Pensions Committee

Minutes PENSIONS COMMITTEE 25 September 2024 Meeting held at Committee Room 5 - Civic Centre Committee Members Present: Councillors Reeta Chamdal (Chair), Kaushik Banerjee (Vice-Chair), Stuart Mathers and Tony Burles LBH Officers Present: Tunde Adekoya, Finance Manager – Pensions & Governance Richard Ennis, Corporate Director of Finance and Section 151 Officer James Lake, Director of Pensions, Treasury & Statutory Accounts Anisha Teji, Senior Democratic Services Officer Jack Francis-Kent – Pension Board Member and Principal Internal Auditor Also Present: Marian George, Independent Adviser Andy Lowe, Hampshire County Council Andrew Singh, Isio Sunny Jheeta,lsio Christophe Osborne – LCIV Silvia Knott-Martin - LCIV Rodger Hackett – Chair of Pensions Board 73. APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE (Agenda Item 1) There were no apologies for absence. 74. DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST IN MATTERS COMING BEFORE THIS MEETING (Agenda Item 2) None. 75. MINUTES OF THE MEETING - 5 JUNE 2024 (Agenda Item 3) RESOLVED: That the Committee agreed the minutes from the meeting on 5 June 2024 as an accurate record. 76. TO CONFIRM THAT ITEMS MARKED PART I WILL BE CONSIDERED IN PUBLIC AND THOSE MARKED PART II WILL BE CONSIDERED IN PRIVATE (Agenda Item 4) It was confirmed that agenda items 5 – 9 would be considered in Part I and agenda items 10 – 12 would be considered in Part II. 77. ADMINISTRATION REPORT (Agenda Item 5) The Finance Manager – Pensions & Governance i ntroduced the Pensions Administration & Performance report. The report highlighted a 100% KPI and a 4.5% increase in portal sign-ups from 30.95% to 44.5%, along with a reduction in backlog cases from 4158 to 524. Cyber security penetration testing in Jul y identified one high vulnerability, which Hampshire County Council (HCC) intended to fix by December, while twice -yearly testing had resulted in fewer vulnerabilities. User experience improvements included email acknowledgments for portal logins and form processing. The annual benefit statement and employer benchmark data had been prepared, showing performance improvement results, with actions to be discussed at the next Pensions Board meeting. An update would be provided to the Committee at the December meeting. In response to questions regarding increased update with employers, it was noted that there had been an improvement in communication with employers and payroll providers, especially with academies and schools. Positive feedback was received from accountancy representatives for schools and academies. Engagement with major suppliers and payroll providers had also improved. It was explained that actions from benchmarking data would involve writing to employers and fining those who are late in sending information. The Committee heard that in terms of McCloud financial liability the actuary had not yet provided an exact figure however previously there was an assumed liability of £3,000,000 on a £1.3 billion fund. New legislation had been introduced and the timeline for knowing the exact costs was uncertain. It was noted that there were layers of security in place, including prevention bots and regular penetration testing to manage cyber security threats and further discussion would take place at the next Pensions Board meeting. RESOLVED: That the Pensions Committee noted the Administration update. 78. INVESTMENT STRATEGY AND FUND MANAGER PERFORMANCE - PART I (Agenda Item 6) The Finance Manager – Pensions & Governance introduced the Investments Strategy and Fund Manager Performance report and highlighted the new dashboard produced collaboratively by officers. The dashboard was designed to be more user -friendly and had resulted in significant cost savings. It was reported that the headline funding level was now at 120%, with assets up to 1.38 billion. The performance of the fund in the quarter under review was 2%, which was 0.2% behind the benchmark. The one -year performance was 12.5%, which was 0.5% ahead of its benchmark. The three and five -year returns were 3.6% and 4.0% annualised, respectively, against a 4.1% return target in the funding strategy statement. It was agreed that a glossary of acronyms would be circulated to Members. During Member discussions further information wa s provided on third Quarter Performance noting that the LCIV Global offer growth fund, managed by Bailey Gifford, had underperformed. It was explained that the market had been driven by a few information technology stocks in the US and equity managers foun d it difficult to outperform the market due to the concentration of these stocks. Despite this many concerns had been addressed, risk was being managed and there was continued monitoring. The Committee considered the status and future plans for infrastru cture investments particularly focusing on the LCIV Infrastructure Fund and other related fund. Members also discussed the distribution and reinvestment of funds from Macquarie infrastructure funds, which were nearing the end of their life. RESOLVED: That the Committee noted the funding and performance update. 79. RESPONSIBLE INVESTMENT (Agenda Item 7) The Director of Pensions, Treasury and Statutory Accounts introduced the item on the Responsible Investments Update. The report provided information on how managers entrusted with the investing Pension Fund assets were implementing their Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) policies and demonstrated their commitment to ensuring it was a cogent part of their investment process. RESOLVED: That that the Pensions Committee: 1. Noted the fund managers’ ESG activities and compliance efforts. 2. Noted LCIV & LAPFF activities. 80. RISK REGISTER REPORT (Agenda Item 8) The Director of Pensions, Treasury and Statutory Accoun ts introduced the item on the Pension Fund Risk Register. It was reported that that the Council's risks had been moved from a spreadsheet to a new risk management system, allowing for better record-keeping and the removal of inactive risks. Eleven risks ha d been retired and three remain actively monitored. In response to Member questions about the funds governance to comply with certain requirements, it was noted that the risk was introduced due to the new General Code of Practice by the Pensions Regulator , which included a new set of rules that had to be complied with. A review of the situation was done by September using a tool that produced a report on compliance and a peer review was also being undertaken to address any gaps. The progress would be regularly reported to the Pensions Board. In terms of keeping risks PEN 9 and 10 on the register, officers emphasised the importance of managing risks as part of day -to-day business, especially with member dealings. The key risk was ensuring that there was e nough money in the fund to pay pensions and managing cash flow. Members agreed to continue monitoring the situation and added risks 9 and 10 as active risks. This would be reviewed at the December meeting. RESOLVED: That the Pensions Committee: 1. Considered and agreed the Risk Register in terms of the approach, the specific risks identified and the measures being taken to mitigate those current risks. 2. Noted the revised format and agreed the retired risks and those which remained open. 3. Agreed to add risk PENs 9 & 10 as active risks. 81. GOVERNANCE (Agenda Item 9) The Committee considered the Governance report which included the work plan and governance updates. The workplan outlined future discussion items. Members discussed training and assessment updates. The Committee discussed officer workload and the need to achieve full compliance with the new requirements. A joint training session on equality, diversity, and inclusion was suggested, with plans for separate sessions due to scheduling conflicts. RESOLVED: That the Committee: 1. Noted the dates for Pensions Committee meetings. 2. Made suggestions for future agenda items, working practices and / or reviews. 3. Noted Committee’s Continuous Professional Development update 4. Agreed updated Communications Policy 5. Agreed updated Reporting Breaches Policy 6. Noted GCoP Update 82. INVESTMENT PART II - STRATEGY REVIEW AND MANAGER UPDATES (Agenda Item 10) This item was discussed as a Part II item without the press or public present as the information under discussion contained confidential or exempt information as defined by law in the Local Government (Access to Information) Act 1985. This was because it discussed ‘information relating to the financial or business affairs of any part icular person (including the authority holding that information)’ (paragraph 3 of the schedule to the Act). The Director of Pensions, Treasury and Statutory Accounts and Finance Manager – Pensions and Governance presented the Part II Investment update. The report detailed the implementation of the investment strategy of the Hillingdon Pension Fund and Members considered key local authority fund statistics. RESOLVED: That the Pensions Committee agreed recommendations 1 – 5 as listed in the confidential report. 83. ACTUARY CONTRACT EXTENSION (Agenda Item 11) This item was discussed as a Part II item without the press or public present as the information under discussion contained confidential or exempt information as defined by law in the Local Government (Access to Information) Act 1985. This was because it discussed ‘information relating to the financial or business affairs of any particular person (including the authority holding that information)’ (paragraph 3 of the schedule to the Act). The Director of Pensions, Treasury and Statutory Accounts and Finance Manager – Pensions and Governance presented report on the Actuary Contract Extension. RESOLVED: That the Committee agreed the recommendation as detailed in the report. 84. GUARANTEED MINIMUM PENSION (GMP) (Agenda Item 12) This item was discussed as a Part II item without the press or public present as the information under discussion contained confidential or exempt information as defined by law in the Local Government (Access to Information) Act 1985. This was because it discussed ‘information relating to the financial or business affairs of any particular person (including the authority holding that information)’ (paragraph 3 of the schedule to the Act). The Director of Pensions, Treasury and Statutory Accounts and Finance Manager – Pensions and Governance presented the Guaranteed Minimum Pensions GMP report which was considered in Part II. Members discussed the report and agreed the resolution listed in the Part II minutes. RESOLVED: That the Pensions Committee agreed the recommendation listed in the Part II minutes. The meeting, which commenced at 5.00 pm, closed at 7.22 pm. These are the minutes of the above meeting. For more information on any of the resolutions please contact Anisha Teji on ateji@hillingdon.gov.uk. Circulation of these minutes is to Councillors, Officers, the Press and Members of the Public.

Classification: Public Pensions Committee 10 December 2024 Pensions Administration & Performance Item 5 Committee Pensions Committee Contact Officers Tunde Adekoya – Finance Papers with this report Hampshire Administration Report September 2024 – on shared drive REASON FOR ITEM The provision of administration services for the Hillingdon Pension Fund is delivered in partnership with Hampshire County Council (HCC) through Hampshire Pension Service (HPS) under a section 101 agreement. The agreement includes Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) which are generally consistent with national standards. The purpose of this report is to update the Pension s Committee on pensions administration activities and the performance of the administration provider against the agreed indicators. RECOMMENDATIONS 1. That the Pensions Committee note the administration update INFORMATION Pensions administration services are provided by Hampshire County Council (HCC) under a section 101 agreement. The attached report provides an update of HCC’s performance as of J une 2024. Historic monthly reports are included in the member shared drive. Past key performance indicators show 100% against all indicators, for each month since the October 2021 inception. Member portal registrations continue to improve month-on-month and as of 30 September 2024 show 46.46%, which is ahead of the exiting SCC position of 30.95% Inherited backlog cases continue to be cleared wit h total cases reducing from 4,158 at inception, to 378 as of 30 September 2024. Other key updates include:  Acceptable telephone call handling performance.  67.8% of pensioners have either signed up to the portal or made an election for paper correspondence.  Cyber Security: Next vulnerability testing scheduled for week commencing 2nd of December 2024. Classification: Public Pensions Committee 10 December 2024  115 of 115 annual returned received,97 by deadline (30th April), 15 received a month later and 3 employers submitted their returns significantly later.  99.28% of Active Benefit Statements Produced by end of August 2024 and 99.99% of Deferred Benefit Statements produced in the same period, in line with statutory deadlines.  The table below details the key milestones for each step of the 2024 year-end process. McCloud  The LGA have alerted us to a calculation error with Club transfer out quotations issued by the Teachers’ Pension Scheme (TPS), for members protected by the McCloud remedy – HPF transfers team have reviewed the quotes received from TPS, of which there are only a handful across all schemes they administer and found that they had already queried the figures provided.  On 20th September, the LGA issued a McCloud public service pensions history form, and set out two approaches for administrators – send the form to all scheme members and ask that all members respond, regardless of whether they have prior public service pension scheme membership; or send the form to all scheme members and only request responses from those who have prior public service pension scheme membership – we intend to adopt the second approach, but are considering how best to issue the forms. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS Financial implications are included in the body of the report. LEGAL IMPLICATIONS Legal implications have been included in the body of the report. Completed/Due Task 05/10/2024 Latest date Pensions Savings Statements sent – will be produced for each employer as ABS have been completed. 31/10/2024 Latest date e-comms sent to members with benefit statement available on Member Portal. 30/11/2024 Life Certificates issued to Overseas Pensioners. 30/11/2024 TPR Scheme Return (expecting TPR to return to November deadline this year) 30/11/2024 Active and Deferred member newsletters.

Monthly administration report September 2024 1 Contents 1. Summary ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ . 2 2. Background ................................ ................................ ................................ ............................. 2 3. Membership ................................ ................................ ................................ ............................ 2 4. Administration performance................................ ................................ ................................ .... 3 5. Call and email volumes ................................ ................................ ................................ ............ 5 6. Online services ................................ ................................ ................................ ........................ 6 7. Employer Services ................................ ................................ ................................ ................... 7 8. 2024 End of Year timetable................................ ................................ ................................ ...... 8 9. Unprocessed historic casework ................................ ................................ ................................ 9 10. Preserved Refunds ................................ ................................ ................................ ................. 10 11. McCloud ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ 10 12. Pensions Dashboard Programme (PDP) ................................ ................................ .................. 11 13. 2024/2025 Software Development ................................ ................................ ........................ 11 14. Audit ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ..... 12 15. Scheme legislation updates ................................ ................................ ................................ ... 12 16. Employer and Member Communications ................................ ................................ ............... 13 17. Compliments and Complaints ................................ ................................ ................................ 13 2 1. Summary 1.1. The purpose of this report is to update the London Borough of Hillingdon with the current position of their local government pension scheme membership; performance against service level agreements and to provide other important and current information about the administration of the London Borough of Hillingdon Local Government Pension Fund. 2. Background 2.1. Hampshire Pension Services administer the Local Government Pension Scheme (LGPS) on behalf of the London Borough of Hillingdon (LBH) with effect from 27 September 2021. 2.2. Hampshire Pension Services also administer the LGPS for Hampshire County Council, West Sussex County Council and Westminster City Council; the Fire Pension Schemes for both West Sussex and Hampshire, and the Police Pension Schemes for Hampshire. 3. Membership 3.1. The table below details the number of members against status for each of the Local Government pension schemes and is correct as of the date this report was prepared. To support the monitoring of change in membership numbers, the table now compares the membership detailed in the OBC with the current month to show the total growth in membership since the start of the partnership. Active* Deferred Pensioner Preserved Refunds** Total OBC 9,020 11,400 7,036 - 27,456 September 2024 9,117 12,551 8,545 1,687 31,900 Growth 1.07% 10.09% 21.44% - 16.18% *Leavers which are waiting to be processed are included in the active membership. However, the OBC deferred figure included both 2,045 leavers waiting to be processed and 1,256 preserved refunds. **The preserved refund members are included for completeness but are not counted for the purposes of reporting membership to the Pensions Regulator and DLUHC (previously MHCLG). 3 4. Administration performance 4.1. Hampshire Pension Services’ performance against agreed service level agreements for key processes are monitored monthly. They are calculated based on the number of working days taken to complete the process and are adjusted for time that we are unable to proceed, due to requiring input from the member or third party. 4.2. The table below shows performance from 1st September – 30th September 2024. The service level agreement (SLA) for all casework is 15 working days, except for deferred benefits which are processed in 30 working days, and rejoiners which are processed in 20 working days. Time to Complete Type of Case 0-5 days 6-10 days 11- 15 days 16- 20 days 21- 30 days 31-40 days Total % completed on time Average days to complete process Total Cases (previous month) % completed on time (previous month) Active Retirement 12 13 1 0 0 0 26 100.00% 6 12 100.00% Deferred Retirement 7 27 5 0 0 0 39 100.00% 8 32 100.00% Estimates 2 14 1 0 0 0 17 100.00% 8 40 100.00% Refunds 1 22 0 0 0 0 23 100.00% 8 24 100.00% Deferred Benefits 6 2 0 5 103 0 116 100.00% 24 108 100.00% Interfunds and Transfers In 6 2 5 0 0 0 13 100.00% 9 9 100.00% Interfunds and Transfers Out 2 12 1 0 0 0 15 100.00% 8 12 100.00% Divorce Quotes 2 2 3 0 0 0 7 100.00% 8 8 100.00% Divorce Actuals 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 100.00% 0 100.00% Rejoiners/Aggregation 5 3 2 6 0 0 16 100.00% 11 19 100.00% Deaths 4 0 5 0 0 0 9 100.00% 8 7 GRAND TOTAL 47 97 23 11 103 0 281 100.00% 271 100.00% 4 4.3. Due to current software restrictions, the following casework can only be reported as total numbers processed in the month. Type of Case Total number of cases in the month New Joiners 38 New beneficiary benefits in payment 5 4.4. The table below shows outstanding work as of 30th September 2024. The time outstanding reflects the time from date of receipt of the initiating request, and includes time whilst cases are on hold pending further information. Work which has been pended is monitored by the team and is also pushed for review by the system at pre-determined intervals. This means that all pended casework is regularly reviewed, and actions taken to ensure it can be moved and processed. 4.5. Those cases which currently exceed the agreed service level agreement are on hold waiting for information from the member, their employer or another party and the time taken to process will be adjusted once the work has been completed. *Estimates include all ‘quote’ calculations for retirement, transfers, divorce, refunds, dependants quotes and interfunds. Time Outstanding Type of Case 0-5 days 6-10 days 11-15 days 16-20 days 21-30 days 31+ days Total Total Outstanding (previous month) Active Retirement 0 1 0 0 0 2 3 20 Deferred Retirement 6 2 1 1 3 9 22 37 Estimates* 12 7 7 3 5 47 81 114 Refunds 3 4 0 0 1 0 8 10 Deferred Benefits 3 11 14 3 40 61 132 166 Interfunds and Transfers In 2 4 4 1 6 118 135 135 Interfunds and Transfers Out 3 1 6 0 1 3 14 1 Divorce Quotes 1 2 0 0 0 3 6 7 Divorce Actuals 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Rejoiners/Aggregation 1 2 9 2 6 14 34 49 Deaths 1 1 3 0 4 27 36 34 GRAND TOTAL 32 34 44 10 66 282 468 573 5 4.6. We have included a tracker below which monitors the movement in work outstanding month on month. 5. Call and email volumes 5.1. The table below sets out the call statistics for Hillingdon for the month of September 2024: Calls Received 122 Calls Answered 122 Calls Answered Percentage 100.00% Calls Abandoned 0 Abandoned Percentage 0.00% Average Wait Time 67 seconds Calls Answered Within 5 Minutes 116 Calls answered waiting for longer than 5 mins 6 Percentage Of Calls Answered Within 5 Minutes 95.00% 5.2. Abandoned calls are caused by the member ending the call before we can answer, and in some cases, this can be because they have heard one of our automatic messages asking them to visit our website or Portal. 5.3. The total number of calls received were 3,533 and the statistics above are included in this number. 5.4. Our Pension Customer Support Team (PCST) record the number of emails received into our main Pension Services inbox. The table below shows the combined (Hampshire, West Sussex, Westminster, and Hillingdon) volumes, for the current and previous month. 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700Total cases Work in progress month on month tracker Active Retirement Deferred Retirement Estimates Refunds Deferred Benefits Interfunds and Transfers In Interfunds and Transfers Out Divorce Quotes Divorce Actuals Rejoiners/Aggregation Deaths 6 5.5. Of the emails responded to by PCST, 154 of these were for Hillingdon members. 5.6. In September 2024 we received 59 ‘My Messages’ from Hillingdon members via the member portal, which are dealt with via our normal 5 working day response time. 6. Online services Member Portal 6.1. Active, Deferred, Preserved Refund and Pensioner members of the Hillingdon Local Government pension scheme have the ability to register for our Member Portal and update their personal details, death grant nominations, and bank details; securely view annual benefit statements, payslips and P60’s; run online voluntary retirement estimates; and complete their membership option, retirement declaration and refund claim forms online. 6.2. The table below shows the total number of current registrations for each status as of 30th September 2024. 6.3. The table below sets out the number of Member Portal log ins, for the current month and previous month for comparison. Month Active Deferred Pensioner August 2024 2,555 2,409 530 September 2024 817 462 368 Month Total Emails Received Response from PCST Forms and Emails Forwarded to another team* August 2024 6,097 5,370 765 September 2024 8,051 6,926 1,125 Status Registrations to date % of total membership Registrations to 31/08/2024 % of total membership Active 5,057 55.47% 5,047 54.22% Deferred 5,062 40.33% 4,968 39.81% Pensioner 3,918 45.85% 3,860 45.44% TOTAL 14,037 46.46% 13,875 45.82% 7 6.4. The table below shows the number of opt outs of the Member Portal for each membership status. Comparing the number of registrations and opt outs to the total membership allows us to identify the number of members who have not engaged via either route. Cyber Security 6.5. Our next external penetration testing will be booked with Intertek and carried out the week commencing 2nd December 2024 – following this testing a report will be provided to our IT department who will review the vulnerabilities identified and liaise with Civica and the Systems team within Hampshire Pension Services, to address them. 7. Employer Services Employer training 7.1. There were no employer training sessions provided in September; the next bitesize sessions are due to be held in November. New and Exiting employers 7.2. 117 active scheme employers as of 30th September 2024. 7.3. There are currently 15 pending admitted bodies and 2 possible pending academy conversions. 7.4. There are currently 5 employers changing payroll provider effecting 603 members. Annual returns and Employer Performance 7.5. Reports were issued to the fund in September which summarised the following outcomes: • In 2024, there were 115 active scheme employers where an annual return was due by 30th April Engagement Active Deferred Pensioner Total Portal 5,057 5,062 3,918 14,037 Opt out 36 125 1,882 2,043 No contact 4,024 7,364 2,745 14,133 Total 9,117 12,551 8,545 30,213 8 • 97 returns were received by the deadline (up from 81 in 2023), with 15 received in the following month. 3 employers provided their return significantly late (down from 8 in 2023). • 1,231 data queries were sent to employers which compares to 1,836 in 2023 and 2,257 in 2022. This number excludes any queries sent on pay. • As at 4th September 2024, 73 queries remain outstanding across 13 employers. • There are 66 employers (57%) who have been benchmarked with “major data quality issues” (red rating), this is down from 94 (80%) in 2023. 7.6. The report was followed up with a meeting with the fund in September to review these outcomes and actions to be taken to sustain and improve for next year. Employer performance letters have been agreed with the fun and will be sent out in early October. 8. 2024 End of Year timetable 8.1. The table below details the key milestones for each step of the 2024 year-end process. Completed Task 05/10/2024 Latest date Pensions Savings Statements sent – will be produced for each employer as ABS have been completed. 31/10/2024 Latest date e-comms sent to members with benefit statement available on Member Portal. 30/11/2024 Life Certificates issued to Overseas Pensioners. 30/11/2024 TPR Scheme Return (expecting TPR to return to November deadline this year) 30/11/2024 Active and Deferred member newsletters. 8.2. Deferred Benefit Statements – The production of deferred benefit statements has been completed. 9 8.3. Active Benefit Statements – The production of active benefit statements has been ongoing, throughout September, and the current position is as follows. 8.4. The 61 cases outstanding need further investigation, or we are awaiting responses from employers. 8.5. We have completed our 2023/24 annual allowance calculations and have sent Pensions Savings Statements (PSS) to 3 members who have exceeded this years’ £60,000 allowance – all PSS were sent by 6th October 2024. 9. Unprocessed historic casework 9.1. At the point of onboarding, there were 3,840 unprocessed leavers – the date of leaving for these members was prior to 1st September 2021. 9.2. As of 1st September 2024, the unprocessed leavers position is as follows. Total Number of Statements Required Total Number of Statements Produced Total Number of Statements Missing Percentage of Statements Produced Total Number Of Statements Produced as at 31st August Total Number Of Statements Missing as at 31st August Percentage Of Statements Produced as at 31st August 12,134 12,134 0 100.00% 12,133 1 99.99% Total Number of Statements Required Total Number of Statements Produced Total Number of Statements Missing Percentage of Statements Produced Total Number Of Statements as of 31st August Total Number Of Statements as of 31st August Percentage Of Statements Produced as of 31st August 9,770 9,709 61 99.38% 9,700 70 99.28% Unprocessed Leavers transferred from Surrey, at point of onboarding. 3,840 Additional unprocessed leavers identified since onboarding 318 Total unprocessed leavers 4,158 Leavers processed, and records finalised by HPS 3,780 10 *Included in the ‘Leavers processed, and records finalised by HPS’. 9.3. Of the 378 cases outstanding, 268 of these are with employers who Dataplan provide the payroll service for – we continue to encourage Dataplan to respond to our queries. 9.4. The top 5 employers with outstanding leavers are as follows: 10. Preserved Refunds 10.1. We have written to all members with a preserved refund, who left prior to 1 April 2014 – as their refund is not limited to being paid within 5 years. The current position of this project is as follows: 11. McCloud 11.1. The LGA have alerted us to a calculation error with Club transfer out quotations issued by the Teachers’ Pension Scheme (TPS), for members protected by the McCloud remedy – our Leavers processed in the last month* 63 Outstanding leavers to be processed 378 Employer Number of leavers outstanding Swakeleys Academy 21 Harlington School 13 William Byrd Primary School 10 Eden Academy – Moorcroft 10 GN Acad Trust - Guru Nanak 10 Pre-1 April 2014 preserved refund members 72 Number of members sent letters 72 Claim forms received 5 Refunds processed 5 11 transfers team have reviewed the quotes received from TPS, of which there are only a handful across all schemes we administer and found that they had already queried the figures provided. 11.2. On 20th September, the LGA issued a McCloud public service pensions history form, and set out two approaches for administrators – send the form to all scheme members and ask that all members respond, regardless of whether they have prior public service pension scheme membership; or send the form to all scheme members and only request responses from those who have prior public service pension scheme membership – we intend to adopt the second approach, but are considering how best to issue the forms. 11.3. From October, we will be revisiting the service records which we were unable to finalise ahead of this year’s benefit statement production – a combination of poor quality or no service/break data being provided by the members previous or current employer, will require us to adopt the LGA guidance that sets out how to calculate service using the member’s full time and actual pensionable pay. 12. Pensions Dashboard Programme (PDP) 12.1. After discussion with Civica and review of the PASA guidance for data matching, we are finalising our policy for full and partial matches, and will be sharing the documented policy with Partners, alongside an updated Pensions Dashboard report, in November. 12.2. We previously contacted all AVC providers, requesting a list of the members who have an AVC fund, so we can reconcile this with UPM, and confirmation of which of the following options they intend to adopt. • Direct connection to the eco system. • Via a third party and return data via a separate connection to the one used by HPS. • Provide data to HPS and use our connection. 12.3. All AVC providers have at least acknowledged our email, and we will be following up with those who haven’t provided detailed responses, in October. 13. 2024/2025 Software Development 13.1. We have adopted the same approach for Deferred Retirement and Deferment cases from September, whereby members receive a GOV.UK email confirmation to confirm that their retirement/deferment has been processed. 13.2. The Employer Services team have commenced testing of the Monthly Returns software – a number of limitations have been identified, which will generate unnecessary and additional work, so we are working with Civica to understand if the software can be configured to work 12 alongside our other established processes – testing will continue until early November, and a more detailed update will be provided to Partners once we have a clear understanding of how the monthly returns process will work for both employers and HPS. 14. Audit 14.1. The position of our 2024/25 pension audits are as follows: Audit Area Timing Pension leavers Audit of the controls to ensure accurate, prompt and complete administration of pension leavers, including the production of on-going annual benefit statements within agreed timescales, by HPS. In progress Pension starters Review of the control framework to support appropriate, complete and prompt admission of new starters to the various pension schemes administered by HPS. Quarter 3 Cyber Security To provide assurance over the cyber security arrangements within HPS. Quarter 3 Pensions payroll and benefit calculations Annual review to provide assurance that Hampshire Pension Services’ (HPS) systems and controls ensure that:- • Lump sum and on-going pension payments are calculated correctly, are valid and paid to the correct recipients; • All changes to on-going pensions are accurate and timely; • Pension payroll runs are accurate, complete, timely and secure with all appropriate deductions made and paid over to the relevant bodies. Quarter 3/4 15. Scheme legislation updates 15.1. Legislation updates that have been received during September 2024 for the Local Government Pension Scheme, are detailed in Appendix 1, including any actions that Hampshire Pension Services have taken. 13 16. Employer and Member Communications 16.1. Employer communications - There were no employer communications issued in September. 16.2. Member communications – There were no member communications issued in September. 16.3. Data Protection Breaches – There were no data protection breaches identified in September. 17. Compliments and Complaints 17.1. We received one complaint in September from a member of the LBH LGPS, further detail can be found in Appendix 2. 17.2. We received three compliments in September from members of the LBH LGPS. Further information can be found in Appendix 3. 14

Classification: Public Pensions Committee 10 December 2024 INVESTMENT STRATEGY and FUND MANAGER PERFORMANCE (Part I) ITEM 6 Committee Pensions Committee Officer Reporting Babatunde Adekoya, Finance Papers with this report LCIV Executive Summary 30 September 2024 Hymans Interim Valuation Report 30 September 2024 NT performance report on shared drive LCIV Performance reporting on shared drive HEADLINES The Fund officers and LCIV team have worked collaboratively to produce ‘easy to digest’, dashboard executive summary which draws out highlights of the performance and funding position as well as providing an easy access format for additional investment related information and statistics. Attached is the report for quarter ending 30 September 2024 for review and comment. RECOMMENDATIONS It is recommended that Pensions Committee: 1. Note the funding and performance update. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS The financial implications are contained within the body of the report. The executive summary report is provided by LCIV without charge. LEGAL IMPLICATIONS There are no legal implications in the report. Classification: Public Pensions Committee 10 December 2024

Quarterly Executive Summary: Hillingdon Working together to deliver sustainable prosperity for the communities that count on us all Quarterly Executive Summary 30 June 2024 - 30 September 2024 120% £1.14bn The Funding level remained unchanged this quarter The liabilities increased by £20m over the quarter. Funding and Liabilities1 Pension Assets 1.39bn 0.92% market value this quarter. increase in market value this quarter 2 Investment Performance 1.3% (0.5)% The Fund returned 1.3% this quarter. The Fund underperformed its benchmark by 0.5% this quarter 3 Assumptions to calculate liabilities 31 Mar 2022 30 Sep 2024 88 120Funding Level (%) (171) 220Deficit/Surplus (£m) • Ongoing OngoingFunding basis • 4.1 6.3Discount rate (%p.a.) • 2.7 2.3Pension increases (%p.a.) 1431000000 2150 1,431 1,210 1,070 1,100 1,140 1,060 1,050 1,170 1,230 1,120 1,140 1,263 1,180 1,149 1,150 1,182 1,195 1,184 1,248 1,345 1,379 1,391 88 98 107 105 104 113 113 107 109 120 120 900 1100 1300 1500 1700 1900 2100 £(m) 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 Percentage Mar-22 Jun-22 Sep-22 Dec-22 Mar-23 Jun-23 Sep-23 Dec-23 Mar -24 Jun-24 Sep-24 Liabilit ies £m (LHS) Assets Value £m (LHS) Funding Level % (RHS) Salary increases are assumed to be 0.5% above pension increases, plus an additional promotional salary scale. • Discount rate methodology: Expected returns on the entire strategy over 20 years with a 70% likelihood. • Pension increase methodology: Expected CPI inflation over 20 years with a 50% likelihood. • Source: Hymans actuarial data. Source: Hymans actuarial data. Funding Level By Progression Source: Northern Trust custody data Source: Northern Trust custody data Source: Hymans actuarial data. Page 1 of 9 Quarterly Executive Summary: Hillingdon Working together to deliver sustainable prosperity for the communities that count on us allPerformance: Total Fund vs Benchmark Hillingdon 1.3 8.2 14.6 3.5 4.1 6.5 1.8 8.9 14.0 4.6 5.7 6.7 -0.5 -0.7 0.6 -1.1 -1.6 -0.2 -5 0 5 10 15 20 % 3 months YTD 1 year 3 years 5 years Since Incept ion Hillingdon Benchmark Relative Performance Manager Contribution to Total Return - Q3 2024 0.68 0.16 0.03 0.11 0.35 -0.27 0.15 0.04 0.08 -0.10 -0.04 -0.00 0.18 -0.06 -0.00 0.07 0.00 1.36 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 LGIM - World Developed Equity LGIM - Future World Fund LCIV Global Alpha Growth Paris Aligned LGIM - UK Index Linked Gilts LCIV MAC Fund AEW UK UBS Property LGIM - Real Estate Long Icome LCIV Absolute Return Fund Blackstone Dislocation Fund Adam Street LGT Capital LCIV Infrastructure Fund Macquarie M&G Investments LCIV Private Debt Fund Permira Credit Total Source: Northern Trust custody data as of 30 September 2024. Returns are gross of fees and annualised for periods greater than 1 year. Source: Northern Trust custody data as of 30 September 2024. Returns are gross of fees. Page 2 of 9 Quarterly Executive Summary: Hillingdon Working together to deliver sustainable prosperity for the communities that count on us allCommentary Market Update – Q3 2024 The third quarter of 2024 was a topsy turvy period in the capital markets. There was a sharp decline in equity markets at the beginning of August, with Japanese stocks at the forefront of the sell off. With inflation trending down, bonds fulfilled their traditional role in helping to offset losses in equity markets. Gold also performed strongly and has continued its strong run. Markets regained their poise quickly, and the early August storm did not have a lasting impact. In September, the U.S. Federal Reserve (the ‘Fed’) cut interest rates for the first time in this monetary policy cycle. This ‘pivot’ was anticipated, but the 0.5% reduction in the reference rate was larger than some had expected. Although the Bank of England decided to hold fire on further cuts in rates in Q3, other central banks did reduce rates by small margins. Late in the third quarter, the Chinese government announced a series of policies intended to encourage investment and consumption and help unlock the capital tied up in the property sector. The first announcements did not have much of an impact, but momentum grew, and the CSI 300 Index of leading Chinese companies surged to a gain of 20% in Sterling terms in September. Sovereign and investment grade bonds performed strongly. Global equities (based on the MSCI World Index) made small gains in Sterling terms, and leadership of the markets shifted away from U.S. technology companies to other sectors and regions, particularly Asia Pacific, and t o value stocks. This was a better environment for stock pickers, and the performance of our actively managed equity funds has improved. The positive outcomes in financial markets in the last 12 months mask the human cost of armed conflict in the Middle East and Europe. There are other geopolitical flash points to monitor, and the period leading up to, and following, the U.S. Presidential election could be volatil e. The risk of sharp, but hopefully short, bursts of volatility was one of the themes highlighted by expert panellists at the London CIV Annual Conference in September. Equity The big American technology companies which are perceived to be the biggest beneficiaries of the proliferation of applications based on artificial intelligence came off the boil in Q3. Given the extent to which these companies had been the key drivers of the 20.5% gain in the MSCI World Index in the year to the end of June 2024, this was an important development. Companies which are more sensitive to the positive trend in interest rates, such as financials, industrials and consumer-facing businesses, outperformed technology companies. Value came back into favour, and emerging markets stocks outpaced ‘Western’ stocks by a big margin, mainly because of the momentum generated by stimulus measures announced by the Chinese government. This rotation in leadership is important because it helps to level the playing field for active managers who must be careful to diversify the sources of exposure to thematic, economic and other drivers when building portfolios. In short, building an active portfolio which is dominated by a small number of stocks which are likely to move in tandem based on news flow and/or shifts in sentiment is not good practice in managing mainstream active strategies. LCIV Global Alpha Growth Paris Aligned Fund performed in line with the MCSI All Country World Index. The Fund made gains of more than 19% for the year ended 30 September ’24 and reduced the shortfalls in performance against their benchmarks over 12 months. We continued to expand the range of products offered to Partner Funds. By the end of October, we launched the LCIV Global Equity Value Fund. This Fund will offer strong responsible investment parameters, alignment to our net zero ambitions and strong value propositions. We have selected Wellington Investment Management as the sub-fund manager for the LCIV Global Equity Value Fund. We believe the selected strategy for this Fund exhibits strong value characteristics and ‘anti-momentum’ bias which complements well the growth tilted active equity strategies our Partners Funds use. Wellington is a household name with a large asset base (over $1 trillion in assets under management as of 30 June 2024) and an Page 3 of 9 Quarterly Executive Summary: Hillingdon Working together to deliver sustainable prosperity for the communities that count on us all institutional mindset. They have demonstrated that they have strong research capabilities, Responsible Investment integration and net-zero commitments aligned with our ambitious targets. In addition, we have been able to negotiate very competitive management fees with this manager. Fixed Income Fixed income funds Sovereign and investment grade credit were strong in the third quarter, benefitting from the decline in yields linked to the improved outlook for inflation, evidenced by the decision by the U.S. Federal Reserve to reduce its reference rate by a full 0.5% in a single move. Spreads on credit instruments, a key indicator of risk in these markets, declined or remained stable after a wobble early in August. The Bloomberg Global Aggregate Credit Index, a good proxy for the performance of high-quality debt, gained 4.7% in Sterling terms in Q3 2024. The Index is up 12.1% over one year, but down 1.5% per annum over three years. This highlights the magnitude of the impact on bond markets of the transition to a new regime for inflation and interest rates which began late in 2021. The LCIV MAC Fund captures exposure to all segments of the credit markets through investment managers offering complementary strategies. This Fund benefitted from the interest rate risk embedded in the investment grade debt held by one of the managers, and by the solid performance of both investment grade and high yield bonds and loans. The 3.8% gain for the LCIV MAC Fund in Q3 2024 pushed the one year return up to 14.3%, 4.3% more than the Sonia +4.5% target. Multi-Asset Exposure to interest rate risk was an important source of profits during the third quarter, through direct exposure to sovereign bonds and credit, and indirect exposure from investments in interest rate sensitive assets, such as infrastructure and property. The other sources of profits varied across the range of Sub-funds, but included commodities, especially gold, defensive equities and currencies. LCIV Absolute Return Fund performed well in late July and early August, when the surge in volatility drove up the value of protection strategies. This Fund also benefited from gains in the Yen and gold. These gains were diluted when markets recovered, but the Sub-fund was up 2.6% in Q3 2024. We are encouraged to see a better trend in performance, but there is still a lot to do to get the three- year (+1.3% per annum) performance record back on track. LCIV Infrastructure Fund – Q2 2024 The Fund remains 80% committed across eight fund investments and is 67% drawn, following new investor commitments over Q1 2024. StepStone, the delegated Investment Manager of the Fund, continue to seek new opportunities to deploy the uncommitted capital with a focus on minimising deployment dilution and yield. The Fund’s net IRR since inception is tracking in line with the Fund’s investment objective at 9%, with each underlying investment performing in line with expectations. The Fund’s 1-year yield is also tracking in line with the investment objective, noting the Fund only began distributing income at the end of the initial four-year ramp-up period. LCIV Private Debt Fund – Q2 2024 The performance of the Fund is not formally assessed against its objective until after the fourth year of the investment period. However, the inception to date IRR is 8.4% above the target of 6-8% and the Fund valuation is ahead of the total contributed capital since inception of £420.1m, reflecting the initial strong performance from the portfolio. The fund's investment period runs until March 2025, there is approximately £120 million in uncommitted capital reserves after netting capital calls with distributions during the ramp up phase. We plan to commit an additional £80 million to the Pemberton Mid-Market Debt Fund IV and £80 million to the Churchill Middle Market Senior Loan Fund V, maintaining a 50:50 regional split between European and US markets. This Fund is now closed to new commitments and London CIV is about to have the first close for LCIV Private Debt Fund II. Page 4 of 9 Quarterly Executive Summary: Hillingdon Working together to deliver sustainable prosperity for the communities that count on us all Manager Performance Asset Class / Fund Name 3 Months (%) 1 Year (%) 3 Years p.a. (%) Since Inception p.a. (%)Weight Fund Benchmark Fund Benchmark Fund Benchmark Fund Benchmark Global Equities 54.3 LGIM - Global Equities 2.5 2.8 23.4 24.3 8.4 8.7 9.6 9.827.3 LGIM - Future World Fund 0.7 0.7 21.8 21.6 8.7 8.4 10.5 10.322.4 LCIV Global Alpha Growth Paris Aligned Fund 0.7 0.9 19.8 23.5 (1.2) 12.3 (0.4) 13.04.5 Property 10.4 UBS Property 2.7 1.2 0.5 1.7 0.0 (0.4) 3.3 3.35.4 AEW UK (5.6) 1.2 4.8 1.7 (1.9) (0.4) 5.7 5.05.0 Multi-Asset Credit 9.4 LCIV MAC Fund 3.7 2.3 14.3 9.7 0.0 0.0 7.5 8.99.4 Index Linked Gilts 7.6 LGIM - UK ILG 1.4 1.4 6.0 6.0 (11.8) (11.8) (1.9) (1.8)7.6 Infrastructure 5.1 LCIV Infrastructure Fund 4.1 2.0 13.3 8.2 10.2 6.5 5.8 5.34.3 Macquarie (7.8) 2.0 (1.0) 8.2 17.6 6.5 9.4 4.30.8 Private Debt 4.9 LCIV Private Debt Fund 1.8 1.5 11.4 6.0 0.0 0.0 7.2 6.04.1 Permira 0.4 2.2 12.2 9.2 8.4 7.5 7.5 5.50.8 M&G Investments (30.6) 2.2 (44.1) 9.2 (0.4) 7.5 1.0 5.30.0 Real Estate Long Income 3.4 LGIM - LPI Income Property 1.2 0.3 3.0 2.7 (2.9) 8.0 (1.0) 6.53.4 Diversified Growth 2.8 LCIV Absolute Return Fund 2.9 1.3 4.7 5.4 1.3 3.4 4.9 1.32.8 Opportunistic Dislocation 1.8 Blackstone Dislocation Fund (5.8) 3.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 (4.2) 7.51.8 Private Equity 0.3 Adam Street (22.0) 1.4 (25.7) 24.5 (13.3) 12.8 5.5 0.00.2 LGT (0.2) 1.4 (1.1) 24.5 (0.5) 12.8 10.0 0.00.1 Source: Northern Trust custody data as of 30 September 2024 Returns are gross of fees and annualised for periods greater than 1 year. Page 5 of 9 Quarterly Executive Summary: Hillingdon Working together to deliver sustainable prosperity for the communities that count on us all Asset Allocation Actual Asset Allocation vs Target Allocation by Asset Class As of 30 September 2024 -4 -2 0 2 4 (%) Cash & Cash Equivalents Private Equity Diversified Growth Opportunist ic Dislocation Real Estate Long Income Private Debt Index Linked Gilts Property Infrastructure Multi-Asset Credit Global Equit ies Source: Northern Trust custody data as of 30 September 2024 Asset Class Actual Asset Allocation (%) 30 September 2024 Actual Asset Allocation (%) 30 September 2024 vs Strategy Asset Allocation (%) Strategic Asset Allocation (%) 31 December 2023 Actual Asset Allocation (%) 30 June 2024 Change in Asset Allocation (%) Quarter on Quarter Global Equities 54 +351 54 0 Multi-Asset Credit 9 -312 9 0 Infrastructure 5 -38 5 0 Property 10 +37 11 (0) Index Linked Gilts 8 +17 8 0 Private Debt 5 -05 5 (0) Real Estate Long Income 3 -25 3 0 Opportunistic Dislocation 2 -35 1 0 Diversified Growth 3 +30 3 (0) Private Equity 0 +00 0 (0) Cash & Cash Equivalents 0 +00 0 (0) Source: Northern Trust custody data as of 30 September 2024 Page 6 of 9 Quarterly Executive Summary: Hillingdon Working together to deliver sustainable prosperity for the communities that count on us allAsset Allocation Changes - Q3 2024 Asset Class Market Value 30 June 2024 (£'m) Net contribution* (£'m) Income (£'m) Fees (£'m) Appreciation (£'m) Market Value 30 September 2024 (£'m) Global Equities - - - 754742 12 Property (1) 1 - 144148 (3) Multi-Asset Credit - 5 - 130126 - Index Linked Gilts - - - 105104 1 Infrastructure 3 1 - 7066 1 Private Debt (3) - - 6871 1 Real Estate Long Income - - - 4847 1 Diversified Growth (7) - - 3945 1 Opportunistic Dislocation 7 - - 2520 (1) Private Equity - - - 45 (1) Cash & Cash Equivalents (3) - - 46 - 1,379 1,392Total (5) 7 11 Source: Northern Trust * Net contributions include cash contributions/distributions, securites/receipts, fee/fee rebates, inter account transfers for consolidations and benefit payments. Copied history of backloaded data may not display the correct contributions/withdrawals creating misrepresentation. Assessment Framework As of 30 September 2024 Asset Class Manager LCIV Global Alpha Growth Paris Aligned Fund Baillie Gifford LCIV Absolute Return Fund Ruffer LCIV MAC Fund Pimco LCIV Infrastructure Fund Stepstone LCIV Private Debt Fund Churchill LCIV Private Debt Fund Pemberton Performance Resourcing Process / Strategy Responsible Investment & Engagement Business Risk Risk Management & Compliance Cost Transparency / Value for Money Best Execution / Liquidity / Deployment Monitoring Status Normal Normal Normal Normal Normal Normal Normal Monitoring Enhanced Monitoring Watch List Source: London CIV. Page 7 of 9 Quarterly Executive Summary: Hillingdon Working together to deliver sustainable prosperity for the communities that count on us all Disclaimer Important information London LGPS CIV, Fourth Floor, 22 Lavington Steet, London, SE1 0NZ Issued by London LGPS CIV Limited, which is authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority number 710618. London CIV is the trading name of London LGPS CIV Limited. Thi s material is for limited distribution and is issued by London LGPS CIV and no other person should rely upon the information contain ed within it. This document is not intended for distribution to, or use by, any person or entity in any jurisdiction or country where such distribution would be unlawful under the laws governing the offer of units in the collective investment undertakings. Any distribution, by whatever means, of this document and related material to persons who are not eligible under the relevant laws governing the offer of unit s in collective investment undertakings is strictly prohibited. Any research or information in this document has been undert aken and may have been acted on by London CIV for its own purpose. Th e result of such research and information are being made avail able only incidentally. The data used may be derived from various sources, and assumed to be correct and reliable, but it has not been independently verified; its accuracy and completeness is n ot guaranteed, and no liability is assumed for any direct or consequential losses arising from its use. The views expressed do not constitute investment or any othe r advice and are subject to change and no assurances are made as to their accuracy. Past performance is not a guide t o future performance. The value of investments and the income from th em may go down as well as up and you may not get back the amount you invested. Changes in the rates of exchange between currenci es may cause the value of investments to diminish or increase. Fluc tuation may be particularly marked in the case of a higher volatility fund and the value of an investment may fall suddenly and substantially. Level and basis of taxation may change from time to time. Subject to the express requirements of any other agreement, we will not provide notice of any changes to our personnel, structur e, policies, process, objectives or, without limitation, any other matter contained in this document. No part of this material may be produced, reproduced, stored in retrieval system, published on any websites or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, recording or otherwise, without the prior written consent of London LGPS CIV. London LGPS CIV Limited. is a private limited company, registered in England and Wales, registered number 9136445. About London CIV London LGPS CIV Limited ('London CIV'), established in 2015 by London Local Authorities manages London Local Government Pension Scheme ('LGPS') assets. London CIV is one of eight U.K. LGPS asset pooling companies. The London Boroughs and City of London who are the 32 Shareholders, are also our clients ('Partner Funds'). Fourth Floor, 22 Lavington Street, London, SE1 0NZ Company No. 9136445 www.londonciv.org.uk Page 8 of 9 Quarterly Executive Summary: Hillingdon Working together to deliver sustainable prosperity for the communities that count on us all Appendix Asset Allocation Asset Class / Fund Name Market Value (30 June 2024) £m Net Contributions £m Income £m Fees £m Appreciation £m Market Value (30 September 2024) £m Weights (%) (30 June 2024) Weights (%) (30 September 2024) Change in weights (%) Strategic Asset Allocation (%) 31 Dec 2023 Asset Allocation vs Strategic Asset Allocation (%) 31 Dec 2023 Global Equities 742 - - - 12 754 54 54 0.36 51 3 LCIV Global Alpha Growth Paris Aligned Fund 63 - - - - 63 5 5 -0.01 % % LGIM - Future World Fund 309 - - - 2 311 22 22 -0.04 % % LGIM - Global Equities 370 - - - 9 379 27 27 0.42 % % Index Linked Gilts 104 - - - 1 105 8 8 0.04 7 - LGIM - UK ILG 104 - - - 1 105 8 8 0.04 % % Multi-Asset Credit 126 - 5 - - 130 9 9 0.25 12 (3) LCIV MAC Fund 126 - 5 - - 130 9 9 0.25 % % Property 148 (1) 1 - (3) 144 11 10 -0.35 7 3 AEW UK 74 (1) - - (5) 69 5 5 -0.39 % % UBS Property 74 (1) 1 - 1 75 5 5 0.04 % % Real Estate Long Income 47 - - - 1 48 3 3 0.01 5 (2) LGIM - LPI Income Property 47 - - - 1 48 3 3 0.01 % % Diversified Growth 45 (7) - - 1 39 3 3 -0.43 - 3 LCIV Absolute Return Fund 45 (7) - - 1 39 3 3 -0.43 % % Private Equity 5 - - - (1) 4 - - -0.07 - - Adam Street 4 - - - (1) 3 - - -0.06 % % LGT 2 - - - - 2 - - -0.01 % % Infrastructure 66 3 1 - 1 70 5 5 0.25 8 (3) LCIV Infrastructure Fund 51 6 - - 2 59 4 4 0.56 % % Macquarie 15 (3) - - (1) 11 1 - -0.31 % % Private Debt 71 (3) - - 1 68 5 5 -0.22 5 - LCIV Private Debt Fund 56 - - - 1 57 4 4 0.03 % % M&G Investments 0 - - - - - - - -0.01 % % Permira 15 (3) - - - 11 1 - -0.25 % % Cash & Cash Equivalents 6 (3) - - - 4 - - -0.21 - - Non-custody 6 (3) - - - 4 - - -0.21 % % Opportunistic Dislocation 20 7 - - (1) 25 1 2 0.37 5 (3) Blackstone Dislocation Fund 20 7 - - (1) 25 1 2 0.37 % % Total 1,379 - 1,392 100 100(5) 7 11 Source: Northern Trust custody data as of 30 September 2024 Page 9 of 9

London Borough of Hillingdon Pension Fund Funding update report at 30 September 2024 This report is addressed to the Administering Authority of the London Borough of Hillingdon Pension Fund (the Fund). This document should be read in conjunction with the fund's current Funding Strategy Statement. The purpose of this report is to provide the funding position of the London Borough of Hillingdon Pension Fund as at 30 September 2024 and show how it has changed since the previous valuation at 31 March 2022. This report has not been prepared for use for any other purpose and should not be so used. The report should not be disclosed to any third party except as required by law or regulatory obligation or with our prior written consent. Hymans Robertson LLP accept no liability where the report is used by or disclosed to a third party unless such liability has been expressly accepted in writing. Where permitted, the report may only be released or otherwise disclosed in a complete form which fully discloses the advice and the basis on which it is given. The figures presented in this report are prepared only for the purposes of providing an illustrative funding position and have no validity in other circumstances. In particular, they are not designed to meet regulatory requirements for valuations, and do not constitute an 'indicative actuarial valuation' under LGPS (Scotland) Regulation 61 (2A). This report also contains the data and assumptions underlying the results and the reliances and limitations which apply to them. Surplus/(deficit) £0.22bn +£0.39bn vs last valuation Funding level 120% +31% vs last valuation Required return 5.1% +0.2% vs last valuation Return likelihood 83% +22% vs last valuation 28 October 2024 Page 1 of 12 Results Funding position update The table on this page shows the estimated funding position at 30 September 2024 on the Fund's Ongoing basis (as defined in the Fund's FSS). The table also shows what future investment return would be required for the Fund to be 100% funded, along with the likelihood of the investment strategy achieving this return. The equivalent results at 31 March 2022 on the Ongoing basis are shown for comparison. An increase in the likelihood corresponds to an improvement in the funding position (and vice versa). Please note that the asset value at 30 September 2024 shown in this report may differ to the actual asset value at that date. The asset value in this report is an estimate based on a rollforward from 31 March 2022 using estimated cashflows (see section A2) and estimated investment returns (see section A3). This approach ensures the asset value is consistent with the liabilities and gives a more reliable estimate of the funding position than if the actual asset value was used. Ongoing basis 31 March 2022 30 September 2024 Assets 1.26 1.36 Liabilities Active members 0.39 0.33 Deferred pensioners 0.37 0.26 Pensioners 0.67 0.54 Total liabilities 1.43 1.14 Surplus/(deficit) (0.17) 0.22 Funding level 88% 120% Required return (% pa)* 4.9% 5.1% Likelihood of achieving this return 60% 83% * Future investment return for funding level to be 100% Monetary amounts in £bn 28 October 2024 Page 2 of 12 Understanding the funding level To help better understand the funding level, the chart below shows how the funding level varies with the assumed rate of future investment returns at 31 March 2022 and 30 September 2024. The percentages next to each point on the lines show the likelihood of the investment strategy achieving that return at the respective date (for further details see section A5). The solid-coloured point indicates the funding level on the Fund's chosen assumptions. Assumed future investment return (% pa) Funding level 95% 90% 85% 80% 75% 70% 65% 60% 55% 50% Last valuation 31 Mar 2022 30 Sept 2024 1.5% 2.5% 3.5% 4.5% 5.5% 6.5% 7.5%40% 60% 80% 100% 120% 140% 160% 28 October 2024 Page 3 of 12 Funding level progression The chart below shows how the funding level has progressed between 31 March 2022 and 30 September 2024. It allows for changes in market conditions and other factors described in Appendix B. Funding level FundingLevel Mar '22 May '22 Jul '22 Sep '22 Nov '22 Jan '23 Mar '23 May '23 Jul '23 Sep '23 Nov '23 Jan '24 Mar '24 May '24 Jul '24 Sep '24 Nov…85% 90% 95% 100% 105% 110% 115% 120% 125% 28 October 2024 Page 4 of 12 Next steps Change in funding level since the last valuation is to be expected due to the volatile nature of both the Fund's assets and liabilities. However, understanding the factors underlying the change may help inform the Fund's ongoing monitoring of its funding strategy and risk management. The results at 30 September 2024 in this report are estimates based on rolling forward the fund's funding position from 31 March 2022. You should understand the methodology and limitations of this approach described in Appendices B and C, and that factors such as changes to the investment strategy and membership profile may not be fully reflected in the results. No decisions should be made solely on the results in this report. Please get in touch with your Hymans Robertson contact if you wish to discuss the results in this report further. 28 October 2024 Page 5 of 12 Appendix A - Data and assumptions A.1 Membership data The membership data underlying the figures in this report was supplied by the fund for the purpose of the valuation at 31 March 2022 and is summarised below: 31 March 2022 Number Avg. age Accrued benefit (£k pa) Payroll (£k pa) Active members 8,691 53.2 23,167 152,450 Deferred pensioners 12,903 53.1 20,151 Pensioners and dependants 7,675 69.6 42,417 Average ages are weighted by liability. The membership is assumed to evolve over time in line with the demographic assumptions described in the Fund's FSS. Please see Appendix A for details of the rollforward methodology which includes the estimated changes in membership data which have been allowed for. A.2 Cashflows since the valuation at 31 March 2022 We have allowed for the following cashflows in estimating the assets and liabilities at 30 September 2024. Estimated cashflows (£k) 31 March 2022 to 30 September 2024 Employer contributions 105,935 Employee contributions 26,856 Benefits paid 134,895 Cashflows are assumed to be paid daily. Contributions are based on the estimated payroll, certified employer contributions (including any lump sum contributions) and the average employee contribution rate at 31 March 2022. Benefits paid are projections based on the membership at 31 March 2022. 28 October 2024 Page 6 of 12 A.3 Investment returns since the valuation at 31 March 2022 Investment strategy Actual/ index From To Return Whole fund Actual 1 April 2022 30 September 2024 8.13% The total investment return for the whole period is 8.13%. A.4 Financial assumptions Assumption 31 March 2022 30 September 2024 Funding basis Ongoing Ongoing Discount rate (% pa) 4.1% 6.2% Pension increases (% pa) 2.7% 2.3% Salary increases are assumed to be 0.5% pa above pension increases, plus an additional promotional salary scale. For further details on the methodology used to derive the assumptions, please see the Fund's FSS. 28 October 2024 Page 7 of 12 A.5 Demographic assumptions Life expectancy (years) Ongoing basis Male Female Pensioners 22.3 24.8 Non-pensioners 23.0 26.1 Life expectancies are from age 65 and are based on the Fund's membership data at 31 March 2022. Non-pensioners are assumed to be aged 45 at that date. All other demographic assumptions are the same as at the most recent valuation at 31 March 2022. 28 October 2024 Page 8 of 12 Appendix B - Technical information B.1 Funding update methodology The last formal valuation of the fund was carried out as at 31 March 2022. The results in this report are based on rolling forward the results of the last formal valuation to 30 September 2024 using approximate methods. The roll-forward allows for: The CARE, deferred and pensioner liabilities at 30 September 2024 include a total adjustment of 11.4% to reflect the difference between actual September CPI inflation values (up to 30 September 2023) and the assumption made at 31 March 2022. The adjustment for each year's actual inflation is applied from 31 October 2023 that year, cumulative with prior years' adjustments, which may lead to step changes in the funding level progression chart. In preparing the updated funding position at 30 September 2024, the membership is assumed to have changed since 31 March 2022 in line with the demographic assumptions described in the Fund's FSS. No allowance has been made for any other changes. The principal reason for this is that insufficient information is available to make any such adjustment. Significant membership movements, or any material difference between estimated inputs and actual experience, may affect the reliability of the results. The Fund should consider whether any such factors mean that the roll forward approach may not be appropriate. No allowance has been made for any early retirements or bulk transfers since 31 March 2022. There is also no allowance for any changes to Local Government Pension Scheme (LGPS) benefits except where noted in the formal valuation report or Funding Strategy Statement. Where the Fund has moved to a different funding basis since 31 March 2022 this may give rise to step changes in the funding level on the date of the change. estimated cashflows over the period as described in section A.2 investment returns over the period (estimated where necessary) as described in section A.3 changes in financial assumptions as described in section A.4 estimated additional benefit accrual. 28 October 2024 Page 9 of 12 B.2 Sensitivity of results to assumptions The results are particularly sensitive to the real discount rate assumption (the discount rate net of pension increases) and the assumptions made for future longevity. If the real discount rate used to value the accrued liabilities was lower then the value placed on those liabilities would increase. For example, if the real discount rate at 30 September 2024 was 1.0% pa lower then the liabilities on the Ongoing basis at that date would increase by 18.2%. In addition, the results are sensitive to unexpected changes in the rate of future longevity improvements. If life expectancies improve at a faster rate than allowed for in the assumptions then, again, a higher value would be placed on the liabilities. An increase in life expectancy of 1 year would increase the accrued liabilities by around 3-5%. 28 October 2024 Page 10 of 12 Appendix C - Reliances and limitations The report should not be disclosed to any third party except as required by law or regulatory obligation or with our prior written consent. Hymans Robertson LLP accept no liability where the report is used by or disclosed to a third party unless such liability has been expressly accepted in writing. Where permitted, the report may only be released or otherwise disclosed in a complete form which fully discloses the advice and the basis on which it is given. The last formal valuation of the fund was carried out as at 31 March 2022 and this report relies upon the results of that valuation. The reliances and limitations that applied to that valuation apply equally to these results. The results of the valuation have been projected forward using approximate methods. The margin of error in these approximate methods increases as time goes by. The method may not be appropriate if there have been significant data changes since the previous formal valuation (for example redundancy exercises, significant unreduced early retirements, ill health retirements and bulk transfers). The methodology assumes that actual experience since the valuation at 31 March 2022 has been in line with assumptionss. The data used in this exercise is summarised in section 3. Data provided for the purposes of the formal valuation at 31 March 2022 was checked at the time for reasonableness and consistency with other sources. Data provided since then (eg actual investment returns) has been used as-is. The data is the responsibility of the Administering Authority and the results rely on the data. The results in this schedule are based on calculations run on 28 October 2024 using the data set out in section 3. Any other factors coming to light after this report was prepared have not been allowed for and could affect the results. If any data has materially changed since 28 October 2024 the results could be materially different if they were recalculated. Some financial assumptions may be based on projections from our Economic Scenario Service (ESS) model which is only calibrated at each month-end. Results between month ends use the latest available calibration, adjusted in line with the movement in market conditions. This adjustment is approximate and there may be step changes at month-end dates when a new ESS monthly calibration is factored in. The methodology underlying these calculations mean that the results should be treated as indicative only. The nature of the fund's investments means that the surplus or deficit identified in this report can vary significantly over short periods of time. This means that the results set out should not be taken as being applicable at any date other than the date shown. 28 October 2024 Page 11 of 12 As with all modelling, the results are dependent on the model itself, the calibration of the underlying model and the various approximations and estimations used. These processes involve an element of subjectivity and may be material depending on the context. No inferences should be drawn from these results other than those confirmed separately in writing by a consultant of Hymans Robertson LLP. Decisions should not be based solely on these results and your Hymans Robertson LLP consultant should be contacted to discuss any appropriate action before any is taken. Hymans Robertson LLP accepts no liability if any decisions are based solely on these results or if any action is taken based solely on such results. This report complies with the relevant Technical Actuarial Standards. Hymans Robertson LLP is a limited liability partnership registered in England and Wales with registered number OC310282. A list of members of Hymans Robertson LLP is available for inspection at One London Wall, London EC2Y 5EA, the firm's registered office. Authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority and licensed by the Institute and Faculty of Actuaries for a range of investment business activities. Hymans Robertson is a registered trademark of Hymans Robertson LLP. 28 October 2024 Page 12 of 12

