Notice:  There are a few heavy issues going around (at least in my thoughts).  I’ll name ONE, TWO, THREE below, and simply tell us that today, I am avoiding the heavy-duty thinking and instead am reporting (below ONE, TWO, THREE sections) an odd assortment of what the heck is happening with our Child Support Enforcement $4 billion annual budget, including some very strange ways of labeling: Grantee, Principal investigator (when there is one), DUNS# (required for federal purchase and absent on too many HHS Grant awards) not to mention the name of the AWARD itself.

I promise this will be interesting, IF this is your cup of tea.  If you don’t have a sense of humor, Lord help you, and quit now, this post will irritate you!

Retranslated, that little intro tells you I’m not feeling well (given these contexts, and psychologically) today, so you get offerings, and that’s it.  Then again, I’ve been studying these topics long enough, and have a unique enough viewpoint, they might also be worth considering under Who moved The Cheese and “You did WHAT!?$#@?? with my money, Congress?”

ONE

including a recent significant ruling from Orange County, California (mother was awarded damages, including some punitive, of $4.9 million for social worker abuses causing in appropriate removal of her children.  It took her six years to get them back, and supervised visitation and child abuse allegations — by the child, not the mom — threats, and all kinds of horrible events were involved in this case.

In other words, it was a fairly typical situation when molestation crops up as a topic.   Father is put on supervised visitation, monitors begin threatening the girls AND the mother when one girl (autistic) resists, and they follow through on the threat, and stick the kid in foster care.  To add to the interest, this is a mother from Seal Beach, where another allegedly “fairly typical” divorce ended last fall in an 8-person massacre.  If these are “typical” we are in serious trouble.  I commented on this in another forum:  If you care to read it, see my 2nd & 3rd comments on this thread, today:  (About the Nonprofits Front Groups that help traffick kids (and just exhaust their parents to get an “unfit” declaration).   I started this thread to stop irritating people on the other threads who preferred banter and in-fighting to strategizing based on analysis, which possibly helped keep both sets of blood pressures down a notch.  I can ignore them and they can more easily ignore me.

In my comment I reminded us that this was such a major issue that a Georgia Senator and her husband were (possibly) murdered while she was in the process of exposing it; there are a number of individuals who simply don’t buy that Nancy Schaefer’s husband murdered her, then committed suicide.  Among these is Garland Favorito, who says he was close to the family and gives a year-later follow up.   So it was  rather heavy-duty morning.

TWO, San Francisco’s New Sheriff was just arraigned on DV charges.

Some details here — I don’t know how “national” the coverage on this one is.  I haven’t followed this one so closely, but for women in certain situations (yes, me, too) who have in the past hoped that sheriffs might help them stop a crime in progress, or report one just committed, the sense that the head of the place has issues with it himself, and problems with women, is naturally disturbing.  There have been also in various places, allegations and lawsuits against district attorneys or their employees surrounding rape, etc., by coworkers, and of course i’ve already blogged “Dubious Doings by District Attorneys.”  These men and women, some of who have given their lives in the line of duty, including literally to protect victims in a ‘domestic dispute” in process (and involving bullets, also have the capacity to sit back and do nothing with impunity.  The cumulative effect of, between family law and criminal elements, wonder where to go for justice — or assistance — gets discouraging year after year.  Here’s some news on this matter:

Also, in San Francisco, an incoming sheriff, Ross Mirkarimi, is now on the spot for domestic violence against his wife:

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-sf-sheriff-domestic-violence-jpeg-09ad6.jpg-20120113,0,4587269.photo

SAN FRANCISCO — San Francisco’s new sheriff is scheduled to appear in court on allegations he mistreated his wife in front of their toddler son and told her not to tell anybody about it.

Sheriff Ross Mirkarimi (meer-kah-REEM’-ee) is expected to plead not guilty at his arraignment Thursday afternoon in San Francisco Superior Court.

Mirkarimi’s lawyer, Robert Waggener, says he will likely ask for a speedy trial.

Prosecutors have charged the 50-year-old sheriff with domestic violence battery, child endangerment and dissuading a witness. The three misdemeanor charges come after a New Year’s Eve incident with his wife, Eliana Lopez, at their home.

This is not just any old sheriff (no offence, men and women serving on the forces!) but a former SF Supervisor;

. . .

• Reentry for Ex-Offenders: Formation of the Safe Communities Reentry Council to help reintegrate the formerly incarcerated — recognizing the reentry process as a critical opportunity to break the cycle of crime and violence and reduce California’s worst-in-the-nation recidivism rate.
• Ross was born in Chicago to an Iranian father and mother of Russian descent.Ross spent most of his youth in Rhode Island, obtained his undergraduate degree from St. Louis University (Political Science and Russian Literature), and earned Master’s degrees from Golden Gate University (Economics) and the University of San Francisco (Environmental Science/Management). He is also a graduate of the San Francisco Police Academy, where he was class president.Prior to being elected Supervisor, Ross served as an investigator with the San Francisco District Attorney’s Office for almost nine years, specializing in economic and environmental crimes.Community organizing and activism have always been a significant part of Ross’s life, as student body president of St. Louis University, president of the Missouri Public Interest Research Group (MOPIRG), and co-founder of the California Green Party.

He would seem to be well-educated and well-qualified, unless the charges are true.  Per enotes.com, he’s very progressive, and was even a member of NOW

Reparations bill

Mirkarimi also authored a piece of reparations bill, which would give descendants of those displaced by the San Francisco Redevelopment Agency from the Western Addition priority in obtaining affordable housing. During the 1960s the city tore down much of the historic Fillmore district, most of whose resident’s were permanently removed. Two-thirds of those displaced were African American.^[27]

Makes sense to me….  He also was in favor of public (not private) regulated medical marijuana dispensaries (controversial enough?) and

On April 21, 2009, Ross Mirkarimi became a father, as Eliana Lopez, a Venezuelan TV star whom he met at an environmental conference in Brazil, gave birth to his son, Theo Aureliano Mirkarimi.^[7][8]

I do note:

He grew up inJamestown, Rhode Island, where he graduated from the Catholic, all-male Bishop Hendricken High School in 1979.

Here’s some SFWeekly on the issue, with plenty of links, including one showing Eliana denying the abuse  and speaking about her neighbor’s insistence on prosecution.  Me, I’m noticing the size differencene (husband/wife), don’t have enough facts to make a call (and it’s not my call), but if it’s true, it sure is a matter of concern, and — sorry — attending an all male Catholic high school (even though sounds like a good one) says something to me.

Ross Mirkarimi Update: Eliana Lopez Admits She Talked to Neighbor, But Denies Abuse

(from SFweekly blog).

By Lauren Smiley Wed., Jan. 18 2012 at 6:00 PM

Police Interview Second Witness In Domestic Violence Incident 

A copy of Sheriff Ross Mirkarimi’s arrest warrant was released to the media today, painting a disturbing picture of what allegedly took place between Mirkarimi and his wife, Eliana Lopez, during a reported New Year’s Eve domestic dispute.

According to the warrant, Mirkarimi was taking his family to lunch on Dec. 31 when Lopez asked him if, after his inauguration, she could travel to Venezuela to visit her family with their 2-year-old son, Theo. Mirkarimi reportedly lost his cool, and began screaming “fuck you,” to Lopez.

“Fuck you, fuck you, you are trying to take Theo away from me,” Mirkarimi reportedly said. He then allegedly turned the car around and told her that he wasn’t taking them to eat, saying something to the effect of “she didn’t deserve to eat.”

The fight escalated when the couple returned to their Western Addition home, where Mirkarimi allegedly pushed, pulled, grabbed, and verbally abused Lopez, according to the document.

Lopez ran outside the house, telling him that she would call the police. The couple’s son was screaming and crying, too. Mirkarimi repeatedly apologized to his wife and begged her to come back into the house, per the warrant.

The next day, Lopez visited her neighbor, Ivory Madison, and told her about the domestic violence dispute. She was in tears and asked Madison to video the bruise on her arm, explaining that she wanted all of it recorded in case Mirkarimi tried to take their son away.

On Jan. 12 — after the incident had been reported to police — officers contacted “another neighbor” who claims Lopez told her about the New Year’s Eve fight. She reportedly told the witness that it was the second time in 2011 that Mirkarimi had abused her. She showed her the bruise on her arm, which was a “pretty big” brown injury that appeared to be a hand or finger marks, according to police.

