Skip to content
Environmental Professionals' Organization of Connecticut Inc at a glance

· Public charity

Environmental Professionals' Organization of Connecticut Inc

To promote scientific and educational growth in the field of environmental science

$19k
Granted FY2019
4
Grants FY2019
1
States reached
$3k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its fieldRead
04Through 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, FY2017 to 2019.

Environment$33kAnimals$3k
02FY2019 · 4 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 4 grants below total $10,749, the rows itemized in this filing. The $19,249 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $8,500 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.
$3,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$969k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
AUDUBON CONNECTICUT$3,349
LAKE WARAMAUG TASK FORCE$3,000
NORTHWEST CONSERVATION DISTRICT$3,000
GREAT HOLLOW MANAGEMENT INC$1,400
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:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY17–19) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 30% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%CONNECTICUT RIVER CONSERVANCY: $3k → 14%WEANTINOGE HERITAGE LAND TRUST: $3k → 9%AUDUBON CONNECTICUT: $3k → 9%HOLCOMB FARM INC: $2k → 11%SOLAR YOUTH: $5k → 12%APPALACHIAN TRAIL CONSERVANCY: $2k → 9%NORTHWEST CONSERVATION DISTRICT: $3k → 9%EARTHPLACE: $3k → 9%LAKE WARAMAUG TASK FORCE: $3k → 9%SOUNDWATERS: $1k → 9%GREAT HOLLOW MANAGEMENT INC: $1k → 9%CONNECTICUT BEARDSLEY ZOO: $3k → 9%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.
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
Connecticut River Coastal Conservation District Inc

To promote the sound use and management of natural resources. the district provides technical assistance and education in soil and water conservation and control.

Environment
2
North Central Conservation District Inc

To provide leadership and take initiatives for locally led conservation with the goal to protect soil, water and other natural resources of north central connecticut.

Environment
3
Connecticut Land Conservation Council Inc

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

Environment
4
Connecticut Farmland Trust Inc

Protect Connecticuts farmland for agricultural use by purchasing and accepting donations of agricultural conservation easements

Food & Nutrition
5
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
6
Kestrel Land Trust Inc

Kestrel land trust inc. 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
7
Nantucket Conservation Foundation Inc

The nantucket conservation foundation owns, protects, and stewards over 9,000 acres of land and coastal shoreline, conserves nantucket's rare and significant natural resources, and engages in impactful ecological research to inform…

Environment
8
Royal River Conservation Trust

The royal river conservation trust (rrct) is a regional land trust working primarily in seven maine municipalities. the trust owns,cares for, and stewards land and conservation easements to protect land and water resources for the general…

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
Avalonia Land Conservancy Inc

Avalonia land conservancy, founded in 1968, is a land trust dedicated to conservation through the acquisition of open space. it is a non-profit, non-political, tax-exempt organization. we believe that the conservation of natural resources…

Environment
11
Norwalk River Watershed Association Inc

To protect water quality and wildlife habitat in the seven-town Norwalk River Watershed

Environment
12
Aspetuck Land Trust

Founded in 1966, Aspetuck Land Trust is a non-profit membership ogranization whose mission is to protect land forever and connect people to the natural world.

Environment
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Northwest Connecticut Land Conservancy Inc; the most unlike its peers is Great Hollow Management Inc. 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

12 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. 12 of the 13 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)
7
Early backer (in before they grew)
12/12
Grantees still filing
12/12
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

CONNECTICUT RIVER WATERSHED COUNCIL INC: $3,000 · EnvironmentCONNECTICUT RIVER WATERSHED COUNCIL INCNorthwest Conservation District Inc: $3,000 · EnvironmentNorthwest Conservation District IncLAKE WARAMAUG TASK FORCE INC: $3,000 · EnvironmentLAKE WARAMAUG TASK FORCE INCNORTHWEST CONNECTICUT LAND CONSERVANCY INC: $3,000 · EnvironmentNORTHWEST CONNECTICUT LAND CONSERVANCY INCEARTHPLACE INC: $3,000 · EnvironmentEARTHPLACE INCHolcomb Farm Inc: $2,000 · EnvironmentHolcomb Farm IncSOUNDWATERS INC: $1,000 · EnvironmentSOUNDWATERS INCSOLAR YOUTH INC: $5,000 · EducationSOLAR YOUTH INCTHE CCSU FOUNDATION INC: $3,000 · EducationTHE CCSU FOUNDATION INCCONNECTICUT ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETYINC: $3,000 · AnimalsCONNECTICUT Z…GREAT HOLLOW MANAGEMENT INC: $1,400 · AnimalsGREAT HOLLOW …AUDUBON CONNECTICUT: $3,349 · OtherAUDUBON CO…APPALACHIAN TRAIL CONSERVANCY: $2,200 · Recreation & Sports
Environment$18,000Education$8,000Animals$4,400Other$3,349Recreation & Sports$2,200

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetSOLAR YOUTH INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetTHE CCSU FOUNDATION INC: $3,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetNorthwest Conservation District Inc: $3,000 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetLAKE WARAMAUG TASK FORCE INC: $3,000 over 1y, 1.0% of budgetNORTHWEST CONNECTICUT LAND CONSERVANCY INC: $3,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetCONNECTICUT ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETYINC: $3,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetEARTHPLACE INC: $3,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetAPPALACHIAN TRAIL CONSERVANCY: $2,200 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetHolcomb Farm Inc: $2,000 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetGREAT HOLLOW MANAGEMENT INC: $1,400 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetSOUNDWATERS INC: $1,000 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.

The Connecticut Commu…Select Equity Group F…Fairfield County's Co…National Fish and Wil…The Pfizer Foundation…American Online Givin…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
The Connecticut Community FoundationCT13.5× affinity4 shared granteesties to 8 of 8Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Connecticut Community Foundation · Select Equity Group Foundation · Fairfield County's Community Foundation Inc · National Fish and Wildlife Foundation · The Pfizer Foundation Inc · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile 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 Environmental Professionals' Organization of Connecticut Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Environmental Professionals' Organization of Connecticut Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 9%
  • Connecticut River Watershed Council Inc: 40% of income from government
  • Northwest Conservation District Inc: 30% of income from government
  • Solar Youth Inc: 19% of income from government
  • Northwest Connecticut Land Conservancy Inc: 9% of income from government
  • Great Hollow Management Inc: 5% of income from government
  • Soundwaters Inc: 4% of income from government
  • Holcomb Farm Inc: 2% of income from government
  • The Ccsu Foundation Inc: 0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
1get no government money at all
2report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely 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.
04Through Plinth

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

How do I get to Environmental Professionals' Organization of Connecticut Inc?

Find your warmest path to Environmental Professionals' Organization of Connecticut 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 13 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 2019, released 2019. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Possibly out of date. A more recent filing (FY2025) is on record and reports $26k of grant expense, but none of it to a named recipient. On a Form 990 that can mean grants abroad, filed by region only (Schedule F), grants under $5,000, which are not itemized, or a schedule referenced as an attachment the e-file does not carry. The figures above are therefore from FY2019, the most recent year this funder named its grantees.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Environmental Professionals' Organization of Connecticut’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