Classification: Public Pensions Committee 10 December 2024 RESPONSIBLE INVESTMENTS UPDATE ITEM 7 Committee Pensions Committee Officer Reporting Babatunde Adekoya, Finance Papers with this report Full manager voting - Shared drive. LGIM Engagement Report Q3 2024 – Shared drive LAPFF Engagement Report Q3 2024 – Shared drive LCIV Engagement September 2024 – Shared drive HEADLINES Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) refers to the three central factors in measuring the sustainability and societal impact of an investment in a company or business. These criteria help to better determine the future financial performance of companies (return and risk). The purpose of this report is to provide information on how managers entrusted with investing the Pension Fund assets are implementing their ESG policies and demonstrate their commitment to ensuring it is a cogent part of their investment process. In addition, the report details the progress on the UK Stewardship Code project, policy updates and other relevant information. RECOMMENDATIONS It is recommended that Pensions Committee: 1. Note the fund managers’ ESG activities and compliance efforts 2. Note LCIV & LAPFF activities SUPPORTING INFORMATION Voting and Engagement Fund managers carry out proxy voting on the Pension Fund’s behalf. Below is a breakdown of voting statistics by LGIM , and London CIV (Ruffer and Baillie Gifford). The London CIV itself, through Federated Hermes EOS, also exercised voting rights at 66 meetings. Classification: Public Pensions Committee 10 December 2024 Fund Managers Voting Breakdown Q3, 2024 LCIV Meetings Resolutions Votes With Against Abstention/Non -Voting Sep-24 LCIV - Ruffer 4 72 60 8 4 LCIV - Baillie Gifford 6 109 86 18 5 Eos 66 868 386 482 0 76 1,049 532 508 9 % 50.71 48.43 0.86 LGIM Meetings Resolutions Votes With Against Abstention Sep-24 2,171 15,346 11,633 3,632 81 2,171 15,346 11,633 3,632 81 % 75.80 23.67 0.53 The volume of meetings attended, and resolutions voted on by all the fund managers shown above , encapsulates their commitment to ESG issues and demonstrat es alignment of their stewardship activities with their own investment beliefs, policies, and guidelines. Through this approach, they seek to be active owners on behalf of their clients, by encouraging good governance and a high standard of corporate practices. The voting breakdown above indicates LGIM have voted against proposed management resolutions on 24% of voting opportunities and supported resolutions on approximately 76% of occasions. The London CIV through E OS and two equities portfolio managers, Ruffer and Baillie Gifford combined to back various management resolutions on 51% of voting opportunities and about 48% against the resolutions proposed by company managements. Abstentions for LGIM and LCIV were 1% respectively. Engagement ESG factors play an increasingly important role in determining the performance of certain assets. Pension Fund asset managers, as part of their ESG commitments undertake various engagement activities in their holistic approach in making investment decision s. These activities aim to affect changes within invested companies where it is deemed necessary or to complement existing practices. Classification: Public Pensions Committee 10 December 2024 LCIV During the quarter under review Federated Hermes (EOS) on behalf of the LCIV engaged with 307 companies on ESG issues and other objectives globally. EOS engagement activities during the quarter under review focused on key areas such as:  Human Capital  Board Effectiveness  Climate Change Please refer to the ESG documents on the members shared drive for detailed information about the EOS (LCIV) engagement activities. LGIM Holding boards to account To be successful, companies need to have people at the helm who are well equipped to create resilient long-term growth. By voting and engaging directly with companies, LGIM encourages management to control risks while seeking to benefit from emerging opportunities. The manager aims to safeguard and enhance clients’ assets by engaging with companies and holding manag ement to account for their decisions. Voting is an important tool in this process, and one which they use extensively. Creating sustainable value LGIM believe it is in the interest of all stakeholders for companies to build sustainable business models that are also beneficial to society. They work to ensure companies are well -positioned for sustainable growth, and to prevent market behaviour that destroys long-term value. Their investment process includes an assessment of how well companies incorporate relevant ESG factors into their everyday thinking. The manager engages directly and collaboratively with companies to highlight key challenges and opportunities, and support strategies that seek to deliver long -term success. Promoting market resilience As a long-term investor for its clients, it is essential that markets (and, by extension, the companies within them) are able to generate sustainable value. In doing so, LGIM believe companies should become more resilient amid change and therefore, seek to benefit the whole market. They use their influence and scale to ensure that issues affecting the value of clients’ investments are recognised and appropriately managed. This includes working with key policymakers, such as governments and regulators, and collaborating with asset owners to bring about positive change across markets as a whole. Classification: Public Pensions Committee 10 December 2024 Environment - Hindalco Industries Ltd Sector: Metals and mining Issue identified: The aluminium sector has a significant role to play in the global transition to net zero and is one of 20 ‘climate critical’ sectors captured within LGIM Climate Impact Pledge. Hindalco Industries has been selected for direct, qualitative engagement within this programme. Summary of the resolution Resolution 5 – Re-elect Kumar Mangalam Birla as director. AGM, 22-08-2024 How LGIM voted: Against resolution 5 (against management recommendation) Rationale for the vote decision LGIM vote is applied in line with their Climate Impact Pledge engagement escalation, whereby they vote against the (re-election of the chair of the Board at companies lagging their minimum expectations on climate change. This is the second consecutive year LGIM are applying vote sanctions against the company on this basis. Disclosure of a forward-looking, coherent and quantified transition plan is still absent from the report, therefore falling short of LGIM expectations. LGIM also noted Hindalco has pushed back its short-term scope 1 and 2 emission intensity reduction target from 2025 to 2027. Despite three engagement meetings and multiple email exchanges, the manager is still unclear on a) its plans to develop existing disclosure into a coherent transition plan, b) the process, accountability structures and resources in place to develop it over 2024 and c) timings of a planned disclosure. Why is this vote ‘significant’? LGIM believe that climate change is a financially material risk; their Climate Impact Pledge engagement programme is focused on encouraging companies across 20 ‘climate critical sectors’ to transition to net zero. Society People: Human rights campaign As set out in LGIM human rights policy, it believes that human rights is financially material for investors, and that managing the business elements of human rights within operations is essential for companies to minimise the risks to their business of human rights violations (including, for example, failing to obtain and maintain the company’s social license to operate, reputational damage, trade barriers, supply chain disruptions, consumer or group boycotts, exposure to legal liability). Classification: Public Pensions Committee 10 December 2024 Identify The aim of LGIM human rights letter campaign is to communicate its expectations, and to seek companies’ own views and more information about their approach to these risks, by asking them to complete a survey. While this is a letter campaign, the manager is are keen for it to be a two-way exchange, so that it can better inform its next steps. The campaign is focussed on the high-risk sectors outlined in their human rights policy, namely: utilities, energy, mining and minerals, apparel and textiles, technology and automotives. The range of around 400 companies captured is: • Global: over 40 countries across both developed and emerging markets (the top five countries being the US, China, Canada, India and Japan) • Mid-large cap, by geography and sector Engage A letter was drafted for each sector, addressed to the chair of the company, sharing why LGIM believe human rights are fundamentally important within that sector, along with their human rights expectations (as set out in our human rights policy). Additionally, they have asked companies to provide information and feedback about their human rights practices through a questionnaire. Having begun the campaign in the beginning of the third quarter of 2024, they have sent the letters in stages, completing by the end of the quarter. Next steps Based on the collected results in the questionnaires, LGIM plan to conduct further one-on-one, direct engagements. It will also plan to publish its findings and observations. Further, based on the feedback, the manager will look into further updating its human rights policy with detailed expectations on a number of salient human rights topics that have been identified that are material to LGIM. LAPFF During the quarter LAPFF issued a number of voting alerts which have been shared with LGIM for their consideration. (LCIV receive directly). Details on the various LAPFF engagements can also be found on the members shared drive. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS ESG initiatives included within the Pension Fund budget. LEGAL IMPLICATIONS Legal implications are included in the report.

Quarterly Engagement Report July-September 2024 BP , Tobacco Industry, Water Stewardship lapfforum.org 2 LAPFF QUARTERLY ENGAGEMENT REPORT | JULY - SEPTEMBER 2024 ENGAGEMENTS SUPPLY SIDE BP & Shell Objective:  During continued engagement with Shell and BP , LAPFF’s approach has remained to test oil and gas companies beyond claims of decarbonisation based on existing business models to challenge the viability of the current business. This expectation, based on LAPFF policy, is that the demand for hydrocarbons will 1) reduce in aggregate terms; and 2) that demand will be met by lowest cost producers. BP has been regarded as at the better end of the sector in recognising climate change as an issue but faces the same competitive and structural pressures CLIMATE above from what is a disruptive transition due to disruptive alternative technologies. The war in Ukraine has increased governments’ focus on less reliance on fossil fuels on energy security and price volatility grounds. What seems to be an inevitable shrinkage in the sector, not matched by growth from elsewhere supports the argument for more cash returns - not buybacks - to shareholders instead. Achieved Shell: From meeting the then new Chair of Shell in 2023, LAPFF believes that the position holds that the company is better run from the top, as the Chair has a more realistic grasp of the issues at stake regarding decarbonisation and is a plainer communicator and more realistic. As an example, there is less emphasis on “nature based solutions” (i.e. planting trees) as the IPCC regards that as necessary for hard to abate sectors, not fossil fuel companies. LAPFF has previously questioned the extent to which its climate change strategy has been sufficiently integrated into business planning and financing. LAPFF was therefore pleased that there has been restructuring and the energy transition work and corporate strategy now reports to the CFO. Shell has said that it cannot make the investment case for renewables. That is not in itself unreasonable but does support the argument for more cash returns to shareholders instead. Achieved BP: With regards to BP , LAPFF has noted some rowing back from their 2023 carbon reduction targets. Although BP has made some commitment to investment in renewables, and is stating the supply of power for electric vehicles is a growth area, it does appear that the company has substantial threats to its business model regarding the scope of no-carbon products that would fully replace the scale of the fossil fuel business, and that expectation of more cash returns to shareholders should be more clearly set out. To understand the company’s approach, this quarter LAPFF met with the company’s new CEO, Murray Auchincloss. In what was a useful and informative discussion, the company outlined how it was seeking to transition the business, and the scope for scaling up revenues from hydrogen, wind power, biofuels and electric vehicles. The company set out major projects it was seeking to undertake, including a hydrogen and CCS hub in Teeside. The company also discussed how it planned to fund investment in transition initiatives and manage associated financial risks. On the issue of targets, discussion included the pace of the transition, including moving in line with national expectations. In Progress Shell: A meeting with the Shell Chair is pending. LAPFF continues to challenge whether Carbon Capture and Storage can be made to work as a line of business, given that the costs involved make it a last resort if cheaper substitute energy sources are 3 LAPFF QUARTERLY ENGAGEMENT REPORT | JULY - SEPTEMBER 2024 lapfforum.org ENGAGEMENTS not possible. Developments in aviation fuels and biofuels need to be examined in more detail, particularly as the mode of synthetic aviation fuel Shell refers to is to take CO2 resulting from combustion by carbon capture from elsewhere and converting it – by an energy intensive process – into a hydrocarbon. That is not a contribution to net zero. That is merely using the same emission twice, whilst still resulting in an emission. CCS has been given prominence for, inter alia, gas (methane) for power, hydrogen for home heating, hydrogen for ammonia production and hydrogen for steel making. All of these have non-fossil hydrogen alternatives. It should be noted that CCS for coal was heavily promoted as a way of maintaining coal demand, but never materialised with the phase out of coal on economic as well as emissions grounds. There is the same risk with gas. In Progress BP: BP has had less emphasis than Shell on Carbon Capture and Storage as a line of business. Developments in aviation fuels and biofuels need to be examined in more detail, BP’s annual report suggests a different approach to Shell, being based not on fossil fuel derived carbon, but bio-ethanol, fats and oils. BP is also placing more emphasis on electric vehicle charging. In our meeting, the company set out its views on the demand for low carbon energy, EV charging and biofuels. While information was provided about how it expects to pivot towards lower-carbon and renewable energy in the medium term, LAPFF will continue to seek to better understand both the scale of such revenues over the longer term and the longer-term impacts for investors of any attempts to transition from an “oil and gas” company to an “energy” company. Drax Objective:  Drax’s Yorkshire power station is the UK’s largest single emitter of carbon dioxide. LAPFF has focused for several years, from its own research as well as public coverage of the company, on Drax’s business model which faces considerable challenges. These challenges include the continuation of government subsidy which is in excess of £500m a year and is more than all of the profit. That subsidy runs out in 2027 . But added to that is, so far not approved by HM Government, the proposition to add carbon capture and storage to Drax for what is called BioEnergy Carbon Capture and Storage (BECCS) which would require further subsidy, locked in for the duration of at least 25 years. On the environmental side there are significant issues with claims of net zero as well as continuity of supply of imported wood pellets. Achieved: LAPFF had identified that Drax has been cutting down rare forest wood in Canada, and also reported that during the energy crisis that Drax had closed a plant, as it was more profitable to sell the pellets than to use the pellets for power generation – thus casting doubt on Drax’s role in energy security. The BBC reported in 2022 that Drax was sourcing pellets from whole trees, not waste wood and sawdust from primary forests in Canada. Then the Cooling towers at Drax Power Station near Selby, North Yorkshire. 4 LAPFF QUARTERLY ENGAGEMENT REPORT | JULY - SEPTEMBER 2024 lapfforum.org prices – which as well as affecting domestic consumers also raises the cost of power for electricity intensive new industries e.g. steel from electric arc furnaces 6) the fact that all that CCS would do – if it were to work – would be to remove the carbon dioxide from burning the woody biomass that wouldn’t have been emitted if the wood were not burned. Drax with CCS would only be “negative” if counteracting tree grow due to the cutting of trees also matched emissions, which due to the long growth cycle is not the case something that is not currently proven. 7) the combination of the high subsidy for a putative national target, raises the question, “if Drax is so important why not nationalise it?” That is relevant as Drax has been prone to brinkmanship to lobby for continuing subsidy. Steel -SSAB & ThyssenKrupp Objective: Steel is a major contributor to global emissions and an industry with emerging green technologies. LAPFF has engaged the sector on transition plans and building on this sought to engage companies on the developing alternatives to coal/coke-based steel production. SSAB is an international steel producer headquartered in Sweden. Sweden itself has large iron ore deposits in the Kiruna region north of the Arctic Circle. ThyssenKrupp is a large engineering company based in Essen, (mono-culture) pine. That is an ecological problem for biodiversity. Also of note is this statement from the new Secretary of State for Energy and Net Zero, Ed Miliband made on Monday 8th July 2024. “In an unstable world, the only way to guarantee our energy security and cut bills permanently is to speed up the transition away from fossil fuels and towards homegrown clean energy.” Given that Drax supplies wood pellets from overseas, and UK forests do not have the capacity to make any appreciable alternative supply, there must be a problem with the term “homegrown”. In Progress: The meetings offered with the CFO and the senior SID following questions at the last AGM are pending. The issues LAPFF has raised are central to the business model. The argument for the government to continue to support Drax is the mantra that “the UK can’t be carbon net-zero by 2050 without it” thus Drax with carbon capture and storage would result in “negative emissions”. The problem with that is several fold: 1) security of supply of pellets 2) ecological issues 3) water supply as CCS is very water intensive 4) ammonia is a toxic chemical used in large quantities in the process 5) the cost of government support for CCS on top of the existing subsidy, which has an effect on electricity ENGAGEMENTS BBC identified that Drax took more than 40,000 tonnes of wood from so-called “old-growth” forests in 2023. Old-growth is some of the oldest forest which the provincial government says provides “unique habitats, structures and ecological functions”. The BBC claims matched LAPFF research, but the company defended the claims from the BBC publicly. However, in August 2024 Drax agreed to settle to the sum of £25m with Ofgem its regulator after its investigation which concluded, “there was an absence of adequate data governance and controls in place that had contributed to: (i) Drax misreporting data in relation to their annual profiling submission to Ofgem for compliance period 1 April 2021 to 31 March 2022 (“CP20”); and (ii) Drax being unable to provide Ofgem with sufficient evidence demonstrating how its CP20 annual profiling submission had been arrived at and unable to support the reliability of its profiling data reporting of forestry type and sawlogs for Canadian consignments for that same period… “Ofgem takes the importance of accurate data reporting very seriously, in this case by a company of significant size and a major scheme participant. Accurate information is important for a number of reasons, including helping to improve statistics on biomass use and to monitor the effects of biomass use on the areas of origin. This information is intended to enable the Secretary of State to understand and monitor the extent to which both primary forests and sawlogs are used in woody biomass, which has consequences for carbon emissions and biodiversity.” LAPFF has also since noted that that the video on the Drax website from Drax’s CEO rebutting the BBC position is now a dead-link. LAPFF’s original research also identified that the “catchment area” surveys that Drax cites as showing that trees grow to match emissions by offset absorption don’t actually do that. The surveys merely ask the question whether there has been a reduction in absorption capacity. That question doesn’t address the needed increase in absorption capacity. The one catchment area report that says that there may have been an increase in absorption capacity put that down to replacing indigenous hardwood with Fossil-free steel is manufactured at the ironworks at SSAB in Oxelosund, Sweden 5 LAPFF QUARTERLY ENGAGEMENT REPORT | JULY - SEPTEMBER 2024 lapfforum.org ENGAGEMENTS Germany. It manufactures steel based products, it is also a steel producer currently producing virgin steel from iron ore, with none from recycling. LAPFF’s focus was therefore on their transition plans to achieving net zero. Ahead of the meetings LAPFF noted that SSAB has a low Carbon Disclosure Project (CDP) rating of D, and ThyssenKrupp, a rating of A. Achieved: LAPFF has previously identified in a report on steel to a LAPFF Business Meeting that SSAB had innovative “green steel” production in the form of new steel produced not by blast furnaces but direct reduction of iron using hydrogen from electrolysis. The power for that coming from hydroelectric power in northern Sweden. LAPFF had identified that green steel has the potential to be disruptive technology on the basis of cost and the fact that hydrocarbons do not play a role in the process LAPFF met with SSAB in September 2024 where it heard of not only the commitment to green steel being called “HyBrit” but also recycled steel for which the melting is done using an electric arc furnace with fossil fuel free electricity. That is in fact more flexible than blast furnaces as blast furnaces have a fixed production capacity, whereas the output from electric arc can be matched to demand and quality required. It is apparent that SSAB is disappointed with its CPD rating and research prior to and discussions in the meeting leads to an agreement on that. It seems that other steel companies are disclosing less practically, and less strategically, credible routes to decarbonisation, which rely on unproven technology for maintaining blast furnaces with CCS or hydrogen from CCS. LAPFF also met with ThyssenKrupp in September 2024. The company currently produces 11.5MT of steel per year, but a strategic change will reduce that to 9MT. The company plans to produce steel by Direct Reduction of Iron (DRI) as “green steel” from green hydrogen, which will be sourced externally, principally from Rotterdam by pipes as Germany has relatively little capacity for home production. The plant will replace more than one blast furnace. Current production is 0.15MT and the plan is for that to rise to 0.5MT. In the initial stages the DRI will run from unabated methane and will then switch to green hydrogen. Potential future supplies of green hydrogen will be from the Middle East and Australia. One potential method of carrying hydrogen is by converting to ammonia and then back again. Ore is sourced mainly from Brazil and Australia. There are not plans to produce recycled steel, and there are no plans to use CCS dependent technology. In Progress:  More steel company engagements are planned. LAPFF intends to explore further why less strategically credible (i.e. fossil fuel dependent) routes to net zero seem to achieve a higher CDP rating than SSAB, reverting to SSAB and ThyssenKrupp if necessary and appropriate. There are long-term geographic issues about the price of green steel if production nearer the ore and energy sources will ultimately give rise to lowest cost production. Asia Research and Engagement Objective: LAPFF has worked with Asia Research and Engagement (ARE) for several years. ARE is facilitating collaboration between investors seeking to accelerate the shift towards sustainable energy in Asia. The initial focus of the engagements has been reducing the carbon risks facing financial institutions and coal-exposed power companies. Achieved: LAPFF met with Kasikorn Bank, one of the major financial institutions in Thailand, to discuss progress on its approach to sustainable finance. The company has made progress in a number of areas, notably in its goals regarding its levels of ‘sustainable financing’. The company has not disclosed a breakdown of allocations within this, such as how much it invests in climate solutions and transition technologies. However, it has made positive headway in its aspirations and overall progress. Investors also looked at the company’s exposure to physical climate risks, particularly flooding and rising sea levels, with large parts of Thailand at potential risk in different climate change scenarios. In Progress: There is a pipeline of engagement calls, many of which are companies that LAPFF has met through the initiative before. We hope to see progress being made and will continue encourage companies to further reduce the risks they face. These engagement calls continue to be a valuable avenue to engaging companies with material- climate risks and who are essential to the energy transition in Asia. DEMAND SIDE Airlines Objective: Airlines account for approximately 2% of global CO2 emissions. A paper on the decarbonisation of aviation is being produced for the LAPFF membership. Ahead of that LAPFF met in September 2024 with Ryanair. Achieved: The meeting was encouraging and reinforced our research. There were no areas for disagreement or potential disagreement. 99% of Ryanair’s emissions are from the fuel. The Ryanair team were knowledgeable on the methods and options for decarbonisation with a lot of detailed information on savings and targets and UK and EU requirements and targets. Ryanair has a target of 12% use of Sustainable Aviation Fuel (SAF) by 2030, which compares to a UK Government target of 10% and EU target of 5%. That is in addition to emissions reduction from newer aircraft and engines, which are more fuel efficient. Biomass derived SAF has some limits around land-use and other crop displacement. It is envisaged that hydrogen-based fuels won’t be around until after 2050 as that requires a redesigning of aircraft, given that although having much less mass per unit of energy, there is the problem that hydrogen requires much larger volume than kerosine which are larger than the wing space which is where fuel currently resides. The International Air Transport Association (IATA) has chosen Trinity College Dublin as the certification body for all new SAF pathways. 6 LAPFF QUARTERLY ENGAGEMENT REPORT | JULY - SEPTEMBER 2024 lapfforum.org ENGAGEMENTS In Progress:  LAPFF is planning to engage with other airlines and with Shell and BP , which are significant aircraft fuel suppliers. CLIMATE TRANSITION PLANS Objective: Due to the scale of climate risks, LAPFF expects companies to outline credible transition plans, which include Paris-aligned targets and detailed strategies for reaching those goals. To enable investors to make informed investment and stewardship decisions these plans should be disclosed with material climate-related impacts included within financial statements. LAPFF also considers it good practice for companies to provide shareholders with the opportunity to express their views on the credibility of the plans through a specific AGM vote. A specific vote on a company’s transition plan enables shareholders to signal support for the decarbonisation strategy and any associated capital expenditure requirements. Such a vote also enables shareholders to indicate their confidence in the plan through a dedicated vote rather than directing it at different resolutions on the ballot. To encourage companies to provide such a vote to shareholders, LAPFF has organised collaborative letters to companies. Research for LAPFF suggests that around a fifth of FTSE 100 companies have provided such a vote in the past three years. As such, LAPFF continues to seek to encourage additional companies to provide ‘say on climate’ votes to its shareholders. Achieved: To achieve that ambition of wider support for transition plan votes, LAPFF alongside CCLA organised a letter to FTSE 100 companies that have not provided such a vote over the past three years. The letter outlined the case for companies providing shareholders the opportunity to have a say on the company transition plan. It noted that emerging good practice was for plans to be updated every three years, and in line with that expected a vote on the plan at least every three years. Over the quarter, LAPFF sought to gain wider investor support for the letter which was then sent to companies in September. LAPFF saw increased support for the letter from last year with 41 investors signing up to the letter. In total, the investors represented £1.6 trillion in AUM demonstrating the scale of support. Alongside sending the letter to the companies, the letter was also press released to raise awareness of the issue and gain wider support. In progress: LAPFF asked companies to respond to the letter and will be tracking those responses. LAPFF will also scrutinising AGM agendas to see whether more say on climate votes are provided over the coming year. In addition, LAPFF will be continuing to place pressure on issuers to provide their shareholders the opportunity to voice their opinions through a dedicated vote on what is a major risk and concern for responsible investors. HARD TO ABATE SECTORS Cement - CRH Objective: Cement was agreed as an area of focus by LAPFF members at the business meeting in July 2024. CRH is a building supplies and cement producer and the majority of CRH’s sales are cement. Cement accounts for approximately 8% of global greenhouse gas emissions. Emissions come from 1) a non-fossil fuel source, the chemical decomposition of calcium carbonate in cement manufacturing 2) the heat needed for cement production in kilns. Cement is a difficult to abate sector and the carbon emissions from the calcium carbonate will require some form of carbon capture and storage (‘CCS’). Achieved: LAPFF met with CRH to discuss its actions towards achieving net zero. The meeting was encouraging. CRH has already been benefiting from cost savings and opportunity from the transition, such as cheaper electricity for kilns and other energy dependent processes, and also ‘recycling’ roads in renewing roads. The company’s plans are thoughtful and backed by actions and implementation. As of 2024 there is no working model of CCS on cement, though Heidelberg cement may have a working site by the end of 2024. CRH’s actions to decide on investment in Carbon Capture and Storage won’t affect 2030 targets as the working assumption is that CCS won’t be used before that date. Actions will require forms of regulation to both mandate the use of ‘carbon-neutral cement’ as well as restricting cement that had been produced traditionally from competing unfairly, or by passing it off as carbon- neutral when it isn’t. In Progress: LAPFF is planning to engage with other cement producers on a comparative basis. ENVIRONMENT TOBACCO COMPANIES & PLASTICS Objective: There is also increasing global pressure for companies to address single-use plastics in their product ranges. This affects tobacco companies as cigarette butts, which are largely made of a plastic, are the most littered item in the world with an estimated 4.5 trillion cigarette butts being thrown away each year. LAPFF’s aim in these engagements was to understand how companies were assessing risk in these areas, and modelling for potential needs to adopt their business model to a changing regulatory environment, as well as how they were taking action to look for plastic alternatives. Achieved: LAPFF met Philip Morris, Imperial Brands, and Japan Tobacco Inc. this quarter to discuss these issues. It is clear that the tobacco industry has not yet found a suitable alternative to the plastic filters used in cigarettes. Several companies describe this in their reports as challenging, largely due to consumer acceptance, but also because of the implications for emissions and the costs associated with R&D. 7 LAPFF QUARTERLY ENGAGEMENT REPORT | JULY - SEPTEMBER 2024 lapfforum.org ENGAGEMENTS Achieved: In January 2024 LAPFF member Greater Manchester Pension Fund (GMPF) filed a resolution ahead of Constellation Brands AGM. It requested that Constellation Brands issue a report assessing the feasibility and practicality of establishing time-bound, quantitative goals to reduce supply chain water usage to mitigate value chain risks related to global water scarcity in high-risk areas. During Q2 LAPFF issued a voting alert recommending members support the resolution. The alert highlighted the need for investors to be able to assess the extent to which companies, for which water is material, demonstrate sustainable practices. Constellation Brands AGM was held in July during which over 35% of votes represented supported the resolution, despite the Board’s opposition to the proposal. Given 2024 is the first year a resolution of this kind has been filed at Constellation Brands, the result is significant and demonstrates the appetite among investors for the company to improve its approach to managing water-related risks. In Progress: LAPFF is set to meet British American Tobacco in October to discuss these same issues and will be monitoring progress by the companies in these areas as regulation develops. WATER STEWARDSHIP Constellation Brands Objective: LAPFF is a founding member of the Valuing Water Finance Initiative which engages companies on their water impacts and seeks to reduce their exposure to material water-related risks. As part of the initiative, LAPFF is the lead investor for Constellation Brands. LAPFF has been asking the company to set time-bound, science or contextual goals, targets or policies to address impacts on water availability in water scarce areas across the sections of the value chain for which water is most material. While tobacco products remain a key part of these companies’ business models, there is a drive to create what are often referred to as ‘reduced risk products’ or ‘next generation products’, which broadly encompasses heated tobacco products and various types of vapes. As companies seek to expand their business into other areas, the increased prevalence of vapes in their product mixes raises additional concerns around plastics and the disposal of batteries in single-use vapes. This will require a more circular economy, which all three companies are adopting in slightly different ways. Whilst there is work being done by the tobacco industry, there is a long way to go. Conversations also followed how tobacco companies faced increasing global regulatory pressures on smoking and vaping, including proposed legislation like the UK Tobacco and Vapes Bill, which if pursued, would mean anyone born after 1 January 2009 can never legally be sold tobacco products. Polluted Water sign at River Mole, Surrey, UK 8 LAPFF QUARTERLY ENGAGEMENT REPORT | JULY - SEPTEMBER 2024 lapfforum.org ENGAGEMENTS Achieved: One of the companies that LAPFF is engaging through the NA100 initiative is the Danish Pharmaceutical company Novo Nordisk. Pharmaceutical companies have been identified by the initiative as a key sector to engage. Pharmaceutical companies face a range of physical and transition risks, including species loss affecting the ability of companies to develop new drugs. The investor group met a representative from investor relations. The representative answered the investor questions but did not engage in detailed discussion. Key points covered included the company’s use of the Science-Based Targets Network, and timelines for assessments being made public. Whilst detail in the conversation was limited, the company appeared to be making sizable considerations about how to address its impact and dependencies on nature. In Progress: An aim of the engagement is to meet with companies involved at least twice a year. Whilst LAPFF and other investors have been discussing indicators of NA100’s benchmark in company engagements, the benchmark itself, which will score companies across its six key pillars, is set to be published at COP16 in late October 2024. Companies have had a chance to respond with further information to this benchmark. Once published, it will provide industry comparisons, information on potential areas of best practice and a further basis for engagement. SOCIAL FACTORS ZERO HOUR CONTRACTS Objective: LAPFF has initiated a series of engagements focused on the use and potential elimination of zero-hours contracts (ZHCs) in the UK. The Forum is seeking to engage with companies that utilize ZHCs as part of their core operations to understand the extent of their use, the potential impacts of a ban on business operations, and any steps being taken to mitigate a ban and/or associated risks. Where applicable, the Forum may also seek further disclosure on ZHC exposure to help investors better assess the potential effects on specific Achieved: In the quarter LAPFF met the chair of Severn Trent Water (STW). STW is one of the largest water utility companies in the UK, serving over 4.5 million households and businesses across the Midlands and parts of Wales. This was the third meeting that LAPFF has had with Severn Trent’s chair and the Forum welcomed the ongoing dialogue with the company on the issue. The meeting took place just after Ofwat released draft determinations for the next regulatory period (2025-2030), outlining proposed price controls and investment allowances for water companies. To meet the expected increase in capital expenditure to address, amongst other things, pollution from storm overflows water companies are seeking to increase water prices. STW plans were well received by Ofwat even if the regulator reduced the company’s proposed price increase. Despite significant sector challenges, they remain committed to meeting their sewer overflow targets. Progress is being made towards addressing Combined Sewer Overflow (CSO) spills, including network-wide CSO monitoring, nature-based solutions, and innovations such as the company’s “Zero Spills Hub”. In Progress: Despite progress being made, water companies continue to have some way to go to reduce overflows and reduce the regulatory and reputational risks they face on the issue. LAPFF will therefore continue to engage with water utility companies with the focus on ensuring progress towards their targets and that the additional investment is being used cost-efficiently. LAPFF will also be following the regulator’s final determinations. NOVO NORDISK & NA100 Objective: Nature Action 100 (NA100) seeks to mobilise investors to drive corporate action in addressing biodiversity loss and nature-related risks. Its primary goal is to ensure companies integrate nature into their strategies, reduce negative impacts on ecosystems, and contribute to global biodiversity targets through enhanced accountability and transparency. In Progress: It is LAPFF’s view that Constellation Brands remains acutely exposed to water-related risk within its supply chain, potentially limiting its ability to protect shareholder value. While Constellation Brands has committed to and worked to manage their water-related risks in direct operations, they have been unable to demonstrate they are managing the same risks across the supply chain which could lead to increased input prices and disruptions. LAPFF will re-engage with the company during Q4 with a view to leveraging momentum off the back of the shareholder proposal. UK Water Utility Companies Objective: Since 2022, LAPFF has engaged with water utility companies to address ongoing concerns about the pollution of rivers and coastal areas caused by storm overflows through Combined Sewer Overflows (CSOs). CSOs act as relief valves during periods of heavy rainfall, preventing sewage from backing up into homes by releasing excess stormwater and wastewater into the environment. Under the UK government’s 2050 plans, the number of CSO overflow incidents is expected to decrease gradually through increased investment. As a highly regulated sector, water companies must submit their investment plans for review every five years to the Water Services Regulation Authority (Ofwat) for review and approval. Achieving environmental objectives within these five year plans has both reputational and financial implications, as companies face rewards or penalties based on their performance. Through its engagements, LAPFF aims to ensure that water utilities companies are making progress in reducing overflow incidents while ensuring that upcoming five year business plans are cost efficient and include both environmental and social commitments. This year’s engagements reflect on data from 2023, a year that saw an increase in overflow incidents due to significantly wetter weather in the UK. LAPFF seeks to understand how companies are interpreting the impact of this wet year and whether they remain on track to meet the target of reducing overflows to an average of no more than 20 incidents per year by 2025. 9 LAPFF QUARTERLY ENGAGEMENT REPORT | JULY - SEPTEMBER 2024 lapfforum.org ENGAGEMENT CAHRA Objective: LAPFF met with Maersk earlier in 2024 amidst increasing scale and intensity of armed global conflicts, noting that Maersk had operations in the Red Sea and had faced attacks stemming from the escalation of conflict in Gaza. LAPFF aimed to explore how the company was approaching heightened human rights due diligence (hHRDD). Achieved: LAPFF met with Maersk for a second time to discuss hHRDD and the company’s approach to global conflict zones. Whilst the company was able to provide some specific examples of hHRDD in its operations, it was still unclear how it implemented an approach that incorporated this approach more widely across its entire operations where appropriate. Alongside this engagement, LAPFF continued its participation in the Investor Alliance for Human Rights (IAHR) pilot project on conflict-affected and high- risk areas (CAHRAs). The initiative is: “engaging a delimited set of portfolio companies in the technology and renewable energy sectors with exposure to risks in CAHRAs.” In Progress: LAPFF will consider following up with Maersk to discuss hHRDD more widely. LAPFF continues to engage as a supporting investor through IAHR’s pilot project to inform engagement with other companies on CAHRA. NIKE VOTING ALERT Nike faced five shareholder resolutions at its September 2024 AGM, with one on a ‘Supply Chain Management Report’, and another regarding ‘Work-driven Social Responsibility’. These come amidst ongoing concerns around Nike’s approach to addressing significant risks such as forced labour, wage theft, and other human rights violations within its supply chain. These concerns come as the push for stronger transparency and accountability is driven by new regulatory frameworks such as the EU’s Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive, which will require companies to take a more proactive role in managing human rights in their supply chains. use of ZHCs is limited to only specific areas, such as hospitality and sporting events, where flexibility is beneficial to operations. The company further elaborated that its flexible working policy ensures that employees on ZHCs can request fixed-hour contracts, and all ZHC employees have full employment contracts with the same terms and benefits as the broader workforce. The company believes its approach aligns with best practices and would not be impacted by the Labour party’s proposed changes. Hollywood Bowl outlined that a small proportion of its hourly workforce, primarily university students, are on zero-hour contracts which will be phased out by September 2024 in favour of fixed- term contracts for those returning during holiday periods. The company is awaiting further government guidance on the proposed Employment Rights Bill 2024 before determining its broader approach. They remain open to further engagement with the Forum as the proposed UK Employment Rights Bill 2024 develops. In Progress: LAPFF’s policy is that, on balance, there is no clear evidence that business models based on zero- hour contracts and precarious work outperform business models with different and more inclusive human capital strategies. In that context, LAPFF will continue to monitor developments relating to Employment Rights Bill and continue to engage investee companies regarding their exposure to the practice. companies or sectors. There are estimated to be around 1 million workers on ZHC’s in the UK. Women and people from ethnic minority backgrounds are more likely to be employed under this type of contract, and the very large majority of workers on them are in non-supervisory roles. The use of ZHCs is clustered in several sectors such as hospitality, arts, entertainment and leisure, health and social care, transport and storage, wholesale and retail. Prior to the July UK general election, the Labour Party had committed to ban zero-hours contracts in its Employment Rights Green Paper. Following the election, the government has promised to introduce The Employment Rights Bill which will prohibit ZHCs. Therefore, it is conceivable that some form of ban or restrictions placed on the use of ZHCs might be enacted in the coming years, which might have a significant impact on certain companies or sectors. Achieved: During Q3 LAPFF received written responses from both Compass Group and Hollywood Bowl. Mitie Group agreed to a meeting with LAPFF vice- Chair John Gray. Frasers Group refused LAPFF’s invitation to engage and did not provide its position as it relates to Zero Hour Contracts. In response to the question of exposure, Compass Group stated its A member of staff at Hollywood Bowl in Thurrock, Essex 10 LAPFF QUARTERLY ENGAGEMENT REPORT | JULY - SEPTEMBER 2024 lapfforum.org ENGAGEMENT are in place for companies to move to net zero homes, have Paris-aligned transition plans and targets, and ensure they are working with suppliers to reduce emissions, and are prepared for new regulatory standards, such as the Future Homes Standard. Achieved: In the quarter, LAPFF met the chair of Bellway to discuss its approach to decarbonisation. Bellway presented its “Better with Bellway” strategy, focusing on carbon reduction, including progress on Scope 1 and 2 emissions and plans to tackle Scope 3 emissions, which represent the majority of its carbon emissions. Discussions also covered Bellway’s preparation for the Future Home Standard, efforts in heat pump installations, and zero- bill homes. Bellway emphasised its focus on sustainability, supply chain decarbonisation, and long-term emission reduction goals. LAPFF met with the Chief Operating Officer and the Group Company Secretary at Vistry Group to discuss the company’s sustainability initiatives, its approach to reducing Scope 3 emissions, planning and pilots to be ready for the Future Homes Standard. The COO highlighted Vistry’s commitment to engaging with supply chain partners, increasing the use of timber frame construction, and ensuring compliance with evolving regulations. The meeting also discussed the challenges of meeting both housing targets and sustainability goals. At both meetings LAPFF also raised the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) investigation regarding the alleged sharing of commercially sensitive information. In Progress: Across both engagements with Bellway and Vistry, LAPFF heard of progress in preparing for regulatory changes such as the Future Homes Standard and efforts to work with suppliers to reduce emissions across their value chains. LAPFF has plans to engage other housebuilders in the following quarter and longer term to ensure continued progress in meeting their decarbonisation objectives, especially in regard to their supply chain. In the meeting with Vistry, LAPFF raised the fact that the company had a combined CEO and Chair role and will be following up on this. of talent internally for the purpose of succession planning could alleviate pressures on the granting of excessive awards for the purpose of retention. LAPFF also met with Sherry Coutu, Chair of the Remuneration Committee of the educational publishing company Pearson. The company had received an opposition vote of 30.2% to the remuneration report during its AGM earlier this year. Similarly to AstraZeneca, the company outlined that a relatively high percentage of its revenue derives from the US and higher quantum was necessary to retain and motivate talent. LAPFF raised concerns over the apparent excessive nature of a buyout award made for new CEO Omar Abbosh which totalled over £13 million. The award was granted to replace shares Mr Abbosh lost as a result of leaving the employment of Microsoft. LAPFF also raised concerns over the recent increase in maximum variable pay levels from 550% to 750% of the base salary. Lastly, LAPFF met with the Chair of Synthomer, Caroline Johnstone, alongside Remuneration Committee Chair, Holly Van Deursen. The company had received 44.6% opposition to its remuneration report during its 2024 AGM. The primary driver behind the dissent was the apparent lack of alignment between the rate of vesting of CEO awards with recent shareholder experience, this in part a result of non-financial performance criteria vesting at 100%. LAPFF further raised concerns over the use of EBITDA as a performance metric in both the annual and long-term incentive scheme, which provided the opportunity for the CEO to be paid twice for the same performance. In Progress: LAPFF has further calls scheduled with companies at which high levels of investor dissent was recorded during the 2024 proxy season, which will be undertaken during Q4. HOUSEBUILDERS Objective: LAPFF continues to engage the largest UK housebuilders on their climate transition strategies. In general, half of the industry’s current GHG emissions are from homes in use and the other half are from suppliers (including diesel vehicles and cement). The engagements seek to ensure plans LAPFF recommended a vote in favour of both resolutions given alignment with the Forum’s principles of engagement, aiming to enhance accountability, transparency, and the ethical management of human rights risks. The resolutions called for more detailed assessments and disclosures on supply chain practices and the adoption of Worker-Driven Social Responsibility (WSR) principles, which emphasise stronger, worker-centered mechanisms for addressing labour violations. LAPFF believes that resolutions such as these demonstrate an investor voice asking that Nike ensure its policies are not only compliant with international standards but also effectively safeguard workers’ rights and reduce reputational, legal, and operational risks. GOVERNANCE EXECUTIVE REMUNERATION Objective: During Q3, LAPFF requested engagement with UK-listed companies at which significant dissent to remuneration was observed during the 2024 proxy season. The objective of the engagements was to understand what was driving the dissent and steps being taken by the company to address shareholder concerns. Achieved: LAPFF held meetings with AstraZeneca, Pearson and Synthomer to discuss the high levels of shareholder dissatisfaction. This included a meeting with the Chair of AstraZeneca, Michel Demaré, to discuss the company’s approach to Executive compensation following opposition of 35.6% to the remuneration report at the 2024 AGM. The CEO of AstraZeneca was the highest paid in the FTSE100 in 2024, receiving over £18 million in total compensation. Mr Demaré outlined that the company benchmarked pay against a US peer group, a market in which the quantum of pay is comparatively high versus the UK. Mr Demaré further highlighted the value created for shareholders by AstraZeneca over recent years. In response, LAPFF outlined expectations of its members as it relates to excessive quantum and observed that a focus on the development 11 LAPFF QUARTERLY ENGAGEMENT REPORT | JULY - SEPTEMBER 2024 lapfforum.org ENGAGEMENT governance standards when it comes to investing in public equities. The other speakers were Lord Dominic Johnson, former Minister for Investment and Karim Palant, Director of External Affairs, BVCA. The discussion covered the number of DC schemes, pension fund consolidation, and the government’s pension investment review. issues. The position of asset owners versus fund managers is particularly relevant to this area. LAPFF PARTY CONFERENCE EVENTS Each year LAPFF hosts fringe events at political party conferences. These meetings provide the opportunity to raise awareness of the work that LAPFF undertakes and engage with national politicians and other stakeholders. At the Lib Dem conference, the focus of the meeting was: Investing in the green transition – what needs to change? The discussion was chaired by Gideon Amos MP , with Cllr Toby Simon speaking on behalf of LAPFF and outlining the work of the Forum. The other speakers included Wera Hobhouse MP , Energy and Climate Change Spokesperson, Baroness Shaista Sheehan, Director, Peers for the Planet Group and Cllr Martin Horwood, President Green Liberal Democrats. The discussion covered divestment, fiscal incentives and fossil fuel subsidies and offsetting. At the Labour Party conference, the meeting was titled: A new deal for working people – how will investors react? LAPFF vice-chair Cllr John Gray outlined company engagement on employment standards and the importance of social factors to responsible investors. The other speakers were Liam Byrne MP , Chair of the Business and Trade Select Committee and Nicola Smith, Head of the Rights, International, Social and Economics department at the TUC. The discussion covered the importance of good workplace practices for creating growth, the role investors can play in driving better standards, the upcoming employment rights bill, directors’ duties, fiduciary duties, company reporting and the government’s pension investment review. At the Conservative Party conference, the event was focused on: “Investing in the UK – can British pension funds do more?” The meeting was chaired by Charlotte Pickles, the director of the think tank Reform with LAPFF’s chair, Cllr Doug McMurdo, outlining fiduciary duties and the importance of corporate CAPITAL MARKETS - LSEG Objective: LAPFF has been concerned about the weakening of standards relating to new entrants to the London listed companies’ market, which has included, Aston Martin Lagonda, NMC Health, Finablr and Quindell, the former of which has lost >90% of its value since listing, the other three being 100% losses. The LAPFF Executive convened a ‘Capital Markets Working Group’ in the light of a recent concerted campaign by some interests to further weaken the standards of the listing regime. That campaign has included the Capital Markets Industry Taskforce, which is just that, it is a coalition of “fee earning” interests rather than shareholder interests, including issues of investor protection. It is chaired by the CEO of the London Stock Exchange. Achieved: An open letter was sent in May 2024 to the Chair of London Stock Exchange Group, which asked for an evidence-based approach, and to supply the evidence for assertions made to date. Unfortunately, the response did not sufficiently address the issues. Because of that LAPFF in August 2024 wrote back to the LSEG, making it clear that LAPFF expected the May letter to be answered properly, with evidence and accuracy. It was stressed that like any other listed company, LSEG should be making accurate representations to shareholders and the market about its own business. LAPFF is aware of one large quality company that has delisted which doesn’t accord with the narrative that over- regulation is a problem. What appears to be the problem is the unattractiveness of the FTSE Index, given that a few large companies dominate by market capitalisation (‘top-heavy composition’) which works against diversification – and of which oil and gas companies as well as financials are factors in that. For example, the largest oil and gas company in the S&P 500 index is Exxon which is 15th by market capitalisation, compared to the UK where Shell is 2nd and BP 5th. In Progress: The Capital Markets Working Group plans to undertake a survey of LAPFF members on these Top: Liberal Democrat leader, Ed Davey MP delivers his keynote speech on the last day of the conference Middle: Conservative Party leadership candidate Kemi Badenoch seen at the conference Bottom: Prime Minister Keir Starmer delivers his Party Conference speech at the Labour Party Conference 2024 12 LAPFF QUARTERLY ENGAGEMENT REPORT | JULY - SEPTEMBER 2024 lapfforum.org COMPANY PROGRESS REPORT Excluding the 76 letters through the Climate Transition Plan (CTP) initiative, 42 Companies were engaged over the quarter. The table below shows those companies engaged outside the CTP initiative, but the graphs include those engagements. Company/Index Activity Topic Outcome ALIMENTATION COUCHE-TARD INC. Alert Issued Climate Change AP MOLLER - MAERSK AS Meeting Human Rights Dialogue ASTRAZENECA PLC Meeting Remuneration No Improvement BARRATT DEVELOPMENTS PLC Sent Correspondence Climate Change Awaiting Response BELLWAY PLC Meeting Climate Change Small Improvement BERKELEY GROUP HOLDINGS PLC Sent Correspondence Climate Change Awaiting Response BP PLC Meeting Climate Change Dialogue BURBERRY GROUP PLC Meeting Environmental Risk Small Improvement CEMEX SAB DE CV Sent Correspondence Environmental Risk Awaiting Response CIMB GROUP HOLDINGS BERHAD Meeting Climate Change Moderate Improvement CLARKSON PLC Sent Correspondence Remuneration Awaiting Response COMPASS GROUP PLC Received Correspondence Employment Standards Dialogue CRH PLC Meeting Climate Change Change in Process FRASERS GROUP PLC Sent Correspondence Employment Standards Satisfactory Response HEIDELBERG MATERIALS AG Sent Correspondence Environmental Risk Awaiting Response HOLLYWOOD BOWL GROUP PLC Sent Correspondence Employment Standards Change in Process HUANENG POWER INTERNATIONAL Meeting Climate Change Moderate Improvement HUNTING PLC Sent Correspondence Remuneration Awaiting Response IMPERIAL BRANDS PLC Meeting Environmental Risk Dialogue JAPAN TOBACCO INC Meeting Environmental Risk Dialogue KASIKORNBANK PCL Meeting Climate Change Small Improvement LOREAL SA Meeting Human Rights Substantial Improvement MITIE GROUP PLC Meeting Employment Standards Dialogue NIKE INC. Alert Issued Human Rights NOVO NORDISK A/S Meeting Environmental Risk Dialogue PEARSON PLC Meeting Remuneration No Improvement PERSIMMON PLC Sent Correspondence Climate Change Awaiting Response PHILIP MORRIS INTERNATIONAL INC. Meeting Environmental Risk Small Improvement PLUS500 LTD Sent Correspondence Remuneration Awaiting Response PURETECH HEALTH PLC Sent Correspondence Remuneration Awaiting Response RYANAIR HOLDINGS PLC Meeting Environmental Risk Dialogue SEVERN TRENT PLC Meeting Environmental Risk Dialogue SMITH & NEPHEW PLC Sent Correspondence Remuneration Awaiting Response SPIRENT COMMUNICATIONS PLC Sent Correspondence Remuneration Awaiting Response SSAB (SVENSKT STAL AB) Meeting Environmental Risk Dialogue STANDARD BANK Sent Correspondence Social Risk Awaiting Response SYNTHOMER PLC Meeting Remuneration No Improvement TAYLOR WIMPEY PLC Sent Correspondence Climate Change Awaiting Response TBC BANK GROUP PLC Sent Correspondence Remuneration Awaiting Response THYSSENKRUPP AG Meeting Environmental Risk Dialogue TRAVIS PERKINS PLC Sent Correspondence Remuneration Awaiting Response VISTRY GROUP PLC Meeting Climate Change Small Improvement 13 LAPFF QUARTERLY ENGAGEMENT REPORT | JULY - SEPTEMBER 2024 lapfforum.org ENGAGEMENT DATA 02 04 06 08 01 00 120 Cl/i.ss01mate Change Remunerat/i.ss01on Env/i.ss01ronmental R/i.ss01sk Governance (General) Soc/i.ss01al R/i.ss01sk Employment Standards Reputat/i.ss01onal R/i.ss01sk Human R/i.ss01ghts Supply Cha/i.ss01n Management F/i.ss01nance and Account/i.ss01ng ENGAGEMENT TOPICS MEETING ENGAGEMENT OUTCOMES ACTIVITY POSITION ENGAGED COMPANY DOMICILES 0 20 40 60 80 100 Sent Correspondence Meeting Received Correspondence Alert Issued 02 04 06 08 0 100 120 Chairperson Specialist Staff Exec Director or CEO 02 04 06 08 01 00 120 GBR IRL USA DNK DEU ESP MEX GRC GGY LUX ISR CHN THA MYS JPN FRA GEO SWE CYM 02 04 06 08 01 00 120 Dialogue Awaiting Response Small Improvement Change in Process Moderate Improvement Substantial Improvement Satisfactory Response 02 04 06 08 01 00 120 Cl/i.ss01mate Change Remunerat/i.ss01on Env/i.ss01ronmental R/i.ss01sk Governance (General) Soc/i.ss01al R/i.ss01sk Employment Standards Reputat/i.ss01onal R/i.ss01sk Human R/i.ss01ghts Supply Cha/i.ss01n Management F/i.ss01nance and Account/i.ss01ng 14 LAPFF QUARTERLY ENGAGEMENT REPORT | JULY - SEPTEMBER 2024 lapfforum.org ENGAGEMENT DATA Count of Goal 17 Count of Goal 16 Count of Goal 15 Count of Goal 14 Count of Goal 13 Count of Goal 12 Count of Goal 11 Count of Goal 10 Count of Goal 9Count of Goal 8Count of Goal 7Count of Goal 6Count of Goal 5Count of Goal 4Count of Goal 3Count of Goal 2Count of Goal 1 LAPFF SDG ENGAGEMENTS SDG 1: No Poverty 2 SDG 2: Zero Hunger 0 SDG 3: Good Health and Well-Being 4 SDG 4: Quality Education 2 SDG 5: Gender Equality 0 SDG 6: Clean Water and Sanitation 1 SDG 7: Affordable and Clean Energy 1 SDG 8: Decent Work and Economic Growth 8 SDG 9: Industry, Innovation, and Infrastructure 11 SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities 16 SDG 11: Sustainable Cities and Communities 5 SDG12: Responsible Production and Consumption 5 SDG 13: Climate Action 111 SDG 14: Life Below Water 1 SDG 15: Life on Land 3 SDG 16: Peace, Justice, and Strong Institutions 4 SDG 17: Strengthen the Means of Implementation and Revitalise the 0 Global Partnership for Sustainable Development SDG 15 SDG 6 SDG 11 SDG 1 SDG 12 SDG 3 SDG 7 SDG 9 SDG 10 SDG 16 SDG 13 SDG 8 SDG 4 SDG 14 15 LAPFF QUARTERLY ENGAGEMENT REPORT | JULY - SEPTEMBER 2024 lapfforum.org Avon Pension Fund Barking and Dagenham Pension Fund Barnet Pension Fund Bedfordshire Pension Fund Berkshire Pension Fund Bexley (London Borough of) Brent (London Borough of) Cambridgeshire Pension Fund Camden Pension Fund Cardiff & Glamorgan Pension Fund Cheshire Pension Fund City of London Corporation Pension Fund Clwyd Pension Fund (Flintshire CC) Cornwall Pension Fund Croydon Pension Fund Cumbria Pension Fund Derbyshire Pension Fund Devon Pension Fund Dorset Pension Fund Durham Pension Fund Dyfed Pension Fund Ealing Pension Fund East Riding Pension Fund East Sussex Pension Fund Enfield Pension Fund Environment Agency Pension Fund Essex Pension Fund Falkirk Pension Fund Gloucestershire Pension Fund Greater Gwent Pension Fund Greater Manchester Pension Fund Greenwich Pension Fund Gwynedd Pension Fund Hackney Pension Fund Hammersmith and Fulham Pension Fund Haringey Pension Fund Harrow Pension Fund Havering Pension Fund Hertfordshire Pension Fund Hillingdon Pension Fund Hounslow Pension Fund Isle of Wight Pension Fund Islington Pension Fund Kensington and Chelsea (Royal Borough of) Kent Pension Fund Kingston upon Thames Pension Fund Lambeth Pension Fund Lancashire County Pension Fund Leicestershire Pension Fund Lewisham Pension Fund Lincolnshire Pension Fund London Pension Fund Authority Lothian Pension Fund Merseyside Pension Fund Merton Pension Fund Newham Pension Fund Norfolk Pension Fund North East Scotland Pension Fund North Yorkshire Pension Fund Northamptonshire Pension Fund Nottinghamshire Pension Fund Oxfordshire Pension Fund Powys Pension Fund Redbridge Pension Fund Rhondda Cynon Taf Pension Fund Scottish Borders Pension Fund Shropshire Pension Fund Somerset Pension Fund South Yorkshire Pension Authority Southwark Pension Fund Staffordshire Pension Fund Strathclyde Pension Fund Suffolk Pension Fund Surrey Pension Fund Sutton Pension Fund Swansea Pension Fund Teesside Pension Fund Tower Hamlets Pension Fund Tyne and Wear Pension Fund Waltham Forest Pension Fund Wandsworth Borough Council Pension Fund Warwickshire Pension Fund West Midlands Pension Fund West Yorkshire Pension Fund Westminster Pension Fund Wiltshire Pension Fund Worcestershire Pension Fund Pool Company Members ACCESS Pool Border to Coast Pensions Partnership LGPS Central Local Pensions Partnership London CIV Northern LGPS Wales Pension Partnership LOCAL AUTHORITY PENSION FUND FORUM MEMBERS

