UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549
FORM N-CSR
CERTIFIED SHAREHOLDER REPORT OF REGISTERED MANAGEMENT
INVESTMENT COMPANIES
Investment Company Act file number |
811-3721 | |||||
|
| |||||
|
Dreyfus Intermediate Municipal Bond Fund, Inc. |
| ||||
|
(Exact name of Registrant as specified in charter) |
| ||||
|
|
| ||||
|
c/o The Dreyfus Corporation 200 Park Avenue New York, New York 10166 |
| ||||
|
(Address of principal executive offices) (Zip code) |
| ||||
|
|
| ||||
|
Janette E. Farragher, Esq. 200 Park Avenue New York, New York 10166 |
| ||||
|
(Name and address of agent for service) |
| ||||
| ||||||
Registrant's telephone number, including area code: |
(212) 922-6000 | |||||
|
| |||||
Date of fiscal year end:
|
5/31 |
| ||||
Date of reporting period: |
11/30/11 |
| ||||
Dreyfus |
Intermediate Municipal |
Bond Fund, Inc. |
SEMIANNUAL REPORT November 30, 2011
Save time. Save paper. View your next shareholder report online as soon as it’s available. Log into www.dreyfus.com and sign up for Dreyfus eCommunications. It’s simple and only takes a few minutes.
The views expressed in this report reflect those of the portfolio manager only through the end of the period covered and do not necessarily represent the views of Dreyfus or any other person in the Dreyfus organization. Any such views are subject to change at any time based upon market or other conditions and Dreyfus disclaims any responsibility to update such views.These views may not be relied on as investment advice and, because investment decisions for a Dreyfus fund are based on numerous factors, may not be relied on as an indication of trading intent on behalf of any Dreyfus fund.
Not FDIC-Insured • Not Bank-Guaranteed • May Lose Value |
Contents | |
THE FUND | |
2 |
A Letter from the Chairman and CEO |
3 |
Discussion of Fund Performance |
6 |
Understanding Your Fund’s Expenses |
6 |
Comparing Your Fund’s Expenses With Those of Other Funds |
7 |
Statement of Investments |
32 |
Statement of Assets and Liabilities |
33 |
Statement of Operations |
34 |
Statement of Changes in Net Assets |
35 |
Financial Highlights |
36 |
Notes to Financial Statements |
44 |
Information About the Renewal of the Fund’s Management Agreement |
FOR MORE INFORMATION | |
Back Cover |
Dreyfus Intermediate Municipal
Bond Fund, Inc.
The Fund
A LETTER FROM THE CHAIRMAN AND CEO
Dear Shareholder:
We are pleased to present this semiannual report for Dreyfus Intermediate Municipal Bond Fund, Inc., covering the six-month period from June 1, 2011, through November 30, 2011. For information about how the fund performed during the reporting period, as well as general market perspectives, we provide a Discussion of Fund Performance on the pages that follow.
Investors were encouraged by expectations of a more robust economic recovery into the first quarter of 2011, but sentiment subsequently deteriorated due to disappointing economic data, an escalating sovereign debt crisis in Europe and a contentious debate regarding taxes, spending and borrowing in the United States. Market volatility was particularly severe in August and September after a major credit rating agency downgraded long-term U.S. government debt. While most fixed-income securities proved volatile in this tumultuous environment, municipal bonds held up relatively well due to robust demand for a limited supply of newly issued securities.
The economic outlook currently remains clouded by uncertainty regarding the ability of European policymakers to contain the region’s debt crisis. However, conditions in the United States seem to be improving as inflationary pressures have receded, consumer confidence has strengthened and the unemployment rate has declined.To assess the potential impact of these and other developments on your investments, we encourage you, as always, to speak with your financial advisor.
Thank you for your continued confidence and support.
Jonathan R. Baum
Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
The Dreyfus Corporation
December 15, 2011
2
DISCUSSION OF FUND PERFORMANCE
For the period of June 1, 2011, through November 30, 2011, as provided by Steven Harvey, Portfolio Manager
Fund and Market Performance Overview
For the six-month period ended November 30, 2011, Dreyfus Intermediate Municipal Bond Fund achieved a total return of 3.60%.1 The Barclays Capital 7-Year Municipal Bond Index (the “Index”), the fund’s benchmark, achieved a total return of 3.88% for the same period.2
Despite intensifying economic uncertainty during the reporting period, municipal bonds fared relatively well as a reduced supply of newly issued securities was met by robust investor demand.The fund’s returns were slightly lower than its benchmark due primarily to a higher allocation to bonds rated double-A and triple-A.
The Fund’s Investment Approach
The fund seeks the maximum amount of current income exempt from federal income tax as is consistent with the preservation of capital.To pursue its goal, the fund normally invests substantially all of its assets in municipal bonds that provide income exempt from federal personal income tax.
The fund invests at least 80% of its assets in municipal bonds rated A or higher, or the unrated equivalent as determined by Dreyfus. The fund may invest up to 20% of its assets in municipal bonds rated below A, including bonds rated below investment grade (“high yield” or “junk” bonds) or the unrated equivalent as determined by Dreyfus. The dollar-weighted average maturity of the fund’s portfolio ranges between three and 10 years.
We focus on identifying undervalued sectors and securities, and we minimize the use of interest rate forecasting. We select municipal bonds by using fundamental credit analysis to estimate the relative value and attractiveness of various sectors and securities and to exploit pricing inefficiencies in the municipal bond market.We actively trade among various sectors, such as pre-refunded, general obligation and revenue, based on their apparent relative values.
The Fund | 3 |
DISCUSSION OF FUND PERFORMANCE (continued)
Municipal Bonds Held Up Relatively Well Amid Uncertainty
Investor confidence generally was shaken in the spring of 2011 when Greece appeared headed for default on its sovereign debt, U.S. economic data disappointed and a contentious political debate regarding U.S. government spending and borrowing intensified. Consequently, investors shifted their focus to traditionally defensive investments, producing bouts of heightened volatility in many financial markets.Turbulence was particularly severe in August and September, after a major credit-rating agency downgraded its assessment of long-term U.S. debt securities. Securities that had been hard-hit in late summer rebounded to a degree in October and November as certain macroeconomic concerns eased.
Positive supply-and-demand forces helped intermediate-term municipal bonds gain some value despite these developments. New issuance volumes fell sharply in 2011 after a flood of new supply in late 2010 when issuers sought to lock in federal subsidies provided by the expiring Build America Bonds program. Political pressure to reduce spending and borrowing also led to fewer capital projects requiring financing during the reporting period.Yet, demand for municipal bonds remained steadily robust from individual and institutional investors seeking higher levels of tax-exempt income.
Although many states and municipalities continued to struggle with budget shortfalls, tax revenues generally have trended upwards, helping to relieve fiscal stresses.
Revenue Bonds Supported Relative Performance
Early in the reporting period, the fund established positions in the general obligation bonds of certain states—including California, Illinois and New Jersey—that we believed were punished too severely at the end of 2010.These securities subsequently rebounded, contributing positively to the fund’s relative performance. We also favored income-oriented bonds backed by dedicated revenues from municipal projects.The fund benefited during the reporting period from revenue bonds backed by health care facilities, airports and corporations. In addition, the fund’s relative results were buoyed by underweighted exposure to low yielding escrowed bonds, which fell out of favor among investors.
4
The fund also benefited during much of the reporting period from an average duration that was modestly longer than market averages. The fund’s duration posture enabled it to capture incrementally higher levels of income and to participate more fully in market rallies.We generally focused on bonds with eight- to 10-year maturities, and we maintained underweighted exposure to bonds maturing in three years or less.
On the other hand, the fund’s relative performance was mildly undermined by our ongoing efforts to improve its overall credit profile. A shift toward higher-rated bonds prevented the fund from benefiting more fully from relative strength among lower-rated securities. A small weighting in tobacco securitization bonds lagged on weaker-than-expected consumption trends.
Maintaining Credit Discipline
We believe the fund remains well positioned for an environment of subpar economic growth and heightened market volatility. We have maintained an emphasis on revenue bonds with strong credit characteristics, particularly those backed by essential services facilities.We also are encouraged by the market’s longer-term prospects. In our judgment, municipal bonds appear likely to be the focus of demand from investors seeking tax-advantaged income as they grow more concerned about persistently low interest rates and potential tax increases.
December 15, 2011
Bond funds are subject generally to interest rate, credit, liquidity and market risks, to varying | |
degrees, all of which are more fully described in the fund’s prospectus. Generally, all other factors | |
being equal, bond prices are inversely related to interest-rate changes, and rate increases can cause | |
price declines. | |
1 | Total return includes reinvestment of dividends and any capital gains paid. Past performance is no |
guarantee of future results. Share price, yield and investment return fluctuate such that upon | |
redemption, fund shares may be worth more or less than their original cost. Income may be subject | |
to state and local taxes, and some income may be subject to the federal alternative minimum tax | |
(AMT) for certain investors. Capital gains, if any, are fully taxable. | |
2 | SOURCE: LIPPER INC. — Reflects reinvestment of dividends and, where applicable, capital |
gain distributions.The Barclays Capital 7-Year Municipal Bond Index is an unmanaged total | |
return performance benchmark for the investment-grade, geographically unrestricted 7-year tax- | |
exempt bond market, consisting of municipal bonds with maturities of 6-8 years. Index returns do | |
not reflect fees and expenses associated with operating a mutual fund. |
The Fund | 5 |
UNDERSTANDING YOUR FUND’S EXPENSES (Unaudited)
As a mutual fund investor, you pay ongoing expenses, such as management fees and other expenses. Using the information below, you can estimate how these expenses affect your investment and compare them with the expenses of other funds.You also may pay one-time transaction expenses, including sales charges (loads) and redemption fees, which are not shown in this section and would have resulted in higher total expenses. For more information, see your fund’s prospectus or talk to your financial adviser.
Review your fund’s expenses
The table below shows the expenses you would have paid on a $1,000 investment in Dreyfus Intermediate Municipal Bond Fund, Inc. from June 1, 2011 to November 30, 2011. It also shows how much a $1,000 investment would be worth at the close of the period, assuming actual returns and expenses.
Expenses and Value of a $1,000 Investment |
assuming actual returns for the six months ended November 30, 2011 |
Expenses paid per $1,000† | $ | 3.92 |
Ending value (after expenses) | $ | 1,036.00 |
COMPARING YOUR FUND’S EXPENSES
WITH THOSE OF OTHER FUNDS (Unaudited)
Using the SEC’s method to compare expenses
The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has established guidelines to help investors assess fund expenses. Per these guidelines, the table below shows your fund’s expenses based on a $1,000 investment, assuming a hypothetical 5% annualized return. You can use this information to compare the ongoing expenses (but not transaction expenses or total cost) of investing in the fund with those of other funds.All mutual fund shareholder reports will provide this information to help you make this comparison. Please note that you cannot use this information to estimate your actual ending account balance and expenses paid during the period.
