Building end to end accessibility at the BBC

Paul Bepey At Accessibility Scotland 2018 Paul Bepey @pBepey described how the BBC have built an inclusive accessibility model across its backstage systems. This includes building accessibility in Procurement, Recruitment through to building inclusive design and BBC staff work producing content.

Paul talked about the journey the BBC has taken to get here and things they have learned along the way.



Download Pauls slides in Microsoft Powerpoint format.


Thanks very much, and thanks for the invite, and thanks, everybody, for coming. I’m going to apologise in advance for my, quite frankly, rubbish voice. It’s an unwanted parting gift from my daughter yesterday. Yeah, thanks for that.

As Peter said, I’m going to talk about the whole enter in experience for Staff-facing technology.

Sorry, can I just check that everybody can hear me before I go on. I’m aware that my microphone’s … thank you.

So, yeah, as Peter said, I’m Paul. I’m the assistant tech lead for Staff-facing technology at the BBC.

There are my Twitter details, LinkedIn details. I’m also a member of the Business Disability Forum and NADSN, National Association of Disables Staff Networks.

I’m supported by a team of specialists up and down the country, who work with our projects end users, and techie and non-techie people, to ensure that the experience that we give to our employees meets their needs.

In this we’re going to cover Access to Work, our assisted tech platform, our procurement, designing internal projects, requesting U-technology, user involvement, events, future ambitions, and standards and policies.

The BBC accessibility structure, which got a bit of a … in some ways we’ve got a bit of a unique structure. Our accessibility structure’s made up of two teams. We’ve got my team, who deal with the internal Staff-facing products, and we’ve got an external team, who deal … they sit within the same area, but it’s just done by different teams.

They deal with the, the iPlayer, and all of the stuff that most of you guys probably interact with either on a daily basis or from time to time.

Why do we do this? Obviously, the BBC, or the public broadcaster, and there’s a message that comes down from Tony Hall that says this needs to happen.

The BBC is for everybody, regardless of ability, technical requirement, accessibility requirement, everybody is a license fee payer, so therefore everybody is entitled to access the services that we provide in a way that meets their needs, whether you be a screen reader user, magnification user, et cetera.

On the flip side, if we look at this, why do we do this for internal product? It’s all about retaining the best talent. We all know that organizations claim to be disability confident, and they claim to have accessibility at their heart.

If you don’t have accessibility at your heart, and as part of your core DNA, like organizations such as Apple and Barclay’s, as we just saw with Curt earlier, how are you going to retain … how are you going to attract and retain the best talent? That’s us in why we do this. Yeah.

Hang on. Sorry. I think I’ve missed a slide. Oh my God, sorry guys.

All right. Okay, so BBC Access Services or Access to Work. So what is this?

Obviously, once an individual comes into the BBC, we need to ensure that they can hit the ground from day one running.

That’s having all of their technology in place, all of the other services that they may need, say, BSL, maybe travel to and from work or in work travel, as well as other ad hoc services such as facilitation, guiding, and anything else that they need.

We’ve got a team who deal with that, so we outsourced our Access to Work provision from Capitur a couple of years ago to Remploy, so those guys, basically, when somebody’s offered a job, it flows from the HR process, so kicks in the Access to Work process, which could either be initiated by an employee or an online manager at anytime, either when somebody starts or during somebody’s employment.

Now that will obviously, the assessment happens at a place that’s convenient to the user, so we don’t mandate that you need to come into the office for our business assessment because we all know that that doesn’t work for everybody. I remember when I did mine.

I hadn’t started at the BBC. I was due to start, I think it was a month later, and I was supposed to be there at two, half two, and at half three I’m still stood on the circle line because somebody had decided to throw themselves in front of a train. Quite frankly, that conversation could have happened over the phone because I knew I needed tech.

I knew which technology I needed because I’ve obviously been a user of assisted technology for a while. It didn’t really warrant a trip into the office. When we re-procured the contract, we put it in to say that conversation can either happen over the phone or at a place that’s convenient to the user or within business premises should they want that.

Yeah, once the assessment’s happened, the recommendations are made, and the technologies procured. With our assistive tech, we don’t actually go to Access to Work for licenses because, quite frankly, we found it a phaff.

We’d be put in a request for something like Zoomtext, Dragon, or JAWS.

