we got a pretty light agenda today so um M's going to give a report out for March um usually we would do this on the first um time we meet in the month but because the pre because of March ended on a weekend it takes another week for the Arcadia data to refresh and so that's why we kind of postponed it until um this time so we've got some reports and then Don will give us an update about the end the HCC benchmarking um kind of solution that we've been looking at and want to kind of discuss that with the group so pretty light agenda um I don't want to jinx us but I I would think that we'll get out before the hour is up so I think that will make all of you happy um so we will see how how the discussion goes so Maddie you are up yep uh so first slide as usual uh big you know good overhaul or overall performance for the different ma populations this is looking at end of year 2023 comparing it to year-to date 2020 uh 4 so we have our overall risk scores over at the on the top and these are ma popul ation only and we also have our risk capture so everyone is overall we're performing at around you know 52% for the Enterprise Ohio at 51 and Florida at 60% which been pretty consistent with uh individual payers and how we are been seeing Florida in comparison to Ohio uh and then we also have some high level looking at the PCP activation and visits so Florida right now has you know a little more completed visits and upcoming visits compared to Ohio but not too surprising considering the population size differences in the you know amount of patients in each Ohio contract and then Maddie will you explain your footnote about the appointment does that impact the completed visit number or what does that impact yeah so uh it when I say appointment data is through March 13th that would mean uh the appointment the latest appointment with a kept indicator in the table that I'm utilizing is only through March 13th at the moment and like I said that was one of the things that we were kind of keeping an eye on and tracking to see how long it is between refreshes or in between a completed month and the following to see when we get that full month view with the the completed slash kept indicator for appointments okay so then this first view is just looking at that overall Enterprise ma contracts but looking at it at a trending perspective so getting that month over month so this just shows our Clos risk for the first three months in our risk capture and um I expect that the March risk capture will still increase a little with run out and um be closer to that q1 goal but I know that's still one of those goals that you know that we'll talk about with the benchmarking and maybe that'll help give a better window realistically with what all we're including in this risk score compared to maybe what you know the goals were for when we were only looking at Chronic conditions but looking at December so this would be interpreted as the blue bar is that Target close risk So based on our most recent potential or as I'd say suggested risk if we were to hit 92% risk capture we would want to end with um the a closed risk of that value now MD let me make sure I understand so because I think this is a new slide I'm not sure if we've shown this before but really like these charts and we'll continue to do this so as of today um we're at a 66 if we reach a 92% WFT capture of the suggested wrath then by by the end of the year then the the closed risk would be 1.17 is that right correct okay and then the 1.27 represents if 100% of the suggested ra that that's what the suggested Raff is as of today is 1.27 correct correct okay and then remind me and the group do these numbers so I know there was an issue with the suspect conditions within Arcadia does that in does this include that or exclude the issue we the issue we have with that um I've not heard back on a specific timeline I think this does include suspects from medication based but they did not give me an exact date of when they think that that got switched back on and we are still waiting for a followup about timelines and fixing that so that would mean that the suggested graph of the 1.27 is maybe a little bit inflated correct correct okay all right just for the group to know okay Maddie can I ask a question I I guess I'm a little puzzled by just the the change from month over month I mean looks like January was very good and then not A lot's happened since then am I reading this correctly or am I misunderstanding something um I think with more runout it'll be higher than what we expect I based on me comparing um 2024 data to 2023 um I would expect the values to go up a little and that the graph will kind of normalize or even out with the additional months but yeah I think that's been one of the things was when we compared you know February through February it was you know the risk capture looked concerningly different but yeah when you add the additional month suddenly January is performing better than January 2023 so I think that'll definitely be something that we have to keep making a note of and tracking yeah because I mean if this is pretty close to what we're doing that's definitely concerning that we only captured 0.1 Raph in February and 0.02 in March which I find hard to believe so Maddie when you're talking about with the run out do does that mean that how do I want to say this so we're in March the0 54 from January is based on the point in time in March is that right I guess uh what do you mean by you'll have to