Skip to content
Connecticut Land Conservation Council Inc at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

Connecticut Land Conservation Council Inc

Connecticut Land Conservation Council, Inc.s mission is to elevate and strengthen land conservation in Connecticut.

$217k
Granted FY2024still arriving
13
Grants FY2024still arriving
1
States reached
$24k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its fieldRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2023 to 2024.

Environment$262k
02FY2024 · 13 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 13 grants below total $163,102, the rows itemized in this filing. The $217,402 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $54,300 is giving the schedule does not break out (grants under the $5,000 itemization floor, grants to individuals, grants on other schedules). Every figure below describes the itemized rows only.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k6 grants · $45k
  • $10k–50k7 grants · $118k
$12,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$4.4M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
East Haddam Land Trust Inc$23,777
Salisbury Association Inc$20,000
Litchfield Land Trust Inc$18,904
Groton Open Space Association Inc$18,000
Greenwich Land Trust$13,055
Clinton Land Conservation Trust$12,400
The Nature Conservancy of CT$12,000
Great Meadows Conservation Trust$9,247
Roxbury Land Trust$9,000
Old Lyme Land Trust$7,500
Wyndham Land Trust Inc$7,219
Kent Land Trust$6,000
Killingworth Land Conservation Trust Inc$6,000
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.

None of its grants could be placed against low income need for this view.

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 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
Redding Land Trust Inc

The primary mission of Redding Land Trust is to preserve the natural resources of the Town of Redding, CT and to promote the scientific and educational study of local and natural resources, and to acquire, by gift or purchase, land or…

Environment
2
Farmington Land Trust

The Farmington Land Trust Inc protects open space in the town of Farmington CT through the acquisition of open space, stewardship of acquired land, education of the public about the importance of open space and advocacy that ensures…

Environment
3
Northern Connecticut Land Trust Inc

Preserve the natural resources on the northern CT region including agricultural land and other ecologically significant open space.

Environment
4
Watertown Land Trust

Preservation of open space in watertown, ct; maintenance of owned and conserved properties and public education of enviromental issues.

—
5
Stamford Land Conservation Trust Inc

To obtain lands through donation or purchase and to protect and preserve them. While preserving we are improving the sustainable of wildlife, water tables and overall quality of our natural habitat.

Environment
6
Essex Land Trust Inc

Land conservation and management

Environment
7
Canton Land Conservation Trust Inc

to acquire, preserve, and protect land of scenic, natural or historic value within the Town of Canton and surrounding environs. (see schedule O for full mission statement)

Environment
8
Salem Land Trust Inc

Conserving the beauty, rural character, and natural diversity of the Town of Salem, CT

Environment
9
Kestrel Land Trust

Kestrel land trust conserves and cares for forests, farms, and riverways in the connecticut river valley of western massachusetts while nurturing an enduring love of the land

Environment
10
Brewster Conservation Trust

Land conservation

Environment
11
Princeton Land Trust

The princeton land trust was formed to preserve the natural beauty and rural character of the town of princeton.

—
12
Land Conservancy of Ridgefield Inc

The Land Conservancy of Ridgefield, Inc. ("the Land Conservancy"), founded in 1967, preserves and protects, for the general benefit of the public, Ridgefield, Connecticut's natural resources including land and water resources, the plant…

Environment
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Kent Land Trust Inc; 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.
04the grantee network

20 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. 20 of the 21 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
6
Early backer (in before they grew)
20/20
Grantees still filing
10/20
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

EAST HADDAM LAND TRUST INC: $36,106 · EnvironmentEAST HADDAM LAND TRUST INCAVALONIA LAND CONSERVANCY INC: $20,250 · EnvironmentAVALONIA LAND CONSERVANCY INCLITCHFIELD LAND TRUST INC: $18,904 · EnvironmentLITCHFIELD LAND TRUST INCGROTON OPEN SPACE ASSOCIATION INC: $18,000 · EnvironmentGROTON OPEN SPACE ASSOCIATION INCTHE GREENWICH LAND TRUST INC: $13,055 · EnvironmentTHE GREENWICH LAND TRUST INCNORFOLK LAND TRUST INC: $12,160 · EnvironmentNORFOLK LAND TRUST INCWARREN LAND TRUST INC: $11,646 · EnvironmentWARREN LAND TRUST INCMIDDLESEX LAND TRUST: $9,800 · EnvironmentASPETUCK LAND TRUST: $9,575 · EnvironmentROXBURY LAND TRUST INC: $9,000 · EnvironmentOLD LYME LAND TRUST INC: $7,500 · EnvironmentWYNDHAM LAND TRUST INC: $7,219 · EnvironmentSTEEP ROCK ASSOCIATION INC: $7,000 · Environment+2 more: $12,000 · Environment+2 moreCLINTON LAND CONSERVATION TRUST INC: $12,400 · OtherCLINTON LAND CONSERVA…THE NATURE CONSERVANCY: $12,000 · OtherTHE NATURE CONSERVANC…Cornwall Conservation Trust Inc: $10,000 · OtherCornwall Conservation…GREAT MEADOWS CONSERVATION TRUST INC: $9,247 · OtherGREAT MEADOWS CONSERV…KILLINGWORTH LAND CONSERVATION TRUST INC: $6,000 · OtherKILLINGWORTH LAND CON…THE SALISBURY ASSOCIATION INC: $20,000 · Arts & Culture
Environment$192,215Other$49,647Arts & Culture$20,000

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetEAST HADDAM LAND TRUST INC: $36,106 over 2y, 2.5% of budgetAVALONIA LAND CONSERVANCY INC: $20,250 over 1y, 1.2% of budgetTHE SALISBURY ASSOCIATION INC: $20,000 over 1y, 4.0% of budgetLITCHFIELD LAND TRUST INC: $18,904 over 1y, 1.9% of budgetGROTON OPEN SPACE ASSOCIATION INC: $18,000 over 1y, 9.0% of budgetTHE GREENWICH LAND TRUST INC: $13,055 over 1y, 1.3% of budgetCLINTON LAND CONSERVATION TRUST INC: $12,400 over 1y, 12% of budgetNORFOLK LAND TRUST INC: $12,160 over 1y, 18% of budgetTHE NATURE CONSERVANCY: $12,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetWARREN LAND TRUST INC: $11,646 over 1y, 0.9% of budgetCornwall Conservation Trust Inc: $10,000 over 1y, 4.4% of budgetMIDDLESEX LAND TRUST: $9,800 over 1y, 3.0% of budgetASPETUCK LAND TRUST: $9,575 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetROXBURY LAND TRUST INC: $9,000 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetOLD LYME LAND TRUST INC: $7,500 over 1y, 8.2% of budgetWYNDHAM LAND TRUST INC: $7,219 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetSTEEP ROCK ASSOCIATION INC: $7,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetKENT LAND TRUST INC: $6,000 over 1y, 1.8% of budgetKILLINGWORTH LAND CONSERVATION TRUST INC: $6,000 over 1y, 18% of budgetBETHANY LAND TRUST INC: $6,000 over 1y, 11% 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.

The John T and Jane a…The Nature ConservancyBafflin FoundationIbm International Fou…The Summer Hill Found…Fields Pond Foundatio…The Connecticut Commu…Aetna Foundation IncThe Pfizer Foundation…Morgan Stanley Global…National Philanthropi…Vanguard Charitable E…
The John T and Jane a Wiederhold FoundationCT17.8× affinity6 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The John T and Jane a Wiederhold Foundation · The Nature Conservancy · Bafflin Foundation · Ibm International Foundation · The Summer Hill Foundation · Fields Pond Foundation Inc · The Connecticut Community Foundation · Aetna Foundation Inc · The Pfizer Foundation Inc · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · National Philanthropic Trust · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program

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 Connecticut Land Conservation Council Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Connecticut Land Conservation Council Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 80%1%5%11%20%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 30%
  • The Salisbury Association Inc: 54% of income from government
  • Groton Open Space Association Inc: 50% of income from government
  • Norfolk Land Trust Inc: 49% of income from government
  • Cornwall Conservation Trust Inc: 30% of income from government
  • Aspetuck Land Trust: 28% of income from government
  • Avalonia Land Conservancy Inc: 21% of income from government
  • Steep Rock Association Inc: 19% of income from government
  • Wyndham Land Trust Inc: 1% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
8get no government money at all
3report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
2rely 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.

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 21 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 Connecticut Land Conservation Council’s 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