We were waiting on something for three or four weeks, and the individual’s started. They now need to use that technology.

They haven’t got it because Access to Work have either lost the paperwork, or they’ve not funded it, or something’s been put down wrong.

The wrong technology’s been requested. We decided what we would do is we would actually take all of that license cost back in-house and we’d fund it centrally. We’ve got licenses for our, firstly, our AT users, and then dev communities, which will come on to in a bit.

We have a central pool of licenses, probably far more than we need, but then, in doing that, we’ve ensured that, literally, when anybody comes in, they can hit the ground running.

Works slightly different with hardware. With hardware such as Braille displays or magnification, or portable magnifiers, et cetera, they are funded by Access to Work. We have a small pool of equipment that we can loan out to people until they get their funding, but yeah, for the hardware and things like that, we would encourage Access to Work for that.

Much the same way as cabs to and from work, or transport within work, interpretation, and those whole host of other services, most of which I’ll probably forget, so I’m not even going to try and name them all.

What is covered by AT platform? We cover the whole remit, so anything from screen readers to magnification, literacy and numeracy tools, and literally any. If there’s a piece of technology that a user needs, we have a process that we’ll come onto in a minute about how we introduce all of that.

We like to … we like to pride ourselves on being inclusive and actually giving the user the tools that they need to do their job. Although we have what you may want to call a corporate catalogue and specifically say you can not use this piece of technology.

If it meets your needs, and it doesn’t break any of the drivers or anything on the BBC build, then, yeah, crack on. If it enables you to do your job, I’m really not worried about what technology you use. As long as we can get the licenses and we can get things working, it’s all about being user-focused and putting the user at the heart of how we design our services to get the best out of them, and to enable them to get the best out of the workplace.

And now my… just crashed.

Okay, I just spoke briefly about enabling users to request assisted technology, so we have a process in place even. Basically, if a user requires a piece of technology, they can down one of three ways.

They can either come to my team and request it directly, then can go through a central IT portal that enables them to log a request for this, or they can speak to the guys who do our Access to Work assessments, who would then put in a request in a regular governance catchall that we have.

Once that request goes in, we look at the what is this technology, what’s it going to do. Get it in, do some testing. We do two levels of testing, so firstly my guys will look at it. Yeah, okay. That’s cool. That works. Get it installed on a couple of machines, and then we’ll hand it to the user for a while.

Kind of like a try before you buy thing, and while that’s happening, we’ll be going through the packaging process to get it sorted so it can be centrally deployed should anybody else need it, while at the same time having discussions about licensing and how we’re going to provide those licenses.

Is it going to be a site license? What’s the pricing model from the supplier? Is it going to be a monthly subscription? Is it … excuse me … a one-off cost, or even better, is it free?

Sorry, I’m just having some water.

Once all of the evaluations happened, and it gets packaged, it will then be signed off and added to the core catalogue. Anybody can request assistance technology to their apps that you know barriers around it.

If you request, say, for example, Dragon, JAWS, or ZoomText or Text Help, Claro, or whatever, you don’t go through 100 approval processes. It’s, right, okay yeah, you’ve requested. You can have it.

It’s all about breaking down those barriers and creating that inclusive workplace. Because we all know what it’s like with … excuse me.

You and I know what it’s like about people maybe not feeling comfortable about making a declaration that they need this piece of technology, so we try to make it as easy for people as we can to get the services that they need.

Okay, so projects. What we refer to as projects most of the people probably refer to as applications and stuff like that. We have two approaches here; all of it is inclusive.

Excuse me. If we’re working with an external supplier, they obviously see our guidelines, policies, and as I said earlier, I think I probably missed a slide, which was about procurement, so accessibility is embedded into every single one of our procurements.

If you don’t … If you cannot make a piece of technology accessible, then it’s a pretty much 99% sure that you are not going to get onto the BBC and into our network.

I would like to say that everything goes live completely accessible, but obviously, that isn’t the case.

Where that’s not the case, we’ll work with suppliers to put a roadmap in place, and we’ll ensure that that’s committed to and stuck to, and where possible, we’ll release …. get that ahead of schedule if we can.

Now, some developers and suppliers take that really well, others don’t. I’ve quite obviously lost count of the amount of times that people have said to me, but you’re the only people that ask for this.

