· Public charity
Vermont Land Trust Inc
Rooted in vermont since 1977, the vermont land trust unites land and lives for the enduring benefit of people and the place we share.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
The 3 grants below total $139,095 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $147,596 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $8,501 is giving the schedule does not break out: grants under the $5,000 itemisation floor, grants to individuals, and grants reported on other schedules. Every figure below describes the itemised rows only.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k1 grant · $8k
- $10k–50k1 grant · $10k
- $50k–250k1 grant · $121k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| GREEN COMMONS OF VERMONT | $120,797 |
| CENTER FOR WHOLE COMMUNITIES | $10,000 |
| EQUINOX PRESERVATION TRUST | $8,298 |
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 (FY17–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 99% 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.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +191% since the first grant, against +6% for the ones you funded once.
3 repeat relationships — 1 still active in FY2025, 2 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, 7% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $129k 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
- PMPOULTNEY METTOWEE NATURAL RESOURCES CONSERVATION DISTRICT2× · 2018–2022 · $185k
- CFCENTER FOR AN AGRICULTURAL ECONOMY INC3× · 2020–2022 · $30k · revenue +191%
- CFCENTER FOR WHOLE COMMUNITIES INC2× · 2023–2025 · $20k · revenue -53%
Funded once
- VRVERMONT RELEAF COLLECTIVEone grant, 2023 · $1.2M
- NFNORTHEAST FARMERS OF COLOR LAND TRUST INCone grant, 2023 · $891k
- PMPROSPECT MOUNTAIN ASSOCIATION INCone grant, 2019 · $558k · revenue -25% · 56% of their budget
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.
Open Space Preservation
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
The mission of cooperation vermont community land trust is to reclaim the commons.
The mission of alliance for vermont communities, inc. is to protect working farms, forests and communities of central vermont and to promote responsible development that will sustain the rural heritage and values for present and future…
The mission of cooperation vermont is to build thriving community economic and enviromental democracy.
We connect people to natural places by protecting open land and creating outdoor experiences in north central massachusetts.
To protect and enhance the natural resources of vermont in order to promote the well-being of present and future generations of vermonters and visitors; preserve and aid in the preservation of open land along rivers and lakes; protect and…
Promotion of the conservation and protection of natural resources in the mountains of northern new england
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…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Preservation Trust of Vermont Inc and the most unlike its peers is The Equinox Preservation Trust Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
12 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. 12 of the 24 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.
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 NORTHEAST FARMERS OF COLOR LAND TRUST INC ↗
- Who funds PROSPECT MOUNTAIN ASSOCIATION INC ↗
- Who funds AMES HILL-MARLBORO COMMUNITY CTR ↗
- Who funds INTERVALE CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds PRESERVATION TRUST OF VERMONT INC ↗
- Who funds CENTER FOR AN AGRICULTURAL ECONOMY INC ↗
- Who funds CENTER FOR WHOLE COMMUNITIES INC ↗
- Who funds Middlebury Area Land Trust ↗
- Who funds The Equinox Preservation Trust Inc ↗
- Who funds COLD HOLLOW TO CANADA INCORPORATED ↗
- Who funds AHA Abenaki Helping Abenaki Inc ↗
- Who funds ELNU ABENAKI INC ↗
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: The Vermont Community Foundation · High Meadows Fund Inc · The Windham Foundation Inc · Ben & Jerry's Foundation Inc · Impactassetsinc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · 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 Vermont Land Trust Inc 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, a single department, or state — and drag the year to watch it move.
- Cold Hollow to Canada Incorporated — 56% of income from government
- Preservation Trust of Vermont Inc — 29% of income from government
- Aha Abenaki Helping Abenaki Inc — 16% of income from government
- Intervale Center Inc — 13% of income from government
- Center for an Agricultural Economy Inc — 12% of income from government
- Prospect Mountain Association Inc — 3% of income from government
- Middlebury Area Land Trust — 2% of income from government
- Elnu Abenaki Inc — 0% of income from government
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.