Skip to content
Coalitions & Collaboratives Inc at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

Coalitions & Collaboratives Inc

Coco, inc.

$980k
Granted FY2024still arriving
30
Grants FY2024still arriving
9
States reached
$61k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2018 to 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

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

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

Does the money reach high-need areas?

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

show:

Its 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 its 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
How this is measured
Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty line in the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP.

Which US states its grants reach

WA
ID
MT
MN
OR
NV
WY
SD
PA
CA
UT
CO
VA
MD
NM
NC
HI
LA
How this is measured
US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are delivered. Need from public data (U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA), shown as context about the area, never attributed to the funder’s giving.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

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

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +69% since the first grant, against -16% for those 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

+69%
-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
How this is measured
First-time means a grantee’s first year in the filing window; renewed means funded in an earlier year too. The renewed share climbs naturally as a portfolio matures, so the signal is a year that bucks it (a wave of new grantees). 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%
  • EC
    ELK CREEK FIRE FIGHTER & EMERGENCY SERVICES ASSOCIATION
    one grant, 2023 · $75k
  • BS
    BIG SKY FIRE DEPARTMENT
    one grant, 2023 · $75k
How this is measured

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

04Its field

Closest unfunded matches

The nonprofits that most resemble its grantees but are not funded by it, scored along the direction from the rest of the field toward the portfolio. 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
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
5
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.

—
6
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
7
Lookout-Glasgow Rangeland Protection Ass

Rangeland Fire Protection

Public Safety & Disaster
8
Ojai Valley Firesafe Council Inc

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

Public Safety & Disaster
9
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
10
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
11
Community Wildfire Planning Center
Philanthropy
12
Fire Adapted Bailey

Wildfire mitigation and preparation

Public Safety & Disaster
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Sustainable Northwest; 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.
04the grantee network

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

Each grant beside the grantee’s revenue from every source, year by year.

How this is measured

Counted here: distinct organizations funded across 2017 to 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.

Each grantee is resolved to its own IRS returns. Association, dated; never a causal claim.

3
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
23
Early backer (in before they grew)
52/53
Grantees still filing
38/53
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and 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 grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's 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
Grantee by grantee: a decade per organization, before and after funding

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

Co-funders

Grantmakers whose grantees overlap with this funder’s far more than size alone predicts. Closer means stronger alignment; arcs show where they also fund each other. Here they form a tightly interlocked group: 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

How this is measured
Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. Overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization Coalitions & Collaboratives Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Coalitions & Collaboratives Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%6%23%51%90%funder's 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
How this is measured
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 a grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first, a floor rather than 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 to 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 from IRS e-file XML, the funder’s own 990/990-PF, and from the multi-year returns of the 94 grantees we resolved, each linked to its source. Grantee outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III), read as association with funding, never as caused by it. Low-confidence name matches are suppressed rather than guessed. How we build these →

How this is measured
Each figure carries one of six labels. Filed is what the funder reported on its 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.

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

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Coalitions & Collaboratives’ filings →

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 endowment market
who holds foundation money, and what just moved
The camps
funders cluster by geography, not ideology
By state
where grant money is based, and what stays home