We don’t need to do this for any other customer. Why you guys? And I think I said when I first started presenting there’s probably going to some crossover between the stuff that Curt presented and the stuff that I’m presenting, so why do we do that? Well, it’s obviously a winner. If it’s accessible, then it’s usable by everybody. It’s good marketing. I don’t want to take it down to marketing, but at the end of the day, that’s who a lot of organizations look at it. If I make is accessible, then hey, it’s not only going to be you guys that can use it. It’s going to be everybody, which is good.

Yeah, some suppliers will work with us easier than others. Where a supplier doesn’t really want to work with us, then we have got an exact level of buy-in so we can push it up the chain if we really need to. But I’d rather not, if I’m honest, because I don’t want to be escalating every two minutes. I’d rather that people just came on board and worked with us.

As part of that inclusive working process, my team will often go down to suppliers and meet them, show the assistive technology and show them why.

Give a bit of education. Okay, guys, why do you need to design like this? Why is it bad practice to design something that’s completely mouse oriented when you’ve got somebody using JAWS or Dragon. Because we all know how mouse click works in Dragon.

It’s not exactly … it’s quite complex. Obviously, with JAWS is you want to use a mouse, you either needs to use JAWS cursor or get it scripted. Now we do script applications in an absolute worst case scenario. I’d love to say we haven’t got any scripted tech out there, but we have because we’ve got a lot of legacy tech out there. The broadcast industry is a bit like the AT industry. It doesn’t move very fast, but when it does, it does.

Then we come to the internal stuff. How do we design the internal project? We have, as I said earlier, providing the education, so we work with our design teams. We’ve got design guidelines, assistive tech guidelines, education.

We’ve got some training courses that are written about how to design the best content for screen readers with magnification, with all of that stuff in mind. My guys, we’re always available to answer questions for internal teams when they need that.

Hang on. I don’t know why I’m having issues with my slides, so I’m really sorry.

Yeah, the working collaboratively. Obviously, answering the … being there on hand. This is mainly for internal, so internally, we will embed a member of my team in with a given project, given time. We’ll have regular catch ups, regular testing sessions.

We don’t really go for the approach where show me a product at the end, and we’ll do a one-off test because we generally found that doesn’t work.

You’ve got Dave. He’s designed a whole product, and let’s say, for example, he’s totally used a lot of mouse interaction and stuff. Now that isn’t going to work for obvious reasons. If we get to look at that early on, we can give a stare and keep the message positive, as in these are the good things that you’re doing, but hey, you might want to change this.

Maybe that colour contrast is a bit dodgy for people who have colour blindness. Maybe that wording that you’re using there is a bit challenging for people who maybe have dyslexia. It’s all about keeping, yeah, keeping the message positive and not beating people with a big stick and saying you must do this. This is the way that we want to do it.

Its accessibility is there to benefit everybody. It’s about collaborating and keeping it friendly and keeping people on board, really.

User involvement. If I’m totally honest, this isn’t something that the BBC is always been maybe the best at. Obviously, moving into the future with say things like disability confidence, one of the key things around that is that you need to have good and robust, for want of a better word, customer engagement models.

So why do it? Okay, so we’ve … I’ve just covered the disability confidence, but it’s also there’s no point in designing an application or a business process that works well for the business, but it doesn’t work for the user. We all know that we have various users with various assistive tech requirements and technical capabilities.

Some people are more technical than others. It’s just the nature of how people work. It’s all about putting the user first and actually designing an application or a service that works well for those guys. The only way that you can truly do that is to embed user research and user groups at the beginning of that either design process or procurement process.

When I say the beginning of the procurement process, what I mean is obviously once the bidders have actually either passed or failed the question responses. You can involve the users then, so we can say we have an application coming in. This is what it’s going to do.

Any volunteers for testing or being involved in it? Maybe design stakeholders, how would you like this to work for you? Then we can take that away and we can actually work with that, but if we don’t do that, we end up with a whole load of technology that may well work for the business, but it doesn’t work, it doesn’t work for the users, and that’s not good. I mean, I’m going to talk about a case study.

We recently replaced one of our user systems. Some of you will know what that is. I’m aware that some of you are here from Accessibility London, where I spoke about the same thing.

Yeah, we replaced the system. Now the system we replaced was, I think it’s fair to say, quite old. Maybe it wasn’t the best designed. I mean, the people just designed differently back in the day. Because of the way that it worked, it had a lot of scripting, so literally, every time the system was updated, we needed to script it.

