Norman Rosenberg: Absolutely, Kieran. Yes. RPM continues to be a part of all of the new deals on the mobile health side, particularly with the care gap closure programs and our payer partnerships. Because ultimately, what it’s there for is to lower the cost of care, provide proactive care, keep patients out of the hospital. So as we go and do care gap closure that we talked about, all the care gap closure services that we provide, if we do see candidates, we do visit with patients that are good candidates for RPM platform. That’s the time that we would enroll them. We’re already in their home. We would enroll them in the program. And then obviously, we’d begin monitoring them from there. So it’s absolutely symbiotic with our care gap closure programs with a lot of our mobile health deployments, and it continues to be a big driver for us for the future. We’re excited about it.
Operator: The next question is a follow-up from Richard Close. Please go ahead.
Richard Close: Yes. Norm, is there any way you could give us for the transport volumes and the pricing that will be in the queue?
Norman Rosenberg: I don’t know it off the top of my head, but we’ll put the Q in there. It will be in the Q within 24 hours. Just to give you an idea, the volumes were up double digits, if I looked at Q2 versus Q2. But I think maybe even over 20%, but definitely double digits. And the year-over-year average price also went up. I just don’t want to quote the wrong number to you, but I can tell you directionally where it is. And then it will be out there tomorrow.
Richard Close: Okay. And then with respect to free cash flow, I appreciate the comments on the collections in the second quarter and DSOs and whatnot. So how are you thinking about free cash flow, maybe conversion of adjusted EBITDA to free cash flow for the year?
Norman Rosenberg: So first, let’s look at where we are at the halfway point, and we did include the cash flow statement as we typically do in the earnings release. So what I like to do, given the way working capital has had such an impact on our results, on our operating cash flow. I’d like to take the operating cash flow piece and split it into two pieces. So you have the net income or net loss as it were and adding back the noncash items, that’s one piece and then you have the changes in the working capital categories. And that gives you a little bit of an idea. The working capital stuff is going to continue to be a drain. If you look at the first half of the year, all of the negative on the operating cash flow side and then some came from the working capital category.
So we had a $14 million, $15 million increase in AR versus the end of the year, we had a $14 million, $15 million decrease in accounts payable, so that we really had a big negative cash cycle there. On the other hand, when you look at the cash flow that was generated from operations, what I’d like to call the P&L cash flow, I think it worked out to roughly $16 million in the first half of the year. which is kind of what we had been running at when we think of being able to generate $30 million to $40 million of operating cash flow. So if we were at a point where we could get the working capital to be a net zero effect, that’s kind of the cash flow generation that you’re looking at. So I would compare the $14.7 million, I think, it was, of adjusted EBITDA that we generated in the first 6 months of the year with about $16 million of P&L cash flow, right, absent the impact of the working capital categories over that same period of time.