One of the women reporting him actually helped host a fundraiser to get him elected:

Ross Mirkarimi Update: Neighbor Who Reported Domestic Violence Fundraised for New Sheriff

By Erin Sherbert Mon., Jan. 9 2012 at 8:00 AM

Comments (3) 

Categories: Politics

But a quick Google search shows that it’s not exactly his political enemies, but rather his political allies who are “the forces at work” in this ongoing case. Ivory Madison, the neighbor who called police to report the alleged domestic violence, is also the same woman who helped get Mirkarimi elected.

According to ActBlue, a democratic political action committee, Madison hosted a fundraiser for Mirkarimi on Oct. 15, 2011. Here’s what the invite said:

Please Join Us In Support of Ross Mirkarimi For Sheriff!

Spend some quality time with Ross, his wife Eliana Lopez, and their son

Hosted by Ivory Madison & Abraham Mertens, Jane Morrison, Thea Selby, and Gladys Holder Soto

etc.  This ain’t over yet.  

THREE:

Will show in next few posts, I hope.  Have been seeing the need to incorporate and address the different angles that come up when Juvenile Justice Diversionary programs (i.e., help them, don’t jail them) run into the family law’s approach, which is the more diversions the better, and the dangers of being a mother in this day and time, once physical assaults have occurred and jumpstarted some legal action.   Family Court is a great place for batterers (that’s what the DV orgs call such people, as does the book’ The Batterer as Parent”) aka “parent” as the father-friendly AFCC groups like to call them.

The problem the Juvenile Justice groups confront is very, very real — which is racist incarceration practices.  It’s a large and wide-ranging topic, so I can’t say a whole lot more, just now.

I also have been feeling, not just seeing, the influence of the outfits that are able to operate with more freedom because they are under-reported; they are rarely front-page news, although they help create it and censor it in times, through simply buying out media.  I’m talking about nonprofits like ALEC, or The New American Century.

Really, these are tough times, and it requires sound thinking.   I’d love to just ignore all this and put my nose to the grindstone again, but year after year of doing exactly that (while children in the home, or after they were — overnight, and again right on the cusp of success for them and me both — NOT in my home) one knows better than to just charge off as IF one were totally free to choose, when in context, one is not.

Years of disruption of income for women without supportive families is particularly worrisome.  We have no job stability or social stability, and quite frankly, recreating onesself in relationship to the communities where one has fought the courts and or one’s ex for so long, after which discovering the means of betrayal (within supposedly supportive government institutions) — how’d you like to do this for approximately 20, 30, possibly 40, possibly til the day you die, years?    Particularly when you know you can contribute and have in the past, when it was possible to work for a few years in a row on single projects, or at a single line of work?

This experience actually is better preparation for war (or, as such, business startups) than for any professional occupations or things one can do in a time of peace, which this isn’t.  My experience of marriage AND family (of origin) has been one of nonstop tribal-style warfare, and most of the war appeared to be over shutting down basic expressions of sentient life, use of one’s mind, and humanity.  Things like choice.  Or seeking to protect the fruits of my own efforts for a season or maybe even two in a row.  and I know my case was better than many, although perhaps not for the length.

Yesterday, I spent time (hours) with an acquaintance who had a social worker set her up and remove children without any order, or due process, while a restraining order was on.  (Munchausen’s by Proxy).  I looked up the social worker who did this thing, by name (not my state) and found she had barely completed a bachelor’s in social science (it took maybe 5 years), worked briefly for an entity which got HHS block grants in the area, it doesn’t appear this person ever lived outside the immediate geographic area (which the mother had, as had the father in the case)– and suddenly this erstwhile social worker becomes Director of Family Court Services?

Not only does this particular mother have no contact with her kids, to speak of, she also has no LIFE outside fighting this case (now at the federal level) and for periods she also had no home.  The custody reversal kicked her out of her own home without somewhere to go, apparently deprived of community property, and for a time she was simply living in her car in a cold climate (not the first mother I know this has happened to).    And yet, the FR groups still say, the courts are biased against men?  WHERE?

The story is grindingly simple and I noted that the process again began with ordering supervised visitation to the mother, immediately.  Give us your assets, and pay to see your kids that you gave birth to.

Land of the free and home of the brave? ?   Brave yes — free, no.

Added to all this, one never really (?) gets over loss of relationship with one’s children, and particularly not when it was known to in violation of due process, and without a factual or legal basis on the record as to why, and suspiciously corresponded with one guy’s high child support arrears (through not working) and a few other middle-aged female’s known empty nests (one, opted for abortion + snatch someone else’s kids, the other, after two (at least) known failed relationships, needed to have some kids around possibly for church social status — and free housekeeping).  Women are no less complicit in these matters than men, although I do believe more equality in government (meaning, CONGRESS!) might bring out the best — not the worst — in human nature.

SO,  BELOW THIS LINE iS WHERE THE POST’S TITLE CONTENT BEGINS.  JUST LOOKING….

+ + + + + + = = = = = + + + + + + = = = = = + + + + + + = = = = = + + + + + + = = = = = + + + + + + = = = = =

From the “90FD series” which apparently may represent the Partnership With Universities to Fix Things series:

1115 Grants Awarded in FY 2011

Section 1115 Grants: Partnership to Strengthen Families: Child Support Enforcement and University Partnerships

(check it out).

If one grant catches my attention, I often go look for similar ones on TAGGS.  Which means I often have two or three reports of various sorts to browse, scan and possibly check out, going at a time.  This helps me (i’m a scanner; hey– it takes all kinds!) to build a little mental database of what’s going on in the free money to help solve society’s problems by standardizing & circulating answers to almost every question  (similar to catechism, only supposedly not religious) business, which is what HHS is pretty well invested in.  Actually YOU are invested if you file an income tax return, or have it withheld.  Make that a “WE.”

It’s becoming clearer and clearer that TAGGS database wasn’t actually designed for human use outside the people administering the grants.  I mean:  The third column here is supposed to actually describe what the Award is about — it’s “Award Title”

Results 1 to 305 of 305 matches.
Page 1 of 1	1

Well, that really narrows it down, thanks for the explanation.   One year’s salary (average administrative secretarial?) for “STATE OF GEORGIA” award.  Glad you found something to put in that field called “Award Title.”

Now we can start with the research:  Is it bigger than a breadbox?  Is it a consumable or an invisible intangible?   Can I link to it, and who is selling it?   Should I search for it at HHS or within the GA Dept of HUMAN RESOURcES?

MN is doing this kind of labelling too, obviously.  So is TN, only TN can’t make up its mind what to call itself in the Grantee Institution field . . . . .

“TN ST” or “STATE OF TENNESSEE” (depending on how it was entered) and CHARLES BRYSON (or “MR. CHARLES BRYSON”) are quite active, and I wonder if this too involves some ‘retooling” of the child support system.  Most grants have a partial clue to what’s going on, but some really do not:

Any particular reason why the name of an award is simply the name of the state, or the department within the state?   Hello, I am applying for a grant, my Company  is “BROKEN ARROW PROMISES”   I promise to XYZ.   OK, but the public needs to know what the grant is for, so we’ll just call it the  BROKEN ARROW PROMISES grant, which will explain where their taxes are going.

Here’s a simple search of all grants to this department, showing a few different DUNS#, some NO DUNS# (oops), and over $6 billion of grants, which we already know is going to include literal TANF (food stamps, cash aid) Child Support Enforcement, Medicaid, Foster Care and Adoption Assistance,, research grants to some hospitals surely, support of various institutes in a university here and there, no doubt, and of course it is going to include the ominpresent:  Marriage and Fatherhood promotion funding, I imagine, and possibly Access/visitation (if this department is the State Grantee).  This is a fraction of federal aid to TN, but it represents only grants from HHS to this agency within the state:

(1) this amount relates to a very few award series, which i’m not going to look up just now, except that this is certainly an interesting award title for something representing $67 million of funding, don’t you think?

the “TNSOSR” is labeled CFDA code 93667 which reads “Social Services Block Grant”

the “TNLIEA is labeled CFDA code 93568 which reads ‘Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program’ (LIHEAP).  Why were some awards labeled simply LIHEAP and this, LIEA?  I don’t know.

(2) — THE LARGEST CATEGORY (to this State Dept.) includes TANF itself, grants from OCSE, and other, plus a mere $182K to Access/Visitation.   So far in 2012 — just for reference — over $20.8 million has been distributed, or at least awarded, under the DUNS# 878556299

Another chunk of awards (a large chunk) is for Child Care, which it shows is part of TANF.  Makes sense that child care assistance helps people get to their jobs.  It’s a lot of money, isn’t it!

