Edmonton, AB · Charitable organization
St Luke/St John's Chapel
Provide religious services to the Protestant community of the Canadian Armed Forces at Canadian Forces Base Edmonton which includes military members and their families and Dept.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2021
- Under C$10k6 grants · C$2k
- C$10k–50k1 grant · C$12k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| CANADIAN FORCES CHAPEL FUND (WIDER MISSIONS) | C$11,636 |
| VETERAN'S FOOD BANK EDMONTON | C$382 |
| EDMONTON MEALS ON WHEELS | C$382 |
| WIN HOUSE | C$382 |
| BISSELL CENTRE | C$382 |
| E4C | C$191 |
| BOYLE MCCAULEY - OPERATION FRIENDSHIP | C$191 |
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.
8 repeat relationships — 6 still active in FY2021, 2 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2021 (too recent to call).
How the two cohorts compare
Organizations
Total granted
Still filing today
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2021, 97% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; C$382 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
- EMEdmonton Meals on Wheels4× · 2017–2021 · C$18k · revenue +85%
- BCBissell Centre4× · 2017–2021 · C$18k · revenue +128%
- WHWIN HOUSE4× · 2017–2021 · C$5k · revenue +17%
Funded once
- VFVETERAN'S FOOD BANK EDMONTONone grant, 2021 · C$382
Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent CRA filings.
7 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. 7 of the 9 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: Alberta Blue Cross Hearts of Blue · The Stollery Charitable Foundation · Atco Gas Employees' Community Service Fund · Atco Electric Epic · The Edmonton Community Foundation Priv Act · United Way of the Alberta Capital Region · TELUS Friendly Future Foundation - Fondation TELUS Pour un Futur Meilleur · United Way of Calgary and Area · CHIMP: Charitable Impact Foundation (Canada) · United Way of Greater Toronto · 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.