The dataset shows entities the upstream entity-resolution pipeline adjudicated as RELATED to other funded entities — distinct legal registrations that share a name, structure, or governance lineage — where related-party relationships are more likely to materialise.
Detection signal · general.entity_merge_candidates.llm_verdict = 'RELATED' (Splink candidate → LLM adjudication) edges joined to general.entity_golden_records on both sides · ≥ 2 distinct RELATED counterparties · confidence ≥ 0.7 · signal = related-counterparty count · severity weights cross-dataset presence and source-record volume
Glassbox surfaces correlations and observations, not findings of misconduct. Severity is a calibrated read on how strongly the dataset matches the pattern definition — a starting point for review, not a verdict.
● Observation
The match meets the pattern threshold but the signal is the lower band. Normal review queue.
● Attention
The match exceeds the routine threshold. Worth a closer look — pull the source rows, walk the citation.
● Flag
The match is in the highest band of the calibrated scale. Recommend: prioritise for active review.
Severity is computed from the detection signal · general.entity_merge_candidates.llm_verdict = 'RELATED' (Splink candidate → LLM adjudication) edges joined to general.entity_golden_records on both sides · ≥ 2 distinct RELATED counterparties · confidence ≥ 0.7 · signal = related-counterparty count · severity weights cross-dataset presence and source-record volume
17,501 matches· page 21
Live table · computed Fri, 25 Sep 2026 02:16:17 GMT
The dataset shows BELANGER, NICOLE (CURTISS-WRIGHT DEFENSE SOLUTIONS) (organization) adjudicated as RELATED to 11 other entities by the entity-resolution pipeline (mean verdict confidence 0.80) — DEELJUR, KESHAV DARSHAN (CURTISS-WRIGHT DEFENSE SOLUTIONS); ABRAHAM, RYAN (CURTISS-WRIGHT DEFENSE SOLUTIONS); GENEST, PAUL (CURTISS-WRIGHT DEFENSE SOLUTIONS); HARTER, MATHIEU (CURTISS-WRIGHT DEFENSE SOLUTIONS); HUGHES, KEVIN (CURTISS-WRIGHT DEFENSE SOLUTIONS); it appears in 1 dataset (fed) with 1 source records. Glassbox surfaces the network; the funder verifies governance overlap.
Evidence strength
0.59 · moderate
11 cited fields from source records
Show observations (11 cited fields)Hide observations
Aggregated from the matches below. Severity bands are calibrated per pattern; counts and dollar totals reflect this snapshot only.
related count
11
avg related confidence
0.797
related entity
DEELJUR, KESHAV DARSHAN (CURTISS-WRIGHT DEFENSE SOLUTIONS) (0.85) — Both records are individual grant recipients at Curtiss-Wright Defense Solutions, but represent different people (Nicole Belanger vs. Keshav Darshan Deeljur). Same employer/affiliate org, different individuals — RELATED not SAME.
related entity
ABRAHAM, RYAN (CURTISS-WRIGHT DEFENSE SOLUTIONS) (0.82) — Both records reference Curtiss-Wright Defense Solutions but represent different named individuals (Abraham, Ryan vs. Belanger, Nicole) acting as contacts/representatives. Same parent company but distinct grant recipient entries — RELATED vi
related entity
GENEST, PAUL (CURTISS-WRIGHT DEFENSE SOLUTIONS) (0.82) — Both records reference Curtiss-Wright Defense Solutions but represent different named individuals (Belanger Nicole vs Genest Paul) acting as contacts/representatives. Same parent company, different grant recipient entries — RELATED not SAME
related entity
HARTER, MATHIEU (CURTISS-WRIGHT DEFENSE SOLUTIONS) (0.82) — Both records reference Curtiss-Wright Defense Solutions but represent different named individuals (Nicole Belanger vs. Mathieu Harter) acting as grant recipients/contacts. Same parent company but distinct recipient entries, not the same leg
related entity
HUGHES, KEVIN (CURTISS-WRIGHT DEFENSE SOLUTIONS) (0.82) — Both records share the parent company Curtiss-Wright Defense Solutions but represent different individuals (Nicole Belanger vs Kevin Hughes). They are related via the same employer but are distinct grant recipient entries.
CANADA SPECIAL OLYMPICS 2016 GAMES ORGANIZING COMMITTEE INC.|CANADA SPECIAL OLYMPICS 2016 GAMES ORGANIZING COMMITTEE INC.
high
recipient · CANADA SPECIAL OLYMPICS 2016 GAMES ORGANIZING COMMITTEE INC.|CANADA SPECIAL OLYMPICS 2016 GAMES ORGANIZING COMMITTEE INC.
The dataset shows CANADA SPECIAL OLYMPICS 2016 GAMES ORGANIZING COMMITTEE INC.|CANADA SPECIAL OLYMPICS 2016 GAMES ORGANIZING COMMITTEE INC. (organization) adjudicated as RELATED to 11 other entities by the entity-resolution pipeline (mean verdict confidence 0.84) — QUEBEC SPECIAL OLYMPICS INC.; SPECIAL OLYMPICS ALBERTA; SPECIAL OLYMPICS CANADA; SPECIAL OLYMPICS CANADA TOTAL; SPECIAL OLYMPICS LONDON; it appears in 1 dataset (fed) with 1 source records. Glassbox surfaces the network; the funder verifies governance overlap.
Evidence strength
0.59 · moderate
11 cited fields from source records
Show observations (11 cited fields)Hide observations
related count
11
avg related confidence
0.842
related entity
QUEBEC SPECIAL OLYMPICS INC. (0.85) — Entity A is Quebec Special Olympics Inc., a provincial chapter. Entity B is a separate legal org created specifically to organize the 2016 Canada Special Olympics Games. Same movement, but distinct legal entities with different scopes.
related entity
SPECIAL OLYMPICS ALBERTA (0.85) — Entity B is a temporary organizing committee for the 2016 Canada Special Olympics Games, distinct legal entity from Special Olympics Alberta (Entity A). Both relate to Special Olympics but are separate organizations with different mandates
related entity
SPECIAL OLYMPICS CANADA (0.85) — Entity B is a temporary organizing committee for the 2016 Special Olympics Canada Games — a distinct legal entity (no BN) created to run a specific event, not the national Special Olympics Canada charity (BN 118836337). Same movement, diffe
related entity
SPECIAL OLYMPICS CANADA TOTAL (0.85) — Entity A is Special Olympics Canada (national charity umbrella), Entity B is a specific one-time event organizing committee for the 2016 Games. Related affiliate/subsidiary, not the same legal entity.
related entity
SPECIAL OLYMPICS LONDON (0.85) — Both are Special Olympics entities but serve distinct purposes: A is a local London chapter (CRA charity, BN 109068435); B is a temporary organizing committee for the 2016 Canada Games. Different legal entities, different scope.
recipient · CANADIAN PROGRESS CLUB, DRAYTON VALLEY
The dataset shows CANADIAN PROGRESS CLUB, DRAYTON VALLEY (non_profit) adjudicated as RELATED to 11 other entities by the entity-resolution pipeline (mean verdict confidence 0.86) — CANADIAN PROGRESS CLUB - AIRDRIE; CANADIAN PROGRESS CLUB - CALGARY CHINOOK; CANADIAN PROGRESS CLUB CALGARY MOUNT ROYAL; THE CANADIAN PROGRESS CLUB EDMONTON CENTRE; CANADIAN PROGRESS CLUB CALGARY DOWNTOWN; it appears in 1 dataset (ab) with 1 source records. Glassbox surfaces the network; the funder verifies governance overlap.
Evidence strength
0.59 · moderate
11 cited fields from source records
Show observations (11 cited fields)Hide observations
related count
11
avg related confidence
0.864
related entity
CANADIAN PROGRESS CLUB - AIRDRIE (0.92) — Both are local chapters of the Canadian Progress Club network but located in different cities (Drayton Valley vs Airdrie). Different chapters = distinct legal entities, but affiliated under the same national organization.
related entity
CANADIAN PROGRESS CLUB - CALGARY CHINOOK (0.92) — Both are local chapters of the Canadian Progress Club national organization, but serve different cities (Calgary Chinook vs. Drayton Valley). Same parent brand, different legal chapters => RELATED, not SAME.
related entity
CANADIAN PROGRESS CLUB CALGARY MOUNT ROYAL (0.92) — Both are local chapters of the Canadian Progress Club but in different cities (Drayton Valley vs. Calgary Mount Royal). Same national organization family but distinct legal entities per different-cities rule.
related entity
THE CANADIAN PROGRESS CLUB EDMONTON CENTRE (0.92) — Both are local chapters of the Canadian Progress Club but in different cities (Drayton Valley vs Edmonton Centre). Same national organization, different local chapters/entities — RELATED not SAME.
related entity
CANADIAN PROGRESS CLUB CALGARY DOWNTOWN (0.85) — Both are local chapters of the Canadian Progress Club but in different cities (Calgary Downtown vs. Drayton Valley). Same national organization family but distinct legal entities at the chapter level. No shared BN. Different cities => RELAT
The dataset shows Chipewyan Prairie First Nation (government) adjudicated as RELATED to 11 other entities by the entity-resolution pipeline (mean verdict confidence 0.80) — CHIPEWYAN PRAIRIE FIRST NATION HOUSING SOCIETY; CHIPEWYAN PRAIRIE FIRST NATION TRAPPERS ASSOCIATION; CHIPEWYAN PRAIRIE EDUCATION AUTHORITY; Chipewyan Prairie First Nation Health Centre; CHIPEWYAN PRAIRIE FIRST NATION RECREATION BOARD; it appears in 3 datasets (ab, cra, fed) with 364 source records. Glassbox surfaces the network; the funder verifies governance overlap.
Evidence strength
0.59 · moderate
11 cited fields from source records
Show observations (11 cited fields)Hide observations
related count
11
avg related confidence
0.8
related entity
CHIPEWYAN PRAIRIE FIRST NATION HOUSING SOCIETY (0.85) — Housing Society is a separate non-profit entity created by Chipewyan Prairie First Nation for housing programs. Same community/parent, but distinct legal organisation. No shared BN. Parent/affiliate relationship, not same legal entity.
related entity
CHIPEWYAN PRAIRIE FIRST NATION TRAPPERS ASSOCIATION (0.85) — Chipewyan Prairie First Nation Trappers Association is a distinct affiliated body of the First Nation, not the same legal entity. Same community/affiliation but different organisation with different legal purpose.
related entity
CHIPEWYAN PRAIRIE EDUCATION AUTHORITY (0.82) — Both are affiliated with Chipewyan Prairie Dene First Nation but are distinct legal entities: A is the First Nation government itself; B is its education authority, a separate body serving the community. Parent/affiliate relationship, not s
related entity
Chipewyan Prairie First Nation Health Centre (0.82) — Health Centre is a subsidiary/departmental unit of Chipewyan Prairie First Nation, not the same legal entity. Different names, different entity types, no shared BN. Parent org vs. health service facility => RELATED.
related entity
CHIPEWYAN PRAIRIE FIRST NATION RECREATION BOARD (0.82) — Recreation Board is a subsidiary/affiliate body of Chipewyan Prairie First Nation, not the same legal entity. Distinct org with separate non-profit registration; preference is RELATED over SAME when in doubt.
The dataset shows CLARESHOLM CHURCH OF THE NAZARENE (non_profit) adjudicated as RELATED to 11 other entities by the entity-resolution pipeline (mean verdict confidence 0.83) — CHURCH OF THE NAZARENE - CANADA WEST DISTRICT; CHURCH OF THE NAZARENE; Church of the Nazarene Canada; CHURCH OF THE NAZARENE CANADA PACIFIC DISTRICT; CHURCH OF THE NAZARENE - NATIONAL; it appears in 1 dataset (ab) with 1 source records. Glassbox surfaces the network; the funder verifies governance overlap.
Evidence strength
0.59 · moderate
11 cited fields from source records
Show observations (11 cited fields)Hide observations
related count
11
avg related confidence
0.83
related entity
CHURCH OF THE NAZARENE - CANADA WEST DISTRICT (0.88) — Canada West District is the regional governing body; Claresholm Church of the Nazarene is a local congregation within that district. Different legal entities: no shared BN, different scope. Parent/affiliate relationship.
related entity
CHURCH OF THE NAZARENE (0.85) — Claresholm Church of the Nazarene is a local congregation in Claresholm, AB; Entity A is a distinct registered CRA charity with its own BN. Different BN roots and different geographic scope suggest affiliate/chapter relationship, not the sa
related entity
Church of the Nazarene Canada (0.85) — Claresholm Church of the Nazarene is a local congregation affiliated with Church of the Nazarene Canada (the national body, BN 127875276). Same denomination but different legal entities: local chapter vs. national organization.
related entity
CHURCH OF THE NAZARENE CANADA PACIFIC DISTRICT (0.85) — Pacific District is the regional denominational body (CRA charity, BN 894773372); Claresholm Church of the Nazarene is a local congregation in Claresholm AB — same denomination but different legal entities, parent/affiliate relationship.
related entity
CHURCH OF THE NAZARENE - NATIONAL (0.85) — Entity A is the national-level Church of the Nazarene charity (CRA BN). Entity B is a local congregation in Claresholm, AB. Different legal entities: regional chapter vs. national body. No shared BN root.
The dataset shows CORRIDOR CHALLENGER LEAGUE (charity) adjudicated as RELATED to 11 other entities by the entity-resolution pipeline (mean verdict confidence 0.74) — BURNABY CHALLENGER LEAGUE; DRUMMONDVILLE CHALLENGER LEAGUE; PARKLAND CHALLENGER LEAGUE; SOUTH DELTA CHALLENGER LEAGUE; ANTIGONISH CHALLENGER LEAGUE; it appears in 1 dataset (cra) with 2 source records. Glassbox surfaces the network; the funder verifies governance overlap.
Evidence strength
0.59 · moderate
11 cited fields from source records
Show observations (11 cited fields)Hide observations
related count
11
avg related confidence
0.745
related entity
BURNABY CHALLENGER LEAGUE (0.82) — Both are Challenger League chapters (sports/recreation for people with disabilities) registered with CRA, but serve different geographic areas: Corridor vs Burnaby, BC. Likely affiliated regional chapters of the same network, not the same l
related entity
DRUMMONDVILLE CHALLENGER LEAGUE (0.78) — Both are Challenger League chapters (adapted sports) but in different regions: 'Corridor' vs 'Drummondville'. No shared BN. Likely affiliated under same national program but are distinct local organisations.
related entity
PARKLAND CHALLENGER LEAGUE (0.78) — Both are Challenger League sports organisations for people with disabilities, but 'Corridor' and 'Parkland' indicate different regional chapters/affiliates in Alberta. Same program type, different geographic entities — RELATED not SAME.
related entity
SOUTH DELTA CHALLENGER LEAGUE (0.78) — Both are regional chapters of the Challenger League (sports program for people with disabilities) but serve different areas: Corridor and South Delta. Same program type/brand, different geographic chapters — RELATED not SAME.
related entity
ANTIGONISH CHALLENGER LEAGUE (0.75) — Both are Challenger League charities (adapted sports) but serve different geographic areas: Corridor region vs. Antigonish, NS. Likely affiliated chapters of the same national program but distinct legal entities.
recipient · DENE THA FIRST NATION SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT
The dataset shows DENE THA FIRST NATION SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT (organization) adjudicated as RELATED to 11 other entities by the entity-resolution pipeline (mean verdict confidence 0.75) — DENE THA' FIRST NATION EDUCATION; Dene Tha' First Nation; DENE THA' FIRST NATION HEALTH SERVICES; DENE THA COMMUNICATION SOCIETY; DENE THA GAS UTILITY; it appears in 1 dataset (ab) with 131 source records. Glassbox surfaces the network; the funder verifies governance overlap.