STILL under the largest chunk if funding marked “(2)” above, here are the 2011 awards to this department, showing a variety of award purposes:

We see awards 90FD0129, 0139, 0148, 0171, and 0177 in a variety of budget years, (0177 being budget year 1).   FD0129 (Showing “zero” in 2011) began in 2008, is marked “discretionary” and disbursed $156K.  For what (??) who knows?  Click on any hyperlink to learn more about the award, like when it started.   FD0139 began in 2009 (recovery act year, not really good news, as recovery act awards have a reputation by now as not well monitored) and amount is $218,764 — for What?  WHAT “family services” — marriage promotion?

Charles Bryson is one of two listed IV-D contacts (Private Collection Agency Policy — though none listed for TN).

A few search results here — this is a NCSEA (National Child Support Enforcement Association) porta-conference flyer, i.e, products for sale.  The logo reads “Innovate, Collaborate, Communicate” and “Planting the Seeds of the Modern Family” which definitely seems to be how CSE agencies (local) see themselves anyhow.

NCSEA is excited to introduce our 2011 Annual Conference workshop recordings, the NCSEA Portable Conference–a great way to get the most from the 2011 NCSEA Annual Conference experience.

Six workshop sessions (listed below) were recorded–including audio and video recordings, synched to the Power Point Presentation--and made available for purchase in CD or Streaming format, requiring Microsoft Silverlight (www.Silverlight.net). Please be sure that your system can accommodate the streaming interface recording. No refunds are available for technical difficulties.

If you were unable to attend NCSEA’s Annual Conference, you can now share in the valuable information presented at the workshops.

NCSEA Portable Conference Pricing

The Portable Conference is available in a bundle including all six workshops. Individual workshops may not be purchased separately.

• NCSEA members $ 250 • Non-members $ 375

Don’t ever say your child support issues are “local” or your county is the most corrupt in the nation.  Strategies are nationalized.  For those of us non-members (and note — the public CANNOT become members – at least in California, you actually have to be a child support director to become a member!) So even if a parent had $375 to spare (unlikely in the days of expanding and innovating child support agencies), he or she would also have to have a friend in the agency.  Get a look at this! (Still from the portable conference site)

Collaboration & Communication -the New Face of the Innovative Child Support Agency

The role of child support agencies appears to be expanding to include innovations, more collaborations, and better communications. New ideas for programs to reach out to our customers and partners are being tested. Child support agencies are increasingly involved with new initiatives to help parents become more responsible and better able to care for their children and themselves… Work force and prisoner reentry initiatives in child support offices are becoming more popular nationally as we work with NCPs {{noncustodial parents}} to help them meet their responsibilities. Learn how your agency can better serve its community. We’ll discuss some new initiatives, how they started and how they are being funded at a time when we all have to do more with less.

Presenters:

Alicia Key, IV-D Director, Child Support Division, Office of the Texas Attorney General

Angela Anton, Assistant Jefferson (KY) County Attorney, Child Support Division {{REmember, Kentucky has the “Turning It Around” extort your Dads into fatherhood program participation once they’ve been arrested for nonpayment?}}

Kimberly Dent, Human Services Program Administrator 3, Ohio Department of Job and Family Services

Amy B. Gober (Moderator), Senior Associate, Center for the Support of Families

{{Sure, that’s really helping….Children don’t need food, they need better relationship skills classes for their parents, etc.}}

Here’s our Mr. Bryson as participant.  Notice all the grants he’s overseeing in TN:

Reducing Adversarial Relationships: How Child Support Agencies Take On Access and Visitation

Enjoy a frank discussion on how and why to improve the access and visitation program in your state/office. Best practices are shared on how to work with both parents in developing communication tools and conflict resolution ideas for the betterment of the child. Presenters:

Russell Eastman, Manager, Georgia Division of Child Support Services Charles Bryson, Director, Tennessee Child Support Field Operations and Management Gerry White, Compliance and Program Development Manager, Families First.** Ann Russell (Moderator), Program Specialist, OCSE

**Families First is a major Atlanta-based organization, I’ve actually had a mother ask me to investigate this one, and began to.  Anyhow, Mr. White shows up at a nice fatherhood conference here:

Families First Presents Workshop at 10th Annual International Fatherhood Conference

The National Partnership for Community Leadership held its 10^th Annual International Fatherhood Conference June 10-13^th in Washington DC. The goal of the conference is to build strong family relationships, and this year’s theme: “Reconnecting Fathers to Families: At Home & Abroad” emphasized the need to educate the world about the importance of responsible fatherhood.

Dr. Gerry White and Freddie Wilson represented Families First at the conference and presented a workshop entitled “Quantitative Study of Factors that Impact Parental Involvement Among African American Unwed Fathers.” This workshop identified key factors associated with father involvement through programmatic and research findings. It also provided specific strategies for assisting fathers with improving involvement, and detailed how responsible fatherhood involvement is multi-dimensional.

NPCL (above) IS about pushing fathers’ rights, period.   It has many ways of doing this, and its CEO, “Dr. Jeffrey Johnston” bio reads — in part —

Dr. Johnson is a nationally recognized authority in the areas of leadership, employment and training, urban poverty and youth employment.  A particular focus of Dr. Johnson’s work has been on the plight of African-American men and families.  He is regularly invited to testify before the United States Congress on matters pertaining to low-income fathers and strengthening families. He played a principal role in passage of the first national fatherhood legislation in Congress, The Fathers Count Bill.  Dr. Johnson is also the author of several publications including Fatherhood Development: A Curriculum for Young Fathers.

and I think we get the general emphasis here, right?  So this is a group Families First is advertising (its conference) and Families First is, among many other things, receiving support — or at least partnering with — two Georgia Counties (Cobb & Fulton) and Depts. of Human Resources.  Its Program leader — known to be associating with a major fatherhood promoter (Dr. Johnston, who holds 3 degrees from UMichigan), and has been given by way of NCSEA portaconference (and obviously the live NCSEA conference) — a nationwide platform alongside three other seriously heavyweight Child Support Personnel (Mr. Bryson of TN being the Title IV-D contact, and we can see from TAGGS a hint of the budget size this relates to).

This should further illustrate how HHS supported and Government-supported Nonprofits are being allowed to drive policy for the entire nation (which is, FYI, over 50% female) in places they don’t have access to, and often don’t know exist.

re:

I have blogged this before, use “search.”  I had somethings to say about the Ohio branch, and learned a lot researching it about how Ohio is put together these days, particularly its “Fatherhood Commission.”

“YOWSA!” — I don’t remember if I’d seen this particular little project by the Colorado Dynamic Duo of “center for policy research” (the 6 to 7-woman team whose leadership includes Jessica Pearson, whose origins date back to the beginning of AFCC) and “Policy Studies, Inc.”   This is from 2006 and is comparing Colorado (Small state) Tennessee (medium state) and Texas (large-state) versions of how to set up Access visitation programming.  Every parent should read it, and see how the ‘team” includes a mingling of the courts, child support, and often a third party.  in TEXAS this was simple — go to the fatherhood program administrator.

http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cse/pol/DCL/2007/dcl-07-07a.pdf  This was funded by the OCSE, not through grant, but by task order.  Suggest look it up on USaspending.gov.  It also mentions assigning “parenting plan coordinator” and estimates costs, or reports them.  Acknowledgements show the trio in each state:

We wish to thank the following people for their invaluable assistance during this project:

Colorado:

Pam Hennessey, Child Support Enforcement Coordinator, Colorado Judicial Department Cindy Savage, Director, Office of Dispute Resolution, Colorado Judicial Department Pam Gagel, Family Court Facilitator, Denver District Court

Tennessee:

Elizabeth A. Sykes, Deputy Director, Administrative Office of the Courts Mary Rose Zingale, Programs Manager, Administrative Office of the Courts Charles Bryson, Director of Field Operations and Management, Tennessee Child Support Division

Texas:

Michael Hayes, Manager of Collaborations, Fatherhood and Family Initiatives, Child Support Division Alisha Key, Director, Texas Office of Court Administration Arlene Pace, Access and Visitation Coordinator, Child Support Division

This ACF site (year, 2004) itself shows where the major source of referrals is coming, and how the goal of the program (or at least measured criteria) includes “increased noncustodial parenting time.”  http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cse/pubs/2004/reports/prelim_access_visitation_grants/texas.html

State Access Program Coordinator:
Arlene Pace
Office of the Attorney General
Child Support Division
PO Box 12017
Austin, Texas 78711-2017

Internet: Arlene.pace@cs.oag.state.tx.us

Annual Federal Grant Award: $621,404
Minimum 10% State Match: $ 69,045
Number of Minor Age Children in Single (Biological) Parent Households: 721,702

This shows a “love” for supervised visitation outcomes in the A/V funding.  This gets interesting when A/V program coordinators happen to also be operating such centers (Google “Helen O. Page” for that one)

Services Provided

Poor people are particularly targeted for these services (and their Title IV-D cases or IV-A help justify it), plus, although so much of program literature pushing fatherhood programs loves to bring up race, and the plight of the African-American male and his disenfranchisement, true as this may be (though it seems to pale compared to African-American Females overall, who couldn’t even vote until the 1900s, and whose position in slavery in prior generations (for those whose genealogy this applies to) included being used by masters for breeding by way of rape as well.  But in the A/V programs in Texas, it’s mostly poor Caucasians getting these services:

Annual Income

Race/Ethnicity

I also find it odd that being as there’s such an interest from the head of HHS to measure ethnicity, the system has more “unknowns” that actually identified customers…. If I had a program like this, I’d know by looking at results that there either wasn’t good measurements being taken, or that my categories needed adjustment. Nevertheless, in fy2012, there’s hope to expand A/V functionality even further.