rephrase that for me so are we do these risk scores get restated each month yes they do it's still for that time period but they do get restated so that's why I mentioned when I you know we first compared the same time frame it didn't look uh very comparable but then when you add additional runout and you compare them they are more align so and I think this Cadence of data will only get better since you know we've had issues and run into delays and so I do expect the Cadence will only get better so then you know it'll take less run out to stabilize and look more comparable and complete so let me make sure that I understand so let's say we're in April right and we end the end of April we rerun this report the February 64 could actually increase correct in the in the April report yeah so everything is refreshed when the risk engine runs which is a monthly process okay does that does that help Dr juel because I'm kind of the same as you that I believe that's why you're seeing January and February not a whole lot difference is because of that run out we have more run out for January encounters than we do for February at this point there's one other thing that's that's affecting this too I mean so Anthem and Etna you know big part of the ma programs here they they've we've change contracts with them right so that we now have like the employed and independents are on separate contracts and I both Anthem and Etna haven't delivered us the independent section of those those contracts yet so we we've been kind of hung up with essentially getting that into our Cadia because of these new C that we've signed we we've just received anthems yesterday and we expect to receive Etna later this month so I think that's also going to have certainly an impact on on this um that we're we're seeing I I'm sure that point 64 will go up you know once we start seeing that that claims dat data flowing in there and Maddie is it safe to assume that the January figure is complete now yeah I'd say the only I'd say it's pretty complete when I um look at the same type of view for 2023 uh the Enterprise ma ended at 0.53 so and then similarly February was at 63 in the last poll so I think March is really the one that's needs that additional jump and and what was it for 2023 for March Maddie just for Point 71 so I do think it'll definitely jump okay all right well I think that's something like you said that we'll we watch and we'll see next for next month what we're looking at all right and then and same thing this is just specifically for the Ohio group and yeah it'll be looking at the same type of Trends and uh comments concerns that we called out in this last slide and I'll just add that you know what I like about this slide is kind of to show where where we're trying to shoot for right for December with shooting for that 92% goal that's that's what our risk scores would would look like so um that's something that I that I like about this is we show kind of what current is but then we also have a focus and a target of where where we want to and expect to end up by by hitting our goal and then similarly uh Florida ma uh I know these numbers are always look a little lower than or closed risk and suggested risk always look lower but we always have higher risk capture and I know that just comes with the population love how you bring me up and then shoot me down RIS capture is good though hey technically in from the primary care Institute they you know you're out you're Stellar so if we're just looking at risk capture it's great I just don't want you to get too overconfident Maria oh so this slide has been adjusted compared to what we did previously so this is now based on you know patients I included the median raft capture I know that was something we caught up previously CU you know that's a good indicator of to actually see you know well how well are they performing or how you know I guess underperforming for the next slide but so this just shows the top 10 providers with the best raft capture and this was filtered to providers who have seen at least 50 patients and I also included the average uh number of patients scen in the parentheses would show how many patients in our BVO contracts or Ohio sorry Ohio contracts would that these providers saw Dr juel do you have any insight as you see these provider names um does do these do these surprise you at all do do you have do you know about these providers um I know Dr Rosenthal has always been someone who has an extremely high Medicare Wellness visit rate completion um so that would certainly go hand inand with good HCC capture um it's a good mix actually it's it's it's a mix of internal Med and Family Med um it's different sites there's not like one site here I think I don't I think looking at the list it might actually be 10 different sites that are represented here so it's not like a location thing either but certainly nobody who's like been in the on this list who's now on the list from the previous slide and um yeah I mean it this looks like a lot of uh looks like a lot of APs here actually looks like seven maybe or six six of the 10 or eight PP so I don't know oh interesting okay so I don't know if the I don't know if these are instances where the AP is seeing a patient you know for more of an acute visit and you know not addressing the hcc's because they're basically seeing them not for chronic issues I don't know it's just a thought the the other providers were MDS I on the first slide I think everyone was a position