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

Identify the Entities, Find the Funding, Talk Sense!

Archive for September 17th, 2011

Trim the Budget? OK, Trim Embezzlement and Fraud FIRST, especially in Nonprofits and Government

with one comment

Some people (particularly my regular Parisian fan club? visitor from Paris) may wonder why I raise such a big stink about such small nonprofits, at time, that don’t file, don’t incorporate, and replicate like rabbits.  And particularly ones that have as part of their nonprofit purpose marketing a licensed very much FOR-profit item (usually a curriculum and training to certify people in affiliate marketing to captive audiences, like parents ordered into court-referred, court-mandated classes or counseling, or people in prison).

Well that’s basically because I notice patterns, I’ve dealt with some nonprofit that don’t put out what they publicize (and are funded for) and I can multiply.

I also think that if the US General Accounting Office (GAO) agrees with me, which it does, I might be onto something (although they’ve been pointing it out for longer).  I posted this before; there are more where it came from:

GAO, Reports & Testimonies, By Agency (HHS/ACF is our area):

(Note: This first one, August 2011, relates to safety of children in child care facilities, and is not addressing financial matters)

Child Care: Overview of Relevant Employment Laws and Cases of Sex Offenders at Child Care Facilities

GAO-11-757 August 19, 2011

Why GAO Did This Study

Very little is known about sexual abuse among children that are regularly cared for by more than 1.3 million child care providers every week in the United States. In this context, GAO was asked to (1) provide an overview of federal and state laws related to the employment of sex offenders at child care facilities and (2) examine cases where individuals who were convicted of serious sexual offenses were subsequently employed or present at child care facilities.

What GAO Found

Federal laws regulate the employment of sex offenders at federal child care facilities. For example, federally operated facilities are required to conduct criminal-history checks on employees, as are facilities receiving grants from the Department of Health and Human Services’ Head Start program. At the state level, laws vary widely. For example, all 50 states require criminal-history checks for owners and employees of licensed child care facilities, but many state laws exempt facilities from licensing if they do not exceed certain thresholds, such as a minimum number of children. Penalties for violating licensing requirements can range from a $5 administrative fine to imprisonment for a term of years.

The cases GAO examined show examples of individuals convicted of serious sexual offenses who gained access to child care facilities as maintenance workers, spouses or friends of providers, a cafeteria worker, and a cook. At least seven of these cases involve offenders who previously targeted children, and in three of the cases, the offenders used their access to children at the facilities to offend again. Among the cases, GAO found instances of providers who (1) knowingly hired offenders and (2) did not perform preemployment criminal-history checks. GAO also found examples of facilities operating without licenses, and facilities that employed offenders while receiving federal funds. The following four cases illustrate the nature of the situations GAO identified.

(cases from Missouri, Kentucky, Washington, D.C. & New York featured)

Highlights Page (PDF)   Full Report (PDF, 32 pages)   Accessible Text

I find this interesting because our current administration has continued to really push Head Start, Early Head Start, Zero to Five and almost anything that would get those kids away from their Mamas (and Papas) at an early age.  Look at the budgets!

Here’s one on Child Support (Enforcement):

Child Support Enforcement: Departures from Long-term Trends in Sources of Collections and Caseloads Reflect Recent Economic Conditions
GAO-11-196, Jan 14, 2011
Summary (HTML)   Highlights Page (PDF)   Full Report (PDF, 41 pages)   Accessible Text

The CSE program is run by states and overseen by the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). States receive federal performance incentive payments and a federal match on both state CSE funds and, except for fiscal year 2008, on the incentive payments, which must be reinvested into the program. The Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 (DRA) eliminated this incentive match beginning in 2008, but the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 [ARRA]  temporarily reinstated it for 2 years. **

. . .

 Preliminary HHS data show that total CSE expenditures grew by 2.6 percent in fiscal year 2008 as many states increased their own funding to maintain CSE operations when the federal incentive match was eliminated. Some state officials attributed this increase in part to state lawmakers’ broad support for the program. ***  In contrast to fiscal year 2008, a different picture emerged in fiscal year 2009, when the incentive match was temporarily restored but total CSE expenditures fell slightly by 1.8 percent, which HHS officials told GAO was due to state budget constraints.

Most states nationwide have not implemented “family first” policy options since DRA. Several state CSE officials GAO interviewed said they support “family first” policies in principle, but funding constraints prevented implementing these options, because giving more child support collections to families means states retain less as reimbursement for public assistance costs.

So, when you hear OCSE, HHS, or anyone else crowing about getting more money to the families than before, i.e., “pass through” or “Family First” just remember, the states agree in THEORY, but not in practice; maintaining their operations is more important than children having enough to eat.  I realize operations have to be maintained, but over the years, we have found that the child support system has dedicated itself to expanding programs and scope, i.e., creating “emotional support” by noncustodial parents, and other not-sufficiently-audited purposes and programs.

By the way, KIDS TURN of SF & San Diego comes under this category — as they are direct beneficiaries of pushing the access/visitation theme through the courts plus TANF reform of 1996.

