Montreal, QC · Private foundation
The N & J Richer Foundation /La Fondation N & J Richer
The only programs that were carried out during the year were donations made to qualified doneees.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| JEWISH GENERAL HOSPITAL FOUNDATION | C$100,000 |
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 +31% since the first grant, against +22% for the ones you funded once.
4 repeat relationships — 1 still active in FY2024, 3 since wound down.
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, 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
- JGJEWISH GENERAL HOSPITAL FOUNDATION5× · 2017–2024 · C$157k · revenue +31%
- FCFEDERATION CJA3× · 2017–2019 · C$28k · revenue +69%
- TETEMPLE EMANU-EL BETH SHALOM2× · 2019–2021 · C$11k · revenue +24%
Funded once
- UFUHN FOUNDATIONone grant, 2021 · C$20k · revenue +4%
- CACANADIAN ASSOCIATES OF BEN GURION UNIVERSITYgraduatedone grant, 2018 · C$8k · revenue +426%
- YYM-YWHAone grant, 2020 · C$5k · revenue +22%
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.
To provide funds to aid the cause of cancer research in canada and israel.
The museum of jewish of montreal is an innovative place to connect with montreal's jewish life and identify share its diverse heritage and create new cultural experiences. the organization's activities include historical walking tours art…
From our offices in montreal and toronto canadian friends of tel aviv university (cftau) organizes events and activities from coast to coast with an for a alumni past attendees and friends of tel aviv university (tau) and provide direct…
La fondation utilise ses revenus pour favoriser et soutenir le développement et l'avancement de l'enseignement à l'université due québec à montréal
Accumuler des fonds pour financier la recherche effectuée par l'institut de recherches cliniques de montréal
B'nai brith hillel foundation of montreal inc.s' mission is to support jewish students on campus.
Providing funds for medical charitable and educational purposes by making gifts grants contributions and donations to or for the benefit of the mont sinai hospital centre montreal
Raising funds for jewish education in the west island of montreal
Affilié à l'université laval le chu de québec - université laval dispense des soins et des services de santé généraux spécialisés et surspécialisés en y intégrant l'enseignement la recherche clinique et fondamentale et l'évaluation des…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Federation Cja and the most unlike its peers is People Players Inc.. 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: Conam Charitable Foundation · United Way East Ontario / Centraide Est de L'Ontario · 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.