Look at this:  Of the sources which the Feds seem actually interested in (columns, 1, 2 & 3) very little self-referrals are occurring.  Referals are coming from the courts and child support systems itself (2,724) which indicates it was NOT the grassroots desire for these services.  Moreover, 2,724/3,779 “other” indicates that referrals are coming from outside the main anticipated sources — so where were these coming from?  Fatherhood groups?  Who really knows?

Source of Client Referrals

Outcomes

(etc.)

STILL footnoting the TENNESSEE grants above (the chart with several DUNS# and some amounts with no DUNS#):

(3)

Being curious, I went to the USASPENDING.gov site, and found over $93 million in 63 grants to this DUNS#, all starting in 2009.  Recommended to do.  OF these $90 million (50 awards were on the commission on aging, and the two awards/grants (for once, the amounts match with HHS) relate to Medicaid, and are not on this blog’s lists of topics.  Just FYI.

Here’s one from WV that parallels the descriptive powers of the TN one in red font above:  Award is named after Grantee Institution; they are one and the same:

and I wonder what’s the difference between HEALTH HUMAN RESOURCES and FAMILIES SERVICES? in West Virginia.  Why is one a Resource (implies tangibles to be drawn from) and the other a Service? (implies good deeds, actions what is served).  Either way, the resources of HHS are going to both departments:

Or here are some from Texas, which got a lot of this OCSE Section 1115 Waiver grants, which (I think) the whole 90FD series represents anyhow:

In other words, in the OCSE Research Grants 1115 Waiver, one would like to know What Research for What Purpose is said new grant.  Particularly when it’s for $0.70 million in a year of economic recession nationwide!  So, we are told, hello, it’s a 1115 Waiver.  (the CFDA category — I didn’t include in printout– would tell that).  Then it’s in support of a PAID INITIATIVE.  I get the idea it entails payments — but which initiative?  Does anyone have a clue how to pick the main words out of a very long title, and stick them in a short data entry field?  Appparently not.

So viewers can call up a VERY busy Michael Hayes (possibly on a plane to the next Fatherhood Summit; last year it was in MN), and ask him?  And who’s Kammi Siemens?   . . . . Here are some more:

This is hardly a surprising award title, given the field, but does make me wonder why — IF the idea is to help the children — it might not be a better idea to help build the assets of the household they are living in, and cut down on the middlemen and brokers.  And, if there are Urban Mothers now paying child support to their custody-switched kids, is there a parallel program to help them build THEIR assets?  Or is the process just to jail them if they get in arrears based on the concept that it’s wilful, and not “inability to pay” as is assumed with so many fathers (at least in the program literature supporting fatherhood via OCSE).

Here’s a similar one in Washington STate, this time through a different agency:

Here’s another in washington that, on it ssurface, would appear to be an efficient way of locating hidden assets from noncustodial parents and doing something about it — and this was defunded.  In Year 1 of the budget.

Whoever thought up the family court system sure was brilliant.  It is a system for STRIPPING assets (including real estate) via stripping parents of access to their children, and sitting back placing bets on the winner when said parents tries to get time or even a glimpse of the absentee children.  Then the fight is, of course, somewhat “fixed” through Access/Visitation funding, which only one of the players is informed of.

Here’s some from Wisconsin — which is the home state of the Inter(?)national branch of AFCC:

How much more improvement is possible than providing pro-bono legal help (and encouragement) to sue for custody modification orders, help which is not available to the custodial (mother) to defend from; and/or all kinds of programs to Compromise Arrears on the basis of altered custody situations, or other change of circumstances, such as perhaps finding out that there are compromise of arrears programs around?

Here’s what a simple google search of “Grant 90 FD” blew in the door:

SOURCE:  Another Nice report from Jessica Pearson & Center for Policy Research (date, maybe 2006)

COLLECTING CHILD SUPPORT FROM LOW-INCOME NCPS: WHAT COLORADO HAS TRIED AND LEARNED

• An Evaluation of the Responsible Fatherhood Program of El Paso County, Colorado
• (OCSE Grant #: 90-FD-0004/01)
• FORGIVING ARREARS: An Evaluation of the Colorado Arrears Forgiveness Demonstration Project (OCSE Grant #: 90-FD-0028/01)

  This presentation will discuss various interventions to promote child support payment among low-income NCPs in Colorado. They are: (1) referring unemployed or underemployed NCPs to the El Paso County Parent Opportunity Project (POP), a responsible fatherhood program offering assistance with employment, child support, and child access (August 1998 – April 2001); (2) referring NCPs who were paroled or released from a state prison to the Denver Work and Family Center (WFC), a one-stop center offering assistance with employment, child support. and family reunification (August 1999 – March 15, 2001); (3) offering NCPs with child support arrears the possibility of reducing or eliminating arrears owed to the state by making complete and timely child support payments over a ten-month period of time (May 2001 – February 2002); and (4) reducing the child support burden by dropping debt and retroactive support obligations for a random sample of NCPs with new child support orders (February – December 1998). These interventions were implemented and evaluated under several demonstration and evaluation grants awarded by the federal Office of Child Support Enforcement to the Colorado Division of Child Support Enforcement.

Hopefully you get the gist of the program, 1, 2, 3 & 4, which you helped pay to demonstrate and evalute (OCSE did):  In order, responsible Fatherhood, help with access (increased access to one’s kids).   Helping reunite men coming out of prison with their families, reducing arrears, and dropping retroactive support for some people with NEW orders.   OCSE was awarding these grants to Colorado “Division of Child Support Enforcement.”

Remember, the Demo States were Colorado (small), Tennessee (medium) and Texas (large).  COlorado, I found out, has many trade names, some of which sound like an arm of government when they aren’t.  For the record, here they are, past, present and trade names.  This is just FYI: (I just searched ‘child support enforcement”)

Found 11 matching record(s).  Viewing page 1 of 1. # ID Number Document Number Name  Event Status Form Formation Date 1 20031200845  20031200845 AMERICAN CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT INC. Articles of Incorporation Name Changed DPC 06/20/2003 2 20031200845  AMERICAN CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT INC., Dissolved November 30, 2004 Batch Event Administratively Dissolved DPC 06/20/2003 3 19931046695  19931046695 CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT OF COLORADO Register a Trademark Expired TM/L0035 05/04/1993 4 20021159113  20021159113 COALITION FOR CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT Articles of Incorporation Name Changed DNC 06/11/2002 5 20021159113  COALITION FOR CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT, Delinquent August 1, 2005 Batch Event Delinquent DNC 06/11/2002 6 20091675201  20091675201 CSE Child Support Enforcement Co. Trade Name Withdrawn FO 12/29/2009 7 20041071101  20041071101 CSE CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENTCO. Trade Name Expired FPC 02/26/2004 8 20001209752  20001209752 EL PASO COUNTY CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT UNIT Trade Name Effective DPC 10/27/2000 9 19991113541  19991113541 EL PASO/TELLER COUNTIES CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT UNIT ADMINISTERED FOR THE DEPT. OF SOCIAL SERVICES BY MAXIMUS Trade Name Effective FPC 06/15/1999 10 20001209751  20001209751 TELLER COUNTY CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT UNIT Trade Name Effective DPC 10/27/2000 11 20111041261  20111041261 U.S. Child Support Enforcement Inc Articles of Incorporation Good Standing DPC 01/20/2011

Whatever . . .  let’s go find some more “90FD” grant expenditures.

