It's a question with many answers, I think.
The costs of improving the data relative to the costs of the program are quite small. In fact, our entire organization runs for $100 million. We're covering health data across all of the different domains of health care, health expenditure, health workforce, etc.
In terms of improving the data there's a small incremental cost. It may be in the small millions of dollars, sort of thing, to improve it. But there's also, more importantly, the non-monetary costs. It is the willingness of various organizations to provide data. I think that's a really important piece, and also the opportunity that we have through digital health, through eHealth, to capture data more naturally as services are being provided as opposed to as an administrative add-on after the fact. I think that's something we need to capitalize.
If we had national standards in the electronic health records across the country, and a requirement to capture all this data in one place according to one standard, the ability to look at the costs and the implications and the opportunities, I think, would be much greater around all of the issues we've talked about—health outcomes for people, waste duplication, inappropriate prescribing, all kinds of things. That's a real opportunity.