Let's Get Honest! Blog: Absolutely Uncommon Analysis of Family & Conciliation Courts' Operations, Practices, & History

'A Different Kind of Attention Develops Sound Judgment' | 'Suppose I'm Right Here?…' (posted 3/23 & 3/5/2014). Over 680 posts, Public-Interest Investigative Blogging On These Matters Since 2009.

Vital Info: Formerly “Sticky” Posts (pared down from 15) [2/8/2017]

with one comment

The post’s former motto, displayed in top-right corner, was obscured by the title once I upgraded the blog. I moved the former motto into the title (Site Identity) area, and changed the motto. It’s still not fully visible, so, for the record, here it is as of “Q1” 2017:

‘A Different Kind of Attention Develops Sound Judgment’ | ‘Suppose I’m Right Here?…’ (posted 3/23 & 3/5/2014).

Over 680 posts, Public-Interest Investigative Blogging On These Matters Since 2009.

Clear references to two posts, NOT marked “Sticky,” but which do demonstrate my practices (“A Different Kind of Attention“) and basic question, based on those practices over now many years, “Suppose I’m Right Here?  What Would You Do When the Lights Go On?”  (Would it change your personal cause-focused social media behavior or “leisure time”?) If I’m right (and I typically link to supporting evidence and coherent connections between the various parts of it; if there is missing evidence or improper connections/assumptions others can see) what logical (even if seemingly impossible at first) changes should be made?

If you (personally) are just not willing or able to make any significant changes to what you repeat, parrot, re-blog or even what you look into on a regular basis — then on what basis are you complaining about government practices?

The second March 2014 post (Suppose I’m Right…)  is FULL of still-relevant information; I suggest using the scroll function to preview it.  It’s a call to identify the presence or absence of “pre-framing” questions vs. using the language of logic, and I call out those groups which are perpetuating incongruous and at times inane statements as part of their basic group identity claims.  You can see this throughout social media, like a brand name without the company name always attached.

I identify group-think: “knee-jerk-responses-solicited” language in by now established advocacy groups. I also look closely at some of the NIJ studies being cited as exciting new proof.  Who EVER does the drill-down and gets the context of the studies before learning the catechism of the movements?

Some entertainment is involved as well as (fair’s fair!) my own versions of some of the basic fables (storytelling) on some very serious subject matter making the rounds.

How many comprehend that part of discovering what TO do includes making sound decisions on what NOT to do before what TO do becomes self-evident, personally? Among the best things I’ve done in the past several years is to say “No” and “No more!” and meaning it when it becomes clear the various conversations are not raising the basic comprehension level of any group, or that group cannot or will not deal with its own cognitive dissonance.

Or censorship of discussion of basic, elemental material which if comprehended, discredits the group’s primary assumptions.

Amazing what you can learn [this blog is partial testament] when the schedule is cleared of talk with the crazies (“crazy” specifically referring to those who do not apply proper filters and fact-checks before sign-up, join-in, and become an unsponsored “affiliate,” using one’s own custody cases, to hucksters and — and this really does apply UNTIL you’ve looked up, read, and comprehended the tax returns, and tax returns of your friend’s friends and recommended resources — strangers] and spent some solitary time seriously scrutinizing available evidence in its specific AND larger contexts.

There’s a major difference between being able to argue the main points of a hypothesis of theory, as opposed to simply outshouting them, in comments fields, “forums,” or social media where dissident or disturbing information can be simply dismissed, and comments deleted before the public gets to read them.

It seems to be human nature to construct narratives of reality, especially about things one has some experience with and wishes to bond with shared experiences by others on. However this need for simplified bonding phrases can also ensnare individuals in self-defeating suppositions.

I have little respect for professionals, trained in mediating and facilitating groups who as professionals hold conflicts-of-interest professional affiliations but do not disclose these to the people they are “helping.”

In the fields of domestic violence, fathers’ rights (“responsible fatherhood”), “child maltreatment” / child abuse, divorce, custody and child support, that field is crowded with conflicts of interests. The ENTIRE family court apparatus itself represents exactly this kind of conflict of interest in its administration, its goals, and its operations — something which can be at least pursued and tracked historically through tracking the behavior of primary nonprofits (plural!) involved.  Speculation about and ongoing suggestions that one can professional cleaning up specific practices within single fields involving the family courts is, in the context, (and in my opinion) ridiculous.  FIRST, handle the conflicts of interest — financial, and close the doors to any money-laundering, and payment of bribes.

It shouldn’t take too long to figure out that this essentially means, closing the doors to court-connected corporations themselves, while welfare law (1996) and other acts of Congress before them (such as the Family Violence Prevention and Services Act, “FVPSA,” I came to learn over time) specifically allocate funding for control of the field — coming through HHS.  Meanwhile, “HMRF” funding also comes through HHS.

I believe that individually (and not always organized under a banner, a group name, a nonprofit, or a “movement”) both women and men can make a significant difference by demanding honesty in personal associations (including on-line), and taking enough solitary time to do some basic, (BASIC basic) drill-downs (actually, “look-ups” might be a better word…) on their favorite philanthropies or nonprofits (pick one — it almost doesn’t matter), then look at some more.

Then go learn to look up (USA) some federal agency grants.  Not to mention contracts.  Pick up a LONG document full of numbers and words called the “Comprehensive Annual Financial Report” (CAFR) of SOME government entity you’re interested in — and read the table of contents, the transmittal letter up front, the “MD&A” (Management Discussion & Analysis) and even those “Notes” at the end.  While you’re at it, look at the numbers too. These CAFRs often have organization charts; they tell you what is and what is not being reported on, and often contain startling admissions.

Start to make some sense of the one in your hands.  Then read another — and you have something to compare the first one too.  Learn what are some basic — real basic — tools for looking things up and discover (I did!) in the process just in what condition they are, currently.  Think about that — what does it say about a country which continues taxing its citizens, but cannot and does not account for the receipts and provide functional databases (AND advertise where they are found on federal agency home pages!) so people may do their own lookups?

And then the same government makes a big deal about “public/private partnerships” why — just in case some people might get too close to the truth on the accountability gaps?  What a sure way to make money disappear — redistribute through a diverse set of interconnected nonprofits, blended government with private wealth, and then trademarking the programs, taking them national and international, and selling it as in the public interest.  Really???

In part, this is what I’ve done when curious about something, including on-line websites ending *.org and promoting some cause.  You’ll see it on this blog.  Do you prefer stories?  Do your stories have to have an individual’s name in them, a plot — distressed child, estranged spouse, bad judge, unfair custody evaluator, flawed practices and family courts not stopping child abuse (where they ever set up to do this??) — instead of an organization’s name, or a government entity’s name, or an accounting term describing the report form (Annual Report, Budget, Financial Statement, Tax return, etc.)?

Understandable, but perhaps it’s time to grow up.

(Note:  if that “shoe doesn’t fit,” which it might not for many readers, then the message wasn’t for you; don’t wear it!  IF someone else is writing in similar manner on these things (doing more drill-downs across-the-board, not just in one geography or one field, please submit links on a comment!).

[These paragraphs above added 3/18/2017.  Now, about the “Sticky” stuff:]


(This post is sticky, too!)

 Vital Info, or at least Formerly “Sticky” Posts (pared down from 15) [2/8/2017]

(That title is also an active link; its url is the generated “shortlink.”

It just happens to be yellow because the usual link color wouldn’t display so well.)

This post provides the former (as of its publication) Top 15 Sticky Posts in 15 IMAGEs (Screenshots), and above that in a separate, shorter list (minus the pictures) so I may unstick most of them with confidence the information won’t be lost among the 680+ posts spanning seven years (now almost eight) .

Anything I labeled “sticky,” meaning “stays near top of the blog,” holds concepts and contents I obviously considered vital.  Then again, so are my current posts, but the concepts on the sticky ones remain fundamental.


There are limits to how much re-organizing (“house-keeping”) of any blog is possible while still investigating, writing, and hoping to keep publishing; this move is overdue.  But it’s time to condense the “Sticky” posts — which stayed month after month and year after year at the top of the blog’s central column leading an ongoing parade of post.  With this re-arrangement that list of vital titles now becomes less “in your face” than I’d like, but helps especially people who have been following or know about this blog better scan the main area (not just side-bar “most recent posts” and Table of Contents formatting) for my current research and themes.  For the same reason (scanning for topics and themes) I continue to choose long, more than just “catchy” post titles — getting the topics as close to top-level visibility as possible, although in covering the topics, the posts are going to be long and sometimes, the juicy heart of them, further towards the bottom.

I kept this post “Sticky #1” of now only 7, and removed that “glue” from the others

This post exists to provide the former (as of its publication) Top 15 Sticky Posts in 15 IMAGEs (Screenshots).  The images are simply labeled #1,  #2, etc. and the date and time of the screenshots.

Each image caption will have a link to both the screenshot, and the individual post, so you can access them from this page.  Click “LINK” to go straight to that post, or date & time are to read the screenshot, basically a preview of its contents, full-size.  Post titles are visible in the images:  

[The images + captions are in the dark-green background section, but otherwise, with two links/image caption, look about like this.]

#4 (Screenshot Feb. 7 @ 833.20pm PST)

 LINK Sticky Post #4 (Screenshot Feb. 7 @ 833.20pm PST  

 

Also for those removed from the “top-of-the-blog” position, they are still listed in proper date order on the various tables of contents (<>2017,  <>2016 only, and <>Sept. 2012 – June 29, 2014)

ALSO, SEPARATELY, and FIRST( if you don’t need the Image to make up your mind), and FOR READER CONVENIENCE, I’m posting both the LINKS and links to screenprints of those images, all together at the top.  For each image, the same two links/each will be provided on their Captions also (except once where I mistakenly included two shots of one post, and another time where I deliberately took one screenshot of two posts).

IF YOU ARE MORE VISUALLY ORIENTED, SKIP THE SHORT SECTION IN LIGHT-GREEN BACKGROUND (It’s all text, 15 bullets divided into 3 groups of 5 each, and two links per item (bullet)) and LOOK FOR THE IMAGES IN DARK-GREEN BACKGROUND LIKE THIS.  Thanks in advance for telling others about my blog.
Read the rest of this entry »

2017 Table of Contents Continues Themes From 2016.

with one comment

Rev. 1/12/2017

For 2017 Link to this post for this year2017 Table of Contents Continues Themes from 2016   I am writing mid-January, 2017, so all posts still display (for now) on “Most Recent Posts” on the sidebar.  The (short, so far) Table for 2017 however, is at the bottom of this page. It will at any point in time be only as updated as I have taken time to make it.  Meanwhile, the “8 most recent posts” is the best indicator of how current this table is.

  • Valuable material in addition to the actual list (table) of posts remains on the 2016 post, but I included below on this post some images of the actual TOC 2016 (minus the extra narratives), which copied into a word-processing document, formatted, then “printed to pdf.” Printing to pdf and loading that pdf onto the blog (accessible by a single click on the link I provide) produces a document in which every post in that table can be accessed by clicking on its name.  On every row, the post’s underlined title is an active link to the post, whether viewed here, or viewed on the uploaded pdf (8.5X11) format
    • This sounds more complex than it is.  Anyhow, after those images and the “access” link comes the Table for 2017, which I will add to as I publish each post. In fact it’s towards the end of this (so far, short) post.
  • As before, the right sidebar will display titles and links to only the last few posts.  I have it set to only eight.  The blog as a whole contains about 670 posts.

Here’s a link to the one-page pdf of TOC 2017 in 8.5X11 pdf form.  It includes the last three posts from 2016 too, and an two images (one for each page) of what it will look like:

Click for the 2017 TOC + last 3 of 2016 (with active links). It's just 1 page.

Click for the 2017 TOC + last 3 of 2016 (post titles = active, links). It’s just 1 page and current through Feb. 6 only. UPDATED: TOC through March 21, adds p.2, here. Or see partial table (updated) right on the post, right below here for Posts Feb 9- March 21, 2017)…(After adding new posts to tables on this blog post, I updated, and printed to pdf, added an image for “Page 2” here as you can see, in 8X11.5 format)

<==toc-2017-@ feb-8-2017

<==TOC 2017 @ through March 21, 2017

Posts 6-15; (Image of second page added 3/22/2017). Post titles are active links (clickable) through the TOC 2017 pdf link above image, not on the image itself. The link in this caption is just in case someone wishes to view it better.



 6  Vital Info: Formerly “Sticky” Posts (pared down from 15)       [2/8/2017] Feb. 9, 2017
7 Progressive Language Creep Section from 2012 “Reconceptualize This” post (reviewed and reformatted 2017) Feb. 19, 2017
8 Retrospective @ 1/2017:  Beginning-of-Year Posts (“As I’ve Been Saying, Since 2009”) and an Update or Two  Feb. 21, 2017
9 OHIO.  My Oh My…  501©3, EIN#34-1376870, ACTION Ohio Coalition for Battered Women, a 1970s, deficit-ridden holdout, Still testifying – NOT, of course, about OHIO.Fatherhood.Gov (1999ff), though… Feb. 28, 2017
10 Understand Statewide “CADV” Funding (CFDAs 93591, 93592, 93671, and 93136 grants to Statewide Orgs) But Also Check Out “Family and Community Violence Prevention” (93910) in all its Male/Minority-focused Wealth — Over $99M to One Recipient under ONE Principal Investigator, Spanning 10 years — and Glory. Mar 6, 2017
11  Don’t know Who or What ~QIC-NRF ~ is?  Looks like neither do the AHA, the NFI, the ABA Center on Children and the Law, and HHS/Children’s Bureau (at least as uploaded at UCBerkeley’s School of Social Welfare CalSWEC) who collaborated on IT, then reported IT as a WHO (2010).  File under Fatherhood Engagement Absurdities — or at least, lots of anomalies —  2010 Mar. 7, 2017
12  Should the USA join the Commonwealth of Nations?  And if Not, Why Should We Allow our Elected Federal and State Officials to sponsor Coordination of Child Welfare, Domestic Violence, and Family Court|Custody Practices, as Ordered (Ordained?) by Appointed (not elected) Experts To Promote Their Personal Beliefs, Practices, and Profits? (A Few Reminders of Who’s Who) Mar. 12, 2017
13 Explaining my Inspirat’n for asking, on March 8, Internat’l Women’s Day, Should the USA Join the Commonwealth of Nations?… Mar. 17, 2017
14  Who is Foundation Press? (Started 1/22/2017, published 3/20/2017) Mar. 20, 2017
15 Dear Readers (2017 Themes and Ongoing Concerns) [started 1/19, published in part 2/19, and the whole enchilada 3/21/17] Mar. 21, 2017

For 2016 ONLY with valuable material before/after:

It (also) is now accessible in two formats — on-line, or a printed pdf (paginated to fit 8.5X11 format), as explained below (pdf completed added post-publication here).

I closed out 2016 with an average of one post a week (52 posts total). 