(**ARRA — speaking of which, see the next report I’ve linked to here:)

ARRA Contract & Grant Recipients Misdeeds, and resulting Debts


Before the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, U.S. Senate


Thousands of Recovery Act Contract and Grant Recipients Owe Hundreds of Millions in Federal Taxes

Statement of Gregory D. Kutz, Director Forensic Audits and Investigative Service

For Release on Delivery

Expected at 2:30 p.m. EDT

Tuesday, May 24, 2011

Also finding some real “anomalies” is the office responsible for auditing HHS — the source of all TANF (welfare), Child Support Enforcement, Medicaid, Head Start & Early Head Start, Abstinence, Marriage, Fatherhood, and Access/Visitation funding.  For starters; this office also manages Foster Care, ie., Titles IV-A, IV-D, IV-E, for starters.    Here’s just a little sampler (running to the millions) from last April:


REPORTS:  “US Office of Inspector General, Health & Human Services, Office of Audit Services/ ACF reports 

Review of Title IV-E Foster Care Costs Claimed on Behalf of Delinquent Children in Los Angeles County, California

Executive Summary

We estimated that for fiscal years 2005 and 2006, the California Department of Social Services (the State agency) claimed unallowable Title IV-E costs totaling $5.7 million (Federal share) on behalf of delinquent Los Angeles County children, consisting of $2.2 million in maintenance payments and $3.5 million in associated administrative costs. Title IV-E of the Social Security Act authorizes Federal funds for States to provide foster care for children under an approved State plan. For children who meet foster care eligibility requirements, Federal funds are available to States for maintenance payments, administrative costs, and training costs.

Of the 100 monthly maintenance payments in our sample, 80 payments were allowable, 18 payments were unallowable, and 2 payments could not be evaluated because the case files had been sealed under a court order. The 18 unallowable payments consisted of 13 payments and associated administrative costs for children who were not eligible for services and 5 payments for eligible children that included costs for unallowable services or for services that were not provided.

We recommended that the State agency (1) refund to the Federal Government $5.7 million for unallowable costs, consisting of $2.2 million in maintenance payments and $3.5 million in associated administrative costs, and (2) ensure compliance with Federal requirements by periodically selecting a sample of foster care case files for delinquent children to determine whether the Los Angeles County Department of Children and Family Services made correct eligibility determinations and maintained sufficient documentation to support eligibility determinations and claimed payments only for eligible children, allowable services, and services provided. The State agency did not concur with our first recommendation or the amount of the recommended refund.

“delinquent L.A. County Children” in Foster care (??).  Note — this was from April 2011, and they reported on a whopping 100 cases from 6 years ago.  Of those 100, approximately 1 and 4 were inappropriate payments, and they want their money back.

The Samaans,

I also note that in the recent (Sacramento, CA area) where the two-year old daughter of a woman employed, working as an attorney under Attorney General Kamala Harris, was murdered on a child-abduction following court-ordered visitation; she could not save her own daughters’ life, and the father’s father (father couldn’t speak because he killed himself also), a Dr. Marak Samaan — had been terminated from a California University for criminal activity (pled down to misdemeanor) surrounding IMPROPER BILLING, THREE HABITUAL PRACTICES, in his PRIVATE PSYCHOLOGICAL PRACTICE.  While such criminal activity apparently lost him a tenured professorship, and (as of 2010) was about to have him lose his license to practice in the field of behavioral health, it apparently wasn’t sufficient to stop him from working for the courts as a psychologist!    This man blamed the family court system for his son having shot the kid and himself to death.  We are indeed in dark days, but I have got to believe that financial accountability and compliance with simple, basic regulations for nonprofits is a great barometer of individuals, nonprofits, or systems

Here’s one from OHIO, Hamilton County:

Review of Ohio Department of Job and Family Services Claims for Costs Reported by the Hamilton County Department of Job and Family Services

Executive Summary

Our review found $59 million (Federal share) in unallowable Administration for Children and Families (ACF) costs identified in the Ohio Department of Job and Family Services’ (State agency) report for services provided by child welfare organizations from July 1, 2001, through June 30, 2004. We conducted this audit at the request of ACF after the State agency identified a total of $216 million in unallowable costs reported by the Hamilton County Department of Job and Family Services (County agency). The County agency inappropriately allocated the child welfare organizations’ costs through indirect cost pools. The State agency inappropriately claimed the costs because it relied on the County agency’s reported program costs and did not ensure that the County agency allocated the costs in accordance with the cost allocation plan and other Federal requirements.



Within the U.S. Department of Health & Human Services (HHS), the Administration for Children and Families (ACF) provides funding to State, territorial, local, and tribal organizations for programs relating to children and families. State, county, city, and tribal governments and private local agencies provide services to eligible children and families.

Ohio’s Administration of Programs for Children and Families

In Ohio, the Department of Job and Family Services (State agency) administers ACF programs and other Federal and State programs related to health care, cash assistance, food assistance, childcare, child support enforcement and administration, foster care, and employment and training assistance. County agencies coordinate and provide these services to eligible children and families and report costs to the State agency. The State agency then claims these costs for Federal reimbursement.

On May 1, 2008, the State agency issued a report entitled Hamilton County Limited Review (State agency’s report) related to costs reported by the Hamilton County Department of Job and Family Services (County agency). The State agency’s report found that the County agency did not properly account for Federal, State, and local funds and recommended that the State recover $216 million. However, the State agency’s report did not clearly identify what portion of the costs recommended for recovery pertained to ACF programs. Therefore, ACF requested that we conduct this audit.

County Agency Child Welfare Service Costs

During our audit period, the County agency charged costs to the State agency for services provided by certain child welfare organizations:

• Under the auspices of the Multi-County System Agency, a consortium of county governmental entities, the County agency contracted for consecutive periods with Beech Acres and then with Hamilton Choices, LLC (collectively, BA/HC), to provide treatment and care for high-risk foster care children.

The County agency contracted with Magellan Behavioral Health (Magellan) to coordinate and administer the delivery of child welfare and mental health services to children and families.

Hillcrest Training School and Youth Center (Hillcrest), a county-operated, accredited community correctional/treatment center and training school for youth offenders, provided rehabilitative services to adjudicated youths (non-foster-care children) who were placed there by the Hamilton County Juvenile Court.1

What I’m pointing out here is that money goes from the Feds (through ACF) to the States, to County Agencies, that then contract out to provide services with various organizations, which may be LLCs, or other incorporated organizations.     There are many layers of transfer of money, and so many levels at which reconciliations and checks should happen, but apparently don’t.

