NGA Global Payroll. With services in 188 countries, we are helping people aro...NGA Human Resources
This deck lays out the various benefits and components of NGA Global Payroll, a HR BPO solution for employers of multinational workforces who want to ensure global compliance, focus on their core business and leverage cloud technology to improve business outcomes. NGA Global Payroll connects cloud HR systems with payroll engines in 188 countries, through Payroll Exchange, NGA's services integration middleware platform.
NGA Global Payroll. With services in 188 countries, we are helping people aro...NGA Human Resources
This deck lays out the various benefits and components of NGA Global Payroll, a HR BPO solution for employers of multinational workforces who want to ensure global compliance, focus on their core business and leverage cloud technology to improve business outcomes. NGA Global Payroll connects cloud HR systems with payroll engines in 188 countries, through Payroll Exchange, NGA's services integration middleware platform.
How Aetna Mitigated 701 Malware Infections on Mobile DevicesSkycure
View webinar recording - http://hubs.ly/H06134H0
Learn how Aetna protects its corporate data from mobile threats while providing a better user experience and complying with strict industry regulations.
Understanding Risk Stratification, Comorbidities, and the Future of HealthcareHealth Catalyst
Risk stratification is essential to effective population health management. To know which patients require what level of care, a platform for separating patients into high-risk, low-risk, and rising-risk is necessary. Several methods for stratifying a population by risk include: Hierarchical Condition Categories (HCCs), Adjusted Clinical Groups (ACG), Elder Risk Assessment (ERA), Chronic Comorbidity Count (CCC), Minnesota Tiering, and Charlson Comorbidity Measure. At Health Catalyst, we use an analytics application called the Risk Model Analyzer to stratify patients into risk categories. This becomes a powerful tool for filtering populations to find higher-risk patients.
The Modern Care Management Team: Tools and Strategies Evolve, but the Outcome...Health Catalyst
The care management team concept has evolved over the last decade to be more patient- and data-driven. Truly modern care management teams—those that represent the future of care management—provide team-based care that is carefully planned, comprehensive, highly coordinated, data driven, evidence based, seamless, and patient centric. But what’s equally important as being patient-centric and patient-driven, is relying on a comprehensive, effective care management system—a suite of tools with features in five core competencies:
Data integration.
Patient stratification and intake.
Care coordination.
Patient engagement.
Performance measurement.
As the industry’s care management teams continue to evolve (e.g., using predictive analytics to proactively identify patients), their primary goal remains: achieving optimal outcomes for the patients they serve.
How Physicians Can Prepare for the Financial Impact of MACRAHealth Catalyst
If all goes according to plan, the first performance period for the new Medicare Access and Chip Reauthorization Act (MACRA) is just around the calendar corner. It’s a complicated reimbursement structure with multiple tracks that are guaranteed to reward with bonuses or inflict pain through penalties in CMS’s new zero sum game. To the physicians and practices that adopt this new program early and position themselves for the best fiscal outcomes, go the spoils. But for many smaller practices and those that consistently underperform, the outlook may be glum regardless. Here are some highlights of the new program and the financial impact it will have on clinicians and practices.
Why You Need to Understand Value-Based Reimbursement and How to Survive ItHealth Catalyst
There are clear signs the healthcare industry is in the midst of a shift to value-based reimbursement. The most noticeable signs are the recent and proposed 2015 rulings from CMS. There are four areas in value-based reimbursement that will be impacted by the end of 2015: the physician payment structure, bundled payments, Inpatient Prospective Payment Systems regulations, and commercial payers. To survive the shift to value-based reimbursement, it’s important for providers and payers to take three steps: provide access to rich data, share knowledge and learn from each other, develop strategies by doing assessments.
How to survive cms's most recent 3% hospital readmissions penalties increase Health Catalyst
Hospital readmissions rates are now at 3 percent, which means that health systems are feeling the financial burden of decreased payments from Medicare. They also need to track two more 30-day readmission rates. While there aren’t any new penalty measures planned for 2016, coronary artery bypass grafts will be added as yet another measure to track in 2017. By using three strategies to reduce readmission rates, health systems will experience better outcomes and decreased penalties. The three strategies include the following: (1) implementing a data warehouse that provides a single source of truth; (2) engaging a multidisciplinary team to lead the improvement efforts; (3) installing a sophisticated analytics platform.
