Thunder Bay, ON · Charitable organization
Finnish Evangelical Lutheran Mission
Worship services bible studies and devotions in the Finish language in the community of Thunder Bay Ontario.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under C$10k1 grant · C$599
- C$10k–50k1 grant · C$10k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| Lutheran Community Care | C$10,000 |
| Suomi Koti of Thunder Bay | C$599 |
Do your dollars go where the need is?
Where your grant dollars land — at home and around the world.
Your giving at home — 65% of grant dollars (C$77k). The 35% that went abroad (C$42k) is mapped below.
Beyond home — 35% of all-years giving (C$42k)
0 countries, by the recipient’s country on the filing.
International giving is mapped by the recipient’s country from the same T3010 filings; comparable need data isn’t available at that grain.
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 — 2 still active in FY2024, 5 since wound down.
How the two cohorts compare
Organizations
Total granted
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
- SKSuomi Koti of Thunder Bay3× · 2022–2024 · C$4k · revenue +16%
- LLLAPPE LUTHERAN CHURCH2× · 2018–2019 · C$307 · revenue +6%
- CECHRIST EVANGELICAL LUTHERAN CHURCH2× · 2018–2019 · C$231 · revenue +20%
Funded once
- SLSLEY Lutheran Evangelical Association of Finlandone grant, 2019 · C$759
Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent CRA filings.
5 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. 5 of the 8 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.
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: My Tribute Gift Foundation · 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.