Okotoks, AB · Charitable organization
Chinook Winds Region - The United Church of Canada
The chinook winds regional council [cwrc] provides advisory fiscal and personnel support to congregations related ministries clergy and lay members of the united church of canada in the province of alberta extending from south of highway 13 in alberta to the canada-united states border.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under C$10k3 grants · C$10k
- C$10k–50k2 grants · C$59k
- C$50k–250k1 grant · C$135k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| OGDEN UNITED CHURCH | C$135,000 |
| FISH CREEK UNITED CHURCH | C$49,000 |
| ECUMENICAL CAMPUS MINISTRY | C$10,000 |
| RED DEER PRESBYTERY CAMPS SOCIETY | C$5,040 |
| MCCLURE UNITED | C$3,000 |
| WATERTON PARK UNITED CHURCH | C$2,000 |
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.
16 repeat relationships — 6 still active in FY2024, 10 since wound down.
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, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; C$0 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
- SVSYMONS VALLEY UNITED CHURCH4× · 2020–2023 · C$85k · revenue +25%
- CUCENTRAL UNITED CHURCH2× · 2020–2021 · C$50k · revenue +41%
- MHMEDICINE HAT ECUMENICAL CAMPUS MINISTRY4× · 2019–2023 · C$26k · revenue +534%
Funded once
- CCCANYON CHURCH CAMP ASSOCIATIONone grant, 2023 · C$36k
- SSYMONSone grant, 2019 · C$23k
- OUOGDEN UNITED CHURCHone grant, 2023 · C$15k
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.
Weekly worship
Weekly worship services in person and available on-line as a recording. Provide pastoral care. Donate funds to local food bank and mission funds.
Weekly church services funeral services as needed support for members and adherants throughout year. bible study sessions weekly coffee support groups
weekly worship services pastoral care outreach weddings funerals baptism fundraising
Worship Services, Bible Study Groups and Discussion Groups, Pastoral Care
Sunday worship
Virtual and in person weekly church services
Church services -- in person via Zoom and You Tube
We hold worship services weekly.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Symons Valley United Church and the most unlike its peers is Calgary Kasota Camp Society. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
25 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. 25 of the 33 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 OGDEN UNITED CHURCH ↗
- Who funds UNITED/PRESBYTERIAN CAMPUS MINISTRY COMMITTEE ↗
- Who funds ST. ANDREW'S UNITED CHURCH ↗
- Who funds FISH CREEK UNITED CHURCH ↗
- Who funds SYMONS VALLEY UNITED CHURCH ↗
- Who funds RED DEER PRESBYTERY CAMPS SOCIETY ↗
- Who funds ECUMENICAL CAMPUS MINISTRY ↗
- Who funds CENTRAL UNITED CHURCH ↗
- Who funds MCCLURE UNITED ↗
- Who funds KNOX UNITED CHURCH ↗
- Who funds MEDICINE HAT ECUMENICAL CAMPUS MINISTRY ↗
- Who funds RALPH CONNOR MEMORIAL UNITED CHURCH ↗
- Who funds WATERTON PARK UNITED CHURCH ↗
- Who funds BAR HARBOUR CAMP ↗
- Who funds MCDOUGALL UNITED CHURCH ↗
- Who funds CALGARY KASOTA CAMP SOCIETY ↗
- Who funds HILLHURST UNITED CHURCH ↗
- Who funds RED DEER LAKE UNITED CHURCH ↗
- Who funds FORT MACLEOD-GRANUM PASTORAL CHARGE ↗
- Who funds RAYMOND UNITED CHURCH ↗
- Who funds ST. ANDREW'S UNITED CHURCH ↗
- Who funds MCKILLOP UNITED CHURCH ↗
- Who funds OKOTOKS UNITED CHURCH ↗
- Who funds WOODCLIFF UNITED CHURCH ↗
- Who funds FOREST LAWN UNITED CHURCH ↗
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: The United Church of Canada · The United Church of Canada Foundation / Fondation de L'Église Unie Du Canada · The Calgary Foundation · Northern Spirit Regional Council - the United Church of Canada · United Way of Calgary and Area · BenefAction Foundation · Charitable Gift Funds Canada Foundation / Fonds de Bienfaisance Canada · PayPal Giving Fund Canada · Canadahelps Canadon · Canadian Online Giving Foundation/Fondation canadienne de dons en ligne
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.