Finding the perfect data governance environment is an elusive target. It’s important to govern to the least extent necessary in order to achieve the greatest common good. With the three data governance cultures, authoritarian, tribal, and democratic, the latter is best for a balanced, productive governance strategy.
The Triple Aim of data governance is: 1) ensuring data quality, 2) building data literacy, and 3) maximizing data exploitation for the organization’s benefit. The overall strategy should be guided by these three principles under the guidance of the data governance committee.
Data governance committees need to be sponsored at the executive board and leadership level, with supporting roles defined for data stewards, data architects, database and systems administrators, and data analysts. Data governance committees need to avoid the most common failure modes: wandering, technical overkill, political infighting, and bureaucratic red tape.
Healthcare organizations that are undergoing analytics adoption will also go through six phases of data governance including: 1) establishing the tone for becoming a data-driven organization, 2) providing access to data, 3) establishing data stewards, 4) establishing a data quality program, 5) exploiting data for the benefit of the organization, 6) the strategic acquisition of data to benefit the organization.
As U.S. healthcare moves into its next stage of evolution, the organizations that will survive and thrive will be those who most effectively acquire, analyze, and utilize their data to its fullest extent. Such is the mission of data governance.
Hospital Readmissions Reduction Program: Keys to SuccessHealth Catalyst
Avoidable readmissions are a major financial major problem for the healthcare industry, especially for government payers. To tackle this problem, CMS launched the Hospital Readmissions Reduction Program (HRRP). While some hospitals may be able to absorb the financial penalties under HRRP, they still need to track increasingly complex reporting metrics. Most tracking solutions are inadequate for today’s complicated reporting needs. A healthcare enterprise data warehouse and analytics applications, however, are designed to solve the numerous reporting burdens. When used together, they also deliver a robust solution that enables hospitals to track and drive real cost and quality improvement initiatives, all without the need for users to be technical experts.
The Medicare Access and CHIP Reauthorization Act (MACRA) overhauls the payment system for Medicare providers. It’s a complex program that requires careful study so physicians can make the best choice for how they want to report. This choice ultimately impacts reimbursement and the potential bonuses or penalties associated with each reporting option.
This FAQ covers both tracks of the new rule, the Merit-based Incentive Payment System (MIPS), and the Advanced Alternative Payment Model (APM), with a background review and a comprehensive list of questions and answers.
It’s a practical guide complete with next steps for strategic and tactical planning.
6 Steps for Implementing Successful Performance Improvement Initiatives in He...Health Catalyst
A systematic approach to performance improvement initiative includes three components: analytics, content, and deployment. Taking six steps will help an organization to effectively cover all three components of success. Step 1: Integrate performance improvement into your strategic objectives. Step 2: Use analytics to unlock data and identity areas of opportunity. Step 3: Prioritize programs using a combination of analytics and a deployment system. Step 4: Define the performance improvement program’s permanent teams. Step 5: Use a content system to define program outcomes and define interventions. Step 6: Estimate the ROI.
Improving Patient Safety and Quality Through Culture, Clinical Analytics, Evi...Health Catalyst
According to the Centers of Disease Control (CDC), an estimated 70,000 patients die each year from hospital-associated infections (HAIs): contrast the CDC statistic with the fact that only 35,000 people die each year in the U.S. from motor vehicle accidents. Learn key best practices in patient safety and quality including: patient safety as a team sport, the added challenges of healthcare being the most complex, adaptive system, and how culture, analytics, and content contribute to improve outcomes and lower costs.
How to Drive ROI In Your Healthcare Quality Improvement Projects Health Catalyst
At a time when average hospital’s margins are stagnating, executives should be asking tough questions about the ROI of "indispensable" technologies. Will new technologies prove their worth or drive them further into the red? How do you measure and track ROI?
We need to educate clinicians on financial metrics and finance people need to learn more about the clinical processes and outcomes. One of the historical problems with calculating ROI has been the fundamental culture divide between clinicians and finance. Gone should be the days that clinicians deliver care without knowing the financial cost of that care.
