So any further task orders or significant wins in that through that vehicle would be meaningful. But also, there are a number of procurements in that technology modernization space that have been held up with the protests that if they were to be resolved in the early quarters of this year and fall in our favor, we could see them contribute more meaningfully as well in FY ’24. So it’s really — it’s a mix of things. But David, is there anything further that you would add?
David Mutryn: Yeah. Just to pull the string on one thing you mentioned, entering any year, we tend to have strong visibility into our revenue guidance, meaning more than 90% of our guided revenue is typically already in backlog. This year is no exception there. In fact, as you mentioned, we’ve really had two really strong years of rebid success. And we do see FY ’24 having lower rebid volume, which provides an even higher degree of visibility than we may normally have coming into the year. So while there’s a component of new business as always, that we assume there is potential for additional success there to drive further top line growth.
Bert Subin: Very helpful. Thanks for the answers.
Operator: We now have a follow-up from Charlie Strauzer with CJS Securities. Please proceed.
Charlie Strauzer: Hi, thanks. Just a couple of quick follow-ups. First of all, on the cybersecurity breach, are you anticipating any more potential expense leakage into next year in your guidance?
David Mutryn: Yeah, I’ll take that. As I said in my prepared remarks, we’re substantially complete with the analysis of impacted individuals and the largest component of the costs we’ve incurred to date have been related to those required notifications that came out of that. So right now, based on our best forecast of current proceedings and the associated costs, our guidance for fiscal year ’24 does not contemplate material costs for further notifications or legal and consulting fees, which has been most of what we’ve incurred to date. However, we should point out that as detailed in our forthcoming 10-K, there are a number of class action suits that have been filed related to the incidence and we’re not now able to determine or predict the ultimate outcome of any of those proceedings or provide an estimate or range of the possible outcome of those.
Charlie Strauzer: Got it. Thank you. And then just shifting gears to the international businesses, obviously, the divestitures. Divested a few of them already. Could we expect to see some more news on that front in terms of portfolio optimization, if you will?
Bruce Caswell: Yeah, Charlie, it’s Bruce. I’ll take that. I mentioned in my prepared remarks that we really — we feel that, that our work there is not done and it will continue into the coming quarters of this year. And at the same time, as I did on the last call, I wanted to kind of lay out what the characteristics are of the business that we see in the future outside the US. And the example I used in my prepared remarks was really with the United Kingdom and the work that we do there. It’s a customer that we probably enter that market easily a decade ago, maybe a little bit more and have over time built a broad and increasingly diversified business in terms of the services that we provide. And while the Department for Work and Pensions remains our single largest customer, I’ve been pleased with our ability to move work into other departments and agencies.
And UK has long been a government that has a very, I think, fair model and for contracting with the private sector. And we have found it to be a good customer to work with. And in fact, over time, have become really known as a strategic supplier in that market. So I think the net-net is that we’re comfortable with a smaller footprint, concentrating our efforts in areas like that where we can offer the full range of services and capabilities that we have as a company. And most importantly, quite substantial markets. My latest recollection was that the UK represents a $6 billion addressable market, and it has meaningful growth characteristics that align with the strategic capabilities that we’ve outlined over our three to five year plan. So hopefully, that gives you a bit more color in terms of our direction of travel.
Charlie Strauzer: That’s great. Thanks, Bruce. And then just a quick housekeeping for David. Interest rate assumption — interest expense assumption for the coming years?
David Mutryn: Yeah, sure. So as always, our — all of our guidance is organic and that it doesn’t include any M&A activity that hasn’t been complete. So that means our interest forecast is consistent with that and therefore, reflects our excess cash flow paying down debt further over the year. As far as the rate goes, as a reminder, we’re about half fixed rate through interest rate swaps. So for the half that is floating, we do use the SOFR forward curve to forecast what the rate will do over the year. And as we do pay down, we intend to pay down the floating rate, which is currently at a higher rate than what we think.
Charlie Strauzer: Got it. And just a sense of the average rate currently?
David Mutryn: Currently, it’s about 6%.
Charlie Strauzer: Great. Thank you very much.
Operator: Our next question is a follow-up from Bert Subin with Stifel. Please proceed.
Bert Subin: Hey, thanks for the follow-up. Just to piggyback on that question on the interest expense side. I guess where do you want that to go? $70 million, that’s quite a decline this year. But if I look back a few years, your interest expense was obviously much lower. But at what point do you stop paying down debt? And is something like share repurchases become more interesting?
