Skip to content
Canadian charitiesMostly funded, not a grantmaker — see who funds it →

Nakusp, BC · Public foundation

Nakusp and Area Community Foundation

Grant funds to registered charities and community organizations continued to support and maintain healthy diverse community objectives and initiatives.

C$21k
Granted FY2024still arriving
8
Grants FY2024still arriving
1
Regions reached
C$8k
Largest
01What you fundRead
02Your edgeRead
03Your fieldRead
01What you fund
01FY2024 · 8 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

C$2,500
Median grant
1
Regions reached
C$417k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
ARROW AND SLOCAN LAKES COMMUNITY SERVICESC$7,575
NAKUSP PUBLIC LIBRARYC$2,500
ARROW AND SLOCAN LAKES COMMUNITY SERVICESC$2,500
ARROW AND SLOCAN LAKES COMMUNITY SERVICESC$2,500
ARROW LAKES DISTRICT ART COUNCILC$2,000
NAKUSP DISTRICT MUSEUMC$1,500
ARROW AND SLOCAN LAKES COMMUNITY SERVICESC$1,500
ARROW AND SLOCAN LAKES COMMUNITY SERVICESC$1,075
02Your edge
repeat funding

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.

84%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
C$125k · 5 repeat orgsC$23k to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +225% since the first grant, against +22% for the ones you funded once.

5 repeat relationships — 3 still active in FY2024, 2 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

5
6

Total granted

C$125k
C$14k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+225%
+22%

Still filing today

80%
83%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 57% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; C$9k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

  • AL
    ARROW LAKES SCHOOL DISTRICT #10
    7× · 2017–2023 · C$31k · revenue +226% · 100% of their budget
  • AL
    ARROW LAKES DISTRICT ART COUNCIL
    3× · 2022–2024 · C$6k · revenue +225% · 41% of their budget
  • RO
    Rotary of Nakusp
    2× · 2017–2018 · C$2k · revenue +7%

Funded once

  • AS
    ARROW SLOCAN LAKES COMMUNITY SERVICES
    one grant, 2019 · C$9k · revenue -39%
  • NS
    NAKUSP SENIOR CITIZENS SOCIETY
    one grant, 2018 · C$2k · revenue -49%
  • BC
    Burton Community Association
    one grant, 2017 · C$2k · revenue +22%

Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent CRA filings.

03Your field

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.

1
Burns Lake Public Library Board

Provides library services including lending books dvd's cd's audio books periodicals reference books and public use of internet facilities. we also provide literacy programs and continuing education programs for adults children and youth.

—
2
Arrow Lakes Hospital Foundation

Funding the purchase of hospital equipment and providing bursaries for students studying in the medical profession

—
3
Slave Lake Regional Library Board

Library operations and related programming activities; native communities library operations and support

—
4
Aurora Public Library Board

Provision of library services

—
5
Bark Lake Cultural Developments

Dinners games planned concerts bi-monthly newsletters historical tours & displays social media stories

—
6
Duck Lake Historical Museum Society

Education of the history of the area. catalogue of articles. erection of permanent exhibits and operation of a museum.

—
7
Nelson and District Museum Archives Art Gallery and Historical Society

Museum archives and art gallery

—
8
Arrow Lakes Health Care Auxiliary Society

Operation of thrift shop and other miscellaneous fundraising activities in nakusp b.c. to earn funds for health care recipients' comforts and furniture and equipment for the health care facilities.

—
9
Slocan Lake Arts Council (Society)

Art workshops open mic events music in the park kid's crafty day camps community singalongs concerts.

—
10
Nechako Valley Historical Society

Collecting artifacts for the local museum cataloging them and helping with displays documenting historical data digitizing and photohgraphing all artifacts

—
11
Muskoka Lakes Museum Port Carling

The purpose is to collect document preserve research exhibit and interpret all those objects that are documented to illustrate the settlement and development of the muskoka lakes district

—
12
Radium Hot Springs Public Library

Offered library and literacy programs to the village of radium hot springs.

—

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Arrow Lakes Historical Society and the most unlike its peers is The Rotary Foundation (Canada). Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.

02the grantee network

10 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. 10 of the 13 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.

2
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
9/10
Grantees still filing
6/10
Grew since you first funded

Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing

25%50%75%100%C$100kC$1.0MC$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetARROW LAKES SCHOOL DISTRICT #10 — C$30,640 over 7y, 100% of budgetARROW SLOCAN LAKES COMMUNITY SERVICES — C$8,850 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetARROW LAKES DISTRICT ART COUNCIL — C$6,000 over 3y, 41% of budgetNAKUSP PUBLIC LIBRARY — C$4,500 over 2y, 1.3% of budgetRotary of Nakusp — C$2,385 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetNAKUSP SENIOR CITIZENS SOCIETY — C$1,800 over 1y, 1.5% of budgetBurton Community Association — C$1,730 over 1y, 0.9% of budgetColumbia Basin Environmental Education Network — C$800 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetArrowtarian — C$500 over 1y, 0.2% of budget
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 set of overlaps that mostly run through you, not between each other.

Canadahelps Canadon
Canadahelps CanadonON1.2× affinity4 shared granteesties to 0 of 0Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: 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.

On method. Every financial figure here is read directly from the Canada Revenue Agency’s published T3010 data — your own annual information return and the multi-year returns of the 13 grantees we resolved across every year we hold, several hundred filings in all (a different count from the grant rows on the cover, which are one fiscal year) — each linked to its source. Grantee achievements and outcomes are each organization’s own program description on its T3010; we read these as association with sustained funding — the foundation is one of several forces — suppress low-confidence name matches rather than guess, and say so where a figure rests on a single grant or filing. Not everything on this page is a filed figure, and the difference matters. Filed is what you reported on your return. Official is another government record about an organization, such as a federal award or a charity register, joined by name where no shared identifier exists. Resolved is an identity we worked out where the filing named a recipient without a BN, kept only above a measured confidence threshold. Computed is arithmetic over those, like themes, portfolio clusters and co-funder strength. Context is a statistic about a place rather than about an organization, which is what the need overlay is: it describes the area a grantee’s address sits in, not where its work lands. Inferred is drawn by a model from text, like the partnerships read out of public news and organization websites. Each is labeled where it appears. How we build these →

Generated from your T3010 annual information return for the fiscal period ending 2024-12-31, as published by the Canada Revenue Agency in 2024. Amounts are Canadian dollars, as filed and never converted. Registered as a public foundation under foundations.

Source object 859435281:2024-12-31 · View the T3010 on the CRA register

Play a game based on Nakusp and Area’s filings →