Evidence strength
0.59 · moderate
11 cited fields from source records
Show observations (11 cited fields)Hide observations
related count
11
avg related confidence
0.752
related entity
DENE THA' FIRST NATION EDUCATION (0.85) — Both are departments/divisions of Dene Tha' First Nation but serve distinct functions (Education vs. Social Development). Same parent nation, different organizational units — RELATED not SAME.
related entity
Dene Tha' First Nation (0.82) — Entity B 'DENE THA FIRST NATION SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT' is a department/program of Entity A (the First Nation government), not the same legal entity. It is a subsidiary/affiliate operational unit, not a separate incorporated body.
related entity
DENE THA' FIRST NATION HEALTH SERVICES (0.82) — Both are departments/programs of Dene Tha' First Nation, but 'Social Development' and 'Health Services' are distinct functional units, not the same legal entity. Prefer RELATED as separate departmental bodies under the same First Nation.
related entity
DENE THA COMMUNICATION SOCIETY (0.75) — Both involve Dene Tha community but serve distinct functions: A is a communication society (non-profit), B is social development (government/band program). Same community, different legal entities/mandates. Prefer RELATED over SAME.
related entity
DENE THA GAS UTILITY (0.75) — Both share 'Dene Tha' indicating same First Nation community, but 'Social Development' and 'Gas Utility' are distinct departments/entities under Dene Tha First Nation. Related affiliates, not the same legal organisation.
recipient · DENE THA' FIRST NATION SOCIAL SERVICES
The dataset shows DENE THA' FIRST NATION SOCIAL SERVICES (organization) adjudicated as RELATED to 11 other entities by the entity-resolution pipeline (mean verdict confidence 0.79) — DENE THA' FIRST NATION EDUCATION; Dene Tha' First Nation; DENE THA' FIRST NATION HEALTH SERVICES; DENE THA' COMMUNITY SCHOOL; DENE THA' ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT; it appears in 1 dataset (ab) with 1 source records. Glassbox surfaces the network; the funder verifies governance overlap.
Evidence strength
0.59 · moderate
11 cited fields from source records
Show observations (11 cited fields)Hide observations
related count
11
avg related confidence
0.79
related entity
DENE THA' FIRST NATION EDUCATION (0.88) — Both are departments/divisions of Dene Tha' First Nation but serve distinct functions (Education vs. Social Services). Same parent nation, different operational units — RELATED, not SAME.
related entity
Dene Tha' First Nation (0.85) — Entity B is a specific department/division (Social Services) of Entity A (Dene Tha' First Nation), not the same legal organisation. Departmental units are RELATED but not SAME as the parent government body.
related entity
DENE THA' FIRST NATION HEALTH SERVICES (0.85) — Both are departments/programs of Dene Tha' First Nation but serve distinct functions: Social Services vs Health Services. Same parent nation, different operational units. RELATED, not SAME.
related entity
DENE THA' COMMUNITY SCHOOL (0.82) — Both are Dene Tha' First Nation entities but serve distinct functions: A is a community school (charity/education), B is social services (organization). Same community, likely affiliated, but different legal entities with different mandates
related entity
DENE THA' ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT (0.82) — Both relate to Dene Tha' First Nation but are distinct departments/arms: A is the Economic Development division (with BN 107012585), B is Social Services. Same First Nation, different functional units — RELATED not SAME.
The dataset shows DOWN SYNDROME ASSOCIATION (charity) adjudicated as RELATED to 11 other entities by the entity-resolution pipeline (mean verdict confidence 0.70) — HALIFAX NS DOWN SYNDROME ASSOCIATION; ASSOCIATION DU SYNDROME DE DOWN; CANADIAN DOWN SYNDROME SOCIETY; CANADIAN DOWN SYNDROME SOCIETY; DOWN SYNDROME ASSOCIATION OF ONTARIO; it appears in 1 dataset (cra) with 4 source records. Glassbox surfaces the network; the funder verifies governance overlap.
Evidence strength
0.59 · moderate
11 cited fields from source records
Show observations (11 cited fields)Hide observations
related count
11
avg related confidence
0.698
related entity
HALIFAX NS DOWN SYNDROME ASSOCIATION (0.75) — Entity B specifies Halifax NS, indicating a regional chapter or local association. Entity A has no location qualifier and may be a national or separate local body. Different cities/scope => RELATED not SAME per rules.
related entity
ASSOCIATION DU SYNDROME DE DOWN (0.72) — Entity A is a French-named Quebec charitable org with a confirmed BN. Entity B is English-named 'DOWN SYNDROME ASSOCIATION' with no BN. Likely related organizations (bilingual/regional) but insufficient evidence to confirm same legal entity
related entity
CANADIAN DOWN SYNDROME SOCIETY (0.72) — Entity B 'DOWN SYNDROME ASSOCIATION' lacks a BN root and has minimal source links. High keyword overlap but different names suggest a regional/local affiliate or separate org, not the national 'Canadian Down Syndrome Society'. Prefer RELATE
related entity
CANADIAN DOWN SYNDROME SOCIETY (0.72) — Entity B has no BN and only 4 source links vs A's 39. 'DOWN SYNDROME ASSOCIATION' appears in A's alternates as 'DOWN SYNDROME ASSOCIATION LAMBTON', suggesting a local chapter. Different legal entities; prefer RELATED over SAME.
related entity
DOWN SYNDROME ASSOCIATION OF ONTARIO (0.72) — Entity B has no BN root and only the generic name 'DOWN SYNDROME ASSOCIATION' with no province qualifier. Entity A is clearly Ontario-specific with a BN. Likely a different regional chapter or related org, not the same legal entity.
recipient · EVANGEL PENTECOSTAL ASSEMBLY OF EDMONTON
The dataset shows EVANGEL PENTECOSTAL ASSEMBLY OF EDMONTON (non_profit) adjudicated as RELATED to 11 other entities by the entity-resolution pipeline (mean verdict confidence 0.64) — EVANGEL PENTECOSTAL ASSEMBLY; EVANGEL PENTECOSTAL ASSEMBLY; EVANGEL PENTECOSTAL CHURCH; EVANGEL PENTECOSTAL CHURCH; EVANGEL ASSEMBLY; it appears in 1 dataset (ab) with 1 source records. Glassbox surfaces the network; the funder verifies governance overlap.
Evidence strength
0.59 · moderate
Why this may be benign · Denominational hierarchies (dioceses, synods, conferences, councils, presbyteries) routinely move funds between the parent body and congregations; structural relatedness here is expected.
11 cited fields from source records
Show observations (11 cited fields)Hide observations
related count
11
avg related confidence
0.637
related entity
EVANGEL PENTECOSTAL ASSEMBLY (0.72) — Entity A has BN root 107354797 and appears in CRA/FED data. Entity B adds 'OF EDMONTON' specifying a city, has no BN, and appears only in AB non-profit data. Likely same or affiliated org but different registrations; per rules, prefer RELAT
related entity
EVANGEL PENTECOSTAL ASSEMBLY (0.65) — Entity B specifies 'OF EDMONTON' suggesting a specific city branch/chapter. No shared BN root to confirm identity. Name overlap is strong but the geographic qualifier and lack of BN on B suggest a related chapter rather than the same legal
related entity
EVANGEL PENTECOSTAL CHURCH (0.65) — Similar Pentecostal church names but no shared BN root. Entity B specifies Edmonton location; Entity A has no city qualifier. Likely same congregation or affiliate but insufficient evidence to confirm SAME legal entity.
related entity
EVANGEL PENTECOSTAL CHURCH (0.65) — No shared BN root; Entity B has no BN. Names share 'Evangel Pentecostal' but differ: 'Church' vs 'Assembly of Edmonton'. Likely related Pentecostal congregations but not confirmed same legal entity.
related entity
EVANGEL ASSEMBLY (0.62) — Both share 'Evangel Assembly' core name but B adds 'Pentecostal' and 'of Edmonton' specifics. No shared BN root; A has CRA registration. Could be same org or a related Edmonton chapter. Prefer RELATED per rules when in doubt.
The dataset shows FOUNTAIN TIRE EDMONTON ROPER ROAD LTD. (organization) adjudicated as RELATED to 11 other entities by the entity-resolution pipeline (mean verdict confidence 0.81) — FOUNTAIN TIRE CHARITABLE FOUNDATION; FOUNTAIN TIRE ( DELTA ) LTD.; FOUNTAIN TIRE FALHER CO. LTD.; FOUNTAIN TIRE (RED DEER) CO LTD; Fountain Tire Ltd; it appears in 1 dataset (ab) with 1 source records. Glassbox surfaces the network; the funder verifies governance overlap.
Evidence strength
0.59 · moderate
11 cited fields from source records
Show observations (11 cited fields)Hide observations
related count
11
avg related confidence
0.813
related entity
FOUNTAIN TIRE CHARITABLE FOUNDATION (0.85) — Both share 'Fountain Tire' brand but are distinct legal entities: A is a charitable foundation (non-profit), B is a specific retail/operating company (ltd). Foundation vs. operating subsidiary => RELATED, not SAME.
related entity
FOUNTAIN TIRE ( DELTA ) LTD. (0.85) — Both share 'Fountain Tire' brand but are distinct legal entities: one is Delta location (BN 885188540), the other is Edmonton Roper Road with no BN. Different cities, no shared BN root — likely franchisee affiliates, not the same legal org.
related entity
FOUNTAIN TIRE FALHER CO. LTD. (0.85) — Both are distinct Fountain Tire franchise/dealer companies operating in different cities (Falher vs. Edmonton Roper Road). Same brand but different legal entities with different locations. Likely co-franchisees or affiliates, not the same l
related entity
FOUNTAIN TIRE (RED DEER) CO LTD (0.85) — Both share 'Fountain Tire' brand but are distinct legal entities: one is Red Deer location, other is Edmonton Roper Road. Different cities, no shared BN root. Likely franchisees or subsidiaries under Fountain Tire brand — RELATED.
related entity
Fountain Tire Ltd (0.82) — Entity B appears to be a specific franchised location (Edmonton Roper Road) operating under the Fountain Tire brand, not the same legal entity as the parent Fountain Tire Ltd (BN 898297213). Different legal names, no shared BN root.
GOODSTONEY FIRST NATION STONEY TRIBAL ADMINISTRATION
high
recipient · GOODSTONEY FIRST NATION STONEY TRIBAL ADMINISTRATION
The dataset shows GOODSTONEY FIRST NATION STONEY TRIBAL ADMINISTRATION (organization) adjudicated as RELATED to 11 other entities by the entity-resolution pipeline (mean verdict confidence 0.74) — Chiniki First Nation (in Trust to Stoney Tribal Administration); STONEY NAKODA FIRST NATION; STONEY FIRST NATION; BEARSPAW FIRST NATION (IN TRUST TO STONEY TRIBAL ADMINISTRATION); Goodstoney First Nation; it appears in 1 dataset (ab) with 8 source records. Glassbox surfaces the network; the funder verifies governance overlap.
Evidence strength
0.59 · moderate
11 cited fields from source records
Show observations (11 cited fields)Hide observations
related count
11
avg related confidence
0.737
related entity
Chiniki First Nation (in Trust to Stoney Tribal Administration) (0.82) — Chiniki and Goodstoney are two distinct First Nations bands within the Stoney Tribal Administration umbrella. Same administrative body (Stoney Tribal Administration) but different band entities — RELATED not SAME.
related entity
STONEY NAKODA FIRST NATION (0.78) — Goodstoney First Nation is one of three bands within the Stoney Tribal Administration/Stoney Nakoda Nation. They share the Stoney Nakoda identity but are distinct legal entities — band vs. tribal umbrella — making them RELATED, not SAME.
related entity
STONEY FIRST NATION (0.75) — Stoney First Nation is the broader collective (Stoney Tribal Administration covering Bearspaw, Chiniki, Goodstoney bands). Goodstoney First Nation is one of three constituent bands — a related but distinct legal entity, not the same organis
related entity
BEARSPAW FIRST NATION (IN TRUST TO STONEY TRIBAL ADMINISTRATION) (0.72) — Both involve Stoney Tribal Administration but A is specifically Bearspaw First Nation (one of three Stoney bands) held in trust, while B references Goodstoney First Nation — a distinct band. They share the Stoney Tribal Administration umbre
related entity
Goodstoney First Nation (0.72) — Goodstoney First Nation is the band/nation itself (CRA qualified donee, fed grants). 'Stoney Tribal Administration' is an administrative body serving multiple Stoney bands. Likely affiliate/admin arm, not the same legal entity. Prefer RELAT
GRANT MACEWAN UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF CONTINUING EDUCATION
high
recipient · GRANT MACEWAN UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF CONTINUING EDUCATION
The dataset shows GRANT MACEWAN UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF CONTINUING EDUCATION (organization) adjudicated as RELATED to 11 other entities by the entity-resolution pipeline (mean verdict confidence 0.82) — EWANCHUK, LOGAN (GRANT MACEWAN UNIVERSITY); GRANT MACEWAN COMMUNITY COLLEGE ALUMNI ASSOCIATION; BURAK, KATHERINE (GRANT MACEWAN UNIVERSITY); DAVIS, JEFFREY (GRANT MACEWAN UNIVERSITY); MACEWAN UNIVERSITY ACCOUNTING CLUB; it appears in 1 dataset (ab) with 6 source records. Glassbox surfaces the network; the funder verifies governance overlap.
Evidence strength
0.59 · moderate
11 cited fields from source records
Show observations (11 cited fields)Hide observations
related count
11
avg related confidence
0.819
related entity
EWANCHUK, LOGAN (GRANT MACEWAN UNIVERSITY) (0.85) — Entity A is an individual researcher (Logan Ewanchuk) affiliated with Grant MacEwan University receiving a federal grant. Entity B is a specific school/division of Grant MacEwan University. Both relate to the same university but are not the
related entity
GRANT MACEWAN COMMUNITY COLLEGE ALUMNI ASSOCIATION (0.85) — Both share the Grant MacEwan brand but are distinct legal entities: one is an alumni association (non-profit), the other is a university continuing education school (internal academic unit). Same parent institution, different organisations.
related entity
BURAK, KATHERINE (GRANT MACEWAN UNIVERSITY) (0.82) — Entity A is an individual researcher (Katherine Burak) affiliated with Grant MacEwan University receiving a federal grant. Entity B is a specific school/division of Grant MacEwan University. Both connect to the same university but are disti
related entity
DAVIS, JEFFREY (GRANT MACEWAN UNIVERSITY) (0.82) — Entity A is an individual researcher (Jeffrey Davis) affiliated with Grant MacEwan University; Entity B is a specific school/division of that university. Both relate to Grant MacEwan University but are not the same legal entity.
related entity
MACEWAN UNIVERSITY ACCOUNTING CLUB (0.82) — Both relate to MacEwan University but are distinct units: A is a student accounting club (federal grant recipient), B is the School of Continuing Education (Alberta grants). Same parent institution, different legal/operational entities.
The dataset shows GVIC Communications Corp (company) adjudicated as RELATED to 11 other entities by the entity-resolution pipeline (mean verdict confidence 0.80) — GVIC COMMUNICATIONS CORP. - DELORAINE TIMES & STAR; GVIC COMMUNICATIONS CORP. - FLIN FLON REMINDER; GVIC COMMUNICATIONS CORP. - KAMSACK TIMES; GVIC COMMUNICATIONS CORP. - THE CANORA COURIER; GVIC COMMUNICATIONS CORP. - THE REDVERS OPTIMIST; it appears in 1 dataset (fed) with 62 source records. Glassbox surfaces the network; the funder verifies governance overlap.
