It's an actual policy change. That, in itself, is a formalized approach. It isn't something that we're considering on a case-by-case basis.
I will say, though, that if a particular community doesn't want that approach, that is certainly within their prerogative as well. Some communities, for example, have sufficient resources to manage a crisis without needing an advanced payment.
That is a huge cultural shift. It's built on trust, actually. If you don't trust people, you need to see every receipt. If you trust people, you can do audits in a way that is far more respectful of the relationship.
We're not on the ground, as officials. In particular, deep within departments, they are not on the ground to understand that, for example, a team of 20 volunteers that has been working 24 hours a day might need to buy T-shirts. I'm not even saying it would or wouldn't have been covered in the past, but to an auditor or to a person reimbursing on a receipt basis, for example, that might look like a silly expense.
For the many first nations leaders I've talked to, keeping their volunteers engaged and connected is super important for being able to continue to, for example, prepare the site so that the fire doesn't breach the wall. We can't necessarily understand on a granular basis what goes into that.
Having been a professional working in not-for-profit, I can tell you that keeping your volunteers happy is a critical ingredient in keeping your organization running.
That flexibility allows communities to make those decisions on the fly, without worrying about whether they are going to get covered for it.
We are now looking to be a supportive partner in those kinds of decisions and doing so in an accountable way together.