Annual Report 2021

How we run our organization

5.1 Corporate Governance

APG wants to be a trusted guide and reliable partner for all its stakeholders. This requires good governance and ethical business practices.

Corporate Governance Code

APG Group NV complies with the applicable laws and regulations and regulatory guidelines. In addition, we voluntarily adhere to the principles and best practice provisions of the Dutch Corporate Governance Code (hereafter: the “Code”) in respect of our role and responsibilities as pension administrator. We fully comply with the Code. For those elements of this annual report to which we cannot apply the principles and best practices, we explain why. For more information, please refer to the information about the  Corporate Governance Code at website APG.nl.

Executive Board

The members of the Executive Board are jointly responsible for the day-to-day management, strategy, results - including short-term and long-term value creation for clients -, and for the sustainability performance of APG and its affiliates. The Executive Board is also responsible for compliance with all relevant legislation and regulations, risk management, and the company’s funding. The various key areas (portfolios) are divided among the members of the Executive Board. The Executive Board renders account to the Supervisory Board and the shareholders. 

Each calendar quarter, the Executive Board reviews APG’s business performance, together with the heads of the various departments. On these occasions, they also look ahead to the implementation of the strategy.
The Executive Board is furthermore assisted, both at business unit and at group level, by risk committees. The risk committee at group level consists of the members of the Executive Board, the general counsel, the secretary, and the managers of the Group Risk & Compliance and Group Internal Audit departments. This risk committee meets at least four times a year.

The Executive Board receives support from sub-boards that each has its own focus area. For example, the Portfolio Board deals with the use of scarce resources for change initiatives within APG that help us achieve our strategic goals. The IT Board focuses on ensuring a controlled, safe, flexible, and future-proof IT landscape. Finally, the Data Board focuses on data management.

Composition

On March 1, 2021, our former CFRO Annette Mosman, a member of the Executive Board since 2018, succeeded Gerard van Olphen as Chief Executive Officer and Chair of the Management Board. 
In 2021, Francine Roelofsen-van Dierendonck became portfolio holder of Participants and Employers Services & Fund Operations. She was previously responsible for Fund Operations on an interim basis. Ronald Wuijster continued to be responsible for APG Asset Management and HR. His portfolio has been expanded to include Facility Services. Since March 3, 2021, the position of CFRO has been temporarily held by Jan Nijland. This position is expected to be filled in 2022.

At the end of 2021, the Executive Board consisted of two women and three men, in line with the target ratio of the relevant Dutch legislation on a balanced allocation of seats on executive boards and supervisory boards.

A comprehensive overview of the allocation of portfolios within the Executive Board can be found in the section Personal details of the Executive Board members.

Supervisory Board

The Supervisory Board oversees the management and activities of the Executive Board. The Supervisory Board assists the Executive Board with advice, focusing on the group’s interests and long-term value creation. The Board mainly concerns itself with shareholders relations, achieving objectives, internal risk management and control systems, financial reporting, compliance, cybersecurity, corporate governance, personnel trends, effective and efficient conduct of the business, APG’s reputation, corporate culture, sustainability, diversity, and the performance of the tasks by these two Boards. The Supervisory Board also oversees the implementation of APG’s general remuneration policy. The Supervisory Board has two committees: the Audit and Risk Committee and the Remuneration and Selection Committee.

The Supervisory Board plays a key role in the appointment and dismissal of members of the Executive and Supervisory Board. The Supervisory Board draws up the job profile, selects, and prepares the appointments. As the Executive Board’s employer, it submits proposals to the shareholders for the remuneration policy for the Executive Board. It does so with due regard to the principles of a managed remuneration policy laid down in the relevant legislation and regulations. The formal authority to appoint and dismiss members of the Executive and Supervisory Board and to decide their remuneration rests with the general meeting of shareholders. 

At year-end 2021, the Supervisory Board consisted of three women and two men, in line with the target ratio of the relevant Dutch legislation on gender balance.

