Thank you for the question.
You've put your finger on the problem: the geographic distribution of clients and service providers. The programs make it possible to reach these clients differently, which is why a strategy is needed. The non-insured health benefits program is actually a benefits program where the expenses incurred by the client are reimbursed directly to the dentist. It works extremely well in urban or suburban settings, where people have access to dentists.
We usually use more programs like the children's oral health initiative to provide services in communities where we would not otherwise find them.
However, even in peri-urban areas, these programs can be useful for prevention in schools and to ensure that parents bring their children to specialists first, and to dentists, second. It's a combination of services, so it's important to have the strategy that we talked about earlier. Efforts should be combined when it comes to these programs. In remote areas, we have to face more difficulties.
The non-insured health benefits program, for example, will sometimes make it possible to contract work to dentists rather than having them present themselves as independent service providers. In fact, we are awarding contracts in certain regions to get dentists to practise in communities, which is more efficient and less expensive. This also provides support and a clientele to service providers who come to work in a remote community. The approaches to services are therefore very different depending on the regions and geographic distribution of customers and service providers.
Mr. Tremblay spoke earlier about our strategy and regional access plans that take into account this dynamic and the type of tool we need to bring clients closer to service providers or, conversely, to bring clients closer to service providers in communities.