Quarterly Investment Review - Private Markets 30 June 2024 Bookmarks London CIV Fund Range|3|1 |0|2 |0|3 Funds|4|1 LCIV Infrastructure Fund|4|2 |0|3 |0|2 |0|3 Mandate Design Review|11|3 LCIV Private Debt Fund|31|2 |0|3 |0|2 |0|3 Mandate Design Review|37|3 Appendices|45|1 |0|2 |0|3 Glossary of Terms|45|2 |0|3 Disclaimer|48|2 |0|3 Introduction Hillingdon This report is confidential. It has been prepared for inform ation purposes only and does not constitute investment advice. Whilst reasonable care has been taken to ensure that the i nformation and opinions expressed as part of this report were considered and valid at the time the report was published no representation or warranty as to the accuracy or completeness of this information is given. Contents London CIV Fund Range2 Funds LCIV Infrastructure Fund3 LCIV Private Debt Fund30 Appendices Glossary of Terms44 Disclaimer47 London CIV Quarterly Private Markets Investment Review London Borough of Hillingdon Pension Fund Summary Update Funds Appendices30 June 2024 {S} {U} {F} {A} Please see below a summary of your investments in London CIV p rivate market funds as at 30 June 2024, showing drawn and undrawn commitments and current valuation. Commitments Undrawn Commitment NAVInvested Since Inception Active Investments £ £ ££ EUUT LCIV Infrastructure Fund 55,000,000 11,458,456 52,914,28643,541,544 LCIV Private Debt Fund 70,000,000 22,949,839 56,765,16047,050,161 Total 125,000,000 34,408,295 109,679,44690,591,705 Please see below a summary of the London CIV Private Market fu nds, including both those in which you are invested, and those you are not. 30 June 2024 Total Commitment Drawn to Date Undrawn Commitments No. of Investors Inception DatePrivate Markets 30 June 2024 Fund Value % Drawn % Available for Investment £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000EUUT LCIV Infrastructure Fund 475,000 315,874 631/10/2019159,126 383,869 21%66% LCIV Real Estate Long Income Fund 213,000 213,000 311/06/2020n/a 155,484 -100% LCIV Renewable Infrastructure Fund 1,108,500 481,149 1629/03/2021627,351 553,484 23%43% LCIV Private Debt Fund 625,000 420,091 829/03/2021204,909 506,832 8%67% LCIV UK Housing Fund 450,000 73,200 831/03/2023376,800 71,889 40%16% £'000 £'000 £'000 £'000SLP The London Fund 250,000 104,026 415/12/2020145,974 105,821 37%42% 3,121,500 1,607,340 1,514,160 1,777,379 Source: London CIV as at 30 June 2024. London CIV Fund Range 2 London CIV Quarterly Private Markets Investment Review London Borough of Hillingdon Pension Fund Summary Update Funds Appendices30 June 2024 {S} {U} {F} {A} LCIV Infrastructure Fund Quarterly Summary as at 30 June 2024 Total Fund Value: £383.9m Inception date: 31/10/2019 Total Fund commitments: £475.0m Total contributed since inception: £315.9m Total contributed in the quarter: - Total distributed since inception: £8.8m Total distributed in the quarter: £1.4m Investment Objective The Fund's long term objective is to seek to achieve a net return of 8-10% per annum and a cash yield of 4-6% per annum. Key Dates and Timelines: The Fund is open ended, it does not have an investment period and is permitted to make new investments throughout its term. Each commitment is subject to a lock-up period of five years from the relevant close. Hillingdon Valuation: £52.9m Hillingdon commitment: Total contributed since inception: Total contributed in the quarter: Total distributed since inception: Total distributed in the quarter: 31/10/2019 £55.0m £43.5m - £1.2m £0.2m Hillingdon commitment date: This is equivalent to 13.78% of the Fund Executive Summary The LCIV Infrastructure Fund (the “Fund”) NAV increased to £383. 9m in Q2 2024, from £371.4m in Q1 2024. The increase in NAV was mainly driven by a significant unrealised gain over the quarter totalling £13.9m, relating to Macquarie Green Renewable E nergy Fund 2 (“MGREF 2”), Arcus European Infrastructure Fund 2 (“AEIF 2”) and Capital Dynamics Clean Energy and Infrastructure VIII (“CE VIII”). AEIF 2 saw the largest movement, accounting for c. 50% of the unrealised gain, as one portfolio company’s carrying value was updated to reflect the exit valuat ion finalised over the quarter, which is expected to close in H2 2024, resulting in a gros s realised IRR of 33%. MGREF 2 and CE VIII movements were related to underlying assets moving th rough key construction milestones and hence marked up from cost to a DCF valuati on. The unrealised gain was offset slightly by the Fund’s third income d istribution totalling £1.4m, with the rolling three quarters yield in line with the Fund’s annual yield target albeit towards the lower end as the portfolio continues to ramp-up. Subsequ ent to quarter end, the fourth distribution was confirmed and is due to be paid out to i nvestors at the end of September. Note, there was capital call activity from three investments during thequarter however this did not impact the NAV as i) cash reserves were used for AEIF 2 and Brookfi eld Global Transition Fund (“BGTF”) and ii) the cash was received subsequent to quar ter end for KKR Global Infrastructure Investors IV (“KKR IV”). The largest and mos t notable capital call was for KKR IV, a new secondary fund investment that closed after quarter end, wh ich totalled £17.2m and was used to fund the transaction - more details will follow in the Q3 2024 commentary. The Fund remains 80% committed across eight fund investments and is 67 % drawn, following new investor commitments over Q1 2024. StepStone, the del egated Investment Manager of the Fund, continue to seek new opportunities to deploy the u ncommitted capital with a focus on minimising deployment dilution and yield. More details are included 3 London CIV Quarterly Private Markets Investment Review London Borough of Hillingdon Pension Fund Summary Update Funds Appendices30 June 2024 {S} {U} {F} {A} within the Investment Activity section below. The Fund’s net IRR si nce inception is tracking in line with the Fund’s investment objective at 9%, with each underlyi ng investment performing in line with expectations. The Fund’s 1-year yield is also tracking in line with the investment objective, noting the Fund only began distributing inco me at the end of the initial four-year ramp-up period. Further detail can be found within t he Performance section below. 4 London CIV Quarterly Private Markets Investment Review London Borough of Hillingdon Pension Fund Summary Update Funds Appendices30 June 2024 {S} {U} {F} {A} LCIV Infrastructure Fund Current Investments Abbreviation Investment Date Total Commitments LCIV Fund CommitmentsVintage Unfunded GBPInvestments (Local) (Local '000) (£ '000) Primary Macquarie Green Renewable Energy Fund 2 MGREF 2 Dec-19 €1,634m €75,0002020 10,020 Arcus European Infrastructure Fund 2 AEIF 2 Mar-20 €1,217m €50,0002018 6,396 Equitix Fund VI EF VI Mar-20 £1,471m £50,0002020 359 Basalt Infrastructure Partners III BIP III May-20 $2,750m $50,0002020 7,085 European Diversified Infrastructure Fund III EDIF III Jul-20 €4,156m €75,0002020 0 Capital Dynamics Clean Energy and Infrastructure VIII CE VIII Dec-20 £300m £40,0002019 3,532 Brookfield Global Transition Fund BGTF Dec-21 $12,964m $50,0002021 20,093 Secondary Meridiam Infrastructure North America II 1 MINA II Aug-22 $873m $43,9982010 51 KKR Global Infrastructure Investors IV KKR Jun-24 $17,000m $33,9972021 10,325 Total Committed to Investments 57,861 Drawn Capital 315,874 Funds available for investment 101,265 Total Fund Commitments 475,000 1 The original commitment was $22.67m. Source: London CIV as at 30 June 2024. LCIV Fund GBP Commitment is calculated as GBP cost plus undrawn commitments multiplied by FX rate as at 30 June 2024. 5 London CIV Quarterly Private Markets Investment Review London Borough of Hillingdon Pension Fund Summary Update Funds Appendices30 June 2024 {S} {U} {F} {A} LCIV Infrastructure Fund Cashflow Activity During the quarter ended 30 June 2024, the Fund made no capital calls to investors. A capital call was made after quarter end (2 July 2024) for £17.2m to fund th e KKR IV investment. Cash reserves and distributions received were used to pay the call notices received by the Fund. The cash flows to/from the underlying investments were as follows: Investment Amount Due Date Comments BGTF ($0.7m) 09 April 2024 Capital call - Investments and man agement fee and expenses MGREF 2 €17k 10 April 2024 Distribution - Fee rebate EDIF III €34k 15 April 2024 Distribution - Fee rebate EDIF III €0.7m 21 June 2024 Distribution - Income AEIF 2 (€0.5m) 24 June 2024 Capital call – Repayment of senior bridge facility CE VIII £0.13m 25 June 2024 Distribution - Income KKR IV ($20.9m) 27 June 2024 Capital call - investment MINA II $0.5m 28 June 2024 Distribution – Return of capital an d interest income Investment Activity During the quarter, there were no new investments made by the Fund, how ever, the Fund did call capital to fund a new secondary transaction that closed just after q uarter end, detailed further below. As referenced in the Executive Summary, StepStone are seeking to invest the uncommitted capital following the close in Q1 2024 in line with the return obj ectives and investment restrictions of the Fund, with a particular focus on yield and deplo yment. LCIV remains actively engaged with them on a pipeline of suitable opportunities acro ss primary funds, secondaries, and co-investments, there are currently three live opport unities covered below. Over the quarter, StepStone progressed investment due diligence on a u nique secondary fund opportunity that would enable c. £15m of instant deployment and a further c. 15m as the fund progresses through its investment period. StepStone received their IC approval on a low double-digits discount and closed on the secondary transactionjust after quarter end. The underlying fund is managed by KKR and is the fourth flagship fund targeting global infrastructure opportunities in OECD countries with a focus on Europe and North America. KKR IV is well progressed after raising $17bn, closing on 14 underlyi ng investments across transport, communications, and renewable subsectors. Alongside the secondary opportunity, StepStone progressed investment due diligence on a c. £30m primary fund opportunity that also received their IC approval and again closed on the investment just after quarter end. The fund is focused on ready-to-build solar PV assets within the UK - more details will follow in the Q3 2024 commentary. StepStone have also sourced a new GP-led secondary opportunity and prog ressed investment due diligence over the quarter. The opportunity is a hig h-quality infrastructure manager seeking liquidity and further funding for one asset within their flagship fund series, as they seek to execute on a delayed business plan. It is well subscribed from ex isting investors and StepStone are currently negotiating an allocation, which would fit well in the Fund. Given this is one asset, StepStone will size the allocation accordingly at c. £10m which would be deployed instantly. Subsequent to quarter end, StepStone secur ed an allocation for the Fund and closed on the investment – more details will follow i n the Q3 2024 commentary. 6 London CIV Quarterly Private Markets Investment Review London Borough of Hillingdon Pension Fund Summary Update Funds Appendices30 June 2024 {S} {U} {F} {A} LCIV Infrastructure Fund Performance Source: London CIV as at 30 June 2024 The Fund’s net IRR since inception is 9%, tracking in line wit h the Fund’s investment objective of 8% - 10%. It is still relatively early in the life of the Fund and as the remainder of the development/construction assets move to operations and are marked up from cost, performance is expected to move towards the hig her end of the investment objective. AEIF 2 is an early strong performer, recording an underlying gross IRR of 28.5% to date as it benefits from two early exits at extremely attractive valuations. CEI VIII and Equitix VI are initial underperformers, however mainly due to the underlying assets still moving through development/construction. StepStone are happy wi th how the underlying portfolio is progressing and have no concerns around performance. The Fund began distributing income at the end of the ramp-up p eriod in Q4 2023, where the majority of the portfolio was now operational. Sin ce, the Fund has distributed £8.8m and the yield is tracking in line with the 1-year investment objective of 4% - 6%. The yield is expected to be towards the lower end of t he objective as it is the first-year post ramp-up period, noting that the seconda ry transaction into Meridiam Infrastructure North America II (“MINA II”) has si gnificantly benefited the income generation of the portfolio. Fund Monitoring As the Fund is no longer fully committed and out of its ramp-up perio d, dialogue between London CIV and StepStone is focused on pipeline (as covered in the Inv estment Activity section above) and performance / ongoing portfolio management. Approximately 80% of the Fund is committed to primaries and secondaries as of Q2 2024, with the remainder unallocated at the end of the quarter. Post quarter-end, an additional 13% of the Fund was committed to primaries and secondaries (across the op portunities referenced in the Investment Activity section above) with the remaining u ncommitted reserves to be invested in a manner such that all compliance restrictions are met with reasonable headroom. During Q2 2024, capital calls from all primary funds totalled £1.0 mi llion, primarily in relation to Arcus and Brookfield, with the drawdown rate tracking sl ightly ahead of StepStone’s pacing model. BGTF is the notable lagging investment, as t he final investment collapsed after it did not receive regulatory approvals. StepStone are happy with the development of the portfolio at this stag e in the Fund’s life, reflected in the performance figures to date. 7 London CIV Quarterly Private Markets Investment Review London Borough of Hillingdon Pension Fund Summary Update Funds Appendices30 June 2024 {S} {U} {F} {A} LCIV Infrastructure Fund 0 100 200 300 400 500 £m Dec 2019 Mar 2020 Jun 2020 Sep 2020 Dec 2020 Ma r 2021 Jun 2021 Sep 2021 Dec 2021 Ma r 2022 Jun 2022 Sep 2022 Dec 2022 Ma r 2023 Jun 2023 Sep 2023 Dec 2023 Ma r 2024 Jun 2024 Commitments MGREF 2 AEIF 2 EF VI BIP III EDIF III CE VIII BGTF MINA II KKR Funding Review 0 100 200 300 400 500 £m Dec 2019 Mar 2020 Jun 2020 Sep 2020 Dec 2020 Ma r 2021 Jun 2021 Sep 2021 Dec 2021 Ma r 2022 Jun 2022 Sep 2022 Dec 2022 Ma r 2023 Jun 2023 Sep 2023 Dec 2023 Ma r 2024 Jun 2024 Commitments MGREF 2 AEIF 2 EF VI BIP III EDIF III CE VIII BGTF MINA II KKR Commitment Review Source: London CIV as at 30 June 2024. 8 London CIV Quarterly Private Markets Investment Review London Borough of Hillingdon Pension Fund Summary Update Funds Appendices30 June 2024 {S} {U} {F} {A} LCIV Infrastructure Fund Performance MetricsRealisationsMovements in the quarter Current Net IRR Target Yield Target Net IRR Income Distributions Realised Gains Unrealised Gain/Loss Capital Returns FX Gain/Loss Capital Calls 31 Mar 24 Fair Value 30 Jun 24 Fair Value Current Cost %%%(£ '000)(£ '000)(£ '000)(£ '000) (£ '000)(£ '000)(£ '000)(£ '000)(£ '000) Primary 7.510.08.5--2,548- (521)-58,75560,78254,453MGREF 2 27.75.013.0--8,058- (396)41644,75552,83334,104AEIF 2 3.86.08.5--(377)- --51,97451,59749,641EF VI 8.75.011.5--614- (66)-37,82038,36932,096BIP III 10.75.08.5606-707- (721)-81,33481,32166,129EDIF III 6.03.011.0123-1,909- --36,50838,41836,468CE VIII 5.44.010.0--555(59) (34)60420,43721,50320,369BGTF Secondary 0.68.210.169-1,090(348) (60)-34,49935,18135,584MINA II --14.0---- (3)16,563-16,56016,563KKR 798-15,106(407) (1,801)17,583366,083396,564345,408Investment Total Quarterly Investment Reconciliation Source: London CIV as at 30 June 2024. Performance Metric data is provided by Stepstone as at 30 June 2024. Performance data is net of manager fees but gross of LCIV fees. QTD (£ '000) Opening NAV 371,356 Drawdowns 0 Distributions (1,436) Gains/Losses 13,949 Closing NAV 383,869 9 Mandate Design Review London CIV Quarterly Private Markets Investment Review London Borough of Hillingdon Pension Fund Summary Update Funds Appendices30 June 2024 {S} {U} {F} {A} LCIV Infrastructure Fund 14% 9% 11% 8% 14% 8% 8% 8% 6% 14% Macquarie Asset Management Arcus Infrastructure Partners Equitix Investment Management Basalt Infrastructure Partners Igneo Infrastructure Partners Capital Dynamics Holding AG Brookfield Meridiam Infrastructure Partners KKR Global Infrastructure Investors IV Uncommitted reserves Fund Allocation of Commitments Max 25% Invested with a single fund SponsorLimit Current 16% 14% 13% 10% 21% 10% 6% 9% 4% Macquarie Asset Management Arcus Infrastructure Partners Equitix Investment Management Basalt Infrastructure Partners Igneo Infrastructure Partners Capital Dynamics Holding AG Brookfield Meridiam Infrastructure Partners KKR Global Infrastructure Investors IV Fund Allocation of NAV Max 25% Invested with a single fund SponsorLimit Current Note where an allocation is below 3% the data label is not shown. The Manager considers the investment restrictions at the time of each initial investment made after December 2023, being the fourth anniversary of the initial investment. The above information is a summary and does not represent the full fund terms. For further information please contact your Client Relations Manager. Source: London CIV based on Stepstone information as at 30 June 2024. 10 Mandate Design Review London CIV Quarterly Private Markets Investment Review London Borough of Hillingdon Pension Fund Summary Update Funds Appendices30 June 2024 {S} {U} {F} {A} LCIV Infrastructure Fund 85% 15% Primary Secondary Eligible Investments Review Min 80% Max 20% Primary and Secondary Investments Co-Investments and Direct InvestmentsLimit Current 46% 19% 8% 11% 13% Renewables T ransport Communications Utilities & Power Social Other Sector breakdown Min 25% Max 25% per sector Renewable investments Other SectorsLimit Current Note where an allocation is below 3% the data label is not shown. The Manager considers the investment restrictions at the time of each initial investment made after December 2023, being the fourth anniversary of the initial investment. The above information is a summary and does not represent the full fund terms. For further information please contact your Client Relations Manager. Source: London CIV based on Stepstone information as at 30 June 2024. 11 Mandate Design Review London CIV Quarterly Private Markets Investment Review London Borough of Hillingdon Pension Fund Summary Update Funds Appendices30 June 2024 {S} {U} {F} {A} LCIV Infrastructure Fund 74% 17% 5% 4% Europe inc. UK US Non-OECD Other Geography breakdown Min 50% Min 30% Invested in Europe (including the UK) Invested outside Europe Invested anywhere Limit Current 45% 25% 30% EUR GBP USD Currency of Drawn Capital Unconstrained Foreign currency exposure through owning overseas investments is often a material driver of Net Asset V alue volatility relative to Fund currency Limit Current Note where an allocation is below 3% the data label is not shown. The Manager considers the investment restrictions at the time of each initial investment made after December 2023, being the fourth anniversary of the initial investment. The above information is a summary and does not represent the full fund terms. For further information please contact your Client Relations Manager. Source: London CIV based on Stepstone information as at 30 June 2024. 12 Mandate Design Review London CIV Quarterly Private Markets Investment Review London Borough of Hillingdon Pension Fund Summary Update Funds Appendices30 June 2024 {S} {U} {F} {A} LCIV Infrastructure Fund 83% 17% Brownfield Greenfield Development Stage Min 80% Established infrastructure assets (being brownfield investments ) Limit Current Note where an allocation is below 3% the data label is not shown. The Manager considers the investment restrictions at the time of each initial investment made after December 2023, being the fourth anniversary of the initial investment. The above information is a summary and does not represent the full fund terms. For further information please contact your Client Relations Manager. Source: London CIV based on Stepstone information as at 30 June 2024. 13 London CIV Quarterly Private Markets Investment Review London Borough of Hillingdon Pension Fund Summary Update Funds Appendices30 June 2024 {S} {U} {F} {A} LCIV Infrastructure Fund Macquarie Green Renewable Energy Fund 2 (MGREF 2) Summary Vintage: 2020 Fund Size: €1.6 billion Sponsor: Macquarie Asset Management Currency: EUR Sector: Renewables Geography: Europe (80%), North Amer ica and Australia (20%) Investment Period End: December 2023 Term End: December 2044 IP Extension: n/a Term Extension: 2 (GP) + 2 (LP Consent) Investment Overview Macquarie will target control-oriented equity investment s with an allocation of 50-75% of commitments to construction and 25-50% to operational proj ects. MGREF 2 is targeting a net IRR of 8% to 9%, underpinned by an annual 10% to 12% cash yield f ollowing the construction period. Sector 50% 26% 8% 16% Solar Wind Diversified Renewables Unallocated Portfolio 19% 16% 11% 11% 8% 8% 6% 5% 16% Reden Solar Ventos de Sao Zacarias (Araripe IV) Apex Energies Island Green Power SunRun (US Residential Solar Co) Principia Energy (Enel Green Power) Fengchui Wind Power Gwynt y Mor Unallocated Source: MIRA, Stepstone as at 30 June 2024 Investment Diversification Key Developments As of 30 June 2024, MGREF 2 has invested 84% of commitments acr oss eight investments. o One further investment is expected to be made in the second half of 2024. On a fund life-to-date basis, MGREF 2 has generated a net IRR of 8.3%. Notable portfolio activity during the quarter includes: o The first stage in the repair of Gwynt y Môr's failed export cable is expected to be completed in August 2024, which will allow the cable to ret urn to service with a curtailment that will result in an export capacity limit of 87.5%. o Apex Energies saw a 59.3% increase in energy production comp ared to Q2 2023, mainly driven by higher volumes commissioned and in operation, which increased by 72 MW to a total of 177 MW YoY. o Reden's sale of up to ~1 GW of French greenfield projects is cu rrently in advanced stages of negotiation with a preferred bidder and targeting a close by the end of 2024. o Island Green Power is in the process of preparing several assets for sale, with a combined capacity of ~550 MWp solar and ~300 MWp battery, whi ch are expected to begin later in 2024. In the UK, Project Cottam, with net capacity of ~780 MWp solar and 240 MWp battery, has progressed to the final stage of the planning process and development consent is expected in Q3 2024. o Ventos de Sao Zacarias has completed the construction of 59 tu rbines and, of those, 41 have been commissioned. The project remains on tra ck to reach its Commercial Operations Date on schedule. Overall, the net asset value of the fund increased by 2.6% in Q2 2024 to €1,563.1m. ESG Activity During Q2 Macquarie assisted Apex Energies in reviewing and refining its Net Zero 2040 targets and action plans. The company’s final Map to NetZero 2024 targets a ~50 per cent emissions cut by 2030, with the remaining emissi ons cut in the following decade. Macquarie also worked with Reden’s management team to final ise its 2040 Net Zero business plan. The business plan has been under development since 2023 and includes an interim target of a 42 per cent reduction in scope1 and 2 emissions by 2030. 14 London CIV Quarterly Private Markets Investment Review London Borough of Hillingdon Pension Fund Summary Update Funds Appendices30 June 2024 {S} {U} {F} {A} LCIV Infrastructure Fund Arcus European Infrastructure Fund 2 (AEIF 2) Summary Vintage: 2018 Fund Size: €1.2 billion Sponsor: Arcus Infrastructure Partners Currency: EUR Sector: Diversified Geography: Europe Investment Period End: April 2023 Term End: April 2030 IP Extension: n/a Term Extension: 1 + 1 (Board Approved) + 1 (LP Consent) Investment Overview AEIF 2 seeks to build a portfolio of 8 to 10 investments, makin g equity investments of EUR100-250 million, and will target a net IRR of 12% to 14% on a whole fund basis and a net yield of 5% p.a. after the investment period. Sector 45% 27% 9% 8% 7% Logistics and Storage Energy Infrastructure Rail Leasing Wind Fiber Unallocated Portfolio 29% 16% 11% 9% 8% 8% 8% 7% Constellation Cold Logistics Smart Meter Assets Horizon Energy Infrastructure Peacock Group Holdings B.V . Momentum Opus Bilprovning HB RTS Swiss4net Unallocated Source: Arcus, Stepstone as at 30 June 2024 Investment Diversification Key Developments As of 30 June 2024, AEIF 2 had invested c. 94% across nine assets. Since inception, AEIF 2 has generated a net IRR of 25.1% driven by two att ractive realisations. The portfolio showed steady performance over the quarter: o Constellation Cold Logistics: During the quarter, AEIF 2 en tered definitive transaction documentation for the sale of Constellation to EQT Infrastructure VI, the expected proceeds to the fund are expected to result ina gross TVM/IRR for Constellation of 2.7x/33%. o Horizon Energy Infrastructure: Horizon added 48k meters toits portfolio during the quarter, in line with budget. Revenue was ~10% above budget, and EBITDA was ~12% above budget for one-off terminations. During the quarter, Horizon was selected by Octopus Energy to deliver an initial 100k met ers into the German market. o Smart Meter Assets: During the quarter, both revenues and EB ITDA outperformed budget by 2% and 1%, respectively. SMA has sign ed an agreement with Utilita to deliver 478k SMETS2 meters over th ree years. The buyout of GLIL’s preferred equity stake in SMA was completed in July 2024 providing Arcus with 100% ownership. o Momentum Clean Energy Solutions: During the quarter, energy generation was ~12.6% below budget, primarily the result of lower wind yiel ds across the Danish portfolio. Revenue was below budget by 7%. while EBIT DA was 31% behind. Overall, the net asset value of the fund rose from €1,279m to €1,524m over the quarter. ESG Activity Opus B has been chosen as one of the pilot companies for the net zero project led by Arcus, aiming to create a decarbonisation roadmap and sys tematic transition plan to achieve net zero by 2050. Smart meter asset provider Horizon have now completed a full EU taxonomy alignment assessment. The company is fully aligned with the economic activity “Installation, maintenance and repair of instruments and d evices for measuring, regulation and controlling energy performance of building s”. 15 London CIV Quarterly Private Markets Investment Review London Borough of Hillingdon Pension Fund Summary Update Funds Appendices30 June 2024 {S} {U} {F} {A} LCIV Infrastructure Fund Equitix Fund VI (EF VI) Summary Vintage: 2020 Fund Size: £1.5 billion Sponsor: Equitix Investment Management Currency: GBP Sector: Diversified Geography: UK, North and South Ame rica, Australia Investment Period End: March 2025 Term End: March 2045 IP Extension: n/a Term Extension: 2 (LP Consent) + 2 (Manager) Investment Overview EF VI will invest predominantly in the social/PPP, utilitie s, renewables, transportation, and telecom sectors. EF VI is seeking to build a diversified port folio of 40-50 assets that require average ticket sizes of c.£15-25 million to generate a gross /net IRR of 10.5%/8.5% and cash yield of 6% p.a. Sector 24% 21% 18% 16% 12% 9% Environmental Services Network Utilities Renewable Power Social Infrastructure Portfolio T ransportation Portfolio 17% 12% 8% 7%7%6%5% 5% 23% Viridor Energy Limited John Laing Investment Limited Calisen Limited Grain Connect Limited AirT anker Limited UK Green Investment Rampion Limited Agility T rains East Limited Kinlochleven Power Limited Lakeside T opco Limited Project Keys II Freedom Fibre Limited Other Source: Equitix, Stepstone as at 30 June 2024 Investment Diversification Key Developments Equitix VI’s Q2 2024 commentary has not been received and henc e the commentary on this page is as of Q1 2024 – an update will be provided in the next quarterly commentary. Equitix VI is c. 99% invested as of March 31, 2024, and is curren tly four years into its five-year investment period which runs to March 2025. The Fund has 51 assets across Australia, Colombia, the UK, and the US. At the end of Q1 2024, the fund’s gross IRR was 9.7%. Notable updates over Q1 2024 include: o Clinitek: is a clinical waste facility, located in Tunstall , Stoke-on-Trent, whose construction was completed in 2022. Following evaluation o f change of use scenarios against a divestment of the project, management c oncluded that a divestment was preferable. The asset was sold on February 5, 2024 for £17.9 million, equal to the Q4 2023 valuation. o Equitix Proton Cancer Centre: is a cancer centre constructe d in 2017, located in South Wales. This was leased to Rutherford Estates until M ay 2046. The project is making progress on recovery options after the liq uidation of Rutherford Health and a new operator has been identified and commercial negotiations are progressing. o Beatrice Offshore Windfarm: is a 588MW offshore wind farm of fshore of Scotland. Production and availability were below budget fo r 2023, somewhat anticipated due to planned downtime. Availability underpe rformance was driven by grid downtime in H2 2023 due to the connection of a ne ighbouring windfarm and various repair works. Due to a government-mand ated repayment of previously received balancing revenues, dist ributions are not expected during 2024. o Alder Hey Hospital: is a 30 year operating availability base d PPP hospital concession in Liverpool, UK. During the quarter, the projec t demonstrated improved performance, with financial performance penalti es being passed to the facilities management contractor however, a commercia l settlement is expected to be required given the construction and operatio nal interface between the systems. 16 London CIV Quarterly Private Markets Investment Review London Borough of Hillingdon Pension Fund Summary Update Funds Appendices30 June 2024 {S} {U} {F} {A} LCIV Infrastructure Fund ESG Activity In Q4 Hornsea One supported a heavy lift cargo drone trial whi ch sought to eliminate the health and safety risks faced by technicians r elated to dropped objects and strain injuries. Drone use allows turbines to st ay offline for shorter periods during transfers, allowing more renewable product ion and fewer boat journeys reducing GHG emissions. Lakeside TopCo is developing a social value strategy across three key themes: Delivering Quality Employment and Inspiring Young People, Promoting Wellbeing in the Workplace, and Community and Supporting Environment al Sustainability. The strategy is being formulated based on a Local Needs Asses sment so that initiatives target outcomes which are most beneficial to the community 17 London CIV Quarterly Private Markets Investment Review London Borough of Hillingdon Pension Fund Summary Update Funds Appendices30 June 2024 {S} {U} {F} {A} LCIV Infrastructure Fund Basalt Infrastructure Partners III (BIP III) Summary Vintage: 2020 Fund Size: $2.8 billion Sponsor: Basalt Infrastructure Partners Currency: USD Sector: Diversified Geography: North America, Europe Investment Period End: February 2025 Term End: February 2030 IP Extension: n/a Term Extension: 2 Investment Overview BIP III aims to deliver attractive inflation-linked and cas h-yielding returns across a portfolio of 10-12 assets, deploying US$125-250 million per investment . BIP III will target a 14%-15% gross IRR (11-12% net), underpinned by a gross yield of 5%-6%. Sector 41% 35% 8% 6% 9% T ransport Communications Utilities Power (Renewable) Other Unallocated Portfolio 15% 15% 14% 12% 10% 10% 8% 6% 9% Skyway Unilode Freyja LNG Nobina Goetel Iris Platform Xpress Natural Gas Habitat Solar Other Unallocated Source: Basalt, Stepstone as at 30 June 2024 Investment Diversification Key Developments As of Q2 2024, the fund has committed 93% across eight investments, t racking at a gross IRR / TVM of 12% / 1.3x. During the quarter, BIP III invested follow-on capital into Freyja LNG, Goetel and Iris, taking drawn capital to 82% of the fund siz e. Since inception net IRR and TVPI stand at 8% and 1.2x respectively, in lin e with the target. The four largest investments are discussed below: o Skyway Towers: Skyway is a portfolio of 442 macro cell towers in the US. The company leases space on its towers under long-term contract s to major wireless carriers. Q2 2024 EBITDA was ~14% below budget due to lower tower cashflows and co-location revenue. Post quarter-end, Skyw ay agreed to an amendment to the T-Mobile Build to Suit agreement, providin g a price reduction following a recent unsuccessful RfP. o Freyja: Freyja is engaged in the construction of a state-of- the-art LNG gas carrier (with an additional six operational). Q2 2024 EBITD A outperformed budget by ~3% due to 100% availability rates and lower opex. D uring the quarter, a sixth vessel became operational, in-line with it s construction schedule. o Goetel: Goetel is a rural German fiber platform. As of Q2 2024 , the platform reached ~83,000 homes passed. The fiber roll-out has been sl ower than expected YTD 2024 due to Goetel replacing underperforming c onstruction partners. o Unilode: Unilode is an aviation leasing business, owning an d managing a fleet of ~145,000-unit load devices as of Q2 2024. As of Q2 2024, EBI TDA is ~16% behind budget, driven by delays in maintenance repair and ov erhaul (“MRO”) contract wins. The division is undergoing a strategic revie w to improve efficiencies and synergies. Overall, the net asset value of the fund grew from $2,660m in Q1 2024 to $2,704m in Q2 2024. 18 London CIV Quarterly Private Markets Investment Review London Borough of Hillingdon Pension Fund Summary Update Funds Appendices30 June 2024 {S} {U} {F} {A} LCIV Infrastructure Fund ESG Activity Basalt published its annual ESG report during Q2 which revea led that total emissions across all funds decreased by 14.5% from 2022 to 20 23, from 129,165 tCO₂e to 110,456 tCO₂e. In addition, Basalt engaged with an independent adviser to understand the process of setting a net zero target under the Net Zero Investment Fra mework (NZIF) guidance. 19 London CIV Quarterly Private Markets Investment Review London Borough of Hillingdon Pension Fund Summary Update Funds Appendices30 June 2024 {S} {U} {F} {A} LCIV Infrastructure Fund European Diversified Infrastructure Fund III (EDIF III) Summary Vintage: 2020 Fund Size: €4.2 billion Sponsor: Igneo Infrastructure Partners Currency: EUR Sector: Diversified Geography: Europe Investment Period End: November 2023 Term End: November 2030 IP Extension: n/a Term Extension: 5 (LP Consent each time ) + 2 (Manager) Investment Overview EDIF III will seek to make 10 to 15 investments of EUR300-400 m illion in gas, water and electricity networks, ports, rail and toll roads, and telec ommunication networks. EDIF III is targeting a gross IRR of 10% and a cash yield of 5%. Sector 29% 15% 14% 10% 5% 27% Utilities - Energy-from-Waste Onshore Wind Fibre Broadband Utilities - Bulk Liquid Storage Biogas Unallocated Portfolio 29% 15% 14% 10% 5% 27% enfinium Finerge Westconnect Evos DAH Gruppe Unallocated Source: Igneo Infrastructure Partners, Stepstone as at 30 June 2024 Investment Diversification Key Developments As of 30 June 2024, EDIF III has invested €2,690m (65% of totalfund commitments) across five investments to date tracking at a 11.5% gross IRR since inception: o DAH: Operational performance YTD through April 2024 was below target, with biomethane utilisation rate at 98.5% (v. 99.0% target) and electricity utilisation at 80.2% (v. 87.4% target), due to technical issues at four electricity-producing sites and biological issues at the Schöllnitz plant, which are now resolved. o enfinium: Partnered with Hitachi Zosen Inova to install the UK’s first Energy- from-Waste carbon capture pilot project at the Ferrybridge 1 facility. The trial will run for at least 12 months and will be operational from July 2024, capturing up to one tonne of CO2 a day. o Evos: Value creation plan is on schedule and YTD through May 2024 the EBITDA gain is in line with expectations. Overall, 55% of the total t argeted run-rate incremental EBITDA increases have been secured thanks to co mmercial improvements, organisational changes and terminal clustering which seeks to better integrate overlapping functions between closely located terminals. o Finerge: On June 6, 2024, Finerge closed the acquisition of the minority stakes in existing assets owned by Local Pensions Partnership Investments ("LPPI") in eight operational wind farms in Portugal. The projects are regulated under the Feed-inTariff ("FiT") regime and the acquired capacity amo unts to 164 MW of a total capacity of 548 MW. o Westconnect: Entered into a wholesale agreement with the lo cal utility provider in Bielefeld to roll-out and market fibre to over 100,000 households Igneo expects to launch a final Series 4 of fundraising, aiming to reach the hard cap of EUR 5 bn. Overall, the net asset value of the fund increased from €3,316.5m in Q1 2 024 to €3,346m in Q2 2024. ESG Activity In May 2024, enfinium launched its Net Zero Transition Plan. The Compan y will target “Net Zero” by 2033 for Scope 1 and 2 emissions, as it seeks to subsequentl y become a net carbon removals business. At the Evos leadership conference, ambitious sustainability goals were presented to employees with specific targets for health and safety, carbon dioxide emiss ion reduction and the use and generation of renewable energy for each of 2025, 2030, and 2045 in line with the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals. 20 London CIV Quarterly Private Markets Investment Review London Borough of Hillingdon Pension Fund Summary Update Funds Appendices30 June 2024 {S} {U} {F} {A} LCIV Infrastructure Fund Capital Dynamics Clean Energy and Infrastructure VIII (CE VIII) Summary Vintage: 2019 Fund Size: £0.3 billion Sponsor: Capital Dynamics Holding AG Currency: GBP Sector: Renewables Geography: Europe Investment Period End: December 2024 Term End: December 2034 IP Extension: 1 (Manager) + 1 (Board) Term Extension: 1 (Manager) + 1 + 1 (both LP Consent) Investment Overview CE VIII will focus on renewable energy infrastructure oppor tunities, primarily consisting of greenfield solar and onshore wind energy assets. CE VIII int ends to generate a gross IRR of 12-15%, underpinned by a mid-single digit cash yield for operational assets. Sector 75% 23% Onshore wind Solar Other Portfolio 29% 20% 11% 8% 13% Longhill Pines Burn Fenix Sorbie Nemesis Crockandun ACME Strathrory Antrim Other Source: Capital Dynamics, Stepstone as at 30 June 2024 Investment Diversification Key Developments As of 30 June 2024, 91% of the £300m total committed capital has been invested. o The fund’s net IRR increased to 6.1% as the fund continues to ramp-up. Distributions of £1.1m were made in the quarter from operational assets. Notable activity during the quarter includes: o Operational solar PV assets benefited from good irradianceacross Europe in Q2 2024 even though the revenues were negatively affected by lo wer than budgeted merchant power prices. Grid constraints in Northe rn Ireland have remained at record high levels in Q2 negatively affecting th e revenues generated by the Keane portfolio assets. o Longhill project is now operational and is exporting energy under the PPA. Therefore, the valuation of Longhill in Q2 has been updated t o reflect the fair market value on the basis of discounted cash flows instead of valuing at cost. Since the full takeover under the TSA is still pending, addit ional risk premium has been applied to the discount rate used in Q2 which is expec ted to be removed once the full takeover occurs. o The construction of Strathrory wind farm has commenced in Ma y 2024 and is progressing well. o Due to the summer holiday season in Italy, ECG plant in Italy i s still waiting to be energised with the other two plants still waiting for the final approval of the executive designs. o The fund continued working on the sale of Castlegore wind pro ject with the transaction expected to close by the end of 2024. Overall, the net asset value rose from £273.9m to £288.3m over the quarter. ESG Activity Capital Dynamics estimates that the environmental benefit s generated by the Fund's assets in Q2 2024 are equivalent to: o Avoided CO2 emissions from electricity otherwise used to power 9,114 homes for one year – avoiding approximately 17,417 metric tons of g reenhouse gas emissions per year. o Avoided greenhouse gas emissions from 8,079 passenger vehicles. o Avoided CO2 emissions from 2,207,401 gallons of gasoline ot herwise consumed. o Avoided CO2 emissions from 52,557 barrels of oil otherwise consumed. 21 London CIV Quarterly Private Markets Investment Review London Borough of Hillingdon Pension Fund Summary Update Funds Appendices30 June 2024 {S} {U} {F} {A} LCIV Infrastructure Fund Brookfield Global Transition Fund (BGTF) Summary Vintage: 2021 Fund Size: $13 billion Sponsor: Brookfield Currency: USD Sector: Renewables Geography: Global Investment Period End: June 2027 Term End: June 2035 IP Extension: n/a Term Extension: 1 + 1 Investment Overview BGTF is an energy-transition fund, with a dual mandate to max imize investor returns and reduce greenhouse gas emissions. BGTF will invest globally , where Brookfield has a presence, namely North America, Europe, South America, and Asia Pacif ic. BGTF will target a gross IRR of 13%+ and a net IRR of 10%+. Sector 25% 16% 15%5% 8% 31% Solar Diversified Renewables Nuclear Diversified Power Other Unallocated Portfolio 15% 12% 10% 7%5% 13% 31% Westinghouse Scout Clean Energy, LLC Urban Grid Standard Solar, Inc. InterEnergy Holdings Ltd. Global Renewable Development Portfolio Avaada Energy Private Limited Other Unallocated Source: Brookfield, Stepstone as at 30 June 2024 Investment Diversification Key Developments As of 30 June 2024, BGTF has committed 77% of total fund commit ments and invested 25% across nine platforms. The fund’s investments had a fair value of $7.9 billion with a gross IRR of 17%. Key portfolio developments in Q2 2024 are discussed below: o Avaada: Commissioned two projects (200 MW) during the quarter and won bids related to c. 5.9 GW of wind and solar opportunities, increasing its development pipeline. o Carbon TerraVault JV: Completed the second of three instalment payments of US$ 46 million, following receipt of a draft permit for a rese rvoir project in California. o Entropy: FID was reached on Glacier Phase 2, a ~160k ton per an num project, backed by a 15-year fixed-price offtake from the Canada Growth Fund. o InterEnergy: Brookfield invested the remaining commitment of US$173 million. o Scout Clean Energy: Received equipment and secured debt fora 209 MW solar project expected to COD in 2024; acquired a 104 MW wind project in California; and executed a 12-year PPA contract for the remaining capaci ty of a 180 MW operating asset. o Standard Solar: Commissioned four projects in the quarter, totalling 14 MW, is expecting an additional ~172 MW to COD by the end of the year, a nd closed five agreements to acquire 26MW of development projects. o Leap Green Energy: In July 2024, Brookfield acquired 74% of t he Indian wind- focused renewable platform for US$89 million. Brookfield has the opportunity to invest an additional $121 million over the next four years to acquire a total interest of 98%. Overall, the net asset value increased from $6,808m to $7,235m over the quarter. ESG Activity BGTF are on track to deliver over 10,000 megawatts of renewable energy capacity by the end of 2026, resulting in 13.3 million tonnes of CO2 emi ssions avoided annually, or enough to power over 1.6 million homes in the U.S. annually 22 London CIV Quarterly Private Markets Investment Review London Borough of Hillingdon Pension Fund Summary Update Funds Appendices30 June 2024 {S} {U} {F} {A} LCIV Infrastructure Fund Meridiam Infrastructure North America II (MINA II) Summary Vintage: 2010 Fund Size: $873 million Sponsor: Meridiam Infrastructure Partners Currency: USD Sector: Transportation Geography: North America Investment Period End: n/a Term End: December 2035 IP Extension: n/a Term Extension: 1 (GP) + 1 (LP Consent) Investment Overview MINA II, which was acquired via a secondary tender, targets g reenfield investments in North America and is now invested in 13 projects in the transport an d social infrastructure sectors. The investment is expected to return a net IRR and yield of 9.7% and 8% p.a. respectively. Sector 69% 8% 6% 5% 8% Roads Rail Healthcare Airports Other Unallocated Portfolio 21% 20% 19% 8% 5% 5% 5% 5% 8% North T arrant Express Segments 3 I-66 (Virginia) IH-635 (LBJ) Purple Line Project Maryland LaGuardia Airport Redevelopment Projects Felix Bulnes Hospital* Long Beach Court Building North Anthony Henday Drive Other Unallocated Source, Meridiam, Stepstone as at 30 June 2024 Investment Diversification Key Developments As of 30 June 2024, MINA II has invested $794m across 13 invest ments. The five largest investments commentaries are as below: o North Tarrant Express Segment 3: Q2 2024 revenue was US$80.7million, above forecast and mainly driven by the ramp-up in performance of Segment C. o IH-635: Higher than forecasted capture rates have positive ly impacted performance, with toll revenue reaching US457.5 million, representing 14% Y/Y growth. In H1 2024, MINA II investors received a US$6 million distribution, exceeding the forecast. o I-66: Q2 2024 average daily traffic was 20% above Q2 2023, and revenue was US$60.5 million, or 55% above the same period last year. The project company paid down TIFIA debt service ahead of schedule, enabling dis tributions to be paid in Q4 2024 versus 2027 as forecast in the original bid case. o Purple Line: The project has made significant progress on th e Operations & Maintenance facility and the light rail tunnel, alongside t he production of 28 light rail vehicles. o Felix Bulnes: In April 2024, the project company executed an amendment with the grantor to increase the availability payment until the e nd of the contract due to higher number of beds and occupancy than concession ag reement requirements. In May 2024 a claim to recover compensation fo r previous hospital overutilization was submitted. Overall, the net asset value increased from $2,356.6m to $2, 424.6m over the quarter driven by shifts in the discount rate and asset-level updates. ESG Activity SDG 3 (Good Health and Wellbeing) – Both CRCHUM and Felix Bulnes Hospital have a high collaborative engagement with domestic and international health bodies for early warning, risk reduction and management of health risks. SDG 7 (Affordable and Clean Energy) - 77% of assets in portfol io have obtained a sustainability-related certification, including the LEE D Gold certification, and EMS certified ISO 14001. 23 London CIV Quarterly Private Markets Investment Review London Borough of Hillingdon Pension Fund Summary Update Funds Appendices30 June 2024 {S} {U} {F} {A} LCIV Infrastructure Fund SDG 8 (Decent Work and Economic Growth) – 92% of assets have a strong level of contractually binding obligations to ensure suppliers' an d subcontractors' ESG compliance. SDG 11 (Sustainable Cities and Communities) – 57% of road ass ets have a pricing policy or lane availability policy that contributes to the promotion of cleaner/lighter vehicles or more efficient mobility. 24 London CIV Quarterly Private Markets Investment Review London Borough of Hillingdon Pension Fund Summary Update Funds Appendices30 June 2024 {S} {U} {F} {A} LCIV Infrastructure Fund KKR Global Infrastructure Investors IV (KKR) Summary Vintage: 2021 Fund Size: $17 billion Sponsor: KKR Currency: USD Sector: Diversified Geography: Global Investment Period End: June 2024 Term End: January 2033 IP Extension: n/a Term Extension: 1+1+1 (GP+LP Consent) Investment Overview KKR IV is a 2021 vintage fund established to invest in global i nfrastructure opportunities, predominantly across transport, communications and renew ables, in OECD countries with a focus on Europe and North America, targeting a net IRR of 14% a nd a low single-digits cash yield. Key Developments The Fund formally closed on this investment subsequent to quarter end and hence reporting will commence from next quarter. 25 London CIV Quarterly Private Markets Investment Review London Borough of Hillingdon Pension Fund Summary Update Funds Appendices30 June 2024 {S} {U} {F} {A} LCIV Infrastructure Fund Underlying Portfolio Summary The following table provides a summary of the underlying assets as shown in the portfolio diversification pie charts on previous pages. Underlying Fund Asset Sector Location Investment Stage Fund estimated exposure £'000 MGREF 2 Reden Solar Solar France Operational 13,816 MGREF 2 Ventos de Sao Zacarias (Araripe IV) Wind Brazil Development 11,285 MGREF 2 Apex Energies Solar France Operational 8,007 MGREF 2 Island Green Power Solar United Kingdom Construction 7,820 MGREF 2 SunRun (US Residential Solar Co) Solar United States Operational 6,109 MGREF 2 Principia Energy (Enel Green Power) Diversified Renewables Greece Operational 5,814 MGREF 2 Fengchui Wind Power Wind Taiwan Operational 4,394 MGREF 2 Gwynt y Mor Wind United Kingdom Operational 3,492 AEIF 2 Constellation Cold Logistics Logistics and Storage Luxembourg Operational 19,045 AEIF 2 Smart Meter Assets Energy Infrastructure United Kingdom Operational 9,853 AEIF 2 Horizon Energy Infrastructure Energy Infrastructure United Kingdom Operational 7,009 AEIF 2 Peacock Group Holdings B.V. Rail Leasing Netherlands Operational 5,636 AEIF 2 Momentum Wind Denmark Operational 5,147 AEIF 2 Opus Bilprovning Logistics and Storage Sweden Operational 5,136 Underlying Fund Asset Sector Location Investment Stage Fund estimated exposure £'000 AEIF 2 HB RTS Logistics and Storage Netherlands Operational 4,833 AEIF 2 Swiss4net Fiber Switzerland Operational 4,168 AEIF 2 eFiber Fiber Netherlands Development 0 EF VI Viridor Energy Limited Environmental Services UK Operational 9,431 EF VI John Laing Investment Limited Portfolio UK, Americas, Australia Portfolio 6,675 EF VI Calisen Limited Network Utilities UK Operational 4 ,315 EF VI Grain Connect Limited Network Utilities UK Operational 3,755 EF VI AirTanker Limited Social Infrastructure UK Operational 3,658 EF VI UK Green Investment Rampion Limited Renewable Power UK Operational 3,353 EF VI Agility Trains East Limited Transportation UK Operational 2,906 EF VI Kinlochleven Power Limited Renewable Power UK Operational 2,863 EF VI Lakeside Topco Limited Environmental Services UK Operational 1,932 EF VI Project Keys II Transportation UK Operational 1,74 1 EF VI Freedom Fibre Limited Network Utilities UK Operational 1,740 EF VI Triton Knoll OFTO Limited Renewable Power UK Operational 1,288 EF VI Beatrice Offshore Windfarm Limited Renewable Power UK Operational 1,247 26 London CIV Quarterly Private Markets Investment Review London Borough of Hillingdon Pension Fund Summary Update Funds Appendices30 June 2024 {S} {U} {F} {A} LCIV Infrastructure Fund Underlying Fund Asset Sector Location Investment Stage Fund estimated exposure £'000 EF VI Hornsea 1 Holdings Limited Renewable Power UK Operational 1,245 EF VI Gigaclear Limited Network Utilities UK Operational 876 EF VI Bio Capital 2 Limited Environmental Services UK Operational 860 EF VI Crail Meters Limited Network Utilities UK Operational 827 EF VI Equitix Proton Cancer Centre LLP Social Infrastructure UK Operational 802 EF VI Capital Hospitals Limited Social Infrastructure UK Operational 728 EF VI Equitix Nexus 2021 LLP Social Infrastructure UK Operational 725 EF VI Clinitek (Stoke) LLP Environmental Services UK Operational 632 EF VI Equitix Cheetah 2021 LLP Social Infrastructure UK Operational 546 EF VI Diagnostic Centre (Taunton) LLP Social Infrastructure UK Operational 451 EF VI Project Keys Transportation UK Operational 395 EF VI Yorkshire Learning Partnership Projectco. Limited Social Infrastructure UK Operational 386 EF VI Pritchatts Park Village LLP Social Infrastructure UK Construction 351 Underlying Fund Asset Sector Location Investment Stage Fund estimated exposure £'000 EF VI Equitix Rosebery 2022 LLP Social Infrastructure UK Operational 298 EF VI North West Priority Schools Social Infrastructure UK Operational 271 EF VI Equitix Cheylesmore 2021 LLP Social Infrastructure UK Operational 265 EF VI Westfield Energy Recovery Limited Environmental Services UK Construction 97 BIP III Skyway Communications North America Operational 6,815 BIP III Unilode Transport Global Operational 6,672 BIP III Freyja LNG Transport Global Operational 6,470 BIP III Nobina Transport Europe Operational 5,450 BIP III Goetel Communications Europe Construction 4,702 BIP III Iris Platform Communications Europe Constructio n 4,472 BIP III Xpress Natural Gas Utilities North America Operational 3,667 BIP III Habitat Solar Power (Renewable) North America O perational 2,531 BIP III FX Hedges & Other (Basalt Infra) Other North America Operational 86 EDIF III enfinium Utilities - Energy- from- Waste UK Operational 23,901 EDIF III Finerge Onshore Wind Portugal / Spain Operational 12,066 EDIF III Westconnect Fibre Broadband Germany Operationa l 11,770 EDIF III Evos Utilities - Bulk Liquid Storage Netherlands Operational 7,905 27 London CIV Quarterly Private Markets Investment Review London Borough of Hillingdon Pension Fund Summary Update Funds Appendices30 June 2024 {S} {U} {F} {A} LCIV Infrastructure Fund Underlying Fund Asset Sector Location Investment Stage Fund estimated exposure £'000 EDIF III DAH Gruppe Biogas Germany Operational 4,369 CE VIII Longhill Onshore wind Scotland Operational 11,06 0 CE VIII Pines Burn Onshore wind Scotland Construction 7, 633 CE VIII Fenix Solar Spain Operational 4,138 CE VIII Sorbie Onshore wind Scotland Operational 3,054 CE VIII Nemesis Solar Spain Operational 1,636 CE VIII Crockandun Onshore wind Northern Ireland Operational 1,604 CE VIII ACME Solar Italy Construction 1,432 CE VIII Strathrory Onshore wind Scotland Construction 1, 356 CE VIII Antrim Onshore wind Northern Ireland Operational 1,310 CE VIII Tyrone Onshore wind Northern Ireland Operational 1,094 CE VIII Alzo Solar Italy Operational 990 CE VIII Seegronan Onshore wind Northern Ireland Operational 885 CE VIII Castlegore Onshore wind Northern Ireland Pre Construction 487 CE VIII Econtaminazio ni Solar Italy Operational 152 CE VIII Basic Solar Italy Pre Construction 145 CE VIII ECG Solar Italy Construction 123 BGTF Westinghouse Nuclear United States Operational 5,05 1 BGTF Scout Clean Energy, LLC Diversified Renewables United States Development 4,191 BGTF Urban Grid Solar United States Development 3,340 BGTF Standard Solar, Inc. Solar United States Development 2,291 BGTF InterEnergy Holdings Ltd. Diversified Power Mexico Operational 1,803 Underlying Fund Asset Sector Location Investment Stage Fund estimated exposure £'000 BGTF Global Renewable Development Portfolio Diversified Renewables United States Development 1,269 BGTF Avaada Energy Private Limited Solar India Operational 1,052 BGTF Circular Services Waste Management United States Operational 976 BGTF Clean Max Enviro Energy Solutions Private Limited Solar India Construction 857 BGTF Biofuels (CalBio) Biofuels United States Construction 714 BGTF Toehold and Other Investments Diversified United States Operational 479 BGTF Powen Solar United States Development 439 BGTF Carbon TerraVault JV (CRC) Carbon Capture United States Development 406 BGTF Sunovis Solar Germany Development 369 BGTF Energea Solar Brazil Construction 253 BGTF Cambridge Power Energy Storage United Kingdom Development 223 BGTF Solarity Solar Chile Development 153 BGTF Entropy Carbon Capture Canada Development 119 MINA II North Tarrant Express Segments 3 Roads USA Operational 17,327 MINA II I-66 (Virginia) Roads USA Operational 16,179 MINA II IH-635 (LBJ) Roads USA Operational 15,866 28 London CIV Quarterly Private Markets Investment Review London Borough of Hillingdon Pension Fund Summary Update Funds Appendices30 June 2024 {S} {U} {F} {A} LCIV Infrastructure Fund Underlying Fund Asset Sector Location Investment Stage Fund estimated exposure £'000 MINA II Purple Line Project Maryland Rail USA Under Construction 6,214 MINA II LaGuardia Airport Redevelopmen t Airports USA Operational 4,279 MINA II Felix Bulnes Hospital* Healthcare Chile Operational 4,113 MINA II Long Beach Court Building Other USA Operational 3,696 MINA II North Anthony Henday Drive Roads Canada Operational 2,952 MINA II Presidio Parkway Roads USA Operational 1,988 MINA II Central 70 Roads USA Operational 1,655 MINA II CRCHUM Healthcare Canada Operational 743 MINA II Southwest Calgary Ring Road Roads Canada Operational 572 MINA II Waterloo LRT Rail Canada Operational 281 Source: London CIV based on underlying reports as at 30 June 2024. 29 London CIV Quarterly Private Markets Investment Review London Borough of Hillingdon Pension Fund Summary Update Funds Appendices30 June 2024 {S} {U} {F} {A} LCIV Private Debt Fund Quarterly Summary as at 30 June 2024 Total Fund Value: £506.8m Inception date: 29/03/2021 Total Fund commitments: £625.0m Total contributed since inception: £420.1m Total contributed in the quarter: - Total distributed since inception: - Total distributed in the quarter: - Investment Objective The Fund's objective is to target an internal rate of return (net of any fees) of 6-8% for the life of the Fund. Key Dates and Timelines: The Fund has a fixed life, the investment period will end four years after the first close on 29 March 2025 and the trust period will continue for eight years after the final close (plus two successive one year extensions at discretion of the manager). Note: Total contributed amounts include equalisation payments/receipts. Hillingdon Valuation: £56.8m Hillingdon commitment: Total contributed since inception: Total contributed in the quarter: Total distributed since inception: Total distributed in the quarter: 29/10/2021 £70.0m £47.1m - - - Hillingdon commitment date: This is equivalent to 11.20% of the Fund Executive Summary The LCIV Private Debt Fund (the "Fund") NAV increased to £506.8m in Q2 2024 from £498.0m in Q1 2024. This is due to income distributions of £7. 2m. There were capital calls of £11.5m, distributions of £23.5m and an FX loss of (£2.2m) due to Sterling appreciation in Q2. Income distributions into the Fund are used to offset capital c alls. The performance of the Fund is not formally assessed against its objecti ve until after the fourth year of the investment period. However, the inception to date IRR is 8.4% above the target of 6-8% and the Fund valuation is ahead of the total contributed cap ital since inception of £420.1m, reflecting the initial strong performance fr om the portfolio. The fund's investment period runs until March 2025, there is approximately £120 million in uncommitted capital reserves after netting capital calls with distributions during the ramp- up phase. We plan to commit an additional £80 million to the Pemberton Mid-Market Debt Fund IV and £80 million to the Churchill Middle Market Senior Loan F und V, maintaining a 50:50 regional split between European and US markets. 30 London CIV Quarterly Private Markets Investment Review London Borough of Hillingdon Pension Fund Summary Update Funds Appendices30 June 2024 {S} {U} {F} {A} LCIV Private Debt Fund Current Investments Abbreviation Investment Date Total Commitments LCIV Fund CommitmentsVintage Unfunded GBPInvestments (Local) (Local '000) (£ '000) Primary Churchill Middle