APG Group NV has two shareholders: Stichting Pensioenfonds ABP (92.16%) and Stichting Sociaal Fonds Bouwnijverheid (7.84%). The Supervisory Board regularly consulted with the shareholders during the financial year, on topics ranging from appointments and reappointments of members of the Management and Supervisory Boards, shareholder relations, and the progress made on implementing the APG strategy 2025. 

Ethical business practices

We are aware that, as the largest pension administrator and leading asset management company in the Netherlands, we play an important role in society, since we contribute to the financial welfare of a large number of households in the Netherlands. This is why we believe it is crucial to conduct ethical business practices. This applies both to the activities of APG as an organization and to the activities of each individual employee. Consequently, we set great store by the principles of trustworthiness, prudence, and integrity.

Code of Conduct

To ensure that we conduct our business ethically, we revised our Code of Conduct. Our Code of Conduct is a guideline, our compass, for who we are and who we want to be, and for what we stand for. We uphold six core values in this regard: We connect, we impact our clients, we make difficult things easy, we continuously improve, we affect each other, and we are not wasteful. The new Code of Conduct provides guiding principles for our entire conduct at APG, as well as for our interactions with each other, our clients, shareholders, suppliers, regulators, and society as a whole. 

These core values and behavioral principles form part of the strategy. We regularly bring them to people’s attention. For instance, in meetings between the Executive Board, management and staff. We also draw attention to them through publications on the Intranet and in e-learnings. Each year, employees are asked to sign a compliance statement, essentially a confirmation that they have complied with the Code of Conduct during the past year. Compliance is furthermore monitored by testing private investment transactions, exterior activities, invitations, and gifts against the standards of the  Code of Conduct and Staff Integrity Policy.

The Code of Conduct applies to anyone who holds a temporary or long-term position at APG: staff, managers and supervisory directors. To certain key areas specific rules may apply, in addition to the Code of Conduct. One example of this is the Staff Integrity Policy. For staff working in New York and Hong Kong, the code of conduct has been modified to reflect the local situation, in order to comply with local legislation and regulations. 

The Staff Integrity Policy contains various rules, including rules about handling information with care; contacts with suppliers and outsourcing; conflicts of interest; exterior activities; gifts; invitations; insider trading; and market abuse. These rules are drawn from such sources as the Dutch Financial Supervision Act, the GDPR (the General Data Protection Regulation), the Dutch Pensions Act, and anticorruption legislation.

We believe it important to have a simple procedure in place for employees to report suspected abuse or irregularities. This is why we have appointed confidential counsellors and set up a Whistleblower Channel through which abuse may be reported anonymously. This is open to all divisions of APG’s business, both in the Netherlands and abroad. The Chief Executive Officer and Chief Compliance Officer are immediately notified of any abuse or suspicion of abuse. If there is a suspicion of material abuse the chair of the Supervisory Board is notified too. Cases of abuse or irregularities involving a member of the Executive Board may be reported directly to the chair of the Supervisory Board. 

Sustainability governance

Under the Corporate Governance Code, the Executive Board is responsible for the social aspects of APG’s business. 
The Sustainability Board set up for this purpose consists of the chair of the Executive Board, heads of business unit managers, and staff directors. The Sustainability Board implements our sustainability goals: “We want to create a future in which prosperity and well-being are sustainably shared.” This aim is achieved by our business units by developing plans and carrying out activities. The Sustainability Board periodically discusses the reported results. In 2021, the Board met four times. A Sustainability office supports the business units by facilitating and coordinating the desired developments. 

External supervision

DNB, the Dutch Central Bank is legally responsible for regulating pension funds, not the administrators of pension funds. Since pension funds have outsourced many operational processes to pension administration such as APG, these parties are increasingly regulated by DNB. APG consults with DNB about organizing the supervision of pension administrators. 
APG Asset Management (APG AM) manages assets for four pension fund clients. APG AM does this both on a collective basis, by managing investment plans, and on an individual basis by managing so-called “segregated accounts.” APG AM has been accredited for these activities by the Dutch Authority for the Financial Markets AFM and falls under AFM’s AIFMD and MIFID supervision. At the same time, DNB exercises prudential oversight over APG AM’s collective and individual asset management. As regards solvency and liquidity requirements, APG AM follows the ICLAAP.

