Drew Asher: Yes, the team — thanks, Scott. The team does a lot of work to mine out balance sheet positioning and statutory capital of our peers that are in potential financial difficulty, looking at what assets are backing reserves on their balance sheets. And then you’re right, hopefully taking a conservative approach on that and doing that different depending on the carrier situation. So we’ll see how that plays out. I hope to get every nickel of that $314 million, but trying to be realistic and prudent, but we will fight for it because that’s shareholder money. On the HBR for commercial. Commercial includes both Marketplace, and we’ve got about $3 billion of commercial group business, which runs sort of meaningfully higher structurally than our Marketplace business.
And we still expect to do a little bit better than last year. Last year, commercial, we posted an 81.1. But thinking about the SEP membership rolling in, with a little bit higher HBR, now that’s not for a full year. So you have to sort of slope that through. But from a progression standpoint because the deductible natures of the commercial business, you should expect like an ongoing tick up of that total commercial HBR, but it’s sort of on track to what we expect.
Sarah London : And again, just important to remember that the performance of the core business and Marketplace is allowing us to absorb that SEP growth. And those members tend to become more profitable in their sophomore year. So assuming good retention, the book that we’re building this year will have incremental contribution next year.
Operator: And our next question today comes from Michael Ha with Morgan Stanley.
Michael Ha : Maybe just quickly first on Medicaid acuity adjustments. Wondering where these adjustments assumed are embedded in your 1.4% composite rate increase guide for ’23? Or are you now tracking better than that for ’23? Trying to understand if these mid-year renewals actually represent upside to your guide? And then on Star, I believe you’re originally targeting 20% of members in 4-STAR+PLUS plans at your Investor Day? Now that came down to about 14% to 18% last quarter, and now 0%. I’m trying to understand what exactly changed since last quarter? It sounds like you might not have received cut points yet, or maybe I’m wrong, you did, and they’re far more difficult. Was it driven by the two key outlier deletion? I’m just trying to get some more insight on what changed from last quarter to now? And does that even influence your ’24 MA growth assumptions?
Sarah London : Yes. So let me hit Stars and sort of rebate. So we did — at Investor Day, we were looking at 20% in 4 stars. On the Q1 call, because of what we saw in terms of the overall Medicare rate environment, some of the changes that we had made coming into the year, relative to a focus on duals and what we were planning to do for 2024 bid construction and going forward, we walked through the fact that for our target population, right, which is increasingly going to be low-income complex and duals members, that 3.5 stars is the more appropriate focal point for our Star strategy. And so that is really how, over the next 3 to 4 cycles, we’re looking at success in Star. And so I also on that call, pointed out that we were seeing 4-star progress in the measures that we had visibility into at that point, which were those core admin and ops and pharmacy measures, which is our focus in this first cycle, but that we had a number of contracts that were on the bubble and that we were taking a conservative approach and actually assuming minimal progress.