Link to TOC 2016 & that post’s revised title:  {1}Table of Contents 2016 (52 posts Jan. 23 – Dec. 13, 2016) with {2} Intro on First 5 Years Fund(ing), incl. but not limited to Tobacco Lawsuit Settlement Payouts + Warren Buffett’s “Ounce of Prevention Fund”(IL) and {3} Appendix of Tags from some Critical-to-Understand Posts
Read the rest of this entry »

Written by Let's Get Honest

January 9, 2017 at 8:09 pm

About the Language and Length (Notes on Writing Style from TOC 2014 post) with Work Sample: The Calif Endowment (Publ. 10-13-2016, “Sticky”)

with one comment

Some Notes on Length and Writing Style,

and Work Sample (Preview/Postlude)

(Exploring one nonprofit & one of its backing foundations  with financial and filing details sheds light on the organizations’ mutual and relative sizes, revenue sources, and overall purposes, as a counterpoint and “backdrop” to organization’s public-profiles, i.e., their websites)  

Full Post Title & ShortLink:  About the Language and Length (Notes on Writing Style from TOC 2014 post) with Work Sample: The Calif Endowment (Publ. 10-13-2016, “Sticky”)

Including evidence from “The California Endowment” (“TCE”)’s Fiscal year 2004 Form 990PF return; it shows supplemental Statements detailing Direct Charitable Activities (expenses $16M),  and afterwards, showing dollar amounts in expenses, investments, liabilities, etc. as shown on the main IRS form.

The “charitable activities” performed that year were in part in conjunction with The California Healthcare Foundation to develop an Internet “app” to streamline people’s applications for as many social services and healthcare (welfare-type, public-funded) services as possible:

In conjunction with third-party vendor, The California Endowment supervised the development and implementation of the One-e-App technology solution. One-e-App is a Web-based system that is designed to screen and enroll all eligible individuals in California in multiple publicly funded health and social service programs, such as Medi- Cal and Healthy Families…

While paying that same year $11M in investment managers’ fees and holding a variety of investments as the “evidence” link above shows.  Here’s TCE more recently and right underneath it, “The California Healthcare Foundation (also more recent return):

ORGANIZATION NAME ST YR FORM PP TOTAL ASSETS EIN
California Endowment CA 2015 990PF 188 $3,768,442,347.00 95-4523232

Check out the close similarity in EIN#s — interesting, huh? 954523232 and 945423231

We are looking at $3.7 billion assets vs. $0.78 billion (or $780M) in total gross assets…

ORGANIZATION NAME ST YR FORM PP TOTAL ASSETS EIN
California HealthCare Foundation CA 2015 990O 237 $780,974,997.00 95-4523231

The California Healthcare Foundation (assets a mere “pipsqueak” by TCE standards) with its (2015) $781M of assets, spent also a lot on its 7 independent contractors, i.e., investment managers, including over $2.6M on “Makena Capital Management, LLC.”…
Read the rest of this entry »

Get Real(itybloger)! — Call In, Read the Links on CAFRs, Review Regularly. (First posted Jan. 24, 2014)

with 3 comments

The “CAFR” topic is a governmental accounting and reporting practice which affects all people (and particularly in this situation, all US Citizens) because of its impact on the economy and our understanding of the size and scope of government operations. It is an over-arching and underlying issue, but it has been a hidden issue.

For example, as Carl Herman (Harvard Economics grad) put this in 2012, a very good question in my opinion.  Once certain evidence IS posted, it requires an review of reasoning built on “the big picture” (not including that evidence), and that “big picture” includes the hot topic of “DEFICIT.”

This is a “README” article! // Let’s Get Honest

CAFR summary: if $600B ‘fund’ can’t fund $27B pension, $16B budget deficit, why have it?(Posted on June 18, 2012 by Carl Herman in ‘Washington’s Blog”),

. . . Governor Brown is silent about the $600 billion in surplus cash and investments, claiming the $16 billion budget deficit can only be addressed by austerity – massive funding cuts to our essential infrastructure. A 2.8% divestment of the fund would cover the $16 billion deficit.
Read the rest of this entry »

ORPHANS: Where The Great Commission meets the Military-Industrial Complex [First Published May 18, 2013]

with one comment

NOTE: Intro. section in this background color added [free of charge] Jan. 2016, some years after original publication May 2013. “Nightlight Christian Adoptions” was mentioned in the original post, I’ve just been looking more closely at tax return contents, in the interim. The original post may have been more “inspired,” however…. //LGH….It deals with this topic:

NOTE: this 3,000 word (you’re welcome!) post is out of sequence — belongs back with the “On the Road to Emmaeus” and “”Christian Social Services: Replenishing the Ranks of the Faithful (Bethany Christian Services posts, ca. Eastertime, 2013.

  • 6723 Whittier, McLean, VA (Always Look Up Street Addresses!!!)**

…at one time or another these organizations (at a minimum) shared a street address:

  • SHAOHANNAH’S HOPE (later “SHOWHOPE”)
  • CONGRESSIONAL COALITION ON ADOPTION INSTITUTE (“CCAI”)
  • CHRISTIAN ALLIANCE FOR ORPHANS (“CAFO”)
  • ASSOCIATION OF FORMER INTELLIGENCE OFFICERS (“AFIO”)

File under, if you notice the details, What’s wrong with this picture?

Read the rest of this entry »

While We’re There — the Northern California Mediation Center . . . and ITS corporate records, history, people, etc. (publ. 9/22/2012)

with 4 comments

While We’re There — the Northern California Mediation Center . . . and ITS corporate records, history, people, etc. (publ. 9/22/2012) <==Full Post Title + shortlink.

[ca. 8,000 words.    Significant additions after publishing.NCMC   introduced as to corporate filings, some personnel. Post concludes  showing how “parental alienation” indoctrination happens,is self-perpetuating, and is hostile towards mothers, generally, and is definitely a marketable scheme [yes, scheme] as well. See “train-the-trainers” @ public cost mentality.In midstream, I’m taking (to another post) a basic explanation of what “Corporation” means, FYI]


We might as well talk about the Northern California Mediation Center alongside  The Judith Wallerstein Center for the Family in Transition, and right alongside respective corporate and nonprofit filings, fundings, tax returns affiliations and actions.{{The introduction is a little passionate, but it’s about a dozen paragraphs.  Scroll down if you want to skip them!  I added numbers to make it easier!}}
Read the rest of this entry »

Another POV on “The Center for the Family in Transition” (and its funders) (Publ. 9/22/2012)

with 3 comments

Another POV on “The Center for the Family in Transition” (and its funders) (Publ. 9/22/2012)
Excerpt pulled to top of post in 2016.  This sticky post (below which are more current ones) originally published 9/22/2012.  It should be put in bold print, large letters and stuck on a refrigerator IF one is stuck in divorce drama at this time, as a reminder of the resonance of the rooms it will be taking place in!

The phrase “Families in Transition” is jargon, and it is virtually trademarked for use in the courts.  The term comes from, it seems, ONE individual with key connections to psychoanalysis (Judith Wallerstein, who was married to Robert S. Wallerstein, also a devoted and highly placed psychoanalyst, at one time President of the International Psychoanalytic Association (“IPA”), essentially the inheritance of Sigmund Freud. 


This association, IPA, was formed shortly AFTER Sigmund Freud’s ex-communication (by colleagues) for ca. 1895 presenting “the Etiology of Hysteria” and saying it related to violent sexual and physical assaults on his patients by their caretakers (often fathers or uncles, etc.) from the early 1900s).   In the 1950s, “The Origins of Psychoanalysis” incl. editor Sigmund’s daughter Anna) apparently included censorship of how Freud viewed his own “about-face” after being cold-shouldered by his colleagues.  In the 1980s a man was given access to the Freud Archives and wrote about this, in the interest of speaking the truth, and was again could-shouldered, and taken off the archives also.


For more, see March 5, 2014 post “Suppose I’m Right Here ….What Would You Do When the Lights go on?” Seeing the Wallerstein-Wallerstein connection, and the consistent practice of re-framing reality (truths about person-to-person violence, including parent to child, man to woman, and vice versa), and the origins of the fields of psychoanalysis, psychiatry, psychology, get it? the “Psyche” field in general  having been introduced as the bedrock formula for the conception of “FAMILY” and the “FAMILY COURTS,” a logical deduction is that those courts are also essentially — not “tangentially” —  crooked.

So, how can that “crooked” be cleaned up?  Can it?  Does the propagation of truth versus the propagation of the coverup of the (often ugly) truth matter, or not?  If it does not matter, how can calling something “justice” be applied on top of that foundation?

Read the rest of this entry »

The Fascinating Genealogy of Founders of the London-based Institute for Strategic Dialogue (ISD) behind the Strong Cities Network (SCN) the USDOJ Attorney General in September 2015 recommended We All Join Too

leave a comment »

I have posted on Strong Cities Network before.

(logo from Strongcitiesnetwork.org)

It came up again on noticing the Center for Cities and Schools (founded 2004 at UC Berkeley) who is currently featuring a “Strong Cities. Successful Young People” banner (one among six) on its home page.  In fact UCB is even fund-raising for this project. (See two colorful images below left).

#1 of 4 images

I took another look at the USDOJ announcement of the launch of Strong Cities, decided to look up the CEO referenced (the founder of the Institute was noticeably NOT mentioned), and the genealogy of at least the Institute’s founder or co-founder AND its current CEO, particularly interesting to a classical musician or anyone interested in arts, classical music, sculpture, etc.  So now you have this post:

The Fascinating Genealogy of Founders of the London-based Institute for Strategic Dialogue (ISD) behind the Strong Cities Network (SCN) the USDOJ Attorney General in September 2015 recommended We All Join Too (case-sensitive shortlink ends “-“-6Pj” post started 5-16-2017).

Runner-up title to this post:  Sept. 2015 the USDOJ launched a Strong Cities Network Initiative, run by ISD (London), launched at the UN.  Its current CEO is a descendant of Gustav Mahler, its first founder, Baron George Weidenfield, Publisher.

This topic also overlaps with what I wrote about yesterday on the purpose of gradually increasing the “competence and mandate” of administrative agencies relative to national governments with the eventual goal of a “working peace” run administratively and functionally rather than by “blueprint” (such as legally?).  Quote from yesterday’s first post:

 “The tensions continue between [functionalism and citizen’s rights to know] –and they didn’t start yesterday!”  A second source and quote is there also (a brief bio of Mitrany, 1988-1977, and how and through whom he entered the American university conference circuit (Harvard, Yale) as well as working for the Institute for Advanced Science* (“IAS”) at “1 Einstein Drive, Princeton, NJ,” in his truly internationally oriented lifespan) — and for the last part, working as a consultant to Unilever and Lever Brothers, Ltd.!!)


click image to read better (annotat’n is only filename)

Checking back in at the StrongCitiesNetwork.org website, I see that the Global Summit will be held May 17-19, 2017 in Denmark (I say “will” idealistically hoping to publish this by the end of today, May 16, 2017!).

 

 

“Strong Cities, Community Resilience, Anti-Terrorism (Sept. 29, 2015, USDOJ announcement):”

Click image for link (and full page from USDOJ).  Notice the phrase “Against Violent Extremism” (acronym would be “AVE.”  This article doesn’t mention any acronym, but is introducing the phrase. The CEO of the ISD running the SCN (!) (referenced here) in does, in bio blurbs.

…..”no systematic efforts are in place to share experiences, pool resources, and build a community of cities to inspire local action on a global scale” (see image, Para. 1).

[If you deleted the reference to purposes, you can hear a complaint that there isn’t a “community of cities” in place, period.]

The Strong Cities Network (SCN)  – which launches September 29th at the United Nations – will empower municipal bodies to fill this gap while working with civil society and safeguarding the rights of local citizens and communities.

The SCN will strengthen strategic planning and practices to address violent extremism in all its forms by fostering collaboration among cities, municipalities and other sub-national authorities. ….

The SCN will connect cities, city-level practitioners and the communities they represent through a series of workshops, trainings and sustained city partnerships.  Network participants** will also contribute to and benefit from an online repository of municipal-level good practices and web-based training modules and will be eligible for grants supporting innovative, local initiatives and strategies that will contribute to building social cohesion and resilience to violent extremism.

It’s a like a club with memberships; only network participants get the resources.

Sasha Alexandra Zdraska Havlicek (1975) (image is not from the USDOJ announcement); click image to access the page.

The SCN will include an International Steering Committee of approximately 25 cities and other sub-national entities from different regions that will provide the SCN with its strategic direction.  The SCN will also convene an International Advisory Board, which includes representatives from relevant city-focused networks, to help ensure SCN builds upon their work.**  It will be run by the Institute for Strategic Dialogue (ISD), a leading international “think-and-do” tank with a long-standing track record of working to prevent violent extremism:

“The SCN provides a unique new opportunity to apply our collective lessons in preventing violent extremism in support of local communities and authorities around the world”, said CEO Sasha Havlicek of ISD.  {{her LinkedIn}} “We look forward to developing this international platform for joint innovation to impact this pressing challenge.”

**Networks interacting with networks building practices….

Here’s a photo of the current “International Steering Committee members.”

Click images to read commentary, including that the gender balance is still 6 (or perhaps 7 counting the CEO) women to 16 men, and that there is no photo caption, and no identification of people’s names in the list of 25 cities on the International Steering Committee.

(1) Notice there is an intention NOT to deal (in the USA at least) with “states” but only with cities.  So, it’s not Denver, Colorado, USA — or New York City, NY, USA — but only “Denver, USA; New York, USA, or Minneapolis, USA.  They want to get rid of the “states” relationship — but in the USA, many of our taxes, protections, and legal rights such as exist, occur under State law.  What’s more, many city or municipality budgets are also heavily interdependent on state and federal, as well as influenced by regional funding.  The concept of “Strong CITIES” wishes to equalize this across borders, in discord with our form of government.

Apparently the former head of the United States Justice Department, i.e., the Attorney General Loretta Lynch, in 2015 at time of this announcement — as well as the various mayors — had no problem with this discord or conflict of jurisdiction.  Also, membership in this network is “free” but again, limited to what kind of decision-makers in authority can join.   Also, (2), Notice the gender balance — looks like 6 women to 16 men, or just over ⅓ representation by women.  Anyhow:


Before I post more about Ms. Havlicek, isn’t it interesting that the USDOJ announcement, in referencing a major charity, referenced its CEO, and not its President and (co-) founder? Although another source says “co-founder” there might possibly be some protests at the level of communications influence already wielded by the other co-founder or, if Wiki has it right, “founder,” Baron George Weidenfield,” major publisher:

(Wikipedia on) The Institute for Strategic Dialogue (ISD) is a London-based ‘think and do tank’ that has pioneered policy and operational responses to the rising challenges of violent extremism and inter-communal conflict. Combining research and analysis with government advisory work and delivery programmes, ISD has been at the forefront of forging real-world, evidence-based responses to the challenges of integration, extremism and terrorism. ISD’s founder and president was George Weidenfeld, Baron Weidenfeld.[1] Its Director/CEO is Sasha Havlicek.[2]

The footnote 2, in a journal, shows Havlicek’s academic background:  London School of Economics (Bachelors’ and Masters’) and a graduate diploma  from an Institut Detudes Politique (IEP)in Paris:

References[edit]


What mostly inspired this post was learning about Sasha Havlicek’s background, but for now, the George Weidenfield background, showing where the wealth came from — publishing, and writing.  He was also of course a philanthropist.  I have a section also on Axel Springer Ag (and Axel Springer — more publishing empires) and on Gordon Getty (son of oil tycoon J. Paul Getty) because it comes up, and make occasional notes on just how many times some of these men married and divorced — and whom.
Read the rest of this entry »

Written by Let's Get Honest

May 17, 2017 at 8:58 pm

UCB’s CC+S (Kellogg Foundation-sponsored) 2016 PK-12 Infrastructure Planning (Education Work Group Details) ~~ Cont’d.

with one comment

This post name,

UCB’s CC+S (Kellogg Foundation-sponsored) 2016 PK-12 Infrastructure Planning (Education Work Group Details) ~~> Cont’d. , ends with a short-link ending “-6P8

and should not be confused with its originating post, similar name but now a different link because I split it in half.  What CC+S stands for is in next title, and I hope it’s plain that “UCB” stands for University of California-Berkeley.  That originating post: UCB’s Center for Cities + Schools (Kellogg Foundation-sponsored) 2016 PK-12 Infrastructure Planning (Education Work Group Details) (case-sensitive short-link ends “-6Lh”) Post started (contents written, then moved from another post) May 9, 2017.

