Customize your view of this lesson. Use the checkboxes below to filter activities in or out.

  • Photograph of Henry Kissinger, Leonid Brezhnev, President Ford, and Andrei Gromyko outside the American Embassy in Helsinki, Finland on July 30, 1975.

    Students read a case study describing the Helsinki Accords and the decision that President Ford made to sign the accords. In small groups, they brainstorm a list of stakeholders affected by the accords, take on the role of one of these stakeholders, and write a decision statement from the perspective of that stakeholder.

      1 hr Directions
    1. Activate students' prior knowledge about decision-making.

    As an entry ticket, have students quickly write about a significant decision they have made recently. Invite volunteers to share their responses with the class, and discuss. Guide the conversation by asking: How did you make the decision? What things did you consider? Who did your decision affect? Who did you ask for help in making the decision? Discuss the different ways students made their decisions and what factors were most important to them.

     

    2. Introduce the topic of President Gerald R. Ford and the Helsinki Accords.

    Ask students to quickly brainstorm, on paper, what they know about presidential decisions. Collect students’ papers to review as a formative assessment. Then discuss presidential decision-making as a class. Ask: In what ways do you think presidential decisions are similar to the decisions you make? In what ways are they different? Explain that presidential decisions can have an impact on people around the world and for years to come. Tell students that, throughout this lesson, they will focus on an important decision that President Gerald Ford made in 1975. Play the provided video clip from the documentary Gerald Ford: A Test of Character. Discuss the clip as a whole class. Ask: What were the Helsinki Accords? Why were they important?


    3. Have students read and discuss the case study.

    Distribute a copy of the handout Case Study: The Helsinki Accords to each student and have students read the Introduction, Geography, Assessment, and Conflict sections independently. Have students annotate the case study by highlighting key points, marking any unfamiliar vocabulary, asking any questions of the material, and briefly summarizing each section. When students have finished reading, discuss the reading using the following prompts:

    • What was going on in the world politically at the time the Helsinki Accords were signed?
    • What were some of the key ideas covered by the accords?
    • How did the Soviet Union’s goals in signing the accords differ from those of the U.S. and its allies?


    4. Have students write a decision statement from the perspective of one of the stakeholders in the decision.

    Ask students to work in their small groups to brainstorm all of the people involved in President Ford’s decision to sign the Helsinki Accords. Explain that these people are considered stakeholders in the decision. Ask groups to share their ideas with the class and write these ideas on the board. Assign a stakeholder from the case study to each group and ask them to read the section of the case study pertaining to their assigned stakeholder. Then, have each group draft a decision statement from the perspective of their assigned stakeholder. Groups’ decision statements should include whether or not the stakeholder would want President Ford to sign the accords, why they feel this way, and how President Ford’s signing the accords would affect them.


    5. Invite groups to share their decision statements with the class.

    Write “For signing the accords” and “Against signing the accords” on the board. Have each group read aloud their decision statement to the class. As they read, write their stakeholder under the appropriate heading. Discuss the similarities and differences in the stakeholders’ opinions. Ask: What were some of the most commons concerns about the accords? What were some of the most common reasons in favor of signing the accords? Collect students’ annotated copies of the case study and their decision statements and keep them for use in Activities 3 and 4 of this lesson.


    6. Have students reflect on the process they used to make their decisions.

    In their small groups, ask students to discuss the process they used in making their decision. Then have each student write their thoughts about the decision-making process on a separate sheet of paper. Have them consider these questions: What factors were most important to you in making your decision? What was difficult about making the decision? What were some factors that you considered but ultimately decided were not important to your decision? Explain. When students have finished their reflections, preview the type of thinking they will do in Activity 2 by discussing what it might be like to have to consider all the various stakeholders’ points of view when making the decision. Ask: Do you feel that you could come to a decision that would satisfy all stakeholders? Why or why not?

    Alternative Assessment

    Assess groups’ written decision statements. Look for evidence of a general understanding of the historical importance and complexity of the Helsinki Accords, as well as an understanding of the perspective of their assigned stakeholder. Informally assess individual students based on their participation in the discussions and their written reflection statements.

    Extending the Learning

    Have students make a current-event connection to a significant decision in the news, using a modified version of the prompts in Step 1.