Evidence strength
0.59 · moderate
11 cited fields from source records
Show observations (11 cited fields)Hide observations
related count
11
avg related confidence
0.801
related entity
GVIC COMMUNICATIONS CORP. - DELORAINE TIMES & STAR (0.82) — Entity B is GVIC Communications Corp. operating a specific publication (Deloraine Times & Star), a named division/trade name. Per rules, prefer RELATED over SAME when doubt exists; the publication suffix indicates a distinct operational uni
related entity
GVIC COMMUNICATIONS CORP. - FLIN FLON REMINDER (0.82) — Entity B is GVIC Communications Corp. operating a specific publication (Flin Flon Reminder), suggesting a division/trade name rather than identical legal entity. Prefer RELATED over SAME per tie-break rules.
related entity
GVIC COMMUNICATIONS CORP. - KAMSACK TIMES (0.82) — Entity B is GVIC Communications Corp. operating/trading as the Kamsack Times publication. The parent legal entity and a named publication/division are related but not strictly the same legal record; prefer RELATED over SAME per rules.
related entity
GVIC COMMUNICATIONS CORP. - THE CANORA COURIER (0.82) — Entity B specifies a named publication (The Canora Courier) operated by GVIC Communications Corp., suggesting a division/trade name rather than a fully identical legal entity. Prefer RELATED over SAME per rules.
related entity
GVIC COMMUNICATIONS CORP. - THE REDVERS OPTIMIST (0.82) — Entity B is GVIC Communications Corp. operating/publishing 'The Redvers Optimist', a specific publication or trade name. B is a division/publication of A, not identical legal entity. Prefer RELATED over SAME per rules.
HINTON METIS ASSOCIATION LOCAL 1988 OF THE METIS ASSOCIATION OF ALBERTA
high
recipient · HINTON METIS ASSOCIATION LOCAL 1988 OF THE METIS ASSOCIATION OF ALBERTA
The dataset shows HINTON METIS ASSOCIATION LOCAL 1988 OF THE METIS ASSOCIATION OF ALBERTA (non_profit) adjudicated as RELATED to 11 other entities by the entity-resolution pipeline (mean verdict confidence 0.88) — LOCAL #100 (EDMONTON) OF THE METIS ASSOCIATION OF ALBERTA.; LOCAL #11 (ONOWAY) OF THE METIS ASSOCIATION OF ALBERTA; LOCAL # 147 ( FAUST ALBERTA) OF THE METIS ASSOCIATION OF ALBERTA; LOCAL 14 (CALGARY) OF THE METIS ASSOCIATION OF ALBERTA; LOCAL #168 (BRETON) OF THE METIS ASSOCIATION OF ALBERTA; it appears in 1 dataset (ab) with 1 source records. Glassbox surfaces the network; the funder verifies governance overlap.
Evidence strength
0.59 · moderate
Why this may be benign · Federated charities (United Way / Centraide, Jewish federations, national bodies with provincial or local chapters) are legally distinct entities that are related by charter — relatedness is disclosed, not hidden.
11 cited fields from source records
Show observations (11 cited fields)Hide observations
related count
11
avg related confidence
0.877
related entity
LOCAL #100 (EDMONTON) OF THE METIS ASSOCIATION OF ALBERTA. (0.92) — Both are distinct local chapters of the Metis Association of Alberta — Local 1988 in Hinton vs Local 100 in Edmonton. Different local numbers, different cities; sibling affiliates under the same parent, not the same entity.
related entity
LOCAL #11 (ONOWAY) OF THE METIS ASSOCIATION OF ALBERTA (0.92) — Both are distinct local chapters of the Metis Association of Alberta but different locals: Hinton Local 1988 vs Onoway Local #11. Same parent org, different geographic chapters => RELATED not SAME.
related entity
LOCAL # 147 ( FAUST ALBERTA) OF THE METIS ASSOCIATION OF ALBERTA (0.92) — Both are distinct local chapters of the Metis Association of Alberta but in different locations (Hinton Local 1988 vs Faust Local 147). Same parent organization, different legal entities.
related entity
LOCAL 14 (CALGARY) OF THE METIS ASSOCIATION OF ALBERTA (0.92) — Both are distinct local chapters of the Metis Association of Alberta — Local 1988 in Hinton vs. Local 14 in Calgary. Same parent organization but different geographic chapters, so RELATED not SAME.
The dataset shows KNIGHTS OF COLUMBUS #1732 (charity) adjudicated as RELATED to 11 other entities by the entity-resolution pipeline (mean verdict confidence 0.79) — Knights of Columbus; Knights of Columbus Charities Inc; KNIGHTS OF COLUMBUS NORTH RUSTICO FOOD BANK; LASALLE KNIGHTS OF COLUMBUS FOUNDATION; THE ALBERTA KNIGHTS OF COLUMBUS CHARITABLE FOUNDATION; it appears in 1 dataset (cra) with 2 source records. Glassbox surfaces the network; the funder verifies governance overlap.
Evidence strength
0.59 · moderate
11 cited fields from source records
Show observations (11 cited fields)Hide observations
related count
11
avg related confidence
0.785
related entity
Knights of Columbus (0.85) — Entity A is a specific local council (#1732) of the Knights of Columbus fraternal order; Entity B appears to be the national/umbrella organization. Local council vs. national body = RELATED, not SAME. Different BN roots support this.
related entity
Knights of Columbus Charities Inc (0.85) — Entity A is a local Knights of Columbus council (#1732); Entity B is 'Knights of Columbus Charities Inc.', a separate national/corporate charitable entity. Same fraternal family but distinct legal organisations — chapter vs. charitable corp
related entity
KNIGHTS OF COLUMBUS NORTH RUSTICO FOOD BANK (0.85) — Both are Knights of Columbus entities but distinct: A is council #1732 (a local council), B is a food bank operated by KoC in North Rustico PEI. Different legal registrations, different purposes. Council vs. food bank affiliate => RELATED.
related entity
LASALLE KNIGHTS OF COLUMBUS FOUNDATION (0.85) — Both are Knights of Columbus entities but distinct: A is a named foundation, B is a specific council (#1732). Foundation vs. council chapter = RELATED affiliates under the KofC umbrella, not the same legal org.
related entity
THE ALBERTA KNIGHTS OF COLUMBUS CHARITABLE FOUNDATION (0.85) — Entity A is a provincial charitable foundation (BN 119211662) for Alberta Knights of Columbus. Entity B is a local council (#1732) with no BN. Different legal entities: one is a foundation, the other a specific council chapter.
recipient · KNIGHTS OF COLUMBUS FATHER MALONEY COUNCIL
The dataset shows KNIGHTS OF COLUMBUS FATHER MALONEY COUNCIL (charity) adjudicated as RELATED to 11 other entities by the entity-resolution pipeline (mean verdict confidence 0.80) — KNIGHTS OF COLUMBUS, ST. PATRICK'S COUNCIL 485; KNIGHTS OF COLUMBUS 3945 CHARITABLE TRUST; KNIGHTS OF COLUMBUS BUILDING TRUST; KNIGHTS OF COLUMBUS FOOD BANK; KNIGHTS OF COLUMBUS INDOOR GAMES; it appears in 1 dataset (cra) with 1 source records. Glassbox surfaces the network; the funder verifies governance overlap.
Evidence strength
0.59 · moderate
11 cited fields from source records
Show observations (11 cited fields)Hide observations
related count
11
avg related confidence
0.797
related entity
KNIGHTS OF COLUMBUS, ST. PATRICK'S COUNCIL 485 (0.85) — Both are Knights of Columbus councils (Catholic fraternal org), but different councils: 'St. Patrick's Council 485' vs 'Father Maloney Council'. Separate local chapters sharing parent KoC affiliation => RELATED, not SAME.
related entity
KNIGHTS OF COLUMBUS 3945 CHARITABLE TRUST (0.82) — Both are Knights of Columbus entities but Entity A is a registered charitable trust (BN 887894095, council 3945) while Entity B is a named council (Father Maloney) with no BN. Different legal entities within the same fraternal organization.
related entity
KNIGHTS OF COLUMBUS BUILDING TRUST (0.82) — Both are Knights of Columbus entities but distinct: A is a Building Trust (property/asset entity, has BN), B is a named local Council (Father Maloney, no BN). Different legal purposes and no shared BN root.
related entity
KNIGHTS OF COLUMBUS FOOD BANK (0.82) — Both are Knights of Columbus entities but distinct: A is a food bank operation, B is a specific council (Father Maloney). Different functional units within the KoC fraternal organization — likely affiliated but not the same legal entity.
related entity
KNIGHTS OF COLUMBUS INDOOR GAMES (0.82) — Both are Knights of Columbus chapters but distinct councils/entities: one is an Indoor Games organization (BN 207129000), the other is Father Maloney Council with no BN. Different local chapters, not the same legal entity.
recipient · KNIGHTS OF COLUMBUS ST. PATRICK'S COUNCIL
The dataset shows KNIGHTS OF COLUMBUS ST. PATRICK'S COUNCIL (charity) adjudicated as RELATED to 11 other entities by the entity-resolution pipeline (mean verdict confidence 0.78) — KNIGHTS OF COLUMBUS (BC) CHARITY FOUNDATION; Knights of Columbus; KNIGHTS OF COLUMBUS BUILDING TRUST; KNIGHTS OF COLUMBUS COUNCIL 9246; KNIGHTS OF COLUMBUS FOOD BANK; it appears in 1 dataset (cra) with 1 source records. Glassbox surfaces the network; the funder verifies governance overlap.
Evidence strength
0.59 · moderate
11 cited fields from source records
Show observations (11 cited fields)Hide observations
related count
11
avg related confidence
0.779
related entity
KNIGHTS OF COLUMBUS (BC) CHARITY FOUNDATION (0.85) — Both are Knights of Columbus entities but distinct: A is a BC-wide charity foundation (BN 129494472), B is a local council (St. Patrick's, no BN). Different legal entities — foundation vs. local council chapter.
related entity
Knights of Columbus (0.82) — Entity A is a specific local council (St. Patrick's) of the Knights of Columbus fraternal organization; Entity B appears to be the broader/national Knights of Columbus entity. Local council vs. parent organization => RELATED, not SAME.
related entity
KNIGHTS OF COLUMBUS BUILDING TRUST (0.82) — Both are Knights of Columbus entities but distinct: A is a Building Trust (property/asset holding body, has BN), B is St. Patrick's Council (a local council chapter, no BN). Different legal structures/purposes within the same fraternal orga
related entity
KNIGHTS OF COLUMBUS COUNCIL 9246 (0.82) — Both are Knights of Columbus local councils but have distinct identities: Council 9246 is identified by number, St. Patrick's by parish name. Different councils within the KofC fraternal organization — same parent body, different chartered
related entity
KNIGHTS OF COLUMBUS FOOD BANK (0.82) — Both are Knights of Columbus entities but serve different functions: A is a food bank operation, B is a specific council (St. Patrick's). Likely affiliated under the same KofC umbrella but are distinct legal charitable registrations.
recipient · LÉGION ROYALE CANADIENNE DE BEAUHARNOIS
The dataset shows LÉGION ROYALE CANADIENNE DE BEAUHARNOIS (organization) adjudicated as RELATED to 11 other entities by the entity-resolution pipeline (mean verdict confidence 0.77) — LÉGION CANADIENNE; LÉGION ROYALE CANADIENNE SUCC. 172, BAY CHALEUR; LÉGION ROYALE CANADIENNE, FILIALE 06-012 COMMANDEUR ALPHONSE-DESJARDINS; Légion Royale Canadienne Filiale 277 Michel Jr Levesque; Légion Royale Canadienne Filiale 265 (Québec); it appears in 1 dataset (fed) with 1 source records. Glassbox surfaces the network; the funder verifies governance overlap.
Evidence strength
0.59 · moderate
11 cited fields from source records
Show observations (11 cited fields)Hide observations
related count
11
avg related confidence
0.773
related entity
LÉGION CANADIENNE (0.85) — Entity A is the national Royal Canadian Legion (Légion Canadienne), a CRA qualified donee. Entity B is a specific local branch in Beauharnois, QC. National organization vs. regional chapter => RELATED, not SAME.
related entity
LÉGION ROYALE CANADIENNE SUCC. 172, BAY CHALEUR (0.85) — Both are Royal Canadian Legion branches but different locals: Beauharnois (no branch number) vs. Branch 172 Bay Chaleur. Same national organization (Royal Canadian Legion) but distinct local chapters in different regions.
related entity
LÉGION ROYALE CANADIENNE, FILIALE 06-012 COMMANDEUR ALPHONSE-DESJARDINS (0.82) — Both are Royal Canadian Legion branches in the Beauharnois area but Entity B has a specific branch number (06-012) and named subunit (Commandeur Alphonse-Desjardins), suggesting distinct local branches, not the same legal entity.
related entity
Légion Royale Canadienne Filiale 277 Michel Jr Levesque (0.82) — Both are local branches of the Royal Canadian Legion. Entity A is the Beauharnois branch; Entity B is Branch 277. These are likely the same branch under different name formats, but without confirming Branch 277 = Beauharnois, prefer RELATED
related entity
Légion Royale Canadienne Filiale 265 (Québec) (0.78) — Both are Royal Canadian Legion branches in Quebec, but Entity A is Filiale 265 (a numbered branch) while Entity B is 'de Beauharnois' (a named branch). Likely different local chapters of the same national organization. RELATED as affiliates
LESLIEVILLE LODGE #351 BENEVOLENT AND PROTECTIVE ORDER OF ELKS OF CANADA
high
recipient · LESLIEVILLE LODGE #351 BENEVOLENT AND PROTECTIVE ORDER OF ELKS OF CANADA
The dataset shows LESLIEVILLE LODGE #351 BENEVOLENT AND PROTECTIVE ORDER OF ELKS OF CANADA (non_profit) adjudicated as RELATED to 11 other entities by the entity-resolution pipeline (mean verdict confidence 0.89) — PONOKA ELKS LODGE NO. 561 OF THE BENEVOLENT AND PROTECTIVE ORDER OF ELKS OF CANADA; BENEVOLENT AND PROTECTIVE ORDER OF ELKS HANNA LODGE NO 451; THE BENEVOLENT AND PROTECTIVE ORDER OF ELKS OF CANADA, LODGE NO. 117,; THE BENEVOLENT PROTECTIVE ORDER OF ELKS OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA; The Grand Lodge of the Benevolent and Protective Order of Elks of the Dominion of Canada; it appears in 1 dataset (ab) with 1 source records. Glassbox surfaces the network; the funder verifies governance overlap.
Evidence strength
0.59 · moderate
11 cited fields from source records
Show observations (11 cited fields)Hide observations
related count
11
avg related confidence
0.888
related entity
PONOKA ELKS LODGE NO. 561 OF THE BENEVOLENT AND PROTECTIVE ORDER OF ELKS OF CANADA (0.95) — Both are distinct local lodges of the Benevolent and Protective Order of Elks of Canada — Lodge #561 in Ponoka and Lodge #351 in Leslieville. Same fraternal order but different numbered chapters in different cities, so RELATED not SAME.
related entity
BENEVOLENT AND PROTECTIVE ORDER OF ELKS HANNA LODGE NO 451 (0.92) — Both are local lodges of the Benevolent and Protective Order of Elks of Canada but are distinct numbered lodges (351 Leslieville vs 451 Hanna) in different Alberta communities. Same fraternal organization affiliation but different legal ent
related entity
THE BENEVOLENT AND PROTECTIVE ORDER OF ELKS OF CANADA, LODGE NO. 117, (0.92) — Both are local lodges of the Benevolent and Protective Order of Elks of Canada but are distinct chapters: Lodge No. 117 vs Lodge #351 (Leslieville). Different lodge numbers = different legal entities; same parent fraternal organization.
related entity
THE BENEVOLENT PROTECTIVE ORDER OF ELKS OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA (0.92) — Entity A is the national/dominion-level organization; Entity B is a specific local lodge (#351 Leslieville) within the same fraternal order. National body vs. regional chapter => RELATED, not SAME.
related entity
The Grand Lodge of the Benevolent and Protective Order of Elks of the Dominion of Canada (0.92) — Entity A is a local lodge (#351, Leslieville) of the Elks fraternal order; Entity B is the national Grand Lodge — the governing/parent body. Classic chapter vs. national organization: RELATED, not SAME.
