Skip to content
Plinth
Foundation DossiersAlso receives grants — funding profile →
Plinth

· Public charity

Coalitions & Collaboratives Inc

Coco, inc.

$980k
Granted FY2024still arriving
30
Grants FY2024still arriving
9
States reached
$61k
Largest
01What you fundRead
02The needRead
03Your edgeRead
04Your fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What you fund
01100% classified

What you funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2018–2024.

Environment$2.5MPublic Safety & Disaster$1.9MCommunity Improvement$141kCivil Rights$107kPhilanthropy$102kCrime & Legal$96kHuman Services$75kArts & Culture$35kOther$0
02FY2024 · 30 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k1 grant · $5k
  • $10k–50k24 grants · $694k
  • $50k–250k5 grants · $274k
$31,191
Median grant
9
States reached
$1.1M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
YOSEMITE SEQUOIA RC&DC$60,595
EASTERN MADERA COUNTY FIRE SAFE COUNCIL$55,520
LINCOLN COUNTY EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT$53,565
NORTH BAY JOBS WITH JUSTICE$53,480
SOUTHERN OREGON FOREST RESTORATION COLLABORATIVE$50,911
POWDER BASIN WATERSHED COUNCIL$49,649
SUSTAINABLE NORTHWEST$44,704
LAKE COUNTY RCD FOR THE FSC$43,781
Individual grant recipient$42,440
FRIENDS OF TYRON CREEK$39,112
GRAND COUNTY WILDFIRE COUNCIL$38,126
CULTURAL BURN ASSOCIATION$35,410
CAROLINA LAND & LAKES$35,012
COALITION FOR THE POUDRE RIVER$32,475
MANCOS CONSERVATION DISTRICT$31,191
02The need
03

Do your dollars go where the need is?

Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, then read against the area’s typical level.

show:

Your human-services grants (FY22–23, $75k) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%YUBA WATERSHED PROTECTION & FIRE SAFE: $45k → 15%YUBA WATERSHED PROTECTION & FIRE SAFE: $30k → 15%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount

Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty linein the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP; grantee ZIP can differ from where services are delivered.

Which US states your grants reach

WA
ID
MT
MN
OR
NV
WY
SD
PA
CA
UT
CO
VA
MD
NM
NC
HI
LA

US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are actually delivered. Need from public data — U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA — shown as context about the area, never attributed to your giving.

03Your edge
repeat funding

Who you back again

Which organizations you funded more than once, and which you funded a single time. Each grantee is matched to its own filings.

73%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$3.6M · 52 repeat orgs$1.3M to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +83% since the first grant, against -16% for the ones you funded once.

52 repeat relationships — 13 still active in FY2024, 39 since wound down; 17 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

52
24

Total granted

$3.6M
$843k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+83%
-16%

Still filing today

63%
33%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 48% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $502k went to new ones.

50%100%’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant

’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
EnvironmentPublic Safety & DisasterCommunity ImprovementEmploymentYouth DevelopmentPublic BenefitOther

First-time = a grantee’s first year in your filing window; renewed = funded in an earlier year too. As a portfolio matures the renewed share naturally climbs — once funded, an org stays “renewable” — so the signal is the years that buck it (a new-grantee intake wave). The earliest year is left-censored: relationships that predate the data read as “new.” Theme is the grantee’s IRS cause.

Backed again, and grew

  • WA
    Wildfire Adapted Partnership
    5× · 2019–2023 · $184k · revenue +141%
  • HW
    HAWAII WILDFIRE MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATION
    3× · 2020–2023 · $123k · revenue +311%
  • TF
    THE FOREST STEWARDS GUILD
    4× · 2019–2023 · $117k · revenue +106%

Funded once

  • FA
    Fire Adapted Colorado
    one grant, 2023 · $92k · revenue +24%
  • BS
    BIG SKY FIRE DEPARTMENT
    one grant, 2023 · $75k
  • EC
    ELK CREEK FIRE FIGHTER & EMERGENCY SERVICES ASSOCIATION
    one grant, 2023 · $75k

Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Your field

The map has a center of gravity: the average direction from the rest of the sector toward the organizations the foundation funds — the shape of its giving. Scoring every nonprofit along that direction surfaces the ones that look most like the portfolio. These are the closest matchesthat aren’t grantees — a resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.

