadth of index and active strategies to create cost-effective solutions. And, as pioneers in index, ETF, and ESG investing, we are always inventing new ways to invest. As a result, we have become the world’s fourth-largest asset manager* with US $3.48 trillion† under our care.

				* Pensions & Investments Research Center, as of December 31, 2021.
				^† This figure is presented as of December 31, 2022 and includes approximately $58.60 billion USD of assets with respect to SPDR products for which State Street Global Advisors Funds Distributors, LLC (SSGA FD) acts solely as the marketing agent. SSGA FD and State Street Global Advisors are affiliated. Please note all AUM is unaudited.

C-59

LOGO

ssga.com

Marketing communication

State Street Global Advisors Worldwide Entities

Quay, Dublin 2. Canada: State Street Global Advisors, Ltd., 1981 McGill College Avenue, Suite 500, Montreal, Qc, H3A 3A8, T: +514 282 2400 and 30 Adelaide Street East Suite 800, Toronto, Ontario M5C 3G6. T: +647 775 5900. France: State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, France Branch (“State Street Global Advisors France”) is a branch of State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, registered in Ireland with company number 49934, authorised and regulated by the Central Bank of

Ireland, and whose registered office is at 78 Sir John Rogerson’s Quay, Dublin 2.

State Street Global Advisors France is registered in France with company number RCS Nanterre 899 183 289, and its office is located at Coeur Défense — Tour A — La Défense 4, 33e étage,100, Esplanade du Général de Gaulle, 92 931 Paris La Défense Cedex, France. T: +33 1 44 45 40 00. F: +33 1 44 45 41 92.

Germany: State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, Branch in Germany, Brienner Strasse 59, D-80333 Munich, Germany (“State Street Global Advisors Germany”). T: +49 (0)89 55878 400. State Street Global Advisors Germany is a branch of State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, registered in Ireland with company number 49934, authorised and regulated by the Central Bank of

Ireland, and whose registered office is at 78 Sir John Rogerson’s Quay, Dublin 2.

Hong Kong: State Street Global Advisors Asia Limited,

Registered office address 78 Sir John Rogerson’s Quay, Dublin 2. Registered Number: 49934. T: +353 (0)1 776 3000. F: +353 (0)1 776 3300. Italy: State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, Italy Branch (“State Street Global Advisors Italy”) is a branch of State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, registered in Ireland with company number 49934, authorised and regulated by the Central Bank of Ireland, and whose registered office is at 78 Sir John Rogerson’s Quay, Dublin 2. State Street Global Advisors Italy is registered in Italy with company number 11871450968 —REA: 2628603 and VAT number 11871450968, and its office is located at Via Ferrante Aporti, 10 - 20125 Milan, Italy. T: +39 02 32066 100. F: +39 02 32066 155. Japan: State Street Global Advisors (Japan) Co., Ltd., Toranomon Hills Mori Tower 25F 1-23-1 Toranomon, Minato-ku, Tokyo 105-6325 Japan. T: +81-3-4530-7380. Financial Instruments Business Operator, Kanto Local Financial Bureau (Kinsho #345), Membership: Japan Investment Advisers Association, The Investment Trust Association, Japan, Japan Securities

Dealers’ Association. Netherlands: State Street

Global Advisors Netherlands,

Apollo Building 7th floor, Herikerbergweg

29, 1101 CN Amsterdam, Netherlands. T: +31 20 7181 000. State Street Global

Advisors Netherlands is a branch office of State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, registered in Ireland with company number 49934, authorised and regulated by the Central Bank of

Ireland, and whose registered office is at 78 Sir John Rogerson’s Quay, Dublin 2. Singapore: State Street Global Advisors Singapore Limited, 168, Robinson Road, #33-01 Capital Tower, Singapore 068912 (Company Reg. No: 200002719D, regulated by the Monetary Authority of Singapore). T: +65 6826-7555. F: +65 6826-7501. Switzerland: State Street Global Advisors AG, Beethovenstr. 19, CH-8027 Zurich. Registered with the Register of Commerce Zurich CHE-105.078.458. T: +41 (0)44 245 70 00. F: +41 (0)44 245 70 16. United Kingdom: State Street Global Advisors Limited. Authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority. Registered in England. Registered No. 2509928. VAT No. 5776591 81. Registered office: 20 Churchill Place, Canary Wharf, London, E14 5HJ. T: 020 3395 6000. F: 020 3395 6350. United States: State Street Global Advisors, 1 Iron Street, Boston, MA 02210-1641. T: +1 617 786 3000.

C-60

LOGO

Investing involves risk including the risk of loss of principal.

The whole or any part of this work may not be reproduced, copied or transmitted or any of its contents disclosed to third parties without SSGA’s express written consent.

nor liability for, decisions based on such information and it should not be relied on as such.

This communication is directed at professional clients (this includes eligible counterparties as defined by the appropriate EU regulator

who are deemed both knowledgeable and experienced in matters relating to investments. The products and services to which this communication relates are only available to such persons and persons of any other description (including retail clients) should not rely on this communication.

Responsible-Factor (R Factor) scoring is designed by State Street to reflect certain ESG characteristics and does not represent investment performance. Results generated out of the scoring model is based on sustainability and corporate governance dimensions of a scored entity.

The information contained in this communication is not a research recommendation or ‘investment research’ and is classified as a Marketing Communication’ in accordance with the Markets in Financial Instruments Directive (2014/65/EU) or applicable Swiss regulation. This means that this marketing communication (a) has not been prepared in accordance with legal requirements designed to promote the independence of investment research (b) is not subject to any prohibition on dealing ahead of the dissemination of investment research.

ID1482701-3479909.3.1.GBL.RTL 0323 Exp. Date: 03/31/2024

C-61

LOGO

March 2023

Japan

Proxy Voting and Engagement Guidelines

State Street Global Advisors’ Proxy Voting and Engagement Guidelinesⁱ for Japan outline our approach to voting and engaging with companies listed on stock exchanges in Japan. These Guidelines complement and should be read in conjunction with State Street Global Advisors’ Global Proxy Voting and Engagement Principles, which outline our overall approach to voting and engaging with companies, and State Street Global Advisors’ Conflicts Mitigation Guidelines, which provide information about managing the conflicts of interests that may arise through State Street Global Advisors’ proxy voting and engagement activities.

These Proxy Voting and Engagement Guidelines are also applicable to SSGA Funds Management, Inc.. SSGA Funds Management, Inc.is an SEC-registered investment adviser. SSGA Funds Management, Inc., State Street Global Advisors Trust Company, and other advisory affiliates of State Street make up State Street Global Advisors, the investment management arm of State Street Corporation.

C-62

LOGO



				State Street Global Advisors’ Proxy Voting and Engagement Guidelines for Japan address our market-specific approaches to topics including directors and boards, accounting and audit-related issues, capital structure, remuneration and mergers, compensation, and other governance-related issues. When voting and engaging with companies in global markets, we consider market-specific nuances in the manner that we believe will most likely protect and promote the long-term economic value of client investments. We expect all companies to observe the relevant laws and regulations of their respective markets, as well as any country-specific best practice guidelines and corporate governance codes. We may hold companies in some markets to our global standards when we feel that a country’s regulatory requirements do not address some of the key philosophical principles that we believe are fundamental to our global voting principles. With companies in Japan, State Street Global Advisors takes into consideration the unique aspects of Japanese corporate governance structures. We recognize that under Japanese corporate law, companies may choose between three structures of corporate governance: the statutory auditor system, the committee structure and the hybrid structure. Most Japanese boards predominantly consist of executives and non-independent outsiders affiliated through commercial relationships or cross-shareholdings. Nonetheless, when evaluating companies, State Street Global Advisors expects the boards of Japanese companies to address conflicts of interest and risk management, and to demonstrate an effective process for monitoring management. Regardless of the corporate governance structure a company adopts, we expect all companies at a minimum to comply with Japan’s Corporate Governance Code (the “Code”). Consistent with the ‘comply or explain’ expectations established by the Code, we encourage companies to proactively disclose their level of compliance with the Code. In instances of non-compliance, and when companies cannot explain the nuances of their governance structure effectively, either publicly or through engagement, we may vote against the board leader.

State Street Global Advisors’ Proxy Voting and Engagement Philosophy				In our view, corporate governance and sustainability issues are an integral part of the investment process. The Asset Stewardship Team consists of investment professionals with expertise in corporate governance, remuneration, accounting, and environmental and social issues. We have established robust corporate governance principles and practices that are backed with extensive analytical expertise to understand the complexities of the corporate governance landscape. We engage with companies to provide insight on the principles and practices that drive our voting decisions. We also conduct proactive engagement to address significant shareholder concerns and issues in a manner consistent with maximizing shareholder value. The team works alongside members of State Street Global Advisors’ Active Fundamental and Asia-Pacific (“APAC”) Investment Teams, collaborating on issuer engagements and providing input on company-specific fundamentals.

C-63

LOGO



Directors and Boards				Principally, a board acts on behalf of shareholders by protecting their interests and preserving their rights. In order to carry out their primary responsibilities, directors have to undertake activities that range from setting strategy and providing guidance on strategic matters, overseeing executive management, to selecting the CEO and other senior executives, creating a succession plan for the board and management, and providing effective risk oversight, including of risks related to sustainability issues. Further, we believe good corporate governance necessitates the existence of effective internal controls and risk management systems, which should be governed by the board.

				State Street Global Advisors believes that a well-constituted board of directors with a balance of skills, expertise and independence provides the foundation for a well-governed company. We view board quality as a measure of director independence, director succession planning, board diversity, evaluations and refreshment, and company governance practices. We vote for the (re-)election of directors on a case-by-case basis after considering various factors, including board quality, general market practice, and availability of information on director skills and expertise.

				Japanese companies have the option of having a traditional board of directors with statutory auditors, a board with a committee structure, or a hybrid board with a board level audit committee. We will generally support companies that seek shareholder approval to adopt a committee or hybrid board structure.

				Most Japanese issuers prefer the traditional statutory auditor structure. Statutory auditors act in a quasi-compliance role, as they are not involved in strategic decision-making, nor are they part of the formal management decision process. Statutory auditors attend board meetings, but do not have voting rights at the board; however, they have the right to seek an injunction and conduct broad investigations of unlawful behavior in the company’s operations.

				State Street Global Advisors will support the election of statutory auditors unless the outside statutory auditor nominee is regarded as non-independent based on our criteria, the outside statutory auditor has attended less than 75 percent of meetings of the board of directors or the board of statutory auditors during the year under review, or the statutory auditor has been remiss in the performance of their oversight responsibilities (fraud, criminal wrongdoing, and breach of fiduciary responsibilities).

				Board Independence

				In principle, we believe independent directors are crucial to robust corporate governance and help management establish sound corporate governance policies and practices. A sufficiently independent board will most effectively monitor management and perform oversight functions that are necessary to protect shareholder interests.

				We believe that boards of TOPIX 500 companies should have at least three independent directors and be at least one-third independent. Otherwise, we may oppose the board leader who is responsible for the director nomination process.

C-64

LOGO



				For non-TOPIX 500 companies, we may oppose the board leader if the board does not have at least two independent directors. For companies with a committee structure or a hybrid board structure, we also take into consideration the overall independence level of the committees.

				In determining director independence, we consider the following factors: • Participation in related-party transactions and other business relations with the company • Past employment with the company • Professional services provided to the company • Family ties with the company Regardless of board structure, we may oppose the election of a director for the following reasons: • Failure to attend board meetings • In instances of egregious actions related to a director’s service on the board

Board Gender Diversity				We expect boards of all listed companies to have at least one female board member. If a company does not meet this expectation, State Street Global Advisors may vote against the Chair of the board’s nominating committee or the board leader in the absence of a nominating committee. Additionally, if a company does not meet this expectation for three consecutive years, State Street Global Advisors may vote against all incumbent members of the nominating committee or those persons deemed responsible for the nomination process. We may waive this voting guideline if a company engages with State Street Global Advisors and provides a specific, timebound plan for adding at least one woman to its board.

Climate-related Disclosures				State Street Global Advisors finds that the recommendations of the Taskforce on Climate-related Financial Disclosures (TCFD) provide the most effective framework for disclosure of climate-related risks and opportunities. As such, we take voting action against companies in the TOPIX 100 that fail to provide sufficient disclosure regarding climate-related risks and opportunities related to that company, or board oversight of climate-related risks and opportunities, in accordance with the TCFD framework.

Indemnification and Limitations on Liability				Generally, State Street Global Advisors supports proposals to limit directors’ and statutory auditors’ liability and/or expand indemnification and liability protection up to the limit provided by law, if he or she has not acted in bad faith, gross negligence or reckless disregard of the duties involved in the conduct of his or her office. We believe limitations and indemnification are necessary to attract and retain qualified directors.

C-65

LOGO



Shareholder Rights

Virtual/Hybrid Shareholder Meetings				As a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, companies are increasingly conducting their shareholder meetings in a virtual or hybrid format. While we are encouraged by the success of virtual and hybrid shareholder meetings, companies and shareholders must remain vigilant in continuing to improve their virtual shareholder meeting practices.

				Recognizing the success of virtual and hybrid shareholder meetings and a shifting regulatory environment, we will generally support proposals that grant boards the right to hold shareholder meetings in a virtual or hybrid format as long as companies uphold the following best practices:

				• Afford virtual attendee shareholders the same rights as would normally be granted to in-person attendee shareholders

				• Commit to time-bound renewal (five years or less) of meeting format authorization by shareholders

				• Provide a written record of all questions posed during the meeting, and

				• Comply with local market laws and regulations relating to virtual and hybrid shareholder meeting practices

				If a company breaches of any of the criteria above, we may vote against the Chair of the nominating committee.

Accounting and Audit- Related Issues				State Street Global Advisors believes that a company’s auditor is an essential feature of an effective and transparent system of external supervision. Shareholders should have the opportunity to vote on the appointment of the auditor at the annual meeting.

Ratifying External Auditors				We generally support the appointment of external auditors unless the external auditor is perceived as being non-independent and there are concerns about the accounts presented and the audit procedures followed.

Approval of Financial Statements				We believe the disclosure and availability of reliable financial statements in a timely manner is imperative for the investment process. We expect external auditors to provide assurance of a company’s financial condition. Hence, we may vote against the approval of financial statements if i) they have not been disclosed or audited; ii) the auditor opinion is qualified/adverse, or the auditor has issued a disclaimer of opinion; or iii) the auditor opinion is not disclosed.

Limiting Legal Liability of External Auditors				We generally oppose limiting the legal liability of audit firms as we believe this could create a negative impact on the quality of the audit function.

C-66

LOGO



Capital Structure, Reorganization, and Mergers

Unequal Voting Rights				State Street Global Advisors supports the “one-share, one-vote” policy and favors a share structure where all shares have equal voting rights. We support proposals to abolish voting caps or multiple voting rights and will oppose measures to introduce these types of restrictions on shareholder rights.

				We generally oppose proposals authorizing the creation of new classes of common stock with superior voting rights. We will generally oppose new classes of preferred stock with unspecified voting, conversion, dividend distribution, and other rights. In addition, we will not support capitalization changes that add classes of stock with undefined voting rights or classes that may dilute the voting interests of existing shareholders.

				However, we will support capitalization changes that eliminate other classes of stock and/ or unequal voting rights.

Share Capital Increases				We believe pre-emption rights should be introduced for shareholders. This can provide adequate protection from excessive dilution due to the issuance of new shares or convertible securities to third parties or a small number of select shareholders.

Increase in Authorized Capital				We generally support increases in authorized capital where the company provides an adequate explanation for the use of shares. In the absence of an adequate explanation, we may oppose the request if the increase in authorized capital exceeds 100 percent of the currently authorized capital. Where share issuance requests exceed our standard threshold, we will consider the nature of the specific need, such as mergers, acquisitions and stock splits.

Dividends				We generally support dividend payouts that constitute 30 percent or more of net income. We may vote against a dividend payout if the dividend payout ratio has been consistently below 30 percent without adequate explanation or if the payout is excessive given the company’s financial position. Particular attention will be paid where the payment may damage the company’s long-term financial health.

Share Repurchase Programs				Companies are allowed under Japan Corporate Law to amend their articles to authorize the repurchase of shares at the board’s discretion. We will oppose such amendments. We believe the company should seek shareholder approval for a share repurchase program at each year’s AGM, providing shareholders the right to evaluate the terms of the repurchase.

C-67

LOGO



				We generally support proposals to repurchase shares, unless the issuer does not clearly state the business purpose for the program, a definitive number of shares to be repurchased and the timeframe for the repurchase. We may vote against share repurchase requests that allow share repurchases during a takeover period.

Mergers and Acquisitions				Mergers or reorganizing the structure of a company often involve proposals relating to reincorporation, restructurings, mergers, liquidations and other major changes to the corporation. We will support proposals that are in the best interests of shareholders, demonstrated by enhancing share value or improving the effectiveness of the company’s operations. In general, provisions that are deemed to be destructive to shareholders’ rights or financially detrimental will not be supported.

				We evaluate mergers and structural reorganizations on a case-by-case basis. We will generally support transactions that we believe will maximize shareholder value. Some of the considerations include, but are not limited to, the following:

				• Offer premium

				• Strategic rationale

				• Board oversight of the process for the recommended transaction, including director and/ or management conflicts of interest

				• Offers made at a premium and where there are no other higher bidders

				• Offers in which the secondary market price is substantially lower than the net asset value

				We may vote against a transaction considering the following:

				• Offers with potentially damaging consequences for minority shareholders because of illiquid stock

				• Offers where we believe there is a reasonable prospect for an enhanced bid or other bidders

				• Offers in which the current market price of the security exceeds the bid price at the time of voting

Anti-Takeover Measures				In general, State Street Global Advisors believes that adoption of poison pills that have been structured to protect management and to prevent takeover bids from succeeding is not in shareholders’ interest. A shareholder rights plan may lead to management entrenchment. It may also discourage legitimate tender offers and acquisitions. Even if the premium paid to companies with a shareholder rights plan is higher than that offered to unprotected firms, a company’s chances of receiving a takeover offer in the first place may be reduced by the presence of a shareholder rights plan.

C-68

LOGO



				Proposals that reduce shareholders’ rights or have the effect of entrenching incumbent management will not be supported.

				Proposals that enhance the right of shareholders to make their own choices as to the desirability of a merger or other proposal are supported.

Shareholder Rights Plans				In evaluating the adoption or renewal of a Japanese issuer’s shareholder rights plans (“poison pill”), we consider the following conditions: (i) release of proxy circular with details of the proposal with adequate notice in advance of meeting, (ii) minimum trigger of over 20 percent, (iii) maximum term of three years, (iv) sufficient number of independent directors, (v) presence of an independent committee, (vi) annual election of directors, and (vii) lack of protective or entrenchment features. Additionally, we consider the length of time that a shareholder rights plan has been in effect. In evaluating an amendment to a shareholder rights plan (“poison pill”), in addition to the conditions above, we will also evaluate and consider supporting proposals where the terms of the new plan are more favorable to shareholders’ ability to accept unsolicited offers.

“Cross-shareholdings”				“Cross-Shareholdings” are a long-standing feature of the balance sheets of many Japanese companies, but, in our view, can be detrimental for corporate governance practices and ultimately shareholder returns. Therefore, State Street Global Advisors may vote against the board leader at those TOPIX 500 companies where the “cross-shareholdings” (strategic listed shares) held by a company exceed 30 percent of the company’s net assets (as in the securities report disclosed for the previous fiscal year). We may waive the guideline if a company engages with State Street Global Advisors and provides a specific, timebound, and publicly available plan for reducing its exposure to “cross-shareholdings”:

				• To less than 30% by 2025; or

				• By 50% of current level by 2025

Compensation				In Japan, excessive compensation is rarely an issue. Rather, the problem tends to be the lack of connection between pay and performance. Fixed salaries and cash retirement bonuses tend to comprise a significant portion of the compensation structure while performance-based pay is generally a small portion of the total pay. State Street Global Advisors, where possible, seeks to encourage the use of performance-based compensation in Japan as an incentive for executives and as a way to align interests with shareholders.

C-69

LOGO



Adjustments to Aggregate Compensation Ceiling for Directors				Remuneration for directors in Japan is generally reasonable. Typically, each company sets the director compensation parameters as an aggregate, thereby limiting the total pay to all directors. When requesting a change, a company must disclose the last time the ceiling was adjusted, and management provides the rationale for the ceiling increase. We will generally support proposed increases to the ceiling if the company discloses the rationale for the increase. We may oppose proposals to increase the ceiling if there has been corporate malfeasance or sustained poor performance.

Annual Bonuses for Directors/Statutory Auditors				In Japan, since there are no legal requirements that mandate companies to seek shareholder approval before awarding a bonus, we believe that existing shareholder approval of the bonus should be considered best practice. As a result, we support management proposals on executive compensation where there is a strong relationship between executive pay and performance over a five-year period.

Retirement Bonuses for Directors/Statutory Auditors				While many companies in Japan have abolished the practice where retirement bonuses, based upon tenure, make up a sizeable portion of directors and auditors’ lifetime compensation, there remain many proposals seeking shareholder approval for the total amounts paid to directors and statutory auditors as a whole. In general, we support these payments unless the recipient is an outsider or in instances where the amount is not disclosed.

Stock Plans				Most option plans in Japan are conservative, particularly at large companies. Japanese corporate law requires companies to disclose the monetary value of the stock options for directors and/or statutory auditors. Some companies do not disclose the maximum number of options that can be issued per year and shareholders are unable to evaluate the dilution impact. In this case, we cannot calculate the dilution level and, therefore, we may oppose such plans due to poor disclosure. We also oppose plans that allow for the repricing of options.

Deep Discount Options				As Japanese companies move away from the retirement bonus system, deep discount options plans have become more popular. Typically, the exercise price is set at JPY 1 per share. We evaluate deep discount options using the same criteria used to evaluate stock options and consider the vesting period.

Risk Management				We believe that risk management is a key function of the board, which is responsible for setting the overall risk appetite of a company and for providing oversight on the risk management process established by senior executives at a company. We allow boards to have discretion regarding the ways in which they provide oversight in this area. However, we expect companies to disclose how the board provides oversight on its risk management system and risk identification. Boards should also review existing and emerging risks that evolve in tandem with the changing political and economic landscape or as companies diversify or expand their operations into new areas.

C-70

LOGO



				As responsible stewards, we believe in the importance of effective risk management and oversight of issues that are material to a company. To effectively assess the risk of our clients’ portfolios and the broader market, we expect our portfolio companies to manage risks and opportunities that are material and industry-specific and that have a demonstrated link to long-term value creation, and to provide high-quality disclosure of this process to shareholders. Consistent with this perspective, we may seek to engage with our portfolio companies to better understand how their boards are overseeing risks and opportunities the company has deemed to be material to its business or operations. If we believe a company has failed to implement and communicate effective oversight of these risks, we may consider voting against the directors responsible.

Environmental and Social Issues				As a fiduciary, State Street Global Advisors takes a comprehensive approach to engaging with our portfolio companies about material environmental and social factors. Our Asset Stewardship program prioritization process allows us to proactively identify companies for engagement and voting in order to mitigate sustainability risks in our portfolio. Through engagement, we aim to build long-term relationships with the issuers in which we investon behalf of our clients and to address a broad range of topics relating to the promotion of long-term shareholder value creation. When voting, we fundamentally consider whether the adoption of a shareholder proposal addressing an environmental or social topic material to the company would promote long-term shareholder value in the context of the company’s existing practices and disclosures as well as existing market practice. For more information on our approach to environmental and social issues, please see our Global Proxy Voting and Engagement Guidelines for Environmental and Social Factors, available at ssga.com/about-us/asset-stewardship.html.

General/Routine

Expansion of Business Activities				Japanese companies’ articles of incorporation strictly define the types of businesses in which a company is permitted to engage. In general, State Street Global Advisors views proposals that expand and diversify the company’s business activities as routine and non-contentious. We will monitor instances in which there has been an inappropriate acquisition and diversification away from the company’s main area of competence that resulted in a decrease of shareholder value.

C-71

LOGO



About State Street Global Advisors				For four decades, State Street Global Advisors has served the world’s governments, institutions and financial advisors. With a rigorous, risk-aware approach built on research, analysis and market-tested experience, we build from a breadth of index and active strategies to create cost-effective solutions. And, as pioneers in index, ETF, and ESG investing, we are always inventing new ways to invest. As a result, we have become the world’s fourth-largest asset manager* with US $3.48 trillion^†under our care.

				* Pensions & Investments Research Center, as of December 31, 2021.
				^† This figure is presented as of December 31, 2022 and includes approximately $58.60 billion USD of assets with respect to SPDR products for which State Street Global Advisors Funds Distributors, LLC (SSGA FD) acts solely as the marketing agent. SSGA FD and State Street Global Advisors are affiliated. Please note all AUM is unaudited.

C-72

LOGO

ssga.com

Marketing communications

State Street Global Advisors Worldwide Entities

Bank of Ireland, and whose registered office is at 78 Sir John Rogerson’s Quay, Dublin 2. Canada: State Street Global Advisors, Ltd., 1981 McGill College Avenue, Suite 500, Montreal, Qc, H3A 3A8, T: +514 282 2400 and 30 Adelaide Street East Suite 800, Toronto, Ontario M5C 3G6. T: +647 775 5900. France: State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, France Branch (“State Street Global Advisors France”) is a branch of State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, registered in Ireland with company number 49934, authorised and regulated by the Central Bank of Ireland, and whose registered office is at 78 Sir John Rogerson’s Quay, Dublin 2. State Street Global Advisors France is registered in France with company number RCS Nanterre 899 183 289, and its office is located at Coeur Défense — Tour A — La Défense 4, 33e étage, 100, Esplanade du Général de Gaulle, 92 931 Paris La Défense Cedex, France. T: +33 1 44 45 40 00. F: +33 1 44 45 41 92. Germany: State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, Branch in Germany, Brienner Strasse 59, D-80333 Munich, Germany (“State Street Global Advisors Germany”). T: +49 (0)89 55878 400. State Street Global Advisors Germany is a branch of State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, registered in Ireland with company number 49934, authorised and regulated by the Central Bank of Ireland, and whose

registered office is at 78 Sir John Rogerson’s Quay, Dublin 2. Hong Kong: State Street Global Advisors Asia Limited, 68/F, Two International Finance Centre, 8 Finance Street, Central, Hong Kong. T: +852 2103-0288. F: +852 2103-0200. Ireland: State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited is regulated by the Central Bank of Ireland. Registered office address 78 Sir John Rogerson’s Quay, Dublin 2. Registered Number: 49934. T: +353 (0)1 776 3000. F: +353 (0)1 776 3300. Italy: State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, Italy Branch (“State Street Global Advisors Italy”) is a branch of State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, registered in Ireland with company number 49934, authorised and regulated by the Central Bank of Ireland, and whose registered office is at 78 Sir John Rogerson’s Quay, Dublin 2. State Street Global Advisors Italy is registered in Italy with company number 11871450968 — REA: 2628603 and VAT number 11871450968, and its office is located at Via Ferrante Aporti, 10 -20125 Milan, Italy. T: +39 02 32066 100. F: +39 02 32066 155. Japan: State Street Global Advisors (Japan) Co., Ltd., Toranomon Hills Mori Tower 25F 1-23-1 Toranomon, Minato-ku, Tokyo 105-6325 Japan. T: +81-3-4530-7380. Financial Instruments Business Operator, Kanto Local Financial Bureau (Kinsho #345), Membership: Japan Investment Advisers Association, The Investment

Trust Association, Japan, Japan Securities Dealers’ Association. Netherlands: State Street Global Advisors Netherlands, Apollo Building 7th floor, Herikerbergweg 29, 1101 CN Amsterdam, Netherlands. T: +31 20 7181 000. State Street Global Advisors Netherlands is a branch office of State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, registered in Ireland with company number 49934, authorised and regulated by the Central Bank of Ireland, and whose registered office is at 78 Sir John Rogerson’s Quay, Dublin 2. Singapore: State Street Global Advisors Singapore Limited, 168, Robinson Road, #33-01 Capital Tower, Singapore 068912 (Company Reg. No: 200002719D, regulated by the Monetary Authority of Singapore). T: +65 6826-7555. F: +65 6826-7501. Switzerland: State Street Global Advisors AG, Beethovenstr. 19, CH-8027 Zurich. Registered with the Register of Commerce Zurich CHE-105.078.458. T: +41 (0)44 245 70 00. F: +41 (0)44 245 70 16. United Kingdom: State Street Global Advisors Limited. Authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority. Registered in England. Registered No. 2509928. VAT No. 5776591 81. Registered office: 20 Churchill Place, Canary Wharf, London, E14 5HJ. T: 020 3395 6000. F: 020 3395 6350. United States: State Street Global Advisors, 1 Iron Street, Boston, MA 02210-1641. T: +1 617 786 3000.

C-73

LOGO

Investing involves risk including the risk of loss of principal.

The whole or any part of this work may not be reproduced, copied or transmitted or any of its contents disclosed to third parties without SSGA’s express written consent.

All information is from SSGA unless otherwise noted and has been obtained from sources believed to be reliable, but its accuracy is not guaranteed. There is no representation or warranty

as to the current accuracy, reliability or completeness of, nor liability for, decisions based on such information and it should not be relied on as such.

Responsible-Factor (R Factor) scoring is designed by State Street to reflect certain ESG characteristics and does not represent investment performance. Results generated out of the

scoring model is based on sustainability and corporate governance dimensions of a scored entity.

ID1482398-3479913.3.1.GBL.RTL 0323

Exp. Date: 03/31/2024

C-74

LOGO

March 2023

North America (United States & Canada)

Proxy Voting and Engagement Guidelines

State Street Global Advisors’ Proxy Voting and Engagement Guidelinesⁱ for North America outline our approach to voting and engaging with companies listed on stock exchanges in the United States and Canada. These Guidelines complement and should be read in conjunction with State Street Global Advisors’ Global Proxy Voting and Engagement Principles, which outline our overall approach to voting and engaging with companies, and State Street Global Advisors’ Conflicts Mitigation Guidelines, which provide information about managing the conflicts of interests that may arise through State Street Global Advisors’ proxy voting and engagement activities.

C-75

LOGO



				State Street Global Advisors’ Proxy Voting and Engagement Guidelines for North America (United States [“US”] and Canada) address our market-specific approaches to topics including directors and boards, accounting and audit related issues, capital structure, reorganization and mergers, compensation, and other governance-related issues.

				When voting and engaging with companies in global markets, we consider market-specific nuances in the manner that we believe will most likely protect and promote the long-term economic value of client investments. We expect companies to observe the relevant laws and regulations of their respective markets, as well as country specific best practice guidelines and corporate governance codes. We may hold companies in some markets to our global standards when we feel that a country’s regulatory requirements do not address some of the key philosophical principles that we believe are fundamental to our global voting principles.

				In our analysis and research into corporate governance issues in North America, we expect all companies to act in a transparent manner and to provide detailed disclosure on board profiles, related-party transactions, executive compensation, and other governance issues that impact shareholders’ long-term interests. Further, as a founding member of the Investor Stewardship Group (“ISG”), we proactively monitor companies’ adherence to the Corporate Governance Principles for US listed companies (the “Principles”). Consistent with the “comply-or-explain” expectations established by the Principles, we encourage companies to proactively disclose their level of compliance with the Principles. In instances of non-compliance, and when companies cannot explain the nuances of their governance structure effectively, either publicly or through engagement, we may vote against the independent board leader.

State Street Global Advisors’ Proxy Voting and Engagement Philosophy				In our view, corporate governance and sustainability issues are an integral part of the investment process. The Asset Stewardship Team consists of investment professionals with expertise in corporate governance, remuneration, accounting, and environmental and social issues. We have established robust corporate governance principles and practices that are backed with extensive analytical expertise to understand the complexities of the corporate governance landscape. We engage with companies to provide insight on the principles and practices that drive our voting decisions. We also conduct proactive engagements to address significant shareholder concerns and issues in a manner consistent with maximizing shareholder value.

				The team works alongside members of State Street Global Advisors’ Active Fundamental and various other investment teams, collaborating on issuer engagements and providing input on company-specific fundamentals.

C-76

LOGO



Directors and Boards				Principally, a board acts on behalf of shareholders by protecting their interests and preserving their rights. In order to carry out their primary responsibilities, directors have to undertake activities that range from setting strategy and providing guidance on strategic matters, overseeing executive management, to selecting the CEO and other senior executives, creating a succession plan for the board and management, and providing effective risk oversight, including of risks related to sustainability issues. Further, good corporate governance necessitates the existence of effective internal controls and risk management systems, which should be governed by the board.

				State Street Global Advisors believes that a well-constituted board of directors, with a balance of skills, expertise, and independence, provides the foundations for a well-governed company. We view board quality as a measure of director independence, director succession planning, board diversity, evaluations and refreshment, and company governance practices. We vote for the (re-)election of directors on a case-by-case basis after considering various factors, including board quality, general market practice, and availability of information on director skills and expertise.

				In our analysis of boards, we consider whether board members have adequate skills to provide effective oversight of corporate strategy, operations, and risks, including environmental and social issues. Boards should also have a regular evaluation process in place to assess the effectiveness of the board and the skills of board members to address issues, such as emerging risks, changes to corporate strategy, and diversification of operations and geographic footprint.

				In principle, we believe independent directors are crucial to robust corporate governance and help management establish sound corporate governance policies and practices. We believe a sufficiently independent board will most effectively monitor management and perform oversight functions necessary to protect shareholder interests.

				Director-related proposals include issues submitted to shareholders that deal with the composition of the board or with members of a corporation’s board of directors. In deciding the director nominee to support, we consider numerous factors.

Director Elections				Our director election guideline focuses on companies’ governance profile to identify if a company demonstrates appropriate governance practices or if it exhibits negative governance practices. Factors we consider when evaluating governance practices include, but are not limited to the following:

				• Shareholder rights

				• Board independence

				• Board structure

C-77

LOGO



				If a company demonstrates appropriate governance practices, we believe a director should be classified as independent based upon the relevant listing standards or local market practice standards. In such cases, the composition of the key oversight committees of a board should meet the minimum standards of independence. Accordingly, we may vote against a nominee at a company with appropriate governance practices if the director is classified as non-independent under relevant listing standards or local market practice and serves on a key committee of the board (compensation, audit, nominating, or committees required to be fully independent by local market standards).

				Conversely, if a company demonstrates negative governance practices, State Street Global Advisors believes the classification standards for director independence should be elevated. In such circumstances, we will evaluate all director nominees based upon the following classification standards:

				• Is the nominee an employee of or related to an employee of the issuer or its auditor?

				• Does the nominee provide professional services to the issuer?

				• Has the nominee attended an appropriate number of board meetings?

				• Has the nominee received non-board related compensation from the issuer?

				In the US market where companies demonstrate negative governance practices, these stricter standards will apply not only to directors who are a member of a key committee but to all directors on the board as market practice permits. Accordingly, we may vote against a nominee (with the exception of the CEO) where the board has inappropriate governance practices and is considered not independent based on the above independence criteria.

				Additionally, we may withhold votes from directors based on the following:

				• Overall average board tenure is excessive. In assessing excessive tenure, we consider factors such as the preponderance of long tenured directors, board refreshment practices, and classified board structures

				• Directors attend less than 75 percent of board meetings without appropriate explanation or providing reason for their failure to meet the attendance threshold

				• Directors of companies that have not been responsive to a shareholder proposal that received a majority shareholder support at the last annual or special meeting

				• Consideration can be warranted if management submits the proposal(s) on the ballot as a binding management proposal, recommending shareholders vote for the particular proposal(s)

C-78

LOGO



				• Directors of companies have unilaterally adopted/ amended company bylaws that negatively impact our shareholder rights (such as fee-shifting, forum selection, and exclusion service bylaws) without putting such amendments to a shareholder vote

				• Compensation committee members where there is a weak relationship between executive pay and performance over a five-year period

				• Audit committee members if non-audit fees exceed 50 percent of total fees paid to the auditors

				• Directors who appear to have been remiss in their duties

				Board Gender Diversity

				We expect boards of all listed companies to have at least one female board member and the boards of Russell 3000 companies to be composed of at least 30 percent women directors. If a company does not meet the applicable expectation, State Street Global Advisors may vote against the Chair of the board’s nominating committee or the board leader in the absence of a nominating committee. Additionally, if a company does not meet the applicable expectation for three consecutive years, State Street Global Advisors may vote against all incumbent members of the nominating committee or those persons deemed responsible for the nomination process.

				We may waive this voting guideline if a company engages with State Street Global Advisors and provides a specific, timebound plan for either reaching the 30-percent threshold (Russell 3000) or for adding a woman director (non-Russell 3000).

				Board Racial/Ethnic Diversity

				We believe effective board oversight of a company’s long-term business strategy necessitates a diversity of perspectives, especially in terms of gender, race and ethnicity. If a company in the Russell 1000 does not disclose, at minimum, the gender, racial and ethnic composition of its board, we may vote against the Chair of the nominating committee. We may withhold support from the Chair of the nominating committee also when a company in the S&P 500 does not have at least one director from an underrepresented racial/ethnic community on its board.

				Workforce Diversity

				We may vote against the Chair of the compensation committee at companies in the S&P 500 that do not disclose their EEO-1 reports. Acceptable disclosures include:

				• The original EEO-1 report response

				• The exact content of the report translated into custom graphics

C-79

LOGO



				Director Time Commitments

				When voting on the election or re-election of a director, we also consider the number of outside board directorships that a non-executive and an executive may undertake. Thus, State Street Global Advisors may take voting action against a director who exceeds the number of board mandates listed below:

				• Named Executive Officers (NEOs) of a public company who sit on more than two public company boards

				• Non-executive board chairs or lead independent directors who sit on more than three public company boards

				• Director nominees who sit on more than four public company boards

				For non-executive board chairs/lead independent directors and director nominees who hold excessive commitments, as defined above, we may consider waiving our policy and vote in support of a director if a company discloses its director commitment policy in a publicly available manner (e.g., corporate governance guidelines, proxy statement, company website). This policy or associated disclosure must include:

				• A numerical limit on public company board seats a director can serve on

				– This limit cannot exceed our policy by more than one seat

				• Consideration of public company board leadership positions (e.g., Committee Chair)

				• Affirmation that all directors are currently compliant with the company policy

				• Description of an annual policy review process undertaken by the Nominating Committee to evaluate outside director time commitments

				If a director is imminently leaving a board and this departure is disclosed in a written, time-bound and publicly-available manner, we may consider waiving our withhold vote when evaluating the director for excessive time commitments.

				Service on a mutual fund board, the board of a UK investment trust or a Special Purpose Acquisition Company (SPAC) board is not considered when evaluating directors for excessive commitments. However, we do expect these roles to be considered by nominating committees when evaluating director time commitments.

				Climate-related Disclosures

				State Street Global Advisors finds that the recommendations of the Taskforce on Climate-related Financial Disclosures (TCFD) provide the most effective framework for disclosure of climate-related risks and opportunities.

C-80

LOGO



				As such, we may take voting action against companies in the S&P 500 and S&P/TSX Composite that fail to provide sufficient disclosure regarding climate-related risks and opportunities related to that company, or board oversight of climate-related risks and opportunities, in accordance with the TCFD framework.

Director-Related Proposals				We generally vote for the following director-related proposals:

				• Discharge of board members’ duties, in the absence of pending litigation, regulatory investigation, charges of fraud, or other indications of significant concern

				• Proposals to restore shareholders’ ability in order to remove directors with or without cause

				• Proposals that permit shareholders to elect directors to fill board vacancies

				• Shareholder proposals seeking disclosure regarding the company, board, or compensation committee’s use of compensation consultants, such as company name, business relationship(s), and fees paid

				We generally vote against the following director-related proposals:

				• Requirements that candidates for directorships own large amounts of stock before being eligible to be elected

				• Proposals that relate to the “transaction of other business as properly comes before the meeting,” which extend “blank check” powers to those acting as proxy

				• Proposals requiring two candidates per board seat

Majority Voting				We will generally support a majority vote standard based on votes cast for the election of directors.

				We will generally vote to support amendments to bylaws that would require simple majority of voting shares (i.e. shares cast) to pass or to repeal certain provisions.

Annual Elections				We generally support the establishment of annual elections of the board of directors. Consideration is given to the overall level of board independence and the independence of the key committees, as well as the existence of a shareholder rights plan.

Cumulative Voting				We do not support cumulative voting structures for the election of directors.

C-81

LOGO



Separation Chair/CEO				We analyze proposals for the separation of Chair/CEO on a case-by-case basis taking into consideration numerous factors, including the appointment of and role played by a lead director, a company’s performance, and the overall governance structure of the company.

				However, we may take voting action against the chair or members of the nominating committee at S&P 500 companies that have combined the roles of chair and CEO and have not appointed a lead independent director.

Proxy Access				In general, we believe that proxy access is a fundamental right and an accountability mechanism for all long-term shareholders. We will consider proposals relating to proxy access on a case-by-case basis. We will support shareholder proposals that set parameters to empower long-term shareholders while providing management the flexibility to design a process that is appropriate for the company’s circumstances.
				We will review the terms of all other proposals and will support those proposals that have been introduced in the spirit of enhancing shareholder rights.

				Considerations include the following: • The ownership thresholds and holding duration proposed in the resolution • The binding nature of the proposal • The number of directors that shareholders may be able to nominate each year • Company governance structure • Shareholder rights • Board performance

Age/Term Limits				Generally, we may vote against age and term limits unless the company is found to have poor board refreshment and director succession practices, and has a preponderance of non-executive directors with excessively long tenures serving on the board.

Approve Remuneration of Directors				Generally, we will support directors’ compensation, provided the amounts are not excessive relative to other issuers in the market or industry. In making our determination, we review whether the compensation is overly dilutive to existing shareholders.

C-82

LOGO



Indemnification				Generally, we support proposals to limit directors’ liability and/or expand indemnification and liability protection if he or she has not acted in bad faith, gross negligence, or reckless disregard of the duties involved in the conduct of his or her office.

Classified Boards				We generally support annual elections for the board of directors.

Confidential Voting				We will support confidential voting.

Board Size				We will support proposals seeking to fix the board size or designate a range for the board size and will vote against proposals that give management the ability to alter the size of the board outside of a specified range without shareholder approval.

Board Responsiveness				We may vote against the re-election of members of the compensation committee if we have serious concerns about remuneration practices and if the company has not been responsive to shareholder pressure to review its approach. In addition, if the level of dissent against a management proposal on executive pay is consistently high, and we have determined that a vote against a pay-related proposal is warranted in the third consecutive year, we may vote against the Chair of the compensation committee.



Shareholder Rights

Virtual/Hybrid Shareholder Meetings				As a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, companies are increasingly conducting their shareholder meetings in a virtual or hybrid format. While we are encouraged by the success of virtual and hybrid shareholder meetings, companies and shareholders must remain vigilant in continuing to improve their virtual shareholder meeting practices.

				Recognizing the success of virtual and hybrid shareholder meetings and a shifting regulatory environment, we will generally support proposals that grant boards the right to hold shareholder meetings in a virtual or hybrid format as long as companies uphold the following best practices:

				• Afford virtual attendee shareholders the same rights as would normally be granted to in-person attendee shareholders

				• Commit to time-bound renewal (five years or less) of meeting format authorization by shareholders

				• Provide a written record of all questions posed during the meeting, and

C-83

LOGO



				• Comply with local market laws and regulations relating to virtual and hybrid shareholder meeting practices

				If a company breaches of any of the criteria above, we may vote against the Chair of the nominating committee.

Accounting and Audit-Related Issues

Ratifying Auditors and Approving Auditor Compensation				We support the approval of auditors and auditor compensation provided that the issuer has properly disclosed audit and non-audit fees relative to market practice and the audit fees are not deemed excessive. We deem audit fees to be excessive if the non-audit fees for the prior year constituted 50 percent or more of the total fees paid to the auditor. We will also support the disclosure of auditor and consulting relationships when the same or related entities are conducting both activities and will support the establishment of a selection committee responsible for the final approval of significant management consultant contract awards where existing firms are already acting in an auditing function.

				In circumstances where “other” fees include fees related to initial public offerings, bankruptcy emergence, and spin-offs, and the company makes public disclosure of the amount and nature of those fees which are determined to be an exception to the standard “non-audit fee” category, then such fees may be excluded from the non-audit fees considered in determining the ratio of non-audit to audit/audit-related fees/tax compliance and preparation for purposes of determining whether non-audit fees are excessive.

				We will support the discharge of auditors and requirements that auditors attend the annual meeting of shareholders.

				Approval of Financial Statements

				We believe the disclosure and availability of reliable financial statements in a timely manner is imperative for the investment process. We expect external auditors to provide assurance of a company’s financial condition. Hence, we may vote against the approval of financial statements if i) they have not been disclosed or audited; ii) the auditor opinion is qualified/adverse, or the auditor has issued a disclaimer of opinion; or iii) the auditor opinion is not disclosed.

Capital Structure				Capital structure proposals include requests by management for approval of amendments to the certificate of incorporation that will alter the capital structure of the company.

C-84

LOGO



				The most common request is for an increase in the number of authorized shares of common stock, usually in conjunction with a stock split or dividend. Typically, we support requests that are not unreasonably dilutive or enhance the rights of common shareholders. In considering authorized share proposals, the typical threshold for approval is 100percent over current authorized shares. However, the threshold may be increased if the company offers a specific need or purpose (merger, stock splits, growth purposes, etc.). All proposals are evaluated on a case-by-case basis taking into account the company’s specific financial situation.

Increase in Authorized Common Shares				In general, we support share increases for general corporate purposes up to 100 percent of current authorized stock.
				We support increases for specific corporate purposes up to 100 percent of the specific need plus 50 percent of current authorized common stock for US and Canadian firms. When applying the thresholds, we will also consider the nature of the specific need, such as mergers and acquisitions and stock splits.

Increase in Authorized Preferred Shares				We vote on a case-by-case basis on proposals to increase the number of preferred shares.
				Generally, we will vote for the authorization of preferred stock in cases where the company specifies the voting, dividend, conversion, and other rights of such stock and the terms of the preferred stock appear reasonable.
				We will support proposals to create “declawed” blank check preferred stock (stock that cannot be used as a takeover defense). However, we may vote against proposals to increase the number of blank check preferred stock authorized for issuance when no shares have been issued or reserved for a specific purpose.

Unequal Voting Rights				We will not support proposals authorizing the creation of new classes of common stock with superior voting rights and may vote against new classes of preferred stock with unspecified voting, conversion, dividend distribution, and other rights. In addition, we will not support capitalization changes that add “blank check” classes of stock (i.e. classes of stock with undefined voting rights) or classes that dilute the voting interests of existing shareholders.

				However, we will support capitalization changes that eliminate other classes of stock and/ or unequal voting rights.

Reorganization and Mergers				The reorganization of the structure of a company or mergers often involve proposals relating to reincorporation, restructurings, liquidations, and other major changes to the corporation.

C-85

LOGO



				Proposals that are in the best interests of the shareholders, demonstrated by enhancing share value or improving the effectiveness of the company’s operations, will be supported.
				In general, provisions that are not viewed as economically sound or are thought to be destructive to shareholders’ rights are not supported.
				We will generally support transactions that maximize shareholder value. Some of the considerations include the following:
				• Offer premium
				• Strategic rationale
				• Board oversight of the process for the recommended transaction, including, director and/ or management conflicts of interest
				• Offers made at a premium and where there are no other higher bidders
				• Offers in which the secondary market price is substantially lower than the net asset value

				We may vote against a transaction considering the following:
				• Offers with potentially damaging consequences for minority shareholders because of illiquid stock, especially in some non-US markets
				• Offers where we believe there is a reasonable prospect for an enhanced bid or other bidders
				• The current market price of the security exceeds the bid price at the time of voting

Anti-Takeover Issues				Typically, these are proposals relating to requests by management to amend the certificate of incorporation or bylaws to add or to delete a provision that is deemed to have an anti-takeover effect. The majority of these proposals deal with management’s attempt to add some provision that makes a hostile takeover more difficult or will protect incumbent management in the event of a change in control of the company.
				Proposals that reduce shareholders’ rights or have the effect of entrenching incumbent management may not be supported.
				Proposals that enhance the right of shareholders to make their own choices as to the desirability of a merger or other proposal are supported.

C-86

LOGO



Shareholder Rights Plans				US: We will support mandates requiring shareholder approval of a shareholder rights plans (“poison pill”) and repeals of various anti-takeover related provisions.

				In general, we may vote against the adoption or renewal of a US issuer’s shareholder rights plan (“poison pill”).
				We will vote for an amendment to a shareholder rights plan (“poison pill”) where the terms of the new plans are more favorable to shareholders’ ability to accept unsolicited offers (i.e. if one of the following conditions are met: (i) minimum trigger, flip-in or flip-over of 20 percent, (ii) maximum term of three years, (iii) no “dead hand,” “slow hand,” “no hand” nor similar feature that limits the ability of a future board to redeem the pill, and (iv) inclusion of a shareholder redemption feature (qualifying offer clause), permitting ten percent of the shares to call a special meeting or seek a written consent to vote on rescinding the pill if the board refuses to redeem the pill 90 days after a qualifying offer is announced).
				Canada: We analyze proposals for shareholder approval of a shareholder rights plan (“poison pill”) on a case-by-case basis taking into consideration numerous factors, including but not limited to, whether it conforms to ‘new generation’ rights plans and the scope of the plan.

Special Meetings				We will vote for shareholder proposals related to special meetings at companies that do not provide shareholders the right to call for a special meeting in their bylaws if:
				• The company also does not allow shareholders to act by written consent
				• The company allows shareholders to act by written consent but the ownership threshold for acting by written consent is set above 25 percent of outstanding shares
				We will vote for shareholder proposals related to special meetings at companies that give shareholders (with a minimum 10 percent ownership threshold) the right to call for a special meeting in their bylaws if:
				• The current ownership threshold to call for a special meeting is above 25 percent of outstanding shares
				We will vote for management proposals related to special meetings.

Written Consent				We will vote for shareholder proposals on written consent at companies if:
				• The company does not have provisions in their bylaws giving shareholders the right to call for a special meeting

C-87

LOGO



				• The company allows shareholders the right to call for a special meeting, but the current ownership threshold to call for a special meeting is above 25percent of outstanding shares
				• The company has a poor governance profile

				We will vote management proposals on written consent on a case-by-case basis.

Super-Majority				We will generally vote against amendments to bylaws requiring super-majority shareholder votes to pass or repeal certain provisions. We will vote for the reduction or elimination of super-majority vote requirements, unless management of the issuer was concurrently seeking to or had previously made such a reduction or elimination.

Compensation				Despite the differences among the types of plans and the awards possible there is a simple underlying philosophy that guides the analysis of all compensation plans; namely, the terms of the plan should be designed to provide an incentive for executives and/or employees to align their interests with those of the shareholders and thus work toward enhancing shareholder value. Plans that benefit participants only when the shareholders also benefit are those most likely to be supported.

Advisory Vote on Executive Compensation and Frequency				State Street Global Advisors believes executive compensation plays a critical role in aligning executives’ interest with shareholders’, attracting, retaining and incentivizing key talent, and ensuring positive correlation between the performance achieved by management and the benefits derived by shareholders. We support management proposals on executive compensation where there is a strong relationship between executive pay and performance over a five-year period. We seek adequate disclosure of various compensation elements, absolute and relative pay levels, peer selection and benchmarking, the mix of long-term and short-term incentives, alignment of pay structures with shareholder interests as well as with corporate strategy, and performance. Further shareholders should have the opportunity to assess whether pay structures and levels are aligned with business performance on an annual basis.

				In Canada, where advisory votes on executive compensation are not commonplace, we will rely primarily upon engagement to evaluate compensation plans.

Employee Equity Award Plans				We consider numerous criteria when examining equity award proposals. Generally we do not vote against plans for lack of performance or vesting criteria. Rather the main criteria that will result in a vote against an equity award plan are:

C-88

LOGO



				Excessive voting power dilution To assess the dilutive effect, we divide the number of shares required to fully fund the proposed plan, the number of authorized but unissued shares and the issued but unexercised shares by the fully diluted share count. We review that number in light of certain factors, such as the industry of the issuer.

				Historical option grants Excessive historical option grants over the past three years. Plans that provide for historical grant patterns of greater than five to eight percent are generally not supported.

				Repricing We may vote against any plan where repricing is expressly permitted. If a company has a history of repricing underwater options, the plan will not be supported.

				Other criteria include the following:

				• Number of participants or eligible employees

				• The variety of awards possible

				• The period of time covered by the plan

				There are numerous factors that we view as negative. If combined they may result in a vote against a proposal. Factors include:

				• Grants to individuals or very small groups of participants

				• “Gun-jumping” grants which anticipate shareholder approval of a plan or amendment

				• The power of the board to exchange “underwater” options without shareholder approval. This pertains to the ability of a company to reprice options, not the actual act of repricing described above

				• Below market rate loans to officers to exercise their options

				• The ability to grant options at less than fair market value;

				• Acceleration of vesting automatically upon a change in control

				• Excessive compensation (i.e. compensation plans which we deem to be overly dilutive)

				Share Repurchases If a company makes a clear connection between a share repurchase program and its intent to offset dilution created from option plans and the company fully discloses the amount of shares being repurchased, the voting dilution calculation may be adjusted to account for the impact of the buy back.

C-89

LOGO



				Companies will not have any such repurchase plan factored into the dilution calculation if they do not (i) clearly state the intentions of any proposed share buy-back plan, (ii) disclose a definitive number of the shares to be bought back, (iii) specify the range of premium/discount to market price at which a company can repurchase shares, and (iv) disclose the time frame during which the shares will be bought back.

				162(m) Plan Amendments If a plan would not normally meet our criteria described above, but was primarily amended to add specific performance criteria to be used with awards that were designed to qualify for performance-based exception from the tax deductibility limitations of Section 162(m) of the Internal Revenue Code, then we will support the proposal to amend the plan.

Employee Stock Option Plans				We generally vote for stock purchase plans with an exercise price of not less than 85 percent of fair market value. However, we take market practice into consideration.

Compensation-Related Items				We generally support the following proposals:
				• Expansions to reporting of financial or compensation-related information within reason

				• Proposals requiring the disclosure of executive retirement benefits if the issuer does not have an independent compensation committee

				We generally vote against the following proposal:

				• Retirement bonuses for non-executive directors and auditors

Miscellaneous/ Routine Items				We generally support the following miscellaneous/routine governance items:
				• Reimbursement of all appropriate proxy solicitation expenses associated with the election when voting in conjunction with support of a dissident slate

				• Opting-out of business combination provision

				• Proposals that remove restrictions on the right of shareholders to act independently of management

				• Liquidation of the company if the company will file for bankruptcy if the proposal is not approved

				• Shareholder proposals to put option repricings to a shareholder vote

				• General updating of, or corrective amendments to, charter and bylaws not otherwise specifically addressed herein, unless such amendments would reasonably be expected to diminish shareholder rights (e.g. extension of directors’ term limits, amending shareholder vote requirement to amend the charter documents, insufficient information provided as to the reason behind the amendment)

C-90

LOGO



				• Change in corporation name

				• Mandates that amendments to bylaws or charters have shareholder approval

				• Management proposals to change the date, time, and/or location of the annual meeting unless the proposed change is unreasonable • Repeals, prohibitions or adoption of anti-greenmail provisions • Management proposals to implement a reverse stock split when the number of authorized shares will be proportionately reduced and proposals to implement a reverse stock split to avoid delisting

				• Exclusive forum provisions

				State Street Global Advisors generally does not support the following miscellaneous/ routine governance items:

				• Proposals requesting companies to adopt full tenure holding periods for their executives

				• Reincorporation to a location that we believe has more negative attributes than its current location of incorporation

				• Shareholder proposals to change the date, time, and/or location of the annual meeting unless the current scheduling or location is unreasonable

				• Proposals to approve other business when it appears as a voting item

				• Proposals giving the board exclusive authority to amend the bylaws

				• Proposals to reduce quorum requirements for shareholder meetings below a majority of the shares outstanding unless there are compelling reasons to support the proposal

Risk Management				We believe that risk management is a key function of the board, which is responsible for setting the overall risk appetite of a company and for providing oversight on the risk management process established by senior executives at a company. We allow boards to have discretion regarding the ways in which they provide oversight in this area. However, we expect companies to disclose how the board provides oversight on its risk management system and risk identification. Boards should also review existing and emerging risks that evolve in tandem with the changing political and economic landscape or as companies diversify or expand their operations into new areas.