This slide set give practical advice on how to set goals, measure ROI and gives excel templates that are based on years of experience by the authors
Why Your Healthcare Business Intelligence Strategy Can't WinHealth Catalyst
Business intelligence may hold tremendous promise but it can’t answer healthcare’s challenges unless it’s built on the solid foundation of a clinical data warehouse. Learn the definition of business intelligence, why a clinical data warehouse is needed for any healthcare BI strategy, the various options in data warehousing, which one is most effective for hospitals and the industry and why.
The Key to Transitioning from Fee-for-Service to Value-Based ReimbursementsHealth Catalyst
The shift from fee-for-service to value-based reimbursements has good and bad consequences for healthcare. While the shift will ultimately help health systems provide higher quality lower cost care, the transition may be financially disastrous for some. In addition, the shifting revenue mix from commercial payers to Medicare and Medicaid is creating its own set of challenges. There are, however, three keys to surviving the transition: 1) Effectively manage shared savings programs to maximize reimbursement. 2) Improve operating costs. 3) Increase patient volumes. With an analytics foundation, health systems will be able to meet and survive today’s healthcare challenges.
5 Reasons Why Healthcare Data is Unique and Difficult to MeasureHealth Catalyst
Healthcare data is not linear. It is a complex, diverse beast unlike the data of any other industry. There are five ways in particular that make healthcare data unique:
1. Much of the data is in multiple places.
2. The data is structured and unstructured.
3. It has inconsistent and variable definitions; evidence-based practice and new research is coming out every day. 4. The data is complex.
5. Changing regulatory requirements.
The answer for this unpredictability and complexity is the agility of a late-binding Data Warehouse.
2. 2
Forward Looking Statements
This presentation and other written or oral statements made from time to time by ADP may contain “forward-looking
statements” within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Statements that are not historical in
nature and which may be identified by the use of words like “expects,” “assumes,” “projects,” “anticipates,” “estimates,” “we
believe,” “could” “is designed to” and other words of similar meaning, are forward-looking statements. These statements are
based on management’s expectations and assumptions and depend upon or refer to future events or conditions and are
subject to risks and uncertainties that may cause actual results to differ materially from those expressed. Factors that could
cause actual results to differ materially from those contemplated by the forward-looking statements or that could contribute to
such difference include: ADP's success in obtaining and retaining clients, and selling additional services to clients; the pricing
of products and services; compliance with existing or new legislation or regulations; changes in, or interpretations of, existing
legislation or regulations; overall market, political and economic conditions, including interest rate and foreign currency trends;
competitive conditions; our ability to maintain our current credit ratings and the impact on our funding costs and profitability;
security or privacy breaches, fraudulent acts, and system interruptions and failures; employment and wage levels; changes in
technology; availability of skilled technical associates; and the impact of new acquisitions and divestitures. ADP disclaims any
obligation to update any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise,
except as required by law. These risks and uncertainties, along with the risk factors discussed under “Item 1A. - Risk Factors”
in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2017 should be considered in evaluating any forward-
looking statements contained herein.
3. 3
CEO’s Perspective
• Solid first quarter revenue growth of 6% with
adjusted diluted EPS growth of 6% in the
quarter
• Quarterly retention improvement of 160 basis
points
• Robust PEO performance with 14% revenue
growth and 10% growth in average Worksite
Employees
• Continued investments in innovation, service,
and distribution
• Subsequent to quarter-end, announced
acquisition of Global Cash Card
4. 4
1Q Fiscal 2018 Financial Highlights
Total Revenues (unaudited)
Adjusted Earnings before Interest and
Taxes (EBIT) (unaudited) (a) (b)
Adjusted Diluted EPS
(unaudited) (a)
$0.86
$0.91$2.9B
$3.1B
$0.6B $0.6B
6%
(a) “Adjusted” results exclude charges/reversals related to Service Alignment Initiative during both fiscal 2017 and fiscal 2018, and charges associated with proxy contest matters during fiscal 2018
and certain other items described on slide 9. See appendix for reconciliation of non-GAAP financial measures to their comparable GAAP measures.
(b) Adjusted EBIT performance measures include interest income earned on investments associated with our client funds extended investment strategy and interest expense on borrowings related
to our client funds extended investment strategy. We believe these amounts to be fundamental to the underlying operations of our business model. Our calculation of adjusted EBIT may differ
from similarly titled measures used by other companies.
(c) “Organic” growth rates exclude foreign currency translation, the results of our fiscal 2017 acquisitions until their one year anniversary and the results of the CHSA and COBRA businesses which
were disposed of in fiscal 2017. See supplemental schedule to the earnings release for the reconciliation of organic growth rates to reported growth rates.
.
-3%
6% Reported
6% Organic(c)
5. 5
1Q Fiscal 2018 New Business Bookings and Segment Results
PEO Services
Worldwide New
Business Bookings
• Revenues h 2% Reported
h 3% Organic (a)
• Client revenue retention
h 160 basis points
• U.S. pays per control h 2.4%
• Average client funds balances h 6%
• Margin 110 basis points
Employer Services
• 3% compared with Q1 FY17
representing annualized
recurring revenues anticipated
from new orders
• Revenues h 14%
• Average worksite employees paid
h 10% to 484,000
• Margin 60 basis points
(a) “Organic” growth rates exclude the results of our fiscal 2017 acquisitions until their one year anniversary and the fiscal 2017 results of the CHSA and COBRA businesses
which were disposed of in fiscal 2017. See supplemental schedule to the earnings release for the reconciliation of organic growth rates to their comparable reported
growth rates.
6. 6
Fiscal 2018 Outlook
Revenues Margin Expansion Adjusted Diluted EPS (b)
Worldwide New
Business Bookings
U.S. Pays per Control
Adjusted Effective
Tax Rate (b)
%
%
h 5% - 7% compared to $1.65 billion
sold in fiscal 2017
h ~2.5% compared to 2.4%
increase in fiscal 2017
h 31.7% from 30.9% in fiscal 2017
h 6% - 8% Reported (a)
ES Revenue h 4% - 5% (a)
PEO Revenue h 11% - 13%
Adjusted EBIT Margin (b)
50 - 25 basis points
Expected to be below forecasted range
in 1H and above range in 2H
ES Margin 75 - 50 basis points
PEO Margin h 25 - 50 basis points
h 5% - 7%
Expected to be below forecasted range in
1H and above range in 2H
(a) Revenue growth includes about a one percentage point impact from the Global Cash Card acquisition
(b) “Adjusted” results exclude the gain on the sale of CHSA and COBRA businesses in fiscal 2017, charges/reversals related to the Service Alignment Initiative during fiscal 2017 and fiscal
2018, reversals related to the Workforce Optimization Effort in fiscal 2017, and charges related to proxy contest matters in fiscal 2018. See appendix for reconciliation of non-GAAP financial
measures to their comparable GAAP measures.
8. 8
Client Funds Portfolio Extended Investment Strategy
• Average Client Funds Balances h ~3% from
$23.0 billion in FY17 compared to the prior forecast
of h 2% to 3%
• Yield on the Client Funds Portfolio h ~20bps
compared to 1.7% in FY17
• Client Funds Interest Revenue h $45 to $55 million
from $397 million in FY17 compared to the prior
forecast of h $40 to $50 million
• Impact from Extended Investment Strategy
h $35 to $45 million from $431 million in FY17
compared to the prior forecast of h $30 to
$40 million Interest on the Extended Portfolio flows into two separate sections of the Statements of Consolidated Earnings.
(a) Reported as Interest on Funds Held for Clients in the revenue section of the Statements of Consolidated Earnings.
(b) A component of Interest Income on Corporate Funds, reported within Other Income, net, on the Statements of
Consolidated Earnings.
(a)
(b)
FY18 Forecast
Average
Balance
Average Yield
Client Funds
Interest
Client Short $4.5 – 4.6B ~1.2% ~$50M
Client Extended ~10.1B ~1.8% 185 – 190M
Client Long 9.0 – 9.1B 2.3% – 2.4% 210 – 215M
Total Client Funds $23.6 - $23.8B ~1.9% $445 - 455M
Corporate Extended Interest Income 3.2 – 3.3B ~1.8% ~60M
Borrowing Days Interest Expense 3.2 – 3.3B ~1.3% ~(40)M
FY18 Net Impact From
Client Funds Extended
Investment Strategy
$465 - 475M
9. 9
GAAP Reconciliations
In addition to our GAAP results, we use the adjusted results and other non-GAAP metrics set forth in the table below to evaluate our operating performance in the absence of certain
items and for planning and forecasting of future periods:
Adjusted Financial Measure U.S. GAAP Measures Adjustments/Explanation
Adjusted EBIT Net earnings - Provision for income taxes
- All other interest expense and income
- Gains/losses on non-operational transactions such as sales of businesses and assets
- Certain restructuring charges
- Non-operational costs related to proxy contest matters
See footnotes (a),(b) and (c) on page 10
Adjusted diluted earnings per share Diluted earnings per share EPS impacts of:
- Gains/losses on non-operational transactions such as sales of businesses and assets
- Certain restructuring charges
- Non-operational costs related to proxy contest matters
See footnote (b) and (c) on page 10
Adjusted effective tax rate Effective tax rate Tax impacts of:
- Gains/losses on non-operational transactions such as sales of businesses and assets
- Certain restructuring charges
- Non-operational costs related to proxy contest matters
Constant dollar basis U.S. GAAP P&L line items Determined by calculating the current year result using foreign exchange rates consistent with the prior year
Organic revenue growth Revenues -Impact of acquisitions
-Impact of dispositions
-Impact of foreign currency translation
Corporate extended interest income Interest income -All other interest income
Corporate interest expense-short-term financing Interest expense -All other interest expense
We believe that the exclusion of the identified items helps us reflect the fundamentals of our underlying business model and analyze results against our expectations, against prior
period, and to plan for future periods by focusing on our underlying operations. We believe that the adjusted results provide relevant and useful information for investors because it
allows investors to view performance in a manner similar to the method used by management and improves their ability to understand and assess our operating performance. The
nature of these exclusions are for specific items that are not fundamental to our underlying business operations. Since these adjusted financial measures and other non-GAAP metrics
are not measures of performance calculated in accordance with U.S. GAAP, they should not be considered in isolation from, as a substitute for, or superior to their U.S. GAAP
measures, and they may not be comparable to similarly titled measures at other companies.
10. 10
GAAP Reconciliations
Net earnings
(Continuing Operations, $ in millions, except per share data)
1Q FY18 As Reported Constant Dollar
All other interest expense (a)
All other interest income (a)
Service Alignment Initiative (b)
Adjusted EBIT
$401.5 $368.7 9% 8%
15.0 15.0
(6.3) (4.8)
$564.1 $578.8 (3%) (3%)
% Change
1Q FY17
Provision for income taxes 146.7 160.0
(3.3)
Adjusted EBIT Margin 18.3% 19.8%
Diluted EPS
Service Alignment Initiative (b)
$0.90 $0.81 11% 11%
0.05-
Adjusted diluted EPS $0.91 $0.86 6% 6%
Proxy contest matters (c) -10.5
-0.01
39.9
(a) We include the interest income earned on investments associated with our client funds extended investment strategy and interest expense on borrowings related to our client funds extended
investment strategy as we believe these amounts to be fundamental to the underlying operations of our business model. These adjustments in the table above represent the interest income and
interest expense that is not related to our client funds extended investment strategy and are labeled as “All other interest expense” and “All other interest income”.
(b) The majority of charges relating to our Service Alignment Initiative represent severance charges. Severance charges/(reversals) have been taken in the past and not included as an adjustment to get
to adjusted results. Unlike severance charges in prior periods, these specific charges relate to our broad-based, company-wide Service Alignment Initiative.
(c) Represents non-operational costs related to proxy contest matters.
Proxy contest matters (c)
11. 11
Fiscal 2018 Outlook - GAAP Reconciliations
Earnings before income taxes / margin (GAAP)
(Continuing Operations, $ in millions)
Twelve Months Ended
June 30, 2017
Fiscal 2018
Forecast
All other interest expense (a)
All other interest income (b)
Adjusted EBIT margin (Non-GAAP)
$2,531.1 20.4% ~(190) – (165)bps
59.3 +50bps
(22.4) (20)bps
$2,447.6 19.8% ~(50) – (25)bps
Service Alignment Initiative – F17 (e) (75)bps
Service Alignment Initiative – F18 (f) +20bps
Effective tax rate (GAAP)
Gain on sale of businesses – 2Q F17 (c)
31.5% 31.5%
Adjusted effective tax rate (Non-GAAP) 30.9% 31.7%
Service Alignment Initiative – F17 (e)
(0.0%)
-
Service Alignment Initiative – F18 (f)
+0.4%
+0.1%
Gain on sale of businesses – 2Q F17 (c) +170bps(205.4) (170)bps
Workforce Optimization Effort – 4Q F17 (d) +5bps(5.0) (5)bps
90.0 75bps
--
Workforce Optimization Effort – 4Q F17 (d)
(0.9%)
-
-
-
(a) No material impact is expected from change in all other interest expense in fiscal 2018.