1
Idaho Forest Restoration Partnership
Environment
2
Headwaters Basin Project

The project's mission is to reduce the risk of high-intensity, catastrophic wildfires and to maintain the old-growth forests, water supply, biological integrity, cultural resources, and ecological sustainability of public and private lands…

Environment
3
Coast Fork Willamette Watershed Council

The Coast Fork Willamette Watershed Council is a local nonprofit organization that strives to enhance and restore habitat for fish and wildlife our community and for future generations. Our Board of Directors consists of seven members with…

Environment
4
Lookout-Glasgow Rangeland Protection Ass

Rangeland Fire Protection

Public Safety & Disaster
5
Amador Fire Safe Council

Protect the people of amador county and their property from the effects of catastrophic fires through education, cooperation, innovation and action

Public Safety & Disaster
6
Tuolumne River Preservation Trust dba Yosemite Rivers Alliance

At Yosemite Rivers Alliance, we unite conservation and community to protect and restore the three rivers that ?ow through the Yosemite Regionthe Tuolumne, Stanislaus, and Merced.

—
7
Timberview Area Firewise Improvement

To reduce the risk of loss of life and property in the Timberview and adjacent areas through promotion of fire safety, education, prevention and suppression as well as related emergency procedures.

Public Safety & Disaster
8
Crooked River Watershed Council

To promote stewardship of the Crooked River Watershed and its resources and to ensure sustainable watershed health, functions, and uses for optimal conservation and benefit.

Environment
9
Ojai Valley Firesafe Council Inc

Promoting wildfire safety through education and action in the ojai valley area.

Public Safety & Disaster
10
Estes Valley Watershed Coalition

Our mission is to bring together local, state, and federal partners to collaborate on projects that support the water, forests, and wildlife of the estes valley.

Environment
11
Routt County Wildfire Mitigation Council

Routt County Wildfire Mitigation Council's main exempt purpose is to create resilient fire-adapted communities to minimize the potential impacts of wildfire. This is done through partnerships, coordination, education, outreach, and…

Public Safety & Disaster
12
Fire Adapted Bailey

Wildfire mitigation and preparation

Public Safety & Disaster

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The Ember Alliance and the most unlike its peers is Plumas Corporation. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.

Your grantees are a median of 22 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.

THE FIELDby orgYOUR GRANTEESby number22%4%<5yr14%21%5–10yr19%17%10–20yr16%39%20–35yr13%12%35–55yr16%8%55yr+
THE FIELDby orgYOUR MONEYby value22%4%<5yr14%21%5–10yr19%20%10–20yr16%36%20–35yr13%10%35–55yr16%10%55yr+

The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 4% of your grantees by number, and just 4% of your money.

Closures · last 5 years

The orgs you fund almost never close — 2% lost their exemption, against 13% of the field you don’t fund.

orgs you fund
2%2/82
the rest of the field
13%
240,394/1,819,483

Age = years since IRS exemption (a founding proxy). “Closed” = auto-revocation for 3 years of non-filing — a floor on closure, not proof, and bigger established orgs lapse least. Association, not causation.

04the grantee network

53 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.

Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue from every source. Association, dated; never a causal claim.

Counted here: distinct organizations you funded across 2017–2025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 53 of the 94 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile; the rest are funded organizations whose filings we could not track year by year.