				As responsible stewards, we believe in the importance of effective risk management and oversight of issues that are material to a company. To effectively assess the risk of our clients’ portfolios and the broader market, we expect our portfolio companies to manage risks and opportunities that are

C-91

LOGO



				material and industry-specific and that have a demonstrated link to long-term value creation, and to provide high-quality disclosure of this process to shareholders. Consistent with this perspective, we may seek to engage with our portfolio companies to better understand how their boards are overseeing risks and opportunities the company has deemed to be material to its business or operations. If we believe a company has failed to implement and communicate effective oversight of these risks, we may consider voting against the directors responsible.

Environmental and Social Issues				As a fiduciary, State Street Global Advisors takes a comprehensive approach to engaging with our portfolio companies about material environmental and social factors. Our Asset Stewardship program prioritization process allows us to proactively identify companies for engagement and voting in order to mitigate sustainability risks in our portfolio. Through engagement, we aim to build long-term relationships with the issuers in which we invest on behalf of our clients and to address a broad range of topics relating to the promotion of long-term shareholder value creation. When voting, we fundamentally consider whether the adoption of a shareholder proposal addressing an environmental or social topic material to the company would promote long-term shareholder value in the context of the company’s existing practices and disclosures as well as existing market practice.

				For more information on our approach to environmental and social issues, please see our Global Proxy Voting and Engagement Guidelines for Environmental and Social Factors, available at ssga.com/about-us/asset-stewardship.html.

About State Street Global Advisors				For four decades, State Street Global Advisors has served the world’s governments, institutions and financial advisors. With a rigorous, risk-aware approach built on research, analysis and market-tested experience, we build from a breadth of index and active strategies to create cost-effective solutions. And, as pioneers in index, ETF, and ESG investing, we are always inventing new ways to invest. As a result, we have become the world’s fourth-largest asset manager* with US $3.48 trillion^†under our care.

				* Pensions & Investments Research Center, as of December 31, 2021. ^† This figure is presented as of December 31, 2022 and includes approximately $58.60 billion USD of assets with respect to SPDR products for which State Street Global Advisors Funds Distributors, LLC (SSGA FD) acts solely as the marketing agent. SSGA FD and State Street Global Advisors are affiliated. Please note all AUM is unaudited.

C-92

LOGO

ssga.com

Marketing communications

State Street Global Advisors Worldwide Entities

number 49934, authorised and regulated by the Central Bank of Ireland, and whose registered office is at 78 Sir John Rogerson’s Quay, Dublin 2. Canada: State Street Global Advisors, Ltd., 1981 McGill College Avenue, Suite 500, Montreal, Qc, H3A 3A8, T: +514 282 2400 and 30 Adelaide Street East Suite 800, Toronto, Ontario M5C 3G6. T: +647 775 5900. France: State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, France Branch (“State Street Global Advisors France”) is a branch of State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, registered in Ireland with company number 49934, authorised and regulated by the Central Bank of Ireland, and whose registered office is at 78 Sir John Rogerson’s Quay, Dublin 2. State Street Global Advisors France is registered in France with company number RCS Nanterre 899 183 289, and its office is located at Coeur Défense — Tour A — La Défense 4, 33e étage, 100, Esplanade du Général de Gaulle, 92 931 Paris La Défense Cedex, France. T: +33 1 44 45 40 00. F: +33 1 44 45 41 92. Germany: State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, Branch in Germany, Brienner Strasse 59, D-80333 Munich, Germany (“State Street Global Advisors Germany”). T: +49 (0)89 55878 400. State Street Global Advisors Germany is a branch of State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, registered in Ireland with company number 49934, authorised and regulated by the Central

Bank of Ireland, and whose registered office is at 78 Sir John Rogerson’s Quay, Dublin 2. Hong Kong: State Street Global Advisors Asia Limited, 68/F, Two International Finance Centre, 8 Finance Street, Central, Hong Kong. T: +852 2103-0288. F: +852 2103-0200. Ireland: State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited is regulated by the Central Bank of Ireland. Registered office address 78 Sir John Rogerson’s Quay, Dublin 2. Registered Number: 49934. T: +353 (0)1 776 3000. F: +353 (0)1 776 3300. Italy: State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, Italy Branch (“State Street Global Advisors Italy”) is a branch of State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, registered in Ireland with company number 49934, authorised and regulated by the Central Bank of Ireland, and whose registered office is at 78 Sir John Rogerson’s Quay, Dublin 2. State Street Global Advisors Italy is registered in Italy with company number 11871450968 — REA: 2628603 and VAT number 11871450968, and its office is located at Via Ferrante Aporti, 10 -20125 Milan, Italy. T: +39 02 32066 100. F: +39 02 32066 155. Japan: State Street Global Advisors (Japan) Co., Ltd., Toranomon Hills Mori Tower 25F 1-23-1 Toranomon, Minato-ku, Tokyo 105-6325 Japan. T: +81-3-4530-7380. Financial Instruments Business Operator, Kanto Local Financial Bureau (Kinsho #345), Membership: Japan Investment Advisers Association, The Investment

C-93

LOGO

Investing involves risk including the risk of loss of principal.

The whole or any part of this work may not be reproduced, copied or transmitted or any of its contents disclosed to third parties without SSGA’s express written consent.

reliability or completeness of, nor liability for, decisions based on such information and it should not be relied on as such.

investing in industry sectors or securities which underperform the market as a whole.

This communication is directed at professional clients (this includes eligible counterparties as defined by

the appropriate EU regulator who are deemed both knowledgeable and experienced in matters relating to investments. The products and services to which this communication relates are only available to such persons and persons of any other description (including retail clients) should not rely on this communication.

The information contained in this communication is not a research recommendation or ‘investment research’ and is classified as a

Exp. Date: 03/31/2024

C-94

LOGO

March 2023

Rest of the World

Proxy Voting and Engagement Guidelines

State Street Global Advisors’ Proxy Voting and Engagement Guidelinesⁱ for the Rest of the World outline our approach to voting and engaging with companies listed on stock exchanges in international markets not covered under specific country/regional Guidelines. These Guidelines complement and should be read in conjunction with State Street Global Advisors’ Global Proxy Voting and Engagement Principles, which outline our overall approach to voting and engaging with companies, and State Street Global Advisors’ Conflicts Mitigation Guidelines, which provide information about managing the conflicts of interests that may arise through State Street Global Advisors’ proxy voting and engagement activities.

C-95

LOGO



				At State Street Global Advisors, we recognize that markets not covered under specific country/regional guidelines, specifically emerging markets, are disparate in their corporate governance frameworks and practices. While they tend to pose broad common governance issues, such as concentrated ownership, poor disclosure of financial and related-party transactions, and weak enforcement of rules and regulation, our Guidelines are designed to identify and to address specific governance concerns across the markets. We also evaluate the various factors that contribute to the corporate governance framework of a country. These factors include, but are not limited to: (i) the macroeconomic conditions and broader political system in a country; (ii) quality of regulatory oversight, enforcement of property and shareholder rights; and (iii) the independence of judiciary.

				When voting and engaging with companies in global markets, we consider market-specific nuances in the manner that we believe will most likely protect and promote the long-term economic value of client investments. We expect all companies to observe the relevant laws and regulations of their respective markets, as well as any country-specific best practice guidelines and corporate governance codes. We may hold companies in some markets to our global standards when we feel that a country’s regulatory requirements do not address some of the key philosophical principles that we believe are fundamental to our global voting principles.

				State Street Global Advisors’ Proxy Voting and Engagement Guidelines for the Rest of the World address our approaches to topics including directors and boards, accounting and audit-related issues, capital structure, reorganization and mergers, remuneration, and other governance-related issues.

State Street Global Advisors’ Proxy Voting and Engagement Philosophy in Emerging Markets				State Street Global Advisors’ approach to proxy voting and issuer engagement in emerging markets is designed to increase the value of our clients’ investments through the mitigation of governance risks. The overall quality of the corporate governance framework in an emerging market country drives the level of governance risks investors assign to a country. Thus, improving the macro governance framework in a country may help to reduce governance risks and to increase the overall value of our clients’ holdings over time. In order to improve the overall governance framework and practices in a country, members of our Asset Stewardship Team endeavor to engage with representatives from regulatory agencies and stock markets to highlight potential concerns with the macro governance framework of a country. To help mitigate company-specific risk, the State Street Global Advisors Asset Stewardship Team works alongside members of the Active Fundamental and emerging market specialists to engage with emerging market companies on governance issues and address any specific concerns, or to get more information regarding shareholder items that are to be voted on at upcoming shareholder meetings. This integrated approach to engagement drives our proxy voting and engagement philosophy in emerging markets.

C-96

LOGO



Directors and Boards				Principally, a board acts on behalf of shareholders by protecting their interests and preserving their rights. In order to carry out their primary responsibilities, directors have to undertake activities that range from setting strategy and providing guidance on strategic matters, overseeing executive management, to selecting the CEO and other senior executives, creating a succession plan for the board and management, and providing risk oversight, including of risks related to sustainability issues. Further, we believe good corporate governance necessitates the existence of effective internal controls and risk management systems, which should be governed by the board.

				We believe that a well-constituted board of directors, with a good balance of skills, expertise and independence, provides the foundation for a well-governed company. However, several factors, such as low overall independence level requirements by market regulators, poor biographical disclosure of director profiles, prevalence of related-party transactions, and the general resistance from controlling shareholders to increase board independence, render the election of directors as one of the most important fiduciary duties we perform in emerging market companies.

Board Independence				We vote for the (re-)election of directors on a case-by-case basis after considering various factors, including board quality, general market practice and availability of information on director skills and expertise. We expect companies to meet minimum overall board independence standards, as defined in a local corporate governance code or market practice. Therefore, in several countries, we may vote against certain non-independent directors if overall board independence levels do not meet market standards.

				Our broad criteria for director independence in emerging market companies include factors such as:

				• Participation in related-party transactions

				• Employment history with company

				• Relations with controlling shareholders and employees

				• Company classification of a director as non-independent

Board Committees				In some countries, market practice calls for the establishment of a board level audit committee. We believe an audit committee should be responsible for monitoring the integrity of the financial statements of a company and appointing external auditors. It should also monitor their qualifications, independence, effectiveness and resource levels. Based upon our desire to enhance the quality of financial and accounting oversight provided by independent directors, we expect that listed companies have an audit committee constituted of a majority of independent directors.

C-97

LOGO



Board Gender Diversity				We expect boards of listed companies in all markets and indices to have at least one female board member. If a company does not meet this expectation, State Street Global Advisors may vote against the Chair of the board’s nominating committee or the board leader in the absence of a nominating committee. Additionally, if a company does not meet this expectation for three consecutive years, State Street Global Advisors may vote against all incumbent members of the nominating committee or those persons deemed responsible for the nomination process.

				We may waive this voting guideline if a company engages with State Street Global Advisors and provides a specific, timebound plan for adding at least one woman to its board.

Board Responsiveness to High Dissent against Pay Proposals				Poorly structured executive compensation plans pose increasing reputational risk to companies. Ongoing high level of dissent against a company’s compensation proposals may indicate that the company is not receptive to investor concerns. If the level of dissent against a company’s remuneration report and/or remuneration policy is consistently high, and we have determined that a vote against a pay-related proposal is warranted in the third consecutive year, we may vote against the Chair of the remuneration committee.

Climate-related Disclosures				State Street Global Advisors finds that the recommendations of the Taskforce on Climate-related Financial Disclosures (TCFD) provide the most effective framework for disclosure of climate-related risks and opportunities.

				As such, we may take voting action against companies in the Hang Seng and Straits Times that fail to provide sufficient disclosure regarding climate-related risks and opportunities related to that company, or board oversight of climate-related risks and opportunities, in accordance with the TCFD framework.

Shareholder Rights

Virtual/Hybrid Shareholder Meetings				As a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, companies are increasingly conducting their shareholder meetings in a virtual or hybrid format. While we are encouraged by the success of virtual and hybrid shareholder meetings, companies and shareholders must remain vigilant in continuing to improve their virtual shareholder meeting practices.

				Recognizing the success of virtual and hybrid shareholder meetings and a shifting regulatory environment, we will generally support proposals that grant boards the right to hold shareholder meetings in a virtual or hybrid format as long as companies uphold the following best practices:

				• Afford virtual attendee shareholders the same rights as would normally be granted to in-person attendee shareholders

C-98

LOGO



				• Commit to time-bound renewal (five years or less) of meeting format authorization by shareholders

				• Provide a written record of all questions posed during the meeting, and

				• Comply with local market laws and regulations relating to virtual and hybrid shareholder meeting practices

				If a company breaches of any of the criteria above, we may vote against the Chair of the nominating committee.

Accounting and Audit-Related Issues				The disclosure and availability of reliable financial statements in a timely manner is imperative for the investment process. As a result, board oversight of internal controls and the independence of the audit process are essential if investors are to rely upon financial statements. We believe that audit committees provide the necessary oversight for the selection and appointment of auditors, the company’s internal controls and the accounting policies, and the overall audit process.

Appointment of External Auditors				We believe that a company’s auditor is an essential feature of an effective and transparent system of external supervision. Shareholders should be given the opportunity to vote on their appointment or re-appointment at the annual meeting. We believe that it is imperative for audit committees to select outside auditors who are independent from management.

Approval of Financial Statements				We believe the disclosure and availability of reliable financial statements in a timely manner is imperative for the investment process. We expect external auditors to provide assurance of a company’s financial condition. Hence, we may vote against the approval of financial statements if i) they have not been disclosed or audited; ii) the auditor opinion is qualified/adverse, or the auditor has issued a disclaimer of opinion; or iii) the auditor opinion is not disclosed.

				Capital Structure, Reorganization, and Mergers State Street Global Advisors believes that changes to a company’s capital structure, such as changes in authorized share capital, share repurchase and debt issuances, are critical decisions made by the board. We believe the company should have a business rationale that is consistent with corporate strategy and should not overly dilute its shareholders.

Related-Party Transactions				Most companies in emerging markets have a controlled ownership structure that often includes complex cross-shareholdings between subsidiaries and parent companies (“related companies”). As a result, there is a high prevalence of related-party transactions between the company and its various stakeholders, such as directors and management. In addition, inter-group loan and loan guarantees provided to related companies are some of the other

C-99

LOGO


				related-party transactions that increase the risk profile of companies. In markets where shareholders are required to approve such transactions, we expect companies to provide details about the transaction, such as its nature, value and purpose. This also encourages independent directors to ratify such transactions. Further, we encourage companies to describe the level of independent board oversight and the approval process, including details of any independent valuations provided by financial advisors on related-party transactions.

Share Repurchase Programs				With regard to share repurchase programs, we expect companies to clearly state the business purpose for the program and a definitive number of shares to be repurchased.

Mergers and Acquisitions				Mergers or reorganization of the structure of a company often involve proposals relating to reincorporation, restructurings, liquidations and other major changes to the corporation. Proposals that are in the best interest of the shareholders, demonstrated by enhancing share value or improving the effectiveness of the company’s operations, will be supported. In general, provisions that are not viewed as financially sound or are thought to be destructive to shareholders’ rights are not supported.

				We evaluate mergers and structural reorganizations on a case-by-case basis. We generally support transactions that maximize shareholder value. Some of the considerations include, but are not limited to, the following:

				• Offer premium

				• Strategic rationale

				• Board oversight of the process for the recommended transaction, including director and/ or management conflicts of interest

				• Offers made at a premium and where there are no other higher bidders

				• Offers in which the secondary market price is substantially lower than the net asset value

				We may vote against a transaction considering the following:

				• Offers with potentially damaging consequences for minority shareholders because of illiquid stock

				• Offers where we believe there is a reasonable prospect for an enhanced bid or other bidders

				• The current market price of the security exceeds the bid price at the time of voting

C-100

LOGO



				We will actively seek direct dialogue with the board and management of companies that we have identified through our screening processes. Such engagements may lead to further monitoring to ensure the company improves its governance or sustainability practices. In these cases, we believe the engagement process represents the most meaningful opportunity for State Street Global Advisors to protect long-term shareholder value from excessive risk due to poor governance and sustainability practices.

Compensation				We consider it to be the board’s responsibility to set appropriate levels of executive remuneration. Despite the differences among the types of plans and the potential awards, there is a simple underlying philosophy that guides our analysis of executive remuneration: there should be a direct relationship between executive compensation and company performance over the long term. In emerging markets, we encourage companies to disclose information on senior executive remuneration.

				Shareholders should have the opportunity to assess whether pay structures and levels are aligned with business performance. When assessing remuneration reports, we consider factors such as adequate disclosure of remuneration elements, absolute and relative pay levels, peer selection and benchmarking, the mix of long-term and short-term incentives, alignment of pay structures with shareholder interests, corporate strategy and performance. We may oppose remuneration reports where pay seems misaligned with shareholders’ interests. We may also vote against the re-election of members of the remuneration committee if we have serious concerns about remuneration practices and if the company has not been responsive to shareholder pressure to review its approach. With regard to director remuneration, we support director pay provided the amounts are not excessive relative to other issuers in the market or industry, and are not overly dilutive to existing shareholders.

Risk Management				We believe that risk management is a key function of the board, which is responsible for setting the overall risk appetite of a company and for providing oversight on the risk management process established by senior executives at a company. We allow boards to have discretion regarding the ways in which they provide oversight in this area. However, we expect companies to disclose how the board provides oversight on its risk management system and risk identification. Boards should also review existing and emerging risks that evolve in tandem with a changing political and economic landscape or as companies diversify or expand their operations into new areas.

				As responsible stewards, we believe in the importance of effective risk management and oversight of issues that are material to a company. To effectively assess the risk of our clients’ portfolios and the broader market, we expect our portfolio companies to manage risks and opportunities that are material and industry-specific and that have a demonstrated link to long-term value creation, and to provide high-quality disclosure of this process to shareholders.

C-101

LOGO



				Consistent with this perspective, we may seek to engage with our portfolio companies to better understand how their boards are overseeing risks and opportunities the company has deemed to be material to its business or operations. If we believe a company has failed to implement and communicate effective oversight of these risks, we may consider voting against the directors responsible.

Environmental and Social Issues				As a fiduciary, State Street Global Advisors takes a comprehensive approach to engaging with our portfolio companies about material environmental and social factors. Our Asset Stewardship program prioritization process allows us to proactively identify companies for engagement and voting in order to mitigate sustainability risks in our portfolio. Through engagement, we aim to build long-term relationships with the issuers in which we invest on behalf of our clients and to address a broad range of topics relating to the promotion of long-term shareholder value creation. When voting, we fundamentally consider whether the adoption of a shareholder proposal addressing an environmental or social topic material to the company would promote long-term shareholder value in the context of the company’s existing practices and disclosures as well as existing market practice.

				For more information on our approach to environmental and social issues, please see our Global Proxy Voting and Engagement Guidelines for Environmental and Social Factors, available at ssga.com/about-us/asset-stewardship.html.

General/Routine Issues				Some of the other issues that are routinely voted on in emerging markets include approving the allocation of income and accepting financial statements and statutory reports. For these voting items, our guidelines consider several factors, such as historical dividend payouts, pending litigation, governmental investigations, charges of fraud, or other indication of significant concerns.

About State Street Global Advisors				For four decades, State Street Global Advisors has served the world’s governments, institutions and financial advisors. With a rigorous, risk-aware approach built on research, analysis and market-tested experience, we build from a breadth of index and active strategies to create cost-effective solutions. And, as pioneers in index, ETF, and ESG investing, we are always inventing new ways to invest. As a result, we have become the world’s fourth-largest asset manager* with US $3.48 trillion^†under our care.

				* Pensions & Investments Research Center, as of December 31, 2021.
				^† This figure is presented as of December 31, 2022 and includes approximately $58.60 billion USD of assets with respect to SPDR products for which State Street Global Advisors Funds Distributors, LLC (SSGA FD) acts solely as the marketing agent. SSGA FD and State Street Global Advisors are affiliated. Please note all AUM is unaudited.

C-102

LOGO

ssga.com

Marketing communication

State Street Global Advisors Worldwide Entities

registered office is at 78 Sir John Rogerson’s Quay, Dublin 2. Canada: State Street Global Advisors, Ltd., 1981 McGill College Avenue, Suite 500, Montreal, Qc, H3A 3A8, T: +514 282 2400 and 30 Adelaide Street East Suite 800, Toronto, Ontario M5C 3G6. T: +647 775 5900. France: State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, France Branch (“State Street Global Advisors France”) is a branch of State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, registered in Ireland with company number 49934, authorised and regulated by the Central Bank of Ireland, and whose registered office is at 78 Sir John Rogerson’s Quay, Dublin 2. State Street Global Advisors France is registered in France with company number RCS Nanterre 899 183 289, and its office is located at Coeur Défense — Tour A —La Défense 4, 33e étage, 100, Esplanade du Général de Gaulle, 92 931 Paris La Défense Cedex, France. T: +33 1 44 45 40 00. F: +33 1 44 45 41 92. Germany: State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, Branch in Germany, Brienner Strasse 59, D-80333 Munich, Germany (“State Street Global Advisors Germany”). T: +49 (0)89 55878 400. State Street Global Advisors Germany is a branch of State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, registered in Ireland with company number 49934, authorised and regulated by the Central Bank of Ireland, and whose registered office is at 78 Sir John Rogerson’s Quay,

Dublin 2. Hong Kong: State Street Global Advisors Asia Limited, 68/F, Two International Finance Centre, 8 Finance Street, Central, Hong Kong. T: +852 2103-0288. F: +852 2103-0200. Ireland: State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited is regulated by the Central Bank of Ireland. Registered office address 78 Sir John Rogerson’s Quay, Dublin 2. Registered Number: 49934. T: +353 (0)1 776 3000. F: +353 (0)1 776 3300. Italy: State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, Italy Branch (“State Street Global Advisors Italy”) is a branch of State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, registered in Ireland with company number 49934, authorised and regulated by the Central Bank of Ireland, and whose registered office is at 78 Sir John Rogerson’s Quay, Dublin 2. State Street Global Advisors Italy is registered in Italy with company number 11871450968 —REA: 2628603 and VAT number 11871450968, and its office is located at Via Ferrante Aporti, 10 -20125 Milan, Italy. T: +39 02 32066 100. F: +39 02 32066 155. Japan: State Street Global Advisors (Japan) Co., Ltd., Toranomon Hills Mori Tower 25F 1-23-1 Toranomon, Minato-ku, Tokyo 105-6325 Japan. T: +81-3-4530-7380. Financial Instruments Business Operator, Kanto Local Financial Bureau (Kinsho #345), Membership: Japan Investment Advisers Association, The Investment Trust Association, Japan,

C-103

LOGO

Investing involves risk including the risk of loss of principal.

The whole or any part of this work may not be reproduced, copied or transmitted or any of its contents disclosed to third parties without SSGA’s express written consent.

of, nor liability for, decisions based on such information and it should not be relied on as such.

This communication is directed at professional clients (this includes eligible counterparties as defined by the appropriate

EU regulator who are deemed both knowledgeable and experienced in matters relating to investments. The products and services to which this communication relates are only available to such persons and persons of any other description (including retail clients) should not rely on this communication.

ID1482392-3479918.3.1.GBL.RTL 0323 Exp. Date: 03/31/2024

C-104

LOGO

March 2023

United Kingdom and Ireland

Proxy Voting and Engagement Guidelines

State Street Global Advisors’ Proxy Voting and Engagement Guidelinesⁱ for the United Kingdom and Ireland outline our approach to voting and engaging with companies listed on stock exchanges in the United Kingdom and Ireland. These Guidelines complement and should be read in conjunction with State Street Global Advisors’ Global Proxy Voting and Engagement Principles, which outline our overall approach to voting and engaging with companies, and State Street Global Advisors’ Conflicts Mitigation Guidelines, which provide information about managing the conflicts of interests that may arise through State Street Global Advisors’ proxy voting and engagement activities.

C-105

LOGO



				State Street Global Advisors’ Proxy Voting and Engagement Guidelines for the United Kingdom (“UK”) and Ireland address our market-specific approach to topics including directors and boards, accounting and audit-related issues, capital structure, reorganization and mergers, remuneration, and other governance-related issues.
				When voting and engaging with companies in global markets, we consider market-specific nuances in the manner that we believe will most likely protect and promote the long-term economic value of client investments. We expect companies to observe the relevant laws and regulations of their respective markets, as well as country-specific best practice guideliness and corporate governance codes. We may hold companies in some markets to our global standards when we feel that a country’s regulatory requirements do not address some of the key philosophical principles that we believe are fundamental to our global voting principles.
				In our analysis and research into corporate governance issues in the UK and Ireland, we expect all companies that obtain a primary listing on the London Stock Exchange or the Irish Stock Exchange, regardless of domicile, to comply with the UK Corporate Governance Code (the “Code”), and proactively monitor companies’ adherence to the Code. Consistent with the ‘comply or explain’ expectations established by the Code, we encourage companies to proactively disclose their level of compliance with the Code. In instances of non-compliance in which companies cannot explain the nuances of their governance structure effectively, either publicly or through engagement, we may vote against the independent board leader.

State Street Global Advisors’ Proxy Voting and Engagement Philosophy				In our view, corporate governance and sustainability issues are an integral part of the investment process. The Asset Stewardship Team consists of investment professionals with expertise in corporate governance, remuneration, accounting, and environmental and social issues. We have established robust corporate governance principles and practices that are backed with extensive analytical expertise to understand the complexities of the corporate governance landscape. We engage with companies to provide insight on the principles and practices that drive our voting decisions. We also conduct proactive engagement to address significant shareholder concerns and issues in a manner consistent with maximizing shareholder value.

				The team works alongside members of State Street Global Advisors’ Active Fundamental and Europe, Middle East and Africa (“EMEA”) investment teams, collaborating on issuer engagements and providing input on company-specific fundamentals.

C-106

LOGO



Directors and Boards				Principally, a board acts on behalf of shareholders by protecting their interests and preserving their rights. In order to carry out their primary responsibilities, directors have to undertake activities that range from setting strategy and providing guidance on strategic matters, overseeing executive management, to selecting the CEO and other senior executives, creating a succession plan for the board and management, and providing risk oversight, including of risks related to sustainability issues. Further, we believe good corporate governance necessitates the existence of effective internal controls and risk management systems, which should be governed by the board.
				We believe that a well-constituted board of directors, with a balance of skills, expertise and independence, provides the foundations for a well-governed company. We view board quality as a measure of director independence, director succession planning, board diversity, evaluations and refreshment, and company governance practices. We vote for the (re-)election of directors on a case-by-case basis after considering various factors, including board quality, general market practice, and availability of information on director skills and expertise.
				We may also consider board performance and directors who appear to be remiss in the performance of their oversight responsibilities when analyzing their suitability for reappointment (e.g. fraud, criminal wrongdoing and breach of fiduciary responsibilities).

Board Independence				In principle, we believe independent directors are crucial to robust corporate governance and help management establish sound corporate governance policies and practices. We believe a sufficiently independent board will most effectively monitor management and perform oversight functions necessary to protect shareholder interests.

				Our broad criteria for director independence for UK companies include factors such as:

				• Participation in related-party transactions and other business relations with the company

				• Employment history with company

				• Excessive tenure and a preponderance of long-tenured directors

				• Relations with controlling shareholders

				• Family ties with any of the company’s advisers, directors or senior employees

				• Company classification of a director as non-independent

C-107

LOGO



Director Attendance at Board Meetings				We also consider attendance at board meetings and may withhold votes from directors who attend less than 75 percent of board meetings in a given year without appropriate explanation or providing reason for their failure to meet the attendance threshold. In addition, we monitor other factors that may influence the independence of a non-executive director, such as performance-related pay, cross-directorships and significant shareholdings.

Classified Boards				We support the annual election of directors.

Separation Chair/CEO				While we are generally supportive of having the roles of chair and CEO separated in the UK market, we assess the division of responsibilities between chair and CEO on a case-by-case basis, giving consideration to factors such as the company’s specific circumstances, overall level of independence on the board and general corporate governance standards in the company. Similarly, we monitor for circumstances in which a combined chair/CEO is appointed or a former CEO becomes chair.

Board Committees				We believe companies should have committees for audit, remuneration and nomination oversight. The audit committee is responsible for monitoring the integrity of the financial statements of the company, the appointment of external auditors, auditor qualifications and independence, and effectiveness and resource levels. Similarly, executive pay is an important aspect of corporate governance, and it should be determined by the board of directors. We expect companies to have remuneration committees to provide independent oversight over executive pay. We may vote against nominees who are executive members of audit or remuneration committees.

				We consider whether board members have adequate skills to provide effective oversight of corporate strategy, operations and risks, including environmental and social issues. Boards should also have a regular evaluation process in place to assess the effectiveness of the board and the skills of board members to address issues such as emerging risks, changes to corporate strategy, and diversification of operations and geographic footprint. The nomination committee is responsible for evaluating and reviewing the balance of skills, knowledge, and experience of the board. It also ensures that adequate succession plans are in place for directors and the CEO. We may vote against the re-election of members of the nomination committee if, over time, the board has not addressed concerns over board structure or succession.

				Poorly structured executive compensation plans pose increasing reputational risk to companies. Ongoing high level of dissent against a company’s compensation proposals may indicate that the company is not receptive to investor concerns. If the level of dissent against a company’s remuneration report and/or remuneration policy is consistently high, and we have determined that a vote against a pay-related proposal is warranted in the third consecutive year, we may vote against the Chair of the remuneration committee.

C-108

LOGO



Board Gender Diversity				We expect boards of all listed companies to have at least one female board member and the boards of FTSE 350 companies to be composed of at least 30 percent women directors. If a company does not meet the applicable expectation, State Street Global Advisors may vote against the chair of the board’s nominating committee or the board leader in the absence of a nominating committee. Additionally, if a company does not meet the applicable expectation for three consecutive years, State Street Global Advisors may vote against all incumbent members of the nominating committee or those persons deemed responsible for the nomination process.

				We may waive this voting guideline if a company engages with State Street Global Advisors and provides a specific, timebound plan for either reaching the 30-percent threshold (FTSE 350) or for adding a woman director (non-FTSE 350).

Board Racial/Ethnic Diversity				Effective board oversight of a company’s long-term business strategy necessitates a diversity of perspectives, especially in terms of gender, race and ethnicity. If a company in the FTSE 350 does not disclose, at minimum, the gender, racial and ethnic composition of its board, we may vote against the Chair of the nominating committee. We may withhold support from the Chair of the nominating committee also when a company in the FTSE 100 does not have at least one director from an underrepresented racial and/or ethnic community on its board.

Director Time Commitments				When voting on the election or re-election of a director, we also consider the number of outside board directorships a non-executive and an executive may undertake. Thus, State Street Global Advisors may take voting action against a director who exceeds the number of board mandates listed below:

				• Named Executive Officers (NEOs) of a public company who sit on more than two public company boards

				• Non-executive board chairs or lead independent directors who sit on more than three public company boards

				• Director nominees who sit on more than four public company boards

				For non-executive board chairs/lead independent directors and director nominees who hold excessive commitments, as defined above, we may consider waiving our policy and vote in support of a director if a company discloses its director commitment policy in a publicly available manner (e.g., corporate governance guidelines, proxy statement, company website). This policy or associated disclosure must include:

				• A numerical limit on public company board seats a director can serve on

				– This limit cannot exceed our policy by more than one seat

				• Consideration of public company board leadership positions (e.g., Committee Chair)

C-109

LOGO



				• Affirmation that all directors are currently compliant with the company policy

				• Description of an annual policy review process undertaken by the Nominating Committee to evaluate outside director time commitments

				If a director is imminently leaving a board and this departure is disclosed in a written, time-bound and publicly-available manner, we may consider waiving our withhold vote when evaluating the director for excessive time commitments.

				Service on a mutual fund board, the board of a UK investment trust or a Special Purpose Acquisition Company (SPAC) board is not considered when evaluating directors for excessive commitments. However, we do expect these roles to be considered by nominating committees when evaluating director time commitments.

Climate-related Disclosures				State Street Global Advisors finds that the recommendations of the Taskforce on Climate-related Financial Disclosures (TCFD) provide the most effective framework for disclosure of climate-related risks and opportunities.

				As such, we may take voting action against companies in the FTSE 350 that fail to provide sufficient disclosure regarding climate-related risks and opportunities related to that company, or board oversight of climate-related risks and opportunities, in accordance with the TCFD framework.

Indemnification and Limitations on Liability				Generally, we support proposals to limit directors’ liability and/or expand indemnification and liability protection up to the limit provided by law. This holds if a director has not acted in bad faith, gross negligence, nor reckless disregard of the duties involved in the conduct of his or her office.

Shareholder Rights

Virtual/Hybrid Shareholder Meetings				As a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, companies are increasingly conducting their shareholder meetings in a virtual or hybrid format. While we are encouraged by the success of virtual and hybrid shareholder meetings, companies and shareholders must remain vigilant in continuing to improve their virtual shareholder meeting practices.

				Recognizing the success of virtual and hybrid shareholder meetings and a shifting regulatory environment, we will generally support proposals that grant boards the right to hold shareholder meetings in a virtual or hybrid format as long as companies uphold the following best practices:

				• Afford virtual attendee shareholders the same rights as would normally be granted to in-person attendee shareholders

				• Commit to time-bound renewal (five years or less) of meeting format authorization by shareholders

C-110

LOGO



				• Provide a written record of all questions posed during the meeting, and Comply with local market laws and regulations relating to virtual and hybrid shareholder meeting practices

				If a company breaches of any of the criteria above, we may vote against the Chair of the nominating committee.

Accounting and Audit-Related Issues				Companies should have robust internal audit and internal control systems designed for effective management of any potential and emerging risks to company operations and strategy. The responsibility of setting out an internal audit function lies with the audit committee, which should have as members independent non-executive directors. Appointment of External Auditors

Appointment of External Auditors				State Street Global Advisors believes that a company’s auditor is an essential feature of an effective and transparent system of external supervision. Shareholders should be given the opportunity to vote on their appointment or re-appoint at the annual meeting. When appointing external auditors and approving audit fees, we take into consideration the level of detail in company disclosures and will generally not support such resolutions if an adequate breakdown is not provided and if non-audit fees are more than 50% of audit fees. In addition, we may vote against members of the audit committee if we have concerns with audit-related issues or if the level of non-audit fees to audit fees is significant. In certain circumstances, we may consider auditor tenure when evaluating the audit process.

Limit Legal Liability of External Auditors				We generally oppose limiting the legal liability of audit firms because we believe this could create a negative impact on the quality of the audit function.

Approval of Financial Statements				We believe the disclosure and availability of reliable financial statements in a timely manner is imperative for the investment process. We expect external auditors to provide assurance of a company’s financial condition. Hence, we may vote against the approval of financial statements if i) they have not been disclosed or audited; ii) the auditor opinion is qualified/adverse, or the auditor has issued a disclaimer of opinion; or iii) the auditor opinion is not disclosed.

Capital Structure, Reorganization, and Mergers

Share Issuances				The ability to raise capital is critical for companies to carry out strategy, to grow, and to achieve returns above their cost of capital. The approval of capital raising activities is essential to shareholders’ ability to monitor returns and to ensure capital is deployed efficiently. We support capital increases that have sound business reasons and are not excessive relative to a company’s existing capital base.

C-111

LOGO



				Pre-emption rights are a fundamental right for shareholders to protect their investment in a company. Where companies seek to issue new shares without pre-emption rights, we may vote against if such authorities are greater than 20% of the issued share capital. We may also vote against resolutions that seek authority to issue capital with pre-emption rights if the aggregate amount allowed seems excessive and is not justified by the board. Generally, we are against capital issuance proposals greater than 100% of the issued share capital when the proceeds are not intended for a specific purpose.

Share Repurchase Programs				We generally support a proposal to repurchase shares. However, this is not the case if the issuer does not clearly state the business purpose for the program, a definitive number of shares to be repurchased, the range of premium/discount to market price at which a company can repurchase shares, and the timeframe for the repurchase. We may vote against share repurchase requests that allow share repurchases during a takeover period.

Dividends				We generally support dividend payouts that constitute 30% or more of net income. We may vote against the dividend payouts if the dividend payout ratio has been consistently below 30% without adequate explanation or the payout is excessive given the company’s financial position. Particular attention will be paid where the payment may damage the company’s long term financial health.

Mergers and Acquisitions				Mergers or reorganizing the structure of a company often involve proposals relating to reincorporation, restructurings, mergers, liquidations, and other major changes to the corporation. Proposals that are in the best interests of the shareholders, demonstrated by enhancing share value or improving the effectiveness of the company’s operations, will be supported. In general, provisions that are not viewed as financially sound or are thought to be destructive to shareholders’ rights and are not supported. We will generally support transactions that maximize shareholder value. Some of the considerations include the following:

				• Offer premium

				• Strategic rationale

				• Board oversight of the process for the recommended transaction, including, director and/ or management conflicts of interest

				• Offers made at a premium and where there are no other higher bidders

				• Offers in which the secondary market price is substantially lower than the net asset value

				We may vote against a transaction considering the following:

				• Offers with potentially damaging consequences for minority shareholders because of illiquid stock

C-112

LOGO



				• Offers in which we believe there is a reasonable prospect for an enhanced bid or other bidders

				• The current market price of the security exceeds the bid price at the time of voting

Anti-Takeover Measures				We oppose anti-takeover defenses such as authorities for the board when subject to a hostile takeover to issue warrants convertible into shares to existing shareholders.

Notice Period to Convene a General Meeting				We expect companies to give as much notice as is practicable when calling a general meeting. Generally, we are not supportive of authorizations seeking to reduce the notice period to 14 days.

Remuneration

Executive Pay				Despite the differences among the types of plans and awards possible, there is a simple underlying philosophy that guides our analysis of executive pay: there should be a direct relationship between remuneration and company performance over the long term. Shareholders should have the opportunity to assess whether pay structures and levels are aligned with business performance. When assessing remuneration policies and reports, we consider adequate disclosure of various remuneration elements, absolute and relative pay levels, peer selection and benchmarking, the mix of long-term and short-term incentives, alignment of pay structures with shareholder interests as well as with corporate strategy and performance. We may oppose remuneration reports where pay seems misaligned with shareholders’ interests. We may also vote against the re-election of members of the remuneration committee if we have serious concerns about remuneration practices or if the company has not been responsive to shareholder concerns.

Equity Incentive Plans				We may not support proposals on equity-based incentive plans where insufficient information is provided on matters such as grant limits, performance metrics, performance, vesting periods, and overall dilution. Generally we do not support options under such plans being issued at a discount to market price or plans that allow for re-testing of performance metrics.

Non-Executive Director Pay				Authorities that seek shareholder approval for non-executive directors’ fees are generally not controversial. We typically support resolutions regarding directors’ fees unless disclosure is poor and we are unable to determine whether they are excessive relative to fees paid by comparable companies. We will evaluate any non-cash or performance related pay to non-executive directors on a company- by-company basis.

C-113

LOGO



Risk Management				State Street Global Advisors believes that risk management is a key function of the board, which is responsible for setting the overall risk appetite of a company and for providing oversight of the risk management process established by senior executives at a company. We allow boards to have discretion over how they provide oversight in this area. However, we expect companies to disclose how the board provides oversight on its risk management system and risk identification. Boards should also review existing and emerging risks that evolve in tandem with the with a changing political and economic landscape or as companies diversify their operations into new areas. As responsible stewards, we believe in the importance of effective risk management and oversight of issues that are material to a company. To effectively assess the risk of our clients’ portfolios and the broader market, we expect our portfolio companies to manage risks and opportunities that are material and industry-specific and that have a demonstrated link to long-term value creation, and to provide high-quality disclosure of this process to shareholders. Consistent with this perspective, we may seek to engage with our portfolio companies to better understand how their boards are overseeing risks and opportunities the company has deemed to be material to its business or operations. If we believe a company has failed to implement and communicate effective oversight of these risks, we may consider voting against the directors responsible.

Environmental and Social Issues				As a fiduciary, State Street Global Advisors takes a comprehensive approach to engaging with our portfolio companies about material environmental and social factors. Our Asset Stewardship program prioritization process allows us to proactively identify companies for engagement and voting in order to mitigate sustainability risks in our portfolio. Through engagement, we aim to build long-term relationships with the issuers in which we invest on behalf of our clients and to address a broad range of topics relating to the promotion of long-term shareholder value creation. When voting, we fundamentally consider whether the adoption of a shareholder proposal addressing an environmental or social topic material to the company would promote long-term shareholder value in the context of the company’s existing practices and disclosures as well as existing market practice. For more information on our approach to environmental and social issues, please see our Global Proxy Voting and Engagement Guidelines for Environmental and Social Factors, available at ssga.com/about-us/asset-stewardship.html.

About State Street Global Advisors				For four decades, State Street Global Advisors has served the world’s governments, institutions and financial advisors. With a rigorous, risk-aware approach built on research, analysis and market-tested experience, we build from a breadth of index and active strategies to create cost-effective solutions. And, as pioneers in index, ETF, and ESG investing, we are always inventing new ways to invest. As a result, we have become the world’s fourth-largest asset manager* with US $3.48 trillion† under our care.

				* Pensions & Investments Research Center, as of December 31, 2021.
				^† This figure is presented as of December 31, 2022 and includes approximately $58.60 billion USD of assets with respect to SPDR products for which State Street Global Advisors Funds Distributors, LLC (SSGA FD) acts solely as the marketing agent. SSGA FD and State Street Global Advisors are affiliated. Please note all AUM is unaudited.

C-114

LOGO

ssga.com

Marketing communication

State Street Global Advisors Worldwide Entities

T: +612 9240-7600. F: +612 9240-7611. Belgium: State

Street Global Advisors Belgium, Chaussée de La Hulpe 185, 1170 Brussels, Belgium. T: +32 2 663 2036. State Street Global Advisors Belgium is a branch office of State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, registered in Ireland with company number 49934, authorised and regulated by the Central Bank of Ireland, and whose registered office is at 78 Sir John Rogerson’s Quay, Dublin 2. Canada: State Street Global Advisors, Ltd., 1981 McGill College Avenue, Suite 500, Montreal, Qc, H3A 3A8, T: +514 282 2400 and 30 Adelaide Street East Suite 800, Toronto, Ontario M5C 3G6. T: +647 775 5900. France: State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, France Branch (“State Street Global Advisors France”) is a branch of State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, registered in Ireland with company number 49934, authorised and regulated by the Central Bank of Ireland, and whose registered office is at 78 Sir John Rogerson’s Quay, Dublin 2. State Street Global Advisors France is registered in France with

company number RCS Nanterre 899 183 289, and its office is located at Coeur Défense — Tour A —La Défense 4, 33e étage, 100, Esplanade du Général de Gaulle, 92 931 Paris La Défense Cedex, France. T: +33 1 44 45 40 00. F: +33 1 44 45 41 92. Germany: State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, Branch in Germany, Brienner Strasse 59, D-80333 Munich, Germany (“State Street Global Advisors Germany”). T: +49 (0)89 55878 400. State Street Global Advisors Germany is a branch of State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, registered in Ireland with company number 49934, authorised and regulated by the Central Bank of Ireland, and whose registered office is at 78 Sir John Rogerson’s Quay, Dublin 2. Hong Kong: State Street Global Advisors Asia Limited, 68/F, Two International Finance Centre, 8 Finance Street, Central, Hong Kong. T: +852 2103-0288. F: +852 2103-0200. Ireland: State Street Global Advisors Europe

Limited is regulated by the Central Bank of Ireland. Registered office address 78 Sir John Rogerson’s Quay, Dublin 2. Registered

Number: 49934. T: +353 (0)1 776 3000. F: +353 (0)1 776 3300. Italy: State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, Italy Branch (“State Street Global Advisors Italy”) is a branch of State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, registered in Ireland with company number 49934, authorised and regulated by the Central Bank of Ireland, and whose registered office is at 78 Sir John Rogerson’s Quay, Dublin 2. State Street Global Advisors Italy is registered in Italy with company number 11871450968 —REA: 2628603 and VAT number 11871450968, and its office is located at Via Ferrante Aporti, 10 -20125 Milan, Italy. T: +39 02 32066 100. F: +39 02 32066 155. Japan: State Street Global Advisors (Japan) Co., Ltd., Toranomon Hills Mori Tower 25F 1-23-1 Toranomon, Minato-ku, Tokyo 105-6325 Japan. T: +81-3-4530-7380. Financial Instruments Business Operator, Kanto Local Financial Bureau (Kinsho #345), Membership: Japan Investment Advisers Association, The Investment Trust Association, Japan, Japan Securities Dealers’ Association. Netherlands: State Street Global Advisors

C-115

LOGO

Netherlands, Apollo Building 7th floor, Herikerbergweg 29, 1101 CN Amsterdam, Netherlands. T: +31 20 7181 000. State Street Global Advisors Netherlands is a branch office of State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, registered in Ireland with company number 49934, authorised and regulated by the Central Bank of Ireland, and whose registered office is at 78 Sir John Rogerson’s Quay, Dublin 2. Singapore: State Street Global Advisors Singapore Limited, 168, Robinson Road, #33-01 Capital Tower, Singapore 068912 (Company Reg. No: 200002719D, regulated by the Monetary Authority of Singapore). T: +65 6826-7555. F: +65 6826-7501. Switzerland: State Street Global Advisors AG, Beethovenstr. 19, CH-8027 Zurich. Registered with the Register of Commerce Zurich CHE-105.078.458. T: +41 (0)44 245 70 00. F: +41 (0)44 245 70 16. United Kingdom: State Street Global Advisors Limited. Authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority. Registered in England. Registered No. 2509928. VAT No. 5776591 81. Registered office: 20 Churchill Place, Canary Wharf, London, E14 5HJ. T: 020 3395 6000. F: 020 3395 6350. United States: State Street Global Advisors, 1 Iron Street, Boston, MA 02210-1641. T: +1 617 786 3000.

Investing involves risk including the risk of loss of principal.

The whole or any part of this work may not be reproduced, copied or transmitted or any of its contents disclosed to third parties without SSGA’s express written consent.

The information provided does not constitute investment advice and it should not be relied on as such. It should not be

considered a solicitation to buy or an offer to sell a security. It does not take into account any investor’s particular investment objectives, strategies, tax status or investment horizon. You should consult your tax and financial advisor.

The trademarks and service marks referenced herein are the property of their respective owners. Third party data providers make no warranties or representations of any kind

relating to the accuracy, completeness or timeliness of the data and have no liability for damages of any kind relating to the use of such data.

ID1482704-3479919.3.1.GBL.RTL 0323 Exp. Date: 03/31/2024

C-116


Guidance Asset Stewardship April 2023				Guidance on Managing Geopolitical Risk
				Guidance on Managing Geopolitical Risk

				As asset stewards, we are aware of the financial risks associated with geopolitical risk, including risks arising from unexpected conflict between or among nations. Where appropriate, we may seek to mitigate relevant risks through engagements and proxy voting.

				Below is our guidance and approach to stewardship in such instances in an effort to protect shareholder value.

Guidance for Impacted Companies				We expect our portfolio companies that may be impacted by geopolitical risk to: • Manage and mitigate risks related to operating in impacted markets, which may include financial, sanctions, regulatory, and/or reputational risks, among others; • Strengthen board oversight of these efforts; and • Describe these efforts in public disclosures. In addition to these conflict-specific expectations, our existing Guidance on Human Rights Disclosures & Practices applies to all companies in our portfolio.

Engagements				We may request engagements with portfolio companies that have been identified as having exposure to geopolitical risk. Our objective will be to understand how companies are disclosing and managing relevant sanctions, regulatory, reputational, human rights-related, and financial risks (e.g., disruptions to operations, supply chain, human capital management strategies), and to encourage alignment with our expectations.

Proxy Voting				We may consider using proxy voting to hold boards accountable for insufficient oversight of relevant risks, in line with our existing oversight expectations for directors.

Conclusion				This guidance is an example of the Asset Stewardship Team’s commitment to proactively managing risks to our portfolio in order to enhance long-term value for our clients. Please reach out to State Street Global Advisors’ Asset Stewardship Team at [email protected] to request an engagement on this topic.

C-117



About State Street Global Advisors				Our clients are the world’s governments, institutions and financial advisors. To help them achieve their financial goals we live our guiding principles each and every day: • Start with rigor • Build from breadth • Invest as stewards • Invent the future For four decades, these principles have helped us be the quiet power in a tumultuous investing world. Helping millions of people secure their financial futures. This takes each of our employees in 29 offices around the world, and a firm-wide conviction that we can always do it better. As a result, we are the world’s fourth-largest asset manager* with US $3.62 trillion^† under our care.

				* Pensions & Investments Research Center, as of December 31, 2021. ^† This figure is presented as of March 31, 2023 and includes approximately $65.03 billion USD of assets with respect to SPDR products for which State Street Global Advisors Funds Distributors, LLC (SSGA FD) acts solely as the marketing agent. SSGA FD and State Street Global Advisors are affiliated. Please note all AUM is unaudited.

ssga.com

Marketing communications

State Street Global Advisors Worldwide Entities

Abu Dhabi: State Street Global Advisors Limited, ADGM branch is regulated by the Financial Services Regulatory Authority (FSRA).

Level 28, ADGM Square, Al Maryah Island, P.O Box 76404, Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates. Regulated by the ADGM Financial Services Regulatory Authority. T: +971 2 245 9000. Australia: State Street Global Advisors, Australia, Limited (ABN

42 003 914 225) is the holder of an Australian Financial Services License (AFSL Number 238276). Registered office: Level 14, 420 George Street, Sydney, NSW 2000, Australia. T: +612 9240-7600. F: +612 9240-7611. Belgium: State Street Global Advisors Belgium, Chaussée de La Hulpe 185, 1170 Brussels, Belgium. T: +32 2 663 2036. State Street Global Advisors Belgium is a branch office of

with company number 49934, authorised and regulated by the Central Bank of Ireland, and whose registered office is at 78 Sir John Rogerson’s Quay, Dublin 2. State Street Global Advisors France is registered in France with company number RCS Nanterre 899 183 289, and its office is located at Coeur Défense – Tour A – La Défense 4, 33e étage, 100, Esplanade du Général de Gaulle, 92 931 Paris La Défense Cedex, France. T: +33 1 44 45 40 00. F: +33 1 44 45 41

92. Germany: State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, Branch in Germany, Brienner Strasse 59, D-80333 Munich, Germany (“State Street Global



				Guidance on Managing Geopolitical Risk

C-118

Advisors Germany”). T: +49 (0)89 55878 400. State Street Global Advisors Germany is a branch of State Street Global

Advisors Europe Limited, registered in Ireland with company number 49934, authorised and regulated by the Central Bank of Ireland, and whose registered office is at 78 Sir John Rogerson’s Quay, Dublin 2. Hong Kong: State Street Global Advisors Asia Limited, 68/F, Two International Finance Centre, 8 Finance Street, Central, Hong Kong. T: +852 2103-0288. F: +852 2103-0200. Ireland: State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited is regulated by the Central Bank of Ireland. Registered office address 78 Sir John Rogerson’s Quay, Dublin 2. Registered Number: 49934. T: +353 (0)1 776 3000. F: +353 (0)1 776 3300. Italy: State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, Italy Branch (“State Street Global Advisors Italy”) is a branch of State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, registered in Ireland with company number

49934, authorised and regulated by the Central Bank of Ireland, and whose registered office is at 78 Sir John Rogerson’s Quay, Dublin 2. State Street Global Advisors Italy is registered in Italy with company number 11871450968 — REA: 2628603 and VAT number 11871450968, and its office is located at Via Ferrante Aporti, 10 -20125 Milan, Italy. T: +39 02 32066 100. F: +39 02 32066 155. Japan: State Street Global Advisors (Japan) Co., Ltd., Toranomon Hills Mori Tower 25F 1-23-1 Toranomon, Minato-ku, Tokyo 105-6325 Japan. T: +81-3-4530-7380. Financial Instruments Business Operator, Kanto Local Financial Bureau (Kinsho #345), Membership: Japan Investment Advisers Association, The Investment Trust Association, Japan, Japan Securities Dealers’ Association. Netherlands: State Street Global Advisors Netherlands, Apollo Building 7th floor, Herikerbergweg 29, 1101 CN Amsterdam, Netherlands. T: +31 20 7181 000. State Street Global

Advisors Netherlands is a branch office of State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, registered in Ireland with company number 49934, authorised and regulated by the Central Bank of Ireland, and whose registered office is at 78 Sir John Rogerson’s Quay, Dublin 2. Singapore: State Street Global Advisors Singapore Limited, 168, Robinson Road, #33-01 Capital Tower, Singapore 068912 (Company Reg. No: 200002719D, regulated by the Monetary Authority of Singapore). T: +65 6826-7555. F: +65 6826-7501. Switzerland: State Street Global Advisors AG, Beethovenstr. 19, CH-8027 Zurich. Registered with the Register of Commerce Zurich CHE-105.078.458. T: +41 (0)44 245 70 00. F: +41 (0)44 245 70 16. United Kingdom: State Street Global Advisors Limited. Authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority. Registered in England. Registered No. 2509928. VAT No. 5776591 81.

Registered office: 20 Churchill Place, Canary Wharf, London, E14 5HJ. T: 020 3395 6000. F: 020 3395 6350. United States: State Street Global Advisors, 1 Iron Street, Boston, MA 02210-1641. T: +1 617 786 3000.

The views expressed in this material are the views of SSGA Asset Stewardship Team through the period ended April 12, 2023 and are subject to change based on market and other conditions. This document contains certain statements that may be deemed forward-looking statements. Please note that any such statements are not guarantees of any future performance and actual results or developments may differ materially from those projected.

Investing involves risk including the risk of loss of principal.

The whole or any part of this work may not be reproduced, copied or



				Guidance on Managing Geopolitical Risk

C-119

transmitted or any of its contents disclosed to third parties without SSGA’s express written consent.

horizon. You should consult your tax and financial advisor.

(including retail clients) should not rely on this communication.

The information contained in this communication is

not a research recommendation or ‘investment research’ and is classified as a ‘Marketing Communication’ in accordance with the Markets in Financial Instruments Directive (2014/65/EU) or applicable Swiss regulation. This means that this marketing communication (a) has not been prepared in accordance with legal requirements designed to promote the independence of investment research (b) is not subject to any prohibition on dealing ahead of the dissemination of investment research.

ID1522578-4654606.2.1.GBL.RTL 0423 Exp. Date: 03/31/2024



				Guidance on Managing Geopolitical Risk

C-120


Insights Asset Stewardship March 2023	Guidance on Climate-related Disclosures

	At State Street Global Advisors, we believe that managing climate-related risks and opportunities is a key element in maximizing long-term risk-adjusted returns for our clients. As a result, we have a longstanding commitment to enhance investor-useful disclosure around this topic. We have encouraged our portfolio companies to report in accordance with recommendations of the Task Force for Climate-related Financial Disclosures (TCFD)¹since we first endorsed the framework in 2017. Since then, companies have improved the quality and quantity of climate-related disclosure and investors have matured their expectations.
	This guidance outlines our expectations with respect to the disclosure of climate-related risks and opportunities and our approach to voting and engagement on this important topic. We will continue to engage with portfolio companies to ensure investors receive the information needed to assess how companies are approaching climate-related risks and opportunities.

Our Expectations for Climate-related Disclosures	We expect all companies in our portfolios to offer public disclosures in accordance with the four pillars of the TCFD framework: Governance, Strategy, Risk Management, and Metrics and Targets.

	1	Governance The TCFD recommends companies describe the board’s oversight of, and management’s role in, assessing and managing climate-related risks and opportunities.

	2	Strategy The TCFD recommends companies describe identified climate-related risks and opportunities and the impact of these risks and opportunities on their businesses, strategy, and financial planning.

	3	Risk Management The TCFD recommends companies describe processes for identifying, assessing, and managing climate-related risks and describe how these processes are integrated into overall risk management.

	4	Metrics and Targets The TCFD recommends companies disclose metrics and targets used to assess and manage climate-related risks and opportunities.

Disclosure Expectations for Effective Climate Transition Plans	We believe it is our responsibility to provide portfolio companies that have adopted a climate transition plan with clarity on our expectations for effective climate transition plan disclosure.

