Cap-Chat, QC · Charitable organization
Comite Des Oeuvres Charitables Conseil Cap Chat No 3765
Dons à notre église dons aux organismes communautaires et humanitaires dons pour la recherche organiser des activités pour nos personnnes âgées service de repas aux jeunes aide aux femmes en détresse et porter secours et assistance aux plus démunis etc
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| MAISON DES JEUNES DE CAP-CHAT | C$600 |
| FONDATION SANTÉ DE LA HAUTE-GASPÉSIE | C$200 |
| FABRIQUE DE CAP-CHAT | C$200 |
| ASSO. DU CANCER DE L'EST DU QUÉBEC | C$100 |
| FONDATION DES MALADIES DU COEUR | C$50 |
| FONDATION LOUISE AMÉLIE | C$50 |
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.
11 repeat relationships — 6 still active in FY2024, 5 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
- FLFONDATION LOUISE AMÉLIE7× · 2017–2024 · C$400 · revenue +584%
- ADASSOCIATION DU CANCER DE L'EST DU QUÉBEC3× · 2021–2024 · C$350 · revenue +16%
- ADASS. DES PERSONNES HANDICAPÉES VISUELLES5× · 2017–2021 · C$200 · revenue +20%
Funded once
- FDFABRIQUE DE CAP-CHATone grant, 2023 · C$100
- SASOCIÉTÉ ALZHEIMERone grant, 2021 · C$50 · revenue +2%
- FMFONDATION MIRAgraduatedone grant, 2018 · C$25 · revenue +45%
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.
Service d'interprétation pour les malentendants
Ateliers de jour pour personnes handicapées
Education de chien guide pour enfants ayant des handicapes
Sans objet
Offrir du soutien et de l'information à l'échelle du québec aux personnes vivant avec la migraine ou des céphalées ainsi que leurs proches afin de les aider à mieux gérer leur condition et à briser leur isolement
Offre des services à une clientèle atteinte de déficience dans un centre d'équitation thérapeutique
Services d'écoute pour les personnes en difficulté
L'organisme offre des services communautaires davantage axés sur tous les besoins individuels des personnes ayant des limitation fonctionnelles de toute nature.
Sensibilisation public-éducation publication de bulletin d'information organisation de conférence-échange veille téléphonique pour patients
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is L'association Du Cancer De L'est Du Quebec and the most unlike its peers is Les bouts de papier de la Haute-Gaspésie. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
9 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. 9 of the 14 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 MAISON DES JEUNES DE CAP-CHAT ↗
- Who funds FONDATION LOUISE AMÉLIE ↗
- Who funds FONDATION DES MALADIES DU COEUR ↗
- Who funds ASSOCIATION DU CANCER DE L'EST DU QUÉBEC ↗
- Who funds ASS. DES PERSONNES HANDICAPÉES VISUELLES ↗
- Who funds SOC. CAN. DE LA SCIÉROSE EN PLAQUES ↗
- Who funds LES BOUTS DE PAPIERS DE LA HAUTE-GASPÉSIE ↗
- Who funds SOCIÉTÉ ALZHEIMER ↗
- Who funds FONDATION MIRA ↗
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: 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.