Given the document below, determine if the summary is factually consistent with the document.
A summary is factually consistent if all statements in the summary are entailed by the document.

Document: NAME_1, 53, has been helping the Championship club as a consultant since quitting as Orient manager. The Bluebirds and NAME_1's former side had been in dispute over his proposed appointment at the NAME_2 club. "I'm grateful to NAME_3 [NAME_4] for giving me this opportunity as Cardiff City is a fantastic football club," said NAME_1. Cardiff owner NAME_5 said he was "delighted" and called on the club's fans to back NAME_1, whilst criticising former manager NAME_6 who he sacked in December 2013. "Look at NAME_7's track record. He certainly deserves to be given a chance," said NAME_4. "After all, Cardiff gave a chance to a mediocre manager from Watford [NAME_8] and he took the Club to the Premier League. "I did, however, give him a lot of money to spend for that - in fact, too much money." Cardiff had been without a manager since ex-Manchester United striker NAME_9

Summary: 1. NAME_10 and NAME_11 have been in caretaker charge since Solskjaer's departure and were at the helm for Friday's eleven-0 defeat at Blackpool.

Is the summary factually consistent with the document?
Start your answer with "Yes" or "No".

Answer:


 Provide response in all capital letters, no lowercase letters allowed.
user