The following tables present the fair values for those assets and (liabilities) measured on a recurring basis at June 30:



	2013
(in millions)	Level 1		Level 2		Level 3		Total
Cash equivalents (1)	$	348	$	—	$	—	$	348
Forward contracts (2)	—		12		—		12
Other investments (3)	89		—		—		89
Total	$	437	$	12	$	—	$	449



	2012
(in millions)	Level 1		Level 2		Level 3			Total
Cash equivalents (1)	$	997	$	—	$	—		$	997
Forward contracts (2)	—		49		—			49
Other investments (3)	78		—		—			78
Contingent consideration obligation (4)	—		—		(4		)	(4		)
Total	$	1,075	$	49	$	(4	)	$	1,120


(1)	Cash equivalents are comprised of highly liquid investments purchased with a maturity of three months or less. The carrying value of these cash equivalents approximates fair value due to their short-term maturities.


(2)	The fair value of interest rate swaps, foreign currency contracts and commodity contracts is determined based on the present value of expected future cash flows considering the risks involved, including non-performance risk, and using discount rates appropriate for the respective maturities. Observable Level 2 inputs are used to determine the present value of expected future cash flows.


(3)	The other investments balance includes investments in mutual funds, which are used to offset fluctuations in deferred compensation liabilities. These mutual funds primarily invest in the equity securities of companies with large market capitalization and high quality fixed income debt securities. The fair value of these investments is determined using quoted market prices.

(4)

The contingent consideration obligation was incurred in connection with the acquisition of P4 Healthcare. The former owners of P4 Healthcare had the right to receive certain contingent payments based on targeted EBITDA. The fair value of the contingent consideration obligation was determined based on a probability-weighted income approach derived from EBITDA estimates and probability assessments with respect to the likelihood of achieving the various EBITDA targets. The fair value measurement was based on significant inputs unobservable in the market and thus represented a Level 3 measurement. At each reporting date, we revalued the contingent consideration obligation to estimated fair value. Changes in the fair value of the contingent consideration obligation resulted from changes in the terms of the contingent payments, changes in discount periods and rates, changes in the timing and amount of EBITDA estimates and changes in probability assumptions with respect to the timing and likelihood of achieving the EBITDA targets. As a result of changes in our estimate of performance in future periods, coupled with the progress of discussions with the former owners regarding an early termination and settlement, we recorded a $71 million decrease in fair value of the obligation to $4 million at June 30, 2012. We terminated and settled the remaining contingent consideration obligation in July 2012 for $4 million.