Saint-Jerome, QC · Private foundation
Fondation Jean-Louis Tasse
Dons à des écoles et universités
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under C$10k1 grant · C$6k
- C$10k–50k3 grants · C$84k
- C$50k–250k2 grants · C$273k
- C$250k+1 grant · C$310k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| Fondation UQTR | C$310,000 |
| Fondation UQAM | C$210,000 |
| Centre des Services scolaires des Patriotes | C$62,842 |
| Fondation UQO | C$30,000 |
| Fondation UQAR | C$30,000 |
| Fondation UQAC | C$24,000 |
| Fondation UQAT | C$6,000 |
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.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +48% since the first grant, against -22% for the ones you funded once.
10 repeat relationships — 5 still active in FY2024, 5 since wound down; 2 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, 96% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; C$30k 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
- FDFONDATION DE L'UQAM8× · 2017–2024 · C$2.3M · revenue +28%
- FUFondation UQTR8× · 2017–2024 · C$1.2M · revenue +42%
- CDCentre des Services scolaires des Patriotes6× · 2019–2024 · C$286k · revenue +48%
Funded once
- IÉINSTITUT ÉCONOMIQUE DE MONTRÉALone grant, 2020 · C$75k
- CSCOMMISSION SCOLAIRE DES PATRIOTESone grant, 2018 · C$25k
- CSCOMMISSION SOLAIRE DES PATROTESone grant, 2019 · C$25k
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.
Octroi de bourses et financement de projets de recherche ou de développement pour les institutions universitaires.
Bourses d'études dans le but de promouvoir la profession d'ingénieur auprès des étudiants
Enseignement et recherche universitaire
Financement de plusieurs projets de recherche reliés à la gestion de hec montréal et contributions à des programmes de bourses à hec montréal
Bourses d'études acquisition d'équipements technologiques développement de projets structurants avancement de l'éducation fonds recherche et développement.
La fondation des ingéneurs municipaux du québec établit organise et maintient des fonds pour promouvoir l'avancement de l'éducation en général et plus particulièrement dans les domaines du génie civil et de la construction en octroyant des…
Offres et fournit de l'enseignement au niveau universitaire dirige et réalise de la recherche de niveau universitaire distribue des bourses d'études aux étudiants.
La fondation remet des bourses d'études de perfectionnement ainsi que des bourses pour la recherche et le développement
Programme de bourses projets de soutien à l'étude
Activités d'enseignement supérieur et de recherche
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Fondation De L'universite Du Quebec En Abitibi-Temiscamingue Inc. and the most unlike its peers is Le Phare De Longueuil. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
11 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. 11 of the 20 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 FONDATION DE L'UQAM ↗
- Who funds Fondation UQTR ↗
- Who funds Centre des Services scolaires des Patriotes ↗
- Who funds INSTITUT ÉCONOMIQUE DE MONTRÉAL ↗
- Who funds LE PHARE DE LONGUEUIL ↗
- Who funds Fondation UQAR ↗
- Who funds Fondation UQO ↗
- Who funds Fondation UQAC ↗
- Who funds Fondation UQAT ↗
- Who funds FONDATION ÉCOLE INTERATIONALE ST-SACREMENT ↗
- Who funds CHEVALIERS DE COLOMB DE BELOEIL ↗
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 Université du Québec · Les Soeurs de la Congrégation de Notre Dame · Fondation de l'Université du Québec à Montréal · Fondation Des Comptables Professionnels Agréés Du Québec · The Molson Foundation/Fondation Molson · Fondation Lucie et André Chagnon · Fondation J.A. Deseve · La Fondation du Grand Montréal - The Foundation of Greater Montreal · Rbc Foundation/Rbc Fondation · Charitable Gift Funds Canada Foundation / Fonds de Bienfaisance Canada · PayPal Giving Fund Canada · 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.