3
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
23
Early backer (in before they grew)
52/53
Grantees still filing
37/53
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

ELK CREEK FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT — $142,212 · OtherELK CREEK FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICTLINCOLN COUNTY EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT — $124,215 · OtherLINCOLN COUNTY EMERGENCY MANAGEMENTCASCADIA CONSERVATION DISTRICT — $101,713 · OtherJEFFERSON CONSERVATION DISTRICT — $81,081 · OtherMEAD COUNTY FIREWISE — $79,405 · Other+45 more — $1,759,578 · Other+45 moreAUDUBON CANYON RANCH INC — $127,111 · EnvironmentAUDUBON CANYON RANCH INCHAWAII WILDFIRE MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATION — $122,745 · EnvironmentHAWAII WILDFIRE MANAGEMENT ORGANI…Mountain Valleys Resource Conservation & Development Council — $103,038 · EnvironmentMountain Valleys Resource Conserv…MT ADAMS RESOURCE STEWARDS — $95,591 · EnvironmentMT ADAMS RESOURCE STEWARDSYosemiteSequoia Resource Conservation — $93,969 · EnvironmentYosemiteSequoia Resource Conserva…Powder Basin Watershed Council — $84,760 · EnvironmentPowder Basin Watershed CouncilTHE EMBER ALLIANCE — $74,905 · EnvironmentCLEARWATER RESOURCE COUNCIL — $68,203 · EnvironmentSpanish Peaks Alliance for Wildfire Protection — $61,423 · EnvironmentCOALITION FOR THE POUDRE RIVER WATERSHED — $61,244 · EnvironmentFIRE SAFE COUNCIL OF NEVADA COUNTY — $59,999 · EnvironmentRUFFED GROUSE SOCIETY — $57,864 · EnvironmentBIG THOMPSON WATERSHED COALITION — $57,730 · EnvironmentSOUTHERN OREGON FOREST RESTORATION COLLABORATIVE — $50,911 · Environment+14 more — $357,965 · Environment+14 moreWildfire Adapted Partnership — $183,558 · Public Safety & DisasterWildfire Adapted …Grand County Wildfire Council — $112,966 · Public Safety & DisasterGrand County Wild…Fire Adapted Colorado — $91,629 · Public Safety & DisasterFire Adapted Colo…MENDOCINO COUNTY FIRE SAFE COUNCIL INC — $79,910 · Public Safety & DisasterMENDOCINO COUNTY …West Region Wildfire Council — $75,105 · Public Safety & DisasterWest Region Wildf…Eastern Madera County Fire Safe Council Inc — $61,520 · Public Safety & DisasterEastern Madera Co…SEIGLER SPRINGS COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATION — $56,762 · Public Safety & DisasterSEIGLER SPRINGS C…ISLAND PARK SUSTAINABLE FIRE COMMUN — $50,386 · Public Safety & DisasterISLAND PARK SUSTA…CARLTON COMPLEX LONG TERM RECOVERY GROUP — $33,481 · Public Safety & DisasterIDAHO FIREWISE INC — $26,721 · Public Safety & Disaster+1 more — $7,624 · Public Safety & DisasterTHE FOREST STEWARDS GUILD — $117,096 · Youth DevelopmentSUSTAINABLE NORTHWEST — $81,457 · Community ImprovementSOUTH WILLAMETTE SOLUTIONS — $23,748 · Community ImprovementUNITED WAY OF MISSOULA COUNTY — $101,783 · PhilanthropyYUBA WATERSHED PROTECTION AND FIRE SAFE COUNCIL — $74,958 · Human Services
Other$2,288,204Environment$1,477,458Public Safety & Disaster$779,662Youth Development$117,096Community Improvement$105,205Philanthropy$101,783Human Services$74,958

Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetWildfire Adapted Partnership — $183,558 over 5y, 9.8% of budgetAUDUBON CANYON RANCH INC — $127,111 over 3y, 1.8% of budgetHAWAII WILDFIRE MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATION — $122,745 over 3y, 8.5% of budgetTHE FOREST STEWARDS GUILD — $117,096 over 4y, 1.7% of budgetGrand County Wildfire Council — $112,966 over 3y, 25% of budgetMountain Valleys Resource Conservation & Development Council — $103,038 over 3y, 14% of budgetUNITED WAY OF MISSOULA COUNTY — $101,783 over 4y, 2.8% of budgetMT ADAMS RESOURCE STEWARDS — $95,591 over 4y, 3.6% of budgetYosemiteSequoia Resource Conservation — $93,969 over 3y, 6.3% of budgetFire Adapted Colorado — $91,629 over 1y, 25% of budgetPowder Basin Watershed Council — $84,760 over 2y, 6.9% of budgetSUSTAINABLE NORTHWEST — $81,457 over 2y, 0.6% of budgetMENDOCINO COUNTY FIRE SAFE COUNCIL INC — $79,910 over 3y, 7.6% of budgetWest Region Wildfire Council — $75,105 over 3y, 2.5% of budgetYUBA WATERSHED PROTECTION AND FIRE SAFE COUNCIL — $74,958 over 2y, 7.6% of budgetTHE EMBER ALLIANCE — $74,905 over 2y, 3.6% of budgetCOMMUNITY ASSOCIATION OF BIG SUR — $70,673 over 1y, 18% of budgetCLEARWATER RESOURCE COUNCIL — $68,203 over 2y, 16% of budgetEastern Madera County Fire Safe Council Inc — $61,520 over 2y, 7.1% of budgetSpanish Peaks Alliance for Wildfire Protection — $61,423 over 2y, 43% of budgetCOALITION FOR THE POUDRE RIVER WATERSHED — $61,244 over 3y, 1.7% of budgetFIRE SAFE COUNCIL OF NEVADA COUNTY — $59,999 over 2y, 4.7% of budgetRUFFED GROUSE SOCIETY — $57,864 over 2y, 0.5% of budgetBIG THOMPSON WATERSHED COALITION — $57,730 over 2y, 11% of budgetSEIGLER SPRINGS COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATION — $56,762 over 2y, 23% of budgetNorth Bay Jobs With Justice — $53,480 over 1y, 2.8% of budgetSOUTHERN OREGON FOREST RESTORATION COLLABORATIVE — $50,911 over 1y, 4.6% of budgetISLAND PARK SUSTAINABLE FIRE COMMUN — $50,386 over 2y, 16% of budgetFriends of Tryon Creek — $39,112 over 1y, 1.9% of budgetWASHINGTON RESOURCE CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT C — $38,587 over 1y, 2.2% of budgetBLACKFOOT CHALLENGE INC — $38,235 over 2y, 1.3% of budgetDOVETAIL PARTNERS INC — $35,819 over 2y, 4.8% of budgetSALMON RIVER RESTORATION COUNCIL — $35,785 over 2y, 2.9% of budgetCarolina Land & Lakes RC-D Inc — $35,012 over 1y, 6.4% of budgetRoaring Fork Outdoor Volunteers — $34,828 over 2y, 2.1% of budgetCARLTON COMPLEX LONG TERM RECOVERY GROUP — $33,481 over 2y, 3.8% of budgetKLAMATH WATERSHED PARTNERSHIP BILL LEHMAN — $29,545 over 2y, 2.5% of budgetCIRCUIT RIDER COMMUNITY SERVICES — $29,385 over 1y, 3.7% of budgetWildfire Collaborative Roaring Fork Valley — $29,324 over 1y, 6.5% of budgetIDAHO FIREWISE INC — $26,721 over 2y, 7.8% of budgetSOUTH WILLAMETTE SOLUTIONS — $23,748 over 2y, 4.1% of budgetTREES WATER AND PEOPLE — $21,987 over 1y, 0.9% of budgetLOUISIANA GREEN CORPS INC — $21,603 over 1y, 3.1% of budgetBOULDER WATERSHED COLLECTIVE — $20,828 over 1y, 0.9% of budgetClimate and Wildfire Institute Inc — $19,103 over 1y, 1.5% of budgetMATTOLE RESTORATION COUNCIL — $18,753 over 2y, 0.9% of budgetPLUMAS CORPORATION — $18,037 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetALLIANCE FOR THE CHESAPEAKE BAY INC — $14,277 over 1y, 0.1% of budget
Go grantee by grantee — a decade per org, and how each moved after you funded them

A decade per grantee — revenue shaded, your grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.

The grantmakers whose grantees overlap with yours far more than size alone predicts. Each orbits closer the stronger the alignment; the arcs between them show where they also fund each other. Here it reads as a tightly interlocked camp — most of these funders back each other's grantees too.

