Sherrie D. Wood challenges her conviction for four counts of making fraudulent statements to obtain federal workers’ com *485 pensation benefits in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1920. She argues that the admission of evidence suggesting that she reimbursed herself without authorization for expenses incurred as the result of her involvement with the Four Winds Tribe (Tribe), a Native American organization, or worse, that she embezzled tribal funds, was erroneous because it was irrelevant, inadmissible, and highly prejudicial.

The district court held that the evidence was intrinsic, rather than extrinsic, to the charged offense because it completed the story as to the manner in which she obtained the funds. We review for abuse of discretion the determination that evidence was admissible intrinsic evidence. United States v. Sumlin, 489 F.3d 683, 689 (5th Cir. 2007). As the district court correctly observed, the challenged evidence explained the extent of Wood’s involvement with the tribe as well as how, why, and by whom payments were made to her. This evidence completed the story by proving the immediate context of the events in question. United States v. Rice, 607 F.3d 133, 141 (5th Cir. 2010).

AFFIRMED.