LITTLE EINSTEINS DAYCARES COMMUNITY FOUNDATION AT CASTLEDOWNS
high
recipient · LITTLE EINSTEINS DAYCARES COMMUNITY FOUNDATION AT CASTLEDOWNS
The dataset shows LITTLE EINSTEINS DAYCARES COMMUNITY FOUNDATION AT CASTLEDOWNS (non_profit) adjudicated as RELATED to 11 other entities by the entity-resolution pipeline (mean verdict confidence 0.80) — LITTLE EINSTEINS DAYCARES COMMUNITY FOUNDATION AT SHERWOOD; LITTLE EINSTEINS DAYCARES COMMUNITY FOUNDATION AT DIAMOND DAYCARE; LITTLE EINSTEINS DAYCARES COMMUNITY FOUNDATION AT KEHEEWIN; LITTLE EINSTEINS DAYCARES COMMUNITY FOUNDATION AT KIDS KORNER; LITTLE EINSTEINS DAYCARES COMMUNITY FOUNDATION AT MOUNT ROYAL; it appears in 1 dataset (ab) with 1 source records. Glassbox surfaces the network; the funder verifies governance overlap.
Evidence strength
0.59 · moderate
Why this may be benign · Community foundations pool and re-grant local donations by design; money flowing in and back out through them is their normal operating model, not a circular scheme.
11 cited fields from source records
Show observations (11 cited fields)Hide observations
related count
11
avg related confidence
0.805
related entity
LITTLE EINSTEINS DAYCARES COMMUNITY FOUNDATION AT SHERWOOD (0.85) — Same 'Little Einsteins Daycares Community Foundation' brand but different locations (Sherwood vs Castledowns). No shared BN. Likely sister chapters/locations of the same organization family, not the same legal entity.
related entity
LITTLE EINSTEINS DAYCARES COMMUNITY FOUNDATION AT DIAMOND DAYCARE (0.82) — Both share 'Little Einsteins Daycares Community Foundation' branding but differ by location (Diamond Daycare vs Castledowns), suggesting separate registered non-profits under a common umbrella — likely affiliates/chapters, not the same lega
related entity
LITTLE EINSTEINS DAYCARES COMMUNITY FOUNDATION AT KEHEEWIN (0.82) — Same 'Little Einsteins Daycares Community Foundation' brand but different locations (Keheewin vs Castledowns). Likely affiliated branches/chapters, not the same legal entity. No shared BN to confirm identity. Prefer RELATED per rules.
related entity
LITTLE EINSTEINS DAYCARES COMMUNITY FOUNDATION AT KIDS KORNER (0.82) — Both share the 'Little Einsteins Daycares Community Foundation' brand but differ by location suffix (Kids Korner vs Castledowns), suggesting separate registered non-profits under a common umbrella — RELATED, not SAME.
LITTLE EINSTEINS DAYCARES COMMUNITY FOUNDATION AT DIAMOND DAYCARE
high
recipient · LITTLE EINSTEINS DAYCARES COMMUNITY FOUNDATION AT DIAMOND DAYCARE
The dataset shows LITTLE EINSTEINS DAYCARES COMMUNITY FOUNDATION AT DIAMOND DAYCARE (non_profit) adjudicated as RELATED to 11 other entities by the entity-resolution pipeline (mean verdict confidence 0.79) — LITTLE EINSTEINS DAYCARES COMMUNITY FOUNDATION AT CASTLEDOWNS; LITTLE EINSTEINS DAYCARES COMMUNITY FOUNDATION AT KIDS KORNER; LITTLE EINSTEINS DAYCARES COMMUNITY FOUNDATION AT MILLCREEK DAYCARE; LITTLE EINSTEINS DAYCARES COMMUNITY FOUNDATION AT MOUNT ROYAL; LITTLE EINSTEINS DAYCARES COMMUNITY FOUNDATION AT SUNSHINE FACTORY DAYCARE; it appears in 1 dataset (ab) with 1 source records. Glassbox surfaces the network; the funder verifies governance overlap.
Evidence strength
0.59 · moderate
Why this may be benign · Community foundations pool and re-grant local donations by design; money flowing in and back out through them is their normal operating model, not a circular scheme.
11 cited fields from source records
Show observations (11 cited fields)Hide observations
related count
11
avg related confidence
0.789
related entity
LITTLE EINSTEINS DAYCARES COMMUNITY FOUNDATION AT CASTLEDOWNS (0.82) — Both share 'Little Einsteins Daycares Community Foundation' branding but differ by location (Diamond Daycare vs Castledowns), suggesting separate registered non-profits under a common umbrella — likely affiliates/chapters, not the same lega
related entity
LITTLE EINSTEINS DAYCARES COMMUNITY FOUNDATION AT KIDS KORNER (0.82) — Both share 'Little Einsteins Daycares Community Foundation' as parent but represent distinct location-based entities (Diamond Daycare vs Kids Korner). Likely affiliated chapters/sites of same foundation, not the same legal entity.
related entity
LITTLE EINSTEINS DAYCARES COMMUNITY FOUNDATION AT MILLCREEK DAYCARE (0.82) — Same foundation brand 'Little Einsteins Daycares Community Foundation' but distinct location suffixes (Diamond Daycare vs Millcreek Daycare) suggest separate registered entities or chapters at different sites, not the same legal org.
related entity
LITTLE EINSTEINS DAYCARES COMMUNITY FOUNDATION AT MOUNT ROYAL (0.82) — Both share 'Little Einsteins Daycares Community Foundation' branding but differ by location suffix (Diamond Daycare vs Mount Royal), suggesting separate chapter/site entities under a common umbrella — RELATED not SAME.
LITTLE EINSTEINS DAYCARES COMMUNITY FOUNDATION AT KEHEEWIN
high
recipient · LITTLE EINSTEINS DAYCARES COMMUNITY FOUNDATION AT KEHEEWIN
The dataset shows LITTLE EINSTEINS DAYCARES COMMUNITY FOUNDATION AT KEHEEWIN (non_profit) adjudicated as RELATED to 11 other entities by the entity-resolution pipeline (mean verdict confidence 0.79) — LITTLE EINSTEINS DAYCARES COMMUNITY FOUNDATION AT CASTLEDOWNS; LITTLE EINSTEINS DAYCARES COMMUNITY FOUNDATION AT KIDS KORNER; LITTLE EINSTEINS DAYCARES COMMUNITY FOUNDATION AT MOUNT ROYAL; LITTLE EINSTEINS DAYCARES COMMUNITY FOUNDATION AT SHERWOOD; LITTLE EINSTEINS DAYCARES COMMUNITY FOUNDATION AT SUNSHINE FACTORY DAYCARE; it appears in 1 dataset (ab) with 1 source records. Glassbox surfaces the network; the funder verifies governance overlap.
Evidence strength
0.59 · moderate
Why this may be benign · Community foundations pool and re-grant local donations by design; money flowing in and back out through them is their normal operating model, not a circular scheme.
11 cited fields from source records
Show observations (11 cited fields)Hide observations
related count
11
avg related confidence
0.792
related entity
LITTLE EINSTEINS DAYCARES COMMUNITY FOUNDATION AT CASTLEDOWNS (0.82) — Same 'Little Einsteins Daycares Community Foundation' brand but different locations (Keheewin vs Castledowns). Likely affiliated branches/chapters, not the same legal entity. No shared BN to confirm identity. Prefer RELATED per rules.
related entity
LITTLE EINSTEINS DAYCARES COMMUNITY FOUNDATION AT KIDS KORNER (0.82) — Both share 'Little Einsteins Daycares Community Foundation' brand but differ by location suffix (Keheewin vs Kids Korner), suggesting separate registered non-profits under a common umbrella. No shared BN to confirm SAME legal entity.
related entity
LITTLE EINSTEINS DAYCARES COMMUNITY FOUNDATION AT MOUNT ROYAL (0.82) — Both share 'Little Einsteins Daycares Community Foundation' brand but differ by location (Keheewin vs Mount Royal). Likely affiliated branches of the same network, not the same legal entity. No shared BN to confirm identity.
related entity
LITTLE EINSTEINS DAYCARES COMMUNITY FOUNDATION AT SHERWOOD (0.82) — Same 'Little Einsteins Daycares Community Foundation' brand but different location suffixes (Sherwood vs Keheewin). Likely sibling/affiliate locations of the same org family, not the same legal entity. No shared BN to confirm merger.
LITTLE EINSTEINS DAYCARES COMMUNITY FOUNDATION AT KIDS KORNER
high
recipient · LITTLE EINSTEINS DAYCARES COMMUNITY FOUNDATION AT KIDS KORNER
The dataset shows LITTLE EINSTEINS DAYCARES COMMUNITY FOUNDATION AT KIDS KORNER (non_profit) adjudicated as RELATED to 11 other entities by the entity-resolution pipeline (mean verdict confidence 0.79) — LITTLE EINSTEINS DAYCARES COMMUNITY FOUNDATION AT CASTLEDOWNS; LITTLE EINSTEINS DAYCARES COMMUNITY FOUNDATION AT DIAMOND DAYCARE; LITTLE EINSTEINS DAYCARES COMMUNITY FOUNDATION AT KEHEEWIN; LITTLE EINSTEINS DAYCARES COMMUNITY FOUNDATION AT MOUNT ROYAL; LITTLE EINSTEINS DAYCARES COMMUNITY FOUNDATION AT SHERWOOD; it appears in 1 dataset (ab) with 1 source records. Glassbox surfaces the network; the funder verifies governance overlap.
Evidence strength
0.59 · moderate
Why this may be benign · Community foundations pool and re-grant local donations by design; money flowing in and back out through them is their normal operating model, not a circular scheme.
11 cited fields from source records
Show observations (11 cited fields)Hide observations
related count
11
avg related confidence
0.792
related entity
LITTLE EINSTEINS DAYCARES COMMUNITY FOUNDATION AT CASTLEDOWNS (0.82) — Both share the 'Little Einsteins Daycares Community Foundation' brand but differ by location suffix (Kids Korner vs Castledowns), suggesting separate registered non-profits under a common umbrella — RELATED, not SAME.
related entity
LITTLE EINSTEINS DAYCARES COMMUNITY FOUNDATION AT DIAMOND DAYCARE (0.82) — Both share 'Little Einsteins Daycares Community Foundation' as parent but represent distinct location-based entities (Diamond Daycare vs Kids Korner). Likely affiliated chapters/sites of same foundation, not the same legal entity.
related entity
LITTLE EINSTEINS DAYCARES COMMUNITY FOUNDATION AT KEHEEWIN (0.82) — Both share 'Little Einsteins Daycares Community Foundation' brand but differ by location suffix (Keheewin vs Kids Korner), suggesting separate registered non-profits under a common umbrella. No shared BN to confirm SAME legal entity.
related entity
LITTLE EINSTEINS DAYCARES COMMUNITY FOUNDATION AT MOUNT ROYAL (0.82) — Both share 'Little Einsteins Daycares Community Foundation' branding but differ by location suffix ('Kids Korner' vs 'Mount Royal'), suggesting separate chapter/site entities under a common umbrella rather than one legal entity.
LITTLE EINSTEINS DAYCARES COMMUNITY FOUNDATION AT MILLCREEK DAYCARE
high
recipient · LITTLE EINSTEINS DAYCARES COMMUNITY FOUNDATION AT MILLCREEK DAYCARE
The dataset shows LITTLE EINSTEINS DAYCARES COMMUNITY FOUNDATION AT MILLCREEK DAYCARE (non_profit) adjudicated as RELATED to 11 other entities by the entity-resolution pipeline (mean verdict confidence 0.76) — LITTLE EINSTEINS DAYCARES COMMUNITY FOUNDATION AT DIAMOND DAYCARE; LITTLE EINSTEINS DAYCARES COMMUNITY FOUNDATION AT SUNSHINE FACTORY DAYCARE; LITTLE EINSTEINS DAYCARES COMMUNITY FOUNDATION AT TENDER HEART CHILD CARE CENTRE; LITTLE EINSTEINS DAYCARES COMMUNITY FOUNDATION AT THE FRIENDLY FROG DAYCARE; LITTLE EINSTEINS DAYCARES COMMUNITY FOUNDATION AT MOUNT ROYAL; it appears in 1 dataset (ab) with 1 source records. Glassbox surfaces the network; the funder verifies governance overlap.
Evidence strength
0.59 · moderate
Why this may be benign · Community foundations pool and re-grant local donations by design; money flowing in and back out through them is their normal operating model, not a circular scheme.
11 cited fields from source records
Show observations (11 cited fields)Hide observations
related count
11
avg related confidence
0.762
related entity
LITTLE EINSTEINS DAYCARES COMMUNITY FOUNDATION AT DIAMOND DAYCARE (0.82) — Same foundation brand 'Little Einsteins Daycares Community Foundation' but distinct location suffixes (Diamond Daycare vs Millcreek Daycare) suggest separate registered entities or chapters at different sites, not the same legal org.
related entity
LITTLE EINSTEINS DAYCARES COMMUNITY FOUNDATION AT SUNSHINE FACTORY DAYCARE (0.82) — Both share 'Little Einsteins Daycares Community Foundation' as parent brand but designate different daycare locations (Sunshine Factory vs. Millcreek). Likely site-level chapters of the same foundation — RELATED, not SAME distinct legal ent
related entity
LITTLE EINSTEINS DAYCARES COMMUNITY FOUNDATION AT TENDER HEART CHILD CARE CENTRE (0.82) — Both share 'Little Einsteins Daycares Community Foundation' brand but are distinct location-specific entities (Tender Heart Child Care Centre vs Millcreek Daycare). Likely affiliated chapters/sites under a common foundation umbrella, not th
related entity
LITTLE EINSTEINS DAYCARES COMMUNITY FOUNDATION AT THE FRIENDLY FROG DAYCARE (0.82) — Same foundation brand 'Little Einsteins Daycares Community Foundation' but different location suffixes (Friendly Frog Daycare vs Millcreek Daycare). Likely separate chapter/site entities under a common umbrella, not the same legal org. Pref
LITTLE EINSTEINS DAYCARES COMMUNITY FOUNDATION AT ST. ALBERT
high
recipient · LITTLE EINSTEINS DAYCARES COMMUNITY FOUNDATION AT ST. ALBERT
The dataset shows LITTLE EINSTEINS DAYCARES COMMUNITY FOUNDATION AT ST. ALBERT (non_profit) adjudicated as RELATED to 11 other entities by the entity-resolution pipeline (mean verdict confidence 0.76) — LITTLE EINSTEINS DAYCARES COMMUNITY FOUNDATION AT MOUNT ROYAL; LITTLE EINSTEINS DAYCARES COMMUNITY FOUNDATION AT SHERWOOD; LITTLE EINSTEINS DAYCARES COMMUNITY FOUNDATION AT CASTLEDOWNS; LITTLE EINSTEINS DAYCARES COMMUNITY FOUNDATION AT THE FRIENDLY FROG DAYCARE; LITTLE EINSTEINS DAYCARES COMMUNITY FOUNDATION AT SUNSHINE FACTORY DAYCARE; it appears in 1 dataset (ab) with 1 source records. Glassbox surfaces the network; the funder verifies governance overlap.