    In Activity 1, students were introduced to President Gerald R. Ford’s 1975 decision to sign the Helsinki Accords and identified the stakeholders in that decision. In Activity 2, students will build additional background knowledge of the geographic and political context of President Ford’s decision.

    Photograph of President Ford addressing the Conference on Security and Coo[eration in Helsinki, Finland.

    Students compare maps of Europe before WWII and at the time the Helsinki Accords were signed to better understand the geographic context of the Helsinki Accords. They read and annotate three of President Ford’s speeches about the Helsinki Accords. They then complete a table to analyze the influence each stakeholder had on President Ford’s decision to sign the Helsinki Accords.

      1 hr Directions

    Tips & Modifications

    Tip

    In Step 2, note that because the borders of Soviet Socialist Republics are delineated on the 1977 map, students may not at first see that Lithuania, Estonia, and Latvia are part of the Soviet Union. If necessary, clarify this for students.

    Modification

    In Step 3, consider having students use the annotated version of President Gerald R. Ford’s Address in Helsinki Before the Conference on Security and Co-operation in Europe. This version is on note cards and includes President Ford’s original markings and annotations. 

    1. Discuss students' experiences making a decision from a stakeholder's perspective in the previous activity.

    Have students form new groups that include at least one student from each of the groups in Activity 1. Use the following prompts to facilitate discussion within these new groups:

    • What factors influenced your stakeholder to make the decision?
    • Did you feel that your stakeholder’s decision was balanced? Why or why not?
    • Did you learn anything from another stakeholder that you didn’t know or hadn’t considered when making your decision?
    • Do you think that new information may have persuaded your stakeholder to make a different decision? Why or why not?

    Have each small group write a brief summary of their discussion and share it with the whole class. Briefly discuss the summaries. Ask students to describe how a presidential decision would be different from the ones that they made as stakeholders. Elicit from students that presidents must consider the opinions of all stakeholders when making a decision.

     

    2. Have students investigate the geographic context of President Ford’s decision to sign the Helsinki Accords by examining maps of Europe before and after World War II.

    Have students work in their original small groups from Activity 1 to compare the 1939 map of Europe prior to the beginning of WWII with the 1977 one of Europe during the Cold War after WWII. Have groups open the maps in two separate windows on their computers to make comparison easier. Project the maps as well, and demonstrate how to zoom in and make the maps full screen. As groups compare the maps, ask them to create a list of the major differences they see. Then have them each write a summary of how the geography of Europe changed after WWII. Discuss the differences students noted between the two maps, referencing the projected map. Ask students to identify NATO and Warsaw Pact countries on the 1977 map. Point out where the “line” was that divided NATO countries and Warsaw Pact countries. Ask: Which NATO countries border Warsaw Pact countries? Which Warsaw Pact countries and territories border NATO countries? Why would these places be strategically important?


     3. Model how to analyze a president’s speech to gain additional understanding of the presidential decision-making process.

    Explain to students that they can gain perspective on all the opinions and concerns Ford had to consider in his decision to sign the Helsinki Accords by analyzing speeches he gave on the subject to different audiences. Distribute to each student a copy of the press release version of President Gerald R. Ford’s Address in Helsinki Before the Conference on Security and Co-operation in Europe. Ask them to follow along as they listen to an audio recording of Ford’s speech and to pay particular attention to the reasons Ford gives for supporting the accords. Play the audio of the speech and have students highlight the written version as they listen. Distribute the Analyzing a Political Speech worksheet. Model how to analyze the speech by having students answer the questions posed on the worksheet as a class. Ask: When did Ford give this speech? What was the context in which Ford gave this speech? What was the purpose of his speech? Who was his primary audience? Who was his secondary audience (if applicable)? What were some ideas, concerns, or declarations Ford made in this speech? How did the points Ford made in his speech address his audience and their concerns?


     4. Have groups analyze two additional speeches Ford gave related to the Helsinki Accords.

    Distribute the text of President’s Departure Statement, given on July 26, 1975, to half of the small groups and Presidential Remarks, Meeting With Americans of Eastern European Background, given on July 25, 1975, to the other half. Have each group read and analyze the speeches as they did in Step 3, using the Analyzing a Political Speech worksheet. When groups have completed their analysis, invite them to share their thoughts with the class. Discuss the similarities and differences among the three speeches. Ask: Were there any points Ford made in one speech that he did not make in the others? Did any of the speeches push some themes more strongly than others? Why would that be the case? How did he change his speeches for different audiences? Note students’ responses on the board.