London CIV Quarterly ACS Investment Report 30 September 2024 Bookmarks Investment Summary|3|1 |0|2 |0|3 Performance Summary|4|1 |0|2 |0|3 Quarterly Update|5|1 |0|2 |0|3 Funds|17|1 LCIV Global Alpha Growth Paris Aligned Fund|17|2 |0|3 |0|2 |0|3 LCIV Absolute Return Fund|29|2 |0|3 |0|2 |0|3 LCIV MAC Fund|39|2 |0|3 Passive Investment Summary|48| 2 |0|3 Appendices|49|1 |0|2 |0|3 Glossary of Terms|49|2 |0|3 Style Analysis Methodology|55|2 |0|3 Disclaimer|56|2 |0|3 Introduction Hillingdon Important Note: No part of this material may be reproduced, stored in retriev al system or transmitted in any form or by any means, electron ic, mechanical, recording or otherwise, without the prior written consent of London CIV. We are pleased to present the London CIV Quarterly Investment Report for the London Borough of Hillingdon Pension Fund for the quarter to 30 September 2024. The Report provides an Investment Summary with valuation and performance data of your Pension Fund's holdings. It includes an update on activities at London CIV, a market update and Fund commentary from the London CIV Investment Team as well as key portfolio data and a summary of ESG activity d uring the quarter. Investment Summary2 Performance Summary3 Quarterly Update4 LCIV Global Alpha Growth Paris Aligned Fund16 LCIV Absolute Return Fund28 LCIV MAC Fund38 Passive Investment Summary47 Glossary of Terms48 Style Analysis Methodology54 Disclaimer55 London CIV Quarterly Investment Review London Borough of Hillingdon Pension Fund Summary Update Funds Appendices30 September 2024 3 5 17 49 Investment Summary S 30 June 2024 Net Subscriptions / (Redemptions) Net Market Move 30 September 2024Cash Distributions PaidACS Active Investments £ £ £ ££ Global Equities LCIV Global Alpha Growth Paris Aligned Fund 62,721,430 - 420,945 63,142,375 - Fixed Income LCIV MAC Fund 125,839,075 - 4,656,795 130,495,870 - Multi Asset LCIV Absolute Return Fund 44,736,697 (6,800,000) 1,160,323 39,097,020 - Total 233,297,202 (6,800,000) 6,238,063 232,735,265- The table below outlines the valuation of investments held per passive manager at the beginning and end of the quarter. A listing of the individual funds held can be found at the end of the Funds section of this report. 30 June 2024 30 September 2024 Passive Investments † £ £ LGIM 783,397,288 797,500,114 † Passive investments are managed in investment funds for which London CIV has no management or advisory responsibility and are shown for information purposes only. 2 London CIV Quarterly Investment Review London Borough of Hillingdon Pension Fund Summary Update Funds Appendices30 September 2024 3 5 17 49 Performance Summary Current Quarter % 1 Year % 3 Years p.a. % 5 Years p.a. % CF Inception Date Since CF Inception p.a. %Net Performance LCIV Global Alpha Growth Paris Aligned Fund 0.67 (1.23) n/a 22/04/2021 Investment Objective: MSCI All Country World Gross Index (in GBP)+2% 10.92 n/a Relative to Investment Objective (12.15) n/a (0.41) 11.46 (11.87) 19.81 1.16 (0.49) 22.91 (3.10) Benchmark: MSCI All Country World Gross Index (in GBP) Relative to Benchmark 0.67 0.00 20.54 (0.73) 8.76 (9.99) n/a n/a 9.27 (9.68) LCIV Absolute Return Fund 2.56 1.26 4.62 21/06/2016 Target: SONIA (30 day compounded) +3% (from 1 January 2022, previously 1m 6.44 5.16 Relative to Target (5.18) (0.54) 4.53 4.51 0.02 4.34 2.05 0.51 8.46 (4.12) LCIV MAC Fund 3.82 n/a n/a 31/05/2022 Investment Objective: SONIA (30 day compounded) +4.5% (from 1 January n/a n/a Relative to Investment Objective n/a n/a 6.56 8.90 (2.34) 14.35 2.42 1.40 10.04 4.31 3 London CIV Quarterly Investment Review London Borough of Hillingdon Pension Fund Summary Update Funds Appendices30 September 2024 3 5 17 49 U Client Relations Team Report During the third quarter we hosted our Annual Conference. London’s LGPS community gathered to discuss how it will work more collegiately to drive further growth, savings and security. This two-day conference took place on 5 and 6 September in the Royal Borough of Greenwich at one of the capital’s newest cultural hubs, Woolwich Works, with more than 120 councillors and pension officials from London boroughs in attendance. Keynote and panel session topics that were covered included the government’s calls for evidence, investing in affordab le housing, views from the private sector, nature-based, credit and infrastructure investment solutions, the impact of geo-political events, market movements and net-zero targets. Key highlights With further pooling and savings, as well as more UK investme nt, at the top of the Pensions Review’s agenda, conference de legates highlighted that London’s LGPS community, through London CIV, is already taking the initiative to address these matters. It was noted that: Assets pooled and deemed pooled at 31st March 2024 increased in value to £31.6bn, an 18 per cent year on year increase. £79m in savings has been generated for the London LGPS community since London CIV’s inception. 43% of assets in London CIV private market funds are invested in the UK. LGPS investment into London CIV private market funds saw the largest rise between 31 March 2023/2024, an increase of 26 per cent to £3.1bn over the year. Going forward It was agreed that the most effective LGPS model is one where e ach pool can evolve organically. Convergence rather than fo rced mergers are most likely to deliver value in a timely manner and over time. Choice, collaboration and compromise must sit at the heart o f London’s LGPS strategy for the future. The more we act in the manner of a homogenous entity and operate as a collegiate community across London, the more we can showcase that we are already doing what is required. It was also agreed that any future strategy cannot just focuson the pooling of LGPS assets, rather it’s about working together to improve the management of all aspects of London’s LGPS, whether that’s: Continuing to pool LGPS assets through vehicles built together within the London LGPS community, which also includes place-based criteria. London CIV already has experience in this area through our UK Housing Fund and The London Fund. Further utilising our enhanced regulatory permissions, having already started to offer a number of additional services, including advisory reviews of existing portfolios of partner funds, and manager selection for model portfolio services (effectively pooling without a fund wrapper). Launching an outsourced pension officer service, which can deliver investment strategies, cash flow analysis, and rep orting activities, usually undertaken by officers in administering authorities (or indeed conflicted 3rd partyconsultants). Partner funds will have the option to take some or all of the service, with the aim that this becomes the full model for all funds in the future. Exploring new, innovative ways that London CIV can help partner funds deliver further savings and efficiencies in the long-term. 4 London CIV Quarterly Investment Review London Borough of Hillingdon Pension Fund Summary Update Funds Appendices30 September 2024 3 5 17 49 Reactions The mood from conference delegates was positive and most eff ectively summed up by Tim Mpofu, Head of Pensions and Treasur y at the London Borough of Haringey: “In the past, it has sometimes felt as though the London funds were al l pulling in 32 different directions, this time around it cer tainly felt like there was a shared sense of purpose and togetherness...while each fund will have its own unique set of objectives and strategy ideas, there does seem to be an increasing need for funds to work more closely together – both among themselves and with the pool. I’ve got to say, the London CIV has really come up with some innovative proposals here and it is encouraging to see the pool evolving in terms of supporting the investment needs of its partner funds.” Pooling Position As of 30 September 2024, pooled assets stood at £32.5 billion, of which £17.7 billion are in funds managed by London CIV. Assets under management via the London CIV Authorised Contractual Scheme (“ACS”) stood at £15.97 billion, and ass ets invested in our private market funds stood at £1.7 billio n, with £3.1 billion in total commitments. The aggregate value of ‘pooled’ passive assets held by Legal and General In vestment Management (“LGIM”) and Blackrock was £14.8billion, with £10.8 billion managed by LGIM and £4 billion managed by BlackRock.  Fund Activity We had a negative net flow across all ACS sub-funds in Q3 2024 o f £134 million. The largest redemption is attributed to the LCIV Real Return Fund. During the quarter we have reinvested £102 million in dividend income across our ACS sub-funds and distributed a further £42 million. Group Engagements As part of our investment manager monitoring programme, we had calls to share the recent findings of the annual investment due diligence and update investors on the monitoring status of five ACS sub-funds. A list of these calls is provided below: ACS sub-funds: 10 July – LCIV MAC Fund and LCIV Alternative Credit Fund 11 July – LCIV Absolute Return Fund 6 August – LCIV Global Equity Focus Fund 20 August – LCIV Emerging Market Equity Fund We record these group calls and make them available in our cli ent portal, so if you did not have a chance to participate and wish to hear these discussions, please contact your designated Client Relations Manager at clientservice@londonciv.org.uk and we would be happy to grant you access to our portal. . 5 London CIV Quarterly Investment Review London Borough of Hillingdon Pension Fund Summary Update Funds Appendices30 September 2024 3 5 17 49 FR Size Current Quarter % 1 Year % Since Inception p.a. % No. of Investors Inception DateACS 3 Years p.a. % 5 Years p.a. % Global Equities LCIV Global Alpha Growth Fund £1,442m 0.38 19.44 511/04/201612.44 Investment Objective: MSCI All Country World Gross Index (in GBP)+2% 1.16 22.91 15.15 Performance Against Investment Objective (0.78) (3.47) (2.71) (0.35) 10.92 (11.27) 8.47 12.98 (4.51) Benchmark: MSCI All Country World Gross Index (in G BP) Performance Against Benchmark 0.67 20.54 8.76 10.78 12.90 (0.29) (1.10) (9.11) (2.31) (0.46) LCIV Global Alpha Growth Paris Aligned Fund £2,347m 0.67 19.81 1113/04/2021(0.67) Investment Objective: MSCI All Country World Gross Index (in GBP)+2% 1.16 22.91 11.25 Performance Against Investment Objective (0.49) (3.10) (11.92) (1.23) 10.92 (12.15) n/a n/a n/a Benchmark: MSCI All Country World Gross Index (in G BP) Performance Against Benchmark 0.67 20.54 8.76 n/a 9.09 0.00 (0.73) (9.99) n/a (9.76) LCIV Global Equity Fund £621m 0.33 22.59 322/05/201711.26 Investment Objective: MSCI All Country World Index Total Return (Gross)+1.5% 0.95 22.21 12.32 Performance Against Investment Objective (0.62) 0.38 (1.06) 9.56 10.41 (0.85) 11.66 12.47 (0.81) Benchmark: MSCI All Country World Index Total Retur n (Gross) Performance Against Benchmark 0.57 20.43 8.79 10.82 10.68 (0.24) 2.16 0.77 0.84 0.58 LCIV Global Equity Quality Fund £577m 3.50 17.99 221/08/20208.42 Benchmark: MSCI All Country World Index (with net d ividends reinvested) 0.47 19.89 11.34 Performance Against Benchmark 3.03 (1.90) (2.92) 7.47 8.28 (0.81) n/a n/a n/a LCIV Global Equity Focus Fund £1,269m 1.33 15.81 617/07/20179.97 Target: MSCI World (GBP)(TRNet)+2.5% 0.86 23.47 13.58 Performance Against Target 0.47 (7.66) (3.61) 9.21 11.98 (2.77) 9.31 13.90 (4.59) Benchmark: MSCI World (GBP)(TRNet) Performance Against Benchmark 0.24 20.50 9.27 11.14 10.84 1.09 (4.69) (0.06) (1.83) (0.87) LCIV Emerging Market Equity Fund £606m 2.98 8.11 811/01/20180.92 Investment Objective: MSCI Emerging Market Index (TR) Net+2.5% 3.09 17.54 4.89 Performance Against Investment Objective (0.11) (9.43) (3.97) (2.80) 3.09 (5.89) 3.04 6.56 (3.52) Benchmark: MSCI Emerging Market Index (TR) Net Performance Against Benchmark 2.46 14.70 0.58 3.97 2.34 0.52 (6.59) (3.38) (0.93) (1.42) 6 London CIV Quarterly Investment Review London Borough of Hillingdon Pension Fund Summary Update Funds Appendices30 September 2024 3 5 17 49 Size Current Quarter % 1 Year % Since Inception p.a. % No. of Investors Inception DateACS 3 Years p.a. % 5 Years p.a. % Global Equities LCIV Sustainable Equity Fund £1,438m (0.30) 19.42 818/04/201810.22 Investment Objective: MSCI World Index Total Return (Net) in GBP+2% 0.74 22.87 14.15 Performance Against Investment Objective (1.04) (3.45) (3.93) 2.08 11.44 (9.36) 8.88 13.35 (4.47) Benchmark: MSCI World (GBP)(TRNet) Performance Against Benchmark 0.24 20.50 9.27 11.14 11.94 (0.54) (1.08) (7.19) (2.26) (1.72) LCIV Sustainable Equity Exclusion Fund £751m 0.32 22.73 511/03/202015.52 Investment Objective: MSCI World Index Total Return (Net) in GBP+2% 0.74 22.87 18.03 Performance Against Investment Objective (0.42) (0.14) (2.51) 2.60 11.44 (8.84) n/a n/a n/a Benchmark: MSCI World (GBP)(TRNet) Performance Against Benchmark 0.24 20.50 9.27 n/a 15.75 0.08 2.23 (6.67) n/a (0.23) LCIV Passive Equity Progressive Paris Aligned Fund £975m 0.35 24.19 401/12/20218.29 Index: S&P World Net Zero 2050 Paris Aligned ESG In dex 0.30 23.88 7.98 Performance Against Index 0.05 0.31 0.31 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a Multi Asset LCIV Global Total Return Fund £104m 3.10 8.86 117/06/20163.60 Target: RPI + 5% 2.14 8.69 10.15 Performance Against Target 0.96 0.17 (6.55) 4.22 13.62 (9.40) 3.66 11.25 (7.59) LCIV Diversified Growth Fund £296m 5.63 15.83 415/02/20163.63 Target: UK Base Rate +3.5% 2.12 8.87 4.96 Performance Against Target 3.51 6.96 (1.33) (0.33) 6.99 (7.32) 1.82 5.68 (3.86) LCIV Absolute Return Fund £1,003m 2.56 4.34 1021/06/20164.53 Target: SONIA (30 day compounded) +3% (from 1 January 2022, previously 1m LIBOR +3%) 2.05 8.46 4.51 Performance Against Target 0.51 (4.12) 0.02 1.26 6.44 (5.18) 4.62 5.16 (0.54) LCIV Real Return Fund £114m 1.76 11.80 216/12/20164.00 Investment Objective: SONIA (30 day compounded) + 3% (from 1 October 2021, previously 1m LIBOR +3%) 2.05 8.46 4.58 Performance Against Investment Objective (0.29) 3.34 (0.58) 1.60 6.44 (4.84) 3.37 5.16 (1.79) 7 London CIV Quarterly Investment Review London Borough of Hillingdon Pension Fund Summary Update Funds Appendices30 September 2024 3 5 17 49 FR Size Current Quarter % 1 Year % Since Inception p.a. % No. of Investors Inception DateACS 3 Years p.a. % 5 Years p.a. % Fixed Income LCIV Global Bond Fund £929m 4.86 13.48 1030/11/20182.31 Benchmark: Bloomberg Global Aggregate Credit Index – GBP Hedged 4.70 12.11 1.97 Performance Against Benchmark 0.16 1.37 0.34 (1.25) (1.54) 0.29 0.43 0.21 0.22 LCIV Short Duration Buy and Maintain Credit Fund £139m 2.14 n/a 206/12/20235.83 Reference Index: iBoxx GBP Coll & Corp 0-5 2.19 n/a 6.07 Performance Against Reference Index (0.05) n/a (0.24) n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a LCIV Long Duration Buy and Maintain Credit Fund £806m 2.74 n/a 606/12/20234.15 Reference Index: iBoxx GBP Coll Corp 10+ 1.99 n/a 4.31 Performance Against Reference Index 0.75 n/a (0.16) n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a LCIV MAC Fund £1,965m 3.82 14.35 1831/05/20183.82 Investment Objective: SONIA (30 day compounded) +4.5% (from 1 January 2022, previously 3m LIBOR +4.5%) 2.42 10.04 6.50 Performance Against Investment Objective 1.40 4.31 (2.68) 3.75 7.98 (4.23) 3.97 6.77 (2.80) LCIV Alternative Credit Fund £590m 2.69 13.09 531/01/20224.37 Investment Objective: SONIA (30 day compounded) +4.5% 2.42 10.04 8.41 Performance Against Investment Objective 0.27 3.05 (4.04) n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a Total LCIV ACS Assets Under Management £15,972m 8 London CIV Quarterly Investment Review London Borough of Hillingdon Pension Fund Summary Update Funds Appendices30 September 2024 3 5 17 49 Markets Backdrop 3 months % YTD % 1 Year % Annualised 3 Years Annualised 5 Years Global equities and equity styles (GBP, unhedged) MSCI World Index 0.2 13.0 20.5 9.3 11.1 MSCI World Value Index 2.8 8.8 13.2 6.7 5.0 MSCI World Growth Index (2.6) 14.9 24.4 7.7 13.1 MSCI Emerging Markets Index 2.5 0.6 14.7 0.6 4.0 Global fixed income indices (hedged to GBP) Bloomberg Global Aggregate Bond Index 4.1 4.1 10.1 (1.0) (0.1) Bloomberg Global Aggregate Credit Index 4.7 4.8 12.1 (1.5) 0.2 Bloomberg Global High Yield Index 5.3 9.3 17.4 2.4 3.3 Currencies Sterling vs Dollar 5.8 5.1 9.6 (0.2) 1.7 Sterling vs Euro 1.8 4.1 4.1 1.1 1.3 Sterling vs Yen (5.5) 7.0 5.4 8.6 7.7 Commodities (U.S. Dollars) Copper LME 3 Month Rolling Forward 2.4 14.8 18.8 3.2 11.4 Crude Oil Brent Future (16.9) (6.8) (24.7) (3.0) 3.4 Gold Spot 13.2 27.7 42.5 14.5 12.3 Source: Bloomberg, monthly data. TR=Total Return. 9 London CIV Quarterly Investment Review London Borough of Hillingdon Pension Fund Summary Update Funds Appendices30 September 2024 3 5 17 49 Markets backdrop commentary The third quarter of 2024 was a topsy turvy period in the capit al markets. There was a sharp decline in equity markets at the beginning of August, with Japanese stocks at the forefront of the sell off. With inflation trending down, bon ds fulfilled their traditional role in helping to offset los ses in equity markets. Gold also performed strongly and has continued its strong run. Markets regained their poise quickly, and the early August storm did not have a lasting impact. In September, the U.S. Federal Reserve (the ‘Fed’) cut inter est rates for the first time in this monetary policy cycle. Th is ‘pivot’ was anticipated, but the 0.5% reduction in the reference rate was larger than some had expected. Although the Bank of England decided to hold fire on further cuts in rates in Q3, other central banks did reduce rates by small margins. Late in the quarter, the Chinese government announced a series of policies intended to encourage investment and consumption and help unlock the capital tied up in the property sector. The first announcements didn’t have much of an impac t, but momentum grew and the CSI 300 Index of leading Chinese c ompanies surged to a gain of 20% in Sterling terms in September. For the quarter as a whole, sovereign and investment grade bo nds performed strongly. Global equities (based on the MSCI W orld Index) made small gains in Sterling terms, and leadership of the markets shifted away from U.S. technology companies to other sectors and regions, particularly Asia Pacific, and to value stocks. This was a better environment for stock pickers, and the performance of our actively managed equity funds has improved (see next section). The positive outcomes in financial markets in the last 12 months mask the human cost of armed conflict in the Middle East an d Europe. There are other geopolitical flash points to monitor, and the period leading up to, and following, the U .S. Presidential election could be volatile. The risk of sha rp, but hopefully short, bursts of volatility was one of the themes highlighted by expert panellists at the London CIV Annual Conference in September. London CIV - Fund Performance Q2 2024 Equity funds The big American technology companies which are perceived to be the biggest beneficiaries of the proliferation of applications based on artificial intelligence came off the boil in Q3. Given the extent to which these companies had been the key drivers of the 20.5% gain in the MSCI World Index in the year to the end of June 2024, this was an important development. Companies which are more sensitive to the positive trend in i nterest rates, such as financials, industrials and consumer-facing businesses, outperformed technology companies. Value came back into favour, and emerging markets stocks outp aced ‘Western’ stocks by a big margin, mainly because of the m omentum generated by stimulus measures announced by the Chinese government. This rotation in leadership is important because it helps tolevel the playing field for active managers who must be careful to diversify the sources of exposure to thematic, economic and other drivers when building portfolios. In short, building an active portfolio which is dominated by a small number of stocks which are likely to move in tandem based on news flow and/or shifts in sentiment is not good practice in managing mainstream active strategies. The strongest performing Sub-funds in the third quarter were those which target companies displaying strong ‘quality’ characteristics, such as high returns on capital and strong balance sheets. LCIV Global Equity Quality Fund was the standout performer in absolute and relative terms, with a gain of 3.5% (+3% vs the benchmark index). LCIV Global Equity Focus Fund also outperformed, as did the LCIV Emerging Marke t Equity Fund, which is encouraging given the weak trend in th e performance of that Sub-fund in the year to the end of Q2. 10 London CIV Quarterly Investment Review London Borough of Hillingdon Pension Fund Summary Update Funds Appendices30 September 2024 3 5 17 49 Most of the growth-oriented Sub-funds made small gains. We n ote, however, that LCIV Global Alpha Growth Fund, LCIV Global Alpha Growth Paris Aligned Fund, LCIV Sustainable Equity Fund and LCIV Sustainable Equity Exclusion Fund outperformed the MSCI World Growth Index by more than 2% each in th e third quarter. These funds have made gains of more than 19% and reduced the shortfalls in performance against their benchmarks over 12 months. The strongest performers in the most recent one-year period are the LCIV Sustainable Equity Exclusion Fund and the LCIV G lobal Equity Fund, with gains of 22.7% and 22.6% respectively, circa 2% more than their benchmark indices. W e are pleased to highlight the LCIV PEPPA Fund as well. The Sub -fund has continued to track its benchmark index within the tolerance range for tracking error, and the investment manager has managed index rebalancing events effectively. The Sub-fund gained 24.2% in the year to the end of September, 0.3% more than its benchmark, helped by the comparison to an index which is calculated net of withholding taxes on dividends.  Fixed income funds Sovereign and investment grade credit were strong in the third quarter, benefitting from the decline in yields linked tothe improved outlook for inflation, evidenced by the decision by the U.S. Federal Reserve to reduce its reference rate by a full 0.5% in a single move. Spreads on credit instruments, a key indicator of risk in these markets, declined or remained stable after a wobble early in August. The Bloomberg Global Aggregate Credit Index, a good proxy for the performance of high-quality debt, gained 4.7% in Sterling terms in Q3. The Index is up 12.1% over one year, but down 1.5% per annum over three years. This highlights the magnitude of the impact on bond markets of the transition to a new regime for inflation and interest rates which began late in 2021. The LCIV Global Bond Fund has outperformed consistently in the past 12 months. The investment manager has managed interest rate (duration) and credit risk effectively. In the 12 months to the end of September 2024, the Sub-fund has gained 13.5%, 1.4% more than the benchmark Index. The LCIV Long Duration Buy and Maintain Credit Fund lagged in the second quarter of this year when an unusually large gap em erged between spreads on long-dated bonds denominated in Sterling and U.S. Dollars. These anomalies are often caused by imbalances in demand for, and supply of, bonds and generally do not persist for long periods. This was illustrated in Q3 when the Sub-fund outperformed its reference index by 0.75% (+2.7% versus +2%). The Sub-fund is nowonly slightly behind the reference index in the period since inception. The LCIV Short Duration Buy and Maintain Credit Fund is in a similar position. In both cases, the investment manager is meeting our expectations. We will complete an in-depth review of these Sub-funds in the fourth quarter. The LCIV MAC Fund captures exposure to all segments of the credit markets through investment managers offering complementary strategies. This Sub-fund benefitted from the interest rate risk embedded in the investment grade debt hel d by one of the managers, and by the solid performance of both i nvestment grade and high yield bonds and loans. The 3.8% gain for the LCIV MAC Fund in Q3 pushed the one year return up to 14.35%, 4.3% more than the Sonia +4.5% target. The LCIV Alternative Credit Fund, which has a purer focus on sub-investment grade debt, returned 2.7% in Q3 and more than 13% over one year, 3.1% more than its target (also Sonia + 4.5%). Multi asset funds All of the multi asset funds posted gains in Q3. These Sub-fun ds demonstrated the value of targeting a wide range of opport unities and adjusting positioning relatively quickly. Exposure to interest rate risk was an important source of profits during the quarter, through direct exposure to sovereign bonds and credit, and indirect exposure from investments in interest rate sensitive assets, such as infrastructure and property. The other sources of profits varied across the range of Sub-funds, but included commodities, especially gold, defensive equities and currencies. 11 London CIV Quarterly Investment Review London Borough of Hillingdon Pension Fund Summary Update Funds Appendices30 September 2024 3 5 17 49 The LCIV Diversified Growth Fund was the standout performerin Q3 with a gain of 5.6%. This Sub-fund is up 15.8% over one year. The investment manager has played the interest rate and credit cycles well during that period, profiting fr om allocations to higher risk and alternative forms of credi t, and better results from the infrastructure segment of the Sub-fund. LCIV Global Total Return Fund had a solid quarter and is up 8.9 % over one year. The tilt in the equity portfolio to value stoc ks and Western European companies was beneficial. Bonds also made money, although profits were diluted by the investment manager’s preference to keep duration low. LCIV Absolute Return Fund performed well in late July and early August, when the surge in volatility drove up the value of protection strategies. The Sub-fund also benefited from gains in the Yen and gold. These gains were diluted when markets recovered, but the Sub-fund was up 2.6% in Q3. We are encour aged to see a better trend in performance, but there is still a lot to do to get the three-year (+1.3% per annum) performance record back on track. The investment manager of LCIV Real Return Fund has adjusted the risk profile of the Sub-fund dynamically this year. The Sub-fund was cautiously positioned at the beginning of Q3, both in terms of allocations to higher risk assets and exposure to changes in interest rates. The return earned in Q3 (+1.8%) was at the low end of the range for our funds, but LCIV Real Return Fund has generated a gain of 11.8% over one year. Fund development and Investment Manager Monitoring Expanding the range of products and services offered to Part ner Funds was an important theme at the LCIV Annual Conferenc e. We will achieve important milestones on that journey in Q4, with the continued development of the LCIV Nature Based Solutions Fund, LCIV Private Debt II Fund, the Indirect Real Estate Pooling service and the launch of two new public markets funds. We will complete the lineup of buy and maintain credit strate gies with the launch of the LCIV All Maturities Buy and Mainta in Credit Fund. We anticipate that the Sub-fund will receive inflows of £450 to £500 million from three Partner Funds in October. This will increase the capital invested in the LCIV family of Buy and Maintain Credit strategies to circa £1.5 billion. The LCIV Global Equity Value Fund will be funded late in October or early in November with initial capital of £250 million to£300 million provided by three investors. We hosted a Meet the Manager event with Wellington, the investment mana ger of the Sub-fund, on the 1st of October. The event was well a ttended. Please contact your Client team representative if you would like to listen to the recording of the event. These new funds target different markets, but share important features, such as strong responsible investment parameters, alignment to our net zero ambitions and strong value propositions. We are grateful to Partner Funds for their sup port in designing and launching these funds. The process of realigning the LCIV Global Bond Fund and the LC IV MAC Fund (Pimco-managed portion) to more stringent ESG an d emissions tests has started. This realignment will be completed in the fourth quarter unless a deterioration in liquidity conditions in the credit markets prompts us to slow the process down to contain trading costs. We are continuing our work on Prospects, or reserves, lists f or our active equity funds. Growth equity strategies are our first priority, but we are also considering options to strengthen the EM Equity Fund by expanding the range of opportunities captured by the Sub-fund. We will engage with inves tors in the Sub-fund in Q4. We will also work with investors in our range of multi asset fu nds in Q4. We have developed a long list of strategies to resea rch based on their potential to contribute to the return requirements of your funds, complement equities and creditand support your RI goals. 12 London CIV Quarterly Investment Review London Borough of Hillingdon Pension Fund Summary Update Funds Appendices30 September 2024 3 5 17 49 The only change in the monitoring status of ACS Sub-funds in the 3rd quarter was a downgrade in the status of the LCIV Emerging Market Equity Fund to ‘Enhanced Monitoring’. Stock selection has been poor, and action was needed to refre sh the research and stock valuation processes. Monitoring f ramework scores for Resourcing and Process/strategy have been reduced to ‘amber’, and Performance is scored ‘red’. Investors in the Sub-fund were updated on the 20th of August. We are monitoring the Sub-fund closely, and we will complete another in-depth review no later than February 2025. We are a lso considering options to strengthen the performance potential of the Sub-fund, for example by introducing a strategy which is complementary to the approach applied by the current team. We will consult with investors on this point before the end of this year. As reported in our previous update, our recommendation to ke ep the LCIV Global Equity Focus Fund on ‘Enhanced Monitoring’ was approved. We updated investors on the 6th of August. The agenda for the rest of 2024 includes updates of the monito ring status of the LCIV Global Equity Fund (currently ‘Enhanced), LCIV Global Equity Quality Fund (‘Normal’), LCIV Passive Equity Progressive Paris Aligned Fund (‘Normal'), LCIV Diversified Growth Fund (‘Enhanced’) and LCIV Real Return Fund (‘Normal'). We will also complete our first reviews of the LCIV Long Duration Buy and Maintain Credit Funds and the LCIV Short Duration Buy and Maintain Credit Funds. Economies and markets Figure 1: Summer storm in Japan So much for the lazy days of summer! The 2024 holiday season kicked off with a severe bout of turbulence in the first week of August, when a series of actions and new data points prompted a surge in risk aversion. Concerns about employment and economic growth in the US and t he poor performance of the Chinese economy, combined with the Bank of Japan's (‘BOJ’) latest move to nudge interest rates up and an escalation of geopolit ical tensions were the main drivers of a wave of selling which spread quickly acrossglobal markets. Japan was at the heart of the storm. The Nikkei 225 index of lea ding companies lost more than 15% of its value (in Sterling terms) between the 31 st of July and the 5 th of August (-11% on the 5th of August alone). The shares of big Japanese banks lost about 25% of their value during that period. Source: Bloomberg. Index values in GBP 13 London CIV Quarterly Investment Review London Borough of Hillingdon Pension Fund Summary Update Funds Appendices30 September 2024 3 5 17 49 The S&P 500 and NASDAQ indices dropped by 6% and 8% respectively in the first week of August. Volatility indicators in the equity and U.S. Treasury bond markets spiked. Figure 2: Storm clouds in the U.S. and global equity markets Bonds did their job: declining yields helped to offset the lo sses in equities and other economically sensitive assets. The value of gold surged, and the escalation of conflict in the Middle East later in Q3 was one of the catalysts for gold setti ng new highs above £2,000 per ounce. The big moves in equity markets raised the spectre of a more se vere downturn, possibly amplified in the case of equities by a reversal in the fortunes of the small group of relatively highly valued technology and tech-related companies which were the dominant drivers of equity market performance in the year to the end of Q2 2024. One of the potential triggers for a severe sell off is the repa triation of capital to Japan as the BOJ continues to normalise monetary policy. Investors h ave borrowed in Yen at exceptionally low cost and reinvested in foreign assets, pa rticularly US Treasury bonds, credit instruments and stocks. The risk is that a disorderly unwinding of this 'carry trade', which is a risk we have highlighted regularly in these report s, will result in intense selling pressure and the withdrawal of liquidity from key markets. Source: Bloomberg. Index values in GBP This did not come to pass, and the summer crisis was averted. I nvestors decided that the risk of aggressive action by the BoJ was low, and that the prospect of a sharp deceleration in the US economy was overstated. In the end, the recovery was remarkably swift, and by the end of August, it didn't look like much had happened at all. Turning back to fundamentals, the big focus was on prospects for the U.S. economy in light of the deterioration in employm ent data, and the risks to personal finances and consumer spending. The US Federal Reserve (‘Fed’) was worri ed enough about the trend, and confident enough in the path of inflation, to cut interest rates by 0.5% in mid- September (to a range of 4.75% to 5%). This is expected to be the first of a series of cuts which will reduce rates by a further1.5% by the end of 2025. The European Central Bank also reduced rates in Q3, by 0.25% to 3.5%, and is expected to cut again in October. The Bank of Eng land (‘BoE’) met after the Fed decision and kept rates on hold, reflecting concerns about persistent price i nflation in the services sector. This helped push Sterling a bove the $1.34 mark, before the positive trend reversed in response to comments made by BoE Governor Andrew Bailey suggesting that policy rates could be reduced more quickly than previously expected. The odds of a soft landing in the US and Western Europe, with mo derate to low growth and inflation stabilising in a range around central bank targets, appear to have improved. The big news late in Q3 was a series of policy announcements bythe Chinese government which aim to stimulate investment and consumption activity. This could provide another source of growth across the globe, although the effects on inflation would have to be considered. 14 London CIV Quarterly Investment Review London Borough of Hillingdon Pension Fund Summary Update Funds Appendices30 September 2024 3 5 17 49 Figure 3: Autumn renaissance in China? Source: Bloomberg. Index values in GBP Outlook The sharp, but short, sell off in equity markets in August was one of the topics of conversation at the LCIV Annual Conferen ce. The view of our expert panellists is that regular bursts of volatility will be a feature of markets going forward as economies and capital markets adjust to new economic and policy regimes. There will certainly be swings in sentiment, sometimes shar p, as new data is released. Geopolitical tensions are high, r isks to global supply chains have increased and the U.S. Presidential election in November could have important consequences. It is too early to assess the impact on the real economy of policy initiatives in China. We would also note the potential effects on liquidity and capital flows of a disorderly unwinding of the Yen carry trade. On a positive note, periods of transition drive divergences in the performance of economies and markets which can be prof itable for funds which are positioned to capitalise on large opportunity sets and complementary approaches to investing. This is another theme highlighted at our conference, and in previous quarterly updates. As long term investors, it is challenging, and probably unproductive, to respond to episodes of risk aversion. However, they do highlight the importance of building resilience into portfolios through diversification of return drivers, exposure within asset classes and style of investing. London CIV Team 15 London CIV Quarterly Investment Review London Borough of Hillingdon Pension Fund Summary Update Funds Appendices30 September 2024 3 5 17 49 LCIV Global Alpha Growth Paris Aligned Fund Quarterly Summary as at 30 September 2024 F Total Fund Value: £2,347.3m Inception date: 13/04/2021 Price: 96.29p Distribution frequency: Quarterly Next XD date: 01/10/2024 Pay date: 29/11/2024 Dealing frequency: Daily Current Quarter % 1 Year % 3 Years p.a. %Net Performance 5 Years p.a. % Since Fund Inception p.a. %† Fund 0.67 19.81 (1.23) n/a (0.67) Investment Objective* 1.16 22.91 10.92 n/a 11.25 Relative to Investment Objective (0.49) (3.10) (12.15) n/a (11.92) Benchmark** 0.67 20.54 8.76 n/a 9.09 Relative to Benchmark 0.00 (0.73) (9.99) n/a (9.76) Since CF Inception p.a. %† (0.41) 11.46 (11.87) 9.27 (9.68) * Investment Objective: MSCI All Country World Gross Index (in GBP)+2% ** Benchmark: MSCI All Country World Gross Index (in GBP) † The investment objective is compounded daily therefore the benchmark return plus the outperformance target may not equal the investment objective. This is a segregated Sub-fund of the London CIV ACS administered by Northern Trust. The delegated investment manager has been Baillie Gifford & Co since the Sub-fund's inception date. Investment Objective The objective of the Sub-fund is to exceed the rate of return of the MSCI All Country World Index by 2-3% per annum on a gross fee basis over rolling five year periods. The Sub-fund also aims to have a weighted average greenhouse gas intensity that is lower than that of the MSCI ACWI EU Paris Aligned Requirements Index. Hillingdon Valuation: £63.1m Hillingdon investment date: 22/04/2021 This is equivalent to 2.69% of the Fund Distribution option: INC share class (Reinvest) Estimated distribution: £72,649 16 London CIV Quarterly Investment Review London Borough of Hillingdon Pension Fund Summary Update Funds Appendices30 September 2024 3 5 17 49 LCIV Global Alpha Growth Paris Aligned Fund Performance since LCIV inception -40 -20 0 20 40 60 30/06/202 1 30 /09/202 1 31/ 12/20 21 31/03/202 2 30/06/20 22 30/09/2022 31/12/2 02 2 31/03/20 23 30 /06/202 3 30/09/202331 /12/202 3 31 /03/2024 30 /06/2024 30 /09/202 4 Fund Investment Objecti ve* Benchmark** Comparator Index⁺ % Source: Fund prices calculated based on published prices. B enchmarks obtained from Bloomberg. All performance reported net of fees and charges with distributions reinvested. * Investment Objective: MSCI All Country World Gross Index (in GBP)+2% ** Benchmark: MSCI All Country World Gross Index (in GBP) ⁺ The Comparator Index MSCI Growth Index Net Total Return is not the stated fund objective, but has been selected as an appropriate index given the style of the Sub-fund. For further details, please refer to the Glossary. Performance The Sub-fund returned +0.7% in Q3 against +0.7% for the MSCI A ll Country World benchmark index thus posting a flat relative performance. O ver the 12-month period to the end of September 2024 the Sub-fund returned +19.8%, 0. 7% less than the benchmark. The Sub-fund has generated -0.7% on an annualised basis since inception, underperforming the benchmark by 9.8% per annum. This was a flat quarter for the Sub-fund which exhibited dece nt downside protection characteristics without sacrificing participation in the upside in what proved to be a roller coaster quarter. The more stable performance is now a lso reflected in the 12- month relative performance figure of -0.7% which while stil l negative, indicates that performance has stabilised. The main driver of returns was t he ‘capital allocators’ basket, a selection of companies skilful in deploying capital into cyclical opportunities. This segment has proven to be the workhorse of the portfolio over the last 18-months. At the stock level the three top contributors were CATL, DoorDash and Prosus. CATL is one of the world’s leading lithium battery manufacturers. Its shares have made good progress throughout the first half of 2024 reflecting strong fundamental progress in unit sales, revenues, and margins. The latest financial r esults showed revenues growing in the region of +20% year-on-year while EBITDA marg ins grew from 14% to 18% (source: Baillie Gifford). As with Prosus below, CATL wa s a significant beneficiary of the Chinese government’s liquidity support and its share s inflected sharply (+40%) throughout September. DoorDash, the US food delivery business, has delivered strong share price performance underpinned by continued operational progress. Revenue gr ew +23% y/y, and total orders grew +19% y/y in the latest reported quarter (source: Baillie Gifford). The investment manager retain high conviction that DoorDash’s focus on operational excellence underpins its growth prospects and has added to t he position. Prosus is a holding company for the overseas (non-African) assets of Na spers. These are a collection of online businesses operating across a range of sectors from food delivery, online classified advertising and payments. This includes a significant stake in Chinese internet giant, Tencent which rose sharply after the Chinese government announced a series of stimulus measures. The three top detractors from relative performance at the st ock level were Novo Nordisk, Elevance Health and Moderna. Novo Nordisk is a rapi dly growing Danish pharmaceutical business. Its Wegovy weight-loss drug is dr iving strong growth for the business. Despite the shares being up +15% year to date (sour ce: Baillie Gifford), they were weak through the quarter owing to a disappointing resul t from an early phase 2 trial of an oral weight loss alternative to Wegovy. Elevance is one of America’s largest health insurance businesses, operating in a range of commer cial and state insurance offerings. It is one of the portfolio’s largest holdings andtherefore even modest falls in the share price can lead it to be a significant detractor. Whi le over the quarter there was no fundamental change to the business, the investment ma nager observes that share prices of health insurance companies are typically su bject to volatility around elections in the U.S. 17 London CIV Quarterly Investment Review London Borough of Hillingdon Pension Fund Summary Update Funds Appendices30 September 2024 3 5 17 49 LCIV Global Alpha Growth Paris Aligned Fund Moderna is a vaccine business that specialises in messenger RNA vaccines. It delivered explosive growth during the pandemic as it supplied vaccine s for Covid-19. However, over the past year, revenues have fallen -64%, including -30 % in the past quarter (source: Baillie Gifford) leading to the stock’s underperf ormance. The investment manager retains their conviction in the company’s prospect s but have become more sceptical over its execution capabilities in the last months. Positioning Forecast tracking error at the end of Q3 was broadly in line with the last quarter at 4.6 (source: Bloomberg Enterprise). About 48% of the active ris k is stock specific. Most of the balance is attributed to style, ‘growth’ specifically, and sector factors. Variances in Sub-fund sector positioning relative to the benchmark are large. At the regional level, as of the end of September 2024, the Sub-fund’s largest exposure remained North America at 65.1%. At the sector level, the Sub-fund maintained its large exposure to the consumer discretionary sector at 22.3%. Thi s sector remains the largest exposure followed by IT at 18.9% and financials at 12 .9%. The number of positions has decreased to 83 from 90 in the prev ious quarter. As previously commented, we were anticipating this number to d ecrease as the investment manager continues to actively assess the role th at some of the smaller positions play in the portfolio. Their focus is on bringing the number of positions in the Sub-fund down in order to free up capital for new ideas or to bu ild bigger positions in high conviction holdings. We expect this process to continu e. A number of ‘incubator’ new positions were added in the quart er in the ‘Disruptors’ and ‘Capital Allocators’ segments of the portfolio. Three c haracteristic examples are Dutch Bros, Builders FirstSource and Ryanair. Dutch Bros is a drive-through coffee chain operating in the U .S. According to the investment manager, the company's long-term goal of reaching over 4,000 outlets over the next 10-15 years (from a base of around 900 today), introduce mobile order & pay, and add more food products to its menu, makes this a compellin g investment case. Builders FirstSource is the largest supplier of building pr oducts, prefabricated components and value-added services to the professional builder space in the US. The investment manager expects Builders FirstSource to contin ue to invest organically to build strength and resilience through value-added products, to consolidate the industry through disciplined M&A, and return excess capital to shareholders through buybacks. Ryanair, Europe's leading short-haul airline, stands out f or its capital allocation discipline and focus on cost efficiency among low-cost carriers, which in the investment manager’s opinion, will support the company in gaining mark et share and strengthening its already robust competitive position. Ryanair was already a holding in the non-Paris-Aligned version of the strategy. The inclusion of this stock in the Sub-fund reflects an improvement in the company’s qualitative asses sment regarding the essentiality of the service it provides and a recognition of the company’s efforts to reduce its carbon footprint. According to Baillie Gifford, Ryanair has emerged as a leader in the aviation sector's transition towards sustainability, demonstrated by its Net Zero 2050 target and its ambition and willingness to lead within the sustainable aviation fuel (SAF) market. Additional commentary regarding Ryanair’s addition in the portfolio can be found in the ‘ESG Activity’ section below. Ten positions were fully liquidated over the quarter. Sellswere spread across the three portfolio segments, Compounders, Disruptors and Capital Allocators with characteristic examples including Adobe Systems, HDFC Bank and SPC Pool Corporation (‘Pool Corp’) respectively. Adobe is a software business with products th at help its customers with digital creativity and to develop superior digital experiences. The investment manager believes the boom in the adoption of generative artificial i ntelligence (AI) tools has catalysed a paradigm shift, in which a proliferation of crea tive AI tools is materially lowering barriers to entry, diminishing the value of design, and enabling competitors to gain ground in Adobe's core and adjacent markets. This poses material challenges to the investment case for Adobe and they have decided to move on from this holding. In July 2023, HDFC Corp merged with HDFC Bank, creating the wo rld's fourth-largest bank by market capitalisation. Operating mainly in their ho me market of India, HDFC provides retail banking, wholesale banking and treasury se rvices. The original investment case for HDFC was based on its potential to strengthen its leading position in a fast-growing economy. However, operational progress h as been disappointing, making it more difficult for the company to achieve the portfolio’s growth hurdle. With the share price appreciating around 10% over the last three m onths, the investment manager has taken the opportunity to sell the position and move on. 18 London CIV Quarterly Investment Review London Borough of Hillingdon Pension Fund Summary Update Funds Appendices30 September 2024 3 5 17 49 LCIV Global Alpha Growth Paris Aligned Fund Cyclical and operational factors have influenced the investment manager’s decision to sell out of the holding in America's largest wholesale distr ibutor of swimming pool supplies, Pool Corp. According to Baillie Gifford, the outlook for new pool construction is weak, as volumes of new family homes sold are declining and the migration trend that was experienced during the pandemic (people moving from frost-belt to sun-belt states) has now tapered off. When considering these headwin ds against a forward P/E of 30, they believe this to be too high for the growth outlook,and as such have chosen to focus on higher conviction ideas. London CIV Summary The investment manager’s efforts to diversify the sources of investment return for the Sub-fund have paid dividends over the reporting period as th e portfolio has shown resilience, delivering a flat relative return over what pro ved to be a roller coaster quarter. The vast majority of Sub-fund holdings (around 98% ) are profitable or free cashflow positive and the portfolio overall is much less reliant on debt funding than the broader market, with net debt-to-equity at around 20% compared to 50% for the index (source: Baillie Gifford). Additionally, the three-year e arnings growth forecast for the portfolio in aggregate remains ahead of that of the index. Provided that the encouraging signs of a broadening market environment we saw in Q3 persist, then we expect these underpinnings to position the Sub-fund well to deliver long-term outperformance. 19 London CIV Quarterly Investment Review London Borough of Hillingdon Pension Fund Summary Update Funds Appendices30 September 2024 3 5 17 49 LCIV Global Alpha Growth Paris Aligned Fund Peer Analysis This analysis is based on the performance of a representative account managed by the investment manager which is most closely aligned to the Sub-fund in terms of investment objective and policy. Data is reported gross of management fees. The peer group is Global All Cap Growth Equity. Over the short-term (up to 1 year) and longer-term (10 years) to the end of June 2024, the Sub-fund is in the third quartileof the peer group. Over three, five and seven-year periods, the Sub-fund remains in the bottom quartile. Tracking error over three years is lower than the median of the peer group, and the information ratio remains in the bottom quartile. Absolute risk, as measured by the standard deviation of returns, is slightly lower than the median but the maximum drawdown is higher. The Global Alpha Growth Paris Aligned portfolio has insufficient history required to perform meaningful peer analysis, which is based on three years of historic returns. We have in this case used the Global Alpha Growth portfolio as a proxy as it is closely aligned to the Paris Aligned fund in terms of investing style and is managed by the same team. Note, however, that the Paris Aligned fund pursues objectives relating to greenhouse gas intensity which may result in significant differences in the performance of the Global Alpha Growth and Global Alpha Growth Paris Aligned funds over time. Key Risk Statistics 100 75 50 25 0 Returns 3 Years Tracking Error 3 Years Informat ion Ratio 3 Years Standard Deviation 3 Years Max Drawdown 3 Years Baillie Gifford & Co Global Alpha MSCI Index MSCI ACWI-GD -0.30% 7.20% -1.31 15.63% 26.24%Sub-Fund proxy● 4.84% 8.20% -0.58 15.75% 23.03%Peer group median 9.12% - - 11.14% 10.74%Index■ Returns YTD 1 Year 3 Years 5 Years 7 Years 10 Years Baillie Gifford & Co Global Alpha 1st 2nd 3rd 4th Sub-Fund proxy 9.42% 14.38% -0.30% 8.93% 10.07% 12.63%● Peer group median 10.20% 16.25% 4.84% 11.53% 12.26% 13.78% Source: eVestment as at 30 June 2024 Source: eVestment as at 30 June 2024 20 London CIV Quarterly Investment Review London Borough of Hillingdon Pension Fund Summary Update Funds Appendices30 September 2024 3 5 17 49 LCIV Global Alpha Growth Paris Aligned Fund Style Analysis This quarter we are changing the source of the style analysis from Style Analytics to Bloomberg. This gives the advantage of being more up to date ( to the current quarter end) and aligns with the factor model we use in risk monitorin g. Broadly the factors remain the same at the high level and are categorised into val ue, growth, size, momentum and quality with some additional factors available. Some of the individual factors, particularly for value and growth are less granula r, but overall the picture of the style tilts of the sub-fund remains consistent. Definitions of the factors can be found in the glossary. The style of the Sub-fund remains consistent. The portfolio is tilted away from value factors and towards growth and quality (variability) factors. The Sub-fund is also biased towards companies with strong balance sheets (low leverage ). There is a tilt to small and mid-cap stocks and a bias towards high beta stocks. The po sitive momentum tilt remains consistent from last quarter. Source: Bloomberg as at 30th September 2024 This analysis is based on a representative account managed by the investment manager which is most closely aligned to the Sub-fund in terms of investment objective and policy. Please to refer to the Appendix for more information about the Style Analysis methodology. 55 21 London CIV Quarterly Investment Review London Borough of Hillingdon Pension Fund Summary Update Funds Appendices30 September 2024 3 5 17 49 LCIV Global Alpha Growth Paris Aligned Fund LCIV Global Alpha Growth Paris Aligned Fund: Portfolio Characteristics 1.7 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.9 5.4 10.7 12.6 12.7 12.9 18.9 22.3 0.0 2.7 4.0 6.4 2.2 4.1 10.6 10.9 7.8 16.2 24.5 10.7 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% Cash and other net assets Utilities Energy Consumer Staples Real Estate Materials Industrials Health Care Communication Services Financials Information Technology Consumer Discretionary Fund Benchmark*Sector Weights 1.7 0.6 0.2 4.1 13.6 2.5 1.2 2.9 18.8 65.1 0.0 0.8 1.2 5.0 16.1 2.6 2.2 3.3 14.9 67.0 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% Cash and other net assets South & Central America Africa & Middle East • Japan Asia Pacific • France • Switzerland • United Kingdom Western Europe North America Region/Country Weights Key Statistics 30 Sep 2024 30 Jun 2024 Number of Holdings 83 90 Number of Countries 18 19 Number of Sectors 9 9 Number of Industries 36 38 Yield % 0.80 0.86 Source: London CIV data as at 30 September 2024 Risk Statistics 30 Sep 2024 30 Jun 2024 Tracking Error (%) 4.57 4.30 Beta to Benchmark 1.12 1.13 Source: London CIV Risk statistics: forecast based on the composition of the portfolio and reference Index at the end of the reporting period (see Glossary of Terms for more information). The model used in the calculation of tracking error was changed as of 31st July 2024 from a monthly prediction horizon to quarterly to better reflect the longer term nature of the funds. 1.7 5.2 2.0 2.2 2.3 2.5 2.9 4.1 7.7 69.4 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% Cash and other net assets Other Investments Chinese Yuan Swedish Krona Taiwanese Dollar Danish Kroner British Pound Japanese Yen Euro United States Dollar Currency Weights Source: London CIV data as at 30 September 2024 *MSCI All Country World Gross Index (in GBP) 22 London CIV Quarterly Investment Review London Borough of Hillingdon Pension Fund Summary Update Funds Appendices30 September 2024 3 5 17 49 LCIV Global Alpha Growth Paris Aligned Fund LCIV Global Alpha Growth Paris Aligned Fund: Portfolio Characteristics Top Ten Equity Holdings Security Name % of NAV Microsoft 4.61 Meta Platforms 4.25 Amazon 4.09 Nvidia Corp 3.56 Elevance Health Inc 3.35 Prosus NV 2.87 Mastercard Inc 2.49 Doordash Inc 2.45 Moodys Corp 2.36 CRH Plc. 2.33 New Positions During Quarter Security Name ADR Ryanair Holdings Plc Builders Firstsource Inc Dutch Bros Inc Soitec S.A Completed Sales During Quarter Security Name Adobe Inc Advanced Micro Devices Inc Certara Inc HDFC Bank 'ADR' Hoshizaki Corp Pernod Ricard NPV Pool Corp Sands China Limited Staar Surgical Co Sysmex Corp Top Ten Contributors Security Name % Contribution Doordash Inc +0.44 Contemporary Amperex Technology Co. +0.44 Prosus +0.41 CRH Plc. +0.37 Adyen +0.35 CBRE Group Inc +0.33 Meta Platforms +0.30 Mercadolibre +0.28 AIA Group +0.25 Nexans SA +0.23 Top Ten Detractors Security Name % Detraction Microsoft (0.59) Novo Nordisk (0.56) Amazon (0.52) Moderna Inc (0.39) Alphabet Inc Class C (0.39) Elevance Health Inc (0.29) Mobileye Global Inc (0.28) Samsung Electronic Gdr (0.26) Entegris Inc (0.19) ASM International (0.18) Source: London CIV data as at 30 September 2024 23 London CIV Quarterly Investment Review London Borough of Hillingdon Pension Fund Summary Update Funds Appendices30 September 2024 3 5 17 49 LCIV Global Alpha Growth Paris Aligned Fund LCIV Global Alpha Growth Paris Aligned Fund: ESG Summary EOS engaged with 15 companies held in the portfolio on a range of 37 environmental, social and governance issues and objectives over the quarter. Out of those engagements, 16% were on environmental, 22% on governance,54% on social and 8% on strategy, risk and communications. During the quarter Baillie Gifford invested in Ryanair, we c hallenged the managers on their rationale behind the addition to the portfolio specif ically around the environmental impact of the airline industry. They explained to us the emergence of a more credible decarbonisation pathway for the airline indu stry and the fuel suppliers building out their sustainable aviation fuel supplies in re cent years. The investment manager also explained Ryanair’s disruption in the airline industry and their own emissions targets. Last year the company improved its sustainable aviation fuel targets to 12.5% by 2030 which is more ambitious than the EU mandates.They believe Ryanair will continue to enhance its fuel efficiency as it aligns with its financial strategy. Baillie Gifford met with Coupang to better understand its climate exposure and material risks, and to encourage the company to report scope 1 and 2 emi ssions. Coupang operates in densely populated areas of Korea, where 70% of the population lives within seven miles of a fulfilment centre. Seoul, known for its narrow streets and high vehicle usage, ranks among the worst cities globally for air pollution. Additionally, as a US-listed company, Coupang must adhere to new SEC requirements to disc lose scope 1 and 2 emissions. The investment manager recommended the disclos ure of scope 1 and 2 emissions, though advised against setting targets until th e company has a clearer understanding of its carbon footprint. Baillie Gifford the n offered the support of their Climate Team and agreed to provide examples of companies they believe to have best practice in similar sectors. Since then, the company has ind icated it is evaluating whether to include scope 1 and 2 emissions in its forthcomingESG report. The investment manager visited Ryanair’s headquarters foran update on the business, meeting with various departments. In their meeting with the Chair of the board, they gained a better understanding of the skills of the new board a ppointees. With the sustainability team, Baillie Gifford sought clarity on decarbonisation planning, especially regarding sustainable aviation fuel (SAF). They received c larity on SAF contracts and that other measures targeting emissions reductions are emb edded in the company’s 2050 Net Zero plan. With the chief operating officer, they ex plored the supply chain bottlenecks facing the company and were introduced to Ryanair Labs, an internal digital and IT innovation hub, which aims to improve customers’ onli ne travel booking experience. These meetings were insightful and helped the i nvestment manager to better calibrate the opportunity in the coming years and increase their