Or here’s one from 2009 about grants that should be closed out, but weren’t:

Review of Administration for Children and Families Grant Closeout Procedures

Executive Summary

We found that the 9,877 Administration for Children and Families (ACF) grants identified by the HHS Division of Payment Management (DPM) as eligible for closeout as of September 30, 2006, which had unexpended balances totaling more than $472 million, remained open in the payment system for several reasons. DPM is responsible for closing grants after receiving instructions from ACF or the HHS Division of Financial Operations. ACF is responsible for initiating closeout of grants. As a general rule, grants must be closed within 180 days after the end of the grant period (the cutoff date). However, the grants remained open after the cutoff dates because of staffing shortages; differences among the grant award, expenditure, and drawdown amounts in the payment system; or a lack of grant closeout procedures. Also, ACF and the Division of Financial Operations lacked follow-up procedures to determine whether DPM had actually closed grants for which closeout was initiated.

We recommended that ACF use the information in this report to ensure that grants are closed in a timely manner and to eliminate the backlog of grants eligible for closeout. In comments on our draft report, ACF described actions that it had taken or planned to take to implement our recommendation

And here’s one of my “favorite” topics:

Review of Undistributable Child Support Collections in Tennessee From October 1, 1998, Through December 31, 2007

Executive Summary

We found that from October 1998 through December 2007, Tennessee did not recognize and report as program income $8.7 million ($5.8 million Federal share) in undistributable child support collections that met the State’s definition of abandoned property. In addition, the State reported incorrect amounts for undistributed collections. Within the Administration for Children and Families, the Office of Child Support Enforcement (OCSE) oversees the Child Support Enforcement program. OCSE requires States to offset program costs by recognizing and reporting income from undistributable child support collections. Undistributable collections result when States receive child support payments but cannot identify or locate the custodial parents or return the funds to the noncustodial parents.

We recommended that the State report as program income undistributable child support collections totaling $8.7 million ($5.8 million Federal share), ensure future compliance with State laws regarding abandoned property, and correct reporting errors on the next quarterly Federal filing. The State said that it would implement our recommendations.

if you look at this, the detail adds: (sorry about the double-character resulting from copying from a ‘pdf’ file).

From October 1, 1998, through December 31, 2007, the State agency recognized and reported $907,012 in program income from undistributable child support collectiions.. However, the State agency did not recognize and report as program income $8,739,762 ($5,768,243 Federal share) in undistributable child support collections that met the Statte’s’sdeeffiinniittiioonnooffaabbaannddoonneeddpprrooppeerrtty.. In addition, the State agency reported incorrect amounts for undistributed collections on its quarterrlly report of collections (Form OCSE-34A) for December 31,2007.

TThe State agency did not recognize and report program income for undistributable child support collections primarily because it had not developed and implemented adequate policies and procedures to comply with State and Federal requirements for treatment of undistributable collections. TheSttatteagenccyy’s’sqquuaarrteterrlylyrreeppoorrttwaassnnoottaacccuurraatteebbeeccaauusseetthheeaaggeennccyyhaadnott (1) adjusted its recordkeeping and support documentation to account for ACF’s recent modifications to the Form OCSE-34A or (2) properly accounted for child support payments collected on behalf of children in the Statte’s’sFoosstteerrCaarreepprroogrraam..

Yes, Foster Care assignment is another way (along with prolonged custody litigation, often inappropriate) to bring federal monies to the states to support children in the system.

This type of “millions unaccounted for” sometimes relates to accounting procedures (or lack thereof), misunderstandings on how to allocate this, or that, or disagreements between States and Feds.  However, notice that the HHS reports were habitually “Limited Scope Review” and that there were no real teeth behind any results — just “recommendations.”  Moreover, the HHS tends to say the States are really responsible, it just oversees (though not yearly, not nationwide and not consistently.  It’s too BIG to oversee everything, anyhow!)  The states tend to kind of blame the changing federal policies.  What very FEW of the discussions even brought up — UNDISTRIBUTABLE CHILD SUPPORT means that child support didn’t reach those children, while it was sitting around earning interest for the states.  Also underplayed, how “unresolved cases” is an excuse not to distribute, hence ENCOURAGING high-conflict litigation profits the states and counties (whilc stealing from the children it’s supposed to help, and hurting both parent’s work lives as they have to incorporate constant litigation into their job schedules, if possible).

THEN — there are other kinds of simply direct embezzlement and fraud coming up at the bottom level — nonprofits that get some of these contracts — as people in charge or their books, or in some cases, the senior executive of the place — just flat-out lie, steal, and get away with it, robbing taxpayers in ever more creative ways.

As a result of some recent (TV, Newspaper) news about embezzlement situations, I found this site:


This one was on TV, because of who got hit with the issue:

Former Democratic Operative & Campaign Treasurer Charged With Bank Fraud In Potential Multi-Million Dollar Embezzlement

Kinde L. Durkee, 58, of Burbank, California, was arrested last week and charged with federal bank fraud in connection with an alleged embezzlement of possibilly millions of dollars from a number of campaigns, including that of Senator Dianne Feinstein(D-CA).  According to Feinstein, her campaign coffers have been “wiped out,” to the tune of millions of dollars.  Durkee’s political consulting firm, Durkee & Associates has run afoul of campaign finance laws in the past.  In the current criminal case, Durkee reportedly had control over 400 bank accounts and appeared to be embezzling cash for personal use — and then shuffling funds around different accounts to cover her trail, according to a federal complaint.  Media reports state that The Los Angeles County Democratic Party says they lost $200,000, RepresentativeSusan Davis (D-San Diego) alleges losses of more than $250,000 and Representative Loretta Sanchez(D-Garden Grove) says Durkee “emptied her campaign fund.”  The FBI complaint against Durkee alleges that she embezzled more than $677,000 from the Solario for Assembly 2010 campaign and spent the money covering bounced employee payroll checks, paying for her mother’s care at an assisted living facility, and paying Costco and Virgin Air bills.Read the story herehereherehere and here.

