FY 2019-20 Proposed Overview and Budget Highlights

1. FY 2019-20 Proposed Overview and Budget Highlights Presented by John Petach, Finance Controller April 29, 2019

2. Agenda I. A Sample of Budget Updates From Around the State II. District Overview and the Process from Mission to Budget • District Overview Basic Facts • Board of Directors - Mission and Board Goals • Superintendent - Key Strategies • The Cabinet - Strategy Implementation – Allocating Resources Via the Budget • Everything Begins With People – 5 Year Staffing Trend III. Key trends “Seeing the forest through the trees” • Glimpse into Four Key District Trends with profound long term financial impacts • Enrollment – 5 Years and 10 Years • Special Education Child Count (SECC) – 5 Years • Public Employee Retirement System Costs – 4 Years • Chromebook Count/Implementation – Five Years • Key Student Performance Metric – Graduation Rates 2010-2018 IV. The 2019-20 Proposed Budget Summary Overview • Summary level discussion of the 2019-20 Proposed Budget

3. Section I Budget News From A Few Districts Around the State

4. 2019-20 Budget News From Around The State • Some districts haven’t had any public meetings on their 2019-20 Proposed Budgets yet • Portland Public 1J (41,326 Students) - $17 million shortfall • Adding 27 FTE to Licensed Special Education Staff, cutting 45 FTE Licensed non-special education staff, cutting 17 other FTE, and “other” cost reductions • Beaverton (41,135 Students)- $35 million shortfall • Reducing 200 licensed positions and approximately $15 million “other” cost reductions • Hillsboro (20,206 Students) - $9.6 million shortfall • Reducing 38 licensed FTE, 37.5 Classified FTE, 3 Administrators and “other” cost reductions • Bend LaPine (18,325) – Assuming increasing enrollment • Maintaining staffing and days • Salem Keizer (41,326) – Assuming increasing enrollment • Adding 9.75 FTE to Middle School, adding 22 FTE Special Education and adding 15 FTE Transportation (boundary adjustments)

5. Section II District Overview and the Process from Mission to Budget

6. The District Overview Basic Facts • Medford School District 549c was formed in 1959 encompassing approx. 370 square miles: • 23 school sites, 1.9 million square feet of facility space, over 276 acres of grounds • The District is currently comprised of 14 elementary schools, 2 middle schools, 2 high schools, 1 secondary alternative high school and 4 charter schools • The District is forecasting 1,290.36 FTE employees for fiscal 2019-20 • Our food service vendor, Sodexo, serves approximately 1.6 million meals and equivalent meals each year • Drivers for our transportation vendor, First Student, drive over 1.0 million miles per year transporting district students • The District staff and above listed facilities are projected to serve 14,270 students in 2019-20 for which the District receives 1.0 base weightings for state funding @ $8,187 per weighting • According to the most recent 2016 US Census Small Area Income Poverty Estimate (SAIPE) for school districts, the District has approximately (18.6%) living in poverty or 2,665students for which the District receives an extra 0.25 weighting for each qualifying student or 666.14 weightings (4.65%) for funding • 50.3% of our students qualify for free or reduced lunch • In the end, the district effectively gets extra funding for about 9.3% of students on free and reduced lunch • Approximately 900 students are projected to be English Language Learners (ELL) for which the District receives an extra 0.50 weighting for each qualifying student for funding or approximately 450 weightings • The District receives an extra 1.0 weighting up to 11% of total enrollment for students eligible for special education services. Based on recent growth trend, approximately 2,300 students or 16.1% are projected to be eligible for special education services for 2019-20.

7. Board of Directors District Mission • The District is governed by a publicly elected seven member Board of Directors who sets the District Mission, sets District Goals and hires and manages the District Superintendent • We are a high quality teaching and learning organization dedicated to preparing all students to graduate with a sound educational foundation, ready to succeed in post-secondary education, and to be contributing community members. District Goals • Foster Academic Excellence • Assure Equity for All • Improve 3rd grade reading proficiency • Increase high school graduation rate

8. Superintendent • The Superintendent, in collaboration with Board of Directors, Cabinet and Staff develops strategies to achieve Board Goals • The Superintendent has developed Six Key Strategies: • Increase quality student-teacher contact time • Continue to expand Career Pathways • Continue to expand dual and articulated credit offerings • Continue to expand instructional technology to improve 21st Century Learning • Improve education and operational effectiveness and efficiency • Educate the whole child by providing a multitude of social-emotional, behavioral and mental health supports

