Right. It was $9.4 million for 2004-05.
This year it was slated for $11.8 million--as it was last year. The problem with the program last year is that it only distributed about $7.5 million of the $11.8 million. It had an efficiency gap of about $4.3 million in administrative costs, and it was labelled because it was running at about a 40% cost factor. We'd like to see the program operate at about a 20% administrative cost.
In fact, the $9.5 million budget that it's going to receive over the next two years is actually an increase over the 2004-05 budget. Were you aware of that?