Expenses and Value of a $1,000 Investment
assuming a hypothetical 5% annualized return for the six months ended November 30, 2011
Expenses paid per $1,000† | $ | 3.89 |
Ending value (after expenses) | $ | 1,021.15 |
† Expenses are equal to the fund’s annualized expense ratio of .77%, multiplied by the average account value over the |
period, multiplied by 183/366 (to reflect the one-half year period). |
6
STATEMENT OF INVESTMENTS |
November 30, 2011 (Unaudited) |
Long-Term Municipal | Coupon | Maturity | Principal | |
Investments—98.2% | Rate (%) | Date | Amount ($) | Value ($) |
Alabama—2.0% | ||||
Alabama Port Authority, | ||||
Docks Facilities Revenue | ||||
(Insured; National Public | ||||
Finance Guarantee Corp.) | 5.00 | 10/1/22 | 5,000,000 | 5,099,650 |
Alabama Public School and | ||||
College Authority, Capital | ||||
Improvement Bonds | 5.00 | 12/1/24 | 2,500,000 | 2,768,450 |
Birmingham Water Works Board, | ||||
Water Revenue (Insured; | ||||
Assured Guaranty | ||||
Municipal Corp.) | 5.00 | 1/1/17 | 6,310,000 | 7,232,522 |
Jefferson County, | ||||
Limited Obligation | ||||
School Warrants | 5.25 | 1/1/17 | 2,500,000 | 2,401,475 |
Alaska—.5% | ||||
Alaska Industrial Development and | ||||
Export Authority, Revolving | ||||
Fund Revenue | 5.25 | 4/1/24 | 3,780,000 | 4,242,332 |
Arizona—3.8% | ||||
Arizona Transportation Board, | ||||
Highway Revenue | 5.00 | 7/1/21 | 10,990,000 | 12,533,875 |
Arizona Transportation Board, | ||||
Transportation Excise Tax | ||||
Revenue (Maricopa County | ||||
Regional Area Road Fund) | 5.00 | 7/1/17 | 6,000,000 | 7,114,080 |
Phoenix Civic Improvement | ||||
Corporation, Junior Lien Water | ||||
System Revenue | 5.00 | 7/1/23 | 4,290,000 | 5,074,641 |
Pima County, | ||||
Sewer System Revenue | ||||
Obligations (Insured; Assured | ||||
Guaranty Municipal Corp.) | 5.00 | 7/1/23 | 3,250,000 | 3,714,913 |
Pima County Industrial Development | ||||
Authority, Education Revenue | ||||
(American Charter Schools | ||||
Foundation Project) | 5.13 | 7/1/15 | 2,680,000 | 2,628,383 |
Salt River Project Agricultural | ||||
Improvement and Power | ||||
District, Salt River Project | ||||
Electric System Revenue | 5.00 | 12/1/27 | 2,500,000 | 2,833,375 |
The Fund | 7 |
STATEMENT OF INVESTMENTS (Unaudited) (continued)
Long-Term Municipal | Coupon | Maturity | Principal | ||
Investments (continued) | Rate (%) | Date | Amount ($) | Value ($) | |
California—13.8% | |||||
ABAG Finance Authority for | |||||
Nonprofit Corporations, | |||||
Revenue (San Diego | |||||
Hospital Association) | 5.13 | 3/1/18 | 200,000 | 208,604 | |
Arcadia Unified School District, | |||||
GO (Insured; Assured Guaranty | |||||
Municipal Corp.) | 0.00 | 8/1/20 | 1,635,000 | a | 1,111,898 |
Bay Area Toll Authority, | |||||
San Francisco Bay Area Toll | |||||
Bridge Revenue | 5.25 | 4/1/24 | 6,000,000 | 6,801,660 | |
California, | |||||
GO (Various Purpose) | 5.25 | 10/1/20 | 18,060,000 | 20,901,380 | |
California, | |||||
GO (Various Purpose) | 5.25 | 3/1/22 | 1,250,000 | 1,427,588 | |
California, | |||||
GO (Various Purpose) | 5.63 | 4/1/25 | 3,500,000 | 3,906,595 | |
California Department of Water | |||||
Resources, Power Supply Revenue | 5.00 | 5/1/22 | 4,300,000 | 5,015,262 | |
California Department of Water | |||||
Resources, Water System | |||||
Revenue (Central Valley Project) | 5.00 | 12/1/24 | 2,500,000 | 2,810,675 | |
California Health Facilities | |||||
Financing Authority, Revenue | |||||
(Providence Health and Services) | 6.25 | 10/1/24 | 3,000,000 | 3,504,510 | |
California Health Facilities | |||||
Financing Authority, Revenue | |||||
(Sutter Health) | 5.25 | 8/15/22 | 3,000,000 | 3,286,530 | |
California Housing Finance Agency, | |||||
Home Mortgage Revenue | 4.55 | 8/1/21 | 3,810,000 | 3,578,390 | |
California Housing Finance Agency, | |||||
Home Mortgage Revenue | 4.60 | 8/1/21 | 2,580,000 | 2,449,994 | |
California Housing Finance Agency, | |||||
Home Mortgage Revenue | |||||
(Insured; FGIC) | 4.40 | 2/1/18 | 3,300,000 | 3,207,897 | |
California Housing Finance Agency, | |||||
Home Mortgage Revenue | |||||
(Insured; FGIC) | 4.40 | 8/1/18 | 3,310,000 | 3,206,728 | |
California State University | |||||
Trustees, Systemwide Revenue | 5.00 | 11/1/22 | 5,000,000 | 5,828,100 |
8
Long-Term Municipal | Coupon | Maturity | Principal | ||
Investments (continued) | Rate (%) | Date | Amount ($) | Value ($) | |
California (continued) | |||||
Clovis Unified School District, | |||||
GO (Insured; National Public | |||||
Finance Guarantee Corp.) | 0.00 | 8/1/22 | 10,415,000 | a | 6,480,213 |
Coast Community College District, | |||||
GO (Insured; National Public | |||||
Finance Guarantee Corp.) | 0.00 | 8/1/20 | 1,855,000 | a | 1,299,576 |
Los Angeles Department of | |||||
Airports, Subordinate | |||||
Revenue (Los Angeles | |||||
International Airport) | 5.25 | 5/15/25 | 1,845,000 | 2,000,755 | |
Los Angeles Harbor Department, | |||||
Revenue | 5.00 | 8/1/19 | 1,425,000 | 1,646,245 | |
Sacramento City Unified School | |||||
District, GO (Insured; Assured | |||||
Guaranty Municipal Corp.) | 0.00 | 7/1/23 | 5,065,000 | a | 2,861,370 |
San Diego County Water Authority, | |||||
Water Revenue | 5.00 | 5/1/21 | 2,725,000 | 3,288,966 | |
San Diego County Water Authority, | |||||
Water Revenue | 5.00 | 5/1/28 | 5,000,000 | 5,527,500 | |
San Diego Public Facilities | |||||
Financing Authority, | |||||
Water Revenue | 5.00 | 8/1/24 | 7,560,000 | 8,568,126 | |
San Francisco City and County | |||||
Airport Commission, Second | |||||
Series Revenue (San Francisco | |||||
International Airport) | 5.00 | 5/1/17 | 5,000,000 | 5,515,600 | |
Southern California Public Power | |||||
Authority, Revenue (Canyon | |||||
Power Project) | 5.00 | 7/1/23 | 5,000,000 | 5,665,200 | |
Southern California Public Power | |||||
Authority, Revenue (Windy | |||||
Point/Windy Flats Project) | 5.00 | 7/1/23 | 5,000,000 | 5,697,050 | |
Tobacco Securitization | |||||
Authority of Southern | |||||
California, Tobacco | |||||
Settlement Asset-Backed | |||||
Bonds (San Diego | |||||
County Tobacco Asset | |||||
Securitization Corporation) | 4.75 | 6/1/25 | 1,860,000 | 1,574,062 |
The Fund | 9 |
STATEMENT OF INVESTMENTS (Unaudited) (continued)
Long-Term Municipal | Coupon | Maturity | Principal | ||
Investments (continued) | Rate (%) | Date | Amount ($) | Value ($) | |
California (continued) | |||||
Tuolumne Wind Project Authority, | |||||
Revenue (Tuolumne | |||||
Company Project) | 5.00 | 1/1/22 | 2,000,000 | 2,229,940 | |
University of California Regents, | |||||
General Revenue | 5.25 | 5/15/23 | 2,500,000 | 2,823,925 | |
Colorado—.9% | |||||
Colorado Health Facilities | |||||
Authority, Revenue (Catholic | |||||
Health Initiatives) | 6.00 | 10/1/23 | 5,355,000 | 6,171,156 | |
E-470 Public Highway Authority, | |||||
Senior Revenue (Insured; | |||||
National Public Finance | |||||
Guarantee Corp.) | 0.00 | 9/1/18 | 3,000,000 | a | 2,104,170 |
Connecticut—.3% | |||||
Connecticut Health and Educational | |||||
Facilities Authority, Revenue | |||||
(Wesleyan University Issue) | 5.00 | 7/1/26 | 1,000,000 | 1,124,990 | |
Connecticut Health and Educational | |||||
Facilities Authority, Revenue | |||||
(Wesleyan University Issue) | 5.00 | 7/1/27 | 1,000,000 | 1,115,490 | |
District of Columbia—1.8% | |||||
District of Columbia, | |||||
HR (Children’s Hospital | |||||
Obligated Group Issue) | |||||
(Insured; Assured Guaranty | |||||
Municipal Corp.) | 5.25 | 7/15/18 | 2,000,000 | 2,300,620 | |
District of Columbia, | |||||
Income Tax Secured Revenue | 5.00 | 12/1/25 | 2,500,000 | 2,843,300 | |
District of Columbia, | |||||
Revenue (Howard University | |||||
Issue) (Insured; AMBAC) | |||||
(Prerefunded) | 5.00 | 10/1/16 | 2,545,000 | b | 3,012,491 |
District of Columbia, | |||||
Revenue (Howard University | |||||
Issue) (Insured; AMBAC) | |||||
(Prerefunded) | 5.00 | 10/1/16 | 2,660,000 | b | 3,148,615 |
Washington Metropolitan Area | |||||
Transit Authority, Gross | |||||
Revenue Transit Bonds | 5.25 | 7/1/23 | 3,725,000 | 4,255,850 |
10
Long-Term Municipal | Coupon | Maturity | Principal | |
Investments (continued) | Rate (%) | Date | Amount ($) | Value ($) |
Florida—13.8% | ||||
Bay County, | ||||
Sales Tax Revenue | ||||
(Insured; AMBAC) | 5.00 | 9/1/24 | 2,375,000 | 2,513,724 |
Brevard County, | ||||
Local Option Fuel Tax Revenue | ||||
(Insured; National Public | ||||
Finance Guarantee Corp.) | 5.00 | 8/1/23 | 1,260,000 | 1,291,286 |
Broward County, | ||||
Port Facilities Revenue | 5.00 | 9/1/21 | 4,340,000 | 4,653,999 |
Citizens Property Insurance | ||||
Corporation, Coastal Account | ||||
Senior Secured Revenue | 5.00 | 6/1/19 | 3,000,000 | 3,264,960 |
Citizens Property Insurance | ||||
Corporation, High-Risk Account | ||||
Senior Secured Revenue | 5.25 | 6/1/17 | 7,500,000 | 8,275,275 |
Collier County, | ||||
Gas Tax Revenue | ||||
(Insured; AMBAC) | 5.25 | 6/1/19 | 2,190,000 | 2,267,964 |
Collier County School Board, | ||||
COP (Master Lease Program | ||||
Agreement) (Insured; Assured | ||||
Guaranty Municipal Corp.) | 5.25 | 2/15/20 | 3,500,000 | 4,056,640 |
Collier County School Board, | ||||
COP (Master Lease Program | ||||
Agreement) (Insured; Assured | ||||
Guaranty Municipal Corp.) | 5.25 | 2/15/22 | 2,000,000 | 2,306,520 |
Florida Education System, | ||||
University of Florida | ||||
Housing Revenue | ||||
(Insured; National Public | ||||
Finance Guarantee Corp.) | 5.00 | 7/1/22 | 2,055,000 | 2,223,489 |
Florida Hurricane Catastrophe Fund | ||||
Finance Corporation, Revenue | 5.00 | 7/1/16 | 2,250,000 | 2,489,175 |
Florida Municipal Power Agency, | ||||
Revenue (Stanton II Project) | ||||
(Insured; AMBAC) | 5.50 | 10/1/15 | 3,635,000 | 3,765,678 |
Florida Water Pollution Control | ||||
Financing Corporation, | ||||
Water PCR | 5.25 | 1/15/21 | 2,545,000 | 2,752,290 |
The Fund | 11 |
STATEMENT OF INVESTMENTS (Unaudited) (continued)
Long-Term Municipal | Coupon | Maturity | Principal | ||
Investments (continued) | Rate (%) | Date | Amount ($) | Value ($) | |
Florida (continued) | |||||
Hillsborough County, | |||||
GO (Unincorporated Area Parks | |||||
and Recreation Program) | |||||
(Insured; National Public | |||||
Finance Guarantee Corp.) | 5.00 | 7/1/22 | 1,155,000 | 1,419,668 | |
Hillsborough County, | |||||
Junior Lien Utility Revenue | |||||
(Insured; AMBAC) | 5.50 | 8/1/14 | 3,205,000 | 3,582,389 | |
Indian River County, | |||||
GO (Insured; National Public | |||||
Finance Guarantee Corp.) | 5.00 | 7/1/20 | 2,265,000 | 2,475,962 | |
Jacksonville, | |||||
Guaranteed Entitlement | |||||
Improvement Revenue (Insured; | |||||
National Public Finance | |||||
Guarantee Corp.) | 5.38 | 10/1/16 | 3,080,000 | 3,179,638 | |
Jacksonville Aviation Authority, | |||||
Revenue (Insured; AMBAC) | 5.00 | 10/1/19 | 3,220,000 | 3,425,661 | |
Jacksonville Economic Development | |||||
Commission, Health Care | |||||
Facilities Revenue (Florida | |||||
Proton Therapy Institute Project) | 6.00 | 9/1/17 | 2,545,000 | c | 2,681,030 |
Lakeland, | |||||
Energy System Revenue | |||||
(Insured; Assured Guaranty | |||||
Municipal Corp.) | 5.00 | 10/1/18 | 6,250,000 | 7,342,750 | |
Lee County, | |||||
Transportation Facilities | |||||
Revenue (Insured; AMBAC) | 5.50 | 10/1/15 | 2,500,000 | 2,505,150 | |
Martin County, | |||||
Utilities System Revenue | |||||
(Insured; National Public | |||||
Finance Guarantee Corp.) | 5.50 | 10/1/12 | 1,065,000 | 1,106,663 | |
Martin County, | |||||
Utilities System Revenue | |||||
(Insured; National Public | |||||
Finance Guarantee Corp.) | 5.50 | 10/1/13 | 1,485,000 | 1,602,003 | |
Miami-Dade County, | |||||
Aviation Revenue (Miami | |||||
International Airport) | 5.50 | 10/1/25 | 2,500,000 | 2,756,125 |
12
Long-Term Municipal | Coupon | Maturity | Principal | ||
Investments (continued) | Rate (%) | Date | Amount ($) | Value ($) | |
Florida (continued) | |||||
Miami-Dade County, | |||||
Transit System Sales Surtax | |||||
Revenue (Insured; XLCA) | 5.00 | 7/1/24 | 2,330,000 | 2,459,641 | |
Miami-Dade County, | |||||
Water and Sewer System Revenue | 5.38 | 10/1/24 | 5,000,000 | 5,617,700 | |
