 Now, here what we looked at was the input, the process, the outputs and the outcomes and we had developed indicators for all these four boxes. If you look at the input indicators, the number of people who required to be recruited, the number of equipment pieces which need to be provided, procured and provided were the input indicators that we were looking at. We had timelines for that and we looked at whether these were done in time. In relation to the process, it included the capacity building or the skill upgradation of the professionals who were providing the services and also to look at how we would augment the knowledge and awareness skills for self-management of diabetes amongst clients. In terms of the outputs, we looked at the number of people who were actually undergoing the screening, what proportion of them actually required treatment, were they going for treatment, were they being followed up at annual intervals, how many of them, these were the output indicators that we were looking at. In terms of the outcome indicators, our major interest was to see whether the program was making a difference to the way things were being done before the program. So, one of the outcomes that we were looking at was the number of people who come for screening, is there an increase compared to the baseline when the project started. The second thing was, were people coming earlier when they had diabetic retinopathy? And if they come earlier, then obviously we expected that the numbers who would not be visually compromised or go blind would decrease over a period of time. So, those were sort of outcome indicators that we were interested in monitoring under the program. We had a number of outcome variables put in with indicators, but I am just going to take one example. And that example, I could look at the increase in the number of people coming for a screening at the primary and secondary levels, which we call as a primary health center and the community health center, compared to the baseline, what has been the sort of increase over the 5 year duration of the program. And we looked at a 50 percent increase over a 5 year period compared to the baseline. And we had targets fixed, which then became the indicators that compared to the baseline in year 1, approximately 12,500 people would be examined, in year 2, the number of people examined goes up to 26,000 and in year 3 it goes up to 40,000 and then is sustained at that level right through. And this information would be collected from the patient registers, which are being digitized at the primary and secondary care levels. And this information is going to be collected by the implementing partners and would be transmitted every 6 months, so that it could then be compiled and we could look at what has been the outcome on that particular project. We have similar indicators in terms of the increase in the awareness of people with diabetes about eye complications, as well as whether advocacy has actually made a difference at different levels, the state and the national levels has there been a difference. So we have a range of outcome variables that we are looking at with specific indicators in the India context as part of the MND framework over the 5 year project.