Sciences@cecc

It spent $30,267 more than it took in, drawing down the difference. Neither is good or bad on its own — charities hold reserves, run capital campaigns, and spend down endowments, and the return does not say which.

This charity did not report a breakdown of its spending.

That is a normal and permitted way to file — the CRA return lets smaller charities complete a simplified section. It is not a sign of anything, and it does not mean the charity spent nothing on these things.

Sciences@cecc reported spending 99.8% of its expenditure on charitable programs. Among the 4,271 charities registered under public amenities that reported the same line for 2020, the middle of the range is 85.0%, and this charity sits at the 84th percentile — above 84% of them.

That is a position in a distribution, not a verdict. Charities allocate costs differently on the same form, and a lower share often reflects how a return was filled in rather than how the money was spent. The cohort counts only charities that reported this line — about a quarter of the register does not, and they are not in the comparison at all.

Canadian charities report how many of their ten highest-paid positions fall in each pay band. Not who they are, and not what any one person earns — the return does not collect that, and it cannot be worked out from what follows.

• 5$1–39,999
• 1$40,000–79,999

6 positions reported in total. The form asks only about the ten highest-paid, so a smaller number means the charity reported fewer compensated positions than that.