Miami-Dade County, | |||||
Water and Sewer System Revenue | |||||
(Insured; Assured Guaranty | |||||
Municipal Corp.) | 5.25 | 10/1/17 | 5,000,000 | 5,887,150 | |
Miami-Dade County School Board, | |||||
COP (Master Lease Purchase | |||||
Agreement) (Insured; FGIC) | 5.25 | 10/1/17 | 5,000,000 | 5,405,150 | |
Miami-Dade County School Board, | |||||
COP (Master Lease Purchase | |||||
Agreement) (Insured; National | |||||
Public Finance Guarantee Corp.) | 5.00 | 8/1/15 | 5,000,000 | 5,234,150 | |
Orlando Utilities Commission, | |||||
Utility System Revenue | 5.00 | 10/1/23 | 2,500,000 | 2,836,125 | |
Orlando-Orange County Expressway | |||||
Authority, Revenue (Insured; | |||||
Assured Guaranty Municipal Corp.) | 5.00 | 7/1/17 | 2,105,000 | 2,428,749 | |
Palm Bay, | |||||
Educational Facilities Revenue | |||||
(Patriot Charter School Project) | 6.75 | 7/1/22 | 3,000,000 | d | 809,940 |
Palm Beach County School Board, | |||||
COP (Master Lease Purchase | |||||
Agreement) (Insured; AMBAC) | 5.38 | 8/1/14 | 4,000,000 | 4,398,800 | |
Pasco County, | |||||
Solid Waste Disposal and Resource | |||||
Recovery System Revenue | 5.00 | 10/1/16 | 3,000,000 | 3,302,160 | |
Polk County, | |||||
Constitutional Fuel Tax | |||||
Improvement Revenue (Insured; | |||||
National Public Finance | |||||
Guarantee Corp.) | 5.00 | 12/1/19 | 580,000 | 629,056 | |
Polk County, | |||||
Utility System Revenue | |||||
(Insured; National Public | |||||
Finance Guarantee Corp.) | 5.25 | 10/1/18 | 2,000,000 | 2,125,960 |
The Fund | 13 |
STATEMENT OF INVESTMENTS (Unaudited) (continued)
Long-Term Municipal | Coupon | Maturity | Principal | ||
Investments (continued) | Rate (%) | Date | Amount ($) | Value ($) | |
Florida (continued) | |||||
Sarasota County School Board, | |||||
COP (Master Lease Program | |||||
Agreement) (Insured; National | |||||
Public Finance Guarantee Corp.) | 5.00 | 7/1/15 | 1,000,000 | 1,116,170 | |
Seminole County, | |||||
Water and Sewer Revenue | 5.00 | 10/1/21 | 1,050,000 | 1,154,748 | |
Tampa, | |||||
Solid Waste System Revenue | |||||
(Insured; Assured Guaranty | |||||
Municipal Corp.) | 5.00 | 10/1/16 | 2,690,000 | 2,958,381 | |
Volusia County School Board, | |||||
Sales Tax Revenue | |||||
(Insured; Assured Guaranty | |||||
Municipal Corp.) | 5.38 | 10/1/15 | 4,000,000 | 4,126,000 | |
Georgia—3.6% | |||||
Athens Housing Authority, | |||||
Student Housing LR (University | |||||
of Georgia Real Estate | |||||
Foundation East Campus | |||||
Housing, LLC Project) | |||||
(Insured; AMBAC) (Prerefunded) | 5.25 | 12/1/12 | 2,560,000 | b | 2,685,056 |
Athens Housing Authority, | |||||
Student Housing LR (University | |||||
of Georgia Real Estate | |||||
Foundation East Campus | |||||
Housing, LLC Project) | |||||
(Insured; AMBAC) (Prerefunded) | 5.25 | 12/1/12 | 2,700,000 | b | 2,831,895 |
Atlanta, | |||||
Water and Wastewater Revenue | 6.00 | 11/1/20 | 3,000,000 | 3,687,840 | |
Atlanta, | |||||
Water and Wastewater Revenue | |||||
(Insured; Assured Guaranty | |||||
Municipal Corp.) | 5.25 | 11/1/15 | 5,000,000 | 5,526,900 | |
DeKalb County, | |||||
Water and Sewerage Revenue | 5.25 | 10/1/25 | 4,000,000 | 4,430,440 | |
Municipal Electric Authority of | |||||
Georgia, Combustion Turbine | |||||
Project Revenue (Insured; | |||||
National Public Finance | |||||
Guarantee Corp.) | 5.25 | 11/1/16 | 5,000,000 | 5,187,950 |
14
Long-Term Municipal | Coupon | Maturity | Principal | |
Investments (continued) | Rate (%) | Date | Amount ($) | Value ($) |
Georgia (continued) | ||||
Municipal Electric Authority of | ||||
Georgia, Revenue (Project One | ||||
Subordinated Bonds) | 5.75 | 1/1/19 | 2,660,000 | 3,197,107 |
Private Colleges and Universities | ||||
Authority, Revenue | ||||
(Emory University) | 5.00 | 9/1/16 | 3,235,000 | 3,792,035 |
Hawaii—1.1% | ||||
Hawaii, | ||||
Airports System Revenue | 5.00 | 7/1/18 | 6,000,000 | 6,712,560 |
Honolulu City and County, | ||||
Wastewater System | ||||
Revenue (Second | ||||
Bond Resolution) | 5.00 | 7/1/22 | 2,500,000 | 2,879,025 |
Idaho—.2% | ||||
Idaho Health Facilities Authority, | ||||
Revenue (Trinity Health | ||||
Credit Group) | 6.13 | 12/1/28 | 1,450,000 | 1,627,639 |
Illinois—3.4% | ||||
Chicago, | ||||
General Airport Third Lien | ||||
Revenue (Chicago O’Hare | ||||
International Airport) | 5.00 | 1/1/17 | 2,500,000 | 2,835,700 |
Chicago, | ||||
General Airport Third Lien | ||||
Revenue (Chicago O’Hare | ||||
International Airport) | ||||
(Insured; CIFG) | 5.50 | 1/1/15 | 6,450,000 | 6,930,138 |
Chicago, | ||||
General Airport Third Lien | ||||
Revenue (Chicago O’Hare | ||||
International Airport) | ||||
(Insured; National Public | ||||
Finance Guarantee Corp.) | 5.25 | 1/1/17 | 2,000,000 | 2,272,880 |
Chicago, | ||||
GO (Insured; Assured Guaranty | ||||
Municipal Corp.) | 5.00 | 1/1/17 | 2,500,000 | 2,708,100 |
Chicago, | ||||
GO (Insured; National Public | ||||
Finance Guarantee Corp.) | 5.00 | 1/1/20 | 1,450,000 | 1,577,788 |
The Fund | 15 |
STATEMENT OF INVESTMENTS (Unaudited) (continued)
Long-Term Municipal | Coupon | Maturity | Principal | ||
Investments (continued) | Rate (%) | Date | Amount ($) | Value ($) | |
Illinois (continued) | |||||
Cook County Community High School | |||||
District Number 219, GO | |||||
(Insured; Assured Guaranty | |||||
Municipal Corp.) | 5.00 | 12/1/24 | 2,020,000 | 2,144,553 | |
Illinois, | |||||
Sales Tax Revenue | 5.00 | 6/15/18 | 1,700,000 | 1,982,557 | |
Illinois Toll Highway Authority, | |||||
Toll Highway Senior Revenue | 5.00 | 1/1/25 | 5,000,000 | 5,448,700 | |
Metropolitan Pier and Exposition | |||||
Authority, Dedicated State Tax | |||||
Revenue (McCormick Place | |||||
Expansion Project) (Insured; | |||||
National Public Finance | |||||
Guarantee Corp.) | 0/5.55 | 6/15/21 | 2,500,000 | e | 2,647,450 |
Railsplitter Tobacco Settlement | |||||
Authority, Tobacco | |||||
Settlement Revenue | 5.00 | 6/1/18 | 1,500,000 | 1,625,760 | |
Indiana—1.9% | |||||
Indiana Finance Authority, | |||||
First Lien Wastewater Utility | |||||
Revenue (CWA Authority Project) | 5.25 | 10/1/23 | 2,500,000 | 2,912,225 | |
Indiana Health Facility Financing | |||||
Authority, Revenue (Ascension | |||||
Health Subordinate Credit Group) | 5.00 | 5/1/13 | 1,000,000 | 1,060,300 | |
Indianapolis, | |||||
Gas Utility Distribution | |||||
System Second Lien Revenue | |||||
(Insured; Assured Guaranty | |||||
Municipal Corp.) | 5.00 | 8/15/23 | 3,500,000 | 3,867,465 | |
Indianapolis, | |||||
Thermal Energy System First | |||||
Lien Revenue (Insured; Assured | |||||
Guaranty Municipal Corp.) | 5.00 | 10/1/18 | 7,700,000 | 8,993,600 | |
Kansas—1.2% | |||||
Wyandotte County/Kansas City | |||||
Unified Government, | |||||
Utility System Revenue | |||||
(Insured; AMBAC) | 5.65 | 9/1/18 | 9,130,000 | 10,521,777 |
16
Long-Term Municipal | Coupon | Maturity | Principal | |
Investments (continued) | Rate (%) | Date | Amount ($) | Value ($) |
Kentucky—.5% | ||||
Kentucky Municipal Power Agency, | ||||
Power System Revenue (Prairie | ||||
State Project) (Insured; | ||||
National Public Finance | ||||
Guarantee Corp.) | 5.25 | 9/1/19 | 2,000,000 | 2,290,380 |
Pikeville, | ||||
Hospital Improvement | ||||
Revenue (Pikeville Medical | ||||
Center, Inc. Project) | 6.25 | 3/1/23 | 2,195,000 | 2,487,352 |
Louisiana—.2% | ||||
Louisiana State University Board | ||||
of Supervisors and | ||||
Agricultural and Mechanical | ||||
College, Auxiliary Revenue | 5.00 | 7/1/25 | 2,000,000 | 2,192,020 |
Maryland—1.6% | ||||
Maryland, | ||||
GO (State and Local | ||||
Facilities Loan) | 5.00 | 8/1/16 | 4,340,000 | 5,125,627 |
Maryland, | ||||
GO (State and Local | ||||
Facilities Loan) | 5.00 | 8/1/21 | 2,500,000 | 3,016,325 |
Maryland Economic Development | ||||
Corporation, EDR | ||||
(Transportation | ||||
Facilities Project) | 5.38 | 6/1/25 | 1,500,000 | 1,492,605 |
Prince George’s County, | ||||
Consolidated Public | ||||
Improvement GO | 5.00 | 9/15/22 | 3,340,000 | 4,107,098 |
Massachusetts—2.0% | ||||
Massachusetts, | ||||
Consolidated Loan | 5.00 | 4/1/24 | 7,500,000 | 8,793,225 |
Massachusetts Development Finance | ||||
Agency, Revenue (Bentley | ||||
University Issue) | 5.00 | 7/1/23 | 2,550,000 | 2,746,172 |
Massachusetts Development Finance | ||||
Agency, Revenue (Tufts Medical | ||||
Center Issue) | 5.50 | 1/1/22 | 2,990,000 | 3,168,503 |
The Fund | 17 |
STATEMENT OF INVESTMENTS (Unaudited) (continued)
Long-Term Municipal | Coupon | Maturity | Principal | |
Investments (continued) | Rate (%) | Date | Amount ($) | Value ($) |
Massachusetts (continued) | ||||
Massachusetts School Building | ||||
Authority, Senior Dedicated | ||||
Sales Tax Revenue | 5.00 | 10/15/23 | 2,500,000 | 2,973,950 |
Michigan—2.8% | ||||
Detroit, | ||||
Sewage Disposal System | ||||
Senior Lien Revenue | 6.50 | 7/1/24 | 4,765,000 | 5,396,077 |
Detroit, | ||||
Water Supply System Revenue | ||||
(Insured; Assured Guaranty | ||||
Municipal Corp.) | 5.00 | 7/1/22 | 5,000,000 | 5,156,700 |
Detroit School District, | ||||
School Building and Site | ||||
Improvement Bonds (GO— | ||||
Unlimited Tax) (Insured; FGIC) | 6.00 | 5/1/19 | 2,965,000 | 3,435,516 |
Michigan, | ||||
GO (Environmental Program) | 5.00 | 11/1/19 | 2,000,000 | 2,369,180 |
Michigan Building Authority, | ||||
Revenue (State Police | ||||
Communications System) | 5.25 | 10/1/13 | 1,945,000 | 2,114,565 |
Michigan Strategic Fund, | ||||
LOR (State of Michigan | ||||
Cadillac Place Office | ||||
Building Project) | 5.00 | 10/15/15 | 1,040,000 | 1,151,862 |
Wayne County Airport Authority, | ||||
Airport Revenue (Detroit | ||||
Metropolitan Wayne | ||||
County Airport) | 5.00 | 12/1/18 | 2,500,000 | 2,726,100 |
Wayne County Airport Authority, | ||||
Junior Lien Airport Revenue | ||||
(Detroit Metropolitan Wayne | ||||
County Airport) (Insured; | ||||
National Public Finance | ||||
Guarantee Corp.) | 5.00 | 12/1/22 | 2,500,000 | 2,544,325 |
Minnesota—1.6% | ||||
Minneapolis-Saint Paul | ||||
Metropolitan Airports Commission, | ||||
Subordinate Airport Revenue | ||||
(Insured; National Public | ||||
Finance Guarantee Corp.) | 5.00 | 1/1/25 | 5,000,000 | 5,224,350 |
18
Long-Term Municipal | Coupon | Maturity | Principal | ||
Investments (continued) | Rate (%) | Date | Amount ($) | Value ($) | |
Minnesota (continued) | |||||
Minnesota Public Facilities | |||||
Authority, Clean Water | |||||
Revenue (Prerefunded) | 5.00 | 3/1/17 | 7,500,000 | b | 8,947,725 |
Mississippi—.5% | |||||
Mississippi Development Bank, | |||||
Special Obligation Revenue | |||||
(Madison County Highway | |||||
Construction Project) | |||||
(Insured; National Public | |||||
Finance Guarantee Corp.) | 5.00 | 1/1/22 | 3,875,000 | 4,242,040 | |
Missouri—.4% | |||||
Missouri Development Finance | |||||
Board, Infrastructure | |||||
Facilities Revenue (Branson | |||||
Landing Project) | 6.00 | 6/1/20 | 3,160,000 | 3,541,823 | |
Nevada—1.6% | |||||
Clark County, | |||||
Airport System Revenue | 5.00 | 7/1/22 | 3,300,000 | 3,706,428 | |
Clark County School District, | |||||
Limited Tax GO | 5.00 | 6/15/25 | 4,950,000 | 5,250,069 | |
Director of the State of Nevada | |||||
Department of Business and | |||||
Industry, SWDR (Republic | |||||
Services, Inc. Project) | 5.63 | 6/1/18 | 5,000,000 | 5,557,150 | |
New Jersey—3.1% | |||||
Camden County Improvement | |||||
Authority, Health Care | |||||
Redevelopment Project | |||||
Revenue (The Cooper | |||||
Health System Obligated | |||||
Group Issue) | 5.25 | 2/15/20 | 3,000,000 | 3,032,370 | |
Casino Reinvestment Development | |||||
Authority, Revenue (Insured; | |||||
National Public Finance | |||||
Guarantee Corp.) | 5.25 | 6/1/19 | 5,000,000 | 5,203,400 | |
New Jersey Economic Development | |||||
Authority, Cigarette Tax Revenue | 5.38 | 6/15/15 | 3,300,000 | 3,523,080 | |
New Jersey Economic Development | |||||
Authority, Cigarette Tax Revenue | 5.50 | 6/15/16 | 1,000,000 | 1,077,420 |
The Fund | 19 |
STATEMENT OF INVESTMENTS (Unaudited) (continued)
Long-Term Municipal | Coupon | Maturity | Principal | ||
Investments (continued) | Rate (%) | Date | Amount ($) | Value ($) | |