On the site “fraudtalk” (or near it, anyhow, I found this) is an article I recommend reading — ALL of us:

Non-Profits At Risk For Fraud & Embezzlement With Some Practical Recommendations To Protect Your Organization

By Christopher T. Marquet July 11, 2011

All organizations are subject to fraud, waste and abuse. However, non-profits seem to be especially susceptible to internal fraud and theft. In fact, based upon our analysis of more than 1,000 major embezzlement cases in the US in the past three years as outlined in our annual Marquet Report on Embezzlement, non-profits, ranging from small charities to large non-profit institutions, together with religious organizations, are the third most frequently victimized industry sector (behind financial institutions and government entities, respectively).

While embezzlement occurs daily at all types of organizations, we have tracked a large number of significant misappropriations at non-profits. This is in spite of the fact that many cases involving non-profits go unreported and unprosecuted – which is part of the problem. The damage, while significant, is not only financial. Institutional reputation, donor relations, future growth and fundraising, can all be negatively affected by a major defalcation.

We believe that this risk facing non-profits is the result of both a weak financial control structure and a general high level trust factor within a given non-profits community. Nevertheless, while that trust is generally well founded, there are still going to be wayward birds in every flock. A colleague once told me that in every organization, at any given time, there is always someone who is up to no good.

That’s why controls and checks should be habitual and are so vital!
… many embezzlers’ schemes last for years before they are found out. In fact, they often begin in good economic times, when it is easier to hide their schemes from otherwise more vigilant management….Consider the following 26 major embezzlement cases around the US in the news over just the past six months involving non-profits, totaling more than $10 million in direct losses:

June 2011 – Valerie Tebbetts, 54, formerly of Dorchester, Massachusetts, was indicted on charges alleging she embezzled more than $126,000 from The Living Center, a local HIV/AIDS charity group for which she had served as the executive director. According to prosecutors, over a period of more than 2 years, from September 2008 to November 2010, Tebbetts issued numerous checks to pay for personal expenses, including her rent as well as made numerous cash withdrawals from the charity’s accounts. Tebbetts was indicted on three counts of larceny by embezzlement over $250 and false entries in corporate books. Her case is pending.

NOTICE that the nonprofits have all kinds of emotionally appealing names, helping distressed and impoverished or vulnerable people.  Otherwise, they wouldn’t be nonprofits.  Well, these situations attract wolves, also, not just nice shepherds!

May 2011 – Gayle J. Tatman, 59, of Grove City, Ohio, was sentenced to 2 years in prison for embezzling nearly $213,000 from the Grove City Food Pantry for which she had served as treasurer. According to authorities, Tatman siphoned the funds, amounting to half of the non- profit pantry’s cash, over a period of 7 years, from May 2002 until April 2009. Tatman’s scheme involved forgery of checks and at least four of the organization’s bank accounts, including one that was supposed to have been closed out years ago. Tatman pleaded guilty in a plea agreement in January 2011 to one count of bank fraud.

Stealing from a food pantry — how callous can a person get!??!  But how come no one was checking her work more carefully?

Here’s another (I’m skimming the site):

April 2011 – An unnamed female former bookkeeper for the Washington State Superior Court Judges’ Association is being investigated for embezzling as much as $400,000 from the non- profit group. According to reports, the bookkeeper was fired in April 2010 after an internal investigation revealed the misappropriation. The thefts allegedly spanned “several years.” The matter has been turned over to law enforcement officials for investigation and possible prosecution. Specific details about the case have yet to be released.

If this is your state, follow up, let us know what happened.  Notice, unnamed, “possible” prosecution.  Also note a JUDGES ASSOCIATION is a nonprofit.

Here’s one from Northern California:

March 2011 – Thomas Ray Martin, 47, of Concord, California, was charged with embezzling about $162,000 from the Discovery Counseling Center of the San Ramon Valley, a Bay Area non-profit mental health organization where he had served as director. According to authorities, Martin used a debit card linked to the checking account of the organization to pay for personal expenses and luxury items. His misappropriations allegedly spanned more than three years, from July 2007 until September 2010. The thefts were quantified after an audit was conducted following allegations of Martin’s misconduct and he was terminated last October. Martin has been charged with 4 felony counts of grand theft by embezzlement and has pleaded not guilty. His case is pending.

This case was news recently; he got a local super-attorney, pled no-contest, paid back $100K, and the articles indicate his record may be cleared, it was an “unfortunate mistake” (excuse me, 3 years of “mistakes”) and the reporting emphasized, after all, he’s a “family man” with wife and children.

This angered me (if he were a single mother, or a single man — would there have been a different reporting?) — and I did a little background research.

Turns out the business license is suspended (but thanks to California Secretary of State “Business Entities Search” database shortcomings, we don’t know when); the CHARITABLE REGISTRATION is current — but they almost lost the nonprofit status for failure to file for several years and completely blowing off warning notices from the OAG.   It also turns out that this officer was practically the only paid director, whose salary went from $68K to $87K in a few short years, AND that the nonprofit gets grants or contracts from both the county and the local school district, in a very prosperous area, Danville California (former home of PAS promoter Phil Stahl, Ph.D.).

And that the group profits (about $20K/year) from marketing a curriculum licensed out of Kentucky called “Creating Family Connections.”   Same old idea; get some nonprofits together, get grants, get curriculum that is electronics-based (and easy to reproduce it), get your foot in the door and market it nationwide.  The state of Kentucky courts page also markets the (in)famous “Kids First” which comes from a (front group?) nonprofit individual (or 2) in Pennsylvania.  I’m getting tired of this and will most likely be back to finish telling at least this one story — particularly as the newspaper attempted to put the positive spin on it.

