Skip to content
Vermont Association of Conservation Districts Inc at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

Vermont Association of Conservation Districts Inc

Vermont association of conservation districts (vacd) promotes the conservation of vermont's soil, water, forests, wildlife and other natural resources by supporting vermont's fourteen natural resource conservation districts and implementing state-wide programs.

$382k
Granted FY2025still arriving
14
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$90k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its 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, FY2019 to 2025.

Environment$1.2MPublic Safety & Disaster$599k
02FY2025 · 14 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 14 grants below total $334,163, the rows itemized in this filing. The $382,217 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $48,054 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 · FY2025

  • Under $10k4 grants · $28k
  • $10k–50k8 grants · $162k
  • $50k–250k2 grants · $145k
$15,380
Median grant
1
States reached
$1.0M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
FRANKLIN COUNTY NRCD$89,745
CALEDONIA COUNTY NRCD$54,875
BENNINGTON NRCD$40,485
ORLEANS COUNTY NRCD$27,800
WINOOSKI NRCD$20,482
Individual grant recipient$20,000
ESSEX COUNTY NRCD$15,380
BAKERSFIELD VFD$15,000
MOUNT HOLLY FD$12,729
HARTFORD VFA$10,000
CORINTH FIRE DEPARTMENT$9,968
WHITE RIVER NRCD$7,380
ALBANY VFD$5,250
MORRISTOWN FIRE DEPARTMENT$5,069
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 (FY19–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 60% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%BAKERSFIELD VFD: $15k → 9%BRIDGEWATER VFD: $17k → 9%LAMOILLE NRCD: $23k → 9%CABOT FIREMEN'S ASSOCIATION: $12k → 9%NEWBROOK FIRE DEPARTMENT: $12k → 11%ESSEX COUNTY NRCD: $17k → 12%POULTNEY-METTOWEE NRCD: $16k → 12%TOWN OF NEWPORT: $25k → 14%LAMOILLE NRCD: $15k → 9%TOWN OF WILMINGTON: $15k → 11%CALEDONIA COUNTY NRCD: $69k → 12%ESSEX COUNTY NRCD: $15k → 12%ORLEANS COUNTY NRCD: $45k → 14%FRANKLIN COUNTY NRCD: $95k → 9%LAMOILLE NRCD: $14k → 9%CALEDONIA COUNTY NRCD: $55k → 12%ORLEANS COUNTY NRCD: $28k → 14%FRANKLIN COUNTY NRCD: $92k → 9%WINOOSKI NRCD: $51k → 9%CALEDONIA COUNTY NRCD: $14k → 12%ORLEANS COUNTY NRCD: $26k → 14%FRANKLIN COUNTY NRCD: $90k → 9%PLYMOUTH VFD: $15k → 9%WINOOSKI NRCD: $45k → 9%ORLEANS COUNTY NRCD: $25k → 14%FRANKLIN COUNTY NRCD: $31k → 9%WHITE RIVER NRCD: $35k → 9%WINOOSKI NRCD: $23k → 9%PUTNEY FIRE DEPARTMENT: $15k → 11%WEST PAWLET VFD: $18k → 12%FRANKLIN COUNTY NRCD: $31k → 9%WHITE RIVER NRCD: $16k → 9%WINOOSKI NRCD: $20k → 9%FRANKLIN COUNTY NRCD: $27k → 9%WINOOSKI NRCD: $19k → 9%WINDHAM COUNTY NRCD: $13k → 11%FRANKLIN COUNTY NRCD: $22k → 9%WINOOSKI NRCD: $17k → 9%WELLS VFD: $15k → 12%FAIRFIELD FIRE DEPARTMENT: $20k → 9%WINOOSKI NRCD: $13k → 9%TOWN OF PEACHAM: $15k → 12%TOWN OF SHELDON: $12k → 9%BLUSH HILL ESTATES ASSOCIATION: $14k → 9%BENNINGTON NRCD: $40k → 12%MENDON TOWN OF: $15k → 12%TOWN OF WEATHERSFIELD: $20k → 9%MOUNT HOLLY FD: $13k → 12%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 grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

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

76%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$1.4M · 18 repeat orgs$427k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +51% since the first grant, against +40% for those funded once.

18 repeat relationships: 8 still active in FY2025, 10 since wound down; 6 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

18
35

Total granted

$1.4M
$354k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+51%
+40%

Still filing today

17%
23%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 78% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $73k went to new ones.

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

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

’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
Public Safety & DisasterEnvironmentOther
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

  • FC
    FRANKLIN COUNTY NRCD
    7× · 2019–2025 · $388k
  • WN
    WINOOSKI NRCD
    7× · 2019–2025 · $188k
  • CC
    CALEDONIA COUNTY NATURAL RESOURCES
    5× · 2021–2025 · $157k

Funded once

  • TO
    TOWN OF NEWPORT
    one grant, 2024 · $25k
  • FF
    FAIRFIELD FIRE DEPARTMENT
    one grant, 2024 · $20k
  • BV
    BRIDGEWATER VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT INCgraduated
    one grant, 2022 · $17k · revenue +141%
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
Stratton Mountain Volunteer Fire Co Inc