C-121


Figure 1 Key Areas of Climate Transition Disclosure	Category	Disclosure Expectations for Companies that Have Adopted a Climate Transition Plan
	Ambition	•	Disclose what long-term climate ambition has been adopted by the company
	Targets	•	Disclose any interim GHG emissions reduction targets
		•	Disclose any commitment to align with temperature goals
	TCFD Disclosure	•	We promote adoption of TCFD-aligned disclosure
		•	Disclose any scenario analysis performed by the company
		•	Provide emissions reporting and assurance
	Decarbonization Strategy	•	Disclose how the company’s transition plan integrates into the company’s long-term strategy
		•	Discuss decarbonization actions
		•	Disclose carbon offsets utilization
		•	Discuss decarbonization across the value chain
	Capital Allocation Alignment	•	Disclose any integration of climate considerations into capital allocation decisions
		•	Disclose what capital expenditure is made on low carbon strategies
		•	Disclose the company’s approach to carbon pricing
		•	Disclose any investments in decarbonization
	Climate Policy Engagement	•	Disclose any climate change policies and positions
		•	Disclose any trade association review
	Climate Governance	•	Disclose board oversight of the climate transition plan
		•	Disclosure of management oversight of the climate transition plan
	Physical Risk	•	Disclose any physical risk assessment performed by the company
		•	Disclose the company’s physical risk management for identified risks
	Stakeholder Engagement	•	Disclose the company’s:
		–	Industry collaboration
		–	Investor engagement
		–	Climate expert engagement
		–	Internal engagement



				Guidance on Climate-related Disclosures

C-122



Voting Incorporating Our Expectations into Our Proxy Voting Policies				With respect to voting on climate-related disclosure issues, we will first engage with companies related to our climate-related disclosure expectations outlined herein, focusing on companies and industries with the greatest risk and opportunity.

Director Elections				Climate-related Disclosure Expectations State Street Global Advisors has implemented the following proxy voting guidelines: • We may take voting action against companies in the S&P 500, S&P/TSX Composite, FTSE 350, STOXX 600, and ASX 200 indices if companies fail to provide sufficient disclosure regarding climate-related risks and opportunities related to that company, or board oversight of climate related risks and opportunities, in accordance with the TCFD framework.



	Climate Transition Plan Disclosure Expectations for Significant Emitters As a complement to this director voting policy, we have launched an engagement campaign on climate transition plan disclosure targeting significant emitters in carbon-intensive sectors. Through our engagements, we will aim to better understand climate transition plans and strategies, and gain insight on each company’s unique set of climate-related risks and strategic opportunities presented by the transition.

Shareholder Proposals	Climate-related Shareholder Proposals

	Below is the approach when voting on climate-related shareholder proposals:

	•	FOR We will consider voting for shareholder proposals that we believe will lead to increased alignment with our expectations for climate-related disclosures;

	•	ABSTAIN We will consider voting abstain when we support some elements of a proposal’s request, or recognize a company’s commitment to implement related disclosure and/or oversight practices;

	•	AGAINST We will vote against shareholder proposals that we believe are immaterial, overly prescriptive, or would not further our disclosure and oversight expectations



				Guidance on Climate-related Disclosures

C-123



Engagements Incorporating Our Expectations into Conversations with Companies	Climate continues to be a core stewardship priority for State Street Global Advisors. During engagement, we may ask companies one or more of the questions outlined below.
	Governance
	•	Where is the responsibility for climate oversight housed at the board level? How frequently does the board discuss the topic of climate change?

	•	How is climate — and other ESG — experience considered in the board refreshment process?

	•	How is the board incorporating key sustainability drivers into the performance evaluation of management?

	•	How does management and the board utilize external expertise to stay abreast of the emerging areas of climate?

	Strategy

	•	How does the company integrate climate considerations into business strategy and financial planning?

	•	What actions are being considered to support efforts to reduce GHG emissions across the value chain, such as with suppliers and customers?

	•	Where does the company identify the greatest opportunities for decarbonization in the short- and medium-term?

	Risk Management

	•	How does the company consider climate-related risks as part of overall risk management? What is the board’s role?

	•	Has the company assessed the potential impacts of physical risk on its assets and operations?

	•	How does the company manage climate-related policy risks? Has the company conducted an assessment of its stated climate positions versus those of its trade and industry associations?

	Metrics and Targets

	•	What metrics does the company utilize to track progress on achieving its climate goals?

	•	What sources of GHG emissions contribute most significantly to the company’s carbon footprint?



				Guidance on Climate-related Disclosures

C-124



	•	What are the biggest challenges facing the company in achieving its GHG emissions reduction targets?

Conclusion	We encourage companies in our portfolios to align their climate-related disclosures and practices with our expectations and at the same time we endeavor to communicate these expectations clearly to the market. Please reach out to our Asset Stewardship team at [email protected]. We look forward to engaging with you on this important topic.

Endnotes	1 https://fsb-tcfd.org/publications/.



About State Street Global Advisors				For four decades, State Street Global Advisors has served the world’s governments, institutions and financial advisors. With a rigorous, risk-aware approach built on research, analysis and market-tested experience, we build from a breadth of index and active strategies to create cost-effective solutions. And, as pioneers in index, ETF, and ESG investing, we are always inventing new ways to invest. As a result, we have become the world’s fourth-largest asset manager* with US $3.48 trillion^† under our care.
				* Pensions & Investments Research Center, as of December 31, 2021. ^† This figure is presented as of December 31, 2022 and includes approximately $58.60 billion USD of assets with respect to SPDR products for which State Street Global Advisors Funds Distributors, LLC (SSGA FD) acts solely as the marketing agent. SSGA FD and State Street Global Advisors are affiliated. Please note all AUM is unaudited.



				Guidance on Climate-related Disclosures

C-125

ssga.com

Marketing communication

State Street Global Advisors Worldwide Entities

Abu Dhabi: State Street Global Advisors Limited, ADGM branch is regulated by the Financial Services Regulatory Authority (FSRA). This document is intended for Professional Clients or Market Counterparties only as defined by the FSRA and no other person should act upon it. State Street Global Advisors Limited, ADGM Branch, Al Khatem Tower, Suite 42801, Level 28, ADGM Square, Al Maryah Island, P.O Box 76404, Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates. Regulated by the ADGM Financial Services Regulatory Authority. T: +971 2 245 9000. Australia: State Street Global Advisors, Australia, Limited (ABN 42 003 914 225) is the holder of an Australian Financial Services Licence (AFSL Number 238276). Registered office: Level 14, 420 George Street, Sydney, NSW 2000, Australia. T: +612 9240-7600. F: +612 9240-7611. Belgium: State Street Global Advisors Belgium, Chaussée de La Hulpe 185, 1170 Brussels, Belgium. T: +32 2 663 2036. State Street Global Advisors Belgium is a branch office of State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, registered in Ireland with company number 49934, authorised and regulated by the Central Bank of Ireland, and whose registered office is at

78 Sir John Rogerson’s Quay, Dublin 2.

Canada: State Street Global Advisors, Ltd., 1981 McGill College Avenue, Suite 500 , Montreal, Quebec, H3A 3A8, T: +514 282 2400 and 30 Adelaide Street East Suite 800, Toronto, Ontario M5C 3G6. T: +647 775 5900. France: State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, France Branch (“State Street Global Advisors France”) is a branch of State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, registered in Ireland with company number 49934, authorised and regulated by the Central Bank of Ireland, and whose registered office is at 78 Sir John Rogerson’s Quay, Dublin 2. State Street Global Advisors France is registered in France with company number RCS Nanterre 899 183 289, and its office is located at Coeur Défense — Tour A — La Défense 4, 33e étage, 100, Esplanade du Général de Gaulle, 92 931 Paris La Défense Cedex, France. T: +33 1 44 45 40 00. F: +33 1 44 45 41 92. Germany: State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, Branch in Germany, Brienner Strasse 59, D-80333 Munich, Germany (“State Street Global Advisors Germany”). T +49 (0)89 55878 400. State Street Global Advisors Germany is a branch of State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, registered in Ireland with company number 49934, authorised and regulated by the Central

Investment Advisers Association, The Investment Trust Association, Japan, Japan Securities Dealers’ Association. Netherlands: State Street Global Advisors Netherlands, Apollo Building 7th floor, Herikerbergweg 29, 1101 CN Amsterdam, Netherlands. T: +31 20 7181 000. State Street Global Advisors Netherlands is a branch office of State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, registered in Ireland with company number 49934, authorised and regulated by the Central Bank of Ireland, and whose registered office is at 78 Sir John Rogerson’s Quay, Dublin 2. Singapore: State Street Global Advisors Singapore Limited, 168,Robinson Road, #33-01 Capital Tower, Singapore 068912 (Company Reg. No: 200002719D, regulated by the Monetary Authority of Singapore). T: +65 6826-7555. F: +65 6826-7501. Switzerland: State Street Global Advisors AG, Beethovenstr. 19, CH-8027 Zurich. Registered with the Register of Commerce Zurich CHE-105.078.458. T: +41 (0)44 245 70 00. F: +41 (0)44 245 70 16. United Kingdom: State Street Global Advisors Limited. Authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority. Registered in England. Registered No. 2509928. VAT No. 5776591 81. Registered office: 20 Churchill Place, Canary Wharf, London, E14 5HJ. T: 020 3395 6000. F: 020 3395 6350. United States: State Street Global Advisors, 1 Iron Street, Boston, MA 02210-1641.



				Guidance on Climate-related Disclosures

C-126

Investing involves risk including the risk of loss of principal.

The whole or any part of this work may not be reproduced, copied or transmitted or any of its contents disclosed to third parties without SSGA’s express written consent.

reliability or completeness of, nor liability for, decisions based on such information and it should not be relied on as such.

This communication is directed at professional

clients (this includes eligible counterparties as defined by the appropriate EU regulator) who are deemed both knowledgeable and experienced in matters relating to investments. The products and services to which this communication relates are only available to such persons and persons of any other description (including retail clients) should not rely on this communication.

sustainability and corporate governance dimensions of a scored entity.

ID1483211-4117655.2.1.GBL.RTL 0323 Exp. Date: 03/31/2024



				Guidance on Climate-related Disclosures

C-127

LOGO



Guidance				April 2023
				Asset Stewardship

				Guidance on Disclosure Expectations for Effective Climate Transition Plans

				As the world mobilizes toward achieving net-zero emissions by midcentury, our portfolio companies are adopting long-term climate ambitions in increasing numbers. However, few have provided a clear roadmap to achieving these goals — and fewer asset managers have provided detail on what companies are expected to disclose as they prepare for a transition to a low-carbon economy. State Street Global Advisors is a signatory to the Net Zero Asset Managers initiative. We encourage companies in relevant sectors¹to develop climate transition plans that take into account the risks and opportunities associated with a transition to a lower carbon economy. To that end, we believe it is our responsibility to provide portfolio companies with clarity on our expectations for effective climate transition plan disclosure to help ensure we — and the broader investor community — receive the information necessary to assess each company’s preparedness for a transition to a low-carbon economy.

C-128

LOGO



Our Process for Developing Disclosure Expectations				The Asset Stewardship team conducted an in-depth assessment of existing ESG frameworks and standards for relevant climate-related disclosures. We considered several factors (e.g., market adoption, usefulness for decision-making, applicability across sectors, financial materiality) and selected a core set of disclosures for climate transition plans that we believe would be useful to investors like us. We leveraged existing frameworks and considered market practice to help reduce the reporting burden on companies while benefiting investors with more consistent and robust disclosure.

				Our selected disclosures are organized into ten categories that closely align with those found in the Institutional Investors Group on Climate Change (IIGCC) Net-Zero Investment Framework, which is a widely accepted framework that provides guidance to investors on assessing portfolio company transition plan disclosure ². We included two additional categories, “Physical Risk” and “Stakeholder Engagement”, as we believe these are critical in understanding company performance and represent areas where disclosure practices could be improved.

Our Approach: Stakeholder Engagement				We conducted a series of engagements with key stakeholders — portfolio companies in carbon-intensive sectors, asset owners, investor advocates and coalitions, and internal cross-functional subject matter experts — to collect feedback on our expectations and help inform our approach. Through these engagements, we identified areas of disclosure that are realistic and others where the market may need more time to coalesce around methodologies.

				While stakeholders generally agree on the value of considering the risks presented by the social impacts of the transition to a low-carbon economy — including on workers, communities, and customers — we found that the definition of “just transition” and related disclosure expectations is still emerging. In 2022, we conducted a series of targeted engagements with companies in key sectors including Energy, Materials, and Utilities to understand best practices and disclosure trends on managing risks and opportunities associated with workforce transformation, customer affordability, stakeholder engagement, and supply chain management, among others. We continue to prioritize engagement on this topic to inform our disclosure expectations related to just transition.

Disclosure Expectations for Effective Climate Transition Plans				We recognize that there is no one-size-fits-all approach to climate transition plans and that climate-related risks and opportunities are highly nuanced across and within industries. The expectations set out below serve to provide transparency on the core criteria we expect companies that have adopted a climate transition plan to address in their related disclosures.

				We recognize this is an emerging area of disclosure and we will continue to develop our expectations over time, including consideration of any mandated disclosure by regulators.

C-129

LOGO


Figure 1 Key Areas of Climate Transition Disclosure	Category	Disclosure Expectations for Companies that Have Adopted a Climate Transition Plan
	Ambition	• Disclose what long-term climate ambition has been adopted by the company
	Targets	• Disclose any interim GHG emissions reduction targets
		• Disclose any commitment to align with temperature goals
	TCFD Disclosure	• We promote adoption of TCFD-aligned disclosure
		• Disclose any scenario analysis performed by the company
		• Provide emissions reporting and assurance
	Decarbonization Strategy	• Disclose how the company’s transition plan integrates into the company’s long-term strategy
		• Discuss decarbonization actions
		• Disclose carbon offsets utilization
		• Discuss decarbonization across the value chain
	Capital Allocation Alignment	• Disclose any integration of climate considerations into capital allocation decisions
		• Disclose what capital expenditure is made on low carbon strategies
		• Disclose the company’s approach to carbon pricing
		• Disclose any investments in decarbonization
	Climate Policy Engagement	• Disclose any climate change policies and positions
		• Disclose any trade association review
	Climate Governance	• Disclose board oversight of the climate transition plan
		• Disclosure of management oversight of the climate transition plan
	Physical Risk	• Disclose any physical risk assessment performed by the company
		• Disclose the company’s physical risk management for identified risks

C-130

LOGO



Stakeholder Engagement	• Disclose the company’s:

	—	Industry collaboration

	—	Investor engagement

	—	Climate expert engagement

	—	Internal engagement



Applying our Expectations to Proxy Voting and Engagement				We encourage companies in relevant sectors to develop climate transition plans that take into account the risks and opportunities associated with a transition to a lower carbon economy. Through our engagements, we will aim to better understand climate transition plans and strategies, and gain insight on each company’s unique set of climate-related risks and strategic opportunities presented by the transition. We may consider taking voting action against directors of a company in a relevant sector³if those directors fail to implement and communicate effective oversight of climate transition risks applicable to that company and fail to demonstrate responsiveness to us and sufficient disclosure following engagement.

				Say on Climate

				While we are generally supportive of the goals of “Say on Climate” proposals because we support effective climate-related disclosure, we currently do not endorse an annual advisory climate vote. We have reservations with the potential unintended consequences of such a vote, including insulating directors from accountability, distracting from existing frameworks, and straining investors’ limited proxy voting resources. Where management chooses to include a Say on Climate vote, we assess the company’s disclosure on a case-by-case basis consistent with our Disclosure Expectations for Effective Climate Transition Plans in Figure 1 above.

				We would consider supporting a “Say on Climate” shareholder proposal if the company has not provided investors with meaningful climate-related disclosure in line with our expectations, nor signaled the intention to enhance disclosure in the future. For more information on our approach to climate voting and engagement see our Guidance on Climate-related Disclosures.

Conclusion				We encourage companies in our portfolios to align their climate-related disclosures and practices with our expectations and at the same time we endeavor to communicate these expectations clearly to the market. Please reach out to our Asset Stewardship team at [email protected]. We look forward to engaging with you on this important topic

Endnotes				1 As defined by the IIGCC Net Zero Investment Framework

				2 SSGA referred to the IIGCC Net Zero Investment Framework which provides a list of alignment criteria for assessing transition plans for listed equity and fixed income

				3 As defined by the IIGCC Net Zero Investment Framework

C-131

LOGO



About State Street Global Advisors				For four decades, State Street Global Advisors has served the world’s governments, institutions and financial advisors. With a rigorous, risk-aware approach built on research, analysis and market-tested experience, we build from a breadth of index and active strategies to create cost-effective solutions. And, as pioneers in index, ETF, and ESG investing, we are always inventing new ways to invest. As a result, we have become the world’s fourth-largest asset manager* with US $3.62 trillion^† under our care.

				* Pensions & Investments Research Center, as of December 31, 2021.
				^†This figure is presented as of March 31, 2023 and includes approximately $65.03 billion USD of assets with respect to SPDR products for which State Street Global Advisors Funds Distributors, LLC (SSGA FD) acts solely as the marketing agent. SSGA FD and State Street Global Advisors are affiliated. Please note all AUM is unaudited.

C-132

LOGO

ssga.com

Marketing Communication

State Street Global Advisors

Worldwide Entities

____________________________

State Street Global Advisors Belgium is a branch office of State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, registered in Ireland with company number 49934, authorised and regulated by the Central Bank of Ireland, and whose registered office is at 78 Sir John Rogerson’s Quay, Dublin 2. Canada: State Street Global Advisors, Ltd., 1981 McGill College Avenue, Suite 500, Montreal, Qc, H3A 3A8, T: +514 282 2400 and 30 Adelaide Street East Suite 800, Toronto, Ontario M5C 3G6. T: +647 775 5900. France: State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, France Branch (“State Street Global Advisors France”) is a branch of State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, registered in Ireland with company number 49934, authorised and regulated by the Central Bank of Ireland, and whose registered office is at 78 Sir John Rogerson’s Quay, Dublin 2. State Street Global Advisors France is registered in France with company number RCS Nanterre 899 183 289, and its office is located at Coeur Défense — Tour A — La Défense 4, 33e étage, 100, Esplanade du Général de Gaulle, 92 931 Paris La Défense Cedex, France.

T: +33 1 44 45 40 00. F: +33 1 44 45 41 92. Germany: State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, Branch in Germany, Brienner Strasse 59, D-80333 Munich, Germany (“State Street Global Advisors Germany”). T: +49 (0)89 55878 400. State Street Global Advisors Germany is a branch of State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, registered in Ireland with company number 49934, authorised and regulated by the Central Bank of Ireland, and whose registered office is at 78 Sir John Rogerson’s Quay, Dublin 2. Hong Kong: State Street Global Advisors Asia Limited, 68/F, Two International Finance Centre, 8 Finance Street, Central, Hong Kong. T: +852 2103-0288. F: +852 2103-0200. Ireland: State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited is regulated by the Central Bank of Ireland. Registered office address 78 Sir John Rogerson’s Quay, Dublin 2. Registered Number: 49934. T: +353 (0)1 776 3000. F: +353 (0)1 776 3300. Italy: State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, Italy Branch (“State Street Global Advisors Italy”) is a branch of State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, registered in Ireland with company number 49934,

authorised and regulated by the Central Bank of Ireland, and whose registered office is at 78 Sir John Rogerson’s Quay, Dublin 2. State Street Global Advisors Italy is registered in Italy with company number 11871450968 — REA: 2628603 and VAT number 11871450968, and its office is located at Via Ferrante Aporti, 10 -20125 Milan, Italy. T: +39 02 32066 100. F: +39 02 32066 155. Japan: State Street Global Advisors (Japan) Co., Ltd., Toranomon Hills Mori Tower 25F 1-23-1 Toranomon, Minato-ku, Tokyo 105-6325 Japan. T: +81-3-4530-7380. Financial Instruments Business Operator, Kanto Local Financial Bureau (Kinsho #345), Membership: Japan Investment Advisers Association, The Investment Trust Association, Japan, Japan Securities Dealers’ Association. Netherlands: State Street Global Advisors Netherlands, Apollo Building 7th floor, Herikerbergweg 29, 1101 CN Amsterdam, Netherlands. T: +31 20 7181 000. State Street Global Advisors Netherlands is a branch office of State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, registered in Ireland with company number 49934,

C-133

LOGO

authorised and regulated by the Central Bank of Ireland, and whose registered office is at 78 Sir John Rogerson’s Quay, Dublin 2. Singapore: State Street Global Advisors Singapore Limited, 168, Robinson Road, #33-01 Capital Tower, Singapore 068912 (Company Reg. No: 200002719D, regulated by the Monetary Authority of Singapore). T: +65 6826-7555. F: +65 6826-7501. Switzerland: State Street Global Advisors AG, Beethovenstr. 19, CH-8027 Zurich. Registered with the Register of Commerce Zurich CHE-105.078.458. T: +41 (0)44 245 70 00. F: +41 (0)44 245 70 16. United Kingdom: State Street Global Advisors Limited. Authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority. Registered in England. Registered No. 2509928. VAT No. 5776591 81. Registered office: 20 Churchill Place, Canary Wharf, London, E14 5HJ. T: 020 3395 6000. F: 020 3395 6350. United States: State Street Global Advisors, 1 Iron Street, Boston, MA 02210-1641.

Investing involves risk including the risk of loss of principal.

All information is from SSGA unless otherwise noted and

has been obtained from sources believed to be reliable, but its accuracy is not guaranteed. There is no representation or warranty as to the current accuracy, reliability or completeness of, nor liability for, decisions based on such information and it should not be relied on as such.

The whole or any part of this work may not be reproduced, copied or transmitted or any of its contents disclosed to third parties without State Street Global Advisors’ express written consent.

ETFs trade like stocks, are subject to investment risk and will fluctuate in market value. The investment return and principal value of an investment will fluctuate in value, so that when shares are sold or redeemed, they may be worth more or less than when they were purchased. Although shares may be bought or sold on an exchange through any brokerage account, shares are not individually redeemable from the fund. Investors may acquire shares and tender them for redemption through the fund in large aggregations known as “creation units.” Please see

the fund’s prospectus for more details.

Equity securities may fluctuate in value and can decline significantly in response to the activities of individual companies and general market and economic conditions

The whole or any part of this work may not be reproduced, copied or transmitted or any of its contents disclosed to third parties without State Street Global Advisors’ express written consent.

ID1523300- 4117397.4.1.GBL.RTL 0423 Exp. Date: 05/31/2024

C-134


Insights
Asset Stewardship				Guidance on Environmental Management Disclosures
Asset Stewardship
March 2023
				Addressing Deforestation Risk in Supply Chains
				Addressing Deforestation Risk in Supply Chains

Key Takeaways				• Global deforestation is a major driver of biodiversity loss and climate change, and has significant environmental, social and financial implications for ecosystems, communities, companies and investors.

				• Deforestation presents a risk to companies with material links to this practice in their supply chains and investments, and should be disclosed and managed like any other business risk.

				• In response to heightened regulatory, reputational, and financial risks, boards and management teams of companies which source and produce commodities at high risk of deforestation, or finance these activities, should respond accordingly. This includes managing deforestation and land degradation risk in their supply chains and enhancing disclosure on these efforts.

				• There is no standard framework among companies to establish deforestation policies or disclose related oversight practices, risk management efforts, targets and commitments, or performance KPIs, making it difficult for investors to assess exposure to material deforestation-related risks.

				• Partnerships with regional policymakers and local stakeholders are a critical component of managing deforestation-related risks in the supply chain. Successful approaches include public-private partnerships with local policymakers, inclusive training of the local workforce in more sustainable practices, protection of human rights and the respect of Free, Prior and Informed Consent (“FPIC”) of local communities.

				• While nearly 80% of the companies we engaged with acknowledge the value of forests in their public disclosures, only 21% formally recognize deforestation as a business risk.

				• Among the companies engaged, 58% are signatories to initiatives tackling deforestation. To achieve effective management of deforestation risk, companies should consider following this first step with enhanced sustainable business practices, supply chain risk mitigation, robust board oversight and disclosure of these efforts.

C-135



Background				Deforestation is a major driver of biodiversity loss and climate change, and has significant environmental, social and financial implications for ecosystems, communities, companies, and investors. Globally, forests are disappearing at increasing rates. Since 2015, an estimated 10 million hectares of forests have been lost every year, primarily driven by commercial agriculture and production of commodities, including palm oil, soy and cattle.¹

				Forests represent environmental and social value, providing habitat for over 80% of the world’s terrestrial biodiversity and supporting livelihoods for human populations living in and near these forests.²As critical carbon sinks, forests also play an important role in climate change mitigation, absorbing up to 30% of carbon emissions from industry and fossil fuels every year.³

				Article 5 of the Paris Climate Agreement⁴recognizes deforestation as a key component of mitigating greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions with the IPCC stating that deforestation and conversion of natural ecosystems to human uses contributes 11% of global GHG emissions.⁵ Tropical deforestation alone contributes 7%, mostly driven by the production of agricultural and forest commodities. As the world moves toward achieving net-zero emissions by midcentury, our portfolio companies exposed to deforestation and land degradation in their value chains must consider these topics when adopting long-term climate ambitions.

				Deforestation can also have human rights-related implications, resulting in headline, human capital and legal risk for companies with exposure to land degradation practices in their supply chain. This includes the potential displacement of local communities and destruction of areas that provide cultural importance or essential resources such as food, fuel and medicine.⁶ A growing body of evidence has also linked deforestation to outbreaks of infectious disease among local communities and workforces,⁷as native animal species are forced out of their habitats to live among human populations.

				Global momentum around addressing deforestation and nature loss has accelerated with the launch of the Task Force on Nature-related Financial Disclosures (TNFD)⁸and the focus on nature as part of the COP 26 agenda. Among the various nature-related commitments to come out of the summit, the most pertinent to addressing deforestation was the Glasgow Leaders’ Declaration on Forest and Land Use. Countries hosting 90% of global forests, along with financial institutions and companies, signed a pledge to “halt and reverse forest loss and land degradation by 2030 while delivering sustainable development and promoting an inclusive rural transformation.”⁹

				For companies contributing to deforestation through their supply chains and investments, these trends represent a significant shift requiring a renewed approach to their services, products and engagement culture with stakeholders. Aside from presenting an inherent business risk, companies with deforestation exposure are facing heightened regulatory, reputational, and financial risk. At State Street Global Advisors, we believe it is important for boards and management to work to manage risks related to deforestation and land degradation in their supply chains and to enhance disclosure around these efforts.



				Guidance on Environmental Management Disclosures Addressing Deforestation Risk in Supply Chains

C-136



Stewardship Focus Area: Land Use & Biodiversity				Deforestation is an increasingly important area of focus for the State Street Global Advisors’ Asset Stewardship program. Environmental management — spanning topics that include land use, biodiversity, natural resources and the circular economy — has been a thematic stewardship priority for our program for several years. Effective environmental management encompasses all environmental impacts, within both a company’s operations and its supply chain. In 2022, our team will deepen our focus on land use and biodiversity, conducting targeted engagement campaigns, providing guidance to our investee companies and publishing thought leadership on these subjects.

Deforestation Engagement Campaign				In 2021, we initiated a series of targeted engagements with our investee companies with direct exposure to deforestation in their supply chains — primarily those that source agricultural and forest commodities. Our objective was to learn more about how these companies exercise oversight of their supply chains and how they are managing the various material risks stemming from deforestation.

				We relied on existing frameworks, including those from the CDP,^{10 Sustainability Accounting Standards Board (SASB),}¹¹^{United Nations Environment Program (UNEP),}¹²^{United Nations Global Compact (UNGC),}^{13 and Ceres}¹⁴^{to identify high-impact sectors, and engaged 15 of our significant holdings in those sectors to request in-depth engagements (see the Appendix for a list of companies engaged).}

				We chose to focus on engaging companies in the Food & Beverage and Consumer Goods sectors, due to their usage or production of the core commodities and activities responsible for the majority of agriculture-related deforestation. This includes, but is not limited to, cattle, palm oil, cocoa, leather, rubber, soy, timber and mining.

				Our conversations with companies centered on topics including:

				• Supply chain risk management;

				• Product certifications & industry organizations;

				• Participation in the policymaking process;

				• Land rights preservation and community stakeholder engagement;

				• Human rights and FPIC of local communities;

				• Ingredient traceability and identifying high-risk commodities;

				• Reputational risk and evolving consumer preferences;

				• The shifting regulatory context; and

				• Board oversight of deforestation-related risks.



				Guidance on Environmental Management Disclosures Addressing Deforestation Risk in Supply Chains

C-137



				We also engaged with external experts including non-governmental organizations, issue advocates, academic institutions and industry coalitions to understand their perspectives on managing risks related to deforestation. The individuals from these groups helped inform our engagement approach and contextualize our insights gleaned from these conversations.



Engagement Insights				As a result of our engagements and review of company disclosure practices, we identified the following key challenges that companies face and some potential best practices they have adopted to identify and address deforestation risks in their supply chain. These insights are discussed in further detail in the sections below.

				• Supply Chain Risk Management While many of the engaged companies have established supplier code of conducts, ongoing monitoring and non-compliance protocols differentiate leaders from laggards. Challengingly, a lack of industry consensus exists regarding how to engage non-compliant suppliers, stalling the implementation of no-deforestation commitments and allowing product produced on deforested lands to enter global supply chains.

				• Integrity of Auditing Process During the Pandemic Due to safety concerns of conducting in-person audits during the ongoing pandemic, companies have had to pivot and virtually engage in innovative ways, including satellite monitoring and wearable technology. While the pandemic catalyzed innovation, this remote monitoring should be coupled with a return to recurring on-the-ground engagement to be most effective.

				• Product Certification Several industry standard-setters play a critical role in defining industry best practices for product certification, but our investee companies echoed the belief that membership and certification are a floor for risk management, not a ceiling.

				• Government Relations and Policymaking Process Challenges arise for companies when working with local governments with weak land use policies and lax enforcement by authorities. Pragmatic public-private partnerships with local policymakers and international organizations can fortify company efforts to create a more resilient supply chain, protect shareholder value, and benefit local stakeholders.

				• Community Engagement & Protection of Human Rights While often characterized as an environmental risk, deforestation also presents a number of social risks that companies must consider. Companies should adopt policies that address indigenous rights such as FPIC and broader human rights topics, such as forced or child labor. Strong policies on these topics should be supported by stakeholder engagement in the value chain so that companies will have access to unfiltered information and perspectives from key communities.



				Guidance on Environmental Management Disclosures Addressing Deforestation Risk in Supply Chains

C-138



				• No-Deforestation Commitments, Metrics & KPIs In our earlier publication, “Effective Climate-Risk Disclosure in the Agricultural and Forestry Sectors through the Lens of the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures” we highlighted the need for companies in high-impact sectors to set goals to reduce their carbon emissions. Similar timebound goals should be considered when managing deforestation-related risks stemming from key commodities in the supply chain.

				Disclosure Insights

				The 15 companies we engaged disclose the following information related to deforestation:

				• 79% acknowledge the value of forests;

				• 58% are signatories to initiatives tackling deforestation;

				• 50% have established senior-level oversight and reporting structures for deforestation-related risks;

				• 21% formally recognize deforestation as a business risk; and

				• 14% have integrated performance metrics related to deforestation-linked commodities into their executive compensation and broader performance evaluation programs.

Disclosure Expectations for Companies				Companies with material exposure to deforestation in their value chain and/or investments should continue to improve their disclosure in the following areas:
				• Board-level oversight and accountability for deforestation and land use-related risks

				• Reporting and targets to reduce emissions linked to deforestation

				• Conservation or reforestation activity taken by the company

				• How deforestation is managed as a business risk

				• Quantitative and qualitative metrics covering high-risk commodities across value chain



				Guidance on Environmental Management Disclosures Addressing Deforestation Risk in Supply Chains

C-139



Identifying and Mitigating Risks in the Supply Chain				Supplier Engagement An end-to-end approach to ongoing supplier engagement is an essential component of risk management for companies with exposure to deforestation-related commodities. In our engagement with Conagra Brands, an American consumer packaged goods company, we learned how its Supplier Excellence Program facilitates engagement with the company’s vendors. Conagra assesses key suppliers at least annually on ESG risk-related performance and disclosure. This annual sustainability assessment is supplemented by quarterly performance discussions and risk analyses, and regular consultation between all parties to address any operational issues or gaps in disclosure.

Supplier Monitoring				While many of the engaged companies have established supplier code of conducts, ongoing supplier monitoring for compliance with these codes can prove difficult to implement and requires regular independent review. At Hormel Foods Corporation, an American food processing company, the company’s South American beef suppliers have ensured their compliance with relevant requirements by creating monitoring systems for farms supplying cattle, leveraging satellite images and geo-referenced maps of farms, deforestation data and information from public agencies regarding embargoed? areas and human rights. This oversight is coupled with independent audits of all environmental monitoring systems.

Supplier Non-Compliance				Companies without a defined protocol for dealing with non-compliant suppliers may have greater exposure to deforestation risk and may suffer reputational and/or legal consequences by working with suppliers that are misaligned with policy expectations. We found a lack of consensus on how companies engage with non-compliant suppliers, which can delay the termination of relationships with suppliers that fail to adequately address deforestation. Post Holdings, Inc., an American consumer packaged goods company, requires its suppliers to follow an annually reviewed code of conduct, and any potential breach of this conduct is reviewed in a consistent and transparent manner. Industry organizations like the Global Food Safety Initiative (GFSI) ensure that third-party operations audits assist in identifying non-compliant suppliers and share this information among members.

High Risk Commodity Exposure				The investee companies we engaged with shared a variety of approaches to identifying key ingredients in their products, as well as which commodities were most exposed to deforestation risk. These prioritization frameworks were generally holistic, science-based, and dependent on robust supply chain audits. The results of the identification process are paramount, as they inform the metrics and key performance indicators of companies’ deforestation policies and commitments. We learned how The Kraft Heinz Company, an American multinational food company partnered with the Rainforest Alliance, an NGO, to expand its forest risk commodities supply chain assessment to include soy. This work included surveying their suppliers, evaluating sustainable product certifications and better understanding sourcing risks based on counties of origin. The findings from this exercise were material, with over a third of the company’s global soy volume sourced from potential high-risk counties of origin.



				Guidance on Environmental Management Disclosures Addressing Deforestation Risk in Supply Chains

C-140



COVID-19 Supply Chain Auditing Challenges				The global COVID-19 pandemic limited abilities to conduct in-person audits of suppliers, catalyzing innovation in virtual monitoring, while raising questions about the effectiveness of this method in the long-term. Some of our investee companies reported investing further in satellite monitoring capabilities, while others explored new solutions like wearable technology. Post Holdings, Inc equipped on-site employees with Google Glasses to connect with virtual teams to complete multi-party audits in real time. Several of the engaged companies also emphasized the need to maintain employee privacy and ensure that these remote tools don’t breach these obligations or trust. Safely fast-tracking the adoption of these new technologies, while preserving employee privacy and protecting against cybersecurity threats, were both expressed as continued focus areas for our investee companies.

Product Certifications & Industry Organizations				Many of our investee companies emphasized the importance of participating in industry organizations to mitigate risk and work with their suppliers. These organizations provide certifications for companies who fulfill the required environmental and social criteria. Organizations frequently cited in our engagements included:
				• the Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil (RSPO);

				• the Forest Stewardship Council, (FSC);

				• the Sustainable Forest Initiative (SFI);

				• the Program for Forest Endorsement (PEFC); and

				• USDA Organic


				These standard-setters play a critical role in defining industry best practices and encouraging stronger oversight practices, but our investee companies echoed our belief that membership and certification are a floor for risk management, not a ceiling. Compliance with the standards and receiving certification are a strong initial step, but companies cannot be overly reliant on this process and take this as a proxy for total risk mitigation.

Engaging with Policymakers and Local Governments				Participating in industry coalitions and obtaining certification are valuable in creating more sustainable and resilient supply chains, and mitigating social and reputational risk. However, these mechanisms are largely voluntary, and their effectiveness for member companies depends on the jurisdiction their supply chains are located in. Several investee companies told us of the challenge posed when working with local governments with weak land use policies and lax enforcement by authorities. To achieve the systemic change required to meet the 2030 Glasgow pledge, and to mitigate continued environmental and social risk stemming from deforestation practices, companies may need to consider how to best participate in the policy-making conversation.



				Guidance on Environmental Management Disclosures Addressing Deforestation Risk in Supply Chains

C-141



				Highlighting the outsized impact one company’s efforts can have in this process, Mondelez International, Inc., an American multinational confectionery, food, holding and beverage and snack food company, has spent ten years fostering multi-lateral public-private partnerships in one of its critical supply chain domiciles, sub-Saharan Africa. In Ghana, the company developed “Cocoa Life”,¹⁵a program which incentivizes cocoa farmers to adopt more sustainable practices through increased economic benefits like achieving higher yields using less fertilizers and land. Mondelez built on this progress by announcing a formal partnership with the Forest Commission of Ghana, Cocoa Board and United Nations Development Program (“UNDP”) to reduce deforestation and forest degradation in the country while simultaneously reducing emissions in its cocoa supply chain.

				Pragmatic public-private partnerships with local policymakers and international organizations can fortify company efforts to improve supply chain resilience, protect shareholder value, and benefit local stakeholders.

Addressing Evolving Shareholder & Stakeholder Expectations				In recent years, evolving consumer preferences and increased awareness of deforestation’s impacts — particularly its contribution to biodiversity loss and climate change — have led issue advocates and investors to demand enhanced disclosure from companies exposed to deforestation risk. Since 2016, 11 deforestation-related shareholder proposals have been submitted to a shareholder vote, with two of them receiving majority support for the first time in 2021.¹⁶Following the submission of one such proposal at Procter & Gamble, an American multinational consumer goods corporation, requesting that the company report on efforts to eliminate deforestation from its forest pulp and palm oil supply chain, Procter & Gamble responded across several fronts. These actions included implementing public grievance reporting, strengthening its palm oil sourcing policy, advancing company conservation and restoration efforts and accelerating its RSPO certification targets to 2021 from 2022. Investors, issue advocates and consumers will likely continue to hold companies accountable through deforestation-related shareholder proposals moving forward, and boards should prepare to strengthen their disclosure efforts and management oversight accordingly.



				Guidance on Environmental Management Disclosures Addressing Deforestation Risk in Supply Chains

C-142



Preserving Land Rights and Engaging with Community Stakeholders				Effective approaches to acting on deforestation-related commitments must consider the land rights and livelihoods of local people, particularly indigenous communities. As part of Bunge Limited’s commitment to reaching deforestation-free value chains by 2025, we learned how the American agribusiness and food company engages with farmers to protect native vegetation and establishes incentives to support this shift to more sustainable value chains. This process includes fairly compensating farmers who commit to sustainable agricultural practices and avoid negative conversion, discouraging the practice of converting forested land to agriculture in favor of expanding across areas already open for production.

Protecting Human Rights and Respecting FPIC of Local Communities				A critical component of fostering sustainable value chains is the protection of human rights and respect of FPIC of local communities. Responding to feedback from issue advocates, Kellogg Company, an American multinational food manufacturing company, materially revised its deforestation-related commitments to protect local stakeholders in the communities with exposure to its supply chain. These pledges include immediately suspending company groups which perpetrate threats and violence towards human rights advocates, communities and workers. The company also committed to participate in and fund jurisdictional and landscape approaches which fully respect the FPIC of local communities.

Establishing Deforestation Policies and Commitments				Several of the companies we engaged with have committed to establishing no-deforestation ambitions within their supply chains covering key commodities. These policies tend to have time horizons ranging from 2025 to 2030, in line with the global pledge made at COP26. In the absence of a common industry disclosure framework on this subject, the implementation and associated disclosure of these plans varies by company. The Kroger Co., an American retail company that operates supermarkets and multi-department stores, articulated its commitment to source from deforestation-free processes across its four key commodities of palm oil, beef, soy and pulp/paper/timber, with varying implementation mechanisms and certifications for each commodity.

Measuring Success				As companies navigate the aforementioned challenges, there are a range of deforestation-related metrics and KPIs being used to measure success. High-level goals are typically supported by commodity-specific objectives on varying timelines, and progress against these objectives is shared with management, the board and shareholders. For example, The Campbell Soup Company, an American processed food and snack company is focused on reaching 100% of its suppliers passing a social compliance audit by 2025, while achieving equal success in determining accurate country of origin traceability on products derived from high-risk commodities. Mondelez International Inc. continues to report on 10 KPIs associated with its Cocoa Life project, covering target topics in the value chain, including elimination of child labor, supplier compliance certification, and ingredient traceability. Clorox Company, an American global manufacturer and marketer of consumer and professional products has committed to halve the amount of virgin plastic and virgin fiber used in packaging by 2030. To build on these initial efforts, stakeholders in our engagements expressed the need for a standardized disclosure framework that provides added transparency on how companies are performing against any deforestation-related targets and commitments. Benefits cited include defining relative and absolute performance thresholds and incentivizing the adoption of better practices among industry peers.



				Guidance on Environmental Management Disclosures Addressing Deforestation Risk in Supply Chains

C-143



Conclusion				At State Street Global Advisors, we believe that global deforestation — namely its direct linkage to biodiversity loss and climate change — presents a risk to companies with material exposure to this practice in their supply chains and investments, and should be disclosed and managed like any other business risk. This perspective, along with our fiduciary duty to act on behalf of our clients’ long-term interests, informs our asset stewardship efforts on this topic. By sharing these insights from our targeted engagement campaign and analysis of public disclosures, our intention is to equip Boards to more effectively respond to the threat of deforestation.
				Companies in high-exposure sectors are taking various steps to address risks related to global deforestation in their supply chain and investments, but there are a number of challenges they face while identifying and remediating these issues. We will continue to engage with companies to inform our ongoing efforts in this space. Please reach out to our team at [email protected] to request an engagement on this important topic.



				Guidance on Environmental Management Disclosures Addressing Deforestation Risk in Supply Chains

C-144


Appendix: Companies Engaged as Part of Deforestation Engagement Campaign	Company Name	Market/Country	Sector
	AGCO Corporation	United States	Resource Transformation
	Bunge Limited	United States	Food & Beverage
	Campbell Soup Company	United States	Food & Beverage
	Conagra Brands, Inc.	United States	Food & Beverage
	Darden Restaurants, Inc.	United States	Food & Beverage
	Hormel Foods Corporation	United States	Food & Beverage
	Kellogg Company	United States	Food & Beverage
	Mondelez International, Inc.	United States	Food & Beverage
	Post Holdings, Inc.	United States	Food & Beverage
	The Clorox Company	United States	Consumer Goods
	The J.M. Smucker Company	United States	Food & Beverage
	The Kraft Heinz Company	United States	Food & Beverage
	The Procter & Gamble Company	United States	Consumer Goods
	The Kroger Co.	United States	Food & Beverage
	Weyerhaeuser Company	United States	Renewable Resources & Alternative Energy

Endnotes

1 Global Forest Resources Assessment 2020 — Key findings” Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. (2020) http://fao.org/3/CA8753EN/ CA8753EN.pdf.

2 “Forests Sourcebook: Practical Guidance For Sustaining Forests In Development Cooperation” World Bank-WWF Alliance for Forest Conservation and Sustainable Use (2008) World Bank Document.

3 Labbate, Gabriel. “Deforestation Factsheet”, United Nations Environment Programme, (April 2021), https://wedocs.unep.org/bitstream/ handle/20.500.11822/35851/DF.pdf.

4 “Paris Agreement”. United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. (April 2016).

5 “Climate Change and Land: An IPCC Special Report on climate change, desertification, land degradation, sustainable land management, food security, and greenhouse gas fluxes in terrestrial ecosystems”, Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, (January 2020), https://ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/ sites/4/2020/02/SPM_Updated-Jan20.pdf.

6 “Indonesia: Indigenous Peoples Losing Their Forests” Human Rights Watch (September 2019) hrw.org/ news/2019/09/22/indonesia-indigenous-peoples-losing-their-forests#.

7 Gross, Anna. Schipani, Andres. Palma, Stefania. Findlay, Stephanie. “Global Deforestation Accelerates During the Pandemic”, The Financial Times, (August 2020), https://ft.com/content/b72e3969-522c-4e83-b431-c0b498754b2d.

8 “The TNFD Nature-related & Opportunity Management and Disclosure Framework” Taskforce on Nature-related Financial Disclosures, (March 2020) https://tnfd. global/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/220321-TNFD- framework-beta-v0.1-Exec-Summary-FINAL.pdf.

9 “Glasgow Leaders’ Declaration on Forests and Land Use”, UN Climate Change Conference UK 2021, (February 2021), https://ukcop26.org/glasgow-leaders-declaration-on-forests-and-
land-use/.

10 “The Collective Effort to End Deforestation: A Pathway For Companies to Raise Their Ambition”, CDP, (March 2021), https://cdn.cdp.net/cdp-production/cms/reports/ documents/000/005/630/original/CDP_Forests_ analysis_report_2020.pdf?1616334771.

11 “Processed Foods: Sustainability Accounting Standard”, Sustainability Accounting Standards Board, (October 2018) https://sasb.org/wp-content/ uploads/2018/11/ Processed_Foods_Standard_2018.pdf.



				Guidance on Environmental Management Disclosures Addressing Deforestation Risk in Supply Chains

C-145

12 Labbate, Gabriel. “Deforestation Factsheet”, United Nations Environment Programme, (April 2021), https://wedocs.unep.org/bitstream/ handle/20.500.11822/35851/DF.pdf.

13 “A Spotlight on Sustainable Supply Chain & Procurement”, United Nations Global Compact (December 2021), https://unglobalcompact.org/take- action/leadership/integrate-sustainability/roadmap/ supply-chain.

14 “The Investor Guide to Deforestation and Climate Change”, Ceres, (June 2020), https://ceres.org/sites/ default/files/reports/2020-06/Ceres%20Investor%20 Guide%20FINAL%20June%2029.pdf.

15 Van Cutsem, Cedric. “Action Plans to Protect and Restore Forests, with Farmers at the Heart”, Cocoa Life: Mondelez International, (March 2019). https://cocoalife. org/progress/action-plans-to-protect-and-restore- forests-with-cocoa-life-farmers-at-the-heart.

16 Dhanasarnsombat, Sansanee. “Deforestation Shareholder Proposals Wins Signals a Shift”, Bloomberg Law, (August 2021). https://news. bloomberglaw.com/ bloomberg-law-analysis/analysis-deforestation-shareholder-proposal-wins-signal-a-shift.



About State Street Global Advisors	Our clients are the world’s governments, institutions and financial advisors. To help them achieve their financial goals we live our guiding principles each and every day:
	•	Start with rigor
	•	Build from breadth
	•	Invest as stewards
	•	Invent the future
	For four decades, these principles have helped us be the quiet power in a tumultuous investing world. Helping millions of people secure their financial futures. This takes each of our employees in 29 offices around the world, and a firm-wide conviction that we can always do it better. As a result, we are the world’s fourth-largest asset manager* with US $3.48 trillion^† under our care.
	* Pensions & Investments Research Center, as of December 31, 2021.
	^† This figure is presented as of December 31, 2022 and includes approximately $58.60 billion USD of assets with respect to SPDR products for which State Street Global Advisors Funds Distributors, LLC (SSGA FD) acts solely as the marketing agent. SSGA FD and State Street Global Advisors are affiliated. Please note all AUM is unaudited.



				Guidance on Environmental Management Disclosures Addressing Deforestation Risk in Supply Chains

C-146

ssga.com

Marketing communications

State Street Global Advisors Worldwide Entities

Rogerson’s Quay, Dublin 2. Canada: State Street Global Advisors, Ltd., 1981 McGill College Avenue, Suite 500, Montreal, Qc, H3A 3A8, T: +514 282 2400 and 30 Adelaide Street East Suite 800, Toronto, Ontario M5C 3G6. T: +647 775 5900. France: State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, France Branch (“State Street Global Advisors France”) is a branch of State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, registered in Ireland with company number 49934, authorised and regulated by the Central Bank of Ireland, and whose registered office is at 78 Sir John Rogerson’s Quay, Dublin 2. State Street Global Advisors France is registered in France with company number RCS Nanterre 899 183 289, and its office is located at Coeur Défense — Tour A — La Défense 4, 33e étage, 100, Esplanade du Général de Gaulle, 92 931 Paris La Défense Cedex, France. T: +33 1 44 45 40 00. F: +33 1 44 45 41 92. Germany: State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, Branch in Germany, Brienner Strasse 59, D-80333 Munich, Germany (“State Street Global Advisors Germany”). T: +49 (0)89 55878 400. State Street Global Advisors Germany is a branch of State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, registered in Ireland with company number 49934, authorised and regulated by the Central Bank of Ireland, and whose registered office is at 78 Sir John

Rogerson’s Quay, Dublin 2. Hong Kong: State Street Global Advisors Asia Limited, 68/F, Two International Finance Centre, 8 Finance Street, Central, Hong Kong. T: +852 2103-0288. F: +852 2103-0200. Ireland: State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited is regulated by the Central Bank of Ireland. Registered office address 78 Sir John Rogerson’s Quay, Dublin 2. Registered Number: 49934. T: +353 (0)1 776 3000. F: +353 (0)1 776 3300. Italy: State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, Italy Branch (“State Street Global Advisors Italy”) is a branch of State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, registered in Ireland with company number 49934, authorised and regulated by the Central Bank of Ireland, and whose registered office is at 78 Sir John Rogerson’s Quay, Dublin 2. State Street Global Advisors Italy is registered in Italy with company number 11871450968 — REA: 2628603 and VAT number 11871450968, and its office is located at Via Ferrante Aporti, 10 -20125 Milan, Italy. T: +39 02 32066 100. F: +39 02 32066 155. Japan: State Street Global Advisors (Japan) Co., Ltd., Toranomon Hills Mori Tower 25F 1-23-1 Toranomon, Minato-ku, Tokyo 105-6325 Japan. T: +81-3-4530-7380. Financial Instruments Business Operator, Kanto Local Financial Bureau (Kinsho #345), Membership: Japan Investment Advisers

Association, The Investment Trust Association, Japan, Japan Securities Dealers’ Association. Netherlands: State Street Global Advisors Netherlands, Apollo Building 7th floor, Herikerbergweg 29, 1101 CN Amsterdam, Netherlands. T: +31 20 7181 000. State Street Global Advisors Netherlands is a branch office of State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, registered in Ireland with company number 49934, authorised and regulated by the Central Bank of Ireland, and whose registered office is at 78 Sir John Rogerson’s Quay, Dublin 2. Singapore: State Street Global Advisors Singapore Limited, 168, Robinson Road, #33-01 Capital Tower, Singapore 068912 (Company Reg. No: 200002719D, regulated by the Monetary Authority of Singapore). T: +65 6826-7555. F: +65 6826-7501. Switzerland: State Street Global Advisors AG, Beethovenstr. 19, CH-8027 Zurich. Registered with the Register of Commerce Zurich CHE-105.078.458. T: +41 (0)44 245 70 00. F: +41 (0)44 245 70 16. United Kingdom: State Street Global Advisors Limited. Authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority. Registered in England. Registered No. 2509928. VAT No. 5776591 81. Registered office: 20 Churchill Place, Canary Wharf, London, E14 5HJ. T: 020 3395 6000. F: 020 3395 6350. United States: State Street Global Advisors, 1 Iron Street, Boston, MA 02210-1641. T: +1 617 786 3000.



				Guidance on Environmental Management Disclosures Addressing Deforestation Risk in Supply Chains

C-147

Investing involves risk including the risk of loss of principal.

The whole or any part of this work may not be reproduced, copied or transmitted or any of its contents disclosed to third parties without SSGA’s express written consent.

All information is from SSGA unless otherwise noted and has been obtained from sources believed to be reliable, but its accuracy is not guaranteed. There is no representation or

warranty as to the current accuracy, reliability or completeness of, nor liability for, decisions based on such information and it should not be relied on as such.

This communication is directed at professional clients (this includes eligible counterparties as defined by the appropriate EU regulator) who are deemed both knowledgeable and experienced in matters relating to investments. The products and services to which this communication relates are only available to such persons and persons of any other description (including retail clients) should not rely on this communication.

Responsible-Factor (R Factor) scoring is designed by State Street to reflect certain ESG characteristics and does not represent investment performance. Results generated out

of the scoring model is based on sustainability and corporate governance dimensions of a scored entity.

ID1483402-4641947.2.1.GBL.RTL 0323 Exp. Date: 03/31/2024



				Guidance on Environmental Management Disclosures Addressing Deforestation Risk in Supply Chains

C-148

LOGO

May 2023

Asset Stewardship

Guidance on Human Rights Disclosures & Practices

State Street Global Advisors is committed to upholding human rights, and we expect our investee companies to as well given the reputational, regulatory, legal, and operational risks that human rights violations can pose to a company. We expect portfolio companies to regularly identify whether there are risks related to human rights¹ in their operations and manage any material risks that emerge, providing relevant disclosures to investors.

As defined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the ILO Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work.

C-149

LOGO



Our Expectations for Human Rights Disclosures				We expect companies to disclose whether they have established processes for identifying risks related to human rights. If any material human rights risks are identified, we expect further public disclosure describing: 1. Human rights-related risks the company considers most material; 2. Plans to manage and mitigate these risks; 3. Board oversight of these risks; and 4. Assessment of the effectiveness of the human rights risk management program.

				State Street Global Advisors believes that best practices for enhancing human rights-related disclosures include describing:

				• Specific geographic regions, industries, resources, or types of workforce where the risk is highest; • How workers, civil society organizations, and other stakeholders are involved in identifying and mitigating issues; • Which mechanisms exist for workers to raise grievances without fear of retaliation; and • How the company supports impacted individuals in providing restorative remedy.

Engagements				Incorporating Our Expectations Into Conversations with Companies

				We will engage companies on this topic, prioritizing companies with the highest risk of human rights violations. When assessing the risk level of a particular company, we will consider the company’s industry, region, and business model; any history of human rights violations; and client and stakeholder input. In 2021, we initiated a targeted engagement campaign on modern slavery, and in 2022, we undertook another series of proactive engagements on human rights, targeting companies who were noncompliant with the UN Global Compact. We also requested reactive engagements with specific companies if we were made aware that they had been accused of human rights violations.

Thought Leadership Addressing Modern Slavery in Supply Chains				In Q3 2021, we initiated a series of targeted engagements on the topic of modern slavery. We relied on existing frameworks including SASB, the Global Slavery Index, and the International Labor Organization to identify high-risk sectors, and reached out to our largest holdings in those sectors to request in-depth engagements. We focused on companies in industries where modern slavery poses an outsized risk, especially given the increasing reputational and regulatory risks associated with forced labor in the supply chain. Through this process, we gleaned insights into companies’ best practices to inform our ongoing stewardship efforts in this space. To review our insights from this campaign, please visit Modern Slavery Insights.

C-150

LOGO



Voting Incorporating Our Expectations into Our Proxy Voting and Engagement Practices				With respect to voting on human rights-related disclosure issues, we will first engage with companies related to our human rights-related disclosure expectations outlined herein, focusing on companies and industries with the greatest risk and opportunity. Below is the approach we follow when voting on human rights related shareholder proposals:

				• FOR we will consider voting for shareholder proposals that we believe will lead to increased alignment with our expectations for human rights related disclosures;

				• ABSTAIN we will consider voting abstain when we support some elements of a proposal’s request, or recognize a company’s commitment to implement related disclosure and/or oversight practices;

				• AGAINST we will vote against shareholder proposals that we believe are immaterial, overly prescriptive, or would not further our disclosure and oversight expectations.

Investment and Research Activities				State Street Global Advisors also incorporates human rights into investment and research activities. Our firm allocated significant resources toward building our ESG data architecture which gives our portfolio managers and researchers access to a variety of best-in-class data vendors. Our colleagues have access to best-in-class data on companies’ human rights practices.

Conclusion				We encourage companies in our portfolios to align their disclosures and practices with our expectations. Please reach out to State Street Global Advisors’ Asset Stewardship Team at [email protected] to request an engagement on this important topic.

About State Street Global Advisors				For four decades, State Street Global Advisors has served the world’s governments, institutions and financial advisors. With a rigorous, risk-aware approach built on research, analysis and market-tested experience, we build from a breadth of index and active strategies to create cost-effective solutions. And, as pioneers in index, ETF, and ESG investing, we are always inventing new ways to invest. As a result, we have become the world’s fourth-largest asset manager* with US $3.62 trillion^† under our care.

				* Pensions & Investments Research Center, as of December 31, 2021.
				^†This figure is presented as of March 31, 2023 and includes approximately $65.03 billion USD of assets with respect to SPDR products for which State Street Global Advisors Funds Distributors, LLC (SSGA FD) acts solely as the marketing agent. SSGA FD and State Street Global Advisors are affiliated. Please note all AUM is unaudited.

C-151

LOGO

ssga.com

State Street Global Advisors

Marketing Communications

Worldwide Entities

regulated by the Central Bank of Ireland, and whose registered office is at 78 Sir

C-152

LOGO

Important Risk Information

Investing involves risk including the risk of loss of principal.