September 30, 2024 London Borough of Hillingdon Investment Risk & Analytical Services Table of Contents Section 1. London Borough of Hillingdon London Borough of Hillingdon 4 1.1. Client Commentary 5 1.2. Client Commentary (cntd) 6 1.3. Investment Hierarchy 7 1.4. Investment Hierarchy(2) 9 1.5. Market Value Summary - Three Months 11 1.6. Executive Summary 12 1.7. Asset Allocation by Manager 13 1.8. Asset Class Performance 15 1.9. Regional Performance - LBH Regional 16 1.10.Regional Performance(2) - LBH Regional 17 1.11.Total Plan Benchmark 18 1.12.Historical Performance 19 Section 2. Adam Street Adam Street 22 2.1. Executive Summary 23 Section 3. AEW UK AEW UK 24 3.1. Executive Summary 25 3.2. Asset Level Performance 26 Section 4. LCIV Global Alpha Growth Fund LCIV Global Alpha Growth Fund 27 4.1. Executive Summary 28 Section 5. LCIV Infrastructure Fund LCIV Infrastructure Fund 29 5.1. Executive Summary 30 Section 6. LCIV Mac Fund LCIV Mac Fund 31 6.1. Executive Summary 32 Section 7. LCIV Private Debt LCIV Private Debt 33 7.1. Executive Summary 34 Section 8. LCIV Ruffer LCIV Ruffer 35 8.1. Executive Summary 36 Section 9. Legal & General 1 Legal & General 1 37 9.1. Executive Summary 38 9.2. Regional Performance - LBH26 - Regional 39 Section 10. Legal & General 2 Legal & General 2 40 10.1.Executive Summary 41 Section 10. Legal & General 2 Legal & General 2 40 10.2.Regional Performance - LBH27 42 Section 11. LGIM - Future World Equity IND LGIM - Future World Equity IND 43 11.1.Executive Summary 44 Section 12. LGIM LPI Income Property LGIM LPI Income Property 45 12.1.Executive Summary 46 Section 13. LGT LGT 47 13.1.Executive Summary 48 Section 14. M&G Investments M&G Investments 49 14.1.Executive Summary 50 Section 15. Macquarie Macquarie 51 15.1.Executive Summary 52 Section 16. Premira Credit Premira Credit 53 16.1.Executive Summary 54 Section 17. UBS Property UBS Property 55 17.1.Executive Summary 56 Section 18. Appendix Appendix 57 18.1.Disclaimer(s) 58 September 30, 2024 London Borough of Hillingdon S E C T I O N 1 London Borough of Hillingdon Investment Risk & Analytical Services N O R T H E R N T R U S T London Borough of Hillingdon September 30, 2024 Client Commentary Total Scheme Commentary Scheme Performance Commentary London Borough of Hillingdon recorded a return of 1.29% during the quarter. The scheme has generated returns of 14.59%, 3.46% p.a. and 4.07% p.a., over the past one, three and five years respectively meanwhile the benchmark has registered a return of 13.96%, 4.61% p.a. and 5.66% p.a., for the same time periods respectively and since inception the mandate has returned 6.55% p.a., vs the benchmark's return of 6.74% p.a. Analysing the volatility of the mandate had standard deviation of 5.78% over the last year, compared to the benchmark's volatility of 4.69%, whereas the three year volatility of the group and benchmark is 7.09% and 6.61%, over five years the volatility is 7.87% and benchmark volatility is 7.12% and since inception the portfolio was less volatile than the benchmark, 9.52% vs 10.08%. Analysing the risk-return of the portfolio had a tracking error of 1.46% over the past year, compared to 1.54%, 1.58% and 6.09% over the last three and five years and since inception, whilst the information ratio for the same periods were 0.43, -0.74, -1.01 and -0.03. Allocation The market value of London Borough of Hillingdon was £1391.9M. This value has grown since the beginning of the quarter where the value was £1379.3M. Net contributions for the quarter were £-5.1M, whilst asset value appreciation was £10.6M. Income received on assets amounted to £7.1M. The largest holding in the plan is Legal & General 1 with a portfolio allocation of 27.25%. Fund Performance Adam Street Adam Street registered a return of -21.97% during the quarter. The benchmark, MSCI ACWI +4%, returned 1.44% for the third quarter consequently leading to an excess return of -23.07%. Over a three year time frame the strategy has registered a -13.32% p.a. return and generated an excess return of -23.17% p.a. and an information ratio of -1.48 for the same period. Since inception, the fund has yielded 5.53%. AEW UK In the third quarter of the year, the AEW UK significantly underperformed its benchmark as it returned -5.56%, whereas the benchmark yielded 1.22% generating an excess return of -6.70%. In the past three years the strategy has recorded a -1.85% p.a. return and produced an excess return of -1.42% p.a. and an information ratio of -0.09 for the same period, this is a measure of excess returns relative to the incremental risk taken compared to its benchmark. Since inception, the account has registered a 5.74% return and a 0.72% excess return. LCIV Global Alpha Growth Fund LCIV Global Alpha Growth Fund registered an absolute return of 0.67%, failing to beat the benchmark return of 0.90% by -0.22%. Over a three year time frame the account has registered a -1.23% p.a. return and produced an excess return of -12.07% p.a. and a tracking error that is 8.34% over the same period. Since inception, the strategy has returned -0.39% and significantly underperformed showing an excess return of -11.88%. 5 of 58 | Investment Risk & Analytical Services Manager Commentary LCIV Infrastructure Fund The LCIV Infrastructure Fund recorded positive performance for the third quarter of the year returning 4.14%, furthermore, the benchmark returned 1.96% and therefore on a comparative basis the mandate outperformed the benchmark (2.14%). Over the past three years the account has registered a 10.19% p.a. return and generated an excess return of 3.45% p.a. and an information ratio of 0.58 for the same period. Going back to inception, the fund has registered a 5.82% return and a 0.48% excess return. LCIV Mac Fund The LCIV Mac Fund posted positive performance for the third quarter of the year returning 3.70%, additionally, the benchmark returned 2.31% and therefore on a comparative basis the account outperformed the benchmark (1.36%). Over a one year time frame the account has yielded 14.27%, with an excess return of 4.20% and an information ratio of 0.52. From inception, the fund has yielded 7.54% and underperformed showing an excess return of -1.22%. LCIV Private Debt The LCIV Private Debt recorded positive performance for Q3 returning 1.77%, furthermore, the benchmark returned 1.47% and therefore on a comparative basis the mandate outperformed the benchmark (0.29%). Extending the time horizon to the past year the account has returned 11.44%, with an excess return of 5.13% and an information ratio of 0.76. From inception, the fund has recorded a 7.18% return and a 1.12% excess return. LCIV Ruffer LCIV Ruffer had a positive quarter, returning 2.86%. The benchmark, LBH11003 Ruffer BM SONIA, returned 1.30% for the third quarter as a result generating an excess return of 1.54%. In the past three years the manager has recorded a 1.32% p.a. return and produced an excess return of -2.00% p.a. and an information ratio of -0.36 for the same period. Going back to inception, the portfolio has registered a 4.92% return and a 3.56% excess return. Legal & General 1 Legal & General 1 had a positive quarter, yielding 2.49%. Composite benchmark yielded 2.81% in the third quarter of the year, therefore the mandate underperformed the benchmark this quarter. Over three years the manager has recorded a 8.38% p.a. return and generated an excess return of -0.30% p.a. and an information ratio of -1.06 for the same period. Going back to inception, the strategy has yielded 9.59% and underperformed showing an excess return of -0.18%. Legal & General 2 During the course of Q3, Legal & General 2 returned 1.42%. Looking over a longer time horizon, the three year return for the manager is -11.82% p.a., with volatility measured by standard deviation comes in at 14.43%. The account has delivered a return of -1.89% since its inception. N O R T H E R N T R U S T London Borough of Hillingdon September 30, 2024 6 of 58 | Investment Risk & Analytical Services Client Commentary (cntd) Manager Commentary LGIM - Future World Equity IND LGIM - Future World Equity IND had a positive quarter, yielding 0.74%. Extending the time horizon, the three year return for the fund is 8.66% p.a., with volatility measured by standard deviation comes in at 10.79%. The strategy has posted a return of 10.48% since its inception. LGIM LPI Income Property During the course of the third quarter, LGIM LPI Income Property returned 1.22%. Comparing against the benchmark, the manager performed higher than the benchmark by 0.88% in Q3 as it registered a return of 0.34%. Over three years the fund has registered a -2.88% p.a. return and produced an excess return of -10.06% p.a. and an information ratio of -1.76 for the same period. From inception, the fund has yielded -1.03% and significantly underperformed showing an excess return of -7.03%. LGT LGT had a negative quarter, returning -0.24%. The benchmark, MSCI ACWI+4%, yielded 1.44% during the third quarter of the year consequently leading to an excess return of -1.66%. In the past three years the portfolio has registered a -0.54% p.a. return and generated an excess return of -11.84% p.a. and a tracking error that is 16.25% over the same period. Since inception, the strategy has registered a 10.04% return. M&G Investments M&G Investments recorded an absolute return of -30.61%, falling short of the benchmark return of 2.19% by -32.09%. Over the past three years the strategy has recorded a -0.36% p.a. return and produced an excess return of -7.33% p.a. and an information ratio of -0.19 for the same period. Since inception, the manager has returned 1.03% and significantly underperformed showing an excess return of -4.03%. Macquarie Macquarie registered an absolute return of -7.85%, underperforming the benchmark return of 1.96% by -9.62%. In the past three years the fund has recorded a 17.58% p.a. return and produced an excess return of 10.39% p.a. and a tracking error that is 18.27% over the same period. From inception, the manager has registered a 9.40% return and a 4.92% excess return. Premira Credit Premira Credit had a positive quarter, returning 0.45%. Relative to the benchmark, the account returned beneath the benchmark by -1.70% over the third quarter of the year as it yielded a return of 2.19%. In the past three years the fund has registered a 8.40% p.a. return and generated an excess return of 0.82% p.a. and an information ratio of 0.19 for the same period. From inception, the strategy has registered a 7.54% return and a 1.93% excess return. ManagerCommentary UBS Property UBS Property registered an absolute return of 2.69%, surpassing the benchmark return of 1.22% by 1.45%. Over a three year time frame the manager has recorded a 0.01% p.a. return and generated an excess return of 0.45% p.a. and a tracking error that is 3.80% over the same period. Going back to inception, the portfolio has registered a 3.34% return and a 3.0bps excess return. N O R T H E R N T R U S T London Borough of Hillingdon September 30, 2024 7 of 58 | Investment Risk & Analytical Services Category: Total Fund Gross of Fees Investment Hierarchy Three Months Year to Date One Year Account/Group -% Rate of Return Ending Market Value GBP Ending Weight Port Index Relative Excess Port Index Relative Excess Port Index Relative Excess London Borough of Hillingdon 1,391,949,938 100.00 1.29 1.77 -0.47 8.24 8.91 -0.61 14.59 13.96 0.55 Total Plan Benchmark AEW UK 68,837,322 4.95 -5.56 1.22 -6.70 -2.98 2.91 -5.72 4.77 1.71 3.00 LBH22 AEW Benchmark Legal & General 1 379,260,207 27.25 2.49 2.81 -0.31 14.97 15.82 -0.73 23.39 24.26 -0.70 LBH26 L&G Benchmark Legal & General 2 105,307,441 7.57 1.42 1.42 -0.00 -2.50 -2.49 -0.01 5.98 6.01 -0.03 LBH27 L&G Benchmark M&G Investments 170,832 0.01 -30.61 2.19 -32.09 -43.12 6.82 -46.75 -44.08 9.17 -48.78 LBH10 3M SONIA +4%pa Macquarie 10,835,262 0.78 -7.85 1.96 -9.62 1.25 6.08 -4.55 -0.95 8.17 -8.44 LBH14 Macquarie 3M SONIA +3%pa Premira Credit 11,368,309 0.82 0.45 2.19 -1.70 8.20 6.82 1.29 12.24 9.17 2.81 LBH24 Premira 3M SONIA +4%pa UBS Property 75,193,696 5.40 2.69 1.22 1.45 1.58 2.91 -1.29 0.55 1.71 -1.15 LBH06 UBS Property Benchmark Adam Street 2,786,414 0.20 -21.97 1.44 -23.07 -20.73 16.15 -31.75 -25.70 24.46 -40.30 Adam Street PE Bmark LGT 1,515,013 0.11 -0.24 1.44 -1.66 -1.49 16.15 -15.19 -1.13 24.46 -20.56 LGT PE Bmark LCIV Ruffer 39,097,020 2.81 2.86 1.30 1.54 2.45 3.99 -1.48 4.69 5.38 -0.66 LBH11003 Ruffer BM SONIA LCIV Infrastructure Fund 59,452,128 4.27 4.14 1.96 2.14 8.13 6.08 1.94 13.29 8.17 4.73 LBH11004 3M SONIA +3% LGIM LPI Income Property 47,764,183 3.43 1.22 0.34 0.88 3.79 2.53 1.22 3.05 2.70 0.34 LBH28 L&G RPI LCIV Global Alpha Growth Fund 63,142,375 4.54 0.67 0.90 -0.22 10.87 15.20 -3.76 19.80 23.52 -3.01 LBH11005 MSCI World ND+3% LGIM - Future World Equity IND 311,412,713 22.37 0.74 0.74 -0.00 13.78 13.67 0.10 21.83 21.57 0.21 LBH29 Solactive L&G ESG N O R T H E R N T R U S T London Borough of Hillingdon September 30, 2024 8 of 58 | Investment Risk & Analytical Services Category: Total Fund Gross of Fees Three Months Year to Date One Year Account/Group -% Rate of Return Ending Market Value GBP Ending Weight Port Index Relative Excess Port Index Relative Excess Port Index Relative Excess LCIV Private Debt 56,765,137 4.08 1.77 1.47 0.29 3.80 4.47 -0.64 11.44 6.00 5.13 Absolute Return 6% LCIV Mac Fund 130,495,870 9.38 3.70 2.31 1.36 7.91 7.19 0.66 14.27 9.67 4.20 LBH30 3 Month SONIA +4.5% Blackstone Dislocation Fund 24,949,438 1.79 -5.75 3.63 -9.05 - - - - - - LBH31 15% Absolute return p.a. N O R T H E R N T R U S T London Borough of Hillingdon September 30, 2024 9 of 58 | Investment Risk & Analytical Services Category: Total Fund Gross of Fees Investment Hierarchy(2) Three Years Five Years Inception to Date Account/Group -% Rate of Return Ending Market Value GBP Ending Weight Port Index Relative Excess Port Index Relative Excess Port Index Relative Excess Inception Date London Borough of Hillingdon 1,391,949,938 100.00 3.46 4.61 -1.10 4.07 5.66 -1.51 6.55 6.74 -0.18 30/09/1995 Total Plan Benchmark AEW UK 68,837,322 4.95 -1.85 -0.44 -1.42 0.86 1.66 -0.79 5.74 4.98 0.72 30/06/2014 LBH22 AEW Benchmark Legal & General 1 379,260,207 27.25 8.38 8.71 -0.30 10.99 11.26 -0.24 9.59 9.79 -0.18 31/10/2016 LBH26 L&G Benchmark Legal & General 2 105,307,441 7.57 -11.82 -11.81 -0.00 -6.90 -6.91 0.01 -1.89 -1.77 -0.13 22/02/2017 LBH27 L&G Benchmark M&G Investments 170,832 0.01 -0.36 7.52 -7.33 -9.67 6.28 -15.01 1.03 5.27 -4.03 31/05/2010 LBH10 3M SONIA +4%pa Macquarie 10,835,262 0.78 17.58 6.52 10.39 14.33 5.28 8.59 9.40 4.27 4.92 30/09/2010 LBH14 Macquarie 3M SONIA +3%pa Premira Credit 11,368,309 0.82 8.40 7.52 0.82 6.80 6.28 0.49 7.54 5.50 1.93 30/11/2014 LBH24 Premira 3M SONIA +4%pa UBS Property 75,193,696 5.40 0.01 -0.44 0.45 1.74 1.66 0.08 3.34 3.31 0.03 31/03/2006 LBH06 UBS Property Benchmark Adam Street 2,786,414 0.20 -13.32 12.82 -23.17 -1.46 14.83 -14.19 5.53 - - 31/01/2005 Adam Street PE Bmark LGT 1,515,013 0.11 -0.54 12.82 -11.84 5.61 14.83 -8.03 10.04 - - 31/05/2004 LGT PE Bmark LCIV Ruffer 39,097,020 2.81 1.32 3.39 -2.00 4.74 2.20 2.48 4.92 1.31 3.56 28/05/2010 LBH11003 Ruffer BM SONIA LCIV Infrastructure Fund 59,452,128 4.27 10.19 6.52 3.45 - - - 5.82 5.31 0.48 14/11/2019 LBH11004 3M SONIA +3% LGIM LPI Income Property 47,764,183 3.43 -2.88 7.99 -10.06 - - - -1.03 6.45 -7.03 11/03/2020 LBH28 L&G RPI LCIV Global Alpha Growth Fund 63,142,375 4.54 -1.23 12.33 -12.07 - - - -0.39 13.04 -11.88 22/04/2021 LBH11005 MSCI World ND+3% LGIM - Future World Equity IND 311,412,713 22.37 8.66 8.43 0.22 - - - 10.48 10.30 0.16 23/09/2020 LBH29 Solactive L&G ESG N O R T H E R N T R U S T London Borough of Hillingdon September 30, 2024 10 of 58 | Investment Risk & Analytical Services Category: Total Fund Gross of Fees Three Years Five Years Inception to Date Account/Group -% Rate of Return Ending Market Value GBP Ending Weight Port Index Relative Excess Port Index Relative Excess Port Index Relative Excess Inception Date LCIV Private Debt 56,765,137 4.08 - - - - - - 7.18 5.99 1.12 16/11/2021 Absolute Return 6% LCIV Mac Fund 130,495,870 9.38 - - - - - - 7.54 8.86 -1.22 26/05/2022 LBH30 3 Month SONIA +4.5% Blackstone Dislocation Fund 24,949,438 1.79 - - - - - - -4.22 7.51 -10.92 27/03/2024 LBH31 15% Absolute return p.a. N O R T H E R N T R U S T London Borough of Hillingdon September 30, 2024 11 of 58 | Investment Risk & Analytical Services Category: Total Fund Gross of Fees • Currency: GBP Market Value Summary - Three Months Account/Group 30/06/2024 Market Value 30/06/2024 Weight Net Contribution* Income Fees Appreciation 30/09/2024 Market Value 30/09/2024 Weight Change in Weight London Borough of Hillingdon 1,379,310 100.00 -5,075 7,104 75 10,610 1,391,950 100.00 0.00 Adam Street 3,646 0.26 -62 0 0 -798 2,786 0.20 -0.06 AEW UK 73,622 5.34 -693 444 0 -4,536 68,837 4.95 -0.39 Blackstone Dislocation Fund 19,595 1.42 6,700 6 0 -1,352 24,949 1.79 0.37 Cash & Other Assets 6,279 0.46 -2,688 31 0 -26 3,596 0.26 -0.20 Cash & Other Assets 210 0.02 -212 2 0 -0 0 0.00 -0.02 LCIV Global Alpha Growth Fund 62,721 4.55 0 104 0 317 63,142 4.54 -0.01 LCIV Infrastructure Fund 51,189 3.71 5,923 435 0 1,904 59,452 4.27 0.56 LCIV Mac Fund 125,839 9.12 0 4,602 0 55 130,496 9.38 0.25 LCIV Private Debt 55,780 4.04 0 0 0 985 56,765 4.08 0.03 LCIV Ruffer 44,737 3.24 -6,800 239 0 921 39,097 2.81 -0.43 Legal & General 1 370,068 26.83 -20 0 20 9,212 379,260 27.25 0.42 Legal & General 2 103,835 7.53 -1 0 1 1,474 105,307 7.57 0.04 LGIM - Future World Equity IND 309,163 22.41 -24 0 24 2,273 311,413 22.37 -0.04 LGIM LPI Income Property 47,190 3.42 0 0 0 574 47,764 3.43 0.01 LGT 1,590 0.12 -71 0 0 -4 1,515 0.11 -0.01 M&G Investments 246 0.02 -0 0 0 -75 171 0.01 -0.01 Macquarie 14,968 1.09 -3,022 206 0 -1,316 10,835 0.78 -0.31 Premira Credit 14,738 1.07 -3,432 216 0 -154 11,368 0.82 -0.25 UBS Property 73,892 5.36 -673 820 29 1,155 75,194 5.40 0.04 Min -0.43 0.56 Max Market Values are represented in thousands. *Net Contributions include Cash Contributions/Distributions, Security Deliveries/Receipts, Fees/Fee Rebates, Inter Account transfers for Consolidations & Benefits Payments. Copied History or Backloaded Data may not display the correct Contributions/Withdrawals creating misrepresentation. N O R T H E R N T R U S T London Borough of Hillingdon September 30, 2024 12 of 58 | Investment Risk & Analytical Services Executive Summary LONDON BOROUGH OF HILLINGDON TOTAL FUND GROSS OF FEES Three Months Year to Date One Year Three Years Five Years ITD Fund 1.29 8.24 14.59 3.46 4.07 6.55 Index 1.77 8.91 13.96 4.61 5.66 6.74 Index: Total Plan Benchmark RISK STATISTICS 1 Yr 3 Yrs 5 Yrs Return 14.59 3.46 4.07 Index Return 13.96 4.61 5.66 Relative Excess Return 0.55 -1.10 -1.51 Standard Deviation 5.78 7.09 7.87 Index Standard Deviation 4.69 6.61 7.12 Tracking Error 1.46 1.54 1.58 Information Ratio 0.43 -0.74 -1.01 Sharpe Ratio 1.60 0.14 0.30 Index Sharpe Ratio 1.83 0.32 0.56 Sortino Ratio 3.39 0.20 0.43 Treynor Ratio 7.63 0.92 2.21 Jensen's Alpha -1.06 -1.17 -1.80 Relative Volatility (Beta) 1.21 1.05 1.08 R Squared 0.97 0.95 0.97 Index: Total Plan Benchmark. Risk Free Index: JP Morgan 3 month Cash (GBP) Category: Total Fund Gross of Fees. Calculation Frequency: Monthly LONDON BOROUGH OF HILLINGDON ROLLING QUARTERS TOTAL FUND GROSS OF FEES Q4 '21 Q1 '22 Q2 '22 Q3 '22 Q4 '22 Q1 '23 Q2 '23 Q3 '23 Q4 '23 Q1 '24 Q2 '24 Q3 '24 Fund 4.53 -2.01 -6.84 -2.01 0.05 2.78 1.08 -0.56 5.86 4.77 2.01 1.29 Index 4.94 -0.89 -5.78 -1.23 -1.14 3.28 1.64 -0.00 4.63 4.69 2.23 1.77 Index: Total Plan Benchmark LONDON BOROUGH OF HILLINGDON ROLLING QUARTERS TOTAL FUND GROSS OF FEES Q4 '21 Q1 '22 Q2 '22 Q3 '22 Q4 '22 Q1 '23 Q2 '23 Q3 '23 Q4 '23 Q1 '24 Q2 '24 Q3 '24 3M R.Excess -0.39 -1.13 -1.13 -0.79 1.21 -0.49 -0.55 -0.55 1.17 0.07 -0.22 -0.47 3Y R.Excess -1.37 -1.58 -2.08 -2.55 -1.90 -1.08 -0.96 -0.86 -0.63 -0.81 -1.00 -1.10 Index: Total Plan Benchmark N O R T H E R N T R U S T London Borough of Hillingdon September 30, 2024 13 of 58 | Investment Risk & Analytical Services Asset Allocation by Manager *Manager weights less than 2% have been grouped together. Ending Market Value GOF GBP Ending Weight Equity Fixed Income Index Linked Gilts Real Estate DGF/ Absolute Return Private Equity Private Credit Infrastructure Cash London Borough of Hillingdon 1,391,950 100.00 753,822 105,307 185,966 39,097 273,476 11,091 10,177 13,012 54.16 7.57 13.36 2.81 19.65 0.80 0.73 0.93 AEW UK 68,837 4.95 68,835 2 4.95 0.00 JP Morgan Legal & General 1 379,260 27.25 379,260 27.25 Legal & General 2 105,307 7.57 105,307 7.57 M&G Investments 171 0.01 171 0.01 Macquarie 10,835 0.78 10,177 658 0.73 0.05 Newton N O R T H E R N T R U S T London Borough of Hillingdon September 30, 2024 14 of 58 | Investment Risk & Analytical Services Ending Market Value GOF GBP Ending Weight Equity Fixed Income Index Linked Gilts Real Estate DGF/ Absolute Return Private Equity Private Credit Infrastructure Cash Premira Credit 11,368 0.82 10,920 448 0.78 0.03 UBS Property 75,194 5.40 69,367 5,826 4.98 0.42 Adam Street 2,786 0.20 2,786 0.20 LGT 1,515 0.11 1,515 0.11 Cash & Other Assets 3,596 0.26 7 3,589 0.00 0.26 Transition Cash & Other Assets 0 0.00 0 0.00 Epoch Investment P Income LCIV Global Alpha Growth Fund 63,142 4.54 63,142 4.54 LCIV Infrastructure Fund 59,452 4.27 59,452 4.27 LGIM - Future World Equity IND 311,413 22.37 311,413 22.37 LGIM LPI Income Property 47,764 3.43 47,764 3.43 LCIV Private Debt 56,765 4.08 56,765 4.08 LCIV Ruffer 39,097 2.81 39,097 2.81 LCIV Mac Fund 130,496 9.38 130,496 9.38 Blackstone Dislocation Fund 24,949 1.79 22,462 2,488 1.61 0.18 *Market Values are represented in thousands. *Underlying assets of the fund have been included in the market value and allocation. N O R T H E R N T R U S T London Borough of Hillingdon September 30, 2024 15 of 58 | Investment Risk & Analytical Services Asset Class Performance ASSET CLASS ENDING WEIGHTS MARKET VALUE SUMMARY OVER TIME 3 Mos 1 Yr YTD Beginning Market Value 1,379,310 1,183,808 1,252,116 Net Contribution -5,075 34,070 35,047 Income 7,104 19,680 16,132 Fees 75 171 194 Appreciation 10,610 154,393 88,655 Ending Market Value 1,391,950 1,391,950 1,391,950 *Market Values are in 000s. Asset Class End MV End Wt 3 Mos YTD 1 Yr 3 Yrs 5 Yrs ITD Equity 753,822,378 54.16 1.60 14.06 22.38 7.45 7.27 Common Stock 753,822,378 54.16 1.60 14.06 22.38 7.45 7.27 Index Linked Gilts 105,307,441 7.57 1.42 -2.50 5.98 -11.82 -7.08 Balanced Funds 39,097,020 2.81 2.86 2.45 4.69 1.32 2.61 Real Estate 185,966,496 13.36 -0.85 0.31 2.60 -1.42 0.56 6.97 Private Equity 273,476,356 19.65 2.18 5.66 11.73 6.48 6.89 Loans 11,090,642 0.80 -0.18 6.79 10.59 8.68 6.41 Cash & Short Term Deriv. 13,012,382 0.93 0.48 3.13 3.91 4.37 2.16 Pending Cash 0 0.00 - - - - - - Foreign Exchange 0 0.00 - - - - - - Infrastructure 10,177,224 0.73 -8.94 0.08 -2.07 17.14 14.28 Total Fund Gross of Fees 1,391,949,938 100.00 1.29 8.24 14.59 3.46 4.07 6.55 Total Plan Benchmark 1.77 8.91 13.96 4.61 5.66 6.74 Excess Return -0.47 -0.61 0.55 -1.10 -1.51 -0.18 Excess is calculated using relative methodology N O R T H E R N T R U S T London Borough of Hillingdon September 30, 2024 16 of 58 | Investment Risk & Analytical Services Analysis: LBH Regional Regional Performance Category - Base Rates of Return Ending Market value GBP - GOF Ending Weight Three Months Year to Date One Year Portfolio Index Relative Excess Portfolio Index Relative Excess Portfolio Index Relative Excess London Borough of Hillingdon 1,391,949,938 100.00 1.29 1.77 -0.47 8.24 8.91 -0.61 14.59 13.96 0.55 Equity 753,822,378 54.16 1.60 0.56 1.04 14.06 13.18 0.78 22.38 20.68 1.41 United Kingdom 374,555,088 26.91 0.72 - - 13.17 - - 21.40 - - Overseas Equities 379,267,290 27.25 2.49 - - 14.97 - - 23.39 - - Europe ex UK 7,082 0.00 - - - - - - - - - Asia Pacific inc Japan - - - - - - - - - - Emerging Markets 53,194,272 3.82 2.47 4.77 -2.20 11.43 14.56 -2.73 13.75 16.96 -2.74 L&G GPCT World Dev Eq Idx GBP Hdg 170,469,791 12.25 4.56 4.59 -0.02 18.54 19.01 -0.39 30.03 30.51 -0.37 World Developed Equity Index 155,596,144 11.18 0.32 0.32 -0.00 12.49 12.92 -0.38 20.14 20.59 -0.37 Fixed Income - - 2.31 - - 7.19 - - 9.67 - UK Corporate Bonds - - 2.31 - - 7.19 - - 9.67 - Global Corporate Bonds - - - - - - - - - - Index Linked Gilts 105,307,441 7.57 1.42 1.42 -0.00 -2.50 -2.49 -0.01 5.98 6.01 -0.03 Real Estates 185,966,496 13.36 -0.85 1.22 -2.05 0.31 2.91 -2.52 2.60 1.71 0.87 Balanced funds 39,097,020 2.81 2.86 - - 2.45 - - 4.69 - - Epoch Investment - - - - - - - - - - DGF/Absolute Return 39,097,020 2.81 2.86 1.30 1.54 2.45 3.99 -1.48 4.69 5.38 -0.66 Private Equity 273,476,356 19.65 2.18 1.44 0.73 5.66 16.15 -9.03 11.73 24.46 -10.23 Private Credit 11,090,642 0.80 -0.18 2.19 -2.32 6.79 6.82 -0.03 10.59 9.17 1.30 Infrastructure 10,177,224 0.73 -8.94 1.96 -10.69 0.08 6.08 -5.66 -2.07 8.17 -9.47 Cash & Synthetic Cash 13,012,382 0.93 0.41 1.30 -0.88 3.05 3.99 -0.90 3.83 5.38 -1.47 Foreign Exchange 0 0.00 - - - - - - - - - N O R T H E R N T R U S T London Borough of Hillingdon September 30, 2024 17 of 58 | Investment Risk & Analytical Services Analysis: LBH Regional Regional Performance(2) Category - Base Rates of Return Three Years Five Years Inception to Date Portfolio Index Relative Excess Portfolio Index Relative Excess Portfolio Index Relative Excess London Borough of Hillingdon 3.46 4.61 -1.10 4.07 5.66 -1.51 6.55 6.74 -0.18 Equity 7.45 9.08 -1.50 7.27 9.06 -1.64 - - - United Kingdom 6.46 - - -1.05 - - 5.59 - - Overseas Equities 8.38 - - 10.39 - - 7.24 - - Europe ex UK - - - - - - - - - Asia Pacific inc Japan - - - - - - - - - Emerging Markets 1.73 2.84 -1.08 4.57 5.34 -0.73 - - - L&G GPCT World Dev Eq Idx GBP Hdg 9.50 9.65 -0.14 12.68 12.82 -0.13 - - - World Developed Equity Index 9.30 9.48 -0.17 11.32 11.45 -0.12 - - - Fixed Income - - - - - - - - - UK Corporate Bonds - - - - - - - - - Global Corporate Bonds - - - - - - - - - Index Linked Gilts -11.82 -11.81 -0.00 -7.08 -7.32 0.25 - - - Real Estates -1.42 -0.44 -0.99 0.56 1.66 -1.08 6.97 7.18 -0.20 Balanced funds 1.32 - - 2.61 - - - - - Epoch Investment - - - - - - - - - DGF/Absolute Return 1.32 3.39 -2.00 4.74 2.20 2.48 - - - Private Equity 6.48 12.82 -5.62 6.89 14.83 -6.92 - - - Private Credit 8.68 7.52 1.08 6.41 6.28 0.12 - - - Infrastructure 17.14 6.52 9.97 14.28 5.28 8.55 - - - Cash & Synthetic Cash 4.29 3.38 0.88 2.12 2.04 0.08 - - - Foreign Exchange - - - - - - - - - London Borough of Hillingdon September 30, 2024 18 of 58 | Investment Risk & Analytical Services N O R T H E R N T R U S T Total Plan Benchmark . N O R T H E R N T R U S T London Borough of Hillingdon September 30, 2024 19 of 58 | Investment Risk & Analytical Services Historical Performance EQUITY Three Months Year to Date One Year Three Years Five Years ITD Category 1.60 14.06 22.38 7.45 7.27 - Index 0.56 13.18 20.68 9.08 9.06 - Index: Total Equity Benchmark UNITED KINGDOM Three Months Year to Date One Year Three Years Five Years ITD Category 0.72 13.17 21.40 6.46 -1.05 5.59 Index - - - - - - Index: FTSE All Share UK Equity OVERSEAS EQUITIES Three Months Year to Date One Year Three Years Five Years ITD Category 2.49 14.97 23.39 8.38 10.39 7.24 EMERGING MARKETS Three Months Year to Date One Year Three Years Five Years ITD Category 2.47 11.43 13.75 1.73 4.57 - Index 4.77 14.56 16.96 2.84 5.34 - Index: LBH Emerging Markets N O R T H E R N T R U S T London Borough of Hillingdon September 30, 2024 20 of 58 | Investment Risk & Analytical Services Historical Performance UK CORPORATE BONDS Three Months Year to Date One Year Three Years Five Years ITD Category - - - - - - Index 2.31 7.19 9.67 - - - Index: LBH Non-Gilts Benchmark REAL ESTATES Three Months Year to Date One Year Three Years Five Years ITD Category -0.85 0.31 2.60 -1.42 0.56 6.97 Index 1.22 2.91 1.71 -0.44 1.66 7.18 Index: IPD All Property Trusts (GBP) INDEX LINKED GILTS Three Months Year to Date One Year Three Years Five Years ITD Category 1.42 -2.50 5.98 -11.82 -7.08 - Index 1.42 -2.49 6.01 -11.81 -7.32 - Index: LBH Index Linked Benchmark PRIVATE EQUITY Three Months Year to Date One Year Three Years Five Years ITD Category 2.18 5.66 11.73 6.48 6.89 - Index 1.44 16.15 24.46 12.82 14.83 - Index: MSCI ACWI +4% pa N O R T H E R N T R U S T London Borough of Hillingdon September 30, 2024 21 of 58 | Investment Risk & Analytical Services Historical Performance BALANCED FUNDS Three Months Year to Date One Year Three Years Five Years ITD Category 2.86 2.45 4.69 1.32 2.61 - Index - - - - - - Index: Balanced Fund Benchmark INFRASTRUCTURE Three Months Year to Date One Year Three Years Five Years ITD Category -8.94 0.08 -2.07 17.14 14.28 - Index 1.96 6.08 8.17 6.52 5.28 - Index: 3M SONIA +3% pa PRIVATE CREDIT Three Months Year to Date One Year Three Years Five Years ITD Category -0.18 6.79 10.59 8.68 6.41 - Index 2.19 6.82 9.17 7.52 6.28 - Index: 3M SONIA +4% pa September 30, 2024 Adam Street S E C T I O N 2 Adam Street Investment Risk & Analytical Services N O R T H E R N T R U S T Adam Street September 30, 2024 23 of 58 | Investment Risk & Analytical Services Executive Summary ADAM STREET TOTAL FUND GROSS OF FEES Three Months Year to Date One Year Three Years Five Years ITD Fund -21.97 -20.73 -25.70 -13.32 -1.46 5.53 Index 1.44 16.15 24.46 12.82 14.83 - Index: Adam Street PE Bmark RISK STATISTICS 1 Yr 3 Yrs 5 Yrs Return -25.70 -13.32 -1.46 Index Return 24.46 12.82 14.83 Relative Excess Return -40.30 -23.17 -14.19 Standard Deviation 18.26 13.62 20.08 Index Standard Deviation 8.38 10.54 12.30 Tracking Error 19.66 17.69 24.36 Information Ratio -2.55 -1.48 -0.67 Sharpe Ratio -1.70 -1.16 -0.16 Index Sharpe Ratio 2.28 0.98 1.07 Sortino Ratio -1.51 -1.17 -0.24 Treynor Ratio -228.74 243.63 28.18 Jensen's Alpha -29.92 -14.02 0.29 Relative Volatility (Beta) 0.14 -0.06 -0.11 R Squared 0.00 0.00 0.00 Index: Adam Street PE Bmark. Risk Free Index: JP Morgan 3 month Cash (GBP) Category: Total Fund Gross of Fees. Calculation Frequency: Monthly ADAM STREET ROLLING QUARTERS TOTAL FUND GROSS OF FEES Q4 '21 Q1 '22 Q2 '22 Q3 '22 Q4 '22 Q1 '23 Q2 '23 Q3 '23 Q4 '23 Q1 '24 Q2 '24 Q3 '24 Fund -2.01 3.39 1.92 -0.47 -9.35 -6.23 -3.81 4.29 -6.27 2.27 -0.67 -21.97 Index 7.00 -1.55 -7.32 2.56 2.99 5.51 4.34 1.62 7.15 10.29 3.82 1.44 Index: Adam Street PE Bmark ADAM STREET ROLLING QUARTERS TOTAL FUND GROSS OF FEES Q4 '21 Q1 '22 Q2 '22 Q3 '22 Q4 '22 Q1 '23 Q2 '23 Q3 '23 Q4 '23 Q1 '24 Q2 '24 Q3 '24 3M R.Excess -8.42 5.02 9.98 -2.95 -11.99 -11.13 -7.81 2.63 -12.53 -7.27 -4.33 -23.07 3Y R.Excess -5.08 2.14 4.40 1.75 1.45 -11.05 -3.55 -4.16 -6.78 -12.62 -13.97 -23.17 Index: Adam Street PE Bmark September 30, 2024 AEW UK S E C T I O N 3 AEW UK Investment Risk & Analytical Services N O R T H E R N T R U S T AEW UK September 30, 2024 25 of 58 | Investment Risk & Analytical Services Executive Summary AEW UK TOTAL FUND GROSS OF FEES Three Months Year to Date One Year Three Years Five Years ITD Fund -5.56 -2.98 4.77 -1.85 0.86 5.74 Index 1.22 2.91 1.71 -0.44 1.66 4.98 Index: LBH22 AEW Benchmark RISK STATISTICS 1 Yr 3 Yrs 5 Yrs Return 4.77 -1.85 0.86 Index Return 1.71 -0.44 1.66 Relative Excess Return 3.00 -1.42 -0.79 Standard Deviation 8.44 14.81 15.53 Index Standard Deviation 1.23 6.49 5.41 Tracking Error 9.11 15.19 15.07 Information Ratio 0.34 -0.09 -0.05 Sharpe Ratio -0.07 -0.29 -0.05 Index Sharpe Ratio -2.97 -0.45 -0.00 Sortino Ratio -0.11 -0.37 -0.07 Treynor Ratio 0.17 -11.98 -1.07 Jensen's Alpha -11.85 -2.20 0.36 Relative Volatility (Beta) -3.50 0.36 0.75 R Squared 0.24 0.03 0.07 Index: LBH22 AEW Benchmark. Risk Free Index: JP Morgan 3 month Cash (GBP) Category: Total Fund Gross of Fees. Calculation Frequency: Monthly AEW UK ROLLING QUARTERS TOTAL FUND GROSS OF FEES Q4 '21 Q1 '22 Q2 '22 Q3 '22 Q4 '22 Q1 '23 Q2 '23 Q3 '23 Q4 '23 Q1 '24 Q2 '24 Q3 '24 Fund 4.41 2.87 -2.96 -18.29 6.07 6.80 -7.22 0.81 7.98 0.91 1.81 -5.56 Index 7.50 5.60 3.90 -4.00 -14.10 -0.20 0.38 -0.42 -1.16 0.51 1.15 1.22 Index: LBH22 AEW Benchmark AEW UK ROLLING QUARTERS TOTAL FUND GROSS OF FEES Q4 '21 Q1 '22 Q2 '22 Q3 '22 Q4 '22 Q1 '23 Q2 '23 Q3 '23 Q4 '23 Q1 '24 Q2 '24 Q3 '24 3M R.Excess -2.88 -2.58 -6.60 -14.89 23.48 7.02 -7.57 1.23 9.25 0.39 0.65 -6.70 3Y R.Excess -0.04 1.71 -3.83 -8.95 -2.37 5.66 2.05 1.80 1.97 1.23 0.58 -1.42 Index: LBH22 AEW Benchmark N O R T H E R N T R U S T AEW UK September 30, 2024 26 of 58 | Investment Risk & Analytical Services Asset Level Performance Rates of Return (Base) Asset Description Country Sector/Industry 30/09/2024 Market Value 30/09/2024 Weight One Month Three Months Year to Date One Year Three Years Five Years British pound sterling United Kingdom Cash & Short Term Deriv. 2,357 0.00 0.36 0.54 1.98 2.95 - - GBP PENDING CASH United Kingdom Pending Cash 0 0.00 0.00 - - - - - AEW UK INVESTMENT AEW UK C... United Kingdom Real Estate 58,971,730 85.67 0.21 -6.64 -3.56 4.41 -2.01 0.83 AEW UK URBAN REAL ESTATE F... United Kingdom Real Estate 9,863,236 14.33 0.00 1.33 0.50 6.90 -0.28 - Total World Total Fund Gross of Fees 68,837,322 100.00 0.18 -5.56 -2.98 4.77 -1.85 0.86 September 30, 2024 LCIV Global Alpha Growth Fund S E C T I O N 4 LCIV Global Alpha Growth Fund Investment Risk & Analytical Services N O R T H E R N T R U S T LCIV Global Alpha Growth Fund September 30, 2024 28 of 58 | Investment Risk & Analytical Services Executive Summary LCIV GLOBAL ALPHA GROWTH FUND TOTAL FUND GROSS OF FEES Three Months Year to Date One Year Three Years Five Years ITD Fund 0.67 10.87 19.80 -1.23 - -0.39 Index 0.90 15.20 23.52 12.33 - 13.04 Index: LBH11005 MSCI World ND+3% RISK STATISTICS 1 Yr 3 Yrs 5 Yrs Return 19.80 -1.23 - Index Return 23.52 12.33 - Relative Excess Return -3.01 -12.07 - Standard Deviation 12.69 15.79 - Index Standard Deviation 8.65 11.08 - Tracking Error 5.65 8.34 - Information Ratio -0.66 -1.63 - Sharpe Ratio 1.14 -0.24 - Index Sharpe Ratio 2.10 0.89 - Sortino Ratio 2.22 -0.33 - Treynor Ratio 10.61 -3.05 - Jensen's Alpha -8.30 -13.56 - Relative Volatility (Beta) 1.36 1.22 - R Squared 0.86 0.74 - Index: LBH11005 MSCI World ND+3%. Risk Free Index: JP Morgan 3 month Cash (GBP) Category: Total Fund Gross of Fees. Calculation Frequency: Monthly LCIV GLOBAL ALPHA GROWTH FUND ROLLING QUARTERS TOTAL FUND GROSS OF FEES Q4 '21 Q1 '22 Q2 '22 Q3 '22 Q4 '22 Q1 '23 Q2 '23 Q3 '23 Q4 '23 Q1 '24 Q2 '24 Q3 '24 Fund -0.19 -13.75 -12.03 1.62 1.16 4.64 3.17 -4.33 8.06 8.73 1.28 0.67 Index 7.90 -1.69 -8.30 2.86 2.64 5.55 4.58 1.23 7.22 10.62 3.22 0.90 Index: LBH11005 MSCI World ND+3% LCIV GLOBAL ALPHA GROWTH FUND ROLLING QUARTERS TOTAL FUND GROSS OF FEES Q4 '21 Q1 '22 Q2 '22 Q3 '22 Q4 '22 Q1 '23 Q2 '23 Q3 '23 Q4 '23 Q1 '24 Q2 '24 Q3 '24 3M R.Excess -7.50 -12.27 -4.06 -1.21 -1.43 -0.86 -1.34 -5.49 0.78 -1.70 -1.88 -0.22 3Y R.Excess - - - - - - - - - - -13.37 -12.07 Index: LBH11005 MSCI World ND+3% September 30, 2024 LCIV Infrastructure Fund S E C T I O N 5 LCIV Infrastructure Fund Investment Risk & Analytical Services N O R T H E R N T R U S T LCIV Infrastructure Fund September 30, 2024 30 of 58 | Investment Risk & Analytical Services Executive Summary LCIV INFRASTRUCTURE FUND TOTAL FUND GROSS OF FEES Three Months Year to Date One Year Three Years Five Years ITD Fund 4.14 8.13 13.29 10.19 - 5.82 Index 1.96 6.08 8.17 6.52 - 5.31 Index: LBH11004 3M SONIA +3% RISK STATISTICS 1 Yr 3 Yrs 5 Yrs Return 13.29 10.19 - Index Return 8.17 6.52 - Relative Excess Return 4.73 3.45 - Standard Deviation 6.86 6.31 - Index Standard Deviation 0.09 0.52 - Tracking Error 6.91 6.37 - Information Ratio 0.74 0.58 - Sharpe Ratio 1.16 1.22 - Index Sharpe Ratio 31.39 7.66 - Sortino Ratio 4.71 7.12 - Treynor Ratio -0.25 -17.47 - Jensen's Alpha 141.90 9.57 - Relative Volatility (Beta) -31.75 -0.44 - R Squared 0.17 0.00 - Index: LBH11004 3M SONIA +3%. Risk Free Index: JP Morgan 3 month Cash (GBP) Category: Total Fund Gross of Fees. Calculation Frequency: Monthly LCIV INFRASTRUCTURE FUND ROLLING QUARTERS TOTAL FUND GROSS OF FEES Q4 '21 Q1 '22 Q2 '22 Q3 '22 Q4 '22 Q1 '23 Q2 '23 Q3 '23 Q4 '23 Q1 '24 Q2 '24 Q3 '24 Fund 2.76 0.15 0.00 11.70 -0.00 2.99 -0.24 0.00 4.77 0.46 3.37 4.14 Index 0.76 0.90 1.04 1.28 1.56 1.74 1.87 2.03 1.97 2.01 1.99 1.96 Index: LBH11004 3M SONIA +3% LCIV INFRASTRUCTURE FUND ROLLING QUARTERS TOTAL FUND GROSS OF FEES Q4 '21 Q1 '22 Q2 '22 Q3 '22 Q4 '22 Q1 '23 Q2 '23 Q3 '23 Q4 '23 Q1 '24 Q2 '24 Q3 '24 3M R.Excess 1.98 -0.74 -1.03 10.29 -1.54 1.23 -2.07 -1.99 2.74 -1.53 1.35 2.14 3Y R.Excess - - - - 0.36 1.11 0.75 0.34 1.50 1.80 2.52 3.45 Index: LBH11004 3M SONIA +3% September 30, 2024 LCIV Mac Fund S E C T I O N 6 LCIV Mac Fund Investment Risk & Analytical Services N O R T H E R N T R U S T LCIV Mac Fund September 30, 2024 32 of 58 | Investment Risk & Analytical Services Executive Summary LCIV MAC FUND TOTAL FUND GROSS OF FEES Three Months Year to Date One Year Three Years Five Years ITD Fund 3.70 7.91 14.27 - - 7.54 Index 2.31 7.19 9.67 - - 8.86 Index: LBH30 3 Month SONIA +4.5% RISK STATISTICS 1 Yr 3 Yrs 5 Yrs Return 14.27 - - Index Return 9.67 - - Relative Excess Return 4.20 - - Standard Deviation 8.73 - - Index Standard Deviation 0.09 - - Tracking Error 8.80 - - Information Ratio 0.52 - - Sharpe Ratio 1.02 - - Index Sharpe Ratio 45.69 - - Sortino Ratio 1.74 - - Treynor Ratio -0.27 - - Jensen's Alpha 276.46 - - Relative Volatility (Beta) -32.59 - - R Squared 0.12 - - Index: LBH30 3 Month SONIA +4.5%. Risk Free Index: JP Morgan 3 month Cash (GBP) Category: Total Fund Gross of Fees. Calculation Frequency: Monthly LCIV MAC FUND ROLLING QUARTERS TOTAL FUND GROSS OF FEES Q4 '21 Q1 '22 Q2 '22 Q3 '22 Q4 '22 Q1 '23 Q2 '23 Q3 '23 Q4 '23 Q1 '24 Q2 '24 Q3 '24 Fund - - - 0.00 0.00 0.87 1.91 0.99 5.90 2.32 1.70 3.70 Index - - - 1.65 1.93 2.10 2.22 2.37 2.31 2.38 2.34 2.31 Index: LBH30 3 Month SONIA +4.5% LCIV MAC FUND ROLLING QUARTERS TOTAL FUND GROSS OF FEES Q4 '21 Q1 '22 Q2 '22 Q3 '22 Q4 '22 Q1 '23 Q2 '23 Q3 '23 Q4 '23 Q1 '24 Q2 '24 Q3 '24 3M R.Excess - - - -1.62 -1.90 -1.21 -0.31 -1.35 3.51 -0.06 -0.63 1.36 3Y R.Excess - - - - - - - - - - - - Index: LBH30 3 Month SONIA +4.5% September 30, 2024 LCIV Private Debt S E C T I O N 7 LCIV Private Debt Investment Risk & Analytical Services N O R T H E R N T R U S T LCIV Private Debt September 30, 2024 34 of 58 | Investment Risk & Analytical Services Executive Summary LCIV PRIVATE DEBT TOTAL FUND GROSS OF FEES Three Months Year to Date One Year Three Years Five Years ITD Fund 1.77 3.80 11.44 - - 7.18 Index 1.47 4.47 6.00 - - 5.99 Index: Absolute Return 6% RISK STATISTICS 1 Yr 3 Yrs 5 Yrs Return 11.44 - - Index Return 6.00 - - Relative Excess Return 5.13 - - Standard Deviation 7.14 - - Index Standard Deviation 0.00 - - Tracking Error 7.14 - - Information Ratio 0.76 - - Sharpe Ratio 0.85 - - Index Sharpe Ratio - - Sortino Ratio 4.61 - - Treynor Ratio 0.24 - - Jensen's Alpha -9.08 - - Relative Volatility (Beta) 25.22 - - R Squared 0.10 - - Index: Absolute Return 6%. Risk Free Index: JP Morgan 3 month Cash (GBP) Category: Total Fund Gross of Fees. Calculation Frequency: Monthly LCIV PRIVATE DEBT ROLLING QUARTERS TOTAL FUND GROSS OF FEES Q4 '21 Q1 '22 Q2 '22 Q3 '22 Q4 '22 Q1 '23 Q2 '23 Q3 '23 Q4 '23 Q1 '24 Q2 '24 Q3 '24 Fund - -0.68 -0.00 -0.00 9.91 1.50 -1.16 -0.00 7.36 0.00 2.00 1.77 Index - 1.47 1.47 1.47 1.47 1.47 1.47 1.47 1.47 1.47 1.47 1.47 Index: Absolute Return 6% LCIV PRIVATE DEBT ROLLING QUARTERS TOTAL FUND GROSS OF FEES Q4 '21 Q1 '22 Q2 '22 Q3 '22 Q4 '22 Q1 '23 Q2 '23 Q3 '23 Q4 '23 Q1 '24 Q2 '24 Q3 '24 3M R.Excess - -2.11 -1.45 -1.45 8.32 0.03 -2.59 -1.45 5.81 -1.45 0.52 0.29 3Y R.Excess - - - - - - - - - - - - Index: Absolute Return 6% September 30, 2024 LCIV Ruffer S E C T I O N 8 LCIV Ruffer Investment Risk & Analytical Services N O R T H E R N T R U S T LCIV Ruffer September 30, 2024 36 of 58 | Investment Risk & Analytical Services Executive Summary LCIV RUFFER TOTAL FUND GROSS OF FEES Three Months Year to Date One Year Three Years Five Years ITD Fund 2.86 2.45 4.69 1.32 4.74 4.92 Index 1.30 3.99 5.38 3.39 2.20 1.31 Index: LBH11003 Ruffer BM SONIA RISK STATISTICS 1 Yr 3 Yrs 5 Yrs Return 4.69 1.32 4.74 Index Return 5.38 3.39 2.20 Relative Excess Return -0.66 -2.00 2.48 Standard Deviation 3.95 5.64 6.36 Index Standard Deviation 0.04 0.58 0.62 Tracking Error 3.96 5.74 6.51 Information Ratio -0.18 -0.36 0.39 Sharpe Ratio -0.17 -0.21 0.48 Index Sharpe Ratio 0.46 1.53 0.87 Sortino Ratio -0.21 -0.27 0.78 Treynor Ratio -0.71 -3.06 -1.01 Jensen's Alpha -0.58 -1.32 4.88 Relative Volatility (Beta) 0.94 0.38 -3.03 R Squared 0.00 0.00 0.01 Index: LBH11003 Ruffer BM SONIA. Risk Free Index: JP Morgan 3 month Cash (GBP) Category: Total Fund Gross of Fees. Calculation Frequency: Monthly LCIV RUFFER ROLLING QUARTERS TOTAL FUND GROSS OF FEES Q4 '21 Q1 '22 Q2 '22 Q3 '22 Q4 '22 Q1 '23 Q2 '23 Q3 '23 Q4 '23 Q1 '24 Q2 '24 Q3 '24 Fund 1.45 4.44 -4.22 1.80 4.84 -1.06 -6.58 -0.75 2.18 -0.79 0.40 2.86 Index 0.01 0.10 0.22 0.39 0.70 0.94 1.11 1.31 1.33 1.32 1.32 1.30 Index: LBH11003 Ruffer BM SONIA LCIV RUFFER ROLLING QUARTERS TOTAL FUND GROSS OF FEES Q4 '21 Q1 '22 Q2 '22 Q3 '22 Q4 '22 Q1 '23 Q2 '23 Q3 '23 Q4 '23 Q1 '24 Q2 '24 Q3 '24 3M R.Excess 1.44 4.34 -4.44 1.40 4.12 -1.99 -7.60 -2.03 0.84 -2.08 -0.91 1.54 3Y R.Excess 9.25 9.78 7.66 7.19 8.37 8.45 3.58 2.51 1.31 -1.82 -2.33 -2.00 Index: LBH11003 Ruffer BM SONIA September 30, 2024 Legal & General 1 S E C T I O N 9 Legal & General 1 Investment Risk & Analytical Services N O R T H E R N T R U S T Legal & General 1 September 30, 2024 38 of 58 | Investment Risk & Analytical Services Executive Summary LEGAL & GENERAL 1 TOTAL FUND GROSS OF FEES Three Months Year to Date One Year Three Years Five Years ITD Fund 2.49 14.97 23.39 8.38 10.99 9.59 Index 2.81 15.82 24.26 8.71 11.26 9.79 Index: LBH26 L&G Benchmark RISK STATISTICS 1 Yr 3 Yrs 5 Yrs Return 23.39 8.38 10.99 Index Return 24.26 8.71 11.26 Relative Excess Return -0.70 -0.30 -0.24 Standard Deviation 8.61 11.83 13.41 Index Standard Deviation 8.54 11.78 13.37 Tracking Error 0.47 0.31 0.27 Information Ratio -1.85 -1.06 -0.98 Sharpe Ratio 2.09 0.50 0.70 Index Sharpe Ratio 2.21 0.53 0.72 Sortino Ratio 4.47 0.77 1.07 Treynor Ratio 17.92 5.87 9.30 Jensen's Alpha -0.82 -0.32 -0.26 Relative Volatility (Beta) 1.01 1.00 1.00 R Squared 1.00 1.00 1.00 Index: LBH26 L&G Benchmark. Risk Free Index: JP Morgan 3 month Cash (GBP) Category: Total Fund Gross of Fees. Calculation Frequency: Monthly LEGAL & GENERAL 1 ROLLING QUARTERS TOTAL FUND GROSS OF FEES Q4 '21 Q1 '22 Q2 '22 Q3 '22 Q4 '22 Q1 '23 Q2 '23 Q3 '23 Q4 '23 Q1 '24 Q2 '24 Q3 '24 Fund 6.04 -3.31 -10.38 -1.56 4.15 5.24 4.52 -0.42 7.32 9.02 2.90 2.49 Index 6.02 -3.25 -10.29 -1.55 4.23 5.20 4.41 -0.33 7.29 8.99 3.35 2.81 Index: LBH26 L&G Benchmark LEGAL & GENERAL 1 ROLLING QUARTERS TOTAL FUND GROSS OF FEES Q4 '21 Q1 '22 Q2 '22 Q3 '22 Q4 '22 Q1 '23 Q2 '23 Q3 '23 Q4 '23 Q1 '24 Q2 '24 Q3 '24 3M R.Excess 0.02 -0.06 -0.11 -0.01 -0.09 0.03 0.10 -0.08 0.02 0.03 -0.44 -0.31 3Y R.Excess -0.09 -0.11 -0.15 -0.15 -0.17 -0.14 -0.09 -0.08 -0.04 -0.05 -0.19 -0.30 Index: LBH26 L&G Benchmark N O R T H E R N T R U S T Legal & General 1 September 30, 2024 39 of 58 | Investment Risk & Analytical Services Analysis: LBH26 - Regional Regional Performance Base Rates of Return Category Ending Market value GBP - GOF Ending Weight Three Months Year to Date One Year Three Years Five Years Inception to Date Legal & General Inves Manageme 379,260,207 100.00 2.49 14.97 23.39 8.38 10.99 9.59 LBH26 L&G Benchmark 2.81 15.82 24.26 8.71 11.26 9.79 Excess Return -0.32 -0.84 -0.87 -0.33 -0.27 -0.20 Total Fund - Foreign Exchange 379,260,207 100.00 2.49 14.97 23.39 8.38 10.99 9.59 LBH26 L&G Benchmark 2.81 15.82 24.26 8.71 11.26 9.79 Excess Return -0.32 -0.84 -0.87 -0.33 -0.27 -0.20 Equity 379,260,207 100.00 2.49 14.97 23.39 8.38 10.99 10.22 Emerging Markets 53,194,272 14.03 2.47 11.43 13.75 1.73 4.57 4.93 FTSE Emerging 4.77 14.56 16.96 2.84 5.34 5.53 Excess Return -2.30 -3.13 -3.20 -1.11 -0.77 -0.60 L&G GPCT World Dev Eq Idx GBP Hdg 170,469,791 44.95 4.56 18.54 30.03 9.50 12.68 - FTSE Developed Hdg GBP 4.59 19.01 30.51 9.65 12.82 - Excess Return -0.02 -0.47 -0.48 -0.16 -0.14 - World Developed Equity Index 155,596,144 41.03 0.32 12.49 20.14 9.30 11.32 - FT: Developed 0.32 12.92 20.59 9.48 11.45 11.43 Excess Return -0.00 -0.43 -0.45 -0.19 -0.13 - • Excess is calculated using arithmetic methodology September 30, 2024 Legal & General 2 S E C T I O N 10 Legal & General 2 Investment Risk & Analytical Services N O R T H E R N T R U S T Legal & General 2 September 30, 2024 41 of 58 | Investment Risk & Analytical Services Executive Summary LEGAL & GENERAL 2 TOTAL FUND GROSS OF FEES Three Months Year to Date One Year Three Years Five Years ITD Fund 1.42 -2.50 5.98 -11.82 -6.90 -1.89 Index 1.42 -2.49 6.01 -11.81 -6.91 -1.77 Index: LBH27 L&G Benchmark RISK STATISTICS 1 Yr 3 Yrs 5 Yrs Return 5.98 -11.82 -6.90 Index Return 6.01 -11.81 -6.91 Relative Excess Return -0.03 -0.00 0.01 Standard Deviation 9.85 14.43 13.26 Index Standard Deviation 9.86 14.43 13.26 Tracking Error 0.01 0.02 0.21 Information Ratio -2.23 -0.22 0.04 Sharpe Ratio 0.06 -0.99 -0.65 Index Sharpe Ratio 0.07 -0.99 -0.65 Sortino Ratio 0.09 -1.16 -0.80 Treynor Ratio 0.62 -14.32 -8.58 Jensen's Alpha -0.03 -0.01 0.00 Relative Volatility (Beta) 1.00 1.00 1.00 R Squared 1.00 1.00 1.00 Index: LBH27 L&G Benchmark. Risk Free Index: JP Morgan 3 month Cash (GBP) Category: Total Fund Gross of Fees. Calculation Frequency: Monthly LEGAL & GENERAL 2 ROLLING QUARTERS TOTAL FUND GROSS OF FEES Q4 '21 Q1 '22 Q2 '22 Q3 '22 Q4 '22 Q1 '23 Q2 '23 Q3 '23 Q4 '23 Q1 '24 Q2 '24 Q3 '24 Fund 4.94 -5.50 -17.55 -9.31 -6.01 4.30 -6.61 -4.69 8.70 -1.81 -2.09 1.42 Index 4.94 -5.50 -17.54 -9.33 -6.02 4.30 -6.61 -4.69 8.72 -1.81 -2.09 1.42 Index: LBH27 L&G Benchmark LEGAL & GENERAL 2 ROLLING QUARTERS TOTAL FUND GROSS OF FEES Q4 '21 Q1 '22 Q2 '22 Q3 '22 Q4 '22 Q1 '23 Q2 '23 Q3 '23 Q4 '23 Q1 '24 Q2 '24 Q3 '24 3M R.Excess -0.00 -0.00 -0.01 0.01 0.01 -0.01 -0.00 0.01 -0.01 -0.00 -0.00 -0.00 3Y R.Excess 0.03 0.02 0.04 0.02 0.14 -0.00 -0.00 0.00 -0.00 -0.00 -0.00 -0.00 Index: LBH27 L&G Benchmark N O R T H E R N T R U S T Legal & General 2 September 30, 2024 42 of 58 | Investment Risk & Analytical Services Analysis: LBH27 Regional Performance Base Rates of Return Category Ending Market value GBP - GOF Ending Weight Three Months Year to Date One Year Three Years Five Years Inception to Date Legal & General INV Mgmt 105,307,441 100.00 1.42 -2.50 5.98 -11.82 -6.90 -1.89 LBH27 L&G Benchmark 1.42 -2.49 6.01 -11.81 -6.91 -1.77 Excess Return -0.00 -0.01 -0.03 -0.00 0.01 -0.13 Total Fund - Foreign Exchange 105,307,441 100.00 1.42 -2.50 5.98 -11.82 -6.90 -1.89 Index Linked Gilts 105,307,441 100.00 1.42 -2.50 5.98 -11.82 -7.08 -2.03 LBH27 Index Linked 1.42 -2.49 6.01 -11.81 -7.05 -1.99 Excess Return -0.00 -0.01 -0.03 -0.00 -0.03 -0.04 Cash & Short Term Deriv. - - - - - - - - Fixed Income - - - - - - - - CCAJ INVT Grade CP Bnd - - - - - - - - Markit iBoxx £ Non - Gilt 2.28 2.21 9.72 -2.87 -1.07 0.89 Excess Return - - - - - - • Excess is calculated using arithmetic methodology September 30, 2024 LGIM - Future World Equity IND S E C T I O N 11 LGIM - Future World Equity IND Investment Risk & Analytical Services N O R T H E R N T R U S T LGIM - Future World Equity IND September 30, 2024 44 of 58 | Investment Risk & Analytical Services Executive Summary LGIM - FUTURE WORLD EQUITY IND TOTAL FUND GROSS OF FEES Three Months Year to Date One Year Three Years Five Years ITD Fund 0.74 13.78 21.83 8.66 - 10.48 Index 0.74 13.67 21.57 8.43 - 10.30 Index: LBH29 Solactive L&G ESG RISK STATISTICS 1 Yr 3 Yrs 5 Yrs Return 21.83 8.66 - Index Return 21.57 8.43 - Relative Excess Return 0.21 0.22 - Standard Deviation 8.65 10.79 - Index Standard Deviation 8.62 10.79 - Tracking Error 0.13 0.14 - Information Ratio 2.02 1.70 - Sharpe Ratio 1.90 0.57 - Index Sharpe Ratio 1.88 0.55 - Sortino Ratio 4.05 0.91 - Treynor Ratio 16.41 6.17 - Jensen's Alpha 0.16 0.22 - Relative Volatility (Beta) 1.00 1.00 - R Squared 1.00 1.00 - Index: LBH29 Solactive L&G ESG. Risk Free Index: JP Morgan 3 month Cash (GBP) Category: Total Fund Gross of Fees. Calculation Frequency: Monthly LGIM - FUTURE WORLD EQUITY IND ROLLING QUARTERS TOTAL FUND GROSS OF FEES Q4 '21 Q1 '22 Q2 '22 Q3 '22 Q4 '22 Q1 '23 Q2 '23 Q3 '23 Q4 '23 Q1 '24 Q2 '24 Q3 '24 Fund 6.55 -3.76 -8.42 1.20 1.84 4.88 3.67 0.07 7.08 9.32 3.32 0.74 Index 6.50 -3.76 -8.44 1.11 1.76 4.86 3.57 -0.01 6.96 9.28 3.25 0.74 Index: LBH29 Solactive L&G ESG LGIM - FUTURE WORLD EQUITY IND ROLLING QUARTERS TOTAL FUND GROSS OF FEES Q4 '21 Q1 '22 Q2 '22 Q3 '22 Q4 '22 Q1 '23 Q2 '23 Q3 '23 Q4 '23 Q1 '24 Q2 '24 Q3 '24 3M R.Excess 0.05 -0.01 0.02 0.09 0.09 0.02 0.10 0.08 0.11 0.04 0.06 -0.00 3Y R.Excess - - - - - - - 0.15 0.18 0.20 0.22 0.22 Index: LBH29 Solactive L&G ESG September 30, 2024 LGIM LPI Income Property S E C T I O N 12 LGIM LPI Income Property Investment Risk & Analytical Services N O R T H E R N T R U S T LGIM LPI Income Property September 30, 2024 46 of 58 | Investment Risk & Analytical Services Executive Summary LGIM LPI INCOME PROPERTY TOTAL FUND GROSS OF FEES Three Months Year to Date One Year Three Years Five Years ITD Fund 1.22 3.79 3.05 -2.88 - -1.03 Index 0.34 2.53 2.70 7.99 - 6.45 Index: LBH28 L&G RPI RISK STATISTICS 1 Yr 3 Yrs 5 Yrs Return 3.05 -2.88 - Index Return 2.70 7.99 - Relative Excess Return 0.34 -10.06 - Standard Deviation 1.31 5.53 - Index Standard Deviation 1.26 2.53 - Tracking Error 1.46 6.17 - Information Ratio 0.24 -1.76 - Sharpe Ratio -1.77 -0.97 - Index Sharpe Ratio -2.12 2.17 - Sortino Ratio -1.63 -1.02 - Treynor Ratio -6.61 -116.47 - Jensen's Alpha -1.31 -5.34 - Relative Volatility (Beta) 0.35 0.05 - R Squared 0.13 0.00 - Index: LBH28 L&G RPI. Risk Free Index: JP Morgan 3 month Cash (GBP) Category: Total Fund Gross of Fees. Calculation Frequency: Monthly LGIM LPI INCOME PROPERTY ROLLING QUARTERS TOTAL FUND GROSS OF FEES Q4 '21 Q1 '22 Q2 '22 Q3 '22 Q4 '22 Q1 '23 Q2 '23 Q3 '23 Q4 '23 Q1 '24 Q2 '24 Q3 '24 Fund 4.52 3.14 3.15 -0.73 -12.96 -5.40 0.40 -2.57 -0.71 1.34 1.18 1.22 Index 2.95 1.83 5.10 2.24 3.68 1.89 2.51 0.53 0.16 1.06 1.12 0.34 Index: LBH28 L&G RPI LGIM LPI INCOME PROPERTY ROLLING QUARTERS TOTAL FUND GROSS OF FEES Q4 '21 Q1 '22 Q2 '22 Q3 '22 Q4 '22 Q1 '23 Q2 '23 Q3 '23 Q4 '23 Q1 '24 Q2 '24 Q3 '24 3M R.Excess 1.52 1.29 -1.85 -2.91 -16.05 -7.15 -2.06 -3.09 -0.87 0.28 0.06 0.88 3Y R.Excess - - - - - -7.30 -8.29 -9.28 -9.89 -10.09 -10.00 -10.06 Index: LBH28 L&G RPI September 30, 2024 LGT S E C T I O N 13 LGT Investment Risk & Analytical Services N O R T H E R N T R U S T LGT September 30, 2024 48 of 58 | Investment Risk & Analytical Services Executive Summary LGT TOTAL FUND GROSS OF FEES Three Months Year to Date One Year Three Years Five Years ITD Fund -0.24 -1.49 -1.13 -0.54 5.61 10.04 Index 1.44 16.15 24.46 12.82 14.83 - Index: LGT PE Bmark RISK STATISTICS 1 Yr 3 Yrs 5 Yrs Return -1.13 -0.54 5.61 Index Return 24.46 12.82 14.83 Relative Excess Return -20.56 -11.84 -8.03 Standard Deviation 8.85 9.89 12.01 Index Standard Deviation 8.38 10.54 12.30 Tracking Error 14.07 16.25 18.14 Information Ratio -1.82 -0.82 -0.51 Sharpe Ratio -0.73 -0.31 0.33 Index Sharpe Ratio 2.28 0.98 1.07 Sortino Ratio -0.92 -0.42 0.50 Treynor Ratio 19.04 11.57 -36.23 Jensen's Alpha -0.12 0.16 6.11 Relative Volatility (Beta) -0.34 -0.26 -0.11 R Squared 0.10 0.08 0.01 Index: LGT PE Bmark. Risk Free Index: JP Morgan 3 month Cash (GBP) Category: Total Fund Gross of Fees. Calculation Frequency: Monthly LGT ROLLING QUARTERS TOTAL FUND GROSS OF FEES Q4 '21 Q1 '22 Q2 '22 Q3 '22 Q4 '22 Q1 '23 Q2 '23 Q3 '23 Q4 '23 Q1 '24 Q2 '24 Q3 '24 Fund 4.95 -7.40 3.93 3.99 -2.71 -5.47 -4.63 8.04 0.36 -2.38 1.15 -0.24 Index 7.00 -1.55 -7.32 2.56 2.99 5.51 4.34 1.62 7.15 10.29 3.82 1.44 Index: LGT PE Bmark LGT ROLLING QUARTERS TOTAL FUND GROSS OF FEES Q4 '21 Q1 '22 Q2 '22 Q3 '22 Q4 '22 Q1 '23 Q2 '23 Q3 '23 Q4 '23 Q1 '24 Q2 '24 Q3 '24 3M R.Excess -1.92 -5.94 12.14 1.39 -5.54 -10.41 -8.60 6.31 -6.33 -11.49 -2.57 -1.66 3Y R.Excess -6.51 -5.03 -1.51 0.24 0.03 -10.56 -5.41 -2.69 -4.59 -8.43 -9.29 -11.84 Index: LGT PE Bmark September 30, 2024 M&G Investments S E C T I O N 14 M&G Investments Investment Risk & Analytical Services N O R T H E R N T R U S T M&G Investments September 30, 2024 50 of 58 | Investment Risk & Analytical Services Executive Summary M&G INVESTMENTS TOTAL FUND GROSS OF FEES Three Months Year to Date One Year Three Years Five Years ITD Fund -30.61 -43.12 -44.08 -0.36 -9.67 1.03 Index 2.19 6.82 9.17 7.52 6.28 5.27 Index: LBH10 3M SONIA +4%pa RISK STATISTICS 1 Yr 3 Yrs 5 Yrs Return -44.08 -0.36 -9.67 Index Return 9.17 7.52 6.28 Relative Excess Return -48.78 -7.33 -15.01 Standard Deviation 25.36 40.83 32.91 Index Standard Deviation 0.09 0.52 0.58 Tracking Error 25.38 41.06 33.03 Information Ratio -2.10 -0.19 -0.48 Sharpe Ratio -1.95 -0.07 -0.34 Index Sharpe Ratio 41.13 9.66 7.91 Sortino Ratio -1.62 -0.15 -0.65 Treynor Ratio -0.38 -0.90 -1.32 Jensen's Alpha -99.90 -10.60 -37.03 Relative Volatility (Beta) 131.08 3.17 8.57 R Squared 0.23 0.00 0.01 Index: LBH10 3M SONIA +4%pa. Risk Free Index: JP Morgan 3 month Cash (GBP) Category: Total Fund Gross of Fees. Calculation Frequency: Monthly M&G INVESTMENTS ROLLING QUARTERS TOTAL FUND GROSS OF FEES Q4 '21 Q1 '22 Q2 '22 Q3 '22 Q4 '22 Q1 '23 Q2 '23 Q3 '23 Q4 '23 Q1 '24 Q2 '24 Q3 '24 Fund 59.85 9.69 4.12 -0.12 -4.87 2.08 2.34 -2.38 -1.69 -13.06 -5.71 -30.61 Index 1.00 1.15 1.28 1.52 1.80 1.98 2.11 2.26 2.20 2.26 2.23 2.19 Index: LBH10 3M SONIA +4%pa M&G INVESTMENTS ROLLING QUARTERS TOTAL FUND GROSS OF FEES Q4 '21 Q1 '22 Q2 '22 Q3 '22 Q4 '22 Q1 '23 Q2 '23 Q3 '23 Q4 '23 Q1 '24 Q2 '24 Q3 '24 3M R.Excess 58.26 8.45 2.80 -1.62 -6.55 0.10 0.23 -4.54 -3.81 -14.98 -7.77 -32.09 3Y R.Excess -2.10 1.78 -0.93 -1.10 -3.84 -1.12 4.65 7.13 7.38 7.50 5.00 -7.33 Index: LBH10 3M SONIA +4%pa September 30, 2024 Macquarie S E C T I O N 15 Macquarie Investment Risk & Analytical Services N O R T H E R N T R U S T Macquarie September 30, 2024 52 of 58 | Investment Risk & Analytical Services Executive Summary MACQUARIE TOTAL FUND GROSS OF FEES Three Months Year to Date One Year Three Years Five Years ITD Fund -7.85 1.25 -0.95 17.58 14.33 9.40 Index 1.96 6.08 8.17 6.52 5.28 4.27 Index: LBH14 Macquarie 3M SONIA +3%pa RISK STATISTICS 1 Yr 3 Yrs 5 Yrs Return -0.95 17.58 14.33 Index Return 8.17 6.52 5.28 Relative Excess Return -8.44 10.39 8.59 Standard Deviation 11.60 18.24 15.44 Index Standard Deviation 0.09 0.52 0.59 Tracking Error 11.59 18.27 15.44 Information Ratio -0.79 0.61 0.59 Sharpe Ratio -0.54 0.83 0.82 Index Sharpe Ratio 31.39 7.66 6.14 Sortino Ratio -0.73 2.14 2.07 Treynor Ratio -0.11 2.07 1.77 Jensen's Alpha -81.37 -12.06 -11.47 Relative Volatility (Beta) 57.09 7.29 7.16 R Squared 0.20 0.02 0.02 Index: LBH14 Macquarie 3M SONIA +3%pa. Risk Free Index: JP Morgan 3 month Cash (GBP) Category: Total Fund Gross of Fees. Calculation Frequency: Monthly MACQUARIE ROLLING QUARTERS TOTAL FUND GROSS OF FEES Q4 '21 Q1 '22 Q2 '22 Q3 '22 Q4 '22 Q1 '23 Q2 '23 Q3 '23 Q4 '23 Q1 '24 Q2 '24 Q3 '24 Fund 5.75 5.28 4.96 8.92 -1.34 3.00 19.01 6.62 -2.17 1.53 8.21 -7.85 Index 0.76 0.90 1.04 1.28 1.56 1.74 1.87 2.03 1.97 2.01 1.99 1.96 Index: LBH14 Macquarie 3M SONIA +3%pa MACQUARIE ROLLING QUARTERS TOTAL FUND GROSS OF FEES Q4 '21 Q1 '22 Q2 '22 Q3 '22 Q4 '22 Q1 '23 Q2 '23 Q3 '23 Q4 '23 Q1 '24 Q2 '24 Q3 '24 3M R.Excess 4.95 4.34 3.88 7.55 -2.86 1.24 16.83 4.50 -4.07 -0.47 6.10 -9.62 3Y R.Excess 8.53 10.32 9.47 11.16 11.57 10.17 16.06 18.18 17.18 14.40 15.16 10.39 Index: LBH14 Macquarie 3M SONIA +3%pa September 30, 2024 Premira Credit S E C T I O N 16 Premira Credit Investment Risk & Analytical Services N O R T H E R N T R U S T Premira Credit September 30, 2024 54 of 58 | Investment Risk & Analytical Services Executive Summary PREMIRA CREDIT TOTAL FUND GROSS OF FEES Three Months Year to Date One Year Three Years Five Years ITD Fund 0.45 8.20 12.24 8.40 6.80 7.54 Index 2.19 6.82 9.17 7.52 6.28 5.50 Index: LBH24 Premira 3M SONIA +4%pa RISK STATISTICS 1 Yr 3 Yrs 5 Yrs Return 12.24 8.40 6.80 Index Return 9.17 7.52 6.28 Relative Excess Return 2.81 0.82 0.49 Standard Deviation 6.54 4.66 4.04 Index Standard Deviation 0.09 0.52 0.58 Tracking Error 6.55 4.63 4.00 Information Ratio 0.47 0.19 0.13 Sharpe Ratio 1.05 1.27 1.27 Index Sharpe Ratio 41.13 9.66 7.91 Sortino Ratio 5.60 7.49 5.52 Treynor Ratio 0.62 13.06 6.72 Jensen's Alpha -28.50 3.62 1.63 Relative Volatility (Beta) 11.09 0.45 0.76 R Squared 0.02 0.00 0.00 Index: LBH24 Premira 3M SONIA +4%pa. Risk Free Index: JP Morgan 3 month Cash (GBP) Category: Total Fund Gross of Fees. Calculation Frequency: Monthly PREMIRA CREDIT ROLLING QUARTERS TOTAL FUND GROSS OF FEES Q4 '21 Q1 '22 Q2 '22 Q3 '22 Q4 '22 Q1 '23 Q2 '23 Q3 '23 Q4 '23 Q1 '24 Q2 '24 Q3 '24 Fund 1.20 0.42 2.25 2.25 3.03 0.29 2.38 0.96 3.74 6.19 1.44 0.45 Index 1.00 1.15 1.28 1.52 1.80 1.98 2.11 2.26 2.20 2.26 2.23 2.19 Index: LBH24 Premira 3M SONIA +4%pa PREMIRA CREDIT ROLLING QUARTERS TOTAL FUND GROSS OF FEES Q4 '21 Q1 '22 Q2 '22 Q3 '22 Q4 '22 Q1 '23 Q2 '23 Q3 '23 Q4 '23 Q1 '24 Q2 '24 Q3 '24 3M R.Excess 0.19 -0.72 0.95 0.72 1.21 -1.66 0.27 -1.27 1.50 3.85 -0.77 -1.70 3Y R.Excess 0.56 0.25 0.39 0.38 0.66 0.07 1.06 0.33 0.60 2.01 1.48 0.82 Index: LBH24 Premira 3M SONIA +4%pa September 30, 2024 UBS Property S E C T I O N 17 UBS Property Investment Risk & Analytical Services N O R T H E R N T R U S T UBS Property September 30, 2024 56 of 58 | Investment Risk & Analytical Services Executive Summary UBS PROPERTY TOTAL FUND GROSS OF FEES Three Months Year to Date One Year Three Years Five Years ITD Fund 2.69 1.58 0.55 0.01 1.74 3.34 Index 1.22 2.91 1.71 -0.44 1.66 3.31 Index: LBH06 UBS Property Benchmark RISK STATISTICS 1 Yr 3 Yrs 5 Yrs Return 0.55 0.01 1.74 Index Return 1.71 -0.44 1.66 Relative Excess Return -1.15 0.45 0.08 Standard Deviation 2.47 6.94 5.85 Index Standard Deviation 1.23 6.49 5.41 Tracking Error 2.07 3.80 3.09 Information Ratio -0.56 0.12 0.03 Sharpe Ratio -1.95 -0.36 0.01 Index Sharpe Ratio -2.97 -0.45 -0.00 Sortino Ratio -1.83 -0.46 0.02 Treynor Ratio -4.65 -2.75 0.08 Jensen's Alpha -1.00 0.22 0.11 Relative Volatility (Beta) 1.03 0.91 0.93 R Squared 0.26 0.71 0.73 Index: LBH06 UBS Property Benchmark. Risk Free Index: JP Morgan 3 month Cash (GBP) Category: Total Fund Gross of Fees. Calculation Frequency: Monthly UBS PROPERTY ROLLING QUARTERS TOTAL FUND GROSS OF FEES Q4 '21 Q1 '22 Q2 '22 Q3 '22 Q4 '22 Q1 '23 Q2 '23 Q3 '23 Q4 '23 Q1 '24 Q2 '24 Q3 '24 Fund 7.94 6.88 4.14 -2.58 -11.49 -5.11 1.36 -0.16 -1.02 -0.55 -0.53 2.69 Index 7.50 5.60 3.90 -4.00 -14.10 -0.20 0.38 -0.42 -1.16 0.51 1.15 1.22 Index: LBH06 UBS Property Benchmark UBS PROPERTY ROLLING QUARTERS TOTAL FUND GROSS OF FEES Q4 '21 Q1 '22 Q2 '22 Q3 '22 Q4 '22 Q1 '23 Q2 '23 Q3 '23 Q4 '23 Q1 '24 Q2 '24 Q3 '24 3M R.Excess 0.41 1.21 0.23 1.48 3.04 -4.92 0.97 0.26 0.15 -1.06 -1.66 1.45 3Y R.Excess -0.29

Classification: Public Pensions Committee 10 December 2024 Pension Fund Risk Register Item 8 Committee Pension Committee Officer Reporting Tunde Adekoya, Finance Papers with this report Pension Fund Risk Register Open & Closed Risk Matrix HEADLINES The purpose of this report is to identify to the Pension Committee the main risks to the Pension Fund and to enable them to monitor and review risks going forward (see appendices). RECOMMENDATIONS It is recommended that Pensions Committee:  Consider and agree the Risk Register in terms of the approach, the specific risks identified, and the measures being taken to mitigate those current risks.  Note the revised format agreeing the retired risks and those which remain open SUPPORTING INFORMATION Following the introduction of the Council’s new risk management software, JCAD, all 14 risks are now classified into two categories, open and closed risks. Furthermore, as noted at the September meeting, the software allows risks that are being managed as, day-to-day, business as usual items, to be retired but maintained in the background as a record. In the event the risk requires active management it can then easily be re-introduced. Attached are two reports covering open and retired/closed risks: Closed risks being managed as business as usual or tolerated include:  PEN 1 - Fund assets fail to deliver returns in line with the anticipated returns underpinning the valuation  PEN 2 - Inappropriate long-term investment strategy  PEN 3 - Active investment manager under-performance relative to benchmark  PEN 4 - Inflation - Pay and price inflation significantly more than anticipated  PEN 5 - Pensioners living longer  PEN 6 - Poor Performance of Outsourced Administrator Classification: Public Pensions Committee 10 December 2024  PEN 7 - Cyber Security  PEN 8 - ESG - Risk of financial loss through the negative impact of ESG matters  PEN 11 - Failure of the pool in management of funds / access to funds Risks which remain open, and which are actively being managed Include:  PEN 9 - Liquidity on asset management - risk of failure to liquidate assets or meet drawdown calls  Pen 10 - Liquidity on members dealings - risk that the fund is unable to settle member payments  PEN 12 - Failure of the Fund’s governance to comply with statutory requirements  PEN 13 - Key officer risk  PEN 14 - Failure of employers to deliver accurate and timely employee administration information Two of the five open risks (Pen 9 & 10) have been reintroduced as open at the request of committee at the September meeting due to their importance, in view of the fund’s current cashflow position. The other three remain static from the previous quarter. The significance of risks is measured by interaction of the likelihood of occurren ce (likelihood) and by the potential damage that might be caused by an occurrence (impact). The risks are also RAG rated to identify level. Scoring is included in the attached Risk Matrix. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS The financial implications are contained in the risk register attached. LEGAL IMPLICATIONS The legal implications are contained in the risk register attached.

Grid: Record - View: Default List Alert Risk Ref Risk Title and Description Causes Consequences Status Risk Owner Review Lin Risk Catego Last Revie Last Review Review Comments Directorate Current PControlled Profile PENS0001 PEN 01 - Fund assets fail to deliver returns in line with the anticipated returns underpinning valuation Market and economic environment not conducive to asset performance. Incorrect asset allocation. Underperforming fund managers. Reduced asset value. Reduced funding level. Increase in employer contributions. Closed/Tolerated James Lake Financial Finance Directorate D1 D1 PENS0002 PEN 02 - Inappropriate long-t Incorrect asset allocation and Increased employer contributionsClosed/Tolerated James Lake Financial Finance Directorate D1 E1 PENS0003 PEN 03 - Active investment m Incorrect manager decisions Incorrect market environment for their Strategy Key staff loss Reduced investment returns vs passive strategy Lower returns / funding level Increased employer contributions Closed/Tolerated James Lake Financial Finance Directorate D1 D1 PENS0004 PEN 04 - Inflation - Pay and p Global and national market/geo political environment causing higher inflation. Incorrect BoE actions to rectify Increased pension payments / cashflow negative Reduced asset values & increased negative actuarial assumptions reduce funding level Discount rate may be higher which could improve funding level Closed/Tolerated James Lake Financial Finance Directorate D1 E1 PENS0005 PEN 05 - Pensioners living lonImprovements in longevity Pension costs exceeding forecast Reduced funding level Closed/Tolerated James Lake Financial Finance Directorate E2 E2 PENS0006 PEN 06 - Poor Performance o Poor service delivery of outsource partner Poor contract management Lack of action when improvements required Non delivery of pension payments Non compliance with pension regulations Closed/Tolerated James Lake Statutory Service Provi Finance Directorate E2 F2 PENS0007 PEN 7 - Cyber Security Inappropriate cyber protectio Los of data Ransom demands Non delivery of statutory service Closed/Tolerated James Lake IT & Technology Finance Directorate E1 E1 PENS0008 PEN 8 - ESG - Risk of financial Negative ESG influences crea Reduced asset value Reduced funding level Closed/Tolerated James Lake Financial Finance Directorate Not Set Not Set PENS0011 PEN 11 - Failure of the pool in Lack of interest in common fund launch Poor CIV governance Government intervention Lack of diversity in investment Inability to meet pooling requirement Unable to meet any changing in ISS requirements Closed/Tolerated James Lake Financial Finance Directorate D1 E1

Grid: Record - View: Default List Alert Risk Ref Risk Title and Description Causes Consequences Current Profile Status Risk Owner Review Date Linked Record Risk Category Last Review Date Last Reviewed By Review Comments Directorate Service Risk Type Created Date PENS0017 PEN 12 - Failure of the Fund’s governance to comply with statutory requirements New General CoP needs gap analysis and rectification GMP moral vs regulatory requirement Knowledge gaps resulting in ineffectiveness of Committee and/or Board Actions taken against the Fund by TPR for non code compliance Not delivering best practice in accordance with the new code TPR/DLUHC action taken against the Fund for not GMP non compliance Poor decisions and/or oversight by Committee/Board members D3 Static Tunde Adekoya 02/03/25 Statutory Service Provision 02/12/24 Tunde Adekoya Risk Reviewed - No Changes Required PEN 12 - Failure of the Fund’s governance to comply with statutory requirements Finance Directorate Pensions, Treasury & Statutory Accounts Operational 30/05/24 PENS0016 PEN 13 - Key officer risk Small team with specialist knowledge in each role. Limited capacity for succession planning. Non delivery of service statutory requirements Agency staff costs to cover any vacant position. D3 Static Tunde Adekoya 02/03/25 Statutory Service Provision 02/12/24 Tunde Adekoya Risk Reviewed & Risk Score Changed (Please update Status in the Risk Information section below) PEN 13 - Key officer risk Finance Directorate Pensions, Treasury & Statutory Accounts Operational 30/05/24 PENS0015 PEN 14 - Failure of employers to deliver accurate and timely employee administration information Poor outsource contract management by employers Poor performance of outsourced service providers Inadequate payroll reporting by Hillingdon Council Lack of ownership by employers Inaccurate pension records Reporting of employers to TPR - and subsequent ramifications (Fines) Incorrect pensions being paid Pensions payment not processed efficiently Additional pension administration costs A3 Static Tunde Adekoya 02/01/25 Statutory Service Provision 02/12/24 Tunde Adekoya Risk Reviewed - No Changes Required PEN 14 - Failure of employers to deliver accurate and timely employee administration information Finance Directorate Pensions, Treasury & Statutory Accounts Operational 30/05/24 PENS0009 PEN 9 - Liquidity on asset management - risk of failure to liquidate assets or meet drawdown calls Lack of notice given for drawdown Poor cashflow management t Unable to meet trades Financial penalties Overdraft fees E1 Increasing Risk Tunde Adekoya 06/02/25 Financial Finance Directorate Pensions, Treasury & Statutory Accounts Operational 30/05/24 PENS0010 Pen 10 - Liquidity on members dealings - risk that the fund is unable to settle member payments Cashflow negative (Payments greater than income) Poor cashflow management Non payment of pensions Negative impact on pensioners Reputational damage Fines Not Set Increasing Risk Tunde Adekoya 06/02/25 Financial Finance Directorate Pensions, Treasury & Statutory Accounts Operational 30/05/24

Classification: Public Pensions Committee 10 December 2024 GOVERNANCE Item 9 Committee Pensions Committee Officer Reporting Tunde Adekoya, Finance Papers with report Pension Committee Workplan General Code of Practice (GCoP) Compliance Update and Action Plan HEADLINES This report is to enable the Pension Committee to review the Committee workplan , note governance updates as well as approval of various triennial and interim policy updates. RECOMMENDATIONS That the Committee: 1. Note the dates for Pensions Committee meetings. 2. Make suggestions for future agenda items, working practices and / or reviews. 3. Note Committee’s Continuous Professional Development update 4. Note GCoP Update SUPPORTING INFORMATION The Pension Com mittee workplan has been updated and is now shown as an appendix to this report. Committee are asked to review the workplan and make suggestions for consideration and inclusion. Future meeting dates: 26 March 2025 03 June 2025 – TBC 24 September 2025 – TBC 10 December 2025 – TBC 26 March 2026 - TBC Training In line with the required competencies set out by the CIPFA Knowledge and Skills Framework, Pension Committee members should have a general understanding of areas associated with their LGPS fiduciary role. Upcoming changes in legislation are expected to enforce the need for training and will make it a regulatory requirement for Pension Committee members. Classification: Public Pensions Committee 10 December 2024 To monitor progress against this requirement a log of member training is shown below. As a foundation requirement, Pension Committee members are asked to complete the AON CIPFA Knowledge & Skills Framework sessions. Pensions Committee Continuous Professional Development Log 2024/25 Date Details Cllr Chamdal Cllr Banerjee Cllr Riley Cllr Mathers Cllr Burles 11 Jul 24 LCIV Absolute Return 1 Hour 11 Jul 24 LAPFF ESG 1 Hour 31 Jul 24 LCIV Fixed Interest 1 Hour 1 Aug 24 LCIV Multi Asset 1 Hour 22 Aug 24 LCIV Business Meeting 1 Hour 5 & 6 Sep 24 LCIV Conference 7 Hours 10 Hours 17 Sep 24 LCIV Property 1 Hour 1 Hour 1 Hour 1 Hour 30 Sep 24 WCC Training 3 Hour 3 Hour 26/09/2024 LCIV Business Meeting 1 Hour 01/10/2024 LCIV Meet The Manager 1 Hour 20/09/24 SAB Government Pension Review 1 Hour CIPFA Knowledge & Skills Framework 7 Modules Completed 14 Hours * ** * * *Completed Knowledge and Skills training prior to 2024/25. **Cllr Riley joined Pension Committee in May 2023 – training to be completed. Knowledge & Skills Assessment In January 2024 t he members of the Pension Committee and Board were invited to complete an online knowledge assessment. In March 2024 the results of the assessment were discussed at Pensions Committee. Members were asked to revisit AON modules where their individual scor es did not meet the required level. To date, Cllr Burles has confirmed he has revisited the relevant AON modules. Other members included in the assessment are yet to confirm. Training Plan The next phase in the training plan is being developed. Areas on which there will be a focus include: Pension Regulator’s General Code of Practice Investment manager selection and monitoring Ethnic, Diversity & Inclusion Once presenters and material have been agreed , date options will be sent to Committee and Board members. General Code of Practice Classification: Public Pensions Committee 10 December 2024 Following the introduction of the Pensions Regulator’s new General Code of Practice, a gap analysis assessing the Funds compliance , against the new and extended requirements, has been completed in line with the recommended September deadline. Attached to this report is the dashboard results of the initial assessment. A second peer review has taken place, and an action plan produced. The Fund now has a further year to implement the necessary measures to reach compliance across all requirements. A programme of work will be undertaken to remedy any gaps with regular updates being brought to both Committee and Board. The Pension Board has cited reaching compliance over the next year as a key activity and one on which they will focus. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS Continued training will incur fees dependant on the platform and events attended. LEGAL IMPLICATIONS Where applicable the legal implications are included within the body of the report.

1 London Borough of Hillingdon Pension Fund Training Plan 2024-25 This Training Plan for 2024-25 is based on the Training Policy agreed by Pensions Committee in December 2023. The Training Policy requires each member of the Pensions Committee, Local Pension Board and pension fund officers to undertake no less than 2 days (14 hours) of training in each financial year which will include a combination of the delivery methods outlined below. The annual Training Plan is based on an assessment of the current level of knowledge and understanding, together with the consideration of business which the Fund will need to consider over the coming year(s). Specific learning needs for individuals can be addressed through 1:1 or small group sessions with the Fund’s officers/advisers and these can be organised separately. Costs associated with delivering the Training Plan are included in the Fund’s budget. Members must ensure that they properly record and provide details of their attendance at events to Fund officers. We hope that member will embrace the learning and development programme. 2 Induction Refreshers The assessment of the current level of knowledge and understanding of Committee and Board members undertaken during January 2024 has shown that revisiting induction training may be helpful for some members. Pensions administration and governance/legislation are deemed to be the priority subjects. However individual members should prioritise the subject matter(s) which their personal knowledge assessment shows (the largest) gaps in knowledge. The table below shows a timetable for: - revisiting induction material – within the timescales, members can have flexibility how/when they review the material. - an internal discussion session supported by officers and/or advisers to provide an opportunity to discuss the induction material, consider any Fund- specific issues and to ask questions. Subject Matter Timescale for revisiting induction material Internal discussion/Q&S session – date to be confirmed Pensions Administration & Communications April -May 2024 TBC Pensions legislation Funding and actuarial standards Sep 2024 H2 (with preparations for 2025 actuarial valuation – see overleaf) Procurement and contract management Jul-Aug 2024 TBC Investment strategy Oct – Nov 2024 TBC Financial products Reading Material - The Fund’s Handbook (including glossary) provides an overview of how the Fund is managed. This is a newly created document and feedback from Committee and Board members is welcome. - PLSA Made Simple Guides (https://www.plsa.co.uk/Resources/Made-Simple- guides) – the following may be particularly relevant: o Indices and Benchmarks o Cyber Risk o Cost Transparency o ESG o Climate Indices o GMP Equalisation o General Data Protection Regulation - LGPS Scheme Advisory Board website (https://lgpsboard.org/index.php/welcome) 3 In-house Sessions (generally provided by officers and/or the Fund’s providers) Comments below on old plan Subject H1 2024/25 H2 2024/25 Focus Governance The Pensions Regulator and Code of Practice Y Breaches & Reporting to TPR Annual report and accounts including Governance Compliance Statement Y Include investment cost transparency Risk framework Y In-depth review on specific risks Y Cyber. (Others may be indirectly covered in other sessions e.g. TPR code) Funding Actuarial valuation Y Preparation for 2025 valuation Benchmarking of funding - Section 13 Y When Section 13 report available Investment Investment manager selection and monitoring Y Property/LCIV role The Fund's investment managers - London CIV, LGIM & managers with >5% - Managers with <5% Y Y See LCIV market and fund updates below Investment cost transparency Y Include with annual report Responsible investment - General including LCIV and LGIM - LAPFF - Climate reporting Y 4 Subject H1 2024/25 H2 2024/25 Focus Benchmarking of investments Y Comparison with other LGPS funds Pension Administration Regulatory requirements Y Covered in revisiting induction material (above) Benefits Y Communications Y Revised plan/table 2024/25 Subject H1 H2 Focus Governance The Pensions Regulator and Code of Practice  Y Breaches & Reporting to TPR Annual report and accounts including Governance Compliance Statement Y Include investment cost transparency Risk framework In-depth review on specific risks Y Cyber. (Others may be indirectly covered in other sessions e.g. TPR code) Equality, Diversity & Inclusion Y Funding Actuarial valuation Y Preparation for 2025 valuation Benchmarking of funding - Section 13 Y When Section 13 report available Investment Investment manager selection and monitoring Y Y Property/LCIV role The Fund's investment managers - London CIV, LGIM & managers with >5% Y Y See LCIV market and fund updates below 5 2024/25 Subject H1 H2 Focus - Managers with <5% Investment cost transparency Y Include with annual report Responsible investment - General including LCIV and LGIM - LAPFF - Climate reporting Y Benchmarking of investments Y Comparison with other LGPS funds Pension Administration Regulatory requirements Y Covered in revisiting induction material (above) Benefits Y Communications Y 6 Approved External Sessions The following external events are deemed to be most suitable for members’ training plans but the suitability of the content for individual’s learning should be considered before registering. Members may receive invitations to other events directly and attendance should be agreed with officers beforehand. Provider Event details Date(s) London CIV Annual Conference 5 September 2024 London CIV Investor Updates [1] Market updates (Equities, Fixed Income, Multi Asset) Q1 – 30/4, 1/5, 2/5 Q2 – 30/7, 31/7, 1/8 Q3 – 29/10, 30/10, 4/11 LCIV Fund updates 11 April – Equity (Global Alpha) 16 May – Multi Asset Credit 10 July - Multi Asset Credit 11 July – Absolute Return 17 Sept – Equity (Value) Date TBC - Private Debt Pensions and Lifetime Savings Association Local Government Conference https://www.plsa.co.uk/Events/Conferen ces/Local-Authority-Conference 11-13 June 2024 Cotswolds DG Publishing LGPS webinars, regularly featuring news from the Scheme Advisory Board https://lgps-live.com/ Bi-monthly (see website for details) Local Authority Pension Fund Forum Annual conference Mid-year seminar December 2024, Bournemouth To be confirmed [1] : recordings of London CIV events are generally made available. For more advanced learning for Committee members, the following may be suitable: Provider Event details Date(s) London CIV Monthly Business Updates [1] Generally, at 10am on the last Thursday of the month London CIV Coffee with the CIO Generally, 11am on Wednesdays Pensions and Lifetime Savings Association Investment Conference Likely to be February 2025 in Edinburgh DG Publishing LGPS Pooling Symposium https://www.dgpublishing.com/lgps- pooling-symposium/ 23-24 April 2024 Local Government Chronicle Investment related conferences/seminars https://www.lgcplus.com/ Held throughout the year Local Authority Pension Fund Forum Quarterly Business meetings Details available from officers [1] recordings of London CIV events are generally made available on their client portal. Other relevant external sessions will be added as details become available.

Project Stage Mar- 24 Apr- 24 May-24 Jun-24 Jul-24 Aug-24 Sep-24 Oct-24 Nov-24 Dec-24 Jan-25 Feb-25 Mar-25 Apr-25 May-25 Jun-25 Jul-25 Aug-25 Sep-25 1 Evaluate compliance checkers on the market. 2 Research how other funds are tackling the their implementation of the GCOP. 3 Purchase compliance checker 4 Determine which of the 51 modules apply to the fund 5 PB & PC Recruitment Process In Place Amber rated 6 Regular review of PC & PB membership Amber rated PB Fixed term 7 Resignation and Removal of PB members Red Rated Red Rated Red Rated 8 Knowledge & Skills Policy covering expectations of code 9 Documented Policies on appointment of advisers Red Rated Red Rated Red Rated 10 Is above Policy approved by PC Red Rated Red Rated Red Rated 11 Own Risks (Best Practise) 12 Fund Specific Cyber Policy Red Rated Red Rated Red Rated Red Rated 13 Specific Cyber Incident report Plan Red Rated Red Rated Red Rated Red Rated 14 Cyber Hygeine Guidelines (Remote working) Red Rated Red Rated Red Rated Red Rated Scheduled tasks Completed Some requirements/actions still outstanding Requirements/actions overdue Not compliant Governng Body Administration London Borough of Hillingdon Pension Fund General Code of Practice Action Plan 2024/5 Action/task Project Initialisation

TPR General code of practice London Borough of Hillingdon Pension Fund - Scheme Assessment Prepared for: Hillingdon Council London Borough of Hillingdon Pension Fund Committee London Borough of Hillingdon Local Pension Board Prepared by: Aon Date: 25 October 2024 Key Compliant Compliant in some but not all areas Not currently compliant PC Pension Committee (or equivalent) PB Local Pension Board TPR The Pensions Regulator LGPS Local Government Pension Scheme Code TPR's General code of practice Introduction TPR Code Compliance model This report sets out how London Borough of Hillingdon Pension Fund complies with the Pension Regulator’s (TPR) General code of practice (the Code) in relation to the management of the London Borough of Hillingdon Pension Fund which is part of the Local Government Pension Scheme (LGPS). Note that the Code applies to governing bodies of all occupational, personal and Public Service Pension Schemes and therefore it is generic in nature. This document highlights all the key elements of the Code relevant to Public Service Pension Schemes and sets out whether Hillingdon Council is compliant in each of the Code’s modules. There may be a number of requirements relating to these elements that are specifically stipulated within LGPS legislation and it is not the purpose of this compliance model to consider that level of detail. Funding and investment The governing body Communications and disclosure Reporting to TPR Administration The governing body The governing body Board Structure and activities Knowledge and understanding requirements Essential actions Fully compliant in 4 out of 5 modules Fully compliant in 2 out of 2 modules 1 question is red and 2 questions are amber out of 30 questions. No questions are red and no questions are amber out of 20 questions. Advisers and service providers Risk Management 2 questions are red and no questions are amber out of 19 questions. No questions are red and no questions are amber out of 50 questions. 1 question is unanswered. Scheme governance Comments Fully compliant in 0 out of 1 module No questions are red and 1 question is amber out of 24 questions. The Administering Authority have selected to answer all questions within this section. The Administering Authority have selected to include all questions when determining whether they comply with the Code within this section. The governing body – at a glance Fully compliant in 0 out of 1 module Fully compliant in 5 out of 6 modules ▪ Get PC and PB to acknowledge and read particular section of Governance Policy and confirm understanding the contents. ▪ Consultation with Hillingdon Councl, as administering authority necessary to assertain and understand appointment procedure of PC members to ensure compliance. ▪ Timetable for a periodical review of LPB membership to be established, ensuring depth of knowledge is always available to the LPB. ▪ Policy covering removal and resignation of PB members to be formulated and agreed. Procedures for resignation and removal from PC is covered under the Council's constitution. ▪ Polciy to be update wit particular reference points 9-15 from the TPR Code extract. ▪ Officers will consult and put together a documented polcies for making appointments of advisers and service providers ▪ Officers will consult and put together a documented polcies for making appointments of advisers and service providers Essential Actions Module Question Action 1 Role of the governing body 4 Get PC and PB to acknowledge and read particular section of Governance Policy and confirm understanding the contents. 2 Recruitment and appointment to the governing body 2 Consultation with Hillingdon Councl, as administering authority necessary to assertain and understand appointment procedure of PC members to ensure compliance. 3 Recruitment and appointment to the governing body 3 Timetable for a periodical review of LPB membership to be established, ensuring depth of knowledge is always available to the LPB. 4 Recruitment and appointment to the governing body 6 Policy covering removal and resignation of PB members to be formulated and agreed. Procedures for resignation and removal from PC is covered under the Council's constitution. Other Actions Module Question Action 1 Role of the governing body 1 Officers will liaise with Democratic Services and provide information about requisite knowledge and skills required for PC members to be considered, when Council makes appointments onto the PC. 2 Role of the governing body 2 The Council, through responsible officers have considered appointing paid LPB members and is still in consideration going forward. In order to assuage the recruitment difficulties to the LPB, co-opting members on to the board is another option being explored. 3 Role of the governing body 3 Trainig records of all PC and LPB members are kept, monitored and constantly updated for inclusion the quarterly PC meeting work programme. The Knowledge and Skills assesment for both PC and LPB will be conducted annually to ensure all members are up to date in all required area of knowledge. Next assesment is scheduled for January 2025. The governing body Board structure and activities 4 Role of the governing body 4 An induction pack for PC members will be created and sent to both existing and newly appointed PC members to ensure they are aware of their responsibilities. Acknowledgement of receipt of the induction packs will be documented for monitoring via checlist of responses to induction pack. 5 Recruitment and appointment to the governing body 1 Commnication to all categories of scheme membership to be ramped up through the Council's internal system, Hampshire portal and newsletters, then cascaded down to individual employers to encourage participation in LPB and expand pool talent of prospect LPB members. 6 Recruitment and appointment to the governing body 2 Equality, Diversity and Inclusion Policy for the Pension Fund is being developed and contents will be approved by PC and will become a policy to be considered for appointment of LPB members. The Council does have and EDI policy and it will be flagged up to Democratic Services that this should in consideration for appointments ynto the PC. 7 Recruitment and appointment to the governing body 3 Consideration will be given to inclusion of Maximum term of LPB membership in the recruitment policy and time table to aid forward planning. 8 Recruitment and appointment to the governing body 4 Trainig records of all PC and LPB members are kept, monitored and constantly updated for inclusion the quarterly PC meeting work programme. The Knowledge and Skills assesment for both PC and LPB will be conducted annually to ensure all members are up to date in all required area of knowledge. Next assesment is scheduled for January 2025. 9 Recruitment and appointment to the governing body 5 Substitute PC members will now be mandated to undergo same Knowledge and Skills assesments as PC members and training proferred to ensure they have adequate knowledge to perfom their duties when called upon. 10 Appointment and role of the chair 3 Plans for new chair induction will be formulated and become part of the process after election/selection going forward. This will cover all expectations of the LPB chair under the GCoP. Essential Actions Module Question Action 1 Knowledge and understanding 6 Polciy to be update wit particular reference points 9-15 from the TPR Code extract. Other Actions Module Question Action 1 No Actions Knowledge and understanding requirements Advisers and service providers Essential Actions Module Question Action 1 Managing advisers and service providers 1 Officers will consult and put together a documented polcies for making appointments of advisers and service providers 2 Managing advisers and service providers 2 Officers will consult and put together a documented polcies for making appointments of advisers and service providers Other Actions Module Question Action 1 No Actions Risk management Essential Actions Module Question Action 1 No Actions Other Actions Module Question Action 1 Identifying, evaluating and recording risks 5 a To be reviewed more indepth . 2 Scheme continuity planning 1 Possibly write up a fund specific business continuity plan, incorporating those of other partners. 3 Conflicts of interest 8 TPR Criteria on Dealing with conflicts 9-21 will be checked against Fund policy to ensure compliance. Scheme governance Essential Actions Module Question Action 1 No Actions Other Actions Module Question Action 1 No Actions ▪ Role of the governing body (1) ▪ Managing advisors and service providers (4) ▪ Recruiting and appointment to the governing body (2,6) ▪ Arrangements for member-nominated trustee appointments (7) ▪ Appointment and role of the chair (5) ▪ Identifying, evaluating and recording risks (1) ▪ Meetings and decision-making (1) ▪ Internal controls (1) ▪ Remuneration and fee policy (4) ▪ Assurance reports on internal controls (1) ▪ Scheme continuity planning (4) ▪ Conflicts of interest (3,6) ▪ Knowledge and understanding (3,6) ▪ Own risk assessment (4) ▪ Governance of knowledge and understanding (3,6) ▪ Risk management function (7) Value for scheme members (DC only) Scheme governance ▪ Value for members (7) ▪ Systems of governance (4) Notes: The numbers next to the module names above set out Aon's interpretation of the Code for Public Service Pension Schemes. Please note it should not be taken as legal advice. (1) Applies (2) Mostly applies (3) Partially applies (4) Good practice (5) Mostly good practice (6) Partially good practice (7) Does not apply Board structure and activities Advisers and service providers Knowledge & understanding requirements Modules The governing body Risk management Funding and investment Funding and investment Investment Essential actions Fully compliant in 3 out of 4 modules No questions are red and 1 question is amber out of 37 questions. Comments The Administering Authority have selected to answer all questions within this section. The Administering Authority have selected to include all questions when determining whether they comply with the Code within this section. Funding and investment – at a glance None Essential Actions Module Question Action 1 No Actions Other Actions Module Question Action 1 No Actions Funding and investment Investment ▪ Investment governance (4) ▪ Investment decision making (7) ▪ Investment monitoring (4) ▪ Stewardship (6) ▪ Climate change (3,6) ▪ Statement of investment principles (6)* ▪ Default arrangements and charge restrictions (7) Funding and investment Modules Investment Notes: The numbers next to the module names above set out Aon's interpretation of the Code for Public Service Pension Schemes. Please note it should not be taken as legal advice. (1) Applies (2) Mostly applies (3) Partially applies (4) Good practice (5) Mostly good practice (6) Partially good practice (7) Does not apply * Note that for the Statement of investment principles module the Code references good practice for PSPSs. However, due to the overriding legal requirement to have an Investment Strategy Statement (ISS) in place we have not included any questions on this module but have referred to the ISS within the Investment governance module. Administration Administration Scheme administration Information handling Essential actions Fully compliant in 1 out of 1 module Fully compliant in 3 out of 4 modules No questions are red and no questions are amber out of 16 questions. No questions are red and 1 question is amber out of 42 questions. IT Contributions 3 questions are red and no questions are amber out of 17 questions. No questions are red and no questions are amber out of 13 questions. Comments The Administering Authority have selected to answer all questions within this section. The Administering Authority have selected to include all questions when determining whether they comply with the Code within this section. Fully compliant in 3 out of 3 modules Administration – at a glance Fully compliant in 1 out of 2 modules ▪ Fund Specific cyber policy is under production and will be published in due course. ▪ Cyber training is planned for PB members as a prelude to presenting the policy being developed to them. ▪ Fund Specific cyber policy is under production and will be published in due course. This will be addressed in the plicy. Essential Actions Module Question Action 1 No Actions Other Actions Module Question Action 1 Planning and maintaining administration 2 Bespoke Administration issues training will be provided to all PC & LPB, in conjuction with our administration partners, Hamshire Pension Services Information handling Essential Actions Module Question Action 1 No Actions Other Actions Module Question Action 1 No Actions IT Essential Actions Module Question Action 1 Cyber controls 1 Fund Specific cyber policy is under production and will be published in due course. Administration Scheme administration 2 Cyber controls 2 Cyber training is planned for PB members as a prelude to presenting the policy being developed to them. 3 Cyber controls 8 Fund Specific cyber policy is under production and will be published in due course. This will be addressed in the plicy. Other Actions Module Question Action 1 No Actions Contributions Essential Actions Module Question Action 1 No Actions Other Actions Module Question Action 1 No Actions ▪ Planning and maintaining administration (1) ▪ Maintenance of IT systems (1) ▪ Cyber controls (2,6) Information handling ▪ Financial transactions (1) ▪ Transfers out (2) ▪ Receiving contributions (3) ▪ Record-keeping (3,6) ▪ Monitoring contributions (1) ▪ Data monitoring and improvement (1) ▪ Resolving overdue contributions (1) Contributions Notes: The numbers next to the module names above set out Aon's interpretation of the Code for Public Service Pension Schemes. Please note it should not be taken as legal advice. (1) Applies (2) Mostly applies (3) Partially applies (4) Good practice (5) Mostly good practice (6) Partially good practice (7) Does not apply Administration Modules Scheme administration IT Communications and disclosure Communications and disclosure Information to members Public information Essential actions Fully compliant in 5 out of 5 modules Fully compliant in 2 out of 2 modules No questions are red and no questions are amber out of 22 questions. No questions are red and no questions are amber out of 14 questions. Comments The Administering Authority have selected to answer all questions within this section. The Administering Authority have selected to include all questions when determining whether they comply with the Code within this section. Communications and disclosure – at a glance None Essential Actions Module Question Action 1 No Actions Other Actions Module Question Action 1 No Actions Public information Essential Actions Module Question Action 1 No Actions Other Actions Module Question Action 1 No Actions Communication and disclosure Information to members Public information ▪ General principles for member communications (1) ▪ Publishing scheme information (PSPS) (2,6) ▪ Annual pension benefit statements (DC) (7) ▪ Dispute resolution procedures (2,6) ▪ Summary funding and pension benefit statements (DB) (7) ▪ Benefit information statements (PSPS) (1) ▪ Retirement risk warnings and guidance (1) ▪ Notification of right to cash transfer sum or contribution refund (2) ▪ Chair's statement (7) ▪ Scams (1) ▪ Audit requirements (7) Communication and disclosure Modules Information to members Notes: The numbers next to the module names above set out Aon's interpretation of the Code for Public Service Pension Schemes. Please note it should not be taken as legal advice. (1) Applies (2) Mostly applies (3) Partially applies (4) Good practice (5) Mostly good practice (6) Partially good practice (7) Does not apply Reporting to TPR Reporting to TPR Regular reports Whistleblowing- Reporting breaches of the law Essential actions Fully compliant in 1 out of 1 module Fully compliant in 4 out of 4 modules No questions are red and no questions are amber out of 3 questions. No questions are red and no questions are amber out of 11 questions. Comments The Administering Authority have selected to answer all questions within this section. The Administering Authority have selected to include all questions when determining whether they comply with the Code within this section. Reporting to TPR – at a glance None Essential Actions Module Question Action 1 No Actions Other Actions Module Question Action 1 No Actions Essential Actions Module Question Action 1 No Actions Other Actions Module Question Action 1 Who must report 3 Investment Mangers, Actuary, advisers and other engaged service providers will be prrovided with breaches of law procedure and request acknowledgements. Reporting to TPR Regular reports Whistleblowing - reporting breaches of the law ▪ Registrable information and scheme returns (1) Whistleblowing - reporting breaches of the law ▪ Who must report (1) ▪ Decision to report (1) ▪ How to report (1) ▪ Reporting payment failures (1) Reporting to TPR Modules Regular reports Notes: The numbers next to the module names above set out Aon's interpretation of the Code for Public Service Pension Schemes. Please note it should not be taken as legal advice. (1) Applies (2) Mostly applies (3) Partially applies (4) Good practice (5) Mostly good practice (6) Partially good practice (7) Does not apply The information set out in this report is based on the expectations set out in the Code, compared to your current practice and it is not a regulatory and compliance audit. The information is based on the responses by the Administering Authority to questions set by Aon based on information contained in the Code. Copyright © 2024 Aon Solutions UK Limited and Aon Investments Limited. All rights reserved. aon.com. Aon Wealth Solutions’ business in the UK is provided by Aon Solutions UK Limited - registration number 4396810, or Aon Investments Limited – registration number 5913159, both of which are registered in England and Wales have their registered office at The Aon Centre, The Leadenhall Building, 122 Leadenhall Street, London EC3V 4AN. Tel: 020 7623 5500. Aon Investments Limited is authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority. This document and any enclosures or attachments are prepared on the understanding that they are solely for the benefit of the addressee(s). Unless we provide express prior written consent no part of this document should be reproduced, distributed or communicated to anyone else and, in providing this document, we do not accept or assume any responsibility for any other purpose or to anyone other than the addressee(s) of this document. In this context, “we” includes any Aon Scheme Actuary appointed by you. To protect the confidential and proprietary information included in this document, it may not be disclosed or provided to any third parties without Aon’s prior written consent. Aon plc (NYSE:AON) exists to shape decisions for the better - to protect and enrich the lives of people around the world. Our colleagues provide our clients in over 120 countries and sovereignties with advice and solutions that give them the clarity and confidence to make better decisions to protect and grow their business.

London Borough of Hillingdon Pension Fund - Pensions Committee agenda plan Frequency Last review Governance Business Plan & Budget Annual Business Plan & Budget - Update on progress/outturn Quarterly Annual Report and Accounts Draft - unaudited Annual External audit plan Annual External audit results report Annual Internal audit - outcomes As required Local Pensions Board Operating Procedures Every 3 years Nov-21 Local Pensions Board - Annual Report Annual Compliance with Pensions Regulator Code of Practice Annual Benchmarking - Investment; Admin; Funding (Section 13) Various CTI Annual Procurement of services As required Governance Update Quarterly Risk register Quarterly Policies Governance Policy & Compliance Statement inc Governance Compiance Statement Dec-23 Conflicts of Interests Policy Mar-23 Risk Management Policy Mar-22 Procedure for Reporting Breaches of the Law Oct-24 Funding Strategy Statement Mar-23 Investment Strategy Statement Dec-23 Responsible Investment Policy Mar-23 Training Policy Dec-23 Pensions Administration Strategy Mar-24 Scheme pays policy Dec-23 Internal Disputes Resolution Procedure (IDRP) Employees Guide Oct-22 Communications Policy Sep-24 Discretions Policy Jun-22 Pensions Administration Pensions Administration Performance Quarterly Breaches, Complaints and Appeals Annually Data Quality Improvement Plan?? Ad-hoc Funding Actuarial Valuation Every 3 years Mar-23 Investment Review of Investment Strategy Every 3 years Jun-23 Investment update and manager review Quarterly Responsible Investment Update Quarterly Climate Risk Dashbaord (TCFD) Every 3 years Mar-22 At least every 3 years

Classification: Public Pensions Committee 10 December 2024 DRAFT PENSION FUND ANNUAL REPORT & EY EXTERNAL AUDIT PLAN Item 10 Committee Pensions Committee Officer Reporting Tunde Adekoya, Finance Papers with this report Draft Pension Fund Annual Report 2023/24 EY External Audit Plan 2023/24 HEADLINES The draft Pension Fund Annual Report for 2023/24 is attached to this report for Committee approval. As part of the audit process the external auditor will also verify the consistency of the Annual Report with the Annual Accounts. The EY plan for the external audit of the Pension Fund accounts is attached for noting. RECOMMENDATIONS It is recommended that Pensions Committee: 1. Approve the 2023/24 Draft Fund Annual Report 2. Note the EY External Audit Plan SUPPORTING INFORMATION The Pension Fund is required to produce an Annual Report and publish by 1 December each year. The annual report includes the Pension Fund annual accounts which are normally reviewed by Pensions Committee and are to be formally approved at Audit Committee. In 2019 CIPFA publi shed guidance “preparing the annual report” to assist funds in producing the annual report in line with the current regulatory framework. The guidance has been adopted by MHCLG as statutory guidance. The draft report for 2023/24 contains information on the Fund's activities over the last year. The draft report has been brought to Committee for consideration and approval to publish in December. Once the formal external of the accounts and consistency checks are complete the final version will be published. Classification: Public Pensions Committee 10 December 2024 2023/24 Pension Fund Audit Attached to this report is the 202 3/24 EY Audit Planning report for the Pension Fund. The draft Pension Fund Accounts were prepared in line with guidance issued by the Chartered Institute of Public Finance & Accountan cy. The external audit of the Pension Fund began End of August, with the results and sign-off due at the February 2025 Audit Committee. Materiality: Pension Fund planning m ateriality remains unchanged on a basis of 1.0% of the prior year’s net assets of the fund, which for 2022/23 the materiality is estimated as £11.8m. Based on this amount, EY would expect to report on all unadjusted misstatements greater than £0.59m. Key Financial Statement Risks : The plan highlights the key audit risks, these being th e main areas on which specific audit work will focus. For 202 3/24 the audit risk areas include:  Misstatement due to fraud or error (Fraud risk)  Valuation of level 3 (complex) Investments (Significant risk)  Classification of level 2 and level 3 investments. (Significant risk)  IAS 26 – Actuarial present value of promised retirement benefits (Inherent risk) Two listed areas of audit focus are classified as having significant risk s, whilst on e is deemed to be a fraud risk and the fourth an Inherent risk. Fees The basic scale fee for the 202 3/24 audit is £ 81,688, with additional fees of £6,500 and other fees yet to be advised. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS Included in the body of the report. LEGAL IMPLICATIONS Included in the body of he report.

DRAFT London B orough of Hillingdon Pension Fund Annual Report 2023/24 DRAFT C O N T E N T S Section Page Chairman’s Foreword 3 Introduction To The Fund 5 A: Overall Fund Management 8 B: Financial Performance 21 C: Investment Policy and Performance Report 24 D. Scheme Administration 38 E. Report Of The Fund Actuary 47 F: Governance 49 G: Fund Account, Net Asset Statement and Notes 63 H. Asset Pools 98 I: Pensions Administration Strategy 107 J: Funding Strategy Statement 132 K: Investment Strategy Statement 161 L: Communications Policy 171 M: External Audit Opinion 182 Glossary 183 Appendix 1 – Governance Policy 189 Appendix 1 - Conflict of Interest 210 DRAFT CHAIRMAN’S FOREWORD The Pension Fund Commit tee is responsible for overseeing the governance of the London Borough of Hillingdon Pension Fund, including investment management and pensions administration. Committee continues to monitor the Fund closely at every meeting and challenges the officers, investment advisers and investment managers as necessary to ensure the Fund’s investments are being managed effectively. The Fund continues to work closely with its LGPS pool, the London Collective Investment Vehicle (LCIV), to achieve efficiencies through pooling of Pension Fund assets. The Fund continues to benefit from the lower fees negotiated by LCIV on its Legal and General Passive Equities Portfolio, as well as benefitting from lower fees in active equity, Diversified Growth, and alternative investment managers. The Fund’s proportion of assets pooled now is about 85%, making the London Borough of Hillingdon Pension Fund one of the biggest investors within the London CIV pool. The fund has throughout the year under review implemented most of the strategic asset review concepted after the last triennial valuation in March 2022. This includes a commitment to invest 5% of assets in a Dislocation Fund managed by Blackstone Investments, Increase allocation to Equities by 5% and reduction of Index Linked gilts allocation by 5%. The Pension Fund is committed to being a responsible investor and in the last year signed up to the UK Stewardship Code to demonstrate our commitment to active and engaged monitoring of corporate governance in the interests of our members. We as a fund to this end actively engage our fund managers to incorporate ESG into investment processes and ensure active engagement with invested companies in key areas of Environmental, Social and Governance. The Pension Fund launched its inaugural Responsible Investment Policy in 2020, setting out the Fund’s commitment to environmental, social and governance factors as a core part of its investment decision making. This Responsible Investment policy is aligned with the Fund’s Investment Strategy Statement where a brief overview on ESG and voting is included. In addition, the policy is aligned with the Fund’s Funding Strategy Statement with consistency of objectives and return expectations to support the funding level. The Fund has also reorganised its equity portfolio to reduce its carbon exposure which is a considerable long term investment risk. This has been achieved by transferring its previous active UK equity portfolio from LCIV Epoch Income Fund to the LCIV Global Alpha Paris Aligned Fund managed by Baillie Gifford, which is in alignment with the Paris Climate Agreement by screening out carbon intensive companies that do not, or will not, play a role in the transition to a low-carbon future. We have also undertaken a review of ESG impact assessment of our portfolios by rating all engaged fund managers on set traditional criteria to determine if they meet expected minimum level rating on an overall basis. All of the Fund’s current investment mandates achieve a ‘partially meets criteria’ rating at a minimum on an 3 DRAFT overall basis, w ith a significant number that ‘meets traditional criteria’. At an overall level the Fund also meets “meets traditional criteria”. I would like to thank all those involved in the governance of the London Borough of Hillingdon Pension Fund during the year during 2023/24, especially the members of the Pension Fund Committee and the Local Pension Board. Cllr Stuart Mathers Chairman Pensions Committee 2023/24 4 DRAFT INTRODUCTION TO THE FUND Regulation 57 of the Local Government Pension Scheme Regulations 2013 (in respect of England and Wales) requires Local pension Funds to prepare and publish an annual report for each financial year. The London Borough of Hillingdon Pension Fund is part of the Local Government Pension Scheme (LGPS) and is governed by statute. The scheme moved to a career average revalued earning (CARE) scheme, from a final salary scheme in 2014 because of the Local Government Pension Scheme Regulations 2013. In 2016/17, the regulations surrounding investments were amended with the Local Government Pension Scheme (Management and Investment of Funds) Regulations 2016. Hillingdon is the Administering Authority for the Fund. Pensions and entitlement to benefits are fully protected in law. Membership of the Scheme is open to all employees of the Council including school employees except for teachers (who have their own pension scheme). Other employers are admitted to the Pension Fund and depending on their status; their employees may also be able to participate in the LGPS. Employee contributions are determined by central government and are between 5.5% and 12.5% of pensionable pay. Employer rates are set by the Fund actuary every 3 years following a valuation of the assets and liabilities of the Fund. Contributions for 2023/24 were set in the Actuarial valuation on 31 March 2022. The conditions of the Local Government Pension Scheme (LGPS) Regulations set out in clear terms the benefits that are payable to Scheme members. The benefits are guaranteed for those members and therefore members are not reliant on investment performance for their pension benefits. Contributions payable by Scheme members are also defined in the regulations. Employing Authorities are required to pay contributions into the Scheme to meet the cost of funding employee benefits and are required to meet any shortfall in funding the pension liabilities of Scheme members. The Pension Scheme during the financial year 2023 /24 was a defined benefit career average revalued earnings scheme, which aligns LGPS retirement age with an individual’s state pension age. The key benefits of the scheme are outlined below: • Pension benefits based on a 1/49th accrual basis for each year of pensionable service with benefits calculated on the career average pay revalued annually in line with inflation. • Pre-2014 benefits guaranteed with a final salary link for any benefits earned prior to 1 April 2014. • Option to pay 50% of the contribution rate to accrue 50% of the benefits. • Option to convert some pension to lump sum on retirement on a 1:12 ratio. • Life assurance cover 3 x member final pay applicable from the day of joining scheme. • Pensions for dependents: - spouses, civil partners and eligible co- habiting partners and eligible children. • An entitlement to have pension paid early on medical grounds. • Pensions increase annually in line with the cost of living (CPI). 5 DRAFT It shoul d be noted that the f oregoing is not an exhaustive list and that certain conditions have to be met for an individual to be entitled to the benefits outlined. The foregoing benefit structure came into effect on 1 April 2014 and saw the start of significant changes to the public sector pension schemes, with most other schemes introducing their changes a year later , on 1 April 2015. The previous LGPS introduced in 2008 was a defined benefit final salary scheme and was in operation until 31 March 2014. It should be recognised that many scheme members will have benefits accrued under both schemes and indeed some under the pre-2008 scheme. The key benefits under the 2008 scheme are outlined below: • A guarante ed pension based on final pay and length of time in the scheme and an accrual rate of 1/60th per annum. • Tax-free lump sum on benefit accumulated prior to 1 April 2008 and option to convert some of the pension into tax -free lump sum on post 1 April 2008 service. • Life assurance cover 3x member final pay applicable from the day of joining Scheme. • Pensions for dependents: - spouses, civil partners and eligible co- habiting partners and eligible children. • An entitlement to have pension paid early on medical grounds. • Pensions increase annually in line with the cost of living (CPI). Contract ing Out Status (with effect from 1 April 2002 until 5 April 2016) The LGPS was contracted- out of the State Second Pension Scheme (S2P), up to 5 April 2016 when contracting- out ceased. This meant that members paid reduced National Insurance contributions, and they did not earn a pension under S2P. Instead, the LGPS must guarantee to pay a pension that in general is as high as the pension that would have been earned in the State Earnings Related Pension Scheme (SERPS) / S2P. For contracted-out membership between 6 April 1978 and 5 April 1997, HMRC calculates a Guaranteed Minimum Pension (GMP), which is the minimum pension, which must be paid from the London Borough of Hillingdon Pension Fund to the member. For membership after 5 April 1997, the LGPS has guaranteed that the benefits it provides will generally be no less favourable than those provided under a Reference Scheme prescribed under the Pensions Act 1995. Additi onal Voluntary Contributions A facility is available for scheme members to make Additional Voluntary Contributions (AVCs). The Pension Fund Committee has appointed Prudential as the nominated provider for this purpose. This is run separately to the Hillingdon Pension Fund. Further details are available from the Prudential Corporate Pensions Team on 0800 151 3941. Regulati ons The Local Government Pension Scheme Regulations 2013 (as amended) The Local Government Pension Scheme (Transitional Provisions, Savings and Amendment) Regulations 2014 (as amended) 6 DRAFT The Local Government P ension Scheme (Management and Investment of Funds) Regulations 2016 7 DRAFT A: OVERALL FUND MANAGEMENT SCHEME MANAGEMENT AND ADVISERS The London Borough of Hillingdon Pension Fund ('the Fund') is part of the Local Government Pension Scheme (LGPS). The benefits paid out and the regulations are set nationally, but the Fund is administered locally. As the Administering Authority, the London Borough of Hillingdon has legal responsibility for the effective management of the Fund. The Council delegates this responsibility to the Pensions Committee ('the Committee'), which is the formal decision- making body for the Fund. The Corporate Director of Finance has delegated authority for the day -to-day running of the Fund. The local Pension Board ('the Board') was established in 2015 to assist the scheme manager in securing compliance with r egulations relating to the governance and administration within the requirements set by the Pension Regulator. Corporate Director of Finance Andy Evans in his role of Corporate Director of Finance has delegated responsibility for the day-to-day running of the Pension Fund. Officers Responsible for the Fund The Pensions and Statutory Accounts team ensures that both the Committee and Board receive relevant advice on investment strategy, monitoring of the performance of the Fund and on administration and governance matters, in addition to undertaking the accounting duties of the Fund. James Lake Director of Finance - Pensions, Treasury & Statutory Accounts Tunde Adekoya Finance Manager, Pensions & Governance Seby Carvalho Pensions Technical Officer Ian Pyke Pensions Officer Karl Pereira Trainee Pension Fund Accountant Scheme Administration Administration of the scheme is contracted out to Hampshire Pension Service (HPS) to provide the pensions administration under delegated authority for the London Borough of Hillingdon. HPS maintains pension scheme membership records and calculates benefits. Email: pensions@hants.gov.uk Telephone: 01962 845588 Address: Hampshire Pension Services The Castle Winchester Hampshire SO23 8UB 8 DRAFT Fund Custodian and Performance M onitoring The Northern Trust Company acts as the global custodian of the Fund' s assets. As part of its normal procedures Northern Trust holds all assets in safe custody, settles trades, collects dividend income, provides data for corporate actions, liaises closely with all the investment managers and reports on all activity on a monthly and quarterly basis. Where holdings are in pooled funds, the underlying assets held by the relevant funds' custodian are reported to Northern Trust. Regular service reviews take place with Northern Trust to ensure continuous monitoring of the Fund’ s r equirements. Additionally, Northern Trust provide performance analytics, comparing the performance of the Fund and individual managers to agreed benchmarks and market indices on a monthly, quarterly, and annual basis. Northern Trust 50 Bank Street Canary Wharf London E14 5NT Fund Actuary The Fund's actuary is Hymans Robertson Craig Alexander FFA Hymans Robertson LLP 20 Waterloo Street Glasgow G2 6DB Fund Managers Day-to-day investment management of the Fund's assets is delegated to specialist managers in accordance with the LGPS (Management and Investment of Funds) Regulations 2016. During 2022/23, the following managers managed the Fund’s investments externally: Fund Manager Asset Class Adam Street Partners Private Equity AEW UK UK Core Plus and Urban Real Estate Property Blackstone Investments Dislocation Fund Legal & General Investment Management Listed Equities and Index Linked Bonds - (Passive) – Pooled & Property Pooled London CIV – Baillie Gifford Global Equity Income - Pooled London CIV - Ruffer Absolute Return Fund - Pooled London CIV - Stepstone Infrastructure - Pooled London CIV – Churchill Private Debt - Pooled London CIV – CQS & PIMCO Multi Asset Credit LGT Capital Partners Private Equity M&G Investments (Direct Investment) Private Debt Macquarie Investment Infrastructure Permira LLP Private Debt UBS Global Asset Management UK Property Fund of Funds 9 DRAFT Fund Pool and Pool Operator The London Borough of Hillingdon is a member of the London CIV Pool. The London CIV Pool is run and managed by the London LGPS CIV Ltd, an FCA authorised and regulated company. Advisors to the Fund The Fund's Investment Advisor is Iseran Bidco Ltd trading as Isio , (formally KPMG) who was appointed July 2014. They advise the Committee on the Fund's strategic asset allocation and assist in the monitoring of fund managers. David O'Hara Partner Investment Advisory Tax & Pensions Iseran Bidco Ltd (Isio) 10 Norwich Street London EC4A 1BD In addition, the Fund had an Independent Advis or for 2023/24 – Clare Scott. AON Hewitt advises and supports the F und on governance arrangements to the Board. Aon Hewitt 25 Marsh Street Bristol BS1 4AQ Legal Services Legal support to the Fund is provided in-house by the Council. The Council's Borough Solicitor is Glen Egan. Auditor The Fund's external auditor, appointed by the Public Sector Audit Appointments (PSAA), is Ernst & Young. Ernst & Young LLP Grosvenor House Grosvenor Square Southampton SO15 2BE Banker Banking services are provided to the Fund by the Council's banker National Westminster Bank (Natwest). Natwest Bank Plc Unit 227-228 Intu Shopping Centre The Chimes High Street Uxbridge UB8 1LA 10 DRAFT AVC Provider The Fund's provi der for additional voluntary contributions is Prudential. Prudential AVC Customer Services Prudential Craigforth FK9 9UE 11 DRAFT RISK MANAGEMENT POLICY Risk Management within the Governance Structure The Administering Authority recognises that effective risk management is an essential element of good governance in the LGPS and is part of the ongoing decision -making process of Committee. By identifying and managing risks, the Administering Authority can:  demonstrate best practice in governance  improve financial management  minimise the risk and effect of adverse conditions  identify and maximise opportunities that might arise  minimise threats The Administering Authority adopts best practice risk management, which supports a structured and focused approach to managing risks and ensures risk management is an integral part in the governance of the Fund at a strategic and operational level. To whom this Policy Applies This Risk Management Policy applies to all members of the Pension Committee and the local Pension Board, including both scheme member and employer representatives. It also applies to senior officers involved in the management of the Fund. Less-senior officers involved in the daily management of the Fund are also integral to managing risk for the Fund and will be required to have appropriate understanding of risk management relating to their roles, which will be determined and managed by the Head of Finance – Statutory Accounting and Pension Fund. Advisers and suppliers to the Fund are also expected to be aware of this Policy and assist officers, Committee members and Board members as required, in meeting the objectives of this Policy. Aims and Objectives In relation to understanding and monitoring risk, the Administering Authority aims to:  integrate risk management into the culture and day-to-day activities of the Fund  raise awareness of the need for risk management by all those connected with the management of the Fund (including advisers, employers, and other partners)  anticipate and respond positively to change  minimise the probability of negative outcomes for the Fund and its stakeholders  establish and maintain a robust framework and procedures for identification, analysis, assessment and management of risk, and the reporting and recording of events, based on best practice  ensure consistent application of the risk management methodology across all Fund activities, including projects and partnerships. To assist in achieving these objectives in the management of the Fund, the Administering Authority will aim to comply with: 12 DRAFT  the CIPFA publication, “Managing Risk in the Local Government Pension Scheme”  the Pensions Act 2004 and the Pensions Regulator's Code of Practice for Public Service Pension Schemes as they relate to managing risk. Responsibility The Administering Authority must be satisfied that risks are appropriately managed. For this purpose, the Head of Statutory Accounts & Pensions is the designated individual for ensuring the process outlined below is carried out, subject to the oversight of the Pension Committee. However, it is the responsibility of everyone covered by this Policy to identify any potential risks for the Fund and ensure that they are fed into the risk management process. The London Borough of Hillingdon Pension Fund Risk Management Process The Administering Authority's risk management process is in line with that recommended by CIPFA and is a continuous approach which systematically looks at risks surrounding the Fund’s past, present and future activities. The main processes involved in risk management are identified in the figure below and detailed in the following sections: 1. Risk Identification The risk identification process is both a proactive and reactive one: looking forward i.e., horizon scanning for potential risks, and looking back, by learning lessons from reviewing how previous decisions and existing processes have manifested in risks to the organization. Risks are identified by several means including, but not limited to:  formal risk assessment exercises managed by the Pension Committee  performance measurement against agreed objectives 13 DRAFT  findings of internal and external audit and other adviser reports  feedback from the local Pension Board, employers, and other stakeholders  informal meetings of senior officers or other staff involved in the management of the Fund  liaison with other organizations, regional and national associations, professional groups, etc. Once identified, risks will be documented on the Fund's risk register, which is the primary control document for the subsequent analysis, control and monitoring of those risks. 2. Risk Analysis & Evaluation Once potential risks have been identified, the next stage of the process is to analyse and profile each risk. Risks will be assessed by considering the likelihood of the risk occurring and the impact if it does occur, with the score for likelihood multiplied by the score for impact to determine the current overall risk rating, as illustrated in the table below. Attributes: Risk rating Risk rating Risk rating Risk rating Greater than 90% This week Very High (A) A4 6 A3 12 A2 18 A1 24 70% to 90% Next week / this month High (B) B4 5 B3 10 B2 15 B1 20 50% to 70% This year Significant (C) C4 2 C3 4 C2 6 C1 8 30% to 50% Next year Medium (D) D4 1 D3 2 D2 3 D1 4 10% to 30% Next year to five years Low (E) E4 0 E3 0 E2 0 E1 0 Less than 10% Next ten years Very Low (F) F4 0 F3 0 F2 0 F1 0 Small (4) Medium (3) Large (2) Attributes: Financial Reputation Minor complaint, no media interest One off local media interest Adverse national media interest or sustained local interest Ministerial intervention, public inquiry, remembered for years IMPACT THREATS: up to £500k Between £500k and £10m Between £10m and £50m Over £50m Score Score Score Score L I K E L I H O O D Very Large (1) 14 DRAFT When considering the r isk rating, the Administering Authority will have regard to the existing controls in place and these will be summarised on the risk register. Key risks to the effective delivery of this Policy • Administration Risk • Investment Risk • Liquidity Risk • Pooling Risk • Cyber Risk • Key officers Risk • Governance Risk Within each category a series of risks are identified and upon each review an update of the status and any changes in relevant controls are made, the Corporate Director of Finance has responsibility to keep the risk register under review. The register is reviewed quarterly by Pensions Committee. Mitigating Risk Detailed controls to mitigate risk are specified in the Funds risk register. However, the following table contains examples of the controls in place to mitigate key risks across investment, governance, and administration: Area Risk Actions In Place Risk Category/Rating Administration Poor Performance of Outsourced Administrator leading to poor quality information supplied to both members and the Fund Actuary 1. Regular service meetings in place. 2. Monthly KPI reports are provided to track and monitor performance. 3. Critical errors cleared prior to transfer of valuation data to actuary. 4. Data Improvement plan developed, implemented and continuously reviewed. Yellow 15 DRAFT Failure of employers to deliver accurate and timely employee administration information 1. Training provided to educate and empower employers. 2. Regular updates provided to employers on the importance of accurate and timely information. 3. Regular newsletters and update from Hampshire to all employers. 4. Benchmarking and escalation to Employer contacts. 5. Regular meetings with payroll providers on behalf of Scheduled and Admitted bodies to escalate and manage backlog work. Red Investment Risk Inappropriate long-term investment strategy 1. Set Pension Fund specific strategic asset allocation benchmark after taking advice from investment advisers, balancing risk and reward, based on historical data. 2. Keep risk and expected reward from strategic asset allocation under review. 3. Review asset allocation formally on an annual basis. 4. Asset allocation reported quarterly to committee. 5. Officer and advisers actively monitor this risk. Yellow Active investment manager under-performance relative to benchmark 1. The structure includes active and passive mandates, and several managers are employed to diversify the risk of underperformance by any single manager. 2. Short term investment monitoring provides alerts on significant changes to key personnel or changes of process at the manager. 3. Regular monitoring measures performance in absolute terms and relative to the manager’s index benchmark, supplemented with an analysis of absolute returns against those underpinning the valuation. 4. Investment managers would be changed following persistent or severe under-performance. Green Liquidity Risk Liquidity on members dealings - risk that the fund is unable to settle member payments 1. The fund has an active daily cash management process in place to ensure there is sufficient cash available to meet all beneficiary payments. 2. The fund is significantly diversified in different asset classes with the option of distribution portfolios. Green Liquidity on asset management - risk of failure to liquidate assets or meet drawdown calls 1. The fund has an active daily cash management process in place to ensure there is sufficient cash available to meet any drawdown requirements. 2. Cash management includes investing large amounts of surplus cash to balance the investment portfolio or hold in liquid asset classes in anticipation of cash calls. 3. Officers liaise with managers where commitments have been made to keep track of predicted drawdown timescales. 4. The fund is significantly diversified in different asset classes and asset managers to ensure if there is a stop on anyone holding then the portfolio will continue to operate as normal. Yellow 16 DRAFT Pooling Risk Failure of the pool in management of funds / access to funds 1. Quarterly review meetings held with the LCIV pool. 2. Regular reporting out of the pool informing the fund of manager performance. 3. Swift communications received from the pool with staff turnover and concerns the fund may need to be aware. 4. Independent adviser carried out a review of governance for manager selection and manager monitoring to add assurance and discussion points with the pool. 5. Active Shareholder representation at General meeting and AGM. 6. Pool to attend Committee meetings where required, to provide assurance over progress and activity. Green Cyber Risk Cyber Security - Pension schemes hold large amounts of personal data and assets which can make them a target for fraudsters and criminals 1. Council wide policies and processes in place around: acceptable use of devices, email and internet use of passwords and other authentication home and mobile working data access, protection (including encryption), use and transmission of data. 2. Risk is on the Corporate risk register with risk mitigation in place. 3.All member and transactional data flowing from HCC and Hillingdon is sent via encryption software or via the employer portal. 4.Data between the fund, HCC and Hymans is distributed via upload to an encrypted portal. 5. Systems at Hillingdon and HCC are protected against viruses and other system threats. 6. HCC are accredited to ISO27001:2013 and signed up to the Pensions Regulator Pensions Pledge. HCC currently undergoing penetration testing to ensure they are PSN compliant. Yellow Key officers Risk Key officer risk - small team with specialists knowledge in key roles results in the Fund being vulnerable if staff leave 1. The team endeavours to maintain a broad knowledge across the pension function. 2. The Fund has access to specialist support should it be required. 3. The Fund has access to the interim employment market should it be required. Green 17 DRAFT Governance Risk Failure of the Fund’s governance to comply with statutory requirements and/or The Pension Regulator expectations including: Failure to ensure that Committee members’ knowledge and understanding of pension matters is robust and meets statutory requirements Failure to ensure that the Pension Board is effective in carrying out its role 1. Governance Policy Statement reviewed every 3 years. 2. Policies on range of issues, reviewed regularly. 3. Compliance with CIPFA Code of Practice on Public Sector Pensions Finance, Knowledge and Skills. 4. Programme of training sessions and access to external events. 5. Use of Regulator’s on-line toolkit. 6. A knowledge self-assessment framework for Committee and Board members to identify training requirements. 7. The Fund’s Annual Report includes details of Committee and Board members’ training activities. 8. Fund Governance Adviser in place. 9. Access is provided to CIPFA K&S Framework training modules. Yellow 18 DRAFT Costs All costs related to this Risk Policy are met directly by the Fund. Approval, Review and Consultation This Risk Policy was approved at the London Borough of Hillingdon Pension Committee meeting on 15 June 2016 and last amended on 30 March 2022. It will be formally reviewed and updated at least every three years or sooner if the risk management arrangements or other matters included within it merit reconsideration. Third Party risk such as late payment of contributions Contribution payments are monitored closely for accuracy and timeliness. A reporting process is in place to escalate any late/inaccurate payments to ensure all payments are received on 19 th of the subsequent month of payment due date as prescribed by the regulations. In respect of Investment Managers, internal control reports (SOC1 and ISAE3402) are received and reviewed regularly for any non- compliance issues. If management response to non- compliant issues is unsatisfactory, the matter is then addressed directly with the fund manager for further assurance. Controls assurance reports Fund manager Type of report Assurance obtained Reporting accountant Adams Street Partners SOC 1 Reasonable Assurance KPMG LLP AEW UK Ltd ISAE 3402 Reasonable Assurance BDO LLP Blackstone Investments Legal & General Investments Management AAF 01/20/ ISAE 3402 Reasonable Assurance KPMG LLP LCIV Third Party Controls Oversight Reasonable Assurance N/A M&G SOC 1 (IFDS Transfer Agency) Reasonable Assurance PWC Macquarie Infrastructure Real Assets Internal Controls Report Reasonable Assurance RMG Internal Audit (Macquarie Risk Management Group) 19 DRAFT Northern Trust Company SOC 1 Reasonable Assurance KPMG LLP Permira LLP SOC 1- Provided by Alterdomus, the fund’s custodians Reasonable Assurance Ernst & Young LLP UBS Asset Management SOC 1 Reasonable Assurance Ernst & Young LLP The risk management policy was introduced during 2016 as part of the work undertaken by the local Pension Board. The Committee regularly review Fund risks through the risk register. The policy is available at: https://www.hillingdon.gov.uk/pension-fund-documents#Policy%20documents 20 DRAFT B: FINANCIAL PERFO RMANCE The London Borough of Hillingdon Pension Fund is open to employees of the Council, non-teaching staff of local authority schools and certain other bodies eligible to join the Fund. Membership of the LGPS is not compulsory, although employees are automatically admitted to the Fund unless they elect otherwise. General Scheme membership Membership of the scheme is split between • A ctive members - those still contributing to the scheme. • D eferred members - those who are no longer active but have accrued benefits to be held until retirement or transfer to a new employer's scheme; and • P ensioner members - comprise former active members now drawing their benefits and dependents of former active members. The membership of the scheme analysed over the relevant membership profile is shown below: Membership Summary 2022/23 2021/22 2020/21 2019/20 Active Members 10,271 8,691 8,554 8,492 Pensioners/Dependants 7,857 7,673 7,200 6,884 Deferred 12,252 12,907 11,122 11,575 Total Membership 30,380 29,271 26,876 26,951 Membership Summary 2023/24 2022/23 2021/22 2020/21 Active Members 9,187 10,271 8,691 8,554 Pensioners/Dependants 8,389 7,857 7,673 7,200 Deferred 14,366 12,252 12,907 11,122 Total Membership 31,942 30,380 29,271 26,876 CONTRIBUTIONS Total Employee and Employer contributions (including transfers) into the Fund during 2023/24 amounted to £109.8m compared to £57.9m for the previous year. The 47.3% Increase from previous year is mainly attributable to the Bulk Transfers IN (£45.2m) received due to merger between HCUC & RUTC, thus increasing transfers in for 23/24 by £51.9m, coupled with employee’s pay increases during the year under review. Employee contributions ranged from 5.5% to 12.5% dependent on pensionable pay. The Fund actuary sets employer contribution rates and the rates that applied during 2023/24 were set from the 2022 valuation. Analytical Review of Performance 2023/24 2022/23 2021/22 2020/21 2019/20 Pension Fund Account £' 000 £' 000 £' 000 £' 000 £' 000 Dealings With Members Contributions 109,790 57,928 54,966 53,484 49,051 Pensions -69,462 -56,961 -57,077 -50,752 -54,058 21 DRAFT Net Additions/(Withdrawals) from Dealings with members 40,328 967 -2,111 2,732 -5,007 Management Expenses -13,474 -13,844 -10,832 -10,749 -9,882 Net Investment Returns 16,225 15,752 11,858 13,667 23,101 Change In Market Value 133,360 -83,578 102,033 170,519 -86,092 Taxes On Income -29 -28 -35 -22 -48 Net Increase/(Decrease) In Fund 176,410 -80,731 100,913 176,147 -77,928 The Key variances in members dealings were due to the following: • Pensions Paid in 2023/24 increased by 13% due to Pension increase of 10.1% in the year under review and increase in the number of Pensioners by 500. • The change in market value of investments was quite exponential in 23/24 due to the upturn in investments value as a result of worldwide buoyant equities market. This resulted in a swing of about £216m in change in market value from 2022/23 to 2023/24. Analysis of Operational Expenses 2023/24 2022/23 2021/22 2020/21 2019/20 £' 000 £' 000 £' 000 £' 000 £' 000 Administration Employees -325 -274 -384 -397 -324 Outsourced Administration Costs -683 -779 -954 -545 -481 Support Services Charges -158 -51 -47 -21 -20 -1,166 -1,104 -1,385 -963 -825 Governance and Oversight Investment Advisory Services -169 -53 -84 -113 -95 Governance & Compliance -179 -5 -29 -42 -36 External Audit -103 -50 -26 -26 -17 Actuarial Fees -61 -184 -86 -57 -142 -512 -292 -225 -238 -290 Investment Management Management Fees -7,374 -7,158 -5,984 -4,463 -6,485 Performance Fees -2,385 -2,267 -1,132 -2,143 -1,080 Transaction Costs -1,991 -2,937 -2,046 -2,881 -1,143 Custodian fees -46 -86 -60 -61 -59 -11,796 -12,448 -9,222 -9,548 -8,767 Total Operational Expenses -13,474 -13,844 -10,832 -10,749 -9,882 22 DRAFT Investment Fees by Category Management Fees Performance Fees Transaction Costs LGIM LPI 195,991.93 -8,533.64 LCIV 2,742,347.95 837,771.95 448,488.95 UBS Prop 963,298.08 520,688.67 LGIM 222,939.26 256,657.99 AEW 2,750,228.84 479,426.81 Adams Street 76,832.77 8,607.95 117.00 LGT 19,348.23 13120.26258 30,896.94 Permira 223,556.61 824,633.44 0.00 Macquarie 179,496.17 700,908.19 263,786.36 Custodian 45,608.77 7,419,648.61 2,385,041.80 1,991,529.08 11,796,219.49 The Key points to note from the operational expenses are as follows: • Overall Investment management expenses decreased by £370k, year on year, as a result of t ransaction costs decreasing by 33% due to fewer activities by fund managers. • Both Management and Performance Fees Increased cumulatively by £334k, but their effects on expenses were counteracted by lower transaction cost paid in 2023/24 • Increase in performance fees was mainly due to maturity profile and exits from investments by fund managers of alternative assets such as Private Debt (Permira) Infrastructure (Macquarie) and Private Equity (Both LGT and Adams Street). Thus, necessitating payment of performance fees as agreed. 23 DRAFT C: INVESTMENT POLICY AND PERFO RMANCE Investment Policy The Pension Fund Committee sets out a broad statement of the principles it has employed in establishing its investment and funding strategy in the Investment Strategy Statement (ISS). The ISS is prepared by the Pensions Committee after taking advice from the Fund's investment advisor ISIO and Clare Scott the independent governance advisor to the Fund, in accordance with the Regulations. The Investment Strategy Statement required by Regulation 7 must include: a) A requirement to invest money in a wide variety of investments; b) The authority’s assessment of the suitability of particular investments and types of investments; c) The authority’s approach to risk, including the ways in which risks are to be measured and managed; d) The authority’s approach to pooling investments, including the use of collective investment vehicles and shared services; e) The authority’s policy on how social, environmental or corporate governance considerations are taken into account in the selection, non-selection, retention and realisation of investments; and f) The authority’s policy on the exercise of rights (including voting rights) attaching to investments. The Investment Strategy Statement must also set out the maximum percentage of the total value of all investments of fund money, that it will invest in particular investments or classes of investment. Fund Value and Asset allocation The strategic asset allocation is agreed by the Pension Fund Committee based on the risk appetite and return on investments required to fulfil its paramount obligation of paying Pensions to members. The strategy benefits from input by both officers and the Fund’s investment advisors. Whilst managers can use their discretion to make minor variations in the allocation of investments between markets, the major movements are a combination of market gains, revised asset allocation and maturation of Private Equity and alternative investments during the year. Cash movement is incidental as the Fund has a zero cash policy but cash income from alternative investments during the year are received in the custody account pending reinvestment. 24 DRAFT The asset allocation as of 01 April 2023 to 31 March 2024 is as follows: Asset Category Opening Value 01 April 2023 Strategic Weighting Actual Weighting Closing Value 31 March 2024 Strategic Weighting Actual Weighting £'000 % % £'000 % % Equities 562,215 46 48 725,928 51 53 Diversified Growth Fund 47,406 0 4 44,559 0 3 Bonds 222,601 24 19 229,797 19 17 Property 147,050 12 12 143,822 7 11 Alternatives: Private Equity 6,346 0 1 5,521 0 1 Infrastructure 57,521 8 5 66,313 8 5 Private Credit 75,907 5 6 70,979 5 5 Opportunistic Dislocation 0 0 0 19,241 5 1 Long Lease Property 47,386 5 4 46,638 5 3 Cash 16,650 0 1 8,584 0 1 Total 1,183,082 100 100 1,361,382 100 100 25 DRAFT Asset Allocation V ariances The table above shows 4 % variances between Property allocation actual weightings compared to its strategic allocation. This attributable to asset allocation decisions taken to reduce Property allocation by 5% and fund an increase in Equities allocation from 46% to 51%. Strategic allocation to bonds was also reduced from 24% to 19% with the 5% reduction allocated to Opportunistic Dislocation Fund. Fund Value The Fund value Increased by £178m due upturn in investment market conditions witnessed during the year under review. The increase in value is mainly attributable to the performance of the passive equities portfolio managed by LGIM. 727 802 810 957 1,012 1,067 989 1,162 1,264 1,185 1,361 2013/14 2014/15 2015/16 2016/17 2017/18 2018/19 2019/20 2020/21 2021/22 2022/23 2023/24 £'000 Fund Value 26 DRAFT Funding Strategy Statem ent The Funding Strategy Statement sets out the aims and purpose of the pension fund and the responsibilities of the administering authority as regards funding the scheme. Its purpose is: • To establish a clear and transparent fund- specific strategy to identify how employers’ pension liabilities are best met going forward. • To support the regulatory requirement to maintain as nearly constant employer contribution rates as possible. • To take a prudent longer-term view of funding those liabilities The latest Funding Strategy Statement can be accessed via the Pension Fund Web page. https://www.hillingdon.gov.uk/pension-fund-documents#Strategy%20statements Investment Performance Overall absolute performance of the Fund for the year 2023/24 was 0.15% ahead of the overall benchmark. Other performance measurement intervals of three, five years and ten years, the annualised returns were behind the respective benchmarks as shown in the chart below. The since inception relative performance was 0.16% behind the benchmark. Performance of the Fund is measured against an overall strategic benchmark. Below this, each Fund Manager is given individual performance targets, which are linked to index returns for the assets they manage. Details of these targets can be found in the ISS. 11.48 4.54 4.68 6.10 11.33 5.39 5.91 6.72 0.00 2.00 4.00 6.00 8.00 10.00 12.00 14.00 1 year 3 Years 5 Years 10 Years Percentage (%) Fund Annualised Performance LB Hillingdon Strategic Benchmark 27 DRAFT Performance of fund manager s is reviewed quarterly by the Pension Fund Committee, which is supported by officers and the Fund’s investment and independent advisers. Investment Managers’ Performance The overall performance of each manager is measured over rolling three- year periods, as inevitably there will be short-term fluctuations in performance. Fund Manager Performance 2023/24 One Year Benchmark % % Adams Street -3.83 25.31 AEW UK 1.91 -0.70 Baillie Gifford - LCIV 15.98 25.56 LCIV Infrastructure Fund 4.99 8.12 LCIV Private Debt Fund 6.12 6.00 LGIM 1 - LCIV (Passive) 21.77 21.70 LGIM 2 - LCIV (Passive) -5.00 -4.98 LGIM LPI -1.58 4.30 LGIM - Future World Index 21.45 21.05 LCIV MAC Fund 11.52 9.62 LGT Capital Partners 0.96 25.31 M&G Investments -14.62 9.12 Macquarie Infrastructure 26.03 8.12 Permira 13.87 9.12 Ruffer LLP - LCIV -6.01 5.17 UBS Property -0.39 -0.70 -20 -15 -10 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 Percentage (%) Fund Manager Performance One Year Benchmark 28 DRAFT The portfolio is a mi xture of active and passively managed asset classes: • Targets for active fund mandates are set to out -perform the benchmark by a set percentage through active stock selection and asset allocation. Fund managers with active fund mandates are Adams Street, AEW UK, Baillie Gifford (LCIV), Churchill (LCIV), LGT Capital, M&G, Macquarie, Permira, Ruffer (LCIV), Stepstone (LCIV), UBS Property • Targets for passive funds are set to achieve the benchmark through investment in a stable portfolio. All LGIM mandates are passive. • Underperformance of the Fund was mainly attributable to underperforming Private Equity, LGIM LPI, M&G and LCIV Bailie Gifford Global Alpha portfolios. 29 DRAFT The following table shows the one-year, three-year, and five-year performance of the Fund’s managers. Historical Fund Managers Performance Returns and Benchmarks Manager Asset Class Active/Passive Pooled? 1 Year % 3 Years % (p.a.) 5 Years % (p.a.) Strategic Weight % Actual Weight % Benchmark Adams Street Private Equity Active No -3.83 0.26 7.63 0.0 0.0 3 Month SONIA AEW UK Property Active No 1.91 2.74 3.98 7.0 5.0 IPD UK PPFI All Balanced Funds Index LGIM Unit Trust Equity Equities Passive Yes 21.77 9.14 11.30 20.5 26.0 FTSE World Developed Equity index Currency Hedged, FTSE World Developed Equity index unHedged, FTSE Emerging Markets LGIM Index Linked Gilts Bonds Passive Yes -5.00 -9.88 -5.04 7.0 8.0 FTSE A Govt Index Linked Gilts All Stocks Index LGIM Future World Global Equity Equities Passive Yes 21.45 10.52 0.00 20.5 23.0 Solactive Legal & general ESG LGIM LPI Property Passive Yes -1.58 -2.13 0.00 5.0 3.0 Retail Price Index LCIV MAC Fund Bonds Active Yes 11.52 0.00 0.00 12.0 9.0 Sonia 3 Months +4.5%pa LGT Capital Partners Private Equity Active No 0.96 5.08 7.03 0.0 0.0 3 Month SONIA LCIV Infrastructure Fund Infrastructure Active Yes 4.99 7.59 0.00 5.0 4.0 Sonia 3 Months +3%pa 30 DRAFT LCIV Private Debt Fund Private Debt Active Yes 6.12 0.00 0.00 5.0 4.0 Absolute Return 6% LCIV Bailie Gifford Equities Active Yes 15.98 0.00 0.00 5.0 5.0 MSCI World ND +3% M&G Investments Private Debt Active No - 14.62 14.68 0.75 0.0 3 Month Sonia +4%pa Macquarie Infrastructure Infrastructure Active No 26.03 20.9 16.87 3.0 0.0 3 Month Sonia +3%pa Permira Private Debt Active No 13.87 8.82 7.19 0.0 1.0 3 Month Sonia +4%pa LCIV Ruffer LLP Diversified Growth Active Yes -6.01 0.65 5.00 0.0 3.0 Sonia Blackstone Diversified Growth/Dislocation Active No N/A N/A N/A 5.0 2.0 15% Net of Fees UBS Property Property Active No -0.39 2.43 1.49 0.0 5.0 IPD UK PPFI All Balanced Funds Index Overall, the Fund's assets performed above benchmark over 1 year but below benchmark over 3 and 5 years. Fund Managers’ Performances Adam Street Looking over the year the account has returned -3.83%, with an excess return of -23.26% and an information ratio of -2.16. As at 31/03/2024 the reported valuation of the portfolio was 3.73ml. AEW UK Over a one-year time frame the strategy has yielded 1.91%, with an excess return of 2.63% and a benchmark return of -0.69%. The market value of the portfolio reported as at 31/03/24 was 72.5ml. LCIV Global Alpha Growth Fund Over one year the manager has returned 15.98%, with an excess return of -7.63% and a benchmark return of 25.56%. Over the year the valuation of portfolio moved from 53.3ml to 61.9ml. 31 DRAFT LCIV Infrastructure Fund Over a one-year time frame the account has yielded 4.99%, with an excess return of -2.89% and an information ratio of -0.57. From inception, the portfolio has returned 4.73% and underperformed showing an excess return of -0.25%. LCIV Mac Fund Looking over the year the manager has yielded 11.52%, with an excess return of 1.73% and an information ratio of 0.22. From the valuations standpoint the market value reported as at 31/03/24 was 123.7ml LCIV Private Debt In the past year the mandate has yielded 6.12%, with an excess return of 0.11% and an information ratio of 0.02. Going back to inception, the strategy has recorded a 7.07% return and a 1.01% excess return. LCIV Ruffer Over the past year the account has returned -6.01%, with an excess return of -10.62% and a benchmark returns of 5.16%. During the year there were no contributions /withdrawals posted in the account. Legal & General 1 Over the past year the manager has returned 21.77%, with an excess return of 0.06bps and an information ratio of 0.76. Going back to inception, the fund has recorded a 9.48% return and a -0.09bps excess return. The reported valuations as at 31/03/24 was 359.6ml. Legal & General 2 The one-year return for the mandate is -5.00% and over the same time horizon the volatility as measured by standard deviation is 12.22%. The strategy has recorded a return of -1.93% since its inception. The market value of the portfolio as of the end of the quarter was £106.1M. LGIM - Future World Equity IND Over a one-year time frame the account has returned 21.45%, with an excess return of 0.33% and a tracking error of 0.08%. Going back to inception, the strategy has yielded 10.79% and outperformed showing an excess return of 0.17%. Over the year fund had only one major contribution in March 2024 amounting to 45.2ml. 32 DRAFT LGIM LPI Income Property In the past year the manager has yielded -1.58%, with an excess return of -5.64% and a benchmark return of 4.30%. From inception, the portfolio has recorded a -1.74% return and a -8.08% excess return. During the year there were no external flows reported in the account. LGT Over the past year the portfolio has returned 0.96%, with an excess return of -19.43% and an information ratio of -2.25. Since inception, the mandate has yielded 10.25%. M&G Investments In the last one year the strategy has returned -14.62%, with an excess return of -21.75% and an information ratio of -1.83. This portfolio as at 31/03/24 holds minimal valuation amounting to 488k. 33 DRAFT Comparative Performance The graph above shows the Fund’s investment returns in comparison with UK Local Authorities average over one, three and five-year periods. The performance difference is partly attributable to the cautious investment philosophy and risk averse asset allocation strategy adopted by the Fund. 11.48 4.54 4.68 9.20 5.30 6.50 0.00 2.00 4.00 6.00 8.00 10.00 12.00 14.00 1 year 3 Years 5 Years Percentage % LB Hillingdon Comparitive Performace LB Hillingdon Local Authority Universe 34 DRAFT Responsible Investing The Fund is committed to being a long-term steward of the assets in which it invests and expects this approach to protect and enhance the value of the Fund in the long term. External investment managers are expected to undertake appropriate monitoring of underlying investments with regard to their policies and practices on all issues that could present a material financial risk to the long-term performance of the Fund such as corporate governance and environmental factors, integrating material ESG factors within its investment analysis and decision-making. The Fund’s approach to engagement recognises the importance of working in partnership to magnify the voice and maximise the influence of investors as owners. The Fund expects its investment managers to work collaboratively with others if this will lead to greater influence and deliver improved outcomes for shareholders and more broadly. The fund appreciates that to gain the attention of companies in addressing governance concerns; collaborating with other investors sharing similar concerns may be an effective tool. The Fund applied for and was granted signatory status of the 2020 UK Stewardship Code on 02 September 2022. Renewal application was successful and approved by the FRC on 24 August 2023 and we are still signatories on the list as of 21/02/2024. 51 19 13 5 5 7 0 51 17 16 1 4 8 3 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 Equities Bonds Alternatives Diversified Growth/Dislocation Private Debt Property Cash LB Hillingdon Comparitive Asset Allocation as of 31 March 2024 Asset Allocation Comparison Local Authority Universe % Asset Allocation Comparison LB Hillingdon % 35 DRAFT Exercise of voting r ights To ensure effective and consistent use of the voting rights, investment managers are tasked with exercising the voting rights accruing to the Fund. If important issues affecting local residents do emanate from actions of invested companies, the Pensions Committee will contact investment managers in charge of assets of such a company to make their opinion known and ask for such to be presented at meetings with the company or reflected in their voting pattern. The graph above shows a breakdown of voting activities by reporting, Fund’s investment managers during 2023-24 financial year (LGIM & LCIV) . LGIM were the most active in terms of voting activities by attending and voting at 15,130 meetings . All managers’ voting activity relates to the managers ’ votes cast for the funds rather than Hillingdon specific shares. 14,100 140,304 105,763 33,320 1,2211,030 15,120 11,440 1,948 265 0 20,000 40,000 60,000 80,000 100,000 120,000 140,000 160,000 Meetings Resolutions Votes With Against Abstention Fund Managers' Voting Data 2023-24 LGIM LCIV 36 DRAFT Custody The Northern Trus t Company acts as the global custodian of the Fund's assets. As part of its normal procedures Northern Trust holds all assets in safe custody, settles trades, securities lending, collects dividend income, provides data for corporate actions, liaises closely with all of the investment managers and reports on all activity on a monthly and quarterly basis. Where holdings are in pooled funds, the underlying assets held by the relevant funds' custodian are reported to Northern Trust. Regular service reviews take place with Northern Trust to ensure continuous monitoring of the Fund’s requirements. Separation of Responsibilities The Fund employs a global custodian (Northern Trust), independent to the investment managers, to be responsible for the safekeeping of all the monies invested. Northern Trust is responsible for the settlement of all investment transactions and the collection of income. As of the 31 st of March 2024, the Fund’s bank accounts were held with Nat West. Funds not immediately required to pay benefits are held as interest bearing operational cash with the bankers and the custodian. The actuary, Hymans Robertson is responsible for assessing the long- term financial position of the pension fund and issues a Rates and Adjustments statement following their triennial valuation of the Pension Fund, which sets out the minimum contributions which each employer in the Fund is obliged to pay over the following three years. 15,130 155,424117,203 35,268 1,486 Consolidated Voting Breakdown 2023-24 Meetings Resolutions Votes With Against Abstention 37 DRAFT D. SCHEME ADMINISTRATION Service Delivery Administration of the scheme is undertaken under delegated authority by the Pensions team at Hampshire Pension Services. The administrator is responsible for: • Pensions Administration of the LGPS on behalf of London Borough of Hillingdon as the Administering Authority in accordance with relevant legislation and Committee decisions. • Exploiting information technology to improve service standards and efficiency. Hampshire and LB Hillingdon are working closely together to provide a full administration service covering the collecting, and reconciling of pension contributions, transfers of pension rights in to and out of the LGPS and deferred benefits, payment of pensions, calculations for retirements, re-employment, and death benefits. The agreement with Hampshire details agreed performance targets and key performance indicators are reviewed quarterly at Pensions Committee and Pensions Board. PERFORMANCE INDICATORS The contract with Hampshire Pension Services includes several key performance indicators included to ensure that service to members of the pension fund is effective. The targets are set out below, along with actual performance. Performance indicators for 2023/24 Performance indicators for all measurable metrics Improved throughout 2023/24 due largely to the impact of the new administration provider, Hampshire Pension Services (HPS). Type of Case 0-5 days 6-10 days 11-15 days16-20 days 21-30 days 31-40 days Total % completed on time Active Retirement 99 42 17 0 0 0 158 100% Deferred Retirement 109 131 64 0 0 0 304 100% Estimates 76 236 192 0 0 0 504 100% Deferred Benefits 76 18 55 237 1426 0 1,812 100% Transfers In & Out 7 11 4 0 0 0 22 100% Divorc e 12 4 15 0 0 0 31 100% Refunds 13 121 90 0 0 0 224 100% Rejoiners 27 39 56 60 0 0 182 100% Interfunds 110 92 204 0 0 0 406 100% Death Benefits 123 34 40 0 0 0 197 100% GRAND TOTAL 652 728 737 297 1426 0 3,840 100% Time to Complete 38 DRAFT Below are tables of ot her Administration key performance indicators of activities undertaken through 2023/24. Table A - Total number of casework Ref Casework KPI Total number of cases open as at 31 March (starting position) Total number of new cases created in the year (1 April to 30 March) Total number of cases completed in 2023/24 Total % of cases completed in 2023/24 Total number of cases set up but not due until 2024/25 Total number of cases completed in 2022/23 Total % of cases completed in 2022/23 A1 Deaths recorded of active, deferred, pensioner and dependent 14 183 197 100% 50 185 100% A2 New dependent member benefits 23 79 102 100% 13 116 100% A3 Deferred member retirements 10 294 304 100% 28 299 100% A4 Active member retirements 2 156 158 100% 4 120 100% A5 Deferred benefits 503 1,309 1,812 100% 101 1,119 100% A6 Transfers in (including interfunds in, club transfers) 4 158 162 100% 120 146 100% A7 Transfers out (including interfunds out, club transfers) 16 282 298 100% 19 193 100% A8 Refunds 52 172 224 100% 2 159 100% A9 Divorce quotations issued 5 26 31 100% 3 28 100% A10 Actual divorce cases 0 0 0 100% 1 0 100% A11 Member estimates requested either by scheme member and employer 126 378 504 100% 102 603 100% A12 New joiner notifications 0 1 2 100% 4 2,644 100% A13 Aggregation cases 23 159 182 100% 47 150 100% A14 Optants out received after 3 months membership 0 1 2 100% 4 33 100% Total 778 3,198 3,978 498 5,795 Table B - Time taken to process casework Ref Casework KPI Suggested fund target* Actual fund target % completed within fund target in year % completed in previous year B1 Communication issued with acknowledgement of death of active, d f d i d d d t b 5 days 5 days 100% 100% B2 Communication issued confirming the amount of dependents pension 10 days 15 days 100% 100% B3 Communication issued to deferred member with pension and lump sum ti ( t ti ) 15 days 15 days 100% 100% B4 Communication issued to active member with pension and lump sum ti ( t ti ) 15 days 15 days 100% 100% B5 Communication issued to deferred member with confirmation of i d l ti ( t l) 15 days 15 days 100% 100% B6 Communication issued to active member with confirmation of pension d l ti ( t l) 15 days 15 days 100% 100% B7 Payment of lump sum (both actives and deferreds) 15 days 10 days 100% 100% B8 Communication issued with deferred benefit options 30 days 30 days 100% 100% B9 Communication issued to scheme member with completion of transfer i 15 days 15 days 100% 100% B10 Communication issued to scheme member with completion of transfer t 15 days 15 days 100% 100% B11 Payment of refund 10 days 15 days 100% 100% B12 Divorce quotation 45 days 15 days 100% 100% B13 Communication issued following actual divorce proceedings i.e l it i f P i S h i O d 15 days 15 days 100% 100% B14 Communication issued to new starters 40 days 20 days 100% 100% B15 Member estimates requested by scheme member and employer 15 days 15 days 100% 100% 39 DRAFT Table C - Communications and engagement Ref Engagement with online portals Percentage as at 31 C1 % of active members registered 50.56% C2 % of deferred member registered 37.35% C3 % of pensioner and survivor members 42.37% C4 % total of all scheme members registered for self-service 43.06% C5 Number of registered users by age See separate table C6 % of all registered users that have logged onto the service in the last 12 54.91% Communication C7 Total number of telephone calls received in year 2,568 C8 Total number of email and online channel queries received 2,941 C9 Number of scheme member events held in year (total of in-person and 0 C10 Number of employer engagement events held in year (in-person and 34 C11 Number of active members who received a one-to-one (in-person and 0 C12 Number of times a communication (i.e newsletter) issued to: a)Active members 3 (ABS, PSS, b)Deferred members 2 (ABS, newslet ter) c)Pensioners 3 (Payslip/P60, newsletter, life C5: Registrations by age Under 30 30 - 44 45-54 55-64 65-74 75+ Total 514 2,476 2,781 4,283 2,284 799 13,137 Administration KPI table D – Resources Ref Resources D1 Total number of all administration staff (FTE) 9.5 D2 Average service length of all administration staff 6 years 2 months D3 Staff vacancy rate as % 11.20% D4 Ratio of all administration staff to total number of scheme members (all 3,194 D5 Ratio of administration staff (excluding management) to total number of 3,793 Table E - Data Quality Annual Benefit Statements Active Deferred E1 Percentage of annual benefit statements issued as at 31 August 98.69% 100.00% Short commentary if less than 100% 164 statements outstanding at 31/8/23, 157 of which needed data from employers. 7 Data category E3 Common data score 89% E4 Scheme specific data score 89% E5 Percentage of active, deferred and pensioner members recorded as 'gone away' with no home address held, or