THAT one had more explanatory material — in fact a half a post’s worth (approximately).  I feel it’s important — but it wasn’t specifically focused on subject matter in the post title.  It was focused on the context of the post title and making the case again for demanding to know how public funds are being spent, and what public/private partnerships are doing usurping the place formerly held, or to be held, by individual citizens dealing with their elected state, and federal legislatures.

In setting the context, I am always working with definitions in a field where MOST people don’t speak the language I am promoting as a good one to speak.

In the originating post, I talked about the ongoing tension between what organizations WANT to tell us (“the rhetoric of cause”) and what we as citizens ought to want to know, and to make a note of the probable ulterior agenda when in the enthusiasm about “cause” so many groups simply forgot (sic) to post their financials, or forgot (sic) to differentiate between real entities, quasi-entities (government or business) or projects and programs of either one, or both working together.  I then referenced (with a footnoted page) some historic background for this process of “outflanking sovereignty” in pursuit of a better world order — under UN coordination it seems like, at this end.

I said and I believe (because I’ve seen) this, linking to more information on this perspective:

 “The tensions continue between [functionalism and citizen’s rights to know] –and they didn’t start yesterday!”  A second source and quote is there also (a brief bio of Mitrany, 1988-1977, and how and through whom he entered the American university conference circuit (Harvard, Yale) as well as working for the Institute for Advanced Science* (“IAS”) at “1 Einstein Drive, Princeton, NJ,” in his truly internationally oriented lifespan) — and for the last part, working as a consultant to Unilever and Lever Brothers, Ltd.!!)

It’s the 21st century.  We’d better get a handle on  “the name of the game” and the rules of it, too!

THIS post was written earlier, and I admit it’s incomplete at the bottom — because I’d planned to bring up a sequence of tax return images (I did make the images and have them labeled and stored!) better reflecting “Schools of the World” as a 501©3 whose owner was on the “Education” working group for the PK-12 initiative led by four listed entities, two of which shared a street address, and two others of which weren’t separate entities, but a center in another one.

However, I’m a bit worn out with this routine for now. This one is in less polished format than the previous, but is still useful information on a sample project of the “UCB CC+S”

Both posts are being posted at the same time — Monday evening (after “Mothers’ Day” in the USA) May 15, 2017. I expect to revise or expand post-publication either for completion (supply more exhibits), or for clarity.

This will be the second of two in a row, then.


In my next to last recent post, “Today’s Lesson — Annenberg Learner,” I referenced three topics branching out from “Just Do It! Do the Drill-Downs,” one of which was that post, and two more:  one main topic was the UCB Center for Cities & Schools and (with it) the 21st Century Schools Fund.  Another was regarding some “community partners of a church in Florida whose leadership had been on a 2009 Obama White House Faith-based Council.

As part of a preview of these topics (which took up a large part of the “Annenberg Learner” post), I had some extensive quotes, images, and identifying Partners and Advisors page on this topic.   We learned (if it was news to readers) that the UCB Center for Cities & Schools had Partners, an Advisory Board, and is one among several centers at UCB’s  IURD (Institute for Urban and Regional Design), which history goes back to 1962.  However, this Center for Cities and Schools in the timeline is dated only 2004.

REGARDING – Who IS this UCB Center for Cities and Schools and What It’s Doing:

  • A few comments (and images) on this….in fact here’s a series of the home page moving slide show features; notice the reference to “Strong Cities” (which phrase and reference is international / London in origin.)  
  • Some may remember that Minneapolis and NYC joined, the USDOJ cited it as an initiative (<==Sep. 29, 2015 announcement), and the general frame work was anti-terrorist.  Reorganizing the world by cities within regions, instead of as political subdivisions of their own countries is, well, “interesting”).  That this is the leading phrase in the leading image (1 of 6 currently) on the Center for Cities + Schools is surely no accident.  For further reference, see background of CC+S’ founder.
  • However, in THIS post, I’m not dealing with slide 1, but slide (below) #4 of 6 total (as of today) found at the top of “Citiesandschools.berkeley.edu.”

#1 of 4 images

#2 of 4

#3 of 4

#4 of 4 (there were more, but…)


Regarding Strong Cities Network, run by the Institute for Strategic Dialogue, a British charity based in London:

THE CEO and co-founder of the institute (British? charity) behind Strong Cities Network is the grand-daughter of a famous composer and with a family line of “the patrician class” populated by conductors, composers, artists, film-makers and actors, and head-line makers regarding parts of the story as family had to flee the Nazis, and later struggle to get their stolen art back.  In the process (this found, again through a simple search link on a person’s name), we also see the forms of education of their own young at the time, and along those lines, how some were sculpting and teaching at USC and UCLA, or living there.  We may be talking “national” here, but the leaders are definitely thinking and dealing, international.

So “Strong Cities” at UCB CC+S as the leading banner above, again, didn’t just show up coincidentally, but is being promoted.   See also my last post and a link on it to a footnoted page on the process.

{Reader Note: A short section in reference to STRONG CITIES NETWORK as a project of ISD (Institute for Strategic Dialogue in London) and its CEO Sasha Havlicek referenced in the USDOJ announcement 9/29/2015 regarding this, turned up some interesting and relevant information.  She is a direct descendant of the famous classical composer Gustav Mahler, a graduate of the London School of Economics (Bachelors’ and Masters) and Institute Detudes Politique in Paris, and more — but this is definitely a fascinating background.

Click to read Sasha Havlicek bio from “TrustConference.com” website which, it turns out, is an initiative of  Thomson Reuters Foundation. (see screenprint)

I also found it fascinating that the U.S. Attorney General Loretta Lynch in 2015, chose NOT to mention the ISD’s other founder, who was a major publisher (British, American and German) and well-known (says Wiki) Zionist, a Baron, with a host of other honorary titles from different countries over the years.  He also bought/partnered into USA publishing (at one point with the Ann Getty, wife of Gordon Getty, son of J. Paul Getty).

Lord Weidenfield and wife Annabelle in Berlin 2010, Credit: Rex Features (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/books/authors/george-weidenfeld-the-grand-old-man-of-publishing/ (Jan 20, 2016, referring to a 2015 interview)

By the time you bring in the oil-industry second and third (at least) generation wealth and J.Paul Getty, for at least Californians, you are talking about a U.S. District Judge, his son, formerly San Francisco Supervisor, San Francisco Mayor, and lastly since 2011, California Lieutenant Governor (translation:  Second in command of Executive Branch after the Governor), and we are hearing, may run for Governor of California in 2018, Gavin Newsom.

[WIKI\ The Lieutenant Governor of California is a statewide constitutional officer and vice-executive of the State of California. The lieutenant governor is elected to serve a four-year term and can serve a maximum of two terms. In addition to basically ceremonial roles, serving as acting governor in the absence of the Governor, and as President of the California State Senate, the lieutenant governor either sits on, or appoints representatives to, many of California’s regulatory commissions and executive agencies.

thumbnail of Ann & Gordon Getty Foundation (see my other post for the tax returns, or look it up) showing William A. Newsom as unpaid director, along with 3 others including Gordon Getty)

Gavin Newsom (with his now ex-wife), Click this or neighboring image through to 5/16/2017 article in Sacramento Bee (Sacramento is capital of California)

Plenty of powerful individuals well-established in London in the 20th century got there fleeing the Nazis; both co-founders of the ISD have this in their background.  Headlines were made (and at least one movie) over the final restoration by Austria of art the Nazi’s had stolen, after a prolonged legal battle.

I also found it interesting how very many marriages and divorces scatter the backgrounds of some of their famous forebears (and Baron Weidenfield’s also) — not just one or two, but four or five. Meanwhile, in the USA, low-income and middle-class parents are being lectured about their marriage and divorce habits as divorce is bad for kids.  It appears that Anna Mahler (who had lost her father at age 7 and her older sister at age 2, married at age 16) had married to escape the home she was raised in (famous artists salon activity notwithstanding), and then kept on marrying, and divorcing….  She came into her own in sculpture; her sculpture is on display outside UCLA.

Lieutenant Governor Gavin Newsom (Wiki) married 2001, filed for divorce 2005 (in part from careers on opposite coasts…), had an affair** possibly contributing to another person’s divorce, then in 2008 married actress Jennifer Siebel, and quickly began having children, girl, boy, girl, boy  (2009, 2011, 2013, and 2016).  Did I mention, the faith is Roman Catholic?

In 2005, Newsom was selected as a Young Global Leader by the World Economic Forum.[93] In January 2007, it was revealed that Newsom had had a romantic relationship in mid-2005 with Ruby Rippey-Tourk, the wife of his former deputy chief of staff and then campaign manager, Alex Tourk.[94] Tourk filed for divorce shortly after the revelation and left Newsom’s campaign and administration. Newsom’s affair with Rippey-Tourk[95] impacted his popularity with male voters, who viewed his indiscretions as a betrayal of a close friend and ally.[96]

Newsom and Jennifer Siebel at the 2008 San Francisco Pride parade.

Nice guy… California has now legalized marijuana for non-medical use, and same-sex marriage, but wants to continue receiving federal funds to promote “healthy marriage and responsible fatherhood” and all the spinoff programs that came from these starting back in the 1990s, I guess.  Maybe some of our political leaders and national heroes/philanthropists should start practicing what they preach — or stop preaching it!

More to the point — looks like Hon. Gavin Newsom’s personal wealth came in large part from Gordon Getty sponsorship of various financial adventures — more at Wikipedia and my other posts.  This is troublesome when you think about State-level politics in a state of this size.  But, its not exactly a new situation (see Bill Lockyer marital history)…

Trustconference.com has a live-feed (video) background. Notice there is an America and an Asia forum, and check out registration fees (also partners).

 

For those who may have been reading this post at the time, I had been posting here temporarily  but am moving it to its own post, to keep this one more loyal to the title’s subject matter (and shorter). Currently called (but the link will work under any revised title also — when it’s published:)

The Fascinating Genealogy of Founders of the London-based Institute for Strategic Dialogue (ISD) behind the Strong Cities Network (SCN) the USDOJ Attorney General in September 2015 recommended We All Join Too (case-sensitive shortlink ends “-“-6Pj” post started 5-16-2017, published 5-17).

//LGH 5-16-2017 Tuesday.



Notice on the red-framed image above, “#4 of 4,” the publication shown has four (and ½) logos at the bottom?  Who they are matters. They represent the “Leadership Group” of the sponsored report, “Planning for PK-12 Infrastructure:  Adequate Public School Facilities for All Children.”

This “Leadership Group” for the publication then framed the questions, convened and facilitated the working groups according to the framed questions, and as you can see, wrote up the results, which were then posted (among no doubt other places) on the UCB’s CC&S website, “front and center” in an alternating, colorful slide-show of what they are doing.


So, a “bit more” on UCB’s CC+S’ PK-12 Infrastructure (Image 4 of 4 above) “Leadership team” and tax-exempt foundation sponsor (backed by its own $7-8Billion-dollar tax-exempt trust to the tune of contributions in recent years of $367M each, for redistribution in amounts totalling $296M) is in order, I felt. That was a reference to the W.K. Kellogg Foundation and its sponsoring W.K. Kellog Trust No. 5315 (which sponsored this publication).

Description of the project, from a click on the banner: — can you count the named entities, sorted by type as reported here, and then correlate them to a sort by type as to how financial reports and fiscal activity would be made available to the public (i.e., private corporations or public entities)?

That is a translation process, and the better we get at it, the better positioned we are to make a difference in demanding financial accountability for the use of tax receipts, i.e., public funds in or on public institutions.

Source of quote: “http://citiesandschools.berkeley.edu/news/new-natl-initiative-planning-for-pk-12-infrastructure


CC+S is partnering with the 21st Century School FundThe Center for Green Schools, and the National Council on School Facilities to address the structural problems of inequitable and inadequate school facilities found in too many communities across the U.S.
Through this initiative, six national cross-sector working groups have developed a menu of solutions to guide government, industry, labor, and the civic sector in the delivery of high performance public PK-12 infrastructure for all children. The six working groups are organized around basic elements of a well-managed facilities program: Data and Information, Educational Facilities Planning, Management, Funding, Governance and Decision Making, and Accountability. This map identifies policies, practices, and tools needed to structure, manage and fund the public and private capacity for equitable and efficient public school facilities for all communities.

“…for all children” …”for all communities….”  So, these policies, practices and procedures” for Public AND Private capacity for “equitable” and efficient….”  Nice language.

Let’s do some math — what’s the budget, assets and liabilities of each of the above?   How many subsidiary partners are involved in each member of at least the Leadership Team?
Read the rest of this entry »

Written by Let's Get Honest

May 15, 2017 at 9:01 pm

UCB’s Center for Cities + Schools’ (W.K.Kellogg Foundation-sponsored, 2016 promoted) ~Planning for PK-12 Infrastructure~ Initiative

with one comment

In this post,

UCB’s Center for Cities + Schools’ (W.K.Kellogg Foundation-sponsored, 2016 promoted) ~Planning for PK-12 Infrastructure~ Initiative” (case-sensitive short-link ends “-6Lh”; post started (contents written, then moved from another post) May 9, 2017; and  a “~” in title = a quotation mark)

as ever, the tension continues between self-narrative and project descriptions of the involved entities and non-entities (centers within university, and here, also a nonprofit portrayed as though they held corporate personhood and could be a “partner”) and the public’s legitimate right to know who’s who  and which is which, stemming from our right to knowwhat’s being done…

(1)with OUR ONGOING CONTRIBUTIONS TO GOVERNMENT AT ALL LEVELS? And (while I’m at it)

(2) by TAX-EXEMPT ENTITIES (incorporated or other business “persons” who in those “persons” do not pay income OR corporate taxes like most working individuals including those working as employees of either government or nonprofit sector),

…to together and individually influence, guide, steer, transform, drive and/or alter basic forms of government both federal and state, while further obscuring the cash flow to and from these to government entities they are working for or — even if privately funded but still involved working on, and to do this typically reassuring the public at every point, in reports, evaluations, or organization (or government) websites, “we’re really working for YOUR benefit.”

The image also is link to the article

This collective behavior is a form of progressively, and increasingly working to “outflank sovereignty,” (<=

Page header, left side. The right side (not shown) read only “Paradigms.” obviously meant for facing pages in a bound format.

=2012 (uploaded), 2007-published  journal article on David Mitrany I’ve cited before, several times.  Read just a few pages to understand that what we’re experiencing now had foundation in previous generations, and some of who, what, when and where, starting at least in America with the Carnegie International Peace Foundation.

Keep also in mind that the U.S. Constitution’s Amendment introducing the income tax was at the time still recent.

Since I’m going to quote, I showed the “cite” in three screenprints: Title and author; author bio blurb, and page heading showing a journal name, Vol., No. and Time (Spring 2007) within a section “Paradigms.”  Being short on vertical space on this post, I took the quotes to a separate page containing the quotes, accessible through this link:  “The tensions continue between [functionalism and citizen’s rights to know] –and they didn’t start yesterday!”  A second source and quote is there also (a brief bio of Mitrany, 1988-1977, and how and through whom he entered the American university conference circuit (Harvard, Yale) as well as working for the Institute for Advanced Science* (“IAS”) at “1 Einstein Drive, Princeton, NJ,” in his truly internationally oriented lifespan) — and for the last part, working as a consultant to Unilever and Lever Brothers, Ltd.!!)

