Summary of RIVER VALLEY BANCORP

ITEM 7. MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATION.

General

As discussed previously, River Valley was incorporated for the primary purpose of owning all of the outstanding shares of River Valley Financial. As a result, the discussion that follows focuses on River Valley Financial's financial condition and results of operations for the periods presented. The following discussion and analysis of the financial condition as of December 31, 2008, and River Valley's results of operations for periods prior to that date, should be read in conjunction with the Consolidated Financial Statements and the Notes thereto, included in Item 8 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

In addition to the historical information contained herein, the following discussion contains forward-looking statements that involve risks and uncertainties. River Valley's operations and River Valley's actual results could differ significantly from those discussed in the forward-looking statements. Some of the factors that could cause or contribute to such differences are discussed herein but also include, but are not limited to, changes in the economy and interest rates in the nation and River Valley's general market area. The forward-looking statements contained herein include those with respect to the following matters:

1. Management's determination as to the amount and adequacy of the loan loss allowance;

2. The effect of changes in interest rates on financial condition and results of operations; and

3. Management's opinion as to the effect of recent accounting pronouncements on River Valley's consolidated financial position and results of operations.

Effect of Current Events

The global and U.S. economies are experiencing significantly reduced business activity as a result of, among other factors, disruptions in the financial system during the past year. Dramatic declines in the housing market during the past year, with falling home prices and increasing foreclosures and unemployment, have resulted in significant write-downs of asset values by financial institutions, including government-sponsored entities and major commercial and investment banks. These write-downs, initially of mortgage-backed securities but spreading to credit default swaps and other derivative securities, have caused many financial institutions to seek additional capital, to merge with larger and stronger institutions and, in some cases, to fail.

Reflecting concern about the stability of the financial markets generally and the strength of counterparties, many lenders and institutional investors have reduced, and in some cases, ceased to provide funding to borrowers, including other financial institutions. The availability of credit, confidence in the financial sector, and level of volatility in the financial markets have been significantly adversely affected as a result. In recent weeks, volatility and disruption in the capital and credit markets has reached unprecedented levels. In some cases, the markets have produced downward pressure on stock prices and credit capacity for certain issuers without regard to those issuers' underlying financial strength.

In response to the financial crises affecting the banking system and financial markets and going concern threats to investment banks and other financial institutions, the government has responded with a number of new and amended regulatory provisions. Many of these provisions directly or indirectly impact the Company, including the EESA, TARP and the related CPP program, and changes to the federal deposit insurance program. Many of these new regulations and their effect on the Company are discussed in Item 1 - Business - Regulation.

Although the Company's fundamental banking practices and policies have protected it from the significant write-downs and disruption being experienced in the industry, the Company will continue to monitor and enhance its stability in this uncertain environment. In November 2008, although the Bank met all applicable regulatory capital requirements and remained well capitalized, the Company made a preliminary determination that obtaining additional capital pursuant to the CPP for contribution in whole or in part to the Bank might become advisable. As a result, the Company filed an initial application pursuant to the CPP with its regulator, the OTS, seeking approval to sell $8,100,000 in preferred stock to the Treasury (which equalled approximately 3% of its total risk weighted assets as of September 30, 2008). The Company received preliminary approval of its application, and the Company called a Special Meeting of Shareholders on March 10, 2009, to consider whether to amend the Company's Articles of Incorporation in a manner that would permit the Company to issue preferred stock to the Treasury or similar investors.

Although the shareholders approved the amendment of the Articles of Incorporation, which became effective on March 13, 2009, the Board of Directors, after careful consideration, has determined the Company will decline to participate in the TARP's CPP.

Institutions like the Company were expected and encouraged by their regulators to apply for capital infusions through the CPP, even though the Bank is "well capitalized" by regulatory standards. After the Treasury announced the CPP as part of its emergency legislation, the applications were due less than a month after release of the application guidelines. Many companies, like us, applied for the funds as a way to preserve the option while engaging in a more thorough review of the advantages and consequences. This review has been complicated by ongoing adoption of new legislation and new regulations that will apply to recipients of the TARP money, many of which stipulations conflict with each other or are unclear. In fact, after the changes implemented as recently as February 17, 2009, with the adoption of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, companies that have already closed and accepted TARP money have been given the option of returning the money and leaving the program.

