Joshua Dennerlein: Yeah. Hi, everyone. Just kind of curious on that 2.2% operator, where you did the transition, it’s seems — it’s a little hard to tell, but it seems like there’s a rent cut associated with that transition. Could you kind of — could you clarify that if there is a rent cut and what the size is? And then I’d be curious to know if that’s kind of indicative of maybe how operators under 1 time covered. What kind of support they might need?
Dan Booth: Yeah. So I indicated the cut was about — well, the new rent, if you will, from all the transitions including the four that are still to come, we end up with rent approximately 77% of what it was previously, which is $17.3 million versus the old rent of $22.4 million, so call it, $5 million.
Taylor Pickett: And just to the second part of your question, is that indicative, I would be very careful kind of taking that as a broad brush analogy for other restructurings. I mentioned the 2.4% operator is in the process of transitioning and it will be no in rent there. We have done a smaller one that’s so small we don’t have to talk about it, Colorado assets and it was very much less than the discount we saw in this portfolio. This is a very old portfolio, the 2.2% portfolios, a very old portfolio that needed a lot of care and we are really happy to have moved it. But it’s not — I would not paint that brush across the rest of them what we are doing.
Joshua Dennerlein: Okay. That’s good color. And then I wanted to kind of ask on the public health emergency ending. It sounds like the FMAP funding got decoupled from that ending. Could you kind of provide more color on that and maybe how the end and the phase out of the FMAP that might impact your tenants in your portfolio?
Megan Krull: Yeah. I mean the FMAP is interesting, right, because the fact that they decoupled it from the public health emergency is actually beneficial, because then they can sort of have it phased down throughout the year. We don’t know what the states will do with that, right? Some of the states like Texas still have it in their language, have the FMAP tied to the public health emergency ending. So they will have to do something further to get that additional funding through the end of the year. But on the FMAP side, you have got — in our top 10 states, we have got Florida, Indiana, Ohio, Michigan, Pennsylvania, so five of our states that really didn’t have any FMAP rate. They might have given lump sums in the past or potentially those rates expired previously.
So there’s nothing affecting those ones. California had previously already announced that they were extending their 10% FMAP through the end of the year, so regardless of the public or the decoupling there through the end of the year. So they are good. Virginia has previously taken their FMAP rate and put it into their base rate and quality add-ons. So they had already sort of solved that problem previously, because at New York, we don’t have a skilled presence. So that leaves Texas and North Carolina, which is the 2 that we are watching. Both of them have pretty substantial FMAP that ramp with the public health emergency. Texas, as I have mentioned, has it slated to continue or to go into their rate with the September 1st rate setting. We will see if that gets finalized, but we are pretty hopeful that it does.
