Skip to content
Plinth

· Public charity

New Mexico Association of Counties

To strengthen nm counties' ability to govern their own affairs and improve the well-being and quality of life of their constituents.

$1.4M
Granted FY2025still arriving
11
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$528k
Largest
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 FY20172025.

Public Safety & Disaster$5.4MHealth$801kEnvironment$558kCrime & Legal$322kYouth Development$315kPublic Benefit$227kRecreation & Sports$43kReligion$32kOther$0
02FY2025 · 11 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2025

  • $10k–50k6 grants · $110k
  • $50k–250k3 grants · $385k
  • $250k+2 grants · $903k
$24,710
Median grant
1
States reached
$8.7M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
SAN JUAN SOIL & WATER CONSERVATION$527,780
SOUTH CENTRAL MOUNTAIN RC&D COUNCIL$374,800
Individual grant recipient$175,000
CUIDAD SOIL & WATER CONSERVATION$109,824
OTERO COUNTY$99,997
SANTA FE-POJOAQUE SOIL & WATER$24,710
GRANT COUNTY$20,000
Individual grant recipient$19,500
CLAUNCH-PINTO SOILD & WATER$19,500
DIXON COMMUNITY FIRE DEPARTMENT$13,527
EAST MOUNTAIN WILDFIRE PREPAREDNESS$13,090
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:

Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY17–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 18%, against an area that typically sits at 15%. 76% of your dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 15%Sandoval County Detention Center: $37k → 10%VARIOUS UNDER 5K: $43k → 12%Center of Excellence (CEHMM): $155k → 13%CUIDAD SOIL & WATER CONSERVATION: $110k → 14%CURRY COUNTY: $45k → 18%Taos County New Mexico: $71k → 18%Lea County New Mexico: $91k → 19%OTERO COUNTY: $100k → 20%Grant Soil & Water Conservation District: $248k → 20%Edgewood Soil & Water Conservation District: $409k → 20%HIDDEN LAKE PROPERTY: $60k → 21%Dona Ana County: $53k → 23%SOCORRO COUNTY: $175k → 25%LUNA COUNTY: $57k → 26%Cuidad SWCD: $65k → 30%Cuba Soil & Water Conservation Dist: $50k → 10%Forest Stewards Guild: $113k → 12%Eddy County Detention Center: $46k → 13%CIUDAD SWCD: $74k → 14%Taos County New Mexico: $44k → 18%Lea County: $58k → 19%Village of Angel Fire: $75k → 19%DONA ANA COUNTY NEW MEXICO: $42k → 23%Socorro County New Mexico: $98k → 25%LUNA COUNTY NEW MEXICO: $42k → 26%FOREST STEWARDS GUILD: $51k → 12%Ciudad SWCD: $62k → 14%SOUTH CENTRAL MOUNTAIN RC&D: $591k → 17%Socorro County: $70k → 25%Forest Stewards Guild: $42k → 12%Cuidad SWCD: $60k → 14%SOUTH CENTRAL MOUNTAIN RC&D COUNCIL: $375k → 17%SAN JUAN SOIL & WATER CONSERVATION: $528k → 22%Socorro County New Mexico: $38k → 25%CUIDAD SWCD: $45k → 14%South Central Mountain RC&D: $325k → 17%San Juan County: $79k → 22%Metropolitan Detention Center Bernalillo County: $274k → 14%South Central Mountain Resource Conservation & Development Council: $285k → 17%San Juan County: $52k → 22%MDC Bernalillo County: $126k → 14%SOUTH CENTRAL MOUNTAIN RC&D: $94k → 17%South Central Mountain RC&D: $88k → 17%WILDFIRE NETWORK: $83k → 12%SOUTH CENTRAL ROCKY MOUNTAIN: $50k → 17%Wildfire Network: $39k → 12%ROCKY MOUNTAIN YOUTH CORPS: $43k → 18%UPPER HONDO SOIL WATER CONSERV DIS: $50k → 17%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.

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.

70%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$5.4M · 38 repeat orgs$2.3M to everyone else

38 repeat relationships — 6 still active in FY2025, 32 since wound down; 5 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

38
41

Total granted

$5.4M
$1.6M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+104%
+4004%

Still filing today

16%
5%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 50% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $702k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
EnvironmentYouth DevelopmentReligionScience & TechPublic Safety & DisasterEducationOther

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

  • TF
    THE FOREST STEWARDS GUILD
    7× · 2017–2024 · $315k · revenue +226%
  • CF
    CENTER FOR ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH MONITORING AND MANAGEMENT
    2× · 2022–2024 · $192k · revenue +104%
  • RM
    ROCKY MOUNTAIN YOUTH CORPS
    3× · 2017–2019 · $100k · revenue +23%

Funded once

  • ES
    Edgewood Soil & Water Conservation District
    one grant, 2023 · $409k
  • MD
    Metropolitan Detention Center Bernalillo County
    one grant, 2024 · $274k
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2023 · $126k

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
Santa Fe Forest Coalition

Educate the public on forest conservation issues in New Mexico

Environment
2
Rocky Mountain Wild

Rocky mountain wild works to protect, connect, and restore wildlife and wild lands in the southern rocky mountain region. we work to secure the biodiversity of the mountains, plains, and desert ecosystems of colorado, wyoming, utah, and…

Environment
3
Rocky Mountain Youth Corps

Rocky mountain youth corps engages young people in the outdoors, inspiring them to use their strengths and potential to lead healthy, productive lives. we teach responsibility for self, community, and environment through teamwork, service,…

Youth Development
4
Quivira Coalition Inc

Through education, innovation, and collaboration, quivira works in coalition with ranchers, farmers, government agencies, and land stewards to foster resilience on working lands.