Stichting Pensioenfonds ABP, which is both a shareholder and a client of APG, is a pension fund that is regulated by DNB, as are the other pension funds that are our clients. Among other things, the outsourcing of pension administration services to APG is regulated.

Horizontal monitoring

APG attaches great importance to having an open and honest relationship with the Dutch tax authorities. Our collaboration with the Dutch tax authorities is based on transparency, understanding, and trust. We were informed by the Dutch tax authorities that it trusts our fiscal risk management. In 2021, we further improved our existing Tax Control Framework. Based on this and on the trust that the Dutch tax authorities place in us, we concluded a new Horizontal Monitoring covenant with the tax authorities in December 2021. This new covenant is based on the stricter criteria published by the Dutch tax authorities in 2021. 

Responsible fiscal policy on investments

Dutch pension funds operate in a complex international environment, one in which both current regulations and generally applicable principles of international tax law (including OECD) must be complied with. APG understands the value of (international) initiatives aimed at achieving greater balance in taxation and at combating tax avoidance. In this regard, we find that the position of pension funds must always be taken into consideration, as well as the basic principle that their investment returns are usually exempt from taxation. Together with our clients, we proactively pursue a responsible fiscal policy in respect of the investments that we manage for our clients. We help our clients to develop a fiscal investment policy, which we then integrate into the existing investment processes. 

5.2 Risk management

We identify and control risks comprehensively, taking into account both financial and societal values.

APG Integrated Risk Management

APG’s Integrated Risk Management (AIR) comprises risk governance and policy, the risk culture, the risk appetite, the risk management process (supported by the risk and control framework), and risk reporting.

Risk governance and policy

The roles and responsibilities for managing and controlling risks are based on the generally accepted “Three lines” model. The risk committees of the business units and the Executive Board, as well as the Supervisory Board’s Audit and Risk Committee, see to it that overall integrated responsibility for risk management is assured and incorporated in the business plan cycle. 

In 2021, the Risk and Compliance Policy frameworks were updated. APG wants to control its risks within these frameworks. They guide the business units and staff departments, within the limits of their own responsibility, in incorporating risk management in their regular business operations. Such frameworks have for instance been created for the risk taxonomy. Risk taxonomy comprises five risk categories. Each category sets out the principal risks associated with APG’s activities and is in line with the regulations set by the regulators. This is common practice in the pension industry. The risk taxonomy is updated every year. Furthermore, frameworks are prepared for controlling the various risk categories and implementing the risk management process.

Risk culture

A sound and effective risk management depends above all on promoting a culture of risk awareness. This includes using our risk appetite to weigh opportunities against risks as part of the day-to-day activities at all levels of the organization. Within the frameworks and this risk culture, attention is also paid to reporting and detecting possible cases of fraud. For example, within APG’s incident procedure, fraud as a source of an incident is taken into account. There is a regulation for reporting abuses anonymously and we operate a fraud desk where further investigation into possible cases of fraud takes place. 

Risk appetite 

Risk appetite is the degree and type of risk that APG is prepared to accept in the pursuit of its strategic objectives and associated value creation. It specifies where opportunities can be seized, but also the required degree of risk mitigation in case of unwanted risks.
The Executive Board defines the strategic risk appetite for seven elements that are affected by risk: continuity; reputation; relationships; solvency; integrity; services, and customer satisfaction. Aside from that, the risk appetite is also defined for each risk arising from the risk taxonomy. This is referred to as “tactical risk appetite.” 

Risk management process

The risk management process allows us to monitor the development of the risk profile relative to our risk appetite and, where necessary, to avoid or mitigate risks more effectively. This continuous process involves identifying, evaluating, controlling, and monitoring risks. The second-line risk management and compliance functions play an independent and critically challenging role in the risk management process.
In this context, changes in legislation and regulations are also looked at periodically in advance. Compliance indicates these changes in its compliance report. It is the responsibility of the business units to incorporate these changes in laws and regulations into processes and control measures. The risk and control framework helps us make to ensure that we stick to our desired risk profile: we do not take unnecessary or unwanted risks. It also gives us insight into the effectiveness of our critical control measures. We take appropriate measures if necessary. 

