· Public charity
Colorado Coalition of Land Trusts
To unite, elevate and empower colorado's conservation community to protect the lands and waters that define our state.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2020–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- $10k–50k6 grants · $195k
- $50k–250k5 grants · $700k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| RIO GRANDE HEADWATERS LAND TRUST | $167,850 |
| COLORADO OPEN LANDS | $159,750 |
| COLORADO CATTLEMEN'S AGRICULTURAL | $155,953 |
| COLORADO WEST LAND TRUST | $153,600 |
| LA PLATA OPEN SPACE CONSERVANCY | $62,500 |
| CRESTED BUTTE LAND TRUST | $48,500 |
| DOUGLAS LAND CONSERVANCY | $42,689 |
| PALMER LAND CONSERVANCY | $41,300 |
| CENTRAL COLORADO CONSERVANCY | $36,000 |
| MOUNTAIN AREA LAND TRUST | $16,340 |
| MONTEZUMA LAND CONSERVANCY | $10,000 |
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.
Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY20–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 7%. 82% of your dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.
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.
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.
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.
9 repeat relationships — 9 still active in FY2025, 0 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).
How the two cohorts compare
Organizations
Total granted
Median revenue growth · since first grant
Still filing today
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2025, 90% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $91k went to new ones.
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
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
- CCCOLORADO CATTLEMEN'S AGRICULTURAL LAND TRUST5× · 2020–2025 · $550k · revenue +6%
- MCMESA COUNTY LAND CONSERVANCY INC5× · 2020–2025 · $483k · revenue +195%
- COCOLORADO OPEN LANDS4× · 2020–2025 · $353k · revenue +117%
Funded once
- EVESTES VALLEY LAND TRUSTone grant, 2023 · $43k · revenue -43%
- AVASPEN VALLEY LAND TRUSTgraduatedone grant, 2020 · $15k · revenue +100%
- SISAN ISABEL LAND PROTECTION TRUSTone grant, 2020 · $10k · revenue +66%
Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.
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.
To unite, elevate and empower colorado's conservation community to protect the lands and waters that define our state.
Clrt works in partnership with landowners to conserve and protect land and water resources.
The mission of the montana land reliance (mlr) is to partner with landowners to provide permanent protection for private lands that are significant for agricultural production, fish and wildlife habitat, and open space.
Placer Land Trust works with willing landowners and conservation partners to permanently protect and care for natural and agricultural lands in Placer County for current and future generations.
Our mission is to work with landowners and communities to conserve the lands we love, now and forever, and to enrich connections to the natural world.
The purpose of the organization is to monitor, manage, and preserve conservation easements it stewards in northern california. the organization acquires conservation easements in land exhibiting important natural features to protect and…
Conservation legacy engages future leaders who protect, restore, and enhance our nation's lands through community-based service.in 2024, conservation legacy engaged 2,524 participants who completed over 1.5 million service hours on public…
Summit land conservancy works with utah communities to conserve land and water for the benefit of the people and nature.
Oregon agricultural trust partners with farmers and ranchers to protect agricultural lands for the benefit of oregons economy, communities, and landscapes.
Conserve the beauty, character, and diversity of significant lands in far northern california. currently shasta land trust holds conservation easements that permanently protect about 66,000 acres of land.
To conserve and steward the open lands and natural character of the headwaters of the colorado river in partnership with the local community.
To conserve natural resources, agricultural land and open spaces for present and future generations.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Mountain Area Land Trust and the most unlike its peers is The Nature Conservancy. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
16 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.
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing
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.
- Who funds COLORADO CATTLEMEN'S AGRICULTURAL LAND TRUST ↗
- Who funds MESA COUNTY LAND CONSERVANCY INC ↗
- Who funds RIO GRANDE HEADWATERS LAND TRUST ↗
- Who funds COLORADO OPEN LANDS ↗
- Who funds MONTEZUMA LAND CONSERVANCY ↗
- Who funds La Plata Open Space Conservancy ↗
- Who funds WILLIAM J PALMER PARKS FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds MOUNTAIN AREA LAND TRUST ↗
- Who funds Central Colorado Conservacy ↗
- Who funds CRESTED BUTTE LAND TRUST ↗
- Who funds ESTES VALLEY LAND TRUST ↗
- Who funds DOUGLAS LAND CONSERVANCY ↗
- Who funds ASPEN VALLEY LAND TRUST ↗
- Who funds SAN ISABEL LAND PROTECTION TRUST ↗
- Who funds THE NATURE CONSERVANCY ↗
- Who funds EAGLE VALLEY LAND TRUST ↗
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.
Open a dossier: Land Trust Alliance Inc · Colorado Gives Foundation · Gates Family Foundation · The Denver Foundation · The Moore Charitable Foundation Inc · The Trust for Public Land · National Fish and Wildlife Foundation · National Philanthropic Trust · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund
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 Colorado Coalition of Land Trusts 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.
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.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to Colorado Coalition of Land Trusts?
Find your warmest path to Colorado Coalition of Land Trusts 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.