High River Food for Thought LTD.

It took in $12,570 more than it spent, and retained 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.

• Charitable programs61.0%
• Management and administration28.6%
• Fundraising9.7%
• Not allocated to a line0.7%

The reported lines do not add up to the total. The difference is spending the charity did not assign to any of them — the CRA return treats these lines as optional components of the total, not as a complete breakdown of it.

High River Food for Thought LTD. reported spending 61.0% of its expenditure on charitable programs. Among the 2,543 charities registered under support of schools and education that reported the same line for 2024, the middle of the range is 87.5%, and this charity sits at the 20th percentile — below 80% 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.

• 1$40,000–79,999

1 position 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.