This means that this marketing communication (a) has not been prepared in accordance with legal requirements designed to promote the independence of investment research (b) is not subject to any prohibition on dealing ahead of the dissemination of investment research.

The views expressed in this material are the views of SSGA Asset Stewardship Team through the period ended May 26, 2023 and are subject to change based on market and other conditions. This document contains certain statements that may be deemed forward-looking statements. Please note that any such statements are not guarantees of any future performance and actual results or developments may differ materially from those projected.

Investing involves risk including the risk of loss of principal.

The whole or any part of this work may not be reproduced, copied or transmitted or any of its contents disclosed to third parties without SSGA’s express written consent.

All information is from SSGA unless otherwise noted and

This communication is directed at professional clients (this includes eligible counterparties as defined by the appropriate

EU regulator) who are deemed both knowledgeable and experienced in matters relating to investments. The products and services to which this communication relates are only available to such persons and persons of any other description (including retail clients) should not rely on this communication.

The trademarks and service marks referenced herein are the property of their respective owners. Third party data providers make no warranties or representations of any kind relating to the accuracy, completeness or timeliness of the data and have no liability for damages of any kind relating to the use of such data. Responsible-Factor (R Factor) scoring is designed by State Street to reflect certain ESG characteristics and does not represent investment performance. Results generated out of the scoring model is based on sustainability and corporate governance dimensions of a scored entity.

ID1483214-4044035.5.1.GBL.RTL 0323 Exp. Date: 06/30/2024

C-153

Insights

Asset Stewardship

Guidance on Board Oversight of Director Time Commitments

April 2023



Key Takeaways				• The global COVID-19 pandemic and an elevated culture of shareholder engagement have heightened the time commitment required to serve as a director on a public company board. • Investors would benefit from increased transparency over how Nominating Committees assess their directors’ time commitments and what factors are included in this discussion. • This guidance sets forth our expectations for Nominating Committees to evaluate their directors’ time commitments, regularly assess director effectiveness, and provide public disclosure on their policies and efforts to investors.

A Historic Transition				The global COVID-19 pandemic and an elevated culture of shareholder engagement have heightened the time commitment required to serve as a director on a public company board. State Street Global Advisors’ Asset Stewardship team values the critical role that effective boards play in keeping management focused on their companies’ long-term goals. Through our engagements with portfolio companies, we learned how their strategies and operations are continuously reinvented to meet a confluence of challenges, including the global health crisis and the systemic risks of climate change and gender, racial and ethnic inequity. These forces continue to shape board agendas, with directors citing corporate resiliency¹as the emerging topic most central to their conversations in 2021.

The Evolving Role and Expectations of Directors				To effectively manage the risks and opportunities facing their companies, directors are meeting more often. In 2021, S&P 500 boards formally met an average of 9.4 times,²a 25% year-over-year increase. FTSE 150 boards held an average of 11.6 meetings in 2021, a 50% increase compared to 2020,^{3 reflecting the global nature of this development.}

				Additionally, a more robust engagement culture with both internal and external stakeholders has placed more demands on directors’ time.

C-154



SPAC Directorship				The rise of Special Purpose Acquisition Companies (“SPACs”) continues to shape our governance discussions with boards. The rapid pace of SPAC activity has continued to challenge traditional models of corporate governance, and has driven strong demand for qualified SPAC directors, many of whom also serve as public company directors.

				Through our continued dialogue with directors serving on both SPAC and public company boards, we have learned the following:

				• While SPAC director time commitment requirements vary depending on the individual and SPAC board, they are generally less than the average time associated with public company directorship.

				• SPACs are typically subject to a two-year time horizon to find an acquisition target, and directors are generally called on to spend their most significant service time in the final months before the acquisition closes with the target company.

				• Typically, no more than one SPAC director rolls onto the new entity’s board in an official capacity.

				• In many cases, multiple members of the SPAC sponsor management team remain on the board once the target company goes public.

				• SPAC sponsors play a much more time-consuming role relative to directors, and their responsibilities include raising capital, deal sourcing, and conducting deep due diligence on potential targets.

				• SPAC director responsibilities include evaluating target candidates, facilitating industry introductions, and providing general oversight over the process.

				Given these findings, we do not consider service on a SPAC board when evaluating directors for excessive commitments. However, we do expect these roles to be considered by Nominating Committees when evaluating director time commitments.

Our Guidance on Director Time Commitments				Insights gleaned from our director engagements, coupled with a growing body of research,⁴ reflect the ever-increasing time commitment associated with serving as a director on a public company board. Directors have a challenging role, and the topics they are expected to oversee have increased in scope and complexity.



				Guidance on Board Oversight of Director Time Commitments

C-155



				Despite the elevated oversight expectations on directors and the company boards on which they serve, 112 boards among the S&P 500 do not report specific limits on additional board service.⁵ Investors would benefit from increased transparency over how Nominating Committees assess their directors’ time commitments and what factors are included in these decisions. We believe well-governed boards are responsible for establishing, enforcing and disclosing their director commitment policies.

				We expect Nominating Committees to evaluate their directors’ time commitments, regularly assess director effectiveness, and provide public disclosure on their policies and efforts to investors.

Voting Incorporating Our Guidance into Our Voting Policies				When voting on the election or re-election of a director, we consider the number of outside board directorships that a non-executive and an executive may undertake. Thus, State Street Global Advisors may take voting action against a director who exceeds the number of board mandates listed below:
				• Named Executive Officers (NEOs) of a public company who sit on more than two public company boards

				• Non-executive board chairs or lead independent directors who sit on more than three public company boards

				• Director nominees who sit on more than four public company boards

				For non-executive board chairs/lead independent directors and director nominees who hold excessive commitments, as defined above, we may consider waiving our policy and vote in support of a director if a company discloses its director commitment policy in a publicly available manner (e.g., corporate governance guidelines, proxy statement, company website). This policy or associated disclosure must include:

				• A numerical limit on public company board seats a director can serve on

				— This limit cannot exceed our policy by more than one seat

				• Consideration of public company board leadership positions (e.g., Committee Chair)

				• Affirmation that all directors are currently compliant with the company policy

				• Description of an annual policy review process undertaken by the Nominating Committee to evaluate outside director time commitments



				Guidance on Board Oversight of Director Time Commitments

C-156


				A Sample Disclosure Might Look Like:

				“Directors can sit on no more than five public company boards (including our own), with consideration given to public company leadership roles and outside commitments. The Nominating Committee conducts an annual review of director commitment levels, and affirms that all directors are compliant at this time.”

				If a director is imminently leaving a board and this departure is disclosed in a written, time-bound and publicly-available manner, we may consider waiving our withhold vote when evaluating directors for excessive commitments.

				Service on a mutual fund board, the board of a UK investment trust or a Special Purpose Acquisition Company (SPAC) board is not considered when evaluating directors for excessive commitments. However, we do expect these roles to be considered by Nominating Committees when evaluating director time commitments.

Conclusion				We remain focused on our fiduciary duty to improve long-term value of our clients’ investments. It is our conviction that well-governed boards are best placed to evaluate their directors’ time commitments, and that Nominating Committees are responsible for establishing, enforcing and disclosing their director commitment policies to investors.

Endnotes

1 Celia Huber, Frithjof Lund and Nina Speilmann, “How boards have risen to the COVID-19 challenge, and what’s next,” McKinsey & Company, (April 2021), https:// mckinsey.com/business-functions/strategy-and-corporate
-finance/our-insights/how-boards-have
-risen-to-the-covid-19- challenge-and-whats-next.

2 2Julie Hembrock Daum, Kathleen M. Tamayo, Ann Yerger, “2021 U.S. Spencer Stuart Board Index,” Spencer Stuart, (November 2021), https://spencerstuart.com/-/ media
/2021/october/ssbi2021/us-spencer-stuart
-board-index-2021.pdf.

3 3Tessa Bamford, Monisha Banerjee, Livia Enomoto, Keith Fryer, Leoni Fruhwirth, Celia Jackson, Nadia Kangmasto, Alastair Rolfe, Alice Wyatt. “2021 UK Spencer Stuart Board Index” Spencer Stuart, (November 2021), https://spencerstuart.com/
research-and-insight/uk- board-index.

4 Celia Huber, Frithjof Lund and Nina Speilmann, “How boards have risen to the COVID-19 challenge, and what’s next,” Julie Hembrock Daum, Kathleen M. Tamayo, Ann Yerger, “2021 U.S. Spencer Stuart Board Index,”

5 Julie Hembrock Daum, Kathleen M. Tamayo, Ann Yerger, “2021 U.S. Spencer Stuart Board Index,”



				Guidance on Board Oversight of Director Time Commitments

C-157



About State Street Global Advisors				Our clients are the world’s governments, institutions and financial advisors. To help them achieve their financial goals we live our guiding principles each and every day:

				• Start with rigor

				• Build from breadth

				• Invest as stewards

				• Invent the future

				For four decades, these principles have helped us be the quiet power in a tumultuous investing world. Helping millions of people secure their financial futures. This takes each of our employees in 29 offices around the world, and a firm-wide conviction that we can always do it better. As a result, we are the world’s fourth-largest asset manager* with US $3.62 trillion^† under our care.

				* Pensions & Investments Research Center, as of December 31, 2021.
				^† This figure is presented as of March 31, 2023 and includes approximately $65.03 billion USD of assets with respect to SPDR products for which State Street Global Advisors Funds Distributors, LLC (SSGA FD) acts solely as the marketing agent. SSGA FD and State Street Global Advisors are affliiated. Please note all AUM is unaudited.



				Guidance on Board Oversight of Director Time Commitments

C-158

ssga.com

Marketing Communication

State Street Global Advisors

Worldwide Entities

Abu Dhabi: State Street Global Advisors Limited, ADGM branch is regulated by the Financial Services Regulatory Authority (FSRA).

This document is intended for Professional Clients or Market Counterparties only as defined by the FSRA and no other person should act upon it. State Street Global Advisors Limited, ADGM Branch, Al Khatem Tower, Suite 42801, Level 28, ADGM Square, Al Maryah Island, P.O Box 76404, Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates. Regulated by the ADGM Financial Services Regulatory Authority. T: +971 2 245 9000. Australia: State Street Global Advisors, Australia, Limited (ABN 42 003 914 225) is the holder of an Australian Financial Services License (AFSL Number 238276). Registered office: Level 14, 420 George Street, Sydney, NSW 2000, Australia. T: +612 9240-7600. F: +612 9240-7611. Belgium: State Street Global Advisors Belgium, Chaussée de La Hulpe 185, 1170 Brussels, Belgium. T: +32 2 663 2036. State Street Global Advisors Belgium is a branch office of State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, registered in Ireland with company number 49934, authorised and regulated by the Central Bank of Ireland, and whose registered office is at 78 Sir John Rogerson’s Quay, Dublin

2. Canada: State Street Global Advisors, Ltd., 1981 McGill College Avenue, Suite 500, Montreal, Qc, H3A 3A8, T: +514 282 2400 and 30 Adelaide Street East Suite 800, Toronto, Ontario M5C 3G6. T: +647 775 5900. France: State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, France Branch (“State Street Global Advisors France”) is a branch of State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, registered in Ireland with company number 49934, authorised and regulated by the Central Bank of Ireland, and whose registered office is at 78 Sir John Rogerson’s Quay, Dublin 2. State Street Global Advisors France is registered in France with company number RCS Nanterre 899 183 289, and its office is located at Coeur Défense — Tour A — La Défense 4, 33e étage, 100, Esplanade du Général de Gaulle, 92 931 Paris La Défense Cedex, France. T: +33 1 44 45 40 00. F: +33 1 44 45 41 92. Germany: State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, Branch in Germany, Brienner Strasse 59, D-80333 Munich, Germany (“State Street Global Advisors Germany”). T: +49 (0)89 55878 400. State Street Global Advisors Germany is a branch of State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, registered in Ireland with company number 49934, authorised and regulated by the Central Bank of Ireland, and whose registered office is at 78 Sir John Rogerson’s Quay, Dublin 2. Hong Kong: State Street Global Advisors Asia Limited,

68/F, Two International Finance Centre, 8 Finance Street, Central, Hong Kong. T: +852 2103-0288. F: +852 2103-0200. Ireland: State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited is regulated by the Central Bank of Ireland. Registered office address 78 Sir John Rogerson’s Quay, Dublin 2. Registered Number: 49934. T: +353 (0)1 776 3000. F: +353 (0)1 776 3300. Italy: State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, Italy Branch (“State Street Global Advisors Italy”) is a branch of State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, registered in Ireland with company number 49934, authorised and regulated by the Central Bank of Ireland, and whose registered office is at 78 Sir John Rogerson’s Quay, Dublin 2. State Street Global Advisors Italy is registered in Italy with company number 11871450968 — REA: 2628603 and VAT number 11871450968, and its office is located at Via Ferrante Aporti, 10 -20125 Milan, Italy. T: +39 02 32066 100. F: +39 02 32066 155. Japan: State Street Global Advisors (Japan) Co., Ltd., Toranomon Hills Mori Tower 25F 1-23-1 Toranomon, Minato-ku, Tokyo 105-6325 Japan. T: +81-3-4530-7380. Financial Instruments Business Operator, Kanto Local Financial Bureau (Kinsho #345), Membership: Japan Investment Advisers Association, The Investment Trust Association, Japan, Japan Securities Dealers’ Association. Netherlands: State Street Global Advisors Netherlands, Apollo Building

7th floor, Herikerbergweg 29, 1101 CN Amsterdam, Netherlands. T: +31 20 7181 000. State Street Global Advisors Netherlands is a branch office of State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, registered in Ireland with company number 49934, authorised and regulated by the Central Bank of Ireland, and whose registered office is at 78 Sir John Rogerson’s Quay, Dublin 2. Singapore: State Street Global Advisors Singapore Limited, 168, Robinson Road, #33-01 Capital Tower, Singapore 068912 (Company Reg. No: 200002719D, regulated by the Monetary Authority of Singapore). T: +65 6826-7555. F: +65 6826-7501. Switzerland: State Street Global Advisors AG, Beethovenstr. 19, CH-8027 Zurich. Registered with the Register of Commerce Zurich CHE-105.078.458. T: +41 (0)44 245 70 00. F: +41 (0)44 245 70 16. United Kingdom: State Street Global Advisors Limited. Authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority. Registered in England. Registered No. 2509928. VAT No. 5776591 81. Registered office: 20 Churchill Place, Canary Wharf, London, E14 5HJ. T: 020 3395 6000. F: 020 3395 6350. United States: State Street Global Advisors, 1 Iron Street, Boston, MA 02210-1641. T: +1 617 786 3000.



				Guidance on Board Oversight of Director Time Commitments

C-159

Investing involves risk including the risk of loss of principal.

The whole or any part of this work may not be reproduced, copied or transmitted or any of its contents disclosed to third parties without SSGA’s express written consent.

All information is from SSGA unless otherwise noted and has been obtained from sources believed to be reliable, but its accuracy is not guaranteed. There is no

representation or warranty as to the current accuracy, reliability or completeness of, nor liability for, decisions based on such information and it should not be relied on as such.

Responsible-Factor (R Factor) scoring is designed by State Street to reflect certain ESG characteristics and does not represent investment performance. Results

generated out of the scoring model is based on sustainability and corporate governance dimensions of a scored entity.

ID1522581-4055816.3.1.GBL.RTL 0423

Exp. Date: 03/31/2024



				Guidance on Board Oversight of Director Time Commitments

C-160



Insights Asset Stewardship March 2023				Corporate Participation in the Political Process in the United States

				This guidance describes the framework we use to analyze shareholder proposals regarding corporate participation in the political process in the United States.

Background				Corporate participation in the political process is common practice in the United States, and we believe it continues to carry risks that warrant stronger board oversight and increased transparency. Companies that make political contributions, pursue lobbying activities, or support politically-active industry groups in the United States have a responsibility to provide adequate disclosure to investors, and their boards should oversee political activities.

				What follows is an overview of the framework we use to evaluate three common political activity shareholder proposal themes: 1) political contributions; 2) lobbying; and 3) trade association alignment. We will consider supporting relevant shareholder proposals when a company’s disclosures are not fully aligned with our expectations outlined below.

Political Contributions				Political contribution proposals ask issuers to disclose direct and indirect political spending. State Street Global Advisors expects investee companies to disclose the following information regarding political contributions not only through mandated filings, but also on the company’s own website or corporate responsibility reporting:

				• All contributions, no matter the dollar value, made by the company, its subsidiaries, and/ or affiliated Political Action Committees (PACs) to individual candidates, PACs, and other political organizations at the state and federal levels in the US; and

				• The role of the board in oversight of political contributions.



				Corporate Participation in the Political Process in the United States

C-161



Lobbying				Lobbying proposals ask companies to describe the process for the board’s review of political policies, lobbying expenditures, general lobbying activities, and selection and engagement of lobbyists. As investors, we are concerned when lobbying creates potential reputational risks, for example by contradicting companies’ publicly stated positions on relevant issues. We believe that board oversight can help mitigate these risks, as the board is attuned to the company’s values, mission, and public perception. As such, we expect companies to disclose:

				• Membership in US trade associations (to which payments are above $50,000 per year); and

				• The role of the board in overseeing lobbying activities.

Trade Association Alignment				The latest iteration of politically-focused shareholder proposals ask that corporate membership in trade associations be aligned with a company’s stated position on various environmental and social issues, for example climate change. State Street Global Advisors evaluates the following when considering such a proposal:

				• The board’s role in overseeing the company’s participation in the political process in the US, including membership in trade associations;

				• Whether the company regularly performs a gap analysis of its stated positions on relevant environmental and/or social issues versus those of its trade associations; and

				• Whether the company disclosed a list of its US trade association memberships (to which payments are above $50,000 per year).

About State Street Global Advisors				For four decades, State Street Global Advisors has served the world’s governments, institutions and financial advisors. With a rigorous, risk-aware approach built on research, analysis and market-tested experience, we build from a breadth of index and active strategies to create cost-effective solutions. And, as pioneers in index, ETF, and ESG investing, we are always inventing new ways to invest. As a result, we have become the world’s fourth-largest asset manager* with US $3.48 trillion^† under our care.

				* Pensions & Investments Research Center, as of December 31, 2021.
				† This figure is presented as of December 31, 2022 and includes approximately $58.60 billion USD of assets with respect to SPDR products for which State Street Global Advisors Funds Distributors, LLC (SSGA FD) acts solely as the marketing agent. SSGA FD and State Street Global Advisors are affiliated. Please note all AUM is unaudited.



				Corporate Participation in the Political Process in the United States

C-162

ssga.com

Marketing communications

State Street Global Advisors

Worldwide Entities

Advisors Belgium is a branch office of State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, registered in Ireland with company number 49934, authorised and regulated by the Central Bank of Ireland, and whose registered office is at 78 Sir John Rogerson’s Quay, Dublin 2. Canada: State Street Global Advisors, Ltd., 1981 McGill College Avenue, Suite 500, Montreal, Qc, H3A 3A8, T: +514 282 2400 and 30 Adelaide Street East Suite 800, Toronto, Ontario M5C 3G6. T: +647 775 5900. France: State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, France Branch (“State Street Global Advisors France”) is a branch of State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, registered in Ireland with company number 49934, authorised and regulated by the Central Bank of Ireland, and whose registered office is at 78 Sir John Rogerson’s Quay, Dublin 2. State Street Global Advisors France is registered in France with company number RCS Nanterre 899 183 289, and its office is located at Coeur Défense — Tour A — La Défense 4, 33e étage, 100, Esplanade du Général de Gaulle, 92 931 Paris La Défense Cedex, France. T: +33 1 44 45 40 00. F: +33 1 44 45 41 92. Germany: State Street Global Advisors Europe

Limited, Branch in Germany, Brienner Strasse 59, D-80333 Munich, Germany (“State Street Global Advisors Germany”). T: +49 (0)89 55878 400. State Street Global Advisors Germany is a branch of State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, registered in Ireland with company number 49934, authorised and regulated by the Central Bank of Ireland, and whose registered office is at 78 Sir John Rogerson’s Quay, Dublin 2. Hong Kong: State Street Global Advisors Asia Limited, 68/F, Two International Finance Centre, 8 Finance Street, Central, Hong Kong. T: +852 2103-0288. F: +852 2103-0200. Ireland: State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited is regulated by the Central Bank of Ireland. Registered office address 78 Sir John Rogerson’s Quay, Dublin 2. Registered Number: 49934. T: +353 (0)1 776 3000. F: +353 (0)1 776 3300. Italy: State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, Italy Branch (“State Street Global Advisors Italy”) is a branch of State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, registered in Ireland with company number 49934, authorised and regulated by the Central Bank of Ireland, and whose registered office is at 78 Sir John Rogerson’s Quay,

Dublin 2. State Street Global Advisors Italy is registered in Italy with company number 11871450968 — REA: 2628603 and VAT number 11871450968, and its office is located at Via Ferrante Aporti, 10 -20125 Milan, Italy. T: +39 02 32066 100. F: +39 02 32066 155. Japan: State Street Global Advisors (Japan) Co., Ltd., Toranomon Hills Mori Tower 25F 1-23-1 Toranomon, Minato-ku, Tokyo 105-6325 Japan. T: +81-3-4530-7380. Financial Instruments Business Operator, Kanto Local Financial Bureau (Kinsho #345), Membership: Japan Investment Advisers Association, The Investment Trust Association, Japan, Japan Securities Dealers’ Association. Netherlands: State Street Global Advisors Netherlands, Apollo Building 7th floor, Herikerbergweg 29, 1101 CN Amsterdam, Netherlands. T: +31 20 7181 000. State Street Global Advisors Netherlands is a branch office of State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, registered in Ireland with company number 49934, authorised and regulated by the Central Bank of Ireland, and whose registered office is at 78 Sir John Rogerson’s Quay, Dublin 2. Singapore: State Street Global Advisors Singapore Limited, 168,



				Corporate Participation in the Political Process in the United States

C-163

Robinson Road, #33-01 Capital Tower, Singapore 068912 (Company Reg. No: 200002719D, regulated by the Monetary Authority of Singapore). T: +65 6826-7555. F: +65 6826-7501. Switzerland: State Street Global Advisors AG, Beethovenstr. 19, CH-8027 Zurich. Registered with the Register of Commerce Zurich CHE-105.078.458. T: +41 (0)44 245 70 00. F: +41 (0)44 245 70 16. United Kingdom: State Street Global Advisors Limited. Authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority. Registered in England. Registered No. 2509928. VAT No. 5776591 81. Registered office: 20 Churchill Place, Canary Wharf, London, E14 5HJ. T: 020 3395 6000. F: 020 3395 6350. United States: State Street Global Advisors, 1 Iron Street, Boston, MA 02210-1641. T: +1 617 786 3000.

any such statements are not guarantees of any future performance and actual results or developments may differ materially from

those projected.

Investing involves risk including the risk of loss of principal.

The whole or any part of this work may not be reproduced, copied or transmitted or any of its contents disclosed to third parties without SSGA’s express written consent.

You should consult your tax and financial advisor.

for damages of any kind relating to the use of such data.

ID1487000-3503681.3.1.GBL.RTL 0323

Exp. Date: 03/31/2024



				Corporate Participation in the Political Process in the United States

C-164

LOGO

May 2023

Asset Stewardship

Guidance on Diversity Disclosures and Practices

At State Street Global Advisors, we believe that companies have a responsibility to effectively manage and disclose risks and opportunities related to diversity, equity, and inclusion, particularly regarding gender, race, and ethnicity. Gender diversity has been a priority of State Street Global Advisors’ asset stewardship program since 2017 and we have been a leader in this area since, as evidenced by our Fearless Girl campaign. In this Guidance we set forth our expectations for diversity-related disclosures and how we integrate those expectations into our asset stewardship and proxy voting activities.

Information Classification: Limited

Access

C-165

LOGO



Our Expectations for Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Disclosures				Investors can benefit from increased publicly-available data on diversity, equity, and inclusion at portfolio companies. As such, we encourage companies to share relevant information with the market, and we expect all companies in our portfolio to offer public disclosures in five key areas:

				1. Board Oversight Describe how the board executes its role in oversight role of risks and opportunities related to diversity and inclusion;

				2. Strategy Articulate the role diversity (of race, ethnicity, and gender, at minimum) plays in the company’s broader human capital management practices and long-term strategy;

				3. Goals Describe what diversity, equity, and inclusion-related goals exist, how these goals contribute to the company’s overall strategy, and how they are managed and progressing;

				4. Metrics Provide measures of the diversity of the company’s global employee base and board, including:

				a. Workforce Employee diversity by race, ethnicity, and gender (at minimum). We expect to see this information to be broken down by industry-relevant employment categories or levels of seniority, for all full-time employees. In the US, companies are expected to at least use the disclosure framework set forth by the United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission’s EEO-1 Survey. Non-US companies are encouraged to disclose this information in alignment with SASB guidance and nationally appropriate frameworks; and,

				b. Board Diversity characteristics, including racial, ethnic, and gender makeup (at minimum) of the board of directors; and

				5. Board Diversity Articulate goals and strategy related to diverse representation at the board (including race, ethnicity, and gender, at minimum), including how the board reflects the diversity of the company’s workforce, community, customers, and other key stakeholders.

Our Expectations for Pay Equity Disclosures				We expect all companies in the US and the UK to provide public disclosure on:

				1. Adjusted pay gaps related to race and gender within the company (Disclosure of the unadjusted pay gap is also encouraged, but not expected outside of the UK market at this time);

				2. Strategy to achieve and maintain pay equity; and

				3. Role of the board in overseeing pay strategies as well as Diversity, Equity and Inclusion efforts.

Information Classification: Limited Access

C-166

LOGO



Civil Rights Risks				We expect companies in the US to provide public disclosure on:

				1. Risks related to civil rights, including risks associated with products, practices, and services;

				2. Plans to manage and mitigate these risks; and

				3. Processes at the board for overseeing such risks (e.g., committee responsible, frequency of discussions, etc.).

Expanding the Aperture of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion				Investors, regulators, and other stakeholders are increasingly focused on other dimensions of diversity beyond gender, race, and ethnicity. For example, California lawmakers and the Nasdaq exchange include LGBTQ-identified individuals in their perspectives on board diversity. Some advocates are calling for the prioritization of disability as an essential dimension of diversity, and several companies (especially outside of the US) already disclose information regarding the role of people with disabilities in their organization. We encourage our portfolio companies to consider providing disclosures about the full diversity of their organization, as these disclosures are wholly aligned with contributing to the intent to increase diversity of thought that underlies the present more common focus on gender, race and ethnic diversity. The reputational and regulatory risk of not doing so also may increase in the coming years.

Engagements Incorporating Our Expectations into Conversations with Companies				Since 2021, we have reached out to 35 of the largest employers in our portfolio each year to have deeper conversations on human capital management and diversity, equity, and inclusion. Our aim is to monitor companies’ approaches to these topics, and encourage alignment with our expectations described herein.

Voting Incorporating Our Expectations into Our Proxy Voting Policies				In order to achieve alignment with our aforementioned expectations and advance transparency in the public markets, State Street Global Advisors has the following proxy voting guidelines:

				Race & Ethnicity –— United States and United Kingdom

				• If a company in the Russell 1000 or FTSE 350 does not disclose the racial and ethnic composition of its board, we will vote against the Chair of the Nominating Committee. Acceptable disclosures include:

				— Aggregate-level (e.g., “5% of our Directors are Black”, “Seven of our Directors are people of color”, “30% chose not to self-identify”).

				— Individual-level (e.g., “Jane Doe is African-American, John Smith is Caucasian,” etc.).

C-167

Information Classification: Limited Access

LOGO



				• If a company in the S&P 500 or FTSE 100 does not have at least one director from an underrepresented racial or ethnic community, we will vote against the Chair of the Nominating Committee.

				• If a company in the S&P 500 does not disclose its EEO-1 report, we will vote against the Chair of the Compensation Committee. Acceptable disclosures include:

				— The original EEO-1 report response.

				— The exact content of the report translated into custom graphics.

				Gender

				• We expect boards of companies in all markets and indices to have at least one female board member. In markets where we are implementing this policy for the first time, we may waive the policy if a company engages with State Street Global Advisors and provides a specific, timebound plan for adding at least one woman to the board.

				• In addition, we expect companies in the Russell 3000, TSX, FTSE 350, STOXX 600, and ASX 300 indices to have boards comprised of at least 30 percent women directors. We may waive the policy if a company engages with State Street Global Advisors and provides a specific, timebound plan for reaching 30 percent representation of women directors.

				• If a company fails to meet any of the expectations outlined above, State Street Global Advisors may vote against the Chair of the Nominating Committee or the board leader in the absence of a Nominating Committee, if necessary. Additionally, if a company fails to meet this expectation for three consecutive years, State Street Global Advisors may vote against all incumbent members of the Nominating Committee or those persons deemed responsible for the nomination process.

Shareholder Proposals				Below is the approach we follow when voting on shareholder proposals:

				• FOR we will consider voting for shareholder proposals that we believe will lead to increased alignment with our expectations for diversity-related disclosures and practices;

				• ABSTAIN we will consider voting abstain when we support some elements of a proposal’s request, or recognize a company’s commitment to implement related disclosure and/or oversight practices;

				AGAINST we will vote against shareholder proposals that we believe are immaterial, overly prescriptive, or would not further our disclosure and oversight expectations.

Information Classification: Limited Access

C-168

LOGO



Thought Leadership The Board’s Oversight of Racial and Ethnic Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion				In 2020, State Street Corporation announced it would be taking “10 Actions to Address Racism & Inequality.” As part of Action #7, State Street Global Advisors’ Asset Stewardship team led an internal, cross-functional workstream to study best practices in board oversight of racial and ethnic diversity, equity, and inclusion. We partnered with Russell Reynolds Associates and the Ford Foundation to interview 27 directors of FTSE 100 and S&P 500 multinational corporations, culminating in a report titled “The Board’s Oversight of Racial and Ethnic Diversity, Equity and Inclusion.”

Conclusion				We remain focused on our fiduciary duty to maximize the long-term shareholder value of our clients’ investments. We believe that teams with a diversity of perspectives generate a diversity of ideas that can drive the long-term success of a firm. Please reach out to our Asset Stewardship team at [email protected]. We look forward to engaging with you on this important topic.

About State Street Global Advisors				State Street Global Advisors serves governments, institutions and financial advisors with a rigorous approach, breadth of capabilities and belief that good stewardship is good investing for the long term. Pioneers in index, ETF, and ESG investing and the world’s fourth-largest asset manager*, we are always inventing new ways to invest.

				* Pensions & Investments Research Center, as of December 31, 2021.

Information Classification: Limited Access

C-169

LOGO

ssga.com

State Street Global Advisors

Marketing Communications

Worldwide Entities

Abu Dhabi: State Street Global Advisors Limited, ADGM branch is regulated by the Financial Services Regulatory Authority (FSRA).

T: +971 2 245 9000. Australia: State Street Global Advisors, Australia, Limited (ABN 42 003 914 225) is the holder of an Australian Financial Services License (AFSL Number 238276). Registered office: Level 14, 420 George Street, Sydney, NSW 2000, Australia.

T: +612 9240-7600. F: +612 9240-7611. Belgium: State Street Global Advisors Belgium, Chaussée de La Hulpe 185, 1170 Brussels, Belgium. T: +32 2 663 2036. State Street Global Advisors Belgium is a branch office of State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, registered in Ireland with company number 49934, authorised and regulated by the Central Bank of Ireland, and whose

Advisors France”) is a branch of State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, registered in Ireland with company number 49934, authorised and regulated by the Central Bank of Ireland, and whose registered office is at 78 Sir John Rogerson’s Quay, Dublin 2. State Street Global Advisors France is registered in France with company number RCS Nanterre 899 183 289, and its office is located at Coeur Défense — Tour A — La Défense 4, 33e étage, 100, Esplanade du Général de Gaulle, 92 931 Paris La Défense Cedex, France. T: +33 1 44 45 40 00. F: +33 1 44 45 41 92. Germany: State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, Branch in Germany, Brienner Strasse 59, D-80333 Munich, Germany (“State Street Global Advisors Germany”). T: +49 (0)89 55878 400. State Street Global Advisors Germany is a branch of State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, registered in Ireland with company number 49934, authorised and regulated by the Central Bank of Ireland, and whose registered office is at 78 Sir John Rogerson’s Quay, Dublin

F: +353 (0)1 776 3300. Italy: State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, Italy Branch (“State Street Global Advisors Italy”) is a branch of State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, registered in Ireland with company number 49934, authorised and regulated by the Central Bank of Ireland, and whose registered office is at 78 Sir John Rogerson’s Quay, Dublin 2. State Street

Global Advisors Italy is registered in Italy with company number

11871450968 — REA: 2628603 and VAT number 11871450968, and its office is located at Via Ferrante Aporti, 10 -20125 Milan, Italy. T: +39 02 32066 100. F: +39 02 32066 155. Japan: State Street Global Advisors (Japan) Co., Ltd., Toranomon Hills Mori Tower 25F 1-23-1 Toranomon, Minato-ku, Tokyo 105-6325 Japan. T: +81-3-4530-7380. Financial Instruments Business Operator, Kanto Local Financial Bureau (Kinsho #345), Membership: Japan Investment Advisers Association, The Investment Trust Association, Japan, Japan Securities Dealers’ Association. Netherlands:

State Street Global Advisors Netherlands, Apollo Building 7th floor, Herikerbergweg 29, 1101 CN Amsterdam, Netherlands. T: +31 20 7181 000. State Street Global Advisors Netherlands is a branch office of State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, registered in Ireland with company number 49934, authorised and regulated by the Central Bank of Ireland, and whose registered office is at 78 Sir John Rogerson’s Quay, Dublin 2. Singapore: State Street Global Advisors Singapore Limited, 168, Robinson Road, #33-01 Capital Tower, Singapore 068912 (Company Reg. No: 200002719D, regulated by the Monetary Authority of Singapore). T: +65 6826-7555. F: +65 6826-7501. Switzerland: State Street Global Advisors AG, Beethovenstr. 19, CH-8027 Zurich. Registered with the Register of Commerce Zurich CHE-105.078.458. T: +41 (0)44 245 70 00. F: +41 (0)44 245 70 16. South Africa: State Street Global Advisors Limited is regulated by the Financial Sector Conduct Authority in South Africa under license number 42670. United Kingdom: State Street Global Advisors Limited. Authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority. Registered in England. Registered No. 2509928. VAT No. 5776591 81. Registered office: 20 Churchill Place, Canary Wharf, London, E14 5HJ. T: 020 3395 6000. F: 020 3395 6350. United States: State Street Global Advisors, 1 Iron Street, Boston, MA 02210-1641. T: +1 617 786 3000.

Information Classification: Limited Access

C-170

LOGO

Important Risk Information

Investing involves risk including the risk of loss of principal.

The whole or any part of this work may not be reproduced, copied or transmitted or any of its contents disclosed to third parties without SSGA’s express written consent.

The returns on a portfolio of securities which exclude companies that do not meet the portfolio’s specified ESG criteria may trail the returns on a portfolio of securities which

include such companies. A portfolio’s ESG criteria may result in the portfolio investing in industry sectors or securities which underperform the market as a whole.

for damages of any kind relating to the use of such data.

Information Classification: Limited Access

C-171

LOGO

May 2023

Asset Stewardship

Guidance on Human Capital Management Disclosures & Practices

In 2021, State Street Global Advisors’ Asset Stewardship team sought to strengthen our perspective on human capital management. We conducted over 185 engagements with investee companies on this topic in markets across the world, including a proactive engagement campaign targeting the largest employers in our portfolios. Our team also initiated conversations with experts on the topic of human capital management to enhance our understanding of this essential topic.

Our intended outcome through these engagements was to develop expectations for companies’ disclosures on human capital management, and to share our insights regarding best practices and areas for improvement for portfolio companies (please see our complementary Human Capital Management Insights page for more on this topic).

Information Classification: Limited

Access

C-172

LOGO



Our Expectations for Human Capital Management Disclosures				While there are many material dimensions of human capital management, our engagements and analysis suggest that five areas are particularly meaningful components of a successful human capital management strategy across industries. As a starting point, we expect all companies to provide public disclosure on::

				1. Board Oversight Methods outlining how the board oversees human capital-related risks and opportunities;

				2. Strategy Approaches to human capital management and how these advance the long-term business strategy;

				3. Compensation Strategies throughout the organization that aim to attract and retain employees, and incentivize contribution to an effective human capital strategy;

				4. Voice Channels to ensure the concerns and ideas from workers are solicited and acted upon, and how the workforce is engaged and empowered in the organization; and

				5. Diversity, equity, and inclusion Efforts to advance diversity, equity, and inclusion (see our complementary Guidance on Diversity Disclosures and Practices for additional context).

				We expect public disclosures to contain specific information about these essential dimensions of human capital management. For example, instead of disclosing that “employees are surveyed regularly,” companies could consider describing survey frequency, examples of questions asked, and actions taken in response to employee feedback where relevant.

				We understand that this is an evolving topic and we will continue to engage with companies to develop our expectations and inform our stewardship efforts in this space. We also encourage companies to consider emerging disclosure frameworks, including those required by regulators.

Voting Incorporating Our Expectations into Our Proxy Voting and Engagement Practices				With respect to voting on shareholder proposals related to human capital management , we will first engage with companies related to our human capital management-related disclosure and oversight expectations outlined herein, focusing on companies and industries with the greatest risk and opportunity. Below is the approach when voting on human capital management-related shareholder proposals: • FOR We will consider voting for shareholder proposals that we believe will lead to increased alignment with our expectations for human capital-related disclosures and oversight;

Information Classification: Limited Access

C-173

LOGO


				• ABSTAIN We will consider voting abstain when we support some elements of a proposal’s request, or recognize a company’s commitment to implement related disclosure and/or oversight practices.

				• AGAINST We will vote against shareholder proposals that we believe are immaterial, overly prescriptive or would not further our disclosure and oversight expectations.

				For more information on our voting policies related to diversity, equity, and inclusion, please see our Guidance on Diversity Disclosures & Practices. For example, we will take voting action against chairs of the Nominating Committees at S&P 500 companies that do not disclose EEO-1 reports.

Thought Leadership Human Capital Management Insights				As part of our increased focus on human capital management, we conducted over 150 engagements on this topic in markets across the world in 2021, including a proactive engagement campaign targeting 60 of the largest employers in our portfolio across the Americas, EMEA, and APAC regions. Please see our Human Capital Management Insights for insights from these engagements.

Conclusion				We encourage companies in our portfolios to align their disclosures and practices with our expectations. Please reach out to State Street Global Advisors’ Asset Stewardship Team at [email protected] to request an engagement on this important topic.
				For additional context regarding our perspective on labor rights as an essential dimension of human rights, please see our Guidance on Human Rights Disclosures & Practices.

About State Street Global Advisors				For four decades, State Street Global Advisors has served the world’s governments, institutions and financial advisors. With a rigorous, risk-aware approach built on research, analysis and market-tested experience, we build from a breadth of index and active strategies to create cost-effective solutions. And, as pioneers in index, ETF, and ESG investing, we are always inventing new ways to invest. As a result, we have become the world’s fourth-largest asset manager* with US $3.62 trillion^†under our care.
				* Pensions & Investments Research Center, as of December 31, 2021. ^†This figure is presented as of March 31, 2023 and includes approximately $65.03 billion USD of assets with respect to SPDR products for which State Street Global Advisors Funds Distributors, LLC (SSGA FD) acts solely as the marketing agent. SSGA FD and State Street Global Advisors are affiliated. Please note all AUM is unaudited.

C-174

Information Classification: Limited Access

LOGO

ssga.com

Marketing communication

State Street Global Advisors Worldwide Entities

Abu Dhabi: State Street Global Advisors Limited, ADGM branch is regulated by the Financial Services Regulatory Authority (FSRA). This document is intended for Professional Clients or Market Counterparties only as defined by the FSRA and no other person should act upon it. State Street Global Advisors Limited, ADGM Branch, Al Khatem Tower, Suite 42801, Level 28, ADGM Square, Al Maryah Island, P.O Box 76404, Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates. Regulated by the ADGM Financial Services Regulatory Authority. T: +971 2 245 9000. Australia: State Street Global Advisors, Australia, Limited (ABN 42 003 914 225) is the holder of an Australian Financial Services License (AFSL Number 238276). Registered office: Level 14, 420 George Street, Sydney, NSW 2000, Australia. T: +612 9240-7600. F: +612 9240- 7611. Belgium: State Street Global Advisors Belgium, Chaussée de La Hulpe 185, 1170 Brussels, Belgium. T: +32 2 663 2036. State Street Global Advisors Belgium is a ^branch office of State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, registered in Ireland with company number 49934, authorised and regulated by the Central Bank of Ireland, and whose registered office is at 78 Sir John Rogerson’s Quay, Dublin 2.

Canada: State Street Global Advisors, Ltd., 1981 McGill College Avenue, Suite 500, Montreal, Qc, H3A 3A8, T: +514 282 2400 and 30 Adelaide Street East Suite 800, Toronto, Ontario M5C 3G6. T: +647 775 5900. France: State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, France Branch (“State Street Global Advisors France”) is a branch of State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, registered in Ireland with company number 49934, authorised and regulated by the Central Bank of Ireland, and whose registered office is at 78 Sir John Rogerson’s Quay, Dublin 2. State Street Global Advisors France is registered in France with company number RCS Nanterre 899 183 289, and its office is located at Coeur Défense — Tour A — La Défense 4, 33e étage, 100, Esplanade du Général de Gaulle, 92 931 Paris La Défense Cedex, France. T: +33 1 44 45 40 00. F: +33 1 44 45 41 92. Germany: State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, Branch in Germany, Brienner Strasse 59, D-80333 Munich, Germany (“State Street Global Advisors Germany”). T: +49 (0)89 55878 400. State Street Global Advisors Germany is a branch of State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, registered in Ireland with company number 49934, authorised and regulated by the Central Bank of Ireland, and whose registered office is at 78 Sir John Rogerson’s Quay, Dublin 2. Hong Kong: State Street Global Advisors Asia Limited,

49934. T: +353 (0)1 776 3000. F: +353 (0)1 776 3300. Italy: State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, Italy Branch (“State Street Global Advisors Italy”) is a branch of State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, registered in Ireland with company number 49934, authorised and regulated by the Central Bank of Ireland, and whose registered office is at 78 Sir John Rogerson’s Quay, Dublin 2. State Street Global Advisors Italy is registered in Italy with company number 11871450968 — REA: 2628603 and VAT number 11871450968, and its office is located at Via Ferrante Aporti, 10 -20125 Milan, Italy. T: +39 02 32066 100. F: +39 02 32066 155. Japan: State Street Global Advisors (Japan) Co., Ltd., Toranomon Hills Mori Tower 25F 1-23-1 Toranomon, Minato-ku, Tokyo 105-6325 Japan. T: +81-3-4530-7380. Financial Instruments Business Operator, Kanto Local Financial Bureau (Kinsho #345), Membership: Japan Investment Advisers Association, The Investment Trust Association, Japan, Japan Securities Dealers’ Association. Netherlands: State Street Global Advisors Netherlands,Apollo Building

7th floor, Herikerbergweg 29, 1101 CN Amsterdam, Netherlands. T: +31 20 7181 000. State Street Global Advisors Netherlands is a branch office of State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, registered in Ireland with company number 49934, authorised and regulated by the Central Bank of Ireland, and whose registered office is at 78 Sir John Rogerson’s Quay, Dublin 2. Singapore: State Street Global Advisors Singapore Limited, 168, Robinson Road, #33-01 Capital Tower, Singapore 068912 (Company Reg. No: 200002719D, regulated by the Monetary Authority of Singapore). T: +65 6826-7555. F: +65 6826-7501. Switzerland: State Street Global Advisors AG, Beethovenstr. 19, CH-8027 Zurich. Registered with the Register of Commerce Zurich CHE-105.078.458. T: +41 (0)44 245 70 00. F: +41 (0)44 245 70 16. South Africa: State Street Global Advisors Limited is regulated by the Financial Sector Conduct Authority in South Africa under license number 42670.United Kingdom: State Street Global Advisors Limited. Authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority. Registered in England. Registered No. 2509928. VAT No. 5776591 81. Registered office: 20 Churchill Place, Canary Wharf, London, E14 5HJ. T: 020 3395 6000. F: 020 3395 6350. United States: State Street Global Advisors, 1 Iron Street, Boston, MA 02210-1641. T: +1 617 786 3000.

Information Classification: Limited Access

C-175

LOGO

Important Risk Information

Investing involves risk including the risk of loss of principal. The returns on a portfolio of securities which exclude companies that do not meet the portfolio’s specified ESG criteria may trail the returns on a portfolio of securities which include such companies.

A portfolio’s ESG criteria may result in the portfolio investing in industry sectors or securities which underperform the market as a whole.

any such statements are not guarantees of any future performance and actual results or developments may differ materially from those projected.

All information is from SSGA unless otherwise noted and has been obtained from sources believed to be reliable, but its accuracy is not guaranteed. There is no representation or warranty as to the current accuracy, reliability or completeness of, nor liability for, decisions based on such information and it should not be relied on as such. The whole or any part of this work may not be reproduced, copied or transmitted or any of its contents disclosed to third parties without State Street Global Advisors’ express written consent.

ID1483214- 4044335.4.1.GBL.RTL 0423

Exp. Date: 06/30/2024

Information Classification: Limited Access

C-176


Insights Asset Stewardship				Guidance on Effective Board Oversight
March 2023				Guidance on Effective Board Oversight

				As stewards of near-permanent capital to thousands of public companies across the world, State Street Global Advisors focuses on risks and opportunities that may impact long-term value creation for our clients. We rely on the elected representatives of the companies in which we invest — the board of directors — to oversee these firms’ strategies. We expect effective independent board oversight of the material risks and opportunities to its business and operations. We believe that appropriate consideration of these risks and opportunities is an essential component of a firm’s long-term business strategy, and expect boards to actively oversee the management of this strategy. This paper provides guidance to our portfolio companies on how we evaluate the effectiveness of the board oversight of the risks and opportunities and should be read in conjunction with our Global Proxy Voting and Engagement Principles and applicable regional proxy voting and engagement guidelines. It also outlines our approach to incorporating these perspectives into our voting and engagement.

C-177



Guidance On Effective Board Oversight				When evaluating a board’s oversight of financially material risks and opportunities, we assess the following factors, based on disclosures and engagements with directors.

				Oversees Long-term Strategy

				• Articulates the material risks and opportunities and how those risks and opportunities fit into the firm’s long-term business strategy

				• Regularly assesses the effectiveness of the company’s long-term strategy, and management’s execution of this strategy

				For example, we leverage established frameworks, such as The Sustainability Accounting Standards Board (SASB) Materiality Map to inform our views on the materiality of environmental and social issues at a given company. We have also established the following priorities for proxy voting and engagement: Effective Board Oversight; Climate Risk Management; Human Capital Management; and Diversity, Equity & Inclusion.

				Demonstrates an Effective Oversight Process

				• Describes which committee(s) have oversight over specific risks and opportunities, as well as which topics are overseen and/or discussed at the full-board level

				• Includes risks and opportunities in board and/or committee agendas, and articulates how often specific topics are discussed at the committee and/or full-board level

				• Utilizes KPIs or metrics to assess the effectiveness of risk management processes

				• Engages with key stakeholders including employees and investors

				Ensures Effective Leadership

				• Holds management accountable for progress on relevant metrics and targets

				• Integrates necessary skills and perspectives into the board nominating and executive hiring processes, and provides training to directors and executives, including on topics material to the company’s business or operations

				• Conducts a periodic effectiveness review



				Guidance on Effective Board Oversight

C-178


				Ensures Disclosures of Material Information

				• Ensures publication of relevant disclosures, including those regarding material topics

				— For example, we expect companies to disclose against the four pillars of the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures (TCFD) framework

Incorporating our Expectations for Effective Oversight Into our Proxy Voting and Engagement Practices				As responsible stewards, we believe in the importance of effective risk management and oversight of issues that are material to a company. To effectively assess the risk of our clients’ portfolios and the broader market, we expect our portfolio companies to manage risks and opportunities that are material and industry-specific and that have a demonstrated link to long-term value creation, and to provide high-quality disclosure of this process to shareholders. Consistent with this perspective, we may seek to engage with our portfolio companies to better understand how their boards are overseeing risks and opportunities the company has deemed to be material to its business or operations. If we believe a company has failed to implement and communicate effective oversight of these risks, we may consider voting against the directors responsible.

Next Steps For Directors				We encourage directors to review our existing guidance, as well as our voting guidelines, all of which can be found on our website. We believe regular engagements with directors is an essential component of successful long-term partnerships with our portfolio companies. Please reach out to the Asset Stewardship team at [email protected] to request an engagement or share your ideas on effective board oversight.

About State Street Global Advisors				For four decades, State Street Global Advisors has served the world’s governments, institutions and financial advisors. With a rigorous, risk-aware approach built on research, analysis and market-tested experience, we build from a breadth of index and active strategies to create cost-effective solutions. And, as pioneers in index, ETF, and ESG investing, we are always inventing new ways to invest. As a result, we have become the world’s fourth-largest asset manager* with US $3.48 trillion† under our care.

				* Pensions & Investments Research Center, as of December 31, 2021.
				† This figure is presented as of December 31, 2022 and includes approximately $58.60 billion USD of assets with respect to SPDR products for which State Street Global Advisors Funds Distributors, LLC (SSGA FD) acts solely as the marketing agent. SSGA FD and State Street Global Advisors are affiliated. Please note all AUM is unaudited.



				Guidance on Effective Board Oversight

C-179

ssga.com

Marketing communication

State Street Global Advisors Worldwide Entities

Abu Dhabi: State Street Global Advisors Limited, ADGM Branch, Al Khatem Tower, Suite 42801, Level 28, ADGM Square, Al Maryah Island, P.O Box 76404, Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates. Regulated by the ADGM Financial Services Regulatory Authority. T: +971 2 245 9000. Australia: State Street Global Advisors, Australia, Limited (ABN 42 003 914 225) is the holder of an Australian Financial Services License (AFSL Number 238276). Registered office: Level 14, 420 George Street, Sydney, NSW 2000, Australia. T: +612 9240-7600. F: +612 9240-7611. Belgium: State Street Global Advisors Belgium, Chaussée de La Hulpe 185, 1170 Brussels, Belgium. T: +32 2 663 2036. State Street Global Advisors Belgium is a branch office of State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, registered in Ireland with company number 49934, authorised and regulated by the Central Bank of Ireland, and whose registered office is

at 78 Sir John Rogerson’s Quay, Dublin 2. Canada: State Street Global Advisors, Ltd., 1981 McGill College Avenue, Suite 500, Montreal, Qc, H3A 3A8, T: +514 282 2400 and 30 Adelaide Street East Suite 800, Toronto, Ontario M5C 3G6. T: +647 775 5900. France: State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, France Branch (“State Street Global Advisors France”) is a branch of State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, registered in Ireland with company number 49934, authorised and regulated by the Central Bank of Ireland, and whose registered office is at 78 Sir John Rogerson’s Quay, Dublin 2. State Street Global Advisors France is registered in France with company number RCS Nanterre 899 183 289, and its office is located at Coeur Défense – Tour A – La Défense 4, 33e étage, 100, Esplanade du Général de Gaulle, 92 931 Paris La Défense Cedex, France. T: +33 1 44 45 40 00. F: +33 1 44 45 41 92. Germany: State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, Branch in Germany, Brienner Strasse 59, D-80333 Munich, Germany (“State Street Global Advisors Germany”). T: +49 (0)89 55878

400. State Street Global Advisors Germany is a branch of State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, registered in Ireland with company number 49934, authorised and regulated by the Central Bank of Ireland, and whose registered office is at 78 Sir John Rogerson’s Quay, Dublin 2. Hong Kong: State Street Global Advisors Asia Limited, 68/F, Two International Finance Centre, 8 Finance Street, Central, Hong Kong. T: +852 2103-0288. F: +852 2103-0200. Ireland: State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited is regulated by the Central Bank of Ireland. Registered office address 78 Sir John Rogerson’s Quay, Dublin 2. Registered Number: 49934. T: +353 (0)1 776 3000. F: +353 (0)1 776 3300. Italy: State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, Italy Branch (“State Street Global Advisors Italy”) is a branch of State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, registered in Ireland with company number 49934, authorised and regulated by the Central Bank of Ireland, and whose registered office is at 78 Sir John Rogerson’s Quay, Dublin 2. State Street Global Advisors Italy is registered in Italy with company number

11871450968 – REA: 2628603 and VAT number 11871450968, and its office is located at Via Ferrante Aporti, 10 -20125 Milan, Italy. T: +39 02 32066 100. F: +39 02 32066 155. Japan: State Street Global Advisors (Japan) Co., Ltd., Toranomon Hills Mori Tower 25F 1-23-1 Toranomon, Minato-ku, Tokyo 105-6325 Japan. T: +81-3-4530-7380. Financial Instruments Business Operator, Kanto Local Financial Bureau (Kinsho #345), Membership: Japan Investment Advisers Association, The Investment Trust Association, Japan, Japan Securities Dealers’

Association. Netherlands: State Street Global Advisors Netherlands, Apollo Building 7th floor, Herikerbergweg 29, 1101 CN Amsterdam, Netherlands. T: +31 20 7181 000. State Street Global Advisors Netherlands is a branch office of State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, registered in Ireland with company number 49934, authorised and regulated by the Central Bank of Ireland, and whose registered office is at 78 Sir John Rogerson’s Quay, Dublin 2. Singapore: State Street Global Advisors



				Guidance on Effective Board Oversight

C-180

Singapore Limited, 168, Robinson Road, #33-01 Capital Tower, Singapore 068912 (Company Reg. No: 200002719D, regulated by the Monetary Authority of Singapore). T: +65 6826-7555. F: +65 6826-7501. Switzerland: State Street Global Advisors AG, Beethovenstr. 19, CH-8027 Zurich. Registered with the Register of Commerce Zurich CHE-105.078.458. T: +41 (0)44 245 70 00. F: +41 (0)44 245 70 16. United Kingdom: State Street Global Advisors Limited. Authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority. Registered in England. Registered No. 2509928. VAT No. 5776591 81. Registered office: 20 Churchill Place, Canary Wharf, London, E14 5HJ. T: 020 3395 6000. F: 020 3395 6350. United States: State Street Global Advisors, 1 Iron Street, Boston, MA 02210-1641. T: +1 617 786 3000.

Important Risk Information

Investing involves risk including the risk of loss of principal.

The returns on a portfolio of securities which exclude

companies that do not meet the portfolio’s specified ESG criteria may trail the returns on a portfolio of securities which include such companies. A portfolio’s ESG criteria may result in the portfolio investing in industry sectors or securities which underperform the market as a whole.

of investment research (b) is not subject to any prohibition on dealing ahead of the dissemination of investment research.

All information is from SSGA unless otherwise noted and has been obtained from sources believed to be reliable, but its accuracy is not

The whole or any part of this work may not be reproduced, copied or transmitted or any of its contents disclosed to third parties without State Street Global Advisors’ express written consent.

ID1519201-5596229.1.2.GBL.RTL 0423

Exp. Date: 03/31/2024



				Guidance on Effective Board Oversight

C-181


Insights Asset Management				Guidance on Virtual Shareholder Meetings
April 2023				Guidance on Virtual Shareholder Meetings

				As shareholder meetings have increasingly been held virtually due to the pandemic, our Asset Stewardship team outlines our voting approach to management proposals on this topic, expectations for shareholder engagement best practices and guidance on preserving robust shareholder rights.

				As a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, companies are increasingly holding virtual shareholder meetings (“VSMs”) globally. Many companies are proposing amendments to their governing documents that grant the board the ability to host VSMs at their own discretion in perpetuity.

				Recognizing the success of virtual and hybrid shareholder meetings and a shifting regulatory environment, we will generally support proposals that grant boards the right to hold shareholder meetings in a virtual or hybrid format as long as companies uphold the following best practices:

				• Afford virtual attendee shareholders the same rights as would normally be granted to in-person attendee shareholders

				• Commit to time-bound renewal (five years or less) of meeting format authorization by shareholders

				• Provide a written record of all questions posed during the meeting, and

				• Comply with local market laws and regulations relating to virtual and hybrid shareholder meeting practices

				If a company breaches of any of the criteria above, we may vote against the Chair of the nominating committee.

				Our evaluation of these proposals will also consider the operating environment of the company, including local regulatory developments and specific market circumstances impacting virtual meeting practices.

