Currently we have a two-arm approach in terms of the way that we operate. We certainly had a core fund through the sector council program, which is no longer going to be existing, but in terms of our labour market information studies and all of our products and tools that we produce, we do that through project funding through different branches of the government. Sometimes it's the sector councils. Sometimes it's FCRP. Grant has much more diversified sources in terms of project revenue, as we suspected.
In terms of our operations, a lot of those have not been put on hold. We have to continue them. But we have to ensure that there's going to be an organization that continues to be able to do those types of projects, or if it is apparent that there isn't, we have to make sure that there's a soft landing for the intellectual property that is currently being developed, so that any organization, such as the industry associations that we talked about earlier, would be able to take up that mantle. Currently, we're not at that stage, but that's what we're working toward—to make sure that this doesn't happen.
I want to get back to the other question, though. I just wanted to state as well that I think it is fundamental to the sector councils that those who are not plugged in to the industry and to the member associations and everything else will not survive, and I'm not sure that's necessarily a bad thing.