Risk reporting

We continuously monitor risks in five risk categories: strategic risk; operational risk; reporting risk; compliance risk, and financial reporting risk. Each year APG updates a set of sub-risks within these risk categories. These arise from external developments and APG’s strategy and operations. Each calendar quarter, we report on the current risk profile to APG’s risk committee and to the Audit and Risk Committee of the Supervisory Board.

As part of the operational risk control process, we must be demonstrably “in control,” both internally (corporate) and externally (on behalf of the pension funds). APG prepares reports on these matters in conformity with the ISAE 3402 and 3000A standards. The reports on pension management and asset management processes are intended for the eight pension funds for which we work, among others.
In 2021, APG’s risk exposure remained within the established tolerance limits. In a number of areas, there were increased risks.

Below, we will discuss the principal risks that occurred in 2021, for each of the principal groups of major stakeholders.

Risk management - general

Although, just as in 2020, APG had was faced with the consequences of COVID-19, this did not adversely impact our operations. Anticipated risks did not materialize. In early 2021, the risk analysis method was reviewed. However, this did not lead to materially different insights. Our stakeholders (pension funds and regulators) were notified of the developments and the identified risks. Based on our risk analysis and the above review, we consider the following risks as the most significant:

Information Risk Management

To gain access to organizations, cybercriminals are launching phishing campaigns in ever-growing numbers. They increasingly use social engineering techniques for this, for example by installing ransomware. These programs are specifically designed to tempt e-mail users to click on URLs. These URLs look legitimate, but are in fact malicious. Via a variety of awareness campaigns we continuously make all employees aware of this risk. They also take training courses in compliance and cybersecurity.

Furthermore, it has recently become clear that cybercriminals take advantage of vulnerabilities in software components to gain access to organizations’ information systems. We have responded pro-actively against these practices as well and have implemented measures to limit the effects and mitigate the risks. Nevertheless, the cybersecurity risk continues to be real.

Employees 

From the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, sickness absenteeism among our staff showed a downward trend. However, this downward trend was not sustained as the crisis continued. We are aware of the adverse impact that COVID-19 is having on our staff. Working from home also impacts social contacts. Remote working can furthermore create feelings of loneliness. This is something that has our attention. It is also important that new hires are fully inducted into the APG culture, so that they are imbued with the norms and key strategic values that we stand for. 

Risk management - clients

Both APG and its clients realize that our organization must be in control and that the principal risks are managed properly. To this end APG has set up the Three lines of defense (3LoD) model. This model is used to organize our processes in such a way that we are demonstrably “in control.” With respect to the administration of pensions this model has shown that our primary processes, and the monitoring and control measures they contain, need to be reinforced. This was confirmed in 2019 by DNB, the Dutch central bank, following an audit. We are hard at work making these improvements. In 2021, risk analyses were carried out for the primary pension administration processes. For most of these processes these analyses were completed in 2021. 

The 3LoD model also produced findings concerning the functioning of monitoring and control measures that had already been implemented within APG. This relates to findings about the monitoring of work in progress and mandatory pension communications, from analyses of alignments and improbabilities, as well as findings relating to the incorrect or late execution of (dual control and other) checks and inadequate control measures for the timely revocation of authorizations. All the findings were analyzed, with the outcome being that these findings regarding the control measures have not led to systematically defective or unauthorized processing in our records or to activities being carried out late. Action was taken to define the control measures more strictly and logically and to monitor them, in order to prevent repetition.

In order to give our clients independent assurances about the organization and operation of our monitoring and control measures, we issue Standard 3402 and Standard 3000A reports about the services for pension management and asset management. The external auditor publishes these assurance reports. The findings from the 3LoD process have led the external auditor to issue a qualified opinion for 2021 with respect to APG’s Standard 3402 and Standard 3000A reports.

The turbulent global economy and the developments in the financial markets have led to an ongoing high demand from our clients for one-off analyses. This trend is reinforced by the current developments in the Dutch pension industry. In order to be able to make careful decisions, our clients require well-founded advice from us. To satisfy this need, which is complementary to the standard services we provide to the pension funds, we filled a number of vacant positions. 