I also wonder at their being so quick to forgive, forget (though they did fire) the guy.  Maybe no one wants further prying, which I will probably provide anyhow.

Oh yes, the Creating Family Connections curriculum (substance abuse prevention) had a fatherhood connection.  I’ll try & follow up on this one:


History of Family Court
Kentucky launched an innovative and ambitious project when Jefferson County began a Family Court pilot program in 1991. It was the first such court in the state to focus solely on the needs of families and children. Family Court introduced a unique solution that would allow one judge to provide continuity by hearing all of a family’s legal problems and issues.

The Family Court model expanded beyond Louisville to suburban and rural areas across the commonwealth. The project’s success prompted efforts to make Family Court a permanent part of the Kentucky Constitution. Kentucky voters gave Family Court a resounding victory in November 2002 when the amendment passed in all 120 counties with more than 75 percent of the vote.

Today Family Court serves 3.2 million citizens in 71 Kentucky counties. Kentucky Family Court is so progressive and successful that it is considered a national model.  (site is co. 2009)

Here’s a sampler of classes being sold on this site — it really caught my attention months ago:

Go to Kentucky.gov home page

  • Search TermsSearchthis siteJudicial Ethics OpinionsSupreme Court of Kentucky Rules and ProceduresKentucky.gov
Kentucky Court of Justice (Banner Imagery) - click to go to homepage. Kentucky Court of Justice (Banner Imagery) - click to go to homepage.

For the “Cooperative Training and Divorce” link, the class is described, and anyone wishing to “start one in your area” is referred to:

Active Parenting USA Headquarters:
1955 Vaughn Rd. NW, Suite 108
Kennesaw, GA 30144-7808

Because I’m just such an inveterate snoop, I know that this one connects with the Parenting Coordination people.

ACTIVE PARENTING PUBLISHERS, INC. J312304 Profit Corporation Active/Compliance 6/24/1983

They are in the “training the trainers” business like many others:

Active Parenting Training Opportunities

(Families obviously being deaf, blind, dumb and clueless without expert help…..)

Active Parenting Publishers, Inc., was founded in 1980 by Dr. Michael H. Popkin, a former child and family therapist and Coordinator of Child and Family Services for Northside Community Mental Health Centers in Atlanta, Georgia.

“Popkin” is a popular name for incorporation in Georgia, which allows people to search on Officer / Registered Agent names.  TOo bad California Doesn’t — maybe that Discovery Center might’ve found a prior embezzling history on Mr. Martin and saved themselves a lot of grief, and money.    Unless people just start embezzling and cooking books when they hit about age 45-55ff, possibly because the prior work grind wasn’t profitable enough for the desired lifestyle?

POPKIN MICHAEL H ACTIVE PARENTING PUBLISHERS, INC.  that’s THIS one, created “1983” not 1980….at least as to registration with the secretary of state of Georgia.

2nd entity — existed 1985-1992, administratively dissolved:


Profit Corporation – Domestic – Information
Control No.: J515615
Status: Automated Administrative dissolution/Revocation
Entity Creation Date: 10/9/1985
Dissolve Date: 1/9/1992
Jurisdiction: GA
Principal Office Address: x x x x x
ATLANTA GA 30342-3001

Registered Agent
Office Address: x x x x
Agent County:

Title: CEO
Address: x x x x x

APP delivers quality education programs for parents, children and teachers to schools, hospitals, social services organizations, churches and the corporate market. The Active Parenting model is heavily based upon the theories of Alfred Adler and Rudolf Dreikurs (click here for more about Adlerian Psychology as it applies to Active Parenting).

The most popular program is Active Parenting Now, for parents of children ages five to twelve. Active Parenting Publishers is recognized as an innovator in the educational market and is committed to our mission of developing human potential through our programs.

APP operates out of Kennesaw, Georgia, a suburb of Atlanta. Our products are distributed throughout the US as well as in Canada, Japan, Korea, Kuwait and Sweden.


Susan Boyan, M.Ed.
Susan Boyan, M.Ed., (Cooperative Parenting and Divorce) is a Licensed Marriage and Family Therapist. She has worked with children and families since 1971 and has been in private practice since 1984. Mrs. Boyan is a clinical member of the American Association for Marriage and Family Therapy. She is also a member and research chair for the Georgia Play Therapy Association. Some of her other organizations include: Association of Family and Conciliation Courts, Association of Fathers and Children, Step Family Association, Association of Christian Counselors, Southeast Psychomotor Society and the National Association for Children of Alcoholics. She consults extensively and presents numerous professional presentations to national, state and local audiences. Mrs. Boyan does expert witness testimony and has written articles on Parental Alienation. She is a former special education teacher and rehabilitation counselor. Mrs. Boyan divorced in 1979. In 1981 she married and has two daughters. She resides in Atlanta, Georgia, with her family.

From Georgia Sec of STate, “Boyan” — both are dissolved, one in 2008, the other reads, 8/27/11 (?)


Odd;  A divorcelawyers site from Gaithersburg MD (Note:  Maryland is original? home of the Children’s Rights Council/CRC) says this “National Parent Coordinators Association” was formed in 1999, and that the concept originated with psychologists from Colorado, and reiterates the concept that the real problem is always parents failure to communicate, which a professional, of course, must solve — and thus take authority over almost every critical area of an adult or child’s life:  Don’t miss reviewing this site and learning where YOUR TAX AND PRIVATE$$ ARE GOING TO BE HEADING NEXT!