     

     5. Have students explore stakeholders’ influences on the president’s decision-making process.

    Ask students to think about the speeches they analyzed. Ask: Looking at the speeches together as a whole, which stakeholders’ concerns does Ford seem to be addressing in these speeches? What does this tell you about which stakeholders’ opinions Ford was most concerned with? Distribute the Stakeholder Table to each group. Model how to use the table by filling in the first row with the class. Then have groups complete the rest of the table. Return students’ annotated copies of the case study from Activity 1. They can refer to the case study, maps, and speeches as they work.

     

     6. Discuss which stakeholders have the most influence on the president’s decision to sign the accords.

    Ask groups to share which stakeholders had the most influence on the president’s decision and which had the least. Have them offer evidence to support their ideas. This should provide the starting point for a discussion about stakeholder influence and presidential decision-making. Ask students to take notes throughout the discussion. Collect students’ map notes, speech analyses, annotated case studies, and Stakeholder Tables for use in the final activity of this lesson.

    Alternative Assessment

    Use students’ summaries from Steps 1 and 2, Stakeholder Tables, speech analyses, and notes as a formative assessment. Before moving on to the next activity, provide students with any additional support they may need.

    Extending the Learning

    • Have students identify the stakeholders in a current event involving an important presidential decision.
    • Have students read or listen to a speech by the current president of the United States and analyze it as they analyzed Ford’s speeches in this activity.
    • Have students read through President Ford’s annotated version of his speech in Helsinki, provided above. Discuss what the markings on the speech might mean to President Ford. Have students follow along on Ford’s copy of the speech as they list to the audio version. Discuss how the marks on the speech correspond with the President’s delivery.

    In Activity 2, students learned about the geographic and political contexts of President Ford’s decision to sign the Helsinki Accords, and they identified the relative importance of each stakeholder’s opinion. In Activity 3, students will use a web-based interactive to review the previous activities, and they will explore the cascading consequences of President Ford’s decision by creating a consequences web.

    Photograph of the U.S. Delegation during the opening of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe.

    Students review what they learned in the previous activities using the web-based interactive You Decide: Presidential Decisions. They then create a consequences web to graphically illustrate the cascading consequences of President Ford's decision to sign the Helsinki Accords.

      1 hr Directions
    1. Review students’ discussion of stakeholder influences from the previous activity.

    Introduce students to the web-based interactive You Decide: Presidential Decisions. Divide them into small groups and have groups select and play through the Helsinki Accords scenario to review what they learned in previous activities. Ask students to recall which stakeholders they felt had the most influence and the least influence on Ford’s decision to sign the accords. Ask how the maps and speeches they examined helped them reach their decisions. Explain that in addition to stakeholders’ opinions, presidents also need to consider the consequences their decisions might have on those stakeholders.


    2. Have students create a consequences web to show the consequences of President Ford’s decision on various stakeholders.

    Divide students into the same small groups they formed in Activity 1 and distribute each group’s copy of the case study they annotated in Activity 1. Have them re-read the case study in its entirety and highlight any consequences to stakeholders that they note. Next, model how to make a consequences web by drawing a square in the middle of the board and writing “Ford signs the Helsinki Accords” in the square. Then draw a circle and connect it to the square with a line. In the circle write “consequence 1.” Explain that students should draw as many circles as they need to list the consequences of Ford’s decision that were described in the case study. Then model how to illustrate additional effects of the decision. Draw a line from one of the circles to a new circle. In the new circle write “additional effect.” Have students work with their groups to draw a consequences web based on what they read in the case study and in the interactive and the cascading consequences they think the decision will create.


    3. Use a historical perspective to add to the consequences web.

    Explain that since Ford’s decision happened over forty years ago, we can look at it with a historical perspective, which makes it easier to track the cascading effects of his decision. Have students read some of the provided secondary resources with a historical perspective on Ford’s decision and use the resources to refine their consequences web, adding new effects or removing or revising ones they predicted.