The Board of Directors, after evaluating many factors affecting the Company's capitalization, including the state of the national and local economy, our loan quality, and our general conservative banking practices, among other things, has determined that the Company will not participate in the TARP's CPP.

EESA followed, and has been followed by, numerous actions by the Federal Reserve, Congress, Treasury, the SEC and others to address the current liquidity and credit crisis that has followed the sub-prime meltdown that commenced in 2007. These measures include homeowner relief that encourage loan restructuring and modification; the establishment of significant liquidity and credit facilities for financial institutions and investment banks; the lowering of the federal funds rate, including two 50 basis point decreases in October of 2008; emergency action against short selling practices; a temporary guaranty program for money market funds; the establishment of a commercial paper funding facility to provide back-stop liquidity to commercial paper issuers; and coordinated international efforts to address illiquidity and other weaknesses in the banking sector.

It is not clear at this time what impact the EESA, the TARP CPP, the Temporary Liquidity Guarantee Program, ARRA and other liquidity and funding initiatives, whether previously announced or that may be initiated in the future, will have on the financial markets and the other difficulties described above, including the extreme levels of volatility and limited credit availability currently being experienced, or on the U.S. banking and financial industries and the broader U.S. and global economies. Further adverse effects could have an adverse effect on the Company and its business.

The level of turmoil in the financial services industry will present unusual risks and challenges for the Company, as described below:

The Current Economic Environment Poses Challenges For Us and Could Adversely Affect Our Financial Condition and Results of Operations. We are operating in a challenging and uncertain economic environment, including generally uncertain national conditions and local conditions in our markets. The capital and credit markets have been experiencing volatility and disruption for more than 12 months. The volatility and disruption has reached unprecedented levels. The risks associated with our business become more acute in periods of a slowing economy or slow growth. Financial institutions continue to be affected by sharp declines in the real estate market and constrained financial markets. While we are taking steps to decrease and limit our exposure to problem loans, we nonetheless retain direct exposure to the residential and commercial real estate markets, and we are affected by these events.

Our loan portfolio includes commercial real estate loans, residential mortgage loans, and construction and land development loans. Continued declines in real estate values, home sales volumes and financial stress on borrowers as a result of the uncertain economic environment, including job losses, could have an adverse effect on our borrowers or their customers, which could adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations. In addition, a possible national economic recession or further deterioration in local economic conditions in our markets could drive losses beyond that which is provided for in our allowance for loan losses and result in the following other consequences:
increases in loan delinquencies, problem assets and foreclosures may increase; demand for our products and services may decline; deposits may decrease, which would adversely impact our liquidity position; and collateral for our loans, especially real estate, may decline in value, in turn reducing customers' borrowing power, and reducing the value of assets and collateral associated with our existing loans.

Impact of Recent and Future Legislation. Congress and the Treasury Department have recently adopted legislation and taken actions to address the disruptions in the financial system and declines in the housing market. See Item 1 - Business - Regulation - Recent Legislative Developments. It is not clear at this time what impact EESA, TARP, ARRA and other liquidity and funding initiatives of the Treasury and other bank regulatory agencies that have been previously announced, and any additional programs that may be initiated in the future, will have on the financial markets and the financial services industry. The extreme levels of volatility and limited credit availability currently being experienced could continue to affect the U.S. banking industry and the broader U.S. and global economies, which will have an effect on all financial institutions, including the Company. The actual impact that EESA, ARRA and related measures undertaken to alleviate the credit crisis will have on the financial markets is unknown. The failure of such measures to help stabilize the financial markets, and a continuation or worsening of current financial market conditions, could materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations, access to credit or the trading price of our common stock. Finally, there can be no assurance regarding the specific impact that such measures may have on us and no assurance whether or to what extent we will be able to benefit from such programs.