…On further consideration, I expanded that page to include more information on the IAS and the TVA.  (including some annotated images).  It’s quoting good writing and so I believe will be self-explanatory.

Summary:  although “David Mitrany” may not be a “household name” to me, or to people concerned with specific problems within the USA, such as the schools or the family courts, it is a household name to many here, and overseas.  His orientation (see bio) after leaving Romania for Hamburg and ending up in England, where he attended the London School of Economics, and even for a period (says this) worked as a British spy, would be more British then “USA” even though he worked, lectured, and for all I know,  also published here:

A household name among social scientists and historians, a name who is permanently tied to functionalism- one of the most penetrating theories behind the integration dynamics in Europe. In 1943 Mitrany published an important political pamphlet: A Working Peace System. A witness of both World Wars, Mitrany struggled with the problem of how Europe could be freed from the iron fist of power politics. He did not believe in the standard blueprint for an ideal order…

Regarding “standard blueprint for an ideal order,” there are still people in this country (including –who knows? — maybe even a good portion of the US Congress and House of Representatives) who believe that we have in the Constitution at least a working blueprint for a good one, when compared with other governments internationally.  I do.  There seem to be major problems with application, though (!)

What I’m exposing and publicizing here may be easier to understand after more reading on the general topic of functionalism, naming specific people and institutions. It’s not required to get the general idea from the details to the deductions, but I know it helped my own understanding that the practice was planned, premeditated, and part of how it was promoted internationally.  Sample quote from my footnoted page, from Britannica.com on “functionalism”:

https://www.britannica.com/topic/functionalism-international-organizations

…Mitrany advocated the creation of a range of similarly constituted technical and scientific agencies with potentially global reach to implementinfrastructure and reconstruction programs, organized on a technical or functional basis rather than on a territorial basis. …

The contribution of Mitrany’s writing and advocacy was to promote the expansion of both the number and tasks of the existing agencies, the creation of new ones, and their coordination through the auspices of the UN. The construction of what Mitrany called “a working peace system” lay in a twofold process. In the first place, a program would be progressively transferred to functional agencies, a process called “task expansion.” This process would enlarge the mandate and competence of the agencies relative to those of national governments. Thereafter, the network of interdependent relationships that these agencies would come to manage, a process called spillover, would create a so-called working peace system between the members.

Essentially, they are stating that the purpose of creating so many special administrative agencies with multiple boundary-crossing scope of activities and jurisdiction is not to handle the tasks assigned — in other words, NOT what is advertised, but for an ulterior agenda — to ensure increase of the “mandates” AND competence to handle them relative to the national governments.   You can also see this happening within the US, as refers to federal versus states, or regionally coordinated state areas.

With this ulterior agenda, honesty in documenting the legitimate need for the advertised projects and services, seems to have taken an exit out the back door; it has “flown the coop” and is “no longer on the premises.”  This emerges when (“the tension continues….”) they are handled consistently in ways that undermine local finances and people’s understanding of ALL finances, as well as undermining local representative government.

This is even done preaching “Community” at all levels — but you won’t see this unless you follow the money and realize how convoluted that reporting has become on where it goes, where it went, and how much (at any point in time, well accounted for) exists (that’s “balance sheet” style) to continue justifying all the taxations, fees, service cuts, and agency purpose consolidations under first, single themes, then later, over-arching themes.

What’s that got to do with the UCBerkeley Center for Cities + Schools?  LOTS!  (See bio of its Executive Director Deborah McKoy); I’m referring especially to the UN references in her bio blurb.


This tendency seems to have expanded (beyond an easy count) already, within the decades since.  As I referenced in looking recently at the US Census of Governments, it doesn’t seem to count JPAs that cross state lines!

Click IMAGE to see full-sized (Tables to 2012 US Census of Govts issued Sep 2013) [2012 Census of Govts TABLES 1-13 list types of govt (notice across-state-lines JPAs not shownas separate type)[Screen Shot 2017-05-02]

i.e., here I mean, getting around legal restrictions on balance of power between federal and state, or the existence of state boundaries as primary borders of citizens’ rights and responsibilities residing in their home “domicile” (whether it’s a marriage license or a drivers’ license there is only one at a time legal for any U.S. “person,” and taxes and registrations/fee receipts will be demanded of them in those home states unless they report a change of domicile, in which case it will be demanded in the new states.And no matter WHICH state (or territory), generally speaking, income taxes will be required from all employed or receiving qualifying income, individuals.  So, where are all our financial statements of ALL relevant government entities, and how the hell are we supposed to be able to track our own previous, forcible investments in the infrastructure when, especially in the 21st century and facilitated by the Internet, “public/private partnerships” are the Presidentially promoted norm (both political parties)??Reminder: FYI, both K-12 School Districts AND (depending on the state I guess) state university systems are government entities, and both of these (“K-12” and universities) exist right alongside another major set of private universities, Ivy League and otherwise, each with institutional endowments of course and whose students also would no doubt qualify for federal funding help with their tuition loans (hence those private universities also depend in large part on federal assistance for their operations) — which simply file 501©3 forms as tax-exempt educational institutions.The public schools themselves are the ongoing projects of school districts (they occur within some school district) and minor children who aren’t attending legally registered private schools in some form must attend public, but the government entity is the school district.  When it comes, however to the state level, any “Department of Education” isn’t its own entity, but part of the State.I would also like to remind us that the U.S. Constitution make no provision for federally nationalized education; it arose under the Executive Branch and until 1980 wasn’t even separate from it, but contained under the Department of “Health, Education, and Welfare” (HEW), which had been so named since 1953, not long after World War II ended.   Like HHS, after separation into its own department in 1980, it seems to have taken on a new life of its own and expansionary qualities, although overall, it seems that Department of Education would be a small part of the federal budget.So, what we have now is a situation where the public/private partnerships wish to communally and collectively (certain networks of nonprofits known better to each other than the average citizen) commandeer government investments, offering some of their own as well, to shift the paradigm, set up model schools, test them (on students!), and replicate.  And I have found that in the process is a major tendency by the foundations (direct) or their sponsored smaller nonprofits, to literally pay school districts to implement their models.   The nonprofit networks for school reform not only are so many, and feed personnel and programming to each other over time, but they also have sometimes a short shelf-life between actually registering and shutting themselves down voluntarily.Center for Essential Schools, Inc. (the National one –not the regional ones) did this.  Public Education Network Inc. did this.  Chicago Annenberg Challenge did this, dissolving and naming its successor institution “Chicago Public Education Fund.”  The Chicago Public Education Fund had involvement with an entity which later resulted in the infamous $20M no-bid contract for training urban principals or superintendents which just this past April sent three people to federal prison; one of them the CEO of the Chicago Public School System.Meanwhile, in my “Challenging Annenberg” post, I showed this image, and quickly identified that a most of the over $6.68M grant money cited by the big foundation out of its total ($52M) as “paid that year” was not reported as received by the reported grantee the same year.  Because of differing fiscal years and a “MIA” (not easy to locate; not found yet) possible prior tax return on which it might have been reported, I can’t say with authority.

The next narrow screenprint is a detail from the one below showing the Annenberg Foundation’s Statement 17 for YE June 30, 2001 listing multiple Challenge Grantees for the year ending June 30, 2001.  The other list beside it (“Statement 19”) is a detail from a different fiscal year, but same mega-foundation, regarding Chicago Annenberg Challenge, Inc.’s grants from 1997 – 2001, as totaling $44,391,200, and a statement that CAC’s expenditures that year had been ($150K more if you do the math).

(Click image to see this excerpt in pdf format, which will have wide margins top and bottom unlike this.

(Click image to see full-sized) Annenberg Fndtn FY2001 lists $52M of grants to 15 of the “Challenge Grants (Public Education)” paid that yr. My annotations are just to sorting grantees by category, informally, and noting that AISR as an entity doesn’t show up among them. These take time to produce — pls. read!

Annenberg Fndtn FY2001 Statement 19 (Click image to read full-size). Note re Chicago Annenberg Challenge exemplifies (unlike “AISR”) an IDENTIFIED corporate recipient. See next related image listing (as of 2002) 15 (original was “18” per Fndtn website) Challenge Grantees. From that list, specific corporate IDs and EIN#s could be found but notably, AISR at Brown is not on the list. Brown University is, but only a single grant under $1M.


How might this overall scenario affect public awareness of how much cash is available in the schools or for them?

This image, on a different report [State of Our Schools, click image to access full document] (but it contains a similar disclaimer) shows only 3 of the 4 logos on the ones shown on the 2016 report posted as a moving banner page on “Centerforcitiesandschools.berkeley.edu“. The logo NOT shown on this one is the Center for Cities and Schools…


Whether or not we have a literal legal right to know the above could be researched, but common sense says, when our “money” (time, resources, life energy efforts resulting in taxable income or forced or even elective use of anything controlled by or proprietary to government — such as SCHOOLS, courts, or metropolitan-area transportation systems, or provision of services in any way attributable to “welfare” (Social Security Act-related, such as paying or receiving child support, or divorcing being a either male or female parent…) — is being individually taken then our ongoing awareness of what’s (or, ‘WTF!’ is) being done with it should be a vital concern.

It takes vitality to live and work in this country, and as people paying part of the price, we have a right to know about the stewardship of the price paid every bit as much as shareholders in a public-traded company should be able to know about its operations, AND its balance sheets, however large it may be.

When, in pursuit of information on valid documents and accounts of HOW it’s being used (our money), we instead get websites referencing a multitude of quasi-real, temporarily real, and or temporarily existing nonprofits, an evolving series of unidentifiable centers or institutes at universities who do not report in forms we can access, and/or existing joint powers authorities agreeing into existence yet more joint powers authorities (as happened in the case of WestEd — see most recent post!) — then on the part of those making these evasive and incomplete statements with others of the same habits, we are looking at a collective resistance to telling the truth we ought to have a chance to know, see, and assess.

Or, we can get what looks on the surface like many helpful links on official websites, only on further prodding to realize they are broken, or if not broken, do not lead directly to the information labeled on the link, and continually, for example, in the case of some new arrangement of government policies, priorities, or processes, parse out the less specific and direct information, leaving the readers to put together something coherent in terms of WHO is doing WHAT, since WHEN, and AS FUNDED BY WHOM?

That this is occurring should be acknowledged and dealt with by demanding that accountability.  On my part, on this blog, I am publicizing this as the status quo in both the private nonprofit sector, in the government sector, and particularly when the two come together.

EXAMPLE: Origins of the HiAP – Health (not Justice) in All Policies poorly explained on government websites (even after the archived versions are accessed).  HiAP Task force repeatedly referenced but not named.  

However at each step of the way, it seems more participating nonprofit funders, stakeholders,  “intersectoral collaborators” (which is a main point of the enterprise) are:  Public Health Institute (in Oakland), PolicyLink (ditto), Prevention Institute (ditto), also the California Endowment, and more.

Example:UCBerkeley Center for Cities and Schools lists a partner, “California Health In All Policies Task Force,” stating it was created by executive order (but no referencing its global origins and not naming the task force people even, by either position or specific name.

Trying to extract the valuable essence details feels like “herding cats.”  Or spelunking (Cave exploration).
Read the rest of this entry »

Written by Let's Get Honest

May 15, 2017 at 9:00 pm

“DISCONNECTED!” — More on ConnectEd (2006ff nonprofit) and WestEd (1995ff JPA claiming to be since 1966). Can YOU Follow the Connections, Find and Correlate the Financial Statements, and Name the EndGame(s)?

with one comment

Post Foreword:

This post was basically written in full March 27, 2017, and sidelined while I continued researching things Anneberg and others you can see on the sidebar under “Recent Posts” and as shown in images near the top of the “Today’s Lesson … Annenberg Learner” (most recent) post.  (The drill-downs can occupy full attention for a long time while I’m processing the information also).

Looking to move forward with other writing, I quickly (less than one day) did some more interior decorating (added images and text) to the top part, standardized some formatting on the bottom, and posting it May 11, 2017.  I am still beginning to grasp (in “awe”) the scope of the combined intents to transform the entire public school system in an agreed-upon direction by certain networked entities, the cooperation of the US and other Departments of Education in the process (partly understandable – they’re getting significant grants from a number of private tax-exempt foundations over time, for each new favorite “transformation model,” whether it’s “Linked Learning” (here) or “Evidence2Success” (Annie E. Casey foundation promoting over at the AISR at Brown University (AISR = “Annenberg Institute for School Reform at Brown University”) or others.  You can see it in the tax returns.

This is an important post, and I hope readers take time to work through the comments on the images not just the narratives surrounding them.  It explains some key concepts graphically and shows my reasoning behind a statement of alarm about putting “system transformation” in the hands of parties who have already proven themselves dishonest in fiscal transparency and compliance with basic state-level laws of commerce.

In adding some images from USPTO.gov regarding WestEd, I ask WHY would a JPA be formed to do major commerce, competing with the private sector, in such a broad field as “educational services.”

Towards the bottom, particularly for Californians, the current owner of James Irvine Foundation, Donald Bren, is profiled, which just goes to show how power and wealth can indeed be consolidated under even just ONE person, to the point that they run, literally, cities and major parts of a state whose economy has been compared to that of Brazil in recent times.

How it was done is also interesting.  But at least the top ¾ of this post, I would say, don’t miss!   Sincerely, LGH (Let’s Get Honest) 5/11/2017

 “DISCONNECTED!” — More on ConnectEd (2006ff nonprofit) and WestEd (1995ff JPA claiming to be since 1966). Can YOU Follow the Connections, Find and Correlate the Financial Statements, and Name the EndGame(s)? (case-sensitive shortlink ends “-6k7”)

One entity above is private & nonprofit, the other public & governmental.  As such, one would provide a corporate registration and (being that kind of nonprofit) Form 990s and the other OUGHT to be providing Comprehensive Annual Financial Reports (“CAFR”) as a government entity, from what I understand.  It took me a while to find the corporate (secretary of state) business filing for the first entity (in part because of a colon and because its logo made it sound like the name did not include part of the title — and how many entities with the word “Connected” do you imagine might occur in a large state which contains Silicon Valley (?).

Some of its logos and a reminder that it is NOT (despite the name) restricted to practice in just California, and a second reminder that, like its 2006-forward sponsor “The James Irvine Foundation,” it’s quite enthusiastic about the digital hook-up and School-to-Work pipeline (“Linked Learning”) as an avenue to system-wide transformation (into an electronically hooked-up, school-to-work pipeline), which at this point in my blogging life, I’m starting to believe is a sort of addictive drug (cf. a few generations ago, one might say, someone “drank the [spiked] Kool-Aid.”):

NEXT THREE IMAGES: ConnectEd~The CalifCtr for Career + Learning plus LINKEDIN plus James Irivine Fndtn Plus Where ConnectEd works besides Calif SShots 1, 2, and 3 2017May11:

(#1 of 3, Click the Image)

#2 of 3, Click the image.

#3 of 3, Click the image.

But the other entity wouldn’t show up in that database, although apparently it must file a statement with the Secretary of State (here, for California at a minimum.  It was organized under California Joint Powers Act) separately.