    4. Have students reflect on the consequences of Ford’s decision.

    Have each group place their consequences web on their table or desk. Have students walk around the room and view other groups’ webs. Discuss with the class how the webs are similar and different. Ask:

    • Do you think groups captured all the intended and unintended consequences of Ford’s decision? Why or why not?
    • What effects might have been left out of the case study and/or the secondary sources you read online?
    • Were consequences to all stakeholders represented in those resources? If not, which stakeholders are left out of these accounts? Why do you think this is true?

    Ask students to take notes on the discussion and collect their notes and consequences webs to use in the next and final activity in this lesson.

    Alternative Assessment

    Use students’ consequences webs as a formative assessment of students’ thinking.

    Extending the Learning

    Have students create a consequences web for an important decision currently being covered by the national or local media.

    In Activity 3, students created a consequences web to explore the cascading consequences of President Ford’s decision to sign the Helsinki Accords. In the final activity, students will synthesize what they learned in the previous activities and write a formal decision statement.

    Photograph of President Ford addressing delegates during the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe.

    Students synthesize all the information they have gathered in previous activities to write a new decision statement. They then reflect on the similarities and differences between this decision statement and the one they wrote in the first activity from the perspective of a particular stakeholder.

      1 hr Directions
    1. Review and discuss all previous activities in this lesson.

    Briefly review what students learned in Activities 1-3, using the provided President Ford and the Helsinki Accords photo gallery. For each photo in the gallery, review what students learned about the related content in the caption. Explain that in this activity, students will put together everything they learned in the previous activities to write a new decision statement. Place students in the same small groups they worked with in Activity 1, and return students’ annotated case studies, Stakeholder Tables, consequences webs, and notes from the previous activities. Explain that they will use their work in previous activities as evidence in their final decision.


    2. Have students review the information they gathered on stakeholders in President Ford’s decision to sign the Helsinki Accords.

    Distribute a copy of the Your Decision Statement worksheet to each group. Have them use the information they gathered in Activities 1-2 to complete Part 1 of the worksheet. They should refer to the case study, as needed, and to their Stakeholder Table as a reminder of what they learned.


    3. Have students analyze the effects President Ford’s decision had on various stakeholders.

    Have students review the consequences webs they created in Activity 3. Then have them complete Part 2 of the Your Decision Statement worksheet to identify the main consequences for each stakeholder.


    4. Have students write a decision statement.

    Have students use the information they have gathered and summarized in Parts 1 and 2 of the Your Decision Statement worksheet to write a final decision statement. Explain that students can use the decision President Ford made for their decision statement or make their own decision based on what they have learned. Explain that students’ decision statements must include their decision, a rationale for their decision with evidence to support it, and identification of which stakeholders will be negatively impacted and which will be positively impacted by their decision. When students have completed their decision statements, collect them for formal assessment of the full lesson.


    5. Have students reflect on the decision-making process.

    Ask students to compare their final decision statement with the one they wrote in Activity 1 from the perspective of a single stakeholder. Ask:

    • Did your decision change? If your decision did not change, why?
    • What information did you learn throughout the activities that influenced your final decision?
    • How is a president’s decision-making process different from the decision-making process of one stakeholder? Explain.

    Have each student respond in writing to the following prompt: How did analyzing the presidential decision-making process help or hinder you in making your final decision?

    Extending the Learning

    Students can apply what they have learned about presidential decisions and the decision-making process to analyze other important historical or contemporary decisions.

    Allow time for students to explore the other two decision scenarios in the web-based interactive You Decide: Presidential Decisions.

    Alternative Assessment

    Use students’ final decision statements to formally assess their learning. Students’ decision statements should include their decision, a rationale for their decision with evidence to support it, and identification of which stakeholders will be negatively impacted and which will be positively impacted by their decision.

