STATEMENT OF ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

BlackRock Funds

This Statement of Additional Information provides supplementary information pertaining to shares representing interests in the Money Market, U.S. Treasury Money Market, Municipal Money Market, New Jersey Municipal Money Market, North Carolina Municipal Money Market, Ohio Municipal Money Market, Pennsylvania Municipal Money Market, Virginia Municipal Money Market, Mid-Cap Value Equity, Mid-Cap Growth Equity, Small Cap Value Equity, Small Cap Core Equity, Small Cap Growth Equity, Science & Technology Opportunities (formerly Global Science & Technology Opportunities), International Opportunities, Asset Allocation (formerly, Balanced), U.S. Opportunities, Exchange, Small/Mid-Cap Growth, Aurora, Capital Appreciation (formerly, Legacy), Health Sciences Opportunities (formerly, Health Sciences), Energy & Resources (formerly Global Resources), All-Cap Energy & Resources (formerly All-Cap Global Resources) and Global Opportunities Portfolios (collectively, the “Portfolios”) of BlackRock Funds^SM(the “Fund”). The Money Market, U.S. Treasury Money Market, Municipal Money Market, New Jersey Municipal Money Market, North Carolina Municipal Money Market, Ohio Municipal Money Market, Pennsylvania Municipal Money Market and Virginia Municipal Money Market Portfolios may be referred to herein collectively as “Money Market Portfolios.” The Municipal Money Market, New Jersey Municipal Money Market, North Carolina Municipal Money Market, Ohio Municipal Money Market, Pennsylvania Municipal Money Market and Virginia Municipal Money Market Portfolios may be referred to herein collectively as “Municipal Money Market Portfolios,” The New Jersey Municipal Money Market, North Carolina Municipal Money Market, Ohio Municipal Money Market, Pennsylvania Municipal Money Market and Virginia Municipal Money Market Portfolios may be referred to herein collectively as the “State-Specific Municipal Portfolios.” The Mid-Cap Value Equity, Mid-Cap Growth Equity, Small Cap Value Equity, Small Cap Core Equity, Small Cap Growth Equity, Science & Technology Opportunities, International Opportunities, Asset Allocation, U.S. Opportunities, Exchange, Small/Mid-Cap Growth, Aurora, Capital Appreciation, Health Sciences Opportunities, Energy & Resources, All-Cap Energy & Resources and Global Opportunities Portfolios may be referred to herein collectively as “Equity Portfolios.” The Equity Portfolios may also be referred to collectively as “Non-Money Market Portfolios.”

The manager for each Portfolio is BlackRock Advisors, LLC (“BlackRock” or the “Manager”). BlackRock has entered into sub-advisory agreements with respect to certain Portfolios with the following entities, each of which is an affiliate of BlackRock: BlackRock Financial Management, Inc. (“BFM”); BlackRock Investment Management, LLC (“BIM”); BlackRock International Limited (“BIL”); and BlackRock Institutional Management Corporation (“BIMC”, together with BFM, BIM and BIL, the “Sub-Advisors”). Where applicable, the terms “BlackRock” and “Manager” include a Portfolio’s Sub-Advisor.

This Statement of Additional Information is not a prospectus, and should be read only in conjunction with the prospectuses of the Fund dated January 28, 2009, each as amended or supplemented from time to time (the “Prospectuses”). Terms used but not defined herein have the meanings given to them in the Prospectuses. Certain information contained in the annual reports to shareholders of the Fund. Prospectuses and current shareholder reports of the Fund may be obtained at no charge by calling toll-free (800) 441-7762.

This Statement of Additional Information is dated January 28, 2009.


TABLE OF CONTENTS
	Page
Investment Policies	1
Special Considerations for State-Specific Municipal Portfolios	50
Additional Investment Limitations	98
Shareholder and Trustee Liability of the Fund	108
Management, Administration, Distribution and Servicing Arrangements	109
Portfolio Managers and Portfolio Transactions	135
Purchase and Redemption Information	156
Valuation of Portfolio Securities	168
Taxes	171
Additional Information Concerning Shares	179
Miscellaneous	180
Financial Statements	181
Appendix A	A-1
Appendix B	B-1
Appendix C	C-1
Appendix D	D-1

INVESTMENT POLICIES

The following supplements information contained in the Prospectuses concerning the Portfolios’ investment policies. To the extent that an investment strategy is discussed in this Statement of Additional Information but not in the Prospectuses, such strategy is not a principal strategy of the Portfolios. Except as indicated, the information below relates only to those Portfolios that are authorized to invest in the instruments or securities described below.

The Portfolios (other than the Municipal Money Market Portfolios) that are subject to Rule 35d-1 under the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended (the “1940 Act”), will not change their investment policies required by that Rule without giving shareholders 60 days’ prior written notice.

Additional Information on Investment Strategies

Equity Portfolios. Equity securities include common stock and preferred stock (including convertible preferred stock); bonds, notes and debentures convertible into common or preferred stock; stock purchase warrants and rights; equity interests in trusts, general and limited partnerships and limited liability companies; and depositary receipts.

From time to time certain of the Equity Portfolios may invest in shares of companies through initial public offerings (“IPOs”). IPOs have the potential to produce, and have in fact produced, substantial gains for certain Portfolios. There is no assurance that any Portfolio will have continued access to profitable IPOs and therefore investors should not rely on these past gains as an indication of future performance. The investment performance of a Portfolio during periods when it is unable to invest significantly or at all in IPOs may be lower than during periods when it is able to do so. In addition, as a Portfolio increases in size, the impact of IPOs on its performance will generally decrease. Securities issued in IPOs are subject to many of the same risks as investing in companies with smaller market capitalizations. Securities issued in IPOs have no trading history, and information about the companies may be available for very limited periods. In addition, the prices of securities sold in IPOs may be highly volatile or may decline shortly after the initial public offering.

The Equity Portfolios may invest in companies that have relatively small market capitalizations. These organizations will normally have more limited product lines, markets and financial resources and will be dependent upon a more limited management group than larger capitalized companies. In addition, it is more difficult to get information on smaller companies, which tend to be less well known, to have shorter operating histories, not to have significant ownership by large investors and to be followed by relatively few securities analysts. The securities of smaller capitalized companies are often traded in the over-the-counter markets and may have fewer market makers and wider price spreads. This may result in greater price movements and less ability to sell a Portfolio’s investment than if the Portfolio held the securities of larger, more established companies.

Science & Technology Opportunities Portfolio. Companies in the rapidly changing fields of technology and science face special risks. For example, their products or services may not prove commercially successful or may become obsolete quickly. The value of the Science & Technology Opportunities Portfolio’s shares may be susceptible to factors affecting the technology and science areas and to greater risk and market fluctuation than an investment in a fund that invests in a broader range of portfolio securities not concentrated in any particular sector. As such, the Portfolio is not an appropriate investment for individuals who are not long-term investors and who, as their primary objective, require safety of principal or stable income from their investments. The technology and science areas may be subject to greater governmental regulation than many other areas and changes in governmental policies and the need for regulatory approvals may have a material adverse effect on these areas. Additionally, companies in these areas may be subject to risks of developing technologies, competitive pressures and other factors and are dependent upon consumer and business acceptance as new technologies evolve.

Certain of the companies in which the Portfolio invests may allocate greater than usual amounts of resources to research and product development. The securities of such companies may experience above-average price movements associated with the perceived prospects of success of the research and development programs. In addition, companies in which the Portfolio invests could be adversely affected by lack of commercial acceptance of a new product or products or by technological change and obsolescence.

The Science & Technology Opportunities Portfolio’s concentration in the securities of science and technology related companies exposes it to the price movements of companies in those sectors more than a mutual fund that invests in many sectors. Because the Portfolio invests primarily in the science and technology sectors, there is the

risk that the Portfolio will perform poorly during a downturn in one or both of those sectors. Funds that concentrate investments in a small number of sectors may be subject to rapidly changing asset inflows and outflows. The volatile nature of the technology and science areas could cause price appreciation in a particular security or securities that results in that investment increasing its concentration in the Portfolio, in some cases, well above the level at which it was originally purchased.

Health Sciences Opportunities Portfolio. A variety of important factors are influencing the health sciences and related industries in significant ways. The aging of the overall population, and a focus on good health and prevention of illness, as well as increased attention to the diagnosis of diseases and deficiencies, have generated growth in the health science field.

Technological advances in the development of drugs, medical devices and procedures and genetic engineering have similarly fostered growth in the health care area. The focus of consumers and regulators on health care costs, managed health care programs, health maintenance organizations and other service delivery arrangements have driven the industries further.

At the same time, these forces have heightened the difficulty of investing in health sciences companies. Shifts in consumer attitudes or regulatory policy, or new medical or technological developments, can have a substantial positive or negative effect on a company’s business. Such companies may face special risks that their products or services may not prove to be commercially successful or may be rendered obsolete by further scientific and technological developments. The value of the Health Sciences Opportunities Portfolio’s investment in a company whose products are not commercially successful or are rendered obsolete may decrease substantially. Changes in the financial infrastructure for health sciences may also affect the companies. For example, changes in Medicare/Medicaid and private insurance coverage, as well as the consolidation or break-up of individual companies themselves, influence the overall business prospects of the health sciences sector.

The Health Sciences Opportunities Portfolio’s concentration in the securities of health sciences and related companies exposes it to the price movements of these companies more than a mutual fund that invests in many sectors. Because the Portfolio invests primarily in health sciences and related industries, there is the risk that the Portfolio will perform poorly during a downturn in those industries. Funds that concentrate investments in a small number of industries may be subject to rapidly changing asset inflows and outflows. The volatile nature of the health sciences and related industries could cause price appreciation in a particular security or securities that results in that investment increasing its concentration in the Portfolio, in some cases, well above the level at which it was originally purchased.

Energy & Resources and All-Cap Energy & Resources Portfolios. Each Portfolio’s investments will be concentrated in energy and natural resources companies. Because each Portfolio is concentrated in these companies, it may be subject to more risks than if it were broadly diversified over numerous industries and sectors of the economy. A downturn in the energy and natural resources industries would have a larger impact on the Portfolio than on an investment company that does not concentrate in such companies. Energy companies can be significantly affected by the supply of and demand for specific products and services, the supply of and demand for oil and gas, the price of oil and gas, exploration and production spending, government regulation, world events and economic conditions. Natural resource companies can be significantly affected by events relating to international political developments, energy conservation, the success of exploration projects, commodity prices and tax and government regulations. At times, the performance of securities of energy and natural resources companies will lag the performance of other industries or the broader market as a whole.

Other risks inherent in investing in energy and natural resources companies include:

Supply and Demand Risk. A decrease in the production of natural gas, natural gas liquids (“NGLs”), crude oil, coal or other energy or other natural resource commodities or a decrease in the volume of such commodities available for transportation, mining, processing, storage or distribution may adversely impact the financial performance of energy and natural resources companies. Production declines and volume decreases could be caused by various factors, including catastrophic events affecting production, depletion of resources, labor difficulties, environmental proceedings, increased regulations, equipment failures and unexpected maintenance problems, import supply disruption, increased competition from alternative energy sources or commodity prices. Alternatively, a sustained decline in demand for such commodities could also adversely affect the financial

performance of energy and natural resources companies. Factors which could lead to a decline in demand include economic recession or other adverse economic conditions, higher fuel taxes or governmental regulations, increases in fuel economy, consumer shifts to the use of alternative fuel sources, changes in commodity prices, or weather.

Depletion and Exploration Risk. Many energy and natural resources companies are either engaged in the production of natural gas, NGLs, crude oil, refined petroleum products or coal, or are engaged in transporting, storing, distributing and processing these items on behalf of shippers. To maintain or grow their revenues, these companies or their customers need to maintain or expand their reserves through exploration of new sources of supply, through the development of existing sources, through acquisitions, or through long-term contracts to acquire reserves. The financial performance of energy and natural resources companies may be adversely affected if they, or the companies to whom they provide the service, are unable to cost-effectively acquire additional reserves sufficient to replace the natural decline.

Regulatory Risk. Energy and natural resources companies are subject to significant Federal, state and local government regulation in virtually every aspect of their operations, including how facilities are constructed, maintained and operated, environmental and safety controls and the prices they may charge for the products and services they provide. Various governmental authorities have the power to enforce compliance with these regulations and the permits issued under them, and violators are subject to administrative, civil and criminal penalties, including civil fines, injunctions or both. Stricter laws, regulations or enforcement policies could be enacted in the future which would likely increase compliance costs and may adversely affect the financial performance of energy and natural resources companies.

Commodity Pricing Risk. The operations and financial performance of energy and natural resources companies may be directly affected by energy and other natural resource commodity prices, especially those energy and natural resources companies which own the underlying energy or other natural resource commodity. Commodity prices fluctuate for several reasons, including changes in market and economic conditions, the impact of weather on demand, levels of domestic production and imported commodities, energy conservation, domestic and foreign governmental regulation and taxation and the availability of local, intrastate and interstate transportation systems. Volatility of commodity prices, which may lead to a reduction in production or supply, may also negatively impact the performance of energy and natural resources companies which are solely involved in the transportation, processing, storing, distribution or marketing of commodities. Volatility of commodity prices may also make it more difficult for energy and natural resources companies to raise capital to the extent the market perceives that their performance may be directly or indirectly tied to commodity prices.

Utility Industries. Certain Portfolios may invest in utility companies. Risks that are intrinsic to the utility industries include difficulty in obtaining an adequate return on invested capital, difficulty in financing large construction programs during an inflationary period, restrictions on operations and increased cost and delays attributable to environmental considerations and regulation, difficulty in raising capital in adequate amounts on reasonable terms in periods of high inflation and unsettled capital markets, technological innovations that may render existing plants, equipment or products obsolete, the potential impact of natural or manmade disasters, increased costs and reduced availability of certain types of fuel, occasionally reduced availability and high costs of natural gas for resale, the effects of energy conservation, the effects of a national energy policy and lengthy delays and greatly increased costs and other problems associated with the design, construction, licensing, regulation and operation of nuclear facilities for electric generation, including, among other considerations, the problems associated with the use of radioactive materials and the disposal of radioactive wastes. There are substantial differences among the regulatory practices and policies of various jurisdictions, and any given regulatory agency may make major shifts in policy from time to time. There is no assurance that regulatory authorities will, in the future, grant rate increases or that such increases will be adequate to permit the payment of dividends on common stocks issued by a utility company. Additionally, existing and possible future regulatory legislation may make it even more difficult for utilities to obtain adequate relief. Certain of the issuers of securities held in the Portfolios may own or operate nuclear generating facilities. Governmental authorities may from time to time review existing policies and impose additional requirements governing the licensing, construction and operation of nuclear power plants. Prolonged changes in climatic conditions can also have a significant impact on the revenues of an electric and gas utility as well as the expenses of a utility, particularly a hydro-based electric utility.

Utility companies in the United States and in foreign countries are generally subject to regulation. In the United States, most utility companies are regulated by state and/or Federal authorities. Such regulation is intended to ensure appropriate standards of service and adequate capacity to meet public demand. Generally, prices are also regulated in the United States and in foreign countries with the intention of protecting the public while ensuring that the rate of return earned by utility companies is sufficient to allow them to attract capital in order to grow and continue to provide appropriate services. There can be no assurance that such pricing policies or rates of return will continue in the future.

The nature of regulation of the utility industries continues to evolve both in the United States and in foreign countries. In recent years, changes in regulation in the United States increasingly have allowed utility companies to provide services and products outside their traditional geographic areas and lines of business, creating new areas of competition within the industries. In some instances, utility companies are operating on an unregulated basis. Because of trends toward deregulation and the evolution of independent power producers as well as new entrants to the field of telecommunications, non-regulated providers of utility services have become a significant part of their respective industries. The emergence of competition and deregulation may result in certain utility companies being able to earn more than their traditional regulated rates of return, while others may be forced to defend their core business from increased competition and may be less profitable. Reduced profitability, as well as new uses of funds (such as for expansion, operations or stock buybacks) could result in cuts in dividend payout rates. There can be no assurance that favorable developments will occur in the future.

Foreign utility companies are also subject to regulation, although such regulation may or may not be comparable to that in the United States. Foreign utility companies may be more heavily regulated by their respective governments than utilities in the United States and, as in the United States, generally are required to seek government approval for rate increases. In addition, many foreign utilities use fuels that may cause more pollution than those used in the United States, which may require such utilities to invest in pollution control equipment to meet any proposed pollution restrictions. Foreign regulatory systems vary from country to country and may evolve in ways different from regulation in the United States. The Portfolios’ investment policies are designed to enable them to capitalize on evolving investment opportunities throughout the world. For example, the rapid growth of certain foreign economies will necessitate expansion of capacity in the utility industries in those countries. Although many foreign utility companies currently are government-owned, thereby limiting current investment opportunities for a Portfolio, in order to attract significant capital for growth, foreign governments may seek global investors through the privatization of their utility industries. Privatization, which refers to the trend toward investor ownership of assets rather than government ownership, is expected to occur in newer, faster-growing economies and in mature economies. Of course, there is no assurance that such favorable developments will occur or that investment opportunities in foreign markets will increase.

The revenues of domestic and foreign utility companies generally reflect the economic growth and development in the geographic areas in which they do business.

Electric. The electric utility industry consists of companies that are engaged principally in the generation, transmission and sale of electric energy, although many also provide other energy-related services. In the past, electric utility companies, in general, have been favorably affected by lower fuel and financing costs and the full or near completion of major construction programs. In addition, many of these companies have generated cash flows in excess of current operating expenses and construction expenditures, permitting some degree of diversification into unregulated businesses. Some electric utilities have also taken advantage of the right to sell power outside of their traditional geographic areas. Electric utility companies have historically been subject to the risks associated with increases in fuel and other operating costs, high interest costs on borrowings needed for capital construction programs, costs associated with compliance with environmental and safety regulations and changes in the regulatory climate. As interest rates declined, many utilities refinanced high cost debt and in doing so improved their fixed charges coverage. Regulators, however, lowered allowed rates of return as interest rates declined and thereby caused the benefits of the rate declines to be shared wholly or in part with customers. In a period of rising interest rates, the allowed rates of return may not keep pace with the utilities’ increased costs. The construction and operation of nuclear power facilities are subject to strict scrutiny by, and evolving regulations of, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and state agencies having comparable jurisdiction. Strict scrutiny might result in higher operating costs and higher capital expenditures, with the risk that the regulators may disallow inclusion of these costs in rate authorizations or the risk that a company may not be permitted to operate or complete

construction of a facility. In addition, operators of nuclear power plants may be subject to significant costs for disposal of nuclear fuel and for decommissioning such plants.

The rating agencies look closely at the business profile of utilities. Ratings for companies are expected to be impacted to a greater extent in the future by the division of their asset base. Electric utility companies that focus more on the generation of electricity may be assigned less favorable ratings as this business is expected to be competitive and the least regulated. On the other hand, companies that focus on transmission and distribution, which is expected to be the least competitive and the more regulated part of the business, may see higher ratings given the greater predictability of cash flow.

A number of states are considering or have enacted deregulation proposals. The introduction of competition into the industry as a result of such deregulation has at times resulted in lower revenue, lower credit ratings, increased default risk, and lower electric utility security prices. Such increased competition may also cause long-term contracts, which electric utilities previously entered into to buy power, to become “stranded assets” which have no economic value. Any loss associated with such contracts must be absorbed by ratepayers and investors. In addition, some electric utilities have acquired electric utilities overseas to diversify, enhance earnings and gain experience in operating in a deregulated environment. In some instances, such acquisitions have involved significant borrowings, which have burdened the acquirer’s balance sheet. There is no assurance that current deregulation proposals will be adopted. However, deregulation in any form could significantly impact the electric utilities industry.

Telecommunications. The telecommunications industry today includes both traditional telephone companies, with a history of broad market coverage and highly regulated businesses, and cable companies, which began as small, lightly regulated businesses focused on limited markets. Today these two historically different businesses are converging in an industry that is trending toward larger, competitive national and international markets with an emphasis on deregulation. Companies that distribute telephone services and provide access to the telephone networks still comprise the greatest portion of this segment, but non-regulated activities such as wireless telephone services, paging, data transmission and processing, equipment retailing, computer software and hardware and internet services are becoming increasingly significant components as well. In particular, wireless and internet telephone services continue to gain market share at the expense of traditional telephone companies. The presence of unregulated companies in this industry and the entry of traditional telephone companies into unregulated or less regulated businesses provide significant investment opportunities with companies that may increase their earnings at faster rates than had been allowed in traditional regulated businesses. Still, increasing competition, technological innovations and other structural changes could adversely affect the profitability of such utilities and the growth rate of their dividends. Given mergers and proposed legislation and enforcement changes, it is likely that both traditional telephone companies and cable companies will continue to provide an expanding range of utility services to residential, corporate and governmental customers.

Gas. Gas transmission companies and gas distribution companies are undergoing significant changes. In the United States, interstate transmission companies are regulated by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, which is reducing its regulation of the industry. Many companies have diversified into oil and gas exploration and development, making returns more sensitive to energy prices. In the recent decade, gas utility companies have been adversely affected by disruptions in the oil industry and have also been affected by increased concentration and competition. In the opinion of the Manager, however, environmental considerations could improve the gas industry outlook in the future. For example, natural gas is the cleanest of the hydrocarbon fuels, and this may result in incremental shifts in fuel consumption toward natural gas and away from oil and coal, even for electricity generation. However, technological or regulatory changes within the industry may delay or prevent this result.

Water. Water supply utilities are companies that collect, purify, distribute and sell water. In the United States and around the world the industry is highly fragmented because most of the supplies are owned by local authorities. Companies in this industry are generally mature and are experiencing little or no per capita volume growth. As with other utilities, increased regulation, increased costs and potential disruptions in supply may adversely affect investments in water supply utilities.

Utility Industries Generally. There can be no assurance that the positive developments noted above, including those relating to privatization and changing regulation, will occur or that risks other than those noted above will not develop in the future.

Asset Allocation Portfolio. Fixed income securities purchased by the Asset Allocation Portfolio may include domestic, dollar-denominated non-U.S. and non-dollar denominated non-U.S. debt securities, including bonds, debentures, notes, equipment lease and trust certificates, mortgage-related and asset-backed securities, guaranteed investment contracts (“GICs”), obligations issued or guaranteed by the U.S. Government or its agencies or instrumentalities and state and local municipal obligations. These securities may be rated “Ba” or lower at the time of purchase by Moody’s Investors Service, Inc. (“Moody’s”), “BB” or lower by Standard & Poor’s Ratings Group (“S&P”) or another nationally recognized statistical rating organization (“NRSRO”). If unrated, the securities will be determined at the time of purchase to be of comparable quality by the Portfolio’s Manager.

The Asset Allocation Portfolio may also purchase zero-coupon bonds (i.e., discount debt obligations that do not make periodic interest payments) and state and local government obligations. Zero-coupon bonds are subject to greater market fluctuations from changing interest rates than debt obligations of comparable maturities which make current distributions of interest. Dividends paid by the Asset Allocation Portfolio that are derived from interest on municipal obligations will be taxable to shareholders.

The Asset Allocation Portfolio may invest in inflation-indexed bonds, which are fixed income securities whose principal value is periodically adjusted according to the rate of inflation. Two structures are common. The U.S. Treasury and some other issuers use a structure that accrues inflation into the principal value of the bond. Most other issuers pay out the Consumer Price Index accruals as part of a semiannual coupon.

Inflation-indexed securities issued by the U.S. Treasury have maturities of five, ten or thirty years, although it is possible that securities with other maturities will be issued in the future. The U.S. Treasury securities pay interest on a semi-annual basis, equal to a fixed percentage of the inflation-adjusted principal amount. For example, if the Portfolio purchased an inflation-indexed bond with a par value of $1,000 and a 3% real rate of return coupon (payable 1.5% semi-annually), and inflation over the first six months were 1%, the mid-year par value of the bond would be $1,010 and the first semi-annual interest payment would be $15.15 ($1,010 times 1.5%). If inflation during the second half of the year resulted in the whole years’ inflation equaling 3%, the end-of-year par value of the bond would be $1,030 and the second semi-annual interest payment would be $15.45 ($1,030 times 1.5%).

If the periodic adjustment rate measuring inflation falls, the principal value of inflation-indexed bonds will be adjusted downward, and consequently the interest payable on these securities (calculated with respect to a smaller principal amount) will be reduced. Repayment of the original bond principal upon maturity (as adjusted for inflation) is guaranteed in the case of U.S. Treasury inflation-indexed bonds, even during a period of deflation. However, the current market value of the bonds is not guaranteed, and will fluctuate. If a guarantee of principal is not provided, the adjusted principal value of the bond repaid at maturity may be less than the original principal.

The value of inflation-indexed bonds is expected to change in response to changes in real interest rates. Real interest rates in turn are tied to the relationship between nominal interest rates and the rate of inflation. Therefore, if inflation were to rise at a faster rate than nominal interest rates, real interest rates might decline, leading to an increase in value of inflation-indexed bonds. In contrast, if nominal interest rates increased at a faster rate than inflation, real interest rates might rise, leading to a decrease in value of inflation-indexed bonds.

While these securities are expected to be protected from long-term inflationary trends, short-term increases in inflation may lead to a decline in value. If interest rates rise due to reasons other than inflation (for example, due to changes in currency exchange rates), investors in these securities may not be protected to the extent that the increase is not reflected in the bond’s inflation measure.

The periodic adjustment of U.S. inflation-indexed bonds is tied to the Consumer Price Index for Urban Consumers (“CPI-U”), which is calculated monthly by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. The CPI-U is a measurement of changes in the cost of living, made up of components such as housing, food, transportation and energy. Inflation-indexed bonds issued by a foreign government are generally adjusted to reflect a comparable inflation index, calculated by that government. There can be no assurance that the CPI-U or any foreign inflation index will accurately measure the real rate of inflation in the prices of goods and services. Moreover, there can be no assurance that the rate of inflation in a foreign country will be correlated to the rate of inflation in the United States.

Any increase in the principal amount of an inflation-indexed bond will be considered taxable ordinary income, even though investors do not receive their principal until maturity.

Money Market Portfolios

The Money Market Portfolio may invest in a broad range of short-term, high quality, U.S. dollar-denominated instruments, such as government, bank, commercial and other obligations that are available in the money markets. In particular, a Portfolio may invest in:

	(a)	U.S. dollar-denominated obligations issued or supported by the credit of U.S. or non-U.S. banks or savings institutions with total assets in excess of $1 billion (including obligations of non-U.S. branches of such banks);

	(b)	high quality commercial paper and other obligations issued or guaranteed by U.S. and non-U.S. corporations and other issuers rated (at the time of purchase) A-2 or higher by S&P, Prime-2 or higher by Moody’s or F-2 or higher by Fitch Ratings (“Fitch”), as well as high quality corporate bonds rated (at the time of purchase) A or higher by those rating agencies;

	(c)	unrated notes, paper and other instruments that are of comparable quality to the instruments described in (b) above as determined by the Portfolio’s Manager;

	(d)	asset-backed securities (including interests in pools of assets such as mortgages, installment purchase obligations and credit card receivables);

	(e)	securities issued or guaranteed as to principal and interest by the U.S. Government or by its agencies or authorities and related custodial receipts;

	(f)	dollar-denominated securities issued or guaranteed by non-U.S. governments or their political subdivisions, agencies or authorities;

	(g)	funding agreements issued by highly-rated U.S. insurance companies;

	(h)	securities issued or guaranteed by state or local governmental bodies;

	(i)	repurchase agreements relating to the above instruments; and

	(j)	municipal bonds and notes whose principal and interest payments are guaranteed by the U.S. Government or one of its agencies or authorities or which otherwise depend on the credit of the United States.

The U.S. Treasury Money Market Portfolio pursues its objective by investing exclusively in short-term bills, notes and other obligations issued or guaranteed by the U.S. Treasury and repurchase agreements relating to such obligations.

The Municipal Money Market Portfolio pursues its objective by investing primarily in short-term obligations issued by or on behalf of states, territories and possessions of the United States, the District of Columbia and their political sub-divisions, agencies, instrumentalities and authorities and related tax-exempt derivative securities the interest on which is exempt from regular Federal income tax (“Municipal Obligations”).

The Municipal Money Market Portfolios seek to achieve their investment objectives by primarily investing in:

	(a)	fixed and variable rate notes and similar debt instruments rated MIG-2, VMIG-2 or Prime-2 or higher by Moody’s, SP-2 or A-2 or higher by S&P, or F-2 or higher by Fitch;

	(b)	tax-exempt commercial paper and similar debt instruments rated Prime-2 or higher by Moody’s, A-2 or higher by S&P, or F-2 or higher by Fitch;

	(c)	municipal bonds rated A or higher by Moody’s, S&P or Fitch;

	(d)	unrated notes, paper or other instruments that are of comparable quality to the instruments described above, as determined by the Portfolios’ Manager under guidelines established by the Fund’s Board of Trustees; and

	(e)	municipal bonds and notes which are guaranteed as to principal and interest by the U.S. Government or an agency or instrumentality thereof or which otherwise depend directly or indirectly on the credit of the United States.

All securities acquired by the Money Market Portfolios will be determined at the time of purchase by the Portfolios’ Manager, under guidelines established by the Fund’s Board of Trustees, to present minimal credit risks and will be “Eligible Securities” as defined by the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”). Eligible Securities are (a) securities that either (i) have short-term debt ratings at the time of purchase in the two highest rating categories by at least two unaffiliated NRSROs) (or one NRSRO if the security is rated by only one NRSRO), or (ii) are comparable in priority and security with an instrument issued by an issuer which has such ratings, and (b) securities that are unrated (including securities of issuers that have long-term but not short-term ratings) but are of comparable quality as determined in accordance with guidelines approved by the Board of Trustees.

ADRs, EDRs and GDRs. Each Equity Portfolio may invest in both sponsored and unsponsored American Depositary Receipts (“ADRs”), European Depositary Receipts (“EDRs”), Global Depositary Receipts (“GDRs”) and other similar global instruments. ADRs typically are issued by an American bank or trust company and evidence ownership of underlying securities issued by a non-U.S. corporation. EDRs, which are sometimes referred to as Continental Depository Receipts, are receipts issued in Europe, typically by non-U.S. banks and trust companies, that evidence ownership of either non-U.S. or domestic underlying securities. GDRs are depository receipts structured like global debt issues to facilitate trading on an international basis. Unsponsored ADR, EDR and GDR programs are organized independently and without the cooperation of the issuer of the underlying securities. As a result, available information concerning the issuer may not be as current as for sponsored ADRs, EDRs and GDRs, and the prices of unsponsored ADRs, EDRs and GDRs may be more volatile than if such instruments were sponsored by the issuer. Investments in ADRs, EDRs and GDRs present additional investment considerations as described under “Non-U.S. Investments.”

Derivatives. The Portfolios may use instruments referred to as derivative securities (“derivatives”). Derivatives are financial instruments the value of which is derived from another security, a commodity (such as gold or oil), a currency or an index (a measure of value or rates, such as the S&P 500 Index or the prime lending rate). Derivatives allow a Portfolio to increase or decrease the level of risk to which the Portfolio is exposed more quickly and efficiently than transactions in other types of instruments. The Portfolios may use derivatives for hedging purposes. Certain Portfolios may also use derivatives for speculative purposes to seek to enhance returns. The use of a derivative is speculative if the Portfolio is primarily seeking to achieve gains, rather than offset the risk of other positions. When a Portfolio invests in a derivative for speculative purposes, the Portfolio will be fully exposed to the risks of loss of that derivative, which may sometimes be greater than the derivative’s cost. No Portfolio may use any derivative to gain exposure to an asset or class of assets that it would be prohibited by its investment restrictions from purchasing directly.

Hedging. Hedging is a strategy in which a derivative is used to offset the risks associated with other Portfolio holdings. Losses on the other investment may be substantially reduced by gains on a derivative that reacts in an opposite manner to market movements. While hedging can reduce losses, it can also reduce or eliminate gains or cause losses if the market moves in a manner different from that anticipated by the Portfolio or if the cost of the derivative outweighs the benefit of the hedge. Hedging also involves correlation risk, i.e. the risk that changes in the value of the derivative will not match those of the holdings being hedged as expected by a Portfolio, in which case any losses on the holdings being hedged may not be reduced or may be increased. The inability to close options and futures positions also could have an adverse impact on a Portfolio’s ability to hedge its portfolio effectively. There is also a risk of loss by the Portfolio of margin deposits or collateral in the event of bankruptcy of a broker with whom the Portfolio has an open position in an option, a futures contract or a related option. There can be no assurance that a Portfolio’s hedging strategies will be effective. No Portfolio is required to engage in hedging transactions and each Portfolio may choose not to do so.

Non-U.S. Investments. The Money Market Portfolio and the Non-Money Market Portfolios may invest in non-U.S. securities, including securities from issuers located in emerging market countries. Investing in non-U.S. securities involves risks not typically associated with investing in securities of companies organized and operated in the United States that can increase the chances that a Portfolio will lose money.

In addition to equity securities, non-U.S. investments of the Portfolios may include: (a) debt obligations issued or guaranteed by non-U.S. sovereign governments or their agencies, authorities, instrumentalities or political subdivisions, including a non-U.S. state, province or municipality; (b) debt obligations of supranational organizations; (c) debt obligations of non-U.S. banks and bank holding companies; (d) debt obligations of

domestic banks and corporations issued in non-U.S. currencies; (e) debt obligations denominated in the Euro; and (f) non-U.S. corporate debt securities and commercial paper. Such securities may include loan participations and assignments, convertible securities and zero-coupon securities.

Currency Risk and Exchange Risk. Because non-U.S. securities generally are denominated and pay dividends or interest in non-U.S. currencies, the value of a Portfolio that invests in non-U.S. securities as measured in U.S. dollars will be affected favorably or unfavorably by changes in exchange rates. Generally, when the U.S. dollar rises in value against a foreign currency, a security denominated in that currency loses value because the currency is worth fewer U.S. dollars. Conversely, when the U.S. dollar decreases in value against a foreign currency, a security denominated in that currency gains value because the currency is worth more U.S. dollars. This risk, generally known as “currency risk,” means that a stronger U.S. dollar will reduce returns for U.S. investors while a weak U.S. dollar will increase those returns.

Foreign Market Risk. Portfolios that may invest in foreign securities offer the potential for more diversification than a Portfolio that invests only in the United States because securities traded on foreign markets have often (though not always) performed differently from securities traded in the United States. However, such investments often involve risks not present in U.S. investments that can increase the chances that a Portfolio will lose money. In particular, such a Portfolio is subject to the risk that, because there are generally fewer investors on foreign exchanges and a smaller number of shares traded each day, it may be difficult for the Portfolio to buy and sell securities on those exchanges. In addition, prices of foreign securities may fluctuate more than prices of securities traded in the United States. Investments in foreign markets may also be adversely affected by governmental actions such as the imposition of punitive taxes. In addition, the governments of certain countries may prohibit or impose substantial restrictions on foreign investing in their capital markets or in certain industries. Any of these actions could severely affect security prices, impair a Portfolio’s ability to purchase or sell foreign securities or transfer the Portfolio’s assets or income back into the United States, or otherwise adversely affect a Portfolio’s operations. Other potential foreign market risks include exchange controls, difficulties in pricing securities, defaults on foreign government securities, difficulties in enforcing favorable legal judgments in foreign courts, and political and social conditions, such as diplomatic relations, confiscatory taxation, expropriation, limitation on the removal of funds or assets, or imposition of (or change in) exchange control regulations. Legal remedies available to investors in certain foreign countries may be less extensive than those available to investors in the United States or other foreign countries. In addition, changes in government administrations or economic or monetary policies in the U.S. or abroad could result in appreciation or depreciation of portfolio securities and could favorably or adversely affect a Portfolio’s operations.

Publicly Available Information. In general, less information is publicly available with respect to non-U.S. issuers than is available with respect to U.S. companies. Most non-U.S. companies are also not subject to the uniform accounting and financial reporting requirements applicable to issuers in the United States. While the volume of transactions effected on non-U.S. stock exchanges has increased in recent years, it remains appreciably below that of the NYSE. Accordingly, a Portfolio’s non-U.S. investments may be less liquid and their prices may be more volatile than comparable investments in securities in U.S. companies. In addition, there is generally less government supervision and regulation of securities exchanges, brokers and issuers in foreign countries than in the United States.

Settlement Risk. Settlement and clearance procedures in certain foreign markets differ significantly from those in the United States. Foreign settlement procedures and trade regulations also may involve certain risks (such as delays in payment for or delivery of securities) not typically generated by the settlement of U.S. investments. Communications between the United States and emerging market countries may be unreliable, increasing the risk of delayed settlements or losses of security certificates in markets that still rely on physical settlement. Settlements in certain foreign countries at times have not kept pace with the number of securities transactions; these problems may make it difficult for a Portfolio to carry out transactions. If a Portfolio cannot settle or is delayed in settling a purchase of securities, it may miss attractive investment opportunities and certain of its assets may be uninvested with no return earned thereon for some period. If a Portfolio cannot settle or is delayed in settling a sale of securities, it may lose money if the value of the security then declines or, if it has contracted to sell the security to another party, the Portfolio could be liable to that party for any losses incurred. Dividends or interest on, or proceeds from the sale of, foreign securities may be subject to foreign withholding taxes.

Governmental Supervision and Regulation/Accounting Standards. Many foreign governments supervise and regulate stock exchanges, brokers and the sale of securities less than does the United States. Some countries may not have laws to protect investors comparable to the U.S. securities laws. For example, some foreign countries may have no laws or rules against insider trading. Insider trading occurs when a person buys or sells a company’s securities based on nonpublic information about that company. In addition, the U.S. Government has from time to time in the past imposed restrictions, through penalties and otherwise, on foreign investments by U.S. investors such as the Portfolio. Accounting standards in other countries are not necessarily the same as in the United States. If the accounting standards in another country do not require as much detail as U.S. accounting standards, it may be harder for the Manager to completely and accurately determine a company’s financial condition. Also, brokerage commissions and other costs of buying or selling securities often are higher in foreign countries than they are in the United States. This reduces the amount the Portfolio can earn on its investments.

Certain Risks of Holdings Fund Assets Outside the United States. A Portfolio generally holds its foreign securities and cash in foreign banks and securities depositories. Some foreign banks and securities depositories may be recently organized or new to the foreign custody business. In addition, there may be limited or no regulatory oversight over their operations. Also, the laws of certain countries may put limits on a Portfolio’s ability to recover its assets if a foreign bank or depository or issuer of a security or any of their agents goes bankrupt. In addition, it is often more expensive for a Portfolio to buy, sell and hold securities in certain foreign markets than in the United States. The increased expense of investing in foreign markets reduces the amount a Portfolio can earn on its investments and typically results in a higher operating expense ratio for the Portfolio as compared to investment companies that invest only in the United States.

Foreign Economy Risk. The economies of certain foreign markets often do not compare favorably with that of the United States with respect to such issues as growth of gross national product, reinvestment of capital, resources, and balance of payments position. Certain such economies may rely heavily on particular industries or foreign capital and are more vulnerable to diplomatic developments, the imposition of economic sanctions against a particular country or countries, changes in international trading patterns, trade barriers, and other protectionist or retaliatory measures.

Investment in Emerging Markets. As discussed in the Prospectuses, certain Portfolios may invest in the securities of issuers domiciled in various countries with emerging capital markets. Specifically, a country with an emerging capital market is any country that the World Bank, the International Finance Corporation, the United Nations or its authorities has determined to have a low or middle income economy. Countries with emerging markets can be found in regions such as Asia, Latin America, Eastern Europe and Africa.

Investments in the securities of issuers domiciled in countries with emerging capital markets involve certain additional risks that do not generally apply to investments in securities of issuers in more developed capital markets, such as (i) low or non-existent trading volume, resulting in a lack of liquidity and increased volatility in prices for such securities, as compared to securities of comparable issuers in more developed capital markets; (ii) uncertain national policies and social, political and economic instability, increasing the potential for expropriation of assets, confiscatory taxation, high rates of inflation or unfavorable diplomatic developments; (iii) possible fluctuations in exchange rates, differing legal systems and the existence or possible imposition of exchange controls, custodial restrictions or other foreign or U.S. governmental laws or restrictions applicable to such investments; (iv) national policies that may limit a Portfolio’s investment opportunities such as restrictions on investment in issuers or industries deemed sensitive to national interests; and (v) the lack or relatively undeveloped state of legal structures governing private and foreign investments and private property. In addition to withholding taxes on investment income, some countries with emerging markets may impose differential capital gains taxes on foreign investors.

Political and economic structures in emerging market countries may be undergoing significant evolution and rapid development, and these countries may lack the social, political and economic stability characteristic of more developed countries. In such a dynamic environment, there can be no assurance that any or all of these capital markets will continue to present viable investment opportunities for a Portfolio. Some of these countries may have in the past failed to recognize private property rights and have at times nationalized or expropriated the assets of private companies. There is no assurance that such expropriations will not reoccur. In such an event, it is possible that a Portfolio could lose the entire value of its investments in the affected market. As a result the risks described above, including the risks of nationalization or expropriation of assets, may be heightened. In addition,

unanticipated political or social developments may affect the value of investments in these countries and the availability to a Portfolio of additional investments. The small size and inexperience of the securities markets in certain of these countries and the limited volume of trading in securities in these countries may make investments in the countries illiquid and more volatile than investments in Japan or most Western European countries.

Also, there may be less publicly available information about issuers in emerging markets than would be available about issuers in more developed capital markets, and such issuers may not be subject to accounting, auditing and financial reporting standards and requirements comparable to those to which U.S. companies are subject. In certain countries with emerging capital markets, reporting standards vary widely. As a result, traditional investment measurements used in the United States, such as price/earnings ratios, may not be applicable. Emerging market securities may be substantially less liquid and more volatile than those of mature markets, and company shares may be held by a limited number of persons. This may adversely affect the timing and pricing of the Portfolio’s acquisition or disposal of securities.

Practices in relation to settlement of securities transactions in emerging markets involve higher risks than those in developed markets, in part because a Portfolio will need to use brokers and counterparties that are less well capitalized, and custody and registration of assets in some countries may be unreliable. The possibility of fraud, negligence, undue influence being exerted by the issuer or refusal to recognize ownership exists in some emerging markets, and, along with other factors, could result in ownership registration being completely lost. A Portfolio would absorb any loss resulting from such registration problems and may have no successful claim for compensation.

Investments in non-dollar denominated securities including securities from issuers located in emerging market countries may be on either a currency hedged or unhedged basis, and the Portfolios may hold from time to time various non-U.S. currencies pending investment or conversion into U.S. dollars. Some of these instruments may have the characteristics of futures contracts. In addition, certain Portfolios may engage in non-U.S. currency exchange transactions to seek to protect against changes in the level of future exchange rates which would adversely affect the Portfolio’s performance. These investments and transactions involving non-U.S. securities, currencies, options (including options that relate to non-U.S. currencies), futures, hedging and cross-hedging are described below and under “Options and Futures Contracts,” “Interest Rate Transactions, Currency Swaps and Swaptions” and “Non-U.S. Currency Transactions.”

Restrictions on Certain Investments. A number of publicly traded closed-end investment companies have been organized to facilitate indirect foreign investment in developing countries, and certain of such countries, such as Thailand, South Korea, Chile and Brazil, have specifically authorized such funds. There also are investment opportunities in certain of such countries in pooled vehicles that resemble open-end investment companies. Shares of certain investment companies may at times be acquired only at market prices representing premiums to their net asset values. If a Portfolio acquires shares of other investment companies, shareholders would bear both their proportionate share of expenses of the Portfolio (including management and advisory fees) and, indirectly, the expenses of such other investment companies.

Risks of Investments in Russia. A Portfolio may invest a portion of its assets in securities issued by companies located in Russia. Because of the relatively recent formation of the Russian securities markets as well as the underdeveloped state of Russia’s banking system, settlement, clearing and registration of securities transactions are subject to significant risks. Ownership of shares is defined according to entries in the company’s share register and normally evidenced by extracts from the register. These extracts are not negotiable instruments and are not effective evidence of securities ownership. The registrars are not necessarily subject to effective state supervision nor are they licensed with any governmental entity. Also, there is no central registration system for shareholders and it is possible for a Portfolio to lose its registration through fraud, negligence or mere oversight. While a Portfolio will endeavor to ensure that its interest continues to be appropriately recorded either itself or through a custodian or other agent inspecting the share register by obtaining extracts of share registers through regular confirmations, these extracts have no legal enforceability and it is possible that subsequent illegal amendment or other fraudulent act may deprive the Portfolio of its ownership rights or improperly dilute its interest. In addition, while applicable Russian regulations impose liability on registrars for losses resulting from their errors, it may be difficult for a Portfolio to enforce any rights it may have against the registrar or issuer of the securities in the event of loss of share registration. While a Portfolio intends to invest directly in Russian companies that use an independent registrar, there can be no assurance that such investments will not result in a loss to the Portfolio.

Risks of Investing in Asia-Pacific Countries. In addition to the risks of foreign investing and the risks of investing in developing markets, the developing market Asia-Pacific countries in which a Portfolio may invest are subject to certain additional or specific risks. Certain Portfolios may make substantial investments in Asia-Pacific countries. In many of these markets, there is a high concentration of market capitalization and trading volume in a small number of issuers representing a limited number of industries, as well as a high concentration of investors and financial intermediaries. Many of these markets also may be affected by developments with respect to more established markets in the region such as in Japan and Hong Kong. Brokers in developing market Asia-Pacific countries typically are fewer in number and less well capitalized than brokers in the United States. These factors, combined with the U.S. regulatory requirements for open-end investment companies and the restrictions on foreign investment discussed below, result in potentially fewer investment opportunities for a Portfolio and may have an adverse impact on the investment performance of the Portfolio.

Many of the developing market Asia-Pacific countries may be subject to a greater degree of economic, political and social instability than is the case in the United States and Western European countries. Such instability may result from, among other things: (i) authoritarian governments or military involvement in political and economic decision-making, including changes in government through extra-constitutional means; (ii) popular unrest associated with demands for improved political, economic and social conditions; (iii) internal insurgencies; (iv) hostile relations with neighboring countries; and (v) ethnic, religious and racial disaffection. In addition, the governments of many of such countries, such as Indonesia, have a substantial role in regulating and supervising the economy.

Another risk common to most such countries is that the economy is heavily export oriented and, accordingly, is dependent upon international trade. The existence of overburdened infrastructure and obsolete financial systems also presents risks in certain countries, as do environmental problems. Certain economies also depend to a significant degree upon exports of primary commodities and, therefore, are vulnerable to changes in commodity prices that, in turn, may be affected by a variety of factors.

The legal systems in certain developing market Asia-Pacific countries also may have an adverse impact on the Portfolios. For example, while the potential liability of a shareholder in a U.S. corporation with respect to acts of the corporation is generally limited to the amount of the shareholder’s investment, the notion of limited liability is less clear in certain emerging market Asia-Pacific countries. Similarly, the rights of investors in developing market Asia- Pacific companies may be more limited than those of shareholders of U.S. corporations. It may be difficult or impossible to obtain and/or enforce a judgment in a developing market Asia-Pacific country.

Governments of many developing market Asia-Pacific countries have exercised and continue to exercise substantial influence over many aspects of the private sector. In certain cases, the government owns or controls many companies, including the largest in the country. Accordingly, government actions in the future could have a significant effect on economic conditions in developing market Asia-Pacific countries, which could affect private sector companies and a Portfolio itself, as well as the value of securities in the Portfolio’s portfolio.

In addition, economic statistics of developing market Asia-Pacific countries may be less reliable than economic statistics of more developed nations.

In addition to the relative lack of publicly available information about developing market Asia-Pacific issuers and the possibility that such issuers may not be subject to the same accounting, auditing and financial reporting standards as U.S. companies, inflation accounting rules in some developing market Asia-Pacific countries require companies that keep accounting records in the local currency, for both tax and accounting purposes, to restate certain assets and liabilities on the company’s balance sheet in order to express items in terms of currency of constant purchasing power. Inflation accounting may indirectly generate losses or profits for certain developing market Asia-Pacific companies.

Satisfactory custodial services for investment securities may not be available in some developing Asia-Pacific countries, which may result in the Portfolio incurring additional costs and delays in providing transportation and custody services for such securities outside such countries. Certain developing Asia-Pacific countries, such as the Philippines, India and Turkey, are especially large debtors to commercial banks and foreign governments. Portfolio management may determine that, notwithstanding otherwise favorable investment criteria, it may not be

practicable or appropriate to invest in a particular developing Asia-Pacific country. A Portfolio may invest in countries in which foreign investors, including management of the Portfolio, have had no or limited prior experience.

A Portfolio’s investments in non-U.S. securities may also be adversely affected by changes in non-U.S. political or social conditions, diplomatic relations, confiscatory taxation, expropriation, limitation on the removal of funds or assets, or imposition of (or change in) exchange control regulations. In addition, changes in government administrations or economic or monetary policies in the U.S. or abroad could result in appreciation or depreciation of portfolio securities and could favorably or adversely affect a Portfolio’s operations.

In general, less information is publicly available with respect to non-U.S. issuers than is available with respect to U.S. companies. Most non-U.S. companies are also not subject to the uniform accounting and financial reporting requirements applicable to issuers in the United States. While the volume of transactions effected on non-U.S. stock exchanges has increased in recent years, it remains appreciably below that of the NYSE. Accordingly, a Portfolio’s non-U.S. investments may be less liquid and their prices may be more volatile than comparable investments in securities in U.S. companies. In addition, there is generally less government supervision and regulation of securities exchanges, brokers and issuers in foreign countries than in the United States.

Restrictions on Foreign Investments in Asia-Pacific Countries. Some developing Asia-Pacific countries prohibit or impose substantial restrictions on investments in their capital markets, particularly their equity markets, by foreign entities such as a Portfolio. As illustrations, certain countries may require governmental approval prior to investments by foreign persons or limit the amount of investment by foreign persons in a particular company or limit the investment by foreign persons to only a specific class of securities of a company which may have less advantageous terms (including price and shareholder rights) than securities of the company available for purchase by nationals. There can be no assurance that a Portfolio will be able to obtain required governmental approvals in a timely manner. In addition, changes to restrictions on foreign ownership of securities subsequent to a Portfolio’s purchase of such securities may have an adverse effect on the value of such shares. Certain countries may restrict investment opportunities in issuers or industries deemed important to national interests. The manner in which foreign investors may invest in companies in certain developing Asia-Pacific countries, as well as limitations on such investments, also may have an adverse impact on the operations of a Portfolio. For example, a Portfolio may be required in certain of such countries to invest initially through a local broker or other entity and then have the purchased shares re-registered in the name of the Portfolio. Re-registration may in some instances not be able to occur on a timely basis, resulting in a delay during which a Portfolio may be denied certain of its rights as an investor, including rights as to dividends or to be made aware of certain corporate actions. There also may be instances where a Portfolio places a purchase order but is subsequently informed, at the time of re-registration, that the permissible allocation of the investment to foreign investors has been filled, depriving the Portfolio of the ability to make its desired investment at that time.

Substantial limitations may exist in certain countries with respect to a Portfolio’s ability to repatriate investment income, capital or the proceeds of sales of securities by foreign investors. A Portfolio could be adversely affected by delays in, or a refusal to grant, any required governmental approval for repatriation of capital, as well as by the application to the Portfolio of any restrictions on investments. It is possible that certain countries may impose currency controls or other restrictions relating to their currencies or to securities of issuers in those countries. To the extent that such restrictions have the effect of making certain investments illiquid, securities may not be available for sale to meet redemptions. Depending on a variety of financial factors, the percentage of a Portfolio’s portfolio subject to currency controls may increase. In the event other countries impose similar controls, the portion of the Portfolio’s assets that may be used to meet redemptions may be further decreased. Even where there is no outright restriction on repatriation of capital, the mechanics of repatriation may affect certain aspects of the operations of a Portfolio (for example, if funds may be withdrawn only in certain currencies and/or only at an exchange rate established by the government).

In certain countries, banks or other financial institutions may be among the leading companies or have actively traded securities available for investment. The 1940 Act restricts a Portfolio’s investments in any equity securities of an issuer that, in its most recent fiscal year, derived more than 15% of its revenues from “securities related activities,” as defined by the rules thereunder. These provisions may restrict a Portfolio’s investments in certain foreign banks and other financial institutions.

Political and economic structures in emerging market countries may be undergoing significant evolution and rapid development, and these countries may lack the social, political and economic stability characteristic of more developed countries. Some of these countries may have in the past failed to recognize private property rights and have at times nationalized or expropriated the assets of private companies. As a result the risks described above, including the risks of nationalization or expropriation of assets, may be heightened. In addition, unanticipated political or social developments may affect the value of investments in these countries and the availability to a Portfolio of additional investments in emerging market countries. The small size and inexperience of the securities markets in certain of these countries and the limited volume of trading in securities in these countries may make investments in the countries illiquid and more volatile than investments in Japan or most Western European countries. There may be little financial or accounting information available with respect to issuers located in certain emerging market countries, and it may be difficult to assess the value or prospects of an investment in such issuers.

The expense ratios of the Portfolios investing significantly in non-U.S. securities can be expected to be higher than those of Portfolios investing primarily in domestic securities. The costs attributable to investing abroad are usually higher for several reasons, such as the higher cost of custody of non-U.S. securities, higher commissions paid on comparable transactions on non-U.S. markets and additional costs arising from delays in settlements of transactions involving non-U.S. securities.

Investments in Other Investment Companies. In connection with the management of their daily cash positions and subject to applicable law, the Equity Portfolios may invest in securities issued by other investment companies (including investment companies managed by BlackRock and its affiliates) which invest in short-term debt securities and which seek to maintain a $1.00 net asset value per share. Such Portfolios may also, subject to applicable law, invest in securities issued by other investment companies with similar investment objectives, including investing in Exchange Traded Funds (“ETFs”), which are typically open-end funds or unit investment trusts listed on a stock exchange. Portfolios may purchase shares of investment companies (including investment companies managed by BlackRock and its affiliates) investing primarily in non-U.S. securities, including so-called “country funds.” Country funds have portfolios consisting exclusively of securities of issuers located in one foreign country. Securities of other investment companies will be acquired within limits prescribed by the 1940 Act. As with other investments, investments in other investment companies are subject to market and selection risk. As a shareholder of another investment company, a Portfolio would bear, along with other shareholders, its pro rata portion of the other investment company’s expenses, including advisory fees (which, in the case of investment companies managed by BlackRock and its affiliates, would be paid to BlackRock and its affiliates). These expenses would be in addition to the advisory fees and other expenses the Portfolio bears directly in connection with its own operations. Investments by a Portfolio in wholly owned investment entities created under the laws of certain countries will not be deemed an investment in other investment companies.

The Money Market Portfolios may invest in securities issued by other open-end and closed-end investment companies (including investment companies managed by BlackRock and its affiliates) as permitted by the 1940 Act. Investments in other investment companies may cause a Portfolio (and indirectly, the Portfolio’s shareholders) to bear proportionately the costs incurred in connection with the other investment companies’ operations (which in the case of investment companies managed by BlackRock and its affiliates, could include investment advisory fees paid to BlackRock and its affiliates). For the Money Market Portfolios (other than the Municipal Money Market Portfolio, North Carolina Municipal Money Market Portfolio, New Jersey Municipal Money Market Portfolio, Ohio Municipal Money Market Portfolio, Pennsylvania Municipal Money Market Portfolio and Virginia Municipal Money Market Portfolio, as discussed below) as consistent with a Portfolio’s investment objectives and policies, the investment will be limited to securities issued by investment companies which invest in short-term, high quality debt securities and which determine their net asset value per share based on the amortized cost or penny-rounding method of valuation. For the Municipal Money Market Portfolio, North Carolina Municipal Money Market Portfolio, New Jersey Municipal Money Market Portfolio, Ohio Municipal Money Market Portfolio, Pennsylvania Municipal Money Market Portfolio and Virginia Municipal Money Market Portfolio, such securities may also include, as consistent with the Portfolio’s investment objectives and policies, certain variable rate demand securities issued by closed-end investment companies, which invest primarily in portfolios of taxable or tax-exempt securities. It is anticipated that the payments made on the variable rate demand securities issued by closed-end municipal bond funds will be exempt from Federal income tax and, with respect to any such securities issued by single state municipal bond funds, exempt from the applicable state’s income tax. Except as otherwise permitted under the 1940 Act or applicable regulations, each Money Market Portfolio currently intends to limit its

investments in other investment companies so that, as determined immediately after a securities purchase is made: (a) not more than 5% of the value of its total assets will be invested in the securities of any one investment company; (b) not more than 10% of its total assets will be invested in the aggregate in securities of investment companies as a group; and (c) not more than 3% of the outstanding voting securities of any one investment company will be owned by the Money Market Portfolio.

REITs. In pursuing its investment strategy, an Equity Portfolio may invest in shares of real estate investment trusts (“REITs”). REITs possess certain risks which differ from an investment in common stocks. REITs are financial vehicles that pool investor’s capital to purchase or finance real estate. REITs may concentrate their investments in specific geographic areas or in specific property types, i.e., hotels, shopping malls, residential complexes and office buildings.

REITs are subject to management fees and other expenses, and so a Portfolio that invests in REITs will bear its proportionate share of the costs of the REITs’ operations. There are three general categories of REITs: Equity REITs, Mortgage REITs and Hybrid REITs. Equity REITs invest primarily in direct fee ownership or leasehold ownership of real property; they derive most of their income from rents. Mortgage REITs invest mostly in mortgages on real estate, which may secure construction, development or long-term loans; the main source of their income is mortgage interest payments. Hybrid REITs hold both ownership and mortgage interests in real estate.

The market value of REIT shares and the ability of the REITs to distribute income may be adversely affected by several factors, including rising interest rates, changes in the national, state and local economic climate and real estate conditions, perceptions of prospective tenants of the safety, convenience and attractiveness of the properties, the ability of the owners to provide adequate management, maintenance and insurance, the cost of complying with the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, as amended, increased competition from new properties, the impact of present or future environmental legislation and compliance with environmental laws, changes in real estate taxes and other operating expenses, adverse changes in governmental rules and fiscal policies, adverse changes in zoning laws and other factors beyond the control of the issuers of the REITs. In addition, distributions received by a Portfolio from REITs may consist of dividends, capital gains and/or return of capital. As REITs generally pay a higher rate of dividends (on a pre-tax basis) than operating companies, to the extent application of the Portfolio’s investment strategy results in the Portfolio investing in REIT shares, the percentage of the Portfolio’s dividend income received from REIT shares will likely exceed the percentage of the Portfolio’s portfolio which is comprised of REIT shares. Generally, a portion of dividends received by a Portfolio from REIT shares and distributed to the Portfolio’s shareholders will not constitute “qualified dividend income” eligible for the reduced tax rate applicable to qualified dividend income; therefore, the tax rate applicable to that portion of the dividend income attributable to REIT shares held by the Portfolio that shareholders of the Portfolio receive will be a higher rate than that applicable to dividends eligible for the reduced tax rate applicable to qualified dividend income.

REITs (especially Mortgage REITs) are subject to interest rate risk. Rising interest rates may cause REIT investors to demand a higher annual yield, which may, in turn, cause a decline in the market price of the equity securities issued by a REIT. Rising interest rates also generally increase the costs of obtaining financing, which could cause the value of a Portfolio’s REIT investments to decline. During periods when interest rates are declining, mortgages are often refinanced. Refinancing may reduce the yield on investments in Mortgage REITs. In addition, since REITs depend on payment under their mortgage loans and leases to generate cash to make distributions to their shareholders, investments in REITs may be adversely affected by defaults on such mortgage loans or leases.

Investing in certain REITs, which often have small market capitalizations, may involve the same risks as investing in other small capitalization companies. REITs may have limited financial resources and their securities may trade less frequently and in limited volume and may be subject to more abrupt or erratic price movements than securities of larger companies. Historically, small capitalization stocks, such as REITs, have been more volatile in price than large capitalization stocks such as those included in the S&P 500 Index. The management of a REIT may be subject to conflicts of interest with respect to the operation of the business of the REIT and may be involved in real estate activities competitive with the REIT. REITs may own properties through joint ventures or in other circumstances in which the REIT may not have control over its investments. REITs may incur significant amounts of leverage.

Master Limited Partnerships. The Equity Portfolios may invest in publicly traded master limited partnerships (“MLPs”) which are limited partnerships or limited liability companies taxable as partnerships. MLPs

may derive income and gains from the exploration, development, mining or production, processing, refining, transportation (including pipelines transporting gas, oil, or products thereof), or the marketing of any mineral or natural resources. MLPs generally have two classes of owners, the general partner and limited partners. When investing in an MLP, the Equity Portfolios intend to purchase publicly traded common units issued to limited partners of the MLP. The general partner is typically owned by a major energy company, an investment fund, the direct management of the MLP or is an entity owned by one or more of such parties. The general partner may be structured as a private or publicly traded corporation or other entity. The general partner typically controls the operations and management of the MLP through an up to 2% equity interest in the MLP plus, in many cases, ownership of common units and subordinated units. Limited partners own the remainder of the partnership, through ownership of common units, and have a limited role in the partnership’s operations and management.

MLPs are typically structured such that common units and general partner interests have first priority to receive quarterly cash distributions up to an established minimum amount (“minimum quarterly distributions” or “MQD”). Common and general partner interests also accrue arrearages in distributions to the extent the MQD is not paid. Once common and general partner interests have been paid, subordinated units receive distributions of up to the MQD; however, subordinated units do not accrue arrearages. Distributable cash in excess of the MQD paid to both common and subordinated units is distributed to both common and subordinated units generally on a pro rata basis. The general partner is also eligible to receive incentive distributions if the general partner operates the business in a manner which results in distributions paid per common unit surpassing specified target levels. As the general partner increases cash distributions to the limited partners, the general partner receives an increasingly higher percentage of the incremental cash distributions. A common arrangement provides that the general partner can reach a tier where it receives 50% of every incremental dollar paid to common and subordinated unit holders. These incentive distributions encourage the general partner to streamline costs, increase capital expenditures and acquire assets in order to increase the partnership’s cash flow and raise the quarterly cash distribution in order to reach higher tiers. Such results benefit all security holders of the MLP.

MLP common units represent a limited partnership interest in the MLP. Common units are listed and traded on U.S. securities exchanges, with their value fluctuating predominantly based on prevailing market conditions and the success of the MLP. The Equity Portfolios intend to purchase common units in market transactions. Unlike owners of common stock of a corporation, owners of common units have limited voting rights and have no ability annually to elect directors. In the event of liquidation, common units have preference over subordinated units, but not over debt or preferred units, to the remaining assets of the MLP.

Money Market Obligations of Domestic Banks, Non-U.S. Banks and Non-U.S. Branches of U.S. Banks. Each Portfolio may purchase bank obligations, such as certificates of deposit, notes, bankers’ acceptances and time deposits, including instruments issued or supported by the credit of U.S. or non-U.S. banks or savings institutions having total assets at the time of purchase in excess of $1 billion. These obligations may be general obligations of the parent bank or may be limited to the issuing branch or subsidiary by the terms of a specific obligation or by government regulation. The assets of a bank or savings institution will be deemed to include the assets of its domestic and non-U.S. branches for purposes of each Portfolio’s investment policies. Investments in short-term bank obligations may include obligations of non-U.S. banks and domestic branches of non-U.S. banks, and also non-U.S. branches of domestic banks.

To the extent consistent with their investment objectives, the Portfolios may invest in debt obligations of domestic or non-U.S. corporations and banks, and may acquire commercial obligations issued by Canadian corporations and Canadian counterparts of U.S. corporations, as well as Europaper, which is U.S. dollar-denominated commercial paper of a non-U.S. issuer. The Money Market Portfolio may also make interest-bearing savings deposits in commercial and savings banks in amounts not in excess of 5% of their respective total assets.

Liquidity Management. Each Money Market Portfolio may hold uninvested cash reserves pending investment during temporary defensive periods or if, in the opinion of the Portfolio’s Manager, suitable obligations are unavailable. During normal market periods, no more than 20% of a Portfolio’s assets will be held uninvested. Uninvested cash reserves may not earn income.

As a temporary defensive measure, if its Manager determines that market conditions warrant, each Equity Portfolio may invest without limitation in high quality money market instruments. The Equity Portfolios may also

invest in high quality money market instruments pending investment or to meet anticipated redemption requests. The Asset Allocation Portfolio may also invest in these securities in furtherance of its investment objective. High quality money market instruments include U.S. government obligations, U.S. government agency obligations, dollar denominated obligations of non-U.S. issuers, bank obligations, including U.S. subsidiaries and branches of non-U.S. banks, corporate obligations, commercial paper, repurchase agreements and obligations of supranational organizations. Generally, such obligations will mature within one year from the date of settlement, but may mature within two years from the date of settlement.

Preferred Stock. Certain of the Portfolios may invest in preferred stocks. Preferred stock has a preference over common stock in liquidation (and generally dividends as well) but is subordinated to the liabilities of the issuer in all respects. As a general rule, the market value of preferred stock with a fixed dividend rate and no conversion element varies inversely with interest rates and perceived credit risk, while the market price of convertible preferred stock generally also reflects some element of conversion value. Because preferred stock is junior to debt securities and other obligations of the issuer, deterioration in the credit quality of the issuer will cause greater changes in the value of a preferred stock than in a more senior debt security with similar stated yield characteristics. Unlike interest payments on debt securities, preferred stock dividends are payable only if declared by the issuer’s board of directors. Preferred stock also may be subject to optional or mandatory redemption provisions.

Convertible Securities. The Equity Portfolios may invest in convertible securities. A convertible security is a bond, debenture, note, preferred stock or other security that may be converted into or exchanged for a prescribed amount of common stock or other equity security of the same or a different issuer within a particular period of time at a specified price or formula. A convertible security entitles the holder to receive interest paid or accrued on debt or the dividend paid on preferred stock until the convertible security matures or is redeemed, converted or exchanged. Before conversion, convertible securities have characteristics similar to nonconvertible income securities in that they ordinarily provide a stable stream of income with generally higher yields than those of common stocks of the same or similar issuers, but lower yields than comparable nonconvertible securities. The value of a convertible security is influenced by changes in interest rates, with investment value declining as interest rates increase and increasing as interest rates decline. The credit standing of the issuer and other factors also may have an effect on the convertible security’s investment value. Convertible securities rank senior to common stock in a corporation’s capital structure but are usually subordinated to comparable nonconvertible securities. Convertible securities may be subject to redemption at the option of the issuer at a price established in the convertible security’s governing instrument.

Convertible securities are issued and traded in a number of securities markets. Even in cases where a substantial portion of the convertible securities held by a Portfolio is denominated in U.S. dollars, the underlying equity securities may be quoted in the currency of the country where the issuer is domiciled. As a result, fluctuations in the exchange rate between the currency in which the debt security is denominated and the currency in which the share price is quoted will affect the value of the convertible security. With respect to convertible securities denominated in a currency different from that of the underlying equity securities, the conversion price may be based on a fixed exchange rate established at the time the security is issued, which may increase the effects of currency risk. As described below, a Portfolio may be authorized to enter into foreign currency hedging transactions in which it may seek to reduce the effect of exchange rate fluctuations.

Apart from currency considerations, the value of convertible securities is influenced by both the yield on nonconvertible securities of comparable issuers and by the value of the underlying common stock. The value of a convertible security viewed without regard to its conversion feature (i.e., strictly on the basis of its yield) is sometimes referred to as its “investment value.” To the extent interest rates change, the investment value of the convertible security typically will fluctuate. At the same time, however, the value of the convertible security will be influenced by its “conversion value,” which is the market value of the underlying common stock that would be obtained if the convertible security were converted. Conversion value fluctuates directly with the price of the underlying common stock. If the conversion value of a convertible security is substantially below its investment value, the price of the convertible security is governed principally by its investment value. To the extent the conversion value of a convertible security increases to a point that approximates or exceeds its investment value, the price of the convertible security will be influenced principally by its conversion value. A convertible security will sell at a premium over the conversion value to the extent investors place value on the right to acquire the

underlying common stock while holding a fixed income security. The yield and conversion premium of convertible securities issued in Japan and the Euromarket are frequently determined at levels that cause the conversion value to affect their market value more than the securities’ investment value.

Holders of convertible securities generally have a claim on the assets of the issuer prior to the common stockholders but may be subordinated to other debt securities of the same issuer. A convertible security may be subject to redemption at the option of the issuer at a price established in a charter provision, indenture or other governing instrument pursuant to which the convertible security was issued. If a convertible security held by a Portfolio is called for redemption, the Portfolio will be required to redeem the security, convert it into the underlying common stock or sell it to a third party. Certain convertible debt securities may provide a put option to the holder, which entitles the holder to cause the security to be redeemed by the issuer at a premium over the stated principal amount of the debt security under certain circumstances.

A Portfolio may also invest in synthetic convertible securities. Synthetic convertible securities may include either Cash-Settled Convertibles or Manufactured Convertibles. Cash Settled Convertibles are instruments that are created by the issuer and have the economic characteristics of traditional convertible securities but may not actually permit conversion into the underlying equity securities in all circumstances. As an example, a private company may issue a Cash-Settled Convertible that is convertible into common stock only if the company successfully completes a public offering of its common stock prior to maturity and otherwise pays a cash amount to reflect any equity appreciation. Manufactured Convertibles are created by the Manager or another party by combining separate securities that possess one of the two principal characteristics of a convertible security, i.e., fixed income (“fixed income component”) or a right to acquire equity securities (“convertibility component”). The fixed income component is achieved by investing in nonconvertible fixed income securities, such as nonconvertible bonds, preferred stocks and money market instruments. The convertibility component is achieved by investing in call options, warrants, or other securities with equity conversion features (“equity features”) granting the holder the right to purchase a specified quantity of the underlying stocks within a specified period of time at a specified price or, in the case of a stock index option, the right to receive a cash payment based on the value of the underlying stock index.

A Manufactured Convertible differs from traditional convertible securities in several respects. Unlike a traditional convertible security, which is a single security that has a unitary market value, a Manufactured Convertible is comprised of two or more separate securities, each with its own market value. Therefore, the total “market value” of such a Manufactured Convertible is the sum of the values of its fixed income component and its convertibility component.

More flexibility is possible in the creation of a Manufactured Convertible than in the purchase of a traditional convertible security. Because many corporations have not issued convertible securities, the Manager may combine a fixed income instrument and an equity feature with respect to the stock of the issuer of the fixed income instrument to create a synthetic convertible security otherwise unavailable in the market. The Manager may also combine a fixed income instrument of an issuer with an equity feature with respect to the stock of a different issuer when the Manager believes such a Manufactured Convertible would better promote a Portfolio’s objective than alternate investments. For example, the Manager may combine an equity feature with respect to an issuer’s stock with a fixed income security of a different issuer in the same industry to diversify the Portfolio’s credit exposure, or with a U.S. Treasury instrument to create a Manufactured Convertible with a higher credit profile than a traditional convertible security issued by that issuer. A Manufactured Convertible also is a more flexible investment in that its two components may be purchased separately and, upon purchasing the separate securities, “combined” to create a Manufactured Convertible. For example, the Portfolio may purchase a warrant for eventual inclusion in a Manufactured Convertible while postponing the purchase of a suitable bond to pair with the warrant pending development of more favorable market conditions.

The value of a Manufactured Convertible may respond to certain market fluctuations differently from a traditional convertible security with similar characteristics. For example, in the event a Portfolio created a Manufactured Convertible by combining a short-term U.S. Treasury instrument and a call option on a stock, the Manufactured Convertible would be expected to outperform a traditional convertible of similar maturity that is convertible into that stock during periods when Treasury instruments outperform corporate fixed income securities and under-perform during periods when corporate fixed income securities outperform Treasury instruments.

Rights Offerings and Warrants to Purchase. Each Equity Portfolio may participate in rights offerings and may purchase warrants, which are privileges issued by corporations enabling the owners to subscribe to and purchase a specified number of shares of the corporation at a specified price during a specified period of time. Subscription rights normally have a short life span to expiration. The purchase of rights or warrants involves the risk that a Portfolio could lose the purchase value of a right or warrant if the right to subscribe to additional shares is not exercised prior to the rights’ and warrants’ expiration. Also, the purchase of rights and/or warrants involves the risk that the effective price paid for the right and/or warrant added to the subscription price of the related security may exceed the subscribed security’s market price, such as when there is no movement in the level of the underlying security. Buying a warrant does not make the Portfolio a shareholder of the underlying stock. The warrant holder has no voting or dividend rights with respect to the underlying stock. A warrant does not carry any right to assets of the issuer, and for this reason investment in warrants may be more speculative than other equity-based investments. A Portfolio will not invest more than 5% of its net assets, taken at market value, in warrants, or more than 2% of its net assets, taken at market value, in warrants not listed on the New York Stock Exchange (“NYSE”) or NYSE Alternext U.S. (formerly known as The American Stock Exchange). Warrants acquired by a Portfolio in units or attached to other securities are not subject to this restriction.

Options and Futures Contracts. To the extent consistent with its investment objective, each Equity Portfolio may write (i.e., sell) covered call options, buy call options, write secured put options and buy put options for the purpose of hedging or earning additional income, which may be deemed speculative or cross-hedging. Each of the Health Sciences Opportunities, Energy & Resources, All-Cap Energy & Resources, Global Opportunities, Science & Technology Opportunities, Asset Allocation and International Opportunities Portfolios may also purchase exchange-listed and over-the-counter put and call options on non-U.S. currencies, and the Health Sciences Opportunities, Energy & Resources, All-Cap Energy & Resources and Opportunities Portfolios may write covered call options on up to 100% of the currencies in its portfolio. For the payment of a premium, the purchaser of an option obtains the right to buy (in the case of a call option) or to sell (in the case of a put option) the item which is the subject of the option at a stated exercise price for a specific period of time. These options may relate to particular securities, securities indices, or the yield differential between two securities, or, in the case of the Health Sciences Opportunities, Energy & Resources, All-Cap Energy & Resources, Global Opportunities, Science & Technology Opportunities, Asset Allocation and International Opportunities Portfolios, non-U.S. currencies, and may or may not be listed on a securities exchange and may or may not be issued by the Options Clearing Corporation. There is no limit on the amount of a Portfolio’s assets that can be put at risk through the use of options. In addition, unlisted options are not subject to the protections afforded purchasers of listed options issued by the Options Clearing Corporation, which performs the obligations of its members if they default.

Options on particular securities may be more volatile than the underlying securities, and therefore, on a percentage basis, an investment in the underlying securities themselves. A Portfolio will write call options only if they are “covered.” In the case of a call option on a security, the option is “covered” if a Portfolio owns the security underlying the call or has an absolute and immediate right to acquire that security without additional cash consideration (or, if additional cash consideration is required, liquid assets in such amount are designated on the Manager’s books and records in an amount equal to the amount of the Portfolio’s commitments to the extent required by SEC guidelines) upon conversion or exchange of other securities held by it. For a call option on an index, the option is covered if a Portfolio maintains with its custodian liquid assets equal to the contract value. A call option is also covered if a Portfolio holds a call on the same security or index as the written call and the exercise price of the call held is (i) equal to or less than the exercise price of the written call, or (ii) greater than the exercise price of the written call provided the difference is maintained by the Portfolio in liquid assets designated on the Manager’s books and records to the extent required by SEC guidelines.

When a Portfolio purchases an option, the premium paid by it is recorded as an asset of the Portfolio. When a Portfolio writes a put option, in return for receipt of the premium, it assumes the obligation to pay the strike price for the instrument underlying the option if the other party to the option chooses to exercise it. When a Portfolio writes an option, an amount equal to the net premium (the premium less the commission) received by the Portfolio is included in the liability section of the Portfolio’s statement of assets and liabilities as a deferred credit. The amount of this asset or deferred credit will be subsequently marked to market to reflect the current value of the option purchased or written. The current value of the traded option is the last sale price or, in the absence of a sale, the mean between the last bid and asked prices. If an option purchased by a Portfolio expires unexercised the

Portfolio realizes a loss equal to the premium paid. If the Portfolio enters into a closing sale transaction on an option purchased by it, the Portfolio will realize a gain if the premium received by the Portfolio on the closing transaction is more than the premium paid to purchase the option, or a loss if it is less. If an option written by a Portfolio expires on the stipulated expiration date or if the Portfolio enters into a closing purchase transaction, it will realize a gain (or loss if the cost of a closing purchase transaction exceeds the net premium received when the option is sold) and the deferred credit related to such option will be eliminated. If an option written by a Portfolio is exercised, the proceeds of the sale will be increased by the net premium originally received and the Portfolio will realize a gain or loss.

There are several risks associated with transactions in options on securities and indexes. For example, there are significant differences between the securities and options markets that could result in an imperfect correlation between these markets, causing a given transaction not to achieve its objectives. In addition, a liquid secondary market for particular options, whether traded over-the-counter or on a national securities exchange (an “Exchange”) may be absent for reasons which include the following: there may be insufficient trading interest in certain options; restrictions may be imposed by an Exchange on opening transactions or closing transactions or both; trading halts, suspensions or other restrictions may be imposed with respect to particular classes or series of options or underlying securities; unusual or unforeseen circumstances may interrupt normal operations on an Exchange; the facilities of an Exchange or the Options Clearing Corporation may not at all times be adequate to handle current trading volume; or one or more Exchanges could, for economic or other reasons, decide or be compelled at some future date to discontinue the trading of options (or a particular class or series of options), in which event the secondary market on that Exchange (or in that class or series of options) would cease to exist, although outstanding options that had been issued by the Options Clearing Corporation as a result of trades on that Exchange would continue to be exercisable in accordance with their terms.