In addition to the legislation mentioned above, federal and state governments could pass additional legislation responsive to current credit conditions. As an example, the Bank could experience higher credit losses because of federal or state legislation or regulatory action that reduces the amount the Bank's borrowers are otherwise contractually required to pay under existing loan contracts. Also, the Bank could experience higher credit losses because of federal or state legislation or regulatory action that limits its ability to foreclose on property or other collateral or makes foreclosure less economically feasible.

Additional Increases in Insurance Premiums. The FDIC insures the Bank's deposits up to certain limits. The FDIC charges us premiums to maintain the Deposit Insurance Fund. The Bank elected to participate in the FDIC's Temporary Liquidity Guarantee Program, which will increase its insurance premiums by 85 basis points per annum with respect to the Bank's deposits. Current economic conditions have increased expectations for bank failures. The FDIC takes control of failed banks and ensures payment of deposits up to insured limits using the resources of the Deposit Insurance Fund. The FDIC has designated the Deposit Insurance Fund long-term target reserve ratio at 1.25 percent of insured deposits. Due to recent bank failures, the FDIC insurance fund reserve ratio has fallen below 1.15 percent, the statutory minimum. The FDIC has developed a restoration plan that will uniformly increase insurance assessments by 7 basis points (annualized) effective January 1, 2009. Effective April 1, 2009, the plan also has made changes to the deposit insurance assessment system resulting in increases in the assessment range for insured institutions. Further increases in premium assessments would increase the Company's expenses. Also, the FDIC has announced a 20 basis point special assessment payable in September 2009 (possibly to be reduced to a 10 basis point assessment), as well as the possibility of additional special assessments of up to 10 basis points after June 2009, as necessary. See Item 1 - Business - Regulation - Insurance of Deposits.

Increased assessment rates and special assessments could have a material impact on the Company's results of operations.

The Soundness of Other Financial Institutions Could Adversely Affect Us. Financial services institutions are interrelated as a result of trading, clearing, counterparty, or other relationships. We have exposure to many different industries and counterparties, and we routinely execute transactions with counterparties in the financial services industry, including brokers and dealers, commercial banks, investment banks, mutual and hedge funds, and other institutional clients. Many of these transactions expose us to credit risk in the event of default by our counterparty or client. In addition, our credit risk may be exacerbated when the collateral held by us cannot be realized or is liquidated at prices not sufficient to recover the full amount of the loan or derivative exposure due us. There is no assurance that any such losses would not materially and adversely affect our results of operations or earnings.

Future Reduction in Liquidity in the Banking System. The Federal Reserve Bank has been providing vast amounts of liquidity into the banking system to compensate for weaknesses in short-term borrowing markets and other capital markets. A reduction in the Federal Reserve's activities or capacity could reduce liquidity in the markets, thereby increasing funding costs to the Bank or reducing the availability of funds to the Bank to finance its existing operations.

Difficult Market Conditions Have Adversely Affected Our Industry. We are particularly exposed to downturns in the U.S. housing market. Dramatic declines in the housing market over the past year, with falling home prices and increasing foreclosures, unemployment and under-employment, have negatively impacted the credit performance of mortgage loans and securities and resulted in significant write-downs of asset values by financial institutions, including government-sponsored entities, major commercial and investment banks, and regional financial institutions. Reflecting concern about the stability of the financial markets generally and the strength of counterparties, many lenders and institutional investors have reduced or ceased providing funding to borrowers, including to other financial institutions. This market turmoil and tightening of credit have led to an increased level of commercial and consumer delinquencies, lack of consumer confidence, increased market volatility and widespread reduction of business activity generally. The resulting economic pressure on consumers and lack of confidence in the financial markets could adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations. We do not expect that the difficult conditions in the financial markets are likely to improve in the near future. A worsening of these conditions would likely exacerbate the adverse effects of these difficult market conditions on the financial institutions industry. In particular, we may face the following risks in connection with these events:

� We expect to face increased regulation of our industry. Compliance with such regulation may increase our costs and limit our ability to pursue business opportunities.

� Our ability to assess the creditworthiness of our customers may be impaired if the models and approach we use to select, manage and underwrite our customers become less predictive of future behaviors.