Evidence strength
0.59 · moderate
Why this may be benign · Community foundations pool and re-grant local donations by design; money flowing in and back out through them is their normal operating model, not a circular scheme.
11 cited fields from source records
Show observations (11 cited fields)Hide observations
related count
11
avg related confidence
0.765
related entity
LITTLE EINSTEINS DAYCARES COMMUNITY FOUNDATION AT MOUNT ROYAL (0.85) — Same 'Little Einsteins Daycares Community Foundation' brand but different locations (St. Albert vs. Mount Royal). No shared BN. Per rules, different cities with no BN linkage => RELATED (likely regional chapters of same parent foundation).
related entity
LITTLE EINSTEINS DAYCARES COMMUNITY FOUNDATION AT SHERWOOD (0.85) — Same 'Little Einsteins Daycares Community Foundation' brand but distinct location-based entities: one at Sherwood (Park), one at St. Albert. Different cities indicate separate legal organisations under a common umbrella. Prefer RELATED over
related entity
LITTLE EINSTEINS DAYCARES COMMUNITY FOUNDATION AT CASTLEDOWNS (0.82) — Same 'Little Einsteins Daycares Community Foundation' brand but different locations (St. Albert vs. Castledowns). No shared BN. Likely affiliated chapters/branches of the same daycare network, not the same legal entity.
related entity
LITTLE EINSTEINS DAYCARES COMMUNITY FOUNDATION AT THE FRIENDLY FROG DAYCARE (0.82) — Both share 'Little Einsteins Daycares Community Foundation' branding but differ by location (Friendly Frog Daycare vs St. Albert). Likely separate chapters/locations of same foundation network, not a single legal entity.
LITTLE EINSTEINS DAYCARES COMMUNITY FOUNDATION AT SUNSHINE FACTORY DAYCARE
high
recipient · LITTLE EINSTEINS DAYCARES COMMUNITY FOUNDATION AT SUNSHINE FACTORY DAYCARE
The dataset shows LITTLE EINSTEINS DAYCARES COMMUNITY FOUNDATION AT SUNSHINE FACTORY DAYCARE (non_profit) adjudicated as RELATED to 11 other entities by the entity-resolution pipeline (mean verdict confidence 0.80) — LITTLE EINSTEINS DAYCARES COMMUNITY FOUNDATION AT CASTLEDOWNS; LITTLE EINSTEINS DAYCARES COMMUNITY FOUNDATION AT DIAMOND DAYCARE; LITTLE EINSTEINS DAYCARES COMMUNITY FOUNDATION AT KEHEEWIN; LITTLE EINSTEINS DAYCARES COMMUNITY FOUNDATION AT KIDS KORNER; LITTLE EINSTEINS DAYCARES COMMUNITY FOUNDATION AT MILLCREEK DAYCARE; it appears in 1 dataset (ab) with 1 source records. Glassbox surfaces the network; the funder verifies governance overlap.
Evidence strength
0.59 · moderate
Why this may be benign · Community foundations pool and re-grant local donations by design; money flowing in and back out through them is their normal operating model, not a circular scheme.
11 cited fields from source records
Show observations (11 cited fields)Hide observations
related count
11
avg related confidence
0.798
related entity
LITTLE EINSTEINS DAYCARES COMMUNITY FOUNDATION AT CASTLEDOWNS (0.82) — Both share 'Little Einsteins Daycares Community Foundation' branding but differ by location (Sunshine Factory Daycare vs Castledowns). Likely sibling chapters/sites of same network, not a single legal entity. Prefer RELATED over SAME.
related entity
LITTLE EINSTEINS DAYCARES COMMUNITY FOUNDATION AT DIAMOND DAYCARE (0.82) — Both share 'Little Einsteins Daycares Community Foundation' as parent brand but operate at different daycare locations (Sunshine Factory vs Diamond Daycare). Likely sister chapters/affiliates under the same foundation umbrella, not the same
related entity
LITTLE EINSTEINS DAYCARES COMMUNITY FOUNDATION AT KEHEEWIN (0.82) — Both share 'Little Einsteins Daycares Community Foundation' branding but differ by location (Sunshine Factory Daycare vs Keheewin). Likely separate non-profit entities or chapters under a common umbrella — RELATED, not SAME.
related entity
LITTLE EINSTEINS DAYCARES COMMUNITY FOUNDATION AT KIDS KORNER (0.82) — Both share 'Little Einsteins Daycares Community Foundation' as a common parent/umbrella but differ by location ('Sunshine Factory Daycare' vs 'Kids Korner'), suggesting separate chapter/site entities under the same foundation — RELATED, not
LITTLE EINSTEINS DAYCARES COMMUNITY FOUNDATION AT TENDER HEART CHILD CARE CENTRE
high
recipient · LITTLE EINSTEINS DAYCARES COMMUNITY FOUNDATION AT TENDER HEART CHILD CARE CENTRE
The dataset shows LITTLE EINSTEINS DAYCARES COMMUNITY FOUNDATION AT TENDER HEART CHILD CARE CENTRE (non_profit) adjudicated as RELATED to 11 other entities by the entity-resolution pipeline (mean verdict confidence 0.79) — LITTLE EINSTEINS DAYCARES COMMUNITY FOUNDATION AT CASTLEDOWNS; LITTLE EINSTEINS DAYCARES COMMUNITY FOUNDATION AT DIAMOND DAYCARE; LITTLE EINSTEINS DAYCARES COMMUNITY FOUNDATION AT KEHEEWIN; LITTLE EINSTEINS DAYCARES COMMUNITY FOUNDATION AT MILLCREEK DAYCARE; LITTLE EINSTEINS DAYCARES COMMUNITY FOUNDATION AT MOUNT ROYAL; it appears in 1 dataset (ab) with 1 source records. Glassbox surfaces the network; the funder verifies governance overlap.
Evidence strength
0.59 · moderate
Why this may be benign · Community foundations pool and re-grant local donations by design; money flowing in and back out through them is their normal operating model, not a circular scheme.
11 cited fields from source records
Show observations (11 cited fields)Hide observations
related count
11
avg related confidence
0.795
related entity
LITTLE EINSTEINS DAYCARES COMMUNITY FOUNDATION AT CASTLEDOWNS (0.82) — Both share 'Little Einsteins Daycares Community Foundation' branding but differ by location (Tender Heart Child Care Centre vs. Castledowns), suggesting separate registered non-profits under a common umbrella — RELATED rather than SAME.
related entity
LITTLE EINSTEINS DAYCARES COMMUNITY FOUNDATION AT DIAMOND DAYCARE (0.82) — Both share 'Little Einsteins Daycares Community Foundation' as parent/umbrella but are located at different child care centres (Tender Heart vs Diamond Daycare), suggesting separate chapter/site entities under one foundation.
related entity
LITTLE EINSTEINS DAYCARES COMMUNITY FOUNDATION AT KEHEEWIN (0.82) — Both share 'Little Einsteins Daycares Community Foundation' as a common parent/brand but differ by location suffix (Tender Heart Child Care Centre vs. Keheewin), suggesting separate site-level entities under the same umbrella foundation.
related entity
LITTLE EINSTEINS DAYCARES COMMUNITY FOUNDATION AT MILLCREEK DAYCARE (0.82) — Both share 'Little Einsteins Daycares Community Foundation' brand but are distinct location-specific entities (Tender Heart Child Care Centre vs Millcreek Daycare). Likely affiliated chapters/sites under a common foundation umbrella, not th
LITTLE EINSTEINS DAYCARES COMMUNITY FOUNDATION AT THE FRIENDLY FROG DAYCARE
high
recipient · LITTLE EINSTEINS DAYCARES COMMUNITY FOUNDATION AT THE FRIENDLY FROG DAYCARE
The dataset shows LITTLE EINSTEINS DAYCARES COMMUNITY FOUNDATION AT THE FRIENDLY FROG DAYCARE (non_profit) adjudicated as RELATED to 11 other entities by the entity-resolution pipeline (mean verdict confidence 0.81) — LITTLE EINSTEINS DAYCARES COMMUNITY FOUNDATION AT CASTLEDOWNS; LITTLE EINSTEINS DAYCARES COMMUNITY FOUNDATION AT DIAMOND DAYCARE; LITTLE EINSTEINS DAYCARES COMMUNITY FOUNDATION AT KEHEEWIN; LITTLE EINSTEINS DAYCARES COMMUNITY FOUNDATION AT KIDS KORNER; LITTLE EINSTEINS DAYCARES COMMUNITY FOUNDATION AT MILLCREEK DAYCARE; it appears in 1 dataset (ab) with 1 source records. Glassbox surfaces the network; the funder verifies governance overlap.
Evidence strength
0.59 · moderate
Why this may be benign · Community foundations pool and re-grant local donations by design; money flowing in and back out through them is their normal operating model, not a circular scheme.
11 cited fields from source records
Show observations (11 cited fields)Hide observations
related count
11
avg related confidence
0.811
related entity
LITTLE EINSTEINS DAYCARES COMMUNITY FOUNDATION AT CASTLEDOWNS (0.82) — Both share 'Little Einsteins Daycares Community Foundation' brand but are distinct location-based entities (Friendly Frog Daycare vs Castledowns). Different site affiliates of the same foundation network — RELATED, not SAME.
related entity
LITTLE EINSTEINS DAYCARES COMMUNITY FOUNDATION AT DIAMOND DAYCARE (0.82) — Both share the 'Little Einsteins Daycares Community Foundation' parent brand but operate at distinct daycare locations (Friendly Frog vs Diamond Daycare), suggesting affiliated chapters/branches, not the same legal entity.
related entity
LITTLE EINSTEINS DAYCARES COMMUNITY FOUNDATION AT KEHEEWIN (0.82) — Both share 'Little Einsteins Daycares Community Foundation' but differ by location suffix (Friendly Frog Daycare vs Keheewin), suggesting separate branch/chapter entities of the same parent foundation, not the same legal entity.
related entity
LITTLE EINSTEINS DAYCARES COMMUNITY FOUNDATION AT KIDS KORNER (0.82) — Both share 'Little Einsteins Daycares Community Foundation' as parent/umbrella but operate at different locations (Friendly Frog Daycare vs Kids Korner), suggesting affiliated chapters/sites of the same foundation, not identical legal entit
MALANKARA MAR THOMA SYRIAN CHURCH. DIOCESE OF NORTH AMERICA
high
recipient · MALANKARA MAR THOMA SYRIAN CHURCH. DIOCESE OF NORTH AMERICA
The dataset shows MALANKARA MAR THOMA SYRIAN CHURCH. DIOCESE OF NORTH AMERICA (charity) adjudicated as RELATED to 11 other entities by the entity-resolution pipeline (mean verdict confidence 0.85) — ST THOMAS MAR THOMA CHURCH; St.Thomas Mar Thoma Church, Calgary; KINGSTON MAR THOMA CONGREGATION; ST.MATHEW'S MAR THOMA CHURCH, TORONTO; THE MAR THOMA CHURCH, MONTREAL, QUEBEC, CANADA; it appears in 1 dataset (cra) with 3 source records. Glassbox surfaces the network; the funder verifies governance overlap.
Evidence strength
0.59 · moderate
Why this may be benign · Denominational hierarchies (dioceses, synods, conferences, councils, presbyteries) routinely move funds between the parent body and congregations; structural relatedness here is expected.
11 cited fields from source records
Show observations (11 cited fields)Hide observations
related count
11
avg related confidence
0.847
related entity
ST THOMAS MAR THOMA CHURCH (0.88) — Entity A is a local Mar Thoma congregation (BN 860534114) while Entity B is the diocesan/denominational body for North America. Same church tradition but different legal entities: local parish vs. regional diocese. Parent/affiliate relation
related entity
St.Thomas Mar Thoma Church, Calgary (0.88) — St. Thomas Mar Thoma Church Calgary is a local congregation; Malankara Mar Thoma Syrian Church Diocese of North America is the regional diocese/parent body. Same denominational family but different legal entities (different BN, different sc
related entity
KINGSTON MAR THOMA CONGREGATION (0.85) — Kingston Mar Thoma Congregation is a local congregation under the Malankara Mar Thoma Syrian Church Diocese of North America — a regional chapter vs. its parent diocese. Different BN roots, different legal entities, classic parent/affiliate
related entity
ST.MATHEW'S MAR THOMA CHURCH, TORONTO (0.85) — Entity A is a local Toronto congregation; Entity B is the diocesan body (Diocese of North America) of the same Mar Thoma Syrian Church denomination. Same church family but parent diocese vs. local parish — RELATED, not SAME.
related entity
THE MAR THOMA CHURCH, MONTREAL, QUEBEC, CANADA (0.85) — Entity A is a local Montreal congregation (registered charity, BN 892156647). Entity B is the Diocese of North America — the regional governing body of the Malankara Mar Thoma Syrian Church. Local chapter vs. parent diocese: RELATED, not SA
recipient · METROLAND MEDIA GROUP LTD. - MEAFORD EXPRESS
The dataset shows METROLAND MEDIA GROUP LTD. - MEAFORD EXPRESS (organization) adjudicated as RELATED to 11 other entities by the entity-resolution pipeline (mean verdict confidence 0.84) — METROLAND MEDIA GROUP LTD. - ALMAGUIN NEWS; METROLAND MEDIA GROUP LTD. - ARTHUR ENTERPRISE NEWS; METROLAND MEDIA GROUP LTD. - FERGUS-ELORA NEWS EXPRESS; METROLAND MEDIA GROUP LTD. - NEW HAMBURG INDEPENDENT; METROLAND MEDIA GROUP LTD. - PARRY SOUND BEACON STAR; it appears in 1 dataset (fed) with 3 source records. Glassbox surfaces the network; the funder verifies governance overlap.
Evidence strength
0.59 · moderate
11 cited fields from source records
Show observations (11 cited fields)Hide observations
related count
11
avg related confidence
0.842
related entity
METROLAND MEDIA GROUP LTD. - ALMAGUIN NEWS (0.85) — Both are divisions/publications of Metroland Media Group Ltd. but represent distinct local newspapers (Almaguin News vs. Meaford Express). Same parent company, different operating units — RELATED not SAME.
related entity
METROLAND MEDIA GROUP LTD. - ARTHUR ENTERPRISE NEWS (0.85) — Both are divisions/publications of Metroland Media Group Ltd. but represent distinct newspaper titles (Arthur Enterprise News vs. Meaford Express). Same parent company, different operating units — RELATED not SAME.
related entity
METROLAND MEDIA GROUP LTD. - FERGUS-ELORA NEWS EXPRESS (0.85) — Both are divisions/publications of Metroland Media Group Ltd. but represent distinct newspaper brands (Fergus-Elora News Express vs. Meaford Express) operating in different localities. Same parent legal entity, different operational units —
related entity
METROLAND MEDIA GROUP LTD. - NEW HAMBURG INDEPENDENT (0.85) — Both are distinct newspaper divisions of Metroland Media Group Ltd. — Meaford Express and New Hamburg Independent are different publications/locations under the same parent company, making them RELATED rather than SAME.
related entity
METROLAND MEDIA GROUP LTD. - PARRY SOUND BEACON STAR (0.85) — Both are divisions/publications of Metroland Media Group Ltd. but represent distinct newspaper mastheads (Meaford Express vs. Parry Sound Beacon Star) in different cities. Same parent company, different operating units — RELATED not SAME.
The dataset shows MILTON SPECIAL OLYMPICS (charity) adjudicated as RELATED to 11 other entities by the entity-resolution pipeline (mean verdict confidence 0.83) — BELLEVILLE & QUINTE WEST SPECIAL OLYMPICS; Special Olympics Ontario Incorporated; NEW BRUNSWICK SPECIAL OLYMPICS INC.; NEW BRUNSWICK SPECIAL OLYMPICS SOCIETY INC.; SPECIAL OLYMPICS ALBERTA; it appears in 1 dataset (cra) with 1 source records. Glassbox surfaces the network; the funder verifies governance overlap.