  • Subjects & Disciplines

    • Geography
    • Language Arts
      • Reading
      • Writing (composition)
    • Social Studies
      • United States history
      • World history

    Objectives

    Students will:

    • identify the stakeholders in President Ford’s decision to sign the Helsinki Accords
    • make a decision about signing the Helsinki Accords from the perspective of one of the stakeholders
    • describe the political and geographic context of President Ford’s decision to sign the Helsinki Accords
    • identify and analyze the influence each stakeholder had on Ford’s decision-making
    • identify the consequences of President Ford’s decision to sign the Helsinki Accords
    • determine which consequences were intended and which were unintended
    • rate each stakeholder’s influence on President Ford’s decision to sign the Helsinki Accords
    • rate the consequences of President Ford’s decision on each stakeholder
    • make a decision about signing the Helsinki Accords from their own perspective

    Teaching Approach

    • Learning-for-use

    Teaching Methods

    • Brainstorming
    • Cooperative learning
    • Discussions
    • Information organization
    • Modeling
    • Multimedia instruction
    • Reading
    • Reflection
    • Simulations and games
    • Writing

    Skills Summary

    This lesson targets the following skills:



    Connections to National Standards, Principles, and Practices

      IRA/NCTE Standards for the English Language Arts

      • Standard 1: Students read a wide range of print and nonprint texts to build an understanding of texts, of themselves, and of the cultures of the United States and the world; to acquire new information; to respond to the needs and demands of society and the workplace; and for personal fulfillment. Among these texts are fiction and nonfiction, classic and contemporary works.

      National Council for Social Studies Curriculum Standards

      • Theme 2: Time, Continuity, and Change
      • Theme 3: People, Places, and Environments

      National Geography Standards

      • Standard 1: How to use maps and other geographic representations, geospatial technologies, and spatial thinking to understand and communicate information
      • Standard 13: How the forces of cooperation and conflict among people influence the division and control of Earth's surface
      • Standard 17: How to apply geography to interpret the past
      • Standard 4: The physical and human characteristics of places
      • Standard 5: That people create regions to interpret Earth's complexity

      National Standards for History

      Common Core State Standards for English Language Arts & Literacy

      • CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RH.11-12.1: Cite specific textual evidence to support analysis of primary and secondary sources, connecting insights gained from specific details to an understanding of the text as a whole.
      • CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RH.9-10.1: Cite specific textual evidence to support analysis of primary and secondary sources, attending to such features as the date and origin of the information.
      • CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RH.9-10.9: Compare and contrast treatments of the same topic in several primary and secondary sources.
      • CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RI.9-10.7: Analyze various accounts of a subject told in different mediums (e.g., a person's life story in both print and multimedia), determining which details are emphasized in each account.
      • CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RI.9-10.9: Analyze seminal U.S. documents of historical and literary significance  (e.g., Washington's Farewell Address, the Gettysburg Address, Roosevelt's Four Freedoms speech, King's "Letter from Birmingham Jail"), including how they address related themes and concepts.
      • CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.SL.9-10.1: Initiate and participate effectively in a range of collaborative discussions (one-on-one, in groups, and teacher-led) with diverse partners on grades 9-10 topics, texts, and issues, building on others' ideas and expressing their own clearly and persuasively.
      • CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.WHST.11-12.4: Produce clear and coherent writing in which the development, organization, and style are appropriate to task, purpose, and audience.
      • CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.WHST.9-10.4: Produce clear and coherent writing in which the development, organization, and style are appropriate to task, purpose, and audience.
      • Reading Standards for Informational Text 6-12: Delineate and evaluate the reasoning in seminal U.S. texts, including the application of constitutional principles and use of legal reasoning (e.g., in U.S. Supreme Court majority opinions and dissents) and the premises, purposes, and arguments in works of public advocacy (e.g., The Federalist, presidential addresses).
      • Reading Standards for Informational Text 6-12: Integrate and evaluate multiple sources of information presented in different media or formats (e.g., visually, quantitatively) as well as in words in order to address a question or solve a problem.
      • Reading Standards for Literacy in History/Social Studies 6-12: Integration of Knowledge and Ideas, RH.11-12.7
      • Speaking and Listening Standards 6-12: Comprehension and Collaboration, SL.11-12.1
      • Speaking and Listening Standards 6-12: Comprehension and Collaboration, SL.9-10.1
      • Writing Standards 11-12: Produce clear and coherent writing in which the development, organization, and style are appropriate to task, purpose, and audience. 
      • Writing Standards 6-12: Range of Writing, W.11-12.10
      • Writing Standards 6-12: Text Types and Purposes, W.9-10.1
      • Writing Standards 6-12: Range of Writing, W.9-10.10
      • Writing Standards 6-12: Text Types and Purposes, W.11-12.1
      • Writing Standards 9-10: Produce clear and coherent writing in which the development, organization, and style are appropriate to task, purpose, and audience. 