C-182


				While we are encouraged by the success of VSMs thus far,, companies and shareholders must remain vigilant in continuing to improve their VSM practices. Maintaining a strong level of shareholder dialogue, upholding shareholder rights, and leveraging the virtual format to benefit companies and investors will be essential.



About State Street Global Advisors				Our clients are the world’s governments, institutions and financial advisors. To help them achieve their financial goals we live our guiding principles each and every day:

				• Start with rigor

				• Build from breadth

				• Invest as stewards

				• Invent the future

				For four decades, these principles have helped us be the quiet power in a tumultuous investing world. Helping millions of people secure their financial futures. This takes each of our employees in 29 offices around the world, and a firm-wide conviction that we can always do it better. As a result, we are the world’s fourth-largest asset manager* with US $3.62 trillion† under our care.

				* Pensions & Investments Research Center, as of December 31, 2021.
				† This figure is presented as of March 31, 2023 and includes approximately $65.03 billion USD of assets with respect to SPDR products for which State Street Global Advisors Funds Distributors, LLC (SSGA FD) acts solely as the marketing agent. SSGA FD and State Street Global Advisors are affiliated. Please note all AUM is unaudited.



				Guidance on Virtual Shareholder Meetings

C-183

ssga.com

Marketing communication

State Street Global Advisors

Worldwide Entities

State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, registered in Ireland with company number 49934, authorised and regulated by the Central Bank of Ireland, and whose registered office is at 78 Sir John Rogerson’s Quay, Dublin 2. Canada: State Street Global Advisors, Ltd., 1981 McGill College Avenue, Suite 500, Montreal, Qc, H3A 3A8, T: +514 282 2400 and 30 Adelaide Street East Suite 800, Toronto, Ontario M5C 3G6. T: +647 775 5900. France: State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, France Branch (“State Street Global Advisors France”) is a branch of State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, registered in Ireland with company number 49934, authorised and regulated by the Central Bank of Ireland, and whose registered office is at 78 Sir John Rogerson’s Quay, Dublin 2. State Street Global Advisors France is registered in France with company number RCS Nanterre 899 183 289, and its office is located at Coeur Défense — Tour A — La Défense 4, 33e étage, 100, Esplanade du Général de Gaulle, 92 931 Paris La Défense Cedex, France. T: +33 1 44 45 40 00. F: +33 1 44 45 41 92. Germany: State Street Global Advisors Europe

Global Advisors Italy is registered in Italy with company number 11871450968 — REA: 2628603 and VAT number 11871450968, and its office is located at Via Ferrante Aporti, 10 -20125 Milan, Italy. T: +39 02 32066 100. F: +39 02 32066 155. Japan: State Street Global Advisors (Japan) Co., Ltd., Toranomon Hills Mori Tower 25F 1-23-1 Toranomon, Minato-ku, Tokyo 105-6325 Japan. T: +81-3-4530-7380. Financial Instruments Business Operator, Kanto Local Financial Bureau (Kinsho #345), Membership: Japan Investment Advisers Association, The Investment Trust Association, Japan, Japan Securities Dealers’ Association. Netherlands: State Street Global Advisors Netherlands, Apollo Building 7th floor, Herikerbergweg 29, 1101 CN Amsterdam, Netherlands. T: +31 20 7181 000. State Street Global Advisors Netherlands is a branch office of State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited, registered in Ireland with company number 49934, authorised and regulated by the Central Bank of Ireland, and whose registered office is at 78 Sir John Rogerson’s Quay, Dublin 2. Singapore: State Street Global Advisors Singapore Limited, 168,



				Guidance on Virtual Shareholder Meetings

C-184

Robinson Road, #33-01 Capital Tower, Singapore 068912 (Company Reg. No: 200002719D, regulated by the Monetary Authority of Singapore). T: +65 6826-7555.

F: +65 6826-7501. Switzerland: State Street Global Advisors AG, Beethovenstr. 19, CH-8027 Zurich. Registered with the Register of Commerce Zurich CHE-105.078.458. T: +41 (0)44 245 70 00. F: +41 (0)44 245 70 16. United Kingdom: State Street Global Advisors Limited. Authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority. Registered in England. Registered No. 2509928. VAT No. 5776591 81. Registered office: 20 Churchill Place, Canary Wharf, London, E14 5HJ. T: 020 3395 6000. F: 020 3395 6350. United States: State Street Global Advisors, 1 Iron Street, Boston, MA 02210-1641. T: +1 617 786 3000.

The whole or any part of this work may not be reproduced, copied or transmitted or any of its contents disclosed to third parties without State Street Global Advisors’ express

written consent.

The information provided does not constitute investment advice and it should not be relied on as such. It should not

be considered a solicitation to buy or an offer to sell a security. It does not take into account any investor’s particular investment objectives, strategies, tax status or investment horizon. You should consult your tax and financial advisor.

All information is from State Street Global Advisors unless otherwise noted and has been obtained from sources believed to be reliable, but its accuracy is not guaranteed. There is no representation or warranty as to the current accuracy, reliability or completeness of, nor liability for, decisions based on such information and it should not be relied on as such.

Investing involves risk including the risk of loss of principal.

materially from those projected.

which underperform the market as a whole.

ID1522584-4255954.3.1.GBL.RTL 0423

Exp. Date: 04/30/2024



				Guidance on Virtual Shareholder Meetings

C-185

CHAMPLAIN INVESTMENT PARTNERS

PROXY VOTING

Policy

Unless otherwise directed, Champlain, as a matter of policy and as a fiduciary to our clients, has responsibility for voting proxies for portfolio securities consistent with the best interests of the clients. Our firm maintains written policies and procedures as to the handling, research, voting, and reporting of proxy voting and makes appropriate disclosures about our firm’s proxy policies and practices. Our policy and practice include the responsibility to monitor corporate actions, receive and vote client proxies, and disclose any potential conflicts of interest as well as making information available to clients about the voting of proxies for their portfolio securities and maintaining relevant and required records. A copy of our written proxy policy and procedures and/or the record of proxy votes for a client’s portfolio will be provided to that client upon request.

Although Champlain’s policy is to vote proxies for clients unless otherwise directed in writing, there may be times in which the firm would not exercise voting authority on matters where the cost of voting would be high, such as with some foreign securities, and/or the benefit to the client would be low, such as when casting a vote would not reasonably be expected to have a material effect on the value of the client’s investment.

Situations arise in which more than one Champlain client invests in the same company or in which a single client may invest in the same company but in multiple accounts. In those situations, clients may be invested in strategies having different investment objectives, investment styles, or portfolio managers. As a result, Champlain may cast different votes on behalf of different clients or on behalf of the same client with different accounts.

Unless Champlain otherwise agrees in writing, Champlain will not advise or take any action on behalf of a client in any legal proceedings, including bankruptcies or class actions, involving securities held in, or formerly held in, client’s account or the issuers of those securities.

Background

Proxy voting is an important right of shareholders and reasonable care and diligence must be undertaken to ensure that such rights are properly and timely exercised.

Investment advisers registered with the SEC, and that exercise voting authority with respect to client securities, are required by Rule 206(4)-6 of the Advisers Act to (1) adopt and implement written policies and procedures that are reasonably designed to ensure that client securities are voted in the best interests of clients, which must include how an adviser addresses material conflicts that may arise between an adviser’s interests and those of its clients; (2) to disclose to clients how they may obtain information from the adviser with respect to the voting of proxies for their securities; (3) to describe to clients a summary of its proxy voting policies and procedures and, upon request, furnish a copy to its clients; and (4) maintain certain records relating to the adviser’s proxy voting activities when the adviser does have proxy voting authority.

Investment advisers that have ERISA clients and are making decisions on proxy voting and other exercises of shareholder rights are required to: (1) act solely in accordance with the economic interest of the plan and its participants and beneficiaries; (2) consider any costs involved; (3) not subordinate the interests of the participants and beneficiaries in their retirement income or financial benefits under the plan to any non-pecuniary objective, or promote non-pecuniary benefits or goals unrelated to those financial interests of the plan’s participants and beneficiaries or the purposes of the plan; (4) evaluate material facts that form the basis for any particular proxy vote or other exercise of shareholder rights; (5) maintain records on proxy voting activities and other exercises of shareholder rights; and (6) exercise prudence and diligence in the selection and monitoring of persons, if any, selected to advise or otherwise assist with exercises of shareholder rights, such as providing research and analysis, recommendations regarding proxy votes, administrative services with voting proxies, and recordkeeping and reporting services.

C-186

Responsibility

Champlain has designated professionals as Proxy Voting Managers, who are responsible for the administrative management of our proxy voting policy, practices, disclosures and record keeping, including outlining our voting guidelines in our procedures.

Procedure

Champlain has adopted comprehensive proxy voting procedures to implement the firm’s investment policies on behalf of clients. Proxy policies and procedures will be monitored closely, and may be amended or updated when appropriate, to ensure the policies outlined below are effectively executed:

Voting Procedures and Monitoring

•

All employees will forward any proxy materials received on behalf of clients to the Proxy Voting Managers;

•

The Proxy Voting Managers will determine which client accounts hold the security to which the proxy relates; Absent material conflicts, the appropriate company analyst will determine how Champlain should vote the proxy in accordance with applicable voting guidelines and will complete the voting in a timely and appropriate manner. Proxy systems (i.e., Proxy Edge) may be used to aid in the voting process;

•

Clients may provide proxy guidelines to Champlain; in which case the appropriate company analyst will vote in accordance with the applicable voting guidelines provided while adhering to the Conflict of Interest section below;

•

The Proxy Voting Managers will facilitate the proxy voting process, ensure process controls are being adhered to, and review ballots prior to submission; under certain circumstances, ballots are also reviewed by an additional analyst.

•

Compliance conducts quarterly reviews which include confirmation all proxies were voted during the previous quarter, and a sampling of how ballots were voted in relation to client/firm guidelines and policies;

•

Annually, the adequacy of proxy voting policies and procedures are analyzed during the firm’s Risk Assessment process and tested during the Annual Compliance Review.

Proxy Advisory Firms

Although Champlain may use the research provided by proxy advisory firms our practice is to use this research in conjunction with client and firm proxy guidelines and an internal analysis of company filings such as annual reports, proxy statements, and quarterly reports.

The due diligence of proxy advisory firms is consistent with that of other service providers of Champlain, and also includes a review of practices for ensuring accuracy in analyses and voting recommendations, as well as a broader competency assessment.

Recordkeeping

The Proxy Voting Managers shall retain the following proxy records in accordance with the SEC’s five-year retention requirement:

•

These policies and procedures and any amendments;

•

A record of each vote that Champlain casts;

•

A copy of each written request from a client for information on how Champlain voted such client’s proxies, and a copy of any written response;

•

Any document Champlain creates that is material to making a decision on how to vote proxies, or that memorializes that decision.

C-187

Disclosure

•

Champlain will conspicuously display information in its Form ADV Part 2A summarizing the proxy voting policy and procedures, including a statement that clients may request information regarding how Champlain voted a client’s proxies, and that clients may request a copy of these policies and procedures.

Client Requests for Information

•

All client requests for information regarding proxy votes, or policies and procedures, received by any employee should be forwarded to the Proxy Voting Managers;

•

In response to any request, the Proxy Voting Managers will prepare a written response to the client with the information requested, and as applicable will include the name of the issuer, the proposal voted upon, and how Champlain voted the client’s proxy with respect to each proposal about which client inquired.

Voting Guidelines

Fiduciary Duty and Proxy Voting Philosophy

Champlain’s fiduciary duty is to vote proxies in a manner that we believe is in the best interests of our clients; accordingly, Champlain will carefully review each proxy issue and evaluate the statements and views of competing parties. Our proxy voting will generally reflect an appreciation for how diversity throughout a company, including at the Board level, as well as responsible stewardship of resources, are likely to improve the odds that a company will deliver superior long-term shareholder returns. We look for diversity across all relevant dimensions; diversity should be appropriate for each company and not formulaic.

Using Management Guidance

The quality of corporate management is one of the most important considerations of Champlain portfolio managers and analysts when making investment decisions. Considerable weight is given to the recommendations of a company’s management and directors with respect to proxy issues. Unless such recommendations conflict with the interests of clients, votes will be cast in accordance with management recommendations. However, in certain cases, company recommendations may be in conflict with our assessment of sound governance practices and therefore not in the interests of clients, leading to votes in opposition to management. Champlain will strive for consistency in its proxy voting, but also acknowledges that there are no hard and fast rules guiding all situations. Individual proxy issues are always evaluated on their particular merits, and where conflicts arise between the interests of corporate management and the interests of Champlain clients, resolution is always in favor of the clients.

Policy on Board of Directors

Champlain believes that meaningful, independent oversight of corporate managers is a critical function of a company’s Board of Directors, and a cornerstone of sound corporate governance. To that end, we will support proposals seeking a majority of independent and diverse directors for the board, as well as proposals requiring independent and diverse directors for nominating, audit and compensation committees. Votes on individual director nominees are made on a case-by-case basis examining such factors as board and committee composition, past attendance record, financial interest in the company, diversity of skills and experiences, and governance efficacy.

Policy on Audit Committee

Champlain believes that audit committees should be comprised of directors who are independent and financially literate and shall vote in favor of such a structure. The audit committee should have the exclusive authority to hire independent auditors. We will generally withhold votes for audit committee members who approve significant non- audit relationships with outside auditors, as well as vote against ratification of the outside auditor when such relationships exist.

Policy on Proxy Contest Defenses / Anti-takeover Measures

Champlain generally opposes proxy contest defenses and anti-takeover measures since they tend to restrict shareholder rights and participation and often limit the realization of maximum economic value. We support

C-188

shareholder resolutions that reverse previously adopted anti-takeover measures or, in general, enhance shareholder rights. In these situations, we may conduct more issuer specific analysis; however, as with all proxy issues, we conduct a full review of each proposal and vote in the best interests of clients.

Anti-takeover measures generally opposed:

•

Classification of the Board of Directors

•

Shareholder rights plans (poison pills)

•

Greenmail

•

Supermajority rules to approve mergers or amend charter or bylaws

•

Authority to place stock with disproportionate voting rights

•

Golden parachutes

Shareholder resolutions generally supported:

•

Rescind or prohibit any of the above anti-takeover measures

•

Annual voting of directors; repeal classified boards

•

Adoption of confidential voting

•

Adoption of cumulative voting

•

Redeem shareholder rights plans

•

Proposals that require shareholder approval of rights plans (poison pills)

Policy on Capital Structure

Champlain considers disciplined capital use an essential component of effective corporate management. Therefore, we carefully consider proposals to authorize increased common shares, and generally limit authorization to funding needs for the next twelve months or for compelling management uses. We will generally vote for proposals to increase common shares for a stock split. Other capital structure proposals, such as preferred stock, will be voted for on a case-by-case basis.

Policy on Executive and Director Compensation

Champlain believes stock-based compensation plans must be very carefully analyzed to protect the economic interests of shareholders while providing appropriate motivation for corporate managers. Such plans should be highly correlated to both individual and corporate performance. We will oppose all option plans with excessive transfer of shareholder wealth, in the form of dilution to shareholder equity and voting power, to corporate directors, executives and employees. Champlain will consider factors such as other corporate incentives, corporate performance, industry practices, and terms and duration of the non-cash compensation program in its decision. We will vote for proposals requiring shareholder approval to retroactively increase non-cash compensation and will generally vote against such proposals.

We will withhold votes for director nominees in the event of a retroactive increase of non-cash compensation without shareholder approval. Director compensation plans are viewed on a case-by-case basis, with the goal of protecting economic interests of shareholders and aligning interests of directors with shareholders. Employee stock purchase plans are voted on a case-by-case basis.

Policy on Mergers and Corporate Restructurings

All mergers, acquisitions, and restructurings are voted on a case-by-case basis taking into account financial terms, benefits, and acquisition price.

Social and Environmental Issues

To become and remain highly competitive and be able to recruit and retain the most talented employees and directors, companies should strive for alignment between the long-term interests of shareholders,

C-189

employees, customers, other community stakeholders, and the health of the environment. Thus, companies should consider issues such as a lack of diversity, inequality, climate change, and other threats to the community and whether their policies and decisions contribute to those threats. We will evaluate social and environmental proposals on a case-by-case basis using a long-term perspective.

Conflicts of Interest

•

If there is a conflict of interest between the Champlain proxy voting policy and a client’s expressed voting policy, Champlain will vote the proxy in the manner the client has articulated;

•

Champlain will identify any conflicts that exist between the interests of the adviser and the client by reviewing the relationship of Champlain with the issuer of each security to determine if Champlain or any of its employees has any financial, business, or personal relationship with the issuer;

•

If a material conflict of interest exists, the Proxy Voting Manager will determine whether it is appropriate to disclose the conflict to the affected clients, to give the clients an opportunity to vote the proxies themselves, or to address the voting issue through other objective means such as voting in a manner consistent with a predetermined voting policy or receiving an independent third-party voting recommendation;

•

Champlain will maintain a record of the voting resolution of any conflict of interest.

Voting Guidelines on Money Market Funds Held for Clients’ Cash Sweep and Account Transition Holdings

Champlain will vote in line with management’s recommendation on proxies for money market funds held for a client’s cash sweep, as well as for client holdings that Champlain has sold or is in the process of selling as part of an account transition.

C-190

KENNEDY CAPITAL MANAGEMENT LLC

POLICY WITH RESPECT TO

PROXY VOTING

December 2022

Introduction

Rule 206(4)-6 under the Advisers Act of 1940, as amended, sets forth the conditions under which advisers owe a fiduciary obligation with respect to each client for which the adviser exercises investment discretion, including the authority and responsibility to vote proxies. Advisers with proxy voting authority must monitor corporate developments and, where appropriate, vote proxies. In addition, advisers must cast proxy votes solely in the best interest of its clients.

Kennedy Capital Management LLC (“KCM”) has adopted the following policies with respect to voting proxies on behalf of its clients:

This written proxy voting policy, which is updated and supplemented from time-to-time, will be provided to each client for which KCM has been delegated the authority or responsibility to vote proxies;

Clients will be advised about how to obtain a copy of the proxy voting policy and information about how their securities were voted;

The proxy voting policy is consistently applied and records of votes maintained for each client;

KCM documents the reasons for voting, including exceptions;

KCM maintains records of such votes cast and client requests for proxy voting information for inspection by the client or governmental agencies;

KCM monitors such voting for any potential conflicts with the interests of its clients; and

KCM maintains systems to ensure that material conflicts will be resolved prior to voting, documenting in each case that its good faith determination was based on the clients’ best interests and did not result from the conflict.

Conflicts of Interests

KCM is an investment adviser to pension plans, public and private companies, mutual funds and individual investors, and provides sub-advisory services to investment companies, wrap fee programs, model programs as well as to clients of consultants and other investment advisors as described in KCM’s Form ADV. The management fees collected from such clients are KCM’s principal source of revenue. With respect to the fees received for advisory services rendered, conflicts of interest may occur when KCM must vote on ballot items of the public companies for which it manages assets and, in certain cases, KCM may have a relationship with the proponents of proxy proposals or participants in proxy contests.

To mitigate potential conflicts of interest or the appearance of conflicts, KCM does not allow employees to sit on the board of directors of any public company without Senior Management approval. To the extent that such conflicts occur, KCM will generally follow the recommendation of the proxy voting service to ensure that the best interests of its clients are not subordinated to KCM’s interests. KCM may, in selected matters, consult the Proxy Voting Committee to obtain guidance to vote proxies. Routine matters shall not constitute a material conflict with respect to this procedure.

The Proxy Voting Committee has a duty to make reasonable investigation of information relating to conflicts of interest. The Proxy Voting Committee is chaired by the Chief Operating Officer and is comprised of the Director of Research, the Chief Compliance Officer, the Portfolio Operations Manager and such other members as may be amended from time-to-time as required by a majority vote of its current members, with three members serving as a quorum. The Proxy Voting Committee will determine, prior to voting, whether any of the members of the Committee have a material personal or business conflict—in which case the committee member will abstain from voting.

C-191

Engagement of Service Provider

In order to facilitate the proxy voting process, Institutional Shareholder Services, Inc. (“ISS”) has been retained to provide proxy vote research and recommendations based on their own internal guidelines. Votes are cast through the ISS ProxyExchange platform (“ProxyExchange”). The services provided to KCM include access to ISS’ research analysis and voting recommendations, receipt of proxy ballots, vote execution based upon the recommendations of ISS, as well as reporting, auditing, working with custodial banks, and consulting assistance for the handling of proxy voting responsibilities. ProxyExchange also maintains proxy voting records and provides KCM with reports that reflect the proxy voting activities of client portfolios. KCM uses this information for appropriate monitoring of such delegated responsibilities.

KCM may, under soft dollar arrangements, pay for no more than the cost allocated to research services. The cost of that portion of the services not constituting “research” for the purposes of Section 28(e) (“mixed-use” services) will be reimbursed to the broker-dealer provider. Presently, ISS’ services are not provided to KCM by a broker-dealer under a soft dollar arrangement.

Proxies are voted through the ProxyExchange application in accordance with either the ISS Benchmark Research Policy, or the ISS Catholic Policy. It is the client’s decision as to which of these ISS policies will be used to vote its proxies. In the absence of a specific delegation of authority KCM is deemed to have voting authority and, under such circumstances, will vote received ballots in accordance with the ISS Benchmark Research Policy.

Policies Available

•

ISS Benchmark Research Policy

•

ISS Catholic Policy

The ISS Benchmark Research Policy is the default policy to be used for voting proxies for all clients’ accounts (both ERISA and non-ERISA related) unless the client specifically selects the Catholic Policy. KCM declines clients’ requests to implement customized proxy voting policies, as they tend to be expensive to implement and difficult to manage on an ongoing basis. KCM encourages the client to vote its own proxies if the client seeks to impose client-specific voting guidelines that may be inconsistent with one of the two policies offered by KCM. KCM does not generally advise a client on proxy voting issues when the client retains authority to handle such matters itself.

The ISS Benchmark Research Policy and the Catholic Policy are both available upon request. These policies provide a general indication as to how proxies will be voted on certain issues. Neither all potential voting issues nor the intricacies that surround individual proxy votes may be addressed therein, and for that reason, actual proxy votes may differ from the selected policy.

Procedures

KCM generally votes all proxies from a specific issuer the same way for each client; however, proxies may be voted differently for different clients on the same proxy issue based upon one of the two proxy policies chosen by the client. Upon certain circumstances and in KCM’s discretion, a client may direct KCM to vote a proxy different from the specific voting guidelines. The client must submit this request in writing to KCM in advance of the meeting date stated on the proxy ballot.

Although KCM generally votes in accordance with the recommendations of ISS, KCM’s Portfolio Managers (PMs) and analysts are consulted to determine how to vote on issues when the ISS recommendation differs from the recommendation of the issuer’s management. Furthermore, a PM or analyst may direct that proxies be voted in a manner different from that recommended by ISS if he or she is personally informed on the issue and has determined that a different vote is appropriate and in the best interests of KCM’s clients. Documentation of the rationale for any proxy voted contrary to the ISS recommendation will be maintained. KCM will vote in accordance with the recommendations of ISS for all short-term investment fund securities and any unsupervised assets retained in the same custodial account KCM has investment discretion over. In the event that ISS does not provide a recommendation on the aforementioned securities, no vote will be entered for these types of securities unless explicitly instructed by an authorized representative of the account.

C-192

A custodian may report ballots to ISS through an omnibus account. On occasion, these omnibus accounts may reflect ballots for shares held by different KCM investment strategies which in some instances may not be split. If after reviewing the ISS research, the PMs from the respective strategies are in disagreement on how to vote a particular issue, the issue will be referred to the Proxy Voting Committee who will consider all factors affecting each strategy and determine the best way to vote the block of shares.

KCM will make every reasonable effort to vote all proxies in a timely manner for which KCM has been delegated proxy voting discretion; however, instances may exist when KCM is unable to vote, (including but not limited to the following):

•

Delays in account setup between ISS and the client’s custodian;

•

Miscommunication between ISS and the client’s custodian;

•

The client’s custodian did not receive the proxy ballot;

•

The client’s custodian did not submit the proxy ballot to ISS in a timely manner;

•

ProxyExchange does not reflect the proxy ballot information;

•

The proxy ballot was received by KCM with insufficient time to submit a vote;

•

KCM held shares on the record date, but sold the shares prior to the meeting date;

•

The issuer is a non-U.S. company;

•

Securities lending arrangements;

•

A proxy is received for a client that has terminated KCM’s advisory relationship;

•

The client’s custodian does not utilize ISS for submission of proxy materials; or

•

KCM believes it is not in the best interest of the client to vote the proxy for any other reason not specified herein.

Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) Strategy

KCM recognizes that ESG issues can impact the valuation of the companies we invest in on behalf of our Clients. In order to effectively factor in ESG considerations when making voting decisions, proxy related research for all securities held in the ESG SMID Cap strategy are distributed to the PM for review.

Custodial Considerations

For each client account for which KCM has been delegated proxy voting discretion, KCM will notify ISS of the account relationship. KCM completes the initial document that ISS will send to the client’s custodian requesting proxy statements and materials received on behalf of the client account be sent to ISS.

It is important to understand that from time-to-time custodial issues may arise which are beyond KCM’s control. In the event a client delegates proxy voting discretion to KCM, it remains the client’s obligation to instruct its custodian to forward applicable proxy materials directly to ISS so that its shares may be voted. Although KCM makes its best efforts to make sure that the client’s custodian has received KCM’s instructions through ISS, it is the responsibility of the client’s custodian to acknowledge receipt of our instructions and to establish the account correctly in order for proxy materials to be submitted to ISS in a timely manner. KCM is not able to vote shares if ISS does not receive proxy materials on a timely basis from the custodian.

It is within each custodian’s discretion as to whether it will provide ballots to ISS for issuers whose stocks are held in each client’s account. Instead, a custodian may select its own proxy voting provider and choose not to provide proxy ballots to ISS. In these instances, ISS is not able to vote proxies for the client’s account and KCM will not be able to accept voting authority for the client’s account.

When voting ballots, it is within each custodian’s discretion as to whether it will aggregate shares, held on behalf of various clients, in an omnibus account instead of submitting individual ballots for segregated

C-193

accounts. In these cases, the custodian must rely on its internal records to differentiate the various underlying holdings. In these instances, ISS will not be able to provide KCM with a detailed history of voting records at the individual client account level.

Securities Lending Arrangements

The client may contract with its selected custodian to participate in a securities lending program. Under most securities lending arrangements, securities on loan to a borrower on the proxy record date is not voted by the lender unless the securities are recalled prior to the record date for the vote. As a general matter, KCM will not attempt to ask custodians to recall securities engaged in lending programs to facilitate proxy voting; therefore, the responsibility to vote proxies for securities on loan will typically reside with the borrower rather than the lender.

Notification of Account Termination and Closed Accounts

KCM will continue voting a client’s proxies after the client has provided notification to terminate its advisory relationship with KCM unless explicit instructions are received that state otherwise. Although ballots received prior to the actual account termination date will generally be voted, ballots received after the termination of the account will neither be reviewed nor voted.

Voting For Non U.S. Issuers

It is KCM’s policy to seek to vote all proxies for securities held in client accounts for which it has been delegated proxy voting discretion. In the case of non-U.S. issuers, proxies are voted on a best efforts basis and it may be difficult to vote or KCM may be prevented from voting due to a number of administrative issues that may include, but are not limited to, the following:

•

KCM may not know when a meeting is taking place or may not be able to obtain relevant information. For example, KCM may receive meeting notices without enough time to fully consider the proxy or after the cut-off date for voting;

•

Trading restrictions may have been placed on shares subject to voting.

A custodian may, in its sole discretion, determine that it will provide proxies to ISS for U.S. domestic companies, but not for non-U.S. issuers. Or custodians may determine to provide proxies for non-U.S. issuers only to the custodians’ selected proxy voting provider. In these instances, ISS is not able to vote proxies for non-U.S. issuers held in a client’s accounts.

Generally, research coverage of non-U.S. issuers is provided by ISS. However, voting recommendations are not always provided with research; therefore, ballots for non-U.S. issuers are generally voted according to the chosen policy.

In certain circumstances, KCM will occasionally abstain from voting for non-U.S. issuers when unjustifiable costs and resources associated with voting a client’s proxy might exceed any anticipated benefits to the client.

Active Communications with Corporate Management

KCM has actively voted against management-sponsored initiatives where deemed appropriate. This action is the most direct communication of the fiduciary voters’ concerns in some instances. Additional actions may include or have included direct meetings with corporate representatives, conference calls, inquiries through third parties and, on occasion, letter writing. KCM participates in a number of forums where its employees are able to meet and discuss issues with corporate representatives; these forums include conferences, seminars, user workshops, and other venues.

KCM has historically, and will in the future, review the proxy process for ERISA funds to adhere to two operative principles:

•

Our duty of loyalty: What is in the best interest of the fund beneficiaries? Are their rights or ability to act being altered by this vote? Is it other than beneficial?

C-194

•

Our duty of prudence: Is the action proposed other than in the long-term financial interest of the fund? If an issue is reviewed and found to be basically “ERISA-neutral,” less concern is possibly warranted than when it has a potential substantive adverse financial or best interest impact.

To date, KCM has been an active shareholder in the context of the proxy process and, when appropriate or necessary, has engaged in conversations with management and those who monitor the company. KCM will continue to carry out a detailed assessment of a company when evaluating areas of concern.

KCM has not, to date, actively considered filing shareholder proposals or writing letters to companies on a regular basis. These activities and others which could be considered expressions of activism are not under consideration at this time. Should a particular equity company become a concern, the evaluation and voting process will continue to be the first level of monitoring and communication. Participation in national forums and contacts with corporate representatives will also continue. A more individualized approach could evolve if these methods are not satisfactory in the context of a particular company. With numerous stocks to monitor and vote for client accounts, KCM recognizes it is not feasible or appropriate to be in active communication with 100% of companies.

As a result, it is believed that the current use of both internal and external resources to provide economies of scale and to more quickly identify concerns is an effective and appropriate use of time and assets in the management process. The final and perhaps most valuable tool KCM can use in the process of being an active and involved fiduciary remains the weight of its vote and, through that vote, we believe we can play a significant role in bringing concerns to corporate management on behalf of our clients.

Reconciliation

To the extent reasonably practicable, KCM shall seek to reconcile proxies as reflected on ProxyExchange against securities eligible to be voted in client accounts with the exception of accounts in a wrap program or where a client’s custodian wraps ballots¹. Discrepancies identified between the expected ballots and actual ballot will be investigated with ISS and the client’s custodian to make a best effort to determine the cause of the discrepancy. Documentation of discrepancies will be maintained.

Maintenance of Proxy Voting Records & Program Responsibility

The documents listed below shall be maintained for no less than seven (7) years by KCM, by ISS or by another third-party service provider, on behalf of KCM, provided that ISS or another third-party service provider shall undertake to provide KCM copies of such documents promptly upon its request:

•

KCM’s proxy voting policies and procedures;

•

Proxy statements received for client and fund securities, provided that no copy of a proxy statement found on the SEC’s EDGAR website need be retained;

•

Records of votes cast on behalf of clients and funds;

•

Records of oral or written requests for proxy voting information and written responses from KCM; and

•

Any documents prepared by KCM that were material to making a proxy voting decision or that memorialized the basis for the decision.

The Portfolio Operations Manager is responsible for the administration of KCM’s proxy voting activities.

Proxy ballots for wrap account sponsors or in certain circumstances where a client’s custodian wraps ballots are provided to KCM on an aggregated basis for all accounts managed by KCM in the sponsor’s program or by that client’s custodian; therefore, KCM cannot reconcile the holdings in such accounts against the shares voted.

C-195

Inquiries

Clients should contact KCM to request additional proxy voting information or for a record of proxies voted on their behalf. Client inquiries should be directed to Kennedy Capital Management LLC, attention Client Service Department, 10829 Olive Blvd, St. Louis, MO 63141, or by calling 800-859-5462.

Except as otherwise required by law, KCM has a general policy of not disclosing proxy voting records to an unaffiliated third-party.

C-196

PALISADE CAPITAL MANAGEMENT, LP

PROXY VOTING PROCEDURES

Amended January 2024

General Policy

Palisade will vote Client proxies if a Client specifically requests Palisade to do so and Palisade consents to such agreement in writing. With respect to ERISA accounts, Palisade will vote proxies unless the plan documents or the Client’s Investment Management Agreement with Palisade reserve the plan sponsor’s right to vote proxies. Clients may delegate such authority and responsibility to a properly authorized agent. If Clients delegate such authority to Palisade, this delegation generally is contained in the Client’s Investment Management Agreement with the Client or in a separate written instruction. To direct Palisade to vote a proxy in a particular manner, Clients should (i) contact Palisade by mail at: Palisade Capital Management, LP, One Bridge Plaza North, Suite 1095, Fort Lee, New Jersey 07024-7102, Attn: Compliance Department, (ii) call their client service representative at (201) 585-7733, or (iii) send an email to [email protected]. If Palisade agrees in writing to be responsible for voting Client proxies or making elections with respect to issuers of securities held in Client account(s), Palisade will vote proxies in accordance with Clients’ economic interests and in accordance with Palisade’s established policies and procedures. Palisade has contracted with Institutional Shareholder Services, Inc., a third-party proxy voting agent (the “Proxy Agent”) to provide research and assist with voting.

Palisade will retain the following information in connection with each proxy vote:

•

The Issuer’s name;

•

The security’s ticker symbol or CUSIP, as applicable;

•

The shareholder meeting date;

•

The number of shares Palisade voted;

•

A brief identification of the matter voted on;

•

Whether the matter was proposed by the Issuer or a security-holder;

•

Whether Palisade cast a vote;

•

How Palisade cast its vote (for the proposal, against the proposal, or abstain); and

•

Whether Palisade cast its vote with or against management.

Clients may request information on how proxies for its shares were voted by contacting Palisade as described above.

For accounts where Palisade does not vote proxies, Palisade may provide investment advisory services relative to Client investment assets but Clients will maintain exclusive responsibility for: (i) directing the manner in which proxies solicited by issuers of securities beneficially owned by the Client as of the record date shall be voted, and (ii) making all elections relative to any mergers, acquisitions, tender offers, bankruptcy proceedings or other type of events pertaining to the Client’s investment assets. Clients that vote their own proxies are responsible for instructing each of their custodians to forward to the Client copies of all proxies and shareholder communications relating to the Client’s investment assets. If Palisade receives a proxy for a Client and does not have proxy voting authority, the proxy will be forwarded to the Client for voting as promptly as reasonably possible.

Except as noted in this policy, Palisade has no obligation or authority to vote any Client’s proxy, to render any advice with respect to the voting of proxies, or to make elections solicited by or with respect to issuers of securities held by any Client. Accordingly, Clients will receive their proxies or other solicitations directly from their custodian and are responsible for voting such proxies on their own.

Unless otherwise agreed to in writing, Palisade will neither advise nor act on behalf of a Client in legal proceedings involving companies whose securities are held in such Client’s account(s), including, but not

C-197

limited to, the filing of “Proofs of Claim” in class action settlements. If desired, Clients may direct Palisade to transmit copies of class action notices to the Client or a third party. Upon such direction, Palisade will make commercially reasonable efforts to forward such notices in a timely manner. Notwithstanding the foregoing, Palisade has contracted with a third-party vendor to assist Clients (at a Client’s request and sole expense) with the filing and processing of “Proofs of Claim” in class action settlements.

If Palisade exercises voting authority on behalf of a Palisade Client and maintains investment supervision of such Client’s securities, then the following Proxy Voting Procedures (the “Procedures”) will apply to those Client securities:

Proxy Voting Procedures

The Proxy Agent provides research to Palisade on each proxy issue, along with a proxy voting recommendation. The recommendations are determined in accordance with the Proxy Agent’s guidelines, which Palisade has adopted as its general proxy voting policy (the “Guidelines”). Clients may obtain a copy of the Guidelines by submitting a request to Palisade, as described above. Palisade relies on the Proxy Agent to ensure soliciting materials received close to the submission deadline are incorporated into voting recommendations. Palisade receives reports from the Proxy Agent twice weekly to monitor for additional soliciting materials/changes in voting recommendations after the initial voting recommendations are received but before the submission deadline.

Palisade’s Compliance Department is responsible for monitoring receipt of research and recommendations from the Proxy Agent, obtaining voting decisions from the appropriate Palisade investment professionals responsible for voting (if necessary), and for ensuring that Client proxies are voted and submitted to the Proxy Agent in a timely manner. However, if Palisade does not send its vote preference to the Proxy Agent before the voting deadline, the Proxy Agent will vote Palisade Client proxies in accordance with its recommendations. If Palisade receives a physical proxy for a Client for whom Palisade has proxy voting authority, such proxy will be voted promptly in accordance with these Procedures and forwarded to the Proxy Agent for recordkeeping purposes.

When the Proxy Agent recommends voting a proxy consistent with the portfolio company management team’s recommendation, such proxy will automatically be voted in accordance with the Proxy Agent’s recommendation.

When the Proxy Agent recommends either withholding, voting contrary to the portfolio company management team’s recommendation, or does not provide a recommendation for a particular ballot issue, the applicable research and recommendation from the Proxy Agent will be forwarded to the Investment Team that manages the portfolio owning the issue. If the Investment Team desires to vote the proxy contrary to the Proxy Agent’s recommendation, a member of the Investment Team will provide a brief memorandum to Palisade’s Conflicts of Interest Committee explaining the reasons for their desired vote. The Conflicts of Interest Committee will evaluate whether any material conflict of interest (as discussed below) has influenced the Investment Team’s proxy voting decision and may approve an “override” of the Proxy Agent’s recommendation if the Committee is comfortable that no such material conflict exists. In all cases, overriding consideration will be given to each Client’s stated guidelines or restrictions, if any.

Any attempt to influence the proxy voting process by issuers or others not identified in these policies and Procedures should be promptly reported to the CCO. Similarly, any Client’s attempt to influence proxy voting with respect to other Clients’ securities should be promptly reported to the CCO.

Palisade will not neglect its proxy voting responsibilities, but Palisade may abstain from voting if it deems that abstaining is in its Clients’ best interests. In addition, Palisade may be unable to vote securities that have been lent by a Client’s custodian (under a separate agreement between the Client and its custodian), as such securities generally do not generate a proxy. Because Palisade has no knowledge of when securities are loaned by a Client’s custodian, loaned securities are not subject to these Procedures. Also, proxy voting in certain countries involves “share blocking”, which limits Palisade’s ability to sell the affected security during a blocking period that can last for several weeks. Palisade believes that the potential consequences of being unable to sell a security usually outweigh the benefits of participating in a proxy vote,

C-198

so Palisade generally abstains from voting when share blocking is required. The Compliance Department will prepare and maintain memoranda describing the rationale for any instance when Palisade receives but does not vote a Client’s proxy.

Conflicts of Interest

A conflict of interest exists when Palisade has knowledge of a situation where Palisade, its Supervised Persons or affiliates would enjoy a special or increased benefit from casting a Client proxy vote in a particular way. A conflict of interest may occur in the following cases; however, this list is not all-inclusive:

•

The issuer of securities that Palisade holds in Client accounts (and for which Palisade is required to vote Client proxies) is a Palisade client.

•

Palisade is soliciting new business from an issuer of securities that Palisade holds in Client accounts (and for which Palisade is required to vote Client proxies).

•

A Palisade Supervised Person (or a Supervised Person of a Palisade affiliate) serves as a director of an issuer of securities that Palisade holds in Client accounts (and for which Palisade is required to vote Client proxies).

•

A Private Equity Fund managed by Palisade owns equity or debt of an issuer of securities that Palisade holds in Client accounts (and for which Palisade is required to vote Client proxies).

When a material conflict of interest occurs, the Proxy Agent will be solely responsible for voting the affected Client proxy based on its Guidelines or specific Client restrictions, and Palisade will not be permitted to “override” the recommendation (as described above). When a non-material conflict occurs, Palisade’s Conflicts of Interest Committee will be permitted to “override” the recommendation (as described above). As used above, a conflict of interest is presumed to be “material” if it involves 1% or more of Palisade’s annual revenue. The definition of “material” is subject to change at Palisade’s discretion.

Palisade will document all conflicts of interest, whether or not material, and keep the documentation with the Client’s proxy records. Such documentation will be compiled by the Conflicts of Interest Committee and be attached to the Proxy Agent’s certification and voting statement. All documentation in connection with a Palisade conflict of interest will be sent to the Client for whom there was a conflict.

Palisade maintains a list of securities and issuers (known as the “Restricted List”) that cannot be traded in Client or employee personal accounts. The Restricted List minimizes the possibility of the occurrence of a material conflict of interest by prohibiting the trading of securities of issuers where Palisade possesses non-public information, or where Palisade deems it necessary or prudent for other compliance, business, or regulatory objectives. Palisade updates its Restricted List promptly as needed.

Disclosures to Clients and Investors

Palisade includes a description of its policies and Procedures regarding proxy voting in Part 2A of Form ADV, along with a statement that Clients and investors can contact Palisade to obtain a copy of these policies and Procedures, and/or a record of proxy votes on their behalf.

Palisade generally does not disclose to Clients details regarding how proxies were voted for other Clients except in required regulatory filings.

Disclosures to Unaffiliated Third Parties

Any request for information about proxy voting from an unaffiliated third party should be promptly forwarded to the CCO. As a matter of policy, Palisade does not disclose how it expects to vote on upcoming proxies. Additionally, Palisade does not disclose the way it voted proxies to unaffiliated third parties not having a legitimate need to know such information.

Annual and Ongoing Reviews

The Compliance Department will review, no less frequently than annually, the adequacy of Palisade’s proxy voting policies and Procedures to make sure they have been implemented effectively, including whether the

C-199

policies and Procedures continue to be reasonably designed to ensure that proxies are voted in the best interests of Clients.

Terminated Accounts

Palisade will not vote proxies received after a Client terminate its advisory relationship.

C-200

LOGO

SOUTHERNSUN ASSET MANAGEMENT

Proxy Voting

Policy

Pursuant to Rule 206(4)-6 under the Advisers Act, it is a fraudulent, deceptive, or manipulative act, practice or course of business, within the meaning of Section 206(4) of the Advisers Act, for an investment adviser to exercise voting authority with respect to client securities, unless (i) the adviser has adopted and implemented written policies and procedures that are reasonably designed to ensure that the adviser votes proxies in the best interests of its clients, (ii) the adviser describes its proxy voting procedures to its clients and provides copies on request, and (iii) the adviser discloses to clients how they may obtain information on how the adviser voted their proxies. In addition to SEC requirements, our proxy voting policy reflects the fiduciary standards and responsibilities set out under other applicable regulations (i.e., ERISA).

Rule 206(4)-6 is supplemented by Investment Advisers Act Release No. 5325 (September 10, 2019) (“Release No. 5325”), which contains guidance regarding the proxy voting responsibilities of investment advisers under the Advisers Act. Among other subjects, Release No. 5325 addresses the oversight of proxy advisory firms by investment advisers. Further, Investment Advisers Act Release No. 5547 (September 3, 2020) contains supplementary guidance addressing the risk of voting a proxy before an issuer files additional soliciting materials with the SEC and associated client disclosures in this regard.

In order to fulfill its responsibilities under the Advisers Act, SouthernSun has adopted the following policies and procedures for proxy voting with regard to companies in our client’s investment portfolios. Notwithstanding the foregoing, as SSAM UK does not provide advisory services to any client, other than its U.S. parent, it shall not be responsible for voting any proxies.

Responsibility

The Investment Team has the responsibility for the implementation and monitoring of our proxy voting policy and procedures for proxy voting with regard to companies in investment portfolios of our clients.

The Operations Team has both the execution responsibility of voting proxies on behalf of client accounts and the record keeping responsibilities for retaining all proxy-related documents referenced herein. The Operations Team shall work with the Compliance Team to obtain all necessary documentation to support its execution responsibilities.

Key Objectives

Unless otherwise agreed between the adviser and client, the adviser will vote proxies in accordance with these policies and procedures. Adviser and client have flexibility in determining the scope of the adviser’s proxy voting authority.

The key objectives of these policies and procedures recognize that a company’s management is entrusted with the day-to-day operations and long-term strategic planning of the company, subject to the oversight of the company’s board of directors. While “ordinary business matters” are primarily the responsibility of management and should be approved solely by the corporation’s board of directors, these objectives also recognize that the company’s shareholders must have final say over how management and directors are performing and how shareholders’ rights and ownership interests are handled, especially when matters could have substantial economic implications to the shareholders. Consideration of proxy issues is focused on the investment implications of each issue. With that said, each vote made by us is aimed to maximize the economic long-term value of our client’s holdings.

C-201

LOGO

Therefore, we will be guided by the following matters in exercising our proxy voting responsibilities as a fiduciary for our clients:

Accountability. Each company should have effective means in place to hold those entrusted with running a company’s business accountable for their actions. Management of a company should be accountable to its board of directors, and the board should be accountable to shareholders.

Alignment of Management and Shareholder Interests. Each company should endeavor to align the interests of management and the board of directors with the interests of the company’s shareholders, employees, and communities in which they do business. For example, we generally believe that compensation should be designed to reward management for creating value for the shareholders of the company.

Transparency. Promotion of timely disclosure of important information about a company’s business operations and financial performance enables investors to evaluate the performance of a company and to make informed decisions about the purchase and sale of a company’s securities.

Decision Methods

No set of proxy voting guidelines can anticipate all situations that may arise. In certain cases, we may seek insight from company management on how a particular proxy proposal will impact a company and vote accordingly. As the adviser to the SouthernSun U.S. mutual funds (the “Funds”), we will vote proxies of the Funds solely in the interest of its shareholders. We will not subordinate the interests of the Funds to any unrelated objectives. We will act with the care, skill, prudence and diligence under the circumstances then prevailing that a prudent man acting in a like capacity and familiar with such matters would use in the conduct of an enterprise of like character and with like aims.

SouthernSun generally utilizes Broadridge Proxy Edge in order to access web-based proxy voting and meeting information to assist in the administration of the voting process. In addition, we use third party proxy advisory firms (“Proxy Advisors”) which provide vote recommendations for proxy votes, which we may utilize in our research process to assist the overall decision process on proxy votes. SouthernSun, however, does not rely on such vote recommendations, nor does SouthernSun delegate any authority or responsibility to vote proxies, but rather adheres to its own proxy voting process as outlined herein. To the extent that a Proxy Advisor provides additional soliciting materials from an issuer regarding a proxy vote, then SouthernSun will monitor for such materials after SouthernSun has received the Proxy Advisor’s voting recommendation but before the submission deadline. If in the future SouthernSun determines to delegate responsibility or defer to Proxy Advisors when making voting decisions, it will adopt policies for hiring, retaining, and supervising such Proxy Advisors.

In addition, employees must notify the Compliance Team if they are aware of any potential conflict of interest between SouthernSun (including employees) and its clients associated with a proxy vote. The CCO will consider whether SouthernSun is subject to any material conflict of interest in connection with each proxy vote. It is impossible to anticipate all material conflicts of interest that could arise in connection with proxy voting. If SouthernSun detects a material conflict of interest in connection with a proxy solicitation, the Compliance Team will discuss with the applicable Investment Team member who will describe the proxy vote under consideration and identify the perceived conflict of interest. The Investment Team member will also propose the course of action that the Investment Team member believes is in the clients’ best interests.

If it is determined that a material conflict of interest is present and SouthernSun cannot otherwise mitigate or remove the conflict, SouthernSun may determine whether to instead follow the recommendation of a Proxy Advisor so long as SouthernSun concludes that the Proxy Advisor can appropriately provide a voting recommendation. The CCO will retain documentation of the determination to utilize the Proxy Advisor’s recommendation.

C-202

LOGO

Proxy Voting Guidelines

Election of the Board of Directors

We believe that good corporate governance generally starts with a board composed primarily of independent directors. We will evaluate board structures on a case-by-case basis.

Approval of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

We believe that the relationship between a company and its auditors should be limited primarily to the audit engagement, although it may include certain closely related activities that do not raise an appearance of impaired independence.

We will evaluate on a case-by-case basis for instances in which the audit firm has a substantial non-audit relationship with a company to determine whether we believe independence has been, or could be, compromised.

Executive Compensation Plans

We believe that appropriately designed executive compensation plans, approved by shareholders, can be an effective way to align the interests of shareholders and the interests of directors, management, and employees by providing incentives to increase shareholder value. Conversely, we are opposed to plans that substantially dilute ownership interests in the company, provide participants with excessive awards, or have inherently objectionable structural features.

We will generally support measures intended to increase stock ownership by executives and the use of employee stock purchase plans to increase company stock ownership by employees.

The firm may also consider many other factors, such as the nature of the industry and size of the company, when assessing a plan’s impact on ownership interests.

Corporate Structure

We typically view the exercise of shareholders’ rights, including the rights to act by written consent, to call special meetings, and to remove directors, to be fundamental to good corporate governance. However, we will also take into consideration management’s views on specific shareholder rights proposals to ensure that management is not potentially distracted by proposals which are frivolous or appear to be motivated by a short-term perspective.

Because classes of common stock with unequal voting rights limit the rights of certain shareholders, we generally believe that shareholders should have voting power equal to their equity interest in the company and should be able to approve or reject changes to a company’s by-laws by a simple majority vote.

Shareholder Rights Plans

There are shareholder rights plans which, when triggered by a hostile acquisition, attempt to give shareholders share purchase or sale rights so far out of line with the market that certain shareholders are advantaged, possibly at the risk of diminution of wealth to the company. These rights plans are known as poison pills, and such measures may tend to entrench current management, which may be considered to have a negative impact on shareholder value. There are arguments in favor of and against these rights plans.

We believe the best approach is for a company to seek shareholder approval of rights plans, and we generally support shareholder resolutions requesting that shareholders be given the opportunity to vote on the adoption of rights plans.

Maintenance of Records

We will maintain records of our proxy voting and any document created that was material in determining the vote for at least five years (two years on-site).

C-203

LOGO

Investment Company Issues

Proposal

The Funds may invest in other investment companies that are not affiliated (“Underlying Funds”) and are required by the 1940 Act to handle proxies received from Underlying Funds in a certain manner. Notwithstanding the guidelines provided in these procedures, it is our policy to vote all proxies received from the Underlying Funds in the same proportion that all shares of the Underlying Funds are voted, or in accordance with instructions received from fund shareholders, pursuant to Section 12(d)(1)(F) of the 1940 Act. After properly voted, the proxy materials are placed in a file maintained by our Director of Operations for future reference.

SEC Filings

The Form N-PX containing each U.S. mutual fund’s complete proxy voting record for the twelve-month period ended June 30 is filed by SEI Investments Global Funds Services with the SEC by August 31 of each year. These Proxy Voting Policies and Procedures are filed in the Funds’ registration statement.

Procedures

SouthernSun has adopted procedures to implement the firm’s policy and to monitor and ensure that the firm’s policy is observed, implemented properly, and amended or updated, as appropriate, and includes the following:

Voting

•

The Operations Team is notified either electronically or by regular mail of any upcoming proxy votes for pertinent securities as well as any accompanying materials/documentation.

•

The Operations Team then notifies the primary analyst on the Investment Team that is responsible for voting proxies for said security.

•

The primary analyst shall determine the appropriate voting decision according to the guidelines listed above. In addition, a separate analyst on the Investment Team must also review and approve such proxy voting decision. In certain instances, the client may provide specific proxy voting guidelines (e.g., AFL-CIO proxy voting guidelines) and request that the firm votes in accordance with such guidelines. The Investment Team, as a whole, may discuss particular items on a company’s voting ballot in order to determine how to vote.

•

The Operations Team will determine which client accounts hold the security to which the proxy relates.

•

The Operations Team will tabulate all custodial records and send the proxy vote to the company either electronically or by regular mail; provided that, the Operations Team will only be able to successfully submit a proxy vote in the case of foreign securities if the appropriate authorizations have been provided to the client’s custodian.

•

Any breakdowns in the voting process (e.g., missed votes, incorrect votes) must be immediately escalated to the Director of Operations and Chief Compliance Officer for resolution.

•

As a matter of practice, SouthernSun generally will not vote proxies associated with Exchange Traded Funds (“ETFs”), money market funds, or for securities that are on loan or no longer in the firm’s investment strategies at the time of the relevant proxy vote.

•

SouthernSun will generally not participate in companies domiciled in countries requiring share blocking. For situations that involve a power of attorney, SouthernSun cannot guarantee that a vote will be accepted.

C-204

LOGO

Disclosure

•

SouthernSun will provide conspicuously displayed information in its Form ADV summarizing our proxy voting policy and procedures, including a statement that clients may request information regarding how SouthernSun voted proxies, and that clients may request a copy of our proxy policies and procedures.

•

SouthernSun will also seek to include the following disclosure in it is client agreements with clients:

We have adopted and implemented policies and procedures that we believe are reasonably designed to ensure that proxies are voted in the best interest of clients, in accordance with our fiduciary duties and SEC rule 206(4)-6 under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940. Our authority to vote the proxies of our clients is established by our advisory contracts or comparable documents, and our proxy voting guidelines have been tailored to reflect these specific contractual obligations. In addition to SEC requirements governing advisers, our proxy voting policies reflect the fiduciary standards and responsibilities for ERISA accounts set out in Department of Labor Interpretive Bulletin 2008-2, 29 C.F.R. 2509.08-2 (Oct. 17, 2008).

•

The Compliance Team will also send a copy of our policy to all new clients while the Operations Team is responsible for an annual delivery to all existing clients.

Client Requests for Information

•

All client requests for information regarding proxy votes or policies and procedures that are received by any employee should be forwarded to the Operations and Client Relations Teams.

•

In response to any request, the Operations and/or Client Relations Teams will prepare a written response to the client with the information requested and, as applicable, will include the name of the issuer, the proposal voted upon, and how SouthernSun voted the client’s proxy with respect to each proposal about which client inquired.

Records Retention

We will maintain the following records:

•

Copies of all written policies and procedures,

•

A copy of each proxy statement received,

•

A record of each vote cast,

•

A copy of any document created that was material to making a decision how to vote proxies or that memorializes the basis for that decision, and

•

A copy of each written client request for information on how the adviser voted proxies on behalf of the client, and a copy of any written response by the investment adviser to any (written or oral) client request for information on how the adviser voted proxies on behalf of the requesting client.

Other

Client and Other Information

A copy of these Proxy Voting Policies and Procedures is available to our clients, without charge and upon request, by calling (901) 341-2700. We will send a copy of these Proxy Voting Policies and Procedures within three business days of receipt of a request.

When proxies have not been received on behalf of a client, we will make reasonable efforts to obtain missing proxies. With respect to foreign holdings, record and voting deadline dates may be announced with limited time to respond. As such, SouthernSun will make best efforts to respond in a timely manner. In

C-205

LOGO

addition, we will provide each client, without charge, upon request, information regarding the proxy votes cast by us with regard to the client’s securities. In the event that a client has additional securities that we do not manage in a particular account, SouthernSun will provide the proxy voting information directly to the client so that they can vote the proxy personally. Absent an explicit agreement, SouthernSun does not engage in or monitor legal proceedings, including class-action claims, on behalf of its clients. Any notification obligations for class-action lawsuits are the responsibility of the applicable custodian.

