Given the document below, determine if the summary is factually consistent with the document. A summary is factually consistent if all the pronouns in the summary are presented the same way as in the document and they do not introduce any ambiguity.

Document: It said CIA officers acted reasonably in searching computers after concerns they contained classified material. The finding contradicts allegations from lawmakers and an admission from the agency's own inspector general. The allegations came during the intelligence committee's investigation into claims of torture by the CIA. An internal board launched an inquiry after the CIA appealed against findings by NAME_1, the agency's inspector general, that employees had "improperly" gained access to computers used by Senate staff. It concluded that although there had been some "inappropriate access" to a secured network being used by Senate workers, there had been no wrongdoing and no law violated. NAME_2, the chair of the Senate intelligence committee, who has clashed with the CIA over the issue, rejected the board's findings. "I'm disappointed that no-one at the CIA will be held accountable," she said in a statement. "The decision was made to search committee computers,

Summary: 1. Senate staff hadn't been using computers at a CIA facility to examine documents related to the agency's interrogation practices after the September 11 attacks on the United States.

Is the summary factually consistent with the document with respect to pronouns used?
Options: "Yes" or "No"

Answer:


 The words with all capital letters should appear at least 4 times.
user