9. The Superintendents Extended Cabinet • Dr. Brian Shumate, Superintendent • Michelle Cummings, Chief Academic Officer • Brad Earl, Chief Operations Officer • Deborah Simons, Director of Human Resources • Tania Tong, Director of Special Education and Student Services • Kevin Campbell, Director of Secondary Student Achievement • Jeanne Grazioli, Director of Elementary Student Achievement • Terri Dahl, Supervisor of Federal Programs and School Improvement • Amy Tiger, District Athletic Director/Safety Coordinator

10. The Superintendent’s Cabinet - Strategy ImplementationEverything Begins With PeopleStaffing Trend 2014-15 to 2019-20 PB (Page 24) • The District is a service organization and as such people are its primary resource with over 80% of all spending on Wages and Payroll Benefits when charter school revenue pass through’s are excluded • To achieve the goals set out by the Board, The Cabinet has allocated resources to increase staffing by 197.47 FTE or 18.07% over five years • Largest FTE increase is in Instruction with 146.05 FTE or 18.27% increase • Largest percentage increase is in Direct Student Support up 21.48 FTE or 38.18% • The Cabinet, in collaboration with the Superintendent, Ad-Council and Staff prepares action plans and allocates budget resources to successfully implement key strategies

11. Section III Key trends “Seeing the forest through the trees”

12. Enrollment trend: Minimal Growth for 2019-20 (Page 17) • District enrollment has grown 2,729 ADMr or 23.6% over the last decade with Charter School enrollment growing from 100 to 1,733 and non Charter School enrollment growing 1,096 or 9.6% over the decade. If you exclude the estimated 500 ADMr increase in enrollment over the last decade from the movement to full day Kindergarten, non charter growth has been 596 or 5.2% over the decade resulting in a compound annual growth rate of 0.51%. • Statewide enrollment dropped in 2018-19. In light of this and trends we are seeing at the Medford School District, our growth projection for 2019-20 Proposed Budget is conservative. • The projected consolidated ADMr for the District in 2019-20 is up 20 or 0.14% from the 2018-19 projection of 14,250. Of the 20 ADMr increase, all growth is assumed to be in online school enrollment and will fund a 2.0 licensed FTE addition for that program.

13. Enrollment trend: Special Education Child Count (SECC*)(Page 34) • Reasons for SECC increase: • More students with Individualized Education Plans (IEP) are moving into the District (two year analysis being prepared by Student Services) • The Student Services assessment and evaluation team are identifying students more accurately and comprehensively than before • There is a significant increase in students eligible for Autism services • There is a hypothesis that there are some students currently eligible for SpEd (IEP) that should instead be on 504 plans • Actions: • Conduct an audit to identify and address cases in which students need 504 plans instead of an IEP • Review eligibility criteria for special education eligibility

14. 504 Plan vs Individualized Education Plan • There is some confusion regarding the similarities between a 504 plan and an Individualized Education Plan (IEP). While both are intended to help children with disabilities learn with adaptations to their needs, they take a different approach. • A 504 plan is intended for children with a wide range of disabilities who are, nevertheless, able to participate and succeed in a general education classroom. An IEP, on the other hand, is intended for children with a specific set of diagnoses who require special education services. • A 504 plan may include just one or two accommodations (a peanut-free environment, for example) that the school agrees to provide. An IEP is a legal document which includes objectives, goals, accommodations, and a description of an agreed-upon educational setting.

15. Enrollment trend: Special Education Child Count (SECC)(Page 34)How does 549c SECC % compare to other districts? Source: State Controllers 2019-20 ADMw forecast 03/15/19

16. Enrollment trend: Special Education Child Count (SECC)Financial Impact of 11% Cap on Individual Education Plans (IEP)(Pages 33-34) • Special Education spending across all sources, has grown $4.0 million or 20.6% over the last two years alone. • Special Education Child Count (SECC enrollment page 9 of this presentation) has grown 33.21% or 5 times as fast as total enrollment over the last four years, and is projected to increase 42.53% or 6.3 times as fast as total enrollment over the December 2014 to December 2019 five-year period. • Students eligible for Special education are projected to make up 16.1% of all students in 2019-20 up from 12.05% just five years ago. The extra state weighting for funding of special education (IEP) is limited to 11% of enrollment, therefore the District will not receive an extra weighting for funding for approximately 1/3 of the projected students eligible for Special Education in 2019-20. • Assuming 7% SECC growth for 2019-20, if the District were to receive an extra weighting for all special education students above the 11% cap, it would result in approximately (2301 SECC-(14,291*.11)) = 729 more weightings times $8,178/ADMw equals approximately $6.0 million unfunded mandate in 2019-20.

