In its deliberations, the Board did not identify any single factor as being determinative. Rather, the Board’s approvals were based on each Director’s business judgment after a comprehensive consideration of the information as a whole. Individual Directors may have weighed certain factors differently and assigned varying degrees of materiality to information considered by the Board. The Independent Directors were assisted throughout the evaluation process by independent legal counsel.
Based upon its review of the Agreements and the information provided to it, the Board concluded that each Agreement was reasonable in light of the services performed, fees charged and such other matters as the Directors considered relevant in the exercise of their business judgment. The principal factors and conclusions that formed the basis for the Directors’ determinations to approve the continuation of the Agreements are discussed below.
Nature, Extent and Quality of Services
The Board considered the nature, extent and quality of services provided and to be provided to the Fund by ECM and the Sub-Advisers (each, an “adviser”). Among other things, the Board considered, as applicable, each adviser’s organizational history and ownership, personnel, experience, resources and performance track record, its ability to provide or obtain such services as may be necessary in managing, acquiring and disposing of investments on behalf of the Fund, and its ability to provide research and to obtain and evaluate the economic, statistical and financial data relevant to the investment policies of the Fund. With respect to personnel, the Board noted that ECM’s affiliate, Empower Retirement, LLC (“Empower”) provides employees, including various management professionals, who provide services on behalf of ECM - which does not have its own employees - pursuant to an agreement between ECM and Empower. (Empower is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Empower of America; references herein to personnel, services, activities and resources of ECM should be understood generally as including Empower.)
The Board reviewed the qualifications, education, experience, tenure and responsibilities of, and the reporting lines and backup plans for, the senior personnel serving the Fund and the portfolio management teams responsible for the day-to-day management of the Fund, as well as each adviser’s efforts to attract, retain and motivate capable personnel to serve the Fund. In addition, the Board considered, as applicable, each adviser’s reputation for management of its investment strategies, its investment decision-making process, its practices regarding the selection and compensation of brokers and dealers for the execution of portfolio transactions and the procedures it uses for obtaining best execution of portfolio transactions.
In addition, the Board considered each adviser’s overall financial condition and ability to carry out its obligations to the Fund and the organization’s technical resources and operational capabilities, including, with respect to ECM, its investment administration functions, fund accounting services and financial reporting, as well as the controls, internal audit reviews and third-party assessments relating to such operations and services. Also considered by the Board was each organization’s disaster recovery procedures, cybersecurity program and/or controls relating to enterprise resiliency, noting - as to ECM - prior discussions with and presentations by ECM’s Chief Information Security Officer. With respect to ECM, the Board also took into account various organizational developments, including recent acquisitions by Empower and related integration initiatives, as well as recent and planned enhancements, such as progress on the implementation of an enhanced trade order management system and other similar projects.
As part of its assessment of the nature, extent and quality of services, the Board evaluated information regarding each adviser’s regulatory and compliance environment and compliance policies and procedures. The Board considered ECM’s compliance program resources and history, reports from the Chief Compliance Officer (“CCO”) about ECM’s oversight of compliance with applicable laws and regulations and compliance-related resources devoted by ECM in support of the Fund’s obligations pursuant to Rule 38a-1 under the 1940 Act (the “Compliance Rule”). The Board noted the CCO’s assessment that each Sub-Adviser’s compliance program appears to be reasonably designed to comply with the requirements of the Compliance Rule. The Board also considered ECM’s efforts generally to ensure that third-party programs and vendors used to service the Fund - including for purposes of regulatory compliance support - are monitored effectively.
Consideration also was given to the fact that the Board meets with representatives of each Sub-Adviser and ECM every year to discuss portfolio management strategies and performance. Additionally, the quality of each adviser’s communications with the Board, as well as the adviser’s responsiveness to the Board, were taken into account. Also considered was each adviser’s response to market volatility, changing circumstances in the mutual fund industry and investor sentiment, regulatory