Evidence strength
0.59 · moderate
11 cited fields from source records
Show observations (11 cited fields)Hide observations
related count
11
avg related confidence
0.834
related entity
BELLEVILLE & QUINTE WEST SPECIAL OLYMPICS (0.88) — Both are regional Special Olympics chapters in Ontario but serve different cities (Milton vs. Belleville & Quinte West). No shared BN. Same national umbrella (Special Olympics Canada) but distinct local legal entities.
related entity
Special Olympics Ontario Incorporated (0.88) — Milton Special Olympics is a local chapter/affiliate of Special Olympics Ontario, not the same legal entity. Different BN roots (B has none), different scope: provincial org vs. Milton-specific club.
related entity
NEW BRUNSWICK SPECIAL OLYMPICS INC. (0.85) — Both are Special Olympics organizations in Canada but serve different regions: NB Special Olympics is a provincial body (BN: 132657060), Milton Special Olympics is a local chapter in Milton, ON. Different legal entities, different BN roots
related entity
NEW BRUNSWICK SPECIAL OLYMPICS SOCIETY INC. (0.85) — Both are Special Olympics affiliates but different regional chapters: NB provincial society (BN 132657706) vs. Milton (local ON chapter, no BN). Different geographic scope, different BN roots. Regional chapter vs. provincial body => RELATED
related entity
SPECIAL OLYMPICS ALBERTA (0.85) — Special Olympics Alberta is the provincial chapter; Milton Special Olympics is a local/municipal chapter in Milton, Ontario. Different geographic scope, different BN roots — regional chapter vs. provincial body => RELATED, not SAME.
recipient · MINISTER OF FINANCE (DEPT OF EDUCATION)
The dataset shows MINISTER OF FINANCE (DEPT OF EDUCATION) (charity) adjudicated as RELATED to 11 other entities by the entity-resolution pipeline (mean verdict confidence 0.75) — Chipman Forest Avenue School; Fredericton High School; MINISTER OF FINANCE - ROYAL ROAD ELEMENTARY SCHOOL; Minister of Finance; MINISTER OF FINANCE - KESWICK VALLEY MEMORIAL SCHOOL; it appears in 1 dataset (cra) with 1 source records. Glassbox surfaces the network; the funder verifies governance overlap.
Evidence strength
0.59 · moderate
11 cited fields from source records
Show observations (11 cited fields)Hide observations
related count
11
avg related confidence
0.755
related entity
Chipman Forest Avenue School (0.82) — Both are CRA qualified donees under 'Minister of Finance' umbrella but represent distinct entities: A is Dept of Education (general), B is a specific school (Chipman Forest Avenue School). Same parent ministry, different institutional recip
related entity
Fredericton High School (0.82) — Both entities use 'Minister of Finance' as the legal holder for a New Brunswick school/education body, but Entity A is the Dept of Education generically while Entity B is specifically Fredericton High School — same parent mechanism, differe
related entity
MINISTER OF FINANCE - ROYAL ROAD ELEMENTARY SCHOOL (0.78) — Both are CRA qualified donees under 'Minister of Finance' umbrella (likely BC provincial school funding), but A is Dept of Education broadly and B is a specific school (Royal Road Elementary). Same parent, different entities.
related entity
Minister of Finance (0.75) — Entity A is specifically 'Minister of Finance (Dept of Education)' — a provincial department-specific qualified donee — while Entity B is the general 'Minister of Finance' (federal/provincial). The parenthetical qualifier indicates a distin
related entity
MINISTER OF FINANCE - KESWICK VALLEY MEMORIAL SCHOOL (0.75) — Both are CRA qualified donees under 'Minister of Finance' umbrella (NB provincial education funding mechanism), but Entity B names a specific school (Keswick Valley Memorial School) while Entity A refers broadly to Dept of Education — diffe
Multiple Sclerosis Society of Canada - National Office
high
recipient · Multiple Sclerosis Society of Canada - National Office
The dataset shows Multiple Sclerosis Society of Canada - National Office (charity) adjudicated as RELATED to 11 other entities by the entity-resolution pipeline (mean verdict confidence 0.88) — MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS SOCIETY OF CANADA - WINNIPEG CHAPTER; MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS SOCIETY- PEI DIVISION; MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS - SASK DIVISION; Multiple Sclerosis Society of Canada (Alberta Division); MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS SOCIETY OF CANADA, OTTAWA CHAPTER; it appears in 1 dataset (cra) with 5 source records. Glassbox surfaces the network; the funder verifies governance overlap.
Evidence strength
0.59 · moderate
Why this may be benign · Federated charities (United Way / Centraide, Jewish federations, national bodies with provincial or local chapters) are legally distinct entities that are related by charter — relatedness is disclosed, not hidden.
11 cited fields from source records
Show observations (11 cited fields)Hide observations
related count
11
avg related confidence
0.883
related entity
MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS SOCIETY OF CANADA - WINNIPEG CHAPTER (0.95) — Winnipeg Chapter and National Office are distinct organisational units of the MS Society of Canada — regional chapter vs. national body. Same parent organisation but different legal/administrative entities per the rules.
related entity
MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS SOCIETY- PEI DIVISION (0.95) — PEI Division is a regional chapter of the MS Society of Canada; National Office is the parent/national body. Same organization family but distinct legal entities — regional chapter vs. national office => RELATED.
related entity
MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS - SASK DIVISION (0.92) — Entity A is the Saskatchewan provincial division of the MS Society (BN root 107746170); Entity B is the National Office. Different BN roots, different scopes. Regional chapter vs. national body = RELATED, not SAME.
related entity
Multiple Sclerosis Society of Canada (Alberta Division) (0.92) — Entity A is the Alberta Division (regional chapter) with BN 826201782; Entity B is the National Office with no BN. Same parent organization but distinct legal/operational units: regional chapter vs. national office => RELATED.
MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS SOCIETY OF CANADA, OTTAWA CHAPTER
high
recipient · MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS SOCIETY OF CANADA, OTTAWA CHAPTER
The dataset shows MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS SOCIETY OF CANADA, OTTAWA CHAPTER (organization) adjudicated as RELATED to 11 other entities by the entity-resolution pipeline (mean verdict confidence 0.88) — Multiple Sclerosis Society of Canada; Multiple Sclerosis Society of Canada (Alberta Division); Multiple Sclerosis Society of Canada - National Office; MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS SOCIETY OF CANADA - WINNIPEG CHAPTER; MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS - SASK DIVISION; it appears in 1 dataset (fed) with 1 source records. Glassbox surfaces the network; the funder verifies governance overlap.
Evidence strength
0.59 · moderate
Why this may be benign · Federated charities (United Way / Centraide, Jewish federations, national bodies with provincial or local chapters) are legally distinct entities that are related by charter — relatedness is disclosed, not hidden.
11 cited fields from source records
Show observations (11 cited fields)Hide observations
related count
11
avg related confidence
0.884
related entity
Multiple Sclerosis Society of Canada (0.92) — Entity B is a regional chapter (Ottawa) of the national Multiple Sclerosis Society of Canada (Entity A). Different legal units: chapter has no BN, different scope. Per rules, national org vs. regional chapter => RELATED.
related entity
Multiple Sclerosis Society of Canada (Alberta Division) (0.92) — Both are regional chapters/divisions of the MS Society of Canada but represent different geographic units (Alberta Division vs. Ottawa Chapter). No shared BN root. Same national parent organization, different legal regional entities.
related entity
Multiple Sclerosis Society of Canada - National Office (0.92) — Entity A is the national office of the MS Society of Canada; Entity B is the Ottawa Chapter — a regional chapter of the same parent organization. Same umbrella org but distinct legal/operational units, so RELATED not SAME.
related entity
MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS SOCIETY OF CANADA - WINNIPEG CHAPTER (0.92) — Both are regional chapters of the MS Society of Canada but in different cities (Winnipeg vs Ottawa). Same national parent, different local chapters — RELATED not SAME per different-cities rule.
The dataset shows PAOC, DISTRICT OFFICE (charity) adjudicated as RELATED to 11 other entities by the entity-resolution pipeline (mean verdict confidence 0.66) — Eastern Ontario District of the PAOC; EASTERN ONTARIO DISTRICT - PAOC; Maritime District, PAOC; PAOC INTERNATIONAL OFFICE; PAOC Alberta/NWT District; it appears in 1 dataset (cra) with 1 source records. Glassbox surfaces the network; the funder verifies governance overlap.
Evidence strength
0.59 · moderate
Why this may be benign · Federated charities (United Way / Centraide, Jewish federations, national bodies with provincial or local chapters) are legally distinct entities that are related by charter — relatedness is disclosed, not hidden.
11 cited fields from source records
Show observations (11 cited fields)Hide observations
related count
11
avg related confidence
0.658
related entity
Eastern Ontario District of the PAOC (0.72) — Both reference PAOC district offices but Entity A has a specific BN root (239295800) for Eastern Ontario District, while Entity B has no BN and is only 'PAOC, District Office' — likely a different or generic district office record. Insuffic
related entity
EASTERN ONTARIO DISTRICT - PAOC (0.72) — Both involve PAOC district offices but Entity A has a specific BN (123939580) for Eastern Ontario District, while Entity B has no BN and is generically named 'PAOC, District Office' — likely a different regional PAOC district office, not th
related entity
Maritime District, PAOC (0.72) — Both relate to PAOC (Pentecostal Assemblies of Canada) district offices, but Entity A has a specific BN root (Maritime District) while Entity B is a generic 'PAOC District Office' with no BN. Likely different regional offices or one is a ge
related entity
PAOC INTERNATIONAL OFFICE (0.72) — Both share 'PAOC' (Pentecostal Assemblies of Canada) but Entity A is the International Office (BN 803479560) and Entity B is a District Office with no BN. Different organizational units — likely affiliate/related chapters, not the same lega
related entity
PAOC Alberta/NWT District (0.65) — Both are PAOC-affiliated CRA qualified donees but Entity A is explicitly the Alberta/NWT District while Entity B is a generic 'District Office' with no BN or location to confirm identity. Likely related offices, not proven SAME.
PONOKA ELKS LODGE NO. 561 OF THE BENEVOLENT AND PROTECTIVE ORDER OF ELKS OF CANADA
high
recipient · PONOKA ELKS LODGE NO. 561 OF THE BENEVOLENT AND PROTECTIVE ORDER OF ELKS OF CANADA
The dataset shows PONOKA ELKS LODGE NO. 561 OF THE BENEVOLENT AND PROTECTIVE ORDER OF ELKS OF CANADA (non_profit) adjudicated as RELATED to 11 other entities by the entity-resolution pipeline (mean verdict confidence 0.93) — LESLIEVILLE LODGE #351 BENEVOLENT AND PROTECTIVE ORDER OF ELKS OF CANADA; MILK RIVER LODGE, NO. 225 OF THE BENEVOLENT AND PROTECTIVE ORDER OF ELKS OF CANADA; THE BENEVOLENT AND PROTECTIVE ORDER OF ELKS RED DEER LODGE NO. 85; THE BENEVOLENT PROTECTIVE ORDER OF ELKS OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA; The Grand Lodge of the Benevolent and Protective Order of Elks of the Dominion of Canada; it appears in 1 dataset (ab) with 1 source records. Glassbox surfaces the network; the funder verifies governance overlap.
Evidence strength
0.59 · moderate
11 cited fields from source records
Show observations (11 cited fields)Hide observations
related count
11
avg related confidence
0.927
related entity
LESLIEVILLE LODGE #351 BENEVOLENT AND PROTECTIVE ORDER OF ELKS OF CANADA (0.95) — Both are distinct local lodges of the Benevolent and Protective Order of Elks of Canada — Lodge #561 in Ponoka and Lodge #351 in Leslieville. Same fraternal order but different numbered chapters in different cities, so RELATED not SAME.
related entity
MILK RIVER LODGE, NO. 225 OF THE BENEVOLENT AND PROTECTIVE ORDER OF ELKS OF CANADA (0.95) — Both are local lodges of the Benevolent and Protective Order of Elks of Canada but are distinct chapters: Lodge No. 561 in Ponoka vs Lodge No. 225 in Milk River. Same parent order, different local entities.
related entity
THE BENEVOLENT AND PROTECTIVE ORDER OF ELKS RED DEER LODGE NO. 85 (0.95) — Both are local lodges of the Benevolent and Protective Order of Elks of Canada but are distinct chapters: Ponoka Lodge No. 561 vs Red Deer Lodge No. 85. Different cities, different lodge numbers => RELATED affiliates, not SAME entity.
related entity
THE BENEVOLENT PROTECTIVE ORDER OF ELKS OF THE DOMINION OF CANADA (0.95) — Entity A is the national Elks organization (Dominion of Canada). Entity B is a specific local lodge (No. 561, Ponoka) — a chapter/affiliate of the national body. Regional lodge vs. national parent = RELATED, not SAME.
related entity
The Grand Lodge of the Benevolent and Protective Order of Elks of the Dominion of Canada (0.95) — Entity A is Ponoka Elks Lodge No. 561, a local chapter. Entity B is the Grand Lodge, the national governing body. Same fraternal order but different legal entities: local lodge vs. national grand lodge. Parent/affiliate relationship.
recipient · POSTMEDIA NETWORK INC. - THE MITCHELL ADVOCATE
The dataset shows POSTMEDIA NETWORK INC. - THE MITCHELL ADVOCATE (organization) adjudicated as RELATED to 11 other entities by the entity-resolution pipeline (mean verdict confidence 0.85) — POSTMEDIA NETWORK FOUNDATION; Postmedia Network Inc.; POSTMEDIA NETWORK INC. - ONTARIO FARMER; POSTMEDIA NETWORK INC. - THE FAIRVIEW POST; POSTMEDIA NETWORK INC. - THE PINCHER CREEK ECHO; it appears in 1 dataset (fed) with 8 source records. Glassbox surfaces the network; the funder verifies governance overlap.
Evidence strength
0.59 · moderate
11 cited fields from source records
Show observations (11 cited fields)Hide observations
related count
11
avg related confidence
0.847
related entity
POSTMEDIA NETWORK FOUNDATION (0.85) — Both share 'Postmedia Network' brand but are distinct legal entities: A is a registered charity (foundation, BN 805497005); B is Postmedia Network Inc. operating a newspaper (The Mitchell Advocate). Foundation vs. corporate operating entity
related entity
Postmedia Network Inc. (0.85) — Entity B is a specific publication/division (The Mitchell Advocate) operated under Postmedia Network Inc., not a separate legal entity but a distinct operating unit/trade name. Prefer RELATED over SAME per rules.
related entity
POSTMEDIA NETWORK INC. - ONTARIO FARMER (0.85) — Both are Postmedia Network Inc. publications/divisions but represent distinct newspaper titles (Ontario Farmer vs. The Mitchell Advocate). Same parent legal entity, different publication units — RELATED not SAME.
related entity
POSTMEDIA NETWORK INC. - THE FAIRVIEW POST (0.85) — Both are divisions/publications of Postmedia Network Inc. but represent distinct newspaper mastheads (Fairview Post vs Mitchell Advocate). Same parent legal entity, different operating units. Prefer RELATED over SAME per rules.
related entity
POSTMEDIA NETWORK INC. - THE PINCHER CREEK ECHO (0.85) — Both are Postmedia Network Inc. publications (divisions/trade names) but represent distinct newspaper titles (Mitchell Advocate vs Pincher Creek Echo). Same parent legal entity, different operating units. RELATED not SAME.