C-206

LOGO

TABLE OF CONTENTS



Coverage			D-9

1. Board of Directors			D-10

Voting on Director Nominees in Uncontested Elections			D-10

Independence			D-10

ISS Classification of Directors – U.S.			D-11

Composition			D-13

Attendance			D-13

Overboarded Directors			D-13

Gender Diversity			D-13

Racial and/or Ethnic Diversity			D-13

Responsiveness			D-14

Accountability			D-14

Poison Pills			D-14

Unequal Voting Rights			D-15

Classified Board Structure			D-15

Removal of Shareholder Discretion on Classified Boards			D-15

Problematic Governance Structure			D-15

Unilateral Bylaw/Charter Amendments			D-16

Restricting Binding Shareholder Proposals			D-16

Director Performance Evaluation			D-16

Management Proposals to Ratify Existing Charter or Bylaw Provisions			D-17

Problematic Audit-Related Practices			D-17

Problematic Compensation Practices			D-17

Problematic Pledging of Company Stock			D-18

Climate Accountability			D-18

Governance Failures			D-18

Voting on Director Nominees in Contested Elections			D-19

Vote-No Campaigns			D-19

Proxy Contests/Proxy Access			D-19

Other Board-Related Proposals			D-19

Adopt Anti-Hedging/Pledging/Speculative Investments Policy			D-19

Board Refreshment			D-19

Term/Tenure Limits			D-20

Age Limits			D-20

Board Size			D-20

Classification/Declassification of the Board			D-20


W W W . I S S G O V E R N A N C E . C O M		D-2			2 of 81

LOGO



CEO Succession Planning			D-20

Cumulative Voting			D-20

Director and Officer Indemnification, Liability Protection, and Exculpation			D-21

Establish/Amend Nominee Qualifications			D-21

Establish Other Board Committee Proposals			D-22

Filling Vacancies/Removal of Directors			D-22

Independent Board Chair			D-22

Majority of Independent Directors/Establishment of Independent Committees			D-23

Majority Vote Standard for the Election of Directors			D-23

Proxy Access			D-23

Require More Nominees than Open Seats			D-23

Shareholder Engagement Policy (Shareholder Advisory Committee)			D-24

2. Audit-Related			D-25

Auditor Indemnification and Limitation of Liability			D-25

Auditor Ratification			D-25

Shareholder Proposals Limiting Non-Audit Services			D-25

Shareholder Proposals on Audit Firm Rotation			D-26

3. Shareholder Rights & Defenses			D-27

Advance Notice Requirements for Shareholder Proposals/Nominations			D-27

Amend Bylaws without Shareholder Consent			D-27

Control Share Acquisition Provisions			D-27

Control Share Cash-Out Provisions			D-27

Disgorgement Provisions			D-28

Fair Price Provisions			D-28

Freeze-Out Provisions			D-28

Greenmail			D-28

Shareholder Litigation Rights			D-28

Federal Forum Selection Provisions			D-28

Exclusive Forum Provisions for State Law Matters			D-29

Fee shifting			D-29

Net Operating Loss (NOL) Protective Amendments			D-30

Poison Pills (Shareholder Rights Plans)			D-30

Shareholder Proposals to Put Pill to a Vote and/or Adopt a Pill Policy			D-30

Management Proposals to Ratify a Poison Pill			D-30

Management Proposals to Ratify a Pill to Preserve Net Operating Losses (NOLs)			D-31

Proxy Voting Disclosure, Confidentiality, and Tabulation			D-31

Ratification Proposals: Management Proposals to Ratify Existing Charter or Bylaw Provisions			D-31

Reimbursing Proxy Solicitation Expenses			D-32


W W W . I S S G O V E R N A N C E . C O M		D-3			3 of 81

LOGO



Reincorporation Proposals			D-32

Shareholder Ability to Act by Written Consent			D-32

Shareholder Ability to Call Special Meetings			D-33

Stakeholder Provisions			D-33

State Antitakeover Statutes			D-33

Supermajority Vote Requirements			D-33

Virtual Shareholder Meetings			D-34

4. Capital/Restructuring			D-35

Capital			D-35

Adjustments to Par Value of Common Stock			D-35

Common Stock Authorization			D-35

General Authorization Requests			D-35

Specific Authorization Requests			D-36

Dual Class Structure			D-36

Issue Stock for Use with Rights Plan			D-36

Preemptive Rights			D-36

Preferred Stock Authorization			D-36

General Authorization Requests			D-36

Recapitalization Plans			D-38

Reverse Stock Splits			D-38

Share Issuance Mandates at U.S. Domestic Issuers Incorporated Outside the U.S.			D-38

Share Repurchase Programs			D-39

Share Repurchase Programs Shareholder Proposals			D-39

Stock Distributions: Splits and Dividends			D-39

Tracking Stock			D-39

Restructuring			D-39

Appraisal Rights			D-39

Asset Purchases			D-40

Asset Sales			D-40

Bundled Proposals			D-40

Conversion of Securities			D-40

Corporate Reorganization/Debt Restructuring/Prepackaged Bankruptcy Plans/Reverse Leveraged Buyouts/Wrap Plans			D-40

Formation of Holding Company			D-41

Going Private and Going Dark Transactions (LBOs and Minority Squeeze-outs)			D-41

Joint Ventures			D-42

Liquidations			D-42

Mergers and Acquisitions			D-42


W W W . I S S G O V E R N A N C E . C O M		D-4			4 of 81

LOGO



Private Placements/Warrants/Convertible Debentures			D-43

Reorganization/Restructuring Plan (Bankruptcy)			D-44

Special Purpose Acquisition Corporations (SPACs)			D-44

Special Purpose Acquisition Corporations (SPACs) - Proposals for Extensions			D-45

Spin-offs			D-45

Value Maximization Shareholder Proposals			D-45

5. Compensation			D-46

Executive Pay Evaluation			D-46

Advisory Votes on Executive Compensation—Management Proposals (Say-on-Pay)			D-46

Pay-for-Performance Evaluation			D-47

Problematic Pay Practices			D-48

Compensation Committee Communications and Responsiveness			D-49

Frequency of Advisory Vote on Executive Compensation (“Say When on Pay”)			D-49

Voting on Golden Parachutes in an Acquisition, Merger, Consolidation, or Proposed Sale			D-49

Equity-Based and Other Incentive Plans			D-50

Shareholder Value Transfer (SVT)			D-51

Three-Year Value-Adjusted Burn Rate			D-51

Egregious Factors			D-51

Liberal Change in Control Definition			D-51

Repricing Provisions			D-52

Problematic Pay Practices or Significant Pay-for-Performance Disconnect			D-52

Amending Cash and Equity Plans (including Approval for Tax Deductibility (162(m))			D-52

Specific Treatment of Certain Award Types in Equity Plan Evaluations			D-53

Dividend Equivalent Rights			D-53

Operating Partnership (OP) Units in Equity Plan Analysis of Real Estate Investment Trusts (REITs)			D-53

Other Compensation Plans			D-53

401(k) Employee Benefit Plans			D-53

Employee Stock Ownership Plans (ESOPs)			D-54

Employee Stock Purchase Plans—Qualified Plans			D-54

Employee Stock Purchase Plans—Non-Qualified Plans			D-54

Option Exchange Programs/Repricing Options			D-54

Stock Plans in Lieu of Cash			D-55

Transfer Stock Option (TSO) Programs			D-55

Director Compensation			D-56

Shareholder Ratification of Director Pay Programs			D-56

Equity Plans for Non-Employee Directors			D-56

Non-Employee Director Retirement Plans			D-56

Shareholder Proposals on Compensation			D-57

Bonus Banking/Bonus Banking “Plus”			D-57


W W W . I S S G O V E R N A N C E . C O M		D-5			5 of 81

LOGO



Compensation Consultants—Disclosure of Board or Company’s Utilization			D-57

Disclosure/Setting Levels or Types of Compensation for Executives and Directors			D-57

Golden Coffins/Executive Death Benefits			D-57

Hold Equity Past Retirement or for a Significant Period of Time			D-58

Pay Disparity			D-58

Pay for Performance/Performance-Based Awards			D-58

Pay for Superior Performance			D-59

Pre-Arranged Trading Plans (10b5-1 Plans)			D-59

Prohibit Outside CEOs from Serving on Compensation Committees			D-59

Recoupment of Incentive or Stock Compensation in Specified Circumstances			D-60

Severance Agreements for Executives/Golden Parachutes			D-60

Share Buyback Impact on Incentive Program Metrics			D-60

Supplemental Executive Retirement Plans (SERPs)			D-61

Tax Gross-Up Proposals			D-61

Termination of Employment Prior to Severance Payment/Eliminating Accelerated Vesting of Unvested Equity			D-61

6. Routine/Miscellaneous			D-62

Adjourn Meeting			D-62

Amend Quorum Requirements			D-62

Amend Minor Bylaws			D-62

Change Company Name			D-62

Change Date, Time, or Location of Annual Meeting			D-62

Other Business			D-62

7. Social and Environmental Issues			D-63

Global Approach – E&S Shareholder Proposals			D-63

Endorsement of Principles			D-63

Animal Welfare			D-63

Animal Welfare Policies			D-63

Animal Testing			D-64

Animal Slaughter			D-64

Consumer Issues			D-64

Genetically Modified Ingredients			D-64

Reports on Potentially Controversial Business/Financial Practices			D-64

Pharmaceutical Pricing, Access to Medicines, and Prescription Drug Reimportation			D-65

Product Safety and Toxic/Hazardous Materials			D-65

Tobacco-Related Proposals			D-66

Climate Change			D-66

Say on Climate (SoC) Management Proposals			D-66

Say on Climate (SoC) Shareholder Proposals			D-67

Climate Change/Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions			D-67


W W W . I S S G O V E R N A N C E . C O M		D-6			6 of 81

LOGO



Energy Efficiency			D-68

Renewable Energy			D-68

Diversity			D-68

Board Diversity			D-68

Equality of Opportunity			D-69

Gender Identity, Sexual Orientation, and Domestic Partner Benefits			D-69

Gender, Race/Ethnicity Pay Gap			D-69

Racial Equity and/or Civil Rights Audit Guidelines			D-69

Environment and Sustainability			D-70

Facility and Workplace Safety			D-70

General Environmental Proposals and Community Impact Assessments			D-70

Hydraulic Fracturing			D-70

Operations in Protected Areas			D-71

Recycling			D-71

Sustainability Reporting			D-71

Water Issues			D-71

General Corporate Issues			D-72

Charitable Contributions			D-72

Data Security, Privacy, and Internet Issues			D-72

ESG Compensation-Related Proposals			D-72

Human Rights, Human Capital Management, and International Operations			D-72

Human Rights Proposals			D-72

Mandatory Arbitration			D-73

Operations in High-Risk Markets			D-73

Outsourcing/Offshoring			D-73

Sexual Harassment			D-74

Weapons and Military Sales			D-74

Political Activities			D-74

Lobbying			D-74

Political Contributions			D-74

Political Expenditures and Lobbying Congruency			D-75

Political Ties			D-75

8. Mutual Fund Proxies			D-76

Election of Directors			D-76

Closed End Funds- Unilateral Opt-In to Control Share Acquisition Statutes			D-76

Converting Closed-end Fund to Open-end Fund			D-76

Proxy Contests			D-76

Investment Advisory Agreements			D-76

Approving New Classes or Series of Shares			D-77


W W W . I S S G O V E R N A N C E . C O M		D-7			7 of 81

LOGO



Preferred Stock Proposals			D-77

1940 Act Policies			D-77

Changing a Fundamental Restriction to a Nonfundamental Restriction			D-77

Change Fundamental Investment Objective to Nonfundamental			D-77

Name Change Proposals			D-77

Change in Fund’s Subclassification			D-78

Business Development Companies—Authorization to Sell Shares of Common Stock at a Price below Net Asset Value			D-78

Disposition of Assets/Termination/Liquidation			D-78

Changes to the Charter Document			D-78

Changing the Domicile of a Fund			D-79

Authorizing the Board to Hire and Terminate Subadvisers Without Shareholder Approval			D-79

Distribution Agreements			D-79

Master-Feeder Structure			D-79

Mergers			D-79

Shareholder Proposals for Mutual Funds			D-80

Establish Director Ownership Requirement			D-80

Reimburse Shareholder for Expenses Incurred			D-80

Terminate the Investment Advisor			D-80


W W W . I S S G O V E R N A N C E . C O M		D-8			8 of 81

LOGO

Coverage

The U.S. research team provides proxy analyses and voting recommendations for the common shareholder meetings of U.S. - incorporated companies that are publicly-traded on U.S. exchanges, as well as certain OTC companies, if they are held in our institutional investor clients’ portfolios. Coverage generally includes corporate actions for common equity holders, such as written consents and bankruptcies. ISS’ U.S. coverage includes investment companies (including open-end funds, closed-end funds, exchange-traded funds, and unit investment trusts), limited partnerships (“LPs”), master limited partnerships (“MLPs”), limited liability companies (“LLCs”), and business development companies. ISS reviews its universe of coverage on an annual basis, and the coverage is subject to change based on client need and industry trends.

Foreign-incorporated companies

In addition to U.S.- incorporated, U.S.- listed companies, ISS’ U.S. policies are applied to certain foreign-incorporated company analyses. Like the SEC, ISS distinguishes two types of companies that list but are not incorporated in the U.S.:

◾

U.S. Domestic Issuers – which have a majority of outstanding shares held in the U.S. and meet other criteria, as determined by the SEC, and are subject to the same disclosure and listing standards as U.S. incorporated companies (e.g. they are required to file DEF14A proxy statements) – are generally covered under standard U.S. policy guidelines.

◾

Foreign Private Issuers (FPIs) – which are allowed to take exemptions from most disclosure requirements (e.g., they are allowed to file 6-K for their proxy materials) and U.S. listing standards – are generally covered under a combination of policy guidelines:

◾

FPI Guidelines (see the Americas Regional Proxy Voting Guidelines), may apply to companies incorporated in governance havens, and apply certain minimum independence and disclosure standards in the evaluation of key proxy ballot items, such as the election of directors; and/or

◾

Guidelines for the market that is responsible for, or most relevant to, the item on the ballot.

U.S. incorporated companies listed only on non-U.S. exchanges are generally covered under the ISS guidelines for the market on which they are traded.

An FPI is generally covered under ISS’ approach to FPIs outlined above, even if such FPI voluntarily files a proxy statement and/or other filing normally required of a U.S. Domestic Issuer, so long as the company retains its FPI status.

In all cases – including with respect to other companies with cross-market features that may lead to ballot items related to multiple markets – items that are on the ballot solely due to the requirements of another market (listing, incorporation, or national code) may be evaluated under the policy of the relevant market, regardless of the

“assigned” primary market coverage.


W W W . I S S G O V E R N A N C E . C O M		D-9			9 of 81

LOGO

1. Board of Directors

Voting on Director Nominees in Uncontested Elections

Four fundamental principles apply when determining votes on director nominees:

Independence: Boards should be sufficiently independent from management (and significant shareholders) to ensure that they are able and motivated to effectively supervise management’s performance for the benefit of all shareholders, including in setting and monitoring the execution of corporate strategy, with appropriate use of shareholder capital, and in setting and monitoring executive compensation programs that support that strategy. The chair of the board should ideally be an independent director, and all boards should have an independent leadership position or a similar role in order to help provide appropriate counterbalance to executive management, as well as having sufficiently independent committees that focus on key governance concerns such as audit, compensation, and nomination of directors.

Composition: Companies should ensure that directors add value to the board through their specific skills and expertise and by having sufficient time and commitment to serve effectively. Boards should be of a size appropriate to accommodate diversity, expertise, and independence, while ensuring active and collaborative participation by all members. Boards should be sufficiently diverse to ensure consideration of a wide range of perspectives.

Responsiveness: Directors should respond to investor input, such as that expressed through significant opposition to management proposals, significant support for shareholder proposals (whether binding or non-binding), and tender offers where a majority of shares are tendered.

Accountability: Boards should be sufficiently accountable to shareholders, including through transparency of the company’s governance practices and regular board elections, by the provision of sufficient information for shareholders to be able to assess directors and board composition, and through the ability of shareholders to remove directors.

General Recommendation: Generally vote for director nominees, except under the following circumstances (with new nominees¹ considered on case-by-case basis):

Independence

Vote against² or withhold from non-independent directors (Executive Directors and Non-Independent Non-Executive Directors per ISS’ Classification of Directors) when:

◾

Independent directors comprise 50 percent or less of the board;

◾

The non-independent director serves on the audit, compensation, or nominating committee;

◾

The company lacks an audit, compensation, or nominating committee so that the full board functions as that committee; or

◾

The company lacks a formal nominating committee, even if the board attests that the independent directors fulfill the functions of such a committee.

¹ A “new nominee” is a director who is being presented for election by shareholders for the first time. Recommendations on new nominees who have served for less than one year are made on a case-by-case basis depending on the timing of their appointment and the problematic governance issue in question.

² In general, companies with a plurality vote standard use “Withhold” as the contrary vote option in director elections; companies with a majority vote standard use “Against”. However, it will vary by company and the proxy must be checked to determine the valid contrary vote option for the particular company.


W W W . I S S G O V E R N A N C E . C O M		D-10			10 of 81

LOGO

ISS Classification of Directors – U.S.

Executive Director

1.1.

Current officer¹of the company or one of its affiliates².

Non-Independent Non-Executive Director

Board Identification

2.1.

Director identified as not independent by the board.

Controlling/Significant

Shareholder

2.2.

Beneficial owner of more than 50 percent of the company’s voting power (this may be aggregated if voting power is distributed among more than one member of a group).

Current Employment at Company or Related Company

2.3.

Non-officer employee of the firm (including employee representatives).

2.4.

Officer¹, former officer, or general or limited partner of a joint venture or partnership with the company.

Former Employment

2.5.

Former CEO of the company. ^{3, 4}

2.6.

Former non-CEO officer¹of the company or an affiliate²within the past five years.

2.7.

Former officer¹of an acquired company within the past five years.⁴

2.8.

Officer¹of a former parent or predecessor firm at the time the company was sold or split off within the past five years.

2.9.

Former interim officer if the service was longer than 18 months. If the service was between 12 and 18 months an assessment of the interim officer’s employment agreement will be made.⁵

Family Members

2.10.

Immediate family member⁶of a current or former officer¹of the company or its affiliates²within the last five years.

2.11.

Immediate family member⁶of a current employee of company or its affiliates²where additional factors raise concern (which may include, but are not limited to, the following: a director related to numerous employees; the company or its affiliates employ relatives of numerous board members; or a non- Section 16 officer in a key strategic role).

Professional, Transactional, and Charitable Relationships

2.12.

Director who (or whose immediate family member⁶) currently provides professional services⁷in excess of $10,000 per year to: the company, an affiliate², or an individual officer of the company or an affiliate; or who is (or whose immediate family member⁶is) a partner, employee, or controlling shareholder of an organization which provides the services.

2.13.

Director who (or whose immediate family member⁶) currently has any material transactional relationship⁸with the company or its affiliates²; or who is (or whose immediate family member⁶is) a partner in, or a controlling shareholder or an executive officer of, an organization which has the material transactional relationship⁸(excluding investments in the company through a private placement).

2.14.

Director who (or whose immediate family member⁶) is a trustee, director, or employee of a charitable or non-profit organization that receives material grants or endowments⁸from the company or its affiliates².

Other Relationships

2.15.

Party to a voting agreement⁹to vote in line with management on proposals being brought to shareholder vote.

2.16.

Has (or an immediate family member⁶has) an interlocking relationship as defined by the SEC involving members of the board of directors or its Compensation Committee.¹⁰

2.17.

Founder¹¹of the company but not currently an employee.

2.18.

Director with pay comparable to Named Executive Officers.

2.19.

Any material¹²relationship with the company.

Independent Director

3.1.

No material¹²connection to the company other than a board seat.


W W W . I S S G O V E R N A N C E . C O M		D-11			11 of 81

LOGO

Footnotes:

1. The definition of officer will generally follow that of a “Section 16 officer” (officers subject to Section 16 of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934) and includes the chief executive, operating, financial, legal, technology, and accounting officers of a company (including the president, treasurer, secretary, controller, or any vice president in charge of a principal business unit, division, or policy function). Current interim officers are included in this category. For private companies, the equivalent positions are applicable. A non-employee director serving as an officer due to statutory requirements (e.g. corporate secretary) will generally be classified as a Non-Independent Non-Executive Director under “Any material relationship with the company.” However, if the company provides explicit disclosure that the director is not receiving additional compensation exceeding $10,000 per year for serving in that capacity, then the director will be classified as an Independent Director.

2. “Affiliate” includes a subsidiary, sibling company, or parent company. ISS uses 50 percent control ownership by the parent company as the standard for applying its affiliate designation. The manager/advisor of an externally managed issuer (EMI) is considered an affiliate.

3. Includes any former CEO of the company prior to the company’s initial public offering (IPO).

4. When there is a former CEO of a special purpose acquisition company (SPAC) serving on the board of an acquired company, ISS will generally classify such directors as independent unless determined otherwise taking into account the following factors: the applicable listing standards determination of such director’s independence; any operating ties to the firm; and the existence of any other conflicting relationships or related party transactions.

5. ISS will look at the terms of the interim officer’s employment contract to determine if it contains severance pay, long-term health and pension benefits, or other such standard provisions typically contained in contracts of permanent, non-temporary CEOs. ISS will also consider if a formal search process was under way for a full-time officer at the time.

6. “Immediate family member” follows the SEC’s definition of such and covers spouses, parents, children, step-parents, step-children, siblings, in-laws, and any person (other than a tenant or employee) sharing the household of any director, nominee for director, executive officer, or significant shareholder of the company.

7. Professional services can be characterized as advisory in nature, generally involve access to sensitive company information or to strategic decision-making, and typically have a commission- or fee-based payment structure. Professional services generally include but are not limited to the following: investment banking/financial advisory services, commercial banking (beyond deposit services), investment services, insurance services, accounting/audit services, consulting services, marketing services, legal services, property management services, realtor services, lobbying services, executive search services, and IT consulting services. The following would generally be considered transactional relationships and not professional services: deposit services, IT tech support services, educational services, and construction services. The case of participation in a banking syndicate by a non-lead bank should be considered a transactional (and hence subject to the associated materiality test) rather than a professional relationship. “Of Counsel” relationships are only considered immaterial if the individual does not receive any form of compensation (in excess of $10,000 per year) from, or is a retired partner of, the firm providing the professional service. The case of a company providing a professional service to one of its directors or to an entity with which one of its directors is affiliated, will be considered a transactional rather than a professional relationship. Insurance services and marketing services are assumed to be professional services unless the company explains why such services are not advisory.

8. A material transactional relationship, including grants to non-profit organizations, exists if the company makes annual payments to, or receives annual payments from, another entity, exceeding the greater of: $200,000 or 5 percent of the recipient’s gross revenues, for a company that follows NASDAQ listing standards; or the greater of $1,000,000 or 2 percent of the recipient’s gross revenues, for a company that follows NYSE listing standards. For a company that follows neither of the preceding standards, ISS will apply the NASDAQ-based materiality test. (The recipient is the party receiving the financial proceeds from the transaction).

9. Dissident directors who are parties to a voting agreement pursuant to a settlement or similar arrangement may be classified as Independent Directors if an analysis of the following factors indicates that the voting agreement does not compromise their alignment with all shareholders’ interests: the terms of the agreement; the duration of the standstill provision in the agreement; the limitations and requirements of actions that are agreed upon; if the dissident director nominee(s) is subject to the standstill; and if there any conflicting relationships or related party transactions.

10. Interlocks include: executive officers serving as directors on each other’s compensation or similar committees (or, in the absence of such a committee, on the board); or executive officers sitting on each other’s boards and at least one serves on the other’s compensation or similar committees (or, in the absence of such a committee, on the board).

11. The operating involvement of the founder with the company will be considered; if the founder was never employed by the company, ISS may deem him or her an Independent Director.


W W W . I S S G O V E R N A N C E . C O M		D-12			12 of 81

LOGO

12. For purposes of ISS’s director independence classification, “material” will be defined as a standard of relationship (financial, personal, or otherwise) that a reasonable person might conclude could potentially influence one’s objectivity in the boardroom in a manner that would have a meaningful impact on an individual’s ability to satisfy requisite fiduciary standards on behalf of shareholders.

Composition

Attendance at Board and Committee Meetings: Generally vote against or withhold from directors (except nominees who served only part of the fiscal year³) who attend less than 75 percent of the aggregate of their board and committee meetings for the period for which they served, unless an acceptable reason for absences is disclosed in the proxy or another SEC filing. Acceptable reasons for director absences are generally limited to the following:

◾

Medical issues/illness;

◾

Family emergencies; and

◾

Missing only one meeting (when the total of all meetings is three or fewer).

In cases of chronic poor attendance without reasonable justification, in addition to voting against the director(s) with poor attendance, generally vote against or withhold from appropriate members of the nominating/governance committees or the full board.

If the proxy disclosure is unclear and insufficient to determine whether a director attended at least 75 percent of the aggregate of his/her board and committee meetings during his/her period of service, vote against or withhold from the director(s) in question.

Overboarded Directors: Generally vote against or withhold from individual directors who:

◾

Sit on more than five public company boards; or

◾

Are CEOs of public companies who sit on the boards of more than two public companies besides their own—withhold only at their outside boards⁴.

Gender Diversity: Generally vote against or withhold from the chair of the nominating committee (or other directors on a case-by-case basis) at companies where there are no women on the company’s board. An exception will be made if there was at least one woman on the board at the preceding annual meeting and the board makes a firm commitment to return to a gender-diverse status within a year.

Racial and/or Ethnic Diversity: For companies in the Russell 3000 or S&P 1500 indices, generally vote against or withhold from the chair of the nominating committee (or other directors on a case-by-case basis) where the board has no apparent racially or ethnically diverse members⁵. An exception will be made if there was racial and/or ethnic diversity on the board at the preceding annual meeting and the board makes a firm commitment to appoint at least one racial and/or ethnic diverse member within a year.

³ Nominees who served for only part of the fiscal year are generally exempted from the attendance policy.

⁴ Although all of a CEO’s subsidiary boards with publicly-traded common stock will be counted as separate boards, ISS will not recommend a withhold vote for the CEO of a parent company board or any of the controlled (>50 percent ownership) subsidiaries of that parent but may do so at subsidiaries that are less than 50 percent controlled and boards outside the parent/subsidiary relationships.

⁵ Aggregate diversity statistics provided by the board will only be considered if specific to racial and/or ethnic diversity.


W W W . I S S G O V E R N A N C E . C O M		D-13			13 of 81

LOGO

Responsiveness

Vote case-by-case on individual directors, committee members, or the entire board of directors as appropriate if:

◾

The board failed to act on a shareholder proposal that received the support of a majority of the shares cast in the previous year or failed to act on a management proposal seeking to ratify an existing charter/bylaw provision that received opposition of a majority of the shares cast in the previous year. Factors that will be considered are:

◾

Disclosed outreach efforts by the board to shareholders in the wake of the vote;

◾

Rationale provided in the proxy statement for the level of implementation;

◾

The subject matter of the proposal;

◾

The level of support for and opposition to the resolution in past meetings;

◾

Actions taken by the board in response to the majority vote and its engagement with shareholders;

◾

The continuation of the underlying issue as a voting item on the ballot (as either shareholder or management proposals); and

◾

Other factors as appropriate.

◾

The board failed to act on takeover offers where the majority of shares are tendered;

◾

At the previous board election, any director received more than 50 percent withhold/against votes of the shares cast and the company has failed to address the issue(s) that caused the high withhold/against vote.

Vote case-by-case on Compensation Committee members (or, in exceptional cases, the full board) and the Say on Pay proposal if:

◾

The company’s previous say-on-pay received the support of less than 70 percent of votes cast. Factors that will be considered are:

◾

The company’s response, including:

◾

Disclosure of engagement efforts with major institutional investors, including the frequency and timing of engagements and the company participants (including whether independent directors participated);

◾

Disclosure of the specific concerns voiced by dissenting shareholders that led to the say-on-pay opposition;

◾

Disclosure of specific and meaningful actions taken to address shareholders’ concerns;

◾

Other recent compensation actions taken by the company;

◾

Whether the issues raised are recurring or isolated;

◾

The company’s ownership structure; and

◾

Whether the support level was less than 50 percent, which would warrant the highest degree of responsiveness.

◾

The board implements an advisory vote on executive compensation on a less frequent basis than the frequency that received the plurality of votes cast.

Accountability

PROBLEMATIC TAKEOVER DEFENSES, CAPITAL STRUCTURE, AND GOVERNANCE STRUCTURE

Poison Pills: Generally vote against or withhold from all nominees (except new nominees¹, who should be considered case-by-case) if:

◾

The company has a poison pill with a deadhand or slowhand feature⁶;

⁶ If a short-term pill with a deadhand or slowhand feature is enacted but expires before the next shareholder vote, ISS will generally still recommend withhold/against nominees at the next shareholder meeting following its adoption.


W W W . I S S G O V E R N A N C E . C O M		D-14			14 of 81

LOGO

◾

The board makes a material adverse modification to an existing pill, including, but not limited to, extension, renewal, or lowering the trigger, without shareholder approval; or

◾

The company has a long-term poison pill (with a term of over one year) that was not approved by the public shareholders⁷.

Vote case-by-case on nominees if the board adopts an initial short-term pill⁶ (with a term of one year or less) without shareholder approval, taking into consideration:

◾

The disclosed rationale for the adoption;

◾

The trigger;

◾

The company’s market capitalization (including absolute level and sudden changes);

◾

A commitment to put any renewal to a shareholder vote; and

◾

Other factors as relevant.

Unequal Voting Rights: Generally vote withhold or against directors individually, committee members, or the entire board (except new nominees¹, who should be considered case-by-case), if the company employs a common stock structure with unequal voting rights⁸.

Exceptions to this policy will generally be limited to:

◾

Newly-public companies⁹ with a sunset provision of no more than seven years from the date of going public;

◾

Limited Partnerships and the Operating Partnership (OP) unit structure of REITs;

◾

Situations where the super-voting shares represent less than 5% of total voting power and therefore considered to be de minimis; or

◾

The company provides sufficient protections for minority shareholders, such as allowing minority shareholders a regular binding vote on whether the capital structure should be maintained.

Classified Board Structure: The board is classified, and a continuing director responsible for a problematic governance issue at the board/committee level that would warrant a withhold/against vote recommendation is not up for election. All appropriate nominees (except new) may be held accountable.

Removal of Shareholder Discretion on Classified Boards: The company has opted into, or failed to opt out of, state laws requiring a classified board structure.

Problematic Governance Structure: For companies that hold or held their first annual meeting⁹ of public shareholders after Feb. 1, 2015, generally vote against or withhold from directors individually, committee members, or the entire board (except new nominees¹, who should be considered case-by-case) if, prior to or in connection with the company’s public offering, the company or its board adopted the following bylaw or charter provisions that are considered to be materially adverse to shareholder rights:

◾

Supermajority vote requirements to amend the bylaws or charter;

◾

A classified board structure; or

◾

Other egregious provisions.

⁷ Approval prior to, or in connection, with a company’s becoming publicly-traded, or in connection with a de-SPAC transaction, is insufficient.

⁸ This generally includes classes of common stock that have additional votes per share than other shares; classes of shares that are not entitled to vote on all the same ballot items or nominees; or stock with time-phased voting rights (“loyalty shares”).

⁹ Includes companies that emerge from bankruptcy, SPAC transactions, spin-offs, direct listings, and those who complete a traditional initial public offering.


W W W . I S S G O V E R N A N C E . C O M		D-15			15 of 81

LOGO

A provision which specifies that the problematic structure(s) will be sunset within seven years of the date of going public will be considered a mitigating factor.

Unless the adverse provision is reversed or removed, vote case-by-case on director nominees in subsequent years.

Unilateral Bylaw/Charter Amendments: Generally vote against or withhold from directors individually, committee members, or the entire board (except new nominees¹, who should be considered case-by-case) if the board amends the company’s bylaws or charter without shareholder approval in a manner that materially diminishes shareholders’ rights or that could adversely impact shareholders, considering the following factors:

◾

The board’s rationale for adopting the bylaw/charter amendment without shareholder ratification;

◾

Disclosure by the company of any significant engagement with shareholders regarding the amendment;

◾

The level of impairment of shareholders’ rights caused by the board’s unilateral amendment to the bylaws/charter;

◾

The board’s track record with regard to unilateral board action on bylaw/charter amendments or other entrenchment provisions;

◾

The company’s ownership structure;

◾

The company’s existing governance provisions;

◾

The timing of the board’s amendment to the bylaws/charter in connection with a significant business development; and

◾

Other factors, as deemed appropriate, that may be relevant to determine the impact of the amendment on shareholders.

Unless the adverse amendment is reversed or submitted to a binding shareholder vote, in subsequent years vote case-by-case on director nominees. Generally vote against (except new nominees¹, who should be considered case-by-case) if the directors:

◾

Classified the board;

◾

Adopted supermajority vote requirements to amend the bylaws or charter;

◾

Eliminated shareholders’ ability to amend bylaws;

◾

Adopted a fee-shifting provision; or

◾

Adopted another provision deemed egregious.

Restricting Binding Shareholder Proposals: Generally vote against or withhold from the members of the governance committee if:

◾

The company’s governing documents impose undue restrictions on shareholders’ ability to amend the bylaws. Such restrictions include but are not limited to: outright prohibition on the submission of binding shareholder proposals or share ownership requirements, subject matter restrictions, or time holding requirements in excess of SEC Rule 14a-8. Vote against or withhold on an ongoing basis.

Submission of management proposals to approve or ratify requirements in excess of SEC Rule 14a-8 for the submission of binding bylaw amendments will generally be viewed as an insufficient restoration of shareholders’ rights. Generally continue to vote against or withhold on an ongoing basis until shareholders are provided with an unfettered ability to amend the bylaws or a proposal providing for such unfettered right is submitted for shareholder approval.

Director Performance Evaluation: The board lacks mechanisms to promote accountability and oversight, coupled with sustained poor performance relative to peers. Sustained poor performance is measured by one-, three-, and five-year total shareholder returns in the bottom half of a company’s four-digit GICS industry group

(Russell 3000 companies only). Take into consideration the company’s operational metrics and other factors as warranted. Problematic provisions include but are not limited to:

◾

A classified board structure;


W W W . I S S G O V E R N A N C E . C O M		D-16			16 of 81

LOGO

◾

A supermajority vote requirement;

◾

Either a plurality vote standard in uncontested director elections, or a majority vote standard in contested elections;

◾

The inability of shareholders to call special meetings;

◾

The inability of shareholders to act by written consent;

◾

A multi-class capital structure; and/or

◾

A non-shareholder-approved poison pill.

Management Proposals to Ratify Existing Charter or Bylaw Provisions: Vote against/withhold from individual directors, members of the governance committee, or the full board, where boards ask shareholders to ratify existing charter or bylaw provisions considering the following factors:

◾

The presence of a shareholder proposal addressing the same issue on the same ballot;

◾

The board’s rationale for seeking ratification;

◾

Disclosure of actions to be taken by the board should the ratification proposal fail;

◾

Disclosure of shareholder engagement regarding the board’s ratification request;

◾

The level of impairment to shareholders’ rights caused by the existing provision;

◾

The history of management and shareholder proposals on the provision at the company’s past meetings;

◾

Whether the current provision was adopted in response to the shareholder proposal;

◾

The company’s ownership structure; and

◾

Previous use of ratification proposals to exclude shareholder proposals.

Problematic Audit-Related Practices

Generally vote against or withhold from the members of the Audit Committee if:

◾

The non-audit fees paid to the auditor are excessive;

◾

The company receives an adverse opinion on the company’s financial statements from its auditor; or

◾

There is persuasive evidence that the Audit Committee entered into an inappropriate indemnification agreement with its auditor that limits the ability of the company, or its shareholders, to pursue legitimate legal recourse against the audit firm.

Vote case-by-case on members of the Audit Committee and potentially the full board if:

◾

Poor accounting practices are identified that rise to a level of serious concern, such as: fraud; misapplication of GAAP; and material weaknesses identified in Section 404 disclosures. Examine the severity, breadth, chronological sequence, and duration, as well as the company’s efforts at remediation or corrective actions, in determining whether withhold/against votes are warranted.

Problematic Compensation Practices

In the absence of an Advisory Vote on Executive Compensation (Say on Pay) ballot item or in egregious situations, vote against or withhold from the members of the Compensation Committee and potentially the full board if:

◾

There is an unmitigated misalignment between CEO pay and company performance (pay for performance);

◾

The company maintains significant problematic pay practices; or

◾

The board exhibits a significant level of poor communication and responsiveness to shareholders.

Generally vote against or withhold from the Compensation Committee chair, other committee members, or potentially the full board if:

◾

The company fails to include a Say on Pay ballot item when required under SEC provisions, or under the company’s declared frequency of say on pay; or

◾

The company fails to include a Frequency of Say on Pay ballot item when required under SEC provisions.


W W W . I S S G O V E R N A N C E . C O M		D-17			17 of 81

LOGO

Generally vote against members of the board committee responsible for approving/setting non-employee director compensation if there is a pattern (i.e. two or more years) of awarding excessive non-employee director compensation without disclosing a compelling rationale or other mitigating factors.

Problematic Pledging of Company Stock: Vote against the members of the committee that oversees risks related to pledging, or the full board, where a significant level of pledged company stock by executives or directors raises concerns. The following factors will be considered:

◾

The presence of an anti-pledging policy, disclosed in the proxy statement, that prohibits future pledging activity;

◾

The magnitude of aggregate pledged shares in terms of total common shares outstanding, market value, and trading volume;

◾

Disclosure of progress or lack thereof in reducing the magnitude of aggregate pledged shares over time;

◾

Disclosure in the proxy statement that shares subject to stock ownership and holding requirements do not include pledged company stock; and

◾

Any other relevant factors.

Climate Accountability

For companies that are significant greenhouse gas (GHG) emitters, through their operations or value chain¹⁰, generally vote against or withhold from the incumbent chair of the responsible committee (or other directors on a case-by-case basis) in cases where ISS determines that the company is not taking the minimum steps needed to understand, assess, and mitigate risks related to climate change to the company and the larger economy.

Minimum steps to understand and mitigate those risks are considered to be the following. Both minimum criteria will be required to be in alignment with the policy :

◾

Detailed disclosure of climate-related risks, such as according to the framework established by the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures (TCFD), including:

◾

Board governance measures;

◾

Corporate strategy;

◾

Risk management analyses; and

◾

Metrics and targets.

◾

Appropriate GHG emissions reduction targets.

At this time, “appropriate GHG emissions reductions targets” will be medium-term GHG reduction targets or Net Zero-by-2050 GHG reduction targets for a company’s operations (Scope 1) and electricity use (Scope 2). Targets should cover the vast majority of the company’s direct emissions.

Governance Failures

Under extraordinary circumstances, vote against or withhold from directors individually, committee members, or the entire board, due to:

◾

Material failures of governance, stewardship, risk oversight¹¹, or fiduciary responsibilities at the company;

◾

Failure to replace management as appropriate; or

¹⁰ Companies defined as “significant GHG emitters” will be those on the current Climate Action 100+ Focus Group list.

¹¹Examples of failure of risk oversight include but are not limited to: bribery; large or serial fines or sanctions from regulatory bodies; demonstrably poor risk oversight of environmental and social issues, including climate change; significant adverse legal judgments or settlement; or hedging of company stock.


W W W . I S S G O V E R N A N C E . C O M		D-18			18 of 81

LOGO

◾

Egregious actions related to a director’s service on other boards that raise substantial doubt about his or her ability to effectively oversee management and serve the best interests of shareholders at any company.

Voting on Director Nominees in Contested Elections

Vote-No Campaigns

General Recommendation: In cases where companies are targeted in connection with public “vote-no” campaigns, evaluate director nominees under the existing governance policies for voting on director nominees in uncontested elections. Take into consideration the arguments submitted by shareholders and other publicly available information.

Proxy Contests/Proxy Access

General Recommendation: Vote case-by-case on the election of directors in contested elections, considering the following factors:

◾

Long-term financial performance of the company relative to its industry;

◾

Management’s track record;

◾

Background to the contested election;

◾

Nominee qualifications and any compensatory arrangements;

◾

Strategic plan of dissident slate and quality of the critique against management;

◾

Likelihood that the proposed goals and objectives can be achieved (both slates); and

◾

Stock ownership positions.

In the case of candidates nominated pursuant to proxy access, vote case-by-case considering any applicable factors listed above or additional factors which may be relevant, including those that are specific to the company, to the nominee(s) and/or to the nature of the election (such as whether there are more candidates than board seats).

Other Board-Related Proposals

Adopt Anti-Hedging/Pledging/Speculative Investments Policy

General Recommendation: Generally vote for proposals seeking a policy that prohibits named executive officers from engaging in derivative or speculative transactions involving company stock, including hedging, holding stock in a margin account, or pledging stock as collateral for a loan. However, the company’s existing policies regarding responsible use of company stock will be considered.

Board Refreshment

Board refreshment is best implemented through an ongoing program of individual director evaluations, conducted annually, to ensure the evolving needs of the board are met and to bring in fresh perspectives, skills, and diversity as needed.


W W W . I S S G O V E R N A N C E . C O M		D-19			19 of 81

LOGO

Term/Tenure Limits

General Recommendation: Vote case-by-case on management proposals regarding director term/tenure limits, considering:

◾

The rationale provided for adoption of the term/tenure limit;

◾

The robustness of the company’s board evaluation process;

◾

Whether the limit is of sufficient length to allow for a broad range of director tenures;

◾

Whether the limit would disadvantage independent directors compared to non-independent directors; and

◾

Whether the board will impose the limit evenly, and not have the ability to waive it in a discriminatory manner.

Vote case-by-case on shareholder proposals asking for the company to adopt director term/tenure limits, considering:

◾

The scope of the shareholder proposal; and

◾

Evidence of problematic issues at the company combined with, or exacerbated by, a lack of board refreshment.

Age Limits

General Recommendation: Generally vote against management and shareholder proposals to limit the tenure of independent directors through mandatory retirement ages. Vote for proposals to remove mandatory age limits.

Board Size

General Recommendation: Vote for proposals seeking to fix the board size or designate a range for the board size.

Vote against proposals that give management the ability to alter the size of the board outside of a specified range without shareholder approval.

Classification/Declassification of the Board

General Recommendation: Vote against proposals to classify (stagger) the board.

Vote for proposals to repeal classified boards and to elect all directors annually.

CEO Succession Planning

General Recommendation: Generally vote for proposals seeking disclosure on a CEO succession planning policy, considering, at a minimum, the following factors:

◾

The reasonableness/scope of the request; and

◾

The company’s existing disclosure on its current CEO succession planning process.

Cumulative Voting

General Recommendation: Generally vote against management proposals to eliminate cumulate voting, and for shareholder proposals to restore or provide for cumulative voting, unless:


W W W . I S S G O V E R N A N C E . C O M		D-20			20 of 81

LOGO

◾

The company has proxy access¹², thereby allowing shareholders to nominate directors to the company’s ballot; and

◾

The company has adopted a majority vote standard, with a carve-out for plurality voting in situations where there are more nominees than seats, and a director resignation policy to address failed elections.

Vote for proposals for cumulative voting at controlled companies (insider voting power > 50%).

Director and Officer Indemnification, Liability Protection, and Exculpation

General Recommendation: Vote case-by-case on proposals on director and officer indemnification, liability protection, and exculpation¹³.

Consider the stated rationale for the proposed change. Also consider, among other factors, the extent to which the proposal would:

◾

Eliminate directors’ and officers’ liability for monetary damages for violating the duty of care.

◾

Eliminate directors’ and officers’ liability for monetary damages for violating the duty of loyalty.

◾

Expand coverage beyond just legal expenses to liability for acts that are more serious violations of fiduciary obligation than mere carelessness.

◾

Expand the scope of indemnification to provide for mandatory indemnification of company officials in connection with acts that previously the company was permitted to provide indemnification for, at the discretion of the company’s board (i.e., “permissive indemnification”), but that previously the company was not required to indemnify.

Vote for those proposals providing such expanded coverage in cases when a director’s or officer’s legal defense was unsuccessful if both of the following apply:

◾

If the individual was found to have acted in good faith and in a manner that the individual reasonably believed was in the best interests of the company; and

If only the individual’s legal expenses would be covered.

Establish/Amend Nominee Qualifications

General Recommendation: Vote case-by-case on proposals that establish or amend director qualifications. Votes should be based on the reasonableness of the criteria and the degree to which they may preclude dissident nominees from joining the board.

Vote case-by-case on shareholder resolutions seeking a director nominee who possesses a particular subject matter expertise, considering:

◾

The company’s board committee structure, existing subject matter expertise, and board nomination provisions relative to that of its peers;

¹² A proxy access right that meets the recommended guidelines.

¹³ Indemnification: the condition of being secured against loss or damage.

Limited liability: a person’s financial liability is limited to a fixed sum, or personal financial assets are not at risk if the individual loses a lawsuit that results in financial award/damages to the plaintiff.

Exculpation: to eliminate or limit the personal liability of a director or officer to the corporation or its shareholders for monetary damages for breach of fiduciary duty as a director or officer.


W W W . I S S G O V E R N A N C E . C O M		D-21			21 of 81

LOGO

◾

The company’s existing board and management oversight mechanisms regarding the issue for which board oversight is sought;

◾

The company’s disclosure and performance relating to the issue for which board oversight is sought and any significant related controversies; and

◾

The scope and structure of the proposal.

Establish Other Board Committee Proposals

General Recommendation: Generally vote against shareholder proposals to establish a new board committee, as such proposals seek a specific oversight mechanism/structure that potentially limits a company’s flexibility to determine an appropriate oversight mechanism for itself. However, the following factors will be considered:

◾

Existing oversight mechanisms (including current committee structure) regarding the issue for which board oversight is sought;

◾

Level of disclosure regarding the issue for which board oversight is sought;

◾

Company performance related to the issue for which board oversight is sought;

◾

Board committee structure compared to that of other companies in its industry sector; and

◾

The scope and structure of the proposal.

Filling Vacancies/Removal of Directors

General Recommendation: Vote against proposals that provide that directors may be removed only for cause.

Vote for proposals to restore shareholders’ ability to remove directors with or without cause.

Vote against proposals that provide that only continuing directors may elect replacements to fill board vacancies.

Vote for proposals that permit shareholders to elect directors to fill board vacancies.

Independent Board Chair

General Recommendation: Generally vote for shareholder proposals requiring that the board chair position be filled by an independent director, taking into consideration the following:

◾

The scope and rationale of the proposal;

◾

The company’s current board leadership structure;

◾

The company’s governance structure and practices;

◾

Company performance; and

◾

Any other relevant factors that may be applicable.

The following factors will increase the likelihood of a “for” recommendation:

◾

A majority non-independent board and/or the presence of non-independent directors on key board committees;

◾

A weak or poorly-defined lead independent director role that fails to serve as an appropriate counterbalance to a combined CEO/chair role;

◾

The presence of an executive or non-independent chair in addition to the CEO, a recent recombination of the role of CEO and chair, and/or departure from a structure with an independent chair;

◾

Evidence that the board has failed to oversee and address material risks facing the company;

◾

A material governance failure, particularly if the board has failed to adequately respond to shareholder concerns or if the board has materially diminished shareholder rights; or


W W W . I S S G O V E R N A N C E . C O M		D-22			22 of 81

LOGO

◾

Evidence that the board has failed to intervene when management’s interests are contrary to shareholders’ interests.

Majority of Independent Directors/Establishment of Independent Committees

General Recommendation: Vote for shareholder proposals asking that a majority or more of directors be independent unless the board composition already meets the proposed threshold by ISS’ definition of Independent Director (See ISS’ Classification of Directors.)

Vote for shareholder proposals asking that board audit, compensation, and/or nominating committees be composed exclusively of independent directors unless they currently meet that standard.

Majority Vote Standard for the Election of Directors

General Recommendation: Generally vote for management proposals to adopt a majority of votes cast standard for directors in uncontested elections. Vote against if no carve-out for a plurality vote standard in contested elections is included.

Generally vote for precatory and binding shareholder resolutions requesting that the board change the company’s bylaws to stipulate that directors need to be elected with an affirmative majority of votes cast, provided it does not conflict with the state law where the company is incorporated. Binding resolutions need to allow for a carve-out for a plurality vote standard when there are more nominees than board seats.

Companies are strongly encouraged to also adopt a post-election policy (also known as a director resignation policy) that will provide guidelines so that the company will promptly address the situation of a holdover director.

Proxy Access

General Recommendation: Generally vote for management and shareholder proposals for proxy access with the following provisions:

◾

Ownership threshold: maximum requirement not more than three percent (3%) of the voting power;

◾

Ownership duration: maximum requirement not longer than three (3) years of continuous ownership for each member of the nominating group;

◾

Aggregation: minimal or no limits on the number of shareholders permitted to form a nominating group;

◾

Cap: cap on nominees of generally twenty-five percent (25%) of the board.

Review for reasonableness any other restrictions on the right of proxy access. Generally vote against proposals that are more restrictive than these guidelines.

Require More Nominees than Open Seats

General Recommendation: Vote against shareholder proposals that would require a company to nominate more candidates than the number of open board seats.


W W W . I S S G O V E R N A N C E . C O M		D-23			23 of 81

LOGO

Shareholder Engagement Policy (Shareholder Advisory Committee)

General Recommendation: Generally vote for shareholder proposals requesting that the board establish an internal mechanism/process, which may include a committee, in order to improve communications between directors and shareholders, unless the company has the following features, as appropriate:

◾

Established a communication structure that goes beyond the exchange requirements to facilitate the exchange of information between shareholders and members of the board;

◾

Effectively disclosed information with respect to this structure to its shareholders;

◾

Company has not ignored majority-supported shareholder proposals, or a majority withhold vote on a director nominee; and

◾

The company has an independent chair or a lead director, according to ISS’ definition. This individual must be made available for periodic consultation and direct communication with major shareholders.


W W W . I S S G O V E R N A N C E . C O M		D-24			24 of 81

LOGO

2. Audit-Related

Auditor Indemnification and Limitation of Liability

General Recommendation: Vote case-by-case on the issue of auditor indemnification and limitation of liability. Factors to be assessed include, but are not limited to:

◾

The terms of the auditor agreement—the degree to which these agreements impact shareholders’ rights;

◾

The motivation and rationale for establishing the agreements;

◾

The quality of the company’s disclosure; and

◾

The company’s historical practices in the audit area.

Vote against or withhold from members of an audit committee in situations where there is persuasive evidence that the audit committee entered into an inappropriate indemnification agreement with its auditor that limits the ability of the company, or its shareholders, to pursue legitimate legal recourse against the audit firm.

Auditor Ratification

General Recommendation: Vote for proposals to ratify auditors unless any of the following apply:

◾

An auditor has a financial interest in or association with the company, and is therefore not independent;

◾

There is reason to believe that the independent auditor has rendered an opinion that is neither accurate nor indicative of the company’s financial position;

◾

Poor accounting practices are identified that rise to a serious level of concern, such as fraud or misapplication of GAAP; or

◾

Fees for non-audit services (“Other” fees) are excessive.

Non-audit fees are excessive if:

◾

Non-audit (“other”) fees > audit fees + audit-related fees + tax compliance/preparation fees

Tax compliance and preparation include the preparation of original and amended tax returns and refund claims, and tax payment planning. All other services in the tax category, such as tax advice, planning, or consulting, should be added to “Other” fees. If the breakout of tax fees cannot be determined, add all tax fees to “Other” fees.

In circumstances where “Other” fees include fees related to significant one-time capital structure events (such as initial public offerings, bankruptcy emergence, and spin-offs) and the company makes public disclosure of the amount and nature of those fees that are an exception to the standard “non-audit fee” category, then such fees may be excluded from the non-audit fees considered in determining the ratio of non-audit to audit/audit-related fees/tax compliance and preparation for purposes of determining whether non-audit fees are excessive.

Shareholder Proposals Limiting Non-Audit Services

General Recommendation: Vote case-by-case on shareholder proposals asking companies to prohibit or limit their auditors from engaging in non-audit services.


W W W . I S S G O V E R N A N C E . C O M		D-25			25 of 81

LOGO

Shareholder Proposals on Audit Firm Rotation

General Recommendation: Vote case-by-case on shareholder proposals asking for audit firm rotation, taking into account:

◾

The tenure of the audit firm;

◾

The length of rotation specified in the proposal;

◾

Any significant audit-related issues at the company;

◾

The number of Audit Committee meetings held each year;

◾

The number of financial experts serving on the committee; and

◾

Whether the company has a periodic renewal process where the auditor is evaluated for both audit quality and competitive price.


W W W . I S S G O V E R N A N C E . C O M		D-26			26 of 81

LOGO

3. Shareholder Rights & Defenses

Advance Notice Requirements for Shareholder Proposals/Nominations

General Recommendation: Vote case-by-case on advance notice proposals, giving support to those proposals which allow shareholders to submit proposals/nominations as close to the meeting date as reasonably possible and within the broadest window possible, recognizing the need to allow sufficient notice for company, regulatory, and shareholder review.

To be reasonable, the company’s deadline for shareholder notice of a proposal/nominations must be no earlier than 120 days prior to the anniversary of the previous year’s meeting and have a submittal window of no shorter than 30 days from the beginning of the notice period (also known as a 90-120-day window). The submittal window is the period under which shareholders must file their proposals/nominations prior to the deadline.

In general, support additional efforts by companies to ensure full disclosure in regard to a proponent’s economic and voting position in the company so long as the informational requirements are reasonable and aimed at providing shareholders with the necessary information to review such proposals.

Amend Bylaws without Shareholder Consent

General Recommendation: Vote against proposals giving the board exclusive authority to amend the bylaws.

Vote case-by-case on proposals giving the board the ability to amend the bylaws in addition to shareholders, taking into account the following:

◾

Any impediments to shareholders’ ability to amend the bylaws (i.e. supermajority voting requirements);

◾

The company’s ownership structure and historical voting turnout;

◾

Whether the board could amend bylaws adopted by shareholders; and

◾

Whether shareholders would retain the ability to ratify any board-initiated amendments.

Control Share Acquisition Provisions

General Recommendation: Vote for proposals to opt out of control share acquisition statutes unless doing so would enable the completion of a takeover that would be detrimental to shareholders.

Vote against proposals to amend the charter to include control share acquisition provisions.

Vote for proposals to restore voting rights to the control shares.

Control share acquisition statutes function by denying shares their voting rights when they contribute to ownership in excess of certain thresholds. Voting rights for those shares exceeding ownership limits may only be restored by approval of either a majority or supermajority of disinterested shares. Thus, control share acquisition statutes effectively require a hostile bidder to put its offer to a shareholder vote or risk voting disenfranchisement if the bidder continues buying up a large block of shares.

Control Share Cash-Out Provisions

General Recommendation: Vote for proposals to opt out of control share cash-out statutes.


W W W . I S S G O V E R N A N C E . C O M		D-27			27 of 81

LOGO

Control share cash-out statutes give dissident shareholders the right to “cash-out” of their position in a company at the expense of the shareholder who has taken a control position. In other words, when an investor crosses a preset threshold level, remaining shareholders are given the right to sell their shares to the acquirer, who must buy them at the highest acquiring price.

Disgorgement Provisions

General Recommendation: Vote for proposals to opt out of state disgorgement provisions.

Disgorgement provisions require an acquirer or potential acquirer of more than a certain percentage of a company’s stock to disgorge, or pay back, to the company any profits realized from the sale of that company’s stock purchased 24 months before achieving control status. All sales of company stock by the acquirer occurring within a certain period of time (between 18 months and 24 months) prior to the investor’s gaining control status are subject to these recapture-of-profits provisions.

Fair Price Provisions

General Recommendation: Vote case-by-case on proposals to adopt fair price provisions (provisions that stipulate that an acquirer must pay the same price to acquire all shares as it paid to acquire the control shares), evaluating factors such as the vote required to approve the proposed acquisition, the vote required to repeal the fair price provision, and the mechanism for determining the fair price.

Generally vote against fair price provisions with shareholder vote requirements greater than a majority of disinterested shares.

Freeze-Out Provisions

General Recommendation: Vote for proposals to opt out of state freeze-out provisions. Freeze-out provisions force an investor who surpasses a certain ownership threshold in a company to wait a specified period of time before gaining control of the company.

Greenmail

General Recommendation: Vote for proposals to adopt anti-greenmail charter or bylaw amendments or otherwise restrict a company’s ability to make greenmail payments.

Vote case-by-case on anti-greenmail proposals when they are bundled with other charter or bylaw amendments.

Greenmail payments are targeted share repurchases by management of company stock from individuals or groups seeking control of the company. Since only the hostile party receives payment, usually at a substantial premium over the market value of its shares, the practice discriminates against all other shareholders.

Shareholder Litigation Rights

Federal Forum Selection Provisions

Federal forum selection provisions require that U.S. federal courts be the sole forum for shareholders to litigate claims arising under federal securities law.


W W W . I S S G O V E R N A N C E . C O M		D-28			28 of 81

LOGO

General Recommendation: Generally vote for federal forum selection provisions in the charter or bylaws that specify “the district courts of the United States” as the exclusive forum for federal securities law matters, in the absence of serious concerns about corporate governance or board responsiveness to shareholders.

Vote against provisions that restrict the forum to a particular federal district court; unilateral adoption (without a shareholder vote) of such a provision will generally be considered a one-time failure under the Unilateral Bylaw/Charter Amendments policy.

Exclusive Forum Provisions for State Law Matters

Exclusive forum provisions in the charter or bylaws restrict shareholders’ ability to bring derivative lawsuits against the company, for claims arising out of state corporate law, to the courts of a particular state (generally the state of incorporation).

