EXHIBIT 99.1

     TEXT OF FINAL REPORT, DATED MARCH 7, 2005, DETAILING THE CALCULATION OF
        THE TAP DISALLOWANCES RESULTING FROM THE TAP AUDIT OF THE 2000-01
           THROUGH 2002-03 ACADEMIC YEARS OF INTERBORO INSTITUTE, INC.

      According to the State Comptroller's  authority as set forth in Article V,
Section 1 of the State Constitution,  Article II, Section 8 of the State Finance
Law, and a Memorandum of Agreement  dated December 1, 1989,  involving the State
Comptroller,  the  Commissioner  of  Education,  the  President  of  the  Higher
Education  Services  Corporation  (HESC),  and the  Director of the  Budget,  we
audited the records and procedures used in administering the Tuition  Assistance
Program (TAP) at Interboro Institute (Interboro) for the 2000-01 through 2002-03
academic years.

SUMMARY CONCLUSIONS

      In  accordance  with Article 14,  Section  665(3)(b) of the New York State
Education Law (Law), we determined that Interboro was overpaid  $903,150 because
school  officials  incorrectly  certified  17 students  as  eligible  for 27 TAP
awards.  We tested  the  accuracy  of the 9,488 TAP  certifications  the  school
awarded for the  three-year  period that ended on June 30, 2003,  by reviewing a
statistical sample of 200 randomly-selected awards. From our statistical sample,
we  disallowed 14 awards  totaling  $32,168.  A statistical  projection of these
disallowances  to  the  entire  population,  using  a  95  percent  single-sided
confidence  level,  results  in an  audit  disallowance  of  $871,725.  We  also
disallowed 13 awards  totaling  $31,425 based on our review of other awards from
outside the statistical sample period. Therefore, we recommend that HESC recover
a total of $903,150, plus applicable interest from Interboro.

BACKGROUND

      Interboro is an independent  degree-granting college located in Manhattan.
Founded in 1888, it offers  Associate in  Occupational  Studies (AOS) degrees in
Accounting,  Business  Management with a concentration  in computer  technology,
Office Technologies, Security Services and Management, and Paralegal Studies. In
addition,  it is one of only four colleges in New York State (State) that offers
an  associate  degree in  ophthalmic  dispensing.  Interboro's  2003-05  catalog
reports  that 10 percent of the 460 new  students  who  started at the school in
fall 1998 had  graduated  by the end of the 2001  fall  semester.  Further,  the
catalog  states that 13.5  percent of the 468 students who started the fall 1999
semester had graduated at the end of the spring 2002 semester.

      TAP is the largest of the various student grant and  scholarship  programs
administered by HESC. It is an entitlement  program  designed to provide tuition
aid to eligible  full-time  students  who are  enrolled in a variety of eligible
programs.

      We  provided  draft  copies of this  report to HESC,  the State  Education
Department (SED), and Interboro officials for their review and comments. We have
considered their comments in preparing this audit report.

AUDIT SCOPE, OBJECTIVE, AND METHODOLOGY

      The  objective  of  our  performance   audit  was  to  determine   whether
Interboro's management complied with the Law and the Commissioner of Education's
Rules and Regulations  (Regulations) for certifying students as eligible for TAP
awards.  The  scope of our audit did not  include a review of the  process  HESC
followed in determining the amount of such awards.

      According to HESC records,  Interboro officials certified 9,488 TAP awards
totaling $21,161,342 that were paid on behalf of 5,038 students during the three
academic years that ended on June 30, 2003. We reviewed a statistical  sample of
200  randomly  selected  TAP  awards  totaling  $444,100  that  were made to 198
students  during that  period.  We also  reviewed  other awards that came to our
attention during the audit.
<PAGE>

      We conducted our audit in accordance  with Generally  Accepted  Government
Auditing Standards. Such standards require that we plan and perform our audit to
adequately  assess those  operations of Interboro  that are included  within our
audit scope. Further,  these standards also require that we review and report on
Interboro's  internal control system and its compliance with those laws,  rules,
and regulations that are relevant to Interboro's  operations and are included in
our  audit  scope.  An  audit  includes  examining,  on a test  basis,  evidence
supporting  transactions  recorded in the accounting  and operating  records and
applying such other auditing procedures as we consider necessary.  An audit also
includes assessing the estimates,  judgments,  and decisions made by management.
We  believe  that our  audit  provides  a  reasonable  basis  for our  findings,
conclusions, and recommendations.

