Yes, Daniel. Obviously, volumes are tracking as they are in line with projections. It’s still obviously very fluid and evolving, and there have been lots of puts and takes on the margin. But net-net, it has shaped up very much like we anticipated. In the prior quarters, we shared the color on the loss of a few client programs, some wins of a few new programs and then less visibility as you go down in market and all of that sort of rolled up, as you pointed out up to a 2% headwind that we communicated. Since then, we’ve had some new NSA-related wins. The savings identified, as I mentioned, with QPA-based pricing have been meaningful, perhaps slightly more than what we were projecting. But on the other hand, the overall volume picture, as we said, has been slightly weaker. So when you factor in all the original color we provided and how it’s evolved since then, it’s very much tracking to the expectations of that of the 2% headwind. Relative to the – your question about the final ruling, it’s still much – it’s still very much up in the air, right? The latest addition was the Texas ruling, which was for air ambulance claims and made the QPA no longer the primary factor variable but made it equal put it on equal footing with the other variables. And so we would expect that we’re anticipating that when the final rule comes out, it will likely mirror what’s there. But if not, we’re prepared either way. I mean, with our data, with our data science, we’re in a great position to support our clients throughout the entire end-to-end process of surprise billing. From the start in terms of identifying surprise bill, repricing them either at QPA or some other methodology, performing all the analytics, performing the postpaid negotiation and then ultimately, working with them on the IDR process. So no matter which way the rules go, and we think they’ll come out more balanced, we’re ready.