General Recommendation: Generally vote for charter or bylaw provisions that specify courts located within the state of Delaware as the exclusive forum for corporate law matters for Delaware corporations, in the absence of serious concerns about corporate governance or board responsiveness to shareholders.

For states other than Delaware, vote case-by-case on exclusive forum provisions, taking into consideration:

◾

The company’s stated rationale for adopting such a provision;

◾

Disclosure of past harm from duplicative shareholder lawsuits in more than one forum;

◾

The breadth of application of the charter or bylaw provision, including the types of lawsuits to which it would apply and the definition of key terms; and

◾

Governance features such as shareholders’ ability to repeal the provision at a later date (including the vote standard applied when shareholders attempt to amend the charter or bylaws) and their ability to hold directors accountable through annual director elections and a majority vote standard in uncontested elections.

Generally vote against provisions that specify a state other than the state of incorporation as the exclusive forum for corporate law matters, or that specify a particular local court within the state; unilateral adoption of such a provision will generally be considered a one-time failure under the Unilateral Bylaw/Charter Amendments policy.

Fee shifting

Fee-shifting provisions in the charter or bylaws require that a shareholder who sues a company unsuccessfully pay all litigation expenses of the defendant corporation and its directors and officers.

General Recommendation: Generally vote against provisions that mandate fee-shifting whenever plaintiffs are not completely successful on the merits (i.e., including cases where the plaintiffs are partially successful).

Unilateral adoption of a fee-shifting provision will generally be considered an ongoing failure under the Unilateral Bylaw/Charter Amendments policy.


W W W . I S S G O V E R N A N C E . C O M		D-29			29 of 81

LOGO

Net Operating Loss (NOL) Protective Amendments

General Recommendation: Vote against proposals to adopt a protective amendment for the stated purpose of protecting a company’s net operating losses (NOL) if the effective term of the protective amendment would exceed the shorter of three years and the exhaustion of the NOL.

Vote case-by-case, considering the following factors, for management proposals to adopt an NOL protective amendment that would remain in effect for the shorter of three years (or less) and the exhaustion of the NOL:

◾

The ownership threshold (NOL protective amendments generally prohibit stock ownership transfers that would result in a new 5-percent holder or increase the stock ownership percentage of an existing 5-percent holder);

◾

The value of the NOLs;

◾

Shareholder protection mechanisms (sunset provision or commitment to cause expiration of the protective amendment upon exhaustion or expiration of the NOL);

◾

The company’s existing governance structure including: board independence, existing takeover defenses, track record of responsiveness to shareholders, and any other problematic governance concerns; and

◾

Any other factors that may be applicable.

Poison Pills (Shareholder Rights Plans)

Shareholder Proposals to Put Pill to a Vote and/or Adopt a Pill Policy

General Recommendation: Vote for shareholder proposals requesting that the company submit its poison pill to a shareholder vote or redeem it unless the company has: (1) A shareholder-approved poison pill in place; or (2) The company has adopted a policy concerning the adoption of a pill in the future specifying that the board will only adopt a shareholder rights plan if either:

◾

Shareholders have approved the adoption of the plan; or

◾

The board, in its exercise of its fiduciary responsibilities, determines that it is in the best interest of shareholders under the circumstances to adopt a pill without the delay in adoption that would result from seeking stockholder approval (i.e., the “fiduciary out” provision). A poison pill adopted under this fiduciary out will be put to a shareholder ratification vote within 12 months of adoption or expire. If the pill is not approved by a majority of the votes cast on this issue, the plan will immediately terminate.

If the shareholder proposal calls for a time period of less than 12 months for shareholder ratification after adoption, vote for the proposal, but add the caveat that a vote within 12 months would be considered sufficient implementation.

Management Proposals to Ratify a Poison Pill

General Recommendation: Vote case-by-case on management proposals on poison pill ratification, focusing on the features of the shareholder rights plan. Rights plans should contain the following attributes:

◾

No lower than a 20 percent trigger, flip-in or flip-over;

◾

A term of no more than three years;

◾

No deadhand, slowhand, no-hand, or similar feature that limits the ability of a future board to redeem the pill;

◾

Shareholder redemption feature (qualifying offer clause); if the board refuses to redeem the pill 90 days after a qualifying offer is announced, 10 percent of the shares may call a special meeting or seek a written consent to vote on rescinding the pill.


W W W . I S S G O V E R N A N C E . C O M		D-30			30 of 81

LOGO

In addition, the rationale for adopting the pill should be thoroughly explained by the company. In examining the request for the pill, take into consideration the company’s existing governance structure, including: board independence, existing takeover defenses, and any problematic governance concerns.

Management Proposals to Ratify a Pill to Preserve Net Operating Losses (NOLs)

General Recommendation: Vote against proposals to adopt a poison pill for the stated purpose of protecting a company’s net operating losses (NOL) if the term of the pill would exceed the shorter of three years and the exhaustion of the NOL.

Vote case-by-case on management proposals for poison pill ratification, considering the following factors, if the term of the pill would be the shorter of three years (or less) and the exhaustion of the NOL:

◾

The ownership threshold to transfer (NOL pills generally have a trigger slightly below 5 percent);

◾

The value of the NOLs;

◾

Shareholder protection mechanisms (sunset provision, or commitment to cause expiration of the pill upon exhaustion or expiration of NOLs);

◾

The company’s existing governance structure, including: board independence, existing takeover defenses, track record of responsiveness to shareholders, and any other problematic governance concerns; and

◾

Any other factors that may be applicable.

Proxy Voting Disclosure, Confidentiality, and Tabulation

General Recommendation: Vote case-by-case on proposals regarding proxy voting mechanics, taking into consideration whether implementation of the proposal is likely to enhance or protect shareholder rights. Specific issues covered under the policy include, but are not limited to, confidential voting of individual proxies and ballots, confidentiality of running vote tallies, and the treatment of abstentions and/or broker non-votes in the company’s vote-counting methodology.

While a variety of factors may be considered in each analysis, the guiding principles are: transparency, consistency, and fairness in the proxy voting process. The factors considered, as applicable to the proposal, may include:

◾

The scope and structure of the proposal;

◾

The company’s stated confidential voting policy (or other relevant policies) and whether it ensures a “level playing field” by providing shareholder proponents with equal access to vote information prior to the annual meeting;

◾

The company’s vote standard for management and shareholder proposals and whether it ensures consistency and fairness in the proxy voting process and maintains the integrity of vote results;

◾

Whether the company’s disclosure regarding its vote counting method and other relevant voting policies with respect to management and shareholder proposals are consistent and clear;

◾

Any recent controversies or concerns related to the company’s proxy voting mechanics;

◾

Any unintended consequences resulting from implementation of the proposal; and

◾

Any other factors that may be relevant.

Ratification Proposals: Management Proposals to Ratify Existing Charter or Bylaw Provisions

General Recommendation: Generally vote against management proposals to ratify provisions of the company’s existing charter or bylaws, unless these governance provisions align with best practice.


W W W . I S S G O V E R N A N C E . C O M		D-31			31 of 81

LOGO

In addition, voting against/withhold from individual directors, members of the governance committee, or the full board may be warranted, considering:

◾

The presence of a shareholder proposal addressing the same issue on the same ballot;

◾

The board’s rationale for seeking ratification;

◾

Disclosure of actions to be taken by the board should the ratification proposal fail;

◾

Disclosure of shareholder engagement regarding the board’s ratification request;

◾

The level of impairment to shareholders’ rights caused by the existing provision;

◾

The history of management and shareholder proposals on the provision at the company’s past meetings;

◾

Whether the current provision was adopted in response to the shareholder proposal;

◾

The company’s ownership structure; and

◾

Previous use of ratification proposals to exclude shareholder proposals.

Reimbursing Proxy Solicitation Expenses

General Recommendation: Vote case-by-case on proposals to reimburse proxy solicitation expenses.

When voting in conjunction with support of a dissident slate, vote for the reimbursement of all appropriate proxy solicitation expenses associated with the election.

Generally vote for shareholder proposals calling for the reimbursement of reasonable costs incurred in connection with nominating one or more candidates in a contested election where the following apply:

◾

The election of fewer than 50 percent of the directors to be elected is contested in the election;

◾

One or more of the dissident’s candidates is elected;

◾

Shareholders are not permitted to cumulate their votes for directors; and

◾

The election occurred, and the expenses were incurred, after the adoption of this bylaw.

Reincorporation Proposals

General Recommendation: Management or shareholder proposals to change a company’s state of incorporation should be evaluated case-by-case, giving consideration to both financial and corporate governance concerns including the following:

◾

Reasons for reincorporation;

◾

Comparison of company’s governance practices and provisions prior to and following the reincorporation; and

◾

Comparison of corporation laws of original state and destination state.

Vote for reincorporation when the economic factors outweigh any neutral or negative governance changes.

Shareholder Ability to Act by Written Consent

General Recommendation: Generally vote against management and shareholder proposals to restrict or prohibit shareholders’ ability to act by written consent.

Generally vote for management and shareholder proposals that provide shareholders with the ability to act by written consent, taking into account the following factors:

◾

Shareholders’ current right to act by written consent;

◾

The consent threshold;

◾

The inclusion of exclusionary or prohibitive language;


W W W . I S S G O V E R N A N C E . C O M		D-32			32 of 81

LOGO

◾

Investor ownership structure; and

◾

Shareholder support of, and management’s response to, previous shareholder proposals.

Vote case-by-case on shareholder proposals if, in addition to the considerations above, the company has the following governance and antitakeover provisions:

◾

An unfettered¹⁴ right for shareholders to call special meetings at a 10 percent threshold;

◾

A majority vote standard in uncontested director elections;

◾

No non-shareholder-approved pill; and

◾

An annually elected board.

Shareholder Ability to Call Special Meetings

General Recommendation: Vote against management or shareholder proposals to restrict or prohibit shareholders’ ability to call special meetings.

Generally vote for management or shareholder proposals that provide shareholders with the ability to call special meetings taking into account the following factors:

◾

Shareholders’ current right to call special meetings;

◾

Minimum ownership threshold necessary to call special meetings (10 percent preferred);

◾

The inclusion of exclusionary or prohibitive language;

◾

Investor ownership structure; and

◾

Shareholder support of, and management’s response to, previous shareholder proposals.

Stakeholder Provisions

General Recommendation: Vote against proposals that ask the board to consider non-shareholder constituencies or other non-financial effects when evaluating a merger or business combination.

State Antitakeover Statutes

General Recommendation: Vote case-by-case on proposals to opt in or out of state takeover statutes (including fair price provisions, stakeholder laws, poison pill endorsements, severance pay and labor contract provisions, and anti-greenmail provisions).

Supermajority Vote Requirements

General Recommendation: Vote against proposals to require a supermajority shareholder vote.

Vote for management or shareholder proposals to reduce supermajority vote requirements. However, for companies with shareholder(s) who have significant ownership levels, vote case-by-case, taking into account:

◾

Ownership structure;

◾

Quorum requirements; and

◾

Vote requirements.

¹⁴ “Unfettered” means no restrictions on agenda items, no restrictions on the number of shareholders who can group together to reach the 10 percent threshold, and only reasonable limits on when a meeting can be called: no greater than 30 days after the last annual meeting and no greater than 90 prior to the next annual meeting.


W W W . I S S G O V E R N A N C E . C O M		D-33			33 of 81

LOGO

Virtual Shareholder Meetings

General Recommendation: Generally vote for management proposals allowing for the convening of shareholder meetings by electronic means, so long as they do not preclude in-person meetings. Companies are encouraged to disclose the circumstances under which virtual-only¹⁵ meetings would be held, and to allow for comparable rights and opportunities for shareholders to participate electronically as they would have during an in-person meeting.

Vote case-by-case on shareholder proposals concerning virtual-only meetings, considering:

◾

Scope and rationale of the proposal; and

◾

Concerns identified with the company’s prior meeting practices.

¹⁵ Virtual-only shareholder meeting” refers to a meeting of shareholders that is held exclusively using technology without a corresponding in-person meeting.


W W W . I S S G O V E R N A N C E . C O M		D-34			34 of 81

LOGO

4. Capital/Restructuring

Capital

Adjustments to Par Value of Common Stock

General Recommendation: Vote for management proposals to reduce the par value of common stock unless the action is being taken to facilitate an anti-takeover device or some other negative corporate governance action.

Vote for management proposals to eliminate par value.

Common Stock Authorization

General Authorization Requests

General Recommendation: Vote case-by-case on proposals to increase the number of authorized shares of common stock that are to be used for general corporate purposes:

◾

If share usage (outstanding plus reserved) is less than 50% of the current authorized shares, vote for an increase of up to 50% of current authorized shares.

◾

If share usage is 50% to 100% of the current authorized, vote for an increase of up to 100% of current authorized shares.

◾

If share usage is greater than current authorized shares, vote for an increase of up to the current share usage.

◾

In the case of a stock split, the allowable increase is calculated (per above) based on the post-split adjusted authorization.

Generally vote against proposed increases, even if within the above ratios, if the proposal or the company’s prior or ongoing use of authorized shares is problematic, including, but not limited to:

◾

The proposal seeks to increase the number of authorized shares of the class of common stock that has superior voting rights to other share classes;

◾

On the same ballot is a proposal for a reverse split for which support is warranted despite the fact that it would result in an excessive increase in the share authorization;

◾

The company has a non-shareholder approved poison pill (including an NOL pill); or

◾

The company has previous sizeable placements (within the past 3 years) of stock with insiders at prices substantially below market value, or with problematic voting rights, without shareholder approval.

However, generally vote for proposed increases beyond the above ratios or problematic situations when there is disclosure of specific and severe risks to shareholders of not approving the request, such as:

◾

In, or subsequent to, the company’s most recent 10-K filing, the company discloses that there is substantial doubt about its ability to continue as a going concern;

◾

The company states that there is a risk of imminent bankruptcy or imminent liquidation if shareholders do not approve the increase in authorized capital; or

◾

A government body has in the past year required the company to increase its capital ratios.

For companies incorporated in states that allow increases in authorized capital without shareholder approval, generally vote withhold or against all nominees if a unilateral capital authorization increase does not conform to the above policies.


W W W . I S S G O V E R N A N C E . C O M		D-35			35 of 81

LOGO

Specific Authorization Requests

General Recommendation: Generally vote for proposals to increase the number of authorized common shares where the primary purpose of the increase is to issue shares in connection with transaction(s) (such as acquisitions, SPAC transactions, private placements, or similar transactions) on the same ballot, or disclosed in the proxy statement, that warrant support. For such transactions, the allowable increase will be the greater of:

◾

twice the amount needed to support the transactions on the ballot, and

◾

the allowable increase as calculated for general issuances above.

Dual Class Structure

General Recommendation: Generally vote against proposals to create a new class of common stock unless:

◾

The company discloses a compelling rationale for the dual-class capital structure, such as:

◾

The company’s auditor has concluded that there is substantial doubt about the company’s ability to continue as a going concern; or

◾

The new class of shares will be transitory;

◾

The new class is intended for financing purposes with minimal or no dilution to current shareholders in both the short term and long term; and

◾

The new class is not designed to preserve or increase the voting power of an insider or significant shareholder.

Issue Stock for Use with Rights Plan

General Recommendation: Vote against proposals that increase authorized common stock for the explicit purpose of implementing a non-shareholder-approved shareholder rights plan (poison pill).

Preemptive Rights

General Recommendation: Vote case-by-case on shareholder proposals that seek preemptive rights, taking into consideration:

◾

The size of the company;

◾

The shareholder base; and

◾

The liquidity of the stock.

Preferred Stock Authorization

General Authorization Requests

General Recommendation: Vote case-by-case on proposals to increase the number of authorized shares of preferred stock that are to be used for general corporate purposes:

◾

If share usage (outstanding plus reserved) is less than 50% of the current authorized shares, vote for an increase of up to 50% of current authorized shares.

◾

If share usage is 50% to 100% of the current authorized, vote for an increase of up to 100% of current authorized shares.

◾

If share usage is greater than current authorized shares, vote for an increase of up to the current share usage.


W W W . I S S G O V E R N A N C E . C O M		D-36			36 of 81

LOGO

◾

In the case of a stock split, the allowable increase is calculated (per above) based on the post-split adjusted authorization.

◾

If no preferred shares are currently issued and outstanding, vote against the request, unless the company discloses a specific use for the shares.

Generally vote against proposed increases, even if within the above ratios, if the proposal or the company’s prior or ongoing use of authorized shares is problematic, including, but not limited to:

◾

If the shares requested are blank check preferred shares that can be used for antitakeover purposes;¹⁶

◾

The company seeks to increase a class of non-convertible preferred shares entitled to more than one vote per share on matters that do not solely affect the rights of preferred stockholders “supervoting shares”);

◾

The company seeks to increase a class of convertible preferred shares entitled to a number of votes greater than the number of common shares into which they are convertible (“supervoting shares”) on matters that do not solely affect the rights of preferred stockholders;

◾

The stated intent of the increase in the general authorization is to allow the company to increase an existing designated class of supervoting preferred shares;

◾

On the same ballot is a proposal for a reverse split for which support is warranted despite the fact that it would result in an excessive increase in the share authorization;

◾

The company has a non-shareholder approved poison pill (including an NOL pill); or

◾

In, or subsequent to, the company’s most recent 10-K filing, the company discloses that there is substantial doubt about its ability to continue as a going concern;

◾

The company states that there is a risk of imminent bankruptcy or imminent liquidation if shareholders do not approve the increase in authorized capital; or

◾

A government body has in the past year required the company to increase its capital ratios.

Specific Authorization Requests

General Recommendation: Generally vote for proposals to increase the number of authorized preferred shares where the primary purpose of the increase is to issue shares in connection with transaction(s) (such as acquisitions, SPAC transactions, private placements, or similar transactions) on the same ballot, or disclosed in the proxy statement, that warrant support. For such transactions, the allowable increase will be the greater of:

◾

twice the amount needed to support the transactions on the ballot, and

◾

the allowable increase as calculated for general issuances above.

¹⁶ To be acceptable, appropriate disclosure would be needed that the shares are “declawed”: i.e., representation by the board that it will not, without prior stockholder approval, issue or use the preferred stock for any defensive or anti-takeover purpose or for the purpose of implementing any stockholder rights plan.


W W W . I S S G O V E R N A N C E . C O M		D-37			37 of 81

LOGO

Recapitalization Plans

General Recommendation: Vote case-by-case on recapitalizations (reclassifications of securities), taking into account the following:

◾

More simplified capital structure;

◾

Enhanced liquidity;

◾

Fairness of conversion terms;

◾

Impact on voting power and dividends;

◾

Reasons for the reclassification;

◾

Conflicts of interest; and

◾

Other alternatives considered.

Reverse Stock Splits

General Recommendation: Vote for management proposals to implement a reverse stock split if:

◾

The number of authorized shares will be proportionately reduced; or

◾

The effective increase in authorized shares is equal to or less than the allowable increase calculated in accordance with ISS’ Common Stock Authorization policy.

Vote case-by-case on proposals that do not meet either of the above conditions, taking into consideration the following factors:

◾

Stock exchange notification to the company of a potential delisting;

◾

Disclosure of substantial doubt about the company’s ability to continue as a going concern without additional financing;

◾

The company’s rationale; or

◾

Other factors as applicable.

Share Issuance Mandates at U.S. Domestic Issuers Incorporated Outside the U.S.

General Recommendation: For U.S. domestic issuers incorporated outside the U.S. and listed solely on a U.S. exchange, generally vote for resolutions to authorize the issuance of common shares up to 20 percent of currently issued common share capital, where not tied to a specific transaction or financing proposal.

For pre-revenue or other early-stage companies that are heavily reliant on periodic equity financing, generally vote for resolutions to authorize the issuance of common shares up to 50 percent of currently issued common share capital. The burden of proof will be on the company to establish that it has a need for the higher limit.

Renewal of such mandates should be sought at each year’s annual meeting.

Vote case-by-case on share issuances for a specific transaction or financing proposal.


W W W . I S S G O V E R N A N C E . C O M		D-38			38 of 81

LOGO

Share Repurchase Programs

General Recommendation: For U.S.-incorporated companies, and foreign-incorporated U.S. Domestic Issuers that are traded solely on U.S. exchanges, vote for management proposals to institute open-market share repurchase plans in which all shareholders may participate on equal terms, or to grant the board authority to conduct open-market repurchases, in the absence of company-specific concerns regarding:

◾

Greenmail;

◾

The use of buybacks to inappropriately manipulate incentive compensation metrics;

◾

Threats to the company’s long-term viability; or

◾

Other company-specific factors as warranted.

Vote case-by-case on proposals to repurchase shares directly from specified shareholders, balancing the stated rationale against the possibility for the repurchase authority to be misused, such as to repurchase shares from insiders at a premium to market price.

Share Repurchase Programs Shareholder Proposals

General Recommendation: Generally vote against shareholder proposals prohibiting executives from selling shares of company stock during periods in which the company has announced that it may or will be repurchasing shares of its stock. Vote for the proposal when there is a pattern of abuse by executives exercising options or selling shares during periods of share buybacks.

Stock Distributions: Splits and Dividends

General Recommendation: Generally vote for management proposals to increase the common share authorization for stock split or stock dividend, provided that the effective increase in authorized shares is equal to or is less than the allowable increase calculated in accordance with ISS’ Common Stock Authorization policy.

Tracking Stock

General Recommendation: Vote case-by-case on the creation of tracking stock, weighing the strategic value of the transaction against such factors as:

◾

Adverse governance changes;

◾

Excessive increases in authorized capital stock;

◾

Unfair method of distribution;

◾

Diminution of voting rights;

◾

Adverse conversion features;

◾

Negative impact on stock option plans; and

◾

Alternatives such as spin-off.

Restructuring

Appraisal Rights

General Recommendation: Vote for proposals to restore or provide shareholders with rights of appraisal.


W W W . I S S G O V E R N A N C E . C O M		D-39			39 of 81

LOGO

Asset Purchases

General Recommendation: Vote case-by-case on asset purchase proposals, considering the following factors:

◾

Purchase price;

◾

Fairness opinion;

◾

Financial and strategic benefits;

◾

How the deal was negotiated;

◾

Conflicts of interest;

◾

Other alternatives for the business;

◾

Non-completion risk.

Asset Sales

General Recommendation: Vote case-by-case on asset sales, considering the following factors:

◾

Impact on the balance sheet/working capital;

◾

Potential elimination of diseconomies;

◾

Anticipated financial and operating benefits;

◾

Anticipated use of funds;

◾

Value received for the asset;

◾

Fairness opinion;

◾

How the deal was negotiated;

◾

Conflicts of interest.

Bundled Proposals

General Recommendation: Vote case-by-case on bundled or “conditional” proxy proposals. In the case of items that are conditioned upon each other, examine the benefits and costs of the packaged items. In instances when the joint effect of the conditioned items is not in shareholders’ best interests, vote against the proposals. If the combined effect is positive, support such proposals.

Conversion of Securities

General Recommendation: Vote case-by-case on proposals regarding conversion of securities. When evaluating these proposals, the investor should review the dilution to existing shareholders, the conversion price relative to market value, financial issues, control issues, termination penalties, and conflicts of interest.

Vote for the conversion if it is expected that the company will be subject to onerous penalties or will be forced to file for bankruptcy if the transaction is not approved.

Corporate Reorganization/Debt Restructuring/Prepackaged Bankruptcy Plans/Reverse Leveraged Buyouts/Wrap Plans

General Recommendation: Vote case-by-case on proposals to increase common and/or preferred shares and to issue shares as part of a debt restructuring plan, after evaluating:

◾

Dilution to existing shareholders’ positions;

◾

Terms of the offer - discount/premium in purchase price to investor, including any fairness opinion; termination penalties; exit strategy;


W W W . I S S G O V E R N A N C E . C O M		D-40			40 of 81

LOGO

◾

Financial issues - company’s financial situation; degree of need for capital; use of proceeds; effect of the financing on the company’s cost of capital;

◾

Management’s efforts to pursue other alternatives;

◾

Control issues - change in management; change in control, guaranteed board and committee seats; standstill provisions; voting agreements; veto power over certain corporate actions; and

◾

Conflict of interest - arm’s length transaction, managerial incentives.

Vote for the debt restructuring if it is expected that the company will file for bankruptcy if the transaction is not approved.

Formation of Holding Company

General Recommendation: Vote case-by-case on proposals regarding the formation of a holding company, taking into consideration the following:

◾

The reasons for the change;

◾

Any financial or tax benefits;

◾

Regulatory benefits;

◾

Increases in capital structure; and

◾

Changes to the articles of incorporation or bylaws of the company.

Absent compelling financial reasons to recommend for the transaction, vote against the formation of a holding company if the transaction would include either of the following:

◾

Increases in common or preferred stock in excess of the allowable maximum (see discussion under “Capital”); or

◾

Adverse changes in shareholder rights.

Going Private and Going Dark Transactions (LBOs and Minority Squeeze-outs)

General Recommendation: Vote case-by-case on going private transactions, taking into account the following:

◾

Offer price/premium;

◾

Fairness opinion;

◾

How the deal was negotiated;

◾

Conflicts of interest;

◾

Other alternatives/offers considered; and

◾

Non-completion risk.

Vote case-by-case on going dark transactions, determining whether the transaction enhances shareholder value by taking into consideration:

◾

Whether the company has attained benefits from being publicly-traded (examination of trading volume, liquidity, and market research of the stock);

◾

Balanced interests of continuing vs. cashed-out shareholders, taking into account the following:

◾

Are all shareholders able to participate in the transaction?

◾

Will there be a liquid market for remaining shareholders following the transaction?

◾

Does the company have strong corporate governance?

◾

Will insiders reap the gains of control following the proposed transaction?

◾

Does the state of incorporation have laws requiring continued reporting that may benefit shareholders?


W W W . I S S G O V E R N A N C E . C O M		D-41			41 of 81

LOGO

Joint Ventures

General Recommendation: Vote case-by-case on proposals to form joint ventures, taking into account the following:

◾

Percentage of assets/business contributed;

◾

Percentage ownership;

◾

Financial and strategic benefits;

◾

Governance structure;

◾

Conflicts of interest;

◾

Other alternatives; and

◾

Non-completion risk.

Liquidations

General Recommendation: Vote case-by-case on liquidations, taking into account the following:

◾

Management’s efforts to pursue other alternatives;

◾

Appraisal value of assets; and

◾

The compensation plan for executives managing the liquidation.

Vote for the liquidation if the company will file for bankruptcy if the proposal is not approved.

Mergers and Acquisitions

General Recommendation: Vote case-by-case on mergers and acquisitions. Review and evaluate the merits and drawbacks of the proposed transaction, balancing various and sometimes countervailing factors including:

◾

Valuation - Is the value to be received by the target shareholders (or paid by the acquirer) reasonable? While the fairness opinion may provide an initial starting point for assessing valuation reasonableness, emphasis is placed on the offer premium, market reaction, and strategic rationale.

◾

Market reaction - How has the market responded to the proposed deal? A negative market reaction should cause closer scrutiny of a deal.

◾

Strategic rationale - Does the deal make sense strategically? From where is the value derived? Cost and revenue synergies should not be overly aggressive or optimistic, but reasonably achievable. Management should also have a favorable track record of successful integration of historical acquisitions.

◾

Negotiations and process - Were the terms of the transaction negotiated at arm’s-length? Was the process fair and equitable? A fair process helps to ensure the best price for shareholders. Significant negotiation “wins” can also signify the deal makers’ competency. The comprehensiveness of the sales process (e.g., full auction, partial auction, no auction) can also affect shareholder value.

◾

Conflicts of interest - Are insiders benefiting from the transaction disproportionately and inappropriately as compared to non-insider shareholders? As the result of potential conflicts, the directors and officers of the company may be more likely to vote to approve a merger than if they did not hold these interests. Consider whether these interests may have influenced these directors and officers to support or recommend the merger. The CIC figure presented in the “ISS Transaction Summary” section of this report is an aggregate figure that can in certain cases be a misleading indicator of the true value transfer from shareholders to insiders. Where such figure appears to be excessive, analyze the underlying assumptions to determine whether a potential conflict exists.


W W W . I S S G O V E R N A N C E . C O M		D-42			42 of 81

LOGO

◾

Governance - Will the combined company have a better or worse governance profile than the current governance profiles of the respective parties to the transaction? If the governance profile is to change for the worse, the burden is on the company to prove that other issues (such as valuation) outweigh any deterioration in governance.

Private Placements/Warrants/Convertible Debentures

General Recommendation: Vote case-by-case on proposals regarding private placements, warrants, and convertible debentures taking into consideration:

◾

Dilution to existing shareholders’ position: The amount and timing of shareholder ownership dilution should be weighed against the needs and proposed shareholder benefits of the capital infusion. Although newly issued common stock, absent preemptive rights, is typically dilutive to existing shareholders, share price appreciation is often the necessary event to trigger the exercise of “out of the money” warrants and convertible debt. In these instances from a value standpoint, the negative impact of dilution is mitigated by the increase in the company’s stock price that must occur to trigger the dilutive event.

◾

Terms of the offer (discount/premium in purchase price to investor, including any fairness opinion, conversion features, termination penalties, exit strategy):

◾

The terms of the offer should be weighed against the alternatives of the company and in light of company’s financial condition. Ideally, the conversion price for convertible debt and the exercise price for warrants should be at a premium to the then prevailing stock price at the time of private placement.

◾

When evaluating the magnitude of a private placement discount or premium, consider factors that influence the discount or premium, such as, liquidity, due diligence costs, control and monitoring costs, capital scarcity, information asymmetry, and anticipation of future performance.

◾

Financial issues:

◾

The company’s financial condition;

◾

Degree of need for capital;

◾

Use of proceeds;

◾

Effect of the financing on the company’s cost of capital;

◾

Current and proposed cash burn rate;

◾

Going concern viability and the state of the capital and credit markets.

◾

Management’s efforts to pursue alternatives and whether the company engaged in a process to evaluate alternatives: A fair, unconstrained process helps to ensure the best price for shareholders. Financing alternatives can include joint ventures, partnership, merger, or sale of part or all of the company.

◾

Control issues:

◾

Change in management;

◾

Change in control;

◾

Guaranteed board and committee seats;

◾

Standstill provisions;

◾

Voting agreements;

◾

Veto power over certain corporate actions; and

◾

Minority versus majority ownership and corresponding minority discount or majority control premium.


W W W . I S S G O V E R N A N C E . C O M		D-43			43 of 81

LOGO

◾

Conflicts of interest:

◾

Conflicts of interest should be viewed from the perspective of the company and the investor.

◾

Were the terms of the transaction negotiated at arm’s length? Are managerial incentives aligned with shareholder interests?

◾

Market reaction:

◾

The market’s response to the proposed deal. A negative market reaction is a cause for concern. Market reaction may be addressed by analyzing the one-day impact on the unaffected stock price.

Vote for the private placement, or for the issuance of warrants and/or convertible debentures in a private placement, if it is expected that the company will file for bankruptcy if the transaction is not approved.

Reorganization/Restructuring Plan (Bankruptcy)

General Recommendation: Vote case-by-case on proposals to common shareholders on bankruptcy plans of reorganization, considering the following factors including, but not limited to:

◾

Estimated value and financial prospects of the reorganized company;

◾

Percentage ownership of current shareholders in the reorganized company;

◾

Whether shareholders are adequately represented in the reorganization process (particularly through the existence of an Official Equity Committee);

◾

The cause(s) of the bankruptcy filing, and the extent to which the plan of reorganization addresses the cause(s);

◾

Existence of a superior alternative to the plan of reorganization; and

◾

Governance of the reorganized company.

Special Purpose Acquisition Corporations (SPACs)

General Recommendation: Vote case-by-case on SPAC mergers and acquisitions taking into account the following:

◾

Valuation - Is the value being paid by the SPAC reasonable? SPACs generally lack an independent fairness opinion and the financials on the target may be limited. Compare the conversion price with the intrinsic value of the target company provided in the fairness opinion. Also, evaluate the proportionate value of the combined entity attributable to the SPAC IPO shareholders versus the pre-merger value of SPAC. Additionally, a private company discount may be applied to the target if it is a private entity.

◾

Market reaction - How has the market responded to the proposed deal? A negative market reaction may be a cause for concern. Market reaction may be addressed by analyzing the one-day impact on the unaffected stock price.

◾

Deal timing - A main driver for most transactions is that the SPAC charter typically requires the deal to be complete within 18 to 24 months, or the SPAC is to be liquidated. Evaluate the valuation, market reaction, and potential conflicts of interest for deals that are announced close to the liquidation date.

◾

Negotiations and process - What was the process undertaken to identify potential target companies within specified industry or location specified in charter? Consider the background of the sponsors.

◾

Conflicts of interest - How are sponsors benefiting from the transaction compared to IPO shareholders? Potential conflicts could arise if a fairness opinion is issued by the insiders to qualify the deal rather than a third party or if management is encouraged to pay a higher price for the target because of an 80 percent rule (the charter requires that the fair market value of the target is at least equal to 80 percent of net assets of the SPAC). Also, there may be sense of urgency by the management team of the SPAC to close the deal since its charter typically requires a transaction to be completed within the 18-24-month timeframe.

◾

Voting agreements - Are the sponsors entering into enter into any voting agreements/tender offers with shareholders who are likely to vote against the proposed merger or exercise conversion rights?

◾

Governance - What is the impact of having the SPAC CEO or founder on key committees following the proposed merger?


W W W . I S S G O V E R N A N C E . C O M		D-44			44 of 81

LOGO

Special Purpose Acquisition Corporations (SPACs) - Proposals for Extensions

General Recommendation: Vote case-by-case on SPAC extension proposals taking into account the length of the requested extension, the status of any pending transaction(s) or progression of the acquisition process, any added incentive for non-redeeming shareholders, and any prior extension requests.

◾

Length of request: Typically, extension requests range from two to six months, depending on the progression of the SPAC’s acquistion process.

◾

Pending transaction(s) or progression of the acquisition process: Sometimes an intial business combination was already put to a shareholder vote, but, for varying reasons, the transaction could not be consummated by the termination date and the SPAC is requesting an extension. Other times, the SPAC has entered into a definitive transaction agreement, but needs additional time to consummate or hold the shareholder meeting.

◾

Added incentive for non-redeeming shareholders: Sometimes the SPAC sponsor (or other insiders) will contribute, typically as a loan to the company, additional funds that will be added to the redemption value of each public share as long as such shares are not redeemed in connection with the extension request. The purpose of the “equity kicker” is to incentivize shareholders to hold their shares through the end of the requested extension or until the time the transaction is put to a shareholder vote, rather than electing redeemption at the extension proposal meeting.

◾

Prior extension requests: Some SPACs request additional time beyond the extension period sought in prior extension requests.

Spin-offs

General Recommendation: Vote case-by-case on spin-offs, considering:

◾

Tax and regulatory advantages;

◾

Planned use of the sale proceeds;

◾

Valuation of spinoff;

◾

Fairness opinion;

◾

Benefits to the parent company;

◾

Conflicts of interest;

◾

Managerial incentives;

◾

Corporate governance changes;

◾

Changes in the capital structure.

Value Maximization Shareholder Proposals

General Recommendation: Vote case-by-case on shareholder proposals seeking to maximize shareholder value by:

◾

Hiring a financial advisor to explore strategic alternatives;

◾

Selling the company; or

◾

Liquidating the company and distributing the proceeds to shareholders.

These proposals should be evaluated based on the following factors:

◾

Prolonged poor performance with no turnaround in sight;

◾

Signs of entrenched board and management (such as the adoption of takeover defenses);

◾

Strategic plan in place for improving value;

◾

Likelihood of receiving reasonable value in a sale or dissolution; and

◾

The company actively exploring its strategic options, including retaining a financial advisor.


W W W . I S S G O V E R N A N C E . C O M		D-45			45 of 81

LOGO

5. Compensation

Executive Pay Evaluation

Underlying all evaluations are five global principles that most investors expect corporations to adhere to in designing and administering executive and director compensation programs:

Maintain appropriate pay-for-performance alignment, with emphasis on long-term shareholder value: This principle encompasses overall executive pay practices, which must be designed to attract, retain, and appropriately motivate the key employees who drive shareholder value creation over the long term. It will take into consideration, among other factors, the link between pay and performance; the mix between fixed and variable pay; performance goals; and equity-based plan costs;

Avoid arrangements that risk “pay for failure”: This principle addresses the appropriateness of long or indefinite contracts, excessive severance packages, and guaranteed compensation;

Maintain an independent and effective compensation committee: This principle promotes oversight of executive pay programs by directors with appropriate skills, knowledge, experience, and a sound process for compensation decision-making (e.g., including access to independent expertise and advice when needed);

Provide shareholders with clear, comprehensive compensation disclosures: This principle underscores the importance of informative and timely disclosures that enable shareholders to evaluate executive pay practices fully and fairly;

Avoid inappropriate pay to non-executive directors: This principle recognizes the interests of shareholders in ensuring that compensation to outside directors is reasonable and does not compromise their independence and ability to make appropriate judgments in overseeing managers’ pay and performance. At the market level, it may incorporate a variety of generally accepted best practices.

Advisory Votes on Executive Compensation—Management Proposals (Say-on-Pay)

General Recommendation: Vote case-by-case on ballot items related to executive pay and practices, as well as certain aspects of outside director compensation.

Vote against Advisory Votes on Executive Compensation (Say-on-Pay or “SOP”) if:

◾

There is an unmitigated misalignment between CEO pay and company performance (pay for performance);

◾

The company maintains significant problematic pay practices;

◾

The board exhibits a significant level of poor communication and responsiveness to shareholders.

Vote against or withhold from the members of the Compensation Committee and potentially the full board if:

◾

There is no SOP on the ballot, and an against vote on an SOP would otherwise be warranted due to pay-for-performance misalignment, problematic pay practices, or the lack of adequate responsiveness on compensation issues raised previously, or a combination thereof;

◾

The board fails to respond adequately to a previous SOP proposal that received less than 70 percent support of votes cast;

◾

The company has recently practiced or approved problematic pay practices, such as option repricing or option backdating; or

◾

The situation is egregious.


W W W . I S S G O V E R N A N C E . C O M		D-46			46 of 81

LOGO

Primary Evaluation Factors for Executive Pay

Pay-for-Performance Evaluation

ISS annually conducts a pay-for-performance analysis to identify strong or satisfactory alignment between pay and performance over a sustained period. With respect to companies in the S&P1500, Russell 3000, or Russell 3000E Indices¹⁷, this analysis considers the following:

Peer Group¹⁸ Alignment:

◾

The degree of alignment between the company’s annualized TSR rank and the CEO’s annualized total pay rank within a peer group, each measured over a three-year period.

◾

The rankings of CEO total pay and company financial performance within a peer group, each measured over a three-year period.

◾

The multiple of the CEO’s total pay relative to the peer group median in the most recent fiscal year.

Absolute Alignment¹⁹ – the absolute alignment between the trend in CEO pay and company TSR over the prior five fiscal years – i.e., the difference between the trend in annual pay changes and the trend in annualized TSR during the period.

If the above analysis demonstrates significant unsatisfactory long-term pay-for-performance alignment or, in the case of companies outside the Russell indices, a misalignment between pay and performance is otherwise suggested, our analysis may include any of the following qualitative factors, as relevant to an evaluation of how various pay elements may work to encourage or to undermine long-term value creation and alignment with shareholder interests:

◾

The ratio of performance- to time-based incentive awards;

◾

The overall ratio of performance-based compensation to fixed or discretionary pay;

◾

The rigor of performance goals;

◾

The complexity and risks around pay program design;

◾

The transparency and clarity of disclosure;

◾

The company’s peer group benchmarking practices;

◾

Financial/operational results, both absolute and relative to peers;

◾

Special circumstances related to, for example, a new CEO in the prior FY or anomalous equity grant practices (e.g., bi-annual awards);

◾

Realizable pay²⁰ compared to grant pay; and

◾

Any other factors deemed relevant.

¹⁷ The Russell 3000E Index includes approximately 4,000 of the largest U.S. equity securities.

¹⁸ The revised peer group is generally comprised of 14-24 companies that are selected using market cap, revenue (or assets for certain financial firms), GICS industry group, and company’s selected peers’ GICS industry group, with size constraints, via a process designed to select peers that are comparable to the subject company in terms of revenue/assets and industry, and also within a market-cap bucket that is reflective of the company’s market cap. For Oil, Gas & Consumable Fuels companies, market cap is the only size determinant.

¹⁹ Only Russell 3000 Index companies are subject to the Absolute Alignment analysis.

²⁰ ISS research reports include realizable pay for S&P1500 companies.


W W W . I S S G O V E R N A N C E . C O M		D-47			47 of 81

LOGO

Problematic Pay Practices

Problematic pay elements are generally evaluated case-by-case considering the context of a company’s overall pay program and demonstrated pay-for-performance philosophy. The focus is on executive compensation practices that contravene the global pay principles, including:

◾

Problematic practices related to non-performance-based compensation elements;

◾

Incentives that may motivate excessive risk-taking or present a windfall risk; and

◾

Pay decisions that circumvent pay-for-performance, such as options backdating or waiving performance requirements.

The list of examples below highlights certain problematic practices that carry significant weight in this overall consideration and may result in adverse vote recommendations:

◾

Repricing or replacing of underwater stock options/SARs without prior shareholder approval (including cash buyouts and voluntary surrender of underwater options);

◾

Extraordinary perquisites or tax gross-ups;

◾

New or materially amended agreements that provide for:

◾

Excessive termination or CIC severance payments (generally exceeding 3 times base salary and average/target/most recent bonus);

◾

CIC severance payments without involuntary job loss or substantial diminution of duties (“single” or “modified single” triggers) or in connection with a problematic Good Reason definition;

◾

CIC excise tax gross-up entitlements (including “modified” gross-ups);

◾

Multi-year guaranteed awards that are not at risk due to rigorous performance conditions;

◾

Liberal CIC definition combined with any single-trigger CIC benefits;

◾

Insufficient executive compensation disclosure by externally-managed issuers (EMIs) such that a reasonable assessment of pay programs and practices applicable to the EMI’s executives is not possible;

◾

Severance payments made when the termination is not clearly disclosed as involuntary (for example, a termination without cause or resignation for good reason);

◾

Any other provision or practice deemed to be egregious and present a significant risk to investors.

The above examples are not an exhaustive list. Please refer to ISS’ U.S. Compensation Policies FAQ document for additional detail on specific pay practices that have been identified as problematic and may lead to negative vote recommendations.

Options Backdating

The following factors should be examined case-by-case to allow for distinctions to be made between “sloppy” plan administration versus deliberate action or fraud:

◾

Reason and motive for the options backdating issue, such as inadvertent vs. deliberate grant date changes;

◾

Duration of options backdating;

◾

Size of restatement due to options backdating;

◾

Corrective actions taken by the board or compensation committee, such as canceling or re-pricing backdated options, the recouping of option gains on backdated grants; and

◾

Adoption of a grant policy that prohibits backdating and creates a fixed grant schedule or window period for equity grants in the future.


W W W . I S S G O V E R N A N C E . C O M		D-48			48 of 81

LOGO

Compensation Committee Communications and Responsiveness

Consider the following factors case-by-case when evaluating ballot items related to executive pay on the board’s responsiveness to investor input and engagement on compensation issues:

◾

Failure to respond to majority-supported shareholder proposals on executive pay topics; or

◾

Failure to adequately respond to the company’s previous say-on-pay proposal that received the support of less than 70 percent of votes cast, taking into account:

◾

Disclosure of the specific concerns voiced by dissenting shareholders that led to the say-on-pay opposition;

◾

Disclosure of specific and meaningful actions taken to address shareholders’ concerns;

◾

Other recent compensation actions taken by the company;

◾

Whether the issues raised are recurring or isolated;

◾

The company’s ownership structure; and

◾

Whether the support level was less than 50 percent, which would warrant the highest degree of responsiveness.

Frequency of Advisory Vote on Executive Compensation (“Say When on Pay”)

General Recommendation: Vote for annual advisory votes on compensation, which provide the most consistent and clear communication channel for shareholder concerns about companies’ executive pay programs.

Voting on Golden Parachutes in an Acquisition, Merger, Consolidation, or Proposed Sale

General Recommendation: Vote case-by-case on say on Golden Parachute proposals, including consideration of existing change-in-control arrangements maintained with named executive officers but also considering new or extended arrangements.

Features that may result in an “against” recommendation include one or more of the following, depending on the number, magnitude, and/or timing of issue(s):

◾

Single- or modified-single-trigger cash severance;

◾

Single-trigger acceleration of unvested equity awards;

◾

Full acceleration of equity awards granted shortly before the change in control;

◾

Acceleration of performance awards above the target level of performance without compelling rationale;

◾

Excessive cash severance (generally >3x base salary and bonus);

◾

Excise tax gross-ups triggered and payable;

◾

Excessive golden parachute payments (on an absolute basis or as a percentage of transaction equity value); or

◾

Recent amendments that incorporate any problematic features (such as those above) or recent actions (such as extraordinary equity grants) that may make packages so attractive as to influence merger agreements that may not be in the best interests of shareholders; or

◾

The company’s assertion that a proposed transaction is conditioned on shareholder approval of the golden parachute advisory vote.

Recent amendment(s) that incorporate problematic features will tend to carry more weight on the overall analysis. However, the presence of multiple legacy problematic features will also be closely scrutinized.

In cases where the golden parachute vote is incorporated into a company’s advisory vote on compensation (management say-on-pay), ISS will evaluate the say-on-pay proposal in accordance with these guidelines, which may give higher weight to that component of the overall evaluation.


W W W . I S S G O V E R N A N C E . C O M		D-49			49 of 81

LOGO

Equity-Based and Other Incentive Plans

Please refer to ISS’ U.S. Equity Compensation Plans FAQ document for additional details on the Equity Plan Scorecard policy.

General Recommendation: Vote case-by-case on certain equity-based compensation plans²¹ depending on a combination of certain plan features and equity grant practices, where positive factors may counterbalance negative factors, and vice versa, as evaluated using an “Equity Plan Scorecard” (EPSC) approach with three pillars:

◾

Plan Cost: The total estimated cost of the company’s equity plans relative to industry/market cap peers, measured by the company’s estimated Shareholder Value Transfer (SVT) in relation to peers and considering both:

◾

SVT based on new shares requested plus shares remaining for future grants, plus outstanding unvested/unexercised grants; and

◾

SVT based only on new shares requested plus shares remaining for future grants.

◾

Plan Features:

◾

Quality of disclosure around vesting upon a change in control (CIC);

◾

Discretionary vesting authority;

◾

Liberal share recycling on various award types;

◾

Lack of minimum vesting period for grants made under the plan;

◾

Dividends payable prior to award vesting.

◾

Grant Practices:

◾

The company’s three-year burn rate relative to its industry/market cap peers;

◾

Vesting requirements in CEO’s recent equity grants (3-year look-back);

◾

The estimated duration of the plan (based on the sum of shares remaining available and the new shares requested, divided by the average annual shares granted in the prior three years);

◾

The proportion of the CEO’s most recent equity grants/awards subject to performance conditions;

◾

Whether the company maintains a sufficient claw-back policy;

◾

Whether the company maintains sufficient post-exercise/vesting share-holding requirements.

Generally vote against the plan proposal if the combination of above factors indicates that the plan is not, overall, in shareholders’ interests, or if any of the following egregious factors (“overriding factors”) apply:

◾

Awards may vest in connection with a liberal change-of-control definition;

◾

The plan would permit repricing or cash buyout of underwater options without shareholder approval (either by expressly permitting it – for NYSE and Nasdaq listed companies – or by not prohibiting it when the company has a history of repricing – for non-listed companies);

◾

The plan is a vehicle for problematic pay practices or a significant pay-for-performance disconnect under certain circumstances;

◾

The plan is excessively dilutive to shareholders’ holdings;

◾

The plan contains an evergreen (automatic share replenishment) feature; or

◾

Any other plan features are determined to have a significant negative impact on shareholder interests.

²¹ Proposals evaluated under the EPSC policy generally include those to approve or amend (1) stock option plans for employees and/or employees and directors, (2) restricted stock plans for employees and/or employees and directors, and (3) omnibus stock incentive plans for employees and/or employees and directors; amended plans will be further evaluated case-by-case.


W W W . I S S G O V E R N A N C E . C O M		D-50			50 of 81

LOGO

Further Information on certain EPSC Factors:

Shareholder Value Transfer (SVT)

The cost of the equity plans is expressed as Shareholder Value Transfer (SVT), which is measured using a binomial option pricing model that assesses the amount of shareholders’ equity flowing out of the company to employees and directors. SVT is expressed as both a dollar amount and as a percentage of market value, and includes the new shares proposed, shares available under existing plans, and shares granted but unexercised (using two measures, in the case of plans subject to the Equity Plan Scorecard evaluation, as noted above). All award types are valued. For omnibus plans, unless limitations are placed on the most expensive types of awards (for example, full-value awards), the assumption is made that all awards to be granted will be the most expensive types.

For proposals that are not subject to the Equity Plan Scorecard evaluation, Shareholder Value Transfer is reasonable if it falls below a company-specific benchmark. The benchmark is determined as follows: The top quartile performers in each industry group (using the Global Industry Classification Standard: GICS) are identified. Benchmark SVT levels for each industry are established based on these top performers’ historic SVT. Regression analyses are run on each industry group to identify the variables most strongly correlated to SVT. The benchmark industry SVT level is then adjusted upwards or downwards for the specific company by plugging the company-specific performance measures, size, and cash compensation into the industry cap equations to arrive at the company’s benchmark.²²

Three-Year Value-Adjusted Burn Rate

A “Value-Adjusted Burn Rate” is used for stock plan evaluations. Value-Adjusted Burn Rate benchmarks are calculated as the greater of: (1) an industry-specific threshold based on three-year burn rates within the company’s GICS group segmented by S&P 500, Russell 3000 index (less the S&P 500) and non-Russell 3000 index; and (2) a de minimis threshold established separately for each of the S&P 500, the Russell 3000 index less the S&P 500, and the non-Russell 3000 index. Year-over-year burn-rate benchmark changes will be limited to a predetermined range above or below the prior year’s burn-rate benchmark.

The Value-Adjusted Burn Rate is calculated as follows:

Value-Adjusted Burn Rate = ((# of options * option’s dollar value using a Black-Scholes model) + (# of full-value awards * stock price)) / (Weighted average common shares * stock price).

Egregious Factors

Liberal Change in Control Definition

Generally vote against equity plans if the plan has a liberal definition of change in control and the equity awards could vest upon such liberal definition of change in control, even though an actual change in control may not occur. Examples of such a definition include, but are not limited to, announcement or commencement of a tender offer, provisions for acceleration upon a “potential” takeover, shareholder approval of a merger or other transactions, or similar language.

²² For plans evaluated under the Equity Plan Scorecard policy, the company’s SVT benchmark is considered along with other factors.


W W W . I S S G O V E R N A N C E . C O M		D-51			51 of 81

LOGO

Repricing Provisions

Vote against plans that expressly permit the repricing or exchange of underwater stock options/stock appreciate rights (SARs) without prior shareholder approval. “Repricing” typically includes the ability to do any of the following:

◾

Amend the terms of outstanding options or SARs to reduce the exercise price of such outstanding options or SARs;

◾

Cancel outstanding options or SARs in exchange for options or SARs with an exercise price that is less than the exercise price of the original options or SARs;

◾

Cancel underwater options in exchange for stock awards; or

◾

Provide cash buyouts of underwater options.

While the above cover most types of repricing, ISS may view other provisions as akin to repricing depending on the facts and circumstances.

Also, vote against or withhold from members of the Compensation Committee who approved repricing (as defined above or otherwise determined by ISS), without prior shareholder approval, even if such repricings are allowed in their equity plan.

Vote against plans that do not expressly prohibit repricing or cash buyout of underwater options without shareholder approval if the company has a history of repricing/buyouts without shareholder approval, and the applicable listing standards would not preclude them from doing so.

Problematic Pay Practices or Significant Pay-for-Performance Disconnect

If the equity plan on the ballot is a vehicle for problematic pay practices, vote against the plan.

ISS may recommend a vote against the equity plan if the plan is determined to be a vehicle for pay-for-performance misalignment. Considerations in voting against the equity plan may include, but are not limited to:

◾

Severity of the pay-for-performance misalignment;

◾

Whether problematic equity grant practices are driving the misalignment; and/or

◾

Whether equity plan awards have been heavily concentrated to the CEO and/or the other NEOs.

Amending Cash and Equity Plans (including Approval for Tax Deductibility (162(m))

General Recommendation: Vote case-by-case on amendments to cash and equity incentive plans.

Generally vote for proposals to amend executive cash, stock, or cash and stock incentive plans if the proposal:

◾

Addresses administrative features only; or

◾

Seeks approval for Section 162(m) purposes only, and the plan administering committee consists entirely of independent directors, per ISS’ Classification of Directors. Note that if the company is presenting the plan to shareholders for the first time for any reason (including after the company’s initial public offering), or if the proposal is bundled with other material plan amendments, then the recommendation will be case-by-case (see below).


W W W . I S S G O V E R N A N C E . C O M		D-52			52 of 81

LOGO

Vote against proposals to amend executive cash, stock, or cash and stock incentive plans if the proposal:

◾

Seeks approval for Section 162(m) purposes only, and the plan administering committee does not consist entirely of independent directors, per ISS’ Classification of Directors.

Vote case-by-case on all other proposals to amend cash incentive plans. This includes plans presented to shareholders for the first time after the company’s IPO and/or proposals that bundle material amendment(s) other than those for Section 162(m) purposes.

Vote case-by-case on all other proposals to amend equity incentive plans, considering the following:

◾

If the proposal requests additional shares and/or the amendments include a term extension or addition of full value awards as an award type, the recommendation will be based on the Equity Plan Scorecard evaluation as well as an analysis of the overall impact of the amendments.

◾

If the plan is being presented to shareholders for the first time (including after the company’s IPO), whether or not additional shares are being requested, the recommendation will be based on the Equity Plan Scorecard evaluation as well as an analysis of the overall impact of any amendments.

◾

If there is no request for additional shares and the amendments do not include a term extension or addition of full value awards as an award type, then the recommendation will be based entirely on an analysis of the overall impact of the amendments, and the EPSC evaluation will be shown only for informational purposes.

In the first two case-by-case evaluation scenarios, the EPSC evaluation/score is the more heavily weighted consideration.

Specific Treatment of Certain Award Types in Equity Plan Evaluations

Dividend Equivalent Rights

Options that have Dividend Equivalent Rights (DERs) associated with them will have a higher calculated award value than those without DERs under the binomial model, based on the value of these dividend streams. The higher value will be applied to new shares, shares available under existing plans, and shares awarded but not exercised per the plan specifications. DERS transfer more shareholder equity to employees and non-employee directors and this cost should be captured.

Operating Partnership (OP) Units in Equity Plan Analysis of Real Estate Investment Trusts (REITs)

For Real Estate Investment Trusts (REITS), include the common shares issuable upon conversion of outstanding Operating Partnership (OP) units in the share count for the purposes of determining: (1) market capitalization in the Shareholder Value Transfer (SVT) analysis and (2) shares outstanding in the burn rate analysis.

Other Compensation Plans

401(k) Employee Benefit Plans

General Recommendation: Vote for proposals to implement a 401(k) savings plan for employees.


W W W . I S S G O V E R N A N C E . C O M		D-53			53 of 81

LOGO

Employee Stock Ownership Plans (ESOPs)

General Recommendation: Vote for proposals to implement an ESOP or increase authorized shares for existing ESOPs, unless the number of shares allocated to the ESOP is excessive (more than five percent of outstanding shares).

Employee Stock Purchase Plans—Qualified Plans

General Recommendation: Vote case-by-case on qualified employee stock purchase plans. Vote for employee stock purchase plans where all of the following apply:

◾

Purchase price is at least 85 percent of fair market value;

◾

Offering period is 27 months or less; and

◾

The number of shares allocated to the plan is 10 percent or less of the outstanding shares.

Vote against qualified employee stock purchase plans where when the plan features do not meet all of the above criteria.

Employee Stock Purchase Plans—Non-Qualified Plans

General Recommendation: Vote case-by-case on nonqualified employee stock purchase plans. Vote for nonqualified employee stock purchase plans with all the following features:

◾

Broad-based participation;

◾

Limits on employee contribution, which may be a fixed dollar amount or expressed as a percent of base salary;

◾

Company matching contribution up to 25 percent of employee’s contribution, which is effectively a discount of 20 percent from market value; and

◾

No discount on the stock price on the date of purchase when there is a company matching contribution.

Vote against nonqualified employee stock purchase plans when the plan features do not meet all of the above criteria. If the matching contribution or effective discount exceeds the above, ISS may evaluate the SVT cost of the plan as part of the assessment.