The implementation of the pension agreement signed by the Dutch government with the social partners in 2021 has been delayed. As noted earlier in this Report, the Pension of the Future program is looking into all associated aspects and risks. In future, we expect participants to be given more insight in their pension accrual. To do this, their basic data needs to be up to date. The risk posed by overdue changes is that the quality of the data does not satisfy APG’s standards. This can have consequences for the pension benefits. We have taken various control measures to prevent this. In 2021, we worked on improving the quality of the data, on data governance and on the accompanying risk management, and digitalized processes. 

Since January 13, 2019, pension funds are required by law to notify DNB of all activities outsourced to third parties. In 2021, the regulator conducted an investigation into outsourcing by APG. Further to this investigation, initiatives have been taken to get a better grip on this process. This will ensure that the outsourcing risk is controlled and that the continuity, integrity and quality of our services are not adversely impacted by issues relating to outsourcing.

APG processes personal data on a large scale, both for its clients and as employer. We attach great value to the lawful, appropriate, and transparent processing and protection of personal data. There is a risk that we do not sufficiently demonstrably comply with privacy laws and regulations, in particular the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). It is taking longer than expected to fully implement the improvement points that APG had identified. This applies in particular to demonstrating that privacy-related control measures have been implemented. 

Risk management - employees  

Having robust and agile HR is a prerequisite for achieving our strategy for 2025. The Strategic Workforce Planning carried out in 2021 supports establishing competencies - e.g., participant focus and digitalization - needed to achieve the objectives for 2025. There is still a risk that the composition of the workforce is not a good fit with this strategy. Labor market scarcity makes it difficult for APG (and others) to recruit talent.

To meet the changing demand for competencies, APG has initiated a number of HR-related improvement programs and initiatives. Leadership development is taking place at various levels and several programs are being offered that enable employees and managers to develop themselves further. This should enable us to create the necessary capabilities, competencies, and changes in the workforce. COVID-19 forced APG to focus even more on the labor situation. Being a Great Place to Work continues to be an important and clearly defined objective for APG.

Risk management - society   

Vanuit het perspectief van risicomanagement blijft het beheersen van het politiek risico en het reputatierisico van groot belang voor APG. De inhoud van het publieke debat wordt gevoed door hoe het nieuwe pensioenstelsel wordt ingevuld. We volgen de ontwikkelingen op dit gebied.
Om het reputatierisico inzichtelijk te maken meten we de reputatiescore van APG. De score laat een stabiel positief beeld zien. De reputatiescore van onze grootste klant vertoonde een dalende trend. Dit werd veroorzaakt door diverse onderwerpen die de publiciteit trokken. 

Risk management - shareholders

From the point of view of risk management, managing the political and reputational risks continues to be essential for APG. The public debate in this area is largely driven by the way in which the new pension system will be implemented. We are closely following the developments in this respect.
To gain insight into our reputational risk, we measure our reputation score. This score is both stable and positive. The reputation score of our most important client is declining, due to a number of issues that have attracted publicity. 

APG has a positive solvency position. The risk that pension funds find themselves in a dire position, for instance because pension contributions remain unpaid or are not paid in time, has not materialized. This means that it has not impacted our services or financial result.

In 2021, we took further steps to turn the strategic plan 2021-2025 into specific strategic initiatives. To realize these strategic initiatives within the intended period, we adopted a Strategic Implementation Plan. Given the limited resources and the major strain that these initiatives make on the available capacity, it is essential to focus on the right areas. Therefore, choices have been made. For 2022, our priorities are a smoothly managed pension administration, the transition to the Pension of the Future, and continuing on the path of making APG a leading investor. 

Financial reporting risks

APG’s risk management and control systems provide a reasonable degree of certainty that APG’s annual report does not contain any material misstatements. Their functioning is evaluated continually throughout the year. On the basis of these results, the Executive Board has declared that there are no material risks or uncertainties that may impact the “going concern” expectation for APG. See also the In Control Statement in the next paragraph.