In case there’s any question that WestEd is a government entity, the next two images are a record from the USPTO.gov, showing its trademark #17 of 17 (and the list of 17 currently “Live” status).  I’ll provide the “heavily annotated” (with commentary) version (commentary mostly in yellow rectangles and/or involving squiggly arrows; the neater stuff in some red, some blue, but mostly black-and-white fine print is courtesy USPTO.gov.  I’m also providing a link to a cleaner view of the same (on the trademarking of the term “WestEd” itself.  I DNR if I posted this elsewhere or not already:

Click image for better view of the USPTO “TESS” (Trademark) search results and search string

Click image for my commentary! (Detail on WordMark “WestEd” #17 of 17 on this particular search.) Click HERE for a cleaner copy, with more header/footer info from the government website, but my comments entail questioning why a government entity of this scope is filing for trademarks, i.e., planning to enter major-sector commerce in a major way [and thereafter, fails to produce proper reports for the public.]


 

(MOVING ON WITH POST, ABOUT its TITLE):

Pardon the pun on an entity with the word “ConnectEd” in its name and another one who has, apparently, disconnected its governmental conscience from providing AND POSTING proper CAFR statements, year after year, starting with its first year of existence, yet while hiding this information, also is running RELS (regional education laboratories), which would seem to belie the basic meaning behind the word “educate” (“Contradict” might be a more appropriate word.  It’s hypocritical!) From this (“Disconnected!”) post, which was basically completed in draft form (except this introduction) March 27, 2017, I had to say:

“…I challenge anyone (I just did) to scour the entire WestEd website, including links at bottom, links at top, lists of Clients, list of Funders (check it out!), and see if there is ONE reference to the existence of any financial statement for the entity, anywhere on it.  It’s as though the inspired leadership has forgotten the “accounta-bility to taxpayers” part, although they’re quite active in evaluating, reporting and judging other entities providing education services.  FYI, State Boards of Education (several) were signers to the JPA** under both FWL and under SWRL, as well as The University of California Board of Regents.  But WestEd is still a separate agency — so where are its “books?”…..”

**(Joint Powers Agreemt. to form this Joint Powers Agency. FWL and SWRL will be shown below).


WHAT TO LOOK FOR, and HOW TO KNOW WHEN WHAT YOU GOT AIN’T IT:

There is a GASB (Government Accountability Standards Board) and a GFOA (Governors Financial Officer Association of the USA and Canada) basic format for the CAFR.

Here (as an Appendix D to something else) is GFOA.org’s “illustrative” CAFR dated the hypothetical 2022; this illustration seems to be dated 2012.  Some images from it, starting with the Title Page and part of the TOC.  Without my annotations it’d be all black-and-white; for that version, you have a link (!):

For this and all images (except plain title) from the GFOA illustrative CAFR site, click IMAGE to read annotations or full-sized.

(not clickable — not needed)

 

 

 

 

“CAFRs” are identifiable by their title pages, their formats, and particularly their contents — certain required elements. I show some Table of Contents from this example, below.  (I also in 2012 started a blog posting several CAFRs as posts (not “Pages”!)

So if your hands are on something that looks like financials being reported, obtained from some website ending “*.gov” but NOT on something that meets the basic definitions and isn’t labeled “Comprehensive Annual Financial Report of (Gov’t entity so-and-so) for the fiscal year ended (specific date)” — you are looking at something else.  The something else may also be informative, helpful, interesting, and even colorfully engaging (if it gets too colorful, you’re very likely NOT hands-on with a CAFR).   It’s also probably shorter (so what!).  If this is the situation, and regarding any governmental entity, Do Not Pass Go, Do Not Collect $200 — go back to “Square One!”

Why: The CAFR IS “the bottom line” for any government entity, defines what parts it falls into (discrete, blended or component) what other lines of business it’s in (i.e., proprietary activities — and statements, including balance sheets to go with them), and in a very real way WHO it is, and who you are dealing with (supporting or being “serviced” by, for better or for worse) at local, metro, county, state, regional, federal and all other kinds of “every which way” other levels which will affect the things government does (basic services) and how much take-home pay you’re likely to have any given year, and over a lifetime.

ConnectEd, as I already showed (posting the document to support the claim) “disconnected” itself with the requirement to register as a charity in the state of California for five years after incorporating. So, at the end of the day, who is the most “disconnected” if not the public, while we are being taught to plug into almost everything BUT knowing exactly who and what entities are operating on us from afar or locally?

“DISCONNECTED!” — More on ConnectEd (2006ff nonprofit) and WestEd (1995ff JPA claiming to be since 1966). Can YOU Follow the Connections, Find and Correlate the Financial Statements, and Name the EndGame(s)? (case-sensitive shortlink ends “-6k7”)

So, can you?

Can you follow the connections, find and correlate the financial statements, and name the endgame(s)?

[Two more Illustrative CAFR images on what types of valuable information and insight a governmental entity comprehensive — the kind you should want — annual financial statement (CAFR) may provide, and why government entities such as WestEd which don’t feel like coughing it up, are suspect, especially given their major size and scope of operations, and funding agencies at all levels. In providing this I’m hoping readers won’t be lulled into complacency when an entity offers up some other kind of report, like an “annual report,” either financial, or one that reads more like a business promotion brochure, with some charts mixed in.  A close (but not identical) equivalent to the CAFR (of at least the Financial Statements section) for a charity (or trust) over a certain size would be “independent audited financial statements” usually with the words “consolidated” included. Same GENERAL idea — except nonprofits can’t do things governments can, like levy taxes and issue tax-exempt bonds (I think, as to the latter).  The other differences include the categorization of funds as “Governmental, Nongovernmental, Proprietary, Fiduciary.”]

#1 of 2 (CAFR TOC illustration) Click IMAGE to read.

Or are you, as seems to be intentional for the public, living in a state of suspended-animation through lack of incentive, understanding (know-how) or simply the means to fact-check enough to make sense of the economic landscape (by sectors or cross-sectors)?  

Are you “disconnected!” from, with others and together, demanding the level and types of accountability most of the time which any balance of power between people and government requires?

#2 of 2 (CAFR TOC illustration) Click IMAGE to read.

This suspended-animation state regarding government structure and financing and exactly where philanthropy stands in relation to (a) government and (b) “the people” reduces most of us to “just take it on faith” regarding the inflow and outflow over time of financing to and through at least these two significant entities (one a nonprofit, the other a government entity) for the claimed benefit of the education of current and future generations in these states:  California, Utah, Nevada, and Arizona, and nationwide, as “WestEd” is not just active in Western U.S.A..

Having to “just take it on faith” also is living in hope that the relationship developing and expanding is as it’s portrayed throughout the system:  altruistic, for the good of the public, and with intention that when the word “we” is used, “we” is meant, without exceptions entailing who gets to experiment on the population — especially children! — who gets experimented upon, and who pays for it in which manner.  The two entities are:

(1) ConnectEd eventually did start posting its fiscal information at the state level; the tax returns can now be read.  Easier to summarize because it only started up in 2006.

I’ve copied the list of “tags,” separated by commas, from my earlier “”ConnectEd, …. WestEd, the US Dept. of Ed …. ” post, a significant one published in late 2016. Some of the tags are mini-statements, showing discovering this material got to my impassioned side… Here, I’ve bolded, italicized and even highlit a few.  When a “tag” turns into a complete sentence — well, that’s to make the point!

“Keep Your Eyes on the Assets” – Remember to do the DrilldownsAlliance for Excellent Education (DC status revoked but still advertising), Are some 501©3s and (4s) actually formed for the purpose of their directors’ mutual investment strategies – with the company name simply a distracting cover?, Bernard L Madoff funds investment by Alliance for Excellent Education, Bridgespan (see Bain & Company) as subcontractor – and its agendaBridgespan wants philanthropic collaboration (collusion) on public schools. SEE TAX RETURN REFERENCES, Common Catalyst LLC (subcontractor), Communities in SchoolsConnectEd: The California Center for College and Career, Corporate takeover of public educ happening through shape-shifting nonprofits backed by (sometimes) shady fiscal practices. Is this good for the low-income populations they are claiming to help?Democracy Engine fundraising for a status-revoked “Alliance for Excellence in Educ” (at this writing per DCRA.gov bus entities search)Gary HoachlanderMPR Associates, The Chronicle of Philanthropy requires subscription though reporting at times on its subscribers’ activities in public institutions (such as schools)The James Irving FoundationThe Leeds Families (behind Alliance for Exct Education) — who are they?WestEd

Below here, I’m also taking a closer look at major private financing behind ConnectEd as a major part of the history of the State of California, and a comment on privately held, concentrated-in-one-person wealth and political influence (particularly on education) in this state.

(2) WestEd, existing since 1995, was created from two public entities themselves regional (already) and created back in the 1960s, both with member agencies spanning several different states and types of educational systems.

Recent Blogging Context:

This post is a spin-off from one still in draft, which I hope to publish simultaneously (almost).  IT is called: Three (or Four) Famous, Privately Controlled Nonprofits Who Just Wanna Transform Public Education (and Urban Populations to Practice On) (case-sensitive short-link ends “-6iI”).  I included this post’s title in it, and that might be a good review to scroll through for this one.

In addition, and already published in March, 2017

I posted twice, recently, on some Indicators in the Left/Right Debate, and on “Trade of the Previous Century,” including in part on some convoluted organization changes (i.e., the formation of pass-through entities), some of which obviously covered the territory of improving and transforming the entire US public school system.

I found and posted on some odd behaviors and filings among a major player in the nonprofit, coordinate (statewide), control, and profit from privatizing at least the transformation of major sources of ONGOING pubic clientele and funding in this country where primary education is compulsory and failure to attend is a status-offence (truancy), while those who DO offend may be punished, alternately by failure to learn to read, write, count, and think or grow up not being bullied or becoming bullies, or having the politically incorrect social values towards any number of politically-oriented issues.

Those two (March, 2017) posts followed up on a theme from last November which seems of such significant scope, I couldn’t just drop it.  We are talking regionally coordinated networks and entities involved in, literally, a century and a half of California history (at least), and I’m referring to the 11/18/2016 post on “ConnectEd, …. WestEd, the US Dept. of Ed …. ” (title shortened there; full title and a short descriptor from it is:

ConnectED + MPR Associates Inc. + Gary Hoachlander, WestEd, and the US Dept. of Ed, with help from James Irvine Foundation(Case-sensitive, WordPress-generated shortlink ends in “-4LK”) (It is currently 16,000 words long, and a bit complex! Then again, so are the networks I am discussing and exposing…) [For a more specific idea what the post covered, see its tags I posted inside a box with light-blue background just above!]
Read the rest of this entry »

Written by Let's Get Honest

May 11, 2017 at 8:26 pm

Today’s Lesson — Show-and-Tell (and what’s not told) re: ~Annenberg Learner~ and Annenberg Foundation ~Education Initiatives~ (published May 10, 2017)

with one comment

This post is:

Today’s Lesson — Show-and-Tell (and what’s not told) re: ~Annenberg Learner~ and Annenberg Foundation ~Education Initiatives~ with short-link ending “-6Iw” (where “I” stands for the first person singular pronoun, not a lowercase “L” or a #1.)

After about one week’s consistent and intense work on it (including writing new sections and off-ramping them to new posts, digging into some of the subject matter in more depth, poring through years of individual entities’ (and entities’ grantees’) tax returns, red-flagging some for multiple issues, and compiling and organizing well over 100 images from organization websites and tax returns as potential “exhibits”), and reading through it one last time, I’m publishing at about 15,600 words.  It needs “tags” and I’ll try to get these up quickly.  Most of the “intense work” comes on the material BEFORE that representing the title’s subject matter, and formatting it with visual exhibits.

FYI, there is still a functional “DONATE” button on this blog if you’re inspired, but be aware it is NOT tax deductible; I am not posing as, nor am I, a 501©3, and no one else is acting  as a fiscal sponsor or agent either.  Any amounts are welcome, and they would represent moral support as well as financial for what is at several levels, hard work.  Many thanks.  As always, the Comments button is available for feedback. //LGH 5-10-2017.

This message came from the bowels (was the original foundation) of a post published May 3, 2017, significantly updated through May 5, 2017, and visible: on the “Last Few ‘Let’s Get Honest’ Posts” sidebar (see sample below) or if you: <> are a follower (more than 1,900 now) notified by email whenever a new post is published; <> caught it on Twitter; <> happen to be reading this blog and know to scroll down below the “sticky” posts which remain at the top-of-blog main column to get to each new one; or <>happen to pull up a post in some internet search on a topic of interest, which sometimes happens to me while looking for more information on some under-reported topic, organization, or specific grant. One time it even pulled up a post published just 24 hours previous. (The Table of Contents page is updated periodically, not continually, and is a better reference for more distant posts or an overview).

So that recent post was:

Just Do it!  Do the Drill-Downs to see What Lies Beneath.  Or, Continue to “Take It On Faith” in the Multi-campus, Digitally-Driven, Public/Private Partnership Tax-Exempt Mega-Church aka the U.S.A. (post started 4/30/2017 published 5/3/2017, case-sensitive short-link ends “-6Hf”;”aka”=”also known as.”)

Over time, working on that post (formerly with this one’s contents)… 

…and mostly due to new information on how a Center at University of California-Berkeley and its related public (state government, UCBerkeley schools and institutes) and private (nonprofit) Partners, some also referenced on its Advisory Board,** dramatically and collaboratively demonstrate their views of who is and who is not considered a “stakeholder” when it comes to steering public affairs regionally, by metropolitan area, Agenda 21-style, and [by way of public/private partnerships which in general (and by the nature of “genre” itself)] effectively and I say it seems deliberately bypassing financial accountability to and timely informed consent of the public. (Point of Reference:  IURD history timeline, showing 2004 creation of this Center.  The Center is housed at the IURD, Institute for Urban and Regional Development. After the images of publications, there’s a timeline in table form).

… By doing my drill-downs, I also learned a few things about what types of “partner” nonprofits are preferred in at least this collaboration, as judged (my point of view!) by when and how they file Form 990s and how close the story on the various websites is to the reality shown by, again, the “drill-downs.”  From what I found, “we are not amused,”  but alarmed and concerned.   I am concerned that the voices of people not “in on” these deliberations or conferences — or university centers — are not about to be heard, or given opportunity to debate the framework.  Which seems intentional… (I posted on this tendency also). The speed, force, stealth, and continual resorting to “public/private collaborations” and “cross-department consolidations” eradicates independence of thought, balance of powers, and — this is a BIG deal — by suddenly altering the operations, obscures and clouds “the money trail,” that is, where public funds are involved — and exactly how much private funding is inappropriately (conflicts-of-interest) involved.

  • For much of this blog, I posted specifically on court-connected corporations and the tensions between federal “fatherhood” policy and due process, individual rights under family courts when there have been criminal-level events such as domestic violence (assault and battery, terroristic threats etc.) which were not being handled IN criminal courts, but off-ramped by virtue of the off-ramp having been made available, into the family court system and specialized “domestic violence courts’ with related professionals.
  • NOW, in my post these past few quarters (Q4 2016 and Q1, and we are just starting Q2, 2017) on this blog, I have been talking less about the “Federal Designer Families” (fatherhood, marriage vs. domestic violence tensions) but about who decides, and how, in what direction the entire public education system (and alternatives) should go. How they should be transformed or reformed. With my recent encounter with the UCBerkeley Center for Cities & Schools, we seem to have unearthed, alongside that, the same style of public/private planning for major PreK-12 public school facilities infrastructure and where this fits into entire metropolitan region, and regions within the country.