� The process we use to estimate losses inherent in our credit exposure requires difficult, subjective and complex judgments, including forecasts of economic conditions and how these economic predictions might impair the ability of our borrowers to repay their loans, which may no longer be capable of accurate estimation which may, in turn, impact the reliability of the process.

� Our ability to borrow from other financial institutions on favorable terms or at all could be adversely affected by further disruptions in the capital markets or other events, including actions by rating agencies and deteriorating investor expectations.

� Competition in our industry could intensify as a result of the increasing consolidation of financial services companies in connection with current market conditions.

� We may be required to pay significantly higher deposit insurance premiums because market developments have significantly depleted the insurance fund of the FDIC and reduced the ratio of reserves to insured deposits.

Concentrations of Real Estate Loans Could Subject the Company to Increased Risks in the Event of a Real Estate Recession or Natural Disaster. A significant portion of the Company's loan portfolio is secured by real estate. The real estate collateral in each case provides an alternate source of repayment in the event of default by the borrower and may deteriorate in value during the time the credit is extended. A weakening of the real estate market in our primary market area could result in an increase in the number of borrowers who default on their loans and a reduction in the value of the collateral securing their loans, which in turn could have an adverse effect on our profitability and asset quality. If we are required to liquidate the collateral securing a loan to satisfy the debt during a period of reduced real estate values, our earnings and capital could be adversely affected. Historically, Indiana and Kentucky have experienced, on occasion, significant natural disasters, including tornadoes and floods. The availability of insurance for losses for such catastrophes is limited. Our operations could also be interrupted by such natural disasters. Acts of nature, including tornadoes and floods, which may cause uninsured damage and other loss of value to real estate that secures our loans or interruption in our business operations, may also negatively impact our operating results or financial condition.

Critical Accounting Policies

Note 1 to the Consolidated Financial Statements contains a summary of the
Company's significant accounting policies for the year ended December 31, 2008. Certain of these policies are important to the portrayal of the Company's financial condition, since they require management to make difficult, complex or subjective judgments, some of which may relate to matters that are inherently uncertain. Management believes that its critical accounting policies include determining the allowance for loan losses and the valuation of mortgage servicing rights.

Allowance For Loan Losses

The allowance for loan losses is a significant estimate that can and does change based on management's assumptions about specific borrowers and current economic and business conditions, among other factors. Management reviews the adequacy of the allowance for loan losses at least on a quarterly basis. The evaluation by management includes consideration of past loss experience, changes in the composition of the loan portfolio, the current economic condition, the amount of loans outstanding, certain identified problem loans, and the probability of collecting all amounts due.

The allowance for loan losses represents management's estimate of probable incurred losses inherent in the Company's loan portfolios. In determining the appropriate amount of the allowance for loan losses, management makes numerous assumptions, estimates and assessments.

The Company's strategy for credit risk management includes conservative, centralized credit policies, and uniform underwriting criteria for all loans as well as an overall credit limit for each customer significantly below legal lending limits. The strategy also emphasizes diversification on a geographic, industry and customer level, regular credit quality reviews and quarterly management reviews of large credit exposures and loans experiencing deterioration of credit quality.

The Company's allowance consists of three components: probable incurred losses estimated from individual reviews of specific loans, probable incurred losses estimated from historical loss rates, and probable incurred losses resulting from economic or other deterioration above and beyond what is reflected in the first two components of the allowance.

Larger commercial loans that exhibit probable or observed credit weaknesses are subject to individual review. Where appropriate, reserves are allocated to individual loans based on management's estimate of the borrower's ability to repay the loan given the availability of collateral, other sources of cash flow and legal options available to the Company. Included in the review of individual loans are those that are impaired as provided in Statement of Financial Accounting Standards ("SFAS") No. 114, Accounting by Creditors for Impairment of a Loan. Any allowances for impaired loans are measured based on the present value of expected future cash flows discounted at the loan's effective interest rate or fair value of the underlying collateral. The Company evaluates the collectibility of both principal and interest when assessing the need for a loss accrual. Historical loss rates are applied to other commercial loans not subject to specific reserve allocations.