My records from the Georgia SOS show it was incorporated (“formed”?) in 2002, not 1999.  and has since been dissolved


Search Type: Starting With Search Criteria: national parent coordinators
Search Date: 9/17/2011 Search Time: 15:14
Click on the Business Entity Name or Control No to view more information.
Records Found:1
Business Entity Name Control No Type Status Entity
Creation Date

NATIONAL PARENT COORDINATORS ASSOCIATION, INC. 0207284 Non-Profit Corporation Admin. Dissolved 2/11/2002

It filed every other year, approximately (I DNK what the GA requirement is to file for corporations, but one might assume yearly?) and then dissolved.  Perhaps there is a different type of coordination to be considered “at risk” here — with the state!


Image  Date Document

Open the ImageOpen the Image

2/11/2002 New Filing
5/8/2003 Annual Registration
2/4/2005 Annual Registration
1/26/2006 Annual Registration

Open the ImageOpen the Image

5/16/2008 Administrative Dissolution



The goal of a Parent Coordinator is to help parents learn how to communicate more effectively and thus avoid the conflicts which cause them to return to court. When a Parent Coordinator can reduce the need for parents to return to court, the conflict for their children is also reduced.

The concept of parent coordination dates back to the early 1990’s. In 1994, two psychologists from a high conflict study group in Colorado, Carla Garrity and Mitchell A. Baris, published a book about parent coordination called Caught in the Middle: Protecting the Children of High Conflict Divorce. Since then, there have been other studies and publications lending credence to parent coordination.

{{THE ORGANIZATION — TX ORIGIN “CHILDREN IN THE MIDDLE” same theme comes to mind.  }}

As Parent Coordinators have gained success in dealing with high conflict families, more states have begun using them in addition to other services, such as mediation, parenting seminars, custody evaluators and guardians ad litem. The difference Parent Coordinators bring to families in conflict is that they are often appointed long-term to work on problems that reappear after the litigation and other services have ceased. Since Parent Coordinators are often trained mental health therapists, they can understand the underlying emotional and personality issues that contribute to conflicts and can use their training to help deal with these issues.

There is no uniformity among states as to when and how Parent Coordinators are used. In 1999, the National Parent Coordinator Association was formed and is currently seeking to develop standards of practice and ways to encourage collaboration among Parent Coordinators. For more information about the organization, go to www.cooperativeparenting.com.

“cooperativeparenting.com” IS the “Cooperative Parenting Institute” I am challenging someone to provide a home state for:  It IS Termini and Boyan:

Mission Statement

Susan Boyan and Ann Marie Termini are co-founders of the Cooperative Parenting Institute (CPI). The CPI is an organization {what KIND — corporation, association, or what?} whose  (organizations are made of people, they are not people or a “who”) mission is to promote the healing and enhancement of family relationships.

The Institute offers a wide range of services and resources to assist families as well as professionals with a successful transition from a one to two home family. The professionals at CPI are dedicated to educating the public, judges, legal and mental health professionals on the effects of divorce and time-sharing arrangements on the development of children.

I have noticed the habit of, when websites define an organization, the systematic (though not universal) failure to mention whether it is a nonprofit or not, and if so, what state it is legally functioning in.  Some groups do, but when a group self-defines without corporate status, the FIRST step an onlooker, or person interested in evaluating it should verify is whether or not it exists LEGALLY as a business if it is actually doing any business.  If this can’t be looked up independently, one can contact the group and ask (and I’d cc that to the charitable trusts registry (if appropriate) AND secretary of state to wherever IT operates from, if not also the IRS) “are you a corporation, an LLC, an association and if you are a nonprofit, please send your EIN#.  As you are above-board and honest, I’m sure you won’t have a problem with this, right?  By next week, please. or email within 48 hours….

More from this site: (actually links to the Georgia site).

Susan Boyan L.M.F.T. is the co-founder and director of both Family Solutions Counseling Center(1) and the Cooperative Parenting Institute in Atlanta, Georgia. Practicing since 1982, Susan provides psychotherapy through Family Solutions and functions primarily as a child specialist, divorce coach, mediator and a parenting coordinator through the Cooperative Parenting Institute

(1) Search, just now :


No Records were found for the search criteria ‘Family Solutions Counseling Center’ on 9/17/2011 2:47:50 PM

There are, however, 28 organizations with the words “family solutions” in them — just none by this name.  Perhaps the website claiming co-foundership should get the actual verbatim name  in place: I’m not going through all the founding documents on these to find which one Ms. Boyan started, but is no longer a registered agent or officer of.

Search Type: All words Search Criteria: family solutions
Search Date: 9/17/2011 Search Time: 14:52
Click on the Business Entity Name or Control No to view more information.
Records Found:28
Business Entity Name Control No Type Status Entity
Creation Date