The procurement came up, and hang on. We need to move away from the scripting boat and model, and we need to get accessibility embedded deep into this contract. So the first line of the contract says this product must be accessible at launch or as close to as possible.

Obviously, some suppliers came back to us, and they’re “Hang on. This is really scary. We’ve not been asked to do this.” The supplier in question came back so us and went, well, we’ve not done it before, but we’re really willing to work with you.

Okay, lots of people say that, so I kind of took it with a pinch of salt, if honest, but met them. I think I met them at BBC a couple of years ago, and we had regular catch ups of the project. Every time there was a code-drop, we tested it.

I’m not going to say that it didn’t come with issues because it did. Some were caused by the overall design. Some of them were caused by the way that some of the assistive technology interacted, but generally, we ended up with a project, or an application, that when we released it on day one, I would say it was probably 95% accessible.

I’d have loved it to have been 100% accessible, but there were just a couple of things that didn’t happen. In the short term, we’ve got that scripted. I’m not looking at scripting as a longterm solution because, as I said, it doesn’t really follow the inclusive model, and I’d rather not get an organization every time we do a system upgrade.

But I think we did quite a few case studies about this in the BBC, and we really spoke about it a lot. It really drove that message home that if you actually engage at the right time and get accessibility on the table from day one, it isn’t this really, really scary topic that everybody thinks it is. Yeah, it worked really well, and I mean, it’s not only my team that were involved in that. There were a lot of teams who did a lot of work to ensure that happened. Did we get pushback?

Yeah, from some levels. Some of the devs pushed back on it, some of the stakeholders pushed back on it because of obviously release delays and things like that, but I’m really glad to say we didn’t delay the release. The release went absolutely on time, and I think the biggy for me is that we could sit our assisted tech users in front of it, and okay, there may be have been some workflow changes and things like that, but they could. They could use that system, and they still can.

All right, there are improvements going on, so we’re tweaking a few workflows and things like this, and we’ve obviously got a lot of user suggestions coming in, which I think is a good thing. It moves away from that whole, well, this is what we’re going to do. Yeah. I was actually really proud of that.

Events, now obviously, as the public broadcaster, we need to do a lot of education around accessibility. One of the key things that we’ve done over the last two or three years. Well, there are two.

There’s the … What is it referred to on the slide deck? Learn a thing, which basically has been internalized as super fun. I don’t … yeah.

This is when teams get together and they do a bit of a collab day and whatever, and they will learn different skills and stuff like that. Every so often we try and get in there and do something we accessibility. I think it’s, at the moment, it’s once every five to six months. But yeah, it’s like an open team day where you can literally get hands-on with technology and things like that, and then no question is too small and no question is too obvious.

It’s all about the education, and it’s developers go there, various teams go there. We can give them the assistive technology to test with and work out how does it work? How do we do this? What do we do? Which, yeah, again, that’s raised the awareness of accessibility.

For audience facing products, they use a slightly different model, so they have a … they have a champions network, which is basically accessibility advocates, or whatever you want to call them who embed themselves into the iPlayer teams and the BBC news apps team and stuff like that.

They’ll test that so that a lot of those, most of those apps are actually released accessible from day one because I have various guidelines, where there will be a slide at the end of the deck which basically discusses those.

Yeah, we’ve found that that’s a pretty good way of doing it, but also, GAAD, I don’t know how many people have followed GAAD over the last couple of years. Excellent. Is that many or?

No. It’s five.

Oh, okay. Thanks. Yeah, so we do, for say the last two or three years, we’ve done an internal/external GAAD event. For those of you who don’t know, GAAD is Global Accessibility Awareness Day, so it always falls on the third Thursday of May, so this year it’s going to be … yeah, next year it falls on my birthday, which could be quite interesting.

The whole thing is this, I mean, we get people in to give various presentations. I think this year we had Nancy from Employable Me. We had … Who else did we have? A couple of other people from CBeebies. Oh god, I can’t remember.

Yeah, quite a few presenters, anyway, and the whole thing’s available online. Yeah, and we do that, and we stream it online so there’s a … we speak about it on Twitter for quite a while before we do it. The hashtag last year was BBCAAD18, and we generally try and move with the year, so hopefully next year it will be BBCAAD19.

The reason we do that is because we can follow, we can take a look at how many people have followed a given hashtag. Whereas if we just left it as BBCAAD with no year, we wouldn’t really get that information, so how successful are we being at running this event?

Yeah, so we stream it online. It goes out. There’s a link on BBC that often gets put up onto (Access All Areas 2018), and the whole thing is streamed out so people can watch it from wherever. I think this year we had people from … it got quite a lot of coverage, so it was getting coverage in, say, Australia, a lot of Asia, and we had lots of people asking if they could basically stream our event in their offices. We were, yeah, of course. It’s GAAD; that’s what it’s all about. It’s about raising the awareness. I don’t know how many times I can actually say this.

It’s getting that message across and raising that awareness and educating people, which is something that I’m actually really passionate about.

We’re going to be doing another one next year. We’re putting plans together at the moment for that. A list of speakers hasn’t been announced yet, but if anybody’s interested, then just literally follow the hashtag, and once the hashtag’s available, we’ll put it out in various news outlets. I mean, I think last year it went out in … it went out in a few … I think it may have gone out on Ability Net or one of the other ones, but it was certainly getting quite a lot of coverage and being spoken about quite a lot, which again, is a really big thing because we need to do this. Yeah, it’s amazing.

The future ambitions, we’re going through a lot of changes at the BBC at the moment, and I think it’s quite fair to say restructure. Yeah, people just moving into different areas. I think it’s a key … it’s a really good time to actually take stock and say what are we doing? Are we doing this right? Are we doing things right? Or is there anything we can improve on? There are a few things that I want to do.

Firstly, I want to create a central accessibility help, for a better word, for want of a better word. Sorry. That’s somewhere where anybody can go.

It’s like a one-stop shop for accessibility, and it tells you how you invoke various services, who do you speak to for internal context? Who do you speak to for external content? Because we all know how large organizations work. You have pockets of organizations, some of who speak to each other, some who don’t.

Most of the time that’s because people don’t know that the other parts exit. Again, it’s about putting that message out there and saying that we are actually here. We’re the people that will help you and get this accessible and do what we need to do.

Yeah, the central hub, I mean, I saw that … I saw this at another organization, and it had really opened up their world of accessibility, and it was a really key driver into improving, firstly, their service uptake, and secondly, the knowledge of their services. It also dispels that myth that I can’t talk about this because if it’s out there than you can.

The second thing is to actually get a proper resource structure for my team.

I mean, I said that I’m supported by a team of specialists. In my team, there are three of us, and we’re across literally every single piece of internal technology that comes out within the BBC. There’s a whole assistive tech service from end to end, which includes the IT support, the governance, monitoring all of the KPIs, SNA’s, et cetera, all of those procurements, ensuring that accessibility’s covered up in all of those and the whole raft of day-to-day issues.

I’d love to say that we capture everything, but I think three people doing that just isn’t really realistic, so I’m currently building a case at the moment to increase the size of the team and get more coverage, as well as training more people up internally about accessibility.

Another thing that I want to do, I want to build a framework of assistive technology suppliers. Now, I mean, most of us know that the AT market isn’t that big, but what I’d like to do is to build up two lots. There’s a lot for software and hardware provision, and this hasn’t even been … it’s kind of in my head at the moment.

So we’re going to have two lots. There’s going to be a lot for hardware and software provision. Now, we all know … well, I’m pretty sure that I’m aware of the players who are going to go in for that, but then also there’s a provision of services, so that could be anything from ad-hoc user testing, if we need it, scripting where we need that, user training, delivering courses to devs, et cetera.

They’re just a couple other things I really want to get in the next, I would say, 12 to 18 months. I mean, they’ve been on my objective list for quite a while, but I think now’s the time to do it.
Training model. Obviously, as I said, we’re quite a big organization, so how do we deliver our training?

We’ve actually got, and part of this stems from the inclusive design thing. We’ve got … obviously, back in the day, when we had a lot of scripted applications, we needed to wait for specific suppliers to come in and deliver that training for us, which wasn’t the best fit for the organization in some cases because you’ve got lead times. At the end of the day, if somebody’s got a system in front of them, they need to know how to use on day one, not three weeks later.

We started working with our … we have an internal training department, who put both online and face-to-face courses together. We built a relationship with those guys and actually started getting them to design the training for AT users as well.