(b) No material impact is expected from change in all other interest income in fiscal 2018.
(c) Second quarter fiscal 2017 impact from gain on the sale of CHSA and COBRA businesses.
(d) Fourth quarter fiscal 2017 impact of Workforce Optimization Effort adjustment is a reversal of the fiscal 2016 estimate and is not expected to recur in fiscal 2018. The majority of charges relating to Workforce Optimization Effort
represent severance charges. Severance charges have been taken in the past and not included as an adjustment to get to adjusted results. Unlike severance charges in prior periods, these specific charges relate to our broad-based,
company-wide Workforce Optimization Effort.
(e) Fiscal 2017 charges in connection with the Service Alignment Initiative.
(f) Expected impact of Fiscal 2018 charges in connection with Service Alignment Initiative.
(g) Expected impact of Fiscal 2018 charges in connection with proxy contest matters.
-
-
Proxy contest matters – F18 (g) - +0.1%
Proxy contest matters – F18 (g) - - +20bps
12. 12
Fiscal 2018 Outlook - GAAP Reconciliations
(Continuing Operations)
Twelve Months Ended
June 30, 2017
Fiscal 2018
Forecast
Diluted EPS (GAAP)
Gain on sale of businesses – 2Q F17 (a)
$3.85 18% (1)% - 1%
(0.27) (7%)
Adjusted diluted EPS (Non-GAAP) $3.70 13% 5% - 7%
Workforce Optimization Effort – 4Q F17 (b)
+7%
+0%(0%)
Service Alignment Initiative – F17 (c) +3% (3%)
Service Alignment Initiative – F18 (d) - +1%
(a) Second quarter fiscal 2017 impact from gain on the sale of CHSA and COBRA businesses.
(b) Fourth quarter fiscal 2017 impact of Workforce Optimization Effort adjustment is a reversal of the fiscal 2016 estimate and is not expected to recur in fiscal 2018. The majority of charges relating to our Workforce Optimization Effort
represent severance charges. Severance charges have been taken in the past and not included as an adjustment to get to adjusted results. Unlike severance charges in prior periods, these specific charges relate to our broad-based,
company-wide Workforce Optimization Effort.
(c) Fiscal 2017 charges in connection with the Service Alignment Initiative.
(d) Expected impact of Fiscal 2018 charges in connection with Service Alignment Initiative.
(e) Expected impact of Fiscal 2018 charges in connection with proxy contest matters.
(0.01)
Proxy contest matters – F18 (e) - +1%
0.12
-
-
13. 13
ADP Fiscal 2018 Guidance History
11/2/17 Forecast
(a)
7/27/17 Forecast (b)
Total ADP
Revenues h 6% - 8% Reported h 5% - 6% Reported
Adj. EBIT Margin
(c)
50 - 25 bps 50 - 25 bps
Adj. Effective Tax Rate
(c)
h Increase to 31.7% h Increase to 33.0%
Adj. Diluted EPS
(c)
h 5% - 7% h 2% - 4%
Employer Services (ES)
Revenues h 4% - 5% h 2% - 3%
Margin 75 - 50 bps 75 - 50 bps
Pays per Control h ~2.5% h ~2.5%
PEO Services
Revenues h 11% - 13% h 11% - 13%
Margin h 25 - 50 bps h 25 - 50 bps
Worldwide New Business Bookings h 5% - 7% h 5% - 7%
(a) Forecast contemplates the anticipated impacts of the disposition of COBRA and CHSA businesses and Global Cash Card acquisition in revenue and operating results.
(b) Forecast contemplates the anticipated impacts of the disposition of COBRA and CHSA businesses.
(c) “Adjusted” results exclude the gain on the sale of CHSA and COBRA businesses in fiscal 2017, charges related to Service Alignment Initiative during fiscal 2017 and fiscal 2018, reversals
related to the Workforce Optimization Effort in fiscal 2017 and charges related to proxy contest matters in fiscal 2018. See appendix for reconciliation of non-GAAP financial measures to
their comparable GAAP measures.