 

“CC+S promotes high quality education as an essential component of urban and metropolitan vitality to create equitable, healthy and sustainable communities for all.”

Again, I am not completely surprised this time.  At the University of California-Berkeley level, it’s about what I’ve come to expect (as a woman, mother, and domestic violence survivor) from my adopted state (despite how long I’ve lived here, it’s not my home state; the longer I stay, the more alienated I have become from participation in its economy, safely in its court system, and in general, in its social/cultural life while I deal, sometimes reeling, with each new round of abuse of privilege by those I have no real choice to NOT deal with).  I have come to understand the meaning in practice of “politically correct (healthy, sustainable, equitable, green — of course)  to the point of abuse, that is, painfully violating basic civil and legal rights in the name of fixing previous violations and excluding those most violated from the discussions on HOW to fix them, while proclaiming the opposite process is, in fact, under way.

But I am concerned and alarmed. This post alerts readers on three topics and their rapid “deployment” each in its own sectors.

**Click image to better see (Advisory Board UCB Center for Cities + Schools). Much further below, I also have annotated image from “Partners” page.

…led to an “overload” that fell (somewhat) neatly into three sections ‘asking’ to become new posts:

<1> one of them this post, Annenberg Education Initiatives explored, and some surrounding exhortation. Found nearer the bottom herein; look for section header and images like this* (below-the-yellow-section left) and for a section with more text than images.  (In the other sections, involving so many “entities” and non-entities with logos and names masking the entities behind them, I’ve uploaded many explanatory images to clarify who’s who).

Before this Annenberg Education section near the bottom of the post, I also repeated my reminder (from previous “Just Do It! Do the Drill-Downs” post) of how the U.S. Census of Governments (for purposes of counting some — not all — of them) defines government; it mentions three traits, one of which is “governmental character.”  We would do well to keep in mind what that is.

I also repeat below a warning in bright-yellow-background that it’s time for a change of conversation and perspective.  It’s short; here’s an abbreviated version:

Without saying these debates have no merit or aren’t critical (if they weren’t, who’d follow them? Of course they are!), I still say, WHEN will our communal, collective, nation-wide attention be put on the operational backdrop to both sides of ANY major cause, and WHEN will some collective, communally shared comprehension, start to filter down — or bubble up — not just to a vague conscious awareness, but also to a personal interest and decision, … to investigate the operational backdrop in terms which can be compared across sectors?
Whatever this type of lookup may be called doesn’t matter (I call the process “drill-downs”), so much as that it happens, and sooner rather than later.

 

Gov’t Character (from Definitions part of 2012 US Census of Gov’ts) CLICK IMAGE if needed to read full-sized.

*Home page of “Annenberg Learning” naturally features the banner links and a moving slideshow (and two sidebars of more info). Notice reference to “Licensing (fees for Broadcasting, by program)” and original inspiration (1981) having been “British Open University,” with a contract between CPB and Annenberg School of Communications at Univ. of PA

<2> another, a second post still in draft,  expands on new (to me) and significant information which had come to my attention regarding designs (intents)## certain mutually synchronized and financially-involved-with-each-other entities have on the public school asset infrastructures, plural, nationwide (and beyond). Particularly on planning them and increasing investments in them.

## [This background color and border denotes a “footnote” to second post  topic above.  Third post topic shown below it.]

These designs (intents) include but are not limited to (a) increasing public (federal) investments (of course) — $46B is recommended as of 2016; (b) re-purposing public facilities once restored through increased investments and facilities planning (joint use of school structures as community centers); and (c ) significantly restructuring the decision-making process and leadership (“stakeholders”) on how to plan for all the school facilities that are to be the centers of our new, improved, healthier, more sustainable and (of course) more “equitable” infrastructures for the 21st century.

Under (c ) decision-making process, part of this is involving young people (apparently moreso than their parents as a sector, or all taxpayers as a sector) and, I learned through looking, a “Health in All Policies” (aka “HiAP”) collaborative approach, established in California by a governor’s executive order but (I also learned, again through looking!) as housed at the “Strategic Growth Council” itself a cabinet-level council at the state level.   This “California HiaP” I didn’t talk much about on the post, but did include one image annotated in detail.  Here’s another one saying that “HiAP” is originally (and unsurprisingly) part of a global movement, orignating from the World Health Organization (“WHO.”)  Surely you’ve read this already, as a regular browser of the  Journal of Public Health Management and Practice and a member of the public to be managed and practiced on?

Click IMAGE to read details (HiAP for Big Cities discussed in NIH publication)

Click Image to read #2 of 2, what WHO started in 1988, Finland in 2006 (then Pres. of the EU) promoted as HiAP, which US and other countries quickly adopted. I’ll say (Calif. 2008 Exec Order on HiAP!)

So, overall regarding the second “overload” post — good grief!  I had only searched the terms “round table, stakeholders, school reform” or similar phrase, which brought up the university center and its so-called partners and advisors as reported but not explained very well, on that site!

California HiAP Task Force is listed as a Partner.  It seems to represent a consolidation of 22 gov’t departments around the policy, fine print here (on the Oct. 22, 2014 FAQs sheet doesn’t even name people, just departments but also (eventually) divulges the involvement of another significant (and well-heeled) nonprofit in Oakland, California — Public Health Institute (“PHI”).  The UCBerkeley Center (“CC+S”) Partner page, however, says nothing about this.  Several places I looked linked to a California government page on the “HiAP Task Force,” which links were already broken.

[Broken link #1: http://sgc.ca.gov/docs/ Active_Transportation_Action_Plan_9-26-14.pdf; #2: http://sgc.ca.gov/s_hiap.php; #3: https://www.cdph.ca.gov/Pages/PageNotFoundError.aspx?requestUrl=&nbsp;https://www.cdph.ca.gov/programs/Pages/HealthinAllPolicies.aspx which produced an “In Transition” message: Apparently an entire set of CDPH information got archived May 1, 2017, and using the phrase “archive” in front of the web address may correct it as “https://archive.cdph.ca.gov/programs/ Pages/HealthinAllPolicies.aspx.  This works, not including some links which still recycle back to the “Page Not Found” message below.  The page it directs to is basically a page of links.  It does at least contain one to the 2010 Executive Order and reveal yet two more significant trade association 501©3s involved in setting up the Guide, and claiming that it’s in response to popular demand..The unsigned, unstamped, (notarized or anything else) Executive Order there at least names then-Governor (Arnold Schwarzenegger) (also known for recommending that California reduce its prison overpopulation by building some in Mexico).

Normally the words “Task Force” indicate individual people’s names, whether identified by their position alone (i.e., “Speaker of the House” or “Department Head”) or sometimes by specific name. Here, that’s been tossed aside, and somehow an entire state “Department” is named to a Task Force! From that FAQs page (bottom of p1 of 2, image with gray background):

(Click image for better viewing)

and

<3> and a third section from the “Just Do It!” post overload asking (so to speak) to become its own separate post,showing a drill-down on a “faith-based” church and its stated community partners of the conservative evangelical temperament in Florida.  The pastor of this church was appointed to one of the Obama “faith-based” councils 2009-2010, the councils following (basically, with some variations), the pattern set by the Bush Administration in Executive Orders of January 29, 2001 on the topic.  (I had been explaining my usage of “mega church” in the post title and noticed this one on a White House Council; not being familiar with it, I’d looked it up).

After considering the significance and complexity of these three topics, I decided to keep my substantial introduction to the topic and previews especially of the second post and a shorter of the third contained on this post.

While the topics in this post and those two future posts differ, the principle for all three remains — we ALL need to brush up as a nation on our drill-downs and understand the nature, speed, and source (primary actors) of structural changes in U.S.A. policymaking in terms beyond those offered us on the main news headlines, beyond political parties, and beyond the current level of public discourse.

We are failing to recognize the ramifications of consolidated government at the state level, the involvement of university centers (institutes, etc.) in promoting governmental consolidation (for example, HiAAP) and cross-sector collaborations and collaborative policymaking (crossing both governmental jurisdictions and from public to private) , and the role of tax-exempt foundation influence bending the constitutions, law, and stretching the boundaries of credibility (often, on the filings) whether this occurs Republican (and far-right or moderate) or Democrat/Progressive (centrist or left).

Besides keeping expanded previews of the two future post topics mentioned above, I have another “Appeal to Logic.”  No extra charge for this next Appeal to Logic section (orange border, different font and background color); it’s not the first and won’t be the last!

Appeal to Logic —

To demand public sector fiscal and financial accountability, FIRST know what that looks like! Understand where it should be found, how it can get accidentally or intentionally “misplaced” (and in a given situation, to get an accurate sense (develop the smell) for whether this “misplaced” is accidental or intentional.  One clue — if it’s habitual and the filing entity’s board of directors are in a position to know better).  

Unfortunately, developing this awareness also gives a glimpse, in fact, ongoing interface with both the ethical, and, in a word, the “evil,” in the generic sense of desiring and designing evasion of accountability and can be personally unsettling.  I don’t know if it would produce vicarious trauma, but I do know how disconcerting and disturbing it is to see such things “in high places.”

But if so, so what?  Is comfort with deception really better than discomfort knowing it’s better based on the truth?  Once you start to see this, and its scope, retreat into denial and pretense (or amnesia) on what you just saw does not really present itself as an option.

Fiscal and Financial Accountability reveals character.  Failure or resistance to providing it signals other abuses of power already in place and/or worse to come later.
Read the rest of this entry »

Written by Let's Get Honest

May 10, 2017 at 3:18 pm

Just Do it! Do the Drill-Downs to See ‘What Lies Beneath.’ Or, Continue to “Take It On Faith” in the Multi-campus, Digitally Driven, Public/Private Partnership Mega-Church aka, the U.S.A.

with one comment

Just Do it!  Do the Drill-Downs to see What Lies Beneath.  Or, Continue to “Take It On Faith” in the Multi-campus, Digitally-Driven, Public/Private Partnership Tax-Exempt Mega-Church aka the U.S.A. (post started 4/30/2017 published 5/3/2017, case-sensitive short-link ends “-6Hf”;”aka”=”also known as.”)

Yes I did just call this entire country a multi-campus, digitally-driven, public/private partnership, tax-exempt mega-church.

…(The post title as first published read “Digitally Dominated” which I caught when the title didn’t match the title copied into the contents just above; I corrected it.  “Digitally-Distributed” or “Diluted” or any other number of words might also describe the situation.  Deliberations are occurring “digitally” that is, electronically, often in places where the local communities may have no comprehension of in just how many ways their local and state policies are being set regionally and nationally in meetings and discussions to which they are not invited, and of which they are not really cognizant.).

May 4th, 2017, This post also contains some post-publication additions and corrections, especially in a section demonstrating decision-making on roundtables and conferences not quite in the public view — from the example of UCBerkeley’s Center for Cities and Schools 2008 meeting, involving an advisory board from a DC-based entity 21st Century Schools Fund, which brought in other entities it’s involved with (nonprofit of course), including taking funds FROM one in California whose president is the daughter of a wealthy investor, as well as a civil rights attorney from California who spent personal millions of dollars on a campaign to increase the income tax for more school funding (The Advancement Project) to form another (National Council on Schools Facilities) begun only recently and sharing a street address with its pass-through donor nonprofit in D.C. May 5th I will probably add tags.

Before I get into that, the other purpose for this quick post is to publicize two additional pages supplementing the posts dealing with the role of synchronized foundations for takeover and restructuring of school systems, that is, foundations funding both networks of nonprofits and a mixture of schools, school districts, departments of education to the point that tracking either the networks in isolation OR the schools, school districts, departments of education (etc.) responsibly would be so burdensome, so expensive, and so untenable that any successes in the task would seem to be “Pyrrhic” (<==examples of Pyrrhic military victories incl. the Battle of Bunker Hill and the one the term came from, Greek v. Roman empire)– that is, counterproductive. It would seem to cost more in the short and medium term than it might save in the long run.  You can see some of the struggles on these posts (!).

Here are those two pages, both published in late April, 2017. I picked background-colors matching their appearance on the first one and as referenced in a parallel post. (Will repeat this routine at bottom of this post.  I added an image and some commentary [6 short paragraphs] just under this first listing of the two pages to explain a reference to the “ECS” and why the name James B. Conant came up in one of them).

Page name and link:

Bank Street College of Education and School (Fast-Tracking FYI on its 100 year Progressive, Experimental Laboratories involving Young Children, History) [published April 30, 2017].

Page name and link:

Do you Know Your NGA?  Post-PRWORA, 1998 Stealth, Coordinated Expansion/ Diversion of Welfare Funds based on Sociological, Quasi-Religious Ideology on the Ideal Family Structure (the offspring of The 1965 Moynihan Report), Facilitated by (A) At least 39 of the Nation’s Governors and (B) as Coached by Wade Horn ℅ The National Fatherhood Initiative (Page Added Sep. 2016, Published Apr. 27, 2017) [<==with a case-sensitive shortlink ending “-4qs” ]

(Check out a 1964 review of a 1964 book by James B. Conant referencing his 1957 earlier book on the American High School in which he “forgot” to mention segregation as a problem in the public schools; but now (1964) has had a moral awakening and believes that, particularly because of segregation, the current “entrenched, ruling clique” educational leadership should be deposed and replaced by “strong boards of education” with new personnel.  The review (by a woman) was in the Harvard Crimson. Ted Sizer (d. 2009) of “Coalition of Essential Schools and with Harvard School of Education (I think he was Dean) background, coming to Brown University, MUST have known about Conant, and the ECS.**  It appears that he may have, in fact, copied the practice of first putting out a book, then setting up a nonprofit and demanding regional (CES was most certainly set up regionalized) networks for school change according to HIS brilliant (sic) concepts about what’s really “essential” for schools.)

Paragraph ONE. James B. Conant is referenced because the “ECS” (Education Commission for the States, a Colorado-based nonprofit incorporated Dec. 1967 to implement an Education Compact among the States) seems to have been primarily his idea.  A North Carolina ex-? governor Terry Sanford helped promote it to the “National Governor’s Association” (NGA) which of course helped also propagate it.  The NGA’s personal nonprofit is called the NGA “Center for Best Practices,” both allowing for corporate major sponsorship to get a personal audience in front of elected officials responsible for governing populations who mostly cannot get such an audience in exchange for payments because they don’t have the wherewithal to pay!  The NGA page will explain more; its preview part brings up the ECS, with supporting links.

TWO. The ECS ties into the Annenberg Public Education Challenge of the late 1990s early 2000s from the Challenge’s choice of ECS-related leadership. This color-coded* next image from “Chicago Annenberg Challenge Wiki reveals the ECS’ function in the $500M Challenge.

Click HERE to view annotations on “Chicago Annenberg Challenge WIKI Excerpt showing 113M to 3 School Reform Orgs, with #3 ECS to disseminate #2’s model and #1 AISR, chaired by Ted Sizer Screen Shot 2017-05-04 at 1.36PM”

THREE. (*Colors refer to specific entities in order:  Carnegie Corporation (blue), Brown University (rose/orange?), ECS (purple), the “NASDC” model (lime-green) and underscoring how the (then aged) Walter H. Annenberg (per this Wiki, which reads something like folklore, although it is footnoted) talking to a law partner who was ALSO at the time chairman of Carnegie Corporation (and just also happened to be an Annenberg professor over an Annenberg program at Northwestern University, i.e., Chicagoland) that “we need to do something” because — unlike our university system — no one here wants to send their kids to public school, especially in the cities.  (yellow star).  I’ve connected with various arrows, and at the bottom, you can see the plan that what looks like 3 “school reform organizations” splitting $113M between them is, in effect, basically only two school reform projects — “CES” (on which the AISR at Brown University is based) and “NASDC” which I’ve posted on some already, started originally by a US President, and tied into one of the largest social science and behavioral research entities around (operating globally), which is the AIR (American Institutes for Research) (“for behavioral research”) which 501©(3) has a London “related entity” among (several) others…  NASDC eventually merged into AIR. These NETWORK, and those developing the network are in the upper-level wealth sector of the country.

