 I am here to help the movement to figure out how we get more effective finance for community-based adaptation at the local level. I just facilitated a participatory session on financing CBA at the local level. We took the session as a really nice chance to network with our peers. We very much wanted a participatory session, so we got people into groups. We had three key speakers giving top-line messages and learning from their programme about how the change that they managed to bring about happened. Then we broke down into groups and did some power analysis looking at, with the community as the star diagram, so with the communities at the core, what can the different levels of decision makers hold power and make decisions about these people's lives? How can we get them to listen to what they're saying? So we broke down the groups and we got them to look at mapping the key decision makers and the key funds of finance. Then looking at the power analysis, thinking about what are the gender dimensions? Are there any allies to adaptation funds at this level? Are there any opponents to that idea? Are there any hidden agendas that we need to be aware of? Then we got them to produce some asks. I think it's good. I think they're quite tired of being spoken at. The presentation at the beginning I thought we were a little bit tired, but I think there was a lot of really dynamic and quite interesting conversations. We didn't have to prompt anybody, they were quite up for sticking together and chatting and trying to find solutions, so it was great. We came up with quite a few here at different levels. At the community and household level, we want high levels of climate social justice, so it's much more about just projects it's about. These issues are social justice and that came out very strongly from the community, which is great. It's a strength in to have strong, accountable, transparent funding mechanisms to adjust carbon finance with differentiated needs. We've got inclusion of most vulnerable groups, governance of climate finance, for it to be more transparent and accountable. That would be a really strong infrastructure. Next to gender, gender was a very big issue that came out. A more friendly process for CBOs to access finance, I really like that one, I thought that was very interesting. Need for finance for climate change adaptation and implementation, so to go beyond plans. I think that reflects a lot of countries that we work in as well to move it beyond the planning stage. Risk management linked to markets, stronger links to funding on DRR and humanitarian support, which is again great. I think the higher-go framework for action is looking at the connection between CBA and ecosystem-based approaches. More transparent and helpful, longer-term funding, very everybody says the same thing. Stronger links to broader development agendas, community-centred approach and more flexible funding to respond better to community priorities. So a lot about transparency and accountability, a lot about community participation, a lot about linking sectors. Those are the kind of takeaways. Now I think the summary of it would be more transparent and accountable, grace levels of participation and linking between themes.