Sherwood Park, AB · Charitable organization
Ministik Community Church
Place of worship congregations parishes missionary organizations evangelism
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| MOUNT CARMEL BIBLE SCHOOL | C$4,400 |
| THE EMMANUEL FOUNDATION | C$4,400 |
| NORTHERN CANADA EVANGELICAL MISSION | C$2,800 |
| COMMISSION TO EVERY NATION | C$1,200 |
| INGLEWOOD CRC | C$500 |
| VISION MINISTRIES | C$500 |
| SAFE FAMILIES | C$500 |
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 +19% since the first grant, against -76% for the ones you funded once.
5 repeat relationships — 4 still active in FY2024, 1 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, 85% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; C$2k 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
- TETHE EMMANUEL FOUNDATION8× · 2017–2024 · C$39k · revenue +14%
- MCMOUNT CARMEL BIBLE SCHOOL8× · 2017–2024 · C$38k · revenue +28%
- NCNORTHERN CANADA EVANGELICAL MISSION8× · 2017–2024 · C$37k · revenue +49%
Funded once
- BBBETHEL BIBLE CAMPone grant, 2021 · C$2k · revenue -76%
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.
Missionary training -bible studies
Preaching the gospel through broadcasting TV programs Printed publications Emergency Relief Media evangelism Campaigns
Publication of brochures and manuscripts containing religious information; bible study; camp; support of mission and evangelization work
Overnight Bible Camp providing camp experience for children and families
Operate bible camps during the summer months of july and august.
Camp meetings youth camp seasonal events and outreach across canada
Conducting religious services sending relief to impoverished people in developing countries supporting missionary activities around the world and conducting short term mission trips
Summer camp programs for all ages
Emmanuel bible college is a post secondary institution providing undergraduate ministry education. students are equipped for christian ministry vocations through various programs in biblical general and professional studies.
Children's summer programs emphasizing the demonstration of Christian values during all interaction activities. Bible teaching and leadership training for teens and young adults through outdoor wilderness expeditions.
In canada we are involved in evangelism church planting community programs and publication of a denominational magazine. outside canada we are involved in evangelism church planting community development leadership training and other…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Northern Canada Evangelical Mission Inc. and the most unlike its peers is Bethel Bible Camp. 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.
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: 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.