Amos, QC · Charitable organization
Centre de services scolaire Harricana
Formation générale et professionnelle aux jeunes et adultes programmes de concentration en musique et sports au primaire et secondaire
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| PRODUCTIONS DU RACCOURCI INC. | C$3,000 |
| LOISIR ET SPORT ABITIBI-TÉMICAMINGUE | C$600 |
| LA FONDATION DU CEGEP DE L'ABITIBI-TÉMISCAMINGUE | C$500 |
| FONDATION HOSPITALIÈRE D'AMOS INC | C$195 |
| LA MAISON DU BOULEAU BLANC | C$130 |
| LA MAISON DE LA SOURCE GABRIEL | C$65 |
| CENTRE DE PRÉVENTION SUICIDE D'AMOS | C$65 |
| FONDATION SANTÉ PORTNEUF | C$65 |
Who you back again
Which organizations you funded more than once, and which you funded a single time. Each grantee is matched to its own filings.
7 repeat relationships — 5 still active in FY2024, 2 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).
How the two cohorts compare
Organizations
Total granted
Median revenue growth · since first grant
Still filing today
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2024, 21% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; C$4k went to new ones.
First-time = a grantee’s first year in your filing window; renewed = funded in an earlier year too. As a portfolio matures the renewed share naturally climbs — once funded, an org stays “renewable” — so the signal is the years that buck it (a new-grantee intake wave). The earliest year is left-censored: relationships that predate the data read as “new.”
Backed again, and grew
- MDMAISON DU BOULEAU BLANC6× · 2019–2024 · C$2k · revenue +15%
- FHFONDATION HOSPITALIÈRE D'AMOS5× · 2017–2024 · C$2k · revenue +71%
- LFLA FONDATION CEGEP A-T2× · 2021–2024 · C$2k · revenue +72%
Funded once
- HAHOCKEY ABITIBI-TÉMISCAMINGUEone grant, 2018 · C$25k
- GEGÉNIES EN HERBE ABITIBI-TÉMISCAMINGUEone grant, 2018 · C$16k
- AHACCUEIL HARVEY-BIBEAU D'AMOSgraduatedone grant, 2019 · C$3k · revenue +42%
Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent CRA filings.
The map has a center of gravity: the average direction from the rest of the sector toward the organizations the foundation funds — the shape of its giving. Scoring every nonprofit along that direction surfaces the ones that look most like the portfolio. These are the closest matches that aren’t grantees — a resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.
Établir maintenir et diriger une maison de soins palliatifs pour personnes atteintes de cancer en phase avancée et les accompagner ainsi que leurs proches.
Venir en aide aux personnes démunies et vulnérables confrontées à des problèmes de sécurité alimentaire
Recevoir des dons en effectuant des campagnes de levée de fonds afin de venir en aide financièrement à l'équipe d'accompagnement au diapason et à la maison au diapason
Exploiter une maison de soins palliatifs
Offrir des soin vétérinaire aux gens à faible revenu
Aider les aidants naturels et offrir des services de surveillance sécuritaire et de répit auprès des personnes dans le besoin.
Système d'épicerie et livraison à domicile
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Fondation Hospitaliere D'amos Inc. and the most unlike its peers is Canadahelps Canadon. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
18 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2024.
Each one resolved to its own CRA returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue from every source. Association, dated; never a causal claim.
Counted here: distinct organizations you funded across 2017–2024, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 18 of the 26 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile; the rest are funded organizations whose filings we could not track year by year.
Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing
Go grantee by grantee — a decade per org, and how each moved after you funded them
A decade per grantee — revenue shaded, your grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.
- Who funds ACCUEIL HARVEY-BIBEAU D'AMOS ↗
- Who funds OPÉRATION ENFANT SOLEIL ↗
- Who funds MAISON DU BOULEAU BLANC ↗
- Who funds FONDATION HOSPITALIÈRE D'AMOS ↗
- Who funds FONDATION PAUL GUÉRIN-LAJOIE ↗
- Who funds LA FONDATION CEGEP A-T ↗
- Who funds PIAULE DE VAL D'OR ↗
- Who funds MAISON MIKANA ↗
- Who funds LE PASSAGE DE L'AURORE ↗
- Who funds MAISON DE LA FAMILLE ↗
- Who funds FONDATION POUR LES ENFANTS LE CHOIX DU PRÉSIDENT ↗
- Who funds SOCIÉTÉ ALZHEIMER ABITIBI TÉMISCAMINGUE ↗
- Who funds SOCIETE ALZHEIMER DE LAVALLEE-DE-L'OR ↗
- Who funds LA MAISON DE LA SOURCE GABRIEL ↗
- Who funds MAISON D'HERBERGEMENT JACQUE-CANTIN ↗
- Who funds MAMAN VA À L'ÉCOLE ↗
- Who funds FONDATION SANTÉ PORTNEUF ↗
- Who funds MAISON DU SOLEIL LEVANT ↗
The grantmakers whose grantees overlap with yours far more than size alone predicts. Each orbits closer the stronger the alignment; the arcs between them show where they also fund each other. Here it reads as a tightly interlocked camp — most of these funders back each other's grantees too.
Open a dossier: Fondation Soeurs de Notre-Dame Auxiliatrice · Fondation St-Hubert · Fondation Laure Gaudreault · United Way East Ontario / Centraide Est de L'Ontario · PayPal Giving Fund Canada · Canadian Online Giving Foundation/Fondation canadienne de dons en ligne · Canadahelps Canadon
Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. A research starting point: overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.