if I'm not mistaken okay interesting the aps have a lower interest okay yeah there's six APS of the 10 listed here okay sorry I I got new Wi-Fi so we're this is the first up report out with that um so this is for Florida same uh type of deal top 10 based on patient scene included the average patient scene and the median raft capture Dr Daw any insight into these I mean you've got one that's at 79% which is great um yeah it makes sense and I like that they're spread throughout Florida so there's a few from each region um and again most of these uh people do do a lot of anual Wellness visits so again that would make sense good Insight love to hear that it's spread out um so then yeah this be the bottom 10 for Florida okay I actually don't know a lot of these people but and it looks like there are more Physicians here than there are in um Ohio for this list although and I'll say the bottom for Florida the percentage is a good bit higher than the bottom for Ohio I think the Ohio ones are all in the 40s or almost all not mistaken I think 53 was the median for Ohio if I'm not wrong too yes it was so the bottom the bottom for Florida is pretty not bad compared to Ohio so I just look Ted did you have a question I can't see what I'm what I'm presenting I think Ted had a question um I did thanks Jason it was on the monthly uh views I was just wondering how clinovations optim had been reporting those and if it was is the same as we're reporting them here you know or if they were reporting them differently which helped solve for the 3 Monon lag they had a direct connection to Epic Clarity tables so that would be the difference they were also they were also getting a a claim feed too though um so so there's would have still had some of the the same issues in terms of lag were were they so if so does that mean they were reporting closed yeah they were reporting what they called build but it's yeah coded or closed well those are different things though aren't they it's if they were doing build and we're doing closed that's big difference right Don yeah well in terms of what actually went out the door versus what what you're saying is finished closed yeah I mean like the build I mean you're going to see that a combination of closed and and and still coded but not closed right but I guess I'm just I guess the point of making is if they were doing builds then I think that gives you a better monthly and closer to real time view of the progress that we're making versus what um Dr juel and Jason were saying which is here if we if we really just look at closed then January like we're going to have to look back to January before we even feel like that's a representative number so when I say Clos in this case it actually it's coded so it's EHR and claims so it's not closed based strictly on claims oh okay all right so that so that would include what we've built yeah okay that's a little technical but yeah that's that that will so then so then we shouldn't be as nervous about the leaving kind of three months to feel good about that number if it is if it's including build I'm just thinking about if we want to make these actionable or make the report out like okay are we are we on track and month over month are we making the progress that we want to make I guess hearing that Maddie like you feel okay that we can look at we can draw some assertions from your March number there I'd say the March number is the only one that would would still be moving in the next month but January and February would be very minuscule if any when it's rounded there and and do we have I think we've talked about this before but I honestly I just can't remember if it's something we're building towards but I remember the clinovations view was sort of like okay here's what you would expect to get to 90 or to get to 92 working backwards here's what you would expect each month is that is that in this view now and if not can it be just so we know like is 53 good for January or were we expecting that to be 59 and we're actually behind already even though it's early in the year so when optim did theirs they gave kind of a q1 window and said okay you should be between like 52% to 60 so what I did is I took the max for the goal and that's why it's 60% where they would say well if you're within 52% to 60% you're within the window to hit to reach your Target by the end of the year gotcha okay so that's how we'll think about it now is like quarterly yes okay yep and and it's a good point I mean that's the thing is yeah yeah we're not seeing a big difference between February and March right in the risk score like like Dr juel brought up um and and yeah I think it just needs a little more a little more time I would also say that um I'm tracking also using epic just with the EHR um which we're doing we're doing pretty well and and the hope would be that yes those eh would turn into build um and so we'd be able to see that so um yeah I think it's great question Ted we just need to and and kind of just need to continue to monitor just to kind of see if we're making if we're making that progress okay thanks was there another question I I'm showing like two but oh that that's the other meeting never mind okay all right um so um Dr dah you and I should talk offline um about providers and that so so we will we will do that um because my thought is with some of these providers that are doing well with raft capture and was saying that most of these are in different sites that maybe we look at okay does