      In  planning  and   performing   our  audit  of  Interboro,   we  reviewed
management's  internal  control  system.  Our audit was limited to a preliminary
review of this system to obtain an understanding of the environment and the flow
of  transactions  through the  accounting  system and other  systems  that would
support claims for student financial aid.

      Interboro's  management is responsible  for complying with the Law and the
Regulations.  In connection  with our audit,  we performed  tests of Interboro's
compliance with certain provisions of the Law and Regulations.  Our objective in
performing these tests was to obtain reasonable  assurance that the students who
received TAP awards were eligible for them.  Our objective was not to provide an
opinion on Interboro's overall compliance with such provisions.

      Our audit found that, for the transactions  and records tested,  Interboro
was  generally  in  compliance  with  these  provisions,  except as noted in the
following sections of this report.

      In addition to being the State Auditor,  the Comptroller  performs certain
other  constitutionally  and  statutorily  mandated  duties as the chief  fiscal
officer of New York State,  several of which are  performed  by the  Division of
State Services. These include operating the State's accounting system; preparing
the State's financial  statements;  and approving the State contracts,  refunds,
and other payments.  In addition,  the Comptroller  appoints  members to certain
boards,  commissions and public  authorities,  some of whom have minority voting
rights.  The duties may be  considered  management  functions  for  purposes  of
evaluating  organizational  independence  under  Generally  Accepted  Government
Auditing Standards. In our opinion, these management functions do not affect our
ability to conduct independent audits of program performance.

                               AUDIT DISALLOWANCES

The following table summarizes the disallowances that resulted from our audit:

                                                  NUMBER OF
REASON FOR DISALLOWANCES                            AWARDS     AMOUNT    TOTAL
------------------------                          ---------    -------  --------

DISALLOWANCES FROM THE STATISTICAL SAMPLE:

Students Not Matriculated                                12    $28,155
Student Not in Good Academic Standing                     1      2,450
Student Not in Full-Time Attendance                       1      1,513
Student Not Meeting Residency Requirements                1      2,500
                                                  ---------    -------
Total Disallowance from the Statistical Sample           15     34,618
Less: Disallowances for More Than One Reason              1      2,450
                                                  ---------    -------
Net Disallowance from the Statistical Sample             14    $32,168
                                                  =========    =======
Projected Amount                                                        $871,725


                                       2
<PAGE>

DISALLOWANCES FROM OUTSIDE THE STATISTICAL
SAMPLE PERIOD:

Students Not Matriculated                                 9     22,500
Students Not in Good Academic Standing                    3      6,475
Student Not in Full-Time Attendance                       1      2,450
                                                  ---------    -------
Total Disallowance from Outside the Sample               13               31,425
                                                  =========             --------
Total Audit Disallowance                                                $903,150
                                                                        ========

      The  disallowances  are discussed in the following  paragraphs.  Students'
names and related information were provided separately to Interboro officials.

                            STUDENTS NOT MATRICULATED

Criteria-  Section 661 of the Law requires that students be  matriculated  in an
approved program to be eligible for financial aid. It also requires students who
received  their first  financial aid payment in the  1996-1997  academic year or
thereafter  to  have a  certificate  of  graduation  from a high  school  or the
equivalent;  or to have  achieved a passing  score,  as determined by the United
States Secretary of Education,  on a Federally-approved  examination referred to
as  Ability-to-Benefit  (ATB)  test.  Two such  tests  are the  Career  Programs
Assessment  test (CPAt) and the  Combined  English  Language  Skills  Assessment
(CELSA) test.

      In addition,  Section 52.2 of the  Regulations  states,  "The admission of
students shall be determined through an orderly process using published criteria
which  shall be  uniformly  applied."  Compliance  with  these  requirements  is
demonstrated  when  students  meet  the  institution's   admission  criteria  as
published in its catalog.  Interboro  requires  applicants to submit evidence of
high school  graduation or its  equivalent,  or to demonstrate  their ability to
benefit from higher education.  To determine this ability,  Interboro's  testing
department  administers  and grades two  Federally-approved  ATB tests.  Federal
guidelines  require a passing score of 90 on the CELSA; and,  effective June 19,
2002,  passing  scores of 42,  43, and 41 on the  language  usage,  reading  and
numerical components,  respectively, of the CPAt. Previous passing scores on the
CPAt had been 43, 44, and 42, respectively.

Audit  Determination - We disallowed 21 awards (12 from our  statistical  sample
period  and 9 from  outside  the  period)  that had been  paid on  behalf  of 12
students  who were not  properly  matriculated.  Eleven of these  students  were
admitted  based on the  school's  determination  that the  students had obtained
passing  scores on the CPAt.  When we rescored  these  tests,  we found that the
students  had not obtained the passing  scores  required by the Code.  The other
student was admitted based on results of the CELSA test.  When we re-graded this
test, we found that the student had failed to obtain a passing score.

School  Officials'  Position - School  officials  concur with our  disallowances
pertaining   to  11  of  the  12   students   who  were   admitted   using   the
incorrectly-scored  CPAt  and  CELSA  test.  However,  they  disagree  with  our
disallowance  pertaining to the remaining student. School officials contend that
this student,  who had failed the  numerical  section of the test by one answer,
had filled in two spaces - one for the correct  answer (A) and a "fainter"  mark
for an incorrect  answer (E) to question # 25. They  further  contend that it is
reasonable  to accept  answer (A) as correct  since answer (E) is  significantly
different from the correct answer.

Auditor's  Comments - The student's  answer sheet had more than one space filled
in for some  questions.  In all but one of  these  cases,  it is clear  that the
student had  changed his choice  because he had marked an "X" through one of the
filled-in spaces. However, for question #25, neither of the two filled-in-spaces
on the answer sheet had an "X" through it. Thus,  neither can be scored as valid
or correct.


                                       3
<PAGE>

                     STUDENTS NOT IN GOOD ACADEMIC STANDING

Criteria - Section 665 of the Law  requires  that  students be in good  academic
standing to be eligible to receive TAP  awards.  To maintain  such  standing,  a
student  is  required  by  Section   145-2.2  of  the  Regulations  to  maintain
satisfactory  academic progress toward completion of a program and to pursue the
program  of  study  in which he or she is  enrolled.  To  maintain  satisfactory
academic progress, a student must accrue a certain minimum number of credits and
earn a specified  minimum  cumulative  grade point  average,  as required on the
chart of satisfactory  academic progress published by the school and approved by
SED. A student is pursuing the approved program of study if, during each term of
study for which an award is  received,  he or she  receives a passing or failing
grade  in a  predetermined  percentage  of the  minimum  full-time  course  load
required to qualify for the appropriate level of TAP payment.

      A  student  who  fails  to  maintain  good  academic  standing  loses  TAP
eligibility.  Students  can  regain  good  academic  standing  by  making up the
deficiencies without benefit of State awards,  obtaining a TAP waiver, remaining
out of  school  for at least one  calendar  year,  or  transferring  to  another
institution.

Audit Determination - We disallowed four awards (one from our statistical sample
period and three from  outside the period) that had been paid on behalf of three
students who had not maintained  good academic  standing.  One of these students
had not earned  passing or failing grades in enough  courses,  applicable to her
designated program, to meet the pursuit of program  requirements.  The remaining
two  students  had not earned the  cumulative  grade point  average  required on
Interboro's  chart of  satisfactory  academic  progress  to  maintain  their TAP
eligibility.  The three students had not received  waivers,  did not make up the
deficiencies  without  benefit of State awards,  or did not remain out of school
for one calendar year; therefore, they were not eligible for the TAP awards they
received.

School Official's Position - School officials concur with this finding.

                      STUDENTS NOT IN FULL-TIME ATTENDANCE

Criteria  -  Section  661  of  the  Law  requires  students  to be in  full-time
attendance  to be  eligible  for  their  TAP  awards.  Section  145-2.1  of  the
Regulations  states, in part, that full-time study for a semester-based  program
at a  degree-granting  school is defined as enrollment  for at least 12 semester
hours for a semester  of not less than 15 weeks or its  equivalent.  SED's Chief
Executive  Officers'  Memorandum No. 86-17 states that, "If a student  repeats a
course in which a passing grade  acceptable to the  institution has already been
received,  the course cannot be included as part of the student's  minimum full-
time course load for financial aid  purposes." It further  states that "Basic to
the payment of State student aid is the requirement  that courses that make up a
student's  minimum  course  load be  creditable  toward the  degree,  diploma or
certificate program in which the student is enrolled.