Now, while the projects listed above, that Dr. Pearson helped evaluate, had 90FD grants, it apepars that this small, but very influentional nonprofit, is specializing in SPECIAL INTEREST grants along the “90FI” series, (at least when it comes to grants received from HHS — this doesn’t include contracts, or anything from other arms of government) if you click on the link above.  Here they are:

AWARD ACTIONS

Showing: 1 – 21 of 21 Award Actions

SO, while 90FD0004 was Evaluating the REsponsible Fatherhood Program, and the 90FI grant series probably helped Center for Policy Research produce a nice report talking about the responsible fatherhood program, let’s look at the extent of “Responsible Fatherhood Program” grant (this ONE award) in Colorado, which apparently started in 2006, so let’s figure Dr. Pearson’s report gave it a thumbs-up?

$10 million: – that’s a nice chunk of change, right?

Mary E. Roberto is also president of a nonprofit called NAWRS, which is mentioned in this handout.  Relating to “Colorado Works” (which relates clearly to TANF reform), this link also shows how many fatherhood programs were are talking about here (that year).  From a “Colorado Works” newsletter from last June, 2011

For further information, please contact me!

Mary E. Roberto, President National Association for Welfare Research and Statistics (NAWRS)  (MORE ON ThIS ONE< BELOW***)

Mary.Roberto@state.co.us

COLORADO FATHERHOOD PROGRAM UPDATE

^ Top

We are drawing near the end of the Promoting Responsible Fatherhood Community Access Grant that has funded 63 fatherhood programs over the past 5 years. These programs are in all parts of the state and have provided parenting, healthy relationship education, economic stability services and mentoring to fathers.

This month, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families is expected to release new funding opportunities to continue many of the goals of the previously funded National Healthy Marriage and Responsible Fatherhood Initiatives. CDHS Colorado Works intends to seek new funding and will provide updates as this process unfolds. Stay tuned!

Mary Roberto’s position, listed under NAWRS (below) is:

Mary Roberto (303) 866-2641 mary.roberto@state.co.us

Colorado Department of Human Services Program Development and System Innovation 1575 Sherman Street Denver, CO 80203

Regarding NAWRS — it has membership from across the country.  Take a closer look! You really need to get a grasp of the extent of HHS networking here.  I also notice a name, Demetra Nightengale (see my blog) from The Urban Institute.  You’ll also see her name under the Mary Roberto link in the chart — on report contracted by “The Lewin Group” to report on COloradoWorks.

I am glad our nation is so well-“organized,” but sad I went fully 10 years in the court system with not one person IN it, nor one person in a domestic violence advocacy group I contacted (locally) for help or support, in the entire time — in fact NO ONE in the Bay Area made a mention of the fatherhood movement taking money from HHS — at all — until I happened to in desperation call a feminist organization in distress about police lies on reports following an exchange in which the immediate concern was a threat of parental abduction.  Which later happened.  I cannot tell you how many conferences I attended (mostly for free) in the area also, including one or two hotshot ones, and at least one where i functioned as a “fly on the wall” — and none of THEM mentioned this either!

Hard to find an EIN — but two states seem to admit it exists, as far as tax filings are concerned!

A quick check of Arizona — I don’t see the organization. . . . Go figure.

OK, the California Group (Venice, CA) earns almost nothing and spends $115k on the conference.  Its books are in the care of someone c/o Oklahoma Child SUpport Office . . . ..

Ron Haskins keeps showing up (see end of post):   Now there’s a welfare reform academy???

Ron Haskins is ((in 2012??)) the staff director for the Subcommittee on Human Resources of the Committee on Ways and Means, U.S. House of Representatives. Prior to becoming staff director, he was welfare counsel for the Republicans on the Ways and Means Committee. Previously, he was a research professor at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, a lecturer in history and education at the University of North Carolina at Charlotte, a high school social studies teacher in Charlotte, North Carolina, and a non-commissioned officer in the United States Marine Corps. After completing his undergraduate degree in history, Haskins obtained an M.A. in education and a Ph. D. in developmental psychology from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. Haskins has published books and articles on intellectual development, illness and day care, day care policy, education policy, divorce and child support, federal expenditures on social programs, and federal budget and tax policy. In his 12 years in Washington, Haskins has worked primarily on welfare reform, day care, child support enforcement, foster care, unemployment, and budget issues. He is remarried and has four children ranging in age from 9 to 30.

In searching for NAWRS, I ran (again) across an interesting site at “legistorm” which shows congressionally approved privately sponsored travel (if I have that right).  For Republican Bill Archer of Texas, I note that Ron Haskins (WHO WAS AN ARCHITECT OF THE ACCESS/VISITATION PROVISION OF WELFARE REFORM, AND WE HEARD, SNUCK IT IN PAST THE 11th HOUR, WHICH allegedly STUNT HELPED GET HIM RELEASED FROM THE HHS — AND HE HAS SINCE HUNG OUT ELSEWHERE (BROOKINGS INSTITUTE, MOSTLY, IT SEEMS):   was paid $822 to travel to a NAWRS CONFERENCE, PLUS THIS LIST:

Rep. Bill Archer (-Texas, 7th) – Privately Financed Travel

His “top staff traveler” with 6 trips, was Ron Haskins (total costs, $7,063).  My point is, look who’s paying for the conferences to figure out how to spend public funds, without input from the public affected by them, OR for the most part, the taxpayers themselves:

•  

  View Details / PDF	Traveler/Dates	Sponsor	Destination/ Purpose	Cost
  	Haskins, Ronald T. (Ron) 11/30/00-11/30/00	MacArthur Foundation	Chicago, IL To attend a foundation urban policy meeting	$1,419.83
  	Haskins, Ronald T. (Ron) 11/12/00-11/13/00	American Association of Public Welfare Attorneys	Scottsdale, AZ AAPWA 33rd National Training and Continuing Education Conference	$1,107.00
  	Haskins, Ronald T. (Ron) 11/03/00-11/03/00	Annie E. Casey Foundation	Seattle, WA 22nd annual Association for Public Policy Analysis and Management research conference	$1,493.00

   

  
  

  	Haskins, Ronald T. (Ron) 07/28/00-08/02/00	National Association for Welfare Research and Statistics – National Child Support Enforcement Association	Phoenix, AZ – San Diego, CA To discuss welfare reform and child support enforcement issues at annual conferences	$822.00
  	Haskins, Ronald T. (Ron) 07/16/00-07/16/00	National Conference of State Legislatures	Chicago, IL Welfare reform reauthorization session at NCSL’s annual meeting	$762.43

  Haskins, Ronald T. (Ron) 01/09/00-01/11/00

  Texas Governor’s Business Council

  Austin, TX – Houston, TX Visit Texas’ child support enforcement program

  $1,459.00

   YES

  WELL, that’s ALL FOR TODAY, FOLKS!A

See “THE NEW FRONTIER – Exploring the Challenges and Possibilities of the Changed Landscape for Children and the Courts.”

I write this post to again advertise HOW — H-O-W — this organization, for one, is obsessed with promoting ITS self-interests at the expense of others’ safety, sanity, and of the truth.  And for at least a decade now, it has been REALLY obsessed with “Parent Coordination,” and less than interested in INcorporation of Parent Coordination Associations:

FOR EXAMPLE (from Georgia Secretary of State).

(Street address is not the point here; it’s public record, but if you need to write someone, look it up yourself).

They stopped giving annual filings in 2006, it just took 2 years to get administratively dissolved.  So the organization was around for almost (not quite) 4 years.

FLORIDA PARENT COORDINATION —

(This section got long because I found something and researched it.)

Here’s one in Florida that didn’t ever get an EIN# and lasted 1 year 7 months:

Was anyone billed for services under this name?  Where’s the receipts?