this does this person become you know or help the rest of them and maybe that's kind of another thing we look at is is look at some of these by sight and see how they're doing you know um not individual providers but also kind of by sight that some of them might be able to help other ones out especially if one is a high and one is a low um the aps to me is an interesting um discussion because I wouldn't have expected expected APS to be really low so that that's that's interesting Dr juel that you pointed that out so more more to come on that all right this is new I know we've been talking about ma now we're gonna switch to Oscar mie go ahead yep so this is a slide that I started providing for the Oscar teamlet I want to point out that these are kind of estimates based on the CMS HCC model but we are about to have the HHS uh values and scores populated in Foundry and we'll be able to start you know having a accurate look on based on the population and model but uh overall Oscar is also trending 56% so still in you know slightly higher but in that same ballpark of the other Ohio plans and some key things to point out here is we have you know about 53% of the population has no known documented conditions based on uh the current risk year and the data that we have for them and on the flip side those that have at least one uh condition we have already over 700 with 100% capture um in the current year and majority of them you know are in that less than five an open risk uh bucket so the High Acuity population is pretty small so that's a I know this is a new slide here and I know we're working with Yousef in Contracting and some of the the navigation team to help uh you know get some of those processes improved and better for the Oscar population and then I just wanted to give an update this probably more for Ted so Ted we have now um included Oscar patients in our previsit work CU it went in about a week ago um so they will be in both the previsit and the post visit um work cues we're seeing about 30 to 40 Oscar patients per day that's showing up in that work CU of of upcoming scheduled appointments well did how how is it going so far well um we kind of through our previsit team there was a lack of communication to the team that Oscar was going to be included and so they got a little conf and and I think it was more because we didn't think it would be implemented so quickly um and then all of a sudden they showed up and had to just kind of help them a little bit because they're like wait a second what what are these patients they're like under 65 why are they in this in this work you and why don't they have any hcc's in their in their Gap and so we had to kind of explain to them well it's a different model so it's not the CMS registry it's the HHS registry they will be under the age of 65 um so so now they have all kind of been um kind of up to speed on those patients being in there that's awesome thanks um and it will really be good for the Post visit to be because now our our coders will be able to review those encounters and if needed be able to code for additional hcc's based on the documentation very so they are in there yeah can't wait to see how that starts to translate into the scores that that would be great yeah um okay so before we move on that's the reporting that we have for for this month my my question is there is there something that anyone in this group wants to see that we're we're not um presenting on I don't know if this answers your question Jason but I was just gonna ask that so like this this is a this is a great view um that 186 patients um is that I know Michelle we've talked a lot recently about rosters and lists and everything related to to Oscar in particular um does does someone then look at this and go okay let's go dig into those 86 patients and figure out what we can do like is has it have we gotten to that stage where this can kind of translate into a an actual list of patients that we go out and try to address so I think it can right now um this is like this is the first time we're we're seeing this I think where we had struggled was that it doesn't show up in the navigation workbench reporting and so we didn't we didn't have that visibility so I think um moving forward depending on how were able to get that implemented into that report we could either go that route or there may be there may have to be a separate work list um which we are trying to avoid but um but certainly if it's in the workbench report then we're able to then start to drill down and Target those patients if we need to and Michelle remind maybe the group and myself okay so Oscar is not in the workbench report what what is what's the road map for that so um that's where Don you're gonna have to help me here too because I'm still like trying to wrap my head around this technically speaking so um we know that right now oh go ahead no and and I could take that I mean in terms of where what the road map looks like now um is pulling down the information pulling down the members as well as the risk scores from from um for in the case of Oscar pulling that down and sending that off to um to mallerie so that that could be uploaded into their their system we were just we're just kind of looking at a a set of data that we've received for Oscar um but that that normal proc process should should be happening you know we're able to kind of pull down that entire population and send it over having this conversation with Jeff in in terms of getting the