National Forest Found…California Fire Safe …National Fish and Wil…The Watershed Researc…The Nature ConservancyCalifornia Fire Found…National Association …Resources Legacy FundBonneville Environmen…PatagoniaorgUnited States Endowme…Colorado Gives Founda…
National Forest FoundationMT33.1× affinity14 shared granteesties to 10 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: National Forest Foundation · California Fire Safe Council Inc · National Fish and Wildlife Foundation · The Watershed Research & Training Center · The Nature Conservancy · California Fire Foundation · National Association of Conservation Districts · Resources Legacy Fund · Bonneville Environmental Foundation · Patagoniaorg · United States Endowment for Forestry · Colorado Gives Foundation

Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. A research starting point: overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.

Government reliance of your grantees

Every dot is one organization Coalitions & Collaboratives Inc funds. Left–right is the share of its income from government; up–down is the share from you. Bigger dots raise more. Filter to federal or a single department — and drag the year to watch it move.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%6%23%51%90%your share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 100%
  • Klamath Watershed Partnership Bill Lehman — 100% of income from government
  • South Willamette Solutions — 100% of income from government
  • Southern Oregon Forest Restoration Collaborative — 100% of income from government
  • Powder Basin Watershed Council — 86% of income from government
  • Alliance for the Chesapeake Bay Inc — 28% of income from government
  • Sustainable Northwest — 5% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
1get no government money at all
16report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
4rely on government for over half their income
typical government reliance, FY20–25

Government income is each org’s traced federal awards (USASpending — grants and contracts) plus state payments (open checkbooks) as a share of its total revenue (IRS Form 990); the self-reported government-grant line (990 line 1e) is carried for cross-check: a grantee that reports government grants we could not trace to a source is left off the chart rather than shown as receiving none. An association, not a claim that your grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first — a floor, not a census; state records exist for 9 states, so a grantee outside them shows no state figure (dimmed) rather than a false zero. Federal award amounts are obligations, which can span years, so a single-year share is indicative. 990 filings lag 12–24 months.

05Through Plinth

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

How do I get to Coalitions & Collaboratives Inc?

Find your warmest path to Coalitions & Collaboratives Inc through trustees and officers whose names appear on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the shortest route it can evidence.

Each link is a name appearing on two organizations’ public IRS 990 filings, matched on that name and, where the filings support it, on location. A same-state match has geographic support, which is a second matching feature rather than confirmation that the two are one person; a cross-state one is the likeliest to be two people who share a name. Every hop shows its tier, low-confidence and distant paths are held back rather than guessed, and it is worth confirming the person before you use the introduction.

On method. Every financial figure here is read directly from IRS e-file XML — your own 990/990-PF and the multi-year returns of the 94 grantees we resolved across every year we hold, several hundred filings in all (a different count from the grant rows on the cover, which are one fiscal year)— each linked to its source. Grantee achievements and outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III); we read these as association with sustained funding — the foundation is one of several forces — suppress low-confidence name matches rather than guess, and say so where a figure rests on a single grant or filing. Not everything on this page is a filed figure, and the difference matters. Filed is what you reported on your return. Official is another government record about an organization, such as a federal award or a charity register, joined by name where no shared identifier exists. Resolved is an identity we worked out where the filing named a recipient without an EIN, kept only above a measured confidence threshold. Computed is arithmetic over those, like themes, portfolio clusters and co-funder strength. Context is a statistic about a place rather than about an organization, which is what the need overlay is: it describes the area a grantee’s address sits in, not where its work lands. Inferred is drawn by a model from text, like the partnerships read out of public news and organization websites. Each is labeled where it appears. How we build these →

Generated from your IRS Form 990 e-file return for fiscal year 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

More from the funding graph

The unnamed billions
grants reported with no recipient in the public record
The regranting layer
51% of grant dollars land in the regranting layer
The DAF merry-go-round
$9.7B circulates between donor-advised funds
The camps
funders cluster by geography, not ideology
By state
where grant money is based, and what stays home
State money flows
the interactive map of money crossing state lines