New Jersey (continued) | |||||
New Jersey Economic Development | |||||
Authority, School Facilities | |||||
Construction Revenue (Insured; | |||||
National Public Finance | |||||
Guarantee Corporation) | 5.00 | 9/1/18 | 5,500,000 | 6,046,425 | |
New Jersey Health Care Facilities | |||||
Financing Authority, Revenue | |||||
(South Jersey Hospital Issue) | 6.00 | 7/1/12 | 775,000 | 786,230 | |
New Jersey Higher Education | |||||
Student Assistance Authority, | |||||
Student Loan Revenue (Insured; | |||||
Assured Guaranty Municipal Corp.) | 5.88 | 6/1/21 | 4,070,000 | 4,460,232 | |
New Jersey Transportation Trust | |||||
Fund Authority (Transportation | |||||
System) (Insured; National | |||||
Public Finance Guarantee Corp.) | 5.25 | 12/15/18 | 2,930,000 | 3,267,976 | |
New Mexico—1.2% | |||||
Jicarilla, | |||||
Apache Nation Revenue | 5.00 | 9/1/13 | 1,840,000 | 1,910,674 | |
New Mexico Hospital Equipment | |||||
Loan Council, Hospital System | |||||
Revenue (Presbyterian | |||||
Healthcare Services) | 6.00 | 8/1/23 | 7,500,000 | 8,484,825 | |
New York—7.1% | |||||
Long Island Power Authority, | |||||
Electric System General | |||||
Revenue (Insured; National | |||||
Public Finance Guarantee Corp.) | 4.32 | 9/1/15 | 3,000,000 | f | 2,992,740 |
New York City, | |||||
GO | 5.00 | 8/1/17 | 2,000,000 | 2,355,580 | |
New York City, | |||||
GO | 5.00 | 8/1/18 | 5,000,000 | 5,712,150 | |
New York City, | |||||
GO | 5.00 | 4/1/20 | 2,500,000 | 2,753,400 | |
New York City, | |||||
GO | 5.00 | 8/1/20 | 2,655,000 | 3,188,177 | |
New York City, | |||||
GO | 5.00 | 4/1/22 | 4,810,000 | 5,297,542 | |
New York City, | |||||
GO | 5.00 | 8/1/22 | 3,000,000 | 3,453,480 |
20
Long-Term Municipal | Coupon | Maturity | Principal | |
Investments (continued) | Rate (%) | Date | Amount ($) | Value ($) |
New York (continued) | ||||
New York City Health and | ||||
Hospitals Corporation, | ||||
Health System Revenue | 5.00 | 2/15/22 | 4,385,000 | 4,893,923 |
New York City Transitional Finance | ||||
Authority, Future Tax Secured | ||||
Subordinate Revenue | 5.00 | 2/1/24 | 3,000,000 | 3,467,610 |
New York Local Government | ||||
Assistance Corporation, GO | 5.25 | 4/1/16 | 3,425,000 | 3,885,183 |
New York State Dormitory | ||||
Authority, Mortgage Hospital | ||||
Revenue (The Long Island | ||||
College Hospital) | ||||
(Collateralized; FHA) | 6.00 | 8/15/15 | 1,970,000 | 2,022,205 |
New York State Dormitory | ||||
Authority, Revenue (New York | ||||
University Hospitals Center) | 5.25 | 7/1/24 | 700,000 | 728,805 |
New York State Dormitory | ||||
Authority, State Personal | ||||
Income Tax Revenue | ||||
(General Purpose) | 5.25 | 2/15/21 | 2,500,000 | 2,956,425 |
New York State Dormitory | ||||
Authority, State Personal | ||||
Income Tax Revenue | ||||
(General Purpose) | 5.00 | 3/15/22 | 3,340,000 | 3,992,001 |
New York State Thruway Authority, | ||||
Second General Highway and | ||||
Bridge Trust Fund Bonds | ||||
(Insured; AMBAC) | 5.00 | 4/1/18 | 5,000,000 | 5,610,550 |
New York State Urban Development | ||||
Corporation, Corporate Purpose | ||||
Subordinate Lien | 5.13 | 7/1/19 | 2,000,000 | 2,149,960 |
Niagara County Industrial | ||||
Development Agency, Solid | ||||
Waste Disposal Facility Revenue | ||||
(American Ref-Fuel Company | ||||
of Niagara, L.P. Facility) | 5.45 | 11/15/12 | 2,000,000 | 2,022,320 |
Suffolk Tobacco Asset | ||||
Securitization Corporation, | ||||
Tobacco Settlement | ||||
Asset-Backed Bonds | 5.38 | 6/1/28 | 2,815,000 | 2,350,919 |
The Fund | 21 |
STATEMENT OF INVESTMENTS (Unaudited) (continued)
Long-Term Municipal | Coupon | Maturity | Principal | |
Investments (continued) | Rate (%) | Date | Amount ($) | Value ($) |
New York (continued) | ||||
Triborough Bridge and Tunnel | ||||
Authority, General Revenue | ||||
(MTA Bridges and Tunnels) | 5.00 | 1/1/19 | 2,500,000 | 2,984,975 |
North Carolina—2.8% | ||||
North Carolina, | ||||
Limited Obligation Bonds | 5.00 | 11/1/20 | 3,900,000 | 4,764,045 |
North Carolina Eastern Municipal | ||||
Power Agency, Power | ||||
System Revenue | 5.13 | 1/1/14 | 3,000,000 | 3,129,810 |
North Carolina Eastern Municipal | ||||
Power Agency, Power | ||||
System Revenue | 5.00 | 1/1/21 | 1,200,000 | 1,481,448 |
North Carolina Medical Care | ||||
Commission, Retirement | ||||
Facilities First Mortgage | ||||
Revenue (The United Methodist | ||||
Retirement Homes Project) | 4.75 | 10/1/13 | 1,000,000 | 1,000,980 |
North Carolina Medical Care | ||||
Commission, Retirement | ||||
Facilities First Mortgage | ||||
Revenue (The United Methodist | ||||
Retirement Homes Project) | 5.13 | 10/1/19 | 1,250,000 | 1,245,525 |
North Carolina Municipal Power | ||||
Agency Number 1, Catawba | ||||
Electric Revenue (Insured; | ||||
Assured Guaranty Municipal Corp.) | 5.25 | 1/1/16 | 2,540,000 | 2,666,670 |
North Carolina Municipal Power | ||||
Agency Number 1, Catawba | ||||
Electric Revenue (Insured; | ||||
Assured Guaranty Municipal Corp.) | 5.25 | 1/1/17 | 10,000,000 | 10,496,400 |
Ohio—3.1% | ||||
Cuyahoga County, | ||||
Revenue (Cleveland Clinic | ||||
Health System Obligated Group) | 6.00 | 1/1/17 | 5,000,000 | 5,357,400 |
Knox County, | ||||
Hospital Facilities Revenue | ||||
(Knox Community Hospital) | ||||
(Insured; Radian) | 5.00 | 6/1/12 | 405,000 | 409,819 |
Montgomery County, | ||||
Revenue (Miami Valley Hospital) | 5.75 | 11/15/22 | 2,970,000 | 3,464,861 |
22
Long-Term Municipal | Coupon | Maturity | Principal | ||
Investments (continued) | Rate (%) | Date | Amount ($) | Value ($) | |
Ohio (continued) | |||||
Ohio Higher Educational Facility | |||||
Commission, Higher Educational | |||||
Facility Revenue (Xavier | |||||
University Project) (Insured; | |||||
CIFG) (Prerefunded) | 5.25 | 5/1/16 | 3,230,000 | b | 3,800,838 |
Ohio Water Development Authority, | |||||
PCR (Buckeye Power, Inc. | |||||
Project) (Insured; AMBAC) | 5.00 | 5/1/22 | 4,030,000 | 4,302,750 | |
Ohio Water Development Authority, | |||||
Water Pollution Control | |||||
Loan Fund Revenue | |||||
(Water Quality Series) | 5.00 | 12/1/23 | 5,000,000 | 5,768,650 | |
Ross County, | |||||
Hospital Facilities Revenue | |||||
(Adena Health System) | 5.75 | 12/1/22 | 3,835,000 | 4,189,968 | |
Pennsylvania—3.8% | |||||
Allegheny County Airport | |||||
Authority, Airport Revenue | |||||
(Pittsburgh International | |||||
Airport) (Insured; FGIC) | 5.00 | 1/1/19 | 3,395,000 | 3,581,148 | |
Chester County Industrial | |||||
Development Authority, | |||||
Revenue (Avon Grove | |||||
Charter School Project) | 5.65 | 12/15/17 | 790,000 | 784,486 | |
Delaware River Joint Toll Bridge | |||||
Commission, Bridge Revenue | 5.25 | 7/1/13 | 2,500,000 | 2,657,975 | |
Delaware Valley Regional | |||||
Finance Authority, | |||||
Local Government Revenue | 5.75 | 7/1/17 | 6,830,000 | 7,751,640 | |
Erie Higher Education Building | |||||
Authority, College Revenue | |||||
(Mercyhurst College Project) | 5.13 | 3/15/23 | 2,045,000 | 2,176,146 | |
Montgomery County Higher Education | |||||
and Health Authority, HR | |||||
(Abington Memorial Hospital) | |||||
(Insured; AMBAC) | 6.10 | 6/1/12 | 1,750,000 | 1,796,165 | |
Pennsylvania Intergovernmental | |||||
Cooperation Authority, Special | |||||
Tax Revenue (City of | |||||
Philadelphia Funding Program) | 5.00 | 6/15/17 | 4,000,000 | 4,723,800 |
The Fund | 23 |
STATEMENT OF INVESTMENTS (Unaudited) (continued)
Long-Term Municipal | Coupon | Maturity | Principal | ||
Investments (continued) | Rate (%) | Date | Amount ($) | Value ($) | |
Pennsylvania (continued) | |||||
Philadelphia, | |||||
GO (Insured; XLCA) | 5.25 | 2/15/13 | 5,535,000 | 5,784,795 | |
Philadelphia Authority for | |||||
Industrial Development, | |||||
Revenue (Independence | |||||
Charter School Project) | 5.38 | 9/15/17 | 2,000,000 | 2,020,120 | |
Philadelphia School District, | |||||
GO | 5.00 | 9/1/17 | 1,160,000 | 1,312,981 | |
Sayre Health Care Facilities | |||||
Authority, Revenue (Guthrie | |||||
Health Issue) (Prerefunded) | 6.00 | 12/1/11 | 525,000 | b | 530,334 |
Rhode Island—.4% | |||||
Rhode Island Student Loan | |||||
Authority, Student Loan | |||||
Program Revenue | |||||
(Insured; AMBAC) | 4.80 | 12/1/21 | 3,600,000 | 3,561,444 | |
South Carolina—3.1% | |||||
Berkeley County School District, | |||||
Installment Purchase Revenue | |||||
(Securing Assets for Education) | 5.25 | 12/1/21 | 9,395,000 | 9,951,184 | |
Charleston Educational Excellence | |||||
Financing Corporation, | |||||
Installment Purchase Revenue | |||||
(Charleston County School | |||||
District, South Carolina Project) | 5.25 | 12/1/21 | 4,500,000 | 5,016,555 | |
Hilton Head Island Public | |||||
Facilities Corporation, COP | |||||
(Insured; AMBAC) | 5.00 | 3/1/13 | 1,065,000 | 1,116,961 | |
Piedmont Municipal Power Agency, | |||||
Electric Revenue | 5.00 | 1/1/20 | 5,000,000 | 5,742,150 | |
South Carolina Public Service | |||||
Authority, Revenue Obligations | |||||
(Santee Cooper) | 5.00 | 12/1/21 | 3,600,000 | 4,347,180 | |
Tobacco Settlement Revenue | |||||
Management Authority, Tobacco | |||||
Settlement Asset-Backed | |||||
Refunding Bonds | 5.00 | 6/1/18 | 1,300,000 | 1,301,573 |
24
Long-Term Municipal | Coupon | Maturity | Principal | |
Investments (continued) | Rate (%) | Date | Amount ($) | Value ($) |
Texas—4.9% | ||||
Austin, | ||||
Electric Utility System Revenue | 5.00 | 11/15/23 | 1,550,000 | 1,753,546 |
Dallas and Fort Worth, | ||||
Joint Revenue (Dallas/Fort | ||||
Worth International Airport) | ||||
(Insured; XLCA) | 6.13 | 11/1/18 | 4,580,000 | 4,588,565 |
Dallas-Fort Worth International | ||||
Airport Facility Improvement | ||||
Corporation, Revenue | ||||
(Learjet Inc. Project) | 6.15 | 1/1/16 | 4,000,000 | 4,000,440 |
Fort Bend Independent School | ||||
District, Unlimited Tax School | ||||
Building Bonds (Permanent | ||||
School Fund Guarantee Program) | 5.00 | 8/15/23 | 7,105,000 | 8,354,485 |
Gulf Coast Waste Disposal | ||||
Authority, Bayport Area System | ||||
Revenue (Insured; AMBAC) | 5.00 | 10/1/14 | 2,065,000 | 2,224,377 |
Houston, | ||||
Combined Utility System First | ||||
Lien Revenue | 5.00 | 11/15/20 | 2,725,000 | 3,280,355 |
North Texas Tollway Authority, | ||||
First Tier System Revenue | 6.00 | 1/1/23 | 3,000,000 | 3,401,670 |
Port of Corpus Christi Industrial | ||||
Development Corporation, | ||||
Revenue (Valero Refining and | ||||
Marketing Company Project) | 5.40 | 4/1/18 | 1,280,000 | 1,280,333 |
San Antonio, | ||||
Electric and Gas | ||||
Systems Revenue | 5.00 | 2/1/23 | 5,000,000 | 5,561,450 |
Tarrant County Health Facilities | ||||
Development Corporation, | ||||
Health Resources System | ||||
Revenue (Insured; National | ||||
Public Finance Guarantee Corp.) | 5.75 | 2/15/14 | 5,000,000 | 5,535,950 |
Texas Water Development Board, | ||||
State Revolving Fund | ||||
Subordinate Lien Revenue | 5.00 | 7/15/23 | 2,000,000 | 2,370,720 |
The Fund | 25 |
STATEMENT OF INVESTMENTS (Unaudited) (continued)
Long-Term Municipal | Coupon | Maturity | Principal | ||
Investments (continued) | Rate (%) | Date | Amount ($) | Value ($) | |
Texas (continued) | |||||
University of Texas System | |||||
Board of Regents, | |||||
Financing System Revenue | 5.00 | 8/15/20 | 1,000,000 | 1,228,150 | |
Utah—.4% | |||||
Utah Building Ownership Authority, | |||||
LR (State Facilities Master | |||||
Lease Program) | 5.00 | 5/15/17 | 1,825,000 | 1,975,782 | |
Utah Building Ownership Authority, | |||||
LR (State Facilities Master | |||||
Lease Program) (Prerefunded) | 5.00 | 5/15/14 | 1,125,000 | b | 1,246,230 |
Virginia—.5% | |||||
Tobacco Settlement Financing | |||||
Corporation of Virginia, | |||||
Tobacco Settlement | |||||
Asset-Backed Bonds | |||||
(Prerefunded) | 5.25 | 6/1/12 | 425,000 | b | 435,646 |
Virginia College Building | |||||
Authority, Educational | |||||
Facilities Revenue (21st | |||||
Century College and | |||||
Equipment Programs) | 5.00 | 2/1/22 | 3,000,000 | 3,612,990 | |
Washington—4.5% | |||||
Energy Northwest, | |||||
Columbia Generating Station | |||||
Electric Revenue | 5.00 | 7/1/21 | 5,000,000 | 5,618,400 | |