ADVANCED FAMILY SOLUTIONS, LLC 08087028 Limited Liability Company Active/Compliance 11/19/2008
AMERICAN FAMILY HOME SOLUTIONS, LLC 10036163 Limited Liability Company Active/Noncompliance 5/17/2010
ATLANTIC FAMILY SOLUTIONS L.L.C. 09068013 Limited Liability Company Active/Compliance 9/28/2009
BESTWAY HOMECARE AND FAMILY SOLUTIONS, LLC 10055018 Limited Liability Company Active/Compliance 8/2/2010
CHILD AND FAMILY COUNSELING SOLUTIONS, LLC 0681702 Limited Liability Company Active/Compliance 9/14/2006
CITYSIDE FAMILY SOLUTIONS, INC. 11047243 Non-Profit Corporation Active/Owes Current Year AR 6/20/2011
COMPLETE MULTI-FAMILY SOLUTIONS, INC. 10080716 Profit Corporation Active/Compliance 11/18/2010
CORPORATEFAMILY SOLUTIONS LLC 08070688 Limited Liability Company Active/Compliance 9/10/2008
FAMILY CARE SOLUTIONS HEALTH SERVICES TRAINING INSTITUTE, INCORPORATED 10066985 Professional Corporation Active/Compliance 9/23/2010
FAMILY CARE SOLUTIONS, INC. 06100235 Non-Profit Corporation Active/Noncompliance 11/14/2006
FAMILY CENTER FOR LIFESTYLE SOLUTIONS, INC. 0582944 Non-Profit Corporation Active/Compliance 12/9/2005
FAMILY CONCERNS & SOLUTIONS INC. 10071014 Profit Corporation Active/Compliance 10/11/2010
FAMILY SOLUTIONS AND CONSULTATION SERVICES, LLC 0441284 Limited Liability Company Active/Compliance 7/7/2004
FAMILY SOLUTIONS COUNSELING, LLC 07020302 Limited Liability Company Active/Noncompliance 3/7/2007
FAMILY SOLUTIONS FOR ALTERNATIVE PASSIONATE CARE,LLC. (LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY ) 10070303 Limited Liability Company Active/Noncompliance 10/7/2010
FAMILY TLC SOLUTIONS, LLC 10084570 Limited Liability Company Active/Compliance 12/7/2010
GEORGIA FAMILY CRISIS SOLUTIONS, INC. 0461102 Profit Corporation Active/Compliance 10/12/2004
GEORGIA FAMILY SOLUTIONS, LLC. 07065373 Limited Liability Company Active/Compliance 7/13/2007
KMCA FAMILY & FUN SOLUTIONS, L.L.C. 11066287 Limited Liability Company Active/Compliance 9/1/2011
LATIN AMERICA FAMILY SOLUTIONS OF GEORGIA INCORPORATED 11011875 Profit Corporation Active/Noncompliance 2/14/2011
MOM’S FAMILY SOLUTIONS, LLC 11041125 Limited Liability Company Active/Compliance 5/17/2011
MULTI FAMILY FLOORING SOLUTIONS, LLC 10069936 Limited Liability Company Active/Compliance 10/6/2010
MULTIFAMILY SERVICES AND SOLUTIONS, LLC 11044818 Limited Liability Company Active/Compliance 6/9/2011
MULTIFAMILY TECHNOLOGY SOLUTIONS, INC. 0614132 Profit Corporation Active/Compliance 2/27/2006
N’SPIRED BY ACHIEVEMENT FAMILY SERVICES AND SOLUTIONS, LLC. 08038877 Limited Liability Company Active/Compliance 3/31/2008
PIERCE FAMILY SOLUTIONS L.L.C 11003310 Limited Liability Company Active/Compliance 1/15/2011
POSITIVE SOLUTIONS FAMILY ENRICHMENT SERVICES, INC 0644115 Profit Corporation Active/Noncompliance 6/19/2006
PRN NURSING AND ALTERNATIVE LIVING FAMILY CARE SOLUTIONS, LLC 11005241 Limited Liability Company Active/Compliance 1/23/2011
Records Returned 1 of 28 total 28

Note:  The website showing “Cooperative Parenting Institute” of Georgia, with Ms. Boyan, lists a street address of 1936A North Druid Hills Rd, Atlanta.  Searching that address one finds (among other things) “Atlanta Psychotherapy Guild” and on a site copyrighted 2006, then “updated 2010”, alphabetical list of membership, the name Boyan does not appear; odd, if she is doing business at the same address, or taking mail for a business there.   It reads:

The Atlanta Psychotherapy Guild is an association of licensed psychotherapists of all disciplines including counselors, marriage and family therapists, psychiatric nurses, psychiatrists, psychologists, and social workers.


(2) Search, just now:

: http://corp.sos.state.ga.us/corp/soskb/SearchResults.asp?FormName=CorpNameSearch&Words=All&OnlyActive=ON&SearchStr=Cooperative+Parenting+Institute&SearchType=Search

No Records were found for the search criteria ‘Cooperative Parenting Institute’ on 9/17/2011 2:50:24 PM 

I will apologize in public on this blog if I am shown adequate corporation, nonprofit and it’d be nice also to see the professional qualifications too (at this point) for these two women, however, I would at that time note that a more straightforward approach might have been to stick with approximately ONE corporation, nonprofit EIN# if it’s nonprofit and state this on the site.  CRC does this..   However, I won’t expect too much of anyone wrapped up with the likes of the AFCC< given their corporation history, multi-state, and multi-metamorphoses as well.  It’s a family trait.


Back to the Maryland YourDivorceLawyers.com site:

Currently, approximately one-third of the states use Parent Coordinators. There are only four states with Parent Coordinator statutes: Idaho, Kansas, Oklahoma and Oregon. Some states have used existing statutes which allow for “mediators” or “special masters” as a basis to appoint Parent Coordinators: Arizona, California, District of Columbia, Colorado, Hawaii, Massachusetts and New Mexico. Other states appoint Parent Coordinators absent statutory authority: Florida, Georgia, Maryland, Minnesota, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Texas and Vermont.


Non-Profit Corporation – Domestic – Information
Control No.: 0207284
Status: Admin. Dissolved
Entity Creation Date: 2/11/2002
Dissolve Date: 5/16/2008
Jurisdiction: GA

and (there are several, listed alphabetically):

Ann Marie Termini, Ed.S., M.S.
Anne Marie Termini, Ed.S., M.S. LPCAnn Marie Termini, Ed.S., M.S., (Cooperative Parenting and Divorce) is a Licensed Professional Counselor. She has worked with children and families since 1979. Respected in her field, she has conducted seminars on the national, state, and local levels. She has experience developing programs that meet the specific needs of professionals working with children and their families. Mrs. Termini has also published material in professional journals focusing on the therapeutic needs of children. She is a former officer for the San Antonio Association for Marriage and Family Therapy and coordinator for special education services. She has been awarded Clinical Membership in the American Association for Marriage and Family Therapy. Among her many professional activities, Mrs. Termini is a consultant for a family court in Pennsylvania and maintains a private practice. She resides in Clarks Summit, Pennsylvania, with her husband and two daughters.