      The College, Career & Civic Life (C3) Framework for Social Studies State Standards

      • Causation and Argumentation: D2.His.14.3-5: Explain probable causes and effects of events and developments.
      • Causation and Argumentation: D2.His.14.9-12: Analyze multiple and complex causes and effects of events in the past.
      • D2.Civ.13.9-12: Evaluate public policies in terms of intended and unintended outcomes, and related consequences
      • D2.Civ.14.9-12.: Analyze historical, contemporary, and emerging means of changing societies, promoting the common good, and protecting rights.
      • D2.Civ.3.9-12: Analyze the impact of constitutions, laws, treaties, and international agreements on the maintenance of national and international order
      • D2.His.1.9-12: Evaluate how historical events and developments were shaped by unique circumstances of time and place as well as broader historical contexts
      • D2.His.4.9-12.: Analyze complex and interacting factors that influenced the perspectives of people during different historical eras.
  • What You’ll Need

    Required Technology

    • Internet Access: Required
    • Internet access: Required
    • Tech Setup: 1 computer per classroom, 1 computer per small group, Projector, Speakers

    Physical Space

    • Classroom

    Setup

    Arrange the space so students can work in small groups.

    Arrange the space so students can work in small groups. 

    Arrange the space so students can work in small groups. 

    Arrange the space so students can work in small groups. 

    Grouping

    • Large-group instruction

    Accessibility Notes

    • None

    Other Notes

    In Activity 1, Step 5: Collect students’ annotated copies of the case study and their decision statements and keep them for use in Activities 3 and 4 of this lesson.

    In Activity 4, Step 1: Students will need access to all previously completed work for this lesson.

    In Activity 3, Step 2: Students will need to regroup into their original small groups from Activity 1 of this lesson.

    In Activity 3, Step 4: Collect students’ notes and consequences webs for use in the final activity.

    In Activity 2, Step 2: Students will need to regroup into their original small groups from Activity 1 of this lesson.

    In Activity 2, Step 6: Collect students’ notes, speech analyses, annotated case studies, and Stakeholder Tables for use in Activity 4 of this lesson.

  • Background Information

    The decisions a U.S. president makes are high-stakes decisions. Their decisions have an impact not only within the United States, but across the world. This lesson uses a process modified from a decision-making process called Stakeholder Consequences Decision-Making (SCDM). This process includes identifying the constraints and considerations of a decision, identifying the consequences of that decision, assessing the impacts those consequences will have on stakeholders, and weighing those impacts. By applying this process to a presidential decision that has already been made, students can deconstruct the decision within its political and geographic context, as well as view the consequences of that decision through the lens of history.


    Prior Knowledge

    • None

    Recommended Prior Lessons

    • None

    Vocabulary

    Term Part of Speech Definition Encyclopedic Entry
    Allies Noun

    alliance of countries that opposed the Axis during World War II. The Allies were led by the U.S., the United Kingdom, and the Soviet Union.

    Axis Noun

    alliance of countries that opposed the Allies during World War II. The Axis was led by Germany, Italy, and Japan.

    border Noun

    natural or artificial line separating two pieces of land.

    Encyclopedic Entry: {'slug': u'border'}
    Cold War Noun

    (1947-1991) conflict between the Soviet Union (and its allies) and the United States (and its allies). The two sides never confronted each other directly.

    consequence Noun

    result or outcome of an action or situation.

    human rights Noun

    basic freedoms belonging to every individual, including the rights to social and political expression, spirituality, and opportunity.

    intended consequences Noun

    results of an action or situation that are deliberately brought about and/or anticipated.

    political boundary Noun

    imaginary line separating one political unit, such as a country or state, from another.

    political geography Noun

    study of the spatial relationships that influence government or social policies.

    Soviet Union Noun

    (1922-1991) large northern Eurasian nation that had a communist government. Also called the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, or the USSR.

    stakeholder Noun

    person or organization that has an interest or investment in a place, situation or company.

    territory Noun

    land an animal, human, or government protects from intruders.

    unintended consequences Noun

    results of an action or situation that are not deliberately brought about and/or anticipated.

Partner

Funder