rest of those populations sent over um so that we can get back on our monthly Cadence so don do we have kind of okay so let me make sure so because right now in the workbench report and Michelle clarify um if I missed this you have the ma payers they are in your workbench report and this workbench report is not only looking at HCC but it's also looking at quality to in in the one report the Oscar is not currently in and then Don you're saying that manually you guys will have to send data to mallerie or in the short term is it going to be able to be in the workbench report yeah in terms of how it gets into that workbench report I I imagine and this is where I I need help with that I I know that we send it off to Epic they're putting it into Healthy Planet I think that the workbench report is then kind of looking at those members in Healthy Planet to to draw the data out of Epic it is and it's populating Oscar patients it's not populating this it's not the risk capture these these columns for the hosp patients are blank okay so the go ahead Don and and and I think Yousef what what he was doing was he was taking all of the members from Oscar kind of manually you know bringing over an HTC score and then sending that off to Epic rather than do that we would be pulling it out of Oscar it already has HTC scores we'd be sending that directly over to Epic so it would essentially just replace yousef's part in this and it would have the HCC scores that are are more current because it would include pretty much everything that's that's in Epic right the long the long term is we we love to and that this is what I'm working on with send this over so we don't have to actually pull these things down and and send them over the but but until till that gets here you know we're still kind of doing this the same process of pulling information and and sending it manually okay all right maybe we can tackle that a little bit more offline um because I'm trying to figure out so in the work CU for the the previsit work CU that has the Oscar patients it does show their HCC Gap so not scores right but the count of hcc's that haven't been captured this year and that's kind of what the previsit team is using um so I need to think about that because that's coming from the HHS registry in Epic so that might be something possible to use in the short term until we can get all the Arcadia data I got to think a little more about that okay all right um any other anybody have any other thoughts on this topic with with reports both with the ma and and with Oscar um yeah so I think last time the the first couple of slides were presented I think there was also a view for all patients versus just Ma so it had the mssp PCF patients in there as well are we still going to have that view maybe you already have it just didn't present it but yes so we have it so one of the things that um Maddie's going to put together is there will be one report deck like for April for instance it's like 45 slides so it is in the teams Channel under the reporting for the risk adjustment advisory Council and some others so um anyone who needs to get you know different views of different things right we didn't show everything today um is in there so I would um ask that people go in and look at that and then if there's something in that slide deck that is missing because that's kind of the slide deck we're thinking of using going forward um for each month if there's something missing let us know so go in there um Ted for your information Ganesh has access to that also um so it's not just advisory counsil there's some other people besides advisory Council that would have access to those to those reports do that help Maria yes thank you I'll take a look at it my my my kind of thought was I didn't want to spend 45 minutes well and we're kind of there I didn't want to spend the majority of going through just reports right as we have some other things to discuss and and so that's why we put that um the full deck in in that folder for people to access as they need it that makes sense thank you Jason do you think it would be possible for the top performers and the bottom performers in addition to the Blended report to separate out Physicians and APS because like Dr juel said the aps mostly see problem visits so if I'm going to work on performance Improvement for 10 people I think people get more out of it if we work on the 10 Physicians who are at the bottom of the list Maddie can you answer that I mean do you have the ability to decipher between your APS and MDS in the report off the top of my head I am 98% sure that there's a column in one of the tables I'm using I'll just have to adjust um I know this one this month came from from the performance dashboard but I will see so Dr do is your is your thought that one chart should be MD only mddo so Physicians like yeah yep and exclude APS correct because like I said the aps are mostly doing problem visits here just like in Ohio it's not that they have panels or Dr Julie you agree yeah I I do I mean because there really aren't very many APS that are Prim pcps I mean they are yeah hopefully you know in with the diad model we've created pairing up Physicians and APS the hope is that they're involved in the chronic disease management but it it is very uh variable okay okay so Maddie let's look can we plan that for next month then yep okay all right Don let's move on to your topic okay yeah so we've discussed some time ago in terms of getting benchmarks you know for