To the extent consistent with its investment objective, each Equity Portfolio may also invest in futures contracts and options on futures contracts (interest rate futures contracts, index futures contracts, or non-U.S. exchange futures contracts as applicable). These instruments are described in Appendix B to this Statement of Additional Information. There is no limit on the amount of a Portfolio’s assets that can be put at risk through the use of futures contracts and the value of a Portfolio’s futures contracts and options on futures contracts may equal or exceed 100% of its total assets.

To maintain greater flexibility, each of the Equity Portfolios may invest in instruments which have characteristics similar to futures contracts. These instruments may take a variety of forms, such as debt securities with interest or principal payments determined by reference to the value of a security, an index of securities or commodity at a future point in time. The risks of such investments could reflect the risks of investing in futures and securities, including volatility and illiquidity.

Futures contracts obligate a Portfolio, at maturity, to take or make delivery of securities, the cash value of a securities index or a stated quantity of a non-U.S. currency. A Portfolio may sell a futures contract in order to offset an expected decrease in the value of its portfolio positions that might otherwise result from a market decline or currency exchange fluctuation. A Portfolio may do so either to hedge the value of its securities portfolio as a whole, or to protect against declines occurring prior to sales of securities in the value of the securities to be sold. In addition, a Portfolio may utilize futures contracts in anticipation of changes in the composition of its holdings or in currency exchange rates.

A Portfolio may purchase and sell put and call options on futures contracts traded on an exchange or board of trade. When a Portfolio purchases an option on a futures contract, it has the right to assume a position as a purchaser or a seller of a futures contract at a specified exercise price during the option period. When a Portfolio sells an option on a futures contract, it becomes obligated to sell or buy a futures contract if the option is exercised. In connection with a Portfolio’s position in a futures contract or related option, the Manager will designate liquid assets on its books and records in an amount equal to the amount of the Portfolio’s commitments or will otherwise cover its position in accordance with applicable SEC requirements.

The primary risks associated with the use of futures contracts and options are (a) the imperfect correlation between the change in market value of the instruments held by a Portfolio and the price of the futures contract or option; (b) possible lack of a liquid secondary market for a futures contract and the resulting inability to close a futures contract when desired; (c) losses caused by unanticipated market movements, which are potentially

unlimited; (d) the Manager’s inability to predict correctly the direction of securities prices, interest rates, currency exchange rates and other economic factors; and (e) the possibility that the counterparty will default in the performance of its obligations.

The Fund and the Portfolios have claimed exclusions from the definition of the term “commodity pool operator” under the Commodity Exchange Act and, therefore, are not subject to registration or regulation as commodity pool operators under the Act.

Non-U.S. Currency Transactions. Each of the Health Sciences Opportunities, Energy & Resources, All-Cap Energy & Resources, Global Opportunities, Science & Technology Opportunities, Asset Allocation and International Opportunities Portfolios may engage in non-U.S. currency exchange transactions to protect against uncertainty in the level of future exchange rates. Those Portfolios may engage in non-U.S. currency exchange transactions in connection with the purchase and sale of portfolio securities (transaction hedging) and to protect the value of specific portfolio positions (position hedging). The Portfolios may purchase or sell a non-U.S. currency on a spot (or cash) basis at the prevailing spot rate in connection with the settlement of transactions in portfolio securities denominated in that non-U.S. currency, and may also enter into contracts to purchase or sell non-U.S. currencies at a future date (“forward contracts”).

Forward non-U.S. currency exchange contracts involve an obligation to purchase or sell a specified currency at a future date at a price set at the time of the contract. Forward currency contracts do not eliminate fluctuations in the values of portfolio securities but rather allow a Portfolio to establish a rate of exchange for a future point in time. A Portfolio may use forward non-U.S. currency exchange contracts to hedge against movements in the value of non-U.S. currencies relative to the U.S. dollar in connection with specific portfolio transactions or with respect to portfolio positions. A Portfolio generally may enter into forward non-U.S. currency exchange contracts when deemed advisable by its Manager under two circumstances. First, when entering into a contract for the purchase or sale of a security, a Portfolio may enter into a forward non-U.S. currency exchange contract for the amount of the purchase or sale price to protect against variations, between the date the security is purchased or sold and the date on which payment is made or received, in the value of the non-U.S. currency relative to the U.S. dollar or other non-U.S. currency.

Second, when a Portfolio’s Manager anticipates that a particular non-U.S. currency may decline relative to the U.S. dollar or other leading currencies, in order to reduce risk, the Portfolio may enter into a forward contract to sell, for a fixed amount, the amount of non-U.S. currency approximating the value of some or all of the Portfolio’s securities denominated in such non-U.S. currency. With respect to any forward non-U.S. currency contract, it will not generally be possible to match precisely the amount covered by that contract and the value of the securities involved due to the changes in the values of such securities resulting from market movements between the date the forward contract is entered into and the date it matures. Some of the forward non-U.S. currency contracts entered into by the Portfolios are classified as non-deliverable forwards (NDF). NDFs are cash-settled, short-term forward contracts that may be thinly traded or are denominated in non-convertible foreign currency, where the profit or loss at the time at the settlement date is calculated by taking the difference between the agreed upon exchange rate and the spot rate at the time of settlement, for an agreed upon notional amount of funds. All NDFs have a fixing date and a settlement date. The fixing date is the date at which the difference between the prevailing market exchange rate and the agreed upon exchange rate is calculated. The settlement date is the date by which the payment of the difference is due to the party receiving payment. NDFs are commonly quoted for time periods of one month up to two years, and are normally quoted and settled in U.S. dollars. They are often used to gain exposure to and/or hedge exposure to foreign currencies that are not internationally traded. In addition, while forward contracts may offer protection from losses resulting from declines in the value of a particular non-U.S. currency, they also limit potential gains which might result from increases in the value of such currency. A Portfolio will also incur costs in connection with forward non-U.S. currency exchange contracts and conversions of non-U.S. currencies and U.S. dollars.

A Portfolio may also engage in proxy hedging transactions to reduce the effect of currency fluctuations on the value of existing or anticipated holdings of portfolio securities. Proxy hedging is often used when the currency to which the Portfolio is exposed is difficult to hedge or to hedge against the dollar. Proxy hedging entails entering into a forward contract to sell a currency whose changes in value are generally considered to be linked to a currency or currencies in which some or all of the Portfolio’s securities are, or are expected to be, denominated, and to buy U.S. dollars. Proxy hedging involves some of the same risks and considerations as other transactions with similar instruments. Currency transactions can result in losses to the Portfolio if the currency being hedged fluctuates in

value to a degree or in a direction that is not anticipated. In addition, there is the risk that the perceived linkage between various currencies may not be present or may not be present during the particular time that a Portfolio is engaging in proxy hedging. A Portfolio may also cross-hedge currencies by entering into forward contracts to sell one or more currencies that are expected to decline in value relative to other currencies to which the Portfolio has or in which the Portfolio expects to have portfolio exposure. For example, a Portfolio may hold both Canadian government bonds and Japanese government bonds, and the Manager may believe that Canadian dollars will deteriorate against Japanese yen. The Portfolio would sell Canadian dollars to reduce its exposure to that currency and buy Japanese yen. This strategy would be a hedge against a decline in the value of Canadian dollars, although it would expose the Portfolio to declines in the value of the Japanese yen relative to the U.S. dollar.

In general, currency transactions are subject to risks different from those of other portfolio transactions, and can result in greater losses to a Portfolio than would otherwise be incurred, even when the currency transactions are used for hedging purposes. Hedging transactions involving currency instruments involve substantial risks, including correlation risk. While a Portfolio’s use of currency instruments to effect hedging strategies is intended to reduce the volatility of the net asset value of the Portfolio’s shares, the net asset value of the Portfolio’s shares will fluctuate. Moreover, although currency instruments will be used with the intention of hedging against adverse currency movements, transactions in currency instruments involve the risk that anticipated currency movements will not be accurately predicted and that the Portfolio’s hedging strategies will be ineffective. To the extent that a Portfolio hedges against anticipated currency movements that do not occur, the Portfolio may realize losses and decrease its total return as the result of its hedging transactions. Furthermore, a Portfolio will only engage in hedging activities from time to time and may not be engaging in hedging activities when movements in currency exchange rates occur.

Liquid assets equal to the amount of the Portfolio’s assets that could be required to consummate forward contracts will be segregated on the books and records of the Manager to the extent required by SEC guidelines. For the purpose of determining the adequacy of the securities so segregated, the securities will be valued at market or fair value. If the market or fair value of such securities declines, additional cash or securities will be added.

Securities Lending. A Portfolio may seek additional income by lending securities on a short-term basis. Voting rights may pass with the lending of securities. The Trustees of the Fund will call loans of securities to vote proxies or otherwise obtain rights to vote or consent if a material event affecting the investment occurs. The securities lending agreements will require that the loans be secured by collateral in cash, U.S. Government securities or irrevocable bank letters of credit maintained on a current basis equal in value to at least the market value of the loaned securities. A Portfolio may not make such loans in excess of 33¹/3% of the value of its total assets. Securities loans involve risks of delay in receiving additional collateral or in recovering the loaned securities, or possibly loss of rights in the collateral if the borrower of the securities becomes insolvent. The Portfolio is obligated to return the collateral to the borrower at the termination of the loan. A Portfolio could suffer a loss in the event the Portfolio must return cash collateral and there are losses on investments made with the cash collateral. In the event the borrower defaults on any of its obligations with respect to a securities loan, a Portfolio could suffer a loss if there are losses on investments made with the cash collateral, or if the value of the securities collateral falls below the market value of the borrowed securities. A Portfolio could also experience delays and costs in gaining access to the collateral. Each Portfolio may pay reasonable finder’s, lending agent, administrative and custodial fees in connection with its loans.

A Portfolio would continue to accrue interest on loaned securities and would also earn income on investment collateral for such loans. Any cash collateral received by a Portfolio in connection with such loans may be invested in a broad range of high quality, U.S. dollar-denominated money market instruments that meet Rule 2a-7 restrictions for money market funds. Specifically, cash collateral may be invested in any of the following instruments: (a) securities issued or guaranteed as to principal and interest by the U.S. Government or by its agencies or instrumentalities and related custodial receipts; (b) “first tier” quality commercial paper and other obligations issued or guaranteed by U.S. and non-U.S. corporations and other issuers rated (at the time of purchase) in the highest rating category by at least two NRSRO’s, or one if only rated by one NRSRO; (c) U.S. dollar-denominated obligations issued or supported by the credit of U.S. or non-U.S. banks or savings institutions with total assets in excess of $1 billion (including obligations of non-U.S. branches of such banks) (i.e., CD’s, BA’s and time deposits); (d) repurchase agreements relating to the above instruments, as well as corporate debt; and (e) unaffiliated and, to the extent permitted by SEC guidelines, affiliated money market funds. Any such investments must be rated “first tier” and must have a maturity of 397 days or less from the date of purchase.

BlackRock Investment Management, LLC (previously defined as “BIM”), an affiliate of BlackRock, acts as securities lending agent for the Portfolios and will be paid a fee for the provision of these services, including advisory services with respect to the collateral of the Fund’s securities lending program. BIM may invest such collateral in short-term investments, including in one or more investment companies or unregistered investment vehicles managed by BlackRock, BIM or their affiliates and that invest, subject to applicable law, in money market securities or high-quality, short-term instruments.

The Portfolios may lend securities to broker-dealers who are affiliates of Merrill Lynch, subject to the terms of an exemptive order from the SEC.

Short Sales. The Portfolios may only make short sales “against the box.” In this type of short sale, at the time of the sale, the Portfolio owns or has the immediate and unconditional right to acquire the identical or similar security at no additional cost. When selling short “against the box,” a Portfolio forgoes an opportunity for capital appreciation in the security. The Portfolios may make short sales of securities, either as a hedge against potential declines in value of a portfolio security, to realize gain when a security that the Portfolio does not own declines in value and in order to maintain portfolio flexibility. When a Portfolio makes a short sale, it borrows the security sold short and delivers it to the broker-dealer through which it made the short sale. A Portfolio may have to pay a fee to borrow particular securities and is often obligated to turn over any payments received on such borrowed securities to the lender of the securities.

A Portfolio secures its obligation to replace the borrowed security by depositing collateral with the broker-dealer, usually in cash, U.S. Government securities or other liquid securities similar to those borrowed. Depending on arrangements made with the broker-dealer from which the Portfolio borrowed the security regarding payment received by the Portfolio on such security, a Portfolio may not receive any payments (including interest) on its collateral deposited with such broker-dealer.

A Portfolio will incur a loss as a result of a short sale if the price of the security increases between the date of the short sale and the date on which the Portfolio replaces the borrowed security. As a result, if a Portfolio makes short sales in securities that increase in value, it will likely under-perform similar mutual funds that do not make short sales in securities. A Portfolio will realize a gain on a short sale if the security declines in price between those dates. Although a Portfolio’s gain is limited to the price at which it sold the security short, its potential loss is limited only by the maximum attainable price of the security, less the price at which the security was sold and may, theoretically, be unlimited.

Interest Rate and Extension Risk. The value of fixed income securities in the Portfolios can be expected to vary inversely with changes in prevailing interest rates. Fixed income securities with longer maturities, which tend to produce higher yields, are subject to potentially greater capital appreciation and depreciation than securities with shorter maturities. The Portfolios are not restricted to any maximum or minimum time to maturity in purchasing individual portfolio securities, and the average maturity of a Portfolio’s assets will vary.

During periods of rising interest rates, the average life of certain fixed income securities is extended because of slower than expected principal payments. This may lock in a below-market interest rate and extend the duration of these fixed-income securities, especially mortgage-related securities, making them more sensitive to changes in interest rates. As a result, in a period of rising interest rates, these securities may exhibit additional volatility and lose value. This is known as extension risk.

Mortgage Related and Asset-Backed Securities. The Asset Allocation and Global Opportunities Portfolios may make significant investments, and the other Equity Portfolios may from time to time invest, in residential and commercial mortgage-related and other asset-backed securities (i.e., securities backed by home equity loans, installment sale contracts, credit card receivables or other assets) issued by governmental entities and private issuers. The Money Market Portfolios, to the extent consistent with their investment objectives, may invest in these instruments to a lesser extent.

Asset-backed securities are generally issued as pass-through certificates, which represent undivided fractional ownership interests in an underlying pool of assets, or as debt instruments, which are also known as collateralized obligations, and are generally issued as the debt of a special purpose entity organized solely for the purpose of owning such assets and issuing such debt. Asset-backed securities are often backed by a pool of assets representing the obligations of a number of different parties.

The yield characteristics of certain mortgage-related and asset-backed securities may differ from traditional debt securities. One such major difference is that all or a principal part of the obligations may be prepaid at any time because the underlying assets (i.e., loans) may be prepaid at any time. As a result, a decrease in interest rates in the market may result in increases in the level of prepayments as borrowers, particularly mortgagors, refinance and repay their loans. An increased prepayment rate with respect to a mortgage-related or asset-backed security subject to such a prepayment feature will have the effect of shortening the maturity of the security. If a Portfolio has purchased such a mortgage-related or asset-backed security at a premium, a faster than anticipated prepayment rate could result in a loss of principal to the extent of the premium paid. Conversely, an increase in interest rates may result in lengthening the anticipated maturity of such a security because expected prepayments are reduced. A prepayment rate that is faster than expected will reduce the yield to maturity of such a security, while a prepayment rate that is slower than expected may have the opposite effect of increasing yield to maturity. See “— Interest Rate and Extension Risk” above.

Any investments the Portfolios make in mortgage-related securities that are issued by private issuers have some exposure to subprime loans as well as to the mortgage and credit markets generally. Private issuers include commercial banks, savings associations, mortgage companies, investment banking firms, finance companies and special purpose finance entities (called special purpose vehicles or structured investment vehicles) and other entities that acquire and package mortgage loans for resale as mortgage-related securities. Unlike mortgage-related securities issued or guaranteed by the U.S. Government or one of its sponsored entities, mortgage-related securities issued by private issuers do not have a government or government-sponsored entity guarantee, but may have credit enhancement provided by external entities such as banks or financial institutions or achieved through the structuring of the transaction itself. Examples of such credit support arising out of the structure of the transaction include: (1) the issuance of senior and subordinated securities (e.g., the issuance of securities by a special purpose vehicle in multiple classes or “tranches,” with one or more classes being senior to other subordinated classes as to the payment of principal and interest, with the result that defaults on the underlying mortgage loans are borne first by the holders of the subordinated class); (2) the creation of “reserve funds” (in which case cash or investments, sometimes funded from a portion of the payments on the underlying mortgage loans, are held in reserve against future losses); and (3) “overcollateralization” (in which case the scheduled payments on, or the principal amount of, the underlying mortgage loans exceed that required to make payment on the securities and pay any servicing or other fees). However, there can be no guarantee that credit enhancements, if any, will be sufficient to prevent losses in the event of defaults on the underlying mortgage loans.

In addition, mortgage-related securities that are issued by private issuers are not subject to the underwriting requirements for the underlying mortgages that are applicable to those mortgage-related securities that have a government or government-sponsored entity guarantee. As a result, the mortgage loans underlying private mortgage-related securities may, and frequently do, have less favorable collateral, credit risk or other underwriting characteristics than government or government-sponsored mortgage-related securities and have wider variances in a number of terms including interest rate, term, size, purpose and borrower characteristics. Privately issued pools more frequently include second mortgages, high loan-to-value mortgages and manufactured housing loans. The coupon rates and maturities of the underlying mortgage loans in a private-label mortgage-related securities pool may vary to a greater extent than those included in a government guaranteed pool, and the pool may include subprime mortgage loans. Subprime loans refer to loans made to borrowers with weakened credit histories or with a lower capacity to make timely payments on their loans. For these reasons, the loans underlying these securities have had in many cases higher default rates than those loans that meet government underwriting requirements.

The risk of non-payment is greater for mortgage-related securities that are backed by mortgage pools that contain subprime loans, but a level of risk exists for all loans. Market factors adversely affecting mortgage loan repayments may include a general economic turndown, high unemployment, a general slowdown in the real estate market, a drop in the market prices of real estate, or an increase in interest rates resulting in higher mortgage payments by holders of adjustable rate mortgages.

Privately issued mortgage-related securities are not traded on an exchange and there may be a limited market for the securities, especially when there is a perceived weakness in the mortgage and real estate market sectors. Without an active trading market, mortgage-related securities held in a fund’s portfolio may be particularly difficult to value because of the complexities involved in assessing the value of the underlying mortgage loans.

In general, the assets supporting non-mortgage asset-backed securities are of shorter maturity than the assets supporting mortgage-related securities. Like other fixed-income securities, when interest rates rise the value of an asset-backed security generally will decline; however, when interest rates decline, the value of an asset-backed security with prepayment features may not increase as much as that of other fixed-income securities, and, as noted above, changes in market rates of interest may accelerate or retard prepayments and thus affect maturities.

These characteristics may result in a higher level of price volatility for asset-backed securities with prepayment features under certain market conditions. In addition, while the trading market for short-term mortgages and asset-backed securities is ordinarily quite liquid, in times of financial stress the trading market for these securities sometimes becomes restricted.

The relationship between prepayments and interest rates may give some high-yielding mortgage- related and asset-backed securities less potential for growth in value than conventional bonds with comparable maturities. During periods of falling interest rates, the reinvestment of prepayment proceeds by a Portfolio will generally be at lower rates than the rates that were carried by the obligations that have been prepaid. Because of these and other reasons, mortgage-related and other asset-backed security’s total return and maturity may be difficult to predict precisely.

A Portfolio from time to time may purchase in the secondary market (i) certain mortgage pass-through securities packaged and master serviced by PNC Mortgage Securities Corp. (“PNC Mortgage”) (or Sears Mortgage if PNC Mortgage succeeded to the rights and duties of Sears Mortgage) or Midland Loan Services, Inc. (“Midland”), or (ii) mortgage-related securities containing loans or mortgages originated by PNC Bank, National Association (“PNC Bank”) or its affiliates. It is possible that under some circumstances, PNC Mortgage, Midland or other affiliates could have interests that are in conflict with the holders of these mortgage-backed securities, and such holders could have rights against PNC Mortgage, Midland or their affiliates. For example, if PNC Mortgage, Midland or their affiliates engaged in negligence or willful misconduct in carrying out its duties as a master servicer, then any holder of the mortgage-backed security could seek recourse against PNC Mortgage, Midland or their affiliates, as applicable. Also, as a master servicer, PNC Mortgage, Midland or their affiliates may make certain representations and warranties regarding the quality of the mortgages and properties underlying a mortgage-backed security. If one or more of those representations or warranties is false, then the holders of the mortgage-backed securities could trigger an obligation of PNC Mortgage, Midland or their affiliates, as applicable, to repurchase the mortgages from the issuing trust. Finally, PNC Mortgage, Midland or their affiliates may own securities that are subordinate to the senior mortgage-backed securities owned by a Portfolio.

Each Money Market Portfolio may invest in mortgage-related securities issued by the U.S. Government or its agencies or instrumentalities or issued by private companies.

There are a number of important differences among the agencies and instrumentalities of the U.S. Government that issue mortgage-related securities and among the securities that they issue. Mortgage-related securities guaranteed by the Government National Mortgage Association (“GNMA”) include Ginnie Maes, which are guaranteed as to the timely payment of principal and interest by GNMA and such guarantee is backed by the full faith and credit of the United States. GNMA is a wholly-owned U.S. Government corporation within the Department of Housing and Urban Development. GNMA certificates also are supported by the authority of GNMA to borrow funds from the U.S. Treasury to make payments under its guarantee. Mortgage-related securities issued by the Federal National Mortgage Association (“FNMA”) include FNMA guaranteed Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates (also known as “Fannie Maes”) which are solely the obligations of the FNMA, are not backed by or entitled to the full faith and credit of the United States and are supported by the right of the issuer to borrow from the Treasury. FNMA is a government-sponsored organization owned entirely by private stockholders. Fannie Maes are guaranteed as to timely payment of principal and interest by FNMA. Mortgage-related securities issued by the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (“FHLMC”) include FHLMC Mortgage Participation Certificates (also known as “Freddie Macs” or “PCs”). FHLMC is a corporate instrumentality of the United States, created pursuant to an Act of Congress, which is owned entirely by Federal Home Loan Banks. Freddie Macs, which are not guaranteed by the United States or by any Federal Home Loan Banks and do not constitute a debt or obligation of the United States or of any Federal Home Loan Bank, are supported by the right of the issuer to borrow from the Treasury. Freddie Macs entitle the holder to timely payment of interest, which is guaranteed by the FHLMC. FHLMC guarantees either ultimate collection or timely payment of all principal payments on the underlying mortgage loans. When FHLMC generally does not guarantee timely payment of principal, FHLMC may remit the

amount due on account of its guarantee of ultimate payment of principal at any time after default on an underlying mortgage, but in no event later than one year after it becomes payable. FHLMC “Gold” PCs are guaranteed as to timely payment of interest and principal by FHLMC and represent 100% of the current fixed-rate production of the majority of FHLMC fixed-rate securities outstanding.

The Portfolios may invest in multiple class pass-through securities, including collateralized mortgage obligations (“CMOs”) and real estate mortgage investment conduit (“REMIC”) pass-through or participation certificates (“REMIC Certificates”). These multiple class securities may be issued by GNMA, U.S. Government agencies or instrumentalities, including FNMA and FHLMC, or by trusts formed by private originators of, or investors in, mortgage loans. In general, CMOs and REMICs are debt obligations of a legal entity that are collateralized by, and multiple class pass-through securities that represent direct ownership interests in, a pool of residential or commercial mortgage loans or mortgage pass-through securities (the “Mortgage Assets”), the payments on which are used to make payments on the CMOs or multiple pass-through securities. Investors may purchase beneficial interests in CMOs and REMICs, which are known as “regular” interests or “residual” interests. The residual in a CMO or REMIC structure generally represents the interest in any excess cash flow or tax liability remaining after making required payments of principal of and interest on the CMOs or REMICs, as well as the related administrative expenses of the issuer. Residual interests generally are junior to, and may be significantly more volatile than, “regular” CMO and REMIC interests. The Portfolios do not currently intend to purchase residual interests. The markets for CMOs and REMICs may be more illiquid than those of other securities.

Each class of CMOs or REMIC Certificates, often referred to as a “tranche,” is issued at a specific adjustable or fixed interest rate, bears a different stated maturity date and must be fully retired no later than its final distribution date. Principal prepayments on the Mortgage Assets underlying the CMOs or REMIC Certificates may cause some or all of the classes of CMOs or REMIC Certificates to be retired substantially earlier than their final distribution dates. Generally, interest is paid or accrues on all classes of CMOs or REMIC Certificates on a monthly basis.

The principal of and interest on the Mortgage Assets may be allocated among the several classes of CMOs or REMIC Certificates in various ways. In certain structures (known as “sequential pay” CMOs or REMIC Certificates), payments of principal, including any principal prepayments, on the Mortgage Assets generally are applied to the classes of CMOs or REMIC Certificates in the order of their respective final distribution dates. Thus, no payment of principal will be made on any class of sequential pay CMOs or REMIC Certificates until all other classes having an earlier final distribution date have been paid in full.

Additional structures of CMOs or REMIC Certificates include, among others, “parallel pay” CMOs and REMIC Certificates. Parallel pay CMOs or REMIC Certificates are those which are structured to apply principal payments and prepayments of the Mortgage Assets to two or more classes concurrently on a proportionate or disproportionate basis. These simultaneous payments are taken into account in calculating the final distribution date of each class. A wide variety of REMIC Certificates may be issued in the parallel pay or sequential pay structures. These securities include accrual certificates (also known as “Z-Bonds”), which only accrue interest at a specified rate until all other certificates having an earlier final distribution date have been retired and are converted thereafter to an interest-paying security.

Classes of CMOs include interest only (“IOs”), principal only (“POs”), planned amortization classes (“PACs”) and targeted amortization classes (“TACs”). IOs and POs are stripped mortgage-backed securities representing interests in a pool of mortgages the cash flow from which has been separated into interest and principal components. IOs (interest only securities) receive the interest portion of the cash flow while POs (principal only securities) receive the principal portion. IOs and POs can be extremely volatile in response to changes in interest rates. As interest rates rise and fall, the value of IOs tends to move in the same direction as interest rates. POs perform best when prepayments on the underlying mortgages rise since this increases the rate at which the investment is returned and the yield to maturity on the PO. When payments on mortgages underlying a PO are slow, the life of the PO is lengthened and the yield to maturity is reduced.

The scheduled principal payments for PAC Certificates generally have the highest priority on each payment date after interest due has been paid to all classes entitled to receive interest currently. Shortfalls, if any, are added to the amount payable on the next payment date. The PAC Certificate payment schedule is taken into account in calculating the final distribution date of each class of PAC. In order to create PAC tranches, one or more tranches

generally must be created that absorb most of the volatility in the underlying mortgage assets. These tranches (often called “supports” or “companion” tranches) tend to have market prices and yields that are more volatile than the PAC classes.

TACs are similar to PACs in that they require that specified amounts of principal be applied on each payment date to one or more classes of REMIC Certificates. A PAC’s payment schedule, however, remains in effect as long as prepayment rates on the underlying mortgages do not exceed certain ranges. In contrast, a TAC provides investors with protection, to a certain level, against either faster than expected or slower than expected prepayment rates, but not both. TACs thus provide more cash flow stability than a regular sequential paying class, but less than a PAC. TACs also tend to have market prices and yields that are more volatile than PACs.

FNMA REMIC Certificates are issued and guaranteed as to timely distribution of principal and interest by FNMA. In addition, FNMA will be obligated to distribute on a timely basis to holders of FNMA REMIC Certificates required installments of principal and interest and to distribute the principal balance of each class of REMIC Certificates in full, whether or not sufficient funds are otherwise available.

For FHLMC REMIC Certificates, FHLMC guarantees the timely payment of interest, and also guarantees the ultimate payment of principal as payments are required to be made on the underlying mortgage participation certificates (“PCs”). PCs represent undivided interests in specified level payment, residential mortgages or participations therein purchased by FHLMC and placed in a PC pool. With respect to principal payments on PCs, FHLMC generally guarantees ultimate collection of all principal of the related mortgage loans without offset or deduction. FHLMC also guarantees timely payment of principal on certain PCs, referred to as “Gold PCs.”

Certain issuers of CMOs are not considered investment companies pursuant to a rule adopted by the SEC, and a Portfolio may invest in the securities of such issuers without the limitations imposed by the 1940 Act on investments by a Portfolio in other investment companies. In addition, in reliance on an earlier SEC interpretation, a Portfolio’s investments in certain other qualifying CMOs, which cannot or do not rely on the rule, are also not subject to the limitation of the 1940 Act on acquiring interests in other investment companies. In order to be able to rely on the SEC’s interpretation, these CMOs must be unmanaged, fixed asset issuers, that: (1) invest primarily in mortgage-backed securities; (2) do not issue redeemable securities; (3) operate under general exemptive orders exempting them from all provisions of the 1940 Act; and (4) are not registered or regulated under the 1940 Act as investment companies. To the extent that a Portfolio selects CMOs that cannot rely on the rule or do not meet the above requirements, the Portfolio generally may not invest more than 10% of its assets in all such entities and may not acquire more than 3% of the voting securities of any single such entity.

Asset-Based Securities. Certain Portfolios may invest in debt, preferred or convertible securities, the principal amount, redemption terms or conversion terms of which are related to the market price of some natural resource asset such as gold bullion. These securities are referred to as “asset-based securities.” A Portfolio will purchase only asset-based securities that are rated, or are issued by issuers that have outstanding debt obligations rated, investment grade (for example, AAA, AA, A or BBB by S&P or Fitch, or Baa by Moody’s or commercial paper rated A-1 by S&P or Prime-1 by Moody’s) or by issuers that the Manager has determined to be of similar creditworthiness. Obligations ranked in the fourth highest rating category, while considered “investment grade,” may have certain speculative characteristics and may be more likely to be downgraded than securities rated in the three highest rating categories. If an asset-based security is backed by a bank letter of credit or other similar facility, the Manager may take such backing into account in determining the creditworthiness of the issuer. While the market prices for an asset-based security and the related natural resource asset generally are expected to move in the same direction, there may not be perfect correlation in the two price movements. Asset-based securities may not be secured by a security interest in or claim on the underlying natural resource asset. The asset-based securities in which a Portfolio may invest may bear interest or pay preferred dividends at below market (or even relatively nominal) rates. Certain asset-based securities may be payable at maturity in cash at the stated principal amount or, at the option of the holder, directly in a stated amount of the asset to which it is related. In such instance, because no Portfolio presently intends to invest directly in natural resource assets, a Portfolio would sell the asset-based security in the secondary market, to the extent one exists, prior to maturity if the value of the stated amount of the asset exceeds the stated principal amount and thereby realize the appreciation in the underlying asset.

Precious Metal-Related Securities. An Equity Portfolio may invest in the equity securities of companies that explore for, extract, process or deal in precious metals (e.g., gold, silver and platinum), and in asset-based securities

indexed to the value of such metals. Such securities may be purchased when they are believed to be attractively priced in relation to the value of a company’s precious metal-related assets or when the values of precious metals are expected to benefit from inflationary pressure or other economic, political or financial uncertainty or instability. Based on historical experience, during periods of economic or financial instability the securities of companies involved in precious metals may be subject to extreme price fluctuations, reflecting the high volatility of precious metal prices during such periods. In addition, the instability of precious metal prices may result in volatile earnings of precious metal-related companies, which may, in turn, adversely affect the financial condition of such companies. The major producers of gold include the Republic of South Africa, Russia, Canada, the United States, Brazil and Australia. Sales of gold by Russia are largely unpredictable and often relate to political and economic considerations rather than to market forces. Economic, financial, social and political factors within South Africa may significantly affect South African gold production.

U.S. Government Obligations. The Asset Allocation and Global Opportunities Portfolios (and, to the extent consistent with their investment objectives, the other Equity and Money Market Portfolios) may purchase obligations issued or guaranteed by the U.S. Government and U.S. Government agencies and instrumentalities. Obligations of certain agencies and instrumentalities of the U.S. Government are supported by the full faith and credit of the U.S. Treasury. Others are supported by the right of the issuer to borrow from the U.S. Treasury; and still others are supported only by the credit of the agency or instrumentality issuing the obligation. No assurance can be given that the U.S. Government will provide financial support to U.S. Government-sponsored instrumentalities if it is not obligated to do so by law. Certain U.S. Treasury and agency securities may be held by trusts that issue participation certificates (such as Treasury income growth receipts (“TIGRs”) and certificates of accrual on Treasury certificates (“CATs”)). These certificates, as well as Treasury receipts and other stripped securities, represent beneficial ownership interests in either future interest payments or the future principal payments on U.S. Government obligations. These instruments are issued at a discount to their “face value” and may (particularly in the case of stripped mortgage-backed securities) exhibit greater price volatility than ordinary debt securities because of the manner in which their principal and interest are returned to investors.

Examples of the types of U.S. Government obligations that may be held by the Portfolios include U.S. Treasury Bills, Treasury Notes and Treasury Bonds and the obligations of the Federal Housing Administration, Farmers Home Administration, Export-Import Bank of the United States, Small Business Administration, Government National Mortgage Association, Federal National Mortgage Association, Federal Financing Bank, General Services Administration, Student Loan Marketing Association, Central Bank for Cooperatives, Federal Home Loan Banks, Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation, Federal Intermediate Credit Banks, Federal Land Banks, Farm Credit Banks System, Maritime Administration, Tennessee Valley Authority and Washington D.C. Armory Board. The Portfolios may also invest in mortgage-related securities issued or guaranteed by U.S. Government agencies and instrumentalities, including such instruments as obligations of the GNMA, FNMA and FHLMC.

Commercial Paper. The Money Market Portfolios may purchase commercial paper rated in one of the two highest rating categories of an NRSRO. The Non-Money Market Portfolios may purchase commercial paper rated (at the time of purchase) “A-1” by S&P or “Prime-1” by Moody’s or, when deemed advisable by a Portfolio’s Manager, “high quality” issues rated “A-2”, “Prime-2” or “F-2” by S&P, Moody’s or Fitch, respectively. These ratings symbols are described in Appendix A.

Commercial paper purchasable by each Portfolio includes “Section 4(2) paper,” a term that includes debt obligations issued in reliance on the “private placement” exemption from registration afforded by Section 4(2) of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the “1933 Act”). Section 4(2) paper is restricted as to disposition under the Federal securities laws, and is frequently sold (and resold) to institutional investors such as the Fund through or with the assistance of investment dealers who make a market in the Section 4(2) paper, thereby providing liquidity. Certain transactions in Section 4(2) paper may qualify for the registration exemption provided in Rule 144A under the 1933 Act.

Repurchase Agreements. Each Equity Portfolio may agree to purchase securities from financial institutions subject to the seller’s agreement to repurchase them at an agreed upon time and price (“repurchase agreements”). Repurchase agreements are, in substance, loans. Default by or bankruptcy of a seller would expose a Portfolio to possible loss because of adverse market action, expenses and/or delays in connection with the disposition of the underlying obligations.

Each Money Market Portfolio may enter into repurchase agreements. The securities held subject to a repurchase agreement by a Money Market Portfolio may have stated maturities exceeding 13 months, so long as the repurchase agreement itself matures in less than 13 months.

Each Equity and Money Market Portfolio may enter into “tri-party” repurchase agreements. In “tri-party” repurchase agreements, an unaffiliated third party custodian maintains accounts to hold collateral for the Portfolio and its counterparties and, therefore, the Portfolios may be subject to the credit risk of those custodians.

The repurchase price under the repurchase agreements generally equals the price paid by a Portfolio involved plus interest negotiated on the basis of current short-term rates (which may be more or less than the rate on securities underlying the repurchase agreement). The financial institutions with which a Portfolio may enter into repurchase agreements will be banks and non-bank dealers, if such banks and non-bank dealers are deemed creditworthy by the Portfolio’s Manager. A Portfolio’s Manager will continue to monitor creditworthiness of the seller under a repurchase agreement, and will require the seller to maintain during the term of the agreement the value of the securities subject to the agreement to equal at least the repurchase price (including accrued interest and any accrued premium). The accrued premium is the amount specified in the repurchase agreement or the daily amortization of the difference between the purchase price and the repurchase price specified in the repurchase agreement. The Portfolio’s Manager will mark-to-market daily the value of the securities. Securities subject to repurchase agreements will be held by the Fund’s custodian (or sub-custodian) in the Federal Reserve/Treasury book-entry system or by another authorized securities depository. Repurchase agreements are considered to be loans by the Portfolios under the 1940 Act.

The use of repurchase agreements involves certain risks. For example, if the seller of securities under a repurchase agreement defaults on its obligation to repurchase the underlying securities, as a result of its bankruptcy or otherwise, a Portfolio will seek to dispose of such securities, which action could involve costs or delays. If the seller becomes insolvent and subject to liquidation or reorganization under applicable bankruptcy or other laws, a Portfolio’s ability to dispose of the underlying securities may be restricted. Finally, it is possible that a Portfolio may not be able to substantiate its interest in the underlying securities. To minimize this risk, the securities underlying the repurchase agreement will be held by the custodian at all times in an amount at least equal to the repurchase price, including accrued interest. If the seller fails to repurchase the securities, a Portfolio may suffer a loss to the extent proceeds from the sale of the underlying securities are less than the repurchase price.

Certain of the Money Market Portfolios may enter into repurchase agreements in which the collateral may include IO or PO securities related to CMOs issued by U.S. Government agencies and instrumentalities. IOs and POs are subject to the risks described in “Stripped and Zero Coupon Obligations” below and CMOs are subject to the risks described in “Mortgage Related and Asset-Backed Securities” above.

Reverse Repurchase Agreements and Other Borrowings. Each Equity Portfolio is authorized to borrow money. Certain Portfolios may borrow in order to make investments. The purchase of securities while borrowings are outstanding will have the effect of leveraging the Portfolio. Such leveraging increases the Portfolio’s exposure to capital risk, and borrowed funds are subject to interest costs that will reduce net income. The use of leverage by a Portfolio creates an opportunity for greater total return, but, at the same time, creates special risks. If the securities held by a Portfolio should decline in value while borrowings are outstanding, the net asset value of the Portfolio’s outstanding shares will decline in value by proportionately more than the decline in value suffered by the Portfolio’s securities. Although the principal of such borrowings will be fixed, the Portfolio’s assets may change in value during the time the borrowings are outstanding. Borrowings will create interest expenses for the Portfolio that can exceed the income from the assets purchased with the borrowings. To the extent the income or capital appreciation derived from securities purchased with borrowed funds exceeds the interest the Portfolio will have to pay on the borrowings, the Portfolio’s return will be greater than if leverage had not been used. Conversely, if the income or capital appreciation from the securities purchased with such borrowed funds is not sufficient to cover the cost of borrowing, the return to the Portfolio will be less than if leverage had not been used and, therefore, the amount available for distribution to shareholders as dividends will be reduced. In the latter case, the Manager in its best judgment nevertheless may determine to maintain the Portfolio’s leveraged position if it expects that the benefits to the Portfolio’s shareholders of maintaining the leveraged position will outweigh the current reduced return. Borrowings may be made by each Portfolio through reverse repurchase agreements under which the Portfolio sells portfolio securities to financial institutions such as banks and broker-dealers and agrees to repurchase them at a particular date and price. Such Agreements are considered to be borrowings under the 1940

Act. Certain Portfolios may use the proceeds of reverse repurchase agreements to purchase additional securities that meet the Portfolios’ investment guidelines. The Asset Allocation and Global Opportunities Portfolios may utilize reverse repurchase agreements when it is anticipated that the interest income to be earned from the investment of the proceeds of the transaction is greater than the interest expense of the transaction. This use of reverse repurchase agreements may be regarded as leveraging and, therefore, speculative. Reverse repurchase agreements involve the risks that the interest income earned in the investment of the proceeds will be less than the interest expense, that the market value of the securities sold by a Portfolio may decline below the price of the securities the Portfolio is obligated to repurchase and that the securities may not be returned to the Portfolio. During the time a reverse repurchase agreement is outstanding, the Manager will designate liquid assets on its books and records in an amount equal to the amount of the Portfolio’s commitments to the extent required by SEC guidelines. A Portfolio’s reverse repurchase agreements, together with any other borrowings, will not exceed, in the aggregate, 33¹/3% of the value of its total assets. In addition, each of the Asset Allocation and Global Opportunities Portfolios may borrow up to an additional 5% of its total assets for temporary purposes. Whenever borrowings exceed 5% of a Portfolio’s total assets, the Equity Portfolios (other than the Asset Allocation and Global Opportunities Portfolios) will not make any investments.

Certain types of borrowings by a Portfolio may result in the Portfolio being subject to covenants in credit agreements relating to asset coverage, portfolio composition requirements and other matters. It is not anticipated that observance of such covenants would impede BlackRock from managing a Portfolio in accordance with the Portfolio’s investment objectives and policies. However, a breach of any such covenants not cured within the specified cure period may result in acceleration of outstanding indebtedness and require the Portfolio to dispose of portfolio investments at a time when it may be disadvantageous to do so.

In accordance with applicable law, each Portfolio may at times borrow from affiliates of BlackRock, provided that the terms of such borrowings are no less favorable than those available from comparable sources of funds in the marketplace.

The Money Market and U.S. Treasury Money Market Portfolios may enter into reverse repurchase agreements for temporary purposes (such as to obtain cash to meet redemption requests when the liquidation of portfolio securities is deemed disadvantageous or inconvenient).

To take advantage of attractive opportunities in the mortgage market and to enhance current income, the Asset Allocation and Global Opportunities Portfolios may enter into dollar roll transactions. A dollar roll transaction involves a sale by the Portfolio of a mortgage-backed or other security concurrently with an agreement by the Portfolio to repurchase a similar security at a later date at an agreed-upon price. The securities that are repurchased will bear the same interest rate as and have a similar maturity to those sold, but pools of mortgages collateralizing those securities may have different prepayment histories than those sold. During the period between the sale and repurchase, a Portfolio will not be entitled to receive interest and principal payments on the securities sold. Proceeds of the sale will be invested in additional instruments for the Portfolio, and the income from these investments will generate income for the Portfolio. If such income does not exceed the income, capital appreciation and gain or loss that would have been realized on the securities sold as part of the dollar roll, the use of this technique will diminish the investment performance of a Portfolio compared with what the performance would have been without the use of dollar rolls. At the time a Portfolio enters into a dollar roll transaction, the Manager will designate assets on its books and records in an amount equal to the amount of the Portfolio’s commitments and will subsequently monitor the account to ensure that its value is maintained. A Portfolio’s dollar rolls, together with its reverse repurchase agreements and other borrowings, will not exceed, in the aggregate, 33¹/3% of the value of its total assets.

Dollar roll transactions involve the risk that the market value of the securities a Portfolio is required to purchase may decline below the agreed upon repurchase price of those securities. If the broker/dealer to whom a Portfolio sells securities becomes insolvent, the Portfolio’s right to purchase or repurchase securities may be restricted. Successful use of mortgage dollar rolls may depend upon the Manager’s ability to correctly predict interest rates and prepayments. There is no assurance that dollar rolls can be successfully employed.

Indexed Securities. A Portfolio may invest in securities that provide a potential return based on a particular index of value or interest rates. For example, a Portfolio may invest in securities that pay interest based on an index of interest rates. The principal amount payable upon maturity of certain securities also may be based on the value

of the index. To the extent a Portfolio invests in these types of securities, the Portfolio’s return on such securities will be subject to risk with respect to the value of the particular index: that is, if the value of the index falls, the value of the indexed securities owned by the Portfolio will fall. Interest and principal payable on certain securities may also be based on relative changes among particular indices.

Investment Grade Debt Obligations. Each of the Money Market Portfolios may invest in investment grade securities in the rating categories specified in the Prospectuses and above in “Money Market Portfolios.” The Non-Money Market Portfolios may invest in “investment grade securities,” which are securities rated in the four highest rating categories of an NRSRO or deemed to be of equivalent quality by a Portfolio’s Manager. If an investment grade security of a Portfolio is subsequently downgraded below investment grade, the Portfolio’s Manager will consider such an event in determining whether the Portfolio should continue to hold the security. Subject to its investment strategies, there is no limit on the amount of such downgraded securities a Portfolio may hold, although under normal market conditions the Manager does not expect to hold these securities to a material extent.

See Appendix A to this Statement of Additional Information for a description of applicable securities ratings.

Municipal Obligations. The two principal classifications of Municipal Obligations are “general obligation” securities and “revenue” securities. General obligation securities are secured by the issuer’s pledge of its full faith, credit and taxing power for the payment of principal and interest. Revenue securities are payable only from the revenues derived from a particular facility or class of facilities or, in some cases, from the proceeds of a special excise tax or other specific revenue source such as the user of the facility being financed. Revenue securities include private activity bonds which are not payable from the unrestricted revenues of the issuer. Consequently, the credit quality of private activity bonds is usually directly related to the credit standing of the corporate user of the facility involved. Municipal Obligations may also include “moral obligation” bonds, which are normally issued by special purpose public authorities. If the issuer of moral obligation bonds is unable to meet its debt service obligations from current revenues, it may draw on a reserve fund the restoration of which is a moral commitment but not a legal obligation of the state or municipality which created the issuer.

Revenue bonds issued by state or local agencies to finance the development of low-income, multi-family housing involve special risks in addition to those associated with municipal bonds generally, including that the underlying properties may not generate sufficient income to pay expenses and interest costs. Such bonds are generally non-recourse against the property owner, may be junior to the rights of others with an interest in the properties, may pay interest that changes based in part on the financial performance of the property, may be prepayable without penalty and may be used to finance the construction of housing developments which, until completed and rented, do not generate income to pay interest. Increases in interest rates payable on senior obligations may make it more difficult for issuers to meet payment obligations on subordinated bonds.

Also included within the general category of Municipal Obligations are participation certificates in a lease, an installment purchase contract, or a conditional sales contract (“lease obligations”) entered into by a state or political subdivision to finance the acquisition or construction of equipment, land, or facilities. Although lease obligations are not general obligations of the issuer for which the state or other governmental body’s unlimited taxing power is pledged, certain lease obligations are backed by a covenant to appropriate money to make the lease obligation payments. However, under certain lease obligations, the state or governmental body has no obligation to make these payments in future years unless money is appropriated on a yearly basis. Although “non appropriation” lease obligations are secured by the leased property, disposition of the property in the event of foreclosure might prove difficult.

The amount of information regarding the financial condition of issuers of Municipal Obligations may be less extensive than the information for public corporations, and the secondary market for Municipal Obligations may be less liquid than that for taxable obligations. Accordingly, the ability of a Portfolio to buy and sell Municipal Obligations may, at any particular time and with respect to any particular securities, be limited. In addition, Municipal Obligations purchased by the Portfolios include obligations backed by letters of credit and other forms of credit enhancement issued by domestic and non-U.S. banks, as well as other financial institutions. Changes in the credit quality of these institutions could cause loss to a Portfolio and affect its share price.

Opinions relating to the validity of Municipal Obligations and to the exemption of interest thereon from Federal and state income tax are rendered by counsel to the respective issuers and sponsors of the obligations at

the time of issuance. The Fund and its service providers will rely on such opinions and will not review independently the underlying proceedings relating to the issuance of Municipal Obligations, the creation of any tax-exempt derivative securities, or the bases for such opinions.

Private Activity Bonds (“PABs”). PABs are, in most cases, tax-exempt securities issued by states, municipalities or public authorities to provide funds, usually through a loan or lease arrangement, to a private entity for the purpose of financing construction or improvement of a facility to be used by the entity. Such bonds are secured primarily by revenues derived from loan repayments or lease payments due from the entity, which may or may not be guaranteed by a parent company or otherwise secured. PABs generally are not secured by a pledge of the taxing power of the issuer of such bonds. Therefore, an investor should understand that repayment of such bonds generally depends on the revenues of a private entity and be aware of the risks that such an investment may entail. The continued ability of an entity to generate sufficient revenues for the payment of principal and interest on such bonds will be affected by many factors including the size of the entity, its capital structure, demand for its products or services, competition, general economic conditions, government regulation and the entity’s dependence on revenues for the operation of the particular facility being financed.

Municipal Notes. Municipal notes are shorter term municipal debt obligations. They may provide interim financing in anticipation of tax collection, bond sales or revenue receipts. If there is a shortfall in the anticipated proceeds, repayment on the note may be delayed or the note may not be fully repaid, and a Portfolio may lose money.

Municipal Commercial Paper. Municipal commercial paper is generally unsecured and issued to meet short-term financing needs. The lack of security presents some risk of loss to a Portfolio since, in the event of an issuer’s bankruptcy, unsecured creditors are repaid only after the secured creditors out of the assets, if any, that remain.

Yields. Yields on Municipal Obligations are dependent on a variety of factors, including the general condition of the money market and of the municipal bond market, the size of a particular offering, the financial condition of the issuer, the maturity of the obligation and the rating of the issue. The ability of a Portfolio to achieve its investment objective is also dependent on the continuing ability of the issuers of the securities in which the Portfolio invests to meet their obligations for the payment of interest and principal when due. There are variations in the risks involved in holding Municipal Obligations, both within a particular classification and between classifications, depending on numerous factors. Furthermore, the rights of owners of Municipal Obligations and the obligations of the issuer of such Municipal Obligations may be subject to applicable bankruptcy, insolvency and similar laws and court decisions affecting the rights of creditors generally and to general equitable principles, which may limit the enforcement of certain remedies.

Variable Rate Demand Obligations (“VRDOs”) and Participating VRDOs. VRDOs are tax-exempt obligations that contain a floating or variable interest rate adjustment formula and a right of demand on the part of the holder thereof to receive payment of the unpaid principal balance plus accrued interest upon a short notice period not to exceed seven days. Participating VRDOs provide a Portfolio with a specified undivided interest (up to 100%) of the underlying obligation and the right to demand payment of the unpaid principal balance plus accrued interest on the Participating VRDOs from the financial institution that issued the participation interest upon a specified number of days notice, not to exceed seven days. In addition, the Participating VRDO is backed by an irrevocable letter of credit or guaranty of the financial institution. A Portfolio would have an undivided interest in the underlying obligation and thus participate on the same basis as the financial institution in such obligation except that the financial institution typically retains fees out of the interest paid on the obligation for servicing the obligation, providing the letter of credit and issuing the repurchase commitment.

There is the possibility that because of default or insolvency the demand feature of VRDOs and Participating VRDOs may not be honored. The interest rates are adjustable at intervals (ranging from daily to up to one year) to some prevailing market rate for similar investments, such adjustment formula being calculated to maintain the market rate of the VRDOs at approximately the par value of the VRDOs on the adjustment date. The adjustments typically are based upon the Public Securities Association Index or some other appropriate interest rate adjustment index. The Portfolios have been advised by counsel that they should be entitled to treat the income received on Participating VRDOs as interest from tax-exempt obligations. It is not contemplated that any Portfolio will invest more than a limited amount of its total assets in Participating VRDOs.

Because of the interest rate adjustment formula on VRDOs (including Participating VRDOs), VRDOs are not comparable to fixed rate securities. During periods of declining interest rates, a Portfolio’s yield on a VRDO will decrease and its shareholders will forego the opportunity for capital appreciation. During periods of rising interest rates, however, a Portfolio’s yield on a VRDO will increase and the Portfolio’s shareholders will have a reduced risk of capital depreciation.

VRDOs that contain a right of demand to receive payment of the unpaid principal balance plus accrued interest on a notice period exceeding seven days may be deemed to be illiquid securities. A VRDO with a demand notice period exceeding seven days will therefore be subject to a Portfolio’s restriction on illiquid investments unless, in the judgment of the Board of Trustees such VRDO is liquid. The Board of Trustees may adopt guidelines and delegate to the Manager the daily function of determining and monitoring liquidity of such VRDOs. The Board of Trustees, however, will retain sufficient oversight and will be ultimately responsible for such determinations.

Transactions in Financial Futures Contracts. Certain of the Portfolios may deal in financial futures contracts based on a long-term municipal bond index developed by the Chicago Board of Trade (“CBT”) and The Bond Buyer (the “Municipal Bond Index”). The Municipal Bond Index is comprised of 40 tax-exempt municipal revenue and general obligation bonds. Each bond included in the Municipal Bond Index must be rated A or higher by Moody’s or S&P and must have a remaining maturity of 19 years or more. Twice a month new issues satisfying the eligibility requirements are added to, and an equal number of old issues are deleted from, the Municipal Bond Index. The value of the Municipal Bond Index is computed daily according to a formula based on the price of each bond in the Municipal Bond Index, as evaluated by six dealer-to-dealer brokers.

The Municipal Bond Index futures contract is traded only on the CBT. Like other contract markets, the CBT assures performance under futures contracts through a clearing corporation, a nonprofit organization managed by the exchange membership that is also responsible for handling daily accounting of deposits or withdrawals of margin. The particular municipal bonds comprising the index underlying the Municipal Bond Index financial futures contract may vary from the bonds held by a Portfolio. As a result, a Portfolio’s ability to hedge effectively all or a portion of the value of its Municipal Obligations through the use of such financial futures contracts will depend in part on the degree to which price movements in the index underlying the financial futures contract correlate with the price movements of the Municipal Obligations held by the Portfolios. The correlation may be affected by disparities in the average maturity, ratings, geographical mix or structure of a Portfolio’s investments as compared to those comprising the Municipal Bond Index and general economic or political factors. In addition, the correlation between movements in the value of the Municipal Bond Index may be subject to change over time as additions to and deletions from the Municipal Bond Index alter its structure. The correlation between futures contracts on U.S. Government securities and the Municipal Obligations held by a Portfolio may be adversely affected by similar factors and the risk of imperfect correlation between movements in the prices of such futures contracts and the prices of Municipal Obligations held by a Portfolio may be greater. Municipal Bond Index futures contracts were approved for trading in 1986. Trading in such futures contracts may tend to be less liquid than trading in other futures contracts. The trading of futures contracts also is subject to certain market risks, such as inadequate trading activity, which could at times make it difficult or impossible to liquidate existing positions.

Call Rights. A Portfolio may purchase a Municipal Obligation issuer’s right to call all or a portion of such Municipal Obligation for mandatory tender for purchase (a “Call Right”). A holder of a Call Right may exercise such right to require a mandatory tender for the purchase of related Municipal Obligations, subject to certain conditions. A Call Right that is not exercised prior to maturity of the related Municipal Obligation will expire without value. The economic effect of holding both the Call Right and the related Municipal Obligation is identical to holding a Municipal Obligation as a non-callable security. Certain investments in such obligations may be illiquid.

Insured Municipal Bonds. Bonds purchased by a Portfolio may be covered by insurance that guarantees that interest payments on the bond will be made on time and the principal will be repaid when the bond matures. Either the issuer of the bond or the Portfolio purchases the insurance. Insurance is expected to protect the Portfolio against losses caused by a bond issuer’s failure to make interest or principal payments. However, insurance does not protect the Portfolio or its shareholders against losses caused by declines in a bond’s market value. Also, the Portfolio cannot be certain that any insurance company does not make these payments. In addition, if the Portfolio purchases the insurance, it may pay the premiums, which will reduce the Portfolio’s yield. The Portfolio seeks to use only insurance companies that have an AAA credit rating from S&P or Fitch or an Aaa credit rating from

Moody’s. However, if insurance from insurers with these ratings is not available, the Portfolio may use insurance companies with lower ratings or stop purchasing insurance or insured bonds. If a bond’s insurer fails to fulfill its obligations or loses its credit rating, the value of the bond could drop.

Variable and Floating Rate Instruments. The Asset Allocation and Global Opportunities Portfolios may purchase rated and unrated variable and floating rate instruments. These instruments may include variable amount master demand notes that permit the indebtedness thereunder to vary in addition to providing for periodic adjustments in the interest rate. The Portfolios may invest up to 10% of their total assets in leveraged inverse floating rate debt instruments (“inverse floaters”). Tender option bonds (including residual interests thereon) are excluded from this 10% limitation. The interest rate of an inverse floater resets in the opposite direction from the market rate of interest on a security or index to which it is related. An inverse floater may be considered to be leveraged to the extent that its interest rate varies by a magnitude that exceeds the magnitude of the change in the index rate of interest, and is subject to many of the same risks as derivatives. The higher degree of leverage inherent in inverse floaters is associated with greater volatility in their market values. To seek to limit the volatility of these securities, a Portfolio may purchase inverse floating obligations that have shorter-term maturities or that contain limitations on the extent to which the interest rate may vary. Certain investments in such obligations may be illiquid. BlackRock believes that indexed and inverse floating obligations represent flexible portfolio management instruments for a Portfolio that allow the Portfolio to seek potential investment rewards, hedge other portfolio positions or vary the degree of investment leverage relatively efficiently under different market conditions. A Portfolio may invest in indexed and inverse securities for hedging purposes or to seek to increase returns. When used for hedging purposes, indexed and inverse securities involve correlation risk. Furthermore, where such a security includes a contingent liability, in the event of an adverse movement in the underlying index or interest rate, a Portfolio may be required to pay substantial additional margin to maintain the position.

Each Money Market Portfolio may purchase variable and floating rate instruments. Variable and floating rate instruments are subject to the credit quality standards described in the Prospectuses. The Money Market Portfolios invest in variable or floating rate notes only when the Manager deems the investment to involve minimal credit risk. In some cases, the Money Market Portfolios may require that the obligation to pay the principal of the instrument be backed by a letter of credit or guarantee. Such instruments may carry stated maturities in excess of 13 months provided that the maturity-shortening provisions stated in Rule 2a-7 are satisfied. Although a particular variable or floating rate demand instrument may not be actively traded in a secondary market, in some cases, a Money Market Portfolio may be entitled to principal on demand and may be able to resell such notes in the dealer market.

Variable and floating rate demand instruments held by a Money Market Portfolio may have maturities of more than 13 months provided: (i) the Portfolio is entitled to the payment of principal and interest at any time, or during specified intervals not exceeding 13 months, upon giving the prescribed notice (which may not exceed 30 days), and (ii) the rate of interest on such instruments is adjusted at periodic intervals which may extend up to 13 months. Variable and floating rate notes that do not provide for payment within seven days may be deemed illiquid and subject to a 10% limitation on illiquid investments.

In determining a Portfolio’s average weighted portfolio maturity and whether a long-term variable rate demand instrument has a remaining maturity of 13 months or less, the instrument will be deemed by a Portfolio to have a maturity equal to the longer of the period remaining until its next interest rate adjustment or the period remaining until the principal amount can be recovered through demand. In determining a Portfolio’s average weighted portfolio maturity and whether a long-term floating rate demand instrument has a remaining maturity of 13 months or less, the instrument will be deemed by a Portfolio to have a maturity equal to the period remaining until the principal amount can be recovered through demand. Variable and floating notes are not typically rated by credit rating agencies, but their issuers must satisfy the Portfolio’s quality and maturity requirements.

With respect to purchasable variable and floating rate instruments, the Manager will consider the earning power, cash flows and liquidity ratios of the issuers and guarantors of such instruments and, if the instruments are subject to a demand feature, will monitor their financial status to meet payment on demand. Such instruments may include variable amount master demand notes that permit the indebtedness thereunder to vary in addition to providing for periodic adjustments in the interest rate. The absence of an active secondary market with respect to particular variable and floating rate instruments could make it difficult for a Portfolio to dispose of a variable or

floating rate note if the issuer defaulted on its payment obligation or during periods that the Portfolio is not entitled to exercise its demand rights, and the Portfolio could, for these or other reasons, suffer a loss with respect to such instruments.

Illiquid Securities. No Equity Portfolio will invest more than 15% and no Money Market Portfolio will invest more than 10% of the value of its net assets in securities that are illiquid. GICs, variable and floating rate instruments that cannot be disposed of within seven days, and repurchase agreements and time deposits that do not provide for payment within seven days after notice, without taking a reduced price, are subject to these limits. Each Equity and Money Market Portfolio may purchase securities which are not registered under the 1933 Act but which can be sold to “qualified institutional buyers” in accordance with Rule 144A under the 1933 Act. These securities will not be considered illiquid so long as it is determined by the Manager that an adequate trading market exists for the securities. This investment practice could have the effect of increasing the level of illiquidity in a Portfolio during any period that qualified institutional buyers become uninterested in purchasing these restricted securities.

Any securities that are thinly traded or whose resale is restricted can be difficult to sell at the desired time and price. Some of these securities are new and complex, and trade only among institutions; the markets for these securities are still developing, and may not function as efficiently as established markets. Owning a large percentage of restricted or illiquid securities could hamper a Portfolio’s ability to raise cash to meet redemptions. Also, because there may not be an established market price for these securities, a Portfolio may have to estimate their value, which means that their valuation (and, to a much smaller extent, the valuation of the Portfolio) may have a subjective element. Transactions in restricted or illiquid securities may entail registration expense and other transaction costs that are higher than those for transactions in unrestricted or liquid securities. Where registration is required for restricted or illiquid securities a considerable time period may elapse between the time a Portfolio decides to sell the security and the time it is actually permitted to sell the security under an effective registration statement. If during such period, adverse market conditions were to develop, the Portfolio might obtain less favorable pricing terms than were available when it decided to sell the security.

Guarantees. A Portfolio may purchase securities which contain guarantees issued by an entity separate from the issuer of the security. Generally, the guarantor of a security (often an affiliate of the issuer) will fulfill an issuer’s payment obligations under a security if the issuer is unable to do so.

When-Issued Purchases and Forward Commitments. Each Portfolio may purchase securities on a “when-issued” basis and may purchase or sell securities on a “forward commitment,” including “TBA” (to be announced) basis. These transactions involve a commitment by a Portfolio to purchase or sell particular securities with payment and delivery taking place at a future date (perhaps one or two months later), and permit a Portfolio to lock in a price or yield on a security it owns or intends to purchase, regardless of future changes in interest rates or market action. When-issued and forward commitment transactions involve the risk, however, that the price or yield obtained in a transaction may be less favorable than the price or yield available in the market when the securities delivery takes place.

When a Portfolio agrees to purchase securities on this basis, the Manager will designate liquid assets on its books and records in an amount equal to the amount of the Portfolio’s commitments to the extent required by SEC guidelines. It may be expected that the market value of a Portfolio’s net assets will fluctuate to a greater degree when it sets aside portfolio securities to cover such purchase commitments than when it sets aside cash.

If deemed advisable as a matter of investment strategy, a Portfolio may dispose of or renegotiate a commitment after it has been entered into, and may sell securities it has committed to purchase before those securities are delivered to the Portfolio on the settlement date. In these cases the Portfolio may realize a taxable capital gain or loss.

When a Portfolio engages in when-issued, TBA or forward commitment transactions, it relies on the other party to consummate the trade. Failure of such party to do so may result in the Portfolio’s incurring a loss or missing an opportunity to obtain a price considered to be advantageous.

The market value of the securities underlying a commitment to purchase securities, and any subsequent fluctuations in their market value, is taken into account when determining the market value of a Portfolio starting on the day the Portfolio agrees to purchase the securities. The Portfolio does not earn interest on the securities it has committed to purchase until they are paid for and delivered on the settlement date.

Non-Investment Grade Securities. As described in the applicable Prospectuses, certain Equity Portfolios may invest in non-investment grade or “high yield” fixed income or convertible securities commonly known to investors as “junk bonds.”

High yield securities are bonds that are issued by a company whose credit rating (based on rating agencies’ evaluation of the likelihood of repayment) necessitates offering a higher coupon and yield on its issues when selling them to investors, who may otherwise be hesitant to purchase the debt of such a company. While generally providing greater income and opportunity for gain, non-investment grade debt securities may be subject to greater risks than securities which have higher credit ratings, including a high risk of default, and their yields will fluctuate over time. High yield securities will generally be in the lower rating categories of recognized rating agencies (rated “Ba” or lower by Moody’s or “BB” or lower by S&P) or will be non-rated. The credit rating of a high yield security does not necessarily address its market value risk, and ratings may from time to time change, positively or negatively, to reflect developments regarding the issuer’s financial condition. High yield securities are considered to be speculative with respect to the capacity of the issuer to timely repay principal and pay interest or dividends in accordance with the terms of the obligation and may have more credit risk than higher rated securities.

While the market values of high yield securities tend to react less to fluctuations in interest rates than do those of higher rated securities, the values of high yield securities often reflect individual corporate developments and are sensitive to economic changes to a greater extent than higher rated securities. Issuers of high yield securities are often in the growth stage of their development and/or involved in a reorganization or takeover. The companies are often highly leveraged (have a significant amount of debt relative to shareholders’ equity) and may not have available to them more traditional financing methods, thereby increasing the risk associated with acquiring these types of securities. In some cases, obligations with respect to high yield securities are subordinated to the prior repayment of senior indebtedness, which will potentially limit a Portfolio’s ability to fully recover principal or to receive interest payments when senior securities are in default. Thus, investors in high yield securities have a lower degree of protection with respect to principal and interest payments then do investors in higher rated securities.

During an economic downturn, a substantial period of rising interest rates or a recession, highly leveraged issuers of high yield securities may experience financial distress, possibly resulting in insufficient revenues to satisfy their principal and interest payment obligations, to meet projected business goals and to obtain additional financing. An economic downturn could also disrupt the market for lower-rated securities and adversely affect the value of outstanding securities, the Portfolio’s net asset value and the ability of the issuers to repay principal and interest. If the issuer of a security held by a Portfolio defaulted, the Portfolio might not receive full interest and principal payments due to it and could incur additional expenses if it chose to seek recovery of its investment.

The secondary markets for high yield securities are not as liquid as the secondary markets for higher rated securities. The secondary markets for high yield securities are concentrated in relatively few market makers and participants in the markets are mostly institutional investors, including insurance companies, banks, other financial institutions and mutual funds. In addition, the trading volume for high yield securities is generally lower than that for higher rated securities and the secondary markets could contract under adverse market or economic conditions independent of any specific adverse changes in the condition of a particular issuer. Under certain economic and/or market conditions, a Portfolio may have difficulty disposing of some high yield securities due to the limited number of investors in that sector of the market. An illiquid secondary market may adversely affect the market price of the high yield security, which may result in increased difficulty selling the particular issue and obtaining accurate market quotations on the issue when valuing a Portfolio’s assets. Market quotations on high yield securities are available only from a limited number of dealers, and such quotations may not be the actual prices available for a purchase or sale.

The high yield markets may react strongly to adverse news about an issuer or the economy, or to the perception or expectation of adverse news, whether or not it is based on fundamental analysis. Additionally, prices for high yield securities may be affected by legislative and regulatory developments. These developments could adversely affect a Portfolio’s net asset value and investment practices, the secondary market for high yield securities, the financial condition of issuers of these securities and the value and liquidity of outstanding high yield securities, especially in a thinly traded market. For example, Federal legislation requiring the divestiture by Federally insured savings and loan associations of their investments in high yield bonds and limiting the deductibility of interest by certain corporate issuers of high yield bonds adversely affected the market in the past.

When the secondary market for high yield securities becomes more illiquid, or in the absence of readily available market quotations for such securities, the relative lack of reliable objective data makes it more difficult to value a Portfolio’s securities, and judgment plays a more important role in determining such valuations. Increased illiquidity in the junk bond market, in combination with the relative youth and growth of the market for such securities, also may affect the ability of a Portfolio to dispose of such securities at a desirable price. Additionally, if the secondary markets for high yield securities contract due to adverse economic conditions or for other reasons, certain of a Portfolio’s liquid securities may become illiquid and the proportion of the Portfolio’s assets invested in illiquid securities may significantly increase.

High yield securities frequently have redemption features that permit an issuer to repurchase the security from a Portfolio before it matures. If an issuer redeems the high yield securities, a Portfolio may have to invest the proceeds in bonds with lower yields and may lose income.

The rating assigned by a rating agency reflects the issuing agency’s assessment of the safety of a non-investment grade security’s principal and interest payments, but does not address market value risk. Because such ratings of the ratings agencies may not always reflect current conditions and events, in addition to using recognized rating agencies and other sources, the Manager performs its own analysis of the issuers whose non-investment grade securities a Portfolio holds. Because of this, the Portfolio’s performance may depend more on the Manager’s own credit analysis than in the case of mutual funds investing in higher-rated securities. For a description of these ratings, see Appendix A to this Statement of Additional Information.

In selecting non-investment grade securities, the Manager considers factors such as those relating to the creditworthiness of issuers, the ratings and performance of the securities, the protections afforded the securities and the diversity of the Portfolio. The Manager continuously monitors the issuers of non-investment grade securities held by the Portfolio for their ability to make required principal and interest payments, as well as in an effort to control the liquidity of the Portfolio so that it can meet redemption requests. If a security’s rating is reduced below the minimum credit rating that is permitted for a Portfolio, the Portfolio’s Manager will consider whether the Portfolio should continue to hold the security.

In the event that a Portfolio investing in high yield securities experiences an unexpected level of net redemptions, the Portfolio could be forced to sell its holdings without regard to the investment merits, thereby decreasing the assets upon which the Portfolio’s rate of return is based.

The costs attributable to investing in the high yield markets are usually higher for several reasons, such as higher investment research costs and higher commission costs.

The Asset Allocation and Global Opportunities Portfolios may invest in securities rated in the category “C” and above or determined by the Manager to be of comparable quality. Securities rated “C” are considered highly speculative and may be used to cover a situation where the issuer has filed a bankruptcy petition but debt service payments are continued. While such debt will likely have some quality and protective characteristics, those are outweighed by large uncertainties or major risk exposure to adverse conditions.

The Global Opportunities Portfolio may invest in securities of any rating. Investments in distressed securities are speculative and involve significant risk. Distressed securities frequently do not produce income while they are outstanding and may require the Portfolio to bear certain extraordinary expenses in order to protect and recover its investment. Therefore, to the extent the Portfolio seeks capital appreciation through investment in distressed securities, the Portfolio’s ability to achieve current income for its shareholders may be diminished. The Portfolio also will be subject to significant uncertainty as to when and in what manner and for what value the obligations evidenced by the distressed securities will eventually be satisfied (e.g., through a liquidation of the obligor’s assets, an exchange offer or plan of reorganization involving the distressed securities or a payment of some amount in satisfaction of the obligation). In addition, even if an exchange offer is made or a plan of reorganization is adopted with respect to distressed securities held by the Portfolio, there can be no assurance that the securities or other assets received by the Portfolio in connection with such exchange offer or plan of reorganization will not have a lower value or income potential than may have been anticipated when the investment was made or may have no value. Moreover, any securities received by the Portfolio upon completion of an exchange offer or plan of reorganization may be restricted as to resale. As a result of the Portfolio’s participation in negotiations with respect to any exchange offer or plan of reorganization with respect to an issuer of distressed securities, the Portfolio may be restricted from disposing of such securities. To the extent that a Portfolio becomes involved in such proceedings, the Portfolio may

have a more active participation in the affairs of the issuer than that assumed generally by an investor. The Portfolio, however, will not make investments for the purpose of exercising day-to-day management of any issuer’s affairs.

Corporate Loans. Commercial banks and other financial institutions or institutional investors make corporate loans to companies that need capital to grow or restructure. Borrowers generally pay interest on corporate loans at rates that change in response to changes in market interest rates such as the London Interbank Offered Rate (LIBOR) or the prime rate of U.S. banks. As a result, the value of corporate loan investments is generally less exposed to the adverse effect of shifts in market interest rates than investments that pay a fixed rate of interest. However, because the trading market for certain corporate loans may be less developed than the secondary market for bonds and notes, the Portfolio may experience difficulties in selling its corporate loans. Leading financial institutions often act as agent for a broader group of lenders, generally referred to as a syndicate. The syndicate’s agent arranges the corporate loans, holds collateral and accepts payments of principal and interest. If the agent develops financial problems, the Portfolio may not recover its investment or recovery may be delayed. By investing in a corporate loan, the Portfolio may become a member of the syndicate. The corporate loans in which the Portfolio may invest are subject to the risk of loss of principal and income. Although borrowers frequently provide collateral to secure repayment of these obligations, they do not always do so. If they do provide collateral, the value of the collateral may not completely cover the borrower’s obligations at the time of a default. If a borrower files for protection from its creditors under the U.S. bankruptcy laws, these laws may limit a Portfolio’s rights to its collateral. In addition, the value of collateral may erode during a bankruptcy case. In the event of a bankruptcy, the holder of a corporate loan may not recover its principal, may experience a long delay in recovering its investment and may not receive interest during the delay.

Mezzanine Investments. Each of the Asset Allocation, Aurora, Energy & Resources, All-Cap Energy & Resources and Global Opportunities Portfolios, consistent with its restrictions on investing in securities of a specific credit quality, may invest in certain high yield securities known as mezzanine investments, which are subordinated debt securities which are generally issued in private placements in connection with an equity security (e.g., with attached warrants). Such mezzanine investments may be issued with or without registration rights. Similar to other high yield securities, maturities of mezzanine investments are typically seven to ten years, but the expected average life is significantly shorter at three to five years. Mezzanine investments are usually unsecured and subordinate to other obligations of the issuer.

Collateralized Bond Obligations. Each Equity Portfolio may invest in collateralized bond obligations (“CBOs”), which are structured products backed by a diversified pool of high yield public or private fixed income securities, to the extent that the securities underlying the CBO meet the credit quality requirements of the Portfolio. The pool of securities is typically separated into tranches representing different degrees of credit quality. The top tranche of CBOs, which represents the highest credit quality in the pool, has the greatest collateralization and pays the lowest interest rate. Lower CBO tranches represent lower degrees of credit quality and pay higher interest rates to compensate for the attendant risks. The bottom tranche specifically receives the residual interest payments (i.e., money that is left over after the higher tiers have been paid) rather than a fixed interest rate. The return on the bottom tranche of CBOs is especially sensitive to the rate of defaults in the collateral pool.

Supranational Organization Obligations. The Portfolios may purchase debt securities of supranational organizations such as the World Bank, which are chartered to promote economic development. Additional examples of such entities include the Asian Development Bank and the Inter-American Development Bank. The government members, or “stockholders,” usually make initial capital contributions to the supranational entity and in many cases are committed to make additional capital contributions if the supranational entity is unable to repay its borrowings. There is no guarantee that one or more stockholders of a supranational entity will continue to make any necessary additional capital contributions. If such contributions are not made, the entity may be unable to pay interest or repay principal on its debt securities, and a Portfolio may lose money on such investments.

Lease Obligations. The Portfolios may hold participation certificates in a lease, an installment purchase contract, or a conditional sales contract (“lease obligations”).

The Manager will monitor the credit standing of each borrower and each entity providing credit support and/or a put option relating to lease obligations. In determining whether a lease obligation is liquid, the Manager will consider, among other factors, the following: (i) whether the lease can be cancelled; (ii) the degree of assurance that assets represented by the lease could be sold; (iii) the strength of the lessee’s general credit (e.g., its

debt, administrative, economic and financial characteristics); (iv) in the case of a municipal lease, the likelihood that the municipality would discontinue appropriating funding for the leased property because the property is no longer deemed essential to the operations of the municipality (e.g., the potential for an “event of nonappropriation”); (v) legal recourse in the event of failure to appropriate; (vi) whether the security is backed by a credit enhancement such as insurance; and (vii) any limitations which are imposed on the lease obligor’s ability to utilize substitute property or services other than those covered by the lease obligation.

The Municipal Money Market Portfolios will only invest in lease obligations with puts that (i) may be exercised at par on not more than seven days notice, and (ii) are issued by institutions deemed by the Manager to present minimal credit risks. Such obligations will be considered liquid. However, a number of puts are not exercisable at the time the put would otherwise be exercised if the municipal borrower is not contractually obligated to make payments (e.g., an event of nonappropriation with a “nonappropriation” lease obligation). Under such circumstances, the lease obligation, although previously considered liquid, would become illiquid, and a Portfolio might lose its entire investment in such obligation.

Municipal leases, like other municipal debt obligations, are subject to the risk of non-payment. The ability of issuers of municipal leases to make timely lease payments may be adversely impacted in general economic downturns and as relative governmental cost burdens are allocated and reallocated among Federal, state and local governmental units. Such non-payment would result in a reduction of income to a Portfolio, and could result in a reduction in the value of the municipal lease experiencing non-payment and a potential decrease in the net asset value of a Portfolio. Issuers of municipal securities might seek protection under the bankruptcy laws. In the event of bankruptcy of such an issuer, a Portfolio could experience delays and limitations with respect to the collection of principal and interest on such municipal leases and a Portfolio may not, in all circumstances, be able to collect all principal and interest to which it is entitled. To enforce its rights in the event of a default in lease payments, a Portfolio might take possession of and manage the assets securing the issuer’s obligations on such securities, which may increase the Portfolio’s operating expenses and adversely affect the net asset value of the Portfolio. When the lease contains a non-appropriation clause, however, the failure to pay would not be a default and a Portfolio would not have the right to take possession of the assets. Any income derived from a Portfolio’s ownership or operation of such assets may not be tax-exempt. In addition, a Portfolio’s intention to qualify as a “regulated investment company” under the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “Code”), may limit the extent to which a Portfolio may exercise its rights by taking possession of such assets, because as a regulated investment company a Portfolio is subject to certain limitations on its investments and on the nature of its income.

Sovereign Debt. The Portfolios that invest in non-U.S. securities may invest in sovereign debt. Investment in sovereign debt can involve a high degree of risk. The governmental entity that controls the repayment of sovereign debt may not be able or willing to repay the principal and/or interest when due in accordance with the terms of such debt. A governmental entity’s willingness or ability to repay principal and interest due in a timely manner may be affected by, among other factors, its cash flow situation, the extent of its foreign reserves, the availability of sufficient foreign exchange on the date a payment is due, the relative size of the debt service burden to the economy as a whole, the governmental entity’s policy towards the International Monetary Fund and the political constraints to which a governmental entity may be subject. Governmental entities may also be dependent on expected disbursements from foreign governments, multilateral agencies and others abroad to reduce principal and interest arrearages on their debt. The commitment on the part of these governments, agencies and others to make such disbursements may be conditioned on the implementation of economic reforms and/or economic performance and the timely service of such debtor’s obligations. Failure to implement such reforms, achieve such levels of economic performance or repay principal or interest when due may result in the cancellation of such third parties’ commitments to lend funds to the governmental entity, which may further impair such debtor’s ability or willingness to timely service its debts. Consequently, governmental entities may default on their sovereign debt.

Holders of sovereign debt may be requested to participate in the rescheduling of such debt and to extend further loans to governmental entities. In the event of a default by a governmental entity, there may be few or no effective legal remedies for collecting on such debt.

Brady Bonds. A Portfolio’s emerging market debt securities may include emerging market governmental debt obligations commonly referred to as Brady Bonds. Brady Bonds are securities created through the exchange of existing commercial bank loans to sovereign entities for new obligations in connection with debt restructurings under a debt restructuring plan introduced by former U.S. Secretary of the Treasury, Nicholas F. Brady (the “Brady

Plan”). Brady Plan debt restructurings have been implemented in a number of countries, including: Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Bulgaria, Costa Rica, the Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Jordan, Mexico, Niger, Nigeria, Panama, Peru, the Philippines, Poland, Uruguay and Venezuela.

Brady Bonds may be collateralized or uncollateralized, are issued in various currencies (primarily the U.S. dollar) and are actively traded in the over-the-counter secondary market. Brady Bonds are not considered to be U.S. Government securities. U.S. dollar-denominated, collateralized Brady Bonds, which may be fixed rate par bonds or floating rate discount bonds, are generally collateralized in full as to principal by U.S. Treasury zero-coupon bonds having the same maturity as the Brady Bonds. Interest payments on these Brady Bonds generally are collateralized on a one-year or longer rolling-forward basis by cash or securities in an amount that, in the case of fixed rate bonds, is equal to at least one year of interest payments or, in the case of floating rate bonds, initially is equal to at least one year’s interest payments based on the applicable interest rate at that time and is adjusted at regular intervals thereafter. Certain Brady Bonds are entitled to “value recovery payments” in certain circumstances, which in effect constitute supplemental interest payments but generally are not collateralized. For example, some Mexican and Venezuelan Brady Bonds include attached value recovery options, which increase interest payments if oil revenues rise. Brady Bonds are often viewed as having three or four valuation components: (i) the collateralized repayment of principal at final maturity; (ii) the collateralized interest payments; (iii) the uncollateralized interest payments; and (iv) any uncollateralized repayment of principal at maturity (the uncollateralized amounts constitute the “residual risk”).

Most Mexican Brady Bonds issued to date have principal repayments at final maturity fully collateralized by U.S. Treasury zero-coupon bonds (or comparable collateral denominated in other currencies) and interest coupon payments collateralized on an 18-month rolling-forward basis by funds held in escrow by an agent for the bondholders. A significant portion of the Venezuelan Brady Bonds and the Argentine Brady Bonds issued to date have repayments at final maturity collateralized by U.S. Treasury zero-coupon bonds (or comparable collateral denominated in other currencies) and/or interest coupon payments collateralized on a 14-month (for Venezuela) or 12-month (for Argentina) rolling-forward basis by securities held by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York as collateral agent.

Brady Bonds involve various risk factors described above associated with investing in non-U.S. securities, including the history of defaults with respect to commercial bank loans by public and private entities of countries issuing Brady Bonds. In light of the residual risk of Brady Bonds and, among other factors, the history of defaults, investments in Brady Bonds are considered speculative. There can be no assurance that Brady Bonds in which the Portfolios may invest will not be subject to restructuring arrangements or to requests for new credit, which may cause the Portfolios to suffer a loss of interest or principal on any of its holdings.

Interest Rate Transactions, Currency Swaps and Swaptions. The Equity Portfolios may enter into interest rate swaps, may purchase or sell interest rate caps and floors and may enter into options on swap agreements (“swaptions”). The Portfolios may enter into these transactions primarily to preserve a return or spread on a particular investment or portion of their holdings, as a duration management technique or to protect against an increase in the price of securities a Portfolio anticipates purchasing at a later date. They may also be used for speculation to increase returns.

In order to protect against currency fluctuations, the Portfolios that invest in non-U.S. securities may enter into currency swaps. Currency swaps involve the exchange of the rights of the Portfolios and another party to make or receive payments in specified currencies.

The Asset Allocation and Global Opportunities Portfolios may enter into interest rate swaps, caps, floors and swaptions on either an asset-based or liability-based basis, depending on whether a Portfolio is hedging its assets or its liabilities. Swap agreements are two-party contracts entered into primarily by institutional investors for periods ranging from a few weeks to more than one year. In a standard “swap” transaction, two parties agree to exchange the returns (or differentials in rates of return) earned or realized on particular predetermined investments or instruments, which may be adjusted for an interest factor. The gross returns to be exchanged or “swapped” between the parties are generally calculated with respect to a “notional amount,” i.e., the return on or increase in value of a particular dollar amount invested at a particular interest rate or in a “basket” of securities representing a particular index. Forms of swap agreements include interest rate caps, under which, in return for a premium, one

party agrees to make payments to the other to the extent that interest rates exceed a specified rate, or “cap”; and interest rate floors, under which, in return for a premium, one party agrees to make payments to the other to the extent that interest rates fall below a specified rate, or “floor”.

A Portfolio will usually enter into interest rate swaps on a net basis, i.e., the two payment streams are netted out, with the Portfolio receiving or paying, as the case may be, only the net amount of the two payments. In contrast, currency swaps usually involve the delivery of the entire principal value of one designated currency in exchange for the other designated currency.

A swaption is a contract that gives a counterparty the right (but not the obligation) to enter into a new swap agreement or to shorten, extend, cancel or otherwise modify an existing swap agreement, at some designated future time on specified terms. The Portfolios may write (sell) and purchase put and call swaptions.

Whether the Portfolios’ use of swap agreements or swaptions will be successful in furthering their investment objectives will depend on the Manager’s ability to predict correctly whether certain types of investments are likely to produce greater returns than other investments. Because they are two-party contracts and because they may have terms of greater than seven days, swap agreements may be considered to be illiquid. Moreover, a Portfolio bears the risk of loss of the amount expected to be received under a swap agreement in the event of the default or bankruptcy of a swap agreement counterparty. A Portfolio will enter into swap agreements only with counterparties that meet certain standards of creditworthiness. If there is a default by the other party to such a transaction, a Portfolio will have contractual remedies pursuant to the agreements related to the transaction. The swap market has grown substantially in recent years with a large number of banks and investment banking firms acting both as principals and as agents utilizing standardized swap documentation. As a result, the swap market has become relatively liquid. Caps and floors are less liquid than swaps.

The swaps market is largely unregulated. It is possible that developments in the swaps market, including potential government regulation, could adversely affect a Portfolio’s ability to terminate existing swap agreements or to realize amounts to be received under such agreements.

Depending on the terms of the particular option agreement, a Portfolio will generally incur a greater degree of risk when it writes a swaption than it will incur when it purchases a swaption. When a Portfolio purchases a swaption, it risks losing only the amount of the premium it has paid should it decide to let the option expire unexercised. However, when a Portfolio writes a swaption, upon exercise of the option the Portfolio will become obligated according to the terms of the underlying agreement.

A Portfolio will accrue the net amount of the excess, if any, of its obligations over its entitlements with respect to each interest rate or currency swap or swaption on a daily basis and its Manager will designate liquid assets on its books and records in an amount having an aggregate net asset value at least equal to the accrued excess to the extent required by SEC guidelines. If the other party to an interest rate swap defaults, a Portfolio’s risk of loss consists of the net amount of interest payments that the Portfolio is contractually entitled to receive. Because currency swaps usually involve the delivery of the entire principal value of one designated currency in exchange for the other designated currency, the entire principal value of a currency swap is subject to the risk that the other party to the swap will default on its contractual delivery obligations.

Credit Default Swaps. To the extent consistent with their investment strategies, the Asset Allocation and Global Opportunities Portfolios may, for hedging or leveraging purposes, make use of credit default swaps, which are contracts whereby one party makes periodic payments to a counterparty in exchange for the right to receive from the counterparty a payment equal to the par (or other agreed-upon) value of a referenced debt obligation in the event of a default by the issuer of the debt obligation. The use of credit default swaps may be limited by the Portfolios’ limitations on illiquid investments. When used for hedging purposes, the Portfolio would be the buyer of a credit default swap contract. In that case, the Portfolio would be entitled to receive the par (or other agreed-upon) value of a referenced debt obligation from the counterparty to the contract in the event of a default by a third party, such as a U.S. or non-U.S. issuer, on the debt obligation. In return, the Portfolio would pay to the counterparty a periodic stream of payments over the term of the contract provided that no event of default has occurred. If no default occurs, the Portfolio would have spent the stream of payments and received no benefit from the contract. Credit default swaps involve the risk that the investment may expire worthless and would generate income only in the event of an actual default by the issuer of the underlying obligation (as opposed to a credit downgrade or other indication of financial instability). It would also involve credit risk — that the seller may fail to satisfy its payment obligations to the Portfolio in the event of a default.

When the Portfolio is the seller of a credit default swap contract, it receives the stream of payments but is obligated to pay upon default of the referenced debt obligation. As the seller, the Portfolio would effectively add leverage to its portfolio because, in addition to its total assets, the Portfolio would be subject to investment exposure on the notional amount of the swap.

In addition to the risks applicable to derivatives generally, credit default swaps involve special risks because they are difficult to value, are highly susceptible to liquidity and credit risk, and generally pay a return to the party that has paid the premium only in the event of an actual default by the issuer of the underlying obligation (as opposed to a credit downgrade or other indication of financial difficulty).

Credit Linked Securities. Among the income producing securities in which a Portfolio may invest are credit linked securities, which are issued by a limited purpose trust or other vehicle that, in turn, invests in a derivative instrument or basket of derivative instruments, such as credit default swaps, interest rate swaps and other securities, in order to provide exposure to certain fixed income markets. For instance, a Portfolio may invest in credit linked securities as a cash management tool in order to gain exposure to a certain market and/or to remain fully invested when more traditional income producing securities are not available.

Like an investment in a bond, investments in these credit linked securities represent the right to receive periodic income payments (in the form of distributions) and payment of principal at the end of the term of the security. However, these payments are conditioned on the issuer’s receipt of payments from, and the issuer’s potential obligations to, the counterparties to the derivative instruments and other securities in which the issuer invests. For instance, the issuer may sell one or more credit default swaps, under which the issuer would receive a stream of payments over the term of the swap agreements provided that no event of default has occurred with respect to the referenced debt obligation upon which the swap is based. If a default occurs, the stream of payments may stop and the issuer would be obligated to pay the counterparty the par (or other agreed upon value) of the referenced debt obligation. This, in turn, would reduce the amount of income and principal that a Portfolio would receive. A Portfolio’s investments in these instruments are indirectly subject to the risks associated with derivative instruments, including, among others, credit risk, default or similar event risk, counterparty risk, interest rate risk, leverage risk and management risk. It is also expected that the securities will be exempt from registration under the 1933 Act. Accordingly, there may be no established trading market for the securities and they may constitute illiquid investments.

Total Return Swap Agreements. Total return swap agreements are contracts in which one party agrees to make periodic payments to another party based on the change in market value of the assets underlying the contract, which may include a specified security, basket of securities or securities indices during the specified period, in return for periodic payments based on a fixed or variable interest rate or the total return from other underlying assets. Total return swap agreements may be used to obtain exposure to a security or market without owning or taking physical custody of such security or investing directly in such market. Total return swap agreements may add leverage to the Portfolio’s portfolio because, in addition to its total net assets, the Portfolio would be subject to investment exposure on the notional amount of the swap.

Total return swap agreements are subject to the risk that a counterparty will default on its payment obligations to the Portfolio thereunder. Swap agreements also bear the risk that the Portfolio will not be able to meet its obligation to the counterparty. Generally, a Portfolio will enter into total return swaps on a net basis (i.e., the two payment streams are netted against one another with the Portfolio receiving or paying, as the case may be, only the net amount of the two payments). The net amount of the excess, if any, of the Portfolio’s obligations over its entitlements with respect to each total return swap will be accrued on a daily basis, and an amount of liquid assets having an aggregate net asset value at least equal to the accrued excess will be segregated by the Portfolio. If the total return swap transaction is entered into on other than a net basis, the full amount of the Portfolio’s obligations will be accrued on a daily basis, and the full amount of the Portfolio’s obligations will be segregated by the Portfolio in an amount equal to or greater than the market value of the liabilities under the total return swap agreement or the amount it would have cost the Portfolio initially to make an equivalent direct investment, plus or minus any amount the Portfolio is obligated to pay or is to receive under the total return swap agreement.

Hybrid Instruments. Certain Portfolios seek to gain exposure to the commodities markets primarily through investments in hybrid instruments. Hybrid instruments are either equity or debt derivative securities with one or more commodity-dependent components that have payment features similar to a commodity futures contract, a

commodity option contract, or a combination of both. Therefore, these instruments are “commodity-linked.” They are considered “hybrid” instruments because they have both commodity-like and security-like characteristics. Hybrid instruments are derivative instruments because at least part of their value is derived from the value of an underlying commodity, futures contract, index or other readily measurable economic variable.

The prices of commodity-linked derivative instruments may move in different directions than investments in traditional equity and debt securities when the value of those traditional securities is declining due to adverse economic conditions. As an example, during periods of rising inflation, debt securities have historically tended to decline in value due to the general increase in prevailing interest rates. Conversely, during those same periods of rising inflation, the prices of certain commodities, such as oil and metals, have historically tended to increase. Of course, there cannot be any guarantee that these investments will perform in that manner in the future, and at certain times the price movements of commodity-linked instruments have been parallel to those of debt and equity securities. Commodities have historically tended to increase and decrease in value during different parts of the business cycle than financial assets. Nevertheless, at various times, commodities prices may move in tandem with the prices of financial assets and thus may not provide overall portfolio diversification benefits. Under favorable economic conditions, the Portfolio’s investments may be expected to under-perform an investment in traditional securities. Over the long term, the returns on the Portfolio’s investments are expected to exhibit low or negative correlation with stocks and bonds.

Qualifying Hybrid Instruments. Certain Portfolios may invest in hybrid instruments that qualify for exclusion from regulation under the Commodity Exchange Act and the regulations adopted thereunder. A hybrid instrument that qualifies for this exclusion from regulation must be “predominantly a security.” A hybrid instrument is considered to be predominantly a security if (a) the issuer of the hybrid instrument receives payment in full of the purchase price of the hybrid instrument, substantially contemporaneously with delivery of the hybrid instrument; (b) the purchaser or holder of the hybrid instrument is not required to make any payment to the issuer in addition to the purchase price paid under subparagraph (a), whether as margin, settlement payment, or otherwise, during the life of the hybrid instrument or at maturity; (c) the issuer of the hybrid instrument is not subject by the terms of the instrument to mark-to-market margining requirements; and (d) the hybrid instrument is not marketed as a contract of sale of a commodity for future delivery (or option on such a contract) subject to applicable provisions of the Commodity Exchange Act. Hybrid instruments may be principal protected, partially protected, or offer no principal protection. A principal protected hybrid instrument means that the issuer will pay, at a minimum, the par value of the note at maturity. Therefore, if the commodity value to which the hybrid instrument is linked declines over the life of the note, the Portfolio will receive at maturity the face or stated value of the note. With a principal protected hybrid instrument, the Portfolio will receive at maturity the greater of the par value of the note or the increase in its value based on the underlying commodity or index. This protection is, in effect, an option whose value is subject to the volatility and price level of the underlying commodity. The Manager’s decision whether to use principal protection depends in part on the cost of the protection. In addition, the protection feature depends upon the ability of the issuer to meet its obligation to buy back the security, and, therefore, depends on the creditworthiness of the issuer. With full principal protection, the Portfolio will receive at maturity of the hybrid instrument either the stated par value of the hybrid instrument, or potentially, an amount greater than the stated par value if the underlying commodity, index, futures contract or economic variable to which the hybrid instrument is linked has increased in value. Partially protected hybrid instruments may suffer some loss of principal if the underlying commodity, index, futures contract or economic variable to which the hybrid instrument is linked declines in value during the term of the hybrid instrument. However, partially protected hybrid instruments have a specified limit as to the amount of principal that they may lose.

Hybrid Instruments Without Principal Protection. Certain Portfolios may invest in hybrid instruments that offer no principal protection. At maturity, there is a risk that the underlying commodity price, futures contract, index or other economic variable may have declined sufficiently in value that some or all of the face value of the hybrid instrument might not be returned. The Manager, at its discretion, may invest in a partially protected principal structured note or a note without principal protection. In deciding to purchase a note without principal protection, the Manager may consider, among other things, the expected performance of the underlying commodity futures contract, index or other economic variable over the term of the note, the cost of the note, and any other economic factors that the Manager believes are relevant.

Limitations on Leverage. Some of the hybrid instruments in which a Portfolio may invest may involve leverage. To avoid being subject to undue leverage risk, a Portfolio will seek to limit the amount of economic

leverage it has under any one hybrid instrument that it buys and the leverage of the Portfolio’s overall portfolio. A Portfolio will not invest in a hybrid instrument if, at the time of purchase: (i) that instrument’s “leverage ratio” exceeds 300% of the price increase in the underlying commodity, futures contract, index or other economic variable or (ii) the Portfolio’s “portfolio leverage ratio” exceeds 150%, measured at the time of purchase. “Leverage ratio” is the expected increase in the value of a hybrid instrument, assuming a one percent price increase in the underlying commodity, futures contract, index or other economic factor. In other words, for a hybrid instrument with a leverage factor of 150%, a 1% gain in the underlying economic variable would be expected to result in a 1.5% gain in value for the hybrid instrument. Conversely, a hybrid instrument with a leverage factor of 150% would suffer a 1.5% loss if the underlying economic variable lost 1% of its value. “Portfolio leverage ratio” is defined as the average (mean) leverage ratio of all instruments in a Portfolio’s portfolio, weighted by the market values of such instruments or, in the case of futures contracts, their notional values. To the extent that the policy on a Portfolio’s use of leverage stated above conflicts with the 1940 Act or the rules and regulations thereunder, the Portfolio will comply with the applicable provisions of the 1940 Act. A Portfolio may at times or from time to time decide not to use leverage in its investments or use less leverage than may otherwise be allowable.

Counterparty Risk. A significant risk of hybrid instruments is counterparty risk. Unlike exchange-traded futures and options, which are standard contracts, hybrid instruments are customized securities, tailor-made by a specific issuer. With a listed futures or options contract, an investor’s counterparty is the exchange clearinghouse. Exchange clearinghouses are capitalized by the exchange members and typically have high investment grade ratings (e.g., ratings of AAA or AA by Standard & Poor’s). Therefore, the risk is small that an exchange clearinghouse might be unable to meet its obligations at maturity. However, with a hybrid instrument, a Portfolio will take on the counterparty credit risk of the issuer. That is, at maturity of the hybrid instrument, there is a risk that the issuer may be unable to perform its obligations under the structured note.

Inflation risk. Like all mutual funds, the Portfolios are subject to inflation risk. Inflation risk is the risk that the present value of assets or income from investments will be less in the future as inflation decreases the value of money. As inflation increases, the present value of a Portfolio’s assets can decline as can the value of a Portfolio’s distributions.

Stand-by Commitments. Stand-by commitment agreements commit a Portfolio, for a stated period of time, to purchase a stated amount of securities that may be issued and sold to that Portfolio at the option of the issuer. The price of the security is fixed at the time of the commitment. At the time of entering into the agreement, the Portfolio is paid a commitment fee, regardless of whether or not the security is ultimately issued. A Portfolio will enter into such agreements for the purpose of investing in the security underlying the commitment at a price that is considered advantageous to the Portfolio. A Portfolio will limit its investment in such commitments so that the aggregate purchase price of securities subject to such commitments, together with the value of the Portfolio’s other illiquid investments, will not exceed 15% of its net assets taken at the time of the commitment. A Portfolio segregates liquid assets in an aggregate amount equal to the purchase price of the securities underlying the commitment.

There can be no assurance that the securities subject to a stand-by commitment will be issued, and the value of the security, if issued, on the delivery date may be more or less than its purchase price. Since the issuance of the security underlying the commitment is at the option of the issuer, the Portfolio may bear the risk of a decline in the value of such security and may not benefit from an appreciation in the value of the security during the commitment period. The purchase of a security subject to a stand-by commitment agreement and the related commitment fee will be recorded on the date on which the security can reasonably be expected to be issued, and the value of the security thereafter will be reflected in the calculation of a Portfolio’s net asset value. The cost basis of the security will be adjusted by the amount of the commitment fee. In the event the security is not issued, the commitment fee will be recorded as income on the expiration date of the stand-by commitment.

Under a stand-by commitment for a Municipal Obligation, a dealer agrees to purchase at the Portfolio’s option a specified Municipal Obligation at a specified price. Stand-by commitments for Municipal Obligations may be exercisable by a Portfolio at any time before the maturity of the underlying Municipal Obligations and may be sold, transferred or assigned only with the instruments involved. It is expected that such stand-by commitments will generally be available without the payment of any direct or indirect consideration. However, if necessary or advisable, a Portfolio may pay for such a stand-by commitment either separately in cash or by paying a higher price for Municipal Obligations which are acquired subject to the commitment for Municipal Obligations (thus

reducing the yield to maturity otherwise available for the same securities). The total amount paid in either manner for outstanding stand-by commitments for Municipal Obligations held by a Portfolio will not exceed ¹/2 of 1% of the value of such Portfolio’s total assets calculated immediately after each stand-by commitment is acquired.

Stand-by commitments will only be entered into with dealers, banks and broker-dealers which, in the Manager’s opinion, present minimal credit risks. A Portfolio will acquire stand-by commitments solely to facilitate Portfolio liquidity and not to exercise its rights thereunder for trading purposes. Stand-by commitments will be valued at zero in determining net asset value. Accordingly, where a Portfolio pays directly or indirectly for a standby commitment, its cost will be reflected as an unrealized loss for the period during which the commitment is held by such Portfolio and will be reflected as a realized gain or loss when the commitment is exercised or expires.

Each Municipal Money Market Portfolio may acquire stand-by commitments with respect to Municipal Obligations held by it. The acquisition of a stand-by commitment may increase the cost, and thereby reduce the yield, of the Municipal Obligations to which the commitment relates.

Tax-Exempt Derivatives. The Municipal Money Market Portfolios and the Asset Allocation and Global Opportunities Portfolios may hold tax-exempt derivatives which may be in the form of tender option bonds, participations, beneficial interests in a trust, partnership interests or other forms. A number of different structures have been used. For example, interests in long-term fixed-rate municipal debt obligations, held by a bank as trustee or custodian, are coupled with tender option, demand and other features when the tax-exempt derivatives are created. Together, these features entitle the holder of the interest to tender (or put) the underlying municipal debt obligation to a third party at periodic intervals and to receive the principal amount thereof. In some cases, municipal debt obligations are represented by custodial receipts evidencing rights to receive specific future interest payments, principal payments, or both, on the underlying securities held by the custodian. Under such arrangements, the holder of the custodial receipt has the option to tender the underlying securities at their face value to the sponsor (usually a bank or broker dealer or other financial institution), which is paid periodic fees equal to the difference between the securities’ fixed coupon rate and the rate that would cause the securities, coupled with the tender option, to trade at par on the date of a rate adjustment. A participation interest gives a Portfolio an undivided interest in a Municipal Obligation in the proportion the Portfolio’s participation bears to the total principal amount of the Municipal Obligation, and typically provides for a repurchase feature for all or any part of the full principal amount of the participation interest, plus accrued interest. Trusts and partnerships are typically used to convert long-term fixed rate high quality bonds of a single state or municipal issuer into variable or floating rate demand instruments. The Municipal Money Market Portfolios may hold tax-exempt derivatives, such as participation interests and custodial receipts, for municipal debt obligations which give the holder the right to receive payment of principal subject to the conditions described above. It is intended that any such tax-exempt derivatives held by the New Jersey Municipal Money Market Portfolio shall comply with the requirements of N.J.S.A. 54A:6-14.1. The Internal Revenue Service has not ruled on whether the interest received on tax-exempt derivatives in the form of participation interests or custodial receipts is tax-exempt, and accordingly, purchases of any such interests or receipts are based on the opinions of counsel to the sponsors of such derivative securities. Neither the Portfolio nor its Manager will review the proceedings related to the creation of any tax-exempt derivatives or the basis for such opinions.

Tax-Exempt Preferred Shares. The Asset Allocation and Global Opportunities Portfolios may invest in preferred interests of other investment funds that pay dividends that are exempt from regular Federal income tax. Such funds in turn invest in municipal bonds and other assets that pay interest or make distributions that are exempt from regular Federal income tax, such as revenue bonds issued by state or local agencies to fund the development of low-income, multi-family housing. Investment in such tax-exempt preferred shares involves many of the same issues as investing in other open- or closed-end investment companies as discussed below. These investments also have additional risks, including liquidity risk, the absence of regulation governing investment practices, capital structure and leverage, affiliated transactions and other matters, and concentration of investments in particular issuers or industries.

Taxability Risk. Certain of the Portfolios intend to minimize the payment of taxable income to shareholders by investing in tax-exempt or municipal securities in reliance at the time of purchase on an opinion of bond counsel to the issuer that the interest paid on those securities will be excludable from gross income for Federal income tax purposes. Such securities, however, may be determined to pay, or have paid, taxable income subsequent to the Portfolio’s acquisition of the securities. In that event, the Internal Revenue Service may demand that the Portfolio

pay Federal income taxes on the affected interest income, and, if the Portfolio agrees to do so, the Portfolio’s yield could be adversely affected. In addition, the treatment of dividends previously paid or to be paid by the Portfolio as “exempt interest dividends” could be adversely affected, subjecting the Portfolio’s shareholders to increased Federal income tax liabilities. If the interest paid on any tax-exempt or municipal security held by a Portfolio is subsequently determined to be taxable, the Portfolio will dispose of that security as soon as reasonably practicable. In addition, the treatment of dividends previously paid or to be paid by the Portfolio as “exempt interest dividends”could be adversely affected, subjecting the Portfolio’s shareholders to increased Federal income tax liabilities. If the interest paid on any tax-exempt or municipal security held by the Portfolio is subsequently determined to be taxable, the Portfolio will dispose of that security as soon as reasonably practicable. In addition, future laws, regulations, rulings or court decisions may cause interest on municipal securities to be subject, directly or indirectly, to Federal income taxation or interest on state municipal securities to be subject to state or local income taxation, or the value of state municipal securities to be subject to state or local intangible personal property tax, or may otherwise prevent the Portfolio from realizing the full current benefit of the tax-exempt status of such securities. Any such change could also affect the market price of such securities, and thus the value of an investment in the Portfolio.

Yields and Ratings. The yields on certain obligations are dependent on a variety of factors, including general market conditions, conditions in the particular market for the obligation, the financial condition of the issuer, the size of the offering, the maturity of the obligation and the ratings of the issue. The ratings of Moody’s, Fitch and S&P represent their respective opinions as to the quality of the obligations they undertake to rate. Ratings, however, are general and are not absolute standards of quality. Consequently, obligations with the same rating, maturity and interest rate may have different market prices. Subsequent to its purchase by a Portfolio, a rated security may cease to be rated. A Portfolio’s Manager will consider such an event in determining whether the Portfolio should continue to hold the security. Subject to its other investment strategies, there is no limit on the amount of unrated securities a Portfolio may hold, although under normal market conditions the Manager does not expect to hold these securities to a material extent.

Tender Option Bonds. The Equity Portfolios may invest in residual interest municipal tender option bonds, which are derivative interests in Municipal Obligations. The residual interest municipal tender option bonds in which the Portfolios will invest pay interest or income that, in the opinion of counsel to the issuer, is exempt from regular Federal income tax. BlackRock will not conduct its own analysis of the tax status of the interest or income paid by residual interest municipal tender option bonds held by the Portfolios, but will rely on the opinion of counsel to the issuer. Although volatile, these residual interests typically offer the potential for yields exceeding the yields available on fixed rate Municipal Obligations with comparable credit quality, coupon, call provisions and maturity. The Portfolios may invest in residual interests for the purpose of using economic leverage.

Residual interest municipal tender option bonds represent beneficial interests in a special purpose trust formed by a third party sponsor for the purpose of holding Municipal Obligations purchased from a Portfolio or from another third party. The special purpose trust typically sells two classes of beneficial interests: short-term floating rate interests (sometimes known as “put bonds” or “puttable securities”), which are sold to third party investors, and residual interests, which a Portfolio would purchase. The short-term floating rate interests have first priority on the cash flow from the Municipal Obligations. A Portfolio is paid the residual cash flow from the special purpose trust. If the Portfolio is the initial seller of the Municipal Obligations to the special purpose trust, it receives the proceeds from the sale of the floating rate interests in the special purpose trust, less certain transaction costs. These proceeds generally would be used by the Portfolio to purchase additional Municipal Obligations or other permitted investments. If a Portfolio ever purchases all or a portion of the short-term floating rate securities sold by the special purpose trust, it may surrender those short-term floating rate securities together with a proportionate amount of residual interests to the trustee of the special purpose trust in exchange for a proportionate amount of the Municipal Obligations owned by the special purpose trust. In addition, all voting rights and decisions to be made with respect to any other rights relating to the Municipal Obligations held in the special purpose trust are passed through to the Portfolio, as the holder of the residual interests.

A Portfolio may invest in highly leveraged residual interest municipal tender option bonds. A residual interest municipal tender option bond generally is considered highly leveraged if the principal amount of the short-term floating rate interests issued by the related tender option bond trust exceeds 50% of the principal amount of the Municipal Obligations owned by the tender option bond trust.

The sponsor of a highly leveraged tender option bond trust generally will retain a liquidity provider that stands ready to purchase the short-term floating rate interests at their original purchase price upon the occurrence of certain events, such as on a certain date prior to the scheduled expiration date of the transaction, upon a certain percentage of the floating rate interests failing to be remarketed in a timely fashion, upon the bonds owned by the tender option bond trust being downgraded (but not below investment grade or upon the occurrence of a bankruptcy event with respect to the issuer of the Municipal Obligations) or upon the occurrence of certain regulatory or tax events. However, the liquidity provider is not required to purchase the floating rate interests upon the occurrence of certain other events, including upon the downgrading of the Municipal Obligations owned by the tender option bond trust below investment grade or certain events that indicate the issuer of the bonds may be entering bankruptcy. The general effect of these provisions is to pass to the holders of the floating rate interests the most severe credit risks associated with the Municipal Obligations owned by the tender option bond trust and to leave with the liquidity provider the interest rate risk and certain other risks associated with the Municipal Obligations.

If the liquidity provider acquires the floating rate interests upon the occurrence of an event described above, the liquidity provider generally will be entitled to an in-kind distribution of the Municipal Obligations owned by the tender option bond trust or to cause the tender option bond trust to sell the bonds and distribute the proceeds to the liquidity provider. The liquidity provider generally will enter into an agreement with a Portfolio that will require the Portfolio to make a payment to the liquidity provider in an amount equal to any loss suffered by the liquidity provider in connection with the foregoing transactions. The net economic effect of this agreement and these transactions is as if the Portfolio had entered into a special type of reverse repurchase agreement with the sponsor of the tender option bond trust, pursuant to which the Portfolio is required to repurchase the Municipal Obligations it sells to the sponsor only upon the occurrence of certain events (such as a failed remarketing of the floating rate interests—most likely due to an adverse change in interest rates) but not others (such as a default of the Municipal Obligations). In order to cover any potential obligation of the Portfolio to the liquidity provider pursuant to this agreement, the Portfolio may designate on its books and records liquid instruments having a value not less than the amount, if any, by which the original purchase price of the floating rate interests issued by the related tender option bond trust exceeds the market value of the Municipal Obligations owned by the tender option bond trust.

A Portfolio may also invest in short-term floating rate interest tender option bonds. The remarketing agent for the special purpose trust sets a floating or variable rate on typically a weekly basis. These securities grant the Portfolios the right to require the issuer or a specified third party acting as agent for the issuer (e.g., a tender agent) to purchase the bonds, usually at par, at a certain time or times prior to maturity or upon the occurrence of specified events or conditions. The put option or tender option right is typically available to the investor on a periodic (e.g., daily, weekly or monthly) basis. Typically, the put option is exercisable on dates on which the floating or variable rate changes.

Investments in residual interest and floating rate interest tender option bonds may be considered derivatives and are subject to the risk thereof, including counterparty risk, interest rate risk and volatility.

Bank Loans. Bank loans are generally non-investment grade floating rate instruments. Usually, they are freely callable at the issuer’s option. The Asset Allocation and Global Opportunities Portfolios and, to the extent consistent with its primary investment strategies, the Money Market Portfolio may invest in fixed and floating rate loans (“Loans”) arranged through private negotiations between a corporate borrower or a non-U.S. sovereign entity and one or more financial institutions (“Lenders”). A Portfolio may invest in such Loans in the form of participations in Loans (“Participations”) and assignments of all or a portion of Loans from third parties (“Assignments”). A Portfolio considers these investments to be investments in debt securities for purposes of its investment policies. Participations typically will result in the Portfolio having a contractual relationship only with the Lender, not with the borrower. The Portfolio will have the right to receive payments of principal, interest and any fees to which it is entitled only from the Lender selling the Participation and only upon receipt by the Lender of the payments from the borrower. In connection with purchasing Participations, the Portfolio generally will have no right to enforce compliance by the borrower with the terms of the loan agreement relating to the Loans, nor any rights of set-off against the borrower, and the Portfolio may not benefit directly from any collateral supporting the Loan in which it has purchased the Participation. As a result, the Portfolio will assume the credit risk of both the borrower and the Lender that is selling the Participation. In the event of the insolvency of the Lender selling the Participation, the Portfolio may be treated as a general creditor of the Lender and may not benefit from any set-off

between the Lender and the borrower. The Portfolio will acquire Participations only if the Lender interpositioned between the Portfolio and the borrower is determined by the Portfolio’s Manager to be creditworthy. When the Portfolio purchases Assignments from Lenders, the Portfolio will acquire direct rights against the borrower on the Loan, and will not have exposure to a counterparty’s credit risk. The Portfolios may enter into Participations and Assignments on a forward commitment or “when-issued” basis, whereby a Portfolio would agree to purchase a Participation or Assignment at set terms in the future. For more information on forward commitments and when-issued securities, see “When-Issued Purchases and Forward Commitments” below.

A Portfolio may have difficulty disposing of Assignments and Participations. In certain cases, the market for such instruments is not highly liquid, and therefore the Portfolio anticipates that in such cases such instruments could be sold only to a limited number of institutional investors. The lack of a highly liquid secondary market may have an adverse impact on the value of such instruments and on the Portfolio’s ability to dispose of particular Assignments or Participations in response to a specific economic event, such as deterioration in the creditworthiness of the borrower. Assignments and Participations will not be considered illiquid so long as it is determined by the Portfolios’ Manager that an adequate trading market exists for these securities. To the extent that liquid Assignments and Participations that a Portfolio holds become illiquid, due to the lack of sufficient buyers or market or other conditions, the percentage of the Portfolio’s assets invested in illiquid assets would increase.

Trust Preferred Securities. Certain of the Equity Portfolios may invest in trust preferred securities. Trust preferred securities are a comparatively new asset class. Trust preferred securities are typically issued by corporations, generally in the form of interest bearing notes with preferred securities characteristics, or by an affiliated business trust of a corporation, generally in the form of beneficial interests in subordinated debentures or similarly structured securities. The trust preferred securities market consists of both fixed and adjustable coupon rate securities that are either perpetual in nature or have stated maturity dates.

Trust preferred securities are typically junior and fully subordinated liabilities of an issuer and benefit from a guarantee that is junior and fully subordinated to the other liabilities of the guarantor. In addition, trust preferred securities typically permit an issuer to defer the payment of income for five years or more without triggering an event of default. Because of their subordinated position in the capital structure of an issuer, the ability to defer payments for extended periods of time without default consequences to the issuer, and certain other features (such as restrictions on common dividend payments by the issuer or ultimate guarantor when full cumulative payments on the trust preferred securities have not been made), these trust preferred securities are often treated as close substitutes for traditional preferred securities, both by issuers and investors. Trust preferred securities have some of the key characteristics of equity and became popular because they could be treated as preferred equity for accounting purposes. However, trust preferred securities are no longer treated as equity and are rarely issued in the current environment.

Trust preferred securities include but are not limited to trust originated preferred securities (“TOPRS^®”); monthly income preferred securities (“MIPS^®”); quarterly income bond securities (“QUIBS^®”); quarterly income debt securities (“QUIDS^®”); quarterly income preferred securities (“QUIPS^SM”); corporate trust securities (“CORTS^®”); public income notes (“PINES^®”); and other trust preferred securities.

Trust preferred securities are typically issued with a final maturity date, although some are perpetual in nature. In certain instances, a final maturity date may be extended and/or the final payment of principal may be deferred at the issuer’s option for a specified time without default. No redemption can typically take place unless all cumulative payment obligations have been met, although issuers may be able to engage in open-market repurchases without regard to whether all payments have been paid.

Many trust preferred securities are issued by trusts or other special purpose entities established by operating companies and are not a direct obligation of an operating company. At the time the trust or special purpose entity sells such preferred securities to investors, it purchases debt of the operating company (with terms comparable to those of the trust or special purpose entity securities), which enables the operating company to deduct for tax purposes the interest paid on the debt held by the trust or special purpose entity. The trust or special purpose entity is generally required to be treated as transparent for Federal income tax purposes so that the holders of the trust preferred securities are treated as owning beneficial interests in the underlying debt of the operating company. Accordingly, payments on the trust preferred securities are treated as interest rather than dividends for Federal

income tax purposes. The trust or special purpose entity in turn would be a holder of the operating company’s debt and would have priority with respect to the operating company’s earnings and profits over the operating company’s common shareholders, but would typically be subordinated to other classes of the operating company’s debt. Typically a preferred share has a rating that is slightly below that of its corresponding operating company’s senior debt securities.

Pay-in-kind Bonds. The Equity Portfolios may invest in pay-in-kind, or PIK, bonds. PIK bonds are bonds which pay interest through the issuance of additional debt or equity securities. Similar to zero coupon obligations, PIK bonds also carry additional risk as holders of these types of securities realize no cash until the cash payment date unless a portion of such securities is sold and, if the issuer defaults, a Portfolio may obtain no return at all on its investment. The market price of PIK bonds is affected by interest rate changes to a greater extent, and therefore tends to be more volatile, than that of securities which pay interest in cash. Additionally, current Federal tax law requires the holder of certain PIK bonds to accrue income with respect to these securities prior to the receipt of cash payments. To maintain its qualification as a regulated investment company and avoid liability for Federal income and excise taxes, each Portfolio may be required to distribute income accrued with respect to these securities and may have to dispose of portfolio securities under disadvantageous circumstances in order to generate cash to satisfy these distribution requirements.

Stripped and Zero Coupon Obligations. To the extent consistent with their investment objectives, the Equity Portfolios may purchase Treasury receipts and other “stripped” securities that evidence ownership in either the future interest payments or the future principal payments on U.S. Government and other obligations. These participations, which may be issued by the U.S. Government (or a U.S. Government agency or instrumentality) or by private issuers such as banks and other institutions, are issued at a discount to their “face value,” and may include stripped mortgage-backed securities (“SMBS”). Stripped securities, particularly SMBS, may exhibit greater price volatility than ordinary debt securities because of the manner in which their principal and interest are returned to investors, and they are often illiquid.

SMBS are usually structured with two or more classes that receive different proportions of the interest and principal distributions from a pool of mortgage-backed obligations. A common type of SMBS will have one class receiving all of the interest (“IO” or interest-only), while the other class receives all of the principal (“PO” or principal-only). However, in some cases, one class will receive some of the interest and most of the principal while the other class will receive most of the interest and the remainder of the principal. If the underlying obligations experience greater than anticipated prepayments of principal, a Portfolio may fail to fully recoup its initial investment in these securities even if the securities have received the highest rating by an NRSRO. The market value of SMBS can be extremely volatile in response to changes in interest rates. The yields on a class of SMBS that receives all or most of the interest are generally higher than prevailing market yields on other mortgage-related obligations because their cash flow patterns are also volatile and there is a greater risk that the initial investment will not be fully recouped.

Each Equity Portfolio may invest in zero-coupon bonds, which are normally issued at a significant discount from face value and do not provide for periodic interest payments. Zero-coupon bonds may experience greater volatility in market value than similar maturity debt obligations which provide for regular interest payments. Additionally, current Federal tax law requires the holder of certain zero-coupon bonds to accrue income with respect to these securities prior to the receipt of cash payments. To maintain its qualification as a regulated investment company and avoid liability for Federal income and excise taxes, a Portfolio may be required to distribute income accrued with respect to these securities and may have to dispose of portfolio securities under disadvantageous circumstances in order to generate cash to satisfy these distribution requirements. See “Taxes.”

Exchange Traded Notes (ETNs). ETNs, generally notes representing debt of a financial institution, combine aspects of both bonds and ETFs. Unlike bonds, however, ETNs do not make periodic interest payments, and principal is not protected. ETNs, like ETFs, are listed on an exchange and are traded in the secondary market. However, unlike an ETF, an ETN can be held until maturity, at which time the issuer of the ETN will pay a return linked to the performance of the specific asset, index or rate (“reference instrument”) to which the ETN is linked, minus certain fees. The value of an ETN may be influenced by, among other things, time to maturity, level of supply and demand for the ETN, volatility and lack of liquidity in underlying markets, changes in the applicable interest rates, the performance of the reference instrument, changes in the issuer’s credit rating and economic, legal, political or geographic events that affect the reference instrument. The return on an ETN is based on the

performance of one or more underlying assets, reference rates or indexes, minus fees and expenses. An ETN that is tied to a reference instrument may not replicate the performance of the reference instrument. ETNs also incur certain expenses not incurred by their applicable reference instrument. Some ETNs that use leverage can, at times, be relatively illiquid and, thus, they may be difficult to purchase or sell at a fair price. Levered ETNs are subject to the same risk as other instruments that use leverage in any form. While leverage allows for greater potential return, the potential for loss is also greater. Finally, additional losses may be incurred if the investment loses value because, in addition to the money lost on the investment, the loan must still be repaid.

Because the return on the ETN is dependent on the issuer’s ability or willingness to meet its obligations, the value of the ETN may change due to a change in the issuer’s credit rating, despite there being no change in the underlying reference instrument. The market value of ETN shares may differ from the value of the reference instrument. This difference in price may be due to the fact that the supply and demand in the market for ETN shares at any point in time is not always identical to the supply and demand in the market for the assets underlying the reference instrument that the ETN seeks to track.

There may be restrictions on a Portfolio’s right to redeem its investment in an ETN, which are generally meant to be held until maturity. A Portfolio’s decision to sell its ETN holdings may be limited by the availability of a secondary market. An investor in an ETN could lose some or all of the amount invested.

Funding Agreements. The Equity Portfolios and the Money Market Portfolio may invest in GICs and similar funding agreements. In connection with these investments, a Portfolio makes cash contributions to a deposit fund of an insurance company’s general account. The insurance company then credits to the Portfolio on a monthly basis guaranteed interest, which is based on an index (such as LIBOR). The funding agreements provide that this guaranteed interest will not be less than a certain minimum rate. The purchase price paid for a funding agreement becomes part of the general assets of the insurance company, and the contract is paid from the general assets of the insurance company. Generally, funding agreements are not assignable or transferable without the permission of the issuing insurance companies, and an active secondary market in some funding agreements does not currently exist.

Portfolio Turnover Rates. A Portfolio’s annual portfolio turnover rate will not be a factor preventing a sale or purchase when the Manager believes investment considerations warrant such sale or purchase. Portfolio turnover may vary greatly from year to year as well as within a particular year. High portfolio turnover (i.e., 100% or more) may result in increased transaction costs to a Portfolio, including brokerage commissions, dealer mark-ups and other transaction costs on the sale of the securities and reinvestment in other securities. The sale of a Portfolio’s securities may result in the recognition of capital gain or loss. Given the frequency of sales, such gain or loss will likely be short-term capital gain or loss. These effects of higher than normal portfolio turnover may adversely affect a Portfolio’s performance.

SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS FOR STATE-SPECIFIC MUNICIPAL PORTFOLIOS

This information regarding the State-Specific Municipal Portfolios is derived from official statements of certain issuers published in connection with their issuance of securities and from other publicly available information, and is believed to be accurate. No independent verification has been made of any of the following information.

Special Considerations Regarding Investments in Ohio State-Specific Obligations. The Ohio Municipal Money Market Portfolio (the “Ohio Portfolio”) will invest most of its net assets in securities issued by or on behalf of (or in certificates of participation in lease-purchase obligations of) the State of Ohio, political subdivisions of the State, or agencies or instrumentalities of the State or its political subdivisions (“Ohio Obligations”). The Ohio Portfolio is therefore susceptible to general or particular economic, political or regulatory factors that may affect issuers of Ohio Obligations. The following information constitutes only a brief summary of some of the many complex factors that may have an effect. The information does not apply to “conduit” obligations on which the public issuer itself has no financial responsibility. This information is derived from official statements of certain Ohio issuers published in connection with their issuance of securities and from other publicly available information, and is believed to be accurate. No independent verification has been made of any of the following information.

Generally, the creditworthiness of Ohio Obligations of local issuers is unrelated to that of obligations of the State itself, and the State has no responsibility to make payments on those local obligations.

There may be specific factors that at particular times apply in connection with investment in particular Ohio Obligations or in those obligations of particular Ohio issuers. It is possible that the investment may be in particular Ohio Obligations, or in those of particular issuers, as to which those factors apply. However, the information below is intended only as a general summary, and is not intended as a discussion of any specific factors that may affect any particular obligation or issuer.

Much of this information is as of January 1, 2009, particularly debt figures and other statistics.

The State of Ohio (sometimes referred to herein as the “State”) is the seventh most populous state. The Census count for 2000 was 11,353,100, up from 10,847,100 in 1990. The State’s July 2008 population estimate was 11,485,910.

The State operates on a fiscal biennium for its appropriations and expenditures which, for general capital appropriations purposes, runs from July 1 in an even-numbered year to June 30 in the next even-numbered year. Within a fiscal biennium, the State operates on the basis of a July 1 to June 30 Fiscal Year. The State Constitution effectively precludes the State from ending a Fiscal Year or a biennium in a “deficit” position.

Most State operations are financed through the General Revenue Fund (the “GRF”). Personal income and sales-use taxes are the major GRF sources. The State also has maintained a “rainy day” fund, the Budget Stabilization Fund (the “BSF”), which under current law and until used is intended to carry a balance of approximately 5% of the GRF revenues for the preceding Fiscal Year. The BSF is generally maintained by transfer from the surplus, if any, in each Fiscal Year.

The GRF ending fund and cash balances for the State’s 1984-85 through 2006-07 bienniums were as follows:


Biennium	Beginning July 1	Ending June 30	Ending Fund Balance (In Thousands)*		Ending Cash Balance (In Thousands)
1984-85	1983	1985	$	297,600	$	849,900
1986-87	1985	1987		226,300		632,700
1988-89	1987	1989		475,100		784,268
1990-91	1989	1991		135,365		326,576
1992-93	1991	1993		111,013		393,634
1994-95	1993	1995		928,000		1,312,200
1996-97	1995	1997		834,900		1,400,000
1998-99	1997	1999		976,778		1,512,528
2000-01	1999	2001		219,414		819,069
2002-03	2001	2003		52,338		396,539
2004-05	2003	2005		682,632		1,209,200
2006-07	2005	2007		215,534		1,432,925

*	Reflects the ending fund balance including amounts designated for transfer to other funds, including the BSF

1998-99. In the 1998-99 biennium, GRF appropriations of approximately $36 billion provided significant increases in funding for primary and secondary education. Of the first Fiscal Year (ended on June 30, 1998) ending fund balance of over $1.08 billion, approximately $701.4 million was transferred into the ITRF, $200 million into public school assistance programs, and $44.184 million into the BSF. Of the GRF biennium-ending fund balance $325.7 million was transferred to school building assistance; $293.185 million to the ITRF; $85.4 million to SchoolNet (a program to supply computers for classrooms); $4.6 million to interactive video distance learning; and $46.374 million to the BSF.

2000-01. The State’s financial situation varied substantially in the 2000-01 biennium. The first Fiscal Year of the biennium ended with a GRF cash balance of $1.506 billion and fund balance of $855.845 million. A transfer of $49.2 million from the balance increased the BSF to $1.002 billion (or 5% of GRF revenue for the preceding Fiscal Year). An additional $610.4 million was transferred to the ITRF.

In the middle of the second year of the biennium, the State enacted supplemental appropriations of $645.3 million to address shortfalls in its Medicaid and disability assistance programs. The State’s share of this additional funding was $247.6 million, with $125 million coming from Fiscal Year 2001 GRF spending reductions and the remainder from available GRF moneys. The reductions were implemented by OBM prior to March 1, 2001 by a

1 to 2% cut applying to most State departments and agencies. Expressly excluded from the reductions, in addition to debt service and rental payments relating to obligations, were elementary and secondary education.

In March 2001 new lowered revenue estimates for Fiscal Year 2001 and for Fiscal Years 2002 and 2003 were announced. Based on indications that the Ohio economy continued to be affected by the national economic downturn, GRF revenue estimates for Fiscal Year 2001 were reduced by $288 million. In addition, OBM projected higher than previously anticipated Medicaid expenditures. Among the more significant steps taken to ensure the positive GRF ending fund balance at June 30, 2001 were further spending reductions (with the same exceptions noted above for debt service and education) and authorization to transfer from the BSF to the GRF amounts necessary to ensure an ending GRF fund balance of $188.2 million. The State ended Fiscal Year 2001 with a GRF fund balance of $219.414 million making that transfer unnecessary.

2002-03. In the 2002-2003 biennium, ongoing and rigorous consideration was given by the Governor and the General Assembly to revenues and expenditures throughout Fiscal Years 2002-03, primarily as a result of continuing economic conditions, with budgetary pressures during this period were primarily due to continuing lower than anticipated levels of receipts from certain major revenue sources.

Consideration came in four general time frames – the June 2001 biennial appropriation act, late fall/early winter 2001, late spring and summer 2002, and late winter/spring 2003. Significant remedial steps included authorization to draw down and use the entire BSF balance, increased cigarette taxes, and use of tobacco settlement moneys previously earmarked for other purposes.

The biennial GRF appropriations act passed in June 2001 provided for biennial GRF expenditures of approximately $45.1 billion without increases in any major State taxes. That Act and the separate appropriations acts for the biennium included all necessary debt service and lease rental payments related to State obligations. That original appropriations act also provided for transfers to the GRF of $160 million from the BSF and $100 million from the Family Services Stabilization Fund aimed at achieving Fiscal Year and biennium ending positive GRF. fund balances, based on then current estimates and projections.

The Ohio economy continued to be negatively affected by the national economic downturn and by national and international events, and in October 2001 OBM lowered its GRF revenue estimates and projected GRF revenue shortfalls of $709 million for Fiscal Year 2002 and $763 million for Fiscal Year 2003. Executive and legislative actions were taken based on those new estimates, including:

Spending reductions and limits on hiring and major purchases. Governor-ordered spending reductions were at the annual rate of 6% for most State agencies, with lesser reductions for correctional and other institutional agencies, and with exemptions for primary and secondary education and the adjutant general.

December 2001 legislation, the more significant aspects of which included authorizing the additional transfer of up to $248 million from the BSF to the GRF during the current biennium, thereby reducing the estimated BSF balance to $607 million; reallocating to the GRF a $260 million portion of tobacco settlement receipts in Fiscal Years 2002 and 2003; and authorizing Ohio’s participation in a multi-state lottery game, estimated to generate approximately $40 million annually beginning in Fiscal Year 2003.

Continuing weak economic conditions and lower than anticipated personal income and corporate franchise tax receipts then led OBM in the spring of 2002 to project a higher estimated GRF revenue shortfalls of approximately $763 million in Fiscal Year 2002 and $1.15 billion in Fiscal Year 2003. Further executive and legislative actions were taken in Fiscal Year 2002 to ensure a positive GRF fund balance for Fiscal Year 2002 and the biennium. In addition to further appropriations and other management steps, those actions included legislation providing for additional transfers to the GRF of the then remaining BSF balance ($607 million) as needed in Fiscal Years 2002 and 2003, and of $50.8 million of unclaimed funds; $50 million reduction of the Fiscal Year 2002 ending GRF balance to $100 million; increased cigarette tax by 31¢ per pack (to a total 55¢ a pack), estimated by OBM to produce approximately $283 million in Fiscal Year 2003; additional transfers to the GRF of $345 million from tobacco settlement money received in Fiscal Years 2002 and 2003 previously earmarked for construction of elementary and secondary school facilities and replacing the moneys for that purpose with authorized general obligation bonds; and extension of the State income tax to Ohio-based trusts and “decoupling” certain Ohio business taxes from Federal tax law economic stimulus changes affecting business equipment depreciation schedules to produce approximately $283 million in Fiscal Year 2003.

Fiscal Year 2002 ended with positive GRF balances of $108.306 million (fund) and $619.217 million (cash) based on the remedial steps described above, including transfers of $289.6 million from tobacco settlement moneys and $534.3 million from the BSF (leaving a Fiscal Year 2002 BSF ending balance of $427.904 million, with that entire balance appropriated to GRF use if needed in Fiscal Year 2003).

On July 1, 2002, the Governor issued an executive order directing a total of approximately $375 million in GRF spending cutbacks for Fiscal Year 2003 reflecting prior budget balancing discussions with the General Assembly. Excluded from those department and agency cutbacks ranging up to 15% were elementary and secondary education, higher education, alcohol and drug addiction services, and the adjutant general. Also expressly excluded were appropriations for debt service including lease rental contracts and all State office building rent, and ad valorem property tax relief payments (made to local taxing entities).

Based on continuing reduced revenue collections (particularly, personal income taxes and sales tax receipts for the holidays) and projected additional Medicaid spending, OBM in late January 2003 announced an additional GRF shortfall of $720 million. The Governor ordered immediate additional reductions in spending intending to generate an estimated $121.6 million of GRF savings through the end of the Fiscal Year (expressly excepted were appropriations for or relating to debt service on State obligations).

The Governor also proposed and the General Assembly enacted by March 1, 2003, the following additional revenue enhancements, transfers and expenditure reductions for Fiscal Year 2003 to achieve a positive GRF fund balance at June 30, 2003 as then estimated by OBM: an additional 2.5% reduction in local government fund distributions to most subdivisions and local libraries, producing an estimated $30 million in savings; transfers to the GRF from unclaimed funds and various rotary funds; and a one-month acceleration in sales tax collections by vendors filing electronically, to produce $286 million.

To offset the General Assembly’s enactment of legislation that did not include proposed additional taxes on cigarettes and liquor, beer and wine, the Governor on March 25 ordered additional reductions in GRF appropriations spending aggregating $142.5 million for the balance of Fiscal Year 2003. Included were reductions (generally at an annualized rate of 2.5%) of $90.6 million in State foundation and parity aid to school districts and an additional $9.3 million in Department of Education administration spending, $39.2 million in instructional support to higher education institutions, and other selected reductions totaling $3.4 million. The Governor also identified approximately $20 million in excess food stamp administration funds available to offset the need for further expenditure reductions. Expressly excepted from those reductions were appropriations for or relating to debt service on State obligations.

Based on the Administration’s continuing monitoring of revenues, and as an anticipated step in the then ongoing 2004-05 biennial budget and appropriations process, OBM reported revised revenue estimates to the General Assembly on June 11, 2003. Those estimates revised Fiscal Year 2003 revenues downward by an additional $200 million from OBM’s January 2003 adjusted baseline, based primarily on updated income and sales tax receipts through May 31. The Governor and OBM addressed this additional Fiscal Year 2003 revenue shortfall through additional expenditure controls and by drawing upon $193.030 million of Federal block grant aid made available to the State prior to June 30 under a Federal law effective on May 28, 2003.

The State ended the 2002-03 biennium with a GRF fund and cash balances of $52.338 million and $396.539 million, respectively, and a balance in the BSF of $180.705 million.

Additional appropriations actions during the 2002-03 biennium, affecting most subdivisions and local libraries in the State, relate to the various local government assistance funds. The original appropriations act capped the amount to be distributed in Fiscal Years 2002 and 2003 to essentially the equivalent monthly payment amounts in Fiscal Years 2000 and 2001. Subsequent legislation amended the level to the lesser of those prior Fiscal Year amounts or the amount that would have been distributed under the standard formula.

2004-05. The GRF appropriations act for the Fiscal Year 2004-05 biennium was passed by the General Assembly and signed (with selective vetoes) by the Governor in June 2003. The Act provided for total GRF biennial revenues of approximately $48.95 billion and total GRF biennial expenditures of approximately $48.79 billion. That Act and the separate appropriations acts for the biennium included all necessary debt service and lease-rental payments related to State obligations.

Among other expenditure controls: Medicaid cost containment measures including pharmacy cost management initiatives, limited expenditure growth for institutional services and implementation of managed care for higher-cost populations; continued phase-out of certain tangible personal property tax relief payments to local governments; the closing by consolidation of three institutional facilities during the biennium; adjustments in eligibility guidelines for subsidized child care from 185% to 150% of the Federal poverty level and freezing certain reimbursement rates; no compensation increases for most State employees in Fiscal Year 2004 and limited onetime increases in Fiscal Year 2005; and continued limitation on local government assistance fund distributions to most subdivisions and local libraries to the lesser of the equivalent monthly payments in Fiscal Year 2003 or the amount that would have been distributed under the standard formula.

The GRF expenditure authorizations for the 2004-05 biennium also reflected revenue enhancement actions contained in the Act including:

A one-cent increase in the State sales tax (to six percent) for the biennium (expiring June 30, 2005), projected to generate approximately $1.25 billion in each Fiscal Year.

Expansion of the sales tax base to include dry-cleaning/laundry services, towing, personal care and other services, and satellite television, projected in the aggregate to produce approximately $69 million annually. (The inclusion of satellite television in the sales tax base, projected to produce approximately $21 million annually, is subject to an ongoing legal challenge.)
Moving local telephone companies from the public utility tax base to the corporate franchise and sales tax, projected to produce approximately $29 million annually.
Elimination of the sales tax exemption for WATS and 800 telecom services coupled with the enactment of a more limited exemption for call centers, projected to produce approximately $64 million annually.
Adjustments in the corporate franchise tax through the adoption of the Uniform Division of Income for Tax Purposes Act (UDITPA) for apportionment of business income among states, and an increase in the corporate alternative minimum tax, projected in the aggregate to produce approximately $35 million annually.

The Act also authorized and OBM on June 30, 2004 transferred $234.7 million of proceeds received from the national tobacco settlement into the GRF. In addition, the Act authorized the draw down during the biennium of Federal block grant and Medicaid assistance aid made available to the State under a Federal law effective May 28, 2003. OBM drew down $211.6 million and $316.8 million of those Federal monies in Fiscal Years 2004 and 2005, respectively.

Based on regular monthly monitoring of revenues and expenditures, OBM in March 2004 announced revised GRF revenue projections for Fiscal Years 2004 and 2005 based primarily on reduced revenue collections from personal income taxes. In response to OBM reducing its GRF revenue projection by $247.1 million (1.02%) for Fiscal Year 2004 and by $372.7 million (1.48%) for Fiscal Year 2005, the Governor ordered Fiscal Year 2004 expenditure reductions of approximately $100 million. On July 1, the Governor ordered Fiscal Year 2005 expenditure cuts of approximately $118 million and a reduction of $50 million in State spending on Medicaid reflecting an increased Federal share of certain Medicaid services. Expressly excluded from those reductions are debt service and lease rental payments relating to State obligations, State basic aid to elementary and secondary education, instructional subsidies and scholarships for public higher education, in-home care for seniors and certain job creation programs. The balance of those revenue reductions were offset by GRF expenditure lapses and, for Fiscal Year 2005, elimination of an anticipated $100 million year-end transfer to the BSF while maintaining a one-half percent year-end GRF fund balance.

The State ended Fiscal Year 2004 with a GRF fund balance of $157.509 million. Improving economic conditions had a positive effect on revenue in Fiscal Year 2005. With GRF revenue receipts modestly outperforming estimates for much of the Fiscal Year, OBM in June 2005 increased its GRF revenue estimates by $470.7 million. Final Fiscal Year 2005 GRF revenue came in $67.4 million above that revised estimate. With Fiscal Year 2005 spending close to original estimates, the State made the following Fiscal Year-end allocations and transfers: $60 million to address a prior-year liability in the Temporary Assistance to Needy Families program; $40 million to a new disaster services contingency fund; $50 million to the State’s share of the school facilities construction program; and $394.2 million to the BSF. After these and certain smaller transfers, the State ended Fiscal Year 2005 and the biennium with a GRF fund balance of $127.8 million and a BSF balance of $574.2 million.

2006-07. Consistent with State law, the Governor’s Executive Budget for the 2006-07 biennium was released in February 2005 and introduced in the General Assembly. After extended hearings and review, the GRF appropriations Act for the 2006-07 biennium was passed by the General Assembly and signed (with selective vetoes) by the Governor on June 30, 2005. That Act provides for total GRF biennial revenue of approximately $51.5 billion (a 3.8% increase over the 2004-05 biennial revenue) and total GRF biennial appropriations of approximately $51.3 billion (a 5.0% increase over the 2004-05 biennial expenditures). Spending increases for major program categories over the 2004-05 actual expenditures are: 5.8% for Medicaid (the Act also included a number of Medicaid reform and cost containment initiatives); 3.4% for higher education; 4.2% for elementary and secondary education; 5.5% for corrections and youth services; and 4.8% for mental health and mental retardation. The Executive Budget, the GRF appropriations Act and the separate appropriations acts for the biennium included all necessary debt service and lease rental payments related to State obligations.

The GRF expenditure authorizations for the 2006-07 biennium reflect and are supported by a significant restructuring of major State taxes, including:

A 21% reduction in State personal income tax rates phased in at 4.2% per year over the 2005 through 2009 tax years.
Phased elimination of the State corporate franchise tax at a rate of approximately 20% per year over the 2006 through 2010 tax years (except for its continuing application to financial institutions and certain affiliates of insurance companies and financial institutions).

Implementation of a new commercial activities tax (CAT) on gross receipts from doing business in Ohio that phased in over the 2006 through 2010 fiscal years. When fully phased in, the CAT will be levied at a rate of 0.26% on gross receipts in excess of $1,000,000. Litigation has been pending since 2006 challenging the permissibility of the inclusion in the CAT tax base of food sales for off-premise consumption, and litigation was filed in March 2008 challenging the application of the CAT to motor fuels. On September 2, 2008, an appeals court held that the CAT may not be applied to the wholesale sale of food and the retail sale of food for human consumption off premises. The State immediately announced its intention to appeal that decision to the Ohio Supreme Court, and the Court of Appeals decision has been stayed pending that appeal. When fully phased in, the CAT is projected to produce approximately $1.680 billion annually with $188 million of that annual amount expected from its application to those food sales and $139.1 million of that amount attributable to its application to motor fuels.

A 5.5% State sales and use tax (decreased from the 6.0% rate for the 2004-05 biennium).
An increase in the cigarette tax from $0.55 per pack (of 20 cigarettes) to $1.25 per pack.

The then Governor signed into law on June 5, 2006 legislation enacted by the General Assembly imposing a limitation on most GRF appropriations commencing with the 2008-09 biennium. This statutory limitation initially uses Fiscal Year 2007 GRF appropriations as a baseline and then applies an annual growth factor of the greater of 3.5% or the sum of the inflation rates and rate of State population change. Every fourth fiscal year thereafter becomes a new base year. GRF appropriations for State debt service payments are expressly excepted from this statutory limitation. This legislation was enacted as an alternative to a proposed “tax and expenditure limitation” (TEL) amendment to the Ohio Constitution that was withdrawn from the November 2006 general election ballot.

The State ended Fiscal Year 2006 with a GRF cash balance of $1.528 billion and a GRF fund balance of $1.025 billion. Of that ending GRF fund balance, the State carried forward $631.933 million to cover the variance of Fiscal Year 2007 GRF appropriations over estimated revenue, to offset the one-time cost of accelerating the phase-in of reductions in State personal income tax withholding rates, and to maintain 0.5% of Fiscal Year 2007 GRF revenue as an ending fund balance. The remaining $394.034 million was deposited into the BSF increasing its balance to $1.012 billion (which includes $40.045 million in receipts collected from a broad tax amnesty initiative and deposited in June 2006). The State ended Fiscal Year 2007 with a GRF cash balance of $1.432 billion and a GRF fund balance of $215.534 million.

Current Biennium. Consistent with State law, the Governor’s Executive Budget for the 2008-2009 biennium was released in March 2007 and introduced in the General Assembly. After extended hearings and review, the GRF appropriations Act for the 2008-09 biennium was passed by the General Assembly and signed (with selective vetoes) by the Governor on June 30, 2007. Reflecting the continued implementation of the restructuring of State

taxes commenced in 2006-07, that Act was based upon then estimated total GRF biennial revenues of approximately $53.5 billion (a 3.9% increase over the 2006-07 biennial revenue) and total GRF biennial appropriations of approximately $52.4 billion (a 2.1% increase over the 2006-07 biennial expenditures). Spending increases for major program categories over the 2006-07 actual expenditures were: 2.2% for Medicaid (the Act also included a number of Medicaid reform and cost containment initiatives); 13.2% for higher education; 5.25% for elementary and secondary education; 4.92% for corrections and youth services; and 4.7% for mental health and mental retardation. The Executive Budget and the GRF appropriations Act complied with the law discussed above for the 2006-07 biennium limiting appropriations for the 2008-09 biennium. The Executive Budget, the GRF appropriations Act and the separate appropriations acts for the biennium included all necessary debt service and lease rental payments related to State obligations.

The original GRF expenditure authorizations for the 2008-09 biennium reflected and were supported by tax law changes contained in the Act, including:

Restructuring nonresident tax exemption for Ohio motor vehicle purchases projected to produce approximately $54.0 million for the biennium.

Restoring local government fund support by committing a set percent of all tax revenues deposited into the GRF. Local governments will receive 3.7% of total GRF tax revenues annually and local libraries will receive 2.22% of total GRF tax revenues annually.
Eliminating the $300 per month cigarette and tobacco product importation exemption projected to produce approximately $25.0 million annually.

The GRF appropriations Act also created the Buckeye Tobacco Settlement Financing Authority to securitize tobacco settlement receipts payable to the State under the November 1998 national tobacco settlement. On October 29, 2007, the Authority issued its $5.53 billion Tobacco Settlement Asset-Backed Bonds 2007 to fund capital expenditures for higher education ($938.0 million) and common school ($4.112 billion) purposes over three years in lieu of the State issuing GRF-backed general obligation bonds to fund those capital expenditures. The resulting debt service savings to the GRF is funding the expansion of the homestead exemption property tax relief program in the Act. The Act reprograms all prior General Assembly allocations of anticipated tobacco settlement receipts to enable the pledge of 100% of those receipts to the payment of debt service on the Authority’s obligations. The State had previously enacted legislation allocating its anticipated share of those receipts through Fiscal Year 2012 and making a partial allocation thereafter through Fiscal Year 2025. Except for Fiscal Years 2002 through 2004, none of the receipts were applied to existing operating programs of the State. (See above for a discussion of a portion of those receipts used to offset a portion of GRF revenue shortfalls in Fiscal Years 2002 through 2004). Under those previously enacted allocations, the largest amount was to be applied to elementary and secondary school capital expenditures, with other amounts allocated for smoking cessation and other health-related purposes, biomedical research and technology transfer, and assistance to the tobacco growing areas in the State.

With the Ohio economy expected to be negatively affected by the national economic downturn, in January 2008 OBM reduced its original GRF revenue projections by $172.6 million for Fiscal Year 2008 and $385.1 million for Fiscal Year 2009. Based on those lower GRF revenue estimates and increased costs associated with rising Medicaid caseloads, OBM projected a budgetary shortfall for the current biennium of $733.0 million.

Executive and legislative actions were taken based on the new OBM estimates, including:

The Governor on January 31, 2008 issued an executive order directing expenditure reductions and spending controls totaling approximately $509.1 million for the biennium as well as limitations on major purchases, hiring and travel, which amount has since been reduced to $402.0 million based primarily on the transfers of unspent agency appropriations and the June 2008 action described below. Allocation of those reductions has been determined by the OBM Director in consultation with the affected agencies and departments, with annual expenditure reductions ranging up to 10%. An employee reduction plan was also announced aimed at reducing the State’s workforce by up to 2,700 through attrition, unfilled vacancies and an early retirement incentive program. Expressly excluded from the cutbacks are appropriations for or relating to debt service on State obligations, State higher education instructional support, foundation formula support for primary and secondary education, Medicaid entitlement programs, and ad valorem property tax relief payments.

Transfer unspent agency appropriations totaling $120.2 million in Fiscal Year 2008 and $78.0 million in Fiscal Year 2009,
Authorizing expansion of the State-run lottery system to include “keno” games currently projected to generate $65.0 million in Fiscal Year 2009.

In June 2008, the General Assembly also passed legislation that provides for, among other things, transfers to the GRF (after a selective line-item veto) of up to $63.3 million from the BSF for State’s share of increased Medicaid costs, $55.0 million from rotary funds and $25.0 million in uncommitted interest earnings from proceeds of the State’s Tobacco Settlement Asset-Backed Bonds.

The State ended Fiscal Year 2008 with a GRF cash balance of $1.682 billion and a GRF fund balance of $807.566 million. Of the ending GRF fund balance, the State maintained $133.313 million reflecting one-half of one percent of Fiscal Year 2008 GRF revenues as the required ending fund balance and carried forward $674.253 million to cover the expected and planned for variance of Fiscal Year 2009 GRF appropriations over estimated revenue. The BSF balance at the end of Fiscal Year 2008 was $1.012 billion (subject to currently authorized transfers of up to $263.333 million as described herein).

In March 2008, in response to the national economic downturn, the Governor proposed a $1.7 billion economic stimulus plan to stimulate the Ohio economy through investments in logistics and distribution, bioproducts and bio-medical research, advanced and renewable energy, local government infrastructure, conservation projects and brownfield revitalization projects. These investments were to be funded primarily through new GRF bond-backed capital appropriations. After extensive hearings and review, the General Assembly in June passed a $1.57 billion economic stimulus package that mirrored the purposes proposed by the Governor and added funding for higher education workforce programs and expanded the State’s historic preservation tax credits. That legislation reconfigured the sources of funding for the stimulus plan to include in addition to GRF-backed bonds, $230.0 million of cash from the Ohio Tobacco Prevention Foundation (this transfer is subject to a pending legal challenge), $370.0 million in GRF operating appropriations to be made over the next five fiscal years, and $184.0 million in bonds backed by net profit from the State’s liquor enterprise, and directs the OBM Director to transfer $200.0 million from the BSF for funding of certain local government infrastructure road and bridge projects. The Governor line item-vetoed the July 1, 2008 deadline by which the OBM Director must make that BSF transfer, emphasizing GRF budget stabilization as the proper first priority for utilization of BSF moneys and allowing time to explore other funding options for this local government infrastructure portion of the economic stimulus plan. While it is not possible at this time to determine the extent to which this BSF transfer will be needed, the available balance in the BSF would be reduced to $748.9 million should this transfer occur in addition to the above $63.3 million BSF transfer for increased Medicaid costs.

With the Ohio economy continuing to be negatively affected by the national economic downturn, OBM on September 10, 2008 announced a $540.0 million further reduction in its GRF revenue projections for Fiscal Year 2009 and a projected Fiscal Year budgetary shortfall of the same amount. Executive actions announced to offset the projected shortfall include:

Use of additional planned Fiscal Year-end lapses and GRF carry forward totaling $126.4 million.
Use of balances in various non-GRF “rotary funds” totaling $112.0 million.
Transfer to the GRF an additional $40.0 million of interest earnings on the proceeds of the tobacco securitization referred to above.
As authorized by June 2008 legislation referred to above, a transfer to the GRF (subject to Controlling Board approval) of $63.3 million to pay for previously authorized Medicaid cost expenditures.

The $198.3 million balance is being offset by a 4.75% reduction in most agency appropriations, which does not apply to appropriations for debt service or tax relief, Medicaid and disability financial assistance, Department of Education aid to local school districts, the Departments of Rehabilitation and Corrections and Youth Services and selected others.

On December 1, 2008, OBM announced a further $640.4 million reduction in GRF revenue projections for Fiscal Year 2009 expected to result in a projected Fiscal Year budgetary shortfall of the same amount. Executive actions announced to offset much of that projected shortfall include:

Reducing total GRF Medicaid spending by $311.1 million by using cash from non-GRF Medicaid accounts and the corresponding Federal share previously planned for use in Fiscal Year 2010.
Reducing total Medicaid program spending by $21.3 million by enhanced focus on use of other third party liability sources and other program savings exceeding original estimates.
Reducing other GRF expenditures by $180.5 million through a further 5.75% reduction in most agency appropriations, which will not apply to appropriations for debt service or tax relief, Medicaid and disability financial assistance, Department of Education aid to local school districts, the Departments of Rehabilitation and Corrections and Youth Services and selected others. These reductions are in addition to the approximately $1.27 billion of 2008-2009 biennium budget adjustments already undertaken.

The remaining $131.9 million of the shortfall is expected to be offset by additional Federal Medical Assistance Payments (FMAP) to be received under Federal stimulus legislation previously introduced in the 110th Congress and currently expected to be reintroduced in the 111th Congress, that would increase Federal Medicaid match to the GRF by that amount (after taking into account loss of Federal match from the two Medicaid related actions outlined above). OBM is developing further alternatives to accomplish this needed remaining offset if this Federal stimulus legislation is not approved by the Congress and these FMAP payments are not received as currently expected.

Based on these actions and Congress’ expected approval of the FMAP payment (or implementation of the further offsets) referred to above, OBM is projecting a positive GRF fund balance at June 30, 2009. As discussed above, the State is effectively precluded by its Constitution from ending a Fiscal Year or a biennium in a “deficit” position. The Governor and OBM will continue to closely monitor revenues and expenditures, take needed executive actions and work with the General Assembly to ensure a positive GRF ending fund balance.

OBM prepares a financial report summarizing its analyses at the end of each month. The most recent Monthly Financial Reports are accessible via OBM’s home page on the Internet at http://www.obm.ohio.gov/finrep, and copies are available upon request to OBM.

Because GRF cash receipts and disbursements do not precisely coincide, temporary GRF cash flow deficiencies may occur in some months, particularly the middle months, of a Fiscal Year. Statutory provisions provide for effective management by permitting the adjustment of payment schedules (as was done during some prior Fiscal Years) and the use of a “Total Operating Fund” (“TOF”). The State has not and does not do external revenue anticipation borrowing.

The TOF includes the total consolidated cash balances, revenues, disbursements and transfers of the GRF and several other specified funds (including the BSF). The TOF cash balances are consolidated only for the purpose of meeting cash flow requirements, and, except for the GRF, a positive cash balance must be maintained for each discrete fund included in the TOF. The GRF is permitted to incur a temporary cash deficiency by drawing upon the available consolidated cash balance in the TOF. The amount of that permitted GRF cash deficiency at any time is limited to 10% of GRF revenues for the then preceding Fiscal Year.

The State has planned for and encountered some monthly GRF cash flow deficiencies in all recent Fiscal Years. For example, GRF cash flow deficiencies have ranged from occurring in 11 months in Fiscal Years 2003 and 2004 to four months in Fiscal Years 1995, 1997 and 2000. In recent fiscal years, the highest GRF end-of-month cash flow deficiencies were $1.660 billion in Fiscal Year 2005, $1.677 billion in Fiscal Year 2006, and $601.237 million in Fiscal Year 2007. GRF cash flow deficiencies have been and are expected by OBM to remain within the TOF limitations discussed above.

The incurrence or assumption of debt by the State without a popular vote is, with limited exceptions, prohibited by the State Constitution. The State may incur debt to cover casual deficits or to address failures in revenues or to meet expenses not otherwise provided for, but limited in amount to $750,000. The Constitution expressly precludes the State from assuming the debts of any county, city, town or township, or of any corporation. (An exception in both cases is for debts incurred to repel invasion, suppress insurrection, or defend the State in war.) The Constitution provides that “Except the debts above specified . . . no debt whatever shall hereafter be created by, or on behalf of the state.”

By 18 constitutional amendments approved from 1921 to present, Ohio voters have authorized the incurrence of State general obligation (GO) debt and the pledge of taxes or excises to its payment. All related to the financing of capital facilities, except for three that funded bonuses for veterans and one that funded coal technology research and development. Currently, tax supported general obligation debt of the State is authorized to be incurred for the following purposes: highways, local infrastructure, coal development, natural resources, higher education, common schools, conservation, research and development, and site development.

State special obligation debt, the owners or holders of which are not given the right to have excises or taxes levied by the General Assembly to pay principal and interest, is authorized for specified purposes by Section 2i of Article VIII of the Constitution. Debt service payments are subject to biennial appropriations by the General Assembly pursuant to leases or agreements entered into by the State.

As of January 2009, the maximum annual debt service on all obligations payable from the GRF is $1.138 billion in Fiscal Year 2009.

Although supported by the general obligation pledge, highway debt is also backed by a pledge of and has always been paid from the State’s motor fuel taxes and other highway user receipts that are constitutionally restricted in use to highway related purposes. The maximum annual debt service on such obligations payable from such receipts is $214.355 million in Fiscal Year 2009.

In addition to its issuance of highway bonds, the State has financed selected highway infrastructure projects by entering into agreements that call for payments to be made from Federal transportation funds allocated to the State, subject to biennial appropriations by the General Assembly (so called “Federal Grant Anticipation Revenue Vehicle (GARVEE) Bonds “). The highest annual State payment under those agreements in any current or future Fiscal Year is $157.4 million in Fiscal Year 2009. In the event of any insufficiency in those anticipated Federal allocations to make payments on State bonds, the payments are to be made from any lawfully available Federal moneys appropriated to ODOT for the purpose.

The Ohio Building Authority (OBA) issues special obligations for facilities to house branches and agencies of State government and their functions, including: State office buildings and facilities for the Department of Administrative Services and others (DAS), the Department of Transportation (ODOT) and the Department of Public Safety (DPS); juvenile detention facilities for the Department of Youth Services (DYS); Department of Rehabilitation and Correction (DRC) prisons and correctional facilities including certain local and community based facilities; office buildings for the Bureau of Workers’ Compensation (BWC) and Department of Natural Resources (DNR); and school district technology and security facilities. The Treasurer also issues obligations for mental health, parks and recreation, and cultural facilities purposes and to refund certain bonds previously issued for higher education purposes, and has previously issued obligations for elementary and secondary school facilities. Debt service on obligations issued under Section 2i of Article VIII is paid from GRF appropriations, with the exception of debt issued for ODOT and DPS facilities (paid from highway user receipts) and for BWC facilities (paid from the BWC Administrative Cost Fund).

A statewide economic development program assists the financing of facilities and equipment for industry, commerce, research and distribution, including technology innovation, by providing loans and loan guarantees. The law authorizes the issuance of State bonds and notes secured by a pledge of portions of the State profits from liquor sales. The General Assembly has authorized the issuance of these obligations with a general maximum of $630 million to be outstanding at any one time, of which not more than $84 million may be issued for eligible advanced energy projects and not more than $100 million may be issued for eligible logistics and distribution projects. The aggregate amount from the liquor profits to be used in any Fiscal Year in connection with these bonds may not exceed $63 million. The total of unpaid guaranteed loan amounts and unpaid principal of direct loans may not exceed $800 million. Pursuant to a 2000 constitutional amendment, the State has issued $150 million of bonds for revitalization purposes that are also payable from State liquor profits. The maximum annual debt service on all State bonds payable from State liquor profits is $45.32 million in Fiscal Year 2009.

State agencies also have participated in office building and non-highway transportation projects that have local as well as State use and benefit, in connection with which the State has entered into lease-purchase agreements with terms ranging from 7 to 20 years. Certificates of Participation (COPs) have been issued that represent fractionalized interests in or are payable from the State’s anticipated payments. The maximum annual payment under those agreements from GRF appropriations is $25.371 million in Fiscal Year 2017 and the total

GRF-supported principal amount outstanding is $203.075 million. Payments by the State are subject to biennial appropriations by the General Assembly with the lease terms subject to renewal if appropriations are made. The OBM Director’s approval of such agreements is required, particularly if COPs are to be publicly-offered in connection with those agreements.

Certain State agencies issue revenue bonds that are payable from revenues from or relating to revenue producing facilities, such as those issued by the Ohio Turnpike Commission. By judicial interpretation, such revenue bonds do not constitute “debt” under the constitutional provisions described above. The Constitution authorizes State bonds for certain housing purposes (issued by the Ohio Housing Finance Agency) to which tax moneys may not be obligated or pledged.

As part of its debt management, the State has entered into interest rate swap agreements in connection with seven variable rate bond issues, six in a weekly interest rate period and one in a term interest rate period --swapping to a synthetic fixed rate in connection with each of the seven issues in a weekly rate period, and swapping to a synthetic variable rate in connection with the issue in a term rate period. The State has entered into three swaps in connection with one series of its general obligation bonds for common schools – swapping to a synthetic variable rate through the expiration of the initial term rate period and entering into a forward starting synthetic fixed rate swap from that expiration date through the final maturity of those bonds. The State has also entered into one synthetic variable rate swap in connection with $10.490 million outstanding principal amount of general obligation infrastructure fixed rate bonds issued in 2003 with a final maturity of February 1, 2010. For all its swap agreements, the State has established minimum uncollateralized counterparty rating thresholds of AA-/Aa3. Under each of these agreements, the counterparty is required to progressively post collateral securing the State’s position if the counterparty’s credit ratings fall below these minimum thresholds.

The State currently has $708.420 million in outstanding general obligation variable rate debt. Liquidity is provided by the State and it is not anticipated that a liquidity facility will be provided by any other party.

A 1999 constitutional amendment provides an annual debt service “cap” applicable to future issuances of State general obligations and other State direct obligations payable from the GRF or net State lottery proceeds. Generally, and except for the additional $650 million of general obligation debt approved by the voters in November 2005 for research and development and the development of sites for industry, commerce, distribution and research development, new bonds may not be issued if future Fiscal Year debt service on those new and the then outstanding bonds of those categories would exceed 5% of the total estimated GRF revenues plus net State lottery proceeds during the Fiscal Year of issuance. Those direct obligations of the State include, for example, special obligation bonds that are paid from GRF appropriations, but exclude bonds such as highway bonds that are paid from highway user receipts. Pursuant to the amendment and implementing legislation, the Governor has designated the OBM Director as the State official to make the 5% determinations and certifications. Application of the cap may be waived in a particular instance by a three-fifths vote of each house of the General Assembly and may be changed by future constitutional amendments.

The General Assembly has appropriated sufficient moneys to meet all payments related to the debt service requirements on all of the State’s obligations described above for the current biennium (ending June 30, 2009).

The State’s Constitution directs or restricts the use of certain revenues. Highway fees and excise taxes, including gasoline taxes, are limited in use to highway-related purposes. Not less than 50% of the receipts from State income and estate and inheritance taxes must be returned to the originating political subdivisions and school districts. State lottery profits are allocated to elementary, secondary, vocational and special education program purposes, including application to debt service on obligations issued to finance capital facilities for a system of common schools.

Under the current financial structure, Ohio’s 613 public school districts and 49 joint vocational school districts receive a major portion (but less than 50%) of their operating moneys from State subsidy programs (the primary portion of which is known as the “Foundation Program”) distributed in accordance with statutory formulae that take into account both local needs and local taxing capacity. The Foundation Program amounts have steadily increased in recent years, including small aggregate increases even in those Fiscal Years in which appropriations cutbacks were imposed.

School districts also rely heavily upon receipts from locally voted taxes. In part because of provisions of some State laws, such as that partially limiting the increase (without further vote of the local electorate) in voted property tax collections that would otherwise result from increased assessed valuations, some school districts have experienced varying degrees of difficulty in meeting mandated and discretionary increased costs. Local electorates have largely determined the total moneys available for their schools. Locally elected boards of education and their school administrators are responsible for managing school programs and budgets within statutory requirements.

The State’s present school subsidy formulas are structured to encourage both program quality and local taxing effort. Until the late 1970’s, although there were some temporary school closings, most local financial difficulties that arose were successfully resolved by the local districts themselves by some combination of voter approval of additional property tax levies, adjustments in program offerings, or other measures. For more than 20 years, requirements of law and levels of State funding have sufficed to prevent school closings for financial reasons, which in any case are prohibited by current law.

To broaden the potential local tax revenue base, local school districts also may submit for voter approval income taxes on the district income of individuals and estates (and effective July 1, 2005, municipal income taxes that may be shared with school districts). Many districts have submitted the question, and income taxes are currently approved in 145 districts.

Litigation was commenced in Ohio courts in 1991 questioning the constitutionality of Ohio’s system of school funding and compliance with the constitutional requirement that the State provide a “thorough and efficient system of common schools.” On December 11, 2002, the Ohio Supreme Court, in a 4-3 decision on a motion to reconsider its own decision rendered in September 2001, concluded (as it had in its 1997 and 2000 opinions in that litigation) that the State did not comply with that requirement, even after again noting and crediting significant State steps in recent years.

In its prior decisions, the Court stated as general base threshold requirements that every school district have enough funds to operate, an ample number of teachers, sound and safe buildings, and equipment sufficient for all students to be afforded an educational opportunity.

With particular respect to funding sources, the Court concluded in 1997 and 2000 decisions that property taxes no longer may be the primary means of school funding in Ohio.

On March 4, 2003, the plaintiffs’ filed with the original trial court a motion to schedule and conduct a conference to address compliance with the orders of the court in that case, the State petitioned the Supreme Court to issue a writ prohibiting that conference on compliance, and the trial court subsequently petitioned the Supreme Court for guidance as to the proper course to follow. On May 16, 2003, the Supreme Court granted that writ and ordered the dismissal of the motion before the trial court. On October 20, 2003 the United States Supreme Court declined to accept the plaintiffs’ subsequent petition requesting further review of the case.

The General Assembly has taken several steps, including significantly increasing State funding for public schools, as discussed below. In addition, at the November 1999 election electors approved a constitutional amendment authorizing the issuance of general obligation debt for school buildings and for higher education facilities. December 2000 legislation addressed certain mandated programs and reserves, characterized the plaintiffs and the Court as “unfunded mandates”.

Appropriations for school funding in other recent bienniums were: $16.4 billion in the 2006-07 biennium (4.5% increase), $15.7 billion in the 2004-05 biennium (3.3% increase), $15.2 billion in the 2002-03 biennium (17% increase), $13.3 billion in the 2000-01 biennium (15% increase), $11.6 billion in the 1998-99 biennium (18.3% increase), and $10.1 billion in the 1996-97 biennium (13.6% increase). Those total State appropriations exclude non-GRF and Federal appropriations, but include appropriations from the GRF and the lottery profits education fund (LPEF). Those lottery profits totaled $648.106 million in Fiscal Year 2004, $645.137 million in Fiscal Year 2005, $646.276 million in Fiscal Year 2006 (which excludes $5.820 million transferred to the Deferred Prize Fund), and $669.327 million in Fiscal Year 2007. Ohio participation in the multi-state lottery commenced on May, 2002. A constitutional provision requires that net lottery profits be paid into the LPEF to be used solely for the support of elementary, secondary, vocational and special education purposes, including application to debt service on general obligation bonds to finance common school facilities. State appropriations for the purpose made for the 2008-09 biennium are $17.2 billion (4.9% over the previous biennium), representing an increase of 1.7% in Fiscal Year 2008 over 2007 and 3.8% in Fiscal Year 2009 over 2008.

In response to the 1997 Ohio Supreme Court decision holding certain provisions for local school district borrowing unconstitutional, the General Assembly created the school district solvency assistance program. Beginning in Fiscal Year 1999, local school districts in fiscal emergency status as certified by the Auditor of State could apply for an advancement of future year Foundation Program distributions. The amount advanced was then deducted, interest free, from the district’s foundation payments over the following two-year period. Six school districts received a total of approximately $12.1 million in solvency assistance advancements during Fiscal Year 1999, with another six districts receiving a total of approximately $8.657 million in Fiscal Year 2000. This solvency assistance program was held to be not in compliance with the Constitution by the Supreme Court and as a result was restructured in Fiscal Year 2001, including a modification to allow districts that experience an unforeseen catastrophic event to apply for a grant. In Fiscal Year 2006, one district received a solvency advance in the amount of $41 million, while two districts received solvency advances totaling $16.937 million in Fiscal Year 2007 and one district received a solvency advance in the amount of $10.380 million in Fiscal Year 2008. No districts received grants as a result of catastrophic events from Fiscal Year 2006 to Fiscal Year 2008.

Federal courts have ruled that the State shared joint liability with the local school districts for segregation in public schools in Cincinnati, Cleveland, Columbus, Dayton and Lorain. Subsequent trial court orders directed that remedial costs be shared by the State and the respective local districts. For that purpose, recent appropriations, decreasing in each biennium, were $100.800 million in 1998-99, $23.7 million in 2000-01, and $1.0 million in 2002-03. All cases were settled prior to the end of Fiscal Year 2003 and there is no further State liability.

Constitutional amendments relating to taxation, revenues, expenditures, debt or other subjects may be proposed by action of three-fifths of the members elected to each house of the General Assembly or by initiative petition signed by electors numbering at least 10% of the total number of votes last cast for the office of governor. Adoption of a proposed amendment requires approval by a majority of electors voting on it at a statewide election.

The State’s Constitution expressly provides that the State General Assembly has no power to pass laws impairing the obligations of contracts.

At the present time, the State does not levy any ad valorem taxes on real or tangible personal property. Local taxing districts and political subdivisions currently levy such taxes. The State’s Constitution limits the amount of the aggregate levy of ad valorem property taxes, without a vote of the electors or municipal charter provision, to 1% of true value in money, and statutes limit the amount of that aggregate levy, without a vote or charter provision, to 10 mills per $1 of assessed valuation -- commonly referred to in the context of Ohio local government finance as the “ten-mill limitation.”

Although manufacturing (including auto-related manufacturing) remains an integral part of the State’s economy, the greatest growth in Ohio employment in recent years has been in the non-manufacturing sectors. In 2005, Ohio’s economic output as measured by its gross state product (GSP) totaled $442 billion, 3.6% of the national GSP and seventh largest among the states. The State ranks third within the manufacturing sector as a whole ($85 billion) and third in durable goods ($57 billion). As a percent of Ohio’s 2005 GSP, manufacturing was responsible for 19.3%, with 26.4% attributable to the goods-producing sectors and 32.5% to business services sectors, including finance, insurance and real estate. Ohio is the seventh largest exporting state, with 2005 merchandise exports totaling $34.8 billion. The State’s leading export products are machinery (including electrical machinery) and motor vehicles, which together accounted for approximately 57% of that total. In addition, with 14.2 million acres (of a total land area of 26.4 acres) in farmland and an estimated 75,700 individual farms, agriculture combined with related agricultural sectors is an important segment of Ohio’s economy. Ohio’s 2007 crop production value of $4.4 billion represented 3.0% of the U.S. total value. Ohio ranks in the top six states in the production of chicken and layer inventory, eggs, swiss cheese, and tomatoes. In 2007, Ohio’s agricultural sector output totaled $8.4 billion with agricultural export shares (primarily soybeans, feed grains and wheat, and their related products) estimated at a value of $2.2 billion.

The availability of natural resources, such as water and energy, is of vital nationwide concern. Ohio has large quantities of these important natural resources. With Lake Eerie and the Ohio River on its borders, and many lakes and streams throughout the State, water is readily available for all uses. Additionally, Ohio has sizable coal resources, ranking seventh among the states in coal reserves and fourteenth in coal production in 2007.

Payroll employment in Ohio, in the diversifying employment base, since 2000, has increased in 2001, decreased in 2002 and 2003, increased in 2004 through 2006, and `decreased in 2007. Growth in recent years has been concentrated among nonmanufacturing industries, with manufacturing employment tapering off since its 1969 peak. The “nonmanufacturing” sector now employs approximately 86% of all nonagricultural payroll workers in Ohio. The average unemployment rate in Ohio has lately been higher than the national rate. For example, Ohio was 7.3%, compared to the national rate of 6.7% (seasonally adjusted) for November 2008.

As of the date of this Statement of Additional Information, the State’s general obligation bonds are rated Aa1, AA+ and AA+ by Moody’s, Standard & Poor’s and Fitch, respectively, although in February 2008, Moody’s dropped the State’s future credit outlook to “negative” while affirming its rating of Aa1, and in December 2008, Fitch dropped the State’s future credit outlook to “negative” while affirming its rating of AA+.

Special Considerations Regarding Investment in Pennsylvania State-Specific Obligations. The Pennsylvania Municipal Money Market Portfolio (the “Fund”) will invest most of its net assets in securities issued by or on behalf of the State of Pennsylvania, political subdivisions of the State, or agencies or instrumentalities of the State or its political subdivisions, the interest from which is exempt from Pennsylvania personal income taxes (“Pennsylvania State-Specific Obligations”). The concentration of investments in Pennsylvania State-Specific Obligations by the Pennsylvania Municipal Money Market Portfolio raises special investment considerations. In particular, changes in the economic condition and governmental policies of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and its municipalities could adversely affect the value of the Pennsylvania Municipal Money Market Portfolio and its portfolio securities. This section briefly describes current economic trends in Pennsylvania, and constitutes only a brief summary of some of the many complex factors that may have an effect on the Pennsylvania economy. The information set forth below is largely derived from official statements prepared in connection with debt offerings relating to Commonwealth of Pennsylvania General Obligation Bonds that are generally available to investors. No independent verification has been made of the following information.

Many factors affect the financial condition of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania (sometimes referred to herein as the “Commonwealth”) and its political subdivisions, such as social, environmental and economic conditions, many of which are not within the control of such entities. Pennsylvania and certain of its counties, cities and school districts and public bodies have from time to time in the past encountered financial difficulties which have adversely affected their respective credit standings. Such difficulties could affect outstanding obligations of such entities, including obligations held by the Pennsylvania Municipal Money Market Portfolio.

Other factors that may negatively affect economic conditions in Pennsylvania include adverse changes in employment rates, Federal revenue sharing or laws with respect to tax-exempt financing.

The Commonwealth utilizes the fund method of accounting. Over 150 funds have been established and currently exist for the purpose of recording the receipt and disbursement of moneys received by the Commonwealth. The General Fund, the Commonwealth’s largest operating fund, receives all tax revenues, non-tax revenues and Federal grants and entitlements that are not specified by law to be deposited elsewhere. Tax revenues constitute approximately 97.7 percent of Commonwealth revenues in the General Fund. The major tax sources for the General Fund of the Commonwealth are the personal income tax, the sales tax, the corporate net income tax, and the capital stock and franchise tax. Together these four taxes produce over 81 percent of General Fund tax revenues.

The majority of the Commonwealth’s operating and administrative expenses are payable from the General Fund. Debt service on all bond indebtedness of the Commonwealth, except that issued for highway purposes or for the benefit of other special revenue funds, is payable from the General Fund. Legislation enacted with the adoption of the fiscal year 2003 budget established a Budget Stabilization Reserve Fund. Beginning in fiscal year 2003, 25 percent of any fiscal year-end surplus is to be deposited into the Budget Stabilization Reserve Fund. When the Budget Stabilization Reserve Fund balance reaches or exceeds a level equal to 6 percent of General Fund revenues, the proportion of the General Fund’s fiscal year-end balance to be transferred to the Budget Stabilization Reserve Fund is lowered from 25 percent to 10 percent. The General Assembly may appropriate additional amounts to this fund at any time.

At present, the Commonwealth maintains a balance of approximately $743.6 million in the Budget Stabilization Reserve Fund. Further, as of October 2008, the Commonwealth maintains balances in various funds and accounts, including the Budget Stabilization Reserve Fund, totaling approximately 8.5 percent of the

Commonwealth’s annual operating costs. These additional funds may become available through either executive or legislative action to address unforeseen budgetary stresses that could occur. Balances in the Budget Stabilization Reserve Fund are to be used only when emergencies involving the health, safety or welfare of the residents of the Commonwealth or downturns in the economy resulting in significant unanticipated revenue shortfalls cannot be dealt with through the normal budget process. Funds in the Budget Stabilization Reserve Fund may be appropriated only upon the recommendation of the Governor and the approval of a separate appropriation bill by a vote of two-thirds of the members of both houses of the General Assembly. Any funds appropriated from the Budget Stabilization Reserve Fund that are unspent are returned to the Budget Stabilization Reserve Fund.

Recent Developments

On July 4, 2008, the Commonwealth’s fiscal year 2009 budget was enacted by the General Assembly and was signed into law by the Governor. The fiscal year 2009 budget includes a projected rise in Commonwealth revenues, prior to reserves for tax refunds, of 3.1 percent over fiscal year 2008 receipts. The rate of growth projected was based upon a projections that the national and state economies would avoid a prolonged economic slowdown and that economic growth would rebound in the second half of fiscal year 2009. The enacted fiscal year 2009 budget provides for an increase in appropriations of 3.98 percent over the fiscal year 2008 enacted budget and supplemental appropriations. The difference between the enacted appropriations and available revenues is funded through the utilization of the remaining unappropriated surplus from fiscal year 2008.

On December 9, 2008, Governor Rendell and Budget Secretary Soderberg presented a mid-year briefing with respect to the enacted fiscal year 2009 budget. The presentation noted the effect of the national and state economic downturn. Unemployment rates have risen and the Commonwealth has experienced revenue shortfalls. The Pennsylvania unemployment rate as of October 2008 was 5.9 percent and the national unemployment rate for the same period was 6.5 percent. In the first five months of the 2009 fiscal year, General Fund revenue collections were $657.9 million lower than estimated (down 6.8 percent). The presentation noted that in October 2008, General Fund revenues were $283 million below estimate, more than half of which was the result of realized investment losses (the presentation notes that working with the State Treasurer, realized investment losses were mitigated to $10 million). As a result of the revenue shortfalls, Governor Rendell has put $464 million of General Funds into budgetary reserve. The presentation noted that if independent agencies meet the Governor’s request to cut their spending by 4.25 percent, General Fund spending will be reduced by $500 million. In addition, the Governor adopted various administrative actions to reduce spending including implementing a general hiring freeze, eliminating out-of state travel, banning the purchase of new vehicles and banning cabinet and non-union employees’ salaries.

The presentation projected a fiscal 2009 revenue shortfall of $1.6 billion and a deficit fiscal 2009 ending General Fund balance of $1.592 billion. The Governor and Budget Secretary proposed to balance the fiscal 2009 budget through various measures including (i) the budgetary freezes implemented in October and December 2009, (ii) reductions from independent agencies, (iii) appropriation lapses, (iv) transfers from the Rainy Day Fund, (v) transfers to the General Fund of amounts the Commonwealth is projected to receive for natural gas drilling on state-owned lands, and (vi) Federal fiscal relief.

In a subsequent press release on February 2, 2009, Acting Revenue Secretary Stetler reported that Pennsylvania collected $2.2 billion in General Fund Revenues in January 2009, $261.7 million, or 10.7 percent less than anticipated. Fiscal year-to-date General Fund collections total $13.3 billion, which is $1.1 billion, or 7.5 percent, below estimate.

Since the December 9, 2008 mid-year briefing, the economic climate in the Commonwealth has worsened. In a news conference on January 22, 2009 and in his fiscal year 2010 budget address on February 4, 2009, the Governor said that the state is now facing a $2.3 billion gap in the fiscal 2009 budget, which is $700 million higher than the deficit that was projected at the time of the mid-year briefing. The Governor proposes to address the projected $2.3 billion shortfall and balance the fiscal year 2009 budget through a combination of federal fiscal relief, various lapses and budgetary freezes, transfers from the Rainy Day Fund and transfers of Marcellus Shale (natural gas) revenues. He is not proposing any significant increases in personal income or business taxes although his proposed fiscal year 2010 budget includes additional taxes on tobacco products. Additional spending cuts are planned and governmental layoffs are possible.

The Governor is scheduled to deliver his fiscal 2010 budget proposal in early February 2009.

Recent Financial Results

During the five-year period from fiscal year 2003 through fiscal year 2007, total revenues and other sources increased by an average of 5.2 percent annually. Tax revenues during this same period increased by an annual average of 7.4 percent with a portion of the average annual growth rate attributable to various tax rate and base changes enacted over the same period. During the past several fiscal years, fees and license income and other financing sources such as transfers from other funds have continued to become a larger portion of income to the General Fund. Expenditures and other uses during the fiscal years 2003 through 2007 rose at an average annual rate of 4.5 percent. The fund balance at June 30, 2007 totaled $3,370.9 million, an increase of $101.4 million from the balance at June 30, 2006. The fiscal year 2007 year-end unreserved-undesignated portion of the fund balance was $368.7 million, $421.2 million below the amount recorded for fiscal year 2006 at years end.

Fiscal Year 2006.

During fiscal year 2006, revenues of the Commonwealth exceeded the certified estimate by $864.6 million or nearly 3.5 percent. Commonwealth General Fund revenues for the fiscal year totaled $25,854.1 million. Total fiscal year 2006 revenues, net of reserves for tax refunds and including intergovernmental transfers and additional resources, totaled $25,700.9 million. Total expenditures, net of appropriation lapses and including intergovernmental transfers and expenditures from additional sources, were $25,380.3 million. As result of Commonwealth financial operations during the fiscal year, the preliminary unappropriated surplus balance, prior to the statutorily required 25 percent transfer to the Budget Stabilization Reserve Fund, increased to $685.4 million, including the beginning balance from the prior year of operations. Accordingly, 25 percent of this preliminary balance or $171.4 million was transferred to the Budget Stabilization Reserve Fund. The final fiscal year 2006 unappropriated surplus balance was $514.1 million as of June 30, 2006. Revenues available to the Commonwealth, including intergovernmental transfers and additional sources, increased 5.3 percent. Fiscal year 2006 revenues (all sources) totaled $25,700.9 million, an increase of $1,295.3 million over fiscal year 2005.

In July 2005, the General Assembly approved and the Governor signed into law Act 45 of 2005, which authorized the issuance of up to $625 million in debt of the Commonwealth to support programs commonly referred to as “Growing Greener II.” The enactment of Act 45 implements the Governor’s major environmental initiative in the fiscal year 2006 budget. The Growing Greener II program will provide bond funding for the maintenance and protection of the environment, open space and farmland preservation, watershed protection, abandoned mine reclamation, acid mine drainage remediation and other environmental initiatives. Additionally, Act 45 of 2005 authorizes the Governor to direct up to $60 million in existing Growing Greener fees, that are otherwise directed into the Commonwealth’s Environmental Stewardship Fund, to support General Fund debt service for the authorized Growing Greener II bond issuances.

Fiscal year 2006 appropriations from Commonwealth revenues, including supplemental appropriations and net of appropriation lapses, totaled $24,664.6, an increase of 7.4 percent from fiscal year 2005 expenditures. A total of $181.8 million in appropriations were lapsed in fiscal year 2006, and the fiscal year 2006 budget continued to utilize an enhanced level of intergovernmental transfers for a portion of medical assistance costs. In addition, approximately $145.9 million in additional funds were appropriated in fiscal year 2006 to fund expenditures normally funded from Commonwealth revenues, a decrease from $399 million in fiscal year 2005.

For GAAP purposes, the General Fund reported a fund balance of $2,969.5 million, an increase of $100.4 million from the reported $2,869.1 million fund balance at June 30, 2005. On a net basis, total assets increased by $537.1 million to $10,400.2 million. Liabilities increased by $436.8 million to $7,430.7 million largely because of an increase in unearned revenue ($348 million) and an increase in accounts payable ($235 million).

Fiscal Year 2007

Continued weakness in the housing sector and escalating oil prices were two of the main factors that resulted in slower growth of the national economy during fiscal year 2007. Growth in real gross domestic product (GDP) finished at 2.5 percent for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2007, down from 3.4 percent for the prior fiscal year. Corporate profits, growth in wages and salaries and consumer expenditures were all lower during fiscal year 2007

than in the prior fiscal year. Economic growth proved erratic, at just 0.4% in the first quarter of 2007 before rebounding to reach 4.0% in the second quarter of 2007. Job growth continued during the fiscal year and the unemployment rate continued to drop throughout the fiscal year. Overall, these somewhat conflicting national economic conditions still positively impacted state revenue growth, as revenues exceeded the budget estimate. Additional revenues were used, in part, to replenish portions of reserve funds and to support an increased demand for governmental goods and services, particularly in the area of health care costs.

General Fund revenues of the Commonwealth exceeded the certified estimate by $649.6 million or 2.4 percent during fiscal year 2007. Final Commonwealth General Fund revenues for the fiscal year totaled $27,449.1 million. Total fiscal year 2007 revenues, net of reserves for tax refunds and including intergovernmental transfers and additional resources, totaled $27,193.7 million. Total expenditures, net of appropriation lapses and including intergovernmental transfers and expenditures from additional sources, were $27,007.9 million. As result of Commonwealth financial operations during the fiscal year, the preliminary unappropriated surplus balance, prior to the statutorily required 25 percent transfer to the Budget Stabilization Reserve Fund, increased to $707.9 million, including the beginning balance from the prior year of operations. Accordingly, 25 percent of this preliminary balance or $176.9 million was transferred to the Budget Stabilization Reserve Fund. The final fiscal year 2007 unappropriated surplus balance was $530.9 million as of June 30, 2007. Revenues available to the Commonwealth, including intergovernmental transfers and additional sources, increased 5.8 percent. Fiscal year 2007 revenues (all sources) totaled $27,193.7 million, an increase of $1,492.8 million over fiscal year 2006.

Fiscal year 2007 appropriations from Commonwealth revenues, including supplemental appropriations and net of appropriation lapses, totaled $26,298.1 million, an increase of 6.6 percent from fiscal year 2006 expenditures. A total of $105.4 million in appropriations were lapsed in fiscal year 2007, and the fiscal year 2007 budget contained a slightly reduced level of intergovernmental transfers which were utilized to cover a portion of medical assistance costs. Intergovernmental transfers replaced $536.7 million of General Fund medical assistance costs in fiscal year 2007, compared to $735.7 million in fiscal year 2006, a decrease of 27 percent. In addition, approximately $257.7 million in additional funds were appropriated in fiscal year 2007 to fund expenditures normally funded from Commonwealth revenues, an increase from $145.9 million in fiscal year 2006.

For GAAP purposes, the General Fund reported a fund balance of $3,370.9 million, an increase of $401.4 million from the reported $2,969.5 million fund balance at June 30, 2006. On a net basis, total assets increased by $761.3 million to $11,161.5 million. Liabilities increased by $359.9 million to $7,790.6 million largely because of an increase in unearned revenue ($117.2 million) and an increase in accounts payable ($194.1 million). The overall increase in fund balance, $401 million during the fiscal year, was $300 million more than the prior fiscal year increase in fund balance of $101 million.

Fiscal Year 2008

The national economic slowdown and a recession in the housing sector adversely impacted growth in the Commonwealth during fiscal year 2008. Declining home sales and home values, a contraction in available credit from woes in the financial markets, slightly higher unemployment and lower personal consumption resulted in less growth in fiscal year 2008 revenues than had been projected in the February 2008. Commonwealth revenues still exceeded the certified estimate for fiscal year 2008 by $167.5 million or 0.6 percent. Preliminary estimates from February 2008 projected a revenue surplus of $427 million during fiscal year 2008. Lower than projected revenues from corporate and personal income taxes were responsible for the lower than projected growth.

Final Commonwealth General Fund revenues for the fiscal year totaled $27,928.2 million. Total fiscal year 2008 revenues, net of reserves for tax refunds and including intergovernmental transfers and additional resources totaled $27,502.9 million. Total expenditures, net of appropriation lapses and including intergovernmental transfers and expenditures from additional sources, were $27,450.9 million. As a result of Commonwealth financial operations during fiscal year 2008, the preliminary unappropriated surplus balance, prior to the statutorily required transfer to the Budget Stabilization Reserve Fund, totaled $582.9 million. In response to lower-than-projected growth in Commonwealth revenues, the General Assembly approved and the Governor signed into law, a one-year suspension of the 25 percent transfer of a portion of the unappropriated surplus balance to the Budget Stabilization Reserve Fund for fiscal year 2008.

Revenues available to the Commonwealth, including intergovernmental transfers and additional sources, increased 1.3 percent. Fiscal year 2008 revenues (all sources) totaled $27,502.9 million, an increase of $309.2 million over fiscal year 2007. Intergovernmental transfer proceeds decreased $54.5 million, primarily due to the continued phase-out of intergovernmental transfers. Funding from additional sources decreased $115.2 million or 45 percent, primarily due to decreased transfers from other state funds. General Fund revenues grew $478.8 million or 1.7 percent during fiscal year 2008 when measured on a year-over-year basis. Non-tax revenues of the Commonwealth declined by 17 percent during the fiscal year. Reserves for tax refunds in fiscal year 2008 were $1,050 million, an amount equal to the fiscal year 2007 reserves.

Fiscal year 2008 appropriations from Commonwealth revenues, including supplemental appropriations and net of appropriation lapses, totaled $27,450.9 million, an increase of 1.6 percent from fiscal year 2007 expenditures. A total of $356.0 million in appropriations were lapsed in fiscal year 2008, and the fiscal year 2008 budget contained a reduced level of intergovernmental transfers which were utilized to cover a portion of medical assistance costs. Intergovernmental transfers replaced $482.2 million of General Fund medical assistance costs in fiscal year 2008, compared to $536.7 million in fiscal year 2007, a decrease of 10.1 percent. In addition, approximately $142.5 million in additional funds were appropriated in fiscal year 2008 to fund expenditures normally funded from Commonwealth revenues, a decrease from $257.7 million in fiscal year 2007.

Fiscal Year 2009 Budget

The enacted fiscal year 2009 budget provides appropriations and executive authorizations totaling $28,264.2 million of Commonwealth funds against estimated revenues, net of tax refunds and including intergovernmental transfers, of $28,085.7 million. The $575.0 million difference between estimated revenues and budgeted appropriations was expected to be funded by a draw down of the $582.8 million beginning balance.

The fiscal year 2009 revenue estimate was based upon an economic assumption that economic growth will resume in the second half of the fiscal year, reaching nearly 2.0 percent annual growth by June 2009. Total revenues of the Commonwealth, prior to reserves for refunds were expected to grow $856.2 million or 3.1 percent over fiscal year 2008 levels.

The dramatic slowdown in the national economy during the third quarter, rising unemployment rates and the turbulent financial markets have negatively impacted the Commonwealth’s revenues and receipts. Through October 2008, General Fund revenues were $564.8 million below estimate. In addition, as noted above, Acting Revenue Secretary Stetler reported that Pennsylvania collected $2.1 billion in General Fund Revenues in December 2008, $156 million, or 6.9 percent less than anticipated. Fiscal year-to-date General Fund collections total $11.2 billion, which is $814.5 million, or 6.8 percent, below estimate, and the Governor has indicated that the state is now facing a projected $2.3 billion gap in the fiscal year 2009 budget.

Education funding is expanded in the enacted fiscal year 2009 budget as an additional $347.4 million is provided for Pre-K-12 and higher education. The Commonwealth’s main support for local school districts, the Basic Education appropriation, is budgeted to increase 5.5 percent over prior year levels, while funding for Special Education programs are recommended to receive a 3 percent increase.

The enacted budget includes General Fund spending increase of only 1.3 percent in all areas other than Education, Public Welfare, Corrections and Probation/Parole, while improving many vital state-funded services.

The enacted fiscal year 2009 budget includes the beginning of property tax cuts for all Pennsylvania homeowners, which are funded from the proceeds of expanded gaming in the Commonwealth. A total of nearly $800 million in local property and wage tax relief will be distributed in fiscal year 2009. The enacted budget also includes a state-level economic stimulus package-”Protecting Our Progress.” This package includes an $800 million increase to the debt limit for the Redevelopment Assistance Capital Program to fund local community and economic development capital projects, a $500 million bond to fund the Energy Independence Strategy and an $800 million bond issue to improve drinking water and sewer infrastructure in the Commonwealth (“H2O PA”). The Protecting Our Progress package includes $365 million in general obligation bond proceeds for the “Rebuilding Pennsylvania Infrastructure” program. This program will provide additional capital investments to repair aging infrastructures such as structurally deficient bridges and to repair or replace high hazard dams and other similar flood protection systems.

The Energy Independence Strategy will target additional investment in new, clean and alternative energy projects. The Energy Independence Fund will support early stage financing and project financing, along with new incentives for energy conservation and solar energy. The Commonwealth Financing Authority (“CFA”) will issue $500 million in appropriation-backed debt to fund various energy programs.

The H2O PA program will provide $800 million in CFA appropriation-backed debt to address urgent upgrades of existing drinking water and wastewater infrastructure. This program will also support at least $100 million in new funding to address unsafe high-hazard dams across the Commonwealth as well as to provide funding to improve storm water management. In addition, on November 4, 2008 the voters of Pennsylvania approved a referendum for an additional $400 million in bond proceeds to support grants and loans for improving water infrastructure.

The achievement of the budgeted results may be adversely affected by a number of trends or events, including developments in the national and state economy.

Fiscal Year 2010 Proposed Budget

On February 4, 2009, Governor Rendell delivered his fiscal year 2010 budget address. The proposed fiscal year 2010 General Fund budget is $26.6 billion – a decrease of $64.5 million, or 0.2 percent less than fiscal year 2009, after accounting for the use of anticipated federal fiscal relief funds of nearly $1.1 billion in fiscal year 2009 and $2.4 billion in fiscal year 2010, which will offset state costs. In light of the national recession and the forecast for continued economic contraction at the outset of 2009, base General Fund revenues are not expected to grow over the current fiscal year. The proposed fiscal year 2010 budget would reduce or eliminate funding for programs in nearly every Commonwealth agency. It reduces funding for 346 programs and eliminates funding for 101 programs, lowering spending by nearly $1 billion.

The proposed fiscal year 2010 budget includes a reduction of 2,995 positions in the Commonwealth’s current authorized complement, for a total reduction of 4,767 positions since January 2003.

The proposed budget does not include any increases in personal income or business taxes, and continues the phase-out of the capital stock/franchise tax. It includes a number of new revenue sources, including (i) increasing the cigarette tax by 10 cents per pack, (ii) levying a tax on other tobacco products, and (iii) ensuring the public benefits from natural gas production in an area known as the Marcellus Shale that are now being tapped by private companies.

The fiscal year 2010 budget ultimately adopted by the Pennsylvania legislature could differ significantly from the fiscal year 2010 budget proposed by the Governor.

Other Information

Pennsylvania is the sixth most populous state behind California, Texas, New York, Florida and Illinois. Pennsylvania had historically been identified as a heavy industry state although that reputation has changed over the last thirty years as the coal, steel and railroad industries declined and the Commonwealth’s business environment readjusted to reflect a more diversified economic base. This economic readjustment was a direct result of a long-term shift in jobs, investment and workers away from the northeast part of the nation. Currently, the major sources of growth in Pennsylvania are in the service sector, including trade, medical and the health services, education and financial institutions.

Pennsylvania’s annual average unemployment rate was equivalent to the national average throughout the 2000’s. Slower economic growth caused the unemployment rate in the Commonwealth to rise to 5.7 percent in 2003. The resumption of faster economic growth resulted in a decrease in the Commonwealth’s annual unemployment rate to 4.4 percent in 2007. As of October 2008, the Pennsylvania unemployment rate was 5.9 percent and the national unemployment rate for the same period was 6.5 percent.

Nonagricultural employment in Pennsylvania over the ten year period that ended in 2007 increased at an annual rate of 0.6 percent. This compares to a 0.7 percent rate for the Middle Atlantic region and a 1.0 percent rate for the United States as a whole.

The current Constitutional provisions pertaining to Commonwealth debt permit the issuance of the following types of debt: (i) debt to suppress insurrection or rehabilitate areas affected by disaster, (ii) electorate-approved debt, (iii) debt for capital projects subject to an aggregate debt limit of 1.75 times the annual average tax revenues of the preceding five fiscal years and (iv) tax anticipation notes payable in the fiscal year of issuance. All debt except tax anticipation notes must be amortized in substantial and regular amounts.

Debt service on Commonwealth general obligation debt is paid from appropriations out of the General Fund except for debt issued for highway purposes, which is paid from Motor License Fund appropriations. As of June 30, 2008, the Commonwealth had $8,177 million of general obligation debt outstanding.

Other state-related obligations include “moral obligations.” Moral obligation indebtedness may be issued by the Pennsylvania Housing Finance Agency (the “PHFA”), a state-created agency that provides financing for housing for lower and moderate income families. PHFA’s bonds, but not its notes, are partially secured by a capital reserve fund required to be maintained by PHFA in an amount equal to the maximum annual debt service on its outstanding bonds in any succeeding calendar year. PHFA is not permitted to borrow additional funds as long as any deficiency exists in the capital reserve fund. No deficiency exists currently. According to PHFA, as of June 30, 2008, PHFA had $4,273.9 million of revenue bonds outstanding.

The Commonwealth, through several of its departments and agencies, leases various real property and equipment. Some leases and their respective lease payments are, with the Commonwealth’s approval, pledged as security for debt obligations issued by certain public authorities or other entities within the state. All lease payments payable by Commonwealth departments and agencies are subject to and dependent upon an annual spending authorization approved through the Commonwealth’s annual budget process. The Commonwealth is not required by law to appropriate or otherwise provide monies from which the lease payments are to be made. The obligations to be paid from such lease payments are not bonded debt of the Commonwealth.

The Commonwealth Financing Authority (the “CFA”), a major component of the Governor’s Economic Stimulus Proposals for the Commonwealth, was established in April 2004 with the enactment of legislation establishing the CFA as an independent authority and an instrumentality of the Commonwealth. The CFA is authorized to issue its limited obligation revenue bonds and other types of limited obligation revenue financing for the purposes of promoting the health, safety, employment, business opportunities, economic activity and general welfare of the Commonwealth and its citizens through loans, grants, guarantees, leases, lines and letters of credit and other financing arrangements to benefit both for-profit and non-profit entities. The CFA’s bonds and financings are to be secured by revenues and accounts of the CFA, including funds appropriated to CFA from general revenues of the Commonwealth for repayment of CFA obligations. The obligations of the CFA do not constitute a debt or liability of the Commonwealth but rather the obligations are payable from appropriations of the Commonwealth.

In November 2005, the CFA issued its first bonds and since that time, the CFA has completed three additional bond issues. As of June 30, 2008, the CFA had $717.155 million in outstanding bond debt. The Commonwealth’s fiscal year 2009 enacted budget appropriated $62.473 million in state funds to the CFA for payment of all or a portion of CFA debt service during fiscal year 2009. Further, a balance of $4.7 million remains available from prior year appropriations to support CFA debt service payments. Additional appropriations from Commonwealth General Funds for future debt service beyond those mentioned in this section are expected to be requested by the Department of Community and Economic Development for inclusion in future Governor’s Executive Budget requests to the General Assembly.

As part of the enactment process for the fiscal year 2009 budget, the General Assembly enacted and on July 9, 2008, the Governor signed into law Act 63 of 2008 (“Act 63”) and Act 1 of Special Session 1 of 2008 (“Act 1”). Combined, these two acts provide the CFA with additional bond indebtedness authority of up to $1,300 million. Act 63 of 2008 provides the CFA with authority to issue up to $800 million in limited obligation revenue bonds in order to fund water or sewer projects, storm water projects, flood control projects and high hazard unsafe dam projects. Act 63 also provides for the use of Pennsylvania Gaming and Economic Development and Tourism Fund revenues to support debt service costs associated with the $800 million in additional CFA debt authority. Act 1 provides the CFA with authority to issue up to $500 million in limited obligation revenue bonds to fund the development of alternative sources of energy. It is projected that portions of the increased CFA debt authority will be issued over the next two to four fiscal years.

In October 2007, the Commonwealth and the Sports and Exhibition Authority of Pittsburgh and Allegheny County (the “SEA”) entered into a lease agreement (the “Arena Lease”) that, while not creating indebtedness of the Commonwealth, creates a “subject to appropriation” obligation of the Commonwealth. The SEA, a joint public benefit authority, issued in October 2007 its $313.3 million Commonwealth Lease Revenue Bonds (the “Arena Bonds”) to finance a multi-purpose arena (the “Arena”), which will serve as the home of the Pittsburgh Penguins (the “Penguins”), a hockey team in the National Hockey League. The Arena Bonds are not debt of the Commonwealth but are limited obligations of the SEA payable solely from the Special Revenues pledged therefor. While the Special Revenues currently are projected to be adequate to pay all debt service on the Arena Bonds, to the extent such revenues are in any year inadequate to cover debt service, the Commonwealth is obligated under the Arena Lease to make up the deficiency. The obligation of the Commonwealth to make such payments is subject in all cases to appropriation by the General Assembly. The maximum annual amount payable by the Commonwealth under the Arena Lease is $19.1 million.

The Commonwealth maintains contributory benefit pension plans covering all state employees, public school employees and employees of certain state-related organizations. State employees and employees of certain state-related organizations are members of the State Employees’ Retirement System (“SERS”). Public school employees

are members of the Public School Employees’ Retirement System (“PSERS”). With certain exceptions, membership in the applicable retirement system is mandatory for covered employees. For financial reporting purposes, both SERS and PSERS have adopted the Governmental Accounting Standards Board’s Statement No. 25. This Statement requires a specific method of accounting and financial reporting for defined benefit pension plans. Among other things, the Statement requires a comparison of employer contributions to “annual required contributions.” As of June 30, 2007, the unfunded actuarial accrued liability of SERs was $914 million and the unfunded actuarial accrued liability of PSERs was $9,438 million.

In addition to a defined benefit pension plan for State employees and employees of certain state-related organizations, the Commonwealth also provides health care plans for its eligible retirees and their qualifying dependents. These and similar plans are commonly referred to as “other post-employment benefits” or “OPEBs.” The Commonwealth provides OPEB under two plans. The Retired Pennsylvania State Police Program provides collectively bargained benefits to retired state enlisted members and their dependents. The Retired Employee Health Program provides Commonwealth-determined benefits to other retired state employees and their dependents.

Certain State-created organizations have statutory authorization to issue debt for which state appropriations to pay debt service thereon are not required. The debt of these organizations is funded by assets of, or revenues derived from, the various projects financed and is not a statutory or moral obligation of the Commonwealth. Some of these organizations, however, are indirectly dependent on Commonwealth operating appropriations. In addition, the Commonwealth may choose to take action to financially assist these organizations.

City of Philadelphia

The City of Philadelphia (the “City” or “Philadelphia”) is the largest city in the Commonwealth. From time to time, the City and the School District of Philadelphia have experienced financial difficulties which have adversely affected its credit standing.

The Pennsylvania Intergovernmental Cooperation Authority (“PICA”) was created by Commonwealth legislation in 1991 to assist the City of Philadelphia, in remedying its fiscal emergencies. PICA is authorized to provide assistance through the issuance of funding debt and to make factual findings and recommendations to Philadelphia concerning its budgetary and fiscal affairs. At this time, Philadelphia is operating under a revised five-year fiscal plan approved by PICA on June 17, 2008.

No further bonds may be issued by PICA for the purpose of either financing capital projects or a deficit, as the authority for such bond issuance expired December 31, 1994. PICA’s authority to issue debt for the purpose of financing a cash flow deficit expired on December 31, 1995. Its ability to refund existing outstanding debt is unrestricted. PICA had $573.8 million in Special Revenue Bonds outstanding as of June 30, 2008. Neither the taxing power nor the credit of the Commonwealth is pledged to pay debt service on PICA’s bonds.

The current national recession has had a significant negative impact on the City’s finances. Mayor Nutter has noted that the City has confronted a breath-taking drop in revenue beginning in the fall of 2008 that required the most sweeping mid-year budget changes in the history of the City. These include selected closings of public libraries, fire houses and public pools. The Mayor has indicated that additional actions may also be necessary.

Litigation

The Commonwealth is a party to numerous lawsuits in which an adverse final decision could materially affect the Commonwealth’s governmental operations and consequently its ability to pay debt service on its obligations. In 1978, the General Assembly approved a limited waiver of sovereign immunity. Damages for any loss are limited to $250,000 for each person and $1,000,000 for each accident. The Supreme Court of Pennsylvania has held that this limitation is constitutional. Approximately 3,150 suits against the Commonwealth remain open. Tort claim payments for the departments and agencies, other than the Department of Transportation, are paid from departmental and agency operating and program appropriations. Tort claim payments for the Department of Transportation are paid from an appropriation from the Motor License Fund.

The Commonwealth also represents and indemnifies employees who have been sued under Federal civil rights statutes for actions taken in good faith in carrying out their employment responsibilities. There are no caps on damages in civil rights actions. The Commonwealth’s self insurance program covers damages in these cases up to $250,000 per incident. Damages in excess of $250,000 are paid from departmental and agency operating and program appropriations.

The following are among the cases with respect to which the Office of Attorney General and the Office of General Counsel have determined that an adverse decision could have a material effect on government operations of the Commonwealth.

County of Allegheny v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania

In December 1987, the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania held in County of Allegheny v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, that the statutory scheme for county funding of the judicial system is in conflict with the Pennsylvania Constitution. However, the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania stayed its judgment to afford the General Assembly an opportunity to enact appropriate funding legislation consistent with its opinion and ordered that the prior system of county funding shall remain in place until that is done.

The Court appointed a special master to devise and submit a plan for implementation. The Interim Report of the Master recommended a four phase transition to state funding of a unified judicial system, during each of which specified court employees would transfer into the state payroll system. On June 22, 1999, the Governor approved Act 1999-12 under which approximately 165 county-level court administrators became employees of the Commonwealth pursuant to Phase I of the Interim Report. Act 12 also triggered the release of the appropriations that had been made for this purpose in 1998 and 1999. The remainder of the recommendations for later phases remains pending before the Pennsylvania Supreme Court.

Northbrook Life Insurance Co., No. 1120 F&R 1996

This case is the lead case in potential litigation with the entire insurance industry that does business in Pennsylvania. Currently, the Commonwealth Court has docketed in excess of 40 cases representing 20 or more insurance companies. Dozens of additional cases are being held pending this litigation at the administrative boards.

The cases challenge the Department of Revenue’s application of portions of the Life and Health Guarantee Associations Act of 1982 (the “Act”). The Act establishes a funding mechanism to fulfill defaulted obligations of insurance companies under life and health insurance policies and annuity contracts to insured Pennsylvania residents. Insurance companies are assessed to provide the funds due to Pennsylvania residents insured by insurance companies which have become insolvent or are otherwise in default to its insureds.

Because the assessed insurance companies are paying the insurance obligations of other companies, a provision was placed in the Act which allows assessed insurance companies to claim a credit against their gross premiums tax liability based on such assessments. The assessments on each company are broken into various categories, including life insurance assessments, health insurance assessments, and annuity assessments, based on the type and amount of business each company transacts in Pennsylvania. Life and health insurance premiums have always been subject to the premiums tax and there is no dispute that companies may claim credit for life and health assessments. Annuity considerations, however, were taxed for approximately a three-year period, 1992-1995. Some annuity considerations were subject to tax; others were not. After several changes of direction, the Department of Revenue decided to allow credits for assessments paid on taxable annuity considerations. Credits were not allowed for assessments paid on non-taxable annuities.

There is no provision in the insurance law that restricts the credit to only the assessments paid on taxable annuities. Taxpayers want the credit for assessments paid on all annuities, both during the period that annuities were taxed and going forward.

On January 26, 2006, the en banc Court issued a conflicted decision in which the majority ruled for both parties. Both parties filed exceptions. The Court denied all exceptions and upheld its earlier decision. Northbrook filed an appeal to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court. The Supreme Court ruled in Northbrook’s favor but only on a technicality and did not address the substantive findings of the Commonwealth Court. The Supreme Court’s decision resulted in an approximately $7,000.00 credit for Northbrook.

Counsel are now preparing to once again explore a possible global settlement concerning the remaining cases. However, it is likely that counsel will pick another case to move forward and re-argue the substantive issues. If taxpayers prevail on all issues, estimated refunds would total about $150 million.

Hickenbottom v. Nassan, et al.

This is a civil rights action brought against two state troopers for the shooting of a twelve year-old boy. Following trial, the jury returned a verdict of $28 million. The defendants filed post trial motions and have entered into settlement discussions with the plaintiff. The Commonwealth has reached a verbal agreement with the plaintiff’s counsel in exchange for a general release of all claims, which is subject to the execution of written

settlement documents that are presently being negotiated. In the event that the settlement were not consummated, the defendants would pursue the pending post trial motions and an appeal.

As of December 2008, Moody’s rated the general obligation bonds of the Commonwealth “Aa2,” Standard & Poor’s rated such bonds “AA” and Fitch rated such bonds “AA.” There can be no assurance that the economic conditions on which these ratings are based will continue or that particular bond issues may not be adversely affected by changes in economic or political conditions.

Special Considerations Regarding Investment In North Carolina State-Specific Obligations. The concentration of investments in North Carolina State-Specific Obligations by the North Carolina Municipal Money Market Portfolio raises special investment considerations. In particular, changes in the economic condition and governmental policies of North Carolina (the “State”) and its political subdivisions, agencies, instrumentalities, and authorities could adversely affect the value of the North Carolina Municipal Money Market Portfolio and its portfolio securities. This section briefly describes current economic trends in the State, and constitutes only a brief summary of some of the many complex factors that may have an effect. The information set forth below is derived from official statements prepared in connection with the debt offerings of State issuers and other sources that are generally available to investors. No independent verification has been made of the following information.

The State has three major operating funds: the General Fund, the Highway Fund, and the Highway Trust Fund. The State derives most of its revenue from taxes, including individual income taxes, corporation income taxes, sales and use taxes, highway use taxes on motor vehicle rentals, corporation franchise taxes, piped natural gas excise taxes, alcoholic beverage taxes, insurance taxes, estate taxes, tobacco products taxes, and other taxes, e.g., gift taxes, freight car taxes, and various privilege taxes. A streamlined sales tax collection system has been adopted to improve collection efforts, particularly as to out-of-state catalog and internet sales. The State receives other non-tax revenues which are also deposited in the General Fund. The most important are Federal funds collected by State agencies, university fees and tuition, interest earned by the State Treasurer on investments of General Fund moneys, and revenues from the judicial branch. The proceeds from the motor fuel tax, highway use tax, and motor vehicle license tax are deposited in the Highway Fund and the Highway Trust Fund.

On September 21, 2001, the State General Assembly adopted a $14.5 billion budget for fiscal year 2001-2002. Due to the need to increase revenues, the budget contained several new and increased taxes, including the following: a two-year half-cent increase in the statewide sales tax; a two-year increase to 8.25% of the income tax rate for taxable incomes of single and married individuals over $120,000 and $200,000, respectively; a 6% telecommunications tax on out-of-state long distance calls, with the tax on in-state long distance calls dropping from 6.5% to 6%; a 5% tax on satellite television; a 1% gross premiums tax for HMOs and Blue Cross/Blue Shield; and a 3% increase on liquor taxes. Additionally, tuition for students attending the University of North Carolina was raised 9%. The budget increased spending on education and human services while trimming 400 positions from the State’s payrolls. The General Assembly included in the budget $25 million to reduce class size, $93 million for teacher bonuses, and another $44 million to help struggling students meet testing standards. Teachers and school administrators received salary increases averaging close to 3%, while community college instructors and professional staff received a 1.25% salary increase. Each state employee got a $625 raise. The General Assembly provided $15 million for the One North Carolina Fund for the Governor to use to provide incentives in the recruitment of industries to the State. The budget established a mental health trust fund and provided $47.5 million in funding to be used to renovate existing mental health and substance abuse facilities and to help patients move from institutional to community treatment. The General Assembly set aside $181 million to replenish the depleted State Emergency Reserves and placed in reserve $125 million for the Repairs and Renovations Reserve Account and $40 million for the Clean Water Management Trust Fund.

Due to many factors, an overall budget shortfall in the General Fund for fiscal year 2001-2002 of $1.6 billion was projected. The shortfall was primarily a result of an under-realization of budgeted revenues and an increase in Medicaid expenditures exceeding budgeted appropriations. In particular, State personal income tax collections in April 2002 were $595 million, which was over $250 million less than in 2001and over $350 million less than projected for the fiscal year 2001-2002 budget. Overall, tax collections declined 6 percent from the previous fiscal year while the fiscal year 2001-2002 budget had projected a 4 percent revenue increase, a difference of 10 percentage points. Medicaid expenditures were expected to exceed well over $100 million of budgeted appropriations. Both the under-realization of revenues and the increased Medicaid expenditures were attributed to the on-going national and regional economic recession, the severity of which was deepened by the impact of the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks.

In response to the projected budgetary shortfall, the Governor invoked his constitutional authority to insure that the State would meet its constitutional requirement of a balanced budget by issuing Executive Order No. 19, which identified over $1.3 billion of resources available if needed to balance the budget. Executive Order No. 19 reduced expenditures for use by State agencies and for capital improvement projects and transferred funds from General Fund reserves and non-General Fund receipts and reserves. Following the issuance of Executive Order No. 19, the Governor ordered the transfer of an additional $200 million from the previously established Hurricane Floyd relief fund and the Tobacco Trust Fund to cover any remaining budgetary shortfall for fiscal year 2001-2002.

As of the close of the 2001-2002 fiscal year, the General Fund reported a total fund balance of $393.9 million, with reserves of over $390 million and an unreserved fund balance of $3.8 million. For fiscal year 2001-2002, the State experienced a shortfall in tax and non-tax receipts of $1.55 billion. As with other state governments, the slowing national and state economy resulted in a general decline in tax collections. Individual income taxes fell short by over $1 billion, corporate income taxes by $177 million, sales and use taxes by $90.5 million, and franchise taxes by $192.7 million. Inheritance and capital gains taxes were similarly lower than budget expectations. In an effort to meet the State constitutional mandate of balancing the General Fund budget, reductions of $789.2 million were implemented, with the remainder of the budget funded by $437.7 million of non-General Fund dollars, and $239.3 million transferred from the Savings Reserve account.

On September 20, 2002, the General Assembly adopted a $14.3 billion budget for fiscal year 2002-2003, a more than 2% reduction in the budget from the previous year but an increase of 4% over actual spending of $13.7 billion during last year’s fiscal crises. The budget used $800 million in non-recurring revenue to fund ongoing expenses, including $333 million in reimbursements withheld from local governments. To replace that revenue, the General Assembly granted counties the authority to approve an additional half-cent local-option sales tax. This budget included revenue growth of only 1.8% over last year, which was a far more conservative growth projection than had been used in past years. The budget contained over $100 million in unidentified future cuts to be made by various State departments and agencies, and the heads of those departments and agencies were given additional management flexibility to cut programs. The budget provided no raises for state employees but did grant 10 bonus vacation days. Teachers and principals received career step raises. The State Board of Education was required to cut $42 million from its budget, and appropriations for local partnerships with the Smart Start program were reduced by $20 million. Nevertheless, the budget provided $26.8 million to reduce the student-teacher ratio in both kindergarten and first grade classrooms and $28 million to expand a voluntary pre-kindergarten program to prepare at-risk 4-year olds. The budget for the children’s health insurance program, Health Choice, was increased by $7.7 million, while spending for area mental health programs was reduced by $3 million. Three prison facilities were closed, and many positions with the Department of Correction were eliminated, including 23 chaplain positions. The State’s public universities received full funding for enrollment growth, at $66.8 million, and $4.5 million in additional financial aid for students. Individual campuses, however, shared the burden of a $50.2 million spending reduction statewide, amounting to 2.9% for each institution. University tuition increased 8% for in-state students and 12% for out-of-state students. The State’s community colleges received $9 million less than the year before, with more than half of the cuts to be determined by the system’s board. Nevertheless, the 59-campus system also got a $52 million increase for enrollment growth. Community college students also saw a tuition increase.

The conservative revenue growth projections used for the fiscal year 2002-2003 budget were more in line with actual revenues, which spared the State from a mid-year fiscal emergency for the first time in three years. As of the close of the 2002-2003 fiscal year, the General Fund reported a total fund balance of $603.9 million, with reserves of over $353 million and an unreserved fund balance of $250.5 million. Key factors improving the fiscal year-end General Fund balance were higher corporate income and sales tax collections, the accelerated repeal of local government reimbursements, increased transfers from other funds, and significant spending reductions by State agencies. Additionally, the State received $136.9 million in Federal fiscal relief in June 2003, which is the first of two equal flexible grant payments. The second flexible grant payment of $136.9 million was received in October 2003.

On June 30, 2003, the General Assembly adopted a $14.8 billion budget for fiscal year 2003-2004. Due to the current budget difficulties, the General Assembly made permanent a .5% State sales tax increase which was due to expire at the end of fiscal year 2002-2003. Additionally, the fiscal year 2003-2004 budget reduced spending for positions, programs, and general administration at most levels of State government, including at the

Departments of Agriculture, Labor, Environment and Natural Resources, Justice, Corrections, Cultural Resources, Insurance, Revenue, and the Administrative Office of the Courts. Teachers received a pay increase averaging 1.81%, while other State employees received a one-time bonus of $550. An initiative to reduce second grade class sizes received $25.3 million, and $96 million in projected bonuses under the State’s ABC’s plan was funded. State and local boards of education found funding reduced for administrative positions and transportation costs, although an increase of $5 million was earmarked for funding low-wealth schools. University tuition increased 5% for both in-state and out-of-state students, while community college tuition increased 3.2% for in-state students and 8.2% for out-of-state students. The State university system received $46.6 million to fund the additional 518 positions needed to meet a projected 4.5% enrollment increase, while need-based financial aid increased by $5.1 million. An additional $2.8 million was provided to increase aid for in-state students attending private colleges. The community colleges also received $32 million in increased funding for staff and supplies to meet enrollment growth. Funding was reduced for many services provided by the State Department of Health and Human Services, including reduced funding of inflationary increases for Medicaid providers and public agencies and cuts to the Smart Start child care program. The fiscal year 2003-2004 budget increased funding to the Health Choice insurance program by $12.2 million. Various licensing fees were also implemented for health and child care facilities. The General Assembly set aside $150 million for the State Emergency Reserves and placed in reserve $50 million for the Repairs and Renovations Reserve Account and $12.5 million for the Mental Health Trust Fund; however, $38 million was cut from the Clean Water Management Trust Fund.

In December 2003, the Governor called a Special Session of the General Assembly at which the General Assembly appropriated $24 million for economic development. The General Assembly also appropriated $20 million for the One North Carolina Fund, $4.1 million to the community college system for new and expanding industry training, and $20 million to the North Carolina Rural Economic Development Center.

The State ended fiscal year 2003-2004 with an over-collection of revenues of $242.4 million, which was 1.7% of the budgeted revenue forecast. The major tax categories that exceeded the budgeted forecast were individual income, corporate income, and sales and use tax. In addition, unexpended appropriation or reversions of $159 million were realized, and the State received $136.9 million in Federal fiscal relief in October 2003. As of June 30, 2004, the General Fund reported a total fund balance of $708.5 million, with reserves of over $419 million and an unreserved fund balance of $289.4 million.

On July 18, 2004, the General Assembly adopted a $15.9 billion budget for fiscal year 2004-2005. State workers received their first pay raises in three years — the greater of $1,000 or 2.5% of their current salaries. Teachers got an average raise of 2.5%. State university faculty also received an average 2.5% raise, while community college faculty got a 4.5% raise. Retired State employees got a 1.7% cost of living adjustment. The budget provided public schools with over $50 million to hire up to 1,100 new teachers to reduce third-grade class sizes, $7.5 million to improve test scores in the State’s poorest school districts, and $9.1 million to add 2,000 students to the State’s More at Four pre-kindergarten program. Another $4 million was provided to hire 80 school nurses. $6.6 million was budgeted to provide health insurance for children of the working poor, $4 million was provided to hire 75 to 100 additional child abuse care workers, and $3 million was used to increase the foster care and adoption assistance reimbursements by $25 per child per month. Twenty-four independent, nonprofit community healthcare centers serving poor patients received $5 million, while $2 million was distributed among 100 shelters for domestic violence victims. $2.7 million was used to add over 1,400 prison beds at correctional facilities throughout the State. Another $8.6 million was used for economic development to fund the State Biotechnology Center in the Research Triangle Park, the Global TransPark in Kinston, and a Motorsports Testing and Research Center Complex near Charlotte. Another $30 million was allocated to a fund for underground storage tank cleanup.

The General Assembly also approved the issuance of $468 million in special indebtedness over two years to fund a cancer hospital, a cardiovascular center, a health promotion center, a genetics data center, and a pharmacy school at several State universities. The funds will also be used to pay for several other projects at State universities and to preserve land for State parks and to protect land near military bases from encroachment. The funds will also be used to build new juvenile detention facilities. No more than $310 million of this special indebtedness may be issued during the 2004-2005 fiscal year. The fiscal impact of the $468 million of special indebtedness on the General Fund is expected to be zero because of the annual transfer of revenue from other sources to the General Fund in an amount to cover the estimated debt service. The debt service for the State universities projects and the

juvenile detention facilities will be reimbursed from the special revenue funds known as the Health and Wellness Trust Fund and the Tobacco Trust Fund. The debt service for the State parks projects is fully funded by the streams of revenue available to the special revenue funds known as the Parks and Recreation Trust Fund, the Natural Heritage Trust Fund, and the Clean Water Management Trust Fund. The special indebtedness is non-voted debt that is generally secured only by an interest in State property being acquired or improved (e.g., certificates of participation and lease-purchase revenue bonds). With this type of debt, there is no pledge of the State’s faith, credit, or taxing power to secure the debt, which is why voter approval is not required. If the State defaulted on its repayments, no deficiency judgment could be rendered against the State, but the State property that serves as security could be disposed of to generate funds to satisfy the debt. Failure to repay the debt would have negative consequences for the State’s credit rating. Article 9 of Chapter 142 of the State’s General Statutes prohibits the issuance of special indebtedness except for projects specifically authorized by the General Assembly. The use of alternative financing methods provides financing flexibility to the State and permits the State to take advantage of changing financial and economic environments.

In November 2004, the Governor announced that Dell, Inc. would build a computer manufacturing facility in the State. Dell, a leading manufacturer and distributor of personal computers and related products, has now built and operates a state-of-the-art, 400,000 square-foot manufacturing and distribution facility in the Piedmont Triad region. Dell currently has two other U.S. factories in Nashville, Tennessee and Austin, Texas. The North Carolina General Assembly convened a one-day special session on November 4, 2004 and approved an economic incentive for computer manufacturing companies that, in the case of Dell, will provide up to $225 million in tax credits over the next fifteen years. For each year in which Dell meets the required performance targets, the State will provide a grant equal to 75 percent of the State personal income withholding taxes derived from the creation of new jobs.

As of the close of the 2004-2005 fiscal year, the General Fund reported a total fund balance of $1.15 billion, with reserves of over $670 million and an unreserved fund balance of $478.5 million. The General Fund experienced higher than expected growth in tax revenue due to the improving economy and more than $250 million in one-time collection from a Voluntary Compliance Program undertaken by the State Department of Revenue.

On August 11, 2005, the General Assembly adopted a $17.2 billion budget for fiscal year 2005-2006. State workers received pay raises equaling the greater of $850 or 2% of their current salaries and one extra week of vacation. Teachers got an average raise of 2.24%. State community college faculty and professional staff got a 4.5% raise. Retired State employees received a 2% cost of living adjustment. The budget provided $9.48 billion for education, which is a 2.73% or $250 million increase over the previous year’s education budget. The budget funds education at the State’s K-12 schools, community colleges, and universities, including additional funding to cover the more than 35,000 new students enrolled in State public schools this year. The budget dedicated close to $80 million to address the on-going Leandro school funding lawsuit by providing additional funding to low wealth schools districts, disadvantaged students, high school reforms, school-based family support teams, and teacher recruitment. The budget provides $100 million for ABC bonuses for teachers and fully funds teacher assistant positions. More than $3.2 million is provided to expand Governor Mike Easley’s “Learn and Earn” program, which allows students the opportunity to graduate with a high school diploma and a college degree after just five years of study. The budget makes numerous investments in job creation efforts and provides funding for programs to attract new jobs to the State, including $4.5 million in additional funds for the Job Development Investment Grant program, $6 million for the One North Carolina Fund, and $20 million for the North Carolina Rural Center, which has helped create thousands of new jobs in rural communities and update water systems. The budget also included $9 million for the Wilmington and Morehead City ports, $1 million in new funds for community college Small Business Centers, and $2.65 million for customized industry training, which will help employees and companies remain competitive in an ever-changing economy.

On August 30, 2005, North Carolina became the last state on the east coast to approve a lottery. The net proceeds of the lottery will be used to further the goal of providing enhanced educational opportunities, to support public school construction, and to fund college and university scholarships. The lottery legislation directs that 50% of the net proceeds be dedicated to pre-kindergarten and class-size reduction programs that have been implemented over the last five years. Previously, such programs were funded by the General Fund. The remaining net proceeds will be distributed to the Public School Building Capital Fund (40%) and the State Education Assistance Authority (10%). The North Carolina Education Lottery began ticket sales in March 2006, and through June 30, 2008 has transferred over $725 million to support educational programs for the State.

The State ended fiscal year 2005-2006 with a total General Fund balance of $1.77 billion, with reserves of over $1 billion and an unreserved fund of $749.4 million. The General Fund experienced an over-collection of revenues of almost $1.1 billion resulting from conservative revenue estimates, higher employment levels, increased consumer spending, and large gains recognized in the housing and stock markets.

On July 6, 2006, the General Assembly adopted a $18.9 billion budget for fiscal year 2006-2007, which was signed by Governor Easley on July 11, 2006. The budget cut some taxes, spent more on education, and set aside money for future crises. Tax changes included capping the gas tax at current levels, reducing the State sales tax rate from 4.5% to 4.25% effective December, 1, 2006, and reducing the top income tax rate from 8.25% to 8.0% effective January 1, 2007. In addition, a $195.2 million reduction in the transfer from the Highway Trust Fun to the General Fund was provided for fiscal year 2006-2007. This repaid the $125 million one-time transfer from the Highway Trust Fund to the General Fund during the budget crisis in prior years, as well as the $80 million inflationary increase adopted in fiscal year 2002-2003. The budget included an average 8% pay increase for public school teachers in order to surpass the national average by fiscal year 2008-2009. Additional funds were provided to expand the Disadvantaged School Supplemental Fund ($27.5 million), to provide additional supplements to small and low wealth counties ($41.9 million), and to expand middle and high school reform programs in order to improve graduation rates. The budget provided increased access to higher education opportunities at the community college and university systems. Monies were included for need-based financial aid, scholarships for nurses, professional training to recruit and retain quality teachers and principals, and several biotech and economic development initiatives. In addition to the General Fund appropriation increases, the State’s new Education Lottery provided proceeds for reduced class sizes, additional academic pre-K slots, school construction, and college scholarships for needy students. Community college faculty and professional staff received a 6% salary increase and a 2% one-time bonus. University faculty and professional staff received a 6% salary increase, and all other state employees received a 5.5% salary increase. The budget also included a 3.0% adjustment for retirees and made a $30 million payment to the retirement system for the employer contribution that was not funded in fiscal year 2000-2001.

The fiscal year 2006-2007 budget solidified the State as a leader in recruiting new business and growing existing businesses. It included $15 million for the One NC Fund which has resulted in the creation of 18,875 jobs and $2.4 billion in investment throughout the State. The adjustments also provided support for new and emerging companies through investments in the Small Business Innovation Research matching grant program ($5 million). The budget included human services increases for child care subsidies ($27.5 million), community capacity enhancement ($16 million), and the Mental Health Trust Fund ($14.4 million) to assist with mental health reform programs. Additional funds were included for early intervention services ($7.1 million), adoption and foster care assistance ($10.2 million), and child welfare services. The budget included monies to enhance well water safety programs and to protect drinking water supplies. Funds were provided for land conservation, forest development, and habitat protection programs. It also included funds for disease surveillance and detection programs to ensure a safe food supply. The budget made investments in improving the court system. Funds were included to add core court personnel, including assistant district attorneys, deputy clerks, district court judges, and magistrates. It also included funds to improve emergency planning, response and recovery capabilities. The budget included funding for priority health, public safety, education and economic development projects outlined in the State’s Capital Improvement Plan. Projects included constructing a new public health lab and emergency operations center, expanding facilities at the UNC-Wilmington School of Nursing, UNC-Charlotte, and the N.C. State University Engineering Complex, adding two skilled care nursing homes for the State’s veterans, and expanding the State’s Museum of Art. Finally, $222 million from the fiscal year 2005-2006 credit balance was earmarked for the Repairs and Renovations Reserve Account. The amended budget provided for a credit of $324 million to the Savings Reserve Account (Rainy Day Fund), thereby increasing the balance to $637 million. This amount brought the Savings Reserve Account balance to almost 4% of the 2005-2006 fiscal year operating budget. The budget also directed $222 million to the Repair and Renovation Reserve and sets aside $20 million to the Disaster Relief Reserve for future disaster related expenditures.

The State ended fiscal year 2006-2007 with a total General Fund balance of $2.3 billion, with reserves of almost $1.1 billion and an unreserved fund of $1.22 billion. The General Fund experienced an over-collection of revenues of almost $1.366 billion resulting from conservative revenue estimates, higher employment levels, increased consumer spending, and large gains recognized in the housing and stock markets.

On July 30, 2007, the General Assembly adopted a $20.7 billion budget for fiscal year 2007-2008, which was signed by Governor Easley on July 31, 2007. The budget made permanent a statewide sales tax increase that was first approved as a temporary hike in 2001, meaning most consumers will continue to pay a 6.75 percent sales tax on most purchases. Counties were allowed, with voter approval, to raise either the local sales tax by another quarter cent or the land transfer tax from 0.2% to 0.6% of a home’s sale price. The budget also created a $48 million state version of the Federal earned income tax credit by providing a rebate to poor residents even though they owe no taxes. A temporary tax was allowed to expire as planned, dropping the top individual income tax rate to 7.75% from 8%. The budget provided $100 million to fund new scholarships for low-income families so students can obtain a college degree debt-free. An additional $56 million annually for the next two years was allocated to expand the More at Four pre-kindergarten program, and another $37.5 million was provided to help reduce class-sizes in early grades. The 2005 law creating the North Carolina Education Lottery was changed to permit higher prize payouts to attempt to boost ticket sales. A dedicated fund for research at the University of North Carolina’s cancer center received $25 million. Ultimately expected to receive $50 million annually, the fund is paid in part by raising the tax on cigars and smokeless tobacco from 3% to 10% of the wholesale price.

For health and human services, the budget contained several substantive increases, including $8.4 million to provide childcare subsidies for an additional 2,000 children of low-income working parents and $2.0 million to assure that every foster child in North Carolina can go to college. The budget also continued expanding health care opportunities for needy children. Specifically, it provided $7.5 million to continue open enrollment in the CHIP Program, and created the new N.C. Kids’ Care Program, which will provide health care services for over 12,000 children of low income working parents. In addition, $62.4 million was appropriated to operate the new Central Regional Hospital in Butner. The budget also required the State to assume 100% of the counties share of Medicaid expenditures by fiscal year 2009-2010 by capturing a portion of sales tax revenues previously distributed to local government units. The budget also provided substantial investments to improve the court system, law enforcement, and disaster preparation. Funds totaling $21.6 million were included to add core court personnel, including assistant district attorneys, deputy clerks, district court judges, and magistrates. The budget also included funds to increase investigative efforts in drug trafficking, child exploitation, sexual predator and other violent crimes. In addition, $4.8 million was appropriated to expand and enhance gang prevention programs. Finally, the budget included $4.0 million to strengthen emergency preparedness efforts by continuing the identification, monitoring, and mapping of natural hazards and man-made threats to the State.

The budget appropriated $758.6 million to support state employee benefit programs. Specifically, the budget authorized an average 5% compensation increase for all staff on the teacher salary schedule, an average 4.44% increase for public school administrators, a 5.0% increase for Community College and University System faculty, and a 4.0% increase for all other State employees. In addition, the budget provided funds to cover the increase in active and retired employee health-care premiums associated with rising costs. Finally, the budget made the final payment to the retirement system for funds that were withheld in fiscal year 2000-2001. The budget also provided $230.7 million in pay-as-you-go appropriations for priority education, public safety, and infrastructure projects outlined in the State’s Capital Improvement Plan. This includes $108.2 million for several university systems projects, $20 million for water resource development initiatives, $8 million for the secondary data center, and $7.5 million for infrastructure improvements at the State ports. In addition, $145 million from the fiscal year 2006-2007 credit balance was earmarked for the Repairs and Renovations Reserve.

The State ended fiscal year 2007-2008 with a total General Fund balance of $2 billion, with reserves of over $1.35 billion and an unreserved fund of almost $600 million. Total revenues increased only .93% while total expenditures grew much faster at 6.82%. The nominal growth in total revenues is attributable, in part, to the slowdown in the national and State economies. In 2008, employment and economic growth stalled, which explains the overall decrease in tax revenues. However, larger net profits achieved by the North Carolina Education Lottery made up for the slowing tax revenues. The growth of the State’s total expenses is attributable to an increase in education funding, as required by a recent court judgment against the State, and increased spending for Medicaid, the nonfederal costs of which were shared with the State’s counties until October 1, 2007 when the State agreed to shoulder the entire cost.

On July 8, 2008, the General Assembly adopted a $21.4 billion budget for fiscal year 2008-2009, which was signed by Governor Easley on July 16, 2008. The budget did not raise any taxes, but did postpone for a year two scheduled tax breaks worth approximately $30 million — the repeal of the State gift tax and the expansion of the earned income tax credit. Several lesser tax breaks totaling $20 million were passed, including a property tax

homestead exemption for disabled veterans, an extension of a tax credit to small businesses that provide health insurance for employees, and a State sales tax holiday on purchase of energy-efficient appliances. State employees received a raise that is the greater of 2.75% or $1,100. Retired State employees received a 2.2% cost of living adjustment. Teachers and professors at the State universities and community colleges received 3% raises. Public schools received an additional $35 million to cover rising fuel costs and $90 million for teacher bonuses. Dropout prevention grants were increased to $15 million, and the More at Four pre-kindergarten program received a $30 million expansion. Other increases for public schools included $6.2 million of children with disabilities, $6 million for the Disadvantaged Student Supplemental Fund, $3.2 million for academically gifted students, $3 million to establish a mentoring program for first and second year teachers and for first year instructional support personnel, and $2.9 million for supplemental funding to low-wealth counties. The 16-campus university system received $34.6 million to cover enrollment growth, but this was $16 million less than requested. Another $15 million was provided for campus safety recommendations. The State’s community colleges received $23.8 million to fully fund enrollment growth, an additional $2.5 million for an enrollment growth reserve fund, $5 million for instructional equipment, $4 million to support allied health programs, and almost $1 million for minority male mentoring.

The budget provided $50 million for green space projects and another $50 million to help local governments address critical water and sewer needs. There was also $6 million for drought relief, $5.5 million for drinking water system improvements, $4 million for farmland preservation, $2.5 million for wastewater treatment improvements, and $500,000 for green industries education and promotion. $10 million was provided for gang prevention, suppression, and intervention grants. $25 million was budgeted for gap funding of toll roads in fiscal year 2008-2009, along with $24.5 million for highway infrastructure maintenance. The budget provided $9.4 million to expand the NC Health Choice insurance program to another 7,300 children, $4.8 million in aid to local health departments, $4 million for grants to rural preventive health care, and $3.75 million to pay for networks coordinating free health care to low-income and uninsured patients. $8.1 million was provided to expand local psychiatric inpatient services, while $7.3 million was budgeted for new positions at the State’s psychiatric hospitals. The budget provided $6.1 million for walk-in crisis and immediate psychiatric aftercare and $5.75 million for 30 mobile crisis intervention teams.

The budget provided $10 million in grants and investments for severely distressed rural areas, $5 million for the One North Carolina Fund to stimulate job growth, $5 million for the One North Carolina Small Business Fund to provide incentive grants, and $5 million to the Biofuels Center of North Carolina for the development of alternative fuels. $7 million was provided to the State Housing Trust Fund to finance apartments for people with disabilities, while another $2 million was provided to assist with decent, safe, and affordable housing for people low to moderate incomes. The budget provided $3 million to expand the Home Protection Program to offer counseling and finance options for homeowners facing foreclosure.

The General Assembly also authorized $857 million in special indebtedness over the next four years for construction projects, including 1,500 new prison beds, more than 15 university and State buildings, an oyster hatchery, and the renovation of the polar bear exhibit at the North Carolina Zoo. This special indebtedness will allow for the earlier completion of construction projects to help avoid increased costs from rising prices. The State Treasurer stated that borrowing levels remain fiscally sound, even with the additional debt, and his office released an annual debt affordability study advising lawmakers that the State could borrow on average $479.7 million annually for the next five years.

On November 6, 2008, State fiscal analysts reported that the State’s 2008-2009 fiscal year budget faces a shortfall of between $800 million and $1.6 billion, as tax collections on corporate profits fell nearly 32% in the first quarter. The Governor’s office also ordered State agencies to cut their annual budgets by 5%, after having earlier requested that each State agency reduce its expenditures by 2%. Through November 2008, overall tax collections were 6.1% below budget projections.

The foregoing results are presented on a budgetary basis. Accounting principles applied to develop data on a budgetary basis differ significantly from those principles used to present financial statements in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles. For example, based on a modified accrual basis, the General Fund balance as of June 30, 2002 was negative $349 million; as of June 30, 2003 it was negative $167 million; as of June 30, 2004 it was negative $196.3 million; as of June 30, 2005 it was negative $78.8 million; as of June 30, 2006 it was positive $1.97 billion; as of June 30, 2007 it was positive $2.58 billion, and as of June 30, 2008 it was positive $1.68 billion.

Under the State’s constitutional and statutory scheme, the Governor is required to prepare and propose a biennial budget to the General Assembly. The General Assembly is responsible for considering the budget proposed by the Governor and enacting the final budget, which must be balanced. In enacting the final budget, the General Assembly may modify the budget proposed by the Governor as it deems necessary. The Governor is responsible for administering the budget enacted by the General Assembly.

The State budget is based upon a number of existing and assumed State and non-State factors, including State and national economic conditions, international activity, Federal government policies and legislation, and the activities of the State’s General Assembly. Such factors are subject to change which may be material and affect the budget. The Congress of the United States is considering a number of matters affecting the Federal government’s relationship with the state governments that, if enacted into law, could affect fiscal and economic policies of the states, including North Carolina.

In 1998, the State, along with forty-five other states, signed the Master Settlement Agreement (“MSA”) with the nation’s largest tobacco companies to settle existing and potential claims of the states for damages arising from the use of the companies’ tobacco products. Under the MSA, the tobacco companies are required to adhere to a variety of marketing, advertising, lobbying, and youth access restrictions, support smoking cessation and prevention programs, and provide payments to the states in perpetuity. The amount that the State will actually receive from this settlement remains uncertain, but projections are that the state will receive approximately $4.6 billion through the year 2025. In the early years of the MSA, participating states received initial payments that were distinct from annual payments. The initial payments were made for five years: 1998 and 2000 through 2003. The annual payments began in 2000 and will continue indefinitely. However, these payments are subject to a number of adjustments including an inflation adjustment and a volume adjustment. Some adjustments (e.g., inflation) should result in an increase in the payments while others (e.g., domestic cigarette sales volume) may decrease the payments. Also, future payments may be impacted by continuing and potential litigation against the tobacco industry and changes in the financial condition of the tobacco companies. In 1999, the General Assembly approved legislation implementing the terms of the MSA in the State. The Golden LEAF, Inc., a nonprofit foundation, was created to distribute half of the settlement funds received by the State. The legislation directed that these funds be used for the purposes of providing economic impact assistance to economically affected or tobacco-dependent regions of the State. However, the foundation’s share of the payments may be diverted by the General Assembly prior to the funds being received by the State Specific Account. In 2000, the State enacted legislation establishing the Health and Wellness Trust Fund and the Tobacco Trust Fund and created commissions charged with managing these funds. Each fund will receive a quarter of the tobacco settlement payments. The purpose of the Health and Wellness Trust Fund is to finance programs and initiatives to improve the health and wellness of the people of North Carolina. An eighteen-member Health and Wellness Trust Fund Commission will administer this fund. The primary purpose of the Tobacco Trust Fund is to compensate the tobacco-related segment of the State’s economy for the economic hardship it is expected to experience as a result of the MSA. An eighteen-member Tobacco Trust Fund Commission will administer this fund.

A number of tobacco manufacturers that participate in the Tobacco Fund Settlement described above have determined to dispute a portion of their 2006 payment. Approximately $755 million of their total expected payment of $6.5 billion due in April 2006 was placed in a disputed payments account pending determination as to whether the participating states have diligently enforced the terms required by the settlement as contained in each state’s Model Statute. The State believes that its share of the disputed payment amount is approximately $18 million.

The economic profile of the State consists of a combination of services, trade, agriculture, manufacturing, and tourism. Non-agricultural wage and salary employment accounted for approximately 4,104,900 jobs as of November 2008. The largest segment of jobs was approximately 1,423,800 in various service categories, followed by 760,500 in trade, transportation, and utilities, 707,600 in government, and 503,400 in manufacturing. Based on November 2008 data from the United States Bureau of Labor Statistics, the State ranked ninth among the states in non-agricultural employment, twelfth in services employment, eleventh in trade employment, eighth in government employment, and ninth in manufacturing employment. According to the U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis, per capita income in the State during the period from 1990 to 2007 grew from $17,295 to $33,636. Over a similar period, according to the North Carolina Employment Security Commission, the seasonally-adjusted labor force grew from 3,441,436 to 4,531,872, and it has undergone significant changes during this period, as the State has moved from an agricultural economy to a service and goods-

producing economy. Income growth is projected to slow for the next two fiscal years with a modest rebound in wage and salary growth forecast for 2010. As reported by the North Carolina Employment Security Commission, the State’s seasonally-adjusted unemployment rate in November 2008 was 7.9% of the labor force, compared to the nationwide unemployment rate of 6.7% for the same period.

Agriculture is another basic element of the State’s economy. In calendar year 2006, the State’s agricultural industry contributed over $66 billion to the State’s economy, accounted for 19% of the State’s income, and employed over 17% of the workforce. Gross agricultural income was almost $8.7 billion in 2007, placing the State eighth in the nation in gross agricultural income and third in the nation in net farm income. The poultry industry is the leading source of agricultural income in the State, accounting for approximately 38% of gross agricultural income in 2007, followed by the pork industry at approximately 22.1%, nursery and greenhouse products at approximately 10.2%, and the tobacco industry at approximately 6.7%. According to the State Commissioner of Agriculture, in 2007 the State ranked first in the nation in the production of all tobacco, flue-cured tobacco, sweet potatoes and Christmas trees; second in hogs, trout, and turkeys; and fourth in cucumbers for pickles and strawberries.

A significant military presence in the State contributes further to the diversity of the State’s economic base. Over 6% of the State’s 2004 Gross State Product (total goods and services), or $18.1 billion, was attributed to the military sector in the State. The major military installations in the State are Camp Lejuene Marine Corps Base, New River Air Station, Fort Bragg Army Base, Pope Air Force Base, Cherry Point Marine Corps Air Station, and Seymour Johnson Air Force Base. The State created a task force, headed by the Lieutenant Governor, to assist the Federal Base Realignment and Closure Commission (the “BRAC Commission”) in reviewing proposed realignments and closures of Federal military bases. The BRAC Commission completed its review and submitted its recommendations to the President on September 8, 2005, which became law on November 9, 2005. The BRAC Commission recommended the closure of two reserve military centers and the realignment of six other military bases in the State. The impact on area employment for the State was minimal.

The following are cases pending in which the State faces the risk of either a loss of revenue or an unanticipated expenditure. In the opinion of the Department of State Treasurer after consultation with the State Attorney General, an adverse decision in any of these cases would not materially adversely affect the State’s ability to meet its financial obligations.

1. Hoke County et al. v. State of North Carolina, et al. (formerly Leandro, et al. v. State of North Carolina and State Board of Education) — Funding of Public Education. In 1994, students and boards of education in five counties in the State filed suit requesting a declaration that the public education system of North Carolina, including its system of funding, violates the State constitution by failing to provide adequate or substantially equal educational opportunities, by denying due process of law, and by violating various statutes relating to public education. Five other school boards and students intervened and alleged claims for relief on the basis of the high proportion of at-risk and high-cost students in their counties’ systems. The suit is similar to a number of suits in other states, some of which resulted in holdings that the respective systems of public education funding were unconstitutional under the applicable state law.

The State filed a motion to dismiss, which was denied. On appeal the State Supreme Court upheld the present funding system against the claim that it unlawfully discriminated against low wealth counties but remanded the case for trial on the claim for relief based on the Court’s conclusion that the constitution guarantees every child the opportunity to obtain a sound basic education. The trial on the claim of one plaintiff’s county was held in the Fall of 1999. In rulings issued in the Fall of 2000 and Spring of 2001, the trial court concluded that at-risk children in the State are constitutionally entitled to such pre-kindergarten educational programs as may be necessary to prepare them for higher levels of education, and ordered an investigation into why certain school systems succeed without additional funding. Following the State’s filing of an appeal of these rulings, the trial court re-opened the trial and called additional witnesses in the Fall of 2001.

On April 4, 2002, the trial court issued its final order in the case, reaffirming its prior rulings and finding that the State must take all necessary actions to provide each child with the “sound basic education” guaranteed by the State Constitution. The trial court’s order directed the State to provide written reports every 90 days on the steps it has taken to comply with the order. On July 30, 2004, the State Supreme Court affirmed the majority of the trial court’s orders, thereby directing the executive and legislative branches to take corrective action necessary to ensure

that every child has the opportunity to obtain a sound, basic education. The Supreme Court did agree with the State that the trial court exceeded its authority in ordering pre-kindergarten programs for at-risk children. The State is now undertaking measures to respond to the trial court’s directives. The magnitude of State resources which may ultimately be required cannot be determined at this time; however, the total cost could exceed $100 million.

2. N.C. School Boards Association, et al. v. Richard H. Moore, State Treasurer, et al. — Use of Administration Payments. On December 14, 1998, plaintiffs, including the county school boards of Wake, Durham, Johnston, Buncombe, Edgecombe, and Lenoir Counties, filed suit requesting a declaration that certain payments to State administrative agencies must be distributed to the public schools on the theory that such amounts are fines which under the North Carolina Constitution must be paid to the schools. The trial court ruled in favor of plaintiffs on December 14, 2001. In its order, the trial court concluded that specifically identified monetary payments assessed and collected by state agencies are civil fines or penalties whose disposition is controlled by Article IX, Section 7 of the State Constitution. The trial court also concluded the statutes under which these funds are distributed are “unconstitutional and void” to the extent they provide that the money is to “go to agencies or for purposes other than the public schools.” Based upon these conclusions of law, the trial court directed the “clear proceeds” of the affected civil fines and penalties be remitted to the public schools. The trial court also declared “unconstitutional and void” the portions of the State Civil Penalty and Forfeiture Fund and the State School Technology Fund which operate to collect in a central fund and equitably distribute civil fines and penalties to the State’s school system for the purpose of supporting local school technology plans. The order required state agencies to remit civil fines and penalties directly to the local board(s) of education in the county in which the violation leading to the payment occurred for use in the board(s) discretion. Finally, the trial court determined a three-year statute of limitations applies, allowing the order to be enforced retroactively from the date the civil action was filed to include all affected civil fines and penalties collected by State agencies since December 1995. However, the court stayed the operation and enforcement of the order pending appeal.

On appeal, the State Court of Appeals rendered a decision in September 2003 mostly favorable to the State. Further appeal was made to the State Supreme Court, which on July 1, 2005 affirmed in part and reversed in part the decision of the State Court of Appeals and concluded that a majority of the funds in dispute are civil penalties required to be paid into the Civil Penalty and Forfeiture Fund for the benefit of public schools. On August 8, 2008, the trial court entered judgment in favor of plaintiffs in the amount of $750 million. The State General Assembly is aware of the judgment and will determine how to respond.

3. Southeast Compact Commission — Disposal of Low-Level Radioactive Waste. North Carolina and seven other southeastern states created the Southeast Interstate Low-Level Radioactive Waste Management Compact to plan and develop a site for the disposal of low-level radioactive waste generated in the member states. North Carolina was assigned responsibility for development of the first disposal site, with costs to be distributed equitably among the Compact members. In 1997, the Compact Commission discontinued funding of the development of the North Carolina site, alleging that the State was not actively pursuing the permitting and development of the proposed site. North Carolina withdrew from the Compact in 1999. The Compact subsequently petitioned the United States Supreme Court to allow the filing of its complaint against the State demanding repayment of $80 million of Compact payments expended on the permitting of the site, plus $10 million of future lost income, interest, and attorneys’ fees. The United States Supreme Court denied the Compact’s petition in August 2001. On August 5, 2002, the Compact, with the addition of four member states as plaintiffs, filed a new motion requesting the United States Supreme Court to accept the claim under its original jurisdiction. On June 16, 2003, the United States Supreme Court accepted jurisdiction of the case, and the State filed an answer and motion to dismiss. On November 17, 2003, the motion to dismiss was denied, and the United States Supreme Court appointed a special master with authority to determine when additional pleadings will be filed in the case. The Special Master heard oral arguments on dispositive motions filed by both sides on September 3, 2004, and in September 2006 allowed North Carolina’s motions as to several claims. The parties will continue to litigate the remaining claims.

4. State Employees Association of North Carolina v. State of North Carolina; Stone v. State of North Carolina — Diversion of Employer’s Retirement System Contribution. On May 22, 2001, SEANC filed an action demanding repayment of approximately $129 million in employer retirement contributions to the State retirement system. The Governor withheld, and subsequently used, the withheld funds under his constitutional authority to balance the State budget. The trial court dismissed the action on May 23, 2001 for lack of standing,

among other things. Plaintiffs appealed to the State Court of Appeals, and on December 3, 2002, the Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court’s dismissal of the action for lack of standing. On June 13, 2003, the State Supreme Court reversed the lower courts on the issue of standing and remanded the case back to the Court of Appeals for further consideration. The Court of Appeals remanded the case to the trial court without opinion and without considering any remaining issues.

In June 2002, the Stone case was filed on behalf of individual State employees and retirees seeking repayment of withheld employer contributions and a prohibition against future diversions. A class comprised of all members of the retirement system was certified and the case proceeded through class notification and toward trial. On September 6, 2006 and on February 27, 2007, the trial court issued separate orders granting summary judgment in favor of plaintiffs on two of their claims that the diversion of funds violated the State Constitution, while granting summary judgment in favor of the State on the remaining claims. These orders did not direct any repayment of funds. On August 5, 2008, the State Court of Appeals affirmed the order of the trial court. The State will appeal this decision to the State Supreme Court.

5. Goldston, et al. v. State of North Carolina, et al. — Diversion of Highway Trust Funds. On November 14, 2002, a former Secretary of the Department of Transportation and a retired State Senator sued the Governor and the State for using Highway Trust Fund money in the State’s General Fund. The Governor’s Executive Order No. 19 transferred $80 million from the Highway Trust Fund to the General Fund for purposes of balancing the State budget. Also, the General Assembly in its 2002 Special Session authorized this transfer and the transfer of an additional $125 million during fiscal year 2003 in the form of a loan to be repaid with interest through 2009. The suit alleges that these actions are unlawful and unconstitutional and requests a declaration that taxes collected for purposes of Highway Trust Fund expenditures cannot be used for other purposes. Summary judgment was granted in favor of the State on all issues, and plaintiffs appealed. In a unanimous decision filed September 20, 2005, the State Court of Appeals affirmed the granting of summary judgment in favor of the State. Plaintiffs filed a petition for discretionary review with the State Supreme Court, which agreed on March 3, 2006 to review a portion of the decision of the State Court of Appeals. On December 15, 2006, the State Supreme Court reversed the lower courts on the issue of standing and remanded the case for further proceedings by the trial court. The trial court, on March 7, 2008, again granted summary judgment in favor of the State, and plaintiffs have appealed.

6. Lessie J. Dunn, et al. v. State of North Carolina, et al. — Tax on Non-State Municipal Bonds. On February 9, 2004, plaintiffs, on behalf of a class of all others similarly situated, filed suit alleging that the State’s imposition and collection of State income tax on interest received by certain taxpayers on municipal bonds issued by non-North Carolina State and local governments constitutes a violation of the Commerce Clause of the United States Constitution. A similar case recently filed in Ohio was ultimately unsuccessful. The trial court granted class certification on June 14, 2005. The State appealed to the State Court of Appeals as to the composition of the class. On October 17, 2006, the State Court of Appeals unanimously affirmed the trial court’s class certification. The State’s Petition for Discretionary Review was granted by the State Supreme Court, but on December 7, 2007, the State Supreme Court ruled that its earlier grant of discretionary review was improvidently allowed, meaning that the Court of Appeals’ decision upholding class certification stands. The United States Supreme Court, however, has now rejected plaintiff’s argument in Kentucky v. Davis, and this case has been dismissed on the merits.

7. State of North Carolina v. Philip Morris, Inc., et al. — Master Settlement Agreement (“MSA”) Payments. On April 20, 2006, the State filed a Motion for Declaratory Order in the State Business Court against defendants Philip Morris, Inc., R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company, and Lorillard Tobacco Company seeking a declaration that: (1) in 2003, the State continuously had a qualifying statute in full force and effect and “diligently enforced” its provisions throughout that year in accordance with the MSA; (2) the State is not subject to a Non-Participating Manufacturers’ Adjustment for 2003; and (3) defendants are obligated not to withhold or pay into a disputed payments account any payments due, or seek any offset of any payments made, on the basis that the State is subject to a Non-Participating Manufacturers’ Adjustment for 2003. Defendants filed a motion to compel arbitration of this case pursuant to the terms of the MSA. On December 4, 2006, the State Business Court granted Defendants’ motion and ordered the parties to submit their dispute to an arbitration panel. Further litigation was stayed pending the outcome of the arbitration. The State may be unable to recover a portion of 2006’s MSA payment if it does not prevail in this litigation. The State has appealed.

8. Wal-Mart Stores East, Inc. v. Tolson — Refund of Corporate Income Tax. On March 17, 2006, Wal-Mart filed a complaint seeking a refund of over $33.5 million in corporate income taxes. The case challenges the authority of the State’s Secretary of Revenue to require Wal-Mart to file a “combined return” on various statutory

and constitutional grounds. On January 4, 2008, the trial court granted summary judgment in favor of the State, finding that Wal-Mart’s corporate structure for payment of rent had no real economic substance apart from its beneficial effect on Wal-Mart’s tax liability. Wal-Mart has filed a notice of appeal.

9. Petroleum Traders Corporation (PTC) v. State — Refund of E-Procurement Fees. On July 19, 2006, Petroleum Traders Corporation (PTC) filed an action for declaratory judgment seeking a declaration that the State’s e-procurement fee is a tax and is unconstitutional under provisions of the State and Federal Constitutions. PTC claims to have itself paid over $1 million in e-procurement fees and seeks to have the action proceed as a class action, allegedly involving potential refunds in excess of $100 million. On June 26, 2007, the State’s motion to dismiss was allowed in part and denied in part. The State filed an appeal, and on May 20, 2008, the State Court of Appeals reversed and dismissed the entire lawsuit on the basis of sovereign immunity.

10. Kevin Patrick Rowlette, et al. v. Richard Moore, State Treasurer — Interest on Unclaimed Property Refunds. On November 23, 2004, plaintiffs filed suit in Guilford County alleging that the State Treasurer’s retention of the interest and gain from property held in the Escheat Fund is an unconstitutional taking of property under the State Constitution and the United States Constitution. State law provides that the Treasurer holds unclaimed property in the Escheat Fund without liability to the owner for interest and that interest earned is payable to the State Education Assistance Authority for students at public institutions of higher education in the State, as provided by the State Constitution. Plaintiffs seek interest on past and future payments of claims by owners of monies, held in the Escheat Fund, and class certification for all persons receiving claims payments. The action was transferred to Wake County and heard on May 30, 2006. The trial court granted the State’s motion to dismiss on June 8, 2006, which was affirmed by the State Court of Appeals on February 19, 2008. Plaintiffs’ Petition for Discretionary Review was subsequently denied by the State Supreme Court.

The State is also involved in numerous other claims and legal proceedings, many of which normally occur in governmental operations. A review of the status of outstanding lawsuits involving the State by the State Attorney General did not disclose any other proceedings that are expected to have a material adverse effect on the financial position of the State.

In its 1996 Short Session, the North Carolina General Assembly approved State general obligation bonds in the amount of $950 million for highways and $1.8 billion for schools. These bonds were approved by the voters of the State in November 1996. In March 1997, the State issued $450 million of the authorized school bonds. In November 1997, the State issued $250 million of the authorized highway bonds. In April 1998, the State issued an additional $450 million of the authorized school bonds. In April 1999, the State again issued an additional $450 million of the authorized school bonds. In September 2000, the State issued an additional $295 million of the authorized school bonds, and another $100 million of the authorized school bonds were issued in March 2001. In May 2002, the State issued the final $55 million of the authorized school bonds. In November 2003, the State issued an additional $400 million of the authorized highway bonds. The remaining $300 million of the authorized highway bonds were issued by the State in September 2004.

On November 3, 1998, North Carolina voters approved the issuance of $800 million in clean water bonds and $200 million in natural gas facilities bonds. The clean water bonds provide grants and loans for needed water and sewer improvement projects for the State’s municipalities, and fund programs to reduce pollution in the State’s waterways. The natural gas bonds provide grants, loans and other financing for local distribution companies or state or local government agencies to build natural gas facilities, in part to help attract industry to the State’s rural regions. In September 1999, the State issued a total of $197.4 million of authorized clean water bonds and natural gas facilities bonds, $177.4 million of which were a combination of clean water bonds ($172.4 million) and natural gas facilities bonds ($5 million) and $20 million of which were solely natural gas facilities bonds. In October 1999, the State issued an additional $2.6 million of the authorized clean water bonds. In September 2000, the State issued an additional $5 million of the authorized natural gas facilities bonds. In March 2001, the State issued an additional $30 million of the authorized clean water bonds. In March 2002, the State issued an additional $204.4 million of the authorized clean water bonds and an additional $35 million of the authorized natural gas facilities bonds. In April 2002, the State issued an additional $10.6 million of the authorized clean water bonds. In December 2002, the State issued an additional $18.8 million of the authorized clean water bonds and an additional $50 million of the authorized natural gas facilities bonds. In January 2003, the State issued an additional $2.9 million of the authorized clean water bonds. In April 2003, the State issued an additional $33 million of the authorized natural

gas facilities bonds. In May 2003, the State issued an additional $3.65 million of the authorized clean water bonds. In March 2004, the State issued an additional $36 million of the authorized natural gas facilities bonds. The remaining $16 million of the authorized natural gas facilities bonds were issued by the State in January 2005.

On November 7, 2000, North Carolina voters approved the issuance of $3.1 billion in general obligation higher education bonds to finance improvements to the facilities of the 16 public universities and 59 community colleges in the State. In March 2001, the State issued $250 million of the authorized higher education bonds. In May 2002, the State issued an additional $300 million of the authorized higher education bonds.

In March 2003, the State issued bonds representing a consolidation of the clean water bonds and the higher education bonds in the approximate amount of $320 million. In April 2003, the State issued approximately $283.3 million of additional consolidated public improvement bonds. These two issuances consisted of a total of $38.4 million of the clean water bonds and $564.9 million of the higher education bonds. In March 2004, the State issued approximately $707.9 million of additional consolidated public improvement bonds. This issuance consisted of a total of $90.8 million of the clean water bonds and $617.1 million of the higher education bonds. An additional $15.255 million of the clean water bonds was issued separately by the State in March 2004. In January 2005, the State issued $705.5 million of additional consolidated public improvement bonds, consisting of a total of $41 million of the clean water bonds and $664.5 million of the higher education bonds. In March 2006, the State issued an additional $70 million of the authorized clean water bonds, and in June 2006, the State issued an additional $300 million of the authorized higher education bonds. In March 2007, the State issued the remaining $99.3 million of the authorized clean water bonds and $403.5 million of the authorized higher education bonds.

In addition, the State refinanced over $1.8 billion of its existing debt in the years 2002 through 2007 to improve cash flow and to take advantage of lower interest rates by reducing its future debt service payments. Since 2002, the State has also issued approximately $1.24 billion in certificates of participation and lease-purchase revenue bonds. The fiscal year 2006-2007 budget authorized the issuance of up to $672.1 million of special indebtedness as follows: $429.3 million for psychiatric hospitals and a public health laboratory for the Department of Health and Human Services, $132.2 million for medical and mental health centers for the Department of Correction, $45.8 million for higher education projects, and $64.8 million for other State projects. In fiscal year 2008-2008, the State issued $275 million in certificates of participation, and on September 26, 2007, the State issued $287.6 million in Grant Anticipation Revenue Vehicle (GARVEE) bonds to pay for Federal road projects throughout the State, including repairs, resurfacing, and safety improvements along several interstates. The State General Assembly approved the use of GARVEE bonds in 2005, which will be repaid with Federal transportation money the State expects to receive in the years ahead, rather than through State tax revenues. Finally, on August 1, 2008, the State issued $200 million in Capital Improvement Limited Obligation Bonds, the repayment of which is limited to the funds appropriated for that purpose by the State General Assembly in its discretion. The purpose of these bonds is to finance various capital projects.

The State currently has over $7 billion in outstanding long-term debt. The February 2008 study of the State Debt Affordability Advisory Committee reported that all of the State’s debt ratios are at or below median levels for the State’s peer group composed of states rated “triple A” by all three rating agencies. Thus, the study concludes that the State’s debt is considered manageable at current levels. Credit rating agencies consider a debt affordability study as a positive factor when evaluating issuers and assigning credit ratings.

The State’s general obligation bonds are rated AAA with a “stable” outlook by Fitch Ratings, AAA with a “stable” outlook by Standard & Poor’s Rating Services, and Aaa with a “stable” outlook by Moody’s Investors Service, the highest ratings attainable. On January 12, 2007, Moody’s reinstated North Carolina’s Aaa rating, citing the State’s strong financial performance, replenishment of depleted reserves, recent economic gains that surpass national averages, and the State’s effective fiscal management and healthy financial outlook.

Hurricane Isabel came ashore near Ocracoke on the Outer Banks of the State on September 18, 2003. The storm hammered the fragile Outer Banks and raked across the northeastern portion of the State, causing widespread destruction to homes, businesses, and farms. 47 of the State’s 100 counties were declared disaster areas. The State Department of Agriculture reported that damage to crops, livestock, and farm structures in the State exceeded $152 million. Damage to timber in the State was estimated at $565 million, with more than 833,000 acres sustaining some level of damage. By the end of December 2003, more than $155 million in Federal and State disaster assistance to individuals, households, local governments, and private nonprofits had been approved. The Federal government covered 75 percent of the costs; the State paid the other 25 percent.

The State suffered the effects of six tropical weather systems in 2004. In August, Hurricanes Alex, Bonnie, and Charley caused flooding and widespread power outages in eastern North Carolina. In September, Hurricanes Frances, Ivan, and Jeanne devastated central and western North Carolina with torrential rainfall that spawned flash flooding and numerous debris flows, including mudslides and rock falls. Only Hurricanes Frances and Ivan met the criteria necessary to achieve a Federal Disaster Declaration, while Hurricanes Alex, Bonnie, Charley, and Jeanne met the criteria necessary for a State Disaster Declaration. These storms caused over $230 million in damages that wee eligible for state and Federal governmental assistance. The State’s share was approximately $90 million. In order to match Federal funds available to the State for Federal disaster recovery services, the Governor ordered State agencies to revert 0.75 percent of their 2004-05 budgets to provide $120 million for storm relief.

Special Considerations Regarding Investment in Virginia State-Specific Obligations. The Virginia State-Specific Money Market Portfolio will invest primarily in Virginia State-Specific Obligations. For this reason, the Portfolio is affected by political, economic, regulatory or other developments that constrain the taxing, revenue-collecting and spending authority of Virginia issuers or otherwise affect the ability of Virginia issuers to pay interest, principal or any premium. The following information constitutes only a brief summary of certain of these developments and does not purport to be a complete description of them. The information has been obtained from recent official statements prepared by the Commonwealth of Virginia relating to its securities and other publicly available information prepared by the Commonwealth of Virginia, and no independent investigation has been undertaken to verify its accuracy. Moreover, the information relates only to the state itself and not to the numerous special purpose or local government units whose issues may also be held by the Portfolio. The credits represented by such issues may be affected by a wide variety of local factors or structuring concerns, and no disclosure is made here relating to such matters.

In fiscal year 2007, Virginia’s economy continued to expand, however this growth was slightly below the national growth rate for the first time since 1996. Virginia’s personal income in current dollars grew by 5.2 percent in fiscal year 2007, the lowest growth in the three previous years. From 1996 to 2006, personal income in Virginia has been consistently above national levels.

Because of Northern Virginia, with its proximity to Washington, D.C., and Hampton Roads, which has large military installations, the Federal government has a significant economic impact on Virginia.

Among the nonagricultural employment sectors in Virginia, the public administration sector, which includes Federal, state, and local government, is the largest, followed by professional and business activities, retail trade, and education and health.

According to statistics published by the U.S. Department of Labor, Virginia’s unemployment rate from 1997 through 2007 was less than the national unemployment rate each year. Virginia is one of twenty-two states with a right-to-work law and is generally regarded as having a favorable business climate marked by few strikes or other work stoppages. Virginia is also one of the least unionized among the more industrialized states.

Virginia’s state government operates on a two-year budget. The Constitution of Virginia vests the ultimate responsibility and authority for levying taxes and appropriating revenue in the General Assembly, but the Governor has broad authority to manage the budgetary process. Once an appropriation act becomes law, revenue collections and expenditures are constantly monitored by the Governor, assisted by the Secretary of Finance and the Department of Planning and Budget, to ensure that a balanced budget is maintained. If projected revenue collections fall below amounts appropriated at any time, the Governor must reduce expenditures and withhold allotments of appropriations (other than for debt service and other specified purposes) to restore balance. Virginia law provides that up to 15% of a general fund appropriation to an agency may be withheld, if required. An amendment to the Constitution, effective January 1, 1993, established the Revenue Stabilization Fund. This Fund is available to offset a portion of anticipated shortfalls in revenues in years when appropriations based on previous forecasts exceed expected revenues in subsequent forecasts. The Fund consists of an amount not to exceed 10% of Virginia’s average annual tax revenues derived from taxes on income and retail sales for the three preceding fiscal years.

General Fund revenues are principally comprised of tax revenues. In recent fiscal years, most of the tax revenues have been derived from taxes imposed by Virginia on individual and fiduciary income, state sales and use, corporate income, premiums of insurance companies, and deeds, contracts, wills and suits. Historically, balances in the General Fund have decreased in some years, for example in fiscal years 1995, 2001, 2002, 2003 and 2008, and have increased at varying rates in other years, such as fiscal years 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2004, 2005,

2006, and 2007. The General Fund balance decreased by $735.3 million in fiscal year 2008, a decrease of 24.9 percent from fiscal year 2007. Overall tax revenues increased by 1.15 percent from fiscal year 2007 to fiscal year 2008. Overall revenue and non-tax revenues increased by 1.3 percent and by 5.5 percent, respectively. Overall expenditures rose by 6.6 percent in fiscal year 2008, compared to an 11.3 percent increase in fiscal year 2007.

The Debt Capacity Advisory Committee is charged with annually estimating the amount of tax-supported debt that may prudently be authorized, consistent with the financial goals, capital needs and policies of Virginia. The committee annually reviews the outstanding debt of the agencies, institutions, boards and authorities of Virginia for which Virginia has either a direct or indirect pledge of tax revenues or moral obligation. The Committee provides its recommendations on the prudent use of such obligations to the Governor and the General Assembly.

The Constitution of Virginia prohibits the creation of debt by or on behalf of Virginia that is backed by Virginia’s full faith and credit, except as provided in Section 9 of Article X. Section 9 of Article X contains several different provisions for the issuance of general obligation and other debt, and Virginia is well within its limit for each:

     Section 9(a) provides that the General Assembly may incur general obligation debt to meet certain types of emergencies; subject to limitations on amount and duration, to meet casual deficits in the revenue or in anticipation of the collection of revenues of Virginia; and to redeem a previous debt obligation of Virginia. Total indebtedness issued pursuant to Section 9(a)(2) may not exceed 30% of an amount equal to 1.15 times the annual tax revenues derived from taxes on income and retail sales, as certified by the Auditor of Public Accounts for the preceding fiscal year.

     Section 9(b) provides that the General Assembly may authorize the creation of general obligation debt for capital projects. Such debt is required to be authorized by an affirmative vote of a majority of each house of the General Assembly and approved in a statewide referendum. The outstanding amount of such debt is limited to an amount equal to 1.15 times the average annual tax revenues derived from taxes on income and retail sales, as certified by the Auditor of Public Accounts for the three immediately preceding fiscal years. The amount of 9(b) debt that may be authorized in any single fiscal year is limited to 25% of the limit on all 9(b) debt less the amount of 9(b) debt authorized in the current and prior three fiscal years.

     Section 9(c) provides that the General Assembly may authorize the creation of general obligation debt for revenue-producing capital projects for executive branch agencies and institutions of higher learning. Such debt is required to be authorized by an affirmative vote of two-thirds of each house of the General Assembly and approved by the Governor. The Governor must certify before the enactment of the authorizing legislation and again before the issuance of the debt that the net revenues pledged are expected to be sufficient to pay principal of and interest on the debt. The outstanding amount of 9(c) debt is limited to an amount equal to 1.15 times the average annual tax revenues derived from taxes on income and retail sales, as certified by the Auditor of Public Accounts for the three preceding fiscal years. While the debt limits under Sections 9(b) and 9(c) are each calculated as the same percentage of the same average tax revenues, these debt limits are separately computed and apply separately to each type of debt.

Section 9(d) provides that the restrictions of Section 9 are not applicable to any obligation incurred by Virginia or any of its institutions, agencies or authorities if the full faith and credit of Virginia is not pledged or committed to the payment of such obligation. There are currently outstanding various types of such 9(d) revenue bonds. Certain of these bonds, however, are paid in part or in whole from revenues received as appropriations by the General Assembly from general tax revenues, while others are paid solely from revenues of the applicable project. The repayment of debt issued by the Virginia Public Building Authority, the Virginia College Building Authority 21st Century College and Equipment Program, the Innovative Technology Authority, the Virginia Biotechnology Research Park Authority and several other long-term capital leases or notes have been supported all or in large part by General Fund appropriations.

The Commonwealth Transportation Board has issued various series of bonds authorized under the State Revenue Bond Act. These bonds are secured by and are payable from funds appropriated by the General Assembly from the Transportation Trust Fund for such purpose. The Transportation Trust Fund was established by the General Assembly in 1986 as a special non-reverting fund administered and allocated by the Transportation Board to provide increased funding for construction, capital and other needs of state highways, airports, mass transportation and ports. The Virginia Port Authority has also issued bonds that are secured by a portion of the Transportation Trust Fund.

Virginia is involved in numerous leases that are subject to appropriation of funding by the General Assembly. Virginia also finances the acquisition of certain personal property and equipment through installment purchase agreements.

Bonds issued by the Virginia Housing Development Authority, the Virginia Resources Authority and the Virginia Public School Authority are designed to be self-supporting from their individual loan programs. A portion of the Virginia Housing Development Authority bonds, Virginia Public School Authority bonds and the Virginia Resources Authority bonds are secured in part by a moral obligation pledge of Virginia. Should the need arise, Virginia may consider funding deficiencies in the respective debt service reserves for such moral obligation debt, but the General Assembly is not legally required to make any appropriation for such purpose. To date, none of these authorities has advised Virginia that any such deficiencies exist.

As of June 30, 2006, local government in Virginia was comprised of 95 counties, 39 incorporated cities, and 36 incorporated towns. Virginia is unique among the several states in that cities and counties are independent, and their land areas do not overlap. The largest expenditures by local governments in Virginia are for education, but local governments also provide other services such as water and sewer, police and fire protection and recreational facilities. According to figures prepared by the Auditor of Public Accounts of Virginia, the total outstanding debt of counties in the Commonwealth was approximately $11.1 billion as of June 30, 2006, most of which was borrowed for public school construction. The outstanding debt for cities at that date was computed by the Auditor of Public Accounts to be approximately $8.1 billion. The outstanding debt for towns, as of June 30, 2006, was calculated by the Auditor of Public Accounts to be approximately $483.6 million.

On December 16, 2005, Governor Warner presented the Budget Bill (the “2006 Budget Bill”) for the 2006-2008 biennium, which began July 1, 2006. The Governor’s objectives with the bill were to continue Virginia’s financial stability for the long term, make targeted one-time investments that would provide future benefits without committing the Commonwealth to long-term funding obligations, and to maintain core services in K-12 education, capital outlay and maintenance, and public employee compensation. The 2006 Budget Bill included $34,374.6 million from the general fund in base spending, and total general fund resources of $34,419.2 million. Recommendations for new spending totaled $5,947.0 million, including $930.3 million for capital outlay funding. General fund budget savings of $57.3 million were also recommended. The 2006 Budget Bill included approximately $1,501.8 million in one-time general fund spending, including the $930.3 million for capital outlay, $339.0 million for transportation initiatives and $232.5 million for water quality improvements.

New spending items in the 2006 Budget Bill representing major investments in Virginia’s future included $305.1 million to support enrollment growth, base adequacy and research facilities at institutions of higher education; $232.5 million for a one-time additional investment in water quality programs; $624.5 million for transportation projects and programs; $107.1 million to invest in community-based mental health and mental retardation services; $11.0 million for the preservation of forestlands in Virginia through the purchase of almost 10,000 acres of forest property; $55.7 million to increase energy efficiency at state facilities throughout Virginia; $43.8 million as incentive payments to semiconductor manufacturers that have met employment and investment targets; and $4.2 million to stimulate economic development in rural areas by expanding access to broadband networks.

On January 24, 2006, Governor Kaine submitted executive amendments to the 2006 Budget Bill, which included $39.6 million to increase proposed K-12 instructional staff pay raises; $4.7 million to address cost overruns on the University of Virginia’s Medical Research Building; $4.0 million to address a revised cost estimate for Virginia Commonwealth University’s Medical Sciences Building II; and $3.5 million to provide additional support to localities relating to formula changes in criminal justice services program funding. The proposed amendments totaled $7.6 million in general fund savings and $15.1 million in additional general fund revenue.

On June 20, 2006, the General Assembly passed a compromised budget for the 2006-2008 biennal. On December 15, 2006, Governor Kaine presented to the General Assembly his proposed amendments to the 2006 Budget Bill affecting the remainder of the 2006-2008 biennium. The Governor’s objectives were developed with the following goals in mind: maintain the Commonwealth’s financial stability for the long term; make targeted investments that will enhance Virginia’s ability to compete in a global economy; and meet the Commonwealth’s ongoing commitment to fund core services.

Fiscal year 2006 ended with actual collections exceeding the forecast by $147 million or 1.0 percent. Nonwithholding and corporate income tax, the two most volatile revenue sources, continued to grow at unprecedented rates and contributed to the FY 2006 surplus. The General Assembly, in anticipation of this surplus, included $128 million into the beginning balance for FY 2007.

The Governor’s budget amendments provided additional deposits to the Revenue Stabilization Fund totaling $152.7 million. This amount is comprised of $106.7 million in fiscal year 2007 and an additional $46.1 million in fiscal year 2008 (for a total fiscal year 2008 deposit of $184.3 million). With these deposits, the Fund will remain at its Constitutional maximum of $ 1.3 billion in fiscal year 2008. The Fund reached its Constitutional maximum for the first time in fiscal year 2006. Excess deposits (estimated at $36.9 million in fiscal year 2007 and $120.4 million in fiscal year 2008) will be transferred back to the general fund.

After making the deposit to the Revenue Stabilization Fund, approximately 70 percent of the proposed new spending was proposed to be dedicated to transportation and higher education. The Governor restricted recurring expenses to targeted priorities that move Virginia forward in meeting health care, education, public safety, environmental and economic development objectives.

The Virginia General Assembly sent an amended budget to the Governor on February 24, 2007. The budget retained many of the amendments originally introduced. Highlights included a $100 million investment to address capital projects and cost overruns in higher education; an increase in the state contribution for teacher salary increases and an increase in the retiree health care credit; a four percent salary increase for state employees, faculty at Virginia’s public institutions of higher education, and state supported local employees; additional funding for water quality improvements; and 5500 million from the general fund to meet some pressing transportation needs.

Governor Kaine returned the budget bill requesting 17 amendments, primarily technical in nature. On April 4, 2007 the Budget Bill was enacted as Chapter 847 of the 2007 Acts of Assembly.

On December 17, 2007, Governor Kaine presented the 2008 Budget Bill (House Bill 30/Senate Bill 30) (the “2008 Budget Bill”) for the 2008-2010 biennium. The 2008 Budget Bill was developed with the following four main objectives in mind:

Maintain the Commonwealth’s financial stability for the long-term;
Make targeted investments that will pay measurable returns in the future;
Meet the Commonwealth’s ongoing commitment to fund core services; and
Use program performance, financial incentives, and operational streamlining to promote better government.

The 2008 Budget Bill included $36,174.3 million from the general fund in base spending, and total general fund resources of $36,197.7 million. Recommendations for new spending totaled $2,213.6 million, including $54.0 million for capital outlay funding. General fund budget savings of $463.6 million were also recommended.

Major items in the 2008 Budget Bill recommended to meet the Commonwealth’s commitment to fund core services included $890.3 million for the estimated state cost of the technical re-benchmarking of the Standards of Quality for elementary and secondary schools and $254.7 million for a proposed salary increase for state and state-supported local employees, teachers and teaching and research faculty at higher education institutions.

Other proposed spending items included $29.2 million to expand the existing Virginia Preschool Initiative serving at-risk students; $14.6 million to increase community services board emergency services capacity; $4.9 million in improvements aimed at offender reentry; $38.1 million in semiconductor manufacturing performance grants; and $15.1 million in the Governor’s Development Opportunity Fund. A Revenue Stabilization Fund deposit of $21.3 million in fiscal year 2009 based on actual tax revenues for fiscal year 2007 was anticipated.

The Virginia General Assembly sent an amended budget to the Governor on March 13, 2008. The budget retained many of the items the Governor introduced. Highlights of the House and Senate conference report included: the funding for certain capital projects from VPCA/VCBA debt; 2 percent salary increase in both years for state employees and state-supported local employees; 2 percent salary increase for teachers on July 1, 2009; $22 million to increase the per pupil amount for the preschool initiative for disadvantaged four-year olds; $41.6 million for 600 new Mental Retardation waivers in FY 2009; almost $11.1 million per year for base adequacy for

institutions of higher learning; retaining $15.1 million for the Governor’s Opportunity Fund; and providing $30 million in bond funding to be used for acquisition of open space lands, historic sites, and civil war battlefield preservation.

The Governor returned the budget bill requesting 41 amendments, primarily technical in nature. The General Assembly accepted 34 of these amendments. On May 23, 2008 the Governor signed the Budget Bill with one veto, and the Budget Bill was enacted as Chapter 879 of the 2008 Virginia Acts of Assembly. The bill became effective July 1, 2008 (the “2008 Appropriation Act”).

During the fiscal year, Virginia monitors its revenues, expenditures and reserves, in order to make expenditure adjustments during the year if necessary. Such adjustments are made if revenues are substantially below the projected levels. While preliminary data show that general fund revenue collections for fiscal year 2008 exceeded the budgeted forecast, economic indicators for early fiscal year 2009 revenues reflect a slowing economy. Declining employment levels, slower income growth, lower consumer confidence, and continued downward trends in the housing market have resulted in withholding, sales, and recordation taxes being less than projections. For fiscal year 2008, the revenue shortfalls from these areas were offset by higher than expected corporate income tax collections due to strength in the defense and energy sectors. While it is still early in fiscal year 2009, economic indicators suggest that the slower growth pattern will continue, which will adversely impact important components of the Commonwealth’s revenues.

Two general fund revenue sources closely tied to current economic activity — individual income tax withholding and retail sales taxes — experienced a meaningful slowdown in the rate of growth during the second half of fiscal year 2008 and the first quarter of fiscal year 2009. Sales tax collections, which would have to grow at 4.9% to meet the fiscal year 2009 forecast, declined by 2.0% for the first quarter of fiscal year 2009, which ended September 30, 2008. Individual income tax withholding, which would have to increase by 6.4% to meet the fiscal year 2009 forecast, grew at an average rate of 5.5% during the first quarter of fiscal year 2009. Overall revenues for the first quarter of fiscal year 2009 declined 4.2%, compared to the forecasted 2% growth for fiscal year 2009.

Virginia has taken the following actions to address the reduction in revenues:

In mid-July, 2008, the Governor directed state agencies to freeze certain hiring without prior approval at the cabinet level, and to suspend nonessential travel, discretionary equipment purchases and new consulting contracts. The Governor also advised agencies to expect further budget adjustments to reflect any reductions in the general fund revenue forecast for fiscal years 2009 and 2010.
In mid-August, 2008, the Governor accelerated the Fall revenue forecasting process for the remainder of the fiscal year 2009 and for fiscal year 2010 from the usual November timeframe to the first part of October. The revised revenue forecast (described below) is based in part on the reports received from the Governor’s Advisory Board of Economists and the Governor’s Advisory Council in Revenue Estimates, both of which met in mid-September, 2008. Complying with the statutorily-prescribed revenue forecasting process results in a consensus model used to develop reasonable revisions to the biennial revenue forecast.
In early September, 2008, the Governor ordered heads of state agencies to prepare three sets of spending plans for the current budget biennium, reflecting spending cuts of 5%, 10% and 15%. Under applicable law, the Governor is authorized to make cuts of up to 15% of appropriated line items, subject to certain exceptions, when the General Assembly is not in session.
In early October, 2008, the Governor presented his revised revenue forecast, which projected a shortfall in general fund revenues of $973.6 million for fiscal year 2009 and $1.54 billion for fiscal year 2010. In order to reduce the shortfall for fiscal year 2009, the Governor specified reducing state agency spending by over $323 million, recovering over $40 million in various balances from fiscal year 2008 and capturing savings of over $24 million from his previous spending directives to state agencies. The Governor also expects savings of $100 million from improved business practices and efficiencies, nearly $32 million from the reduction or elimination of current services, over $27 million from reduced personnel costs and over $13 million from reduced discretionary expenses. The Governor proposed addressing the remaining shortfall for fiscal year 2009 by financing nearly $250 million in capital outlays through the issuance of bonds and withdrawing $400 million from the Revenue Stabilization Fund, but these actions will require approval by the General Assembly.

On December 17, 2008, the Governor presented the 2009 Budget Bill (House Bill 1600/Senate Bill 850) (the “2009 Budget Bill”) in order to address the projected revenue shortfalls in fiscal years 2009 and 2010. The General Assembly, which convened on January 14, 2009, and adjourns on February 28, 2009, is currently considering the 2009 Budget Bill.

Most recently, Fitch Ratings, Inc. (“Fitch”), Moody’s Investors Service, Inc. (“Moody’s”), and Standard & Poor’s Ratings Services, a division of The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. (“S&P”) assigned the ratings of AAA, Aaa, and AAA, respectively, to the long-term general obligations bonds of Virginia.

Such ratings reflect only the views of the respective rating agencies and an explanation of the significance of such ratings may be obtained only from the respective rating agency. There can be no assurance given that such ratings will be continued for any given period of time or that they will not be revised downward or withdrawn entirely by such rating agencies if, in their judgment, the circumstances so warrant.

Special Considerations Regarding Investment in New Jersey State-Specific Obligations. The following information provides only a brief summary of the complex factors affecting the financial situation in New Jersey, does not purport to be a complete description and is largely based on information drawn from official statements relating to securities offerings of New Jersey municipal obligations available as of the date of this Statement of Additional Information. The accuracy and completeness of the information contained in such offering statements has not been independently verified.

New Jersey Economic Information and Trends. New Jersey’s economic base is diversified, consisting of a variety of manufacturing, construction and service industries, supplemented by rural areas with selective commercial agriculture.

New Jersey’s economy continued to expand in 2007 but at a slower pace than 2006. New Jersey added approximately 117,800 jobs between the bottom of the employment cycle in March 2003 and December 2007. In 2007, payroll employment grew at an average annual rate of 0.1% after growing at rates of 0.8% in 2006, and 1.0% in 2005. New Jersey’s level of payroll employment in December 2007 was around 4.1 million, remaining above the 4 million mark for the 47th month in a row.

New Jersey’s employment fell by -0.1% in May 2008 (-5,300 jobs) as compared to May 2007; this represents the first decline in 2008 as compared to a year ago. Most of the job losses reported in May 2008 were for the financial services sector (-8,300 jobs) reflecting the turmoil due to the subprime mortgage crisis. New Jersey also continues to have job losses in manufacturing (-8,000 jobs) and in construction (-4,700 jobs), which may remain weak if the housing sector continues to decline. The government sector also shed over 1,000 jobs during this period. Employment gains between May 2007 and May 2008 were primarily spread across the service providing sectors with particularly strong growth in education and health services (11,600 jobs) followed by professional business services (3,900 jobs) and other services (2,300 jobs), as compared to a year ago.

The generally stable labor market conditions have kept New Jersey’s employment rate below 5.0% through March 2008; however, it has increased to 5.4% in May 2008, reflecting the recent softening trend. However, New Jersey’s unemployment rate remains below the national unemployment rate.

According to the United States Commerce Department, Bureau of Economic Analysis in a release dated June 19, 2008, the preliminary growth rate for New Jersey’s personal income of 3.6% for the first quarter of 2008 came in below the revised growth rate of 5.1% for the fourth quarter of 2007.

The housing sector is expected to continue to weaken in the months ahead with housing permits in 2008 expected to decline to approximately 20,000 units, significantly below the level of housing permits of approximately 34,000 units for 2006 and the approximately 25,000 units in 2007. Vehicle registrations fell by over 4% in 2007 and registrations for the first quarter of 2008 remain 9% below the same period a year ago. New vehicle registrations are projected to remain below the 600,000 vehicle registration level in 2008 and 2009.

New Jersey and the nation are expected to continue to experience moderating economic growth in 2008. In the Beige Book on economic performance released by the Federal Reserve Board on June 11, 2008, the Federal Reserve Board stated the economic activity remained generally weak. The latest New Jersey economic forecasts

from Global Insight, Moody’s, Economy.com, and Rutgers University expect continued economic growth at a moderate pace; however, financial market stresses and the slowing housing sector may lead to further slowing of economic growth.

New Jersey’s economy is expected to follow the national trend in 2008. Employment is projected to contract slightly by approximately -0.2% in 2008 and stay flat in 2009. The personal income growth rate is expected to increase at a moderate pace of less than the 4.0% rate in 2008 and 2009.

Inflation is expected to remain above the 3% rate expected in 2008, as higher energy and other commodity prices are a concern. However, the Federal Open Market Committee (the “Committee”) expects inflation to moderate later in 2008 into 2009. Low interest rates have supported spending in the housing sector and other consumer durables in New Jersey but further monetary easing not expected. However, as indicated at its June 2008 meeting, the Committee expressed its belief that the substantial easing of monetary policy to date along with the Committees efforts to foster market liquidity should help to promote moderate economic growth over time.

New Jersey and the nation may experience further near-term deterioration in growth and the expected pace of economic expansion may stall if consumers, investors, and businesses become more concerned about energy prices, financial market turmoil and geopolitical tensions. To a large extent, the future direction of the economy nationally and in New Jersey hinges on the assumptions regarding economic recession, energy prices and stability in financial markets. With the positive impact of the Federal economic stimulus package along with supportive monetary and fiscal policies, the long term prospects for economic growth of New Jersey are expected to stabilize in late 2008 and beyond.

New Jersey’s Budget and Appropriation System — Current Operating Expenses.

The General Fund. New Jersey operates on a fiscal year beginning July 1 and ending June 30. The General Fund is the fund into which all New Jersey revenues, not otherwise restricted by statute, are deposited and from which appropriations are made. The largest part of the total financial operations of New Jersey is accounted for in the General Fund. The New Jersey Legislature enacts an appropriations act on an annual basis which provides the basic framework for the operation of the General Fund. The undesignated General Fund balance at year end for fiscal year 2005 was $461.7 million, for fiscal year 2006 was $1,216.7 million and for fiscal year 2007 was $1,410.4 million. For fiscal years 2008 and 2009, the balance in the undesignated General Fund is estimated to be $400.5 and $116.8 million, respectively. The fund balances are available for appropriation in succeeding fiscal years.

Tax and Revenue Anticipation Notes. In fiscal year 1992, New Jersey initiated a program under which it issued tax and revenue anticipation notes to aid in providing effective cash flow management to fund imbalances which occur in the collection and disbursement of the General Fund and Property Tax Relief Fund revenues. Such tax and revenue anticipation notes do not constitute a general obligation of New Jersey or a debt or liability within the meaning of the New Jersey Constitution. Such notes constitute special obligations of New Jersey payable solely from monies on deposit in the General Fund and Property Tax Relief Fund that are legally available for such payment.

New Jersey Capital Project Financings.

General Obligation Bonds. New Jersey finances certain capital projects through the sale of its general obligation bonds. These bonds are backed by the faith and credit of New Jersey. Certain state tax revenues and certain other fees are pledged to meet the principal payments, interest payments and redemption premium payments, if any, required to fully pay the bonds. The aggregate outstanding general obligation bonded indebtedness of New Jersey as of June 30, 2008 was $2,801,345,482. The appropriation for the debt service obligation on outstanding projected indebtedness is $270.9 million for fiscal year 2009.

Pay-As-You-Go. In addition to payment from bond proceeds, capital projects can also be funded by appropriation of current revenues on a pay-as-you-go basis. In fiscal year 2009, the amount appropriated for this purpose is $1,206.2 million.

Other Long Term Debt Obligations of New Jersey.

“Moral Obligation” Bonds. The authorizing legislation for certain New Jersey entities provides for specific budgetary procedures with respect to certain obligations issued by such entities. Pursuant to such legislation, a designated official is required to certify any deficiency in a debt service reserve fund maintained to meet the payments of principal of and interest on the obligations and a New Jersey appropriation in the amount of the deficiency is to be made. However, the New Jersey Legislature is not legally bound to make such an appropriation. Bonds issued pursuant to authorizing legislation of this type are sometimes referred to as “moral obligation” bonds. Those New Jersey authorities and instrumentalities that issue bonds that constitute a “moral obligation” of New Jersey include: (i) New Jersey Housing and Mortgage Finance Agency; (ii) South Jersey Port Corporation; and (iii) New Jersey Higher Education Student Assistance Authority. There is no statutory limitation on the amount of “moral obligation” bonds which may be issued by eligible New Jersey entities.

As of June 30, 2008, outstanding “moral obligation” bonded indebtedness issued by New Jersey entities total $1,720,175,000 and fiscal year 2009 debt service subject to “moral obligation” is $87,105,635.

Obligations Supported by New Jersey Revenue Subject to Annual Appropriation. New Jersey has entered into a number of leases and contracts described below (collectively, the “Agreements” and each an “Agreement”) with several governmental authorities to secure the financing of various projects and programs in New Jersey. Under the terms of the Agreements, New Jersey has agreed to make payments equal to the debt service on, and other costs related to, the obligations sold to finance the projects, including payments on swap agreements defined below. New Jersey’s obligations to make payments with respect to certain financings includes payments related to interest rate exchange agreements described below (“swap agreements”) entered into with respect to such financings. Under such swap agreements, the issuer will make periodic payments to the swap counterparty at either a fixed or variable rate of interest, and will receive periodic payments from the swap counterparty at either a variable or fixed rate of interest, such interest calculations based on the principal or “notional” amount of the swap agreement. If the swap agreement is terminated prior to its stated termination date, either the issuer or the swap counterparty may be required to make a termination payment to the other party. If the payments to an issuer under a swap agreement are not sufficient to pay the interest on the issuer’s related obligation, the issuer must pay such deficiency. New Jersey’s obligation to make payments under the Agreements is subject to and dependent upon annual appropriations being made by the New Jersey Legislature for such purposes. The New Jersey Legislature has no legal obligation to enact such appropriations, but has done so to date for all such obligations. Below is a discussion of those financings pursuant to which State authorities and instrumentalities have entered into Agreements with New Jersey to secure the financing of various State projects.

New Jersey Economic Development Authority. The New Jersey Economic Development Authority (“NJEDA”) issues bonds secured by Agreements pursuant to the following legislative programs: (i) Economic Recovery Bonds issued to finance various economic development purposes (with payments made by New Jersey pursuant to an Agreement being equivalent to payments due to New Jersey under an agreement with the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, subject to appropriation by the New Jersey Legislature); (ii) Pension Bonds issued for the purpose of financing the unfunded accrued pension liability for New Jersey’s retirement system; (iii) Market Transition Facility Bonds issued to pay current and anticipated liabilities and expenses of the Market Transition Facility, which issued private passenger automobile insurance policies for drivers who could not be insured by private insurance companies on a voluntary basis; (iv) the School Facility Construction Bonds (the principal amount of bonds authorized to be issued is $8.9 billion for the “Abbott” districts, $3.5 billion for all other districts and $150 million for county vocational school district projects), pursuant to which the NJEDA issues bonds to finance New Jersey’s share of costs for school facility construction projects and debt service on the bonds is paid pursuant to a contract between the NJEDA and the New Jersey Treasurer; (v) pursuant to the Motor Vehicle Security and Customer Service Act, the NJEDA is authorized to issue bonds to pay the costs of capital improvements for the New Jersey Motor Vehicle Commission facilities (authorized in an amount not exceeding $160 million); (vi) pursuant to the Municipal Rehabilitation and Economic Recovery Act the NJEDA is authorized to issue bonds for the purpose of making loans and grants to sustain economic activity in qualified municipalities; (vii) pursuant to the Business Employment Incentive Program Act, the NJEDA is authorized to issue bonds to provide funds for the payment of, among other things, certain business employment incentive grants in consideration of the attainment of certain employment promotion targets; (viii) the lease financing program through which certain real property, office buildings and equipment are financed with NJEDA bonds (secured by

Agreements between the New Jersey Treasurer and NJEDA); and (ix) pursuant to the Cigarette Tax Securitization Act of 2004, the NJEDA is authorized to issue bonds payable, and secured by, a portion, $0.0325 per cigarette, of the cigarette tax imposed pursuant to N.J.S.A. 54:40A-1 et seq.

New Jersey Educational Facilities Authority. The New Jersey Educational Facilities Authority issues bonds secured by Agreements pursuant to seven separate legislative programs to finance (i) the purchase of equipment to be leased to institutions of higher learning; (ii) grants to New Jersey’s public and private institutions of higher education for the development, construction and improvement of instructional, laboratory, communication and research facilities; (iii) grants to public and private institutions of higher education to develop a technology infrastructure within and among New Jersey’s institutions of higher education; (iv) capital projects at county colleges; (v) grants to public and private institutions of higher education to finance the renewal, renovation, improvement, expansion, construction and reconstruction of educational facilities and technology infrastructures; (vi) grants to public libraries to finance the acquisition, expansion and rehabilitation of buildings to be used as public library facilities and the acquisition and installation of equipment to be located therein; and (vii) loans to public and private institutions of higher education and public or private secondary schools, military schools or boarding schools located in New Jersey which are required under the Dormitory Safety Trust Fund Act to install automatic fire suppression systems for the cost of or a portion of the cost of the construction, reconstruction, development, extension or improvement of dormitory safety facilities, including fire prevention and sprinkler systems.

New Jersey Transportation Trust Fund Authority. In July 1984, New Jersey created the New Jersey Transportation Trust Fund Authority (the “NJTTFA”) for the purpose of funding a portion of New Jersey’s share of the cost of improvements to its transportation system. The principal amount of the NJTTFA’s bonds, notes or other obligations which may be issued in any fiscal year commencing with the fiscal year commencing July 1, 2006 and ending with the fiscal year beginning on July 1, 2010, generally may not exceed $1,600,000,000 in any fiscal year, as such amount shall be reduced in each of those fiscal years by the amount by which the appropriation of New Jersey funds to the Transportation Trust Fund Account for that fiscal year shall exceed $895,000,000; provided, however, that if a portion of that permitted amount of debt, less any reduction as provided above, is not incurred in a fiscal year, an amount not greater than the unused portion may be incurred in a subsequent fiscal year in addition to the amount otherwise permitted, subject to the approval of the Joint Budget Oversight Committee of the New Jersey Legislature. The bonds issued by the NJTTFA are special obligations of the NJTTFA payable from a contract among the NJTTFA, the New Jersey Treasurer and the Commissioner of Transportation, subject to appropriation of the New Jersey Legislature.

New Jersey Building Authority. The New Jersey Building Authority (“NJBA”) issues bonds for the acquisition, construction, renovation and rehabilitation of various New Jersey office buildings, historic buildings and correctional facilities. Pursuant to a lease agreement, New Jersey makes rental payments to NJBA in amounts sufficient to pay debt service on the NJBA bonds, subject to appropriation by the New Jersey Legislature.

New Jersey Sports and Exposition Authority. Legislation enacted in 1992 authorizes the New Jersey Sports and Exposition Authority (the “NJSEA”) to issue bonds for various purposes payable from a contract between the NJSEA and the New Jersey Treasurer. Pursuant to such contract, the NJSEA undertakes certain projects and the New Jersey Treasurer credits to the NJSEA amounts from the General Fund sufficient to pay debt service and other costs related to the bonds, subject to appropriations by the New Jersey Legislature.

Garden State Preservation Trust. In July 1999, New Jersey established the Garden State Preservation Trust (“GSPT”) for the purpose of preserving, as open space, farmland and historic properties. Pursuant to the enabling act of the GSPT, the principal amount of bonds, notes or other obligations which may be issued prior to July 1, 2009, other than refunding bonds, cannot exceed $1.15 billion. After July 1, 2009, only refunding bonds can be issued. The obligations to be issued by the GSPT will be special obligations of the GSPT payable from amounts paid to it under a contract between GSPT and the New Jersey Treasurer, subject to appropriations by the New Jersey Legislature.

New Jersey Health Care Facilities Financing Authority. Pursuant to Legislation, the New Jersey Health Care Facilities Financing Authority is authorized to acquire, construct and lease a project to the New Jersey Department of Human Services (“DHS”) and to issue bonds to finance each project, the debt service on which shall be paid by DHS, subject to appropriations by the New Jersey Legislature.

Under the Hospital Asset Transformation Program established by P.L. 2000, c. 98 and as amended by P.L. 2007, c.110, the New Jersey Health Care Facilities Financing Authority is authorized to issue bonds to provide funds to any nonprofit health care organization in order to, among other things, satisfy the outstanding indebtedness of a hospital, pay the costs of transitioning or terminating the provision of hospital acute care services at a specific location, including the costs of construction, renovation, equipment, information technology and working capital, and pay the costs associated with the closure or acquisition of a general hospital. Such bonds are special obligations to the New Jersey Health Care Facilities Financing Authority payable from amounts paid to it under a contract between the New Jersey Health Care Facilities Financing Authority and the New Jersey Treasurer, subject to appropriation by the New Jersey Legislature.

Each of the NJEDA, the NJBA, the NJSEA and the NJTTFA have entered into a number of swap agreements with respect to certain bond issues. In each case, the outstanding aggregate principal amount of the bonds is equal to the aggregate notional amount of the swap agreements related thereto. The State’s obligation to make payments under the swap agreements is subject to appropriation by the New Jersey Legislature.

New Jersey Certificates of Participation. New Jersey, acting through the Director of the Division of Purchase and Property, has entered into a series of lease purchase agreements which provide for the acquisition of equipment, services and real property to be used by various departments and agencies of New Jersey. Certificates of Participation in such lease purchase agreements have been issued. A Certificate of Participation represents a proportionate interest of the owner thereof in the lease payments to be made by New Jersey under the terms of the lease purchase agreement, subject to appropriation by the New Jersey Legislature.

New Jersey Supported School and County College Bonds. Legislation provides for future appropriations for New Jersey aid to local school districts equal to a portion of the debt service on bonds issued by such local school districts for construction and renovation of school facilities (P.L. 1968, c. 177; P.L. 1971, c. 10; and P.L. 1978, c. 74) and for New Jersey aid to counties equal to a portion of the debt service on bonds issued by or on behalf of counties for construction of county college facilities (P.L. 1971, c. 12, as amended). The New Jersey Legislature has no legal obligation to make such appropriations, but has done so to date for all obligations issued under these laws.

Department of Human Services Programs. The NJEDA issues revenue bonds from time to time on behalf of non-profit community services providers. The payment of debt service on these bonds as well as the payment of certain other provider expenses is made by New Jersey pursuant to service contracts between DHS and these providers, subject to appropriation by the New Jersey legislature.

Conduit Indebtedness of New Jersey Authorities and Instrumentalities. Certain State authorities and instrumentalities are authorized to issue debt on behalf of various private and governmental entities on a conduit basis. Under such circumstances, neither the New Jersey authority or instrumentality acting as a conduit issuer nor the State of New Jersey is responsible for the repayment of such debt. The payment obligations with respect to such debt are solely that of the entity on whose behalf the debt was issued. Those State authorities and instrumentalities that issue debt on behalf of private and governmental entities on a conduit basis include: (i) the New Jersey Economic Development Authority; (ii) the New Jersey Health Care Facilities Financing Authority; (iii) the New Jersey Educational Facilities Authority; (iv) the New Jersey Housing and Mortgage Finance Agency; (v) the New Jersey Environmental Infrastructure Trust; and (vi) the New Jersey Redevelopment Agency.

Counties and Municipalities.

Regulation of County and Municipal Finance. New Jersey’s county and municipal finance system is regulated by various statutes designed to assure that all county and municipal governments and their issuing authorities remain on a sound financial basis. Regulatory and remedial statutes are enforced by the Division of Local Government Services (the “Division”) in the New Jersey Department of Community Affairs.

The Local Budget Law (N.J.S.A. 40A:4-1 et seq.) (the “Local Budget Law”) imposes specific budgetary procedures upon counties and municipalities (“local units”). Every local unit must adopt an operating budget which is balanced on a cash basis, and items of revenue and appropriation must be examined by the Director of the Division (the “Director”). The accounts of each local unit must be independently audited by a registered municipal accountant. New Jersey law provides that budgets must be submitted in a form promulgated by the Division. The Division reviews all local unit annual budgets prior to adoption for compliance with the Local

Budget Law. The Director is empowered (i) to require changes for compliance with law as a condition of approval; (ii) to disapprove budgets not in accordance with law; and (iii) to prepare the budget of a local unit, within the limits of the adopted budget of the previous year with suitable adjustments for legal compliance, if the local unit fails to adopt a budget in accordance with law. This process insures that every local unit annually adopts a budget balanced on a cash basis, within limitations on appropriations or tax levies, respectively, and making adequate provision for (i) principal of and interest on indebtedness falling due in the fiscal year, (ii) deferred charges, and (iii) other statutory expenditure requirements. The Director also oversees changes to local budgets after adoption as permitted by law, and enforces regulations pertaining to execution of adopted budgets and financial administration. In addition to the exercise of regulatory and oversight functions, the Division offers expert technical assistance to local units in all aspects of financial administration, including revenue collection and cash management procedures, contracting procedures, debt management and administrative analysis.

The Local Government Cap Law (N.J.S.A. 40A:4-45.1 et seq.) (the “Cap Law”) limits the year-to-year increase of the total appropriations of any local unit to either 2.5% or a cost-of-living adjustment determined annually by the Director, whichever is less. However, where the cost-of-living adjustment is less than 2.5%, the Cap Law also permits the governing body of any local unit to approve the use of a higher percentage rate up to 3.5%. Regardless of the rate utilized, certain exceptions exist to the Cap Law’s limitation on increases in appropriations. The principal exceptions to these limitations are: (i) municipal and county appropriations to pay debt service requirements; (ii) requirements to comply with certain other New Jersey or Federal mandates; (iii) appropriations of private and public dedicated funds; (iv) amounts approved by referendum; and (v) in the case of municipalities only, to fund the preceding year’s cash deficit or to reserve for shortfalls in tax collections, and amounts required pursuant to contractual obligations for specified services. The Cap Law was re-enacted in 1990 with amendments and made a permanent part of the municipal finance system.

Additionally, new legislation constituting P.L. 2007, c.62, effective April 3, 2007, imposes a 4% cap on the tax levy of a municipality, county, fire district or solid waste collection district, with certain exceptions and subject to a number of adjustments. The exclusions from the limit include increases required to be raised for debt service on the local unit’s bonds and notes, increases to replace certain lost state aid, increases in certain pension contributions, increases in the reserve for uncollected taxes required for municipalities, and certain increases in health care costs over 4%. The Division may approve waivers for certain extraordinary costs identified by statute, and voters may approve increases over 4% not otherwise permitted by a vote of 60% of the voters voting on a public question.

Regulation of the Issuance of Bonds by Counties and Municipalities. New Jersey law also regulates the issuance of debt by local units. The Local Budget Law limits the amount of tax anticipation notes that may be issued by local units and requires the repayment of such notes within 120 days of the end of the fiscal year (six months in the case of the counties) in which issued. The Local Bond Law (N.J.S.A. 40A:2-1 et seq.) governs the issuance of bonds and notes by the local units. No local unit is permitted to issue bonds for the payment of current expenses (other than fiscal year adjustment bonds). Local units may not issue bonds to pay outstanding bonds, except for refunding purposes, and then only with the approval of the Local Finance Board. Local units may issue bond anticipation notes for temporary periods not exceeding in the aggregate approximately ten years from the date of issue. The debt that any local unit may authorize is limited to a percentage of its equalized valuation basis. In the calculation of debt capacity, the Local Bond Law and certain other statutes permit the deduction of certain classes of debt (“statutory deduction”) from all authorized debt of the local unit in computing whether a local unit has exceeded its statutory debt limit. The Local Bond Law permits the issuance of certain obligations, including obligations issued for certain emergency or self liquidating purposes, notwithstanding the statutory debt limitation described above, but, with certain exceptions, it is then necessary to obtain the approval of the Local Finance Board.

School Districts.

Regulation of School District Finance. All New Jersey school districts are coterminous with the boundaries of one or more municipalities. They are characterized by the manner in which the board of education, the governing body of the school districts, takes office. Type I school districts, most commonly found in cities, have a board of education, appointed by the mayor or the chief executive officer of the municipality, constituting the school district. In a Type II school district, the board of education is elected by the voters of the district. Nearly all regional and consolidated school districts are Type II school districts. The New Jersey Department of Education

has been empowered with authority to abolish an existing school board and create a State-operated school district where the existing school board has failed or is unable to take the corrective actions necessary to provide a thorough and efficient system of education in that school district pursuant to N.J.S.A. 18A:7A-15 et seq. (the “School Intervention Act”). The State-operated school district, under the direction of a New Jersey appointed superintendent, has all of the powers and authority of the local board of education and of the local district superintendent.

New Jersey’s school districts operate under the same comprehensive review and regulation as do its counties and municipalities, including, without limitation, the new legislation constituting P.L. 2007, c.62, effective April 3, 2007, discussed above. Certain exceptions and differences are provided, but New Jersey’s supervision of school finance closely parallels that of local governments.

Regulation of the Issuance of Bonds by School Districts. School district bonds and temporary notes are issued in conformity with N.J.S.A. 18A:24-1 et seq. (the “School Bond Law”), which closely parallels the Local Bond Law (for further information relating to the Local Bond Law, see “Counties and Municipalities — Regulation of the Issuance of Bonds by Counties and Municipalities” herein). Although school districts are exempted from the 5 percent down payment provision generally applied to bonds issued by local units, they are subject to debt limits (which vary depending on the type of school system) and to New Jersey regulation of their borrowing.

School bonds are authorized by (i) an ordinance adopted by the governing body of a municipality within a Type I school district; (ii) adoption of a proposal by resolution by the board of education of a Type II school district having a board of school estimate; (iii) adoption of a proposal by resolution by the board of education and approval of the proposal by the legal voters of any other Type II school district; or (iv) adoption of a proposal by resolution by a capital project control board for projects in a State-operated school district.

If school bonds of a Type II school district will exceed the school district borrowing capacity, a school district (other than a regional school district) may use the balance of the municipal borrowing capacity. If the total amount of debt exceeds the school district’s borrowing capacity, the Commissioner and the Local Finance Board must approve the proposed authorization before it is submitted to the voters. All authorizations of debt in a Type II school district without a board of school estimate require an approving referendum, except where, after hearing, the Commissioner and the New Jersey Department of Education determine that the issuance of such debt is necessary to meet the constitutional obligation to provide a thorough and efficient system of public schools. When such obligations are issued, they are issued by, and in the name of, the school district.

In Type I and II school districts with a board of school estimate, that board examines the capital proposal of the board of education and certifies the amount of bonds to be authorized. When it is necessary to exceed the borrowing capacity of the municipality, the approval of a majority of the legally qualified voters of the municipality is required, together with the approval of the Commissioner and the Local Finance Board. When such bonds are issued by a Type I school district, they are issued by the municipality and identified as school bonds. When bonds are issued by a Type II school district having a board of school estimate, they are issued by, and in the name of, the school district.

School District Lease Purchase Financings. School districts are permitted to enter into lease purchase agreements for the acquisition of equipment or for the acquisition of land and school buildings in order to undertake the construction or the improvement of the school buildings. Lease purchase agreements for equipment cannot exceed five years. Lease purchase agreements for school facilities must be approved by the Commissioner, the voters or the board of school estimate, as applicable. The payment of rent on an equipment lease and on a five year and under facilities lease purchase agreement is treated as a current expense and is within the cap on the school district’s budget. Under the Comprehensive Education Improvement and Financing Act, lease purchase payments on leases in excess of five years will be treated as debt service payments and therefore receive debt service aid if the school district is entitled and will be outside the school district’s spending limitation of the General Fund.

New Jersey School Bond Reserve Act. The New Jersey School Bond Reserve Act (N.J.S.A. 18A:56-17 et seq.) establishes a school bond reserve within the constitutionally dedicated fund for the support of free public schools (the “Fund”). Amendments to the Act provide that the Fund will be divided into two school bond reserve accounts. All bonds issued prior to July 1, 2003 shall be benefited by a school bond reserve account funded in an amount equal to 1¹/2% of the aggregate amount of issued and outstanding bonded indebtedness of New Jersey counties, municipalities or school districts for school purposes issued prior to July 1, 2003 and all bonds issued on or after July 1, 2003 shall be benefited by a school bond reserve account equal to 1% of the aggregate amount of issued and outstanding bonded indebtedness of New Jersey counties, municipalities

or school districts for school purposes issued on or after July 1, 2003, provided in each case, that such amounts do not exceed the moneys available in the applicable account. If a municipality, county or school district is unable to meet payment of the principal of or interest on any of its school bonds, the trustee of the school bond reserve will purchase such bonds at the face amount thereof or pay the holders thereof the interest due or to become due. There has never been an occasion to call upon this Fund.

Local Financing Authorities.

Regulation of Local Financing Authorities. The Local Authorities Fiscal Control Law (N.J.S.A. 40A:5A-1 et seq.) provides for State supervision of the fiscal operations and debt issuance practices of independent local authorities and special taxing districts by the New Jersey Department of Community Affairs. The Local Authorities Fiscal Control Law applies to all autonomous public bodies, created by local units, which are empowered (i) to issue bonds, (ii) to impose facility or service charges, or (iii) to levy taxes in their districts. This encompasses most autonomous local authorities (sewerage, municipal utilities, parking, pollution control, improvement, etc.) and special taxing districts (fire, water, etc.). Authorities which are subject to differing New Jersey or Federal financial restrictions are exempted, but only to the extent of that difference.

Financial control responsibilities over local authorities and special districts are assigned to the Local Finance Board and the Director. The Local Finance Board exercises approval over creation of new authorities and special districts as well as their dissolution. The Local Finance Board prescribes minimum audit requirements to be followed by authorities and special districts in the conduct of their annual audits. The Director reviews and approves annual budgets of authorities and special districts.

Regulation of the Issuance of Bonds by Local Financing Authorities. Certain local authorities are authorized to issue debt on behalf of various entities on a conduit basis. Under such circumstances, neither the local authority acting as a conduit issuer, the local unit creating such local authority nor the State of New Jersey is responsible for the repayment of such debt. The payment obligations with respect to such debt is solely that of the entity on whose behalf the debt was issued. The Local Finance Board reviews, conducts public hearings, and issues findings and recommendations on any proposed project financing of an authority or district, and on any proposed financing agreement between a local unit and an authority or special district.

Pollution Control Bonds. In the 1970’s, the New Jersey Legislature initiated a comprehensive statutory mechanism for the management of solid waste disposal within New Jersey that required each county to develop a plan for county-wide controlled flow of solid waste to a franchised location. The controlled flow of solid waste to a franchised location enabled the imposition of above-market-rate disposal fees. Most counties created independent local authorities or utilized existing local authorities in order to finance, with the proceeds of bonds, the technically complex and expensive infrastructure required to implement this statutory mechanism. Typically, the primary security for the amortization of the bonds was the above-market-rate disposal fees, although some bonds were further secured by a guaranty of the respective county. On May 1, 1997, in Atlantic Coast Demolition & Recycling, Inc. v. Board of Chosen Freeholders of Atlantic County, 112 F.3d 652 (3d Cir. 1997), the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit held that New Jersey’s system of controlled flow of solid waste to franchised locations unconstitutionally discriminated against out-of-State operators of waste disposal facilities and, therefore, violated the Commerce Clause of the United States Constitution. Subsequently, the United States Supreme Court denied a petition for writ of certiorari. This decision has terminated controlled flow of solid waste to franchised locations within New Jersey. In the absence of controlled flow, franchisees facing competition from other operators of waste disposal facilities are unable to charge above-market-rate disposal fees. The reduction of such fees to competitive levels has reduced correspondingly the primary source of security for the outstanding bonds of the local authorities. The facts relevant to each local authority within New Jersey remain unique. Some local authorities have successfully implemented refunding and work-out financings. Other local authorities have eliminated revenue shortfalls through the imposition of special waste disposal taxes. In other cases, revenue shortfalls continue, but bond payment defaults by such local authorities have been avoided as a result of a New Jersey program by which New Jersey to date has voluntarily provided financial assistance to qualifying local authorities to satisfy bond payment obligations on a given bond payment date. However, no assurance can be given that such New Jersey subsidies will be made available to such local authorities in the future (or that sufficient funds will be made available to New Jersey for such purpose), particularly given recent New Jersey budget reductions.

Qualified Bonds. In 1976, legislation was enacted (P.L. 1976, c. 38 and c. 39) which provides for the issuance by municipalities and school districts of “qualified bonds.” Whenever a local board of education or the governing body of a municipality determines to issue bonds, it may file an application with the Local Finance Board, and, in the case of a local board of education, the Commissioner of Education of New Jersey, to qualify bonds pursuant to P.L. 1976 c. 38 or c. 39. Upon approval of such an application, the New Jersey Treasurer shall withhold from certain New Jersey revenues or other New Jersey aid payable to the municipalities, or from New Jersey school aid payable to the school district, as appropriate, an amount sufficient to pay debt service on such bonds. These “qualified bonds” are not direct, guaranteed or moral obligations of New Jersey, and debt service on such bonds will be provided by New Jersey only if the above mentioned appropriations are made by New Jersey.

Litigation of the State of New Jersey.

General. At any given time, there are various numbers of claims and cases pending against the State of New Jersey, State agencies and State employees, seeking recovery of monetary damages that are primarily paid out of the fund created pursuant to the New Jersey Tort Claims Act (N.J.S.A. 59:1-1 et seq.). New Jersey does not formally estimate its reserve representing potential exposure for these claims and cases. New Jersey is unable to estimate its exposure for these claims and cases.

New Jersey routinely receives notices of claim seeking substantial sums of money. The majority of these claims have historically proven to be of substantially less value than the amount originally claimed. Under the New Jersey Tort Claims Act, any tort litigation against New Jersey must be preceded by a notice of claim, which affords New Jersey the opportunity for a six-month investigation prior to the filing of any suit against it. In addition, at any given time, there are various numbers of contract and other claims against New Jersey and New Jersey agencies, including environmental claims asserted against New Jersey, among other parties, arising from the alleged disposal of hazardous waste. Claimants in such matters seek recovery of monetary damages or other relief which, if granted, would require the expenditure of funds. New Jersey is unable to estimate its exposure for these claims.

At any given time, there are various numbers of claims and cases pending against the University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey and its employees, seeking recovery of monetary damages that are primarily paid out of the Self Insurance Reserve Fund created pursuant to the New Jersey Tort Claims Act. An independent study estimated an aggregate potential exposure of $148,600,000 for tort and medical malpractice claims pending as of December 31, 2007. In addition, at any given time, there are various numbers of contract and other claims against the University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey, seeking recovery of monetary damages or other relief which, if granted, would require the expenditure of funds. New Jersey is unable to estimate its exposure for these claims.

Lawsuits currently pending or threatened in which New Jersey has the potential for either a significant loss of revenue or a significant unanticipated expenditure are described in official statements relating to securities offerings of New Jersey municipal obligations available as of the date of this Statement of Additional Information.

ADDITIONAL INVESTMENT LIMITATIONS

Each Portfolio is subject to the investment limitations enumerated in this subsection which may be changed with respect to a particular Portfolio only by a vote of the holders of a majority of such Portfolio’s outstanding shares (as defined below under “Miscellaneous”).

Money Market Portfolios:

1. Each of the Money Market, Municipal Money Market and U.S. Treasury Money Market Portfolios may not purchase securities of any one issuer (other than securities issued or guaranteed by the U.S. Government, its agencies or instrumentalities or certificates of deposit for any such securities) if more than 5% of the value of the Portfolio’s total assets (taken at current value) would be invested in the securities of such issuer, or more than 10% of the issuer’s outstanding voting securities would be owned by the Portfolio or the Fund, except that up to 25% of the value of the Portfolio’s total assets (taken at current value) may be invested without regard to these limitations. For purposes of this limitation, a security is considered to be issued by the entity (or entities) whose assets and revenues back the security. A guarantee of a security is not deemed to be a security issued by the guarantor when the value of all securities issued and guaranteed by the guarantor, and owned by the Portfolio, does not exceed 10% of the value of the Portfolio’s total assets.

2. No Portfolio may borrow money or issue senior securities, except that each Portfolio may borrow from banks and (other than a Municipal Money Market Portfolio) enter into reverse repurchase agreements for temporary purposes in amounts up to one-third of the value of its total assets at the time of such borrowing; or mortgage, pledge or hypothecate any assets, except in connection with any such borrowing and then in amounts not in excess of one-third of the value of the Portfolio’s total assets at the time of such borrowing. No Portfolio will purchase securities while its aggregate borrowings (including reverse repurchase agreements and borrowings from banks) in excess of 5% of its total assets are outstanding. Securities held in escrow or separate accounts in connection with a Portfolio’s investment practices are not deemed to be pledged for purposes of this limitation.

3. Each of the Municipal Money Market, U.S. Treasury Money Market, Ohio Municipal Money Market, Pennsylvania Municipal Money Market, North Carolina Municipal Money Market, Virginia Municipal Money Market and New Jersey Municipal Money Market Portfolios may not purchase securities which would cause 25% or more of the value of its total assets at the time of purchase to be invested in the securities of one or more issuers conducting their principal business activities in the same industry. The Money Market Portfolio, on the other hand, may not purchase any securities which would cause, at the time of purchase, less than 25% of the value of its total assets to be invested in the obligations of issuers in the financial services industry, or in obligations, such as repurchase agreements, secured by such obligations (unless the Portfolio is in a temporary defensive position) or which would cause, at the time of purchase, more than 25% of the value of its total assets to be invested in the obligations of issuers in any other industry. In applying the investment limitations stated in this paragraph, (i) there is no limitation with respect to the purchase of (a) instruments issued (as defined in Investment Limitation number 1 above) or guaranteed by the United States, any state, territory or possession of the United States, the District of Columbia or any of their authorities, agencies, instrumentalities or political subdivisions, (b) instruments issued by domestic banks (which may include U.S. branches of non-U.S. banks) and (c) repurchase agreements secured by the instruments described in clauses (a) and (b); (ii) wholly-owned finance companies will be considered to be in the industries of their parents if their activities are primarily related to financing the activities of the parents; and (iii) utilities will be divided according to their services, for example, gas, gas transmission, electric and gas, electric and telephone will each be considered a separate industry.

4. Each of the Ohio Municipal Money Market, Pennsylvania Municipal Money Market, North Carolina Municipal Money Market, Virginia Municipal Money Market and New Jersey Municipal Money Market Portfolios will invest at least 80% of its net assets in AMT Paper (defined below) and instruments the interest on which is exempt from regular Federal income tax, except during defensive periods or during periods of unusual market conditions.

5. The Municipal Money Market Portfolio will invest at least 80% of its net assets in instruments the interest on which is exempt from regular Federal income tax and is not an item of tax preference for purposes of Federal alternative minimum tax, except during defensive periods or during periods of unusual market conditions.

AMT Paper is defined as Municipal Obligations the interest on which is an item of tax preference for purposes of the Federal alternative minimum tax.

Non-Money Market Portfolios:

Each of the Non-Money Market Portfolios (other than the Health Sciences Opportunities, Energy & Resources and All-Cap Energy & Resources Portfolios) may not:

1. Purchase securities of any one issuer (other than securities issued or guaranteed by the U.S. Government, its agencies or instrumentalities or certificates of deposit for any such securities) if more than 5% of the value of the Portfolio’s total assets would (taken at current value) be invested in the securities of such issuer, or more than 10% of the issuer’s outstanding voting securities would be owned by the Portfolio or the Fund, except that up to 25% of the value of the Portfolio’s total assets may (taken at current value) be invested without regard to these limitations. For purposes of this limitation, a security is considered to be

issued by the entity (or entities) whose assets and revenues back the security. A guarantee of a security shall not be deemed to be a security issued by the guarantors when the value of all securities issued and guaranteed by the guarantor, and owned by the Portfolio, does not exceed 10% of the value of the Portfolio’s total assets.

Each of the Non-Money Market Portfolios may not:

2. Purchase any securities which would cause 25% or more of the value of the Portfolio’s total assets at the time of purchase to be invested in the securities of one or more issuers conducting their principal business activities in the same industry, provided that (a) the Science & Technology Opportunities Portfolio may cause 25% or more of its total assets at the time of purchase to be invested in the securities of one or more issuers conducting their principal business activities in a single industry in the science and technology sectors as defined in its Prospectuses; (b) the Health Sciences Opportunities Portfolio will cause 25% or more of its total assets at the time of purchase to be invested in the securities of one or more issuers conducting their principal business activities in health sciences or related industries as described in the Prospectuses; (c) the Energy & Resources and All-Cap Energy & Resources Portfolios will each cause 25% or more of its total assets at the time of purchase to be invested in the securities of one or more issuers conducting their principal business activities in energy or natural resources industries as described in the Prospectuses; (d) there is no limitation with respect to (i) instruments issued or guaranteed by the United States and tax exempt instruments issued by any state, territory or possession of the United States, the District of Columbia or any of their authorities, agencies, instrumentalities or political subdivisions, and (ii) repurchase agreements secured by the instruments described in clause (i); (e) wholly-owned finance companies will be considered to be in the industries of their parents if their activities are primarily related to financing the activities of the parents; and (f) utilities will be divided according to their services; for example, gas, gas transmission, electric and gas, electric and telephone will each be considered a separate industry.

Each Non-Money Market Portfolio (other than the Asset Allocation and Global Opportunities Portfolios) may not:

3. Borrow money or issue senior securities, except that each Portfolio may borrow from banks and enter into reverse repurchase agreements for temporary purposes in amounts up to one-third of the value of its total assets at the time of such borrowing; or mortgage, pledge or hypothecate any assets, except in connection with any such borrowing and then in amounts not in excess of one-third of the value of the Portfolio’s total assets at the time of such borrowing. No Portfolio will purchase securities while its aggregate borrowings (including reverse repurchase agreements and borrowings from banks) in excess of 5% of its total assets are outstanding. Securities held in escrow or separate accounts in connection with a Portfolio’s investment practices are not deemed to be pledged for purposes of this limitation.

None of the Asset Allocation and Global Opportunities Portfolios may:

4. Issue senior securities, borrow money or pledge its assets, except that a Portfolio may borrow from banks or enter into reverse repurchase agreements or dollar rolls in amounts aggregating not more than 33¹/3% of the value of its total assets (calculated when the loan is made) to take advantage of investment opportunities and may pledge up to 33¹/3% of the value of its total assets to secure such borrowings. Each Portfolio is also authorized to borrow an additional 5% of its total assets without regard to the foregoing limitations for temporary purposes such as clearance of portfolio transactions and share redemptions. For purposes of these restrictions, the purchase or sale of securities on a “when-issued,” delayed delivery or forward commitment basis, the purchase and sale of options and futures contracts and collateral arrangements with respect thereto are not deemed to be the issuance of a senior security, a borrowing or a pledge of assets.

All Portfolios:

No Portfolio may:

1. Purchase or sell real estate, except that each Portfolio may purchase securities of issuers which deal in real estate and may purchase securities which are secured by interests in real estate.

2. Acquire any other investment company or investment company security except in connection with a merger, consolidation, reorganization or acquisition of assets or where otherwise permitted by the 1940 Act.

100

     3. Act as an underwriter of securities within the meaning of the Securities Act of 1933 except to the extent that the purchase of obligations directly from the issuer thereof, or the disposition of securities, in accordance with the Portfolio’s investment objective, policies and limitations may be deemed to be underwriting.

     4. Write or sell put options, call options, straddles, spreads, or any combination thereof, except for transactions in options on securities and securities indices, futures contracts and options on futures contracts and, in the case of the Exchange, Small/Mid-Cap Growth, Aurora, Capital Appreciation, Health Sciences Opportunities, Energy & Resources, All-Cap Energy & Resources and Global Opportunities Portfolios, currencies.

     5. Purchase securities of companies for the purpose of exercising control.

     6. Purchase securities on margin, make short sales of securities or maintain a short position, except that (a) this investment limitation shall not apply to a Portfolio’s transactions in futures contracts and related options or a Portfolio’s sale of securities short against the box, and (b) a Portfolio may obtain short-term credit as may be necessary for the clearance of purchases and sales of portfolio securities.

     7. Purchase or sell commodity contracts, or invest in oil, gas or mineral exploration or development programs, except that each Portfolio may, to the extent appropriate to its investment policies, purchase securities (publicly traded securities in the case of each Money Market Portfolio) of companies engaging in whole or in part in such activities and may enter into futures contracts and related options.

     8. Make loans, except that each Portfolio may purchase and hold debt instruments and enter into repurchase agreements in accordance with its investment objective and policies and may lend portfolio securities. See “Investment Policies-Additional Information on Investment Strategies-Securities Lending” above.

     9. Purchase or sell commodities except that each Portfolio may, to the extent appropriate to its investment policies, purchase securities of companies engaging in whole or in part in such activities, may engage in currency transactions and may enter into futures contracts and related options.

In addition, in compliance with Rule 35d-1 under the 1940 Act, each Municipal Money Market Portfolio’s requirement that it invest at least 80% of its assets in certain Municipal Obligations, as described in each Portfolio’s Prospectuses, is a fundamental policy that may be changed with respect to a particular Portfolio only by a vote of the holders of a majority of such Portfolio’s outstanding shares (as defined below under “Miscellaneous”).

Although the foregoing investment limitations would permit the Money Market Portfolios to invest in options, futures contracts and options on futures contracts, and to sell securities short against the box, those Portfolios do not currently intend to trade in such instruments or engage in such transactions during the next twelve months (except to the extent a portfolio security may be subject to a “demand feature” or “put” as permitted under SEC regulations for money market funds). Prior to making any such investments, a Money Market Portfolio would notify its shareholders and add appropriate descriptions concerning the instruments and transactions to its Prospectus.

Unless otherwise indicated, all limitations apply only at the time that a transaction is undertaken. Any change in the percentage of a Portfolio’s assets invested in certain securities or other instruments resulting from market fluctuations or other changes in the Portfolio’s total assets will not require the Portfolio to dispose of an investment until the Manager determines that it is practicable to sell or close out the investment without undue market or tax consequences.

101

TRUSTEES AND OFFICERS

THE FUND

The Board of Trustees of the Fund consists of thirteen individuals, eleven of whom are not “interested persons” of the Fund as defined in the 1940 Act (the “non-interested Trustees”). The Trustees are responsible for the oversight of the operations of the Fund and perform the various duties imposed on the directors of investment companies by the 1940 Act. The non-interested Trustees have retained independent legal counsel to assist them in connection with their duties.

The Board has five standing committees: an Audit Committee, a Governance and Nominating Committee, a Compliance Committee, a Performance Oversight Committee and an Executive Committee.

The members of the Audit Committee (the “Audit Committee”) are Kenneth L. Urish (chair), Herbert I. London and Frederick W. Winter, all of whom are non-interested Trustees. The principal responsibilities of the Audit Committee are to approve the selection, retention, termination and compensation of the Fund’s independent registered public accounting firm (the “independent auditors”) and to oversee the independent auditors’ work. The Audit Committee’s responsibilities include, without limitation, to (1) evaluate the qualifications and independence of the independent auditors; (2) approve all audit engagement terms and fees for the Fund; (3) review the conduct and results of each independent audit of the Fund’s financial statements; (4) review with the independent auditor any audit problems or difficulties encountered during or related to the conduct of the audit; (5) review the internal controls of the Fund and its service providers with respect to accounting and financial matters; (6) oversee the performance of the Fund’s internal audit function provided by its investment advisor, administrator, pricing agent or other service provider; (7) oversee policies, procedures and controls regarding valuation of the Fund’s investments; and (8) resolve any disagreements between Fund management and the independent auditors regarding financial reporting. The Board has adopted a written charter for the Audit Committee. During the fiscal year ended September 30, 2008, the Audit Committee met four times.

The members of the Governance and Nominating Committee (the “Governance Committee”) are Matina Horner (chair), Cynthia A. Montgomery and Robert C. Robb, Jr., all of whom are non-interested Trustees. The principal responsibilities of the Governance Committee are to (1) identify individuals qualified to serve as non-interested Trustees of the Fund and recommend non-interested Trustee nominees for election by shareholders or appointment by the Board; (2) advise the Board with respect to Board composition, procedures and committees (other than the Audit Committee); (3) oversee periodic self-assessments of the Board and committees of the Board (other than the Audit Committee); (4) review and make recommendations regarding non-interested Trustee compensation; and (5) monitor corporate governance matters and develop appropriate recommendations to the Board. The Governance Committee may consider nominations for the office of Trustee made by Fund shareholders as it deems appropriate. Fund shareholders who wish to recommend a nominee should send nominations to the Secretary of the Fund that include biographical information and set forth the qualifications of the proposed nominee. The Board has adopted a written charter for the Governance Committee. During the fiscal year ended September 30, 2008, the Governance Committee met four times.

The members of the Compliance Committee are Joseph Platt (chair), Cynthia A. Montgomery and Robert C. Robb, Jr., all of whom are non-interested Trustees. The Compliance Committee’s purpose is to assist the Board in fulfilling its responsibility to oversee regulatory and fiduciary compliance matters involving the Fund, the fund-related activities of BlackRock and the Fund’s third party service providers. The Compliance Committee’s responsibilities include, without limitation, to (1) oversee the compliance policies and procedures of the Fund and its service providers; (2) review information on and, where appropriate, recommend policies concerning the Fund’s compliance with applicable law; and (3) review reports from and make certain recommendations regarding the Fund’s Chief Compliance Officer. The Board has adopted a written charter for the Compliance Committee. During the fiscal year ended September 30, 2008, the Compliance Committee met five times.

The members of the Performance Oversight Committee (the “Performance Committee”) are David O. Beim (chair), Toby Rosenblatt (vice chair), Ronald W. Forbes and Rodney D. Johnson, all of whom are non-interested Trustees, and Richard S. Davis, an interested Trustee. The Performance Committee’s purpose is to assist the Board in fulfilling its responsibility to oversee the Fund’s investment performance relative to its agreed-upon performance

102

objectives. The Performance Committee’s responsibilities include, without limitation, to (1) review the Fund’s investment objectives, policies and practices, (2) recommend to the Board specific investment tools and techniques employed by BlackRock, (3) recommend to the Board appropriate investment performance objectives based on its review of appropriate benchmarks and competitive universes, (4) review the Fund’s investment performance relative to agreed-upon performance objectives and (5) review information on unusual or exceptional investment matters. The Board has adopted a written charter for the Performance Committee. During the fiscal year ended September 30, 2008, the Performance Committee met four times.

The members of the Executive Committee (the “Executive Committee”) are Ronald W. Forbes, Rodney D. Johnson and Richard S. Davis. Messrs. Forbes and Johnson are non-interested Trustees and Mr. Davis is an interested Trustee. The principal responsibilities of the Executive Committee are to (i) act on routine matters between meetings of the Board of Trustees, (ii) act on such matters as may require urgent action between meetings of the Board of Trustees, and (iii) exercise such other authority as may from time to time be delegated to the Committee by the Board of Trustees. The Board expects to adopt a written charter for the Executive Committee. The Executive Committee was formed after the close of the fiscal year ended September 30, 2008 and so had no meetings during that period.

Prior to November 1, 2007, the Board then in office had five standing committees; the Audit Committee, the Governance and Nominating Committee, the Compliance Committee, the Valuation and Pricing Committee and the Performance Review Committee. These Committees did not meet in the period from October 1, 2007 to November 1, 2007.

Biographical Information

Certain biographical and other information relating to the non-interested Trustees is set forth below, including their year of birth, their principal occupation for at least the last five years, the length of the time served, the total number of investment companies and portfolios overseen in the complex of funds advised by the Manager or its affiliates (“BlackRock-advised funds”) and any public directorships:


Name, Address and Year of Birth	Position(s) Held with the Fund	Length of Time Served²	Principal Occupation(s) During Past Five Years	Number of BlackRock- Advised Funds and Portfolios Overseen	Public Directorships
Non -Interested Trustees:¹

David O. Beim³ 40 East 52nd Street New York, NY 10022 1940	Trustee	2007 to present	Professor of Finance and Economics at the Columbia University Graduate School of Business since 1991; Trustee, Phillips Exeter Academy since 2002; Formerly Chairman, Wave Hill Inc. (public garden and culture center) from 1990 to 2006.	34 Funds 81 Portfolios	None

Ronald W. Forbes⁴ 40 East 52nd Street New York, NY 10022 1940	Trustee	2007 to present	Professor Emeritus of Finance, School of Business, State University of New York at Albany since 2000.	34 Funds 81 Portfolios	None

Dr. Matina Horner⁵ 40 East 52nd St New York, NY 10022 1939	Trustee	2004 to present	Formerly Executive Vice President of Teachers Insurance and Annuity Association and College Retirement Equities Fund from 1989 to 2003.	34 Funds 81 Portfolios	NSTAR (electric and gas utility)

Rodney D. Johnson⁴ 40 East 52nd Street New York, NY 10022 1941	Trustee	2007 to present	President, Fairmount Capital Advisors, Inc. since 1987; Director, Fox Chase Cancer Center since 2002; Member of the Archdiocesan Investment Committee of the Archdiocese of Philadelphia since 2003; Director, The Committee of Seventy (civic) since 2006.	34 Funds 81 Portfolios	None

(footnotes appear on page 104)

103


Name, Address and Year of Birth	Position(s) Held with the Fund	Length of Time Served²	Principal Occupation(s) During Past Five Years	Number of BlackRock- Advised Funds and Portfolios Overseen	Public Directorships
Herbert I. London 40 East 52nd Street New York, NY 10022 1939	Trustee	2007 to present	Professor Emeritus, New York University since 2005; John M. Olin Professor of Humanities, New York University from 1993 to 2005 and Professor thereof from 1980 to 2005; President, Hudson Institute (policy research organization) since 1997 and Trustee thereof since 1980; Chairman of the Board of Trustees for Grantham University since 2006; Director, InnoCentive, Inc. (strategic solutions company) since 2005; Director of Cerego, LLC (software development and design) since 2005.	34 Funds 81 Portfolios	AIMS Worldwide, Inc. (marketing)

Cynthia A. Montgomery 40 East 52nd Street New York, NY 10022 1952	Trustee	2007 to present	Professor, Harvard Business School since 1989; Director, Harvard Business School Publishing since 2005; Director, McLean Hospital since 2005.	34 Funds 81 Portfolios	Newell Rubbermaid, Inc. (manufacturing)

Joseph P. Platt, Jr.⁶ 40 East 52nd Street New York, NY 10022 1947	Trustee	2007 to present	Director, The West Penn Allegheny Health System (a not-for-profit health system) since 2008; Partner, Amarna Corporation, LLC (private investment company) since 2002; Director, WQED Multimedia (PBS and Multimedia, a not-for-profit company) since 2002; Director, Jones and Brown (Canadian insurance broker) since 1998; General Partner, Thorn Partners, LP (private investment) since 1998.	34 Funds 81 Portfolios	Greenlight Capital Re, Ltd (reinsurance company)

Robert C. Robb, Jr. 40 East 52nd Street New York, NY 10022 1945	Trustee	2007 to present	Partner, Lewis, Eckert, Robb and Company (management and financial consulting firm) since 1981.	34 Funds 81 Portfolios	None

Toby Rosenblatt⁷ 40 East 52nd Street New York, NY 10022 1938	Trustee	2005 to present	President, Founders Investments Ltd. (private investments) since 1999; Director of Forward Management, LLC since 2007; Director, The James Irvine Foundation (philanthropic foundation) since 1997; Formerly Trustee, State Street Research Mutual Funds from 1990 to 2005; Formerly Trustee, Metropolitan Series Funds, Inc. from 2001 to 2005.	34 Funds 81 Portfolios	A.P. Pharma, Inc. (specialty pharmaceu-ticals)

Kenneth L. Urish⁸ 40 East 52nd Street New York, NY 10022 1951	Trustee	2007 to present	Managing Partner, Urish Popeck & Co., LLC (certified public accountants and consultants) since 1976; Member of External Advisory Board, The Pennsylvania State University Accounting Department since 2001; Trustee, The Holy Family Foundation since 2001; Committee Member, Professional Ethics Committee of the Pennsylvania Institute of Certified Public Accountants since 2007; Formerly President and Trustee, Pittsburgh Catholic Publishing Associates from 2003 to 2008; Formerly Director, Inter-Tel from 2006 to 2007.	34 Funds 81 Portfolios	None

(footnotes are on next page)

104


Name, Address and Year of Birth	Position(s) Held with the Fund	Length of Time Served²	Principal Occupation(s) During Past Five Years	Number of BlackRock- Advised Funds and Portfolios Overseen	Public Directorships
Frederick W. Winter 40 East 52nd Street New York, NY 10022 1945	Trustee	2007 to present	Professor and Dean Emeritus of the Joseph M. Katz School of Business, University of Pittsburgh since 2005 and Dean thereof from 1997 to 2005, Director, Alkon Corporation (pneumatics) since 1992; Formerly Director, Indotronix International (IT services) from 2004 to 2008; Director, Tippman Sports (recreation) since 2005.	34 Funds 81 Portfolios	None

Interested Trustees^1,9

Richard S. Davis 40 East 52nd Street New York, NY 10022 1945	Trustee	2007 to present	Managing Director, BlackRock, Inc. since 2005; Formerly Chief Executive Officer, State Street Research & Management Company from 2000 to 2005; Formerly Chairman of the Board of Trustees, State Street Research Mutual Funds from 2000 to 2005; Formerly Chairman, SSR Realty from 2000 to 2004.	174 Funds 286 Portfolios	None

Henry Gabbay 40 East 52nd Street New York, NY 10022 1947	Trustee	2007 to present	Formerly Consultant, BlackRock, Inc. from 2007 to 2008; Formerly Managing Director, BlackRock, Inc. from 1989 to 2007; Formerly Chief Administrative Officer, BlackRock Advisors, LLC from 1998 to 2007; Formerly President of BlackRock Funds and BlackRock Bond Allocation Target Shares from 2005 to 2007 and Treasurer of certain closed-end funds in the BlackRock fund complex from 1989 to 2006.	174 Funds 286 Portfolios	None

1	Trustees serve until their resignation, removal or death, or until December 31 of the year in which they turn 72.
2	Following the combination of Merrill Lynch Investment Managers, L.P. (“MLIM”) and BlackRock, Inc. in September 2006, the various legacy MLIM and legacy BlackRock fund boards were realigned and consolidated into three new fund boards in 2007. As a result, although the chart shows certain Trustees as joining the Fund’s Board in 2007, each Trustee first became a member of the boards of other legacy MLIM or legacy BlackRock funds as follows: David O. Beim, 1998; Ronald W. Forbes, 1977; Dr. Matina Horner, 2004; Rodney D.
	Johnson, 1995; Herbert I. London, 1987; Cynthia A. Montgomery, 1994; Joseph P. Platt, Jr., 1999; Robert C. Robb, Jr., 1999; Toby Rosenblatt, 2005; Kenneth L. Urish, 1999 and Frederick W. Winter, 1999.
3	Chair of the Performance Committee.
4	Co-Chair of the Board of Trustees.
5	Chair of the Governance Committee.
6	Chair of the Compliance Committee.
7	Vice Chair of the Performance Committee.
8	Chair of the Audit Committee.
9	Mr. Davis is an “interested person,” as defined in the 1940 Act, of the Fund based on his position with BlackRock, Inc. and its affiliates. Mr. Gabbay is an “interested person” of the Fund based on his former positions with BlackRock, Inc. and its affiliates as well as his ownership of BlackRock, Inc. and PNC securities.

105

Certain biographical and other information relating to the officers of the Fund is set forth below, including their year of birth, their principal occupations for at least the last five years, the length of time served, the total number of BlackRock-advised funds overseen and any public directorships:


Name, Address and Year of Birth	Position(s) Held with the Fund	Length of Time Served	Principal Occupation(s) During Past Five Years	Number of BlackRock- Advised Funds and Portfolios Overseen	Public Directorships
Fund Officers¹
Donald C. Burke 40 East 52nd Street New York, NY 10022 1960	President and Chief Executive Officer	2007 to present	Managing Director of BlackRock, Inc. since 2006; Formerly Managing Director of Merrill Lynch Investment Managers, L.P. (“MLIM”) and Fund Asset Management, L.P. (“FAM”) in 2006, First Vice President thereof from 1997 to 2005, Treasurer thereof from 1999 to 2006 and Vice President thereof from 1990 to 1997.	184 Funds 296 Portfolios	None

Anne F. Ackerley 40 East 52nd Street New York, NY 10022 1962	Vice President	2003 to present	Managing Director of BlackRock, Inc. since 2000; Chief Operating Officer of BlackRock’s U.S. Retail Group since 2006; Head of BlackRock’s Mutual Fund Group from 2000 to 2006; Merrill Lynch & Co., Inc. from 1984 to 1986 and from 1988 to 2000, most recently as First Vice President and Operating Officer of the Mergers and Acquisitions Group.	174 Funds 286 Portfolios	None

Neal J. Andrews 40 East 52nd Street New York, NY 10022 1966	Chief Financial Officer	2007 to present	Managing Director of BlackRock, Inc. since 2006; Formerly Senior Vice President and Line of Business Head of Fund Accounting and Administration at PNC Global Investment Servicing (U.S.) Inc. (formerly PFPC Inc.) from 1992 to 2006.	174 Funds 286 Portfolios	None

Jay M. Fife 40 East 52nd Street New York, NY 10022 1970	Treasurer	2007 to present	Managing Director of BlackRock, Inc. since 2007 and Director in 2006; Formerly Assistant Treasurer of the MLIM/FAM-advised funds from 2005 to 2006; Director of MLIM Fund Services Group from 2001 to 2006.	174 Funds 286 Portfolios	None

Brian P. Kindelan 40 East 52nd Street New York, NY 10022 1959	Chief Compliance Officer	2007 to present	Chief Compliance Officer of the BlackRock-advised funds since 2007; Managing Director and Senior Counsel of BlackRock, Inc. since 2005; Director and Senior Counsel of BlackRock Advisors, Inc. from 2001 to 2004 and Vice President and Senior Counsel thereof from 1998 to 2000.	174 Funds 286 Portfolios	None

Howard Surloff 40 East 52nd Street New York, NY 10022 1965	Secretary	2007 to present	Managing Director of BlackRock, Inc. and General Counsel of U.S. Funds at BlackRock, Inc. since 2006; Formerly General Counsel (U.S.) of Goldman Sachs Asset Management, L.P. from 1993 to 2006.	174 Funds 286 Portfolios	None

1	Officers of the Fund serve at the pleasure of the Board of Trustees.

106

Share Ownership

Information relating to each Trustee’s share ownership in the Fund and in all BlackRock-advised funds that are overseen by the respective Trustee (“Supervised Funds”) as of December 31, 2008 is set forth in the chart below:


Name of Trustee	Aggregate Dollar Range of Equity Securities in the Fund	Aggregate Dollar Range of Equity Securities in Supervised Funds
Interested Trustees:
Richard S. Davis	$50,001-$100,000	over $100,000
Henry Gabbay	None	over $100,000
Non-Interested Trustees¹:
David O. Beim	$50,001-$100,000	$50,001-$100,000
Ronald W. Forbes	$10,001-$50,000	over $100,000
Dr. Matina Horner	$50,001-$100,000	$50,001-$100,000
Rodney D. Johnson	over $100,000	over $100,000
Herbert I. London	$10,001-$50,000	over $100,000
Cynthia A. Montgomery	over $100,000	over $100,000
Joseph P. Platt, Jr.	$10,001-$50,000	over $100,000
Robert C. Robb, Jr.	over $100,000	over $100,000
Toby Rosenblatt	over $100,000	over $100,000
Kenneth L. Urish	None	None
Frederick W. Winter	$50,001-$100,000	$50,001-$100,000

1	Each of the non-interested Trustees (other than Dr. Horner and Mr. Rosenblatt) assumed office on November 1, 2007. Trustees of the Fund are eligible to purchase Institutional Shares of the Portfolio. The Trustees anticipate purchasing additional shares of the Supervised Funds.

As of January 1, 2009, the Trustees and officers of the Fund as a group owned an aggregate of less than 1% of the outstanding shares of the Fund. As of December 31, 2008, none of the non-interested Trustees of the Fund or their immediate family members owned beneficially or of record any securities of affiliates of the Manager.

Compensation of Trustees

Each Trustee who is a non-Interested Trustee is paid as compensation an annual retainer of $150,000 per year for his or her services as Trustee to the BlackRock-advised funds, including the Fund, and a $25,000 Board meeting fee to be paid for each Board meeting up to five Board meetings held in a calendar year (compensation for meetings in excess of this number to be determined on a case-by-case basis), together with out-of-pocket expenses in accordance with a Board policy on travel and other business expenses relating to attendance at meetings. In addition, the Co-Chairs of the Board of Trustees are each paid as compensation an additional annual retainer of $45,000. The Chairs of the Audit Committee, Compliance Committee, Governance Committee, and Performance Committee are paid as compensation an additional annual retainer of $25,000. The Vice-Chair of the Performance Committee is paid an additional annual retainer of $25,000. The Fund compensates the Chief Compliance Officer for his services as its Chief Compliance Officer. The Fund may also pay a portion of the compensation of certain members of the staff of the Chief Compliance Officer.

107

The following table sets forth the compensation earned by the non-Interested Trustees for the fiscal year ended September 30, 2008, and the aggregate compensation paid to them by all BlackRock-advised funds for the calendar year ended December 31, 2008.


Name	Compensation from the Fund	Estimated Annual Benefits Upon Retirement	Aggregate Compensation from the Fund and Other BlackRock- Advised Funds¹
David O. Beim²	$55,437	None	$300,000
Ronald W. Forbes³	$57,220	None	$320,000
Dr. Matina Horner⁴	$55,713	None	$285,000
Rodney D. Johnson³	$57,220	None	$320,000
Herbert I. London	$53,207	None	$275,000
Cynthia A. Montgomery	$53,207	None	$275,000
Joseph P. Platt, Jr.⁵	$55,437	None	$300,000
Robert C. Robb, Jr	$53,207	None	$275,000
Toby Rosenblatt⁶	$60,528	None	$300,000
Kenneth L. Urish⁷	$55,437	None	$300,000
Frederick W. Winter	$53,207	None	$275,000

1	For the number of BlackRock-advised funds from which each non-interested Trustee receives compensation, see the Biographical Information chart beginning on page I-102.
2	Chair of the Performance Committee.
3	Co-Chair of the Board of Directors.
4	Chair of the Governance Committee.
5	Chair of the Compliance Committee.
6	Vice-Chair of the Performance Committee.
7	Chair of the Audit Committee.

Mr. Kindelan assumed office as Chief Compliance Officer and Anti-Money Laundering Compliance Officer of the Fund on November 1, 2007. From November 1, 2007 through September 30, 2008, Mr. Kindelan received approximately $4,816 in compensation from the Fund.

SHAREHOLDER AND TRUSTEE LIABILITY OF THE FUND

Under Massachusetts law, shareholders of a business trust may, under certain circumstances, be held personally liable as partners for the obligations of the trust. However, the Fund’s Declaration of Trust provides that shareholders shall not be subject to any personal liability in connection with the assets of the Fund for the acts or obligations of the Fund, and that every note, bond, contract, order or other undertaking made by the Fund shall contain a provision to the effect that the shareholders are not personally liable thereunder. The Declaration of Trust provides for indemnification out of the trust property of any shareholder held personally liable solely by reason of his being or having been a shareholder and not because of his acts or omissions or some other reason. The Declaration of Trust also provides that the Fund shall, upon request, assume the defense of any claim made against any shareholder for any act or obligation of the Fund, and shall satisfy any judgment thereon.

The Declaration of Trust further provides that all persons having any claim against the Trustees or Fund shall look solely to the trust property for payment; that no Trustee of the Fund shall be personally liable for or on account of any contract, debt, tort, claim, damage, judgment or decree arising out of or connected with the administration or preservation of the trust property or the conduct of any business of the Fund; and that no Trustee shall be personally liable to any person for any action or failure to act except by reason of his own bad faith, willful misfeasance, gross negligence or reckless disregard of his duties as a trustee. With the exception stated, the Declaration of Trust provides that a Trustee is entitled to be indemnified against all liabilities and expenses reasonably incurred by him in connection with the defense or disposition of any proceeding in which he may be involved or with which he may be threatened by reason of his being or having been a Trustee, and that the Fund will indemnify officers, representatives and employees of the Fund to the same extent that Trustees are entitled to indemnification.

108

MANAGEMENT, ADMINISTRATION, DISTRIBUTION AND SERVICING ARRANGEMENTS

Management and Sub-Advisory Agreements. The advisory and sub-advisory services provided by BlackRock, BIMC, BFM and BIL, and the fees received by BlackRock for such services, are described in the Prospectuses.

For their advisory and sub-advisory services, BlackRock, BIM, BIMC, BFM and BIL, as applicable, are entitled to fees, computed daily on a Portfolio-by-Portfolio basis and payable monthly, at the maximum annual rates set forth below.

Small Cap Value Equity and Small Cap Growth Equity Portfolios


Average Daily Net Assets	Management Fee
First $1 billion	.550	%
$1 billion – $2 billion	.500
$2 billion – $3 billion	.475
Greater than $3 billion	.450

Capital Appreciation Portfolio


Average Daily Net Assets	Management Fee
First $1 billion	.650	%
$1 billion – $2 billion	.600
$2 billion – $3 billion	.575
Greater than $3 billion	.550

Aurora Portfolio


Average Daily Net Assets	Management Fee
First $1 billion	.850	%
$1 billion – $2 billion	.800
$2 billion – $3 billion	.750
Greater than $3 billion	.700

Small/Mid-Cap Growth, Health Sciences Opportunities, Energy & Resources And
All-Cap Energy & Resources Portfolios


Average Daily Net Assets	Management Fee
First $1 billion	.750	%
$1 billion – $2 billion	.700
$2 billion – $3 billion	.675
Greater than $3 billion	.650

Mid-Cap Value Equity And Mid-Cap Growth Equity Portfolios


Average Daily Net Assets	Management Fee
First $1 billion	.800	%
$1 billion – $2 billion	.700
$2 billion – $3 billion	.650
Greater than $3 billion	.625

Asset Allocation Portfolio


Average Daily Net Assets	Management Fee		Sub-Advisory Fee to BFM
First $1 billion	.550	%	.400	%
$1 billion – $2 billion	.500		.350
$2 billion – $3 billion	.475		.325
Greater than $3 billion	.450		.300

109

International Opportunities Portfolio


Average Daily Net Assets	Management Fee		Sub-Advisory Fee to BIL
First $1 billion	1.00	%	.85	%
$1 billion – $2 billion	.95		.80
$2 billion – $3 billion	.90		.75
Greater than $3 billion	.85		.70

U.S. Opportunities Portfolio


Average Daily Net Assets	Management Fee
First $1 billion	1.100	%
$1 billion – $2 billion	1.050
$2 billion – $3 billion	1.025
Greater than $3 billion	1.000

Science & Technology Opportunities Portfolio


Average Daily Net Assets	Management Fee
First $1 billion	.90	%
$1 billion – $2 billion	.85
$2 billion – $3 billion	.80
Greater than $3 billion	.75

Global Opportunities Portfolio


Average Daily Net Assets	Management Fee		Sub-Advisory Fee to BFM (as % of average daily net assets allocated to fixed income investments)
First $1 billion	.90	%	.400	%
$1 billion – $2 billion	.85		.350
$2 billion – $3 billion	.80		.325
Greater than $3 billion	.75		.300

Small Cap Core Equity and Exchange Portfolios


	Management Fee
Small Cap Core Equity Portfolio	1.00	%
Exchange Portfolio	0.50

Money Market Portfolios


Average Daily Net Assets	Management Fee		Sub-Advisory Fee to BIMC
First $1 billion	.450	%	.400	%
$1 billion – $2 billion	.400		.350
$2 billion – $3 billion	.375		.325
Greater than $3 billion	.350		.300

BlackRock renders advisory services to each of the Portfolios pursuant to a management agreement (the “Management Agreement”).

BFM renders sub-advisory services to the Asset Allocation and Global Opportunities Portfolios pursuant to sub-advisory agreements. BIL renders sub-advisory services to the International Opportunities Portfolio pursuant to a sub-advisory agreement. BIMC renders sub-advisory services to the Money Market, U.S. Treasury Money Market, Municipal Money Market, Ohio Municipal Money Market, Pennsylvania Municipal Money Market, North Carolina Municipal Money Market, Virginia Municipal Money Market and New Jersey Municipal Money Market Portfolios pursuant to sub-advisory agreements. The Management Agreement with BlackRock and the above-referenced sub-advisory agreements are collectively referred to as the “Advisory Contracts.”

110

Under the relevant Advisory Contracts, BlackRock, BIMC, BFM and BIL are not liable for any error of judgment or mistake of law or for any loss suffered by the Fund or a Portfolio in connection with the performance of the Advisory Contracts. Under the Advisory Contracts, BlackRock, BIMC, BFM and BIL are liable for a loss resulting from a breach of fiduciary duty with respect to the receipt of compensation for services or a loss resulting from willful misfeasance, bad faith or gross negligence in the performance of their respective duties or from reckless disregard of their respective duties and obligations thereunder. Each of the Advisory Contracts is terminable as to a Portfolio by vote of the Fund’s Board of Trustees or by the holders of a majority of the outstanding voting securities of the relevant Portfolio, at any time without penalty, on 60 days’ written notice to BlackRock, BIMC, BFM or BIL, as the case may be. BlackRock, BIMC, BFM and BIL may also terminate their advisory relationship with respect to a Portfolio on 60 days’ written notice to the Fund. Each of the Advisory Contracts terminates automatically in the event of its assignment.

For the period from October 1, 2007 through September 30, 2008, the Fund paid BlackRock management fees (after waivers), and BlackRock waived management fees and reimbursed expenses, as follows:


Portfolios	Fees Paid (After Waivers)		Waivers		Reimbursements
Money Market	$	5,380,246	$	1,811,476	$	36,378
U.S Treasury Money Market	$	1,693,625	$	896,415	$	4,593
Municipal Money Market	$	1,010,597	$	546,666	$	1,045
New Jersey Municipal Money Market	$	479,926	$	372,544	$	2,156
North Carolina Municipal Money Market	$	86,422	$	274,587	$	3,566
Ohio Municipal Money Market	$	396,064	$	332,278	$	1,736
Pennsylvania Municipal Money Market	$	2,030,530	$	859,399	$	11,638
Virginia Municipal Money Market	$	139,955	$	337,716	$	8,132
Capital Appreciation	$	1,406,373	$	274,008	$	16,365
Mid-Cap Value	$	6,257,553	$	2,834	$	1,433,407
Mid-Cap Growth Equity	$	2,784,099		—	$	24,311
Aurora	$	8,836,991		—	$	496,734
Small/Mid-Cap Growth	$	1,596,571		—	$	244,277
Small Cap Value Equity	$	232,708	$	63,397	$	1,315
Small Cap Core Equity	$	960,094	$	5,908	$	80,370
Small Cap Growth Equity	$	5,018,793		—	$	246
Science & Technology Opportunities	$	334,140	$	39,658	$	67,451
Energy & Resources	$	8,825,597		—	$	38,868
All-Cap Energy & Resources	$	10,123,903		—	$	27,575
Health Sciences Opportunities	$	9,326,422		—		—
U.S. Opportunities	$	6,326,651	$	1,958,665	$	302,341
Global Opportunities	$	1,012,287	$	1,858	$	5,199
International Opportunities	$	14,609,963		—	$	122
Asset Allocation	$	3,863,092		—	$	8,296
Exchange	$	1,328,352	$	52,714	$	5,084

For the period from October 1, 2006 through September 30, 2007, the Fund paid BlackRock management fees (after waivers), and BlackRock waived management fees and reimbursed expenses, as follows:


Portfolios	Fees Paid (After Waivers)		Waivers		Reimbursements
Money Market	$	4,890,833	$	2,027,489	$	66,663
U. S. Treasury Money Market	$	1,248,204	$	745,987	$	5,547
Municipal Money Market	$	890,111	$	583,577	$	1,961
New Jersey Municipal Money Market	$	440,013	$	369,672	$	2,998
North Carolina Municipal Money Market	$	75,881	$	265,347	$	4,256
Ohio Municipal Money Market	$	383,005	$	311,470	$	4,188
Pennsylvania Municipal Money Market	$	1,801,166	$	842,878	$	19,711
Virginia Municipal Money Market	$	92,043	$	255,858	$	8,579

111


Portfolios	Fees Paid (After Waivers)		Waivers		Reimbursements
Capital Appreciation	$	1,439,638	$	182,255	$	25,276
Mid-Cap Value	$	8,181,483	$	29,745	$	1,207,433
Mid-Cap Growth Equity	$	3,223,639	$	0	$	66,870
Aurora	$	14,529,034	$	0	$	251,964
Small/Mid-Cap Growth Equity	$	2,108,906	$	0	$	434,365
Small Cap Value Equity	$	439,292	$	6,427	$	6,546
Small Cap Core Equity Portfolio	$	934,936	$	138	$	34,165
Small Cap Growth Equity	$	4,240,886	$	0	$	11,012
Science & Technology Opportunities	$	221,853	$	84,200	$	46,654
Energy & Resources	$	6,962,320	$	0	$	27,902
All-Cap Energy & Resources	$	7,273,881	$	0	$	178,770
Health Sciences Opportunities	$	8,294,893	$	0	$	25,928
U.S. Opportunities	$	3,091,106	$	900,064	$	200,118
Global Opportunities	$	648,979	$	5,732	$	73,085
International Opportunities	$	13,691,113	$	0	$	5,684
Asset Allocation	$	4,296,104	$	0	$	21,892
Exchange	$	1,459,572	$	53,626	$	6,515

For the period from October 1, 2005 through September 30, 2006, the Fund paid BlackRock management fees (after waivers), and BlackRock waived management fees and reimbursed expenses, as follows:


Portfolios	Fees Paid (After Waivers)		Waivers		Reimbursements
Money Market	$	4,158,307	$	2,373,136	$	49,800
U. S. Treasury Money Market	$	1,171,799	$	852,468	$	6,231
Municipal Money Market	$	815,433	$	609,697	$	2,281
New Jersey Municipal Money Market	$	389,154	$	382,036	$	3,339
North Carolina Municipal Money Market	$	71,488	$	227,361	$	3,967
Ohio Municipal Money Market	$	336,700	$	333,578	$	4,065
Pennsylvania Municipal Money Market	$	1,529,582	$	939,078	$	19,957
Virginia Municipal Money Market	$	23,838	$	162,410	$	5,069
Capital Appreciation	$	1,724,264	$	0	$	4,920
Mid-Cap Value	$	6,092,211	$	274,417	$	621,134
Mid-Cap Growth Equity	$	3,412,720	$	70,119	$	65,827
Aurora	$	18,954,278	$	0	$	74,520
Small/Mid-Cap Growth Equity	$	2,103,465	$	47,061	$	309,454
Small Cap Value Equity	$	603,621	$	8,022	$	8,184
Small Cap Core Equity Portfolio	$	705,739	$	18,075	$	29,156
Small Cap Growth Equity	$	3,428,141	$	0	$	19,637
Science & Technology Opportunities	$	232,551	$	36,236	$	61,171
Energy & Resources	$	8,729,489	$	0	$	8,862
All-Cap Energy & Resources	$	4,230,040	$	0	$	7,974
Health Sciences Opportunities	$	4,833,894	$	0	$	0
U.S. Opportunities	$	1,207,167	$	201,472	$	60,823
Global Opportunities	$	14,082	$	163,776	$	51,598
International Opportunities	$	10,491,985	$	0	$	0
Asset Allocation	$	4,079,883	$	170,837	$	0
Exchange	$	1,335,946	$	109,077	$	14,525

112

Pursuant to the Management Agreement, BlackRock may from time to time, in its sole discretion to the extent permitted by applicable law, appoint one or more sub-advisors, including, without limitation, affiliates of BlackRock, to perform investment advisory services with respect to the Portfolios. In addition, BlackRock may delegate certain of its investment advisory functions under the Management Agreements to one or more of its affiliates to the extent permitted by applicable law. BlackRock may terminate any or all sub-advisors or such delegation arrangements in its sole discretion at any time to the extent permitted by applicable law.

Administration Agreement. BlackRock and PNC Global Investment Servicing (U.S.) (“PNC GIS”), formerly PFPC Inc., serve as the Fund’s co-administrators (the “Administrators”) pursuant to an administration agreement (the “Administration Agreement”). PNC GIS has agreed to maintain office facilities for the Fund; furnish the Fund with statistical and research data, clerical, accounting, and bookkeeping services; provide and supervise the operation of an automated data processing system to process purchase and redemption orders; prepare and file certain reports required by regulatory authorities; prepare and file Federal and state tax returns; prepare and file material requested by state securities regulators; calculate various contractual expenses; compute each Portfolio’s net asset value, net income and net capital gain or loss; and serve as a liaison with the Fund’s independent public accountants. The Administrators may from time to time voluntarily waive administration fees with respect to a Portfolio and may voluntarily reimburse the Portfolios for expenses.

Under the Administration Agreement, the Fund pays to BlackRock and PNC GIS on behalf of each Portfolio a fee, computed daily and payable monthly, at an aggregate annual rate of (i) .075% of the first $500 million of each Portfolio’s average daily net assets, .065% of the next $500 million of each Portfolio’s average daily net assets and .055% of the average daily net assets of each Portfolio in excess of $1 billion and (ii) .025% of the first $500 million of average daily net assets allocated to each class of shares of each Portfolio, .015% of the next $500 million of such average daily net assets and .005% of the average daily net assets allocated to each class of shares of each Portfolio in excess of $1 billion.

Under the Administration Agreement, BlackRock is responsible for: (i) the supervision and coordination of the performance of the Fund’s service providers; (ii) the negotiation of service contracts and arrangements between the Fund and its service providers; (iii) acting as liaison between the Trustees of the Fund and the Fund’s service providers; and (iv) providing ongoing business management and support services in connection with the Fund’s operations.

The Administration Agreement provides that BlackRock and PNC GIS will not be liable for any error of judgment or mistake of law or for any loss suffered by the Fund or a Portfolio in connection with the performance of the Administration Agreement, except a loss resulting from willful misfeasance, bad faith or gross negligence in the performance of their respective duties or from reckless disregard of their respective duties and obligations thereunder. In addition, the Fund will indemnify each of BlackRock and PNC GIS and their affiliates against any loss arising in connection with their provision of services under the Administration Agreement, except that neither BlackRock nor PNC GIS nor their affiliates shall be indemnified against any loss arising out of willful misfeasance, bad faith, gross negligence or reckless disregard of their respective duties under the Administration Agreement.

113

For the period from October 1, 2007 through September 30, 2008, the Fund paid the Administrators combined administration fees (after waivers), and the Administrators waived combined administration fees and reimbursed expenses, as follows:


Portfolios	Fees Paid (After Waivers)		Waivers		Reimbursements
Money Market	$	1,340,634	$	144,437	$ 0
U.S Treasury Money Market	$	492,232	$	76,521	$ 0
Municipal Money Market	$	327,500	$	18,791	$ 0
New Jersey Municipal Money Market	$	158,958	$	30,958	$ 0
North Carolina Municipal Money Market	$	60,838	$	20,179	$ 0
Ohio Municipal Money Market	$	131,556	$	30,686	$ 0
Pennsylvania Municipal Money Market	$	497,069	$	129,953	$ 0
Virginia Municipal Money Market	$	81,075	$	26,886	$ 0
Capital Appreciation	$	240,193	$	20,846	$ 0
Mid-Cap Value	$	675,354	$	232,082	$ 0
Mid-Cap Growth Equity	$	343,212	$	7,886	$ 0
Aurora	$	819,536	$	197,630	$ 0
Small/Mid-Cap Growth	$	184,402	$	61,082	$ 0
Small Cap Value Equity	$	52,436	$	1,658	$ 0
Small Cap Core Equity	$	85,102	$	19,532	$ 0
Small Cap Growth Equity	$	856,207	$	910	$ 0
Science & Technology Opportunities	$	38,760	$	9,921	$ 0
Energy & Resources	$	1,041,388	$	23,540	$ 0
All-Cap Energy & Resources	$	1,202,236	$	31,131	$ 0
Health Sciences Opportunities	$	1,143,722	$	0	$ 0
U.S. Opportunities	$	693,691	$	57,353	$ 0
Global Opportunities	$	108,345	$	4,874	$ 0
International Opportunities	$	1,331,847	$	442	$ 0
Asset Allocation	$	678,097	$	5,380	$ 0
Exchange	$	207,922	$	69,313	$ 0

For the period from October 1, 2006 through September 30, 2007, the Fund paid the Administrators combined administration fees (after waivers), and the Administrators waived combined administration fees and reimbursed expenses, as follows:


Portfolios	Fees Paid (After Waivers)		Waivers		Reimbursements
Money Market	$	1,265,662	$	155,974	$	0
U. S. Treasury Money Market	$	395,886	$	46,451	$	0
Municipal Money Market	$	297,502	$	29,984	$	0
New Jersey Municipal Money Market	$	153,429	$	26,502	$	0
North Carolina Municipal Money Market	$	57,161	$	18,667	$	0
Ohio Municipal Money Market	$	122,982	$	31,337	$	0
Pennsylvania Municipal Money Market	$	453,633	$	123,890	$	0
Virginia Municipal Money Market	$	58,128	$	19,183	$	0
Capital Appreciation	$	225,922	$	23,648	$	0
Mid-Cap Value	$	716,097	$	248,137	$	0
Mid-Cap Growth Equity	$	351,206	$	51,806	$	0
Aurora	$	1,287,840	$	203,860	$	0
Small/Mid-Cap Growth	$	226,994	$	54,246	$	0
Small Cap Value Equity	$	79,128	$	1,929	$	0
Small Cap Core Equity Portfolio	$	80,856	$	12,636	$	0
Small Cap Growth Equity	$	737,406	$	3,142	$	0
Science & Technology Opportunities	$	28,070	$	5,936	$	0
Energy & Resources	$	795,841	$	72,840	$	0
All-Cap Energy & Resources	$	847,630	$	71,495	$	0

114


Portfolios	Fees Paid (After Waivers)		Waivers		Reimbursements
Health Sciences Opportunities	$	1,014,937	$	16,819	$	0
U.S. Opportunities	$	318,046	$	44,389	$	0
Global Opportunities	$	61,762	$	10,953	$	0
International Opportunities	$	1,254,716	$	5,066	$	0
Asset Allocation	$	737,168	$	15,794	$	0
Exchange	$	226,980	$	75,663	$	0

For the period from October 1, 2005 through September 30, 2006, the Fund paid the Administrators combined administration fees (after waivers), and the Administrators waived combined administration fees and reimbursed expenses, as follows:


Portfolios	Fees Paid (After Waivers)		Waivers		Reimbursements
Money Market	$	1,432,375	$	326,583	$	0
U. S. Treasury Money Market	$	445,053	$	120,466	$	0
Municipal Money Market	$	349,738	$	46,872	$	0
New Jersey Municipal Money Market	$	161,803	$	52,309	$	0
North Carolina Municipal Money Market	$	52,306	$	31,108	$	0
Ohio Municipal Money Market	$	131,700	$	54,360	$	0
Pennsylvania Municipal Money Market	$	464,656	$	220,206	$	0
Virginia Municipal Money Market	$	26,848	$	21,947	$	0
Capital Appreciation	$	223,467	$	164,155	$	0
Mid-Cap Value	$	612,010	$	488,479	$	0
Mid-Cap Growth Equity	$	483,451	$	146,285	$	0
Aurora	$	2,643,954	$	344,788	$	0
Small/Mid-Cap Growth	$	237,662	$	173,497	$	0
Small Cap Value Equity	$	151,543	$	11,025	$	0
Small Cap Core Equity Portfolio	$	84,745	$	12,239	$	0
Small Cap Growth Equity	$	865,772	$	2,007	$	0
Science & Technology Opportunities	$	35,211	$	5,766	$	0
Energy & Resources	$	1,367,941	$	193,921	$	0
All-Cap Energy & Resources	$	565,038	$	115,221	$	0
Health Sciences Opportunities	$	819,479	$	0	$	0
U.S. Opportunities	$	152,742	$	17,113	$	0
Global Opportunities	$	14,883	$	4,789	$	0
International Opportunities	$	1,355,027	$	0	$	0
Asset Allocation	$	1,066,032	$	15,534	$	0
Exchange	$	226,470	$	81,970	$	0

The Fund and its service providers may engage third party plan administrators who provide trustee, administrative and recordkeeping services for certain employee benefit, profit-sharing and retirement plans as agent for the Fund with respect to such plans, for the purpose of accepting orders for the purchase and redemption of shares of the Fund.

In addition, pursuant to a shareholders’ administrative services agreement (the “Shareholders’ Administrative Services Agreement”), BlackRock provides certain shareholder liaison services in connection with the Fund’s investor service center. The Fund reimburses BlackRock for its costs in maintaining the service center, which costs include, among other things, employee salaries, leasehold expenses, and other out-of-pocket expenses. For the fiscal year ended September 30, 2008, the Fund reimbursed BlackRock $1,071,513 pursuant to the Agreement.

115

Custodian and Transfer Agency Agreements. Pursuant to the terms of a custodian agreement (the “Custodian Agreement”) between the Fund and PFPC Trust Company (“PTC”), an affiliate of BlackRock, PTC or a sub-custodian (i) maintains a separate account or accounts in the name of each Portfolio, (ii) holds and transfers portfolio securities on account of each Portfolio, (iii) accepts receipts and makes disbursements of money on behalf of each Portfolio, (iv) collects and receives all income and other payments and distributions on account of each Portfolio’s securities and (v) makes periodic reports to the Board of Trustees concerning each Portfolio’s operations. PTC is authorized to select one or more banks or trust companies to serve as sub-custodian on behalf of the Fund, provided that, with respect to sub-custodians other than sub-custodians for non-U.S. securities, PTC remains responsible for the performance of all its duties under the Custodian Agreement and holds the Fund harmless from the acts and omissions of any sub-custodian. Citibank, N.A. serves as the international sub-custodian for various Portfolios of the Fund and has been appointed by the Board of Trustees as the Fund’s “foreign custody manager” under Rule 17f-5 of the 1940 Act. As foreign custody manager, Citibank, N.A. selects and monitors foreign sub-custodian banks and furnishes information relevant to the selection of foreign depositories.

For its services to the Fund under the Custodian Agreement, effective January 1, 2008, PTC receives a fee which is calculated based upon each investment portfolio’s average gross assets. The fees for the Money Market Portfolios are as follows; .0025% of each Portfolio’s first $2 billion of average gross assets; and .002% of each Portfolio’s average gross assets in excess of $2 billion. The fees for the Equity Portfolios are as follows; .005% of the first $400 million of each Portfolio’s average gross assets, .004% of the next $1.6 billion of each Portfolio’s average gross assets, and .003% of each Portfolio’s average gross assets in excess of $2 billion. PTC is also entitled to out-of-pocket expenses and certain transaction charges.

With respect to the Municipal Money Market Portfolios, under an arrangement effective June 1, 2008, on a monthly basis, PTC nets the Portfolio’s daily positive and negative cash balances and calculates a credit (“custody credit”) or a charge based on that net amount. The custodian fees, including the amount of any overdraft charges, may be reduced by the amount of such custody credits, and any unused credits at the end of a given month may be carried forward to a subsequent month. Any such credits unused by the end of a Portfolio’s fiscal year expire. Net debits at the end of a given month are added to the Portfolio’s custody bill and paid by the Portfolio.

PNC GIS, which has its principal offices at 301 Bellevue Parkway, Wilmington, DE 19809 and is an affiliate of BlackRock, serves as the transfer and dividend disbursing agent for the Fund pursuant to a Transfer Agency Agreement (the “Transfer Agency Agreement”), under which PNC GIS (i) issues and redeems Hilliard Lyons, Service, Investor, Institutional and BlackRock classes of shares in each Portfolio, (ii) addresses and mails all communications by each Portfolio to record owners of its shares, including reports to shareholders, dividend and distribution notices and proxy materials for its meetings of shareholders, (iii) maintains shareholder accounts and, if requested, sub-accounts and (iv) makes periodic reports to the Board of Trustees concerning the operations of each Portfolio. PNC GIS may, on 30 days’ notice to the Fund, assign its duties as transfer and dividend disbursing agent to any other affiliate of PNC Bank Corp. For its services, PNC GIS receives per account and transaction fees and disbursements.

Distribution Agreement and Distribution and Service Plan. The Fund has entered into a distribution agreement with BlackRock Investments, Inc. (“BII” or the “Distributor”) under which BII, as agent, offers shares of each Portfolio on a continuous basis. BII has agreed to use appropriate efforts to effect sales of the shares, but it is not obligated to sell any particular amount of shares. BII’s principal business address is 40 East 52nd Street, New York, NY 10022. BII is an affiliate of BlackRock.

Pursuant to the Fund’s Amended and Restated Distribution and Service Plan (the “Plan”), the Fund may pay BII and/or BlackRock or any other affiliate or significant shareholder of BlackRock fees for distribution and sales support services. Currently, as described further below, only Investor B, Investor B1, Investor B2, Investor C, Investor C1, Investor C2 and Class R Shares bear the expense of distribution fees under the Plan. In addition, the Fund may pay to brokers, dealers, financial institutions and industry professionals (including BlackRock, BII, BAC, Merrill Lynch, PNC and their affiliates) (collectively, “Service Organizations”) fees for the provision of personal services to shareholders. In the past, BlackRock or BII has retained a portion of the shareholder servicing fees paid by the Fund.

116

The Plan provides, among other things, that: (i) the Board of Trustees shall receive quarterly reports regarding the amounts expended under the Plan and the purposes for which such expenditures were made; (ii) the Plan will continue in effect for so long as its continuance is approved at least annually by the Board of Trustees in accordance with Rule 12b-1 under the 1940 Act; (iii) any material amendment thereto must be approved by the Board of Trustees, including the Trustees who are not “interested persons” of the Fund (as defined in the 1940 Act) and who have no direct or indirect financial interest in the operation of the Plan or any agreement entered into in connection with the Plan (the “12b-1 Trustees”), acting in person at a meeting called for said purpose; (iv) any amendment to increase materially the costs which any class of shares may bear for distribution services pursuant to the Plan shall be effective only upon approval by a vote of a majority of the outstanding shares of such class and by a majority of the 12b-1 Trustees; and (v) while the Plan remains in effect, the selection and nomination of the Fund’s Trustees who are not “interested persons” of the Fund shall be committed to the discretion of the Fund’s non-interested Trustees.

The Plan is terminable as to any class of shares without penalty at any time by a vote of a majority of the 12b-1 Trustees, or by vote of the holders of a majority of the shares of such class.

With respect to Class R Shares, the distribution fee payable under the Plan (at a maximum annual rate of 0.25% of the average daily net asset value of each Portfolio’s outstanding Class R Shares) are used to pay commissions and other fees payable to Service Organizations and other broker/dealers who sell Class R Shares.

With respect to Class R Shares, the front-end sales charge and the distribution fee payable under the Plan (at a maximum annual rate of .25% of the average daily net asset value of each Portfolio’s outstanding Class R Shares) are used to pay commissions and other fees payable to Service Organizations and other broker/dealers who sell Class R Shares.

With respect to Investor B, Investor B1 and Investor B2 Shares, Service Organizations and other broker/dealers receive commissions from BII for selling Investor B, Investor B1 and Investor B2 Shares, which are paid at the time of the sale. The distribution fees payable under the Plan (at a maximum annual rate of 0.75% of the average daily net asset value of each Portfolio’s outstanding Investor B Shares, a maximum annual rate of 0.50% of the average daily net asset value of each Portfolio’s outstanding Investor B1 Shares, and a maximum annual rate of 0.30% of the average daily net asset value of each Portfolio’s outstanding Investor B2 Shares) are intended to cover the expense to BII of paying such up-front commissions, as well as to cover ongoing commission payments to broker-dealers or other Service Organizations. The contingent deferred sales charge is calculated to charge the investor with any shortfall that would occur if Investor B, Investor B1 or Investor B2 Shares are redeemed prior to the expiration of the conversion period, after which Investor B, Investor B1 and Investor B2 Shares automatically convert to Investor A Shares.

With respect to Investor C, Investor C1 and Investor C2 Shares, Service Organizations and other broker-dealers receive commissions from BII for selling Investor C, Investor C1 and Investor C2 Shares, which are paid at the time of the sale. The distribution fees payable under the Plan (at a maximum annual rate of 0.75% of the average daily net asset value of each Portfolio’s outstanding Investor C Shares, a maximum annual rate of 0.55% of the average daily net asset value of each Portfolio’s outstanding Investor C1 Shares, and a maximum annual rate of 0.30% of the average daily net asset value of each Portfolio’s outstanding Investor C2 Shares) are intended to cover the expense to BII of paying such up-front commissions, as well as to cover ongoing commission payments to the broker-dealers or other Service Organizations. The contingent deferred sales charge is calculated to charge the investor with any shortfall that would occur if Investor C, Investor C1 or Investor C2 Shares are redeemed within 12 months of purchase.

From time to time BII and/or BlackRock and their affiliates may voluntarily waive receipt of distribution fees under the Plan, which waivers may be terminated at any time. Payments are made by the Fund pursuant to the Plan regardless of expenses incurred by BII or BlackRock.

The Fund currently does not make distribution payments with respect to Investor A, Investor A1, HL, Service, Institutional or BlackRock Shares under the Plan. However, the Plan permits BII, BlackRock and certain of their affiliates to make payments relating to distribution and sales support activities out of their past profits or other sources available to them (and not as an additional charge to the Fund). From time to time, BII, BlackRock or their affiliates may compensate affiliated and unaffiliated Service Organizations for the sale and distribution of shares of the Fund or for services to the Fund and its shareholders. These non-Plan payments would be in addition to the Fund payments described in this Statement of Additional Information for distribution and shareholder servicing. These non-Plan payments may take the form of, among other things, “due diligence” payments for a dealer’s examination of the Portfolios and payments for providing extra employee training and information relating to Portfolios; “listing” fees for the placement of the Portfolios on a dealer’s list of mutual funds available for purchase

117

by its customers; “finders” fees for directing investors to the Fund; “distribution and marketing support” fees or “revenue sharing” for providing assistance in promoting the sale of the Portfolios’ shares; payments for the sale of shares and/or the maintenance of share balances; CUSIP fees; maintenance fees; and set-up fees regarding the establishment of new accounts. The payments made by BII, BlackRock and their affiliates may be a fixed dollar amount or may be based on a percentage of the value of shares sold to, or held by, customers of the Service Organization involved, and may be different for different Service Organizations. The payments described above are made from BII’s, BlackRock’s or their affiliates’ own assets pursuant to agreements with Service Organizations and do not change the price paid by investors for the purchase of the Portfolio’s shares or the amount the Fund will receive as proceeds from such sales.

The payments described above may be made, at the discretion of BII, BlackRock or their affiliates, to Service Organizations in connection with the sale and distribution of Portfolio shares. Pursuant to applicable Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (“FINRA”) regulations, the details of certain of these payments, including the Service Organizations receiving such payments in connection with the sale and distribution of Portfolio shares, are required to be disclosed. As of the date of this Statement of Additional Information, as amended or supplemented from time to time, the following Service Organizations are receiving such payments: Ameriprise Financial Services, Inc., AXA Advisors, LLC, Banc of America Investment Services, Inc., Citigroup, LPL Financial Corporation, Merrill Lynch, MetLife Securities, Inc., Morgan Stanley, New England Securities Corporation, Oppenheimer & Co. Inc., Raymond James & Associates, Inc., Raymond James Financial Services, Inc., RBC Capital Markets, Tower Square Securities Inc., UBS, Wachovia Securities, Walnut Street Securities Inc. and/or broker-dealers and other financial services firms under common control with the above organizations (or their assignees). The level of payments made to these Service Organizations in any year will vary and normally will not exceed the sum of (a) 0.25% of such year’s Portfolio sales by that Service Organization, and (b) 0.21% of the assets attributable to that Service Organization invested in a Portfolio.

In lieu of payments pursuant to the foregoing, BII, BlackRock, PNC or their affiliates may make payments to the above named Service Organizations of an agreed-upon amount which, subject to certain agreed-upon minimums, will generally not exceed the amount that would have been payable pursuant to the formula, and may also make similar payments to other Service Organizations.

If investment advisers, distributors or affiliates of mutual funds pay bonuses and incentives in differing amounts, financial firms and their financial consultants may have financial incentives for recommending a particular mutual fund over other mutual funds. In addition, depending on the arrangements in place at any particular time, a financial firm and its financial consultants may also have a financial incentive for recommending a particular share class over other share classes. You should consult your financial adviser and review carefully any disclosure by the financial firm as to compensation received by your financial adviser for more information about the payments described above.

Furthermore, BII, BlackRock and their affiliates may contribute to various non-cash and cash incentive arrangements to promote the sale of shares, and may sponsor various contests and promotions subject to applicable FINRA regulations in which participants may receive prizes such as travel awards, merchandise and cash. Subject to applicable FINRA regulations, BII, BlackRock and their affiliates may also: (i) pay for the travel expenses, meals, lodging and entertainment of broker/dealers, financial institutions and their salespersons in connection with educational and sales promotional programs, (ii) sponsor speakers, educational seminars and charitable events and (iii) provide other sales and marketing conferences and other resources to broker-dealers, financial institutions and their salespersons.

BlackRock, Inc., the parent company of BlackRock, has agreed to pay PNC Bank, National Association and certain of its affiliates fees for administration and servicing with respect to assets of the Fund attributable to shares held by customers of such entities. These assets are predominantly in the Institutional Share Class of the Portfolios, with respect to which the Fund does not pay shareholder servicing fees under the Plan. The fees are paid according to the following schedule: Money Market Portfolios — .15% of net assets and Equity Portfolios — .25% of net assets.

118

Service Organizations may charge their clients additional fees for account-related services. Service Organizations may charge their customers a service fee in connection with the purchase or redemption of Portfolio shares. The amount and applicability of such a fee is determined and disclosed to its customers by each individual Service Organization. Service fees typically are fixed, nominal dollar amounts and are in addition to the sales and other charges described in the Prospectuses and this Statement of Additional Information. Your Service Organization will provide you with specific information about any service fees you will be charged.

Pursuant to the Plan, the Fund enters into service arrangements with Service Organizations pursuant to which Service Organizations will render certain support services to their customers (“Customers”) who are the beneficial owners of BlackRock Shares of the Small Cap Value Equity Fund, and HL Shares, Service, Investor A, Investor A1, Investor B, Investor B1, Investor B2, Investor C, Investor C1, Investor C2 and R Shares of all Portfolios. Such services will be provided to Customers who are the beneficial owners of Shares of such classes and are intended to supplement the services provided by the Fund’s Administrators and transfer agent to the Fund’s shareholders of record. In consideration for payment of a service fee of up to 0.25% (on an annualized basis) of the average daily net asset value of the BlackRock Shares of the Small Cap Value Equity Portfolio, and HL, Service, Investor A, Investor B, Investor B1, Investor C, Investor C1 and R Shares, and 0.10% for Investor A1, Investor B2 and Investor C2 Shares, of all Portfolios owned beneficially by their Customers, Service Organizations may provide general shareholder liaison services, including, but not limited to: (i) answering customer inquiries regarding account status and history, the manner in which purchases, exchanges and redemptions of shares may be effected and certain other matters pertaining to the Customers’ investments; and (ii) assisting Customers in designating and changing dividend options, account designations and addresses.

In addition to, rather than in lieu of, distribution and shareholder servicing fees that the Fund may pay to a Service Organization pursuant to the Plan and fees the Fund pays to its transfer agent, the Fund may enter into non-Plan agreements with Service Organizations pursuant to which the Fund will pay a Service Organization for administrative, networking, recordkeeping, sub-transfer agency and shareholder services. These non-Plan payments are generally based on either: (1) a percentage of the average daily net assets of Portfolio shareholders serviced by a Service Organization or (2) a fixed dollar amount for each account serviced by a Service Organization. The aggregate amount of these payments may be substantial. From time to time, BlackRock, BII or their affiliates also may pay a portion of the fees for administrative, networking, omnibus, operational and recordkeeping, sub-transfer agency and shareholder services described above at its or their own expense and out of its or their legitimate profits.

119

For the twelve months ended September 30, 2008, the Portfolios’ share classes bore the following distribution and shareholder servicing fees under the Plan:


Portfolios — BlackRock Shares	Net Distribution Fees	Distribution Waivers	Net Shareholder Servicing Fees		Shareholder Servicing Waivers
Small Cap Value Equity	—	—	$	8,321	—

Portfolios — Hilliard Lyons Shares	Net Distribution Fees	Distribution Waivers	Net Shareholder Servicing Fees		Shareholder Servicing Waivers
Money Market	—	—	$	367,286	—
Municipal Money Market	—	—		—	$461,550

Portfolios — Investor A Shares	Net Distribution Fees	Distribution Waivers	Net Shareholder Servicing Fees		Shareholder Servicing Waivers
Money Market	—	—	$	1,071,733	—
U. S. Treasury Money Market	—	—	$	112,531	—
Municipal Money Market	—	—	$	13,893	—
New Jersey Municipal Money
Market	—	—	$	83,667	—
North Carolina Municipal
Money Market	—	—	$	319	—
Ohio Municipal Money Market	—	—	$	72,877	—
Pennsylvania Municipal
Money Market	—	—	$	139,654	—
Virginia Municipal Money Market	N/A	N/A		N/A	N/A
Mid-Cap Value Equity	—	—	$	1,452,574	—
Mid-Cap Growth Equity	—	—	$	625,673	—
Small Cap Value Equity	—	—	$	49,348	—
Small Cap Growth Equity	—	—	$	511,317	—
Small Cap Core Equity	—	—	$	66,815	—
U.S. Opportunities	—	—	$	850,330	—
Science & Technology Opportunities	—	—	$	69,840	—
International Opportunities	—	—	$	1,373,698	—
Asset Allocation	—	—	$	1,148,230	—
Capital Appreciation	—	—	$	344,133	—
Aurora	—	—	$	1,621,021	—
Small/Mid-Cap Growth	—	—	$	476,241	—
Energy & Resources	—	—	$	2,175,813	—
All-Cap Energy & Resources	—	—	$	976,133	—
Health Sciences Opportunities	—	—	$	1,636,587	—
Global Opportunities	—	—	$	110,116	—

Portfolios — Investor B Shares	Net Distribution Fees	Distribution Waivers	Net Shareholder Servicing Fees		Shareholder Servicing Waivers
Money Market	$93,403	—	$	19,080	$11,855
U. S. Treasury Money Market	N/A	N/A		N/A	N/A
Municipal Money Market	N/A	N/A		N/A	N/A
New Jersey Municipal Money Market	N/A	N/A		N/A	N/A
North Carolina Municipal
Money Market	N/A	N/A		N/A	N/A
Ohio Municipal Money Market	N/A	N/A		N/A	N/A
Pennsylvania Municipal
Money Market	N/A	N/A		N/A	N/A
Virginia Municipal Money Market	N/A	N/A		N/A	N/A

120


Portfolios — Investor B Shares	Net Distribution Fees		Distribution Waivers	Net Shareholder Servicing Fees		Shareholder Servicing Waivers
Mid-Cap Value Equity	$	702,062	—	$	233,173	—
Mid-Cap Growth Equity	$	247,380	—	$	81,057	—
Small Cap Value Equity	$	22,394	—	$	7,439	—
Small Cap Growth Equity	$	61,649	—	$	20,533	—
Small Cap Core	$	53,103	—	$	17,726	—
U.S. Opportunities	$	194,147	—	$	64,634	—
Science & Technology Opportunities	$	55,009	—	$	18,312	—
International Opportunities	$	560,490	—	$	186,704	—
Asset Allocation	$	974,985	—	$	322,085	—
Capital Appreciation	$	251,804	—	$	83,578	—
Aurora	$	1,332,773	—	$	441,776	—
Small/Mid-Cap Growth	$	119,698	—	$	39,611	—
Energy & Resources	$	635,313	—	$	211,126	—
All-Cap Energy & Resources	$	456,079	—	$	151,954	—
Health Sciences Opportunities	$	667,212	—	$	221,887	—
Global Opportunities	$	56,472	—	$	18,824	—

Portfolios — Investor C Shares	Net Distribution Fees		Distribution Waivers	Net Shareholder Servicing Fees		Shareholder Servicing Waivers
Money Market	$	67,341	—	$	16,114	$6,222
U. S. Treasury Money Market		N/A	N/A		N/A	N/A
Municipal Money Market		N/A	N/A		N/A	N/A
New Jersey Municipal Money Market		N/A	N/A		N/A	N/A
North Carolina Municipal
Money Market		N/A	N/A		N/A	N/A
Ohio Municipal Money Market		N/A	N/A		N/A	N/A
Pennsylvania Municipal
Money Market		N/A	N/A		N/A	N/A
Virginia Municipal Money Market		N/A	N/A		N/A	N/A
Mid-Cap Value Equity	$	1,109,234	—	$	369,744	—
Mid-Cap Growth Equity	$	134,368	—	$	44,820	—
Small Cap Value Equity	$	20,982	—	$	6,993	—
Small Cap Growth Equity	$	178,049	—	$	59,356	—
Small Cap Core Equity	$	220,262	—	$	73,418	—
U.S. Opportunities	$	879,224	—	$	293,246	—
Science & Technology Opportunities	$	72,477	—	$	24,198	—
International Opportunities	$	1,779,482	—	$	593,952	—
Asset Allocation	$	589,680	—	$	196,468	—
Capital Appreciation	$	103,046	—	$	34,228	—
Aurora	$	1,131,092	—	$	375,673	—
Small/Mid-Cap Growth	$	111,452	—	$	37,008	—
Energy & Resources	$	1,362,730	—	$	453,823	—
All-Cap Energy & Resources	$	1,710,078	—	$	571,059	—
Health Sciences Opportunities	$	2,568,926	—	$	857,259	—
Global Opportunities	$	152,818	—	$	51,026	—

121


Portfolios — Service Shares	Net Distribution Fees	Net Shareholder Servicing Fees		Shareholder Servicing Waivers
Money Market	N/A	$	1,231,398	—
U. S. Treasury Money Market	N/A	$	566,176	—
Municipal Money Market	N/A	$	203,506	—
New Jersey Municipal Money Market	N/A	$	82,092	—
North Carolina Municipal Money Market	N/A	$	10,504	—
Ohio Municipal Money Market	N/A	$	26,298	—
Pennsylvania Municipal Money Market	N/A	$	139,962	—
Virginia Municipal Money Market	N/A	$	1,182	—
Mid-Cap Value Equity	N/A	$	7,318	—
Mid-Cap Growth Equity	N/A	$	1,565	—
Small Cap Value Equity	N/A	$	4,522	—
Small Cap Growth Equity	N/A	$	88,545	—
Small Cap Core Equity	N/A	$	9,638	—
U.S. Opportunities	N/A	$	216,244	—
Science & Technology Opportunities	N/A	$	351	—
International Opportunities	N/A	$	363,902	—
Asset Allocation	N/A	$	4,854	—
Capital Appreciation	N/A		N/A	N/A
Aurora	N/A		N/A	N/A
Small/Mid-Cap Growth	N/A		N/A	N/A
Energy & Resources	N/A		N/A	N/A
All-Cap Energy & Resources	N/A	$	12,849	—
Health Sciences Opportunities	N/A	$	16,809	—
Global Opportunities	N/A		N/A	N/A


Portfolios — Class R Shares	Net Distribution Fees		Distribution Waivers	Net Shareholder Servicing Fees		Shareholder Servicing Waivers
Mid-Cap Growth Equity	$	1,525	—	$	1,525	—
Aurora	$	3,422	—	$	3,422	—
Small/Mid-Cap Growth	$	4,105	—	$	4,105	—
Science & Technology Opportunities	$	177	—	$	177	—

Other Distribution Arrangements. The Fund and BlackRock have entered into distribution agreements with UBS AG and BMO Harris Investment Management Inc. whereby those firms may, in certain circumstances, sell shares of certain Portfolios in certain jurisdictions. The level of payments made to UBS AG in any year for the sale and distribution of a Portfolio’s shares will vary and normally will not exceed the sum of the service fee payable on the assets attributable to UBS AG plus an additional fee equal to a percentage of such assets which shall range up to 0.25%. BMO Harris Investment Management Inc. does not receive payments in connection with the sale and distribution of Portfolio shares.

Information on Sales Charges and Distribution Related Expenses

Set forth below is information on sales charges (including any contingent deferred sales charges (“CDSCs”)) received by the Portfolios, including the amounts paid to affiliates of BlackRock, for each Portfolio’s last fiscal year. Prior to October 1, 2008, BlackRock Distributors, Inc. (“BDI”), an affiliate of BlackRock, acted as the Portfolios’ distributor. Effective October 1, 2008, BII, an affiliate of BlackRock, acts as the Portfolios’ sole Distributor.

122

Money Market

Investor A and Institutional Sales Charge Information


	Investor A Shares

For the Fiscal Year Ended September 30,	Gross Sales Charges Collected	Sales Charges Retained by BDI	Sales Charges Paid To Affiliates	CDSCs Received on Redemption of Load-Waived Shares
2008	$0	$0	$0	$566

	Institutional Shares

For the Fiscal Year Ended September 30,	Gross Sales Charges Collected	Sales Charges Retained by BDI	Sales Charges Paid To Affiliates	CDSCs Received on Redemption of Load-Waived Shares
2008	$0	$0	$0	$0

Investor B and Investor C Sales Charges Information


For the Fiscal Year Ended September 30,	Investor B Shares CDSCs Received by BDI	CDSCs Paid to Affiliates
2008	$84,752	$84,752

For the Fiscal Year Ended September 30,	Investor C Shares CDSCs Received by BDI	CDSCs Paid to Affiliates
2008	$25,583	$25,583

U.S. Treasury Money Market

Investor A and Institutional Sales Charge Information


	Investor A Shares

For the Fiscal Year Ended September 30,	Gross Sales Charges Collected	Sales Charges Retained by BDI	Sales Charges Paid To Affiliates	CDSCs Received on Redemption of Load-Waived Shares
2008	$0	$0	$0	$0

	Institutional Shares

				CDSCs Received
	Gross Sales	Sales Charges	Sales Charges	on Redemption
	Charges	Retained	Paid To	of Load-Waived
For the Fiscal Year Ended September 30,	Collected	by BDI	Affiliates	Shares
2008	$0	$0	$0	$0

Municipal Money Market

Investor A and Institutional Sales Charge Information


	Investor A Shares

For the Fiscal Year Ended September 30,	Gross Sales Charges Collected	Sales Charges Retained by BDI	Sales Charges Paid To Affiliates	CDSCs Received on Redemption of Load-Waived Shares
2008	$0	$0	$0	$0

	Institutional Shares

				CDSCs Received
	Gross Sales	Sales Charges	Sales Charges	on Redemption
	Charges	Retained	Paid To	of Load-Waived
For the Fiscal Year Ended September 30,	Collected	by BDI	Affiliates	Shares
2008	$0	$0	$0	$0

123

New Jersey Municipal Money Market

Investor A and Institutional Sales Charge Information


	Investor A Shares

				CDSCs Received
	Gross Sales	Sales Charges	Sales Charges	on Redemption
	Charges	Retained	Paid To	of Load-Waived
For the Fiscal Year Ended September 30,	Collected	by BDI	Affiliates	Shares
2008	$0	$0	$0	$0

	Institutional Shares

				CDSCs Received
	Gross Sales	Sales Charges	Sales Charges	on Redemption
	Charges	Retained	Paid To	of Load-Waived
For the Fiscal Year Ended September 30,	Collected	by BDI	Affiliates	Shares
2008	$0	$0	$0	$0

North Carolina Municipal Money Market

Investor A and Institutional Sales Charge Information


	Investor A Shares

For the Fiscal Year Ended September 30,	Gross Sales Charges Collected	Sales Charges Retained by BDI	Sales Charges Paid To Affiliates	CDSCs Received on Redemption of Load-Waived Shares
2008	$0	$0	$0	$0

	Institutional Shares

				CDSCs Received
	Gross Sales	Sales Charges	Sales Charges	on Redemption
	Charges	Retained	Paid To	of Load-Waived
For the Fiscal Year Ended September 30,	Collected	by BDI	Affiliates	Shares
2008	$0	$0	$0	$0

Ohio Municipal Money Market

Investor A and Institutional Sales Charge Information


	Investor A Shares

For the Fiscal Year Ended September 30,	Gross Sales Charges Collected	Sales Charges Retained by BDI	Sales Charges Paid To Affiliates	CDSCs Received on Redemption of Load-Waived Shares
2008	$0	$0	$0	$0

	Institutional Shares

				CDSCs Received
	Gross Sales	Sales Charges	Sales Charges	on Redemption
	Charges	Retained	Paid To	of Load-Waived
For the Fiscal Year Ended September 30,	Collected	by BDI	Affiliates	Shares
2008	$0	$0	$0	$0

Pennsylvania Municipal Money Market

Investor A and Institutional Sales Charge Information


		Investor A Shares

For the Fiscal Year Ended September 30,	Gross Sales Charges Collected	Sales Charges Retained by BDI	Sales Charges Paid To Affiliates	CDSCs Received on Redemption of Load-Waived Shares
2008	$0	$0	$0	$0

	Institutional Shares

For the Fiscal Year Ended September 30,	Gross Sales Charges Collected	Sales Charges Retained by BDI	Sales Charges Paid To Affiliates	CDSCs Received on Redemption of Load-Waived Shares



2008	$0	$0	$0	$0

124

Virginia Municipal Money Market

Institutional Sales Charge Information


	Institutional Shares

For the Fiscal Year Ended September 30,	Gross Sales Charges Collected	Sales Charges Retained by BDI	Sales Charges Paid To Affiliates	CDSCs Received on Redemption of Load-Waived Shares
2008	$0	$0	$0	$0

Mid-Cap Value Equity

Investor A and Institutional Sales Charge Information


	Investor A Shares

For the Fiscal Year Ended September 30,	Gross Sales Charges Collected	Sales Charges Retained by BDI	Sales Charges Paid To Affiliates	CDSCs Received on Redemption of Load-Waived Shares
2008	$233,308	$14,721	$34,769	$2,468

		Institutional Shares

				CDSCs Received
	Gross Sales	Sales Charges	Sales Charges	on Redemption
	Charges	Retained	Paid To	of Load-Waived
For the Fiscal Year Ended September 30,	Collected	by BDI	Affiliates	Shares
2008	$0	$0	$0	$0

Investor B and Investor C Sales Charges Information


For the Fiscal Year Ended September 30,	Investor B Shares CDSCs Received by BDI	CDSCs Paid to Affiliates
2008	$85,605	$85,605

	Investor C Shares
	CDSCs	CDSCs
	Received	Paid
For the Fiscal Year Ended September 30,	by BDI	to Affiliates
2008	$20,285	$20,285

Mid-Cap Growth Equity

Investor A and Institutional Sales Charge Information


	Investor A Shares

For the Fiscal Year Ended September 30,	Gross Sales Charges Collected	Sales Charges Retained by BDI	Sales Charges Paid To Affiliates	CDSCs Received on Redemption of Load-Waived Shares
2008	$101,030	$7,210	$16,767	$49

		Institutional Shares

				CDSCs Received
	Gross Sales	Sales Charges	Sales Charges	on Redemption
	Charges	Retained	Paid To	of Load-Waived
For the Fiscal Year Ended September 30,	Collected	by BDI	Affiliates	Shares
2008	$0	$0	$0	$0

Investor B and Investor C Sales Charges Information


For the Fiscal Year Ended September 30,	Investor B Shares CDSCs Received by BDI	CDSCs Paid to Affiliates
2008	$36,869	$36,869

125


For the Fiscal Year Ended September 30,	Investor C Shares CDSCs Received by BDI	CDSCs Paid to Affiliates
2008	$860	$860

Small Cap Value Equity

Investor A and Institutional Sales Charge Information


	Investor A Shares

For the Fiscal Year Ended September 30,	Gross Sales Charges Collected	Sales Charges Retained by BDI	Sales Charges Paid To Affiliates	CDSCs Received on Redemption of Load-Waived Shares
2008	$1,879	$169	$1,584	$0

	Institutional Shares

				CDSCs Received
	Gross Sales	Sales Charges	Sales Charges	on Redemption
	Charges	Retained	Paid To	of Load-Waived
For the Fiscal Year Ended September 30,	Collected	by BDI	Affiliates	Shares
2008	$0	$0	$0	$0

Investor B and Investor C Sales Charges Information


For the Fiscal Year Ended September 30,	Investor B Shares CDSCs Received by BDI	CDSCs Paid to Affiliates
2008	$3,684	$3,684

	Investor C Shares
	CDSCs	CDSCs
	Received	Paid
For the Fiscal Year Ended September 30,	by BDI	to Affiliates
2008	$28	$28

Small Cap Growth Equity

Investor A and Institutional Sales Charge Information


	Investor A Shares

For the Fiscal Year Ended September 30,	Gross Sales Charges Collected	Sales Charges Retained by BDI	Sales Charges Paid To Affiliates	CDSCs Received on Redemption of Load-Waived Shares
2008	$185,133	$11,888	$47,342	$50

		Institutional Shares

				CDSCs Received
	Gross Sales	Sales Charges	Sales Charges	on Redemption
	Charges	Retained	Paid To	of Load-Waived
For the Fiscal Year Ended September 30,	Collected	by BDI	Affiliates	Shares
2008	$0	$0	$0	$0

Investor B and Investor C Sales Charges Information


For the Fiscal Year Ended September 30,	Investor B Shares CDSCs Received by BDI	CDSCs Paid to Affiliates
2008	$14,195	$14,195

	Investor C Shares
	CDSCs	CDSCs
	Received	Paid
For the Fiscal Year Ended September 30,	by BDI	to Affiliates
2008	$6,496	$6,496

126

Small Cap Core Equity

Investor A and Institutional Sales Charge Information


	Investor A Shares

For the Fiscal Year Ended September 30,	Gross Sales Charges Collected	Sales Charges Retained by BDI	Sales Charges Paid To Affiliates	CDSCs Received on Redemption of Load-Waived Shares
2008	$60,988	$3,873	$15,949	$149

		Institutional Shares

				CDSCs Received
	Gross Sales	Sales Charges	Sales Charges	on Redemption
	Charges	Retained	Paid To	of Load-Waived
For the Fiscal Year Ended September 30,	Collected	by BDI	Affiliates	Shares
2008	$0	$0	$0	$0

Investor B and Investor C Sales Charges Information


For the Fiscal Year Ended September 30,	Investor B Shares CDSCs Received by BDI	CDSCs Paid to Affiliates
2008	$14,472	$14,472

	Investor C Shares
	CDSCs	CDSCs
	Received	Paid
For the Fiscal Year Ended September 30,	by BDI	to Affiliates
2008	$6,496	$6,496

U.S. Opportunities

Investor A and Institutional Sales Charge Information


	Investor A Shares

For the Fiscal Year Ended September 30,	Gross Sales Charges Collected	Sales Charges Retained by BDI	Sales Charges Paid To Affiliates	CDSCs Received on Redemption of Load-Waived Shares
2008	$1,255,896	$82,175	$293,654	$2,588

	Institutional Shares

				CDSCs Received
	Gross Sales	Sales Charges	Sales Charges	on Redemption
	Charges	Retained	Paid To	of Load-Waived
For the Fiscal Year Ended September 30,	Collected	by BDI	Affiliates	Shares
2008	$0	$0	$0	$0

Investor B and Investor C Sales Charges Information


For the Fiscal Year Ended September 30,	Investor B Shares CDSCs Received by BDI	CDSCs Paid to Affiliates
2008	$38,618	$38,618

	Investor C Shares
	CDSCs	CDSCs
	Received	Paid
For the Fiscal Year Ended September 30,	by BDI	to Affiliates
2008	$41,795	$41,795

127

Science & Technology Opportunities

Investor A and Institutional Sales Charge Information


	Investor A Shares

For the Fiscal Year Ended September 30,	Gross Sales Charges Collected	Sales Charges Retained by BDI	Sales Charges Paid To Affiliates	CDSCs Received on Redemption of Load-Waived Shares
2008	$92,582	$6,226	$27,769	$800

		Institutional Shares

				CDSCs Received
	Gross Sales	Sales Charges	Sales Charges	on Redemption
	Charges	Retained	Paid To	of Load-Waived
For the Fiscal Year Ended September 30,	Collected	by BDI	Affiliates	Shares
2008	$0	$0	$0	$0

Investor B and Investor C Sales Charges Information


For the Fiscal Year Ended September 30,	Investor B Shares CDSCs Received by BDI	CDSCs Paid to Affiliates
2008	$13,184	$13,184

	Investor C Shares
	CDSCs	CDSCs
	Received	Paid
For the Fiscal Year Ended September 30,	by BDI	to Affiliates
2008	$5,707	$5,707

International Opportunities

Investor A and Institutional Sales Charge Information


	Investor A Shares

For the Fiscal Year Ended September 30,	Gross Sales Charges Collected	Sales Charges Retained by BDI	Sales Charges Paid To Affiliates	CDSCs Received on Redemption of Load-Waived Shares
2008	$1,336,348	$97,942	$392,440	$1,184

	Institutional Shares

				CDSCs Received
	Gross Sales	Sales Charges	Sales Charges	on Redemption
	Charges	Retained	Paid To	of Load-Waived
For the Fiscal Year Ended September 30,	Collected	by BDI	Affiliates	Shares
2008	$0	$0	$0	$0

Investor B and Investor C Sales Charges Information


For the Fiscal Year Ended September 30,	Investor B Shares CDSCs Received by BDI	CDSCs Paid to Affiliates
2008	$101,382	$101,382

	Investor C Shares
	CDSCs	CDSCs
	Received	Paid
For the Fiscal Year Ended September 30,	by BDI	to Affiliates
2008	$55,492	$55,492

128

Asset Allocation

Investor A and Institutional Sales Charge Information


	Investor A Shares

For the Fiscal Year Ended September 30,	Gross Sales Charges Collected	Sales Charges Retained by BDI	Sales Charges Paid To Affiliates	CDSCs Received on Redemption of Load-Waived Shares
2008	$441,708	$28,829	$74,787	$1,117

		Institutional Shares

				CDSCs Received
	Gross Sales	Sales Charges	Sales Charges	on Redemption
	Charges	Retained	Paid To	of Load-Waived
For the Fiscal Year Ended September 30,	Collected	by BDI	Affiliates	Shares
2008	$0	$0	$0	$0

Investor B and Investor C Sales Charges Information


For the Fiscal Year Ended September 30,	Investor B Shares CDSCs Received by BDI	CDSCs Paid to Affiliates
2008	$192,187	$192,187

	Investor C Shares
	CDSCs	CDSCs
	Received	Paid
For the Fiscal Year Ended September 30,	by BDI	to Affiliates
2008	$13,819	$13,819

Capital Appreciation

Investor A and Institutional Sales Charge Information


	Investor A Shares

For the Fiscal Year Ended September 30,	Gross Sales Charges Collected	Sales Charges Retained by BDI	Sales Charges Paid To Affiliates	CDSCs Received on Redemption of Load-Waived Shares
2008	$55,401	$4,174	$11,563	$1,576

		Institutional Shares

				CDSCs Received
	Gross Sales	Sales Charges	Sales Charges	on Redemption
	Charges	Retained	Paid To	of Load-Waived
For the Fiscal Year Ended September 30,	Collected	by BDI	Affiliates	Shares
2008	$0	$0	$0	$0

Investor B and Investor C Sales Charges Information


For the Fiscal Year Ended September 30,	Investor B Shares CDSCs Received by BDI	CDSCs Paid to Affiliates
2008	$19,151	$19,151

	Investor C Shares
	CDSCs	CDSCs
	Received	Paid
For the Fiscal Year Ended September 30,	by BDI	to Affiliates
2008	$2,824	$2,824

129

Aurora

Investor A and Institutional Sales Charge Information


	Investor A Shares

For the Fiscal Year Ended September 30,	Gross Sales Charges Collected	Sales Charges Retained by BDI	Sales Charges Paid To Affiliates	CDSCs Received on Redemption of Load-Waived Shares
2008	$131,353	$10,618	$18,970	$5,869

	Institutional Shares

				CDSCs Received
	Gross Sales	Sales Charges	Sales Charges	on Redemption
	Charges	Retained	Paid To	of Load-Waived
For the Fiscal Year Ended September 30,	Collected	by BDI	Affiliates	Shares
2008	$0	$0	$0	$0

Investor B and Investor C Sales Charges Information


For the Fiscal Year Ended September 30,	Investor B Shares CDSCs Received by BDI	CDSCs Paid to Affiliates
2008	$143,040	$143,040

	Investor C Shares
	CDSCs	CDSCs
	Received	Paid
For the Fiscal Year Ended September 30,	by BDI	to Affiliates
2008	$6,257	$6,257

Small/Mid-Cap Growth

Investor A and Institutional Sales Charge Information


	Investor A Shares

For the Fiscal Year Ended September 30,	Gross Sales Charges Collected	Sales Charges Retained by BDI	Sales Charges Paid To Affiliates	CDSCs Received on Redemption of Load-Waived Shares
2008	$35,377	$2,781	$5,961	$0

		Institutional Shares

				CDSCs Received
	Gross Sales	Sales Charges	Sales Charges	on Redemption
	Charges	Retained	Paid To	of Load-Waived
For the Fiscal Year Ended September 30,	Collected	by BDI	Affiliates	Shares
2008	$0	$0	$0	$0

Investor B and Investor C Sales Charges Information


For the Fiscal Year Ended September 30,	Investor B Shares CDSCs Received by BDI	CDSCs Paid to Affiliates
2008	$19,276	$19,276

	Investor C Shares
	CDSCs	CDSCs
	Received	Paid
For the Fiscal Year Ended September 30,	by BDI	to Affiliates
2008	$1,523	$1,523

130

Energy & Resources

Investor A and Institutional Sales Charge Information


	Investor A Shares

For the Fiscal Year Ended September 30,	Gross Sales Charges Collected	Sales Charges Retained by BDI	Sales Charges Paid To Affiliates	CDSCs Received on Redemption of Load-Waived Shares
2008	$2,514,235	$209,178	$408,187	$31,800

	Institutional Shares

				CDSCs Received
	Gross Sales	Sales Charges	Sales Charges	on Redemption
	Charges	Retained	Paid To	of Load-Waived
For the Fiscal Year Ended September 30,	Collected	by BDI	Affiliates	Shares
2008	$0	$0	$0	$0

Investor B and Investor C Sales Charges Information


For the Fiscal Year Ended September 30,	Investor B Shares CDSCs Received by BDI	CDSCs Paid to Affiliates
2008	$110,419	$110,419

	Investor C Shares
	CDSCs	CDSCs
	Received	Paid
For the Fiscal Year Ended September 30,	by BDI	to Affiliates
2008	$123,718	$123,718

All-Cap Energy & Resources

Investor A and Institutional Sales Charge Information


	Investor A Shares

For the Fiscal Year Ended September 30,	Gross Sales Charges Collected	Sales Charges Retained by BDI	Sales Charges Paid To Affiliates	CDSCs Received on Redemption of Load-Waived Shares
2008	$1,820,135	$133,498	$288,927	$22,477

	Institutional Shares

				CDSCs Received
	Gross Sales	Sales Charges	Sales Charges	on Redemption
	Charges	Retained	Paid To	of Load-Waived
For the Fiscal Year Ended September 30,	Collected	by BDI	Affiliates	Shares
2008	$0	$0	$0	$0

Investor B and Investor C Sales Charges Information


For the Fiscal Year Ended September 30,	Investor B Shares CDSCs Received by BDI	CDSCs Paid to Affiliates
2008	$184,340	$184,340

	Investor C Shares
	CDSCs	CDSCs
	Received	Paid
For the Fiscal Year Ended September 30,	by BDI	to Affiliates
2008	$70,051	$70,051

131

Health Sciences Opportunities

Investor A and Institutional Sales Charge Information


	Investor A Shares

For the Fiscal Year Ended September 30,	Gross Sales Charges Collected	Sales Charges Retained by BDI	Sales Charges Paid To Affiliates	CDSCs Received on Redemption of Load-Waived Shares
2008	$330,509	$25,345	$93,823	$18,643

		Institutional Shares

				CDSCs Received
	Gross Sales	Sales Charges	Sales Charges	on Redemption
	Charges	Retained	Paid To	of Load-Waived
For the Fiscal Year Ended September 30,	Collected	by BDI	Affiliates	Shares
2008	$0	$0	$0	$0

Investor B and Investor C Sales Charges Information


For the Fiscal Year Ended September 30,	Investor B Shares CDSCs Received by BDI	CDSCs Paid to Affiliates
2008	$184,430	$184,430

	Investor C Shares
	CDSCs	CDSCs
	Received	Paid
For the Fiscal Year Ended September 30,	by BDI	to Affiliates
2008	$43,895	$43,895

Global Opportunities

Investor A and Institutional Sales Charge Information


	Investor A Shares

For the Fiscal Year Ended September 30,	Gross Sales Charges Collected	Sales Charges Retained by BDI	Sales Charges Paid To Affiliates	CDSCs Received on Redemption of Load-Waived Shares
2008	$170,855	$12,855	$44,725	$262

		Institutional Shares

				CDSCs Received
	Gross Sales	Sales Charges	Sales Charges	on Redemption
	Charges	Retained	Paid To	of Load-Waived
For the Fiscal Year Ended September 30,	Collected	by BDI	Affiliates	Shares
2008	$0	$0	$0	$0

Investor B and Investor C Sales Charges Information


For the Fiscal Year Ended September 30,	Investor B Shares CDSCs Received by BDI	CDSCs Paid to Affiliates
2008	$21,554	$21,554

	Investor C Shares
	CDSCs	CDSCs
	Received	Paid
For the Fiscal Year Ended September 30,	by BDI	to Affiliates
2008	$3,665	$3,665

Code of Ethics. The Fund, BlackRock, BFM, BIL, BIMC, BMC and BII have adopted codes of ethics under Rule 17j-1 under the 1940 Act. These codes of ethics permit personnel subject to the codes to invest in securities, including securities that may be purchased or held by the Fund.

Proxy Voting Policies. The Fund has delegated proxy voting responsibilities to BlackRock and its affiliates, subject to the general oversight of the Fund’s Board of Trustees. The Fund expects BlackRock and its affiliates to vote proxies related to the Fund’s portfolio securities for which the Fund has voting authority consistent with the Fund’s best interests. BlackRock has adopted its own proxy voting policies (the “Proxy Voting Policy”) to be used in voting the Fund’s proxies. The Proxy Voting Policy is attached as Appendix C.

132

Copies of the proxy voting record of the Portfolios are available without charge, upon request, by calling 1-800-699-1236 and are posted on the SEC’s website at http://www.sec.gov and reflect the twelve-month period beginning July 1 and ending June 30. The Portfolios’ proxy voting record is also available on the Fund’s website at www.blackrock.com.

Disclosure of Portfolio Holdings. The Board of Trustees of the Fund and BlackRock have each approved Portfolio Information Distribution Guidelines (the “Guidelines”) regarding the disclosure of the Fund’s portfolio securities, as applicable, and other portfolio information. The purpose of the Guidelines is to ensure that (i) shareholders and prospective shareholders of the Fund have equal access to portfolio holdings and characteristics and (ii) third parties (such as consultants, intermediaries and third party data providers) receive such information no more frequently than shareholders and prospective shareholders.

Asset and Return Information. Data on NAVs, asset levels (by total Portfolio and share class), accruals, yields, capital gains, dividends and Portfolio returns (net of fees by share class) are available to shareholders, prospective shareholders, consultants, intermediaries and third party data providers upon request, as soon as such data is available. Data on number of shareholders (total and by share class) and benchmark returns (including performance measures such as standard deviation, information ratio, Sharpe ratio, alpha, and beta) are available to shareholders, prospective shareholders, consultants, intermediaries and third party data providers as soon as such data is released after month-end.

Portfolio Characteristics. Examples of portfolio characteristics include sector allocation, credit quality breakdown, maturity distribution, duration and convexity measures, average credit quality, average maturity, average coupon, top 10 holdings with percent of the Portfolio held, average market capitalization, capitalization range, ROE, P/E, P/B, P/CF, P/S and EPS.

Month-end portfolio characteristics are available to shareholders, prospective shareholders, intermediaries and consultants on the fifth calendar day after month-end.¹
Fund Fact Sheets, which contain certain portfolio characteristics, are available to shareholders, prospective shareholders, intermediaries and consultants on a quarterly basis and will be posted to the Fund’s website promptly upon becoming available.

Portfolio Holdings. In addition to position description, portfolio holdings may also include Portfolio name, CUSIP, ticker symbol, total share and market value for each Equity Portfolio and Portfolio name, ticker symbol, coupon, maturity, current face amount or quantity, CUSIP or SEDOL, market value, market price, yield, weighted average life, duration and convexity of each security in a Portfolio as of a specific date.

Month-end portfolio holdings are available to shareholders, prospective shareholders, intermediaries and consultants on the 20th calendar day after month-end.¹
Quarter-end portfolio holdings are available to third party data providers (e.g., Lipper, Morningstar, Bloomberg, Thomson and S&P) on the 20th calendar day after quarter-end.¹

Other Information. To the extent other Fund information such as attribution analyses or security-specific information (e.g., information about Portfolio holdings where an issuer has been downgraded, been acquired or declared bankruptcy) is provided on an individual basis, such information shall also be made available to existing and prospective shareholders. The executive officers of the Fund may authorize disclosure of the Fund’s portfolio securities and other portfolio information.

Implementation. All Fund and BlackRock employees must adhere to the Guidelines when responding to inquiries from shareholders, prospective shareholders, consultants, intermediaries and third party data providers. In certain circumstances, portfolio information may be released to certain third parties who have signed confidentiality agreements. The Fund’s Chief Compliance Officer (“CCO”) is responsible for oversight of compliance with the Guidelines and will recommend to the Board of Trustees any changes to the Guidelines that he deems necessary or appropriate to ensure the Fund’s and BlackRock’s compliance.

1	The precise number of days specified above may vary slightly from period to period depending on whether the fifth or the 20th calendar day falls on a weekend or holiday.

133

Ongoing Arrangements. As of January 28, 2009, the Fund has ongoing arrangements with the following entities to make available monthly and quarterly portfolio holdings information as described in “Portfolio Holdings” above:

1.		Fund’s Board of Trustees and, if necessary, Independent Trustees’ counsel and Fund counsel.

2.		PFPC Trust Company pursuant to the Fund’s Amended and Restated Custodian Agreement under which the Fund’s portfolio holdings information is provided daily on a real-time basis.


3.		PNC GIS pursuant to the Fund’s Amended and Restated Administration Agreement under which the Fund’s portfolio holdings information is provided daily on a real-time basis.


4.		Deloitte & Touche LLP, the Fund’s independent registered public accountant, whereby the Fund’s portfolio holdings information is provided in connection with the preparation of the Fund’s annual financial statements and as the need arises.

5.		Independent rating agencies — Morningstar, Inc., Lipper Inc. and S&P


6.		Information aggregators — Wall Street on Demand, Thomson Financial and Bloomberg, eVestments Alliance, Informa/PSN Investment Solutions and IMoney.Net


7.		Sponsors of 401(k) plans that include BlackRock-advised funds — E.I. Dupont de Nemours and Company, Inc.

8.		Consultants for pension plans that invest in BlackRock-advised funds — Rocaton Investment Advisors, LLC; Mercer Investment Consulting; Watson Wyatt Investment Consulting; Towers Perrin HR Services; Pinnacle West, Callan Associates, Brockhouse & Cooper, Cambridge Associates, Mercer, Morningstar/Investorforce, Russell Investments (Mellon Analytical Solutions) and Wilshire Associates.


9.		Pricing Vendors — Reuters Pricing Service, Bloomberg, FT Interactive Data (FT IDC), ITG, Telekurs Financial, FactSet, Pricing Direct (formerly Bear Stearns Pricing Service), Standard and Poor’s Security Evaluations Service, Lehman Index Pricing, Bank of America High Yield Index, Loan Pricing Corporation (LPC), LoanX, Super Derivatives, IBOXX Index, Barclays Euro Gov’t Inflation-Linked Bond Index, JPMorgan Emerging & Developed Market Index, Reuters/WM Company, Nomura BPI Index, Japan Securities Dealers Association.

10		Portfolio Compliance Consultants — Oracle/i-Flex Solutions, Inc.

With respect to each such arrangement, the Fund has a legitimate business purpose for the release of information. The release of the information is subject to confidential treatment to prohibit the entity from sharing with an unauthorized source or trading upon the information provided. The Fund, BlackRock and their affiliates do not receive any compensation or other consideration in connection with such arrangements.

EXPENSES

Expenses are deducted from the total income of each Portfolio before dividends and distributions are paid. These expenses include, but are not limited to, fees paid to BlackRock, PNC GIS, transfer agency, networking and recordkeeping fees, reimbursement to BlackRock for costs related to the Fund’s investor service center, fees and expenses of officers and trustees who are not affiliated with BlackRock, BII or any of their affiliates (although the Fund bears certain fees and expenses of the Fund’s Chief Compliance Officer and certain of his staff), taxes, interest, legal fees, custodian fees, auditing fees, distribution fees, shareholder servicing fees, fees and expenses in registering and qualifying the Portfolios and their shares for distribution under Federal and state securities laws, expenses of preparing prospectuses and statements of additional information and of printing and distributing prospectuses and statements of additional information to existing shareholders, expenses relating to shareholder reports, shareholder meetings and proxy solicitations, fidelity bond and trustees and officers liability insurance premiums, the expense of independent pricing services, extraordinary expenses not incurred in the ordinary course of the Fund’s business and other expenses which are not expressly assumed by BlackRock or the Fund’s service providers under their agreements with the Fund. Consistent with the Fund’s Rule 18f-3 plan, any general expenses of the Fund that do not belong to a particular investment portfolio will be allocated among all investment portfolios by or under the direction of the Board of Trustees in a manner the Board determines to be fair and equitable.

134

PORTFOLIO MANAGERS AND PORTFOLIO TRANSACTIONS

Portfolio Managers

Other Funds and Accounts Managed

The following table sets forth information about funds and accounts other than the Mid-Cap Value Equity Portfolio for which that Portfolio’s portfolio managers are primarily responsible for the day-to-day portfolio management as of September 30, 2008.


	Number of Other Accounts Managed and Assets by Account Type			Number of Other Accounts and Assets for Which Advisory Fee is Performance-Based

Name of Portfolio Manager	Other Registered Investment Companies	Other Pooled Investment Vehicles	Other Accounts	Other Registered Investment Companies	Other Pooled Investment Vehicles	Other Accounts

Wayne Archambo	8 $2.01 Billion	0 $0	16 $1.26 Billion	0 $0	0 $0	0 $0

Anthony Forcione	0 $0	0 $0	3 $32.6 Million	0 $0	0 $0	0 $0

The following table sets forth information about funds and accounts other than the Mid-Cap Growth Equity Portfolio for which that Portfolio’s portfolio managers are primarily responsible for the day-to-day portfolio management as of September 30, 2008.


	Number of Other Accounts Managed and Assets by Account Type			Number of Other Accounts and Assets for Which Advisory Fee is Performance-Based

Name of Portfolio Manager	Other Registered Investment Companies	Other Pooled Investment Vehicles	Other Accounts	Other Registered Investment Companies	Other Pooled Investment Vehicles	Other Accounts

Eileen Leary	2 $1.36 Billion	2 $40 Million	6 $308 Million	0 $0	0 $0	0 $0

Andrew Leger	3 $1.63 Billion	1 $13.5 Million	0 $0	0 $0	0 $0	0 $0

The following table sets forth information about funds and accounts other than the Small Cap Value Equity Portfolio for which that Portfolio’s portfolio managers are primarily responsible for the day-to-day portfolio management as of September 30, 2008.


	Number of Other Accounts Managed and Assets by Account Type			Number of Other Accounts and Assets for Which Advisory Fee is Performance-Based

Name of Portfolio Manager	Other Registered Investment Companies	Other Pooled Investment Vehicles	Other Accounts	Other Registered Investment Companies	Other Pooled Investment Vehicles	Other Accounts
Wayne Archambo	8 $2.76 Billion	0 $0	16 $1.26 Billion	0 $0	0 $0	0 $0

Kate O’Connor	7 $1.96 Billion	1 $46.1 Million	17 $1.32 Billion	0 $0	1 $46.1 Million	0 $0

The following table sets forth information about funds and accounts other than the Small Cap Core Equity Portfolio for which that Portfolio’s portfolio managers are primarily responsible for the day-to-day portfolio management as of September 30, 2008.


	Number of Other Accounts Managed and Assets by Account Type			Number of Other Accounts and Assets for Which Advisory Fee is Performance-Based

Name of Portfolio Manager	Other Registered Investment Companies	Other Pooled Investment Vehicles	Other Accounts	Other Registered Investment Companies	Other Pooled Investment Vehicles	Other Accounts

Wayne Archambo	8 $2.71 Billion	0 $0	16 $1.26 Billion	0 $0	0 $0	0 $0

Kate O’Connor	7 $1.91 Billion	1 $46.1 Million	17 $1.32 Billion	0 $0	1 $46.1 Million	0 $0

135

The following table sets forth information about funds and accounts other than the Small Cap Growth Equity Portfolio for which that Portfolio’s portfolio managers are primarily responsible for the day-to-day portfolio management as of September 30, 2008.


	Number of Other Accounts Managed and Assets by Account Type			Number of Other Accounts and Assets for Which Advisory Fee is Performance-Based

Name of Portfolio Manager	Other Registered Investment Companies	Other Pooled Investment Vehicles	Other Accounts	Other Registered Investment Companies	Other Pooled Investment Vehicles	Other Accounts

Andrew Thut	2	1	4	0	0	0
	$646 Million	$13.5 Million	$212 Million	$0	$0	$0

Andrew Leger	3	1	0	0	0	0
	$904 Million	$13.5 Million	$0	$0	$0	$0

The following table sets forth information about funds and accounts other than the Science & Technology Opportunities Portfolio for which that Portfolio’s portfolio managers are primarily responsible for the day-to-day portfolio management as of September 30, 2008.*


	Number of Other Accounts Managed and Assets by Account Type			Number of Other Accounts and Assets for Which Advisory Fee is Performance-Based

Name of Portfolio Manager	Other Registered Investment Companies	Other Pooled Investment Vehicles	Other Accounts	Other Registered Investment Companies	Other Pooled Investment Vehicles	Other Accounts

Thomas P. Callan*	11	16	4	0	1	1
	$4.63 Billion	$1.47 Billion	$233 Million	$0	$281.8 Million	$114 Million

Jean M. Rosenbaum	7	4	0	0	0	0
	$3.71 Billion	$179 Million	$0	$0	$0	$0

Erin Xie	7	7	1	0	1	1
	$3.12 Billion	$565 Million	$85 Million	$0	$248.7 Million	$85 Million

*	Mr. Callan’s assets managed are presented as of November 18, 2008 due to the assignment of additional registered investment companies following the September 30, 2008 fiscal year end.

The following table sets forth information about funds and accounts other than the International Opportunities Portfolio for which that Portfolio’s portfolio managers are primarily responsible for the day-to-day portfolio management as of November 18, 2008.*


	Number of Other Accounts Managed and Assets by Account Type			Number of Other Accounts and Assets for Which Advisory Fee is Performance-Based

Name of Portfolio Manager	Other Registered Investment Companies	Other Pooled Investment Vehicles	Other Accounts	Other Registered Investment Companies	Other Pooled Investment Vehicles	Other Accounts

Thomas P. Callan*	11	16	4	0	1	1
	$3.9 Billion	$1.47 Billion	$233 Million	$0	$281.8 Million	$114 Million

Michael D. Carey*	6	1	1	0	0	0
	$2.24 Billion	$37.8 Million	$39.8 Million	$0	$0	$0

*	Mr. Callan’s and Mr. Carey’s assets managed are presented as of November 18, 2008 due to the assignment of additional registered investment companies following the September 30, 2008 fiscal year end.

The following table sets forth information about funds and accounts other than the Asset Allocation Portfolio for which that Portfolio’s portfolio manager is primarily responsible for the day-to-day portfolio management as of September 30, 2008.


	Number of Other Accounts Managed and Assets by Account Type			Number of Other Accounts and Assets for Which Advisory Fee is Performance-Based

Name of Portfolio Manager	Other Registered Investment Companies	Other Pooled Investment Vehicles	Other Accounts	Other Registered Investment Companies	Other Pooled Investment Vehicles	Other Accounts

Phillip Green	14	6	1	0	1	1
	$206 Million	$756.6 Million	$444.5 Million	$0	$41.1 Million	$444.5 Million

136

The following table sets forth information about funds and accounts other than the U.S. Opportunities Portfolio for which that Portfolio’s portfolio managers are primarily responsible for the day-to-day portfolio management as of September 30, 2008.*


	Number of Other Accounts Managed and Assets by Account Type			Number of Other Accounts and Assets for Which Advisory Fee is Performance-Based

Name of Portfolio Manager	Other Registered Investment Companies	Other Pooled Investment Vehicles	Other Accounts	Other Registered Investment Companies	Other Pooled Investment Vehicles	Other Accounts
Name of Portfolio Manager	Other Registered Investment Companies	Other Pooled Investment Vehicles	Other Accounts	Other Registered Investment Companies	Other Pooled Investment Vehicles	Other Accounts

Thomas P. Callan*	11	16	4	0	1	1
	$3.93 Billion	$1.47 Billion	$233 Million	$0	$281.8 Million	$114 Million

Jean M. Rosenbaum	7	4	0	0	0	0
	$2.79 Billion	$179 Million	$0	$0	$0	$0

*	Mr. Callan’s assets managed are presented as of November 18, 2008 due to the assignment of additional registered investment companies following the September 30, 2008 fiscal year end.

The following table sets forth information about funds and accounts other than the Exchange Portfolio for which that Portfolio’s portfolio managers are primarily responsible for the day-to-day portfolio management as of November 18, 2008.*


	Number of Other Accounts Managed and Assets by Account Type			Number of Other Accounts and Assets for Which Advisory Fee is Performance-Based

Name of Portfolio Manager	Other Registered Investment Companies	Other Pooled Investment Vehicles	Other Accounts	Other Registered Investment Companies	Other Pooled Investment Vehicles	Other Accounts
Name of Portfolio Manager	Other Registered Investment Companies	Other Pooled Investment Vehicles	Other Accounts	Other Registered Investment Companies	Other Pooled Investment Vehicles	Other Accounts

Jeffrey Lindsey*	10	3	9	0	0	1
	$3.43 Billion	$114 Million	$1.1 Billion	$0	$0	$108 Million

Edward Dowd*	10	3	9	0	0	1
	$3.43 Billion	$114 Million	$1.1 Billion	$0	$0	$108 Million

*	Mr. Lindsey’s and Mr. Dowd’s assets managed are presented as of November 18, 2008 due to the assignment of additional registered investment companies following the September 30, 2008 fiscal year end.

The following table sets forth information about funds and accounts other than the Small/Mid-Cap Growth Equity Portfolio for which that Portfolio’s portfolio managers are primarily responsible for the day-to-day portfolio management as of September 30, 2008.


	Number of Other Accounts Managed and Assets by Account Type			Number of Other Accounts and Assets for Which Advisory Fee is Performance-Based

Name of Portfolio Manager	Other Registered Investment Companies	Other Pooled Investment Vehicles	Other Accounts	Other Registered Investment Companies	Other Pooled Investment Vehicles	Other Accounts
Name of Portfolio Manager	Other Registered Investment Companies	Other Pooled Investment Vehicles	Other Accounts	Other Registered Investment Companies	Other Pooled Investment Vehicles	Other Accounts

Andrew Thut	2	1	4	0	0	0
	$1.45 Billion	$13.5 Million	$212 Million	$0	$0	$0

Andrew Leger	3	1	0	0	0	0
	$1.71 Billion	$13.5 Million	$0	$0	$0	$0

Robert Hallisey	0	0	0	0	0	0
	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0	$0

The following table sets forth information about funds and accounts other than the Aurora Portfolio for which that Portfolio’s portfolio managers are primarily responsible for the day-to-day portfolio management as of September 30, 2008.


	Number of Other Accounts Managed and Assets by Account Type			Number of Other Accounts and Assets for Which Advisory Fee is Performance-Based

Name of Portfolio Manager	Other Registered Investment Companies	Other Pooled Investment Vehicles	Other Accounts	Other Registered Investment Companies	Other Pooled Investment Vehicles	Other Accounts
Name of Portfolio Manager	Other Registered Investment Companies	Other Pooled Investment Vehicles	Other Accounts	Other Registered Investment Companies	Other Pooled Investment Vehicles	Other Accounts

Wayne Archambo	8	0	16	0	0	0
	$2.01 Billion	$0	$1.26 Billion	$0	$0	$0

Kate O’Connor	7	1	17	0	1	0
	$1.21 Billion	$46.1 Million	$1.32 Billion	$0	$46.1 Million	$0

137

The following table sets forth information about funds and accounts other than the Capital Appreciation Portfolio for which that Portfolio’s portfolio managers are primarily responsible for the day-to-day portfolio management as of November 18, 2008.*


	Number of Other Accounts Managed and Assets by Account Type			Number of Other Accounts and Assets for Which Advisory Fee is Performance-Based

Name of Portfolio Manager	Other Registered Investment Companies	Other Pooled Investment Vehicles	Other Accounts	Other Registered Investment Companies	Other Pooled Investment Vehicles	Other Accounts

Jeffrey Lindsey*	10	3	9	0	0	1
	$3.42 Billion	$114 Million	$1.1 Billion	$0	$0	$108 Million

Edward Dowd*	10	3	9	0	0	1
	$3.42 Billion	$114 Million	$1.1 Billion	$0	$0	$108 Million

*	Mr. Lindsey’s and Mr. Dowd’s assets managed are presented as of November 18, 2008 due to the assignment of additional registered investment companies following the September 30, 2008 fiscal year end.

The following table sets forth information about funds and accounts other than the Health Sciences Opportunities Portfolio for which that Portfolio’s portfolio managers are primarily responsible for the day-to-day portfolio management as of September 30, 2008.*


	Number of Other Accounts Managed and Assets by Account Type			Number of Other Accounts and Assets for Which Advisory Fee is Performance-Based

Name of Portfolio Manager	Other Registered Investment Companies	Other Pooled Investment Vehicles	Other Accounts	Other Registered Investment Companies	Other Pooled Investment Vehicles	Other Accounts

Thomas P. Callan*	11	16	4	0	1	1
	$3.84 Billion	$1.47 Billion	$233 Million	$0	$281.8 Million	$114 Million

Erin Xie	7	7	1	0	1	1
	$2.13 Billion	$565 Million	$85 Million	$0	$248.7 Million	$85 Million

*	Mr. Callan’s assets managed are presented as of November 18, 2008 due to the assignment of additional registered investment companies following the September 30, 2008 fiscal year end.

The following table sets forth information about funds and accounts other than the Energy & Resources Portfolio for which that Portfolio’s portfolio managers are primarily responsible for the day-to-day portfolio management as of September 30, 2008.


	Number of Other Accounts Managed and Assets by Account Type			Number of Other Accounts and Assets for Which Advisory Fee is Performance-Based

Name of Portfolio Manager	Other Registered Investment Companies	Other Pooled Investment Vehicles	Other Accounts	Other Registered Investment Companies	Other Pooled Investment Vehicles	Other Accounts

Denis J. Walsh, III	3	7	20	0	6	9
	$2.14 Billion	$1.15 Billion	$1.21 Billion	$0	$856 Million	$684.7 Million

Dan J. Rice, III	3	7	19	0	6	8
	$2.14 Billion	$1.15 Billion	$777 Million	$0	$856 Million	$247.9 Million

The following table sets forth information about funds and accounts other than the All-Cap Energy & Resources Portfolio for which that Portfolio’s portfolio managers are primarily responsible for the day-to-day portfolio management as of September 30, 2008.


	Number of Other Accounts Managed and Assets by Account Type			Number of Other Accounts and Assets for Which Advisory Fee is Performance-Based

Name of Portfolio Manager	Other Registered Investment Companies	Other Pooled Investment Vehicles	Other Accounts	Other Registered Investment Companies	Other Pooled Investment Vehicles	Other Accounts

Denis J. Walsh, III	3	7	20	0	6	9
	$2.14 Billion	$1.15 Billion	$1.21 Billion	$0	$856 Million	$684.7 Million

Dan J. Rice, III	3	7	19	0	6	8
	$2.14 Billion	$1.15 Billion	$777 Million	$0	$856 Million	$247.9 Million

138

The following table sets forth information about funds and accounts other than the Global Opportunities Portfolio for which that Portfolio’s portfolio managers are primarily responsible for the day-to-day portfolio management as of November 18, 2008.*


	Number of Other Accounts Managed and Assets by Account Type			Number of Other Accounts and Assets for Which Advisory Fee is Performance-Based

Name of Portfolio Manager	Other Registered Investment Companies	Other Pooled Investment Vehicles	Other Accounts	Other Registered Investment Companies	Other Pooled Investment Vehicles	Other Accounts

Thomas P. Callan*	11	16	4	0	1	1
	$4.67 Billion	$1.47 Billion	$233 Million	$0	$281.8 Million	$114 Million

Michael D. Carey*	6	1	1	0	0	0
	$3.01 Billion	$37.8 Million	$39.8 Million	$0	$0	$0

*	Mr. Callan’s and Mr. Carey’s assets managed are presented as of November 18, 2008 due to the assignment of additional registered investment companies following the September 30, 2008 fiscal year end.

Potential Material Conflicts of Interest

Real, potential or apparent conflicts of interest may arise when a portfolio manager has day-to-day portfolio management responsibilities with respect to more than one fund or account.

BlackRock has built a professional working environment, firm-wide compliance culture and compliance procedures and systems designed to protect against potential incentives that may favor one account over another. BlackRock has adopted policies and procedures that address the allocation of investment opportunities, execution of portfolio transactions, personal trading by employees and other potential conflicts of interest that are designed to ensure that all client accounts are treated equitably over time. Nevertheless, BlackRock furnishes investment management and advisory services to numerous clients in addition to the Fund, and BlackRock may, consistent with applicable law, make investment recommendations to other clients or accounts (including accounts which are hedge funds or have performance or higher fees paid to BlackRock, or in which portfolio managers have a personal interest in the receipt of such fees), which may be the same as or different from those made to the Portfolios. In addition, BlackRock, its affiliates and significant shareholders and any officer, director, stockholder or employee may or may not have an interest in the securities whose purchase and sale BlackRock recommends to the Fund. BlackRock, or any of its affiliates or significant shareholders, or any officer, director, stockholder, employee or any member of their families may take different actions than those recommended to the Fund by BlackRock with respect to the same securities. Moreover, BlackRock may refrain from rendering any advice or services concerning securities of companies of which any of BlackRock’s (or its affiliates’ or significant shareholders’) officers, directors or employees are directors or officers, or companies as to which BlackRock or any of its affiliates or significant shareholders or the officers, directors and employees of any of them has any substantial economic interest or possesses material non-public information. Each portfolio manager also may manage accounts whose investment strategies may at times be opposed to the strategy utilized for a fund. In this connection, it should be noted that Messrs. Callan, Lindsey, Green, Walsh, Rice and Dowd and Misses O’Connor and Xie currently manage certain accounts that are subject to performance fees. In addition, Messrs. Callan, Green, Walsh and Rice and Ms. Xie assist in managing certain hedge funds and may be entitled to receive a portion of any incentive fees earned on such funds and a portion of such incentive fees may be voluntarily or involuntarily deferred. Additional portfolio managers may in the future manage other such accounts or funds and may be entitled to receive incentive fees.

As a fiduciary, BlackRock owes a duty of loyalty to its clients and must treat each client fairly. When BlackRock purchases or sells securities for more than one account, the trades must be allocated in a manner consistent with its fiduciary duties. BlackRock attempts to allocate investments in a fair and equitable manner among client accounts, with no account receiving preferential treatment. To this end, BlackRock has adopted a policy that is intended to ensure that investment opportunities are allocated fairly and equitably among client accounts over time. This policy also seeks to achieve reasonable efficiency in client transactions and provide BlackRock with sufficient flexibility to allocate investments in a manner that is consistent with the particular investment discipline and client base.

Portfolio Manager Compensation Overview

BlackRock’s financial arrangements with its portfolio managers, its competitive compensation and its career path emphasis at all levels reflect the value senior management places on key resources. Compensation may include a variety of components and may vary from year to year based on a number of factors. The principal

139

components of compensation include a base salary, a performance-based, or for certain portfolio managers, performance and revenue-based discretionary bonus, participation in various benefits programs and one or more of the incentive compensation programs established by BlackRock such as its Long-Term Retention and Incentive Plan and Restricted Stock Program.

Base compensation. Generally, portfolio managers receive base compensation based on their seniority and/or their position with the firm. Senior portfolio managers who perform additional management functions within the portfolio management group or within BlackRock may receive additional compensation for serving in these other capacities. A portion of the compensation of the portfolio managers for the Small Cap Value Equity and Mid-Cap Value Equity Portfolios was guaranteed for the fiscal year ended September 30, 2008.

Discretionary Incentive Compensation for the Portfolio Managers except Messrs. Walsh, Rice and Green

Discretionary incentive compensation is based on a formulaic compensation program. BlackRock’s formulaic portfolio manager compensation program may include such factors as: pre-tax investment performance relative to appropriate competitors or benchmarks over 1-, 3- and 5-year performance periods, a measure of operational efficiency and a team revenue component. If a portfolio manager’s tenure is less than five years, performance periods will reflect time in position. In most cases, including for the portfolio managers of the Portfolio, these benchmarks are the same as the benchmark or benchmarks against which the performance of the Portfolio or other accounts managed by the portfolio managers are measured. BlackRock’s chief investment officers determine the benchmarks against which the performance of funds and other accounts managed by each portfolio manager is compared and the period of time over which performance is evaluated. With respect to the portfolio managers, such benchmarks for each portfolio include the following:


Portfolio Managers	Portfolio Managed	Benchmarks Applicable to Each Manager
Wayne Archambo	Mid-Cap Value Equity Portfolio	Lipper Mid-Cap Value Funds
Anthony Forcione		classification

Eileen Leary	Mid-Cap Growth Equity Portfolio	Lipper Mid-Cap Growth Funds
Andrew Leger		classification

Wayne Archambo	Small Cap Value Equity Portfolio	Lipper Small-Cap Value Funds
Kate O’Connor		classification

Wayne Archambo	Small Cap Core Equity Portfolio	Lipper Small-Cap Core Funds
Kate O’Connor		classification

Andrew Thut	Small Cap Growth Equity Portfolio	Lipper Small-Cap Growth Funds
Andrew Leger		classification

Thomas P. Callan	Science & Technology Opportunities	Lipper Science and Technology Funds
Jean M. Rosenbaum	Portfolio	classification
Erin Xie

Thomas P. Callan	International Opportunities Portfolio	A combination of Lipper International Small/Mid-Cap Core and
Michael D. Carey		International Small/Mid-Cap Growth Funds classifications

Thomas P. Callan	U.S. Opportunities Portfolio	A combination of Lipper Mid-Cap Core
Jean M. Rosenbaum		and Mid-Cap Growth Funds classifications

Jeffrey Lindsey	Exchange Portfolio	Russell 1000 Growth Index
Edward Dowd

Andrew Thut	Small/Mid-Cap Growth Portfolio	Russell 2500 Growth Index
Andrew Leger
Robert Hallisey

Wayne Archambo	Aurora Portfolio	Lipper Small-Cap Core Funds
Kate O’Connor		classification

140


Portfolio Managers	Portfolio Managed	Benchmarks Applicable to Each Manager
Jeffrey Lindsey	Capital Appreciation Portfolio	Lipper Large-Cap Growth Funds
Edward Dowd		classification

Thomas P. Callan	Health Sciences Opportunities Portfolio	A combination of Lipper Health/Biotechnology and
Erin Xie		Global Health/Biotechnology Funds classifications

Thomas P. Callan	Global Opportunities Portfolio	A combination of Lipper Global Multi-Cap Core and
Michael D. Carey		Global Multi-Cap Growth Funds classifications

Portfolio managers who meet relative investment performance and financial management objectives during a specified performance time period are eligible to receive an additional bonus which may or may not be a large part of their overall compensation. A smaller element of portfolio manager discretionary compensation may include consideration of: financial results, expense control, profit margins, strategic planning and implementation, quality of client service, market share, corporate reputation, capital allocation, compliance and risk control, leadership, workforce diversity, supervision, technology and innovation. All factors are considered collectively by BlackRock management.

Discretionary Incentive Compensation for Messrs. Walsh, Rice and Green

Discretionary incentive compensation is a function of several components: the performance of BlackRock, Inc., the performance of the portfolio manager’s group within BlackRock, the investment performance, including risk-adjusted returns, of the firm’s assets under management or supervision by that portfolio manager relative to predetermined benchmarks, and the individual’s seniority, role within the portfolio management team, teamwork and contribution to the overall performance of these portfolios and BlackRock. In most cases, including for the portfolio managers of the Fund, these benchmarks are the same as the benchmark or benchmarks against which the performance of the Fund or other accounts managed by the portfolio managers are measured. BlackRock’s chief investment officers determine the benchmarks against which the performance of funds and other accounts managed by each portfolio manager is compared and the period of time over which performance is evaluated. With respect to the portfolio managers, such benchmarks for each portfolio include the following:


Portfolio Managers	Portfolio Managed	Benchmarks Applicable to Each Manager
Denis J. Walsh, III	Energy & Resources Portfolio	Lipper Natural Resources Funds
Dan J. Rice, III		classifications

Denis J. Walsh, III	All-Cap Energy & Resources Portfolio	Lipper Natural Resources Funds
Dan J. Rice, III		classification

Phillip Green	Asset Allocation Portfolio	60% S&P 500 Index / 40% Barclays
		Capital U.S. Aggregate Index

BlackRock’s chief investment officers make a subjective determination with respect to the portfolio managers’ compensation based on the performance of the funds and other accounts managed by each portfolio manager relative to the various benchmarks noted above. Performance is measured on both a pre-tax and after-tax basis over various time periods including 1, 3, 5 and 10-year periods, as applicable.

Distribution of Discretionary Incentive Compensation

Discretionary incentive compensation is distributed to portfolio managers in a combination of cash and BlackRock, Inc. restricted stock units which vest ratably over a number of years. The BlackRock, Inc. restricted stock units, if properly vested, will be settled in BlackRock, Inc. common stock. Typically, the cash bonus, when combined with base salary, represents more than 60% of total compensation for the portfolio managers. Paying a portion of annual bonuses in stock puts compensation earned by a portfolio manager for a given year “at risk” based on BlackRock’s ability to sustain and improve its performance over future periods.

Long-Term Retention and Incentive Plan (“LTIP”) — The LTIP is a long-term incentive plan that seeks to reward certain key employees. Prior to 2006, the plan provided for the grant of awards that were expressed as an amount of cash that, if properly vested and subject to the attainment of certain performance goals, will be settled in cash and/or in BlackRock, Inc. common stock. Beginning in 2006, awards are granted under the LTIP in the form of BlackRock, Inc. restricted stock units that, if properly vested and subject to the attainment of certain performance goals, will be settled in BlackRock, Inc. common stock. Each portfolio manager except Mr. Rice has received awards under the LTIP.

141

Deferred Compensation Program — A portion of the compensation paid to eligible BlackRock employees may be voluntarily deferred into an account that tracks the performance of certain of the firm’s investment products. Each participant in the deferred compensation program is permitted to allocate his deferred amounts among the various investment options. Each portfolio manager has participated in the deferred compensation program.

Options and Restricted Stock Awards — A portion of the annual compensation of certain employees is mandatorily deferred into BlackRock, Inc. restricted stock units. Prior to the mandatory deferral into restricted stock units, BlackRock, Inc. granted stock options to key employees, including certain portfolio managers who may still hold unexercised or unvested options. BlackRock, Inc. also granted restricted stock awards designed to reward certain key employees as an incentive to contribute to the long-term success of BlackRock, Inc. These awards vest over a period of years. Messrs. Archambo, Callan and Carey have each been granted stock options and/or restricted stock in prior years.

Other compensation benefits. In addition to base compensation and discretionary incentive compensation, portfolio managers may be eligible to receive or participate in one or more of the following:

Incentive Savings Plans — BlackRock, Inc. has created a variety of incentive savings plans in which BlackRock employees are eligible to participate, including a 401(k) plan, the BlackRock Retirement Savings Plan (RSP), and the BlackRock Employee Stock Purchase Plan (ESPP). The employer contribution components of the RSP include a company match equal to 50% of the first 6% of eligible pay contributed to the plan capped at $4,000 per year, and a company retirement contribution equal to 3% of eligible compensation, plus an additional contribution of 2% for any year in which BlackRock has positive net operating income. The RSP offers a range of investment options, including registered investment companies managed by the firm. BlackRock contributions follow the investment direction set by participants for their own contributions or, absent employee investment direction, are invested into a balanced portfolio. The ESPP allows for investment in BlackRock common stock at a 5% discount on the fair market value of the stock on the purchase date. Annual participation in the ESPP is limited to the purchase of 1,000 shares or a dollar value of $25,000. Each portfolio manager is eligible to participate in these plans.

Portfolio Manager Beneficial Holdings

As of September 30, 2008, the end of each Portfolio’s most recently completed fiscal year, the dollar range of securities beneficially owned by each portfolio manager in the Portfolios is shown below:


Portfolio Manager	Portfolio(s) Managed	Dollar Range of Equity Securities Beneficially Owned
Wayne Archambo	Mid-Cap Value Equity Portfolio	$50,001-$100,000
	Small Cap Value Equity Portfolio	None
	Small Cap Core Equity Portfolio	None
	Aurora Portfolio	$50,001-$100,000

Thomas P. Callan	Science & Technology Opportunities Portfolio	None
	International Opportunities Portfolio	$100,001-$500,000
	U.S. Opportunities Portfolio	$100,001-$500,000
	Health Sciences Opportunities Portfolio	$100,001-$500,000
	Global Opportunities Portfolio	$500,001-$1,000,000

Michael D. Carey	International Opportunities Portfolio	$100,001-$500,000
	Global Opportunities Portfolio	$100,001-$500,000

Edward Dowd	Exchange Portfolio	None
	Capital Appreciation Portfolio	None

Anthony Forcione	Mid-Cap Value Equity Portfolio	$1-$10,000
Phillip Green	Asset Allocation Portfolio	None
Robert Hallisey	Small/Mid-Cap Growth Portfolio	None
Eileen Leary	Mid-Cap Growth Equity Portfolio	$10,001-$50,000

142


Portfolio Manager	Portfolio(s) Managed	Dollar Range of Equity Securities Beneficially Owned¹
Andrew Leger	Mid-Cap Growth Equity Portfolio	None
	Small Cap Growth Equity Portfolio	None
	Small/Mid-Cap Growth Portfolio

Jeffrey Lindsey	Exchange Portfolio	None
	Capital Appreciation Portfolio	$50,001-$100,000

Kate O’Connor	Small Cap Value Equity Portfolio	None
	Small Cap Core Equity Portfolio	$50,001-$100,000
	Aurora Portfolio	$10,001-$50,000

Dan J. Rice, III	Energy & Resources Portfolio	None
	All-Cap Energy & Resources Portfolio	None

Jean M. Rosenbaum	Science & Technology Opportunities Portfolio	$50,001-$100,000
	U.S. Opportunities Portfolio	None

Andrew Thut	Small Cap Growth Equity Portfolio	None
	Small/Mid-Cap Growth Portfolio	None

Erin Xie	Science & Technology Opportunities Portfolio	None
	Health Sciences Opportunities Portfolio	None

Denis J. Walsh, III	Energy & Resources Portfolio	None
	All-Cap Energy & Resources Portfolio	$10,001 - $50,000

¹	Includes securities attributable to the portfolio manager’s participation in certain deferred compensation and retirement programs.

Portfolio Transactions

Subject to policies established by the Board of Trustees, BlackRock is primarily responsible for the execution of a Portfolio’s portfolio transactions and the allocation of brokerage. BlackRock does not execute transactions through any particular broker or dealer, but seeks to obtain the best net results for the Portfolio, taking into account such factors as price (including the applicable brokerage commission or dealer spread), size of order, difficulty of execution, operational facilities of the firm and the firm’s risk and skill in positioning blocks of securities. While BlackRock generally seeks reasonable trade execution costs, a Portfolio does not necessarily pay the lowest spread or commission available, and payment of the lowest commission or spread is not necessarily consistent with obtaining the best price and execution in particular transactions. Subject to applicable legal requirements, BlackRock may select a broker based partly upon brokerage or research services provided to BlackRock and its clients, including a Portfolio. In return for such services, BlackRock may cause a Portfolio to pay a higher commission than other brokers would charge if BlackRock determines in good faith that the commission is reasonable in relation to the services provided.

In selecting brokers or dealers to execute portfolio transactions, the Manager and Sub-Advisors seek to obtain the best price and most favorable execution for a Portfolio, taking into account a variety of factors including: (i) the size, nature and character of the security or instrument being traded and the markets in which it is purchased or sold; (ii) the desired timing of the transaction; (iii) BlackRock’s knowledge of the expected commission rates and spreads currently available; (iv) the activity existing and expected in the market for the particular security or instrument, including any anticipated execution difficulties; (v) the full range of brokerage services provided; (vi) the broker’s or dealer’s capital (vii) the quality of research and research services provided; (viii) the reasonableness of the commission, dealer spread or its equivalent for the specific transaction; and (ix) BlackRock’s knowledge of any actual or apparent operational problems of a broker or dealer.

Section 28(e) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (“Section 28(e)”) permits an investment adviser, under certain circumstances, to cause an account to pay a broker or dealer a commission for effecting a transaction that exceeds the amount another broker or dealer would have charged for effecting the same transaction in recognition of the value of brokerage and research services provided by that broker or dealer. This includes commissions paid on riskless principal transactions under certain conditions. Brokerage and research services include: (1) furnishing advice as to the value of securities, including pricing and appraisal advice, credit analysis, risk measurement analysis, performance and other analysis, as well as the advisability of investing in, purchasing

143

or selling securities, and the availability of securities or purchasers or sellers of securities; (2) furnishing analyses and reports concerning issuers, industries, securities, economic factors and trends, portfolio strategy, and the performance of accounts; and (3) effecting securities transactions and performing functions incidental to securities transactions (such as clearance, settlement, and custody). BlackRock believes that access to independent investment research is beneficial to its investment decision-making processes and, therefore, to the Portfolios.

BlackRock may participate in client commission arrangements under which BlackRock may execute transactions through a broker-dealer and request that the broker-dealer allocate a portion of the commissions or commission credits to another firm that provides research to BlackRock. BlackRock believes that research services obtained through soft dollar or commission sharing arrangements enhance its investment decision-making capabilities, thereby increasing the prospects for higher investment returns. BlackRock will engage only in soft dollar or commission sharing transactions that comply with the requirements of Section 28(e). BlackRock regularly evaluates the soft dollar products and services utilized, as well as the overall soft dollar and commission sharing arrangements to ensure that trades are executed by firms that are regarded as best able to execute trades for client accounts, while at the same time providing access to the research and other services BlackRock views as impactful to its trading results.

BlackRock may utilize soft dollars and related services, including research (whether prepared by the broker-dealer or prepared by a third-party and provided to BlackRock by the broker-dealer) and execution or brokerage services within applicable rules and BlackRock’s policies to the extent that such permitted services do not compromise BlackRock’s ability to seek to obtain best execution. In this regard, the portfolio management investment and/or trading teams may consider a variety of factors, including the degree to which the broker-dealer: (a) provides access to company management; (b) provides access to their analysts; (c) provides meaningful/insightful research notes on companies or other potential investments; (d) facilitates calls on which meaningful or insightful ideas about companies or potential investments are discussed; (e) facilitates conferences at which meaningful or insightful ideas about companies or potential investments are discussed; or (f) provides research tools such as market data, financial analysis, and other third party related research and brokerage tools that aid in the investment process.

Research-oriented services for which BlackRock might pay with Portfolio commissions may be in written form or through direct contact with individuals and may include information as to particular companies or industries and securities or groups of securities, as well as market, economic, or institutional advice and statistical information, political developments and technical market information that assists in the valuation of investments. Except as noted immediately below, research services furnished by brokers may be used in servicing some or all client accounts and not all services may be used in connection with the Portfolio or account that paid commissions to the broker providing such services. In some cases, research information received from brokers by mutual fund management personnel, or personnel principally responsible for BlackRock’s individually managed portfolios, is not necessarily shared by and between such personnel. Any investment advisory or other fees paid by a Portfolio to BlackRock are not reduced as a result of BlackRock’s receipt of research services. In some cases, BlackRock may receive a service from a broker that has both a “research” and a “non-research” use. When this occurs BlackRock makes a good faith allocation, under all the circumstances, between the research and non-research uses of the service. The percentage of the service that is used for research purposes may be paid for with client commissions, while BlackRock will use its own funds to pay for the percentage of the service that is used for non-research purposes. In making this good faith allocation, BlackRock faces a potential conflict of interest, but BlackRock believes that its allocation procedures are reasonably designed to ensure that it appropriately allocates the anticipated use of such services to their research and non-research uses.

Payments of commissions to brokers who are affiliated persons of the Fund will be made in accordance with Rule 17e-1 under the 1940 Act.

From time to time, a Portfolio may purchase new issues of securities in a fixed price offering. In these situations, the broker may be a member of the selling group that will, in addition to selling securities, provide BlackRock with research services. FINRA has adopted rules expressly permitting these types of arrangements under certain circumstances. Generally, the broker will provide research “credits” in these situations at a rate that is higher than that available for typical secondary market transactions. These arrangements may not fall within the safe harbor of Section 28(e).

144

BlackRock does not consider sales of shares of the mutual funds it advises as a factor in the selection of brokers or dealers to execute portfolio transactions for a Portfolio; however, whether or not a particular broker or dealer sells shares of the mutual funds advised by BlackRock neither qualifies nor disqualifies such broker or dealer to execute transactions for those mutual funds.

Each Portfolio anticipates that its brokerage transactions involving foreign securities generally will be conducted primarily on the principal stock exchanges of the applicable country. Foreign equity securities may be held by a Portfolio in the form of depositary receipts, or other securities convertible into foreign equity securities. Depositary receipts may be listed on stock exchanges, or traded in over-the-counter markets in the United States or Europe, as the case may be. American Depositary Receipts, like other securities traded in the United States, will be subject to negotiated commission rates. Because the shares of each Portfolio are redeemable on a daily basis in U.S. dollars, each Portfolio intends to manage its portfolio so as to give reasonable assurance that it will be able to obtain U.S. dollars to the extent necessary to meet anticipated redemptions. Under present conditions, it is not believed that these considerations will have a significant effect on a Portfolio’s portfolio strategies. See “Portfolio Transactions and Brokerage” in the Statement of Additional Information for information about the brokerage commissions paid by your Portfolio, including commissions paid to affiliates, if any, for the periods indicated.

Each Portfolio may invest in certain securities traded in the OTC market and intends to deal directly with the dealers who make a market in the particular securities, except in those circumstances in which better prices and execution are available elsewhere. Under the 1940 Act, persons affiliated with a Portfolio and persons who are affiliated with such affiliated persons are prohibited from dealing with the Portfolio as principal in the purchase and sale of securities unless a permissive order allowing such transactions is obtained from the SEC. Since transactions in the OTC market usually involve transactions with the dealers acting as principal for their own accounts, the Portfolios will not deal with affiliated persons, including PNC and its affiliates, in connection with such transactions. However, an affiliated person of a Portfolio may serve as its broker in OTC transactions conducted on an agency basis provided that, among other things, the fee or commission received by such affiliated broker is reasonable and fair compared to the fee or commission received by non-affiliated brokers in connection with comparable transactions. In addition, a Portfolio may not purchase securities during the existence of any underwriting syndicate for such securities of which PNC is a member or in a private placement in which PNC serves as placement agent except pursuant to procedures approved by the Board of Trustees that either comply with rules adopted by the SEC or with interpretations of the SEC staff.

During the 12 months ended September 30, 2008, the following Portfolios paid brokerage commissions as follows:


Portfolios	Brokerage Commissions
Capital Appreciation	$	358,159
Mid-Cap Value Equity	$	2,858,231
Mid-Cap Growth Equity	$	458,833
Aurora	$	6,103,058
Small/Mid-Cap Growth	$	557,686
Small Cap Value Equity	$	323,746
Small Cap Core Equity	$	379,948
Small Cap Growth Equity	$	2,240,264
U.S. Opportunities	$	3,171,154
Health Sciences Opportunities	$	2,319,070
Asset Allocation	$	871,640
Exchange	$	6,482
Science & Technology Opportunities	$	110,242
Energy & Resources	$	1,963,902
All Cap Energy & Resources	$	999,909
International Opportunities	$	6,817,777
Global Opportunities	$	459,125

145

During the 12 months ended September 30, 2007, the following Portfolios paid brokerage commissions as follows:


Portfolios	Brokerage Commissions
Capital Appreciation	$	461,993.68
Mid-Cap Value Equity	$	4,109,835.15
Mid-Cap Growth Equity	$	510,851.61
Aurora	$	5,804,287.61
Small/Mid-Cap Growth	$	548,401.35
Small Cap Value Equity	$	239,558.34
Small Cap Core Equity	$	306,489.22
Small Cap Growth Equity	$	1,517,218.29
U.S. Opportunities	$	1,120,928.53
Health Sciences Opportunities	$	1,936,826.95
Asset Allocation	$	960,559.13
Exchange	$	4,118.66
Science & Technology Opportunities	$	93,931.09
Energy & Resources	$	702,110.04
All-Cap Energy & Resources	$	728,740.02
International Opportunities	$	4,275,836.03
Global Opportunities	$	265,220.69

During the 12 months ended September 30, 2006, the following Portfolios paid brokerage commissions as follows:


Portfolios	Brokerage Commissions
Capital Appreciation	$	522,382
Mid-Cap Value Equity	$	3,308,032
Mid-Cap Growth Equity	$	763,048
Aurora	$	9,843,233
Small/Mid-Cap Growth	$	560,256
Small Cap Value Equity	$	526,647
Small Cap Core Equity	$	352,752
Small Cap Growth Equity	$	1,883,202
U.S. Opportunities	$	512,567
Health Sciences Opportunities	$	2,661,098
Asset Allocation	$	1,277,018
Exchange	$	3,558
Science & Technology Opportunities	$	139,917
Energy & Resources	$	1,187,044
All-Cap Energy & Resources	$	907,025
International Opportunities	$	4,033,429
Global Opportunities	$	141,668

The following table shows the dollar amount of brokerage commissions paid to brokers for providing 28(e) research/brokerage services and the approximate dollar amount of the transactions involved for the fiscal year ended September 30, 2008. The provision of 28(e) research/brokerage services was not necessarily a factor in the placement of all brokerage business with such brokers.

146


Portfolio	Amount of Commissions Paid to Brokers for Providing 28(e) Research/Brokerage Services 10/01/07-09/30/08		Amount of Brokerage Transactions Involved 10/01/07-09/30/08
Asset Allocation	$	641,516	$	10,032
Science & Technology Opportunities	$	106,561	$	1,461
International Opportunities	$	6,715,232	$	2,528
Mid-Cap Growth Equity	$	228,981	$	368
Mid-Cap Value Equity	$	2,200,742	$	1,182
Small Cap Growth Equity	$	1,539,496	$	3,899
Small Cap Core Equity	$	303,827	$	862
Small Cap Value Equity	$	248,110	$	1,492
U.S. Opportunities	$	2,944,567	$	4,903
All-Cap Energy & Resources	$	697,884	$	734
Aurora	$	5,009,852	$	1,510
Energy & Resources	$	1,015,397	$	498
Health Sciences Opportunities	$	1,783,247	$	1,149
Capital Appreciation	$	314,832	$	701
Small/Mid-Cap Growth	$	417,898	$	1,607

Over-the-counter issues, including most fixed income securities such as corporate debt and U.S. Government securities, are normally traded on a “net” basis without a stated commission, through dealers acting for their own account and not as brokers. The Portfolios will primarily engage in transactions with these dealers or deal directly with the issuer unless a better price or execution could be obtained by using a broker. Prices paid to a dealer with respect to both non-U.S. and domestic securities will generally include a “spread,” which is the difference between the prices at which the dealer is willing to purchase and sell the specific security at the time, and includes the dealer’s normal profit.

Purchases of money market instruments by a Portfolio are made from dealers, underwriters and issuers. The Portfolios do not currently expect to incur any brokerage commission expense on such transactions because money market instruments are generally traded on a “net” basis with dealers acting as principal for their own accounts without a stated commission. The price of the security, however, usually includes a profit to the dealer. Each Money Market Portfolio intends to purchase only securities with remaining maturities of 13 months or less as determined in accordance with the rules of the SEC. As a result, the portfolio turnover rates of a Money Market Portfolio will be relatively high. However, because brokerage commissions will not normally be paid with respect to investments made by a Money Market Portfolio, the turnover rates should not adversely affect the Portfolio’s net asset values or net income.

Securities purchased in underwritten offerings include a fixed amount of compensation to the underwriter, generally referred to as the underwriter’s concession or discount. When securities are purchased or sold directly from or to an issuer, no commissions or discounts are paid.

The Manager or Sub-Advisors may seek to obtain an undertaking from issuers of commercial paper or dealers selling commercial paper to consider the repurchase of such securities from a Portfolio prior to maturity at their original cost plus interest (sometimes adjusted to reflect the actual maturity of the securities), if it believes that a Portfolio’s anticipated need for liquidity makes such action desirable. Any such repurchase prior to maturity reduces the possibility that a Portfolio would incur a capital loss in liquidating commercial paper, especially if interest rates have risen since acquisition of such commercial paper.

Investment decisions for each Portfolio and for other investment accounts managed by the Manager or Sub-Advisors are made independently of each other in light of differing conditions. BlackRock allocates investments among client accounts in a fair and equitable manner. A variety of factors will be considered in making such allocations. These factors include: (i) investment objectives or strategies for particular accounts, including sector, industry, country or region and capitalization weightings, (ii) tax considerations of an account, (iii) risk or investment concentration parameters for an account, (iv) supply or demand for a security at a given price level, (v) size of available investment, (vi) cash availability and liquidity requirements for accounts, (vii) regulatory restrictions, (viii) minimum investment size of an account, (ix) relative size of account, and (x) such other factors as may be approved by BlackRock’s general counsel. Moreover, investments may not be allocated to one client account over another based on any of the following considerations: (i) to favor one client account at the expense

147

of another, (ii) to generate higher fees paid by one client account over another or to produce greater performance compensation to BlackRock, (iii) to develop or enhance a relationship with a client or prospective client, (iv) to compensate a client for past services or benefits rendered to BlackRock or to induce future services or benefits to be rendered to BlackRock, or (v) to manage or equalize investment performance among different client accounts.

Equity securities will generally be allocated among client accounts within the same investment mandate on a pro rata basis. This pro-rata allocation may result in a Portfolio receiving less of a particular security than if pro-ration had not occurred. All allocations of equity securities will be subject, where relevant, to share minimums established for accounts and compliance constraints.

Initial public offerings of securities may be over-subscribed and subsequently trade at a premium in the secondary market. When BlackRock is given an opportunity to invest in such an initial offering or “new” or “hot” issue, the supply of securities available for client accounts is often less than the amount of securities the accounts would otherwise take. In order to allocate these investments fairly and equitably among client accounts over time, each portfolio manager or a member of his or her respective investment team will indicate to BlackRock’s trading desk their level of interest in a particular offering with respect to eligible clients accounts for which that team is responsible. Initial public offerings of U.S. equity securities will be identified as eligible for particular client accounts that are managed by portfolio teams who have indicated interest in the offering based on market capitalization of the issuer of the security and the investment mandate of the client account and in the case of international equity securities, the country where the offering is taken place and the investment mandate of the client account. Generally, shares received during the initial public offering will be allocated among participating client accounts within each investment mandate on a pro rata basis. In situations where supply is too limited to be allocated among all accounts for which the investment is eligible, portfolio managers may rotate such investment opportunities among one or more accounts so long as the rotation system provides for fair access for all client accounts over time. Other allocation methodologies that are considered by BlackRock to be fair and equitable to clients may be used as well.

Because different accounts may have differing investment objectives and policies, BlackRock may buy and sell the same securities at the same time for different clients based on the particular investment objective, guidelines and strategies of those accounts. For example, BlackRock may decide that it may be entirely appropriate for a growth fund to sell a security at the same time a value fund is buying that security. To the extent that transactions on behalf of more than one client of BlackRock or its affiliates during the same period may increase the demand for securities being purchased or the supply of securities being sold, there may be an adverse effect on price. For example, sales of a security by BlackRock on behalf of one or more of its clients may decrease the market price of such security, adversely impacting other BlackRock clients that still hold the security. If purchases or sales of securities arise for consideration at or about the same time that would involve a Portfolio or other clients or funds for which BlackRock or an affiliate act as investment manager, transactions in such securities will be made, insofar as feasible, for the respective funds and clients in a manner deemed equitable to all.

In certain instances, BlackRock may find it efficient for purposes of seeking to obtain best execution, to aggregate or “bunch” certain contemporaneous purchases or sale orders of its advisory accounts. In general, all contemporaneous trades for client accounts under management by the same portfolio manager or investment team will be bunched in a single order if the trader believes the bunched trade would provide each client with an opportunity to achieve a more favorable execution at a potentially lower execution cost. The costs associated with a bunched order will be shared pro rata among the clients in the bunched order. Generally, if an order for a particular portfolio manager or management team is filled at several different prices through multiple trades, all accounts participating in the order will receive the average price except in the case of certain international markets where average pricing is not permitted. While in some cases this practice could have a detrimental effect upon the price or value of the security as far as a Portfolio is concerned, in other cases it could be beneficial to the Portfolio. Transactions effected by BlackRock on behalf of more than one of its clients during the same period may increase the demand for securities being purchased or the supply of securities being sold, causing an adverse effect on price. The trader will give the bunched order to the broker dealer that the trader has identified as being able to provide the best execution of the order. Orders for purchase or sale of securities will be placed within a reasonable amount of time of the order receipt and bunched orders will be kept bunched only long enough to execute the order.

A Portfolio will not purchase securities during the existence of any underwriting or selling group relating to such securities of which BlackRock, PNC, BII or any affiliated person (as defined in the 1940 Act) thereof is a

148

member except pursuant to procedures adopted by the Board of Trustees in accordance with Rule 10f-3 under the 1940 Act. In no instance will portfolio securities be purchased from or sold to BlackRock, PNC, BII or any affiliated person of the foregoing entities except as permitted by SEC exemptive order or by applicable law.

The portfolio turnover rate of a Portfolio is calculated by dividing the lesser of a Portfolio’s annual sales or purchases of portfolio securities (exclusive of purchases or sales of securities whose maturities at the time of acquisition were one year or less) by the monthly average value of the securities held by the Portfolio during the year.

The Fund is required to identify any securities of its regular brokers or dealers (as defined in Rule 10b-1 under the 1940 Act) or their parents held by the Fund as of the end of its most recent fiscal year. As of September 30, 2008, the following Portfolios held the following securities:


Portfolio	Security	Value
Money Market
Bank of America Corp.	Commercial Paper	$	22,728,743
Bank of America Corp.	Master Notes	$	30,250,000
Barclays Bank Plc	Certificates of Deposit	$	25,000,000
Deutsche Bank Securities, Inc.	Variable Rate Obligations	$	12,265,000
Deutsche Bank Securities, Inc.	Repurchase Agreements	$	18,386,000
HSBC Bank USA	Variable Rate Obligations	$	2,580,000
UBS Securities, LLC	Certificates of Deposit	$	16,000,000
UBS Securities, LLC	Commercial Paper	$	4,988,642

U.S. Treasury Money Market
Barclays Bank Plc	Repurchase Agreements	$	175,000,000
Credit Suisse First Boston Corp.	Repurchase Agreements	$	50,000,000
Deutsche Bank Securities, Inc.	Repurchase Agreements	$	144,402,000
Greenwich Capital Markets, Inc.	Repurchase Agreements	$	175,000,000
HSBC Bank USA	Repurchase Agreements	$	100,000,000
JPMorgan Chase & Co.	Repurchase Agreements	$	140,000,000

Exchange
JPMorgan Chase & Co.	Common Stocks	$	5,824,798

Global Opportunities
Bank of America Corp.	Common Stocks	$	983,500
Barclays Bank Plc	Common Stocks	$	131,899
Credit Suisse First Boston Corp.	Common Stocks	$	172,797
HSBC Bank USA	Common Stocks	$	723,165
JPMorgan Chase & Co.	Common Stocks	$	821,920
UBS Securities, LLC	Common Stocks	$	174,343

International Opportunities
Barclays Bank Plc	Common Stocks	$	4,318,215
Credit Agricole, S.A.	Common Stocks	$	2,721,410
Credit Suisse First Boston Corp.	Common Stocks	$	5,286,663
Deutsche Bank Securities, Inc.	Common Stocks	$	2,496,636
HSBC Bank USA	Common Stocks	$	15,778,580
UBS Securities, LLC	Common Stocks	$	6,365,226

Capital Appreciation
JPMorgan Chase & Co.	Common Stocks	$	2,190,230

Asset Allocation
Bank of America Corp.	Common Stocks	$	1,395,625
Bank of America Corp.	Trust Preferred	$	1,066,042
Bank of America Corp.	Collateralized Mortgage Obligations	$	146,280
Bank of America Corp.	Commercial Mortgage Backed Securities	$	2,202,318
Bank of America Corp.	Asset Backed Securities	$	1,354,882
Bank of America Corp.	Corporate Bonds	$	1,514,400

149


Portfolio	Security	Value
Asset Allocation (continued)
Barclays Bank Plc	Trust Preferred	$	285,010
CIT Group, Inc.	Common Stocks	$	162,342
Credit Agricole, S.A.	Common Stocks	$	879,710
Credit Suisse First Boston Corp.	Trust Preferred	$	401,245
Credit Suisse First Boston Corp.	Collateralized Mortgage Obligations	$	212,415
Credit Suisse First Boston Corp.	Commercial Mortgage Backed Securities	$	5,351,580
Goldman Sachs & Co.	Common Stocks	$	268,800
Goldman Sachs & Co.	Trust Preferred	$	131,793
Goldman Sachs & Co.	Corporate Bonds	$	660,300
JPMorgan Chase & Co.	Common Stocks	$	2,235,762
JPMorgan Chase & Co.	Trust Preferred	$	1,533,994
JPMorgan Chase & Co.	Collateralized Mortgage Obligations	$	281,345
JPMorgan Chase & Co.	Commercial Mortgage Backed Securities	$	779,575
JPMorgan Chase & Co.	Asset Backed Securities	$	3,563,357
JPMorgan Chase & Co.	Corporate Bonds	$	930,964
Lehman Brothers, Inc.	Trust Preferred	$	11
Lehman Brothers, Inc.	Commercial Mortgage Backed Securities	$	4,099,518
Lehman Brothers, Inc.	Asset Backed Securities	$	264,901
Lehman Brothers, Inc.	Corporate Bonds	$	154,613
Morgan Stanley & Co., Inc.	Common Stocks	$	112,700
Morgan Stanley & Co., Inc.	Commercial Mortgage Backed Securities	$	4,141,513
Morgan Stanley & Co., Inc.	Corporate Bonds	$	1,318,598
UBS Securities, LLC	Common Stocks	$	766,237
UBS Securities, LLC	Trust Preferred	$	33,829
UBS Securities, LLC	Corporate Bonds	$	1,352,058

Other Potential Conflicts of Interest

The Bank of America Corporation (“BAC”), though its subsidiary Merrill Lynch and Co., Inc. (“Merrill Lynch”), and The PNC Financial Services Group, Inc. (“PNC”), each have a significant economic interest in BlackRock, Inc., the parent of BlackRock Advisors, LLC, the Portfolios’ Manager. PNC is considered to be an affiliate of BlackRock, Inc., under the 1940 Act. Certain activities of BlackRock Advisors, LLC, BlackRock, Inc. and their affiliates (collectively, “BlackRock”) and PNC and its affiliates (collectively, “PNC” and together with BlackRock, “Affiliates”), and those of BAC, Merrill Lynch and their affiliates (collectively, the “BAC Entities”), with respect to the Portfolios and/or other accounts managed by BlackRock, PNC or BAC Entities, may give rise to actual or perceived conflicts of interest such as those described below.

BlackRock is one of the world’s largest asset management firms with approximately $1.307 trillion in assets under management as of December 31, 2008. BAC is a national banking corporation which through its affiliates and subsidiaries, including Merrill Lynch, provides a full range of financial services. Merrill Lynch is a full service investment banking, broker-dealer, asset management and financial services organization. PNC is a diversified financial services organization spanning the retail, business and corporate markets. BlackRock and PNC are affiliates of one another under the 1940 Act. BlackRock, BAC, Merrill Lynch, PNC and their respective affiliates (including, for these purposes, their directors, partners, trustees, managing members, officers and employees), including the entities and personnel who may be involved in the investment activities and business operations of a Portfolio, are engaged worldwide in businesses, including equity, fixed income, cash management and alternative investments, and have interests other than that of managing the Portfolios. These are considerations of which investors in a Portfolio should be aware, and which may cause conflicts of interest that could disadvantage the Portfolio and its shareholders. These activities and interests include potential multiple advisory, transactional, financial and other interests in securities and other instruments, and companies that may be purchased or sold by a Portfolio.

BlackRock and its Affiliates, as well as the BAC Entities, have proprietary interests in, and may manage or advise with respect to, accounts or funds (including separate accounts and other funds and collective investment vehicles) that have investment objectives similar to those of a Portfolio and/or that engage in transactions in the same types of securities, currencies and instruments as the Portfolio. One or more Affiliates and BAC Entities are also major participants in the global currency, equities, swap and fixed income markets, in each case both on a

150

proprietary basis and for the accounts of customers. As such, one or more Affiliates or BAC Entities are or may be actively engaged in transactions in the same securities, currencies, and instruments in which a Portfolio invests. Such activities could affect the prices and availability of the securities, currencies, and instruments in which a Portfolio invests, which could have an adverse impact on the Portfolio’s performance. Such transactions, particularly in respect of most proprietary accounts or customer accounts, will be executed independently of a Portfolio's transactions and thus at prices or rates that may be more or less favorable than those obtained by the Portfolio. When BlackRock and its Affiliates or the BAC Entities seek to purchase or sell the same assets for their managed accounts, including a Portfolio, the assets actually purchased or sold may be allocated among the accounts on a basis determined in their good faith discretion to be equitable. In some cases, this system may adversely affect the size or price of the assets purchased or sold for a Portfolio. In addition, transactions in investments by one or more other accounts managed by BlackRock or its Affiliates or a BAC Entity may have the effect of diluting or otherwise disadvantaging the values, prices or investment strategies of a Portfolio, particularly, but not limited to, with respect to small capitalization, emerging market or less liquid strategies. This may occur when investment decisions regarding a Portfolio are based on research or other information that is also used to support decisions for other accounts. When BlackRock or its Affiliates or a BAC Entity implements a portfolio decision or strategy on behalf of another account ahead of, or contemporaneously with, similar decisions or strategies for a Portfolio, market impact, liquidity constraints, or other factors could result in the Portfolio receiving less favorable trading results and the costs of implementing such decisions or strategies could be increased or the Portfolio could otherwise be disadvantaged. BlackRock or it Affiliates or a BAC Entity may, in certain cases, elect to implement internal policies and procedures designed to limit such consequences, which may cause a Portfolio to be unable to engage in certain activities, including purchasing or disposing of securities, when it might otherwise be desirable for it to do so.

Conflicts may also arise because portfolio decisions regarding a Portfolio may benefit other accounts managed by BlackRock or its Affiliates or a BAC Entity. For example, the sale of a long position or establishment of a short position by a Portfolio may impair the price of the same security sold short by (and therefore benefit) one or more Affiliates or BAC Entities or their other accounts, and the purchase of a security or covering of a short position in a security by a Portfolio may increase the price of the same security held by (and therefore benefit) one or more Affiliates or BAC Entities or their other accounts.

BlackRock and its Affiliates or a BAC Entity and their clients may pursue or enforce rights with respect to an issuer in which a Portfolio has invested, and those activities may have an adverse effect on the Portfolio. As a result, prices, availability, liquidity and terms of the Portfolio’s investments may be negatively impacted by the activities of BlackRock or its Affiliates or a BAC Entity or their clients, and transactions for the Portfolio may be impaired or effected at prices or terms that may be less favorable than would otherwise have been the case.

The results of a Portfolio’s investment activities may differ significantly from the results achieved by BlackRock and its Affiliates or the BAC Entities for their proprietary accounts or other accounts (including investment companies or collective investment vehicles) managed or advised by them. It is possible that one or more Affiliate- or BAC Entity-managed accounts and such other accounts will achieve investment results that are substantially more or less favorable than the results achieved by a Portfolio. Moreover, it is possible that a Portfolio will sustain losses during periods in which one or more Affiliates or BAC Entity-managed accounts achieve significant profits on their trading for proprietary or other accounts. The opposite result is also possible. The investment activities of one or more Affiliates or BAC Entities for their proprietary accounts and accounts under their management may also limit the investment opportunities for a Portfolio in certain emerging and other markets in which limitations are imposed upon the amount of investment, in the aggregate or in individual issuers, by affiliated foreign investors.

From time to time, a Portfolio’s activities may also be restricted because of regulatory restrictions applicable to one or more Affiliates or BAC Entities, and/or their internal policies designed to comply with such restrictions. As a result, there may be periods, for example, when BlackRock, and/or one or more Affiliates or BAC Entities, will not initiate or recommend certain types of transactions in certain securities or instruments with respect to which BlackRock and/or one or more Affiliates or BAC Entities are performing services or when position limits have been reached.

In connection with its management of a Portfolio, BlackRock may have access to certain fundamental analysis and proprietary technical models developed by one or more Affiliates or BAC Entities. BlackRock will not be under any obligation, however, to effect transactions on behalf of a Portfolio in accordance with such analysis and models. In addition, neither BlackRock nor any of its Affiliates, nor any BAC Entity, will have any obligation to make available any information regarding their proprietary activities or strategies, or the activities or

151

strategies used for other accounts managed by them, for the benefit of the management of a Portfolio and it is not anticipated that BlackRock will have access to such information for the purpose of managing the Portfolio. The proprietary activities or portfolio strategies of BlackRock and its Affiliates and the BAC Entities, or the activities or strategies used for accounts managed by them or other customer accounts could conflict with the transactions and strategies employed by BlackRock in managing a Portfolio.

In addition, certain principals and certain employees of BlackRock are also principals or employees of BlackRock or another Affiliate. As a result, the performance by these principals and employees of their obligations to such other entities may be a consideration of which investors in a Portfolio should be aware.

BlackRock may enter into transactions and invest in securities, instruments and currencies on behalf of a Portfolio in which customers of BlackRock or its Affiliates or a BAC Entity, or, to the extent permitted by the SEC, BlackRock or another Affiliate or a BAC Entity, serves as the counterparty, principal or issuer. In such cases, such party’s interests in the transaction will be adverse to the interests of the Portfolio, and such party may have no incentive to assure that the Portfolio obtains the best possible prices or terms in connection with the transactions. In addition, the purchase, holding and sale of such investments by a Portfolio may enhance the profitability of BlackRock or its Affiliates or a BAC Entity. One or more Affiliates or BAC Entities may also create, write or issue derivatives for their customers, the underlying securities, currencies or instruments of which may be those in which a Portfolio invests or which may be based on the performance of the Portfolio. A Portfolio may, subject to applicable law, purchase investments that are the subject of an underwriting or other distribution by one or more Affiliates or BAC Entities and may also enter into transactions with other clients of an Affiliate or BAC Entity where such other clients have interests adverse to those of the Portfolio.

At times, these activities may cause departments of BlackRock or its Affiliates or a BAC Entity to give advice to clients that may cause these clients to take actions adverse to the interests of the Portfolio. To the extent affiliated transactions are permitted, a Portfolio will deal with BlackRock and its Affiliates or BAC Entities on an arms-length basis. BlackRock or its Affiliates or a BAC Entity may also have an ownership interest in certain trading or information systems used by a Portfolio. A Portfolio’s use of such trading or information systems may enhance the profitability of BlackRock and its Affiliates or BAC Entities.

One or more Affiliates or one of the BAC Entities may act as broker, dealer, agent, lender or adviser or in other commercial capacities for a Portfolio. It is anticipated that the commissions, mark-ups, mark-downs, financial advisory fees, underwriting and placement fees, sales fees, financing and commitment fees, brokerage fees, other fees, compensation or profits, rates, terms and conditions charged by an Affiliate or BAC Entity will be in its view commercially reasonable, although each Affiliate or BAC Entity, including its sales personnel, will have an interest in obtaining fees and other amounts that are favorable to the Affiliate or BAC Entity and such sales personnel.

Subject to applicable law, the Affiliates and BAC Entities (and their personnel and other distributors) will be entitled to retain fees and other amounts that they receive in connection with their service to the Portfolios as broker, dealer, agent, lender, adviser or in other commercial capacities and no accounting to the Portfolios or their shareholders will be required, and no fees or other compensation payable by the Portfolios or their shareholders will be reduced by reason of receipt by an Affiliate or BAC Entity of any such fees or other amounts.

When an Affiliate or BAC Entity acts as broker, dealer, agent, adviser or in other commercial capacities in relation to the Portfolios, the Affiliate or BAC Entity may take commercial steps in its own interests, which may have an adverse effect on the Portfolios. A Portfolio will be required to establish business relationships with its counterparties based on the Portfolio’s own credit standing. Neither BlackRock nor any of the Affiliates, nor any BAC Entity, will have any obligation to allow their credit to be used in connection with a Portfolio’s establishment of its business relationships, nor is it expected that the Portfolio’s counterparties will rely on the credit of BlackRock or any of the Affiliates or BAC Entities in evaluating the Portfolio’s creditworthiness.

Purchases and sales of securities for a Portfolio may be bunched or aggregated with orders for other BlackRock client accounts. BlackRock and its Affiliates and the BAC Entities, however, are not required to bunch or aggregate orders if portfolio management decisions for different accounts are made separately, or if they determine that bunching or aggregating is not practicable, required or with cases involving client direction.

Prevailing trading activity frequently may make impossible the receipt of the same price or execution on the entire volume of securities purchased or sold. When this occurs, the various prices may be averaged, and the

152

Portfolios will be charged or credited with the average price. Thus, the effect of the aggregation may operate on some occasions to the disadvantage of the Portfolios. In addition, under certain circumstances, the Portfolios will not be charged the same commission or commission equivalent rates in connection with a bunched or aggregated order.

BlackRock may select brokers (including, without limitation, Affiliates or BAC Entities) that furnish BlackRock, the Portfolios, other BlackRock client accounts or other Affiliates or BAC Entities or personnel, directly or through correspondent relationships, with research or other appropriate services which provide, in BlackRock’s view, appropriate assistance to BlackRock in the investment decision-making process (including with respect to futures, fixed-price offerings and over-the-counter transactions). Such research or other services may include, to the extent permitted by law, research reports on companies, industries and securities; economic and financial data; financial publications; proxy analysis; trade industry seminars; computer data bases; research-oriented software and other services and products. Research or other services obtained in this manner may be used in servicing any or all of the Portfolios and other BlackRock client accounts, including in connection with BlackRock client accounts other than those that pay commissions to the broker relating to the research or other service arrangements. Such products and services may disproportionately benefit other BlackRock client accounts relative to the Portfolios based on the amount of brokerage commissions paid by the Portfolios and such other BlackRock client accounts. For example, research or other services that are paid for through one client’s commissions may not be used in managing that client’s account. In addition, other BlackRock client accounts may receive the benefit, including disproportionate benefits, of economies of scale or price discounts in connection with products and services that may be provided to the Portfolios and to such other BlackRock client accounts. To the extent that BlackRock uses soft dollars, it will not have to pay for those products and services itself.

BlackRock may receive research that is bundled with the trade execution, clearing, and/or settlement services provided by a particular broker-dealer. To the extent that BlackRock receives research on this basis, many of the same conflicts related to traditional soft dollars may exist. For example, the research effectively will be paid by client commissions that also will be used to pay for the execution, clearing, and settlement services provided by the broker-dealer and will not be paid by BlackRock.

BlackRock may endeavor to execute trades through brokers who, pursuant to such arrangements, provide research or other services in order to ensure the continued receipt of research or other services BlackRock believes are useful in its investment decision-making process. BlackRock may from time to time choose not to engage in the above described arrangements to varying degrees. BlackRock may also into commission sharing arrangements under which BlackRock may execute transactions through a broker-dealer, including, where permitted, an Affiliate or BAC Entity, and request that the broker-dealer allocate a portion of the commissions or commission credits to another firm that provides research to BlackRock. To the extent that BlackRock engages in commission sharing arrangements, many of the same conflicts related to traditional soft dollars may exist.

BlackRock may utilize certain electronic crossing networks (“ECNs”) in executing client securities transactions for certain types of securities. These ECNs may charge fees for their services, including access fees and transaction fees. The transaction fees, which are similar to commissions or markups/markdowns, will generally be charged to clients and, like commissions and markups/markdowns, would generally be included in the cost of the securities purchased. Access fees may be paid by BlackRock even though incurred in connection with executing transactions on behalf of clients, including the Portfolios. In certain circumstances, ECNs may offer volume discounts that will reduce the access fees typically paid by BlackRock. This would have the effect of reducing the access fees paid by the BlackRock. BlackRock will only utilize ECNs consistent with its obligation to seek to obtain best execution in client transactions.

BlackRock has adopted policies and procedures designed to prevent conflicts of interest from influencing proxy voting decisions that it makes on behalf of advisory clients, including the Portfolios, and to help ensure that such decisions are made in accordance with BlackRock’s fiduciary obligations to its clients. Nevertheless, notwithstanding such proxy voting policies and procedures, actual proxy voting decisions of BlackRock may have the effect of favoring the interests of other clients or businesses of other divisions or units of BlackRock and/or its Affiliates or a BAC Entity, provided that BlackRock believes such voting decisions to be in accordance with its fiduciary obligations. For a more detailed discussion of these policies and procedures, see “Proxy Voting Policies and Procedures.”

It is also possible that, from time to time, BlackRock or its Affiliates or a BAC Entity may, although they are not required to, purchase and hold shares of a Portfolio. Increasing a Portfolio’s assets may enhance investment flexibility and diversification and may contribute to economies of scale that tend to reduce the Portfolio’s expense

153

ratio. BlackRock and its Affiliates or BAC Entities reserve the right to redeem at any time some or all of the shares of a Portfolio acquired for their own accounts. A large redemption of shares of a Portfolio by BlackRock or its Affiliates or by a BAC Entity could significantly reduce the asset size of the Portfolio, which might have an adverse effect on the Portfolio’s investment flexibility, portfolio diversification and expense ratio. BlackRock will consider the effect of redemptions on a Portfolio and other shareholders in deciding whether to redeem its shares.

It is possible that a Portfolio may invest in securities of companies with which an Affiliate or a BAC Entity has or is trying to develop investment banking relationships as well as securities of entities in which BlackRock or its Affiliates or a BAC Entity has significant debt or equity investments or in which an Affiliate or BAC Entity makes a market. A Portfolio also may invest in securities of companies to which an Affiliate or a BAC Entity provides or may someday provide research coverage. Such investments could cause conflicts between the interests of a Portfolio and the interests of other clients of BlackRock or its Affiliates or a BAC Entity. In making investment decisions for a Portfolio, BlackRock is not permitted to obtain or use material non-public information acquired by any division, department or Affiliate of BlackRock or of a BAC Entity in the course of these activities. In addition, from time to time, the activities of an Affiliate or a BAC Entity may limit a Portfolio’s flexibility in purchases and sales of securities. When an Affiliate is engaged in an underwriting or other distribution of securities of an entity, BlackRock may be prohibited from purchasing or recommending the purchase of certain securities of that entity for a Portfolio.

BlackRock and its Affiliates and the BAC Entities, their personnel and other financial service providers have interests in promoting sales of the Portfolios. With respect to BlackRock and its Affiliates and BAC Entities and their personnel, the remuneration and profitability relating to services to and sales of the Portfolios or other products may be greater than remuneration and profitability relating to services to and sales of certain funds or other products that might be provided or offered. BlackRock and its Affiliates or BAC Entities and their sales personnel may directly or indirectly receive a portion of the fees and commissions charged to the Portfolios or their shareholders. BlackRock and its advisory or other personnel may also benefit from increased amounts of assets under management. Fees and commissions may also be higher than for other products or services, and the remuneration and profitability to BlackRock or its Affiliates or a BAC Entity and such personnel resulting from transactions on behalf of or management of the Portfolios may be greater than the remuneration and profitability resulting from other funds or products.

BlackRock and its Affiliates or a BAC Entity and their personnel may receive greater compensation or greater profit in connection with an account for which BlackRock serves as an adviser than with an account advised by an unaffiliated investment adviser. Differentials in compensation may be related to the fact that BlackRock may pay a portion of its advisory fee to its Affiliate or to a BAC Entity, or relate to compensation arrangements, including for portfolio management, brokerage transactions or account servicing. Any differential in compensation may create a financial incentive on the part of BlackRock or its Affiliates or BAC Entities and their personnel to recommend BlackRock over unaffiliated investment advisers or to effect transactions differently in one account over another.

BlackRock and its Affiliates or a BAC Entity may provide valuation assistance to certain clients with respect to certain securities or other investments and the valuation recommendations made for their clients’ accounts may differ from the valuations for the same securities or investments assigned by a Portfolio’s pricing vendors, especially if such valuations are based on broker-dealer quotes or other data sources unavailable to the Portfolio’s pricing vendors. While BlackRock will generally communicate its valuation information or determinations to a Portfolio’s pricing vendors and/or fund accountants, there may be instances where the Portfolio’s pricing vendors or fund accountants assign a different valuation to a security or other investment than the valuation for such security or investment determined or recommended by BlackRock.

As disclosed in more detail in “Valuation of Portfolio Securities” in this Statement of Additional Information, when market quotations are not readily available or are believed by BlackRock to be unreliable, a Portfolio’s investments may be valued at fair value by BlackRock, pursuant to procedures adopted by the Fund’s Board of Trustees. When determining an asset’s “fair value,” BlackRock seeks to determine the price that a Portfolio might reasonably expect to receive from the current sale of that asset in an arm’s-length transaction. The price generally may not be determined based on what a Portfolio might reasonably expect to receive for selling an asset at a later time or if it holds the asset to maturity. While fair value determinations will be based upon all available factors that BlackRock deems relevant at the time of the determination, and may be based on analytical values determined by BlackRock using proprietary or third party valuation models, fair value represents only a good faith approximation of the value of a security. The fair value of one or more securities may not, in retrospect, be the price at which those assets could have been sold during the period in which the particular fair values were used in determining a Portfolio’s net asset value. As a result, a Portfolio’s sale or redemption of its shares at net asset value, at a time

154

when a holding or holdings are valued by BlackRock (pursuant to Board-adopted procedures) at fair value, may have the effect of diluting or increasing the economic interest of existing shareholders.

To the extent permitted by applicable law, a Portfolio may invest all or some of its short term cash investments in any money market fund or similarly-managed private fund advised or managed by BlackRock. In connection with any such investments, a Portfolio, to the extent permitted by the 1940 Act, may pay its share of expenses of a money market fund in which it invests, which may result in a Portfolio bearing some additional expenses.

BlackRock and its Affiliates or a BAC Entity and their directors, officers and employees, may buy and sell securities or other investments for their own accounts, and may have conflicts of interest with respect to investments made on behalf of a Portfolio. As a result of differing trading and investment strategies or constraints, positions may be taken by directors, officers, employees and Affiliates of BlackRock or by BAC Entities that are the same, different from or made at different times than positions taken for the Portfolio. To lessen the possibility that a Portfolio will be adversely affected by this personal trading, the Fund, BII and BlackRock each have adopted a Code of Ethics in compliance with Section 17(j) of the 1940 Act that restricts securities trading in the personal accounts of investment professionals and others who normally come into possession of information regarding the Portfolio’s portfolio transactions. Each Code of Ethics can be reviewed and copied at the Commission’s Public Reference Room in Washington, D.C. Information on the operation of the Public Reference Room may be obtained by calling the Commission at (202) 551-8090. Each Code of Ethics is also available on the EDGAR Database on the Commission’s Internet site at http://www.sec.gov, and copies may be obtained, after paying a duplicating fee, by e-mail at publicinfo@sec.gov or by writing the Commission’s Public Reference Section, Washington, DC 20549-0102.

BlackRock and its Affiliates will not purchase securities or other property from, or sell securities or other property to, a Portfolio, except that the Portfolio may in accordance with rules adopted under the 1940 Act engage in transactions with accounts that are affiliated with the Portfolio as a result of common officers, directors, or investment advisers or pursuant to exemptive orders granted to the Portfolios and/or BlackRock by the Commission. These transactions would be affected in circumstances in which BlackRock determined that it would be appropriate for the Portfolio to purchase and another client of BlackRock to sell, or the Portfolio to sell and another client of BlackRock to purchase, the same security or instrument on the same day. From time to time, the activities of a Portfolio may be restricted because of regulatory requirements applicable to BlackRock or its Affiliates or a BAC Entity and/or BlackRock’s internal policies designed to comply with, limit the applicability of, or otherwise relate to such requirements. A client not advised by BlackRock would not be subject to some of those considerations. There may be periods when BlackRock may not initiate or recommend certain types of transactions, or may otherwise restrict or limit their advice in certain securities or instruments issued by or related to companies for which an Affiliate or a BAC Entity is performing investment banking, market making or other services or has proprietary positions. For example, when an Affiliate is engaged in an underwriting or other distribution of securities of, or advisory services for, a company, the Portfolios may be prohibited from or limited in purchasing or selling securities of that company. Similar situations could arise if personnel of BlackRock or its Affiliates or a BAC Entity serve as directors of companies the securities of which the Portfolios wish to purchase or sell. However, if permitted by applicable law, the Portfolios may purchase securities or instruments that are issued by such companies or are the subject of an underwriting, distribution, or advisory assignment by an Affiliate or a BAC Entity, or in cases in which personnel of BlackRock or its Affiliates or of BAC Entities are directors or officers of the issuer.

The investment activities of one or more Affiliates or BAC Entities for their proprietary accounts and for client accounts may also limit the investment strategies and rights of the Portfolios. For example, in regulated industries, in certain emerging or international markets, in corporate and regulatory ownership definitions, and in certain futures and derivative transactions, there may be limits on the aggregate amount of investment by affiliated investors that may not be exceeded without the grant of a license or other regulatory or corporate consent or, if exceeded, may cause BlackRock, the Portfolios or other client accounts to suffer disadvantages or business restrictions.

If certain aggregate ownership thresholds are reached or certain transactions undertaken, the ability of BlackRock on behalf of clients (including the Portfolios) to purchase or dispose of investments, or exercise rights or undertake business transactions, may be restricted by regulation or otherwise impaired. As a result, BlackRock on behalf of clients (including the Portfolios) may limit purchases, sell existing investments, or otherwise restrict or limit the exercise of rights (including voting rights) when BlackRock, in its sole discretion, deems it appropriate.

Present and future activities of BlackRock and its Affiliates and BAC Entities, including BlackRock Advisors, LLC, in addition to those described in this section, may give rise to additional conflicts of interest.

155

PURCHASE AND REDEMPTION INFORMATION

The Fund has authorized one or more brokers and/or financial institutions (“Authorized Persons”) to receive on its behalf purchase and redemption orders that are in “good form” in accordance with the policies of those Authorized Persons. Such Authorized Persons are authorized to designate other intermediaries to receive purchase and redemption orders on the Fund’s behalf, and the Fund will be deemed to have received a purchase or redemption order when an Authorized Persons or, if applicable, such Authorized Person’s authorized designee, receives the order. Such customer orders will be priced at a Portfolio’s net asset value next computed after they are received by an Authorized Person or such Authorized Person’s authorized designee. Financial institutions may include retirement plan service providers who aggregate purchase and redemption instructions received from numerous retirement plans or plan participants.

Investor Shares

Purchase of Shares. The minimum investment for the initial purchase of shares is $1,000, except that the minimum is $250 for certain fee-based retirement programs and $100 for qualified employee benefit plans; there is a $50 minimum for subsequent investments. Purchases through the Automatic Investment Plan are subject to a lower initial purchase minimum. In addition, the minimum initial investment for employees of the Fund, the Fund’s Manager, Sub-Advisors, BII or transfer agent or employees of their affiliates is $100, unless payment is made through a payroll deduction program in which case the minimum investment is $25.

Purchases Through Brokers. It is the responsibility of brokers to transmit purchase orders and payment on a timely basis. Generally, if payment is not received within the period described in the prospectuses, the order will be canceled, notice thereof will be given, and the broker and its customers will be responsible for any loss to the Fund or its shareholders. Orders of less than $500 may be mailed by a broker to the transfer agent.

Other Purchase Information. Shares of each Portfolio of the Fund are sold on a continuous basis by BII as distributor. BII maintains its principal offices at 40 East 52nd Street, New York, New York 10022. Purchases may be effected on weekdays on which the NYSE is open for business (a “Business Day”). Payment for orders which are not received or accepted will be returned after prompt inquiry. The issuance of shares is recorded on the books of the Fund. No certificates will be issued for shares. Payments for shares of a Portfolio may, in the discretion of the Fund’s Manager, be made in the form of securities that are permissible investments for that Portfolio. The Fund reserves the right to reject any purchase order, to modify or waive the minimum initial or subsequent investment requirement and to suspend and resume the sale of any share class of any Portfolio at any time.

Unless a sales charge waiver applies, Investor B, Investor B1 or Investor B2 shareholders of an Equity Portfolio pay a contingent deferred sales charge if they redeem during the first six years after purchase and Investor C, Investor C1 or Investor C2 shareholders pay a contingent deferred sales charge if they redeem during the first twelve months after purchase. Investors expecting to redeem during these periods should consider the cost of the applicable contingent deferred sales charge in addition to the aggregate annual Investor B, Investor B1, Investor B2, Investor C, Investor C1 or Investor C2 distribution fees, as compared with the cost of the initial sales charges applicable to the Investor A and Investor A1 Shares.

Dealer Reallowances. The following are the front-end sales loads reallowed to dealers as a percentage of the offering price of certain of the Fund’s Non-Money Market Investor A Shares. In cases where BII acts as dealer, it will not receive a placement fee on purchases of over $1 million of Investor A Shares. For the tables below, the reallowance or placement fees indicated will apply up to the indicated breakpoint (so that, for example, a sale of $4 million worth of Investor A Shares in the Capital Appreciation Portfolio will result in a placement fee of .50% on the first $3 million and .25% on the final $1 million).

156

CAPITAL APPRECIATION AND ASSET ALLOCATION PORTFOLIOS:


Amount of Transaction at Offering Price	Reallowance or Placement Fees to Dealers (as % of Offering Price)*
Amount of Transaction at Offering Price
Less than $25,000	5.00	%
$25,000 but less than $50,000	4.50
$50,000 but less than $100,000	3.75
$100,000 but less than $250,000	2.75
$250,000 but less than $500,000	2.25
$500,000 but less than $750,000	1.75
$750,000 but less than $1,000,000	1.25
$1 million but less than $3 million	0.75
$3 million but less than $15 million	0.50
$15 million and above	0.25

*	BlackRock may pay placement fees to dealers as shown on purchases of Investor A Shares of $1,000,000 or more.

MID-CAP VALUE EQUITY, MID-CAP GROWTH EQUITY, SMALL CAP VALUE EQUITY, SMALL CAP CORE EQUITY, SMALL CAP GROWTH EQUITY, SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY OPPORTUNITIES, U.S. OPPORTUNITIES, SMALL/MID-CAP GROWTH, AURORA, HEALTH SCIENCES OPPORTUNITIES, ENERGY & RESOURCES, GLOBAL OPPORTUNITIES, INTERNATIONAL OPPORTUNITIES AND ALL-CAP ENERGY & RESOURCES PORTFOLIOS:


Amount of Transaction at Offering Price	Reallowance or Placement Fees to Dealers (as % of Offering Price)*
Amount of Transaction at Offering Price
Less than $25,000	5.00	%
$25,000 but less than $50,000	4.50
$50,000 but less than $100,000	3.75
$100,000 but less than $250,000	2.75
$250,000 but less than $500,000	2.25
$500,000 but less than $750,000	1.75
$750,000 but less than $1,000,000	1.25
$1 million but less than $3 million	1.00
$3 million but less than $15 million	0.50
$15 million and above	0.25

*	BlackRock may pay placement fees to dealers as shown on purchases of Investor A Shares of $1,000,000 or more.

During special promotions, the entire sales charge may be reallowed to dealers. Dealers who receive 90% or more of the sales charge may be deemed to be “underwriters” under the 1933 Act. The amount of the sales charge not reallowed to dealers may be paid to broker-dealer affiliates of BlackRock who provide sales support services. Furthermore, BII or BlackRock may, out of their assets and not as an additional charge to the Portfolios, contribute to various non-cash and cash incentive arrangements to promote the sale of shares, and may sponsor various contests and promotions subject to applicable FINRA regulations in which participants may receive prizes such as travel awards, merchandise and cash. BII or BlackRock may also pay for the travel expenses, meals, lodging and entertainment of broker/dealers, financial institutions and their salespersons in connection with educational and sales promotional programs subject to applicable FINRA regulations. The compensation arrangements described above generally are made available to all qualified financial institutions, broker/dealers and salespersons when such arrangements are in effect, subject to applicable FINRA regulations.

The following special purchase plans result in the waiver or reduction of sales charges for Investor A, Investor A1, Investor B, Investor B1, Investor B2, Investor C, Investor C1 or Investor C2 Shares of each of the Equity Portfolios.

157

Sales Charge Waivers For Each of the Equity Portfolios—Investor A Shares

Qualified Plans. In general, no sales charge will apply to purchases by authorized qualified employee benefit plans (“Qualified Plans”) of Investor A Shares. BlackRock may pay placement fees to dealers, up to the following amounts, on purchases of Investor A Shares of all Non-Money Market Portfolios (except the Index Equity Portfolio) by Qualified Plans:


Less than $3,000,000	1.00	%
$3 million but less than $15 million	0.50	%
$15 million and above	0.25	%

For the table above, the placement fees indicated will apply up to the indicated breakpoint (so that, for example, a sale of $4 million worth of Investor A Shares will result in a placement fee of up to 1.00% on the first $3 million and .50% on the final $1 million).

Other. The following persons associated with the Fund, the Fund’s Manager, Sub-Advisors, distributors, fund accounting agent or transfer agent and their affiliates may buy Investor A Shares of each of the Equity Portfolios without paying a sales charge to the extent permitted by these firms: (a) officers, directors and partners; (b) employees and retirees; (c) representatives of firms who have entered into selling agreements to distribute shares of BlackRock-advised funds; (d) immediate family members of such persons; and (e) any trust, pension, profit-sharing or other benefit plan for any of the persons set forth in (a) through (d). The following persons may also buy Investor A Shares without paying a sales charge: (a) authorized qualified employee benefit plans or savings plans and rollovers of current investments in the Fund through such plans; (b) persons investing through an authorized payroll deduction plan; (c) persons investing through an authorized investment plan for organizations which operate under Section 501(c)(3) of the Code; (d) registered investment advisers, trust companies and bank trust departments exercising discretionary investment authority with respect to amounts to be invested in a Portfolio; (e) persons participating in selected fee-based programs under which they (i) pay advisory fees to a broker-dealer or other financial institution or (ii) pay fees to a broker-dealer or other financial institution for providing transaction processing and other administrative services, but not investment advisory services; and (f) MetLife employees. Investors who qualify for any of these exemptions from the sales charge must purchase Investor A Shares.

The CDSC related to purchases of $1,000,000 or more of Investor A Shares is not charged if the dealer receives a placement fee over time during the 18 months after purchase.

Reduced Sales Charges For Each of the Equity Portfolios—Investor A and Investor A1 Shares

Because of reductions in the front-end sales charge for purchases of Investor A or Investor A1 Shares aggregating $25,000 or more, it may be advantageous for investors purchasing large quantities of Investor Shares to purchase Investor A or Investor A1 Shares. In any event, the Fund will not accept a purchase order of $50,000 or more for Investor B Shares or $500,000 or more for Investor C Shares.

Quantity Discounts. Larger purchases may reduce the sales charge price. Upon notice to the investor’s broker or the transfer agent, purchases of Investor A or Investor A1 Shares made at any one time by the following persons may be considered when calculating the sales charge: (a) an individual, his or her spouse and their children under the age of 21; or (b) a trustee or fiduciary of a single trust estate or single fiduciary account.

Right of Accumulation. Under the Right of Accumulation, the current value of an investor’s existing Investor A, Investor A1, Investor B, Investor B1, Investor B2, Investor C, Investor C1, Investor C2 and Institutional Shares in any Portfolio may be combined with the amount of the investor’s current purchase in determining the applicable sales charge. In order to receive the cumulative quantity reduction, previous purchases of Investor A, Investor A1, Investor B, Investor B1, Investor B2, Investor C, Investor C1, Investor C2 or Institutional Shares must be called to the attention of PNC GIS by the investor at the time of the current purchase.

Reinstatement Privilege. Upon redemption of Investor A, Investor A1 or Institutional Shares, you may reinvest the redemption proceeds in Investor A Shares of the SAME Portfolio without paying a front-end sales charge. This right may be exercised once a year and within 60 days of the redemption, provided the Investor A Share class of that Portfolio is currently open to new investors or the shareholder has a current account in that closed Portfolio. Shares will be purchased at the NAV calculated at the close of trading on the day the request is

158

received in good order. To exercise this privilege, PNC GIS must be notified of the reinvestment in writing by the purchaser, or by his or her broker, at the time the purchase is made. An investor should consult a tax adviser concerning the tax consequences of use of the reinstatement privilege.

Letter of Intent. An investor may qualify for a reduced sales charge immediately by signing a Letter of Intent stating the investor’s intention to invest during the next 13 months a specified amount in Investor A, Investor B, Investor C or Institutional Shares which, if made at one time, would qualify for a reduced sales charge. The 13-month Letter of Intent period commences on the day that the Letter of Intent is received by PNC GIS, and the investor must instruct PNC GIS upon making subsequent purchases that such purchases are subject to a Letter of Intent.

During the term of a Letter of Intent, the Fund’s transfer agent will hold Investor A Shares representing up to 5% of the indicated amount in escrow for payment of a higher sales load if the full amount indicated in the Letter of Intent is not purchased. The escrowed Investor A Shares will be released when the full amount indicated has been purchased.

If the full amount indicated is not purchased within the 13-month period, the investor will be required to pay an amount equal to the difference between the sales charge actually paid and the sales charge the investor would have had to pay on his or her aggregate purchases if the total of such purchases had been made at a single time. If remittance is not received within 20 days of the expiration of the 13-month period, PNC GIS, as attorney-in-fact, pursuant to the terms of the Letter of Intent, will redeem an appropriate number of Investor A Shares held in escrow to realize the difference.

Investor B, Investor B1 and Investor B2 Shares

Investor B and Investor B1 Shares of the Non-Money Market Portfolios are subject to a deferred sales charge if they are redeemed within six years of purchase, and Investor B2 Shares of the Non-Money Market Portfolios are subject to a deferred sales charge if they are redeemed within three years of purchase. Dealers will generally receive commissions equal to 4.00% of Investor B Shares sold by them plus ongoing fees under the Plan. Dealers may not receive a commission in connection with sales of Investor B, Investor B1 or Investor B2 Shares to certain qualified employee benefit plans sponsored by the Fund, BlackRock or its affiliates, but may receive fees under the Plan. These commissions and payments may be different than the reallowances, placement fees and commissions paid to dealers in connection with sales of Investor A, Investor A1, Investor C, Investor C1 and Investor C2 Shares.

Investor C, Investor C1 and Investor C2 Shares

Investor C, Investor C1 and Investor C2 Shares of the Non-Money Market Portfolios are subject to a deferred sales charge of 1% based on the lesser of the original cost or the net asset value of the Investor C, Investor C1 or Investor C2 Shares on the redemption date if redeemed within twelve months after purchase. Dealers will generally immediately receive commissions equal to 1% of the Investor C Shares sold by them plus ongoing fees under the Plan. Dealers may not receive a commission in connection with sales of Investor C, Investor C1 or Investor C2 Shares to certain qualified employee benefit plans sponsored by the Fund, BlackRock or its affiliates, but may receive fees under the Plan. These commissions and payments may be different than the reallowances, placement fees and commissions paid to dealers in connection with sales of Investor A, Investor A1, Investor B, Investor B1 and Investor B2 Shares.

Investor B and Investor C Shares

Shareholders of BlackRock Senior Floating Rate Fund, Inc. (“SFR”) and BlackRock Senior Floating Rate Fund II, Inc. (“SFR II” and together with SFR, the “Funds”) are permitted to invest the proceeds from tender offers conducted by the Funds in Investor B Shares or Investor C Shares, respectively, of Portfolios that currently offer such shares. The holding period for shares held in SFR will be tacked onto the holding period for calculating any applicable contingent deferred sales charge on redemptions of Investor B Shares and the holding period for shares held in SFR II will be tacked onto the holding period for calculating any applicable contingent deferred sales charge on redemptions of Investor C Shares. Further, the three year/3.00% early withdrawal charge that currently applies to shares of SFR and the one year/1.00% early withdrawal charge that currently applies to shares of SFR II will apply to any Investor B or Investor C Shares acquired through the exercise of this reinvestment privilege.

159

Exemptions from and Reductions of the Contingent Deferred Sales Charge

Investor B, Investor B1, Investor B2, Investor C, Investor C1 and Investor C2 Shares. The contingent deferred sales charge on Investor B, Investor B1, Investor B2, Investor C, Investor C1 and Investor C2 Shares of the Non-Money Market Portfolios is not charged in connection with: (1) redemptions of Investor B, Investor B1, Investor B2, Investor C, Investor C2 and Investor C2 Shares purchased through certain authorized qualified employee benefit plans or savings plans and rollovers of current investments in the Fund through such plans; (2) exchanges described in “Exchange Privilege” below; (3) redemptions made in connection with minimum required distributions from IRA and 403(b)(7) accounts due to the shareholder reaching age 70¹/2; (4) certain post-retirement withdrawals from an IRA or other retirement plan if you are over 59¹/2 years old; (5) redemptions made with respect to certain qualified employee benefit plans sponsored by the Fund, BlackRock or its affiliates; (6) redemptions (i) within one year of a shareholder’s death or, if later, the receipt of a certified probate settlement (including in connection with the distribution of account assets to a beneficiary of the decedent) or (ii) in connection with a shareholder’s disability (as defined in the Code) subsequent to the purchase of Investor B, Investor B1, Investor B2, Investor C, Investor C1 or Investor C2 Shares; (7) involuntary redemptions of Investor B, Investor B1, Investor B2, Investor C, Investor C1 or Investor C2 Shares in accounts with low balances as described in “Redemption of Shares” below; (8) redemptions made pursuant to the Systematic Withdrawal Plan, subject to the limitations set forth under “Systematic Withdrawal Plan” below; (9) redemptions related to the payment of PNC Trust Company custodial IRA fees; and (10) redemptions when a shareholder can demonstrate hardship, in the absolute discretion of the Fund. In addition, no contingent deferred sales charge is charged on Investor B, Investor B1, Investor B2, Investor C, Investor C1 or Investor C2 Shares acquired through the reinvestment of dividends or distributions.

When an investor redeems Investor B, Investor B1, Investor B2, Investor C, Investor C1 or Investor C2 Shares, the redemption order is processed to minimize the amount of the contingent deferred sales charge that will be charged. Investor B, Investor B1, Investor B2, Investor C, Investor C1 and Investor C2 Shares are redeemed first from those shares that are not subject to the deferred sales load (i.e., shares that were acquired through reinvestment of dividends or distributions) and after that from the shares that have been held the longest.

Shareholder Features

Exchange Privilege. The exchange of Investor B, Investor B1, Investor B2, Investor C, Investor C1 and Investor C2 Shares will not be subject to a CDSC, which will continue to be measured from the date of the original purchase and will not be affected by exchanges.

Unless an exemption applies, a front-end sales charge will be charged in connection with exchanges of Investor A Shares of a Money Market Portfolio for Investor A Shares of the Fund’s Non-Money Market Portfolios. Exchanges of Investor B or Investor C Shares of a Money Market Portfolio for Investor B or Investor C Shares of a Non-Money Market Portfolio of the Fund will be exercised at NAV. However, a CDSC will be charged in connection with the redemption of the Investor B or Investor C Shares of the Non-Money Market Portfolio received in the exchange. In determining the holding period for calculating the contingent deferred sales charge payable on redemption of Investor B, Investor B1, Investor B2, Investor C, Investor C1 or Investor C2 Shares of the Non-Money Market Portfolios, the holding period of the Investor B, Investor B1, Investor B2, Investor C, Investor C1 or Investor C2 Shares originally held will be added to the holding period of the Investor B or Investor C Shares acquired through exchange.

Investor A Shares of Money Market Portfolios of the Fund that were (1) acquired through the use of the exchange privilege and (2) can be traced back to a purchase of shares in one or more investment portfolios of the Fund for which a sales charge was paid, can be exchanged for Investor A Shares of a Portfolio subject to a sales charge.

A shareholder wishing to make an exchange may do so by sending a written request to the Fund c/o PNC GIS at the following address: PNC Global Investment Servicing (U.S.) Inc., P.O. Box 9819, Providence, RI 02940-8019. Shareholders are automatically provided with telephone exchange privileges when opening an account, unless they indicate on the Application that they do not wish to use this privilege. To add this feature to an existing account that previously did not provide this option, a Telephone Exchange Authorization Form must be filed with PNC GIS. This form is available from PNC GIS. Once this election has been made, the shareholder may simply

160

contact the Fund by telephone at (800) 441-7762 to request the exchange. During periods of substantial economic or market change, telephone exchanges may be difficult to complete and shareholders may have to submit exchange requests to PNC GIS in writing.

If the exchanging shareholder does not currently own shares of the investment portfolio whose shares are being acquired, a new account will be established with the same registration, dividend and capital gain options and broker of record as the account from which shares are exchanged, unless otherwise specified in writing by the shareholder with all signatures guaranteed by an eligible guarantor institution as defined below. In order to participate in the Automatic Investment Program or establish a Systematic Withdrawal Plan for the new account, however, an exchanging shareholder must file a specific written request.

Any share exchange must satisfy the requirements relating to the minimum initial investment requirement, and must be legally available for sale in the state of the investor’s residence. For Federal income tax purposes, a share exchange is a taxable event and, accordingly, a capital gain or loss may be realized. Before making an exchange request, shareholders should consult a tax or other financial adviser and should consider the investment objective, policies and restrictions of the investment portfolio into which the shareholder is making an exchange. Brokers may charge a fee for handling exchanges.

The Fund reserves the right to suspend, modify or terminate the exchange privilege at any time. Notice will be given to shareholders of any material modification or termination except where notice is not required. The Fund reserves the right to reject any telephone exchange request. Telephone exchanges may be subject to limitations as to amount or frequency, and to other restrictions that may be established from time to time to ensure that exchanges do not operate to the disadvantage of any portfolio or its shareholders. The Fund, the Administrators and BII will employ reasonable procedures to confirm that instructions communicated by telephone are genuine. The Fund, the Administrators and BII will not be liable for any loss, liability, cost or expense for acting upon telephone instructions reasonably believed to be genuine in accordance with such procedures.

By use of the exchange privilege, the investor authorizes the Fund’s transfer agent to act on telephonic or written exchange instructions from any person representing himself to be the investor and believed by the Fund’s transfer agent to be genuine. The records of the Fund’s transfer agent pertaining to such instructions are binding. The exchange privilege may be modified or terminated at any time upon 60 days’ notice to affected shareholders. The exchange privilege is only available in states where the exchange may legally be made.

The redemption of shares of one Portfolio and the subsequent investment in another Portfolio generally will be treated as two separate transactions. Therefore, a front-end sales charge will be imposed (unless an exemption applies) on the purchase of Investor A or Investor A1 Shares of a Non-Money Market Portfolio with the proceeds of a redemption of Investor Shares of a Money Market Portfolio. In addition, when Investor Shares of a Money Market Portfolio are redeemed and the proceeds are used to purchase Investor B, Investor B1, Investor B2, Investor C, Investor C1 or Investor C2 Shares of a Non-Money Market Portfolio, a contingent deferred sales charge will be imposed (unless an exemption applies) when the Investor B Shares or Investor C Shares of the Non-Money Market Portfolio are redeemed.

Automatic Investment Plan (“AIP”). Investor Share shareholders and certain Service Share shareholders who were shareholders of the Compass Capital Group of Funds at the time of its combination with The PNC^®Fund in 1996 may arrange for periodic investments in that Portfolio through automatic deductions from a checking or savings account by completing the AIP Application Form which may be obtained from PNC GIS. The minimum pre-authorized investment amount is $50.

Systematic Withdrawal Plan (“SWP”). The Fund offers a Systematic Withdrawal Plan to shareholders who wish to receive regular distributions from their accounts. Upon commencement of the SWP, the account must have a current value of $10,000 or more in a Portfolio. Shareholders may elect to receive automatic cash payments of $50 or more at any interval. You may choose any day for the withdrawal. If no day is specified, the withdrawals will be processed on the 25th day of the month or, if such day in not a Business Day, on the prior Business Day and are paid promptly thereafter. An investor may utilize the SWP by completing the Systematic Withdrawal Plan Application Form which may be obtained by visiting our website at www.blackrock.com/funds.

161

Shareholders should realize that if withdrawals exceed income dividends their invested principal in the account will be depleted. To participate in the SWP, shareholders must have their dividends automatically reinvested. Shareholders may change or cancel the SWP at any time, upon written notice to the Fund, or by calling the Fund at (800) 441-7762. Purchases of additional Investor A Shares of the Fund concurrently with withdrawals may be disadvantageous to investors because of the sales charges involved and, therefore, are discouraged. No contingent deferred sales charge will be assessed on redemptions of Investor B, Investor B1, Investor B2, Investor C, Investor C1 or Investor C2 Shares made through the SWP that do not exceed 12% of the original investment on an annualized basis. For example, monthly, quarterly and semi-annual SWP redemptions of Investor B, Investor B1, Investor B2, Investor C, Investor C1 or Investor C2 Shares will not be subject to the CDSC if they do not exceed 1%, 3% and 6%, respectively, of an account’s net asset value on the redemption date. SWP redemptions of Investor B, Investor B1, Investor B2, Investor C, Investor C1 or Investor C2 Shares in excess of this limit are still subject to the applicable CDSC.

For this reason, a shareholder may not participate in the Automatic Investment Plan (see “Services for Shareholders—Automatic Investment Plan” in the Fund’s Prospectus) and the Systematic Withdrawal Plan at the same time.

Dividend Allocation Plan. The Dividend Allocation Plan allows shareholders to elect to have all their dividends and any other distributions from the Fund or any Eligible Fund (which includes the Fund and other funds as designated by BII from time to time) automatically invested at net asset value in one other such Eligible Fund designated by the shareholder, provided the account into which the dividends and distributions are directed is initially funded with the requisite minimum amount.

Redemption of Shares. Redemptions may be made in the manner and amounts described in the Prospectuses. Signatures, when required, must conform exactly to the account registration. If (i) the proceeds of the redemption would exceed $250,000 for a redemption by wire or ACH, or $100,000 for a redemption by check, (ii) the Fund does not have verified banking information on file, (iii) the proceeds are not to be paid to the record owner at the record address, or (iv) the shareholder is a corporation, partnership, trust or fiduciary, signature(s) must be guaranteed by any eligible guarantor institution.

A signature guarantee is designed to protect the shareholders and the Portfolio against fraudulent transactions by unauthorized persons. A signature guarantee may be obtained from a domestic bank or trust company, recognized broker, dealer, clearing agency, savings association who are participants in a medallion program by the Securities Transfer Association, credit unions, national securities exchanges and registered securities associations. The three recognized medallion programs are Securities Transfer Agent Medallion Program (“STAMP”), Stock Exchanges Medallion Program (“SEMP”) and New York Stock Exchange, Inc. Medallion Signature Program (“MSP”). Signature Guarantees which are not a part of these programs will not be accepted. Please note that a notary public stamp or seal is not acceptable.

Generally, a properly signed written request with any required signature guarantee is all that is required for a redemption. In some cases, however, other documents may be necessary. Additional documentary evidence of authority is required by PNC GIS in the event redemption is requested by a corporation, partnership, trust, fiduciary, executor or administrator.

Investor A shareholders of the Money Market Portfolios may redeem their shares through the checkwriting privilege. Upon receipt of the checkwriting application and signature card by PNC GIS, checks will be forwarded to the investor. The minimum amount of a check is $100. If more than one shareholder owns the account, each shareholder must sign each check, unless an election has been made to permit check writing by a limited number of signatures and such election is on file with PNC GIS. Investor A Shares represented by a check redemption will continue to earn daily income until the check is presented for payment. PNC Bank, as the investor’s agent, will cause the Fund to redeem a sufficient number of Investor A Shares owned to cover the check. When redeeming Investor A Shares by check, an investor should make certain that there is an adequate number of Investor A Shares in the account to cover the amount of the check. If an insufficient number of Investor A Shares is held or if checks are not properly endorsed, they may not be honored and a $15 service charge will be incurred. Checks may not be presented for cash payments at the offices of PNC Bank. This limitation does not affect checks used for the payment of bills or cash at other banks. However, a shareholder cannot close an account by writing a checkwriting check.

162

Computation of Public Offering Prices for Investor A Shares of the Non-Money Market Portfolios.

An illustration of the computation of the public offering price per Investor A Share of the respective Non-Money Market Portfolios, based on the value of such Portfolios’ net assets as of September 30, 2008 follows:


	Mid-Cap Value Equity Portfolio		Mid-Cap Growth Equity Portfolio		Small Cap Value Equity Portfolio		Small Cap Core Equity Portfolio
Net Assets	$	470,264,810.65	$	195,979,898.88	$	16,490,429.75	$	23,686,850.52
Outstanding Shares		48,663,016.211		20,506,711.458		2,065,711.968		1,521,130.437

Net Asset Value Per Share	$	9.66	$	9.56	$	7.98	$	15.57
Maximum Sales Charge, 5.25% of
offering price*		0.54		0.53		0.44		0.86

Offering to Public	$	10.20	$	10.09	$	8.42	$	16.43

*	The maximum sales charge as a percentage of the net asset value per share for each portfolio at September 30, 2008 was as follows: Mid- Cap Value Equity Portfolio 5.54%; Mid-Cap Growth Equity Portfolio 5.54%; Small Cap Value Equity Portfolio 5.51%; and Small Cap Core Equity Portfolio 5.52%.


	Small Cap Growth Equity Portfolio		U.S. Opportunities Portfolio		Science & Technology Opportunities Portfolio		Capital Appreciation Portfolio		Aurora Portfolio
Net Assets	$	211,065,387.20	$	495,655,885.18	$	72,659,302.09	$	125,521,064.08	$	481,193,132.82
Outstanding Shares		11,251,244.337		16,366,135.952		10,804,348.380		8,602,198.076		26,936,463.014

Net Asset Value
Per Share	$	18.76	$	30.29	$	6.73	$	14.59	$	17.86
Maximum Sales
Charge, 5.25% of
offering price*		1.04		1.68		0.37		0.81		0.99

Offering to Public	$	19.80	$	31.97	$	7.10	$	15.40	$	18.85

The maximum sales charge as a percentage of the net asset value per share for each portfolio at September 30, 2008 was as follows: Small Cap Growth Equity Portfolio 5.54%; U.S. Opportunities Portfolio 5.55%; Science & Technology Opportunities Portfolio 5.50%; Capital Appreciation Portfolio 5.55%; and Aurora 5.54%.


	International Opportunities Portfolio		Small/Mid- Cap Growth Portfolio		Energy & Resources Portfolio		All-Cap Energy & Resources Portfolio
Net Assets	$	482,523,576.38	$	138,072,952.96	$	689,645,788.08	$	267,421,630.46
Outstanding Shares		17,144,348,863		12,520,948.713		14,583,079.191		16,707,611.675

Net Asset Value
Per Share	$	28.14	$	11.03	$	47.29	$	16.01
Maximum Sales
Charge, 5.25% of
offering price*
(3.00% for Index
Equity*)		1.56		0.62		2.62		0.89

Offering to Public	$	29.70	$	11.65	$	49.91	$	16.90

*	The maximum sales charge as a percentage of the net asset value per share for each portfolio at September 30, 2008 was as follows: International Opportunities Portfolio 5.54%; Small/MidCap Growth Portfolio 5.62%; Energy & Resources 5.54%; and All-Cap Energy & Resources Portfolio 5.56%.

163


	Asset Allocation Portfolio		Health Sciences Opportunities Portfolio		Global Opportunities Portfolio

Net Assets	$	390,051,200.04	$	564,942,819.98	$	37,529,155.06
Outstanding Shares		30,199,104.440		20,075,138.498		3,782,138.398

Net Asset Value Per Share	$	12.92	$	28.14	$	9.92
Maximum Sales Charge, 5.25% of offering price*		0.72		1.56		0.55

Offering to Public	$	13.64	$	29.70	$	10.47

*	The maximum sales charge as a percentage of the net asset value per share for each Portfolio at September 30, 2008 was as follows: Asset Allocation Portfolio 5.57%; Health Sciences Opportunities Portfolio 5.54%; and Global Opportunities Portfolio 5.54%.

Total front-end sales charges paid by shareholders of Investor A Shares of the Portfolios for the year ended September 30, 2008 were as follows:


Portfolios	Front-End Sales Charges
Capital Appreciation	$	55,401
Mid-Cap Value Equity	$	233,308
Mid-Cap Growth Equity	$	101,030
Aurora	$	131,353
Small/Mid-Cap Growth	$	35,377
Small Cap Value Equity	$	1,897
Small Cap Core Equity	$	60,988
Small Cap Growth Equity	$	185,133
Science & Technology Opportunities	$	92,582
Energy & Resources	$	2,514,235
All-Cap Energy & Resources	$	1,820,136
Health Sciences Opportunities	$	330,509
U.S. Opportunities	$	1,255,896
Global Opportunities	$	170,855
International Opportunities	$	1,336,348

Total front-end sales charges paid by shareholders of Investor A Shares of the Portfolios for the year ended September 30, 2007 were as follows:


Portfolios	Front-End Sales Charges
Capital Appreciation	$	26,387
Mid-Cap Value Equity	$	660,026
Mid-Cap Growth Equity	$	88,978
Aurora	$	319,565
Small/Mid-Cap Growth	$	34,109
Small Cap Value Equity	$	2,716
Small Cap Core Equity	$	111,637
Small Cap Growth Equity	$	146,084
Science & Technology Opportunities	$	47,165
Energy & Resources	$	279,238
All-Cap Energy & Resources	$	896,678
Health Sciences Opportunities	$	1,993,490
U.S. Opportunities	$	624,218
Global Opportunities	$	264,887
International Opportunities	$	199,810
Asset Allocation

164

Total front-end sales charges paid by shareholders of Investor A Shares of the Portfolios for the year ended September 30, 2006 were as follows:


Portfolios	Front-End Sales Charges
Capital Appreciation	$	93,690
Mid-Cap Value Equity	$	756,439
Mid-Cap Growth Equity	$	142,252
Aurora	$	778,757
Small/Mid-Cap Growth	$	58,407
Small Cap Value Equity	$	10,400
Small Cap Core Equity	$	199,678
Small Cap Growth Equity	$	139,932
Science & Technology Opportunities	$	87,008
Energy & Resources	$	229,320
All-Cap Energy & Resources	$	4,002,505
Health Sciences Opportunities	$	4,650,458
U.S. Opportunities	$	559,184
Global Opportunities	$	568,210
International Opportunities	$	1,487,469
Asset Allocation	$	1,269,133

Institutional and BlackRock Shares

Purchase of Shares. Employees of BlackRock, directors, trustees and officers of the funds advised by BlackRock and accounts managed for their benefit and employees and directors of BlackRock, The PNC Financial Services Group, Inc., Merrill Lynch & Co., Inc. or their respective affiliates, may buy BlackRock or Institutional Shares of the Fund without regard to any existing minimum investment requirements. The Fund may in its discretion waive or modify the minimum investment amount, may reject any order for Institutional and BlackRock Shares and may suspend and resume the sale of shares of any Portfolio at any time.

Institutional Shares of the Portfolios may be purchased by customers of broker-dealers and agents which have established a servicing relationship with the Fund on behalf of their customers. These broker-dealers and agents may impose additional or different conditions on the purchase or redemption of Portfolio shares by their customers and may charge their customers transaction, account or other fees on the purchase and redemption of Portfolio shares. Each broker-dealer or agent is responsible for transmitting to its customers a schedule of any such fees and information regarding any additional or different conditions regarding purchases and redemptions. Shareholders who are customers of such broker-dealers or agents should consult them for information regarding these fees and conditions.

Payment for Institutional and BlackRock Shares must normally be made in Federal funds or other funds immediately available by 4:00 p.m. (Eastern time) on the first business day following receipt of the order. Payment may also, in the discretion of the Fund, be made in the form of securities that are permissible investments for the Portfolio. If payment for a purchase order is not received by the prescribed time, an investor may be liable for any resulting losses or expenses incurred by the Fund.

Service Shares

Redemption of Shares. The Fund may redeem Service Shares in any Portfolio account if the account balance drops below the required minimum initial investment as the result of redemption requests and the shareholder does not increase the balance to at least the required minimum initial investment upon thirty days’ written notice. If a customer has agreed with an Institution to maintain a minimum balance in his or her account with the Institution, and the balance in the account falls below that minimum, the customer may be obligated to redeem all or part of his or her shares in the Portfolio to the extent necessary to maintain the minimum balance required.

The following is applicable only to persons who were shareholders of an investment portfolio of Compass Capital Group of Funds at the time of the portfolio’s combination with The PNC Fund in 1996:

165


	Page
Introduction	1
Proxy Voting Policies	1
Boards of Directors	1
Auditors	2
Compensation and Benefits	2
Capital Structure	2
Corporate Charter and By-Laws	2
Corporate Meetings	2
Investment Companies	2
Environmental and Social Issues	2
Reports to the Board	2

1	Letter from Harvey L. Pitt, Chairman, SEC, to John P.M. Higgins, President, Ram Trust Services (February 12, 2002) (Section 206 of the Investment Advisers Act imposes a fiduciary responsibility to vote proxies fairly and in the best interests of clients); SEC Release No. IA- 2106 (February 3, 2003).

2	Other considerations, such as social, labor, environmental or other policies, may be of interest to particular clients. While BlackRock is cognizant of the importance of such considerations, when voting proxies it will generally take such matters into account only to the extent that they have a direct bearing on the economic value of the underlying securities. To the extent that a BlackRock client, such as the Funds, desires to pursue a particular social, labor, environmental or other agenda through the proxy votes made for its securities held through BlackRock as investment adviser, BlackRock encourages the client to consider retaining direct proxy voting authority or to appoint independently a special proxy voting fiduciary other than BlackRock.


Name	Address	Percentage and Class
All-Cap Energy & Resources Portfolio

*Merrill Lynch Pierce Fenner	4800 E Deer Lake Drive 3rd Floor	6.03% of Investor A
& Smith Incorporated (“MLPF&S”)	Jacksonville, FL 32246-6484

*CitiGroup Global Markets Inc.	333 West 34th Street 3rd Floor	5.74% of Investor A
	New York, NY 10001

*MLPF&S	4800 E Deer Lake Drive 3rd Floor	11.94% of Investor B
	Jacksonville, FL 32246-6484

*CitiGroup Global Markets Inc.	333 West 34th Street 3rd Floor	8.33% of Investor B
	New York, NY 10001

*MLPF&S	4800 E Deer Lake Drive 3rd Floor	21.39% of Investor C
	Jacksonville, FL 32246-6484

*CitiGroup Global Markets Inc.	333 West 34th Street 3rd Floor	12.91% of Investor C
	New York, NY 10001

*Morgan Stanley & Co.	Harborside Financial Center	6.72% of Investor C
	Plaza II 3rd Floor
	Jersey City, NJ 07311

Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation	2365 Carillon Pt	12.58% of Institutional
	Kirkland, WA 98033-7353

Houston Endowment Inc.	600 Travis St Ste 6400	10.61% of Institutional
	Houston, TX 77002-3003

Conrad H Hilton Foundation	100 W Liberty Street STE 840	10.44% of Institutional
	Reno, NV 89501-1988

Conrad H Hilton Fund	100 W Liberty Street STE 840	8.70% of Institutional
	Reno, NV 89501-1988

*Children’s Medical Center Corp.	1295 Boyston Street STE 300	7.43% of Institutional
	Boston, MA 02215-0000

*The Bank of New York	111 Sanders Creek Pkway	5.37% of Institutional
FBO University of Arkansas Foundation	East Syracuse, NY 13057-1382

*NFS LLC FEBO	1801 Century Park E Ste 1111	5.04% of Service Class
Yvette Bluhdorn Char Rem Trust	Los Angeles, CA 90067

Asset Allocation Portfolio

*Special Custody Account for the	PO Box 32760	5.95% of Investor A
Exclusive Benefit of Customers	Louisville, KY 40232-2760
Omnibus Account

*MLPF&S	4800 E Deer Lake Drive 3rd Floor	5.81% of Investor A
	Jacksonville, FL 32246-6484

*MLPF&S	4800 E Deer Lake Drive 3rd Floor	10.42% of Investor B
	Jacksonville, FL 32246-6484