Homogenous loans, such as consumer installment and residential mortgage loans are not individually risk graded. Rather, standard credit scoring systems are used to assess credit risks. Reserves are established for each pool of loans based on the expected net charge-offs for one year. Loss rates are based on the average net charge-off history by loan category.

Historical loss rates for commercial and consumer loans may be adjusted for significant factors that, in management's judgment, reflect the impact of any current conditions on loss recognition. Factors which management considers in the analysis include the effects of the national and local economies, trends in the nature and volume of loans (delinquencies, charge-offs and nonaccrual loans), changes in mix, credit score migration comparisons, asset quality trends, risk management and loan administration, changes in the internal lending policies and credit standards, collection practices and examination results from bank regulatory agencies and the Company's internal loan review.

An unallocated reserve is maintained to recognize the imprecision in estimating and measuring loss when evaluating reserves for individual loans or pools of loans. Allowances on individual loans and historical loss rates are reviewed no less than quarterly and adjusted as necessary based on changing borrower and/or collateral conditions and actual collection and charge-off experience.

The Company's primary market area for lending is Clark, Floyd and Jefferson counties in southeastern Indiana and portions of northeastern Kentucky adjacent to that market. When evaluating the adequacy of allowance, consideration is given to this regional geographic concentration and the closely associated effect changing economic conditions have on the Company's customers.

The Company has not substantively changed any aspect to its overall approach in the determination of the allowance for loan losses. There have been no material changes in assumptions or estimation techniques as compared to prior periods that impacted the determination of the current period allowance.

As the national economy worsened, the Bank aggressively managed delinquencies, with overall delinquencies 30 or more days past due as of December 31, 2008 at 1.07%, compared to 1.48% at the same date in 2007. Non-performing loans as of December 31, 2008 were $1.0 million, compared to $1.8 million at the same date in 2007, and non-performing loans as a percent of total loans were .37% and .71% respectively for those periods. Foreclosures were actively processed and at December 31, 2008, the Bank held $259,000 in Real Estate Owned, as compared to $184,000 at the same date a year earlier.

In anticipation of an unavoidable decline in the local economy, the Bank increased its analysis of problem loans and established higher levels of specific reserves for potential losses. Net charge offs for the year ended December 31, 2008 were $924,000 as compared to $530,000 for the same period in 2007. The major portion of the year to year increase was the charge off of one relationship totaling $453,000.

Valuation of Mortgage Servicing Rights

The Company recognizes the rights to service mortgage loans as separate assets in the consolidated balance sheet. The total cost of loans, when sold, is allocated between loans and mortgage servicing rights based on the relative fair values of each. Mortgage servicing rights are subsequently carried at the lower of the initial carrying value, adjusted for amortization, or fair value. Mortgage servicing rights are evaluated for impairment based on the fair value of those rights. Factors included in the calculation of fair value of the mortgage servicing rights include estimating the present value of future net cash flows, market loan prepayment speeds for similar loans, discount rates, servicing costs, and other economic factors. Servicing rights are amortized over the estimated period of net servicing revenue. It is likely that these economic factors will change over the life of the mortgage servicing rights, resulting in different valuations of the mortgage servicing rights. The differing valuations will affect the carrying value of the mortgage servicing rights on the consolidated balance sheet as well as the income recorded from loan servicing in the consolidated income statement. As of December 31, 2008, mortgage servicing rights had a carrying value of $239,000.

Discussion of Changes in Financial Condition from December 31, 2007 to December 31, 2008

At December 31, 2008, River Valley's consolidated assets totaled $372.3 million, representing an increase of $22.3 million, or 6.4%, over the December 31, 2007 total. The increase in assets was primarily attributable to growth in the loan portfolio, from $258.6 million at December 31, 2007 to $285.3 million at the same date in 2008, a growth of $26.7 million or 10.3%. Asset growth was funded by similar growth in deposits with total deposits at December 31, 2008 of $247.8 million, an increase of $28.1 million, or 12.8%, compared to total deposits at . . .