for HTC's right and the we we met with one group I um that I'm sorry that their Name Escapes me that they didn't really have what we needed anyways that deoe used um but in terms of what Aradia is able to provide this is kind of something that they've shot over to us so we're able to look by different populations you know that across all of Arcadia's data you know what they you know what their rates are um and it and we have since kind of asked potentially to get this not only for these populations across time but also show like by region you know how it's different you know bringing this back though I mean our our conversation is really just revisiting what do we want to to get from these what do we want to use these for you know off the top of my my head I I I think I think we're there's definitely a goal around I think it was a 3% increase on HTC's right so people are going to want to see what is that overall risk score and how is that trending and how does that compare to what others have you know so I can see that certainly being an ask but just kind of putting that question out um what other things are people interested in and seeing it because it really dictates at what level of detail we need to ask um our Kad for some information and and if you go to the next slide I mean when when we asked for the region they had mentioned you know an additional you see in the in the bottom footnote like four Insight hours it would cost right so that those those Insight hours I mean those are things that we we'd have fund but before we we would even want want that funded you know we'd have to ask is there anything additional what we would need just to make it one request um and then we'd also have to really kind of think about who who's who would be funding this so where does that come from any questions and anything of said so far so don let me let me go back a little bit and and I'm going to play the new the the new employee card again so did did the original request from this I know deoe put together some information um is is that where this initial request came from or how did this all come about and and the reason I ask is I've all the organizations that I've worked for and and Cleveland Clinic is different I mean I understand why I guess we want to compare but I'm not I'm I'm having a hard time understanding the value of how our risk score compares to the Mayo Clinic is important for Cleveland Clinic and like again I'm playing the new card because I've never done that before I've always looked at okay how are we doing our risk score compared to our region which is more of like our competitors right I mean whether you're looking for I mean so I mean from the conversations that we've had internally over time I mean and that's not necessarily where this originated from but when we see say our at a risk score is is X is that good I mean that you know that you're not going to know unless you're you're kind of comparing it to to others certainly within your region but it it's it's nice when when you can get to something when you're comparing it to providers that are much larger that that have contracts similar to you um and populations that that are similar in terms of the those that are coming to you not sure if that answers your your your question Jason in terms of when the original ask in terms of benchmarks and and how that started did I I'd honestly have to probably go back and dig through the notes I'm sure it was through deoe request um but I I'd have to verify that I'm I'm curious the rest of the council their thoughts no one has any thoughts hey hey Jason have you gotten any requests from from Dr Medina regarding HTC's and essentially goal setting and and how that compares I I'm just curious if that's if that's come out no okay me optim would do these like quarterly sessions with all of their you know they invite all of their clients and you know kind of go over how the whole cohort was doing but they everything would be blinded we wouldn't know who people what other organizations were involved you know people that were doing better than us or doing uh you know not as well as us we would know how we we we would know our numbers and where we stood relative to the other organizations but not who the organizations were so I mean yeah I I don't know that you know I don't know if this kind of stems from just sort of the the the culture of you know being you know concerned with like you know us news and World Report ranking sort of it stems an offshoot of that I I I'm not really sure but that's kind of just one thought I have that's a good thought well go ahead I I was just saying that that that's a good thought that was one of the conversations that we we didn't necessarily have um Benchmark data in in the coming out of archia where when we when Optimum reporting was happening you know they did have those benchmarks and their benchmarks they weren't so much benchmarks as you know as uh Dr duel said a comparison across like maybe 10 or 15 providers and they were blinded they you would know pretty much who you were and how you um so you can see how you compared but you didn't really know anything about the other providers did somebody else I think somebody else had a thought or was gonna say something yeah this um you know Don I'm I'm trying to think back to some of the conversations um you had asked about Dr Medina I think many many months ago um last year looking at um working with PCI uh on the on the score card I know that one of the