Fire Protection

—
2
Barnard Fire Department Inc

Volunteer Fire Department

Public Safety & Disaster
3
Tri-Village Fire Association Inc

Volunteer Fire Department covering the towns of Topsham and Orange Vermont

—
4
Welch Volunteer Fire Department

Provide fire protection

Public Safety & Disaster
5
Brookline Vol Fire Dept Inc

Fire prevention and fire fighting

Public Safety & Disaster
6
East Lynn Volunteer Fire Department

Volunteer Fire Department providing Fire and Rescue Services to the community

Public Safety & Disaster
7
Broadview Volunteer Fire Department

Community volunteer fire deparment

Public Safety & Disaster
8
Claxton Volunteer Fire Department

Volunteer Fire Department

—
9
Stickleyville Volunteer Fire Dept

Fire department for the local community of stickleyville, va

Public Safety & Disaster
10
Greenwood Volunteer Fire Department

Fire and rescue services

Public Safety & Disaster
11
Herrick Volunteer Fire Company Inc

Fire protection

Public Safety & Disaster
12
Vail Volunteer Fire Department

The mission of the vail volunteer fire department is to provide fire protection and also first responder services to a local community and rural area consisting of approximately 690 citizens.

Public Safety & Disaster
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Bakersfield Volunteer Fire Department I; the most unlike its peers is Cold Hollow to Canada Incorporated. 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

13 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. 13 of the 59 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)
5
Early backer (in before they grew)
13/13
Grantees still filing
8/13
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

FRANKLIN COUNTY NRCD: $387,979 · OtherFRANKLIN COUNTY NRCDWINOOSKI NRCD: $187,897 · OtherWINOOSKI NRCDCALEDONIA COUNTY NATURAL RESOURCES: $156,544 · OtherCALEDONIA COUNTY NATURAL RESOURCESORLEANS COUNTY NRCD: $145,829 · OtherORLEANS COUNTY NRCDWHITE RIVER NATURAL RESOURCE CONSERVATION DISTRICT: $77,975 · OtherLAMOILLE COUNTY CONSERVATION DIST: $64,152 · Other+44 more: $634,531 · Other+44 moreCLARENDON FIRE ASSOCIATION INC: $63,998 · Public Safety & DisasterCLARENDON…BRIDGEWATER VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT INC: $17,007 · Public Safety & DisasterBRIDGEWAT…BAKERSFIELD VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT I: $15,000 · Public Safety & DisasterBAKERSFIE…NEWBROOK VOLUNTEER FIRE ASSOCIATION INC: $12,272 · Public Safety & DisasterNEWBROOK …SHELDON FIRE DEPARTMENT INC: $12,003 · Public Safety & DisasterSHELDON F…EAST MONTPELIER VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT INC: $11,843 · Public Safety & DisasterEAST MONT…Ferrisburgh Volunteer Fire Dept Inc: $10,000 · Public Safety & DisasterFerrisbur…LINCOLN VOLUNTEER FIRE COMPANY: $7,695 · Public Safety & DisasterCOLD HOLLOW TO CANADA INCORPORATED: $5,280 · Environment
Other$1,654,907Public Safety & Disaster$149,818Environment$5,280

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

25%50%75%100%$100kgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetCLARENDON FIRE ASSOCIATION INC: $63,998 over 6y, 11% of budgetWEST PAWLET VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT INC: $28,616 over 2y, 22% of budgetHartland Volunteer Fire Department: $19,612 over 2y, 6.0% of budgetBRIDGEWATER VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT INC: $17,007 over 1y, 22% of budgetBAKERSFIELD VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT I: $15,000 over 1y, 13% of budgetNEWBROOK VOLUNTEER FIRE ASSOCIATION INC: $12,272 over 1y, 6.8% of budgetSHELDON FIRE DEPARTMENT INC: $12,003 over 1y, 5.8% of budgetEAST MONTPELIER VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT INC: $11,843 over 1y, 1.5% of budgetFerrisburgh Volunteer Fire Dept Inc: $10,000 over 1y, 7.0% of budgetCORINTH FIRE DEPARTMENT INC: $9,968 over 1y, 4.1% of budgetLINCOLN VOLUNTEER FIRE COMPANY: $7,695 over 1y, 7.1% of budgetWASHINGTON VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPT: $6,098 over 1y, 9.2% of budgetCOLD HOLLOW TO CANADA INCORPORATED: $5,280 over 1y, 3.0% 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.

  • Who funds CLARENDON FIRE ASSOCIATION INC ↗
  • Who funds WEST PAWLET VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT INC ↗
  • Who funds Hartland Volunteer Fire Department ↗
  • Who funds BRIDGEWATER VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT INC ↗
  • Who funds BAKERSFIELD VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT I ↗
  • Who funds NEWBROOK VOLUNTEER FIRE ASSOCIATION INC ↗
  • Who funds SHELDON FIRE DEPARTMENT INC ↗
  • Who funds EAST MONTPELIER VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT INC ↗
  • Who funds Ferrisburgh Volunteer Fire Dept Inc ↗
  • Who funds CORINTH FIRE DEPARTMENT INC ↗

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 Vermont Community…Center for Technology…Vermont Afterschool I…Amazonsmile Foundation
The Vermont Community FoundationVT29.4× affinity14 shared granteesties to 3 of 3Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Vermont Community Foundation · Center for Technology and Civic Life · Vermont Afterschool Inc · 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 Vermont Association of Conservation Districts Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Vermont Association of Conservation Districts Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2025
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 100%2%6%14%25%funder's share of their income ↑0%15%30%45%60%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    10get 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
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–60%
    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 59 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 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Vermont Association of Conservation Districts’ 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