I agree on all points.

If we can get the client to agree to increase the budget we will probably go with a more complex finder and a view. Only allow the user to bring down x number of records.

>That'll work, but bear in mind you'll need a new set of indexes per office. You'll pay for that later in that it will take more time to reindex/re-create indexes, and record updates will have to updated those indexes.
>
>SET KEY would be better for this scenario. Views/SPT would be ideal. I don't see how you not knowing SET KEY relates to the budget. You bill your client for time you spend learning?
>
>>It should be set index list based on the office selected.
>>
>>>>
>>>>Unfortunately at this time all we really have budget for is a quick and dirty solution using filtered indexes and changing indexes on the fly.
>>>>
>>>
>>>What do you mean? You're going to create indexes on the fly? That's dirty and definitely not quick. SET KEY will knock your socks off!