In Control Statement

As Executive Board of APG Group NV, we are responsible for setting up, implementing, and operating the internal risk management and control systems. Aim of the internal risk management and control systems is to manage the strategic, financial, operational, compliance, and financial reporting risks associated when achieving our objectives. In the previous risk paragraph we have explained our principal risks, our internal risk management and control systems, and any possible shortcomings.

While the internal risk management and control systems were set up on the basis of internationally accepted and applied standards, they cannot provide absolute certainty that the financial reporting contains no material misstatements, nor that the systems will prevent all errors, incidents of fraud, or non-compliance with the relevant legislation and regulations.
The material risks and control measures have been identified and recorded in APG’s integrated risk framework. APG’s Executive Board monitors the effectiveness of the internal risk management and control systems and at least once a year systematically reviews the structure and effectiveness of the risk management and control systems. This review covers all material measures aimed at controlling strategic, operational, financial, compliance and reporting risks. This review considers, among other things, any identified weaknesses, wrongdoing and irregularities, concerns raised by whistleblowers, and findings of the internal audit function and external auditor. Where necessary, improvements have been made to the internal risk management and control systems.

Statement of the Executive Board of APG Group NV

The Executive Board of APG Group NV declares that:

• APG Group NV’s annual report provides insight into the principal shortcomings in the internal risk management and control systems;
• any improvements, both made and anticipated, have been explained;
• the risk management and control systems provide a reasonable degree of assurance that the APG Group NV annual report does not contain any material misstatements;
• the APG Group NV annual report has been prepared based on the “going concern” principle;
•  there were no material risks or uncertainties relevant to APG Group NV’s going concern assumption for a period of 12 months from the preparation of the APG Group NV annual report.
   

5.3 Information of the members of the Executive Board

At the end of 2021, the Executive Board consisted of two women and two men.

Annette Mosman (1967, Dutch nationality) has been chair of the Executive Board since March 1, 2021. Annette’s portfolio contains: Policy, Strategy & Change, Pension of the Future (PvS), IT, Communication, Public Affairs, General Counsel/Corporate Affairs and Group Internal Audit.
Annette has extensive management experience in the financial sector. Until March 1, she was CFRO of APG. Before then, she was chair of the Executive Board of Generali Nederland, an insurance company.

Other positions:

• Board member and treasurer, NOC*NSF Association
• Supervisory Board member and chair of the Audit Committee and Investment Committee, Dutch Cancer Society KWF (until May 1, 2021)
• Supervisory Board and Audit Committee member, Jeroen Bosch Hospital Foundation (until December 31, 2021)
• Board member, TBI Foundation
• Supervisory Board member, Ajax NV
• Supervisory Board member, Netspar Foundation

First appointment to the Executive Board: February 6, 2018. Appointed as chair: March 1, 2021

Francine Roelofsen-van Dierendonck (1976, Dutch nationality) is a member of the Executive Board. Francine’s portfolio contains: Participant and Employer Services and Fund operations (DWS & FB).
Francine has extensive experience in leading major and complex operations, and has expertise in digital and other transformations, which she gained at various consumer-oriented organizations. Before joining APG, Francine was the general manager of the Xenos retail chain.

Other positions:

• Supervisory board member and chair, RemCo Royal Haskoning/DHV 

First appointment to the Executive Board: November 1, 2018

Ronald Wuijster (1966, Dutch nationality) is member of the Executive Board. His portfolio contains: APG Asset Management, Human Resources and Facility Services. He also chairs the Executive Board of APG Asset Management N.V.
Joining APG in 2006, Ronald has vast asset management-related technical skills, is very knowledgeable about all facets of the AM business and has extensive investment experience relevant for APG’s investment strategy and that of its clients.

Other positions:

• Chair of Dufas Association
• Executive Board member, FCLTGlobal
• President of the WEF Biodiversity initiative Davos
• Board member, UN Global Initiative on Sustainable Development
• President of the juniors’ committee of the Apeldoorn Mixed Hockey Club

First appointment to the Executive Board: March 6, 2018. Reappointed: March 1, 2022.

