SOCIAL PLANNING COUNCIL OF WINNIPEG INCORPORATED

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 42% · 2018 56% · 2019 43% · 2020 41% · 2021 55% · 2022 63% · 2023 51% · 2024 57%. 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 4 funders to 3 funders, grant income rose C$63k → C$217k.

From the CRA filings of SOCIAL PLANNING COUNCIL OF WINNIPEG INCORPORATED’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

SOCIAL PLANNING COUNCIL OF WINNIPEG INCORPORATED leans on a few funders — its largest provides 62% of grant income and the top three 86%; half comes from just 1 funder.

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 SOCIAL PLANNING COUNCIL OF WINNIPEG INCORPORATED.

Largest funder’s share by year: 2017 96% · 2018 100% · 2019 65% · 2020 100% · 2021 77% · 2022 59% · 2023 69% — diversifying over time.

“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

33% of SOCIAL PLANNING COUNCIL OF WINNIPEG INCORPORATED's funders are still giving 3 years after their first grant; 55% 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

74% of SOCIAL PLANNING COUNCIL OF WINNIPEG INCORPORATED's grant income comes from Manitoba funders.

Funder regions come from each funder’s own filing. C$6k 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.