The dataset shows RCL ONTARIO PROVINCIAL COMMAND 'SUNNYBROOK HOSPITAL' (charity) adjudicated as RELATED to 11 other entities by the entity-resolution pipeline (mean verdict confidence 0.81) — R.C.L. QUEBEC PROVINCIAL COMMAND; RCL ONTARIO PROVINCIAL COMMAND DISTRICT A YOUTH EDUCATION FU; RCL ONTARIO PROVINCIAL COMMAND CHARITABLE FOUNDATION; RCL ONT PROVINCIAL COMMAND BURSARY; Royal Canadian Legion Ontario Command; it appears in 1 dataset (cra) with 1 source records. Glassbox surfaces the network; the funder verifies governance overlap.
Evidence strength
0.59 · moderate
11 cited fields from source records
Show observations (11 cited fields)Hide observations
related count
11
avg related confidence
0.813
related entity
R.C.L. QUEBEC PROVINCIAL COMMAND (0.92) — Both are Royal Canadian Legion provincial commands (RCL), but one is Quebec and the other is Ontario (with Sunnybrook Hospital affiliation). Different provinces, different legal entities — regional chapters of the same national organization
related entity
RCL ONTARIO PROVINCIAL COMMAND DISTRICT A YOUTH EDUCATION FU (0.85) — Both are distinct RCL Ontario Provincial Command entities — one is District A Youth Education Fund, the other is the Sunnybrook Hospital fund. Same parent command, but different legal charitable purposes/accounts.
related entity
RCL ONTARIO PROVINCIAL COMMAND CHARITABLE FOUNDATION (0.82) — Both are under RCL Ontario Provincial Command but serve distinct purposes: A is a charitable foundation, B is a specific hospital fund (Sunnybrook). Same parent body, different legal entities. Prefer RELATED over SAME.
related entity
RCL ONT PROVINCIAL COMMAND BURSARY (0.82) — Both are distinct CRA-registered entities under RCL Ontario Provincial Command umbrella: one is a bursary fund, the other a Sunnybrook Hospital fund. Same parent organization but separate legal/charitable registrations with different purpos
related entity
Royal Canadian Legion Ontario Command (0.82) — Entity B is a specific fund/account of RCL Ontario Command designated for Sunnybrook Hospital, not the same legal entity. No shared BN root. B appears to be a restricted fund or sub-account under the provincial command umbrella.
The dataset shows Read Jones Christoffersen Ltd (company) adjudicated as RELATED to 11 other entities by the entity-resolution pipeline (mean verdict confidence 0.78) — BOISSY, CHAD (READ JONES CHRISTOFFERSEN); DING, EMILY (READ JONES CHRISTOFFERSEN); DOWNTON, ANNIKA (READ JONES CHRISTOFFERSEN); KELLY, JAYLENE (READ JONES CHRISTOFFERSEN); TRINH, FRANCES (READ JONES CHRISTOFFERSEN); it appears in 1 dataset (ab) with 27 source records. Glassbox surfaces the network; the funder verifies governance overlap.
Evidence strength
0.59 · moderate
11 cited fields from source records
Show observations (11 cited fields)Hide observations
related count
11
avg related confidence
0.776
related entity
BOISSY, CHAD (READ JONES CHRISTOFFERSEN) (0.82) — Entity A is an individual (Chad Boissy) who received a grant while affiliated with Read Jones Christoffersen. Entity B is the firm itself. Individual grant recipient vs. the legal company — RELATED, not SAME.
related entity
DING, EMILY (READ JONES CHRISTOFFERSEN) (0.82) — Entity A is an individual (Emily Ding) affiliated with Read Jones Christoffersen, not the company itself. The parenthetical indicates employer/affiliation, not identity. RELATED: individual employee vs. the firm.
related entity
DOWNTON, ANNIKA (READ JONES CHRISTOFFERSEN) (0.82) — Entity A is an individual (Annika Downton) who received a federal grant while affiliated with Read Jones Christoffersen. Entity B is the firm itself. Individual grant recipient vs. the legal company — RELATED, not SAME.
related entity
KELLY, JAYLENE (READ JONES CHRISTOFFERSEN) (0.82) — Entity A is an individual (Jaylene Kelly) who works at/for Read Jones Christoffersen, not the company itself. The parenthetical denotes employer affiliation, not a trade name. Person ≠ legal entity; verdict is RELATED.
related entity
TRINH, FRANCES (READ JONES CHRISTOFFERSEN) (0.82) — Entity A is an individual (Frances Trinh) affiliated with firm Read Jones Christoffersen, not the company itself. A is a named person/grant recipient; B is the corporate legal entity. Person ≠ organisation => RELATED.
Royal Canadian Legion Ontario Command Bursary Fund
high
recipient · Royal Canadian Legion Ontario Command Bursary Fund
The dataset shows Royal Canadian Legion Ontario Command Bursary Fund (charity) adjudicated as RELATED to 11 other entities by the entity-resolution pipeline (mean verdict confidence 0.84) — Royal Canadian Legion Ontario Command; ROYAL CANADIAN LEGION ONTARIO COMMAND - R.C.E.L.; ONTARIO COMMAND - QUILTS OF VALLOUR; ONTARIO COMMAND - SUNNYBROOK COMFORT FUND; ONTARIO PROVINCIAL COMMAND; it appears in 1 dataset (cra) with 17 source records. Glassbox surfaces the network; the funder verifies governance overlap.
Evidence strength
0.59 · moderate
11 cited fields from source records
Show observations (11 cited fields)Hide observations
related count
11
avg related confidence
0.838
related entity
Royal Canadian Legion Ontario Command (0.88) — Entity B is a bursary fund program operated under Entity A (Royal Canadian Legion Ontario Command). Different BN roots (B has none), distinct legal purposes. B is a subsidiary/program fund of A, not the same legal entity.
related entity
ROYAL CANADIAN LEGION ONTARIO COMMAND - R.C.E.L. (0.88) — Entity A is the Royal Canadian Legion Ontario Command (the provincial command body). Entity B is its dedicated bursary fund — a separate charitable entity created by and affiliated with Entity A, not the same legal organisation.
related entity
ONTARIO COMMAND - QUILTS OF VALLOUR (0.85) — Both are Royal Canadian Legion Ontario Command charitable programs (bursary fund vs. Quilts of Valour), sharing the same parent command but serving distinct purposes. They are affiliated programs under Ontario Command, not the same legal en
related entity
ONTARIO COMMAND - SUNNYBROOK COMFORT FUND (0.85) — Both are Royal Canadian Legion Ontario Command charitable funds but serve distinct purposes: A is a bursary/education fund, B is the Sunnybrook hospital comfort fund. Same parent command, different legal entities/programs.
related entity
ONTARIO PROVINCIAL COMMAND (0.85) — Entity A is the Bursary Fund of the Royal Canadian Legion Ontario Provincial Command (Entity B). A is a specific charitable fund/program operated under the umbrella of B — a subsidiary fund, not the same legal entity.
Royal Canadian Legion Saskatchewan Command (Paws for Veterans)
high
recipient · Royal Canadian Legion Saskatchewan Command (Paws for Veterans)
The dataset shows Royal Canadian Legion Saskatchewan Command (Paws for Veterans) (charity) adjudicated as RELATED to 11 other entities by the entity-resolution pipeline (mean verdict confidence 0.85) — Royal Canadian Legion Ontario Command; ALBERTA-NWT COMMAND ROYAL CANADIAN LEGION; ROYAL CANADIAN LEGION KINDERSLEY (SASK #57) BRANCH; ROYAL CANADIAN LEGION (SASK) BRANCH 70 (POPPY FUND); ROYAL CANADIAN LEGION PROVINCIAL COMMAND; it appears in 1 dataset (cra) with 10 source records. Glassbox surfaces the network; the funder verifies governance overlap.
Evidence strength
0.59 · moderate
11 cited fields from source records
Show observations (11 cited fields)Hide observations
related count
11
avg related confidence
0.845
related entity
Royal Canadian Legion Ontario Command (0.95) — Both are provincial commands of the Royal Canadian Legion but represent different provinces (Ontario vs Saskatchewan) with different programs and different BN roots. Same parent organization, different legal entities.
related entity
ALBERTA-NWT COMMAND ROYAL CANADIAN LEGION (0.92) — Both are provincial commands of the Royal Canadian Legion but different jurisdictions: Entity A is Alberta-NWT Command, Entity B is Saskatchewan Command (Paws for Veterans program). Same national organization, different regional legal entit
related entity
ROYAL CANADIAN LEGION KINDERSLEY (SASK #57) BRANCH (0.92) — Entity A is the Kindersley branch (SASK #57) with its own BN root; Entity B is the Saskatchewan Provincial Command's Paws for Veterans program. Both are Royal Canadian Legion units but different legal/organizational levels.
related entity
ROYAL CANADIAN LEGION (SASK) BRANCH 70 (POPPY FUND) (0.88) — Both are Royal Canadian Legion Saskatchewan entities but legally distinct: A is Branch 70 (North Battleford) Poppy Fund with its own BN; B is Sask Command's Paws for Veterans program. Different BN roots, different branches/levels, different
related entity
ROYAL CANADIAN LEGION PROVINCIAL COMMAND (0.85) — Entity A is a provincial command of the Royal Canadian Legion (BN 750781618); Entity B is the Saskatchewan Command's 'Paws for Veterans' program/entity — a distinct sub-unit or affiliated program, not the same legal organisation.
Royal Canadian Legion - Sask Command (Discover the Power in Me)
high
recipient · Royal Canadian Legion - Sask Command (Discover the Power in Me)
The dataset shows Royal Canadian Legion - Sask Command (Discover the Power in Me) (charity) adjudicated as RELATED to 11 other entities by the entity-resolution pipeline (mean verdict confidence 0.85) — Royal Canadian Legion New Brunswick Command; ALBERTA-NWT COMMAND ROYAL CANADIAN LEGION; ROYAL CANADIAN LEGION ONTARIO COMMAND - R.C.E.L.; ROYAL CANADIAN LEGION KINDERSLEY (SASK #57) BRANCH; Royal Canadian Legion Ontario Command; it appears in 1 dataset (cra) with 2 source records. Glassbox surfaces the network; the funder verifies governance overlap.
Evidence strength
0.59 · moderate
11 cited fields from source records
Show observations (11 cited fields)Hide observations
related count
11
avg related confidence
0.855
related entity
Royal Canadian Legion New Brunswick Command (0.95) — Both are provincial commands of the Royal Canadian Legion but in different provinces (New Brunswick vs Saskatchewan). Different regional chapters of the same national organization — RELATED, not SAME.
related entity
ALBERTA-NWT COMMAND ROYAL CANADIAN LEGION (0.92) — Both are provincial commands of the Royal Canadian Legion but represent different provinces: Alberta-NWT Command vs. Saskatchewan Command. Same national parent organization, but distinct regional legal entities. RELATED not SAME.
related entity
ROYAL CANADIAN LEGION ONTARIO COMMAND - R.C.E.L. (0.92) — Both are provincial commands of the Royal Canadian Legion but distinct legal entities: Entity A is Ontario Command (R.C.E.L.) and Entity B is Saskatchewan Command. Different provinces, different organisations — RELATED as affiliates under t
related entity
ROYAL CANADIAN LEGION KINDERSLEY (SASK #57) BRANCH (0.85) — Both are Royal Canadian Legion Saskatchewan entities but distinct: A is a local branch (#57) in Kindersley with a BN root, B is the provincial Sask Command running a specific program. Different organizational levels (branch vs. command).
related entity
Royal Canadian Legion Ontario Command (0.85) — Both are provincial commands of the Royal Canadian Legion but represent different provinces (Ontario vs Saskatchewan). Different BN roots (A has 870781618, B has none). Regional chapters of same national org => RELATED, not SAME.
The dataset shows SANDSTONE PHARMACIES (organization) adjudicated as RELATED to 11 other entities by the entity-resolution pipeline (mean verdict confidence 0.70) — SANDSTONE PHARMACIES LANGDON; SANDSTONE PHARMACIES AIRDRIE; SANDSTONE PHARMACIES BLACKFALDS; SANDSTONE PHARMACIES ENHANCED CARE SOLUT; SANDSTONE PHARMACIES GLENMORE LANDING A; it appears in 1 dataset (ab) with 1 source records. Glassbox surfaces the network; the funder verifies governance overlap.
Evidence strength
0.59 · moderate
11 cited fields from source records
Show observations (11 cited fields)Hide observations
related count
11
avg related confidence
0.698
related entity
SANDSTONE PHARMACIES LANGDON (0.75) — Both share 'Sandstone Pharmacies' brand but Entity B specifies 'Langdon' location, suggesting a distinct branch/franchise location. No BN to confirm same legal entity. Prefer RELATED over SAME per rules.
related entity
SANDSTONE PHARMACIES AIRDRIE (0.72) — Entity B 'SANDSTONE PHARMACIES AIRDRIE' appears to be a specific location/branch of 'SANDSTONE PHARMACIES'. Different city qualifier suggests separate legal entities or locations. No BN to confirm. Prefer RELATED over SAME per rules.
related entity
SANDSTONE PHARMACIES BLACKFALDS (0.72) — Entity B 'SANDSTONE PHARMACIES BLACKFALDS' appears to be a specific location/branch of the 'SANDSTONE PHARMACIES' brand. Different named entities (location suffix), no BN to confirm same legal entity. Prefer RELATED as branch vs. parent.
related entity
SANDSTONE PHARMACIES ENHANCED CARE SOLUT (0.72) — Entity B appears to be a specific program/division ('Enhanced Care Solut[ions]') under the Sandstone Pharmacies umbrella, not an exact legal name match. Likely related operating unit rather than identical legal entity.
related entity
SANDSTONE PHARMACIES GLENMORE LANDING A (0.72) — Entity A is a specific branch/location (Glenmore Landing) of Sandstone Pharmacies, while Entity B appears to be the parent brand or another location. Likely same chain but distinct grant recipients or locations, so RELATED rather than SAME.
The dataset shows SANDSTONE PHARMACIES BLACKFALDS (organization) adjudicated as RELATED to 11 other entities by the entity-resolution pipeline (mean verdict confidence 0.82) — SANDSTONE PHARMACIES AIRDRIE; SANDSTONE PHARMACIES BRAGG CREEK; SANDSTONE PHARMACIES GLENMORE LANDING A; SANDSTONE PHARMACIES LANGDON; SANDSTONE PHARMACIES NANTON; it appears in 1 dataset (ab) with 1 source records. Glassbox surfaces the network; the funder verifies governance overlap.
Evidence strength
0.59 · moderate
11 cited fields from source records
Show observations (11 cited fields)Hide observations
related count
11
avg related confidence
0.818
related entity
SANDSTONE PHARMACIES AIRDRIE (0.85) — Both are 'Sandstone Pharmacies' branded locations but in different cities (Blackfalds vs Airdrie). Likely same pharmacy chain/franchise but different legal entities or locations. Different cities => RELATED per rules.
related entity
SANDSTONE PHARMACIES BRAGG CREEK (0.85) — Both share 'Sandstone Pharmacies' brand, suggesting a common owner/chain, but differ by city (Bragg Creek vs Blackfalds). Different locations = distinct legal entities or branches; classified RELATED as likely affiliates under the same phar
related entity
SANDSTONE PHARMACIES GLENMORE LANDING A (0.85) — Both share 'Sandstone Pharmacies' brand but are located in different cities (Glenmore Landing vs Blackfalds), suggesting separate franchise/branch locations under a common brand, not the same legal entity.
related entity
SANDSTONE PHARMACIES LANGDON (0.85) — Both share 'Sandstone Pharmacies' brand but differ by location (Blackfalds vs Langdon), suggesting separate franchise/branch locations under a common brand — RELATED, not SAME legal entity.
related entity
SANDSTONE PHARMACIES NANTON (0.85) — Both share 'Sandstone Pharmacies' brand but are located in different towns (Blackfalds vs Nanton). Likely franchises or branches of the same pharmacy chain, making them RELATED rather than SAME legal entities.
The dataset shows SANDSTONE PHARMACIES BRAGG CREEK (organization) adjudicated as RELATED to 11 other entities by the entity-resolution pipeline (mean verdict confidence 0.81) — SANDSTONE PHARMACIES AIRDRIE; SANDSTONE PHARMACIES BLACKFALDS; SANDSTONE PHARMACIES FIFTH AVE; SANDSTONE PHARMACIES LANGDON; SANDSTONE PHARMACIES NANTON; it appears in 1 dataset (ab) with 1 source records. Glassbox surfaces the network; the funder verifies governance overlap.
Evidence strength
0.59 · moderate
11 cited fields from source records
Show observations (11 cited fields)Hide observations
related count
11
avg related confidence
0.809
related entity
SANDSTONE PHARMACIES AIRDRIE (0.85) — Both share the 'Sandstone Pharmacies' brand but are in different cities (Bragg Creek vs Airdrie). Likely branches/locations of the same pharmacy chain but distinct legal or operational entities per the different-cities rule.
related entity
SANDSTONE PHARMACIES BLACKFALDS (0.85) — Both share 'Sandstone Pharmacies' brand, suggesting a common owner/chain, but differ by city (Bragg Creek vs Blackfalds). Different locations = distinct legal entities or branches; classified RELATED as likely affiliates under the same phar
related entity
SANDSTONE PHARMACIES FIFTH AVE (0.85) — Both share 'Sandstone Pharmacies' brand but differ by location (Fifth Ave vs Bragg Creek). Likely branches of same pharmacy group but distinct legal/operational entities per different-cities rule. No shared BN to confirm SAME.
related entity
SANDSTONE PHARMACIES LANGDON (0.85) — Both share the 'Sandstone Pharmacies' brand but are located in different communities (Bragg Creek vs Langdon). Likely same ownership/chain but distinct legal entities or locations — RELATED per different-cities rule.
related entity
SANDSTONE PHARMACIES NANTON (0.85) — Both share 'Sandstone Pharmacies' brand but are located in different towns (Bragg Creek vs Nanton), suggesting separate pharmacy locations under a common brand/chain. Different locations = RELATED affiliates, not SAME legal entity.
The dataset shows SANDSTONE PHARMACIES FIFTH AVE (organization) adjudicated as RELATED to 11 other entities by the entity-resolution pipeline (mean verdict confidence 0.80) — SANDSTONE PHARMACIES BRAGG CREEK; SANDSTONE PHARMACIES AIRDRIE; SANDSTONE PHARMACIES BLACKFALDS; SANDSTONE PHARMACIES GLENMORE LANDING A; SANDSTONE PHARMACIES HENDAY; it appears in 1 dataset (ab) with 1 source records. Glassbox surfaces the network; the funder verifies governance overlap.
Evidence strength
0.59 · moderate
11 cited fields from source records
Show observations (11 cited fields)Hide observations
related count
11
avg related confidence
0.795
related entity
SANDSTONE PHARMACIES BRAGG CREEK (0.85) — Both share 'Sandstone Pharmacies' brand but differ by location (Fifth Ave vs Bragg Creek). Likely branches of same pharmacy group but distinct legal/operational entities per different-cities rule. No shared BN to confirm SAME.
related entity
SANDSTONE PHARMACIES AIRDRIE (0.82) — Both share 'Sandstone Pharmacies' brand but operate at different locations (Fifth Ave vs Airdrie). Likely same franchise/chain owner but distinct legal grant recipients at different sites. Different locations => RELATED not SAME.
related entity
SANDSTONE PHARMACIES BLACKFALDS (0.82) — Both share 'Sandstone Pharmacies' brand but differ by location (Fifth Ave vs Blackfalds). Likely branches of the same pharmacy chain, not the same legal entity. No BN to confirm. Prefer RELATED over SAME per rules.
related entity
SANDSTONE PHARMACIES GLENMORE LANDING A (0.82) — Both share the 'Sandstone Pharmacies' brand but are distinct locations (Fifth Ave vs Glenmore Landing). Likely same chain/owner but registered as separate entities. No BN to confirm legal identity. Prefer RELATED over SAME.
related entity
SANDSTONE PHARMACIES HENDAY (0.82) — Both share 'Sandstone Pharmacies' brand but differ by location suffix (Fifth Ave vs Henday), suggesting separate branch locations of the same pharmacy chain. No BN to confirm legal identity. Prefer RELATED over SAME.
The dataset shows SANDSTONE PHARMACIES HENDAY (organization) adjudicated as RELATED to 11 other entities by the entity-resolution pipeline (mean verdict confidence 0.81) — SANDSTONE PHARMACIES AIRDRIE; SANDSTONE PHARMACIES LANGDON; SANDSTONE PHARMACIES BLACKFALDS; SANDSTONE PHARMACIES BRAGG CREEK; SANDSTONE PHARMACIES FIFTH AVE; it appears in 1 dataset (ab) with 1 source records. Glassbox surfaces the network; the funder verifies governance overlap.
Evidence strength
0.59 · moderate
11 cited fields from source records
Show observations (11 cited fields)Hide observations
related count
11
avg related confidence
0.807
related entity
SANDSTONE PHARMACIES AIRDRIE (0.85) — Both share the 'Sandstone Pharmacies' brand but are located in different cities (Henday vs Airdrie). Likely same parent/franchise network but distinct legal or operational entities per different-cities rule.
related entity
SANDSTONE PHARMACIES LANGDON (0.85) — Both share 'Sandstone Pharmacies' brand but differ by location (Henday vs Langdon), suggesting sibling locations under a common brand/owner, not the same legal entity. No BN to confirm. Prefer RELATED over SAME per rules.
related entity
SANDSTONE PHARMACIES BLACKFALDS (0.82) — Both share 'Sandstone Pharmacies' brand but differ by location (Henday vs Blackfalds), suggesting separate pharmacy locations/legal entities under a common brand. Different locations => RELATED (likely same owner/chain), not SAME.
related entity
SANDSTONE PHARMACIES BRAGG CREEK (0.82) — Both share 'Sandstone Pharmacies' brand suggesting same parent/franchise, but 'Bragg Creek' and 'Henday' are distinct locations indicating separate branch entities, not the same legal organisation.
related entity
SANDSTONE PHARMACIES FIFTH AVE (0.82) — Both share 'Sandstone Pharmacies' brand but differ by location suffix (Fifth Ave vs Henday), suggesting separate branch locations of the same pharmacy chain. No BN to confirm legal identity. Prefer RELATED over SAME.
The dataset shows SANDSTONE PHARMACIES SIMONS VALLEY (organization) adjudicated as RELATED to 11 other entities by the entity-resolution pipeline (mean verdict confidence 0.81) — SANDSTONE PHARMACIES AIRDRIE; SANDSTONE PHARMACIES GLENMORE LANDING A; SANDSTONE PHARMACIES BLACKFALDS; SANDSTONE PHARMACIES BRAGG CREEK; SANDSTONE PHARMACIES FIFTH AVE; it appears in 1 dataset (ab) with 1 source records. Glassbox surfaces the network; the funder verifies governance overlap.
Evidence strength
0.59 · moderate
11 cited fields from source records
Show observations (11 cited fields)Hide observations
related count
11
avg related confidence
0.807
related entity
SANDSTONE PHARMACIES AIRDRIE (0.85) — Both share 'Sandstone Pharmacies' brand but operate in different locations (Simons Valley vs Airdrie). Likely same parent pharmacy group but distinct legal/operational entities. Different cities => RELATED, not SAME.
related entity
SANDSTONE PHARMACIES GLENMORE LANDING A (0.85) — Both share 'Sandstone Pharmacies' brand but are different locations (Glenmore Landing vs Simons Valley). Likely same parent chain but distinct legal entities or operating locations. No BN to confirm same legal entity.
related entity
SANDSTONE PHARMACIES BLACKFALDS (0.82) — Both share 'Sandstone Pharmacies' brand but differ by location (Blackfalds vs Simons Valley), suggesting separate pharmacy locations under a common brand — likely related franchise/chain outlets, not the same legal entity.
related entity
SANDSTONE PHARMACIES BRAGG CREEK (0.82) — Both share 'Sandstone Pharmacies' brand but are located at different sites (Bragg Creek vs. Simons Valley). Likely branches of the same pharmacy group but registered as separate legal entities or locations. No shared BN to confirm SAME.
related entity
SANDSTONE PHARMACIES FIFTH AVE (0.82) — Both share 'Sandstone Pharmacies' brand suggesting same parent/operator, but 'Fifth Ave' and 'Simons Valley' are distinct locations — likely separate branch entities under a common pharmacy group, not the same legal entity.
The dataset shows SANDSTONE PHARMACIES SPRAGUE (organization) adjudicated as RELATED to 11 other entities by the entity-resolution pipeline (mean verdict confidence 0.80) — SANDSTONE PHARMACIES BLACKFALDS; SANDSTONE PHARMACIES NANTON; SANDSTONE PHARMACIES AIRDRIE; SANDSTONE PHARMACIES BRAGG CREEK; SANDSTONE PHARMACIES FIFTH AVE; it appears in 1 dataset (ab) with 1 source records. Glassbox surfaces the network; the funder verifies governance overlap.
Evidence strength
0.59 · moderate
11 cited fields from source records
Show observations (11 cited fields)Hide observations
related count
11
avg related confidence
0.798
related entity
SANDSTONE PHARMACIES BLACKFALDS (0.85) — Both share 'Sandstone Pharmacies' brand but are located in different cities (Sprague vs Blackfalds), suggesting separate franchise/branch locations under a common brand — RELATED rather than SAME.
related entity
SANDSTONE PHARMACIES NANTON (0.85) — Both share 'Sandstone Pharmacies' brand but differ by location (Sprague vs Nanton), indicating separate pharmacy locations under a common brand/chain. Likely same owner/operator but distinct legal or operational entities.
related entity
SANDSTONE PHARMACIES AIRDRIE (0.82) — Both share 'Sandstone Pharmacies' brand but differ by location (Sprague vs Airdrie). Likely same pharmacy chain/owner but separate legal or operational entities at different locations. Per rules, different locations => RELATED not SAME.
related entity
SANDSTONE PHARMACIES BRAGG CREEK (0.82) — Both share 'Sandstone Pharmacies' brand but differ by location (Bragg Creek vs Sprague), suggesting separate pharmacy locations under a common brand — affiliate/sibling rather than the same legal entity.
related entity
SANDSTONE PHARMACIES FIFTH AVE (0.82) — Both share 'SANDSTONE PHARMACIES' brand but differ by location suffix (FIFTH AVE vs SPRAGUE), suggesting separate pharmacy locations/branches under a common brand. Likely same owner but distinct legal or operational entities.
LOCAL #168 (BRETON) OF THE METIS ASSOCIATION OF ALBERTA (0.92) — Both are distinct local chapters of the Metis Association of Alberta — Hinton Local 1988 vs Breton Local 168. Same parent federation but different geographic chapters, different local numbers, different communities.
dataset sources
ab
source link count
1
entity type
non_profit
confidence
0.7
related entity
LITTLE EINSTEINS DAYCARES COMMUNITY FOUNDATION AT MOUNT ROYAL (0.82) — Same brand 'Little Einsteins Daycares Community Foundation' but different locations (Castledowns vs Mount Royal). Likely affiliated chapters/branches, not the same legal entity. No shared BN to confirm identity. Prefer RELATED per rules.
dataset sources
ab
source link count
1
entity type
non_profit
confidence
0.7
related entity
LITTLE EINSTEINS DAYCARES COMMUNITY FOUNDATION AT SUNSHINE FACTORY DAYCARE (0.82) — Both share 'Little Einsteins Daycares Community Foundation' as parent brand but operate at different daycare locations (Sunshine Factory vs Diamond Daycare). Likely sister chapters/affiliates under the same foundation umbrella, not the same
dataset sources
ab
source link count
1
entity type
non_profit
confidence
0.7
related entity
LITTLE EINSTEINS DAYCARES COMMUNITY FOUNDATION AT SUNSHINE FACTORY DAYCARE (0.82) — Both share 'Little Einsteins Daycares Community Foundation' branding but differ by location (Sunshine Factory Daycare vs Keheewin). Likely separate non-profit entities or chapters under a common umbrella — RELATED, not SAME.
dataset sources
ab
source link count
1
entity type
non_profit
confidence
0.7
related entity
LITTLE EINSTEINS DAYCARES COMMUNITY FOUNDATION AT SHERWOOD (0.82) — Same 'Little Einsteins Daycares Community Foundation' brand but different location suffixes (Sherwood vs Kids Korner), suggesting separate nonprofit entities or chapters under a common umbrella. No shared BN. Prefer RELATED over SAME.
dataset sources
ab
source link count
1
entity type
non_profit
confidence
0.7
related entity
LITTLE EINSTEINS DAYCARES COMMUNITY FOUNDATION AT MOUNT ROYAL (0.78) — Both share 'Little Einsteins Daycares Community Foundation' branding but are distinct location-based entities: one at Mount Royal, one at Millcreek Daycare. Likely affiliated chapters/branches under a common foundation umbrella, not the sam
dataset sources
ab
source link count
1
entity type
non_profit
confidence
0.7
related entity
LITTLE EINSTEINS DAYCARES COMMUNITY FOUNDATION AT SUNSHINE FACTORY DAYCARE (0.75) — Both share 'Little Einsteins Daycares Community Foundation' base but differ by location suffix (Sunshine Factory Daycare vs St. Albert), suggesting separate chapter/site entities under a common foundation umbrella.
dataset sources
ab
source link count
1
entity type
non_profit
confidence
0.7
related entity
LITTLE EINSTEINS DAYCARES COMMUNITY FOUNDATION AT MILLCREEK DAYCARE (0.82) — Both share 'Little Einsteins Daycares Community Foundation' as parent brand but designate different daycare locations (Sunshine Factory vs. Millcreek). Likely site-level chapters of the same foundation — RELATED, not SAME distinct legal ent
dataset sources
ab
source link count
1
entity type
non_profit
confidence
0.7
related entity
LITTLE EINSTEINS DAYCARES COMMUNITY FOUNDATION AT MOUNT ROYAL (0.82) — Both share 'Little Einsteins Daycares Community Foundation' brand but differ by location suffix (Tender Heart Child Care Centre vs Mount Royal), suggesting separate chapter/site-level non-profits under a common umbrella, not the same legal
dataset sources
ab
source link count
1
entity type
non_profit
confidence
0.7
related entity
LITTLE EINSTEINS DAYCARES COMMUNITY FOUNDATION AT MILLCREEK DAYCARE (0.82) — Same foundation brand 'Little Einsteins Daycares Community Foundation' but different location suffixes (Friendly Frog Daycare vs Millcreek Daycare). Likely separate chapter/site entities under a common umbrella, not the same legal org. Pref
dataset sources
ab
source link count
1
entity type
non_profit
confidence
0.7
related entity
MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS SOCIETY OF CANADA, OTTAWA CHAPTER (0.92) — Entity A is the national office of the MS Society of Canada; Entity B is the Ottawa Chapter — a regional chapter of the same parent organization. Same umbrella org but distinct legal/operational units, so RELATED not SAME.
dataset sources
cra
source link count
5
entity type
charity
confidence
0.7
related entity
MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS - SASK DIVISION (0.88) — Both are regional chapters of MS Society of Canada but different divisions: Sask Division (CRA BN 107746170) vs Ottawa Chapter (no BN, fed grants). Same national parent, different regional entities.