17. Enrollment trend: SECC and Non SECCDecember 2014 to December 2018

18. Enrollment Summary(Pages 12-17 of this presentation) • District wide non-charter enrollment growth over the last decade, excluding the increase from the movement to full day kindergarten in 2015-16, has been about 596 students or 0.51% growth per year From 2014-2018, Excluding 500 ADMr Growth From Shift to Full Day Kindergarten in 2015-16: • District wide enrollment has grown 382 students with more than 100% of the growth (461 students) coming from SECC • Non-SECC enrollment is declining.District wide non-SECC enrollment has dropped 79 students and non-SECC non charter has dropped 379 students or about 95 students per year • SECC enrollment has grown rapidly over the last five years, much faster than overall enrollment • The State of Oregon caps additional funding for SECC students at 11% of enrollment • The District SECC enrollment is over 11%, resulting in a projected unfunded mandate for 2019-20 services it is providing to special education students of approximately $6 million • The current unfunded mandate as of December 2018 is approximately $4.8 million

19. The State of the Oregon Public Employee’s Retirement System (PERS)Unfunded Actuarial Liability(UAL) • Milliman is the actuary for Oregon PERS • Milliman provided an update to the PERS Board in Dec. 2018 on earnings through 09/30/2018. The PERS system earnings were 0.48% for the previous year versus the targeted rate of 7.2%, bumping the UAL from $22.0 B to $26.6 B, and overall PERS system funding to 69% funded. • Why does the percentage the PERS system is funded matter? – PERS is limited in how much they can increase the employer contribution rates each biennium based on how much the plan is funded per PERS rate collar methodology • When the PERS plan is 70% or more funded, the rate employers pay can be increased by the greater of 3% of payroll or 20% of the current base rate each biennium • Between 60% and 70% funded – a graduated double rate collar is in effect meaning as the plan funding drops from 70% to 60% funded, the amount employer rates can increase each biennium goes up from 20% at 70% funded to 40% per biennium at 60% funded • When plan funding falls below 60% funded, the rate collar doubles to allow an increase of 6% of payroll or 40% of the current base rate whichever is greater

20. The State of the Oregon Public Employee’s Retirement System (PERS)Unfunded Actuarial Liability(UAL)

21. The State of the Oregon Public Employee’s Retirement System (PERS)Why does the earnings rate of PERS matter so much? PERS Funding Sources Projected Earnings Rates To PERS Board April 2017 The Oregon PERS Fund earned approximately 5.5% over the last decade Why did the PERS Board choose to reduce the earnings rate from 7.5% to only 7.2%? Almost three quarters of all funding for Oregon PERS from 1970-2015 came from investment earnings

22. The State of the Oregon Public Employee’s Retirement System (PERS)Medford 549c’s GASB 68 Share of UAL 06/30/18and Sensitivity to Earnings Rate Changes • Sensitivity of the District’s proportionate share of the net pension liability to changes in the discount rate – The preceding presents the District’s proportionate share of the net pension liability calculated using the discount rate of 7.20 percent, as well as what the District’s proportionate share of the net pension liability would be if it were calculated using a discount rate that is 1-percentage-point lower (6.20 percent) or 1-perentage-point higher (8.20 percent) than the current rate. • A 1% drop in the assumed earnings rate increases the liability 67% • PERS earned 0.48% versus target earnings of 7.2% last year. If the PERS fund earns 6.2% long term, the Districts share of the UAL is $188 million or 123% of the total general fund expenditures plus transfers out to other funds budgeted for 2019-20.