FOUR. ALL three universities involved here (Brown, Harvard, Northwestern) and two other which the Annenberg Foundation is financially involved with to a significant extent (starting and endowing communications schools at them), the University of Pennsylvania (contains “Wharton School of Business”) and the University of Southern California — are PRIVATE; Brown and Harvard are also historically Ivy League and among the last in the USA to admit women undergraduates to enroll in the same colleges as men (!) but it is the PUBLIC school systems they wish to restructure….Brown didn’t do this until 1969; Harvard around then also.

FIVE. You can see how the role of the “ECS” at this point is to disseminate a model already chosen by these privately conferring foundation billionaires (Annenberg) or running billion-dollar-assets foundations (Carnegie) or billion-dollar-assets PRIVATE universities (Brown, Northwestern no doubt, Harvard) who in the course of their professional and philanthropic lives also had some favorite nonprofits (Coalition for Essential Schools — founded by a Harvard/Brown-connected Ted Sizer) and the ECS (as above) and NASDC — a project, per the wiki of a former U.S. President.

SIX. Does this start to look like the planning process is just bypassing the public, who will have to “just deal” with the consequences, as for decades they’ve also had to “just deal with” the conditions of the public schools still separate and unequal with most private schools at the K-12 level? and sometimes unsafe, sometimes going onto lockdown from violence in OR near them…??  (I think so!).  Look at the annotations on the image and see related posts (and those two pages) for more info.


In addition, those who “scroll down” on this post will see

a message in large print and bright-yellow background.

Now, moving back to the topics in the title:

Calling the U.S.A. “tax-exempt” is accurate, when referring to the federal government.

These definitions matter — a lot.  I will review in detail, again, on this post. Other examples might distract from the main message, and have been put onto nearby posts, for publishing ASAP.

There is going to be a constant tension between what we need to know and see, and what the government and nonprofit sectors working together to steer society (and solve its many problems) feel like telling us on their websites.  It’s our mission (should we accept it) to dig out what needs to be known, whether or not others feel like offering it up voluntarily.  We have this right where the institutions and the sources of funds to support them are “public.”  It’s a matter of where anyone stands on the tax spectrum.


Obviously not everyone operates tax-exempt or engages in public/private partnerships — but good luck existing without being heavily influenced and your future options in this country framed according to the debates, agreements, contracts and understandings made among and between those who do.

While these P/P Partnerships are to be considered by the public “in the public interest,” justifying their existence and formation, the real stakeholders in the eyes (judging by the words) of participant organizations,  on closer look are rarely the public at large.  Sometimes participant organizations who list “stakeholders” on the websites, seem to want extra-credit honorable mention for noble behavior if this time it happens to include normal civilians not in public employment or running a major tax-exempt organization at whichever roundtable is being described…
Read the rest of this entry »

Written by Let's Get Honest

May 3, 2017 at 8:56 pm

Challenge Fund Circuitry (Anyone ELSE want to look up $52M worth of Challenge Grants from Annenberg Foundation Year 2001?)

with one comment

…Or anyone else want to figure out whose “brilliant” idea this maze was in the first place?

This post delves into both aspects.  The “Challenge” originators here and their close previous relationships gets as interesting as “where’d the money really go, that year?” exercises, which would have to be repeated I gather endlessly — continuously — to keep some checks and balances on this arrangement, but perhaps not from top to bottom to get a sense of how equitable and ethical it is overall.  For that understanding, I continue to take “core sample” drill-downs on financial statements (or tax returns) of key organizations, as well as over time, compiling a timeline for the sector across organizations and individuals setting them up.

I also found, you don’t have to “drill” far at all on the tax returns to find misleading representations of where donations went once distributed, and other disturbing characteristics in funds and cashflow reporting when comparing grantor to grantee statements and IRS forms. In the first example I looked at, a grant amount of $6.68M claimed paid in a certain year was not located in the same year to what is designed as an intermediary organization, “Chicago Annenberg Challenge.”  Not long after this, the CAC organization dissolved voluntarily, having designated a successor fund also in Chicago, formed just four years later.  Why even do that?  Or, to rephrase it, what legitimate, ethical, public-interest purpose does this behavior serve?

One thing that does surface — how political it is from the start, in origin and in execution, and perhaps that’s key to the problem.  The entire public school (departments of education federal, state, county, city) system is so vast, it provides endless temptations to exploit, and too few defenses against exploitation for the public.


Post title: Challenge Fund Circuitry (Anyone ELSE want to look up $52M worth of Challenge Grants from Annenberg Foundation Year 2001?) with case-sensitive short-link ending “-6Db”

See next image (link in caption to view full-sized) to see why the word “circuitry” may be appropriate.  The excerpt is labeled as representing a single year’s contributions: 2001. All the colors are just my roughly categorizing recipients by type, including naming convention for the ones named after the Challenge itself.

Annenberg Fndtn FY2001 lists $52M of grants to 15 of the “Challenge Grants (Public Education)” — paid that yr. My annotations are simply sorting grantees by category, informally, and noting that AISR as an entity doesn’t show up among them. These take time to produce — pls. read!

While this image shows $52M “Paid in Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2001” by The Annenberg Foundation, in this post I decided to focus mostly on just one organization out of those 15, one set up specifically to obtain Challenge Grant funding and function (allegedly) as a conduit to the Chicago Public Schools and named after the Public School Challenge.  Chicago Annenberg Challenge, Inc. (“CAC”)

I’m curious in part for its grant size this particular year (see image), in part for it being named (like two others — see brown arrows in the image) after the challenge itself as an entity, and, in significant part seeing the background of some of the interesting individuals involved in its leadership, such as Bill Ayers and the pre-Senator, pre-President Barack Obama, who was chairman of its board 1995-2001.


READER PREVIEW:

[Currently about 20,000 words and without tags. I may move a middle section referencing “Community Learning Partnership” out of an Evanston, IL street address attributed to the Annenberg Foundation’s Year 2000 contribution to “Chicago Public Education Fund,” later, and/or add tags, after publication.].

Also, the post has two references to outside pages (with more background material). These have been written and will be activated shortly. LGH Apr 26, 2017.

ALSO, some people may be aware that a former CPS (Chicago Public School) leader was indicted on 20 felony counts (19 out of 20 counts being dropped in exchange for agreement) regarding a $20M no-bid contract for “SUPES Academy,” which, at least one source says, was an investment of the Chicago Public Education Fund, successor to “Chicago Annenberg Challenge, Inc.” I’ve seen that information, but haven’t assembled it yet.** [Oct. 13, 2015, in The Chicago Reporter by Melissa Sanchez:

Byrd-Bennett pleads guilty in SUPES corruption case 

As part of a plea agreement with federal authorities, former Chicago Public Schools CEO Barbara Byrd Bennett pleaded guilty this morning to one felony count of fraud in connection with the SUPES Academy corruption scandal.

Prosecutors indicted her last week on 20 counts, but as part of the agreement — which includes her promise to cooperate on further cases — they will drop the remaining charges. ||  The former head of the nation’s third-largest school district is now a convicted felon. …

Authorities say Byrd-Bennett steered a $20 million no-bid contract for principal development to SUPES Academy in exchange for the promise of future kickbacks.

The School Board signed the contract barely a month after it voted to shutter 50 schools, mostly in black neighborhoods. The 2013 closings were the largest in U.S. history. || As Byrd-Bennett walked out of court, a handful of retired CPS teachers shouted at her, calling her “a disgrace to African Americans.” {{There were two co-defendants..}}

and, the above article connected from this one in “Report Raises Concern about Principal Turnover” (as reported by “CPEF”  Chicago Public Education Fund.”), article By Stephanie Choporis | November 6, 2015

Heather Anichini, president and CEO of the Fund, says higher turnover rates are found only in the retail, hospitality and logging industries…..[[See this post, she follows Janet Knupp, FORMERLY of COMMUNITIES IN SCHOOLS, who I blogged already over internal discrepancies in their Form 990s — which comes up in CPEF also, below…BIG time….]]

…These findings come on the heels of the SUPES Academy corruption scandal. <==Principals complained bitterly about the quality of that professional development program, which was first brought into the district on the Fund’s dime. The report says the district’s currently available PD options follow a “one-size-fits-none” approach.

The report recommends that CPS find ways to give principals more time to focus on instruction. It also asks the district, universities with principal training programs and nonprofits alike to respond to principals’ needs for more personalized development, to help them learn how to better use existing budgeting and curriculum tools and to expand leadership opportunities and peer-to-peer learning.

The money is often in the training, public/private partnerships are fraught with this type of potential, and the better people monitor (a) the school districts’ financial dealings AND (b) the Form 990s (and financial statements) of often well-known involved nonprofits making headlines for fixing the schools (in this case), and get out the message that (we) will continue to do this, the fewer places there will be to hide this type of behavior.  Some day, perhaps, people will acknowledge my position that this is “endemic” to the entire concept and not fix-able. Expect and demand accountability — how about THAT (as opposed to out-come based public institutions as mediated or adjusted by private non-profit, tax-exempt sector organizations) for an organizing and social change principle?  But, then realize just what one is up against in holding to that point of view, whether LEFT (progressive) or RIGHT (conservative), BOTh wanting to work through and with the largest sources of privately controlled wealth around.

…Just one more quote on this subject from related site, still “The Chicago Reporter

$20 million no-bid contract raises questions on SUPES Academy By Sarah Karp | July 30, 2013,

…Without fanfare, CPS {{=”Chicago Public Schools”}} board members recently approved a three-year, no-bid $20 million contract to provide extensive professional development for principals and network chiefs in what is being dubbed the Chicago Leadership Academy.

The size and the circumstances surrounding the contract have raised eyebrows among some outside observers. The contract with Wilmette-based Supes Academy is by far the largest no-bid contract awarded in at least the past three years, according to a Catalyst Chicago analysis of board documents. In addition, CEO Barbara Byrd-Bennett worked for the company as a coach up until the time she came on board at CPS as a consultant.

There’s also conflicting information about Byrd-Bennett’s involvement with another company owned by the same individuals who run the Supes Academy. …

READ THIS SECTION! (Click image for rest of article)

I have no doubt you’ll find what IS in the post, interesting, and approached from a different angle as usual — because I show-and-tell those Form 990s!

Bill Ayers’ prior involvement in the “small schools” movement and with the Bank Street School of Education puts some background color into the overall agenda of this late-1990s Annenberg Public School Challenge also and showing its current (or I should say, more recent 21st century, late 20th century) behavior is consistent with those sharing similar progressive ideology and acceptance of using education of small children as “laboratory” experiments IN education to be combined with teacher-education at the graduate level.  Although in this post you will also see involvement of a Tennessee Republican Senator (and former governor) of conservative longstanding “privatize government” leanings.

In case “Bank Street College of Education” history, philosophy and practices are not familiar, excerpts from its website (various pages) and Wikipedia, are available as a footnote on a separate page.  They are relevant, but I don’t want it cluttering up this post.  Selected excerpts with a bit of connective tissue are found at this page: Bank Street College of Education and School (Fast-Tracking FYI on its 100 year Progressive, Experimental Laboratories involving Young Children, History).  My page will be published, but not particularly advertised on the main blog page (meaning, sidebar).  Some preview here gives a general flavor, and marked by different color background, light-blue, and its pink border.  Some preview material added here may not be on the other page.

A school within a college

…Bank Street School for Children was founded in 1916 in New York City by visionary educator Lucy Sprague Mitchell as The Bureau of Educational Experiments, a laboratory nursery school staffed by teachers, psychologists, and researchers who worked to discover the environments in which children grew and learned to their full potential, and to educate teachers and others how to create these environments.

….Philosophy

The School for Children is an independent demonstration school for Bank Street College and a working model of the College’s approach to learning and teaching. Education at the School is experience-based, interdisciplinary, and collaborative. The emphasis is on educating the whole child—the entire emotional, social, physical, and intellectual being—while at the same time, the child’s integrity as learner, teacher, and classmate is valued and reinforced.

[Guess parents were replaceable or optional in this model, and for some, are still considered optional…]

Briefly, the Bank Street College of Education Wikipedia also reminds us that among its partnerships are some with educational media corporations, and a few more details, such as its founder having been Dean of Women at UCalifornia Berkeley, when it got $1million for mental health (appropriate to the times, 1950), and that only in 1995 did it finally get its first woman, or black, president, Dr. Augusta Souza Kappner, who had existing ties to the federal USDOE, and helped raise capital.  She was President 1995-2008.  The year 1995 brings Bank Street (in NYC) up to when the Chicago Annenberg Challenge incorporated.  “Leading Black Educator Chosen to Head Bank Street“** (NYT 8/16/1995), and a time when education reform organizations (such as the Coalition of Essential Schools) were becoming more commonplace. (From that article):

**Dr. Kappner, in an interview yesterday, lauded the cultural diversity of the teaching staff at Bank Street, which is regarded as one of the nation’s leading education schools.

“What’s going on at Bank Street is very much in the process of translating into a broader movement across the country,” she said. “The institution is involved in school systems in several other cities.”

Founded in 1916, the college offers master’s programs in education, runs a demonstration school and family center, conducts research on early childhood and produces educational books and computer software.

The graduate student enrollment at Bank Street, at 610 West 112th Street, is 900. The school and the family center have 450 students, from prekindergarten through eighth grade.

From Bank St College of Ed “Past Presidents” page viewed Apr 2017

The current Bank Street College of Education leadership (President) is Shael Polakow-Suransky, who came there July 1, 2014, from being second-in-command just before then to NYC Public School system, and having referenced (a) being a Bank Street alum and (b) having been mentored by Ted Sizer at Brown University! Read more info on his decision, as a former Bloomberg-era person now under a new (Catherine Farina) leadership (Jan. 21, 2014 at “Chalkbeat”

…Polakow-Suransky’s shift may also portend a tighter partnership between the city and the college. As Mayor Bill de Blasio continues to hash out plans for a universal pre-kindergarten program, both Fariña and Bank Street—which has traditionally placed special emphasis on training teachers and leaders in early childhood education—said that they could work together in the future. …

Polakow-Suransky joined the city school system as a teacher in 1994 after graduating from Brown University, where he studied education and urban studies. After teaching math and history at Crossroads Middle School in Manhattan, he moved to Bread and Roses Integrated Arts High School,** then left to found the Bronx International High School in 2001. || He joined the Department of Education’s central administration three years later, [only 2004] first in the Office of New Schools, which oversaw the opening of more than 200 new small schools during his time there.

Several paragraphs below, starting with “In other words,” I am referring back to this quote on Polakow-Suransky’s academic and work history. The material inbetween relates to the Bread and Roses Integrated Arts High School.