They also run trainings for Cooperative Parenting, see my “APB” at the end of yesterday’s post.

read this material on the Kentucky Family Court website under “Cooperative Parenting”  Listen to the language.  I’m posting the link so as to show that the URL is indeed a “*.gov” site:   http://courts.ky.gov/stateprograms/divorceeducation/CPD.htm

The overall emphasis of Cooperative Parenting is to be able to offer children of divorce or unmarried couples a home environment free from being caught in the middle of their parents’ hostility and conflict. The goals of the Cooperative Parenting and Divorce “Group Format” are to:

  • Assist parents in shifting their role from former spouses to co-parents
  • Educate parents regarding the impact of parental conflict on their child’s development
  • Help parents identify their contribution to conflict while increasing impulse control
  • Teach parents anger management, communication, and conflict-resolution skills
  • Educate parents about children’s issues in divorce

Family relationships do not disappear when a marriage ends in separation or divorceFor the sake of their children, divorcing parents or unmarried parents should continue to communicate with each other in all matters of child rearing and wellbeing.**  A child’s adjustment to divorce is determined in part by how well divorcing parents share the joint responsibility of raising their children in a cooperative atmosphere.  Unrelenting parental conflict is the single most common cause of poor adjustment in children following a divorce. ***

This paragraph and statements are so broad, vague, and so do NOT apply to real life situations, real family court practices (which includes creating a “sole custody zero contact” custody order for parents who may disagree with the above philosophy for very good reasons — for example, one parent is abusing the children physically, sexually, or has threatened to kill or abduct them, BOTH of which situations continue to happen in the family law process — it’s so ridiculous a statement if taken as fact (and it is STATED as unequivocal fact, without qualification) — as to constitute a religious belief, and a ridiculous one, at that.

***If this is indeed a court of law, than adjusting children is NOT its business.  Of course, by now we should know clearly that though these courts do have laws, deal with laws (and they even have rules and procedures), in driving essence (besides the financial) they are courts of “psychology & counseling,” whether or not it’s called for.  The statement that anything (let alone the AFCC themesong, it’s one constant claim decade after decade, that anything “high-conflict” is bad  . . . . and we live in a country that participates in wars!) is a single cause of “poor adjustment” (adjustment to WHAT?  Being abused, robbed of their child support, having their lives in constant turmoil to satisfy the Federal/State child support enforcement check book balances?)

(sorry about that, but I did notice that Kentucky indeed has gone overboard in promoting parent education and every other kind of education — but when one looks closely, they are typically marketing for some out of state for-profit organization with an AFCC connection and some sort of government grants & contracts, usually, also)

Speaking of which — notice that this Marquette International said that nonprofits were NOT the main source of embezzlement and fraud problems — financial institutions and governments exceeded them in that aspect!

Meanwhile, please do stop by and read more from the Marquette International 2011 copyright description of how nonprofits can avoid this situation.  What I am more interested in ,however, is how citizens can detect (there are signals) when this behavior is habitual, and stop having taxes they pay for social services — or because not paying them could result in a jail term — which are then funneled to programs that steal, or with employees in them who steal.  Perhaps it’s time we re-examine the policy of creating a multi-tiered hierarchy through the US Income Tax, and allowing anyone with an idea and a penchant for forming a corporation (nonprofit of course) to have privileges in their particular desire to reform the world (or certain parts of it) into their own personal images — and not doing it from a level playing field.

This then creates classes of people who do this, and a H U G E superstructure to enable, pay for, support, track, — and fail to adequately supervise, the whole mess.

Consider from Marquette International, Ltd. (British?)

Our research into this topic reveals that the most common types of embezzlement involve the following types of schemes, in order of frequency:

 Forging checks payable to cash, oneself and/or to personal vendors  Pocketing cash receipts meant for deposit into institutional accounts  Issuing extra paychecks and/or bonus checks through payroll to oneself  Submitting fraudulent expense reports for reimbursement  Submitting fraudulent invoices from phony or legitimate vendors  Abusing institutional credit card accounts for personal use  Electronic transfers of institutional funds to personal accounts and/or vendors  Pilfering institutional equipment and/or inventory

Clearly the most common risk to non-profits primarily involve fraudulent or forged check writing schemes as the cases above demonstrate.

. . .  and:

Bank reconciliations should be made by a different person than those that handle cash receipts and cash disbursements.

Know who your institution’s vendors are. As we can see from the above examples, embezzlers often create phony vendors and submit fraudulent invoices for payment.

Examine payroll records regularly. Some embezzlers issue themselves extra paychecks and bonuses through the payroll system, as we have also seen

As a general citizen, we can’t always see payroll records (UNLESS it’s a public entity or paid from one, then we can see payment records through comptroller’s sites, or request, do an FOIA letter) — but we can be on the lookout for “phony vendors” and corporations.  Although it’s not illegal to simply fail — or change one’s mind – – in a business, that happens — a constant rotation of business names by certain individuals, following name themes set by associations they belong to, and a high percentage of these continuing to lose their licenses for failures to file, or never bother to register AT ALL for a nonprofit status, while claiming it — is indication of a racket, and potential racketeering, i.e., RICO.

No wonder there is an ongoing economic crisis.  If we have given up the concept of (or desire, or even hope of) actually tracking what happens to our own wages after they  leave our own pockets and run off to the IRS, then we have lost sight of whose country we are living in.  The HHS and GAO cannot do it all; and what they DO get around to, does not have teeth anyhow.  It’s more concerned with retrieving federal funds (after all, those are federal agencies).





%d bloggers like this: