OZHAAWASHKO-GIIZHIG TRADITIONAL TEACHING LODGE

The organization over time

Each line starts at 100 in 2017, so what you read is the shape rather than the size: 150 means half as much again as 2017, 50 means half. The number beside each label in the key is where it ended. The shaded band is where the middle 50% of its peers' revenue would sit, given their growth.

How it's funded, over time

Each bar is one year's revenue split into where it came from, and every bar is the same height — these are shares, not amounts, so a year that raised twice as much looks the same size. Hover a bar for the split.

Government-grant reliance: 2017 43% · 2018 694% · 2019 20% · 2020 71% · 2021 1% · 2022 39% · 2023 3% · 2024 6%. Grants only. Government contracts and fees sit inside program revenue.

Surplus & reserves

Operating surplus or deficit each year, and months of liquidity in hand. 3 of the last 8 reported years ran a deficit.

Who funds it, year by year

2017 → 2023: the base narrowed from 2 funders to 1 funder, grant income rose C$1k → C$25k.

From the CRA filings of OZHAAWASHKO-GIIZHIG TRADITIONAL TEACHING LODGE’s funders (the co-funder graph). Association, not causation. Trends are read to FY2023, the last fiscal year that has finished arriving. FY2024 is still being filed and is shown unshaded; it does not move any figure on this page.

How concentrated its funding is

OZHAAWASHKO-GIIZHIG TRADITIONAL TEACHING LODGE leans on a few funders — its largest provides 43% of grant income and the top three 78%; half comes from just 2 funders.

100% of the income these shares are computed over arrives through pass-through sponsors or from payers whose filings do not say what kind of payment it is. Concentration is still measured over all of it, because the money is real; what it does not support is a claim about how many institutions have chosen to fund OZHAAWASHKO-GIIZHIG TRADITIONAL TEACHING LODGE.

Largest funder’s share by year: 2017 98% · 2018 100% · 2019 95% · 2021 100% · 2023 100% — broadly stable.

“Effective funders” = inverse Herfindahl index (1 / Σ shareᵢ²) — the number of equal-sized funders that would give the same concentration. Trends are read to FY2023, the last fiscal year that has finished arriving. FY2024 is still being filed and is shown unshaded; it does not move any figure on this page.

How long its funders stay

0% of OZHAAWASHKO-GIIZHIG TRADITIONAL TEACHING LODGE's funders are still giving 3 years after their first grant; 38% give in more than one year at all.

Share of funders still giving k years after their first recorded grant, pooled across every acquisition cohort. A funder counts as retained in a year only if it made a grant that year. Measured to FY2023, the last fiscal year that has finished arriving — a funder cannot be counted as lapsed in a year most filers have not reached.

Where its funders are

88% of OZHAAWASHKO-GIIZHIG TRADITIONAL TEACHING LODGE's grant income comes from Ontario funders.

Funder regions come from each funder’s own filing. C$53k arriving through sponsors registered in 1 region is excluded from the map and the split above: a sponsor holds money on a donor’s behalf, so its registered address would place those dollars somewhere no donor need ever have been. Trends are read to FY2023, the last fiscal year that has finished arriving. FY2024 is still being filed and is shown unshaded; it does not move any figure on this page.