However the Ficititous name associated (“Parent Coordinator Services“) didn’t expire til 2010

Ms. Rufiange, LMFT (I just looked it up) is listed as an “Assessor” in various “Circuits” at Florida’s DCF, and associated with “Families Against Abuse” in google search, but I don’t see her name on the site.  By the way, this is a powerful statement here (although refers to Boston area, “How I Got My Daughter Back.”).  However, in Florida (at original street address, above) one can see some BIP (Batterers Intervention Programs) being run:

We are a DCF certified “Duluth Model” 26-week Men’s BIP program with three locations in the Central Florida area.  We offer Domestic Violence Assessments and groups by a certified staff of male and female facilitators.  All groups are one and a half hours once a week and are charged on a sliding scale.  Registration is free.  We offer classes on a variety of days and times (including Saturdays!) in different locations in order to accommodate your work schedule as best we can.  Our locations in Orange and Seminole Counties are:

1. Families Against Abuse @ 1510 E. Colonial Drive, Suite 230, Orlando, FL 32803

2. Families Against Abuse @ 4467 Edgewater Drive, Suite C, Orlando, FL 32804

3. Families Against Abuse @ 282 Short Avenue, Suite 112, Longwood, FL 32750

We also offer drug/alcohol evaluations by a certified addiction professional at your at our other company, Families in Recovery

These two (Different) sites illustrate the polar opposites of how to counter abuse.  “FamiliesAgainstAbuse.com” is the mother’s perspective.  FamiliesAgainstAbuse.NET (see log) is the state’s.  Guess which one I prefer…

Now that Ms. Rufiange has my attention (through two nonprofits at one street address) I looked up her business incorporation history in Florida at Sunbiz.org (LOVE that site…):  I’ll comment on each of them quickly, below the list.  (There’s some duplication because it was a Document search, not a business name search)

(1) 282 Short Ave #106.  Lasted 9/24/2010 – 9/23/2011, never got an EIN, involuntarily dissolved.  She’s officer, someone else registered agent.  No annual reports filed.

(2) 282 Short Ave, no Suite#.  Incorporated (effective) 7/1/1995, Admin Dissolut. for Annual Report, 9/15/2006. Actually got an EIN#:  593328214.  Checking two places by EIN#, I see no filings.  I doubt TAGGS would show any; someone should check Florida DCF, though.

Apparently only filed annual reports 2003, 2004, 2005! although plenty show on the system!   Dir. Rufiange resigned (stamped 11/2005), send all correspondence to (Suite #116) “Families in Recovery.” I linked to the image so you can read this.  Middle name doesn’t have a “B”??

(3) I have pasted, above.  No Suite#.  Overlaps with #1:  Effective 2/2005 through 9/2006 (1 yr 7 months) dissolved for failure to file.

(4) 282 Short Ave #112.  Formed 7/13/2005 EIN# 203134721.   “Annual” reports were filed in 2009, 2010 & 2011 only.  This is a For-Profit

Seems like she’s found her “niche” here — it’s outpatient substance abuse treatment (takes Medicare.  Note:  FLAG!).  There are a ton of websites advertising this, which doesn’t say anything about patients actually served.

Type of Care

• Outpatient (OP)

Specific Populations Served

• Persons with Dual Diagnosis (CO)
• Seniors(SE)
• Criminal Justice Clients (CJ)

There is a husband?  Bob Rufiange, who also works at this two-person? counseling firm, above:

THIS RFP extension of a $62,000 contract (youth counseling diversion project, Seminole County) was signed to extend from 2002 through 2003 (one more year) by six provider groups, including “Families in Recovery,” Anne Rew Ruffiange.  It explains better that she’s a service provider contracting (with  5 others) with the county, and possibly in other arenas also.  See #5.  Also, Orange County Business Tax Receipts listing (2010) has the company in two different categories (just FYI).  Apparently “MCC Incorporated” is “dba” Families In Recovery (?), per another Orange County site.

A publication of the Child Abuse Prevention Task Force lists Families & Recover and Families Against Abuse together under “Resources/Counseling”

Another list of providers has Families in Recovery as Suite 100 (see above), an Orange County “District 7” provider list.  This shows her degrees as “M.Ed” and credential “CAP” (=?)

This is the Seminar:

503—“The Dual-Diagnosed Client: Linking Substance Abuse and Domestic Violence Treatment in Your Treatment Plans”

This workshop will assist in understanding the characteristics of batterers and emphasize the development of effective linkages of services between addiction and domestic violence programs. This is paramount if both agencies are to successfully achieve their mission. Each program has its own philoso- phies, terminology, treatment goals and objectives. Learn to successfully design and incorporate treatment for both important issues.

Anne Rufiange, LMFT, CAP

This is the “DV is a Pathology” (not a crime) viewpoint, which is helpful if you are providing intervention services for both pathologies.  It’s interesting, because the 10 year study at acestudy.org links physical & sexual abuse of kids  (as an “Adverse Childhood Event”) as putting people at risk for self-destructive behaviors (including substance abuse, obesity — which was where the study originated, prostitution, runaway, etc, as I recall) in adulthood.

I really wonder just HOW many other problems in the USA would be eliminated if someone began to take the abuse of women and children seriously with a view to STOPPING it, not just developing programs to TREAT it, or to TREAT professionals who choose not to identify and STOP it.  A great place to find these professionals is in the AFCC & CRC, by the way — who value “family” over protection for kids and whichever parent was the most endangered.

(5) Families Against Abuse —

This organization (at various addresses – see below logo) as far as I can see is STILL listed as a “Certified Batterers Intervention Provider” in Circuits 5, 9, and 18 (all 3 address remain on file) with  http://dv.dcf.state.fl.us/results.aspx?type=bip or “MY FLORIDA.COM ™ which is “The official portal of the state of Florida”

This is the most complete summary of who this (erstwhile, would-be) Parent Coordinator Services person is, by profession and interest:  She is listed as faculty on a 2005 (Cape Cod, MA) 18th Symposium on Addictive Disorders.  You should see the list of associations participating!

Anne Rufiange is a Licensed Marriage and Family Therapist, Certified Addiction Professional, Florida Supreme Court Certified Family Mediator, Certified Assessor, Facilitator, Supervisor and Trainer in Batterers’ Intervention.

This 2007 revision describes varieties of  (Court-related) mediators, and what’s required to become one, plus who provides the training.   On the Court Site itself, the types of certification, and requirements, are listed.  Please note that the last statement under each kind says:

        (5)     be of good moral character.

How can a county fill out a contract with an entity which has a name, but isn’t incorporated?   I just don’t get that!

BACK TO THIS TOPIC; AGAIN:

See “THE NEW FRONTIER – Exploring the Challenges and Possibilities of the Changed Landscape for Children and the Courts.”

I write this post to again advertise HOW — H-O-W — this organization, for one, is obsessed with promoting ITS self-interests at the expense of others’ safety, sanity, and of the truth.  And for at least a decade now, it has been REALLY obsessed with “Parent Coordination,” and less than interested in INcorporation of Parent Coordination Associations:

I can’t even deal with the content of that title, or I’ll never finish this post.

For example, for such a self-conforming group requiring the rest of the entire country’s family & conciliation courts to follow their pioneering efforts — simply because they are so well positioned, like membership includes State Superior Court Judges, quite a few people sitting on the top governing organization for the entire California Court System (which, FYI, is the largest in the nation’s — we have the most courts, apparently) — CA Judicial Council/AOC/CFCC — and a whole BOATload of superior court judges too, most of who tow the party line without veering, almost ever, from the founders’ vision of transforming the language of criminal, billing the counties for marriage counseling in an effort to turn back the clock on divorce, and in the process spawning a very profitable industry for people who are probably among the most overpaid people among white collar professionals to start with — and plenty of them working IN government as public servants — etc.

The landscape has “Changed” because certain people didn’t like it as it was — with separation of legal, judicial and executive power for the protection of civil and legal liberties of INDIVIDUALs.  In that realm, the mental health professional could still function — but was not the reigning operative, whose word was to become law, in accordance with a host of judges who could observe that the parents coming before them were indeed mentally disturbed — but not acknowledge WHY, meaning, someone forgot to inform them in advance that the law was in suspension, and psychology reigned supreme; and that this brilliant system need not read case files or collect facts, simply assign more personnel.

Parenting Coordination appears to be still high-priority, although the AFCC is racking up a series of state-level successes (it seems) in first saturation their own press with the word, then assigning parent coordinators, in practice, then continuing to push for it to be endorsed by legislation.  I know I already spoke about how AFCC in Florida managed to make this happen.

Meanwhile, in SCRANTON, one of the Dynamic Duo I keep reporting on (Boyan/Termini), with good reason, continues to apparently get business from the courts.  Joe Pilchesky asked to see her payment receipts and got some, finding out that she is paid on two scales, and also wrote got reimbursed (or requested it) for hotel fees for attending a conference at the “NACC” (National Association for Children’s Counsel), presenting alongside The Hon. Chester Harhut and GAL Danielle M. Ross.

So those receipts are still up and viewable, I believe, under the thread “Co-Parenting” at Scranton Political Times.  It is possibly the most valuable part of the forum, some of the paperwork that was obtained from the courts.  There’s be more, only the FBI swooped in and walked off with a lot of evidence, apparently.  I don’t think anyone has heard from them recently, and I”m not keeping my fingers crossed on what they’re going to report.  Hope is a pleasant emotion, but I try not to build anything substantial on it –at least in this world!