Option Exchange Programs/Repricing Options

General Recommendation: Vote case-by-case on management proposals seeking approval to exchange/reprice options taking into consideration:

◾

Historic trading patterns—the stock price should not be so volatile that the options are likely to be back “in-the-money” over the near term;

◾

Rationale for the re-pricing—was the stock price decline beyond management’s control?;

◾

Is this a value-for-value exchange?;

◾

Are surrendered stock options added back to the plan reserve?;

◾

Timing—repricing should occur at least one year out from any precipitous drop in company’s stock price;

◾

Option vesting—does the new option vest immediately or is there a black-out period?;

◾

Term of the option—the term should remain the same as that of the replaced option;

◾

Exercise price—should be set at fair market or a premium to market;

◾

Participants—executive officers and directors must be excluded.

If the surrendered options are added back to the equity plans for re-issuance, then also take into consideration the company’s total cost of equity plans and its three-year average burn rate.


W W W . I S S G O V E R N A N C E . C O M		D-54			54 of 81

LOGO

In addition to the above considerations, evaluate the intent, rationale, and timing of the repricing proposal. The proposal should clearly articulate why the board is choosing to conduct an exchange program at this point in time. Repricing underwater options after a recent precipitous drop in the company’s stock price demonstrates poor timing and warrants additional scrutiny. Also, consider the terms of the surrendered options, such as the grant date, exercise price and vesting schedule. Grant dates of surrendered options should be far enough back (two to three years) so as not to suggest that repricings are being done to take advantage of short-term downward price movements. Similarly, the exercise price of surrendered options should be above the 52-week high for the stock price.

Vote for shareholder proposals to put option repricings to a shareholder vote.

Stock Plans in Lieu of Cash

General Recommendation: Vote case-by-case on plans that provide participants with the option of taking all or a portion of their cash compensation in the form of stock.

Vote for non-employee director-only equity plans that provide a dollar-for-dollar cash-for-stock exchange.

Vote case-by-case on plans which do not provide a dollar-for-dollar cash for stock exchange. In cases where the exchange is not dollar-for-dollar, the request for new or additional shares for such equity program will be considered using the binomial option pricing model. In an effort to capture the total cost of total compensation, ISS will not make any adjustments to carve out the in-lieu-of cash compensation.

Transfer Stock Option (TSO) Programs

General Recommendation: One-time Transfers: Vote against or withhold from compensation committee members if they fail to submit one-time transfers to shareholders for approval.

Vote case-by-case on one-time transfers. Vote for if:

◾

Executive officers and non-employee directors are excluded from participating;

◾

Stock options are purchased by third-party financial institutions at a discount to their fair value using option pricing models such as Black-Scholes or a Binomial Option Valuation or other appropriate financial models; and

◾

There is a two-year minimum holding period for sale proceeds (cash or stock) for all participants.

Additionally, management should provide a clear explanation of why options are being transferred to a third-party institution and whether the events leading up to a decline in stock price were beyond management’s control. A review of the company’s historic stock price volatility should indicate if the options are likely to be back “in-the-money” over the near term.

Ongoing TSO program: Vote against equity plan proposals if the details of ongoing TSO programs are not provided to shareholders. Since TSOs will be one of the award types under a stock plan, the ongoing TSO program, structure, and mechanics must be disclosed to shareholders. The specific criteria to be considered in evaluating these proposals include, but not limited, to the following:

◾

Eligibility;

◾

Vesting;

◾

Bid-price;

◾

Term of options;

◾

Cost of the program and impact of the TSOs on company’s total option expense; and

◾

Option repricing policy.


W W W . I S S G O V E R N A N C E . C O M		D-55			55 of 81

LOGO

Amendments to existing plans that allow for introduction of transferability of stock options should make clear that only options granted post-amendment shall be transferable.

Director Compensation

Shareholder Ratification of Director Pay Programs

General Recommendation: Vote case-by-case on management proposals seeking ratification of non-employee director compensation, based on the following factors:

◾

If the equity plan under which non-employee director grants are made is on the ballot, whether or not it warrants support; and

◾

An assessment of the following qualitative factors:

◾

The relative magnitude of director compensation as compared to companies of a similar profile;

◾

The presence of problematic pay practices relating to director compensation;

◾

Director stock ownership guidelines and holding requirements;

◾

Equity award vesting schedules;

◾

The mix of cash and equity-based compensation;

◾

Meaningful limits on director compensation;

◾

The availability of retirement benefits or perquisites; and

◾

The quality of disclosure surrounding director compensation.

Equity Plans for Non-Employee Directors

General Recommendation: Vote case-by-case on compensation plans for non-employee directors, based on:

◾

The total estimated cost of the company’s equity plans relative to industry/market cap peers, measured by the company’s estimated Shareholder Value Transfer (SVT) based on new shares requested plus shares remaining for future grants, plus outstanding unvested/unexercised grants;

◾

The company’s three-year burn rate relative to its industry/market cap peers (in certain circumstances); and

◾

The presence of any egregious plan features (such as an option repricing provision or liberal CIC vesting risk).

On occasion, non-employee director stock plans will exceed the plan cost or burn-rate benchmarks when combined with employee or executive stock plans. In such cases, vote case-by-case on the plan taking into consideration the following qualitative factors:

◾

The relative magnitude of director compensation as compared to companies of a similar profile;

◾

The presence of problematic pay practices relating to director compensation;

◾

Director stock ownership guidelines and holding requirements;

◾

Equity award vesting schedules;

◾

The mix of cash and equity-based compensation;

◾

Meaningful limits on director compensation;

◾

The availability of retirement benefits or perquisites; and

◾

The quality of disclosure surrounding director compensation.

Non-Employee Director Retirement Plans

General Recommendation: Vote against retirement plans for non-employee directors. Vote for shareholder proposals to eliminate retirement plans for non-employee directors.


W W W . I S S G O V E R N A N C E . C O M		D-56			56 of 81

LOGO

Shareholder Proposals on Compensation

Bonus Banking/Bonus Banking “Plus”

General Recommendation: Vote case-by-case on proposals seeking deferral of a portion of annual bonus pay, with ultimate payout linked to sustained results for the performance metrics on which the bonus was earned (whether for the named executive officers or a wider group of employees), taking into account the following factors:

◾

The company’s past practices regarding equity and cash compensation;

◾

Whether the company has a holding period or stock ownership requirements in place, such as a meaningful retention ratio (at least 50 percent for full tenure); and

◾

Whether the company has a rigorous claw-back policy in place.

Compensation Consultants—Disclosure of Board or Company’s Utilization

General Recommendation: Generally vote for shareholder proposals seeking disclosure regarding the company, board, or compensation committee’s use of compensation consultants, such as company name, business relationship(s), and fees paid.

Disclosure/Setting Levels or Types of Compensation for Executives and Directors

General Recommendation: Generally vote for shareholder proposals seeking additional disclosure of executive and director pay information, provided the information requested is relevant to shareholders’ needs, would not put the company at a competitive disadvantage relative to its industry, and is not unduly burdensome to the company.

Generally vote against shareholder proposals seeking to set absolute levels on compensation or otherwise dictate the amount or form of compensation (such as types of compensation elements or specific metrics) to be used for executive or directors.

Generally vote against shareholder proposals that mandate a minimum amount of stock that directors must own in order to qualify as a director or to remain on the board.

Vote case-by-case on all other shareholder proposals regarding executive and director pay, taking into account relevant factors, including but not limited to: company performance, pay level and design versus peers, history of compensation concerns or pay-for-performance disconnect, and/or the scope and prescriptive nature of the proposal.

Golden Coffins/Executive Death Benefits

General Recommendation: Generally vote for proposals calling for companies to adopt a policy of obtaining shareholder approval for any future agreements and corporate policies that could oblige the company to make payments or awards following the death of a senior executive in the form of unearned salary or bonuses, accelerated vesting or the continuation in force of unvested equity grants, perquisites and other payments or awards made in lieu of compensation. This would not apply to any benefit programs or equity plan proposals for which the broad-based employee population is eligible.


W W W . I S S G O V E R N A N C E . C O M		D-57			57 of 81

LOGO

Hold Equity Past Retirement or for a Significant Period of Time

General Recommendation: Vote case-by-case on shareholder proposals asking companies to adopt policies requiring senior executive officers to retain a portion of net shares acquired through compensation plans. The following factors will be taken into account:

◾

The percentage/ratio of net shares required to be retained;

◾

The time period required to retain the shares;

◾

Whether the company has equity retention, holding period, and/or stock ownership requirements in place and the robustness of such requirements;

◾

Whether the company has any other policies aimed at mitigating risk taking by executives;

◾

Executives’ actual stock ownership and the degree to which it meets or exceeds the proponent’s suggested holding period/retention ratio or the company’s existing requirements; and

◾

Problematic pay practices, current and past, which may demonstrate a short-term versus long-term focus.

Pay Disparity

General Recommendation: Vote case-by-case on proposals calling for an analysis of the pay disparity between corporate executives and other non-executive employees. The following factors will be considered:

◾

The company’s current level of disclosure of its executive compensation setting process, including how the company considers pay disparity;

◾

If any problematic pay practices or pay-for-performance concerns have been identified at the company; and

◾

The level of shareholder support for the company’s pay programs.

Generally vote against proposals calling for the company to use the pay disparity analysis or pay ratio in a specific way to set or limit executive pay.

Pay for Performance/Performance-Based Awards

General Recommendation: Vote case-by-case on shareholder proposals requesting that a significant amount of future long-term incentive compensation awarded to senior executives shall be performance-based and requesting that the board adopt and disclose challenging performance metrics to shareholders, based on the following analytical steps:

◾

First, vote for shareholder proposals advocating the use of performance-based equity awards, such as performance contingent options or restricted stock, indexed options, or premium-priced options, unless the proposal is overly restrictive or if the company has demonstrated that it is using a “substantial” portion of performance-based awards for its top executives. Standard stock options and performance-accelerated awards do not meet the criteria to be considered as performance-based awards. Further, premium-priced options should have a meaningful premium to be considered performance-based awards.

◾

Second, assess the rigor of the company’s performance-based equity program. If the bar set for the performance-based program is too low based on the company’s historical or peer group comparison, generally vote for the proposal. Furthermore, if target performance results in an above target payout, vote for the shareholder proposal due to program’s poor design. If the company does not disclose the performance metric of the performance-based equity program, vote for the shareholder proposal regardless of the outcome of the first step to the test.

In general, vote for the shareholder proposal if the company does not meet both of the above two steps.


W W W . I S S G O V E R N A N C E . C O M		D-58			58 of 81

LOGO

Pay for Superior Performance

General Recommendation: Vote case-by-case on shareholder proposals that request the board establish a pay-for-superior performance standard in the company’s executive compensation plan for senior executives. These proposals generally include the following principles:

◾

Set compensation targets for the plan’s annual and long-term incentive pay components at or below the peer group median;

◾

Deliver a majority of the plan’s target long-term compensation through performance-vested, not simply time-vested, equity awards;

◾

Provide the strategic rationale and relative weightings of the financial and non-financial performance metrics or criteria used in the annual and performance-vested long-term incentive components of the plan;

◾

Establish performance targets for each plan financial metric relative to the performance of the company’s peer companies;

◾

Limit payment under the annual and performance-vested long-term incentive components of the plan to when the company’s performance on its selected financial performance metrics exceeds peer group median performance.

Consider the following factors in evaluating this proposal:

◾

What aspects of the company’s annual and long-term equity incentive programs are performance driven?

◾

If the annual and long-term equity incentive programs are performance driven, are the performance criteria and hurdle rates disclosed to shareholders or are they benchmarked against a disclosed peer group?

◾

Can shareholders assess the correlation between pay and performance based on the current disclosure?

◾

What type of industry and stage of business cycle does the company belong to?

Pre-Arranged Trading Plans (10b5-1 Plans)

General Recommendation: Generally vote for shareholder proposals calling for the addition of certain safeguards in prearranged trading plans (10b5-1 plans) for executives. Safeguards may include:

◾

Adoption, amendment, or termination of a 10b5-1 Plan must be disclosed in a Form 8-K;

◾

Amendment or early termination of a 10b5-1 Plan allowed only under extraordinary circumstances, as determined by the board;

◾

Request that a certain number of days that must elapse between adoption or amendment of a 10b5-1 Plan and initial trading under the plan;

◾

Reports on Form 4 must identify transactions made pursuant to a 10b5-1 Plan;

◾

An executive may not trade in company stock outside the 10b5-1 Plan;

◾

Trades under a 10b5-1 Plan must be handled by a broker who does not handle other securities transactions for the executive.

Prohibit Outside CEOs from Serving on Compensation Committees

General Recommendation: Generally vote against proposals seeking a policy to prohibit any outside CEO from serving on a company’s compensation committee, unless the company has demonstrated problematic pay practices that raise concerns about the performance and composition of the committee.


W W W . I S S G O V E R N A N C E . C O M		D-59			59 of 81

LOGO

Recoupment of Incentive or Stock Compensation in Specified Circumstances

General Recommendation: Vote case-by-case on proposals to recoup incentive cash or stock compensation made to senior executives if it is later determined that the figures upon which incentive compensation is earned turn out to have been in error, or if the senior executive has breached company policy or has engaged in misconduct that may be significantly detrimental to the company’s financial position or reputation, or if the senior executive failed to manage or monitor risks that subsequently led to significant financial or reputational harm to the company. Many companies have adopted policies that permit recoupment in cases where an executive’s fraud, misconduct, or negligence significantly contributed to a restatement of financial results that led to the awarding of unearned incentive compensation. However, such policies may be narrow given that not all misconduct or negligence may result in significant financial restatements. Misconduct, negligence, or lack of sufficient oversight by senior executives may lead to significant financial loss or reputational damage that may have long-lasting impact.

In considering whether to support such shareholder proposals, ISS will take into consideration the following factors:

◾

If the company has adopted a formal recoupment policy;

◾

The rigor of the recoupment policy focusing on how and under what circumstances the company may recoup incentive or stock compensation;

◾

Whether the company has chronic restatement history or material financial problems;

◾

Whether the company’s policy substantially addresses the concerns raised by the proponent;

◾

Disclosure of recoupment of incentive or stock compensation from senior executives or lack thereof; or

◾

Any other relevant factors.

Severance Agreements for Executives/Golden Parachutes

General Recommendation: Vote for shareholder proposals requiring that golden parachutes or executive severance agreements be submitted for shareholder ratification, unless the proposal requires shareholder approval prior to entering into employment contracts.

Vote case-by-case on proposals to ratify or cancel golden parachutes. An acceptable parachute should include, but is not limited to, the following:

◾

The triggering mechanism should be beyond the control of management;

◾

The amount should not exceed three times base amount (defined as the average annual taxable W-2 compensation during the five years prior to the year in which the change of control occurs);

◾

Change-in-control payments should be double-triggered, i.e., (1) after a change in control has taken place, and (2) termination of the executive as a result of the change in control. Change in control is defined as a change in the company ownership structure.

Share Buyback Impact on Incentive Program Metrics

General Recommendation: Vote case-by-case on proposals requesting the company exclude the impact of share buybacks from the calculation of incentive program metrics, considering the following factors:

◾

The frequency and timing of the company’s share buybacks;

◾

The use of per-share metrics in incentive plans;

◾

The effect of recent buybacks on incentive metric results and payouts; and

◾

Whether there is any indication of metric result manipulation.


W W W . I S S G O V E R N A N C E . C O M		D-60			60 of 81

LOGO

Supplemental Executive Retirement Plans (SERPs)

General Recommendation: Generally vote for shareholder proposals requesting to put extraordinary benefits contained in SERP agreements to a shareholder vote unless the company’s executive pension plans do not contain excessive benefits beyond what is offered under employee-wide plans.

Generally vote for shareholder proposals requesting to limit the executive benefits provided under the company’s supplemental executive retirement plan (SERP) by limiting covered compensation to a senior executive’s annual salary or those pay elements covered for the general employee population.

Tax Gross-Up Proposals

General Recommendation: Generally vote for proposals calling for companies to adopt a policy of not providing tax gross-up payments to executives, except in situations where gross-ups are provided pursuant to a plan, policy, or arrangement applicable to management employees of the company, such as a relocation or expatriate tax equalization policy.

Termination of Employment Prior to Severance Payment/Eliminating Accelerated Vesting of Unvested Equity

General Recommendation: Vote case-by-case on shareholder proposals seeking a policy requiring termination of employment prior to severance payment and/or eliminating accelerated vesting of unvested equity.

The following factors will be considered:

◾

The company’s current treatment of equity upon employment termination and/or in change-in-control situations (i.e., vesting is double triggered and/or pro rata, does it allow for the assumption of equity by acquiring company, the treatment of performance shares, etc.);

◾

Current employment agreements, including potential poor pay practices such as gross-ups embedded in those agreements.

Generally vote for proposals seeking a policy that prohibits automatic acceleration of the vesting of equity awards to senior executives upon a voluntary termination of employment or in the event of a change in control (except for pro rata vesting considering the time elapsed and attainment of any related performance goals between the award date and the change in control).


W W W . I S S G O V E R N A N C E . C O M		D-61			61 of 81

LOGO

6. Routine/Miscellaneous

Adjourn Meeting

General Recommendation: Generally vote against proposals to provide management with the authority to adjourn an annual or special meeting absent compelling reasons to support the proposal.

Vote for proposals that relate specifically to soliciting votes for a merger or transaction if supporting that merger or transaction. Vote against proposals if the wording is too vague or if the proposal includes “other business.”

Amend Quorum Requirements

General Recommendation: Vote case-by-case on proposals to reduce quorum requirements for shareholder meetings below a majority of the shares outstanding, taking into consideration:

◾

The new quorum threshold requested;

◾

The rationale presented for the reduction;

◾

The market capitalization of the company (size, inclusion in indices);

◾

The company’s ownership structure;

◾

Previous voter turnout or attempts to achieve quorum;

◾

Any provisions or commitments to restore quorum to a majority of shares outstanding, should voter turnout improve sufficiently; and

◾

Other factors as appropriate.

In general, a quorum threshold kept as close to a majority of shares outstanding as is achievable is preferred.

Vote case-by-case on directors who unilaterally lower the quorum requirements below a majority of the shares outstanding, taking into consideration the factors listed above.

Amend Minor Bylaws

General Recommendation: Vote for bylaw or charter changes that are of a housekeeping nature (updates or corrections).

Change Company Name

General Recommendation: Vote for proposals to change the corporate name unless there is compelling evidence that the change would adversely impact shareholder value.

Change Date, Time, or Location of Annual Meeting

General Recommendation: Vote for management proposals to change the date, time, or location of the annual meeting unless the proposed change is unreasonable.

Vote against shareholder proposals to change the date, time, or location of the annual meeting unless the current scheduling or location is unreasonable.

Other Business

General Recommendation: Vote against proposals to approve other business when it appears as a voting item.


W W W . I S S G O V E R N A N C E . C O M		D-62			62 of 81

LOGO

7. Social and Environmental Issues

Global Approach – E&S Shareholder Proposals

ISS applies a common approach globally to evaluating social and environmental proposals which cover a wide range of topics, including consumer and product safety, environment and energy, labor standards and human rights, workplace and board diversity, and corporate political issues. While a variety of factors goes into each analysis, the overall principle guiding all vote recommendations focuses on how the proposal may enhance or protect shareholder value in either the short or long term.

General Recommendation: Generally vote case-by-case, examining primarily whether implementation of the proposal is likely to enhance or protect shareholder value. The following factors will be considered:

◾

If the issues presented in the proposal are being appropriately or effectively dealt with through legislation or government regulation;

◾

If the company has already responded in an appropriate and sufficient manner to the issue(s) raised in the proposal;

◾

Whether the proposal’s request is unduly burdensome (scope or timeframe) or overly prescriptive;

◾

The company’s approach compared with any industry standard practices for addressing the issue(s) raised by the proposal;

◾

Whether there are significant controversies, fines, penalties, or litigation associated with the company’s practices related to the issue(s) raised in the proposal;

◾

If the proposal requests increased disclosure or greater transparency, whether reasonable and sufficient information is currently available to shareholders from the company or from other publicly available sources; and

◾

If the proposal requests increased disclosure or greater transparency, whether implementation would reveal proprietary or confidential information that could place the company at a competitive disadvantage.

Endorsement of Principles

General Recommendation: Generally vote against proposals seeking a company’s endorsement of principles that support a particular public policy position. Endorsing a set of principles may require a company to take a stand on an issue that is beyond its own control and may limit its flexibility with respect to future developments.

Management and the board should be afforded the flexibility to make decisions on specific public policy positions based on their own assessment of the most beneficial strategies for the company.

Animal Welfare

Animal Welfare Policies

General Recommendation: Generally vote for proposals seeking a report on a company’s animal welfare standards, or animal welfare-related risks, unless:

◾

The company has already published a set of animal welfare standards and monitors compliance;

◾

The company’s standards are comparable to industry peers; and

◾

There are no recent significant fines, litigation, or controversies related to the company’s and/or its suppliers’ treatment of animals.


W W W . I S S G O V E R N A N C E . C O M		D-63			63 of 81

LOGO

Animal Testing

General Recommendation: Generally vote against proposals to phase out the use of animals in product testing, unless:

◾

The company is conducting animal testing programs that are unnecessary or not required by regulation;

◾

The company is conducting animal testing when suitable alternatives are commonly accepted and used by industry peers; or

◾

There are recent, significant fines or litigation related to the company’s treatment of animals.

Animal Slaughter

General Recommendation: Generally vote against proposals requesting the implementation of Controlled Atmosphere Killing (CAK) methods at company and/or supplier operations unless such methods are required by legislation or generally accepted as the industry standard.

Vote case-by-case on proposals requesting a report on the feasibility of implementing CAK methods at company and/or supplier operations considering the availability of existing research conducted by the company or industry groups on this topic and any fines or litigation related to current animal processing procedures at the company.

Consumer Issues

Genetically Modified Ingredients

General Recommendation: Generally vote against proposals requesting that a company voluntarily label genetically engineered (GE) ingredients in its products. The labeling of products with GE ingredients is best left to the appropriate regulatory authorities.

Vote case-by-case on proposals asking for a report on the feasibility of labeling products containing GE ingredients, taking into account:

◾

The potential impact of such labeling on the company’s business;

◾

The quality of the company’s disclosure on GE product labeling, related voluntary initiatives, and how this disclosure compares with industry peer disclosure; and

◾

Company’s current disclosure on the feasibility of GE product labeling.

Generally vote against proposals seeking a report on the social, health, and environmental effects of genetically modified organisms (GMOs). Studies of this sort are better undertaken by regulators and the scientific community.

Generally vote against proposals to eliminate GE ingredients from the company’s products, or proposals asking for reports outlining the steps necessary to eliminate GE ingredients from the company’s products. Such decisions are more appropriately made by management with consideration of current regulations.

Reports on Potentially Controversial Business/Financial Practices

General Recommendation: Vote case-by-case on requests for reports on a company’s potentially controversial business or financial practices or products, taking into account:

◾

Whether the company has adequately disclosed mechanisms in place to prevent abuses;


W W W . I S S G O V E R N A N C E . C O M		D-64			64 of 81

LOGO

◾

Whether the company has adequately disclosed the financial risks of the products/practices in question;

◾

Whether the company has been subject to violations of related laws or serious controversies; and

◾

Peer companies’ policies/practices in this area.

Pharmaceutical Pricing, Access to Medicines, and Prescription Drug Reimportation

General Recommendation: Generally vote against proposals requesting that companies implement specific price restraints on pharmaceutical products unless the company fails to adhere to legislative guidelines or industry norms in its product pricing practices.

Vote case-by-case on proposals requesting that a company report on its product pricing or access to medicine policies, considering:

◾

The potential for reputational, market, and regulatory risk exposure;

◾

Existing disclosure of relevant policies;

◾

Deviation from established industry norms;

◾

Relevant company initiatives to provide research and/or products to disadvantaged consumers;

◾

Whether the proposal focuses on specific products or geographic regions;

◾

The potential burden and scope of the requested report;

◾

Recent significant controversies, litigation, or fines at the company.

Generally vote for proposals requesting that a company report on the financial and legal impact of its prescription drug reimportation policies unless such information is already publicly disclosed.

Generally vote against proposals requesting that companies adopt specific policies to encourage or constrain prescription drug reimportation. Such matters are more appropriately the province of legislative activity and may place the company at a competitive disadvantage relative to its peers.

Product Safety and Toxic/Hazardous Materials

General Recommendation: Generally vote for proposals requesting that a company report on its policies, initiatives/procedures, and oversight mechanisms related to toxic/hazardous materials or product safety in its supply chain, unless:

◾

The company already discloses similar information through existing reports such as a supplier code of conduct and/or a sustainability report;

◾

The company has formally committed to the implementation of a toxic/hazardous materials and/or product safety and supply chain reporting and monitoring program based on industry norms or similar standards within a specified time frame; and

◾

The company has not been recently involved in relevant significant controversies, fines, or litigation.

Vote case-by-case on resolutions requesting that companies develop a feasibility assessment to phase-out of certain toxic/hazardous materials, or evaluate and disclose the potential financial and legal risks associated with utilizing certain materials, considering:

◾

The company’s current level of disclosure regarding its product safety policies, initiatives, and oversight mechanisms;

◾

Current regulations in the markets in which the company operates; and

◾

Recent significant controversies, litigation, or fines stemming from toxic/hazardous materials at the company.


W W W . I S S G O V E R N A N C E . C O M		D-65			65 of 81

LOGO

Generally vote against resolutions requiring that a company reformulate its products.

Tobacco-Related Proposals

General Recommendation: Vote case-by-case on resolutions regarding the advertisement of tobacco products, considering:

◾

Recent related fines, controversies, or significant litigation;

◾

Whether the company complies with relevant laws and regulations on the marketing of tobacco;

◾

Whether the company’s advertising restrictions deviate from those of industry peers;

◾

Whether the company entered into the Master Settlement Agreement, which restricts marketing of tobacco to youth; and

◾

Whether restrictions on marketing to youth extend to foreign countries.

Vote case-by-case on proposals regarding second-hand smoke, considering;

◾

Whether the company complies with all laws and regulations;

◾

The degree that voluntary restrictions beyond those mandated by law might hurt the company’s competitiveness; and

◾

The risk of any health-related liabilities.

Generally vote against resolutions to cease production of tobacco-related products, to avoid selling products to tobacco companies, to spin-off tobacco-related businesses, or prohibit investment in tobacco equities. Such business decisions are better left to company management or portfolio managers.

Generally vote against proposals regarding tobacco product warnings. Such decisions are better left to public health authorities.

Climate Change

Say on Climate (SoC) Management Proposals

General Recommendation: Vote case-by-case on management proposals that request shareholders to approve the company’s climate transition action plan²³, taking into account the completeness and rigor of the plan. Information that will be considered where available includes the following:

◾

The extent to which the company’s climate related disclosures are in line with TCFD recommendations and meet other market standards;

◾

Disclosure of its operational and supply chain GHG emissions (Scopes 1, 2, and 3);

◾

The completeness and rigor of company’s short-, medium-, and long-term targets for reducing operational and supply chain GHG emissions (Scopes 1, 2, and 3 if relevant);

◾

Whether the company has sought and received third-party approval that its targets are science-based;

◾

Whether the company has made a commitment to be “net zero” for operational and supply chain emissions (Scopes 1, 2, and 3) by 2050;

◾

Whether the company discloses a commitment to report on the implementation of its plan in subsequent years;

◾

Whether the company’s climate data has received third-party assurance;

²³ Variations of this request also include climate transition related ambitions, or commitment to reporting on the implementation of a climate plan.


W W W . I S S G O V E R N A N C E . C O M		D-66			66 of 81

LOGO

◾

Disclosure of how the company’s lobbying activities and its capital expenditures align with company strategy;

◾

Whether there are specific industry decarbonization challenges; and

◾

The company’s related commitment, disclosure, and performance compared to its industry peers.

Say on Climate (SoC) Shareholder Proposals

General Recommendation: Vote case-by-case on shareholder proposals that request the company to disclose a report providing its GHG emissions levels and reduction targets and/or its upcoming/approved climate transition action plan and provide shareholders the opportunity to express approval or disapproval of its GHG emissions reduction plan, taking into account information such as the following:

◾

The completeness and rigor of the company’s climate-related disclosure;

◾

The company’s actual GHG emissions performance;

◾

Whether the company has been the subject of recent, significant violations, fines, litigation, or controversy related to its GHG emissions; and

◾

Whether the proposal’s request is unduly burdensome (scope or timeframe) or overly prescriptive.

Climate Change/Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions

General Recommendation: Generally vote for resolutions requesting that a company disclose information on the financial, physical, or regulatory risks it faces related to climate change on its operations and investments or on how the company identifies, measures, and manages such risks, considering:

◾

Whether the company already provides current, publicly-available information on the impact that climate change may have on the company as well as associated company policies and procedures to address related risks and/or opportunities;

◾

The company’s level of disclosure compared to industry peers; and

◾

Whether there are significant controversies, fines, penalties, or litigation associated with the company’s climate change-related performance.

Generally vote for proposals requesting a report on greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from company operations and/or products and operations, unless:

◾

The company already discloses current, publicly-available information on the impacts that GHG emissions may have on the company as well as associated company policies and procedures to address related risks and/or opportunities;

◾

The company’s level of disclosure is comparable to that of industry peers; and

◾

There are no significant, controversies, fines, penalties, or litigation associated with the company’s GHG emissions.

Vote case-by-case on proposals that call for the adoption of GHG reduction goals from products and operations, taking into account:

◾

Whether the company provides disclosure of year-over-year GHG emissions performance data;

◾

Whether company disclosure lags behind industry peers;

◾

The company’s actual GHG emissions performance;

◾

The company’s current GHG emission policies, oversight mechanisms, and related initiatives; and

◾

Whether the company has been the subject of recent, significant violations, fines, litigation, or controversy related to GHG emissions.


W W W . I S S G O V E R N A N C E . C O M		D-67			67 of 81

LOGO

Energy Efficiency

General Recommendation: Generally vote for proposals requesting that a company report on its energy efficiency policies, unless:

◾

The company complies with applicable energy efficiency regulations and laws, and discloses its participation in energy efficiency policies and programs, including disclosure of benchmark data, targets, and performance measures; or

◾

The proponent requests adoption of specific energy efficiency goals within specific timelines.

Renewable Energy

General Recommendation: Generally vote for requests for reports on the feasibility of developing renewable energy resources unless the report would be duplicative of existing disclosure or irrelevant to the company’s line of business.

Generally vote against proposals requesting that the company invest in renewable energy resources. Such decisions are best left to management’s evaluation of the feasibility and financial impact that such programs may have on the company.

Generally vote against proposals that call for the adoption of renewable energy goals, taking into account:

◾

The scope and structure of the proposal;

◾

The company’s current level of disclosure on renewable energy use and GHG emissions; and

◾

The company’s disclosure of policies, practices, and oversight implemented to manage GHG emissions and mitigate climate change risks.

Diversity

Board Diversity

General Recommendation: Generally vote for requests for reports on a company’s efforts to diversify the board, unless:

◾

The gender and racial minority representation of the company’s board is reasonably inclusive in relation to companies of similar size and business; and

◾

The board already reports on its nominating procedures and gender and racial minority initiatives on the board and within the company.

Vote case-by-case on proposals asking a company to increase the gender and racial minority representation on its board, taking into account:

◾

The degree of existing gender and racial minority diversity on the company’s board and among its executive officers;

◾

The level of gender and racial minority representation that exists at the company’s industry peers;

◾

The company’s established process for addressing gender and racial minority board representation;

◾

Whether the proposal includes an overly prescriptive request to amend nominating committee charter language;


W W W . I S S G O V E R N A N C E . C O M		D-68			68 of 81

LOGO

◾

The independence of the company’s nominating committee;

◾

Whether the company uses an outside search firm to identify potential director nominees; and

◾

Whether the company has had recent controversies, fines, or litigation regarding equal employment practices.

Equality of Opportunity

General Recommendation: Generally vote for proposals requesting a company disclose its diversity policies or initiatives, or proposals requesting disclosure of a company’s comprehensive workforce diversity data, including requests for EEO-1 data, unless:

◾

The company publicly discloses equal opportunity policies and initiatives in a comprehensive manner;

◾

The company already publicly discloses comprehensive workforce diversity data; and

◾

The company has no recent significant EEO-related violations or litigation.

Generally vote against proposals seeking information on the diversity efforts of suppliers and service providers. Such requests may pose a significant burden on the company.

Gender Identity, Sexual Orientation, and Domestic Partner Benefits

General Recommendation: Generally vote for proposals seeking to amend a company’s EEO statement or diversity policies to prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation and/or gender identity, unless the change would be unduly burdensome.

Generally vote against proposals to extend company benefits to, or eliminate benefits from, domestic partners. Decisions regarding benefits should be left to the discretion of the company.

Gender, Race/Ethnicity Pay Gap

General Recommendation: Vote case-by-case on requests for reports on a company’s pay data by gender or race/ ethnicity, or a report on a company’s policies and goals to reduce any gender or race/ethnicity pay gaps, taking into account:

◾

The company’s current policies and disclosure related to both its diversity and inclusion policies and practices and its compensation philosophy on fair and equitable compensation practices;

◾

Whether the company has been the subject of recent controversy, litigation, or regulatory actions related to gender, race, or ethnicity pay gap issues;

◾

The company’s disclosure regarding gender, race, or ethnicity pay gap policies or initiatives compared to its industry peers; and

◾

Local laws regarding categorization of race and/or ethnicity and definitions of ethnic and/or racial minorities.

Racial Equity and/or Civil Rights Audit Guidelines

General Recommendation: Vote case-by-case on proposals asking a company to conduct an independent racial equity and/or civil rights audit, taking into account:

◾

The company’s established process or framework for addressing racial inequity and discrimination internally;

◾

Whether the company adequately discloses workforce diversity and inclusion metrics and goals;

◾

Whether the company has issued a public statement related to its racial justice efforts in recent years, or has committed to internal policy review;


W W W . I S S G O V E R N A N C E . C O M		D-69			69 of 81

LOGO

◾

Whether the company has engaged with impacted communities, stakeholders, and civil rights experts;

◾

The company’s track record in recent years of racial justice measures and outreach externally; and

◾

Whether the company has been the subject of recent controversy, litigation, or regulatory actions related to racial inequity or discrimination.

Environment and Sustainability

Facility and Workplace Safety

General Recommendation: Vote case-by-case on requests for workplace safety reports, including reports on accident risk reduction efforts, taking into account:

◾

The company’s current level of disclosure of its workplace health and safety performance data, health and safety management policies, initiatives, and oversight mechanisms;

◾

The nature of the company’s business, specifically regarding company and employee exposure to health and safety risks;

◾

Recent significant controversies, fines, or violations related to workplace health and safety; and

◾

The company’s workplace health and safety performance relative to industry peers.

Vote case-by-case on resolutions requesting that a company report on safety and/or security risks associated with its operations and/or facilities, considering:

◾

The company’s compliance with applicable regulations and guidelines;

◾

The company’s current level of disclosure regarding its security and safety policies, procedures, and compliance monitoring; and

◾

The existence of recent, significant violations, fines, or controversy regarding the safety and security of the company’s operations and/or facilities.

General Environmental Proposals and Community Impact Assessments

General Recommendation: Vote case-by-case on requests for reports on policies and/or the potential (community) social and/or environmental impact of company operations, considering:

◾

Current disclosure of applicable policies and risk assessment report(s) and risk management procedures;

◾

The impact of regulatory non-compliance, litigation, remediation, or reputational loss that may be associated with failure to manage the company’s operations in question, including the management of relevant community and stakeholder relations;

◾

The nature, purpose, and scope of the company’s operations in the specific region(s);

◾

The degree to which company policies and procedures are consistent with industry norms; and

◾

The scope of the resolution.

Hydraulic Fracturing

General Recommendation: Generally vote for proposals requesting greater disclosure of a company’s (natural gas) hydraulic fracturing operations, including measures the company has taken to manage and mitigate the potential community and environmental impacts of those operations, considering:

◾

The company’s current level of disclosure of relevant policies and oversight mechanisms;

◾

The company’s current level of such disclosure relative to its industry peers;

◾

Potential relevant local, state, or national regulatory developments; and


W W W . I S S G O V E R N A N C E . C O M		D-70			70 of 81

LOGO

◾

Controversies, fines, or litigation related to the company’s hydraulic fracturing operations.

Operations in Protected Areas

General Recommendation: Generally vote for requests for reports on potential environmental damage as a result of company operations in protected regions, unless:

◾

Operations in the specified regions are not permitted by current laws or regulations;

◾

The company does not currently have operations or plans to develop operations in these protected regions; or

◾

The company’s disclosure of its operations and environmental policies in these regions is comparable to industry peers.

Recycling

General Recommendation: Vote case-by-case on proposals to report on an existing recycling program, or adopt a new recycling program, taking into account:

◾

The nature of the company’s business;

◾

The current level of disclosure of the company’s existing related programs;

◾

The timetable and methods of program implementation prescribed by the proposal;

◾

The company’s ability to address the issues raised in the proposal; and

◾

How the company’s recycling programs compare to similar programs of its industry peers.

Sustainability Reporting

General Recommendation: Generally vote for proposals requesting that a company report on its policies, initiatives, and oversight mechanisms related to social, economic, and environmental sustainability, unless:

◾

The company already discloses similar information through existing reports or policies such as an environment, health, and safety (EHS) report; a comprehensive code of corporate conduct; and/or a diversity report; or

◾

The company has formally committed to the implementation of a reporting program based on Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) guidelines or a similar standard within a specified time frame.

Water Issues

General Recommendation: Vote case-by-case on proposals requesting a company report on, or adopt a new policy on, water-related risks and concerns, taking into account:

◾

The company’s current disclosure of relevant policies, initiatives, oversight mechanisms, and water usage metrics;

◾

Whether or not the company’s existing water-related policies and practices are consistent with relevant internationally recognized standards and national/local regulations;

◾

The potential financial impact or risk to the company associated with water-related concerns or issues; and

◾

Recent, significant company controversies, fines, or litigation regarding water use by the company and its suppliers.


W W W . I S S G O V E R N A N C E . C O M		D-71			71 of 81

LOGO

General Corporate Issues

Charitable Contributions

General Recommendation: Vote against proposals restricting a company from making charitable contributions. Charitable contributions are generally useful for assisting worthwhile causes and for creating goodwill in the community. In the absence of bad faith, self-dealing, or gross negligence, management should determine which, and if, contributions are in the best interests of the company.

Data Security, Privacy, and Internet Issues

General Recommendation: Vote case-by-case on proposals requesting the disclosure or implementation of data security, privacy, or information access and management policies and procedures, considering:

◾

The level of disclosure of company policies and procedures relating to data security, privacy, freedom of speech, information access and management, and Internet censorship;

◾

Engagement in dialogue with governments or relevant groups with respect to data security, privacy, or the free flow of information on the Internet;

◾

The scope of business involvement and of investment in countries whose governments censor or monitor the Internet and other telecommunications;

◾

Applicable market-specific laws or regulations that may be imposed on the company; and

◾

Controversies, fines, or litigation related to data security, privacy, freedom of speech, or Internet censorship.

ESG Compensation-Related Proposals

General Recommendation: Vote case-by-case on proposals seeking a report or additional disclosure on the company’s approach, policies, and practices on incorporating environmental and social criteria into its executive compensation strategy, considering:

◾

The scope and prescriptive nature of the proposal;

◾

The company’s current level of disclosure regarding its environmental and social performance and governance;

◾

The degree to which the board or compensation committee already discloses information on whether it has considered related E&S criteria; and

◾

Whether the company has significant controversies or regulatory violations regarding social or environmental issues.

Human Rights, Human Capital Management, and International Operations

Human Rights Proposals

General Recommendation: Generally vote for proposals requesting a report on company or company supplier labor and/or human rights standards and policies unless such information is already publicly disclosed.

Vote case-by-case on proposals to implement company or company supplier labor and/or human rights standards and policies, considering:

◾

The degree to which existing relevant policies and practices are disclosed;

◾

Whether or not existing relevant policies are consistent with internationally recognized standards;

◾

Whether company facilities and those of its suppliers are monitored and how;


W W W . I S S G O V E R N A N C E . C O M		D-72			72 of 81

LOGO

◾

Company participation in fair labor organizations or other internationally recognized human rights initiatives;

◾

Scope and nature of business conducted in markets known to have higher risk of workplace labor/human rights abuse;

◾

Recent, significant company controversies, fines, or litigation regarding human rights at the company or its suppliers;

◾

The scope of the request; and

◾

Deviation from industry sector peer company standards and practices.

Vote case-by-case on proposals requesting that a company conduct an assessment of the human rights risks in its operations or in its supply chain, or report on its human rights risk assessment process, considering:

◾

The degree to which existing relevant policies and practices are disclosed, including information on the implementation of these policies and any related oversight mechanisms;

◾

The company’s industry and whether the company or its suppliers operate in countries or areas where there is a history of human rights concerns;

◾

Recent significant controversies, fines, or litigation regarding human rights involving the company or its suppliers, and whether the company has taken remedial steps; and

◾

Whether the proposal is unduly burdensome or overly prescriptive.

Mandatory Arbitration

General Recommendation: Vote case-by-case on requests for a report on a company’s use of mandatory arbitration on employment-related claims, taking into account:

◾

The company’s current policies and practices related to the use of mandatory arbitration agreements on workplace claims;

◾

Whether the company has been the subject of recent controversy, litigation, or regulatory actions related to the use of mandatory arbitration agreements on workplace claims; and

◾

The company’s disclosure of its policies and practices related to the use of mandatory arbitration agreements compared to its peers.

Operations in High-Risk Markets

General Recommendation: Vote case-by-case on requests for a report on a company’s potential financial and reputational risks associated with operations in “high-risk” markets, such as a terrorism-sponsoring state or politically/socially unstable region, taking into account:

◾

The nature, purpose, and scope of the operations and business involved that could be affected by social or political disruption;

◾

Current disclosure of applicable risk assessment(s) and risk management procedures;

◾

Compliance with U.S. sanctions and laws;

◾

Consideration of other international policies, standards, and laws; and

◾

Whether the company has been recently involved in recent, significant controversies, fines, or litigation related to its operations in “high-risk” markets.

Outsourcing/Offshoring

General Recommendation: Vote case-by-case on proposals calling for companies to report on the risks associated with outsourcing/plant closures, considering:

◾

Controversies surrounding operations in the relevant market(s);


W W W . I S S G O V E R N A N C E . C O M		D-73			73 of 81

LOGO

◾

The value of the requested report to shareholders;

◾

The company’s current level of disclosure of relevant information on outsourcing and plant closure procedures; and

◾

The company’s existing human rights standards relative to industry peers.

Sexual Harassment

General Recommendation: Vote case-by-case on requests for a report on company actions taken to strengthen policies and oversight to prevent workplace sexual harassment, or a report on risks posed by a company’s failure to prevent workplace sexual harassment, taking into account:

◾

The company’s current policies, practices, oversight mechanisms related to preventing workplace sexual harassment;

◾

Whether the company has been the subject of recent controversy, litigation, or regulatory actions related to workplace sexual harassment issues; and

◾

The company’s disclosure regarding workplace sexual harassment policies or initiatives compared to its industry peers.

Weapons and Military Sales

General Recommendation: Vote against reports on foreign military sales or offsets. Such disclosures may involve sensitive and confidential information. Moreover, companies must comply with government controls and reporting on foreign military sales.

Generally vote against proposals asking a company to cease production or report on the risks associated with the use of depleted uranium munitions or nuclear weapons components and delivery systems, including disengaging from current and proposed contracts. Such contracts are monitored by government agencies, serve multiple military and non-military uses, and withdrawal from these contracts could have a negative impact on the company’s business.

Political Activities

Lobbying

General Recommendation: Vote case-by-case on proposals requesting information on a company’s lobbying (including direct, indirect, and grassroots lobbying) activities, policies, or procedures, considering:

◾

The company’s current disclosure of relevant lobbying policies, and management and board oversight;

◾

The company’s disclosure regarding trade associations or other groups that it supports, or is a member of, that engage in lobbying activities; and

◾

Recent significant controversies, fines, or litigation regarding the company’s lobbying-related activities.

Political Contributions

General Recommendation: Generally vote for proposals requesting greater disclosure of a company’s political contributions and trade association spending policies and activities, considering:

◾

The company’s policies, and management and board oversight related to its direct political contributions and payments to trade associations or other groups that may be used for political purposes;


W W W . I S S G O V E R N A N C E . C O M		D-74			74 of 81

LOGO

◾

The company’s disclosure regarding its support of, and participation in, trade associations or other groups that may make political contributions; and

◾

Recent significant controversies, fines, or litigation related to the company’s political contributions or political activities.

Vote against proposals barring a company from making political contributions. Businesses are affected by legislation at the federal, state, and local level; barring political contributions can put the company at a competitive disadvantage.

Vote against proposals to publish in newspapers and other media a company’s political contributions. Such publications could present significant cost to the company without providing commensurate value to shareholders.

Political Expenditures and Lobbying Congruency

General Recommendation: Generally vote case-by-case on proposals requesting greater disclosure of a company’s alignment of political contributions, lobbying, and electioneering spending with a company’s publicly stated values and policies, considering:

◾

The company’s policies, management, board oversight, governance processes, and level of disclosure related to direct political contributions, lobbying activities, and payments to trade associations, political action committees, or other groups that may be used for political purposes;

◾

The company’s disclosure regarding: the reasons for its support of candidates for public offices; the reasons for support of and participation in trade associations or other groups that may make political contributions; and other political activities;

◾

Any incongruencies identified between a company’s direct and indirect political expenditures and its publicly stated values and priorities.

◾

Recent significant controversies related to the company’s direct and indirect lobbying, political contributions, or political activities.

Generally vote case-by-case on proposals requesting comparison of a company’s political spending to objectives that can mitigate material risks for the company, such as limiting global warming.

Political Ties

General Recommendation: Generally vote against proposals asking a company to affirm political nonpartisanship in the workplace, so long as:

◾

There are no recent, significant controversies, fines, or litigation regarding the company’s political contributions or trade association spending; and

◾

The company has procedures in place to ensure that employee contributions to company-sponsored political action committees (PACs) are strictly voluntary and prohibit coercion.

Vote against proposals asking for a list of company executives, directors, consultants, legal counsels, lobbyists, or investment bankers that have prior government service and whether such service had a bearing on the business of the company. Such a list would be burdensome to prepare without providing any meaningful information to shareholders.


W W W . I S S G O V E R N A N C E . C O M		D-75			75 of 81

LOGO

8. Mutual Fund Proxies

Election of Directors

General Recommendation: Vote case-by-case on the election of directors and trustees, following the same guidelines for uncontested directors for public company shareholder meetings. However, mutual fund boards do not usually have compensation committees, so do not withhold for the lack of this committee.

Closed End Funds- Unilateral Opt-In to Control Share Acquisition Statutes

General Recommendation: For closed-end management investment companies (CEFs), vote against or withhold from nominating/governance committee members (or other directors on a case-by-case basis) at CEFs that have not provided a compelling rationale for opting-in to a Control Share Acquisition statute, nor submitted a by-law amendment to a shareholder vote.

Converting Closed-end Fund to Open-end Fund

General Recommendation: Vote case-by-case on conversion proposals, considering the following factors:

◾

Past performance as a closed-end fund;

◾

Market in which the fund invests;

◾

Measures taken by the board to address the discount; and

◾

Past shareholder activism, board activity, and votes on related proposals.

Proxy Contests

General Recommendation: Vote case-by-case on proxy contests, considering the following factors:

◾

Past performance relative to its peers;

◾

Market in which the fund invests;

◾

Measures taken by the board to address the issues;

◾

Past shareholder activism, board activity, and votes on related proposals;

◾

Strategy of the incumbents versus the dissidents;

◾

Independence of directors;

◾

Experience and skills of director candidates;

◾

Governance profile of the company;

◾

Evidence of management entrenchment.

Investment Advisory Agreements

General Recommendation: Vote case-by-case on investment advisory agreements, considering the following factors:

◾

Proposed and current fee schedules;

◾

Fund category/investment objective;

◾

Performance benchmarks;

◾

Share price performance as compared with peers;

◾

Resulting fees relative to peers;

◾

Assignments (where the advisor undergoes a change of control).


W W W . I S S G O V E R N A N C E . C O M		D-76			76 of 81

LOGO

Approving New Classes or Series of Shares

General Recommendation: Vote for the establishment of new classes or series of shares.

Preferred Stock Proposals

General Recommendation: Vote case-by-case on the authorization for or increase in preferred shares, considering the following factors:

◾

Stated specific financing purpose;

◾

Possible dilution for common shares;

◾

Whether the shares can be used for antitakeover purposes.

1940 Act Policies

General Recommendation: Vote case-by-case on policies under the Investment Advisor Act of 1940, considering the following factors:

◾

Potential competitiveness;

◾

Regulatory developments;

◾

Current and potential returns; and

◾

Current and potential risk.

Generally vote for these amendments as long as the proposed changes do not fundamentally alter the investment focus of the fund and do comply with the current SEC interpretation.

Changing a Fundamental Restriction to a Nonfundamental Restriction

General Recommendation: Vote case-by-case on proposals to change a fundamental restriction to a non-fundamental restriction, considering the following factors:

◾

The fund’s target investments;

◾

The reasons given by the fund for the change; and

◾

The projected impact of the change on the portfolio.

Change Fundamental Investment Objective to Nonfundamental

General Recommendation: Vote against proposals to change a fund’s fundamental investment objective to non-fundamental.

Name Change Proposals

General Recommendation: Vote case-by-case on name change proposals, considering the following factors:

◾

Political/economic changes in the target market;

◾

Consolidation in the target market; and

◾

Current asset composition.


W W W . I S S G O V E R N A N C E . C O M		D-77			77 of 81

LOGO

Change in Fund’s Subclassification

General Recommendation: Vote case-by-case on changes in a fund’s sub-classification, considering the following factors:

◾

Potential competitiveness;

◾

Current and potential returns;

◾

Risk of concentration;

◾

Consolidation in target industry.

Business Development Companies—Authorization to Sell Shares of Common Stock at a Price below Net Asset Value

General Recommendation: Vote for proposals authorizing the board to issue shares below Net Asset Value (NAV) if:

◾

The proposal to allow share issuances below NAV has an expiration date no more than one year from the date shareholders approve the underlying proposal, as required under the Investment Company Act of 1940;

◾

The sale is deemed to be in the best interests of shareholders by (1) a majority of the company’s independent directors and (2) a majority of the company’s directors who have no financial interest in the issuance; and

◾

The company has demonstrated responsible past use of share issuances by either:

◾

Outperforming peers in its 8-digit GICS group as measured by one- and three-year median TSRs; or

◾

Providing disclosure that its past share issuances were priced at levels that resulted in only small or moderate discounts to NAV and economic dilution to existing non-participating shareholders.

Disposition of Assets/Termination/Liquidation

General Recommendation: Vote case-by-case on proposals to dispose of assets, to terminate or liquidate, considering the following factors:

◾

Strategies employed to salvage the company;

◾

The fund’s past performance;

◾

The terms of the liquidation.

Changes to the Charter Document

General Recommendation: Vote case-by-case on changes to the charter document, considering the following factors:

◾

The degree of change implied by the proposal;

◾

The efficiencies that could result;

◾

The state of incorporation;

◾

Regulatory standards and implications.

Vote against any of the following changes:

◾

Removal of shareholder approval requirement to reorganize or terminate the trust or any of its series;

◾

Removal of shareholder approval requirement for amendments to the new declaration of trust;


W W W . I S S G O V E R N A N C E . C O M		D-78			78 of 81

LOGO

◾

Removal of shareholder approval requirement to amend the fund’s management contract, allowing the contract to be modified by the investment manager and the trust management, as permitted by the 1940 Act;

◾

Allow the trustees to impose other fees in addition to sales charges on investment in a fund, such as deferred sales charges and redemption fees that may be imposed upon redemption of a fund’s shares;

◾

Removal of shareholder approval requirement to engage in and terminate subadvisory arrangements;

◾

Removal of shareholder approval requirement to change the domicile of the fund.

Changing the Domicile of a Fund

General Recommendation: Vote case-by-case on re-incorporations, considering the following factors:

◾

Regulations of both states;

◾

Required fundamental policies of both states;

◾

The increased flexibility available.

Authorizing the Board to Hire and Terminate Subadvisers Without Shareholder Approval

General Recommendation: Vote against proposals authorizing the board to hire or terminate subadvisers without shareholder approval if the investment adviser currently employs only one subadviser.

Distribution Agreements

General Recommendation: Vote case-by-case on distribution agreement proposals, considering the following factors:

◾

Fees charged to comparably sized funds with similar objectives;

◾

The proposed distributor’s reputation and past performance;

◾

The competitiveness of the fund in the industry;

◾

The terms of the agreement.

Master-Feeder Structure

General Recommendation: Vote for the establishment of a master-feeder structure.

Mergers

General Recommendation: Vote case-by-case on merger proposals, considering the following factors:

◾

Resulting fee structure;

◾

Performance of both funds;

◾

Continuity of management personnel;

◾

Changes in corporate governance and their impact on shareholder rights.


W W W . I S S G O V E R N A N C E . C O M		D-79			79 of 81

LOGO

Shareholder Proposals for Mutual Funds

Establish Director Ownership Requirement

General Recommendation: Generally vote against shareholder proposals that mandate a specific minimum amount of stock that directors must own in order to qualify as a director or to remain on the board.

Reimburse Shareholder for Expenses Incurred

General Recommendation: Vote case-by-case on shareholder proposals to reimburse proxy solicitation expenses. When supporting the dissidents, vote for the reimbursement of the proxy solicitation expenses.

Terminate the Investment Advisor

General Recommendation: Vote case-by-case on proposals to terminate the investment advisor, considering the following factors:

◾

Performance of the fund’s Net Asset Value (NAV);

◾

The fund’s history of shareholder relations;

◾

The performance of other funds under the advisor’s management.


W W W . I S S G O V E R N A N C E . C O M		D-80			80 of 81

LOGO

We empower investors and companies to build for long-term and sustainable growth by providing high-quality data, analytics, and insight.

G E T S T A R T E D W I T H I S S S O L U T I O N S

Email [email protected] or visit www.issgovernance.com for more information.

Founded in 1985, Institutional Shareholder Services group of companies (ISS) empowers investors and companies to build for long-term and sustainable growth by providing high-quality data, analytics and insight. ISS, which is majority owned by Deutsche Bourse Group, along with Genstar Capital and ISS management, is a leading provider of corporate governance and responsible investment solutions, market intelligence, fund services, and events and editorial content for institutional investors and corporations, globally. ISS’ 2,600 employees operate worldwide across 29 global locations in 15 countries. Its approximately 3,400 clients include many of the world’s leading institutional investors who rely on ISS’ objective and impartial offerings, as well as public companies focused on

ESG and governance risk mitigation as a shareholder value enhancing measure. Clients rely on ISS’ expertise to help them make informed investment decisions. This document and all of the information contained in it, including without limitation all text, data, graphs, and charts (collectively, the “Information”) is the property of Institutional Shareholder Services Inc. (ISS), its subsidiaries, or, in some cases third party suppliers.

The Information has not been submitted to, nor received approval from, the United States Securities and Exchange Commission or any other regulatory body. None of the Information constitutes an offer to sell (or a solicitation of an offer to buy), or a promotion or recommendation of, any security, financial product or other investment vehicle or any trading strategy, and ISS does not endorse, approve, or otherwise express any opinion regarding any issuer, securities, financial products or instruments or trading strategies.

The user of the Information assumes the entire risk of any use it may make or permit to be made of the Information.

ISS MAKES NO EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES OR REPRESENTATIONS WITH RESPECT TO THE INFORMATION AND EXPRESSLY DISCLAIMS ALL IMPLIED WARRANTIES (INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF ORIGINALITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, NON-INFRINGEMENT, COMPLETENESS, MERCHANTABILITY, AND FITNESS for A PARTICULAR PURPOSE) WITH RESPECT TO ANY OF THE INFORMATION.

Without limiting any of the foregoing and to the maximum extent permitted by law, in no event shall ISS have any liability regarding any of the Information for any direct, indirect, special, punitive, consequential (including lost profits), or any other damages even if notified of the possibility of such damages. The foregoing shall not exclude or limit any liability that may not by applicable law be excluded or limited.


W W W . I S S G O V E R N A N C E . C O M		D-81			81 of 81