23. The State of the Oregon (PERS)Unfunded Liability – What is driving it?PERS Payout Projection

24. Oregon PERS UAL (Page 26)How is it impacting the Medford SD 549c General Fund? • Over the last four years, employer paid PERS contributions by the District have grown $8.0 million or 58.0% or 3.7 times as fast as salary and wages. In terms of dollars, PERS has grown $8.0 million, almost as much as salary and wages, which have grown $9.2 million or 15.7% over the same timeframe • If PERS employer contribution dollars had grown at the same rate as wages, 15.7% over the last four years, the District would be spending $5.9 million less per year on PERS in 2019-20 • PERS Sneak Peak 2021-23 - Costs are projected to go up an additional $5.2 million for each year or $10.4 million for the 2021-23 biennium assuming equal payroll based on projected increases in employer contribution rates

25. Impact of SpEd Unfunded Mandate and PERS Cost IncreasesOver the last 4-5 YearsHow much State School Funding is needed to Offset?What does this mean for the future? • There has been a $12 million loss in resources at Medford School District 549c in the last five years due to the combination of an estimated $6.00 million unfunded mandate for services provided to students eligible for special education and a $5.9 million increase in mandated PERS costs • How much additional K-12 State School Funding is necessary to backfill Medford 549c to make up for the preceding $12 million loss in resources? • If we assume Medford 549c is approximately 2.4% of all weighted enrollment (ADMw) in Oregon and additional funding would be allocated on this basis, the legislature would need to increase funding approximately $1 billion over the biennium from its current projected level of $8.8715 billion to $9.8715 billion to offset Medford 549c’s $12 million loss in resources over the last 4-5 years. ($500 million/per year additional funding times 2.4% = $12 million SSF increase for Medford 549c) • Assuming K-12 funding continues to grow 4-4.5 % per year over time, assuming PERS cost increases continue to grow at the current or higher rate and/or assuming SpEd unfunded mandates continue to grow in line with recent trends, the District is going to have to restructure/reduce overall services/staffing beginning with the 2021-23 biennium to balance the budget in 2021-22

26. 21st Century LearningImplementation of Chromebook Technology In the Classroom • The availability of classroom technology has increased rapidly over the last five years. The District has gone from 297 to 13,757 Chromebooks in five years. • The Non-Charter portion of the District has more Chromebooks 13,757 than students 12,517 • The total number of Chromebooks, Laptops, PC’s, printers and other mobile devices managed by NTS has more than doubled to approximately 23,000 but NTS staff has only increased 3 FTE over the same timeframe • Replacement cost of current Chromebook inventory $4.2M • Assuming a 4 year replacement cycle, Chromebook replacement costs will average $1.05 million per year assuming there is no additional increase in inventory

27. 21st Century LearningChromebook Curriculum and 1to1 Pilot • What is the value of a Chromebook to students without quality digital curriculum aligned to state standards? • There is a seven year cycle or curriculum adoptions (page 122) • The District has been purchasing/aligning digital curriculum typically buying books and digital curriculum with each new subject adoption • While there is more work to be done, most, but not all subjects, now have digital curriculum available • Digital Curriculum plus books costs about $100-$120/student or $1.3-$1.5 million per adoption • Electronic Curriculum, Books and technology cost approximately $2.35-$2.55 million per adoption • $1.3-$1.5 million for curriculum plus • $1.05 million for Chromebooks • Ninth grade one-to-one Chromebook pilot will launch in 2019-20 • Expands time in the learning day • Removes technology barriers for economically disadvantaged students

28. Key Student Performance Metric – Graduation Rates (Pages ii,7) • Despite the challenging and changing trends noted in the preceding pages, four year graduation rates have increased from 65.21% to 80.50% over the last five years • Said another way, in 2013-14 more than 1 out of 3 students were failing to graduate in four years. By 2017-18, more than 4 out of 5 students are graduating on time

29. Section IV The 2019-20 Proposed Budget Summary Overview

30. 2019-20 Proposed Budget HighlightsGeneral Fund • The 2019-20 Proposed Budget is balanced • This budget is primarily focused on maintaining existing services • District wide enrollment assumes very little growth • SpEd budgets assume relatively flat SECC, if SECC does increase substantially in line with recent trend, additional staffing will be necessary • The combination of $5.91million in increased funding and a $4.30 million reduction in transfers to other funds provides or frees up enough resources to maintain staff work days and increase staffing 16.47 FTE • Employee payroll benefit costs are increasing at a financially unsustainable rate driven primarily by higher PERS contributions and healthcare costs • Employee payroll benefits will increase $4.93 consuming 83% of this years revenue increase • No additional contributions to the PERS reserve are included in the Proposed budget

31. General Fund – Financial SummaryProposed Balanced Budget for 2019-20

32. General Fund Financial SummaryRevenue ( Page 14) • The Oregon State School Fund Co-chairs 2019-21 budget assumes $8.8715 billion or an 8.2% increase over the 2017-19 $8.2 billion budget, growing at 4.05% per year • For the District, Revenue is estimated to increase $5.91 million or 4.1% over prior budget and includes the assumption of a $0.5 million 2018-19 true up in 2019-20. In 2018-19, there was a $0.99 million or $0.49 million higher prior year revenue true up. If the prior year true ups were equalized in both years, adjusted revenue would be up $6.32 million or 4.4%. • Local sources, primarily property taxes, are up $1.25 million or 3.1%. • Primarily Property taxes up $1.16 million or 3.1% • Interest Income up $0.08 million due to higher interest rates • Intermediate sources are up $0.04 million or 1.38% essentially flat to prior year • State sources are up $4.6 million or 4.5%. • Net State School Fund (SSF) is up $4.6 million or 5.5% • All other state sources are flat year over year

33. General Fund Financial SummaryTransfers in from Other Funds (Page 14) • Transfers in from other funds are equal to last year at $1.4 million. • $1.4 million is being transferred in from the PERS reserve fund • After the $1.4 million transfer in 2019-20 there will be $2.0 million left in the PERS reserve fund

34. General Fund Financial SummaryBeginning Fund Balance (Page 14) • Beginning Fund Balance Reserves are estimated at $9.23 million down $1.35 million or 12.7% from prior year due to deficit spending in the prior year driven primarily by one time transfers out to other funds in 2018-19 that will be reduced in 2019-20 as detailed on page 44 of this PowerPoint presentation

35. General Fund Financial SummaryTotal Resources (Page 14) • Total Resources available are projected up $4.57 million or 2.9% due to combination of Revenue up $5.91 million, no change in transfers in from other funds and Beginning Reserves down $1.35 million as detailed on preceding pages.

36. General Fund Financial SummarySalaries and Wages (Page 21) • Salaries and Wages are up $2.94 million or 4.5% due to the combination of: • Step Wage Increase $1.2 million • Cost of Living Adjustment (2%) $1.2 million • Additional 16.47 FTE $0.82 million, includes 4.5 FTE transfer from Measure 98 • Instruction 8.0 FTE • Direct Instruction Support 5.0 FTE • General Support 3.47 FTE • Lower average Salaries due to attrition -$0.28 million savings

37. Staffing Changes for 2019-20Across All Funds (Pages 22-24) • Total Proposed FTE of 1,290.36 is up 10.97 or 0.86% from Current FTE of 1,279.39 • General Fund FTE of 1,169.2 is up 16.47 FTE or 1.4% from current FTE of 1,152.75 • Special Revenue Fund FTE are down 5.5 FTE or 4.3% to 121.15 from 126.65 • 4.5 FTE shifted from Measure 98 to the General Fund and one open position eliminated • The 10.97 FTE increase across all funds includes 6.0 FTE in Special Education and 4.97 FTE in non Special Education assignments • The 6.0 FTE increase in Special Education assumes no increase in SECC count and includes: • 2.0 FTE student success specialists in Early Intervening Services, 1.0 FTE Behavior Support in Psychological services and moving 3.0 FTE in Psychological Services in house (offset by reduction in professional contract services) • If the increasing SECC count trend continues in 2019-20, additional staffing may be necessary • The 4.97 FTE increase in non Special Education areas includes: • 2.0 FTE for Online School teachers in High School, 1.0 FTE Dual Language Coordinator, 1.0 FTE IT Analyst II, 1.0 FTE Help Desk Supervisor in Network and Telecom Services, 1.0 FTE Career Center and 0.47 FTE IMC Tech partially offset by a reduction of 1.0 FTE unfilled Check & Connect position and a 0.50 reduction in Certified at NMHS