I GATHER IT MUST BE REALLY CRITICAL TO CONTINUED SUCCESS OF THIS FAMILY COURT CORRUPTION, HENCE I’M CONTINUING TO BLOG IT.  ALSO, THE TERM IS OFFENSIVE TO COMMON SENSE — HOW MANY PARENTS REALLY CAN’T “WALK AND CHEW GUM“?  THE PROBLEM ISN’T LACK OF COORDINATION, IT’S CONTEMPT OF COURT ORDERS, OR POORLY WRITTEN COURT ORDERS, THAT CAUSE THE ONGOING TROUBLES.

This appears to be the general idea retained by the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts (California Chapter), judging by the upcoming workshop at an upcoming conference.  Here’s the paragraph, which is workshop 2 of a full-day “Pre-conference” institute, upcoming in February.  Oh to be a fly on the wall there!

Let’s look at how many times we can say “parenting coordination” in one paragraph:

I2 Inside Parenting Coordination Practice in California: Managing Roles, Responsibilities and Risks

As budget cuts result in long waits for courtrooms, Consensual Dispute Resolution models like Parenting Coordination grow more attractive. This full day Institute provides an in-depth picture of Parenting Coordination in California for parenting coordinators (a.k.a. parenting plan coordinators, parent coordinators, child custody special masters or wise persons), and for the lawyers, mental health professionals and judges who refer families to parenting coordination, advise parents in parenting coordination, and deal with orders and recommendations of parenting coordinators. The program will address the history and legal underpinnings of Parenting Coordination in California; identifying the families who will benefit from Parenting Coordination; developing orders appointing parenting coordinators; best practices for psychologists and lawyers acting as parenting coordinators; compensation of parenting coordinators; and ethical guidelines, grievances and professional discipline.

Presenters: Lyn Greenberg, Ph.D., Alexandra Leichtner, JD, Leslie Ellen Shear, JD, CFLS, CALS

• 13 times in 3 sentences plus one workshop title.  Pause, and see if you read it all aloud in one breath without stumbling.  If you can’t, and you’re a parent, you need coordination.
• Take that phrase out, see what verbs are left, and get an idea of any actual IDEAS in there.
• We should also be very comforted to know that one of the presenters, Ms. Shear, has 10 initials (in 3 segments) behind her name, and is the same person who (on a site, ACFLS*) described that a few hours of browsing the internet for the terms like “Domestic violence” would qualify her to advise The Public on the topic.  Perhaps she is not citing “ACFLS” here with good cause — it probably still hasn’t filed.    Even her own ACFLS team-mates took her on for trying to do some rabble-rowsing on the Frankie Valli case, before reading BOTH sides of the issue, but it must be nice to be a big fish in a small pond, and lead off the presentation there.

* the “A” in ACFLS stands for “Ass’n.” as I explained yesterday.  It does in AFCC also.  Since “FCC” stands for Family & Conciliation Courts, we should hardly be surprised when there is no respect for INDIVIDUAL’s rights when it comes to the group discussing absent parents.  They are a plural, they think in plural, and despite the talk (and the Declaration of Independence, Bill of Rights, etc.) are a groupthink organization led by some prominent personalities which continue leading the pack, and having their publications sited, until they age out by simply growing old enough to die, which Meyer Elkin and I guess Jude Pfaff have by now.  Joan Kelly et al. have not.

While I”m here — I’m curious about what’s the difference between a FAMILY court and a CONCILLIATION court.  I hear they are different sets of codes.   Funny, one rarely pauses to think about it.  Either way, this ASSociation wishes to lead them both.

The “ACFLS” formed in 1980.  If you’re taking its word for when it formed.  Or, 1995, if you’re taking the word of the California Secretary of State.  Give or take 15 years, it’s family law, after all — close enough, right?

When I look at the Charitable Registry, it is labeled “Exempt Active” (Search HERE) and has no EIN# and no material up there.

OK — Mea Culpa — I don’t deal that much with “Exempt” nonprofit associations, so here’s the rules on that — and this ACFLS doesn’t HAVE to show its stuff to the public.  It’s a mutual benefit organization (i trust it’s not a religious organization, although generally speaking, I find AFCC policies line up neatly with conservative religious groups neatly; aka, see California Healthy Marriages Coalition):

Exempt – Active – Status assigned to religious and mutual benefit corporations,as both are exempt from registration and reporting requirements under the Supervision of Trustees and Fundraisers for Charitable Purposes Act. “Active” reflects the organization’s status with the Secretary of State.

Exempt – Inactive – Status assigned to religious and mutual benefit corporations, as both are exempt from registration and reporting requirements under the Supervision of Trustees and Fundraisers for Charitable Purposes Act. These organizations show as “Suspended” in the Secretary of State’s records.

Exempt – Dissolved – Status assigned to religious and mutual benefit corporations, as both are exempt from registration and reporting requirements under the Supervision of Trustees and Fundraisers for Charitable Purposes Act. These organizations have completed the dissolution process with the Secretary of State’s office.

Now, the conference I’m quoting from (with the Parenting Coordination paragraph above, link below) is being held by THIS association (top row)

I left an active search link on the bottom (AFCC) title, “Surrendered” so one can see that its Registered Agent address was 111 Hill Street, Los Angeles (which is the courthouse, last I heard) and its Jurisdiction, for some strange reason is up in Denver, in fact pretty near Jessica Pearson’s Center for Policy Research, etc.  A registration in another state (I forget whether it was IL or WI — but it’s blogged here) also shows Ms.  — or Dr. — Pearson’s name also; the groups are related.  This is known, documented history one can find several places, except not at the annual Battered Mother’s Custody Conference.  Empowered Battered MOthers can be a force to deal with, particularly after they find out what degree of withholding of information they’ve been subject to, particularly by groups from California which know better, but don’t care enough to talk about it.

So this is my public apology for lumping in ACFLS as a nonprofit in with nonprofits/charities  who ILLEGALLY don’t file with the SOS or OAG in my state, even if they, too, are also a little shaky on what decade they were formed in, such as RTI (see yesterday’s post for explanation of the R and the I)

PAUSE/INTERJECTION TO ACKNOWLEDGE THE RELATIONSHIP TRAINING INSTITUTE & ITS CORPORATION TIME WARPs (again):

If you repeat this search (HERE, EIN#470942805 — or use the “129795” State Reg. number), we can see it was notified ONCE to turn its stuff in, apparently NEVER produced its’ STUFF” (IRS, RRF, Schedule B listing contributors, etc.) has with the OAG and retains “Current” status — which I think is just weird.  And unlike ACFLS, it’s not “Exempt” and is actually saying it’s providing a public benefit as a charity.

Website:  “http://rtiprojects.org” states:

Relationship Development and Domestic Violence Prevention, Training, and Consultation

The Relationship Training Institute (RTI) is a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization, established in 1986 by David B. Wexler, Ph.D. to provide training, consultation, treatment, and research in the field of relationship development and relationship enhancement.

TRUE — it is a charity (inexplicably, given its filing history with the state), although “1986” is either out of state, or stretching the imagination and sense of time even more than ACFLS (2004- 1986 start dates is an 18 year gap, about enough for one child, if parents separated shortly after birth, to age out of the family law, or foster care, system).  Also, perhaps this started in a different state (Arizona?) and moved to California San Diego (Enron by the Sea) as a domestic corporation.  My Secretary of State doesn’t privilege citizens of this state (or anyone else looking) with that information on the website.

On this site one can see he is also advertising for workshops with the Gottman Institute (I think — see site, and yesterday’s post).  I cannot locate the link to “institute for relational harm reduction” I used to see on this site.  Either someone alerted him and it was removed (to avoid further embarrassment) or it’s still up there on another page – I find the website a little difficult to navigate.

THESE groups, however, get discounted rates for taking workshops there, meaning at RTI.  As of today’s website view.

Allied Agency staff receives discounted rates for Training Workshops

• Brandman University College, San Diego
• Center for Community Solutions (I seem to recall as an A/V subgrantee from California Judicial Council site).
• Home Start
• IntraPsychic Clinic
• Jenna Druck Foundation
• Pacific Coast Counseling
• Paradise Valley Hospital, Bayview Behavioral Health Campus
• San Diego Domestic Violence Council
• San Diego Family Justice Center  (these 2 have common history, I believe)
• San Diego Phobia Foundation
• San Diego Psychological Association
• San Diego Youth & Community Services
• The San Diego LGBT Community Center

BACK TO TODAY’s TOPIC:

THE NEW FRONTIER – Exploring the Challenges and Possibilities of the Changed Landscape for Children and the Courts.

Friday, February 10, 2012

8:00am – 1:00pm 8:30am – 12:45pm 9:00am – 5:15pm 10:30am – 10:45pm 12:45pm – 1:00pm 1:00pm – 5:15pm 3:00pm – 3:15pm

Pre-Conference Registration Morning Institute (1) All Day Institute (2) Coffee Break

Lunch Break Afternoon Institutes (3-4) Coffee Break

 

Apparently California Doesn’t yet have an actual statute legitimizing parent coordination by force (judicial order) over a parent’s objections.  Therefore, there remains work to be done, and new frontiers to be settled.  Let’s get down to BUSINESS, AFCC personnel!  Even if it means a pre-conference institute!  As we saw, the pre-conference institute was pretty intense about “parent coordination,” so here’s a nice workshop in the MAIN conference (upcoming) wherein professionals can see how, once entrenched at a COUNTY level, it could then be spread to other counties, and finally raise your voice loud for a necessary statute, and if possible mandatory parenting coordination for everyone, no matter what.  Maybe someone could add that to the access/visitation program funding, and spread some of these tax$$ around to people who really are coordinated — among themselves, at least!

We can read how to extract parent coordination fees even when a family is broke.  This should be Kids’ Play (after all, Kids’ Turn was a successful model, was it not):   

WORKSHOPS (1-4)

W1 Establishing a Local Parenting Coordinator Program, Including Pro Bono PC Services to Indigent Families

This workshop will provide a model for setting up a local Parenting Coordination Program (PC) to make available to the court a panel of trained and qualified mental health and attorney providers for referral of high conflict cases by the court and counsel.

This presentation will include a component of the program that provides services for pro bono cases. This portion was modeled after the successful pro bono program operated in the Washington DC court in conjunction with the American Psychological Association.

Hmm.

LGH comment, showing my lack of restraint (but harming no one)….

AFCC, AAML, and APA are related organizations, and have some personnel in common no doubt with each other.  And people in trauma (from the courts) like to continue the litany  . . . . “but in MY county, OUR court is the worst, they are UNBELIEVABLY corrupt in OUR area, why should I bother to study outside my area?  I can’t be bothered to study AFCC, read the history of the parent coordination, welfare reform, access visitation, I have no time to look up grants — we just want OUR GAL, Custody evaluator, Judge (etc.) Supervised Visitation Provider — to be removed.  Come to the rally, hold a sign, protest Mr. so and so, and Ms. So and so (unless they have a Ph.D.).

Well, some people are starting to study a little more.  S/he that hath ears to hear — we live in an INTERNET age (got that), with things like airplanes, conferences, and nationwide and regional associations.  Deal with it!

(Maybe that mindset does deserve to be fleeced; who knows?   – – – – nah . . . . . . . )

The speakers will provide hands-on experiences on how the program was established in San Diego County,** its successes and limitations, training recommendations and protocols, model stipulations and orders, and practice tips.. A portion of the presentation would address the development of the component of the program that serves low income high conflict families by using qualified doctoral and post-doctoral psychology students under the supervision of a clinical director.*** The purpose of the program is to provide the court with a case management tool for those cases which do not seem to lend  themselves to resolution through litigation or other means of alternative dispute resolution.

Presenter: Honorable Lorna Alksne, Charlene S. Baron, JD, MA, Shirley Ann Higuchi, JD, Lori Love, Ph.D.

(**speaking of funny ideas established in San Diego with plans to expand nationwide and internationally, see posts on the One-Stop Justice Shop and Casey Gwinn’s personal retirement plan, started apparently while he was still City Attorney, with help from public employees at the time.  I’m pretty sure I posted the rundown on the related audit of the city for these practices, starting with the next City Attorney).

(***as a consequence of being low-income, you also get to be subject matter to train the next generation of people heading for one of the highest-paid (considering hours worked) white-collar jobs around — Psychology.  Up there with Judge.   See “early childhood development specialist.”

The presence of the Honorable (?) Lorna Alksne reminds me of some internet press on this judge.  I’m not familiar with the San Diego Parenting Coordination Protocol (YET), but here it is.  We all have to stop somewhere:

The (pretty much fathers’ rights, but they too dig up information) AngieMedia site comments in Nov. 2009

Grand Juries Stymied from Investigating Courts

California’s county Grand Juries are tasked with investigating and reporting on problems in county and local governments. However, the San Diego County Grand Jury has been effectively prohibited from investigating the San Diego Superior Court itself for a variety of reasons. Aside from whatever legal technicalities there may be for this, it is clear there is a strong motivation for the government officials who control the county to prevent investigation of the court system itself. The government wants naive citizens to believe that the courts in the county are fair and obey the law when neither is true.

The San Diego Superior Court is filled with abuse, corruption, illegal conduct, and disreputable judges such as drunk driver Lisa Schall, cover-up scam artist Lorna Alksne, abusive Christine Goldsmith with her nepotistic control over the San Diego City Attorney, and TV-star-wannabe DeAnn Salcido (who recently resigned over her misconduct) that the Grand Jury would literally have to investigate most judges for misconduct and eventually verbally eviscerate the judiciary and file criminal indictments against many of them to even get a start on cleaning up the corrupt mess that these judges wish to remain hidden.

By “Cover up Artist” — link says:

San Diego Courts Cover Up Missing Forms and Psych Evals

I don’t know anyone with a court case who doesn’t have some issues with missing or altered transcripts or other data.  It seems common (alas).  We’ve heard of dual docketing systems, AND dual physical files — one for the court case (parents) and another — which the parent never sees — to justify the program funding.   Here’s a comment from The Public Court.Com (Emad Tadros // “Zoe the Cat” credentialing site).  Also read the info re: the attempt to retroactively file forms which a rule of court (?) required specifically (mandated) to be filed BEFORE custody evaluations, and the response gotten when someone protested blatant ignoring this mandate by this court in particular.  Why these courts should be getting our business, still, I have no idea.  This says it well:  (12/27/2011 comment on:  Complaint Filed to the California Bar (topic FL 326, 327 forms)

San Diego Family Law Court is an illegal “boiler room” often operating to place litigants who have assets in very high risk situations. The priority is the financial interest of the attorneys not the litigants or the public’s trust. The California Legislature has ordered the California State Bar to come up with accountability for this type of activity—The Board of Governors was created for this purpose.

These series of designed financial crimes should be investigated by the US Attorney’s Office, specifically Jason Forge who is now prosecuting Theresa Erickson who was running an illegal baby selling ring in San Diego Probate Court for 6 years. This illegal activity was also under the supervision of Supervising Judge Lorna Alksne. Just like every other business the amounts of these “high conflict” cases and the excessive periods of time families are held hostage in litigation should generate an investigation, similar to an outbreak of ecoli or tampered tylenol bottles. The tainted cases aka as the “high conflict” case has become a haven for waste and corruption. The Court is operating as an unregulated “boiler room” worse than the mortgage crisis and Bernie Madhoff because 1000s are speaking out about it and nothing is being done. There is no accountability and no accounting for what is being done to the Families and Children.

Families are coming to the Court for assistance with their family issue and the attorneys who advertise as Family Law Specialists are simply acting like con-artists. The cons seize as much assets as possible for as long as possible until the children “age-out” and in some cases keep it going beyond that. These attorneys are effectively rewarding themselves over the long-term for bringing in new money to the court similar to new money clients bring to a bank. It is completely illegal as the intent is to sezie assets by prolonging litigation that should only take months not many years to resolve. Fruad investigators at the bank are trained to look for patterns but this kind of accountability is not there to protect the public—the public must stand up for itself! Report the patterns to the FBI. The pattern of the “high conflict” case is the same – the attorneys and professionals involved are the same. It is a scam, a con, fraud.

Yes, “We the Public” may have conflicts with our exes — but it’s nothing compared to the conflict we have with certain associations, organizations, and fields of practice collaborating — nationwide — to strip us of our legal rights (and any assets — or if indigent, to engage welfare funds instead) — in the process of something which is NOT that abnormal a process, and shouldn’t be:

1.  Divorcing.  Sometimes people need to divorce.  This shouldn’t take from 5 to 15 years to complete!

2.  In some cases, trying to find SOME arm of the U.S., STate, County, or Municipal government (we used to think this was the criminal law system, aided by police or district attorneys) to prosecute — in order to stop — criminal behavior against us, or one of our kids.

The reason these meetings have to be “members only” and in places far away from the jurisdiction they are handling (in the case of national conferences) it that people — especially parents — of reasonably sound mind and logic, would protest the practices.  That’s why California has a “Brown Act”

Time to go.  Did you learn something?