patrick.mcgreevy@latimes.com
jean.merl@latimes.com
Times staff writers Abby Sewell and Richard Simon contributed to this report. Copyright © 2011, Los Angeles Times
Identify the Entities, Find the Funding, Talk Sense!
“ICF”, or is it “I C F”?? and why the “NRCSPHM” must be strategic to our national defense… First published Oct. 20, 2011 | Short-link ends “-Tb”| about 21,000 words
BLOGGER’s UPDATE MESSAGE Aug. 15, 2018: First published Oct. 20, 2011, not updated since except to add post title w/short-link label (a more recent admin. habit) and change the background color to white (necessitated when blog upgrade retroactively changed the default background color to “yuck pale green”), add a post border line and my now standard font: fairly routine changes.
Otherwise I’m not attempting to improve its curb appeal, not even for quotes (now I often add boxes around them), missing or expired images to logos (now I often take screenshots to avoid that happening), and especially not trying to correct TAGGS.HHS.Gov margins; TAGGs itself has had a major restructure since them). My purpose is for quoting on Twitter. I think the message is still relevant, still “missed” by too many, and worth repeating.
Some terms, individual and nonprofit or program names now much more mainstream as specific public policy models, I was questioning this far back; just over two years after the entire apparatus was cracked open on comprehending the basic concepts behind “Federal incentives to States” under Welfare Reform (two specific funding streams) + where groups like Association of Family and Conciliation Courts’ cult-like, court-connected, nonprofit-spawning group behaviors style=”(it being a membership association primarily of judges, family lawyers, mediators, custody evaluators, and such — people MOST likely to make a FINE living from family court referrals, if not already public civil servants in that capacity!) fit in.
Not including this message and above label, the post is still About 21,000 words (note: that includes all words within all TAGGS tables too)..
First published Oct. 20, 2011 | Short-link ends “-Tb”| about 21,000 words, by LGH (“LetUsGetHonest”)
(Today [Oct. 2011], I simply blogged, and continued — incorporating some discussion about our two main databases, about access/visitation grants, demonstrating the importance of doing trademark registration searches on groups (as in Colorado) and following up on a California-based group (influence found in Colorado by way of Washington) which, having been formed in 1970 as “Mothers Anonymous” and intended to help mothers involved in child abuse stop it, was within one year of incorporation changed to “Parents Anonymous,” got its stuff trademarked, was already, or got “in” with the HHS & DOJ — and is doing, currently about $18 million worth of business with HHS & DOJ combined.
The influence of fatherhood promotion is definitely showing in its materials, as well as the habit of marketing, marketin g, getting the trademark licensed, certifying accreditation to teach one’s own private curriculum brand — AND with close ties to Los Angeles County Judicial System among its board members. This group was THE top grantee of a certain category (in the year 2002), and I hadn’t even heard of it before.
I did not finish with the El Paso County, Colorado information (at bottom), and connecting the work of CPR & PSI to actual Child Support Enforcement Groups (via a different, trademarked name), but although it’s LONGwinded — I guarantee you, taken in small installations, this IS a very informative post.
I also catch TAGGS omitting DUNS# (such that many, many grants will remain unseen) and usaspending.gov doing the exact same thing — with the DUNS#, $697K grants showed (for parents anonymous). Omitting the DUNS$ the $18 million surfaced. O Mi God . . . ..
Oct. 21, 2011 update:
Concern #1:
March 9, 2009 letter from the Executive Office of the Massachusetts, Dept. of Environmental Protection, a 6-page letter to the US Office of Inspector General, expresses concern that ICF was used to evaluate. Troubling 2009 protest of ICF assessment (topic: drinking water contaminate perchlorate, as to cumulative effects on fetus, infants, and children’s neurodevelopment / hypothyroidism; article was “rushed out the door” (full of errors), potential conflict of interest, etc.) – – –
The letter is signed by: Tzedash Zewdie, Ph.D./Toxicologist; Carol Rowan-West, MSPH/Director, Office of Research and Standards, and C.Mark Smith, Ph.D.,SM/Deputy Director of Office of Research and Standards, and Toxicologist. Among other concerns were the dumping of the responsibility for protection from water contamination upon the most vulnerable sectors of the public (young children), to take iodide supplements, and not on the polluters. The letter recommends the OIG make available the drafts from which the OIG (using ICF) got its conclusion.
[article abstract from link to Dr. Zewdie, above): Perchlorate inhibits (blocks, slows, lowers etc.) iodide-uptake in the thyroid. Iodide is required to synthesize hormones critical to fetal and neonatal development. Many water supplies and foods are contaminated with perchlorate. Massachusetts has stricter and more protective standards than other “regulatory agencies”].
(If ICF fudges on something this basic to health of fetuses, infants, and young children, how are they going to be handling the more general, marriage & fatherhood factor?)
Concern #2:
A Wikipedia article (flagged by Wikipedia as probably less than objective) shows how many firms ICF began acquiring, and notes that its CEO is from MIT. What I’m concerned about is why HHS lists this corporation as “City” and not a contractor….. And its habit of acquiring company after company…. Reminds me of Maximus, the child support giant…
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:
Monday, October 3, 2011
Contact: Kenneth J. Wolfe
(202) 401-9215ACF announces over $119 million in Grant Awards for Healthy Marriage and Responsible Fatherhood
HHS’ Administration for Children and Families, Office of Family Assistance (OFA) today announced $119,393,729 in grant awards to 120 grantees to promote healthy marriage and responsible fatherhood. Authorized by the Claims Resolution Act of 2010 (CRA), the grant awards will help fathers and families build strong relationships to support the well-being of their children.
As ever, the missing noun, “mothers.” Leaving it out is accurate, as these do NOT help mothers build strong relationships with their kids, rather, it helps completely eliminate contact with the children in some cases, in order to be more fair to fathers (supposedly) in the courts. Once a family court has eliminated such contact, including by refusing to do anything about ongoing violations of existing court orders, or ongoing threats making attempts to re-establish broken contact a Russian Roulette for some mothers, many, many of the organizations set up to help “BUILD STRONG RELATIONSHIPS” for the kids, refuse to help mothers — at all — even contact them. It is a win-win situation for any substandard father whose real goal is to hurt that mother through taking her kids.
It is a lose-lose situation for the taxpayers, who will have clean-up duty, or pay for ongoing monitoring procedures (supervised visitation centers) which themselves sometimes come up fraudulent.
“A strong and stable family is the greatest advantage any child can have,” said George Sheldon, HHS acting assistant secretary for children and families. “These grants support programs that promote responsible parenting, encourage healthy relationships and marriage, and help families move toward self-sufficiency and economic stability.”
The Healthy Marriage program awarded a total of $59,997,077 in grants, which include 60Community-Centered Healthy Marriage grants and a National Resource Center for Strategies to Promote Healthy Marriage grant. The Responsible Fatherhood program awarded a total of $59,396,652 in grants, which include 55 Pathways to Responsible Fatherhood grants and four Community-Centered Responsible Fatherhood Ex-Prisoner Reentry Pilot Project grants.
THE PRESS RELEASE LIST OF GRANTEES:
After painstakingly comparing the recent ACF announcement on how and to whom it scattered $119 million (more) of “healthy marriage / responsible fatherhood” grants, in a press release which listed no contact, no grant award number, and did not even use the same Grantee names as the database on which one can look these up does (http://TAGGS.hhs.gov, which I keep promoting and quoting on this blog), I have found a 1:1 correspondence to my “90FM” series and the list — with 3 exceptions.
My comment to the last post, I named the few exceptions (including $1.2 million omitted, and about $800K under-reported as to ANTHEM, and this group “ICF” which I had found on-line, but nowhere in the TAGGS database. Til just now.
I also started a new page on this blog (2011 Healthy Marriage Grantees . . . Speed- Dating), but its layout isn’t much better.
I uploaded my printout (which is horizontal and wont fit on this post). Using the TAGGS list, instinctively having discovered the grants series, only to discover that someone had fudged entering the “principal investigator’s” last names – – I had only one group left to locate: ICF, Incorporated out of Fairfax, Virginia, which got a $1.5 million grant to push marriage education, presumably.
Finally I googled the ridiculous set of initials “NRCSPHM” after speculating on their potential meaning (looks like I didn’t read the press release carefully enough, having just skipped to the list of grantees), and found a grants opportunity announcement from San Bernadino County, CA — leading to the interpretation:
NATIONAL
RESOURCE CENTER
for
STRATEGIES
to
PROMOTE HEALTHY MARRIAGE
= NRCSPHM, “obviously”
How grandiose.
Is it not enough to let corporations form, dissolve, and reform to make nonprofits (that don’t report properly to the IRS, or their local state registry of charitable trusts, as required to by law, from the same, fairly narrow set of marriage promoters with government contacts in HHS and/or to the National Fatherhood Intiative, plus those working in the child support and welfare fields, plus anyone whose gut instinct leads them to join some of the right-wing, mega-churches that advertise their wares on-line and run off to Uganda and other sub-Saharan Africa countries to make sure the gays are not getting out of hand, and support leadership who recommend handling this by killing them?
Or groups that believe the best way to stop the spread of AIDS is by persuading hormone-ridden teenagers in school systems which do NOT challenge them adequately to refrain from sex (while failing to account for middle-aged or other adult males who cannot refrain from having sex with THEIR KIDS, or other kids). . . . ..
Just for the record, some marriages need to be broken up because they are just a little to close for comfort, either for the person being assaulted, or for the inappropriate sexual relationships with minors in the family. And those of us who have gotten OUT of some of those situations, and family lines where this was occurring, do not appreciate standing by for the next decade and watching public funds to used to propagate ridiculous practices based on paid-for theory that doesn’t account for exceptions, doesn’t require grantees to really even be legal entities, doesn’t MONITOR the funds from start to finish, and can’t show any results more than accounts of warm bodies who ALLEGEDLY sat through their classes.
We are having ongoing murder/suicide around custody “disputes,” while the groups running the thing run off and meet in exotic or plush conferences, tax-deductible, to run mutual trainings, tax-deductible, and make up new themes to describe the “flawed parents” they are (sigh) forced to deal with in the process of rescuing children and eliminating the concept of crime as crime, to be replaced with new definitions they have (privately) agreed upon, and how to get these “solutions” voted into state laws. If you’re lost, this paragraph was talking about the AFCC; any paragraph about the related CRC would have to talk about the practice of financing this through child support and welfare diversions. That was called “Welfare Reform,” FYI.
There was already a “NATIONAL HEALTHY MARRIAGE RESOURCE CENTER” in California — Dennis Stoica, registered agent:
OK, I let off enough steam (don’t worry, I’m pissed, but not armed, except with information) to get to the point of this post.
I finally found the missing $1,500,000 grant, and grantee.
Do you know why earlier search hadn’t located “ICF, INC”?? Well, looks here like someone decided to put spaces inbetween the initials in the name, although in the ACF press release the acronym for the project award had no spaces:
| ICF Incorporated, LLC (NRCSPHM) | Fairfax |
VA
|
$1,500,000
|
| Award Title | Sum of Actions | |||
| 2011 | ACF | I C F, INC | NATIONAL RESOURCE CENTER FOR STRATEGIES TO PROMOTE HEALTHY MARRIAGE | $ 1,500,000 |
Then I looked up the name, with its idiosyncratic TAGGS database entry, spacing between the letters of the name. OH — there was about another $1 million of grants?
| Recipient Name | City | State | ZIP Code | County | DUNS Number | Sum of Awards |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| I C F, INC | FAIRFAX | VA | 22031-6050 | FAIRFAX | 072648579 | $ 2,477,256 |
The company under which Healthy Marriage (a.k.a. “Responsible Fatherhood,” same diff…) shows as “ICF International” (see below). But
under ICF Incorporated, L.L.C.” in Bloomberg (Businessweek/Investing), after noting “no key executives listed,” and a 1969 founding, shows why we should be giving this company a financial boost, with a $$5.5 million start-up grant, rather than an actual contract:
ICF Incorporated, L.L.C. Wins $107,631,975 Modified Federal Contract02/1/2011Office of Acquisition Management (Environmental Protection Agency), EPA/Headquarters, has awarded a $107,631,975.00 modified federal contract on Feb. 1 for professional, administrative, and management support services to ICF Incorporated, L.L.C.
ICF Inc Win $8,462,890 Federal Contract12/25/2010ICF Inc., Fairfax, Va., announced that it has won a $8,462,890 federal contract from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s Office of Acquisition Management, Cincinnati, for technical and regulatory support for the development of criteria for water media.
ICF Inc. Wins $4.92 Million Federal Contract09/30/2010ICF Inc., Fairfax, Va., won a $4,919,708 federal contract from the U.S. Department of Education’s Contracts and Acquisitions Management for race to the top technical assistance network under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. [“ARRA”]
Well, no, actually more like $3,656,370 million since 2007, and this organization is categorized as “City Government,” although it’s a private, for-profit corporation, from what I can tell in the real world outside TAGGS:
| Recipient: | I C F, INC |
| Address: | 9300 LEE HIGHWAY FAIRFAX, VA 22031-6050 |
| Country Name: | United States of America |
| County Name: | FAIRFAX |
| HHS Region: | 3 |
| Type: | Supplier Organizations ( Service, Supplies, Material and Equipment ) |
| Class: | City Government |
Showing: 1 – 6 of 6 Award Actions
| FY | Award Number | Award Title | Budget Year of Support | Award Code | Agency | Action Issue Date | DUNS Number | Amount This Action |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2011 | 90FH0002 | NATIONAL RESOURCE CENTER FOR STRATEGIES TO PROMOTE HEALTHY MARRIAGE | 1 | 00 | ACF | 09-28-2011 | 072648579 | $ 1,500,000 |
| 2011 | 90PD0271 | SELF-SUFFICIENCY RESEARCH CLEARNINGHOUSE | 1 | 0 | ACF | 09-27-2011 | 072648579 | $ 977,256 |
| Fiscal Year 2011 Total: | $ 2,477,256 | |||||||
| FY | Award Number | Award Title | Budget Year of Support | Award Code | Agency | Action Issue Date | DUNS Number | Amount This Action |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2010 | 90PD0270 | SELF-SUFFICIENCY RESEARCH CLEARINGHOUSE | 2 | 0 | ACF | 09-17-2010 | 072648579 | $ 500,000 |
| Fiscal Year 2010 Total: | $ 500,000 | |||||||
| FY | Award Number | Award Title | Budget Year of Support | Award Code | Agency | Action Issue Date | DUNS Number | @@##Amount This Action |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2009 | 90LH0001 | NATIONAL CHILD CARE TOLL-FREE HOTLINE | 1 | 2 | ACF | 06-15-2009 | 072648579 | $- 702,966 |
| 2009 | 90PD0270 | SELF-SUFFICIENCY RESEARCH CLEARINGHOUSE | 1 | 0 | ACF | 09-18-2009 | 072648579 | $ 500,000 |
| {{LGH: See FOOTNOTES}} Fiscal Year 2009 Total: | $-202,966 | |||||||
| FY | Award Number | Award Title | Budget Year of Support | Award Code | Agency | Action Issue Date | DUNS Number | Amount This Action |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2007 | 90LH0001 | NATIONAL CHILD CARE TOLL-FREE HOTLINE | 1 | 0 | ACF | 09-21-2007 | 072648579 | $ 882,080 |
| Fiscal Year 2007 Total: | $ 882,080 | |||||||
| Total of all award actions: | $ 3,656,370 |
{{{FOOTNOTES: These comments appeared in FY2009 Total “Amount” column. Unclear whether they’re HHS’ or mine. Probably mine, from 2011 post..quoting from ICF International website at that time}}
Also in 2005, ICF International acquired Caliber Associates, a Fairfax, Virginia, firm that provided high-end consulting services, primarily to U.S. federal clients.In 2007, ICF International acquired Energy and Environmental Analysis (EEA), Advanced Performance Consulting Group (APCG), Z-Tech Corporation, and SH&E.In 2008, ICF acquired Jones & Stokes.[3]In 2009, ICF International acquired Macro International Inc.[4] and Jacob & Sundstrom, Inc.[5]
In 2010, ICF acquired Marbek Resource Consultants Ltd.[6]
In 2011, ICF acquired AeroStrategy LLC
This is a major corporation doing major business with the US Govt and others; it was founded originally by a Tuskeegee airman, and has deep connections to the defense industry and technology. (read up from its site). It went public (Trading on NASDAQ) as of 2006 for $12.00 a share and is danged impressive!
This is the “SHORT” description. AGAIN, I note that the TAGGS database did NOT give its accurate name (omitting the “INTERNATIONAL”) for some reason spaced out the letters of its name (which the company, obviously, does not do) and so forth. Here is website description from the news release on its going public in 2006
ICF International (Nasdaq: ICFI) partners with government and commercial clients to deliver consulting services and technology solutions in the energy, environment, transportation, social programs, defense, and homeland security markets. The firm combines passion for its work with industry expertise and innovative analytics to produce compelling results throughout the entire program life cycle, from analysis and design through implementation and improvement. Since 1969, ICF has been serving government at all levels, major corporations, and multilateral institutions. More than 1,800 employees serve these clients worldwide. ICF’s Web site is http://www.icfi.com.
Here they are describing their “RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD” work (no mention is made of “marriage” in the overview). They are experienced in transforming communities, and no doubt, their work will indeed continue to give father(hood practitioners and promoters) the PR edge and corporate influence, plus public presence through social media, that mothers — who are losing their kids to these fatherhood programs in droves, now — do not have someone doing for our cause, although we give birth to these children, after 9 months (Usually) sometimes nurse them, alter our lives to take care of them, and have a President who has only expanded the programs that his Presidential forebears put in place, which cause this trouble to women leaving abuse while there is a family court system waiting, with open jaws, to direct traffic to one of their family-strengthening programs…
ICF helps U.S. federal and state agencies, grantees, nonprofit agencies, and service providers in reaching communities, fathers, and families with the message of how responsible fatherhood is critically linked to nearly every aspect of a thriving community.
Our experts bring skills from the fields of youth at risk, education, children and youth, poverty, and family strengthening and can see the links among these areas. Although the issue has been recently spotlighted in the media and in policy, ICF’s work in this area spans years.
ICF contributes toward finding ways to help providers implement programs that improve outcomes for children and families. We have helped service providers implement systemic changes to bring men into mentoring, civic life, and neighborhood stabilization efforts in ways that have wide-ranging impact.
We help organizations get the information that they need to develop programs that support fathers and families through a range of services including: (See site for the list):
… CLIENTS (and we see it’s not the OCSE, but the OFA)
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS)
- Administration for Children and Families (ACF)
- Office of Family Assistance (OFA)
The most recent one they are doing acknowledges — taking TANF monies and trying to direct traffic to a FBCO (Faith-based group) — which in the case of women trying to leave abuse, which SOMETIMES includes abuse by priests, preachers, or pastors, or at least coverups of this BY them, after being made aware of it (it’s part of the religious territory) will then have the same types of groups rooting for the men they are trying to keep a safe distance from. I”m going to post the list of projects, current and past, done by this organization. (No WONDER things are getting rough around the edges in family courts!)
PLEASE NOTE: the ACF Press release mentions this $1.5 million grant going to the “healthy marriage” grantee portion (as if this wasn’t primarily promoting paternalism anyhow) — but as far as I can tell, ICF International considers the project to be filed under “RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD.” That is the program link.
http://www.icfi.com/markets/families-and-communities/responsible-fatherhood#tab-2-projects
Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) and Faith-Based Community Organization (FBCO) Collaboration
With our strong research capacity and experienced practitioner-consultants, ICF is improving state and local TANF services by connecting local programs with high-performing FBCOs already serving similar populations.
Welfare Peer Technical Assistance (WPTA)
ICF administers technical assistance to WPTA, which facilitates the sharing of information between and among States, Territories, Tribes, and localities and helps establish linkages between organizations serving the needs of Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) participants.
National Healthy Families Technical Assistance Project
ICF supports OFA and its technical assistance teams in providing seamless, comprehensive technical assistance (TA) to support the needs of Healthy Marriage and Responsible Fatherhood Education grantees.
National Responsible Fatherhood Clearinghouse (NRFC)
ICF leads content management and direction for the National Responsible Fatherhood Clearinghouse, which serves as a national repository and distribution center for information and research relating to responsible fatherhood programs, initiatives and activities.
Office of Family Assistance (OFA) Targeted Technical Assistance
ICF provides technical assistance planning and delivery, research, writing, training, and wraparound product development to OFA Targeted Technical Assistance, an innovative technical assistance and project support contract.
{{Sev’l expired-link logos from 2011 were removed during 2018 quick-edit update//LGH}}
Now that I have a DUNS#, let’s see how much business other than HHS grants, they do with us, meaning the U.S.
USASPENDING.GOV:
For example, this grant:
Transaction Number # 5
|
Date Signed: September 30 , 2011Obligation Amount: $9,481,719 |
|||||||||||||
(NOTICE the other database {{USASPENDING.gov}} doesn’t add the spaces between initials of the group’s name). . . .HHS is a world unto itself, for sure…)
From the TIMELINE tab (on this DUNS# for ICF, INC) it shows that 2003 was a low, 2009, a substantial jump, and 2011 looks to be a banner year for the company.
Of the $1 billion plus of business, $32 million were received in 84 grants, the most (or, largest amount) in 2009.
NOT that you can rely on this database, either (i’ve found by experience, but here’s the other acknowledgement — it aint’ complete, or accurate, or reliable);
I checked “Health and Human Services” (5 grants) and came up with a smaller number than are on the TAGGS database, by about $1.5 million: The last reward does not show yet. (however in other searches, I’ve found grants in prior years, over $1 million, that didn’t make it onto USASpending ever, apparently. I have typically thought of this as USASpending UNDER-reporting, and only recently (when associated with all the other “anomalies” of the TAGGS database) considered the possibility of HHS OVER-reporting, which would be consistent with the practices of some of their court-affiliated grantees, a few of who have been caught (I’m thinking particularly in the supervised visitation field: Karen Anderson, Genia Shockome cases .. … )
COMMENTARY on USASPENDING.GOV (various, random):
OMB falls short on USASpending.gov data, GAO says
OMB has not included subcontracting award data on USAspending.gov and has no specific plan for collecting such data.
- By Matthew Weigelt
- Mar 15, 2010
The USASpending.gov Web site has been live for more than two years so the public can see where its tax dollars are going, but the site’s data has not been complete nor accurate, according to a new report.
USASpending.gov went live Dec.13, 2007–a month earlier than the legislated deadline. It’s a Web site compiling a comprehensive list of the more than $1 trillion in financial assistance awarded through contracts, loans and grants. Congress mandated such a site in its Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA), which became law in September 2006.
Since the Office of Management and Budget launched the site, OMB has fallen short of several of program requirements, the Government Accountability Office [“GAO”] reported March 12.
Or, from 2011, from “SUNLIGHT FOUNDATION”:
House Oversight Subcommittee Discusses Problems with USASpending.gov Data
Kaitlin Lee
March 15, 2011, 4:46 p.m.
On Friday, Ellen testified in front of the Subcommittee on Technology, Information Policy, Intergovernmental Relations and Procurement Reform, a subcommittee of the House Committee on Oversight and Reform. Her testimony mostly focused on the findings from our Clearspending project, which assessed the data quality of the grant programs in USASpending.gov. It was heartening to see the committee taking the issue of data quality in USASpending.gov so seriously. While admittedly not a sexy topic, this issue has serious implications in decisions that the government makes about our federal spending. To quote Rep. Issa’s (CALIFORNIA) opening statement, “The failures to make the data right is the reason we’re not getting a responsible government”.
Clearspending found nearly $1.3 trillion dollars
in misreported spending in 2009. This includes spending reports that were late, incomplete or inconsistent with other information sources that track federal spending. In Ellen’s testimony, she discussed two specific examples of poor data quality in USASpending.gov: the Department of Education reported over $6 trillion in student loans for 2010 and the Department of Agriculture did not report any spending for the National School Lunch Program, which obligated $8 billion in grants last year. The CIOs from both these agencies also testified on the panel, and were given a chance to respond to our critiques during the committee Q&A.
Chris Smith, the CIO of the USDA, testified that the reason the grants were not reported was because they went to individuals, and the law governing grant reporting does not require reporting for grants to individuals. However, the actual program description describes these grants as formula grants to states. The entity receiving the grant is a state, not an individual, and therefore the grant is subject to the reporting requirements. Smith also mentioned that the transactions were under $25,000 and therefore not subject to the reporting requirement. While this may be the case, it seems unlikely. The program in question has a $10 billion bu
You Will Be Watched on USASpending.gov…Maybe Even Prosecuted
SUNDAY, JANUARY 13. 2008 AT 01:32 PM | BY COBY LOGEN IN BREAKIN’ THE LAW
I intended to write about how innovative and exciting USASpending.govis, because it opens up extensive government budget databases: you can search, browse, and even write programs to query the system.But, that changed when I read this on the home page:WARNING: This is a United States Federal Government computer system that is “FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY.” This system is subject to monitoring. Therefore, no expectation of privacy is to be assumed. Individuals found performing unauthorized activities are subject to disciplinary action including criminal prosecution. Click here for more information.
Wow.I guess Uncle Sam doesn’t really want to open up his budget for public review.dget. Let’s say that each state gets an equal payment once a month. That would still be over $16 million dollars per transaction–not even close to the $25,000 minimum. It seems that the reporting guidelines have been misinterpreted in this case.
and, a rather frightening 2007 article on USASPENDING.gov from “DOTGOVWATCH.ORG” indicates, while we are flopping around hoping to get some sensible information, or doing so is likely to be watched, and that the home page contained this warning:
WARNING: This is a United States Federal Government computer system that is “FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY.” This system is subject to monitoring. Therefore, no expectation of privacy is to be assumed. Individuals found performing unauthorized activities are subject to disciplinary action including criminal prosecution. Click here for more information. {link has moved since….}
GRANT ANNOUNCEMENT for this NRCSPHM:
| National Resource Center for Strategies to Promote Healthy Marriage HHS-2011-ACF-OFA-FH-0207 |
| Funding Opportunity Title: | National Resource Center for Strategies to Promote Healthy Marriage |
| Funding Opportunity Number (FON): | HHS-2011-ACF-OFA-FH-0207 |
| Program Office: | Office of Family Assistance |
| Funding Type: | Discretionary |
| Funding Category: | Cooperative Agreement (WITH WHOM??) |
| Announcement Type: | Initial |
| CFDA#: | 93.086 |
| Post Date: | 06/28/2011 |
| Application Due Date: | 07/28/2011 |
| The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), Administration for Children and Families (ACF), Office of Family Assistance (OFA) is announcing the solicitation of applications to competitively award cooperative agreements for demonstration projects that support “healthy marriage promotion activities” as authorized by The Claims Resolution Act of 2010 (Public Law 111-291).The cooperative agreement awarded under the Funding Opportunity Announcement will support the development, implementation, management of a National Resource Center for Marriage and Relationship Education (NRCMRE).The NRCMRE will support marriage and relationship education (MRE) program development, implementation, and integration. ACF is responsible for Federal programs that promote the economic and social well-being of families, children, individuals, and communities. The NRCMRE will provide MRE information, resources,and technical assistance designed to assist in the development of a broad approach to serving families and children by incorporating MRE into already existing services. |
WHAT”S NEW? Welfare Reform has always supported DHHS running social science experimentations on the American Public, and required states receiving assistance — access visitation assistance — to help the Secretary of HHS (NOTE: Presidential appointee, not elected) — run them:
This SEpt. 1999 “ACTION TRANSMITTAL” (internal HHS document posted on-line) regarding 45 CFR 303.109 shows that there was not even a requirement to monitor what happened to the grants added until 2 years after they’d been in operation! Nor was there a stipulation for protection procedures. It provides a nice history of the Access Visitation procedures, which apparently started in 1988 with $4 million and have been at $10 million/year since 1996 or so. Obama Administration likes to stay on the good side of the fatherhood movement and so has been promising to increase and expand this.
Recommended browsing for review, and for newcomers to the concept that the Federal Government is interested in your family court case, and tweaking the outcome of it through federal incentives to the states.
| Apr 28, 1999 | AT-99-007 | Final Rule – Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs: Monitoring, Evaluation, and Reporting |
The intro gets a little technical, but read it anyhow:
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
Administration for Children & Families
Office of Child Support EnforcementAT-99-07
ISSUED: April 28, 1999
TO: STATE AGENCIES ADMINISTERING CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT PLANS UNDER TITLE IV-D OF THE SOCIAL SECURITY ACT AND OTHER INTERESTED INDIVIDUALS
SUBJECT: Final Rule 150 Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs: Monitoring, Evaluation, and Reporting
BACKGROUND: Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs is a recent program to enable States to establish and administer programs to support and facilitate noncustodial parent’s access to and visitation of their children. $10 million per year has been granted to States since 1997; it is a continuing capped appropriation. Funds are granted to states based upon the number of children in single family households, a $50,000 minimum per state will be increased to $100,000 this year. The range of grants is from $100,000 to nearly $1 million per year. State programs are managed by agencies designated by the Governor; many states do not operate the program through the IV-D agency. Funds may be used for the following activities: mediation (both voluntary and mandatory), counseling, education, development of parenting plans, visitation enforcement (including monitoring, supervision and neutral drop-off and pick up), and development of guidelines for visitation and alternative custody arrangements.
ATTACHMENT: Attached is the final rule published in the Federal Register on March 30, 1999 (64 FR 15132-6). This is a new regulation mandated by Section 469B(e)(3) of the Social Security Act which was enacted by Section 391 of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996. This rule is consistent with the President’s Memorandum of March 4, 1995 to the heads of Department and Agencies which announced a government-wide Regulatory Reinvention Initiative to reduce or eliminate mandated burdens on States and others.
REGULATORY REFERENCE: 45 CFR Parts 303.109
DATES: This regulation is effective April 29, 1999
INQUIRIES: ACF Regional Administrators
__________________________
David Gray Ross
Commissioner
Office of Child Support Enforcement. . .
SUMMARY: This final rule implements provisions contained in section 391 of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 and establishes the requirements for State monitoring, reporting and evaluation of Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs. Access and Visitation programs support and facilitate non-custodial parents’ access to and visitation of their children by means of activities including mediation (both voluntary and mandatory), counseling, education, development of parenting plans, visitation enforcement (including monitoring, supervision and neutral drop-off and pickup) and development of guidelines for visitation and alternative custody arrangements.
In Trumbull, OHIO — very recently — a young girl (13 months old) was RAPED by both her parents in a supervised visitation facility; which was discovered not by the supervising facility (obviously) but by a relative who caught images on the cell phone. The same mother’s prior daughter, “Tiffany” had been snatched by the foster care system at birth, and — in a foster home with mother and father — had been in 2009, killed by ‘asphyxiation associated with blunt trauma.” This was not a custody situation, but a CPS-type situation. . . . .
To show their appreciation for reporting something they had missed, the system ALSO took the two-year old son of the relative who did the right thing and reported — called the police, disowned the relative who had perpetrated this horror. Ohio is up in arms about this, and I have a post in draft format exploring how the funding works in OHIO to enable this kind of “protection” of children. I found out that (speaking of incentives to break up families — while HHS pays other people to strengthen them) the Ohio DJFS (Dept of Job & Family Services) or whatever it’s called, got $206 MILLION — in 2011 alone — for Adoption Incentives, and $191 MILION for Foster Care (or vice versa). Maybe these were support payments to foster care families and not just incentives, but the amount clearly trounced other payments under the same DUNS# for this major department.
All the fatherhood fundings seem to come to this dept. as well as the access visitation fundings. I found it tied into the Marriage Education stream as well, at the sate level, and linked to a TENNESSEE group selling curricula, a (nonprofit?) called FIRST THINGS FIRST. The item in question was trying to encourage black families to get and stay married, specifically. I think OHIO is a bit afraid of black people; they should move to East or West Coast (or Chicago) and “get real!” vs. trying to regulate breeding behaviors through selling marriage education!
Let me quote this 1999 HHS Action Transmittal (of a final rule regulating access/visitation grants) — because it’s not a half-bad summary, or birds-eye view of how some of these programs (including the healthy marriage system also) really got entrenched and became the norm:
AT-9907, Issued April 28, 1999
History of Federal Involvement in Access and Visitation
The Federal financial involvement in access and visitation began when the Family Support Act of 1988 (Pub. L. 100-485) authorized up to $4 million each year for fiscal years 1990 and 1991 for State demonstration projects to develop, improve, or expand activities designed to increase compliance with child access provisions of court orders.
Typically the process of encouraging someone to comply with a court order is contained right in the legal process. You file a contempt order with the court, and the judge rules on this, or sanctions someone. What necessity was there to develop programs to “encourage” U.S. citizens to comply with rule of law, or a court order? I do not believe this could’ve been the genuine purpose, just the alleged purpose. Designing programs to manipulate people’s behavior is manipulation, period. using public money to do so, I say, is wrong. We EXPECT people to adhere to a common standard, and then use the existing state and local court systems, so all know what the standards are, and there can be a common expectation of ethics. Alas, this system was much more distant from the people affected (i.e. voted on in washington; but some of us live on the other coast).
The legislation required an evaluation of these projects and a Report to Congress on the findings. In October 1996, the Department of Health and Human Services transmitted to Congress the report entitled, “Evaluation of the Child Access Demonstration Projects”. The report indicated that requiring both parents to attend mediation sessions and developing parenting plans was successful for cases without extensive long-term problems.
In September, 1996, the U.S. Commission on Child and Family Welfare submitted a report to the President and Congress which strongly endorsed additional emphases at all government levels, especially State and local levels, to ensure that each child from a divorced or unwed family have a parenting plan which encourages and enables both parents to stay emotionally involved with the child(ren).
Finally, PRWORA added a new provision at section 391 to award funds annually to States to establish and administer programs to support and facilitate non-custodial parents’ (fathers or mothers) access to, and visitation of, their children. Activities funded by this program include mediation (both voluntary and mandatory), counseling, education, development of parenting plans, visitation enforcement (including monitoring, supervision, neutral drop-off and pickup), development of guidelines for visitation and alternative custody arrangements. States may administer programs directly or through contracts or grants with courts, local public agencies, or nonprofit private entities; States are not required to operate such programs on a statewide basis. Under this provision, the amount of the grant to be made to the State shall be the lesser of 90 percent of State expenditures during the fiscal year for activities just described or the allotment to the State for the fiscal year. The Federal government will pay for 90 percent of project costs, up to the amount of the grant allotment. In other words, States are required to provide for at least ten percent of project funding even if they do not spend their entire allotment. The allotment would be determined as follows: an amount which bears the same ratio to $10,000,000 for grants as the number of children in the State living with only 1 biological parent bears to the total number of such children in all States. Such allotments are to be adjusted so that no State is allotted less than $50,000 for fiscal years 1997 and 1998 or $100,000 for any succeeding fiscal year.
As you can see, Congress wants these programs in operation. As it says, they are directed towards fathers (admittedly then, and probably still (though less so now, about 15 years later) who are the main noncustodial parents and ones paying child support (although — is anyone keeping track??)) So right here, unknown to me (I was in a marriage, getting assaulted at the time, like many other women), my government was setting up programs to encourage INCREASING noncustodial parent time beyond whatever we would eventually decide ourselves, without these programs’ involvement.
Personal/Anecdotal re: Mediation:
This also resulted — in my case — of going straight to mandated mediation upon a restraining order having been made permanent, and in that condition (while I was still in shock, and probably he was also) a court order was figured out in a VERY short time frame (one appointment), where I was not in shape to protect my boundaries, informed of the access visitation programs, or knowledgeable even about the rules of court for DV cases. Our mediation almost completely defeated the prime stipulations of the restraining order. Bad idea! But because a restraining order was such a huge leap, at the time, our family didn’t know what it’d just been cheated out of, on the basis of anticipation that their father was going to bail out on child support (before any was really set, even!), and needed more policy to encourage him to pay.
Here is how this Action Transmittal responds to comments raised by DV advocates, or at least some, as to safety issues. Please note that this is 1999, and only NOW has any provision whatsoever regarding safety to the custodial parent been raised:
Comment: There was a concern among commenters that the regulation contains no requirement to monitor whether States are screening potential clients for domestic violence (spousal or child abuse) to ensure that the battered spouse is not put at further risk.
In 2006 (10 years later) and in countless instances inbetween, a woman was murdered during an exchange of children. However, as her husband had buried her, and no body was found, it was an unusual high-profile trial: Two children (6 & 8) were there when she was murdered during the routine, court-ordered exchange. Finally, the man was convicted, and as part of his plea-bargain, helped the police by leading them to the (shallow grave) 3 miles from his home: Hans & Nina Reiser case. DastardlyDads blogspot keeps count (I couldn’t handle doing this, have no idea how the person in question does): see (February 2011 post)
Response: We share the concerns for safety expressed by commentators who wrote about domestic violence.
No they don’t. Not really. I do not believe the people responding here were themselves in situations where a life was at risk, possibly theirs, possibly their offspring’s, around custody issues. If it had been, the response would’ve been less “detached” and “handsoff” in nature:
Access and visitation by a non-custodial parent can lead to dangerous situations for some parents and their children. The safety of the custodial parents and their children must be addressed when it is a problem.
CAN? It already had been; the wording should have been “has led.” And “dangerous situations” doesn’t use the word “lethal” in any way, which it should’ve.
But — because of child suppport ,and because of child psychologist reports about continuing contact, there MUST be no complete separation from the criminally behaving parent.
It is our intent to encourage States to ensure safety when necessary in implementing grants under this program. States should develop procedures to assess the degree of danger, weighing sensitively the assertions of both parents.
“Weighing sensitively” replaces, evaluating the truth of . .. But the, we’re talking family courts…..
In response to the comments, we have added to the regulation a new requirement under Sec. 303.109(a) requiring States to monitor programs to safeguard against domestic violence, as follows: “(a) Monitoring. The State must monitor all programs funded under Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs to ensure that the programs * * * contain safeguards to ensure the safety of parents and children.”
Comment: Several commenters suggested that the regulation require specific approaches for addressing problems that may occur in activities funded by these grants. Concerns were noted regarding mandated mediation and supervised transfer and visitation of children.
Response: Since we wish to provide maximum flexibility to the States, we have not required specific approaches to dealing with issues of domestic violence. Consistent with our authority under the Statute to regulate what the States need to monitor, we require States to monitor their grantees to ensure that there are procedures in place and being used to ensure safety.
Regarding mandated mediation, we wish to make clear that the statute does not mandate mediation for any particular clients. Mediation mandated by the courts for contending parents is one service that the States may chose to fund. We recognize that in some cases, mediation may be dangerous for the victim of abuse. There is also evidence that in some cases involving partner abuse, mediation has been effective. This is a service that warrants careful monitoring by States to ensure that safety assessments are conducted. When it is determined not to be warranted, alternative forms of conflict resolution should be used.
Alternative forms of conflict resolution, most likely involving the same stable of family law mediation providers, i.e., AFCC personnel who tend to minimize DV and discredit it.
EVALUATION OF CHILD ACCESS PROJECTS
This “Evaluation of the Child Access Demonstration Projects,” I have read. Highlights from this one, published by HHS, acknowledge that the purpose is SPECULATION that more access might mean more child support payments — however, also cites child psychology as it being better for the child to have contact with both children. This being in 1996, and two short years after the Violence Against Women Act (“VAWA”) passed, failure to mention it is notable. Responding to “fathers’ rights groups” IS mentioned:
Purpose
As set forth in the Family Support Act of 1988, this evaluation explored the effect of two waves of Child Access Demonstration projects on the amount of time required to resolve access disputes; reductions in litigation related to access disputes; improvements in compliance with court-ordered child support amounts; and promotion of the emotional adjustment of children. It also assessed the extent and nature of child access disputes as well as parental satisfaction with the demonstrations.
Background
Recent research in child psychology shows generally that close, frequent, and positive contact with the father following divorce and separation is beneficial for the child.
Child access is also important for child support enforcement. Recent Census data and research studies have indicated that where noncustodial parents have visitation rights or joint custody they tend to be more compliant with child support orders, although it is difficult to show cause and effect since the parents wanting to see the child may also be the better payers. Desire for increased child contact may follow child support payment rather than vice versa. Moreover, denial of visitation is seen {{by _ _ _ _ _ _ _??}} as the major reason for nonpayment of child support for noncustodial parents who have money to pay child support.
Whatever the reason is, the person is noncompliant. Trying to set up programs to “get inside their head” as to why is based on some philosophy, I guess, that it’s more important to please noncompliant parents (NB, at the time, primarily fathers) than to establish — for both parties and for stability for the kids — an expectation that a court order is a court order. Same for visitation.
There has been considerable pressure {{from fathers and fathers’ groups}} for the system to give support to the needs of noncustodial as well as custodial parents.
In 1996, it’s obvious that then-President Clinton’s 1995 Executive Order to incorporate more ‘Fatherhood” in federal agencies was already out there. No mention of this seems real odd.
Over 43 States authorize joint custody. There are currently over 200 court-based divorce mediation programs and over 280 fathers’ rights groups organized throughout the country to facilitate child access by noncustodial parents.
Of course there are! The Children’s Rights Council (Maryland) had been around since the 1980s; and the HHS itself had just provided a tidy grant to start the National Fatherhood Initiative aslo. Regarding “over 200 court-based divorce mediation programs” — the organization most pushing mediation has been the AFCC.
A co-founder of AFCC includes Jessica Pearson (hear tell, see NAFCJ.net, also her name is on at least one of its earlier incorporations in California, from Denver; I’ve posted it more than once on-line here). This report was done by
Congress responded to the continuing public debate about the problem of noninvolvement by noncustodial parents and resulting litigation by directing HHS to conduct State demonstration projects relating to a variety of means of facilitating continuing involvement by the noncustodial parent.
In 1996 a new Federal grant program for child access and visitation programs was established nationwide. (etc. . . . You can read it. . .. )
This is a later (after 2002) summary bearing the typical evaluation credit: Center for Policy Research / Policy Studies, Inc. (both in Denver).
Its writers (compilers, I gather) are Jessica Pearson and David Price, for the respective agencies. I’ve profiled both these corporations plenty on the blog and associated Dr. Pearson clearly with the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts. Its language is apparent here, in discussion A/V funding when it comes to “high-conflict families.” I think this section pretty much Says it All — in describing the largest court system in the country (California’s) zero mention is made of the phrase “domestic violence.” Notice the substitutionary words, applied to BOTH parents, not just one. THey are viewed as a unit, and not as individuals:
The phrase “high-conflict” is used 40 times (approximately once every 4 pages on averate) and an entire chapter is devoted to how to deal with such, “parents.”
SECTION 3 SERVICES FOR HIGH-CONFLICT FAMILIES
“To investigate and provide long-term access assistance to families with entrenched disputes and/or serious allegations of parental misconduct, using a variety of court-ordered services.”
“serious allegations of parental misconduct” clearly puts said misconduct into the “behavioral” realm and not criminal. Readers should understand that the authors, by association, would consider “parental alienation” serious misconduct, as well as alleging or reporting, or having allowed a child to report, any serious misconduct. There are no moral values or standards outside the dispute resolution industry here, apparently:
INTRODUCTION
Brief investigations by trained court personnel when parents exhibit high conflict behavior, with recommendations to the court on needed services.
It is not necessary to conduct any extended investigation, or read reports of non-court personnel, such as police reports, or CPS reports.
Translation: This is a “Catch-22.” If there HAS been “serious parental misconduct” it is going to cause conflict — unless one parent can be extorted or intimidated into silence (which this system helps do). . . . NO reference to ascertaining the cause of it shows up. The knee-jerk solution is tell the court to “recommend needed services”
I will translate this formula for driving business to related professionals, or court-affiliated nonprofits another time here:
ANY CONFLICT is an excuse to INCREASE BILLABLE HOURS (whether to Title IV_D provided, or force the parent(s) to pay) to some “SERVICE.”
SECTION 3 SERVICES FOR HIGH-CONFLICT FAMILIES
INTRODUCTION
More approaches listed (on this page, anyhow):
- Multi-session, psycho-educational interventions for parents for whom domestic violence has been an issue, with the objective of helping them parent apart and understand the dynamics of domestic violence.
- Monthly meetings and/or telephone contact on a more frequent basis with mental health professionals to resolve ongoing issues and disputes about access
- Explanatory materials on supervised visitation and exchange services for parents and providers in many languages.
- Supervised exchange services for families who display conflict during drop-off and pick-up of the children
- Supervised visitation services for families with allegations of domestic violence, abuse, and/or other forms of parental misconduct or conflict.
- ␣␣ Teaching inexperienced parents how to interact with their children during supervised visits by providing instruction and feedback.**
- ThedevelopmentofastandingorderofthePresidingJudgeoftheFresnoCountySuperior Court that police can invoke requiring parents to use supervised visitation services if the police are called out two or more times to assist with the exchange of the children.␣␣ Thedevelopmentofa12-weekcurriculumfornever-married,separated,ordivorcedparents where domestic violence has been an issue.
(**aka, do not rape, etc.)
A 12-week curriculum for domestic violence? (There are 52-week batterers intervention programs, and they aren’t even proven effective…excepting getting out of a jail sentence for DV)
the word “mother” occurs 42 times and “father” more than 100 times. The document is well worth reading to understand how the court “thinks” about parents walking into its doors, while providing services that the federal government (as of the late 1990s) pays 90% of the expenses for, and that any state paying less than $100K for statewide services will still get $100K for statewide services anyhow.
I have not tracked to what extent this program has been expanded, or the Administration hopes to expand payments for it as of 2012. I have stomach issues and it’s early in the day, might need to keep any meals down . . .
David A. Price is a very interesting professional: He publishes consistently opposite the CPR group, and/or with Jane Venohr, Ph.D. (who has been staff in both CPR & PSI), for example, in Colorado:
Multiple Initiatives Grant
- A Profile of Former-TANF and NON-TANF Clients in the IVD Caseload
Jessica Pearson, Ph.D., Nancy Thoennes, Ph.D., 01/24/2000.- A Study Of Interest Usage On Child Support Arrears State Of Colorado Final Report
Jane Venohr, Ph.D., David Price, Ph.D., Esther Griswold, M.A., 06/01/2000.- County Policies and Attitudes Towards Incarcerated NCPs
Esther Ann Griswold, M.A., Jessica Pearson, Ph.D., 04/24/2000.- Longer Term Evaluation of Colorado’s Driver’s License Suspension
Nancy Thoennes, Ph.D., Jessica Pearson, Ph.D., 02/24/2000.- Survey of State Child Support Policies, Procedures, and Programs for Incarcerated Parents
Esther Griswold, M.A., Jessica Pearson, Ph.D., Christine Allison, M.A., 09/24/2000.- The Effects of Repeated Driver’s License Suspensions Among Parents Who Owe Child Support
Nancy Thoennes, Ph.D., Jessica Pearson, Ph.D., 09/24/2000.- Updated Colorado Staffing Standards for Child Support Enforcement
Jane C. Venohr, Ph.D., David A. Price, Ph.D., 07/28/2000.
Notice the authors. (Thoennes is also CPR). In the selection above, the piece citing David Price has credit like this:
Jane Venohr, Ph.D.
David Price, Ph.D.
Policy Studies Inc.
999 18th Street, Suite 1000
Denver, CO 80202
(303) 863-0900
(on the left — and on the right side, is CPR)
Esther Griswold, M.A., Center for Policy Research 1570 Emerson Street Denver, CO 80218 (303) 837-1555
However, Jane Venohr has been (from the start? Certainly for a long time) “CPR” — she is one of the 3 key leaders, out of 6 women listed in “About Us.”
Jane Venohr, Ph.D., Research Associate
jvenohr@centerforpolicyresearch.org
Dr. Venohr has over 20 years of experience assessing and researching Medicaid, child care, child support, and other health and human services and workforce programs. She is the nation’s leading expert on child support guidelines and has worked with over 25 states to develop and update guidelines and present them to legislatures.
So for purposes of the study, Jane wore her PSI had with Mr. Price, and someone else wore the CPR had. This is common among AFCC-personnel; if you don’t know the common association, you just don’t know. Perhaps in all professions, but I sure notice it among the court’s. ALSO, in Colorado, “David A. Price” is only associated with two corporations, one of which (he) voluntarily dissolved in 2008, apparently, namely, a law firm:
Found 2 matching record(s). Viewing page 1 of 1. # Name Address Type Count 1 PRICE, DAVID A. 930 ACOMA ST., #415, DENVER, CO
80204, USRegistered Agent 1 2 PRICE, DAVID A. 200 GRAND AVE STE 315, GRAND
JUNCTION, CO 81501, USRegistered Agent 1
The first one was formed (note) in 1984, and he has been filing consistently — unlike many marriage grantees– even this past month! It’s also a nonprofit.
|
|||||||||||||
I believe I have pointed this out before, but Policy Studies Inc. has 12 trade names, many of them relating to child support; (always) notice the dates of incorporation:
|
|||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
and the last two:
| # | ID Number![]() |
Document Number | Name | Status | Form | Effective Date | Comment |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 11 | 20021223054 | 20021223054 | BOULDER COUNTY PARENT OPPORTUNITY PROGRAM (POP) | Effective | DPC | 08/13/2002 12:00 AM | |
| 12 | 20021223055 | 20021223055 | EL PASO COUNTY PARENT OPPORTUNITY PROGRAM (POP) | Effective | DPC | 08/13/2002 12:00 AM |
The “Parent Opportunity Programs” have been studied, noted as problemmatic for mothers, by National Alliance of Family Court Judges (Liz Richards).
The El Paso County Child Support Services site has a section on this, what appears to be an access-visitation-funded program, one would think from the description:
This would seem to be a government site, judging by the phrase “El Paso County” and how official it looks. However the URL is clearly a *.com:


| The purpose of the Fatherhood Program is to provide education and support for those individuals desiring to enrich their lives and their child(ren) while providing peer based engagement, motivation and indefinite support to individual fathers and families. These fathers will be educated about practical parenting styles and skills. Emphasis will be placed on the critical need for fathers to be active in parenting their children {{Access & Visitation…}} as well as serving as positive role models for other children in our communities. The Fatherhood Program will assist dads to identify and overcome barriers they face in maintaining an active role in their children’s lives,{{also code for access and visitation, possibly including help modifying support or custody orders}} becoming and remaining current on financial obligations to their children, and finding on-going support in the community. | |
| Through a case planning process, a dad’s strengths will be identified, opportunities evaluated and discussed, and a simple written plan formulated. The plan will identify the responsiblity of the dad and the responsibility theFatherhood Case Manager in implementing the plan. |
The ‘Fatherhood Case Manager’ is listed as a DHHS employee:
“The Fatherhood Program of Jefferson County is a program initiative of The Jefferson County Child Support office and is funded by a grant from the State of Colorado Division of Colorado Works made possible by a grant from The Administration of Children and Families Office of Family Assistance.” (ACF/OFA, meaning, probably, National). “Colorado WOrks” is no doubt their welfare program).” Suppose a noncustodial mother hits this page? We do exist, even as the silent minority!)
SEE HOW THIS WoRKS, yet? LInks to, for example:
WEBSITES
www.coloradodads.org
www.familiesfirstcolorado.org
. . .(I explored this site a bit, which includes a home for abused children, and “Circle of Parents(TR), which also turns out to be HHS/OFA funded:
Families First received a Partners for Kids: United Hands Make the Best Families Responsible Fatherhood sub- award grant from the national Circle of Parents® office, to provide training and technical assistance to these two sites. The project is funded by the U.S. DHHS, Office of Family Assistance.
“Mission Statement : Prevent child abuse and neglect and strengthen families through mutual self-help parent support groups.”
Anything HHS-funded and purporting to prevent child abuse is likely to do this by promoting father involvement . . . It’s how the cookie crumbles:
About Circle of Parents: Fatherhood
FATHERHOOD.GOV
Checkout the new Fatherhood Newsletters
Webinar: Father Factor in Children’s Health
August 2011; Time: 1:19:29In 2006 Circle of Parents received a grant from the Office of Family Assistance to implement a comprehensive training, technical assistance and community access project to aid local home visiting programs in the provision of support and education to new and expectant fathers. Parents as Teachers, Nurse-Family Partnership, Healthy Families America, Early Head Start and/or Healthy Start homed visiting programs in the states of Colorado, Florida, Illinois, Kansas, Michigan, Minnesota, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Rhode Island, South Dakota, Tennessee, Washington and Wisconsin received $50,000 each to begin services to expecting and new fathers. The project is being implemented in partnership with the Circle of Parents National Network, the National Fatherhood Initiative, the Conscious Fathering Program™ of Parent Trust for Washington Children, PACT Law Center, Prevent Child Abuse America and Leslie Starsoneck, a domestic violence expert. **
CIRCLE OF PARENTS RECEIVED $4,800,000 IN “Promoting Responsible Fatherhood Community Access Program” funding from the OFA from 2006 through 2010, a five-year period. The first two years, a flat $900K each, then each subsequent year $1,000,000. Here it is, all = award 90FR0098. (Found in 3 minutes — I didn’t think of it on first posting — taggs.hhs.gov / award search / selected Year 2011/cfda 93086, and scanned the (178) results). This group shows no 2011 award, but its presence in the list shows prior awards.
Circle of Parents® EIN 800106957
| Recipient Name | City | State | ZIP Code | County | DUNS Number | Sum of Awards |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CIRCLE OF PARENTS | CHICAGO | IL | 60611-3777 | COOK | 623444994 | $ 4,800,000 |
The “Chicago” connection makes me wonder whether Jeffrey Leving is involved. (See FFCA conferences, a large part of which each year appears to be drooling over (and coordinating how to get) the next round of fatherhood funding from whichever HEAD representative from the HHS/ACF shows up to remind them, “Who’s Your Daddy?” when it comes to caring about them enough to donate public funding from US Taxpayers (of both genders).
Here’s the Tax Return signed 4/15/2011 by CEO Cynthia R. Savage, with a very moderate salary (for the field) of $73K. Then again, most if it apparently comes from grants taken away from TANF to start with, or other HHS funds used to promote fatherhood, after setting up organization after organization with websites and other “technical assistance” to dominate the PR on a topic, and sell trainings or curricula, usually.
Revenue (that year):
ORGANIZATION NAME |
STATE |
YEAR |
TOTAL ASSETS |
FORM |
PAGES |
EIN |
| Circle of Parents | IL | 2010 | $65,404 | 990 | 31 | 80-0106957 |
| Circle of Parents | IL | 2009 | $68,336 | 990 | 25 | 80-0106957 |
| Circle of Parents | IL | 2008 | $52,969 | 990 | 28 | 80-0106957 |
| Circle of Parents | IL | 2007 | $26,843 | 990 | 25 | 80-0106957 |
| Circle of Parents | IL | 2006 | $83,638 | 990 | 24 | 80-0106957 |
| Circle of Parents | IL | 2005 | $16,914 | 990 | 18 | 80-0106957 |
| Circle of Parents | IL | 2004 | $3,803 | 990 | 25 | 80-0106957 |
Here’s one project of the group (note the format, graphics, high-quality media) that directly states it was funded by the above grant #90FR0098):
http://issuu.com/dadsofdouglascounty/docs/dadsgroupflyers
it is from Douglas County, KANSAS and designed to make Dads feel more comfortable in toddler playgroups, including a section called “DADDY & ME.”
NOTE: KANSAS was making news at a petition site recently: Topeka has declared it cannot afford even its domestic violence laws any more, they are too expensive, it is decriminalizing domestic battery, expecting the county to pick up the slack. I kid you not:
This article from “The Nation” sites the recent “Seal Beach, California” shooting — around a custody dispute. The ex-wife and 7 bystanders were murdered. Obviously, what’s needed is more promotion of “responsible” fatherhood to counter murderous fathers. It is more important to let Dads know how to feel comfortable while pushing strollers and at parks, than to stop that insanity!
[Tagline:] Topeka, Kansas, decriminalized domestic violence to save money. It’s not the only city to cut services to survivors of abuse, just as the need escalates.
After Chad Taylor, the district attorney of Shawnee County in Topeka, Kansas, had his budget cut by the County Commission last month, he announced that he no longer had the financial resources to pursue misdemeanor domestic violence cases, essentially handing them off to the city. The City Council, in turn, voted last week to decriminalize domestic violence so that it didn’t have to pay up. This put the ball back in Taylor’s court; he now says he will review cases sent to him by Topeka police and pursue them on a case-by-case basis. During the game of hot potato, suspected abusers walked free—reports range from eighteen to thirty people. Happy Domestic Violence Awareness Month.
Explained from “The Horse’s Mouth” — in yet another multi-color, logo-decorated newsletter (Date August, 2011):
In 2006, Circle of Parents applied for and received one of (only) Five “Responsible Fatherhood Community Access” grants from the HHS/OFA. She specifically mentions connections to “FamiliesFirst” in Colorado, two Dads in particular being among their national leadership, but until this ($900K grant, probably part of a 4-year agreement) they weren’t “specifically focused on fatherhood.” HOWEVER, “the grant provided the opportunity to move the ‘cultural norm’ of our Circle of Parents network, and the ‘cultural norm” of local community-based/faith-based home visitation programs farther along the continuum of engaging and supporting fathers.”
Provided the opportunity? Translation: We took the grant, and so agreed to tailor it towards fathers….. LIke they’d wanted to all along, but not having access to free HHS funds was hampering their ability to change the culture of the organization. (How much “culture” and a 2-year old organization have, to start with? MORE LIKELY — the organization was formed with a view to this in mind, and very much with an awareness of the HHS funding streams available. Only the 990s would tell, most likely, though.
One of our strategic objectives was focused on changing the organization’s cultural norms around embracing fathers. The National Fatherhood Initiative (NFI), experts in the fatherhood field, joined forces with Circle of Parents to help show us the way. We needed to assess where each grantee was on the scale of father-friendliness.
is called fawning, obsequious pandering to whoever has the money, and probably conflict of interest, too. It’s disgusting! The sole purpose of this organization appears to be transforming LOCAL groups into so-called “father-friendliness.” The Executive Order that endorsed this activity, in 1995, came from a philandering Democratic President with a history financial corruption preceding the PResidency (i.e., “Clintongate,”) and with need of a personal cleanup crew to handle that philandering. This is the SAME LANGUAGE 15 years later.
Each local and state grantee completed a father-friendly check-up assessment and created an action plan to increase their abilities to engage fathers.
Knowing that organizational change was important when we wrote the grant, Circle of Parents created a multi-level training and technical assistance system to assist the Network state and local grantees in becoming more father-friendly. In addition to NFI, expert consultants such as a domestic violence professional with experience in working with males and Bernie Dorsey of the Con- scious Fathering Program of Parent Trust for Washington Children, were engaged to provide much-needed direction and guidance. By year 3 it became clear that we needed to be more intentional in our efforts. We added additional training events and technical assistance focused on not only organizational assessment, but also staff self-assessment. If organizations are going to change their cultural norms, the staff must make personal changes as well. Circle of Parents’ commitment to father outreach and engagement will continue long after the grant ends in September. In this issue, we’ve focused on North Carolina as one illustration of the far reaching impact of this grant both on the state and local levels.
Karen Schrader took $50,100 as Program Administrator from the over $1 million of government grants (i.e., money taken from poor households food stamps, cash aid, or children’s child support / enforcement) to act as a talking head for the NFI policy set up in 1994, when this group got a conflict-of-interest-type grant from HHS, having a co-founder that was then WORKING for the HHS. (Wade Horn, to my recall).
The third employee was paid $34,000 — would support most single-parent families adequately most places in the US — if they were NOT constantly dragged into father-friendly high-conflict custody ligitation, thanks to programs like this — to support the talk and promotion of this one group. Membership dues one year, $13,000. That might go a long ways to supporting a family, or helping a family get some of its infrastructure in place (like transportation) to enable access to work. Or medical care, you name it. $642K of this $1Million plus was given away to other organizations. Father-friendly ones only, I”m sure . . . $217K was, again, salaries and benefits to do this; $31K in travel (wouldn’t YOU like to have a $31K travel budget?) and in IRS form Part IX, “Statement of Functional Expenses” they have nothing under “Professional Fundraising” (who needs it, with this kind of a HHS grant backing!), but $162K in “other program expenses,” meaning, expenses directly related to doing their program. Of course, their “program” is to transform the culture of (whoever they interact with) to become more father-friendly to start with . . ..
Their “Program Accomplishments” are generic, and out of $1,189,089 expenses for accomplishing them, $1,054,454, or over50%, were via government grant, and in the process, said “program accomplishments” produced around $5k revenue as well. Details for this $1.1 million of expenses (note, the average Circle of Parents(tr) HHS grant was $1 million, so if I were the HHS (and thought anyone was watching), I would want some account of where it went.
990 reads: “See Schedule O” (usually attached to the end of the tax return). “
Did the organization complete Schedule O — is checked “No.”
AS SUCH — this is a TYPICAL GRANTEE . . . . Incorporated shortly before some new uptick in fatherhood / marriage funding, sustained and set up almost entirely by it, and with the primary emphasison “Technical Assistance & Training” which I translated as “PR” and “Web site support.” plus conferences, training, membership fees to do it YOUR way (insert brand name _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ). 990s are VERY interesting, and often tell a different story and the front face of the organization, although Karen Schrader was astonishingly honest about “just what” Circle of Parents(tr) really is.
Of course, I picked up on it immediately from their website, because they aren’t the only organization transformed into father-friendly by HHS infusions.
The newsletter – JUNE 2011 — was posted at the link “SMART START & NORTH CAROLINA PARTNERSHIP FOR CHILDREN, Inc.”

“What is Smart Start?
Smart Start was created in 1993 as an innovative solution to a problem: Children were coming to school unprepared to learn.”
Their FUNDERS page speaks loudly — it’s basically a laundry list of organizations that also do fatherhood promotion, plus a pharmaceutical, a tutoring program (Kaplan), a school supply, and (last year) over $1 million from W.K. Kellogg Foundation. Oh yes — and the Z.Smith Reynolds Foundation which Domestic Violence advocate & public policy influencer Ms. Starosek worked for, above . . ..
CIRCLE OF PARENTS(tr)
USASPENDING.GOV — as I have to say, seems habitual — is not reporting one of these $900K grants (the 2006 one, even though USASPENDING.gov has time slots back to 2000 for its data), and only 4 out of 5 awards, resulting in:
Its listed as a partner on this group: “FRIENDS,” or “NATIONAL RESOURCE CENTER FOR COMMUNITY-BASED CHILD ABUSE PREVENTION” out of Chapel Hill, NC: (800 Eastowne Dr., Ste. 105, Chapel Hill, NC 27514, to be precise). I am thinking this is another nonprofit formed to accommodate or appropriate another HHS-originated policy & grant to go with it.
FRIENDS is an acronym for Family Resource Information, Education, and Network Development Service.
FRIENDS National Resource Center for Community-Based Child Abuse Prevention (CBCAP) is a service of the United States Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families, Children’s Bureau. We are a federally mandated Training and Technical Assistance Provider for CBCAP lead agencies.
How is FRIENDS National Resource Center for CBCAP funded?
FRIENDS National Resource Center for CBCAP (FRIENDS) is funded under a cooperative agreement with the Children’s Bureau to provide training and technical assistance to designated CBCAP Lead Agencies and Set-Aside Grantees. For more information about the Children’s Bureau, please see their web site.
What is CBCAP?
CBCAP stands for Community-Based Child Abuse Prevention. It refers to specific types of child abuse prevention programs that exist in every state in the U.S.
What legislation supports CBCAP?
The key Federal legislation addressing prevention in child abuse and neglect is the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act (CAPTA) which was originally enacted in 1974. This Act has been amended several times in the last 37 years and was most recently amended and reauthorized on December 10th, 2010, by the CAPTA Reauthorization Act of 2010 (P.L. 111-320).
Why were CBCAP programs created?
CBCAP programs were established by Title II of the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act Amendments of 1996 and most recently reauthorized in December of 2010.
** For “expert” read “heat shield.” I linked to her LinkedIn — Ms. Starsonek hails from North Carolina and lists herself as working on this Circle of Parents(tr) “Fatherhood Initiative,” and formerly as a consultant for the NC Administrative Office of the Courts, although it’s clear her public policy experience has focused on “domestic violence/ intimate partner abuse.” The business is “nonprofit organization management” not “domestic violence advocate.” A 107 page article on-line here comments on how judges feel about “judicial sensitivity taining” re: domestic violence, i.e., it insults their intelligence to sit through propaganda.
A very good summary of her approach in a 2004 article from “Philanthropy Journal,” called “A Voice for Victims,” recommends the usual “integrated approach” and helping agencies get along with each other, gives her personal philosophy and background, and seems a typical system approach: It does not mention the existence of the AFCC, and attributes failure to protect women & children from getting murdered around custody disputes, plus the suicides apparently to lack of understanding and coordination — rather than any corruption or undue influence within the system. As such, the solutions are going to be more training and more interagency cooperation.
Based in part on recommendations made by a task force coordinated by Starsoneck, a select committee of the N.C. House this year passed what she characterizes as “landmark” domestic-violence legislation. With nearly two-dozen provisions, the law addresses a broad range of topics. It expands legal services for victims of domestic violence, provides for treatment for offenders, addresses the role of schools, and directs the state Department of Health and Human Services to recommend a plan for dealing with victims of domestic violence who have substance-abuse or mental-health problems. The law also bars discrimination by employers against victims of domestic violence who are seeking relief from the courts, ensures safer and more consistent handling of child custody and visitation in domestic violence cases (I’d like to see that!)
Note: North Carolina DHS has a “Fatherhood Project” — I don’t suppose any discussion of this comes up in public policy matters affecting child visitation and custody around domestic violence, does it? For example, informing victims that the field of “Fatherhood” exists?
WHILE these reports, task forces, and discussions are ongoing, North Carolina — like very other state — continues to have its Healthy Marriage Responsible Fatherhood projects going on (affecting the safety of women & children attempting to leave abuse) and their Access/Visitation Programs as well — run from the Department of Human Resources — (affecting the safety of women & children attempting to leave abuse, and sometimes fathers with children attempting to leave domestic violence (Referring to the physical abuse in particular) as well). The access/visitation grants ARE the answer to women & children attempting to leave domestic violence, which sometimes casts them upon welfare. And historically the DV groups rarely report on this, either. SOMETIMES they do, but never to the point of protesting the expansion of those two policies, which would be like cutting off the hand that feeds the same groups!
I found 43 grants under two (there are more, but I only searched two) fatherhood-centric grants systems, in NC (all years). Obviously, from the chart below, the OCSE is administering the Access Visitation (“SAVP”) grants. (OCSE comes under HHS). OBVIOUSLY, marriage/fatherhood is being pushed — or at least “promoted” — through: Welfare Office, University Level, Community Action Organizations. I am curious why a “Voice for the Victims” may not be mentioning this consistently throughout a professional development resulting in 127 contacts (in this case). Without meaning to minimize Ms. Starosek’s career concern about DV issues, she has a educational background of psychology and social science, plus government involvement (contracting and consulting). She has been active also (per article) in Massachusetts, where AFCC is even listed right on the family court site — twice. Somehow, this has not caught her attention, and I suspect this is probably because of the associations more with policy-makers and government councils, that people going through the custody-child-removal system enabled by the grants, and the policies behind them. It is simply an entirely different point of view, and results in an entirely different voice.
FYI — we can speak. Victims, unless their larynxes have been injured in an assault — CAN speak. most I’ve met are articulate (discounting some for the PTSD), and don’t need ongoing interpretation. They are often adults, and are eyewitnesses of their own experience, and often networked well enough to know others’ common experience. They are often the best voice of what they have consistently experienced, and this voice has been lost. Federal Policymakers are not INTERESTED in the roadkill to their rhetoric as applied at the state level. They are interested in maintaining political viability by continuing to get grants for their associates, knowing FULL WELL that there is no adequate oversight, and no real document results in the objectives under which these programs were (improperly) sold to Congress to start with (Welfare Reform 1996).
(NORTH CAROLINA: Years, All CFDAs 93597 (A/V) and 93086 (HM/RF) series). Circle of Parents, in taking on this DV expert made sure NOt to hear “the voice of the victims” of family court coverup of DV.. . … ….. , meanwhile complying with federal regulation 45 CFR 303.109 (as to these grants), or at least its sentiment, in taking on a token DV person to lend legitimacy . . . .
| Program Office | Grantee Name | Grantee Type | Award Number | Award Title | Action Issue Date | CFDA Program Name | Award Activity Type | Principal Investigator | Sum of Actions |
| ACF | CHOANOKE AREA DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATION, INC | Community Action Organization | 90FR0001 | FATHERS IN FOCUS NETWORK | 09/21/2007 | Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants | DEMONSTRATION | SALLIE P SURFACE | $ 245,296 |
| ACF | CHOANOKE AREA DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATION, INC | Community Action Organization | 90FR0001 | FATHERS IN FOCUS NETWORK | 09/14/2008 | Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants | DEMONSTRATION | SALLIE P SURFACE | $ 245,296 |
| ACF | CJH Educational Grant Services, Inc. | Welfare Department | 90FE0059 | HEALTHY MARRIAGE DEMONSTRATION, PRIORITY AREA 8 | 09/17/2007 | Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants | DEMONSTRATION | CYNTHIA J HARRIS | $ 550,000 |
| ACF | CJH Educational Grant Services, Inc. | Welfare Department | 90FE0059 | HEALTHY MARRIAGE DEMONSTRATION, PRIORITY AREA 8 | 09/14/2008 | Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants | DEMONSTRATION | CYNTHIA J HARRIS | $ 550,000 |
| ACF | EAST CAROLINA UNIVERSITY | Junior College, College & University | 90FE0017 | HEALTHY MARRIAGE DEMONSTRATION, PRIORITY AREA 8 | 09/20/2007 | Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants | DEMONSTRATION | DR ELIZABETH B CARROLL | $ 405,528 |
| ACF | EAST CAROLINA UNIVERSITY | Junior College, College & University | 90FE0017 | HEALTHY MARRIAGE DEMONSTRATION, PRIORITY AREA 8 | 09/26/2008 | Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants | DEMONSTRATION | DR ELIZABETH B CARROLL | $ 525,161 |
| ACF | UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA AT CHAPEL HILL | Junior College, College & University | 90FE0094 | HEALTHY MARRIAGE DEMONSTRATION, PRIORITY AREA 7 | 09/20/2007 | Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants | DEMONSTRATION | ANNE JONES | $ 490,465 |
| ACF | UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA AT CHAPEL HILL | Junior College, College & University | 90FE0094 | HEALTHY MARRIAGE DEMONSTRATION, PRIORITY AREA 7 | 06/06/2008 | Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants | DEMONSTRATION | ANNE JONES | $ 0 |
| ACF | UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA AT CHAPEL HILL | Junior College, College & University | 90FE0094 | HEALTHY MARRIAGE DEMONSTRATION, PRIORITY AREA 7 | 09/22/2008 | Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants | DEMONSTRATION | ANNE JONES | $ 530,482 |
| OCSE | NC ST DEPT OF HUMAN RESOURCES, DIV OF SOCIAL SERVICES | Welfare Department | 0001NCSAVP | SAVP 2000 | 08/22/2000 | Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs | SOCIAL SERVICES | $ 207,273 | |
| OCSE | NC ST DEPT OF HUMAN RESOURCES, DIV OF SOCIAL SERVICES | Welfare Department | 0101NCSAVP | SAVP 2001 | 08/23/2001 | Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs | SOCIAL SERVICES | $ 207,273 | |
| OCSE | NC ST DEPT OF HUMAN RESOURCES, DIV OF SOCIAL SERVICES | Welfare Department | 0201NCSAVP | 2002 SAVP | 08/06/2002 | Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs | SOCIAL SERVICES | $ 248,098 | |
| OCSE | NC ST DEPT OF HUMAN RESOURCES, DIV OF SOCIAL SERVICES | Welfare Department | 0201NCSAVP | 2002 SAVP | 09/14/2009 | Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs | SOCIAL SERVICES | $- 23,880 | |
| OCSE | NC ST DEPT OF HUMAN RESOURCES, DIV OF SOCIAL SERVICES | Welfare Department | 0301NCSAVP | 2003 SAVP | 09/11/2003 | Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs | SOCIAL SERVICES | $ 248,098 | |
| OCSE | NC ST DEPT OF HUMAN RESOURCES, DIV OF SOCIAL SERVICES | Welfare Department | 0301NCSAVP | 2003 SAVP | 09/14/2009 | Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs | SOCIAL SERVICES | $- 30,070 | |
| OCSE | NC ST DEPT OF HUMAN RESOURCES, DIV OF SOCIAL SERVICES | Welfare Department | 0401NCSAVP | 2004 SAVP | 09/15/2004 | Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs | SOCIAL SERVICES | $ 272,566 | |
| OCSE | NC ST DEPT OF HUMAN RESOURCES, DIV OF SOCIAL SERVICES | Welfare Department | 0501NCSAVP | 2005 SAVP | 09/14/2005 | Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs | SOCIAL SERVICES | $ 272,566 | |
| OCSE | NC ST DEPT OF HUMAN RESOURCES, DIV OF SOCIAL SERVICES | Welfare Department | 0601NCSAVP | 2006 SAVP | 09/19/2006 | Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs | SOCIAL SERVICES | $ 268,587 | |
| OCSE | NC ST DEPT OF HUMAN RESOURCES, DIV OF SOCIAL SERVICES | Welfare Department | 0701NCSAVP | 2007 SAVP | 07/20/2007 | Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs | SOCIAL SERVICES | $ 278,157 | |
| OCSE | NC ST DEPT OF HUMAN RESOURCES, DIV OF SOCIAL SERVICES | Welfare Department | 0801NCSAVP | 2008 SAVP | 01/30/2008 | Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs | SOCIAL SERVICES | $ 271,792 | |
| OCSE | NC ST DEPT OF HUMAN RESOURCES, DIV OF SOCIAL SERVICES | Welfare Department | 0901NCSAVP | FY 2009 STATE ACCESS & VISITATION | 12/23/2008 | Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs | SOCIAL SERVICES | $ 272,258 | |
| OCSE | NC ST DEPT OF HUMAN RESOURCES, DIV OF SOCIAL SERVICES | Welfare Department | 1001NCSAVP | FY 2010 STATE ACCESS & VISITATION | 11/25/2009 | Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs | SOCIAL SERVICES | $ 279,933 | |
| OCSE | NC ST DEPT OF HUMAN RESOURCES, DIV OF SOCIAL SERVICES | Welfare Department | 1101NCSAVP | FY 2011 STATE ACCESS & VISITATION | 10/08/2010 | Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs | SOCIAL SERVICES | $ 286,100 | |
| OCSE | NC ST DEPT OF HUMAN RESOURCES, DIV OF SOCIAL SERVICES | Welfare Department | 9701NCSAVP | SAVP 1997 | 05/31/1998 | Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs | SOCIAL SERVICES | $ 233,772 | |
| OCSE | NC ST DEPT OF HUMAN RESOURCES, DIV OF SOCIAL SERVICES | Welfare Department | 9701NCSAVP | SAVP 1997 | 12/02/1999 | Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs | SOCIAL SERVICES | $- 216,494 | |
| OCSE | NC ST DEPT OF HUMAN RESOURCES, DIV OF SOCIAL SERVICES | Welfare Department | 9701NCSAVP | SAVP 1997 | 01/04/2000 | Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs | SOCIAL SERVICES | $ 205 | |
| OCSE | NC ST DEPT OF HUMAN RESOURCES, DIV OF SOCIAL SERVICES | Welfare Department | 9801NCSAVP | 09/01/1998 | Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs | SOCIAL SERVICES | $ 233,772 | ||
| OCSE | NC ST DEPT OF HUMAN RESOURCES, DIV OF SOCIAL SERVICES | Welfare Department | 9801NCSAVP | 02/24/2003 | Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs | SOCIAL SERVICES | $- 233,772 | ||
| OCSE | NC ST DEPT OF HUMAN RESOURCES, DIV OF SOCIAL SERVICES | Welfare Department | 9901NCSAVP | 08/16/1999 | Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs | SOCIAL SERVICES | $ 207,273 | ||
| OCSE | NC ST DEPT OF HUMAN RESOURCES, DIV OF SOCIAL SERVICES | Welfare Department | 9901NCSAVP | 02/25/2003 | Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs | SOCIAL SERVICES | $- 132,019 | ||
| OFA | CHOANOKE AREA DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATION, INC | Community Action Organization | 90FR0001 | FATHERS IN FOCUS NETWORK | 09/22/2006 | Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants | DEMONSTRATION | SALLIE P SURFACE | $ 245,296 |
| OFA | CHOANOKE AREA DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATION, INC | Community Action Organization | 90FR0001 | FATHERS IN FOCUS NETWORK | 08/24/2009 | Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants | DEMONSTRATION | SALLIE P SURFACE | $ 245,296 |
| OFA | CHOANOKE AREA DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATION, INC | Community Action Organization | 90FR0001 | FATHERS IN FOCUS NETWORK | 09/24/2010 | Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants | DEMONSTRATION | SALLIE SURFACE | $ 245,296 |
| OFA | CJH Educational Grant Services, Inc. | Welfare Department | 90FE0059 | HEALTHY MARRIAGE DEMONSTRATION, PRIORITY AREA 8 | 09/25/2006 | Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants | DEMONSTRATION | CYNTHIA J HARRIS | $ 550,000 |
| OFA | CJH Educational Grant Services, Inc. | Welfare Department | 90FE0059 | HEALTHY MARRIAGE DEMONSTRATION, PRIORITY AREA 8 | 09/18/2009 | Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants | DEMONSTRATION | CYNTHIA J HARRIS | $ 550,000 |
| OFA | CJH Educational Grant Services, Inc. | Welfare Department | 90FE0059 | HEALTHY MARRIAGE DEMONSTRATION, PRIORITY AREA 8 | 09/24/2010 | Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants | DEMONSTRATION | CYNTHIA HARRIS | $ 550,000 |
| OFA | EAST CAROLINA UNIVERSITY | Junior College, College & University | 90FE0017 | HEALTHY MARRIAGE DEMONSTRATION, PRIORITY AREA 8 | 09/22/2006 | Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants | DEMONSTRATION | DR LINDA ROBINSON | $ 514,308 |
| OFA | EAST CAROLINA UNIVERSITY | Junior College, College & University | 90FE0017 | HEALTHY MARRIAGE DEMONSTRATION, PRIORITY AREA 8 | 09/18/2009 | Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants | DEMONSTRATION | DR ELIZABETH B CARROLL | $ 519,625 |
| OFA | EAST CAROLINA UNIVERSITY | Junior College, College & University | 90FE0017 | HEALTHY MARRIAGE DEMONSTRATION, PRIORITY AREA 8 | 09/24/2010 | Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants | DEMONSTRATION | ELIZABETH CARROLL | $ 548,181 |
| OFA | Family Resource Center of Raleigh, Inc. | Other Social Services Organization | 90FM0009 | COMMUNITY FAMILY PRESERVATION PROGRAM – A HEALTHY MARRIAGE EDUCATION AND RELATIONSHIP SKILLS TRAINING PROGRAM FOR LOW-INCOME YOUTH, ADULTS AND COUPLES. | 09/27/2011 | Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants | DEMONSTRATION | KIMBERLY M KIMBERLY | $ 725,000 |
| OFA | UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA AT CHAPEL HILL | Junior College, College & University | 90FE0094 | HEALTHY MARRIAGE DEMONSTRATION, PRIORITY AREA 7 | 09/22/2006 | Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants | DEMONSTRATION | ANNE JONES | $ 375,685 |
| OFA | UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA AT CHAPEL HILL | Junior College, College & University | 90FE0094 | HEALTHY MARRIAGE DEMONSTRATION, PRIORITY AREA 7 | 09/16/2009 | Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants | DEMONSTRATION | ANNE JONES | $ 538,524 |
| OFA | UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA AT CHAPEL HILL | Junior College, College & University | 90FE0094 | HEALTHY MARRIAGE DEMONSTRATION, PRIORITY AREA 7 | 09/24/2010 | Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants | DEMONSTRATION | ANNE JONES | $ 550,000 |
|
Results 1 to 43 of 43 matches.
|
(THAT was just for effect, and you could find a similar chart in any other state).
“PARENT TRUST FOR WASHINGTON CHILDREN” logo alerts me to, probably another grant behind this one: There are only so many icons available showing human figures looped together by a heart, or heart-type logo! . . Besides, the leading page is “BUILDING STRONG, HEALTHY FAMILIES” which is a government theme. When it comes to REAL families, somone is a father, someone a mother, someone gives birth (possibly more than once, creating siblings) and the term is “RAISING” my/our children, not BUILDING them! An entirely different mindset is involved in “BUILDING a family.” Builders are not the house, they are outside the house! The house is made out of material they manipulate, according to some master plan, or at least SOME plan. However, life comeso after childbirth, and from the perspective of the individuals, people GROW, and hopefully good values are instilled, safe places,future hopes, associations — and real, living connections. The life force from within is the verb “GROW” and the artificial, social-science-focused (i.e., focusing on the theory, policy, or others involved) results in terms like “BUILDING FAMILIES,” (Plural). Particularly as many of these policies are resulting in partially dead, or wholly dead families (i.e., murder/suicides), wasted years, wasted tax dollars, and time taken out of building their own futures, according to their OWN plans which just may happen to fit their own reality better than an “almost one size fits all” policy from above . . . . . . (well, you can tell what kind of mood I”m in today on all this mess!) (it’s reall organized, but in practice, it’s messing with other, important realities, like due process in the courts, and the ability to make independent choices, by MOTHERS!)(and, many FATHERS, too!).
This one, apparently, is marketing “Professional Trainings” especially “Conscious Fathering”(tr). Contact your local affiliate to buy it:
“
with “DONATE” “WEB STORE” “CONTACT US” (in that order)
(It took a while to locate, but it’s a project of the Seattle Foundation, self-described as the largest funder in King’s County) or at least helped by them):
| Parent Trust for Washington Children | 9/10/2010 | $15,000.00 | ![]() |
support general operating expenses. |
EIN# 911036940, I’ll check TAGGS (yes, they have been filing, at least): recorded here under a different name (and no DUNS#)…
| Recipient Name | City | State | ZIP Code | County | DUNS Number | Sum of Awards |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| PARENTS ANONYMOUS WASHINGTON STATE | SEATTLE | WA | 98101 | KING | $ 50,000 |
(“Mutual Support” programs? How about put some of that to tracking down that “undistributable child support collections” held at the state level, no doubt in Washington, like other states!)
| FY | Award Number | Award Title | Budget Year of Support | Award Code | Agency | Action Issue Date | DUNS Number | Amount This Action |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1998 | 90CA1648 | DEVELOPMENT OF MUTUAL SUPPORT PROGRAMS | 1 | 0 | ACF | 09-14-1998 | $ 50,000 |
There are thousands of “90CA” awards. To narrow it, I picked 1998, and only WA, D.C. & CA (most projects get tested in CA, why not?) — narrowing it down to 18 awards. Parents Anonymous apparently got started in California anyhow, and the washington group eventually changed its name: Here we go, from TAGGS:
| Fiscal Year | Program Office | Grantee Name | State | Award Number | Award Title | Budget Year | CFDA Number | CFDA Program Name | Award Action Type | Principal Investigator | Sum of Actions |
| 1998 | CB | CAL ST LA UNIV AUXILIARY SERVICES, INC | CA | 90CA1589 | PRIORITY AREA 1.01 – FIELD INITIATED RESEARCH ON CHILD ABUSE & NEGLECT | 1 | 93670 | Child Abuse and Neglect Discretionary Activities | NEW | MITCHELL EISEN, PH.D. | $ 9,750 |
| 1998 | CB | CENTER FOR CHILD PROTECTION & FAMILY SUPPORT | DC | 90CA1614 | CHILD ABUSE AND NEGLECT DISCRETIONARY PROJECTS | 2 | 93670 | Child Abuse and Neglect Discretionary Activities | NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION | JOYCE N THOMAS | $ 100,000 |
| 1998 | CB | D.C. CHILDREN’S TRUST FUND | DC | 90CA1645 | DEVELOPMENT OF MUTUAL SUPPORT PROGRAMS | 1 | 93670 | Child Abuse and Neglect Discretionary Activities | NEW | CAROLYN S ABDULLAH | $ 50,000 |
| 1998 | CB | EDGEWOOD THE SF PROTESTANT ORPHANAGE | CA | 90CA1599 | PRIORITY AREA 1.03 – INNOVATIVE APPROACHES TO KINSHIP CARE OF CHILDREN IN WELFARE SYSTEM | 2 | 93670 | Child Abuse and Neglect Discretionary Activities | NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION | LILLIAN JOHNSON | $ 199,464 |
| 1998 | CB | FAMILY HEALTH CENTERS OF SAN DIEGO, INC | CA | 90CA1608 | CHILD ABUSE AND NEGLECT DISCRETIONARY PROJECTS | 2 | 93670 | Child Abuse and Neglect Discretionary Activities | NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION | ASCENCION HERNANDEZ | $ 100,000 |
| 1998 | CB | FAMILY SUPPORT SERVICES OF THE BAY AREA | CA | 90CA1587 | CHILD ABUSE AND NEGLECT DISCRETIONARY PROJECTS | 2 | 93670 | Child Abuse and Neglect Discretionary Activities | NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION | PATRICIA CHAMBERS, PH.D | $ 150,000 |
| 1998 | CB | KITSAP BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS | WA | 90CA1609 | CHILD ABUSE AND NEGLECT DISCRETIONARY PROJECTS | 2 | 93670 | Child Abuse and Neglect Discretionary Activities | NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION | ELIZABETH S BOSCH | $ 100,000 |
| 1998 | CB | LOS ANGELES COUNTY, DEPT OF CHILDREN’S SRVS | CA | 90CA1594 | PRIORITY AREA 1.03 – INNOVATIVE APPROACHES TO KINSHIP CARE OF CHILDREN IN WELFAR | 2 | 93670 | Child Abuse and Neglect Discretionary Activities | NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION | SHARYN L LOGAN | $ 200,000 |
| 1998 | CB | MARY’S CENTER OF MATERNAL & CHILD CARE | DC | 90CA1586 | PRIORITY AREA 2.01 – HEALTHY FAMILIES DC | 2 | 93670 | Child Abuse and Neglect Discretionary Activities | NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION | JOAN YENGO | $ 150,000 |
| 1998 | CB | PARENTS ANONYMOUS | CA | 90CA1592 | PRIORITY AREA 1.01 – NATIONAL NETWORK OF MUTUAL SUPPORT/SELF HELP PROGRAMS | 2 | 93670 | Child Abuse and Neglect Discretionary Activities | NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION | TERESA RAFAEL | $ 350,000 |
| 1998 | CB | PARENTS ANONYMOUS | CA | 90CA1646 | DEVELOPMENT OF MUTUAL SUPPORT PROGRAMS | 1 | 93670 | Child Abuse and Neglect Discretionary Activities | NEW | LISA PION-BERLIN | $ 50,000 |
| 1998 | CB | PARENTS ANONYMOUS WASHINGTON STATE | WA | 90CA1648 | DEVELOPMENT OF MUTUAL SUPPORT PROGRAMS | 1 | 93670 | Child Abuse and Neglect Discretionary Activities | NEW | SYLVIA MEYER | $ 50,000 |
| 1998 | CB | SAN DIEGO COUNTY YMCA | CA | 90CA1630 | PRIORITY AREA 1.04 – SCHOOL-BASED CHILD MALTREATMENT PREVENTION | 1 | 93670 | Child Abuse and Neglect Discretionary Activities | NEW | TANYA PHAM | $ 100,000 |
| 1998 | CB | SAN DIEGO COUNTY YMCA | CA | 90CA1630 | PRIORITY AREA 1.04 – SCHOOL-BASED CHILD MALTREATMENT PREVENTION | 2 | 93670 | Child Abuse and Neglect Discretionary Activities | NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION | TANYA PHAM | $ 100,000 |
| 1998 | CB | SAN DIEGO STATE UNIVERSITY, FOUNDATION | CA | 90CA1566 | PRIORITY AREA 1.02R – CONSOR- TIUM FOR LONGITUDINAL STUDIES OF CHILD MALTREATMENT PROJECTS | 4 | 93670 | Child Abuse and Neglect Discretionary Activities | NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION | ALAN LITROWNIK | $ 250,000 |
| 1998 | CB | STANISLAUS COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION | CA | 90CA1601 | CHILD ABUSE AND NEGLECT DISCRETIONARY PROJECTS | 1 | 93670 | Child Abuse and Neglect Discretionary Activities | NEW | HAROLD R DEARMOND | $ 54,725 |
| 1998 | CB | WA ST DIVISION OF PUBLIC ASSISTANCE | WA | 90CA1590 | CHILD ABUSE AND NEGLECT DISCRETIONARY PROJECTS | 1 | 93670 | Child Abuse and Neglect Discretionary Activities | NEW | SHERRY C BRUMMEL | $ 197,471 |
| 1998 | CB | WA ST DIVISION OF PUBLIC ASSISTANCE | WA | 90CA1590 | CHILD ABUSE AND NEGLECT DISCRETIONARY PROJECTS | 2 | 93670 | Child Abuse and Neglect Discretionary Activities | NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION | SHERRY C BRUMMEL | $ 195,092 |
I just looked up “Parents Anonymous” and behold — only CA & AZ show any DUNS#s . . . . the umbrella organizations? Are they ALL running “Conscious Fathering(tr)” professional training classes, and if so, for how much? Notice, CA gets the biggest grants…
| Recipient Name | City | State | ZIP Code | County | DUNS Number | Sum of Awards |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| PARENTS ANONYMOUS (earliest grant shown 1995, Budget Year, 2) | CLAREMONT | CA | 91711 | LOS ANGELES | 090749326 | $ 2,828,196 |
| PARENTS ANONYMOUS (THIS GRANT IS 2010….) | PHOENIX | AZ | 85014 | MARICOPA | 119833135 | $ 792,550 |
| PARENTS ANONYMOUS (THIS GRANT, 1999) | PHOENIX | AZ | 85014 | MARICOPA | $ 50,000 | |
| PARENTS ANONYMOUS OF BUFFALO & ERIE COUNTY | BUFFALO | NY | 14206 | ERIE | $ 750,000 | |
| PARENTS ANONYMOUS OF NEW JERSEY, INC. | PRINCETON | NJ | 08540 | MERCER | $ 50,000 | |
| PARENTS ANONYMOUS OF PENNSYLVANIA | HARRISBURG | PA | 17102 | DAUPHIN | $ 50,000 | |
| PARENTS ANONYMOUS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, INC. | CHARLESTON | SC | 29416 | CHARLESTON | $ 50,000 | |
| PARENTS ANONYMOUS ORG. OF MASS., INC. | BOSTON | MA | 02116 | SUFFOLK | $ 50,000 | |
| PARENTS ANONYMOUS WASHINGTON STATE | SEATTLE | WA | 98101 | KING | $ 50,000 |
Showing: 1 – 9 of 9
TAKING the DUNS# “090749326” to USASPENDING.gov, we see they have “only” missed over $2 million of grants here:
- Total Dollars:$697,225
- Transactions:1 – 2 of 2
One grant was “discretionary” — and is the National Child Abuse HelpLine (call your local Parenting Anonymous(tr) group leader???) – 2010and the 2007 one was actually even named after this group:
Recipient: PARENTS ANONYMOUS
675 W FOOTHILL BLVD STAT 220 , CLAREMONT, CALIFORNIAReason for Modification: Program Source: 75-1536:Children and Families Services Programs Agency: Department of Health and Human Services : Administration for Children and Families CFDA Program : 93.670 : Child Abuse and Neglect Discretionary Activities Description: NATIONAL PARENT HELPLINEDate Signed:
August 22 , 2010Obligation Amount:
$500,000andTransaction Number # 2
Federal Award ID: U81CE001039: 000 (Grants)
Recipient: PARENTS ANONYMOUS
675 W FOOTHILL BLVD STAT 220 , CLAREMONTReason for Modification: Program Source: Agency: Department of Health and Human Services : Centers for Disease Control and Prevention CFDA Program : 93.136 : Injury Prevention and Control Research and State and Community Based Programs Description: ENHANCING CHILD MALTREATMENT PREV INITIATIVES THROUGH PARENTS ANONYMOUSA INC.Date Signed:
July 02 , 2007
Obligation Amount:
$197,225
“parents anonymousa inc.”?? This is supposedly an extension of an earlier grant we don’t see there:
| Obligation / Action Date | 07/02/2007 |
|---|---|
| Starting Date | 09/30/2006 |
| Ending Date | 09/29/2008 |
| R |
BUT, when I omit the DUNS# and just search on the name (in quotes, Prime Award search) I see this — and have to say, just go look yourself:
This includes more from the Arizona group, and Buffalo and Erie County (NY, PA, I guess). There are grants or contracts from the Justice Department, and under the term “DRUG-FREE”, as well as (now we know where the term “Strengthening Families” comes from:
Transaction Number # 1
|
Date Signed: August 17 , 2000Obligation Amount: $3,000,000 |
|||||||||||||
Transaction Number # 2
|
Date Signed: September 30 , 2001Obligation Amount: $2,993,400 |
|||||||||||||
They are basically THROWING money at this group, and the Arizona branch (again, looking at transaction details, DUNS# is often missing).
In 2002 (this is from “USASPending.gov”), same program: they got $2.7 million
cfda 16;541 comes under ”
| CFDA Program Title | JUVENILE JUSTICE AND DELINQUENCY PREVENTION_SPECIAL EMPHASIS AND T/A |
|---|
(OK, I finally looked up the project title). The DOJ awarded a $16 million grant to Parents Anonymous — to try out and assess its own programs! This is the AUdit Report saying their evaluation was “adequate”!!
Here they are seeking donations: Be a Circle of Friends ($500), Patron ($1,000), Hero ($1,500), Champion ($5,000 and get to speak at national conference), or Benefactor ($10,000). They havent figured out privileges for $10,000 and above yet . . . .. Contact “Meryl Levine.” I have a feeling it MAY be this Meryl Levine (from NJ, actually, but look at the details and compare to what Parents ANonymous is doing). The pay for Parents Anonymous VP was over $100K/year.)
DO THESE CONNECTIONS have anything to do with getting THOSE grants?
Let’s take a look at who “CALSWEC” is, with HQ at UCBerkeley:
Created in 1990, the California Social Work Education Center (CalSWEC) is a consortium of the state’s 21 accredited social work graduate schools, the 58 county departments of social service and mental health, the California Departments of Social Services (CDSS) and Mental Health (CDMH), the California Chapter of the National Association of Social Workers, professional associations, and foundations.
CalSWEC is the nation’s largest coalition of its kind working to provide professional education, student financial aid, in-service training, and workforce research–all directed toward developing effective, culturally competent public service delivery to the people of California.CalSWEC’s main office is at the University of California, Berkeley.Download a copy of the CalSWEC Fact Sheet (October 2011).
Child Welfare CommitteeThe Child Welfare Committee is responsible for leading and overseeing curriculum, stipend, and other issues of social work education pertaining to public child welfare. It includes members of the Board and community volunteers interested in child welfare social work. Committee members are listed below.
Committee Chair
Charlene Reid, Director
Division of Social Services
Tehama County Department of Social ServicesStaff
Barrett Johnson, Director, Child Welfare In-Service Training Project, CalSWEC
Meryl Levine, Vice President of Development
Parents Anonymous Inc.Viola W. Lindsey
Department of Social Work and Social Ecology
Loma Linda UniversityKristina Lavato-Hermann
School of Social Welfare
San Francisco State UniversityChristine Mattos
F&EÂ Steering Committee
California Department of Social ServicesDavid Meyers, Sr. Attorney
Center for Families, Children & the Courts
Administrative Office of the Courts/Judicial Council of CaliforniaMark Miller, Training Director
Los Angeles County Department of Children & Family ServicesKate Mortimer, Project Coordinator, Title IV-E Program
Department of Social Work
California State University, Northridge

http://www.justice.gov/oig/grants/g9004013.htm
Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, Strengthening At-Risk Families All Across America Grant Awarded to the Parents Anonymous Incorporated, Grant Number 1998-JS-FX-0001, Claremont, California
Report No. GR-90-04-013
August 2004
Office of the Inspector General
Executive Summary
The Office of the Inspector General, Audit Division, has completed an audit of a Strengthening At-Risk Families All Across America Grant awarded by the U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs (OJP), Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP) to Parents Anonymous located in Claremont, California. The purpose of this grant was to build and support strong, safe families in partnership with local communities by utilizing the Parents Anonymous model that helps break the cycle of abuse and delinquency. As of August 20, 2003, Parents Anonymous was awarded a total of $16,673,900 to assess strengths and needs of Parents Anonymous programs. The grant supported national training, technical assistance, outreach, referrals, and program materials and publications. In addition, the grant funded Parents Anonymous’ efforts to design a children’s program model, and a national database system for collecting, analyzing, and disseminating information about Parents Anonymous.Our audit revealed that controls over the accounting process and records related to the grant were adequate. We found Parents Anonymous to be in compliance with OJP’s grant requirements. We reviewed Parents Anonymous’ compliance with essential grant conditions and found no weaknesses in the accounting records.These items are discussed in detail in the Findings and Recommendations section of the report. Our audit objectives, scope, and methodology appear in Appendix I.
(WELL, here are two of those reports from the OIG):
Sort by date/ Sort by relevance DOJ/OIG OJP External Audit Reports
… At-Risk Families All Across America Grant Awarded to the Parents Anonymous
Incorporated, Audit Report GR–90–04–013, August 2004. …
http://www.justice.gov/oig/grants/_ojp.htm-69k- CachedAudit Report
… Claremont, California. Report No. GR–90–04–013 August 2004 Office of
the Inspector General Executive Summary. The Office …
http://www.justice.gov/oig/grants/g9004013.htm-3k- Cached
Guess I’ll have to write for it:Prior to 2010, only the Audit Executive Summaries have been posted. All the Executive Summaries have been cleared and are arranged within the appropriate state directory for convenience. States not represented in this distribution do not have Executive Summaries available for inclusion at this time.
AS WITH THE HEALTHY MARRIAGES CURRICULA — it seems the JUSTICE DEPT. is helping a specific organization disseminate its own, specialty, program material. There is ONE little minor detail with this grant going to this organization: . . .. and that’s called CONFLICT OF INTEREST. (whether it’s above, or below, I looked at the founding documents and find that a long-time L.A. County Judge (haven’t checked out whether other mental health professionals in the employee of the County, or working FOR the Justice Department) (or, as to HHS, in the family court system or around it) – – – were, at the time the grant was awarded.
Note: California board had an L.A. County Judge (eventually became a judge ) on the group since 1973, and it might be worthwhile to see who else those board members represent. Meanwhile, I want to know about this Justice Program “strengthening families all across america” program. It’s probably a bunch a hooey, based on how frequent there are these family-court-related massacres, one state or another.
In the year 2002, the DOJ gave away $52 million (grants) in “Developing, Testing, and Demonstrating Promising New Programs.” The top Ten Recipients included: #1, Parents Anonymous (the City of Los Angeles itself being #7)”
Do their state registrations show?
AZ as charity,- yes:
| ID | NAME | DBA |
|---|---|---|
| 12810 | *PARENTS ANONYMOUS OF ARIZONA, INC |
(at the same street address, as a “dba” also)
| ID | NAME | DBA |
|---|---|---|
| 24105 | CPLC SOUTHWEST, INC. | PARENTING ARIZONA |
in 2003 (* 2008) it also picked up the trade name: “PARENTING ARIZONA: SAFE CHILDREN, STRONG FAMILIES” (Search will probably expire, but file ID 300792 may help on the corporations search website).
Pennsylvania (per corporate website) has plenty of these by county.
CALIFORNIA HAS ITS USUAL ASSEMBLY OF: Formed, dissolved, suspended, with one survivor:
| Entity Number | Date Filed | Status | Entity Name | Agent for Service of Process |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| C1239568 | 02/22/1984 | DISSOLVED | PARENTS ANONYMOUS OF MARIN COUNTY | CARRIE PUGH |
| C0896252 | 08/30/1978 | SUSPENDED | PARENTS ANONYMOUS OF ORANGE COUNTY | |
| C1023786 | 04/13/1981 | SUSPENDED | PARENTS ANONYMOUS OF SACRAMENTO, INC. | PETER A BUCK |
| C1259155 | 10/18/1984 | SUSPENDED | PARENTS ANONYMOUS OF SHASTA COUNTY, INC. | BARBARA RAYNARD |
| C0606551 | 09/03/1970 | ACTIVE | PARENTS ANONYMOUS, INC. | LISA PION BERLIN |
| C0816640 | 05/27/1977 | DISSOLVED | PARENTS ANONYMOUS, PACIFIC-SOUTHWEST | SHELLY TAYLOR |
Lisa Pion Berlin, Ph.D. apparently influenced the CAPTA legislation, and here is the main site, Los Angeles area: Every other term is trademarkeed…
http://www.parentsanonymous.org/pahtml/pressExpert.html
Dr. Pion-Berlin is a renowned expert in the prevention of child abuse and neglect. She has authored legislation to strengthen the prevention focus of the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act (CAPTA) and is frequently called upon by national and state policymakers along with the media to share unique solutions for implementing effective community-based child abuse prevention programs, achieving meaningful Parent Leadership and Shared Leadership, and creating child welfare system reform to ensure safe and strong families. Dr. Pion-Berlin also speaks on a variety of parenting topics such as: (see site).
Her son? husband? relative? (It’s an unusual last name) is a filmmaker; this one is about hazing
The ” National Child Abuse Prevention Advisory Council, helps promote Parents Anonymous(r) Inc.
With a unique blend of highly respected public figures and experts in the child abuse field, the National Child Abuse Prevention Advisory Council focuses on increasing public awareness about Parents Anonymous® Inc. and its effectiveness in strengthening families and preventing abuse and neglect.(in fact, I can only see one person, maybe two, on the list that is not some celebrity from a TV show….)
(Heavy emphasis on trademarked classes and training parents to teach them, as a means to prevent child abuse. In other words,parenting classes. Guess where I am gong next…..) The theme is having Parents (not just social staff employees) involved. This (next) says that in 1994, they got funding to form the NPLT (tr) concept:
Parent Leadership and Parent Leaders
Parents who are committed to helping to create change in their homes and their communities are called Parent Leaders. They may be parents, grandparents, kinship care providers, foster parents or anyone in a parenting role who speaks from his/her own perspective – – and not in a staff role for an organization. Those who are most effective, however, are Parent Leaders who have personal experience in the systems they are working to change.
In other words, we’d rather you be an insider, but speak as a parent.
Parents Anonymous® Inc. took Parent Leadership to a new level in 1994 when it received funding to create the first National Parent Leadership Team® (NPLT), thereby ensuring Shared Leadership on a national scale. The creation, development and study of this first NPLT, initiated the Parents Anonymous® Inc. Parent Leadership research agenda. We brought 12 members from across the country on board. Over the years the Team has continued to grow and members work in partnership with Parents Anonymous® Inc. in all matters related to programs and policies.
OK, this is probably the Grants we just saw above (Taggs) for the California group — the time frame matches, as well as the name of teh grant. TIHS is probably why the fatherhood emphasis gets in there — because of the HHS funding… The above quote was from a newsletter put out by a Childrens Center associated with Harvard? or at least with a harvard.edu address: ©2011 Judge Baker Children’s Center
I don’t know how common this last name is, but here is a David S. Pion-Berlin teaching at Univ. of California/Riverside, showing a Ph.D. from International Studies in 1984, Univ. of Denver


Yes, Dr. (in what?) Lisa Pion-Berlin takes credit for her husband, David S. (Political Science, Latin Americanist) and having been raised by her wonderful father (Nazi Refuge) — no mention whatsoever is made of any mother. IN context, I can understand why, but again — this site is emphasizing Dads, on father’s day.
Value The Importance Of Your Fathers Daily
Celebrating Father’s Day this Sunday is essential to focusing on their critical role in our children’s lives. We all need to make sure we embrace fathers daily and value their importance! I have experienced first hand two extraordinary Fathers: my own dad, Kurt Berlin and my husband, David Pion-Berlin.
I was raised by an extraordinary Dad who has challenged me to be a caring, responsible and contributing member of our society. He still practices law in DC at 85 years old and provides me with valuable input and support (even when I don’t ask) in my role as Mom and as President and CEO of Parents Anonymous® Inc.
(OBVIOUSLY this is a very website-oriented, and heavily trademarked group, with frequent new programs and initiatives, every single one (that I’ve seen) with a slick website. I noticed heavy First 5 (California) group, which is a red flag to me; there were questions regarding their funding in the news, including conflicts of interest between someone on its board directing moneys to another charity he was on).
“The Shared Leadership” plan would seem to be incorporating parent-input, and thus good. But (see my notes), the type of parent input preferred is someone IN the system, and the influence could readily go both way. Again, I simply found this group (at all) by pegging (yet another) fatherhood training certification affecting Jefferson County CO, from Washington State, and as it happens, originated in Southern California. http://www.nationalparenthelpline.org/what-we-do/mission-history.
As a domestic violence survivor become a custodial mother become a custody-challenged custodial mother (fatherhood funding influence is clear, in hindsight), become a NONcustodial mother and from there increasingly impoverished (i.e., repeatedly losing work), I know FIRSThand the feeling of a fantastic website full of empathetic terms and hotlines, including the National Domestic Violence Hotline (1-800-799-SAFE or something), which refers people to local agencies that (in the situation I just described) do not help anyhow. They can be good listeners, however — just not provide actual help. The same goes for other similarly high-web-profile groups like NCADV, DVLEAP, etc. — they are on the policy side, and not on the actual help side. Those who don’t have personal referrals to real sources of help will be sorry on calling the official numbers and hoping for real, tangible, in-time, valid resources — as opposed to the appearance of resources.
Here is the “Charitable Trusts” record of the Parents Anonymous satellite groups. Only the main one survives, as we can see:
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AS early as 2001, we can see their revenues and assets are JUST FINE; even in these hard times, they are not suffering too bad: EIN# 23-7278097, and the founding articles filing is 47pp long on-line here
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2009:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
As I said, they are selling classes and have copyrighted material (plus their websites have the “Donate” buttons, legal as they are a charity). Unlike many of the fatherhood group organzations, this SMART bunch (original board, or early board, included a woman who later became a judge) have (to this date) a lot of grants and a lot of program service revenue, the proportion is closer to half. (2009: $
667,716 contributions/grants — $902,923 program service revenue (what they are DOING as a nonprofit is actually bringing in revenue). Plus about $1K investment, and $8K “Other” revenue.” (which their tax form will explain). The nonprofit purpose has become technical assistance to spread the gospel about their (copyrighted) concept, and presumably write off expenses, like $940K salaries, etc. (in other words, they more than wrote off the program service income earnings).
Got this business model yet? . .. by our accredited network organizations. What do they do?
This work – promoting one’s own work and business model — earns Dr. Pion-Berlin $195K per year, VP Meryl Levine $111K, and another VP Sandra Williams $122K, for 40 hour weeks.
Other earnings (revenue) 660K Government GRANTS, plus $863K Government CONTRACTS, and like I mention, $39,194 (or about a good secretary’s annual salary), accreditation fees. No royalties show up ….
And, of the original 10 (1972) members of the Board, including one just labeled “Betty L., Los Angeles” (no address — guess that was one of the anonymous parents), the top 4 (except Secretary) are two J.D.s, an M.D., and what looks like a social worker, an ACSW and an MD/MPMH (mental health practitioner):
In 1996, Amendment stated that any remaining assets would be distributed by the Superior Court where the principal office is (which just so happens, I believe, to be Los Angeles…)
If this corporation holds any assets on trust, such assets shall be disposed of in such manner as may be directed by decree of the Superior Court of the County in which the corporation’s principal office is located, upon petition therefor by the Attorney General or by any person concerned in the liquidation.
Hopefully, none of those on the board will have any inappropriate relationships with said Superior Court, or, if a judge is involved in said distribution (which looks like a sizeable amount), he/she will have been REAL honest on the “conflicts of interest” filling.
THEN AGAIN, common sense tells us, this is Los ANGELES COUNTY (see Richard Fine, etc.) and that is a little much to expect.
Some of the incorporators: Jean Matusinka, J.D. became (or was) a judge and a prosecutor of sex and DV crimes; this is her 2006 Obit (LA times), she died at 66, from lung cancer, unfortunately:
Judge Jean Matusinka, 66; Professor, Former Sex Crimes Prosecutor
Obituaries | PASSINGS
April 02, 2006|From Times Staff and Wire ReportsJudge Jean E. Matusinka, 66, a Los Angeles Superior Court judge and former deputy district attorney, died Monday of lung cancer at Torrance Memorial Hospital. Since 1990, she had been handling a civil calendar at the Torrance courthouse and was hearing cases until a week before her death.
Born in New York City, Matusinka graduated from Hunter College with a degree in history and earned her law degree at Brooklyn Law School in 1966. Admitted to the State Bar of California in 1970, she joined the district attorney’s office in L.A. as a deputy district attorney. She specialized in sex crimes, child abuse and domestic violence cases. She was instrumental in forming the child abuse and domestic violence section and the sexual crimes program of the central trials division. Matusinka was one of the prosecutors in the early days of the McMartin Pre-School molestation case in the mid-1980s.
{{tis case keeps cropping up in association with judges, or nonprofits (incl. one in Brooklyn), and deals with hysteria, ruined the preschool operators, and etc. “The longest and most expensive criminal trial in United States history had a modest beginning. On May 12, 1983, 40-year-old Judy Johnson dropped her two-and-one-half-year-old son off at the front of the McMartin Preschool in Manhattan Beach, California without notice and drove away. The school’s teachers cared for the unknown “pre-verbal” boy in the hopes that his mother would return for him at the day’s end. ” The link I gave details Matusinka’sinvolvement.}}
She was appointed to the Los Angeles Superior Court by then-Gov. George Deukmejian in 1985. One of her first jobs was presiding over the calendar in the downtown criminal courts building. As a judge handling criminal and civil cases, she gained a reputation for toughness, fairness and decisiveness. She was also a clinical professor at the USC Keck School of Medicine’s Institute of Psychiatry, Law and Behavioral Science.
THIS USED TO BE “MOTHERS ANONYMOUS, INC.” and @ SEPT. 1970, had the stated purpose of: “
By 1971, the name had been changed to “Parents Anonymous.”
(Back to Jefferson County Colorado’s Fatherhood Program’s “Famlies First” link to “Circle of Parents” where, naturally, one is going to find a fatherhood program paid for by yours truly, the US HHS.)
Through March 2011, 2,280 expecting or fathers of infants, 1,546 fathers of children between 1 and 5 years, 1,057 mothers and 153 other caregivers were served through 710 Conscious Fathering classes and 1,103 Circle of Parents’ groups for fathers.
Funding for this project was made possible through a 5-year Responsible Fatherhood Community Access Program grant received by the Circle of Parents national office in 2006. This grant is funded through the United States Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families, Office of Families Assistance – Grant No. 90FR0098, CFDA #93.086.
www.thefamilytree.org
www.proudtoparent.org
www.uptoparents.org
|
|||
However, my question was — is what appears to be the EL PASO
In an attempt to nurture and grow the relationships between non-custodial parents and their children, El Paso County Child Support Services has developed the El Paso County Parent Opportunity Program (POP). Through individualized case management, POP works with non-custodial parents to achieve personal family and career-oriented goals. By achieving these goals, parents can both bond with their children and learn to become better providers for their families.
(the ‘evolving nature of child support,” you’re in it…..)
POP also offers various legal and community services to eligible parents. POP case managers are able to find legal help and mental health counseling for parents in need of them. POP provides services through a community partnership comprised of El Paso County Department of Human Services, Center on Fathering, Goodwill Industries, and Child Support Services of Colorado.
To be eligible to receive POP services, applicants must be non-custodial parents who are residents of El Paso or Teller Counties and have an income of not more than 185% of the federal poverty level.
Obviously, they are targeting IV-D cases, and will be able to get some funding for them from the government.
(An aside, but looking up “El Paso County” we find that in Oct. 2011, it discovered that the state had shorted it $1.3 million from sales tax collected, but not sent back to the county. An additional $830,000 is apparently still under discussion:
El Paso County Recoups $1.3 Million from State
COLORADO SPRINGS, Colo. (AP) – Colorado has shortchanged El Paso County in the amount of sales tax revenue collected by the state but not sent back to the county. . . . The discrepancy follows a years-long investigation into the money that’s collected by Colorado and remitted back to the county monthly . . .Such discrepancies may not be unique to El Paso County. Douglas County officials say the state’s been off about $200,000 a year since a 1 percent capital improvement tax was passed there in 1996…
Colorado officials sent letters to the county’s 14,000 vendors, advising them of potential reporting errors.
Part-time employees researched the discrepancy and found errors in which collections were posted to other entities, vendors provided wrong information and data was incorrectly keyed in.
That resulted in the $1.3 million going back to the county from the state. Twenty-seven additional audits totaling $830,000 are pending with the state.
“We’re happy to hear it’s working out well for the county. We think this is a good partnership for everyone,” said Mark Couch, spokesman for the Colorado Department of Revnue. The state has upgraded its computer system and has converted paper files and manual data entry to a new electronic system, Couch said.
ANYHOW, MY POINT BEING — remember to research trademark names and registrants. In this case, Policy Studies, Inc. IS “El Paso County Parenting Opportunity Project” which is described (below) as a unit within the child support department. Knowing, as you do now, that CPR and PSI (dba in this case El Paso County POP) have personnel in common, at least did have Jane Venohr, Ph.D. in common (and they pubish together), being the nonprofit and for-profit prongs of evaluation — here is a 2007 “Colorado Parenting Time Project”
The evaluation is, this time, conducted by 3 CPR people — but NOT Jane Venohr; instead, by Pearson Thoennes and instead of Venohr, “Lanae Davis.”
They speak of the El Paso POP as though objectively and not associated with it, in this report:
Cover page: (formatting appears differently in the original)
Submitted to: Colorado Department of Human Services Division of Child Support Enforcement 1575 Sherman Street Denver, Colorado 80218*
Submitted by: Center for POLICY RESEARCH 1570 Emerson Street Denver, Colorado 80218 303.837.1555 http://www.centerforpolicyresearch.org
(the offices are 0.5 miles, or a 3 minute drive, away from each other)….PSI (or, El PasoPOP) as of 2002 was 1 mile, or a 6 min drive away)
September 2007
[Authors} Jessica Pearson, Ph.D. ~ Lanae Davis, M.A. ~ Nancy Thoennes, Ph.D.
CPR has three Ph.D.’s — Venohr is the 3rd — but only used two for this report.
Prepared under grant number 90FD0096 from the Federal Office of Child Support Enforcement (OCSE) to the State of Colorado Department of Human Services Division of Child Support Enforcement (DHS).
Points of view expressed in the document are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official position of OCSE or DHS.
Here is the HHS grant that paid for it (the study):
This $125,000 award was made in 2004 (El Paso POP having become a trade name shortly before, in 2002).
| Program Office | Grantee Name | Grantee Address | Grantee Type | Award Number | Award Title | CFDA Number | CFDA Program Name | Award Class | Award Activity Type | Award Action Type | Principal Investigator | Sum of Actions |
| OCSE | CO DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES | 1575 SHERMAN STREET | Welfare Department | 90FD0096 | COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES | 93564 | Child Support Enforcement Research | DISCRETIONARY | DEMONSTRATION | NEW | PAULINE BURTON | $ 125,000 |
I imagine that the “F” stands for Fatherhood (or possibly “Family”) and “D” Demonstration….
Here’s a “9wantstoknow” 2009 investigation complaining about what people used food stamps for. Pauline BUrton, this time, stood up for their right to choose (understanding there are limits): Interesting! At this time (2009, shortly after the report) at least, her office was: “. . . . Pauline Burton, Colorado Department of Human Services director of the office of self sufficiency, whose office runs the food and cash assistance program” If the people concerned about what people used their food stamps for actually knew what their government was using TANF & OCSE funds for (diversionary projects), they might feel differently! Her knowledge of who was on Food Stamps obviously would provide some links to people (like the noncustodial parent/father involved) who might want to be in the POP demonstration project….
(I say “Father” because so many women I know have never been able to receive help from any A/V program, including after requesting it and when visitation orders were being ignored. I was in this position, but knew nothing about the A/V system and so didn’t know I could ask).
Executive Summary
The Colorado Parenting Time Project was designed to assess whether identifying parents with visitation problems in the child support caseload and providing services aimed at resolving them improves parent-child contact and the subsequent payment of child support. Conducted in child support agencies in El Paso and Jefferson Counties, the project ultimately involved the identification of a total of 716 cases with visitation problems during May 2005 to December 2006, and their assignment to different groups for treatments of varying intensity:
␣ In both counties, a high-level treatment group was offered informal facilitation by the child access specialist (CAS), a specially trained worker at the child support agency retained with grant funds;
␣ In Jefferson County, a low-level treatment group was handed or mailed printed information about parenting time problems and various community resources to help parents with access problems, including free mediation and parent education services; and
␣ In El Paso County, an established unit within the child support agency (Parent Opportunity Project, or POP) offered noncustodial parents assistance with employment and parenting time using both facilitation and mediation techniques.
I am curious, and selected TAGGS search “90FD to find over 400 projects nationwide. Limiting it to Colorado it was (I forget, but fewer than 50). I then reduced it to “NEW” grants and came up with these 11, stretching from the year 1999 through 2010. There is only one other principal investigator, and I am going to talk about some fo the “abstracts” which reveal the purposes. Wouldn’t it be interesting to see how many of these “research” type OCSE grants went to the same organization(s)?
| Grantee Name | Award Number | Award Title | Budget Year | Action Issue Date | CFDA Program Name | Award Class | Award Activity Type | Award Action Type | Principal Investigator | Sum of Actions | Award Abstract |
| CO DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES | 90FD0004 | PRIORITY AREA 4.01 – NONCUSTODAIL PARENTS & THEIR RELATIONSHIP TO THE ENFORCEMEN | 1 | 09/16/1997 | Child Support Enforcement (CSE) | DISCRETIONARY | DEMONSTRATION | NEW | PAULINE BURTON | $ 72,500 | Abstract Not Available |
| CO DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES | 90FD0028 | NEW APPROACHES TO CHILD SUPPORT ARREARAGES | 1 | 09/14/1999 | Child Support Enforcement (CSE) | DISCRETIONARY | DEMONSTRATION | NEW | PAULINE BURTON | $ 75,000 | |
| CO DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES | 90FD0069 | SECTION 1115 DEMONSTRATION GRANT-PRIORITY AREA 4 | 1 | 09/15/2002 | Child Support Enforcement (CSE) | DISCRETIONARY | DEMONSTRATION | NEW | PAULINE BURTON | $ 100,000 | Abstract Not Available |
| CO DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES | 90FD0080 | SECTION 1115 DEMONSTRATION GRANT PRIORITY AREA 1 | 1 | 09/10/2003 | Child Support Enforcement Research | DISCRETIONARY | DEMONSTRATION | NEW | PAULINE BURTON | $ 55,023 | Abstract Not Available |
| CO DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES | 90FD0096 | COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES | 1 | 09/14/2004 | Child Support Enforcement Research | DISCRETIONARY | DEMONSTRATION | NEW | PAULINE BURTON | $ 125,000 | Abstract Not Available |
| CO DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES | 90FD0111 | SECTION 1115 DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM – PA 2 | 1 | 07/12/2005 | Child Support Enforcement Research | DISCRETIONARY | DEMONSTRATION | NEW | PAULINE BURTON | $ 114,741 | |
| CO DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES | 90FD0126 | AVOIDING AND MANAGING CHILD SUPPORT ARREARS IN COLORADO (PRIORITY AREA 1) | 1 | 09/20/2008 | Child Support Enforcement Research | DISCRETIONARY | DEMONSTRATION | NEW | JOHN BERNHART | $ 99,815 | |
| CO DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES | 90FD0132 | SECTION 1115 – PRIORITY AREA 2 | 1 | 09/20/2008 | Child Support Enforcement Research | DISCRETIONARY | DEMONSTRATION | NEW | JOHN BERNHART | $ 30,000 | |
| CO DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES | 90FD0166 | PROJECTS TO ADDRESS CHILD SUPPORT NEEDS OF ACTIVE DUTY MILITARY MEMBERS | 1 | 09/27/2010 | Child Support Enforcement Research | DISCRETIONARY | OTHER | NEW | JOHN BERNHART | $ 52,443 | |
| CO DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES | 90FD0168 | TRIPLE PLAY, THREE PATHS TO SUCCESS | 1 | 09/25/2010 | Child Support Enforcement Research | DISCRETIONARY | OTHER | NEW | JOHN BERNHART | $ 84,783 | |
| CO ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES | 90FD0033 | COLLECTING CHILD SUPPORT FROM INCARCERATED & PAROLED OBLIGORS | 1 | 09/14/1999 | Child Support Enforcement (CSE) | DISCRETIONARY | DEMONSTRATION | NEW | PAULINE BURTON | $ 80,000 | Abstract Not Available |
|
Results 1 to 11 of 11 matches.
|
Abstracts include:
Grant 90FD0111: “early intervention in all cases with NEW ORDERS, NEW delinquencies, high orders, and/or TANF involvement.” (year, 2005)
In targeting New Orders, this is about to become standard practice now — requiring ALL child support orders to entail diversionary funds to “access visitation” activities. Going after delinquencies gives the facilitator an edge to highly suggest the parent participate (too much delinquency could result in jail), etc., etc.
JOHN BERNHART is apparently Division Director of Colorado Department of Child Support Services.
I also (searching) found him on a 2007 “Colorado Family Support Council” website, and felt it relevant to describe: They are like other states’ child support training agency, and run conferences to train each other, being a nonprofit:
History
The Colorado Family Support Council was organized in 1974 under the umbrella of the Colorado District Attorney’s Council (CDAC). Seed money in the amount of $500.00 was provided to the Family Support Council by CDAC.
The purpose of the Colorado Family Support Council was to promote understanding of family support issues and to provide a forum for child support workers to discuss problems, solutions and further the direction of the program.
Since training has always been perceived as an important element in the effectiveness of the IV-D program, the council began sponsoring an annual training conference for those working in the field of child support. In addition to the annual conferences, the council has sponsored numerous regional training sessions on topics of interest. In 1985, CFSC merged its annual conference with, and became host of, the national conference in Snowmass.
In 1991 the Council incorporated as a 501(c)3 charitable organization. The purpose of the council had to change slightly to drop lobbying efforts to keep its educational tax preference status. Donations made to CFSC are now tax deductible for many tax filers.
In 2005, the Council started its website at http://www.cfscinc.org to keep its membership informed of pertinent information and assist its board of directors in conducting the business of the organization.

And this past 2010, one of the conference VENDOR/EXHIBITORS happened to be PSI, which, again runs an access/visitation grant right from El Paso County Child Support Services as “El Paso County POP” At least, I believe that’s what “PSI” below represents:
Thanks to our 2010 sponsors and exhibitors. Their contributions help us to host an outstanding conference with affordable registration fees.
![]() LabCorp |
![]() Orchid Cellmark |
![]() PSI |
![]() Systems & Methods Inc |
![]() WICSEC |
– |
(upper right). (Orchid Cellmark probably gives DNA printing or paternity tests;it looks familiar).
IRS filings (go back to 2001, here):
ORGANIZATION NAME |
STATE |
YEAR |
TOTAL ASSETS |
FORM |
PAGES |
EIN |
| Colorado Family Support Council | CO | 2010 | $44,401 | 990EZ | 8 | 84-1180995 |
This post could go on indefinitely. I will summarize some of my own recent finds, and hope it has provided some tools:
My recent finds (as a consequence of doing this post):
Organizations/COrporations:
After an exhausting, bloodhound-trail-following attempt to get the “REAL” California Healthy Marriage Coalition” (complete with whoever is running it) to Please Stand Up (on-line, in the form of a historically coherent, traceable set of incorporations, nonprofit registrations, and if I”m lucky, even 990s filed on-line), I determined to post the entire list, and talk about some of them. Which is below. I am also starting a new Page here to start profiling these BUSINESSES, AGENCIES or DEPARTMENTS (see grantee types) one by one. I disclaim all responsibility for any actions readers may take on what’s below before fact-checking themselves; I think the dizzying re-incarnations of a certain two (basic) California groups may have resulted in cross-referencing one with the other at times,
For my birthday, I would also like to see the articles of incorporation of EVERY SINGLE one of the Healthy Marriage / Responsible Fatherhood Grantees, so the public can know which of them used to be (or still are) working for:
(1) The Department of HHS/ACF (who it seems would be approving the grants), &/or :
(2) Local Court system or other County Public Employment, with potential influence on who steers the contracts that these nonprofits are going to take advantage other, in the booming business of “parent education” “marriage education” ‘Fatherhood promotion” and what’s apparently another one, “RELATIONSHIP SKILLS DEVELOPMENT.”
I also would like a chart (it’d need to be 3D at this point) cross-referencing Board of Directors in common. As most normal people are not this anal-retentive, or “could care less,” I’ll likely produce that birthday gift myself.
Any of those terms can be used to suck money out of the Title IV-A (welfare) and Title IV-D (Child Support Enforcement) funds, plus some others, like child welfare, which is synonymous with a child going to sleep with a biological father in the home, apparently (judging by some of the programs being promoted around the term “child welfare.”
Moreover, when scrutinized, the financial — business – profit is actually going to any company that has developed a marketable curriculum. This is not only in the form of money, but also in the form of reputation, and anything that would help them keep their place in line for more federally-sponsored business promotion. Meanwhile, one or both of the parties being forced or induced to consume their material — or divorce in front of judges who believe they should, and have some stake in some of those nonprofits or for-profits — are most likely losing finances and reputation.
In that regard, these guys put AFCC to shame. AFCC markets quit a bit of its own material, including the usual Conference CDS, DVDs) including BOOKS — and does this through mandated participation via family law system. But I think they have to work a little harder at keeping it going — in other words, it takes a court order to force someone in front of a parent educator, parent coordinator (unless they can be induced to do so voluntarily under duress) and into a parent education classes aimed at a 5th grade mentality and taking up one’s dwindling resource of TIME.
But it does NOT take a court order for the manufacturers of a marriage curriculum to get their local pastors, priests, and the occasional rabbi or imam,* to (1) form a corporation with profits anticipated and grants to set it up and (2) set up a website soliciting business, after they understand of course that step one is to join a coalition and then buy into being trained to market membership in the same corporation. Brilliant. Of course, AFCC’s preparatory work in wearing down couples and pushing for legislation, and forming associations to endorse each other’s policies while pretending independence, is going to be helpful overall publicity….
(no relation, but interesting reference: I.M.A.M. organization, incl points 1& 2 out of 5:)
- To be a central resource for the Shia Muslims in North America and their religious and spiritual leadership (Marja’iyyah) in all that pertains to matters of their religion and beliefs away from any political or party influence.
- To organize matters of the Shia Muslims in North America in relevant areas such as worship, marriage, divorce, wills, inheritance, or other religious legal matters.
No, if we want to eradicate poverty in this country we should teach someone to set up a corporation selling healthy marriage curriculum, and trying to persuade teenagers not to have sex. We are not likely to run out of sexually active teens (or for that matter, mature adults) and I don’t think divorce is going anywhere — so there is definitely a market niche. Too bad some us didn’t get in on it in the 1980s, but judging by the 1990s and 2000s, there’s hope for newcomers if they buy in, imitate the business model, and don’t rock the boat.
Ideally, this curriculum should be completely self-promoting and self-executing by internet download. That way, more is left over from the grants gotten to promote it — not including whatever is lost in the black hole of “No accountability,” several of which are showing up, the closer one looks.
The names of this curriculum tend to run in cutesy-sounding acronyms, one summary of which shows up here:
MML, LoveU2(tr), PREP, PREPARE/ENRICH, “PAIRS” (and so forth), plus a whole variety of BootCamps
MML — “Mastering the Mysteries of Love”; PAIRS – “Practical Application of Intimate Relationship Skills, PREP – “Prevention and Relation Education Program”
(link shows that PREP is hoping to adapt a version for Muslim Couples, working with a group in Qatar).
Some of these hearken back to University Institutes and research/demonstration grants previously funded by the US Government. One of these days, if they get enough TANF participants (and others) forced through these classes, they may come up with the right formula to create the perfect human relationship. Alternately, they can continue working on producing the perfect human being through Early Headstart, the K-12 public education system, and whatever other sources are around.
|
Award Number = 90FM
Showing: 1 – 50 of 70 Award Actions
Recipient: AUBURN UNIVERSITY
Recipient ZIP Code: 36849
| FY | Award Number | Award Title | Budget Year of Support | CFDA Number | Agency | Action Issue Date | Amount This Action |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2011 | 90FM0006 | ALABAMA HEALTHY MARRIAGE AND RELATIONSHIP EDUCATION INITIATIVE (AHMREI) | 1 | 93.086 | ACF | 09-27-2011 | $ 2,489,548 |
| Award Actions Count: 1 | Award Actions Subtotal: | $ 2,489,548 | |||||
Recipient: AVANCE, INC
Recipient ZIP Code: 77092
| FY | Award Number | Award Title | Budget Year of Support | CFDA Number | Agency | Action Issue Date | Amount This Action |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2011 | 90FM0041 | COMMUNITY-CENTERED HEALTHY MARRIAGE AND RELATIONSHIP GRANTS | 1 | 93.086 | ACF | 09-26-2011 | $ 799,999 |
| Award Actions Count: 1 | Award Actions Subtotal: | $ 799,999 | |||||
Recipient: Alliance for North Texas Healthy & Effective Marriages
Recipient ZIP Code: 75246-1754
| FY | Award Number | Award Title | Budget Year of Support | CFDA Number | Agency | Action Issue Date | Amount This Action |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2011 | 90FM0018 | ALLIANCE FOR NORTH TEXAS HEALTHY AND EFFECTIVE MARRIAGES, DBA ANTHEM STRONG FAMILIES WILL IMPLEMENT A 3-TIERED PROJECT THAT PROVIDES HEALTHY MARRIAGE SERVICES, ECONOMIC STABILITY AND JOB PLACEMENT. | 1 | 93.086 | ACF | 09-26-2011 | $ 1,514,359 |
| Award Actions Count: 1 | Award Actions Subtotal: | $ 1,514,359 | |||||
Recipient: Arizona Youth Partnership
Recipient ZIP Code: 85741-2259
| FY | Award Number | Award Title | Budget Year of Support | CFDA Number | Agency | Action Issue Date | Amount This Action |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2011 | 90FM0030 | BUILDING FUTURES FOR FAMILIES-HEALTHY MARRIAGE PROJECT IN PIMA, PINAL AND GILA COUNTIES OF ARIZONA. | 1 | 93.086 | ACF | 09-28-2011 | $ 634,536 |
| Award Actions Count: 1 | Award Actions Subtotal: | $ 634,536 | |||||
Recipient: BEECH ACRES PARENTING CENTER
Recipient ZIP Code: 45230-2907
| FY | Award Number | Award Title | Budget Year of Support | CFDA Number | Agency | Action Issue Date | Amount This Action |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2011 | 90FM0029 | BUILDING STRONG MARRIAGES AND RELATIONSHIPS | 1 | 93.086 | ACF | 09-26-2011 | $ 799,999 |
| Award Actions Count: 1 | Award Actions Subtotal: | $ 799,999 | |||||
Recipient: BETHANY CHRISTIAN SERVICES
Recipient ZIP Code: 49501-0294
| FY | Award Number | Award Title | Budget Year of Support | CFDA Number | Agency | Action Issue Date | Amount This Action |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2011 | 90FM0011 | BE REAL PROGRAM (“BUILDING AND ENHANCING RELATIONSHIPS, EMPLOYMENT, AND LIFE SKILLS”) | 1 | 93.086 | ACF | 09-26-2011 | $ 799,996 |
| Award Actions Count: 1 | Award Actions Subtotal: | $ 799,996 | |||||
Recipient: CAMBODIAN ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA, INC
Recipient ZIP Code: 90806-2708
| FY | Award Number | Award Title | Budget Year of Support | CFDA Number | Agency | Action Issue Date | Amount This Action |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2011 | 90FM0034 | MARRIAGE ENRICHMENT PROJECT | 1 | 93.086 | ACF | 09-26-2011 | $ 570,000 |
| Award Actions Count: 1 | Award Actions Subtotal: | $ 570,000 | |||||
Recipient: CATHOLIC CHARITIES
Recipient ZIP Code: 67214-3504
| FY | Award Number | Award Title | Budget Year of Support | CFDA Number | Agency | Action Issue Date | Amount This Action |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2011 | 90FM0042 | PROVIDING MARRIAGE AND RELATIONSHIPS SKILLS AS WELL AS JOB AND CAREER ADVANCEMENT ACTIVITIES THAT WILL PROMOTE ECONOMIC STABILITY AND SELF-SUFFICIENCY | 1 | 93.086 | ACF | 09-26-2011 | $ 1,445,587 |
| Award Actions Count: 1 | Award Actions Subtotal: | $ 1,445,587 | |||||
Recipient: CATHOLIC CHARITIES/DIOCESE TRENTON
Recipient ZIP Code: 08618-5705
| FY | Award Number | Award Title | Budget Year of Support | CFDA Number | Agency | Action Issue Date | Amount This Action |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2011 | 90FM0016 | EL CENTRO HEALTHY MARRIAGES INITIATIVE | 1 | 93.086 | ACF | 09-26-2011 | $ 555,300 |
| Award Actions Count: 1 | Award Actions Subtotal: | $ 555,300 | |||||
Recipient: CHILDREN`S AID SOCIETY IN CLEARFIELD COUNTY
Recipient ZIP Code: 16830-3323
| FY | Award Number | Award Title | Budget Year of Support | CFDA Number | Agency | Action Issue Date | Amount This Action |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2011 | 90FM0003 | HEALTHY RELATIONSHIP PROJECT IN CENTRAL PENNSYLVANIA WITH A FOCUS ON CLEARFIELD COUNTY AND 8 ADJACENT COUNTIES INCLUDING AA (II)(III)(IV) AND (V) | 1 | 93.086 | ACF | 09-27-2011 | $ 354,714 |
| Award Actions Count: 1 | Award Actions Subtotal: | $ 354,714 | |||||
Recipient: COMMUNITY PREVENTION PARTNERSHIP OF BERKS COUNTY
Recipient ZIP Code: 19601-3303
| FY | Award Number | Award Title | Budget Year of Support | CFDA Number | Agency | Action Issue Date | Amount This Action |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2011 | 90FM0044 | COMMUNITY-CENTERED HEALTHY MARRIAGE AND RELATIONSHIP PROJECT | 1 | 93.086 | ACF | 09-27-2011 | $ 787,665 |
| Award Actions Count: 1 | Award Actions Subtotal: | $ 787,665 | |||||
Recipient: CRECIENDOS UNIDOS/GROWING TOGETHER
Recipient ZIP Code: 85004
| FY | Award Number | Award Title | Budget Year of Support | CFDA Number | Agency | Action Issue Date | Amount This Action |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2011 | 90FM0021 | TODO ES POSIBLE (EVERYTHING IS POSSIBLE) – A MARRIAGE PROGRAM FOR HISPANIC FAMILIES IN PHOENIX, AZ | 1 | 93.086 | ACF | 09-27-2011 | $ 359,796 |
| Award Actions Count: 1 | Award Actions Subtotal: | $ 359,796 | |||||
Recipient: California Healthy Marriages Coalition
Recipient ZIP Code: 92024-2215
| FY | Award Number | Award Title | Budget Year of Support | CFDA Number | Agency | Action Issue Date | Amount This Action |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2011 | 90FM0019 | CALIFORNIA COMMUNITY-CENTERED HEALTHY MARRIAGE AND RELATIONSHIP PROJECT | 1 | 93.086 | ACF | 09-27-2011 | $ 2,500,000 |
| Award Actions Count: 1 | Award Actions Subtotal: | $ 2,500,000 | |||||
LGH notes on this group: (Needs to be a separate post, but here’s a teaser):
SEARCHED THIS GROUP BY ITS EIN# (Simple “Recipient” search on TAGGS”) — there are two series, note DUNS#s….
| Recipient Name | City | State | ZIP Code | County | DUNS Number | Sum of Awards |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| California Healthy Marriages Coalition | LEUCADIA | CA | 92024-2215 | SAN DIEGO | 003664535 | $ 7,883,475 |
| California Healthy Marriages Coalition | LEUCADIA | CA | 92024-2215 | SAN DIEGO | 361795151 | $ 7,142,080 |
The heading (when you click on the title, above) shows the street address. Note: LEUCADIA, and in SAN DIEGO area.
| Recipient: | California Healthy Marriages Coalition |
| Address: | 1045 PASSIFLORA AVE LEUCADIA, CA 92024-2215 |
| Country Name: | United States of America |
| County Name: | SAN DIEGO |
| HHS Region: | 9 |
| Type: | Other Social Services Organization |
| Class: | Non-Profit Private Non-Government Organizations |
However, from the official HHS/ACF Grantee award announcement, HERE, there is no entry for “California Healthy Marriages Coalition.” How could there be, in 2011, as the outfit no longer exists. Instead, it’s called (latest corporate name incarnation I could find, may not be the most current):
(From the ACF site, not TAGGS: http://www.acf.hhs.gov/news/press/2011/Grantawards2011.html. As TAGGS information is supplied by the agency in question (see description on the site) the information should match, and public should be able to sort by an identification number. That’s basic common sense — IF the intent was transparency).
| Healthy Relationships California | Leucadia |
CA
|
$2,500,000
|
What on TAGGS (and on the public website) is “California Healthy Marriages Coalition” is now called, “Healthy Relationships California.”
This is why the TAGGS database, which possesses EIN# and DUNS#, could easily have put that field in any report generated, but chose to omit EIN (would probably show up a lot of grantees who never bothered to get one) so we could follow the career & grants-allocations track of a nonprofit that keeps changing its corporate name, something that only checking at the State (not federal) level would otherwise show. And Healthy Marriage Grantees are notoriously (when examined) shape-shifters.
So I check out this nonprofit name on the Charitable Trusts registration, California STate Office of Attorney General:
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NOTE: The $48,225.00 was probably a “Compassion Capacity-Building Grant” to start with. Google “990 finder” and search by EIN to get the Federal Fillings:
Here, the amount $48,225 shows under “CHMC.”
ORGANIZATION NAME |
STATE |
YEAR |
TOTAL ASSETS |
FORM |
PAGES |
EIN |
| California Healthy Marriages Coal | CA | 2005 | $48,225 | 990EZ | 10 | 68-0606790 |
| California Healthy Marriages Coalition | CA | 2008 | $328,871 | 990 | 24 | 68-0606790 |
| California Healthy Marriages Coalition | CA | 2007 | $340,894 | 990 | 19 | 68-0606790 |
| California Healthy Marriages Coalition | CA | 2006 | $148,062 | 990 | 21 | 68-0606790 |
| California Healty Marriages Coaltion | CA | 2009 | $334,155 | 990 | 22 | 68-0606790 |
Looking at the 2005 EIN, one reads purpose: “CHMC has begun (in 2005) a 17-month federally-funded project
to offer training and technical assistance
to marriage-support organizations (including coalitions) throughout California.” EXPENSES: $41,709.
Two Directors (only) are listed: Dennis Stoica (at a PO Box in Cerritos, CA), and Carolyn Curtis, Ph.D., at a street address in Sacramento. Remember the names;
they will show up in several other related organizations / associations, including with another name-changing organization (getting millions) in Colorado.
Modest salaries are only $10K (Stoica) and $7K (Curtis). Curtis seems to have better luck staying incorporated than STOICA:
(Secretary of State)
| Entity Number | Date Filed | Status | Entity Name | Agent for Service of Process |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| C2629035 | 11/08/2004 | SUSPENDED | CALIFORNIA STATE HEALTHY MARRIAGE INITIATIVE ((Oakland addresss) | CHRIS GRIER |
| C2896098 | 06/01/2006 | ACTIVE | FRESNO COUNTY HEALTHY MARRIAGE COALITION, INC., A NONPROFIT PUBLIC BENEFIT CORPORATION | ROBYN L ESRAELIAN |
| C2271911 | 03/07/2001 | DISSOLVED | HEALTHY CHALLENGES MARRIAGE, FAMILY AND CHILD COUNSELING PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION | ELIZABETH LEHRER |
| C2884897 | 06/23/2006 | SUSPENDED | NATIONAL HEALTHY MARRIAGE RESOURCE CENTER | DENNIS J STOICA |
| C2884898 | 06/23/2006 | SUSPENDED | ORANGE COUNTY HEALTHY MARRIAGE AND FAMILY COALITION | DENNIS J STOICA |
| C2955473 | 10/04/2006 | SUSPENDED | RIVERSIDE HEALTHY MARRIAGE COALITION, INC. | LEGALZOOM.COM, INC. |
| C2650745 | 05/12/2004 | ACTIVE | SACRAMENTO HEALTHY MARRIAGE PROJECT | CAROLYN RICH CURTIS |
| C3210304 | 05/29/2009 | ACTIVE | SAINTS HEALTHY MARRIAGE PROJECT | REGINA GLASPIE |
| C2860238 | 03/02/2006 | ACTIVE | STANISLAUS COUNTY HEALTHY MARRIAGE COALITION | JAMES CARLETON STEWARD |
| C3013354 | 08/13/2007 | ACTIVE | YUBA-SUTTER HEALTHY MARRIAGE PROJECT | WILLIAM F JENS |
“ORANGE COUNTY HEALTHY MARRIAGE AND FAMILY COALITION” (Stoica, see above) never bothered to register with the Attorney General as a Nonprofit:
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
which may have something to do with why it got suspended. Alas, because that makes the EIN# harder to get at. Mr. Stoica flew off (at least via internet) to Florida
and has started (as of 2010) an association of Marriage Educators, nevertheless, called “NARME.” Moreover, for how many people refer to the Orange County Marriage group, one would think it’s still legitimate. But I’m focusing on the other ones, today.
2011 News Release, announcement by Calif. Congressman Doris Matsui features Dr. Curtis and the “Relationship Skills Center,” from Matsui.house.gov:
Congresswoman Matsui Announces Nearly $800,000 for Local Family Development Services
WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, Congresswoman Doris Matsui (CA-5) announced that the Relationship Skills Center, a Sacramento-based relationship education non-profit, has been awarded $798,825 through the United States Department of Health and Human Services to provide relationship and family stability educational services.
Awarded through the Administration for Children and Families-Healthy Marriage Initiative, this funding will be used by the Relationship Skills Center to provide evidence based relationship education classes and case management services to help families improve their marriage and relationship skills, achieve career and economic stability, and connect families with a variety of community resources.
“We are thrilled to receive this grant. In the last five years we have helped 735 couples form healthy, stable, safe families,” said Carolyn CurtisHISTORY OF THE HEALTHY MARRIAGE PROJECT
The Healthy Marriage Project was founded in 2004 by lifetime therapist and college professor Dr. Carolyn Curtis. She discovered that communities across the nation were organizing and reducing their divorce rate by up to 50%. After a successful career as a therapist helping one couple at a time, Curtis envisioned an organization that would be capable of changing the lives of thousands of couples and their children across our community. In 2005 HMP obtained its 501 (c) (3) designation and began providing relationship skills classes through community and faith-based organizations in the Sacramento Region. HMP received its first significant funding in the form of a $50,000 grant from the Compassion Capital Fund
Ph.D., Executive Director of the Relationship Skills Center.
The “Relationship Skills Center” (per Curtis’ LinkedIn profile) was “Formerly Healthy Marriage Project” and Dr. Curtis has worked there since 2004, “7 years 8 months” OK…. Looking at the list of ACF grantees, this organization name does not appear. However it has the same street address as “Sacramento Healthy Marriage Project,” including the suite#.
RELATIONSHIP SKILLS PAGE “CONTACT US,” URL: “http://www.skills4us.org/Contact%20Us“
Address
9719 Lincoln Village Drive, Suite 205
Sacramento, CA 95827
CHARITABLE TRUSTS: “SACRAMENTO HEALTHY MARRIAGE PROJECT.”
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Moreover, if one looks at the details, it’s clear that “EIN# 134280316” has been a going concern (both assets and income) from Day 1 (2005-06 year), but has not provided the annual required RRF forms, or iRS reports, regularly, as required by law. Finally in 2010, they got a slap on the wrist from the Attorney General: |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
(in the chart here, below the words “Fee Notice” are several entries indicating professional fundraising for the organization by “EXPRESSIONS.” Professional Fundraisers also are required to register, and hand over evidence that their profits were received by an officer of the nonprofit they are raising funds for…. I’ll quote from the Fee Notice, which is a red flag for the public of something out of order for a nonprofit).
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
The FEE NOTICE, dated Sept. 20, 2011, “NOTICE OF INCOMPLETE REPORT, reads,
1. Explanation/Information not provided for “YES” answer to Part B , Question No. 6.
Part B of an RRF is “PART B – STATEMENTS REGARDING ORGANIZATION DURING THE PERIOD OF THIS REPORT” and question 6 is:
During this reporting period, did the organization receive any governmental funding? If so, provide an attachment listing the name of the agency, mailing address, contact person, and telephone number. Incidentally, question 2 is: During this reporting period, was there any theft, embezzlement, diversion or misuse of the organization’s charitable property or funds? Question 5, for which (on the 2009 RRF, available to see on-line), “During this reporting period, were the services of a commercial fundraiser or fundraising counsel for charitable purposes used? If “yes,” provide an attachment listing the name, address, and telephone number of the service provider.
was checked “No,” and (right around Father’s Day 2009) they were using a commercial fundraiser, a sole proprietorship called “EXPRESSIONS.”
And (on 9/20/2011) the group was also reminded:
2. The $75 renewal fee was not received. Please send a check in that amount, payable to “Attorney General’s Registry of Charitable Trusts”.
In order to remain in compliance with the filing requirements set forth in Government Code sections 12586 and 12587, please provide the requested information, together with a copy of this letter, to the above address, within thirty (30) days of the date of this letter.
I look forward to finding out by October 20th whether this nonprofit which exists primarily as a recipient of a Federal Grants program directing funds from welfare and child support enforcement (as I understand it) into marriage education classes, will get its act together. I’d also really like to read the articles of incorporation, which it would make sense to post, and some groups actually do, on-line.
On this ‘RELATIONSHIP SKILLS CENTER” (boasted about recently by Congressman Doris Matsui), we clearly have a SACRAMENTO emphasis, and address — yet, given that Carolyn Curtis shows as one of two incorporators of not the SACRAMENTO HEALTHY MARRIAGE but “CALIFORNIA HEALTHY MARRIAGE” (corporate registration showing a SAN DIEGO area, not SACRAMENT) (now called “HEALTHY RELATIONSHIPS” on the charitable site . . ) it appears that Relationship Skills Center (formerly Healthy Relationships — which IS “California Healthy Marriages” but shares a street address & jurisdiction with the Sacramento Healthy Marriage….) sees itself as the original organization, per its “About Us/ History Page”:
HISTORY OF THE HEALTHY MARRIAGE PROJECT
The Healthy Marriage Project was founded in 2004 by lifetime therapist and college professor Dr. Carolyn Curtis. … Curtis envisioned an organization that would be capable of changing the lives of thousands of couples and their children across our community. In 2005 HMP obtained its 501 (c) (3) designation and began providing relationship skills classes through community and faith-based organizations in the Sacramento Region.
…HMP received its first significant funding in the form of a $50,000 grant from the Compassion Capital Fund, …
In 2006, HMP applied for and was awarded $2.5 million from the Administration for Children and Families to provide relationship skills classes to low income pregnant unwed couples or couples with an infant. The resulting Flourishing Families Program, now in its fourth year, has served over 500 families, and its success has been nationally recognized. In 2009 HMP was chosen as one of three from a total of 120 healthy marriage demonstration grantees to provide peer to peer training. HMP was selected to lead four workshops at the National Healthy Marriage – Responsible Fatherhood Grantee Conference.
OK, here are the 2 relevant ACF Grantees again, for 2011, per the Oct 3 news release. interesting that October is also “Domestic Violence Awareness Month”:
.Healthy Marriage Grantees (top of two charts; the bottom, of almost equal amount (total) is “Fatherhood.”
| Legal Name Organization | City |
State
|
Award Amount
|
| Healthy Relationships California | Leucadia |
CA
|
$2,500,000
|
Secretary of State shows Incorporator Patty Howell (and if one clicks, the Leucadia Address) SOS site does not allow EXACT search, so we got others, too (it really is an inferior search site, and very unwieldy)
| Entity Number | Date Filed | Status | Entity Name | Agent for Service of Process |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| C3073670 | 01/16/2008 | SUSPENDED | CALIFORNIA CENTER FOR HEALTHY RELATIONSHIPS, INC. | LEGALZOOM.COM, INC. |
| C2746528 | 05/13/2005 | ACTIVE | HEALTHY RELATIONSHIPS CALIFORNIA | PATTY HOWELL |
| C2790720 | 06/09/2006 | ACTIVE | OAKLAND BERKELEY INITIATIVE FOR HEALTHY RELATIONSHIPS | DARRYL HARRISON |
| C2494811 | 01/06/2003 | DISSOLVED | THE CENTER FOR HEALTHY RELATIONSHIPS, INC. | TAMARA ILICH |
| Sacramento Healthy Marriage Project | Sacramento |
CA
|
$798,825
|
Secretary of State Registration shows it’s still active:
| Entity Number | Date Filed | Status | Entity Name | Agent for Service of Process |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| C2650745 | 05/12/2004 | ACTIVE | SACRAMENTO HEALTHY MARRIAGE PROJECT | CAROLYN RICH CURTIS |
The EIN# 680606790 (federal level — posted above) belongs to “CALIFORNIA HEALTHY MARRIAGES COALITION” (per IRS 990s) which “IS” “HEALTHY RELATIONSHIPS CALIFORNIA” as to (state-level) Charitable Registrations. Carolyn Curtis, Ph.D. (along with Stoica) was indeed apparently a founder — at least an incorporator. Somehwere, CHMC became “HEALTHY RELATIONSHIPS CALIFORNIA” — however (inexplicably) that corporation was also formed in 2005 by another person, Patty Howell. Adding to the confusion,
The EIN# 134280316 belongs to “CHMC” — which is Leucadia (=San Diego Area). KEY that EIN# into the OAG site and you’ll get a listing called
“Sacramento Healthy Marriages Project “
14. Marriage Skills Education and the Courts
Saving marriages was once a goal of family courts, but was de- emphasized amid all the other problems courts address. Recent developments in relationship skills education offer new hope for improving marriages. Meanwhile, there are increasing demands to do something to reduce the damage to parents and children in fam- ily separation. Can courts not just mitigate the effects of family breakdown, but also help reduce it? First, they must study what works, and carefully adapt programs to the people they serve and to other real-world constraints.
Bill Coffin M.Ed., Special Assistant for Marriage Education, Administration for Children and Families, Washington, D.C.
John Crouch, J.D., Arlington, VA Fred J. DeJong, Ph.D., Calvin College, Grand Rapids, MI
On Friday June 17 from 1:30 pm to 3:00 pm (ET), NARME Board Member Dennis Stoica (President of California Healthy Marriages Coalition) will conduct a 90-minute webinar – for NARME Members only – comparing and contrasting the six different grant announcements which are scheduled to be released earlier that week.
Hundreds of organizations participated in a similar teleconference that Dennis conducted back in 2006 when the original Healthy Marriage Demonstration Grants and Promoting Responsible Fatherhood Grants were released; and many of those participants attributed their subsequent success in being awarded grants to a combination of that teleconference and the subsequent grant-writing tele-trainings that Dennis conducted during that year’s grant-writing period. Since this webinar will only be offered to NARME members, if you have not yet joined NARME you should do that right away by going tohttp://www.regonline.com/builder/site/Default.aspx?EventID=881238.

Director


Master Trainer of…

Co-Founder

Community Mobiliz…

Implementation Sp…

Special Projects …

Special Projects …

Church of Our Saviour, “Serving God for over 150 years“
2979 Coloma St. // PO Box 447
Placerville, CA 95667-0447
office@oursaviourpv.org

| Marriage Education | Fr. Craig Kuehn | Our Saviour offers several, research based, courses designed to enhance relationships, generically called marriage education. Every couple can benefit by attending at least one marriage education program per year. For more inforamtion, see www.edhealthymarriages.org. |
Coalition history
We began under the intiation of the California Healthy Marriages Coalition and we received our initial funding from them (www.camarriage.com). Fr. Craig Kuehn of the Episcopal Church of Our Saviour, Placerville and Meredith Koch of Marshall Hospital, Placerville attended a workshop about grant opportunities promoting healthy marriages. Ever since then, the project snowballed into a coalition of faith-based and community-based organizations interested in and offering marriage and related programs to the people of El Dorado County, California.
We are a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization as recognized by the Internal Revenue Service.
YES THEY ARE — and one of the few who seems to have kept it up, better than their leaders. As such they are helping market classes and products put out by
some truly conservative groups, who are doing QUITE well and remain close to the government faucet. how nice to know that religious organizations can profit from this also. They can collect their tithes AND their grants, from people who pay taxes towards the grants also, no doubt. SEE THE LINKS LIST: including one I definitely recognize as being marketed through the welfare system, too: PREPARE/ENRICH (a research project out of Minnesota, FOR-profit formed in 1980); “SMARTMARRIAGES.COM” (a FOR-profit) organized by Diane Sollee, with this logo:

(ALSO quite well-informed about the marriage grants system, while shamelessly marketing classes, DVDs, train-the trainers, certifications, and holding conferences to keep this up),
and “Institute for American Values,” PResident, David Blankenhorn (also of National Fatherhood Initiative)
WIKIPEDIA on Blankenhorn confirms this and highlights his “expert-witness” testimony against Prop 8 (anti-Gay, California) as heard in the Supreme Court:
Blankenhorn founded the Institute for American Values, a nonpartisan think tank whose stated mission is to “study and strengthen key American values”, in 1987.[1][3] In 1992, President George H.W. Bush appointed Blankenhorn to serve on the National Commission on America’s Urban Families.[4][2][5]Blankenhorn helped to found the National Fatherhood Initiative, a nonpartisan organization focused on responsible fatherhood, in 1994.[1][2][6] As of 2007, Blankenhorn has written “scores of op-ed pieces and essays, co-edited eight books and written two.”[1] Blankenhorn identifies as a liberal Democrat.[7][1] “In his decision filed on August 4, 2010, Judge Vaughn Walker ruled that Blankenhorn was not qualified as an expert witness, and that his testimony was “unreliable and entitled to essentially no weight.”[10]
BLANKENHORN is a Harvard Grad, (BA Social Studies 1977), and a masters in Comparative Social Science from a British University. He was raised Presbyterian in Mississippi.
| Entity Number | Date Filed | Status | Entity Name | Agent for Service of Process |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| C2856112 | 03/03/2006 | ACTIVE | EL DORADO HEALTHY MARRIAGES COALITION | CRAIG KUEHN |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RECIPIENT SEARCH RESULTS
Recipient EIN = 204384330 No matching awards found.
| Entity Name: | EL DORADO HEALTHY MARRIAGES COALITION |
| Entity Number: | C2856112 |
| Date Filed: | 03/03/2006 |
| Status: | ACTIVE |
| Jurisdiction: | CALIFORNIA |
| Entity Address: | PO BOX 447 |
| Entity City, State, Zip: | PLACERVILLE CA 95667 |
| Agent for Service of Process: | CRAIG KUEHN |
| Agent Address: | 2979 COLOMA ST |
| Agent City, State, Zip: | PLACERVILLE CA 95667 |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ORGANIZATION NAME |
STATE |
YEAR |
TOTAL ASSETS |
FORM |
PAGES |
EIN |
| El Dorado Healthy Marriages Coal | CA | 2006 | $2,476 | 990EZ | 10 | 20-4384330 |
By my basic math, $7,428-$5,390 = $1,038 in some form of “comp” (no benefits listed) which I don’t see on the form.
However, we do see $11,144 in “Conference fees & travel, supplies, & organization fees.” There’s likely a membership going to CHMC, they buy material to vend? and they get tax-deductive travel & conference times. Think AmWay…. The tax-exempt purpose is: “PROMOTE AND TEACH MARRIAGE PROGRAMS.”
Somehow, $20,655 (of $20,500 received) was spent to:
Start-up and organizational expenses, capacity building to include six faith-based and community-based organizations teaching marriaged (sic) education. This included training as (“at”) the Smart Marriages Conference and from California Healthy Marriages Coalition, 64 couples received marriage education. (that’s a pretty high overhead…. How much did the marriage education for those couples cost?)
Meredith Koch (retired nurse in the area) is found also teaching “PAIRS” classes. PAIRS Foundation ends up being Federally Funded, too, in South Florida:
Large, Multi-Year, Federally-Funded Study
Finds Enduring Impact of Marriage EducationFindings from a large, federally funded, multi-year study of South Florida couples participating in nine hours of marriage and relationship education found statistically significant improvements in consensus, satisfaction, affection, and cohesion for both distressed and non-distressed participants…
Another way of seeing this — PAIRS is another nonprofit out of Florida helping the US Government run a multi-level marketing setup. It could’ve been cars, toys, or
any other service which would come under Consumer Protection laws; but it just instead happens to be relationship education. One can Be a “Leader,” a “CPAIRS” (Christian — Perhaps later, Jews Muslims, Buddhists, Ba’hai, Hindi, etc. might make it on the radar — but so for those populations haven’t really caught the “marriage education is free money” bug yet, to the extent these religious Christian (churches) have.) One can also be a PTP, MT, or TRAINER. Buy into the system. Might as well – -your taxes have already paid for it, and others like it. See “UNDERSTANDING PAIRS LEVELS” at the site, telling title, “consumer.PAIRS.COM”
Recipient Name City State ZIP Code County DUNS Number Sum of Awards PAIRS FOUNDATION Weston FL 33331-3642 BROWARD 839942422 $ 4,950,000
(that’s roughly $1 million/year from 2006-2010)
(SIGH. As usual, a combo of for-profit, and not-for-profits under similar names show up. Seth D. Eisenberg of Florida — or is it Virginia? — has got it together now,
and the PAIRS FOUNDATION (Inc.), which merged with PAIRS, Ltd. (his corp from VA) are now in business under EIN# 650629670. With these cohorts, which are visualized (and listed) in CORPORATIONWIKI.Com. This time, the FOR-PROFIT LLC is “Partnership Skills, LLC”
As of March, 2011, a list of (mostly churches) with “COURSE PROVIDER” column mostly blank, included Seth & PAIRS International, LLC,” right after “Okeechobee Missionary Baptist Church” and listed these potential under “COUNSELOR” column: ” I notice the URL shows the Clerk of Records for the local Circuit court for Okeechobee County.
EISENBERG, SETH KOSS, PHYLLIS FARBER, AURORA MINZER- BRYANT,SHARON FARBER, RHETT PARKER, DANA GARFIELD, ANNIE SALYERS, JANET GORDON, LORI SPINOSA, WILLIAM HERRINGTON, PEGGY VALDEZ, SCOTT.
The merger was in May, 2006, and possibly helped getting this, which I am sure also helped: (fromTAGGS).
| FY | Award Number | Award Title | Budget Year of Support | Award Code | Agency | Action Issue Date | DUNS Number | Amount This Action |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2006 | 90FE0029 | HEALTHY MARRIAGE DEMONSTRATION GRANTS: PRIORITY AREA 2 | 1 | 0 | ACF | 09-24-2006 | 839942422 | $ 990,000 |
| Fiscal Year 2006 Total: | $ 990,000 | |||||||
If I go to USASPENDING.gov and type in the DUNS# and check “GRANTS” only (not “Contracts, Loans,” etc.), and check the tab “TIMELINE” it’s very clear that the above 2006 grant was NOT reported to usaspending.gov, although 2007, 08, 09 & 10 were. In other words, usaspending.gov ain’t reliable.
Also clear (looking at details) from this is that the CFDA is 93086 (marriage/fatherhood ) AND that the source is “75-
Also, (I took the DUNS# and went to “USASPENDING.gov” Prime Award, checked every category except grants, and got 15 transactions:
- Total Dollars:$227,754
- Transactions:1 – 15 of 15
Recommended to do (est. time — 4 minutes max) — well over $100K of this is contracts from 2011 only. The map above (interactive) shows that half its business (contracts) are from California & Indiana (strong fatherhood state) combined, but also Georgia, Virginia, NOrth Carolina and Florida. Not bad, eh?
And (same search, showing “Timeline” of increase in contracts (by graph/bars) shows about a 5-fold increase from 2009. If you’re IN, you’re IN, in this field.
Nonprofit + related For-PRofit means wider coverage and probably more profits. Simply design a product to match the HHS Healthy Marriage/Fatherhood grants stream! THere’s also a “4-1-1 Kids, Inc.” with his name on it. Seth appears to be 2nd Generation “MARRIAGE EDUCATION” — as it says on “FATHERHOODCHANNEL.com“:
Seth Eisenberg, the youngest son of PAIRS Founder Lori Heyman Gordon, grew up with a front row seat to the birth of marriage and relationship education. He joined PAIRS Foundation in 1995 to help improve business and organizational systems, began teaching classes in 1999, training instructors in 2000, and was elected President/CEO in 2008. Over the past 12 years, Seth spearheaded development of PAIRS’ evidence-based, brief, multi-lingual courses and technologies to make marriage and relationship education widely accessibile to diverse communities worldwide. He has taught classes to thousands of young people, adults and trained more than 1,000 PAIRS instructors who deliver services to tens of thousands. In 2006, Seth’s “PAIRS Relationship Skills for Strong South Florida Families,” proposal was awarded a multi-year, multi-million dollar grant from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families. The grant program has allowed thousands of people throughout South Florida to participate in free classes, including many low-income, formerly homeless, recovering addicts, special needs populations, immigrants, and veterans who could not have otherwise benefited, while also conducting extensive, rigorous research activities to better understand and validate the impact of marriage and relationship education.
It is “free” to low-income because most likely it was taken from more direct social services to these populations, such as food, housing help, cash aid, or child support enforcement where applicable. Reminder: The Florida “PAIRS” first started (out of several incorporations) as for-profit, and it started in 1994.
I look it up at http://www.sunbiz.org, which is where FL corporations go to register. California needs a site like this.
|
From the (top) filing I get an EIN# 521327867
ORGANIZATION NAME |
STATE |
YEAR |
TOTAL ASSETS |
FORM |
PAGES |
EIN |
| PAIRS Foundation | FL | 2009 | $313,681 | 990 | 25 | 52-1327867 |
| PAIRS Foundation | FL | 2008 | $353,339 | 990 | 26 | 52-1327867 |
| PAIRS Foundation | FL | 2007 | $0 | 990R | 2 | 52-1327867 |
| PAIRS Foundation | FL | 2007 | $414,952 | 990 | 17 | 52-1327867 |
| Pairs Foundation Ltd | FL | 2006 | $252,096 | 990 | 22 | 52-1327867 |
| Pairs Foundation Ltd | VA | 2005 | $306,643 | 990 | 16 | 52-1327867 |
| Pairs Foundation Ltd | FL | 2004 | $300,853 | 990 | 14 | 52-1327867 |
| Pairs Foundation Ltd | VA | 2003 | $242,249 | 990 | 15 | 52-1327867 |
| Pairs Foundation Ltd | VA | 2002 | $63,906 | 990 | 14 | 52-1327867 |
EIN Watchdog.net describes it as having begun in 1984 c/o “Lori H. Gordon” (which matches his description, above) and last filed in 2007, and with a street address of 2771 Executive Park, #1 Weston, FL. This worries me, because that’s one of the operating addresses of this organization (per USAspending.gov) and was also found in a SEC complaint on REAL ESTATE INVESTMENT FRAUD (but no overlap of persons involved that I can see, just the street address). To be clerar, this is a criminal complaint, date-stamped Nov. 15, 2007, U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission Southern District vs. (various redevelopment agencies)
(COMPLAINT):
SUMMARY
1. Since at least 2002, Webb, individually and through certain entities he owns and controls, -has defrauded numerous investors through a real estate-based investment scheme. During the relevant period, the Defendants have raised at least $8.4 million from more than 80 investors by offering and selling securities in the form of investment contracts to investors in several states, including Florida, California and North Carolina.
(PAIRS had contracts in those states, plus Georgia, Virginia? & Indiana).
The PAIRS Foundation, Ltd. (per watchdog.net) address figures in paragraphs 15 & 30
15. CitiRise NC is a North Carolina limited liability company with its original principal office at 901 Barmouth Ct., Raleigh, North Carolina 27614. At least by November 2005, Citifise NC was reporting on its North Carolina State filings’that its principal office address was at 2771 Executive Park Drive, Suite 1, Weston, Florida 33331-3643, the same address used by CitiRise FL
30. Webb and the Webb Companies solicited investment offers in various ways, including through word-of-mouth generated by other investors and through Webb’s personal contact with local church groups, including meeting with local.pastors of such churches. In addition, Webb supervised the preparation of promotional materials advertising alliances with faith-based groups, such as a “partnership” between CitiRise and the Southern Christian Leadership Conference. Webb and the Webb Companies also, on occasion, used independent sales associates who solicited investors through their personal or professional contacts in exchange for commissions. Webb and the Webb Companies also manufactured publicity in other ways, including favorable newspaper profiles in The Triangle Tribune and Triangle
Business Journal in Raleigh-Durham, North Carolina and an appearance by Webb on Fox News’ Hannity & Colmes program in December 2005. In addition, one of Webb’s entities, CitiRise, maintained a website (at http://www.citirise.com) fiom at least 2005 to approximately October 2007 that described Webb’s professional biography, the CitiRise business “model,” and reflected theCitiRise “Corporate Headquarters” address at 2771 Executive Park Drive, Suite 1, Weston, Florida 33331-an address CitiRise no longer occupied from around the Summer of 2006
PAIRS FOUNDATION, Inc. changed FROM that address (per FL filings) on 1/20/2009, to 1675 Market Street #207, Weston, FL, but didn’t report this until 9/20/2010. In other words, 5 days after filing the 2009 report, it moved. 09/20/2010 — ADDRESS CHANGE
USAspending.gov contracts (15 records from 2009 forward) reflect for some reason both addresses.
I thought it was common knowledge that “Ltd.” was not a USA corporate suffix; Corporation or “Inc.” (etc.) are. I guess not. The purpose of the nonprofit
“Research, development and training of relationship skills for youth and families and communities. Development of materials and programs to reduce anger, conflict and violence.”
Here is Lori Gordon giving a rave review to (Helping sell) a book by D. Stosney, called “Love without Hurt” in which he explains how abused women can help their men stop abusing them. Rave reviewers also included Dianne Sollee of “Smartmarriages.com”
This is an important book for everyone in every stage of a relationship, to heal and make whole the love we begin with. Give it as a wedding gift, birthday present, parenting gift. This is knowledge and understanding we all need to be able to heal ourselves and preserve our most cherished relationships. — Lori H. Gordon, Ph.D. founder of PAIRS.
(Here’s the book, described): Reviews of Love without Hurt: Turn Your Resentful, Angry, or Emotionally Abusive Relationship into a Compassionate, Loving One
Library Journal
Stosny has put into words the techniques used in his successful Compassion-Power and Boot Camp programs, which help women who have been subjected to criticism, put-downs, or cold shoulders from their husbands or boyfriends. Complete with checklists, case studies, and well-researched information, his program not only shows the damage that verbally and emotionally abusive relationships do to spouses and children but also demonstrates how to change them, with guidance for both parties. For their part, women are directed to practice self-healing skills. Clear, timely, and on the mark; recommended for all libraries. Copyright 2005 Reed Business Information.
(Usually verbally and emotionally abusive are on their way to physically abusive which, unchecked, goes all the way to “lethal” unless stopped, although not all go the full range. Somehow this is being missed. … And it absolutely the church theme, for the most part, that women are to stop the abuse, somehow, by changing themselves. That’s another reason I protest these programs….)
Looking up “Lori H. Gordon, Ph.D.” I found (yet another) Christian Marriage Association, as they advertised PAIRS training.
Practical Application of Intimate Relationship Skills(PAIRS)
2771 Executive Park Drive Suite #1
Weston, FL 33331
USAWebsite: http://www.pairs.com/ Contact(s) Seth Eisenberg Phone: 877-PAIRS-4U Fax: 954-337-2981 Purpose Sustain healthy relationships Description The PAIRS programs, developed by Lori H. Gordon, Ph.D., provide a comprehensive system to enhance self-knowledge and to develop the ability to sustain pleasurable intimate relationships. PAIRS is located in Reston, Virginia but is a nationally known program

“The Association of Marriage & Family Ministries” ( photo to right appears to be its founders, out of Scottsdale, AZ) reveals that marriage education is a great tool for church growth. So I suppose there’s no harm in having non-believers fund church growth because, what’s good for the Kingdom is surely good for the rest of America?
The Association of Marriage and Family Ministries (AMFM) and its members are committed to you, the local Church, the pastor and all those called to this vital area of ministry. There has never been a greater time in history to show the love of Christ than today in serving those marriages and families that God has given us.
Today, there is no greater growth tool for the church than to have strong marriages and healthy families walking out of the church on Sunday (when ever you worship) and walking into the culture on Monday. What a great opportunity to impact our culture for the Kingdom.
…
Blessings,
Eric and Jennifer Garcia
Co-Founders

(Sunday worship post-dated Jesus Christ by a few centuries, last I heard. See Emperor Constantine 🙂 )
LIKe NCADV,NARME, and AFCC, there is a sliding scale of membership. THe more you can afford, the more you will pay.
“Resource Vendors” pay the highest:
Student Membership – $35
Individual Membership – $75
Church Organization Membership – $125 – $450
Resource Membership (Vendors) – $225 – $550
(I.E. SPECIAL PRIVILEGES FOR SPECIAL PAYMENTS )
FORGIVE ME FOR NOT RESISTING THE TEMPTATION TO POINT OUT THAT THE BIBLE SAYS AND RECOMMENDS THE OPPOSITE:
BY CONTRAST, THE BIBLE CONDEMNS HAVING “RESPECT OF PERSONS” AND DECLARE THAT GOD DOESN’T.
JAMES 2:
|
My brethren, have not the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Lord of glory, with respect of persons.2For if there come unto your assembly a man with a gold ring, in goodly apparel, and there come in also a poor man in vile raiment; 3And ye have respect to him that weareth the gay clothing, and say unto him, Sit thou here in a good place; and say to the poor, Stand thou there, or sit here under my footstool: 4Are ye not then partial in yourselves, and are become judges of evil thoughts? 5Hearken, my beloved brethren, Hath not God chosen the poor of this world rich in faith, and heirs of the kingdom which he hath promised to them that love him? 6But ye have despised the poor. Do not rich men oppress you, and draw you before the judgment seats? 7Do not they blaspheme that worthy name by the which ye are called?8If ye fulfil the royal law according to the scripture, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself, ye do well: 9But if ye have respect to persons, ye commit sin, and are convinced of the law as transgressors.
|
NOT TO MENTION (WHILE I”M IN “JAMES”) A SCATHING COMMENTARY ON RICH MEN, AND FAWNING OVER THEM IN THE CHURCHES:
”
|
|
||
INSTEAD, THESE PROGRAMS ARE ACTUALLY TAKING AWAY FROM THE FATHERLESS AND THE WIDOWS, BY TAKING TANF FUNDS TO PROMOTE MARRIAGE EDUCATION TO HELP EXPAND THEIR CHURCHES! . . . IF THEY WERE PREACHING RIGHT TO START WITH, WOULDN’T THEIR MARRIAGES BE IN BETTER SHAPE? SEEMS TO ME THERE’S ENOUGH INFORMATION IN THE BIBLE ON LOVING ONE ANOTHER, AND A GOOD BIT ON MARRIAGE ALSO (I COR 13, EPHESIANS – – IT’S THROUGHOUT).
SOMEBODY HAD TO DO THIS — why not me? — I looked up their corporate status in Scottsdale. For one, someone from Scottsdale is following my site:
| ID | Type | Name |
|---|---|---|
| 12163487 | CORPORATION | THE ASSOCIATION OF MARRIAGE AND FAMILY MINISTRIES, INC. |
©Copyright 2000 by Arizona Secretary of State – ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
Here we go: (date — today, 10/11/11)
| Corporate Status Inquiry | |
|---|---|
| File Number: -1216348-7 | |
| Corp. Name: THE ASSOCIATION OF MARRIAGE AND FAMILY MINISTRIES, INC. | |
| This Corporation is NOT in Good Standing for the following reasons: | |
|---|---|
| DELINQUENT ANNUAL REPORT 09/13/2011 | |
| 2011 ANNUAL REPORT WAS DUE ON 05/19/2011 | |
| Next Annual Report Due: 05/19/2011 |
Surprise, surprise, lots of Delinquent Reports, and two Dissolved/Reinstated. I can’t paste too much from the AZ corporations site; it positions funny.
Somehow, being delinquent, or even suspended status rarely seems to slow down these groups. I recently ran across another one (with California links) called “ABOVE THE LINE” — they run retreats, and marriage enrichment seminars, and (as I recall) the Tonkins were proud of their association with Dr. Phil.
There is “ABOVE THE LINE ASSOCIATION, INC.” at the same (residential) address the Garcia’s (of AMFM), which ALSO appears to be not filing, but not yet IRS_suspended. Here are the 990 reports:
EIN# 460496745
| ID | Type | Name |
|---|---|---|
| 10418500 | CORPORATION | ABOVE THE LINE ASSOCIATION, INC. |
It got warnings about dissolution in 2006, 2007, 2008, and 2009. It WAS dissolved the year after it formed — 2003, and reinstated. What a mess — and these people are teaching us how NOT to get divorced?
On 9/27/2005, they provided (finally! Forms are available in a single click on-line, too!) the “Annual Report” for years 2003, 2004 & 2005, and were reinstated.
By 12/11/2006, their status was pending again, but they managed to file a report by the following April, for the year 2006. Three months later, they are again “status pending” and apparently didn’t respond. Another 12 months, another notice, and still they didn’t respond. So in 9/2008 they were dissolved – but got reinstated two months later (11/17/2008) probably by forking over the annual reports for 2007 and 2008.
Is that the type of behavior (even for tiny grants) we want of an organization getting $103,000 of help/grants from the Government?
| Administrative Dissolution Date | Administrative Dissolution Reason | Reinstatement Date |
|---|---|---|
| AD-DISSOLVED – FILE A/R | ||
| AD-DISSOLVED – FILE A/R | 11/17/2008 | |
| AD-DISSOLVED – FILE A/R | 09/27/2005 |
(But as of 7/2005, the same couple had already formed AMFM, above).
Your query: ( Organization Name: None Chosen , State: None Chosen , Zip: None Chosen , EIN: 460496745 , Fiscal Year: None Chosen )
4 matching documents retrieved (4 displayed)
ORGANIZATION NAME |
STATE |
YEAR |
TOTAL ASSETS |
FORM |
PAGES |
EIN |
| Above The Line Association Inc. | AZ | 2007 | $5,464 | 990EZ | 15 | 46-0496745 |
| Above The Line Association Inc. | AZ | 2006 | $2,498 | 990EZ | 12 | 46-0496745 |
| Above The Line Association Inc. | AZ | 2005 | $800 | 990 | 17 | 46-0496745 |
| Above The Line Association Inc. | AZ | 2002 | $0 | 990 | 12 | 46-0496745 |
And their 2005 filing explains WHY it pays to look at the IRS 990 filings!
Government Grant (doesn’t show under this EIN via TAGGS) — $103,500
Program Expenses: (neat, eh?) $102,845.
Eric and Jennifer Garcia (husband/wife) are the unpaid directors of “ABOVE THE LINE ASSOCIATION INC.”
“Part II line 43” expenses are explained, among other things as (statement 3):
STATEMENT 3 SCHEDULE A, PART II,LINE 2 TRANSACTIONS WITH TRUSTEES ,DIRECTORS, ETC.
THE ORGANIZATION PAID $100,000 TO A LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY, GARCIA-TOOKER LLC, WHICH IS OWNED BY ERIC AND JENNIFER GARCIA. THE PAYMENT WAS FOR THE SPONSORSHIP OF TWO MARRIAGE AND FAMILY CONFERENCES DURING THE YEAR 2005.
I find the multiple corporate names in a few short years, and the shoddy incorporation history to be a little suspicious. Where did the initial $103K come from and why is it not listed in TAGGS that I can see (I tried the EIN#)?
Roughly translated, they paid themselves $100K (which is “Expenses”) to sponsor two marriage conferences (not named). Because this is not a major amount, who is about to look it up, or go request the information? But multiply this by how many such organizations are lining up to do exactly the same thing, and there goes our social services funding, nationwide, poured down the gullet of religious tax evaders and delinquent filers.
Garcia-Tooker LLC DID exist, possibly in order to shift money to or from Above the Line . . . and/or AMFM (the 2005forward version). While I think Rev. Craig Kuehn of El Dorado Healthy Marriage (duration, one tax filing in 2006) simply wasn’t up to the corporate filings (he’s a Rev!) — this looks like more deliberate planning to move names and money around — and less honest.
I looked this up. From what I can tell, “GARCIA-TOOKER LLC” (these two) INCORPORATED in JAN. 2004. One month later they changed their name to “ASSOCIATION OF FAMILY & MARRIAGE MINISTRIES, LLC.” (may load microfilm image)…. In other words, by the time they’d published their incorporation, it was under a different name. 8 months later an agent resigned:
THIS LINKS TO THE GRAPHICS OF “ABOVE THE LINE” — what they are selling: “http://marriagehelpcenters.com” (see “Dr. Phil” connection).
Their lnks are familiar by now — and some we know federally funded: (photo is “Ron & Tina Konkin”)

Throughout the years that we’ve been providing our seminar and bootcamp services, we’ve aligned ourselves with many organizations and partners who share our commitment to helping people just like you. The following are just some of our affiliations, partnerships, and camaraderie.
- Dr. Phil McGraw
- Marriage Boot Camp
- Smart Marriages (Diane Sollee, goes way back)
- Because Of Me
- California Healthy Marriages Coalition (good luck tracking this one, but one of the staff members IS a Moonie// link not active)
- First Things First (out of TN, and a definite HHS/ACF grantee collaborating with other such grantees to get those TANF funds….)
- Beyond Affairs Network
- Dimensional Journey
- Association of Marriage and Family Ministries (the Garcia’s from Arizona I’m trying to trace, click to get “Page not found.”)
Among other things being sold is an “Exclusive Couples Retreat” (only $4,995) where one can learn to play games designed by Dr. Phil….Intensive Relationship Boot Camp is only $1,225. . (not including hotel, ca $109 group rate). . . . Don’t miss two upcoming in California . . . . .
GUIDESTAR regarding “Above the Line, Inc.,” a red-font alert to left of the listing, writes: “This organization does not appear in the IRS’s most recent list of tax-exempt organizations. IRS records do not, however, indicate that the organization’s tax-exempt status has been revoked. Contact the organization for more information.”
THERE”S MORE TO THIS MAZE:
|
San Diego “Fictitious Business” registration shows 3 trademarks of this group:
But they want to sell me further details (forget it!)
Notice that the “Coalition” is the “OWNER NAME.” However, I happen to know that in the OAG site, it has a different name. SEarching that, I found (notice dates),
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
Executive Director and Founder, Healthy Marriage Project
437 connections
In 2006, CHMC received a five-year, $2.4 million per year grant from Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families (HHS/ACF), the largest grant ever awarded by HHS/ACF in support of Healthy Marriages. Through this funding, CHMC partners with a network of 23 faith- and community-based organizations (FBCOs) throughout California (from http://www.camarriage.com/about/index.ashx?nv=3)
Today Was A Very Special Day In California
Bento Leal
November 30, 2001Today was a very special day in California:
Tonight (Thursday, Nov. 29) 800 people heard True Mother speak at the Marriott Hotel in downtown Oakland, CA.
Program: Delicious dinner, songs by the Redeemed Convicts for Christ, then Rev. Jenkins greeted everyone, later he introduced Arhbishop Stallings who gave an uplifting introduction of True Mother, who read her speech with warmth and grace. Afterwards flowers and plaques were given to Mother. Mother then presented 3 of the gold watches to leading ministers and she also presented 8 framed Ambassador for Peace certificates to selected leaders. The program went very well and the audience was very appreciative of the entire event. Afterward, there was a lively victory celebration with hookup to True Father at East Garden for singing and testimony.
Earlier in the day was an afternoon ILC that featured 70 people (40 guests and 30 UC members). Several Ambassadors for Peace attended the ILC. Northern California has awarded 90 Ambassadors for Peace representing clergy, educators, community organization leaders, journalists, and others. Dr. Frank Kaufman presented the IIFWP material very eloquently and professionally and was followed by Imam Qasmi of the Muslim community of Sacramento who strongly praised TPs for their work to promote strong marriages and families, and bring unity among the faiths. Though he is fasting for Ramadan, he drove the 2 hours from Sacramento just to present his 15 minute talk to our group. He immediately drove back to officiate services in his mosque.
We then had a presentation by our local WFWP chairwoman. After the break, a sister read the HDH material on Marriage for our AFC session, which was followed by Rev. Lawrence Van Hook speaking strongly about the importance of a God-centered marriage.
One special feature of the day was a visit by Archbishop Stallings and a few of us with Mayor Jerry Brown of Oakland. We presented him with a nicely framed Ambassador for Peace certificate in his office. He was impressed with our work and has fond memories of working with us over the years. He asked us to help him with tutors for struggling students in a military academy for 7th graders that he set up in Oakland. We said that we would help him.
Archbishop Stallings was also able to bring Rev. Dr. J. Alfred Smith, Sr., Pastor of Allen Temple Baptist Church in Oakland. Rev. Smith is a foremost leader among the clergy in Oakland. This was the first time he had attended a speech with TPs, {{TRUE PARENTS, get it?}} so this was a HUGE breakthrough. Mother presented him with a watch for all of the wonderful work he is doing for the city of Oakland. The door is now open for us to work more closely with him.
CHMC site describes Bento Leal’s background including working with a different set of federal grants in SF: HERE IT IS:
Bento Leal
Implementation Specialist
Bento@CaMarriage.com
510.333.3478Bento has worked in the field of marriage- and family-strengthening for the past 20 years. Before joining CHMC staff, he worked with Federal grants in the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Area to provide life skills mentoring to ex-offenders and to help build family-strengthening capacity of small or emerging faith-based and community organizations. Bento is a trainer in several Marriage Education curricula, including Mastering the Mysteries of Love (MML). Bento’s primary assignments with CHMC are to teach MML leadership workshops and provide technical assistance to newly-trained MML facilitators so they are successful in organizing and conducting MML classes. Bento and his wife, Kimiko, have been married for 25 years.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Related Documents |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Prerequisite Information | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| IRS Return Data | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
CALIFORNIA HEALTHY MARRIAGES COALITION
1045 PASSIFLORA AVE. ENCINITAS CA 92024
RE: NOTICE OF INCOMPLETE REPORT
April 5, 2010
The Annual Registration Renewal Fee Report submitted on behalf of the captioned organization is incomplete for the following reason(s):
1. The $150 renewal fee was not received. Please send a check in that amount, payable to “Attorney General’s Registry of Charitable Trusts”.
In order to remain in compliance with the filing requirements set forth in Government Code sections 12586 and 12587
| Entity Number | Date Filed | Status | Entity Name | Agent for Service of Process |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| C2629035 | 11/08/2004 | SUSPENDED | CALIFORNIA STATE HEALTHY MARRIAGE INITIATIVE | CHRIS GRIER |
| C2896098 | 06/01/2006 | ACTIVE | FRESNO COUNTY HEALTHY MARRIAGE COALITION, INC., A NONPROFIT PUBLIC BENEFIT CORPORATION | ROBYN L ESRAELIAN |
| C2271911 | 03/07/2001 | DISSOLVED | HEALTHY CHALLENGES MARRIAGE, FAMILY AND CHILD COUNSELING PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION | ELIZABETH LEHRER |
| C2884897 | 06/23/2006 | SUSPENDED | NATIONAL HEALTHY MARRIAGE RESOURCE CENTER | DENNIS J STOICA |
| C2884898 | 06/23/2006 | SUSPENDED | ORANGE COUNTY HEALTHY MARRIAGE AND FAMILY COALITION | DENNIS J STOICA |
| C2955473 | 10/04/2006 | SUSPENDED | RIVERSIDE HEALTHY MARRIAGE COALITION, INC. | LEGALZOOM.COM, INC. |
| C2650745 | 05/12/2004 | ACTIVE | SACRAMENTO HEALTHY MARRIAGE PROJECT | CAROLYN RICH CURTIS |
| C3210304 | 05/29/2009 | ACTIVE | SAINTS HEALTHY MARRIAGE PROJECT | REGINA GLASPIE |
| C2860238 | 03/02/2006 | ACTIVE | STANISLAUS COUNTY HEALTHY MARRIAGE COALITION | JAMES CARLETON STEWARD |
| C3013354 | 08/13/2007 | ACTIVE | YUBA-SUTTER HEALTHY MARRIAGE PROJECT | WILLIAM F JENS |
| Entity Number | Date Filed | Status | Entity Name | Agent for Service of Process |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| C3073670 | 01/16/2008 | SUSPENDED | CALIFORNIA CENTER FOR HEALTHY RELATIONSHIPS, INC. | LEGALZOOM.COM, INC. |
| C2746528 | 05/13/2005 | ACTIVE | HEALTHY RELATIONSHIPS CALIFORNIA | PATTY HOWELL |
| C2790720 | 06/09/2006 | ACTIVE | OAKLAND BERKELEY INITIATIVE FOR HEALTHY RELATIONSHIPS | DARRYL HARRISON |
| C2494811 | 01/06/2003 | DISSOLVED | THE CENTER FOR HEALTHY RELATIONSHIPS, INC. | TAMARA ILICH |
| Entity Name: | HEALTHY RELATIONSHIPS CALIFORNIA |
| Entity Number: | C2746528 |
| Date Filed: | 05/13/2005 |
| Status: | ACTIVE |
| Jurisdiction: | CALIFORNIA |
| Entity Address: | (SAME AS ABOVE) |
| Entity City, State, Zip: | LEUCADIA CA 92024 |
| Agent for Service of Process: | PATTY HOWELL |
| Agent Address: | 1045 PASSIFLORA AVE |
| Agent City, State, Zip: | LEUCADIA CA 92024 |
Recipient: Center For Self-Sufficiency, Inc.
Recipient ZIP Code: 53211
| FY | Award Number | Award Title | Budget Year of Support | CFDA Number | Agency | Action Issue Date | Amount This Action |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2011 | 90FM0043 | CENTER FOR SELF-SUFFICIENCY HEALTH MARRIAGE AND RELATIONSHIP EDUCATION PROJECT NOW TO SUCCEED | 1 | 93.086 | ACF | 09-26-2011 | $ 1,779,393 |
| Award Actions Count: 1 | Award Actions Subtotal: | $ 1,779,393 | |||||
Recipient: Community Marriage Builders, Inc.
Recipient ZIP Code: 47714-1863
| FY | Award Number | Award Title | Budget Year of Support | CFDA Number | Agency | Action Issue Date | Amount This Action |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2011 | 90FM0005 | SOUTH WESTERN INDIANA HEALTHY MARRIAGE INITIATIVEMARRIAGE EDUCATION, RELATIONSHIP, PARENTING, FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT, JOB AND CAREER ADVANCEMENT, DIVORCE REDUCTION SKILLS FOR COUPLES AND INDIVIDUALS. | 1 | 93.086 | ACF | 09-27-2011 | $ 799,999 |
| Award Actions Count: 1 | Award Actions Subtotal: | $ 799,999 | |||||
Recipient: EL PASO CENTER FOR CHILDREN
Recipient ZIP Code: 79930
| FY | Award Number | Award Title | Budget Year of Support | CFDA Number | Agency | Action Issue Date | Amount This Action |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2011 | 90FM0045 | HEALTHY OPPORTUNITIES FOR MARRIAGE ENRICHMENT | 1 | 93.086 | ACF | 09-26-2011 | $ 799,945 |
| Award Actions Count: 1 | Award Actions Subtotal: | $ 799,945 | |||||
Recipient: ELIZABETHS NEW LIFE CENTER
Recipient ZIP Code: 45405
| FY | Award Number | Award Title | Budget Year of Support | CFDA Number | Agency | Action Issue Date | Amount This Action |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2011 | 90FM0046 | MARRIAGE WORKS! OHIO COLLABORATIVE | 1 | 93.086 | ACF | 09-26-2011 | $ 2,500,000 |
| Award Actions Count: 1 | Award Actions Subtotal: | $ 2,500,000 | |||||
{{NOTE: I look at this one below, simply because $2.5 million is a definite vote of confidence from HHS. For the record, the total HHS grants recorded for this group show as: $17 million. It’s pulling in Abstinence Funding, and is the lead agency in the multi-county “Marriage Works!” above. Something tells me our HHS doesn’t want too much fertility among the TANF recipients; it will starve them out I guess by diverting funds into
get-rich-quick grants on anyone producing abstinence is best curricula.}}
| Recipient Name | City | State | ZIP Code | County | DUNS Number | Sum of Awards |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ELIZABETHS NEW LIFE CENTER | DAYTON | OH | 45405 | MONTGOMERY | 101653447 | $ 17,272,584 |
Recipient: FIRST THINGS FIRST
Recipient ZIP Code: 37403-3433
| FY | Award Number | Award Title | Budget Year of Support | CFDA Number | Agency | Action Issue Date | Amount This Action |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2011 | 90FM0048 | CHAMPIONS FOR CHILDREN-HAMILTON COUNTY | 1 | 93.086 | ACF | 09-26-2011 | $ 1,070,834 |
| Award Actions Count: 1 | Award Actions Subtotal: | $ 1,070,834 | |||||
Recipient: Family Guidance, Inc.
Recipient ZIP Code: 15143-9554
| FY | Award Number | Award Title | Budget Year of Support | CFDA Number | Agency | Action Issue Date | Amount This Action |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2011 | 90FM0047 | TWOGETHER PITTSBURGH PROVIDING SIX TYPES OF “ALLOWABLE ACTIVITIES” TO THE COMMUNITY: AA (II) EDUCATION IN HIGH SCHOOLS; AA (IV) MARRIAGE PREPARATION | 1 | 93.086 | ACF | 09-26-2011 | $ 1,163,684 |
| Award Actions Count: 1 | Award Actions Subtotal: | $ 1,163,684 | |||||
Recipient: Family Resource Center of Raleigh, Inc.
Recipient ZIP Code: 27601-1947
| FY | Award Number | Award Title | Budget Year of Support | CFDA Number | Agency | Action Issue Date | Amount This Action |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2011 | 90FM0009 | COMMUNITY FAMILY PRESERVATION PROGRAM – A HEALTHY MARRIAGE EDUCATION AND RELATIONSHIP SKILLS TRAINING PROGRAM FOR LOW-INCOME YOUTH, ADULTS AND COUPLES. | 1 | 93.086 | ACF | 09-27-2011 | $ 725,000 |
| Award Actions Count: 1 | Award Actions Subtotal: | $ 725,000 | |||||
Recipient: Family Service Center at Houston and Harris County
Recipient ZIP Code: 77006
| FY | Award Number | Award Title | Budget Year of Support | CFDA Number | Agency | Action Issue Date | Amount This Action |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2011 | 90FM0017 | HOUSTON MARRIAGE PROJECT | 1 | 93.086 | ACF | 09-27-2011 | $ 698,102 |
| Award Actions Count: 1 | Award Actions Subtotal: | $ 698,102 | |||||
Recipient: Fathers & Families Resources/Research Center
Recipient ZIP Code: 46208-4705
| FY | Award Number | Award Title | Budget Year of Support | CFDA Number | Agency | Action Issue Date | Amount This Action |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2011 | 90FM0027 | STRENGTHENING FAMILIES: LINKING HEALTHY MARRIAGE AND STRONG FATHERS | 1 | 93.086 | ACF | 09-26-2011 | $ 1,780,000 |
| Award Actions Count: 1 | Award Actions Subtotal: | $ 1,780,000 | |||||
Recipient: Future Foundation
Recipient ZIP Code: 30344-4137
| FY | Award Number | Award Title | Budget Year of Support | CFDA Number | Agency | Action Issue Date | Amount This Action |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2011 | 90FM0013 | REALTALK – A COMPREHENSIVE HEALTHY MARRIAGE EDUCATION AND RELATIONSHIP SKILLS INITIATIVE FOR YOUTH AND PARENTS | 1 | 93.086 | ACF | 09-26-2011 | $ 685,000 |
| Award Actions Count: 1 | Award Actions Subtotal: | $ 685,000 | |||||
Recipient: GRANATO COUNSELING SERVICES
Recipient ZIP Code: 22182
| FY | Award Number | Award Title | Budget Year of Support | CFDA Number | Agency | Action Issue Date | Amount This Action |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2011 | 90FM0024 | FIT RELATIONSHIPS PROGRAMS | 1 | 93.086 | ACF | 09-26-2011 | $ 799,599 |
| Award Actions Count: 1 | Award Actions Subtotal: | $ 799,599 | |||||
Recipient: Healthy You, Inc.
Recipient ZIP Code: 363031997
| FY | Award Number | Award Title | Budget Year of Support | CFDA Number | Agency | Action Issue Date | Amount This Action |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2011 | 90FM0020 | JUST THE FACTS | 1 | 93.086 | ACF | 09-26-2011 | $ 681,956 |
| Award Actions Count: 1 | Award Actions Subtotal: | $ 681,956 | |||||
Recipient: High Country Consulting LLC
Recipient ZIP Code: 82001-2758
| FY | Award Number | Award Title | Budget Year of Support | CFDA Number | Agency | Action Issue Date | Amount This Action |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2011 | 90FM0049 | STRENGTHENING WYOMING TEEN AND LOW INCOME TANF FAMILIES THROUGH SKILL BASED RELATIONSHIP TRAINING AND ECONOMIC SELF-SUFFICIENCY | 1 | 93.086 | ACF | 09-26-2011 | $ 535,082 |
| Award Actions Count: 1 | Award Actions Subtotal: | $ 535,082 | |||||
Recipient: IRCO-IMMIGRANT & REFUGEE COMMUNITY ORGANIZATION
Recipient ZIP Code: 97220
| FY | Award Number | Award Title | Budget Year of Support | CFDA Number | Agency | Action Issue Date | Amount This Action |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2011 | 90FM0015 | REFUGEE AND IMMIGRANT FAMILY EMPOWERMENT PROJECT | 1 | 93.086 | ACF | 09-26-2011 | $ 492,000 |
| Award Actions Count: 1 | Award Actions Subtotal: | $ 492,000 | |||||
Recipient: Imperial Valley Regional Occupational Program
Recipient ZIP Code: 92243-2943
| FY | Award Number | Award Title | Budget Year of Support | CFDA Number | Agency | Action Issue Date | Amount This Action |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2011 | 90FM0061 | PROJECT JUNTOS | 1 | 93.086 | ACF | 09-26-2011 | $ 799,000 |
| Award Actions Count: 1 | Award Actions Subtotal: | $ 799,000 | |||||
Recipient: JOHN BROWN UNIVERSITY
Recipient ZIP Code: 72761
| FY | Award Number | Award Title | Budget Year of Support | CFDA Number | Agency | Action Issue Date | Amount This Action |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2011 | 90FM0023 | HEALTHY MARRIAGES INITIATIVE | 1 | 93.086 | ACF | 09-26-2011 | $ 724,428 |
| Award Actions Count: 1 | Award Actions Subtotal: | $ 724,428 | |||||
Recipient: Jewish Family & Children`s Service of Sarasota-Manatee,
Recipient ZIP Code: 34237-5223
| FY | Award Number | Award Title | Budget Year of Support | CFDA Number | Agency | Action Issue Date | Amount This Action |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2011 | 90FM0060 | HEALTHY FAMILIES/HEALTHY CHILDREN | 1 | 93.086 | ACF | 09-26-2011 | $ 799,993 |
| Award Actions Count: 1 | Award Actions Subtotal: | $ 799,993 | |||||
Recipient: KEIKI O KA AINA PRESCHOOL, INC.
Recipient ZIP Code: 96819
| FY | Award Number | Award Title | Budget Year of Support | CFDA Number | Agency | Action Issue Date | Amount This Action |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2011 | 90FM0012 | KOKA CARES – KEIKI O KA AINA CAREER AND RELATIONSHIP EDUCATION SERVICES | 1 | 93.086 | ACF | 09-26-2011 | $ 798,752 |
| Award Actions Count: 1 | Award Actions Subtotal: | $ 798,752 | |||||
Recipient: Kentucky River Foothills Development Council, Inc.
Recipient ZIP Code: 40475-2457
| FY | Award Number | Award Title | Budget Year of Support | CFDA Number | Agency | Action Issue Date | Amount This Action |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2011 | 90FM0050 | KRFDC COMMUNITY CENTERED HEALTHY MARRIAGE AND RELATIONSHIP PROJECT | 1 | 93.086 | ACF | 09-27-2011 | $ 799,999 |
| Award Actions Count: 1 | Award Actions Subtotal: | $ 799,999 | |||||
Recipient: MARRIAGE SAVERS OF CLARK COUNTY
Recipient ZIP Code: 45503-4175
| FY | Award Number | Award Title | Budget Year of Support | CFDA Number | Agency | Action Issue Date | Amount This Action |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2011 | 90FM0004 | THE COMMITMENT PROJECT-INSPIRING COMMITMENT TO HEALTHY MARRIAGE AND RELATIONSHIPS,RESPONSIBLE PARENTING AND ECONOMIC STABILITY FOR THE BENEFIT OF FAMILIES AND CHILDREN. | 1 | 93.086 | ACF | 09-27-2011 | $ 798,380 |
| Award Actions Count: 1 | Award Actions Subtotal: | $ 798,380 | |||||
Recipient: MULTI-PURPOSE SENIOR CITIZENS PROGRAM, INC
Recipient ZIP Code: 40066
| FY | Award Number | Award Title | Budget Year of Support | CFDA Number | Agency | Action Issue Date | Amount This Action |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2011 | 90FM0036 | MULTI-PURPOSE COMMUNITY ACTION AGENCY COMMUNITY-CENTERED HEALTHY MARRIAGE AND RELATIONSHIP PROGRAM | 1 | 93.086 | ACF | 09-26-2011 | $ 344,904 |
| Award Actions Count: 1 | Award Actions Subtotal: | $ 344,904 | |||||
Recipient: Meier Clinics Foundation
Recipient ZIP Code: 60187-4579
| FY | Award Number | Award Title | Budget Year of Support | CFDA Number | Agency | Action Issue Date | Amount This Action |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2011 | 90FM0051 | MEIER CLINICS, FAMILY BRIDGES, HEALTY MARRIAGE INITIATIVE | 1 | 93.086 | ACF | 09-26-2011 | $ 2,500,000 |
| Award Actions Count: 1 | Award Actions Subtotal: | $ 2,500,000 | |||||
Recipient: Mission West Virginia, Inc.
Recipient ZIP Code: 25526
| FY | Award Number | Award Title | Budget Year of Support | CFDA Number | Agency | Action Issue Date | Amount This Action |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2011 | 90FM0052 | N/A | 1 | 93.086 | ACF | 09-28-2011 | $ 683,935 |
| Award Actions Count: 1 | Award Actions Subtotal: | $ 683,935 | |||||
Recipient: More Than Conquerors Inc
Recipient ZIP Code: 300835318
| FY | Award Number | Award Title | Budget Year of Support | CFDA Number | Agency | Action Issue Date | Amount This Action |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2011 | 90FM0053 | COMMUNITY-CENTERED HEALTHY MARRIAGE AND RELATIONSHIP GRANTS | 1 | 93.086 | ACF | 09-27-2011 | $ 798,798 |
| Award Actions Count: 1 | Award Actions Subtotal: | $ 798,798 | |||||
Recipient: NATIONAL OFFICE OF SAMOAN AFFAIRS
Recipient ZIP Code: 90746
| FY | Award Number | Award Title | Budget Year of Support | CFDA Number | Agency | Action Issue Date | Amount This Action |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2011 | 90FM0055 | NATIVE HAWAIIAN AND OTHER PACIFIC ISLANDER (NHOP) HEALTHY MARRIAGE AND RELATIONSHIP PROJECT | 1 | 93.086 | ACF | 09-26-2011 | $ 685,308 |
| Award Actions Count: 1 | Award Actions Subtotal: | $ 685,308 | |||||
Recipient: NEW MEXICO STATE UNIVERSITY
Recipient ZIP Code: 88003
| FY | Award Number | Award Title | Budget Year of Support | CFDA Number | Agency | Action Issue Date | Amount This Action |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2011 | 90FM0037 | NEW MEXICO BORDER REGION HEALTHY MARRIAGE AND RELATIONSHIP PROJECT | 1 | 93.086 | ACF | 09-28-2011 | $ 799,999 |
| Award Actions Count: 1 | Award Actions Subtotal: | $ 799,999 | |||||
Recipient: NORTHWEST FAMILY SERVICES
Recipient ZIP Code: 97213-2933
| FY | Award Number | Award Title | Budget Year of Support | CFDA Number | Agency | Action Issue Date | Amount This Action |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2011 | 90FM0002 | GREATER PORTLAND COMMUNITY-CENTERED HEALTHY MARRIAGE AND RELATIONSHIP PROJECT ASSISTING OVER 19,500 LOW INCOME FAMILIES GAIN FAMILY AND ECONOMIC STABILITY OVER THE 3 YEAR PROJECT. | 1 | 93.086 | ACF | 09-27-2011 | $ 1,395,000 |
| 2011 | 90FM0002 | GREATER PORTLAND COMMUNITY-CENTERED HEALTHY MARRIAGE AND RELATIONSHIP PROJECT ASSISTING OVER 19,500 LOW INCOME FAMILIES GAIN FAMILY AND ECONOMIC STABILITY OVER THE 3 YEAR PROJECT. | 1 | 93.086 | ACF | 09-28-2011 | $ 0 |
| Award Actions Count: 2 | Award Actions Subtotal: | $ 1,395,000 | |||||
Recipient: OK ST DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES
Recipient ZIP Code: 73125
| FY | Award Number | Award Title | Budget Year of Support | CFDA Number | Agency | Action Issue Date | Amount This Action |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2011 | 90FM0032 | THRIVING MARRIAGES: RETREATS FOR SPECIAL NEEDS POPULATIONS | 1 | 93.086 | ACF | 09-27-2011 | $ 776,304 |
| Award Actions Count: 1 | Award Actions Subtotal: | $ 776,304 | |||||
Recipient: OPERATION KEEPSAKE
Recipient ZIP Code: 44087-1654
| FY | Award Number | Award Title | Budget Year of Support | CFDA Number | Agency | Action Issue Date | Amount This Action |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2011 | 90FM0056 | MARRIAGE IS FOR KEEPS | 1 | 93.086 | ACF | 09-26-2011 | $ 798,054 |
| Award Actions Count: 1 | Award Actions Subtotal: | $ 798,054 | |||||
Recipient: PHOENIX PROGRAMS OF NEW YORK,INC
Recipient ZIP Code: 10023
| FY | Award Number | Award Title | Budget Year of Support | CFDA Number | Agency | Action Issue Date | Amount This Action |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2011 | 90FM0025 | PHOENIX HOUSE CONNECTIONS | 1 | 93.086 | ACF | 09-26-2011 | $ 618,768 |
| Award Actions Count: 1 | Award Actions Subtotal: | $ 618,768 | |||||
Recipient: PROJECT S.O.S., INC.
Recipient ZIP Code: 32216-6241
| FY | Award Number | Award Title | Budget Year of Support | CFDA Number | Agency | Action Issue Date | Amount This Action |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2011 | 90FM0033 | COMMUNITY-CENTERED HEALTHY MARRIAGE ANDRELATIONSHIP GRANTS | 1 | 93.086 | ACF | 09-26-2011 | $ 672,703 |
| Award Actions Count: 1 | Award Actions Subtotal: | $ 672,703 | |||||
Recipient: PUBLIC STRATEGIES INC
Recipient ZIP Code: 73116-7909
| FY | Award Number | Award Title | Budget Year of Support | CFDA Number | Agency | Action Issue Date | Amount This Action |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2011 | 90FM0026 | FAMILY EXPECTATIONS | 1 | 93.086 | ACF | 09-26-2011 | $ 2,500,000 |
| Award Actions Count: 1 | Award Actions Subtotal: | $ 2,500,000 | |||||
Recipient: Parenting Center (The)
Recipient ZIP Code: 76107
| FY | Award Number | Award Title | Budget Year of Support | CFDA Number | Agency | Action Issue Date | Amount This Action |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2011 | 90FM0031 | EMPOWERING FAMILIES PROJECT | 1 | 93.086 | ACF | 09-26-2011 | $ 797,093 |
| Award Actions Count: 1 | Award Actions Subtotal: | $ 797,093 | |||||
Recipient: RECAPTURING THE VISION, INTERNATIONAL, INC.
Recipient ZIP Code: 33157-5372
| FY | Award Number | Award Title | Budget Year of Support | CFDA Number | Agency | Action Issue Date | Amount This Action |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2011 | 90FM0028 | RECAPTURING THE VISION INTERNATIONAL: THE MARRIAGE/RELATIONSHIP PROJECT TARGETING HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS AND YOUNG ADULTS 18-25. | 1 | 93.086 | ACF | 09-27-2011 | $ 799,230 |
| Award Actions Count: 1 | Award Actions Subtotal: | $ 799,230 | |||||
Recipient: STARKVILLE SCHOOL DISTRICT
Recipient ZIP Code: 39759-2803
| FY | Award Number | Award Title | Budget Year of Support | CFDA Number | Agency | Action Issue Date | Amount This Action |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2011 | 90FM0035 | BUILDING STRONG FAMILIES | 1 | 93.086 | ACF | 09-26-2011 | $ 699,874 |
| Award Actions Count: 1 | Award Actions Subtotal: | $ 699,874 | |||||
Recipient: Sacramento Healthy Marriage Project
Recipient ZIP Code: 95821
| FY | Award Number | Award Title | Budget Year of Support | CFDA Number | Agency | Action Issue Date | Amount This Action |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2011 | 90FM0059 | FLOURISHING FAMILIES PROGRAM | 1 | 93.086 | ACF | 09-26-2011 | $ 798,825 |
| Award Actions Count: 1 | Award Actions Subtotal: | $ 798,825 | |||||
| Page Award Actions Count: 50 | Award Actions Amount for this Page: | $ 48,511,440 | |||||
| Total of 70 Award Actions for 60 Awards | Total Amount for all Award Actions: | $ 60,296,527 | |||||
(NEXT PAGE of the SAME SERIES):
Unfortunately, the next page will not display on this simple search allowing me to find the remaining 10 grantees. I managed to get 68 awards to show
under “Advanced Search,” keying in nothing but the same “90FM” under awards — and got basically the rest, but without the HTML links. Here are those 68, and I’ll highlight where the above listing. I”m glad I did — because notice that the Principal INvestigator field has a strange showing, i.e., someone possibly didn’t type in the {Principal Investigator’s) last name — but the first name twice, meaning if you searched the database by that field, you’d miss the Public Strategies, Inc. $2.5 million (new) grant, and several others. There is a LOT of this type of inexplicable typo or other screwup activity (like failing to enter a DUNS# where there is one) in TAGGS, sometimes I wonder why:
Note that “DIBBLE FUND” here shows up alpha under “The” (such a database, eh?) towards the end. I am going to publish this post, and take a personal Time Out” to cool off, after having learned more than the public was intended to know about, for example, the California Healthy Marriages Act” and how it’s apparently gone through a few incorporations and name changes. Or how there is one person on three of the grantees’ boards below, and the website (she) is listed as “founding” is under about a fourth business name ,not shown below and whose corporation status, trademark registration, or listing of “we changed the company name” I haven’t caught up with. One address (including suite#) seems to match two of the organizations below. Notice also that the Colorado-based “WAIT Training” (near bottom of the list) — which appears to be its legitimate corporate name, although its website claims to have said the “new” name is Center for Relationship Education (but no namechange was filed) shows up under the ACF/HHS listing of “2011 grantees” not under “WAIT training” but instead under “Center for Relationship Education.”
All in all, it seems that many obstacles are in place to non-federal grantee recipients, like a person actually just wanting to know!, in tracking single organizations.
I have already mocked the grandiose schemes and language of both this California Healthy Marriage Coalition (and warned us about it) before, along with the Dibble Fund, whose goal is to educate EVERYONE over the age of 14 who has, may have, or is in some other way potentially fertile male or female — existed in the State of California, and educate them (at public expense) on marriage. Search “Leucadia” on my blog to find it.
They are connected at the hip with WAIT Training (or at least Joneen MacKenzie) which is basically a religious — VERY religious — abstinence education group out of Colorado. And a brand-new association (that they’re advertising) called “NARME” which I looked up, it’s in Tallahassee, Florida, and on the board are some of the groups below. I’m getting tired of all this nonsense, as well as alarmed at what appears to be overt tolerance of federal grantees that form shell front groups, take the money, and either pull a chameleon or simply disappear (and I have one of those to show, also — not on this list, because they disappeared back in 2006).
///
|
Results 1 to 68 of 68 matches.
|
![]() |
|
Page 1 of 1
|
1 |
| Grantee Name | State | County | Award Number | Award Title | Budget Year | Award Action Type | Principal Investigator | Sum of Actions |
| AUBURN UNIVERSITY | AL | LEE | 90FM0006 | ALABAMA HEALTHY MARRIAGE AND RELATIONSHIP EDUCATION INITIATIVE (AHMREI) | 1 | NEW | FRANCESCA M FRANCESCA | $ 2,489,548 |
| AVANCE, INC | TX | HARRIS | 90FM0041 | COMMUNITY-CENTERED HEALTHY MARRIAGE AND RELATIONSHIP GRANTS | 1 | NEW | MARTHA MARTHA | $ 799,999 |
| Alliance for North Texas Healthy & Effective Marriages | TX | DALLAS | 90FM0018 | ALLIANCE FOR NORTH TEXAS HEALTHY AND EFFECTIVE MARRIAGES, DBA ANTHEM STRONG FAMILIES WILL IMPLEMENT A 3-TIERED PROJECT THAT PROVIDES HEALTHY MARRIAGE SERVICES, ECONOMIC STABILITY AND JOB PLACEMENT. | 1 | NEW | COSETTE COSETTE | $ 1,514,359 |
| Arizona Youth Partnership | AZ | PIMA | 90FM0030 | BUILDING FUTURES FOR FAMILIES-HEALTHY MARRIAGE PROJECT IN PIMA, PINAL AND GILA COUNTIES OF ARIZONA. | 1 | NEW | DANIEL DANIEL | $ 634,536 |
| BEECH ACRES PARENTING CENTER | OH | HAMILTON | 90FM0029 | BUILDING STRONG MARRIAGES AND RELATIONSHIPS | 1 | NEW | NATHANIEL NATHANIEL | $ 799,999 |
| BETHANY CHRISTIAN SERVICES | MI | KENT | 90FM0011 | BE REAL PROGRAM (“BUILDING AND ENHANCING RELATIONSHIPS, EMPLOYMENT, AND LIFE SKILLS”) | 1 | NEW | NONYEM A NONYEM | $ 799,996 |
| CAMBODIAN ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA, INC | CA | LOS ANGELES | 90FM0034 | MARRIAGE ENRICHMENT PROJECT | 1 | NEW | KIMTHAI KIMTHAI | $ 570,000 |
| CATHOLIC CHARITIES | KS | SEDGWICK | 90FM0042 | PROVIDING MARRIAGE AND RELATIONSHIPS SKILLS AS WELL AS JOB AND CAREER ADVANCEMENT ACTIVITIES THAT WILL PROMOTE ECONOMIC STABILITY AND SELF-SUFFICIENCY | 1 | NEW | MARTHA L MARTHA | $ 1,445,587 |
| CATHOLIC CHARITIES/DIOCESE TRENTON | NJ | MERCER | 90FM0016 | EL CENTRO HEALTHY MARRIAGES INITIATIVE | 1 | NEW | RONALD RONALD | $ 555,300 |
| CHILDREN`S AID SOCIETY IN CLEARFIELD COUNTY | PA | CLEARFIELD | 90FM0003 | HEALTHY RELATIONSHIP PROJECT IN CENTRAL PENNSYLVANIA WITH A FOCUS ON CLEARFIELD COUNTY AND 8 ADJACENT COUNTIES INCLUDING AA (II)(III)(IV) AND (V) | 1 | NEW | BONNIE BONNIE | $ 354,714 |
| COMMUNITY PREVENTION PARTNERSHIP OF BERKS COUNTY | PA | BERKS | 90FM0044 | COMMUNITY-CENTERED HEALTHY MARRIAGE AND RELATIONSHIP PROJECT | 1 | NEW | CHERYL CHERYL | $ 787,665 |
| CRECIENDOS UNIDOS/GROWING TOGETHER | AZ | MARICOPA | 90FM0021 | TODO ES POSIBLE (EVERYTHING IS POSSIBLE) – A MARRIAGE PROGRAM FOR HISPANIC FAMILIES IN PHOENIX, AZ | 1 | NEW | GUILLE GUILLE | $ 359,796 |
| California Healthy Marriages Coalition | CA | SAN DIEGO | 90FM0019 | CALIFORNIA COMMUNITY-CENTERED HEALTHY MARRIAGE AND RELATIONSHIP PROJECT | 1 | NEW | PATTY PATTY{{probably Patty Howell”}} | $ 2,500,000 |
| Center For Self-Sufficiency, Inc. | WI | MILWAUKEE | 90FM0043 | CENTER FOR SELF-SUFFICIENCY HEALTH MARRIAGE AND RELATIONSHIP EDUCATION PROJECT NOW TO SUCCEED | 1 | NEW | JEANETTE JEANETTE | $ 1,779,393 |
| Community Marriage Builders, Inc. | IN | VANDERBURGH | 90FM0005 | SOUTH WESTERN INDIANA HEALTHY MARRIAGE INITIATIVEMARRIAGE EDUCATION, RELATIONSHIP, PARENTING, FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT, JOB AND CAREER ADVANCEMENT, DIVORCE REDUCTION SKILLS FOR COUPLES AND INDIVIDUALS. | 1 | NEW | JOHN JOHN | $ 799,999 |
| EL PASO CENTER FOR CHILDREN | TX | EL PASO | 90FM0045 | HEALTHY OPPORTUNITIES FOR MARRIAGE ENRICHMENT | 1 | NEW | LEONARD LEONARD | $ 799,945 |
| ELIZABETHS NEW LIFE CENTER{{Abortion Alternatives}}** | OH | MONTGOMERY | 90FM0046 | MARRIAGE WORKS!OHIO COLLABORATIVE{{known fatherhood collaboration: see below | 1 | NEW | GREG GREG | $ 2,500,000 |
| FIRST THINGS FIRST | TN | HAMILTON | 90FM0048 | CHAMPIONS FOR CHILDREN-HAMILTON COUNTY | 1 | NEW | DEBORAH DEBORAH | $ 1,070,834 |
| Family Guidance, Inc.{{evangelistic– see 10/9/2011 post}} | PA | ALLEGHENY | 90FM0047 | TWOGETHER PITTSBURGH**PROVIDING SIX TYPES OF “ALLOWABLE ACTIVITIES” TO THE COMMUNITY: AA (II) EDUCATION IN HIGH SCHOOLS; AA (IV) MARRIAGE PREPARATION(**LLP formed in 2009 to do this) | 1 | NEW | ROBERT L ROBERT | $ 1,163,684 |
| Family Resource Center of Raleigh, Inc. | NC | WAKE | 90FM0009 | COMMUNITY FAMILY PRESERVATION PROGRAM – A HEALTHY MARRIAGE EDUCATION AND RELATIONSHIP SKILLS TRAINING PROGRAM FOR LOW-INCOME YOUTH, ADULTS AND COUPLES. | 1 | NEW | KIMBERLY M KIMBERLY | $ 725,000 |
| Family Service Center at Houston and Harris County | TX | HARRIS | 90FM0017 | HOUSTON MARRIAGE PROJECT | 1 | NEW | TIM TIM | $ 698,102 |
| Fathers & Families Resources/Research Center | IN | MARION | 90FM0027 | STRENGTHENING FAMILIES: LINKING HEALTHY MARRIAGE AND STRONG FATHERS | 1 | NEW | ROBERT ROBERT | $ 1,780,000 |
| Future Foundation | GA | FULTON | 90FM0013 | REALTALK – A COMPREHENSIVE HEALTHY MARRIAGE EDUCATION AND RELATIONSHIP SKILLS INITIATIVE FOR YOUTH AND PARENTS | 1 | NEW | QAADIRAH QAADIRAH | $ 685,000 |
| GRANATO COUNSELING SERVICES | VA | FAIRFAX | 90FM0024 | FIT RELATIONSHIPS PROGRAMS | 1 | NEW | LAURA A LAURA | $ 799,599 |
| Healthy You, Inc. | AL | HOUSTON | 90FM0020 | JUST THE FACTS | 1 | NEW | MARY A MARY | $ 681,956 |
| High Country Consulting LLC | WY | LARAMIE | 90FM0049 | STRENGTHENING WYOMING TEEN AND LOW INCOME TANF FAMILIES THROUGH SKILL BASED RELATIONSHIP TRAINING AND ECONOMIC SELF-SUFFICIENCY | 1 | NEW | KATHLEEN KATHLEEN | $ 535,082 |
| IRCO-IMMIGRANT & REFUGEE COMMUNITY ORGANIZATION | OR | MULTNOMAH | 90FM0015 | REFUGEE AND IMMIGRANT FAMILY EMPOWERMENT PROJECT | 1 | NEW | LEE P LEE | $ 492,000 |
| Imperial Valley Regional Occupational Program | CA | IMPERIAL | 90FM0061 | PROJECT JUNTOS | 1 | NEW | MARY MARY | $ 799,000 |
| JOHN BROWN UNIVERSITY | AR | BENTON | 90FM0023 | HEALTHY MARRIAGES INITIATIVE | 1 | NEW | APRIL APRIL | $ 724,428 |
| Jewish Family & Children`s Service of Sarasota-Manatee, | FL | SARASOTA | 90FM0060 | HEALTHY FAMILIES/HEALTHY CHILDREN | 1 | NEW | ROSE ROSE | $ 799,993 |
| KEIKI O KA AINA PRESCHOOL, INC. | HI | HONOLULU | 90FM0012 | KOKA CARES – KEIKI O KA AINA CAREER AND RELATIONSHIP EDUCATION SERVICES | 1 | NEW | MOMI MOMI | $ 798,752 |
| Kentucky River Foothills Development Council, Inc. | KY | MADISON | 90FM0050 | KRFDC COMMUNITY CENTERED HEALTHY MARRIAGE AND RELATIONSHIP PROJECT | 1 | NEW | VICKI VICKI | $ 799,999 |
| MARRIAGE SAVERS OF CLARK COUNTY | OH | CLARK | 90FM0004 | THE COMMITMENT PROJECT-INSPIRING COMMITMENT TO HEALTHY MARRIAGE AND RELATIONSHIPS,RESPONSIBLE PARENTING AND ECONOMIC STABILITY FOR THE BENEFIT OF FAMILIES AND CHILDREN. | 1 | NEW | RONDA M RONDA | $ 798,380 |
| MULTI-PURPOSE SENIOR CITIZENS PROGRAM, INC | KY | SHELBY | 90FM0036 | MULTI-PURPOSE COMMUNITY ACTION AGENCY COMMUNITY-CENTERED HEALTHY MARRIAGE AND RELATIONSHIP PROGRAM | 1 | NEW | PAT PAT | $ 344,904 |
| Meier Clinics Foundation | IL | DU PAGE | 90FM0051 | MEIER CLINICS, FAMILY BRIDGES, HEALTY MARRIAGE INITIATIVE | 1 | NEW | NANCY NANCY | $ 2,500,000 |
| Mission West Virginia, Inc. | WV | PUTNAM | 90FM0052 | N/A | 1 | NEW | TORRI TORRI | $ 683,935 |
| More Than Conquerors Inc | GA | DE KALB | 90FM0053 | COMMUNITY-CENTERED HEALTHY MARRIAGE AND RELATIONSHIP GRANTS | 1 | NEW | PHILLIPIA PHILLIPIA | $ 798,798 |
| NATIONAL COUNCIL ON FAMILY RELATIONS | MN | ANOKA | 90FM0001 | HEALTHY MARRIAGE RESOURCE CENTER | 1 | NEW | MICHAEL L BENJAMIN | $ 899,694 |
| NATIONAL COUNCIL ON FAMILY RELATIONS | MN | ANOKA | 90FM0001 | HEALTHY MARRIAGE RESOURCE CENTER | 2 | ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) | MICHAEL L BENJAMIN | $ 200,000 |
| NATIONAL COUNCIL ON FAMILY RELATIONS | MN | ANOKA | 90FM0001 | HEALTHY MARRIAGE RESOURCE CENTER | 2 | EXTENSION WITH OR WITHOUT FUNDS | MICHAEL L BENJAMIN | $- 962,992 |
| NATIONAL COUNCIL ON FAMILY RELATIONS | MN | ANOKA | 90FM0001 | HEALTHY MARRIAGE RESOURCE CENTER | 2 | NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION | MICHAEL L BENJAMIN | $ 699,755 |
| NATIONAL COUNCIL ON FAMILY RELATIONS | MN | ANOKA | 90FM0001 | SMART STEPS TO HEALTHY RELATIONSHIPS IN UTAH | 2 | ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) | MICHAEL L BENJAMIN | $ 450,000 |
| NATIONAL OFFICE OF SAMOAN AFFAIRS | CA | LOS ANGELES | 90FM0055 | NATIVE HAWAIIAN AND OTHER PACIFIC ISLANDER (NHOP) HEALTHY MARRIAGE AND RELATIONSHIP PROJECT | 1 | NEW | JUNE JUNE | $ 685,308 |
| NEW MEXICO STATE UNIVERSITY | NM | DONA ANA | 90FM0037 | NEW MEXICO BORDER REGION HEALTHY MARRIAGE AND RELATIONSHIP PROJECT | 1 | NEW | ESTHER ESTHER | $ 799,999 |
| NORTHWEST FAMILY SERVICES | OR | MULTNOMAH | 90FM0002 | GREATER PORTLAND COMMUNITY-CENTERED HEALTHY MARRIAGE AND RELATIONSHIP PROJECT ASSISTING OVER 19,500 LOW INCOME FAMILIES GAIN FAMILY AND ECONOMIC STABILITY OVER THE 3 YEAR PROJECT. | 1 | ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) | ROSE ROSE | $ 0 |
| NORTHWEST FAMILY SERVICES | OR | MULTNOMAH | 90FM0002 | GREATER PORTLAND COMMUNITY-CENTERED HEALTHY MARRIAGE AND RELATIONSHIP PROJECT ASSISTING OVER 19,500 LOW INCOME FAMILIES GAIN FAMILY AND ECONOMIC STABILITY OVER THE 3 YEAR PROJECT. | 1 | NEW | ROSE ROSE | $ 1,395,000 |
| OK ST DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES | OK | OKLAHOMA | 90FM0032 | THRIVING MARRIAGES: RETREATS FOR SPECIAL NEEDS POPULATIONS | 1 | NEW | MARY JO MARY JO | $ 776,304 |
| OPERATION KEEPSAKE | OH | SUMMIT | 90FM0056 | MARRIAGE IS FOR KEEPS | 1 | NEW | PEGGY S PEGGY | $ 798,054 |
| PHOENIX PROGRAMS OF NEW YORK,INC | NY | NEW YORK | 90FM0025 | PHOENIX HOUSE CONNECTIONS | 1 | NEW | NAOMI NAOMI | $ 618,768 |
| PROJECT S.O.S., INC. | FL | DUVAL | 90FM0033 | COMMUNITY-CENTERED HEALTHY MARRIAGE ANDRELATIONSHIP GRANTS | 1 | NEW | PAM PAM | $ 672,703 |
| PUBLIC STRATEGIES INC | OK | OKLAHOMA | 90FM0026 | FAMILY EXPECTATIONS | 1 | NEW | SAMMYE SAMMYE | $ 2,500,000 |
| Parenting Center (The) | TX | TARRANT | 90FM0031 | EMPOWERING FAMILIES PROJECT | 1 | NEW | JENNIFER JENNIFER | $ 797,093 |
| RECAPTURING THE VISION, INTERNATIONAL, INC. | FL | 90FM0028 | RECAPTURING THE VISION INTERNATIONAL: THE MARRIAGE/RELATIONSHIP PROJECT TARGETING HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS AND YOUNG ADULTS 18-25. | 1 | NEW | JACQUELINE JACQUELINE | $ 799,230 | |
| STARKVILLE SCHOOL DISTRICT | MS | OKTIBBEHA | 90FM0035 | BUILDING STRONG FAMILIES | 1 | NEW | JOAN JOAN | $ 699,874 |
| Sacramento Healthy Marriage Project | CA | SACRAMENTO | 90FM0059 | FLOURISHING FAMILIES PROGRAM | 1 | NEW | CAROLYN CAROLYN | $ 798,825 |
| Scholarship and Guidance Association | IL | COOK | 90FM0038 | FAMILY LIFE SKILLS PROGRAM | 1 | NEW | MARTHA MARTHA | $ 794,180 |
| Shalom Task Force | NY | NEW YORK | 90FM0008 | COMMUNITY-CENTERED HEALTHY MARRIAGE AND RELATIONSHIP EDUCATION IN THE ORTHODOX JEWISH COMMUNITY OF NEW YORK CITY AND THE METROPOLITAN NYC AREA | 1 | NEW | DANIEL DANIEL | $ 541,633 |
| TEXAS STATE UNIVERSITY-SAN MARCOS | TX | HAYS | 90FM0007 | STRENGTHENING RELATIONSHIPS/STRENGTHENING FAMILIES (SR/SF) | 1 | NEW | W. SCOTT W. SCOTT | $ 617,280 |
| TEXAS TECH UNIVERSITY | TX | LUBBOCK | 90FM0002 | NATIONAL HEALTHLY MARRIAGE RESOURCE CENTER | 1 | NEW | JAMES D MITCHELL | $ 512,993 |
| THE DIBBLE FUND FOR MARRIAGE EDUCATION | CA | ALAMEDA | 90FM0010 | BUILDING BRIGHTER FUTURES | 1 | NEW | CATHERINE M CATHERINE | $ 794,846 |
| TOLEDO AREA MINISTRIES | OH | LUCAS | 90FM0040 | KEEPING IT TOGETHER | 1 | NEW | DONNA DONNA | $ 799,999 |
| UNIVERSITY BEHAVIORAL ASSOCIATES | NY | BRONX | 90FM0057 | UNIVERSITY BEHAVIORAL ASSOCIATES MARRIAGE & RELATIONSHIP EDUCATION PROGRAM | 1 | NEW | SCOTT SCOTT | $ 799,999 |
| UNIVERSITY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA | FL | ORANGE | 90FM0039 | PROJECT TOGETHER | 1 | NEW | ANDREW ANDREW | $ 2,184,508 |
| UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE | TN | KNOX | 90FM0022 | RELATIONSHIP RX: INTEGRATING A COUPLES INTERVENTION PROGRAM INTO A PRIMARY CARE SETTING | 1 | NEW | DEBBIE DEBBIE | $ 723,508 |
| UTAH STATE UNIVERSITY | UT | CACHE | 90FM0001 | SMART STEPS TO HEALTHY RELATIONSHIPS IN UTAH | 1 | ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPLEMENT ( + OR – ) (DISCRETIONARY OR BLOCK AWARDS) | BRAIN J BRAIN | $ 0 |
| UTAH STATE UNIVERSITY | UT | CACHE | 90FM0001 | SMART STEPS TO HEALTHY RELATIONSHIPS IN UTAH | 1 | NEW | BRAIN J BRAIN | $ 785,612 |
| WAIT Training | CO | DENVER | 90FM0054 | THE COLORADO HEALTHY MARRIAGE PROJECT | 1 | NEW | JONEEN JONEEN | $ 1,605,705 |
| YOUTH & FAMILY SERVICES OF CANADIAN COUNTY, INC | OK | CANADIAN | 90FM0058 | SAFE AND LOVING RELATIONSHIPS FOR AT-RISK YOUTH | 1 | NEW | TRACY TRACY | $ 338,367 |
**”Elizabeth’s New Life Center has a logo: the Elizabeth in question was the mother of John the Baptist, (per Bible), the cousin of Jesus and prophet heralding his coming. Another overtly Christian group, million$$ grant. This one looks pretty Roman Catholic….

In 1989, Steve and Vivian Koob, along with their church, founded Elizabeth’s New Life Center (ENLC) as a compassionate response and option to the abortion clinic operating in their neighborhood. ENLC opened its first office in the Five Oaks neighborhood of the city of Dayton to serve pregnant women facing unexpected pregnancies.
I am glad that Steve and Vivian Koob founded an organization to follow their vision (I suppose). However, according to the State of Ohio, it was founded as a nonprofit, at least, in 1992, not 1989. The evidence is here: (because of “paste” function, business name doesn’t display. LINK to search is here; remember to include the “S” in “ELIZABETHS”) [Jon Husted Ohio Secretary of State Business Name Search]
ELIZABETH’s NEW LIFE CENTER BUSINESS FILING — see dates. |
In 1994, Elizabeth’s New Life Center purchased a vacant building beside the abortion clinic and renovated it into a women’s center with medical capabilities. The following year ENLC opened its first Mother and Baby Boutique to provide needy clients with material assistance to establish family life, and in 1999 began providing abstinence education services to schools in an effort to expand efforts to prevent teen pregnancy.
Not mentioned: Abstinence education not proven to reduce teen pregnancies, in fact it’s been an abysmal failure from what I hear.
About that same time, Elizabeth’s New Life Center purchased and renovated a medical building on Forest Avenue in front of Grandview Hospital’s emergency room. That facility currently houses administrative offices, Women’s Center-Dayton, Holy Family Prenatal Care, classrooms, a nutrition center, and a chapel accessible to both clients and staff.
ENLC continued its growth as the youth development department was awarded highly competitive federal grants to provide abstinence education to area schools in 2002, 2005, and 2008. In 2006, Elizabeth’s New Life Center also was awarded one of the largest federal healthy marriage demonstration grants in the country to establish Marriage Works! Ohio and offer marriage education across Southwestern Ohio.
COngress shall make no law establishing a religion. They don’t have to any more. All that’s needed is to fund corporations that did. No Thank You, George Bush!)
“Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives”
The Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives (OFBCI), was established January 29, 2001, when President George W. Bush “issued two executive orders related to faith-based and community organizations. The first executive order established a White House Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives. The second order established centers to implement this initiative at the Department of Justice, along with the Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, and Housing and Urban Development.”[1]
Government by Executive Order, it’s definitely problemmatic. We’re in it.
I should get this ebook, published 2008, in anticipation of Presidential Election: The Court and the Cross, by Frederick Lane
Today Elizabeth’s New Life Center operates from six women’s centers, three in Dayton and ones in Warren, Hamilton, and Shelby counties. The Dayton boutique (??) continues to operate from the Five Oaks building, and Marriage Works! Ohio operates from a facility on Main Street in Dayton.
TO CLARIFY MY POSITION: My viewpoint on abortion changed considerably after (1) I became a mother, and (2) I had to deal with a jealous relative who’d opted for abortion, then went after my kids. Before then I was far more liberal and neutral. However I STILL do not think we should allow religious groups to take government funding for abstinence education. Then again I don’t think the Federal Government should be in so deep into education either– first of all, because their model is antiquated and based on authoritarianism and designed to slow down children from learning, and to keep the lower castes in place. YES, I believe that. A lot more arts (etc.) education would go further to dealing with literacy and math (not to mention probably violence) issues in the schools, but as fate? would have it, the opposite approach is taken. I see the schools as a caste-sorter, by economics and race, and so do statistics. Be that as it may, this organization has prospered because of then-President George Bush, and his decision to break down church/state.
This organization has several trade names, had a merger or so, and the original incorporator (registered agent) was from a law firm out of “10 Courthouse Plaza” in Dayton. I can’t upload the articles of incorporation (at this point). And I don’t see they are filing in my 990-finder, an E perhaps TAGGS will give me a nice DUNS#, but usually duns# only show on TAGGS if you can search by EIN, which I (haven’t found yet). THey are most definitely soliciting donations on the web. The board of 12 has 3 women on it (only) one of who is the Warren County (OH) Prosecutor Another board member is the County Auditor.
Vivian Koob (one of the two founders) has a bio also showing a connection with State Government (and pro-life activism):
Vivian Koob
Executive DirectorVivian Koob founded Elizabeth’s New Life Center with her husband Steve in 1989. Vivian holds a Master of Education degree as well as a Master in Rehabilitative Counseling. Before founding Elizabeth’s New Life Center she taught high school and spent 12 years working for the State of Ohio Bureau of Vocational Rehabilitation. She also spent years as a stay-at-home mom for her large family of natural, adopted and foster children. The Koobs’ blended family includes 12 living children and 16 grandchildren.
One of their programs listed, “Marriage Works!” (a trade name of this group, its Ohio SOS records say) includes “FE grants,” i.e. clear Fatherhood emphasis:
|
Funding for this project was provided by the United States Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families, Grant: 90FE0035. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the United States Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families. Participation in all Marriage Works! Ohio programs is voluntary.
View Our Privacy Notice |
While MARRIAGE WORKS! is a collaboration, This ELIZABETH NEW LIFE center is the “Lead Agency,” according to the website, which is soliciting donations. WHO HOLDS THE EIN#?

Marriage Works! Ohio is a collaborative effort of diverse organizations united to help build healthy families and healthy communities throughout the Miami Valley of Ohio by providing marriage and relationship education for couples.
SIX Counties are involved in “Marriage Works!” Among the other agencies is a “Family Violence Prevention Center.”
I experienced the religious-based marriage counseling as a response to domestic violence in the home (long ago). I assure the general public (speaking for at least my Northern California urban area), the religious groups are not one iota better addressed to handle DV (or interested in doing so if it’s going to reduce warm bodies in the pews, or tithes by evicting a batterer) than they were last decade. Nor do the religious leaders seem any more inclined to treat it as a reportable crime which it is (and child abuse absolutely is for pastors). So here is what to the outsider looks like a “Family Violence Prevention Center.” and when a person comes in, she will be receiving services provided by a lead agency pro-life Catholic group, whose web and public presence has been funded by fatherhood education. I notice that this FVPC also leads to a “DIVERT” Violence program.

The focus will be on family preservation through treatment, and stopping battering through training the batterer. People get killed that way, but this is how the field of DV has been altered (a sea-change) to accommodate the Marriage/Fatherhood agenda. And as I will be showing NEXT post, the groups doing this are many times chronically dishonest, and sometimes crooks, when characterizing WHO THEY ARE as an organization.
- DIVERT: Xenia and County DIVERT crisis response in collaborative partnerships with law enforcement jurisdictions throughout Greene County to offer home and community based services to families experiencing domestic disputes or domestic violence
Jackie Weckesser, DIVERT Crisis Response Specialist, 937-376-8526 ext. 26
Jennifer Henderson, DIVERT Crisis Response Specialist, 937-376-8526 ext. 27- Domestic Violence Intervention Program: (DVIP) , therapeutic and educational group counseling for batterers working to prevent future cycles of violence. Fee for service
Cherie Dixon, DV Intervention Counselor, 937-376-8526 ext. 31
At the bottom of this “DIVERT” page are the links showing possibly origins or technical support in setting up the web. I notice NCADV is one. Upcoming post on them, too:
Privacy Policy | Donate | Contact | Apply for a Job | Apply to Volunteer
NCADV.org | NRCDV.org | NDVH.org | ODVN.org
This brochure shows how one organization, when it added considerable funding, became more and more entrenched in the County Government, got a spanking new building in 2000, named after the donor (what takes place in it, who knows) and probably have not YET told any women coming for help, or totally traumatized that in the same approximate year, the Ohio Legislature created a “Fatherhood Commission” and required that it targeted counties with a lot of single-mother households (probably to get access to the TANF funds that go with them).
It began as a shelter, before VAWA and probably many laws against domestic violence had even been passed.
The Greene County Domestic Violence Project began as a two-bedroom apartment in Yellow Springs in 1979 as a project of the Greene County Welfare Department. In 1980, the agency incorporated as a private, not for profit corporation and the shelter moved to its first house in Xenia, which had one staff and several students. The project relocated twice more until 1984 when it settled into its long-term site in a large Victorian House in the Water Street District of Xenia where it remained until 2001.
It morphed into a mental health agency and a new facility:
And, in 1995 the Xenia Police Division and GCDVP collaborated to form a nationally recognized program entitled DIVERT that partners law enforcement with domestic violence crisis workers for home based follow-up. Today, DIVERT services are being made available throughout Greene County and the agency has been able to operate satellite educational programs in Fairborn.
Violence Free Futures….
In 1997 the agency began to set a goal to secure a new facility and requested the help of the community. Seventeen community leaders formed the Shelter Facility Task Force and began to search for a site for the new facility. The Board decided to mortgage the aging property and invest the loan to begin a capital campaign which would require that the agency hire a Development Officer. The Shelter Facility Task force located a potential site, the Xenia Grace Chapel which was up for sale
(“Violence-Free Futures” is echoes of the wording from one of the major resource centers, formerly the Family Violence Prevention Fund, now “Futures without Violence.” As such, it focuses on prevention through education [[which has NOT been shown to work]] — which of course it will help provide.)
(reading this brochure, and recognizing what it represents, I am feeling a little sick….)
Or that there was an Ohio Task Force on “Changing the Culture of Custody” which was basically AFCC-central, and even flew membership out to Arizona to take input from such membership, including prominent “Parental Alienation” promoter (and published author marketing books through the courts also), Philip Stahl Ph.D.
It was named after one of the County Commissioners, in fact the President of the County Commissioners:
The Greene County Commissioners The Hon. Kathryn K. Hagler, Pres. 61 Greene Street Xenia, Ohio 45385 (name at bottom of link having been served of a certain notice on a civic project):
Hon. Hagler has been involved with the Governor’s Child Support Task Force. As Child Support — at this point — has been re-tooled and adjusted to accommodate “Fatherhood” (see Clinton 1995 Executive Memo, etc.) — and child support offices throughout the nation, it seems (Indiana comes esp. to mind) to solicit participation in fatherhood programs (see above grantees) under — extortion, at times — in exchange for participating in prolonged custody battles they may not even want — etc. – – – – – This would seem to me a mild conflict of interest, at a minimum.
Here’s the blurb on the woman the building is named after:

Kathryn K. Hagler began her 19th year (third year of a fifth term) as a Greene County Commissioner with the start of the year 2001. Prior to her service to Greene County, Mrs. Hagler was a school teacher for 35 years. In 1982, she began a new phase in her life when she became Greene County’s first female County Commissioner. During her time as a Commissioner, Mrs. Hagler helped initiate a program in which retired teachers volunteer their time to assist Greene County jail inmates work toward their general (high school) equivalency diplomas. Awards and recognitions Mrs. Hagler has received include: the Paula J. Macilwaine Award (for her GED program), the Ervin J. Nutter Award (for her service to the community), the Senior Citizen of the Year Award from the Golden Age Senior Citizens Center, and recognition from the Ohio Senior Citizens Hall of Fame and the Women’s Hall of Fame. Over the years she has been involved with Greene County United Way, American Business Women’s Association, the Governor’s Child Support Task Force, the Altrusa Club, and Greene County Domestic Violence. Mrs. Hagler is very committed to families and children of domestic violence. Because of that commitment, Mrs. Hagler and her family were the largest donors to the capital campaign for victims of domestic violence. On June 1, 2000, the Greene County Domestic Violence Project named their new facility after Mrs. Hagler for her commitment. The Kathryn K. Hagler Family Violence Prevention Center is scheduled to officially open on June 12, 2001.
Fathers and Families is very active in Ohio, it says here, and rejoices about advances it has won in the Child Support arena. The article following this one rejoices at a nonpaying mother being thrown in jail for nonpayment, as it encourages the opposite for fathers:
Monday, September 26th, 2011 by FAF Staff
Donald Hubin, Ph.D., Chairman of Fathers and Families of Ohio’s Executive Committee, was quoted in Child- support changes arrive: New provisions give struggling parents leniency(9/25/11) in the Columbus Dispatch, a 200,000 circulation newspaper in Ohio’s capital.
Under the new Ohio policies, for which Fathers and Families has advocated and supports, child support enforcement agencies will not be able to seize the driver’s licenses or professional licenses of any obligors who are paying at least half of their child support obligations. Given the terrible economy, and the fact that many obligors’ obligations are not being modified downward to accommodate for their lower wages and/or job losses, this is an important measure.
Kimberly C. Newsom, executive director of the Ohio Child Support Enforcement Agencies Directors’ Association, (OCDA) said the laws have been flexible and enforcement efforts have changed as the sinking economy made it harder for many parents to pay support.
“As Ohio started going into an economic recession, counties weren’t suspending licenses as much. They were working with parents and trying to assist them with employment or getting them into work programs to try and get them employed,” Newsom said.
In Franklin County, parents are often referred to job training or co-parenting classes, said Susan Brown, director of the county’s Child Support Enforcement Agency.
I’ll bet they ARE being referred to co-parenting classes which will definitely help feed hungry children and increase the income in whoever is raising them. (sure, yeah). I’m sure a single mother whose Dad is behind in child support would rather have a co-parenting class (mothers are solicited to attend too, you know!) than the child support. Particularly if there was domestic violence in the marriage or partnership previously. .
My Prior Post with some research on Franklin County, OPNFF, OHIO fatherhood initiative, and more of these matters (Scroll down).
Link at “Columbus Urban League” — A.A.M.I. (African-American Males Initiative) shows some of the partners and funders — and referrers to classes. This is Franklin County:
Father 2 Father
Columbus Urban League
African-American Male Initiatives
Mission
To assist men in becoming the instinctive, responsible, & nurturing fathers they desire to be. While also, educating the general public on the unique, important, & essential role that Fathers play in the development of their children.Scope of Services
Provide a classroom curriculum that develops the attitudes and skills needed for responsible fatherhood and helping men discover and cultivate their nurturing potential. Assistance with issues regarding child support, visitation, and family law matters, ultimately advocating for policy change/implementation that make these very areas more father friendly.Partners
Columbus Urban League’s (CUL) – African-American Male Initiatives (A.A.M.I.)
Columbus Urban League’s Head Start
Ohio Commission on Fatherhood (OFC)
Franklin County Child Support Enforcement Agency (FCSEA)
Ohio Practitioners Network of Fathers & Families (OPNFF)
Nationwide Children’s Hospital (Family & Volunteer Services)Target Audience
Class Curriculum – ‘Nurturing Father’
African-American fathers between the ages of 16-35 referred by CUL Head Start, Franklin County Child Enforcement Agency & Juvenile Court System. There will be a dual class format (One AM – One PM) on 3 month cycles. Each class will consist of 12-15 fathers giving us the ability to serve 100 fathers per calendar year.
Kathryn K. Hagler Family Violence Center, or No Family Violence Center — GREENE COUNTY is highly involved (and vice versa) with the “National Fatherhood Initiative” (NFI started in 1994 with a cronyism-based grant from Wade Horn before he quit HHS, like JUST before), with the Greene County Child SUpport system, and with Green County Commissioners.
Here’s a recent link to their 2011 goings-on, which was apparently prepared in part with another PR firm who has made it big by going with the Fatherhood Flow: “PUBLIC STRATEGIES, INC.” (see my post on PSI in Denver vs. PSI in Denver), which runs (I think) the Oklahoma Marriage Initiative, in large part.
Prepared By:
With Contributions From:
Public Strategies, Inc. Ohio State University Extension—Greene County
An Initiative of the Ohio Commission on Fatherhood
April 2011
Introduction
The Ohio Commission on Fatherhood (OCF) has partnered with National Fatherhood Initiative (NFI) in 2011 to assist 12 Ohio counties mobilize around responsible fatherhood. Greene County was one of the 12 counties selected to participate in this Community Mobilization Initiative.
Children who live absent their biological fathers are, on average, at least two to three times more likely to be poor, to use drugs, to experience educational, health, emotional and behavioral problems, to be victims of child abuse, and to engage in criminal behavior than their peers who live with their married, biological (or adoptive) parents.1
As of April 2011, and based on my reading of what these grants are doing (and how they have changed the courts) that poverty could be attributable about as much to the war on single mothers which this rhetoric has waged, as much as not having a Daddy in the home, per se. Some Daddys need to get OUT of the home, because they are violent; others refuse to work while they are living WITH their kids, preferring instead to let mothers do it. There are varieties of families and varieties of Daddy-in-the-home scenarios, as well as a huge variety of Daddy NOT in the home scenarios.
None of this centralization and collaboration (taxation WITHOUT appropriate representation, or informed public consent) accounts for OR allows the true diversity of ways there are to earn a living, raise (and educate) a child, or escape poverty WITHOUT being forced into high-stakes, high-conflict custody litigation, and paying heavily into the system that — by its own words, and I can see plainly by state on-line databases — doesn’t even account for money it takes from children, while diverting child support enforcement monies (that pesky $4 billion) away from actually distributing child support they have collected. I truly do believe that our country would be better off — ENTIRELY — without this whole agency, based on its track record.
If I as an employer had a track record that lousy, I’d definitely be fired. Instead, I was taken repeatedly out of paying jobs where my work was needed and appreciated (as a single mother) to answer frivolous lawsuits in a process where no cause of action was ever proved, let alone most of the time even alleged.
Children who grow up without their fathers are at greatest risk for child abuse. In fact, the presence of a child’s father in the home lowers the likelihood that a child will be abused. Compared to living with both parents, living in a single-parent home doubles the risk that a child will suffer physical, emotional, or educational neglect.9 There were 1,436 new allegations of child abuse/neglect in Greene County in 2009.1
I have been talking here about a Marriage/Fatherhood County grantee — they got $2.5 million in 2011 alone — based in Warren County OHIO, who turns out to e a pro-life, Catholic-based group (adamantly so) that has targeted abortion clinics and hospitals to get their message out. IT turns out that two on the board of this organization work for Warren County, and then the Executive Director has worked for the state. I think that any group getting $2.5 million (or over $1 million) in this economic climate should not only be watched but scrutinized — because that amount indicates the Secretary of HHS and public policy has another “brainstorm” of some idea, and is throwing money behind it.
While this one appears to have stayed legitimate and above-board, many (on the list above here, the TAGGS chart) absolutely have not. We have GOT to stop this ongoing trotting out of fatherhood rhetoric to enable more grants — which are not tracked. EVERY SINGLE EIN# should be posted and public be enabled to find out whether their websites are telling the truth about an organization. FAILURE TO FILE is a red flag I can’t talk about this group yet, until I see an IRS form (even if they have been a church to start with, as an organization taking federal grants, they should have an EIN — and they really should also have a DUNS#, enabling us to look for contracts, too, and outside the HHS).
This one also appears to be heavily networked with a group that believes domestic violence can be stopped through marriage and relationship education (that’s the model). This education is often going to happen through the web, therefore once set up, it will be having a low overhead, and turn profits for someone. We deserve to know WHO, as they go about solving the problems of poor people!
For the record, then, and in light of “Elizabeth’s New Life Center” (Inc. 1992, not 1989, and having several registered trade names also) being the lead agency of “Marriage Works!” a multi-county collaborative, and every single one of their websites (almost) soliciting donations, here is who in Greene County Ohio (where a Commissioner got a building named after her, by donating so much to it), was ALSO collaborating to RAPIDLY MOBILIZE more fatherhood STUFF:
Greene County Leader Focus Group Results
The Greene County focus group on fatherhood was attended by nineteen individuals representing a diverse cross section of the community and included representatives from the Ohio Commission on Fatherhood.
The following community sectors/organizations/individuals participated in the discussion (Note: some organizations had more than one representative and some people represented several sectors).
Adult Probation Anderson Williamson Insurance Child Support Children’s Service Board County Commissioner Drug & Alcohol Initiative Family and Children First Council Fairborn City Schools Greene County Career Center Greene County Combined Health District Greene County Community Foundation Greene County Fatherhood Initiative Grant Greene County Public Transit System Greene Leaf Therapeutic Community Program Juvenile Court Parent Education and Support Xenia Association of Churches & Ministries
No one representing the mothers, or custodial parents’ interests when there has been violence — was probably even aware of this meeting, much less present.
The ideas they came up with were predictable, and please note that FATHERHOOD PROGRAMMING was to be incorporated into the FAMILY VIOLENCE PREVENTION CENTER (named after a County Commissioner). Also marriage promotion….
When asked what assets or resources existed in Greene County that could be mobilized, expanded or used to promote responsible fatherhood the following were mentioned:
24/7 Dad Breakfast for Dads Churches – particularly if they opened their gyms and facilities for activities Daddy and Me Carnival (Early Childhood Collaborative Coalition) Family Violence Prevention Center programming Graduation Reality and Dual Role Skills – Family & Consumer Science program for pregnant and parenting teens Green County College Success Program The Marriage Resource Center Money Management Classes Urban Light Ministries – InsideOut Dad and other programs, Visitation Center.
http://fatherhood.ohio.gov/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=yxKCPn6VuPA%3d&tabid=93
MARRIAGE PROMOTION = FATHERHOOD PROMOTION = USUALLY PUBLIC/PRIVATE PARTNERSHIPS.
EXAMPLE: PUBLIC STRATEGIES, INC. (a PR Firm in Oklahoma).
I have JUST now showed you that Public Strategies is working directly with National Fatherhood Initiative to “Rapidly MObilize” more fatherhood (stuff & programs). See the “REAPS” link, the “Fatherhod.ohio.gov” link — right above here. Now, I probably know Public Strategies a little better than you do, unless you study this topic, live in Oklahoma, or work for them. You can also see them, bolded in maroon font, in the chart above, of grantees of the new “90FM” grant series to promote — what else, marriage and fatherhood.
In fact, they just got another $2.5 million, alongside Elizabeth’s New Life Center, alongside also California Healthy Marriages Coalition, which I am going to flat-out SAY I believe is a fraud (a front group), so I will now have to prove this in subsequent post).
But here is the “OKMARRIAGE.COM” link telling the origins of this Oklahoma Marriage Project (from top-down, Governor, and Department of HHS), choosing the PR Firm Public Strategies Inc. (WHY might be a very good question) and explaining an intention to bypass Commissions to Study, and passing Legislation, but through a “multi-sector” approach to (Ramrod it through). which, as you can see, they are also recommending in Ohio. When the word “mobilize” is used, the idea is obviously that an emergency exists. It is a MILITARY term, that’s what it calls to mind. The intention is to bypass the slower (but more due-process, and more public-input-wanted!) processes designed into state and federal constitutions and instead, get the thing going FAST.
Here’s what they say about their origins and how they GRABBED $10 Million of TANF funding (intended for welfare: Food stamps, cash aid, helping poor families) to set up the infrastructure to funnel more grants to anyone who was of the same belief system (as to the causes of poverty and child abuse), and away from those who didn’t, including families on welfare that probably needed the help. Moreover, the double-whammy is, money is ALSO diverted from Child Support Enforcement at times for similar purposes. Here we go:

OMI History
In 1998, University of Oklahoma and Oklahoma State University economists produced a joint study on what Oklahoma needed to do to become a more prosperous state.
And someone probably funded that joint project. Coincidentally, in 1998, the US Congress was passing Fatherhood Resolutions (as in 1999), Welfare Reform had just happened, and nationwide a condition of receiving welfare funding to states mandated that every state create a centralized state distribution unit (SDU), or forfeit their TANF funding. TANF was the welfare reform that changed program funding to block grants to states….It figures in here. Maybe that was coincidental, but I doubt it.
National Fatherhood Initative DOES have congressional and senate contacts / “Task Forces” and has from shortly after its (1994) founding. As it says, here:
(Back to the OMI About us Page)
Their conclusions included the usual economic analysis relating to tax issues and regulatory reform issues, as well as some surprising results. The economic researchers found some social indicators that were hurting Oklahoma’s economy. They mentioned the high divorce rate, high rates of out-of-wedlock births and high rates of child deaths because of child abuse. One OSU economist wrote in an editorial, “Oklahoma’s high divorce rate and low per-capita income are interrelated. They hold hands. They push and pull each other. There’s no faster way for a married woman with children to become poor than to suddenly become a single mom.”
As evidence of his serious commitment to this [DIvorce leads to poverty and child abuse] issue, [Governor] Keating put his Cabinet Secretary for Health and Human Services, Jerry Regier, in charge of developing a plan of action for the Oklahoma Marriage Initiative. In addition, Public Strategies (PSI), a small public affairs/public relations firm, was awarded a project management bid and, from the beginning, national experts {{GEE — I wonder which ones! }} advised various aspects of the Initiative. This leadership outlined the main themes and components of the OMI. They deliberately decided not to appoint a Commission to “study” the issues, nor did they propose a legislative package of reforms. Instead, they decided on a multi-sector approach with both a secular track and a faith-based track. The OMI was to be a public/private partnership, guided by high-level leadership and strong operational, day-to-day management. Its major focus at this initial stage was delivering education services to the public, conducting research, and working with the faith sector to develop marriage-strengthening services.
I would have to characterize this as a State Governor (who is head of the State EXECUTIVE branch) intentionally overstepping his bounds, deliberately avoiding the legislative branch, to push through his own plan, using federal funds that WERE supplied to the state of Oklahoma through legislation. Intentionally NOT having a commission study the issues is suspect. Now read the next part carefully
Initial activities were funded with private foundation monies and discretionary state dollars. Howard Hendrick, Department of Human Services (DHS) Director, pointed out that using TANF monies to fund the initiative fit within the intent of the family formation goals of the 1996 federal welfare reform law. The DHS Board set aside $10 million of undedicated TANF funds for OMI activities. The funds were earmarked primarily for developing marriage-related services, and leaders acknowledged that efforts should be made to make them available to low-income populations.
FORMERLY, AFDC (pre-1996) would have made sure this was to low-income families. But the sea-change to TANF BLOCK_GRANTS TO STATES intentionally freed up the possibility of states doing more creative things with these funds. This was great if you’re into promoting marriage and fatherhood, and probably no accident. Look at who was pushing the 1996 reform, and you have a lot of answers….
Right there you can see it was not restricted to low-income population, but efforts should be made to let poor people know their option to take marriage education (etc.) classes, for their own good, of course.
I just saw on-line an advertisement for a psychologist at Public Strategies firm (Glassdoor.com) The pay was $72K.
Thus, the Oklahoma Marriage Initiative was launched and has grown to become the broad-based social service prevention project that it is today. The OMI has made sound decisions-by both policy and political standards-to build on the best [paid-for] research available, to invest in research to learn about marriage and divorce in Oklahoma, and to assess, to the extent possible, the effects of its activities and programs.
From “http://www.okmarriage.org/ProgramHighlights/MarriageProblems.asp” = the “OMI – ABOUT US page”
“PUBLIC STRATEGIES” started in 1990 (site says):
Clients are primarily HHS/ACF and other corporations. Listed under “Corporate” clients is “PREP” which is itself a company that feeds off marriage education policy. Two professors from Denver (also on the advisory board to Public Strategies) co-founded a Colorado Business to produce/sell this product, itself clearly focusing off Marriage Education grants See “PREPinc.com.” Nonprofit clients include The Dibble FUnd (itself also a corporation feeding off Healthy Marriage education policy.
about us Established in 1990, Public Strategies (PSI) began as a public relations and event planning firm with only two staff members with a client base that included the Oklahoma City Cavalry professional basketball team. In a matter of years, PSI became the only firm in the United States to develop and maintain a state-run healthy marriage initiative, which has since become the longest-running and most in-depth endeavor of its kind in the country.PSI has grown into a culturally and professionally diverse firm with 150 staff members, and offices in Oklahoma, Colorado and Washington, D.C. We have a solid success record of client-centered project management and strategic planning services for a variety of clients in the public and private sectors.
Public Strategies is committed to helping organizations and individuals reach their full potential while maximizing their impact on the public good. Our clients represent the impact that PSI has had on an array of fields including education, business, faith, criminal justice, child welfare and human services.
http://www.publicstrategies.com/default1.asp?ID=2
WELL, enough for one day, eh?
///
I browse Courthouse news (since I found out about the site) and believe this article should be posted. Franklin County, PA also keeps hitting my radar.
It was a Medical Condition, not Child Abuse — but the Dad was Jailed over a year, and the daughter put in Foster Care.
Monday October 3, 2011
HARRISBURG, Pa. (CN) – Parents say they lost custody of their children, were identified as child abusers and the father was jailed for more than a year because doctors and state officials falsely attributed their 4-month-old daughter’s childhood stroke and congenital rickets to child abuse.
Jamel Billups and Jacqueline Rosario, who are black, sued the Penn State Milton S. Hershey Medical Center, Franklin County and its Office of Children, Youth and Families and a long list of individuals, in Federal Court.
The parents say that when their daughter, L.B., suffered a stroke and showed signs of rickets on Oct. 19, 2009, the Child Safety team at Penn State Hershey Medical Center falsely blamed her condition on child abuse, and the state then seized her and her 2-year-old brother, T.R., and sent them to foster homes.
The parents say L.B.’s abdominal CT scan and skeletal surveys revealed 16 rib fractures, but medical evidence that showed no related internal injuries proved these fractures were the result of “weak bones rather than abusive trauma.”
They say that despite medical knowledge that Vitamin D deficiency can lead to rickets and weak bones in African Americans, Penn State’s Child Safety Team failed to require that L.B.’s blood be tested for abnormal clotting factors or that the child’s or mother’s blood be tested for vitamin D deficiency.. . .
They claim that agents of the Office of Children, Youth and Families, defendants Tammie Lay and Dawn M. Watson, “failed to conduct their own independent non-presumption tainted investigation” and “relied exclusively upon the conclusion of defendant Penn State’s Child Safety Team and defendants [Drs. Mark S.] Dias, [Kathryn R.] Crowell and [Arabinda K.] Choudhary that L.B.’s intracranial hemorrhages were caused by abuse on the afternoon of October 19, 2009 and rib fractures were caused by abuse 4 to 8 weeks prior to her hospitalization without conducting any independent medical review or confirmation of their own.”
The complaint continues: “On October 21, 2009, eight days before Jamel was arrested, defendant [Lauren] Sulcove emailed defendant Dias to introduce herself as the prosecutor that would be handling the case against Jamel.”. . .
After the report was issued, Jamel Billups was charged with felony aggravated assault and endangering the welfare of a child.
The parents say: “As soon as Jamel learned of the issuance of the arrest warrant on the day it was issued, October 29, 2009, he immediately and voluntarily reported to the Chambersburg police station and was taken into custody. The court set a $200,000.00 straight bail for Jamel, a bail that the Billups’ family could not post. Jamel’s remained in jail from October 29, 2009 until December 17, 2010, when a jury acquitted Jamel of all criminal charges.”. . .
And here comes the Grant connection:
According to the complaint, “Penn State created a Child Safety Team on September 1, 2009 for the express purpose, inter alia, of investigating whether injuries reported as suspicious for child abuse were, in fact, caused by child abuse. Penn State has a discriminatory policy that lends the full faith and credit of Penn State to employees who testify for the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania in criminal prosecutions, for the Commonwealth’s county child protection agencies in dependency proceedings and Childline expunction hearings but denies the same full faith and credit of the Penn State Hershey Medical Center to those employees who testify for the accused parents.”
Penn State, according to the complaint, received “a 2.8 million dollar grant from the United States Center for Disease Control (CDC) for educating parents about shaken baby syndrome.”
Defendant Dr. Mark Dias, co-director of the Penn State Child Safety Team, is a neurosurgeon, a Fellow of the American Academy of Pediatrics, and “holds himself out as an expert in child abuse who can determine whether an injury was caused by abuse and frequently testifies with the full faith and credit of Penn State for the prosecution in criminal cases,” according to the complaint.
“In 2010, defendant Dias wrote a chapter of a book about child abuse entitled ‘The Case for Shaking’.” It was Defendant Dias’ published efforts that enabled Penn State to receive the CDC 2.8 million dollar grant to ‘educate’ parents about shaken baby syndrome.”
That information, from their site, is here:
Welcome to the Pennsylvania Shaken Baby Syndrome Prevention and Awareness Program
“Saving babies’ lives one family at a time.”
Shaken Baby Syndrome (SBS) is one of the most severe forms of child abuse caused by the violent shaking of an infant with or without impact against an object. Approximately 1/3 of the victims die as a result of direct brain injuries. Thousands of victims who survive suffer permanent neurological damage such as blindness, developmental delays, mental retardation, seizures, physical disabilities, paralysis, and/or brain damage.
Shaken Baby Syndrome usually results from a parent or caregiver shaking a baby because the baby would not stop crying. Since crying is the primary reason that infants are shaken, it is important to inform parents, when their baby is born, how to deal with the frustrations of a crying baby as well as to equip them with effective parenting and coping strategies. Educated parents are then advocates for their child’s safety. They are encouraged to share this information with others who may care for their child such as relatives, friends, and childcare providers.
Admittedly, this is important information. However ,not all parents shake their babies in frustration and anger. And a father just spent a year in jail, being innocent. The parents have a lot of courage to sue, and let’s hope a good attorney, too. We already know there’s a tendency to get black children into foster care, and incentives for getting children into foster care as well.
The Shaken Baby Syndrome Prevention & Awareness Program was developed in 1998 in Upstate New York by Dr. Mark Dias, MD, Pediatric Neurosurgeon. Since the inception of the SBS program, Upstate New York has reduced the incidence of infant abusive head injuries by nearly 50%. The results of this research project was published in the Journal of Pediatrics in April 2005. In 2005, the upstate New York Program expanded into Pediatric offices and has shown an additional 10% decrease in infant abusive head injuries.
In 2002, the identical program was started as a pilot study, under Dr. Dias, in central Pennsylvania and Pennsylvania Law 2002-176: The Shaken Baby Syndrome Education Act was passed. The program partnered with, and is now funded by, the Pennsylvania Department of Health to expand into 100% of all birthing and children’s hospitals in Pennsylvania and in 2004 the name of the program was changed from the Central Pennsylvania SBS Education Program to the Pennsylvania Shaken Baby Syndrome Prevention & Awareness Program.
In October 2007, The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) awarded the Pennsylvania Shaken Baby Syndrome Prevention & Awareness Program a $2.8 million dollar grant to continue the prevention efforts by expanding the education into pediatric and family practice offices in 16 counties in Central Pennsylvania. This “booster” of education is being presented at the 2 month, 4 month and 6 month immunization visits and complements, but does not duplicate, the education provided at the time of the baby’s birth. The focus is on infant crying & techniques to assist parents in coping with a crying infant. The study will assess the cost and feasibility of providing this form of education in an outpatient setting. Phase II of the program is funded by the CDC for five years.
The Pennsylvania Shaken Baby Syndrome Prevention & Awareness Program provides PNA approved nursing in-services, supplies, educational videos and guidance free of charge. Our goal is to ensure that every parent of every child born in Pennsylvania receives education on shaken baby syndrome!
More information on that law: Again, the law is to educate about SBS:
A baby’s head is large and heavy in proportion to the baby’s body. There is space between the brain and skull to allow for growth and development. The baby’s neck muscles are not yet developed.Violently shaking a baby or young child forces the head to whip back and forth, causing blood vessels in the brain and eyes to rip and bleed. In addition, this motion causes the brain to move and bounce against the skull which can cause brain damage. Shaking a baby can cause:
blindness broken bones cerebral palsy death hearing loss mental retardation paralysis seizures speech or learning difficultiesShaken Baby Syndrome PA Legislation
Act No. 2002 – 176, Shaken Baby Syndrome Education and Prevention Program signed in December 2002. Requires hospitals to:
Provide parents educational materials on SBS free of charge. Present parents with a voluntarily commitment statement indicating that they have received the educational materials. Charged the Department of Health to develop a program to focus on awareness, education and prevention of Shaken Baby Syndrome and prescribe a format for a Commitment Statement.
About the Child Safety Team member’s expert testimony:
The parents add that Dr. Crowell, a member of the Penn State Child Safety Team, “qualified as an expert in child abuse for the first time in her life at the dependency hearing for L.B. and T.R on December 18, 2009. Defendant Crowell was qualified as an expert in child abuse for the second time in her life at Jamel’s preliminary criminal hearing on December 28, 2009. Dr. Crowell acknowledged under oath at Jamel’s criminal trial that she misrepresented medical evidence critical to L.B.’s case when she testified at Jamel’s preliminary hearing.”
Thirty paragraphs later, the parents say that Dr. Crowell “testified falsely that L.B. had ‘an extensive screening’ for ‘coagulation problems’ and ‘an extensive screening for bleeding disorders’ that were ‘normal’ and that L.B.’s ‘metabolic workup was normal.'”
Reminder: The Child Safety Team had only been started a few months earlier. Within one month of them being assembled, they had a black father in jail and two kids in foster care, erroneously. The bail was set too high for this man to get out of jail. How many times do we hear of people being quickly sprung from jail after domestic violence? (or sent to diversionary programs instead of jail). See my Toms River article for an example of this, when the woman victim was an employee of the DYFS herself….
This next part, if true, is disgraceful. A medical doctor testifying FOR the family suffered restrictions that ones from the prosecution did not. First, they point out that some doctors (for the prosecution) had liability insurance; while one wishing to testify FOR the family, did not:
The parents say that Crowell was also “paid by, and enjoyed the liability insurance, of Penn State” and was never their daughter’s treating physician.
Defendant Dr. Arabinda Choudhary, another member of the Penn State Child Safety Team, “was not board certified by the American Board of Radiology nor does he possess any certificates of additional qualifications in pediatric radiology or neuro-radiology,” according to the complaint. The parents say that Dr. Choudhary, “with reckless indifference to the truth, changed his initial diagnosis of L.B.’s venous stroke from possible thrombosis to the anatomically impossible diagnosis of a congenital/developmental anomaly.”Choudhary also was “paid by, and enjoyed the liability insurance, of Penn State” and was never their daughter’s treating physician, the parents say.
The chairwoman of Penn State’s Radiology Department, defendant Dr. Kathleen D. Eggli, “just before the scheduled criminal trial of Jamel … implemented a new policy in the radiology department in which defendant Eggli selectively imposed restrictions on a Penn State radiologist who was sought out for a second opinion by the Billups family and rendered an opinion different than that of the Penn State Child Safety Team,” the complaint states. “The restrictions imposed on this doctor who was willing to testify for the Billups family were not imposed on the Penn State radiologist who testified for the prosecution, defendant Choudhary, or on any other doctor at Penn State who testified for the prosecution. The restrictions included a prohibition on communicating the doctor’s faculty appointment as an assistant professor of radiology at Penn State, denial of liability insurance from Penn State and a prohibition on the use of Penn State logo and letterhead, all prohibitions that were not applied to Defendants Dias, Crowell or Choudhary during their investigation and testimony on behalf of the prosecution and county children and youth agency.”
The doctor was faculty — assistant professor of radiology — and forbidden to use the Penn State logo or letterhead? Interesting! . . . . ..
This sounds like typical agency behavior — AFTER the father was criminally acquitted, the two workers tried to get a restriction on his parenting — he could not be alone with the children. This part is saddening:
The parents say that even after Jamel was acquitted of criminal charges, “FCCYS agents Kari Coccagna and Minnie Tuner threatened to immediately send the police to forcibly remove T.R. and L.B. from Jamel and Jackie if Jamel and Jackie did not agree to a ‘voluntary’ safety plan. The ‘voluntary’ safety plan required that Jamel ‘agree’ that he would not be alone with his children and required Jackie and Jamel to ‘agree’ to unannounced visits from employees of defendant FCCYS or suffer the immediate removal of their children from their care by the police.
They had their foot in the door. The accusations of abuse had been proved false, and the father and family had paid heavily for the Child Safety Team and prosecutors mistakes. Now this (black) couple is to endure yet further violations of their civil liberties and right to privacy, for what reason? And under threat of removal of their children if they said no? SOunds like, having seen how the law works by this time, they signed the voluntary safety plan. To have the Dad never be alone with the children places a burden on the family, and the mother, after obviously the father had been taken out of the work force (assuming he’d been working) for over a year, sitting in jail wrongly!
At all times relevant to this complaint, defendant Franklin County and defendant FCCYS had a policy of using safety plans as voluntary placement agreements and extending those agreements beyond 30 days in violation of 55 Pa. Code §3130.65. Defendants Franklin County, FCCYS, Coccagna and Tuner extended the voluntary placement agreement beyond 30 days without obtaining a court order in violation of Pennsylvania law and Jamel’s and Jackie’s right to due process pursuant to Franklin County and FCCYS policy or, in the alternative, defendants Coccagna and Watson violated the due process protection provided in 55 Pa. Code §3130.65 and failed to obtain a court order to extend the ‘voluntary’ safety plan beyond 30 days on their own.”
There’s nothing “voluntary” about anything when the alternative is to have your children forcibly removed and put into foster care, after they already had been! That’s flat-out extortion when there has been no abuse!
The parents add: “On June 18, 2011, FCCYS closed its case with the Billups family and terminated the ‘voluntary’ safety plan.”
Look at the timeline. He was criminally cleared in December 2009, and it took over a year and a half to get this agency to drop its attack on the family. Suppose this had been a family of a different color (or able to afford that $200K bail?) — would it have played out differently?
The parents and their children seek punitive damages for reckless indifference to civil rights, due process violations, negligence, failure to train, extending voluntary placement agreements beyond 30 days, unconstitutionally favoring expert witnesses for the prosecution and disadvantaging expert witnesses for the defendants, and for the 414 days that Jamel was jailed for a crime he did not commit.
They are represented by Mark Freeman of Media, Pa.
(that is also the entire article).
I’m glad this family finally was reunited, and commend them for courage in suing.
The topic and similar ones are handled by a Dr. Charles Pragnell. I”m including this link FYI; he writes also about false allegations of child abuse through lack of proper medical diagnosis, and other topics. This links happens to be about how come Mucnchausen’s By Proxy got such wide acceptance.
Because he deals more in other countries (including European and in Australia) the perspective is different. He also relates it sometimes to the historical World War I & II information, as I recall. He writes about many topics with injections of common sense and different perspectives than the witch-hunt one.
http://www.fassit.co.uk/fabricated_induced_illness.htm
Addendum — Last Post complained in part about “healthy Marriage” funding, and in the same post I also pointed out that major corporations (Through ALEC, at least) are pushing certain types of very conservative legislation — including marriage promotion.
This Huffington Post Article (found right alongside the one I”m blogging, above) validates the claim that marriage is good for corporate products:
Marriage And Economic Growth: National Marriage Project Report Finds Major Links
The Huffington Post, Stephanie Hallet, 10/3/2011
Marriage, quite literally, is the lifeblood of the economy, according to a new report released Monday by the National Marriage Project at the University of Virginia. The report, “The Sustainable Demographic Dividend,” examined demographic data, such as census records and consumer expenditure surveys, and concluded that economic growth is dependent on healthy marriages.
The University of Virginia researchers found that when people get married and have children, seven sectors of the economy experience tenable growth. The specific sectors are: child care, life and personal insurance, household products and services, health care, food, home maintenance/home services, and pets and toys. By contrast, those industries suffer when marriage and fertility rates are low.
Since the recession hit, marriage and fertility rates have been waning. In 2009, the number of babies born in the U.S. dropped by 2.3 percent.
. . .
What are the major findings in this report?
[In the report] we’re arguing that the economy depends on strong families because families, of course, provide a future customer base, they supply future workers with important human social capital and they also give men an incentive to work harder in the labor force.
Marriage as an inducement for men to work. Sounds “gg..rr..eat” for women. Support multinational corporations — have babies and marry, so your man will be a better employee. (FYI — this is the theme behind fatherhood programs, too. Use access to the children as bait to persuade Dads to try harder to get jobs, above the table jobs…..)
So when either marriage or fertility are waning, that can have a negative long-term impact on the economy and also, of course, on particular industries. We also point out that people who get married and have kids are more likely to spend money in certain sectors of the economy. In particular, the seven areas we highlight in this report are: child care, life and personal insurance, household products and services, health care, food, home maintenance/home services, and pets and toys. What that means concretely is that companies like Procter & Gamble, Northwestern Mutual life insurance, Target, Home Depot, these kinds of companies are more likely to flourish when Americans get married and have kids.
About Charles PragnellArticles written by Charles include:
Charles has nearly forty years’ experience working with children and young people as a social worker and senior manager of social services. He has undertaken research for the National Children’s Bureau as well as conducting presentations at national and international conferences on children’s issues related to child protection and social policy. He has lectured at English and Australian universities. Charles is regularly published in journals in the U.K., South Africa and online.
Let’s talk about money, who has no idea where it’s gone, where the federal government gets its receipts from, and what happens when you leave politicians in charge of it.
This post is a miscellany — but this Change.org link explains why you should tell your legislator NOW to cut the (crap) funding of federal incentives to increase the welfare load, while claiming to be reducing it.
Cut TANF / Title IV-D Programs which represent $4 billion of waste
Overall, it’s producing public blight and undermining due process.
A friend of mine put this Change.org information out, and NOW is the time to talk to legislators about this in common sense terms. She summarizes:
Why this is Important
This letter is to request that you take action to cut spending on pork barrel spending on certain TANF [&] IV-D programs which represent $4 billion untraceable dollars that no one keeps track of. These funds meant for needy children were diverted and wasted by the US Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to non needs based programs available to all fathers engaged in the family court litigation industry—no matter how wealthy they are. These parents now ask Congress to take a stand to hold ACF’s defective leadership and the programs destroying families accountable by demanding the following budget cuts:
1. TANF Contingency Fund authorized under 403(b) Social Security Act for payment to States and other non-federal entities under Titles I, IV-D, X, XI, and XIV “to remain available until expended.” (p. 474)
(the “Contingency Fund” is Federal provision of money to states in years of economic downturn; it’s receipt is provisional depending on the states behavior & spending).
2. ID Code 75-1552-0-1-609, lines 0005 and 0009 [$990 million] (p. 473)
3. ID Code 75-1501-0-1-609 lines 0002, 0003 [Access and Visitation] [$1.7 billion] (p. 474)
Access and Visitation historically has been $10 million (not $1.7 billion) per year, and has even at that level been a source of protracted custody litigation, and a gender-specific (fathers emphasis) attempt to change the judicial process into an “out-come” based process, which is establishing another form of government, essentially. Because doing this is illegal at the state level, the federal grants say they just “facilitate” programs to increase access and visitation of noncustodial parents. The organization “Kids’ Turn” which I’ve highlighted (SF and San Diego, CA nonprofits) benefits from these grants, which fund “parent education” among other things. It’s my understanding that most judges and family court lawyers are not really hurting for cash flow. There are states trying to make “access visitation” programs mandatory for every custody modification, as I recall, and it was one of Obama’s promises (through HHS) to a fathers and families group to do this. I’ve written plenty of this topic, search it on the blog….)
4. Discretionary “Child Support Incentives” to States [$305 million] (p. 475)
This is talking about the 66% Federal incentive to states for child support enforcement (which could also include such activities as fatherhood programs, marriage education, parenting classes, etc., as I understand it:) This particular link refers to ARRA (I’m just providing general glossary of the concepts)
A Federal match of 66 percent is available for State administrative costs of carrying out child support enforcement program activities under title IV-D of the Social Security Act (Act). ARRA temporarily changes the child support authorization language to allow States to use Federal incentive payments provided to States in accordance with Section 458 of the Act as their State share of expenditures eligible for Federal match. This change is effective October 1, 2008 through September 30, 2010. The requirements of Section 458(f) of the Social Security Act and 45 CFR 305.35 regarding “reinvestment” of incentive funds remain in effect.
This change is in effect for any incentive funds expended during FY 2009 and FY 2010, including incentives earned and not expended in prior years (i.e., prior to October 1, 2008). Incentive payments expended during FY 2008 (October 1, 2007-September 30, 2008) are not eligible for additional Federal funds.
5. ID Code 75–1512–0–1–506 “Healthy Families” [$1.7 billion] (p.476)
A family with its civil and legal rights intact is likely to be a healthy family. What, really, are those being used for?
6. ID Code 75–1512–0–1–506 “Abstinence Education” [$1.7 billion] (p. 477)
Yes, former President George Bush lives: Abstinence Education.
You know what that is? Obviously it doesn’t apply to our Congressional Leaders (see previous US Presidents, Governors, and other legislators, or Rep. Weiner. Federal Grantswire says that entities “soliciting” to teach teenagers (and I kid you not, some parents caught in custody battles!) how not to have sex can get formula grants to do this:
Objectives (050):To enable States to provide abstinence education, and at the option of the State, where appropriate, mentoring, counseling, and adult supervision to promote abstinence from sexual activity, with a focus on those groups which are most likely to bear children out-of-wedlock. The Affordable Health Care Act (ACA) appropriated funding for this program through FY 2014.Types of Assistance (060):FORMULA GRANTSUses and Use Restrictions (070):Pursuant to Section 510(b)(2) of Title V of the Social Security Act, the term “abstinence education” means an educational or motivational program that:
(A) has as its exclusive purpose, teaching the social, psychological, and health gains to be realized by abstaining from sexual activity;
(B) teaches abstinence from sexual activity outside marriage as the expected standard for all school age children;
(C) teaches that abstinence from sexual activity is the only certain way to avoid out-of-wedlock pregnancy, sexually transmitted diseases, and other associated health problems;
(D) teaches that a mutually faithful monogamous relationship in the context of marriage is the expected standard of human sexual activity
Turn off that recent movie, “What Number Are You?” in which a woman runs up sex with 20 men and believes that her odds of finding the right one are going to decrease if she goes over this…. Also turn off “Crazy Stupid Love” in which one ladies’ man teaches a monogamous jilted husband how to pick up women, which of course he does easily with a makeover and more domineering attitude. Also pay no need to the endless procession of married Congressional leaders caught in the act, or trying to get some action going (Rep. Weiner using Congressional gym as backdrop for lewd photos of himself; LA Times, “New Half-naked Photos: Rep. Weiner calls for press conference” June 6, 2011, just in time for Fathers’ Day…; some tweet’s of a man’s crotch were reported; he represents portions of Brooklyn & Quuens, and this was his 7th term…)
No, Abstinence education isn’t aimed at everyone. And it’s not because those pushing it as a group really do believe in abstinence for themselves: It’s aimed at poor people who might have children that become welfare recipients, and while I won’t mention color, I’ll relate that the Congressional Record in passing welfare reform certainly did. It’s not that we really disapprove of sex outside marriage, or promoting promiscuity as desirable, if not the ideal — but really, what this is about (besides the business angle of getting the grants — which probably aren’t tracked any better than the A/V grants or collected child support is) is allegedly the public debt load, and as a friend of mine put it, the ruling elite which — face it (or look at Congress), still are white males, not wanting to lose their place in society by greater fertility among people of color. By sharing the characteristics, poor white men, and with their participation in fatherhood ego-bolstering activity, can share in some of the trickle-down glory & control by programs that restore control over women and children who dismissed or left them, sometimes for very valid reasons…
(But I’m getting off from the budget angle here, sorry).
Seriously:
7. Line 0129 “Faith Based Initiatives” [$1 million] (p.479)
Struggling parents want things like jobs, housing, education, childcare, and access to medical care to help them weather the current economic crisis. Instead, these hard working families are forced to invest $4 Billion in irresponsible, extortion based, Temporary Aid to Needy Families (TANF) programs that promote widespread Medicaid and child support fraud, protracted high conflict litigation, and bogus therapy programs.
Child support agencies deliberately withhold and mismanage billions of paid collected support, which starves children onto TANF and causes parents to be falsely prosecuted for nonpayment.
Good parents are being exploited, bankrupted, and emotionally destroyed while their kids are needlessly placed on the welfare, Medicaid, and foster care system rolls. Billions of dollars of child support remains unaccounted for nationwide.
These frivolous programs spend without restraint and direct money to places HHS cannot identify (as noted by the OIG and GOA reports on the second page.) There is no oversight. DHHS’s position is that once the money goes to the states, they are not responsible for oversight. Fraud is rampant, yet the OIG does nothing to enforce the laws to protect families.
90% of the parents paying child support are fathers. Using child support enforcement programs as a vehicle, these extortion based programs force fathers to elect between criminal penalties and inciting “high conflict” family court litigation to create a “need” for their own publicly funded services. These irresponsible programs cash in on the “incentives” by placing children in unstable homes, and then starve the entire family onto some sort of public assistance. We can identify no legitimate purpose for these programs and request that Congress take the following actions:
(for more, click on the link):
. . . . Below here is me collecting various articles and thinking aloud about this whole mess. Quite honestly, I’m tired!
You might be too if you lived in California!!
“Almost” comical, if I don’t think about it too hard:
Some Gov. Jerry Brown appointees get pension and paycheck
Gov. Jerry Brown had vowed to rein in pension costs. But some of his appointees are receiving double payments totaling more than $200,000 a year.
Ann Ravel, the chairwoman of the California Fair Political Practices Commission,… (Rich Pedroncelli / Associated Press)September 29, 2011|By Shane Goldmacher and Patrick McGreevy, Los Angeles TimesReporting from Sacramento — Every month, Ann Ravel gets a paycheck from her salary as chairwoman of California’s ethics watchdog agency and a second, bigger check from her public pension as a retiree.
The double payments, which total more than $305,000 a year, represent the kind of costly pension perk that Gov. Jerry Brown has vowed to rein in.
. . .
But since he assumed office nine months ago, Brown has appointed numerous officials like Ravel to state jobs in which they can simultaneously collect a full salary and a public pension.
One is earning $234,000 in combined wages and pension to serve on California’s state’s unemployment board, which the governor wants to eliminate. Six Brown appointees to the state’s parole board are layering wages atop pensions.
“That should be against the law,” said Marcia Fritz, a certified public accountant and president of the California Foundation for Fiscal Responsibility, which seeks to end what she called “double dipping.”
“It violates the whole premise of having a retirement program,” she said.
California law forbids rank-and-file state employees to draw full-time government wages and state-administered retirement benefits at the same time. But an exemption exists for political appointees to more than a dozen powerful boards and commissions, where members can legally earn both.
Taxpayers are footing the bill. The state treasury must cover $3.51 billion this year for California’s beleaguered pension system, known as CalPERs, though payments to active state employees account for a fraction of that sum.
As a candidate, Brown pledged to stop pension abuses. In March, he rolled out a 12-point plan for reducing pension costs that included “limits on post-retirement public employment.”
But only six weeks earlier, the governor had appointed Ravel, 62, to chair the Fair Political Practices Commission
HEY, Isn’t that the group that ruled against county benefits going to California Judges, who by law were to be paid by the state? Richard Fine, etc.?
ANyhow, it must be OK because Republicans do it too.
“The Republicans were doing it too,” said Ravel, a Democrat.
The same day Brown appointed Ravel, he also tapped Robert Dresser as the $132,179-a-year chairman of the state’s Unemployment Insurance Appeals Board. Dresser, 70, defended taking the salary while receiving $102,955 in annual pension payments after decades as a state attorney.
“What I am doing is consistent with state policy and law,” he said.
“It is unclear from state records how often such appointments occur….”
It is unclear from state records how often such appointments occur, but previous governors also made them.
. . .
A group of GOP legislators sought to ban the double earnings in budget negotiations with Brown earlier this year.
When those talks collapsed, Republicans introduced their own measure, but it never received a hearing in the Democratic-controlled Legislature.
Now, taxpayers are stuck “paying for double dipping at the expense of real programs such as education and public safety,” said Sen. Tom Harman (R-Huntington Beach), one of the Republicans who had been in discussions with the governor.
The issue has come before the Legislature before. In 2009, state senators grilled Anthony Kane, a Schwarzenegger appointee to the parole board, about his retirement as a deputy prison warden and his subsequent collection of a pension and board salary.
“That was not my goal, to retire and come back and be a commissioner. That wasn’t the plan,” Kane said, according to a hearing transcript.
The state Senate declined to confirm Kane then. Senate leader Darrell Steinberg (D-Sacramento), one of Kane’s questioners, pledged new legislation to end the exemption for political appointees.
He never introduced such a bill.
NO — He introduced a bill to retroactively immunize California Judiciary for taking county-paid bribes in cases before them where the County was a party — that’s the SBX-211 that got rammed through right around the time, these guys were getting REAL fed up with Mr. Fine’s whistleblowing…..I blogged it.
WHILE WE’re HERE — about those Judicial Disclosures (Form 700s):
Fair Political Practices Commission Described (Chairman is salaried, the other 4 are paid $100/day). THe Political Reform Act was passed by a ballot measure in 1974, to:
The Political Reform Act is designed to assure that:
- State and local government serve all citizens equally, without regard to status or wealth
- Public officials perform their duties impartially, without bias because of personal financial interests or the interests of financial supporters
- Public officials disclose income and assets that could be affected by official actions and disqualify themselves from participating in decisions when they have conflicts of interest
- Election campaign receipts and expenditures are fully and truthfully disclosed so voters are informed and improper practices are inhibited
- Elections are fair
- No laws or practices favor incumbents
- The state ballot pamphlet gives useful information about state measures so voters can be less dependent on paid advertising for information
- The activity of those who lobby the state legislature is regulated and finances disclosed to prevent improper influence on public officials
(etc.).
Link to Info on “Statement of Economic INterests (form 700) forms.”
A statement of Economic Interest (FORM 700) is a state form on which state and local government officials publicly disclose their personal assets and
income that may be materially affected by their official acts. Agency employees, including some public officials who are designated in a conflict of interest code are required to disclose certain financial interests according to the disclosure categories assigned to that position in their agency’s conflict of interest code.
Certain public officials, including public officials who manage public investments, are required to disclose all financial interest. These officials make full economic disclosure in accordance with state law, rather than their agency’s conflict of interest code.
Download Form 700 from the Fair Political Practices Commission.
Judges file with the clerk of their court; retired judges are to file directly with the FPPC (in California). Now we know where to get those forms from, too. 2010 RonKayinLA Article summarizes the California Judicial Scandal in taking county benefits payments while ruling over cases involving the count(ies) “No man is permitted to try a case where he has an interest in the outcome.”
ARticle 1 — Sept. 23, 2011:
Sen. Dianne Feinstein is suing her former treasurer and her campaign’s bank for fraud and breach of contract, alleging that the bank was complicit in a massive fraud case that has rocked the political world.
The suit was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Court on Friday against First California Bank, Feinstein’s former treasurer Kinde Durkee and her company, Durkee & Associates.
Durkee was arrested Sept. 2 on a federal fraud charge after allegedly embezzling possibly millions of dollars from her clients, who include Feinstein and many other prominent California Democrats.
The complaint alleges that First California Bank was “at the heart of the illegal transfer out of plaintiffs’ accounts.” It quotes a letter from the bank to clients acknowledging that it appears Durkee had commingled funds and made transfers between accounts and that the balances credited to any given account may not accurately reflect the funds belonging to the associated campaigns.
“Despite knowledge of this pervasive pattern of misconduct, First California Bank continued to provide banking services to Durkee and Durkee & Associates, LLC, for many years, happy to collect the fees and interest generated by the scores of accounts Durkee maintained at the bank,” the complaint stated, going on to suggest that other banks and professionals may also have been complicit.
The complaint cites multiple instances of checks written without authorization and misreported fund balances, including a balance summary dated July 2 that reported Feinstein’s Senate account had a balance of $2.3 million when, in fact, its balance was about $266,000. Bill Carrick, Feinstein’s longtime campaign consultant, said the full extent of the funds taken from Feinstein’s account is still unknown because the bank has not handed over records.
ARTICLE TWO
The politicians and consultants who trusted the Long Beach resident with millions of dollars saw little to hint that she might become vilified as the ‘Bernie Madoff of campaign finance treasurers.
(after descriptions of what a modest and low-profile lifestyle she and her husband led….)
…As the treasurer considered the “platinum standard” in California, Durkee oversaw at least 360 bank accounts for almost 100 candidates, six dozen political action committees, about 60 Democratic clubs and committees and a handful of nonprofits. The ongoing federal investigation has triggered turmoil in state Democratic circles, with politicians, including members of the Los Angeles City Council and Congress, locked out of their accounts and worried that millions of dollars may be lost. U.S. Sen. Dianne Feinstein had $5.2 million, according to Durkee’s last report, but the bank can find just $662,101.
“I never saw her driving a Ferrari. She lived a very non-pretentious life,” said state Sen. Louis Correa (D-Santa Ana), who met her when he first ran for office 17 years ago. “You see a persona and then you see this, and the picture doesn’t fit.”
The image that emerges from Durkee’s political world is of an intentionally low-profile player who rarely discussed her personal life. She had a sweet voice and a pedigree that inspired trust. She was the protege of a Los Angeles accountant {{Glazer}} who had a national reputation for his ethical standards and the daughter of a beloved Lutheran minister memorialized as “gracious, warm, caring and ever-present.”
Ya gotta watch out for the religious ones, I keep telling us!
Durkee registered Durkee & Associates as a limited liability corporation four years after Glazer’s death. She lists herself as the owner and her husband and her two sisters as members. The firm’s website said it had been in business since 1972. Her rates were cheap and politicians found her responsive.
The top one here? (which shows a Burbank address):
| Entity Number | Date Filed | Status | Entity Name | Agent for Service of Process |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 200327910101 | 09/22/2003 | ACTIVE | DURKEE AND ASSOCIATES, LLC | LAURENCE ZAKSON |
| 199928710057 | 10/12/1999 | ACTIVE | DURKEE PROPERTIES, LLC | DONALD L. JONES |
“Everybody knew Kinde Durkee was the person to go to,” said state Sen. Gloria Negrete McLeod (D-Chino). “She was just the nicest person you could ever talk to.”
Federal investigators say Durkee admitted she had misappropriated money for years and filed false campaign finance reports. A Times review of those campaign records for about 180 state and federal committees found that she reported they had $9.8 million in cash on June 30. But First California Bank put the value of all Durkee-controlled accounts it could identify on Sept. 21 at $2.5 million. Durkee also had at least one account at City National Bank.
Durkee’s arrest on suspicion of mail fraud stemmed from the allegation that she drained $677,181 from an assemblyman’s account and, making about 30 complicated transfers, used it to pay business and personal expenses.
…
Durkee has been accused of covering up for an employee who embezzled. Two years ago, state Sen.Christine Kehoe (D-San Diego) learned from state auditors that a Durkee employee had embezzled $57,166 from her campaign. She called for a criminal investigation in a six-page letter that detailed how Durkee failed to tell her of the theft and filed reports that did not disclose it. A state audit concluded that the same employee siphoned $8,244 from state Board of Equalization member Jerome Horton, but again Durkee’s firm did not report it. Durkee paid at least some of the money back.
The treasurer rarely drew much media attention. But in 2007, the San Francisco Chronicle reported that Durkee was the treasurer of Californians for Obama, which raised more than $10,000 but spent much of it on expenses, including payments to Durkee’s firm. Asked to explain her involvement, a Durkee representative said: “She does not talk to reporters.” In 2009, the news broke that Kehoe had fired Durkee.
Durkee did have a public record that her loyal clients simply brushed aside. Since 2002, the state Fair Political Practices Commission has assessed fines 11 times against committees that used Durkee as treasurer. Durkee typically cooperated with these investigations, sometimes accepting blame and paying the fine. Earlier this year, she did just that, agreeing to pay $13,000. But that case became her firm’s undoing.
A commission investigator noticed that Durkee appeared to shift money from client accounts to her firm’s without permission and shuttle some back when needed to cover checks. The FBI was alerted.
john.hoeffel@latimes.com
patrick.mcgreevy@latimes.com
jean.merl@latimes.com
Times staff writers Abby Sewell and Richard Simon contributed to this report. Copyright © 2011, Los Angeles Times
November 16, 2010 (Can’t wait to read the November, 2011 version of this letter):
from the Department of the Treasury, Financial Management Services, courtesy David A. Lebryk, Commissioner
In accordance with the provisions of Section 114(a) of the Act of September 12, 1950 (31 U.S.C. 3513(a)), I am transmitting herewith the Combined Statement of Receipts, Outlays, and Balances of the United States Government for the fiscal year ended September 30, 2010.
This statement presents budget results and the cash-related assets and liabilities of the Federal Government with supporting details.
(for those of you who had a public school education, but somehow made it to this page anyhow, I note that there was no decimal given on the $3,456 billion. By supplying one, I get $1,294.3 (not .2) billion, but after a while, billion, trillion, it tends to blur, right?… 0.1 Bill is only $100 million, that ain’t a whole lot overall.
Have you heard of ‘ALEC” – American Legislative Exchange Council” ??

In their terms:
Our Mission
The mission of the American Legislative Exchange Council is…
…to advance the Jeffersonian principles of free markets, limited government, federalism, and individual liberty, through a nonpartisan public-private partnership of America’s state legislators, members of the private sector, the federal government, and general public.
…to promote these principles by developing policies that ensure the powers of government are derived from, and assigned to, first the People, then the States, and finally, the Federal Government.
…to enlist state legislators from all parties and members of the private sector who share ALEC’s mission.
…to conduct a policy making program that unites members of the public and private sectors in a dynamic partnership to support research, policy development, and dissemination activities.
…to prepare the next generation of political leadership through educational programs that promote the principles of Jeffersonian democracy, which are necessary for a free society.
History . . . . if you can spell Neo-Con, very Big Business:
Former ALEC chairmen (a roster of legislators….)
More than 30 years ago, a small group of state legislators and conservative policy advocates met in Chicago to implement a vision: A nonpartisan membership association for conservative state lawmakers who shared a common belief in limited government, free markets, federalism, and individual liberty. Their vision and initiative resulted in the creation of a voluntary membership association for people who believed that government closest to the people was fundamentally more effective, more just, and a better guarantor of freedom than the distant, bloated federal government in Washington, D.C.
At that meeting, in September 1973, state legislators, including then Illinois State Rep. Henry Hyde, conservative activist Paul Weyrich, and Lou Barnett, a veteran of then Gov. Ronald Reagan’s 1968 presidential campaign, together with a handful of others, launched the American Legislative Exchange Council. Among those who were involved with ALEC in its formative years were: Robert Kasten and Tommy Thompson of Wisconsin; John Engler of Michigan; Terry Branstad of Iowa, and John Kasich of Ohio, all of whom moved on to become governors or members of Congress. Congressional members who were active during this same period included Senators John Buckley of New York and Jesse Helms of North Carolina, and Congressmen Phil Crane of Illinois and Jack Kemp of New York.
Let’s talk JUST a little bit about Paul Weyrich. Here’s a nice photo from Wikipedia, and some data:
Paul M. Weyrich (October 7, 1942 – December 18, 2008[1][2][3][4]) was an American conservative political activist and commentator, most notable as a figurehead of the New Right. He co-founded the Heritage Foundation,[5] a conservative think tank and the Free Congress Foundation, another conservative think tank. He switched from the Roman Rite of the Catholic Church to that of Melkite Greek Catholic Church and was ordained protodeacon. (Protodeacon is an honorific rank given to certain married deacons in Eastern Christian churches. )
![]()
In 1966,[5] he became press secretary[citation needed] to RepublicanU.S. SenatorGordon L. Allott of Colorado.[5] While serving in this capacity, he met Jack Wilson, an aide of Joseph Coors, patriarch of the Coors brewing family. Frustrated with the state of public policy research, they founded Analysis and Research Inc., in 1971, but this organization failed to gain traction.
(Weyrich)….Founding the Heritage Foundation
Can you spell, Unification Church monies, National Parenting Day and Sun Myung Moon? ???
Founded in 1973, The Heritage Foundation is a New Rightthink tank. Its stated mission is to formulate and promote conservative public policies based on the principles of “free enterprise, limited government, individual freedom, traditional American values, and a strong national defense.” It is widely considered one of the world’s most influential public policy research institutes.
History
The Foundation wields considerable influence in Washington, and enjoyed particular prominence during the Reagan administration. Its initial funding was provided by Joseph Coors, of the Coors beer empire, and Richard Mellon Scaife, heir of the Mellon industrial and banking fortune. The Foundation maintains strong ties with the London Institute of Economic Affairsand the Mont Pelerin Society.
With a long history of receiving large donations from overseas, Heritage continues to rake in a minimum of several hundred thousand dollars from Taiwan and South Korea each year.
In autumn of 1988, the South Korean National Assembly uncovered a document revealing that Korean intelligence gave $2.2 million to the Heritage Foundation on the sly during the early 1980s. Heritage officials “categorically deny” the accusation.
Heritage’s latest annual report does acknowledge a $400,000 grant from the Korean conglomerate Samsung. Another donor, the Korea Foundation – which conduits money from the South Korean government – has given Heritage almost $1 million in the past three years.
. . .
Meanwhile, there was also a connection between Heritage and the Rev Sun Myung Moon (founder of the Moonies). This first appeared in a 1975 congressional investigation on the Korean Central Intelligence Agency (KCIA) activities in the US.
The report noted, “In 1975, Ed Feulner … was introduced to KCIA station chief Kim Yung Hwan by Neil Salonen and Dan Feffernan of the Freedom Leadership foundation”.
Salonen was head of Sun Myung Moon’s Unification Church in the United States. The Freedom Leadership Foundation (FLF), a political arm of Moon’s Unification network, was linked to the World Anti- Communist League.
In the early 1980s, the KCIA began making donations to Heritage Foundation. In turn, Heritage established an Asian Studies Center.
AND I want to point out (again) along with the ultra-conservative influence and agenda, the same funders and policy-influencers at this 501(c)3 are often — VERY often — found also behind fatherhood and fathers’ rights institutes at universities, projects to demonstrate how fatherhood will reduce welfare roles, “Fragile Families” studies, etc., etc.
Another set of factoids, these are from “Sourcewatch” on the Heritage Foundation: I posting a LARGE section for effect. Remember, above, the 9% corporate tax (and that this group is a NONProfit….)
Funding
The Heritage Foundation is a 501(c)(3) non-profit organisation. In its annual report it states that “we rely on the financial contributions of the gemeral public: individuals, foundations and corporations. We accept no government funds and perform no contract work.”
2006 Budget
In calendar year 2006 the Heritage Foundation spent over $40.5 million on its operations. That year the foundation raised over $25 million from individual contributors and $13.1 million from foundations.
While corporations provided only $1.5 million – 4% of Heritage’s contributions in 2006 – they none the less have significant interest in the foundations policy output. There’s defense contractors Boeing and Lockheed Martin, finance and insurance companies such as Allstate Insurance, Mortgage Insurance Companies of America, and American International Group (AIG), auto company Honda, tobacco company Altria Group (Philip Morris), drug and medical companies Johnson & Johnson,GlaxoSmithKline, Novartis, and Bristol-Myers Squibb Foundation, oil companies ChevronTexaco and Exxon Mobil, software giant Microsoft, and chipping in over $100,000 each, Alticor (Amway), Pfizer, PhRMA, and United Parcel Service (UPS). [2]
Historical funding
Between 1985 and 2003, Media Transparency reports that the following funders provided $57,497,537 (unadjusted for inflation) to the Heritage Foundation [4]:
- Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation
- Scaife Foundations: Sarah Mellon Scaife, Scaife Family, Carthage
- John M. Olin Foundation, Inc.
- Castle Rock Foundation
- JM Foundation
- Claude R. Lambe Charitable Foundation
- Philip M. McKenna Foundation, Inc.
- Charles G. Koch Charitable Foundation
- Roe Foundation
- Rodney Fund
- Ruth and Lovett Peters Foundation
- Orville D. and Ruth A. Merillat Foundation
- Bill and Berniece Grewcock Foundation
- Samuel Roberts Noble Foundation
- William H. Donner Foundation
- Walton Family Foundation (as in, Wal-Mart….)
- Armstrong Foundation
- John Templeton Foundation
- William E. Simon Foundation
Right Web says of the Heritage Foundation:
- “The foundation received $2. 2 million from the Federation of Korean Industries in the early 1980s. Initially it was believed this donation came from the Korean Central Intelligence Agency (which would make the Heritage Foundation a foreign agent of Korea), but the Federation later stated that the donation came at the encouragement of the KCIA.”
- “The Heritage Foundation’s income has increased every year since 1981. The progression has been: 1981–$7. 1 million; 1982-$8. 6 million; 1983–$10. 6 million; 1984–$10. 7 million; 1985-$11. 6 million; 1986–$14. 0 million; 1987–$14. 3 million; and 1988–$14. 6 million. In 1988, foundations provided 38 percent of Heritage’s income, individuals provided 34 percent, and corporations gave 17 percent; the remainder came from investments and sales of materials.”[5]
That information came from “ALEC EXPOSED” …..
![]()
ALEC Corporations
ALEC is not a lobby; it is not a front group. It is much more powerful than that. Through ALEC, behind closed doors, corporations hand state legislators the changes to the law they desire that directly benefit their bottom line. Along with legislators, corporations have membership in ALEC. Corporations sit on all nine ALEC task forces and vote with legislators to approve “model” bills. They have their own corporate governing board which meets jointly with the legislative board. (ALEC says that corporations do not vote on the board.) They fund almost all of ALEC’s operations. Participating legislators, overwhelmingly conservative Republicans, then bring those proposals home and introduce them in statehouses across the land as their own brilliant ideas and important public policy innovations—without disclosing that corporations crafted and voted on the bills. ALEC boasts that it has over 1,000 of these bills introduced by legislative members every year, with one in every five of them enacted into law. ALEC describes itself as a “unique,” “unparalleled” and “unmatched” organization. It might be right. It is as if a state legislature had been reconstituted, yet corporations had pushed the people out the door. Learn more at ALECexposed.org.
In 1973, persuading Joseph Coors to put the money in, Weyrich and Edwin Feulner founded the Heritage Foundation as a think tank[5] to counter liberal views on taxation and regulation, which they considered to be anti-business. While the organization was at first only minimally influential, it has grown into one of the world’s largest public policy research institutes and has been hugely influential in advancing conservative policies. The following year, again with support from Coors, Weyrich founded the Committee for the Survival of a Free Congress (CSFC),[5] an organization that trained and mobilized conservative activists, recruited conservative candidates, and raised funds for conservative causes.
Under Weyrich, the CSFC proved highly innovative. It was among the first grassroots organizations to raise funds extensively through direct mailcampaigns. It also was one of the first organizations to tap into evangelical Christian churches as places to recruit and cultivate activists and support for social conservative causes. In 1977, Weyrich co-founded Christian Voice with Robert Grant. Two years later, with Jerry Falwell, he founded the Moral Majority. Weyrich coined the phrase “Moral Majority”.[8]
Over the next two decades, Weyrich founded, co-founded, or held prominent roles in a number of other notable conservative organizations. Among them, he was founder of the American Legislative Exchange Council, an organization of state legislators; a co-founder of the Council for National Policy, a strategy-formulating organization for social conservatives; co-publisher of the magazineConservative Digest; and national chairman of Coalitions for America, an association of conservative activist organizations. The CSFC, reorganized into the Free Congress Foundation, also remained active.
Under the auspices of the FCF, he founded the Washington, D.C.–based satellitetelevision stationNational Empowerment Television (NET), later relaunched as the for-profit channel, “America’s Voice”, in 1997. That same year, Weyrich was forced out of the network he had founded when the network’s head persuaded its board to force out Weyrich in a hostile takeover. Chip Berlet of Political Research Associates says this was “apparently for his divisive behavior in attacking GOP pragmatists”.[9]
From 1989 to 1996, he was also president of the Krieble Institute, a unit of the FCF that trained activists to support democracy movements and establish small businesses in Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union.[citation needed]
Frustrated with public indifference to the Lewinsky scandal, Weyrich wrote a letter in February 1999 stating that he believed conservatives had lost the culture war, urging a separatist strategy where conservatives ought to live apart from corrupted mainstream society and form their own parallel institutions:
More from the ALEC website “History” page….
From Clearinghouses to Think Tanks
Following the end of the Reagan Administration, the Task Forces, under the leadership of Delaware State Senator Jim Neal, gradually began to shift from clearinghouses of ideas submitted by ALEC members into freestanding think tanks and model bill movers. They began to actively solicit more input from private sector members, seizing upon ALEC’s long-time philosophy that the private sector should be an ally rather than an adversary in developing sound public policy.
To date, ALEC’s Task Forces have considered, written and approved hundreds of model bills on a wide range of issues, model legislation that will frame the debate today and far into the future. Each year, close to 1,000 bills, based at least in part on ALEC Model Legislation, are introduced in the states. Of these, an average of 20 percent become law.
http://notseeamerica.com/ALEC-Alumni.html
Wisconsin’s history and public policy reflects the red/blue divide. It is the state that gave birth to the Republican Party, which supported slavery abolition, and the John Birch Society, which opposed the civil rights movement. In the first half of the 20th Century, the state elected both progressive hero Robert “Fighting Bob” LaFollette and right-wing extremist Joe McCarthy. It is the state that elected both former Senator Russ Feingold (D) and Representative Paul Ryan (R).
Wisconsin also produced Paul Weyrich, who in 1973 co-founded both the Heritage Foundation and ALEC (and in subsequent years, Free Congress and Moral Majority). Weyrich’s ALEC, it seems, has been a factory for many of the state’s most recent right-wing policy initiatives.
Wisconsin’s Progressive Traditions Resist For-Profit Prisons and Bail-Bonds
Elements of Wisconsin’s criminal justice system reflect Wisconsin’s progressive traditions. Since 1979, Wisconsin has been ahead of most U.S. states in banning commercial bail-bonding (46 states still use it), joining the rest of the world in recognizing the practice as unacceptable (it is criminalized in countries like England and Canada). Posting another person’s bail for profit has a record of corrupting the sentencing process, and puts the decision of whether an accused person goes free in the hands of a profit-oriented business.
…Both the for-profit prison industry and the for-profit bail-bond industries have done so through ALEC, the national organization that facilitates corporate-sponsored “model bills” for legislators to introduce in their states.
ALEC and For-Profit Criminal Justice
The American Bail Coalition (ABC), the for-profit bail bond industry’s national organization and lobbying wing, calls ALEC the industry’s “life preserver”. ABC pays for ALEC membership, and a representative sits on the ALEC corporate board (the “Private Enterprise Board”) as well as ALEC’sExecutive Committee. The trade group boasts that “during its two decade involvement with ALEC, ABC has written 12 model bills fortifying the commercial bail industry.”
The nation’s largest private prison operator CCA is also an ALEC member and funder, and pays for a seat on the “Public Safety Task Force” that approves ALEC model legislation dealing with crime and penalties. Since the late 1980s and 1990s, ALEC has created model bills that lengthen sentences, which have dramatically increased incarceration rates, and bills that privatize prisons, putting more of those inmates under the control of for-profit corporations.
Wisconsin politicians have long ties to ALEC. Former Governor Tommy Thompson was involved in ALEC’s early years. Milwaukee’s groundbreaking “school choice” program was based on ALEC model legislation. ALEC alum Scott Walker’s first act upon becoming governor was to introduce an omnibus “tort reform” bill mirroring many ALEC bills. But, the state’s progressive traditions have thus far trumped efforts by ALEC’s Wisconsin legislators to open the state to commercial bail-bonding and private prison industries. But they are still trying.
ALEC Exposed
Almost always drafted outside of the state with little or no input from state residents (but significant input from corporate interests), ALEC bills have made substantial changes to laws in all 50 states and in some ways determined how state taxpayer dollars are allocated. The full list of legislative membership in ALEC is not public, and legislators introduce ALEC bills in the legislator’s own name. ALEC conferences allow elected officials to hobnob with some of the wealthiest corporations in the world, often behind closed doors and without public scrutiny. This secrecy has prevented state residents from holding their elected leaders accountable for passing laws that serve out-of-state corporate interests at the expense of the individuals that live, work, and vote in the state.
A visit to the “About” menu on ALEC’s website will give you a sense of the organization’s history, its current members, and its funders. But to get to the true depths of collusive corruption, you need to visit the site’s “model legislation” page, the gateway to all the bills ALEC has drafted. Unsurprisingly, you can’t view that legislation unless you’re a member.Alas, becoming a member of ALEC isn’t so easy. You have to be an elected Republican legislator (PDF) who pays roughly $100 per biennium to join after being thoroughly vetted, or you can become a “private sector” member (PDF) by paying a few thousand dollars minimum depending on which legislative domains are of the most interest to you.You can’t find out which Wisconsin Republican politicians are members of ALEC unless you’re a member because ALEC won’t provide it. You could ask Wisconsin representatives, but you won’t get an honest answer. Loopholes in Wisconsin’s strict open meetings laws (PDF) were created by Democrats and Republicans alike to allow them to push their own party’s agendas. Because of these loopholes, Wisconsin Republicans are able to hold secret meetings with ALEC to plan their lopsided legislative strategies whenever they want with no public knowledge or intervention.ALEC’s partners play an important role in Wisconsin and other states in pushing their dreamt up legislation aimed at enriching them while destroying everyone else. The State Policy Network (SPN) is important to ALEC because they coordinate the activities of a wide variety of conservative “think tanks” at the state level throughout the U.S. Many publications from these “think tanks” can be accessed and downloaded from the SPN website.
For Wisconsinites, two important SPN members to note include the MacIver Institute for Public Policy, and the Wisconsin Policy R
Read more: http://digitaljournal.com/article/305144#ixzz1ZfX2Veb6
Income security— Income security benefits are paid to the aged, the disabled, the unemployed and low-income families. Included within this classification are programs such as general retirement and disability, public assistance [TANF, right?] and unemployment compensation. Outlays for these benefits were $624 billion in fiscal 2010—an increase of 16.9 percent or $90.1 billion over the fiscal 2009 level.
Miscellaneous Asset Accounts:
1012 U.S. Treasury Miscellaneous Assets $20,685,324.88 twenty-point-six million
1016 Federal Reserve Banks, Deferred Items $1,375,803.06 (I dont know meaning of the term “Deferred Items.”)
1053 U.S. Treasury – Owned Gold $11,041,058,821.09 eleven-point-oh-four-one million
1054 Gold Certificate Fund, Board Of Governors Of The Federal Reserve System2 $-11,036,836,601.1 negative eleven-point-oh-three-six million
1423 U.S. Currency With The International Monetary Fund $143,609,533.65
(and etc.. such as …..) 1670 Receivable For Forged, Or Incorrect Payment Of All U.S. Government Checks 1840 Deposits In Transit To The Treasury Account 1869 Deposit In Suspense, Electronic Funds Transfer 1870 E-Commerce Collections 1875 Undistributed Disbursing Transactions
(Agencies Reporting On Statement Of Transactions, FMS-224 – Revised)
Total Miscellaneous Asset Accounts $-483,509,607.91 (ie, in the hole just under $500 million)
Total Asset Accounts (including other than “Misc.”) – $1,135,885,827,712.54
Footnotes 1, 2: “1/ Major sources of information used to determine Treasury’s operating cash include Federal Reserve Banks, the Treasury Regional Finance Centers, The Internal Revenue Service Centers, the Bureau of Public Debt and various electronic systems. Deposits are reflected as received andWithdrawals are reflected as processed.
2/ The difference between Gold and Gold Certificates represents 100,000 fine troy ounces of unmonetized gold held by the U.S. Mint as assurance that Gold Certificates are fully backed by Reserve Gold.
Fiat money is money that has value only because of government regulation or law. The term derives from the Latin fiat, meaning “let it be done”, as such money is established by government decree. Where fiat money is used as currency, the term fiat currency is used.
Fiat money originated in 11th century China,[1] and its use became widespread during the Yuan and Ming dynasties.[2] The Nixon Shock of 1971 ended the direct convertibility of the United States dollarto gold. Since then all reserve currencies have been fiat currencies, including the dollar and the euro.[3]
Administration For Children And Families General Fund Accounts
. .Family Support Payments To States, Administration For Children And Families, Health And Human Services
Fund Resources: Undisbursed Funds (Dept. 75, Account 1501) Beginning of Year Balance: $887,346,371.55
Appropriations, and other Obligational Authority: $4,665,683,723.63 (THIS IS THE “$ 4 BILLION” figure we keep squawking about)
Outlays (what actually got paid out) .. . . . . . . . . . $4,422,869,054.30 (somewhere around $243 million still waiting, earning interest?)
End of year balance, undisbursed funds under this category — $1,130,161,040.88
If the average citizen did what some court-affiliated corporations and political appointees regularly do, they’d be in jail.
Here’s a link to some that are, courtesy the IRS:
For those of us whose minds don’t naturally run towards, how can I get away with it, the fine distinctions between: tax evasion, money laundering, embezzlement, a Ponzi scheme, and obstruction of IRS investigation of income tax evasions, mail fraud, straightfoward stealing through forging signatures (being in position such as bookkeeper or accountant, and able to do so), or simply flat-out “stealing state funds” this roster of recent IRS deadbeats is sort of a primer.
Many of these closely resemble some behaviors that appear (got to clear myself on this one!) to characterize the initial start-up behavior of the main court organization Association of Family & Conciliation Courts, in Los Angeles.
I’m putting this “primer” up because the approach “but they just don’t understand my case” has not been working for most parents. Put yourself in the judge’s shoes, a little more, by understanding court operations. It is the parents’ turn to start understanding how the courts actually work, meaning, who’s running them, and how they are financed. And get over the idea that one can be guaranteed whoever is wearing the black robes and manning a gavel, is per se of noble character, though I’m sure many ARE. Respect the position, but make sure those in it — and the administrative agencies surrounding them — are held accountable!
“Class is in session — pay attention!”
In this example, a Minnesota State Auditor abused her position to enrich herself, some relatives, and a check-cashing company that helped with the conspiracy. This auditor got audited, and has to pay it back:
Former Minnesota Department of Revenue Employee Sentenced For Stealing $1.9 Million in State Funds
On September 7, 2011, in Minneapolis, Minn., Pamela Marie Dellis, of Lindstrom, was sentenced to 60 months in prison for conspiracy to commit mail fraud and money laundering. Dellis was charged along with two co-defendants on January 7, 2011, and pleaded guilty on March 7, 2011. On August 9, 2011, Dellis’s niece, Laurie R. Sondrall, of Minneapolis, was sentenced to 27 months on one count of conspiracy. Dellis’s sister, Nancy T. Sondrall, of Brooklyn Center, awaits sentencing. All three defendants will be required to pay back more than $1.9 million in restitution.
In their plea agreements, the defendants admitted that from January 12, 2005, through September 17, 2010, they conspired to defraud the State of Minnesota by embezzling funds by creating false tax refund checks. According to court documents, as an auditor with the Minnesota Department of Revenue, Dellis’s job, in part, was to process tax overpayments. In numerous instances, however, she falsified records to create the impression that a taxpayer was owed a refund due to an overpayment when, in fact, that was not the case. Then, she drafted a refund check or a “transfer of funds,” made payable to her sister or niece, for the false refund amount. Dellis admitted using variations of her co-conspirators’ names on the checks and transfers to make it more difficult to detect that the refunds were not legitimate.*** To cash the checks, Dellis and her co-conspirators sometimes sought the services of a check-cashing business and then divided the check proceeds. On other occasions, the checks were deposited into an account, in an effort to conceal the source of the funds, and then withdrawn and shared by the co-conspirators. In all, Dellis was responsible for more than 200 fraudulent tax refund payments, totaling approximately $1.9 million.
*** parallel from the family court system in Los Angeles, as investigated by Kelly O’Meara. I admire this woman’s work, whose credits include:
For her work, The National Foundation for Women Legislators named O’Meara Investigative Reporter of the Year in 2001 and the following year, the Citizens Commission on Human Rights gave her their International Human Rights Award.
Other major investigative reports that O’Meara filed while at Insight include a 12-part series entitled How the Money Works, that probed Federal agency financial reporting. Her examinations of annual updates of department and agency audits focusing on missing money showed that trillions go unaccounted for at agencies such as the Department of Defense and the Department of Housing and Urban Development.
In another series, U.S. Money Laundering, O’Meara looked at Enron, the Bank of New York and an estimated $500 billion of annual money laundering in the U.S. financial system. She also explored the relationship between Washington and capital markets.
In her series, Local Government Corruption, O’Meara investigated corruption in county governments and the judiciary, specifically the County of Los Angeles court system. She was the first reporter to break the story of the Los Angeles judges’ slush fund account and trigger an independent audit of that account, which has since been transferred to the county. **She received the 1999 Friend of the Child Award from the California Protective Parents Association for her articles on the Los Angeles family courts.
(**where it is STILL unaccounted for….) Another investigative story might be WHY so many so-called children’s advocates chose to ignore this information in building their reform movements. Don’t get me started…. The same groups also by and large ignored Mr. Fine while he was sitting improperly jailed for reporting it!
Here’s another one:
California Man Sentenced on Tax Charges
On July 29, 2011, in Sacramento, Calif., Owen Charles, of Pleasant Hill, was sentenced to 51 months in prison. Charles was convicted on January 14, 2011, of tax evasion, fraudulent use of a social security number and false statements to a federal agency. According to testimony presented at trial, Charles claimed to believe that the law only required him to pay income tax on his federal retirement. An IRS audit determined that between 2001 and 2003, he had failed to pay more than $1.2 million in taxes, interest, and penalties on income from, among other things, real estate sales and rental properties.
A person who can sell real estate and function as a landlord is smart enough to understand that income is taxable…. If $1.2 million was the taxes, interest, and penalties, what was the actual income?
Upon learning that he was being audited, Charles took measures to frustrate IRS collection efforts. He did three “cash out” refinances of his million-dollar Benicia home; he moved money into nominee accounts; and he disguised his control of those accounts by using a false social security number, shell corporate names, and another person’s name. In 2001, Charles wired more than $900,000 to a bank account in the Turks and Caicos Islands. Charles also claimed to have been living under a vow of poverty while driving luxury vehicles and controlling more than $1 million in assets.
Unbelievable. The fraudulent use of a social security number has been cited in child support cases as well; see “How To Destroy a Nuclear Physicist” and Maximus recycling an old child support case (after his kids were emancipated) and going after him, again:
In 1998, two years after Tony’s youngest child was emancipated, Maximus/Child Support Enforcement created a case in which Mary Ann was alleged to have had a male child two (2) months before that she claimed was Tony’s. At this point Tony had had no contact with Mary Ann for 20 years.
Notice of this action by Maximus/Child Support Enforcement appeared to be a “recycling” of the original 1991 case without providing justification for the action. Tony requested a DNA paternity test but that was immediately denied by Maximus/Child Support Enforcement in Tennessee on the basis that the “mother” would not allow a paternity test to be done.
Eventually, Tony was able to avoid this obligation by proving to the Missouri Court that he could not have been anywhere near Mary Ann at the time of the conception and the case was dismissed. In addition, in 2004 he learned that the alleged child never existed. The last child that Mary Ann had was in 1991, after which she had her Fallopian tubes ligated. This information surfaced in conversations between Mary Ann, Tony, and Amanda in 2004.
As is common in cases such as Tony’s, child support enforcement never gives up. According to Maximus/Child Support Enforcement, a “Final Administrative Order” was filed in the St. Louis County Circuit Court in July 1999 claiming an “arrearage” of $11,000. A Tennessee case number was assigned in violation of federal law (one state cannot amend another state’s original court order for child support and make a new case out of it) and this practice is illegal per decree of the U. S.. Supreme Court.
Here are a few involving attorneys — such as, a former district attorney:
Former District Attorney Sentenced for Tax Evasion
On June 1, 2011, in Lafayette, La., Joseph Floyd Johnson was sentenced to 18 months in prison, followed by three years of supervised release and ordered to pay $179,661 in restitution. Johnson was employed as an assistant district attorney with the Lafayette Parish District Attorney’s Office from 1995 until at least July 2010 and he was also engaged in the private practice of law beginning around 1989 until at least July 2010. Based on the taxable income Johnson earned, he owed federal income tax.
According to his plea agreement, in November 2010, Johnson admitted that he willfully attempted to evade federal income tax by failing to prepare and submit a tax return for the tax year 2003 on or before April 15, 2004, as required by law. He also admitted to committing other acts such as concealing the nature, extent and location of his assets to the IRS, making false statements to IRS agents, placing funds and property in the names of nominees to attempt to hide the true ownership of the assets, making checks payable to others to conceal assets from the IRS, paying creditors instead of the government and depositing checks into a client trust account to conceal the nature of the funds and give the appearance that the funds were neither income nor assets. According to the bill of information, as of July 2010, Johnson failed to file federal income tax returns for 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007 and 2008 despite the fact that he was required to do so by law.
Minnesota Attorney Sentenced For Tax Evasion
On May 26, 2011, in Minneapolis, Minn., Samuel Alfred McCloud was sentenced to 18 months in prison and two years of supervised release on one count of tax evasion. McCloud was also ordered to cooperate with the Internal Revenue Service and the Minneapolis Department of Revenue in the assessment and collection of taxes, interest, and penalties owed by him.
McCloud pleaded guilty on December 9, 2010. In his plea agreement, he admitted concealing $595,000 from both the IRS and the Minnesota Department of Revenue. Between 2004 and 2006, McCloud worked at two law firms, but he instructed clients to write checks to him directly rather than making them payable to the law firms. McCloud admitted depositing or instructing others to deposit those checks in bank accounts held in the name of another person as well as in the name of several sham corporations. In addition to failing to report the income, McCloud failed to pay state or federal taxes on it.
Cute. Seems like no one wants to pay taxes. Some form nonprofits, and others work and just attempt to flat-out hide their income. Others think “large” in schemes to defraud the innocent . . . . .
Do Not try to evade Income Taxes or any other kind of taxes illegally For PEte’s sake don’t copy the AFCC folk and start forming all kinds of corporations to give an appearance of actually being more than (basically) one association with an agenda — getting as many mental health practitioners as possible a great retirement plan, and tax-deductible air fare and hotel accommodations in fun places to think up the next set of schemes to be forced on the parents and their children.
But there is nothing wrong with taking a hard look at who is paying the taxes, and asking WHY the conversation all over the TVs, and the Child Support Enforcement Agencies, and the Think Tanks is about “creating” and/or finding jobs, jobs, jobs — [which would produce income tax, income tax, income tax for the 42% of government receipts for its operations, which we can safely say are mostly run by corporations, corporations, corporations influencing legislators….] when the fact is, the wealthiest people don’t even work that many jobs — instead, they create family and other foundations (including in other countries), tax shelters, they start, develop, go public with and sometimes buy & sell corporations; they invest in stocks, trade commodities or currencies markets, and in the resulting spare time because their income is NOT tied to a 9 to 5 (or 7 to 7pm) jobs, can meet with each other to figure out what legislation will best suit their business interests — not yours, THEIRS. And/or they have adequate technology to market their businesses and conduct videoconferences, etc.
They possess and work in an entirely different field of ideas, attitudes and expectations, one of which is to manage people and run business, or at times, countries…..
The U.S. Public Education system exists, in part, to make sure that not too many youngsters learn these skills, and to groom them for their appointed future as employEES — not business owners or day traders, or investors. Heck, literacy and math, history and economics are hardly taught. There iS, however, a values war being run through the schools, and the metal detectors, lack of privacy and civil rights, and herd-mentality-treatment and such communicate to the average student what his or her future just might be if that student does not color within the lines. Scant mention is made of how much is paid to politicians campaigns to keep this system going.
I’ll bet THIS article is a good one (podcast, though). Note: “CCHR” appears to be a Scientology outfit, but neither Blumentield nor O’Meara are, that I’m aware of.
This is good reading (and a decade old) in O’Meara’s / Insight’s follow-up on whether, say, is anyone at Los Angeles going to, er, pay some of those 30 years of back taxes? And trying to get a few more answers about WHO knows how much cash is being collected. Remember, this is “OLD” news, yet who even bothers to talk about it any more , and what (if anything) was resolved?
Found on a Yahoo Groups discussion: posted July 21, 2001:
A Financial Fiasco Is in the Making
An alleged slush fund for the Los Angeles Superior Court Judges Association may be the tip of an iceberg of misappropriation of government money in Los Angeles County.
“Put your concerns in writing and mail them to me.” Click; the line goes dead. The voice on the phone was that of Los Angeles Superior Court Presiding Judge James Basque* as Insight pressed him to explain whether the Los Angeles Superior Court Judges Association (LASCJA), of which he is the chairman, has made any attempt to pay 30 years of back taxes to county, state and federal authorities.
(CHART inserts, mine, from the CA OAG site): Notice, it has no EIN#!
Organization Name Registration Number Record Type Registration Status City State Registration Type Record Type LOS ANGELES SUPERIOR COURT JUDGES ASSOCIATION EX550137 Charity Exempt – Active LOS ANGELES CA Charity Registration Charity 1 Below is the detailed data for the registrant you selected.
You may CLOSE this window to return to the Search Results and choose another registrant.Registrant Information
Full Name: LOS ANGELES SUPERIOR COURT JUDGES ASSOCIATION FEIN: Type: Mutual Benefit Corporate or Organization Number: 2062529
Registration Number: EX550137 Record Type: Charity Registration Type: Charity Registration Issue Date: 12/31/1990 Renewal Due Date: 5/15/1991 Registration Status: Exempt – Active Date This Status: Date of Last Renewal: Address Information
Address Line 1: 111 N HILL ST RM 204 Phone: Address Line 2: Address Line 3: Address Line 4: LOS ANGELES CA 90012 Annual Renewal InformationRelated Documents
No Related Documents Prerequisite Information
No Prerequisite Information IRS Return Data
And the Secretary of Site record for the corporation shows 1997. OK . . . . .
| Entity Number | Date Filed | Status | Entity Name | Agent for Service of Process |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| C2062529 | 12/10/1997 | ACTIVE | LOS ANGELES SUPERIOR COURT JUDGES ASSOCIATION | FREDERICK R BENNETT |
(and a different room….)
| Entity Name: | LOS ANGELES SUPERIOR COURT JUDGES ASSOCIATION |
| Entity Number: | C2062529 |
| Date Filed: | 12/10/1997 |
| Status: | ACTIVE |
| Jurisdiction: | CALIFORNIA |
| Entity Address: | 111 N. HILL ST RM 546 |
| Entity City, State, Zip: | LOS ANGELES CA 90012 |
| Agent for Service of Process: | FREDERICK R BENNETT |
| Agent Address: | 111 N HILL ST RM 546 |
| Agent City, State, Zip: | LOS ANGELES CA 90012 |
Which is most definitely the courthouse itself:

![]() |
![]() |
||||||
|
|||||||
It has been more than two years since Insight broke the story of the Los Angeles Superior Court judges earning money off the books by providing minimum continuing legal education (MCLE) classes to attorneys in the courtrooms. The fees collected were deposited into a private bank account that has come to be known as the $100,000 “coffee and flowers” fund (see “Is Justice for Sale in L.A.?,” May 3, 1999).
The problem with this arrangement is that, apparently to cover for the fact that the judges weren’t paying taxes on this income, whether earned or extorted, the LASCJA illegally used the employer-identification number (EIN) of the County of Los Angeles. In time the county politely asked the learned jurists to stop using that number. But no criminal charges were filed against the judges and no one raised the issue of making good on back taxes. So when Basque abruptly ended that telephone conversation, Insight decided to take another look at the status of that private bank account and to revisit the Los Angeles County Superior Court Finance Office.
Insight put its “concerns” about those back taxes in writing, as requested by the presiding judge, and hand-delivered the formal request to his chambers. Basque neither responded to the questions nor agreed to a meeting, instead deferring to the county’s counsel, Frederick Bennett.**
(notice, also the registered agent of this corporation / alleged nonprofit with no EIN#) (yet!)
Although Bennett says that he “has some background information concerning the [judges] association,” not once in his three-page response did he discuss whether the judges have made any attempt to pay what could amount to 30 years of back taxes and penalties. Instead, he obfuscates, rambling on that he is “informed and believes the association has used its own taxpayer’s identification number since approximately 1997, when the county auditor [J. Tyler McCauley] indicated that would be the better practice.”
Which number is …. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ?
For the LASCJA to use its own identification number, as required by law, is a “better practice?” What about it being illegal for the judges to have enjoyed their private income for so many years under the county’s EIN? Not a word. But Bennett continues to defend the judges by explaining that “the association does not pay taxes,” as he is “informed and believes that it is an organization exempt from taxes.”
Bennett provided a copy of the LASCJA’s year 2000 federal IRS 990 Form indicating the organization’s tax-exempt status but advised that the information he was providing should be verified with the LASCJA’s attorney, John J. Collins of the Pasadena law firm of Collins, Muir and Traver.
Collins had less information than Bennett. It appears that Collins can only speak about the LASCJA back to the winter of 1997, when he first began representing the association. Asked if he is aware of any efforts by the judges to pay taxes on these large sums of money earned during the 30-year period, Collins tells Insight: “I can’t speak about that because I don’t know they made any money.”
(NOTE: appears to be when it registered as a separate corporation, possibly because of prompting from some of these investigators….)
That assuredly is a lawyerly response, given that Collins admitted to having read Insight’s earlier article about the LASCJA which contained details about checks being deposited into the judges’ private Bank of America account. It at that time contained a little more than $100,000.
Neither Collins nor the judges have addressed the issue that, based on the bank records, large sums of money may be owed in back taxes. Furthermore, based on correspondence from Collins, it is clear that the association’s counsel is much more informed about the status of the account than he lets on.
Since Insight began looking into the “slush fund” of the Superior Court judges and their finance office, requests for information have been submitted by private citizens, including Marvin Bryer, a retired computer analyst in La Crescenta, Calif. He became involved in the Superior Court’s financial matters because of problems his daughter was having in a child-custody case. In February 1998, Bryer made a statutory request through Collins to inspect the LASCJA’s records. Collins refused, saying LASCJA “is not a public entity nor an exempt organization as defined under this statute.” He stated that “the Los Angeles Superior Court Judges Association is a private organization and its documents, including financial records and tax information, are confidential and not subject to disclosure.”
While Collins says the LASCJA is a “private” organization, according to California Secretary of State Bill Jones, the association filed for tax-exempt status in December 1997 — well within the time frame of Bryer’s request for inspection of the records. When Insight reminded Collins about this correspondence, the lawyer once more stonewalled, saying: “I’m not giving you any opinion on that. That’s not part of my function. I’m not telling you what their legal status is. Everything that’s out there is a matter of public record. You’ve got the filings, the informational returns and that’s enough for you to come to your conclusions.”
Meanwhile, the LASCJA continues to use the county courthouse for its private business. According to documents filed with the California secretary of state, the LASCJA lists the courthouse at 111 North Hill Street as its business address. Then there is a letter from Collins dated November 2000 stating that “the tax returns for 1998 and 1999 have been deposited in Room 119 [the Superior Court Finance Office] of the Central District Court. … you should ask for Mr. Alf Schonbach, who is the court administrator–finance and accounting.” Despite assurances from county auditor McCauley that the judges no longer were conducting their private business from the court premises, Collins continues to direct inquiries about the LASCJA to the court’s finance office.
Schonbach long has been a key player in the oversight of the LASCJA account. And it is Schonbach who was in command of the Superior Court Finance Office when one of his underlings, Gregory Pentoney, and an attorney friend, Robert Fenton, cooked up a scheme to collect $5 million in unclaimed sums deposited — and long forgotten — in the county’s Condemnation and Interpleader [C&I] trust fund. Pentoney and Fenton pleaded guilty to one felony count of taking a bribe and receiving a bribe. Pentoney was sentenced to two years in state prison; Fenton received 16 months.
USlegal definition” “Condemnation”
Condemnation suit is a judicial proceeding for the purpose of taking property by eminent domain for public use upon the payment of just compensation for such taking. It is also known as condemnation proceeding. Such a proceeding adjudicates all rights, including ownership and just compensation, as well as the right to take the property.
and “Interpleader”
Interpleader is the procedure when two parties are involved in a lawsuit over the right to collect a debt from a third party, who admits the money is owed but does not know which person to pay. The debtor deposits the funds with the court (“interpleads”), asks the court to dismiss him/her/it from the lawsuit and lets the claimants settle their dispute in court.
Interesting . . . .
so, here is a Fenton Appeal on the case:
[PDF]IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA …
caselaw.findlaw.com/data2/californiastatecases/B152057.PDFFile Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat – Quick View
Jul 1, 2002 – against Fenton and Pentoney. Fenton and Pentoney subsequently pled “no contest” to violating Penal Code sections 67.5 (bribing a ministerial …
And, moreover, here is Marv Byers (?) Johnnypumphandle’s commentary on the fact that the City of Glendale omitted a “Statement of Economic Interest” (for Fenton, while he was working as its City Attorney?); gets kind of like a mystery here, I understand!:
BEGIN of PUMPHANDLE QUOTE:
”
enton / Pentoney – arrested August 28, 1998
Latest News
January 25, 2001 – The case has been moved to Dept Q, Judge Wolf, and will now be heard on February 9 at 8:30 am. We understand that Judge Wolf has previously ruled favorably for Fenton.
January 11, 2001 – In a related case, LC043853, which is to be heard in the Van Nuys Court, Dept. C24 on January 25, 2001, Robert Fenton had sued the City of Glendale to recover his ‘costs’ in scamming money from the County of LA which was routed to the City of Glendale. The suit was tabled until the criminal case was resolved. As we all know, Fenton went to jail for his part in the bribery scheme. When he was working for the City of Glendale as their City Attorney (so he could act for Glendale in getting LA County funds), Glendale was required by law to have a Statement of Economic Interest on file for all public officials that represent the City. Guess what? Glendale took part in the scheme by ‘overlooking’ this requirement. The City of Glendale has no Statement of Economic Interest. If it were not for the crime committed while Fenton was in office, Glendale should only be sanctioned. But now, it looks like Glendale was in on the scheme an tried to hide Fenton’s connections. This is criminal activity that needs investigation by the State Attorney General’s office.
Older News
August 11, 2000. Robert Fenton was sentenced today to 16 months in the State Prison System. However, Judge Waldrip specified that Fenton was to be processed through the LA County Restitution Center (???) in order to earn back the fines that were placed on him. Sentencing for Gregory Pentoney was continued to September 8th at 1:30 pm in Judge Waldrip’s court. (8th floor, 700 Civic Center Drive, Santa Ana,CA).
4 Cases of Restitution came before Judge Waldrip. He denied restitution for Marvin Bryer, Rose Jensen, and the City of Glendale (Glendale has a suit pending against Fenton that would also address the restitution.). The Judge met with counsel for almost an hour prior to the sentencing to work out the details – Restitution was granted to the LA Superior Court in the amount of $24,000. Although, an estimate of $61,000 (for the interest on the stolen money) was claimed by the Superior Court, the figure of $24,000 was approved by the Judge – pending acceptance by the LA Superior Court which was not present at this hearing. $16,000 to be paid by Fenton – $8000 to be paid by Pentoney. Because of this seemingly high amount, the judge reduced Fenton’s fine from $10,000 to $5,000.
We believe that there are hundreds of cases that Fenton and Pentoney used to defraud LA County out of much more money than has been uncovered in this case. (Although there were many counts of theft in this case, all other counts but one were dismissed by Judge Waldrip.) The Crusaders will be looking into these many other cases to see if the money can be returned to the taxpayers.
So far, we have not determined that any of the money was returned to the County since the ‘return money’ checks we found were made out to the LA Superior Court which is funded by the State of California.
October 15, 1999 – Over a year later, Fenton and Pentoney’s bail has been reduced to $100,000 and now Pentoney (public defender Walter Katz) has filed a 170.1 to recuse all the judges in LA County. The recusal was granted by Judge Hess and the case is being moved to Orange County. All judges in LA County are unable to hear this case. (Does this mean they are all connected to the scheme? And why did it take a year to learn that all the judges must be disqualified in this case?) . . .
“Since substantial sums are involved due to compounding interest, municipalities and even private citizens working for the municipalities sometimes subsequently try to locate the cases in which they believe money is owed. But success is limited, the prosecutor said, because the county refuses to provide outsiders with a blanket list of all such cases.
Pentoney, however, is charged with providing that information to Fenton, who, between December 1995 and November 1996, submitted 99 requests for disbursements of more than $5 million from the trust accounts on behalf of various municipalities.”
To understand this some (why not?), read the various Los Angeles articles describing the crime, and scheme — how Pentoney had to sell Fenton insider information about accounts that still had compounded interest due the municipalities in emininent domain cases. In other words, a city (municipality) wants to grab some land. They have to deposit money into an account (“condemnation”) until the case is finished, that money gets compounding interest. I’m sure it adds up. Sometimes the cities forget to collect the interest too — and then “bounty hunters” can go try and get it back. Problem: The county didn’t want to ” ‘fess up” where such funds were so cities could go get them back, even though those funds belonged to the cities….
Amazing what one finds looking for simple information. I found this on a Yahoo groups “Family court reform” message — Marv Byer was looking for Gregory Pentoney’s ex-wife, who it appears he also cheated in a property matter, failed to disclose to a judge during the divorce, and guess what — it looks like Pentoney got custody of the children (because his ex-wife is paying him child support!) As Pentoney went to jail, that meant the former Mrs. Pentoney ended up paying child support to the jailed Pentoney’s girlfriend. Marv Byer wants to help her, and I can imagine is at the time rather peeved at having disc overed the scam affecting his own daughter’s custody case, no doubt….
“You should have money coming to you. Your ex husband cheated you out of
community property. He is going to State prison for bribery.While you were married, your husband failed to disclose that he had money in
escrow in a housing complex he was buying. It is located at 7336 Unit #66 in
Downey. He didn’t list it as community property, although he signed for it
while he was married to you.He did not disclose the escrow account to the judge, and after the divorce he
lied on public record. He held up the final property closure until after the
divorce was final. Then he went to a notary and did a quit claim on the
property. He swore that he had made an error in his grant deed and he swore
he was NOT married when he signed. This is a lie. His statement is perjury.
In addition Pentoney quit claimed the property as a “gift” to himself as an
unmarried man and to his father and mother.Then on March 8, 1995 Gregory Pentoney allowed Melissa Wall to start a
criminal enterprise from that property using a dba Morris and Associates
Bookkeeping Service. On Nov 1, 1996. the police raided the house and found
checks from Robert Fenton to Morris. The checks were confiscated by the DA
and are the subject matter of a bribery scheme and conviction. The case is
People vs Pentoney BA173392 in Orange County.
In case you’re a little mixed up: Pentoney was the finance employee, Fenton was the outside attorney. For Pentoney a.k.a. connected to “Morris and Associates” out of Pentoney-owned property( that he possibly cheated his ex-wife out of during a prior divorce) are paying FENTON, then was Morris and Associates a money laundering situation?
As I (again) read the “Beware AFCC” post of “stopcourtorderedchildabuse.” (FYI — itself a nonprofit claiming to be a nonprofit that I haven’t yet located… and run by another AFCC member (at least at one point) family lawyer also running ANOTHER training operation, Child Abuse Solutions, claiming to be a nonprofit whose registration may be a PO box in Berkeley, but which nonprofit registration I haven’t found yet — and is in this same business, training court professionals…. …… ) .. The timeframe is very closely connecting this information with the origins of the AFCC, and connecting the origins of the AFCC (Los Angeles COunty Superior Court Judges Slush Fund) with the habit of tax evasion and other not so legal activity . . . . . .. and then we learn that the bank account in question was Bank of America (formerly Security Pacific) which the man Charles Rossotti (See this post), also formerly IRS and with stock in the accounting used (then) in L.A. — it gets very interesting indeed.
HERE: And I paste the relevant paragraphs into the link title (hover cursor to read)
While he was pleading not guilty, he and his parents sold the property in
violation of criminal forfeiture laws. There is criminal victim restitution
laws that appear to allow you, the former Mrs. Pentoney, to have a claim on
the sale of this property.Even knowing that this is true, the DA nevertheless allowed Gregory Pentoney
to increase your child support that you will be paying to him while he is in
State prison, The money will go to his girl friend who is now his wife, and
who is caring for your child while Gregory Pentony is in prison. This is
wrong. Please contact us. “
AND HERE, (MOREOVER) IS MARV BRYER PUBLICIZING HOW THE PEOPLE V. PENTONEY TRIAL WAS SHIFTED, QUASHED, AND DISAPPEARED, ETC. VERY INTERESTING READING. HE BELIEVED THAT THE PENTONEY CASE WAS KEY TO THE L.A. AREA “RICO,” AND PENTONEY’S. HIS BAIL WENT SOMEHOW FROM $1.5 MILLION TO $100K. BYER BELIEVES THEY LET HIM OFF SO HE WOULDN’T RAT THEM OUT.
As a result of a series of Insight articles about theft from the C&I trust account, Schonbach was directed to produce a listing of the unclaimed funds and make it publicly available. This currently reflects a balance of a little more than $54 million but does not include the “zero-balance” cases, where principle [“principal”] has been paid but interest still is accruing. Insight’s articles also prompted the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors in September 2000 to request a special audit of the C&I account — at a cost to taxpayers of $18,000 — which eventually was made public last February. (2001)
The accounting firm of Vasquez Farukhi & Co. conducted the special audit of the C&I trust account and stated it did not find “any material misstatements in the Condemnation and Interpleader Fund.” In other words, the C&I account is in good shape. But is it?
For the purposes of defining the fund Vasquez Farukhi explained that the “SK4 [Condemnation and Interpleader Fund] was established by the County of Los Angeles for the Superior Court of the county to account for four types of deposits consisting of eminent domain [condemnation] deposits, interpleader [deposits for credit relief], nonbondsmen bail deposits and deposits made in compliance with judicial order.” Having been advised by Los Angeles County Treasurer Joe Spillane that the county takes in between $400 million and $600 million a year, financial analysts tell Insight it seems odd that the C&I fund audit would reflect a mere $54 million.
Even more odd is that no one in the county government could provide Insight with a bottom-line figure of how much cash was collected through the C&I fund for fiscal 2000 alone. Spillane explained that he had little or no knowledge of the court’s finances. He receives a bottom-line figure from the auditor but has no clue about the deposit specifics. “We’re not looking,” explains Spillane, “for each of the individual deposits for each of the funds. That would be impossible.
Any individual being audited would have to give a reconciliation, some backup documentation! THis is part of good business practice. I have seen other county records (in FL) where the transfers by clerks of the court are shown. THey deal with huge amounts, but it’s their responsibility.
My function is to account for funds that are in the treasury, balance those to our bank accounts and our investments and have cash available for disbursement.” Spillane insists, “The auditor has the detail. I don’t know what is in the condemnation fund because it’s a fund that we don’t maintain.” Claiming to have exhausted his knowledge of how the money moves in Los Angeles, Spillane recommended that Insight speak with McCauley, the county auditor — a task easier said than done.
Several weeks passed before McCauley allowed a brief telephone interview and, while the agreed-upon focus of the conversation was to provide a bottom-line figure on the amount of cash being collected at the Superior Court, the auditor said he could provide few specifics. For those, he said, Insight would have to go to Schonbach in the Superior Court Finance Office. And, of course, Schonbach refused to discuss the court’s cash collections
SCHONBACH appears on the other timeline as well (to which I’m sure Bryer’s and some NAFCJ reporting went in as well):
Begin quote from:

History of the AFCC – Association of Family and Conciliation Courts
COURT CANCER METASTASIZES Metamorphosis of the Conference of Conciliation Courts into the Association of Family Conciliation Courts A Guide to Destroying Children BY MARV BRYER
1995:
• Also in May, Deputy Executive Officer to Auditor Judy Call (who is on the signature card for the LASCA and person who signed the checks to cash and to judges) sent a letter to Tyler McCauley, LA County Auditor- Controller (who is doing the audit). The letter stated that Judy wanted all the money transferred from the (Subject: transmission of administrative responsibility for the LA Superior Court Judges Account ) to transfer LASCA account to the judges. • LASCJA is still not registered at IRS or FTB or city. The only identity belonging to the account is the Auditor-Controller because the tax number is for LA County. None of the money has been reported to IRS. (just like if I used Marv’s SSN and opened an account…and then got a job using Marv’s SSN. He would be reported to IRS if he didn’t report taxes after cutting the W- 2. If I don’t pay taxes, they will come after the ID and Marv) a Federal crime
• Also in May, a letter saying Confidential from Tyler McCauley to John Clark, admitting that there was an attempt to charge Marv $2000 which Marv called extortion. Admitted that the checks that Pentenoy gave Marv should have gone into the Court revenue, not into the private fund for judges. • Marv’s daughter subpeoned the Auditor’s investigation file. The Auditor admits they are doing an investigation but refused to give the file to her.
1996
August 6, Marv sued Pentenoy and Patricia Higgins for fraud and lying about court money.
DA raided the court with a search warrant and shut down work in Finance Dept.
• November 1, DA raided Pentenoy’s office, car, home (which is the same as Morris and Associates) and Judy Call’s office, locked up the computers and home [of?] Robert Fenton in Encino (who was bribing Pentenoy) and hid evidence.
Reminder. The L.A. County D.A.’s office around this time must’ve been Gil Garcetti’s, which was also sitting on undistributed child support, a.k.a., topic of Silva v. Garcetti lawsuit (Richard Fine). … So while they are racing around to prosecute crime, remember who it is ….
(Marv was busily suing and now could not get to the evidence.) • November 7, DA made another raid on Finance Dept and took a package marked “Marvin Bryer”, Pentenoy had notes on Marv.(Unconstitutional because no new search warrant…still don’t know what first search warrant said)
{{how Marv knew this??}}
• Dec 10, the Daily Journal reported the raid. (Since 1900, LA has been stealing money from the public. Pentenoy had lists of all the money that was stolen in Eminent Domain (when take people’s money) and Interpleader Accounts. He and Al Schonbach take it to the dumpster, but Pentenoy went to the dumpster later and retrieved it.)
1997
Marv Bryer subpoenaed all bank statements.
The LA Superior Court Judges Association bank statements state they have been a customer since 1962.
This LASCJA has to be the beginnings of the AFCC. It is doing the same thing and has the same behavioral problems, like ETHICS!
1998
LA Superior Court Judges Association corporation incorporated Jan 1, 1998 {{see above, 12/10/1997, close enough}}….
Registered with IRS and Secty of State/FTB with a new EIN # after Marv subpoenaed the bank statements.
2000
Hypothesis: CCC became the AFCC which became the JMEF which became the LASCJA.
NOW I am back to the Kelly O’Meara article, above: The same journalist then goes on to describe how a faulty computer system may have let about $59 billion go missing from HUD around 2000:
Perhaps taxpayers in Los Angeles will have time to find out what happened to all those millions.
Meanwhile, Insight pressed on trying to obtain a bottom-line figure for cash taken in by the court. McCauley’s office finally provided a 37-page computer printout that allegedly reflects the court’s cash deposits for fiscal 2000. Although the printout provides a monthly ending balance for credits and debits, the report provides no details about the source and amounts of the debits and credits represent, providing only the unauditable lump-sum transfers.
As one accountant put it, “This is archaic. It’s ridiculous to think that a county as large as Los Angeles can’t program an accounting system that reconciles the books on a daily basis and [that] also can easily produce specific information about various accounts and provide yearly fund balances. It’s just absurd.”Faulty Number Crunching
How could the books for the County of Los Angeles be in such a mess if the authorities there weren’t trying to hide something, critics ask. At least some of the problem appears to lay with the computing system. The Countywide Accounting and Purchasing System (CAPS) is a product of American Management Systems (AMS) and has been used in Los Angeles since 1987. IRS Commissioner Charles Rossotti is the founder and former chairman of AMS and remains a major stockholder in the company that provides computing services not only to Los Angeles County but to key federal agencies, including the IRS.
Charles Rossotti is Georgetown, Harvard, very smart, characterized with 5 others who founded AMS as “whiz kids.”
As Insight recently reported, due to severe problems with its AMS accounting system, the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) was unable to balance its books under the recently departed secretary Andrew Cuomo (see “Cuomo Leaves HUD in Shambles,” March 5) and, in 1999, was unable to account for $59 billion (see “Why Is $59 Billion Missing from HUD?” Nov. 6, 2000). ** Not surprisingly, under pressure from Insight, HUD since has decided to scrap the HUDCAPS computer program. But others have had similar problems with AMS finance systems, including the states of Mississippi and Kansas. Then again, as any auditor will be glad to confirm, there is nothing like institutionalized confusion to cover for and invite corruption.
(SMILE….)
** I started to read this $59 Billion article, and feel it should be on the post. Look below…..
Results of search for “AMERICAN MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS” returned 9 entity records. (likely no relation, but interesting enough….)
Entity Number Date Filed Status Entity Name Agent for Service of Process C0602191 07/03/1970 SUSPENDED AMERICAN BUSINESS MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS, INC. C0941617 10/01/1979 DISSOLVED AMERICAN DATA MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS C1170493 03/07/1983 SUSPENDED AMERICAN ENERGY MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS, INC. LLOYD C OWNBEY JR C1167394 01/21/1983 SUSPENDED AMERICAN FACILITIES MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS, INC. ANTHONY J THOMAS JR C1132885 01/21/1983 DISSOLVED AMERICAN PROFESSIONAL MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS DAVID L ANDERSON C1327378 12/28/1984 DISSOLVED AMERICAN RECORDS MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS, INC. JOHN L TUCKER C1096092 11/09/1981 SURRENDER AMERICAN STORES MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS COMPANY C T CORPORATION SYSTEM C0842796 04/05/1978 SUSPENDED PAN AMERICAN MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS, INC. ** RESIGNED ON 03/18/1991 C1093417 10/21/1981 FORFEITED SYSTEMS MANAGEMENT AMERICAN CORPORATION ** RESIGNED ON 10/31/1994
Charles Rossotti’s background sounds almost frighteningly competent. HEre it is, in “The Carlyle Group.” I have no idea what happened to AMS functioning in California, but imagine an archaic management system run by an IRS commissioner? WHen the issue is getting the figures out so someone pays taxes on them?
http://www.carlyle.com/team/item5829.html (Global ALTERNATIVE Asset Management….)
Charles O. RossottiSenior AdvisorWashington , DCSegment : Corporate Private EquityFund : U.S. Buyout , U.S. Growth CapitalIndustry : Technology & Business ServicesCharles O. Rossotti is a Senior Advisor focusing primarily on investments in the fields of information technology and business services. He is based in Washington, DC.
Prior to joining Carlyle, Mr. Rossotti served from 1997 to 2002 as Commissioner of the Internal Revenue Service, the federal agency that serves 175 million taxpayers and employs 100,000 people. As a result of his leadership, the public’s rating of the IRS increased greatly and relationships of trust with Congress, tax professionals and business groups were restored, and the agency’s effectiveness turned around.
In 1970, Mr. Rossotti co-founded American Management Systems, Inc. and until 1997 served at various times as President, Chief Executive Officer and Chairman. AMS grew through his tenure, becoming a major international business systems consulting and systems integration firm with revenues of more than $1 billion. AMS clients include Fortune 500 companies and federal, state and local government agencies in North America and Europe. In 1979, AMS was one of the first technology services firms to go public.
Mr. Rossotti earned his A.B. in economics, magna cum laude, from Georgetown University and his M.B.A., with high distinction, from Harvard Business School. In 1970, he received the Distinguished Civilian Service Medal from the Department of Defense. In 2002, he received the Alexander Hamilton Medal from the Department of Treasury. In 2003, he received an Alumni Achievement Award from Harvard Business School.
Mr. Rossotti is on the Board of Directors of Carlyle portfolio companies Apollo Global, Booz Allen Hamilton, Compusearch Software and Wall Street Institute. In addition, he currently serves on the Board of Directors of Bank of America Corporation and AES Corporation, a publicly-owned global electric power company.
Bank of America is distributing California Child Support (the Statewide Distribution Unit).
In addition to his business activities, Mr. Rossotti serves on the Boards of Capital Partners for Education and the Comptroller General’s Advisory Committee of the Government Accountability Office (GAO). In 2005, he served as a member of President Bush’s advisory panel on reform of the income tax.
Not exactly too comforting that AMS (and this IRS commissioner) had a DOD background: Wikipedia:
But only after a year, Rossotti went to work for the Office of the Secretary of Defense. From 1965 to 1969, Rossotti worked for Robert McNamara, becoming Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Systems Analysis at age 29.
In 1970, Rossotti and several DOD colleagues co-founded American Management Systems, a technology and management consulting firm. Rossotti served as Chief Executive Officer from the late 1980s to the mid-1990s.
IRS Years
In 1997, Rossotti was named Commissioner of Internal Revenue by then President Bill Clinton where he served for 5 years.
He was considered a reformer, upgrading the agency’s technology, as well as turning the IRS into a more customer service oriented agency. Rossotti received a waiver from the Clinton administration that allowed him to retain his AMS stock in a blind trust.
More on “AMS” same source:
The company grew throughout the 1980s and 1990s, implementing key systems such as the accounting system for New York City and The Standard Procurement System for the United States Department of Defense. The company was acquired by CGI Group in 2004, with AMS’s federal defense business being acquired by CACI.
AMS was founded in 1970 by five former Defense Department “Whiz Kids”: Charles Rossotti, Ivan Selin, Frank Nicolai, Patrick W. Gross, and Jan Lodal.
If they were such whiz kids, then how come no one can find that money or the accounting for it, for Los Angeles that Insight was looking for?
The company’s initial headquarters were in the Washington, D.C. suburb of Arlington, Virginia. From its inception, much of AMS’s revenue was derived from contracts with federal agencies. The company grew quickly during the 1970s. During its first decade of operation, AMS focused its business on consulting and selling customized software to large government and corporate organizations. [1]
The company grew to over nine thousand employees, with many offices in both the United States and other countries. At one point in the 1990s, one quarter of the company’s revenue, albeit none of the profit, came from Europe.
I hope you find some of this detail interesting (I do….)
Lawsuits, divestiture, and sale
In 1999, the state government of Mississippi terminated an $11.2 million contract with AMS to modernize the state’s tax system and sued the company for $985 million in damages.[3] A jury awarded the state $474.5 million in actual and punitive damages in August 2000, causing a drop in stock price from 44 3/8 to 14. The company subsequently settled the suit for $185 million.[4]
Another customer, the Federal Thrift Investment Board, cancelled a contract in 2000 for a system to make Thrift Savings Plan data available online. The subsequent lawsuit was settled for $5 million in June 2003.[5] A subsequent United States Senate investigation authored by senatorsSusan Collins and Joe Lieberman identified various reasons for four years of delays and cost overruns, including lack of formal agreement on a detailed design and problems with the structure of the contract.[6]
In December 2002, AMS sold its Global Energy Group to Bangalore, India-based Wipro Technologies.
New CEO Alfred T. Mockett was hired by AMS in 2001 to grow the company’s sales from $1.1 billion to $3 billion a year, with a goal of becoming a top tier system integrator through growth and acquisitions, with an eventual goal of a “big bang merger of equals.” When this strategy proved unsuccessful, Mockett negotiated a sale of the firm. CGI, a Canadian company, was the primary purchaser, paying $858 million for the commercial business and all government business not related to national defense. The defense portion of AMS could not be sold to a foreign-based company so CACI purchased the defense and intelligence practice for $415 million.[7] The AMS brand was retained by CGI for a time and the AMS website directed users to the CGI site. CGI’s United States headquarters are in Fairfax, Virginia.
Bloomberg profile of Mr. Rossotti and all the boards he’s on at age 7,
Or this one:
GOOD work, Kelly O’Meara! All these months I’ve been reading your name on just one or two articles, but I see that’s the high standard of ferretting out the facts is typical!
Here we go:
Why Is $59 Billion Missing From HUD?
Posted Nov. 6, 2000
By Kelly Patricia O Meara
Insight MagazineThe Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) has earned a failing grade from the House Government Reform subcommittee on Government Management for the way the agency manages taxpayers’ money. Subcommittee chairman Stephen Horn, R-Calif., is said to be furious that HUD’s most recent financial report shows the agency is unable to balance its checkbook and cannot account for $59 billion.
For most Americans, it is incomprehensible that $59 billion could be missing from the ledger of a single agency. But despite years of earning failing grades — as well as years of being unable to account for tens of billions of dollars — the Clinton/Gore management team at HUD has continued to shell out hundreds of millions of dollars to the same contractors hired to ensure financial systems are in place and working. It doesn’t take a certified public accountant to see that HUD Secretary Andrew Cuomo’s financial house is not in order, and Susan Gaffney, the inspector general (IG) of HUD, tells Insight, “It’s more serious than you know.”
This dire yet brutally honest evaluation by the IG came in response to questions about her testimony concerning HUD’s 1999 audit, delivered before Horn’s subcommittee in May. And HUD’s 1999 audit still has not been completed even as the agency is nearing the starting date for the 2000 audit. Instead, Gaffney submitted a 14-page “summary” for 1999, providing a laundry list of systemic reasons for HUD’s financial woes. Indeed, it took Insight a day and a half just to make sense of the IG’s simplified testimony concerning these financial shenanigans.
Beyond the fact that $59 billion is unaccounted for and that auditors have had to make manual adjustments to the checkbook system retroactively, it is glaringly apparent in the IG’s report that taxpayers should consider themselves lucky that the amount isn’t much higher. What also is more than evident is that the IG devoted most of her testimony to explaining failed processes at HUD rather than focusing on any specific examples of theft, conversion, embezzlement and other larceny. . . .
. . .
What the IG is saying is that HUD’s finances are in a shambles because, during 1999, the agency was converting to a new computer system, the field offices didn’t balance their checkbooks on a monthly basis and manual postings were made to the financial statements so late that the IG had no time to review whether the postings were correct. Gaffney does report in one section of her testimony that “242 adjustments, totaling about $59.6 billion, were made to adjust fiscal year 1999 activity.”
The IG, however, does not explain where the “adjustments” were made, for what services or from which region or field office. But she tells Insight that HUD’s financial problems stem from glitches within the agency’s computer systems.
THis next segment of quotations is long, but the same principle — seems to me — applies to the computer conversion of CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT to statewide, at just about this same time (late 1990s, and for California, it was not done by 1999, as I recall). They say : You keep the old system running alongside the new one until the kinks are worked out. And you balance the books at least monthly. Well, here’s how HUD — and the Housing Inspector chose to do it, instead:
According to one source familiar with HUD’s finances who spoke on condition that he not be identified, blaming computer glitches is what is done when they want to hide fraud. “The history of effort and expenditures that has been poured into correcting deficiencies at HUD does not support a theory of incompetence. If you don’t have decent accounting systems it’s because someone wants to make sure you don’t. It’s standard operating procedure that if one system is being replaced you keep the old one up and running while you work out the kinks in the new one — they’re run parallel. In this case, they took down a system that was running, replaced it with a system that wasn’t and then cried, ‘Oh, we can’t balance the books!’ They can’t say the resources don’t exist to correct the problem. If Cuomo can find hundreds of community builders to run around neighborhoods, he can find enough people to balance the checkbooks.”
And the source adds, “Furthermore, if I wanted to rip off HUD, this is exactly how I would do it. Don’t run parallel systems, don’t bother to balance the books and then radically reengineer the system all at the same time that you double the volume of work. It’s a system ripe for financial fraud.
Like the family law system also… and the OCSE.
The point is that you have to know what checks were authorized in a specific place and how they sort out, and if you balance the books monthly it becomes very easy to zero in on where the fraud is taking place. What the IG has missed is that it’s not about knowing a problem exists, it’s about fixing the problem — you want to know where and why you’re missing $59 billion. A huge computer system isn’t needed for HUD to balance the books; monthly statement reconciliation is all that is necessary.”
The source continues: “Everything that has transpired at HUD is not an accident, and it sure isn’t a computer glitch. When you take the different material violations of the most basic financial-management rules and compare them to the time and effort put in to have first-rate systems, it is impossible to explain it as anything other than significant financial fraud. The losses could be far greater than $59 billion, but they don’t know for sure because the audit isn’t completed. Secretary Cuomo is a very smart control freak, so it’s ludicrous to think that he doesn’t know what is going on.
Any more than the Charles Rossotti who co-founded AMS system that was in use in Los Angeles, and completely turned around the IRS; who is running the Carlyle Group now, on a whole lot of Boards (including Merrill Lynch) and who at age 29 after Georgetown and Harvard, was working for the Department of Defense on Systems _____ (see this post). Doesn’t know what’s going on? I don’t think so!
There are several ways to correct these problems. Most are basic, but if you want to use the big sledgehammer, the Office of Management and Budget [OMB] and Congress have the ability to make HUD balance the books or [they] shut down the money supply. They are the guardians at the gate. But that is the most telling thing about this problem — OMB and the appropriators have been silent. This is exactly what happened right before the savings-and-loan scandal.”
I found out today that the OMB got moved to become the responsibility of the President (of the US) in 1970. I put up the link to the U.S. Code requiring the Commissioner of the Treasury to report to the American public, where the money is…..
So is it possible that a problem within the agency’s computer systems is the cause of tens of billions of dollars being unaccounted for or missing? Not if you ask whistle-blower Jack Ballinger.
Change of focus to NYC Housing Authority, NYCHA — which is evidently under HUD:
In 1994 Ballinger began working for the New York City Housing Authority (NYCHA) as a contract inspector. He worked his way up through the system and was made manager of a new section, the Computer Operations and Reports Section. He was there only a few weeks when he became aware of major problems in payments to contractors. What he found was the main financial-management computer system, known as Financial Management Services (FMS), contained files verifying payments of more than $50 million on nearly 150 contracts that did not show up on the computer system used by the bookkeepers and investigators to track the services provided. Called CAD, this system should have been keeping track of the inspections, the inspector, dates of inspection and inspection results.
One system (FMS) tracks payments to vendors, the other (CAD) tracks the actual work. FMS seems to be generating its own payments that don’t correspond to work done. Now go back to the IRS General Fraud Investigations page, and notice that this is how fraud is sometimes done.
Realizing the gravity of the problem, Ballinger reported the missing files. Shortly thereafter the new section was disbanded, his staff was sent back to their previous positions and he was transferred to Coney Island as a boiler inspector. Nonetheless, he was joined in calling for an investigation by a dozen other “clean” inspectors. Ballinger first requested an investigation by the New York City Department of Investigations. When nothing happened, he contacted Bill DiBlasio, then the IG for HUD in New York (and now Hillary Rodham Clinton’s campaign manager); HUD IG Gaffney in Washington; Rep. Rick Lazio, R-N.Y.; and HUD Secretary Cuomo, whose agency provides more than 90 percent of the funding that NYCHA receives.
Despite overwhelming evidence of corruption — including audio- and videotapes of bribes being offered and accepted, as well as one inspector telling his story of an organized group of inspectors receiving bribes — there was no serious investigation of the misappropriation of funds within the NYCHA. “The IG,” says Ballinger, “said it was a paperwork mistake and cleared up. But not one person who looked at this could see it as a paperwork problem, and this has been going on for almost two years.
COnclusion:
Gaffney is saying that just about anyone can get into HUD’s financial system, including many who don’t have any business or authorization to be in it . Once in, intruders can change numbers, take money and engage in financial fraud without anyone catching or stopping them.
While Gaffney cannot force changes within HUD, as IG she can bring the problems to light. Unfortunately, the testimony she provided to Congress did little more than alert members to the already-known fact that there are serious financial-management problems under Cuomo at HUD. The IG’s report provides no specific data to help lawmakers, who have oversight of this agency, recommend appropriate and necessary changes. In fact, it is possible members of Congress had the same difficulty deciphering the IG’s testimony as everyone else with whom Insight has spoken. Despite the fact that the entire report by the IG to Congress deals with financial mismanagement at HUD, not once in all of her 14 pages of testimony did Gaffney so much as use the word “money.”
How much HUD’s missing $59 billion is of concern to lawmakers is anyone’s guess. Chairman Horn, as well as Senate Governmental Affairs Committee Chairman Fred Thompson of Tennessee and Senate Appropriations subcommittee on VA-HUD Chairman Kit Bond of Missouri, did not return Insight’s calls about these matters.
[again, Posted Nov. 6, 2000
By Kelly Patricia O Meara
Insight Magazine]
This has been a very long day, and post. Please go to the Petition site and at least read it, understand that this is Business as Usual in the U.S. and sign to cut — at least specific to our interest here — pork from the TANF diversionary and incentive to prolong custody conflict monies. THis is a measly $ 4 billion, but it’s affecting all of us to take these families out of the market, forcing some of them to become unwilling social burdens, as they fight for sanity and safety of their kids, while the groups running the place got started RIGHT HERE as I have (again) described — somewhere between a los angeles county judges association that didn’t feel like incorporating til caught, and the desire of would-be mental-health coaches to the world’s intention to exploit a captive audience situation through Conciliation Law. To me, that’s what I spell RACKET, i.e., R.I.C.O. with this exception:
Kind of like ALEC (and aided by some of the same corporations that FUND ALEC), the AFCC/CRC/OCSE combination is basically setting up a parallel system of justice, altering the basic forms of government; they are taking the money (not paying taxes properly) and running with it. Sometimes they take children too — do you realize how many children are actually lost in the foster care system?
The Lost Children
It took the death of Florida’s Rilya Wilson in the Spring of 2002 for the issue of children “missing” from foster care to garner national attention. It first came to light that the state of Florida had managed to lose track of nothing less than 500 of its foster care children. Some time thereafter, the body of 17-year-old Marissa Karp was found in Collier County Florida. She had run away from her state-designated foster family in April. The Collier County Sheriff’s Office explained to the St. Petersburg Times that she had been murdered.
Since August of 2002, officials in the states of California, Tennessee, and Michigan have disclosed that hundreds of children are similarly “missing” from their foster care systems.
The Los Angeles County Department of Children and Family Services reported in August that 740 foster children were missing from its system.
Shortly thereafter, Michigan foster care officials announced that 300 foster children were missing from their foster care system. Governor John Engler declared that finding these children would be a “top priority.” As of November, 2002, the Family Independence Agency (as Michigan’s child protection agency is known) had managed to locate only 48 of these missing children.
“Anytime a child is missing, that’s a big concern for us and we make all the efforts we can to try and locate them as quickly as possible,” explained Carla Aaron, a spokesperson for the Tennessee Department of Children’s Services. Aaron reported in November of 2002 that nothing short of one out of every 20 foster children were missing from Tennessee’s foster care system. Tennessee officials reported that 98 percent of these 496 “lost children” were adolescent runaways.
Here is the article “The Lost Children,” much as it appeared on Lifting the Veil in 1997, with some minor subsequent edits having been made in 1998.
Read The Lost Children
Last updated December 07, 2002
But that’s a topic for another day. CHECK THIS OUT!
http://www.change.org/petitions/cut-tanf-title-iv-d-programs-which-represent-4billion-of-waste
“TAGG” you’re It: CFDA 93.086 Grantees– Let Me Count The Ways (to distribute $121,077,648 on the same old theme, re-shrinkwrapped)…
with one comment
Reader Warning:
Format of these posts — I am simply researching (looking up) as I go, and posting what I find, with commentary. There is a narrative. If you want the list of the grants in question, scroll down to the bottom.
Topics in this post include:
And finally, at the bottom, is another printout of a Grant Series. The post is raggedy and scraggledy (with long incomplete expressive sentences, sometimes missing a predicate) — but I am going to post it anyhow. I believe the information is interesting enough for someone of similar interests to grab part of it, and do his/her own lookups.
Personally, I believe that untold numbers of the HHS grantees are simply front operations, that enable money laundering. I say this because they cannot maintain a corporate name very long, have multiple people, for example, on a central (umbrella or founding) organization board — and then these people form splitoff nonprofits (sometimes also getting HHS grants) — under their names, and the various groups refer to each other (as if independence existed) to further boost their image. That, FYI, is an AFCC pattern through and through. One of the chief groups that led me to come right out and say this was the “California Healthy Marriage Coalition” (CHMC) — which hails to San Diego County, Southern California + Sacramento Healthy Marriage Project?” – -hailing to Sacramento, Northern California. These guys are absolutely unbelievable. Check the street addresses and personnel. San Diego & Sacramento (State Capitol). Watch out!
Over time, the chronological development of the groups — and their ever-changing rhetoric (exhibiting planning, as one phrase gets discredited, another is in the wings and in the works. Right now, it’s “relationship skills” near the forefront, but Parenting Coordination appears to have been legislated in many states, which is bad news for good Moms, for sure.
OK, HERE WE GO:
The structure & contents of site “TAGGS” is a real window into what US policymakers think of the commoners, i.e., those who work for hourly wages with taxes deducted upfront to fund social science research — much of it “discretionary” “demonstration” and allegedly “new” grants. Another commentary on what someone thinks of the “commoners” is how careless, incomplete, and inaccurate — that’s not including the intentionally obscure and deceptive facets also. It is an appearance only of “transparency.”
The 2011 Total of CFDA 93.086 (Healthy Marriage/Responsible Fatherhood) grants, per this site (run just now) is:
I have been running searches (of all types) on this website for most of the time I’ve blogged here. It should be telling details of how public money, allocated to the Health and Human Services Department, is being spent, and on whom. So many of the marriage, fatherhood, AND “domestic violence prevention” organizations, when closely examined, are not even legitimate — their incorporation status is lost in one state, and they simply head off to another, networking through the usual court-related associations set up years ago.
I believe a general overview of specific grant series paint a picture, even if one doesn’t study all the details (although groups local to you, I’d want to!). For example, look at the project name of this first sample (the rest, below):
(would display with the navy-blue header row, except I pasted, rather than “dragged” the info onto the blog. Same source as above).
Recipient: *FAMILY SERVICE OF WESTCHESTER
Recipient ZIP Code: 10606-3003
WTHell is a “Fathers Court”? Is there a Corresponding Mothers’ Court? Should we then eliminate the concept of “Children’s Court”? (that won’t happen — the word “children” in almost any combo is a huge grants draw….). Can we separate childless couples into a “Marriage Court”? And, if so, why should all the unmarried and childless, (or they raised kids without going through family court hell, and are continuing to contribute to society, while this system allows, almost indiscriminately, group after religious or simply elitist group, to skim the profits, collected via the IRS and supplemented by large corporations or foundations (Ford, Annie E. Casey, etc.)?
FK sounds like a new series. For the record, here’s the nationwide total of the “FK” series a quick TAGGS run for 2011 only: to run this (takes seconds, only) is easy:
Select one or all from Fiscal Year. The current calendar year will be searched by default.
ALL 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001 2000 1999 1998 1997 1996 1995
Enter a keyword in the Award Title. If left blank, all award titles will be searched. Special characters are not permitted.
Enter an Award Number. If left blank, all award numbers will be searched. Special characters and spaces are not permitted.
Recipient ZIP Code: 63158
Recipient ZIP Code: 20001-4330
Notice, both of those are $1.5 million grants, and from groups that have been around for a while. Whoever, the 2nd one above (DC zip code) is, this is their total grants since 2006:
Showing: 1 – 6 of 6 Award Actions
They got $500K per year (2006,7,8,9,10) on a “90FR” grant, and this year, switched to receiving a “90FK,” with triple the amount and a fancier project name — misspelled. Let’s hope that whoever is entering these names isn’t also entering information that involves a decimal point on accounts receivable or payable for our government. More likely, someone is being pressured (too much) to help cover up the abuse & mis-use of these funds, by making them harder to track by names. (recall that the last series of 90FM names had ALL the Principal Investigator last names omitted (the “FN” field was doubled). Either this or there is NO proofreading or fact-checking in the Taggs submission process whatsoever — not too encouraging, considering the amount of money they are reporting on.
I’ve done data entry (and AR/AP before) and had I messed up that many words (and obviously failed to spellcheck, or had spellcheck function consistently set to “off”), I’d lose my job. As you can see, I haven’t been working in government. (Disclaimer: this blog is volunteer, and I do not spellcheck, or copyedit and have a post explaining this, and why).
If I took this number over to USASPENDING.gov, no doubt we’d get a different total, even if selecting grants only & HHS only. I do not know what result would com if (this would be another step) I went to Washington DC and checked their incorporation, or NCCSDataweb.org and looked for a nonprofit filing. (not today…)
Oh well — since you insisted — here’s the data:
http://dccollaboratives.org/
Read the description: This is a 501(c)3 of 501(c)3’s. . .
Our Mission
The Healthy Families/Thriving Communities Collaborative Council (HFTCCC) brings together community leaders to create and sustain a District-wide network that empowers families and communities to improve their quality of life.
Perhaps it would be wiser to figure out what “disempowered” families, including mothers, — confront it, and stop it. As Washington, D.C. is one of the most powerful places on the planet (not including the centers of Finance…), in one of the formerly? most powerful countries in the world, one wonders how, when, and why it became filled with such disempowered families. Apparently there was a power grab somewhere along the way. Address that — and families will be more empowered.
{{Judging by the HHS funding, the word “families” means “fathers” which is common usage among grantees.]]
We are a 501(c) (3), organization that provides leadership, advocacy, resource development, technical assistance, and training to the six Healthy Families/Thriving Communities Collaboratives. The six Collaboratives are independent nonprofit organizations that operate across the District of Columbia in communities facing intergenerational economic, social and safety challenges. Since the mid 1990s, the Collaboratives supported by the Collaborative Council, have joined with community members – residents and institutions alike – to re-weave the social fabric. Each community solution is tailored to the needs of the community with Collaboratives and their partners offering a range of unique services and supports to children and families.
[[After describing a forum to report results, based on surveys…]]
The street address exactly matches the “DC Children’s Trust,” and, for example, a Parent Training center for adoptive & foster parents.
1112 11th Street, NW
Suite B
Washington, DC 20001
The DC Children’s Trust’s mission is (per its Facebook summary).
Clearly, the standards emphasize getting promoting responsible fatherhood grants in order to teach groups how to prevent child abuse (cf. Footloose in Tuscaloosa post). This, FYI, is national policy, OCSE /Welfare policy and at some level, could be called HHS policy. In order to prevent abuse of children by fathers & mothers, train fathers and get them back in the homes. Period. Children’s Trusts help direct funding, they are often public/private partnerships. Under “products” ( a long list) I see “Parents Anonymous Grant,” which I recently blogged, right? (cf. “Circle of Parents” is basically a NFI mouthpiece; the work together).
At the same address is:
NOTICE — 1996 = established right after welfare reform made father-promotion grants available, block grants to the states (and presumably DC) to enable diversionary programs as a long-term solution to end poverty and child abuse.
History
East River Family Strengthening Collaborative, Inc. (ERFSC) was established in 1996 and is one of seven neighborhood based collaboratives in the District of Columbia participating in the Healthy Families Thriving Communities Collaborative Council. This program, spearheaded by the DC Child and Family Services Agency, received its planning grant in April 1996 and its implementation grant in August 1997.
ERFSC is also an expansion of the Child Welfare Working Group of the Rebuilding Communities Initiative (RCI) spearheaded by Marshall Heights Community Development Organization. RCI embodies a system reform agenda for which the central goal is the improved and sustained well being of children and families.
ERFSC has operated as an independent stand-alone organization since October 2000. This organization evolved out of a seven (7) year old Child Welfare Initiative funded by the District of Columbia’s Child and Family Services Agency and the Annie E. Casey Foundation in 1996. For the first five (5) years of its inception, the Marshall Heights Community Development Organization, Inc. (MHCDO) provided fiscal agency responsibilities. In October 2000, ERFSC received its 501©3 to serve as an independent non-profit agency.
Where are the tax returns for the years 2002, 2003-4-5-6 & 7?
Your query: ( Organization Name: east river family strengthening collaborative , State:“DC” , Zip: None Chosen , EIN: None Chosen , Fiscal Year: None Chosen )
4 matching documents retrieved (4 displayed)
ORGANIZATION NAME
STATE
YEAR
TOTAL ASSETS
FORM
PAGES
EIN
{There are many directors, and about 3 of them (per 2009 Tax Return) are working 40 hours a week — for nothing. Only Mae H. Best is paid ($115K), so here is her bio — notice the Youngstown, OH connection:
(Website says they became a separate 501(c)3 in 2000. Looks like one of the first things that happened thereafter (or the Foundation 990 Finder is wrong) was to not file tax returns for several years. I will check another source, and retract statement if they show such returns).
This article (scroll down) has a paragraph identifying this neighborhood nonprofit as having grabbed some of the “Promise Neighborhoods” funding, which is described, and modeled ? after Geoffrey Canada’s “The Harlem Zone.”
To be consistent, this should have been labeled “father absence” which is a cause of poverty, right. SIngle mothers in different context might not be so poor; however when stuck in a poor enclave right next to Congressional Districts, than something ain’t right, obviously. The only gender mentioned in association with this list of bad things is female, but I’m sure residents are both female and male….
This should be a separate post. Mr. Canada — clearly an astounding person —
His parents divorced when he was about 4, with 2 older and 1 younger sibling, and apparently didn’t support the family. Nevertheless, being sent away to live with his Long Island grandparents in his teens, he went on to be recruited by (win an award from) the Fraternal Order of Masons, and get degrees in Psychology, Sociology, and finally Education, the last from Harvard. Thank you Mom — I guess you did well! should be a comment, but this is not heard in the publications, is it?
(There’s a reason I took time to mention Geoffrey Canada, The Harlem Zone, which relates to another major nonprofit run by the son of Marian Wright Edelman of the Children’s Defense Fund, and which (one can see the trend here) is promoting charter schools hard, and has begun to take some serious flack in a few states by program personnel ramrodding their agenda through, over the voices of local, state-based parents and volunteer workers. ). Like Ronald D. Mincy (also of Harvard, but in Economics) here is another prominent African-American male leader whose mother MIGHT have done something right (judging by the degrees, and their current position) — and yet their work — which is helping change society — shows an emotional obsession with the absent father, and an inability to properly credit a mother, or recognize that THEIR OWN SUCCESS comes through struggles but with a single mother. In effect, their work — supported by major foundations which I’ll hazard a guess are not run by any minority whatsoever — (like the Ford Foundation) — has now scapegoated single mothers across the country, and made it not only almost impossible, but also socially unacceptable — and politicially incorrect — to succeed. Children are being REMOVED from such mothers apparently by the thousands, even when after removal, disaster (death in foster care, or in a court-ordered exchange with the noncustodial parent) often happens.
Mixing truths, but framing them according to their personal childhood experience, and buoyed up by federal funding and corporate funding — society is indeed being transformed — and what i see is the continued buoying up of the public education which has failed students according to their color, caste, and neighborhoods (which the unequal system will continue to do, although it also fails those in prosperous suburban enclaves in different ways). We have become (not are becoming) a federally centralized country with a parallel set of government-by-administrative-agency. This is essentially socialism and foreign to the purpose of the country and the Constitution, to which Presidents must swear an oath to uphold and defend, but don’t. Any “Cradle to grave” solution focusing on TRAINING — is indeed socialism, and contrary to LIFE (which has more variety, and also a greater variety of personal goals), LIBERTY (consider the economic angle) and PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS. People fork this over when they fail to protest, or even investigate where their own money is being spent. I did this also — while working FT, raising children, and seeking to keep all of us alive from the imminent danger of, their father. It took YEARS to get out (after deciding to get out) and then only to face systems putting us back in — and come to find they are based on childhood longing for the father, positioned in Harvard, MIT (see next) and other high places.
Geoffrey Canada, father-absent resounding success & Harvard (Education) grad, created and expanded The Harlem Zone, and Ronald D. Mincy, father-absent, father-obsessed, Ph.D.’d Harvard (economics) Grad, and director of — well, Logo Below — of whom this naturally reminded me– apparently conducted a vertical study of the Harlem Zone:
** (portion in red) — was this Dr. Mincy’s father? Is this is hope — that his Dad really wanted to be involved, but there were just too many obstacles to father-involvement? Is all this really about certain men who ascended to (or were selected & placed, not that they didn’t earn every single degree, but are we allowed to mention the Fraternal Order of Masons (for Mr Canada), are we allowed to mention just how many foundations supported Dr. Mincy?) in VERY influential positions, as the figurehead of the successful black man, who is now — rather than confronting the system-concept which separated families to start with (FYI, it’s called slavery) — and is instead, working for the same TYPE of masters (if not some corporations that went back nearly as far) and doing the same thing to other famlies who share none of their Ph.D. characteristics, and may not even know this has been done to them, and by transforming the welfare system further and further to minimize and curtail “mother-involvement,” ensure that the child support system can be utilized by even mutli-millionaire fathers to separate children from their biological mothers, as well as diverting cash aid to single-mother households by defining success by the number of adult biologically related males in the home?
Why are we allowing groups like Columbia School of Social Policy, or corporations & foundations — to change the forms of government to figure out HOW to produce desired social results? This is nothing other than “Wealth-Makes-Right” and those on the top of society got their because God wanted them to, from which the position of “God” can be fulfilled through social design and planning how others will — or will not– live, bypassing the legal systems, for example, in particular, the criminal code.
Fraternal Order of Masons – interesting…
There’s more . . . .
Hardly surprising — we do remember, right, that former U.S. President severed ties with the Southern Baptist Convention over their treatment — and view– of women. While I may not agree with what he’s doing instead (joined a worldwide “Council of Elders” — give me a break!), this part is true:
Jimmy Carter Severs Ties With Southern Baptist Convention: “Many Male Religious Leaders Help Subjugate Women“
Well, the world is fully of nutcase Messiahs, they are found amongst the homeless, and among the ultrarich. Guess which group probably has done more harm, and been responsible for more human misery, wars, poverty, and genocides, in the long-term?
A little more detail on Mr. Canda’s life, from “blackpast.org” an on-line encyclopedia. His mother was a counselor. He had no sisters…..
(VERY) BRIEFLY: The EDELMANS & CHILDREn’s DEFENSE FUND (1992 interview with Marian Wright Edelman) speaks about her parent’s Baptist past
….”her childhood home in Bennettsville, S.C. That was the starting point for the self-assured black girl who would emerge from the segregated South to go to Yale University Law School, create the Children’s Defense Fund and propel herself onto the national scene as an impassioned and relentless champion of needy children and families…. It was in that spirit, to promote continuity, that Mrs. Edelman wrote a little book, a “spiritual and family dowry,” for her sons, Joshua, Jonah and Ezra. She has been married for 24 years to Peter Edelman, a law professor at Georgetown University.
I don’t know how much readership understands the role of the Children’s Defense Fund in policies around today, or how one of her 3 sons’ work intersects with Mr. Canada’s, at the nonprofit, charterschoolpromotion level. I am wondering whether she would be OK with the impact of these social programs on real mothers, today:
. . .
OK — now I will link Jonah Edelman to Geoffrey Canada (finally), through Mr. Edelman’s Wikipedia — and hopefully you will see the connection with these inexorable training grants from HHS — there is an HHS connection in the family line:
STAND FOR CHILDREN is no ordinary nonprofit — it was set up to be nationwide from the very beginning and to force social transformation. It is also very well endowed. Currently, this group is facing off with teachers’ unions, (see “Illinois”) and Mr. Edelman was caught boasting about how he got these unions to give away their rights — although the cause is, “improving public schools” – — right? . . .
He is, essentially, a blueblood acting like a blueblood, i.e., arrogant — taking charge — and rescuing poor people by redesigning government policy— and insisting it be done “his way” or the highway. When I say blueblood, we know Marian Wright Edelson’s personal background and commitment, discipline, and values. Her husband/Jonah’s father qualifies as blueblood (See “Georgetown” and working for RFK), and former assistant Secretary to the DHHS — – where the fatherhood programs now life — and it appears these were instrumental in some of their beginnings. And may give a better clue to their actual purposes.
Yes, about that rally:
WE’RE TALKING ABOUT SOME OF THE FOUNDERS OF THE MOVEMENTS NOW GOING ON IN HHS, where “CHILDREN & FAMILIES” precludes speech of individuals, and where leadership is to be followed, not questioned, when it comes to policy. The intent is to transform the public schools, and if necessary, take on teacher’s unions. I see an article boasting about how their legislators all one, and several “status quo” legislators lost. Grassroots advocacy, organization, and funding, right? Next, there is this one showing alliance / alignment with Mr. Canada. As I have explained, that also = alignment with the fatherhood prominence, and getting more children into state care than Mom’s care, by combining early childhood education + public school (regular or charter) education, both federal projects, while endorsing — apparently — welfare-diversions (like the HTTC above) to transform certain communities:
1. Post-Election Message from Stand’s CEO, Jonah Edelman (nov. 8, 2010)
This is grassroots organizing from the top-down, not the bottom-up, and if anything, this organization is ORGANized and visionary; that also apparently runs in the family line, plus (see educations). . . . . (did they attend local public schools, K-12?) . . . . . Checking my Nonprofit status — and actually reading a tax return (great way to learn about a group — read their tax returns if possible) — there is a:
and apparently (per that tax return) a
The (2002) board of SFCLC (DC group) was:
Every one of those corporations / organizations the board of directors sit on has a story, and most likely an interest in education reform. Who are these people, and why have they taken on (with private, not public funding — on this tax return at least) organization to restructure the US Educational system according to their particular vision? For example, because it’s simplest to illustrate, “BRIGHT HORIZONS FAMILY SOLUTIONS” is top dog in employer-provided daycare.
From the site: INSIDERTRADING.PROCON.ORG
“A new nationwide 4G wireless broadband network provider that will use a unique combination of satellite and terrestrial technology to revolutionize wireless communications in the United States.” ”
SkyTerra is North America’s leading developer and supplier of mobile satellite communications services (MSS). Since 1996 SkyTerra has been providing reliable wireless voice, two-way radio and data services for a wide range of customers across North America, northern South America, Central America, the Caribbean and Hawaii via its two existing MSAT satellites. Satellite service is the perfect communications solution for remote locations lacking terrestrial coverage and when man made or natural disasters strike. Current customers cover a broad spectrum including public safety, security, broadcasting, natural resources, fleet management and asset tracking. {{AND/Or SPYING….}}
LIGHTSQUARED: The idea behind this is providing (4G at least) “Wholesale broadband access” to the entire country. In Nov. 2010, they launched a satellite from Kazakhstan, and the site mentions:
It is waiting? for FCC approval of its service; there’s claims it would jam GPS. Fascinating reading — and here’s an article on the debate between FCC (Congressional favorite) this new one — only slightly technical. Recommended read– it plays into the job market, digital divide.
SkyTerra Wikipedia
The Satellite road aboard a Russian Satellite, launched last November, per the Nasa article: !!!
(Somehow this isn’t as comforting as it is probably supposed to be….)
The Iscol Family (apparently husband made his money in mobile communications…)
<>STAND FOR CHILDREN LEADERSHIP, JILL ISCOL
It’s hard to know where, on the web, to start. Cornell, Yale, New York City? The portion of Cornell University this husband/wife pair is currently funding / running? Their connections with Hillary Rodham Clinton? Well, while we’re on the topic, how about article from “CENTER FOR A NEW AMERICAN SECURITY.”
In this summary (it’s the entire web page) you can see the policy-making influence with Gores, Family Strengthening projects, and the ability to somehow raise incredible finances for whatever project her heart desires. This is what Yale Graduates do, and the Columbia background also includes a penchant the teaching. Does this look like someone who would be taking input from the lower ranks of society, or dishing it out, according to the personal vision determined with the social & political set she runs in, and they do? Or taking feedback on the impact of these programs on the working class, (or, welfare recipients) which might be at odds from program purposes?
Sorry — I have to point this out Bank Street College of Education began with a single person’s idea in 1916, and a humanist (as oppose to, say, Deist) idea to study children and figure out what produces the best results, according to humanist definitions and in the process of creating a better world. This intense obsession — and it IS an obsession — with getting children away from their natural parents (while preaching marriage and family throughout) — didn’t start yesterday. Particularly one sees the institutes throughout the country wishing to “study” children in order to do a better job than previous generations. This is reflected to date in Obama Administration’s expansion of Head Start, Early Head Start, and push to get mothers out of the home and back to work, and kids into daycare centers where HHS will pay for “Child Development Scholars” to take notes, etc. etc. Consider — this was before women got the vote!
(The next three bullets, quotes from a “Harvard Educational Review” very laborious review of a book on the development of Preschool in America)
Your basic “Children as lab rats” concept, but of course for a noble purpose. A Tulane University “Child Development Center” history page describes the Patty Smith Hill Influence, in fact, mentioning the 1969 Chicago University “Lab School.”:
Lucy Sprague Mitchell (from a 2006 “Education Update” site), in short, another blueblood (Radcliffe, UCBerkeley Dean of Women) gets together with others to change the world, starting with studying how to produce a better child:
(I continued looking — got that “childlike curiosity” still, I guess) — this person who never had a formal education til she was 16, was into early education for the purposes of studying how children learn . . . she had a domineering father . . . . this Bureau of Educational Systems was subsidized by a cousin’s inheritance . . . and the methods included:
Wikipedia on Bank Street College of Education directly ties this group to Head Start. (Bank Street was simply the Greenwich Village location of the Bureau of Educational Experiments when it started):
The little kids are brought in to test theory on, but the place started with theory. Of course, little kids in nursery schools is something of a controlled situation, and in fact, studying a young child in isolation from its parents makes next to no sense to me. See my post “monkeying with mothers.” Same mentality!
Some things never change. I found a grant (from another organization currently, I think, associated with a group attempting to eradicate no-fault divorce in Ohio, National Council of Family Relations, in cooperation with Utah State University. Or, at least in the same grant series. Some ideas just refuse to die, including that the best people to change society are those at the top — although typically it’s those who are starting wars, and sending the masses of lower class youth to go die in them, not to mention locking them up the disproportionately to the white-collar criminals…. and then (Lamar Alexander) getting rich by buying stock in the private prisons that oppress them — which they do, resulting in lawsuits for sexual assault and more. (CCA).
Notice the nature of this grant, that it’s at a University, and that it’s funded under “Head Start.” This year, 2011, there were 26 “90YR” projects — ALL at Universities, across the country — and $4.78 million worth — testing, measuring, responding, and attempting to predict human behavior according to certain variables. I really should post them. For example, UCLA Board of Regents wants to get better at predicting children’s behavior (good luck with that one!):
Recipient: UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA-LOS ANGELES, BOARD OF REGENTS
Recipient ZIP Code: 90095
And Utah State has its
And Ms. Roggman’s Background:
Lori Roggman
Staff Biography Education
Ph.D., 1988, University of Texas (Developmental Psychology)
M.S., 1981, Utah State University (Family & Human Development)
B.S., 1972, Utah State University (Psychology)
Teaching
Undergraduate: Parenting/ChildGuidance, Infancy/Early Childhood
Graduate: Human Development Theories (6060), Frontiers of Human Development (7060), Topical Seminars on Language Development, Attachment, Play, Fathers.
– – – – Ah Well . . . . .
This is part of the “FAMILY LIFE DEVELOPMENT CENTER” at Cornell…. (NOTE: the “HTTC” far above — the DC-based Collaborative I found on the TAGGS list — has a curious link to “Family Development Institute” and is taking personal information for anyone wanting to get credentialed as one: Guess you can learn how to raise (“develop”) a family, if you get credentialed for it here; wonder who pays how much for the training. SAME CONCEPT AT CORNELL — in fact overall, this is the concept. I call it “Designer Families,” although what often seems to result is family breakup, for a better, state-approved “design,” from my experience (and I’m well networked with similar cases….) (I also did a search on ‘Fatherhood” then “motherhood” at the School of Human Ecology with the usual results: fatherhood 15 to motherhood 8. Several of the faculty appear to have come from Fragile Families studies, and some prior HHS connection. The last reference to “fatherhood” was an article by (AFCC professional?) Robert E. Emery, and discussing Custody Evaluations. Others of course discussed child support….)
THIS is now, East River Family Strengthening Collaborative Executive Director, as quoted in the “promising neighborhoods” article at “Circle of Philanthropy”
**omitted — they may hear or witness their parents fighting, or one being assaulted….
{Annie E. Casey Foundation is one of the major funders of fatherhood studies; I have been studying this for over 2 eyars. They show up EVERYwhere, including in groups allegedly preventing family violence, and providing “resource centers,” (Websites, and the paid-for studies that can be downloaded there, and training opportunities), such as “Family Violence Prevention Fund.” Excuse me, I forgot their recent federally-assisted web facelift, physical move (to the SF Praesidio) AND name change. How, instead of the grandiose promise of preventing Family VIolence (which I see no evidence they are), they are expanding the scope: “Futures Without Violence.” AS I recall (you can check), Annie E. Casey funds this, and probably the “fragile families” study as well.
I like that they state their timeline and incorporation history. That’s good. Notice the “letter to the community” starts with “father absence.”
Letter to The Community
Help Us Make Ward 7 Stronger.
Dear Friend of ERFSC:Imagine a family situation where the father is absent, the mother is unemployed and the children are barely making it in school due to lack of attention and necessary resources. Now consider the stress and embarrassment of not having the “right clothes” to wear to school, a healthy lunch to edify the children’s minds, and a single parent who is so busy trying to make ends meet, that she involuntarily neglects her children. Surely you can see how a family situation like this can negatively affect the mother’s mental health and the children’s self esteem and impact their ability to learn. Surely you can envision how this situation can get worse and result in children who fall into the juvenile system or worse!
I imagine there is not a single person on this board, or among the families served, who is completely and totally unaware that:
To rephrase Daddy’s in jail as putting him back with his family (without addressing the “why” of incarceration, which could range from violent criminal activity not a good role model for kids, to drug-related criminal activity not a good role model for kids, to racism, to the fact that there’s a huge corporate lobbying industry behind expanding the prison system (search CCA on my site, “Corrections Corporation of America” – -to possibly even child support arrearages, if combined with other things . . .at what point is it NOT good to reunite that family, and instead allow the female-headed household to be strengthened without letting an abuser back in?
“With your generous donation, we can open up many windows of opportunity and give our residents a life beyond their limited boundaries along with the tools, the hope and the desire to strive for empowerment. By making a donation, you will not only be contributing directly to the success of these families, but will also be playing an active role in the overall sustainability of ERFSC.
You may donate right here on our Web site or send your donation check to our office”
Look who is funding the individual agency, and the umbrella agency here — and below, it’s clear the money (a) comes from welfare that might otherwise actually REACH the household in question, instead of being DIVERTED to fund non-taxpaying entities which set up slick and donations-collecting websites so they can take credit for any social services provided. . . . Moreover, between TAGGS & HHS — it’s clear one is under-reporting or the other is OVER-reporting. Think about that before you donate, because this is common practice in the field:
USASPENDING has reported (per this DUNS# — which is not always specific only to one organization, i understand — but at least an identifier) only 3 of the 6 grants, or about half of their total. No data pre-dating 2009 exists. We can also see that this money is most DEFINITELy coming out of TANF, or “Temporary Assistance for Needy Families”
I.e., someone’s food and cash aid. It is more important to have healthy, stable marriages — or try to — than for children to eat and be clothed if not living with their biological Daddies. . . ..
Transaction Number # 1
1112 11th St NW Ste B 0 , Washington, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
September 28 , 2011
Obligation Amount:
$1,533,518
to search D.C. corporations, apparently you have to create a user account. I don’t want to do this, so let’s check out just the umbrella nonprofit, and this one:
HTTC: Unlike most households, their assets are steadily increasing. View a tax return, and subtract $500K per year (minimum) from the “government grants” and see if it is a well-run organization that could stand on its own, and note the ration of grants to program service income, and the executive pay, etc. That’s what I do when viewing tax returns. Notice — they got $500K in 2006. Where is the 2006 tax return?
ORGANIZATION NAME
STATE
YEAR
TOTAL ASSETS
FORM
PAGES
EIN
TOTAL of “90FK” awards for 2011:
TOTAL of “90FM” awards for 2011:
Why Think when you can Hyperlink?
The heart of the “Healthy Marriage/Responsible Fatherhood” grantee system is an attempt to get the entire nation (at its expense) in front of trainers and facilitators to — for the sake of our country — submit to indoctrination in what, and how, to speak (i.e., think) about themselves, their children, their neighbors, poverty, work, and their place in this world.
The “CIRCLE OF IDEAS” circulating through this system is getting smaller and smaller, while the ripples from having thrown this stone into the pond of plurality are still spreading. Ig pushed in t is intentional domination and restriction of a nation’s vocabulary — for profit — to subdue and restrict its thinking about cause & effect, particularly so as NOT to connect this type of corruption with incidents of murder/suicide, kidnapping, child molestation, threats, stalking, or ongoing, chronic stress and work attrition — even when the connection is open, upfront, and obviously in the custody context.
In Liberia, women of different faiths united (risking their lives) to “Pray the Devil Back to Hell” and changed the course of the country’s history. They did not want any more excuses for terrorism and attempted genocide. I do believe that in the USA we are going to have to do this too, ladies and men of conscience. Not through Occupying Wall Street — but through sitting one’s behind down on some paperwork (or accounting) of this travesty — and THEN boycott something that is profiting from this enterprise at our children’s futures’ expense.
Recent events in California include: a little girl not returned on visitation; Daddy kills herself and himself. This mother had her child at age approximately 44? (Samaan/Fay). 8 people killed in Seal Beach, California hair salon, one man in the salon, and one outside it, who was sitting in a car — the rest were women. And recently in Richmond, California, a brawl broke out in City Hall, surrounding the “Office of Neighborhood Safety.” Gang members were being paid to attend classes.
I have not blogged this yet, but as I am networked with “Parents” (mothers and grandmothers) across the country who are tired of THIS war, I became aware of an incident in Trumbull County Ohio which totally baffles the mind — until one explores the funding stream, and the organizaing element of “Fatherhood” at the state level. Yes, you danged well bet there is a connection! And I am tired of this propaganda, and excuse-making. I am tired of, when the closer I look, the more questions come up — WHERE is this entity incorporated? Why, when the web page is so fancy, and obviously well-funded — can one so many times not find the nonprofit’s EIN# and tax return — and why when those ARE found, they tend to fall into two categories:
1. The organization would not exist without HHS (and/or DOJ) funding, and is being propped up by them.
2. The organization disappeared (took the money and ran) and no one has caught up with it after an initial, small grant.
3. The organization is itself a FOR-PROFIT and HHS has chosen its (fatherhood promoting, family-strengthening) curriculum as one of about a dozen favored solutions to produce world peace (stop abuse, elmiinate poverty, or make irresponsible men responsible through bribes, or a system of bribes/extortion, etc. — i.e., “training” — and the HHS has helped this organization get all set up, create its private market niche or brand, and then certify or license “train the trainer” seminars (tax deductible) to spread it all over the place. . . . . And is doing this through the already present systems of social welfare, such as TANF, Child Support, Child Abuse Prevention, you name it. For example “Boot Camp for New Dads” is pushed to hospitals where children are being born. And the PR firm “Public Strategies, Inc.” in Oklahoma – which as basically “made” by the Healthy Marriage Initiative (it seems to have almost no other clients) actually got another GRANT?
This, friends, is not what government is for — this is a “Metastasized” government which is eating away the substance of the people that are sustaining it in money, in time, and in labor — and by consuming products it declares we need, when we don’t. Has anyone ever calculated the huge profits made simply to detox people from chronic stress, and the illnesses that that state produces in a human body?
Those who buy into this program will likely have income, including potential retirement income; those who do not will be subjected to it, with the exception of those who designed the curricula, who are probably laughing their way between an offshore bank to the next product idea, or (like ICF International Inc., LLC) buying out lesser companies and figuring out how to expand from their Billion-$$ Business with the US Government, one of the largest spenders (and debtors) in the world.
HERE IS THE SYSTEM:
Middle class pays for it, and if entangled in it, pays (for example, in the courts). Many of the middle class have jobs working in the institutions that market these trainings and are used to SELL curricula to fix poverty (etc — create utopia, basically).
People who have slipped out of or were never out of the lower economic sector — who cannot directly pay for classes — will be forced to take them anyhow, and the implicit “bargain” with the middle classes (from policymakers) is that by forcing the poor rabble into them (through extortion) they will be therefore off the streets and not on YOUR doorstep, so continue to produce wages and taxes that will be distributed to the fatherhood and marriage promoters nationwide, i.e., those who step to our tune.
The HHS GRANTS PROVIDES THE HYPERLINK ADVANTAGE, AND PRE-FAB ASSOCIATIONS:
Most resource centers, examined, are primarily on-line database storage.
The Hyperlink advantage — Federal Help to set up Resources, Visually Engaging Websites, with Official-sounding LInks to the “upline,” and cute new Acronyms for the latest way to market the same material, for example, “FRIENDS” (see last post or so) with the radical concept that Parents might actually know something about their own families. This fact sheet from a Florida group cites Fatherhood grantees “Circle of Parents”(tr) and “Parents Anonymous(tr)” and declares that we are all in this together, and those who have taken control of our families, and are paid to do so, now wish to “collaborate” and “Share leadership” with the actual parents. This being a totally foreign concept to social workers and social scientists in general, SOMEONE had to copyright the concept and run trainings on how to let parents back into the decisionmaking process about their kids and their lives. Get this, from “Factsheet #13” (address to whom?)
Or, here is a “PARENT LEADERSHIP AMBASSADOR FACILITATOR GUIDE” by Circle of Parents & “Friends” — actually by YOU (i.e, USA working citizens), as it cites an HHS grant. Or names a month after its copyrighted concept self: Did you know that
“February was designated as National Parent Leadership Month® by Parents Anonymous®, Inc.”
(which I found out on a site from an organization that my colleagues, family, and friends’ taxes paid to set up and propagate, also trademarked: “Circle of Parents(tr)” Get the picture yet? Here’s the portion of what was taken away from Parents which this proclamation (modeled after the Declaration of Independence, but entirely foreign to it in purpose and process):
How sweet — PPP — Parents, Practitioners and Policymakers. Maybe you can register the trademark “P3” (get a triangle, to imply that we are somehow equal participants, and this is not, instead a basic pyramid scheme run with IRS help….). No thank you — give me back the wasted HHS funds, and keep your gold stars; we are not in gradeschool any more.
I notice, despite all the “fatherhood” words flying around (although not in this PR piece), there’s still no mention of “mother” on it. And as I believe I HAVE established, “Circle of Parents” has been bought out by HHS/NFI-elements, and is walking, talking, and publicizing like them:
PACT I believe stands for PARENTS (meaning Dads) & CHILDREN TOGETHER — PACT. I could be wrong, but check this out:
(this link leads right to the Hawai’i DHS)
Hawai‘i State Commission on Fatherhood
(etc., etc.)
The last several posts, I attempted to correlate the ACF announcement with actual grantees, and find out WTF (the “W” standing for ‘WHO’) they were. As it turned out, most of the grants were the “90FM” series. I found that most of the top half of the ACF Press Release correlated to the 90FM grant series. That “find” was the result of familiarity with the TAGGS database combined with hunch. Then I compared my printout with the ACF press release. The printout was alpha by grantee institution and the ACF Press Release alpha by state. Complicating it was the name changes of the grantee institutions, but I did check them off, one by one.
There are, however, in 2011 (as of today) $121,077,648 of distributions on the TAGGS database, under a single “CFDA” — 93.086.
There’s been major talk between HHS and, say, the Fathers and Families Coalition of America, or even in the recent 2010 law, about making things more fair to fathers (i.e., pleasing the FR movement leadership) by altering the “FATHER”-related portion of money stolen from TANF & OCSE from one-third to one-half. Accordingly, the HHS/ACF Press announcement of october 3 makes it look well balanced between two themes: Top half, MARRIAGE ($59-odd million) and bottom half, FATHERHOOD ($59-odd million).
In practice, the top half having gone primarily to “FM” which sure looks like faith-based groups, is in effect giving it to fatherhood-propagation anyhow; that’s pretty much what faith-based groups do. IF they weren’t so inclined, they would be just secular social service groups, and as such deal with their difficulties with feminism, women having the vote, women controlling reproduction or contraception, married women having a say in household finances, married women actually reporting what their (likewise married, obviously) spouses were doing to them, or their children in the home, and in general opting out of marriage because of that. They also would line up with the rest of the United States that is NOT “faith-based” or practicing a private cult that disagrees with basic laws (such as cultlike beliefs as, you cannot–really- divorce, or beating up someone to dominate the relationship is normal behavior if it’s done to preserve the “father-leader/mother-breeder” status quo).
Yet this next printout shows an increasing variety of grant streams: FM, FR, FK, FN, & FO are among the new ones. FE (Fatherhood Education) is getting “old,” obviously. From what I can tell, FN is for Native American; FK seems to deal with incarcerated populations, and I haven’t figured out FO yet. Notice not a single of these begins with the word “M” for “Marriage.” Perhaps that letter might be mistakenly associated with “MOTHERS” about which this movement has little to do, except in making sure they are not going to be sole physical custodians, and certainly not sole physical and legal ones, for long, if HHS has anything to do with it.
In this listing, you will also see a number of organizations with grants listed as $0, which I gather means either they’re not getting one this year, or they haven’t yet. CIRCLE OF PARENTS, that I landed pretty hard on last post (today’s revision) is among the $0 ones.
THESE CHARTS ARE FOR SCROLLING, BUT THE LINKS ARE ACTIVE — CLICK TO LEARN MORE ABOUT ANY GROUP OR GRANT. TAKE A LOOK AT THE TITLES — of the PROJECTS and of the GRANTEES. Compare with the $$. Ask: WTF are they doing? and perhaps look locally, and demand some explanation, or trace the funding in your area.
AGAIN — for comparison — here’s the official announcement:
Healthy Marriage / Responsible Fatherhood 2011 Grantees = $59,997,077 + $59,396,652 = $119,393,729.
As of October 22, 2011 evening, I searched the code “93.086” which represents this category of grants — and got $121,077,648.
A difference of $1,643,919 in just a few weeks (could be legit) — but take a look.
At the bottom I talk some about a Community Action Group in Ohio (WSOS). Research is incomplete on this, and I may not have all the facts straight, but readers can fact-check themselves as well. I am trying to answer the larger question about the relationship between “Community Action Programs” in this state and their fundings.
In general, perhaps without my narrative of any guidance, readers might get a general idea of what titles programs are getting how much money, and where. This listing is not by state, but alpha by Grantee — which gets interesting as we already know Grantees have creative name-changing habits already, plus TAGGS has opted some creative spellings of existing names. I figure this is just part of the game. Here we go:
This report ran “AWARD SEARCH” “YEAR 2011″ CFDA 93086” from dropdown list and comes out in 4 segments: 50 entries per page, plus the last few:
Showing: 1 – 50 of 178 Award Actions
Page: « Previous 1 2 3 4 Next »
Recipient: *FAMILY SERVICE OF WESTCHESTER
Recipient ZIP Code: 10606-3003
Recipient: ADVOCAP, INC
Recipient ZIP Code: 54936-1108
Recipient: AL ST OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR
Recipient ZIP Code: 36104
Recipient: ASSOCIATION OF VILLAGE COUNCIL PRESIDENTS (ONAP)
Recipient ZIP Code: 99559-0219
Recipient: AUBURN UNIVERSITY
Recipient ZIP Code: 36849
Recipient: AVANCE, INC
Recipient ZIP Code: 77092
Recipient: Alliance for North Texas Healthy & Effective Marriages
Recipient ZIP Code: 75246-1754
Recipient: Archuleta County Department of Human Services
Recipient ZIP Code: 81147
Recipient: Arizona Youth Partnership
Recipient ZIP Code: 85741-2259
Recipient: BEECH ACRES PARENTING CENTER
Recipient ZIP Code: 45230-2907
Recipient: BETHANY CHRISTIAN SERVICES
Recipient ZIP Code: 49501-0294
Recipient: Brighter Beginnings
Recipient ZIP Code: 94601
Recipient: CAMBODIAN ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA, INC
Recipient ZIP Code: 90806-2708
Recipient: CANGLESKA, INC.
Recipient ZIP Code: 57752-0638
Recipient: CATHOLIC CHARITIES
Recipient ZIP Code: 67214-3504
Recipient: CATHOLIC CHARITIES INC ARCHDIOCESE OF HARTFORD
Recipient ZIP Code: 06105-1901
Recipient: CATHOLIC CHARITIES/DIOCESE TRENTON
Recipient ZIP Code: 08618-5705
Recipient: CENTERFORCE
Recipient ZIP Code: 94901-5516
Recipient: CHAUTAUQUA OPPORTUNITIES, INC
Recipient ZIP Code: 14048-2754
Recipient: CHICAGO DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
Recipient ZIP Code: 60604
Recipient: CHILDREN’S FRIEND AND SERVICE
Recipient ZIP Code: 02903-4011
Recipient: CHILDRENS HOSPITAL OF LOS ANGELES-SCH OF PHYSICAL THER
Recipient ZIP Code: 90027
Recipient: CHILDREN`S AID SOCIETY IN CLEARFIELD COUNTY
Recipient ZIP Code: 16830-3323
Recipient: CHILDREN`S INSTITUTE , INC
Recipient ZIP Code: 90005
Recipient: CHIPPEWA CREE TRIBE
Recipient ZIP Code: 59521
Recipient: CIRCLE OF PARENTS
Recipient ZIP Code: 60611-3777
Recipient: CO DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES
Recipient ZIP Code: 80203
Recipient: COEUR DALENE TRIBE
Recipient ZIP Code: 83851-0408
Recipient: COMMUNITY PREVENTION PARTNERSHIP OF BERKS COUNTY
Recipient ZIP Code: 19601-3303
Recipient: CONFEDERATED SALISH & KOOTENAI TRIBES
Recipient ZIP Code: 59855-0278
Recipient: CONFEDERATED TRIBES OF SILETZ
Recipient ZIP Code: 97380
Recipient: COOK INLET TRIBAL COUNCIL, INC
Recipient ZIP Code: 99503
Recipient: COUNCIL ON PREVENTION & EDUCATION SUBSTANCES, INC
Recipient ZIP Code: 40204-1743
Recipient: CRECIENDOS UNIDOS/GROWING TOGETHER
Recipient ZIP Code: 85004
Recipient: California Healthy Marriages Coalition
Recipient ZIP Code: 92024-2215
Recipient: Center For Self-Sufficiency, Inc.
Recipient ZIP Code: 53211
Recipient: Child family Services of Eastern Virginia
Recipient ZIP Code: 23517
Recipient: Community Marriage Builders, Inc.
Recipient ZIP Code: 47714-1863
NEXT! – PAGE 2 of 4
Recipient: Connections To Success
Recipient ZIP Code: 633012634
Recipient: County of Montrose
Recipient ZIP Code: 81401
Recipient: DC DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES
Recipient ZIP Code: 20032
Recipient: DOUGLAS CHEROKEE ECONOMIC AUTHORITY, INC
Recipient ZIP Code: 37816-1218
Recipient: EAST LOS ANGELES COMMUNITY UNION
Recipient ZIP Code: 90022-5147
Recipient: EDUCATION ASSISTANCE CENTER OF LONG ISLAND, INC
Recipient ZIP Code: 11550
Recipient: EL PASO CENTER FOR CHILDREN
Recipient ZIP Code: 79930
Recipient: ELIZABETHS NEW LIFE CENTER
Recipient ZIP Code: 45405
Recipient: Employment Opportunity & Training Center of Northeaster
Recipient ZIP Code: 18503
Recipient: FAMILY & CHILDREN’S SERVICE, INC.
Recipient ZIP Code: 74120-4429
Recipient: FIRST A M E CHILD DEVELOPMENT CENTER
Recipient ZIP Code: 98122
Recipient: FIRST THINGS FIRST
Recipient ZIP Code: 37403-3433
Recipient: FOREST COUNTY POTAWATOMI COMMUNITY
Recipient ZIP Code: 54520-0396
Recipient: FORTUNE SOCIETY, INC (THE)
Recipient ZIP Code: 10031-7116
Recipient: FRESNO COUNTY ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION
Recipient ZIP Code: 93721
Recipient: Family Guidance, Inc.
Recipient ZIP Code: 15143-9554
Recipient: Family Resource Center of Raleigh, Inc.
Recipient ZIP Code: 27601-1947
Recipient: Family Service Center at Houston and Harris County
Recipient ZIP Code: 77006
Recipient: Fathers & Families Resources/Research Center
Recipient ZIP Code: 46208-4705
Recipient: Fathers` Support Center, St. Louis
Recipient ZIP Code: 63158
Recipient: Friends Outside in Los Angeles County, Inc.
Recipient ZIP Code: 91101-1632
Recipient: Future Foundation
Recipient ZIP Code: 30344-4137
Recipient: GATEWAY COMMUNITY SERVICE ORGANIZATION
Recipient ZIP Code: 41472
Recipient: GOODWILL INDUSTRIES INC
Recipient ZIP Code: 55104-1708
Recipient: GOODWILL INDUSTRIES OF AUSTIN
Recipient ZIP Code: 78703
Recipient: GOODWILL INDUSTRIES OF PITTSBURGH
Recipient ZIP Code: 15203-2102
Recipient: GRANATO COUNSELING SERVICES
Recipient ZIP Code: 22182
Recipient: HAYMARKET CENTER
Recipient ZIP Code: 60607
Recipient: HOOPA VALLEY BUSINESS COUNCIL, EDUCATION DEPARTMENT
Recipient ZIP Code: 95546
Recipient: Healthy Families/Thriving Communities Collaborative Cou
Recipient ZIP Code: 20001-4330
Recipient: Healthy You, Inc.
Recipient ZIP Code: 363031997
Recipient: High Country Consulting LLC
Recipient ZIP Code: 82001-2758
Recipient: Horizon Outreach
Recipient ZIP Code: 77386
Recipient: I C F, INC
Recipient ZIP Code: 22031-6050
Recipient: IRCO-IMMIGRANT & REFUGEE COMMUNITY ORGANIZATION
Recipient ZIP Code: 97220
Recipient: Imperial Valley Regional Occupational Program
Recipient ZIP Code: 92243-2943
Recipient: JOHN BROWN UNIVERSITY
Recipient ZIP Code: 72761
Recipient: Jewish Family & Children`s Service of Sarasota-Manatee,
Recipient ZIP Code: 34237-5223
Recipient: KEIKI O KA AINA PRESCHOOL, INC.
Recipient ZIP Code: 96819
Recipient: Kanawha Institute for Social Research & Action, Inc.
Recipient ZIP Code: 25064-1433
Recipient: Kentucky River Foothills Development Council, Inc.
Recipient ZIP Code: 40475-2457
Recipient: LIGHTHOUSE YOUTH SERVICES, INC
Recipient ZIP Code: 45206-1780
Recipient: LUTHERAN SOCIAL SERVICES OF SOUTH DAKOTA
Recipient ZIP Code: 57105-6048
Recipient: Lexington Leadership Foundation
Recipient ZIP Code: 40504-3154
NEXT! — PAGE 3 of 4
Recipient: MARRIAGE SAVERS OF CLARK COUNTY
Recipient ZIP Code: 45503-4175
Recipient: MD ST DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES
Recipient ZIP Code: 21201
Recipient: MEMPHIS & SHELBY COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
Recipient ZIP Code: 38105-5041
Recipient: MID-IOWA COMMUNITY ACTION, INC
Recipient ZIP Code: 50158
Recipient: MILWAUKEE COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT
Recipient ZIP Code: 53226
Recipient: MULTI-PURPOSE SENIOR CITIZENS PROGRAM, INC
Recipient ZIP Code: 40066
Recipient: Meier Clinics Foundation
Recipient ZIP Code: 60187-4579
Recipient: Metro United Methodist Urban Ministry
Recipient ZIP Code: 92116-4557
Recipient: Minnesota Council on Crime and Justice
Recipient ZIP Code: 55415-1200
Recipient: Mission West Virginia, Inc.
Recipient ZIP Code: 25526
Recipient: More Than Conquerors Inc
Recipient ZIP Code: 300835318
Recipient: NASHVILLE METROPOLITIAN BORDEAUX HOSPITAL
Recipient ZIP Code: 37218
Recipient: NATIONAL OFFICE OF SAMOAN AFFAIRS
Recipient ZIP Code: 90746
Recipient: NATIONAL ORGANIZATION OF CONCERNED BLACK MEN, INC
Recipient ZIP Code: 20009-4422
Recipient: NEW MEXICO STATE UNIVERSITY
Recipient ZIP Code: 88003
Recipient: NJ ST DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS
Recipient ZIP Code: 08625
Recipient: NOOKSACK INDIAN TRIBE
Recipient ZIP Code: 98244-0157
Recipient: NORTHWEST FAMILY SERVICES
Recipient ZIP Code: 97213-2933
Recipient: NW Marriage Institute
Recipient ZIP Code: 98682-2328
Recipient: New York Youth At Risk, Inc.
Recipient ZIP Code: 10038
Recipient: OAKLAND/LIVINGSTON HUMAN SERVICES AGENCY
Recipient ZIP Code: 48056
Recipient: OH St Governor`s Office of Faith Based & Comm Initiativ
Recipient ZIP Code: 43215
Recipient: OK ST DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES
Recipient ZIP Code: 73125
Recipient: OPERATION KEEPSAKE
Recipient ZIP Code: 44087-1654
Recipient: PARENTS PLUS
Recipient ZIP Code: 54952-0452
Recipient: PEANUT BUTTER & JELLY PRESCHOOL
Recipient ZIP Code: 87105
Recipient: PEOPLE FOR PEOPLE, INC.
Recipient ZIP Code: 19130-2202
Recipient: PHOENIX PROGRAMS OF NEW YORK,INC
Recipient ZIP Code: 10023
Recipient: PROJECT S.O.S., INC.
Recipient ZIP Code: 32216-6241
Recipient: PUBLIC STRATEGIES INC
Recipient ZIP Code: 73116-7909
Recipient: Parenting Center (The)
Recipient ZIP Code: 76107
Recipient: QUILEUTE INDIAN TRIBE
Recipient ZIP Code: 98350
Recipient: RECAPTURING THE VISION, INTERNATIONAL, INC.
Recipient ZIP Code: 33157-5372
Recipient: RIDGE Project, Inc
Recipient ZIP Code: 43512-2575
Recipient: Retreat, Inc.
Recipient ZIP Code: 11937
Recipient: SOCIAL ADVOCATES FOR YOUTH (SAY), SAN DIEGO, INC.
Recipient ZIP Code: 92123
Recipient: SOUTH PUGET INTERTRIBAL PLANNING AGENCY
Recipient ZIP Code: 98584
Recipient: SOUTHWEST KEY PROGRAMS, INC.
Recipient ZIP Code: 78704
Recipient: SPRINGFIELD URBAN LEAGUE, INC
Recipient ZIP Code: 62703-1002
Recipient: STARKVILLE SCHOOL DISTRICT
Recipient ZIP Code: 39759-2803
Recipient: SUQUAMISH & KLALLAM HEALTH PLAN
Recipient ZIP Code: 98346
Recipient: Sacramento Healthy Marriage Project
Recipient ZIP Code: 95821
Recipient: Scholarship and Guidance Association
Recipient ZIP Code: 60609-4231
And FINALLY:
Fiscal Year = 2011
Showing: 151 – 178 of 178 Award Actions
Page: « Previous 1 2 3 4 Next »
Recipient: Shalom Task Force
Recipient ZIP Code: 10274-0137
Recipient: St. Louis Healthy Marriage Coalition
Recipient ZIP Code: 63108-3302
Recipient: Structured Employment Econ Dev Corp (SEEDCO)
Recipient ZIP Code: 10010
Recipient: Supportive Integrated Services
Recipient ZIP Code: 71101
Recipient: TANANA CHIEFS CONFERENCE
Recipient ZIP Code: 99701-4871
Recipient: TARRANT COUNTY WORKFORCE BOARD
Recipient ZIP Code: 76103
Recipient: TEXAS STATE UNIVERSITY-SAN MARCOS
Recipient ZIP Code: 78666
Recipient: THE DIBBLE FUND FOR MARRIAGE EDUCATION
Recipient ZIP Code: 94707-0881
Recipient: THE HIVE CREATIVE GROUP
Recipient ZIP Code: 36303-1997
Recipient: TLINGIT & HAIDA TRIBES CENTRAL COUNCIL
Recipient ZIP Code: 99801
Recipient: TOLEDO AREA MINISTRIES
Recipient ZIP Code: 436201735
Recipient: TOTAL ACTION AGAINST POVERTY IN ROANOKE
Recipient ZIP Code: 24001-2868
Recipient: The South Carolina Center for Fathers and Families
Recipient ZIP Code: 29204-2413
Recipient: UNITED WAY OF JACKSON COUNTY, INC
Recipient ZIP Code: 49201-1223
Recipient: UNIVERSITY BEHAVIORAL ASSOCIATES
Recipient ZIP Code: 10467-2401
Recipient: UNIVERSITY OF ARKANSAS FOR MEDICAL SCIENCES
Recipient ZIP Code: 72205-7101
Recipient: UNIVERSITY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA
Recipient ZIP Code: 32826
Recipient: UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE
Recipient ZIP Code: 37916
Recipient: UTAH STATE UNIVERSITY
Recipient ZIP Code: 84322
Recipient: Urban Ventures Leadership Foundation
Recipient ZIP Code: 55408-2410
Recipient: VISITING NURSE ASSOCIATION
Recipient ZIP Code: 05405-3401
Recipient: WAIT Training
Recipient ZIP Code: 80237
Recipient: WSOS COMMUNITY ACTION COMMISSION, INC
Recipient ZIP Code: 43420-3021
Recipient: YOUTH & FAMILY ALLAIANCE
Recipient ZIP Code: 78704-7046
Recipient: YOUTH & FAMILY SERVICES OF CANADIAN COUNTY, INC
Recipient ZIP Code: 73036
Recipient: YWCA OF SAN ANTONIO
Recipient ZIP Code: 78240-1480
Showing: 151 – 178 of 178 Award Actions
Page: « Previous 1 2 3 4 Next »
Comment re:
Recipient: WSOS COMMUNITY ACTION COMMISSION, INC
Recipient ZIP Code: 43420-3021
This is the ONLY agency where an HHS grant (apparently) goes directly to a certain OHIO County where a recent child-rape in a supervised visitation center has been making headline news. In exploring the situation — and the institution — it turns out that the institution where it happens was 75% government funded, with HALF the funding being a special “Children’s Levy” to the state, and the other 22% “Federal Funding.”
OHIO — like a few states — has an actual “FATHERHOOD COMMISSION” which does what Fatherhood Commissions do, primarily directing grants towards saving families by keeping Dads involved. Part of the streamlined funding (or, “Flexible Funding” as it’s called), enabling them to get the money FAST to serve children and families — like this 13 month old girl that was raped and molested by her biological mother and father, who got access too her (despite Daddy already being a registered juvenile sex offender) by taking “parenting classes,” and like her older sister — removed from Mom the day she was born, put in foster care, and there bludgeoned to death by a foster care mother, now in prison I gather, before she turned two. In addition to the funding to provide supervised visitation access centers where by abusers can REALLY bond with their offspring, the state of Ohio now has to pay for jail space for mother and father, and public defenders, as the outrage is normally wanting the couple to go to jail for life.
I looked at the docket for the father and mother, and find out that while the father’s attorney has been REAL pro-active (insanity plea, etc.) — and that it’s $27.00 per action — the mother’s, if any, appears to be doing nothing. I have YET to locate a single tax return for the outfit that failed to supervise here, but we hear (so far) that the citizens attempting to get into the Board meeting for the public-funded organization were turned away at the door. To date, in looking at the “FCFC” setup (hard to understand unless you explore Ohio’s “FAMILIES AND CHILDREN FIRST” site), there are precious few FCFC’s (out of 88 counties in the state) which actually filed — with the state of ohio — as one, resulting in a public-access tax return stating how much money they got, WHAT THEIR BOARDS OF DIRECTORS ARE PAID — and where it went.
This organization’s primary business is HEAD START — HANDICAPPED TRAINING & TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE FULL AND HALF DAY, with occasional RURAL FACILITIES and just a tad of ‘PROMOTING RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD.”
FREMONT, OH 43420-3021
This group must’ve given money to some non-TRumbull County recipients, judging by the results searching awards by LOCATION, and choosing Trumbull County. Be patient, I’ll explain. This is selecting no year: I already know all awards to this county (directly from HHS) were ACF awards, from the same basic Location Search / Group by Agency:
County = TRUMBULL
State = OHIO
Summary = Recipient
Showing: 1 – 7 of 7 Recipients
Award Actions
Awards
S
These awards (if you click on it) are in the exact same category and project name as the WSOS ones, above:
Trumbull Community Action program is labeled as a nonprofit PRIVATE org. under TAGGS, for what it’s worth (WSOS as nonprofit PUBLIC,e tc.)
WARREN, OH 44485-3730
AWARD ACTIONS
Showing: 1 – 50 of 64 Award Actions
Page: « Previous 1 2 Next »
Their website explains Community Action Programs as part of the 1960s War on Poverty, generally; explains that in 2002, they got Head STart funding, and in essence, they are a middle-man contracting with the government to provide services. the WSOS apparently represents 4 Ohio Counties (out of 88 available). I”m not quite sure how ‘TRUMBULL” county fits in there, but WSOS grants are apparently going there.
The program under which “HELP ME GROW” classes appear to take place includes the place where the child was raped during a scheduled visitation. (Cell phone images were found, so whether or not it took place is not in question).
2002
2003
Apparently the WSOS stands for 4 different Ohio Counties: Odd there is no “T” in that acronym, seeing as Trumbull is getting the bulk of their HHS monies:
1965
2002
2003
Funding sought to help unemployed fathers in nine Ohio counties
SHARE THIS POST on...
Written by Let's Get Honest|She Looks It Up
October 27, 2011 at 1:26 pm
Posted in AFCC, Business Enterprise, Cast, Script, Characters, Scenery, Stage Directions, compulsory schooling, Designer Families, Funding Fathers - literally, History of Family Court, Organizations, Foundations, Associations NGO Hybrids, Parent Education promotion, Who's Who (bio snapshots)
Tagged with Access-Visitation, AFCC, Child Support, Education, fatherhood, HHS-TAGGS grants database, obfuscation, social commentary, Studying Humans, U.S. Govt $$ hard @ work..