Audit  Determination - We disallowed two awards (one from our statistical sample
period  and one from  outside  the  period)  that had been paid on behalf of two
students who did not maintain full-time status. One of the students had enrolled
in a course she had previously  passed.  When we excluded this course,  we found
that the  student  had  enrolled  in fewer  than 12  credits  for the term.  The
remaining  student  was  enrolled  in courses  that were not  applicable  to the
program in which she was enrolled.

School Officials' Position - School officials concur with this finding.

                   STUDENT NOT MEETING RESIDENCY REQUIREMENTS

Criteria - Section 661 of the Law requires  that an applicant for a TAP award at
the  undergraduate  level be a legal  resident of New York State  (State) for at
least one year immediately preceding the beginning of the semester for which the
award  is made,  or be a legal  resident  of the  State  and  have  been a legal
resident during the final two semesters of high school.  Furthermore,  according
to HESC's Policy and Procedures  Manual (Manual),  "the student must show having
established  a domicile  or  permanent  place of abode in New York  State."  The
Manual  stipulates that  institutions  should not certify  eligibility for State
awards for any student whose State residency is suspect.


                                       4
<PAGE>

Audit  Determination - We disallowed one sample term award that had been paid on
behalf of a student. Interboro officials could not provide us with documentation
to establish that this student had met the one-year residency  requirement.  The
student,  whose  spring  2001 term award was  disallowed,  was denied  financial
independence  by HESC. In addition,  documentation  in the student's  folder had
indicated  that his father  was a New Jersey  resident.  For  example,  an award
letter dated December 13, 1999,  from the Social  Security  Administration,  was
sent to the  father's  New  Jersey  address.  According  to HESC's  Manual,  the
residence of the parent is presumed to be the residence of a dependent student.

School Officials' Position - School officials concur with this finding.

                                  OTHER MATTER

      The following  finding pertains to an issue that Interboro  officials need
to address.

                           ENTRANCE EXAMINATION SCORES

Criteria - Section 661 of the Law, as well as  Interboro's  published  admission
criteria,  require  students  who do not  possess a high  school  diploma or its
equivalent to achieve passing scores on an ATB test.

Audit Determination - We identified 83 CPAts,  administered to 83 students, that
had been graded incorrectly.  When we re-graded these tests, we found that 11 of
the students had not obtained  passing  scores and should not have been admitted
to the school. The re-graded scores for the remaining 72 students, though higher
or lower than the score  indicated  by the grader,  were higher than the passing
scores and did not affect the  students'  admissibility.  We also  identified  a
CELSA test that had been graded  incorrectly.  When we re-graded  this test,  we
found that the student had not obtained a passing score.

School  Officials'  Position  - School  officials  told us that  they are in the
process of  implementing  a new system to ensure  that ATB test such as the CPAt
and CELSA, are graded correctly.

          RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE HIGHER EDUCATION SERVICES CORPORATION

1.    Recover the $903,150,  plus applicable interest,  from Interboro Institute
      for its incorrect TAP certifications.

2.    Ensure that Interboro Institute officials verify compliance with residency
      requirements for the students they certify as eligible for TAP awards.

                RECOMMENDATION TO THE STATE EDUCATION DEPARTMENT

      Ensure that Interboro  Institute officials comply with the State Education
Department  requirements  relating to  matriculation,  good  academic  standing,
full-time status, and admissions' test cited in this report.

      Major  contributors to this report were Cindi Frieder,  Kenrick  Sifontes,
Sal D'Amato,  Erica  Zawrotniak,  Kezia Chacko,  Vladimir Davydov and Gatangalie
Shiwkumar.

      We wish to  express  our  appreciation  to the  management  and  staff  of
Interboro Institute for the courtesies and cooperation  extended to our auditors
during this audit.


                                       5