Environment
5
Catron County Citizens Groupinc

Training/create jobs/conversation

6
Wilderness Workshop

Wilderness workshop's mission is to protect the wilderness, water, and wildlife of western colorado's public land.

7
Southwest Environmental Center

To promote and protect Wildlife

8
Rio Bravo Restoration

Natural Resource Stewardship

Environment
9
Colorado Ag Water Alliance

Works with farmers and ranchers to address water issues around the state impacting agriculture.

Environment
10
San Juan Resource Conservation and Development Council Inc

San juan resource conservation and development council, inc.'s mission is to protect and improve the natural, cultural, historic and economic resources of the eight county area of southwest colorado.

Environment
11
San Juan Citizens Alliance

The San Juan Citizens Alliance advocates for clean air, pure water, and healthy lands - the foundations of resilient communities, ecosystems and economies in the San Juan Basin.

Environment
12
New Mexico Association of Soil and Water Conservat

To facilitate conservation of natural resources in new mexico by providing opportunities and quality support to local conservation districts through representation and leadership.

Environment

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Center for Environmental Health Monitoring and Management and the most unlike its peers is Dixon Community Fire Department. 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

8 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 20172025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 8 of the 84 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.

2
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
8/8
Grantees still filing
6/8
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

Grant Soil & Water Conservation Dis — $568,864 · OtherGrant Soil & Water Conservation DisSAN JUAN SOIL & WATER CONSERVATION — $527,780 · OtherSAN JUAN SOIL & WATER CONSERVATIONEdgewood Soil & Water Conservation District — $408,682 · OtherEdgewood Soil & Water Conservation DistrictMetropolitan Detention Center Bernalillo County — $273,965 · OtherMetropolitan Detention Center Bernalillo CountyCIUDAD SWCD — $265,283 · OtherIndividual grant recipient — $245,000 · OtherWILDFIRE NETWORK — $172,924 · Other+69 more — $2,669,249 · Other+69 moreSOUTH CENTRAL MOUNTAIN RESOURCE CONSERVATION & DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL — $1,835,027 · EnvironmentSOUTH CENTRAL MOUNTAIN RESO…+2 more — $29,954 · EnvironmentTHE FOREST STEWARDS GUILD — $315,309 · Youth DevelopmentCENTER FOR ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH MONITORING AND MANAGEMENT — $191,829 · Science & TechROCKY MOUNTAIN YOUTH CORPS — $100,001 · ReligionDixon Community Fire Department — $51,576 · Public Safety & DisasterPARTNERS IN EDUCATION FOR THE SANTA FE PUBLIC SCHOOLS — $23,500 · Education
Other$5,131,747Environment$1,864,981Youth Development$315,309Science & Tech$191,829Religion$100,001Public Safety & Disaster$51,576Education$23,500

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 budgetSOUTH CENTRAL MOUNTAIN RESOURCE CONSERVATION & DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL — $1,835,027 over 9y, 53% of budgetTHE FOREST STEWARDS GUILD — $315,309 over 7y, 3.1% of budgetCENTER FOR ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH MONITORING AND MANAGEMENT — $191,829 over 2y, 1.6% of budgetROCKY MOUNTAIN YOUTH CORPS — $100,001 over 3y, 0.8% of budgetDixon Community Fire Department — $51,576 over 3y, 44% of budgetPARTNERS IN EDUCATION FOR THE SANTA FE PUBLIC SCHOOLS — $23,500 over 1y, 4.9% of budgetCHAMA PEAK LAND ALLIANCE — $14,999 over 2y, 3.7% of budgetCIMARRON WATERSHED ALLIANCE INC — $14,955 over 1y, 13% 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.

  • Who funds SOUTH CENTRAL MOUNTAIN RESOURCE CONSERVATION & DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL
  • Who funds THE FOREST STEWARDS GUILD
  • Who funds CENTER FOR ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH MONITORING AND MANAGEMENT
  • Who funds ROCKY MOUNTAIN YOUTH CORPS
  • Who funds Dixon Community Fire Department

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.

Santa Fe Community FoundationNM17.2× affinity6 shared granteesties to 2 of 4Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Santa Fe Community Foundation · National Fish and Wildlife Foundation · Center for Technology and Civic Life · Institute for Responsive Government Inc · Amazonsmile 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 New Mexico Association of Counties 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
202122232425
no gov · 00%4%15%34%60%your share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get 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, FY2025

    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.

    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 84 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 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    More from the funding graph