Curious after learning more about this man’s own background (he attended an alternative high school, ‘school without walls,” in the 1970s in Michigan himself; see the “wiki”), I looked for the unusually-named “Bread and Roses Integrated Arts High School” that he left (after a stint, for how many years unknown, there, his second school appointment apparently and first high school appointment):

USNews.com “Best US High Schools” At Bread and Roses Integrated Arts High School, the student body makeup is 60 percent male and 40 percent female, and the total minority enrollment is 100 percent. Bread and Roses Integrated Arts High School is 1 of 522 high schools in the New York City Public Schools.

NYDailyNews, March 14, 2013, by Michael Feeney:  Students defend failing Bread and Roses High School but blame their classmates for phaseout; ‘The teachers do everything they can,’ said one, ‘but if we don’t care this is what happens.’

“Bread and Roses Integrated Arts High School on Edgecombe Ave. near W. 135th St. is one of four uptown schools – and 22 citywide – slated for phaseout or closure by the Department of Education. (MARIELA LOMBARD/FOR NEW YORK DAILY NEWS)”

…Bread and Roses was one of three uptown public schools slated for phaseout by the Panel for Educational Policy this week, along with the Choir Academy of Harlem and J.H.S. 013 Jackie Robinson.

A fourth school, MS 45/STARS Prep Academy, a Grade 6 to 8 school in East Harlem, will close at the end of the school year, the panel decided. It was one of two schools that will be closed in June. ….

In the fall, the Eagle Academy for Young Men of Harlem will begin teaching its first class in the Bread and Roses building on Edgecombe Ave. near W. 135th St.

The all-boys school will start with a sixth-grade class and expand each year until Bread and Roses is phased out.

The NYDailynews article quoted a parent from its parent association saying they were led to believe this was a “turnaround” school, but instead it was just dumped.

Closure would be 4th change in three years for Bread & Roses HS Feb. 14, 2013 by Joanna Seow in “Chalkbeat.org:

The school received an “F” on its last city report card, with only 41 percent of students graduating in four years compared to a citywide four-year graduation rate of more than 65 percent.  About 100 students, teachers and parents protested the phase-out plan in a two-hour hearing Wednesday night in the school auditorium, with many arguing that Bread and Roses was never given the opportunity to follow through or finish an improvement process before starting a new one.  The school has been put through the “transformation” model, which was supposed to change school leadership, bring in extra support services, and experiment with longer school days and new teacher training; the “restart” model, in which school operations are handed over to an independent education organization; and then the proposed “turnaround” model — all within the last three years.

It is 78% “disadvantaged” and (currently viewed, not two decades ago!) its is just below 40% and math just above 40%, both below state and further below national averages.  In addition, a 2013-2014 “High School Quality Snapshot” produced by the NYSDOE rated this small school (274 students) Poor or Fair (not a single “Good”) in key areas (see chart), with a graduation rate far below city average:

Bread and Roses Integrated Arts HS Quality Snapshot 2013-2014 (click for the rest of pdf)

Bread and Roses Integrated Arts High School Scores (per USNews.com viewed Apr2017)

In other words, his undergraduate study at Ivy League Brown, while Ted Sizer was there (Polakow-Suransky is younger — b. 1972 — and Sizer supervised his masters’ dissertation).  There appears to be no PhD level in this career educator now college of education president.  The “CES” model was “gearing up” (but before CES bothered to incorporate and legitimize itself at Brown!) focused on the areas being emphasized at the time; Polakow-Suansky then taught for only about 10 years before moving into administration — with, apparently, a “Small Schools” emphasis, which also ties him in purpose to Ayers and others, as well as to the CES philosophy in general.

Current Bank Street College of Educ President bio blurb (@July1, 2014) shows predecessor position was second in command at NYCity (not “State”) DOE! Also read pp.2

Meanwhile, it’s April 2017 and Bank Street College of Education has not yet uploaded its FY2015 (which ended 6/30/2016, almost one year ago) tax return — and he’s President.  No “related” organizations are reported at Bank Street, and from what I can tell, this should not be a complex tax return to file, either.

In case this isn’t clear yet, there is a “Bank Street/Brown University (CES Sizer, Small Schools, etc.) AND, as it turns out in Polakow-Suransky’s career path, a “Broad Academy” (as in two Eli-Broad-Foundation-funded training entities, spanning 2001-current, with the “switchout” around 2005/2006) connection between movements, nonprofits, and professional training “academies” not to mention colleges of education (whether at Brown or at Bank Street).

For more, again, go to the separate page: Bank Street College of Education and School (Fast-Tracking FYI on its 100 year Progressive, Experimental Laboratories involving Young Children, History)



NOW ABOUT THAT ANNENBERG CHALLENGE FUNDING CIRCUITRY:

For the fiscal year ending June 30, 2001 (which obviously could include the latter half of 2000), Annenberg Foundation claims to have paid Chicago Annenberg Challenge (“CAC”) $6,685,200.  That would be nice to document from the recipient end, but — I can’t without a (so far) missing tax return from CAC for ITS fiscal year 2000, representing what would have been the first half of Annenberg Foundation’s Fiscal Year 2000, but labeled here “Year Ending June 30, 2001” as the image shows.  They were on different fiscal years.

Looks like the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, Inc. existed just about 8 short years, from 1995? until it closed down in 2003, fizzling out like this.  Again, one might ask:  Why?  (Actually Illinois Corporate record shows even briefer existence — 4/27/1995 through 1/30/2002 voluntary dissolution, less than seven years)

Total results: 3Search Again.

ORGANIZATION NAME ST YR FORM PP TOTAL ASSETS EIN
Chicago Annenberg Challenge IL 2003 990PF 24 $0.00 36-4016426
Chicago Annenberg Challenge IL 2002 990PF 28 $1,418.00 36-4016426
Chicago Annenberg Challenge IL 2001 990PF 32 $452,608.00 36-4016426

The numbers under Total Assets (from this source) always represent Year-End Total Gross Assets (not “net” which may be smaller) and do not reflect all activity during the year, but obviously the last three tax returns show an organization that is shutting itself down.

The bottom row represents fiscal year 2001 for this entity, which as you can see, isn’t showing even $1M of assets (but $452K) at year-end, or $1M of contributions (but only $1.9K).

It also had an address change this year to Northfield, Illinois (back again to Chicago for 2002), and didn’t acknowledge even $2,000 contributions from anywhere, and stated it was not required to file a Schedule B (which would report “Excess Contributions” such as $6M from Annenberg).

The next screenprint shows it did acknowledge $1.9K ($1,954) contributions on line 1. So, we have a logistical problem — what is the explanation for the ($6,685,200 – $1,954) difference between claimed contributions and acknowledged on the recipient tax return?

A “Schedule A” of Support showing the prior four years for some entities might solve the problem, however, no “Schedule A” shows for year 2001, or Year 2002 (which amended return was stamped with three different 2006 dates, and which details the dissolution of the CAC). I recommend readers scroll through at least the “CAC” returns for Years 2001 and 2002 above, to see (for 2001) particularly how grants are not identifying the actual grantees in the main schedule, but an addendum further shows which “grantee” went to an actual “grantee” by a different name. For example, grants which may have looked like they were going to actual public schools, many times were instead going to universities, or other “systems-change” nonprofits — not that (this being a Form 990PF versus public charity filer) this form provided EIN#s (which a Form 990 prompts for, at least current versions of it) for ANY entity than the designated successor one (see next table for “CPEF”).

Finding a Year 2000 tax return if, for example, Annenberg had dumped the entire $6.68M to the CAC before  or on 12/31/2000 (Annenberg’s statement is labeled by the Year ENDING date as 2001 while CAC the recipient’s Fiscal Year = Calendar Year) might show this — but I don’t have ready access to it.  Anyone else who might find that on-line?

2001, Chicago Annenberg Challenge only admits receiving a bit over $1K contributions…Notice column titles (for next image).

Bottom half of FY2001 CAC Form 990PF, annotated to show odd classification of distributions (Lns 26) and resultant $1.8M deficit “per the books” vs. none, “cash basis. See Column titles seen on top of page 1 image, above. Click for Full-sized.

I’m seeing details on the 2001 (Amended) Tax return here that aren’t too hard to understand, but weighing whether it would be worthwhile to print, annotate, upload, narrate, and otherwise document right now — For example, the millions of dollars distributed are listed (Yr 2001) under right-hand column “cash” and not left-hand (of the $$ figure columns) under Revenues and Expenses per the books (see colorfully annotated image of p.1)

Next link, also in the image caption, labels the annotated image showing just a piece of the many “anomalies” or oddities showing up on that return: Chicago Annenberg Challenge (CAC, EIN#364016426) FY2001 990PF Part I bottom half showing total revs $80K Ln24 Total Expenses (per the books) Ln26b $1’8M but (Ln26d, rh column-CashBasis, $6’9M

I think let’s move on to the other parts of this same story, which are equally interesting!

“CAC” had already designated a successor organization and was already donating in part to it: Chicago Public Education Fund,  which tax returns currently look like this:

Total results: 3Search Again. Notice CAC was a Form 990PF but its successor, a plain Form 990.

ORGANIZATION NAME ST YR FORM PP TOTAL ASSETS EIN
Chicago Public Education Fund IL 2015 990 36 $12,696,363.00 36-4279013
Chicago Public Education Fund IL 2014 990 35 $14,948,783.00 36-4279013
Chicago Public Education Fund IL 2013 990 29 $8,843,438.00 36-4279013

From the same Illinois Cyberdrive Search site, this one says, Business ID# 60326282, Formed 1999, and ‘Not in Good Standing’.

CPEF, Entity#60326282, Formed 1999, “Not Good Standing” as viewed 4/2017

Interesting:   this was first funded (it says) in 1999 with about $1 million.  The Year 2000 return lists some “Schedule B” (Excess) Contributors (or perhaps back then it was a different schedule), just one page of them, however the numbering begins not with “1” but with “30.”  And while there are two or three $20K or $25K contributors, and $200K from “The Chicago Tribune,” there is a noticeable $995K from “The Annenberg Foundation” that year.  (See link provided, I did not “image”).  A closer look at CAC grantees Yr 2001 shows that some were was already going to this entity Chicago Public Education Fund.


Actually, the Year 2000 tax return of the CPEF above, IS relevant to discuss — after I noticed that even on its “Page 5 of 6 Schedule B Pt. I Excess Contributions” — obviously not ALL the “Excess Contributions for the year” as totaled, still added up (just page 5 only) to about $200K more than is reported on the IRS Form in Part I Summary.  Page 1 total Contributions:  $1,031,406 or $1.03M.  Page5 of 6 (not even taking into account what might have been on pp. 1-4 or p.6 which isn’t uploaded either!) total as written is $1,226,816 or $1.22M (per cell phone calculator).  Their CEO that year received a salary of $142,000 + benefits (as the only paid officer or one working FT) for this type of internal discrepancy re: correcting the substandard math & english of Chicago Public School systems!!

The five CPEF images below (may not annotated; you can follow the sequence I’m sure) are:

  • #1 Part I, Page 1 top for Year 2000 (understand that this represents only the second year of operation:  Fiscal year = Calendar year)
  • #2 Excess Contributions (page 5 of 6) top part up through Annenberg Foundation $995K contribution (Annenberg Foundation also bears an usual address in Evanston, IL)
  • #3 Excess Contributions (page 5 of 6) bottom part (which overlaps with the Annenberg $995K to show it’s the same document, and bears a footer.
  • #4 & 5 One or two images showing to whom the $881K of grants went that year; note: the first column “Classification” =/= grantee name.  Look at the amounts and grantee names.

Because I’m not annotating them, I’m also not printing to pdf for each image  You have the link to the tax return above if the images don’t display large enough to read.  As I said near top of this post, you don’t have to drill down that far to see discrepancies!

CPEF (EIN#36-4279013) Yr2000 Form 990 Pg1 top (Image 1 of 5) Total Contribs $1.03M

CPEF (EIN#36-4279013) Yr2000 Form 990 SchedB Excess Contribs, p5 TOP (Image 2 of 5)

CPEF (EIN#36-4279013) Yr2000 Form 990 SchedB Excess Contribs, p5 BOTTOM (Image 3 of 5, overlaps 2 rows with Image 2)

CPEF (EIN#36-4279013) Yr2000 Form 990 Statemt of Grants FROM, TOP (Image 4 of 5)

CPEF (EIN#36-4279013) Yr2000 Form 990 Statemt of Grants FROM, TOP, showing Total was $881K (Image 5 of 5)

Wikipedia on Chicago Annenberg Challenge is somewhat short and sweet (suggest — read it!) and answered another question I had in reviewing several tax returns — it was on the “to do list” — look up who is Vartan Gregorian, who showed up on Forms 990PF.   That and other questions may be answered in this short spiel on how the Public School Challenge came to be:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The Chicago Annenberg Challenge (CAC) was a Chicago public school reform project from 1995 to 2001 that worked with half of Chicago’s public schools and was funded by a $49.2 million, 2-to-1 matching challenge grant over five years from the Annenberg Foundation. The grant was contingent on being matched by $49.2 million in private donations and $49.2 million in public money. The Chicago Annenberg Challenge was one of 18 locally designed Annenberg Challenge project sites that received $387 million over five years as part of Walter Annenberg‘s gift of $500 million over five years to support public school reform. The Chicago Annenberg Challenge helped create a successor organization, the Chicago Public Education Fund (CPEF), committing $2 million in June 1998 as the first donor to Chicago’s first community foundation for education.

Annenberg Foundation doesn’t list an address in Evanston, IL, which is a wealthy (and 91% white per “Blockshopper”) suburb of Chicago (and where Northwestern University, most of it, is located) that I’m aware of, however Kenneth B. Rolling and a “Community Learning Partnership” (*.org) does at 2308 Park Place, Evanston, IL — the address from which nearly $1M was granted TO the Chicago Public Education Fund from Annenberg in FY2000, above…

It doesn’t take too long looking at the website (which may or may not have been there in 2000) to see that this is organizing for social change (in fact, certifications working with community colleges in key cities) along the PICO, IAF, (ACORN?) etc. model.  I’m not exploring this thoroughly here, just referencing it as an out-of-place detail on a tax return.  I simply knew that Annenberg wasn’t featuring its Evanston, IL offices on their main site (or tax returns) over the years… I have a sense that in general, this is also what the Public School Challenge is about as well — at least from the perspective of its progressive adherents.

The “history” page of the nonprofit listed at this street address references a “Center for Community Change” which is searchable on this blog and as I recall (probably) has Open Society Foundations connections.

KenRolling@2308ParkPlaceEvanston IL shows yet another Community Organizing Nonprofit (cf Annenberg Fndtn grants to CPEF per its SchedB FY2000) From that website:
Read the rest of this entry »

Written by Let's Get Honest

April 26, 2017 at 8:13 pm

martinplaut

Journalist specialising in the Horn of Africa and Southern Africa

Let's Get Honest! Blog: Absolutely Uncommon Analysis of Family & Conciliation Courts' Operations, Practices, & History

'A Different Kind of Attention Develops Sound Judgment' | 'Suppose I'm Right Here?...' (posted 3/23 & 3/5/2014). Over 680 posts, Public-Interest Investigative Blogging On These Matters Since 2009.

iakovos alhadeff

Anti-Propaganda

Red Herring Alert

There's something fishy going on!

The American Spring Network

News. by the people, for the people. The #1 source for independent investigative journalism in the Show-Me State, serving Missouri since 2011.

Family Court Injustice

Mom & Kids Need "Just Us" to Fight Family Court Injustice

The Espresso Stalinist

Wake Up to the Smell of Class Struggle ☭

Spiritual Side of Domestic Violence

Finally! The Truth About Domestic Violence and The Church

%d bloggers like this: