The Lac la Biche Agricultural Society

It took in $142,748 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.

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.

The Lac la Biche Agricultural Society reported spending 0.0% of its expenditure on charitable programs. Among the 68 charities registered under agriculture that reported the same line for 2020, the middle of the range is 75.1%, and this charity sits at the 0th percentile — below 100% 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$1–39,999

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.