Josh Raskin: Okay – that’s helpful. Which ties to my second question, which is it sounds like a lot of the medical cost improvement is predicated on what you’re calling funding improvements or reimbursement improvements. So I’m trying to figure out how are you seeing a 15% to 16% improvement in funding in the first year of the 2022 members and yet your risk scores are still 1 to 1. I think you said 1.0 or 1.1. And again going back to that medical expense is a large majority of that improvement in risk coding or is some of that medical cost management too?
Sherif Abdou: Thanks, Josh. It’s a combination so – and number one, those percentage for the population that were there in 2022 and now still with us in 2023. It’s a combination of the benchmark improvement in the counties that we are in. In addition to the increase of a percentage of the dual eligible populations that comes with a higher funding and also our engagement with the chronic special need program, which also comes with a higher funding. So the – and the average of the risk scoring that I shared is across all population and – an annual average because at the end – as you very well know that there is a degradation over a period of time for population – the severely young population kind of depart and the new patients come in with the 0.8 average of risks.
So that modifies the risk score across all populations throughout an average year. So like I said, the overall population should increase 7.7% and the specific visits and population have shown an increase of 16% and that’s a combination between the risk scoring, the benchmark adjustment and the increase of dual risk population percentage in our population.
Josh Raskin: Okay. So and I want to make sure I get this clear, because I think it’s important. At 16% that you’re quoting in terms of increased PMPMs, that’s not risk coding, right or are there some component of that?
Sherif Abdou: Correct.
Josh Raskin: But that’s more mixed, okay. How much is the risk coding component of that 16% is there an estimate there?
Sherif Abdou: Yes. So it’s about 3% to 5% across all population, of course vary from one population to other, about 3% to 5% of that is – in risk adjustment.
Josh Raskin: Okay, that’s super helpful. Thanks again.
Operator: Thank you. Our next question today comes from Ryan Daniels at William Blair. Please go ahead.
Unidentified Analyst: Hi, guys. This is Jack on for Ryan Daniel. Thanks for taking my question. So just first, when looking at the cash burn, the fourth quarter looks to be slightly elevated and I understand fourth quarter is historically higher? But I’m curious how should we think about cash burn going forward in 2023 and I believe in your prepared remarks you said you expect to be cash flow positive in early 2024? So does 2023 get you mostly there where the cash burn tapers quite a bit or I guess just kind of how should we think about this going forward? Thanks.
Atul Kavthekar: Yes, Jack, that’s great question. So the way I would suggest you think about and I gave a little bit of an indication of sort of again the seasonality of EBITDA. And I think that that may be a reasonable proxy – for you to think about the burn as we progress through the year. But again, you can think of it as . We gave you EBITDA guidance, 40 to 60 loss over the course of the year. You should probably tack onto that when you think about burn, you should probably tack onto it. Roughly $20 million say of between cash interest, working capital changes as we go through the year. So you can think of that as sort of the entirety of the burn. And again, you can kind of map that out I think over in the quarters as you proportionate to your EBITDA, if that makes sense.
I think in the first quarter, especially as we went through managed our expenses. We were very careful. We were very aggressive in how we managed our cash and our research and we’ll continue do that of course. But I think you’d probably see a little bit of a less burn in the first quarter as compared to the next three.
Unidentified Analyst: Perfect. That’s great color. Thank you. Another quick question too. Are you guys seeing anything in terms of the pipeline for 2024? I know that for 2023. So pretty robust growth in that cohort class. And I know it’s really early and you’re not guiding beyond 2023, but I’m curious if you have any comments on the 2024 progression or if it’s on track at this point?
Sherif Abdou: Yes. We are very confident. Thanks for the question, Jack. And the pipeline is we have a clear line of sight for 2024 growth and especially in the counties and the states and the geographies that we are in today and providers that we’re engaged with today where they want to expand the relationship to all Medicare Advantage and all Medicare SEO patients that will be included in our platform coming 2024. So we have a clean line of sight for 2024 growth and we’re continuing to be very confident about it as well.
Unidentified Analyst: Okay. Understood. Thanks. And then one really just quick last question and this is going off Brooks question on demand. I’m curious you guys have seen any uptick in conversations with health systems. And if this is a segment you’re looking to pursue and maybe if you can just touch on the opportunity there? Thanks.