38. General Fund Financial SummaryEmployee Payroll Benefits (Pages 25-26) • Employee Payroll Benefits are up $4.93 million or 12.2% • The $4.93 equates to 83% of the total revenue increase • PERS is up $3.84 million or 21.3% to $21.87 million • Approximately $3.2 million of the increase is due to increases in employer contribution rates • Approximately $0.64 million of the increase is due to higher wages 2019-20 • Healthcare is up $0.79 million or 5.1% based on preliminary estimates • Social Security and Medicare benefits are up $0.28 million driven by the higher 2019-20 wage base • All other benefits are up $.02 million year over year in total • Throughout the 2019-20 Proposed Budget book you will see the functional narrative regarding cost increases say “driven by ……and increases in PERS and other employee payroll benefits.” The increases to PERS and Healthcare noted above are the reason for this comment

39. General Fund Financial SummaryPurchased Services (Page 27) • Purchased Services are up $0.85 million or 3.1%. • Charter School Payments are up $0.45 million or 3.5% based on statutory pass through formula • Transportation is $0.18 million or 3.0%, 70% of increase is reimbursed by State School Fund • Utilities are up $0.16 million or 7% based on expected rate increases • Travel & Training is up $0.06 million – PLTW, Skills USA, Professional Development for Dual Language Program, Teachers College Writers Revolution, CPM (Algebra) • All other purchased services are equal to prior year in total

40. General Fund Financial SummarySupplies and Materials (Page 28) • Supplies and Materials are up $0.25 million or 4.6% • Software is up $0.275 million or 27.7% due primarily to $0.175 million for the new Synergy Student Information System, $0.076 for a new ELL software, $0.05 million PowerSchool maintenance transferred from other expense objects (page 28) partially offset by $0.026 in reductions spread across several smaller software packages • Excluding software, overall supplies and materials are down $0.025 million or $0.5%.

41. General Fund Financial SummaryCapital Outlay (Page 28) • Capital Outlay is down $70K due primarily to replacing a 35 year old delivery truck for $85K in the 2018-19 fiscal year.

42. General Fund Financial SummaryOther Expense Objects (Page 29) • Other objects are down $0.03 million or 3.7%. • $0.05 million transferred to software for PowerSchool maintenance • Excluding the Power School costs transferred to Software (page 26), costs are up $0.02 million or 2.0% due to inflation of dues/fees/memberships.

43. General Fund Financial SummaryTotal Expenditures (Page 20) • Total expenditures are up $8.87 million or 6.4% due primarily to the combination of a $2.94 million increase in Salaries and Wages (33%), $4.93 million increase in Employee Payroll Benefits (56%) and $0.85 million (10%) increase in purchased services noted in the preceding pages. Supplies and Materials, Capital Outlay and Other Objectsmake up the remaining $0.15 million increase (1%)

44. General Fund Financial SummaryTransfers Out to Other Funds (Page 29) • Transfers out to other funds are down $4.30 million or 50.1%. • Transfers to Capital Projects are down $2.92 million • $2.5 million less for Chromebooks • $0.59 million less for Synergy Student Information System • Partially offset by $0.17 more for other projects • Transfers to the PERS reserve are down $1.38 million based on 2018-19 transfers to PERS reserves not being budgeted for 2019-20. • The $4.28 million in transfers out to other funds for 2019-20 are going to Project Reserves $3.628 million (pages 116-122), Secondary Athletics $0.375 million (page 113), Physical Education Expansion (PEEK) $0.250 million (page 112)and Food Service Guarantee $0.025 million (page 110)

45. General Fund Financial SummaryContingency (Page 29) • Contingency is projected to be equal to prior year in dollars at $9.23 million but lower as a percentage of Revenue plus Transfers in for 2019-20 at 6.1% versus 6.3% in 2018-19.

46. Special Revenue Requirements Highlights (pages 105-124) • Requirements = Spending plus Reserves/Contingency

47. Other Funds Requirements Highlights (pages 125-131) • Requirements = Spending plus Reserves/Contingency

48. Next Steps • Email any questions or comments you have to Brad Earl by noon Wednesday May 8th • Brad will email all of you with the group email list in the next 24 hours • Next Budget Committee Meeting is Monday May 13th at 6 pm • 3rd Budget Committee Meeting (If needed) - Tuesday May 21st at 6 pm • Board Meeting: Public Hearing on the FY2019-20 Budget – Monday June 3, 7 pm • Board Meeting: Adoption of the 2019-20 Budget – Monday June 17, 7 pm