Hillingdon Pension Fund Outline Audit planning report Year ending 31 March 2024 April 2024 The UK firm Ernst & Young LLP is a limited liability partnership registered in England and Wales with registered number OC300001 and is a member firm of Ernst & Young Global Limited. A list of members’ names is available for inspection at 1 More London Place, London SE1 2AF, the firm’s principal place of business and registered office. Ernst & Young LLP is a multi-disciplinary practice and is authorised and regulated by the Institute of Chartered Accountants in England and Wales, the Solicitors Regulation Authority and other regulators. Further details can be found at http://www.ey.com/UK/en/Home/Legal. xApri30 18 April 2024 Dear Audit Committee Members Outline Audit Planning Report Attached is our Outline Audit Planning Report for the forthcoming meeting of the Audit Committee. The purpose of this report is to provide the Audit Committee of Hillingdon Pension Fund (the Fund) with a basis to review our proposed audit approach and scope forthe 2023/24 audit, in accordance with the requirements of the Local Audit and Accountability Act 2014, the National Audit Office’s 2020 Code of Audit Practice, the Statement of Responsibilities issued by Public Sector Audit Appointments (PSAA) Ltd, auditing standards and other professional requirements, but also to ensure that our audit is aligned with the Audit Committee’s service expectations. We have not yet fully completed our planning at the date of issue of this report and therefore this is an outline plan. If there are any changes to the risks we have identified or our planned response to these risks, once we have fully concluded our planning, we will update the Committee. This report summarises our initial assessment of the key risks driving the development of an effective audit for the Fund. We have aligned our audit approach and scope with these. The Audit Committee, as the Fund’s body charged with governance, has an essential role in ensuring that it has assurance over both the quality of the draft financial statements prepared by management and the Fund’s wider arrangements to support the delivery of a timely and efficient audit. Where this is not done it will impact the level of resource needed to discharge our responsibilities. We draw Audit Committee members and officers attention to the Public Sector Audit Appointment Limited’s Statement of Responsibilities (paragraphs 26-28) which clearly set out what is expected of audited bodies in preparing their financial statements (see Appendix A). Audit Committee London Borough of Hillingdon Uxbridge UB8 1UW Address The UK firm Ernst & Young LLP is a limited liability partnership registered in England and Wales with registered number OC300001 and is a member firm of Ernst & Young Global Limited. A list of members’ names is available for inspection at 1 More London Place, London SE1 2AF, the firm’s principal place of business and registered office. Ernst & Young LLP is a multi-disciplinary practice and is authorised and regulated by the Institute of Chartered Accountants in England and Wales, the Solicitors Regulation Authority and other regulators. Further details can be found at http://www.ey.com/UK/en/Home/Legal. This report is intended solely for the information and use of the Audit Committee, and management, and is not intended to be and should not be used by anyone other than these specified parties. We welcome the opportunity to discuss this report with you on 30 April 2024 as well as understand whether there are other matters which you consider may influence our audit. Yours faithfully Debbie Hanson Partner For and on behalf of Ernst & Young LLP Enc Confidential — All Rights Reserved Contents Public Sector Audit Appointments Ltd (PSAA) issued the “Statement of responsibilities of auditors and audited bodies”. It is available from the PSAA website ( https://www.psaa.co.uk/managing-audit- quality/statement-of-responsibilities-of-auditors-and-audited-bodies/statement-of-responsibilities-of-auditors-and-audited-bodies-from-2023-24-audits/ ). The Statement of responsibilities serves as the formal terms of engagement between appointed auditors and audited bodies. It summarises where the different responsibilities of auditors and audited bodies begin and end, and what is to be expected of the audited body in certain areas. The “Terms of Appointment and further guidance (updated July 2021)” issued by the PSAA ( https://www.psaa.co.uk/managing-audit-quality/terms-of-appointment/terms-of-appointment-and-further- guidance-1-july-2021/) sets out additional requirements that auditors must comply with, over and above those set out in the National Audit Office Code of Audit Practice (the Code) and in legislation, and covers matters of practice and procedure which are of a recurring nature. This report is made solely to the Audit Committee and management of Hillingdon Pension Fund. Our work has been undertaken so that we might state to the Audit Committee and management of Hillingdon Pension Fund those matters we are required to state to them in this report and for no other purpose. To the fullest extent permitted by law we do not accept or assume responsibility to anyone other than the Audit Committee and management of Hillingdon Pension Fund for this report or for the opinions we have formed. It should not be provided to any third-party without our prior written consent. Audit risks02 Overview of our 2023/24 audit strategy 01 Independence07 Appendices08Audit timeline06 Audit materiality03 Audit team05 Scope of our audit04 Hillingdon Pension Fund – Outline Audit planning report 4 Overview of our 2023/24 audit strategy01 Hillingdon Pension Fund - Outline Audit planning report 5 Confidential — All Rights Reserved Overview of our 2023/24 audit strategy Hillingdon Pension Fund – Outline Audit planning report 6 The following ‘dashboard’ summarises the significant accounting and auditing matters outlined in this report. It seeks to provide the Audit Committee with an overview of our initial risk identification for the upcoming audit and any changes in risks identified in the current year. We continue to assess risk throughout the audit. We will bring any changes in our risk assessment to the attention of the Audit Committee. Audit risks and areas of focus Risk / area of focus Risk identified Change from PY Details Misstatements due to fraud or error Fraud risk No change in risk, but change in focus As identified in ISA 240, management is in a unique position to perpetrate fraud because of its ability to manipulate accounting records directly or indirectly and prepare fraudulent financial statements by overriding controls that would otherwise appear to be operating effectively. We perform mandatory procedures to address this risk regardless of specifically identified fraud risks. In the prior year, we identified the risk of manipulation of investment income and valuation as the most likely way management would seek to override controls and presented this as a specific fraud risk. In the current year, we have associated the specific risk to investment income only as we consider that this is more susceptible to manipulation than investment valuation. Valuation of level 3 (complex) investments Significant risk No change in risk or focus We consider the valuation of level 3 (complex) investments to be a significant risk due to the unobservable inputs making up the valuations. Significant judgements are made by the investment managers to value these investments whose prices are not publicly available. The value of investments valued at level 3 as at 31-3-23 was £245m. The Fund’s private debt investments are categorised as being at level 3 in the fair value hierarchy. This is due to the uncertainty associated with the valuation of such investments where the valuations are not based on observable inputs. Classification of level 2 and level 3 investments. Significant risk Increase in risk no change in focus In 2022/23, our audit of fair value hierarchies of the Pension Fund’s assets identified an error in the classification of investments which resulted in £64 million of investments being reclassified from level 2 to level 3. There was a similar error in the 2021/22 year of £47 million. As a result of these errors, we have increased this risk from an inherent risk in the prior year to a significant risk in 2022/23. There is an element of judgment in the fair value hierarchy classification and we will therefore scrutinise and challenge the Pension Fund’s classifications in the current year. IAS 26 – Actuarial present value of promised retirement benefits Inherent risk No change in risk or focus We consider the valuation of IAS 26 disclosures to have a higher degree of inherent risk because of the level of estimation uncertainty resulting from the calculation using a number of underlying assumptions. The actuary is required to make assumptions on salary increases, discount rates, pension rates, scheme member longevity and other variables. Confidential — All Rights Reserved Overview of our 2023/24 audit strategy Hillingdon Pension Fund - Outline Audit planning report 7 Planning materiality Materiality for the Fund has been set at £11.8 million, which represents 1% of net assets in the final draft 2022/23 financial statements. We consider net assets, to be the appropriate basis of materiality for the Fund due to the scale and interest to users of the financial statements. This is the same basis as that used in the prior year. Performance materiality Audit differences £11.8 m £8.9 m Performance materiality has been set at £8.9 million, which represents 75% of materiality. This is consistent with the prior year. Our assessment reflects the strong control environment present at the Fund and our expectation of a relatively low level of misstatements based on results from previous audits. £0.59m We will report all uncorrected misstatements relating to the primary statements (fund account and net asset statement) greater than £0.59 million. Other misstatements identified will be communicated to the extent that they merit the attention of the Audit Committee. Materiality Confidential — All Rights Reserved Overview of our 2023/24 audit strategy Hillingdon Pension Fund - Outline Audit planning report 8 This Outline Audit Planning Report covers the work that we plan to perform to provide you with:  Our audit opinion on whether the financial statements of the Fund give a true and fair view of the financial transactions of the Fund during the year ended 31 March 2024 and the amount and disposition at that date of its assets and liabilities for 2023/24.  Our opinion on the consistency of the Fund financial statements within the Fund annual report with the published financial statements of the London Borough of Hillingdon. Our audit will also include the mandatory procedures that we are required to perform in accordance with applicable laws and auditing standards. When planning the audit we take into account several key inputs:  Strategic, operational and financial risks relevant to the financial statements;  Developments in financial reporting and auditing standards;  The quality of systems and processes;  Changes in the business and regulatory environment; and,  Management’s views on all of the above. By considering these inputs, our audit is focused on the areas that matter and our feedback is more likely to be relevant to the Fund. Taking the above into account, and as articulated in this Outline Audit planning report, our professional responsibilities require us to independently assess the risks associated with providing an audit opinion and undertake appropriate procedures in response to those risks. Our Terms of Appointment with PSAA allow them to vary the fee dependent on “the auditors assessment of risk and the work needed to meet their professional responsibilities”. Therefore to the extent any of these or any other risks are relevant in the context of the Fund’s audit, we set those within this Outline Audit planning report and we will continue to discuss these with management as to the impact on the scale fee. Effects of climate-related matters on financial statements Public interest in climate change is increasing. We are mindful that climate-related risks may have a long timeframe and therefore while risks exist, the impact on the current period financial statements may not be immediately material to the Fund. It is, nevertheless, important to understand the relevant risks to make this evaluation. In addition, understanding climate-related risks may be relevant in the context of qualitative disclosures in the notes to the financial statements. We make inquiries regarding climate-related risks on every audit as part of understanding the entity and its environment. As we re-evaluate our risk assessments throughout the audit, we continually consider the information that we have obtained to help us assess the level of inherent risk. Audit scope and approach We intend to take a substantive audit approach. Audit scope Confidential — All Rights Reserved Overview of our 2023/24 audit strategy Hillingdon Pension Fund - Outline Audit planning report 9 The audit will be led by Debbie Hanson as the Partner in Charge. Debbie will be supported by Ruth Plucknett, Manager, and Josna Jose , Lead Senior. See Section 05 for further details of the audit team and the areas where management and EY specialists are expected to provide input for the current year audit. Audit team Timeline Details of the planned timeline for delivery of the audit are set out in Section 06. We expect to have fully completed our risk assessment and work to walkthrough the Fund’s key systems and processes, including work to comply with the enhanced requirements of ISA (UK) 315 (Revised), by the end of April 2024. Our detailed testing of balances and disclosure in the financial statements is expected to be complete by the end of October 2024. Our reporting and presentation to you of our final Audit Results Report is however yet to be confirmed, as we need to take into accountthe Department for Levelling-up, Housing and Communities (DLUHC) and Financial Reporting Council (FRC) measures to address local audit delays, and the associated impact on the Council and Pension Fund audits. Confidential — All Rights Reserved Audit risks02 Hillingdon Pension Fund - Outline Audit planning report 10 Confidential — All Rights Reserved Our response to significant risks Hillingdon Pension Fund - Outline Audit planning report 11 We have set out the significant risks (including fraud risks denoted by*) identified for the current year audit along with the rationale and expected audit approach. The risks identified below may change to reflect any significant findings or subsequent issues we identify during the audit. The financial statements as a whole are not free of material misstatements whether caused by fraud or error. As identified in ISA (UK) 240, management is in a unique position to perpetrate fraud because of its ability to manipulate accounting records directly or indirectly and prepare fraudulent financial statements by overriding controls that otherwise appear to be operating effectively. We identify and respond to this fraud risk on every audit engagement. We will undertake our standard procedures to address fraud risk, which include:  Inquiry of management about risks of fraud and the controls put in place to address those risks.  Understanding the oversight given by those charged with governance of management’s processes over fraud.  Consideration of the effectiveness of management’s controls designed to address the risk of fraud. Performing mandatory procedures regardless of specifically identified fraud risks, including:  Testing the appropriateness of journal entries recorded in the general ledger and other adjustments made in the preparation of the financial statements.  Assessing accounting estimates for evidence of management bias.  Evaluating the business rationale for any significant unusual transactions. We will utilise our data analytics capabilities to assist with our work. We have identified the risk of manipulation of investment income as the most likely way management would seek to override controls.Our approach will focus on testing to confirm that investment income provided through the custodian and fund managers is appropriately journaled into the financial statements. Misstatements due to fraud or error* What is the risk? What will we do? Confidential — All Rights Reserved Our response to significant risks (cont’d) Hillingdon Pension Fund - Outline Audit planning report 12 We consider the valuation of level 3 (complex) investments to be of a higher degree of inherent risk due to the unobservable inputs making up the valuations. Significant judgements are made by the investment managers or administrators to value these investments whose prices are not publicly available. The value of investments valued at level 3 as at 31-3- 23 was £245m. The Fund’s private debt and infrastructure investments are categorised as being at level 3 in the fair value hierarchy. We will:  Assess the competence of valuation experts through review and analysis of ISAE 3402 internal control reports issued on the fund managers and the custodian;  Where the ISAE 3402 reports are not issued at 31 March 2024, we will obtain and review bridging letters;  Review the control reports for any issues or qualifications which impact the valuation controls over the funds.  Review the basis of valuation for property investments and other unquoted investments, assessing the appropriateness of the valuation methods used;  Where available, review the latest audited accounts for the relevant underlying investment funds and compare the net asset values with the valuation of the assets in the accounts of the Fund. We will also ensure there are no matters arising that highlight weaknesses in the Fund’s valuation;  If the latest audited accounts are issued at a different date compared to the reporting date of the Fund, we will perform roll forward procedures to support the valuation of the investments as of 31 March 2024, such as benchmark indexation for similar assets and analysis of cash movements in the gap period and understand what the Pension Fund has done to assess how the valuations are still materially correct as at 31 March 2024; and  Perform analytical procedures by checking the valuation output for reasonableness against our own expectations. Valuation of level 3 (complex) investments What will we do?What is the risk? Confidential — All Rights Reserved Our response to significant risks (cont’d) Hillingdon Pension Fund - Outline Audit planning report 13 The classification of investments using the fair value hierarchy requires the accurate identification of observable and unobservable inputs and requires a high level of professional judgement, We have identified errors in the fair value hierarchies of the pension fund assets in the last two years of audit. In 2022/23 the error was £64 million of investments reclassified from level 2 to level 3 and in 2021/22 it was £47.8 million. We have, as a result, raised this from an inherent risk to a significant risk. We will:  Gain an understanding of the Pension Fund’s approach to classification and the nature of its investments.  Assess the significance of market inputs used in the hierarchy valuation as well as the sources of the inputs.  Confirm the basis of the valuation of each class of investment asset and assess whether it is appropriate  Obtain quoted prices directly from independent sources and compare these with the Pension Fund’s assessment of observable market inputs ( bid market price, current yields, and closing bid price) to confirm correct classification.  Test accounting entries have been correctly processed in the financial statements. Classification of level 2 and level 3 investments What will we do?What is the risk? Confidential — All Rights Reserved Other areas of audit focus Hillingdon Pension Fund - Outline Audit planning report 14 IAS 26 (inherent risk) We consider the valuation of IAS 26 to be of a higher degree of inherent risk because of the level of estimation uncertainty resulting from the calculation using a number of underlying assumptions. The actuary is required to make assumptions on salary increases, discount rates, pension rates, scheme member longevity and other variables. Our response: Key areas of challenge and professional judgement What is the risk/area of focus, and the key judgements and estimates? We will:  Assess the competence of management experts, Hymans Robertson;  Engage with the NAO’s consulting actuary and our EY Pensions team to review whether the IAS26 approach applied by the actuary is reasonable and compliant with IAS26;  Leverage the work of EY Pensions undertake as part of the London Borough of Hillingdon to create an auditor’s estimate for the pension liability, to gain assurance over the process and assumptions used to estimate the present value of future retirement benefits; and  Ensure that the IAS26 disclosure is in line with the relevant standards and consistent with the valuation provided by the actuary. We have identified other areas of the audit, that have not been classified as significant risks, but are still important when considering the risks of material misstatement to the financial statements and disclosures and therefore may be key audit matters we will include in our audit report. Confidential — All Rights Reserved Tysers UK Group Audit materiality03 Hillingdon Pension Fund - Outline Audit planning report 15 Confidential — All Rights Reserved Materiality For planning purposes, materiality for 2023/24 has been set at £11.8 million. This represents 1% of the Fund’s net assets in the draft 2022/23 financial statements. We consider net assets to be the appropriate basis of materiality for the Fund due to the scale and interest to users of the financial statements. We have provided supplemental information about audit materiality in Appendix D. Planning materiality — the amount over which we anticipate misstatements would influence the economic decisions of a user of the financial statements. Performance materiality — the amount we use to determine the extent of our audit procedures. We have set performance materiality at 75% of planning materiality. This is based on our expectation of few misstatements for the audit. Audit difference threshold — we propose that misstatements identified below this threshold are deemed clearly trivial. We will report to you all uncorrected misstatements over this amount. Other uncorrected misstatements, such as reclassifications and misstatements in the disclosures and corrected misstatements will be communicated to the extent that they merit the attention of the Audit Committee, or are important from a qualitative perspective. We request that the Audit Committee confirm their understanding of, and agreement to, these materiality and reporting levels. Hillingdon Pension Fund - Outline Audit planning report 16 Fund Materiality Key definitions Net Assets £1,185m Planning materiality £11.8m Performance materiality £8.9m Audit differences £0.59m Confidential — All Rights Reserved Scope of our audit04 Hillingdon Pension Fund - Outline Audit planning report 17 Confidential — All Rights Reserved Under the Code of Audit Practice, our principal objectives are to undertake work to support the provision of our audit report to the audited body and to satisfy ourselves that the audited body has made proper arrangements for securing economy, efficiency and effectiveness in its use of resources to the extent required by the relevant legislation and the requirements of the Code. We issue an audit report that covers: Our opinion on the financial statements:  whether the financial statements give a true and fair view of the financial transactions of the Fund during the year ended 31 March 2024 and the amount and disposition at that date of its assets and liabilities for 2023/24; and  whether the financial statements have been prepared properly in accordance with the relevant accounting and reporting framework as set out in legislation, applicable accounting standards or other direction. Consistency statement: Our opinion on the consistency of the Fund financial statements within the Fund annual report with the published financial statements of London Borough of Hillingdon Council. Our opinion on other matters: whether other information published together with the audited financial statements is consistent with the financial statements. We are also required to discharge our statutory duties and responsibilities as established by the Local Audit and Accountability Act 2014 and Code of Audit Practice. Procedures required by standards  Addressing the risk of fraud and error;  Significant disclosures included in the financial statements;  Entity-wide controls;  Reading other information contained in the financial statements and reporting whether it is inconsistent with our understanding and the financial statements; and  Auditor independence. Hillingdon Pension Fund - Outline Audit planning report 18 Objective and Scope of our Audit scoping Audit process and strategy Confidential — All Rights Reserved Our audit involves: ► Identifying and understanding the key processes and internal controls; ► Substantive tests of detail of transactions and amounts; ► Reliance on the work of other auditors where appropriate; and ► Reliance on the work of experts in relation to areas such as disclosures based on actuarial reports. Our initial assessment of the key processes across the Fund has not identified any processes where we will seek to test key controls, either manual or IT. Our audit strategy will, as in previous years, follow a fully substantive approach. This will involve testing the figures within the financial statements rather than looking to place reliance on the controls within the financial systems. We assess this as the most efficient way of carrying out our work and obtaining the level of audit assurance required to conclude that the financial statements are not materially misstated. Analytics We will use our computer-based analytics tools to enable us to capture whole populations of your financial data, in particular journal entries. These tools: ► Help identify specific exceptions and anomalies which can then be subject to more traditional substantive audit tests; and ► Give greater likelihood of identifying errors than random sampling techniques. We will report the findings from our process and analytics work, including any significant weaknesses or inefficiencies identified and recommendations for improvement, to management and the Audit Committee. Internal Audit We will review Internal Audit plans and the results of their work. We will reflect the findings from these reports, together with reports from any other work completed in the year, where they raise issues that could have an impact on the financial statements. Hillingdon Pension Fund - Outline Audit planning report 19 Audit Process Overview Audit process and strategy Confidential — All Rights Reserved Hillingdon Pension Fund - Outline Audit planning report 20 Audit team05 Confidential — All Rights Reserved Audit team Debbie Hanson* Audit partner Ruth Plucknett Engagement manager Josna Jose Lead senior 21 * Key Audit Partner Specialist (Specialist PWC consulting actuary and EY Pensions Advisory team) London Borough of Hillingdon Audit Planning Report 2023/24 Confidential — All Rights Reserved Use of specialists When auditing key judgements, we are often required to use the input and advice provided by specialists who have qualifications and expertise not possessed by the core audit team. The areas where management and EY specialists are expected to provide input for the current year audit are: Area Specialists IAS 26 disclosure Management Specialist – Hymans Robertson EY Specialist – PwC (Consulting Actuary to the NAO on behalf of audit providers) and EY Pensions Advisory Team In accordance with Auditing Standards, we will evaluate each specialist’s professional competence and objectivity, considering their qualifications, experience and available resources, together with the independence of the individuals performing the work. We also consider the work performed by the specialist in light of our knowledge of the Fund’s business and processes and our assessment of audit risk in the particular area. For example, we would typically perform the following procedures: ► Analyse source data and make inquiries as to the procedures used by the specialist to establish whether the source data is relevant and reliable ► Assess the reasonableness of the assumptions and methods used ► Consider the appropriateness of the timing of when the specialist carried out the work ► Assess whether the substance of the specialist’s findings are properly reflected in the financial statements Hillingdon Pension Fund - Outline Audit planning report 22 Confidential — All Rights Reserved Hillingdon Pension Fund – Outline Audit planning report 23 Audit timeline06 Confidential — All Rights Reserved Timetable of communication and deliverables Below is a draft timetable showing the key stages of the audit and the deliverables we have agreed to provide to you through the audit cycle in 2023/24. From time to time matters may arise that require immediate communication with the Audit Committee and we will discuss them with the Audit Committee Chair as appropriate. We will also provide updates on corporate governance and regulatory matters as necessary. Audit phase 2024 Timetable Deliverables Planning: Risk assessment and setting of scopes March/April This Audit Planning Report to be presented to the 30 April 2024 meeting of the Audit Committee. Walkthrough of key systems and processes March/April Execution of audit procedures on the financial statements September - October Audit completion procedures November * Audit Results Report shared with management and, in turn, the Audit Committee. Audit conclusion November * Audit opinion and completion certificates. The Auditor’s Annual Report to bring together all of our work’s over the year. This will be a joint report with the London Borough of Hillingdon Hillingdon Pension Fund - Outline Audit planning report 24 Timeline * The final timetable is yet to be confirmed as we need to take into account the Department for Levelling-up, Housing and Communities (DLUHC) and Financial Reporting Council (FRC) measures to address local audit delays, and the consequent impact on the Council and Pension Fund audits. Confidential — All Rights Reserved Hillingdon Pension Fund - Outline Audit planning report 25 Independence07 Confidential — All Rights Reserved Introduction In addition, during the course of the audit, we are required to communicate with you whenever any significant judgements are made about threats to objectivity and independence and the appropriateness of safeguards put in place, for example, when accepting an engagement to provide non-audit services. We ensure that the total amount of fees that EY and our network firms have charged to you and your affiliates for the provision of services during the reporting period, analysed in appropriate categories, are disclosed. Hillingdon Pension Fund - Outline Audit planning report 26 The FRC Ethical Standard and ISA (UK) 260 ‘Communication of audit matters with those charged with governance’, requires us to communicate with you on a timely basis on all significant facts and matters that bear upon our integrity, objectivity and independence. The Ethical Standard, as revised in December 2019, requires that we communicate formally both at the planning stage and at the conclusion of the audit, as well as during the course of the audit if appropriate. The aim of these communications is to ensure full and fair disclosure by us to those charged with your governance on matters in which you have an interest. Required communications Planning stage Final stage ► The principal threats, if any, to objectivity and independence identified by Ernst & Young (EY) including consideration of all relationships between you, your affiliates and directors and us; ► The safeguards adopted and the reasons why they are considered to be effective, including any Engagement Quality review; ► The overall assessment of threats and safeguards; ► Information about the general policies and process within EY to maintain objectivity and independence. ► In order for you to assess the integrity, objectivity and independence of the firm and each covered person, we are required to provide a written disclosure of relationships (including the provision of non-audit services) that may bear on our integrity, objectivity and independence. This is required to have regard to relationships with the entity, its directors and senior management, its affiliates, and its connected parties and the threats to integrity or objectivity, including those that could compromise independence that these create. We are also required to disclose any safeguards that we have put in place and why they address such threats, together with any other information necessary to enable our objectivity and independence to be assessed; ► Details of non-audit/additional services provided and the fees charged in relation thereto; ► Written confirmation that the firm and each covered person is independent and, if applicable, that any external experts used have confirmed their independence to us; ► Details of any non-audit/additional services to a UK PIE audit client where there are differences of professional opinion concerning the engagement between the Ethics Partner and Engagement Partner and where the final conclusion differs from the professional opinion of the Ethics Partner ► Details of any inconsistencies between FRC Ethical Standard and your policy for the supply of non-audit services by EY and any apparent breach of that policy; ► Details of all breaches of the IESBA Code of Ethics, the FRC Ethical Standard and professional standards, and of any safeguards applied and actions taken by EY to address any threats to independence; and ► An opportunity to discuss auditor independence issues. Confidential — All Rights Reserved Relationships, services and related threats and safeguards Overall, we consider that the safeguards that have been adopted appropriately mitigate the principal threats identified and we therefore confirm that EY is independent and the objectivity and independence of Debbie Hanson , your audit engagement partner, and the audit engagement team have not been compromised. Hillingdon Pension Fund - Outline Audit planning report 27 Overall Assessment We highlight the following significant facts and matters that may be reasonably considered to bear upon our objectivity and independence, including the principal threats, if any. We have adopted the safeguards noted below (where applicable) to mitigate these threats along with the reasons why they are considered to be effective. However we will only perform non-audit services if the service has been pre-approved in accordance with your policy. A self interest threat arises when EY has financial or other interests in the Fund. Examples include where we have an investment in the Fund; where we receive significant fees in respect of non-audit services; where we need to recover long outstanding fees; or where we enter into a business relationship with you. At the time of writing, there are no long outstanding fees. We believe that it is appropriate for us to undertake those permitted non-audit/additional services set out in Section 5.40 of the FRC Ethical Standard 2019 (FRC ES), and we will comply with the policies that you have approved. None of the services are prohibited under the FRC's ES and the services have been approved in accordance with your policy on pre-approval. In addition, when the ratio of non-audit fees to audit fees exceeds 1:1, we are required to discuss this with our Ethics Partner, as set out by the FRC ES, and if necessary agree additional safeguards or not accept the non- audit engagement. We will also discuss this with you. At the time of writing, there are no non-audit fees associated with Hillingdon Pension Fund. No additional safeguards are required. A self interest threat may also arise if members of our audit engagement team have objectives or are rewarded in relation to sales of non-audit services to you. We confirm that no member of our audit engagement team, including those from other service lines, has objectives or is rewarded in relation to sales to you, in compliance with Ethical Standard part 4. There are no other self interest threats at the date of this report. Self interest threats Self review threats arise when the results of a non-audit service performed by EY or others within the EY network are reflected in the amounts included or disclosed in the financial statements. There are no self review threats at the date of this report. Self review threats Partners and employees of EY are prohibited from taking decisions on behalf of management of your company. Management threats may also arise during the provision of a non-audit service in relation to which management is required to make judgements or decision based on that work. There are no management threats at the date of this report. Management threats Other threats, such as advocacy, familiarity or intimidation, may arise. There are no other threats at the date of this report. Other threats Confidential — All Rights Reserved Other communications Hillingdon Pension Fund - Outline Audit planning report 28 EY has policies and procedures that instil professional values as part of firm culture and ensure that the highest standards of objectivity, independence and integrity are maintained. Details of the key policies and processes in place within EY for maintaining objectivity and independence can be found in our annual Transparency Report which the firm is required to publish by law. The most recent version of this Report is for the period ended 30 June 2023 and can be found here: EY UK 2023 Transparency Report . EY Transparency Report 2023 Confidential — All Rights Reserved Hillingdon Pension Fund - Outline Audit planning report 29 Appendices08 Confidential — All Rights Reserved Appendix A – PSAA Statement of Responsibilities As set out on the next page our fee is based on the assumption thatthe Fund complies with PSAA’s Statement of Responsibilities of auditors and audited bodies. See https://www.psaa.co.uk/managing-audit-quality/statement-of-responsibilities-of-auditors-and-audited-bodies/statement-of-responsibilities-of-auditors-and-audited- bodies-from-2023-24-audits/. In particular the Fund should have regard to paragraphs 26-28 of the Statement of Responsibilities which clearly set out what is expected of audited bodies in preparing their financial statements. We set out these paragraphs in full below: Preparation of the statement of accounts 26. Audited bodies are expected to follow Good Industry Practice and applicable recommendations and guidance from CIPFA and, as applicable, other relevant organisations as to proper accounting procedures and controls, including in the preparation and review of working papers and financial statements. 27. In preparing their statement of accounts, audited bodies are expected to:  prepare realistic plans that include clear targets and achievable timetables for the production of the financial statements;  ensure that finance staff have access to appropriate resources to enable compliance with the requirements of the applicable financial framework, including having access to the current copy of the CIPFA/LASAAC Code, applicable disclosure checklists, and any other relevant CIPFA Codes.  assign responsibilities clearly to staff with the appropriate expertise and experience;  provide necessary resources to enable delivery of the plan;  maintain adequate documentation in support of the financial statements and, at the start of the audit, providing a complete set of working papers that provide an adequate explanation of the entries in those financial statements including the appropriateness of the accounting policies used and the judgements and estimates made by management;  ensure that senior management monitors, supervises and reviews work to meet agreed standards and deadlines;  ensure that a senior individual at top management level personally reviews and approves the financial statements before presentation to the auditor; and  during the course of the audit provide responses to auditor queries on a timely basis. 28. If draft financial statements and supporting working papers of appropriate quality are not available at the agreed start date of the audit, the auditor may be unable to meet the planned audit timetable and the start date of the audit will be delayed. Hillingdon Pension Fund – Outline Audit planning report 30 Confidential — All Rights Reserved Appendix B — Fees The duty to prescribe fees is a statutory function delegated to Public Sector Audit Appointments Ltd (PSAA) by the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government. This is defined as the fee required by auditors to meet statutory responsibilities under the Local Audit and Accountability Act 2014 in accordance with the requirements of the Code of Audit Practice and supporting guidance published by the National Audit Office, the financial reporting requirements set out in the Code of Practice on Local Authority Accounting published by CIPFA/LASAAC, and the professional standards applicable to auditors’ work. As part of our reporting on our independence, we set out here a summary of the expected fees for the year ended 31 March 2024. Scale fee variations are agreed when we incur work in addition to the planned level of work built into the scale fee. Current Year 2023/24 Prior Year 2022/23 Proposed fee £ Proposed fee £ Scale Fee – Code work 81,688 24,954 Scale Fee Variation – Note 1 0 8,784 Requested rebased fee sub-total 81,688 33,738 Additional fee for the provision of IAS 19 assurance letters – Note 2 6,500 0 Additional fee with respect to testing of triennial membership data submissions – Note 3 0 8,700 Additional specific in year risks – Note 4 TBC 20.000 to £30,000 Total fees tbc Hillingdon Pension Fund - Outline Audit planning report 31 Note 1 – In order to meet regulatory and compliance audit requirements not present at the time of PSAA awarding the audit contract for audits up to and including the 2022/23 financial year, we assessed that the recurrent cost of additional requirements to carry out our 2022/23 audit should increase to £33,738. PSAA have increased the base scale fee, but in our view this still does not fully cover the additional work required and we will therefore be submitting a further proposed increase to PSAA for 2022/23 for their determination. This does not apply for 2023/24. Note 2 – We plan to charge an additional fee in relation to the work required to respond to IAS19 assurance requests from admitted body auditors for 2021/22 and 2023/24. As the audit of the London Borough of Hillingdon for 2022/23 is not currently planned to be undertaken, we have not been asked to provide similar assurances for 2022/23. Note 3 – We will charge an additional fee in 2022/23 with respect to detailed testing of the triennial membership submission to the actuary. This work is only required every three years Note 4 – we have identified a number of specific in year risks in this Plan and further issues may be identified through our audit which require additional work and therefore fee. We will identify any such issues throughout our audit and report these to management and submit any resulting additional fees to PSAA for determination once the audit is concluded. ISA 315 in particular is likely to result in an additional fee, as this is not currently reflected in the PSAA scale fee. The fee for this is likely to be in the range of £4,000 to £6,000 Confidential — All Rights Reserved We have detailed the communications that we must provide to the Audit Committee. Our Reporting to you Required communications What is reported? When and where Terms of engagement Confirmation by the Audit Committee of acceptance of terms of engagement as written in the engagement letter signed by both parties. The statement of responsibilities serves as the formal terms of engagement between the PSAA’s appointed auditors and audited bodies . Our responsibilities Reminder of our responsibilities as set out in the engagement letter. The statement of responsibilities serves as the formal terms of engagement between the PSAA’s appointed auditors and audited bodies . Planning and audit approach Communication of: ► The planned scope and timing of the audit ► Any limitations on the planned work to be undertaken ► The planned use of internal audit ► The significant risks identified When communicating key audit matters this includes the most significant risks of material misstatement (whether or not due to fraud) including those that have the greatest effect on the overall audit strategy, the allocation of resources in the audit and directing the efforts of the engagement team. Outline Audit planning report – April 2024 Significant findings from the audit ► Our view about the significant qualitative aspects of accounting practices including accounting policies, accounting estimates and financial statement disclosures ► Significant difficulties, if any, encountered during the audit ► Significant matters, if any, arising from the audit that were discussed with management ► Written representations that we are seeking ► Expected modifications to the audit report ► Other matters if any, significant to the oversight of the financial reporting process Audit results report – November 2024 Hillingdon Pension Fund – Outline Audit planning report 32 Appendix C — Required communications with the Audit Committee Confidential — All Rights Reserved Appendix C — Required communications with the Audit Committee (cont’d) Our Reporting to you Required communications What is reported? When and where Going concern Events or conditions identified that may cast significant doubt on the entity’s ability to continue as a going concern, including: ► Whether the events or conditions constitute a material uncertainty ► Whether the use of the going concern assumption is appropriate in the preparation and presentation of the financial statements ► The adequacy of related disclosures in the financial statements Audit results report – November 2024 Misstatements ► Uncorrected misstatements and their effect on our audit opinion, unless prohibited by law or regulation ► The effect of uncorrected misstatements related to prior periods ► A request that any uncorrected misstatement be corrected ► Material misstatements corrected by management Audit results report – November 2024 Subsequent events ► Enquiries of the Audit Committee where appropriate regarding whether any subsequent events have occurred that might affect the financial statements Audit results report – November 2024 Fraud ► Enquiries of the Audit Committee to determine whether they have knowledge of any actual, suspected or alleged fraud affecting the entity ► Any fraud that we have identified or information we have obtained that indicates that a fraud may exist ► Unless all of those charged with governance are involved in managing the entity, any identified or suspected fraud involving: a. Management; b. Employees who have significant roles in internal control; or c. Others where the fraud results in a material misstatement in the financial statements ► The nature, timing and extent of audit procedures necessary to complete the audit when fraud involving management is suspected ► Any other matters related to fraud, relevant to Audit Committee responsibility Audit results report – November 2024 Hillingdon Pension Fund - Outline Audit planning report 33 Confidential — All Rights Reserved Appendix C — Required communications with the Audit Committee (cont’d) Our Reporting to you Required communications What is reported? When and where Related parties ► Significant matters arising during the audit in connection with the entity’s related parties including, when applicable: ► Non-disclosure by management ► Inappropriate authorisation and approval of transactions ► Disagreement over disclosures; ► Non-compliance with laws and regulations ► Difficulty in identifying the party that ultimately controls the entity Audit results report – November 2024 Independence Communication of all significant facts and matters that bear on EY’s, and all individuals involved in the audit, objectivity and independence Communication of key elements of the audit engagement partner’s consideration of independence and objectivity such as: ► The principal threats ► Safeguards adopted and their effectiveness ► An overall assessment of threats and safeguards ► Information about the general policies and process within the firm to maintain objectivity and independence Communication whenever significant judgements are made about threats to objectivity and independence and the appropriateness of safeguards put in place. Outline Audit planning report – April 2024 Audit results report – November 2024 Hillingdon Pension Fund - Outline Audit planning report 34 Confidential — All Rights Reserved Appendix C — Required communications with the Audit Committee (cont’d) Our Reporting to you Required communications What is reported? When and where External confirmations ► Management’s refusal for us to request confirmations ► Inability to obtain relevant and reliable audit evidence from other procedures Audit results report – November 2024 Consideration of laws and regulations ► Subject to compliance with applicable regulations, matters involving identified or suspected non-compliance with laws and regulations, other than those which are clearly inconsequential and the implications thereof. Instances of suspected non-compliance may also include those that are brought to our attention that are expected to occur imminently or for which there is reason to believe that they may occur ► Enquiry of the Audit Committee into possible instances of non-compliance with laws and regulations that may have a material effect on the financial statements and that the Audit Committee may be aware of Audit results report – November 2024 Internal controls ► Significant deficiencies in internal controls identified during the audit Audit results report – November 2024 Representations ► Written representations we are requesting from management and/or those charged with governance Audit results report – November 2024 Material inconsistencies and misstatements ► Material inconsistencies or misstatements of fact identified in other information which management has refused to revise Audit results report – November 2024 Auditors report ► Any circumstances identified that affect the form and content of our auditor’s report Audit results report – November 2024 Fee reporting ► Breakdown of fee information when the audit plan is agreed ► Breakdown of fee information at the completion of the audit ► Any non-audit work Outline Audit planning report – April 2024 Audit results report – November 2024 Hillingdon Pension Fund - Outline Audit planning report 35 Confidential — All Rights Reserved Appendix D — Additional audit information Our objective is to form an opinion on the Fund’s financial statements under International Standards on Auditing (UK) as prepared by you in accordance with International Financial Reporting Standards as adopted by the UK, and as interpreted and adapted by the Code of Practice on Local Authority Accounting. Our responsibilities in relation to the financial statement audit are set out in the formal terms of engagement between the PSAA’s appointed auditors and audited bodies. We are responsible for forming and expressing an opinion on the financial statements that have been prepared by management with the oversight of the Audit Committee. The audit does not relieve management or the Audit Committee of their responsibilities. In addition to the key areas of audit focus outlined in section 2, we have to perform other procedures as required by auditing, ethical and independence standards, company law and other regulations. We outline the procedures below that we will undertake during the course of our audit. Our responsibilities required by auditing standards ► Identifying and assessing the risks of material misstatement of the financial statements, whether due to fraud or error, design and perform audit procedures responsive to those risks, and obtain audit evidence that is sufficient and appropriate to provide a basis for our opinion ► Obtaining an understanding of internal control relevant to the audit in order to design audit procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the Fund’s internal control ► Evaluating the appropriateness of accounting policies used and the reasonableness of accounting estimates and related disclosures made by management ► Concluding on the appropriateness of management’s use of the going concern basis of accounting ► Evaluating the overall presentation, structure and content of the financial statements, including the disclosures, and whether the financial statements represent the underlying transactions and events in a manner that achieves fair presentation ► Obtaining sufficient appropriate audit evidence to express an opinion on the financial statements. Reading other information contained in the financial statements,the Audit Committee reporting appropriately addresses matters communicated by us to the Audit Committee and reporting whether it is materially inconsistent with our understanding and the financial statements ► Maintaining auditor independence Hillingdon Pension Fund - Outline Audit planning report 36 Regulatory update Other required procedures during the course of the audit Confidential — All Rights Reserved Appendix D — Additional audit information (cont’d) Procedures required by the Audit Code  Discharging our statutory duties and responsibilities as established by the Local Audit and Accountability Act 2014 and Code of Audit Practice  Reviewing, and reporting on as appropriate, other information published with the financial statements. We have included in Appendix C a list of matters that we are required to communicate to you under professional standards. Hillingdon Pension Fund – Outline Audit planning report 37 Other required procedures during the course of the audit Purpose and evaluation of materiality For the purposes of determining whether the accounts are free from material error, we define materiality as the magnitude of an omission or misstatement that, individually or in the aggregate, in light of the surrounding circumstances, could reasonably be expected to influence the economic decisions of the users of the financial statements. Our evaluation of it requires professional judgement and necessarily takes into account qualitative as well as quantitative considerations implicit in the definition. We would be happy to discuss with you your expectations regarding our detection of misstatements in the financial statements. Materiality determines the level of work performed on individual account balances and financial statement disclosures. The amount we consider material at the end of the audit may differ from our initial determination. At this stage, however, it is not feasible to anticipate all of the circumstances that may ultimately influence our judgement about materiality. At the end of the audit we will form our final opinion by reference to all matters that could be significant to users of the accounts, including the total effect of the audit misstatements we identify, and our evaluation of materiality at that date. Confidential — All Rights Reserved Appendix E - Non-Compliance with Laws and Regulations (NOCLAR) Non-Compliance with Laws and Regulations includes: Any act or suspected act of omission or commission (intentional or otherwise) by the entity (including any third parties under the control of the entity such as subsidiaries, those charged with governance or management or an employee acting on behalf of the company), either intentional or unintentional, which are contrary to the prevailing laws or regulations Management Responsibilities: “It is the responsibility of management, with the oversight of those charged with governance, to ensure that the entity’s operations are conducted in accordance with the provisions of laws and regulations , including compliance with the provisions of laws and regulations that determine the reported amounts and disclosures in an entity’s financial statements.” ISA 250A, para 3 “The directors’ report must contain a statement to the effect that… so far as the director is aware, there is no relevant audit information of which the company’s auditor is unaware, and he has taken all the steps that he ought to have taken as a director in order to make himself aware of any relevant audit information and to establish that the company’s auditor is aware of that information.” ISA 250A, para 3 “Management is responsible for communicating to us on a timely basis , to the extent that management or those charged with governance are aware, all instances of identified or suspected non-compliance with laws and regulations …” Audit Engagement Letter Management’s responsibilities are also set out in the International Ethics Standard Board of Accountants’ International Code of Ethics (IESBA Code) Para 360.08 Auditor Responsibilities The International Ethics Standard Board of Accountants’ International Code of Ethics (IESBA Code) section 360 sets out the scope and procedures in relation to responding to actual or suspected non-compliance with laws and regulations. Professional accountancy organisations who are members of the International Federation of Accountants (IFAC), such as the Institute of Chartered Accountants in England and Wales (ICAEW) are required to adopt the IESBA Code of Ethics. We as your auditor are required to comply with the Code by virtue of our registration with ICAEW. “If the auditor becomes aware of information concerning an instance of non-compliance or suspected non-compliance with laws and regulations, the auditor shall obtain: An understanding of the nature of the act and the circumstances in which it has occurred; and Further information to evaluate the possible effect on the financial statements The auditor shall evaluate the implications of the identified or suspected non-compliance in relation to other aspects of the audit, including the auditor’s risk assessment and the reliability of written representations, and take appropriate action.” ISA 250A, paras 19 and 22 Examples of Non-Compliance with Laws and Regulations (NOCLAR) Matter Implication ► Suspected or known fraud or bribery ► Potential fraud/breach of anti-bribery legislation ► Health and Safety incident ► Potential breach of section 2 of the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974 ► Payment of an unlawful dividend ► Potential breach of Companies Act 2006 ► Loss of personal data ► Potential GDPR breach ► Allegation of discrimination in dismissal ► Potential non-compliance with employment laws ► HMRC or other regulatory investigation ► Suspicion of non-compliance with laws/regulations ► Deliberate journal mis-posting or allegations of financial impropriety ► Potential fraud / breach of Companies Act 2006 ► Transacting business with