 Today I want to give you guys a little bit of a better understanding of our process which underlies the recommendations that we make for programs like sailors. So see if I can move on to the next slide. There we go. So our process has been recognized by the Council on Higher Education accreditation. We'd encourage you to check out the joint statement on the transfer and award of credit. That was put out by CHEA and ACRO and the American Council on Education, really to try and encourage organizations to feel comfortable using credit for prior learning to help their students succeed. It's a process, as I said, that sort of serves as an industry standard and all of our participating organizations from the College Board and their AP and CLEP exams, DSST, to folks like sailor organizations like Google and Walt Disney and all of these folks go through the same process with the same rigorous standards. So we start off with what we call an eligibility check, and this is really where, before we engage subject matter experts, our staff go in and make sure that these programs are structured in a way that is going to allow a successful evaluation. We check expectations such as the learning outcomes that they are able to explain to us. Do they have appropriate assessments? How are their courses structured? They're grading standards. We look at the actual learning experience and environment that the student learning is taking place in, and check those sorts of basic requirements. Things like the qualifications of their instructors are a big one, make sure that classes are being taught by folks who are qualified to teach them, student record management and security processes, all that kind of thing. But really the meat of the review is not conducted by ACE staff. We rely on subject matter expert faculty from accredited colleges and universities that we recruit to participate on evaluations with us. So that next step is to put together a faculty team based on the subject areas that are involved in the course. So we make sure that we have at least two faculty per subject area, and some courses may encompass multiple subject areas, particularly we see this in the military, where we have some learning experiences that are counted as a single course, but they involve thousands of hours of training that these learners go through, and they can encompass multiple subject areas. So some of these reviews have very large faculty teams that we assemble. Those faculty must be currently teaching and have at least five years of experience teaching in that subject area at an accredited college or university. And we do our best to make sure that in our recruitment of faculty, we pull from all different accrediting regions because we don't want our process to sort of accidentally end up reflecting the preferences of a particular regional accreditor. We want to make sure that it's applicable across the board. Nationally. And for those faculty, we provide them with some guidance, some tools, rubrics, tools like I mentioned, Bloom's Taxonomy to make sure that they all are sort of normed with our expectations and standards. But we really rely on those experts to let us know to keep our process current, right, to really reflect their expertise in the field. And what they know is current expectations for that particular discipline in the field so that our recommendations always reflect current expectations in that field of study. So we really do want that feedback from them. If they say, Hey, okay, you know, this course matches up with what you'll see In colleges right now, but we know, for instance, that conversations are moving in this direction, you know, and a few years when these folks go up for re review. We want to make sure that they're ready to evolve with the field so that we make sure that we're always staying current as much as we possibly can. During the actual evaluation, those experts then go through and review everything about that course that we can get our hands on they evaluate the the syllabi, the sort of schedule assignments, those learning outcomes. Assessments we put a particular emphasis on again because we are often evaluating learning experiences that happen in nontraditional contexts, you know, they might be learning while they're on the job in some fashion and doing formal training that's interspersed with things. We want to make sure that at the end of the day, we're checking that each of those learning outcomes is assessed at an appropriate level of complexity and rigor for the sort of level of sophistication of the learning outcomes that they've associated with the course. And so it's really about that scope, that depth, that rigor that we ask them to look at and to think also about that college equivalence. So if there is a sort of standard expectation for an introductory level course in a particular discipline, we want those faculty members to compare the learning that happens in the program they're evaluating with those expectations so that we can make sure that they really line up. And at the conclusion of the review we issue a final report. The reviewers must reach consensus on what the credit recommendation will be and it takes the form of a number of semester hours at a particular educational level. Lower division, upper division, graduate. We also sometimes issue recommendations at the vocational or certificate level and in a particular subject area. It is possible going through a review that no credit is awarded if the course is not structured in a way that that allows them to really ensure that that learning is documented and that any student who passes it has indeed met the learning outcomes. We might issue no credit recommendation. We do try to catch those kinds of things during the eligibility visit. We also might find that there's the potential for a significant and meaningful level of learning but there are some key aspects of the course missing. Say a particular learning outcome that's important to the course but they say there's an assessment and it didn't show up in the review. We can issue a conditional recommendation and give them a chance to fix that before it's published. Nothing gets published until all of the appropriate aspects of the course are available and implemented in the course itself. And at that point we publish to the National Guide. So if you guys are familiar with our credit recommendations you've hopefully checked out the National Guide before. Within the next month or so you will see a new and revised National Guide that we're very excited about. It's going to have a little bit additional functionality, some better search options for schools that are receiving transcripts and needing to look up courses and match them with your curricula. And we'll also be able to add some supplemental material in there as well as our organizations are interested in doing that. And at that point those organizations also have transcripts available to their students. So in addition to conducting the recommendations, ACE does the credentialing around those experiences to make sure that the students have a portable way to explain and showcase what they know and the work that they've done to a college that they want to go to.