Port Moody Ecological Society

It took in $4,315 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 programs91.7%
• Management and administration1.2%
• Fundraising7.1%

Port Moody Ecological Society reported spending 91.7% of its expenditure on charitable programs. Among the 4,465 charities registered under public amenities that reported the same line for 2024, the middle of the range is 85.8%, and this charity sits at the 63th percentile — above 63% 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.

This charity filed the compensation schedule but left every band blank. That is not the same as reporting nobody.

Charities that hold significant property not used in their programs must spend a minimum amount each year — the disbursement quota. Port Moody Ecological Society files this schedule; most charities do not.

Charities may also carry a disbursement excess forward for five years, so a single year is a slice of a longer calculation rather than the whole of it.