Energy Northwest, | |||||
Columbia Generating Station | |||||
Electric Revenue | 5.00 | 7/1/23 | 5,000,000 | 5,494,650 | |
Franklin County, | |||||
GO (Pasco School District | |||||
Number 1) (Insured; Assured | |||||
Guaranty Municipal Corp.) | |||||
(Prerefunded) | 5.25 | 6/1/13 | 5,000,000 | b | 5,365,950 |
Goat Hill Properties, | |||||
LR (Government Office Building | |||||
Project) (Insured; National | |||||
Public Finance Guarantee Corp.) | 5.25 | 12/1/20 | 2,360,000 | 2,542,286 | |
Port of Seattle, | |||||
Intermediate Lien Revenue | 5.00 | 2/1/18 | 2,500,000 | 2,815,725 |
26
Long-Term Municipal | Coupon | Maturity | Principal | |
Investments (continued) | Rate (%) | Date | Amount ($) | Value ($) |
Virginia (continued) | ||||
Port of Seattle, | ||||
Limited Tax GO | 5.75 | 12/1/25 | 1,000,000 | 1,166,040 |
Port of Seattle, | ||||
Limited Tax GO (Insured; | ||||
Assured Guaranty | ||||
Municipal Corp.) | 5.00 | 11/1/16 | 5,000,000 | 5,347,350 |
Port of Tacoma, | ||||
Limited Tax GO (Insured; | ||||
Assured Guaranty | ||||
Municipal Corp.) | 5.00 | 12/1/20 | 3,025,000 | 3,470,220 |
Washington, | ||||
GO | 5.75 | 10/1/12 | 465,000 | 481,982 |
Washington, | ||||
GO | 5.75 | 10/1/12 | 5,000 | 5,230 |
Washington, | ||||
GO (Various Purpose) | 5.00 | 2/1/22 | 2,500,000 | 3,036,575 |
Washington, | ||||
GO (Various Purpose) | ||||
(Insured; AMBAC) | 5.00 | 1/1/19 | 3,600,000 | 4,051,044 |
West Virginia—.2% | ||||
West Virginia University Board | ||||
of Governors, University | ||||
Improvement Revenue (West | ||||
Virginia University Projects) | 5.00 | 10/1/22 | 1,475,000 | 1,710,292 |
Wisconsin—.4% | ||||
Wisconsin Public Power Inc., | ||||
Power Supply System Revenue | ||||
(Insured; Assured Guaranty | ||||
Municipal Corp.) | 5.00 | 7/1/19 | 2,950,000 | 3,224,852 |
U.S. Related—3.2% | ||||
Puerto Rico Commonwealth, | ||||
Public Improvement GO | 5.25 | 7/1/23 | 1,500,000 | 1,530,510 |
Puerto Rico Electric Power | ||||
Authority, Power Revenue | 5.00 | 7/1/22 | 2,500,000 | 2,682,900 |
Puerto Rico Highways and | ||||
Transportation Authority, Highway | ||||
Revenue (Insured; National Public | ||||
Finance Guarantee Corp.) | 5.50 | 7/1/13 | 1,630,000 | 1,712,527 |
The Fund | 27 |
STATEMENT OF INVESTMENTS (Unaudited) (continued)
Long-Term Municipal | Coupon | Maturity | Principal | |
Investments (continued) | Rate (%) | Date | Amount ($) | Value ($) |
U.S. Related (continued) | ||||
Puerto Rico Highways and | ||||
Transportation Authority, | ||||
Transportation Revenue | 5.50 | 7/1/24 | 1,750,000 | 1,858,693 |
Puerto Rico Highways and | ||||
Transportation Authority, | ||||
Transportation Revenue | ||||
(Insured; National Public | ||||
Finance Guarantee Corp.) | 5.25 | 7/1/12 | 2,440,000 | 2,448,198 |
Puerto Rico Infrastructure | ||||
Financing Authority, Special | ||||
Tax Revenue | 5.00 | 7/1/16 | 510,000 | 548,969 |
Puerto Rico Infrastructure | ||||
Financing Authority, Special | ||||
Tax Revenue (Insured; AMBAC) | 5.50 | 7/1/18 | 3,000,000 | 3,312,960 |
Puerto Rico Infrastructure | ||||
Financing Authority, Special | ||||
Tax Revenue (Insured; AMBAC) | 5.50 | 7/1/23 | 2,670,000 | 2,841,841 |
Puerto Rico Public Buildings | ||||
Authority, Government Facilities | ||||
Revenue (Insured; XLCA) | 5.25 | 7/1/20 | 2,000,000 | 2,129,960 |
Puerto Rico Sales Tax Financing | ||||
Corporation, Sales Tax Revenue | ||||
(First Subordinate Series) | 5.50 | 8/1/21 | 8,000,000 | 9,083,200 |
Total Long-Term Municipal Investments | ||||
(cost $824,755,013) | 866,594,664 |
28
Short-Term Municipal | Coupon | Maturity | Principal | |||
Investments—.2% | Rate (%) | Date | Amount ($) | Value ($) | ||
California—.2% | ||||||
California, | ||||||
GO Notes | ||||||
(Kindergarten-University) | ||||||
(LOC: California State | ||||||
Teachers Retirement | ||||||
System and Citibank NA) | 0.09 | 12/1/11 | 1,400,000 | g | 1,400,000 | |
New York—.0% | ||||||
New York City, | ||||||
GO Notes (LOC; JPMorgan | ||||||
Chase Bank) | 0.12 | 12/1/11 | 400,000 | g | 400,000 | |
Total Short-Term Municipal Investments | ||||||
(cost $1,800,000) | 1,800,000 | |||||
Total Investments (cost $826,555,013) | 98.4 | % | 868,394,664 | |||
Cash and Receivables (Net) | 1.6 | % | 13,782,239 | |||
Net Assets | 100.0 | % | 882,176,903 |
a Security issued with a zero coupon. Income is recognized through the accretion of discount. |
b These securities are prerefunded; the date shown represents the prerefunded date. Bonds which are prerefunded are |
collateralized by U.S. Government securities which are held in escrow and are used to pay principal and interest on |
the municipal issue and to retire the bonds in full at the earliest refunding date. |
c Security exempt from registration under Rule 144A of the Securities Act of 1933.This security may be resold in |
transactions exempt from registration, normally to qualified institutional buyers.At November 30, 2011, this security |
was valued at $2,681,030 or 0.3% of net assets. |
d Non-income producing—security in default. |
e Zero coupon until a specified date at which time the stated coupon rate becomes effective until maturity. |
f Variable rate security—interest rate subject to periodic change. |
g Variable rate demand note—rate shown is the interest rate in effect at November 30, 2011. Maturity date represents |
the next demand date, or the ultimate maturity date if earlier. |
The Fund | 29 |
STATEMENT OF INVESTMENTS (Unaudited) (continued)
Summary of Abbreviations | |||
ABAG | Association of Bay Area Governments | ACA | American Capital Access |
AGC | ACE Guaranty Corporation | AGIC | Asset Guaranty Insurance Company |
AMBAC | American Municipal Bond | ARRN | Adjustable Rate Receipt Notes |
Assurance Corporation | |||
BAN | Bond Anticipation Notes | BPA | Bond Purchase Agreement |
CIFG | CDC Ixis Financial Guaranty | COP | Certificate of Participation |
CP | Commercial Paper | EDR | Economic Development Revenue |
EIR | Environmental Improvement Revenue | FGIC | Financial Guaranty Insurance |
Company | |||
FHA | Federal Housing Administration | FHLB | Federal Home Loan Bank |
FHLMC | Federal Home Loan Mortgage | FNMA | Federal National |
Corporation | Mortgage Association | ||
GAN | Grant Anticipation Notes | GIC | Guaranteed Investment Contract |
GNMA | Government National | GO | General Obligation |
Mortgage Association | |||
HR | Hospital Revenue | IDB | Industrial Development Board |
IDC | Industrial Development Corporation | IDR | Industrial Development Revenue |
LOC | Letter of Credit | LOR | Limited Obligation Revenue |
LR | Lease Revenue | MFHR | Multi-Family Housing Revenue |
MFMR | Multi-Family Mortgage Revenue | PCR | Pollution Control Revenue |
PILOT | Payment in Lieu of Taxes | PUTTERS | Puttable Tax-Exempt Receipts |
RAC | Revenue Anticipation Certificates | RAN | Revenue Anticipation Notes |
RAW | Revenue Anticipation Warrants | RRR | Resources Recovery Revenue |
SAAN | State Aid Anticipation Notes | SBPA | Standby Bond Purchase Agreement |
SFHR | Single Family Housing Revenue | SFMR | Single Family Mortgage Revenue |
SONYMA | State of New York Mortgage Agency | SWDR | Solid Waste Disposal Revenue |
TAN | Tax Anticipation Notes | TAW | Tax Anticipation Warrants |
TRAN | Tax and Revenue Anticipation Notes | XLCA | XL Capital Assurance |
30
Summary of Combined Ratings (Unaudited) | |||||
Fitch | or | Moody’s | or | Standard & Poor’s | Value (%)† |
AAA | Aaa | AAA | 28.9 | ||
AA | Aa | AA | 43.0 | ||
A | A | A | 19.2 | ||
BBB | Baa | BBB | 7.0 | ||
BB | Ba | BB | .5 | ||
B | B | B | .3 | ||
F1 | MIG1/P1 | SP1/A1 | .2 | ||
Not Ratedh | Not Ratedh | Not Ratedh | .9 | ||
100.0 |
† | Based on total investments. |
h | Securities which, while not rated by Fitch, Moody’s and Standard & Poor’s, have been determined by the Manager to |
be of comparable quality to those rated securities in which the fund may invest. | |
See notes to financial statements. |
The Fund | 31 |
STATEMENT OF ASSETS AND LIABILITIES |
November 30, 2011 (Unaudited) |
Cost | Value | ||
Assets ($): | |||
Investments in securities—See Statement of Investments | 826,555,013 | 868,394,664 | |
Cash | 731,910 | ||
Interest receivable | 12,185,714 | ||
Receivable for investment securities sold | 1,518,267 | ||
Receivable for shares of Common Stock subscribed | 224,116 | ||
Prepaid expenses | 166,717 | ||
883,221,388 | |||
Liabilities ($): | |||
Due to The Dreyfus Corporation and affiliates—Note 3(b) | 524,430 | ||
Payable for shares of Common Stock redeemed | 419,016 | ||
Accrued expenses | 101,039 | ||
1,044,485 | |||
Net Assets ($) | 882,176,903 | ||
Composition of Net Assets ($): | |||
Paid-in capital | 840,290,386 | ||
Accumulated undistributed investment income—net | 152,001 | ||
Accumulated net realized gain (loss) on investments | (105,135 | ) | |
Accumulated net unrealized appreciation | |||
(depreciation) on investments | 41,839,651 | ||
Net Assets ($) | 882,176,903 | ||
Shares Outstanding | |||
(300 million shares of $.001 par value Common Stock authorized) | 63,966,892 | ||
Net Asset Value, offering and redemption price per share ($) | 13.79 | ||
See notes to financial statements. |
32
STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS |
Six Months Ended November 30, 2011 (Unaudited) |
Investment Income ($): | ||
Interest Income | 17,746,608 | |
Expenses: | ||
Management fee—Note 3(a) | 2,610,075 | |
Shareholder servicing costs—Note 3(b) | 519,433 | |
Directors’ fees and expenses—Note 3(c) | 64,977 | |
Professional fees | 39,931 | |
Custodian fees—Note 3(b) | 33,332 | |
Registration fees | 17,071 | |
Prospectus and shareholders’ reports | 16,209 | |
Loan commitment fees—Note 2 | 5,682 | |
Miscellaneous | 31,142 | |
Total Expenses | 3,337,852 | |
Less—reduction in fees due to earnings credits—Note 3(b) | (187 | ) |
Net Expenses | 3,337,665 | |
Investment Income—Net | 14,408,943 | |
Realized and Unrealized Gain (Loss) on Investments—Note 4 ($): | ||
Net realized gain (loss) on investments | 4,465,966 | |
Net unrealized appreciation (depreciation) on investments | 11,988,146 | |
Net Realized and Unrealized Gain (Loss) on Investments | 16,454,112 | |
Net Increase in Net Assets Resulting from Operations | 30,863,055 | |
See notes to financial statements. |
The Fund | 33 |
STATEMENT OF CHANGES IN NET ASSETS
Six Months Ended | ||||
November 30, 2011 | Year Ended | |||
(Unaudited) | May 31, 2011 | |||
Operations ($): | ||||
Investment income—net | 14,408,943 | 30,635,816 | ||
Net realized gain (loss) on investments | 4,465,966 | 4,221,440 | ||
Net unrealized appreciation | ||||
(depreciation) on investments | 11,988,146 | (5,269,250 | ) | |
Net Increase (Decrease) in Net Assets | ||||
Resulting from Operations | 30,863,055 | 29,588,006 | ||
Dividends to Shareholders from ($): | ||||
Investment income—net | (14,256,942 | ) | (30,552,597 | ) |
Capital Stock Transactions ($): | ||||
Net proceeds from shares sold | 39,679,831 | 101,505,301 | ||
Dividends reinvested | 10,842,896 | 23,223,511 | ||
Cost of shares redeemed | (43,103,963 | ) | (128,054,855 | ) |
Increase (Decrease) in Net Assets | ||||
from Capital Stock Transactions | 7,418,764 | (3,326,043 | ) | |
Total Increase (Decrease) in Net Assets | 24,024,877 | (4,290,634 | ) | |
Net Assets ($): | ||||
Beginning of Period | 858,152,026 | 862,442,660 | ||
End of Period | 882,176,903 | 858,152,026 | ||
Undistributed investment income—net | 152,001 | — | ||
Capital Share Transactions (Shares): | ||||
Shares sold | 2,894,889 | 7,509,367 | ||
Shares issued for dividends reinvested | 791,494 | 1,726,097 | ||
Shares redeemed | (3,148,468 | ) | (9,586,589 | ) |
Net Increase (Decrease) in Shares Outstanding | 537,915 | (351,125 | ) | |
See notes to financial statements. |
34
FINANCIAL HIGHLIGHTS
The following table describes the performance for the fiscal periods indicated. Total return shows how much your investment in the fund would have increased (or decreased) during each period, assuming you had reinvested all dividends and distributions.These figures have been derived from the fund’s financial statements.
Six Months Ended | ||||||||||||
November 30, 2011 | Year Ended May 31, | |||||||||||
(Unaudited) | 2011 | 2010 | 2009 | 2008 | 2007 | |||||||
Per Share Data ($): | ||||||||||||
Net asset value, | ||||||||||||
beginning of period | 13.53 | 13.52 | 13.06 | 13.12 | 13.21 | 13.18 | ||||||
Investment Operations: | ||||||||||||
Investment income—neta | .23 | .48 | .49 | .51 | .50 | .49 | ||||||
Net realized and unrealized | ||||||||||||
gain (loss) on investments | .25 | .00 | b | .45 | (.07 | ) | (.09 | ) | .03 | |||
Total from Investment Operations | .48 | .48 | .94 | .44 | .41 | .52 | ||||||
Distributions: | ||||||||||||
Dividends from | ||||||||||||
investment income—net | (.22 | ) | (.47 | ) | (.48 | ) | (.50 | ) | (.50 | ) | (.49 | ) |
Net asset value, end of period | 13.79 | 13.53 | 13.52 | 13.06 | 13.12 | 13.21 | ||||||
Total Return (%) | 3.60 | c | 3.65 | 7.42 | 3.44 | 3.16 | 4.03 | |||||
Ratios/Supplemental Data (%): | ||||||||||||
Ratio of total expenses | ||||||||||||
to average net assets | .77 | d | .75 | .75 | .78 | .81 | .80 | |||||
Ratio of net expenses | ||||||||||||
to average net assets | .77 | d | .75 | .75 | .77 | .79 | .80 | |||||
Ratio of interest and expense | ||||||||||||
related to floating rates notes | ||||||||||||
issued to average net asstes | — | — | — | .02 | .05 | .06 | ||||||
Ratio of net investment income | ||||||||||||
to average net assets | 3.31 | d | 3.53 | 3.68 | 3.94 | 3.81 | 3.72 | |||||
Portfolio Turnover Rate | 10.72 | c | 21.46 | 13.22 | 22.75 | 28.89 | 23.87 | |||||
Net Assets, end of period | ||||||||||||
($ x 1,000) | 882,177 | 858,152 | 862,443 | 785,392 | 831,359 | 734,048 |
a | Based on average shares outstanding at each month end. |
b | Amount represents less than $.01 per share. |
c | Not annualized. |
d | Annualized. |
See notes to financial statements. |
The Fund | 35 |
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Unaudited)
NOTE 1—Significant Accounting Policies:
Dreyfus Intermediate Municipal Bond Fund, Inc. (the “fund”) is registered under the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended (the “Act”), as a diversified open-end management investment company. The fund’s investment objective is to seek the maximum amount of current income exempt from federal income tax as is consistent with the preservation of capital. The Dreyfus Corporation (the “Manager” or “Dreyfus”), a wholly-owned subsidiary of The Bank of New York Mellon Corporation (“BNY Mellon”) serves as the fund’s investment adviser. MBSC Securities Corporation (the “Distributor”), a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Manager, is the distributor of the fund’s shares, which are sold to the public without a sales charge.
The Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) Accounting Standards Codification (“ASC”) is the exclusive reference of authoritative U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (“GAAP”) recognized by the FASB to be applied by nongovernmental entities. Rules and interpretive releases of the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) under authority of federal laws are also sources of authoritative GAAP for SEC registrants. The fund’s financial statements are prepared in accordance with GAAP, which may require the use of management estimates and assumptions.Actual results could differ from those estimates.
The fund enters into contracts that contain a variety of indemnifications. The fund’s maximum exposure under these arrangements is unknown.The fund does not anticipate recognizing any loss related to these arrangements.
(a) Portfolio valuation: The fair value of a financial instrument is the amount that would be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement date (i.e. the exit price). GAAP establishes a fair value hierarchy that prioritizes the inputs of valuation techniques used to measure fair value.This hierarchy gives the highest priority to unadjusted quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities
36
(Level 1 measurements) and the lowest priority to unobservable inputs (Level 3 measurements).
Additionally, GAAP provides guidance on determining whether the volume and activity in a market has decreased significantly and whether such a decrease in activity results in transactions that are not orderly. GAAP requires enhanced disclosures around valuation inputs and techniques used during annual and interim periods.
Various inputs are used in determining the value of the fund’s investments relating to fair value measurements.These inputs are summarized in the three broad levels listed below:
Level 1—unadjusted quoted prices in active markets for identical investments.
Level 2—other significant observable inputs (including quoted prices for similar investments, interest rates, prepayment speeds, credit risk, etc.).
Level 3—significant unobservable inputs (including the fund’s own assumptions in determining the fair value of investments).
The inputs or methodology used for valuing securities are not necessarily an indication of the risk associated with investing in those securities.
Changes in valuation techniques may result in transfers in or out of an assigned level within the disclosure hierarchy. Valuation techniques used to value the fund’s investments are as follows:
Investments in securities are valued each business day by an independent pricing service (the “Service”) approved by the Board of Directors. Investments for which quoted bid prices are readily available and are representative of the bid side of the market in the judgment of the Service are valued at the mean between the quoted bid prices (as obtained by the Service from dealers in such securities) and asked prices (as calculated by the Service based upon its evaluation of the market for such securities). Other investments (which constitute a
The Fund | 37 |
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Unaudited) (continued)
majority of the portfolio securities) are carried at fair value as determined by the Service, based on methods which include consideration of: yields or prices of municipal securities of comparable quality, coupon, maturity and type; indications as to values from dealers; and general market conditions. All preceding securities are categorized within Level 2 of the fair value hierarchy.
The Service’s procedures are reviewed by Dreyfus under the general supervision of the Board of Directors.
When market quotations or official closing prices are not readily available, or are determined not to reflect accurately fair value, such as when the value of a security has been significantly affected by events after the close of the exchange or market on which the security is principally traded (for example, a foreign exchange or market), but before the fund calculates its net asset value, the fund may value these investments at fair value as determined in accordance with the procedures approved by the Board of Directors. Certain factors may be considered when fair valuing investments such as: fundamental analytical data, the nature and duration of restrictions on disposition, an evaluation of the forces that influence the market in which the securities are purchased and sold, and public trading in similar securities of the issuer or comparable issuers. These securities are either categorized as Level 2 or 3 depending on the relevant inputs used.
For restricted securities where observable inputs are limited, assumptions about market activity and risk are used and are categorized within Level 3 of the fair value hierarchy.
The following is a summary of the inputs used as of November 30, 2011 in valuing the fund’s investments:
Level 2—Other | Level 3— | |||
Level 1— | Significant | Significant | ||
Unadjusted | Observable | Unobservable | ||
Quoted Prices | Inputs | Inputs | Total | |
Assets ($) | ||||
Investments in Securities: | ||||
Municipal Bonds | — | 867,584,724 | 809,940 | 868,394,664 |
38
The following is a reconciliation of Level 3 assets for which significant unobservable inputs were used to determine fair value:
Municipal Bonds ($) | ||
Balance as of 5/31/2011 | — | |
Realized gain (loss) | — | |
Change in unrealized appreciation (depreciation) | (90,060 | ) |
Purchases | — | |
Sales | ||
Transfers into Level 3† | 900,000 | |
Transfers out of Level 3 | — | |
Balance as of 11/30/2011 | 809,940 | |
The amount of total gains (losses) for the | ||
period included in earnings attributable | ||
to the change in unrealized gains (losses) | ||
relating to investments still held at 11/30/2011 | (684,900 | ) |
† | Transfers into Level 3 represents the value at the date of transfer.The transfer into Level 3 for the |
current period was due to the lack of observable inputs following the issuer’s default. |
In May 2011, FASB issued Accounting Standards Update (“ASU”) No. 2011-04 “Amendments to Achieve Common FairValue Measurement and Disclosure Requirements in GAAP and International Financial Reporting Standards (“IFRS”)” (“ASU 2011-04”). ASU 2011-04 includes common requirements for measurement of and disclosure about fair value between GAAP and IFRS. ASU 2011-04 will require reporting entities to disclose the following information for fair value measurements categorized within Level 3 of the fair value hierarchy: quantitative information about the unobservable inputs used in the fair value measurement, the valuation processes used by the reporting entity and a narrative description of the sensitivity of the fair value measurement to changes in unobservable inputs and the interrelationships between those unobservable inputs. In addition, ASU 2011-04 will require reporting entities to make disclosures about amounts and reasons for all transfers in and out of Level 1 and Level 2 fair value measurements.The new and revised disclosures are effective for interim and annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2011. At this time, management is evaluating the implications of ASU 2011-04 and its impact on the financial statements.
The Fund | 39 |
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Unaudited) (continued)
(b) Securities transactions and investment income: Securities transactions are recorded on a trade date basis. Realized gains and losses from securities transactions are recorded on the identified cost basis. Interest income, adjusted for accretion of discount and amortization of premium on investments, is earned from settlement date and recognized on the accrual basis. Securities purchased or sold on a when issued or delayed delivery basis may be settled a month or more after the trade date.
(c) Dividends to shareholders: It is the policy of the fund to declare dividends daily from investment income-net. Such dividends are paid monthly. Dividends from net realized capital gains, if any, are normally declared and paid annually, but the fund may make distributions on a more frequent basis to comply with the distribution requirements of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “Code”).To the extent that net realized capital gains can be offset by capital loss carryovers, it is the policy of the fund not to distribute such gains. Income and capital gain distributions are determined in accordance with income tax regulations, which may differ from GAAP.
(d) Federal income taxes: It is the policy of the fund to continue to qualify as a regulated investment company, which can distribute tax exempt dividends, by complying with the applicable provisions of the Code, and to make distributions of income and net realized capital gain sufficient to relieve it from substantially all federal income and excise taxes.
As of and during the period ended November 30, 2011, the fund did not have any liabilities for any uncertain tax positions.The fund recognizes interest and penalties, if any, related to uncertain tax positions as income tax expense in the Statement of Operations. During the period, the fund did not incur any interest or penalties.
Each of the tax years in the three-year period ended May 31, 2011 remains subject to examination by the Internal Revenue Service and state taxing authorities.
40
The fund has an unused capital loss carryover of $5,397,021 available for federal income tax purposes to be applied against future net securities profits, if any, realized subsequent to May 31, 2011. If not applied, $1,169,736 of the carryover expires in fiscal 2016, $3,912,775 expires in fiscal 2017 and $314,510 expires in fiscal 2018.
Under the recently enacted Regulated Investment Company Modernization Act of 2010 (the “2010 Act”), the fund will be permitted to carry forward capital losses incurred in taxable years beginning after December 22, 2010 (“post-enactment losses”) for an unlimited period. However, the 2010 Act requires post-enactment losses to be utilized before the utilization of losses incurred in taxable years prior to the effective date of the 2010 Act. As a result of this ordering rule, capital loss carryovers related to taxable years beginning prior to the effective date of the 2010 Act may be more likely to expire unused.
The tax character of distributions paid to shareholders during the fiscal year ended May 31, 2011 was as follows: tax exempt income $30,552,249 and ordinary income $348.The tax character of current year distributions will be determined at the end of the current fiscal year.
NOTE 2—Bank Lines of Credit:
The fund participates with other Dreyfus-managed funds in a $225 million unsecured credit facility led by Citibank, N.A. and a $300 million unsecured credit facility provided by The Bank of New York Mellon, a subsidiary of BNY Mellon and an affiliate of Dreyfus (each, a “Facility”), each to be utilized primarily for temporary or emergency purposes, including the financing of redemptions. In connection therewith, the fund has agreed to pay its pro rata portion of commitment fees for each Facility. Interest is charged to the fund based on rates determined pursuant to the terms of the respective Facility at the time of borrowing. During the period ended November 30, 2011, the fund did not borrow under the Facilities.
The Fund | 41 |
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Unaudited) (continued)
NOTE 3—Management Fee and Other Transactions With Affiliates:
(a) Pursuant to a management agreement with the Manager, the management fee is computed at the annual rate of .60% of the value of the fund’s average daily net assets and is payable monthly.
(b) Under the Shareholder Services Plan, the fund reimburses the Distributor an amount not to exceed an annual rate of .25% of the value of the fund’s average daily net assets for certain allocated expenses of providing personal services and/or maintaining shareholder accounts.The services provided may include personal services relating to shareholder accounts, such as answering shareholder inquires regarding the fund and providing reports and other information, and services related to the maintenance of shareholder accounts. During the period ended November 30, 2011, the fund was charged $296,874, pursuant to the Shareholder Services Plan.
The fund compensates Dreyfus Transfer, Inc., a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Manager, under a transfer agency agreement for providing personnel and facilities to perform transfer agency services for the fund. During the period ended November 30, 2011, the fund was charged $102,249 pursuant to the transfer agency agreement, which is included in Shareholder servicing costs in the Statement of Operations.
The fund has arrangements with the custodian and cash management bank whereby the fund may receive earnings credits when positive cash balances are maintained, which are used to offset custody and cash management fees. For financial reporting purposes, the fund includes net earnings credits as an expense offset in the Statement of Operations.
The fund compensates The Bank of New York Mellon under a cash management agreement for performing cash management services related to fund subscriptions and redemptions. During the period ended November 30, 2011, the fund was charged $12,650 pursuant to the cash management agreement, which is included in Shareholder servicing costs in the Statement of Operations.These fees were partially offset by earnings credits of $187.
42
The fund also compensates The Bank of New York Mellon under a custody agreement for providing custodial services for the fund. During the period ended November 30, 2011, the fund was charged $33,332 pursuant to the custody agreement.
During the period ended November 30, 2011, the fund was charged $2,981 for services performed by the Chief Compliance Officer.
The components of “Due to The Dreyfus Corporation and affiliates” in the Statement of Assets and Liabilities consist of: management fees $432,194, custodian fees $23,293, chief compliance officer fees $4,743 and transfer agency per account fees $64,200.
(c) Each Board member also serves as a Board member of other funds within the Dreyfus complex. Annual retainer fees and attendance fees are allocated to each fund based on net assets.
NOTE 4—Securities Transactions:
The aggregate amount of purchases and sales of investment securities, excluding short-term securities, during the period ended November 30, 2011, amounted to $98,768,430 and $91,954,044, respectively.
At November 30, 2011, accumulated net unrealized appreciation on investments was $41,839,651, consisting of $45,729,814 gross unrealized appreciation and $3,890,163 gross unrealized depreciation.
At November 30, 2011, the cost of investments for federal income tax purposes was substantially the same as the cost for financial reporting purposes (see the Statement of Investments).
The Fund | 43 |
INFORMATION ABOUT THE RENEWAL OF THE |
FUND’S MANAGEMENT AGREEMENT (Unaudited) |
At a meeting of the fund’s Board of Directors held on November 7-8, 2011, the Board considered the renewal of the fund’s Management Agreement with Dreyfus pursuant to which Dreyfus provides the fund with investment advisory and administrative services (the “Agreement”). The Board members, none of whom are “interested persons” (as defined in the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended) of the fund, were assisted in their review by independent legal counsel and met with counsel in executive session separate from representatives of Dreyfus. In considering the renewal of the Agreement, the Board considered all factors that it believed to be relevant, including those discussed below.The Board did not identify any one factor as dispositive, and each Board member may have attributed different weights to the factors considered.
Analysis of Nature, Extent and Quality of Services Provided to the Fund.The Board considered information previously provided to them in a presentation from Dreyfus representatives regarding the nature, extent, and quality of the services provided to funds in the Dreyfus representative fund complex, and Dreyfus representatives confirmed that there had been no material changes in this information. Dreyfus provided the number of open accounts in the fund, the fund’s asset size and the allocation of fund assets among distribution channels. Dreyfus also had previously provided information regarding the diverse intermediary relationships and distribution channels of funds in the Dreyfus fund complex and Dreyfus’ corresponding need for broad, deep, and diverse resources to be able to provide ongoing shareholder services to each distribution channel, including the distribution channel(s) for the fund.
The Board also considered research support available to, and portfolio management capabilities of, the fund’s portfolio management personnel and that Dreyfus also provides oversight of day-to-day fund operations, including fund accounting and administration and assistance in meeting legal and regulatory requirements.The Board also considered Dreyfus’ extensive administrative, accounting, and compliance infrastructures.
44
Comparative Analysis of the Fund’s Performance and Management Fee and Expense Ratio.The Board reviewed reports prepared by Lipper, Inc. (“Lipper”), an independent provider of investment company data, which included information comparing (1) the fund’s performance with the performance of a group of comparable funds (the “Performance Group”) and with a broader group of funds (the “Performance Universe”), all for various periods ended September 30, 2011, and (2) the fund’s actual and contractual management fees and total expenses with those of a group of comparable funds (the “Expense Group”) and with a broader group of funds (the “Expense Universe”), the information for which was derived in part from fund financial statements available to Lipper as of September 30, 2011. Dreyfus previously had furnished the Board with a description of the methodology Lipper used to select the Performance Group and Performance Universe and the Expense Group and Expense Universe.
Dreyfus representatives stated that the usefulness of performance comparisons may be affected by a number of factors, including different investment limitations that may be applicable to the fund and comparison funds. The Board discussed the results of the comparisons and noted that the fund’s total return performance was variously at or below the Performance Group median and above the Performance Universe median in all but one of the various time periods.
The Board also noted that the fund’s yield performance was above the Performance Group median, in eight of the past ten 1-year periods, and above the Performance Universe median for each 1- year the various time periods. Dreyfus also provided a comparison of the fund’s calendar year total returns to the returns of the fund’s Lipper category average.
The Board received a presentation from the fund’s portfolio managers, who described how the dramatic changes to the municipal bond market over the prior several years, evidenced by historically high priced volatil-
The Fund | 45 |
INFORMATION ABOUT THE RENEWAL OF THE FUND’S |
MANAGEMENT AGREEMENT (Unaudited) (continued) |
ity and liquidity challenges, suggest an increased focus on downside risk in the fund’s portfolio.The portfolio manager also discussed the strategy implemented for the fund in 2009, quantitative risk management tools applied to overseeing the fund, the fund’s current structure to defend against interest rate volatility, and credit review policies and strategies that seek to mitigate credit risk. The portfolio managers also explained the fund’s performance relative to its duration structure, credit structure, and the market and economic environment.The Board noted the generally compressed spread among the returns of the Performance Group funds and that 50 basis points or less (depending on the time period) separated the fund’s total return from the performance group median in periods where the fund achieved a total return that was below the median.
The Board also reviewed the range of actual and contractual management fees and total expenses of the Expense Group and Expense Universe funds and discussed the results of the comparisons. They noted that the fund’s contractual management fee was above the Expense Group median, the fund’s actual management fee was above the Expense Group median and the Expense Universe median, and the fund’s actual total expenses were above the Expense Group median and the Expense Universe median.
Dreyfus representatives reviewed with the Board members the management or investment advisory fees paid to Dreyfus or its affiliates by funds in the same Lipper category as the fund, or by separate accounts and/or other types of client portfolios managed by Dreyfus or Standish Mellon Asset Management Company, a Dreyfus affiliate and the primary employer of the fund’s primary portfolio managers, considered to have similar investment strategies and policies as the fund (the “Similar Accounts”), and explained the nature of the Similar Accounts. Dreyfus representatives noted that neither Dreyfus nor Standish advise any separate accounts and/or other types of client portfolios considered to have similar investment strategies and policies as the fund.They discussed differences in fees paid and the relationship of the fees paid in light of any differences in the services provided and other relevant
46
factors. The Board considered the relevance of the fee information provided for the Similar Accounts to evaluate the appropriateness and reasonableness of the fund’s management fee.
Analysis of Profitability and Economies of Scale. Dreyfus’ representatives reviewed the expenses allocated and profit received by Dreyfus and the resulting profitability percentage for managing the fund, and the method used to determine the expenses and profit. The Board concluded that the profitability results were not unreasonable given the services rendered and service levels provided by Dreyfus.The Board previously had been provided with information prepared by an independent consulting firm regarding Dreyfus’ approach to allocating costs to, and determining the profitability of, individual funds and the entire Dreyfus fund complex. The consulting firm also had analyzed where any economies of scale might emerge in connection with the management of a fund.
The Board’s counsel stated that the Board should consider the profitability analysis (1) as part of their evaluation of whether the fees under the Agreement bear a reasonable relationship to the mix of services provided by Dreyfus, including the nature, extent and quality of such services, and (2) in light of the relevant circumstances for the fund and the extent to which economies of scale would be realized if the fund grows and whether fee levels reflect these economies of scale for the benefit of fund shareholders. Dreyfus representatives noted that a discussion of economies of scale is predicated on a fund having achieved a substantial size with increasing assets and that, if a fund’s assets had been stable or decreasing, the possibility that Dreyfus may have realized any economies of scale would be less. Dreyfus representatives also noted, as a result of shared and allocated costs among funds in the Dreyfus funds complex, the extent of economies of scale could depend substantially on the level of assets in the complex as a whole, so that increases and decreases in complex-wide assets can affect potential economies of scale in a manner that is disproportionate to, or even in the opposite direction from, changes in the fund’s asset level.The Board also considered potential benefits to Dreyfus
The Fund | 47 |
INFORMATION ABOUT THE RENEWAL OF THE FUND’S |
MANAGEMENT AGREEMENT (Unaudited) (continued) |
from acting as investment adviser and noted that there were no soft dollar arrangements in effect for trading the fund’s investments.
At the conclusion of these discussions, the Board agreed that it had been furnished with sufficient information to make an informed business decision with respect to the renewal of the Agreement. Based on the discussions and considerations as described above, the Board concluded and determined as follows.
The Board concluded that the nature, extent, and quality of the services provided by Dreyfus are adequate and appropriate.
The Board generally was satisfied with the fund’s overall perfor- mance (particularly in recent periods), in light of the considerations described above.
The Board concluded that the fee paid to Dreyfus was reasonable in light of the considerations described above.
The Board determined that the economies of scale which may accrue to Dreyfus and its affiliates in connection with the management of the fund had been adequately considered by Dreyfus in connection with the fee rate charged to the fund pursuant to the Agreement and that, to the extent in the future it were determined that material economies of scale had not been shared with the fund, the Board would seek to have those economies of scale shared with the fund.
The Board considered these conclusions and determinations, along with information received on a routine and regular basis throughout the year. In addition, it should be noted that the Board’s consideration of the contractual fee arrangements for this fund had the benefit of a number of years of reviews of prior or similar agreements during which lengthy discussions took place between the Board and Dreyfus representatives. Certain aspects of the arrangements may receive greater scrutiny in some years than in others, and the Board’s conclusions may be based, in part, on their consideration of the same or similar arrangements in prior years.The Board determined that renewal of the Agreement was in the best interests of the fund and its shareholders.
48
For More Information
Ticker Symbol: DITEX
Telephone 1-800-DREYFUS
Mail The Dreyfus Family of Funds, 144 Glenn Curtiss Boulevard, Uniondale, NY 11556-0144 E-mail Send your request to info@dreyfus.com Internet Information can be viewed online or downloaded at: http://www.dreyfus.com
The fund files its complete schedule of portfolio holdings with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) for the first and third quarters of each fiscal year on Form N-Q. The fund's Forms N-Q are available on the SEC’s website at http://www.sec.gov and may be reviewed and copied at the SEC’s Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. Information on the operation of the Public Reference Room may be obtained by calling 1-800-SEC-0330.
Information regarding how the fund voted proxies relating to portfolio securities for the most recent 12-month period ended June 30 is available on the SEC’s website at http://www.sec.gov and without charge, upon request, by calling 1-800-DREYFUS.
Item 2. Code of Ethics.
Not applicable.
Item 3. Audit Committee Financial Expert.
Not applicable.
Item 4. Principal Accountant Fees and Services.
Not applicable.
Item 5. Audit Committee of Listed Registrants.
Not applicable.
Item 6. Investments.
(a) Not applicable.
Item 7. Disclosure of Proxy Voting Policies and Procedures for Closed-End Management Investment Companies.
Not applicable.
Item 8. Portfolio Managers of Closed-End Management Investment Companies.
Not applicable.
Item 9. Purchases of Equity Securities by Closed-End Management Investment Companies and Affiliated Purchasers.
Not applicable. [CLOSED END FUNDS ONLY]
Item 10. Submission of Matters to a Vote of Security Holders.
There have been no material changes to the procedures applicable to Item 10.
Item 11. Controls and Procedures.
(a) The Registrant's principal executive and principal financial officers have concluded, based on their evaluation of the Registrant's disclosure controls and procedures as of a date within 90 days of the filing date of this report, that the Registrant's disclosure controls and procedures are reasonably designed to ensure that information required to be disclosed by the Registrant on Form N-CSR is recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the required time periods and that information required to be disclosed by the Registrant in the reports that it files or submits on Form N-CSR is accumulated and communicated to the Registrant's management, including its principal executive and principal financial officers, as appropriate to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosure.
(b) There were no changes to the Registrant's internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the second fiscal quarter of the period covered by this report that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect, the Registrant's internal control over financial reporting.
Item 12. Exhibits.
(a)(1) Not applicable.
(a)(2) Certifications of principal executive and principal financial officers as required by Rule 30a-2(a) under the Investment Company Act of 1940.
(a)(3) Not applicable.
(b) Certification of principal executive and principal financial officers as required by Rule 30a-2(b) under the Investment Company Act of 1940.
SIGNATURES
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the Investment Company Act of 1940, the Registrant has duly caused this Report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.
Dreyfus Intermediate Municipal Bond Fund, Inc.
By: /s/ Bradley J. Skapyak | |
Bradley J. Skapyak, President
| |
Date: |
January 17, 2012 |
| |
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the Investment Company Act of 1940, this Report has been signed below by the following persons on behalf of the Registrant and in the capacities and on the dates indicated. | |
| |
By: /s/ Bradley J. Skapyak | |
Bradley J. Skapyak, President
| |
Date: |
January 17, 2012 |
| |
By: /s/ James Windels | |
James Windels, Treasurer
| |
Date: |
January 17, 2012 |
|
EXHIBIT INDEX
(a)(2) Certifications of principal executive and principal financial officers as required by Rule 30a-2(a) under the Investment Company Act of 1940. (EX-99.CERT)
(b) Certification of principal executive and principal financial officers as required by Rule 30a-2(b) under the Investment Company Act of 1940. (EX-99.906CERT)
[EX-99.CERT]—Exhibit (a)(2)
SECTION 302 CERTIFICATION
I, Bradley J. Skapyak, certify that:
1. I have reviewed this report on Form N-CSR of Dreyfus Intermediate Municipal Bond Fund, Inc.;
2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;
3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations, changes in net assets, and cash flows (if the financial statements are required to include a statement of cash flows) of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;
4. The registrant's other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Rule 30a-3(c) under the Investment Company Act of 1940) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Rule 30a-3(d) under the Investment Company Act of 1940) for the registrant and have:
(a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;
(b) Designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such internal control over financial reporting to be designed under our supervision, to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles;
(c) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date of this report based on such evaluation; and
(d) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the second fiscal quarter of the period covered by this report that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant's internal control over financial reporting;
5. The registrant's other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of the registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):
(a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process, summarize, and report financial information; and
(b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal control over financial reporting.
By: /s/ Bradley J. Skapyak |
Bradley J. Skapyak, |
President |
Date: January 17, 2012 |
SECTION 302 CERTIFICATION
I, James Windels, certify that:
1. I have reviewed this report on Form N-CSR of Dreyfus Intermediate Municipal Bond Fund, Inc.;
2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;
3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations, changes in net assets, and cash flows (if the financial statements are required to include a statement of cash flows) of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;
4. The registrant's other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Rule 30a-3(c) under the Investment Company Act of 1940) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Rule 30a-3(d) under the Investment Company Act of 1940) for the registrant and have:
(a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;
(b) Designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such internal control over financial reporting to be designed under our supervision, to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles;
(c) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date of this report based on such evaluation; and
(d) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the second fiscal quarter of the period covered by this report that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant's internal control over financial reporting;
5. The registrant's other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of the registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):
(a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process, summarize, and report financial information; and
(b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal control over financial reporting.
By: /s/ James Windels |
James Windels, |
Treasurer |
Date: January 17, 2012 |
|
[EX-99.906CERT]
Exhibit (b)
SECTION 906 CERTIFICATIONS
In connection with this report on Form N-CSR for the Registrant as furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the undersigned hereby certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:
(1) the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as applicable; and
(2) the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Registrant.
By: /s/ Bradley J. Skapyak |
Bradley J. Skapyak, |
President |
|
Date: January 17, 2012 |
|
By: /s/ James Windels |
James Windels, |
Treasurer |
|
Date: January 17, 2012 |
|
This certificate is furnished pursuant to the requirements of Form N-CSR and shall not be deemed "filed" for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, or otherwise subject to the liability of that section, and shall not be deemed to be incorporated by reference into any filing under the Securities Act of 1933 or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.
:<8X&D2.YR>6'3T M-7J*`,>TTZ>SUI2F#8)#)Y?/,;,R$I]/E)'IG'I3GMI#XGBNA:,85MV0S97& M[((.,YX&X=.]:U%`#78JC,J,Y`R%7&3[<\5@V5A=P:5I#-;-]HL6^>+>N6!5 ME.#G'<'KVKH**`.?EL+M-,@5;9I)FOQ=R(CK\H\W>1R0,XXX[TS4=)FENK]X MK022W9C:&XRH^SL%"Y.3D=,_+G/2NCHH`YQ=(FBO/W=J!(;XW'VP%>(RVXKU MW=RN,8[UT=%%`!1110`4444`%%%%`!1110!2&L:83@:C9Y]//7_&KM9%O&DV MOZM%(H9'@@5E/<'S,BJ%G>75C;R2*4DA.IO`496+X:4KD-G],4`=-56;4K"" M4Q37MM'(O5'E4$?@35'1]2OKXPR3VR)!/$9%8%05/&!]XD\'K@8QTYJ&ZCNI M?$EPMI+#&YL$!,L1<'YW]Q_6@#=!#`$$$'D$4M -LN MV/-\O=NX`'!(ZY]!BK::M?;!,_V R MOBS)"(AE<>8"6E_>ORIST'& ^W/ MN,#M5W5K/[9JUFBOY 75]0M'!O(8H MXB7C!VY8OMW)P'.,\C&>H'//`!O$@`DG`'4FH([VTEMFN8[J%X%SNE60%1CK MD]*HZ1J%U?/LF$*M"I6X55/$FXC`.>F!G\1ZU7NK;R-66S1C]CO@\TL('\28 MW`>S9&1['UH`W$=9$5XV#(P!5E.01ZBG5@IJ]W]DLKEOL[+>JQ6-5.8SL+C) MS\P&,'@50GU*]CDTO49469Y;.241PJP"@K&>02 1SCM0!U;LJ(SNP55&2 MQ.`!212QSQ++#(LD;#*LAR"/8TRTD:6TBD:6.4NH;?$,*V>X&3Q^- "XAN%9H)HY55BI*,&`([<=ZEKE=*N M[FSTVSL;"`.S&Y8;@#PLI``RR^OK^%1M(\D\[MN0MJ-FQ02;@I94)&0<$9/T MH`ZZBL3^U;HHLX$(B>[-J(BAWK\Y3<3GU&<8Z=Z;I^K7DZZ5).(-E^&RJ(04 M(0MU).>GIWH`W:***`"BBB@`HHHH`****`"BBB@`HHHH`****`"BBB@`HHHH M`****`"BBB@`HHHH`****`"BBB@`HHHH`****`"BBB@"!+.VCN&N$MX5G;[T M@0!C]3UIO]GV7E^7]CM_+W^9M\I<;O[V,=?>J5D+W4+&*]-[);F=1(D2(A55 M/*@Y!)XQGD?A3;'7[>>U4W&Y;A5)D2.)W`PQ4L,`\94T`:45K;P2-)#;Q1N_ MWF1`"?J144VF6%Q*TL]E;2R-U=XE)/XD4U=6L6=%6<-OVX8*2OS#*@MC`)R, M`^H]:@ENI+36V2XN&%K+;&2,$+A&0_-SC/0@\GUH`MRZ?93;/-M+>38NU=T8 M.T>@XX%']GV7E^7]DM_+W^9M\L8W?WL8Z^]8=MJ5Y_9+)=W3PWBW`5G*IE4( M$AXVXXCW=NH-:%QJX)M?L8602W/V=_,#(4;86Z$9'0?G0!=CL;.((([6!/+8 MLFV,#:3U(]#3KBTMKK;]IMXIMO3S$#8_.H-)O)-0TFWNV55DFC#;1T!K,MM4 MDM;6>ZO[F5I;>$FXM&C4%'XP4P,E>HR21TYZT`;4=I;12^;';Q))M";U0`[1 MVSZ>U*;:!KA;AH8S.HVK(5&X#T!ZU5.L62RM$TDBLBAGW0N`@()R21QT/7TI MPU6S*;O,;.X+L,3!R2,C"XR>`3T['TH`L/;PN9"\,;&10KY4')8U8.%"``,.0<>M5DU:VDO(+:+>YFC:165&(`!`YXXY/X8YJ_0` MQ(T0L415+G )IUX60H"P^AZU-10!66PLU=W6T M@#2`AR(QE@>H/KFE2QM(VB9+6!6A&(RL8!0>@]*L44`1);01PM"D,:Q-G**H M"G/7CWI([6WB6-8X(D6,$(%0`*#UQZ5-10!5&FV`B\H65L(PV[9Y2XSZXQUH M;3;%BQ:RMB68.V8EY8=">.HR:M44`0&RM6F,QMH3*W!,=?I2+8VB"$+ M:P*("3$!&!Y>>NWT_"K%%`!1110`4444`%%%%`!1110`4444`%%%%`!1110` M4444`%%%%`!1110`4444`%%%%`!1110`4444`%%%%`!1110`4444`9D&GW=I M!]FL[V-+=@.X#CMD'\:CM]$^RRRM#.`C6OV=59,D'+'<3GG)8YX M%2:3J_\`:=GO6`0W.Q7\AW[,,J=V.A'?'KZ5:TZY:]TZWNGC$9GC638&W8!& M1S@=J`,NP\.)9[`7MY@/+W&2V!;**%RI)XSM'KSG%7M6TM-32!7D,?E2A\@9 MW+@AE^A!(J_5'5;Z73X4G2W$T(8"9MY!C7^]@`Y`[T`0W>CBXU"2\CN'AD>W M,(VC[K V;, )8P[RA_ MND_=`&. -1MX?1U1C]D$J M.&!2T`1L!A\RYYX8]^.U3MJK-IR7,,`,AF2&2&23:8W9@I!(!Z$CZCFE35&2 MXNX;R)+=H$\Q,2%O,3^\.!WXQSS^&0`ATHV]U;3P/#&8HWC9%API5F#':`1M MY'OU[UI5#:232VL 9(FM+-YBUNMPZ%MK*K=`.#EN#QQTZUK4`%% M%%`!1110`4444`%%%%`!1110`4444`%%%%`!1110`4444`%%%%`!1110`444 M4`%%%%`!1110`4444`%%%%`!1110`4444`%%%%`!1110!B6^GW*Z1I\D M2?3DYHHH`PK'3+B&VLUFT\M%%),9; ,$\=NE+;Z1,VJP/<6 M(^R;IB$8H1"IV;1C/JK'C.-U%%`#M%TZ]M+B&:ZM=XW2JH8INM]SLVX8/(8' MGOQZ5H7DDNI>';KR+=S+/#)&L6Y TU6(V[1M+=K<0[V7#A=A`X)QRG?U%%%`"SP7[2W5S%:3I]J:*)D21!*L:AB M2#NV@DG'7CK3;S3WN[>VCETMS9QI(OV19$#*W`1L[L=-W SD<\>]=,H(4`G)`Y/K110`ZBBB@`HHHH`** M**`"BBB@`HHHH`****`"BBB@`HHHH`****`"BBB@`HHHH`****`"BBB@`HHH
AIC'E>>!@;N_6NEHHH`****`"BBB@`HHHH`****`"BBB@ M`HHHH`****`"BBB@`HHHH`****`"BBB@`HHHH`****`"BBB@#C-2#EVVN%N/ MM7-R+!C'$T5B+]60JZ8V[H\*.>F2YXXX':NSHH M`YF\L+*2^OY3Y5KY1C3S2F=SL1(=_J#\HY[9]:BN9I+C3+:TL(O*E4R7&R)Q MM^1C@C)'R%R"/8<5U=%`&%'>V]YK6DW,4B_Z1:2D+O\`="!CU^]^1]*HR20G MP?J^V4%$EN`I$F?XSMYS]/K75T4`9#2Q'Q3;;95)>RDP`^<_.A&!],_E6O11 M0`4444`%%%%`!1110`4444`%%%%`!1110`4444`%%%%`!1110`4444`%%%%` M!1110`4444`%%%%`!1110`4444`%%%%`!1110`4444`%%%%`!1110`4444`% F%%%`!1110`4444`%%%%`!1110`4444`%%%%`!1110`4444`?_]D_ ` end