views that um was of interest when we were trying to set uh goals for PCI performance in particular um was to look at can can we get an increase of 3% in performance um compared to last year I don't I don't remember specifically uh what the if there was a benchmarking conversation with that one but there have been a lot of conversations since because of the um v24 to V28 business happening and and not under and not really knowing if the 3% Target in performance was something that was worth pursuing versus looking at actual raft capture instead um and so I'm wondering if that's where the 3% component came in um along these conversations the course of these conversations does that ring a bell to you at all and if not that's fine too okay no it does I mean I I remember kind of putting together some of the information that that we we shared and There Was You know the targets that came out of that right but and that's kind of where I'm going is people would ask okay well what's available like it so so our score is X you know that is that good right you know what how much is left to get um and that gets that leads right into raft capture in terms of what what is is available yet to to to rece um so maybe it's not so much a comparison to others but kind of looking at your population and saying here's a raft capture if we were to increase this um because you could only you're kind of limited in terms of your who your population is unless you're bringing in um new patients yeah that's that's kind of where I'm leaning towards I mean one of the things is especially with ma data um you know CMS used to publish but you needed to know age contracts but they're so far behind that you really don't get that information and and the other problem I had with the Deo information is when they were shown those risk scores and the different Specialties they're doing it feif for service so they're not looking at Ma although then they did their you know their projections based on Ma data which I I found very problematic um but so let's do this um and know that Nick's not on and and maybe we talk to Tracy and her new role kind of figure out what kind of what her thoughts are um and kind of continue on so maybe that's what we'll do is um just kind of because my other concern with arcadas is I don't know how big their clientele is right I know for instance Inter Mountain uses them um so I know in mountains data is in there but I have no idea like and that's why we were trying to think of it by region is you know because it is different you know the Florida region is going to be different than your risk scores in Ohio which are going to be different than your scores in California um and so that's why I wanted to get it more regionalized to really kind of do comparison but um yeah J Jason when when we look at our ref capture percentages now I mean it do those how do those compare to I guess to what you've seen in the past I mean do do you know how much basically more room is available and and I think that's probably what gets into that feeds into that Benchmark conversation right and in terms of here's what others are doing are we doing better than worse than maybe our peers yeah when it comes to the raft capture I mean that's kind of why we had um primary care set there is at 92% you want to be north of 90% in your capture every year I will tell you if you get a 3% increase in your risk score year-over-year that's pretty good A lot of you know a lot of ma plans payers you don't you don't see a 3% um so 3% is actually really really good um I know deoe put more put some things out there like 8 to 10% which I'm just like that's not possible um that's just not possible and and I've had conversation with others about that internally so um so yeah I I think if you get a 3% increase over last year that's really good but I I guess the question I still have is we don't really know what the 20203 risk score is yet we have an idea um but it would be nice to kind of have that kind of finalize to know okay so this is how we ended for 2023 you know so this is what what we've got to focus on for 2024 so I think uh we just need to do some more discussions about like I said let me talk to Nick um maybe talk to Tracy Too get their thoughts on it if there's this uh Dr Marino we need to talk to I mean I'm learning people's names every week new new people so I'm happy to discuss and and kind of find out I just want to make sure it's value added especially if we're going to you know put some investment into this financially so okay well I thought we'd End early it's five minutes till so sorry I thought it but but good discussions I think we have really good discussions and some follow-ups for next month's reports Maddie are are we still on schedule because we'll meet in two weeks will we have April's um data for that meeting that one on the 9th yes I uh Dawn is the risk engine being is that just for human no that's right the well the risk engine for the for the ninth you said um yes it's being delayed a week because of of Qi um they they have to S say load a bunch of data that's preventing that that's delaying the the risk engine from running for like a week so would we need to shoot for the 203d then for the report out yeah okay all right we will okay we'll figure out if we have an agenda for the 9th if not we might cancel and wait till the 23rd but I'll I'll keep everyone posted okay okay thanks everyone have a good evening you thank you everybody good night thanks thank you bye e e e