Okay. So it now that we've kind of walked away through the beginning parts of the process, and we've committed to what we're, what skills, characteristics, values, we let me not say values, but what skills characteristics experiences we value, then there's the intentional alignment piece and identifying where we can, where we can make sure that all of our questions and the components of our process align there. So just a couple of examples. First, so my program does an interview process. And we have the just general packet that applicants submit to us before we add invite a select group of folks to to interview with us. So when they submit their packet, first, we'll ask them to complete or submit a CV, a questionnaire and the questionnaire includes questions that are designed to speak to their reason for being interested in the program. Just helping us learn a little bit more about them and their skills and experiences. We do still ask for recommendations. And I know that's something that we we differ on right now. Recently, my the graduate school went from requiring three recommendations to two so that's there's some wiggle room there. But one of the things that as of this admission cycle we've we've changed is that instead of doing an open ended, kind of unguided recommendation, we went to asking people to submit recommenders names or you know, whenever they type their recommenders names into the application site, it'll send them a questionnaire, and the questionnaire is meant to be completed, they just go through and rate the applicant based on a number of specific characteristics. And so these characteristics, we actually pulled directly from some of the disposition literature. Right. And so we thought, well, that's another opportunity to to make sure there's alignment between dispositions and what they're going to be evaluated on, throughout the program, and at admissions. Right, because admissions, starting way at the beginning of the process is actually our first opportunity to gatekeeper right, we make sure it's an opportunity to think about potentially catching some potential dispositional issues right from the beginning, rather than allowing people at the entrance into the program, and then it being much more challenging to remediate. So what are those things that we can pick up on are right at the beginning of the process? So the other thing that I really like about the decision to transition from the open ended just letter is that typically, when people write those letters, they say very, you know, common things. So instead of was a hard worker, they were they contributed consistently to class. They worked with me on a project. Okay, those those are all wonderful things, and how do we use that information to, to aligned with, right, what are those identified skills and traits and blah, blah, blah, right? We can't really, and when you have about 200 of them, and you're reading all the same, the same statements, how how are you able to gauge who's a stronger candidate based on that? Right? So the theory is that making the transition to using a standardized tool might actually help reduce bias, in some ways to because everybody's being evaluated with this same same measurement. That's just one example. Yeah, no, I