Jan Nijland (1960, Dutch nationality) was appointed on March 3, 2021 as CFRO on an interim basis. His portfolio contains: Finance, Risk & Compliance and Tax.

Other positions:

• Supervisory board member, Pension Fund for KLM flying personnel
• Supervisory Board member, KLM general pension fund

For more information about the members of the Executive Board, please refer to: apg.nl/en/about-apg/

Resigned as chair of the Executive Board as of March 1, 2021:

Gerard van Olphen (1962, Dutch nationality).

Other positions as of March 1, 2021 

• Supervisory Board member, Dutch Heart Foundation
• Supervisory Board member, Netspar Foundation
• Supervisory Board member, ASR Nederland NV

5.4 Information of the members of the Supervisory Board

At the end of 2021, the Supervisory Board consisted of two women and two men.

Pieter Jongstra
(1956, Dutch nationality) 
Chairman

Other relevant positions:

• Supervisory Board chair, CZ (from January 1, 2022)
• Supervisory Board member, Mazars Holding NV
• Board member and treasurer, Stichting Ondersteuning Nederlandse Bachvereniging

First appointment to the Supervisory Board: February 4, 2015. Reappointed: February 4, 2019. Term of appointment: 4 years. 

Dick van Well
(1948, Dutch nationality) 
Vice-Chairman

Other relevant positions:

• Supervisory Board member, Dura Vermeergroep NV
• Supervisory Board member, Avenue Beheer BV
• Advisory Board member, LSI Projectinvestment NV
• Independent Chairman, Stichting Administratiekantoor PPF Participatie Fonds
• Board member, Nationaal Programma Rotterdam Zuid
• Director, Stichting Continuïteit Feyenoord 

First appointment to the Supervisory Board: November 14, 2016. Reappointment: November 14, 2020. Term of appointment: 4 years.

José Meijer
(1955, Dutch nationality) 

Other relevant positions:

• Chairman of the Partij van de Arbeid in Weert and surrounding area (political party)
• Steering committee member, IMVB covenant of the Pensioenfederatie
• Chairwoman, Stichting Zelfregulering Pensioenfondsen (until October 1, 2021)
• Interim chair of the Dutch Pension Federation (until October 1, 2021)
• Member, FNV pension team (until July 16, 2021)
• Committee on Workers’ Capital, worldwide network of Union Officials, chair of the Trustee Leadership (until July 16, 2021)

First appointment to the Supervisory Board: September 5, 2020. Term of appointment: 4 years.

Sarah Russell
(1962, Australian nationality)

Other relevant positions:

• Supervisory Board member (and chair of the Audit Committee), The Currency Exchange Fund 
• Supervisory Board member, Nordea Bank Abp
• Supervisory Board member, Ostrum Asset Management
• Supervisory Board member, APG Asset Management NV

First appointment to the Supervisory Board: May 15, 2021. Term of appointment: 4 years.

Claudia Zuiderwijk
(1962, Dutch nationality)

Other relevant positions:

• Chairman of the Executive Board, Amsterdam Public Transport Company GVB
• Supervisory Board member, Royal KPN NV
• Ambassador, NEMO Science Museum Center, Amsterdam
• Policy Board member International Association of Public Transport (UITP)
• NL Groeit Mentor

First appointment to the Supervisory Board: July 27, 2015. Reappointment: July 27, 2019. Term of appointment: 4 years.

Supervisory Board members who resigned in 2021:

Maes van Lanschot (1952, Dutch nationality), resigned on May 15, 2021.

Other relevant positions as of May 15, 2021:

• Chief Financial Officer TropIQ Health Sciences BV
• General Manager Landgoed Zwijnsbergen BV

Roger van Boxtel (1954, Dutch nationality), resigned on April 1, 2021.

Other relevant positions as of April 1, 2021:

• Chairman of the Executive Board, De Fundatie Museum
• Chairman of the Executive Board, Amsterdam Sinfonietta
• Member, General Assembly Ajax

Amsterdam/Heerlen, March 8, 2022

The Executive Board:

Annette Mosman, chair

Francine Roelofsen -  van Dierendonck

Ronald Wuijster

Jan Nijland (temporary)