Their trainers are pretty much all skilled up in assistive tech, so they know how to use JAWS, Dragon, ZoomText, and mobile platform, so iOS.

At the moment, we don’t do very much we android, so yeah, they know how to use all that and put the courses together. We offer them refresher training every so often.

It’s they can either have it when they want or just go and procure it or ask us for it. We found that that really increased workforce productivity. Now, is there room for improvement? I think, yeah, there probably is, but there’s always room for improvement.

Nothing is ever perfect. This is an ongoing journey. Technology changes, applications change, everything. It’s a moving environment.

At the moment, that’s working really well. I mean, there’s obviously room for improvement, and we do that wherever possible. But I think it’s a really good model for people to adopt because you’re not waiting, or you don’t have a requirement for these external organizations as much if you can deliver it internally.

It doesn’t only … it firstly increases the productivity. People get what they need quicker, but it also … I don’t want to bring it down the cost, but it’s cheaper because you’ve got internal staff delivering it, so you’re not paying a consultancy fee for somebody to come in and give a day’s training that you’re probably going to need to do again a year later if you’ve made a system update, or whatever.

Hang on.

God, I’ve got a couple of slides off. Sorry.

So how do we … monitoring our accessibility, how do we do that?

Obviously, if we’ve got all this tech, we need to know where we are, and are we heading in the right direction? Are we not capturing everything? Are there things that we could be doing better? We’ve got a central database, for want of a better word, which contains all of the applications that are staff facing, along with our accessibility status and next review date because we can have an application, especially with cloud-based software.

We found that cloud is a huge issue for us. Before, where everything was fat client, you could literally take the update or not take it, and if it were inaccessible, you would hold the update off until such time as you’d made it accessible, whether that be by scripting or by speaking to a developer or a supplier and getting to make it accessible. That’s a bit of a challenge with cloud-based.

How do you … obviously, if moving the way that things are moving with cloud-based, we have to really ensure that those review dates are tight and they happen in a timely manner.

Generally, we do get told when somebody is going to do, say, a cloud drop. Generally, we’ll prioritize those because we know that once that’s hit, there’s no real going back.

It’s either wait for the next release or catch it when it’s in what’s known as a staging environment, which is like half test, half dev. It’s not a live environment; it’s an environment where testers and developer can login and actually put the application through its paces. What we do there is we’ll test it.

We’ll get those results back to the supplier, and then we’ll go with that.

But, yeah, so monitoring accessibility, we’ve, as I said, we’ve got the centre database. We’ve got … and what happens is every three months we pull off a report, which contains all of the applications, all of the accessibility statuses, and that goes up to exec board and heads of technology, just so that we can keep a bit of an eye on where we are.

Generally, when we’re moving in the right direction, is it as fast as I would like? No. I think it’s fair to say that somethings are faster than others. I’d love everything to move along swiftly, but that realistically doesn’t happen.

Then depending on what comes out of that report, that sets the priorities, well, some of the priorities, for my team over the next three months because we’ve obviously got stuff that isn’t on that report yet because it’s not live. That would be … they will be in a semi-test state.

My guy will be looking at those, but we can’t put those on the report because it would be … make it inaccurate. Yeah, so that sets a lot of the strategy and the work priorities and things like that, so we, yeah, again, we tend to find that works okay, but it’s something that we’re always looking at improving and looking at better ways of doing.

And I guess, yeah, the tool. Who can access it? Anybody can, line managers, employees, whoever. It’s a tool that’s freely available on our staff network. It think it’s got two purposes. For me, it’s not only about compliance.

I don’t like the work compliance if I’m honest because it looks a bit, I don’t know, a bit negative, but we put it in so that an employee or a line manager could go and look at a tool. Say, for example, they’re employing somebody with an assisted tech requirement, or maybe had developed a disability within their working life because that does happen.

They could then go in and look at the accessibility of that tool and work out what they need to do. Do they need to approach our access services to put any reasonable adjustments in place? Or is that person going to be okay just from day one?

I think that’s quite empowering, and it takes away the requirements for managers or users to actually go directly to my team and say, hey, does this work? Does that work? It’s enabling them to go and find the information that they need at a time that they need it. So, yeah.

I think I’ve pretty much-covered everything that I was going to, so I’m going to for questions.

Thank you very much.